Loading translation...
The usual formulation of these qualities comprises a pair of terms, one of which describes what qualities are positively present and the other what negative attributes have been eliminated. While the second of the two elements—the quality of being rid of hindrances—is summarized throughout by the term “liberated” (grol), the terminology used for the first element—summarizing the positive attributes—evolves as the text unfolds. In the first few chapters we see mentions of “having knowledge and being liberated” (rig pa dang grol ba). In the fourth, fifth, and seventh chapters the equivalent becomes being “coherent and liberated” (rigs pa dang grol ba). In the ninth chapter, the terms used are “equipped and liberated” (ldan pa dang grol ba). It is noteworthy that the term for “coherent and liberated” (yuktamukta, rigs pa dang grol ba) is also used in the canonical literature (in the Vinayavibhaṅgha (Toh 3), Vinayottaragrantha (Toh 7a), several Vinaya commentaries, and some sūtras) as a description of the necessary qualities of the inspired eloquence (pratibhāna, spobs pa) of those qualified to give teachings; in this regard see, for example, Upholding the Roots of Virtue (Toh 101), n.73.
In this catalog, Repudiating Those Who Violate the Discipline is included among the “Miscellaneous Sūtras” (Tib. mdo sde sna tshogs) less than ten sections (Tib. bam po) long. Denkarma F.297.a; see also Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, p. 53, no. 92.
Chen 2014, pp. 178–79. Here Chung-hui Tsui tells us that this work was inscribed by Fan Hai, who was the court scribe during that period, and is dated 457
The Denkarma (Tib. ldan dkar ma) catalog includes Toh 123 among the discourses translated from Chinese (Denkarma, F.300.a; Herrmann-Pfandt 2008, p. 138, no. 255). Toh 123 also lacks the standard colophon that usually follows Tibetan translations from the Sanskrit. Additionally, this text contains specific vocabulary (discussed at length in Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua, pp. 1–85) indicating that it was translated from the Chinese. See also Silk 2018, p. 234.
Translated based on the Stok, Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa editions: ’ur sgra. Degé reads: ’ud sgra.
From this point onward in the text this repeated phrase is explicitly abridged by omitting what follows down to and including “cannot be pointed out,” with the instruction (to the reader) that it should be expanded as before. For ease of reading, we have chosen to provide the full sentence for each occurrence.
Translated based on the Stok, Yongle, Peking, and Choné editions: ’jigs pa ma yin pa med pa. The Degé Kangyur reads ’jig pa ma yin pa med pa (“it is without nondisintegration”).
The two terms that are used here are both commonly translated as “person” in English, but they have been rendered here as “primordial man” (Skt. puruṣa, Tib. skyes bu) and “person” (Skt. pudgala, Tib. gang zag). In this case, the term skyes bu translates the Sanskrit term puruṣa or “cosmic man” of the renowned Rig Veda 10.90 and, by extension, the inactive ultimate being of the Sāṁkhya, while the term gang zag translates the Sanskrit term pudgala, which refers to the “person” at the level of the individual.
The Tibetan brtan pa here could simply mean “fixed” or “stable” but, following as it does just after the two preceding terms, may also refer to the polestar (Skt. dhruva), mythologically personified as the son of Uttānapāda and thus grandson of Manu. Compare with the same Tibetan term, rendered “stability,” in the list at 5.53 where it appears instead flanked by rtag pa (“permanence”) and ther zug (“eternality”).
This rendering is somewhat speculatively based on the reading in the Degé Kangyur, tshangs par spyad pa’i tha snyad, which is also the reading in the Lhasa, Dodedrak, and Urga Kangyurs. The Stok Palace, Shey, Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, and Choné Kangyurs instead read tshangs par spyad pa’i tha chad (“improper pure conduct”), which superficially might seem a more likely reading but is not quite in line with the theme of this passage. The Phugdrak Kangyur reads: tshangs par spyad pa’i mtha’ chad pa (“lowliest of pure conduct”).
This is an abbreviated reference to a statement widespread in the canonical literature about arhats “regarding gold as no different than filth and the palm of the hand as like space itself.”
Translated following the Degé, Lhasa, Urga, Stok Palace, and Shey Kangyurs, which all read bzhi po here. The Narthang, Yongle, Lithang, Kanxi, and Choné Kangyurs instead have gzhi po, which could possibly be interpreted as “basis” or “substratum.”
Translated according to the reading chos zhes bya ba’i tha snyad in the Stok Palace, Shey, Narthang, and Lhasa Kangyurs. Degé and most Kangyurs read chos shes bya ba’i tha snyad …, which seems less likely; the sentence would then be translated, “The noble ones even deny that it is a correctly designated convention to designate phenomena that are objects of knowledge.”
Aside from the list of musical instruments, we have translated the Tibetan word sgra as “terms” in this paragraph.
Tentative translation. Tib. dpe chad pa. This obscure turn of phrase does not appear to occur anywhere else in the Kangyur. It has been rendered literally here in spite of the fact that the literal meaning makes little sense in context. Plausible alternatives are difficult to discern.
Tib. ma byas pa, usually shorthand for the notion that what one experiences is not the karmic result of past actions.
Tentative translation. Tib. shA ri’i bu de bzhin gshegs pas sangs rgyas rjes su dran pa’i chos bstan pa la yang sangs rgyas bcom ldan ’das rnams kyis kyang rjes su dran par mi spyod do. This reading is consistent across the Tshalpa and Thempangma recensions of the Kangyur. However, this line breaks the pattern established in the section, and has been emended here by reading the phrase sangs rgyas bcom ldan ’das kyis as *sangs rgyas bcom ldan ’das kyi.
Tib. dge sbyong chu skyar. The Sanskrit term baka, rendered here in Tibetan as chu skyar, literally means “stork” or “crane.” The stork, crane, and other birds like it evoke a sense of cheating, hypocrisy, and cunning deceit in Sanskrit literature, most likely due to the cunning and stealth with which they hunt their food.
Tentative translation. The Degé and Stok editions read chos gos mi gtsang ba’i dgon pa dang ldan pa yin no.
Tib. chos dang ’thun pas. It is also possible to read this phrase as “legally” or “according to the law,” and that it refers to Buddhists being legally prohibited from teaching.
Translated based on the Stok, Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa editions: ngas. Degé reads: des.
The phrase “scatters flies” has been added to the English translation for the sake of clarity.
Translated based on the Stok edition: dpang du gyur pa yin. Degé reads: dbang du gyur pa yin (“overpowered”).
Translated based on the Stok, Lithang, Peking, and Narthang editions: btsam pa med pa. Degé reads: rtsam pa med pa.
Translated based on the Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa editions: ’dod pa rnams la log par spyod pa. The Degé and Stok editions read: ’dod pa rnams la log par mi spyod pa (“who does not engage in sexual misconduct”).
Tentative translation. Tib. de la skyes bu dam pa ma yin pa la rjes su ma gnang ba de lta bu gang ci yang rung mchil ma dor ba tsam de thams cad kyang dad pas byin pa yin no.
Tentative translation. The Degé and Stok editions read: dkyogs. The Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa editions read: bkyogs. This translation amends the verb to bklags.
Tib. nges par ’byung ba. According to the previous list, this probably refers to the monk Apprehending Origination (Tib. ’byung par dmigs pa).
The six non-Buddhist teachers are Purāna Kāśyapa, Māskārin Gośāliputra, Saṃjāyin Vairaṭiputra, Kakuda Kātyāyana, Ajita Keśakambala, and Nirgrantha Jñātiputra.
