瑜伽師地論 思所成地 · 勝義伽他

The first of the three sets of verses in the Stage of What is Attained through Reflection (the wisdom of reflection). Forty-four verses, examining the ultimate meaning of the no-self of the person (pudgala).

In one line: The Verses on the Ultimate Meaning refute both extremes at once with a single verse — "There is no master, no doer, and no experiencer at all; nor do phenomena have any activity — and yet the turning of activity is not nonexistent" — refuting over-affirmation (no real self) and refuting under-denial (cause and effect not empty), and so establishing the Middle Way of the no-self of the person; examined to the bottom, there is not even one who is liberated.

Three Points of the Eye

1. A single verse's twofold refutation = the Middle Way. Master, doer, and experiencer are all blocked off (refuting the "self-activity" of over-affirmation), while "the turning of activity is not nonexistent" displays that phenomena have an intrinsic nature (refuting under-denial). No-self, yet cause and effect not empty — "only the twelve links of existence, the aggregates, the bases, and the elements are in circulation; no living being can be found." Paired with the "seven kinds of no-activity": all conditioned factors are momentary, without real activity, yet dependent arising is not nonexistent.

2. The five-aggregate similes see through what is grasped. Form is like a mass of foam · feeling like floating bubbles · perception like a heat-shimmer · the conditioned factors like a plantain-tree · consciousness like a conjured show (spoken by the Kinsman-of-the-Sun, that is, the Buddha). The self that is grasped is nothing but what is taken up upon the five aggregates; the aggregates being illusory, the self has nowhere to lodge. Simile: the fool grasping a self is "like a great elephant sunk in the mire."

3. The ground of reflection already discloses the skeleton of Consciousness-Only mind-and-consciousness (where the ultimate meaning lies). The defiled mentation (the seventh, manas) ever arises and perishes together with the four afflictions; its liberation is neither prior nor after, and its nature is originally pure — not that a separate purifier is had. The store consciousness, subsumed under the suffering of the conditioned, is treasured in craving and goes toward idle proliferation, "issuing forth its streams like a pool, exhausted dry only by the practice of the true Dharma." The two truths are contemplated together (the conventional says it turns-in-accordance, the ultimate has no doer). Two kinds of liberation (from afflictions / from the matter · with-remaining-basis / without-remaining-basis), arriving finally at "in the continuity of the name 'living being,' and in the mark of the concept 'phenomenon,' there is no circling in birth-and-death, and there is likewise no one who enters nirvāṇa."

Appended · Pointers

The no-self of the person, and conditioned arising being without master and without doer → the ascertainment of the ground of the wisdom of reflection in the Section on Ascertainment 〔T1579 0658c–0668b〕; the defiled mentation and the store consciousness → the Cheng Weishi Lun's chapters on the seventh, the manas, and on the store consciousness 〔T1585〕, and the eight consciousnesses of the Hundred Dharmas treatise (this series); the countering of the two extremes of over-affirmation and under-denial → the Middle Way of the Madhyāntavibhāga's Chapter on the Character. For the doctrinal exposition, see the Exposition.

1. The Verses That Are Established (Forty-Four Verses · in Today's Words)

Here now the "Verses on the Ultimate Meaning" are established; these are verses spoken in a scripture. 〔Turned one by one into today's words as follows:〕

There is no master, no doer, and no experiencer 〔to be found〕 at all; nor do phenomena have any 〔activity that belongs to a self〕 — and yet the turning of activity is not nonexistent. Only the twelve links of existence, the five aggregates, the twelve bases, and the eighteen elements are in circulation. Examine all of this closely, and no "living being" can be found. Within and without alike, all of this is empty; and the very one who would cultivate emptiness is likewise never to be had. A "self" is decidedly not existent — it is only a false reckoning born of distortion. Sentient beings and self are both absent; only "causal phenomena" exist. All conditioned factors are momentary; they do not even "abide," let alone "act." Yet 〔people〕 say that what arises is the very activity, is the very doer.

The eye cannot see form, the ear cannot hear sound, the nose cannot smell scent, the tongue cannot taste flavor, the body cannot feel the tangible, the mind cannot know phenomena; and here too there is no 〔self〕 that can hold or press 〔the faculties〕 into service. A phenomenon cannot produce another phenomenon, nor can it produce itself — it arises only when the many conditions are complete; it is not that "the former one" is carried over, but that there is a fresh, new arising. A phenomenon cannot destroy another phenomenon, nor can it destroy itself — it arises only when the many conditions are complete, and having arisen, it perishes of its own accord.

