三彌底部論

As previously stated, there are persons born in an abode of the skandhas who, upon relinquishing the five skandhas, assume the intermediate skandhas and the five skandhas.

Question: How do we clearly know that an intermediate body exists? What is the point in dispute?

Answer: Other schools say that no intermediate body exists. Why? Because no abode for it is mentioned.

The Buddha told Shariputra: “Regarding hell, I clearly know those who pass into hell. I also clearly know the path by which they can go to hell. I further clearly know, up to and including, that all sentient beings can reach nirvana.” Yet the Buddha did not state this: “I clearly know that an intermediate existence is present.” Nor did he say, “I clearly know sentient beings passing into the intermediate existence.” He did not speak of a path by which one may pass into an intermediate existence.

Other schools see that the Buddha did not speak of it in these scriptures. They therefore hold that there is no intermediate body.

Furthermore, the Buddha did not speak of another place of birth, but he clearly spoke of birth in five places. The Buddha declared that Devadatta was born in hell. He clearly knew that certain brahmins were born among animals, that Kolaka was born among hungry ghosts, that Anathapindika was born in heaven, and that King Shankha was reborn as a human. Thus, although he clearly knew these things, he did not state that anyone was born in an intermediate existence.

Other schools see that the Buddha did not speak of an abode of five skandhas there. They therefore hold that no intermediate existence exists.

The Buddha also spoke of karma: through this karma, one experiences birth in hell; through this karma, birth among animals, hungry ghosts, humans, or devas in the five destinies. Thus all beings are born in the five places. Yet the Buddha did not speak of karma producing an intermediate existence. Therefore, those other schools hold that no intermediate existence exists.

They also say that the Buddha definitively taught that these five destinies truly exist: hell beings, animals, hungry ghosts, humans, devas, and so forth. He did not definitively teach an intermediate existence. Seeing that the Buddha did not define an intermediate existence, the other schools hold that no intermediate existence exists.

There is also immediate birth.

The Buddha said that when a person commits the five heinous offenses, upon the destruction of the body he is immediately born in the Avici Hell. If an intermediate existence truly existed, the Buddha would not have said that he enters the Avici Hell immediately.

The other schools see that the Buddha spoke of immediate entrance into the Avici Hell. They therefore hold that no intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, it is indeterminate.

If, upon death, one is born in a certain place, that place would be intermediate and would be called the intermediate existence. That intermediate existence would itself be born in the place of birth. This interval in time and space would be called intermediate existence. Therefore, the other schools hold that no intermediate existence exists.

It would also be useless.

To say that an intermediate skandha exists is useless. Why? Because in the abode of intermediate existence there is no long or short lifespan; no continuous state of illness or freedom from illness; no experiencing or not experiencing the suffering produced by karma; no agreeable or disagreeable forms, sounds, odors, tastes, or tangible objects; and no fine food or clothing. Thus, to say that an intermediate existence exists is useless.

There is also birth according to the same dharma or according to a different dharma. If the intermediate existence is born according to the same dharma, it is the birth-existence, not an intermediate existence. If it is born according to a different dharma, it loses the designation of another destiny, as in the Noble Eightfold Path. Thus both identity and difference of dharma lead to error. Therefore, there is no intermediate existence.

Moreover, its characteristics are not described. The Buddha described five characteristics of the realms, but did not describe the characteristics of an intermediate existence.

Seeing that its characteristics were not described, other schools therefore say that no intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, birth occurs directly from this body. The Buddha said that there are sentient beings who fall from this body into Avici and undergo birth in a single thought-moment.

The Buddha spoke of birth in a single thought-moment; he did not speak of birth in an abode of intermediate existence.

The other schools see that in a single thought-moment one falls from this body into the place where birth is experienced. Therefore, they hold that no intermediate existence exists. These are their reasons.

Thus, the other schools hold that no intermediate existence exists. Yet this doctrine says that one assumes the five skandhas in the abode of intermediate existence. What has just been presented is the other schools' assertion that intermediate existence is absent.

Question: If, contrary to their assertions, those reasons establish that an intermediate existence exists, we now wish to hear the explanation. The other schools cling to the absence of an intermediate state; do you intend to use these reasons to reestablish intermediate existence? Moreover, since the other schools say that the abode of the five destinies alone was taught, does intermediate existence not exist?

