The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines
Chapter 3
Toh 9
Degé Kangyur, vol. 26 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka), folios 1.b–382.a; vol. 27 (shes phyin, nyi khri, kha), folios 1.b–393.a; and vol. 28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ga), folios 1.b–381.a
Imprint
![84000 logo](https://cached-fe.84000.co/imgs/logo.png)
Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group
under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha
First published 2023
Current version v 1.1.12 (2024)
Generated by 84000 Reading Room v2.23.4
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.
![Logo for the license](https://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-nd/2.0/88x31.png)
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 Twenty-Five Thousand Lines is among the most important scriptures underlying both the “vast” and the “profound” approaches to Buddhist thought and practice. Known as the “middle-length” version, being the second longest of the three long Perfection of Wisdom sūtras, it fills three volumes of the Kangyur. Like the two other long sūtras, it records the major teaching on the perfection of wisdom given by the Buddha Śākyamuni on Vulture Peak, detailing all aspects of the path to enlightenment while at the same time emphasizing how bodhisattvas must put them into practice without taking them—or any aspects of enlightenment itself—as having even the slightest true existence.
Acknowledgements
Translation by the Padmakara Translation Group. A complete draft by Gyurme Dorje was first edited by Charles Hastings, then revised and further edited by John Canti. The introduction was written by John Canti. We are grateful for the advice and help received from Gareth Sparham, Greg Seton, and Nathaniel Rich.
This translation is dedicated to the memory of our late colleague, long-time friend, and vajra brother Gyurme Dorje (1950–2020), who worked assiduously on this translation in his final years and into the very last months of his life. We would also like to express our gratitude to his wife, Xiaohong, for the extraordinary support she gave him on so many levels.
The translation was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
The generous sponsorship of Kris Yao and Xiang-Jen Yao, which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
Text Body
Chapter 3
Then the Blessed One addressed the venerable Subhūti: “Subhūti, commencing with the perfection of wisdom, you should be inspired to tell bodhisattva great beings152 how bodhisattva great beings will become emancipated in the perfection of wisdom!” [F.87.a]
Thereupon, those bodhisattva great beings, those great śrāvakas, and those gods who were present thought, “Will this venerable Subhūti teach the perfection of wisdom to these bodhisattva great beings through the armor of the strength and force just of his own wisdom and inspired speech, or will he teach it through the power of the Buddha?”
Through the power of the Buddha, the venerable Subhūti knew in his own mind the thoughts in the minds of those bodhisattva great beings, those śrāvakas, and those gods, and he said to the venerable Śāradvatīputra, “Venerable Śāradvatīputra, whatever the śrāvakas of the Blessed One say, whatever they teach, whatever they expound, it is the power of the Tathāgata. None of the doctrines that the Tathāgata have taught go against the nature of reality. {Dt.99} It is in this way that these noble children will train in the doctrines he teaches and actualize the nature of reality. Śāradvatīputra, it is the Tathāgata himself who through skillful means teaches the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattva great beings. However, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, this teaching of the perfection of wisdom to bodhisattva great beings is not within the capacity of any śrāvakas or pratyekabuddhas.”
Then the venerable Subhūti asked the Blessed One, “Blessed Lord, you have spoken of ‘bodhisattvas, bodhisattvas,’ yet what is it that has the designation bodhisattva or perfection of wisdom? [F.87.b] Blessed Lord, I do not observe any such thing that is called ‘bodhisattva’ or ‘perfection of wisdom.’ Blessed Lord, since I do not observe such a ‘bodhisattva,’ such a ‘perfection of wisdom,’ or even such a term as ‘bodhisattva,’ what bodhisattva great being should I instruct and teach, and in what perfection of wisdom?”
The Blessed One replied to the venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, it is like this: the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all just names. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: the name used to refer to a being, for instance, is just a designation. Besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol, something that is a designation153 neither arises nor ceases. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“The self, life forms, living beings, life, living creatures, individuals, human beings, people, agents, actors, petitioners, instigators, experiencers, instigators of experience, knowers, and viewers are all just designations. {Dt.100} Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, things that are designations neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all just designations. [F.88.a] Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, things that are designations neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: the name used to refer to inner physical form, for instance, is no more than just a designation for something. Besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol, a designation for something154 neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the terms feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are no more than just designations for things. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, designations for things neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, the term ‘bodhisattva’ and all those phenomena are no more than just designations for things. Besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, designations for things neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the eyes is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the eyes, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the mental faculty [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. [F.88.b] Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, sights is no more than just a designation for things. A designation for things is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for sights, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for mental phenomena [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the sensory element of the eyes is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of the eyes, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the sensory element of sights is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of sights, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, the sensory element of visual consciousness is no more than just a designation for something. That designation for something is like this: besides its assignment by convention to be a mere name or symbol for the sensory element of visual consciousness, it neither arises nor ceases. That name does not exist inside, does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two. [F.89.a]
“Subhūti, the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, {Dt.101} the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the sensory element of mental consciousness [and so forth], they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva,’ they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: associated with what is called the inner [dependent origination of] the physical body, as another instance, there are terms assigned by convention that are just designations. The bones of the head is a conventionally assigned designation, the bones of the neck is a conventionally assigned designation, and the bones of the shoulders, the bones of the arms, the bones of the joints, the bones of the ribs, the bones of the hips, the bones of the thighs, the bones of the shins, and the bones of the feet [F.89.b] are conventionally assigned designations, but these are all no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols for the bones of the head and [the other bones of the body], up to and including the bones of the feet, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: associated with what is called outer [dependent origination], as yet another instance, there are diverse terms assigned by convention—grass, trees, branches, leaves, and petals—that are all no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are no more than just designations. Those designations for things are like this: besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, they neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: for ‘the blessed lord buddhas of the past,’ for instance, there is a mere name, but that name does not exist inside, [F.90.a] does not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, it is like this: phenomena such as, for instance, dreams, echoes, reflections, magical displays, mirages, the moon’s appearance in water, and phantom emanations of the tathāgatas are no more than just designations. Those designations for things, besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two. {Dt.102}
“In the same way, Subhūti, the perfection of wisdom, a bodhisattva, and the term ‘bodhisattva’ are all phenomena that are no more than just designations for things. Those designations for things, besides their assignment by convention to be mere names or symbols, neither arise nor cease. Those names do not exist inside, do not exist outside, and cannot be apprehended as neither of the two.
