大智度論 集散品上Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · Gathering and Dispersal, Part 1 of 2

If dharmas have no gathering and no dispersal to begin with, is it not a superfluous question to ask from where they gather and to where they disperse? The Chapter on Gathering and Dispersal sets this hard question on the table at its very opening. Subhūti declares of himself that he does not perceive and does not find a bodhisattva practising prajñā, because he does not find the gathering or the dispersal of any dharma: from form up to consciousness, from the eye up to the mind, the twelve links of dependent arising, the six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, the dharmas of the three times, the Buddha and all the Buddhas, bodhisattvas, and śrāvakas, and even the real mark of all dharmas; seeking each, he sees neither its gathering nor its dispersal; and since he sees neither gathering nor dispersal, there is no ground on which to force a name upon the bodhisattva: 「是字不住，亦不不住」 tr. "this word does not dwell, nor does it not dwell". The pivot of the whole chapter lies in one sentence of the treatise-author: all dharmas are empty because of the emptiness of the unfindable, and the reason they are all empty lies precisely in ‘no gathering, no dispersal’. So the treatise-author first sets the names ‘gathering’ and ‘dispersal’ right: eye and form as conditions give rise to consciousness, and the receiving of results goes on in succession without end; this is called gathering; this consciousness ceases of itself moment by moment, and as soon as the conditions part it disperses; at arising there is no coming and at ceasing no going; this is called dispersal. Having set the names right, he gathers them under four gates: because there is no coming or going, because there is no arising or ceasing, because ultimate emptiness does not lose the causes and conditions of karma, and because one contemplates the truth of cessation and the truth of origination, gathering and dispersal are each unfindable. Since gathering and dispersal cannot be found, the name has nowhere to dwell, as the name cart exists when rim, spokes, and hub combine and is lost the moment they disperse; hence the name neither dwells nor does not dwell. From this the first part opens out the many things one should not dwell in: form up to old age and death, the six perfections, letters, supernormal powers, impermanence, suffering, emptiness, up to the gates of dhāraṇī and samādhi, none should be dwelt in, because ‘form is emptiness, emptiness is form’; and on to receiving no mark at all, since 「取相著故，生諸結使」 tr. "grasping marks and being attached, one gives rise to the fetters"; and it ends with the passage on the brahmin ascetic Śreṇika, showing that even one within the small vehicle can believe and enter the principle of the emptiness of dharmas, not grasping marks but dwelling in the practice of faith, how much more one who practises the Great Vehicle. The last part extends the unfindability of gathering and dispersal into leaving the two extremes: permanence and annihilation, existence and non-existence, the six inner faculties and the six outer objects, and even this prajñā and what is not prajñā, wherever two extremes form, one leaves them and walks the middle way, 「離是二邊行中道，是為般若波羅蜜」 tr. "to leave these two extremes and walk the middle way is prajñāpāramitā"; then by the eighteen emptinesses it shows that the six perfections have no existence of their own, glosses prajñā as foremost among all wisdoms, and finally returns to the question ‘whose prajñāpāramitā is it?’: for the sake of the worldly truth prajñā ‘belongs to the bodhisattva alone’, and at the time of becoming a Buddha its name turns into ‘omniscience of all kinds’, so it belongs neither to the Buddha, nor to the two vehicles, nor to ordinary people; a bodhisattva who trains thus draws gradually near to sarvajñā, is always born by transformation, and is never apart from the Buddhas. In reading this chapter there is no need first to fit dharmas with a real place of gathering or dispersal; one need only see the same one thing in every failure to find gathering or dispersal: because dharmas have no gathering and no dispersal they are ultimately empty, and because they are ultimately empty the name does not dwell, no single dharma is dwelt in, and no mark at all is received. No gathering and no dispersal, yet no hindrance to provisional designation; dwelling in no single dharma, yet walking the middle way throughout. This is the path of prajñā opened by the unfindability of gathering and dispersal.

Subhūti: I Do Not See the Gathering and Dispersal of All Dharmas; How Can I Establish a Name for the Bodhisattva? (Sūtra)

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! I do not perceive, and cannot find, any such thing as a bodhisattva practising prajñāpāramitā; for whom, then, should I speak prajñāpāramitā?

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of all dharmas; if I establish a name for a bodhisattva and call him a bodhisattva, I fear that later there will be regret! World-Honored One! This name does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name in itself has no existence. Precisely for this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of form, up to the gathering and dispersal of consciousness; since they cannot be found, how can I establish a name for them? World-Honored One! For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence.

‘World-Honored One! Nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the eye, up to the gathering and dispersal of the mind; since they cannot be found, how can I establish a name and say that this is a bodhisattva? World-Honored One! The name of the eye, up to the name of the mind, none of them abides, nor do they not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of forms, up to the gathering and dispersal of dharmas; since they cannot be found, how can I establish a name and say that this is a bodhisattva? World-Honored One! The name of forms, up to the name of dharmas, none of them abides, nor do they not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide. Eye-consciousness up to mind-consciousness, eye-contact up to mind-contact, the feeling born with eye-contact as its condition up to the feeling born with mind-contact as its condition—these are all likewise.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of ignorance, up to the point that I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of old age and death. World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the extinction of ignorance, up to the point that I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the extinction of old age and death.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of lust, anger, and delusion, or the gathering and dispersal of all kinds of wrong views; these are all likewise.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the six perfections; the gathering and dispersal of the four foundations of mindfulness, up to the gathering and dispersal of the eight limbs of the noble path; the gathering and dispersal of emptiness, the signless, and non-action; the gathering and dispersal of the four meditations, the four immeasurable minds, and the four formless absorptions; the gathering and dispersal of the recollection of the Buddha, the recollection of the Dharma, the recollection of the Saṅgha, the recollection of morality, the recollection of relinquishment, the recollection of the gods, the recollection of the good, the recollection of in-and-out breathing, the recollection of the body, and the recollection of death; nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the Buddha's ten powers, up to the eighteen unshared dharmas. World-Honored One! Since I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, how can I establish a name and say that this is a bodhisattva? World-Honored One! This name does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the five aggregates that are like a dream, nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the five aggregates that are like an echo, like a shadow, like a mirage, like a magical transformation; this too is as said before. World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of separation, nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of quiescence, of non-arising and non-ceasing, of the not-shown, of the neither stained nor pure.

‘World-Honored One! I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of suchness, dharma-nature, the reality-limit, the dharma-mark, and the dharma-position; this too is as said before.

