The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines
Chapter 6: Subhūti
Toh 10
Degé Kangyur, vol. 29 (shes phyin, ka), folios 1.a–300.a; vol. 30 (shes phyin, kha), folios 1.a–304.a; vol. 31 (shes phyin, ga), folios 1.a–206.a
Translated by Gareth Sparham
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2022
Current version v 1.0.13 (2022)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.17.7
84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha is a global non-profit initiative to translate all the Buddha’s words into modern languages, and to make them available to everyone.
This work is provided under the protection of a Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution - Non-commercial - No-derivatives) 3.0 copyright. It may be copied or printed for fair use, but only with full attribution, and not for commercial advantage or personal compensation. For full details, see the Creative Commons license.
Table of Contents
Summary
The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines is one version of the Long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras that developed in South and South-Central Asia in tandem with the Eight Thousand version, probably during the first five hundred years of the Common Era. It contains many of the passages in the oldest extant Long Perfection of Wisdom text (the Gilgit manuscript in Sanskrit), and is similar in structure to the other versions of the Long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras (the One Hundred Thousand and Twenty-Five Thousand) in Tibetan in the Kangyur. While setting forth the sacred fundamental doctrines of Buddhist practice with veneration, it simultaneously exhorts the reader to reject them as an object of attachment, its recurring message being that all dharmas without exception lack any intrinsic nature.
The sūtra can be divided loosely into three parts: an introductory section that sets the scene, a long central section, and three concluding chapters that consist of two important summaries of the long central section. The first of these (chapter 84) is in verse and also circulates as a separate work called The Verse Summary of the Jewel Qualities (Toh 13). The second summary is in the form of the story of Sadāprarudita and his guru Dharmodgata (chapters 85 and 86), after which the text concludes with the Buddha entrusting the work to his close companion Ānanda.
Acknowledgements
This sūtra was translated by Gareth Sparham under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The Translator’s Acknowledgments
This is a good occasion to remember and thank my friend Nicholas Ribush, who first gave me a copy of Edward Conze’s translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines in 1973. I also thank the Tibetan teachers and students at the Riklam Lobdra in Dharamshala, India, where I began to study the Perfection of Wisdom, for their kindness and patience; Jeffrey Hopkins and Elizabeth Napper, who steered me in the direction of the Perfection of Wisdom and have been very kind to me over the years; and Ashok Aklujkar and others at the University of British Columbia in Canada, who taught me Sanskrit and Indian culture while I was writing my dissertation on Haribhadra’s Perfection of Wisdom commentary. I thank the hermits in the hills above Riklam Lobdra and the many Tibetan scholars and practitioners who encouraged me while I continued working on the Perfection of Wisdom after I graduated from the University of British Columbia. I thank all those who continued to support me as a monk and scholar after the violent death of my friend and mentor toward the end of the millennium. I thank those at the University of Michigan and then at the University of California (Berkeley), particularly Donald Lopez and Jacob Dalton, who enabled me to complete the set of four volumes of translations from Sanskrit of the Perfection of Wisdom commentaries by Haribhadra and Āryavimuktisena and four volumes of the fourteenth-century Tibetan commentary on the Perfection of Wisdom by Tsongkhapa. I thank Gene Smith, who introduced me to 84000. I thank everyone at 84000: Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche and the sponsors; the scholars, translators, editors, and technicians; and all the other indispensable people whose work has made this translation of The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines and its accompanying commentary possible.
Around me everything I see would be part of a perfect road if I had better driving skills.Where I was born, where everything is made of concrete, it too is a perfect place.Everyone I have been with, everyone who is near me now, and even those I have forgotten—there is no one who has not helped me.So, I bow to everyone and to the world and ask for patience, and, as a boon, a smile.
Acknowledgment of Sponsors
We gratefully acknowledge the generous sponsorship of Matthew Yizhen Kong, Steven Ye Kong and family; An Zhang, Hannah Zhang, Lucas Zhang, Aiden Zhang, Jinglan Chi, Jingcan Chi, Jinghui Chi and family, Hong Zhang and family; Mao Guirong, Zhang Yikun, Chi Linlin; and Joseph Tse, Patricia Tse and family. Their support has helped make the work on this translation possible.
