攝大乘論釋

The Eighth Distinctive Aspect of the Training in Higher Wisdom

The Treatise says: Thus, the distinctions in the training in higher concentration have already been explained.

How should the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom be understood?

Explanation: There are distinctions between the concentration of bodhisattvas and that of the Two Vehicles. Concentration is the basis of wisdom, and wisdom is accomplished in dependence upon concentration. The wisdom of bodhisattvas and the wisdom of the Two Vehicles must likewise differ.

How can this be known? What Dharma constitutes the training in higher wisdom? The training in non-conceptual wisdom consists of the distinctions of non-conceptual wisdom.

These should be understood as the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom. This non-conceptual wisdom is of three kinds: First is preparatory non-conceptual wisdom, namely, the wisdoms of inquiry, investigation, and so forth; these are the cause of the path. Second is non-conceptual wisdom itself, namely, the essential nature of the path.

Third is the subsequent wisdom following non-conceptual wisdom, namely, the wisdom arising after emerging from contemplation; this is the fruit of the path. These three wisdoms all depend upon the essence of the training in higher wisdom. The wisdom of inquiry and investigation depends upon the training in higher wisdom in this sense: a practitioner of contemplation, relying upon the future attainment of non-conceptual wisdom, cultivates expedient wisdom.

Because one seeks the future fruit of non-conceptual wisdom, the expedient means are accomplished in this present life. Since this wisdom is that which depends, it is called dependent upon the training in higher wisdom. Moreover, this expedient wisdom can lead to future non-conceptual wisdom.

When non-conceptual wisdom arises, it is necessarily accomplished in dependence upon these expedient means. Since these are its basis, it is said to depend upon the training in higher wisdom. “The essential nature of the path” means wisdom arising inwardly while in contemplation.

Because it is free from distraction, it is called inward. Because this wisdom arises in dependence upon contemplation, it is said to depend upon the training in higher wisdom. Furthermore, its own essence is inward.

The cause has already ceased, the result has not yet arisen, and the essence of the path continues by itself; thus its own essence is called inward. Because it arises in dependence upon its own essence, it is said to depend upon the training in higher wisdom. The statement that wisdom arising after emerging from contemplation depends upon the training in higher wisdom means that this wisdom is accomplished in dependence upon non-conceptual wisdom and is therefore said to depend upon the training in higher wisdom.

Why is this? After entering contemplation and cognizing the object, the subsequent wisdom arises with this as its condition.

Of these three kinds of wisdom, which should be established?

Only non-conceptual wisdom itself should be established. If this wisdom is established, the other wisdoms are also established. If the preceding wisdom were established, it would reveal only the meaning of the cause and not the meaning of the fruit.

The nineteen distinctive meanings, such as intrinsic nature and so forth, would also not be established. If the subsequent wisdom were established, it would reveal only the meaning of the fruit and not that of the cause. The nineteen distinctive meanings, such as intrinsic nature and so forth, would likewise not be established.

Why is this? This wisdom takes the wisdom of inquiry and investigation as its cause. This wisdom is the fruit of the wisdom of inquiry and investigation.

This wisdom is the cause of subsequent wisdom, and subsequent wisdom is its fruit. By establishing this wisdom, both the preceding and subsequent wisdoms are established. Therefore, only this wisdom should be established.

In establishing it, the intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom should first be explained. Intrinsic nature means its essential characteristic.

The Treatise says: Through the intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom, its basis, characteristics, cognitive object, arising through conditions, refutation of objections, retention, companions, fruition, homogeneous outflow, deliverance, culmination, wholesome practices, preparatory practice, merits, subsequent wisdom, the non-difference of preparatory practice, subsequent non-conceptual wisdom, analogies, majestic power, effortlessness, performance of activities, and profound meaning, the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom should be understood.

Through the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom, the distinctions of non-conceptual wisdom should be understood.

Explanation: This means that through the intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom, the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom should be understood. Through the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom, the distinctions of non-conceptual wisdom should be understood. If explained sequentially, nineteen meanings must be discussed.

Here, for the sake of brevity, “through non-conceptual wisdom” is stated first. Next, the nineteen meanings are enumerated, and afterward it is stated generally that the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom should be understood. Through the distinctions in the training in higher wisdom, the distinctions of non-conceptual wisdom should be understood.

Non-conceptual wisdom is established by means of these nineteen meanings. This wisdom is the essence of the training in higher wisdom. The distinctions in the training in higher wisdom are precisely the distinctions of this wisdom.

It should be understood in this way.

What is the intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom?

The Treatise says: The intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom should be understood as being free from five characteristics.

Explanation: If it is entirely free from these five characteristics, it is non-conceptual wisdom. If it is not completely free from all five characteristics, it is not non-conceptual wisdom.

The Treatise says: The five characteristics are: 1. freedom from non-mentation; 2. freedom from the state beyond initial and sustained thought; 3. freedom from the quiescence of the concentration of the cessation of perception and feeling; 4. freedom from the intrinsic nature of form; and 5. with respect to ultimate truth, freedom from any other conceptual discrimination.

Explanation: If this wisdom were called non-conceptual wisdom merely because it is free from mentation, would those who are deeply asleep, insane, or intoxicated—who are also free from mentation—thereby attain non-conceptual wisdom? If transcending initial and sustained thought were also called non-conceptual wisdom, then from the second concentration upward, where initial and sustained thought have been transcended, one would necessarily attain non-conceptual wisdom.

If these two meanings were accepted, ordinary beings would also attain non-conceptual wisdom. Here, because one may be free from mind and mental factors, could this be called non-conceptual wisdom? In the concentration of the cessation of perception and feeling and similar states, if those abiding in such a state were said to attain non-conceptual wisdom, it would not constitute wisdom.

Why is this? In the concentration of cessation and similar states, mind and mental factors are absent. If it were said that the intrinsic nature of wisdom is like the intrinsic nature of form, then, just as form is insentient and does not know, this wisdom would likewise have to be insentient and unknowing.

If, with respect to ultimate truth, a conceptual discrimination already manifesting it were taken as non-conceptual wisdom, then this conceptual discrimination would have to constitute non-conceptual wisdom. Why is this? Because this conceptual discrimination can distinguish ultimate truth, thinking, “This meaning is true.”

The Treatise says: Wisdom that is separate from these five characteristics should be understood as non-conceptual wisdom.

Explanation: If wisdom is free from these five characteristics, it arises with ultimate truth as its object. It does not conceptually discriminate anything other than ultimate truth; that is, this true Dharma cognizes only ultimate truth. Just as visual consciousness does not take conceptual discrimination as its nature, this is called the characteristic of non-conceptual wisdom.

The Treatise says: What has been explained here is the nature of non-conceptual wisdom. Therefore, a verse says:

Explanation: Within this training in higher wisdom, the preceding discussion used nineteen meanings to reveal the nature of non-conceptual wisdom. A verse is further given to establish this meaning.

What does this verse seek to clarify? It seeks to clarify the supreme excellence of non-conceptual wisdom, which stands foremost among all cultivated practices.

The Treatise says:

The intrinsic nature of bodhisattvas

Is separate from the five characteristics.

The nature of non-conceptual wisdom

Is suchness free from conceptual discrimination.

Explanation: Bodhisattvas take non-conceptual wisdom as their essence. Non-conceptual wisdom and bodhisattvas are not different. The intrinsic nature of non-conceptual wisdom is precisely the intrinsic nature of bodhisattvas.

Non-conceptual wisdom is free from the five characteristics; this is precisely the bodhisattvas’ freedom from the five characteristics. Because there is no conceptual discrimination within suchness, freedom from the five characteristics is called non-conceptual. “Sentient being” is a provisional designation, whereas dharmas truly exist.

Apart from this wisdom, there is no other Dharma that can be called a bodhisattva. The wisdom of exhaustion and the wisdom of non-arising are bodhi. This sentient being takes bodhi as its essence.

