The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines
Chapter 8: The Religious Mendicant Śreṇika
- Jinamitra
- Surendrabodhi
- Yeshé Dé
Toh 10
Degé Kangyur, vol. 29 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, ka), folios 1.a–300.a; vol. 30 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, kha), folios 1.a–304.a; vol. 31 (shes phyin, khri brgyad, 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 1.0.21 (2023)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.19.1
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 8: The Religious Mendicant Śreṇika
Then venerable Subhūti said to the Lord, “Lord, given that I do not find, do not apprehend, and do not see a bodhisattva or the perfection of wisdom, to which bodhisattva will I give advice and instruction in what perfection of wisdom? Lord, given that I do not find, do not apprehend, and do not see any real basis, this really is something I might be uneasy about—Lord, while not finding, not apprehending, and not seeing any real basis, which dharma will advise and instruct which dharma? Because, Lord, given that I do not find, do not apprehend, and do not see all dharmas, this really is something I might be uneasy about, how I might make just the name bodhisattva and just the name perfection of wisdom wax and wane.
“Lord, furthermore, that name does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.153 And why? It is because that name does not exist that it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything. Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of form, and, Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness either, what will I label [F.75.a] with the name bodhisattva?154 By the same token, Lord, that name does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything. And why? That name does not exist, therefore it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.
“Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the eyes, and, Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the ears, nose, tongue, body, or thinking mind, and similarly, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the constituents, sense fields, or dependent origination, how will I label anything with155 the name bodhisattva?
“The name form, and the names feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness, as well as ears, nose, tongue, body, and thinking mind, do not stand alone and do not meet up with anything. And why? Those names do not exist, therefore they do not stand alone and do not meet up with anything.
“Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of eye consciousness. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, or thinking-mind consciousness, so how will I, while not apprehending and not seeing eye consciousness, or ear, nose, tongue, body, or thinking-mind consciousness, label anything with the name bodhisattva? Lord, also those names do not stand alone and do not meet up with anything. And why? Those names do not exist, therefore they do not stand alone and do not meet up with anything.
“Lord, I [F.75.b] do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of eye contact, of ear, nose, tongue, body, and thinking-mind contact, or of feeling that arises from the condition of eye contact. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of feeling that arises from the condition of ear, nose, tongue, and body, or thinking-mind contact. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the earth element, and I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the water element, fire element, wind element, space element, or consciousness element. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of ignorance, and, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of volitional factors, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, contact, feeling, craving, appropriation, existence, birth, or old age and death. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of greed, hatred, or confusion. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of obsessions, obscurations, proclivities, or fetters. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the sixty-two views. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of self, and, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of a living being, a creature, one who lives, an individual, a person, one born of Manu, a child of Manu, one who does, [F.76.a] one who feels, one who knows, or one who sees. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the perfection of giving, and, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the perfection of morality, patience, perseverance, concentration, or wisdom. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of any of the emptinesses. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the applications of mindfulness, Lord, and similarly I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the four right efforts, legs of miraculous power, faculties, powers, limbs of awakening, or path. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the gateways to liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the four concentrations, four immeasurables, or four formless absorptions. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of mindfulness of the Buddha, mindfulness of the Dharma, mindfulness of the Saṅgha, mindfulness of morality, mindfulness of giving away, mindfulness of the gods, mindfulness of what is included in the body, mindfulness of disgust, mindfulness of breathing in and out, or mindfulness of death.
“And, Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the five eyes, six clairvoyances, ten powers, four fearlessnesses, four detailed and thorough knowledges, [F.76.b] or eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha, what will I label with the name bodhisattva? That name, furthermore, does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything. And why? That name does not exist, therefore it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.
“Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the five appropriating aggregates, which are like a dream, and, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the five appropriating aggregates, which are like an illusion, a mirage, a city of the gandharvas, an echo, an apparition, a reflection in the mirror, and a magical creation. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of isolation, calm, nonproduction, nonstopping, nonappearing, not occasioning anything, nondefilement, or nonpurification. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of suchness, unmistaken suchness, unaltered suchness, the true nature of dharmas, the dharma-constituent, the establishment of dharmas, the certification of dharmas, the very limit of reality, or the inconceivable element.156
“Similarly, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the dharmas that are wholesome and unwholesome, basic immorality and not basic immorality, with outflows and without outflows, with afflictions and without afflictions, ordinary and extraordinary, compounded and uncompounded, defiled and purified, [F.77.a] or saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of dharmas that are past, future, or present. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the Lord. Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of tathāgatas, worthy ones, unsurpassed, perfect, complete buddhas seated together with their śrāvaka saṅghas and bodhisattva communities in as many world systems in the eastern direction as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River. Lord, given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of tathāgatas, worthy ones, unsurpassed, perfect, complete buddhas seated together with their śrāvaka saṅghas and bodhisattva communities in as many world systems as there are sand particles in the Gaṅgā River in each of the southern, western, northern, northeastern, southeastern, southwestern, or northwestern directions, below or above, which bodhisattva will I advise and instruct in what perfection of wisdom? Lord, that name, furthermore, does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything. And why? That name does not exist, therefore it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.
“Thus, Lord, I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of the suchness of all phenomena. Given that I do not apprehend and do not see even the waxing and waning of the name of the suchness of all phenomena, which bodhisattva will I advise and instruct in what perfection of wisdom? Lord, that name suchness, furthermore, does not stand alone [F.77.b] and does not meet up with anything. And why? That name does not exist, therefore it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.
“Lord, whatever this designation bodhisattva that is a conventional term for the true nature of dharmas is, it cannot be said to be aggregates, or constituents, or sense fields, up to the distinct attributes of a buddha—or anything at all, insofar as it is just a dharma designation. Lord, it is just as the name dream cannot be said to be anything at all, and the names illusion, echo, apparition, mirage, a reflection of the moon in water, and magical creation cannot be said to be anything at all. That which is the name space cannot be said to be anything at all, and similarly the names earth, water, fire, and wind cannot be said to be anything at all. That which is the name suchness cannot be said to be anything at all, and the names unmistaken suchness, unaltered suchness, true nature of dharmas, dharma-constituent, establishment of dharmas, certification of dharmas, and very limit of reality cannot be said to be anything at all; the names perfection of giving, morality, patience, perseverance, concentration, and perfection of wisdom cannot be said to be anything at all; and the names morality, meditative stabilization, wisdom, liberation, and knowledge and seeing of liberation cannot be said to be anything at all. That which is the name stream enterer cannot be said to be anything at all, and the name stream enterer dharmas and the names once-returner, non-returner, [F.78.a] worthy one, pratyekabuddha, bodhisattva, and bodhisattva dharmas cannot be said to be anything at all. That which is the name buddha and the name buddha dharmas cannot be said to be anything at all—to be wholesome or unwholesome or neutral, to be basic immorality or not basic immorality, to be permanent or impermanent, or to be happiness or suffering, self or no self, calm or not calm, isolated or not isolated, or a real thing or not a real thing. Having seen the reason for this, Lord, I said, ‘Given that I do not apprehend and do not see the waxing and waning of all dharmas, this really is something I might be uneasy about, namely, were I to label with the name bodhisattva or perfection of wisdom.’ Lord, that name, furthermore, does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything. And why? That name does not exist, therefore it does not stand alone and does not meet up with anything.
“Lord, if the minds of bodhisattva great beings are not cowed, do not tense up, and do not experience regret, and if they do not tremble, feel frightened, or become terrified when the perfection of wisdom is being spoken about, you should know that those bodhisattva great beings stand on the irreversible level by way of not taking their stand on it and will go forth to the knowledge of all aspects.157
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in form; they should not stand in feeling, perception, volitional factors, [F.78.b] or consciousness; they should not stand in the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, or thinking mind; and they should not stand in a form, a sound, a smell, a taste, a feeling, or a dharma. They should not stand in the eye consciousness, and they should not stand in the ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, or thinking-mind consciousness. They should not stand in eye contact; they should not stand in feeling that arises from the condition of eye contact; they should not stand in ear, nose, tongue, body, or thinking-mind contact; and they should not stand in feeling that arises from the condition of ear, nose, tongue, body, or thinking-mind contact. They should not stand in the earth element, and they should not stand in the water element, fire element, wind element, space element, or consciousness element. They should not stand in ignorance, and they should not stand in volitional factors, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, contact, feeling, craving, appropriation, existence, birth, or old age and death.