“Subhūti, thus it is that when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they should train in names and symbols that are designations, instructions that are designations, and dharmas that are designations.155
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner do not consider whether so-called physical forms are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are imbued with happiness. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are imbued with suffering. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms constitute a self. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms constitute a nonself. [F.90.b] They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are at peace. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not at peace. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are empty. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not empty. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are with signs. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are without signs. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are with aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are without aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are conditioned. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are unconditioned. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are afflicted. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are purified. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms arise. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms cease. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are void. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are not void. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are virtuous. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are nonvirtuous. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are free from being objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are contaminated. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are uncontaminated. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are tainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are untainted with afflicted mental states. [F.91.a] They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are mundane. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are supramundane. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are associated with cyclic existence. They do not consider whether so-called physical forms are associated with nirvāṇa. {Dt.103}
“They do not consider whether so-called feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are imbued with happiness. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are imbued with suffering. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] constitute a self. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] constitute a nonself. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are at peace. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not at peace. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are empty. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not empty. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are with signs. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are without signs. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are with aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are without aspirations. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are conditioned. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are unconditioned. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are afflicted. [F.91.b] They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are purified. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] arise. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] cease. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are void. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are not void. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are virtuous. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are nonvirtuous. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are free from being objectionable. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are contaminated. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are uncontaminated. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are tainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are untainted with afflicted mental states. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are mundane. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are supramundane. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are associated with cyclic existence. They do not consider whether so-called consciousness [and those other aggregates] are associated with nirvāṇa. [B7]
“They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are impermanent. They do not consider whether the so-called eyes are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, [F.92.a] whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called sights are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called sights are impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called sights are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called visual consciousness is imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether it constitutes a self or a nonself, whether it is at peace or not at peace, whether it is empty or not empty, whether it is with signs [F.92.b] or without signs, whether it is with aspirations or without aspirations, whether it is conditioned or unconditioned, whether it is defiled or purified, whether it arises or ceases, whether it is void or not void, whether it is virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether it is objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether it is contaminated or uncontaminated, whether it is tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether it is mundane or supramundane, or whether it is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is impermanent. They do not consider whether so-called visually compounded sensory contact is imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether it constitutes a self or a nonself, whether it is at peace or not at peace, whether it is empty or not empty, whether it is with signs or without signs, whether it is with aspirations or without aspirations, whether it is conditioned or unconditioned, whether it is defiled or purified, whether it arises or ceases, whether it is void or not void, whether it is virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether it is objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether it is contaminated or uncontaminated, whether it is tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether it is mundane or supramundane, or whether it is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa. {Dt.104}
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the eyes, sights, and visual consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent, whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, [F.93.a] whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether the so-called ears are permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called ears are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called ears are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called sounds are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called sounds are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called sounds are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called auditory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. [F.93.b] They do not consider whether so-called aurally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the ears, sounds, and auditory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether the so-called nose is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called nose is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called nose is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called odors are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called odors are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called odors are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. [F.94.a] They do not consider whether so-called olfactory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called nasally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the nose, odors, and olfactory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called tongue is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called tastes are permanent. [F.94.b] They do not consider whether so-called tastes are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tastes are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called gustatory consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called lingually compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the tongue, tastes, and gustatory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether the so-called body is permanent. [F.95.a] They do not consider whether the so-called body is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called body is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tangibles are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called tactile consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called corporeally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the body, touch, and tactile consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void [F.95.b] or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is permanent. They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether the so-called mental faculty is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mental phenomena are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mental consciousness is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is permanent. They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is impermanent [and so forth]. They do not consider whether so-called mentally compounded sensory contact is associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa.
“They do not consider whether any so-called feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the mental faculty, mental phenomena, and mental consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering—are permanent or impermanent. [F.96.a] They do not consider whether they are imbued with happiness or imbued with suffering, whether they constitute a self or a nonself, whether they are at peace or not at peace, whether they are empty or not empty, whether they are with signs or without signs, whether they are with aspirations or without aspirations, whether they are conditioned or unconditioned, whether they are defiled or purified, whether they arise or cease, whether they are void or not void, whether they are virtuous or nonvirtuous, whether they are objectionable or free from being objectionable, whether they are contaminated or uncontaminated, whether they are tainted with afflicted mental states or untainted with afflicted mental states, whether they are mundane or supramundane, or whether they are associated with cyclic existence or associated with nirvāṇa. {Dt.105}
“If you ask why, it is that when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not consider whether that perfection of wisdom, that bodhisattva, or that term bodhisattva are present in conditioned elements. They do not consider whether they are present in unconditioned elements. And if you ask why that is, it is because when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not imagine and they do not conceptualize any of those phenomena. This is because, when they practice the perfection of wisdom, they remain in nonconceptual states and cultivate the applications of mindfulness. Practicing the perfection of wisdom, apart from focusing their attention on all-aspect omniscience, they still do not observe a perfection of wisdom itself. Nor do they observe the name perfection of wisdom. Nor do they observe a bodhisattva. [F.96.b] Nor do they observe the name bodhisattva. Nor do they observe the buddhas. Nor do they observe the name buddha.
“So as to cultivate the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, the path, the perfections, all the aspects of emptiness, the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, the extrasensory powers, the meditative stabilities and dhāraṇī gateways, the powers of the tathāgatas, the fearlessnesses, the kinds of exact knowledge, and the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas, as they practice the perfection of wisdom they do not even observe the nature of the perfection of wisdom. They do not even observe the name perfection of wisdom. Nor do they observe the bodhisattvas. They do not even observe the name bodhisattva. Nor do they observe the buddhas. They do not even observe the name buddha.
“If you ask why, it is because when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they absolutely understand what is the defining characteristic of a phenomenon for all phenomena, and that defining characteristic of a phenomenon for all phenomena is to be neither defiled, nor to be purified.
“Subhūti, when bodhisattva great beings [F.97.a] practice the perfection of wisdom, they understand the designation for things as names or symbols, and in thus understanding the designation for things as names or symbols, they will not be attached to physical forms. They will not be attached to feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness. {Dt.106}
“They will not be attached to the eyes. They will not be attached to sights. They will not be attached to visual consciousness. They will not be attached to visually compounded sensory contact. They will not even be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the eyes, sights, and visual consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.
“They will not be attached to the ears. They will not be attached to sounds. They will not be attached to auditory consciousness. They will not be attached to aurally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the ears, sounds, and auditory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.
“They will not be attached to the nose. They will not be attached to odors. They will not be attached to olfactory consciousness. They will not be attached to nasally compounded sensory contact. They will not even be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the nose, odors, and olfactory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.
“They will not be attached to the tongue. They will not be attached to tastes. They will not be attached to gustatory consciousness. [F.97.b] They will not be attached to lingually compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the tongue, tastes, and gustatory consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.
“They will not be attached to the body. They will not be attached to tangibles. They will not be attached to tactile consciousness. They will not be attached to corporeally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the body, touch, and tactile consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering.
