解脫道論 三解脫一道人與煩惱斷治

The longest passage in the whole treatise, one thousand three hundred sixty-nine characters, and from beginning to end a single paragraph.

Midway through, the author states a number: the defilements are one hundred thirty-four. Immediately after it he opens a general heading, twenty topic-names read straight through, with nothing but list punctuation between them.

Read straight past, that is a string of names. But add up the number attached to each topic—three, three, four, four, four, four, four, four, five, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, ten, ten, ten, twelve, twelve—and it comes to exactly one hundred thirty-four.

Not off by a hair.

That one sum changes the character of the passage: this is not a list opened at random but a register with a running total, one that balances. When the author stated his number, he had counted.

And the same sum can be run the other way, to catch an error.

The Taishō base reads that topic as 四慳, “four stinginesses.” Adding it as four gives only one hundred thirty-three—one short.

Three graphs further on in the very same sentence, the answer is handed over: what that topic lists is dwelling, family, gains, form, and Dhamma—five; and its closing clause reads “these five are extinguished by the non-returner path”—five again. Both of these are the Taishō text’s own words, and neither has been touched by emendation.

The critical edition changes 四 to 五. The body lists five, the body closes with five, and the sum of the whole heading balances against the author’s own stated total only at five—three places pointing at one graph.

Here is a tool to carry away: whenever the treatise states a total for itself and then sets out a number of topics beneath it, add each topic’s number up and check the sum once. If it agrees, the skeleton of the passage is in your hands; if it does not, the size of the gap is itself the clue—it will tell you which topic has gone wrong.

Three further places in this same passage read irregularly in the base while a witness variant would exactly make them regular: the nine conceits are headed nine but list only eight; the abandoning clause for the second “ten bases of vexation” reads “ten” while its own list runs to only nine; and among the twelve unwholesome arisings one item is short the graph for “arising.”

The three are shaped much like “five stinginesses,” but they are handled differently: in those three the critical edition did not amend the body at all—it only entered a variant—so the body still follows the base, and the two readings are simply set down together. The measure lies in whether the critical edition amended the body, not in which reading runs more smoothly.

One seam is left that the author himself did not close: the general heading opens twenty topics, while the body explains twenty-one—“ten bases of vexation” appears twice, and what the two refer to is entirely different. The heading holds only one place for it. Whether that extra topic is counted within the one hundred thirty-four, the author does not say a word about.

The last sentence merely names two things: the two attainments. Not one graph of explanation, all of it left to the two passages that follow.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Three Liberations on One Path and the Abandoning of Defilements · Doorway · Summer 2026

1. Mutually Attaining the Three Liberations on One Path

Question: How does attaining the three liberations become one path?

Answer: Having attained signless liberation, one comes to attain the three liberations.

Why? Through signlessness this person’s mind is liberated. Although liberated, through what has already been done and through appropriating the desireless liberation already attained, the three liberations become what is attained.

Why? Through construction, the mind is liberated—through liberation.

Through sign and appropriation, one attains emptiness liberation; the three liberations are also attained together.

Why? If the mind is liberated through appropriation, it is through liberation, sign, and construction.

Thus, having attained the three liberations, one accomplishes one path.

2. What Is the Difference Between Liberation and a Door of Liberation?

What is the difference between liberation and a door of liberation?

Answer: Only that path knowledge, liberated from defilements, is called liberation. In the sense of a door through which one enters the clarified essence, it is called a door of liberation.

Furthermore, liberation is only path knowledge; the object on which it depends is Nibbāna, and this is called a door of liberation.

3. General Heading of the Defilements

The defilements are 134 defilements: three unwholesome roots, three seekings, four influxes, four knots, four floods, four bonds, four clingings, four courses to bad destinations, five stinginesses, five hindrances, six roots of dispute, seven tendencies, the worldly eight conditions, nine conceits, ten bases of vexation, ten unwholesome courses of action, ten knots, ten wrong extremes, twelve inversions, and twelve unwholesome arisings of mind.

