解脫道論 因緣分類、三節與有生節

This passage begins with twelve questions in succession: among the twelve factors of conditionality, how many are defilements? How many are karma? How many are results? How many belong to the past, the future, and the present? How many are conditions? How many have arisen? What is conditionality? What is a conditioned dhamma? What is the difference between the two? What is the defiled nature of conditionality?

Twelve questions follow a single “Question” marker: this is the densest questioning in the entire treatise.

The answer begins with the numbers, and both sets add up: three are defilements, two are karma, and the remaining seven are results—3 + 2 + 7 makes exactly 12; two belong to the past, two to the future, and the remaining eight to the present—2 + 2 + 8 also makes exactly 12. The first three-part grouping is also paired with three similes, all drawn from a painter: like a painter’s colors, like a painter’s painted object, and like colors of many kinds.

Then the picture changes.

It should not be said that the twelve divisions themselves are “condition”; nor should it be said that “condition” exists apart from the twelvefold conditionality. Both sides are blocked. The same stop comes again when the text goes on to distinguish conditionality from conditioned dhamma: whether conditioned or unconditioned should not be said.

“Should not be said” occurs three times in this passage, and only eleven times in the entire treatise. Where the questions are densest, restraint also appears most often. The twelve questions are laid out, and the answer responds to each one; yet at the two most exacting points, its answer is, “This should not be said.”

Here is a tool to carry away: when questions come one after another, first count how many there are; then see how many the answer addresses, in what order it addresses them, and which one it sets aside. Without counting the questions first, you cannot see where the treatise itself holds back and does not speak.

Next the treatise gives a master heading of seven approaches: this conditionality can be known through seven approaches—three junctures, four summaries, twenty modes, wheel, drawing, analysis, and mutual inclusion. The formula should look familiar: the method concerning the aggregates has four approaches and the method concerning the sense bases has five; it was omitted altogether from the method concerning the elements, and here it returns. It returns in a slightly different form: the two-character expression “can be surpassed” is missing.

The first of the seven approaches is the three junctures. The treatise first states them once by factor names—between formations and consciousness is the first juncture, between feeling and craving the second, and between becoming and birth the third; it then immediately states them again by the three times—past karma and defilement condition present result at the first juncture, present result conditions present defilement at the second, and present defilement conditions future result at the third. The same set of junctures is stated once in each of two coordinate systems.

One place is worth pausing over for yourself. The treatise asks, “What does ‘becoming juncture’ mean?” yet closes the answer, “This is called the becoming-birth juncture”—the source name in the question has three characters, while the source name at the close has four; and “becoming-birth juncture” occurs only once in the entire treatise. Are these the same name? This edition records both as they stand and does not make them match.

The latter half tells how a person dies and is reborn: the faculties gradually fail; the life faculty and moisture are lost, like a palmyra leaf drying; four dhammas arise—karma, karma-sign, destination, and destination-sign; rapid mind arises and ceases, and with the cessation of the life faculty the end is complete; immediately after the final mind, resultant mind crosses into later becoming, as one lamp lights another, as fire comes from a fire-jewel. The two similes are placed side by side, and the treatise does not say why they are used together.

(Keep in mind, too, one thing that does not add up: at the end, the numbers of forms at conception rise in sequence—30, 46, and 54—yet the items listed beneath them, added according to the punctuation of the base text—30 + 2 + 8 = 40, and 30 + 3 + 8 = 41—both fail to match their announced totals. The treatise gives no method for its arithmetic. This stands in exact contrast to the two sets of 12 at the beginning, whose sums work at once; this edition records the figures as they stand and does not calculate on the text’s behalf.)

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Classifications, Junctures, and Rebirth · Doorway · Summer 2026

Twelve Questions in One Breath

Question: Of the twelve factors of conditionality, how many are called defilements? How many are called karma? How many are results? How many are past? How many are future? How many are present? How many are conditions? How many have arisen? What is conditionality? What is a conditioned dhamma? What is the difference between these two? What is the defiled nature of conditionality?