Answer: Because the five destinies and the places to which beings travel were not described exhaustively, the Buddha did not separately mention intermediate existence. It does not follow that intermediate existence is absent. When one goes from one city to another, although the journey is not mentioned, reaching the other place would be impossible without traveling there. Thus, not mentioning the journey does not mean that there was no journey to that place. Intermediate existence is likewise.

Furthermore, the other schools say that because the Buddha did not speak of a place of birth, intermediate existence does not exist.

Because it has no fixed dwelling, the Buddha did not call intermediate existence a place of abode. In ordinary abodes, sentient beings experience bodily suffering or pleasure in accordance with their lawful and unlawful deeds and form attachments there. The Buddha clearly knew this and therefore did not describe intermediate existence as such an abode.

Furthermore, other schools say that because the Buddha taught karma but no karma of intermediate existence, intermediate existence does not exist. Yet through karma accumulated and performed by a person, one undergoes birth in the six destinies, in the form realm, or in the formless realm. Such karma constitutes the path of approach: through it the intermediate existence is formed and then proceeds to the place of rebirth. Therefore, the Buddha did not separately speak of the karma of intermediate existence. The fact that he did not mention such karma does not mean that intermediate existence is absent.

Again, the other schools say that the Buddha definitively taught the real existence of the five destinies but did not speak of intermediate existence where it ought to have been mentioned. Yet the Buddha said that the people of a certain country had created karma in many circumstances that he did not describe. From the Buddha's failure to speak definitively of something indeterminate, one cannot conclude that no such dharma can exist. The Buddha therefore did not define intermediate existence. One cannot on that account say that it does not exist. This should be clearly understood.

Again, other schools say that immediate birth in Avici leaves no intermediate existence. The Buddha called it “immediate” because no other destiny intervenes. Therefore, one cannot say that no intermediate existence exists.

Again, other schools say that because it is indeterminate, no intermediate existence exists. Yet the Buddha spoke of the intermediate dhyana, and it is not therefore indeterminate. Between the first and second dhyanas lies an intermediate state. The Buddha spoke of this intermediate dhyana, although within the teaching on dhyana he did not always separately mention it. This should be clearly understood. Likewise, intermediate existence is not indeterminate.

Again, other schools say that because it is useless, no intermediate existence exists. Yet it serves the function of reaching the other birth. That function belongs to intermediate existence, through which one proceeds there to undergo birth. Thus intermediate existence is not useless.

Again, other schools say that, whether birth is according to the same or a different dharma, no intermediate existence exists.

There is birth in two places: one is born in the abode of intermediate existence and, after perishing there, undergoes birth in the other place. These two places involve both the same and different dharmas. How are they the same? Their sphere is the same. How are they different? Traveling and being born are different. Therefore, one cannot say that no intermediate existence exists.

Again, other schools say that because its characteristics were not described, no intermediate existence exists. In many places of doctrinal discussion, this matter was not stated. Had the Buddha repeatedly described birth in intermediate existence, there would be no reason to ask whether intermediate existence exists. Therefore, one cannot say that it does not exist.

Again, other schools say that because one is born directly from one's own body, no intermediate existence exists. Before being born there, one is said to be born there directly from this body; yet before reaching that birth, one is born from this class and falls into the interval, assuming the intermediate existence that has no fixed abode. One sees oneself in this subtle body as though standing upon the earth, not different from the former body. It arises in accordance with craving and relies upon delight in this body. Therefore, this statement does not eliminate intermediate existence.

Intermediate existence exists; why would it be rejected? As the Buddha said to Malunkyaputta: “At that time, when you see, hear, and clearly know this, you will be neither in that world nor in this world nor in between. This is called the end of suffering.” We understand the Buddha's path to include an intermediate state. Therefore, intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, intermediate existence exists, as the Buddha said in the Vatsagotra Sutra. The Buddha told Vatsagotra that when one has relinquished this body but has not yet been born there, the mind-born body is then conjoined with craving and grasping; hence he calls it a sentient being. We see that the Buddha taught this in the Vatsagotra Sutra. Therefore, intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, intermediate existence exists because one may enter nirvana in the interval.