This heading contains twenty numbered topics. What follows names each topic and assigns the path by which it is abandoned.

4. Names of the Topics and Their Abandoning

Three Unwholesome Roots

The three unwholesome roots are greed, aversion, and delusion.

Of these three, aversion becomes attenuated through two paths and is extinguished without remainder by the non-returner path. Greed and delusion become attenuated through three paths and are extinguished without remainder by the arahant path.

Three Seekings

The three seekings are seeking sensual desire, seeking existence, and seeking the holy life.

Of these, seeking the holy life is extinguished without remainder by the stream-entry path; seeking sensual desire is extinguished by the non-returner path; and seeking existence by the arahant path.

Four Influxes

The four influxes are the influxes of sensual desire, existence, views, and ignorance.

The influx of views is extinguished by the stream-entry path; the influx of sensual desire by the non-returner path; and the influxes of existence and ignorance by the arahant path.

Four Knots

The four knots are the body-knot of sensual desire (貪欲身結), the body-knot of aversion, the body-knot of stealing discipline (戒盜身結), and the body-knot of appropriation of this truth.

The body-knot of stealing discipline and the body-knot of appropriation of this truth are extinguished by the stream-entry path; the body-knot of aversion by the non-returner path; and the body-knot of greed (貪身結) by the arahant path.

(The list says 貪欲身結, “body-knot of sensual desire,” while the abandoning statement says 貪身結, “body-knot of greed.” The forms remain distinct.)

Four Floods and Four Bonds

The four floods are the floods of sensual desire, existence, views, and ignorance.

The four bonds are the bonds of sensual desire, existence, views, and ignorance.

They are extinguished as stated in the first case.

(These two topics share one abandoning statement, the only such case in the passage.)

Four Clingings

The four clingings are clinging to sensual desire, clinging to views, clinging to discipline (戒取), and clinging to a doctrine of self.

Of these, three clingings are extinguished by the stream-entry path; clinging to sensual desire is extinguished by the arahant path.

(“Three clingings” gathers the three without naming each. It remains as written.)

Four Courses to Bad Destinations

The four courses to bad destinations are the courses through desire, aversion, fear, and delusion.

These four are extinguished by the stream-entry path.

Five Stinginesses

The five stinginesses are stinginess over dwelling, family, gains, form, and Dhamma.

These five are extinguished by the non-returner path.

Five Hindrances

The five hindrances are sensual desire, aversion, sloth, sleep, and the unsegmented Chinese sequence 調慢疑—agitation, conceit, doubt.

Of these, doubt is extinguished by the stream-entry path; sensual desire, aversion, and conceit by the non-returner path; sloth and agitation by the arahant path; and 睡眠隨色—literally, “sleep follows form.”

(The heading says five, while the abandoning statement names seven: doubt, sensual desire, aversion, conceit, sloth, agitation, and sleep. Its last listed item is the three-graph sequence 調慢疑; the text does not segment it. The final handling, 睡眠隨色, does not assign sleep to any path. Both irregularities remain as written.)

Six Roots of Dispute

The six roots of dispute are anger, concealment, envy, deceit, delight in evil, and contact with views.

Deceit, delight in evil, and contact with views are extinguished by the stream-entry path; anger, concealment, and envy by the non-returner path.

(This topic ends at the non-returner path and has no arahant-path portion.)

Seven Tendencies

The seven tendencies are the tendency to sensual attachment, aversion, conceit, views, doubt, the desire-for-existence tendency (有欲使), and ignorance.

The tendencies to views and doubt are extinguished by the stream-entry path; sensual attachment and aversion by the non-returner path; and conceit, the existence tendency (有使), and ignorance by the arahant path.

(The list says 有欲使, “desire-for-existence tendency,” while the abandoning statement says 有使, “existence tendency.” They remain distinct.)