Taking "two categories" as its support, this "arising" comes to be had: one is being ever heedless toward objects; the other is, again, a false and wrongful climbing-upward. One swept along by delusion goes toward the wrongful climbing-upward; one drawn along by the several cravings is ever heedless toward objects. Because there are phenomena that have a "cause," the mass of sufferings likewise follows. The root is the two afflictions 〔ignorance (avidyā) and craving〕; the twelve links divide into two 〔sets〕. A 〔phenomenon〕 has of itself no activity that could arise, nor is it made by another 〔phenomenon〕, still less can some other 〔self〕 make it — yet activity is not nonexistent. 〔Arising〕 is not within, nor without, nor in between the two — because 〔future〕 conditioned factors have not yet arisen; and yet at times it seems as though it could be had. Suppose the conditioned factors have already arisen: then for this very reason there is nothing to be had; in the future, there is no mark 〔to grasp〕; in the past, one can indeed discriminate. What is discriminated is what has been undergone; what has not been undergone can 〔by class〕 also be discriminated. Although the conditioned factors have no beginning, still a "beginning" can be had 〔that is, the fresh arising, moment after moment〕.

The forms are like a mass of foam; the feelings are like floating bubbles (water-bubbles); the perceptions are like a heat-shimmer; the conditioned factors are like a plantain-tree; the consciousnesses are like a conjured show — thus said the Kinsman-of-the-Sun 〔the Buddha, that is, He-Whose-Kin-Is-the-Sun〕 (the base text reads "曰親," while the Song, Yuan, and Ming editions read "日親"). The conditioned factors arise all at once, and all at once they abide and perish. "Delusion" cannot delude that "delusion," nor can it delude the one "who is deluded," still less can some other thing set delusion going — yet delusion is not nonexistent: it is from unwarranted attention that the several delusions arise; and this unwarranted attention, too, is not something an undeluded person would give rise to. Meritorious action, non-meritorious action, and imperturbable action — these are, again, to be understood in terms of the three times; and there are the three kinds of karma, and each and all of these do not harmonize with one another. The present perishes swiftly; the past abides with no location; the not-yet-arisen depends on the many conditions — and yet 〔conventionally〕 it is still said that "the mind turns in accordance with 〔karma〕." Whether one says it is 〔always〕 associated, or not associated at all 〔neither holds〕; it is not that "every mind is associated with every 〔conditioned factor〕," and yet it is said that the mind turns in accordance.

On this 〔stream of consciousness〕 there is no break; it is similar and yet dissimilar; and by conformity to the "view of self," conventional activity is not nonexistent. If the material body is broken up, the name-body 〔feeling, perception, formations, consciousness〕 perishes along with it; and yet 〔conventionally〕 it is said that there is a present and a future life, that one does the deed oneself and reaps its fruit oneself. Because of the difference between before and after, and because it is subsumed under one's own cause and one's own fruit, whether the "doer" and the "experiencer" are one or different cannot be stated. Because the pathway of causes is unbroken, the harmonized activity turns; 〔the fruit〕 is produced from its own cause and is made by appropriation. With delight in idle proliferation for a cause, one performs karma either pure or impure; 〔and so there come〕 the maturation of the several seeds, and the agreeable fruit and the disagreeable fruit.

In dependence on the maturation of the several seeds, the "view of self" arises; 〔the store consciousness〕 is realized within oneself, is without form, and is not to be seen — and the ordinary person, lacking the power of discernment, reckons it to be the "inner self." Taking the view of self as support, one then gives rise to all manner of false views. By a comprehensive grasping of one's own kind 〔the latent tendency〕, by the aid of past habituation, and by conformity to what one hears, the "view of self" is generated. From craving and from 〔the object as〕 condition, the grasping at an "inner self" arises; through appropriation and expectation, one defiles-and-habituates the outer 〔objects〕 as the grasped. The world is truly to be dreaded; through delusion one appropriates it; having first given rise to "the treasuring-in-craving," one thereby goes toward idle proliferation. That which is treasured-in-craving 〔the suffering of the conditioned〕, the noble ones penetrate as being suffering; this suffering presses upon the ordinary fool, without a moment's rest. With an unbalanced binding it fetters the mind, and amasses those masses of sufferings. "Amassing" is the object with respect to which the ordinary fool reckons a "self" and reckons "pain and pleasure." The several ordinary fools cling fast, like a great elephant sunk in the mire. By delusion it becomes dominant, all-pervasive in its operation and all-pervasive in its effect. This 〔store-consciousness〕 pool issues forth the several streams (the base text reads "池 [pool]," while the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace editions read "地 [ground]"); in the world it flows out as a torrent; it cannot be dried up by fire, wind, or sun, save only by "the practice of the true Dharma." As to suffering one reckons "I experience it," within pain and pleasure one comes to know it is suffering; discriminating this, one gives rise to a "view"; and from that 〔view〕 the 〔suffering〕 is born, and 〔the suffering〕 in turn gives birth to that 〔view〕.