“They will not be attached to the mental faculty. They will not be attached to mental phenomena. They will not be attached to mental consciousness. They will not be attached to mentally compounded sensory contact. They will not be attached to feelings conditioned by sensory contact compounded by the mental faculty, mental phenomena, and mental consciousness—be they imbued with happiness or suffering, or giving rise to neither happiness nor suffering. They will not be attached to conditioned elements. They will not be attached to unconditioned elements.
“They will not be attached to the perfection of generosity. They will not be attached to the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, or the perfection of wisdom. They will not even be attached to the names of these [perfections] or their defining characteristics. They will not even be attached to the body of a bodhisattva.
“They will not be attached to the eye of flesh. They will not be attached to the eye of divine clairvoyance, the eye of wisdom, the eye of the Dharma, [F.98.a] or the eye of the buddhas. They will not be attached to the extrasensory powers. They will not be attached to the emptiness of internal phenomena. They will not be attached to the emptiness of external phenomena. They will not be attached to the emptiness of external and internal phenomena, and they will not be attached to [the other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities. They will not be attached to the applications of mindfulness. They will not be attached to the correct exertions, the supports for miraculous ability, the faculties, the powers, the branches of enlightenment, or the noble eightfold path. They will not be attached to the truths of the noble ones, the meditative concentrations, the immeasurable attitudes, the formless absorptions, the eight aspects of liberation, the nine serial steps of meditative absorption, emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, or the extrasensory powers. They will not be attached to the meditative stabilities or to the gateways of the dhāraṇīs. They will not be attached to the ten powers of the tathāgatas, the four fearlessnesses, the four kinds of exact knowledge, great loving kindness, great compassion, or the eighteen distinct qualities of the buddhas. {Dt.107}
“They will not be attached to the real nature. They will not be attached to the very limit of reality. They will not be attached to the realm of phenomena. They will not be attached to the maturation of beings. They will not be attached to the refinement of the buddhafields. They will not be attached to skillful means. If you ask why, it is because there is no such thing as attaching, [F.98.b] nothing that attaches, and nothing to be attached to.
“Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings who practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner will flourish through the perfection of generosity. They will flourish through the perfection of ethical discipline, the perfection of tolerance, the perfection of perseverance, the perfection of meditative concentration, and the perfection of wisdom. They will enter a bodhisattva’s full maturity. They will step on to the level at which progress has become irreversible.
“They will perfect the extrasensory powers, and having indeed perfected the extrasensory powers, they will bring beings to maturity, and in order to to serve, honor, respect, and worship the blessed lord buddhas, refine the buddhafields, and behold the lord buddhas, they will move from buddhafield to buddhafield. And, having indeed seen those lord buddhas, they will also manifest the roots of virtuous action through which they seek to serve, honor, respect, and worship those lord buddhas. Also, through those roots of virtuous action they will be reborn in proximity to those lord buddhas. They will also hear the Dharma from those lord buddhas. [Their retention of] all the teachings that they have heard will never be interrupted until they have manifestly attained buddhahood in unsurpassed, complete enlightenment. They will also acquire the dhāraṇī gateways, and they will also acquire the gateways of the meditative stabilities. Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings [F.99.a] who practice the perfection of wisdom should understand these designations for things as names and symbols. {Dt.108}
“Subhūti, you asked, ‘Blessed Lord, you have spoken of “bodhisattvas, bodhisattvas.…” ’156 Do you think, Subhūti, that physical forms constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in physical forms, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that physical forms are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness are present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, [F.99.b] do you think that an absence of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the eyes constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the eyes are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty are present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!” [F.100.a]
“Subhūti, do you think that sights constitute a bodhisattva, or do you think that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that sights are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena are present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!” {Dt.109} [F.100.b]
“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, and the sensory element of auditory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, and the sensory element of olfactory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, and the sensory element of gustatory consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, and the sensory element of tactile consciousness constitute a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or else do you think that anything other than the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that [F.101.a] a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of visual consciousness; or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the sensory element of mental consciousness?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the sensory element of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the sensory element of visual consciousness is present in a bodhisattva; or do you think that the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the sensory element of mental consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think [F.101.b] that an absence of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or else do you think that an absence of the sensory element of the ears, an absence of the sensory element of sounds, an absence of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the nose, an absence of the sensory element of odors, an absence of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the tongue, an absence of the sensory element of tastes, an absence of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, an absence of the sensory element of the body, an absence of the sensory element of touch, an absence of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, or an absence of the sensory element of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the water element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?” [F.102.a]
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the earth element, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the earth element is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element are present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the water element, an absence of the fire element, an absence of the wind element, an absence of the space element, or an absence of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, and do you think that formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than formative predispositions, consciousness, name and [F.102.b] form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in ignorance, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that ignorance is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, are present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of [the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?” {Dt.110}
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, [F.103.a] do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of physical forms, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of physical forms is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, or the real nature of consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of physical forms constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of feelings, an absence of the real nature of perceptions, an absence of the real nature of formative predispositions, or an absence of the real nature of consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty [F.103.b] constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, or the real nature of the mental faculty is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the ears, an absence of the real nature of the nose, an absence of the real nature of the tongue, an absence of the real nature of the body, or an absence of the real nature of the mental faculty constitutes a bodhisattva?” {Dt.111}
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of sounds, [F.104.a] the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, or the real nature of mental phenomena is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of sounds, an absence of the real nature of odors, an absence of the real nature of tastes, an absence of the real nature of tangibles, or an absence of the real nature of mental phenomena constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, [F.104.b] the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, [F.105.a] or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of sights, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness; or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of sights is present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness is present in a bodhisattva; or do you think that the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, [F.105.b] the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of sights constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva; or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of odors, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the body, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of touch, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, [F.106.a] an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, or an absence of the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the earth element, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, or the real nature of the consciousness element?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that [F.106.b] the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, or the real nature of the space element are present in a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of the consciousness element is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of the earth element constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of the water element, an absence of the real nature of the fire element, an absence of the real nature of the wind element, an absence of the real nature of the space element, or an absence of the real nature of the consciousness element constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that anything other than the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that anything other than the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, [F.107.a] the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of ignorance, or do you think that a bodhisattva is present in the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death is present in a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that an absence of the real nature of ignorance constitutes a bodhisattva, or do you think that an absence of the real nature of formative predispositions, an absence of the real nature of consciousness, [F.107.b] an absence of the real nature of name and form, an absence of the real nature of the six sense fields, an absence of the real nature of sensory contact, an absence of the real nature of sensation, an absence of the real nature of craving, an absence of the real nature of grasping, an absence of the real nature of the rebirth process, an absence of the real nature of actual birth, or an absence of the real nature of aging and death constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
