隨相論

THIS TREATISE EXPLAINS THE SIXTEEN TRUTHS

Question: In general, what are these sixteen truths? Why are they called sixteen?

Answer: The Vibhāṣā explains sixteen aspects, thereby establishing sixteen names. These are the true characteristics by which phenomena are designated. The Upadeśa Scripture explains that there are sixteen names.

Although there are seven entities, the Truth of Suffering has four aspects: impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self; together with the Truths of Origination, Cessation, and the Path, each counted as one, they make seven. The Buddha’s Original Teaching Upadeśa Scripture explains this meaning as follows: After the Buddha’s nirvana, Venerable Ānanda and Venerable Kātyāyana recited what they had heard and then explained the meaning of the scriptures, just as disciples who composed treatises explained the scriptures.

Therefore, it is called the Upadeśa Scripture (Discourse on Cultivating Virtue Through Dispassion). Upadeśa, “exposition,” is one of the twelve divisions of scripture. The Vibhāṣā also arose from this Upadeśa.

In brief, the Upadeśa was transmitted from this source. Now, concerning the Vibhāṣā Scripture, we shall first rely upon its explanation. Because conditioned phenomena depend upon causes and conditions, they are called impermanent.

Being powerless, they cannot arise by themselves; only upon encountering conditions do they arise. This is like a small child who cannot stand up by himself but must rely upon another’s assistance before he can rise. Therefore, it is said that they are dependent.

These conditions are craving and karma. Only when both these dharmas are present can the five skandhas arise and karma produce its result. Although karma may be capable of producing a subsequent result, if there is no craving or attachment, that result will not arise.

It is also like earth and water, which can produce sprouts of grass and grain. If no one tends them, the seeds remain dormant within the earth, and those sprouts certainly cannot arise. If craving and karma do not arise, that result cannot arise.

When craving and karma unite as causes and conditions, the result is produced and, once produced, exists. When the power of karma is exhausted, that result ceases to exist. Ultimately, it again becomes empty, for from beginning to end it is not independent of causes and conditions.

Because it belongs to conditions, it is called impermanent. The nature of affliction is called suffering. Affliction is of two kinds: first, adverse affliction; second, compliant affliction.

When disciples of the Buddha undergo adverse affliction, they constantly give rise to fear concerning birth and death. A scripture says: It is like heating a sword blade in a fire until it dazzles the eyes. When a person grasps it, he anticipates its harmful character. Merely thinking of it, he constantly gives rise to fear. The Buddha told his disciples: Fear of birth and death is likewise. Therefore, this is spoken of in the adverse sense: birth, aging, sickness, death, and so forth manifest the characteristics of affliction and suffering.

For ordinary beings, compliant affliction pertains to their craving for birth and death; that is, they comply with and follow it. It is like two brothers: the elder brother truly loves the younger, but the younger is often angry with him. Although the elder brother may become angry, he still dearly loves his younger brother.

Ordinary beings cling to birth and death and undergo suffering and affliction, yet remain attached to them in the same way. Therefore, the nature of affliction is taken as suffering. Because it counteracts the notion of “mine,” it is called emptiness.

Ordinary beings cling to all dharmas and say, “These belong to me.” To reveal clearly that none of them belongs to oneself, this counteractive teaching is called emptiness. Emptiness counteracts the view of self, for ordinary beings cling to the five skandhas and regard them as the self. To reveal clearly that all dharmas are without self, non-self is taught as the counteragent to this attachment.

Next, the four names of the Truth of Origination are explained. A dharma that serves as a seed according to principle is called a cause because it can produce a result. Such a dharma-seed must possess four conditions. According to this principle, those four conditions are as follows:

First, a damaged dharma-seed cannot produce anything. It is like grinding and damaging a seed: although all the other necessary conditions may be present, it cannot produce a sprout. Craving and afflictions can produce both results and further seeds; if they are destroyed, then although all the other conditions are present, they cannot produce a result.

Second is long-term dormancy. Although all the conditions are present, a sprout cannot be produced because the seed has remained dormant for a long time. Results produced by craving are likewise. Śrāvakas cultivate the path for sixty great kalpas; pratyekabuddhas cultivate it for one hundred kalpas; and Buddhas cultivate it for three asaṃkhyeya kalpas.

Before those belonging to the Three Vehicles have generated the aspiration, they give rise, like icchantikas, to craving and afflictions. Afflictions then produce karma, and karma brings about results. Yet before those results are experienced, the merit and wisdom cultivated in the distant past over many days and months do not develop deeply or extensively.

This affects the preceding cause and weakens its power. Thus, although all the other causes and conditions are present, it cannot produce a result. A scripture states that the ninety-eight delusions produce afflictions, and that a single affliction can produce the ninety-eight delusions.

For example, the cause of greed can fully produce the ninety-eight delusions, and all of them produce greed. Third is loss of the proper time. Although all the conditions are present, a sprout cannot be produced.

Seeds sown in spring immediately grow, whereas seeds cannot grow in winter. When the cause loses its proper time, the result cannot arise. For example, because of ignorance, Aṅgulimāla (the Harmless One) killed two hundred people.

Upon death he necessarily should have fallen into hell, yet in that very life he became an arhat. Although the conditions for the evil and wrongful deeds he had previously committed were present, they could no longer produce their results. Fourth is the incompleteness of causes and conditions.

Although the seed has not been damaged, covered over, or deprived of its proper time, it still cannot produce a sprout. If earth, water, human labor, and other causes and conditions are incomplete, the seed cannot sprout. A cause’s production of a result is likewise.

Although it has not been destroyed, has not remained dormant for a long time, and has not lost its proper time, if its causes and conditions are incomplete, it cannot produce a result. For uncreated karma capable of producing a favorable result, three things must be sufficient: first, association with good spiritual friends; second, a mind inclined toward faith; third, the creation of much powerful evil karma. The three corresponding conditions must be sufficient for what is required.

If these three are absent and the karmic causes and conditions are incomplete, there can be no result.

The Scripture on Foul Defilements says: If sentient beings aspire to be born as humans and create the relevant karma, but the causes and conditions are incomplete, they must undergo the result of birth as animals. If they create evil karma leading to birth among animals, but its causes and conditions are insufficient, they may undergo the result of birth as humans. For example, although an arhat possesses various kinds of karma, having eliminated the karma of affliction, he has no afflictions as accompanying conditions and therefore cannot be born again.

Likewise, in cessation, although a non-returner has exhausted the relevant karma, if craving has not yet been exhausted, he cannot take birth in the form realm but is born in an intermediate-state body. Again, when one has newly attained the first fruit, the intention to cultivate the path arises, and therefore the afflictions are extinguished. Afflictions produce karma; although both karma and afflictions had been present, through eliminating the afflictions abandoned by the path of seeing, one can no longer employ new karma to undergo rebirth.

A worldly dharma-seed can produce a sprout only when all four conditions according to principle are present. Craving and karma, as dharma-seeds, are likewise: only when all four conditions according to principle are present can they produce a result. After producing a result, they again become causes.

Question: Between karma and afflictions, which is the principal seed? Answer: Afflictions are principal. Afflictions produce karma, but karma cannot produce afflictions.

Thus, afflictions are the root. Furthermore, karma without afflictions certainly cannot produce birth, whereas when afflictions are present without karma, birth occurs in a skandha-body.

Second, manifestation is called arising through accumulation. Manifestation has two meanings. First, craving, in conjunction with karma, causes the fruit to arise: what has not yet arisen will arise, and what has not yet become manifest immediately becomes manifest.

Second, craving can manifest an actual object; though that object is bad, craving fixes the mind upon it. That is, the object is regarded as good: the object is manifested as good. For example, when the three consciousnesses present a woman, an ordinary person sees that object as lovable; tigers and wolves, seeing her, wish to devour her flesh; a noble one sees her as a repository of bones—that is, as consisting entirely of bones.

Thus, according to the object, it is perceived as lovable or as something to be eaten. All this is because craving manifests the object. Because craving manifests it, a locus arises, and one then becomes attached to it.

Karma is capable of producing a fruit; if these two manifestations did not exist, the fruit could not arise. Clarifying these two kinds of manifestation explains the meaning of arising from accumulated conditioning.

Non-Buddhist teachers maintain that all dharmas do not arise from multiple causes, but say that they arise through Ishvara: one cause produces all things. To refute this, it must be made clear that a fruit can arise only after various causes and conditions have assembled. Although conditions converge, if they cannot cause a fruit to arise, they do not have the meaning of causes and conditions.

An accumulation that causes the fruit to arise is a cause. The two kinds of manifestation further clarify the meaning of convergence and also clarify the meaning of the fruit’s arising. Therefore, manifestation is used to explain arising through accumulation.

It is like a potter using water as a standard: the various conditions assemble and together fashion a pot. Because they can produce the fruit and bring it to completion, they are called conditions. When the cause is immediately present, the fruit immediately arises.

Conditions, moreover, can cause the fruit to arise, bringing one full period of karmic retribution to complete fulfillment.

Next, the Truth of Cessation is explained as having four names. Because the five skandhas come to an end and cannot arise again, it is called Cessation. Here this is spoken of in dependence upon karmic retribution.

The present five skandhas come to an end, and the future five skandhas do not arise; therefore, it is called Cessation. Because it causes grasping to cease, it is called the essence of the unconditioned. The Truth of Cessation itself takes the unconditioned as its essence; it does not take the cessation and non-arising of the five skandhas as its essence.

The cessation and non-arising of the five skandhas occur within the three times, whereas the essence of the Truth of Cessation is unconditioned and is not a dharma belonging to the three times. The cessation and non-arising of the five skandhas occur in the three times. For example, the five skandhas of Shariputra and Maudgalyayana ceased in the past and do not arise again.

If they are the five skandhas of a noble one in the present, then they cease in the present and do not arise again. Within the unconditioned dharma there are no five skandhas. The five skandhas arise only within this conditioned realm.

Because ending and non-arising mean the disappearance of the conditioned, this is called the unconditioned. Furthermore, only when the five skandhas have completely ceased and do not arise again can this unconditioned be realized. Taking complete ending and non-arising as the disappearance of the conditioned, it is called unconditioned cessation.

Because it can extinguish the three kinds of fire, it is called quiescence.

The three fires are of two kinds. First, desire, anger, and delusion are taken as the three fires. These three afflictions are called fires for three reasons.

First, they can burn away all the wholesome roots of sentient beings. Second, these three afflictions can make the mind feverish; thus, they have the meaning of burning the mind. Third, because they can burn throughout the three realms, they are called fires.

These three afflictions pervade the three realms. They arise from the six sense objects, the six sense faculties, and the six consciousnesses. The faculties, objects, and consciousnesses all revolve continuously because of these three afflictions, and thus there is no peace or happiness.

The three afflictions are like fires capable of burning, while the faculties, objects, and consciousnesses are like the firewood that is burned.

Question: There is no anger in the higher realms, so how can it be said that anger exists there?

Answer: Ordinary beings born in the higher realms possess all the afflictions to be eliminated by seeing the truths. These are not absent in the higher realms; because they ordinarily do not arise there, they are said to be absent. Thus, to say that they exist is ultimately only a manner of speaking.

Second, the three kinds of suffering are taken as the three fires. These three kinds of suffering can burn sentient beings and prevent them from attaining peace and happiness. In the desire realm, all three kinds of suffering are present. In the form realm, the suffering of change and the suffering of conditioned existence are present. In the formless realm, there is only the suffering of conditioned existence. The three kinds of suffering correspond to the three calamities: the suffering of suffering is the calamity of fire, the suffering of change is the calamity of water, and the suffering of conditioned existence is the calamity of wind. Thus, there are these two kinds of three fires, both of which cause agitation. Extinguishing both sets of these three fires is called quiescence.

