大智度論 幻人無作品Dazhidulun — Mahāprajñāpāramitā-upadeśa · The Illusory Person Makes Nothing

The previous chapter, Modes of Practice, broke the marks of dharmas by the ‘gate of signlessness’; this chapter goes on to use ‘illusion’ as its simile to show that dharmas are empty to begin with and make nothing. Subhūti first poses a question on others' behalf: World-Honored One, if someone asks, ‘can an illusory person train in prajñā, and even train in omniscience of all kinds and attain omniscience?’, how should I answer? The Buddha does not answer directly but asks Subhūti in return: is form different from illusion? Feeling, perception, constructions, consciousness, the eye up to the feeling born of mind-contact, the four foundations of mindfulness up to the limbs of the eightfold noble path, the three gates of liberation, emptiness, signlessness, and non-action, the six perfections up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, is each of them different from illusion? Subhūti answers ‘No’ to each, and pressed to the limit, even unsurpassed awakening is no different from illusion; so he himself speaks the gathering-up of the whole passage: form is not different from illusion and illusion is not different from form, form is illusion and illusion is form, and so on up to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The Buddha presses further: does illusion have defilement or purity? Does it arise or cease? None of these. Since it neither arises nor ceases, can such a dharma train in prajñā and attain omniscience? It cannot. Then is this provisional name, the five aggregates of clinging, the bodhisattva? It is. But does this provisional name have arising, ceasing, defilement, or purity? It does not. If a dharma is only a name, neither body nor bodily action, neither speech nor verbal action, neither mind nor mental action, neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure, can such a dharma train and attain anything? It cannot. The Buddha then gathers this passage into one sentence: if a bodhisattva can train in prajñā in this way, he will attain omniscience, precisely because of ‘nothing being attained’. Subhūti answers in accord: a bodhisattva should train in prajñā and attain awakening the way an illusory person does; why? The five aggregates are the illusory person, and the illusory person is the five aggregates. Coming to the commentary, Nāgārjuna first explains why Subhūti poses this question: in the previous chapter the Buddha answered Śāriputra on the very deep meaning of emptiness, and Subhūti thought: if dharmas are of one mark and nothing can be distinguished, then would an illusory person be no different from a real bodhisattva? But an illusory person has no reality and only deceives people's eyes; how could he become a Buddha? So the Buddha again and again uses illusion as a simile to make him understand that the falseness of the five aggregates of clinging is just like illusion. Though the illusory person truly does not act, people see him as if acting, and so he is called acting; just as a conjurer, with a little spell, some props, and some words, can make appear cities, towers, and all manner of scenes, so too the five aggregates of clinging, from the causes and conditions of a little of the spell of ignorance in former lives, make appear the constructions, consciousness, name and form, and all the body and mind. People who see the illusion give rise to greed and attachment and neglect their livelihood, and regret it only when the illusion vanishes; beings cling to these five aggregates of clinging, and only when impermanence destroys them do they regret, saying ‘how could I have clung to these illusory five aggregates and lost the real mark of all dharmas?’ Since the bodhisattva is like an illusion, why must he still practise the path in all its forms and seek awakening? The Buddha answers: the five aggregates are false and deceptive, and it is only by a provisional name that he is called bodhisattva; in this provisional name there is no action and no causes and conditions of action, no mind and no mental dharmas, without stain and without purity, because of ultimate emptiness; and this is exactly the meaning of ‘making nothing’: not a denial of the activity of practice, but a screening-off of the clinging to ‘a real agent and a real thing done’. So the bodhisattva should practise prajñā the way an illusory person does; the five aggregates are the illusory person, no different. The second half turns to another question. Subhūti asks: when a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the mind of the Great Vehicle hears prajñā taught this way, will he be alarmed and afraid? The Buddha answers: if he lacks skilful means and does not meet a good friend, he will be alarmed and afraid. What, then, is skilful means? With the mind that seeks omniscience, to contemplate form up to consciousness as impermanent, suffering, without self, empty, signless, without action, quiescent, and apart, eight marks, and these eight marks too as all unfindable; and to vow to teach this dharma for all beings without grasping it; matched thus into the framework of the six perfections. One sentence among these is especially important: it is not that one takes emptiness to ‘make’ form empty; form itself is empty and emptiness is form; emptiness is not something produced by contemplation, it is the nature of dharmas as they are. Nāgārjuna explains that the root of this alarm lies in ‘inner and outer causes and conditions not being complete’: within, no right recollection, no keen wisdom, no deep compassion; without, being born where there is no Buddha-dharma, not hearing prajñā, not meeting a good friend who can cut off doubt; when inner and outer do not come together, alarm arises. He sets up a simile of a physician compounding medicine too: dharma has no fixed dharma to begin with; for a cold illness one gives a hot medicine, but met with a hot illness it becomes no medicine at all; the bodhisattva gives medicine according to the illness and his mind does not cling to any fixed real dharma; that is why, of the two kinds of giving, the gift of Dharma is the greater. The last section speaks of the reverse: if a bodhisattva lacks skilful means and has moreover followed an evil friend, he will be alarmed and afraid when he hears prajñā. The evil friend teaches people to keep far from the six perfections, and there are evil Māras who take the forms of a Buddha, a pratyekabuddha, a preceptor or teacher, a father or mother, or a bhikṣu, urging people to abandon the bodhisattva path and take the realisation of the śrāvaka, without ever telling you that this is Māra's deed and Māra's offence. Nāgārjuna closes with the simile of the ‘soft-spoken thief’: the evil friend is like a thief of gentle words who slowly draws near you and, once near, does you harm; an ordinary thief harms only this one life of yours, only takes your life and property, but the evil friend harms you life after life, cuts the root of your wisdom-life, and robs you of the measureless treasure of the Buddha's Dharma. So once he is recognised, one should quickly keep body and mind far from him. Read through, this chapter does one thing only: the previous chapter broke the marks of dharmas by the gate of signlessness, and this chapter uses ‘illusion’ to show that dharmas are empty to begin with and make nothing. Taking illusion as the simile for the five aggregates, using the provisional name to screen off a real agent and a real thing done, practising prajñā with a mind that attains nothing; with skilful means complete one is neither alarmed nor afraid, and following an evil friend one falls and should keep far away. ‘The five aggregates are the illusory person, the illusory person is the five aggregates’ is its eye; ‘because of nothing being attained’ is its pivot; and it comes to rest at last on the sentence ‘knowing this, one should quickly keep body and mind far away’. This is the prajñā, illusion-like, making nothing, and attaining nothing, that the Chapter on the Illusory Person Makes Nothing wants you to train in.

