俱舍論頌疏論本 29

English (machine translation) 29

Language: English

29.1

From here, second, explaining the virtues that depend [on concentration], within which there are six parts: first, explaining the four immeasurables; second, explaining the eight liberations; third, explaining the eight bases of mastery; fourth, explaining the ten totalities; fifth, explaining the basis of the body obtained; sixth, explaining the conditions for giving rise to concentration.

29.2

First, explaining the four immeasurables. The treatise states: 'Having thus explained the concentrations that serve as bases, we should distinguish the virtues produced depending on concentration; among the virtues, we first distinguish the immeasurables.' The verse states:

29.3

'The immeasurables are four, because of counteracting hatred and the like;
benevolence and compassion are non-hatred in nature, sympathetic joy is joy, equanimity is non-greed.
Their aspects, respectively, are granting bliss and removing suffering,
rejoicing, and being equal toward sentient beings;
they take sentient beings of the desire realm as object;
sympathetic joy is in the first two dhyānas; the rest are in six, or five and ten;
they cannot abandon afflictions;
arising in humans, they are achieved through concentration in three.'

29.4

Explanation: The first line marks the topic in general; the next line shows that there are only four; the next two lines reveal their intrinsic nature; the next three lines explain their aspects; the next line explains their object; the next two lines explain their grounds of dependence; the next line explains that they do not abandon afflictions; the next line explains their location and achievement. 'The immeasurables are four': first, benevolence; second, compassion; third, sympathetic joy; fourth, equanimity. They are called 'immeasurable' because they take immeasurable sentient beings as their object, because they induce immeasurable merit, and because they bring about immeasurable fruit. Question: 'For what reason are there only four?' Answer: 'The verse says, "because of counteracting hatred and the like" (the "and the like" includes the three obstacles such as malice); here there are four obstacles: first, hatred; second, malice; third, non-rejoicing; fourth, sensual greed and hatred. Because they counteract these four frequently occurring obstacles, benevolence and the rest are established.'

29.5

'Benevolence and compassion are non-hatred in nature, sympathetic joy is joy, equanimity is non-greed' reveals their intrinsic nature. Benevolence and compassion have non-hatred as their nature. If following the author of the treatise, benevolence uses non-hatred, compassion is non-malice, sympathetic joy is the feeling of joy, and equanimity is non-greed. Benevolence, compassion, and the rest, if taken together with their retinue, have the five aggregates as their nature. Question: 'If equanimity is non-greed in nature, how can it counteract hatred?' Answer: 'The hatred counteracted here is induced by greed. If following the author of the treatise, equanimity has the two dharmas of non-greed and non-hatred as its nature.'

29.6

'Granting bliss and removing suffering, rejoicing, and being equal toward sentient beings' explains their aspects. Granting bliss is benevolence; removing suffering is compassion; rejoicing is sympathetic joy; being equal toward sentient beings is equanimity, meaning being equal toward enemies and friends, casting aside enemies and casting aside friends; hence it is called 'equanimity'. Thinking, 'May all sentient beings obtain such bliss,' one enters the absorption of benevolence. Thinking, 'May all sentient beings be free from such suffering,' one enters the absorption of compassion. Thinking, 'That sentient beings have obtained bliss and are free from suffering—how delightful!' one enters the absorption of sympathetic joy. Thinking, 'All sentient beings are entirely equal, without enemy or friend,' one enters the absorption of equanimity.

29.7

"[They] take sentient beings of the desire realm as their object" explains the objective sphere: these four immeasurables generally take all sentient beings of the desire realm as their object. They do not take the higher realms as their object because they act as antidotes against hindrances such as malice belonging thereto; since the higher realms are free from malice and the like, they do not take the higher realms as their object.

29.8

"[Appreciative] joy [relies on] the first two dhyānas; the remaining [three rely on] six, or five, or ten" explains the levels on which they rely. The immeasurable of appreciative joy is established relying solely on the first and second dhyānas. "The remaining six" means that the remaining three immeasurables rely on six levels: the four dhyānas, the threshold (anāgamya), and the intermediate [dhyāna]. "Or five": some masters say they rely only on five levels, excluding the threshold level; they state that cultivating the immeasurables is a relaxed state and that only those who are already detached from desire can cultivate them, hence the threshold is excluded. Others wish to maintain that these four immeasurables rely universally on ten levels: the desire realm, the four fundamental dhyānas, the preliminary stages (sāmantaka) of the four dhyānas, and the intermediate [dhyāna]. The intention here is that both the fundamental and preparatory stages of concentrated and non-concentrated levels are subsumed under the immeasurables; hence they are common to ten levels.