The absence of these three is called sublime. These three are birth, aging, and death, which are three sufferings. These three sufferings equally pervade the three realms; this is the meaning of the three kinds of suffering.

Birth occurs everywhere throughout the three realms, and wherever there is birth, there is the suffering of birth. In the desire realm, aging is manifested by white hair and a wrinkled face. The six classes of devas in the form realm do not have these signs of aging, but aging there has another meaning.

It is like a painting that at first is vivid and lovely, but as time passes, its colors fade and gradually become pale. The physical bodies of beings in the higher realms are also like this, and this is called aging. The mind in the formless realm also undergoes aging.

When the karmic retribution is exhausted, that mind changes and becomes different. While its appointed time remains, the concentrated mind is firm; but when it comes to an end, the concentrated mind weakens, and one must fall back into a lower state. Therefore, all three realms contain the suffering of aging.

All three realms come to an end, and all contain the suffering of death; therefore, these are called fetters.

Ordinary beings by nature constantly seek security, and therefore cultivate worldly goodness and obtain the pleasant fruits of retribution. Yet these three calamities cause them to undergo suffering; thus, they are called the three sufferings that serve as fetters. In the unconditioned there are no such three fetters, and therefore it is called sublime.

Question: At the time of birth in the higher realms, one does not personally experience suffering. Why, then, is it called suffering?

Answer: The birth that ends in death is suffering; the experience itself is called suffering. Birth is the root of suffering. Because birth exists within birth-and-death, suffering exists. Wherever there is what is called birth, there is suffering. It is like the term “hell”: hell itself is only a name, and that place itself is not the suffering, but because suffering can arise there, it is called a suffering hell.

Question: Among the three kinds of suffering, to which kind does the suffering of birth belong?

Answer: If birth is accompanied by painful feeling, it is the suffering of suffering. If birth is accompanied by pleasant feeling, it is the suffering of change. If birth is accompanied by neutral feeling, it is the suffering of conditioned existence. Birth in the desire realm possesses all three sufferings. Birth in the form realm possesses two sufferings: the suffering of change and the suffering of conditioned existence. In the formless realm, there is only the suffering of conditioned existence.

The suffering of aging also possesses all three kinds. If pleasure changes into pain, this is the suffering of suffering. If pain changes into pleasure and pleasure changes into pain, this is the suffering of change. If pleasure changes into neutral feeling, this is the suffering of conditioned existence. Throughout the three realms, the suffering of death also possesses all three kinds. These kinds have already been explained above.

Question: How many kinds of suffering are taught in the sutras?

Answer: There are immeasurable kinds of suffering. Here, however, only eight kinds of suffering are discussed, while the others are not mentioned. Furthermore, all these sufferings are individually classified under the three kinds of suffering. In former times, eight sufferings were taught, among which was the suffering of illness. Here, seven objective conditions of suffering are discussed. Besides these, there are many other kinds of suffering. Therefore, the suffering of illness is not discussed.

Although the suffering of illness exists among human beings in the desire realm, it is nearly absent among the devas of the desire realm, and therefore it is not mentioned. The reason there is no suffering of illness in the heavenly realms is that illness arises from internal and external conditions. Externally, illness arises because heat and cold are unequal and because food and drink are unsuitable.

Internally, it arises from excessive activity, which weakens the four great elements, or from excessive sitting, which also weakens them. Because the four great elements are weak, illness arises. In the higher realms there is neither heat nor cold, nor unequal food and drink, nor other unsuitable conditions.

Internally, the four great elements are very strong, and there are no conditions such as excessive walking or sitting; therefore, there is no suffering of illness.

To clarify further the meaning of illness: if devas of the six desire heavens do not eat for three days, up to seven days, they will die after seven days. If they have not yet died, their four great elements gradually weaken, and this is called the suffering of illness.

Question: What are the other four sufferings?

Answer: The suffering of the five skandhas pervades the three realms. Not obtaining what one seeks, not being separated from what one loves, and encountering what one hates are freely experienced as karmic retribution. Where beings do not dwell intermingled in one place, these three kinds of suffering do not exist; yet they do exist among the devas of the six heavens of desire.

Devas of an inferior grade who desire and delight in a superior state but are not born there experience suffering. This is precisely the suffering of not obtaining what one seeks. Their conflict with the asuras is the suffering of encountering what one hates; nevertheless, unlike the asuras, they are not bound or destroyed there.

There is also the suffering of separation from what one loves. Liberation means release from every loss and permanent separation from all such harm. These are causes, conditions, and karmic results.

Afflictions are the cause, while karma is the condition; therefore, one receives the karmic result of the five skandhas. These are three erroneous dharmas. Ultimate liberation also has three aspects.

Because it is not merely temporary liberation, it is called permanent separation.

Question: Why are afflictions called the condition and cause of karma?

Answer: Afflictions are seeds. Because they are also capable of immediately producing karma, they are called its cause. If there are no afflictions, then even if karma exists, it cannot immediately bring about birth. If there is no karma but afflictions exist, it is as though birth into the skandhas may occur. When afflictions are exhausted, karma brings forth an adorned result. Ultimately, because afflictions give rise to karma, results come into being.

Next is the explanation of the Four Truths. That by which the task is performed is called the path. There are generally two explanations here.

The first is that the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising are that which performs, while morality, concentration, and wisdom are what is performed. Beginning with the knowledge of the dharma of suffering, one knows this path of cognition. Through twelve mental moments, the afflictions are severed, culminating in the knowledge of exhaustion.

The thirteenth mental moment is the knowledge of non-arising. The original morality belonging to conditioned existence is called associated with outflows. Through the practices of these two kinds of knowledge, it becomes outflow-free concentration.

Furthermore, this knowledge has three kinds: wisdom born of hearing, wisdom born of reflection, and wisdom born of cultivation. The wisdom born of cultivation is again of two kinds: associated with outflows and free from outflows. Through the practices of the two knowledges, it becomes free from outflows.

For one practicing the knowledge of exhaustion, the knowledge of the dharma of suffering becomes manifest. The eight factors of the Noble Path are then complete. Morality and concentration were originally associated with outflows, but the practice of the knowledge of exhaustion causes them to become free from outflows.

The knowledge of exhaustion has two kinds: first, right view; second, right intention. Both contemplate impermanence, but with differences in subtlety and coarseness. Right view perceives subtly, whereas right intention perceives coarsely, and these two give rise to one another.

If right view is the knowledge of exhaustion, it may also be said that right view becomes free from outflows. Ultimately, according to this comparison, the knowledge of exhaustion causes wisdom to become free from outflows. As this meaning has been elucidated, at a single moment, when the knowledge of exhaustion performs its function, it causes morality, concentration, and wisdom to become free from outflows.

Although their natures differ, they occur simultaneously; all stages up to arhatship are likewise. If, however, one right view were to regard another right view, or one right intention were to regard another right intention, they could not occur simultaneously. The preceding right view necessarily causes the subsequent right view to become free from outflows.

Right intention is likewise. At one moment, two dharmas of a single nature cannot coexist. As this meaning has been elucidated, at another time wisdom is made manifest.

All stages up to arhatship, as effected by the knowledge of exhaustion, are likewise. All stages up to arhatship, as effected by the knowledge of non-arising, are also likewise. Because the knowledge of non-arising functions, morality, concentration, and wisdom become free from outflows.

After seeing the Truths, there are ten subsequent mental moments. These ten subsequent mental moments pertain to the fruit. If a stream-enterer undertakes twelve mental moments of contemplation, this is the knowledge of non-arising, which causes the simultaneously arising morality, concentration, and wisdom, as well as wisdom arising at a different time, to become free from outflows.

Question: Seeing the dharma of suffering is itself the knowledge of non-arising. Why, then, is it not stated as such?

Answer: If the seeing of the dharma of suffering is considered in its own form, it must await the knowledge of the dharma of suffering before it can also be called that which produces the knowledge of non-arising. If considered in relation to the subsequent knowledge of suffering, it produces that subsequent knowledge of suffering and serves as the basis for severing the afflictions of the higher realms. It also belongs to the knowledge of exhaustion; thus it is not definitely the knowledge of non-arising. It necessarily belongs to the knowledge of exhaustion. Only the thirteenth mental moment is definite and may be called the knowledge of non-arising.

The second explanation is this: Morality, concentration, and wisdom become free from outflows through the activity of the outflow-free mind; therefore, the mind is called the path. The outflow-free mind is that which acts, while morality, concentration, and wisdom are what is practiced. The knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising are dharmas that assist the mind.

The preceding explanation differs from the later explanation. It is further said that, therein, morality, concentration, and wisdom accord with the principle, and hence are so named. Speaking generally, because the four characteristics accord with the principle of the path, the mind is thusness.

Speaking separately, because it accords with the principle of neither annihilation nor permanence, it is called thusness. In this way, the principle is apprehended through knowledge. Wrong intention cannot penetrate thusness in this manner.

Because it cannot accomplish this task and is not in accord with thusness, it is not called thusness. Because it is produced by right view, it is called right practice. If a disciple hears a true teacher expound the correct teaching, then from that correct sound there arises right hearing.

Right hearing gives rise to right cultivation. Training successively in this way is called that which is performed. In the case of a pratyekabuddha or a Buddha, right reflection leads to right cultivation.

There is no meaning of right hearing arising from a correct sound, because those of these two vehicles have sharp faculties and can awaken through their own reflection.

Question: Fundamentally, pratyekabuddhas and Buddhas must all have passed through hearing the Dharma before wisdom born of reflection and cultivation could arise. Why, then, is there no right hearing giving rise to right reflection?

Answer: It is not that they did not hear in previous lives, but what is presently undertaken is the matter at hand. Did they not already accumulate hearing in the past? At that time, a teacher immediately taught them; relying on what was taught, they gave rise to the wisdom born of reflection. By proceeding directly to reflection, they awakened to the Truth by themselves. A disciple, however, must rely upon the teacher’s fresh instruction in order to reflect. Permanent release is called emancipation. There are also two explanations of this.

One explanation is that wrong intention gives rise to afflictions. Afflictions give rise to karma, and karma gives rise to karmic results. None of these is right intention. If outflow-free wisdom arises, wisdom gives rise to morality and concentration. All of these are right. Right and wrong are opposites. What is right transcends what is wrong. It is not a temporary transcendence but a permanent transcendence.

Another explanation is that afflictions are inversions, whereas wisdom is non-inversion. Inversion and non-inversion are opposites. Non-inversion is permanent separation from inversion.

The preceding explanation is extensive, while the later one is concise; hence their difference. An earlier commentator explained that there are sixteen names. Because no conditioned dharma has an everlasting nature, it is called impermanent.

If an unconditioned dharma is taken as the basis, then it exists: eternally without arising, eternally without abiding and ceasing. Conditioned dharmas arise temporarily, abide temporarily, and cease temporarily. This nature of dharmas is also called impermanence.

It arises from ignorance. Suffering means failing to understand the world and consequently producing one’s own suffering. How much more so when one fails truly and profoundly to understand the principle and instead holds erroneous views!

Because of this, there is suffering, and ignorance is its root. Because of this ignorance, one undergoes the karmic results of birth and death. If there were no place of birth and death, there would be no suffering.

What worldly people are separated from here is called emptiness. Among the six faculties, the Buddha himself used an accumulation as a simile for the six faculties, causing the expression “in between” to mean the space amid an accumulation. A self or person does not exist within this interval; therefore, it is said to be separate.

Because it is separate from a self and a person, it is called emptiness. Because it has no sovereignty, it is called non-self. Sovereignty has two meanings.

First, because one does not depend upon another, it is called sovereignty. Second, because things occur according to one’s will, it is called sovereignty. If one wishes fire to be extinguished, the fire is extinguished.

