解脫道論 義疏通講 · 冊6

The Path of Freedom opens a new fascicle and a new chapter. Fascicle two closes at 〔T32 409b17〕, fascicle three opens at 〔T32 409b20〕, and the heading “Chapter Six, Chapter on the Analysis of Practice” stands at 〔T32 409b24〕. The first sentence of the text is, “At this point, the ācariya of dependence observes his temperament for several days” 〔T32 409b25〕.

A teacher on whom one depends spends several days observing a person. What does the teacher observe? The person’s temperament. What should be done after it has been observed? “When his temperament and meditation subject correspond, the practitioner should be taught the fourteen temperaments” 〔T32 409b25–26〕.

The author then sets out a list of fourteen names.

The observation may be stated at the outset: this list of fourteen is not a single straight line, but two rows of seven written in an interlaced order; “equal temperament” appears twice because it is the seventh place in each of the two rows. Below, the author himself acknowledges this with the word “two.”

How the Fourteen Items Are Arranged

The list runs as follows: “desirous temperament, angry temperament (瞋恚行), deluded temperament” 〔T32 409b26–27〕; “faithful temperament, intelligent temperament, discursive temperament” 〔T32 409b27〕; “desirous-and-angry temperament (欲瞋恚行), desirous-and-deluded temperament, angry-and-deluded temperament, equal temperament” 〔T32 409b27–28〕; and “faithful-and-intelligent temperament, faithful-and-discursive temperament, intelligent-and-discursive temperament, equal temperament” 〔T32 409b28〕.

Four sections: three, three, four, four.

The three in the first section are single names of defilements—desire, anger, and delusion. The three in the second are single names on the side of faith and wisdom—faith, intelligence, and discursiveness. The four in the third comprise the three pairwise combinations on the side of the defilements—desire-and-anger, desire-and-delusion, and anger-and-delusion—followed by equal temperament. The four in the fourth comprise the three pairwise combinations on the side of faith and wisdom—faith-and-intelligence, faith-and-discursiveness, and intelligence-and-discursiveness—followed once more by equal temperament.

Fold these four sections together in pairs. Join the first section to the third and one obtains desire, anger, delusion, desire-and-anger, desire-and-delusion, anger-and-delusion, and equality—seven items. Join the second section to the fourth and one obtains faith, intelligence, discursiveness, faith-and-intelligence, faith-and-discursiveness, intelligence-and-discursiveness, and equality—also seven items.

One list of fourteen is, in fact, two rows of seven.

The author does not say, “These are two rows.” He simply writes them in an interlaced order. The manner of interlacing is three, three, four, four: first the three single names from row A, then the three single names from row B, then the remaining four from row A, and finally the remaining four from row B.

The List of Fourteen Persons Has Exactly the Same Arrangement

The author next changes the formulation, moving from “temperament” to “person”: “Here greed-and-desire, mind, disposition, temperament, nature, and delighting attachment are without difference in this meaning; because of temperament, there come to be fourteen persons” 〔T32 409b29–409c01〕.

Greed-and-desire, mind, disposition, temperament, nature, and delighting attachment—six names. The author says that they are “without difference in this meaning” 〔T32 409c01〕: in this matter, these names are not distinguished. He does not explain them one by one, but immediately proceeds.

The list of fourteen persons is: “a practitioner of desirous temperament, a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔行人), a practitioner of deluded temperament” 〔T32 409c01–02〕; “a practitioner of faithful temperament, a practitioner of intelligent temperament, a practitioner of discursive temperament” 〔T32 409c02〕; “a practitioner of desirous-and-angry temperament (欲瞋行人), a practitioner of desirous-and-deluded temperament, a practitioner of angry-and-deluded temperament, a practitioner of equal temperament” 〔T32 409c02–03〕; and “a practitioner of faithful-and-intelligent temperament, a practitioner of faithful-and-discursive temperament, a practitioner of intelligent-and-discursive temperament, a practitioner of equal temperament” 〔T32 409c03–04〕.

Again the sequence is three, three, four, four; again “a practitioner of equal temperament” appears once in tenth position and once in fourteenth position.

The arrangement of the two lists is repeated without the slightest difference. This itself is evidence: the author has neither omitted nor accidentally repeated a name; he is arranging the names according to a fixed pattern.

Having completed the list, he chooses one item as a model: “Here desire for desire, disposition to desire, nature of desire, and delight in desire designate a practitioner of desirous temperament” 〔T32 409c04–05〕; “that person’s desire constantly operates as predominant desire” 〔T32 409c05〕, and this is called desirous temperament. He then says, “All the others should be distinguished in the same way” 〔T32 409c06〕, leaving the reader to distinguish the remaining thirteen by the same method.

The Word “Two” Is the Author’s Own Evidence

When the fourteen persons have been arranged, the author says, “At this point, the fourteen persons are summarized as seven persons” 〔T32 409c06–07〕.

The seven pairs are formed in this way: “a practitioner of desirous temperament and a practitioner of faithful temperament become one” 〔T32 409c07〕; “a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) and a practitioner of intelligent temperament become one” 〔T32 409c07–08〕; “a practitioner of deluded temperament and a practitioner of discursive temperament become one” 〔T32 409c08〕; “a practitioner of desirous-and-angry temperament (欲瞋行人) and a practitioner of faithful-and-intelligent temperament become one” 〔T32 409c08–09〕; “a practitioner of desirous-and-deluded temperament and a practitioner of faithful-and-discursive temperament become one” 〔T32 409c09〕; “a practitioner of angry-and-deluded temperament and a practitioner of intelligent-and-discursive temperament become one” 〔T32 409c09–10〕; and the last pair is “the two practitioners of equal temperament become one” 〔T32 409c10〕.

Read the seven pairs in sequence. The first pair joins the first and fourth positions in the list of fourteen persons; the second joins the second and fifth; the third joins the third and sixth. The fourth joins the seventh and eleventh; the fifth joins the eighth and twelfth; the sixth joins the ninth and thirteenth. The seventh joins the tenth and fourteenth positions.

The manner of pairing the seven restores the two interlaced rows to two rows. The tenth and fourteenth positions are the seventh item of row A and the seventh item of row B—and both are called a practitioner of equal temperament.

The wording of the last pair is therefore not “a practitioner of equal temperament and a practitioner of equal temperament become one,” but “the two practitioners of equal temperament become one” 〔T32 409c10〕.

That word “two” is the fingerprint the author himself pressed onto the page. He knows that the name appeared twice, and he knows that the two occurrences are not the same occurrence. He need not explain; he merely places the word “two” before the seventh pair.

Reading Practice: When a Name Reappears in a Long List, Do Not First Treat It as an Interpolation—First Fold the List

This is the reading practice delivered by the passage.

