解脫道論 五陰的句義、相、分別與攝

The chapter opens by saying that the meditator should arouse a method in five fields—the aggregates, sense bases, elements, conditionality, and noble truths. All five names are set down at once.

From there to this passage, the treatise has remained with the first. It has explained the five aggregates—form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness—one by one, and the final sentence of the consciousness aggregate has brought the five aggregates to a close. But the door of the “aggregate method” has not yet closed.

This passage is the moment that door closes.

Before closing it, the treatise turns back and looks at the five aggregates four more times: by phrase-meaning, by characteristic, by classification, and by inclusion. Four approaches reexamine them without adding a single new name.

Each of the four approaches uses a different form, and none repeats another. The first consists of definitions—one word has a certain meaning; the second follows a three-part pattern of one characteristic, one simile, and one basis; the third sets out three classifications; the fourth links everything throughout through “is included in.” Recognize the form first, then read the content: once the form is recognized, the similes in the second approach will not be mistaken for idle embellishment, and the repetition in the fourth will not be read as needless wordiness.

The three-part pattern of the second approach is not new. Two passages earlier, all thirty-two entries under the aggregate of formations use it. After an intervening consciousness-aggregate passage that sets out not a single simile, it returns here and is applied to five entries. Among the five bases, the bases for feeling, perception, and formations are all contact—the three middle aggregates share one source, while the two at the ends each have their own basis. The treatise does not explain this, and this edition does not supply a reconciliation.

At the end of the fourth approach, something changes.

The first three approaches each close themselves with a sentence, and all three sentences follow one pattern. The fourth does not use that closing formula. It says instead, “Thus through these approaches one knows the method of distinguishing aggregates. This is the method concerning aggregates”—once the closing formula breaks, the whole structure closes with it. What it closes is no longer this one approach, but the entire aggregate method. An inline note follows on the next line: the method concerning aggregates is complete.

This “is complete” is not an isolated case. The same closing formula appears five times in the treatise, exactly once for each of the five names at the chapter’s opening: the aggregate method ends here, while the sense bases, elements, conditionality, and noble truths each end in their own place. If you mark these five closing formulas while reading the chapter, the whole chapter’s skeleton becomes clear at a glance.

There is one place worth pausing over for yourself. The first approach asks for the phrase-meanings of the five aggregates, yet the answer lists six entries: beyond the five aggregates, it also explains the word “aggregate” itself. Nor does this entry stand before the other five as a general heading; it comes after them. If it stood first, the collective name would be established before its members were divided; coming last, it is as though the treatise turns back after explaining all five to add one sentence: why are all five called aggregates? Why explain this additional item? The treatise does not say; this edition records it as it stands and does not delete it.

(Also remember: at the opening of the fourth approach, punctuation has broken apart the three names under “threefold inclusion,” and they can be recovered only from the ensuing order of sense base, element, and truth; in the four alternatives, since Nibbāna is included in truth but not in aggregates, the “three” in “three truths” can only mean suffering, origin, and path, excluding cessation—the treatise does not say this explicitly, but the four alternatives themselves compel it.)

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Phrase-Meaning, Characteristic, Classification, and Inclusion of the Five Aggregates · Doorway · Summer 2026

General Heading: Four Reexaminations

Further, the distinctions among these five aggregates can be known from four perspectives: phrase-meaning, characteristic, classification, and inclusion.

The account of the five aggregates began with the aggregate of form and has already explained each in turn. This passage adds no new name; it simply looks again, in four ways, at the five aggregates already established.

First Approach: Phrase-Meaning

Question: How by phrase-meaning?

Answer: form means manifestation; feeling means what can be felt; perception means knowing; formations mean making; consciousness means understanding; aggregate means a gathered class.

Thus they can be known by phrase-meaning.

The question asks for the phrase-meanings of the five aggregates, but the answer lists six items—one for each of the five aggregates, followed by an additional phrase-meaning for the word “aggregate” itself. It is recorded as it stands: this edition neither deletes the extra item nor explains why one more item appears.