‘I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of wholesome and unwholesome dharmas; I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of conditioned and unconditioned dharmas, of dharmas with outflows and without outflows, the gathering and dispersal of past, future, and present dharmas, and of dharmas that are not past, not future, not present. What are the dharmas that are not past, not future, not present? They are the unconditioned dharmas. World-Honored One! Nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the unconditioned dharmas.

‘World-Honored One! Nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the Buddha. World-Honored One! Nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the Buddhas, together with the bodhisattvas and the saṅgha of śrāvakas, in worlds of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges. World-Honored One! Since I cannot find the gathering and dispersal of the Buddhas, how can I teach bodhisattva-mahāsattvas to practise prajñāpāramitā? World-Honored One! This name of bodhisattva does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.

‘World-Honored One! Nor can I find the gathering and dispersal of the real mark of all these dharmas; how can I establish a name for a bodhisattva and say that this is a bodhisattva? World-Honored One! This name, the real mark of all dharmas, does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.’

Why Say ‘Not Seeing the Bodhisattva’ Again? Of the Four Cravings, the Hardest to Dispel Is Craving for Dharmas (Treatise)

What follows is the treatise's explanation.

Question: The preceding chapters have already said that the bodhisattva, the bodhisattva's name, and prajñāpāramitā are not seen, and that all dharmas are not within, not without, not in between, and so on; why now say it again?

Answer: Beings have four kinds of craving—craving for desire, craving for existence, craving for non-existence, and craving for dharmas. Craving for desire is easy to see; its fault lies in marks such as impurity. Craving for existence has no marks such as impurity to be disgusted by, and is somewhat hard to dispel. Craving for non-existence is able to break down existence and resembles wisdom, and so it is harder still to dispel. As for craving for dharmas, it is craving attached to all kinds of wholesome dharmas that benefit the path; its fault is the hardest of all to see, and therefore it is said again. It is like small grass, which is easily removed with a little effort, whereas a great tree takes deep and heavy effort and is hard to uproot.

Furthermore, the dharma of before and the dharma here are partly the same and partly different: before, what was heard was that the bodhisattva's name cannot be seen; here what is said is that the bodhisattva's name is not perceived and not found—it is because it is not perceived and not found that it is not seen, not because the power of wisdom is weak that it is not seen.

Question: Before one has practised prajñāpāramitā, is there a bodhisattva? Why is it now said that a bodhisattva practising prajñāpāramitā is not seen?

Answer: From beginningless time beings have in their very nature been unfindable; it is not that they become unfindable because prajñāpāramitā has been practised. It is only because of falsehood, deception, and inversion that ordinary people, following this provisional name, take it that there is a bodhisattva. Now, practising prajñāpāramitā, one extinguishes falsehood, deception, and inversion and knows that it was originally non-existent—not that it originally existed and now does not. If one said that it originally existed and now does not, one would fall into annihilation.

Furthermore, the regret in Subhūti's mind is the fear of breaking the precept against false speech. Why? In the Buddha's Dharma all dharmas are definitely without self; if I say that there is a bodhisattva and that I will speak prajñāpāramitā for him, I fall into the offence of false speech—therefore there is regret in his mind.

Furthermore, there is another cause and condition for the regret in his mind: all dharmas, because they are unfindable and empty, are entirely empty. Why? Because there is no gathering and no dispersal.

What Are ‘Gathering’ and ‘Dispersal’? Endless Succession Is Called Gathering; Ceasing Moment by Moment, with No Coming and No Going, Is Called Dispersal (Treatise)

For example, the eye and form serve as causes and conditions and eye-consciousness arises; when the three things, eye, form, and consciousness, come together, eye-contact arises; within the causes and conditions of eye-contact there then arise mental dharmas such as feeling, perception, and construction. Within this, if wrong recollection arises, all kinds of afflictions and wrongdoing arise; if right recollection arises, all kinds of wholesome dharmas arise. Wholesome and unwholesome deeds bring on the recompense of the six paths, and from this body of recompense wholesome and unwholesome deeds are sown again. Continuing in succession like this, endless and inexhaustible—this is called ‘gathering’. The other faculties, of ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, are all likewise.

What is called ‘dispersal’ means that dharmas such as eye-consciousness arise and cease moment by moment, because their causes and conditions separate and scatter. When these dharmas, such as eye-consciousness, arise, there is no place from which they come—it is not like grain from the fields being carried and gathered together; when they are destroyed, there is also no place to which they go—it is not like grain being distributed to the people, with somewhere to go.

This is, in brief, the mark of the gathering and dispersal of dharmas: when they arise they come from nowhere, and when they scatter and are destroyed they go nowhere; these dharmas are all like magical transformations, merely deceiving people's eyes!

Why Gathering and Dispersal Cannot Be Found: No Coming and No Going, No Arising and No Ceasing, Ultimate Emptiness and the Two Truths (Treatise)

Question: If so, dharmas still have the mark of gathering and dispersal; why does Subhūti say they are not perceived and not found?

Answer: Because there is no place from which they come, gathering cannot be found; because there is no place to which they go, dispersal cannot be found. Furthermore, because arising is originally non-existent, gathering cannot be found; because ceasing is originally non-existent, dispersal cannot be found. Because of ultimate emptiness, gathering cannot be found; because the causes and conditions of deeds are not lost, dispersal cannot be found. Furthermore, because one contemplates the truth of cessation of the world, gathering cannot be found; because one contemplates the truth of the origination of the world, dispersal cannot be found. By meanings of all these kinds, one should know that gathering and dispersal cannot be found—how then can a name be established for a bodhisattva? If a name is forcibly established, this name too has no abiding, and also is not without abiding.

Why the Name Neither Abides Nor Does Not Abide: The Simile of the Cart, the Simile of the Five Aggregates, and the Simile of Fire Burning the Mouth (Treatise)

Question: Why is this name said not to abide?

Answer: A name has to abide upon a dharma, and dharmas are empty, so the name has no place to abide. It is like a cart: only when parts such as the wheels, rims, spokes, and hubs come together is there the name ‘cart’; if this coming together is taken apart, the name ‘cart’ is lost. This name ‘cart’ does not abide in the wheels and other parts, yet neither is it apart from the wheels and other parts; seek this name ‘cart’ in terms of oneness or of difference, and it cannot be found either way! Because the name ‘cart’ is lost, one can know that a name has no place to abide. When its causes and conditions scatter and are destroyed, there is already no name—how much less after the causes and conditions have perished! Beings are also like this: only when the five aggregates, such as form, come together is there this name ‘being’; if the five aggregates separate and scatter, the name has no place to abide. When the five aggregates separate and scatter there is already none—how much less when there are no five aggregates at all!

