唯識三十頌 白話全本

The verse

由假說我法，有種種相轉。 彼依識所變，此能變唯三：

Because we speak, by convention, of a self and of things, the many appearances arise and turn. These rest on what consciousness transforms — and the transformers are just three.

In plain words

The moment we open our mouths, two kinds of speech come out.

One is talk of a "self": I'm happy, I'm tired, my house, my child, I get to decide. The other is talk of "things" one by one — what the sūtras call dharmas: this is a table, that is a mountain, this is a thought, that is a rule. Ordinary people talk this way, and the scriptures speak this way too. Nothing wrong with that.

Vasubandhu, in his very first verse, gently points out one thing: this "self" and these "things" are only spoken of by way of a borrowed name — that is the word 假 ("convention, designation") in "由假說我法." He does not mean they are fakes, that there is simply nothing there. He means there is no independent, solid, self-standing "self" or "thing" actually sitting out there the way we assume. We take it to be there; in fact it is only set up under a name.

Someone will ask: if they are not real, then why do these "selves" and "things" have so many shapes, and keep shifting? — that is "有種種相轉": countless appearances (相), endlessly turning out new forms as conditions shift (轉).

The verse answers: all these shapes are what "consciousness" transforms into — that is "彼依識所變." It is our own mind-consciousness that conjures up an image of "as-if there's a self, as-if there's an outer world"; then we turn around, grab that image, and take it for a real "self" and real "outer things."

The last line asks: this consciousness that does the transforming — how many kinds are there? Here the verse gives only the number: just three (此能變唯三). Their names begin in the next verse.

Everything the whole Thirty Verses sets out to say starts from this line: what we take to be "self" and "world" rests on what consciousness transforms. The remaining twenty-nine verses begin by naming the three transformers, then unfold the point layer by layer.

The verse

謂異熟、思量，及了別境識。 初阿賴耶識，異熟一切種，

namely, the ripening, the deliberating, and the object-discerning consciousness. The first, the storehouse consciousness, is the ripening and the all-seeds [consciousness] —

In plain words

The previous verse said: the consciousness that transforms into "self" and "world" comes in just three kinds. This verse first names the three, one by one, then takes up the first on its own.

The three names are: the ripening, the deliberating, and the object-discerning.

• The ripening (異熟) is the deepest, storehouse-like consciousness (we'll soon learn it is the ālaya). It holds the seeds left by all our past deeds and, driven by karma, slowly "ripens" their fruits — hence "ripening."
• The deliberating (思量) is the consciousness that hides in the depths and never for a moment stops taking the storehouse to be "I" (the manas, detailed only at verse 5).
• The object-discerning (了別境) is the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and thinking mind — the six consciousnesses that sort out the world.

Having named them, the verse turns to the first and most fundamental — the storehouse consciousness (阿賴耶識). It is given three identities at once:

The first identity is "ālaya," which simply means "store" (a storehouse). It can store (the storer), is stored (the stored), and is gripped tight as "I" (the appropriated-store). Everything defiled is bound up with it as mutual condition, and beings have, beginninglessly, taken it for "the self within my own mind."

The second identity is "ripening" (異熟). It is the very subject of fruition that our good and bad deeds draw forth and "ripen." That one life can connect to the next, unbroken, rests on it — hence "the ripened fruit that draws forth the realms, destinies, and births."

The third identity is "all-seeds" (一切種). A "seed" is a seed. Every deed we have done, every thought we have stirred, leaves a "seed" within it (a latent capacity that will one day bear fruit). It holds all these countless seeds intact and lets none be lost — hence "all-seeds."

So this verse, in effect, sets the order of appearance for the whole book: there are three transforming consciousnesses, and the first to appear, the deepest and most fundamental, is this storehouse consciousness — called at once "store," "ripening," and "all-seeds." How it works and how it continues, the next verses spell out.

The verse

不可知執受，處了常與觸、 作意、受、想、思，相應唯捨受。

Its appropriation, its world, and its discerning are unknowable; it is always conjoined with contact, attention, feeling, perception, and volition; and of feelings it is associated with equanimity alone.

In plain words

The last verse set up the storehouse consciousness; this one says how it operates — three things: what it takes as object, which mental functions always accompany it, and what kind of feeling it carries.

First: its "discerning" and its "objects" are both too subtle for you to notice (unknowable).

"Discerning" (了) is how this consciousness works — it too discriminates and cognizes, only so subtly that you can never catch it in the act.

What it cognizes is of two kinds. One is called "appropriation" (執受): the two things it grips fast — the "seeds" within us that will one day bear fruit, and this living, sentient physical body (the embodied organism); it is precisely because it grips them that our body is "alive and feeling." The other is called "the world" (處): the whole container-world (mountains, rivers, the earth) we inhabit.

But its discerning, the body it appropriates, and the world it cognizes are all "unknowable" — its operation is too subtle to know; its inner object too subtle; the outer world too vast to measure. So all your life you neither feel it working nor know that it is the one holding your body together and bearing up the whole world for you.

Second: the five most basic mental functions that always accompany it (the five omnipresent).

From beginningless time until it turns pure, in every state, this consciousness is constantly accompanied by the five most universal mental factors —

• Contact (觸): the function, when sense-faculty, object, and consciousness meet, that joins the mind to its object;
• Attention (作意): the function that rouses the mind and steers it toward the object;
• Feeling (受): the function that "receives" the object as agreeable, disagreeable, or neither;
• Perception (想): the function that takes an image of the object and assigns it a name;
• Volition (思): the function that propels the mind into action.

These five are "omnipresent" — whenever any consciousness arises, they come along; so the storehouse consciousness too is necessarily associated with them.

Third: the only feeling it carries is "equanimity."

Of the five feelings (pain, pleasure, sorrow, joy, equanimity), the storehouse consciousness is associated with equanimity alone — that flat, neither-painful-nor-pleasant reception. Why? Because "此識行相極不明了，不能分別違、順境相" — its operation is so unclear that it cannot tell agreeable from disagreeable; it merely flows on, subtle, uniform, unbroken. So it is never glad or pained — always that quiet equanimity.

The verse

是無覆無記，觸等亦如是， 恒轉如瀑流，阿羅漢位捨。

It is unobstructed-neutral; contact and the rest are likewise; it turns on, ever, like a torrent; and at the stage of the arhat it is relinquished.

In plain words

This verse finishes the last four points about the storehouse consciousness, completing the account of the first transformer.

First: it is "unobstructed-neutral" — morally neutral, undefiled.

Things fall into four kinds: good, bad, obstructed-neutral, and unobstructed-neutral. Which is the storehouse consciousness? Only "unobstructed-neutral." "Neutral" means neither good nor bad; "unobstructed" means not covered by defiled afflictions, not blocking the path. It is itself neither good nor bad — and this matters, because it must serve as the support for both the defiled and the pure side: if it had a moral leaning of its own, it could neither impartially store both good and bad seeds nor be perfumed.

Second: "contact and the rest are likewise" — the five factors that accompany it are neutral too.

The last verse said the storehouse consciousness is constantly accompanied by contact, attention, feeling, perception, and volition. These five share its nature — likewise unobstructed-neutral, likewise karmically ripened, likewise cognizing that unknowable object. Associated factors must match the nature of the consciousness they accompany.

Third: "it turns on, ever, like a torrent" — it is like a waterfall.

This is the most famous line of the verse. How to describe this consciousness's mode of being? Two words: "ever" (恒) and "turning" (轉).

"Ever" means it is, from beginningless time, of one kind, continuous, never interrupted — so it is not cut off (not annihilated). "Turning" means it arises and ceases moment by moment, the prior perishing as the next arises, always changing — so it is not permanent (not a fixed, abiding self). Together: neither cut off nor permanent, just like a torrent.

From afar a waterfall looks like "one" thing hanging there, unbroken over long time; up close, not a single drop is still, none is the same drop. Just so: it flows on without break (not cut off) and is forever being replaced (not permanent). The CWL draws the waterfall three ways — though wind beats up its waves, the current does not break (though it meets conditions and stirs up the eye-consciousness and the rest, it itself continues unbroken); it carries fish and grass up and down with its flow (it carries seeds and habit-energies along with it). In a word: it is not a thing, but a flow — beginningless, endless, neither cut off nor permanent.

Fourth: "at the stage of the arhat it is relinquished" — reaching arhatship, the name "storehouse" is given up.

When does it come to term? On reaching the stage of the arhat (the fruit of no-more-learning, across the three vehicles), the afflictions are utterly exhausted and one no longer grips this consciousness as "I" — and then the name "storehouse" (ālaya) is "relinquished."

But note carefully: what is relinquished is the name, not the substance of the consciousness. The CWL says it plainly: "非捨一切第八識體" — it does not abolish the eighth consciousness entirely. As an ancient-Chinese thematic parallel, the Zhuanshilun says this consciousness's "flow" is still not extinguished even at the fruit of arhatship. What is given up is its identity as the "storehouse" gripped as a self; the flow goes on.