“And why? Lord, it is because form is empty of form, and because feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is empty of consciousness. Lord, that emptiness of form is not form, and emptiness is not other than form. Form itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is form. Lord, that emptiness of feeling is not feeling, and emptiness is not other than feeling. Feeling itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is feeling. Lord, that emptiness of perception is not perception, and emptiness is not other [F.79.a] than perception. Perception itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is perception. Lord, that emptiness of volitional factors is not volitional factors, and emptiness is not other than volitional factors. Volitional factors themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is volitional factors. Lord, that emptiness of consciousness is not consciousness, and emptiness is not other than consciousness. Consciousness itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is consciousness.
“Because of this one of many explanations, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in form, and they should not stand in feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness. Connect this in the same way with the constituents and sense fields.
“The earth element is empty of the earth element. The emptiness of the earth element is not the earth element, and emptiness is not other than the earth element. The earth element itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is the earth element. The water element . . . the fire element . . . the wind element . . . the space element . . . and the consciousness element is empty of the consciousness element. The emptiness of the consciousness element is not the consciousness element, and emptiness is not other than the consciousness element. The consciousness element itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is the consciousness element.
“Ignorance is empty of ignorance. The emptiness of ignorance is not ignorance, and emptiness is not other than ignorance. Ignorance itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is ignorance. Volitional factors . . . consciousness . . . [F.79.b] name and form . . . the six sense fields . . . contact . . . feeling . . . craving . . . appropriation . . . existence . . . birth . . . and old age and death is empty of old age and death. The emptiness of old age and death is not old age and death, and emptiness is not other than old age and death. Old age and death themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is old age and death. Because of this one of many explanations, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in ignorance, up to old age and death.
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the applications of mindfulness. And why? Because the applications of mindfulness are empty of the applications of mindfulness. That emptiness of the applications of mindfulness is not the applications of mindfulness, and emptiness is not other than the applications of mindfulness. The applications of mindfulness themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is the applications of mindfulness. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the applications of mindfulness.
“Similarly, they should not stand in the right efforts . . . legs of miraculous power . . . faculties . . . powers . . . limbs of awakening . . . path . . . noble truths . . . concentrations . . . immeasurables . . . formless absorptions . . . eight deliverances . . . nine serial absorptions . . . emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness . . . clairvoyances . . . ten powers . . . fearlessnesses . . . detailed and thorough knowledges . . . great love . . . great [F.80.a] compassion . . . or the distinct attributes of a buddha.
“And why? Because the distinct attributes of a buddha are empty of the distinct attributes of a buddha. That emptiness of the distinct attributes of a buddha is not the distinct attributes of a buddha, and emptiness is not other than the distinct attributes of a buddha. The distinct attributes of a buddha themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is the distinct attributes of a buddha. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the distinct attributes of a buddha.
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the perfection of giving. And why? Because the perfection of giving is empty of the perfection of giving. Lord, that emptiness of the perfection of giving is not the perfection of giving, and emptiness is not other than the perfection of giving. The perfection of giving itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is the perfection of giving. Similarly, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the perfection of morality . . . the perfection of patience . . . the perfection of perseverance . . . the perfection of concentration . . . or the perfection of wisdom. And why? Because the perfection of wisdom is empty of the perfection of wisdom. Lord, that emptiness of the perfection of wisdom is not the perfection of wisdom, and emptiness is not other than the perfection of wisdom. The perfection of wisdom itself is emptiness, and [F.80.b] emptiness itself is the perfection of wisdom. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in the perfection of wisdom.
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in syllables, in syllable accomplishment,158 in a single explanation, in two explanations, or in a number of different explanations. And why? Lord, it is because syllables are empty of syllables. Lord, that emptiness of syllables is not syllables, and emptiness is not other than syllables. The syllables themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is the syllables. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in syllables.
