Loading translation...
See Lamotte’s discussion of this concept (Lamotte, Introduction, pp 33-37), even though he emphasizes the rhetorical meaning more than the behavioral meaning.
The Guhyasamājatantra (see bibliography) is generally recognized as one of the earliest systematic tantric texts. It expounds a philosophically pure Middle Way nondualism, combined with an explicit teaching of the reconciliation of dichotomies (i.e., how even evil can be transmuted to enlightenment, etc.) and an elaborate meditational methodology, employing sacred formulae (mantra), rituals, and visualizations. The meditation of jewels, buddhas, sacred universes (maṇḍala), etc., as existing in full detail inside a mustard seed on the tip of the yogin’s nose is a characteristic exercise in the Guhyasamāja, as in Chap. 3.
See 7.1-7.15, where Vimalakīrti states that the “wrong way” leads to buddhahood, Mañjuśrī that all passions constitute the “tathāgata-family” (itself an important tantric concept), and Mahākaśyapa that only those guilty of the five deadly sins can conceive the spirit of enlightenment. The Guhyasamāja (V.4) states: “Even those who have committed great sins, such as the five deadly sins, will succeed on the buddha-vehicle, there in the great ocean of the Mahāyāna” (ānantaryaprabhṛtayaḥ mahāpāpakṛto ’pi ca | siddhyante buddhāydne ’smin mahāyānamahodadhau ||). It then goes on to list in Vimalakīrtinirdeśa fashion all sorts of terrible crimes of lust and hatred, ending with the phrase that such “a mentally nondualistic, intelligent person’s buddhahood is attained” (siddhyate tasya buddhatvaṃ nirvikalpasya dhīmataḥ ||).
See 6.30. The Guhyasamāja elaborates the symbolism of the “Five Tathāgatas,” the leaders of the tathāgata-families, who are usually called Vairocana, Amitābha, Akṣobhya, Ratnasaṃbhava, and Amoghasiddhi, and thus correspond to the tathāgatas listed by the goddess too closely to be merely coincidentally related. Tathāgataguhyaka, further, is a subtitle of the Guhyasamāja itself.
Also transliterated Yen Fo-t’iao; his translation, like some of the other early translations, has not survived. See Lamotte p 2 et seq.
The other Tibetan translation (or translations) by unknown translators surviving only in some of the fragments found at Dunhuang; these fragments may represent two different versions. See Lamotte p 19.
This list of qualities of the noble disciples (āryāśravāka) is absent in the Chinese of K and X. It is, however, frequently found in Mahāyāna sūtras (see Lamotte, p 98, n 2).
The ten transcendences (daśapāramitaḥ), which correspond to the ten stages (daśabhūmayaḥ) of the bodhisattva.
According to the Degé and Stok Palace Kangyurs, which correspond to the Sanskrit text’s anupalambhānutpattikadharmakṣānti-samanvāgataiḥ. The Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Cone, and Lhasa Kangyurs all omit dang mi skye ba’i.
Tib. mtha’ dang mtha’ med par lta ba’i bag chags kyi mtshams sbyor ba kun bcod pa; Skt. antānantadṛṣṭivāsanābhisaṃdhisamucchedaka. “Convictions concerning finitude” refers to two sorts of extremism, absolutism and nihilism, and “convictions concerning infinitude” refers to convictions that hypostatize voidness (i.e., infinity, etc.) as a self-existent entity. Thus the bodhisattvas are said here to have realized, even on the subconscious level, both the voidness of things and the voidness of voidness.
The list has been revised to ensure that the names match those in the Sanskrit text, although there are a few differences in order and content. For exhaustive references concerning the presence of some of these bodhisattvas in other Mahāyāna sūtras, see Lamotte, pp 100-102, ns. 12-33. The Chinese lists in K and X vary somewhat; see Luk, pp 3-4, for K; and Lamotte, p 102, for X. For information about the more well-known bodhisattvas, see glossary.
Tib. dkon mchog ’byung gnas (lit. “Jewel-Mine”). The Chinese versions give his name as “Jewel-Ray” (Ratnarāśi), although the Skt. Ratnākara is supported by his appearance in a number of other Mahāyāna sūtras, where he is also identified as a Licchavi, a merchant’s son, and a great bodhisattva of the tenth stage, as well as by the Sanskrit manuscript. For full references, see Lamotte, p 103, n 38.
The jewels were gold, silver, pearl, sapphire, ruby, emerald, and diamond, although various sources alter this list slightly.
Skt. trisāhasramahāsāhasralokadhātu. The term “galaxy” was chosen to evoke the sense of inconceivable scope intended by the original Skt. term, as such cosmological terms were never aimed at material precision, but rather at triggering an imaginative vision of inconceivable cosmic immensity. I have modified the following catalogue of objects and places to conform to a more modern cosmology.
This list of mountains, according to Lamotte (p 104, n 41), occurs in other Mahāyāna sūtras but does not correspond to usual Buddhist cosmology, except for the fact that Sumeru, mentioned first, is in the center (of each world) and Mount Cakravāḍa, actually a mountain range, is mentioned and surrounds each world of four continents. This list is first in the order of the Tibetan.
Tib. zhi gnas pha rol phyin mchog brnyes; Skt. śamathāpāramitāgraprāpta. Śamathā can be adequately rendered “mental quiescence” when it refers in general to one of the two main types of Mahāyāna meditation; the other is “transcendental analysis” or “analytic insight” (vipaśyana). In this verse, however, Ratnākara refers to it in its aspect of final attainment; hence “trance” best conveys the sense of extreme one-pointed fixation of mind.
Tib. skyes bu’i khyu mchog; Skt. puruṣarṣabha. This common epithet of the Buddha contains the simile comparing him to the chief bull of a herd of cattle because of his power and majesty.
Tib. ’chi med ’gro; Skt. amṛtaga (lit. “goes to deathlessness”). The buddhas’ teachings lead to nirvāṇa; in nirvāṇa there is no birth, and where there is no birth there is no death.
The subtle difference here between Tib. and Ch. of K and X is noteworthy. Tib. causally relates “deep analysis of things” (Skt. dharmaprabedha) to the teaching of their ultimate meaning, which accords with the Indo-Tibetan emphasis on “transcendental analysis” (vipaśyana) as indispensable for realization of the ultimate nature of things. Ch. (both K and X) puts the two (analysis and the ultimate) in opposition, saying, “(You are) expert in analysis of the nature of all things, (yet are) unmoved with respect to the ultimate meaning, (as you have) already attained sovereignty with respect to all things.”
The fact about Buddhist doctrine that most baffled ancient critics is that the cause and effect of karma operates without any ego principle to link the doer of an action and the experiencer of that action’s karmic effects.
The Tibetan grammar leaves it ambiguous as to whether the absence of feeling, etc., refers to enlightenment or to the outsiders. K and X indicate the former, but we have chosen the latter to avoid characterizing supreme enlightenment as a mere “nonthought,” etc., since it obviously transcends all polarities. Further, it is in keeping with the tenor of the sūtra to distinguish between enlightenment and the mere attainment of even the most advanced samādhi.
Tib. lan gsum bzlas pa chos kyi ’khor lo rnam mang po. Although neither Skt. nor Tib. mention the aspects as “twelve,” Lamotte supplies this from the occurrence of the formula in other sūtras, where the three revolutions correspond respectively to the paths of insight (darśanamārga), meditation (bhāvanāmārga), and mastery (aśaikṣamarga), each revolution having four aspects corresponding to the Four Noble Truths. The first revolution involves recognition of each truth, the second thorough knowledge of each, and the third complete realization of each. See Lamotte, p 107, n 49; Mahāvyutpatti, nos. 1309-1324. However, since there is no mention of the “twelve aspects,” but rather “many aspects,” it is possible that what is referred to is the three doctrines of the Buddha elaborated in the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra, also known as the “Three Turnings of the Wheel of Dharma”; namely, the Disciple Vehicle teaching of the Four Noble Truths, the Mādhyamika teaching of Transcendent Wisdom, and the Vijñānavāda teaching of “Fine Discrimination Between Existence and Nonexistence” (see Lamotte’s Saṃdhinirmocana sūtra, VII, no. 30, pp 85, 206).
After this verse, there are two verses in K and X, not in Tib. or Skt. For verses in K, see Luk, p 7, lines 3-10, and McRae, p 73, verses 9-10; for X see Lamotte, p 108. Since X tends to be more consistent with Tib., I will translate X: “The billion-world galaxy, with its realms of gods and dragons, appears in the little parasols offered to the Lord; thus we bow to his vision, knowledge, and mass of virtues. The Lord displays the worlds to us with this miracle—they all are like a play of lights, as all bear witness in astonishment. Obeisance to the Lord of ten powers, endowed with knowledge and vision.”
Skt. āveṇikabuddhalakṣaṇa. This and the subsequent two verses (Chap. 3) illustrate some of the special buddha-qualities, which total eighteen (see glossary “eighteen special qualities of the Buddha” for a complete list).
This verse in Tib. and Skt. appears to be expanded into two verses in K and X: “The Lord speaks with but one voice, but all beings, each according to his kind, gain understanding, each thinking that the Lord speaks his own language. This is a special quality of the Buddha. The Lord speaks with but one voice, but all beings, each according to his own ability, act upon it, and each derives his appropriate benefit. This is a special quality of the Buddha.” For K see Luk, p 7, and McRae, p 74. For an interesting discussion of the speech of the Buddha, see Lamotte, pp 109-110, 11. 52.
This and the preceding two lines ascribe to the Buddha the attainment of the three doors of liberation: voidness (śūnyatā), signlessness (animittatā), and wishlessness (apraṇihitatā).
Tib. byang chub sems dpa’ rnams kyi sangs rgyas kyi zhing yongs su dag pa; Skt. bodhisattvāṇam buddhakṣetrapariśuddhi. Although the explanations given by the Buddha obviate the need for discussion of the meaning of this term, it is worthwhile to note that this concept is the logical corollary of the bodhisattva’s conception of enlightenment: that it be attained for the sake of all sentient beings as well as for his own sake. Thus, the bodhisattva’s quest for enlightenment does not involve merely his own development, although that is of course primary; it must also involve his cultivation of a whole “field” of living beings, those who, through karmic interconnection, have destinies intertwined with his, occupying the same worlds as he, etc. Hence, his purification of a buddhafield is a mode of expressing his ambition to cultivate a whole world or universe while he cultivates himself, so that he and his field of living beings may reach enlightenment simultaneously.
K and X differ here quite radically. X: “For example, sons, if one should wish to construct a palace in an unoccupied place and then adorn it, he could do so freely and without hindrance, but if he wished to build it in empty space itself, he could never succeed. In the same way, the bodhisattva, although he knows that all things are like empty space, produces pure qualities, for the development and benefit of living beings. That is the buddhafield which he embraces. To embrace a buddhafield in this way is not like building in empty space.” K: “It is as if a man wished to build a building in a vacant place—he could do so without difficulty. But (if he wished to do it) in empty space, he could not succeed. Likewise, the bodhisattva, in order to cultivate all living beings, wants to embrace a buddhafield. One who thus wishes to embrace a buddhafield (does not do so) in the void.” The first impulse of the translator is to resort to the Ch. versions in the interest of simplicity and ease, since the simile there is much more clearly drawn: vacant lot = living beings, empty space = any sort of materialistic notion about a buddhafield; ergo building on solid needs of living beings succeeds, and any other way fails. However, upon reflection, what does the Buddha wish to convey in this example? Are not living beings and their needs and purposes just as ultimately empty as “all things”? Would not the concretization of the benefit of living beings violate the definition of liberative technique integrated with wisdom given by Vimalakīrti himself (see 4.22)? Is it not more fitting to understand the Buddha here as telling us not to concretize any mundane aims, however beneficial, but that the bodhisattva’s great compassion must always adhere to the wisdom that sees the ephemerality of all purposive notions, constructed or constructive? When we undertake something we know to be essentially impossible, through the sheer intensity of compassion, do we not enter the realm of inconceivability? Finally, may not the Buddha be speaking in tune with his own subsequent miraculous display, as he demonstrates the actual possibility for him, no less than for space-age technology, of building a pure buddhafield in the empty space of ultimate voidness?
X changes the order of these four to conception, positive thought, virtuous application, and high resolve. Either order is quite acceptable, since the four work together throughout the bodhisattva’s career.
This phrase is taken from K (it is absent in Tib., Skt. and X) because it rounds out the list of ten virtues, being the counterpart of the sin known as “frivolous speech.” “Free of divisive intrigues and adroit in reconciling factions” basically describes one virtue, the opposite of “backbiting” (see glossary “ten sins” and “ten virtues”).
This step of “development…” is included in the progression by both K and X, and, since it makes more explicit the transition from liberative technique to the buddhafield itself, we have included it (although it is absent in Tib. and Skt.).
Śāriputra was one of the foremost disciples of the Buddha, especially renowned in Disciple Vehicle texts for his wisdom; he was called “foremost of the wise” (prajñāvatām agrya). In this sūtra, as well as in other Mahāyāna sūtras, he becomes the “fall guy” par excellence, as he is often inclined to express the Disciple Vehicle point of view, which is then roundly rejected by the Buddha, by Vimalakīrti, or by one of the bodhisattvas. In fairness to him, it is often noted that the petty thoughts that arise in his mind, for which he is severely criticized, are caused to arise there by the magical influence of the Buddha or of Vimalakīrti, so that a thought that may be entertained by numerous members of the assembly may be brought into the open and rejected. He serves therefore as an archetype of the disciple personality and need not be condemned as exceptionally obtuse personally.
Tib. ’jig rten dang ’jig rten las ’das pa’i gsang sngags dang bstan bcos; Skt. laukikalokottaramantraśāstra. This is a possible reference to tantric practices, but it is missing in both K and X, who mention only “mundane practices.”
Vimalakīrti is here shown as the embodiment of the practice of “reconciliation of dichotomies.”
Both K and X have, instead of this phrase, “because he taught them loyalty and filial devotion.”
Tib. mi rtag par is missing, but supplied by Lamotte (p 130) from the Dunhuang fragments, and also from K and X; it is supported, too, by the Sanskrit manuscript (aiśvaryānityatvasaṃdarśanāyau).
These similes are famous in the Disciple Vehicle as well as Mahāyāna. The fact of their presence in Disciple Vehicle teachings was used by Prāṡangika philosophers such as Buddhapālita and Candrakīrti, to prove that insubstantiality or selflessness of phenomena (dharmanairātmyā) was taught in the Disciple Vehicle. For further references, see Lamotte, p 132, n 23.
According to Lamotte, the four hundred and four diseases are classified with one hundred and one arising from each of four primary elements. But according to the “eight branches” (aṣṭāṇga) of Indian and Tibetan medicine, they arise from the three humors, vāta, pitta, and kapha (vital airs, bile, and phlegm, Tib. rlung mkhris bad kan gsum), when their balance becomes disturbed: i.e., one hundred and one from airs, one hundred and one from bile, one hundred and one from phlegm, and one hundred and one from unhealthy combinations of all three.
Tib. has simply “born from merit and charity.” The translation here follows K. The store of merit culminates in the saṃbhogakāya, body of beatitude, and the store of wisdom culminates in the dharmakāya, ultimate body.
Skt. śīla, samādhi, prajñā, vimukti, and vimuktijñānadarśana are the five Dharma-aggregates, or pure aggregates, or members of the Dharma-body of the Buddha (see Lamotte, p 139, n 30).
These are the two main types of Mahāyāna meditation. The former corresponds to the fifth transcendence and includes all practices that cultivate one-pointedness of mind; the latter corresponds to the sixth transcendence, especially the analytic penetration to the realization of personal selflessness (pudgalanairātmya) and phenomenal selflessness (dharmanairātmya), or voidness. The latter is not so well known as the former, which is commonly considered to be the main type of meditation: nondiscursive, one-pointed, etc. Nevertheless, it is said frequently in both sūtras and commentaries that without integrated practice of both, the higher stages of enlightenment will not be attained. For more details, see glossary (under “mental quiescence” and “transcendental analysis”).
Degé has dben pa, isolation, but most of the other Kangyurs (including the Stok Palace) have bden pa, truth, and this is confirmed by the Sanskrit, satya.
Skt. utsāhate. This has been translated most frequently in its meaning of “fitness, capacity,” as each of the monks and bodhisattvas asked by the Buddha to visit Vimalakīrti replies with the same phrase: “I am not fit…” or “I am not able…” However, from the Tibetan use of the word spro ba, which means to be enthusiastic, inspired, gladdened, I chose to interpret this in its meaning of enthusiasm, which in the negative gives “I am not enthusiastic…” or “I am reluctant….” That is, none of those asked by the Buddha are actually pretending to be unable to visit Vimalakīrti; they only plead their unwillingness, timidity, etc., in order to be excused by the Buddha from carrying out his command.
Vimalakīrti confounds Śāriputra by demanding of him the ability to reconcile dichotomies in actual practice, i.e., by rejecting Śāriputra’s Disciple Vehicle position and expecting him to follow the way of the bodhisattva. Śāriputra reacts in the same way as the other monks and bodhisattvas in this chapter: he is overwhelmed and speechless, yet intuitively recognizes the rightness of Vimalakīrti’s statements. He can neither accept them and put them into practice nor reject them outright (see Lamotte, p 142, n 3).
Maudgalyāyana was known as the “foremost of those endowed with miraculous powers” (ṛddhimatāṃ agrya) and was paired with Śāriputra as one of the two leading disciples of the Buddha. Vimalakīrti chastises him basically for failing to use his “wisdom eye,” his superknowledge of what is in others’ minds (paracittajñāna), to determine that his listeners were willing and able to learn and understand the Mahāyāna teaching of the profound nature of reality, and for teaching them instead the Disciple Vehicle teaching, with its one-sided emphasis on world-rejection, etc.
Tib. rlabs thams cad dang bral ba; Skt. sarvormivigata, lit. “free of all waves” (of thought).
Skt. dharmadhātu. This is not the dharmadhātu (phenomenal element) included among the eighteen elements (see glossary). It is one of the five synonyms of voidness included in Maitreya’s Madhyāntavibhāga, I, 15—tathatā bhūtakoṭiśca ’nimittaṃ paramārthatā | dharmadhātuśca paryāyāḥ śūnyatāyāḥ samāsataḥ ||—where it is analyzed in a rather unusual way as “the element of Dharma, from which arise the noble qualities of the arhats….” However, Tib. dbyings definitely indicates interpretation of dhātu as space, realm, etc., rather than element; so, with the proviso that it is a synonym of voidness, it is here translated “ultimate realm” (i.e., no relative realm at all). See glossary, “ultimate realm.”
This passage follows X quite closely, but K is somewhat different in details (see Luk, pp 21-22, or McRae, p 86).