The Worldly Eight Worldly Conditions

The worldly eight worldly conditions are gain, loss, disgrace, fame, praise, blame, suffering, and pleasure.

Aversion toward the four unwelcome conditions is extinguished by the non-returner path; the tendency toward the four welcome conditions by the arahant path.

(The general heading says 八法, “eight conditions,” while this explanation says 八世法, “eight worldly conditions.” They remain visibly distinct.)

Nine Conceits

The nine conceits are: from another who is superior, “I am superior”; with one who is superior, “I am equal”; from one who is superior, “I am inferior”; from one who is equal, “I am equal”; from one who is equal, “I am inferior”; from one who is inferior, “I am superior”; from one who is inferior, “I am equal”; and from one who is inferior, “I am inferior.”

The nine conceits are extinguished by the arahant path.

(The topic is called nine, but only eight statements are listed. No ninth statement is supplied.)

Ten Bases of Vexation: First

The ten bases of vexation are greed, aversion, delusion, conceit, views, doubt, sloth, agitation, shamelessness, and lack of moral dread.

Views and doubt are extinguished by the stream-entry path; aversion by the non-returner path; the remaining seven by the arahant path.

(The general heading says “ten bases of defilement,” while the explanation says “ten bases of vexation.” Its abandoning statement uniquely gathers “the remaining seven.”)

Ten Bases of Vexation: Second

The ten bases of vexation are these: a person becomes vexed because another has done, is doing, or will do what is harmful to me; because that person has done, is doing, or will do what is harmful to someone dear to me; and because a person not dear to me has done, is doing, or will do something, one becomes vexed in an inappropriate place.

The ten bases of vexation are extinguished by the non-returner path.

(This bears the same name as the preceding topic but denotes something entirely different. It has no separate position in the twenty-topic heading. The base nevertheless says “ten,” although the three persons multiplied by three times yield nine; the witnesses’ “nine” has not been adopted.)

Ten Unwholesome Courses of Action

The ten unwholesome courses of action are killing, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, harsh speech, divisive speech, frivolous speech, greed, aversion, and wrong view.

Killing, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, false speech, and wrong view are extinguished by the stream-entry path; harsh and divisive speech and aversion by the non-returner path; frivolous speech and greed by the arahant path.

Ten Tendencies

The ten tendencies (十使) are sensual attachment, aversion, conceit, views, doubt, clinging to discipline, attachment to existence, envy, stinginess, and ignorance.

Views, doubt, and clinging to discipline are extinguished by the stream-entry path; sensual attachment, aversion, envy, and stinginess by the non-returner path; and conceit, attachment to existence, and ignorance by the arahant path.

(The general heading says 十結, “ten knots,” while this explanation says 十使, “ten tendencies.” They remain visibly distinct.)

Ten Wrong Extremes

The ten wrong extremes are wrong view, wrong thought, wrong speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration, wrong knowledge, and wrong liberation.

Wrong view, false speech as wrong speech, action, wrong livelihood, wrong knowledge, and wrong liberation are extinguished by the stream-entry path; wrong thought, harsh and divisive speech as wrong speech by the non-returner path; and frivolous speech as wrong speech, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, and wrong concentration by the arahant path.

(The single name “wrong speech” is distributed across all three paths.)

Twelve Inversions

The twelve inversions are the inversion of perception, mind, and view that takes the impermanent as permanent; and likewise the painful as pleasant, the impure as pure, and not-self as self.

The three inversions that take the impermanent as permanent, the three that take not-self as self, the inversion of view that takes the impure as pure, and the inversion of view that takes suffering as pleasure are extinguished by the stream-entry path. The inversions of perception and mind that take the impure as pure are extinguished by the non-returner path. The inversions of perception and mind that take suffering as pleasure are extinguished by the arahant path.