Within a single question, twelve interrogatives follow one after another: eight ask “how many,” two ask “what,” and the final two each take a different form. They are reproduced here as they stand.

Defilement, Karma, and Result

Answer: Three are defilements—ignorance, craving, and grasping. Two are karma—formations and becoming. The remaining seven are results.

Here, what is called defilement becomes a cause and gives rise to later becoming, like a painter’s pigments; the object does not arise by itself, like the colored object painted by the painter; defilements cause it to arise, and with conditions it comes into being, like colors of various kinds.

Three Times

Two are past—ignorance and formations. Two are future—birth and aging-and-death. The remaining eight are present.

By thus taking up the three times, the beginningless continuity of birth and death can be known.

Two Things That Should Not Be Said

It should not be said that the twelve divisions are conditionality; nor should it be said that conditionality exists apart from the twelvefold conditionality.

What Is Conditionality, and What Is a Conditioned Dhamma?

What, then, is conditionality? Because these twelve dhammas, in their sequence, turn one after another as causes, this is called conditionality.

What brings the twelve divisions of conditionality into arising is an arisen dhamma.

What is the difference between these two? Conditionality is distinct from formations; it is not accomplished and cannot be spoken of. It should not be said to be either conditioned or unconditioned. The formation that gives rise to a conditioned dhamma has become accomplished and conditioned. Herein lies the difference between these two dhammas.

What Is the Defiled Nature of Conditionality?

What is the defiled nature of conditionality? Through this activity and this characteristic, ignorance and formation come to be. Regarding that activity, that characteristic, and that nature, the noble person does not depend on another but penetrates them with the light of wisdom. All of this is called the defiled nature of conditionality.

Master Heading: Seven Approaches

Further, this conditionality can be known through seven approaches: through three junctures, through four summaries, through twenty modes, through the wheel, through drawing, through analysis, and through mutual inclusion.

The seven names are separated one by one with enumeration commas, with none run together; the treatise itself reports seven approaches, and the list yields exactly seven. They are reproduced here as they stand.

Three Junctures

What are the three junctures?

Between formations and consciousness is the first juncture; between feeling and craving is the second; between becoming and birth is the third.

Past karma and defilements condition present results: this is the first juncture. Present results condition present defilements: this is the second. Present defilements condition future results: this is the third.

The first and third are cause-result junctures and becoming junctures; the second is a result-cause juncture and not a becoming juncture.

Becoming Juncture

What does “becoming juncture” mean?

Answer: Immediately after the end, before the aggregates, bases, and elements have been crossed beyond, because initial karma and defilements serve as conditions, there is birth again among the various destinations—this is called the becoming-birth juncture.

The question says “What does ‘becoming juncture’ mean?” while the close says “this is called the becoming-birth juncture.” The name in the question and the name at the close differ. They are reproduced here as they stand and are not made to agree.

Signs of Death

Question: How does this come about?

Answer: An ordinary person who, in association with ignorance and craving, has made meritorious or harmful karma is at this time said to be dying.

Suffering through death, he lies where the dead are placed. He sees neither this world nor the next; having lost mindfulness, he cannot recollect. At this time he experiences the suffering of birth. Intention and knowledge decline; the body’s vigor declines; the faculties gradually fail. From the upper or lower part of the body, the life faculty is lost and moisture is lost, like a palmyra leaf drying.

Four Dhammas: Karma, Karma-Sign, Destination, and Destination-Sign

At this time, as in sleep and dream, through leaf four dhammas arise—karma, karma-sign, destination, and destination-sign.

What is karma? It is what he has done, whether meritorious or unmeritorious, heavy or light, much or little. As though near to what he first did, that karma arises.

What is a karma-sign? At the place where and on the support by which he performed karma, there arises a companion to the karma. When the karma-sign arises, at that time it may be as though he were performing the karma in the present.

What is destination? With merit as condition, a good destination arises; with nonmerit as condition, a bad destination arises.