If one wishes water not to freeze, the water does not freeze. This is sovereignty. All conditioned dharmas depend upon other things and therefore undergo arising, abiding, and cessation.

Moreover, they do not conform to one’s wishes. If one possesses supernormal powers, one may transform them; but ultimately, such powers all depend upon concentration and cultivation before they can function. Thus one cannot avoid depending upon what lacks sovereignty.

Because there is no sovereignty, there is no self. All these principles serve as causes. We shall now explain the analogies successively.

Take a seed as an analogy. Just as a seed requires supporting conditions before it can develop into a tree: before that tree arises, the seed already exists. Through its vital power, it produces a sprout that emerges. Therefore, present karma is divided into four parts:

The first is simply pure wholesome or unwholesome karma. Before it receives assistance from conditions, it inherently possesses the power to bring about a result. That result comes at the end of life and is as though in the future.

Karma itself possesses the power to bring about a result and can cause that result to come afterward. In the present, it can cause entry upon the path of principle. Entry upon that path of principle is called the cause; emergence from that path of principle is called arising through accumulation.

The original seed can produce a tree. The tree, sprout, branches, leaves, and so forth, in the present and future, depend upon that seed being in soil, together with earth and water, and upon external conditions before it can sprout. Once the sprout emerges and arises in the present, that seed immediately perishes.

Other karma is also like this. Originally it can bring about a result, while the result lies in the future. When the present retribution has ended, one first receives the skandhas in which to be born.

As the skandhas of birth have just arisen, the initial part of the karma is lost. That through which karma can emerge into the skandhas is the path of principle. It is entirely due to the causes and conditions of cultivation.

The arising of the result in the intermediate state is described as emerging from the path of principle. It is also called arising through accumulation. The course through which it proceeds is called the place of birth.

That sprout first emerges into the present. From the sprout, the tree is produced; from the tree and its branches, flowers are produced. This is called the course of progression.

That progression gradually increases and develops. When the sprout stage has been passed and the branch has just produced a bud, the sprout comes to an end. Karma is likewise so.

First the sprout of the intermediate state is produced. One then relinquishes the sprout of the intermediate state and receives proper birth, beginning with the kalala and continuing until the seventh stage, whereupon it ends. This is called the course of progression.

Its gradual growth is called the passage of progression. The stage of the intermediate state is called the stage preceding the kalala. As soon as birth occurs, the second part of the karma separates and is lost.

Because the kalala continues to arise, it is called birth. Since this birth arises from karma, it is called karma. It is the place.

What is called the course of progression is also called the karma of the place of birth. The functioning of the third part is powerful. If karma had no function, then although external conditions had arisen and passed, ultimately nothing could arise.

The principle upon which something depends is called a condition. The trunk of the tree gradually grows, as in the stage before flowers are produced. From the time flowers arise and fall until fruition is completed, that seed again produces a tree in the future.

All this is called the principle of dependence. Flowers, fruits, and everything else depend upon this stage as their seed and thereby arise. As soon as a flower arises and a seed is produced, the third part immediately ends.

Karma is also like this. At first, from the kalala through the seventh stage, one is not yet capable of creating causes for samsara and liberation, until the six faculties are complete. Once the second moment has passed, one can create the causes of samsara and liberation.

The cause at this stage is the karma belonging to the fourth part. Because the karma of this fourth part is the principle upon which there is dependence, it is called a condition. As soon as the fourth part of karma arises, the third part of karma ends.

The functioning of the fourth part then becomes powerful, and the result immediately arises. In other respects, the force of the conditions is weak. It is precisely through the functioning of karma that the result is completed.

If karma brings about birth in the intermediate state, both causes and conditions are weak. Craving is taken as the cause and karma as the condition. Both are weak.

Therefore, the seed cannot be taken as a complete analogy; only a small part of it serves as an analogy. When the performance of karma is complete, it can bring about these four stages. Results differ according to their proper times.

Thus, there are four kinds with respect to these stages.

Question: Can one small but complete karma bring about this result?

Answer: A single moment of illumination is one karma. Yet in meaning it may be divided into three parts. The first and last parts are weak, while the middle part is strong. The weak brings about the intermediate state; the strong brings about the result of birth. If karma does not continue in its course, it is strong at first and weak afterward.

Question: If the karma producing the result and the seed are different, how can this be?

Answer: This meaning is untenable. According to the Sarvastivada school, that illumination is a conditioned dharma, and all such dharmas exist only for a moment. When a moment ceases, there is a single seed.

Moreover, the expression “ten moments” is used. If these are divided into two, does the presently arising first moment produce the seed of the second moment? The second moment produces a minute particle (extremely small), and thereafter its characteristic becomes manifest.

Once the first has arisen and ceased, it does not reach the second; how then could it produce the third? If considered according to the division of causes, “continuity” is merely a designation. The first moment, as a homogeneous cause, can produce the second moment and then disappear, and so on until it is included among the homogeneous causes of flowers and fruits.

The result of this karma lies in the future. When the first moment has ceased, the second moment takes the result in the past, present, and future. Subsequently, the past successively destroys this.

If this were not so, the seed of the first moment would be the root, and there would be no second or third moment succeeding it in continuity. Here, the seed of the initial moment may again be said to possess the capacity to produce. Subsequent results are described as homogeneous causes.

A seed composed of the four great elements has four parts, all of which can produce a single result. This is said to be unlike karma, in which this cause and result are included through homogeneous acquisition.

As the Sammitiya school says: Material form perishes from moment to moment, yet in meaning it abides temporarily. Before a seed produces a sprout, it is only a single seed, which will produce its result according to its presently manifest part. The sprout is the result that is properly being produced.

If the continuity persists, it also has the capacity to produce the trunk, leaves, and their characteristics. Afterward they fall away; everything is like this. Karma, however, is not so.

Although karma itself perishes, there presently exists a dharma of non-loss that takes possession of this result and prevents it from being lost. This will now be explained more broadly by discussing the wholesome observance of precepts. The precepts have a basis.

The basis has the preliminary procedure and the proper procedure. The preliminary procedure involves three matters. First, the assembly harmoniously grants permission for the precepts to be received.

Second, one formally requests the precepts. Third, there is the objective sphere. The essential objective sphere is the lifelong undertaking to abstain from all evil.

The proper procedure is the master’s pronouncement on one’s behalf. Beginning with the motion and three proclamations and continuing until the threefold karman has been completed, one immediately acquires the wholesome field of the body. This wholesomeness itself is the precepts.

The essential point is that this mind relies upon them and embraces them as its basis. Throughout the entire period of reception, it does not perish. From then onward, its continuity perpetually flows.

If one commits an offense in the meantime, the precepts can no longer continue to flow. If one repents, they can again continue to flow. “Flow” means that a single moment of the precepts issues from the basis; what has issued arises and then ceases.

It is not that this moment of the precepts produces a second moment of the precepts, and then a third moment of the precepts again issues from the basis. All subsequent arising is like this: it can issue from the basis. According to the Sarvastivada doctrine, there is something similar: accompanying acquisition is bound to the precepts.

Although what arises comes to an end, accompanying acquisition simultaneously remains bound to it. In the present and the past, this firmly binds the result in the present and future. According to the Sammitiya school, when the precepts produce this wholesome karma, the dharma of non-loss arises together with it.

This does not mean that karma continues to exist. Rather, through karma this body arises and then perishes, while the dharma of non-loss does not perish; it takes possession of the karmic result and prevents it from being lost. The dharma of non-loss does not perish.

A perishing dharma is a dharma that awaits its time of cessation. This means that it abides temporarily. It ends only when the result arises.

In the case of precepts associated with concentration, they all possess the meaning of a continuous flow according to their basis. In the case of an object given in generosity, the flow constantly continues in accordance with the object while it exists in the present. If there were no continuing flow, no result could be obtained.

The dharma of non-loss and all wholesome qualities arise together. Although no wholesome act emerges into the present and continues outside the mind, it nevertheless has the meaning of continuing to flow.

Question: Karma and the dharma of non-loss both arise, and both are conditioned dharmas. What is the substance of karma, such that when it ceases, the dharma of non-loss does not cease?

Answer: The performance of good is a dharma in the continuum of mind; therefore, as soon as it arises, it ceases. The dharma of non-loss is not a distinct dharma apart from the continuum of mind; therefore, it does not cease from thought-moment to thought-moment. This accords with the meaning held by the Sarvastivadins. Although what has been acquired also ceases from thought-moment to thought-moment, even though it is not a dharma in the continuum of mind, its own kind continues without interruption.

Question: How does the continuous flow of giving become established?

Answer: Body and speech are karma relating to the body. Physical deportment belongs to bodily karma, while spoken words belong to verbal karma. Using the hands to lift an object, take an object, or carry an object before another person belongs to physical deportment.

This deportment belongs to bodily karma. Uttering words and loudly calling for this person to take this object and give it to another person—these are spoken words and thus belong to verbal karma. The arising of bodily and verbal karma depends upon three conditions.

First, there are the three wholesome roots. Second, from the three wholesome roots comes right reflection. Third, from right reflection arises volition, namely, the volition to give.

Generally speaking, this is called the function of deliberation. These are the three conditions from which bodily and verbal karma arise. Strictly speaking, it is volition.

The bodily and verbal karma that it initiates is called giving. Bodily and verbal karma initiated through these three conditions is called wholesome giving. A bodhisattva may remain silent while raining down goodness.

Mental karma, moreover, is the karma of giving. There are three kinds of fields. First is the field of merit, such as Buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Second is the field of nurturing kindness, such as one’s father and mother. Third is the field of poverty, namely, hungry and thirsty sentient beings. If one gives to the field of merit, the wholesome root of non-delusion is predominant.

When facing greed and when a mind of loving-kindness and compassion toward sentient beings arises, the wholesome root of non-hatred is predominant. At a single moment, all three wholesome roots may be complete. According to the field toward which giving is directed, there is no distinction of greater or lesser.

Giving is also of two kinds. The first is reverential giving. The second is beneficial giving.

If one gives reverentially, wholesome merit will arise. The culmination of that giving is wholesome, but it does not continue to flow. Why is this so?

For example, after the Buddha entered nirvana, people, out of reverence for the Buddha, offered robes and food. Likewise, when a person takes robes and food to make offerings to a Blessed One of the past and possesses a reverential mind, there is no one who makes use of these things. The wholesome merit therefore cannot continue to flow in accordance with their use.

Second, beneficial giving is undertaken to benefit the four great elements of the person before one. That person makes use of the object, thereby causing the four great elements to increase. This is giving for the sake of benefit.

Accordingly, its merit continuously flows in dependence upon three things.

Those three things are: first, the three wholesome roots; second, the remaining object; and third, the sentient being. Among these three, if even one is incomplete, the wholesome merit no longer continues to flow. For example, although some of the object remains and a sentient being uses it, if the donor has died or has given rise to wrong views and severed the wholesome roots, that wholesome state does not return to its basis, and thus the merit no longer continues to flow.

If the donor remains alive, the wholesome roots have not been severed, and the person capable of using it has not perished, but the remaining object has been exhausted, the merit no longer continues to flow. If the donor has not severed the wholesome roots and has not died, and the remaining object has not been exhausted, but the recipient has died and no one uses it, the merit no longer continues to flow. Although another person may use it, the original donor had no intention concerning that person; that person uses it on his own, and therefore that wholesome merit ultimately does not arise separately.

If the danapati, the donor, had a universally inclusive intention, then the merit follows its use. All of these are wholesome provisions. Because it is a field of merit, when receiving that gift one must fully comply with the donor’s intention in its use.

Then, in accordance with the dedication made by the donor, merit is generated successively without end. If this is not done and it is instead dedicated to someone else, this goes against the donor’s intention. Such dedication to the donor not only brings no merit, but also adds an offense.