29.9

"They cannot abandon the afflictions": these four immeasurables cannot abandon defilements for three reasons. First, because they are subsumed under the fundamental dhyānas with outflows (the earlier text has already explained that the fundamental dhyānas do not abandon defilements). Second, because they arise in association with attention born of resolve (adhimokṣamanaskāra); to abandon defilements necessarily requires attention to reality, but since these are based on resolve, they cannot abandon them. Third, because their object encompasses all sentient beings universally; abandoning defilements necessarily requires attention directed toward phenomena, but since these take sentient beings as their object, they do not abandon defilements. The earlier statement that these serve as antidotes to four hindrances was made in reference to subduing malice and the like at the preparatory stage, or because they can cause what has already been abandoned to become even further removed; hence it was previously said that they act as antidotes to the four hindrances. If based on the fundamental absorption, the four immeasurables do not truly abandon defilements. Question: "How does a beginner cultivate loving-kindness and the others?" Answer: "First, reflecting on the pleasure one has experienced oneself, one forms this thought: 'May all sentient beings equally experience such happiness.' If that person originally had flourishing afflictions and cannot extend their mind equanimously in this way, they should divide sentient beings into three classes: friends, neutral persons, and enemies. Friends are further divided into three: superior, middling, and inferior. Superior friends are those who give birth to one's physical or Dharma body; middling friends are those with whom one exchanges material wealth and Dharma; inferior friends are those with whom one exchanges only material wealth. Neutral persons form a single class. Enemies are also divided into three: superior enemies are those who take away one's reputation, life, or close kin; middling enemies are those who deprive one of the requisites sustaining one's own life; inferior enemies are those who deprive one's kin of the requisites sustaining life. Together these form seven classes. Having differentiated the classes, one first arouses a sincere resolve to give happiness to superior friends. Once this wish is established, one gradually cultivates the same resolve toward middling and inferior friends. Having attained equanimity toward the three classes of friends, next one gradually cultivates the same resolve toward neutral persons, and then toward inferior, middling, and superior enemies. Through the power of repeated practice, one becomes able to give rise to the wish to grant happiness to superior enemies. Once this resolve has been cultivated to be equal toward [superior enemies] and superior friends without regression, one then gradually expands the object: gradually extending the contemplation, one thinks of one village, one country, one direction, and all worlds, pervading them with the bestowal of happiness. This is the completion of the cultivation of the immeasurable of loving-kindness. As for the method of cultivating compassion, one observes sentient beings submerged in the ocean of suffering, and wishes that they all attain liberation. As for the method of cultivating appreciative joy, one contemplates sentient beings obtaining happiness and being freed from suffering, and feels deep joy and comfort, thinking, 'How pleasant indeed!' As for the cultivation of equanimity, it begins first with neutral persons, and gradually progresses until one can arouse an equanimous mind toward superior friends, equal to that toward neutral persons."

29.10

"[Arisen in] humans, [one who possesses one] definitely achieves three": these four immeasurables are initiated by humans, not by others. Whenever one is attained, three are definitely possessed.

29.11

From here, the second part explains the eight liberations. The treatise says: "Having explained the immeasurables, we next explain the liberations." The verse says:

29.12

"The liberations are of eight kinds; the first three have non-attachment as their nature,
[occurring in] two, two, and one, one concentration; four are virtuous immaterial absorptions;
The liberation of the cessation of sensation and ideation arises immediately after the extremely subtle [mind],
Arising from the pure mind of its own level, or [the mind of] the lower, taintless [level].
Three have the visible of the desire realm as their object; four have the category of subsequent [cognition] as their path,
Taking suffering, origination, and cessation of their own and higher [levels], non-analytical cessation, and space [as their object]."

29.13

Explanation: The first line states the general heading. The next two lines specifically explain the first three liberations. The fourth line specifically explains the next four liberations. The second gāthā line specifically explains the eighth liberation. The final gāthā generally explains the objective spheres. Regarding "the liberations are of eight kinds": First, the liberation of one possessing the concept of internal form contemplating external form: having attachment to the concept of form in one's own body, to eliminate this attachment one contemplates external impure colors such as bluish decay, so that attachment does not arise; hence it is called a liberation. Second, the liberation of one without the concept of internal form contemplating external form: having no attachment to the concept of form in one's own body, although attachment is already eliminated, to make [detachment] steadfast one contemplates external impure colors such as bluish decay, so that attachment does not arise; it is called a liberation. Third, the liberation of the pure, bodily realizing and fully dwelling [therein]: contemplating pure colors so that attachment does not arise is called the pure liberation. "Contemplating pure colors" reveals that the contemplation has become superior; bodily realizing this pure liberation within the body is called "bodily realizing"; becoming fully accomplished and abiding in this concentration is called "fully dwelling." The four immaterial concentrations constitute the next four liberations; because each of these four liberations can abandon attachment to the lower levels, they are called liberations. Eighth, the liberation of the concentration of the cessation of sensation and ideation, bodily realizing and fully dwelling [therein]: turning away from sensation and so forth is called liberation. According to the Vibhāṣā, "liberation" here means the sense of turning away from.