The defiled mentation, ever and always, arises and perishes together with the several afflictions. If one is liberated from the several afflictions, it is not prior to 〔the afflictions〕, nor after 〔them〕. It is not that this 〔mentation〕, having already arisen, then has a pure 〔mentation〕 arise as a separate and different thing; it is that it was originally without defilement — this is why one speaks of "liberation from the masses of afflictions." That which has defilement is, in its ultimate nature, pure; and since there is no "thing to be purified," how could there be any "purifier"? Because the several seeds have perished, and because the several afflictions are exhausted, it is right here on this 〔consciousness〕 that there is non-defilement — which displays the two kinds of distinction 〔liberation from afflictions and liberation from the matter〕. 〔Nirvāṇa〕 is realized within oneself, is nothing but the exhaustion of the masses of suffering, and forever cuts off idle proliferation — it is therefore that in which there is no idle proliferation whatsoever. In the continuity of the name "living being," and in the mark of the concept "phenomenon," there is no circling in birth-and-death, and there is likewise no "one who enters nirvāṇa."

2. The Prose Commentary (the Explanation the Treatise Carries with Itself · in Today's Words)

In this 〔set of verses〕, it is in dependence on the ultimate meaning of the "no-self of the person (pudgala)" that these Verses on the Ultimate Meaning are thus proclaimed, for the sake of countering the twofold grasping at the extremes of "over-affirmation" and "under-denial."

"With respect to what is appropriated one speaks of it as master; with respect to the several karmic activities one speaks of it as doer; with respect to the several fruits and retributions one speaks of it as experiencer" — this half-verse blocks off the self discriminated as "apart from the aggregates." "Phenomena, too, have no activity" blocks off the self discriminated as "identical with the aggregates"; and by this one departs from the extreme grasping of "over-affirmation." "And yet the turning of activity is not nonexistent" displays that phenomena do have an intrinsic nature; and by this one departs from the extreme grasping of "under-denial." "Activity" is of three kinds: first, the activity of a master; second, the activity of a doer; third, the activity of an experiencer; and it is because there are these three activities that master, doer, and experiencer are provisionally set up.

Though it says "the several phenomena," it has not yet said what a "phenomenon" is; so it goes on to say the half-verse "only the twelve 〔links of existence〕, and so on." Such as the sequence of the links of existence, and the circulation of the several aggregates and the rest — this displays that "not grasping a subtle plurality of selves" is able to counter the grasping at master, doer, and experiencer. The eye, with form for its condition, produces the fruit that is eye-consciousness, and there is no separate experiencer — here it displays that it is right within the eighteen elements that "the character of an experiencer" is spoken of. Though it says "there is no master," it has not said there is no master of what; so it goes on to say "examine all of this closely, and no living being can be found." To say "examine closely" is to observe carefully and truly by means of the three means of knowledge 〔direct perception, inference, and authoritative teaching〕. If this 〔living being〕 did not exist, how would one establish the accomplishment of inner and outer? So it goes on to say "within and without alike, all of this is empty" — displaying that inner and outer are merely provisionally set up. How does one establish the two accomplishments of "the observer and the observed"? So it says "the very one who would cultivate emptiness is likewise never to be had." How does one establish the two accomplishments of "the noble one and the ordinary being"? So it says "a self is decidedly not existent, being a false reckoning born of distortion" — displaying that the self of the noble one and of the ordinary being is decidedly without any real self-nature, and is merely reckoned by distortion to exist. How does one establish the accomplishment of "that and this"? So it says "sentient beings and self are both absent." How does one establish the accomplishment of "the defiled and the pure"? So it says "only causal phenomena exist" — 〔making plain〕 that neither the defiled one nor the pure one is to be had.