Thereafter, one may even fall into an evil destiny and undergo its results. This is no trivial matter, and one may therefore readily become angry.

Question: When the wholesome roots have been severed, wholesome states no longer have roots. How, then, can it be said that wholesome states arise?

Answer: This should be understood in two ways.

Question: The initial path of stream-entry is uncontaminated. If there are no uncontaminated factors serving as its basis, how can it be attained? When an arhat regresses and again gives rise to the path of cultivation in order to destroy the afflictions, the afflictions have no unwholesome roots as their basis. How, then, can they arise?

Answer: There are two kinds of causes of arising. The first is the antecedent cause of arising, namely, the presence of the three wholesome roots. Before a wholesome deed is performed, these wholesome roots are already present.

Because they can produce the wholesome deed that is performed, they are called antecedent causes of arising. The complete cause of arising is volition, followed by reflection and discernment through which a wholesome state arises. Because a wholesome state arises only at the time of reflection and discernment, this is called the complete cause of arising.

If the wholesome roots have not been severed, then when a wholesome deed is performed, it arises from both causes. If the wholesome roots have been severed, then when a wholesome deed is performed, it arises solely from the complete cause of arising. When the wholesome state arises, it reconnects with the three wholesome roots, causing them to become associated with the wholesome mind.

The severance of the wholesome roots does not mean that the substance of the wholesome roots has been completely extinguished. Rather, when wrong view is present and there is no wholesome mind, and this condition continues, it is called severance. When the uncontaminated path arises, the substance of the contaminated wholesome roots ceases.

Before the initial uncontaminated path of stream-entry, uncontaminated wholesome roots have not previously existed; nevertheless, it arises from the complete cause of arising. When an arhat regresses and gives rise to afflictions, although the three unwholesome roots have ceased, they again arise from the complete cause of arising.

Question: According to the Lesser Vehicle, after the Buddha receives offered food and eats it, does he defecate?

Answer: The Buddha does not defecate. When food reaches his throat, there are a thousand sinews within the throat that receive all the food. After it is eaten, it transforms into blood and flesh; therefore, he does not defecate. In the case of a wheel-turning king, there are two explanations. According to the first, he defecates normally. According to the second, because he has the two ordinary outlets possessed by ordinary people, he therefore defecates. The food eaten by the devas of the six heavens is called Sudha. Su is translated as “wholesome,” and dha as “true.” Because this food is subtle and exquisite, it does not become impure matter.

Not being bound together has the meaning of cessation. When all collective bondage has ended and purity is attained, this is called cessation. As with the foregoing example, if a later statement exists, there must be an earlier statement. In India, when asked about nirodha, it is said that this single matter contains ten meanings under the name Nirodhalana, also called nirodha. Cessation is likewise called nirodha.

We shall now explain the meaning of cessation and not discuss the other meanings. The first statement is used to distinguish it. The Madhyama Agama contains an explanation of this bondage.

The sutra records that the Buddha told the bhiksus: “Craving abides in your eye. When you eliminate it, craving is entirely extinguished, together with the binding of consciousness.” Craving means being bound by the afflictions. The eye, forms, and their sphere are the bondage. If the bondage of craving is extinguished, the eye and its bondage are also destroyed and extinguished.

The scripture gives this analogy: It is like a person confined in prison, tightly fettered and bound. That prison constitutes one bondage. If he can break open the lock and also destroy the prison, he is thereby freed from both bondages.

These two bondages together bind sentient beings, and thus constitute common karma. Liberation from craving is called purity. Liberation from the realm of objects is called final exhaustion.

This is precisely the removal attained in nirvana without remainder. The cessation of craving is nirvana with remainder. The cessation of the realm of objects is nirvana without remainder.

The eye is likewise. The ear and nose necessarily follow the same principle. Because one is liberated from all three realms, this is called quiescence.

The three realms originally have two kinds. First, the three periods of time take the three realms as their characteristic; therefore, it is not clearly understood that distinctions exist within conditioned dharmas. Since they do not exist in the characteristic of the unconditioned, they are not spoken of there.

Because of wrong thought, afflictions arise. Afflictions produce karma. Karma in turn produces karmic retribution.

Thus, within the three realms, causes and effects arise from one another. In unconditioned dharmas, causes and effects do not arise from one another; therefore, there are no three periods of time. Conditioned dharmas are originally empty, and therefore birth occurs.

Where there is birth, there are aging and death. Unconditioned dharmas are originally unborn. Because they are unborn, there are no aging and death.

Conditioned dharmas fully possess two kinds. Because the three characteristics are in motion, it is called quiescence. Within this, each affliction has a corresponding liberation.

The ninety-eight afflictions thus have ninety-eight liberations. Dharmas are originally unborn. To be unborn is itself liberation.

Because sentient beings are deluded and inverted, they give rise to craving and attachment toward form. Because of this craving and attachment, karma is produced. Karma produces karmic retribution.

Afflictions cling to form and cannot designate emptiness as the principle of their object. Therefore, with regard to the unconditioned, if this craving is severed, the unconditioned is thereby realized. The ninety-eight delusions have ninety-eight unconditioned karmas, with their corresponding karmic retributions.

Afflictions do not separately possess an unconditioned state.

True goodness is called wondrous. Goodness is of four kinds. First is true goodness.

Second is intrinsic goodness. Third is goodness through associated characteristics. Fourth is goodness produced by instigation.

True goodness is nirvana. Samsara consists of evil dharmas. Nirvana is free from evil and does not arise from causes and conditions; therefore, it is called true goodness.

Intrinsic goodness means non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion, the three wholesome roots. These three wholesome roots do not depend upon conditions. By their nature, they can counteract the three evils of greed, hatred, and delusion.

Nirvana has none of these three evils. Because this accords with nirvana, it is called good. It is like three kinds of medicine that do not depend upon one another, each having by nature the capacity to cure illness: oil can cure wind disorders, butter can cure heat disorders, and honey can cure phlegmatic disorders.

Third is goodness through associated characteristics, namely wholesome mental karma. Because it corresponds with the three wholesome roots, faith and wisdom arise; and when faith and wisdom arise, the mind and the dharmas assisting the mind, corresponding with the three wholesome roots, all become wholesome. Before they are intermixed, each of these three wholesome roots can counteract one kind of evil.

The mind and the dharmas assisting the mind merely intermingle with the three wholesome roots and thus cannot counteract the functioning of evil. When their characteristics are combined, they can destroy evil deeds. It is like various medicines: before they have dissolved into one another, they remain mixed, and each can cure an illness.

After they have been blended together, there is nothing among the four kinds of goodness produced by instigation that they cannot cure. This refers to wholesome bodily and verbal conduct. Body and speech are not originally wholesome.

Because mental karma is wholesome, wholesome bodily and verbal conduct is instigated. The arising of bodily and verbal goodness is like water, which is not originally medicine, but which is present in medicine so that it may be heated. Because the medicine acts upon the water, the water becomes medicine.

The three wholesome roots all become wholesome by conforming to true goodness. Evil is a coarse dharma. The unconditioned is free from evil and is true goodness; therefore, it is called wondrous and excellent.

Question: When the mind and the dharmas assisting the mind correspond with the three wholesome roots, do they fully correspond with all three wholesome roots at the same moment?

Answer: At one moment, they correspond with the three wholesome roots, as when faith, wisdom, and the present state are manifest. The rational wisdom of this mind is non-delusion. When greed and hatred do not arise, this is non-hatred and non-delusion.

Question: When the mind and the dharmas assisting the mind correspond with the three unwholesome roots, do they fully correspond with all three unwholesome roots at the same moment?

Answer: When an evil mind is manifest, this mind contains inverted reasoning and corresponds with ignorance. When suffering corresponds with greed, it does not correspond with hatred, for their evil natures oppose one another.

Question: Do the three wholesome roots belong to the dharmas of mind?

Answer: They are not dharmas of mind. Being inherently existent, they do not correspond with the mind. As the Mahasanghika and other schools say: The nature of the minds of sentient beings is originally pure, but it is defiled by adventitious dust.

That purity is the three wholesome roots. Since beginningless time in samsara, sentient beings have always had adventitious dust, namely afflictions; and afflictions arise in accordance with what the eye sees. The afflictions that follow the eye are precisely the three unwholesome roots.

Because the three wholesome roots exist, faith and wisdom arise. When faith and wisdom arise, they accord with the three wholesome roots; therefore, they are said to correspond. Because the three unwholesome roots exist, unwholesome greed and hatred arise.

When the unwholesome arises, it accords with the three unwholesome roots; therefore, it is said to correspond. If wrong views arise and sever the three wholesome roots, those three wholesome roots temporarily cease, but they are not permanently extinguished. When goodness subsequently arises, they continue to arise once again.

If the three wholesome roots are completely severed, that severance means that they will never arise again. Ultimately, this is called permanent separation. It is like a person surrounded by hostile bandits: if he has not gone far away from them, he is not yet secure and cannot be said to be absolutely secure.

Only when both have left that domain is he entirely secure. Inward conjunction is likewise. If one remains among the hostile bandits of the afflictions, then neither is yet secure.

Although some severance and separation have occurred, that severance is not yet complete, so the meaning of security has not yet reached the highest state of security. In an arhat, all afflictions are completely extinguished and will never arise again. This is precisely supreme security.

A stream-enterer sees the truth, and both kinds of afflictions are completely extinguished and will never arise again; thus, he also attains the highest security.

Because it opposes false paths, it is called the Path. There are ninety-six kinds of sramanas who practice false paths. If one practices the true path of moral discipline, concentration, and wisdom, one can reach nirvana.

To counteract false paths, moral discipline, concentration, and wisdom are therefore spoken of as the Path. This is further explained as the Path. It is like a person who says that his mind wishes to reach a certain place.

He must first seek the road. To seek liberation, one must first seek the supramundane path; and moral discipline, concentration, and wisdom are where it may be found. Therefore, they are called the Path.

Because it counteracts what is not true thusness, it is called Thusness. This has two explanations. The first clarifies that what it counteracts is not in accord with principle.

The second clarifies that what it counteracts is not practice in accordance with reality. The four inversions do not accord with principle and thus are not true thusness: they place permanence, bliss, self, and purity within samsara, and place impermanence, suffering, non-self, and impurity within nirvana. One now contemplates samsara as impermanent, suffering, non-self, and impure, and nirvana as permanent, blissful, self, and pure.

Because this accords with principle, it is Thusness.

Question: What is the nirvana of the Lesser Vehicle? Is the self realized? Is the self all dharmas, or is it not the case that all is non-self?

Answer: The Lesser Vehicle elucidates the absence of self in all dharmas; therefore, it is called non-self. If nirvana possessed an intrinsic substance, it could consequently constitute a dharma of self. This counteracts practices that are not in accord with truth.

Non-Buddhist paths hold views of eternalism and annihilationism. The eternalist view maintains that the self is indestructible and will receive retribution in the future. Because there is future karmic retribution, they practice asceticism in the present.

There are altogether eleven practices. First is perpetual sitting: always sitting and never rising. Second is undertaking great austerities: not dwelling anywhere, but entering perilous mountains and carrying out ascetic practices.

Third is not eating: abstaining from food and deliberately starving oneself. Fourth is prolonged standing: standing continually in one place. Fifth is turning one’s head toward wherever the sun is in order to gaze upon it.

In the morning one faces east, observing the sun as it rises and descends without ever becoming lax. Sixth is the fivefold heating: constantly subjecting oneself to blazing heat, with the fire of the sun overhead and fires on all four sides surrounding one. Seventh is fixing the eyes: looking at one place and keeping one’s gaze focused upon it.

Eighth is facing a lofty mountain. Ninth is invoking fire. Tenth is immersing oneself in water.

