This state is only attained on the tenth bhiimi, on which the third type o f the path o f familiarization as aspiration exists.. However, the three are not coextensive because aspiration
Trang 1welfares, but one has not yet attained the state of, from the perspective o f those to be guided,
o n e s accom plishing the welfare o f sentient beings during subsequent attainm ent equaling the one o f a buddha This state is only attained on the tenth bhiimi, on which the third type o f the path o f familiarization as aspiration exists However, from the perspective o f relinquishment and realization, the accom plishm ent o f the welfare o f beings on the tenth b hiim i does not equal the one o f a buddha because this is m ade clear in the sütras through the exam ples o f a m inute particle and the earth, respectively (the same is said in Uttaratantra 1.78, w hich com pares the two with the am ount o f water in a hoofprint and in the ocean, respectively).
475 XVIII.74ab.
476 PGSD (pp 18 0 -8 1 ) defines the path o f familiarization as dedication as “the maháyána subsequent clear realization that consists o f the subsequent attainments o f dedicating the roots
o f virtue o f on ese lf and others to perfect enlightenm ent.” In terms o f its boundary lines, it is
tw ofold—existing on the impure and pure bhümis In terms o f its objects, as listed in the sütras,
it is twelvefold (CZ, pp 2 6 9 -8 1 ) The definition o f dedication in general is “being congruently associated with the resolve that one’s ow n and others’ roots o f virtue cause the accom plishing o f
a special fruition.” It is tw ofold—dedication fo r higher realms and nirvána, with the latter c o n sisting o f the dedications in the hínayána and the maháyána, respectively The roots o f virtue
to be d edicated consist o f all those that are accum ulated in the three times The levels to w hich they are dedicated are threefold— m undane levels, the levels o f the hínayána, and unsurpass able enlightenm ent In terms o f special dedication, said virtues are dedicated by way o f being embraced by the prajñá that is free from the three spheres The purpose o f dedicating in this w ay
is to make virtues inexhaustible and increase them further The w itnesses o f dedication are all buddhas and bodhisattvas in the three times, to w hom on e prays so that one’s dedication will be accomplished.
477 PGSD (p 182) defines the path o f familiarization as rejoicing as “the maháyána subse quent clear realization that consists o f the subsequent attainments o f perfectly cultivating the joy about the roots o f virtue o f on eself and others, which is congruently associated with the feeling o f mental bliss.” It is twofold in terms o f the impure and pure bhümis.
478 PGSD (pp 18 1 -8 2 ) says that aspiration, dedication, and rejoicing are not m utually exclusive because all types o f contaminated maháyána paths o f familiarization are included in the path o f familiarization as aspiration For all o f them are paths o f familiarization that are embraced by the resolve o f striving for enlightenm ent However, the three are not coextensive because aspiration and dedication, which are congruently associated with the feeling o f equa nimity, are not the path o f familiarization as rejoicing According to MPZL (p 80), the paths o f familiarization as aspiration, dedication, and rejoicing, respectively, are the causes that produce the accum ulation o f merit during subsequent attainment that has not arisen yet, let the already arisen merit not decline, and increase that undeclined merit Similarly, SBZ (pp 3 1 6 -1 7 ) says that the reason for teaching the contaminated subsequent attainment o f the path o f familiar ization through the triad o f aspiration, dedication, and rejoicing is as follows In general, the practice o f subsequent attainment includes infinitely m any m undane and supram undane paths (such as the páramitás and the four immeasurables) However, aspiration gives rise to the path
in one’s m ind stream through bringing together all paths o f subsequent attainm ent (such as the páramitás) Through dedication, all paths arise through being dedicated to the k n ow led ge o f all aspects and thus do not decline Through rejoicing, said paths as well as the roots o f virtue o f others do not only not decline, but increase further as the causes o f the know ledge o f all aspects
In this way, these three gather the accum ulations during subsequent attainment.
479 PGSD (p 182) defines the path o f familiarization as accom plishm ent as “the maháyána subsequent clear realization that consists o f the remedies that relinquish the cognitive obscura
Trang 2uninterrupted paths o f the mahayana path o f familiarization In terms o f its boundary lines, it
is tw ofold —existing o n the im pure and pure bhumis In terms o f relinquishm ent, it is also tw o fold— the paths o f familiarization as accom p lish m en t that directly relinquish the seeds o f the factors to be relinquished through familiarization and their im pregnations o f negative ten den cies, respectively.
480 CZ, pp 2 9 1 -9 2
481 This m eans that the above quote is taken as a probative argum ent with subject (the purities o f form, prajnaparamita, and fruition), predicate (these three being one), and reason (because they do not exist as tw o and so on).