Though it says the several phenomena all have no activity, it has not said in what way they are without activity; so it says "all conditioned factors are momentary; they do not even abide, let alone act." Earlier it already said "the turning of activity is not nonexistent"; how is it that they are without activity and yet there is a turning of activity? So it says "one then says that what arises is the activity, is the doer": with respect to the fruit it is named "activity," with respect to the cause it is named "doer"; and "what arises" displays that 〔consciousness〕 is produced from the several bases and the several consciousnesses; its coming-to-be produced is not something accomplished apart from the eye and the rest 〔of the faculties〕. As for the earlier statement that the several phenomena have no activity, here it displays that "no activity" is briefly of seven kinds: (1) no functioning-activity (the eye cannot see form, and so on); (2) no activity of turning-along (here too there is none that can hold or press into service; in the aforesaid sequence, master and doer are alike never to be had, and so there is no activity of turning-along); (3) no activity of producing another (a phenomenon cannot produce another); (4) no activity of self-production (nor can it produce itself); (5) no activity of transferring-over (it arises because the many conditions are present, not that "the former one" is carried over into a fresh, new arising); (6) no activity of destroying another (a phenomenon cannot destroy another); (7) no activity of self-destruction (nor can it destroy itself). Question: just as it arises because the many conditions are present, does it likewise perish because the many conditions are present? Answer: it arises because the many conditions are present, and having arisen, it perishes of its own accord.

The earlier statement "there are causal phenomena that exist" is meant to display that the "defiled intrinsic nature" of the householder and the renunciant is a matter of causal phenomena that exist; so it says "taking the two categories as support, this arising comes to be had," and so forth. By these two verses, it displays that ignorance and craving are "causal phenomena that exist." The next five verses display the "cause" and the "time-division" on which the varieties within the category of defilement depend. Here, "causal phenomena" refers to ignorance through to feeling; "causal masses of suffering" refers to craving through to aging-and-death — this statement displays the three kinds of defilement: afflictions, karma, and birth. "Because of the root two afflictions" displays the defilement of afflictions, taking up only the most eminent defilement of afflictions. The words "of itself has no activity that could arise," and the rest, further and separately display the meaning of the defilement of karma; for what it does has differences, and its fruit-maturation is inconceivable. "Of itself has no activity that could arise" is because it awaits a good or bad friend, being drawn along by another; "nor is it made by another" is because it awaits accomplishment by one's own exertion; "still less can some other make it" is because it awaits the difference of the cause in the prior birth before there is anything done. The verses "not within, nor without," and so forth, display that in dependence on the future no defilement is produced, while in dependence on the present and past conditioned factors defilement can be produced: suppose the conditioned factors have already arisen — then by this mark there is no discrimination; the future has no mark, so there is no discrimination — thus in such a way, what is to come is decidedly unknowable. If one does not discriminate in this way, then a different class can at times be had. If it is with respect to the past, then one can discriminate — thus in such a way, a past appearance can be discriminated; and not only what has been undergone can be discriminated: what has not been undergone, though one does not clearly grasp its appearance, can still by its class be discriminated. This, then, displays that in dependence on the discrimination of present conditioned factors as cause, the several defilements are produced. "Although the conditioned factors have no beginning, still a beginning can be had" displays the time-division difference of defilement: from beginningless time it constantly pursues, and moment after moment it is freshly arisen.

From this point on, it displays the category of purity, because when one observes it as it truly is, purity is attained. Whether by the "particular mark" — observing form and the rest as like a mass of foam, and so on; or by the "common mark" — observing that conditioned phenomena share the common mark of arising, abiding, and perishing; or by the "two truths, the conventional and the ultimate" — for though there is no "one who is deluded," it is not that there is no delusion: with respect to the conventional truth of what is produced from the many conditions, one says "delusion can delude"; but with respect to the ultimate, there is nothing pursued. Again it displays: it is not that one "who is not deluded" gives rise to unwarranted attention — so he is deluded by delusion. And by the conventional, one says that the several consciousnesses turn in accordance with meritorious action and the rest; but with respect to the ultimate, there is nothing pursued. "Again, the three are to be known" refers to past, future, and present; "the three kinds of karma" refers to bodily karma and the rest; "each and all do not harmonize" is that they do not harmonize with respect to one another. Why? "The present perishes swiftly, the past abides with no location, the not-yet-arisen depends on the many conditions, and yet the mind turns in accordance": if it were associated with this 〔mind〕 by turns, in the way meritorious action and the rest are, there being no harmonizing — then the principle of mind-association is likewise so; how could there be any real character of turning-in-accordance? For what reason? If the mind is associated with those several conditioned factors, or not associated 〔neither holds〕; it is not that this and that are at times not associated, and at times not not-associated; nor is it that every mind is either associated or not associated. Thus, by the ultimate, the "character of the mind's turning-in-accordance" cannot be established.