Bodhi is non-conceptual wisdom; non-conceptual wisdom is the bodhisattva. To reveal that non-conceptual wisdom is precisely the bodhisattva, it is said that the intrinsic nature of bodhisattvas is free from the five characteristics; subsequent non-conceptual wisdom is not mentioned. Thus, the intrinsic nature of bodhisattvas has now been explained.

This nature arises in dependence upon a basis. That basis will now be explained. It was previously said that this wisdom is called non-conceptual.

Does this wisdom arise in dependence upon mind, or does it arise without depending upon mind? If it arises in dependence upon mind, then because it can think, it is called mind. Thinking is itself conceptual discrimination.

If this wisdom arises in dependence upon conceptual discrimination, it should not be called non-conceptual. If it does not arise in dependence upon mind, it would be the same as form and other dharmas and should not be called wisdom. To clarify these two faults, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

The basis of bodhisattvas

Is neither mind nor non-mind.

It is non-conceptual wisdom,

Not belonging to the category of deliberative thought.

Explanation: This wisdom does not take mind as its support, because this wisdom is not conceptual thought; nor does it take non-mind as its support, because it takes the rapidly functioning continuum as its support. The rapidly functioning class is the disposition of mind. Since it takes this as its support, it cannot be said that non-mind is its support. To clarify the causes and conditions from which this wisdom arises, the treatise again states a verse.

The Treatise says:

The cause and condition of the bodhisattvas,

Said to be the perfuming from hearing,

Is non-conceptual wisdom,

And correct contemplation in accordance with principle.

Explanation: Of the four conditions, three are excluded, and only the causal condition is taken. What is the characteristic of a causal condition? If cause and effect are of the same kind, it is called a causal condition.

For example, a preceding wholesome mind serves as the cause of a subsequent wholesome mind. Hearing the sound of the Dharma from another gives rise to the causal perfuming from hearing. This perfuming subsequently produces correct contemplation.

Because this correct contemplation arises from hearing another person correctly expound the teaching, the verse says, “said to be.” The causal condition of this wisdom has the perfuming from hearing and correct contemplation as its essence. Through this causal condition, non-conceptual wisdom that has not yet arisen is caused to arise, and once arisen, it is made to remain firmly established. Without this perfuming, non-conceptual wisdom could not arise; therefore, this is called its causal condition.

This wisdom arises from the perfuming from hearing.

What Dharma serves as the object-condition?

The Treatise says:

The object realm of the bodhisattvas,

The ineffable Dharma-nature,

Is that of non-conceptual wisdom:

Suchness of the twofold selflessness.

Explanation: The preceding verse explained the causal condition of the bodhisattvas. This verse explains the object-condition of the bodhisattvas. The object realm is precisely the object-condition.

What is the characteristic of an object-condition?

A Dharma arises in dependence upon this condition, just as a weak person is able to stand by relying upon a staff. If, through contemplating this Dharma, another Dharma arises, then the former is the condition of the latter, as the five sense objects give rise to the five consciousnesses. This object has two meanings: first, an object-condition serving as a support; second, an object-condition serving as a basis of comparative inference.

For example, relying upon the characteristic of impermanence in mind, a person compares, assesses, and infers that dharmas such as form are all impermanent. The ineffable Dharma-nature is the object-condition of the bodhisattvas. All dharmas are ineffable because of their imagined nature.

Why is this? Since dharmas have no intrinsic essence and appear only through the discriminating mind, all dharmas can be said neither to exist nor not to exist. They appear in this way, yet do not exist in this way; therefore, they cannot be said to exist.

They do not exist in this way, yet they are not nonexistent, because they appear; therefore, they cannot be said not to exist. If one knows that the object of cognition does not exist in this way, one is therefore discriminating the characteristic of essencelessness. Does this discriminated characteristic of essencelessness exist or not?

If the essence of essencelessness does not exist, then it would consequently exist. If essencelessness exists, then it cannot be said to be nonexistent. For this reason, the Dharma-nature, in both ultimate and conventional truth, cannot be said either to exist or not to exist.

The essence of the Dharma-nature is the suchness of the twofold selflessness. Because of the imagined nature, the dependent nature is devoid of both person and dharma; this is called the twofold selflessness. To abandon and eliminate the view that this selflessness is sheer nonexistence, it is called suchness.

This suchness is the object of the bodhisattvas. Why is this? Because when this non-conceptual wisdom arises, it must arise taking this object as its condition.

Thus, this wisdom arises conditioned by ineffable suchness.

What is the characteristic of its apprehension of the object?

The Treatise says:

The characteristic of the bodhisattvas,

Within the realm of suchness,

Is that of non-conceptual wisdom:

Without characteristics and without differentiation.

Explanation: Within the realm of suchness, this wisdom arises in complete equality. Non-difference and absence of characteristics are its characteristic; this is precisely its own characteristic. It is like eye-consciousness apprehending form: as characteristics such as blue appear, it is not different from such forms as blue. This wisdom and the realm of suchness are likewise. Yet this is also unlike eye-consciousness and form. Form is without real essence but possesses visible form; eye-consciousness has an essence but possesses no visible form. This wisdom corresponds to the realm of suchness and cannot be said to be different from it.

If all dharmas are ineffable in nature, what then is the object of discrimination?

The Treatise says:

The meaning corresponding to intrinsic nature

Is the object of discrimination; there is no other.

Explanation: All verbal expressions possess three kinds of correspondence: numerical grouping, continuity, and sequence. Since these three are inseparable, they are called correspondence. Moreover, these three dharmas combine to constitute meaning and are therefore called correspondence. This correspondence is the meaning of intrinsic nature. This meaning itself is the object of discrimination. Apart from this meaning, there is no other meaning. Therefore, all dharmas cannot be expressed in words.

How is it known that apart from this nature there is no other meaning?

To establish this meaning,

The Treatise says:

Letters joined successively, one after another,

Constitute a corresponding meaning.

Explanation: Letters joined successively, one after another, constitute the first correspondence. Through this correspondence, the other two correspondences are also complete. Because these three correspondences are present, meaning is fully constituted. Through correspondence, this meaning is said to be established. For example, within the continuity of words such as “eye faculty,” sentient beings apprehend them as conveying meaning; therefore, it is called correspondence. This meaning is the object of discrimination. Hence, the object of discrimination consists solely of verbal expression, and meaning likewise consists solely of verbal expression.

If all dharmas cannot be expressed in words, how can this meaning be established?

The Treatise says:

Wisdom apart from verbal expression

Does not arise with regard to the object of knowledge.

Explanation: Speech is employed only when a person has not yet clearly understood. With regard to the object signified by words—that is, the object being spoken of—wisdom does not arise. If you say that wisdom concerning what is signified arises within verbal expression, this is not so. Why?

The Treatise says:

Because it does not resemble verbal expression,

All is ineffable.

Explanation: This verbal expression does not resemble what is signified, because their characteristics differ. The characteristic of words is one thing, while the characteristic of what is signified is another. Therefore, all words and everything signified by them are ineffable.

What dharma is sustained by non-conceptual wisdom?

The Treatise says:

The sustaining power of the bodhisattvas

Is non-conceptual wisdom.

Its subsequently attained practice

Causes growth until the ultimate end.

Explanation: The subsequently attained wisdom of non-conceptual wisdom enables the bodhisattvas to attain the two practices of merit and wisdom. Relying upon this wisdom, these two practices arise, grow, and continue until the ultimate end. Therefore, subsequent non-conceptual wisdom can foster the growth of the bodhisattvas’ correct practice. Subsequent non-conceptual wisdom is that which sustains; the bodhisattvas are those who are sustained.

What dharmas are the companions of non-conceptual wisdom?

The Treatise says:

The companions of the bodhisattvas

Are said to be the two kinds of path,

For the non-conceptual wisdom

Of the five paramitas.

Explanation: Companions are characterized by mutual assistance. Because they assist one another in accomplishing a single task, they are called mutually assisting. The single task is the fruit of bodhi.