Subhūti Poses the Question on Behalf of the Assembly: If Someone Asks, ‘Can an Illusory Person Who Trains in Prajñā, Up to the Omniscience of All Kinds, Attain Sarvajñā?’, How Should I Answer?

At that time the venerable Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! If someone were to ask, “Can a person conjured by illusion, training in prajñāpāramitā, attain sarvajñā (omniscience)? Can an illusory person training in the perfection of meditation (dhyāna), the perfection of vigour (vīrya), the perfection of patience (kṣānti), the perfection of morality (śīla), and the perfection of giving (dāna), training in the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas and the omniscience of all kinds, attain sarvajñā?”—how, again, should I answer him?’

The Buddha Does Not Answer Directly but Asks Back, Layer by Layer: Is There Any Difference between Form, and So On Up to Unsurpassed Awakening, and Illusion?—Subhūti Answers Each Time ‘There Is No Difference’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘I shall ask you in return; answer me as you see it. Subhūti! What do you think? Is there any difference between form and illusion? Is there any difference between feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness and illusion?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! There is no difference.’

The Buddha said: ‘What do you think? Is there any difference between the eye and illusion? And so on up to: is there any difference between the mind and illusion? Is there any difference between forms, and so on up to dharmas, and illusion? Is there any difference between the eye-element, and so on up to the mind-consciousness element, and illusion? Is there any difference between eye-contact, and so on up to mind-contact, and between the feeling produced by the conditions of eye-contact, and so on up to the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact, and illusion?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! There is no difference.’

The Buddha asked again: ‘What do you think? Is there any difference between the four foundations of mindfulness and illusion? And so on up to: is there any difference between the limbs of the noble eightfold path and illusion?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha asked again: ‘What do you think? Is there any difference between emptiness, signlessness, and non-action and illusion?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha asked again: ‘Subhūti! What do you think? Is there any difference between the perfection of giving and illusion? And so on up to: is there any difference between the eighteen unshared dharmas and illusion?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha asked again: ‘Subhūti! What do you think? Is there any difference between anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi (unsurpassed, right, and complete awakening) and illusion?’

Subhūti States the Reason: Form Is Illusion and Illusion Is Form, and So On Up to Unsurpassed Awakening, Which Is Also Illusion (in the Sentence Pattern of the Heart Sūtra)

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! There is no difference. For what reason? Form is not different from illusion, illusion is not different from form; form is illusion, illusion is form. World-Honored One! Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are not different from illusion, illusion is not different from feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness; consciousness is illusion, illusion is consciousness. World-Honored One! The eye is not different from illusion, illusion is not different from the eye; the eye is illusion, illusion is the eye. The feeling produced by the conditions of eye-contact, and so on up to the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact, are all likewise. World-Honored One! The four foundations of mindfulness are not different from illusion, illusion is not different from the four foundations of mindfulness; the four foundations of mindfulness are illusion, illusion is the four foundations of mindfulness; and so on up to: anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is not different from illusion, illusion is not different from anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi; anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi is illusion, illusion is anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’

The Buddha Tests It Further by Illusion's Having No Stain or Purity, No Arising or Ceasing: Can a Dharma That Neither Arises nor Ceases Train and Attain the Fruit?—The Answer Is No

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘What do you think? Does illusion have defilement, have purity?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha said: ‘Subhūti! What do you think? Does illusion have arising, have ceasing?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha said: ‘If a dharma neither arises nor ceases, can this dharma train in prajñāpāramitā and come to attain sarvajñā?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The One Question Answered ‘Yes’: The Provisional Name of the Five Aggregates of Clinging Is the Bodhisattva; but Does This Provisional Name Have Arising and Ceasing, Defilement and Purity, and Can a Dharma That Is Only a Name Train and Attain the Fruit?—Still the Answer Is No

The Buddha said: ‘What do you think? Is the provisional name of the five aggregates of clinging the bodhisattva?’

Subhūti said: ‘Yes, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha said: ‘What do you think? Does the provisional name of the five aggregates of clinging have arising and ceasing, have defilement and purity?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha said: ‘What do you think? If a dharma is only a name—not body, not bodily action; not speech, not verbal action; not mind, not mental action; neither arising nor ceasing, neither stained nor pure—can such a dharma train in prajñāpāramitā and attain sarvajñā?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One!’

The Buddha Sets Out the Meaning Directly: If a Bodhisattva Can Train in Prajñā in This Way, He Will Attain Sarvajñā, Precisely Because There Is Nothing to Be Attained

The Buddha said: ‘If a bodhisattva-mahāsattva is able to train in prajñāpāramitā in this way, he will attain sarvajñā, precisely because there is nothing to be attained.’

Subhūti Responds: The Bodhisattva Should Train in Prajñā and Attain Awakening as an Illusory Person Does, Because the Five Aggregates Are the Illusory Person and the Illusory Person Is the Five Aggregates

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva should train in prajñāpāramitā in this way and attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi—training just as an illusory person trains. For what reason? World-Honored One! One should know that the five aggregates are the illusory person, and the illusory person is the five aggregates.’

The Buddha Tests It in Order by the Five Aggregates, by Dream, and by Echo, Shadow, Mirage, and Conjuration: Can They Train in Prajñā and Attain Sarvajñā?—Each Time the Answer Is No, Because Their Nature Is Without Anything

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘What do you think? Will these five aggregates, training in prajñāpāramitā, attain sarvajñā?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! For what reason? The nature of these five aggregates is without anything, and even this nature of being without anything is unfindable.’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘What do you think? Will the five aggregates that are like a dream, training in prajñāpāramitā, attain sarvajñā?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! For what reason? The nature of a dream is without anything, and even this nature of being without anything is unfindable.’

