Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Questions on Selflessness

Translation of འཕགས་པ་བདག་མད་པ་དྲས་པ་ཞས་བྱ་བ་ཐག་པ་ཆན་པའ་མད (འཕགས་པ་བདག་མེད་པ་དྲིས་པ་ཞེས་བྱ་བ་ཐེག་པ་ཆེན་པོའི་མདོ)

Language
English
Translators
Rebecca Hufen, Shanshan Jia
Extent
32 passages, 2,599 words
Text
complete digital text
Source
84000 · Translated by the Dharmasāgara Translation Group under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating… · CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha). Shown whole and unaltered, with its notes, on a…

Contents

Text

84000's introduction

intro.1

Questions on Selflessness consists of a dialogue between a group of followers of the Mahāyāna tradition and a group of tīrthikas, who pose several questions on the doctrine of selflessness. In the exchange that follows, the Mahāyāna proponents elucidate this and other key Buddhist doctrines, such as the distinction between relative and ultimate reality, the origin of suffering, the emptiness and illusoriness of all phenomena, and the path to awakening.

intro.2

Questions on Selflessness consists of a dialogue between a group of followers of the Mahāyāna tradition and a group of tīrthika philosophers, who call upon the Buddhists to explain and defend their doctrine of selflessness. In the exchange that follows, the proponents of the Mahāyāna point out some of the problems with categorically affirming or denying the existence of a self, and they go on to clarify several related Buddhist doctrines, such as the distinction between relative and ultimate reality, the illusory nature of perceptions, and the emptiness of all phenomena. A passage of dialogue in prose is followed by a set of verses that describe the causes of suffering and the continuous transmigration in cyclic existence, as well as the liberation one attains by engendering the mind of awakening and the perfection of insight. The structure of the text deviates notably from the standard sūtra format, in which a description of the setting and the audience of the discourse is presented, followed by the delivery of the discourse itself and a conclusion extolling the benefits of the teaching. Rather, the text has neither a description of the setting nor the conclusion extolling its benefits, and its content consists not of the words of the Buddha himself but of those of the anonymous followers of the Mahāyāna.

intro.3

A Sanskrit manuscript of this sūtra, written in Newari script, is preserved in the National Archives of Nepal.¹ It was edited, introduced, and translated into French by Lévi (1928). Another edition was prepared by Vaidya (1961) and recently a revised edition was published by the Nairātmaparipṛcchā Study Group (2019). For our translation, we have compared the Tibetan text with this most recent Sanskrit edition by the Nairātmaparipṛcchā Study Group, and mention of the Sanskrit in the notes refers to this edition.

intro.4

There are also two Chinese translations of this sūtra (Taishō 846 and Taishō 1643), both of which contain some notable differences from the Tibetan and the extant Sanskrit sources. In the earliest Chinese translation (Taishō 846, 外道問聖大乘法無我義經, Wai dao wen sheng dasheng fa wuwo yi jing), which was prepared by Fa Tian (d. 1001) in the year 986, the sūtra begins rather differently than it does in the Tibetan. Here the text starts with the usual opening phrase, “Thus did I hear at one time,” and we are moreover told that the Buddha is present in the assembly and is the one to whom the questions are posed. The other translation (Taishō 1643, 尼乾子問無我義經, Ni gan zi wen wuwo yi jing), which was prepared by Ri Cheng (1017–78) in the year 1063, has the same opening content as the Tibetan and Sanskrit sources, but instead of employing the general designation tīrthika, the translation uses the more specific category of nirgrantha­jñāti­putra (尼乾子), which usually designates the Jains. This specification only exists in this later Chinese translation; otherwise, this translation is quite close to the extant Sanskrit. The translator also attributes the text to Aśvaghoṣa and categorizes it as a treatise (śāstra), rather than a sūtra.²

intro.5

According to the colophon to the Tibetan translation, it was prepared by the Indian scholar Kamalagupta and the great Tibetan translator Rinchen Sangpo. We can therefore assume that it was undertaken in the first half of the eleventh century, when these two scholars flourished. The first translation of this text from the Tibetan into a Western language was the French translation by Feer in 1883. The translation presented here is based on the Tibetan version in the Degé Kangyur, the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) of the Kangyur, and the Stok Palace manuscript.