The verse

次第二能變，是識名末那， 依彼轉緣彼，思量為性相。

Next, the second transformer: this consciousness is named manas; it turns in dependence on that and takes that as object; deliberation is its nature and mode.

In plain words

Having finished the first transforming consciousness (the ālaya), we come to the second — its name is "manas."

"Manas" is Sanskrit; it means "mind" or "deliberation." Note: it is not the same as what we usually call the "sixth consciousness" (the sixth is called "mind-consciousness," the consciousness that arises dependent on the mind; this seventh one is simply called "the mind/manas" itself).

What marks this manas? The verse points it out in two lines.

The first line, "it turns in dependence on that and takes that as object" — it arises in dependence on the ālaya, and then fixes its gaze right back on the ālaya.

"That" (彼) refers to the ālaya consciousness discussed above. "Turns in dependence on that" means: manas arises, turns, only by relying on the ālaya. "Takes that as object" means: once arisen, what it cognizes is also the ālaya — without pause it stares at the ālaya and mistakes it for an "I."

So manas is peculiar: it depends on the ālaya and it also cognizes the ālaya; it both arises from it and turns back to grasp it as self.

The second line, "deliberation is its nature and mode" — its essence and its operation are both "deliberation."

"Nature" is what it essentially is; "mode" is how it operates. For manas, both are "deliberation" — its essence is deliberation, its way of working is deliberation. That is why it is called "manas (mind, deliberation)."

But this "deliberation" is special: it is "constant and examining" (恒審) — both "constant" (never for a moment interrupted) and "examining" (deeply, finely weighing). A comparison makes it clear: the sixth consciousness deliberates but is interrupted (it stops in sleep or a faint) — examining but not constant; the eighth ālaya never stops yet is too subtle to examine — constant but not examining; the first five are neither. Only manas is both constant and examining — from beginningless time, every instant, silently, it deeply weighs one thing: "there is an I."

This is exactly its trouble, and the subject of the next verse: the "I" it constantly examines is the very root of all affliction.

The verse

四煩惱常俱，謂我癡、我見、 并我慢、我愛，及餘觸等俱。

It is ever conjoined with four afflictions — namely self-delusion, self-view, together with self-conceit and self-love — and is conjoined as well with the rest, contact and so on.

In plain words

The last verse said manas, without pause, affirms "I." This verse explains: the "I" it affirms is in fact clenched into one knot by four afflictions. These four have accompanied manas from beginningless time ("ever conjoined" means constantly together).

Which four?

• "Self-delusion" (我癡): this is "ignorance," confusion. About this matter of "self" it sees nothing clearly; muddled, it does not grasp the truth that "there is in fact no real self." Everything begins from this confusion.
• "Self-view" (我見): this is "self-grasping." Upon a body-and-mind that has no "self," it insists there is an "I."
• "Self-conceit" (我慢): this is "haughtiness." Relying on the "I" it has posited, it lifts itself up, asserts itself, feels "I am something."
• "Self-love" (我愛): this is "self-greed." Toward the "I" it has posited, it clings deeply, cannot let go.

The four have a sequence to them: first confusion (self-delusion), then positing an I (self-view), then self-elevation (self-conceit) and clinging (self-love).

The CWL says these four "此四常起，擾濁內心，令外轉識恒成雜染" — without pause they churn within, muddying the mind, and along with them the outer six consciousnesses (seeing, hearing, thinking…) become defiled too. "有情由此生死輪迴，不能出離" — beings keep spinning in birth-and-death, unable to escape, precisely because of these four afflictions of manas. That is why they are called "afflictions."

Finally, "and is conjoined as well with the rest, contact and so on" — manas's associated factors are not only these four afflictions; it is also conjoined with others ("the rest"). For instance the five omnipresent factors covered earlier (contact, attention, feeling, perception, volition) — manas accompanies them all. (The masters count manas's factors differently; Dharmapāla's settled view is eighteen; the verse first names the crucial four afflictions and gathers the others under "and the rest, contact and so on.")

The verse

有覆無記攝，隨所生所繫， 阿羅漢滅定，出世道無有。

It is comprised under the obstructed-neutral; it is bound according to where one is born; at arhatship, in the cessation attainment, and on the supramundane path, it is not present.

In plain words

This verse finishes the last three points about manas, completing the account of the second transformer.

First: it is "obstructed-neutral."

The previous ālaya was "unobstructed-neutral" (neutral, undefiled); manas, however, is "obstructed-neutral" — likewise "neutral" (counts as neither good nor bad), but with "obstructed" added in front. Why obstructed? Because it always travels with those four afflictions (self-delusion, self-view, self-conceit, self-love), which are defiled and "obstruct the noble path, veil one's own mind" — they cover your mind and block your path of practice. So although it does no good or bad deeds (neutral), it is defiled (obstructed). In a word: it is "defiled, but neutral."

Second: "bound according to where one is born" — wherever it is born, there it is bound.

"Bound" means belonging-to, tied-to. Manas does not float outside the three realms; whichever realm this life of yours is born into (desire, form, formless), your manas is "bound" to that realm. Because it always "spontaneously and constantly cognizes the storehouse of its own ground, grasping it as the inner self," it is tied to that ground.

Third: "at arhatship, in the cessation attainment, and on the supramundane path, it is not present" — when is this defiled manas no longer there?

This defiled consciousness has been present from beginningless time; so when is it severed? The line gives three stages, but distinguish "permanently severed" from "temporarily suppressed":

• At "arhatship": this is permanent severance. Reaching the no-more-learning fruit (arhat) of the three vehicles, this defiled manas — seeds and active form together — is forever cut off; thereafter it is gone.
• In the "cessation attainment" and on the "supramundane path": this is temporary suppression. A practitioner still in training (not yet at no-more-learning), entering the cessation attainment, or while the supramundane uncontaminated wisdom is present, has this defiled manas pressed down so it does not become active; but the seeds remain, and once one exits or the wisdom recedes, it arises again.

Why only these stages can hold it down: because it is so constant and subtle that "no contaminated path can suppress it"; only the "noble path of the three vehicles" (the uncontaminated wisdom that truly realizes no-self) can counter it, suppress it, and finally sever it.

So this verse quietly points the way: to counter the deepest, most stubborn self-grasping, what works is not suppression, but the genuine arising of the wisdom of no-self.

The verse

次第三能變，差別有六種， 了境為性相，善不善俱非。

Next, the third transformer: its kinds are six; discerning objects is its nature and mode; it is good, bad, or neither.

In plain words

Having finished the first transformer (the ālaya) and the second (manas), we come to the third — the one we know best and use most.

First: "its kinds are six" — it splits into six at once.

The first two transformers were each a single consciousness; the third is not one but six: eye-consciousness, ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, and mind-consciousness. Why six? Because each rests on one faculty and faces one class of object — the eye on the eye-faculty toward form, the ear on the ear-faculty toward sound… up to the mind toward dharmas. As faculty and object differ, they divide into six. (The CWL says they are "named after the faculty," each with five senses; or they can be "named after the object," called form-consciousness up to dharma-consciousness.)

Second: "discerning objects is its nature and mode" — their shared work is to sort out objects.

For these six, essence (nature) and operation (mode) are one and the same: "discerning objects" — cognizing, sorting out the object before them. Eye-consciousness discerns color, ear-consciousness sound… mind-consciousness all dharmas. That is why they are all named "consciousness" (consciousness = discerning).

Third: "it is good, bad, or neither" — they run through all three moral natures.

This line marks the greatest difference between the first six and the two deep consciousnesses. The eighth, the ālaya, is "unobstructed-neutral" (ever neutral); the seventh, manas, is "obstructed-neutral" (ever defiled but neutral) — both are of one nature, unchanging. But the first six run through all three natures: they can be good (a kind heart, a good deed), bad (an evil thought, an evil deed), or "neither" (morally neutral).

This is crucial: what actually does good and bad deeds, and draws the pleasure and pain of lives to come, is mainly these first six consciousnesses that run through the three natures (especially the sixth, mind-consciousness). The two deep consciousnesses only store and grasp-the-self; they do not directly make good or bad karma. Making karma — and cultivating good and severing evil — all play out on these six discerning consciousnesses. So several later verses spell out which mental factors accompany these six, and how each arises.

The verse

此心所遍行、別境、善、煩惱、 隨煩惱、不定，皆三受相應。

Their mental factors are the omnipresent, the object-specific, the wholesome, the afflictions, the derivative afflictions, and the indeterminate; and all are associated with the three feelings.

In plain words

The last verse set up the six "discerning" consciousnesses. But a consciousness never arises bare — it always brings a string of "mental factors" (the mental activities that move along with the mind: contact, feeling, perception, greed, hatred, and so on). This verse gives a master outline of the factors these six consciousnesses carry: how many classes, how many in all, what feelings they bring. The next several verses (10–14) then name them class by class.