Twelve Unwholesome Arisings of Mind

The twelve unwholesome arisings of mind are: an unprompted arising of mind associated with views and accompanied by joy, and a prompted arising; an unprompted arising not associated with views and accompanied by joy, and a prompted arising; an unprompted arising associated with views and accompanied by equanimity, and a prompted arising; an unprompted arising not associated with views and accompanied by equanimity, and a prompted arising; an unprompted arising associated with aversion and accompanied by grief, and a prompted mind (有行心); an arising of mind accompanied by agitation; and an arising of mind accompanied by doubt.

Of these, the four arisings associated with views and the arising accompanied by doubt are extinguished by the stream-entry path. Two associated arisings become attenuated through two paths and are extinguished without remainder by the non-returner path. The four arisings not associated with views and the arising accompanied by agitation become attenuated through three paths and are extinguished without remainder by the arahant path.

(The prompted item in the grief-and-aversion pair says only 有行心, “prompted mind,” while the other eleven items say “arising of mind.” The witnesses’ regularized 心起 has not been adopted.)

5. Final Heading of the Two Attainments

The two attainments are two attainments not shared with ordinary persons: accomplishment in fruition, and the attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling.

The final sentence gives only their names. They are explained in the next two passages.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Three Liberations on One Path and the Abandoning of Defilements · Vernacular · Summer 2026

This is the longest unit in the book: 1,369 Chinese characters in one continuous paragraph. It first discharges the “one path” left by the preceding passage, then gives twenty headings for defilements and assigns each to the path by which it is abandoned.

The finding comes first. The text announces “134 defilements,” and the numbers in its twenty-topic heading add to exactly 134. That sum depends on the item “five stinginesses.” The Taishō base says “four stinginesses,” which yields 133, even though the item lists five and closes “these five.” The critical edition changes four to five, aligning the list, the close, and the announced total.

First Discharging the Other Half of “One Path”

The preceding passage closed only “through contemplation, on diverse paths.” This unit immediately supplies the other half: “Question: How does attaining the three liberations become one path? Answer: Having attained signless liberation, one comes to attain the three liberations” 〔T32 459c21–23〕.

The answer gives three branches. One who attains signless liberation attains all three; “although liberated, through what has already been done and through appropriating the desireless liberation already attained, the three liberations become what is attained” 〔T32 459c23–25〕; and “through sign and appropriation, one attains emptiness liberation; the three liberations are also attained” 〔T32 459c25–26〕.

Only after all three does the text close: “Thus, having attained the three liberations, one accomplishes one path” 〔T32 459c27–28〕.

Each branch bears “Why?” but none of the three is introduced by the graph for “Question.” The explicit “Question:” occurs only at the unit’s opening; the three “Why?” prompts and the next section’s “What is the difference?” remain unlabelled. This is a small formal fact, nothing more.

Liberation and Door of Liberation: One Question, Two Answers

The next section asks, “What is the difference between liberation and a door of liberation? Answer: Only that path knowledge, liberated from defilements, is called liberation” 〔T32 459c28–29〕, then adds: “in the sense of a door through which one enters the clarified essence, it is called a door of liberation” 〔T32 459c29–460a01〕.

This first answer distinguishes functions: release from defilements is liberation; serving as the entrance to the clarified essence is a door of liberation.

The author then answers again: “Furthermore, liberation is only path knowledge; the object on which it depends is Nibbāna, and this is called a door of liberation” 〔T32 460a01–02〕.

The second answer changes the division: liberation is the knowledge, and the door of liberation is the object on which that knowledge depends—Nibbāna. The first answer divides by function, the second by substance and object.

One question and two answers, and the author does not say which is primary and which subsidiary; he simply joins them with 復次, “furthermore.” This device occurs in more than one place in the treatise—the topic of “ground” in the preceding passage is joined the same way. Recorded, not adjudicated.

A Stated Total

The third section consists of only two sentences, but they are the passage’s skeleton.

The first says: “The defilements are 134 defilements” 〔T32 460a02〕. This expression occurs only once in the treatise.