What is called a destination-sign is this: when entering the womb, birth is obtained through the conjunction of three things; for spontaneous birth, one is born in dependence on a particular place, and the place where he will be born arises—perhaps a palace or a seat, a mountain or a tree or a river. It arises in accordance with his destination and the sign grasped together with it. At this time he goes there, perhaps leaning, sitting, or lying down; he sees it or grasps it.

Final Mind and Resultant Mind

At this time, the karma first performed and its karma-sign, or the destination and its destination-sign, serve as the object. Rapid mind manifests, arises, and ceases; when death comes, immediately after rapid mind, it ceases together with the life faculty and the end is complete.

Immediately after the final mind, in sequence, rapid mind arises, taking only that karma, that karma-sign, the destination, or the grasped sign as its object.

The resultant mind crosses over there into later becoming, as one lamp lights another lamp, as fire comes forth from a fire-jewel. That juncture-mind arises and is therefore like a companion.

Form at Conception

In the mother’s womb, dependent on the parents’ impure substances, thirty forms produced by karma arise; there are ten for the base and body.

For him, at the aging moment, across the mindless juncture, forty-six forms arise—thirty produced by karma, two forms produced by the food juncture, and eight forms across the mindless juncture.

At the aging moment together with the second mind, fifty-four forms arise—thirty produced by karma, three forms produced at the time of food, and eight.

Thus they arise: consciousness conditions name-and-form, and name-and-form conditions consciousness. In this way the becoming juncture is formed. Here it can be known through three junctures.

The three numbers—thirty, forty-six, and fifty-four—increase in sequence, yet if the items listed beneath them are added one by one according to the punctuation of the base text, thirty plus two plus eight makes forty, although the total is stated as forty-six; thirty plus three plus eight makes forty-one, although the total is stated as fifty-four. Neither sum agrees. The treatise gives no method of calculation. They are reproduced here as they stand; this edition neither calculates on the text’s behalf nor adds punctuation on its behalf.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Classifications, Junctures, and Rebirth · Vernacular · Summer 2026

Let the observation be stated first: This passage sets down twelve questions in one breath, making it the densest stretch of questioning in the entire treatise; and “should not be said” appears three times in the answer. The place where questioning is densest is precisely also the place that most often says, “this should not be said.”

One is density and one is restraint: the two sides of the same passage.

Twelve Questions

The questions are posed like this: “In a single moment the twelve factors of conditionality are formed. Question: Of those twelve factors, how many are called” 〔T32 450c13〕 “defilements? How many are called karma? How many are results? How many are past? How many are future? How many are present?” 〔T32 450c14〕 “How many are conditions? How many have arisen? What is conditionality? What is a conditioned dhamma? How do” 〔T32 450c15〕 “the two differ? What is the defiled nature of conditionality?” 〔T32 450c16〕

Under a single “Question:” come twelve questions in succession. Eight ask “how many,” two ask “what,” and the final two each take a different form.

This is the densest stretch of questioning in the entire treatise. Elsewhere, questions usually come one question and one answer at a time, with at most three or four asked together; here there are twelve.

First Count What Adds Up: Two Sets of Twelve

The answer begins with the numbers.

The first set: “the two differ? What is the defiled nature of conditionality? Answer: Three are defilements—ignorance, craving, and” 〔T32 450c16〕 “grasping. Two are karma—formations and becoming. The remaining seven are result” 〔T32 450c17〕—three plus two plus seven gives exactly twelve.

The second set: “the painted object. Defilement brings it forth; with conditions it comes to birth, like varied colors. Two are past—” 〔T32 450c19〕 “ignorance and formations. Two are future—birth and aging-and-death. The remaining eight are present” 〔T32 450c20〕—two plus two plus eight also gives exactly twelve, with the final factor, “aging-and-death,” counted as one.

Both sets add up. This is worth remembering, because near the end of this passage there is a place that does not add up (see below).

For the threefold division, the treatise also provides three similes, all using a painter: defilement is like a painter’s colors; the object does not arise by itself, like the object painted by the painter; defilement brings it forth, and with conditions it comes to birth, like varied colors. One matter, three similes, and all three draw on the same image—the source term “painter,” written with two characters, appears only these two times in the entire treatise, both in this one sentence.