Then the Blessed One asked, “Subhūti, to what purpose have you said that physical forms do not157 constitute a bodhisattva, that anything other than physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva, that a bodhisattva is not present in physical forms, that physical forms are not present in a bodhisattva, and that the absence of physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness do not constitute a bodhisattva, that anything other than consciousness [and the other aggregates] does not constitute a bodhisattva, that a bodhisattva is not present in consciousness [and the other aggregates], that consciousness [and the other aggregates] are not present in a bodhisattva, and that the absence of consciousness [and the other aggregates] does not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mental faculty, sights, sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, mental phenomena, the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, the sensory element of visual consciousness, the sensory element of the ears, the sensory element of sounds, the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the sensory element of the nose, the sensory element of odors, the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the sensory element of the tongue, the sensory element of tastes, the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the sensory element of the body, the sensory element of touch, the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the sensory element of the mental faculty, [F.108.a] the sensory element of mental phenomena, and the sensory element of mental consciousness; the earth element, the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, and the consciousness element; and ignorance, formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, and aging and death all do not constitute a bodhisattva; that anything other than [all those phenomena], up to and including aging and death, do not constitute a bodhisattva; that a bodhisattva is not present in [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death; that [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death are not present in a bodhisattva; and that the absence of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva? {Dt.112} Why do you say that the real nature of physical forms, the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of the eyes, the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, the real nature of the mental faculty, the real nature of sights, the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, the real nature of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, [F.108.b] the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, the real nature of the consciousness element, the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, and the real nature of aging and death all do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that anything other than [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva; that a bodhisattva is not present in [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death; that [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, is not present in a bodhisattva; and that the absence of [the real nature of all those phenomena, up to and including] the real nature of aging and death, does not constitute a bodhisattva?” [B8]
“Blessed Lord,” replied Subhūti, “if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could the designation ‘physical forms’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in physical forms! How could physical forms be present158 in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of physical forms become a bodhisattva! How could the designations ‘feelings,’ ‘perceptions,’ ‘formative predispositions,’ or ‘consciousness’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than consciousness [and the other aggregates] constitute a bodhisattva! [F.109.a] How could a bodhisattva be present in consciousness [and the other aggregates]! How could consciousness [and the other aggregates] be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of consciousness [and the other aggregates] become a bodhisattva!
“Blessed Lord, if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could the designations ‘the eyes,’ ‘the ears,’ ‘the nose,’ ‘the tongue,’ ‘the body,’ ‘the mental faculty,’ ‘sights,’ ‘sounds,’ ‘odors,’ ‘tastes,’ ‘tangibles,’ ‘mental phenomena,’ ‘the sensory element of the eyes,’ ‘the sensory element of sights,’ ‘the sensory element of visual consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the ears,’ ‘the sensory element of sounds,’ ‘the sensory element of auditory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the nose,’ ‘the sensory element of odors,’ ‘the sensory element of olfactory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the tongue,’ ‘the sensory element of tastes,’ ‘the sensory element of gustatory consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the body,’ ‘the sensory element of touch,’ ‘the sensory element of tactile consciousness,’ ‘the sensory element of the mental faculty,’ ‘the sensory element of mental phenomena,’ ‘the sensory element of mental consciousness,’ ‘the earth element,’ ‘the water element,’ ‘the fire element,’ ‘the wind element,’ ‘the space element,’ ‘the consciousness element,’ ‘ignorance,’ ‘formative predispositions,’ ‘consciousness,’ ‘name and form,’ ‘the six sense fields,’ ‘sensory contact,’ ‘sensation,’ ‘craving,’ ‘grasping,’ ‘the rebirth process,’ ‘actual birth,’ or ‘aging and death’ constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death! How could [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, become a bodhisattva!
“Blessed Lord, if bodhisattvas are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, [F.109.b] how could anything designated as the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything other than the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in the real nature of physical forms! How could the real nature of physical forms be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of the real nature of physical forms constitute a bodhisattva! How could anything designated as the real nature of feelings, the real nature of perceptions, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of the eyes, the real nature of the ears, the real nature of the nose, the real nature of the tongue, the real nature of the body, the real nature of the mental faculty, the real nature of sights, the real nature of sounds, the real nature of odors, the real nature of tastes, the real nature of tangibles, the real nature of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of the eyes, the real nature of the sensory element of sights, the real nature of the sensory element of visual consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the ears, the real nature of the sensory element of sounds, the real nature of the sensory element of auditory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the nose, the real nature of the sensory element of odors, the real nature of the sensory element of olfactory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the tongue, the real nature of the sensory element of tastes, the real nature of the sensory element of gustatory consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the body, the real nature of the sensory element of touch, the real nature of the sensory element of tactile consciousness, the real nature of the sensory element of the mental faculty, the real nature of the sensory element of mental phenomena, the real nature of the sensory element of mental consciousness, the real nature of the earth element, the real nature of the water element, [F.110.a] the real nature of the fire element, the real nature of the wind element, the real nature of the space element, the real nature of the consciousness element, the real nature of ignorance, the real nature of formative predispositions, the real nature of consciousness, the real nature of name and form, the real nature of the six sense fields, the real nature of sensory contact, the real nature of sensation, the real nature of craving, the real nature of grasping, the real nature of the rebirth process, the real nature of actual birth, or the real nature of aging and death constitute a bodhisattva! {Dt.113} How could anything other than the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! How could a bodhisattva be present in the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death! How could the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, be present in a bodhisattva! How could the absence of the real nature of [all those phenomena, up to and including] aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva! That would be impossible!”
“Well said, Subhūti, well said!” replied the Blessed One. “Subhūti, bodhisattva great beings, as beings who are not apprehended, should train accordingly in the perfection of wisdom that is not apprehended.
“Subhūti, you asked, ‘What is it that has the designation bodhisattva?’159 Do you think, Subhūti, that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness?” [F.110.b]
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are permanent?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are impermanent?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are permanent, for feelings that are impermanent, for perceptions that are permanent, for perceptions that are impermanent, for formative predispositions that are permanent, for formative predispositions that are impermanent, for consciousness that is permanent, or for consciousness that is impermanent?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are happiness?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are suffering?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are happiness, for feelings that are suffering, for perceptions that are happiness, for perceptions that are suffering, for formative predispositions that are happiness, for formative predispositions that are suffering, for consciousness that is happiness, or for consciousness that is suffering?” [F.111.a]
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are a self?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not a self?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are a self, for feelings that are not a self, for perceptions that are a self, for perceptions that are not a self, for formative predispositions that are a self, for formative predispositions that are not a self, for consciousness that is a self, or for consciousness that is not a self?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are at peace?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not at peace?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are at peace, for feelings that are not at peace, for perceptions that are at peace, for perceptions that are not at peace, for formative predispositions that are at peace, for formative predispositions that are not at peace, for consciousness that is at peace, or for consciousness that is not at peace?” [F.111.b]
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are empty?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are not empty?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are empty, for feelings that are not empty, for perceptions that are empty, for perceptions that are not empty, for formative predispositions that are empty, for formative predispositions that are not empty, for consciousness that is empty, or for consciousness that is not empty?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are with signs?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are without signs?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are with signs, for feelings that are without signs, for perceptions that are with signs, for perceptions that are without signs, for formative predispositions that are with signs, for formative predispositions that are without signs, for consciousness that is with signs, or for consciousness that is without signs?” [F.112.a]
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
“Subhūti, do you think that this ‘bodhisattva’ is a designation for feelings that are with aspirations, for feelings that are without aspirations, for perceptions that are with aspirations, for perceptions that are without aspirations, for formative predispositions that are with aspirations, for formative predispositions that are without aspirations, for consciousness that is with aspirations, and for consciousness that is without aspirations?”