1

Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Now, the tīrthikas—those who hold views based on objectification and who engage in concepts and analysis—went among the followers of the Mahāyāna. Respectfully, with joined palms, they asked these questions on selflessness: “Sons of noble family, the Omniscient One taught that there is no self in the body. If there truly³ is no self in the body, then how do playfulness, laughter, crying, enjoyment, anger, pride, jealousy, calumny, and so forth come about? Is there truly a self in the body or not? It would be proper for you to dispel our doubts.”

The followers of the Mahāyāna replied, “Friends, it should not be said that there truly is or is not a self in the body, because to say in this case that there truly is or is not a self is mistaken speech. Now, if there were a self, then why is it not perceptible at all, even after searching through the hair, nails, skin, head, flesh, bones, marrow, fat, ligaments, liver, intestines, throat, hands, feet, limbs, and other minor parts, both inside and outside the body?”

The tīrthikas said, “The self is only visible to those who have the divine eye. How could it be visible to us who only have eyes of flesh?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna replied, “It is not seen even by those with the divine eye. For how can something that has no color, form, or shape be seen?”⁴

The tīrthikas asked,

2

“Then is it nonexistent?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna said, “To say that it is nonexistent⁵ or to say that it is existent is mistaken speech. If it is nonexistent, then why do playfulness, laughter, crying, enjoyment, anger, pride, jealousy, calumny, and so forth arise so clearly? Therefore, it is not correct to say that it is nonexistent. One should not say that it is existent or nonexistent. Since this would be a fault, one should not say that it exists or that it does not exist.”

The tīrthikas asked, “Then what is apprehended in this case?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna said, “Nothing at all is apprehended.”

The tīrthikas asked, “Is it as empty as the sky?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna said, “Friends, it is exactly like that! It is as empty as the sky.”

The tīrthikas asked, “If that is so, then how should one view playfulness, laughter, crying, enjoyment, anger, pride, jealousy, calumny, and so forth?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna said, “They should be regarded as like an illusion, a dream, and a magical deception.”

The tīrthikas asked, “How are they like an illusion, a dream, and a magical deception?”

The followers of the Mahāyāna said, “An illusion is a mere analogy. A dream is a mere appearance that is not graspable, empty by nature, and nonexistent in essence. A magical deception is intentionally fabricated. This is the way things are, friends. You should regard all these things as being like an illusion, a dream, and a magical deception.

“Moreover, the distinction between the relative and the ultimate should be pointed out. In this regard, the relative consists in the conception ‘this is self, that is other.’ To conceptualize a soul, a person,

3

an individual, an agent, an observer, wealth, children, wives, friends, relatives, and so forth is called the relative.

“Where there is no self, no other, no soul, no person, no individual, no agent, no observer, no wealth, no children, no wives, no friends, no relatives, and so forth, this is called the ultimate.⁶ The relative consists in habitually labeling all things, in the results of virtuous and nonvirtuous deeds, and in birth and cessation.

“The very essence of suchness, where there are no virtuous results, no nonvirtuous results, no birth, and no cessation, is beyond both pollution and purification.⁷ This is the middle way teaching to strive for in practice. In this regard, it is said:

“Relative and ultimate
Are explained as two categories:
The relative comprises worldly phenomena;
The ultimate is beyond the worldly.

“Engaging with relative phenomena,
Sentient beings are overpowered by emotional defilements.
Not knowing the ultimate at all,
They wander for a long time in saṃsāra.

“The unwise form the concepts
Of relative worldly phenomena.
Due to such conceptualization,
They experience suffering.

“Ordinary individuals, due to their immaturity,
Do not know the path of liberation.⁸
They experience sundry forms
Of unending suffering.⁹

“Oblivious to the ultimate,
Where worldly existence ceases,
They are born and cease.
Although birthless, they come and go.