The two kinds of path are the companions of the bodhisattvas: the path of provisions and the path of support. The four paramitas, beginning with generosity, constitute the path of provisions. The paramita of meditative concentration constitutes the path of support.

Why? From the four paramitas, wholesome dharmas arise. These wholesome dharmas give rise to the prajnaparamita.

This prajnaparamita arises in dependence upon meditative concentration. The prajnaparamita is precisely non-conceptual wisdom. Before unsurpassed bodhi is attained, non-conceptual wisdom repeatedly arises throughout the intervening period until the ultimate fruit is reached.

When distinguished, there are five paramitas; when combined, there are two paths. They can assist the sixth paramita, and together they accomplish the one ultimate fruit; therefore, they are called companions.

If non-conceptual wisdom relies upon the two paths, what resultant reward does it attain?

The Treatise says:

The resultant reward of the bodhisattvas

Is the twofold perfection within Buddhahood.

It is attained by non-conceptual wisdom

Through preparatory practice.

Explanation: There is fruit without retribution, and there is fruit with retribution. If something arises from a cause, it is generally called a fruit. If something arises from a cause in a particular sense, it is called a fruit of retribution. Fruit means arising; retribution means ripening. The two bodies of response and transformation are called the combined two perfections of the Buddha. The fruit of retribution of non-discriminating wisdom matures within the conjunction of the Buddha’s two perfections. If the fruit arises during the preparatory practice of non-discriminating wisdom, this fruit belongs to the transformation body. If the fruit arises when non-discriminating wisdom is attained, it belongs to the response body.

How is this known?

The Treatise says:

The homogeneous fruit of bodhisattvas,

Arising in subsequent lives,

Is non-discriminating wisdom,

Which gradually increases and becomes supreme.

Explanation: A fruit may have an equal cause or a superior cause. Because this fruit takes something of the same kind as its cause, it is called a homogeneous fruit. Within the two perfections, the homogeneous fruit of non-discriminating wisdom transforms the first bhumi into the second bhumi, and so forth, until it transforms the tenth bhumi into Buddhahood.

In each subsequent stage, it is progressively transformed, increased, and made supreme. Thus, the first bhumi is the cause of the same kind for the second bhumi, and the second bhumi is the homogeneous fruit of the first bhumi. The same applies to all the other bhumis.

In relation to benefiting others, it is an increase; in relation to benefiting oneself, it is supreme. Moreover, the stage of one with further training is an increase, while the stage beyond training is supreme.

How is the emancipation accomplished through non-discriminating wisdom?

The Treatise says:

The emancipation of bodhisattvas,

Because attainment and accomplishment correspond,

Is non-discriminating wisdom;

It should be known within the ten bhumis.

Explanation: The cessation of afflictions and karma is emergence. The cessation of the fruit of retribution is freedom. These are precisely the two kinds of nirvana: nirvana with remainder and nirvana without remainder.

Emergence means freedom, and freedom means emergence. Why, then, is this stated twice? Because freedom has three meanings, two terms are established.

The three are: eternal freedom, superior freedom, and definitive freedom. In emancipation, non-discriminating wisdom corresponds to two meanings: first, correspondence through attainment; second, correspondence through accomplishment. It should be known that these two kinds of correspondence do not extend beyond the ten bhumis.

When non-discriminating wisdom is first attained on the first bhumi, it is called correspondence through attainment. From after the first bhumi through the tenth bhumi, cultivating non-discriminating wisdom for innumerable kalpas until reaching the ultimate is called correspondence through accomplishment. This non-discriminating wisdom is cultivated through two paths during three asamkhyeya kalpas.

What Dharma constitutes its ultimate culmination?

The Treatise says:

The culmination of bodhisattvas,

Through attaining the purity of the three bodies,

Is non-discriminating wisdom,

Which attains the highest mastery.

Explanation: Culmination is of two kinds: first, the culmination of purity; second, the culmination of mastery. The culmination of purity means that purity is first attained on the first bhumi. Thereafter, on each bhumi, purity becomes progressively more refined until, at the tenth bhumi, the culmination of purity is reached.

It is like refining gold. Through this purity, the bodhisattva subsequently attains the three bodies, which continue to become progressively purified. The culmination of mastery means that not only is the ultimate purity of the three kinds of bodies attained, but there is also another culmination, namely, the ten kinds of mastery, as the Treatise will explain below.

These ten kinds of mastery subsequently become progressively superior. These two dharmas ultimately become supreme to the furthest extent. This is the culmination attained by non-discriminating wisdom and is called the predominant fruit.

What are the merits of non-discriminating wisdom?

There are three kinds of non-discrimination: first, preparatory non-discrimination; second, fundamental non-discrimination; third, subsequently attained non-discrimination.

Why is the preparatory practice called non-discrimination?

At first, upon hearing others say that non-discriminating wisdom is the true path of the bodhisattva, although bodhisattvas themselves have not yet realized the true principle, they give rise only to a mind of faithful aspiration toward this wisdom. Subsequently, relying upon this mind of faithful aspiration, they are able to enter the principle realized by this non-discriminating wisdom. Because non-discriminating wisdom arises from this faithful aspiration, this faithful aspiration is called preparatory non-discrimination. The merit of this preparatory non-discrimination is called non-defilement.

What is its analogy?

The Treatise says:

Just as space is undefiled,

So is this non-discriminating wisdom;

All kinds of grave evil karma

Are transformed through faithful aspiration.

Explanation: This non-discriminating wisdom is pure and undefiled, just as space is not defiled by the four kinds of sensory objects. By what dharmas can it not be defiled? They are the various kinds of grave evil karma produced by body, speech, and mind through adherence to other views and paths of cultivation.

Because the ten evils differ from one another, they are called various kinds. When extremely grave afflictions serve as conditions, such karma is continually committed. If one commits it without remorse, without applying an antidote, and while having accomplices, it is called grave.

The causes of this evil karma cannot defile non-discriminating wisdom. If a person hears the correct teaching from another and gives rise to faithful aspiration toward non-discriminating wisdom, this faithful aspiration destroys the four paths of evil karma. Why is this so?

Evil karma arises in reliance upon what is contrary to reason. Faithful aspiration arises from reason. What arises in reliance upon what is contrary to reason is false; what arises from this reason is true.

The false cannot oppose the true, and therefore it is said to be destroyed. This verse shows that preparatory non-discriminating wisdom can counteract the four paths of evil karma. Because it is not intermixed with evil karma, this is the merit of the preparatory practice.

What are the merit and purity of fundamental non-discriminating wisdom?

The Treatise says:

Just as space is pure,

So is this non-discriminating wisdom;

It is liberated from every obstruction

Through attainment and accomplishment.

Explanation: Just as space, when free from the four obstructions of smoke, clouds, and the like, is called pure by people of the world, so too is the purity of non-discriminating wisdom. By being free from what dharmas does it attain purity?

The Treatise says:

It is liberated from every obstruction.

Explanation: Every obstruction refers to the three obstructions of skin, flesh, and mind, or the obstructions to the four virtues: those of the icchantika, adherents of non-Buddhist paths, sravakas, and pratyekabuddhas. Through complete liberation from all these obstructions, purity is attained. Through what is this liberation accomplished?

The Treatise says:

Through attainment and accomplishment.

Explanation: Through correspondence with the ultimate virtues of the bhumis, through accomplishing the cause on the tenth bhumi, and through accomplishing the fruit on the Buddha bhumi, liberation from every obstruction is attained. This is the fundamental merit. What are the merit and non-defilement of subsequently attained non-discriminating wisdom?

The Treatise says:

Just as space is undefiled,

So is non-discriminating wisdom;

If it appears within the world,

It is not defiled by worldly dharmas.

Explanation: Just as space cannot be wetted by water, burned by fire, or moved by wind, so too is non-discriminating wisdom undefiled. Because it undergoes no alteration, it is said to be undefiled. Why is this so?