Tentative translation. It is not quite clear to us who this being called Constant Generosity might be, although it appears to refer to the Buddha himself. Tib. thams cad rtag tu sbyin zhes bya bas dge ba ci yin zhes tshol ba na.
Tentative translation. Tib. ’du ’dzi las skyes pa. This compound is likely synonymous with the compound ’du ’dzi la dga’ ba (Skt. saṅgaṇikārāma).
Translation based on the Stok Palace and Yongle Kangyur readingss: ldan pa. Degé reads: bden pa (“true”).
Translation based on the Stok Palace Kangyur reading: ldan pa. Degé reads: bden pa (“true”).
Only eleven of the “twelve branches of Buddhist scripture” are enumerated here. “Extensive teachings” (Skt. vaipulya; Tib. shin tu rgyas pa'i sde) is missing.
Tentative translation. Tib. gang gi phyir bden pa’i yon tan ’di dag gsung ba ni de ltar ’gyur ba’i phyir ro.
Tentative translation. Tib. bdag nyid chen pos dgon gnas dang/ gnas gsum zhal gyis bzhes mod kyi.
Translation based on the Stok Palace, Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, Choné, and Lhasa Kangyur readings: bud med. Degé reads: dug med.
Translation based on the Stok Palace, Yongle, Lithang, Peking, Narthang, and Choné Kangyur readings: gsog. Degé reads: gsob.
Translation based on the Stok Palace Kangyur reading: rnam par thar pa. Degé reads: rnam par ’thag pa (“Victory”).
One of the three gateways of liberation.
One of the three gateways of liberation.
A particular realization attained by bodhisattvas that arises as a result of analysis of the essential nature of phenomena.
Name of a past buddha.
The five aggregates of form, sensation, perception, formation, and consciousness. On the individual level the five aggregates refer to the basis upon which the mistaken idea of a self is projected.
The world of yakṣas, ruled over by Kubera.
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.
One of the twelve branches of Buddhist scriptures.
A fundamental practice of Buddhist meditation generally divided into the following four categories: application of mindfulness to the body, application of mindfulness to feelings, application of mindfulness to the mind, and application of mindfulness to phenomena.
The name of a monk in the lineage of the buddha Mahāvyūha and the name of the order founded by that monk after Mahāvyūha entered parinirvāṇa.
The name of a monk in the lineage of the buddha Mahāvyūha and the name of the order founded by that monk after Mahāvyūha entered parinirvāṇa.
An optional set of thirteen practices that monastics can adopt in order to cultivate greater detachment. They consist in (1) wearing patched robes made from discarded cloth rather than from cloth donated by laypeople; (2) wearing only three robes; (3) going for alms; (4) not omitting any house while on the alms round, rather than begging only at those houses known to provide good food; (5) eating only what can be eaten in one sitting; (6) eating only food received in the alms bowl, rather than more elaborate meals presented to the saṅgha; (7) refusing more food after indicating one has eaten enough; (8) dwelling in the forest; (9) dwelling at the root of a tree; (10) dwelling in the open air, using only a tent made from one’s robes as shelter; (11) dwelling in a charnel ground; (12) being satisfied with whatever dwelling one has; and (13) sleeping in a sitting position without ever lying down.
From a wealthy brahmin family, Bakkula is said to have become a monk at the age of eighty and lived to be one hundred sixty. He is also said to have had two families, because as a baby he was swallowed by a large fish and the family who discovered him alive in the fish’s stomach also claimed him as their child. The Buddha’s foremost pupil in terms of health and longevity, it is also said he could remember many previous lifetimes and was a pupil of the previous buddhas Padmottara, Vipaśyin, and Kāśyapa.
One of the twelve branches of Buddhist scriptures.
One of the eight hot hells. The name of this hell refers to the black thread that is used to measure lines on the bodies of those reborn there so that they can be cut into pieces.
Name of a king.
Name of a buddha.
Manu being the archetypal human, the progenitor of mankind, in the Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, and other Indian texts, “child of Manu” is a synonym of “human being” or mankind in general. See also “descendant of Manu.”
Manu being the archetypal human, the progenitor of mankind, in the Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, and other Indian texts, “descendant of Manu” is a synonym of “human being” or mankind in general. See also “child of Manu.”
The Tibetan rigs pa is used to translate several Sanskrit terms (which cannot be reconstructed with certainty for this text) with the literal meaning of being connected or coherent, but with contextual meanings ranging from appropriateness or suitability, through correctness, conformity, congruence, to reasoned and rational thinking or argument, and the principles used to validate scriptural statements. In this text the epithet is one of several others paired with “liberated” as criteria for the authenticity of monks, their worthiness to receive offerings, etc. See “knowledge,” “equipped,” “liberated,” and also n.1. “Coherent and liberated” is also used (in other texts) as a description of the necessary qualities of the inspired eloquence (pratibhāna, spobs pa) of those qualified to give teachings.
A term for beings who violate discipline to the extent that they may never make progress on the path to becoming a buddha.
The name of a monk in the lineage of the buddha Mahāvyūha and the name of the order founded by that monk after Mahāvyūha entered parinirvāṇa.
One of the eight hot hells.
The forest located outside of Vārāṇasī where the Buddha first taught the Dharma.
The relative nature of phenomena, which arise in dependence upon causes and conditions. Together with the four noble truths, this was the first teaching given by the Buddha.
Manu being the archetypal human, the progenitor of mankind, in the Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, and other Indian texts, “child of Manu” is a synonym of “human being” or mankind in general. See also “descendant of Manu.”
Manu being the archetypal human, the progenitor of mankind, in the Mahābhārata, the Purāṇas, and other Indian texts, “descendant of Manu” is a synonym of “human being” or mankind in general. See also “child of Manu.”
A cousin of the Buddha Śākyamuni who broke with him and established his own community. His tradition continued into the first millennium ᴄᴇ. He is portrayed as plotting against the Buddha and even succeeding in wounding him. He is usually identified with wicked beings in accounts of previous lifetimes.
Indian scholar who assisted with the translation of sūtras into Tibetan.
A previous buddha who gave Śākyamuni the prophecy of his buddhahood.
One of the twelve branches of Buddhist scriptures.
A set of circumstances that do not provide the freedom to practice the Buddhist path: being born in the realms of (1) the hells, (2) hungry ghosts (pretas), (3) animals, or (4) long-lived gods, or in the human realm among (5) barbarians or (6) extremists, (7) in places where the Buddhist teachings do not exist, or (8) without adequate faculties to understand the teachings where they do exist.
In the context of Buddhist philosophy, one way to describe experience in terms of eighteen elements (eye, form, and eye consciousness; ear, sound, and ear consciousness; nose, smell, and nose consciousness; tongue, taste, and tongue consciousness; body, touch, and body consciousness; and mind, mental phenomena, and mind consciousness).
This also refers to the elements of the world, which can be enumerated as four, five, or six. The four elements are earth, water, fire, and air. A fifth, space, is often added, and the sixth is consciousness.
Name of a past buddha.
One of several different epithets, as applied to authentic monks or practitioners, that are paired with “liberated” (mukta, grol ba). Others in this text are [having] “knowledge” and “coherent,” q.v.; see also n.1. The Tibetan ldan pa in this context may be an alternative to rigs pa as a rendering of a single Sanskrit term in the source text, or a closely related term. The most literal meaning is “joined” or “connected,” but the specific sense is set out in 9.72–9.74.
An alternate name for the monk Apprehending Origination who was in the lineage of Buddha Mahāvyūha and the name of the order founded by that monk after Mahāvyūha entered parinirvāṇa.