Eleventh is making offerings to the devas: exhausting one’s sinews and bones while playing the vina as an offering to the devas. The annihilationist view means that when the body perishes, the self also perishes. It denies both the future and the present, and the mind itself commits various offenses.

Such conduct is not in accord with right practice and is therefore called practice not in accord with truth. One now contemplates neither permanence nor annihilation, departs from the two extremes, and accords with the realm of nirvana; therefore, this is called right practice. Why is nirvana called a realm?

There are two meanings. First, it is guarded by persons of great power. These persons of great power are the Buddha, pratyekabuddhas, and arhats, who realize nirvana without error.

Therefore, it is said to be guarded. Second, hostile bandits cannot enter it. In nirvana one is far removed from the afflictions; thus they cannot enter.

“Not advancing” has three meanings. First is unwillingness to go. Second is a divergent path.

Third is a doubtful path. If one gives rise to the view of self, takes samsara as the ultimate destination, and is unable to seek nirvana, this is the meaning of unwillingness to go. Departing from desire, advancing in one’s quest, cultivating the path, and observing the precepts constitute a divergent path.

Not knowing what is right among the eight uncontaminated concentrations constitutes a doubtful path. If one cultivates uncontaminated wisdom and distinguishes right from wrong, one thereby eliminates the doubtful path. By not clinging to samsara, one eliminates unwillingness to go.

The cultivation of uncontaminated wisdom can eliminate the view of self, attachment to precepts, doubt, and the afflictions. Nirvana is free from afflictions, and this accords with the characteristics of nirvana. Because this is not erroneous, it is called right practice.

Because it counteracts all fears, it is called escape. Concerning all such fears, the Buddha asked King Prasenajit: “Suppose someone said that a great immortal had come here from the east. Upon the land there is the sun; and then, in succession, it became evident that people were saying that great mountains were also advancing from the other three directions.

What would Your Majesty now plan to do?”

The king replied to the Buddha: “Venerable Blessed One! This cannot be resolved through kind words, nor through giving, nor by inspiring fear. Nor can it be resolved with troops. It cannot be dealt with by these four means. I can only single-mindedly and swiftly cultivate the Noble Eightfold Path in order to seek escape.”

The Buddha asked again: “If your head and robes were on fire, you would certainly have to extinguish the fire first. Is cultivating the Noble Eightfold Path likewise?”

The king answered: “Venerable Blessed One! Because my head and robes are on fire, I must first extinguish the fire, and only then will that suffering end. If I do not do so, the suffering will continue. But if I cultivate the Noble Eightfold Path, I will forever depart from suffering. Thus cultivating the Noble Eightfold Path is not the same as extinguishing the fire first. The mountains advancing from the four directions are analogies for aging, sickness, death, and the suffering of separation from those one loves. The suffering of aging can destroy youthful vigor; the suffering of sickness can take away health; the suffering of death can overthrow life; and the suffering of separation from those one loves can turn one away from happiness.”

All the preceding passages concern the distinct meanings by which Venerable Vasubandhu explains the positions maintained by the Upadesa masters, the masters of doctrinal debate.

The author of the treatise says: “I shall now explain this according to what I believe. Because whatever arises also ceases, it is called impermanent. Conditioned dharmas arise and cease and therefore cannot be permanent. Arising means coming into existence, and cessation means becoming nonexistent. Because they exist at first and do not exist afterward, they are called impermanent. Why is arising not perpetual arising, and cessation not perpetual cessation? Why are arising and cessation said to be impermanent?”

The explanation is: Because arising is destroyed, there is cessation; hence cessation is impermanent. Cessation in turn destroys arising; hence arising is also impermanent. Their nature of mutual opposition is called suffering.

The five skandhas are the place where all sufferings gather; they oppose the minds of sentient beings and cause them to experience suffering therein. Sentient beings cannot go without receiving a body, which they nourish with clothing, drink, and food; yet they do not recognize this kindness, and it constantly gives rise to suffering and affliction. This is what runs contrary to the minds of sentient beings.

Any increase or decrease in clothing, food, and other necessities can give rise to suffering and affliction. Wishing to become comfortable, one sits for a long time, yet prolonged sitting again gives rise to suffering. Even when sitting peacefully in a solitary place, prolonged sitting again gives rise to suffering.

Thus the four postures constantly conflict with one another. This opposition arises because the minds of sentient beings, conditioned by unreal objects, are contradicted; therefore, arising is suffering. Because its substance is absent, it is called emptiness.

All dharmas are merely provisional designations and, moreover, have no intrinsic substance. Through combination there arises the meaning of a cause. A cause is established with respect to combination, and consequently the meaning of an effect arises.

What arises is designated as the effect; thus causes and effects have no intrinsic substance. Why is this? The conjunction of faculties and objects can give rise to consciousness.

Apart from faculties and external objects, could there still be a cause possessing intrinsic substance? Causes and effects cannot themselves constitute efficacious function; without causes and effects, there is no efficacious function. These are called causes and effects and are therefore designated as meanings, yet there is no agent.

A cause has no intrinsic substance or reality that can act. It has no efficacious function. An effect has no intrinsic substance or reality that can experience the enjoyment of suffering or happiness; this is what is meant.

Here, emptiness means the absence of intrinsic substance; therefore, it is called emptiness. Because there is no person in oneself, it is called non-self.

The Buddha said: There are dharmas that are not apart from the eighteen dhatus. If it is said that a self exists, within which dhatu is it included? If it is not included within the eighteen dhatus, one should therefore know that there is no self. This is the meaning of the refutation of the Vatsiputriya school. According to their doctrine, they say: “The self pervades the eighteen dhatus; how could it be included within any one dhatu separately?” Here they cling to the assertion that the self is neither one with nor different from them, and is indescribable as being contained within them. This must be refuted.

For example, the eye faculty and visible form are the objects relied upon, while eye-consciousness is that which can cognize them. Because the faculty takes the object as its condition, consciousness arises. First, their doctrine should be refuted by establishing the object that is cognized.

Does the self, which pervades faculty and object, constitute one entity with them, or is it different from them? If it is different, then there would be three dharmas—the faculty, the object, and the self—as objects of cognition. Why, then, did the Buddha speak of two and not three?

If it is said that a self exists apart from faculty and object, yet the Buddha did not teach it as an object of cognition, then this self is useless. Furthermore, if it is said to be different from faculty and object, your assertion that it is not different is thereby destroyed. If it is said that the self is one with faculty and object, then there are only faculty and object; where is there a self?

Thus, your assertion that they are not one is also destroyed.

Next, their doctrine should be refuted by establishing that which cognizes the object. Are the self and consciousness one, or are they different? If they are different, there would be two kinds of cognizer, namely, the self and consciousness. If these are two dharmas, why did the Buddha not speak of both? Although you claim that the self exists, the Buddha did not teach it; thus, the self is useless. Furthermore, your assertion that they are not different is thereby destroyed. If the self and consciousness are one, consciousness arises from conditions and is therefore conditioned; the self would likewise be conditioned. Yet you establish the self as neither existent nor unconditioned. This assertion is destroyed. Moreover, you say that they cannot be one; this assertion too is destroyed.

In refuting the self posited by non-Buddhists, the non-Buddhists establish the doctrine of a self and claim that four kinds of cognition attest to the existence of a self: first, direct cognition; second, inferential cognition; third, cognition through analogy; and fourth, cognition through hearing. These four kinds of cognition attest to the existence of a self. Among non-Buddhists there are the two views of annihilationism and eternalism.

The annihilationist view regards this body as the self; therefore, when this body perishes, that self also perishes with it. That is, this very body is manifestly seen to exist. Thus, through direct cognition one knows that a self exists.

If one sees inhalation and exhalation within the five skandhas, this is taken to be a characteristic of the self. Having seen this characteristic, one thereby knows that a self exists.

This is inferential cognition by which one understands the self. Knowing that another’s body also possesses a self is cognition through analogy by which one knows that a self exists. Hearing the Holy Truth declare that a self exists, one thereby knows that a self exists.

Knowing through hearing is thus knowing that a self exists. According to the eternalist view, only inferential cognition and cognition through hearing are employed to know that there is a self. Eternalists maintain that atoms and the self cannot be seen through direct cognition.

Furthermore, eternalists may say: “The self is that which understands this direct cognition.” This is illustrated by regarding the white part of the eye as the moon. Within that whiteness is a red spot, which is the sun. Again, between them is a blue color, said to be space.

Within that blue color, they say, is the self. The self is eternal, and this too can be seen; hence it is known through direct cognition. The moon is created like a mother, the sun is created like a father, and space is created by Isvara.

Yet because the self is not created by any cause, it is eternal. Therefore, that blue color is called space. When it is obscured, it cannot be seen or known; hence it is called space.

Vasubandhu refutes these claims one by one. The objects known through direct cognition do not exceed seven dharmas: the six sense objects and consciousness. The six sense objects and consciousness are not the self; how, then, could the self be known through direct cognition?

As for inferential cognition: the eye, visible form, space, and attention serve as causes and conditions for the arising of eye-consciousness. Consciousness is the eye’s illumination, its capacity for understanding. What is seen has a function.

Through inference, therefore, one certainly knows that the eye exists. But the self has no distinct function. On what basis can one infer and know that a self exists?

As for analogy, when a wise person sees the form of a domestic cow, by analogy he recognizes the form of a wild ox. This is how analogy should be understood. Yet the self is neither directly known as an object of cognition nor is it similar to any known object.

Because of what they have heard, they cling to a self, saying that the Holy Truth teaches that a self exists: “I trust the sounds and words of the holy teacher; therefore, I posit a self.” This is not so. Your teachers teach the two kinds of views, eternalism and annihilationism. For example, the three non-Buddhist teachers Bà Bà Lệ Kha, A Lại Già Dã, and Ưu Lầu Ca give rise to the eternalist view, cling to the assertion that a self exists, and say that there is a future life.

Ha Lê Đa Văn, Đà A Luân La Già Na, and three other non-Buddhist teachers give rise to the annihilationist view, cling to the assertion that there is no self, and do not say that there is a future life. Your teachers assert both existence and nonexistence according to their own convictions. How, then, can their words attest that a self exists?

It is said, not by comparing oneself with the self, that the self is the lord of the five skandhas, dwelling alone within them like a king whose kingdom belongs to him alone and is shared with no one. Now, to make clear that the five skandhas have no lord, it is said that they have no self-existing cause. Therefore, this is called non-self.

Question: For what function do the non-Buddhists establish the self? If it has a function, then its existence could be known by inference.

Answer: It is said that the external marks of the self are five, while the internal marks are nine. This is the attachment maintained by Ulūka. The five external marks are: first, the locus of exhalation; second, the locus of inhalation; third, the locus of blinking; fourth, the locus of seeing; and fifth, the lifespan.

Because these five marks are fully present, it is known that a self exists. The marks of the self are precisely these five functions. This will now be refuted.

If the first four marks establish that a self exists, then what of an egg, in which those four marks are initially absent? Could a self exist in it? How is this principle to be understood?

Although the first four marks are absent, the fifth mark is present, and thus one knows that a self exists. This too is refuted: lifespan continues in conjunction with the marks of the body. When one who illuminates the self attains liberation, that self becomes separated from the body.

When the self is separated from the body, lifespan is no longer present. How, then, can lifespan serve as proof that a self exists?

As for the internal marks, it is said that the self is permanent and that the mind, being like the smallest subtle particle, is also permanent. Apart from these, there are Dharma and non-Dharma. Dharma is wholesome, while non-Dharma is unwholesome.

Dharma and non-Dharma can cause the self and mind to unite. When the self and mind unite, nine dharmas arise. From the self and mind arises cognition, by which one can know.

From cognition arise suffering and pleasure. From suffering and pleasure arise desire and aversion. Desire arises toward pleasure, while aversion arises toward suffering.