482 PG SD (pp 1 8 2 -8 4 ) defines th e pure path o f familiarization as “the mahayana subsequent clear realization that consists o f the sustaining remedies for the cognitive obscurations w hich are the factors to be relinquished through familiarization.” It is equivalent to the paths o f libera tion o f the m ahayana path o f familiarization As for taking the above quote from the sutras as a probative argum ent, the subject in question is the path o f liberation that is taught explicitly here
as the pure path o f familiarization It is fourfold in terms o f ¿ravakas, pratyekabuddhas, bodhi- sattvas, and buddhas, but the o n e to be taught primarily here is the m ahayana path o f liberation
As for the predicate, w hen the paths o f liberation are pure o f their respective stains, their objects (such as form) are also pure o f their respective stains and the seeing o f the true nature o f these objects is also pure o f its respective stains As for the reason, w ith a m ind that accords w ith the facts o n e cannot analyze any difference between the paths o f liberation o f the m ahayana path
o f familiarization being pure o f their respective stains and the seeing o f the true nature o f their objects being pure o f its respective stains, neither through a difference in substance in terms o f specifically characterized p h en o m e n a , nor through distinct isolates in term s o f generally char acterized phenom ena As for the particular explanation o f the pure fruition, its definition is “the qualities o f the paths o f liberation, or the reality o f cessation, o f being free from the seeds o f the respective factors to be relinquished through the power o f the uncontam inated uninterrupted paths.” This is equivalent to the fruitions o f the approach o f virtuous effort The definitions o f the pure fruitions o f ¿ravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas, respectively, are “the quali ties o f the paths o f liberation, or the reality o f cessation, in the m ind streams o f those in the lesser yana, those in the m iddling yana, and noble bodhisattvas.” The definition o f the pure fruition o f buddhas is “the qualities o f realization or relinquishm ent o f having exhaustively relinquished the two obscurations, including their latent tendencies.” In brief, the path o f libera tion o f the second bhum i represents a pure fruition because it is the sustaining rem edy o f being free from its respective obscurations through the uninterrupted path that is its specific cause.
483 PGSD (pp 17 5 -7 6 ) explains the follow ing on the physical supports o f the arising o f the path o f familiarization For pratyekabuddhas, it is certain to arise in a physical support within the desire realm For ¿ravakas, the support o f the new arising o f their path o f familiarization
is o n e within the desire or form realms, while the support o f sustaining an already arisen path
o f familiarization can also be o n e in the formless realm For bodhisattvas, the support is certain
to be o n e within the desire or fo rm realms and not one in the formless realm because the lat ter is not a suitable support o f the direct operation o f the enlightened activity o f mahayana noble ones As for the mental supports, the new arising o f the path o f familiarization o f the hlnayana can rely on any o f the six grounds o f dhyana, while the m ental support o f sustain ing an already arisen path o f familiarization can also be a state o f m ind in the formless realm For ¿ravakas on the path o f familiarization can m anifest the meditative absorption o f cessation through relying on the actual m editative absorption o f the Peak o f Existence The path o f famil iarization o f bodhisattvas m ainly relies on the actual fourth dhyana because calm abiding and superior insight are properly balanced in it, which makes it easy to practice the path However,
Trang 3the formless realm at all because the actual formless meditative absorption whose nature consists
o f the last m om en t o f the special path o f the meditative equipoise o f the first bhüm i functions
as the direct cause for the second bhümi T hough the first m o m en t o f the m ahàyàna path o f familiarization is definitely a meditative equipoise, its direct cause can be both the special path
o f the meditative equipoise o f the first bhümi and the special path o f the subsequent attainment
o f that bhümi.