The second gives the heading: “three unwholesome roots, three seekings, four influxes, four knots, four floods, four bonds, four clingings, four courses to bad destinations, five stinginesses, five hindrances, six roots of dispute, seven tendencies, the worldly eight conditions, nine conceits, ten bases of vexation, ten unwholesome courses of action, ten knots, ten wrong extremes, twelve inversions, and twelve unwholesome arisings of mind” 〔T32 460a03–06〕.

Twenty topics run together. Read straight through, they look like a chain of names; structurally, they are a register that can be audited by addition.

Reading Method: When the Text States a Total, Add the Items

The method is direct: whenever a text announces a total and then lists numbered items, add the numbers and test the claim.

Counted that way: three, three, four, four, four, four, four, four, five, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, ten, ten, ten, twelve, twelve.

Added up—one hundred thirty-four.

Not off by a hair from the total the treatise states for itself.

Once that sum is taken, the character of the passage changes. It is not a list opened at random but a register with a running total, one that balances; when the author stated his number, he had counted.

And more important still: the same sum can be run the other way, to catch an error. If the numeral of some topic is wrong, the total will not agree; and the size of the gap points straight at the place where the trouble lies. This passage has exactly such a place.

The Threefold Internal Evidence for That Item

The Taishō base reads 四慳, “four stinginesses,” here.

Adding by four gives a sum of one hundred thirty-three—one less than the total the treatise states for itself.

And the critical edition reads 五 here. Adding by five gives exactly one hundred thirty-four.

And that is not the only witness. Reading on in the same sentence, the author sets out the names of this topic one by one: “the five stingi­nesses are stinginess as to dwelling, as to family, as to gains, as to form, and as to Dhamma” 〔T32 460a23–24〕, closing “these five are extinguished by the non-returner path” 〔T32 460a24〕.

Dwelling, family, gains, form, Dhamma—what is listed is five.

And the closing words of this topic read “these five are extinguished by the non-returner path”—what is gathered is five as well.

What matters is this: the five names listed and that clause 此五 are the Taishō base’s own words, and neither has been emended. Within one and the same sentence, that is, the Taishō base heads it as four, lists five, and gathers as five.

So three places converge: the body lists five, the body gathers five, and the sum of the whole heading balances against the stated total only at five. The critical edition changes 四 to 五, and all three agree.

By this edition’s general rule, where the critical edition has amended the body, the text follows the corrected reading rather than the Taishō base; this is such a place. And what permits saying so is not that other witnesses write it this way, but that three places in the treatise itself point together at one graph.

(One more thing worth noting in passing: among the twenty-one topics of the passage, only two gather by a numeral—“these four are extinguished by the stream-entry path” 〔T32 460a22–23〕 and “these five are extinguished by the non-returner path” 〔T32 460a24〕. Every other topic ties its members to a path by name. And the topic where the trouble falls happens to be one of those two.)

Pause: A Twenty-Topic Heading but Twenty-One Explanations

Once the sum is taken, there is one more thing to stop and look at.

The general heading opens twenty topics. Yet reading down through them, what is explained is twenty-one.

Here is the one that is extra: “the ten bases of vexation are greed, aversion, delusion, conceit, views, doubt, sloth, agitation, shamelessness, and fearlessness of wrongdoing” 〔T32 460b10–11〕—this is the first ten bases of vexation, a list of ten names.

And immediately after it another arrives: “as for the ten bases of vexation, this person has done, is doing, or will do what is not beneficial to me, and vexation arises” 〔T32 460b12–13〕—this is the second ten bases of vexation, and it speaks of three kinds of person (myself, one I hold dear, one I do not hold dear) each set against three times (done, doing, will do), with a further clause at the end: “as for one I do not hold dear, that person has done, is doing, or will do it, and vexation arises where it has no ground” 〔T32 460b15–16〕.

One and the same name, occurring twice, and what the two refer to is entirely different. The first is a list of ten defilements by name; the second is the ground on which resentment arises.