“Fools who dwell on worldly phenomena
Will rove around like a wheel.
In saṃsāra, the place of suffering,
They will revolve again and again.¹⁰

“Just as the sun and the moon
Continue to come and go,
Likewise, these beings, transmigrating in the world,
Come and go, again and again.

“The whole of saṃsāra¹¹ is impermanent and unstable,

4

Disintegrating at every moment.
That is why, by knowing the ultimate,
One abandons the state of relative reality.

“Devas from the higher realms,
As well as gandharvas, apsarases, and humans,¹²
Are all subject to transmigration—
All this is the result of the relative.

“Siddhas, vidyādharas, and yakṣas,
Gandharvas¹³ and mahoragas,
Go again and again to hell—
All this is the result of the relative.

“Those with great perseverance who come to abide
In the abode of the devas due to good qualities
Must again pass away and fall from the higher realms—
All this is the result of the relative.¹⁴

“Whoever attains the supreme state
Of Śakra or of a universal monarch
Will once again enter the birthplace of animals—
All this is the result of the relative.

“Abandoning the great bliss¹⁵
Of the devas of the higher realms,
A yogin should always meditate
On the mind of awakening, which is luminosity.

“Essenceless, unapprehendable,
Entirely empty, groundless,
And beyond all conceptual elaboration—
Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.

“Neither hard nor soft,
Neither warm nor cold,
Neither tangible nor graspable—
Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.

“Neither long nor short,
Neither round nor triangular,
Neither thin nor thick—
Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.¹⁶

“Beyond meditation,
Out of range for tīrthikas,
And having the perfection of insight as its practice¹⁷—
Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.

“Beyond analogy, it is nothing to meditate on.
The supreme unseen abode,
Completely pure by nature—
Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.

“All things are like foam,
Essenceless like water bubbles,
Neither permanent nor having self.
They are similar to magical illusions and mirages.

“Like a vase that is made from a lump of clay,¹⁸
Beings are filled with conceptual elaborations‍—
Desire, anger, and so forth‍—
They are utterly illusion-like.

“Just as in the morning where there was a dew drop
A moment later there is nothing to be seen,

5

So, too, when one sees the perfection of insight
The intellect gives way to the unconditioned.¹⁹

“Continuous laughter and play,
Talking, singing, music,
The enjoyment of material things, and so forth
Are all similar to dreams.

“Things constructed by beings
Are all similar to dreams.
Dreams are imaginings of the mind.
Mind itself is like the sky.

“One who constantly meditates²⁰
On this way of the perfection of insight
Becomes free of all entities
And attains the supreme state.²¹

“Those who uphold, with meditation,
The highest awakening
Cultivated by all the buddhas
Will gain the fruit of the Mahāyāna.”²²

Colophon

Translated, edited, and finalized by the Indian preceptor Kamalagupta and the great Tibetan editor-translator Bhikṣu Rinchen Sangpo.

Notes

notes.1

1. NAK 3/693; NGMPP reel no. A 936-11(5).

notes.2

2. This attribution to Aśvaghoṣa, however, was called into question by Lévi (1928) and Bhattacharya (1966). In addition to comparing the Tibetan text with the Sanskrit, we have also made occasional reference to the second Chinese translation by Ri Cheng.

notes.3

3. The Skt. here reads “If the body is without self, there is no supreme self” (yadi śarīraṃ nairātmakaṃ paramātmā na vidyate).

notes.4

4. The Skt. reads “compounded nature” (saṃskāra).

notes.5

5. The phrase “or to say that it is existent” is absent in the Skt., which instead reads “friends” (mārṣā). Taishō 1643 lacks this entire sentence.

notes.6

6. Instead of “this is called the ultimate,” the Skt. reads “this is the middle way of all phenomena” (sā madhyamā pratipattir dharmāṇām).

notes.7

7. The passage “The relative consists in … and purification” is missing in the Skt.

notes.8

8. The Skt. reads “Ordinary immature people, being blind, / Do not see the path to liberation” (muktimārgaṃ na paśyanti andhā bālāḥ pṛthagjanāḥ).

notes.9

9. The Skt. reads “They are born and perish unceasingly in the five realms” (utpadyante nirudhyante ajasraṃ gatipañcasu).