When reading a long list in an old translation, the first reaction to seeing the same name twice within the list is often, “It was copied twice here.” Do not decide so at once. First do one thing: fold the list.

The fold has three steps.

First, count the sections within the list. Look at where the treatise itself pauses—where the category changes, where the construction changes, or where a closing word appears. The four sections here are seen in just this way: the first three are single names of defilements, the next three are single names of faith and wisdom, the next four are paired names of defilements plus equality, and the final four are paired names of faith and wisdom plus equality.

Second, join the sections in pairs and see whether they form several rows of equal length. Here three joins four and three joins four, forming two rows of seven. If the joined sections do not have equal length, that fold does not stand and the sections must be examined again.

Third, return to the passage below and see whether the author himself uses this fold. Here he does: the seven pairings proceed position by position through the two folded rows. Whether the fold is sound is not decided by the reader; the passage below verifies it itself.

After the three steps, the repeated name is accounted for: it appears twice because it occupies one place in each of the two rows.

This reading practice can be carried into any long list in this treatise. The longer the list, the more worthwhile it is to fold it before reading.

A Place to Pause: Why Does the Third Answer Change the Arrangement?

Among the seven pairs, the author poses questions and gives answers only for the first three.

For the first pair: “Question: Why do a practitioner of desirous temperament and a practitioner of faithful temperament become one?” 〔T32 409c10–11〕. The answer is, “A practitioner of desirous temperament increases faith while acting from desire with a good companion, because of approaching and beholding good qualities” 〔T32 409c11–12〕, followed by “Further, through three approaches, desire and faith, by this phrase, form one characteristic” 〔T32 409c12–13〕. The three approaches are “the meaning of loving recollection, the meaning of seeking good qualities, and the meaning of non-relinquishment” 〔T32 409c13〕.

For the second pair: “Question: Why do angry temperament (瞋恚行) and intelligent temperament become one?” 〔T32 409c16–17〕. The answer is, “A practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) increases intelligence while acting from anger with a good companion, because of approaching and beholding good qualities” 〔T32 409c17–18〕, followed by “Further, through three approaches, anger and intelligence form one characteristic” 〔T32 409c18–19〕. The three approaches are “because of non-loving recollection, because of seeking anger, and because of relinquishing” 〔T32 409c19〕.

The third pair changes: “Question: Why do a practitioner of deluded temperament and a practitioner of discursive temperament become one?” 〔T32 409c22–23〕. The answer is, “In order to attain the good, a practitioner of deluded temperament increases discursiveness while acting from delusion, because of approaching and beholding good qualities and because faith and wisdom move apart” 〔T32 409c23–24〕—here there is one additional “because.” Then comes, “Further, through two approaches, delusion and discursiveness form one characteristic” 〔T32 409c24–25〕—here there is one fewer approach. The two approaches are “because they are not self-settled and because they move” 〔T32 409c25〕.

It is worth pausing here to ask: Why does precisely the third pair change?

The author does not say. This edition does not speak on his behalf. Only one thing can be verified, and it is very regular: each of the three pairs has a total of four.

In the first pair, one “because” in the former part plus three approaches in the latter gives four. In the second, one “because” in the former part plus three approaches in the latter gives four. In the third, two “because” clauses in the former part—“because of approaching and beholding good qualities and because faith and wisdom move apart” 〔T32 409c24〕—plus two approaches in the latter still gives four.

The third pair has not lost an item; one item has moved from the latter part to the former.

The paired contrasts in those latter portions give the same message. The first two answers each set out three pairs. The first begins with “Here a person of desire recollects desire, while a person of faith recollects the good” 〔T32 409c14〕 and closes with “a person of desire has not relinquishing the unlovely as a characteristic, while a person of faith has not relinquishing the lovely as a characteristic” 〔T32 409c15–16〕. The second begins with “Here an angry person (瞋人) does not rest in loving recollection, while an intelligent person does not rest in recollection of conduct” 〔T32 409c19–20〕 and closes with “an angry person (瞋人) rests in relinquishment, while an intelligent person rests in the conduct of relinquishment” 〔T32 409c21〕. The third sets out only two pairs: “Here delusion settles in disorder and is therefore unsettled, while discursiveness becomes unsettled because of its many discursive recollections” 〔T32 409c25–26〕, and “delusion becomes movement because it has no direction, while discursiveness becomes movement because of tranquillity” 〔T32 409c26–27〕.

Three pairs, three pairs, two pairs. They correspond exactly to three approaches, three approaches, and two approaches.

The additional “because” is “because faith and wisdom move apart” 〔T32 409c24〕. The four-character expression 信慧動離 occurs only once in the whole treatise, and the author does not explain its meaning. What can be verified ends here. The number four is preserved; the author does not state why he changed the arrangement.

Having answered the three pairs, the author closes: “The remaining temperaments should be distinguished by this method; in this way there come to be seven persons” 〔T32 409c28–29〕. Of the fourth through seventh pairs, he says not another word.

The Quickness and Slowness of the Seven Persons All Turn on the One Word “Delusion”

With the seven persons established, the author next asks, “Among these seven persons, who cultivates quickly? Who cultivates slowly?” 〔T32 409c29〕.

There are seven sentences, one for each person, all constructed in the same way. The three statements of quick cultivation are: “A practitioner of desirous temperament cultivates quickly on account of being settled and easy to instruct—because faith is strong and because delusion and discursiveness are weak” 〔T32 409c29–410a02〕; “a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) cultivates quickly, settled and easy to instruct—because intelligence is strong and because delusion and discursiveness are weak” 〔T32 410a02–03〕; and “a practitioner of desirous-and-angry temperament (欲瞋行人) cultivates quickly, settled and easy to instruct—because faith and intelligence are strong and because delusion and discursiveness are weak” 〔T32 410a04–05〕.

The four statements of slow cultivation are: “A practitioner of deluded temperament cultivates slowly and is difficult to instruct—because delusion and discursiveness are strong and because faith and intelligence are weak” 〔T32 410a03–04〕; “a practitioner of desirous-and-deluded temperament cultivates slowly and is difficult to instruct—because faith is unsettled and because delusion and discursiveness are strong” 〔T32 410a05–06〕; “a practitioner of angry-and-deluded temperament cultivates slowly and is difficult to instruct—because intelligence is unsettled and because delusion and discursiveness are strong” 〔T32 410a06–07〕; and “a practitioner of equal temperament cultivates slowly and is difficult to instruct—because intelligence does not rest stably and because delusion and discursiveness are strong” 〔T32 410a07–09〕.

The concluding causal wording for all three quick cultivators is the same string, “because delusion and discursiveness are weak”; all four slow cultivators likewise carry the same string, “because delusion and discursiveness are strong.”