The Buddha told the bhikshus: “Five kinds of persons are called thoroughbred steeds.” What are these five? One who enters nirvana in the interval is the first kind. One who enters nirvana after birth is the second. One who enters nirvana with exertion is the third. One who enters nirvana without exertion is the fourth. One who enters nirvana by proceeding to the highest realm is the fifth.

We see that the Buddha spoke of entering nirvana in the interval. Therefore, intermediate existence exists. The physical body does not reach the next place, and consciousness without a body cannot reach it.

We see that this body does not reach that place. Therefore, intermediate existence exists.

It also exists because of the power of the divine eye. The Buddha said: “With the divine eye, I see sentient beings passing into birth.” If no intermediate existence existed, the Buddha would not have said that with the divine eye he saw sentient beings falling away and being reborn. We see that the Buddha spoke of using the divine eye to see sentient beings passing into birth. This establishes intermediate existence.

Likewise, the Buddha spoke of the gandharva. The Buddha said: “When three conditions come together, there is entry into the womb.” What are the three? The father and mother unite, and the gandharva arrives and stands before them. When these three things come together, entry into the womb occurs. Hence this is called the conjunction of three conditions. If there were no intermediate existence, the Buddha would not have spoken of the gandharva.

We see that the Buddha spoke of the condition of the gandharva. Therefore, intermediate existence exists. Furthermore, there is continuity beginning with the kalala. From that point until old age, without an interval, the material body possesses continuity. We see this continuity. Therefore, there must be a path from death to that place, upon which the intermediate existence is assumed, so that such continuity can be established.

There is also the analogy of rice. From a grain of rice comes a rice shoot, and from the shoot comes the rice plant. How does this fixed material dharma form the rice plant? Before its birth, the grain already exists. What, then, corresponds to the rice shoot? The intermediate existence is like the rice shoot.

Furthermore, that arising produces the rice plant. We see that the analogy of rice is taught. Therefore, we see that intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, there is the radiance of the world. Ananda said: “I heard the World-Honored One say concerning bodhisattvas that, clearly mindful and fully aware, they descend from the Tushita palace into their mother's womb. At that time, every abode of intermediate existence is pervaded by excellent, wondrous radiance; only afterward do they enter the womb.” Because we see this worldly radiance, intermediate existence exists.

Furthermore, when a person is about to undergo birth, a transformation occurs, enabling that person to approach the other place; the mind changes when one is about to undergo birth. Without transformation, there would be no rebirth. It is like someone born in the country of Panchala-Mathura and then born there again.

Why? Because he does not appear to be born in another destiny and no transformation occurs. If there were no intermediate existence, such transformation could not be established.

This occurrence should not be seen in the other destiny itself. One relies upon this place, sees the other place, and travels there. It is like using the divine eye to see one traveling through space by supernormal power.

We see that one about to undergo birth must be transformed. Therefore, intermediate existence exists.

It was previously said that, because there is severance, intermediate existence must exist. This concerns severing three bonds. At that time, among the three places, the severance of the three bonds is described as “not this.” What does “not this” mean? It means not being attached to the inner entrance. What does “not the other” mean? It means not being attached to the outer entrance. One is also not attached to the entrance between them. What does it mean not to be attached to intermediate existence? It means not being attached to the six consciousnesses. This is what the Buddha taught, but it does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Furthermore, as previously stated concerning the Vatsagotra Sutra, it speaks of the three realms, and the Buddha taught the three realms. What does “relinquishing this body” mean? It means relinquishing the desire realm. What does “not yet born there” mean? It means not yet born in the sphere of the form realm. What does “at that time” mean? It means birth in the form realm. What does the mind-born body conjoined with craving and grasping mean? It means attachment to the fragrance of dhyana, together with the sign of craving. Thus what the Buddha said does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, it was previously said that one enters nirvana in the interval because practice has already been completed. If “entering nirvana in the interval” meant birth in an intermediate existence, then concern with practice and entry into nirvana would arise together with energetic exertion. This therefore does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, it was previously said that just as a body does not travel while its reflected image appears in human form—the image appearing upon a mirror—so, after death, birth is experienced in another place. Thus this also does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, it was previously said that through the power of the divine eye even a subtle path is clearly known. There are subtle paths that ordinary people cannot see. Because one delights in seeing them through the divine eye, it is called the power of the divine eye. It therefore cannot clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, concerning the previously mentioned gandharva, it means one who proceeds there. According to the wholesome or unwholesome karma previously created, when one approaches death, one proceeds in the direction determined by that wholesome or unwholesome karma. Therefore, the Buddha's teaching about the gandharva does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, concerning the continuity previously discussed, what does this mean? You say that after death here, an intermediate existence is born. But continuity may mean simply that from this death, rebirth is undergone. The existence of continuity does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, concerning the earlier analogy of the young rice plant, it does not correspond to that destiny. Why? Although rice is used as an analogy, the analogy cannot establish a destiny. Why? Because, owing to the nature of rice, the grain produces a young shoot; the color of the shoot then arises, and it can afterward become a rice plant. But after a human falls away and an intermediate existence arises, it cannot in this same manner produce a human. Therefore, this analogy is inapplicable and does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, concerning the radiance of the world previously mentioned, it refers to a later time. Ananda was told: “I heard that when the World-Honored One spoke of bodhisattvas attaining anuttara-samyak-sambodhi, at that time radiance wondrously illuminated the entire world.” Reflecting on that illumination, one may say that radiance appears in the interval when bodhisattvas become Buddhas. But if Buddhahood were not attained, that radiance would not occur. Hence this statement is not correct and does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