notes.10

10. In the extant Sanskrit, the preceding two verses appear to have become conflated into a single verse of six lines: “Fools involved in worldly phenomena Wander round and round like a wheel. They do not know the ultimate, Where saṃsāra ceases. Trapped in the net of saṃsāra, They go round again and again.” (bhramanti cakravan mūḍhā lokadharmasamāvṛtāḥ | paramārthaṃ na jānanti bhavo yatra nirudhyate | veṣṭitā bhavajālena saṃsaranti punaḥ punaḥ.)

notes.11

11. The Skt. reads “all compounded things” (sarvasaṃskārā).

notes.12

12. The Tib. reads “devas and humans” (lha mi). Since devas are already mentioned in the first line of this verse, we opted for the Skt. reading “apsaras.” Taishō 1643 has only “gandharva” (乾闥婆).

notes.13

13. The Skt. reads “kinnaras” ( kinnara ).

notes.14

14. This verse is missing in the Skt.

notes.15

15. According to the Skt. mahāsukha. The Tib. reads “pleasant truth” (bden pa bzang po).

notes.16

16. The Skt. has two more stanzas here: “Neither white nor red, Neither dark blue nor yellow, Without color or form— Such is the definition of the mind of awakening. “Without transformation or manifestation, Without antagonism or bondage, Without form, like the sky— Such is the definition of the mind of awakening.” (na śvetaṃ nāpi raktaṃ ca na kṛṣṇaṃ na ca pītakam | avarṇaṃ ca nirākāraṃ bodhicittasya lakṣaṇam | nirvikāraṃ nirābhāsaṃ nirūhaṃ nirvibandhakam | arūpaṃ vyomasaṃkāśaṃ bodhicittasya lakṣaṇam.)

notes.17

17. The Skt. reads “form” (rūpam).

notes.18

18. We are translating “vase” based on the Skt. (ghaṭī). The Tibetan translation reads “Assembled from a lump of clay,” (gong bu bzhin du bsdus gyur pa).

notes.19

19. Translation of this verse is tentative. The Sanskrit and the two Chinese translations all differ slightly. The Skt. reads: “Just as a lightning in the midst of clouds, Is no longer seen after a moment, With the view of transcendent insight, The supreme state should be cultivated.” (abhrāntare yathā vidyut kṣaṇād api na dṛśyate | prajñā­pāramitādṛṣṭyā bhāvayet paramaṃ padam ||.) Taishō 1643 reads: “Just as a moon in the midst of clouds Is no longer seen after a moment, Using profound insight, One realizes that the conditioned is like an illusion.” (如月處雲中 剎那而不現 以甚深般若 達有為如幻.) Taishō 846 reads: “Just as lightning is no longer seen after a moment, observe that the perfection of insight and virtuous actions are also thus.” (如電之住剎那不見。觀彼般若波羅蜜多。及作諸善。亦復如是.)

notes.20

20. In the Tib. this line seems to have been rendered twice, in two slightly different ways. To leave both in place would make for an irregular verse of five lines, whereas the Skt. verse only has four lines. We have therefore followed the Skt. here.

notes.21

21. The Sanskrit reads “Is liberated from all wrongdoing” (sarvapāpanirmuktaḥ).

notes.22

22. The Skt. reads “nirvāṇa” instead of “Mahāyāna.” After this verse, the Sanskrit adds another verse and a concluding sentence: “As many faults as relative reality has, Just as many virtues does nirvāṇa have. Nirvāṇa is nonarising; It is unstained by any faults. “Then the tīrthikas, being satisfied, became free from conceptualization, and having concentrated on the practice, they acquired the wisdom of the Mahāyāna.” (yāvantaḥ saṃvṛter doṣās tāvanto nirvṛter guṇāḥ | nirvṛtiḥ syād anutpattiḥ sarvadoṣair na lipyate || atha te tīrthikāḥ tuṣṭā vikalpa­rahitāḥ | tadā bhāvanāṃ samādhāya mahāyāna­jñānalābhino 'bhūvann iti || mahāyāna­nirdeśe nairātma­paripṛcchā samāptā ||.)