From desire and aversion arises effort, which exerts great force to eliminate suffering and seek pleasure. From effort arise Dharma and non-Dharma. Those who hold the view of permanence believe in a future existence.

Their practice of austerities in the present is called Dharma. Those who hold the view of annihilation believe there is no future existence. Because their minds continually commit evil deeds in the present, this is called non-Dharma.

From Dharma and non-Dharma arises cultivation. When cultivation matures, this function is quickly exhausted. Cultivation is the power of causes.

Through cultivation, one recollects past events. Because separately existent Dharma and non-Dharma combine, Dharma and non-Dharma arise among those nine dharmas. At times one performs good, and at times one commits evil.

Separately existent Dharma and non-Dharma perform five kinds of activity. First, they can cause fire to rise upward. Second, they can cause wind to blow around.

Third, they can cause earth and water to sink downward. Fourth, they can cause the smallest particles to combine. Fifth, they can cause the self and mind to unite.

The non-Buddhists teach two calamities: first, the intermediate calamity; and second, the calamity of fire. In the intermediate calamity, altogether three hundred thousand koṭis elapse—that is, three hundred thousand koṭis of kalpas: one hundred thousand koṭis of fire, one hundred thousand koṭis of water, and one hundred thousand koṭis of wind-worlds. At the time of the fire calamity, the world declines for one kalpa and arises for one kalpa; water and wind are likewise.

Destruction means that the coarse particles perish, while the fundamental, extremely subtle particles separate from one another yet continue to abide. Arising means that Dharma and non-Dharma cause them to combine. Dharma brings them together to form a wholesome path, while non-Dharma brings them together to form an unwholesome path.

Because the fundamental particles combine, they subsequently increase, further particles arise, and the world is formed. The self and mind again pursue external particles and alternately separate and unite. Throughout three hundred thousand koṭis, the interval is filled with fire calamities.

When a fire calamity occurs after three hundred thousand koṭis have elapsed, the world proceeds toward destruction. The fundamental subtle particles proceed toward separation and gather together. The self and mind also proceed toward a certain state and abide there; then the self gradually attains liberation.

After these three hundred thousand koṭis of fire calamities have passed, Dharma and non-Dharma again cause combination.

Question: How does fire arise? How does wind blow? Why are earth and water below?

Answer: Fire can bring things to completion, yet fire cannot rise upward by itself. If it did not rise, beings could not properly prepare food and drink. Furthermore, fire possesses light, which is wisdom.

In the realm of Īśvara Heaven, the body abides throughout the six destinies. From the mind upward is the realm of human beings and devas. From the mind downward to the navel leads toward the asuras and hungry ghosts.

From the navel to the feet are animals and hell beings. Humans and devas possess the light of wisdom and therefore dwell above. Since fire possesses light and presides over wisdom, it is above.

If wind did not move in every direction, beings could not come and go, just as with a boat upon the sea. If wind merely sank and rose, a boat could not advance. Because wind blows, there is coming and going.

If earth and water were not below, beings would have nowhere to rely upon. Earth and water are dark and produce the tactile conditions of hell beings and animals; therefore, they are below. Hell beings and animals are dark and possess sensation; therefore, they are beneath the earth.

Earth and water are dark and produce sensation; therefore, they are below.

In order to attain liberation forever, one should cultivate four dharmas: moral discipline, generosity, ascetic practice, and meditative concentration. From these four dharmas arises the true Dharma. One who attains the true Dharma is one who attains the Path. From the true Dharma arise bliss and wisdom. One who possesses wisdom then receives the joyful recompense of heaven. Thereafter, wisdom severs Dharma and non-Dharma. The self and mind become forever separated from one another. The nine dharmas can never arise again. Thus one attains liberation forever. If the view that the self is like the smallest subtle particle is refuted, this attachment collapses of itself.

The Treatise says: Desire and craving are of four kinds:

First is attachment to a self without discrimination, together with craving and desire.

Second is attachment to the existence of a self, without discrimination, together with craving and desire.

Third is attachment to the existence of a self, with discrimination between superior and inferior, together with craving and desire.

Fourth is the binding together of continuous characteristics with craving and desire.

These will now be explained in sequence.

First is attachment to a self. In the present, one clings to the assertion that there is a self within this body, without making distinctions. One clings to one skandha as the self and to the other skandhas as not the self, yet without discriminating among them. All five skandhas are not the self, yet craving arises toward the self. Because a defiled and attached mind arises toward the self and toward the objects of form, scent, taste, touch, and so forth, this is called desire. The self and craving are to be eliminated by the path of seeing. Desire is to be eliminated by the path of cultivation.

The second kind of craving and desire pertains to those who hold the view of permanence. They maintain that the self is not extinguished but reaches a future existence; therefore, this is called discrimination concerning the self. It does not differ from the foregoing explanation of a future existence, which asserts that a self exists. Craving arises toward that self. Defiled attachment arises toward the six sense objects possessed by the self; therefore, this is called desire.

The third is attachment to the existence of a self, as explained above, while also discriminating between superior and inferior. Such discrimination is discrimination concerning the self in a future existence: whether it will experience suffering or pleasure, whether it will be born above the earth or below the earth. This is the meaning of superior and inferior. The accompanying craving and desire do not differ from what was explained above.

Concerning the fourth kind of craving and desire, the text of the Treatise does not state that there is attachment to a self. Nevertheless, it is still attachment to the self, craving, and desire. Attachment to the self without discrimination does not differ from what was explained above. It means that the self is not extinguished but reaches a future existence. With regard to the future, attachment arises toward the place where one will arise. This means that, because of craving, this body subsequently binds together to form another body. The two lives, earlier and later, continue without interruption; therefore, this is called binding together. The accompanying continuity, craving, and desire do not differ from what was explained above.

The Treatise says: In the Buddha’s sutras, the five skandhas are said to be the basis of craving and desire. When craving and desire arise, craving and desire constitute the place of their arising and that upon which they depend. That sutra also says that craving and desire are of four kinds.

The Treatise lists the four names in sequence, which will now be explained. Regarding the explanation of cause: first, craving and desire with respect to the five skandhas constitute the initial basis and therefore are called the cause, just as a seed is related to its fruit. “Basis” means the initial cause.

According to the sutra text, craving and desire are the root. Thus craving and desire are the cause. The present explanation defines the fundamental cause as the initial basis.

At first, one clings to a self in the present, and therefore craving and desire arise. This craving and desire possess the power to bring about a future result and therefore are called the beginning. Just as the presence of a seed entails the power to produce its fruit, it is therefore spoken of in terms of fruit and seed.

It is further explained that the second craving is the arising of the five skandhas, which can cause the fruition to come about. It is like a seed and its fruit. This second craving arises in dependence upon the future existence of a self and the sense objects; because craving then comes into conjunction, it can cause the future fruit to become present. That mind of craving is the arising. It is like a seed that eventually produces flowers or fruit, together with the seasons, the seed, leaves, and flowers. The fruit is the result.

Next, in explaining the place of arising, the third craving is the arising of the five skandhas; it can produce good or bad five skandhas. It is like fruit in relation to soil, water, fields, and so forth, possessing flavor, potency, transformation through ripening, and efficacy. The third craving discriminates superiority and inferiority in the future.

When retribution is received, there is ascent and descent. Through the third craving, future superiority and inferiority, as well as karmic retribution, can arise. Through the second, that fruit gradually comes truly to exist.

It is now said that one again grasps that fruit as truly existing, and then that fruit arises in fields, water, soil, and so forth; because these become conditions for the formation of the fruit, it grows and develops flavor. Those fields may be good or bad, and the various forces applied to them are not alike. The fruit develops flavor according to these circumstances.

Differences according to conditions are likewise so. Because craving makes discriminations, the fruit may be good or bad. The doctrine of scent is established according to the Sammitiya school and the tenets of non-Buddhist traditions.

There are three kinds. The first is fragrance, the second is stench, and the third is neutral. Neutral means neither fragrant nor foul.

According to the other schools, however, there are only fragrance and stench. They do not distinguish any residual scent, while fragrance and stench each have two kinds: the first increases, and the second diminishes. Musk, for example, when smelled by a person, increases the subtle particles in the nostrils.

When tiny insects smell this fragrance, it diminishes the subtle particles in their nostrils. Excrement is foul; when people smell it, it diminishes the subtle particles in their nostrils, but when pigs and dogs smell it, it increases the subtle particles in their nostrils. There are seven kinds of taste: sweet, bitter, pungent, sour, salty, astringent, and bland—the last being the taste of water.

The astringent causes constriction, as though producing an obstruction. The ash-colored taste means that a mild taste continually rises to the ears. There are ten kinds of potency: light, heavy, cold, hot, astringent, essential, hard, soft, wearing, and dry.

A fully ripened fruit contains moisture, like the linqin fruit, though the flesh within it is dry. Transformation through digestion is of three kinds: sweet, sour, and pungent. These three tastes are thus named because, when the fruit is eaten and enters the belly, if it is transformed into fluid it is called sweet; if transformed into heat, it is called sour; and if transformed into wind, it is called pungent.

Fluid is the essence of sweetness; because it contains much water, this fluid substance is called sweet. The essence of heat causes sourness in the throat and gives rise to heat, and is therefore called sour. The essence of wind can make the body and face feel rough.

The dry essence is not smooth but rough, and is therefore called astringent. The human body has three regions. From the heart upward is fluid; from the heart downward to the navel is heat; and from the navel downward to the feet is wind.

If these three regions are balanced, there is free circulation and harmony, without illness. If they become congested and fail to circulate, illness results. Thus, the six tastes undergo dissimilar transformations.

The two tastes, sweet and rich, mature into sweetness; the sour taste matures into sourness; and the three tastes—bitter, pungent, and astringent—mature into pungency and astringency. As for efficacy, medicines made from trees and leaves naturally possess efficacy. A tree root may also emit light, or it may be able to enter the abode of spirits.

It may also remove poison, as the medicine of Magadha gives rise to all medicinal herbs yet itself contains no poison. The potency of a fruit differs according to its conditions, just as sentient beings experience differing karmic retributions.

Now the meaning of the word “condition” is explained. The fourth craving arises conditioned by the five skandhas. From this, the five skandhas arise. It is like fruit arising in dependence upon a flower after it has blossomed. The attachment of the fourth craving produces future existence, binding together two kinds in continuous succession. The future five skandhas arise in dependence upon this. It is called dependence upon the fourth craving, just as fruit arises in dependence upon a flower after it has blossomed. When this process has ended, it is called cessation. This process itself comprises the twelve links of dependent arising.

This is the cause. When that cause is severed and no longer continues, it is called cessation. This elucidates that when the first craving is severed, among the sixteen aspects of the truths, the four pertaining to cessation each have a dharma as their essence.

Because there is no suffering, it is called peaceful. Suffering does not produce the sensation of suffering—this is what is meant. This fruit arose from what preceded it.

This is called the fruit of suffering. Previously, the severance of the cause was clarified; now the absence of the fruit is clarified. If the fruit arose again, it would be agitated and not-self; how could it be peaceful?

Because the fruit is absent, it is peaceful. This clarifies the emptiness of the second craving. The second craving arises from the first craving; because its fruit is unsurpassed, it is called wondrous.

Being supremely excellent, without error and without equal, it is said to be unsurpassed. This clarifies the emptiness of the third craving. The third craving discriminates superiority and inferiority.

Now it is made clear that the superior is without inferiority, thereby eliminating superiority and inferiority, so that craving cannot return. This is called permanent separation without return. “Without” means permanent separation: because it causes one to escape and never return, it is called permanent separation.

This clarifies the emptiness of the fourth craving. The fourth craving binds tightly and causes continuity. This leads back into samsara.