Then Three Occurrences of “Should Not Be Said”

The tone then suddenly changes.

“With this taking of the three times, beginningless continuity through birth and death can be known. That the twelve factors are conditionality” 〔T32 450c21〕 “should not be said; that apart from the twelvefold conditionality there is conditionality also should not be said” 〔T32 450c22〕—it should not be said that the twelve factors themselves are conditionality; it should also not be said that another conditionality exists apart from the twelvefold conditionality.

Both sides are blocked.

A third comes further on, when the difference between conditionality and conditioned dhamma is explained: “conditionality differs among formations; not accomplished, it cannot be stated; whether conditioned or unconditioned” 〔T32 450c25〕 “should not be said” 〔T32 450c26〕.

In this passage, “should not be said” appears three times; in the entire treatise it appears only eleven times. More than a quarter of them are crowded into this passage.

This is the shape of the passage: where questioning is densest, restraint is most frequent. Twelve questions line up, and the answer responds to them one by one; yet when it reaches the two most pressing points, what it says is “this should not be said.” This edition records the text as it stands and does not decide the matter for it, nor does it infer a position from this.

Reading Practice: When Questions Come in a Series, Count the Questions, Then the Answers

This passage offers a very practical reading method: when you meet a series of questions, first count how many questions there are; then see how many the answer addresses, in what order it addresses them, and which one it leaves aside.

Applied here: there are twelve questions, and the answer responds roughly in order—first the three divisions (one through three), then the three times (four through six). At the seventh and eighth questions (“How many are conditions?” and “How many have arisen?”), the answer consists of two “should not be said” clauses and the statement “What brings the twelve factors of conditionality into arising is an arisen dhamma” 〔T32 450c24〕; the ninth and tenth questions each receive an explanation; the eleventh (“How do the two differ?”) receives a dedicated answer; and the twelfth (“What is the defiled nature of conditionality?”) also receives a dedicated answer and closes with “This is called the defiled nature of conditionality.”

What is answered and what should not be said both appear in the same answer. Unless one first counts the questions clearly, one cannot see where the treatise itself holds back from speaking.

Conditionality and Conditioned Dhamma: The Difference Is “Accomplished”

The two terms asked about in “How do the two differ?” receive a very short answer. It is worth copying them out and looking at them.

Conditionality is: “Conditionality? Because these twelve dhammas, in sequence, turn about as causes for one another, this is called conditionality” 〔T32 450c23〕—the twelve dhammas serve as causes for one another in sequence, and this “serving as causes for one another in sequence” itself is called conditionality. A conditioned dhamma is: “What brings the twelve factors of conditionality into arising is an arisen dhamma” 〔T32 450c24〕—the arisen dhamma that brings the twelve factors of conditionality into arising.

Where is the difference? “A formation that gives rise to a conditioned dhamma has become accomplished and conditioned; these two” 〔T32 450c26〕 “dhammas differ” 〔T32 450c27〕. One remains “unaccomplished,” so it should not be said to be conditioned or unconditioned; the other has become accomplished and conditioned.

Put another way: conditionality is a relation; a conditioned dhamma is a thing. As for the relation, it should not be called either conditioned or unconditioned (the treatise says this should not be said), while the thing has already become accomplished and conditioned. This edition states only this much according to the text and does not press the treatise further.

A Structural Form That Disappeared and Then Returned

The seven-approach master heading appears here: “penetrates it with luminous understanding. All this is called the defiled nature of conditionality. Again” 〔T32 450c29〕 “this conditionality can be known through seven approaches: through the three junctures, through the four summaries,” 〔T32 451a01〕 “through twenty modes, through wheel, through drawing, through analysis, and through mutual inclusion” 〔T32 451a02〕.

The reader should recognize this pattern: in the aggregate method, four approaches; in the sense-base method, five approaches—first announce the number of approaches, next list their names, and then pose questions under each in turn. The element-method passage omits the entire pattern. In the conditionality method, it returns.