Second Approach: Characteristic

Question: How by characteristic?

Answer:

Form has its own form as its characteristic; it is like seeing a thorn; its basis is the four great elements.

Feeling has feeling as its characteristic; it is like a grave leprous illness; its basis is contact.

Perception has holding a sign as its characteristic; it is like making an image; its basis is contact.

Formations have combination as their characteristic; they are like turning a wheel; their basis is contact.

Consciousness has knowing as its characteristic; it is like knowing a taste; its basis is name-and-form.

Thus they can be known by characteristic.

In this approach, all five items are presented in the same three-part form: one characteristic, one simile, and one basis; not one of the five lacks any part. Of the five bases, three are contact—feeling, perception, and formations are all connected with contact; form is connected with the four great elements, and consciousness with name-and-form. This is recorded as it stands.

Third Approach: Classification

Question: How by classification?

Answer: aggregates are classified in three ways—the five aggregates, the five clinging aggregates, and the five Dhamma aggregates.

In this connection: the five aggregates are all conditioned qualities. The five clinging aggregates are all qualities with influxes. The five Dhamma aggregates are the aggregates of virtue, concentration, wisdom, release, and knowledge-and-vision of release. Within these five clinging aggregates is what can be enjoyed.

Thus they can be known by classification.

Fourth Approach: Inclusion

Question: How by inclusion?

Answer: inclusion is of three kinds—inclusion by sense base, inclusion by element, and inclusion by truth.

The base text here reads, “three kinds of inclusion: sense-base inclusion, element-inclusion-truth, inclusion”; its punctuation attaches the word “truth” to the end of “element inclusion.” The treatise itself reports three kinds, and the following text discusses inclusion one by one in the order of sense base, element, and truth; thus the three names can be recovered in that order as given above. The original wording is recorded as it stands; this edition does not repunctuate it.

In this connection—

First, inclusion by sense base: the aggregate of form is included in eleven sense bases; the three aggregates (feeling, perception, and formations) are included in the Dhamma base; and the aggregate of consciousness is included in the mind base.

Next, inclusion by element: the aggregate of form is included in eleven elements; the three aggregates are included in the Dhamma element; and the aggregate of consciousness is included in seven elements. The aggregates of virtue, concentration, wisdom, and knowledge-and-vision of release are included in the Dhamma base and the Dhamma element; the aggregate of release is included in the Dhamma base and the mind base, and in the Dhamma element and the mind-consciousness element.

Then, inclusion by truth: the five aggregates may be included in truth or not included in truth. The five clinging aggregates are included in the truths of suffering and origin. The aggregates of virtue, concentration, and wisdom are included in the truth of the path; the aggregate of release is not included in truth; and the aggregate of knowledge-and-vision of release is included in the truth of suffering.

Four Alternatives concerning Aggregates and Truth

Some phenomena are included in the aggregates but not in the truths; some are included in the truths but not in the aggregates; some are included in both the aggregates and the truths; and some are included in neither the aggregates nor the truths.

In this connection:

Form not bound to a faculty, and fruits of recluseship associated with the path, are included in the aggregates but not in the truths.

Nibbāna is included in the truths but not in the aggregates.

The three truths are included in both the aggregates and the truths.

Regulation is included in neither the aggregates nor the truths.

Thus, through these approaches, one knows the method of distinguishing the aggregates. This is called the method concerning the aggregates. (The method concerning the aggregates is complete.)

One Irregular Closure

The first three approaches each close with a sentence of their own—the first says, “Thus it can be known by phrase-meaning”; the second, “Thus it can be known by characteristic”; and the third, “Thus it can be known by classification.” The fourth does not use this closing formula. Instead it says, “Thus, through these approaches, one knows the method of distinguishing the aggregates. This is called the method concerning the aggregates.”

