成實論

CHAPTER 192: NOBLE PRACTICE

There are two practices: the practice of emptiness and the practice of non-self. Not seeing a sentient being within the five skandhas is called the practice of emptiness; seeing that even the five skandhas do not exist is the practice of non-self. How is this known?

The sutra says: “One sees that form has no intrinsic nature, and sees that feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness have no intrinsic nature.” Again, the sutra says: “Through the absence of intrinsic nature, liberation is attained.” Therefore, one should know that the intrinsic nature of form does not truly exist. The intrinsic natures of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness likewise do not truly exist.

Again, the sutra says: “The five skandhas are all empty, like an illusion; an illusion cannot be said to be real.” If an illusion truly existed, it would not be called an illusion; yet it also cannot be said to be nonexistent, for it is merely unreal and capable of deceiving. Furthermore, this practitioner contemplates everything as empty. Therefore, one should know that the five skandhas do not truly exist, just as, when the characteristic of unity is refuted, one no longer sees such a thing as a wall.

The five skandhas are likewise: there is not a single real dharma among them.

Question: If form and the other dharmas are likewise not real, should there now be only conventional truth?

Answer: Cessation is the truth of ultimate meaning and therefore must exist. As the sutra says: “The false is deceptive; truth is in accordance with reality.” Cessation is reality, definitively so, and is therefore said to exist as the truth of ultimate meaning. Furthermore, when a practitioner gives rise to true wisdom, all conditioned things are seen as false and empty. Therefore, one should know that cessation exists as the truth of ultimate meaning.

Question: You say that no sentient being is seen within the five skandhas. On what basis are the five skandhas called a sentient being? Are they with outflows or without outflows?

Answer: They are both with outflows and without outflows.

Question: The sutra says: “Whenever a sentient being is seen, what is seen is invariably the five skandhas of appropriation.”

Answer: Dharmas without outflows are also included within the category of sentient beings, rather than within the category of nonsentient things such as wood and stone. Therefore, one should know that sentient beings are also designated on the basis of the skandhas without outflows. Furthermore, when a noble one abides in a mind without outflows, that person is still called a sentient being possessing mind. Therefore, a mind without outflows is also called a sentient being. All skandhas are called skandhas of appropriation because they all arise from appropriation.

Question: How is it known that they arise from appropriation?

Answer: Dharmas without outflows all arise from mental karma such as generosity, observance of the precepts, and cultivation of meditative concentration; without these, they would not arise. As the sutra says: “Obscured by ignorance and tightly bound by the fetter of craving, the fool acquires this body, and the wise person does likewise.” Mind itself is a skandha of appropriation.

Question: If all skandhas are called skandhas of appropriation, what difference is there between minds with outflows and minds without outflows?

Answer: All skandhas are called skandhas of appropriation because they arise from appropriation. Yet because those without outflows do not appropriate a body in a future life, they are called “without outflows.” The distinction lies therein. The skandhas are called skandhas of appropriation because they arise from appropriation. Therefore, this sutra is not self-contradictory. These two practices both take nonexistence as their object. If form and the other dharmas are empty and their intrinsic natures have ceased, they are all nonexistent.

Question: These two practices both take the five skandhas as their object. The sutra says: “Seeing form as empty and without self, one sees feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness as empty and without self.” How, then, can this be?

Answer: It is only on the basis of the skandhas that emptiness and non-self are seen. Why is this? Because only with regard to what arises through causes and conditions does one see that a sentient being is empty, and one also sees the cessation of form and the other dharmas.

Question: In that case, both are objects. If the practitioner reflects upon the skandhas and emptiness, does that mean that the objects are both the skandhas and nonexistence?

Answer: Because the practitioner does not see a sentient being within the causes and conditions conventionally called a sentient being, the mind of emptiness immediately arises; only afterward does the practitioner see emptiness. Furthermore, in the cessation of the five skandhas, one does not see the intrinsic nature of form or the intrinsic natures of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. Therefore, it is known that both of these practices take nonexistence as their object.

Answer: Acquiescence itself is wisdom. Why is this? Because willing acceptance and joyful acquiescence have the same meaning: the practitioner first knows suffering and afterward acquiesces in and delights in that truth.

If one did not first know it, how could one acquiesce in and delight in it? Furthermore, the wording is incomplete: it speaks only of contemplative acquiescence and does not mention wisdom. Would this mean that one who accepts and practices the fruit is without wisdom?

If you maintain that the practitioner possesses wisdom although it is called acquiescence, then this acquiescence should also be wisdom. Again, the sutra says: “When the practitioner knows and sees, the outflows are immediately exhausted.” It also says that knowing, seeing, and realization have the same meaning. Furthermore, the Buddha spoke of the wisdom of suffering and the wisdoms of its origination, cessation, and the path, but did not say that there is a separate acquiescence.

Therefore, one should know that wisdom itself is acquiescence. Moreover, when the Buddha explained the meaning of wisdom, he said that it is called wisdom because it knows in accordance with reality. Acquiescence also knows in accordance with reality, and therefore there is no difference.

If you say that it is called acquiescence because its faculties are not yet mature, that is incorrect. We do not say that acquiescence comes first and wisdom afterward; within a single mind it is called both acquiescence and wisdom. The meaning of that sutra has not been established, so how can you use what has not been established to establish your claim?

You say that acquiescence means that the task has not yet been completed. I have already answered that its meaning is first to know and afterward to acquiesce. Therefore, one should understand that acquiescence itself is completion.

If one did not know conclusively, how could one acquiesce? You say that at the time of acquiescence one has not yet reached certainty. Yet in your doctrine acquiescence is used to sever the fetters; if it were not certain, how could it sever them?

You say that at the time of acquiescence doubt still clings to the mind. If so, does doubt cling throughout the entire Path of the Truths? Would the wisdom that arises therein then invariably not be wisdom?

Furthermore, there is no distinction whereby one is acquiescence and the other wisdom. Just as the worldly contemplation that accords with the Four Noble Truths is called both acquiescence and wisdom, acquiescence and wisdom without outflows should likewise be understood.

Question: The wisdom of the exhausted mind and the wisdom of non-arising are only wisdom, not view?

Answer: For what reason?

Question: The sutra separately speaks of right view and does not call it right wisdom. Therefore, wisdom is not view.

Answer: If so, right view would not be called right wisdom. If you say that right view is right wisdom, then right wisdom must also be right view. Furthermore, among the fivefold Dharma-body, knowledge and vision of liberation are separately mentioned within the category of wisdom; would they therefore not be wisdom? If so, the wisdom of exhaustion and the wisdom of non-arising would likewise not be wisdom. In fact, they are right view. Because their characteristics differ, they are spoken of as right wisdom: since they arise in the mind of an arhat who has exhausted all afflictions, they are therefore called right wisdom.

Question: If right wisdom is right view, then an arhat should not be said to be accomplished in the ten factors.

Answer: Their essence is one, though their names differ, just as Dharma-wisdom and the wisdom of suffering are so named. It is also said that an arhat is accomplished in the eight meritorious qualities of a field of merit. Therefore, right wisdom itself is right view. Furthermore, among the six dharmas of harmonious respect, the sixth is said to be harmony of views. According to what you say, the wisdom of exhaustion and the wisdom of non-arising would not be called harmonious respect. Again, correct contemplation is called right view; because the wisdom of exhaustion and the wisdom of non-arising are correct contemplation, they too are called right view.

Question: The wisdom associated with the five consciousnesses is only wisdom, not view?

Answer: Why is it not view?

Question: The five consciousnesses are all without discrimination. Because they initially engage their objects, seeing is said to involve reflection and examination. Furthermore, the five consciousnesses take only present objects. Therefore, are they not view?

Answer: Because they lack initial and sustained mental application, they are unable to discriminate. If you say that they are not view because they initially engage their objects, that is incorrect. Why?

In your doctrine, visual consciousness takes a continuous object just as mental consciousness does. It should not be said merely to engage an object initially. If that were so, mental consciousness should likewise have no seeing.

You also say that they are not view because they take present objects. That too is incorrect. The knowledge of another’s mind also takes a present object; should it therefore not be view?

In the five consciousnesses there is no true wisdom, because they do not engage in contemplative practice; they also invariably follow conventional designations. Therefore, view, knowledge, wisdom, and all such qualities are entirely absent from them—how much more so any question of whether they are view.

Question: Some say that the faculty of the eye is called seeing. How should this be understood?

Answer: The faculty of the eye does not see. Visual consciousness is capable of taking objects; according to conventional speech, however, it is said that the eye sees.

Question: Some say that there are eight kinds of view: the five wrong views, worldly right view, the view of one in training, and the view of one beyond training. Apart from these eight views, how many kinds of wisdom are not called view? How should this be understood?

Answer: Just as seeing, knowing, attaining, understanding, comprehending, penetrating, and realizing all have the same meaning. If it is said that this makes the other not-seeing, this is merely a statement made through one’s own conceptual recollection and discrimination.