29.14

"The first three have non-attachment as their nature": the first three liberations take non-attachment as their essential nature, because they directly counter attachment. Among the three, the first two operate under the aspect of impurity, forming representations of bluish decay and the like; the third liberation operates under the aspect of purity, forming representations of pure and lustrous appearance. The concomitants of these three all consist of the five aggregates.

29.15

"[Occurring in] two, two, and one, one concentration": this means two in two concentrations, and one in one concentration. The upper "two" refers to the first two liberations; the lower "two" refers to the first two dhyānas. Because the first two liberations arise relying on the first two dhyānas, they are called "two in two concentrations." "One in one concentration": "one" refers to the third liberation; this single liberation arises relying solely on the fourth dhyāna, hence it is called "one in one concentration." Because the fourth dhyāna is free from the eight afflictions and the mind is clear and pure, the pure liberation exists there.

29.16

"Four are virtuous immaterial absorptions": the four immaterial liberations take virtuous concentration as their essential nature. They are neither neutral nor defiled, because they are liberations; nor are they non-concentrated virtue, because their nature is weak and inferior. Immaterial non-concentrated virtue refers to such as the mind at the moment of death.

29.17

"The liberation of the cessation of sensation and ideation arises immediately after the extremely subtle [mind]": regarding the liberation of the cessation concentration, some explain that it turns away from sensation and ideation; some explain that it turns away from all minds that have an intentional object; some explain that it is liberated from the hindrances to concentration; hence it is called a liberation. This concentration manifests immediately after an extremely subtle mind. Minds entering the concentration of cessation are of three kinds in total: first, the mind with ideation; second, the subtle mind; third, the extremely subtle mind. Compared to the mind with ideation, the previous one was already called subtle; this one is even more subtle, hence called extremely subtle. One enters the concentration of cessation from the extremely subtle mind.

29.18

"Arising from the pure mind of its own level, or [the mind of] the lower, taintless [level]" explains the mind that emerges from the concentration of cessation. The mind emerging from the concentration of cessation arises either as the pure mind of the peak of existence, or as the taintless mind of the lower stage of nothingness. Thus, the entering mind is solely with outflows, while one emerges through either a mind with outflows or a taintless mind.

29.19

"Three have the visible of the desire realm as their object": the first three liberations take only the sphere of visible form (rūpāyatana) of the desire realm as their object. With respect to their differences: the objects of the first two are repulsive, while the object of the third is agreeable.

29.20

"Four have the category of subsequent [cognition] as their path, taking suffering, origination, and cessation of their own and higher [levels as their object]": the four immaterial liberations each take the truths of suffering, origination, and cessation of their own level and higher levels, as well as the path belonging to the category of subsequent cognition of the nine levels, as their objective sphere.

29.21

"Non-analytical cessation, and space": the immaterial liberations also take the non-analytical cessation of the truths of suffering and origination of their own level and higher levels, as well as the non-analytical cessation of the category of subsequent cognition of the nine levels, along with space, as their objective sphere. Question: "Why is there no liberation in the third dhyāna?" Answer: "In the third concentration, there is no attachment to color-form induced by the eye-consciousness; furthermore, one is agitated by the sublime pleasure of that level itself; therefore, there is no liberation." Question: "For what reason does the practitioner cultivate the pure liberation?" Answer: "In order to bring about joy, they cultivate the pure liberation. The preceding contemplation of impurity causes the mind to be depressed and sorrowful; now, cultivating the contemplation of purity stimulates it to rejoice. Alternatively, it is to accurately know one's own capability: namely, whether the previously cultivated liberation of impurity has succeeded or not; for only if afflictions do not arise when contemplating pure appearances has it succeeded." Question: "Why are the third and eighth liberations given the designation 'bodily realized' in the sūtra, while the remaining six are not?" Answer: "Because among the eight, these two are superior, and because they are at the borders of the two realms, they receive the name 'bodily realized.' The third liberation takes only pure appearances, preventing defilements from arising, and is therefore called superior. The eighth liberation is called superior because it is without mind. The third liberation is at the border of the form realm, and the eighth liberation is at the border of the formless realm."