Yet it returns in a slightly different form: the aggregate and sense-base passages contain the expressions “can be surpassed through four approaches” and “can be surpassed through five approaches,” whereas here it says “can be known through seven approaches”—the two-character expression “can be surpassed” is absent. This edition records the wording as it stands and does not supply it.

There is one more point that does add up: the seven names here are separated one by one with enumeration marks, with nothing run together; the treatise announces seven approaches, and counting gives exactly seven. In the two earlier master headings of the same kind in this chapter, one is broken apart by punctuation (“base inclusion, element inclusion truth, inclusion”), while the other is written continuously without breaks (“through domain through condition”). The same pattern has three forms in three places; this is the cleanest written of the three.

Three Junctures: The Same Thing in Two Coordinate Systems

The first of the seven approaches is the three junctures.

The treatise first states them through the factor-names: “How are they known through three junctures? Between formations and consciousness is the first juncture; between feeling and craving is the” 〔T32 451a03〕 “second juncture; between becoming and birth is the third juncture” 〔T32 451a04〕.

It immediately states them again through the three times: “In the past, karma” 〔T32 451a04〕 “and defilement condition present result; this is the first juncture. Present result” 〔T32 451a05〕 “conditions present defilement; this is the second juncture. Present defilement conditions future” 〔T32 451a06〕 “result; this is the third juncture” 〔T32 451a07〕.

The same division is stated once in each of two coordinate systems: once in terms of the names of the twelve factors, and once in terms of past, present, and future. Set the two accounts side by side, and it becomes very clear where the three “junctures” fall.

Then the treatise classifies the three junctures: “result, the third juncture. The first and third are cause-result junctures and becoming junctures; the second” 〔T32 451a07〕 “juncture is a result-cause juncture and not a becoming juncture” 〔T32 451a08〕. The first and third are cause-result junctures and also becoming junctures; the second is a result-cause juncture and not a becoming juncture.

Four names appear together, and the treatise gives not one of them a definition. Only the “becoming juncture” receives a question.

Pause: The Question Says “Becoming Juncture,” the Close Says “Becoming-Birth Juncture”

Now pause at this sentence.

“the juncture is a result-cause juncture and not a becoming juncture. What does ‘becoming juncture’ mean? Answer: Immediately after death, before” 〔T32 451a08〕 “passing beyond the aggregates, bases, and elements; because of initial karma and defilement as conditions, there is renewed birth in the various destinations;” 〔T32 451a09〕 “this is called the becoming-birth juncture” 〔T32 451a10〕.

In the source, the name in the question has three characters: 有節. The name at the close has four characters: 有生節.

And the three-character name “有生節” occurs only once in the entire treatise.

Pause and ask: Are these the same name?

If they are the same, then between the question and the answer the treatise has added one character to the name. If they are not, then the “becoming juncture” that was asked about has still not received its own closing formula. Only two things can be verified: the question reads “What does ‘becoming juncture’ mean?”; the answer closes “This is called the becoming-birth juncture.” This edition records both as they stand and does not make them match, nor does it choose one as correct.

The Passage on Death and an Addition That Does Not Add Up

The second question is answered by “This is called the becoming-birth juncture. Question: How does it occur? Answer: That person enters into association with ignorance and craving” 〔T32 451a10〕. The answer describes how a person dies and how a person is reborn.

First comes the breakdown of the bodily signs: intention and knowing decline, bodily vigor declines, and the faculties gradually fail—“decline; the faculties gradually fail. From the body, whether above or below, the life faculty is lost, and” 〔T32 451a14〕 “moisture is lost, as a palmyra leaf dries” 〔T32 451a15〕. The palmyra leaf dries—this is the only time this simile is used in the entire treatise.

Next come “through the leaf, four” 〔T32 451a15〕 “dhammas arise: karma, karma-sign, destination, and destination-sign” 〔T32 451a16〕. The four dhammas are explained one by one: karma is the meritorious or unmeritorious deed that was done; karma-sign is the companion that arises at the place where karma was done; destination is the arising of one of the two destinations, good or bad; destination-sign is the appearance of the place where birth will occur—a palace, a seat, a mountain, a tree, or a river.