Chapter 6: Subhūti
The Lord then said to venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, starting with the perfection of wisdom, be confident in your readiness to give a Dharma discourse to the bodhisattva great beings about how bodhisattva great beings go forth in the perfection of wisdom.”
Then it occurred to those bodhisattva great beings, those great śrāvakas, and those gods to think, “Will venerable Subhūti instruct the bodhisattva great beings in the perfection of wisdom on account of armor in which reposes the power of his own intellect and confident readiness, or will he instruct them through the power of the Buddha?”
Then through the power of the Buddha venerable Subhūti, understanding in his mind the thought processes occurring to those bodhisattva great beings, those great śrāvakas, and those gods, said to venerable Śāriputra, “Venerable Śāriputra, whatever the Lord’s śrāvakas say, teach, and expound, it is all through the Tathāgata’s power. [F.58.a] And whatever the Tathāgata teaches, none of it contradicts the true nature of dharmas. When those children of a good family are training in that Dharma teaching they are also directly confronting the true nature of dharmas. Śāriputra, it is just the Tathāgata who, by skillful means, will expound the perfection of wisdom to the bodhisattva great beings. Śāriputra, teaching the perfection of wisdom here is not within the scope of any of the śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas or bodhisattva great beings.”116
Venerable Subhūti then said to the Lord, “Lord, you say this—namely, ‘bodhisattva great being.’ What phenomenon is this, the word bodhisattva great being, for? Lord, I do not see that—namely, the phenomenon with the name bodhisattva. Lord, I do not see those bodhisattva great beings, that perfection of wisdom, nor that word bodhisattva, so which bodhisattva great beings will I advise and instruct in what perfection of wisdom?”
“Subhūti,” the Lord replied, “those—namely, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva—are just words. They do not exist inside, they do not exist outside, and they cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.117 Subhūti, it is like this: the word being is uttered again and again, but you cannot apprehend any being. It is a mere name designation, and except for being used conventionally as a mere word and conventional term, any phenomenon that is a designation is not produced and does not stop.118 Similarly with self, [F.58.b] living being, creature, one who lives, individual, person, one born of Manu, a child of Manu, one who does, one who makes someone else do, motivator, one who motivates, one who feels, one who makes someone else feel, one who knows, and one who sees—they are all phenomena that are designations, and thus, being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, phenomena that are designations are not produced and do not stop. Those names do not exist inside, they do not exist outside, and they cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva are all phenomena that are designations, and that phenomenon that is a designation, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop.
“Subhūti it is like this: the form this inner body119 has is just a dharma designation, and that dharma designation, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop. That name does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is just a dharma designation, and except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop. That name does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist. Similarly, Subhūti, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva are all phenomena that are designations; that phenomenon that is a designation, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop.
“Subhūti, this—namely, [F.59.a] eyes—is just a dharma designation, and, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name—eyes—does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist. Similarly, Subhūti, ears . . . nose . . . tongue . . . body . . . and thinking mind is just a dharma designation, and that dharma designation, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop. That name—thinking mind—does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, a form is just a dharma designation, and, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name also does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist. Similarly, Subhūti, a sound . . . a smell . . . a taste . . . a feeling . . . and a dharma is just a dharma designation, and that dharma designation, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, is not produced and does not stop. That name dharma does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, eye constituent120 is just a dharma designation, and, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name eye constituent does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, form constituent is just a dharma designation, and, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name form constituent does not exist inside, does not exist outside, [F.59.b] and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, eye consciousness