Question: If it is said that when they scatter and are destroyed the name cannot be found, then while they are together and not yet scattered and destroyed there is a name; why say it cannot be found?

Answer: This name ‘bodhisattva’ is one, while the aggregates are five; one cannot make five, and five cannot make one. If five could make one—it is like five bolts of cloth, which cannot be used as one bolt; if one could make five—it is like one bolt of cloth, which cannot be used as five bolts. For this reason, the one name ‘bodhisattva’ cannot abide in the five aggregates.

As for what is called ‘not non-abiding’: if, where the causes and conditions of a name come together, there were nothing and no name at all, then worldly language and all kinds of affairs would perish; if worldly truth did not exist, the truth of the highest meaning would not exist either; if both truths did not exist, dharmas would be thrown into confusion!

Furthermore, if the name were really contained within the causes and conditions, then as soon as one said ‘fire’ it ought to burn the mouth, and as soon as one said ‘existence’ it ought to stop up the mouth. If the name were not in the dharma at all, then saying ‘fire’ ought not to give rise to the thought of fire, and one who went seeking fire might get water. It is precisely because this name has been commonly passed down and practised by everyone since long ago that one can recognise the thing by following the name. For this reason, it is said that the meaning of a name is neither abiding nor not abiding.

Furthermore, here Subhūti himself states the cause and condition: because it has no existence, this name neither abides nor does not abide.

Just like this name ‘bodhisattva’, all kinds of dharmas—the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements, and so on—are also likewise.

Why the Five Aggregates Are Spoken of Again as Like a Dream, Like an Illusion; Why, of the Ten Similes, Only Five Are Given (Treatise)

Question: As said before, the gathering and dispersal of dharmas such as the five aggregates cannot be found; why now speak of the five aggregates again?

Answer: Before, the five aggregates were only spoken of directly; now it is said that the five aggregates are like a dream, like an illusion. Furthermore, some people think that the five aggregates of ordinary people are false and deceptive, unreal, like a dream, while the five aggregates of the sages are not false and deceptive; for this reason Subhūti says: like a dream, like an illusion, they equally do not abide.

Question: Among the ten similes, why are only five things given?

Answer: If all ten were stated, that too would be acceptable; only, following the minds of beings, five similes are spoken, and since the matter is already clear there is no need to state them all. Or else, because they correspond to the five aggregates, five similes are spoken. The other dharmas are likewise.

Which Meaning Is Taken for Separation, Quiescence, Non-Arising, Non-Ceasing, and the Not-Shown; How Gathering and Dispersal Are Spoken of for Unconditioned Dharmas (Treatise)

Separation is of two kinds: first, bodily separation; second, mental separation. Bodily separation is leaving behind the affection of family, worldly affairs, and the like, and dwelling at leisure in a quiet place; mental separation is being far removed from all kinds of fetters. There are also two further kinds of separation: first, dharmas are separate from names; second, dharmas are each separate from their own specific marks. What is spoken of here is the latter two kinds of separation. Why? Because here the aim is to break down names; as for separation from specific marks, it will be spoken of elsewhere. In the dharma of the Small Vehicle, the former two kinds of separation are mostly spoken of.

Quiescence is also of two kinds: first, with a mark of pure goodness, evil affairs are quiescent; second, the mark of quiescence such as that of nirvāṇa—contemplating the dharmas of the world as being likewise. Here only the latter kind of quiescence is spoken of.

Non-arising is also of two kinds: first, future dharmas and unconditioned dharmas are called non-arising; second, all dharmas in truth have no mark of arising, because arising cannot be found. Here only the latter kind of non-arising is spoken of.

Non-ceasing is of three kinds: cessation through knowledge, cessation not through knowledge, and cessation through impermanence. What is spoken of here is cessation through impermanence; because it runs counter to cessation through impermanence, it is called non-ceasing.

The not-shown means that, because every contemplating mind has ceased and the path of language is cut off, there is no dharma that can be pointed out and said to have such-and-such a mark—whether one says it is existent or non-existent, permanent or impermanent, and so on.

Neither stained nor pure, together with the meaning of suchness, dharma-nature, the reality-limit, the dharma-mark, and the dharma-position, is as said before.

Question: The dharmas of the five aggregates have gathering and dispersal, and it is by running counter to this that ‘neither gathering nor dispersal’ is spoken of; but dharmas such as suchness, dharma-nature, and the reality-limit have nothing to run counter to—why is ‘neither gathering nor dispersal’ said of them too?

Answer: When a practitioner attains suchness, dharma-nature, and the like, it is called gathering; when he loses them, it is called dispersal. It is like space, which originally has no gathering and no dispersal: when a door or window is cut open it is called gathering; when it is stopped up it is called dispersal.

The meaning of the wholesome, the unwholesome, up to the Buddhas of the ten directions as many as the sands of the Ganges, is as said before. These Buddha-dharmas and the Buddha's names all have nothing on which to rely, and so all are empty: they do not abide, nor are they not abiding.

No Name Can Be Spoken Within Dharmas; the Bodhisattva Who Hears and Is Not Alarmed Abides in the Avaivartika Nature (Sūtra)

Subhūti said further: ‘World-Honored One! Dharmas come together through causes and conditions and are merely set up as provisional names; what is called a bodhisattva is no more than a name. This name cannot be spoken within the five aggregates of clinging, cannot be spoken within the twelve sense-fields or the eighteen elements, up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, and cannot be spoken within any kind of dharma that comes together. World-Honored One! A dream, for example, cannot be spoken within dharmas; an echo, a shadow, a mirage, a magical transformation also cannot be spoken within dharmas; and for what is called space, for example, there is likewise no dharma in which it can be spoken.

‘World-Honored One! Just so with the names earth, water, fire, and wind—there is no dharma in which they can be spoken; the names morality, samādhi, wisdom, liberation, and the knowledge and vision of liberation—there is no dharma in which they can be spoken; just so with the name srota-āpanna, up to the names arhat and pratyekabuddha—there is no dharma in which they can be spoken; just so with the name Buddha and the name Dharma—there is no dharma in which they can be spoken: that is, that it is wholesome or unwholesome, permanent or impermanent, suffering or bliss, self or not-self, quiescent or separate, existent or non-existent.