Then comes the series of minds: rapid mind arises and ceases; the life faculty ceases and the end is completed; immediately after the final mind, rapid mind arises again; “destination or a grasped sign performs its function. At the locus of resultant mind it crosses into later becoming, as one lamp” 〔T32 451a28〕 “lights another, as fire issues from a fire-jewel” 〔T32 451a29〕.

Here two similes follow one another—a lamp lighting another lamp, and fire issuing from a fire-jewel. The two similes are placed side by side, yet the treatise does not say why they are used together, nor whether the two similes make the same point or two different points. Each simile occurs only once in the entire treatise. This edition records them as they stand and does not reconcile them.

Last comes form at conception. “In the mother’s womb, dependent on the parents’ impure substances, thirty forms made by karma arise, locus” 〔T32 451b01〕 “body has ten” 〔T32 451b02〕; at the aging moment, across a mindless juncture, forty-six forms arise; at the aging moment together with the second mind, fifty-four forms arise.

The three numbers rise in sequence: thirty, forty-six, fifty-four.

But if the items listed beneath them are added according to the base text’s punctuation: “arise. Thirty made by karma, two forms made at the food juncture, and eight mindless-juncture” 〔T32 451b03〕 forms—thirty plus two plus eight gives forty, yet it is labeled forty-six; “thirty are formed, three forms are made at the time of food, and eight; thus they arise, consciousness conditions” 〔T32 451b05〕—thirty plus three plus eight gives forty-one, yet it is labeled fifty-four.

Neither one adds up.

This forms an exact contrast with the two sets of twelve at the beginning of the passage (three plus two plus seven; two plus two plus eight): within the same passage, the earlier additions agree as soon as they are calculated, while the later additions do not. The treatise gives no method of calculation here. This edition records the numbers as they stand; it does not repair the arithmetic, and it does not add punctuation on the treatise’s behalf—because the items and numbers here present precisely the same sort of run-on writing encountered throughout this chapter, and this time even the context cannot supply what is missing.

The final sentence is “name-and-form; name-and-form conditions consciousness. Thus the becoming juncture is formed; in this way, through the three junctures” 〔T32 451b06〕 “it can be known” 〔T32 451b07〕. The first of the seven approaches is complete here.

---

Carry away three things: one observation—this passage sets down twelve questions in one breath (eight “how many,” two “what,” and the final two each distinct), making it one of the densest stretches of questioning in the entire treatise; and “should not be said” appears three times in the answer 〔T32 450c22（二見）·450c26〕, while it occurs only eleven times in the entire treatise. Where questioning is densest, restraint is most frequent. One reading method—when questions come in a series, first count the questions, then count the answers: only after counting the questions clearly can you see which ones the answer addresses and which it leaves aside. One place to pause—the question reads “What does ‘becoming juncture’ mean?” while the close reads “This is called the becoming-birth juncture” 〔T32 451a08·451a10〕; the name in the question has three source characters, while the name at the close has four (the source name “有生節” occurs only once in the entire treatise): are these the same name? This edition records them as they stand and does not make them match.

Three smaller points should also be remembered: the two sets of twelve—the threefold division and the three times—both add up, while the two totals for form at conception near the end do not (thirty plus two plus eight is forty, though the total is given as forty-six; thirty plus three plus eight is forty-one, though the total is given as fifty-four), and the treatise supplies no method of calculation; the master-heading pattern is absent from the element method and returns in this passage, but it reads only “can be known through seven approaches,” lacking the two-character expression “can be surpassed,” while its seven names are individually separated, the cleanest of the three such headings in this chapter; at death the similes of one lamp lighting another and fire issuing from a fire-jewel are given one after the other, each occurs only once in the entire treatise, and the treatise does not reconcile them.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Classifications, Junctures, and Rebirth · Exposition · Summer 2026