This refers to those teachings (of śūnyatā, etc.) the Buddha reserves for disciples of greatest ability, definitive teachings (nītārthavacana) as opposed to teaching meant to develop disciples (to the point when they can understand the definitive teachings), which are known as interpretable teachings (neyārthavacana). See glossary, “definitive meaning.”
Mahākāśyapa was known as “the foremost among the upholders of the ascetic practices” (dhūtaguṇavādinām agraḥ) and was the Buddha’s successor as leader of the saṅgha after the parinirvāṇa. Here he is engaged in one of the twelve ascetic practices (see glossary), that of living on food begged as alms (paiṇḍapātika). Thus, in the very execution of his specialty he is scolded by Vimalakīrti, who points out to him that such practices are intrinsically worthless and are useful only if combined with the true equanimity reached through the wisdom that realizes voidness.
Kāśyapa is favoring the poor here by depriving the rich of the chance to give food to him and thus benefit themselves.
Skt. yo ’svabhāvo ’parabhāvaś ca tad anujjvalitam | yad anujjvalitaṃ tan na śāmyati. His seemingly irrelevant statement, which occurs again in Vimalakīrti’s speech to Kātyāyana (3.25), is, in fact, highly relevant to the main Disciple Vehicle concern: the burning of the misery of the world, in which, they believe, man’s condition is like that of one whose head is ablaze. Hence their major preoccupation is to extinguish that fire, just as a burning man will seek water with a frantic intensity to save himself. Thus Vimalakīrti is telling Mahākāśyapa and Kātyāyana that since they do not have intrinsic existence as self, or imparted existence as other in relationship to anything else, they do not really exist and, therefore, they cannot burn with the misery of the world and there is nothing to extinguish in liberation (nirvāṇa literally meaning “extinguishment”).
Among Subhūti’s other strong points, he was known as the “foremost among those worthy of offerings,” (dakṣiṇeyānāṃ agraḥ, see Lamotte, p 154, n 27). Thus Vimalakīrti challenges him precisely about his worthiness, defining it by testing Subhūti’s equanimity in the face of all the most unworthy things he can think of and causing Subhūti to feel frightened and confused by his own adherence to dualities such as good and evil.
By “fruition,” Vimalakīrti means any of the culminating stages of realization attained by those who practice the teachings, such as the Four Noble Truths, the twofold selflessness, etc.
Tib.: chos thams cad dang yang ldan la chos thams cad kyi ’du shes dang yang bral. The Skt. of the Potala MS reads na sarvadharmasamanvāgataś ca sarvadharmasamadhigataś ca, but to accord with the Tib., which seems clearer and was presumably translated from a different MS, this would have to be emended to read sarvadharmasamanvāgataś ca na sarvadharmasaṃjñāvigataś ca.
Tib. nyon mongs pa med pa (lit. “absence of passions,” or afflictions). However, the Skt. here is araṇa, and K and X use “nondisputation,” which is actually equivalent to dispassion, since the “struggle,” or “disputation,” referred to is internal, the turbulence of inner struggle of one prey to passions. This is perhaps more appropriate here, since Subhūti was renowned for his attainment of this state (see Lamotte, p 154, n 27; araṇavihārīnām agro, etc.)
According to the Mahāyāna understanding of the miraculous nature of the three bodies of the Buddha, especially the “incarnation-body” (nirmāṇakāya), Vimalakīrti himself is an extremely likely candidate to be one of its operatives. Thus, one steeped in the Mahāyāna faith would see him here as being subtly playful with Subhūti.
Tib. yi ge de dag thams cad ni yi ge med pa ste/ rnam par grol ba ni ma gtogs so/ chos thams cad ni rnam par grol ba’i mtshan nyid do. K and X differ slightly, but essentially have the same meaning: “Language does not have an independent nature. When it is no more, there is liberation.” In other words, no independent nature = ultimately nonexistent; it is no more = when the ultimate is realized; then liberation = when even words are realized to be liberation, there is no more duality, and there is realization. Ch. stresses the experiential moment of pure gnosis of voidness. Tib. expresses this gnosis along with its nondual, postattainment wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdhajñāna). It is Vimalakīrti’s last word on nonduality to instruct Subhūti.
Pūrṇa, “son of Maitrāyaṇī,” was known as “the foremost of expounders of the Dharma” (dharmakathikānām agraḥ; see Lamotte, p 160, n 42). According to the Pāli sources (as cited by Lamotte), this very incident, or one similar to it, resulted in five hundred young monks’ attainment of the state of arhat. In any case, it can be assumed that Pūrṇa was often entrusted with the instruction of young monks, and it was just such an occasion on which Vimalakīrti apprehended him. His reproaches are along the same line as those given to Maudgalyāyana, only more explicit, i.e., that the great disciples should not teach the Dharma because they cannot recognize the affinity for the Mahāyāna in their pupils.
This means they attained the eighth bodhisattva stage, called “The Immovable,” where the bodhisattva becomes irreversible (avaivartika) and previous to which he is liable to regression, even to forgetting the spirit of enlightenment already conceived in former lifetimes, as in the case of these monks.
Kātyāyana was renowned as the founder of the Abhidharma tradition of analysis of the meaning of the Buddha’s discourses. He was pronounced by the Buddha, according to the Pāli sources, to be the “foremost expounder of the detailed meaning of the concise declarations (of the Buddha)” (aggo saṅkhittena bhāsitassa vitthārena attham vibhajantānam). True to form, Vimalakīrti finds him when he is engaged in the execution of his special expertise (see Lamotte, p 162, n 49 and glossary).
Aniruddha was said to be “foremost among possessors of the divine eye” (agro divyacakṣukānām; see Lamotte, p 167, n 56, and glossary).
This dilemma was more embarrassing to Aniruddha than confounding, since logically he could have answered that of course his divine eye was compounded, just like that of outsider adepts. Vimalakīrti touched his pride in this critique; hence the dilemma he poses here bears only superficial resemblance to the Mādhyamika dialectic.
Upāli was especially well known as expert in Vinaya, the code of monastic discipline, and was its chief compiler after the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa (vināyadharāṇām agraḥ).
Tib. the tsom sol te bdag cag gnyis ltung ba las phyung shig (lit. “remove our doubts and take us both out from the infraction”). The “absolution” consists in the senior monk’s listening to their confession and encouraging their resolution not to repeat the infraction. Thus he grants no dispensations in regard to the retributive effects and only gives them the opportunity to come to a new understanding and decision in their own minds. This is traditional in Buddhist discipline.
Skt. vināyadhara. As usual, Vimalakīrti makes his point on the disciple’s home ground: Upāli was known as vināyadharāṇāṃ agraḥ, “foremost upholder of the discipline,” as the two monks mention in the next paragraph.
Rāhula was the actual son of the Buddha and was admired in the saṅgha as a renunciant and devotee because he forsook the throne to join the saṅgha under his father. The Pāli sources show him dubbed “foremost among those eager for training” (Skt. śikṣākāmānam agro; see Lamotte, p 177, n 70).
Tib. thog ma’i dang tha’ ma’i mthar lta ba dang bral ba’o. K and X have instead: “Renunciation is beyond this, that, and in between, being above the sixty-two false views.” The Skt. does not appear to include this sentence.
Some verses of Tsong Khapa summarize the Mahāyāna “mind of renunciation” very aptly: “Reverse the interest in this life by thinking over again and again that leisure and opportunity (to practice the Dharma) are hard to find and that there is no (fixed) duration of life. Reverse interest in the life hereafter by constantly meditating upon the inexorability of karma and the sufferings of the world. Through such concentration, when there is not the slightest ambition, even for a split second, for even the greatest successes in the world, the mind of renunciation has arisen.” See G. Wangyal, Door of Liberation (New York, Girodias, 1973), Chap. V.
Even after his explanation, the young men still confuse renunciation, a mental concentration, with the mundane act of entering the monkhood. So Vimalakīrti has to remind them that the conception of the spirit of enlightenment is the true renunciation, not just a mere change of clothes and habits.
Tib. and Skt. have thirty-two hundred, but K and X have thirty-two, which seems more reasonable.
Ānanda was renowned for many things: learning, mindfulness, steadfastness, etc., and was the second leader of the saṅgha , after Mahākāśyapa. Vimalakīrti finds fault with him when he is being “foremost of attendants” (aggo upaṭṭhākānām), caring for the Buddha’s apparent needs as he did faithfully for twenty-five years.
See Lamotte, p 183, n 77, for learned references to this incident in other sources, notably Vatsasūtra.
Tib. gzhan mu stegs can spyod pa pa dang kun tu rgyu dang gcer bu pa dang tsho ba pa dag; Skt. anyatīrthika caraka parivrajaka nigranthājīvāḥ. I have simply rendered this “outsider sectarians” so as not to burden the reader with irrelevant names, as this expression is a cliché for all the outsider groups occurring in other Mahāyāna sūtras (see Lamotte, p 186, n 81).
See Lamotte, p 186, n 82, for another version of this episode translated by Kumārajīva in Prajñāpāramitopadeśa.
K and X start a new chapter at this point, while Tib. and Skt. include the disciples’ and bodhisattvas’ responses to the Buddha’s request in a single chapter.
The characterization of Maitreya in Mahāyāna sūtras is that of having a certain naiveté. Mañjusrī often chides him, and Vimalakīrti does not let him rest on his laurels.
K and X give a different reading: “How then, Maitreya, did you receive the prophecy of your attainment of buddhahood after only one more birth? Did you receive it as the reality of birth or as the reality of death? In the former case, this reality is uncreated, and in the latter case, it does not die.” As always, Ch. is less abstract than Tib., but both agree on the general tenor of Vimalakīrti’s refutation of Maitreya’s acceptance of the prophecy as being valid on the ultimate level of reality (paramārthasatyatā). On the question of the validity of prophecies on the superficial and ultimate levels, see Lamotte, p 189, n 89.
The thrust of Vimalakīrti’s instruction here is that “being enlightened” and “being unenlightened” are valid designations only on the superficial, designative, relative level of truth. “Discriminative construction” is that mental process that seeks to “absolutize” a relative thing, taking “ignorance” and “enlightenment” as ultimately real things. Thus in all the subsequent negational descriptions of enlightenment, the phrase “on the ultimate level” may be understood to avert a nihilistic interpretation. See Introduction, i.1 ff.
Tib. rnam par rig pa med pa; Skt. avijñapti (lit. “without means of cognition”). Again, it may be stressed that all these statements imply the qualification “ultimately” (paramārthena).
K and X: “It is the seat of interdependent origination, because it is like infinite space.” Ch. thus takes pratītyasamutpāda (see glossary “dependent origination” and “relativity”) as equivalent to śūnyatā, which is correct as regards its ultimate nature. Vimalakīrti refers to the “cessation-order” of the twelve links of origination: that is, stopping ignorance stops synthetic activity; stopping synthetic activity stops consciousness; stopping consciousness stops name-and-form; stopping name-and-form stops the six sense-media; stopping the sense-media stops contact; stopping contact stops sensation; stopping sensation stops craving; stopping craving stops grasping; stopping grasping stops existence; stopping existence stops birth; and stopping birth stops old age and death. This is the sequence of realization of the twelvefold chain during the attainment of enlightenment on the seat of enlightenment.
Tib. dam pa’i chos yongs su ’dzin pa; Skt. saddharmasaṃgraha. Here taken as “incorporation” in the sense of the bodhisattva’s incorporation of the holy Dharma in all phases of his daily life.
An important work written by Vasubandhu, probably in the fourth century, as a critical compendium of the Abhidharmic science.
Conventionally, the general name for the Buddhist teachings presented in a scientific manner, as a fully elaborated transcendental psychology. As one of the branches of the Canon, it corresponds to the discipline of wisdom (the Sūtras corresponding to meditation, and the Vinaya to morality). Ultimately the Abhidharma is “pure wisdom, with its coordinate mental functions” (Prajñāmalā sānucārā), according to Vasubandhu.
Lit. “Intense Delight.” The universe, or buddhafield of the Tathāgata Akṣobhya, lying in the east beyond innumerable galaxies, whence Vimalakīrti came to reincarnate in our Sahā universe.
This describes actual reality, as finally there is no enduring person himself or thing itself, since persons and things exist only in the relative, conventional, or superficial sense, and not in any ultimate or absolute sense. To understand Buddhist teaching correctly, we must be clear about the two senses (conventional/ultimate, or relative/absolute), since mistaking denial of ultimate self as denial of conventional self leads to nihilism, and mistaking affirmation of conventional self as affirmation of ultimate self leads to absolutism. Nihilism and absolutism effectively prevent us from realizing our enlightenment, hence are to be avoided.
See “absorption.”
“Absorption” has been translated as “meditation,” “contemplation,” “attainment,” etc., and any of these words might serve. The problem is to establish one English word for each of the important Sanskrit words samāpatti, dhyāna, samādhi, bhāvanā, etc., so as to preserve a consistency with the original. Therefore, I have adopted for these terms, respectively, “absorption,” “contemplation,” “concentration” and “realization” or “cultivation,” reserving the word “meditation” for general use with any of the terms when they are used not in a specific sense but to indicate mind-practice in general.
Desire, hatred and anger, dullness, pride, and jealousy, as well as all their derivatives, said to number 84,000. Also translated “afflictions.”
Desire, hatred and anger, dullness, pride, and jealousy, as well as all their derivatives, said to number 84,000. Also translated “passions.”
This translation of skandha is fairly well established, although some prefer the monosyllabic “group.” It is important to bear in mind that the original skandha has the sense of “pile,” or “heap,” which has the connotation of utter lack of internal structure, of a randomly collocated pile of things; thus “group” may convey a false connotation of structure and ordered arrangement. The five “compulsive” (upādāna) aggregates are of great importance as a schema for introspective meditation in the Abhidharma, wherein each is defined with the greatest subtlety and precision. In fact, the five terms rūpa, vedanā, samjñā, saṃskāra, and vijñāna have such a particular technical sense that many translators have preferred to leave them untranslated. Nevertheless, in the sūtra context, where the five are meant rather more simply to represent the relative living being (in the realm of desire), it seems preferable to give a translation—in spite of the drawbacks of each possible term—in order to convey the same sense of a total categorization of the psychophysical complex. Thus, for rūpa, “matter” is preferred to “form” because it more concretely connotes the physical and gross; for vedanā, “sensation” is adopted, as limited to the aesthetic; for samjñā, “intellect” is useful in conveying the sense of verbal, conceptual intelligence. For samskāra, which covers a number of mental functions as well as inanimate forces, “motivation” gives a general idea. And “consciousness” is so well established for vijñāna (although what we normally think of as consciousness is more like samjñā, i.e., conceptual and notional, and vijñāna is rather the “pure awareness” prior to concepts) as to be left unchallenged.
See “thirty-seven aids to enlightenment”
One of the six outsider teachers defeated by the Buddha at Śrāvastī.
The highest heaven of the form-world, where a buddha always receives the anointment of the ultimate wisdom, reaching there mentally from his seat of enlightenment under the Bodhi-tree.
A bodhisattva in the assembly at Vimalakīrti’s house, often figuring in other Mahāyāna sūtras, especially Akṣayamatinirdeśasūtra.
Buddha of the universe Abhirati, presiding over the eastern direction; also prominent in tantric works as one of the five dhyāni buddhas, or tathāgatas (see Lamotte, pp. 360-362, n. 9).
The Buddha of boundless light; one of the five Tathāgatas in Tantrism; a visitor in Vimalakīrti’s house, according to the goddess’s report.
A courtesan of Vaiśālī who gave her garden to the Buddha and his retinue, where they stay during the events of the sūtra.
A major śrāvaka disciple and personal attendant of the Buddha Śākyamuni during the last twenty-five years of his life. He was a cousin of the Buddha (according to the Mahāvastu, he was a son of Śuklodana, one of the brothers of King Śuddhodana, which means he was a brother of Devadatta; other sources say he was a son of Amṛtodana, another brother of King Śuddhodana, which means he would have been a brother of Aniruddha).
Ānanda, having always been in the Buddha’s presence, is said to have memorized all the teachings he heard and is celebrated for having recited all the Buddha’s teachings by memory at the first council of the Buddhist saṅgha, thus preserving the teachings after the Buddha’s parinirvāṇa. The phrase “Thus did I hear at one time,” found at the beginning of the sūtras, usually stands for his recitation of the teachings. He became a patriarch after the passing of Mahākāśyapa.
Lit. “infinite array of jewel-qualities.” A universe of Buddha Ratnavyūha, also mentioned in the Lalitavistarasūtra.
A śrāvaka disciple and cousin of the Buddha who was famed for his meditative prowess and superknowledges. See also n.78.
According to Buddhist tradition, one who has conquered his enemy passions (kleśa-ari-hata) and reached the supreme purity. The term can refer to buddhas as well as to those who have reached realization of the Disciple Vehicle.
One of the great masters of Indian Buddhism. The main disciple of Nāgārjuna, he lived in the early a.d. centuries and wrote numerous important works of Mādhyamika philosophy.
This great Indian philosopher lived in the fourth century and was the founder of the Vijñānavāda, or “Consciousness-Only,” school of Mahāyāna Buddhism.
Universe whence comes the Brahmā Śikhin.
Titan .
The thirty-two signs and the eighty marks of a superior being.
A bodhisattva emblematic of the great compassion; of great importance in Tibet as special protector of the religious life of the country and in China, in female form, as Kwanyin, protectress of women, children, and animals.
This vast Mahāyāna sūtra (also called the Buddhāvataṃsaka) deals with the miraculous side of the Mahāyāna. It is important in relation to the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa, since the latter’s fifth chapter, “The Inconceivable Liberation,” is a highly abbreviated version of the essential teaching of the former.
The three bad migrations are those of (1) denizens of hells, (2) inhabitants of the “limbo” of the pretaloka, where one wanders as an insatiably hungry and thirsty wretch, and (3) animals, who are trapped in the pattern of mutual devouring (Tib. gcig la gcig za).
These basic precepts are five in number for the laity: (1) not killing, (2) not stealing, (3) chastity, (4) not lying, and (5) avoiding intoxicants. For monks, there are three or five more; avoidance of such things as perfumes, makeup, ointments, garlands, high beds, and afternoon meals.
Lit. “King of Healers.” In the story of Śākyamuni’s former life in this sūtra, he is the tathāgata of the universe Mahāvyūha, during the eon called Vicaraṇa, who taught Prince Candracchattra about Dharma-worship. In later Buddhism, this buddha is believed to be the supernatural patron of healing and medicine.
(c. a.d. 400). A major Indian philosopher, a master of the Mādhyamika school of Buddhism, who founded a sub-school known as Svātantrika.