Relying upon this wisdom, bodhisattvas contemplate the work of benefiting all sentient beings. Through the power of this wisdom, bodhisattvas direct their minds into the three realms and manifest various former lives. Although they are born within the world, they are not altered by the eight worldly dharmas.

The eight dharmas are gain, loss, good reputation, ill repute, praise, blame, pleasure, and pain. On account of these eight dharmas, desire and anger arise, yet desire and anger cannot alter this wisdom. Fundamental ignorance, the root of desire and anger, cannot cause it to waver.

Why is this so? Because the false cannot oppose the true. Since this wisdom arises from non-discriminating wisdom, it is called non-discriminating.

This verse shows that subsequently attained wisdom enables one to be free from the obstruction of retribution. One abides neither in samsara nor in nirvana, but acts solely to benefit others. This is the merit of subsequently attained wisdom.

What are the distinctions among the three kinds of non-discrimination? To clarify these distinctions and prevent them from being confused, analogies are established.

The Treatise says:

Like a mute person wishing to know,

Like a mute person who knows,

Like a person who is not mute and knows—

The three wisdoms are analogous to these.

Explanation: Suppose a mute person wishes to know something but cannot express what he wishes to know. Preparatory non-conceptual wisdom is likewise. While investigating and contemplating suchness on the path of skillful means, it cannot express it.

Suppose a mute person has actually come to know something but cannot express what he knows. Fundamental non-conceptual wisdom is likewise. At the very moment of contemplating suchness and directly realizing it, it also cannot express what it has realized.

Suppose a person who is not mute knows something and can express what he knows. Subsequently attained wisdom is likewise. In accordance with what has been seen, it can establish the true teaching and explain it to others.

At first, before attainment has been reached, because it is free from conceptualization and lacks the conditions for verbal expression, it cannot speak. Next, at the very moment of attainment, because it is free from conceptualization and lacks the conditions for verbal expression, it cannot speak. After attainment, because it has emerged from contemplation, it can express what it has seen without error.

This verse clarifies the three distinctions between that which can and cannot be verbally expressed.

The Treatise says:

Like an ignorant person wishing to know,

Like an ignorant person who has come to know,

Like a person not ignorant who knows—

The three wisdoms are illustrated thus.

Explanation: One who does not yet know the categories of things is called ignorant. The analogy of the ignorant person successively has the three meanings explained above. This verse clarifies the distinction between the non-conceptual and the conceptual. Inexpressibility takes non-conceptualization as its cause: because there is no conceptualization, there is no verbal expression. Expressibility takes conceptualization as its cause: because there is conceptualization, there is verbal expression. The analogy of the ignorant person reveals non-conceptualization.

Are the objects of these three wisdoms unreal or real, and in what way?

The Treatise says:

Like the five consciousnesses wishing to know,

Like what the five consciousnesses come to know,

Like what mental consciousness comes to know—

The three wisdoms are illustrated thus.

Explanation: “Five” means the five non-conceptual consciousnesses, such as eye-consciousness. Suppose that, through the five consciousnesses, a person investigates the five sense objects, apprehending either a real object or an unreal one, while mental consciousness arises together with the five consciousnesses. Preparatory non-conceptual wisdom is likewise: if it realizes a portion, that is real; if it does not realize it, that is unreal.

Suppose that, at the very moment when a person obtains a real object through the five consciousnesses, there is neither conceptualization nor verbal expression. Fundamental non-conceptual wisdom is likewise: it obtains a real object without conceptualization or verbal expression. Suppose that, in mental consciousness, a person attends only to a previously experienced object.

This is called apprehending an unreal object, with conceptualization and verbal expression. This verse clarifies that the three kinds of object apprehended differ because some are real and some unreal.

The Treatise says:

Like one who, not yet knowing, seeks to understand,

Like one who knows while reading,

Like one who understands the meaning—

In sequence, these illustrate the three wisdoms.

Explanation: Suppose a person who does not yet know written characters merely seeks to learn them. Preparatory non-conceptual wisdom is likewise: not yet knowing suchness, it merely trains in the means of seeing suchness. This reveals the state of not yet understanding.

Suppose a person who already knows the characters can, while reading, read only the text but does not yet understand its meaning. Fundamental non-conceptual wisdom is likewise: its work of benefiting oneself has been accomplished, but it has not yet undertaken the work of benefiting others. This reveals the state of having understood.

Suppose a person who already knows the characters and understands their meaning. While reflecting, this person possesses two abilities: the ability to recognize the characters and the ability to understand the meaning. Because their function has been brought to completion, subsequently attained non-conceptual wisdom is likewise: it has comprehended suchness and has also emerged from contemplation; regarding what was previously seen, it understands clearly and speaks without error.

This reveals that understanding has reached its culmination. This verse teaches that distinctions exist because the work of training differs. The three stages have already been explained in sequence: not yet understanding, having understood, and consummate understanding.

The first has no object. The latter two have objects: the Dharma and its meaning.

The latter two have objects; how do their characteristics differ?

The Treatise says:

Like a person when his eyes are closed,

Non-conceptual wisdom is likewise;

Like a person when his eyes are open,

Subsequently attained wisdom is likewise.

Explanation: This verse reveals only fundamental wisdom and subsequently attained wisdom. They differ because their bases differ. Fundamental wisdom is based on what is neither mind nor non-mind. Subsequently attained wisdom is based on mind; thus, the two wisdoms differ in relation to their objects. Fundamental wisdom does not apprehend an object, because the object and wisdom are not different. Subsequently attained wisdom apprehends an object, because the object and wisdom are different. Fundamental wisdom does not take an object as its cognitive condition, like closed eyes. Subsequently attained wisdom takes an object as its cognitive condition, like open eyes. This verse clarifies that they differ because one apprehends an object and the other does not.

How do the powers of these two wisdoms differ?

The Treatise says:

Space is without conceptualization,

Undefiled, unobstructed, and beyond extremes;

As forms appear within space,

So too is subsequently attained wisdom.

Explanation: Space has four qualities: first, it is undefiled; second, it is unobstructed; third, it is without conceptualization; and fourth, it is boundless. Fundamental wisdom is likewise. The eight worldly dharmas, the seven modes of transmigration, and so forth belonging to all worldly existence cannot defile it.

Because it counteracts them, it is said to be undefiled with respect to all objects. In accordance with principle and measure, it is unobstructed and unattached; therefore, it is said to be unobstructed. With respect to all dharmas, the single flavor of suchness is empty and all-pervasive; therefore, it is said to be without conceptualization.

Free from all extremes, the Middle Way is immeasurable; therefore, it is said to be boundless. Suppose forms appear within space: space cannot conceptualize them, but forms can be distinguished. Subsequently attained wisdom is likewise: its cause cannot conceptualize, yet this wisdom can distinguish.

That is, it is both that which distinguishes and that which is distinguished.

If buddhahood is manifested through non-conceptual wisdom and is free from conceptualizing sentient beings, how can it perform deeds that benefit sentient beings in accordance with principle and without error? To reveal that these deeds are performed without exertion, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

Like a mani jewel and a celestial drum,

They accomplish their respective tasks without thought.

Thus, without conceptualization,

The various deeds of the Buddhas are accomplished.

Explanation: A wish-fulfilling jewel, though without conceptualization, can fulfill the aspirations of sentient beings. A celestial drum, though struck by no one, can produce four kinds of sounds in accordance with the wishes of sentient beings: “The enemy is coming,” “The enemy is departing,” “Indulge in pleasures,” and “Give rise to disenchantment.” The Buddhas are likewise: though they have become free from conceptualization, they can initiate deeds that benefit sentient beings. There are two kinds of beneficial deed: first, benefit through transformation bodies, like a wish-fulfilling jewel; second, benefit through teaching the Dharma, like a celestial drum.