First: the factors fall into "six classes."

The six classes are —

• The "omnipresent": present whenever any mind arises (the most universal — contact, attention, feeling, perception, volition);
• The "object-specific": arising only toward particular objects (aspiration, resolve, mindfulness, concentration, discernment);
• The "wholesome": present only in a wholesome mind (faith, conscience, shame…);
• The "afflictions": the root afflictions (greed, hatred, delusion…);
• The "derivative afflictions": those that flow off from the root afflictions (rage, enmity, envy, stinginess…);
• The "indeterminate": neither fixed as good nor bad, depending on circumstance (regret, torpor, applied and sustained thought).

The CWL also explains why each class is so grouped: the omnipresent are "obtainable in every mind," the object-specific "arise toward particular objects," the wholesome "arise only in a wholesome mind," the afflictions are "the root afflictions," the derivative afflictions are "an outflow of the afflictions," the indeterminate are "fixed as neither good nor defiled."

Second: they total "fifty-one."

Summing the six classes: five omnipresent, five object-specific, eleven wholesome, six afflictions, twenty derivative afflictions, four indeterminate — "these six classes total fifty-one." These fifty-one are the basis for the "fifty-one mental factors" in the later Hundred Dharmas treatise. (This is why verse 9 is a structural pivot of the whole text: it renders the contents of the mind as a countable list.)

Third: these six consciousnesses are "all associated with the three feelings" — they can carry all three feelings.

Which three? Pleasant feeling (receiving an agreeable object, body and mind at ease), painful feeling (receiving a disagreeable object, body and mind pressed), and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling (receiving a neutral object). Why can the six carry all three? Because they are "easily shifting, not fixed" — their nature is not constant, it changes. This contrasts exactly with the foregoing: the eighth and seventh, the two deep consciousnesses, are "equanimity alone" (forever that one flat tone), whereas these six discerning consciousnesses are clearly pleasured and pained. (The three feelings can each be split in two further: on the five senses they are called "bodily feeling," on the mind-consciousness "mental feeling.")

The verse

初遍行觸等，次別境謂欲、 勝解、念、定、慧，所緣事不同。

First, the omnipresent — contact and the rest; next, the object-specific — aspiration, resolve, mindfulness, concentration, discernment; their objects differ.

In plain words

The last verse sorted the mental factors into six classes and set the outline. From here, the verses name them class by class. This one covers the first two classes: omnipresent, object-specific.

The first class, "omnipresent" — contact and the rest, five of them.

The verse passes over them in a single phrase, "first, the omnipresent — contact and the rest," because they were already detailed earlier (with the eighth consciousness): contact, attention, feeling, perception, volition. "Omnipresent" means "running through every mind" — whenever any consciousness arises, these five are surely present. So no repetition here; "contact and the rest" suffices.

The second class, "object-specific" — aspiration, resolve, mindfulness, concentration, discernment, five of them.

This class is the opposite of the omnipresent. The omnipresent are in every mind; the object-specific, by contrast, "have different objects" — they arise only on meeting a particular object. Each cognizes its own:

• "Aspiration": toward a desired object, it arouses "hope" (wanting to obtain, to do). So it is the support of effort.
• "Resolve": toward a settled object, it "seals and holds" (firmly affirms, not shaken by other accounts).
• "Mindfulness": toward a once-experienced object, it "clearly remembers, does not forget." It is the support of concentration.
• "Concentration": toward an object under observation, it "keeps the mind focused, undistracted." It is the support of wisdom.
• "Discernment": toward an object under observation, it "selects and decides" (distinguishes, judges, severs doubt).

See it? These five are not always present — without "wanting" there is no aspiration, without "remembering" no mindfulness, with a scattered mind no concentration. They arise only on meeting the right object. Precisely because they "each cognize their own object," they form a separate class, the "object-specific."

(Among these five, mindfulness, concentration, and discernment are especially important — they are the very mental basis of the practice of "discipline-concentration-wisdom" and "the four foundations of mindfulness.")

The verse

善謂信、慚、愧、無貪等三根， 勤、安、不放逸、行捨及不害。

The wholesome: faith, conscience, shame; the three roots beginning with non-greed; effort, ease, non-negligence, equanimity-of-formations, and non-harming.

In plain words

This verse lists the "wholesome mental factors" — those that arise only in a wholesome mind, eleven in all. One by one (following the CWL's definitions):

• "Faith": the mind deeply trusting and gladly seeking what is "real, virtuous, capable" (the Three Jewels, wholesome dharmas). Its essence is "purifying the mind" — like a water-clearing gem dropped into murky water, it clarifies the mind. It counters "non-faith."
• "Conscience": by one's own moral sense and the true Dharma, esteeming the worthy and good, ashamed of faults (shame turned inward). It counters "shamelessness."
• "Shame": by worldly regard, recoiling from the cruel and evil, ashamed of misdeeds (shame turned outward). It counters "non-shame."
• "Non-greed," "non-hatred," "non-delusion" — these three together are the "three wholesome roots" (the roots of all good): non-greed is non-attachment toward "existence and its means"; non-hatred is non-aversion toward "suffering and its causes"; non-delusion is clear understanding of "things and principles." They are the very antidotes to the three "unwholesome roots" (greed, hatred, delusion).
• "Effort" (energy): vigorous and bold in "the good to be cultivated, the evil to be severed." It counters "indolence."
• "Ease" (pliancy): leaving behind bodily-mental heaviness, making body and mind supple and fit for work. It counters "torpor."
• "Non-negligence": by effort and the three roots, guarding and cultivating in "what is to be severed and cultivated," not letting go. It counters "negligence."
• "Equanimity-of-formations": by effort and the three roots, letting the mind rest level, upright, effortless (neither agitated nor sunk). It counters "agitation."
• "Non-harming": doing no injury to any sentient being, its function being compassion.

Of these eleven, seven are "real" (faith·conscience·shame·three roots·effort·ease), and three are "nominal" — non-negligence and equanimity-of-formations are in fact other names for "effort + the three roots" in different functions, and non-harming is a portion of "non-hatred" (the CWL: of the eleven wholesome, three are conventionally posited, the rest real).

This class is the side practice is to nurture — exactly the reverse of the afflictions and derivative afflictions (the side to be countered) in the next verse.

The verse

煩惱謂貪、瞋、癡、慢、疑、惡見。 隨煩惱謂忿、恨、覆、惱、嫉、慳、

The afflictions: greed, hatred, delusion, conceit, doubt, wrong-view. The derivative afflictions: rage, enmity, concealment, vexation, envy, stinginess,

In plain words

This verse turns to the reverse of the wholesome — the defiled mind to be countered. First the six most basic (root afflictions), then the start of those derived from them (derivative afflictions).

The six root afflictions:

• "Greed": attachment to, unwillingness to release, "existence and its means." It brings suffering.
• "Hatred": loathing and anger toward "suffering and its causes." It is the support of all evil deeds.
• "Delusion": muddled unclarity about "things and principles." It is "the support of all defilement" — every affliction comes from this one stroke of confusion.
• "Conceit": exalting oneself over others, relying on oneself.
• "Doubt": wavering about the truths (the Four Noble Truths, etc.). It blocks the arising of the wholesome.
• "Wrong-view": a topsy-turvy reckoning of the truth, a "defiled discernment" (a misfiring cleverness). It opens into five: ① self-view (grasping "I, mine" upon the five aggregates); ② extreme view (grasping annihilation or eternity); ③ false view (denying cause and effect); ④ view-grasping (clinging to one's own wrong view as supreme); ⑤ rule-and-rite-grasping (clinging to useless precepts as liberating).

These six (with wrong-view's five, ten in all) are the root of all affliction.

Derivative afflictions (the first six here):

"Derivative afflictions" are defiled states "derived from, following on" the root afflictions. Most are a "portion" (one facet) of some root affliction, not a new thing — this verse gives six:

• "Rage": flaring up at once on meeting a disagreeable object before one (a portion of "hatred").
• "Enmity": after rage, holding ill-will, refusing to let go, knotting into resentment (a portion of hatred).
• "Concealment": having done wrong, fearing loss of gain or repute, hiding it (a portion of delusion, or of greed-and-delusion).
• "Vexation": after rage and enmity, on meeting an adverse condition, turning fierce, uttering savage words (a portion of hatred).
• "Envy": caring only for one's own name and gain, unable to bear others' flourishing, jealous (a portion of hatred).
• "Stinginess": clinging to wealth and dharma, unwilling to give, secretly hoarding (a portion of greed).

See the pattern? Rage, enmity, vexation, envy are all different faces of "hatred"; stinginess is a face of "greed"; concealment is a face of "delusion." So the CWL says again and again "apart from hatred (greed, delusion) there is no separate mark-and-function" — the derivative afflictions have no independent substance; they are root afflictions turning different faces under different circumstances. (A clue for practice: counter the root, and the derivatives loosen of themselves.)