Here now it displays, by the conventional, the causes and conditions for saying "the mind turns in accordance." "On this stream there is no break" — in this verse it displays that the conventional truth is not without activity and turning-in-accordance; and again, by the ultimate, there is no doer and no experiencer, while by the conventional one comes to say "one does the deed oneself and reaps it oneself"; and again, whether doer and experiencer are one or different cannot be stated — to display this meaning, it goes on to say the verse "the difference of before and after," and so forth. Thus, by the ultimate, there is no master, doer, or experiencer; there is only cause and fruit. Upon the character of cause and fruit it resolves the several doubts, briefly by five verses, displaying that here one gives rise to the distortion of "self": the first verse displays that although there is no self, still the subsequent existence is not cut off; and the several causes and fruits are not all present at once; nor is everything produced from everything; and again, this pathway of causes is not cut off — the four lines within the verse resolve, in that sequence, these four doubts. The second verse displays the character of cause and fruit. The last three verses display the distortion of "self" arising within the several causes and fruits that are without self: displaying that object-condition, that support, that cause, and that fruit. The first verse displays the object-condition: 〔the store consciousness〕 is realized within oneself, is without form and hard to see, and is hard to ponder, and so is named "without form" (the scripture says the mark of form is that which can be pondered; because it is hard to point out and show to another, it is "not to be seen"). The second verse displays its support and fruit: the ordinary person is the "support," the several views are the "fruit." The third verse displays its cause: the innate view of self is produced by the comprehensive grasping-and-reckoning of the latent tendency of one's own kind; the discriminated view of self of the several outsiders and the rest is produced by past habituation and so on — and this outsider-view must, by repeated habituation, by unwarranted pondering, and further by conformity to hearing an untrue Dharma from another, come to grow. Here it displays: it is by the faults of support, attention, and object that the discriminated view of self comes to arise.

The next five verses display how that "view of self," by the sequence of "amassing," gives rise to "suffering"; and how this suffering, together with the view of self, is the cause-and-condition of the two sufferings; and how it can be an obstacle to liberation. Among them, the first verse displays "amassing"; the second and third verses display the store consciousness subsumed under "the suffering of the conditioned" — 〔the consciousness〕, having treasured it in craving, then goes toward idle proliferation (saying "I shall exist," "I shall not exist," and so on; to say "treasuring-in-craving" is to appropriate it as one's own body; and again this suffering, at all times, constantly pursues, without a single moment's rest). The fourth verse displays that this suffering is the condition for "the one who reckons a self" and for "pain and pleasure." The fifth verse displays that reckoning a self, by reason of delusion, obstructs liberation. To say "dominant" is with regard to the other two sufferings; to say "all-pervasive in operation" is that it pursues the several feelings; "all-pervasive in effect" is that it pervades the wholesome, the unwholesome, and the indeterminate. Here now it displays that the suffering of the conditioned subsumed under the store consciousness is similar to the other 〔streams〕, and again displays the difference: because it can be dried up only by "the practice of the true Dharma," it is, among the several streams in the world, the most violent. "The several streams" figures the eye and the other six 〔faculties〕, the five destinies, the three realms, and so on. "The practice of the Dharma" displays "the full knowledge of understanding-and-liberation" and "the full knowledge of bondage." "The full knowledge of understanding-and-bondage" is just the knowing of suffering — that is, knowing that the suffering-feeling and the pleasure-feeling that I experience all depend upon suffering; and again this discrimination can give rise to the several views, and from that 〔view they are〕 produced, and 〔they〕 can in turn give rise to that 〔view〕.

Having displayed "the full knowledge of understanding-and-bondage," there remain six verses that display "the full knowledge of understanding-and-liberation": it says that the defiled mentation ever and always arises and perishes together with the several afflictions; if one is liberated from the several afflictions, it is not prior, nor after — "not prior" is because it ever arises together with the several afflictions; "not after" is because it perishes at the very same time as those afflictions. It further displays the character of the "liberation" spoken of: it is not that this 〔mentation〕, having arisen, is then purified, with some other remaining pure mentation arising; it is that it was from the first without defilement, and so is spoken of as "liberation." To accomplish this meaning, it further says the verse "that which has defilement is, in its ultimate nature, pure," and so forth. And it further displays two kinds of liberation: liberation from afflictions, and liberation from the matter. "Because the several seeds have perished, and because the several afflictions are exhausted" displays liberation from afflictions; "it is right here that there is non-defilement" displays liberation from the matter. As the scripture says: "Bhikṣu, know this! If within the eye craving-and-desire is forever cut off, then this eye too shall be forever cut off," and so on at length. Having thus displayed "liberation with a remaining basis," it goes on to display "liberation without a remaining basis": "realized within oneself" displays that it is inconceivable; "nothing but the exhaustion of the masses of suffering" is to dispel the false reckoning of "sheer non-existence-of-nature" — 〔nirvāṇa〕 is the forever-stilled-and-extinguished with a remaining basis, and so is spoken of as stilled-and-extinguished, not as being wholly without nature. "Without idle proliferation" is that this liberation-nature is realized only within: that "different or not different," "after death it shall exist, or it shall not exist," and all such idle proliferation, cannot be predicated of it. To display that the person (pudgala) and phenomena are alike neither circling in birth-and-death nor entering parinirvāṇa, it therefore says the verse: "In the continuity of the name 'living being,' and in the mark of the concept 'phenomenon,' there is no circling in birth-and-death, and there is likewise no one who enters nirvāṇa."