One of the twelve branches of Buddhist scriptures.
One of the twelve branches of scripture or aspects of the Dharma. Literally meaning “vast” or “extensive,” it refers to a particular set of lengthy sūtras or collections of sūtras that provides a comprehensive overview of Buddhist thought and practice. This category includes individual works such as the Lalitavistara and Saddharmapuṇḍarīka and collections such as the Mahāsannipāta, Buddhāvataṃsaka, Ratnakūta, and Prajñāpāramitā.
Acts for which one will be reborn in hell immediately after death, without any intervening stages; they include killing one’s mother, one’s father, or an arhat, causing a schism in the saṅgha, and causing the blood of a thus-gone one to flow.
The four levels of meditative concentration, corresponding to the four levels of the form realm.
Four gods who live on the lower slopes (fourth level) of Mount Meru in the Heaven of the Four Great Kings and guard the four cardinal directions. Each is the leader of a semidivine class of beings living in his realm. They are Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Virūḍhaka, Virūpākṣa, and Vaiśravaṇa.
The four acceptable norms of behavior concern posture while walking, standing, sitting, and lying down.
A class of generally benevolent nonhuman beings who inhabit the skies, sometimes said to inhabit fantastic cities in the clouds, and more specifically to dwell on the eastern slopes of Mount Meru, where they are ruled by the Great King Dhṛtarāṣṭra. They are most renowned as celestial musicians who serve the gods. In the Abhidharma, the term is also used to refer to the mental body assumed by sentient beings during the intermediate state between death and rebirth. Gandharvas are said to live on fragrances (gandha) in the desire realm, hence the Tibetan translation dri za, meaning “scent eater.”
An epithet of the Buddha.
One of the eight hot hells.
One of the six heavens of the desire realm.
One of the eight hot hells.
A term for any view that leads to further suffering in saṃsāra instead of liberation.
The five supernatural abilities attained through realization and yogic accomplishment: divine sight, divine hearing, knowing how to manifest miracles, remembering previous lives, and knowing the minds of others. (Provisional 84000 definition. New definition forthcoming.)
One of the eight hot hells.
Name of a king.
A buddha in the southwestern direction.
sangs rgyas kyi sde snod tshul khrims ’chal pa tshar gcod pa’i mdo (Buddhapiṭakaduḥśīlanigraha). Toh 220, Degé Kangyur vol. 63 (mdo sde, dza), folios 1.b–77.b.
sangs rgyas kyi sde snod tshul khrims ’chal pa tshar gcod pa’i mdo. bka’ ’gyur (dpe bsdur ma) [Comparative Edition of the Kangyur], krung go’i bod rig pa zhib ’jug ste gnas kyi bka’ bstan dpe sdur khang (The Tibetan Tripitaka Collation Bureau of the China Tibetology Research Center). 108 volumes. Beijing: krung go’i bod rig pa dpe skrun khang (China Tibetology Publishing House), 2006–9, vol. 63, pp. 3–188.
sangs rgyas kyi sde snod tshul khrims ’chal pa tshar gcod pa zhes bya ba theg pa chen po’i mdo (Buddhapiṭakaduḥśīlanigrahānāmanāmamahāyānasūtra). Stok Palace Kangyur vol. 53 (mdo sde, kha), folios 322.b–430.a.
sangs rgyas kyi mdzod kyi chos kyi yi ge. Toh 123, Degé Kangyur vol. 54 (mdo sde, tha), folios 53.b–212.b.
Denkarma (pho brang stod thang ldan dkar gyi chos kyi ’gyur ro cog gi dkar chag). Toh 4364, Degé Tengyur vol. 206 (sna tshogs, jo), folios 294.b–310.a.
Adamek, L. Wendi. The Teachings of Master Wuzhu: Zen and Religion of No-Religion. Columbia University Press, 2011.
Chen, Huaiyu. “Religion and Society on the Silk Road: The Inscriptional Evidence from Turfan.” In Early Medieval China: A Sourcebook, edited by Wendy Swartz et al., 76–94. Columbia University Press, 2014.
Herrmann-Pfandt, Adelheid. Die lHan kar ma: ein früher Katalog der ins Tibetische übersetzten buddhistischen Texte. Wien: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2008.
Lancaster, Lewis. The Korean Buddhist Canon: A Descriptive Catalogue. University of California Press, 1979. Online at Resources for East Asian Language and Thought.
McCombs, M. Jason. “Mahāyāna and the Gift: Theories and Practices.” PhD diss., Univ. of California, Los Angeles, 2014.
Morrell, Robert E., and Ichien Muju. Sand and Pebbles (Shasekishu): The Tales of Muju Ichien, a Voice for Pluralism in Kamakura Buddhism. SUNY Series in Buddhist Studies. State University of New York Press, 1985.
Silk, Jonathan (1994). “The Origins and Early History of the Mahāratnakūta Tradition: Traditions of Mahāyāna Buddhism with a Study of the Ratnarāśisūtra and related Materials” PhD diss., University of Michigan, 1994.
Silk, Jonathan (2019). “Chinese Sūtras in Tibetan Translation: A Preliminary Survey.” Annual Report of The International Research Institute for Advanced Buddhology (ARIRIAB) at Soka University 22 (2019): 227–46.
Stein, Rolf. Rolf Stein’s Tibetica Antiqua: With Additional Materials. Translated and edited by Arthur P. McKeown. Brill’s Tibetan Studies Library 24. Leiden: Brill, 2010.
Thompson, H. Leslie, trans. Jamgon Kongtrul’s Retreat Manual. Ithaca, NY: Snow Lion Publications, 1994.
Tsui, Chung-hui [崔中慧]. “A Study of Early Buddhist Scriptural Calligraphy: based on Buddhist manuscripts found in Dunhuang and Turfan (3–5 century).” PhD diss., University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong SAR, 2010.
C Choné (co ne) Kangyur
D Degé (sde dge) Kangyur
H Lhasa (zhol) Kangyur
J Lithang (’jang sa tham) Kangyur
K Peking (pe cin) Kangxi Kangyur
N Narthang (snar thang) Kangyur
S Stok Palace (stog pho brang) Manuscript Kangyur
Y Peking Yongle (g.yung lo) Kangyur
When Śāriputra voices amazement at how the Buddha uses words to point out the inexpressible ways in which nothing has true existence, the Buddha responds with an uncompromising teaching on how the lack of true existence and the absence of a self are indeed not simply philosophical views but the very cornerstone of the Dharma. To have understood, realized, and applied them fully is the main quality by which someone may be considered a member of the saṅgha and authorized to teach others and to receive offerings. Those who persist in perceiving anything—even elements of the path and its results—as having any kind of true existence are committing the most serious of all violations of discipline (śīla), and since they fail to follow the Buddha’s core teaching in this way they should not even be considered his followers. The Buddha’s dialogue with Śāriputra continues on the consequences of monks’ violating their discipline more broadly, and he gives several prophecies about the future decline of the Dharma that will be caused by the misbehavior of such monks.
An initial translation by Nika Jovic for the Dharmachakra Translation Committee was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Andreas Doctor, Adam Krug, and John Canti revised and edited the translation and the introduction, and Dion Blundell copyedited the text. Martina Cotter was in charge of the digital publication process.