After it comes a one-line interlinear note: “The method concerning the aggregates is complete.” It is recorded as it stands.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Phrase-Meaning, Characteristic, Classification, and Inclusion of the Five Aggregates · Vernacular · Summer 2026

The five aggregates have now been explained. This passage turns back and looks at them four more times.

The central observation can be stated first: this passage has the shape “four approaches look again, and the last gathers in the whole.” The first three each close with a sentence of their own; the fourth suddenly leaves that closing formula aside—because it closes not only that approach but the entire method concerning the aggregates.

And “method concerning the aggregates” is the first of the five major sections in this chapter. At the end of this passage, that first section closes its door.

First See the Frame: The Chapter’s Opening Sentence

To see this passage’s place clearly, we have to return to the opening of the chapter.

At its opening, the chapter says that the meditator “should arouse a method in five fields” 〔T32 445c13〕, “namely, the method concerning the aggregates, sense bases, elements, and conditionality” 〔T32 445c14〕, “and the method concerning noble truths” 〔T32 445c15〕. The five names are set down all at once; the text then opens and closes them one by one.

From there to here, the treatise has remained with the first—the aggregates. It explains form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness one by one. The final sentence on consciousness, “this is called the aggregate of consciousness; this is called the five aggregates” 〔T32 448b24〕, closes the five aggregates. Yet the method concerning the aggregates itself has not closed.

This passage is that closure.

General Heading: Four Approaches, One More than in the Previous Passage

The passage begins: “Further, these five aggregates are distinguished in four ways: by phrase-meaning” 〔T32 448b25〕, “by characteristic, by classification, and by inclusion” 〔T32 448b26〕.

The preceding passage has just used the same formula—the aggregate of consciousness is treated in “three ways.” Here there are four; the next passage on the twelve sense bases has five 〔T32 449a07〕. Three, four, five: the number rises across three consecutive passages. First the text announces the number of approaches, then names them, then poses a question for each; it repeats that procedure three times, word for word.

How to Read: Recognize the Form before Reading the Content

The reading practice this passage offers lies in the form of its four approaches: within a single passage, each of the four uses a different form, and not one form is repeated. Once the form is recognized, the content becomes quicker to read.

The first approach takes the form of definition, one item to a sentence: “form” 〔T32 448b26〕 “means manifestation; feeling means what can be felt; perception means knowing; formations mean making; consciousness” 〔T32 448b27〕 “means understanding” 〔T32 448b28〕—a given term has a given meaning, and nothing more.

The second approach suddenly changes form: “Question: How by characteristic? Answer: Form has its own form as its characteristic, like seeing a thorn; the four great elements” 〔T32 448b29〕 “are its basis. Feeling has feeling as its characteristic, like a grave leprous illness; contact is its basis” 〔T32 448c01〕. One characteristic, one simile, and one basis make a three-part sentence. This three-part form is not new—the thirty-two entries under the aggregate of formations two passages earlier all follow it 〔T32 447c13–448a18〕. After an intervening passage on consciousness that establishes not a single simile, it returns here and is applied to five entries.

The third changes again: it lists three kinds, giving each its own contents. The fourth changes once more: throughout it uses “is included” to assign membership, thirty occurrences in an unbroken run.

Four approaches, four forms. If the reader does not first recognize the form, the similes in the second approach will be taken as idle embellishment, and the repeated “is included” in the fourth as a heap of repetition. Once the forms are recognized, the point becomes clear: the second approach supplies images; the fourth establishes inclusion.

Second Approach: Five Bases, Three of Them Contact

The second approach deserves a closer look.

Form has the four great elements as its basis, and consciousness has name-and-form. Feeling, perception, and formations, however, all have contact as their basis 〔T32 448c01·448c02·448c03〕. Of five bases, three are tied to the same place.

The treatise does not explain why. Only the distribution itself can be verified: the middle three aggregates share one source, while the two at the ends each have their own basis. This edition records the distribution as it stands and does not supply a reconciliation.