The verse

誑、諂與害、憍、無慚及無愧、 掉舉與惛沈、不信并懈怠、

deceit, flattery, and harming, arrogance, shamelessness and non-shame, agitation and torpor, non-faith and indolence,

In plain words

The last verse began the derivative afflictions (defiled states derived from the roots), giving six. This verse continues with ten. They are in fact sorted by the range over which they co-arise into three classes: minor, middling, major.

Minor derivatives (the last four) — each arising on its own, the narrowest range:

• "Deceit": faking virtue to grab fame and gain, trickery (a portion of greed and delusion).
• "Flattery": fawning, putting on a show to ensnare others (a portion of greed and delusion).
• "Harming": without compassion for beings, out to injure (a portion of hatred).
• "Arrogance": intoxicated with one's own advantages (wealth, looks, talent, fame), self-inflated (a portion of greed).

Middling derivatives (two) — present in every unwholesome mind, middling range:

• "Shamelessness": disregarding one's own conscience and the Dharma, recoiling from the worthy and good, unashamed of faults.
• "Non-shame": disregarding worldly regard, even esteeming the cruel and evil, unashamed of misdeeds.

(These two are present whenever evil arises — hence "pervading the unwholesome mind." Conscience and shame are the wholesome's two gatekeepers (verse 11); once the gatekeepers withdraw, evil deeds grow.)

Major derivatives (this verse gives four) — present in every defiled mind, the widest range:

• "Agitation": the mind restless toward its object, unable to settle (blocking "equanimity-of-formations" and "calm / śamatha").
• "Torpor": the mind dull toward its object, unable to rouse or be put to work (blocking "ease" and "insight / vipaśyanā").
• "Non-faith": unwilling to trust and seek the real, virtuous, capable; the mind muddied (blocking pure faith).
• "Indolence": slack in the good to cultivate and the evil to sever (blocking effort).

Note that these four are exactly the reverse of the last verse's wholesome factors: agitation ↔ equanimity-of-formations, torpor ↔ ease, non-faith ↔ faith, indolence ↔ effort. Those who meditate know them best — the mind is either "agitated" (scattered, restless) or "sunk" (dull, unrousable); these two are the greatest enemies of cultivating concentration.

(Though these major derivatives "pervade the defiled mind" and each has its own function, the CWL says their substance is still an "outflow" of the root afflictions — agitation a portion of greed, torpor a portion of delusion. So it is still the same path: "cut the root and the branches wither.")

The verse

放逸及失念、散亂、不正知。 不定謂悔、眠，尋、伺二各二。

negligence and forgetfulness, distraction, non-discernment; the indeterminate are regret, sleep, investigation and analysis — two, each twofold.

In plain words

This verse finishes the last two columns of the mental factors: first it closes out the remaining four derivative afflictions (the last four major ones), then it gives the four "indeterminate."

The last four derivatives (major) — the widest range, pervading every defiled mind:

• "Negligence": unwilling to guard against the defiled or cultivate the pure, dissolute and slack (not a separate thing — it is indolence plus greed-hatred-delusion combined, named negligence overall).
• "Forgetfulness": unable to retain the object clearly, unable to keep up right mindfulness (blocking "mindfulness").
• "Distraction": the mind drifting this way and that over its objects, unable to settle (blocking "concentration").
• "Non-discernment": misconstruing the contemplated object, getting it wrong (blocking "right knowing," hence "many transgressions").

Set these against what came before: the last verse's agitation and torpor are the two enemies every meditator knows (blocking calm, blocking insight); this verse's forgetfulness, distraction, non-discernment are exactly the reverse of the "object-specific" mindfulness, concentration, and discernment — the very faculties practice has to build, and these three are what dismantle them. With this, all twenty derivative afflictions are named.

The four indeterminate (regret·sleep·investigation·analysis) — a class undetermined as to good or defiled:

What is special about these four? The earlier wholesome, root, and derivative factors all have a fixed moral nature (wholesome is wholesome, afflicted is defiled). These four, though, "depend on the case" — they can be wholesome or defiled, do not necessarily pervade every mind, do not necessarily pervade every ground; hence "indeterminate."

• "Regret" (also "evil-doing"): regretting what one has done. Note it "blocks calm" — regret churning back and forth keeps the mind from settling. (Regretting an evil deed is wholesome regret; regretting a good deed is defiled.)
• "Sleep": making the body not at ease, the mind dull and cursory, unrousable (blocking insight).
• "Investigation": the mind coarsely searching over "inner-speech" (the verbal thinking within).
• "Analysis": the mind finely examining over inner-speech. (Investigation is coarse, analysis fine; both are made of a portion of "volition" and "discernment.")

"Two, each twofold" means: these four fall into two pairs — regret·sleep one pair, investigation·analysis another; and each pair, in turn, runs both defiled and pure.

With this verse, the six classes of mental factors (5 universal · 5 object-specific · 11 wholesome · 6 root afflictions · 20 derivatives · 4 indeterminate), fifty-one in all, are completely set out.

The verse

依止根本識，五識隨緣現， 或俱或不俱，如濤波依水。

depending on the root consciousness, the five consciousnesses arise by conditions, together or not together, like waves upon water.

In plain words

The nature of the six consciousnesses (discerning objects) and their fifty-one associated mental factors have all been stated. From this verse on, the topic is "when the six consciousnesses arise and when they do not" — their "arising-condition." This verse takes up the first five consciousnesses (eye·ear·nose·tongue·body).

First, on what the five consciousnesses arise:

• "Depending on the root consciousness": the root consciousness is the ālaya (the ādāna consciousness), the root from which all defiled and pure consciousnesses arise. The first five (together with the sixth, mind-consciousness) all take it as their common, intimate basis.
• "The five consciousnesses arise by conditions": the five are not always present; they arise only "by conditions." These conditions, the CWL says, are "attention, faculty, object" and the like — inwardly the root consciousness, outwardly attention (a stir of noticing), the five faculties (eye, ear, and so on), and the outer object; only when these conditions gather do the five consciousnesses arise.
• "Together or not together": so in a given moment, perhaps only one consciousness arises (just hearing), or several arise together (seeing and hearing and tasting at once) — anywhere from one to five, depending on how many outer conditions gather.

Then a simile to close:

• "Like waves upon water": this is like waves on the surface of water. Water stands for the root consciousness, waves for the five consciousnesses. Much wind (outer conditions) raises several waves; little wind, one wave; the wind stilled, the waves subside. But however many waves arise, or none, the waves are never apart from the water — likewise the five consciousnesses are never apart from the root consciousness, cannot arise on their own, but must rest upon the root consciousness (water) and await attention·faculty·object (the wind) to arise.

(So the CWL says: the first five consciousnesses are "coarse in operation," and the outer conditions they depend on are often not complete, so "they arise seldom and are absent often.")

The verse

意識常現起，除生無想天， 及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕。

the mind-consciousness arises constantly, except when born in the no-thought heaven, in the two mindless absorptions, in sleep and in swoon.

In plain words

The last verse said the first five consciousnesses "arise seldom." This verse takes up the sixth, mind-consciousness — and it is just the reverse: it "arises constantly," present almost all the time.

Why can the mind-consciousness be constant? The CWL says: the sixth consciousness "can think of itself" and can "turn by inner and outer gates" (it engages both outer objects and inner ones), and moreover "does not depend on many conditions" — unlike the first five, which must wait for so many outer conditions to gather. So the conditions it rests on are almost never incomplete, and thus it arises almost without break.

But there are five exceptions — five places where even the mind-consciousness is cut off, called the "five mindless states":

• "Born in the no-thought heaven": one who cultivates the no-thought absorption, by the force of "aversion to coarse ideation," is born in the no-thought heaven, suppressing the non-constant mind and mental factors (the first six consciousnesses), with "ideation"-cessation foremost, hence "no-thought heaven." While born there, the first six consciousnesses are all cut off.
• "The two mindless absorptions": the "no-thought absorption" and the "cessation absorption." Entering these two, the six consciousnesses are absent, hence "mindless."
• "Sleep" (extreme): extreme sleep — a bodily state induced by exhaustion and the like, suppressing the first six consciousnesses so none operates. (Note: not light dreaming sleep, but sleep so deep that even the mind-consciousness is cut off.)
• "Swoon" (extreme): extreme swoon (fainting) — a bodily state induced by wind-heat and the like, likewise suppressing the six consciousnesses.

Except for these five, the mind-consciousness arises constantly.

Here is a crucial point: in the five mindless states, the first six consciousnesses (the mind-consciousness included) are wholly cut off — so once cut off, how can they arise again? The CWL says: "this shows that, the six consciousnesses having been cut off, they later re-arise from their own seeds in the root consciousness." The six, once severed, are revived from the "seeds in the root consciousness (ālaya)." So these five "cut-off" moments are precisely the proof: at the very point where the six consciousnesses are wholly severed, there is still an unsevered root consciousness (ālaya) sustaining things, so that the six can be cut off and yet continued.