29.22

From here, the third part explains the eight spheres of mastery (abhibhvāyatana). The treatise says: "Having explained the liberations, we next explain the spheres of mastery." The verse says:

29.23

"The spheres of mastery are of eight kinds: two are like the first liberation,
The next two are like the second, and the last four are like the third."

29.24

Explanation: The spheres of mastery are of eight kinds: 1. Having the concept of internal form, contemplating few external forms. 2. Having the concept of internal form, contemplating many external forms. 3. Without the concept of internal form, contemplating few external forms. 4. Without the concept of internal form, contemplating many external forms. Without the concept of internal form, contemplating external blue, yellow, red, and white constitute four spheres of mastery, which added to the previous ones make eight. Among the eight, the first two are like the first liberation, the next two are like the second liberation, and the last four are like the third liberation. Cultivating the earlier liberations can only turn away from the mind of attachment, but cannot master the object; cultivating the subsequent spheres of mastery enables one to master the object, so that whatever one wishes to contemplate, defilements will never arise, enabling one to subdue the object. Because the mind surpasses the sphere of the object, they are called spheres of mastery.

29.25

From here, the fourth part explains the ten spheres of totality (kṛtsnāyatana). The treatise says: "Having explained the spheres of mastery, we next explain the spheres of totality." The verse says:

29.26

"The spheres of totality are of ten kinds: eight are like the pure liberation,
The last two are pure immaterial [concentrations], taking the four aggregates of their own level as object."

29.27

The commentary explains: There are ten totalities, meaning the universally pervasive contemplation of earth, water, fire, wind, blue, yellow, red, white, as well as the two bases of boundless space and boundless consciousness. Because one contemplates everywhere and comprehensively without any interval, they are called 'totalities'. Among the ten, the first eight are like the pure liberation; that is, the intrinsic nature of the eight is in each case non-greed. If taken together with their companions, all are of the nature of the five skandhas, depend on the fourth dhyāna, and take as their object visible matter of the desire [realm]. The last two totalities are respectively space and consciousness; their intrinsic nature is wholesome immaterial [absorption], and they each take the four skandhas of their own level as their objective sphere. One should know that here, the practitioner who cultivates contemplation enters the stations of mastery from the liberations, and enters the totalities from the stations of mastery, because what arises later and later surpasses what came earlier and earlier. That is to say, when cultivating the liberations, one merely grasps pure marks generically in relation to the object, not yet being able to differentiate blue, yellow, red, and white. Although the last four stations of mastery are able to differentiate blue, yellow, red, and white, they are not yet able to produce a boundless mode of activity. As for the first four totalities, one contemplates each one, such as blue, as boundless, and further reflects: 'On what do blue and the others depend?' One knows that they depend on the great elements. Next, one contemplates each of earth and the others as boundless, and further reflects: 'Due to what is this perceived matter vast?' One knows that it is due to space. Next, one contemplates the base of boundless space, and further reflects: 'On what does this which is able to perceive depend?' One knows that it depends on vast consciousness. One then contemplates the base of boundless consciousness; because this consciousness upon which [things] depend has no other distinct basis, one does not cultivate further above as a totality.

29.28

From here, fifth, the text clarifies the physical basis on which they are attained. The treatise says: 'Through what are these three classes of merits, the liberations and the rest, attained (first question)? Depending on what physical basis do they arise (second question)?' The verse says:

29.29

'Cessation-attainment is as explained before; the rest are both accessible by two attainments.
The immaterial depend on the three realms; the rest arise only in human rebirth.'

29.30

The commentary explains: The liberation of the attainment of cessation was already explained in the 'Indriya Chapter'. The remaining liberations and so forth are accessible through both kinds of attainment: if one practiced them before, they are attained through detachment; if one has not practiced them before, they are attained through application. The four immaterial liberations, and the two totalities of space and consciousness, each universally arise depending on physical bases across the three realms. The rest arise only in humans; due to the power of instruction, ordinary beings as well as noble ones are all capable of manifesting them.

29.31

From here, sixth, the text clarifies the conditions for giving rise to samādhis. The treatise says: 'For those born in the form and formless realms, due to what distinct conditions do they give rise to the dhyānas and the formless [samādhis]?' The verse says:

29.32

'The two realms, through cause and karma, are able to give rise to formless samādhis;
Giving rise to dhyānas in the form realm is also through the power of nature.'