constituent is just a dharma designation, and, except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name eye consciousness constituent does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, ear constituent . . . sound constituent . . . and ear consciousness constituent . . . ; nose constituent . . . smell constituent . . . and nose consciousness constituent . . . ; tongue constituent . . . taste constituent . . . and tongue consciousness constituent . . . ; body constituent . . . touch constituent . . . and body consciousness constituent . . . ; and thinking-mind constituent . . . dharma constituent . . . and thinking-mind consciousness constituent is just a dharma designation, and except for being used conventionally as just a name and a conventional term, a dharma designation is not produced and does not stop. That name thinking-mind consciousness constituent does not exist inside, it does not exist outside, and it cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva are thus phenomena that are designations; those phenomena that are designations, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those terms—perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva—do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, it is like this: inner body121 is being used conventionally as a mere term. Skull, neck bone, shoulder blade, arm bone, spine, rib, hip bone, thigh bone, [F.60.a] lower leg bone, and foot bone are conventions designated just by names. They are just dharma designations, and those dharma designations, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva are phenomena that are designations, and those phenomena that are designations, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those terms do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, it is like outer grass,122 wood, branch, leaf, and petal. Those are all are just conventions designated by various words, and those words, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva are phenomena that are designations, and those phenomena that are designations, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those terms do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, it is like123 the names of past lord buddhas—except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, they are not produced and do not stop. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Subhūti, it is like [F.60.b] a dream, an echo, an apparition, an illusion, a mirage, a reflection of the moon in water, and a tathāgata’s magical creation. All those phenomena are just merely designated and, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those terms do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Similarly, Subhūti, all those phenomena—namely, perfection of wisdom, bodhisattva, and the word bodhisattva—are just merely designated, and those phenomena that are designations, except for being used conventionally as just names and conventional terms, are not produced and do not stop. Those terms do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended where both do not exist.
“Therefore, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom should train in names that are conventional terms making things known, in advice that makes things known, and in dharmas that make things known.124
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom do not view ‘form is permanent.’ They do not view ‘form is impermanent.’ They do not view ‘form is happiness’ or ‘is suffering,’ ‘has a self’ or ‘is selfless,’ ‘is calm’ or ‘is not calm,’ ‘is empty’ or ‘is not empty,’ ‘has a sign,’ or ‘is signless,’ ‘is wished for’ or ‘is wishless,’ ‘is compounded’ or ‘is uncompounded,’ ‘is arising’ or ‘is stopping,’ ‘is isolated’ or ‘is not isolated,’ ‘is wholesome’ or ‘is unwholesome,’ ‘is with basic immorality’ or ‘is without basic immorality,’ ‘is with outflows’ or ‘is without outflows,’ [F.61.a] ‘is afflicted’ or ‘is unafflicted,’ ‘is ordinary’ or ‘is extraordinary,’ ‘is defilement’ or ‘is purification,’ or ‘form is saṃsāra.’ Neither do they view ‘form is nirvāṇa.’
“Similarly, they do not view ‘feeling . . . ,’ ‘perception . . . ,’ ‘volitional factors . . . ,’or ‘consciousness is permanent.’ They do not view ‘it is impermanent.’ Similarly they do not view it ‘is happiness’ or ‘is suffering,’ ‘has a self’ or ‘is selfless,’ ‘is calm’ or ‘is not calm,’ ‘is empty’ or ‘is not empty,’ ‘has a sign,’ or ‘is signless,’ ‘is a wish for’ or ‘is wishless,’ ‘is compounded’ or ‘is uncompounded,’ ‘is arising’ or ‘is stopping,’ ‘is isolated’ or ‘is not isolated,’ ‘is wholesome’ or ‘is unwholesome,’ ‘is with basic immorality’ or ‘is without basic immorality,’ ‘is with outflows’ or ‘is without outflows,’ ‘is afflicted’ or ‘is unafflicted,’ ‘is ordinary’ or ‘is extraordinary,’ ‘is defilement’ or ‘is purification,’ or ‘is saṃsāra’ or ‘is nirvāṇa.’
“Similarly, they do not view ‘the eye constituent is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ ‘the form constituent is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ or ‘the eye consciousness constituent is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ up to they do not view it ‘is saṃsāra’ or ‘is nirvāṇa.’