484 PGSD (pp 185 and 187) says that the know ledge o f entities that is the main topic o f the third chapter o f the AA must be the remedial know ledge o f entities o f bodhisattvas because those to be guided for w h om this chapter is mainly taught m ust be those with the mahàyàna disposition As for the reasons for teaching the know ledge o f entities after the knowledge o f the path, through understanding that the k now ledge o f entities o f bodhisattvas is one in nature with its cause, the know ledge o f the path, it is understood that it is the actual cause o f the knowledge
o f all aspects and that the paths o f the hlnayàna represent the antagonistic factors of, that is, the places o f going astray from, this know ledge o f entities o f bodhisattvas Therefore, it is explained here by differentiating the hlnayàna and mahàyàna knowledges o f entities In brief, w ithout know ing all entities to be adopted and rejected, the paths o f all three yànas are not know n prop erly The definition o f the knowledge o f entities o f not abiding in samsàric existence and peace
is “the knowledge o f mahàyàna noble ones o f directly realizing that samsàra, nirvána, and what
is between do not exist by any nature o f their own.” Its instances consist o f all the knowledges
o f mahàyàna noble ones The definition o f the know ledge o f entities o f abiding in samsàric existence and peace is “the knowledge o f hlnayàna noble ones o f not realizing this.” Its instances consist o f all the k n ow led ges o f hlnayàna noble ones The m ahàyàna k n ow led ge o f entities is also called the “know ledge o f entities o f not abiding in the extrem es o f either samsàric existence
or peace.” For through great prajnà, bodhisattvas do not abide in the extreme o f samsàra and, through great compassion, they do not abide in the extreme o f nirvána The hlnayàna k n o w l edge o f entities is called “the k now ledge o f entities o f abiding in the extremes o f both samsàric existence and peace” because the followers o f the hlnayàna cling to samsàra as what is to be rejected and nirvána as w hat is to be adopted MCG (fols 73b 6-75a.2) states that the entities
w ith regard to which the kn ow led ge o f entities cuts through superim positions consist o f skan dhas, dhàtus, and àyatanas The realization o f éràvakas is to k n ow that all o f these are merely
em pty o f a personal identity The realization o f the mahàyàna is to k n ow them as freedom from reference points because they are em pty o f both identities T he first six am ong the nine points o f the know ledge o f entities (not abiding, or abiding, in samsàra or nirvána; being close
to, or distant from, the fruitional mother; and being remedial or antagonistic factors) describe the differences b etw een the hlnayàna and the m ahàyàna knowledges o f entities, w hile the last three (trainings, equality o f the trainings, and path o f seeing) describe the actual path o f the mahàyàna knowledge o f entities Prajnàpàramità is the wisdom o f samsàra and nirvána (or the three times) being equal in the expanse o f the nature o f p h en om en a—great equality That this great equality does not abide in either extrem e o f samsàra (entities) and nirvána (nonentities) is called “the knowledge o f entities,” “sugata heart,” and “dharm adhàtu.” Therefore, the cognizing subject that focuses on this is called “the k now ledge o f the path.” From the perspective o f not abiding in the extrem e o f nirvána, it is called “great com p assion ” and, from the perspective o f not abiding in the extreme o f samsàra, “prajnàpàramità.” T h rou gh realizing this just as it is, it is impossible to abide in either o f these two extremes On the other hand, the path o f the éràvakas that is to be relinquished here apprehends samsàra as an entity and nirvána as the extinction that is the nonentity o f the five skandhas having ceased This mistaken m o d e o f apprehension does not go beyond the sphere o f m inds and mental factors and thus not beyond the objects o f the three realms Therefore, m ind does not cease, w hereas the rem edial know ledge o f entities
o f bodhisattvas represents the subsequent attainment o f m ind having ceased through realiz
Trang 4phen om en a such as the skandhas) and the k n ow led ge o f entities, which realizes the true nature
o f these entities It is the latter that constitutes the first o f the nine points that define the k n o w l edge o f entities It m ust be explained according to the intention o f the sütras and the great treatises as being only a feature that defines the know ledge o f entities, but w ithout grasping the essential points o f the know ledge o f entities and the know ledge o f the path, one should not explain the profound intention o f prajñápáramitá to others W hat is primarily explained in this chapter here through the detailed division o f the know ledge o f entities is the explicit teaching
on the u n c o m m o n know ledge o f entities o f bodhisattvas The reasons for explaining this are that, according to the sütras, šrávakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas m ust all attain their respective forms o f enlightenm ent through practicing prajñápáramitá and that the kn ow led ge
o f entities is presented with regard to šrávakas and pratyekabuddhas, while the know ledge o f the path is presented with regard to bodhisattvas Thus, it is taught that šrávakas and pratyek abuddhas only possess the particular instance o f prajñápáramitá that is the mere know ledge
o f entities, but not the know ledge o f the path or the know ledge o f all aspects Therefore, the šrávakas possess the particular know ledge o f entities that is the mere clear realization o f per sonal identitylessness, but lack the k n ow led ge o f entities o f realizing that these entities lack any phenom enal identity The pratyekabuddhas possess the particular know ledge o f entities o f additionally realizing that, a m o n g phenom ena, apprehended objects lack any identity, but they still lack the clear realization that is the com plete k n o w led g e o f entities (that is, realizing both types o f identitylessness fully) This presentation is well k now n am o ng all Indian and Tibetan scholars as being the intention o f the prajñápáramitá sütras and the AA It also elim inates the presentation o f those w h o say that the know ledge o f entities is nothing but the realization o f personal identitylessness Thus, šrávakas and pratyekabuddhas possess m erely the c o m m o n kinds o f the know ledge o f entities that serve as the rem edies for their particular obscurations (respectively, just the afflictive obscurations and the afflictive obscurations plus on e half o f the cognitive obscurations), whereas only bodhisattvas possess the u n c o m m o n know ledge o f e n ti ties that serves as the co m p lete rem ed y for the cognitive obscurations Therefore, this chapter determ ines the distinctions between the c o m m o n and the u n co m m o n know ledges o f entities The u n co m m o n kn ow led ge o f entities o f bodhisattvas is taught in detail by way o f its nature, distinctive features, factors to be relinquished and remedies, trainings, and the path o f seeing o f clearly realizing it In this w ay, o n e sh o u ld not think that the know ledge o f entities is nothing but the know ledge o f entities that consists o f the path o f šrávakas and is to be relinquished by bodhisattvas.