(With this, the third transformer — the six consciousnesses — is fully expounded, from nature-and-mark through mental factors to arising-condition. Together with the ālaya of the first transformer and the manas of the second, all three transformers are now set out.)

The verse

是諸識轉變，分別、所分別， 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。

these consciousnesses transform — the discriminating and the discriminated; by this, those are all absent, hence all is Consciousness-Only.

In plain words

The previous sixteen verses set out all three "transformers" of consciousness (ālaya · manas · the six consciousnesses). At this verse, the thesis of "Consciousness-Only-without-object" is formally established — that is: outside the mind there is in fact no independent object.

Line by line:

• "These consciousnesses transform": the consciousnesses just discussed (together with their associated mental factors) all "transform." How? The CWL says: when each consciousness arises, it "transforms-into" two parts — a "seeing-part" and an "image-part."
• "The discriminating and the discriminated": the part that grasps, that takes (the seeing-part) is called "discriminating"; the part that is grasped, that is taken (the image-part) is called "the discriminated." Simply: the consciousness itself produces a "grasper" and a "grasped" — both sides are transformed by consciousness.
• "By this, those are all absent": "those" refers to the "real self and real dharmas" we take to truly exist outside the mind. Precisely because (by this) both the grasper and the grasped are only what consciousness itself transforms-into, the real self and real dharmas standing independent apart from consciousness are decidedly absent.
• "Hence all is Consciousness-Only": so everything is not apart from consciousness — this is "Consciousness-Only."

Note the measure of the word "only." The CWL especially says: "the word 'only' is to exclude a real thing apart from consciousness, not the mental factors etc. that are not apart from consciousness." The "only" of "Consciousness-Only" is to exclude "a real thing standing independent of consciousness," not to say that even the mental factors and other-dependent transformations are absent. So Consciousness-Only is not "nothing whatever exists":

• the real self and real dharmas grasped as outside the mind — absent (this breaks "augmentation," the over-positing of an external object);
• the seeing-and-image parts and mind-and-factors that consciousness dependently transforms-into — not to be called absent (this breaks "diminution," the erasing of consciousness's function).

Falling to neither side, the CWL says, is "far from the two extremes of augmentation-and-diminution … according with the Middle Way."

(This verse is the pivot of the whole treatise: the earlier verses said "how consciousness transforms"; here it breaks through to "what is transformed-into has no real substance," formally establishing Consciousness-Only-without-object. The verses that follow answer various difficulties.)

The verse

由一切種識，如是如是變， 以展轉力故，彼彼分別生。

from the all-seed consciousness, transforming so and so, by the mutual force, the various discriminations arise.

In plain words

The last verse established "Consciousness-Only-without-object" — outside the mind there is no independent object. At once a difficulty is raised: "If there is only consciousness and no external conditions whatever, from where do all the various discriminations (the many cognitions, thoughts) in our minds arise?" This verse answers it.

The answer: not from an external object, but from two inner forces within consciousness itself —

• "From the all-seed consciousness": the "all-seed consciousness" is the root consciousness (ālaya); because it holds the seeds (functions) able to give rise to every result, it is called "all-seeds."
• "Transforming so and so": these seeds stored in the root consciousness, helped by other conditions, transform "so and so" — from the seed-state to the matured-state. The doubled "so" shows the transformed seeds are very many.
• "By the mutual force": the "mutual force" is the force by which the eight present consciousnesses (with their respective image-parts and seeing-parts) help and reinforce one another.
• "The various discriminations arise": by these two — the transforming of the root consciousness's seeds, plus the mutual reinforcing of the eight present consciousnesses — the various "discriminations" (false-discriminating cognitions) arise. The doubled "various" shows the kinds of discrimination are very many.

The CWL states the sense plainly: "though there is no external condition … the various discriminations still arise; what need is there for an external condition to give rise to discrimination?" — even with no external object, by the root consciousness's all-seed transformation plus the eight present consciousnesses' mutual force, the various discriminations arise just the same; what need of an external object to trigger them?

(Simply: you suppose "thoughts are stirred up by external objects," but in fact thoughts are turned out by the internal cycle of "seed → present-activity → re-perfuming the seed." The next verse answers another difficulty: without external objects, how does birth-and-death carry on?)

The verse

由諸業習氣、二取習氣俱， 前異熟既盡，復生餘異熟。

from the karmic energies and the two-grasping energies together, the prior retribution exhausted, the remaining retribution arises.

In plain words

The last verse answered the first difficulty (without external objects, where do the various thoughts come from). This verse answers the second: "Even with only inner consciousness and no external object, by what does a being's round of birth-and-death carry on, life after life?"

The answer, again, is not an external object but two "energies" (perfumed functional seeds) within the root consciousness —

• "From the karmic energies": "karma" means meritorious, non-meritorious, and imperturbable karma (that is, the contaminated wholesome and unwholesome volitional karma). The karma ceases the instant it arises, but it "perfumes" the root consciousness, leaving a function — this function is the "karmic energy." Its work is to summon the retribution-fruit (fixing which destiny the next life falls into, what its overall retribution is); it is the "dominant condition."
• "The two-grasping energies together": "the two graspings" are the whole grasper (seeing-part) and grasped (image-part) subject-object division. The function they perfume upon the root consciousness is the "two-grasping energy." Its work is to directly produce the retribution-fruit (supplying the very mind-content of that next-life retribution); it is the "causal condition." These two energies are "together" — one a distant condition, one an intimate condition, mutually assisting.
• "The prior retribution exhausted, the remaining retribution arises": "retribution" is the karma-summoned retribution-body. When the prior retribution-fruit (this life's overall retribution) is used up (exhausted), the two-grasping seeds again produce the "remaining retribution" (the next life's fruit). Life after life, prior exhausted, later arising.

The CWL closes plainly: "by this birth-and-death turns endlessly; what need of an external condition to make it continue? … by karma and the two graspings, the round of birth-and-death is never apart from consciousness." By these two energies, birth-and-death turns without end; what need of an external object to continue it? The whole round is never apart from consciousness.

(The CWL further gathers the energies of birth-and-death continuity into three: the name-and-speech energy, the self-grasping energy, the existence-member energy. This verse's "karmic·two-grasping energy" falls within the mechanism of these three.)

(Read with the last verse: the last states "within one life, how thoughts arise" (horizontal); this states "across lives, how birth-and-death continues" (vertical). Both faces, horizontal and vertical, run not on external objects but on the energies within consciousness turning of themselves.)

The verse

由彼彼遍計，遍計種種物， 此遍計所執，自性無所有。

by the various imaginings, imagining the various things — this wholly-imagined, its nature is utterly non-existent.

In plain words

The earlier verses established “Consciousness-Only-without-object.” From this verse on, the “three natures” (three kinds of own-nature) distinguish false imposition, conditioned arising, and the reality disclosed when false imposition is absent: the wholly-imagined nature, the other-dependent nature, and the perfectly-accomplished nature. This verse takes up the first: the wholly-imagined nature.

"Imagining" means "universal calculating-and-measuring" — the mind, facing an object, everywhere discriminating, calculating, grasping. Line by line:

• "By the various imaginings": "the various" says the imagining minds are many in kind (per the CWL's Dharmapāla sense, chiefly the sixth, mind-consciousness, and the seventh, manas — the two that grasp self and dharmas).
• "Imagining the various things": what these minds imagine, falsely grasp — the "various things" — are the aggregates, bases, elements, and the "real self, real dharmas" grasped upon them.
• "This wholly-imagined": the "nature" the mind so universally calculates and falsely grasps (supposing it truly exists thus) is the "wholly-imagined (nature)."
• "Its nature is utterly non-existent": yet this falsely-grasped nature, the CWL says, is "utterly non-existent" — whether sought by reason or by scripture, it cannot be found; it simply is not.

Simply: the wholly-imagined nature is that layer of "you suppose it exists, but it utterly does not." Like seeing a snake in a rope — the snake is wholly-imagined by your mind; on the rope there is no snake at all. This "snake" is the wholly-imagined, its nature utterly non-existent.

(Among the three natures, this one alone is the pure falsity of "existent-to-feeling, non-existent-to-reason" — seemingly there to feeling, wholly absent to reason. The next verse states the other two: the other-dependent (the rope of consciousness-transformation, arising by conditions, not to be called absent) and the perfectly-accomplished (the suchness revealed once the falsely-grasped snake is removed from the rope).)

The verse

依他起自性，分別緣所生。 圓成實於彼，常遠離前性。

the other-dependent nature is born of discrimination-conditions; the perfectly-accomplished nature, upon it, is ever-apart from the prior nature.

In plain words

The last verse stated the first of the three natures — the wholly-imagined (you suppose it exists, but it utterly does not). This verse takes up the other two: the other-dependent and the perfectly-accomplished.