With the above, the Verses on the Ultimate Meaning of the Holy Teaching have been explained.

The Stage of What is Attained through Reflection is the stage of the "wisdom born of reflection" — one takes the Dharma heard and lays it upon the mind, examining it round after round, examining it to the bottom, examining out the ultimate meaning. Of the three sets of verses here, this first set, the "Verses on the Ultimate Meaning," forty-four verses, examines the hardest pass of all: the no-self of the person (pudgala). The hard places are all taught by means of the similes the treatise itself already holds.

First, a Question: Since There Is No "Self," Then Who Is It That Performs Karma, Who Reaps Retribution, Who Is Liberated?

This is a threshold every follower of the Buddha sooner or later runs up against. The Buddha teaches no-self; yet plainly it is "I" who live out my days, plainly it is "I" who perform the karma, plainly it is "I" who undergo pain and pleasure. If there truly were no self, would not cause and effect fall away into emptiness?

The very first verse of the Verses on the Ultimate Meaning cleaves this threshold open in one stroke:

「都無有宰主及作者、受者;諸法亦無用,而用轉非無。」

tr. "There is no master, no doer, and no experiencer at all; nor do phenomena have any activity — and yet the turning of activity is not nonexistent."

In this one short verse it refutes both extremes at once. The treatise itself makes the point very clear — these forty-four verses are spoken "in dependence on the ultimate meaning of the no-self of the person," "for the sake of countering the twofold grasping at the extremes of over-affirmation and under-denial." The ancient masters put the two extremes even more plainly: "To grasp that there is a self-activity is called over-affirmation; to deny away the nature of phenomena is called under-denial" (so Kuiji's Concise Compendium and Dunlun's Notes agree).

One extreme is over-affirmation: forcibly installing, apart from or within the five aggregates, a "self" that can master, that can create, that can receive. The treatise takes it apart in three cuts: with respect to what "I" appropriate, it is called "master"; with respect to the several karmic activities, it is called "doer"; with respect to fruit and retribution, it is called "experiencer." These three, together with "phenomena, too, have no activity" (within the aggregates there is likewise no activity belonging to a self), are all blocked off — and this refutes over-affirmation.

The other extreme is under-denial: since there is no self, some slide all the way down, discarding even causal activity, and say, "everything is empty anyway, so it makes no difference what one does." The treatise at once pulls them back: "and yet the turning of activity is not nonexistent" — the turning of activity is not nonexistent; phenomena do have an intrinsic nature. And this refutes under-denial.

Refute over-affirmation, and refute under-denial too — falling into neither extreme; this is exactly the Middle Way. No-self is not the absence of activity; it is only the absence of a "self" playing master within the activity.

Then Who Is It That Circles Round? — Only the Twelve Links, and the Aggregates, Bases, and Elements

Having refuted the self, the treatise at once fills the vacated seat:

「唯十二有支、蘊、處、界,流轉。審思此一切,眾生不可得。」

tr. "Only the twelve links of existence, the aggregates, the bases, and the elements are in circulation. Examine all of this closely, and no living being can be found."

Saṃsāra is not "a self" circling round; it is this apparatus of cause and effect — the twelve links of existence, the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements — circling round of itself. However closely you "examine" (the treatise says: one must observe carefully and truly by the three means of knowledge — direct perception, inference, and authoritative teaching), you will find no "living being" to serve as protagonist. The eye, with form for condition, produces the fruit that is eye-consciousness — within this stretch of cause and effect, there is simply no need for, and no finding of, a second "experiencer."

This answers the threshold posed at the outset: the one who performs karma and reaps retribution is not a "self," but the self-continuity of causal phenomena. With no doer, karma is still perfumed into seeds; with no experiencer, the fruit still matures in dependence on its cause. Lacking the "self," cause and effect become, if anything, cleaner and more coherent.