The Buddha said: ‘What do you think? Will the five aggregates that are like an echo, like a shadow, like a mirage, like a conjuration, training in prajñāpāramitā, attain sarvajñā?’

Subhūti said: ‘No, World-Honored One! For what reason? The nature of echo, shadow, mirage, and conjuration is without anything, and even this nature of being without anything is unfindable. The six faculties are likewise. World-Honored One! Consciousness is the six faculties, and the six faculties are the five aggregates. These dharmas are all unfindable because of inner emptiness, and so on up to unfindable because of the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas.’

What follows is the treatise's commentary.

Question and Answer One: That an Illusory Person Is Empty and Deceptive Is Easy to Answer, So Why Must Subhūti Ask the Buddha?—The Treatise-Author Answers: The Doubt Arose from the Profound Meaning of Emptiness in the Previous Chapter

The treatise-author explains. Question: Why does Subhūti take this matter to ask the Buddha? If someone asks, ‘Can an illusory person who trains in prajñāpāramitā attain becoming a Buddha?’, one should only answer him, ‘He cannot.’ An illusory person is false and deceives people; he has no root or branch, no real substance. This matter is very easy to answer, so why go and ask the Buddha?

Answer: In the previous chapter the Buddha answered Śāriputra with the profound meaning of emptiness, and Subhūti then had this thought: ‘All dharmas are only of one mark, without distinction. If that is so, then there is no difference between an illusory person and a real bodhisattva; and yet the bodhisattva cultivates all kinds of merit and is able to become a Buddha, whereas the illusory person has no real substance, only deceives people's eyes, and cannot become a Buddha’—this is the origin of Subhūti's posing the doubt and asking the Buddha.

Question and Answer Two: The Illusory Person Has No Mind or Consciousness; How Can He Be Said to ‘Practise’?—The Treatise-Author Answers: Although He Does Not Really Practise, People See Him Seeming to Practise, So It Is Called Practice (the Simile of the Illusory Person Doing Good)

Question: An illusory person cannot cultivate merit, because he has no mind or consciousness; how can he be said to ‘practise’?

Answer: Although he really does not practise, people see him seeming to practise, and so it is called practice. It is like an illusory person giving food and drink, wealth, and the seven jewels, leaving home and keeping the precepts, being patient, being vigorous, sitting in meditation, teaching the Dharma, and so on; people without wisdom then take this to be true practice, not knowing that it is only an illusion.

Subhūti's Doubt Continues: Since All Dharmas Are of One Mark and Empty and Deceptive, What Distinguishes an Illusory Person Conjuring Himself into a Buddha from a Real Bodhisattva Becoming a Buddha?

Subhūti again had this thought: ‘If it is truly as the Buddha says, “All dharmas are only of one mark, without anything, only false,” then there is no difference between an illusory person and a real bodhisattva, or even a Buddha. It is like this: an illusory person can also conjure himself into a Buddha, practise the six perfections, subdue Māra's troops, sit at the seat of awakening, accomplish the Buddha path, emit great light, and teach the Dharma to ferry people across; a real bodhisattva practises the real path, is able to become a Buddha, and ferries beings to liberation—what, then, is the difference between the two?’

The Buddha Asks Back and Does Not Answer Directly; Question and Answer Three Explains Why: Subhūti Has the Wisdom of Emptiness Yet Still Esteems the Buddha-Dharmas, So the Buddha Uses the Emptiness of the Five Aggregates as a Simile to Make Him Understand That the Buddha-Dharmas Are Likewise

So the Buddha said: ‘I shall ask you in return; answer me as you see it.’

Question: Why does the Buddha not answer directly, but instead asks in return and lets Subhūti answer as he sees it?

Answer: Subhūti, with the wisdom of emptiness, contemplates the five aggregates of the three realms as all empty, and a mind of revulsion and detachment arises in him; only because the residual habits of all kinds of afflictions still remain, although he is able to know in general terms that the dharmas of the Buddhas are empty, he still holds something in esteem and cannot contemplate the Buddha-dharmas too as being, like an illusion, without anything; therefore the Buddha speaks by way of a simile. It is as if to say, ‘You take the emptiness of the five aggregates as your proof: the dharmas of the Buddhas are likewise. As you contemplate the worldly five aggregates as empty, I contemplate the Buddha-dharmas likewise.’

So the Buddha asks Subhūti: ‘What do you think? Is there any difference between form and illusion? Is there any difference between illusion and form? And so on up to feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, likewise.’ If there were a difference, only then should you ask; if there is no difference, you should not ask in this way.

Subhūti Answers ‘Not Different’; Question and Answer Four: Feeling, Perception, Constructions, and Consciousness Have No Shape, So How Are They Also Said to Be Like Illusion and Not Different?—The Treatise-Author Answers: The Illusory Person Displays Marks of Joy, Pleasure, Sorrow, and Pain, and People without Wisdom Then Think There Are Feeling, Perception, Constructions, and Consciousness

Subhūti answers: ‘There is no difference.’

Question: To say that form is not different from illusion is still acceptable, because the illusory person has form; but feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness have no shape or form, so how can they be said also to be like illusion and not different?

Answer: The illusory person displays all kinds of marks of joy, pleasure, sorrow, and pain; people without wisdom see them and think that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness truly exist there.