“No, Blessed Lord!”
The Blessed One then asked, “Subhūti, on what basis do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for physical forms, and similarly, that a bodhisattva is not a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness? Similarly, why do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for physical forms that are permanent, not a designation for physical forms that are impermanent, not a designation for physical forms that are imbued with happiness, {Dt.114} not a designation for physical forms that are imbued with suffering, not a designation for physical forms that are a self, not a designation for physical forms that are not a self, not a designation for physical forms that are at peace, not a designation for physical forms that are not at peace, not a designation for physical forms that are empty, not a designation for physical forms that are not empty, [F.112.b] not a designation for physical forms that are with signs, not a designation for physical forms that are without signs, not a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations, and not a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations?
“Similarly, why do you say that a bodhisattva is not a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are permanent, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are impermanent, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are imbued with happiness, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are imbued with suffering, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are a self, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not a self, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are at peace, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not at peace, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are empty, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are not empty, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are with signs, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are without signs, not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are with aspirations, and not a designation for consciousness and the other aggregates that are without aspirations?”
Subhūti then replied, “Blessed Lord, if physical forms are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms! If feelings are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings! If perceptions are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for perceptions! If formative predispositions are absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for formative predispositions! If consciousness is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, [F.113.a] how could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness!
“Blessed Lord, if permanence is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, and if impermanence is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent physical forms! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent physical forms! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent feelings! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent feelings! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent perceptions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent perceptions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent formative predispositions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent formative predispositions! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for permanent consciousness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for impermanent consciousness!
“Blessed Lord, in the same way, if happiness is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if suffering is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms imbued with happiness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms imbued with suffering! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness imbued with happiness! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] imbued with suffering!
“Blessed Lord, if self is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if nonself is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms with self! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms without self! [F.113.b] How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness with self! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] without self!
“Blessed Lord, if being at peace is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if not being at peace is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are not at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are at peace! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are not at peace!
“Blessed Lord, if empty is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if not empty is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are not empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are empty! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are not empty!
“Blessed Lord, if having signs is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if being without signs is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are with signs! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are without signs! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are with signs! [F.114.a] How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are without signs!
“Blessed Lord, if having aspirations is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended and if being without aspirations is absolutely nonexistent and not apprehended, how could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are with aspirations! How could a bodhisattva be a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are without aspirations!”
“Subhūti, it is so! It is so!” replied the Blessed One. “Subhūti! When bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, they should train in the perfection of wisdom without apprehending a designation for physical forms; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are permanent; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are impermanent; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are permanent; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [and the other aggregates] that are impermanent; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are imbued with happiness; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are imbued with suffering; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are imbued with happiness; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are imbued with suffering; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are a self; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without self; [F.114.b] without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are a self; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without self; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are at peace; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are not at peace; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness that are at peace; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are not at peace; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are empty; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are not empty; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are empty; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are not empty; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are with signs; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without signs; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are with signs; without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without signs; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are with aspirations; without apprehending a designation for physical forms that are without aspirations; without apprehending a designation for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness that are with aspirations; and without apprehending a designation for consciousness [or the other aggregates] that are without aspirations. {Dt.115}
“You said, Subhūti, ‘I do not observe any such thing as a “bodhisattva.”’ With regard to that statement of yours, Subhūti, mental phenomena do not observe the element of mental phenomena.160 [F.115.a] The element of mental phenomena does not observe mental phenomena. Subhūti, the element of physical forms does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of physical forms. The element of feelings does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of feelings. The element of perceptions does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of perceptions. The element of formative predispositions does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of formative predispositions. The element of consciousness does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of consciousness. The element of the eyes does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of the eyes. The element of feelings does not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of the ears, the element of the nose, the element of the tongue, the element of the body and the element of the mental faculty do not observe the element of mental phenomena. The element of mental phenomena does not observe the element of the mental faculty [and so forth]. Subhūti, the conditioned elements do not observe unconditioned elements. Unconditioned elements do not observe conditioned elements. If you ask why, unconditioned elements cannot be conceived apart from conditioned elements, nor can conditioned elements be conceived apart from unconditioned elements.
“Accordingly, Subhūti, [F.115.b] when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not observe any dharmas at all. Since they do not observe anything, they do not fear, they do not tremble, and they will not be fearful. Their minds will not be discouraged in any respect whatsoever. They will not lose heart. They will not be regretful. If you ask why, Subhūti, it is because, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom, they do not observe physical forms; they do not observe feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, or consciousness; they do not observe the eyes; they do not observe the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, or the mental faculty; they do not observe sights; and they do not observe sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, or mental phenomena. They do not observe the earth element. They do not observe the water element, the fire element, the wind element, the space element, or the consciousness element. They do not observe ignorance, and they do not observe formative predispositions, consciousness, name and form, the six sense fields, sensory contact, sensation, craving, grasping, the rebirth process, actual birth, or aging and death. They do not observe attachment. They do not observe hatred or delusion. They do not observe the self. They do not observe sentient beings, life forms, life, living creatures, individuals, human beings, people, actors, agents, experiencers, instigators of experience, knowers, or viewers. They do not observe the realm of desire. [F.116.a] They do not observe the realm of form. They do not observe the realm of formlessness. {Dt.116} They do not observe the mind of śrāvakas. They do not observe the mind of pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe the mind of bodhisattvas. They do not observe śrāvakas. They do not observe the attributes of śrāvakas. They do not observe pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe the attributes of pratyekabuddhas. They do not observe bodhisattvas. They do not observe the attributes of bodhisattvas. They do not observe buddhas. They do not observe the attributes of buddhas. They do not observe enlightenment. They do not observe the attributes of enlightenment. They do not observe anything, up to and including all mundane and supramundane phenomena. Since they do not observe any dharmas at all, they are not afraid, they do not tremble, and they will not be fearful.”