‘World-Honored One! Because of this meaning there is regret in my mind: the mark of gathering and dispersal of all dharmas cannot be found, and yet a name is to be established for a bodhisattva and it is to be said that this is a bodhisattva. World-Honored One! This name does not abide, nor does it not abide. Why? Because this name has no existence. For this reason, this name does not abide, nor does it not abide.

‘If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva hears such a teaching—that prajñāpāramitā has such a mark and such a meaning—and his mind does not sink, does not regret, is not alarmed, not afraid, not terrified, one should know that this bodhisattva surely abides in the avaivartika nature, because he abides by way of the dharma of non-abiding.’

Breaking Down the Bodhisattva's Name Through Another Gate: The Five Aggregates and the Bodhisattva Do Not Include One Another (Treatise)

The treatise-author explains: Before, the bodhisattva's name and all dharmas were broken down through the gate of neither abiding nor not abiding; now the bodhisattva's name is broken down again through another gate, showing that there is no dharma of which it can be said that it is the bodhisattva. Why? The bodhisattva is not the five aggregates, and the five aggregates are not the bodhisattva; in the five aggregates there is no bodhisattva, and in the bodhisattva there are no five aggregates; the five aggregates do not belong to the bodhisattva, and the bodhisattva does not belong to the five aggregates; apart from the five aggregates there is no bodhisattva, and apart from the bodhisattva there are no five aggregates. Seen in this way, the bodhisattva's name cannot be found; one should know that it is empty. Up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, all are likewise.

It is like everything seen in a dream: all of it is false and cannot be spoken, and in this dream there is no fixed mark of any dharma—what are called the five aggregates, the twelve sense-fields, and the eighteen elements are all merely a deceiving of the mind. The rest—shadow, echo, mirage, and magical transformation—are also likewise, merely deceiving the ears and eyes!

Again, it is like space, which cannot be spoken within any dharma, because it has no mark. Space runs counter to form, so it cannot be said to be called form; nor is the point where form comes to an end space, because apart from this there is no further dharma. If it is said that entering and exiting is the mark of space, that too is not right! That entering and exiting is bodily action, not the mark of space; and if it is said to have no mark, then there is no such dharma. For this reason, space merely has a name. The bodhisattva's name is also likewise.

Dream and Space Merely Have Names; Why Do Earth, Water, Fire, and Wind, Which Are Real Dharmas, Also Merely Have Names? (Treatise)

Question: Things like a dream or space can be said merely to have a name; but earth, water, fire, and wind are really existent dharmas—why are they too said merely to have a name?

Answer: People without wisdom take earth and all such things to be really existent; the sages, observing with the wisdom-eye, see that they are all false and deceptive. It is like a small child who sees the image in a mirror and takes it to be really existent, gladly reaching out to take it and treating it as real; when an adult looks, he knows that it is merely deceiving people's eyes. The multitude of ordinary people see fine particles come together to form earth and take it to be really existent earth; another person, who has the divine eye, scatters this earth and sees only fine particles; and when one discriminates and breaks up this earth with the wisdom-eye, none of it can be found at all.

Furthermore, in the discussion of the very first chapter the mark of the body was refuted in all kinds of ways; since the body can be refuted, earth too can be refuted.

Furthermore, if earth were really existent, why does it all become fire when one cultivates the contemplation of everything as fire? If it is said that what is contemplated in meditative absorption is really existent, then would not the Buddha's saying that all dharmas are empty become false? Yet this is not right. Water, fire, and wind are all likewise.

As with the body made of the four great elements—the body itself is already like this; how much more must the various deeds the body performs, such as keeping the precepts, be empty! If coarse deeds such as the precepts are already empty, how much more must meditative absorption, wisdom, liberation, the knowledge and vision of liberation, and the like be empty! If the five aggregates of morality and the rest are empty, how much more must all the fruits of the noble path obtained through causes and conditions be empty! If the fruits of the noble path are empty, how much more must the persons from srota-āpanna up to the Buddha be empty!

For this reason, although the bodhisattva's name is established out of dharmas from the wholesome up to existence and non-existence and so on, it is not called wholesome, up to not being called existent or non-existent, because gathering and dispersal cannot be found.

What Is the Avaivartika Nature? Faith and Delight in Ultimate Emptiness, and the Simile of the Child of a Noble Clan (Treatise)

Since Subhūti has understood the mark of emptiness to be thus, how could he say that there is a bodhisattva and speak prajñāpāramitā for him? If a bodhisattva hears these words and is not alarmed and not afraid, then he abides in the avaivartika nature, because he abides by way of a dharma that is like non-abiding.

What is called the avaivartika nature means that although this bodhisattva has not yet attained the acceptance of the non-arising of dharmas and has not yet received a prediction from the Buddhas, yet through the power of merit and wisdom he is able to believe, accept, love, and delight in the ultimate emptiness of all dharmas; this is called abiding in the avaivartika nature, because he has obtained a share of the avaivartika's quality. It is like a small child born into a noble clan: although he has not yet accomplished any undertaking, simply because the clan is noble he counts as noble.

The Bodhisattva Who Wishes to Practise Prajñā Should Not Abide in Form up to Old Age and Death, in the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, or in the Six Perfections (Sūtra)

Subhūti said further: ‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in form, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; should not abide in the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind; should not abide in forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and dharmas; should not abide in eye-consciousness up to mind-consciousness; should not abide in eye-contact up to mind-contact; should not abide in the feeling born with eye-contact as its condition up to the feeling born with mind-contact as its condition; should not abide in the earth element, nor in the water, fire, wind, space, and consciousness elements; should not abide in ignorance up to old age and death. Why? World-Honored One! Form—the mark of form is empty; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness—the mark of consciousness is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of form is not called form, and apart from emptiness there is also no form; form is emptiness, and emptiness is form. The emptiness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness is not called consciousness, and apart from emptiness there is also no consciousness; consciousness is emptiness, and emptiness is consciousness. Up to old age and death—the mark of old age and death is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of old age and death is not called old age and death, and apart from emptiness there is also no old age and death; old age and death is emptiness, and emptiness is old age and death. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in form, up to should not abide in old age and death.

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the four foundations of mindfulness. Why? The four foundations of mindfulness—the mark of the four foundations of mindfulness is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of the four foundations of mindfulness is not called the four foundations of mindfulness, and apart from emptiness there are also no four foundations of mindfulness; the four foundations of mindfulness are emptiness, and emptiness is the four foundations of mindfulness. Up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, it is likewise. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eighteen unshared dharmas.