And in the general heading there is only one place for it—十煩惱處, “ten bases of defilement.”

Stop and ask: does this topic count within the one hundred thirty-four?

Let the text answer for itself. Three things can be checked:

First, the sum of the heading’s twenty topics already comes to one hundred thirty-four—the places are already full. Were the second ten bases of vexation counted in as well, the sum would become one hundred forty-four.

Second, the name used in the general heading is 十煩惱處, which occurs only this once in the treatise, while the body’s explanations both read 十惱處. Between heading and explanation there is already a one-graph difference.

Third, the author says not a word himself—he neither states whether the two are the same or different, nor which of them answers to that one place in the heading.

This edition sets down only these three and does not decide on the author’s behalf whether the second ten bases of vexation ought to be counted. He stated a number, opened twenty topics, and explained twenty-one; the seam between the three he did not close himself.

Three Places Where Witnesses Could Regularize an Irregular Base

Three further places in this passage read irregularly in the base while a witness variant would exactly smooth them out. In all three this edition records without amending, and the body still follows the base; but each is worth a look, because their shape is the same.

The first is in the nine conceits.

“The nine conceits are: from one who is superior, conceit ‘I am superior’; toward one superior, conceit ‘I am equal’; from one superior, conceit ‘I am inferior’” 〔T32 460b06–07〕, and then “from one equal, conceit ‘I am equal’; from one equal, conceit ‘I am inferior’; from one inferior, conceit ‘I am superior’; from one inferior, conceit ‘I am equal’; from one inferior, conceit ‘I am inferior’” 〔T32 460b07–09〕.

This topic is named the nine conceits. And counting what is listed, there are only eight statements.

The nine conceits are by nature three times three: three kinds of person—superior, equal, inferior—each set against three comparisons, superior, equal, inferior. Arranged that way there should be superior/superior, superior/equal, superior/inferior, equal/superior, equal/equal, equal/inferior, inferior/superior, inferior/equal, inferior/inferior—nine statements. What the base lacks is precisely “from one equal, conceit ‘I am superior.’”

And this section carries two critical notes, both on the same line 〔460b08〕: by the first, the graph 等 in “from one equal, conceit ‘I am equal’” is read 勝 by the four witnesses; by the second, the graph 我 in “from one equal, conceit ‘I am inferior’” is read 我等生慢從等我 by the four witnesses.

Read together, the two notes make the four witnesses read here “from one equal, conceit ‘I am superior’; from one equal, conceit ‘I am equal’; from one equal, conceit ‘I am inferior’”—all three statements complete, and the number of the nine conceits agreeing with its name.

The second is in the abandoning clause of the second ten bases of vexation.

“The ten bases of vexation are extinguished by the non-returner path” 〔T32 460b16〕—the graph 十, “ten,” here is read 九, “nine,” by the four witnesses.

And the way this topic lists its members has already been counted above: three kinds of person each set against three times, which is nine. The witnesses’ reading agrees with its own list.

The third is in the twelve unwholesome arisings.

That topic has twelve members, and every one of them reads “arising of such-and-such a mind”; only one is an exception: “arising of an unprompted mind associated with aversion accompanied by grief, and a prompted mind; arising of a mind accompanied by agitation; arising of a mind accompanied by doubt” 〔T32 460c10–12〕—有行心, “prompted mind,” is short the graph for “arising.” And the note falls precisely here: the four witnesses read 心起.

The three have the same shape: the base leaves an irregularity standing, and a witness variant would supply exactly what it lacks.

And this edition’s handling of them is the same as well: the notes in all three belong to the class of “recorded but not adopted”—the critical edition did not alter the body of the Taishō text and merely entered a variant. So the body follows the base throughout: its list remains eight, its graph remains “ten,” its wording remains 有行心; the two readings are simply set down together, and nothing is adjudicated.