The generous sponsorship of Zhou Tian Yu, Chen Yi Qin, and LZ which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
Repudiating Those Who Violate the Discipline is located in the General Sūtra section of the Degé Kangyur and is structured in eight chapters followed by a long epilogue. Although it purports to be a text on discipline and how it is violated, its main doctrinal thrust is to set out a view of Buddhist practice based uncompromisingly on the ultimate view of emptiness. To practice or teach others in ways that do not fully embrace that ultimate view turns out to be the transgression of discipline to which the sūtra’s title refers, and the Buddha goes even further in insisting that those who follow such mistaken ways are not only failing to follow his teachings correctly but are also not qualified to receive offerings and are not even to be considered members of the Buddhist saṅgha.
The sūtra begins with Śāriputra expressing his astonished admiration of how the Buddha has been able to formulate and express teachings about what is intrinsically inexpressible—the nature of his awakening to how phenomena are uncompounded, unarisen, and devoid of distinguishing marks and characteristics. The Buddha then uses various analogies to reinforce how paradoxical it is indeed that there can be any teachings at all on emptiness free of apprehending, and he elaborates on the ultimate nature of phenomena.
Next, the Buddha differentiates between virtuous friends and evil ones, emphasizing that evil friends are those who cause others to apprehend phenomena mistakenly. This teaching is followed by a discussion on the meaning of recollecting the Buddha, which is described here as a state in which all directing of the attention on an object or notion of any kind is avoided. The Buddha then explains how a virtuous friend must teach others, insisting on the nature of the correct view. He elaborates on the meaning of the noble saṅgha, revealing that there will be monks in the future who will deceive householders with wrong teachings in the pursuit of their own livelihood. The Buddha also warns against the many groups of non-Buddhists who will reject the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the buddhas, and thus cause the Dharma Jewel to disappear.
This is followed by a detailed presentation of ten faults that lead monks who violate their discipline to rebirth in the lower realms. The Buddha gives predictions of monks who will teach an impure Dharma in the future, supporting these predictions with a lengthy discussion of badly behaved monks who became highly influential in the past and spread mistaken interpretations of the Dharma in the world. Śākyamuni then discusses several of his past lives in which he worshiped and pleased countless other buddhas with the wish to attain awakening but lacked the view of emptiness free of apprehending. Finally, the epilogue highlights the need to abandon all clinging to the view of a self, and it cautions against the numerous non-Buddhists and badly behaved monks who will lead immature beings astray.
As the title suggests, one of the primary concerns of this sūtra is the identification and repudiation of those who have violated their discipline. The Buddha makes it clear that what determines the purity of one’s discipline is not just how one maintains the formal vows one has taken, but is even more a question of whether one has a proper understanding of emptiness in terms of the nonapprehending of phenomena, as he has taught.
Not to follow properly the teachings he has been at pains to formulate on this crucial point is a betrayal of them, to the point that people who fail to take full notice of them are not worthy of offerings made to the saṅgha, and are not to be considered his followers at all. The Buddha argues throughout that such people must be excluded from the monastic saṅgha, because their presence compromises one of the saṅgha’s primary functions as the proper recipient of gifts that are given through faith. In this regard the sūtra makes frequent mention of the necessary qualities seen as criteria for the worthiness of the saṅgha to be an object of refuge overall, for the worthiness of members of the saṅgha to be recipients of offerings individually, and by extension for their worthiness to teach and guide others—these qualities being most often mentioned in the context of their absence in those who violate discipline. When such people hide in the monastic ranks, we are told, they are no better than thieves and robbers who steal the Dharma. The worst of them are those members of the Buddhist saṅgha who teach a corrupted Dharma based on their misunderstanding or rejection of the doctrine of emptiness as nonapprehending. The severity of the negative karmic consequences that these beings incur is compounded by the fact that their teachings lead beings further from awakening and result in the corruption, suppression, and destruction of the Dharma.
This sūtra is notable for how it places the view of emptiness and nonapprehending firmly in the realm of discipline (śīla). While discipline is usually explained more in terms of placing restraint on physical and verbal behavior through the observation of rules and precepts—the training of the mind being rather the domain of meditative absorption (samādhi) and wisdom (prajñā)—this text makes it clear that the commitment to follow the Buddha’s instructions and through them attain awakening is also a precept in the domain of discipline, yet has to be accompanied by a profound understanding of the nature of that awakening.
Translations of this sūtra survive in both Chinese and Tibetan, but no Sanskrit source has been identified to date. The Tibetan translation was completed in the late eighth or early ninth century by the Indian scholar Dharmaśrīprabha and the translator-monk Palgyi Lhünpo at the Lhenkar (Tib. lhan dkar ma) Palace, and it is included in the Lhenkarma (or Denkarma) royal catalog of works that was compiled in the early ninth century. Both translators also worked on the Tibetan translation of the vinaya literature, and Palgyi Lhünpo is given the title “chief editor” (zhu chen) in other colophons.
The Chinese translation (Taishō 653) was completed by the renowned translator Kumārajīva (344–413
Both the Tōhoku and Taishō canonical catalogs link Taishō 653 to another Tibetan sūtra translation, Toh 123, which appears to be a direct translation of the Chinese in Taishō 653, rather than of a Sanskrit source, as seems to have been the case with our text, Toh 220. Based on a cursory comparison of Toh 123 and Toh 220, we can say that their content and structure are generally very similar. However, these two Tibetan translations also differ in many respects, including their titles, their length, the number of chapters, the initial settings, and the literary styles and lexicons.
Repudiating Those Who Violate the Discipline does not rank among the best-known sūtras extensively quoted in Buddhist literature, and does not seem to have received attention in Indian treatises. However, it has been mentioned or cited by a range of Tibetan authors over the centuries, including Gampopa and Drolungpa Lodrö Jungne in the eleventh, Tsongkhapa in the fourteenth, Pawo Tsuklal Trengwa in the sixteenth, Karma Chagmé and Drigung Chungtsang in the seventeenth, Yongdzin Yeshé Gyaltsen in the eighteenth, and Shabkar and Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé in the nineteenth. Nevertheless, most of these citations refer to the later chapters that speak of the decline of the Dharma that will be caused in the future by monks whose discipline is corrupted in general, i.e., mostly in an outer sense, and do not seem to take account of the important and profound points that the Buddha makes in the earlier chapters about the much more far-reaching “inner” corruption of discipline in terms of wrong views of emptiness. Kongtrül cites this sūtra to show how distractions can lead to suffering over innumerable lifetimes. In modern scholarship, Jonathan Silk has cited it to highlight criticism of monastic greed and illegitimate practices. Jason McCombs refers to the scripture in his discussion of the practice of making donations, and he points to concerns related to monastic corruption expressed in the text. Robert Morrell quotes the sūtra’s warning against monks who take ordination merely to escape secular duties. And finally, Wendi Adamek has quoted the sūtra in reference to monks who pretend to be genuine Dharma teachers when they are not.
This English translation is based on the Degé Kangyur edition, in consultation with the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and the Stok Palace Kangyur.
[B1] Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas.
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in the Deer Park of Ṛṣipatana at Vārāṇasī, together with a great saṅgha of five hundred monks who had exhausted their defilements, completed their tasks, done their duties, laid down their burdens, accomplished their goals, and eliminated the bonds binding them to existence. Their minds were fully liberated by perfect understanding, their insight was fully liberated, and they had attained mastery. They were all worthy ones, except for one person—Venerable Ānanda.
At that time, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, Venerable Maudgalyāyana, Venerable Mahākāśyapa, Venerable Subhūti, Venerable Bakkula, Venerable Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, and Venerable Ānanda rose from their afternoon meditative seclusion and went to the place where the Blessed One was staying. They bowed down at his feet and took seats to one side.
Śāriputra said to the Blessed One, “The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!”