The Main Text of the Simile of the Conjuring Art: The Conjurer, with a Little Spell, a Few Props, and Words, Displays All Kinds of City Walls and Towers; the Five Aggregates of Clinging Likewise Appear as Constructions, Consciousness, and Name-and-Form on the Conditions of the Art of Ignorance from Former Lives

Furthermore, the Buddha makes this simile so that people may know that the five aggregates of clinging are false, like an illusion. Although the five aggregates of clinging are not different from illusion, the Buddha, wishing people to understand, makes a simile for this very purpose. Beings always take it that only illusion is false, not knowing that the five aggregates of clinging, though they seem to exist, are in fact not different from illusion. Therefore Subhūti, concentrating his mind and weighing it, came to know that ‘the five aggregates are not different from illusion’. For what reason? Just as the form of an illusory person can deceive the fleshly eye and make people give rise to sorrow, joy, pain, and pleasure, the five aggregates of clinging can also deceive the wisdom eye and make people give rise to all kinds of afflictions such as greed and angry vexation. Again, it is like the conjuring art: with only a little spell, a few objects, and words as its basis, it can display all kinds of scenes—city walls, towers, and so on; the five aggregates of clinging are also like this: on the conditions of only a little art of ignorance from former lives, there come to be constructions, consciousness, name-and-form, and all kinds of marks of body and mind—precisely because of this, it is said that the five aggregates of clinging are not different from illusion.

The Simile of Clinging to the Conjured Thing and Regretting When the Illusion Vanishes: Beings Cling to the Five Aggregates of Clinging Just as Onlookers Cling to a Conjured Scene, and Only When Impermanence Destroys Them Do They Regret Having Lost the Real Mark

It is like someone who sees conjured things, gives rise to a mind of greedy clinging, and neglects his own livelihood, and only when the conjuration vanishes does regret arise; the five aggregates of clinging are also like this: the conditions of deeds in former lives conjure up the five aggregates of this present life, and people then enjoy the five desires and give rise to greed and anger, and only when impermanence destroys them does regret arise in their minds: ‘How could I have clung greedily to these conjured five aggregates, and lost the real mark of all dharmas?’

The Buddha Asks and Subhūti Answers ‘Illusion and Form Are Not Different’; If Not Different, Form Is Emptiness and Enters Non-arising and Non-ceasing—Then How Does One Practise Prajñā and Become a Buddha?

When the Buddha asks this, Subhūti, for the sake of the gateway of delight in explaining, answers: ‘Illusion and form are not different.’

If they are not different, then this form-dharma is emptiness and enters into the dharma of non-arising and non-ceasing; and if a dharma neither arises nor ceases, how can one practise prajñāpāramitā and become a Buddha?

Subhūti Further Doubts Why the Bodhisattva Must Practise the Path in All Kinds of Ways; the Buddha Answers His Thought: The Five Aggregates Are Only Provisionally Named the Bodhisattva, and within the Provisional Name There Is No Deed and No Condition of Deeds, Because of Ultimate Emptiness

Subhūti again had this thought: ‘If that is so, why then must the bodhisattva practise the path in all kinds of ways, seeking anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’

The Buddha, knowing his thought, answered: ‘The five aggregates are false; only because of a provisional name are they called a bodhisattva. Within this provisional name there is no deed and no condition of deeds, no mind and no mental-factor dharmas, without stain and without purity, because of ultimate emptiness.’

The Buddha States the General Meaning: The Bodhisattva Should Practise Prajñā as an Illusory Person Does; the Five Aggregates Are the Illusory Person, Coming Forth from Deeds and from Illusory Deeds, and Because Their Nature Is Without Anything They Cannot Become a Buddha; Dream, Conjuration, Shadow, and Echo Are Likewise

The Buddha further said: ‘The bodhisattva should practise prajñāpāramitā as an illusory person does; these five aggregates are the illusory person, with no difference, all coming forth from the conditions of deeds in former lives, from illusory deeds. These five aggregates also cannot accomplish becoming a Buddha. For what reason? Because their nature is without anything.’ The rest—like a dream, like a conjuration, like a shadow, like an echo, and so on—are all likewise.

Question and Answer Five: Why Is It Said, ‘Consciousness Is the Six Faculties, and the Six Faculties Are the Five Aggregates’?—The Treatise-Author Explains by the Third Member of the Twelve Causes and Conditions That the Six Faculties Are Not Apart from the Five Aggregates

Question: Why is it said, ‘Consciousness is the six faculties, and the six faculties are the five aggregates’?

Answer: This consciousness is the third member among the twelve causes and conditions; within it there is also form, and there are also mental-factor dharmas, but only because they are not yet mature does it receive the name ‘consciousness’; from consciousness arise the six sense-fields, and in both of these stages the five aggregates are all present. When form is accomplished it is called the five faculties, and when name is accomplished it is called the mind-faculty; the six faculties are not apart from the five aggregates, and precisely because of this it is said, ‘Consciousness is the six faculties.’

Question and Answer Six: The Five Aggregates Are Present Everywhere in the Twelve Causes and Conditions; Why Is It Said Only That the Six Faculties Have the Five Aggregates?—The Treatise-Author Answers: Consciousness Is the Root of the Present Body, and the Six Faculties Can Produce Offence and Merit, So They Alone Are Spoken Of

Question: If that is so, the five aggregates are present everywhere among the twelve causes and conditions; why is it said only that the six faculties have the five aggregates?

Answer: This consciousness is the root of the present body, and beings are much in error about the dharmas present before them; name-and-form is not yet mature and does not yet have any function, so it is not spoken of; the six faculties can receive pain and pleasure and can give rise to offence and merit, so they are spoken of. As for the remaining eleven members of the causes and conditions, they too are said in this way to have the five aggregates.

The Treatise-Author Again Clarifies ‘Consciousness Is the Six Faculties, the Six Faculties Are the Five Aggregates’ by Three Meanings: to Refute the View, Five Hundred Years Later, of Consciousness Apart from Form and Form Apart from Consciousness; the Successive Continuity from Former Lives; and, Finally, the Return to Unfindability in Inner Emptiness

Furthermore, the Buddha knew that five hundred years later, those who study the Dharma would discriminate the marks of all dharmas as each different from the others, speaking of consciousness apart from form-dharmas and speaking of form apart from consciousness-dharmas; the Buddha, wishing to refute these wrong views and to bring people to enter ultimate emptiness, therefore says ‘consciousness is the six faculties’ even though the five faculties are not within consciousness; and says ‘the six faculties are the five aggregates’ even though the five aggregates are not complete within the six faculties.