Question: If the initial wisdom that breaks through provisional designations is called knowing, while after entering the stage of Dharma it is called seeing; and if initial contemplation is called knowing, while thorough comprehension is called seeing, are there not such differences in the depth and shallowness of these dharmas?

CHAPTER 194: THE THREE KINDS OF WISDOM

The three kinds of wisdom are the wisdom born of hearing, the wisdom born of reflection, and the wisdom born of cultivation. That which arises from the sutras and the other divisions of the twelvefold canon is called the wisdom born of hearing. Because, relying upon it, one can give rise to undefiled noble wisdom, it is called wisdom.

As stated in the sutra: “The bhikkhu Rahula has now only just accomplished liberation through wisdom.” Although one may study the Vedas and other worldly scriptures, since they cannot give rise to undefiled wisdom, such study is not called the wisdom born of hearing. If one can reflect upon and discern the meanings contained in the sutras, this is called the wisdom born of reflection. As it is said: After practitioners hear the Dharma, they reflect upon its meaning and purport.

It is also said: After practitioners hear the Dharma and reflect upon it, they should cultivate in accordance with it. If they can directly know and see it before them, this is called the wisdom born of cultivation. As it is said: With a concentrated mind, practitioners see the arising and cessation of the five skandhas.

As stated in the sutra: “Bhikkhus! By cultivating meditative concentration, you will directly know and see things as they truly are.”

Furthermore, the Sutra on the Seven Correct Knowledges says: “If a bhikkhu knows the Dharma, this is called the wisdom born of hearing; if he knows the meaning, this is called the wisdom born of reflection; if he knows the proper time and so forth, this is called the wisdom born of cultivation.” Again, when Rahula recited the section on the five aggregates of clinging, this was called the wisdom born of hearing; when he personally reflected upon its meaning, this was called the wisdom born of reflection; and after he attained the Path, this was called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the sutra speaks of three staffs: the staff of hearing, the staff of seclusion, and the staff of wisdom. The staff of hearing is called the wisdom born of hearing; the staff of seclusion is called the wisdom born of reflection; and the staff of wisdom is called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the sutra says that hearing the Dharma has five benefits: “One hears what one has not heard before; what one has heard becomes clear; one dispels doubt and establishes right view; and through wisdom one penetrates the profound meaning and purport.” Hearing what one has not heard before and clarifying what one has heard are called the wisdom born of hearing; dispelling doubt and establishing right view are called the wisdom born of reflection; and penetrating the profound meaning and purport through wisdom is called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the Discourse on the Benefits of Hearing the Dharma says: “When practitioners hear the Dharma with their ears and recite and rehearse it with their mouths, this is called the wisdom born of hearing; when they reflect upon and discern it with their minds, this is called the wisdom born of reflection; and when they see and penetrate it, this is called the wisdom born of cultivation.”

Again, among the four factors of stream-entry, hearing the true Dharma is called the wisdom born of hearing; correctly recollecting its meaning is called the wisdom born of reflection; and cultivating in accordance with the Dharma is called the wisdom born of cultivation. Again, among the five gateways to liberation, hearing the Dharma from a venerable elder is called the wisdom born of hearing; penetrating its words and meaning is called the wisdom born of reflection; and giving rise to joy and so forth is called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the sutra says: “The Dharma taught by the Buddha is good in the beginning, good in the middle, and good in the end. Good men! Whether elder or young, upon hearing the Dharma, one reflects: ‘Household life is noisy; the homeless life is tranquil.

If one does not go forth, one cannot purely cultivate the holy life in the present Dharma.’ One then abandons all possessions, relatives, and wealth, goes forth, observes the precepts, guards the sense faculties, and conducts oneself with dignified deportment. Dwelling alone and reflecting, one abandons the five hindrances and then realizes the first dhyana and so forth, up to the exhaustion of the defilements.” Here, when elder and young hear the Dharma, this is called the wisdom born of hearing; when they reflect that household life is noisy and the homeless life tranquil, this is called the wisdom born of reflection; and when they abandon the five hindrances, up to the exhaustion of the defilements, this is called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the sutra says: “Only through two causes and conditions can right view arise: hearing the Dharma from another and personally reflecting and recollecting correctly.” Hearing the Dharma from another is the wisdom born of hearing; personally reflecting and recollecting correctly is the wisdom born of reflection; and being able to give rise to right view is the wisdom born of cultivation. Again, a verse says:

Here, associating closely with good people and hearing and receiving the true Dharma are called the wisdom born of hearing; delighting in dwelling in solitude is called the wisdom born of reflection; and disciplining and beautifying one’s own mind is called the wisdom born of cultivation.

Again, the Buddha taught the bhikkhus: “Whenever you speak, you should speak of the Four Noble Truths; whenever you reflect, you should reflect upon the Four Noble Truths.” Here, speaking of the Four Noble Truths is the wisdom born of hearing; reflecting upon the Four Noble Truths is the wisdom born of reflection; and realizing the Four Noble Truths is the wisdom born of cultivation. Thus, in many passages throughout the sutras, the Buddha taught these three kinds of wisdom.

Question: Of these three kinds of wisdom, how many exist in the realm of desire, how many in the realm of form, and how many in the formless realm?

Answer: All three exist in both the realm of desire and the realm of form. For example, the householder Shou was reborn in the Akanishtha heaven and taught the Dharma there. One who teaches the Dharma must reflect upon its meaning. Therefore, one should know that the realm of form also possesses the wisdom born of reflection. In the formless realm there is only the wisdom born of cultivation.

Question: Some say that the realm of desire has no wisdom born of cultivation and that the realm of form has no wisdom born of reflection. What of this?

Answer: For what reason would the realm of desire have no wisdom born of cultivation?

Question: Because the path of the realm of desire cannot eliminate the hindrances or restrain the fetters, and because the factors that cause bondage in the realm of desire do not become directly present.

Answer: Nowhere in the Buddha-Dharma is it said that the path of the realm of desire cannot eliminate the hindrances or restrain the fetters, or that the two factors causing bondage in the realm of desire do not become directly present. On the contrary, it is said that the path of the realm of desire can destroy the afflictions. Why? Because in the realm of desire there is contemplation of impurity and so forth. As stated in the sutra: “When the contemplation of impurity is well cultivated, it can destroy sensual desire.” The same is true of loving-kindness and so forth.

Question: In the realm of desire, this contemplation of impurity cannot completely eliminate the afflictions, can it?

Answer: The contemplation of impurity and so forth in the realm of form likewise cannot ultimately eliminate the afflictions.

Question: Are not the afflictions eliminated by practices such as contemplating coarseness, oppression, and so forth, rather than by contemplation of impurity and the like?

Answer: In which sutra is it said that contemplating coarseness and so forth can eliminate the afflictions, while contemplation of impurity and so forth cannot? On the contrary, the sutras say that the afflictions can be eliminated through contemplation of impurity and so forth. Moreover, what power do the contemplations of coarseness and so forth possess that enables them to eliminate the afflictions, while contemplation of impurity and so forth cannot?

Again, if the practices of contemplating coarseness and so forth exist in the realm of desire, then if these practices are used to eliminate the afflictions, that settles the matter; if they are not, the reason must be stated. Why would contemplation of impurity and so forth exist there, but not contemplation of coarseness and so forth? If the latter exists there yet does not eliminate the afflictions, then although it also exists in the realm of form, the reason why it can eliminate them there should likewise be stated.

Why is it unable to do so in the realm of desire, yet able to do so in the realm of form?

Question: Although contemplation of coarseness and so forth exists in the realm of desire, it cannot eliminate the afflictions because that realm is distracted. One whose mind is distracted cannot eliminate them, as the sutra says: “A collected mind is the Path; a distracted mind is not the Path.”

Answer: You must explain why the realm of desire is called a distracted realm. Contemplation of impurity and so forth exists there. If it is a distracted realm, how can one contemplate bones and the other signs of transformation? Moreover, what distinct characteristic does the collected mind of the realm of form possess that is absent from the realm of desire?

Question: Because the path of the realm of form can attain freedom from desire. Dying here, one is reborn in the realm of form, just as one uses one wedge to remove another.

Answer: What is meant by freedom from desire?

Question: Eliminating the afflictions is called freedom from desire. The path of the realm of form can eliminate the afflictions, whereas that of the realm of desire cannot.

Answer: After adherents of non-Buddhist paths have severed the fetters, they give rise to them again and are reborn in the Desire Realm. Therefore, when ordinary beings are said to have severed the fetters, this is not called the severance of the afflictions. If, after being severed, they arise again, then should not fetters severed by the uncontaminated path also arise again?

This cannot be so. Moreover, the sutra says that only after severing the three fetters can one sever the three poisons. Ordinary beings cannot sever the three fetters and therefore cannot become free from desire.