One thing here must be counted exactly: among the four slow statements, that string stands at the end in three of them, but not in the one for the practitioner of deluded temperament—there it is moved to the earlier position, and the sentence ends with “because faith and intelligence are weak” 〔T32 410a04〕. Six of the seven sentences place delusion and discursiveness last; in the one person named for delusion, the author moves it forward.

Now look back at who the three quick cultivators are: desire, anger, and desire-and-anger—the three items in row A of the list that do not contain the word “delusion.” Who are the four slow cultivators? Delusion, desire-and-delusion, anger-and-delusion, and equality—the three items containing delusion plus equal temperament.

The author marks the reason in each sentence and establishes no separate general rule. What can be verified is this distribution: the quickness and slowness of the seven persons follow delusion without a single exception—“delusion and discursiveness” occurs seven times across the seven sentences, “weak” in the three quick ones and “strong” in the four slow ones, with no exception; what differs is only its position (last in six sentences, earlier in the one for the practitioner of deluded temperament).

One critical note should be retained here. At 〔T32 410a05〕, in “the practitioner of desirous-and-deluded temperament cultivates slowly,” the character for “slowly” is “quickly” in the 【宮】 witness. If 【宮】 were followed, four persons would cultivate quickly and three slowly, breaking the distribution above. The present text follows the Taishō base; the variant is recorded without adjudication.

Gathered into Three

The final sentence gathers the seven persons once more: “At this point, through the root defilements, the seven persons become three: a practitioner of desirous temperament, a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人), and a practitioner of deluded temperament” 〔T32 410a09–10〕.

Fourteen temperaments, fourteen persons, seven persons, three persons—the passage makes three successive gatherings. The term “root defilements” occurs only once in the whole treatise 〔T32 410a09〕. The author does not explain the name or list its items; he uses it only as the reason for the final gathering.

One further small matter should be retained: the three names use characters different from those in the two earlier lists. The list of fourteen temperaments has angry temperament (瞋恚行) 〔T32 409b26〕; the list of fourteen persons has a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔行人) 〔T32 409c01–02〕; here there is a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人) 〔T32 410a10〕. The same person has three forms within one passage. This is a difference of written character: 嗔 and 瞋 are both present. They are recorded without being made uniform.

Once the three are established, the next passage begins by asking about the three: “Question: What are the causes of these three temperaments?” 〔T32 410a10〕. That belongs to the next unit.

---

Take away three things. One observation—the lists of fourteen temperaments and fourteen persons both proceed in the sequence three, three, four, four; they are two rows of seven written in an interlaced order, and “equal temperament” and “a practitioner of equal temperament” each reappear in tenth and fourteenth positions, not as interpolations but as the seventh item of each row. Thus the seventh pair says, “the two practitioners of equal temperament become one” 〔T32 409c10〕: the word “two” is the author’s own acknowledgment of the repetition. One reading practice—when a name reappears in a long list, fold the list before judging it: first count its sections; second join them in pairs to see whether they form rows of equal length; third return to the passage below and see whether the author himself uses the fold. One place to pause—in the three answers, the first two have one “because” and three approaches, while the third has two “because” clauses and two approaches 〔T32 409c23–25〕: the paired contrasts likewise number three pairs, three pairs, and two pairs, while each answer has a total of four. The additional phrase in the third, “because faith and wisdom move apart” 〔T32 409c24〕, occurs once in the whole treatise and is not explained; the reason for changing the arrangement is not stated. This edition does not adjudicate on the author’s behalf.

Four smaller matters should also be retained: this passage contains zero citations and zero similes—all three occurrences of the character 如 belong to 如是, “in this way,” and the author cites not a single sentence; “form one characteristic” occurs nine times in the whole treatise and six of those occurrences are here (409c13·409c16·409c19·409c22·409c25·409c27), while “because of approaching and beholding good qualities” occurs three times in the whole treatise and all three are here (409c12·409c18·409c24); the three critical notes have three different witness counts—four witnesses at 409c24, three at 409c26 (only 【明】 is absent), and only the 【宮】 witness at 410a05; and the “meditation subject” in the opening phrase “when his temperament and meditation subject correspond” 〔T32 409b25–26〕 is not itemized until the next chapter, whose opening says, “At this point, the teacher of dependence observes the practitioner’s conduct, assigns thirty-eight practices, and should further instruct the practitioner so that the two practices correspond” 〔T32 411a08–09〕, matching this passage’s two expressions “observes his temperament” and “correspond.”

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Fourteen Temperaments, Seven Persons, and Three Temperaments · Exposition · Summer 2026

The preceding passage closes with three persons: “At this point, through the root defilements, the seven persons become three: a practitioner of desirous temperament, a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人), and a practitioner of deluded temperament” 〔T32 410a09–10〕.

Once the three have been established, this passage begins from the three. What begins here, however, is not one question, but three.

“Question: What are the causes of these three temperaments?” 〔T32 410a10〕—the first question.

“How can one know that this is a practitioner of desirous temperament, this is a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人), and this is a practitioner of deluded temperament?” 〔T32 410a10–11〕—the second question.

“How, according to temperament, should one receive robes, go for alms, sit and lie down, and handle one’s place of activity and deportment?” 〔T32 410a11–12〕—the third question.

State the observation first: the answers to these three questions are neither in one place nor consecutive. The first question is answered immediately; the answer to the second runs across this passage and continues to the end of the next unit; and the answer to the third crosses two units and appears only in the fourth unit of this chapter—where the author repeats this question almost word for word.

These three questions form the lines of division for the three remaining units of this chapter.

The first question: three kinds of cause, one in each section

The first question receives the most direct answer: “Answer: initially performed action as cause, elements as cause for the temperaments, and drawbacks as cause” 〔T32 410a12–13〕. Three names are given, and the next three sections follow those names.

Initially performed action as cause 〔T32 410a13–14〕 concerns previous action and the place from which one comes. For a practitioner of desirous temperament, “because, at first, means were applied toward what was lovely, many wholesome actions make a practitioner of desirous temperament” 〔T32 410a14〕. Next comes “then falling from heaven, one is born here; repeatedly producing hostile actions of killing, cutting, stocks and fetters, one becomes a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人)” 〔T32 410a15–16〕, then “covered by unlovely action, one falls from hell or from among dragons and is born here” 〔T32 410a16–17〕, and finally “one who at first often drinks alcohol and causes division becomes a practitioner of deluded temperament and falls from animal birth to be born here” 〔T32 410a17–18〕.