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the perfection of giving, should not abide in the perfection of morality, the perfection of patience, the perfection of vigour, the perfection of meditation, or the perfection of prajñā. Why? The perfection of giving—the mark of the perfection of giving is empty; up to the perfection of prajñā—the mark of the perfection of prajñā is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of the perfection of giving is not called the perfection of giving, and apart from emptiness there is also no perfection of giving; the perfection of giving is emptiness, and emptiness is the perfection of giving. Up to the perfection of prajñā, it is likewise. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the six perfections.’

From the Gate of Modesty to the Gate of Non-Abiding; the Many Names of Prajñā and the Stages of ‘Practice’ (Treatise)

The treatise-author explains: Before, Subhūti spoke of prajñā through the gate of modesty: although with his mouth he said he would not speak, in fact he was precisely speaking prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattvas. Now Subhūti changes to the gate of non-abiding and speaks prajñāpāramitā for the bodhisattvas directly.

Prajñāpāramitā has all kinds of names: ‘contemplating’, ‘cultivating’, ‘according’, ‘uniting’, ‘entering’, ‘practising’, ‘abiding’, and so on; all of these are called practising prajñāpāramitā. It is only that it is spoken of with all kinds of names so that the listeners may rejoice.

Furthermore, among them there are also slight differences. What is called ‘practice’ refers to hearing, reciting, writing out, right recollection, expounding, reflecting, weighing, discriminating, cultivating, and so on, up to the point of anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—all of this is together called practice. Within this practice there are finer divisions: the very first is called ‘contemplating’, like first seeing a thing; learning gradually day by day is called ‘practising’; fitting together with prajñāpāramitā is called ‘uniting’; following prajñāpāramitā is called ‘according’; penetrating prajñāpāramitā is called ‘entering’; discriminating and grasping marks, holding that there is such a thing, is called ‘recollecting’; practising constantly without stopping, so that one's own mind resembles prajñā, is called ‘training’; after the training is accomplished, observing with skilful means and knowing right and wrong, gain and loss, is called ‘reflecting’; practising together with prajñā with a mind of meditative absorption is called ‘cultivating’; obtaining the path of prajñāpāramitā and not losing it is called ‘abiding’; running counter to abiding is then called ‘not abiding’.

Since the Emptiness of All Dharmas Is Already Non-Abiding, Why Say Again One Should Not Abide? The Signless Samādhi and the Simile of the Flying Bird (Treatise)

Question: It was said before that all dharmas are empty, which is itself non-abiding; why is it now said again that one should not abide in dharmas?

Answer: Although it was said before, it is said again now only because the mind of craving attached to dharmas is hard to dispel.

Furthermore, there is a signless samādhi: entering this samādhi, one grasps no marks in any dharma, yet does not enter the absorption of cessation. The wisdom of the bodhisattva is inconceivable: although he does not grasp the marks of any dharma, he is able to practise the bodhisattva path. It is like a bird flying in space, which has nothing to rely on yet is able to fly high; the bodhisattva is also like this: he does not abide in dharmas, yet he is able to practise the bodhisattva path.

Question: As soon as a person's mind takes hold of an object it arises; how can the bodhisattva not abide in any dharma and yet not enter the absorption of cessation?

Answer: Here Subhūti himself has said it, namely: form and the mark of form are in themselves empty; the emptiness of form is not form, yet neither is there form apart from emptiness; form is emptiness, and emptiness is form. This meaning has already been spoken of in the second chapter. Up to not abiding in the six perfections, it is likewise: because of emptiness, there is nothing in which to abide.

One Should Not Abide in Letters or in the Supernormal Powers (Sūtra)

Subhūti said further: ‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in letters—the one-syllable gate, the two-syllable gate; in all such kinds of syllable-gates he should not abide. Why? Because letters—the mark of letters is empty; this too is as said before.

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the supernormal powers. Why? The supernormal powers—the mark of the supernormal powers is empty. The emptiness of the supernormal powers is not called the supernormal powers, and apart from emptiness there are also no supernormal powers; the supernormal powers are emptiness, and emptiness is the supernormal powers. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the supernormal powers.’

Two Kinds of Bodhisattva, Examples of the Syllable-Gates, and Entering the Real Mark on Hearing One Syllable (Treatise)

The treatise-author explains: There are two kinds of bodhisattva: one practises meditative absorption, the other studies reading and recitation. Those who sit in meditation give rise to supernormal powers; those who study reading are able to know and discriminate letters. What is called the one-syllable gate is one syllable forming one word, as when earth is called ‘bhū’; what is called the two-syllable gate is two syllables forming one word, as when water is called ‘jala’; what is called the three-syllable gate is as when water is called ‘boshilan’. In this way there are all kinds of syllable-gates.

Furthermore, when a bodhisattva hears one syllable, he at once enters the real mark of all dharmas. For instance, hearing the syllable ‘a’, he knows that all dharmas are from the very beginning unarisen, and so on; hearing ‘duḥkha’, he gives rise to the mark of suffering in all dharmas and at once gives rise to the mind of great compassion; hearing ‘anizha’, he knows the mark of impermanence of all dharmas and at once enters the noble practice of the path. The rest is as expounded at length in the dhāraṇī-gate of letters.

As for the meaning of the supernormal powers, it has already been spoken of above. Because these two things, letters and supernormal powers, are both ultimately empty, the bodhisattva does not abide in them.

One Should Not Abide in Impermanence up to the Gates of Dhāraṇī and Samādhi; Without Skilful Means One Performs Practices and Does Not Receive Prajñā (Sūtra)

Subhūti said further: ‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in form being impermanent, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being impermanent. Why? Impermanence—the mark of impermanence is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of impermanence is not called impermanence, and apart from emptiness there is also no impermanence; impermanence is emptiness, and emptiness is impermanence. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in form being impermanent, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being impermanent. He should not abide in form being suffering, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being suffering; should not abide in form being not-self, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being not-self; should not abide in form being empty, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being empty; should not abide in form being quiescent, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being quiescent; should not abide in form being separate, should not abide in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness being separate; this too is as said before.

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in the mark of suchness. Why? The mark of suchness—the mark of suchness is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of the mark of suchness is not called suchness, and apart from emptiness there is also no suchness; suchness is emptiness, and emptiness is suchness. World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in dharma-nature, the dharma-mark, the dharma-position, or the reality-limit. Why? The reality-limit is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of the reality-limit is not called the reality-limit, and apart from emptiness there is also no reality-limit; the reality-limit is emptiness, and emptiness is the reality-limit.