Furthermore, in former lives the mind simply dwelt upon the six faculties and engaged in all kinds of recollection, imagining, and discrimination, and thereby produced the body of the six faculties and the five aggregates of this present life; and again, from the body of this present life all kinds of fetters arise, producing the six faculties and the five aggregates of later lives; and so it continues in succession. Precisely because of this it is said, ‘Consciousness is the six faculties, and the six faculties are the five aggregates.’

And this dharma is unfindable within inner emptiness, and so on up to unfindable within the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas.

What follows is the sūtra text.

Subhūti Asks: Will a Bodhisattva Who Has Newly Aroused the Mahāyāna Intent Be Startled and Frightened on Hearing Prajñā Taught?—The Buddha Answers: If He Has No Skilful Means and No Good Friend, He Will Be Startled, Frightened, and Afraid

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! Will a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the Mahāyāna mind, on hearing someone teach this prajñāpāramitā, be startled, be frightened, be afraid?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘If a bodhisattva who has newly aroused the Mahāyāna mind has no skilful means with regard to prajñāpāramitā, and moreover does not find a good friend, this bodhisattva may be startled, may be frightened, may be afraid.’

Subhūti Asks What Skilful Means Is; the Buddha Answers with the Many Gates of Contemplation That Make Up Skilful Means: Contemplating the Impermanence, Suffering, Non-self, Emptiness, Signlessness, Non-action, Quiescence, and Separation of Form and So On Up to Consciousness, All as Unfindable

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! What is skilful means, such that a bodhisattva who practises this skilful means is not startled, not afraid, not frightened?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘There is the bodhisattva-mahāsattva who, practising prajñāpāramitā, with a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, contemplates the mark of impermanence of form, and this contemplation too is unfindable; he contemplates the mark of impermanence of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and this too is unfindable. Subhūti! This is called the skilful means within the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's practice of prajñāpāramitā.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, contemplates the mark of suffering of form, and this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise; with a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, he contemplates the mark of non-self of form, and this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, with a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, contemplates the mark of emptiness of form, and this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise; he contemplates the mark of signlessness of form, and this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise; he contemplates the mark of non-action of form, and this too is unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise; he contemplates the mark of quiescence of form, and this too is unfindable, and so on up to consciousness, likewise; he contemplates the mark of separation of form, and this too is unfindable, and so on up to consciousness, likewise. This is called the skilful means within the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's practice of prajñāpāramitā.’

The Buddha Matches the Eight-Mark Contemplation to the Six Perfections: Teaching the Dharma as Unfindable Is Giving; Not Contemplating with the Mind of the Two Vehicles Is Morality; Patient Acceptance and Delight in All Dharmas Is Patience; Neither Abandoning nor Resting Is Vigour; Not Giving Rise to the Two Vehicles or to Unwholesome Minds Is Meditation

The Buddha went on: ‘Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā contemplates the mark of impermanence of form, and this too is unfindable; he contemplates the mark of suffering, the mark of non-self, the mark of emptiness, the mark of signlessness, the mark of non-action, the mark of quiescence, and the mark of separation of form, and these too are all unfindable. Feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. At this time the bodhisattva has this thought, “I shall proclaim to all beings this dharma of impermanence, and this too is unfindable; I shall proclaim to all beings the mark of suffering, the mark of non-self, the mark of emptiness, the mark of signlessness, the mark of non-action, the mark of quiescence, and the mark of separation, and this too is unfindable.” This is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's perfection of giving.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva does not, with the mind of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, contemplate the impermanence of form, and this too is unfindable; does not, with the mind of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, contemplate the impermanence of consciousness, and this too is unfindable; does not, with the mind of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, contemplate the suffering, non-self, emptiness, signlessness, non-action, quiescence, and separation of form, and these too are all unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. This is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's perfection of morality.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā, with regard to the mark of impermanence of these dharmas, and so on up to the mark of separation, is able to bear them patiently and to delight in them; this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's perfection of patience.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā, with a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, contemplates the mark of impermanence of form as also unfindable, and so on up to the mark of separation as also unfindable; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. With a mind conjoined with sarvajñā, he neither abandons nor rests; this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's perfection of vigour.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā does not give rise to the intention of a śrāvaka or a pratyekabuddha, nor to any other unwholesome mind; this is called the bodhisattva-mahāsattva's perfection of meditation.

Finally, the Skilful Means of Original Emptiness: It Is Not That Form Is Made Empty—Form Is Emptiness and Emptiness Is Form, and So On Up to the eighteen unshared dharmas, All Likewise; Therefore He Is Not Startled, Not Afraid, Not Frightened

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā reflects in this way: ‘It is not that form is made empty and only then called the emptiness of form; form itself is emptiness, and emptiness is form; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are likewise. It is not that the eye is made empty and only then called the emptiness of the eye; the eye is emptiness, and emptiness is the eye; and so on up to the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact: it is not that feeling is made empty and only then called the emptiness of feeling; feeling is emptiness, and emptiness is feeling. It is not that the four foundations of mindfulness are made empty and only then called the emptiness of the four foundations of mindfulness; the four foundations of mindfulness are emptiness, and emptiness is the four foundations of mindfulness; and so on up to: it is not that the eighteen unshared dharmas are made empty and only then called the emptiness of the eighteen unshared dharmas; the eighteen unshared dharmas are emptiness, and emptiness is the eighteen unshared dharmas.’ In just this way, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā is not startled, not afraid, not frightened.