The Blessed One replied, “Śāriputra, what prompted you to say, ‘The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!’?”
“Blessed One, when I was alone in the forest in meditative seclusion, the thought came up in my mind, ‘How is it that the Blessed One uses names and distinguishing marks to explain things that have no names and distinguishing marks, and describes things that are utterly indescribable?’ Blessed One, when I thought about what this really meant, I was astonished. Blessed One, it was when I had seen what this really meant that I said, ‘The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!’ ”
“It is indeed, Śāriputra,” replied the Blessed One. “Śāriputra, this point is indeed astonishing. This point is most astonishing! For such is the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the thus-gone, worthy, perfect buddhas.
“Śāriputra, imagine that in the open sky, where nothing stays and nothing can be apprehended, a painter or a painter’s skilled apprentice were to draw a multitude of forms in various colors and shapes. Would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing!” replied Śāriputra. “Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra,” continued the Blessed One, “much more astonishing are the things that the Thus-Gone One has explained after fully awakening to unsurpassed and perfect buddhahood. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, such matters as an absence of characteristics, an absence of mental engagement, an absence of effort, an absence of movement, an absence of attainment, an absence of activity; a giving up of attainment, a nonattainment of attainment, an interruption of nonattainment, an attainment that is not subsequently attained, a relinquishment of attainment, a true nonattainment of attainment; an absence of purification, an absence of anything to be purified, a not being subject to purification; a not thought of, a not to be thought of, a not thought of as wholesome; a not elaborated, a not to be elaborated, a not elaborated as wholesome; a not imputed, a not to be imputed, a not imputed as wholesome; and a not confused, a not to be subsumed, a not subsumed, an absence of foundation, an absence of apprehending, a not departing, an absence of anything to depart, a not departing into the wholesome, an intrinsic emptiness, an intrinsic lack of essential nature, an intrinsically not pointed out, an intrinsically not to be pointed out, an intrinsically not to be pointed out as wholesome, a difficult to believe for the whole world, and an absence of names or distinguishing marks identified nonetheless just as they are in terms of names and distinguishing marks—all these matters that are indescribable he has described in words. How all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that, Śāriputra, is the most astonishing!
“Śāriputra, imagine that someone placed Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, in his mouth, chewed it three times, swallowed it as if it were food without feeling the slightest discomfort, and then walked off in midair. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that man’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a great fire of dung about one league high and one league wide burned, blazed, and flared up in a great firestorm. Imagine that the crackling sound of that fire filled the four directions, and its flames, roaring in the four directions, rose up about four leagues high into the air. Imagine then that a person carrying a big bundle of grass were to enter that fire. As he enters it, great gusts of wind begin to blow from the four directions; yet, when the flames hit him, neither his body nor the grass is consumed by the fire, so that when he emerges from the fire, not even a single blade of grass is scorched. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that man’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing. Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person wanted to cross a great ocean, and he traveled from one shore to the other on a large raft made of stones. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing. Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to lift this world with its four continents and its oceans, mountains, vegetation, and water, and then climb up to the Brahmā abodes using a ladder made of the legs of bees. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to hoist Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, with a thread that dangles in the wind and hold it up in the sky. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: is the great Ganges River huge, wide, deep, and boundless?”
“Yes, Blessed One, it is.”
“Śāriputra, imagine that a deluge as large as the great Ganges River were falling on this trichiliocosm and that, while it was falling from the sky, someone were to catch this great downpour in one hand, without letting a single drop of water fall to the ground. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: is Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, huge and immense?”
“Blessed One, yes, it is huge. Well-Gone One, it is immense!”
“Śāriputra, imagine that a great rain of boulders as large as Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, were to fall on this trichiliocosm, and that while it was falling from the sky, someone were to catch this great rain of boulders in one hand, without letting even the smallest pebble the size of a mustard seed slip from their hand and fall to the ground. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that when the great eon of incineration comes about, a person were to extinguish that great, blazing mass of fire by spitting on it, and then restore the entire universe, including the celestial mansions, with a single breath. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to place all sentient beings in the palm of one hand, and with the other lift up this trichiliocosm with its oceans, mountains, continents, forests, landscapes, vegetation, and water, hold them in midair, and cause all those sentient beings to have a single thought and a single mind. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, the things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out after fully awakening to unsurpassed and perfect buddhahood—how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without cessation in three ways, without ownership in eight ways, without intrinsic nature in six ways, without intrinsic existence in seven ways, intrinsically empty in eight ways, and yet believed in by the entire world in nine ways—are much more astonishing still.
“Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, these teachings are without characteristics and have relinquished characteristics; they are without mental engagement and do not possess mental engagement; they are without effort, without coming, without going, and without arrangement; they are without elaboration and are free of elaboration; they are without torment and are free of torment; they have no far side, no near side, no shore, and no absence of a shore; they are without valleys, without plains, without rivers, and without an absence of rivers; they are without freedom, without liberation, without confusion, without the absence of delusion, without delusion, and without the net of delusion; they are without being just as they are, without a validly perceived object, without an object of analysis, and have no conceptual domain; they are without movement and without wandering; they are without nonsound and without harsh words; they are without recollection and they put an end to recollection; they are without intention and put an end to intention; they are without mental faculty and put an end to mental faculty; they are without liberation and without utter liberation; they are without falsehood and without the quality of falsehood; they are without deception, without the quality of deception, and without the net of deception; they are without names, without distinguishing marks, without conventions, and without the absence of conventions; they are without designations and without not being designations; they are without a full extent and without not being a full extent; they are without guidance, without a path, and without freedom from the fruition of a path; they are free of confusion, and have relinquished conceptual thought, the absence of thought, the thorough absence of thought, the utter absence of thought, and discursive thought; they are without adulteration, without grasping, without thorough grasping, without holding, and without anything to be thoroughly held; they are without attainment and without something to be attained; they eliminate truth, eliminate desire, eliminate anger, and eliminate delusion; they are without truth and without falsity; they are without permanence, without impermanence, without clarity, without the absence of clarity, without light, and without darkness; they are without possessiveness, without their own essence, without an object of their own essence, and empty of their own essence; and they are without liberation, without mental engagement, and without death. Being ultimate reality, they overcome Māra’s army, overcome the afflictions, overcome the aggregates, overcome the elements, overcome the sense fields, overcome notions in terms of aggregates, overcome notions in terms of elements, overcome notions in terms of sense fields, overcome notions in terms of a self, overcome notions in terms of a being, overcome notions in terms of a life force, overcome notions in terms of persons, overcome notions in terms of existence, overcome notions in terms of real entities, and overcome wrong views and mistaken comprehensions.
“Śāriputra, they overcome and destroy all forms of clinging, among which, Śāriputra, they overcome and destroy those notions regarding phenomena that are held by beings who are not sublime. Śāriputra, they also overcome and destroy the doctrines of those who find inspiration in suchness or in the one and only suchness, but who are not sublime and take hold of the Thus-Gone One’s words in the wrong way. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, whoever is a proponent of a self, a being, a life force, a person, eternity, nothingness, existence, nonexistence, names, distinguishing marks, or imputations, and anyone who apprehends entities, Śāriputra, holds beliefs not in agreement with the Thus-Gone One. Śāriputra, those who hold beliefs not in agreement with the Thus-Gone One are mistaken. Those who are mistaken are not my disciples, and those who are not my disciples hold beliefs not in agreement with nirvāṇa; they hold beliefs not in agreement with the Buddha, hold beliefs not in agreement with the Dharma, and hold beliefs not in agreement with the Saṅgha. Śāriputra, I do not allow those who hold such views to go forth or take full ordination. Śāriputra, I do not allow even small cups of water to be donated as gifts out of faith to those who hold such views. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, all such people hold to belief in an unwholesome intrinsic nature of that sort.