The full stop falls in a strange place here. Each of the three persons has two matters—the action performed and the place of birth from which the person comes. Yet the punctuation of the base places the place of birth of a practitioner of desirous temperament together with the action of a practitioner of angry temperament in one sentence, makes the place of birth of a practitioner of angry temperament a sentence by itself, and places only the action and place of birth of a practitioner of deluded temperament in the same sentence. The item boundaries and sentence boundaries do not agree. This edition records the punctuation as it stands and does not divide it anew.

The section closes with “Thus, temperament: initial action as cause” 〔T32 410a18〕—here the closing drops the word represented by 所 from the general heading “initially performed action as cause.” Within the same section, the opening has “initially performed” and the close has “initial.” In each of the following two sections, the general heading, opening question, and close use the same wording; only this first section is uneven.

The section on elements as cause 〔T32 410a18〕 is the shortest: “Because two elements are nearest, one becomes a practitioner of deluded temperament—namely, the earth element and the water element” 〔T32 410a18–19〕; “because two elements are nearest, one becomes a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人)—namely, the fire element and the wind element” 〔T32 410a19–20〕; and “because the four elements are equal, one becomes a practitioner of desirous temperament” 〔T32 410a20–21〕.

The first two items each take two elements as cause and name them; the third does not give the names and says only “the four elements are equal” 〔T32 410a20〕. Three items, two forms. The first two items use the four elements two at a time, exhausting them without repetition; the third uses all four once more, now through their “equality.”

The section on drawbacks as cause 〔T32 410a21–22〕 contains this chapter’s only alternative statement; it is considered separately below.

Reading practice: record the order of the three names section by section

The reading practice given by this passage is small and readily usable.

Where this treatise discusses the three temperaments, section after section uses the same three names—desire, anger, and delusion. While reading, each time a section ends, write beside it the order in which the three names appeared in that section.

For this passage, the record is as follows:

In the section on initially performed action: desire 〔T32 410a14〕, anger (瞋) 〔T32 410a16〕, delusion 〔T32 410a17〕.

In the section on elements: delusion 〔T32 410a19〕, anger (瞋) 〔T32 410a20〕, desire 〔T32 410a21〕.

In the section on drawbacks: desire 〔T32 410a22〕, anger (瞋) 〔T32 410a22〕, delusion 〔T32 410a23〕.

In the section on things: desire 〔T32 410a27〕, anger (嗔) 〔T32 410b01〕, delusion 〔T32 410b05〕.

Among the four sections, only the section on elements reverses the entire order. Even after the reversal, anger remains in the middle—four sections, four occurrences, and anger never leaves the middle position. In the section on things the source writes 嗔, while the preceding three sections write 瞋; this is a difference of written character.

What is the use of recording the order? It is this: when an order reverses, that is a place to pause. Pausing does not necessarily yield an answer—this passage gives none, and the author does not say why the section on elements counts in reverse. But the pause ensures at least one thing: the order one has read is the treatise’s own order, not an order one has arranged automatically.

This method can be carried into any passage of this treatise where a fixed set of names repeatedly appears.

A pause: the two statements are opposite, and the middle item disappears

The section on drawbacks says: “One with the greatest amount of 淡 (‘phlegm’) becomes a practitioner of desirous temperament; one with the greatest amount of 瞻 (no English gloss determined) becomes a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人); and one with the greatest amount of 風 (‘wind’) becomes a practitioner of deluded temperament” 〔T32 410a22–23〕.

Three items and three pairings: 淡 (“phlegm”) with desire, 瞻 (no English gloss determined) with anger, and 風 (“wind”) with delusion.

Immediately afterward the author gives another sentence: “another statement says: one with the greatest amount of 淡 (‘phlegm’) becomes a practitioner of deluded temperament, and one with the greatest amount of 風 (‘wind’) becomes a practitioner of desirous temperament” 〔T32 410a23–24〕.

This is worth pausing over.

The first verifiable fact is that the two statements exactly reverse the items concerning 淡 and 風. In the first, 淡 produces desire and 風 produces delusion; in the later, 淡 produces delusion and 風 produces desire. It is not a supplement and not a subdivision, but an exchange.

The second verifiable fact is that the later statement gives only two items, and the middle item disappears. The first statement has 瞻 producing a practitioner of angry temperament; the later statement mentions neither 瞻 nor anger. It answers only two of the three items.

The third verifiable fact is that the author preserves both statements and gives not a single word of judgment. The section simply closes with “Thus: drawbacks as cause” 〔T32 410a24〕, as though nothing had happened.

The three-character formula “another statement says” occurs five times in the whole treatise, and this occurrence is the only one in this chapter—the preceding unit has zero citations, and from this point to the end of the chapter no second alternate statement appears. The author rarely cites another statement in the entire work; here the statement cited is contrary to his own, and after citing it he gives no judgment.

One small related matter remains. The character 淡 has a critical note: four witnesses read 痰, and the note is duplicated, with two points of attachment in this passage—one in the first statement and one in the later statement 〔T32 410a22·410a23〕. The two places have the same base reading and the same variant, so any change would affect both. The character 瞻 has no critical note at all. The present text follows the Taishō base; the variant is recorded without adjudication.

The second question: can be known through seven approaches, but two names do not correspond

After answering the three causes, the author takes up the second question: “How can one know that this person is of desirous temperament, this person is of angry temperament, and this person is of deluded temperament?” 〔T32 410a24–25〕

“Answer: can be known through seven approaches” 〔T32 410a25–26〕. The seven items are “thus, through things, through defilements, through conduct, through taking up, through food, through action, and through lying down” 〔T32 410a26–27〕.

The seven items are listed, but when they are answered one by one below, two headings do not correspond to the names here. The fourth item here is “through taking up,” while the next unit opens it as “How through wearing robes—a practitioner of desirous temperament?” 〔T32 410b18〕. The sixth item here is “through action,” while the next unit opens it as “How through things is it known?” 〔T32 410c01–02〕—and “things” is precisely the name of the first item.

For now, keep these two places in view. Whether the names correspond is a matter for the next unit; this passage can only record the seven items as they stand, without changing them.

The first item: through things

The first of the seven items is answered in full within this passage. Each of the three persons receives one short section.

For a practitioner of desirous temperament: “A practitioner of desirous temperament sees whatever things there are” 〔T32 410a27–28〕; “what has never before been seen is seen, and once seen, is looked at again” 〔T32 410a28〕—what has not been seen is to be seen, and what has been seen is looked at again; “constantly failing to attend to the genuine drawbacks while observing, even a small good quality does not seem difficult, and the person does not seek release from this” 〔T32 410a28–29〕; and “having observed, the person cannot relinquish that conduct and goes on to know other things” 〔T32 410a29–410b01〕. The closing statement is “Through conduct such as this, desirous temperament can be known” 〔T32 410b01〕.