The term bhikṣu, often translated as “monk,” refers to the highest among the eight types of prātimokṣa vows that make one part of the Buddhist assembly. The Sanskrit term literally means “beggar” or “mendicant,” referring to the fact that Buddhist monks and nuns—like other ascetics of the time—subsisted on alms (bhikṣā) begged from the laity.
In the Tibetan tradition, which follows the Mūlasarvāstivāda Vinaya, a monk follows 253 rules as part of his moral discipline. A nun (bhikṣuṇī; dge slong ma) follows 364 rules. A novice monk (śrāmaṇera; dge tshul) or nun (śrāmaṇerikā; dge tshul ma) follows thirty-six rules of moral discipline (although in other vinaya traditions novices typically follow only ten).
Lit. “three-thousand-great-thousand-world realm.” Each of these is composed of one thousand realms, each of which contains one thousand realms, each of which contains one thousand realms = one thousand to the third power = one billion worlds.
This refers to the ultimate nature of reality, to the fact that, ultimately, nothing has ever been produced or born nor will it ever be because birth and production can occur only on the relative, or superficial, level. Hence “birthlessness” is a synonym of “voidness,” “reality,” “absolute,” “ultimate,” “infinity,” etc.
A living being who has produced the spirit of enlightenment in himself and whose constant dedication, lifetime after lifetime, is to attain the unexcelled, perfect enlightenment of Buddhahood.
Also translated “ultimate body.”
Creator-lord of a universe, there being as many as there are universes, whose number is incalculable. Hence, in Buddhist belief, a title of a deity who has attained supremacy in a particular universe, rather than a personal name. For example, the Brahmā of the Aśoka universe is personally called Śikhin, to distinguish him from other Brahmās. A Brahmā resides at the summit of the realm of pure matter (rūpadhātu), and is thus higher in status than a Śakra.
Lit. “awakened one.” Title of one who has attained the highest attainment possible for a living being. “The Buddha” often designates Śākyamuni because he is the buddha mainly in charge of the buddhafield of our Sahā universe.
Ancient name for the town in Bihar province, where the Buddha attained his highest enlightenment under the Bodhi-tree. Modern name, Bodhgaya.
Roughly, a synonym for “universe,” although Buddhist cosmology contains many universes of different types and dimensions. “Buddhafield” indicates, in regard to whatever type of world-sphere, that it is the field of influence of a particular Buddha. For a detailed discussion of these concepts, see Lamotte, Appendice, Note I.
(c. fourth century). A great Mādhyamika master, who was later regarded as the founder of the Prāsaṅgika sub-school.
See Avataṃsaka.
A mountain in this sūtra and many others; but, in systematized Buddhist cosmology, the name of the ring of mountains that surrounds the world.
(1) Chief of the Licchavi. (2) Son of the king Ratnacchattra, mentioned in the former-life story told by the Buddha to Śakra in Chapter 12.
(c. sixth century). The most important Mādhyamika philosopher after Nāgārjuna and Āryadeva, he refined the philosophical methods of the school to such a degree that later members of the tradition considered him one of the highest authorities on the subject of the profound nature of reality.
The collection of the Vast (vaipulya) Sūtras of the Mahāyāna, supposed to have been collected supernaturally by a great assembly of bodhisattvas led by Maitreya, Mañjuśrī, and Vajrapāṇi. There is a Mahāyāna sūtra called Bodhisattvapiṭaka, but the word more usually refers to the whole collection (piṭaka) of Mahāyāna sūtras, to distinguish them from the Three Collections (Tripiṭaka) of the Hinayāna.
The third Noble Truth, equivalent to nirvāṇa.
Chinese word for dhyāna, which was adopted as the name of the school of Mahāyāna practice founded by Bodhidharma, and later to become famous in the west as Zen.
Tibetan translator of this sūtra in the ninth century, also well known for his collaboration in compiling the Mahāvyutpatti (Skt.-Tib. dictionary).
’phags pa dri ma med par grags pas bstan pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo (Āryavimalakīrtinirdeśanāmamahāyānasūtra). Toh. 176, Degé Kangyur, vol. 60 (mdo sde, ma), folios 175b–239a.
’phags pa dri ma med par grags pas bstan pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo (Āryavimalakīrtinirdeśanāmamahāyānasūtra). [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, vol. 60, pp. 476–635.
Study Group on Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. 梵文維摩經 : ポタラ宮所蔵写本に基づく校訂. Vimalakīrtinirdeśa, A Sanskrit Edition Based upon the Manuscript Newly Found at the Potala Palace. Tokyo: Institute for Comprehensive Studies of Buddhism, Taishō Daigaku Shuppankai, 2006.
Lamotte, Étienne. L’Enseignement de Vimalakīrti (Vimalakīrtinirdeśa). Louvain: Université de Louvain, Institut Orientaliste, 1962. [Translated from Tib. and Xuanzang’s Chinese].
Luk, Charles (tr.). The Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra. Berkeley and London: Shambhala, 1972. [Translated from Kumārajīva’s Chinese].
McRae, John R. (tr.). The Vimalakīrti Sūtra. Berkeley: Numata Center for Buddhist Translation and Research, 2004. [Translated from Kumārajīva’s Chinese].
Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra. Sanskrit text: see Lamotte 1935. Tibetan text: ’phags pa dgongs pa nges par ’grel pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, Toh 106, Degé Kangyur vol. 49 (mdo sde, tsha), folios 1b–55b. English translation: see Buddhavacana Translation Group.
Saddharmapuṇḍarīka. Sanskrit text: see Vaidya 1960, Wogihara et al. 1934-1935. Tibetan text: dpal dam chos pad ma dkar po zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo, Toh 113, Degé Kangyur, vol. 51 (mdo sed, ja), folios 1b–180b. English translations: see Kern 1884; Roberts, 2018.
Guhyasamājatantra. Sanskrit text: see Bagchi 1965. Tibetan text: de bzhin gshegs pa thams cad kyi sku gsung thugs kyi gsang chen gsang ba ’dus pa zhes bya ba brtag pa’i rgyal po chen po, Toh 442, Degé Kangyur vol. 81 (rgyud ’bum, ca), folios 89b–148a.
yul ’khor skyong gis zhus pa (Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā). Toh 62, Degé Kangyur vol. 42 (dkon brtsegs, nga), folios 227.a–257.a. English translation in Vienna Buddhist Translation Studies Group (2021).
Candrakīrti. Prasannapadānāmamūlamadhyamakavṛtti. Sanskrit text: see La Vallée Poussin 1903-1912. Tibetan text: dbu ma rtsa ba’i ’grel pa tshig gsal ba, Toh 3860, Degé Tengyur vol. 102 (dbu ma, ’a), folios 1b–200a.
Nāgārjuna. Prajñanāmamūlamādhyamakakārikā. Sanskrit text and translation: see Inada 1970. Tibetan text: dbu ma rtsa ba’i tshig le’ur byas pa shes rab, Toh 3824, Degé Tengyur vol. 96 (dbu ma, tsa), folios 1b–19a.
Śāntideva. Śikṣāsamuccaya. Sanskrit text: see Vaidya, 1961. Tibetan text: bslab pa kun las btus pa, Toh 3940, Degé Tengyur vol. 111 (dbu ma, khi), folios 3a–194b. English translation: see Goodman 2016.
Bagchi, S. (ed.). Guhyasamājatantra. Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, No. 9. Darbhanga: Mithila Institute of Postgraduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1965.
Buddhavacana Translation Group. The Sūtra Unravelling the Intent (Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra, Toh 106). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2020.
Dayal, Har. The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature. 1932. Reprint, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1970.
Goodman, Charles. The Training Anthology of Śāntideva: A Translation of the Śikṣā-samuccaya. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.
Inada, K. Nāgārjuna. Buffalo, N.Y., 1970.
Kern, H. (ed.). Saddharma-Puṇḍarīka, or Lotus of the True Law. Sacred Books of the East, Vol. XXI. Oxford: Clarendon, 1884.
Lamotte, Étienne (tr.). Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra: L’Explication des mystères. [Tib. text and French translation]. Louvain: Université de Louvain; and Paris: Adrien Maisonneuve, 1935.
La Vallée Poussin, L. de (ed.). Mūlamadhyamakakārikās (Mādhyamikasūtras) de Nāgārjuna avec la Prasannapadā, commentaire de Candrakīrti . Bibliotheca Buddhica IV. St. Petersburg: Académie Impériale des sciences, 1903-1913.
Roberts, Peter (tr.). The White Lotus of the Good Dharma (Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra, Toh 113). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2018.
Sakaki (ed.). Mahāvyutpatti, Skt.-Tib. lexicon. Kyoto, 1916-1925.
Vaidya, P. L. (ed.) Saddharmapuṇḍarīkasūtra. Darbhanga: The Mithila Institute of Post-Graduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1960.
Vaidya, P. L. (ed.) Śikṣāsamuccaya of Śāntideva. Buddhist Sanskrit Texts, No. 11. Darbhanga: Mithila Institute of Postgraduate Studies and Research in Sanskrit Learning, 1961.
Vienna Buddhist Translation Studies Group, trans. The Questions of Rāṣṭrapāla (Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchāsūtra, Toh 62). 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, 2021.
Wogihara, Unrai and Tsuchida, Chikao. Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-sūtram: Romanized and Revised Text of the Bibliotheca Buddhica publication by consulting a Sanskrit Ms. & Tibetan and Chinese translations. Tōkyō: Seigo-Kenkyūkai, 1934–1935.
Ch. Chinese
K Kumārajīva’s Ch. translation
X Xuanzang’s Ch. translation
While the Buddha is teaching outside the city of Vaiśālī, a notable householder in the city—the great bodhisattva Vimalakīrti—apparently falls sick. The Buddha asks his disciple and bodhisattva disciples to call on Vimalakīrti, but each of them relates previous encounters that have rendered them reluctant to face his penetrating scrutiny of their attitudes and activities. Only Mañjuśrī has the courage to pay him a visit, and in the conversations that ensue between Vimalakīrti, Mañjuśrī, and several other interlocutors, Vimalakīrti sets out an uncompromising and profound view of the Buddha’s teaching and the bodhisattva path, illustrated by various miraculous displays. Its masterful narrative structure, dramatic and sometimes humorous dialogue, and highly evolved presentation of teachings have made this sūtra one of the favorites of Mahāyāna literature.
Translated by Robert A. F. Thurman and first published, under the title The Holy Teaching of Vimalakīrti: A Mahāyāna Scripture, by the Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park and London, in 1976.
This electronic edition for 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, with an abridged introduction and notes, and lightly edited under the supervision of Professor Thurman, is published by his kind permission as the copyright holder.
From the Preface to the original edition:
I sincerely thank my friend and benefactor, Dr. C. T. Shen, both for his sponsorship of the work and for his most helpful collaboration in the work of comparing the Tibetan and Chinese versions. We were sometimes joined in our round-table discussions by Drs. C. S. George, Tao-Tien Yi, F. S. K. Koo, and T. C. Tsao, whose helpful suggestions I gratefully acknowledge. My thanks also go to Ms. Yeshe Tsomo and Ms. Leah Zahler for their invaluable editorial assistance, and to Ms. Carole Schwager and the staff of The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Preface to this electronic edition:
I earnestly thank Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche for his great efforts in creating the 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha project, to present in English the many great works of the Buddha’s teachings freely to the world.
I also thank John Canti, of 84000, for his careful, creative, and very learned translating and editorial work on this electronic edition, without which this improved translation would not have materialized. I thank Mr. Patrick Alexander, of the Penn State University Press, who was the one who informed me that the copyright to my original translation done for the Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religions had reverted to me upon the termination of that Institute, to which I had previously conveyed my rights.
I intend to publish in print form a further update of that original version at a future time. Since there have been a number of free-floating electronic forms of this text on the internet for some years now, I am happy that the sūtra in its current revision is now available in the 84000 Reading Room, among the many other translations on that site.
Sarva maṅgalam!
Among Buddhist sūtras, The Teaching of Vimalakīrti stands out like a masterfully faceted diamond, so located between the heaps of gold, silver, and pearls of the Transcendent Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā) Sūtras and the array of sapphires, rubies, emeralds, and other gems of the Buddha Garland (Buddhāvataṃsaka), or Inconceivable Liberation (Acintyavimokṣa) Sūtras as to refract the radiances of all, beaming them forth to the beholder in a concentrated rainbow-beam of diamond light.
I elaborate upon this traditional metaphor here to convey a sense of how the Vimalakīrti is truly unique among Buddhist sūtras. Unmatched in its content—a quintessence of Mahāyāna doctrines, both of the profound and of the extensive categories—its aesthetic virtue, too, makes it an object of the connoisseur’s delight. This helps us understand how a hundred generations of Mahāyāna Buddhists in India, Central Asia, China, Japan, and South East Asia were disposed to study, revere, and enjoy this sūtra, finding enlightenment, inspiration, and the grace of pleasant humor.
The sūtra starts with the Buddha, in the presence of a large assembly of monks and bodhisattvas gathered before him in Āmrapālī’s grove outside Vaiśālī, receiving offerings from five hundred youths from the city, headed by the Licchavi bodhisattva Ratnākara, and in response revealing the entire universe as a vast buddhafield in a miraculous display, seen by all present. After pronouncing a notable praise to the Buddha in verse, Ratnākara asks him to explain what is meant by a bodhisattva purifying his buddhafield. The Buddha’s response to this request, together with further descriptions in the fifth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters, constitute one of the most complete and profound teachings on the subject of buddhafields to be found in the canonical literature.
The second chapter introduces the great Licchavi bodhisattva Vimalakīrti, master of the liberative art, who lives as a layman but transcends all categorization. Manifesting himself as if sick, he teaches all the notables and citizens of Vaiśālī, as they come to inquire about his health, on the insubstantial and unsatisfactory nature of the ordinary body, and compares it to the body of a tathāgata. In the third chapter, the Buddha asks his principal disciples, one by one, to visit Vimalakīrti on his sickbed. All of them in turn, however—first the great disciples, and then the bodhisattvas—feel reluctant to do so and decline on the grounds that previous encounters with him (recounted in detail) have left them astonished and somewhat discomfited by the profundity and transcendent nature of his views, often on topics or practices of which they had themselves hitherto been considered peerless masters.
Mañjuśrī, despite his own reluctance, is the only bodhisattva to assent to the Buddha’s request, and the fourth and subsequent chapters describe the conversations between him, Vimalakīrti, and a number of other interlocutors from the large assembly accompanying Mañjuśrī to Vimalakīrti’s house in the eager anticipation of hearing the Dharma expressed in the exchange between these two high-level bodhisattvas. Their discussion starts with what is meant by sickness, how a bodhisattva should comfort another bodhisattva who is sick, and how a sick bodhisattva should control his own mind, with most of the dialogue consisting of long passages spoken by Vimalakīrti in response to brief questions by Mañjuśrī. In the fifth chapter, Vimalakīrti performs the miraculous feat of bringing to his house in Vaiśālī millions of enormous thrones belonging to the entourage of a buddha from another, vastly distant universe, the Tathāgata Merupradīparāja, and explains how such apparently impossible transformations of time, space, and other phenomena become possible for a bodhisattva who lives in the inconceivable liberation. In the sixth chapter—after a discussion with Mañjuśrī on sentient beings and compassion—he leaves it to a goddess living in his house to demonstrate graphically to the hapless great disciple Śāriputra the dualistic notions he holds on attainment, vehicle, and even gender.
The seventh chapter opens with Vimalakīrti answering Mañjuśrī’s leading questions to explain that whatever ways a bodhisattva might follow, including those conventionally considered the most negative and harmful, will cause him to attain the qualities of the buddhas. This leads to a discussion on the family of the tathāgatas (tathāgatagotra) and a long speech in verse by Vimalakīrti extolling the ways in which the actions of bodhisattvas correspond to worldly activities, but transcend and surpass them by far. All of this is made possible by bodhisattvas’ freedom from dualistic thinking, and in the eighth chapter Vimalakīrti individually questions the bodhisattvas present about how each of them practices non-duality, receiving thirty-one different replies all of which Mañjuśrī finds laudable, but nevertheless still tinged with dualism. He requests Vimalakīrti to add his own point of view, to which Vimalakīrti’s responds with his famous silence.
Śāriputra again becomes an object of mind-opening critique when, at the opening of the ninth chapter, Vimalakīrti catches him wondering how everyone present is going to eat before noon. Vimalakīrti miraculously makes everyone perceive another distant buddhafield, where the Tathāgata Gandhottamakūṭa and his bodhisattvas are about to take their meal. Vimalakīrti emanates a bodhisattva, a messenger who goes to that buddhafield and invites all the bodhisattvas there back to the house in Vaiśālī, bringing a vessel of their miraculous, highly fragrant food for the assembly to enjoy. Vimalakīrti elicits from the visiting bodhisattvas an account of how Gandhottamakūṭa teaches the Dharma only through perfumes, and explains to them how the Buddha Śākyamuni has to use much grosser expedients to tame the wild and difficult beings of his own buddhafield, the Sahā world. The visitors are surprised and impressed by the Buddha’s compassion. They express the wish to pay him their respects and Vimalakīrti, in the tenth chapter, magically transports the entire assembly, including the visiting bodhisattvas, into the Buddha’s presence in Āmrapālī’s grove so that they may do so. A discussion between the Buddha, Vimalakīrti, and Ānanda of the great variety of methods used to express the Dharma in different buddhafields ensues, and the Buddha gives the visitors, before they depart for their own buddhafield, a long teaching on “the destructible and indestructible,” explaining how bodhisattvas should neither destroy what is compounded nor rest in what is uncompounded.
In the penultimate chapter, prompted by the Buddha, Vimalakīrti describes how he sees the Tathāgata. When Śāriputra asks where Vimalakīrti was before manifesting in this world, the Buddha tells him it was in Abhirati, the buddhafield of Akṣobhya. Everyone present wants a glimpse of that buddhafield, so at the Buddha’s request Vimalakīrti physically miniaturizes Abhirati, brings it to Vaiśālī to show and inspire them all, and then replaces it where it was. In a dialogue with Śakra in the final chapter the Buddha explains, as in many other sūtras, the extraordinary merit of studying and understanding this teaching, and recounts how in one of his own former lives he was taught the importance of Dharma-worship by the Tahāgata Bhaiṣajyarāja. He then entrusts his own enlightenment along with this sūtra to Maitreya, explaining the importance it will have in conveying the profound principles of the Dharma to beings in the future, as well as asking Ānanda to memorize it and giving it several different names.