Again, it was previously said that a person about to undergo birth does so through transformation. This means something seen in a dream. A person dreaming in Panchala-Mathura may see Mathura, whose northern region is the country's boundary. Yet no intermediate existence is present. The transformation of one about to undergo birth is likewise and does not clearly establish intermediate existence.

It is further said that if intermediate existence existed, the Buddha would not have told the bhikshus: “Suppose two houses have many doors, but each has only one great gateway. A person standing there guarding that gate sees people entering and leaving. In the same manner, with the divine eye I see beings passing into birth there.”

If there were no intermediate existence, this would conflict with what the scriptures teach. If with the divine eye one sees sentient beings passing back and forth, yet no sentient being could actually be seen, the statement would be meaningless.

Furthermore, if there were no intermediate existence, a human could not be born in another realm. Why? When this present birth ends, this being must then be born elsewhere.

If there were no intermediate existence, even the divine eye could not know it. Nor could one know that after creating wholesome or unwholesome karma, a person is born in a wholesome or unwholesome destiny. As the Buddha said previously: “With the divine eye, I see sentient beings falling away and being born elsewhere.” All such statements are alike. Therefore, we see that one falls from the human state into another place and, relying upon that, undergoes birth. Thus we see that an intermediate existence is certainly established. Intermediate existence is definite. I now state this again.

Question: As stated above, when a person relinquishes the five skandhas and is born elsewhere, what does that person do while assuming the five skandhas in the abode of intermediate existence?

Answer: First is the ordinary person who, while not yet complete in the five skandhas in the five destinies, assumes the state of kalala. In the kalala state there is no empty sphere, and it has two entrances: the bodily entrance and the mental entrance. A place of spontaneous birth within the six destinies has six entrances. One spontaneously born there is neither deaf nor blind. This should be clearly understood. There are nine wholesome and unwholesome faculties. In the three realms there are seven afflictions abandoned by seeing the truths and seven afflictions abandoned by cultivation. Together these are fourteen, comprising the ninety-eight latent afflictions. There are five such kinds in the three realms.

Second is the ordinary person who, after becoming detached from the desire realm, is born among the non-percipient devas. In the five destinies, this person assumes two skandhas and has five entrances. That abode is not conjoined with all the skandhas. One descends there relying upon the entrance of the mental dhatu and afterward becomes separated. Detachment from the desire realm should be understood in this way.

Third is the ordinary person detached from the form realm, who then descends from the form realm and is born in the desire realm.

Question: Suppose one falls from the formless realm. Because previously created karma was conjoined with dhyana corresponding to the form realm, one may be born among the percipient devas. Why could the following not likewise occur? If one previously created karma conjoined with the samadhi of non-perception, might one not fall from the formless realm and be born among the non-percipient devas?