‘Furthermore, World-Honored One! A bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide in any dhāraṇī-gate, should not abide in any samādhi-gate. Why? The dhāraṇī-gate—the mark of the dhāraṇī-gate is empty; the samādhi-gate—the mark of the samādhi-gate is empty. World-Honored One! The emptiness of the dhāraṇī-gates and samādhi-gates is not called dhāraṇī-gates and samādhi-gates, and apart from emptiness there are also no dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates; dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates are emptiness, and emptiness is dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates. World-Honored One! For this cause and condition, a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā should not abide even in the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates.

‘World-Honored One! Suppose a bodhisattva-mahāsattva who wishes to practise prajñāpāramitā, but lacks skilful means, abides in form with a mind that holds there is a self; this bodhisattva then becomes a practitioner who fabricates form. Abiding in feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness with a mind that holds there is a self, this bodhisattva becomes a practitioner who fabricates consciousness. If a bodhisattva becomes one who performs practices, he cannot receive prajñāpāramitā and cannot fulfil prajñāpāramitā; because he does not fulfil prajñāpāramitā, he cannot accomplish sarvajñā. World-Honored One! Such a bodhisattva-mahāsattva, wishing to practise prajñāpāramitā but lacking skilful means, abides with a mind that holds there is a self in the twelve sense-fields up to the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates; this bodhisattva then becomes a practitioner who fabricates the twelve sense-fields, up to fabricating the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates. If a bodhisattva becomes one who performs practices, he cannot receive prajñāpāramitā and cannot fulfil prajñāpāramitā; because he does not fulfil prajñāpāramitā, he cannot accomplish sarvajñā. Why? Form is not received; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not received. If form is not received, it is not form, because its nature is empty; if feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not received, they are not consciousness, because their nature is empty. The twelve sense-fields are not received, up to the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates are not received. If the twelve sense-fields are not received, they are not the twelve sense-fields; up to: if the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates are not received, they are not dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates, because their nature is empty. Prajñāpāramitā too is not received; if prajñāpāramitā is not received, it is not prajñāpāramitā, because its nature is empty. Such a bodhisattva-mahāsattva, wishing to practise prajñāpāramitā, should contemplate the emptiness of the nature of all dharmas. When he contemplates like this, the mind has no place in which to practise; this is called the non-receiving samādhi of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Its vast function is not shared with the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. This wisdom of sarvajñā too is not received, because there is inner emptiness, as well as outer emptiness, inner-and-outer emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, the emptiness of the highest meaning, the emptiness of the conditioned, the emptiness of the unconditioned, ultimate emptiness, beginningless emptiness, the emptiness of dispersal, the emptiness of nature, the emptiness of specific marks, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of the unfindable, the emptiness of non-existent dharmas, the emptiness of existent dharmas, and the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas. Why? This sarvajñā cannot be obtained by a practice that grasps marks, because a practice that grasps marks is defiled. What is the defiled mark? The mark of form, up to the marks of the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates—this is called the defiled mark. If these marks are received, if they are cultivated, one then supposes that sarvajñā can be obtained.’

Why One Should Not Abide Even in Wholesome and Indeterminate Dharmas; the Non-Receiving Samādhi Is Not Shared with the Two Vehicles (Treatise)

The treatise-author explains: The noble practices such as impermanence, together with suchness, dharma-nature, the reality-limit, the dhāraṇī-gates, and the samādhi-gates, have already been spoken of before.

Question: One should not abide in defiled dharmas, because they involve offence; but why should one not abide in wholesome dharmas and indeterminate dharmas either?

Answer: Although these dharmas are not offences, they can give rise to the causes and conditions of offence; just as the Buddha says here: there are bodhisattvas who practise prajñāpāramitā with a mind that holds there is a self, abide in form and crave form, and perform all kinds of deeds in order to increase form; with feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness it is likewise—they practise in order to give rise to the five aggregates. This is not being able to receive prajñāpāramitā. Although such a person says with his mouth, ‘I practise prajñāpāramitā’, in fact it is only worldly practice; because he does not fulfil prajñāpāramitā, he cannot reach omniscience. Up to the dhāraṇī-gates and the samādhi-gates, it is likewise.

Here Subhūti himself states the cause and condition of non-abiding, namely: form is not received; if form is not received, it is not form, because its nature is by origin always empty.

Question: The impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and so on of form are not received because they involve fault and offence; it is like a red-hot ball of gold: although there is gold to be coveted, simply because it is burning hot one knows it cannot be taken. If this is so, what further fault is there, that the dharmas of the five aggregates must be forcibly refuted?

Answer: Attachment is of two kinds: first, attachment of desire; second, attachment of views. Some people contemplate impermanence, suffering, and so on, break the attachment of desire, and attain liberation; others, though they contemplate impermanence and so on, are still attached to dharmas and give rise to views; for the sake of such people the mark of form is expounded analytically as empty, and in this way they can be free of the attachment of views. Up to the dhāraṇī-gates and the samādhi-gates, it is likewise.

Question: The śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas exhaust the outflows because they do not receive any dharma; why is it said here that the non-receiving samādhi is not shared with the two vehicles?

Answer: Although they have the non-receiving samādhi, they lack its vast function; it is neither sharp nor deep, nor is it firm. Furthermore, the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas attain the non-receiving of dharmas only at the time the outflows are exhausted; the bodhisattva has long known that all dharmas are not received, all being like the nirvāṇa without remainder and ultimate emptiness; therefore it is said to be not shared with the two vehicles. Furthermore, because the two vehicles still have residual habits and still have obstruction, although they have the samādhi of no receiving, it is not pure. It is like Mahākāśyapa, who, hearing the music of the bodhisattvas, could not keep himself still in his seat. The bodhisattvas asked him: ‘You are foremost in dhūta; why do you look as if you want to get up and dance?’ Kāśyapa answered: ‘Toward the five desires of humans and gods I am forever free and unmoved; but this is a power manifested by the causes and conditions of the meritorious deeds of great bodhisattvas, and I cannot yet bear it! It is like Sumeru, king of mountains, which can endure winds rising on all four sides; but if the vairambha wind blows, it cannot keep itself still.’ So it can be seen that the residual habits of the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas are, from the bodhisattva's point of view, afflictions.