In keeping with an alternative title of the sūtra (Inconceivable Liberation), Vimalakīrti lays great emphasis on the theme of inconceivability, that is, the ultimate incomprehensibility of all things, relative or absolute. He thus spells out the furthest implication of the application of voidness: that the finite, ego-centered mind cannot even conceive of the ultimate nature of things and, hence, as far as such minds are concerned, their ultimate reality is itself inconceivability. This accords with the degree of attainment of the bodhisattva, so frequently reached by Vimalakīrti’s audiences, called “the tolerance of the birthlessness of all things” (anutpattikadharmakṣānti). It is extremely significant that the term “tolerance” (kṣānti) is used here, rather than “conviction,” “understanding,” or “realization”; it emphasizes the fact that where the ultimate is concerned, the mind is unable to grasp anything in the pattern of dualistic knowledge, for there is no finite object in this case and only relative objects can be grasped with relative certainty in the mundane sense. Yet that is not to say that the student’s task is to simply put a label of “inconceivability” on all things and rest complacent with a sense of having reached a high state. Indeed, there are three stages of this tolerance: the verbal (ghoṣānugā), conforming (anulomikī), and true tolerance of the birthlessness of things. This indicates the difficulty of attainment of true tolerance, which occurs only at the eighth stage of bodhisattvahood. Inconceivability as a verbal concept is only a principle to be applied to the mind, just like the verbal concept of voidness, or even of infinity.
When we reflect intensively on any of these concepts, our minds open gradually in an ever widening sphere whose limits proceed from preconceived limitation to preconceived limitation. We discover to our surprise that there is always something further, and we logically discard the possibility of any limit being ultimate because any limit serves as the near boundary of the next larger space or dimension or time. If we adhere rigorously to this process, we soon find ourselves lost in the stars, as it were, with less and less security about ever having started from anywhere.
The Buddha gave this type of deepest teaching only to disciples able to deal with it. Nāgārjuna himself rarely spelled it out explicitly, restricting himself to providing the means whereby the disciplined intellect can strip away its own conceptualizations and habitual notions. But Vimalakīrti felt that such a message should be available to a much larger circle of people, for he expressed himself definitively on all occasions, as recorded in this sūtra.
The main technique Vimalakīrti uses that is of interest here—dichotomy—is found in his discourse, which relates to another alternative title of the sūtra, “Reconciliation of Dichotomies” (Yamakapuṭavyatyastanihāra). This is in keeping with the traditional method of the Middle Way masters, who had great skill in pitting polar opposites against each other to eliminate the fixedness of each and to free the mind of the student who applies himself to the polarities to open into a middle ground of reality beyond concepts. The mahāsiddhas of first-millennium India refined this art to a consummate degree in their songs and extraordinary deeds, and the Great Ch’an and Zen Masters wielded the same “double-edged sword” in their earthshaking statements and their illuminating activities. The singular quality of such teachers’ use of dichotomies lies in the fact that they relate them to the actual practice of the hearers, forcing them to integrate them in their minds and actions. Thus, they expect them to be liberated inconceivably, while being totally engaged in the work of helping other living beings. They recommend their full cultivation of great love and great compassion while maintaining total awareness of the total absence of any such thing as a living being, a suffering being, a being in bondage. In short, they show the way to the full nonduality of wisdom and great compassion, the latter being expressed as skill in liberative art—the integrated approach acknowledged by all the masters as the essence of the Mahāyāna.
Vimalakīrti’s reconciliation of dichotomies is so thoroughgoing that he shocks the disciples by his advocacy of the most horrible things as being part of the bodhisattva’s path. The bodhisattva may commit the five deadly sins, follow the false outsider teachings, entertain the sixty-two false views, consort with all the passions, and so on. Even the māras, or devils, that plague the various universes are said to be bodhisattvas dwelling in inconceivable liberation—playing the devil, as it were, in order to develop living beings.
It is an extraordinary fact that Vimalakīrti’s method in integrating the intellectual and behavioral dichotomies is one of many blatant hints of tantric ideas in the background of his teaching method. Futher research is needed to determine whether these connections prove the existence of tantrism at a time earlier than modern scholars generally believe or whether later tantrics found Vimalakīrti’s teachings a source of inspiration. However, the concept of the adept using paths generally considered evil for the attainment of enlightenment and the buddha-qualities is basic in tantric doctrine and practice; Śākyamuni’s revelation of the Sahā world as a jeweled buddhafield accords with tantric method; and Vimalakīrti’s discussion of how a bodhisattva in inconceivable liberation can transfer Mount Sumeru, or an entire universe, into a mustard seed is reminiscent of the yogic practices for transmuting dimensions of time and space found in the Guhyasamāja. The description of Vimalakīrti as versed in “esoteric practices”; the description of the “family of the tathāgatas”; Vimalakīrti’s verse identifying wisdom as the mother and liberative art as the father, exactly corresponding with the central tantric symbolism of male and female as vajra and bell, and the like; the yogic powers ascribed to the bodhisattva in inconceivable liberation, such as the ability to take fire in his stomach; the mention of the appearance of many tathāgatas—including Akṣobhya, Amitābha, Ratnavyūha, Sarvārthasiddha, and others—in the house of Vimalakīrti, teaching the esotericisms of the tathāgatas (tathāgata-guhyaka); and the culmination of the sūtra in the vision of the Buddha Akṣobhya: all these lend the sūtra a certain aura of tantra. Whatever the “historical” relationship may be, there is no doubt that the mahāsiddhas of later times would have felt at home in the house of Vimalakīrti.
Nothing concrete is known about the “original text” of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. It purports to record events that took place during Gautama Buddha’s time (sixth to fifth century B.C.), but no text was apparent in India until after Nāgārjuna (c. first century B.C. to first century A.D.) had revived the Mahāyāna traditions, discovering the Mahāyāna Sanskrit sūtras, the Vimalakīrti text among them. This text was subsequently translated into Chinese seven different times, starting in the second century with Yan Fodiao (A.D. 188), the version of Kumārajīva (A.D. 406) being the most popular, and that of Xuanzang (A.D. 650) the most technically accurate. It was translated into Tibetan at least twice, the definitive version completed in the early ninth century by the well-known Tibetan translator Chönyi Tsültrim (chos nyid tshul khrims), also known as Dharmatāśīla, who was one of the compilers of the Mahāvyutpatti. It was also translated into Sogdian, Khotanese, and Uighur. For many years it was thought that all Sanskrit texts of the work had been lost, except for some fragments quoted in Mahāyāna philosophical works. In 1998, however, a Sanskrit manuscript was found in the Potala Palace, Lhasa, of which edited versions were published in 2004 and 2006 by the Taishō University Study Group on Sanskrit Buddhist Literature.
The Japanese chose Kumārajīva’s version for their translation, and the majority of modern translations have been based on this text. In 1962, Dr. E. Lamotte set forth to rectify this situation by basing his fine French translation on the Tibetan and the Xuanzang versions. The history comes full circle finally, as the Rev. E. Bangert first translated the Tibetan into modern Thai and then into current Sanskrit.
My translation is based on the Tibetan version, as I am most at home in that language, although at times the simplicity of the Kumārajīva, the psychological precision of Xuanzang, or the elegance of Lamotte may have clarified the Tibetan, provided an alternative, or given me another reference point from which to find a middle way. Any significant departures from the basic Tibetan have been duly noted. The recently discovered Sanskrit text of the sūtra only came to light thirty years after the first edition of this translation was published, but was consulted for this new edition and has helped to make some of the revisions, including the updating of a number of Sanskrit proper names.
Reverence to all the buddhas, bodhisattvas, noble disciples, and pratyekabuddhas, in the past, the present, and the future.
Thus did I hear on a single occasion. The Lord Buddha was in residence in the garden of Āmrapālī, in the city of Vaiśālī, attended by a great gathering. Of bhikṣus there were eight thousand, all arhats. They were free from impurities and afflictions, and all had attained self-mastery. Their minds were entirely liberated by perfect knowledge. They were calm and dignified, like royal elephants. They had accomplished their work, done what they had to do, cast off their burdens, attained their goals, and totally destroyed the bonds of existence. Their true knowledge had made their minds entirely free. They all had attained the utmost perfection of every form of control over their minds.
Of bodhisattvas there were thirty-two thousand, great spiritual heroes who were universally acclaimed. They were dedicated through the penetrating activity of their great superknowledges and were sustained by the grace of the Buddha. Guardians of the city of Dharma, they upheld the true doctrine, and their great teachings resounded like the lion’s roar throughout the ten directions. Without having to be asked, they were the natural spiritual benefactors of all living beings. They maintained unbroken the succession of the Three Jewels, conquering devils and foes and overwhelming all critics.
Their mindfulness, intelligence, realization, meditation, retention, and eloquence all were perfected. They were free of all obscurations and emotional involvements, living in liberation without impediment. They were totally dedicated through the transcendences of generosity; subdued, unwavering, and sincere morality; tolerance; effort; meditation; wisdom; skill in liberative art; commitment; power; and gnosis. They had attained the intuitive tolerance of the ultimate incomprehensibility and unborn nature of all things. They turned the irreversible wheel of the Dharma. They were stamped with the insignia of signlessness.
They were expert in knowing the spiritual faculties of all living beings. They were brave with the confidence that overawes all assemblies. They had gathered the great stores of merit and of wisdom, and their bodies, beautiful without ornaments, were adorned with all the auspicious signs and marks. They were exalted in fame and glory, like the lofty summit of Mount Sumeru. Their high resolve as hard as diamond, unbreakable in their faith in the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha, they showered forth the rain of ambrosia that is released by the light rays of the jewel of the Dharma, which shines everywhere.
Their voices were perfect in diction and resonance, and versatile in speaking all languages. They had penetrated the profound principle of relativity and had destroyed the persistence of the instinctual mental habits underlying all convictions concerning finitude and infinitude. They spoke fearlessly, like lions, sounding the thunder of the magnificent teaching. Unequaled, they surpassed all measure. They were the best captains for the voyage of discovery of the treasures of the Dharma, the stores of merit and wisdom.
They were expert in the way of the Dharma, which is straight, peaceful, subtle, gentle, hard to see, and difficult to realize. They were endowed with the wisdom that is able to understand the thoughts of living beings, as well as their comings and goings. They had been consecrated with the anointment of the peerless gnosis of the Buddha. With their high resolve, they approached the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the eighteen special qualities of the Buddha.
They had crossed the terrifying abyss of the bad migrations, and yet they assumed reincarnation voluntarily in all migrations for the sake of disciplining living beings. Great Kings of medicine, understanding all the sicknesses of passions, they could apply the medicine of the Dharma appropriately.
They were inexhaustible mines of limitless virtues, and they glorified innumerable buddhafields with the splendor of these virtues. They conferred great benefit when seen, heard, or even approached. Were one to extol them for innumerable hundreds of thousands of myriads of eons, one still could not exhaust their mighty flood of virtues.
These bodhisattvas were named: Samadarśin, Samaviṣamadarśin, Samādhivikurvaṇarāja, Dharmeśvara, Dharmaketu, Prabhāketu, Prabhāvyūha, Ratnavyūha, Mahāvyūha, Pratibhānakūṭa, Ratnakūṭa, Ratnapāṇi, Ratnamudrāhasta, Nityotkṣiptahasta, Nityotpalakṛtahasta, Nityotkaṇṭhita, Nityaprahasitapramuditendriya, Prāmodyarāja, Devarāja, Praṇidhiprayātaprāpta, Pratisaṃvitpraṇādaprāpta, Gaganagañja, Ratnolkādhārin, Ratnavīra, Ratnananda, Ratnaśrī, Indrajāla, Jālinīprabha, Anārambaṇadhyāyin, Prajñākūta, Ratnajaha, Mārapramardin, Vidyuddeva, Vikurvaṇarāja, Lakṣaṇakūṭasamatikrānta, Siṃhaghoṣābhigarjitaśvara, Śailaśikharasaṃghaṭṭanarāja, Gandhahastin, Gajagandhahastin, Satatodyukta, Anikṣiptadhura, Sumati, Sujāta, Padmaśrīgarbha, Padmavyūha, Avalokiteśvara, Mahāsthāmaprāpta, Brahmajāla, Ratnayaṣṭin, Mārajit, Kṣetralaṃkṛta, Maṇiratnacchattra, Suvarnacūḍa, Maṇicūḍa, Maitreya, Mañjuśrīkumārabhūta, and so forth, with the remainder of the thirty-two thousand.
There were also gathered there ten thousand Brahmās, at their head Brahmā Śikhin, who had come from the Aśoka universe with its four sectors to see, venerate, and serve the Buddha and to hear the Dharma from his own mouth. There were twelve thousand Śakras from various four-sector universes. And there were other powerful gods: Brahmās, Śakras, Lokapālas, devas, nāgas, yakṣas, gandharvas, asuras, garuḍas, kinnaras, and mahoragas. Finally, there was the fourfold community, consisting of bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, laymen, and laywomen.
The Lord Buddha, thus surrounded and venerated by these multitudes of many hundreds of thousands of living beings, sat upon a majestic lion-throne and began to teach the Dharma. Dominating all the multitudes, just as Sumeru, the king of mountains, looms high over the oceans, the Lord Buddha shone, radiated, and glittered as he sat upon his magnificent lion-throne.
Thereupon, the Licchavi bodhisattva Ratnākara, with five hundred Licchavi youths, each holding a precious parasol made of seven different kinds of jewels, came forth from the city of Vaiśālī and presented himself at the grove of Āmrapālī. Each approached the Buddha, bowed at his feet, circumambulated him clockwise seven times, laid down his precious parasol in offering, and withdrew to one side.
As soon as all these precious parasols had been laid down, suddenly, by the miraculous power of the Lord, they were transformed into a single precious canopy so great that it formed a covering for this entire billion-world galaxy. The surface of the entire billion-world galaxy was reflected in the interior of the great precious canopy, where the total content of this galaxy could be seen: limitless mansions of suns, moons, and stellar bodies; the realms of the devas, nāgas, yakṣas, gandharvas, asuras, garuḍas, kinnaras, and mahoragas, as well as the realms of the four Mahārājas; the king of mountains, Mount Sumeru; Mount Himavat, Mount Mucilinda, Mount Mahāmucilinda, Mount Gandhamādana, Mount Ratnaparvata, Mount Kālaparvata, Mount Cakravāḍa, and Mount Mahācakravāḍa; all the great oceans, rivers, bays, torrents, streams, brooks, and springs; and finally, all the villages, suburbs, cities, capitals, provinces, and wildernesses. All this could be clearly seen by everyone. And the voices of all the buddhas of the ten directions could be heard proclaiming their teachings of the Dharma in all the worlds, the sounds reverberating in the space beneath the great precious canopy.
At this vision of the magnificent miracle effected by the supernatural power of the Lord Buddha, the entire host was ecstatic, enraptured, astonished, delighted, satisfied, and filled with awe and pleasure. They all bowed down to the Tathāgata, withdrew to one side with palms pressed together, and gazed upon him with fixed attention. The young Licchavi Ratnākara knelt with his right knee on the ground, raised his hands, palms pressed together in salute of the Buddha, and praised him with the following hymn:
Then, the young Licchavi Ratnākara, having celebrated the Buddha with these verses, further addressed him, “Lord, these five hundred young Licchavis are truly on their way to unexcelled, perfect enlightenment, and they have asked what is the bodhisattvas’ purification of the buddhafield. Please, Lord, explain to them the bodhisattvas’ purification of the buddhafield!”
Upon this request, the Buddha gave his approval to the young Licchavi Ratnākara. “Good, good, young man! Your question to the Tathāgata about the purification of the buddhafield is indeed good. Therefore, young man, listen well and remember! I will explain to you the purification of the buddhafield of the bodhisattvas.”
“Very good, Lord,” replied Ratnākara and the five hundred young Licchavis, and they set themselves to listen.
The Buddha said, “Noble son, a buddhafield of bodhisattvas is a field of living beings. Why so? A bodhisattva embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that he causes the development of living beings. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that living beings become disciplined. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that, through entrance into a buddhafield, living beings are introduced to the buddha-gnosis. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that, through entrance into that buddhafield, living beings increase their noble spiritual faculties. Why so? Noble son, a buddhafield of bodhisattvas springs from the aims of living beings.
“For example, Ratnākara, should one wish to build in empty space, one might go ahead in spite of the fact that it is not possible to build or to adorn anything in empty space. In just the same way, should a bodhisattva, who knows full well that all things are like empty space, wish to build a buddhafield in order to develop living beings, he might go ahead, in spite of the fact that it is not possible to build or to adorn a buddhafield in empty space.
“Yet, Ratnākara, a bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of positive thought. When he attains enlightenment, living beings free of hypocrisy and deceit will be born in his buddhafield.
“Noble son, a bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of high resolve. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who have harvested the two stores and have planted the roots of virtue will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of virtuous application. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who live by all virtuous principles will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the magnificence of the conception of the spirit of enlightenment. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are actually participating in the Mahāyāna will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of generosity. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who give away all their possessions will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of morality. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who follow the path of the ten virtues with positive thoughts will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of tolerance. When he attains enlightenment, living beings with the transcendences of tolerance, discipline, and the superior trance—hence beautiful with the thirty-two auspicious signs—will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of effort. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who devote their efforts to virtue will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of meditation. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are evenly balanced through mindfulness and awareness will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of wisdom. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are destined for the ultimate will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the four immeasurables. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who live by love, compassion, joy, and impartiality will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the four means of unification. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are held together by all the liberations will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is skill in liberative art. When he attains enlightenment, living beings skilled in all liberative arts and activities will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment. Living beings who devote their efforts to the four foci of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of magical power, the five spiritual faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors of enlightenment, and the eight branches of the holy path will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is his mind of total dedication. When he attains enlightenment, the ornaments of all virtues will appear in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the doctrine that eradicates the eight adversities. When he attains enlightenment, the three bad migrations will cease, and there will be no such thing as the eight adversities in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of his personal observance of the basic precepts and his restraint in blaming others for their transgressions. When he attains enlightenment, even the word ‘crime’ will never be mentioned in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the purity of the path of the ten virtues. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are secure in long life, great in wealth, chaste in conduct, enhanced by true speech, soft-spoken, free of divisive intrigues and adroit in reconciling factions, enlightening in their conversations, free of envy, free of malice, and endowed with perfect views will be born in his buddhafield.
“Thus, noble son, just as is the bodhisattva’s production of the spirit of enlightenment, so is his positive thought. And just as is his positive thought, so is his virtuous application.
“His virtuous application is tantamount to his high resolve; his high resolve is tantamount to his determination; his determination is tantamount to his practice; his practice is tantamount to his total dedication; his total dedication is tantamount to his liberative art; his liberative art is tantamount to his development of living beings; and his development of living beings is tantamount to the purity of his buddhafield.
“The purity of his buddhafield reflects the purity of living beings; the purity of the living beings reflects the purity of his gnosis; the purity of his gnosis reflects the purity of his doctrine; the purity of his doctrine reflects the purity of his transcendental practice; and the purity of his transcendental practice reflects the purity of his own mind.”