Answer: No passage says that one may fall from the formless realm and be born among the non-percipient devas. Therefore, one should consider that when perception is destroyed here in the desire realm, one is born in the form realm among the non-percipient devas. There are distinct states in which desire, applied thought, joy, and pleasure are destroyed. Only then, upon falling from the formless realm, could one be born in the form realm among the non-percipient devas. Thus there would be a separate state in which perception is destroyed and from which one falls from the formless realm to be born among the non-percipient devas of the form realm.

As it has been said, there may also be persons born in a superior place. This matter should be clearly understood. Yet there is no passage clearly stating that one falls from the formless realm and is born among the non-percipient devas of the form realm.

Furthermore, the karmic characteristic of the samadhi of perception differs from that of the samadhi of non-perception. Therefore, the point can be clearly known.

Fourth are the arhats.

Question: For such a person, the transformation involved in seeking rebirth no longer has a path, and there is no person to undergo rebirth. Why? Does this mean that after the ninety-eight latent afflictions have been eliminated, there is no person who assumes the afflictions and is born in an abode?

Answer: The three existences are the three realms. When there is birth, there is karma, and there is death. These existences are called the three existences. Here, the intermediate birth-existence is discussed.

Fifth are two persons: one is the stream-enterer, who undergoes seven deaths and seven births; the other is the once-returner.

Sixth is a person who enters nirvana in the intermediate state.

Seventh are two persons: one who enters parinirvana after birth and one who enters parinirvana with exertion.

Eighth is one who enters parinirvana without exertion.

With regard to the form realm, this is merely an outline and is not stated in full. Thus, this person speaks of abodes to which ordinary persons do not cling.

There are thirteen kinds of persons. What are the thirteen?

First is an ordinary person not yet disenchanted with the desire realm.

Second is an ordinary person disenchanted with the desire realm.

Third is an ordinary person disenchanted with the form realm.

Fourth is one who undergoes seven lives and seven deaths.

Fifth is the once-returner.

Sixth is the once-returner who goes from family to family.

Seventh is the once-returner who has but one interval remaining.

Eighth is the non-returner who has become detached from the desire realm and is born above.

Ninth are three persons: one who enters nirvana after birth, one who enters parinirvana with exertion, and one who enters nirvana without exertion.

Tenth is one who enters nirvana in the intermediate state.

Eleventh is one who, detached from the form realm, is born higher.

Twelfth is one who is born and proceeds to enter nirvana.

Thirteenth is the arhat.

Thus, the first kind of ordinary person has two types: one born in a wholesome abode and one born in an unwholesome abode.

The second kind of ordinary person has two types: one born in the desire realm and one born in the form realm.

The third kind of ordinary person has three types: those born in the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm.

The World-Honored One said that shravakas not yet detached from the desire realm are of two types, being born in the two places of humans and devas. Those seeking detachment from the desire realm are of two types: those born in the desire realm and those born in the form realm. Those seeking detachment from the form realm are of three types: those born in the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm. Arhats are likewise of three types in relation to the desire, form, and formless realms. The ordinary person who has not yet sought detachment from the desire realm and its abode of five skandhas possesses all five skandhas, the dhatus and ayatanas, in eight types. Why is this so?

Answer: Every intermediate existence in the desire realm has five skandhas, six dhatus, and six entrances. Therefore, it forms the sphere experienced in the intermediate state, and hence birth occurs. We now say that one may relinquish a birth-existence of six entrances and assume a birth-existence of six entrances. Again, after relinquishing six entrances, one assumes a birth-existence of six entrances. It is as follows:

Second: relinquishing a birth-existence of five entrances and assuming a birth-existence of six entrances.

Third: relinquishing a birth-existence of six entrances and assuming one of five or six entrances.

Fourth: relinquishing six and assuming six or five.

Fifth: relinquishing five and assuming five or six.

Sixth: relinquishing five and assuming six or five.

Seventh: relinquishing six and assuming five or five.

Eighth: relinquishing five and assuming five or five.

What is the first? It means falling away from a state in which the faculties and body are complete, passing from spontaneous birth to spontaneous birth.

The second is falling away from the kalala, arbuda, ghana, or lump-of-flesh stage—that is, passing from spontaneous birth to spontaneous birth.

The third is falling away from a state in which the faculties and body are complete, and passing from kalala to spontaneous birth.

The fourth is falling away from a state in which the faculties and body are complete, and passing from spontaneous birth to kalala.