What is the extremely profound meaning of this non-conceptual wisdom? From the standpoint of its object, the extremely profound meaning is established as follows: Does this wisdom arise in relation to the conceptually apprehended object of dependent nature, or does it arise in relation to other objects? What fault would follow in either case? If it takes the conceptually apprehended object of dependent nature as its object, the meaning of this wisdom’s non-conceptuality cannot be established. If it arises in relation to other objects, there are no other objects apart from this object; thus, saying that it apprehends other objects is also meaningless. Furthermore, if it arises in relation to objects, the meaning that object and wisdom are without difference cannot be established.

The Treatise says:

It is not this, yet it is this;

It is not wisdom, yet it is wisdom.

Because it does not differ from its object,

Wisdom is non-conceptual.

Explanation: This wisdom does not take dependent nature as its object. Why? Because this wisdom does not take conceptualization as its object; therefore, it is said, “It is not this.” Nor does it take other objects as its cognitive conditions.

Why? This wisdom takes only the dharma-suchness of dependent nature as its object. Dharma and dharma-suchness cannot be said to be either one or different, for they are, respectively, the impure and pure object, and the particular characteristic and universal characteristic.

Because it is not the case that it does not take consciousness as its cognitive condition, it is said, “Yet it is this.” Furthermore, is this wisdom wisdom, or is it not wisdom? What fault would follow in either case? If its nature is wisdom, how can it be non-conceptual, since the nature of wisdom is conceptualization?

If its nature is not wisdom, how can it be called wisdom? Since non-conceptuality is not the nature of wisdom, how can it be called non-conceptual wisdom?

The Treatise says:

It is not wisdom, yet it is wisdom

Explanation: The original line of the verse reads, “Neither wisdom nor non-wisdom.” What does “not wisdom” mean? Because it does not arise in preparatory wisdom or subsequent wisdom, it is said to be not wisdom. If so, how can it not become non-wisdom?

Or else this meaning would also be untenable. Why? Non-wisdom may arise from incorrect reflection and can produce outflows such as desire.

This wisdom arises from non-discriminating preparatory wisdom and can produce non-discriminating subsequent wisdom; therefore, it is said to be not non-wisdom. Furthermore, because this wisdom does not arise within discrimination, it is said to be not wisdom. Because this wisdom does not arise anywhere else, but arises only within the suchness of discriminated dharmas, it is said to be not non-wisdom.

In this verse, the preceding line explains the following line.

The Treatise says:

With respect to an undifferentiated object,

Wisdom is non-discriminating.

Explanation: If wisdom arises through the two characteristics of apprehender and apprehended, it possesses discrimination, and preparatory wisdom is not called non-discriminating. If wisdom is not different from what is apprehended and arises in complete equality with it, it is called non-discriminating wisdom. In the sutras, the Buddha taught that the intrinsic nature of all dharmas is non-discriminating. To reveal this principle, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

The Buddha taught that all dharmas

Are intrinsically without discrimination.

Because what is discriminated is nonexistent,

Non-discrimination too is nonexistent.

Explanation: The intrinsic nature of all dharmas is non-discriminating. How is this meaning known? To demonstrate it, the third line is established. Because the supposedly real kinds that can be discriminated are nonexistent, while even the true non-discriminating Dharma is existent, it is said that the intrinsic nature of all dharmas is non-discriminating.

If all dharmas are intrinsically non-discriminating because what is discriminated does not exist, why are sentient beings not liberated by intrinsic nature?

The Treatise says:

Non-discrimination too is nonexistent.

Explanation: Because dharmas are intrinsically non-discriminating, wisdom, like its object, is non-discriminating. If so, why are beings not liberated by intrinsic nature? Indeed, dharmas are intrinsically non-discriminating, and wisdom, like its object, is also intrinsically non-discriminating, yet liberation is not attained by intrinsic nature.

Cultivated wisdom is capable of realizing this Dharma. Because of the obstruction of non-wisdom, wisdom cannot arise. One must cultivate wisdom and eliminate the obstruction before liberation can be attained.

As for the meaning of not being liberated by intrinsic nature: if discrimination arises within the intrinsically non-discriminating, this is non-wisdom, namely ignorance. Within dharmas that are intrinsically non-discriminating, there is non-discriminating wisdom. Its distinctions will now be explained.

The Treatise says: Here there are three kinds of non-discrimination: 1. preparatory non-discrimination, 2. non-discriminating wisdom, and 3. subsequent non-discriminating wisdom.

Explanation: Generally speaking, there are three kinds within intrinsic non-discrimination. These three reveal the path of skillful means, the path of the principal practice, and the path of culmination: entering skillful means, abiding within skillful means, and emerging from skillful means. When separately discussed in terms of causes and conditions, persons, and activities, there are eleven kinds.

The Treatise says: Preparatory non-discrimination has three kinds of distinctions in its arising: that produced by causes and conditions, by the power of spiritual penetration, and by repeated cultivation.

Explanation: These three are distinguished in terms of causes. Preparatory non-discrimination is produced by three powers: the power of causes and conditions, the power of spiritual penetration, or the power of repeated cultivation. Because it is produced by these three powers, there are distinctions in its arising. If it is produced through the power of causes and conditions, this means through the power of one’s nature. If it is produced through the power of spiritual penetration, this means through the power of previous lives. If it is produced through the power of repeated cultivation, this means through effort exerted in the present.

The Treatise says: Non-discriminating wisdom also has three kinds: contentment, freedom from error, and freedom from conceptual proliferation. These are the distinctions of non-discrimination.

Explanation: These three are distinctions in terms of persons: ordinary beings, followers of the Two Vehicles, and bodhisattvas. It should be understood that the non-discrimination of contentment comes from attaining the culmination of the two kinds of wisdom born of hearing and reflection. Because one is content, one does not discriminate; it is therefore called the non-discrimination of contentment.

When ordinary beings or bodhisattvas reach the culmination of the wisdom born of hearing and reflection, they have attained everything that was to be realized. A mind of contentment arises, and so they do not discriminate. Furthermore, sentient beings in the world possess the non-discrimination of contentment.

Because of this contentment, they are born in the Highest Existence. They then regard it as complete liberation, believing that beyond this realm there is nowhere else to go. A mind of contentment arises, and they do not wish to advance further in cultivation; therefore, they do not discriminate.

Non-discrimination free from error belongs to followers of the Two Vehicles. Because they have comprehended the true objects—the four characteristics such as impermanence—without error, and because they constantly refrain from discriminating these four characteristics, such as impermanence, in an erroneous manner again, theirs is non-discrimination. Non-discrimination free from conceptual proliferation belongs to the bodhisattvas.

Bodhisattvas do not discriminate any dharma, nor do they even discriminate unsurpassed bodhi. Why? Because dharmas are inexpressible.

To impose verbal expressions upon what is inexpressible is called conceptual proliferation. There are four kinds of verbal assertion called the Four Slanders. To say that something exists is the slander of superimposition.

To say that it does not exist is the slander of diminution. To say that it both exists and does not exist is the slander of contradiction. To say that it neither exists nor does not exist is the slander of conceptual proliferation.

Bodhisattvas attain non-discriminating wisdom, which cannot be revealed through verbal expression; therefore, it is called non-discrimination free from conceptual proliferation. Why? Because it transcends worldly wisdom and cannot be known by worldly wisdom.

The Treatise says: Subsequent non-discriminating wisdom has five distinctions: comprehension, recollection and retention, establishment, intermixture, and fulfillment at will. These reveal its distinctions in activity.

Explanation: These five are distinctions in terms of activity. Subsequent wisdom has the revelation of activities as its nature. Here, “revelation” means understanding and awakening to an activity.

After comprehending through this wisdom, one reveals the matter in this way: “While cultivating contemplation, I saw it thus; the matter was thus.” Therefore, it is called the revelation of comprehension. After emerging from contemplation, through this wisdom one recollects and retains without losing what one has comprehended and is able to establish the true teaching, instructing others to cultivate it; therefore, it is called the revelation of establishment.