Read this section beside the “five stinginesses” above, and its measure becomes clear: at the five stinginesses the critical edition had already amended the body, and three places within the text itself agreed, so this edition follows the corrected reading; in these three places the critical edition did not amend the body but only entered a variant, so this edition follows the base. The criterion lies in whether the critical edition amended the body, not in which reading runs more smoothly.

How to Read the Twenty-One Explanations: Five Departures from the Formula

The remaining topics follow one uniform format: give the names, say 於此, “of these,” and then tie them to the path that abandons them. The two graphs 於此 occur fifteen times in the passage. Read straight through, it is easy to take the whole as one undifferentiated stretch.

And precisely because the formula is uniform, the places that depart from it stand out. There are five in the passage:

One: two topics share a single abandoning statement. “The four floods are the flood of sensuality, of existence, of views, and of ignorance. The four bonds are the bond of sensuality, of existence, of views, and of ignorance. They are extinguished as stated in the first case” 〔T32 460a17–19〕—two topics are named together and then dispatched by the one clause “as stated in the first case.” This is the only such place in the passage. And “the first case” points to the manner of abandoning in the four influxes just above it, not to any outside authority.

Two: a remainder is gathered by “the rest.” “Views and doubt are extinguished by the stream-entry path; aversion by the non-returner path; the remaining seven by the arahant path” 〔T32 460b11–12〕—of ten names, the first three are picked out one by one and the other seven are carried off by the single phrase “the remaining seven.” This is the only such place in the passage.

Three: one name is not tied to any path. In the topic of the five hindrances: “the five hindrances are sensual desire, aversion, sloth, sleep, and 調慢疑” 〔T32 460a24–25〕, with the abandoning statement “doubt is extinguished by the stream-entry path; sensual desire, aversion, and conceit by the non-returner path; sloth and agitation by the arahant path; sleep follows form” 〔T32 460a25–27〕.

This topic repays a closer look. Five are headed, while seven names are picked out in the abandoning statement—doubt, sensual desire, aversion, conceit, sloth, agitation, sleep. Where do the extra names come from? From the last item listed: that item reads 調慢疑, three graphs written in one unsegmented run. Those three graphs occur only this once in the treatise.

And the handling of the last name is more unusual still: 睡眠隨色, “sleep follows form”—it does not say by which path it is extinguished, only that it follows form. This is the one handling in the whole passage not tied to any path, and it too occurs only once. Recorded as it stands, nothing supplied.

Four: one topic finishes after two paths. “The six roots of dispute are wrath, concealment, envy, deceit, delight in evil, and contact with views” 〔T32 460a27–28〕, and its abandoning has only two clauses: “deceit, delight in evil, and contact with views are extinguished by the stream-entry path; wrath, concealment, and envy by the non-returner path” 〔T32 460a28–29〕.

Most of the other topics run through all three paths; this one alone is finished at the non-returner path, with no arahant-path portion. Three plus three, and not one of the six is left over—it is exhausted, not omitted.

Five: one name is distributed across three paths. In the topic of the ten wrong extremes: “the ten wrong extremes are wrong view, wrong intention, wrong speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration, wrong knowledge, and wrong liberation” 〔T32 460b24–26〕.

Look at its abandoning: “wrong view, false speech under wrong speech, action, wrong livelihood, wrong knowledge, and wrong liberation are extinguished by the stream-entry path” 〔T32 460b26–27〕; “wrong intention, and harsh and divisive speech under wrong speech, by the non-returner path” 〔T32 460b27–28〕; “frivolous speech under wrong speech, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, and wrong concentration, by the arahant path” 〔T32 460b28–29〕.

“Wrong speech” appears three times, each time carrying one portion: false speech goes to the stream-entry path, harsh and divisive speech to the non-returner path, frivolous speech to the arahant path. One name distributed across three paths—no other topic in the passage is like this.

Several More One-Graph Differences Between Heading and Explanation

Several names also shift between the general heading and the explanations.