The similes are also worth remembering: seeing a thorn, a grave leprous illness, making an image, turning a wheel, and knowing a taste. Of these five similes, half are drawn from pain and implements, and half from making and tasting—they follow the same path as the thirty-two everyday similes in the formations passage two sections earlier, without recourse to marvels.

Pause: Asked about Five Aggregates, the Answer Gives Six Items

Now pause at the first approach.

The question concerns the phrase-meanings of the five aggregates. The answer, however, lists six: form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness—and then, after “means understanding,” it adds “aggregate means a gathered class” 〔T32 448b28〕.

Within its account of the phrase-meanings of the five aggregates, the treatise also takes the occasion to explain the word “aggregate” itself.

Pause and ask one question: why explain this additional item?

This passage cannot answer. Only two things can be verified: first, the question concerns five aggregates but the answer gives six items; second, the four-character expression 種類集義, “gathered class,” occurs only once in the entire treatise 〔T32 448b28〕.

Its position is also striking—it does not stand before the five items as a general heading, but comes after them as the final entry. If it came first, the collective name would be established before the items were divided; coming last, it is as though the treatise turns back after explaining all five to add one sentence: why are all five called “aggregates”?

This edition records the extra item as it stands. It neither deletes it nor supplies an explanation for why it appears.

Fourth Approach: Three Kinds of Inclusion, Their Three Names Broken Apart by Punctuation

The opening of the fourth approach demands close attention: “Question: How by inclusion? Answer: inclusion is of three kinds: sense-base inclusion, element-inclusion-truth, inclusion” 〔T32 448c09〕.

The treatise itself reports three kinds. Yet the punctuation on the page joins “truth” to the end of “element inclusion,” leaving only the isolated word “inclusion” at the end.

The three names can still be recovered. The following discussion proceeds one by one in the order of sense base, element, and truth: first, “the aggregate of form is included in eleven sense bases; the three aggregates are included in the Dhamma base; the aggregate of consciousness in the mind base” 〔T32 448c10〕; next, eleven elements, the Dhamma element, and “the aggregate is included in seven elements” 〔T32 448c12〕; then, “the mind-consciousness element. The five aggregates may be included in truth or not included in truth” 〔T32 448c14〕. Sense base, element, truth: not one is missing.

Once again, the warrant for the restoration lies in the sequence that follows, not in the surface wording. This is already the sixth place in this chapter where context is needed to restore something run together or broken by punctuation. This edition records the original characters as they stand and does not alter the punctuation.

One further correspondence is worth recording. The aggregate of consciousness is “included in seven elements” 〔T32 448c12〕—and that seven is precisely the “seven consciousnesses” of the preceding passage 〔T32 448a26〕. When the number matches, the inclusion matches.

Four Alternatives: Not One Left Empty

The final part of the fourth approach gives four alternatives: “Some phenomena are included in the aggregates but not in truth; some are included in truth” 〔T32 448c17〕 “but not in the aggregates; some are included in both the aggregates and truth” 〔T32 448c18〕 “and some are included in neither the aggregates nor truth” 〔T32 448c19〕.

Aggregate but not truth; truth but not aggregate; both aggregate and truth; neither aggregate nor truth—the four alternatives are complete.

More important, each of the four alternatives gives its actual instance; not one is left empty. For aggregate but not truth, it names form not bound to a faculty and fruits of recluseship associated with the path, then continues: “Included. Nibbāna is included in truth but not in the aggregates. The three truths are included in the aggregates” 〔T32 448c21〕 “and also included in truth. Regulation is included in neither the aggregates nor truth” 〔T32 448c22〕.

The passage locks together tightly at one point. Since Nibbāna is included in truth but not in the aggregates, the “three” in “three truths” can only be suffering, origin, and path, without cessation—the treatise does not say this explicitly, but the four alternatives themselves compel it. This edition records only that internal connection and does not establish a separate thesis on the treatise’s behalf.