Through this wisdom, the bodhisattva takes all dharmas as objects, just as before. That is, as before, among the manifold objects, wisdom contemplates these objects; through this contemplation, transformation of the basis is attained. Therefore, it is called the revelation of intermixture.

Through this wisdom, the bodhisattva has attained transformation of the basis. Whatever the bodhisattva wishes is accomplished. This means, for example, that the great elements such as earth are transformed into gold and the like.

Therefore, it is called revelation through fulfillment at will.

The Treatise says: To establish non-discriminating wisdom, another verse is given as follows:

Explanation: The distinctions in meaning of non-discriminating wisdom have already been explained. Wishing further to establish the meaning of non-discrimination, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

Hungry ghosts, animals, humans,

And devas, each as appropriate,

Through minds differing toward one object,

Make it into their respective realms of experience.

Explanation: For example, four kinds of sentient beings discriminate a single river and make it into four objects: hungry ghosts regard it as pus and blood; creatures such as fish regard it as their dwelling place; humans call it water; and devas call it earth. According to their respective discriminations, it becomes a different object. If the object were real, these perceptions would necessarily obstruct one another, and four objects could not exist in one place at one time.

Therefore, one should know that they are created by the discriminations of consciousness. If you accept that all four consciousnesses take objects as their conditions, and that consciousness is not separate from its object, you must also accept that all four objects exist simultaneously in the same place. If you accept that all four objects exist, you must believe that all discriminations lack real existence.

If the objects are unreal, consciousness must arise of itself rather than arising conditioned by an object. If so, the four difficulties within consciousness-only would be hard to resolve, and the four meanings could not be established. This difficulty is explained in that treatise.

What fault would there be if consciousness existed without an object?

To explain this meaning, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

In the past and the future,

As with the two kinds of reflected images and dreams,

Cognition takes nonexistent objects as its conditions;

Thus, what does not transform becomes its object.

Explanation: Events of the past and future have only names and no substance. If the mind takes these two periods as its conditions, there is only consciousness and no object. The conditions experienced in dreams are likewise. Reflected images are of two kinds: first, images in a mirror; second, images in meditative concentration. In the concentrated mind, such characteristics as blue, yellow, and so forth arise; apart from the mind, there is no other dharma, and therefore these are called images. If the mind takes these two kinds of images as its conditions, there is likewise only consciousness and no object.

If these four kinds of objects do not exist, what does consciousness take as its condition?

The Treatise says:

Thus, what does not transform becomes its object.

Explanation: External objects have always been nonexistent, but they appear through the transformations of consciousness. Consciousness then takes these as its objects; therefore it is said, “what does not transform becomes its object.” This principle has already been established and should no longer be doubted. Why is this so? If one rejects this principle, the attainment of Buddhahood becomes impossible. To clarify this meaning, another verse is given.

The Treatise says:

If objects were established as objects,

There would be no non-conceptual cognition.

Explanation: If objects possessed real substance, their status as objects would be established, and consequently there would be no non-conceptual cognition. Why is this so? If the objects being discriminated were truly existent, then discriminating cognition would not be erroneous, whereas non-discrimination would become erroneous. If this were so, all ordinary beings would be free from error, while all noble beings would fall into error.

What fault would there be in this?

The Treatise says:

Thus, there would be no fruit of Buddhahood;

Such a thing is impossible.

Explanation: Non-conceptual cognition is the true path. To say that this cognition does not exist while claiming that the fruit of Buddhahood can still be attained is impossible. Such an assertion contradicts both the Agamas and sound reasoning. Therefore, one must understand that objects have no substance, yet they can be discriminated. Because one can discern that their substance is empty, discrimination itself is also nonexistent. Therefore, non-conceptual cognition accords with reason and is not erroneous. Furthermore, there is another line of reasoning proving that objects have no substance, yet can be discriminated.

The Treatise says:

Bodhisattvas attain mastery,

Through the power of fulfilling their vows;

Whatever they wish comes about as intended;

The same is true of those who attain concentration.

Explanation: Bodhisattvas attain mastery over entering, abiding in, and emerging from meditative concentration. They attain mastery over supernormal knowledge, wisdom, transformation, subjugation, and thorough understanding. On the various bhumis, they attain the ten masteries.

Bodhisattvas first make vows to benefit sentient beings. Having attained non-conceptual cognition, they subsequently emerge from contemplation, and whatever they wish to accomplish is fulfilled. This may be through a present vow or through an original vow.

The vow is the cause, and joy is the result. They first make a vow to benefit sentient beings, and afterward whatever their minds desire is fulfilled. This means transforming the earth and so forth.

If bodhisattvas whose practice is still shallow wish to benefit sentient beings, they first make a vow in the present. Having made the vow, they immediately enter contemplation; after emerging from contemplation, whatever they wish is fulfilled according to their intent. If bodhisattvas whose practice is profound wish to benefit sentient beings, they need not make a present vow, nor need they enter or emerge from contemplation.

Merely through the power of their original vows, whatever they wish to do is fulfilled. If sravakas attain mastery of the nine concentrations, then through mastery of these concentrations they attain mastery of the six supernormal powers. With regard to a single object, according to the power of their vows and aspirations, they can transform it into innumerable different things.

If objects truly possessed inherent nature, this could not be accomplished. Just as with the two kinds of emptiness, no degree of mastery could transform them into something else. Why is this so?

Because they are true. From the standpoint of external objects, this verse shows that objects have no inherent nature.

With regard to internal objects, what does the absence of inherent nature mean?

The Treatise says:

Those accomplished in discernment,

And wise ones who attain concentration,

Contemplate all dharmas as internal objects;

Their meanings become manifest accordingly.

Explanation: Discernment means vipasyana. Attaining the three undefiled faculties is called accomplishment. Those from the stage of approaching stream-entry up to the fruit of arhatship are called persons accomplished in discernment.

“Wise ones” means bodhisattvas. To show that those at the stages of hearing and reflection are not regarded here as wise ones, and that only those who have entered the stage of cultivation are regarded as wise, the text says that they “attain concentration.” When sravakas and bodhisattvas cultivate contemplation and examine all dharmas as internal objects, then, just as these two kinds of practitioners contemplate the Dharma of the twelve divisions of scripture, whatever meanings are revealed become manifest to both of them accordingly.

If they contemplate the meaning of the Buddha, the meaning of the Buddha becomes manifest within the various dharmas. Just as the meaning of the Buddha becomes manifest, so too do form and the other five skandhas, as well as impermanence and the other ten perceptions. From the standpoint of internal objects, this verse shows that objects have no inherent nature.

How does one know that both internal and external objects lack inherent nature?

The Treatise says:

When cultivating non-discrimination,

None of the meanings becomes manifest.

One should know that no objects exist;

Therefore, consciousness also does not exist.

Explanation: When a bodhisattva abides in non-conceptual contemplation, if no meanings—whether internal, external, or both internal and external—continue to manifest, one knows that all objects lack true existence. If there are no external objects, there is no internal consciousness. Why is this so? Since that which is cognized does not exist, how could the cognition that cognizes it exist? This principle is indeed so. Because the cognized does not exist, the cognizing consciousness likewise does not exist. One should know that this meaning has already been fully clarified in the section on the supreme characteristics.

Is this cognition identical to or different from the Prajnaparamita?

The Treatise says: This non-conceptual cognition is precisely the Prajnaparamita. Their names differ, but their meaning is the same.

Explanation: One should not regard them as different merely because their names are not the same. Because their meaning is the same, they are one. Because they are one, the text says “is precisely.” If the names differ, how can their meaning be said to be the same?

The Tathagata establishes dharmas according to the meaning of their inherent nature. Dharmas are encompassed as being the same; names are not encompassed and declared to be the same. Why is this so?

Names differ from place to place, but meanings are the same everywhere. Names are provisionally established and have meaning only within their own context; they are not the same in other places. Meaning has a definite nature, and therefore the meaning is the same.

Practice is accomplished by relying on meaning, not by relying on names.

How does one know that the meaning is the same?