Furthermore, this samādhi of no receiving is known in full only by the Buddha; the bodhisattva, because he seeks the Buddha path, although he cannot yet know it in full, already surpasses the two vehicles; therefore it is said to be not shared with the two vehicles. Because people value this non-receiving samādhi and give rise to an attached mind, Subhūti says: not only is this samādhi not received—form up to omniscience of all kinds are none of them received. Why? Subhūti himself states the cause and condition, namely that they are not received because of the eighteen emptinesses.

Question: Why use these eighteen emptinesses to contemplate all dharmas as empty?

Answer: Here Subhūti himself states the cause and condition: because of grasping marks and craving and attachment, all kinds of fetters arise. What is called a mark is the mark of form, up to the marks of the dhāraṇī-gates and the samādhi-gates—all of these are the root of afflictions. In the Buddha's Dharma there is not even a hair's breadth of a dharma-mark that can be grasped.

The Brahmin ascetic Śreṇika Never Gives Rise to Faith in Omniscience: What Is True Faith? (Sūtra)

Subhūti said further: ‘World-Honored One! The brahmin ascetic Śreṇika, with regard to omniscience, never gives rise to a faith that grasps marks. What is called his faith? He has faith in prajñāpāramitā, is able to discriminate, understand, weigh, and reflect, yet he does not take faith by way of a dharma with marks, nor by way of a dharma without marks. In this way the brahmin ascetic Śreṇika does not grasp marks and abides in the practice of faith; with the wisdom of the emptiness of nature he enters the mark of dharmas, yet does not receive form, and does not receive feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness. Why? Because the specific mark of all dharmas is empty, they cannot be found and received. This brahmin ascetic Śreṇika does not come to see this wisdom by inner contemplation, does not come to see this wisdom by outer contemplation, does not come to see this wisdom by inner-and-outer contemplation, nor does he come to see this wisdom by contemplating with no wisdom at all. Why? Because this brahmin ascetic does not see that there is a dharma that knows, a knower, a dharma that is known, or a place of knowing. This brahmin ascetic does not see this wisdom in inner form, does not see this wisdom in inner feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; does not see this wisdom in outer form, does not see this wisdom in outer feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; does not see this wisdom in inner-and-outer form, does not see this wisdom in inner-and-outer feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; nor does he see this wisdom apart from form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, because inner and outer are both empty. It is right here that the brahmin ascetic Śreṇika's mind gains faith and understanding in omniscience; for this reason the brahmin ascetic has faith in the real mark of all dharmas, because all dharmas cannot be found. Having had faith and understanding in this way, there is then no dharma that can be received, because all dharmas are without marks and without recollection. This brahmin ascetic also has nothing to attain with regard to dharmas, whether receiving or relinquishing, because receiving and relinquishing both cannot be found. This brahmin ascetic's wisdom too is not bound in thought, because the mark of all dharmas is not bound in thought.

‘World-Honored One! This is called the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva, because on this shore and the other shore alike there is nothing to be crossed. This bodhisattva does not receive form, feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, because all dharmas are not received; up to the dhāraṇī and samādhi-gates, he does not receive them either, because all dharmas are not received. This bodhisattva, within this, also does not take nirvāṇa, not yet having fulfilled the four foundations of mindfulness up to the eight limbs of the noble path, not yet having fulfilled the ten powers up to the eighteen unshared dharmas. Why? Because these four foundations of mindfulness are not the four foundations of mindfulness, up to these eighteen unshared dharmas are not the eighteen unshared dharmas; these dharmas are not dharmas, nor are they non-dharmas. This is called the prajñāpāramitā of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva: form is not received, up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are not received.’

Why Cite the Brahmin ascetic Śreṇika? Even the Small Vehicle Has the Emptiness of Dharmas (Treatise)

The treatise-author poses the question: By what cause and condition is the brahmin ascetic Śreṇika spoken of here?

Answer: This sūtra, by all kinds of causes and conditions, speaks of the emptiness of dharmas, up to saying that there is not the slightest fine mark that can be grasped. People's minds doubt this, find it strange, and do not believe it, because this principle is hard to see, being ultimately without marks. For this reason Subhūti cites this as proof: even within the Small Vehicle there is the emptiness of dharmas—how much more must those who practise the dharma of the Great Vehicle believe in the emptiness of dharmas!

Furthermore, there was the brahmin Shanruo, who was skilled at recognising the marks of a person of omniscience; seeing the bodhisattva eat the milk-gruel, he knew that he would become a Buddha that very day. Śreṇika was his maternal uncle.

Śreṇika was advanced in years, of high virtue, and of great renown; after leaving home he read widely in all the scriptures, cultivated his mind, sat in meditation, and trained in the way, and he often went to the hall of debate in order to seek wisdom. The brahmacārins said: ‘The six teachers each proclaim themselves omniscient. Pūraṇa Kāśyapa has great renown and is the teacher of a great multitude; when his disciples die, whether young or old, he does not state where they are reborn. When the disciples of the other five teachers die, whether young or old, they state where they are reborn. The Buddha too is a great teacher and has great renown; when his disciples die, for the young he states where they are reborn, for the old he does not state where they are reborn.’ When Śreṇika heard this, on another day he went to where the Buddha was, and after exchanging greetings sat down to one side.

Śreṇika Questions the Buddha: Seven Questions and Seven Times ‘No’; He Attains the Path and Leaves Home (Treatise)

Śreṇika said: ‘I ask the Buddha's permission; I wish to put a question!’

The Buddha said: ‘Ask as you please.’

Śreṇika said: ‘Once in the past I went to the debating hall and debated with the assembly; what I heard there before, I have told the Buddha truthfully in full. At that time I thought: the Buddha's Dharma says that disciples who are young still receive a later birth and those who are old do not receive a later birth—which of these, after all, is the fixed standard?’

The Buddha told Śreṇika: ‘My Dharma is very deep, subtle, and hard to understand! Through the long night you have been attached to all kinds of differing views, differing desires, and differing dharmas, and therefore you cannot see my Dharma for yourself!’

The brahmin ascetic Śreṇika said to the Buddha: ‘In my heart I revere the Buddha; may the Buddha have compassion on me and speak the subtle Dharma for me, so that I may gain the eye right here in my seat, and not let me have come in vain!’

The Buddha asked the brahmin ascetic: ‘What do you think? Do you see form as the thus-gone?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Are feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness the thus-gone?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Is there a thus-gone within form?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Is there a thus-gone within feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Is there a thus-gone apart from form?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Is there a thus-gone apart from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha asked: ‘Do you see, besides, a thus-gone one who is without form and without feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘No!’