Five Similes, to See Through the Five Aggregates

To say "no-self" alone still feels abstract; so the treatise brings out five similes spoken from the Buddha's own mouth — the most famous string of teaching-tools in the whole piece:

「諸色,如聚沫;諸受,類浮泡;諸想,同陽焰;諸行,喻芭蕉;諸識,猶幻事——曰親之所說。」

tr. "The forms are like a mass of foam; the feelings are like floating bubbles; the perceptions are like a heat-shimmer; the conditioned factors are like a plantain-tree; the consciousnesses are like a conjured show — thus said the Kinsman-of-the-Sun."

"Kinsman-of-the-Sun" is He-Whose-Kin-Is-the-Sun, the Buddha (a descendant of the Sugarcane line, the Solar line). The five aggregates are matched one by one: form is like the foam gathered on the water's surface, scattering at a touch; feeling is like the water-bubbles struck up by raindrops, perishing as soon as they arise; perception is like the heat-shimmer of the open wilds (which the thirsty deer mistakes for water), sheer illusion; the conditioned factors are like a plantain-tree, peeled layer by layer to the very bottom with no solid core; consciousness is like the conjured show a magician produces, seeming to be there, empty when grasped. Once the five aggregates are seen through, the "self" has nowhere to lodge — for the self people grasp is nothing other than what they take up upon these five heaps.

Why, Though There Is Plainly No Self, Do We Nonetheless Feel There Is a Self? — The Root of the View of Self

Refuting the self is not hard; the hard thing is that this "view of self" clings extremely deep. The treatise chases it to its root — and in this one chase, within the ground of the wisdom of reflection, it chases out the very skeleton of the Consciousness-Only teaching of mind and consciousness.

The treatise asks: on what does the "view of self" arise? It arises in dependence on "the maturation of the several seeds." That which the ordinary person mistakes for the "inner self" is something "realized within oneself, without form, not to be seen" — and the ordinary person, lacking the power of discernment, takes it for the "self." Reading on with the treatise's words, this is plainly a description of the store consciousness: it is stored in the deepest place, loved and treasured (to "treasure in craving" is to appropriate it as one's own essential body), and thereby it goes, all the way, toward idle proliferation. The ancient masters point it out directly: this verse "makes plain the store consciousness — as when a pool issues forth its streams" (Dunlun and Kuiji agree), and Kuiji further cites the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra's simile of the sea and the wind, "as when the sea meets the condition of wind," to bring out the meaning.

The similes the treatise gives are equally fierce:

「諸愚夫固著,如大象溺泥。」「此池派眾流,於世流為暴;非火風日竭,唯除正法行。」

tr. "The several ordinary fools cling fast, like a great elephant sunk in the mire." "This pool issues forth the several streams; in the world it flows out as a torrent; it cannot be dried up by fire, wind, or sun, save only by the practice of the true Dharma."

The fool who grasps a self is like a great elephant mired in the bog: the more it struggles, the deeper it sinks. That store consciousness is like a deep pool, issuing forth all the streams — the eye and the other six faculties, the five destinies, the three realms — flooding out across the world into a raging river; the sun cannot dry it, the wind cannot dry it, the fire cannot dry it. The one and only thing that can exhaust it dry is "the practice of the true Dharma." (In "the pool issues forth the several streams," the character "pool": the base text reads "池 [pool]," while the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Palace editions read "地 [ground]"; take "pool," and the simile is of the store consciousness issuing streams like a deep pool; take "ground," and the simile is of it bringing forth the many waters like the great earth — the two readings stand together, and the sense is coherent either way.)

The view of self further divides into two roots: one is the "innate view of self," produced by the comprehensive grasping of the latent tendency of one's own kind, borne by everyone from birth; the other is the "discriminated view of self," which the outsiders perfume out after the fact through past habituation, through unwarranted pondering, and through hearing an untrue Dharma. The former is deep, the latter coarse; but both are uprooted only under "the practice of the true Dharma."

The Defiled Mentation: The Seventh Consciousness Makes Its Appearance within the Ground of Reflection

Following the view of self one layer further in, the treatise points out the "mechanism" that constantly grasps a self:

「染污意,恒時諸惑俱生滅。若解脫諸惑,非先,亦非後。」

tr. "The defiled mentation, ever and always, arises and perishes together with the several afflictions. If one is liberated from the several afflictions, it is not prior, nor after."

This "defiled mentation" is the seventh consciousness, the manas. It has a distinctive trait: ever and always it arises together, and perishes together, with the several afflictions (the four afflictions — delusion about self, view of self, conceit of self, and love of self) — never letting go. The ancient masters state it clearly: "this is the manas accompanied by the four afflictions, arising together and perishing together"; and at the time of liberation, "when the vajra-path arises, the defiled mentation and its four afflictions are cut off at the very same time" (Dunlun and Kuiji agree) — hence "not prior, nor after": the four afflictions ever arise together with it, so liberation is not prior to the afflictions; the four afflictions perish at the same time as it, so it is not after them either.