The Treatise says: As the sutra states: If a bodhisattva abides in the Prajnaparamita, then by practicing in non-abiding places, the bodhisattva can cultivate all the other paramitas to perfection.

Explanation: To establish non-conceptual cognition, and because it is not different from the Prajnaparamita, the Prajnaparamita Sutra is cited as proof. Because bodhisattvas cultivate the Prajnaparamita without falling away from it, this is called abiding. Furthermore, when bodhisattvas wish to cultivate the other paramitas, they first cultivate the Prajnaparamita as a skillful means. The other paramitas are accomplished by abiding within the Prajnaparamita; therefore this is called abiding. Abiding within the Prajnaparamita, bodhisattvas cultivate the paramitas apart from five places. However long they have cultivated each paramita, it now reaches accomplishment; therefore this is called perfection.

The Treatise says: How can practicing in non-abiding places perfect the other paramitas?

This means being apart from five places: 1. Being apart from the place of self-attachment held by non-Buddhist practitioners.

Explanation: When non-Buddhist practitioners abide in their prajna, they give rise to attachment to a self. They think, “I now abide in prajna. Prajna belongs to me.” When bodhisattvas abide in prajna, they do not do so in this manner. Therefore, this is called being apart from the place of attachment to the view of self, because it does not accord with their position.

The Treatise says: 2. Being apart from the place of discrimination of bodhisattvas who have not yet seen suchness.

Explanation: Bodhisattvas at stages before the bhumis, who have not yet seen suchness, discriminate that non-discrimination is the Prajnaparamita, thinking, “This itself is the Prajnaparamita.” If bodhisattvas have already seen suchness, they do not make this discrimination concerning the Prajnaparamita. Therefore, this is called being apart from the place of discrimination, because it does not accord with their position.

The Treatise says: 3. Being apart from the two opposing extremes of samsara and nirvana.

Explanation: Ordinary beings abide on the side of samsara, while shravakas abide on the side of nirvana. Bodhisattvas abide in prajnaparamita and are free from both extremes; hence it is said that they are free from the two extremes, because these are not consonant with their sphere of abiding.

Treatise: 4. Being free from the notion that merely eliminating the afflictive hindrance is sufficient.

Explanation: Shravakas regard the elimination of the afflictive hindrance as sufficient and have no further aspiration, namely, toward the elimination of the cognitive hindrance. Bodhisattvas are not like this. To eliminate the cognitive hindrance, bodhisattvas cultivate and study prajnaparamita. Therefore, it is said that they are free from the sphere of conduct in which one is content with what has been attained, because it is not consonant with their sphere of abiding.

Treatise: 5. Being free from abiding in nirvana without remainder while failing to see the work of benefiting sentient beings.

Explanation: Pratyekabuddhas abide in nirvana without remainder and do not contemplate benefiting sentient beings. Bodhisattvas are not like this. Abiding in prajnaparamita, they do not abandon the work of benefiting sentient beings.

Nirvana also has that with remainder and that without remainder. In relation to the Dharma body, it is without remainder; in relation to the enjoyment body and transformation body, it is with remainder. It is said that bodhisattvas are free from abiding in nirvana without remainder because this is not consonant with their sphere of abiding.

Nonconceptual wisdom has five distinctions corresponding to the five spheres that must be abandoned above. First is the distinction of being free from error: this wisdom is not inverted, whereas the other is inverted. Second is the distinction of nonconceptuality: this wisdom is nonconceptual, whereas the other involves conceptual discrimination.

Third is the distinction of having no fixed abiding place: this wisdom has no fixed abiding place, whereas the other has a fixed abiding place. Fourth is the distinction of right practice: this right practice can eliminate both the afflictive and cognitive hindrances, whereas the other right practice can eliminate only the afflictive hindrance. Fifth is the distinction in the fruit attained: the fruit attained through this wisdom is the perpetual abiding of the three bodies, whereas the fruit attained through the other is the nirvana of permanent cessation.

Treatise: How does the wisdom of shravakas differ from the wisdom of bodhisattvas?

Explanation: It has already been said that nonconceptual wisdom and prajnaparamita are one. Now the distinction between the nonconceptual wisdom of prajnaparamita and the wisdom of the Two Vehicles is to be further revealed.

Treatise: One should know that the distinction lies in nonconceptuality.

Explanation: Shravakas engage in conceptual discrimination; bodhisattvas do not. One should know that it is on account of this meaning that there is a difference.

Treatise: Because of not conceptually discriminating among the skandhas and the other Dharma gateways.

Explanation: Because the wisdom of shravakas takes the skandhas and the other Dharma gateways as its objects, distinguishing characteristics arise. Because bodhisattvas do not conceptually discriminate among the skandhas and the other Dharma gateways, nonconceptual characteristics arise. Therefore, there is a difference.

Treatise: Because it is not partial, since it penetrates the suchness of the two kinds of emptiness, enters into the characteristics of all that is knowable, and relies upon all activities that benefit sentient beings.

Explanation: There are two aspects: first, the aspect of what is knowable; second, the aspect of benefiting sentient beings. Within the aspect of what is knowable, there are again two kinds: the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of dharmas. Within the aspect of benefiting sentient beings, there are also two kinds: oneself and others.

Within the aspect of what is knowable, shravakas penetrate only the emptiness of persons and give rise to uncontaminated wisdom only with regard to suffering and the other truths of the Four Noble Truths. Within the aspect of benefiting sentient beings, they make vows and cultivate solely for their own benefit. Of these two aspects, they possess only one part of each.

Within the aspect of what is knowable, bodhisattvas fully penetrate both the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of dharmas. With regard to all things, they give rise to wisdom that knows both the principle and the full extent of phenomena. Within the aspect of benefiting sentient beings, they make vows and cultivate for both themselves and others.

Thus, within each of these two aspects, they fully possess both parts. Since possessing both parts differs from possessing only one, it is said that the distinction is that it is “not partial.”

Treatise: Because of the distinction of not abiding, for they abide in nirvana with no fixed abiding place.

Explanation: Shravakas cling to and abide in nirvana just as ordinary beings cling to and abide in samsara. Bodhisattvas are not like this. They see that both samsara and nirvana are created by conceptual discrimination and that both are by nature devoid of characteristics; therefore, they abide in neither.

Treatise: Because they are perpetually distinguished with respect to nirvana without remainder, not falling into the extremes of annihilation and exhaustion.

Explanation: The two differ with respect to nirvana without remainder because their wisdom differs. In nirvana without remainder, those of the Two Vehicles have neither an enjoyment body nor a transformation body because they do not contemplate benefiting others. Because they have no enjoyment body, they fall into annihilation; because they have no transformation body, they fall into exhaustion. In nirvana without remainder, bodhisattvas perpetually manifest both bodies without limit, to say nothing of the Dharma body. Because they have perfected both their own benefit and the benefit of others, they possess an enjoyment body and do not fall into annihilation; they possess a transformation body and do not fall into exhaustion.

Treatise: Because of the distinction of unsurpassed meaning, for in truth there is no other vehicle superior to this Mahayana.

Explanation: The Shravaka Vehicle and the Pratyekabuddha Vehicle have a vehicle above them because they are inferior to the Mahayana. The Bodhisattva Vehicle is unsurpassed because no vehicle is superior to the Mahayana. A vehicle has wisdom as its essence, and the wisdom within the Mahayana is supreme. Because of these five meanings, the wisdom of the Two Vehicles differs from the wisdom of bodhisattvas.

Treatise: Here there is a verse as follows:

Explanation: To summarize the preceding five meanings and reveal the merit of these five meanings, another verse is spoken.

Treatise:

Through wisdom, five distinctions;

Relying on great compassion, merit is cultivated.

Explanation: The wisdom of bodhisattvas is superior to that of the Two Vehicles because of five distinctions. Not only is it superior to wisdom content with what has been attained, but, relying upon wisdom, they also cultivate merit. Merit refers to the other five perfections among the Six Perfections. This line reveals that their benefit of self is superior to that of the Two Vehicles. There is yet another superior meaning: for the benefit of others, they rely upon great compassion to cultivate merit. Merit refers to those other five perfections.