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in ‘form is impermanent,’ and they should not stand in ‘feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness is impermanent.’ And why? Lord, it is because form that is impermanent159 is empty of the intrinsic nature of form that is impermanent. That which is the emptiness of impermanence is not impermanence, and impermanence is not other than emptiness. Impermanence itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is impermanence. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in ‘form is impermanent.’
“Similarly, they should not stand in ‘feeling is impermanent’ . . . ‘perception is impermanent’ . . . [F.81.a] ‘volitional factors are impermanent’ . . . or ‘consciousness is impermanent.’ And why? Lord, it is because consciousness that is impermanent is empty of the intrinsic nature of consciousness that is impermanent. That which is the emptiness of impermanence is not impermanence, and impermanence is not other than emptiness. Impermanence itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is impermanence. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in consciousness.
“Similarly, they should not stand in ‘form is suffering, selfless, calm, empty, signless, wishless, or isolated.’ Similarly, they should not stand in ‘feeling . . .’; ‘perception . . .’; ‘volitional factors . . .’; or consciousness is suffering, selfless, calm, empty, signless, wishless, or isolated.’ And why? Lord, it is because consciousness that is isolated is empty of consciousness that is isolated. Lord, the isolation of consciousness is not consciousness, and isolation is not other than consciousness. Consciousness itself is isolation, and isolation itself is consciousness. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in ‘consciousness is isolated.’
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in suchness. And why? Lord, it is because suchness is empty of suchness. Lord, the emptiness of suchness is not suchness, [F.81.b] and suchness is not other than emptiness. Suchness itself is emptiness, and emptiness itself is suchness. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in suchness. Similarly, they should not stand in the true nature of dharmas, the dharma-constituent, the certification of dharmas, or the very limit of reality.
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in all the dhāraṇī gateways. And why? Lord, it is because the dhāraṇī gateways are empty of the dhāraṇī gateways. Lord, the emptiness of the dhāraṇī gateways is not the dhāraṇī gateways, and the dhāraṇī gateways are not other than emptiness. The dhāraṇī gateways themselves are emptiness, and emptiness itself is the dhāraṇī gateways. Because of this one of many explanations, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should not stand in all the dhāraṇī gateways.
“Furthermore, Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom without skill in means stand in form with a mind that has descended160 into grasping at ‘I’ and grasping at ‘mine,’ they practice an enactment of form,161 and they do not practice the perfection of wisdom. If they stand in feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . or consciousness, they practice an enactment of consciousness, and they do not practice the perfection of wisdom. And why? Because bodhisattva great beings practicing an enactment do not cultivate the perfection of wisdom, do not fully grasp162 the perfection of wisdom, do not [F.82.a] become absorbed in the yoga of the perfection of wisdom, and therefore do not fulfill the perfection of wisdom and go forth to the knowledge of all aspects.
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom without skill in means stand in the dhāraṇī gateways with minds that have descended into grasping at ‘I’ and grasping at ‘mine,’ they practice an enactment of them, and they do not practice the perfection of wisdom. And why? Because bodhisattva great beings practicing an enactment do not cultivate the perfection of wisdom, do not fully grasp the perfection of wisdom, do not become absorbed in the yoga of the perfection of wisdom, and therefore do not fulfill the perfection of wisdom and go forth to the knowledge of all aspects.
“Lord, if bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom without skill in means stand in suchness, unmistaken suchness, unaltered suchness, the true nature of dharmas, the dharma-constituent, the establishment of dharmas, the certification of dharmas, or the very limit of reality with minds that have descended into grasping at ‘I’ and grasping at ‘mine,’ they practice an enactment of those, and they do not practice the perfection of wisdom. And why? Because bodhisattva great beings practicing an enactment do not cultivate the perfection of wisdom, do not fully grasp the perfection of wisdom, do not become absorbed in the yoga of the perfection of wisdom, and therefore do not complete the perfection of wisdom and go forth to the knowledge of all aspects. [F.82.b]
“And why? It is because, Lord, form is not fully grasped, and feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness are not fully grasped. And why? Because a form not fully grasped is not form because of the emptiness of a basic nature, and feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness not fully grasped is not consciousness, because of the emptiness of a basic nature, up to the very limit of reality is not fully grasped. And why? Because the very limit of reality not fully grasped is not the very limit of reality because of the emptiness of a basic nature. And also, the perfection of wisdom is not fully grasped . . . because of the emptiness of a basic nature.