One further character occurs only once in the entire treatise: 制, “regulation” 〔T32 448c22〕. It is placed in the fourth alternative—neither included in the aggregates nor included in truth. The treatise does not explain its meaning, and this edition does not supply one.

The Final Approach Breaks the Pattern, and the Whole Closes with It

Now return to the central observation.

The first three approaches each close with a sentence of their own: “Thus they can be known by phrase-meaning” 〔T32 448b28〕, “Thus they can be known by characteristic” 〔T32 448c04〕, and “Thus they can be known by classification” 〔T32 448c08〕. All three follow one pattern.

What does the fourth do? It does not use that closing formula. Instead it says: “Thus, through these approaches, one knows the method of distinguishing the aggregates. This is called the method concerning the aggregates” 〔T32 448c23〕.

Once the closing formula breaks, the whole structure closes with it. By the time the fourth approach reaches its end, what it closes is no longer the approach of inclusion alone, but the entire method concerning the aggregates.

A one-line interlinear note follows: “(The method concerning the aggregates is complete)” 〔T32 448c24〕.

This “is complete” is not an isolated case. The same closing formula occurs five times in the entire treatise—448c24, 449c24, 450a16, 451c27, and 453b27. Those five closing formulas correspond one for one to the five methods in this chapter. The aggregate method ends here, the sense-base method at 449c24, the element method at 450a16, the method concerning conditionality at 451c27, and the method concerning noble truths at 453b27.

The chapter’s opening gives five names, and within the chapter five “is complete” formulas answer them. If those five closures are marked while reading, the chapter’s entire skeleton becomes visible at a glance—another reading practice to carry away.

One Critical Note Changed the Body Text

One final matter of wording should be recorded.

At the question in this passage, the Taishō text has 想, while the critical edition follows the Korean edition and changes it to 相; the body now before us reads 相 〔T32 448b29〕. This is not a note merely recording that “one witness reads such-and-such”: the critical edition changed the body text. This edition follows the character displayed in the critical text and therefore does not follow the Taishō reading here.

For a nearby comparison, the general heading names the approaches as “by characteristic, by classification, and by inclusion” 〔T32 448b26〕. Since the approach is named “characteristic,” reading “characteristic” in the question connects it with the general heading. This edition records only that local correspondence and does not adjudicate the reading.

The other note concerns 謂 in “consciousness has knowing as its characteristic”; all four witnesses read 識 instead 〔T32 448c03〕. If the four witnesses are followed, this entry differs slightly in syntax from the preceding four. Both readings are recorded without decision; the body follows the base.

---

Carry away three things. One observation: four approaches reexamine the aggregates, and the final approach does not use the standard closure. The first three end with their own closing formulas; the fourth changes to “Thus, through these approaches, one knows the method of distinguishing the aggregates. This is called the method concerning the aggregates” 〔T32 448c23〕. Once the closing formula breaks, the whole structure closes with it, and the first of the chapter’s five methods closes its door. One reading practice: recognize the form before reading the content. Within one passage the four approaches use four forms—definition, a three-part form, three classifications, and repeated inclusion—and not one is repeated; mark the five occurrences of “is complete” in the treatise as well, and the chapter’s skeleton becomes clear. One place to pause: the question asks for the phrase-meanings of five aggregates, but the answer gives six items. The extra “aggregate means a gathered class” 〔T32 448b28〕 comes after the five rather than before them. Why explain this additional item? This edition records it as it stands and does not delete it.

Remember three smaller matters as well: three of the five bases in the characteristic approach are contact 〔T32 448c01·448c02·448c03〕; punctuation breaks apart the three names under threefold inclusion, and the following sequence restores them 〔T32 448c09〕; since Nibbāna is included in truth but not in the aggregates, the three truths must be suffering, origin, and path, without cessation—the treatise does not say this explicitly, but the four alternatives themselves compel it.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Phrase-Meaning, Characteristic, Classification, and Inclusion of the Five Aggregates · Exposition · Summer 2026