“Blessed Lord, when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom in that manner, why do they not become discouraged with regard to all those dharmas? Why will they not become utterly disheartened?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is because bodhisattva great beings do not observe such dharmas as the mind or mental states. Subhūti, this is why when bodhisattva great beings practice the perfection of wisdom they do not become discouraged with regard to all those dharmas. They do not become utterly disheartened.”
“Blessed Lord, how is it that bodhisattva great beings’ [F.116.b] mental faculty experiences no fearfulness?”
“Subhūti,” replied the Blessed One, “it is because bodhisattva great beings do not observe a mental faculty or a sensory element of the mental faculty. Subhūti, this is why bodhisattva great beings experience no fearfulness.
“So it is, Subhūti, that bodhisattva great beings should train in the perfection of wisdom by not apprehending anything at all. Subhūti, should it be the case that bodhisattva great beings practicing the perfection of wisdom apprehend no such perfection of wisdom, apprehend no such bodhisattva, apprehend no such term as bodhisattva, and apprehend no such mind of enlightenment, then that in itself is the essential advice for bodhisattva great beings! That is their very instruction.”
This completes the third chapter from “The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines.”
Colophon
It is said in the original Jangpa manuscript:
This [Tibetan translation of] The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines has been edited twice on the basis of the original “gold manuscript,” which had been [commissioned as] a commitment of the spiritual mentor Nyanggom Chobar, and it has also been edited on the basis of the manuscript kept at Yerpa. Since it is extant, scribes of posterity should copy [the text] according to this version alone.
In the [recast] version of The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines [Toh 3790] that was edited by master Haribhadra, and in some [other] manuscripts, the text ends with the seventy-first chapter entitled “Unchanging Reality.” In certain [other] manuscripts, including the original (phyi mo) [Toh 9], there are seventy-six chapters, with [F.380.b] the addition of the [seventy-second] chapter entitled “Distinctions in the Training of a Bodhisattva,” the [seventy-third] chapter entitled “The Attainment of the Manifold Gateways of Meditative Stability by the Bodhisattva Sadāprarudita,” the [seventy-fourth] chapter entitled “Sadāprarudita,” the [seventy-fifth] chapter entitled “Dharmodgata,” and the [seventy-sixth] chapter entitled “Entrustment.” This accords with earlier accounts and the authentic records of teachings received. Insofar as there are distinctions in the translation of these five later chapters, I have seen a few manuscripts where the terminology is slightly dissimilar, although there are no differences in meaning.
In general, throughout the present text there are all sorts of unique allusions and variations in the elaboration of the points that are expressed. In particular, in the chapter entitled “The Introductory Narrative,” there are some passages where the text corresponds to The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines.
At the time when the carving of the xylographs of this very text, along with those of the Multitude of the Buddhas (Buddhāvataṃsaka), was completed, in the presence of King Tenpa Tsering, the ruler of Degé, the beggar monk Tashi Wangchuk composed these verses at Sharkha Dzongsar Palace, where the wood-carving workshop was based. May they be victorious!
ye dharmā hetuprabhavā hetun teṣāṃ tathāgato bhavat āha teṣāṃ ca yo nirodho evaṃ vādī mahāśramaṇaḥ [ye svāhā]
“Whatever events arise from causes, the Tathāgata has told of their causes, and the great ascetic has also taught their cessation.”
Bibliography
Primary Sources in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Toh 9, Degé Kangyur vols. 26–28 (shes phyin, nyi khri, ka–a), folios ka.1.b–ga.381.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, Toh 9]. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–2009, vols. 26–28.
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by Takayasu Kimura. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin 2007–9 (1–1, 1–2), 1986 (2–3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6–8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Ki.}
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Dutt, Nalinaksha. Calcutta Oriental Series 28. London: Luzac, 1934. Reprint edition, Sri Satguru Publications, 1986. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references: {Dt.nn}
Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text based on the edition by P. L. Vaidya, in Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, vol. 4. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute, 1960. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL). Page references (for chapters 73–75): {Va.nn}
Secondary References in Tibetan and Sanskrit
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag nyi shu lnga pa (Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines, the “eight-chapter” (le’u brgyad ma) Tengyur version]. Toh 3790, Degé Tengyur vols. 82–84 (shes phyin, ga–ca), folios ga.1.b–ca.342.a.
shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa stong phrag brgya pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā) [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Toh 8, Degé Kangyur vols. 14–25 (shes phyin, ’bum, ka–a).
Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in Twenty-Five Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit text of the Anurādhapura fragment, based on the edition by Oskar von Hinüber, “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura,” in Nachrichten der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Phil.-Hist.Kl. 1983, pp. 189–207. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā [The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines]. Sanskrit texts based on Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14 (chapters 1–12); and on Kimura, Takayasu, Śatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009–14. Available as e-texts, Part I and Part II, on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (mostly according to the Gilgit manuscript GBM 175–675, fols. 1–27) from Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University, 2005. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
The Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Sanskrit edition (Gilgit manuscript fols. 202.a.5-205.a.12, GBM 571.5–577.12) from Yoke Meei Choong, Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā, Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Daṃṣṭrasena. shes rab kyi pha rol tu phyin pa ’bum pa rgya cher ’grel pa (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā) [“An Extensive Commentary on The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines”], Toh 3807, Degé Tengyur vols. 91–92. Also in Tengyur Pedurma (TPD) (bstan ’gyur [dpe bsdur ma]), [Comparative Edition of the Tengyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 120 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 1994–2008, vol. 54 (TPD 54) pp. 627–1439 and vol. 55 pp. 2–550.
Denkarma (ldan dkar ma; pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Phangthangma (dkar chag ’phang thang ma). Beijing: mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 2003.
Butön (bu ston rin chen grub). bde bar gshegs pa’i bstan pa’i gsal byed chos kyi ’byung gnas gsung rab rin po che’i mdzod. In gsung ’bum/_rin chen grub/ zhol par ma/ ldi lir bskyar par brgyab pa/ [The Collected Works of Bu-ston: Edited by Lokesh Chandra from the Collections of Raghu Vira], vol. 24, pp. 633–1056. New Delhi: International Academy of Indian Culture, 1965–71.
Jamgön Kongtrül (’jam mgon kong sprul). shes bya kun khyab mdzod [“The Treasury of Knowledge”]. Root verses contained in three-volume publication. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1982; Boudhnath: Padma Karpo Translation Committee edition, 2000 (photographic reproduction of the original four-volume Palpung xylograph, 1844). Translated, along with the auto-commentary, by the Kalu Rinpoche Translation Group in The Treasury of Knowledge series (TOK). Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1995 to 2012. Mentioned here are Ngawang Zangpo 2010 (Books 2, 3, and 4) and Dorje 2012 (Book 6, Parts 1–2).