“Lord, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom should analyze how all dharmas are empty of a basic nature, and the investigation of them should be done in such a way that the thinking mind does not consider any dharma at all. Lord, this meditative stabilization sphere of bodhisattva great beings is called sarvadharmāparigṛhīta; it is vast, prized, infinite, fixed,163 cannot be stolen, and is not shared in common with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.
“Bodhisattva great beings abiding in that sphere of meditative stabilizations will go forth to the knowledge of all aspects. And that knowledge of all aspects is not fully grasped, because of inner emptiness, outer emptiness, inner and outer emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, the emptiness of ultimate reality, the emptiness of the compounded, the emptiness of the uncompounded, the emptiness of what transcends limits, [F.83.a] the emptiness of no beginning and no end, the emptiness of nonrepudiation, the emptiness of a basic nature, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of its own mark, the emptiness of not apprehending, the emptiness of a nonexistent thing, the emptiness of an intrinsic nature, and the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature. And why? Because it cannot be expressed as a causal sign, because a causal sign is an affliction.
“What is a causal sign? Form is a causal sign. Feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness are causal signs. Eyes are a causal sign. Ears, nose, tongue, body, and thinking mind are causal signs. A form is a causal sign. A sound, a smell, a taste, a feeling, and a dharma are causal signs. Eye consciousness is a causal sign. Ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and thinking-mind consciousness are causal signs. Eye contact is a causal sign. Ear contact, nose contact, tongue contact, body contact, and thinking-mind contact are causal signs. Feeling that arises from the condition of eye contact is a causal sign. Feeling that arises from the condition of ear contact, feeling that arises from the condition of nose contact, feeling that arises from the condition of tongue contact, feeling that arises from the condition of body contact, and feeling that arises from the condition of thinking-mind contact are causal signs. The earth element is a causal sign. The water element, fire element, wind element, space element, and consciousness element are causal signs. Ignorance is a causal sign. [F.83.b] Volitional factors, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, contact, feeling, craving, appropriation, existence, birth, and old age and death are causal signs. The applications of mindfulness, the right efforts, the legs of miraculous power, the faculties, the powers, the limbs of awakening, the path, the perfections, the ten powers, the fearlessnesses, the detailed and thorough knowledges, the distinct attributes of a buddha, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, not occasioning anything, the dharma-constituent, the true nature of dharmas, the certification of dharmas, the meditative stabilization gateways, and the dhāraṇī gateways are all causal signs. Syllables are causal signs. A single explanation, two explanations, and a number of different explanations are causal signs. Clairvoyance is a causal sign. All the meditative stabilization gateways and dhāraṇī gateways are causal signs. They are all called affliction.
“If the perfection of wisdom were something that could be taken up through a causal sign, then the religious mendicant Śreṇika164 would not have gained faith in the knowledge of a knower of all here in this teaching. Which faith? The trust, feeling of confidence, and belief in the perfection of wisdom, the feeling that it is reliable, and the thinking about, weighing, and testing of it—and this not by way of a causal sign and not by way of the absence of a causal sign. Thus, it should be taken up by way of no causal sign and no absence of causal sign, without taking it up.
“The religious mendicant Śreṇika also believed in this knowledge of a knower of all. As a faith follower he comprehended with partial knowledge, and having thus comprehended did not fully grasp form. Similarly, he did not fully grasp feeling, perception, volitional factors, [F.84.a] or consciousness. And why? Because he did not apprehend a grasper of all dharmas that are empty of their own mark. And again, why? Because he did not see that knowledge as an inner attainment and clear realization, and he did not see it as an outer one. He did not see that knowledge as an inner and outer attainment and clear realization, and he did not see that knowledge as some other attainment and clear realization either.