Moreover, ordinary beings cannot sever the three fetters and therefore cannot become free from desire. Furthermore, ordinary beings constantly entertain thoughts of self and the like, and thus cannot sever the view of a self and the other fetters. If ordinary beings could become free from desire, all their afflictions should cease to exist.

Why? Because all afflictions arise through numerous conditions, just as the sutra says that the self is formed through numerous conditions. If this ordinary being does not give rise to the view of a self regarding the five skandhas of the Desire Realm, while not yet having acquired the skandhas of the higher realms, would he not then be entirely without the view of a self?

Such faults would follow. Thus, his afflictions would necessarily have been completely and permanently severed; would this ordinary being then be an arhat? Yet in truth his afflictions have not been completely severed.

As the sutra says: “When they hear a great peal of thunder, two kinds of people are unafraid: a Wheel-Turning Sage King and an arhat.” Should this ordinary being also be unafraid?

Moreover, an arhat does not delight in life or fear death. Thus, when the arhat Upasena was bitten by a snake and his life was about to end, his faculties did not change and his complexion remained unaltered. Should this person also be the same? Furthermore, the eight worldly dharmas cannot obscure an arhat’s mind. Should this person also be the same, since he has become free from desire? Yet in truth, although ordinary beings are said to be free from desire, they possess none of these characteristics. Therefore, know that they have not severed the afflictions.

Question: Ordinary beings can sever the afflictions, because when their lives end here, they are reborn in the Form Realm. If they had not severed them, how could they be reborn there? The sutra also says that adherents of non-Buddhist paths become free from desire.

It further says that Arada Kalama and Udraka Ramaputra abandoned the Desire Realm and the Form Realm and were reborn in the Formless Realm. It also says that by means of form one becomes free from desire, by means of the formless one becomes free from form, and by means of cessation one becomes free from the arising of conceptual thought. Therefore, your assertion that ordinary beings are not said to have severed the afflictions because, although they sever them, they arise again is unreasonable.

You also say that however much ordinary beings sever, in truth they merely suppress; it is only conventionally called severance and relinquishment, while in reality they do not sever anything. Though in truth they are not free from desire, they are said to be free from desire. As the verse says: If one thinks in terms of self and what belongs to self, only when death comes can these be severed.

A young child playing with earth cherishes it and clings to it while still fond of it; but when the child grows weary of it, the child immediately breaks it apart and casts it away. This too is called freedom from desire. Yet there is a difference between the severance attained by non-Buddhists and severance through death: severance through death does not lead to rebirth in the Form or Formless Realm; and although a child offers up the earth, this does not produce a great karmic result.

Though the words employed are the same, their meanings differ. Therefore, should it not be known that ordinary beings truly attain severance and relinquishment?

Answer: There are distinctions among methods of suppression. If one can deeply suppress the afflictions, one is reborn in the two realms of Form and Formlessness. Moreover, if one can suppress the view of a self, the faults already described would follow.

If one cannot suppress the view of a self in the Desire Realm, how can one be reborn in the Form and Formless Realms? One merely suppresses greed and anger and is therefore reborn in the Form Realm. One cannot suppress the view of a self and the other fetters.

Therefore, know that ordinary beings truly cannot sever the fetters. The Desire Realm also contains wholesome dharmas capable of suppressing the afflictions; therefore, know that the Desire Realm also possesses wisdom cultivated through practice. Moreover, the sutra says that, apart from the seven bases, the attainment of the Path is also permitted.

Therefore, know that, relying on concentration belonging to the Desire Realm, one can give rise to true wisdom.

Question: Does this person not attain arhatship by relying on the preliminary stage of the first dhyana rather than on concentration belonging to the Desire Realm?

Answer: No. When it is said “apart from the seven bases,” both the first dhyana and its preliminary stage have already been excluded. Moreover, there is no reason here for one to rely on the preliminary stage rather than on concentration belonging to the Desire Realm.

If this practitioner can enter the preliminary stage, why can he not enter the first dhyana? This too has no justification. Furthermore, the Susima Sutra says: “First comes knowledge of the stability of dharmas; afterward comes knowledge of nirvana.” This does not mean that one must first attain dhyana concentration and only afterward exhaust the contaminants.

It means only that one must certainly begin with knowledge of the stability of dharmas and subsequently exhaust the contaminants. Therefore, know that the dhyana concentrations are excluded. It was precisely to exclude the dhyana concentrations that the Susima Sutra was taught.

If the preliminary stage were admitted, the same fault as with the dhyanas would follow. Moreover, no sutra mentions the name “preliminary stage.” This is merely a distinction produced by your own conceptual imagination.

Question: I previously gave the analogy of the wedge. Therefore, know that a path of one level can sever the fetters of another level, just as a small wedge can remove a large wedge. In this way, the path of the Form Realm can sever the fetters of the Desire Realm.

If a practitioner first severs desire and evil, unwholesome dharmas, only then can he enter the first dhyana. Therefore, know that there must certainly be a preliminary stage whose concentration severs desire. It is also said that, by relying on form, one becomes free from desire.

If there were no preliminary stage, how could one rely on form? Furthermore, the sutra says: “If a practitioner attains pure happiness, he can relinquish impure happiness.” This is just as Nanda was able to abandon his wife only after he was promised lovely maidens. Moreover, if one has not attained the tranquil flavor of the first dhyana, one cannot regard the five sensual desires as base and inferior.

Therefore, know that one must first attain the preliminary stage of the first dhyana before one can relinquish the Desire Realm.

Answer: By attaining the pure and wholesome states of the Desire Realm, one can sever the unwholesome, as in the five kinds of inclination toward renunciation. Thus, when a noble disciple recollects the five sensual desires, joy does not arise and the mind does not become open and harmonious, but contracts like a scorched feather or sinew; yet when he considers the dharma of renunciation, his mind becomes open and unobstructed.

It is also said that whenever a practitioner gives rise to unwholesome discursive thought, he immediately extinguishes it with wholesome discursive thought. Therefore, your analogy of removing a wedge can also apply to the Desire Realm. Your statement that one becomes free from desire by relying on form concerns the final result.

A practitioner uses the path of the Desire Realm to sever the afflictions, severing them successively until he becomes capable of attaining the wholesome dharmas of the Form Realm. Only then does he ultimately sever the Desire Realm and attain the dharmas of the Form Realm. You also say that an arhat who attains the concentration of cessation has also attained the other concentrations.

This merely describes the final result. Your statements about attaining pure and sublime happiness and the pure flavor of tranquility have both already been answered in general. Moreover, if there were no concentration in the Desire Realm, how could a distracted mind realize the wholesome dharmas of the Form Realm?

Question: Does not an arhat liberated through wisdom lack concentration and possess wisdom alone?

Answer: In this case, only dhyana concentration is denied. There must certainly be a brief period in which the mind is collected, even if only for a single thought-moment. As the Buddha says in the sutra: “When a bhiksu takes up his robe, the three poisons are present; only after he has put it on do they cease.” No sutra says that true knowledge can arise in a scattered and distracted mind; rather, they all speak of collecting the mind and knowing reality as it is.

CHAPTER 195: THE FOUR UNOBSTRUCTED KNOWLEDGES

Question: Is there a worldly knowledge close to the stage of the Dharma?

Answer: This is the knowledge present in the Dharma of Warmth and the other preparatory stages, which can destroy provisional designations. Because this knowledge perceives the truth through worldly conventions, it is called worldly knowledge; because it is close to the noble path, it is called “close to the stage of the Dharma.”

Question: On the path of seeing the truths, are future knowledge and the other kinds of knowledge cultivated?

Answer: There is no future knowledge or the like. How could it be said otherwise? Why? Because within the characteristics of dharmas there is no mind that apprehends provisional designations. Therefore, on the path of seeing the truths, worldly knowledge is not cultivated.

Question: The sutra speaks of four unobstructed knowledges. Is this so?

Answer: Just as unobstructed knowledge concerning names is called unobstructed knowledge of phenomena, unobstructed knowledge concerning vocal sounds is called unobstructed knowledge of expression, because sounds and speech differ according to different regions and customs. As the sutra says, “A practitioner should not become attached to the speech of any country.” Some forms of speech are inappropriate in meaning and difficult to understand.

Without names, meanings cannot be made clear. To have no obstruction or exhaustion in such modes of expression is called unobstructed knowledge of eloquent exposition. As the sutra says: “There are four modes of teaching the Dharma: one may expound with meaningful import but not attain the unconditioned; one may attain the unconditioned but lack meaningful import; one may possess both; or one may fail in both.” These three are called skillfulness in expression.

The unobstructed knowledge that comprehends the meanings within names and words is called unobstructed knowledge of meaning. As it is said, there are four modes of teaching the Dharma: possessing skillfulness in meaning but not skillfulness in language; possessing skillfulness in language but not skillfulness in meaning; possessing both kinds of skillfulness; and possessing neither kind of skillfulness. One who can attain these four kinds of unobstructed knowledge is fully endowed with skillful means.