485 PGSD (p 189) defines the know ledge o f entities that is close to the fruitional m other
as “the k n ow led ge o f noble bodhisattvas o f being skilled in the m eans o f accom plishing the fruitional mother.” Its instances are the maháyána paths o f seeing and familiarization The definition o f the k n ow led ge o f entities that is distant from the fruitional m other is “the k n o w l edge o f hínayána noble on es o f not being skilled in the m eans o f accom plishing the fruitional
m other.” Its instances are the hínayána paths o f seeing, familiarization, and nonlearning.
486 C onze 1973, p 84.
487 CZ, pp 5 7 -5 8
488 Samyutta Nikaya III 141-42.
489 IV 21.
490 Verses 4 6 -4 8
491 The three paths are the twelve links o f dependent origination, grouped in three catego-ries: affliction (links 1, 8, 9), karma (links 2 and 10), and arising (the rem aining seven links).
Trang 5493 Lines IV.66ab.
494 IV.90.
495 D 4 049, fol 100b.6-7.
496 PGSD (pp 1 8 7-88) says that ¿ravakas and pratyekabuddhas lack the realization o f p h e nom enal identitylessness because this lack is established through b o th scripture and reasoning The Mahdsannipataratnaketudharani says:
Those w ho always regard the three realms as being identityless,
Substanceless, and without an autonom ous agent,
A nd cultivate the according poised readiness
Will be liberated from all migrations.
The Lahkavatarasutra states, “N o t to realize signlessness m eans n ot realizing the enligh ten ment o f the m ahayana, but it does not m ean not realizing the enlightenm ent o f ¿ravakas.” The
Ghanavyuhasutra says:
Because o f not d estroying the existence o f phenom enal entities
Sravakas clearly realize this.
As for the reasonings, if ¿ravakas and pratyekabuddhas realized phen om en al identitylessness, it would follow that the hlnayana is not a path that lacks both special m eans and prajna because it possesses the prajha o f realizing emptiness If this is accepted, it stands in contradiction to the following passages Prajndparamitdsamcayagdtha XVI.5d says:
Through being without m eans and lacking prajha, they fall into fravakahood.
AA V.lOab states:
Realizations being deficient
D ue to falling into existence or peace
Also, it would follow that it is untenable to explain blind people not perceiving the sun and the followers o f the hlnayana not perceiving em ptiness free from reference points, respectively, as
an example and its corresponding m eaning because ¿ravakas and pratyekabuddhas possess the prajha o f directly realizing emptiness If this is accepted, it contradicts Uttaratantra 1.153 saying:
The ultimate o f the self-arisen ones
Is to be realized through confidence alone.
Those w ithout eyes do not see
The bright and radiant disk o f the sun.
Also, it w ou ld follow that the explanation o f the followers o f the hlnayana lacking the four h ap pinesses o f intending the welfare o f others, achieving the m eans fo r that, realizing the vastness
o f all phenom ena there are, and realizing em ptiness is not tenable because they possess the prajna o f realizing emptiness If this is accepted, it contradicts Mahaydnasutrdlamkara IV.21 (see PSD above).
497 This and the follow ing quotes are found on pp 2 9 9 -301 in CZ.
498 PGSD (pp 189-91) defines the rem edial know ledge o f entities as “the know ledge o f mahayana noble o n e s o f not b ein g b o u n d by clinging to characteristics in term s o f the charac teristics o f the triad o f ground, path, and fruition.” The definition o f the k n ow led ge o f entities that is an antagonistic factor is “the k n ow led ge o f hlnayana noble on es that is bound by such clinging.” That the m ahayana knowledge o f entities is not b ound by said clinging to characteris tics in terms o f ground, path, and fruition is because it, through the power o f directly realizing