“And why? Because he did not apprehend and see any dharma with which he might know, or which might know, or which he might know, because he did not see that knowledge inside form, and he did not see that knowledge inside feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness; he did not see that knowledge outside form, and he did not see that knowledge outside feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness; he did not see that knowledge inside and outside of form, and he did not see that knowledge inside and outside of feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness; and he did not see that knowledge as other than form, and he did not see that knowledge as other than feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness, because of the emptiness of outer and inner. Similarly, up to he did not see that knowledge inside the very limit of reality, he did not see that knowledge outside the very limit of reality, he did not see that knowledge inside and outside the very limit of reality, and he did not see that knowledge as other than the very limit of reality, [F.84.b] because of the emptiness of outer and inner.
“The religious mendicant Śreṇika believed in this one of many explanations, and, because he could not find all dharmas, as a faith follower believing in it he took the true nature of dharmas as his authority and entered into the knowledge of a knower of all. Believing like that, he did not fully grasp any dharma, because he did not pay attention to any causal signs. He did not apprehend any dharma to seize or release, because all dharmas are not seized and are not released; and he did not even falsely project nirvāṇa, because he did not falsely project all dharmas. Lord, this—namely, that he does not fully grasp form, that he does not fully grasp feeling, perception, volitional factors, or consciousness because he has not fully grasped all dharmas, up to that he has not fully grasped even the very limit of reality because he has not fully grasped all dharmas—is the state in which the bodhisattva great beings have gone beyond the others;165 it is the perfection of wisdom.
“In the interim they do not pass into complete nirvāṇa until their prayers are completed, up to until the eighteen distinct attributes are completed. And why? Because those prayers are nonprayers, those powers are nonpowers, those fearlessnesses are nonfearlessnesses, those detailed and thorough knowledges are nondetailed and nonthorough knowledges, up to those eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha are nonbuddhadharmas—they are not dharmas and they are not nondharmas. Lord, this—namely, that they do not fully grasp form, up to that they do not fully grasp even the very limit of reality because they have not fully grasped all dharmas—is the state in which [F.85.a] bodhisattva great beings have gone beyond the others; it is the perfection of wisdom. [B7]
“Furthermore, Lord, bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom should make an investigation like this: ‘Just what is the perfection of wisdom? Of what is it a perfection of wisdom? Why is it the perfection of wisdom? And what is the perfection of wisdom for?’ If, when they investigate and ponder like that, they see that the dharma that does not exist and that they do not find is the perfection of wisdom, they see it well, because, Lord, all dharmas do not exist and are not found.”
Then venerable Śāriputra asked venerable Subhūti, “Venerable Subhūti, what dharmas do not exist and are not found?”
“Venerable Śāriputra,” replied Subhūti, “because of inner emptiness, outer emptiness, inner and outer emptiness, the emptiness of emptiness, great emptiness, the emptiness of ultimate reality, the emptiness of the compounded, the emptiness of the uncompounded, the emptiness of what transcends limits, the emptiness of no beginning and no end, the emptiness of nonrepudiation, the emptiness of a basic nature, the emptiness of all dharmas, the emptiness of its own mark, the emptiness of not apprehending, the emptiness of a nonexistent thing, the emptiness of an intrinsic nature, and the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, the perfection of wisdom, Venerable Śāriputra, does not exist and is not found. The perfection of concentration, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of patience, [F.85.b] the perfection of morality, and the perfection of giving do not exist and are not found. Venerable Śāriputra, inner emptiness does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, up to the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature also does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, because of inner emptiness, up to the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, form does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness do not exist and are not found, up to the thirty-seven dharmas on the side of awakening do not exist and are not found. The clairvoyances do not exist and are not found, up to the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha do not exist and are not found. Venerable Śāriputra, suchness does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, the true nature of dharmas, the dharma-constituent, the establishment of dharmas, the certification of dharmas, up to the very limit of reality does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, a stream enterer also does not exist and is not found, up to Venerable Śāriputra, a worthy one, pratyekabuddha, bodhisattva, and buddha do not exist and are not found. Venerable Śāriputra, because of inner emptiness, up to the emptiness that is the nonexistence of an intrinsic nature, all-knowledge also does not exist and is not found. The knowledge of all path aspects does not exist and is not found. Venerable Śāriputra, the knowledge of all aspects also does not exist and is not found.