If a person possesses both of these capacities, what fruit of recompense will that person attain?

Treatise:

Riches and bliss, worldly and supramundane,

Are said to be not far away.

Explanation: Becoming a wheel-turning king, one of the five heavenly kings above in the Desire Realm, a Brahma deity of the Form Realm, attaining the absorptions of the Formless Realm, and the distinct worldly absorptions attained by bodhisattvas are called worldly riches and bliss. The liberation of the Two Vehicles and unsurpassed bodhi are called supramundane riches and bliss. Such fruits are easily attained according to one’s wishes; therefore, they are said to be “not far away.” Bodhisattvas who have reached the stage of utmost mastery constantly practice loving-kindness and compassion toward impoverished and suffering sentient beings in the world.

With what intention, then, would bodhisattvas not give material possessions? What is the meaning of that intention?

Treatise: If bodhisattvas truly exist in this world, their existence should also be knowable.

Explanation: This reveals that bodhisattvas possess both real existence and benevolence. Because they possess real existence, they truly exist; because they possess benevolence, it is said that their existence can be known.

Treatise: If bodhisattvas rely upon the trainings in moral discipline, concentration, and wisdom, accumulate merit, and attain the ten kinds of mastery, they are capable of attaining extraordinary and supreme excellence in all activities that benefit others.

Explanation: The three trainings encompass the ten perfections and all worldly merits; therefore, this is called the accumulation of merit. If bodhisattvas attain what they have not yet attained and do not lose what they have already attained, this is called correspondence. This is the perfection of the cause.

Reaching the ten kinds of mastery is the perfection of the fruit. Benefiting others is of two kinds, or of four kinds. The two kinds are first reflecting and then acting.

There are also two kinds, namely, the latter two fearlessnesses. Or there are four kinds, as explained previously. Attaining these is attaining an unsurpassed power unequaled by anyone; this is the perfection of benevolent virtue.

Among the three virtues, the two virtues of cause and fruit reveal benefit for oneself, while benevolent virtue reveals benefit for others. Having finished explaining the three trainings, the treatise now clearly states this meaning in order to reveal the perfection of the bodhisattva’s three virtues.

Treatise: Why, then, do we see sentient beings in the world encountering severe suffering and calamity?

Explanation: A question is now posed. If the bodhisattva’s three virtues are all intended to rescue all sentient beings, why do sentient beings encounter times of suffering and calamity? If bodhisattvas see suffering but do not rescue beings, then they lack supreme capacity. If they lack supreme capacity, then there are no bodhisattvas. Suffering and calamity are of two kinds: internal and external. Both internal and external suffering and calamity may be either light or severe. That which can be counteracted is light; that which cannot be counteracted is severe.

The Treatise states: Because the bodhisattva sees that those sentient beings have created karma capable of bringing about painful retribution and obstructing the fruit of happiness.

Explanation: The bodhisattva sees that certain sentient beings have karmic obstructions that impede the bodhisattva’s superior power and bring about painful retribution. The bodhisattva possesses knowledge of this karma concerning them. Although this frustrates his superior power, he sets that power aside and does not employ it.

This is precisely the bodhisattva’s power of karma. It is like a river whose water possesses eight qualities: sentient beings may drink and use it as they wish, with no one either hindering or assisting them. Yet hungry ghosts, because of their karmic obstructions, are unable to drink it.

The bodhisattva is like the river, wealth is like the water, and sentient beings with karmic obstructions are like hungry ghosts. Because of their karmic obstructions, they cannot enjoy the bodhisattva’s wealth.

The Treatise states: Because the bodhisattva sees that, if he were to give them the conditions for happiness, this would obstruct the arising of wholesome dharmas.

Explanation: The bodhisattva sees that certain sentient beings have no karmic obstructions, yet if they are poor, wholesome dharmas can arise and increase in them, whereas if they are wealthy and comfortable, they become heedless and commit offenses. The bodhisattva wishes them to undergo the suffering of poverty in their present lives so that, in accordance with this condition, wholesome dharmas may arise and be perfected. Therefore, the bodhisattva does not give them the conditions for happiness. This is precisely the bodhisattva’s power of knowing what is possible and what is impossible.

The Treatise states: Because the bodhisattva sees that, when they lack the conditions for happiness, disenchantment with samsara can become immediately present in them.

Explanation: The bodhisattva sees that certain sentient beings, because of poverty and hardship, continually have present in their minds disenchantment with samsara. The bodhisattva wishes them to lack the conditions for happiness so that their minds of disenchantment may be perfected and they may accord with wholesome conduct; therefore, he does not give them the conditions for happiness. This is precisely the bodhisattva’s power of knowing faculties, aspirations, and dispositions.

The Treatise states: Because the bodhisattva sees that giving them the conditions for happiness would constitute causes and conditions for the growth of all unwholesome dharmas.

Explanation: The bodhisattva sees that, for certain sentient beings, as long as they continually undergo the retribution of poverty, unwholesome dharmas do not increase during that time. The bodhisattva wishes them continually to undergo the retribution of poverty and does not wish them to experience the retribution of wealth and happiness even for a single instant, thereby producing the causes and conditions of unwholesome dharmas—loving themselves and hating others.

These two causes and conditions can foster the growth of unwholesome dharmas. If the bodhisattva were to give them wealth, he would thereby bring their minds of attachment and hatred to maturity. Therefore, the bodhisattva does not give them the conditions for happiness.

This is precisely the bodhisattva’s power of knowing the paths that lead everywhere.

The Treatise states: Because the bodhisattva sees that, if he were to give them the conditions for happiness, this would become a cause and condition for harming innumerable other sentient beings.

Explanation: The bodhisattva sees that, if certain sentient beings were to obtain great wealth, they would not merely harm themselves but would also be able to injure and afflict innumerable sentient beings. The bodhisattva wishes them to undergo the suffering of poverty and does not wish them, through wealth and comfort, to injure and afflict the bodies and minds, and even the wholesome roots, of sentient beings. Therefore, the bodhisattva does not give them the conditions for happiness. This is precisely the bodhisattva’s power of knowing the paths that lead everywhere.

The Treatise states: Therefore, it is not that the bodhisattva lacks the superior power to accomplish this. Moreover, sentient beings of this kind are also manifestly seen in the world.

Explanation: “Superior power” means transcendent capability. Superior power is threefold, namely, three virtues: First is the ability to attain the cause, namely, the three fields of training. Second is the ability to attain the fruit, namely, the ten masteries. Third is the ability to benefit others, meaning that the bodhisattva clearly understands the faculties, aspirations, dispositions, and so forth of sentient beings. If he sees that giving will be beneficial, he gives; if he sees that not giving will be beneficial, he does not give. The bodhisattva takes benefit as decisive; he does not take giving or not giving as decisive. Because giving may be of no benefit, there are sentient beings in the world who undergo suffering.

The Treatise states: Here there is a verse as follows:

Explanation: In order to summarize the preceding five meanings, a verse is again spoken.

The Treatise states:

Seeing karma obstructing the wholesome,

And disenchantment becoming manifest,

Fearing harm to those sentient beings,

The bodhisattva does not give.

Explanation: Some sentient beings have karmic obstructions and cannot receive the bodhisattva’s gifts. For some sentient beings, possessing the conditions for happiness obstructs wholesome dharmas. Some sentient beings, because of poverty and suffering, continually have minds disenchanted with samsara. For some sentient beings, possessing the conditions for happiness causes unwholesome dharmas to grow. Some sentient beings, because of great wealth and pleasure, persecute and harm others. Seeing such circumstances, the bodhisattva wishes to cause them to abandon harming themselves and harming others; therefore, he does not give them the conditions for happiness. For this reason, those sentient beings cannot receive the bodhisattva’s gifts.