“Similarly, they do not view ‘the ear constituent . . . ,’ the sound constituent . . . ,’ or ‘the ear consciousness constituent . . .’; ‘the nose constituent . . . ,’ ‘the smell constituent . . . ,’ or ‘the nose consciousness constituent . . .’; ‘the tongue constituent . . . ,’ ‘the taste constituent . . . ,’ or ‘the tongue consciousness constituent . . .’; ‘the body constituent . . . ,’ [F.61.b] ‘the touch constituent . . . ,’ or ‘the body consciousness constituent . . .’; or the thinking-mind constituent . . . ,’ ‘the dharma constituent . . . ,’ or ‘the thinking-mind consciousness constituent is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ up to they do not view it ‘is saṃsāra’ or ‘is nirvāṇa.’
“They do not view that any ‘pleasurable feeling’ or ‘suffering feeling’ or ‘neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling’ that arises from the condition of contact between the eyes, form, and eye consciousness ‘is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ up to they do not view that it ‘is saṃsāra’ or ‘is nirvāṇa.’ Similarly, they do not view that any ‘pleasurable feeling’ or ‘suffering feeling’ or ‘neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling’ that arises from the condition of contact between the ear constituent, sound constituent, and ear consciousness constituent; the nose constituent, smell constituent, and nose consciousness constituent; the tongue constituent, taste constituent, and tongue consciousness constituent; the body constituent, touch constituent, and body consciousness constituent; or the thinking-mind constituent, dharma-constituent, and thinking-mind consciousness constituent ‘is permanent’ or ‘is impermanent,’ up to they do not view that it ‘is saṃsāra’ or ‘is nirvāṇa.’
“And why? Because bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not view the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, or the word bodhisattva in the compounded element or uncompounded element. And why? Because, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not mentally construct and do not conceptualize any of those dharmas. Standing without mentally constructing any dharma,125 they cultivate the applications of mindfulness. Practicing the perfection of wisdom, they do not view [F.62.a] the perfection of wisdom or even the name perfection of wisdom; they do not view a bodhisattva or even the name bodhisattva. Similarly, when they cultivate the right efforts, legs of miraculous power, faculties, powers, limbs of awakening, and path; the perfection of giving, perfection of morality, perfection of patience, perfection of perseverance, perfection of concentration, and perfection of wisdom; the powers and fearlessnesses, up to the distinct attributes of a buddha, and are practicing the perfection of wisdom, they do not, except for paying attention to the knowledge of all aspects, view the perfection of wisdom, the name perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, or the name bodhisattva. Those bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom excellently realize the defining marks of the dharmas. And that defining mark of a dharma, of the dharmas, is not defiled and is not purified.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom should understand that they are just names and conventional terms that are dharma designations. Having understood that they are just names and conventional terms that are dharma designations, they do not settle down on form. They do not settle down on feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness. They do not settle down on the eyes. They do not settle down on a form, eye consciousness, and eye contact. They do not settle down on any pleasurable feeling or suffering feeling or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling that arises from the condition of eye contact. [F.62.b]
“Similarly, they do not settle down on the ears . . . , the nose . . . , the tongue . . . , or the body . . . , or on the thinking-mind, dharma, thinking-mind consciousness, and thinking-mind contact. They do not settle down on any pleasurable feeling or suffering feeling or neither pleasurable nor suffering feeling that arises from the condition of thinking-mind contact. They do not settle down on the compounded element or the uncompounded element. They do not settle down on the perfection of giving. They do not settle down on the perfection of morality, patience, perseverance, concentration, or wisdom. They do not settle down on any of their names or marks.
“They do not settle down on a bodhisattva’s body. They do not settle down on the flesh eye, divine eye, wisdom eye, dharma eye, or buddha eye. Similarly, they do not settle down on the perfection of clairvoyance, inner emptiness, outer emptiness, or inner and outer emptiness, up to they do not settle down on emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature. They do not settle down on suchness. They do not settle down on the very limit of reality. They do not settle down on the dharma-constituent. They do not settle down on bringing beings to maturity, purifying a buddhafield, or skillful means. And why? Because something that might settle down, something on account of which it might settle down, and something on which it might settle down––none of those dharmas exist.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom who do not settle down on [F.63.a] all dharmas grow in the perfection of giving. They grow in the perfection of morality, patience, perseverance, concentration, and wisdom. They enter into the secure state of a bodhisattva, step onto the irreversible level, complete the clairvoyances, and, having completed the clairvoyances, bring beings to maturity, and they respect, revere, honor, and worship the lord buddhas. They roam from buddhafield to buddhafield in order to purify a buddhafield and behold the lord buddhas. Having beheld those lord buddhas, the wholesome roots on account of which they would respect, revere, honor, and worship those lord buddhas will come about in them. And because of those wholesome roots they will come to be right in the presence of the lord buddhas.126 They will hear the Dharma from those lord buddhas, and the continuum of the Dharma they have heard will not be cut until reaching the site of awakening. They will obtain the dhāraṇī gateways. They will obtain the meditative stabilization gateways.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom should understand that it is a designation that is a name and conventional term for something.