“Śāriputra, those who have let go of belief in such an unwholesome intrinsic nature go forth in the teachings as follows: they do not think about entering nirvāṇa, they do not think about nirvāṇa, and they do not cling to nirvāṇa. They are not afraid, scared, or terrified of emptiness. Since they strive to let go of all phenomena, it goes without saying that they do not hold to a belief in such an unwholesome intrinsic nature. Since their attention is not turned to any of those kinds of belief, such as belief in a self, belief in a being, belief in a life force, or belief in a person, they are steeped in the absorption free of distinguishing marks. Without holding on to distinguishing marks, they understand that all distinguishing marks have a single characteristic—the absence of characteristics—and that, Śāriputra, is the acceptance of what concords with the truth. Śāriputra, because the monks who possess such an acceptance are my disciples, they should receive and make use of gifts that are given out of faith.
“Those people have attained freedom from delusion. Why is that? Śāriputra, it is because this Dharma is without going and coming, without something to be apprehended, and without something to be thoroughly apprehended; without something to cling to and without something external; without conventional terms and without designations; it is without joy, without something to be enjoyed, and has overcome joy; it is without gathering together and free of gathering together; it is without going, without coming and going, and puts an end to all movement; it ends all conventions; it is without seeing, without observation, without apprehending, without adulteration, without convention, without truth, without falsity, without permanence, without impermanence, without the sky, without light, and without atmosphere; it is without inclusion, without exclusion, and without belief; it is without something to be taught and without something to be definitively taught; it is without multiplicity and without the lack of multiplicity; it is without movement, without conceits, without designation, without investigation, without composure, without afflictions, and not subject to purification; it is without names, without distinguishing marks, without actions related to distinguishing marks, and without an object of thought; it is without the female gender and without the male gender; it is without gods, without nāgas, without yakṣas, without gandharvas, and without kumbhāṇḍas; it is without nothingness, without eternality, without being, without a life force, without a soul, and without a person; it is without a descendant of Manu and without a child of Manu; it is without permanence, without transmigration, and without the lack of transmigration; it is not harmful; it is without discipline and without contravened discipline; it is without affliction, without purification, without absorption, without attainment, without the faculty of absorption, without concentration, and without the result of concentration; it is without knowing, without seeing, without apprehended object, and without the lack of apprehended object; it is without a path and without the fruition of a path; it is without insight and without the faculty of insight; it is without knowledge and without ignorance; it is without liberation, without the lack of liberation, and without complete liberation; it is without fruition and without the attainment of fruition; it is without power, without weakness, without anxiety, and without fearlessness; it is without recollection and without the faculty of recollection; it is without abiding and without dwelling; it is without envy, without the path of envy, without conceptualization, without nonconceptualization, and without discursiveness; it is without awakening and without the factors of awakening; it is without understanding and without not understanding; it is without earth, without water, without fire, without wind, and without space; it is without wholesome actions and without unwholesome actions; it is without phenomena and without the absence of phenomena; it is without happiness and without suffering; it destroys all elaborations and is free of destroying all elaborations; and it is cooling, without humility, and without composure. It destroys all wrong views, desires, bonds, pride, names and distinguishing marks, and conceits. It ends all conventions, and it is without conceptual imputations and without distinguishing marks.
“Śāriputra, in the Dharma to which the Thus-Gone One has perfectly and completely awakened there is no permanence, no impermanence, no happiness, no suffering, no affliction, no purification, no nihilism, no eternalism, no being, no life force, no soul, no primordial man, no person, no descendant of Manu, no child of Manu, no celestial fixed pole, and no gandharva; no entity, no absence of entity, no cessation, no noncessation, no attainment, and no nonattainment; no transmigration, no oppression, no birth, and no arising; no past, no future, no present, no birth, no old age, no sickness, no death, no sorrow, no wailing, no pain, no unhappiness, and no disturbance; no perfect awakening and no absence of perfect awakening; no past, no future, no center; no being at peace, no being tamed, no decrease, no increase, no engagement, no imputation, no nonimputation, and no imputation and nonimputation combined; and no space, no opportunity, no distress, no freedom from desire, no cessation, and no nirvāṇa.
“Why is that? Śāriputra, that the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any phenomenon whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. That the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any convention whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. That the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any entity whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. Śāriputra, the Thus-Gone One has no conceits about nirvāṇa. Because he has passed into nirvāṇa he has no conceits. Of those who have passed into nirvāṇa, none have conceits. They do not adhere to nirvāṇa. They do not delight in nirvāṇa. That is why, Śāriputra, the fact that the Thus-Gone One, after fully awakening to unsurpassed perfect buddhahood, taught a Dharma about all conditioned phenomena being uncompounded, unarisen, devoid of distinguishing marks, devoid of characteristics, unconditioned, and impossible to teach is truly astonishing!”
This was chapter 1, “The Setting.”
“Blessed One,” Śāriputra then inquired, “according to this Dharma discourse, what are the ways in which an evil friend gives instructions and teachings, and what are the ways in which a virtuous friend gives instructions and teachings?”
“Śāriputra,” the Blessed One replied, “a monk might instruct and teach another monk as follows: ‘Come, monk. Engage your attention on the Buddha, engage your attention on the Dharma, and engage your attention on the Saṅgha. Engage your attention on recollecting moral discipline. Engage your attention on recollecting giving. Engage your attention on recollecting the gods. Come, monk. Observe the body as being the body and sustain that observing. To keep hold of the distinguishing marks of sustaining, engage your attention on the body’s impure characteristics. Come, monk. Engage your attention on the fact that all formations are impermanent and are suffering. Engage your attention on the fact that all phenomena lack a self and are empty. Come, monk. Hold fast to the distinguishing marks you have observed and keep them in mind. Bear the distinguishing marks you have observed in mind so that the mind will not wander. Come, monk. Reflect upon and work to acquire wholesome qualities. Do not hold on to the distinguishing marks of unwholesome qualities. Generate enthusiasm to help you to not hold on to them and to abandon them instead. Remain vigilant about the distinguishing marks that indicate that you have abandoned nonvirtues, so that they do not arise in the future. Come, monk. Carefully consider and direct your attention to the aspects of the aggregates, the sense fields, and the elements as repulsive. Come, monk. Bear in mind the distinguishing marks that indicate wholesome and unnwholesome qualities. Then, engage your attention on these key points to abandon them: To abandon desire, engage your attention on impurity. To abandon anger, engage your attention on love. To abandon delusion, engage your attention on dependent origination. Come, monk. Engage your attention on pure moral discipline. Engage your attention on the distinguishing marks related to absorption. Engage your attention on pure insight. Direct your effort toward the four concentrations. Reflect upon and work to acquire the result you should attain. Engage your attention without considering unwholesome qualities. Engage your attention and rely on virtuous qualities. Strive to cultivate the path. Bear those distinguishing marks that indicate virtuous qualities perfectly in mind and engage your attention on the fact that nirvāṇa is happiness and peace. Work to acquire this view, so that you can attain nirvāṇa.’ When a monk instructs and teaches another with such statements and also says, ‘Engage your attention on purity,’ he is encouraging him to hold a mistaken understanding. The notion that this is to view things correctly will encourage him to view things wrongly.