One who teaches the Dharma at the middle or superior level is difficult to answer and difficult to approach, delights in unconditioned exposition, possesses inexhaustible meaningful import and wisdom, and encounters no impediment in speech.

Question: How can this unobstructed knowledge be attained?

Answer: It is attained through the causal conditions of karma from previous lives. If, life after life, one skillfully cultivates the causal conditions of wisdom and the means associated with the skandhas, then through the power of that cultivation, even though in the present life one has not studied written texts or read and recited the scriptures, one may nevertheless attain it, just as one attains the divine eye and the other superknowledges.

Question: What kind of practitioner can attain it?

Answer: Only noble ones can attain it. Some say that only arhats attain it, not those who are still in training. This assertion is not necessarily so. Those in training can also attain the eight liberations; why, then, could they not attain this knowledge?

Question: In which realms do these four kinds of unobstructed knowledge exist?

Answer: All four exist in both the Desire Realm and the Form Realm. In the Formless Realm, only unobstructed knowledge of meaning exists. Unobstructed knowledge is of two kinds: conditioned and unconditioned. Those in training possess both kinds; those beyond training possess only the unconditioned kind. When they are attained, all are attained at once. Women can attain them, as did the bhiksuni Dhammadinna.

CHAPTER 196: THE FIVE KNOWLEDGES

The five knowledges are: knowledge of the abiding nature of phenomena, knowledge of nirvana, knowledge free from contention, knowledge arising from aspiration, and knowledge of the ultimate limit. Knowing how phenomena arise is called knowledge of the abiding nature of phenomena, as when birth conditions aging and death, and so on through ignorance; this is called knowledge of the abiding nature of phenomena. The cessation of these phenomena is called knowledge of nirvana, as when the cessation of birth brings about the cessation of aging and death, and so on until, through the cessation of ignorance, formations also cease.

Question: If so, knowledge of nirvana should also be called knowledge of the abiding nature of phenomena. Why? Because whether or not a Buddha appears, this nature always abides.

Answer: The complete cessation of all phenomena is called nirvana. When they have entirely ceased, what phenomenon remains that could abide?

Question: Is nirvana not something that truly exists?

Answer: Because the skandhas cease and nothing remains, it is called nirvana. What else is there within it?

Question: Nirvana truly exists. How is this known? The Truth of Cessation is called nirvana.

Since the Truths of Suffering and the others truly exist, nirvana must also truly exist. Furthermore, the knowledge relating to nirvana is called knowledge of cessation. If there were no phenomenon, how could knowledge arise?

Moreover, in the sutra the Buddha told the bhiksus: “There is the arisen, which is a conditioned phenomenon, and there is the unarisen, which is an unconditioned phenomenon.” Another sutra says: “There are only two kinds of phenomena: conditioned and unconditioned.” Conditioned phenomena undergo arising, cessation, abiding, and alteration; unconditioned phenomena do not undergo arising, cessation, abiding, or alteration.

Another sutra says: “Of all phenomena, whether conditioned or unconditioned, the complete cessation of nirvana alone is supreme.” It is also said that form is impermanent, while nirvana, which is the cessation of form, is permanent; the same applies through consciousness. Moreover, the sutra says: “Cessation must be realized.” If there were no phenomenon, what would be realized? The Buddha also said in the Sutra on the Many Elements: “The wise know, as they truly are, the conditioned element and the unconditioned element.” The unconditioned element is nirvana.

Since it is known through true knowledge, how can it be said not to exist? Furthermore, nowhere in the sutras is it definitively stated that nirvana is a nonexistent phenomenon. Therefore, it is evident that your assertion that nirvana does not exist is merely your own conceptual discrimination.

Answer: If, apart from the skandhas, there were some other phenomenon called nirvana, then the complete cessation of the skandhas should not be called nirvana. Moreover, if nirvana exists, its essence should be explained: what is it like? Furthermore, the concentration that takes nirvana as its object is called signless.

If the characteristics of a phenomenon still remained, how could it be called signless? As the sutra says: “The practitioner sees the characteristics of form cease, and so on until he sees the characteristics of phenomena cease.” Moreover, throughout the sutras it is said: “All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are without self; nirvana is quiescent cessation.” Here, “self” means the intrinsic nature of phenomena.

If not seeing the intrinsic nature of phenomena is called seeing non-self, then nirvana is a phenomenon without intrinsic nature and cannot be seen, because this phenomenon does not cease. It is like a jar: while the jar exists, there is no phenomenon of the jar’s destruction; only when the jar is destroyed can one speak of the jar’s destruction. The same applies to cutting down a tree and similar acts.

Likewise, while formations remain, it is not yet called nirvana. Only through the cessation of formations does the name nirvana arise. Furthermore, the cessation of suffering does not mean that some separate phenomenon remains.

As the sutra says: “Bhiksus, when this suffering ceases, other suffering does not arise and there is no further continuity; that is the foremost quiescence and peace.” What is described is the abandonment and relinquishment of all body and mind, the complete separation from and utter cessation of craving—nirvana. Here it is said that this suffering ends and other suffering does not arise. What phenomenon could still remain to be called nirvana?

Nor does there separately exist any phenomenon called exhaustion. It is simply that craving which has arisen ceases and craving which has not arisen does not arise; this is then called exhaustion. What further phenomenon could there be that is called exhaustion?

Truly, none can be stated. Furthermore, if this phenomenon with a different name were the nonexistence of the five skandhas and yet were called nirvana, then nonexistence would therein be called existence, which is untenable. Because there is complete cessation, it is called nirvana.

It is just like the wearing out of a robe: there is no separate phenomenon of the robe’s wearing out. If it were otherwise, there would also have to be a separate phenomenon corresponding to the wearing out of a robe and the like. Your statement that there is knowledge of cessation presents no difficulty.

Knowledge also arises regarding the cutting down of a tree and similar events, yet no separate phenomenon of “cutting” exists. Moreover, knowledge arises dependent upon formations; in this case, when formations no longer remain, it is called nirvana, just as when a thing is absent, one knows that it is absent.

Question: Then does nirvana not exist at present?

Answer: It is not that nirvana does not exist; it is only that it is not a separately existing real phenomenon. If nirvana did not exist, one would remain forever in samsara with no hope of ever attaining liberation. It is like a jar being broken or a tree being cut down; there simply is no separate real entity.

The statements concerning the other Truths and the like have all already been answered in general. Why? Because there is the cessation of suffering, one speaks of the unarisen, the unoriginated, the unmade, the unconditioned, and so forth; none of these expressions presents any difficulty.

Knowledge free from contention means that, whatever knowledge one employs, one does not contend with others. Some say that it is precisely the mind of loving-kindness, because through loving-kindness one does not afflict or harm sentient beings. Others say that it is precisely non-activity, because through non-activity one does not contend with things.

Still others say that it is precisely the mind that delights in nirvana, because one who delights in nirvana has no reason to contend. Others also say that it exists in the fourth dhyana. This assertion is not necessarily so.

An arhat cultivates this knowledge and therefore does not engage in contention. Knowledge arising from aspiration is unobstructed knowledge with regard to all phenomena.

Question: If this is so, does only the Buddha, the Blessed One, uniquely attain this knowledge?

Answer: That is indeed so. Only the Buddha, the Blessed One, is fully endowed with this knowledge. Others attain unobstructed knowledge only to the extent of their capacities. Knowledge of the ultimate limit means the supreme knowledge attained by a practitioner, which is cultivated and increased through all dhyanas and concentrations. For example, one gains mastery over the extension or reduction of one’s lifespan and similar matters. It is called knowledge of the ultimate limit—that is, knowledge that has a bounded limit.

CHAPTER 197: KNOWLEDGE OF THE SIX SUPERKNOWLEDGES

There are six superknowledges. THE SIX SUPERKNOWLEDGES are: supernatural bodily powers, the divine eye, the divine ear, knowledge of others’ minds, recollection of past lives, and the extinction of the outflows. Supernatural bodily powers refer to the practitioner’s body constantly emitting water and fire, soaring into the air and grasping the sun and moon, appearing and disappearing, flying to the realm of Brahma the Sovereign, and performing various transformations. All such activities are called supernatural powers.

Question: How can these things be accomplished?

Answer: They are attained because the practitioner diligently cultivates meditative concentration. As a sutra says, the power of one in meditative concentration is inconceivable. Some say that transformation is a karmically indeterminate state of mind.

This is unreasonable. If that practitioner manifests various transformations for the benefit of others, how can this be called indeterminate? Some say that a mind of the Desire Realm produces transformations in the Desire Realm, while a mind of the Form Realm produces transformations in the Form Realm.

This statement is also unreasonable. The same principle should apply to the eye and the other faculties: can one use consciousness of the Desire Realm to see the Form Realm? Thus, what fault would there be if a mind of the Form Realm produced transformations in the Desire Realm?