For a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔行人): “As for a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔行人者), on seeing any such thing” 〔T32 410b01–02〕—only this one of the three carries the character 者; “like one who is weary and cannot look for long” 〔T32 410b02〕, the only simile in this passage and the sole occurrence in the whole treatise; “readily taking up drawbacks, the person often disparages others, and with respect to many good qualities does not find them not difficult” 〔T32 410b02–03〕; and “the person does not relinquish this, but gains facility only through drawbacks” 〔T32 410b03–04〕. The closing statement is “Knowing and doing other things is likewise so; angry temperament (瞋行) can be known through such conduct” 〔T32 410b04–05〕. The 嗔 of 嗔行人者 and the 瞋 of 瞋行 are a difference of written character.

For a practitioner of deluded temperament: “A practitioner of deluded temperament sees any such thing and, with respect to both good qualities and drawbacks, comes to trust others” 〔T32 410b05–06〕; “hearing another disparage it, the person also disparages it; hearing another praise it, the person also praises it, because the person does not know for themself” 〔T32 410b06–07〕. The closing statement is “Through conduct such as this toward external things, deluded temperament can be known” 〔T32 410b07–08〕.

Three closing statements, three forms. One has “through conduct such as this”; one has “knowing and doing other things is likewise so” and adds another word rendered “conduct”; and one has “through conduct such as this toward external things.” The author does not make their forms uniform, and this edition records them as they stand.

The statements concerning a practitioner of desirous temperament and a practitioner of angry temperament can also be read side by side. One has “even a small good quality does not seem difficult” 〔T32 410a29〕, while the other has “with respect to many good qualities does not find them not difficult” 〔T32 410b03〕—small against many, and an affirmative form against a negative one. The two sentences plainly invite comparison, yet their forms are not fully uniform.

The entire section closes with “Thus, through things” 〔T32 410b08〕, not “Thus, it can be known through things.” The fifth item in the next unit is reversed: it opens with “How through things is it known?” 〔T32 410c01–02〕 and closes with “Thus, it can be known through things” 〔T32 410c08〕. The words used for opening and closing are interlaced between the two sections.

---

Carry away three things. One observation: the passage opens with three questions in one breath, and their answers fall in three places: the first question is answered immediately 〔410a12–410a24〕; the answer to the second begins at 〔410a24–25〕 and runs through the whole of the next unit; and the third question, “How, according to temperament, should one receive robes, go for alms, sit and lie down, and handle one’s place of activity and deportment?” 〔410a11–12〕, is answered only after two intervening units. The answering question is nearly the same as this one—the expression “receive robes, go for alms, sit and lie down, and place of activity” occurs twice in the whole treatise, once here and once there 〔410c15–16〕. The three questions are therefore the lines of division for the three remaining units of this chapter. One reading practice: record the order of the three names section by section. The four sections here read desire-anger-delusion, delusion-anger-desire, desire-anger-delusion, and desire-anger-delusion; only the section on elements reverses the order, while anger remains in the middle. A reversed sequence is a place to pause. One place to pause: “another statement says” in the section on drawbacks 〔410a23〕. The two statements exactly reverse 淡 (“phlegm”) and 風 (“wind”); the later gives only two items and omits the first statement’s middle pairing, 瞻 (no English gloss determined) with anger; and the author preserves both without adjudication. This is the only alternate statement in this chapter.

Four smaller matters should also be retained: the section opens with “initially performed action as cause” but closes with “initial action as cause” 〔410a13–14·410a18〕, while the openings and closes of the next two sections use the same wording; the elements section has three items in two forms—the first two each take two elements as cause and name them, while the third says only “the four elements are equal” and does not name them; two of the seven listed items do not correspond to the headings of their answers—“through taking up” 〔410a26〕 is answered under “How through wearing robes—a practitioner of desirous temperament?” 〔410b18〕, and “through action” 〔410a27〕 under “How through things is it known?” 〔410c01–02〕; and the critical note on 淡 is a duplicated＊ note with two attachments in this passage 〔410a22·410a23〕, while 瞻 has no critical note.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Causes of the Three Temperaments and General Framework for Discernment · Exposition · Summer 2026

The preceding passage listed seven items but explained only the first. This passage continues by explaining the second through the seventh in turn: through defilements, through conduct, through wearing robes, through food, through things, and through lying down and sitting.

The observation may be stated at the outset: what these six items discern is exceedingly orderly—every item sets three persons side by side, and every item proceeds in the order desire, anger, and delusion without a single disruption. Yet the frame enclosing them, six questions and six closes, has no two among its twelve sentences in the same form.

The content is orderly; the form is entirely disorderly. This is not an impression gained from reading but something that can be counted sentence by sentence.

First Draw Out the Frame and Look at It by Itself

The six questions:

“Question: How can it be known through defilements?” 〔T32 410b08〕 · “Question: How through conduct?” 〔T32 410b12〕 · “Question: How through wearing robes—a practitioner of desirous temperament?” 〔T32 410b18〕 · “Question: How can it be known through food?” 〔T32 410b23〕 · “Question: How can it be known through things?” (知 rather than 可知) 〔T32 410c01–02〕 · “Question: How through lying down and sitting?” 〔T32 410c09〕.

Three ask how it may be known and three do not. The third is more distinctive still: beneath the item’s name it adds a person—“How through wearing robes—a practitioner of desirous temperament?” Among the six questions, this alone contains the name of a person.

The six closes:

“Thus, it can be known through defilements” 〔T32 410b11–12〕 · “Thus, through conduct” 〔T32 410b18〕 · “Thus, through wearing robes, it can be known” 〔T32 410b23〕 · “Thus, it is known by desire” 〔T32 410c01〕 · “Thus, it can be known through things” 〔T32 410c08〕 · “Thus, it can be known through lying down” 〔T32 410c15〕.

Four use the explicit formula “can be known,” and two do not. The fourth closing sentence has the wrong name: its item asks about food, but its close says “by desire.”

No formula of “thus” immediately followed by “through food” occurs anywhere in the entire treatise.

The Content in the Middle, by Contrast, Never Departs from Its Order

The frame is this irregular, yet what stands inside it is highly regular.

Through defilements: “A practitioner of desirous temperament has five defilements and often engages in jealousy, stinginess, deceit, flattery, and desire. This is called the five” 〔T32 410b08–09〕; “A practitioner of angry temperament (瞋恚行人) has five defilements and often engages in indignation, resentment, concealment, stinginess, and anger. This is called the five” 〔T32 410b09–10〕; “A practitioner of deluded temperament has five defilements and often engages in laziness, indolence, doubt, remorse, and ignorance. These are the five” 〔T32 410b10–11〕. Each person has five, without a single discrepancy in the count.