Subhūti Asks What Protection by a Good Friend Is; the Buddha Answers: One Who Teaches That All Dharmas Are Impermanent, Suffering, Non-self, Empty, Signless, Without Action, Quiescent, and Separated, All as Unfindable, and Who Holds the Wholesome Roots and Directs Them Only to Omniscience, Is a Good Friend

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! What is it for a bodhisattva-mahāsattva, because of the protection of a good friend, on hearing someone teach this prajñāpāramitā, not to be startled, not afraid, not frightened?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The good friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva teaches that form is impermanent and that this too is unfindable, and holds to this wholesome root, not heading toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, heading only toward omniscience; this is called the good friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. He teaches that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are impermanent and that this too is unfindable, holds to this wholesome root, not directing it toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, directing it only toward omniscience; this is a good friend. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has yet other good friends, who teach that form is suffering and that this too is unfindable, and teach that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are suffering and that this too is unfindable; who teach that form is non-self and that this too is unfindable, that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are non-self and that this too is unfindable; who teach that form is empty, signless, without action, quiescent, and separated, and that this too is unfindable, and teach that feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty, signless, without action, quiescent, and separated, and that this too is unfindable; and who hold to this wholesome root, not directing it toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, directing it only toward omniscience. Subhūti! This is called the good friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has yet other good friends, who teach that the eye is impermanent, and so on up to separated, and that this too is unfindable; and so on up to the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact, teaching that it is impermanent, and so on up to separated, and that this too is unfindable; holding to this wholesome root, not directing it toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, directing it only toward omniscience; this is a good friend. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has yet other good friends, who teach that cultivating the dharma of the four foundations of mindfulness, and so on up to separation, is also unfindable; holding to this wholesome root, not directing it toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, directing it only toward omniscience. Subhūti! This is a good friend. And so on up to teaching that cultivating the eighteen unshared dharmas and cultivating omniscience is also unfindable; holding to this wholesome root, not directing it toward the path of the śrāvaka or the pratyekabuddha, directing it only toward omniscience; this is called the good friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.’

What follows is the treatise's commentary.

Question and Answer One: Why Does Subhūti Give Rise to This Doubt?—The Treatise-Author Answers: Because He Heard That No Bodhisattva Practises Prajñā, and That Even the Empty Five Aggregates Cannot Practise It, He Doubted Who Could Practise It

Question: Why does Subhūti give rise to such a doubt and ask the Buddha, ‘Will a bodhisattva who has newly aroused intent be frightened on hearing this Dharma?’

Answer: Because he heard that there is no bodhisattva practising prajñāpāramitā, and that even the dharma of the five aggregates, merely emptied, cannot practise prajñāpāramitā, the doubt arose, ‘Who, in the end, can practise prajñāpāramitā?’, and therefore he asked the Buddha.

The Buddha Shows the Cause of Fear: Inner and Outer Causes and Conditions Are Incomplete—Within, No Right Recollection, Wisdom, or Compassionate Mind; Without, No Birth in the Middle Country, No Hearing of Prajñā, No Meeting with a Good Friend

The Buddha says: If a bodhisattva's inner and outer causes and conditions are incomplete, there will be fear. The inner causes and conditions mean having no right recollection, having no sharp wisdom, and having no deep compassion for beings—within, there are no such skilful means. The outer causes and conditions mean not being born in the land of the Middle Country, not getting to hear prajñāpāramitā, and not finding a good friend who can cut off doubts—without, there are no such causes and conditions. Precisely because the inner and outer causes and conditions cannot come together, one is startled, frightened, and afraid.

Question and Answer Two: Why Is It Said Only That Contemplating Dharmas with a Mind Conjoined with Sarvajñā Frees One from Fear?—The Treatise-Author Answers: Earlier the Mind Contemplating Emptiness Was Coarse and Gave Rise to Clinging; Now, as the Buddha Intends, Great Compassion Arises and There Is No Clinging (the Simile of the Physician Compounding Medicines)

Now Subhūti asks about this skilful means, and the Buddha answers: ‘With a mind conjoined with the omniscience of all kinds, one contemplates dharmas, and at the same time does not grasp dharmas.’

Question: Skilful means originally included contemplating form as impermanent and all kinds of other marks, and only so did it keep one from fear; why is it now said only, ‘With a mind conjoined with sarvajñā one contemplates dharmas, and therefore is not fearful and not frightened’?

Answer: Earlier the bodhisattva only contemplated the emptiness of dharmas, and because his mind was still coarse, clinging arose; now he contemplates with recollection, imagining, and discrimination, just as the Buddha intends—giving rise to great compassion among beings, not clinging to any dharma, unobstructed in wisdom, wishing only to ferry beings to liberation; he contemplates dharmas by way of impermanence, emptiness, and all the rest, and at the same time does not grasp these dharmas.

Having contemplated dharmas in this way, he has this thought: ‘I shall use this Dharma to ferry beings to liberation and make them leave the inverted views.’ Precisely because of this, the mind does not cling and does not see a single definitely real dharma; it is like a physician compounding many medicines, who gives hot medicine to a patient who suffers from cold, yet in a hot illness this same hot medicine becomes, on the contrary, no medicine at all.

Of the Two Kinds of Giving, the Giving of Dharma Is Greatest and Is Giving; the Other Five Perfections Are Distinguished according to Their Meaning; Original Emptiness, Not Manufactured Emptiness: Form Has from the Beginning Always Been Empty of Itself, and Therefore Emptiness Is Form

Of the two kinds of giving, the giving of wealth and the giving of Dharma, the giving of Dharma is greatest, and so it is called the perfection of giving.

The other five perfections—morality and so on up to prajñā—are likewise distinguished according to their meaning.

Furthermore, what is called the bodhisattva's skilful means is not using the eighteen emptinesses to make form empty. For what reason? It is not that a mark of emptiness forcibly makes form empty; form itself is emptiness; this form has from the beginning always been empty of itself, and precisely because the mark of form is empty, emptiness is form; and so on up to the dharmas of the Buddhas, all likewise.

The Key to the Good Friend Lies in ‘Dedication’: Teaching People to Dedicate This Wisdom to Anuttarā Samyaksaṃbodhi—This Is Where It Differs from the Contemplations Before

What is called a good friend is one who teaches people to dedicate this wisdom to anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi. The bodhisattva already knew the contemplations of impermanence, emptiness, and all the rest; now only ‘dedication’ is singled out and spoken of, as the point of difference.