Others say that supernatural powers based on the first dhyana can reach the Brahma worlds, while those based on the fourth dhyana can reach as far as the Akanishtha Heaven. This too is unreasonable. It depends upon the extent of one’s faculties and powers: a person of keen faculties can use supernatural powers based on the first dhyana to reach the fourth dhyana; a person of dull faculties who uses supernatural powers based on the second dhyana cannot use those based on the first dhyana.

For example, when the Great Brahma King goes to the intermediate dhyana, there are no supernatural powers there; although the power of the first dhyana can reach the Brahma heavens, by means of the first dhyana one cannot know where the Brahma King is. Moreover, the Buddha uses recollection of past lives to remember the Formless Realm. As a sutra says: “Whatever former place of birth there may have been in the Form Realm or the Formless Realm, the Buddha remembers and knows it all.” Therefore, this is not fixed.

Others say that the divine eye is of the nature of wisdom. This also is incorrect. The divine eye is formed through luminosity, whereas wisdom is not so formed.

Question: A sutra says that cultivating the perception of light can produce knowledge and vision. Is this knowledge and vision the divine eye?

Answer: No. It is also said that the divine ear is of the nature of wisdom; yet it is called an ear, and therefore it is not wisdom. Moreover, the divine eye takes present forms as its objects, whereas mental consciousness does not do so. Furthermore, the explanation of the divine eye says that it knows the karmic retributions of sentient beings. Eye-consciousness does not possess this power; it is only when knowledge arises in mental consciousness through the use of eye-consciousness that this occurs. Thus, the material form produced through meditative concentration is called the divine eye.

Question: How large or small is the form of the divine eye?

Answer: It is about the size of the pupil.

Question: What of a blind person?

Answer: It likewise occupies the place of the eye.

Question: Is the divine eye one or two?

Answer: There are two.

Question: Does it see only in whichever direction one looks?

Answer: It sees throughout all directions.

Question: Do magically created persons also possess it?

Answer: They do not. The person who creates the transformation possesses it. The discussion of the divine ear is likewise.

When a practitioner knows the mind of another, this is called knowledge of others’ minds.

Question: Why is it not said that one knows the mental factors of another?

Answer: For this reason, there are no separate mental factors; knowing another’s feeling, perception, and so forth is also called knowledge of others’ minds. Others say that this knowledge takes objects of the same nature, as when the outflowed or the outflow-free knows the outflow-free. This is unreasonable.

They do not state any definite cause or condition by which it knows an object of the same nature. Some say that it takes only the present as its object. This too is incorrect.

It may take the future as its object, as when someone enters the concentration without awareness and another knows that, upon emerging from that concentration, he will become aware of such-and-such things. Some say that this knowledge cannot know the path of seeing the truths. This statement also is incorrect.

What fault would there be in knowing it? Therefore, it is taught: “When a pratyekabuddha wishes to know the third mind-moment on the path of seeing the truths, he sees the seventh mind-moment; when a sravaka wishes to know the third mind-moment, his consciousness sees the sixteenth.” Is this not called the path of seeing the truths? Others say that this knowledge cannot know a person of higher faculties on a higher stage.

This also is not fixed. Devas also know the Buddha’s mind. For example, on one occasion the Buddha greatly desired to dismiss the Sangha, and later considered allowing it to return; the Brahma King knew all this.

On another occasion, the Buddha thought of becoming a king so as to govern and transform the world by means of the true Dharma. Mara immediately knew this, came to him, and urged him to do so. Devas also know, “This person is an arhat,” and even, “This person is cultivating the stage of stream-enterer.” Bhiksus likewise know the Buddha’s mind.

For example, when the Buddha was about to enter nirvana, Aniruddha knew in sequence that the Buddha had entered the various meditative concentrations. Others say that this knowledge cannot know the Formless Realm. This too is unreasonable.

The Buddha can know the Formless Realm through recollection of past lives; the same applies to knowledge of others’ minds. What fault would there be in this?

Question: How does one know another’s mind?

Answer: One knows it through the object upon which it rests. For example, a mind engaged with form is called a mind that takes form as its object. The same applies to the other objects.

Question: If so, does knowledge of others’ minds take all dharmas as its objects?

Answer: Precisely so. If one did not know the object, how could one know the mind? As a sutra says: “I know that your mind is thus.” This means that it takes form and the other dharmas as objects.

Knowledge of another’s mind is of three kinds: first, knowledge through signs; second, knowledge obtained as karmic retribution; and third, knowledge attained through cultivation. Knowledge through signs means knowing by means of the Anga incantation and the like. Knowledge obtained as karmic retribution is that possessed by ghosts, spirits, and the like.

Knowledge attained through cultivation is the knowledge of others’ minds acquired through the power of cultivating meditative concentration. Among these six superknowledges, that which is attained through cultivation, or through the various skandhas of embodiment in past lives, is called the knowledge of past lives.

Question: Whose skandhas does one recollect?

Answer: One recollects one’s own skandhas, those of others, and those of non-sentient things. Although one cannot recollect the skandhas of one who surpasses oneself, one can know that person’s precepts and other dharmas. How is this known? Sariputra replied to the Blessed One: “I cannot know the Buddha’s mind in the past or future, but I can know his dharmas.” Furthermore, a deva of the Pure Abodes knew the Buddha’s mind and therefore came and said to him: “Thus it is, Blessed One! The deportment of the Buddhas of the past was also like this.”

Question: In the explanation of recollection of past lives, why are common characteristics and common natures mentioned?

Answer: Because one remembers clearly, characteristics and names are stated in this way, such as the names of persons and the like. Furthermore, because one knows particular matters, they are called characteristics: surname, personal name, and clan, as when it is said, “This is your family; this is called your lineage.” Characteristics and natures are stated together so that it is understood that all are clearly known.

Question: Why is the recollection clear?

Answer: The dharmas of the past have ceased and all their characteristics have vanished, yet one is able to know them; this is indeed extraordinary. Some infer and know through characteristics but do not attain clarity, and then claim that the Buddha’s disciples are likewise. Therefore, nature and characteristics are stated together.

Some know the past through the knowledge of past lives; others know it through the contemplative wisdom of one who possesses the path, as in the teaching that formations condition consciousness. Of these two, contemplative wisdom is superior. Why?

Although a person may know eighty thousand great kalpas, if he lacks this contemplative wisdom, he may give rise to the wrong view that what has existed up to the present is called samsara and that beyond this there is nothing at all. If one possesses the contemplative wisdom of the path, one will never give rise to this erroneous thought. Some say that this knowledge recollects the past in successive order.

This is unreasonable. If one had to recollect events moment by moment and in sequence, it would be difficult to know fully even the events of a single kalpa, much less those of immeasurable kalpas.

Question: Why, then, does a sutra say: “Throughout the ninety-one kalpas up to the present, I have never seen generosity result in loss or fail to bear fruit”?

Answer: In this passage, the Buddha takes the seven Buddhas as witnesses. Moreover, he also lived for a long time in the Pure Abodes and saw those Buddhas there. Furthermore, because the Buddha attained true knowledge, his merit was pure. If a person who makes offerings obtains merit in two lives, this accords with that teaching. Some say that this knowledge cannot know higher planes. This is unreasonable. It has already been answered above in the discussion of supernatural bodily powers and the other superknowledges.

Question: If this is of the nature of recollection, why is it called knowledge?

Answer: Recollection arises in dependence upon characteristics. The past has no present characteristic, yet one is able to recollect it. Therefore, it should be known that superior wisdom is called recollection. Recollection of past lives is of three kinds: first, that which employs the knowledge of past lives; second, that which is obtained as karmic recompense; and third, spontaneously remembering upon birth. The knowledge of past lives is said to be obtained through cultivation. That obtained as karmic recompense is found among ghosts, spirits, and the like. Spontaneously remembering upon birth occurs in the human realm.

Question: Through what karma does one spontaneously remember upon birth?

Answer: It is obtained through karma that does not afflict or harm sentient beings. Why is this? Because the sufferings at death and birth are extremely oppressive, causing recollection to be lost. At such times, it is difficult not to lose one’s memory; therefore, this must depend upon wholesome karma. Furthermore, some people can recall at most seven past lives. This matter is not fixed. Some who in previous lives deeply cultivated the practice of non-harming are able to recollect the distant past.

The superknowledge that realizes the knowledge of the exhaustion of the outflows is precisely the vajra samadhi. The vajra samadhi is the exhaustion of the outflows; the knowledge of exhaustion on the path of no further obstruction is the knowledge of one beyond training. Because the vajra samadhi completely extinguishes all outflows, it is called the superknowledge that realizes the knowledge of the exhaustion of the outflows.

Question: Regarding the other superknowledges, should it not also be explained through which Dharma they are realized?

Answer: It was previously stated that through deeply cultivating meditative concentration one realizes the superknowledge of spiritual powers. Furthermore, according to the function to be employed, both the realization and the matter realized are called superknowledge. Some say that the entire Noble Path is an expedient means for exhausting the outflows.