“This ‘bodhisattva’127—what do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva form, or is the bodhisattva other than form, or is the bodhisattva in form, or is form in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without form?”
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . or consciousness, or is the bodhisattva other than consciousness, or is the bodhisattva in consciousness, or is consciousness in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without consciousness?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva eyes, or is the bodhisattva other than eyes, or is the bodhisattva in eyes, or are eyes in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without eyes?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva ears . . . a nose . . . a tongue . . . a body . . . or a thinking mind, or is the bodhisattva other than a thinking mind, or is the bodhisattva in a thinking mind, or is a thinking mind in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without a thinking mind?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva a form, or is the bodhisattva other than a form, or is the bodhisattva in a form, or is a form in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without a form?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva a sound . . . a smell . . . a taste . . . [F.64.a] a feeling . . . or dharmas, or is the bodhisattva other than dharmas, or is the bodhisattva in dharmas, or are dharmas in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without dharmas?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva eyes, form, and eye consciousness; or is the bodhisattva other than eyes, form, and eye consciousness; or is the bodhisattva in eyes, form, and eye consciousness; or are eyes, form, and eye consciousness in the bodhisattva; or is the bodhisattva without eyes, form, and eye consciousness?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva ears, sound, and ear consciousness . . . nose, smell, and nose consciousness . . . tongue, taste, and tongue consciousness . . . body, touch, and body consciousness . . . or thinking mind, dharma, and thinking-mind consciousness? Or is the bodhisattva other than them, or is the bodhisattva in them, or are they in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without thinking mind, dharma, and thinking-mind consciousness?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva the earth element, or is the bodhisattva other than the earth element, or is the bodhisattva in the earth element, or is the earth element in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without the earth element?”
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva the water element . . . the fire element . . . the wind element . . . the space element . . . or the consciousness element, or is the bodhisattva other than the consciousness element, or is the bodhisattva in the consciousness element, or is the consciousness element in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without the consciousness element?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva ignorance, or is the bodhisattva other than ignorance, or is the bodhisattva in ignorance, or is ignorance in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without ignorance?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva volitional factors . . . consciousness . . . name and form . . . the six sense fields . . . contact . . . feeling . . . craving . . . appropriation . . . existence . . . birth . . . or old age and death, or is the bodhisattva other than old age and death, or is the bodhisattva in old age and death, or is old age and death in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without old age and death?”
“None of those, Lord,” he replied.
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is the bodhisattva the suchness of form, or is the bodhisattva other than the suchness of form, or is the bodhisattva in the suchness [F.65.a] of form, or is the suchness of form in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without the suchness of form?”
The Lord then asked, “Similarly, is the bodhisattva the suchness of feeling . . . the suchness of perception . . . the suchness of volitional factors . . . or the suchness of consciousness, or is the bodhisattva other than the suchness of consciousness, or is the bodhisattva in the suchness of consciousness, or is the suchness of consciousness in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without the suchness of consciousness?”
The Lord then asked, “Similarly, is the bodhisattva the suchness of the constituents, sense fields, or dependent origination, up to old age and death? Or is the bodhisattva other than the suchness of old age and death, or is the bodhisattva in the suchness of old age and death, or is the suchness of old age and death in the bodhisattva, or is the bodhisattva without the suchness of old age and death?”