What follows is the sūtra text.

Subhūti Asks: Why Is One Who Lacks Skilful Means and Follows a Evil Friend Startled, Frightened, and Afraid on Hearing Prajñā?—The Buddha Answers with the Marks of Lacking Skilful Means: Apart from the Mind of Omniscience, Cultivating, Attaining, and Fixing the Mind on Prajñā and the Six Perfections, and Having Something Fixed in Mind and Something Attained with Regard to the Emptiness of All Dharmas

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! How is it that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā, lacking skilful means and following a evil friend, is startled, frightened, and afraid on hearing someone teach this prajñāpāramitā?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, apart from the mind of omniscience, cultivates prajñāpāramitā, attains this prajñāpāramitā, fixes his mind on this prajñāpāramitā; with regard to the perfection of meditation, the perfection of vigour, the perfection of patience, the perfection of morality, and the perfection of giving, he likewise has something attained, has something fixed in mind.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva, apart from the mind of sarvajñā, contemplates the inner emptiness of form, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and contemplates the inner emptiness of feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; he contemplates the inner emptiness of the eye, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas, and so on up to contemplating the inner emptiness of the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact, and so on up to the emptiness of non-existent and existent dharmas; and upon these emptinesses of dharmas he still has something fixed in mind, something grasped as attained.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā, apart from the mind of sarvajñā, cultivates the four foundations of mindfulness, and also fixes his mind on them and grasps them as attained; and so on up to cultivating the eighteen unshared dharmas, and also fixing his mind on them and grasping them as attained. In just this way, Subhūti, the bodhisattva-mahāsattva practising prajñāpāramitā, because he lacks skilful means, is startled, frightened, and afraid on hearing someone teach this prajñāpāramitā.’

Subhūti Asks the Marks of a Evil Friend; the Buddha's First Answer: He Teaches People to Depart from the Six Perfections, and Does Not Expose the Matter of the Evil Māra Taking the Form of a Buddha to Teach Departure from the Six Perfections

Subhūti said to the Buddha: ‘World-Honored One! How is it that a bodhisattva-mahāsattva following a evil friend is startled, frightened, and afraid on hearing someone teach prajñāpāramitā?’

The Buddha told Subhūti: ‘The evil friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva teaches people to depart from prajñāpāramitā, to depart from the perfection of meditation, the perfection of vigour, the perfection of patience, the perfection of morality, and the perfection of giving. Subhūti! This is called the evil friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva. Subhūti! The bodhisattva-mahāsattva has yet other evil friends, who do not speak of the deeds of Māra, do not speak of Māra's offences, and are unwilling to say this: “The evil Māra conjures the form of a Buddha and comes to teach the bodhisattva to depart from the six perfections, saying to the bodhisattva, ‘Good man! Why must you cultivate prajñāpāramitā? Why must you cultivate the perfection of meditation, the perfection of vigour, the perfection of patience, the perfection of morality, and the perfection of giving?’”—such a person should be known as the evil friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.

The Various Marks of a Evil Friend (Continued): The Evil Māra Takes the Form of a Buddha to Teach the Sūtras of the Two Vehicles, to Say ‘You Are Not a True Bodhisattva’, and to Say ‘All Is Empty, So What Use Is Awakening?’; He Takes the Body of a Pratyekabuddha to Say There Are No Buddhas, Bodhisattvas, or Śrāvakas in the Ten Directions

Furthermore, Subhūti! That evil Māra again conjures the form of a Buddha, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and proclaims to him the sūtras of the śrāvaka vehicle—namely from the sūtra up to the upadeśa—teaching him to analyse and expound such sūtras; yet he never speaks to him of the deeds of Māra or Māra's offences—this should be known as the evil friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the form of a Buddha, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says this: ‘Good man! You do not have the real bodhisattva mind, nor are you at the stage of avaivartika, nor can you attain anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi.’ Yet such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences are not spoken of to him—this should be known as the bodhisattva's evil friend.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the form of a Buddha, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says to the bodhisattva: ‘Good man! Form is empty, without self and without what belongs to self; feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness are empty, without self and without what belongs to self; the eye is empty, without self and without what belongs to self; and so on up to the feeling produced by the conditions of mind-contact is empty, without self and without what belongs to self; the perfection of giving is empty, and so on up to prajñāpāramitā is empty; the four foundations of mindfulness are empty, and so on up to the eighteen unshared dharmas are empty; why must you seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’ Such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences he neither speaks of nor teaches—this should be known as the bodhisattva's evil friend.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the body of a pratyekabuddha, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says to the bodhisattva: ‘Good man! The ten directions are all empty; within them there are no Buddhas, no bodhisattvas, no śrāvakas.’ Such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences he neither speaks of nor teaches—this should be known as the evil friend of the bodhisattva-mahāsattva.

The Various Marks of a Evil Friend (Continued): Māra Takes the Form of a Preceptor or Teacher to Teach Departure from the Bodhisattva Path into the Two Vehicles; Takes the Form of Parents to Say That Seeking Awakening Means Suffering the Cutting Off of Hands and Feet for Immeasurable Kalpas; Takes the Form of a Bhikṣu to Teach the Dharma by Grasping Marks with Something to Be Attained—Once This Is Known, One Should Keep Far Away

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the body of a preceptor or an ācārya, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and teaches him to depart from the bodhisattva path, teaches him to depart from the omniscience of all kinds; teaches him to depart from the four foundations of mindfulness and so on up to the limbs of the noble eightfold path; teaches him to depart from the perfection of giving, and so on up to teaching him to depart from the eighteen unshared dharmas; teaches him to enter emptiness, signlessness, and non-action; and says: ‘Good man! Cultivate these dharmas and fix your mind on them, and it is enough to attain the realised fruit of a śrāvaka; why must you seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’ Such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences he neither speaks of nor teaches—this should be known as the bodhisattva's evil friend.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the form of parents, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says to the bodhisattva: ‘Child! Strive diligently for the realisation of the fruit of srota-āpanna, and so on up to striving diligently for the realisation of the fruit of arhat; why must you seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi? To seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi, you must undergo birth and death for immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas, have your hands cut off and your feet cut off, and suffer all kinds of pain!’ Such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences he neither speaks of nor teaches—this should be known as the bodhisattva's evil friend.