As stated in the sutra: “When a Buddha appears in the world, if a good person hears the Dharma, leaves home, observes the precepts, abandons the five hindrances, cultivates concentration, and sees the Truths…” All these are expedient means for exhausting the outflows. Others say that giving and other wholesome dharmas are also called causes and conditions for exhausting the outflows, as stated in the sutra: “The practitioner practices giving to assist in accomplishing the exhaustion of the outflows and the knowledge of emptiness and non-self.” This is the true realization of the superknowledge of the exhaustion of the outflows.

This Dharma has the particular name “vajra samadhi.” Because it can destroy all characteristics, it is called vajra. Practitioners of non-Buddhist paths are said to possess only the five superknowledges, because none of them attains this true knowledge.

Question: It is through the knowledge of non-self that the view of self is destroyed. Why, then, are craving, anger, and the like eliminated through this knowledge?

Answer: The knowledge of non-self can extinguish all characteristics. Because characteristics no longer remain, all afflictions are extinguished.

Question: Since the initial knowledge of non-self can destroy all characteristics, what further purpose do the second and subsequent knowledges serve?

Answer: Although the characteristics are extinguished, they arise again; therefore, the second and subsequent knowledges must be employed.

Question: If characteristics arise again after being extinguished, there would be no limit to this. Then there would be no path of the arhat.

Answer: There is a limit. As we presently observe, when milk ceases, it may arise again; but there is a time when milk ceases and butter arises. Thus there is a limit. Characteristics are likewise. When iron is heated, its black characteristic ceases and then arises again; but when the red characteristic arises, there is then a limit. The various analogies of drops of milk in a vessel, and so forth, are likewise. When all characteristics have been completely extinguished and no further characteristic arises, this is called attaining the path of the arhat.

Question: Do arhats have no characteristics at all?

Answer: If they abide in an unconcentrated mind, at that time they also have the characteristics of form and so forth, but these do not produce faults. When a person sees form and, through a distorted mind, discriminates wrongly, characteristics can then produce faults.

Question: What is the knowledge of emptiness and non-self?

Answer: If, within the five skandhas, a practitioner does not perceive a conventionally designated sentient being, and through the emptiness of dharmas sees the substance of form cease, up to and including the cessation of consciousness, this is called the knowledge of emptiness and non-self.

Question: Even supposing that dharmas permanently remained, craving and the other afflictions could still be completely eliminated. It is said that although the myriad things perpetually exist, those who are diligent can eliminate craving and attachment. Why, then, must perceptions be extinguished?

Answer: The sutra states: “Whatever has the characteristic of arising, knowing its characteristic of cessation, one attains the pure Dharma eye regarding all dharmas.” Where there is cessation and severance, there is ultimate severance. Some practitioners, having departed from sensual desire, restrain and cut off craving and anger; therefore, the Buddha spoke this verse concerning them. It is also said that all conditioned formations are empty by nature, like illusions. Ignorant ordinary beings take them to be truly existent, whereas trainees clearly understand that they are false and illusory. Therefore, it should be known that one realizes the cessation of all dharmas by means of such wisdom. This is called realizing the superknowledge of the exhaustion of the outflows.

CHAPTER 198: ACCEPTANCE AND KNOWLEDGE

Question: The sutra states: “If a practitioner possesses seven expedient means and three contemplations of meaning, then regarding these dharmas the practitioner will swiftly exhaust the outflows.” What knowledge is this?

Answer: The seven expedient means are the wisdom born of hearing and the wisdom born of reflection. Why is this? Because one whose mind is not yet concentrated gives rise to this contemplation: This is form; this is the accumulation of form; this is the cessation of form; this is the path leading to the cessation of form; this is the gratification in form, its danger, and the escape from it.

Question: If these are the wisdom born of hearing and reflection, why is it said that one will swiftly exhaust the outflows?

Answer: Although they are the wisdom born of hearing and reflection, by thus discerning the five skandhas they can destroy the mind that conceives a self; therefore, it is said that one will swiftly exhaust the outflows. The knowledge of the three contemplations means contemplating conditioned dharmas as impermanent, suffering, and non-self. If one contemplates conditioned dharmas merely through the gateways of the skandhas, dhatus, and ayatanas, there is no benefit.

Question: If so, impermanence and suffering were already explained under dangers, while non-self was already explained under escape. Why, then, are these three contemplations explained again?

Answer: In learning the three contemplations, the wisdom born of hearing and reflection comes first, followed by the wisdom born of cultivation. The seven factors were first explained within the wisdom born of hearing and reflection; afterward, the three contemplations are explained within the wisdom born of cultivation. Why is this? If by impermanence one means the characteristic of suffering and destruction, that is the impermanence of destruction, not the impermanence of conditioned formations. Although the elimination of sensual defilement was mentioned, the means by which it is eliminated was not explained. Therefore, the meaning of the three contemplations is explained afterward.

Question: What are called the eight acceptances?

Answer: If there is a knowledge capable of destroying conventional designation, this is called acceptance. This acceptance is present in the dharmas of Warmth, Summit, Acceptance, and Foremost-in-the-World.

Question: Practitioners also possess acceptance regarding the Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, the precepts, and so forth. Why are only eight mentioned?

Answer: They are mentioned because they are superior. “Superior” means being near the Path. Because acceptance is wisdom and knowledge, it is called acceptance.

Thus the knowledge of the Dharma of suffering is called acceptance of the Dharma of suffering, and the others are generally likewise. Why is this? One first employs the wisdom born of reflection in accordance with the Path, and only afterward obtains direct knowledge.

It is like an elephant keeper who first examines an elephant’s tracks and, by inferential knowledge, knows that it is there, and only afterward sees it directly. The practitioner is likewise: first using the knowledge of acceptance to infer and contemplate nirvana, and afterward directly seeing it through knowledge. Therefore, the sutra says that the wise person is one who sees and is able to exhaust the outflows.

CHAPTER 199: THE NINE KNOWLEDGES

Question: A certain treatise master says that when an arhat realizes the knowledge of exhaustion, the arhat attains nine kinds of mundane knowledge: wholesome and indeterminate knowledge pertaining to the Desire Realm, and so forth, up to wholesome and indeterminate knowledge pertaining to the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. How is this matter?

Answer: Not all arhats attain the meditative concentrations, so how could they attain all nine knowledges?

Question: Do not all arhats attain all meditative concentrations, although not all are able to enter them directly?

Answer: If they are unable to enter them directly, how can this be called attainment? It is like someone saying, “I know the scriptures and writings,” while not knowing a single character. This matter is likewise.

Question: If a person has departed from sensual desire but is not yet able to enter the first dhyana directly, will that person not be reborn there upon death?

Answer: The sutra states: “One first enters it here and is afterward reborn there.” If one does not enter it here now, how can one be reborn there?

Question: When one departs from sensual desire, have not all past and future dhyanas already been attained, so that one is reborn through the karmic recompense thereby acquired?

Answer: Future karma has not been performed and has not arisen, so it cannot yield karmic recompense. Past dhyanas have already arisen in the mind; if they give karmic recompense, there is no difficulty. Moreover, one certainly cannot attain future karma. If it could be attained, all future things should be attained—for who could obstruct them and cause some not to be attained?

Question: If future dharmas cannot be obtained, then a trainee should not accomplish the eight factors, and one beyond training should not accomplish the ten factors. Why is this? If one relies on the second dhyana and the others to enter the fixed state of the true Dharma, this person will only obtain right thought in the future.

Again, when a practitioner's knowledge of exhaustion becomes present, one then obtains worldly right view in the future. Again, there are those who rely on the formless concentrations to attain the fruit of arhatship. Such persons obtain right thought, right speech, right action, and right livelihood in the future.

Again, if one relies on the third dhyana and the others to attain the Noble Path, one obtains joy in the future. All such dharmas would therefore be nonexistent. Hence, one should know that future dharmas exist.

Moreover, if there were no cultivation in the future, how could the fruits of the various dhyanas and concentrations be attained? If, while on the path of knowledge, a practitioner obtains by inference the fruits subsumed under the various knowledges and concentrations, then, if this were not so, those fruits should always be obtained. But this is impossible.

Therefore, one should know that there must be cultivation in the future.

Answer: To say that those factors do not exist does no harm. Why is this? Because I say that the factors such as morality are obtained sequentially, not simultaneously. Thus, this cannot be used as an objection. As for your statement that those various kinds are obtained: when a practitioner attains the knowledge of suffering, the other kinds of knowledge are all said to have been obtained. It is like obtaining the kind that is a cause and therefore being said to have obtained the characteristic of a cause; yet one is not said to obtain the characteristic of a cause gradually in each successive thought-moment. This matter is likewise.

Question: However many knowledges of suffering and the others a practitioner has successively obtained, they have all been relinquished. Then, upon simultaneously attaining the fruit of stream-entry, which knowledge is included in that attainment?

Answer: Once the uncontaminated knowledges have been obtained, they are not lost.