29.33

The commentary explains: Rebirth in the upper two realms is in general due to three conditions: First, through the power of cause, meaning that previously, familiarity and frequent practice served as the cause for their arising. Second, through the power of karma, meaning that one previously created karma conducive to rebirth in a higher level to be experienced in subsequent lives; when the maturation of that karma is about to appear, its power is able to induce the progressive arising of that samādhi. Third, through the power of nature: when the receptacle world is about to be destroyed, sentient beings of a lower level naturally are able to give rise to the dhyānas of the higher levels and be born into the upper two realms. Giving rise to the formless samādhis is due to the power of cause and karma, not the power of nature, because the heavens such as the Cloudless Heaven are free from calamities and destruction. When one is born in the form realm and gives rise to dhyāna, it is due to the two conditions above as well as the power of nature. If one is born in the desire realm, when giving rise to the higher samādhis, one adds the power of instruction to the previous three conditions.

29.34

From here, the second major section clarifies the enduring of the true Dharma in the world. If explaining the meaning according to the three divisions, from here downwards is the propagation section. The treatise says: 'The various Dharma doors distinguished above were all for the sake of broadly upholding the teaching of the World-Honoured One. What is meant by the true Dharma (first question)? For how long will it abide (second question)?' The verse says:

29.35

'The Buddha's true Dharma is of two kinds: teaching and realization are its substance.
As long as there are those who hold, explain, and practice it, it abides in the world.'

29.36

The commentary explains: The upper two lines answer the first question; the lower two lines answer the second question. The true Dharma is of two kinds: first, teaching; second, realization. The teaching refers to the sūtras, vinaya, and abhidharma. Realization refers to the factors of awakening of the three vehicles. As long as there are those who can uphold and correctly expound them, the Dharma of teaching abides in the world. As long as there are those who can correctly cultivate and practice in accordance with the teaching, the Buddha's true Dharma of realization abides in the world. The Way relies on people to propagate it; the Dharma depends on people to abide. When the people are present, the Dharma is present; when the people are gone, the Dharma is gone. Therefore Vasubandhu says: 'Therefore, corresponding to the duration of the abiding in the world of these three kinds of persons, one should know that the Dharma of the world abides for that long.' The noble teachings generally say that it abides for only a thousand years; some explain that the Dharma of realization abides for only a thousand years, while the duration of the abiding of the Dharma of teaching exceeds this.

29.37

From here, third, the text clarifies the fundamental tenet of the treatise, within which there are two parts: first, directly clarifying the fundamental tenet; second, lamentation and exhortation to study.

29.38

As for directly clarifying the fundamental tenet, the treatise says: 'This treatise relies on and gathers the Abhidharma; relying on what principles does it explain the Abhidharma?' The verse says:

29.39

'The principles deliberated by Kaśmīra are established; I have mostly relied on them to explain the Abhidharma.
A few shortcomings are my own faults; the correct principle for determining the Dharma rests with the Muni.'

29.40

The commentary explains: The Vaibhāṣikas of Kaśmīra deliberated the principles of the Abhidharma so that they were well established; I have mostly relied on them to explain the treasury of the Abhidharma. A few shortcomings are my own faults. The correct principle for determining the Dharma rests solely with the World-Honoured One and the great noble disciples of the Tathāgatas.

29.41

From here, second, lamentation and exhortation to study, within which there are two parts: first, lamenting the persons; second, exhorting the study of the Dharma.

29.42

Within lamenting the persons, there are two parts: first, directly lamenting the persons; second, reiterating the explanation of the lamentation.

29.43

Within directly lamenting the persons, there are two parts: first, lamenting those possessed of virtue; second, lamenting the arising of faults.

29.44

First, as for lamenting those possessed of virtue, the verse says:

29.45

'The great master, the eye of the world, has long been closed;
Those capable of serving as witnesses have mostly dispersed and perished.'

29.46

The commentary explains: The great master of the three realms served as the eye of the world; his nirvāṇa being long ago, it is described as 'already closed'. Śāriputra and the others are called 'those capable of witnessing'; following the Buddha's extinction, they are described as 'mostly dispersed and perished'.

29.47

From here, second, as for lamenting the arising of faults, the verse says:

29.48

'People who do not see the real truth and are without restraint
Confuse the noble teaching through vile discursive thinking.'

29.49

The commentary explains: Having already lost the great master and also lacking the storehouse of the Dharma, ordinary beings simply lack the wisdom eye: not seeing the real truth and having no Dharma to restrain themselves, they give rise to evil discursive thinking and confuse and delude the noble teaching—their fault is great indeed!

29.50

From here, second, reiterating the explanation of the lamentation, divided into two: first, reiterating [the lament for] those possessed of virtue; second, reiterating [the lament for] the arising of faults.