Through conduct: for all three persons the text says “observe walking by its character,” and then looks at the feet. A practitioner of desirous temperament “lifts his foot quickly yet walks evenly, lifts his foot evenly, does not set his foot down broadly, and lifts his foot in a pleasing way as he walks” 〔T32 410b13–14〕; a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人) “raises his foot abruptly and sets it down abruptly, his feet strike one another, and he places half a foot on the ground” 〔T32 410b15〕; and a practitioner of deluded temperament “raises his foot rubbing the ground and sets it down rubbing as well, walking with one foot touching the other” 〔T32 410b16–17〕. The distinction among the three persons lies entirely in a pair of feet: one lifts and sets them evenly, one is abrupt and heavy, and one drags and rubs with foot striking foot.

Through wearing robes, through food, through things, and through lying down and sitting likewise give one sentence to each of the three persons, always in the order desire, anger, and delusion.

The item through food shows the method most clearly. The three persons eat the same meal: a practitioner of desirous temperament “measures for himself and takes a fitting, moderate portion of morsel food, knows its aroma and flavor, does not eat quickly; if he obtains a little flavor, he becomes greatly delighted” 〔T32 410b25–26〕; a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) “takes much morsel food and eats with a full mouth; if he obtains a little flavor, he becomes greatly angry and distressed” 〔T32 410b27–28〕; and a practitioner of deluded temperament “makes his morsel food small, unrounded, and immoderate, takes little, smears his mouth with the food, puts half the morsel into his mouth and drops half into the dish, and with a distracted mind does not attend to the food” 〔T32 410b28–410c01〕. In the very same matter—obtaining a little flavor—the practitioner of desirous temperament becomes greatly delighted, the practitioner of angry temperament greatly angry and distressed, while the practitioner of deluded temperament does not taste it at all and drops half the food into the dish.

The item through things concerns sweeping. “A practitioner of desirous temperament sweeps the ground with his body level and holds a broom without working quickly; without distinguishing earth and sand, he is nonetheless able to make it clean” 〔T32 410c02–03〕; a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) “takes hold of the broom abruptly, quickly clears away earth and sand on both sides with an urgent sound, and, though clean, leaves it uneven” 〔T32 410c03–04〕; a practitioner of deluded temperament (愚癡行人) “holds the broom loosely, looks back and forth to the end, and leaves places unclean and uneven” 〔T32 410c05–06〕. The hands of the three persons holding the broom are, respectively, even, abrupt, and loose.

The item through lying down and sitting even counts how they respond when called in the night: a practitioner of desirous temperament “rises when called in the night and, if there is something in doubt, answers at once” 〔T32 410c10–11〕; a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) “if someone calls in the night, rises at once and answers angrily” 〔T32 410c12–13〕; and a deluded person “if someone calls in the night, responds ‘yi, yi’ and answers only after a long time” 〔T32 410c14〕. One answers at once, one answers angrily, and one says “yi, yi” for a long time before answering.

The expression rendered “yi, yi” occurs only once in the entire treatise.

The Third Item: The Only Question That Writes a Person into the Question

Among the six questions, the third is the most distinctive: “Question: How through wearing robes—a practitioner of desirous temperament?” 〔T32 410b18〕

The other five questions ask only about the item—through defilements, conduct, food, things, or lying down and sitting. This one alone adds “a practitioner of desirous temperament” after the item’s name. Yet the answer below still gives all three persons: a practitioner of desirous temperament has a manner in which “not much is seen and it is not loose; he wears the robe too low, properly aligned and rounded, variously pleasing and agreeable to behold” 〔T32 410b19–20〕; “a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) wears his robe by its character” 〔T32 410b20〕, “far too tight and too high, not properly aligned or rounded” 〔T32 410b20–21〕; and a practitioner of deluded temperament wears it “very loose, not properly aligned or rounded.”

The person added in the question does not cause the other two persons to disappear from the answer. It is recorded without deletion.

This item also has a duplicated critical note: for 大 in “far too tight and too high,” the Ming witness reads 太 〔T32 410b20〕, and the same note also governs 大 in “becomes greatly angry and distressed” under the later item on food 〔T32 410b27–28〕. One critical note governs two places, and the text follows the base at both.

A Pause: The Witnesses Changed One Place but Not the Other

Earlier readers did see the irregularity of the frame.

The fifth question is rendered “How can it be known through things?” 〔T32 410c01–02〕. Among the three questions rendered with “can be known,” this alone has 知 rather than 可知 in the source: it lacks the character 可. Yet the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong witnesses all read 可知 here.

The two-character form supplied by the four witnesses is exactly the form absent from this question. This shows that a copyist read this place, found it irregular, and made it uniform.

Yet within the same passage, the fourth closing sentence reads “Thus, it is known by desire” 〔T32 410c01〕—the item is food, but the close says desire—and the four witnesses do not change a single character. There is no critical note at that place.

This gives reason to pause and ask: why was the form of “known” changed, but not “desire”?

The treatise does not say, and neither do the critical notes. Only the following verifiable facts can be placed side by side: first, the witnesses change a missing character in a question but do not change a different name in a close; second, this passage has several other irregularities—the six forms of the questions, the six forms of the closes, 以 against 已, and three forms of designation—and the witnesses do not alter any of them; third, the Taishō prints the base reading in both places, and this edition does not change either one.

This edition does not adjudicate on behalf of the author or of the four witnesses. It only sets out what was changed and what was not.

Three Forms within One Item: By, Already, and By Such

The three personal closes in the second item deserve to be viewed separately:

For the practitioner of desirous temperament: “Thus, by conduct, desirous temperament can be known” 〔T32 410b14〕. A practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人): “Thus, by conduct already performed (已行), an angry person (瞋恚人) can be known” 〔T32 410b15–16〕. For the practitioner of deluded temperament: “By conduct such as this, a practitioner of deluded temperament can be known” 〔T32 410b17〕.

Three sentences within one item, in three forms; moreover, the 已 in the second sentence is not the same written character as the 以 in the other two. They are recorded without being made uniform.

The designations follow the same pattern. The angry person has three designations within this passage: the first item has a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋恚行人) 〔T32 410b09–10〕, the second a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人) 〔T32 410b14〕, and the third a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人). The deluded person also has three: ordinarily a practitioner of deluded temperament, in the fifth item a practitioner of deluded temperament (愚癡行人) 〔T32 410c04–05〕, and in the sixth a deluded person 〔T32 410c13〕. The distinction between 嗔 and 瞋 is a difference of written character.

Two persons, each with three names, all within a single passage.

One Name Appears on Two Lists

There is another place that is easy to glide past while reading.