First the other-dependent:

• "The other-dependent nature": "other-dependent" means "depending on other conditions." This nature is not had on its own; it arises only depending on various conditions.
• "Born of discrimination-conditions": specifically, it arises from the conditions of "false discrimination" — that is, the seeing-parts and image-parts consciousness itself transforms-into. The CWL says it "arises upon conditions, this nature not absent": arising by conditions, it cannot be called absent.

Note the difference from the wholly-imagined: the wholly-imagined is "utterly non-existent" (pure falsity, wholly absent), but the other-dependent is "not absent" (condition-born, existent). To use the figure: seeing a rope as a snake — the "snake" is the wholly-imagined (wholly absent), the "rope" is the other-dependent (condition-born, not to be called absent).

Then the perfectly-accomplished:

• "The perfectly-accomplished, upon it": "upon it" means "upon that other-dependent." The perfectly-accomplished is nowhere else — it is right upon this rope of the other-dependent.
• "Ever-apart from the prior nature": "the prior nature" means the wholly-imagined just stated. Upon the other-dependent, "ever-apart" from that falsely-grasped wholly-imagined (the snake), what is revealed — the CWL says "the suchness revealed by the two emptinesses (self-emptiness, dharma-emptiness)" — this is the perfectly-accomplished.

The CWL pins the two phrases "upon it" and "ever-apart" finely: "upon it" says the perfectly-accomplished and the other-dependent are "not-identical-not-apart" (not one and the same, nor separate — revealed right upon the other-dependent); "ever-apart" says the grasped grasper-grasped is "eternally non-existent to reason."

(So the three natures are one line: the other-dependent (rope) is the basis, the wholly-imagined (snake) is what must be departed, and the perfectly-accomplished (the reality of seeing it is a rope, originally with no snake) is what is revealed. The next verse states whether the perfectly-accomplished and the other-dependent are "one" or "different.")

The verse

故此與依他，非異非不異， 如無常等性，非不見此彼。

so this and the other-dependent are neither different nor non-different, like the nature of impermanence and the rest; not without seeing this is that seen.

In plain words

The last verse established the other-dependent (condition-born · not absent) and the perfectly-accomplished (the suchness revealed upon the other-dependent, apart from the wholly-imagined). This verse closes the set, answering a question that naturally arises: the perfectly-accomplished (suchness) and the other-dependent (consciousness-transformation) — are they "one and the same" or "two"?

• "So this and the other-dependent are neither different nor non-different": "this" means the perfectly-accomplished. The perfectly-accomplished and the other-dependent are "not different" (not two separate things) and "not non-different" (not utterly the same either). The CWL gives the reasons: if "different" (two), then suchness would not be the other-dependent's real nature (but it plainly is the other-dependent's real nature); if "non-different" (one and the same), then the perfectly-accomplished would be impermanent like the other-dependent (but suchness is not impermanent). So neither different nor non-different.
• "Like the nature of impermanence and the rest": take a ready example — the relation of the common-marks "impermanence, no-self" to "conditioned things" (all conditioned dharmas). Impermanence is the common-mark of conditioned things: it is not two separate things from conditioned things (not different), yet you cannot say impermanence equals any one particular conditioned thing (not non-different). The perfectly-accomplished (suchness) to the other-dependent is just this relation of "dharma (the other-dependent) and dharma-nature (the perfectly-accomplished)" — the dharma-nature is not apart from the dharma, nor is it any one particular dharma.
• "Not without seeing this is that seen": this states the order of seeing. "This" is the perfectly-accomplished, "that" the other-dependent. "Not without seeing this (the perfectly-accomplished) is that (the other-dependent) seen" — meaning: it is not that one sees the other-dependent truly without realizing the perfectly-accomplished; rather, one must first realize the perfectly-accomplished (suchness), and only then can the subsequently-attained cognition discern the other-dependent (see that the other-dependent is "illusory"). The CWL says: the non-discriminating cognition must first directly realize suchness, and only then can the subsequently-attained cognition discern the other-dependent nature "as illusion etc."

The commentator further lists eight similes for the other-dependent's "illusoriness": illusion, mirage (heat-shimmer on the ground that seems to be water), dream, mirror-image, light-shadow, valley-echo, water-moon, conjuration (a thing produced by transformation) — all eight are "non-existent-yet-seeming-existent": without substance, yet seeming to arise with a mark. The other-dependent is just so: arising by conditions, yet without own-nature.

(With this verse the three natures are complete: the wholly-imagined (absent) · the other-dependent (illusory · non-existent-yet-seeming-existent) · the perfectly-accomplished (suchness · the other-dependent's dharma-nature). They are neither three unrelated substances nor one undifferentiated thing: the other-dependent is the condition-born basis, the real self-and-dharmas falsely imposed upon it are the wholly-imagined, and the dharma-nature disclosed when that grasping is absent is the perfectly-accomplished.)

The verse

即依此三性，立彼三無性， 故佛密意說，一切法無性。

upon these very three natures the three non-natures are established; so the Buddha with hidden intent says all dharmas are without nature.

In plain words

The earlier verses established the three natures: the wholly-imagined (absent), the other-dependent (not absent), the perfectly-accomplished (suchness). The CWL at once raises its own difficulty: "if there are three natures, why did the World-Honored One say all dharmas are without own-nature?" If the other-dependent and perfectly-accomplished are not absent, why is no-own-nature stated comprehensively? This verse answers that question; Kuiji also connects the three-non-nature framework with the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra's No-Own-Nature-Mark chapter.

• "Upon these very three natures the three non-natures are established": the "no-nature" the Buddha speaks is not spoken out of thin air — it is established upon these three natures just stated, the corresponding three "non-natures" (the mark-less-nature, birth-less-nature, ultimate-meaning-no-nature; particulars in the next verse). The three natures are the positive statement, the three non-natures the negative — the two faces of one and the same matter.
• "So the Buddha with hidden intent says all dharmas are without nature": so the Buddha's "all dharmas without own-nature" is spoken with "hidden intent." "Hidden intent" means "there is more meaning behind the words, a particular aim, not as flat as the surface says" (the technical term is "non-literal").

The crux is the phrase "hidden intent." The CWL states it plainly: the Buddha's no-nature is "not the nature wholly absent" — not that even the substance-nature is one and all absent. Why so? Because the latter two natures (the other-dependent, the perfectly-accomplished) are "not absent in substance," yet the fool insists on "superimposing" upon them, fixing a "real self, real dharma" nature — and this fixing is the wholly-imagined. To break this false grasping, the Buddha "speaks of no-nature over both the existent and the non-existent" — one word "no-nature" sweeps away the grasping (the wholly-imagined) that should be swept.

So "all dharmas without nature" is a hidden-intent teaching, not a wholesale dismissal: what it breaks is the wholly-imagined (the layer falsely added) and the grasping at "natural existence"; it does not dismiss the other-dependent (the condition-born consciousness-transformation) and the perfectly-accomplished (suchness) along with it. The CWL later especially admonishes: "those of wisdom should not, relying on this word 'no-nature,' dismiss all dharmas as wholly without nature."

(This verse establishes the CWL's three-nature reading of scriptural no-nature language: it removes the wholly-imagined superimposition without dismissing the other-dependent and perfectly-accomplished. The next verse states the three non-natures one by one against the three natures.)

The verse

初即相無性，次無自然性， 後由遠離前，所執我、法性。

the first is the mark-less-nature; the next is without a natural nature; the last, by being apart from the prior grasped self-and-dharma nature.

In plain words

The last verse said "upon the three natures the three non-natures are established, the Buddha with hidden intent says all dharmas without nature." This verse states the three non-natures one by one against the three natures — and the key is: these three "no's" each mean something different.

• "The first is the mark-less-nature": the first, the "mark-less-nature," is established upon the wholly-imagined. Why "mark-less-nature"? The CWL says "for its substance-mark is utterly non-existent, like a sky-flower" — the substance-mark of the wholly-imagined is simply not there, like a flower in the sky (the phantom flower one sees when the eyes are strained). This is truly absent.
• "The next is without a natural nature": the second, the "birth-less-nature" (no natural nature), is established upon the other-dependent. The CWL says "this is like an illusion born depending on many conditions, without the falsely-grasped natural nature, provisionally said no-nature" — the other-dependent is like a thing conjured up, born depending on many conditions, without that "naturally existent, self-arising" nature the fool falsely grasps. Note: it is not truly absent, it is "without a natural nature," hence called "provisionally no-nature, not the nature wholly absent."
• "The last, by being apart from the prior grasped self-and-dharma nature": the third, the "ultimate-meaning-no-nature," is established upon the perfectly-accomplished. The CWL says "this ultimate-meaning, by being apart from the prior wholly-imagined self-and-dharma nature, is provisionally said no-nature" — this ultimate-meaning of the perfectly-accomplished is revealed by "being apart from the prior wholly-imagined self-and-dharma nature"; its "no" refers to the wholly-imagined departed, hence again "provisionally no-nature, not the nature wholly absent" (suchness itself is not absent).