When that binding is severed, there is no further return and no activity of mental factors; this is called the Path.

The Path has morality, concentration, and wisdom as its essence. Its practice arises from an undefiled mind. The undefiled mind itself has three qualities: first, maturity; second, uprightness; and third, clarity.

Maturity means being without limitation; clarity means being without delusion; and uprightness means correctness. When cultivated wisdom is attained and distraction is abandoned, this is called maturity. Being mature, it cannot regress or be lost.

If the mind is obscured, then its objects are confused. Through clarity, it is not deluded. If anything false becomes attached to it, it cannot be called upright.

Because the correct is not false, it is called upright. Because uprightness is unmixed, it is called true. The undefiled mind fully possesses these three virtues and therefore gives rise to the Path, which likewise fully possesses these three virtues.

Because it penetrates the true objects of cognition, it is called “suchness.” Because it accords with the true objects that are the principles of the Four Truths, it is thus called “suchness.” Certainty is called right practice. As the sutra says, although this is the Path, there is no other path. Because its vision is pure, and because nothing surpasses or equals it, it is called certain.

Moreover, if there were even one dharma superior to this Dharma, it would thereby become uncertain. If there were another distinct dharma equal to this Dharma, it likewise would not be certain. What is uncertain cannot be called right concentration.

The treatise cites the sutra to demonstrate the definition, saying that although this is a path, no other dharma can compare with it, and therefore it is supreme. Thus it is said that there is no other path. There are two kinds of seeing.

The first is accumulated views, namely, the five kinds of views. The second is right view, namely, exhaustive knowledge. Exhaustive knowledge is the final wisdom attained by an arhat after the afflictions have been eliminated.

One who can eliminate accumulated views—narrow views—attains the right view of an arhat. This is called purified seeing. If the point of seeing the Path is clearly explained, there are thirteen states of mind, which are also called right view and are capable of purified seeing.

This is called right practice. Therefore, only right practice is the Path. Apart from this, how could there be another path?

Ultimate deliverance is called emergence. The truth of cessation is the ultimate, and the ultimate does not arise. Uncontaminated wisdom eliminates the afflictions, crosses beyond all outflows, and realizes the unconditioned; therefore, it is called deliverance.

The unconditioned is the ultimate, and the path that realizes the unconditioned is likewise ultimate. Thus the truth of cessation, being ultimate, is called the goal; deliverance is called the ultimate; and ultimate deliverance is termed emancipation.

The treatise states: The sutra also says that sentient beings have four kinds of views. The first is the view of permanence; the second, the view of pleasure; the third, the view of what belongs to a self; and the fourth, the view of self. To refute these four kinds of views, the Buddha taught impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self.

In explaining these terms, when views arise, the view of self necessarily arises first. When the view of self arises, the other three kinds of views arise in full. When the view of self arises, one regards the self as permanent.

Thus the view of permanence arises: the self is deemed permanent, like a knife that cannot cut it and fire that cannot burn it; it therefore cannot be destroyed. This is considered pleasure. Thus the view of pleasure arises.

One then holds that there is a self and what belongs to the self: this belongs to me. Thus the view of what belongs to the self arises. If the view of self is refuted, those three views are refuted along with it.

The teachers of Samkhya and Vaisheshika further give rise to the view of permanence, saying: What exists is not nonexistent, and what is nonexistent is not existent. The nonexistence of all dharmas is eternally nonexistent and cannot become existent. What exists is eternally existent and cannot become nonexistent.

All dharmas are permanent. Although all dharmas are presently seen to arise and cease, this is merely transformation: they cannot initially arise, nor can they ultimately cease, just as gold remains gold through its transformations. The substance of gold never arises or ceases.

According to this doctrine, primordial nature produces space and the five great elements. The five great elements in turn produce the five faculties.

Question: What does it mean to say that primordial nature produces space?

Answer: Space and sound arise together. Space is the root, and sound is the branch. Sound belongs to space and is the quality of space.

It is exceedingly subtle, and nothing can destroy it. Primordial nature produces wind, together with touch. Wind is the root, and touch is the branch.

Touch is the quality of wind. Wind is coarse, while space is subtle; space penetrates and breaks through wind, and wind is intermingled with space. Wind therefore possesses two qualities: its own quality is touch, and the quality derived from another is sound.

Primordial nature produces fire, and fire and color arise together. Fire is the root, and color is the branch. Color is the quality of fire.

Fire is coarse, while wind is subtle. Wind penetrates and breaks through fire, and fire is intermingled with wind. Fire possesses three qualities: its own quality is color, while its qualities derived from others are sound and touch.

Primordial nature produces water, and water and taste arise together. Water is the root, and taste is the branch. Taste is the quality of water.

Water is coarse, while fire is subtle. Fire penetrates and breaks through water, and water is intermingled with fire. Water fully possesses four qualities: its own quality is taste, while its qualities derived from others are sound, color, and touch.

Primordial nature produces earth. Earth and fragrance arise together. Earth is the root, and fragrance is the branch.

Fragrance is the quality of earth. Earth is coarse, while water is subtle. Water penetrates and breaks through earth, and earth is intermingled with water.

Earth fully possesses five qualities: its own quality is fragrance, while its qualities derived from others are sound, color, touch, and taste. The five great elements serve as causes producing the five faculties. The five faculties are their effects.

The faculty of hearing is produced from space and therefore reverts to and apprehends space. Its own quality does not apprehend the other qualities; although it hears sound, it does not see color. Wind produces the skin, namely, the fleshly skin.

The skin in turn apprehends wind. Although its own quality apprehends touch, it does not apprehend the other qualities. Fire produces the eyes, water produces the tongue, and earth produces the nose.

The latter two cases may be understood in the same way. The five faculties are produced from the five great elements. When the five faculties cease, they return to the five great elements.

When the auditory faculty ceases, it returns to space; and so forth, until the olfactory faculty ceases and returns to earth. Therefore, all dharmas are held to be permanent. To refute the view of permanence, it is clarified that what exists undergoes cessation: it did not exist before and does not exist afterward; therefore, it is said to be impermanent.

This statement clarifies that nonexistence is not existence. It makes clear that before existence there was no existence. The absence of existence is nonexistence.

Originally there was nonexistence, but now existence has come to be; thus nonexistence is not eternally nonexistent. It also states that existence is not nonexistence. It now clarifies that existence becomes nonexistence.

What previously existed has now become nonexistent; thus existence does not exist permanently.

Question: How can fire penetrate and break through water?

Answer: Color is the quality of fire. Because water has color within it, fire penetrates and breaks through water.

Question: What is the primordial nature that is said to be capable of producing things?

Answer: There are three kinds of dharmas. The first is primordial nature; the second is called the person; and the third is transformation. The first of these three is called primordial nature.

The person is simply called the person. Transformation is also called nature and is also called transformation. As for the first, because it has no cognition, it cannot be called the person; because it does not change, it cannot be called transformation.

Therefore, it is called primordial nature. The person possesses cognition but cannot act; thus it is not called primordial nature. Because it does not transform, it is not called transformation.

It is called only the person. Everything from the three qualities onward lacks cognition. Because it can extensively produce things, it is subsequently called nature.

Because what is produced from it undergoes transformation, it is called transformation. All three dharmas are permanent. The first two are permanent and do not transform.

The last is permanent yet capable of transformation, just as the nature of gold does not change although it may be transformed into something else. The person is the self. Primordial nature is like a blind person who can walk but cannot see the road, while the person is like one who has eyes but no feet: he can see but cannot walk.

Primordial nature can act but has no cognition; the person can know but cannot act. When the person and primordial nature unite, the transformed nature arises.

In general, there are eight kinds of nature. The first is root primordial nature; the second is the nature of the three qualities; the third is the nature of the great principle; the fourth is the nature of self-attachment; the fifth is the nature of the subtle elements; the sixth is the nature of the great elements; the seventh is the nature of the cognitive faculties; and the eighth is the nature of the faculties of action.

Among these, root primordial nature is originally existent, and from it arise the seven kinds of nature. Those seven kinds of nature are also transformed nature. From that root arise the nature of the three qualities.

In the Indian language, the first of the three qualities is called Sattva. Because it cannot be translated, it is described as subtle existence. When things arise from it, their entire substance is subtle and wondrous.

The second is called Rajas, correctly translated as dust in motion. Because it is capable of defilement, it is called dust. The third is called Tamas, correctly translated as darkness; this is its substance.

In terms of their meanings, the first is light and luminous; the second is called movement and sustaining; and the third is called movement and obstruction. All dharmas, whether internal or external, do not go beyond these three kinds.

Previously, the external doctrine was discussed. In the external dharmas there are four external doctrines. The space element and the fire element are light and luminous.

The wind element is moving and sustaining, and can bear things up so that they do not fall. Earth and water are heavy and obstructive; their substance is heavy and buried in darkness. This may be considered in relation to the six realms.

The devas are light and luminous. Human beings are moving and sustaining. The four evil destinies are heavy and obstructive, buried in the depths.

In the doctrine of internal dharmas, equanimous feeling is light and luminous, while pleasant feeling is moving and sustaining. The mind moves and engages, firmly grasping its objects. Painful feeling is heavy and obstructive.

Wisdom is light and luminous. Greed is moving and sustaining. Anger and delusion are heavy and obstructive.

First, the three qualities arise. Among them, subtle existence is manifested first; the external dharmas are not yet manifest, but are subsequently manifested. From the self-nature of the three qualities arises the great self-nature. The great is awareness; awareness means knowing the root, and it possesses the subtle awareness of function. From the great self-nature arises the self-nature of ego-clinging, which asserts the existence of a self and other things. According to the doctrine of the Samkhya, the subtle elements arise from ego-clinging, and from the subtle elements arise the gross realities. According to the doctrine of the Vaisheshika, however, the subtle elements arise from the gross realities.

Now this will be explained on the basis of the foregoing. The term “subtle elements” means that there are only the five sense-objects, with the dharma-object excluded because it is not yet understood. From the five sense-objects arise the gross realities, namely, the five great elements.

Since no dharma can exist outside them, they are called “great.” They are called “realities” because all dharmas, whether coming or going, remain within these five. All dharmas themselves undergo change, but the substance of these five always remains and does not change. When the eye faculty disintegrates, it returns to the space element.

The eye faculty itself undergoes disintegration, but the space element does not. Likewise, up to the nose faculty, which returns to earth, it is also thus. Therefore, they are called realities.

From the gross realities arise the cognitive faculties. The eye and the other five faculties are capable of cognition. From the cognitive faculties arise the faculties of action.

There are five faculties of action: first, the mouth; second, the hands; third, the feet; fourth, the orifices; and fifth, the male and female faculties. The mouth, which can speak, is the faculty of speech. Speech itself is the action of the mouth.

The hands are the faculties of grasping; grasping pertains to the action of taking. The orifices are the faculties of elimination, capable of discharging filth. Such discharge is an action of elimination.

The male and female faculties can produce children; this production is the generative faculty. In producing children, the male and female faculties are faculties of action. These constitute the twenty-five categories, the meaning of the real principles.

The five faculties of action, the five cognitive faculties, the five sense-objects, and the five great elements make twenty in all. Ego-clinging is the twenty-first. The great is the twenty-second.

The three qualities are the twenty-third. The person is the twenty-fourth. Primordial nature is the twenty-fifth.

Question: The doctrine of the five great elements teaches the three qualities. The five great elements should belong only to the gross realities. To which of the three qualities do they belong?

Answer: Their essential nature belongs to the three qualities. The five great elements themselves belong to the gross realities. It is like a single sprout being differentiated into many sprouts, or like carving the form of a horse or an elephant.