The Buddha said: ‘If through all these gates you do not see a thus-gone one, then ought you to give rise to doubt and say: in the Buddha's Dharma, which, after all, is the fixed standard?’

Śreṇika answered: ‘I ought not to give rise to doubt.’

The Buddha told Śreṇika: ‘If a disciple of mine cannot yet know this Dharma clearly and thoroughly, I say that he has a later birth, because his original residual habits, such as the conceit of self, still remain; if a disciple of mine can clearly and thoroughly understand this meaning, I do not state where he is reborn, because his original residual habits, such as the conceit of self, no longer remain.’

When Śreṇika heard these words, he at once attained the path; having attained the path, he rose from his seat and said to the Buddha: ‘I wish to leave home and cultivate the path!’ At once his hair and beard fell away of themselves, and he became a śramaṇa; before long he attained arhatship, because he had gained the eye from the Buddha, true and not false.

The discussion on this passage of the sūtra is this: what Śreṇika had faith in was faith that the Buddha could enable him to attain the path; this is called the first faith. After that, he heard the Buddha refute the self, and knew that from the very beginning there has always been no self; because there is no self, dharmas belong to no one, are like an illusion, like a dream, false and deceptive, unreal, and cannot be grasped. Having gained this power of faith, he entered the real mark of all dharmas, and no longer received form as the thus-gone, up to consciousness as the thus-gone.

Why the Brahmin ascetic Always Answered ‘No’: The Many Causes and Conditions for Refuting the Self (Treatise)

The treatise-author poses the question: Why did the brahmin ascetic answer ‘No’ to every question of the Buddha?

Answer: The brahmin ascetic had originally taken the general mark to be the self; now the Buddha questioned him item by item, and for this reason he answered the Buddha ‘No’.

Furthermore, the brahmin ascetic had heard people speak of the self in two ways: some say the five aggregates are the self, and some say there is a self apart from the five aggregates. If the five aggregates were the self, there would be no other self. Why? The self is one and the aggregates are five; one cannot make five, and five cannot make one. Furthermore, the five aggregates have the mark of impermanence, of arising and ceasing; if the five aggregates were the self, the self too ought to arise and cease; if it arose and ceased, offence and merit would be lost. These five aggregates arise from the coming together of causes and conditions and are not sovereign; if the self too were like this, what use would this self be? Because it would not be sovereign. Because of faults of all these kinds, one cannot say that form is the thus-gone, or that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are the thus-gone. As for there being a self apart from the five aggregates, that too ought not to be, because it has no mark. If one speaks of knowing, seeing, receiving, and the like, these are all marks of the five aggregates, not marks of a self; how could a person of wisdom say that there is a self apart from the five aggregates? For this reason he answered ‘No’. If someone says that there is, besides, a separate self that is not the five aggregates, this too is not right; it is all the discrimination of inverted, false views.

By causes and conditions of all these kinds, one can know that there is no self, and the self is just the thus-gone; all dharmas are also thus, all the same as the thus-gone; because there is no owner, dharmas belong to no one.

Furthermore, the brahmin ascetic searched for the wisdom that can attain the path, seeking it in four places, yet none had a fixed mark—namely: contemplating the five aggregates of one's own body is called inner; contemplating the bodies of others outwardly is called outer; contemplating both this and that together is called inner-and-outer. None of these three kinds of wisdom attains the path, yet having no wisdom at all does not attain the path either. Furthermore, what is called inner is the six inner sense-fields, and outer is the six outer sense-fields. Furthermore, inner is the wisdom that contemplates, and outer is the object contemplated.

This Śreṇika knew that every kind of contemplation has faults. Why? Inwardly, by the power of wisdom, one says of outer dharmas that they are permanent, impermanent, existent, non-existent, and so on; yet in fact outer dharmas have no fixed mark—if they had a fixed mark, there would be no need for wisdom to function. Moreover, this wisdom arises from the causes and conditions of outer dharmas; since the mark of outer dharmas is not fixed, wisdom too is not fixed. It is like a scale, which is set up in order to weigh things, while things are what the scale weighs: the two exist in dependence on each other; apart from things there is no scale, and apart from the scale there are no things. This immeasurable wisdom of the teaching is called the skilful means for attaining the path; by it one attains what is called the fruit of the noble path.

Furthermore, to speak briefly of the meaning of true wisdom, namely: it is not seen in the inner five aggregates, not seen in the outer five aggregates, not seen in the inner-and-outer five aggregates, nor seen apart from the five aggregates—wisdom seen in this way is true.

If one contemplates the impermanence of the five aggregates with the wisdom of impermanence, this wisdom exists from the coming together of causes and conditions and is not true; one who is attached to this contemplation falls into wrong view, and only one who is not attached attains the path. If the mark of impermanence were true, why would one who is attached to it fail to attain the path? For this reason, in all that is inner and outer, no wisdom with a fixed standard is seen.

If it is said that apart from contemplations such as impermanence one can attain the path, then all ordinary people ought also to attain the path; for this reason it is said that apart from this wisdom there is also nothing to be attained.

At that time the brahmin ascetic, with this wisdom, gained in his mind separation from all dharmas, and separated himself from wisdom itself as well; all wrong views that grasp marks, such as the view of self, were extinguished all at once—yet this was not attained from non-wisdom either.

At that time the brahmin ascetic rejoiced, contemplated the mark of the immeasurable dharma-nature, and praised the Buddha as truly the great teacher!

What is called not relinquishing is because in all dharmas there is a power that aids the path; what is called not receiving is because the real mark of all dharmas is ultimately empty and there is nothing to be attained, and therefore one does not receive.

Furthermore, all kinds of fetters and afflictions, being inverted and false, have originally nothing that can be relinquished; one only knows the mark of all dharmas as they truly are, which is without marks and without recollection. This is called the bodhisattva's perfection of neither receiving nor relinquishing, and is also called prajñāpāramitā. Because on this shore and the other shore alike there is nothing to be crossed, the world is the mark of nirvāṇa, and the mark of nirvāṇa is the mark of the world; they are the same one mark, namely the signless. If one knows thus, one ought to enter extinction; it is only because one has not yet fulfilled all kinds of merits that one does not enter extinction, and also because of the power of great loving-kindness and compassion and of one's original vow that one does not enter extinction. Although the bodhisattva seeks the Buddha path, within this dharma he also has no mark of good or bad, nor any mark of receiving or relinquishing. For this reason it is said to be not dharma, nor non-dharma. This is called the bodhisattva's prajñāpāramitā—no mark whatever is received.