The fifth is falling away from kalala and passing from kalala to spontaneous birth.

The sixth is falling away from kalala and passing from spontaneous birth to kalala.

The seventh is falling away from a state in which the faculties and body are complete, and passing from kalala to kalala.

The eighth is falling away from kalala and passing from kalala to kalala.

Thus the entrances and abodes constitute eight types of abodes of wholesome faculties.

First, every abode has nine.

Second, no person relinquishes wholesome faculties and is born in an existence. One assumes an abode of birth-existence ninety-nine times in this way. Then, falling away from hell or from a state in which wholesome faculties have been severed, one falls from that state of wholesome faculties. From a state conjoined with those wholesome faculties, one passes to other wholesome faculties. Thus five types are formed in each case, but there is no seventh or eighth.

It should also be said that although a human may sever wholesome faculties, he may again be born from hell into hell. Therefore, eight types can be formed in this manner regarding unwholesome faculties, one type in each abode.

For one detached from the desire realm, the first of the abodes of five skandhas includes all five.

Second, one relinquishes a birth-existence of two skandhas and assumes a birth-existence of five skandhas.

In this way, a person may fall from the heaven of non-percipient beings, or pass from the heaven of percipient beings to the heaven of percipient beings. Five such types should be established.

One school says that in such a regressive birth, beings follow karma previously created. These types gather together and, conjoined with dhyana, are immediately born in an abode of percipient devas.

Likewise, through karma created in a former life, accumulated in the samadhi of non-perception and conjoined with immediacy, one is born among the non-percipient devas. Therefore, eight types can be established in this manner.

Thus, with respect to the dhatus, entrances, and abodes, each entrance has four types. What are the four? First, relinquishing six entrances upon entering a birth-existence and assuming six or two.

Second, relinquishing six and assuming five or two.

Third, relinquishing five and assuming six or two.

Fourth, relinquishing five and assuming five or two.

This can be clearly understood from what was stated previously. Thus, for the ordinary person who enters the womb without disenchantment, four types can be established, conjoined with wholesome faculties and not conjoined with unwholesome faculties.

The fifth category can be made into five types, without a seventh or eighth.

For one detached from the form realm, the abodes of the skandhas have five such types. Together with the six destinies, there are five types. How are the two types combined with the five?

Answer: A person may relinquish a birth-existence of one dhatu and assume a birth-existence fifteen times; or relinquish six and assume fifteen. Together with entry, there are seven types; together with the two entries, there are two types. The abodes of wholesome and unwholesome faculties make eleven types. For one who undergoes seven deaths and seven births, the abode consists of the five skandhas. Altogether there are five types of dhatus, abodes, and entrances. The abodes of wholesome faculties and so forth are of one type.

Thus, for the once-returner, the abodes of unwholesome faculties altogether number seven.

Furthermore, concerning abodes, all ten are great families.

The abode of the skandhas is of one type, including the dhatus, entrances, and abodes. There are eight types of abodes of wholesome faculties and so forth. For the once-returner with one interval remaining, the abode of the skandhas is one type; the dhatus, entrances, and abodes are one type; the abodes of wholesome faculties are four types; and the abodes of unwholesome faculties are one type. This makes two types of abodes for the once-returner. One is the abode of the skandhas disenchanted with the desire realm, and another is the abode of the dhatus and entrances.

There are two types born higher through wholesome faculties. One type is accomplished through practice, and the second is likewise.

For an arhat detached from the form realm, the abode of the five skandhas is of one kind. The abodes of the dhatus and entrances are of two kinds.

The abodes of wholesome faculties are of three kinds, and the abodes of unwholesome faculties are of three kinds. These form four kinds of abodes in the intermediate passage. They should be clearly understood in this way.

The first and second abodes of existence concern those not yet detached from desire.

The third abode concerns those detached from desire. It should be clearly understood in this way.

Thus, altogether, the eighteen dhatus, the twelve conditioned entrances, and the skandhas should be clearly understood in this manner. The skandhas thus turn successively and arise through causes and conditions. Therefore, if one wishes to eliminate them and bring about the cessation of the skandhas, one must possess right effort and practice in accordance with the Dharma.

The treatise based upon this teaching is complete.

Treatise of the Sammitiya School

End of the Final Fascicle