More important still is the further layer the treatise turns over: its purity is not "first dirty, then washed clean," not another clean mentation brought in to replace it; rather, "that which has defilement is, in its ultimate nature, pure" — its self-nature is originally pure, and it only appears defiled because the adventitious afflictions entangle it. Since there is no real "defilement to be purified," what need is there of a "purifier"? When the defilement is exhausted, that is purity; the very thing itself, as it stands, is it.

The ground of reflection is still only the second of the three wisdoms of hearing, reflection, and cultivation, and is separated from true cultivation (the Stage of What is Attained through Cultivation) by a whole stage; yet the defiled mentation, the store consciousness, the seeds, the two truths — the entire skeleton of the Consciousness-Only teaching of mind and consciousness — is already set up within these forty-four verses. This too is why this set of verses is called "the ultimate meaning."

One Is Conventional, One Is Ultimate: Only When Read on Both Levels Do They Not Clash

Reading to here, a doubt arises: you said earlier "no doer, no experiencer," and later you say "one does the deed oneself and reaps it oneself," "the mind turns in accordance with karma" — is this not self-contradiction?

The treatise resolves it by the "two truths." The ancient masters divide it very finely: "the first three lines are contemplation by the ultimate truth, the latter five lines contemplation by the conventional truth" (Dunlun and Kuiji agree). Spoken by the ultimate: there is no doer, no experiencer, not even "one who is deluded" ("though there is no one who is deluded, it is not that there is no delusion"). Spoken by the conventional: for what is produced from the many conditions, on the level of provisional naming one may perfectly well say "delusion can delude," say "the mind turns in accordance with meritorious action and the rest," say "one does the deed oneself and reaps it oneself." The two levels are not on the same plane, and so they naturally do not clash — the ultimate does not spoil the conventional's cause and effect; the conventional does not set up the ultimate's real self. This is exactly the settling-into-place of the earlier line "the turning of activity is not nonexistent."

Drawing to a Close: In Liberation, Too, There Is No "One Who Is Liberated"

At the last, the treatise carries no-self through to the very bottom, leaving not a single "self" even in nirvāṇa:

Two kinds of liberation — "the several seeds have perished, the several afflictions are exhausted" is liberation from afflictions, and "right here there is non-defilement" is liberation from the matter; the exhaustion of afflictions is "with a remaining basis," and nothing-but-the-exhaustion-of-the-masses-of-suffering (yet not being wholly without nature — the treatise deliberately guards against anyone sliding toward "annihilation") is "without a remaining basis." Yet even having reached this point, one still cannot say there is a "one who enters nirvāṇa":

「眾生名相續,及法想相中,無生死流轉,亦無涅槃者。」

tr. "In the continuity of the name 'living being,' and in the mark of the concept 'phenomenon,' there is no circling in birth-and-death, and there is likewise no one who enters nirvāṇa."

"Living being" is only a name in continuity; "phenomenon" too is only the mark of a concept; and within this name-and-mark, one finds neither a self circling in birth-and-death, nor a self realizing nirvāṇa. Saṃsāra with no one circling in saṃsāra, nirvāṇa with no one entering nirvāṇa — the no-self of the person, examined this far, is at last examined to the bottom.

This is the very purport of the Verses on the Ultimate Meaning: with a single verse's twofold refutation it stands the Middle Way firm (no-self, yet cause and effect not empty); with the five-aggregate similes it sees through what is grasped; with the defiled mentation and the store consciousness it lights up the root of the view of self; with the two truths it dissolves the contradiction; and at the last it sets down even the one who is liberated. What the ground of reflection examines, in examining the Dharma, is just this one flavor: the ultimate meaning.

Carrying Forward

The single verse's twofold refutation, countering over-affirmation and under-denial → the Middle Way of the Madhyāntavibhāga's Chapter on the Character (the departure from the two extremes); the no-self of the person and the no-self of phenomena → in one continuous line with the ascertainment of the ground of the wisdom of reflection in the Section on Ascertainment ("as for conditionally-arisen phenomena — they are phenomena without master, without doer"); the defiled mentation ever accompanied by the four afflictions, and the store consciousness treasured in craving → the Cheng Weishi Lun's chapter on the seventh, the manas, and its chapter on the store consciousness, and the eight consciousnesses among the mind-dharmas of the Hundred Dharmas treatise (this series) — the skeleton of mind and consciousness disclosed in the ground of reflection is here broadly established by the later treatises.