Thereupon, magically influenced by the Buddha, the venerable Śāriputra had this thought: “If the buddhafield is pure only to the extent that the mind of the bodhisattva is pure, then, when Śākyamuni Buddha was engaged in the career of the bodhisattva, his mind must have been impure. Otherwise, how could this buddhafield appear to be so impure?”
The Buddha, aware of venerable Śāriputra’s thoughts, said to him, “What do you think, Śāriputra? Is it because the sun and moon are impure that those blind from birth do not see them?”
Śāriputra replied, “No, Lord. It is not so. The fault lies with those blind from birth, and not with the sun and moon.”
The Buddha declared, “In the same way, Śāriputra, the fact that some living beings do not behold the splendid display of virtues of the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is due to their own ignorance. It is not the fault of the Tathāgata. Śāriputra, the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is pure, but you do not see it.”
Then, the Brahmā Śikhin said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Reverend Śāriputra, do not say that the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is impure. Reverend Śāriputra, the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is pure. I see the splendid expanse of the buddhafield of the Lord Śākyamuni as equal to the splendor of, for example, the abodes of the highest deities.”
Then the venerable Śāriputra said to the Brahmā Śikhin, “As for me, O Brahmā, I see this great earth, with its highs and lows, its thorns, its precipices, its peaks, and its abysses, as if it were entirely filled with ordure.”
Brahmā Śikhin replied, “The fact that you see such a buddhafield as this as if it were so impure, reverend Śāriputra, is a sure sign that there are highs and lows in your mind and that your positive thought in regard to the buddha-gnosis is not pure either. Reverend Śāriputra, those whose minds are impartial toward all living beings and whose positive thoughts toward the buddha-gnosis are pure see this buddhafield as perfectly pure.”
Thereupon the Lord touched the ground of this billion-world galactic universe with his big toe, and suddenly it was transformed into a huge mass of precious jewels, a magnificent array of many hundreds of thousands of clusters of precious gems, until it resembled the universe of the Tathāgata Ratnavyūha, called Anantaguṇaratnavyūha. Everyone in the entire assembly was filled with wonder, each perceiving himself seated on a throne of jeweled lotuses.
Then, the Buddha said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, do you see this splendor of the virtues of the buddhafield?”
Śāriputra replied, “I see it, Lord! Here before me is a display of splendor such as I never before heard of or beheld!”
The Buddha said, “Śāriputra, this buddhafield is always thus pure, but the Tathāgata makes it appear to be spoiled by many faults, in order to bring about the maturity of inferior living beings. For example, Śāriputra, the gods of the Trayastriṃśa heaven all take their food from a single precious vessel, yet the nectar that nourishes each one differs according to the differences of the merits each has accumulated. Just so, Śāriputra, living beings born in the same buddhafield see the splendor of the virtues of the buddhafields of the buddhas according to their own degrees of purity.”
When this splendor of the beauty of the virtues of the buddhafield shone forth, eighty-four thousand beings conceived the spirit of unexcelled perfect enlightenment, and the five hundred Licchavi youths who had accompanied the young Licchavi Ratnākara all attained the conformative tolerance of ultimate birthlessness.
Then, the Lord withdrew his miraculous power and at once the buddhafield was restored to its usual appearance. Then, both men and gods who subscribed to the Disciple Vehicle thought, “Alas! All constructed things are impermanent.”
Thereby, thirty-two thousand living beings purified their immaculate, undistorted Dharma-eye in regard to all things. The eight thousand bhikṣus were liberated from their mental defilements, attaining the state of nongrasping. And the eighty-four thousand living beings who were devoted to the grandeur of the buddhafield, having understood that all things are by nature but magical creations, all conceived in their own minds the spirit of unexcelled, totally perfect enlightenment.
At that time, there lived in the great city of Vaiśālī a certain Licchavi, Vimalakīrti by name. Having served the ancient buddhas, he had generated the roots of virtue by honoring them and making offerings to them. He had attained tolerance as well as eloquence. He played with the great superknowledges. He had attained the power of retention and the fearlessnesses. He had conquered all demons and opponents. He had penetrated the profound way of the Dharma. He was liberated through the transcendence of wisdom. Having integrated his realization with skill in liberative art, he was expert in knowing the thoughts and actions of living beings. Knowing the strength or weakness of their faculties, and being gifted with unrivaled eloquence, he taught the Dharma appropriately to each. Having applied himself energetically to the Mahāyāna, he understood it and accomplished his tasks with great finesse. He lived with the deportment of a buddha, and his superior intelligence was as wide as an ocean. He was praised, honored, and commended by all the buddhas and was respected by Śakra, Brahmā, and all the Lokapālas. In order to develop living beings with his skill in liberative art, he lived in the great city of Vaiśālī.
His wealth was inexhaustible for the purpose of sustaining the poor and the helpless. He observed a pure morality in order to protect the immoral. He maintained tolerance and self-control in order to reconcile beings who were angry, cruel, violent, and brutal. He blazed with energy in order to inspire people who were lazy. He maintained concentration, mindfulness, and meditation in order to sustain the mentally troubled. He attained decisive wisdom in order to sustain the foolish.
He wore the white clothes of the layman, yet lived impeccably like a religious devotee. He lived at home, but remained aloof from the realm of desire, the realm of pure matter, and the immaterial realm. He had a son, a wife, and female attendants, yet always maintained continence. He appeared to be surrounded by servants, yet lived in solitude. He appeared to be adorned with ornaments, yet always was endowed with the auspicious signs and marks. He seemed to eat and drink, yet always took nourishment from the taste of meditation. He made his appearance at the fields of sports and in the casinos, but his aim was always to mature those people who were attached to games and gambling. He visited the fashionable outsider teachers, yet always kept unswerving loyalty to the Buddha. He understood the mundane and transcendental sciences and esoteric practices, yet always took pleasure in the delights of the Dharma. He mixed in all crowds, yet was respected as foremost of all.
In order to be in harmony with people, he associated with elders, with those of middle age, and with the young, yet always spoke in harmony with the Dharma. He engaged in all sorts of businesses, yet had no interest in profit or possessions. To educate living beings, he would appear at crossroads and on street corners, and to protect them he participated in government. To turn people away from the Individual Vehicle and to engage them in the Mahāyāna, he appeared among listeners and teachers of the Dharma. To develop children, he visited all the schools. To demonstrate the evils of desire, he even entered the brothels. To establish drunkards in correct mindfulness, he entered all the drinking-houses.
He was honored as the merchant among merchants because he demonstrated the priority of the Dharma. He was honored as the landlord among landlords because he renounced the aggressiveness of ownership. He was honored as the warrior among warriors because he cultivated endurance, determination, and fortitude. He was honored as the brahmin among brahmins because he suppressed pride, vanity, and arrogance. He was honored as the official among officials because he regulated the functions of government according to the Dharma. He was honored as the prince of princes because he reversed their attachment to royal pleasures and sovereign power. He was honored as a chamberlain in the royal harem because he brought the young ladies to spiritual maturity.
He was compatible with ordinary people because he appreciated the excellence of ordinary merits. He was honored as the Śakra among Śakras because he showed them the temporality of their lordship. He was honored as the Brahmā among Brahmās because he showed them the special excellence of gnosis. He was honored as the Lokapāla among Lokapālas because he fostered the development of all living beings.
Thus lived the Licchavi Vimalakīrti in the great city of Vaiśālī, endowed with an infinite knowledge of skill in liberative arts.
At that time, out of this very skill in liberative art, Vimalakīrti manifested himself as if sick. To inquire after his health, the king, the officials, the lords, the youths, the brahmins, the householders, the businessmen, the townfolk, the countryfolk, and thousands of other living beings came forth from the great city of Vaiśālī and called on the invalid. When they arrived, Vimalakīrti taught them the Dharma, beginning his discourse from the actuality of the four main elements:
“Friends, this body is so impermanent, fragile, unworthy of confidence, and feeble. It is so insubstantial, perishable, short-lived, painful, filled with diseases, and subject to changes. Thus, my friends, as this body is only a vessel of many sicknesses, wise men do not rely on it. This body is like a ball of foam, unable to bear any pressure. It is like a water bubble, not remaining very long. It is like a mirage, born from the appetites of the passions. It is like the trunk of the plantain tree, having no core. Alas! This body is like a machine, a nexus of bones and tendons. It is like a magical illusion, consisting of falsifications. It is like a dream, being an unreal vision. It is like a reflection, being the image of former actions. It is like an echo, being dependent on conditioning. It is like a cloud, being characterized by turbulence and dissolution. It is like a flash of lightning, being unstable, and decaying every moment. The body is ownerless, being the product of a variety of conditions.
“This body is inert, like the earth; selfless, like water; lifeless, like fire; impersonal, like the wind; and nonsubstantial, like space. This body is unreal, being a collocation of the four main elements. It is void, not existing as self or as self-possessed. It is inanimate, being like grass, trees, walls, clods of earth, and illusions. It is insensate, being driven like a windmill. It is filthy, being an agglomeration of pus and excrement. It is false, being fated to be broken and destroyed, in spite of being anointed and massaged. It is afflicted by the four hundred and four diseases. It is like an ancient well, constantly overwhelmed by old age. Its duration is never certain—certain only is its end in death. This body is a combination of aggregates, elements, and sense-media, which are comparable to murderers, poisonous snakes, and an empty town, respectively. Therefore, you should be repelled by such a body. You should despair of it and should arouse your admiration for the body of the Tathāgata.
“Friends, the body of a tathāgata is the body of Dharma, born of gnosis. The body of a tathāgata is born of the stores of merit and wisdom. It is born of morality, of concentration, of wisdom, of the liberations, and of the knowledge and vision of liberation. It is born of love, compassion, joy, and impartiality. It is born of charity, discipline, and self-control. It is born of the path of the ten virtues. It is born of patience and gentleness. It is born of the roots of virtue planted by solid efforts. It is born of the concentrations, the liberations, the meditations, and the absorptions. It is born of learning, wisdom, and liberative art. It is born of the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment. It is born of mental quiescence and transcendental analysis. It is born of the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the eighteen special qualities. It is born of all the transcendences. It is born from sciences and superknowledges. It is born of the abandonment of all evil qualities, and of the gathering of all good qualities. It is born of truth. It is born of reality. It is born of conscious awareness.
“Friends, the body of a tathāgata is born of innumerable good works. Toward such a body you should turn your aspirations, and, in order to eliminate the sicknesses of the passions of all living beings, you should conceive the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.”
While the Licchavi Vimalakīrti thus taught the Dharma to those who had come to inquire about his sickness, many hundreds of thousands of living beings conceived the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.
Then, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti thought to himself, “I am sick, lying on my bed in pain, yet the Tathāgata, the arhat, the perfectly accomplished Buddha, does not consider me or take pity upon me, and sends no one to inquire after my illness.”
The Lord knew this thought in the mind of Vimalakīrti and said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, go to inquire after the illness of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti.”
Thus addressed, the venerable Śāriputra answered the Buddha, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to ask the Licchavi Vimalakīrti about his illness. Why? I remember one day, when I was sitting at the foot of a tree in the forest, absorbed in contemplation, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came to the foot of that tree and said to me, ‘Reverend Śāriputra, this is not the way to absorb yourself in contemplation. You should absorb yourself in contemplation so that neither body nor mind appear anywhere in the three realms. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you can manifest all ordinary behavior without forsaking cessation. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you can manifest the nature of an ordinary person without abandoning your cultivated spiritual nature. You should absorb yourself in contemplation so that the mind neither settles within nor moves without toward external forms. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment are manifest without deviation toward any convictions. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you are released in liberation without abandoning the passions that are the province of the world.
“ ‘Reverend Śāriputra, those who absorb themselves in contemplation in such a way are declared by the Lord to be truly absorbed in contemplation.’
“Lord, when I heard this teaching, I was unable to reply and remained silent. Therefore, I am reluctant to go to ask that good man about his sickness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahāmaudgalyāyana, “Maudgalyāyana, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Maudgalyāyana replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember one day when I was teaching the Dharma to the householders in a square in the great city of Vaiśālī, and the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came along and said to me, ‘Reverend Maudgalyāyana, that is not the way to teach the Dharma to the householders in their white clothes. The Dharma must be taught according to reality.
“ ‘Reverend Maudgalyāyana, the Dharma is without a living being, because it is free of the dust of living beings. It is selfless, because it is free of the dust of desire. It is lifeless, because it is free of birth and death. It is without a person, because it dispenses with past origins and future destinies.
“ ‘The Dharma is peace and pacification, because it is free of desire. It does not become an object, because it is free of words and letters; it is inexpressible, and it transcends all movement of mind.
“ ‘The Dharma is omnipresent, because it is like infinite space. It is without color, mark, or shape, because it is free of all process. It is without the concept of “mine,” because it is free of the habitual notion of possession. It is without ideation, because it is free of mind, thought, or consciousness. It is incomparable, because it has no antithesis. It is without presumption of conditionality, because it does not conform to causes.
“ ‘It permeates evenly all things, because all are included in the ultimate realm. It conforms to reality by means of the process of nonconformity. It abides at the reality-limit, for it is utterly without fluctuation. It is immovable, because it is independent of the six objects of sense. It is without coming and going, for it never stands still. It is comprised by voidness, it is remarkable through signlessness, and because of wishlessness it is free of presumption and repudiation. It is without establishment and rejection, without birth or destruction. It is without any fundamental consciousness, transcending the range of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and thought. It is without highness and lowness. It abides without movement or activity.
“ ‘Reverend Mahāmaudgalyāyana, how could there be a teaching in regard to such a Dharma? Reverend Mahāmaudgalyāyana, even the expression “to teach the Dharma” is presumptuous, and those who listen to it listen to presumption. Reverend Maudgalyāyana, where there are no presumptuous words, there is no teacher of the Dharma, no one to listen, and no one to understand. It is as if an illusory person were to teach the Dharma to illusory people.
“ ‘Therefore, you should teach the Dharma by keeping your mind on this. You should be adept in regard to the spiritual faculties of living beings. By means of the correct vision of the wisdom-eye, manifesting the great compassion, acknowledging the benevolent activity of the Buddha, purifying your intentions, and understanding the definitive expressions of the Dharma, you should teach the Dharma in order that the continuity of the Three Jewels may never be interrupted.’
“Lord, when Vimalakīrti had discoursed thus, eight hundred householders in the crowd conceived the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment, and I myself was speechless. Therefore, Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahākāśyapa, “Mahākāśyapa, you go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
“Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember one day, when I was in the street of the poor begging for my food, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came along and said to me, ‘Reverend Mahākāśyapa, to avoid the houses of the wealthy, and to favor the houses of the poor—this is partiality in benevolence. Reverend Mahākāśyapa, you should dwell on the fact of the equality of things, and you should seek alms with consideration for all living beings at all times. You should beg your food in awareness of the ultimate nonexistence of food. You should seek alms for the sake of eliminating the materialism of others. When you enter a town, you should keep in mind its actual voidness, yet you should proceed through it in order to develop men and women. You should enter homes as if entering the family of the Buddha. You should accept alms by not taking anything. You should see form like a man blind from birth, hear sounds as if they were echoes, smell scents as if they were like wind, experience tastes without any discrimination, touch tangible objects without there being in gnosis any contact, and know things with the consciousness of an illusory creature. That which is without a state of being self and a state of being other does not burn. And what does not burn will not be extinguished.
“ ‘Elder Mahākāśyapa, if, equipoised in the eight liberations without transcending the eight perverse paths, you can enter the sameness of reality by means of the sameness of perversity, and if you can make a gift to all living beings and an offering to all the noble ones and buddhas out of even a single measure of alms, then you yourself may eat. Thus, when you eat, after offering, you should be neither affected by afflictions nor free of afflictions, neither involved in concentration nor free of concentration, neither living in the world nor abiding in liberation. Furthermore, those who give such alms, reverend, have neither great merit nor small merit, neither gain nor loss. They should follow the way of the buddhas, not the way of the disciples. Only in this way, Elder Mahākāśyapa, is the practice of eating by alms meaningful.’
“Lord, when I heard this teaching, I was astonished and thought, ‘Reverence to all bodhisattvas! If a lay bodhisattva may be endowed with such eloquence, who is there who would not conceive the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment?’ From that time forth, I no longer recommend the vehicles of the disciples and of the solitary sages but recommend the Mahāyāna. And thus, Lord, I am reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Subhūti replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness. Why? My Lord, I remember one day, when I went to beg my food at the house of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti in the great city of Vaiśālī, he took my bowl and filled it with some excellent food and said to me, ‘Reverend Subhūti, take this food if you understand the sameness of all things through the sameness of material objects, and if you understand the sameness of the qualities of the Buddha through the sameness of all things. Take this food if, without abandoning desire, hatred, and folly, you can avoid association with them; if you can follow the path of the single way without ever disturbing the egoistic views; if, neither conquering ignorance and the craving for existence, nor producing knowledge and liberation, your liberation being the same as the equality of the uninterruptible sins, you are neither liberated nor bound; if you do not see the four noble truths, yet are not one who “has not seen the truth”; if you are also neither “one who has attained fruition,” nor “an ordinary person,” while not having eliminated the qualities of “an ordinary person”; if you are not a noble one, and not a non-noble one; and if, though you are in the presence of all things, you are free of any notion of “all things.”
“ ‘Take this food, reverend Subhūti, if, without seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, or serving the Saṅgha, you undertake the religious life under the six outsider masters—namely, Purāṇa Kāśyapa, Māskārin Gośāliputra, Saṃjāyin Vairaṭiputra, Kakuda Kātyāyana, Ajita Keśakambala, and Nirgrantha Jñātiputra, and follow the ways they prescribe.
“ ‘Take this food, reverend Subhūti, if, entertaining all false views, you find neither extremes nor middle; if, bound up in the eight adversities, you do not obtain favorable conditions; if, assimilating the passions, you do not attain purification; if the dispassion of all living beings is your dispassion, reverend; if those who make offerings to you are not thereby purified; if those who offer you food, reverend, still fall into the three bad migrations; if you associate with all māras; if you entertain all passions; if the nature of passions is the nature of a reverend; if you have hostile feelings toward all living beings; if you despise all the buddhas; if you criticize all the teachings of the Buddha; if you do not rely on the saṅgha; and finally, if you never enter ultimate liberation.’
“Lord, when I heard these words of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti, I wondered what I should say and what I should do, but I was totally in the dark. Leaving the bowl, I was about to leave the house when the Licchavi Vimalakīrti said to me, ‘Reverend Subhūti, do not fear these words, and pick up your bowl. What do you think, reverend Subhūti? If it were an incarnation created by the Tathāgata who spoke thus to you, would you be afraid?’