Nordrang Orgyan (nor brang o rgyan). chos rnam kun btus. 3 vols. Beijing: Krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang, 2008.
Tsongkhapa (tsong kha pa blo bzang grags pa). byang chub sems dpa’ sems dpa’ chen po rtagtu ngu’i rtogs pa brjod pa’i snyan dngags dpag bsam gyi ljong pa [“An Avadāna of the Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva Sadāprarudita”], in Lhasa (zhol) Kangyur vol. 34, folios 523.b–555.b (pp. 1046–1110). The same text is also to be found in Tsongkhapa’s Collected Works: gsung ’bum tsong kha pa (bkras lhun par rnying ldi lir bskyar par brgyab pa), vol. 3, Ngawang Gelek Demo, 1975, pp. 242–96.
Zhang Yisun et al. bod rgya tshig mdzod chen mo. 3 vols. Subsequently reprinted in 2 vols. and 1 vol. Beijing: Mi rigs dpe skrun khang, 1985. Translated in Nyima and Dorje 2001 (vol. 1).
Secondary References in English and Other Languages
Bhattacharya, B. [Illustrations of the Indikutasaya Copper Plaques], in Bulletin of the Baroda State Museum and Picture Gallery, I 1. Baroda: 1943-4.
Bodhi, Bhikkhu, trans. The Sūtra on the All-Embracing Net of Views. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1978.
Bongard-Levin, G.M., and Shin’ichirō Hori. “A Fragment of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā from Central Asia.” Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies 19, no. 1 (1996): 19-60.
Boucher, Daniel. “Dharmarakṣa and the Transmission of Buddhism to China.” Asia Major (Academia Sinica) no. 1/2, (2006): 13–37. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41649912.
Burchardi, Anne, trans. The Teaching on the Great Compassion of the Tathāgata (Tathāgatamahākaruṇānirdeśa, Toh 147). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Brunnhölzl, Karl. Gone Beyond: The Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras, The Ornament of Clear Realization, and its Commentaries in the Tibetan Kagyü Tradition. 2 vols. Ithaca: Snow Lion, 2010 and 2011.
Chimpa, Lama and Alaka Chattopadhyaya, trans. Tāranātha’s History of Buddhism in India. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press, 1980.
Choong, Yoke Meei. Zum Problem der Leerheit (śūnyatā) in der Prajñāpāramitā. Frankfurt: Europäische Hochschulschriften, Reihe 27, Bd. 97, 2006, pp. 109–33.
Conze, Edward (1962). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 50 to 55 corresponding to the 5th Abhisamaya. SOR 26. Rome: ISMEO, 1962.
———, trans. (1973). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eight Thousand Lines and Its Verse Summary. Bolinas, CA: Four Seasons Foundation, 1973.
——— (1974). The Gilgit Manuscript of the Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā: Chapters 70 to 82 corresponding to the 6th, 7th, and 8th Abhisamayas. SOR 46. Rome: ISMEO, 1974.
——— (1975). The Large Sūtra on Perfect Wisdom: With the Divisions of the Abhisamayālaṅkāra. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.
——— (1978). The Prajñāpāramitā Literature (Second edition). Tokyo: The Reiyukai, 1978.
Davidson, Ronald. “Studies in Dhāraṇī Literature I: Revisiting the Meaning of the Term Dhāraṇī.” Journal of Indian Philosophy 37, no. 2 (April 2009): 97–147.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1932. Reprinted Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970.
Dharmachakra Translation Committee, trans. (2013). The Play in Full (Lalitavistara, Toh 95). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2013.
——— (2019a). The Jewel Cloud (Ratnamegha, Toh 231). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
——— (2019b). The Precious Discourse on the Blessed One’s Extensive Wisdom That Leads to Infinite Certainty (Niṣṭhāgatabhagavajjñānavaipulyasūtraratnānanta, Toh 99). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2019.
——— (2022). The Heart of the Perfection of Wisdom, the Blessed Mother (Bhagavatīprajñāpāramitāhṛdaya, Toh 21). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
Dorje, Gyurme, trans., (1987). “The Guhyagarbhatantra and its XIVth Century Tibetan Commentary Phyogs bcu mun sel.” 3 vols. PhD diss. University of London, School of Oriental and African Studies, 1987.
———, trans. (2012). Indo-Tibetan Classical Learning and Buddhist Phenomenology. Book 6, Parts 1–2 of Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge. Boston: Snow Lion, 2012.
Dudjom Rinpoche. The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History. 2 vols. Translated by Gyurme Dorje with Matthew Kapstein. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 1991.
Dutt, Nalinaksha. Pañcaviṃśati-sāhasrikā Prajñā-pāramitā. Calcutta Oriental Series 28. London: Luzac, 1934. Reprinted Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1986.
Edgerton, Franklin. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Grammar and Dictionary. 2 vols. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953.
Falk, Harry. “The ‘Split’ Collection of Kharoṣṭhī texts.” ARIRIAB 14 (2011): 13–23.
Falk, Harry, and Seishi Karashima (2012). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 1 (Texts from the Split Collection 1).” ARIRIAB 15 (2012): 19–61.
——— (2013). “A first‐century Prajñāpāramitā manuscript from Gandhāra – parivarta 5 (Texts from the Split Collection 2).” ARIRIAB 16 (2013): 97–169.
Ghoṣa, Pratāpacandra, ed. Çatasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā: A Theological and Philosophical Discourse of Buddha With His Disciples in A Hundred Thousand Stanzas. Calcutta: Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1902–14. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die Lhan Kar Ma: Ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte, Kritische Neuausgabe mit Einleitung und Materialien. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Hikata, Ryusho. Suvikrāntavikrāmi-paripṛcchā-Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra: Edited with an Introductory Essay. Fukuoka, 1958.
Hinüber, O. von. (1983) “Sieben Goldblätter einer Pañca-viṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā aus Anurādhapura.” NAWG 7 (1983): 189–207.
——— (2014). “The Gilgit Manuscripts: An Ancient Library in Modern Research.” In From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances in Buddhist Manuscript Research, edited by P. Harrison & J. Hartmann, 79–135. Vienna: 2014.
Kimura, Takayasu, ed. Śatasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā, II/1–4, 4 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2009 (II-1), 2010 (II-2, II-3), 2014 (II-4). Available as e-text (see links) on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
———, ed. Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñā-pāramitā, I–VIII, 6 vols. Tokyo: Sankibo Busshorin, 2007–9 (1-1, 1-2), 1986 (2-3), 1990 (4), 1992 (5), 2006 (6-8). Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Kloetzli, Randy. Buddhist Cosmology. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983.