Seeing the difference of these three "no's" is most crucial: only the first (the mark-less-nature) is truly absent (the wholly-imagined like a sky-flower); the latter two (the birth-less, the ultimate-meaning) are both "provisionally said" no — one "without a natural nature" (the other-dependent condition-born), one "without the wholly-imagined nature" (the perfectly-accomplished apart from the wholly-imagined). So the previous verse's Buddha-said "hidden intent" and "not the nature wholly absent" are now wholly borne out.

The CWL further closes the ultimate-meaning-no-nature with a figure: "like empty space, though pervading all forms, yet revealed by the no-nature of forms" — the perfectly-accomplished suchness is like empty space, though pervading all forms (things), yet revealed precisely by the forms' "having no wholly-imagined nature."

(The three natures and three non-natures are expounded here. The next verse gathers all this into one heading — "the Consciousness-Only-reality," that is, the perfectly-accomplished, suchness.)

The verse

此諸法勝義，亦即是真如， 常如其性故，即唯識實性。

this, the ultimate-meaning of dharmas, is also suchness; because it is ever-thus in nature, it is the very Consciousness-Only-reality.

In plain words

The earlier verses stated the "characteristic" of Consciousness-Only to the full, by the three natures and the three non-natures. This verse closes the set, pointing out where the whole of Consciousness-Only finally comes to rest — the Consciousness-Only-reality, that is, the perfectly-accomplished, suchness. Line by line:

• "This, the ultimate-meaning of dharmas": "this" means the perfectly-accomplished. It is "the ultimate-meaning of all dharmas" (the most final, most real layer). The CWL says there are four kinds of ultimate-meaning, each deeper than the last: the worldly ultimate-meaning (aggregates-bases-elements), the principled ultimate-meaning (the four truths), the realized ultimate-meaning (the suchness of the two emptinesses), the ultimate-of-the-ultimate (the one-true-dharma-realm). The ultimate-meaning here is the last — "the ultimate-of-the-ultimate," the most excellent field of the path.
• "Is also suchness": it is also "suchness." The CWL parses the two graphs "true-thus": "true" is real (not false), "thus" is ever-thus (without change); meaning this reality, in every state, is "ever-thus in nature" (always just as it is), hence "suchness," the sense of "limpid, not false." The single graph "also" further shows it has many names — also called the dharma-realm, the reality-limit, and so on (different names of one substance).
• "Because it is ever-thus in nature, it is the very Consciousness-Only-reality": precisely because it is "ever-thus in nature" (eternally as its own nature, unchanging and not false), it is the "Consciousness-Only-reality" (the real nature of Consciousness-Only).

Here the CWL especially makes clear why "real nature" is so established. It says "the Consciousness-Only nature" has two pairs of distinctions:

• One pair: the false Consciousness-Only nature (the wholly-imagined) / the real Consciousness-Only nature (the perfectly-accomplished) — saying "real nature" excludes the false (the wholly-imagined).
• One pair: the conventional Consciousness-Only nature (the other-dependent) / the ultimate-meaning Consciousness-Only nature (the perfectly-accomplished) — saying "real nature" excludes the conventional (the other-dependent).

Both pairs point to the same one: the perfectly-accomplished. So "the Consciousness-Only-reality" is, once the false (the wholly-imagined) and the conventional (the other-dependent) are both excluded, that real, ultimate-meaning perfectly-accomplished, suchness.

(With this verse, the "characteristic" of Consciousness-Only is stated, all gathered into "nature" — the perfectly-accomplished suchness. The next five verses turn a different way, stating the "stages": how, step by step in cultivation-and-realization, one truly enters this Consciousness-Only-reality. From here the whole treatise turns from "mark" to "nature," and from "nature" opens the "stages.")

The verse

乃至未起識，求住唯識性， 於二取隨眠，猶未能伏滅。

up until the [intensified-effort] consciousness has not arisen, seeking to abide in the Consciousness-Only nature, the latent tendencies of the two graspings cannot yet be subdued.

In plain words

The last verse established the "Consciousness-Only-reality" (the perfectly-accomplished, suchness) — that is the goal to be realized. But merely knowing the goal is not enough; one must cultivate toward it step by step. So from this verse on the topic is the "stages of Consciousness-Only" — the five stages of cultivation-and-realization. This verse is the first: the provisioning stage.

• "Up until the [intensified-effort] consciousness has not arisen": "the consciousness not yet arisen" refers to the discerning cognition of the "intensified-effort stage" (the decisive-discernment consciousness) not yet arisen. Meaning: from the first arising of the great bodhi-mind, up until before entering the intensified-effort stage, this whole stretch is the provisioning stage.
• "Seeking to abide in the Consciousness-Only nature": this bodhisattva is already "seeking to abide in the Consciousness-Only true ultimate-meaning nature" — deeply believing and understanding the Consciousness-Only teaching, single-mindedly wishing to abide in that Consciousness-Only reality.
• "The latent tendencies of the two graspings cannot yet be subdued": yet — though believing-and-understanding, he "cannot yet realize that the grasper and the grasped are both empty," and mostly practises in the "outer gate" (cultivating by reaching outward). So toward the "latent tendencies" (hidden seeds) drawn out by the "two graspings" (the opposition of the grasping mind and the grasped object), he has not yet the power to subdue them, let alone eliminate them.

What is the "two-grasping latent tendency"? The CWL says: the energy of the two graspings is called the "latent tendency" — it "follows" beings, "sleeps-latent" in the store-consciousness (the ālaya), and watches to "increase," hence "latent tendency." It is the seed of the "knowable obstruction" and the "afflictive obstruction." The provisioning-stage bodhisattva, deep though his faith-and-understanding, cannot yet press down these latent seeds of the two obstructions.

Simply: the provisioning stage is the starting stage — having raised the mind, believed-and-understood Consciousness-Only, begun to gather the provisions of merit and wisdom (hence also called the "portion conducing to liberation"), but the work is still shallow and the latent two-grasping afflictive seeds cannot yet be moved. Like setting out on a far journey, one first stocks up provisions and fare; the road has not truly been taken yet. The next verse states the second stage, "intensified-effort" — beginning truly to apply effort to subdue the two graspings.

The verse

現前立少物，謂是唯識性， 以有所得故，非實住唯識。

setting up a slight thing before it, saying "this is the Consciousness-Only nature" — because of having-something-attained, it does not really abide in Consciousness-Only.

In plain words

The last verse stated the provisioning stage (faith-and-understanding, the two graspings not yet subdued). This verse states the second stage — the intensified-effort stage. Here the bodhisattva begins truly to apply effort, to subdue the two graspings.

What the intensified-effort stage cultivates is the four wholesome roots "warmth, summit, forbearance, highest-worldly-dharma" (the CWL says these four are collectively called "the portion conducing to decisive-discernment" — conducing toward the discernment of the real). How are they cultivated? By the "four investigations" and the "four cognitions-of-the-real":

• The four investigations: to investigate the four — name, meaning, own-nature, distinction — seeing clearly that they are "provisionally-existent, really absent" (seemingly there, but without real substance).
• The four cognitions-of-the-real: to know thoroughly, as it is, that these four are "apart from consciousness non-existent — and consciousness itself too is not really existent."

By contemplating thus, step by step, one gradually subdues the grasping at the "grasped" (object) and the "grasper" (mind).

But this verse points out the intensified-effort stage's limit — it does not yet "really abide" in Consciousness-Only. Why?

• "Setting up a slight thing before it, saying this is the Consciousness-Only nature": even while contemplating emptiness, in his mind he still "sets up a slight thing" as an object — still grasping "this is the Consciousness-Only nature."
• "Because of having-something-attained": so long as he still "sets up" such a one, still "attains" such a one (even the subtlest mark of "the Consciousness-Only nature"), there is still this opposition of "an attaining mind" and "an attained object."
• "It does not really abide in Consciousness-Only": so this is still "not really abiding in Consciousness-Only."

Here lies the most crucial threshold of cultivation-and-realization: so long as you still take "the Consciousness-Only nature" as a thing to be "attained," to be "abided in," that very act of "attaining" and "abiding" is grasper-and-grasped — so you do not yet really abide. Real abiding must wait until "nothing is set up, nothing is attained" (the next verse's path-of-seeing "the cognition attains wholly nothing").

To use a figure: the intensified-effort stage is like having touched the door-frame and seen inside, yet one's hand is still pressed on the frame (still "having-something-attained"), so the person has not yet truly stepped through. In the next verse, the "penetration stage," the hand releases — nothing attained — and in that instant one steps through: that is "really abiding in Consciousness-Only," the first realization of suchness.

The verse

若時於所緣，智都無所得， 爾時住唯識，離二取相故。

when, toward its object, the cognition attains wholly nothing, then one abides in Consciousness-Only, for one is apart from the two-grasping marks.