The heading says 八法, “eight conditions,” while the body says 八世法, “eight worldly conditions,” in “the worldly eight worldly conditions are gain, loss, disgrace, fame, praise, blame, suffering, and pleasure” 〔T32 460b04–05〕. The added 世, “worldly,” occurs in this expression only here.

The heading says 十結, “ten knots,” while the explanation says 十使, “ten tendencies”: sensual attachment, aversion, conceit, views, doubt, clinging to discipline, attachment to existence, envy, stinginess, and ignorance 〔T32 460b20–22〕. The names differ completely, although their structural position is the same. The author does not say they are identical.

There are such differences within a single topic too: the seven-tendencies topic lists 有欲使 while its abandoning clause reads “the tendency to conceit, the tendency to existence, and the tendency to ignorance are extinguished by the arahant path” 〔T32 460b03–04〕—one graph, 欲, short. The four-knots topic lists “the four knots are the body-knot of sensual desire, the body-knot of aversion, the body-knot of stealing discipline, and the body-knot of grasping ‘this alone is true’” 〔T32 460a14–15〕, while its abandoning clause reads 貪身結—also one graph 欲 short.

None of these carries a critical note. Their distinct Chinese forms and distinct English renderings remain visible.

One related pair also appears in the same passage: 戒盜身結, “body-knot of stealing discipline,” among the four knots, and 戒取, “clinging to discipline,” among the four clingings 〔T32 460a19–20〕. The author does not state whether they are the same or different, continuing the unresolved distinction seen in 12-10.

The Last Sentence Merely Names Them

The final sentence says: “The two attainments are two attainments not shared with ordinary persons: accomplishment in fruition, and the attainment of the cessation of perception and feeling” 〔T32 460c16–17〕.

The Chinese expression “two attainments” occurs twice, both within that one sentence.

The sentence gives names only. Fruit attainment is explained in 12-16 and the attainment of cessation in 12-17.

Look back at the dispersed-topic heading of 12-13: “here the dispersed topics may be known—contemplation, thought, joy, feeling, ground, faculty, liberation, defilement, attainment, and the two concentrations” 〔T32 459a28–29〕—ten topics. What this passage explains is precisely the topic “defilement” among them; and what its last sentence names are precisely the last two.

And from beginning to end of this passage the author never once points back to that heading. He simply explains what is to be explained, names what is to be named, and moves on. Recorded as it stands.

---

Carry away three things. One finding: the text announces 134 defilements 〔T32 460a02〕, and the twenty heading numbers total 134 only with five stinginesses. The item lists five and closes 此五, “these five” 〔T32 460a24〕, both unchanged in Taishō; the critical edition’s adopted four-to-five correction therefore agrees with list, close, and total. One method: when a text states a total and gives numbered items, add them; agreement reveals the skeleton, while a discrepancy identifies a fault. One question to hold: the heading has twenty topics but the body explains twenty-one, because two entirely different “ten bases of vexation” appear 〔T32 460b10–11·460b12–13〕. The heading provides one place and the author gives no account of the seam.

Remember three smaller points. Three base irregularities could be regularized by witnesses—the nine conceits labeled nine but listing eight 〔T32 460b06–09〕, “ten” where a three-by-three scheme gives nine 〔T32 460b16〕, and 有行心 without “arising” 〔T32 460c10–12〕—but the critical edition did not amend the body, so none is silently repaired. Five departures from the normal assignment formula include the shared statement for floods and bonds 〔T32 460a19〕, “the remaining seven” 〔T32 460b12〕, 睡眠隨色 〔T32 460a27〕, the six roots ending at non-returning 〔T32 460a29〕, and wrong speech divided across three paths 〔T32 460b28–29〕. Finally, five name differences remain visible: 八法/八世法, 十煩惱處/十惱處, 十結/十使, 有欲使/有使, and 貪欲身結/貪身結.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Three Liberations on One Path and the Abandoning of Defilements · Exposition · Summer 2026