The five defilements of a practitioner of desirous temperament are jealousy, stinginess, deceit, flattery, and desire; the five of a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋恚行人) are indignation, resentment, concealment, stinginess, and anger.

“Stinginess” appears on both lists. The author does not say why it appears twice and makes no distinction between the two.

A critical note falls here: for “stinginess” under the practitioner of angry temperament, the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong witnesses all read “distress” 〔T32 410b10〕. Under the reading of the four witnesses, the two lists no longer repeat an item.

The text follows the Taishō base, recording the repetition and recording the variant without adjudication.

The Punctuation at the End of the Fifth Item Is Uncertain

After the fifth item has described sweeping, the author adds a general statement: “Likewise, in washing, dyeing, sewing, and so forth, all tasks are performed evenly and without applying the mind; this is a person of desire and a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人). In all tasks, they are performed unevenly and without applying the mind. A practitioner of deluded temperament has a distracted mind, does much, and completes nothing. Thus, it can be known through things” 〔T32 410c06–08〕.

The expression rendered “without applying the mind” occurs only twice in the entire treatise, both here. The treatise itself does not make clear how these two sentences should be divided or which sentence belongs to which person: read literally, the first sentence groups the person of desire and the practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) together under “performed evenly,” while the next sentence says “performed unevenly” without a subject, and only in the sentence after that does the practitioner of deluded temperament appear.

Where the division is made changes the person produced by the reading. This edition retains the wording and punctuation as given and does not divide it anew.

Reading Practice: In a Parallel List, Read Only the First and Last Sentences First

The reading practice offered by this passage begins from its close “Thus, it is known by desire.”

When encountering a series of parallel items in this treatise, do not begin by reading their contents one by one. First draw out the first sentence—the question—and the final sentence—the close—of each item, and arrange them in two rows.

Once they are arranged, look for three things: first, whether the six questions have one form; second, whether the six closes have one form; and third, whether the name stated in each close agrees with the name of its item.

Arranged in this way, the passage immediately shows six forms of question and six forms of close, while the name in the fourth close does not correspond. Where the frame goes awry is precisely where this passage most deserves a pause.

This method can be used throughout the treatise, for it contains many parallel lists. Their contents can seem much alike and become tiring, while the frame has only twelve sentences and can be taken in at a glance. The frame is more honest than the content.

---

Carry away three things. One observation—each of the six items has highly orderly content while its frame is entirely disorderly: all six set three persons side by side and follow the order desire, anger, and delusion; yet there are six forms of question—three ask how it may be known and three do not, with the third alone naming a person inside the question—and six forms of close—four use an explicit “can be known” formula and two do not. The fourth close says “Thus, it is known by desire” 〔T32 410c01〕 even though its item concerns food; no closing formula anywhere in the treatise places “thus” directly together with “through food.” One reading practice—when reading parallel items, first draw out only the question and close of each and arrange them side by side, then ask whether the name in each close agrees with the item’s name; where the frame goes awry is where one should pause. One place to pause—the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong witnesses supply a character in the fifth question 〔T32 410c02〕 so that it reads “can be known,” but do not alter a single character of “by desire” in the fourth close; there is no critical note at that latter place. One place was changed and the other was not; the treatise does not say why, and neither do the critical notes, so this edition neither alters nor adjudicates.

Three smaller matters should also be retained: the three personal closes in the second item have three forms—“by conduct,” “by conduct already performed,” and “by conduct such as this” 〔T32 410b14·410b15–16·410b17〕, and 已 in the middle differs in written character from 以; the angry and deluded persons each receive three designations within this passage—a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋恚行人), a practitioner of angry temperament (嗔恚行人), and a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) / a practitioner of deluded temperament, a practitioner of deluded temperament (愚癡行人), and a deluded person—the distinction between 嗔 and 瞋 being a difference of written character; and “stinginess” appears in the lists of both the desirous and angry practitioners 〔T32 410b09·410b10〕, while the four witnesses read “distress” for the angry practitioner’s “stinginess,” under which reading the repetition disappears. The text follows the base and records its repetition.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Discerning Temperament through Six Signs · Exposition · Summer 2026

At the opening of this chapter, three matters were asked in one breath, and the third remained unanswered for more than a thousand characters. In this passage it finally comes to ground: “Question: For what temperament and through what dhammas should robes be received, alms be sought, and sitting, lying down, and one’s place of activity be used?” 〔T32 410c15–16〕

State the observation first: this passage assigns robes, food, dwelling, and destination to three persons. Every sentence for the practitioners of desirous and angry temperaments specifies its assignment in detail. For the practitioner of deluded temperament, however, three of the four matters have only the same three source characters—隨所得, “whatever is obtained.” Only the matter of where to live differs. There the author writes with certainty: “should live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally” 〔T32 410c25〕.

Four Matters: Two Persons Receive Detailed Assignments, One Does Not

Robes: the robe of a practitioner of desirous temperament is “coarse, does not hang down, and is repellent in color” 〔T32 410c16〕; that of a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) is “fine; clean, of good color, hanging down, and lovely” 〔T32 410c17–18〕; a practitioner of deluded temperament should “wear whatever is obtained” 〔T32 410c18〕.

Going for alms: for a practitioner of desirous temperament, “coarse and unclean food, without pleasant smell or flavor; little alms-food” 〔T32 410c19〕; for a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人), “rich and fine, clean, with good smell and flavor, obtained as he wishes” 〔T32 410c20〕; for a practitioner of deluded temperament, “whatever is obtained, with moderation” 〔T32 410c21〕.

Place of activity: for a practitioner of desirous temperament, “a place of coarse rice and food; if he enters a settlement, he should walk toward the sun” 〔T32 410c25–26〕; for a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋恚行人), “where rice, water, food, and drink are complete; entering while following the sun; where there are many faithful and devoted people” 〔T32 410c27–28〕; for a practitioner of deluded temperament, “a place according to whatever is obtained” 〔T32 410c28〕.

The source string 隨所得, rendered “whatever is obtained,” occurs only three times in the whole treatise, precisely in these three places. A practitioner of desirous temperament is given what is coarse, unattractive, and scant—his illness is attachment, so what is unlovely is used to treat it. A practitioner of angry temperament is given what is good, fine, and according to his wishes—his illness is aversion, so what is lovely is used to treat it. Both persons receive countermeasures. The practitioner of deluded temperament does not receive a countermeasure; he simply has “whatever is obtained.”

The Only Exception Falls under Dwelling

Among the four matters, only one statement for a practitioner of deluded temperament does not have “whatever is obtained.”

“A practitioner of deluded temperament should live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally” 〔T32 410c24–25〕.