In plain words

The last verse's intensified-effort stage was "by having-something-attained, not really abiding in Consciousness-Only" — the hand still pressed on the door-frame. This verse, the "penetration stage" (that is, the "path of seeing"), is the hand released, truly stepping through. This is the most crucial verse in the whole cultivation-and-realization — the very instant of the first direct realization of suchness.

• "When, toward its object, the cognition attains wholly nothing": when, facing its object, that "non-discriminating cognition" attains nothing whatever, grasps nothing whatever — no longer grasping the various "proliferation-marks" (the marks conceptual discrimination throws up).
• "Then one abides in Consciousness-Only": in that very instant (then), one is at last "really abiding in the Consciousness-Only true ultimate-meaning nature."
• "For one is apart from the two-grasping marks": because at this time the opposing marks of "grasper (mind) and grasped (object)" are all departed.

The CWL states this instant most precisely: "realizing suchness, cognition and suchness equal-equal, both apart from grasper-grasped marks" — in that instant one directly realizes suchness, and the realizing "cognition" and the realized "suchness" are "equal-equal": there is no subject-object gap of "I realizing, suchness being realized by me," cognition and suchness wholly not-two.

Why must it be "wholly nothing attained"? The commentator pierces it in a line: "the grasper-grasped marks are both discrimination, the proliferation of the having-something-attained mind" — these marks of "grasper, grasped" are themselves "discrimination," themselves the "having-something-attained mind," themselves proliferation. So long as there is "something attained," one is still in proliferation, not yet really abiding; only "wholly nothing attained," grasper-and-grasped both dissolved, is the path of seeing, is really abiding.

Set against the last verse it is clear: the intensified-effort stage "sets up a slight thing, has something attained," hence "not really abiding"; this verse "attains wholly nothing," hence "really abiding." The turn of a single word — from "having-something-attained" to "nothing attained" — is the very watershed between "intensified-effort" and "the path of seeing." Release the hand (nothing attained), and one steps through in that instant; grip the hand (something attained), and one is still outside the gate.

(This is "the entering-mind of the first ground" — the bodhisattva's first direct, immediate realization of suchness, really abiding in the Consciousness-Only-reality. The "Consciousness-Only-reality" spoken of earlier (the perfectly-accomplished, suchness) here turns, at last, from "established" (steadied in reasoning) to "realized" (entered in person). The next verse, the "cultivation stage," is, after the path of seeing, cultivating again and again, severing the two obstructions portion by portion, until the transformation-of-basis is ultimate.)

The verse

無得不思議，是出世間智， 捨二麁重故，便證得轉依。

nothing-attained, inconceivable, this is the supramundane cognition; because it relinquishes the two coarse-heavinesses, it attains the transformation-of-basis.

In plain words

In the last verse, the path of seeing, one first directly realized suchness. But the first realization is only the "first" — the latent seeds of the two obstructions are not yet severed to the end. This verse states the fourth stage, the cultivation stage (that is, the "path of cultivation"): after the path of seeing, cultivating again and again, severing the remaining obstruction portion by portion, and finally attaining the "transformation-of-basis."

First, how the verse describes the cognition cultivated in the cultivation stage:

• "Nothing-attained": this is the "non-discriminating cognition"; it has departed grasper and grasped (and all proliferation), so "nothing-attained" — grasping nothing whatever.
• "Inconceivable": its subtle function is hard to fathom, so "inconceivable."
• "This is the supramundane cognition": it can sever the "two-grasping latent tendencies" (those latent seeds of the two obstructions, the very root of mundane birth-and-death), so "supramundane" — only it severs the mundane root, hence alone it gains the word "supra."
• "Because it relinquishes the two coarse-heavinesses": the "two coarse-heavinesses" are the seeds of the two obstructions (the afflictive and the knowable) — heavy, without workability. Cultivating this non-discriminating cognition again and again can cause the seeds of the two obstructions to perish forever, hence "relinquishing."
• "It attains the transformation-of-basis": having relinquished the two coarse-heavinesses, it attains the vast "transformation-of-basis."

What is the "transformation-of-basis"? The CWL states it most clearly — this is precisely the cashing-out of the earlier "three natures" in practice:

• "Basis": means "what is depended on," that is, the other-dependent (the condition-born consciousness-transformation). All defiled dharmas and pure dharmas depend on it.
• On the defiled side is "the wholly-imagined" (the falsely-grasped); on the pure side is "the perfectly-accomplished" (the real suchness).
• "Transform" has two faces: "relinquishing" and "attaining." By cultivating the non-discriminating cognition again and again, severing the coarse-heavy seeds of the two obstructions in the store-consciousness — then, upon the other-dependent, relinquishing the wholly-imagined (the defiled), attaining the perfectly-accomplished (the pure).

The final two lines are most crucial: "transforming the afflictive obstruction one attains great nirvāṇa, transforming the knowable obstruction one realizes supreme awakening" — transform the "afflictive obstruction," and attain "great nirvāṇa"; transform the "knowable obstruction," and realize "supreme awakening" (supreme bodhi). These two are the "two fruits of the transformation-of-basis": nirvāṇa and bodhi.

So the "transformation-of-basis" is not extinguishing the other-dependent and finding another thing elsewhere, but, right upon this same base of the other-dependent, transforming away the defiled (the wholly-imagined) and transforming out the pure (the perfectly-accomplished). Earlier the three natures were "seeing clearly"; this verse's transformation-of-basis is "transforming-into" — the same matter, fallen from theory into cultivation-and-realization. The next verse is the last stage, the "ultimate stage": these two fruits of the transformation-of-basis perfected to the utmost are the Buddha's dharma-body.

The verse

此即無漏界，不思議善常， 安樂解脫身，大牟尼名法。

this is the undefiled realm, inconceivable, good, eternal; the blissful liberation-body; the great sage named dharma.

In plain words

This is the last of the thirty verses, stating the fifth stage — the ultimate stage, that is, Buddhahood. The two fruits of the transformation-of-basis transformed out in the last verse (nirvāṇa, bodhi), here perfected to the utmost, are the realm of a Buddha. Line by line:

• "This is the undefiled realm": "this" refers to the two fruits of the transformation-of-basis attained in the prior cultivation stage. At the ultimate stage, these two fruits are the "ultimate undefiled realm." The CWL says: all "defilements" (afflictions) are forever ended, no defilement increases any more, the nature is pure, perfect, luminous, hence "undefiled." "Realm" has two senses: one is "store" (it contains boundless rare great merits); one is "cause" (it can generate the worldly and supramundane benefits of the five vehicles).
• "Inconceivable, good, eternal": this undefiled realm is "inconceivable"; and "good" (the pure dharma-realm is apart from arising-and-perishing, the four-cognition mind-classes' subtle function boundless, all of white-dharma good-nature); and "eternal" (the pure dharma-realm is unarising-unperishing, its nature without change, the basis of the four cognitions also constant, hence "eternal").
• "Blissful": and "blissful" — without any affliction; the pure dharma-realm's marks are all still, the four-cognition mind-classes forever apart from harm, hence "blissful."

The final two lines are the treatise's close, and hold a most crucial distinction:

• "The blissful liberation-body": this "liberation-body" even the two vehicles (the śrāvakas, the pratyekabuddhas) can attain — the CWL says: the two fruits of the transformation-of-basis attained by the two vehicles only forever depart the bondage of the "afflictive obstruction," without superior dharmas, hence "only named liberation-body."
• "The great sage named dharma": but the "dharma-body" (the great sage's dharma) the Buddha alone has. "Great sage" is the "great-awakened World-Honored One" (the Buddha), for He accomplished the unsurpassed "dharma of quiescence." This sage's two fruits attained "forever depart both obstructions" (not only the afflictive obstruction, but the knowable obstruction too severed to the end), hence named "dharma-body." The CWL says the dharma-body is "five-dharmas as nature" — the pure dharma-realm plus the four-cognition mind-classes (that is, suchness plus the four cognitions), the two together being the dharma-body; not the pure dharma-realm alone named dharma-body, the two fruits of the transformation-of-basis all subsumed within it.

So these final two lines distinguish the Buddha and the two vehicles cleanly: the two vehicles sever only the afflictive obstruction and attain the "liberation-body" (liberation merely); the Buddha severs both obstructions, five-dharmas as nature, and attains the "dharma-body" (ultimate perfection).

With this verse, the Thirty Verses are complete. Looking back: the first verse began from "the provisional designation of self-and-dharmas" (the self and dharmas beings falsely grasp), through consciousness-transformation, Consciousness-Only-without-object, the three natures and three non-natures, the five stages of cultivation-and-realization, to this last verse, coming to rest in "the great sage named dharma" — the Buddha's dharma-body. From a single thought of false grasping (verse 1) to the ultimate Buddha-fruit (verse 30) — this is the whole course of "Consciousness-Only": transforming consciousness into cognition, transforming the defiled basis into the pure basis, and finally accomplishing the Buddha's dharma-body. The whole Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only, head and tail mirroring each other, threaded through as one.