“Venerable Śāriputra, if the minds of bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom are not cowed, do not tense up, and do not experience regret—if they do not tremble, feel frightened, or become terrified—you should know that those bodhisattva great beings are not separated from the knowledge of all aspects.”
Then venerable Śāriputra asked venerable Subhūti, “Venerable Subhūti, why should you know that bodhisattva great beings [F.86.a] are not separated from the knowledge of all aspects?”
“Venerable Śāriputra,” replied Subhūti, “form is separated from the intrinsic nature of form, and bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom know that as it really is. Venerable Śāriputra, feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is separated from the intrinsic nature of consciousness. Venerable Śāriputra, the perfection of giving . . . the perfection of morality . . . the perfection of patience . . . the perfection of perseverance . . . the perfection of concentration . . . and the perfection of wisdom is separated from the intrinsic nature of the perfection of wisdom. Connect this in the same way with Venerable Śāriputra, the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha are separated from the intrinsic nature of the eighteen distinct attributes of a buddha, and the very limit of reality is separated from the intrinsic nature of the very limit of reality.”
Śāriputra then asked, “Venerable Subhūti, what intrinsic nature does form have, and what intrinsic nature do feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness have?”
“Venerable Śāriputra,” replied Subhūti, “the intrinsic nature of form is not a real thing, and the intrinsic nature of feeling, perception, volitional factors, and consciousness is not a real thing. Venerable Śāriputra, the intrinsic nature of the very limit of reality is not a real thing, so, Venerable Śāriputra, because of this one of many explanations, form is separated from the intrinsic nature of form, feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is separated from the intrinsic nature of consciousness. And similarly, up to the very limit of reality is separated from the intrinsic nature of the very limit of reality. [F.86.b]
“Furthermore, Venerable Śāriputra, form is separated from the defining mark of form. Feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is separated from the defining mark of consciousness. And similarly, up to the very limit of reality is separated from the defining mark of the very limit of reality.
“A defining mark too is separated from the intrinsic nature of a defining mark. The intrinsic nature of a defining mark is separated from the intrinsic nature of a defining mark.”
Śāriputra then asked, “Venerable Subhūti, do bodhisattva great beings training in this training go forth to the knowledge of all aspects?”
“Exactly so. Venerable Śāriputra, exactly so,” replied Subhūti. “Bodhisattva great beings who are training in this training go forth to the knowledge of all aspects. And why? Venerable Śāriputra, it is because all dharmas have not been produced and have not gone forth.”
“Venerable Subhūti, why have all dharmas not been produced and not gone forth?” asked Śāriputra.
“Venerable Śāriputra,” replied Subhūti, “form is empty of form. You cannot get at its production and going forth. Similarly, feeling . . . perception . . . volitional factors . . . and consciousness is empty of consciousness. You cannot get at its production and going forth. Similarly, up to the very limit of reality is empty of the very limit of reality. You cannot get at its production and going forth.
“Venerable Śāriputra, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom are near166 unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. And as they get ever nearer to unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening they get ever closer to attaining a perfectly pure body, a perfectly pure voice, a perfectly pure mind, and perfectly pure marks. And as bodhisattva great beings attain an ever more perfectly pure [F.87.a] body, an ever more perfectly pure voice, an ever more perfectly pure mind, and ever more perfectly pure marks, they do not produce a greedy thought, and they do not produce any thought with hatred, confusion, pride, deviousness, envy, miserliness, attachment, or view, so they never are born in a mother’s womb, they constantly and always take birth apparitionally, and, except to bring beings to maturity, they are never born in the terrible forms of life. They will bring beings to maturity, purify a buddhafield, and pass on from buddhafield to buddhafield without ever being separated from the lord buddhas until awakening in unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. Therefore, Venerable Śāriputra, bodhisattva great beings who want to attain these good qualities and benefits should practice the perfection of wisdom without giving up perseverance. Venerable Śāriputra, bodhisattva great beings thus practicing the perfection of wisdom are near unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening.”
This was the eighth chapter, “The Religious Mendicant Śreṇika,” of “The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines.”167