Question: If what was previously obtained is not lost, then there is no distinction between “one who has attained” and “one who practices.” Why? Because one who has attained the fruit is precisely a practitioner. Does this not entail such faults?

Answer: Even if there is no distinction, what fault is there? Just as one who has accomplished something is also called a practitioner, so it is here. Moreover, since this person further obtains a superior dharma, there is a distinction; therefore, there is no fault.

It is like one who has undertaken the five precepts and later receives the disciplinary observances of renunciation without losing the original precepts. Moreover, one who attains the fruit differs because of seeing the Path. It is like a person who, although already knowing a previous matter, differs because of a matter superior to the former one.

This is likewise. Therefore, one should know that there is no attainment in the future. Furthermore, when a practitioner abides in the knowledge of emptiness and non-self, how could worldly dharmas then be obtained?

Thus, one should know that when the knowledge of exhaustion is attained, worldly knowledge is not attained.

Question: Do these worldly knowledges arise together with the knowledge of exhaustion and enable the arhat to form the intention to enter and emerge from concentration?

Answer: The arhat's mind arises in an uninterrupted continuum, and every thought-moment is pure. If the other nine knowledges were also obtained, then the claim that one cultivates them in the future would be without cause or condition. Why?

According to the various explanations, on this path of seeing the truths, one cultivates only what is similar and dissimilar. On the Path of Seeing, one does not cultivate the higher grounds; on the Path of Cultivation, one does. On the path of inferential knowledge, one does not cultivate wholesome conventional knowledge; with the other knowledges, one does.

On the uninterrupted path, one does not cultivate the knowledge of others' minds. When temporary liberation turns into inverted seeing, one does not cultivate the conventional path on any of the uninterrupted or liberating paths. In temporary liberation, one does not cultivate the conventional path during the nine uninterrupted paths and the first eight liberating paths, but does cultivate it during the ninth liberating path.

In a subtle mind, one does not cultivate any uncontaminated dharma. All such assertions are without reason. Therefore, you should now either state the true cause, accept this on faith, or take learning and practice to be cultivation.

While still at the stages beginning with the Dharma of Warmth, all higher-grade roots of goodness are cultivated because they all increase and flourish. It is like reciting and studying scriptures, through which they all become clear. Therefore, from the stages beginning with the Dharma of Warmth up to the knowledge of exhaustion, all are cultivated.

If this is not so, the true cause must be stated.

CHAPTER 200: THE TEN KNOWLEDGES

The ten knowledges are: knowledge of dharmas, inferential knowledge, knowledge of others' minds, conventional knowledge, the four knowledges of the truths, knowledge of exhaustion, and knowledge of non-arising. Knowing present dharmas is called knowledge of dharmas. As stated in the sutra: “The Buddha told Ananda: You see and know this dharma thus and comprehend it thus; you should also know the past and the future in the same way.” It should say “knowledge of present dharmas.” Yet it does not say “present,” but merely says “knowledge of dharmas.” As stated in the sutra: “Foolish people value present dharmas, whereas the wise value the future.” It also says that present sensual desires and future sensual desires are all nets by which one is bound by Mara.

In passages such as these, the word “present” should always be stated; because the word “present” is omitted for brevity, only “knowledge of dharmas” is said. Knowing the remaining dharmas is called inferential knowledge. The remaining dharmas are those of the past and future.

Because they are known only after present dharmas, it is called inferential knowledge. Why is this? Because one first directly knows the present and afterward knows by inference.

Knowledge of dharmas is called direct knowledge. The reflective and inferential knowing that follows this knowledge of dharmas is called inferential knowledge.

Question: This inferential knowledge is uncontaminated knowledge. How can uncontaminated knowledge be called inferential knowledge?

Answer: There is also worldly inferential knowledge. Why is this? Knowledge of dharmas, inferential knowledge, knowledge of others' minds, knowledge of suffering, knowledge of cessation, and knowledge of the Path may all be either contaminated or uncontaminated. At the stages beginning with the Dharma of Warmth, these knowledges are contaminated; only upon entering the fixed state of the Dharma are they called uncontaminated.

Question: Some say that knowing the activities of the Realm of Desire, the origination of those activities, their cessation, and the path to their cessation is called knowledge of dharmas; while knowing these four aspects of the activities of the two realms of form and formlessness is called inferential knowledge. What of this?

Answer: In the sutra, the Buddha told Ananda that the past and future should also be known in the same way. There is no sutra stating that knowing the activities in the two realms of form and formlessness is called inferential knowledge. Moreover, the sutra says: “The practitioner should reflect: I am now being consumed by present form; in the past I was also consumed by form; and in the future I shall again be consumed by form!” The sutra also says: “That birth conditions death is likewise true in the two periods of the past and future.” As Bodhisattva Ashvaghosha said in verse:

The great treatise masters all speak likewise concerning suffering and the other truths. Moreover, it is reasonable to call the knowledge of dharmas in the past and future inferential knowledge. Why is this?

A practitioner becomes disenchanted with suffering in all three periods; disenchantment means that true wisdom arises regarding those dharmas. Just as present activities are suffering, so too are the activities of the past and future suffering. Now, with which knowledge are the dharmas of the past and future known?

If they are known by knowledge of dharmas, the activities of the realms of form and formlessness also exist in the past and future, and knowledge of them should likewise be called knowledge of dharmas. There would then be only knowledge of dharmas and no inferential knowledge. If there were a separate knowledge for the past and future activities of the realms of form and formlessness, should there not also be a separate knowledge for the past and future activities of the Realm of Desire?

For these reasons, the treatise masters say: “Because there are what has been attained and what has not yet been attained, the truths are seen sequentially.” The suffering of the Realm of Desire is called attained; the suffering of the realms of form and formlessness is called not yet attained. Therefore, they cannot all be known simultaneously. Just as suffering not yet attained is known by inferential knowledge, so too the suffering in the Realm of Desire that has not yet been encountered, which is itself the truth of suffering, should be known by inferential knowledge.

Question: By which knowledge are the fetters cut off on the Path?

Answer: They should be cut off only by knowledge of dharmas. Inferential knowledge belongs to the preparatory path.

Question: Why is knowledge of dharmas used?

Answer: The knowledge of the dharma of suffering and the knowledge of the dharma of cessation are used. Why is this? When a practitioner contemplates impermanence and suffering and sees emptiness and non-self, one then realizes the cessation of all activities. All other knowledges are preparatory means.

Question: The cessation of which suffering is contemplated?

Answer: The suffering of all sensations is contemplated. It is therein that the thought of self can arise; therefore, cessation is also seen therein. As it is said, through inner liberation all craving is completely extinguished, and one declares oneself to have attained arhatship.

Question: Does the sutra not say that the abandonment of all activities is called the nature of abandonment?

Answer: Because this practitioner seeks to realize inner cessation, he becomes disenchanted with and detached from everything. Moreover, the practitioner definitely needs to realize inner cessation; the other things are not necessarily certain.

Question: How does knowledge arise with regard to the Truths?

Answer: Knowing the arising of suffering and so forth is how it arises.

Question: Since this is not a concentrated mind, how can knowledge arise?

Answer: There is such a method of contemplation. There is also the perception that the skandhas are impermanent, flawed, productive of suffering, and without self. As the sutra says: “Whatever is impermanent is therefore without self.” Why is this so?

Because the eye and the other faculties arise and cease. If they were the self, the self would arise and cease; therefore, one knows that they are not the self. When the eye and the other faculties arise, they do not come from anywhere.

Only because there is an agent is it called a self, yet the sutra says that there is no agent. Therefore, one knows that whatever is impermanent is without self. Thus, because the practitioner skillfully cultivates impermanence and non-self, body and mind attain quiescence.

Whenever any formations arise, he perceives them all as affliction and harm, and only then does the perception of suffering arise. It is like an ox without hide, which feels pain at the slightest touch. The practitioner is likewise: because of the perception of non-self, he perfects the supreme perception of suffering.

Because fools entertain the perception of self, even when subjected to great suffering, they still do not recognize it as affliction and harm. This is called knowledge of suffering. Seeing the arising of formations is called knowledge of origination.

Seeing the cessation of formations is called knowledge of cessation. Recollecting the Path from beginning to end is called knowledge of the Path.

Question: What is knowledge of exhaustion?

Answer: Because all characteristics are exhausted, it is called knowledge of exhaustion. Why is this so? Because when a trainee’s characteristics cease, they arise again; here they cease completely, and so it is called knowledge of exhaustion. As the sutra says, if one knows that delusive characteristics are merely delusive perceptions, all suffering is exhausted. The mind and knowledge of a trainee take delusive perception to be the self; the complete cessation of that mind is called knowledge of exhaustion.

As the sutra says: “Before the Buddha, an arhat, relying on the words of the Blessed One, declares: My fetters no longer remain. I no longer have any doubt concerning those fetters. I always single-mindedly gather in right mindfulness and practice correctly; greed and other unwholesome states do not enter my mind.” Here, the fetters arise through grasping at characteristics; when the characteristics cease, the fetters cease.