29.51

First, as for reiterating [the lament for] those possessed of virtue, the verse says:

29.52

'The Self-Awakened One has already returned to supreme quiescence;
Those who upheld his teaching have mostly perished in his wake.'

29.53

The commentary explains: The Buddha is called the 'Self-Awakened One' because he awakened without a teacher. His nirvāṇa being long ago, he is described as 'already returned to quiescence'. Śāriputra and the others who upheld his teaching have now also perished in his wake.

29.54

From here, second, reiterating [the lament for] the arising of faults, the verse says:

29.55

'The world has no protector, having lost the multitude of virtues;
Without a hook to restrain the defilements, they turn at will.'

29.56

The commentary explains: 'The world has no protector' because it has lost the Tathāgata and the great disciples who possessed the multitude of virtues; because of this, sentient beings lack the hook of the true Dharma to restrain the elephant of defilements, giving rise to attachments at will.

29.57

From here, second, exhorting the study of the Dharma, the verse says:

29.58

'Knowing that the lifespan of the Tathāgata's true Dharma
Has gradually perished as if reaching the throat,
Now is the time when the power of the defilements increases;
One should seek liberation and not be negligent.'

29.59

The commentary explains: In the nine hundred years after the Buddha's extinction, Vasubandhu composed the treatises; the lifespan of the true Dharma was gradually perishing, like a dying person whose breath reaches the throat, on the verge of death in an instant. At this time defilements increase; wise people should seek liberation and not let negligence give rise to defilements.

29.60

Chapter on the Refutation of the Self

29.61

Indeed, when clouds disperse, the moon appears; when clinging is destroyed, emptiness is clear. If one does not crush the heterodox, how will the orthodox be revealed? The purpose of this chapter's occurrence is truly well-founded. There are guests who cling to marks, children who lose their way; phenomena have no master, yet they crosswise give rise to the clinging to a self. Once the view of self arises, all defilements arise along with it, drowning them in the river of the three realms of existence and turning their backs on the eightfold noble path. As for this fault, is it not lamentable! The treatise master, with deep affection as if toward an only child, stopped his aching heart and pitied them, and therefore composed this treatise. Clinging to a self is not uniform, but has three general kinds: first, the Vātsīputrīyas; second, the Sāṃkhya school; third, the Vaiśeṣika school. Refuting these three doctrines is extensive, as in the full treatise. Now, only explaining the verses, it cannot be fully laid out; the essential doctrines are briefly raised as an introduction. The Vātsīputrīyas are one of the eighteen schools. When the Buddha was in the world, there was a tīrthika named Vatsa; now this school's doctrine is identical to this tīrthika, and hence it is designated by this name. In the refutations of this chapter, one first refutes the Vātsīputrīyas, next refutes the Sāṃkhya, and afterwards refutes the Vaiśeṣika. Truly because this school is composed of Buddha's disciples whose views are identical to tīrthikas—which is utterly improper—it is refuted first. Now, wishing to refute them, one first examines their doctrine.

29.62

The treatise says: 'However, the Vātsīputrīyas hold that there is a pudgala whose substance is neither identical to nor different from the five skandhas.'

29.63

The explanation states: They assert a real self called 'pudgala', which is translated here as 'frequent appropriator of destinies'. The skandhas perish from moment to moment and have no ability to transmigrate; but because the self can abandon these skandhas and connect to other skandhas, frequently appropriating destinies, they hold that there is a real substantial self named pudgala. They assert that the self is neither identical to nor different from the skandhas, neither annihilated nor eternal. If one says it is identical to the skandhas, then when the skandhas perish the self would perish, which becomes the annihilationist view. If one says it is different from the skandhas, then when the skandhas perish the self remains, which is the eternalist view. Both fall into extremes; therefore, one knows that this self is neither identical to nor different from the five skandha phenomena, neither annihilated nor eternal.

29.64

The treatise master refutes this, saying: 'Is the self you hold substantially real or nominal? If you say it is substantially real, it should be different from the skandhas because it would have a distinct nature, just as real matter and so forth are different from sensation and so forth. Furthermore, if it has a substantial entity, it must necessarily have a cause, just as the real five skandhas are born from causes. If you assert it is born from causes, then it is impermanent, which contradicts your school's [assertion that] the self is not impermanent. If it has a substantial entity but is not born from causes, it would be uncaused, which is identical to the views of tīrthikas. Furthermore, you assert that the self is not unconditioned. If it is not born from causes and is also not unconditioned, the self you hold would be useless. If the self is nominal, then it is identical to what I say, because there is no real self.'