Furthermore, Subhūti! The evil Māra conjures the form of a bhikṣu, comes to where the bodhisattva is, and says to the bodhisattva: ‘The eye is the impermanence of an obtainable dharma, and so on up to: the mind is the impermanence of an obtainable dharma; the eye is suffering, the eye is non-self, the eye is empty, signless, without action, quiescent, and separated—all obtainable dharmas; and so on up to the mind, likewise.’ He teaches the four foundations of mindfulness by way of dharmas that are obtainable; and so on up to teaching the Buddha's eighteen unshared dharmas by way of dharmas that are obtainable. Subhūti! Such deeds of Māra and Māra's offences he neither teaches nor speaks of—this should be known as the bodhisattva's evil friend. Once this is known, one should keep far away from him!

What follows is the treatise's commentary.

The Treatise-Author Explains Lacking Skilful Means at Length: Apart from the Mind Conjoined with the Omniscience of All Kinds, One Grasps a Fixed Mark of Prajñā; Lacking Skilful Means Oneself, One Also Meets the Teaching of a Evil Friend

The treatise-author explains: Earlier, lacking skilful means was spoken of briefly; now lacking skilful means is to be spoken of at length—that is, practising prajñāpāramitā apart from the mind conjoined with the omniscience of all kinds, grasping at a definite mark of this prajñāpāramitā; and likewise with regard to the five perfections and so on up to the dharmas of the Buddhas. This is lacking skilful means in oneself; and in addition one also receives the teaching of a evil friend.

The Evil Friend Greatly Destroys Benefit and Ruins People in All Kinds of Ways: Some Do Not Believe in Offence and Merit, Some Cling to Ultimate Emptiness and Say There Is Nothing to Practise, Some Praise the Small Vehicle and Make One Abandon Beings

Furthermore, the evil friend greatly destroys benefit and ruins people in all kinds of ways; because this is a cause and condition of great evil, the Buddha further uses all kinds of causes and conditions to speak of the marks of the evil friend. What is called a evil friend teaches people to depart from the six perfections. Some, because they do not believe in the recompense of offence and merit, teach people to depart from them; some, because they cling to prajñāpāramitā, say: ‘All dharmas are ultimately empty; what is there for you still to practise?’ Some praise the Small Vehicle, saying: ‘It is enough that you yourself escape the suffering of old age, sickness, and death; what have the affairs of beings to do with you?’ Teaching people to depart through all kinds of causes and conditions such as these—this is called a evil friend.

The Evil Friend Does Not Teach His Disciples to Recognise That ‘Māra Is the Buddha's Bandit’: Māra Takes the Body of a Buddha, the Body of a Pratyekabuddha, and All Kinds of Forms—Preceptor, Parents, Arhat—to Ruin the Bodhisattva's Practice, Making Him Enter the Two Vehicles and Teach the Dharma by Grasping Marks

Furthermore, the evil friend does not teach his disciples to recognise and know that ‘Māra is the Buddha's bandit’. Māra is the lord of the desire realm, has great power, and constantly hates those who practise the path. Only because the Buddha's majestic power is great is Māra helpless against him, but he can ruin minor bodhisattvas. Māra goes so far as to conjure the form of a Buddha to ruin the bodhisattva's practice of the six perfections. Sometimes he praises, opens up, and discourses upon the sūtra teachings that accord with what śrāvakas should learn. Sometimes he conjures the body of a Buddha and says to him: ‘You are not fit to become a Buddha.’ Sometimes he says: ‘All dharmas such as the eye are empty; why must you seek this anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’ Sometimes he conjures the body of a pratyekabuddha; sometimes he says: ‘In the worlds of the ten directions the people of the three vehicles are all empty; for one who seeks the Buddha path there is only an empty name—how can you still wish to become a Buddha?’ Sometimes he teaches people to depart from the bodhisattva's thirty-seven limbs of the path, making them enter the śrāvaka's three gates of liberation, saying: ‘If you enter these three gates and realise the limit of reality, you can put an end to all suffering; you strive diligently in order to attain the four fruits—why must you seek anuttarā samyaksaṃbodhi?’ Sometimes he conjures himself into a preceptor, an ācārya, or parents, and comes to teach people to depart from the Buddha path, saying: ‘You would have to undergo the cutting off of hands, feet, ears, nose, and so on, to give to those who beg; if you do not give, you ruin the mind that seeks buddhahood; if you do give, you must undergo this hardship.’ Sometimes he conjures the dress of an arhat bhikṣu and comes to say to him: ‘The eye is of a definite mark of impermanence, of the marks of suffering, emptiness, and non-self, of non-action, quiescence, and separation; and so on up to the dharmas of the Buddhas, likewise.’ All of this is taught by way of something to be attained, grasping marks, and recollection and discrimination. Deeds of Māra of all kinds such as these, immeasurable, the evil friend does not teach people to recognise and know—this is a evil friend.

Explaining ‘Keep Far Away’ and the Closing Line of the Whole Chapter: The Evil Friend Is Like a Soft-Spoken Bandit; a Bandit Harms Only One Life and Seizes Wealth, but the Evil Friend Harms People Life after Life and Seizes the Wisdom-Life and the Immeasurable Treasures of the Buddha-Dharma, So One Should Swiftly Keep Far Away in Body and Mind

What is called ‘keeping far away’ is because he brings no benefit. It is like a bandit who speaks soft words, gradually drawing close; once close, he harms people—and the evil friend is worse than this bandit! For what reason? The bandit can harm only one body in this present life, but the evil friend harms people life after life; the bandit can only harm life and seize wealth, but the evil friend damages the life-faculty of wisdom-mindfulness and seizes the immeasurable treasures of the Buddha-dharma. Once this is known, one should swiftly keep far away from him, both in body and in mind.