Because trainees practice with characteristics and signlessness, thoughts of self occasionally arise in them, just as one who sees a tree stump may suspect it to be a person. Thus, only an arhat uniquely attains freedom from doubt, because his mind constantly contemplates the five skandhas without seeing a spirit or self. Subsequently, because of the emptiness of dharmas, he does not see an intrinsic nature of form, up to and including an intrinsic nature of consciousness.

Therefore, one should know that the exhaustion of all characteristics is called knowledge of exhaustion. Knowing that characteristics will not arise is called knowledge of non-arising. After a trainee’s characteristics are exhausted, they arise again.

After the characteristics of one beyond training are exhausted, they never arise again. If one can cause all characteristics to cease completely and never arise again, this is then called knowledge of non-arising.

Question: Trainees also know that there is knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising, as when they think: I have exhausted the three fetters, and they will never arise again. Why, then, are they not said to be endowed with all ten factors?

Answer: Because trainees have not eliminated all characteristics, they are not said to possess knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising. It is like a person whose entire body is tightly bound: although one place has been loosened, he is not said to have been freed. There is also this meaning: Sariputra said that Anathapindika was endowed with all ten factors.

Furthermore, because an arhat has attained mastery, he personally knows that his fetters are exhausted and will never arise again. A trainee has not attained this. Moreover, when an arhat attains the path beyond training, he can personally know that all birth has been exhausted; this is called knowledge of exhaustion.

One who has perfected the holy life has relinquished all practices of training. For one who has done what had to be done, all that ought to have been done has been completed; he knows that after this body there will be no further continuity. Therefore, one should know that only an arhat has attained mastery regarding everything that had to be done and has perfected knowledge of exhaustion and knowledge of non-arising, not trainees.

It is like a person suffering from fever: although the fever does not continually recur, he is not called healthy. As the sutra says: “Detached from delight everywhere; extinguishing sorrow everywhere; realizing the cessation of all dharmas; constantly cultivating the undefiled mind.” Knowledge of others’ minds is as explained among the six superknowledges: sentient beings are provisional designations based on the conjunction of the five skandhas.

The forms of knowledge named here are called nominal knowledge, undefiled knowledge, and true knowledge. Because this semblance of undefiled knowledge is designated as knowledge, it is called nominal knowledge.

Question: Some say that all sentient beings are endowed with the various kinds of knowledge. How is this?

Answer: If disciples of the Buddha can know that dharmas arise from many conditions, they can attain this; how could other sentient beings do so? Although it is given the name “knowledge,” all sentient beings know only by means of perception. If one attains this knowledge, one is called an inner ordinary person.

CHAPTER 201: THE FORTY-FOUR KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE

Question: The sutra speaks of forty-four kinds of knowledge: knowledge of aging and death, knowledge of the origination of aging and death, knowledge of the cessation of aging and death, and knowledge of the path leading to the cessation of aging and death. Birth, existence, grasping, craving, feeling, contact, the six ayatanas, name-and-form, consciousness, and formations are treated in the same way. Why is this taught?

Answer: Nirvana is the true and precious Dharma-jewel, and therefore there are many gates through which to enter it. Some enter through the gate of the five skandhas; others contemplate the dhatus, ayatanas, causes and conditions, or the Truths. All such gates can lead to nirvana.

How can this be known? As the sutra says: “A king dwelt within a city. Two messengers arrived, each entering through a different gate.

After arriving, they gained audience with the king and reported the truth. Having made their report, they withdrew. Those entering through the other gates did likewise.” Here, the king represents the practitioner; the gates are contemplation of the skandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, and so forth; the two messengers are cessation and contemplation practiced in accordance with the Dharma; and reporting the truth means penetrating true emptiness.

Although these messengers enter through different gates, they all reach the same place. Likewise, although one contemplates such skillful gates as the skandhas, dhatus, and ayatanas, they all lead into nirvana. As Rahula said: While dwelling alone in a secluded place and reflecting upon the Dharma, he understood that all such dharmas accord with, turn toward, and praise nirvana.

Furthermore, the Buddha spoke of eight qualities, saying: This Dharma can extinguish the fire of the afflictions and is therefore called cessation; it can cause the practitioner’s mind to attain peace and is therefore called peaceful; it can cause the practitioner to reach perfect and complete knowledge and is therefore called arrival. Such meanings all praise nirvana. Moreover, the holy life is the Noble Eightfold Path.

Within the Noble Eightfold Path, right knowledge is supreme, and the fruit of right knowledge is nirvana. Furthermore, all the teachings proclaimed by the Buddha are for the sake of nirvana. Therefore, one should know that all such gates as the five skandhas lead to nirvana.

Question: Some treatise masters say that knowledge of aging and death is knowledge of suffering. How is this?

Answer: It is not so. Why? Because the aspect of suffering is not taught here, and therefore it is not knowledge of suffering.

Question: What kind of knowledge is it, then?

Answer: It is called knowledge of the nature of aging and death.

Question: It also speaks of knowing the origination of aging and death, the cessation of aging and death, and the path leading to the cessation of aging and death. Therefore, should it not be understood as knowledge of suffering?

Answer: This concerns causes and conditions, and therefore it is not the approach of the ultimate truth. Thus, the aspect of suffering should not be taught here; instead, origination and the other aspects should be taught because they accord with one another.

Question: Why are the aspects of satisfaction, danger, escape, and so forth not taught here?

Answer: These meanings are all included, but those who compiled the sutras abbreviated the account and therefore did not state them.

CHAPTER 202: THE SEVENTY-SEVEN KINDS OF KNOWLEDGE

Question: The sutra says: “The seventy-seven kinds of knowledge are: conditioned by birth, aging and death arise; apart from birth, there are no aging and death. It is likewise so in the two periods of the past and future.” This is knowledge of the stability of Dharma, contemplating the impermanence of the conditioned, which arises through the coming together of many conditions. The characteristics of exhaustion, decay, separation, and cessation are also contemplated in this way. This applies up to formations conditioned by ignorance. Why does it not speak here of the nature of aging and death, cessation, the Path, and so forth?

Answer: This is taught for those of keen knowledge. Merely opening the gate enables them to understand that the other dharmas are likewise. Furthermore, with regard to causation, non-Buddhist practitioners frequently make the erroneous claim that the myriad things of the world arise from primordial nature and the like. Therefore, here the Buddha speaks only of causes and conditions.

Question: Having already said that aging and death are conditioned by birth, why does it further say “not apart from”?

Answer: This is stated definitively because among dharmas there are causes that are not determinate. For example, giving is a cause of the merit of wealth, yet observing the precepts also brings merit, as it is said that by observing the precepts one is reborn in heaven. Or some may think that birth, aging, and death arise through causes and conditions, or that they arise without causes and conditions; therefore, this must be stated definitively.

Question: Why must this also be stated definitively concerning past and future lives?

Answer: The present differs in characteristics from the past. That is, beings in past ages had immeasurable lifespans and powers equal to those of the devas. Since there were such differences, it might be feared that people would doubt whether lifespans and the like differed from aging and death, and thus whether their causes and conditions must also differ.

Therefore, this must be stated definitively. The same applies to the future. These six are called knowledge of the abiding nature of dharmas; the remainder is called knowledge of nirvana.

Because it enables aging and death to continue in succession, it is called impermanent, conditioned, produced, and arisen through many conditions. The characteristic of exhaustion and the characteristic of decay constitute the contemplation of impermanence; the characteristic of separation constitutes the contemplation of suffering; and the characteristic of cessation constitutes the contemplation of emptiness and non-self.

Why is this so? Because therein the nature of form ceases, and the natures of feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness cease; this is the meaning of the three contemplations. As a sutra says: “A bhiksu who possesses skillful means in seven respects and contemplates the meaning in three ways swiftly brings the outflows to an end.” All these constitute knowledge of nirvana.

In this way, knowledge of causes and conditions has hundreds of thousands of immeasurable meanings, such as knowledge concerning the eye and so forth. As a sutra says: “The eye is conditioned by karma; karma is conditioned by craving; craving is conditioned by ignorance; ignorance is conditioned by wrong mindfulness; wrong mindfulness is conditioned by the eye and forms. The outflows are conditioned by wrong mindfulness; the nutriments are conditioned by craving; the five sensual desires are conditioned by nutriment such as material food; rebirth in hell and a short lifespan are conditioned by killing, and so forth.” If there was suffering before and there is suffering now, both are conditioned by deluded thought; deluded thought is conditioned by attachment and aversion of body and mind;

attachment and aversion are conditioned by sensual desire; and sensual desire is conditioned by wrong thought.

In this manner, knowledge of all causes and conditions is immeasurable and boundless; one should understand it for oneself.

End of Volume 16 of the Treatise on the Establishment of Truth