“Śāriputra, those who instruct and teach others in such a manner are evil friends, and they are deprecating me. They are speaking in the false and incorrect terms of non-Buddhists. They are teaching the positions that non-Buddhists preach. Śāriputra, I do not authorize the donation of the offerings of the faithful to be used by such unholy beings, not even as little as a small cup of water.
“Śāriputra, it is for the sake of those who give instructions that I am saying this, but those people are not instructing and teaching others in accordance with my words. Why is that? Those who give such instructions and teachings are mostly those who have fallen victim to pride. Śāriputra, even if those ignorant monks do not give up this position in each and every one of all its aspects for five years, expending a great deal of effort in those false words but not questioning the monks in the assembly who hold the view of nonapprehending or gaining understanding from them, Śāriputra, I say that those monks who maintain a false practice of diligence for five years are mixed in the purview of non-Buddhists, and are behaving just like the members of Māra’s hordes.
“On the other hand, Śāriputra, there are also monks who hear the teachings on emptiness and nonapprehending related to such instructions and teachings, accept them in accord with those instructions, and engage their attention on emptiness. They have no doubts or reservations about the teaching of nonapprehending and emptiness. If they engage in it, understand it, contemplate it, and develop conviction in it, without it being based in the view of personhood in any way whatsoever, Śāriputra, I say that those monks are pure and observe pure conduct. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, those monks have mastered the acceptance of nonapprehending, and they can reach nirvāṇa in this very lifetime.
“Śāriputra, I prophesy that such monks who possess the qualities related to the acceptance of nonapprehending will constitute the first great assembly during the lifetime of the blessed Maitreya. I prophesy that the blessed Maitreya will proclaim three times, ‘Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime! Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime! Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime!’ Śāriputra, that is how I prophesy that householders and renunciants who master such an acceptance will reach nirvāṇa in this world.
“Furthermore, Śāriputra, other monks, when instructed and taught the teachings on nonapprehension and emptiness, may feel afraid, scared, or terrified on hearing them; if so, they will be reborn in the hell realms without a lord, refuge, and teacher. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, what completes the conditions for their lower rebirth is to be afraid of the Buddha’s teachings. Moreover, Śāriputra, when I say that some of them will take rebirth in the lower realms, why is that? Śāriputra, the nonexistence that they have imputed as being the Buddha’s teachings is in fact a nonexistence they have imputed in what they apprehend.
“Śāriputra, for someone even to commit the five deeds entailing immediate retribution is not worse than it is to hold a view with respect to a self, to hold a view with respect to a being, to hold a view with respect to a life force, to hold a view with respect to a person, to hold a view with respect to the aggregates, to hold a view with respect to the elements, to hold a view with respect to the sense fields, to hold a view with respect to origination, to hold a view with respect to destruction, to hold a view with respect to discipline, to hold a view with respect to an essence of discipline, to hold a view with respect to an essence of concentration, to hold a view with respect to a pure essence of concentration, to hold a view with respect to the marks of the Buddha, to hold a view with respect to engaging one’s attention on accomplishing the Dharma, or to hold a view with respect to a person as the conventional designation of the Saṅgha.
“Śāriputra, why is that? It is because the teachings of the Thus-Gone One declare that someone who maintains the view of a person cannot be counted as included in the saṅgha. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers is without persons, without concepts, and free of thoughts. Śāriputra, there is not the slightest nonvirtue within the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers. Their discipline is free of being spoiled. Their conduct is free of being spoiled. Their livelihood is free of being spoiled. Their view is free of being spoiled.
“Śāriputra, what is virtue? For the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers it is like this: factors concurrent with the mind, concepts about nonentities, concepts about distinguishing marks, apprehending in terms of names, apprehending in terms of persons, and even, Śāriputra, any mind-related conventions at all about virtuous or unwholesome phenomena—not to apprehend any of these, that is what virtue is taught to be in the Dharma-Vinaya of the noble ones.
“Why is that, Śāriputra? Because one should know that where there is happiness, there is also suffering. Śāriputra, the quality of the Thus-Gone One’s perfect buddhahood is peace. Śāriputra, the quality of the Thus-Gone One’s perfect buddhahood is that in it there is no desire, no nondesire, no happiness, no suffering, no mind, no intention, no perception, and no feeling. Śāriputra, there is not even emptiness. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, when a notion of emptiness is present, notions of a self, notions of a being, notions of a life force, notions of a person, notions of eternity, notions of nothingness, notions of origination, and notions of destruction will also arise. That is why, Śāriputra, it is said that as long as there is a perceiver, there will also be beliefs in perceptions involving distinguishing marks, and that for that reason it is wrong.
“Śāriputra, emptiness is so called because no attention is engaged on an emptiness related to perceptions involving distinguishing marks. It is called emptiness because it is also empty of attention being engaged on emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because there is thus neither virtue nor nonvirtue in emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because there is not even a perception of emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because in common with how all compounded phenomena should be known there is no knowing, no cognizing, no comprehending, no investigating, and no dwelling. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because—since no one is able to engage their attention on emptiness—it is not in the absence of distinguishing marks, it is not in the absence of wishes, and it is not in the absence of engaging attention on distinguishing marks.
“Śāriputra, why is the term dwelling with emptiness so called? When no attention is engaged on any distinguishing marks, even distinguishing marks of emptiness, that it is called dwelling with emptiness. It is when distinguishing marks have been let go that one can speak of the absence of distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, it is when no attention whatsoever is engaged on any such distinguishing marks, when there is no engagement of attention, no distinguishing mark, and no signal, that one can speak of the absence of distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, I have taught that the slightest belief in distinguishing marks or apprehending of distinguishing marks is a wrong view. Why is that? Śāriputra, if it is wrong even to apprehend this Dharma-Vinaya as being at peace, is it not worse to so designate it, designate it as something, or have something as its designation?
“Śāriputra, why do the blessed ones teach so extensively that designations are wrong? Śāriputra, you may not know that these designations are untrue, but the thus-gone ones understand that they are wrong and do not apprehend even the slightest designation whatsoever. Śāriputra, that is why they have taught that designations are wrong views. Śāriputra, the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the thus-gone ones is without recollection and without attention. Why is that? Śāriputra, it is because the thus-gone ones, with regard to any dharma, do not apprehend a suchness intrinsic to it, they do not apprehend an essential nature intrinsic to it, do not apprehend an essential nature extrinsic to it, do not apprehend a sameness, and do not apprehend a lack of sameness.
“Śāriputra, why is the application of mindfulness so called? As I have said, Śāriputra, an apprehended application of mindfulness, an apprehended intrinsic nature, an apprehended suchness intrinsic to something, and an apprehended intrinsic enduring state would be baseless and spurious, and it is in order to ensure the proper understanding of how dharmas are empty of their own inherent characteristics that the Thus-Gone One has spoken of the application of mindfulness. Dharmas are without clinging, without craving, have no location, have no presence, do not endure, and are free of remaining, so there can be no actual mindfulness of them—let alone the application of mindfulness. For that reason it is called the application of mindfulness.
“Śāriputra, if any dharma had any intrinsic suchness—even if it was no bigger than a hundredth part of a hair-tip—the Thus-Gone One would not have appeared in the world and taught that all dharmas are devoid of intrinsic nature. However, Śāriputra, since he knows that all dharmas are devoid of intrinsic nature, are empty of intrinsic nature, have but a single characteristic, and lack characteristics, the Thus-Gone One has taught the application of mindfulness and called it the application of mindfulness. As something that has no location and is not based on anything, is without recollection and without any act of recollection, is without concepts and without thoughts, is without intention and without any act of intention, is without mind and without any act of mind, is without phenomena and any notion of phenomena, is without any notions of anything believing anything whatsoever, and is without dualistic activity, without dwelling, and without enduring—for all these reasons the nonthought of the noble ones is called the application of mindfulness. That whole set of items comprised by what the Thus-Gone One taught to be the application of mindfulness is referred to as the application of mindfulness.