“I answered, ‘No indeed, noble sir!’ He then said, ‘Reverend Subhūti, the nature of all things is like illusion, like a magical incarnation. So you should not fear them. Why? All words also have that nature, and thus the wise are not attached to words, nor do they fear them. Why? All language does not ultimately exist, except as liberation. The nature of all things is liberation.’
“When Vimalakīrti had discoursed in this way, two hundred gods obtained the pure doctrinal vision in regard to all things, without obscurity or defilement, and five hundred gods obtained the conformative tolerance. As for me, I was speechless and unable to respond to him. Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Pūrṇamaitrāyaṇīputra, “Pūrṇa, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Pūrṇa replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness. Why? Lord, I remember one day, when I was teaching the Dharma to some young monks in the great forest, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and said to me, ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, first concentrate yourself, regard the minds of these young bhikṣus, and then teach them the Dharma! Do not put rotten food into a jeweled bowl! First understand the inclinations of these monks, and do not confuse priceless sapphires with glass beads!
“ ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, without examining the spiritual faculties of living beings, do not presume upon the one-sidedness of their faculties; do not wound those who are without wounds; do not impose a narrow path upon those who aspire to a great path; do not try to pour the great ocean into the hoof-print of an ox; do not try to put Mount Sumeru into a grain of mustard; do not confuse the brilliance of the sun with the light of a glowworm; and do not expose those who admire the roar of a lion to the howl of a jackal!
“ ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, all these monks were formerly engaged in the Mahāyāna but have forgotten the spirit of enlightenment. So do not instruct them in the Disciple Vehicle. The Disciple Vehicle is not ultimately valid, and you disciples are like men blind from birth, in regard to recognition of the degrees of the spiritual faculties of living beings.’
“At that moment, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti entered into such a concentration that those monks were caused to remember their various former lives, in which they had produced the roots of virtue by serving five hundred buddhas for the sake of perfect enlightenment. As soon as their own spirits of enlightenment had become clear to them, they bowed at the feet of that good man and pressed their palms together in reverence. He taught them the Dharma, and they all attained the stage of irreversibility from unexcelled, perfect enlightenment. It occurred to me then, ‘The disciples, who do not know the thoughts or the inclinations of others, are not able to teach the Dharma to anyone. Why? These disciples are not expert in discerning the superiority and inferiority of the spiritual faculties of living beings, and they are not always in a state of concentration like the Tathāgata, the arhat, the perfectly accomplished Buddha.’ Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his health.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahākātyāyana, “Kātyāyana, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Kātyāyana replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness. Why? Lord, I remember one day when, after the Lord had given some brief instruction to the monks, I was defining the expressions of that discourse by teaching the meaning of impermanence, suffering, selflessness, and peace, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and said to me, ‘Reverend Mahākātyāyana, do not teach an ultimate reality endowed with activity, production, and destruction! Reverend Mahākātyāyana, nothing was ever destroyed, is destroyed, or will ever be destroyed. Such is the meaning of “impermanence.” The meaning of the realization of birthlessness, through the realization of the voidness of the five aggregates, is the meaning of “suffering.” The fact of the nonduality of self and selflessness is the meaning of “selflessness.” That which has no intrinsic substance and no other sort of substance does not burn, and what does not burn is not extinguished; such lack of extinction is the meaning of “peace.” ’
“When he had discoursed thus, the minds of the monks were liberated from their defilements and entered a state of nongrasping. Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Aniruddha, “Aniruddha, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
“My Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember, Lord, one day when I was taking a walk, the great Brahmā named Śubhavyūha and the ten thousand other Brahmās who accompanied him illuminated the place with their radiance and, having bowed their heads at my feet, withdrew to one side and asked me, ‘Reverend Aniruddha, you have been proclaimed by the Buddha to be the foremost among those who possess the divine eye. To what distance does the divine vision of the venerable Aniruddha extend?’ I answered, ‘Friends, I see the entire billion-world galactic universe of the Lord Śākyamuni just as plainly as a man of ordinary vision sees a myrobalan nut on the palm of his hand.’ When I had said these words, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and, having bowed his head at my feet, said to me, ‘Reverend Aniruddha, is your divine eye compounded in nature? Or is it uncompounded in nature? If it is compounded in nature, it is the same as the superknowledges of the outsiders. If it is uncompounded in nature, then it is not constructed and, as such, is incapable of seeing. Then, how do you see, O elder?’
While the Buddha is teaching outside the city of Vaiśālī, a notable householder in the city—the great bodhisattva Vimalakīrti—apparently falls sick. The Buddha asks his disciple and bodhisattva disciples to call on Vimalakīrti, but each of them relates previous encounters that have rendered them reluctant to face his penetrating scrutiny of their attitudes and activities. Only Mañjuśrī has the courage to pay him a visit, and in the conversations that ensue between Vimalakīrti, Mañjuśrī, and several other interlocutors, Vimalakīrti sets out an uncompromising and profound view of the Buddha’s teaching and the bodhisattva path, illustrated by various miraculous displays. Its masterful narrative structure, dramatic and sometimes humorous dialogue, and highly evolved presentation of teachings have made this sūtra one of the favorites of Mahāyāna literature.
Translated by Robert A. F. Thurman and first published, under the title The Holy Teaching of Vimalakīrti: A Mahāyāna Scripture, by the Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park and London, in 1976.
This electronic edition for 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha, with an abridged introduction and notes, and lightly edited under the supervision of Professor Thurman, is published by his kind permission as the copyright holder.
From the Preface to the original edition:
I sincerely thank my friend and benefactor, Dr. C. T. Shen, both for his sponsorship of the work and for his most helpful collaboration in the work of comparing the Tibetan and Chinese versions. We were sometimes joined in our round-table discussions by Drs. C. S. George, Tao-Tien Yi, F. S. K. Koo, and T. C. Tsao, whose helpful suggestions I gratefully acknowledge. My thanks also go to Ms. Yeshe Tsomo and Ms. Leah Zahler for their invaluable editorial assistance, and to Ms. Carole Schwager and the staff of The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Preface to this electronic edition:
I earnestly thank Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche for his great efforts in creating the 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha project, to present in English the many great works of the Buddha’s teachings freely to the world.
I also thank John Canti, of 84000, for his careful, creative, and very learned translating and editorial work on this electronic edition, without which this improved translation would not have materialized. I thank Mr. Patrick Alexander, of the Penn State University Press, who was the one who informed me that the copyright to my original translation done for the Institute for Advanced Studies of World Religions had reverted to me upon the termination of that Institute, to which I had previously conveyed my rights.
I intend to publish in print form a further update of that original version at a future time. Since there have been a number of free-floating electronic forms of this text on the internet for some years now, I am happy that the sūtra in its current revision is now available in the 84000 Reading Room, among the many other translations on that site.
Sarva maṅgalam!
Among Buddhist sūtras, The Teaching of Vimalakīrti stands out like a masterfully faceted diamond, so located between the heaps of gold, silver, and pearls of the Transcendent Wisdom (Prajñāpāramitā) Sūtras and the array of sapphires, rubies, emeralds, and other gems of the Buddha Garland (Buddhāvataṃsaka), or Inconceivable Liberation (Acintyavimokṣa) Sūtras as to refract the radiances of all, beaming them forth to the beholder in a concentrated rainbow-beam of diamond light.
I elaborate upon this traditional metaphor here to convey a sense of how the Vimalakīrti is truly unique among Buddhist sūtras. Unmatched in its content—a quintessence of Mahāyāna doctrines, both of the profound and of the extensive categories—its aesthetic virtue, too, makes it an object of the connoisseur’s delight. This helps us understand how a hundred generations of Mahāyāna Buddhists in India, Central Asia, China, Japan, and South East Asia were disposed to study, revere, and enjoy this sūtra, finding enlightenment, inspiration, and the grace of pleasant humor.
The sūtra starts with the Buddha, in the presence of a large assembly of monks and bodhisattvas gathered before him in Āmrapālī’s grove outside Vaiśālī, receiving offerings from five hundred youths from the city, headed by the Licchavi bodhisattva Ratnākara, and in response revealing the entire universe as a vast buddhafield in a miraculous display, seen by all present. After pronouncing a notable praise to the Buddha in verse, Ratnākara asks him to explain what is meant by a bodhisattva purifying his buddhafield. The Buddha’s response to this request, together with further descriptions in the fifth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters, constitute one of the most complete and profound teachings on the subject of buddhafields to be found in the canonical literature.
The second chapter introduces the great Licchavi bodhisattva Vimalakīrti, master of the liberative art, who lives as a layman but transcends all categorization. Manifesting himself as if sick, he teaches all the notables and citizens of Vaiśālī, as they come to inquire about his health, on the insubstantial and unsatisfactory nature of the ordinary body, and compares it to the body of a tathāgata. In the third chapter, the Buddha asks his principal disciples, one by one, to visit Vimalakīrti on his sickbed. All of them in turn, however—first the great disciples, and then the bodhisattvas—feel reluctant to do so and decline on the grounds that previous encounters with him (recounted in detail) have left them astonished and somewhat discomfited by the profundity and transcendent nature of his views, often on topics or practices of which they had themselves hitherto been considered peerless masters.
Mañjuśrī, despite his own reluctance, is the only bodhisattva to assent to the Buddha’s request, and the fourth and subsequent chapters describe the conversations between him, Vimalakīrti, and a number of other interlocutors from the large assembly accompanying Mañjuśrī to Vimalakīrti’s house in the eager anticipation of hearing the Dharma expressed in the exchange between these two high-level bodhisattvas. Their discussion starts with what is meant by sickness, how a bodhisattva should comfort another bodhisattva who is sick, and how a sick bodhisattva should control his own mind, with most of the dialogue consisting of long passages spoken by Vimalakīrti in response to brief questions by Mañjuśrī. In the fifth chapter, Vimalakīrti performs the miraculous feat of bringing to his house in Vaiśālī millions of enormous thrones belonging to the entourage of a buddha from another, vastly distant universe, the Tathāgata Merupradīparāja, and explains how such apparently impossible transformations of time, space, and other phenomena become possible for a bodhisattva who lives in the inconceivable liberation. In the sixth chapter—after a discussion with Mañjuśrī on sentient beings and compassion—he leaves it to a goddess living in his house to demonstrate graphically to the hapless great disciple Śāriputra the dualistic notions he holds on attainment, vehicle, and even gender.
The seventh chapter opens with Vimalakīrti answering Mañjuśrī’s leading questions to explain that whatever ways a bodhisattva might follow, including those conventionally considered the most negative and harmful, will cause him to attain the qualities of the buddhas. This leads to a discussion on the family of the tathāgatas (tathāgatagotra) and a long speech in verse by Vimalakīrti extolling the ways in which the actions of bodhisattvas correspond to worldly activities, but transcend and surpass them by far. All of this is made possible by bodhisattvas’ freedom from dualistic thinking, and in the eighth chapter Vimalakīrti individually questions the bodhisattvas present about how each of them practices non-duality, receiving thirty-one different replies all of which Mañjuśrī finds laudable, but nevertheless still tinged with dualism. He requests Vimalakīrti to add his own point of view, to which Vimalakīrti’s responds with his famous silence.
Śāriputra again becomes an object of mind-opening critique when, at the opening of the ninth chapter, Vimalakīrti catches him wondering how everyone present is going to eat before noon. Vimalakīrti miraculously makes everyone perceive another distant buddhafield, where the Tathāgata Gandhottamakūṭa and his bodhisattvas are about to take their meal. Vimalakīrti emanates a bodhisattva, a messenger who goes to that buddhafield and invites all the bodhisattvas there back to the house in Vaiśālī, bringing a vessel of their miraculous, highly fragrant food for the assembly to enjoy. Vimalakīrti elicits from the visiting bodhisattvas an account of how Gandhottamakūṭa teaches the Dharma only through perfumes, and explains to them how the Buddha Śākyamuni has to use much grosser expedients to tame the wild and difficult beings of his own buddhafield, the Sahā world. The visitors are surprised and impressed by the Buddha’s compassion. They express the wish to pay him their respects and Vimalakīrti, in the tenth chapter, magically transports the entire assembly, including the visiting bodhisattvas, into the Buddha’s presence in Āmrapālī’s grove so that they may do so. A discussion between the Buddha, Vimalakīrti, and Ānanda of the great variety of methods used to express the Dharma in different buddhafields ensues, and the Buddha gives the visitors, before they depart for their own buddhafield, a long teaching on “the destructible and indestructible,” explaining how bodhisattvas should neither destroy what is compounded nor rest in what is uncompounded.
In the penultimate chapter, prompted by the Buddha, Vimalakīrti describes how he sees the Tathāgata. When Śāriputra asks where Vimalakīrti was before manifesting in this world, the Buddha tells him it was in Abhirati, the buddhafield of Akṣobhya. Everyone present wants a glimpse of that buddhafield, so at the Buddha’s request Vimalakīrti physically miniaturizes Abhirati, brings it to Vaiśālī to show and inspire them all, and then replaces it where it was. In a dialogue with Śakra in the final chapter the Buddha explains, as in many other sūtras, the extraordinary merit of studying and understanding this teaching, and recounts how in one of his own former lives he was taught the importance of Dharma-worship by the Tahāgata Bhaiṣajyarāja. He then entrusts his own enlightenment along with this sūtra to Maitreya, explaining the importance it will have in conveying the profound principles of the Dharma to beings in the future, as well as asking Ānanda to memorize it and giving it several different names.
In keeping with an alternative title of the sūtra (Inconceivable Liberation), Vimalakīrti lays great emphasis on the theme of inconceivability, that is, the ultimate incomprehensibility of all things, relative or absolute. He thus spells out the furthest implication of the application of voidness: that the finite, ego-centered mind cannot even conceive of the ultimate nature of things and, hence, as far as such minds are concerned, their ultimate reality is itself inconceivability. This accords with the degree of attainment of the bodhisattva, so frequently reached by Vimalakīrti’s audiences, called “the tolerance of the birthlessness of all things” (anutpattikadharmakṣānti). It is extremely significant that the term “tolerance” (kṣānti) is used here, rather than “conviction,” “understanding,” or “realization”; it emphasizes the fact that where the ultimate is concerned, the mind is unable to grasp anything in the pattern of dualistic knowledge, for there is no finite object in this case and only relative objects can be grasped with relative certainty in the mundane sense. Yet that is not to say that the student’s task is to simply put a label of “inconceivability” on all things and rest complacent with a sense of having reached a high state. Indeed, there are three stages of this tolerance: the verbal (ghoṣānugā), conforming (anulomikī), and true tolerance of the birthlessness of things. This indicates the difficulty of attainment of true tolerance, which occurs only at the eighth stage of bodhisattvahood. Inconceivability as a verbal concept is only a principle to be applied to the mind, just like the verbal concept of voidness, or even of infinity.
When we reflect intensively on any of these concepts, our minds open gradually in an ever widening sphere whose limits proceed from preconceived limitation to preconceived limitation. We discover to our surprise that there is always something further, and we logically discard the possibility of any limit being ultimate because any limit serves as the near boundary of the next larger space or dimension or time. If we adhere rigorously to this process, we soon find ourselves lost in the stars, as it were, with less and less security about ever having started from anywhere.
The Buddha gave this type of deepest teaching only to disciples able to deal with it. Nāgārjuna himself rarely spelled it out explicitly, restricting himself to providing the means whereby the disciplined intellect can strip away its own conceptualizations and habitual notions. But Vimalakīrti felt that such a message should be available to a much larger circle of people, for he expressed himself definitively on all occasions, as recorded in this sūtra.
The main technique Vimalakīrti uses that is of interest here—dichotomy—is found in his discourse, which relates to another alternative title of the sūtra, “Reconciliation of Dichotomies” (Yamakapuṭavyatyastanihāra). This is in keeping with the traditional method of the Middle Way masters, who had great skill in pitting polar opposites against each other to eliminate the fixedness of each and to free the mind of the student who applies himself to the polarities to open into a middle ground of reality beyond concepts. The mahāsiddhas of first-millennium India refined this art to a consummate degree in their songs and extraordinary deeds, and the Great Ch’an and Zen Masters wielded the same “double-edged sword” in their earthshaking statements and their illuminating activities. The singular quality of such teachers’ use of dichotomies lies in the fact that they relate them to the actual practice of the hearers, forcing them to integrate them in their minds and actions. Thus, they expect them to be liberated inconceivably, while being totally engaged in the work of helping other living beings. They recommend their full cultivation of great love and great compassion while maintaining total awareness of the total absence of any such thing as a living being, a suffering being, a being in bondage. In short, they show the way to the full nonduality of wisdom and great compassion, the latter being expressed as skill in liberative art—the integrated approach acknowledged by all the masters as the essence of the Mahāyāna.
Vimalakīrti’s reconciliation of dichotomies is so thoroughgoing that he shocks the disciples by his advocacy of the most horrible things as being part of the bodhisattva’s path. The bodhisattva may commit the five deadly sins, follow the false outsider teachings, entertain the sixty-two false views, consort with all the passions, and so on. Even the māras, or devils, that plague the various universes are said to be bodhisattvas dwelling in inconceivable liberation—playing the devil, as it were, in order to develop living beings.
It is an extraordinary fact that Vimalakīrti’s method in integrating the intellectual and behavioral dichotomies is one of many blatant hints of tantric ideas in the background of his teaching method. Futher research is needed to determine whether these connections prove the existence of tantrism at a time earlier than modern scholars generally believe or whether later tantrics found Vimalakīrti’s teachings a source of inspiration. However, the concept of the adept using paths generally considered evil for the attainment of enlightenment and the buddha-qualities is basic in tantric doctrine and practice; Śākyamuni’s revelation of the Sahā world as a jeweled buddhafield accords with tantric method; and Vimalakīrti’s discussion of how a bodhisattva in inconceivable liberation can transfer Mount Sumeru, or an entire universe, into a mustard seed is reminiscent of the yogic practices for transmuting dimensions of time and space found in the Guhyasamāja. The description of Vimalakīrti as versed in “esoteric practices”; the description of the “family of the tathāgatas”; Vimalakīrti’s verse identifying wisdom as the mother and liberative art as the father, exactly corresponding with the central tantric symbolism of male and female as vajra and bell, and the like; the yogic powers ascribed to the bodhisattva in inconceivable liberation, such as the ability to take fire in his stomach; the mention of the appearance of many tathāgatas—including Akṣobhya, Amitābha, Ratnavyūha, Sarvārthasiddha, and others—in the house of Vimalakīrti, teaching the esotericisms of the tathāgatas (tathāgata-guhyaka); and the culmination of the sūtra in the vision of the Buddha Akṣobhya: all these lend the sūtra a certain aura of tantra. Whatever the “historical” relationship may be, there is no doubt that the mahāsiddhas of later times would have felt at home in the house of Vimalakīrti.