29.65

Furthermore, that school's teachings have five repositories of phenomena: the three times constitute three, the unconditioned constitutes the fourth, and the self is the fifth inexpressible repository. When the self is in saṃsāra, it is inexpressible whether it is identical to or different from the three times; when it enters nirvāṇa, it is also inexpressible whether it is identical to or different from the unconditioned; therefore, they establish this self as the inexpressible repository. Refuting this: 'If the self is inexpressible as being different from the preceding four repositories of phenomena, then it should not be stated to be the fifth repository of phenomena. If the self is inexpressible as being identical to the preceding four, then it cannot be stated to be not the fifth. That which is not the fifth is precisely the preceding four repositories of phenomena. Since both the fifth and what is not the fifth are inexpressible, one should only establish the preceding four repositories of phenomena.'

29.66

The above was logical refutation; below is scriptural proof. The treatise says: 'The Bhagavān told the brāhmaṇa: "I say that all that exists is subsumed only under the twelve bases." If the pudgala is not subsumed under the bases, it logically follows that it has no substance. If it is subsumed under the bases, then one should not say it is inexpressible. Furthermore, the sūtra recited by your school also says: "Whatever eye there is, whatever visible matter there is," and so on in detail up to: "Monks, you should know that the Tathāgata only to this extent designates all things and establishes all substantially existent phenomena. Within this there is no pudgala." How can it be said to have a substantial entity? The Bimbisāra Sūtra also says: "Within this there is no nature of self or of what belongs to a self; there are only the substances of all suffering phenomena that are about to arise, are currently arising, and have already arisen," and so on in detail. Relying on the above reasoning and teaching, there is entirely no nature of a self. How can the Vātsīputrīyas crosswise fabricate clinging to a self?'

29.67

From here on, the author of the treatise quotes verses to prove his refutation, in which there are two parts: first, the refutation itself; second, the transmission.

29.68

Initially there are seventeen verse lines that constitute the actual refutation, followed by three lines that constitute the transmission. Within the initial refutation, it is condensed into six sections: first, the section directly revealing true emptiness; second, the section clarifying the Buddha's omniscience; third, the section on setting aside answers to benefit sentient beings; fourth, the section on the inscrutability of the characteristics of causes; fifth, the section on the sequence of the arising of results; sixth, the section on the difficulty of knowing karmic retribution.

29.69

Within the section directly revealing true emptiness, first is the utterance of an arhat nun, and next is the utterance of the World-Honoured One.

29.70

Now, as for the first: the treatise says: "An arhat nun named Selā (translated as 'Little Mountain') spoke to the Demon King:

29.71

"‘You have fallen into the realm of wrong views;
Amidst this empty heap of conditioned formations,
You falsely grasp that a sentient being exists;
The wise realise that none exists.
Just as depending on an assemblage of parts
The nominal designation of a chariot is established,
So conventionally is a sentient being established;
One should know that it depends on the aggregates.’"

29.72

The explanation says: 'You have fallen into the realm of wrong views' points out the fault of the demon. You, this Demon King, have fallen into the realm of wrong views. The view of self-existence is called 'wrong' because: first, it obstructs the noble path; second, it is covered by ignorance; third, it is the cause of defilements; thus it is termed 'wrong'. Tending toward saṃsāra, it is the cause of transmigration. It is called a 'realm' because one tends toward it; the wrong view is itself the realm, so it is called 'the realm of wrong views'.

29.73

'Amidst this empty heap of conditioned formations, you falsely grasp that a sentient being exists' directly explains the wrong view. The combination of the five aggregates is called a 'heap of conditioned formations'. Being completely devoid of an agent, it is called 'empty'. Grasping at a real sentient being constitutes the wrong view.

29.74

'The wise realise that none exists' reveals true emptiness. A sentient being is merely nominal; the noble ones realise it does not exist. Since grasping at a self has been eliminated, true emptiness is thereby revealed.

29.75

From 'Just as depending on an assemblage of parts' up to 'depends on the aggregates' uses an analogy to explain and establish the point. First the analogy reveals it, and then it is correlated with phenomena. Bringing together wheels, rims, and so forth forms the chariot, and the chariot is merely nominal. Bringing together the phenomena of the five aggregates forms a sentient being—how could a sentient being be real?