The Lord then asked, “Subhūti, for what reason do you say, ‘The bodhisattva is not form, and the bodhisattva is not the aggregates, constituents, sense fields, or dependent origination, up to the suchness of old age and death?’ ”
“Lord,” Subhūti replied, “when a being128 absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could that form be a bodhisattva? How could something other than form be a bodhisattva? How could a bodhisattva [F.65.b] be in form? How could form be in a bodhisattva? How could something without form be a bodhisattva? How could feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . or consciousness be a bodhisattva? How could something other than consciousness be a bodhisattva? How could a bodhisattva be in consciousness? How could consciousness be in a bodhisattva? How could something without consciousness be a bodhisattva?”
Connect this in the same way with constituents, sense fields, and dependent origination.
“Lord, when a being absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could old age and death be a bodhisattva? How could something other than old age and death be a bodhisattva? How could a bodhisattva be in old age and death? How could old age and death be in a bodhisattva? How could something without old age and death be a bodhisattva?
“Lord, when a being absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could the suchness of form be apprehended in it?”
Connect this in the same way with the aggregates, constituents, sense fields, and dependent origination.
“Lord, when a being absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could the suchness of old age and death be apprehended in it? It is impossible.”
“Excellent, excellent, Subhūti!” said the Lord. “Bodhisattvas, Subhūti, should train in the perfection of wisdom like that, without apprehending a being.
“And again, Subhūti, where you said, ‘Lord, [F.66.a] you say this, that is, “bodhisattva great being.”129 What phenomenon is this, the word bodhisattva great being, for?’ What do you think? Is bodhisattva the word for form? Or do you think bodhisattva is the word for feeling, perception, or volitional factors, or consciousness?”
The Lord then asked, “What do you think, Subhūti, is bodhisattva the word for the permanence of form, or is bodhisattva the word for the impermanence of form? Similarly, is bodhisattva the word for the pleasurable state of form, the suffering state of form, the selfness of form, the selflessness of form, the calmness of form, or the noncalmness of form?
“Similarly, is bodhisattva the word for the permanence of feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . or consciousness? Or for the impermanence of consciousness, the pleasurable state of consciousness, the suffering state of consciousness, the selfness of consciousness, the selflessness of consciousness, the calmness of consciousness, or the noncalmness of consciousness?
“What do you think, Subhūti, is bodhisattva the word for the emptiness of form, the nonemptiness of form, the sign of a form, the signlessness of form, the form that is wished for, or the wishlessness of form? Is bodhisattva the word for the emptiness of feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . or consciousness, [F.66.b] the nonemptiness of consciousness, the sign of consciousness, the signlessness of consciousness, the consciousness that is wished for, or the wishlessness of consciousness?”
The Lord said, “Subhūti, for what reason do you say that bodhisattva is not the word for the permanence of form and is not the word for the impermanence of form? Similarly, that bodhisattva is not the word for the pleasurable state or the suffering state of form, it is not the word for the self, it is not the word for selflessness, it is not the word for calmness, and it is not the word for noncalmness? That it is not the word for emptiness, it is not the word for nonemptiness, it is not the word for the state of having a sign, it is not the word for signlessness, it is not the word for the state of being a wish for, and it is not the word for wishlessness? Similarly, that bodhisattva130 is not the word for the permanence and is not the word for the impermanence of feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness? And that neither is it the word for the pleasurable state, the suffering state, the self, selflessness, calmness, noncalmness, emptiness, nonemptiness, the state of having a sign, signlessness, the state of being a wish for, or wishlessness?”
“Lord,” Subhūti replied, “when a form absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for form? Lord, when feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness absolutely do not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for consciousness? [F.67.a]
“Lord, when permanence and impermanence absolutely do not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for the permanence and the word for the impermanence of form?
“Similarly, when the pleasurable state . . . the suffering state . . . self . . . selflessness . . . calmness . . . noncalmness . . . emptiness . . . nonemptiness . . . the state of having a sign . . . signlessness . . . the state of being a wish for . . . and wishlessness absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for the wishlessness of form?
“Similarly, Lord, when permanence and impermanence absolutely do not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for the permanence and for the impermanence of consciousness?