Although horses and elephants differ in essential nature, the capacity is the same. The five great elements are likewise. The five great elements themselves belong to the gross realities, yet in accordance with their essential nature they mutually encompass one another, and intrinsically belong to the three qualities.

The previous statement that primordial nature gives rise to space refers to the root: primordial nature is capable of producing it. This Samkhya doctrine clarifies that the cause contains the effect in its entirety. It is like the patra tree, whose fruit fully contains branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits.

Primordial nature likewise fully contains the seven kinds of transformed self-nature. When the person unites with it, the seven kinds are successively manifested; hence this is called arising. It is not that what did not exist before comes to exist afterward; manifestation is termed arising.

Question: Among the three qualities are wisdom and the three afflictions. Do they take things as their objects?

Answer: These are dharmas of subtle existence and do not arise in dependence upon objects. In the Buddhist teaching there are the three wholesome roots and three unwholesome roots; must they likewise arise through dependence on objects?

Question: Among the three qualities there is wisdom, while the great is called awareness. Which of the transformed self-natures, then, does not know?

Answer: The person is the knower. The person can know that the seven kinds of transformation are themselves devoid of a cognitive function. It is like calling someone a “breaker” because that person can break something; the path itself cannot break anything.

Question: The subtle elements are form and the five sense-objects. How can the functioning of the sense-objects reveal the realities?

Answer: The five great elements and the extremely minute particles cannot be seen. Form and the five sense-objects are the outermost manifestations of the five great elements. By seeing the outermost manifestations, one understands the root. Form and the five sense-objects are not extremely minute particles and therefore can be seen.

Question: Primordial nature can produce and can also transform. In relation to primordial nature, the three qualities are what is produced and what is transformed. In relation to the great, they are able to produce and transform. Why, then, is primordial nature, because it can produce, said to receive the designation “producer,” yet because it can transform, is not said to receive the designation “transformer,” while the three qualities receive both designations?

Answer: That which can transform and produce is called the cause. That which is transformed and produced is called the effect. What is simply called transformation and simply called arising is termed the effect. When the effect arises, transformation gives rise to production. When the cause is exhausted, change gives rise to production. Thus, to say now that primordial nature can produce means that it can transform; to say that it can transform means that it can produce. It is not that which is transformed, and therefore it is not said to receive the designation “transformed.” The three qualities possess both meanings and therefore include both designations.

Question: Why can it produce primordial nature?

Answer: That which can produce is the root. Being the root is the meaning of primordial nature; therefore, it is said to receive the designation “primordial nature.”

Question: The person is also a root. Why does it not receive the designation “primordial nature”?

Answer: It has no function here and cannot transform into anything else; therefore, it is not said to receive the designation “primordial nature.” Those who delight in the view of the Nirgranthas give rise to the view that samsara is truly blissful and nirvana is truly painful. This is explained as follows: Is a person with only one hand and one eye in pain? If this is painful, then having one hand and one eye is painful.

If absolutely nothing remained, would that not be truly painful? In nirvana there are no five skandhas; therefore, they say that nirvana is truly the utmost suffering. A person who has no hand or eye seeks treatment from another; if that person gains one hand and one eye, is this blissful?

One who delights in this, upon gaining an additional hand and eye, considers it blissful because the body is made complete. Would this not be truly blissful? In the present life, moreover, the five faculties are complete.

Therefore, they know that possessing this body is truly exceedingly blissful.

The Samkhya and Vaisheshika give rise to a view that delights in existence and maintain that samsara truly contains both pleasure and pain. Humans and devas experience true pleasure, while hell beings and animals experience true pain. The cause of this is that the true cause contains both good and evil.

Evil can bring about suffering, while good can bring about pleasure; hence the cause is real. They know that the effect is likewise real. To refute these two views, it is taught that within samsara, pleasure arises through mutual comparison.

How should this necessarily be known? What is coarse is pleasure, while what is subtle is pain. For example, hungry ghosts regard hell as suffering, but regarding their own retribution, they consider it pleasure.

Animals regard hell and the realm of hungry ghosts as suffering, but regarding their own state, they consider it pleasure. Asuras regard the animal realm as suffering, but regarding their own retribution, they consider it pleasure. Humans and devas, and beings in the realms of form and formlessness, mutually compare their respective modes of existence and deludedly regard them as pleasure.

This continues even to the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, which is deludedly compared with nirvana. Neither-perception-nor-non-perception is suffering, whereas nirvana is bliss, and nothing can surpass nirvana. Therefore, nirvana is true bliss, while samsara is true suffering.

In the Mahayana, the nirvanas of the three vehicles are also distinct, but this cannot be discussed here.

Question: It is commonly held that the gravest offenses lead to hell, intermediate offenses lead to the animal realm, and lesser offenses lead to the realm of hungry ghosts. Why, then, is the animal realm here regarded as superior to the realm of hungry ghosts?

Answer: If the Lesser Vehicle were used to guide the reasoning of the Great Vehicle, then animals would be better off than hungry ghosts. Hungry ghosts are constantly accompanied by fire and undergo many painful retributions. Their heads are small and their bellies large, and they are perpetually afflicted by hunger and thirst.

Even if they obtain clear water, it turns into a great fire. Among animals, this does not occur; therefore, we know that their condition is better. The refutation of the various views follows.

Becoming and cessation, with their ceaseless flow, are the cause. Although something may be a wholesome cause, if it still perpetuates the flow, it is no longer genuine. It is like delicious food containing poison: it thereby ceases to be delicious food.

If goodness itself is not genuine, how could happiness be genuine?

The Treatise says: Because I fashion implements, they are called “mine.” The Samkhya and Vaisheshika schools establish attachment to this doctrine.

First, there are implements fashioned internally; second, there are implements fashioned externally. The self knows who is the agent and who is the experiencer. Knowing is the dharma of the self; it is among the nine dharmas of cognition.

The mind is an implement fashioned internally by the self. The faculties are implements fashioned externally by the self. The sense objects are the provisions of the self.

There are five faculties and five corresponding sense objects. The mind alone is one. Both mind and self are eternal.

No dharma causes them to unite. As previously explained, these are called implements, like the axe spoken of in the world. A craftsman fashions an implement and uses it to make a bed.

Mind and faculties are likewise. Because the self uses them to see forms and perceive sounds and odors, they are called fashioned implements. Because cognition arises from sense objects, they are called provisions.

Since implements are fashioned internally, this proves that a self exists. Since there are external implements, one knows that there are also internal implements; and the provisions prove that the faculties exist. The dharma of the self universally proves the existence of the self, its provisions, and its fashioned implements.

The internally fashioned implement proves that a self exists. The self is the agent. If there were no self, who would cause the mind to be situated at the eye, or at times at the ear, nose, or tongue?

Therefore, one knows that a self exists. The externally fashioned implements prove that an implement is also fashioned internally. In general, this proves two principles.

First, it proves that the mind is one. If there were many minds, why could five cognitions not arise simultaneously to cognize the five sense objects? Therefore, one knows that there is only one mind.

When it is at the eye, it can see but cannot hear. When it is at the ear, it can hear but cannot see colors. Therefore, the five faculties do not function in a common manner.

Second, this constantly proves that the mind exists. If the mind exists, then it exists perpetually. If the five faculties exist perpetually, why does cognition not perpetually arise to cognize the five sense objects? When the mind is present at a faculty, it can cognize its object. Therefore, one knows with certainty that the mind exists.

The provisions prove that externally fashioned implements exist. If there were no externally fashioned implement, then when the eye faculty is damaged, why would one cease to see and then again be able to see colors? Therefore, one necessarily knows that externally fashioned implements exist.

The five dharmas together prove four matters: the mind does not cognize, and the faculties and sense objects are likewise. If there were no self, how could cognition occur? The self is that which cognizes.

Therefore, one knows that the dharma of the self means that a self exists. This dharma proves the existence of the self. If there were no mind, all five objects would be cognized simultaneously.

When color is cognized, however, sound cannot be cognized. Therefore, one knows with certainty that the mind exists. Cognition arises when the mind is at a faculty, and from the cognition thereby obtained it is proven that the mind is one.

If the mind were not one, five minds would simultaneously be present at the faculties, and thus all five cognitions would occur at once. If there were no faculties, why would cognition fail to arise when a faculty was damaged? If there were no five sense objects, what would be cognized?

Mind and self operate in concert. Therefore, the mind is the internally fashioned implement. Since the faculties do not unite with the self, they are called externally fashioned implements.

Sense objects are the objective fields before it; each can independently produce a dharma of the self. They are therefore called the provisions of the self. What is called the self is thus that which fashions implements, while the self’s provisions are what belong to the self—what is “mine.”

The Samkhya establishes the existence of a self, as proven through five principles. First, because an assemblage exists for the sake of another, one knows that a self exists. In the world, when people propagate a teaching and compile scriptures and writings, they do not do so for themselves but for others.

Again, when people in the world assemble beds and seats, these too are not made for themselves but, one may suppose, for others. Seeing that an assemblage is made for another, one knows that this other exists. The bodies of sentient beings are likewise.

The five sense objects, four great elements, five faculties, and five skandhas are assembled together. Seeing this assemblage, one knows that it is not for itself but for another. That other is the self.

Thus, one knows that a self exists. Second, seeing that primordial nature transforms into the three qualities and seven dharmas, one knows that a self exists. Primordial nature merely knows; it cannot transform into the three qualities and seven dharmas.

For it to be able to transform into the three qualities and seven dharmas, there must ultimately be a knower of all things before transformation can occur. That knower is the self. Therefore, one knows that a self exists.

Third, seeing transformation and the presence of cognition within it, one knows that a self exists. Primordial nature is insentient. Primordial nature is the root, and transformation is the branch. Since the root is insentient, cognition cannot exist in the branch. Yet cognition does exist within transformation. Therefore, one knows more broadly that there is a cognitive entity that comes and unites with primordial nature. Cognition exists within transformation, and the cognitive entity is precisely the self. Thus, through the self, one knows that there is a self. This single matter reveals that the self is tightly bound and that attachment to self arises from cognition.

Fourth, seeing that something can be used, one knows that a self exists. That which can be used implies one who uses it; everything usable has a user. Primordial nature can be used; therefore, one knows that a self exists.

Another analogy says: A woman can be enjoyed, while a man is the one who enjoys; seeing that a woman exists, one thereby knows that a man exists. Primordial nature can be used; therefore, the self unites with it. Once united, it transforms into the three qualities and seven dharmas.

The seven dharmas bind the self. Subsequently, upon hearing a teacher’s instruction, one acquires the wisdom born of hearing, reflection, and cultivation, and understands that this bondage arises from primordial nature and causes one to abide in samsara. Toward primordial nature and the bondage it produces, one gives rise to aversion; once this aversion arises, one forever abandons bondage.

That self then attains liberation. An analogy says: Suppose a man, in a dark place, engages in desire with a diseased woman. He does so many times without fearing that it is wrong.

Afterward, when he sees her clearly, he immediately abandons her. If the woman has a stronger disposition, she entices the man to return. If her disposition is weak, once he has developed aversion, he does not return again.

Although at that time he does not return, there still remains, as it were, the possibility of returning. Once primordial nature has first become repugnant, it will forever cease to unite with the self. There is not merely the weak disposition of a woman; primordial nature itself has this weak disposition.

These five distinct principles truly exist; therefore, one knows that a self exists. One thereby knows that transformation arises from primordial nature and consequently produces bondage. Through cultivating wisdom, one gives rise to disenchantment and detachment toward primordial nature.

Primordial nature and the self then separate from each other. The self abides alone, and the self attains liberation. If there were no self, there could be no principle of abiding alone.

The principle of abiding alone truly exists. Having established that the self exists, the attachment to self must subsequently be separately refuted, so as not to confuse these two matters.

The sixteen true principles are explained according to the Treatise on Conforming to Characteristics.