Nothing concrete is known about the “original text” of the Vimalakīrtinirdeśa. It purports to record events that took place during Gautama Buddha’s time (sixth to fifth century B.C.), but no text was apparent in India until after Nāgārjuna (c. first century B.C. to first century A.D.) had revived the Mahāyāna traditions, discovering the Mahāyāna Sanskrit sūtras, the Vimalakīrti text among them. This text was subsequently translated into Chinese seven different times, starting in the second century with Yan Fodiao (A.D. 188), the version of Kumārajīva (A.D. 406) being the most popular, and that of Xuanzang (A.D. 650) the most technically accurate. It was translated into Tibetan at least twice, the definitive version completed in the early ninth century by the well-known Tibetan translator Chönyi Tsültrim (chos nyid tshul khrims), also known as Dharmatāśīla, who was one of the compilers of the Mahāvyutpatti. It was also translated into Sogdian, Khotanese, and Uighur. For many years it was thought that all Sanskrit texts of the work had been lost, except for some fragments quoted in Mahāyāna philosophical works. In 1998, however, a Sanskrit manuscript was found in the Potala Palace, Lhasa, of which edited versions were published in 2004 and 2006 by the Taishō University Study Group on Sanskrit Buddhist Literature.
The Japanese chose Kumārajīva’s version for their translation, and the majority of modern translations have been based on this text. In 1962, Dr. E. Lamotte set forth to rectify this situation by basing his fine French translation on the Tibetan and the Xuanzang versions. The history comes full circle finally, as the Rev. E. Bangert first translated the Tibetan into modern Thai and then into current Sanskrit.
My translation is based on the Tibetan version, as I am most at home in that language, although at times the simplicity of the Kumārajīva, the psychological precision of Xuanzang, or the elegance of Lamotte may have clarified the Tibetan, provided an alternative, or given me another reference point from which to find a middle way. Any significant departures from the basic Tibetan have been duly noted. The recently discovered Sanskrit text of the sūtra only came to light thirty years after the first edition of this translation was published, but was consulted for this new edition and has helped to make some of the revisions, including the updating of a number of Sanskrit proper names.
Reverence to all the buddhas, bodhisattvas, noble disciples, and pratyekabuddhas, in the past, the present, and the future.
Thus did I hear on a single occasion. The Lord Buddha was in residence in the garden of Āmrapālī, in the city of Vaiśālī, attended by a great gathering. Of bhikṣus there were eight thousand, all arhats. They were free from impurities and afflictions, and all had attained self-mastery. Their minds were entirely liberated by perfect knowledge. They were calm and dignified, like royal elephants. They had accomplished their work, done what they had to do, cast off their burdens, attained their goals, and totally destroyed the bonds of existence. Their true knowledge had made their minds entirely free. They all had attained the utmost perfection of every form of control over their minds.
Of bodhisattvas there were thirty-two thousand, great spiritual heroes who were universally acclaimed. They were dedicated through the penetrating activity of their great superknowledges and were sustained by the grace of the Buddha. Guardians of the city of Dharma, they upheld the true doctrine, and their great teachings resounded like the lion’s roar throughout the ten directions. Without having to be asked, they were the natural spiritual benefactors of all living beings. They maintained unbroken the succession of the Three Jewels, conquering devils and foes and overwhelming all critics.
Their mindfulness, intelligence, realization, meditation, retention, and eloquence all were perfected. They were free of all obscurations and emotional involvements, living in liberation without impediment. They were totally dedicated through the transcendences of generosity; subdued, unwavering, and sincere morality; tolerance; effort; meditation; wisdom; skill in liberative art; commitment; power; and gnosis. They had attained the intuitive tolerance of the ultimate incomprehensibility and unborn nature of all things. They turned the irreversible wheel of the Dharma. They were stamped with the insignia of signlessness.
They were expert in knowing the spiritual faculties of all living beings. They were brave with the confidence that overawes all assemblies. They had gathered the great stores of merit and of wisdom, and their bodies, beautiful without ornaments, were adorned with all the auspicious signs and marks. They were exalted in fame and glory, like the lofty summit of Mount Sumeru. Their high resolve as hard as diamond, unbreakable in their faith in the Buddha, Dharma, and Saṅgha, they showered forth the rain of ambrosia that is released by the light rays of the jewel of the Dharma, which shines everywhere.
Their voices were perfect in diction and resonance, and versatile in speaking all languages. They had penetrated the profound principle of relativity and had destroyed the persistence of the instinctual mental habits underlying all convictions concerning finitude and infinitude. They spoke fearlessly, like lions, sounding the thunder of the magnificent teaching. Unequaled, they surpassed all measure. They were the best captains for the voyage of discovery of the treasures of the Dharma, the stores of merit and wisdom.
They were expert in the way of the Dharma, which is straight, peaceful, subtle, gentle, hard to see, and difficult to realize. They were endowed with the wisdom that is able to understand the thoughts of living beings, as well as their comings and goings. They had been consecrated with the anointment of the peerless gnosis of the Buddha. With their high resolve, they approached the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the eighteen special qualities of the Buddha.
They had crossed the terrifying abyss of the bad migrations, and yet they assumed reincarnation voluntarily in all migrations for the sake of disciplining living beings. Great Kings of medicine, understanding all the sicknesses of passions, they could apply the medicine of the Dharma appropriately.
They were inexhaustible mines of limitless virtues, and they glorified innumerable buddhafields with the splendor of these virtues. They conferred great benefit when seen, heard, or even approached. Were one to extol them for innumerable hundreds of thousands of myriads of eons, one still could not exhaust their mighty flood of virtues.
These bodhisattvas were named: Samadarśin, Samaviṣamadarśin, Samādhivikurvaṇarāja, Dharmeśvara, Dharmaketu, Prabhāketu, Prabhāvyūha, Ratnavyūha, Mahāvyūha, Pratibhānakūṭa, Ratnakūṭa, Ratnapāṇi, Ratnamudrāhasta, Nityotkṣiptahasta, Nityotpalakṛtahasta, Nityotkaṇṭhita, Nityaprahasitapramuditendriya, Prāmodyarāja, Devarāja, Praṇidhiprayātaprāpta, Pratisaṃvitpraṇādaprāpta, Gaganagañja, Ratnolkādhārin, Ratnavīra, Ratnananda, Ratnaśrī, Indrajāla, Jālinīprabha, Anārambaṇadhyāyin, Prajñākūta, Ratnajaha, Mārapramardin, Vidyuddeva, Vikurvaṇarāja, Lakṣaṇakūṭasamatikrānta, Siṃhaghoṣābhigarjitaśvara, Śailaśikharasaṃghaṭṭanarāja, Gandhahastin, Gajagandhahastin, Satatodyukta, Anikṣiptadhura, Sumati, Sujāta, Padmaśrīgarbha, Padmavyūha, Avalokiteśvara, Mahāsthāmaprāpta, Brahmajāla, Ratnayaṣṭin, Mārajit, Kṣetralaṃkṛta, Maṇiratnacchattra, Suvarnacūḍa, Maṇicūḍa, Maitreya, Mañjuśrīkumārabhūta, and so forth, with the remainder of the thirty-two thousand.
There were also gathered there ten thousand Brahmās, at their head Brahmā Śikhin, who had come from the Aśoka universe with its four sectors to see, venerate, and serve the Buddha and to hear the Dharma from his own mouth. There were twelve thousand Śakras from various four-sector universes. And there were other powerful gods: Brahmās, Śakras, Lokapālas, devas, nāgas, yakṣas, gandharvas, asuras, garuḍas, kinnaras, and mahoragas. Finally, there was the fourfold community, consisting of bhikṣus, bhikṣuṇīs, laymen, and laywomen.
The Lord Buddha, thus surrounded and venerated by these multitudes of many hundreds of thousands of living beings, sat upon a majestic lion-throne and began to teach the Dharma. Dominating all the multitudes, just as Sumeru, the king of mountains, looms high over the oceans, the Lord Buddha shone, radiated, and glittered as he sat upon his magnificent lion-throne.
Thereupon, the Licchavi bodhisattva Ratnākara, with five hundred Licchavi youths, each holding a precious parasol made of seven different kinds of jewels, came forth from the city of Vaiśālī and presented himself at the grove of Āmrapālī. Each approached the Buddha, bowed at his feet, circumambulated him clockwise seven times, laid down his precious parasol in offering, and withdrew to one side.
As soon as all these precious parasols had been laid down, suddenly, by the miraculous power of the Lord, they were transformed into a single precious canopy so great that it formed a covering for this entire billion-world galaxy. The surface of the entire billion-world galaxy was reflected in the interior of the great precious canopy, where the total content of this galaxy could be seen: limitless mansions of suns, moons, and stellar bodies; the realms of the devas, nāgas, yakṣas, gandharvas, asuras, garuḍas, kinnaras, and mahoragas, as well as the realms of the four Mahārājas; the king of mountains, Mount Sumeru; Mount Himavat, Mount Mucilinda, Mount Mahāmucilinda, Mount Gandhamādana, Mount Ratnaparvata, Mount Kālaparvata, Mount Cakravāḍa, and Mount Mahācakravāḍa; all the great oceans, rivers, bays, torrents, streams, brooks, and springs; and finally, all the villages, suburbs, cities, capitals, provinces, and wildernesses. All this could be clearly seen by everyone. And the voices of all the buddhas of the ten directions could be heard proclaiming their teachings of the Dharma in all the worlds, the sounds reverberating in the space beneath the great precious canopy.
At this vision of the magnificent miracle effected by the supernatural power of the Lord Buddha, the entire host was ecstatic, enraptured, astonished, delighted, satisfied, and filled with awe and pleasure. They all bowed down to the Tathāgata, withdrew to one side with palms pressed together, and gazed upon him with fixed attention. The young Licchavi Ratnākara knelt with his right knee on the ground, raised his hands, palms pressed together in salute of the Buddha, and praised him with the following hymn:
Then, the young Licchavi Ratnākara, having celebrated the Buddha with these verses, further addressed him, “Lord, these five hundred young Licchavis are truly on their way to unexcelled, perfect enlightenment, and they have asked what is the bodhisattvas’ purification of the buddhafield. Please, Lord, explain to them the bodhisattvas’ purification of the buddhafield!”
Upon this request, the Buddha gave his approval to the young Licchavi Ratnākara. “Good, good, young man! Your question to the Tathāgata about the purification of the buddhafield is indeed good. Therefore, young man, listen well and remember! I will explain to you the purification of the buddhafield of the bodhisattvas.”
“Very good, Lord,” replied Ratnākara and the five hundred young Licchavis, and they set themselves to listen.
The Buddha said, “Noble son, a buddhafield of bodhisattvas is a field of living beings. Why so? A bodhisattva embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that he causes the development of living beings. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that living beings become disciplined. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that, through entrance into a buddhafield, living beings are introduced to the buddha-gnosis. He embraces a buddhafield to the same extent that, through entrance into that buddhafield, living beings increase their noble spiritual faculties. Why so? Noble son, a buddhafield of bodhisattvas springs from the aims of living beings.
“For example, Ratnākara, should one wish to build in empty space, one might go ahead in spite of the fact that it is not possible to build or to adorn anything in empty space. In just the same way, should a bodhisattva, who knows full well that all things are like empty space, wish to build a buddhafield in order to develop living beings, he might go ahead, in spite of the fact that it is not possible to build or to adorn a buddhafield in empty space.
“Yet, Ratnākara, a bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of positive thought. When he attains enlightenment, living beings free of hypocrisy and deceit will be born in his buddhafield.
“Noble son, a bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of high resolve. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who have harvested the two stores and have planted the roots of virtue will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of virtuous application. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who live by all virtuous principles will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the magnificence of the conception of the spirit of enlightenment. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are actually participating in the Mahāyāna will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of generosity. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who give away all their possessions will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of morality. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who follow the path of the ten virtues with positive thoughts will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of tolerance. When he attains enlightenment, living beings with the transcendences of tolerance, discipline, and the superior trance—hence beautiful with the thirty-two auspicious signs—will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of effort. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who devote their efforts to virtue will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of meditation. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are evenly balanced through mindfulness and awareness will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is a field of wisdom. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are destined for the ultimate will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the four immeasurables. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who live by love, compassion, joy, and impartiality will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the four means of unification. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are held together by all the liberations will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is skill in liberative art. When he attains enlightenment, living beings skilled in all liberative arts and activities will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment. Living beings who devote their efforts to the four foci of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of magical power, the five spiritual faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors of enlightenment, and the eight branches of the holy path will be born in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is his mind of total dedication. When he attains enlightenment, the ornaments of all virtues will appear in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the doctrine that eradicates the eight adversities. When he attains enlightenment, the three bad migrations will cease, and there will be no such thing as the eight adversities in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield consists of his personal observance of the basic precepts and his restraint in blaming others for their transgressions. When he attains enlightenment, even the word ‘crime’ will never be mentioned in his buddhafield.
“A bodhisattva’s buddhafield is the purity of the path of the ten virtues. When he attains enlightenment, living beings who are secure in long life, great in wealth, chaste in conduct, enhanced by true speech, soft-spoken, free of divisive intrigues and adroit in reconciling factions, enlightening in their conversations, free of envy, free of malice, and endowed with perfect views will be born in his buddhafield.
“Thus, noble son, just as is the bodhisattva’s production of the spirit of enlightenment, so is his positive thought. And just as is his positive thought, so is his virtuous application.
“His virtuous application is tantamount to his high resolve; his high resolve is tantamount to his determination; his determination is tantamount to his practice; his practice is tantamount to his total dedication; his total dedication is tantamount to his liberative art; his liberative art is tantamount to his development of living beings; and his development of living beings is tantamount to the purity of his buddhafield.
“The purity of his buddhafield reflects the purity of living beings; the purity of the living beings reflects the purity of his gnosis; the purity of his gnosis reflects the purity of his doctrine; the purity of his doctrine reflects the purity of his transcendental practice; and the purity of his transcendental practice reflects the purity of his own mind.”
Thereupon, magically influenced by the Buddha, the venerable Śāriputra had this thought: “If the buddhafield is pure only to the extent that the mind of the bodhisattva is pure, then, when Śākyamuni Buddha was engaged in the career of the bodhisattva, his mind must have been impure. Otherwise, how could this buddhafield appear to be so impure?”
The Buddha, aware of venerable Śāriputra’s thoughts, said to him, “What do you think, Śāriputra? Is it because the sun and moon are impure that those blind from birth do not see them?”
Śāriputra replied, “No, Lord. It is not so. The fault lies with those blind from birth, and not with the sun and moon.”
The Buddha declared, “In the same way, Śāriputra, the fact that some living beings do not behold the splendid display of virtues of the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is due to their own ignorance. It is not the fault of the Tathāgata. Śāriputra, the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is pure, but you do not see it.”
Then, the Brahmā Śikhin said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Reverend Śāriputra, do not say that the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is impure. Reverend Śāriputra, the buddhafield of the Tathāgata is pure. I see the splendid expanse of the buddhafield of the Lord Śākyamuni as equal to the splendor of, for example, the abodes of the highest deities.”
Then the venerable Śāriputra said to the Brahmā Śikhin, “As for me, O Brahmā, I see this great earth, with its highs and lows, its thorns, its precipices, its peaks, and its abysses, as if it were entirely filled with ordure.”
Brahmā Śikhin replied, “The fact that you see such a buddhafield as this as if it were so impure, reverend Śāriputra, is a sure sign that there are highs and lows in your mind and that your positive thought in regard to the buddha-gnosis is not pure either. Reverend Śāriputra, those whose minds are impartial toward all living beings and whose positive thoughts toward the buddha-gnosis are pure see this buddhafield as perfectly pure.”
Thereupon the Lord touched the ground of this billion-world galactic universe with his big toe, and suddenly it was transformed into a huge mass of precious jewels, a magnificent array of many hundreds of thousands of clusters of precious gems, until it resembled the universe of the Tathāgata Ratnavyūha, called Anantaguṇaratnavyūha. Everyone in the entire assembly was filled with wonder, each perceiving himself seated on a throne of jeweled lotuses.
Then, the Buddha said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, do you see this splendor of the virtues of the buddhafield?”
Śāriputra replied, “I see it, Lord! Here before me is a display of splendor such as I never before heard of or beheld!”
The Buddha said, “Śāriputra, this buddhafield is always thus pure, but the Tathāgata makes it appear to be spoiled by many faults, in order to bring about the maturity of inferior living beings. For example, Śāriputra, the gods of the Trayastriṃśa heaven all take their food from a single precious vessel, yet the nectar that nourishes each one differs according to the differences of the merits each has accumulated. Just so, Śāriputra, living beings born in the same buddhafield see the splendor of the virtues of the buddhafields of the buddhas according to their own degrees of purity.”
When this splendor of the beauty of the virtues of the buddhafield shone forth, eighty-four thousand beings conceived the spirit of unexcelled perfect enlightenment, and the five hundred Licchavi youths who had accompanied the young Licchavi Ratnākara all attained the conformative tolerance of ultimate birthlessness.
Then, the Lord withdrew his miraculous power and at once the buddhafield was restored to its usual appearance. Then, both men and gods who subscribed to the Disciple Vehicle thought, “Alas! All constructed things are impermanent.”
Thereby, thirty-two thousand living beings purified their immaculate, undistorted Dharma-eye in regard to all things. The eight thousand bhikṣus were liberated from their mental defilements, attaining the state of nongrasping. And the eighty-four thousand living beings who were devoted to the grandeur of the buddhafield, having understood that all things are by nature but magical creations, all conceived in their own minds the spirit of unexcelled, totally perfect enlightenment.
At that time, there lived in the great city of Vaiśālī a certain Licchavi, Vimalakīrti by name. Having served the ancient buddhas, he had generated the roots of virtue by honoring them and making offerings to them. He had attained tolerance as well as eloquence. He played with the great superknowledges. He had attained the power of retention and the fearlessnesses. He had conquered all demons and opponents. He had penetrated the profound way of the Dharma. He was liberated through the transcendence of wisdom. Having integrated his realization with skill in liberative art, he was expert in knowing the thoughts and actions of living beings. Knowing the strength or weakness of their faculties, and being gifted with unrivaled eloquence, he taught the Dharma appropriately to each. Having applied himself energetically to the Mahāyāna, he understood it and accomplished his tasks with great finesse. He lived with the deportment of a buddha, and his superior intelligence was as wide as an ocean. He was praised, honored, and commended by all the buddhas and was respected by Śakra, Brahmā, and all the Lokapālas. In order to develop living beings with his skill in liberative art, he lived in the great city of Vaiśālī.
His wealth was inexhaustible for the purpose of sustaining the poor and the helpless. He observed a pure morality in order to protect the immoral. He maintained tolerance and self-control in order to reconcile beings who were angry, cruel, violent, and brutal. He blazed with energy in order to inspire people who were lazy. He maintained concentration, mindfulness, and meditation in order to sustain the mentally troubled. He attained decisive wisdom in order to sustain the foolish.