29.76

Next, the World-Honoured One spoke in the Saṃyuktāgama to the brahmin Bāvari (Bāvari is translated here as 'Jujube'; his parents, out of fondness for the child, named him after this jujube):

29.77

"‘Listen attentively, Bāvari,
To the Dharma that can untie all knots:
Conditioned by the mind, there is defilement;
Conditioned by the mind, there is also purification.
A self actually lacks the nature of a self;
Owing to inversion, one grasps it as existent.
There is neither sentient being nor self;
There are only phenomena having causes.
Namely, the twelve limbs of existence,
And the aggregates, sensory bases, and elements they subsume.
Examining all these thoroughly,
There is no person (pudgala).
Having observed that the internal is empty,
Observe that the external is empty in like manner;
Even the one who can cultivate the contemplation of emptiness
Is completely unfindable.’"

29.78

The explanation says: 'Listen attentively, Bāvari, to the Dharma that can untie all knots' encourages him to listen to the Dharma. 'Knots' refers to fetters and bonds; you can listen to this wondrous Dharma that unties knots.

29.79

'Conditioned by the mind, there is defilement; conditioned by the mind, there is also purification' indicates the Dharma being taught. When the mind is defiled, there is defilement; when the mind is purified, there is purification; relying on a purified mind, your knots can be untied.

29.80

'A self actually lacks the nature of a self; owing to inversion, one grasps it as existent' explains the previous line on defilement conditioned by mind. There is completely no real self; by arbitrarily calculating an agent, inverted thoughts arise, and the mind becomes defiled thereby.

29.81

'There is neither sentient being nor self; there are only phenomena having causes' indicates purification conditioned by mind. A result arises from a cause, hence it is called a 'phenomenon having a cause'. Merely through the power of the cause is the result able to arise. Since results arise from causes, there is truly no agent, hence there is no view of a self. The combination of cause and effect is nominally called a person, hence there is no sentient being. Realising phenomena that have causes, views of a sentient being and a self are extinguished, and the mind then becomes purified.

29.82

From 'Namely, the twelve limbs of existence' up to 'Is completely unfindable' explains the aforementioned 'phenomena having causes'. The twelve limbs of existence, and the three—aggregates, sensory bases, and elements—all these phenomena are merely cause and effect, without any person (puruṣa). Merely the body of a sentient being lacks a person; this is internal emptiness. External, insentient phenomena are likewise empty of dharmas. The one who cultivates this contemplation of emptiness is also unfindable.

29.83

Examining this scriptural verse, the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, was secretly teaching the Mahāyāna within a Hīnayāna sūtra; the principle of true emptiness is fully expressed here. The Vātsīputrīyas object: If there is no real self, then the World-Honoured One would not be omniscient. It requires a true self that does not perish from moment to moment to be capable of knowing everything all at once, because the mind and mental factors arise and perish moment by moment in different forms, and therefore the mind and mental factors cannot know everything all at once. The author of the treatise answers: "It is only with reference to the continuum possessing the capacity that knowing all phenomena is called 'omniscient'; it is not that all can be known at once through a single thought-moment."

29.84

From here on, he cites a verse in reply, which is the second section: clarifying the Buddha's omniscience. In this there are two parts: first, citing a verse to clarify directly; second, citing a scriptural verse to establish it.

29.85

Now, as for the first, the verse says:

29.86

"Because the continuum possesses capacity,
Just as fire consumes everything,
So too is omniscience [conceived];
It is not by knowing everything all at once."

29.87

The explanation says: When fire consumes everything, how could the fire of a single moment burn everything? It is only with reference to the continuum that it is said to burn everything. The Buddha's wisdom is also like this: it is only in terms of the continuum that he is called omniscient.

29.88

Next is the second part, citing proof. The Vātsīputrīyas ask: "How is it known that knowing all phenomena is stated with reference to the continuum, and not that the self knows all?" The author of the treatise answers: "Because it is said that the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, exists across the three times." The Vātsīputrīyas ask: "Where is this stated?"

29.89

From here on, the author of the treatise cites a verse to establish the proof, as a verse says:

29.90

"The Buddhas of the past,
The Buddhas of the future,
And the Buddhas of the present,
All extinguish the sorrows of sentient beings."

29.91

The explanation says: Since this verse speaks of Buddhas across the three times, it is with reference to the Buddha's wisdom in the state of a continuum knowing all phenomena, and not because of a self that he can know everything all at once, since the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, is subsumed within the three times. That school asserts that the essence of the self is the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, yet they also state that the essence of the self is not subsumed within the three times. Since this verse says that the Buddha is in the three times, the self you assert is not the World-Honoured One. Since the self is not the Buddha, it is clear that omniscience is not due to a self knowing everything all at once. The principle should also be like this.

29.92

Commentary on the Verses of the Abhidharmakośa, Fascicle Twenty-Nine

Linked texts (1)

俱舍論頌疏論本 — Classical Chinese