For the same matter, the practitioner of desirous temperament is given “amid tree shade and water, at a place slightly removed from the village, also in an unfinished monastery” 〔T32 410c21–22〕—an unfinished monastery, a place without bedding. The practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) is given “in tree shade beside water, level and even, in a completed monastery, with bedding complete” 〔T32 410c23–24〕—a completed monastery with all bedding present. Both persons are assigned buildings.

Only the practitioner of deluded temperament is assigned not a building but a person.

The expression 依師親覲, “live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally,” occurs only once in the whole treatise. The two characters 親覲 occur three other times in this chapter, all in the first unit—in the three answers’ phrase “because of approaching and beholding good qualities” 〔T32 409c12·409c18·409c24〕.

Thus the two ends of this chapter join: at its opening, “At this point, the ācariya of dependence observes his temperament for several days” 〔T32 409b25〕—the teacher watches the person; at its end, “a practitioner of deluded temperament should live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally”—the person relies on the teacher. Within one chapter, it begins with the teacher and ends with the teacher.

The first sentence of the next chapter is, “At this point, the teacher of dependence observes the practitioner’s conduct and assigns thirty-eight practices” 〔T32 411a08〕—it is still the same teacher, continuing the work.

Pause Here: Four Matters in the Question, Five in the Answer

The question in this passage lists four matters: receiving robes, going for alms, sitting and lying down, and one’s place of activity.

Yet after answering the four, there is another section: “The deportment of a practitioner of desirous temperament has many places for walking; a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) relies on sitting and lying down; a practitioner of deluded temperament relies on the place of activity” 〔T32 410c28–411a01〕. Deportment. It is not in the question.

But it is present in the question at the opening of this chapter—“How, according to temperament, should one receive robes, go for alms, sit and lie down, and handle one’s place of activity and deportment?” 〔T32 410a11–12〕.

The same question is stated a second time with one matter missing, yet that matter returns in the answer.

It is worth pausing here to ask: why is “deportment” lost when the question is repeated, only to reappear in the answer?

The treatise does not say, and neither do the critical notes—the sentence has no critical note. What can be checked is only the following juxtaposition: first, the opening question lists five matters, this repeated question lists four, and the answer gives five sections; second, the three sentences on deportment occupy only one line, shorter than every section on the preceding four matters; third, four more threefold groups follow—scattered orientation, three similes, drawbacks, and what they delight in—and none appears in any question.

The author does not state the reason, and this edition does not decide it on his behalf. The text is recorded as it stands, without supplying or deleting anything.

In the Final Five Threefold Groups, the Designations Differ across the Five

After deportment, the author sets out four groups in one breath:

“Here, in scattered orientation, one of desire relies on a lovely object as faith, one of anger (瞋恚者) takes an unlovely object as faith, and one of delusion takes non-observation as cause” 〔T32 411a01–02〕; “one of desire is like a slave, one of anger (瞋恚者) is like a master, and one of delusion is like poison” 〔T32 411a02–03〕; “one who is greedy: slight drawback, severing, without stain; anger (瞋恚): great drawback, causing, without stain; one of delusion: great drawback, severing, without stain” 〔T32 411a03–05〕; “a practitioner of desirous temperament delights in forms, a practitioner of angry temperament (瞋行人) delights in contention, and a practitioner of deluded temperament delights in indolence” 〔T32 411a05–06〕.

Across the five threefold groups, the first person receives three designations: the deportment and delight groups have “a practitioner of desirous temperament”; the scattered-orientation and simile groups have “one of desire”; the drawbacks group has “one who is greedy.” The source expression 貪者, “one who is greedy,” occurs three times in the whole treatise, once in this passage, and is the only changed designation among the five groups. It is recorded as it stands without being made uniform.

There are two further small irregularities. In the scattered-orientation group, the first two statements end with “as faith,” while the third ends with “as cause” 〔T32 411a02〕. In the drawbacks group, slight and great are divided between greed and anger-delusion, while severing and causing are divided between greed-delusion and anger—two axes run in parallel, each without uniformity. The treatise does not explain them; the division of the sentence remains pending examination, and the literal wording is retained.

The three-simile group is the briefest: “like a slave” and “like a master” each occur only once in the whole treatise, while “like poison” occurs five times and once in this passage. The three similes stand side by side, and the author explains none of them.

Reading Practice: When Three Persons Are Set Side by Side, First Measure Whose Sentence Is Shortest

The reading practice offered by this passage rests in “whatever is obtained.”

Whenever this treatise sets three persons and four matters side by side, do not simply read straight through. First measure the length of each person’s sentence.

After measuring, look for two things. First, who has the shortest sentences—the shortest place is where the author considers that no assignment need be made for that person. Second, in which matter does the person with the shortest sentences suddenly receive a longer, more definite one—that is the point the passage truly seeks to make.

The measurement is immediate here: of the four statements for a practitioner of deluded temperament, three have only “whatever is obtained,” while the fourth suddenly becomes “should live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally.”

The author assigns things to practitioners of desirous and angry temperaments; to the practitioner of deluded temperament, he assigns a person.

---

Carry away three things. One observation—under the four matters, three statements for a practitioner of deluded temperament use “whatever is obtained” (all three occurrences of 隨所得 in the whole treatise are in this passage: 410c18·410c21·410c28), while only sitting and lying down has “should live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally” 〔T32 410c25〕: the practitioners of desirous and angry temperaments are assigned things, while the practitioner of deluded temperament is assigned a person. One reading practice—when reading a passage that sets three persons side by side, first measure the length of each person’s sentences: the shortest indicates the person for whom the author considers a determination unnecessary, and the place where the shortest suddenly becomes longer and definite is the pivot of the passage. One place to pause—the question lists four matters while the answer gives five sections, adding deportment, although the question at the opening of the chapter includes deportment 〔T32 410a11–12〕 and the repeated question here omits it 〔T32 410c15–16〕; the author gives no reason and the critical notes have none, so this edition neither supplies nor deletes anything.

Three smaller matters should also be retained: 依師親覲, “live in dependence on the teacher and attend him personally,” occurs only once in the whole treatise, while 親覲 occurs three other times in this chapter, all in the three answers of the first unit 〔T32 409c12·409c18·409c24〕—the chapter begins with the teacher and ends with the teacher, and Chapter Seven opens by taking it up with “teacher of dependence” 〔T32 411a08〕; the first member of the final five threefold groups has three forms—a practitioner of desirous temperament, one of desire, and one who is greedy—with the drawbacks group alone using “one who is greedy”; and the character “Answer” in this passage is “If” in the Taishō base, the present text following the corrected reading, as recorded in the apparatus.

---

Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · Requisites and Places of Activity for the Three Temperaments · Exposition · Summer 2026