He wore the white clothes of the layman, yet lived impeccably like a religious devotee. He lived at home, but remained aloof from the realm of desire, the realm of pure matter, and the immaterial realm. He had a son, a wife, and female attendants, yet always maintained continence. He appeared to be surrounded by servants, yet lived in solitude. He appeared to be adorned with ornaments, yet always was endowed with the auspicious signs and marks. He seemed to eat and drink, yet always took nourishment from the taste of meditation. He made his appearance at the fields of sports and in the casinos, but his aim was always to mature those people who were attached to games and gambling. He visited the fashionable outsider teachers, yet always kept unswerving loyalty to the Buddha. He understood the mundane and transcendental sciences and esoteric practices, yet always took pleasure in the delights of the Dharma. He mixed in all crowds, yet was respected as foremost of all.
In order to be in harmony with people, he associated with elders, with those of middle age, and with the young, yet always spoke in harmony with the Dharma. He engaged in all sorts of businesses, yet had no interest in profit or possessions. To educate living beings, he would appear at crossroads and on street corners, and to protect them he participated in government. To turn people away from the Individual Vehicle and to engage them in the Mahāyāna, he appeared among listeners and teachers of the Dharma. To develop children, he visited all the schools. To demonstrate the evils of desire, he even entered the brothels. To establish drunkards in correct mindfulness, he entered all the drinking-houses.
He was honored as the merchant among merchants because he demonstrated the priority of the Dharma. He was honored as the landlord among landlords because he renounced the aggressiveness of ownership. He was honored as the warrior among warriors because he cultivated endurance, determination, and fortitude. He was honored as the brahmin among brahmins because he suppressed pride, vanity, and arrogance. He was honored as the official among officials because he regulated the functions of government according to the Dharma. He was honored as the prince of princes because he reversed their attachment to royal pleasures and sovereign power. He was honored as a chamberlain in the royal harem because he brought the young ladies to spiritual maturity.
He was compatible with ordinary people because he appreciated the excellence of ordinary merits. He was honored as the Śakra among Śakras because he showed them the temporality of their lordship. He was honored as the Brahmā among Brahmās because he showed them the special excellence of gnosis. He was honored as the Lokapāla among Lokapālas because he fostered the development of all living beings.
Thus lived the Licchavi Vimalakīrti in the great city of Vaiśālī, endowed with an infinite knowledge of skill in liberative arts.
At that time, out of this very skill in liberative art, Vimalakīrti manifested himself as if sick. To inquire after his health, the king, the officials, the lords, the youths, the brahmins, the householders, the businessmen, the townfolk, the countryfolk, and thousands of other living beings came forth from the great city of Vaiśālī and called on the invalid. When they arrived, Vimalakīrti taught them the Dharma, beginning his discourse from the actuality of the four main elements:
“Friends, this body is so impermanent, fragile, unworthy of confidence, and feeble. It is so insubstantial, perishable, short-lived, painful, filled with diseases, and subject to changes. Thus, my friends, as this body is only a vessel of many sicknesses, wise men do not rely on it. This body is like a ball of foam, unable to bear any pressure. It is like a water bubble, not remaining very long. It is like a mirage, born from the appetites of the passions. It is like the trunk of the plantain tree, having no core. Alas! This body is like a machine, a nexus of bones and tendons. It is like a magical illusion, consisting of falsifications. It is like a dream, being an unreal vision. It is like a reflection, being the image of former actions. It is like an echo, being dependent on conditioning. It is like a cloud, being characterized by turbulence and dissolution. It is like a flash of lightning, being unstable, and decaying every moment. The body is ownerless, being the product of a variety of conditions.
“This body is inert, like the earth; selfless, like water; lifeless, like fire; impersonal, like the wind; and nonsubstantial, like space. This body is unreal, being a collocation of the four main elements. It is void, not existing as self or as self-possessed. It is inanimate, being like grass, trees, walls, clods of earth, and illusions. It is insensate, being driven like a windmill. It is filthy, being an agglomeration of pus and excrement. It is false, being fated to be broken and destroyed, in spite of being anointed and massaged. It is afflicted by the four hundred and four diseases. It is like an ancient well, constantly overwhelmed by old age. Its duration is never certain—certain only is its end in death. This body is a combination of aggregates, elements, and sense-media, which are comparable to murderers, poisonous snakes, and an empty town, respectively. Therefore, you should be repelled by such a body. You should despair of it and should arouse your admiration for the body of the Tathāgata.
“Friends, the body of a tathāgata is the body of Dharma, born of gnosis. The body of a tathāgata is born of the stores of merit and wisdom. It is born of morality, of concentration, of wisdom, of the liberations, and of the knowledge and vision of liberation. It is born of love, compassion, joy, and impartiality. It is born of charity, discipline, and self-control. It is born of the path of the ten virtues. It is born of patience and gentleness. It is born of the roots of virtue planted by solid efforts. It is born of the concentrations, the liberations, the meditations, and the absorptions. It is born of learning, wisdom, and liberative art. It is born of the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment. It is born of mental quiescence and transcendental analysis. It is born of the ten powers, the four fearlessnesses, and the eighteen special qualities. It is born of all the transcendences. It is born from sciences and superknowledges. It is born of the abandonment of all evil qualities, and of the gathering of all good qualities. It is born of truth. It is born of reality. It is born of conscious awareness.
“Friends, the body of a tathāgata is born of innumerable good works. Toward such a body you should turn your aspirations, and, in order to eliminate the sicknesses of the passions of all living beings, you should conceive the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.”
While the Licchavi Vimalakīrti thus taught the Dharma to those who had come to inquire about his sickness, many hundreds of thousands of living beings conceived the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment.
Then, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti thought to himself, “I am sick, lying on my bed in pain, yet the Tathāgata, the arhat, the perfectly accomplished Buddha, does not consider me or take pity upon me, and sends no one to inquire after my illness.”
The Lord knew this thought in the mind of Vimalakīrti and said to the venerable Śāriputra, “Śāriputra, go to inquire after the illness of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti.”
Thus addressed, the venerable Śāriputra answered the Buddha, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to ask the Licchavi Vimalakīrti about his illness. Why? I remember one day, when I was sitting at the foot of a tree in the forest, absorbed in contemplation, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came to the foot of that tree and said to me, ‘Reverend Śāriputra, this is not the way to absorb yourself in contemplation. You should absorb yourself in contemplation so that neither body nor mind appear anywhere in the three realms. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you can manifest all ordinary behavior without forsaking cessation. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you can manifest the nature of an ordinary person without abandoning your cultivated spiritual nature. You should absorb yourself in contemplation so that the mind neither settles within nor moves without toward external forms. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that the thirty-seven aids to enlightenment are manifest without deviation toward any convictions. You should absorb yourself in contemplation in such a way that you are released in liberation without abandoning the passions that are the province of the world.
“ ‘Reverend Śāriputra, those who absorb themselves in contemplation in such a way are declared by the Lord to be truly absorbed in contemplation.’
“Lord, when I heard this teaching, I was unable to reply and remained silent. Therefore, I am reluctant to go to ask that good man about his sickness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahāmaudgalyāyana, “Maudgalyāyana, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Maudgalyāyana replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember one day when I was teaching the Dharma to the householders in a square in the great city of Vaiśālī, and the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came along and said to me, ‘Reverend Maudgalyāyana, that is not the way to teach the Dharma to the householders in their white clothes. The Dharma must be taught according to reality.
“ ‘Reverend Maudgalyāyana, the Dharma is without a living being, because it is free of the dust of living beings. It is selfless, because it is free of the dust of desire. It is lifeless, because it is free of birth and death. It is without a person, because it dispenses with past origins and future destinies.
“ ‘The Dharma is peace and pacification, because it is free of desire. It does not become an object, because it is free of words and letters; it is inexpressible, and it transcends all movement of mind.
“ ‘The Dharma is omnipresent, because it is like infinite space. It is without color, mark, or shape, because it is free of all process. It is without the concept of “mine,” because it is free of the habitual notion of possession. It is without ideation, because it is free of mind, thought, or consciousness. It is incomparable, because it has no antithesis. It is without presumption of conditionality, because it does not conform to causes.
“ ‘It permeates evenly all things, because all are included in the ultimate realm. It conforms to reality by means of the process of nonconformity. It abides at the reality-limit, for it is utterly without fluctuation. It is immovable, because it is independent of the six objects of sense. It is without coming and going, for it never stands still. It is comprised by voidness, it is remarkable through signlessness, and because of wishlessness it is free of presumption and repudiation. It is without establishment and rejection, without birth or destruction. It is without any fundamental consciousness, transcending the range of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and thought. It is without highness and lowness. It abides without movement or activity.
“ ‘Reverend Mahāmaudgalyāyana, how could there be a teaching in regard to such a Dharma? Reverend Mahāmaudgalyāyana, even the expression “to teach the Dharma” is presumptuous, and those who listen to it listen to presumption. Reverend Maudgalyāyana, where there are no presumptuous words, there is no teacher of the Dharma, no one to listen, and no one to understand. It is as if an illusory person were to teach the Dharma to illusory people.
“ ‘Therefore, you should teach the Dharma by keeping your mind on this. You should be adept in regard to the spiritual faculties of living beings. By means of the correct vision of the wisdom-eye, manifesting the great compassion, acknowledging the benevolent activity of the Buddha, purifying your intentions, and understanding the definitive expressions of the Dharma, you should teach the Dharma in order that the continuity of the Three Jewels may never be interrupted.’
“Lord, when Vimalakīrti had discoursed thus, eight hundred householders in the crowd conceived the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment, and I myself was speechless. Therefore, Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahākāśyapa, “Mahākāśyapa, you go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
“Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember one day, when I was in the street of the poor begging for my food, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came along and said to me, ‘Reverend Mahākāśyapa, to avoid the houses of the wealthy, and to favor the houses of the poor—this is partiality in benevolence. Reverend Mahākāśyapa, you should dwell on the fact of the equality of things, and you should seek alms with consideration for all living beings at all times. You should beg your food in awareness of the ultimate nonexistence of food. You should seek alms for the sake of eliminating the materialism of others. When you enter a town, you should keep in mind its actual voidness, yet you should proceed through it in order to develop men and women. You should enter homes as if entering the family of the Buddha. You should accept alms by not taking anything. You should see form like a man blind from birth, hear sounds as if they were echoes, smell scents as if they were like wind, experience tastes without any discrimination, touch tangible objects without there being in gnosis any contact, and know things with the consciousness of an illusory creature. That which is without a state of being self and a state of being other does not burn. And what does not burn will not be extinguished.
“ ‘Elder Mahākāśyapa, if, equipoised in the eight liberations without transcending the eight perverse paths, you can enter the sameness of reality by means of the sameness of perversity, and if you can make a gift to all living beings and an offering to all the noble ones and buddhas out of even a single measure of alms, then you yourself may eat. Thus, when you eat, after offering, you should be neither affected by afflictions nor free of afflictions, neither involved in concentration nor free of concentration, neither living in the world nor abiding in liberation. Furthermore, those who give such alms, reverend, have neither great merit nor small merit, neither gain nor loss. They should follow the way of the buddhas, not the way of the disciples. Only in this way, Elder Mahākāśyapa, is the practice of eating by alms meaningful.’
“Lord, when I heard this teaching, I was astonished and thought, ‘Reverence to all bodhisattvas! If a lay bodhisattva may be endowed with such eloquence, who is there who would not conceive the spirit of unexcelled, perfect enlightenment?’ From that time forth, I no longer recommend the vehicles of the disciples and of the solitary sages but recommend the Mahāyāna. And thus, Lord, I am reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Subhūti, “Subhūti, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Subhūti replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness. Why? My Lord, I remember one day, when I went to beg my food at the house of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti in the great city of Vaiśālī, he took my bowl and filled it with some excellent food and said to me, ‘Reverend Subhūti, take this food if you understand the sameness of all things through the sameness of material objects, and if you understand the sameness of the qualities of the Buddha through the sameness of all things. Take this food if, without abandoning desire, hatred, and folly, you can avoid association with them; if you can follow the path of the single way without ever disturbing the egoistic views; if, neither conquering ignorance and the craving for existence, nor producing knowledge and liberation, your liberation being the same as the equality of the uninterruptible sins, you are neither liberated nor bound; if you do not see the four noble truths, yet are not one who “has not seen the truth”; if you are also neither “one who has attained fruition,” nor “an ordinary person,” while not having eliminated the qualities of “an ordinary person”; if you are not a noble one, and not a non-noble one; and if, though you are in the presence of all things, you are free of any notion of “all things.”
“ ‘Take this food, reverend Subhūti, if, without seeing the Buddha, hearing the Dharma, or serving the Saṅgha, you undertake the religious life under the six outsider masters—namely, Purāṇa Kāśyapa, Māskārin Gośāliputra, Saṃjāyin Vairaṭiputra, Kakuda Kātyāyana, Ajita Keśakambala, and Nirgrantha Jñātiputra, and follow the ways they prescribe.
“ ‘Take this food, reverend Subhūti, if, entertaining all false views, you find neither extremes nor middle; if, bound up in the eight adversities, you do not obtain favorable conditions; if, assimilating the passions, you do not attain purification; if the dispassion of all living beings is your dispassion, reverend; if those who make offerings to you are not thereby purified; if those who offer you food, reverend, still fall into the three bad migrations; if you associate with all māras; if you entertain all passions; if the nature of passions is the nature of a reverend; if you have hostile feelings toward all living beings; if you despise all the buddhas; if you criticize all the teachings of the Buddha; if you do not rely on the saṅgha; and finally, if you never enter ultimate liberation.’
“Lord, when I heard these words of the Licchavi Vimalakīrti, I wondered what I should say and what I should do, but I was totally in the dark. Leaving the bowl, I was about to leave the house when the Licchavi Vimalakīrti said to me, ‘Reverend Subhūti, do not fear these words, and pick up your bowl. What do you think, reverend Subhūti? If it were an incarnation created by the Tathāgata who spoke thus to you, would you be afraid?’
“I answered, ‘No indeed, noble sir!’ He then said, ‘Reverend Subhūti, the nature of all things is like illusion, like a magical incarnation. So you should not fear them. Why? All words also have that nature, and thus the wise are not attached to words, nor do they fear them. Why? All language does not ultimately exist, except as liberation. The nature of all things is liberation.’
“When Vimalakīrti had discoursed in this way, two hundred gods obtained the pure doctrinal vision in regard to all things, without obscurity or defilement, and five hundred gods obtained the conformative tolerance. As for me, I was speechless and unable to respond to him. Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Pūrṇamaitrāyaṇīputra, “Pūrṇa, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Pūrṇa replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to this good man to inquire about his illness. Why? Lord, I remember one day, when I was teaching the Dharma to some young monks in the great forest, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and said to me, ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, first concentrate yourself, regard the minds of these young bhikṣus, and then teach them the Dharma! Do not put rotten food into a jeweled bowl! First understand the inclinations of these monks, and do not confuse priceless sapphires with glass beads!
“ ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, without examining the spiritual faculties of living beings, do not presume upon the one-sidedness of their faculties; do not wound those who are without wounds; do not impose a narrow path upon those who aspire to a great path; do not try to pour the great ocean into the hoof-print of an ox; do not try to put Mount Sumeru into a grain of mustard; do not confuse the brilliance of the sun with the light of a glowworm; and do not expose those who admire the roar of a lion to the howl of a jackal!
“ ‘Reverend Pūrṇa, all these monks were formerly engaged in the Mahāyāna but have forgotten the spirit of enlightenment. So do not instruct them in the Disciple Vehicle. The Disciple Vehicle is not ultimately valid, and you disciples are like men blind from birth, in regard to recognition of the degrees of the spiritual faculties of living beings.’
“At that moment, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti entered into such a concentration that those monks were caused to remember their various former lives, in which they had produced the roots of virtue by serving five hundred buddhas for the sake of perfect enlightenment. As soon as their own spirits of enlightenment had become clear to them, they bowed at the feet of that good man and pressed their palms together in reverence. He taught them the Dharma, and they all attained the stage of irreversibility from unexcelled, perfect enlightenment. It occurred to me then, ‘The disciples, who do not know the thoughts or the inclinations of others, are not able to teach the Dharma to anyone. Why? These disciples are not expert in discerning the superiority and inferiority of the spiritual faculties of living beings, and they are not always in a state of concentration like the Tathāgata, the arhat, the perfectly accomplished Buddha.’ Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his health.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Mahākātyāyana, “Kātyāyana, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
Kātyāyana replied, “Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness. Why? Lord, I remember one day when, after the Lord had given some brief instruction to the monks, I was defining the expressions of that discourse by teaching the meaning of impermanence, suffering, selflessness, and peace, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and said to me, ‘Reverend Mahākātyāyana, do not teach an ultimate reality endowed with activity, production, and destruction! Reverend Mahākātyāyana, nothing was ever destroyed, is destroyed, or will ever be destroyed. Such is the meaning of “impermanence.” The meaning of the realization of birthlessness, through the realization of the voidness of the five aggregates, is the meaning of “suffering.” The fact of the nonduality of self and selflessness is the meaning of “selflessness.” That which has no intrinsic substance and no other sort of substance does not burn, and what does not burn is not extinguished; such lack of extinction is the meaning of “peace.” ’
“When he had discoursed thus, the minds of the monks were liberated from their defilements and entered a state of nongrasping. Therefore, Lord, I am reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness.”
The Buddha then said to the venerable Aniruddha, “Aniruddha, go to the Licchavi Vimalakīrti to inquire about his illness.”
“My Lord, I am indeed reluctant to go to that good man to inquire about his illness. Why? I remember, Lord, one day when I was taking a walk, the great Brahmā named Śubhavyūha and the ten thousand other Brahmās who accompanied him illuminated the place with their radiance and, having bowed their heads at my feet, withdrew to one side and asked me, ‘Reverend Aniruddha, you have been proclaimed by the Buddha to be the foremost among those who possess the divine eye. To what distance does the divine vision of the venerable Aniruddha extend?’ I answered, ‘Friends, I see the entire billion-world galactic universe of the Lord Śākyamuni just as plainly as a man of ordinary vision sees a myrobalan nut on the palm of his hand.’ When I had said these words, the Licchavi Vimalakīrti came there and, having bowed his head at my feet, said to me, ‘Reverend Aniruddha, is your divine eye compounded in nature? Or is it uncompounded in nature? If it is compounded in nature, it is the same as the superknowledges of the outsiders. If it is uncompounded in nature, then it is not constructed and, as such, is incapable of seeing. Then, how do you see, O elder?’