Konow, Sten. The First Two Chapters of the Daśasāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā: Restoration of the Sanskrit Text, Analysis and Index. Oslo: I Kommisjon Hos Jacob Dybwad, 1941.
Lamotte, Etienne (1998). Śūraṃgamasamādhisūtra: The Concentration of Heroic Progress, An Early Mahāyāna Buddhist Scripture. English translation by Sara Boin-Webb. London: Curzon Press.
——— (2001). The Treatise on the Great Virtue of Wisdom of Nāgārjuna (Mahāprajñāpāramitāśāstra). English translation by Gelongma Karma Migme Chodron. Unpublished electronic text, 2001.
Lethcoe, Nancy R., “Some Notes on the Relationship between the Abhisamayālaṅkāra, the Revised Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā and the Chinese Translations of the Unrevised Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā.” JAOS 96/4 (1976): 499–511.
Lopez, Donald S. The Heart Sūtra Explained: Indian and Tibetan Commentaries. Albany: SUNY, 1988.
Martini, Giuliana (a.k.a. Dhammadinnā). “Bodhisattva Texts, Ideologies and Rituals in Khotan in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries.” In Buddhism Among the Iranian Peoples of Central Asia, vol. 1 of Multilingualism and History of Knowledge, edited by Matteo de Chiara, Matteo, Mauro Maggi, and Giuliana Martini. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2013.
Ñāṇamoli, Bhikkhu, trans. The Path of Purification by Buddhaghosa. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1979.
Negi, J.S., ed. Tibetan Sanskrit Dictionary (bod skad dang legs sbyar gyi tshig mdzod chen mo). 16 vols. Sarnath: Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies, 1993–2005.
Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Jamgön Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge (Books Two, Three, and Four): Buddhism’s Journey to Tibet. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 2010.
Nyima, Tudeng and Gyurme Dorje, trans. An Encyclopaedic Tibetan-English Dictionary. Vol. 1. Beijing and London: Nationalities Publishing House and SOAS, 2001.
Obermiller, E. Prajñapāramitā in Tibetan Buddhism. Delhi: Book Faith India (reprint), 1999.
Padmakara Translation Group, trans. The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten Thousand Lines (Daśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 11). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.
Pagel, Ulrich “The Dhāraṇīs of Mahāvyutpatti # 748: Origins and Formation,” in Buddhist Studies Review 24 no. 2 (2007), 151–91.
Patrul Rinpoche. Kunzang Lama’i Shelung: The Words of My Perfect Teacher. Translated by the Padmakara Translation Group. Revised second edition, 1998. London: International Sacred Literature Trust and Sage Altamira, 1994–98.
Paranavitana, S. “Indikaṭusāya Copper Plaques.” EZ 3 (1933): 199–212.
Rhys Davids, Caroline A.F. Psalms of the Early Buddhists: II Psalms of the Brethren. London: Pali Text Society, 1913. See Internet Archive.
Sakya Pandita Translation Group, trans. The Sūtra on Reliance upon a Virtuous Spiritual Friend (Kalyāṇamitrasevanasūtra, Toh 300). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2011.
Salomon, Richard (2014). “Gāndhārī Manuscripts in the British Library, Schøyen and Other Collections.” In From Birch Bark to Digital Data: Recent Advances In Buddhist Manuscript Research, Edited by Paul Harrison and Jens-Uwe Hartmann. Vienna: Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
——— (2018). The Buddhist Literature of Ancient Gandhāra: An Introduction with Selected Translations. Somerville, MA: Wisdom Publications.
Skilling, Peter, Prapod Assavavirulhakarn, Saerji: “Schøyen MS 2381/241 + 2382/uf18/2d + 2381/186: A (possible) Sanskrit parallel to the Pali Uruvela-sutta.” In Buddhist Manuscripts in the Schoyen Collection, Vol. IV, edited by Jens Braarvig and Jens-Uwe Hartmann. Oslo: Hermes Academic Publishing, 2013.
Sparham, Gareth, trans. (2006–2012). Abhisamayālaṃkāra with vṛtti and ālokā / vṛtti by Ārya Vimuktisena; ālokā by Haribhadra. 4 vols. Fremont, CA: Jain Publishing.
———, trans. (2022a). The Perfection of Wisdom in Eighteen Thousand Lines (Aṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 10). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha.
———, trans. (2022b). The Long Explanation of the Noble Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand, Twenty-Five Thousand, and Eighteen Thousand Lines (*Āryaśatasāhasrikāpañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāṣṭādaśasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitābṛhaṭṭīkā, Toh 3808). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2022.
———, trans. (2024). The Perfection of Wisdom in One Hundred Thousand Lines (Śatasāhasrikāprajñāpāramitā, Toh 8). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2024.
Stein, Lisa, and Ngawang Zangpo, trans. Butön’s History of Buddhism: In India and its Spread to Tibet, A Treasury of Priceless Scripture. Boston: Snow Lion, 2013.
Suzuki Kenta & Nagashima Jundo. “The Dunhuang Manuscript of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā.” In Buddhist Manuscripts from Central Asia: The British Library Sanskrit Fragments, vol. III/2, edited by S. Karashima, J. Nagashima & K. Wille: 593–821. Tokyo, 2015.
Vaidya, P.L. “Aṣṭasāhasrikā prajñāpāramitā.” In Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, vol. 4. Darbhanga: Mithila Institute, 1960. Available as e-text on Göttingen Register of Electronic Texts in Indian Languages (GRETIL).
Watanabe Shōgo, “A Comparative Study of the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā.” JAOS 114/3 (1994): 386–96.
Zacchetti, Stefano (2005). In Praise of the Light: A Critical Synoptic Edition with an Annotated Translation of Chapters 1-3 of Dharmarakṣa’s Guang zan jing, Being the Earliest Chinese Translation of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā. Bibliotheca Philologica et Philosophica Buddhica, Vol. 8. The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology. Tokyo: Soka University.
——— (2015). “Prajñāpāramitā Sūtras.” In Brill’s Encyclopedia of Buddhism, vol. 1, edited by Jonathan Silk. Leiden: Brill.
——— (2021). The Da zhidu lun 大智度論 (*Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa) and the History of the Larger Prajñāpāramitā: Patterns of Textual Variation in Mahāyāna Sūtra Literature. Numata Center for Buddhist Studies: Hamburg Buddhist Studies 14, edited by Michael Radich and Jonathan Silk. Bochum / Freiburg: Projekt Verlag, 2021.
Zürcher, Erik. The Buddhist Conquest of China: The Spread and Adaptation of Buddhism in Medieval China, 3rd ed. [1st ed. 1959] with a foreword by S. F. Teiser. Leiden: Brill (Sinica Leidensia 11), 2007.