“Similarly, when the pleasurable state . . . the suffering state . . . self . . . selflessness . . . calmness . . . noncalmness . . . emptiness . . . nonemptiness . . . the state of having a sign . . . signlessness . . . the state of being a wish for . . . and wishlessness absolutely does not exist and cannot be apprehended, how could bodhisattva be the word for the wishlessness of consciousness?”
“Excellent, excellent, Subhūti!” said the Lord. “Bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom like that should train in the perfection of wisdom without apprehending a word for form; without apprehending a word for feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness; without apprehending the words for form as permanent, impermanent, a pleasurable state, a suffering state, self, selflessness, calmness, noncalmness, emptiness, nonemptiness, the state of having a sign, signlessness, the state of being a wish for, or wishlessness; and without apprehending the words for feeling, [F.67.b] perception, volitional factors, or consciousness as permanent, impermanent, a pleasurable state, a suffering state, selfness, selflessness, calmness, noncalmness, emptiness, nonemptiness, the state of having a sign, signlessness, the state of having a wish, or wishlessness.
“Again, Subhūti, you say, ‘I do not see that—namely, the phenomenon with the name bodhisattva.’ The dharma does not see the dharma-constituent; the dharma-constituent does not see the dharma. Subhūti, the form constituent does not see the dharma-constituent, and the dharma-constituent does not see the form constituent. Similarly, Subhūti, the feeling constituent . . . the perception constituent . . . the volitional factors constituent . . . and the consciousness constituent do not see the dharma-constituent, and the dharma-constituent does not see the consciousness constituent. The eye constituent does not see the dharma-constituent. Similarly, the ear constituent . . . the nose constituent . . . the tongue constituent . . . the body constituent . . . and the thinking-mind constituent does not see the dharma constituent, and the dharma-constituent does not see the thinking-mind constituent. Subhūti, the compounded element does not see the uncompounded element, and the uncompounded element does not see the compounded element. And why? You cannot make the uncompounded known without the compounded, and you cannot make the compounded known without the uncompounded. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom [F.68.a] like that do not see any dharma at all, but they do not tremble, feel frightened, or become terrified at not seeing; their minds are not cowed by any dharma, do not tense up, and do not experience regret.
“And why? Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not see form; do not see feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness; do not see eyes; do not see ears, nose, tongue, body, or thinking mind; do not see a form, a sound, a smell, a taste, a feeling, or a dharma; do not see ignorance; do not see volitional factors, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, contact, feeling, craving, appropriation, existence, birth, or old age and death; do not see greed; do not see hatred or confusion; do not see a self; do not see a being, a living being, one who lives, an individual, a person, one born of Manu, a child of Manu, one who does, one who feels, one who knows, or one who sees; do not see the desire realm; do not see the form realm or formless realm; do not see śrāvakas and the śrāvaka dharmas; do not see pratyekabuddhas and the pratyekabuddha dharmas; do not see bodhisattvas and do not see bodhisattva dharmas; do not see buddhas [F.68.b] and do not see buddha dharmas; do not see awakening, up to do not see all dharmas. And while not seeing all dharmas they do not tremble, feel frightened, or become terrified.”
“Lord, why do the minds of a bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom not become cowed by all dharmas and not tense up?” asked Subhūti.
The Lord replied, “It is because, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings do not apprehend and do not view mind and mental factor dharmas. Therefore, Subhūti, the minds of bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not become cowed by all dharmas and do not tense up.”
“Lord, how is it that the thinking minds of bodhisattva great beings do not tremble?” asked Subhūti.
The Lord replied, “Because, Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings do not apprehend and do not view mind and mental factor dharmas or thinking mind and thinking-mind dharmas. Therefore the thinking minds of bodhisattva great beings do not tremble at all dharmas.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings should practice the perfection of wisdom like that, without apprehending all dharmas. Subhūti, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom do not apprehend a perfection of wisdom, that bodhisattva, that word for bodhisattva, or even that bodhicitta, then just that is the advice about the perfection of wisdom of bodhisattvas; just that is the instruction.” [F.69.a]
This was the sixth chapter, “Subhūti,” of “The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines.”