“Furthermore, Śāriputra, what is recollecting the Buddha? Seeing that there are no entities is called recollecting the Buddha. Also, that the Buddha is inconceivable, that he is without compare, and that his intention comprises suchness is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, what does his intention comprises suchness mean? The blessed buddhas are without concepts, have no thought, and are the absence of concepts and thoughts—that is why one speaks of recollecting the Buddha. To see that intrinsic essence is to see the Buddha.
“What does to see that intrinsic essence mean? To see the absence of entities in the absence of entities is to recollect the Buddha. It is because one sees the Buddha without apprehending even the slightest act of recollection with the dharmas of the mind and mental states that it is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, since it is not easy to recollect using a recollecting that is to abstain from designation and to put an end to any engaging of attention, that is why this teaching is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, this teaching is to be at peace from all engaging of attention. For those who exert themselves in it, recollecting the Buddha does not mean engaging their attention on the distinguishing marks of the Thus-Gone One’s physical form. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, it is consciousness that is always focused just on the distinguishing marks of form. The absence of any entity apprehending the absence of form, that is recollecting the Buddha. To be without concepts, to have no thoughts, and to be without grasping is therefore referred to as recollecting the Buddha.”
This was chapter 2, “The Teaching on Recollection.” [B2]
“Blessed One,” Śāriputra then inquired, “how must one explain these teachings so that one does not become an evil friend? Blessed One, how must one instruct and teach to be referred to as a virtuous friend?”
“Śāriputra,” replied the Blessed One, “a monk should instruct and teach another monk about this as follows: ‘Come, monk. Cultivate recollecting the Buddha and have conviction in it. Do not engage your attention on some state that is attained. Since there are no entities when you see correctly, you must have the convinction that the intrinsic nature of phenomena is not an object of correct seeing, and let go of the notion that something lacking intrinsic nature possesses any essence.
“ ‘Let go of the notion that it has distinguishing marks, while at the same time do not apprehend any entity that is without distinguishing marks—let alone any act of recollection. Because you thus let go of its not having any essence, of its not having any distinguishing marks, and of the very notion of distinguishing marks, it has nothing added, but it is also not an absence of anything added—that, the cessation of all phenomena, is the cultivation of recollecting the Buddha. Because it is without thoughts of virtuous and unwholesome qualities or any examination of them, you therefore let go of concepts and analysis; the Buddha is thus the absence of conceptual thought, and it is without conceptual thought that you should direct your attention to the Buddha. To be without concepts, analysis, or distinguishing marks is to recollect the Buddha, and that is a matter of there being not even the slightest act of recollecting dharmas that are mental states—let alone physical acts, let alone verbal acts, let alone mental acts—for there is no place for them. To let go of characteristics, without movement, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, and without any engagement of attention is to recollect the Buddha. To be without names, without distinguishing marks, without possessiveness, without reflection, without attainment, without acquisition, and without attitudes involving concepts and analysis is to recollect the Buddha.’
“Why is that? Śāriputra, as long as the engagement of attention continues, there is grasping at distinguishing marks, and that, Śāriputra, is a wrong view. But, Śāriputra, as long as there are no distinguishing marks, no discernment, no entities, no concepts, no analysis, no signs, no cessation, no origination, no movement, no arising, and the acceptance of nonarising, this is called recollecting the Buddha. Moreover, that which is without attachments, without cravings, without noncessation, without refutations, without names, and without distinguishing marks—that, Śāriputra, is recollecting the Buddha. It is the absence of characteristics and conventions, and involves not even the slightest act of recollection, let alone any physical or verbal actions, for there is no place for them. Where there are no acts of body, no acts of speech, and no acts of mind, there is no craving, no grasping, no clinging, no noncessation, no refutation, no origination, no birth, no separating, no coming together, no extension, no entities, and where all aspects of concepts and analysis are interrupted, that likewise is what is called recollecting the Buddha.
“Those who possess just such a recollection of the Buddha can, if they wish, transform this entire great trichiliocosm, or overcome trillions of demons, so what they can do for those who apprehend and are motivated by ignorance, which is baseless and not the truth, goes without saying. Once you have understood for yourself, without getting corrupted by Māra or Māra’s attendants, that phenomena are without distinguishing marks, without elaboration, without nonelaboration, without cessation, without refutation, without characteristics, without conventions, without designation, without appearance, and without clarity, since this is therefore recollecting the Buddha, while instructing and teaching it using mere conventions, do not engage your attention on even the slightest belief in distinguishing marks. Do not conceptualize. Do not think. Do not elaborate. Why is that? This teaching that is without entities has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention. It is because it has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention that it is called recollecting the Buddha, and so it is—it has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention. Why is that? Because the buddhas are not something on which attention is engaged through their physical distinguishing marks, nor through concepts, nor through thoughts, nor through clinging, nor through nonclinging, nor through absorption, nor through wisdom, nor through knowledge, nor through the absence of knowledge. Why is that? Because the thus-gone ones are without designations, are inconceivable, entirely inconceivable. Therefore, do not grasp at distinguishing marks. Without clinging even in the slightest to letting go of, attaining, or cultivating any dharma, do not apprehend even the thus-gone ones themselves—let alone an act of recollection.
“Śāriputra, a monk should instruct and teach other monks as follows: ‘Come, monks. Phenomena having their own intrinsic characteristics—you should break that down. Do not engage your attention on notions of phenomena.’ They will take delight in the very absence of clinging to their attention being engaged in that way, in the very absence of attachment, in the very absence of phenomena, in the very absence of entities, and in the single characteristic itself. They will not entertain any notion of phenomena at all—let alone the notion of a person, for there is no place for that.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: if one does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that one could give rise to a notion of phenomena?”
“No, Blessed One, one could not.”
“If one does not engage one’s attention on a notion of phenomena and does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that there would be any phenomena to break down?”
“No, Blessed One, there would be none.”
“Śāriputra, on a tree that had no roots, could it be that any branches, leaves, or bark would grow?”
“No, Blessed One, they would not.”
“Similarly, Śāriputra, if one does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that a notion of phenomena would arise?”
“No, Blessed One, it would not.”
“If one does not engage one’s attention on a notion of phenomena and does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that there would be any phenomena to break down?”
“No, Blessed One, there would be none.”
“Likewise, if one does not apprehend and engage one’s attention on phenomena or the notion of phenomena, there will be no noncessation and no nonproduction to analyze, and only by not conceptualizing phenomena, not thinking about them, not negating them, not stopping them, not engaging with them, and not reversing them can it be said that one has reached the suchness that is their intrinsic nature.
“Śāriputra, those who instruct and teach in these terms are called virtuous friends, though ultimately they have neither virtue nor nonvirtue. Śāriputra, those who possess such characteristics are rare in the world. The unmistaken and correct view possessed by those of this kind is accordingly known as the correct view. Indeed, Śāriputra, the correct view, correct acceptance, and correct conviction, as unmistakenly and correctly observed by those of this kind, comprise what is said by the Thus-Gone One to be the correct view.
“Śāriputra, the view of those who do not have this unmistaken and correct view, whoever they may be, is not the correct view. Śāriputra, proponents of a self, proponents of a being, proponents of a life force, proponents of a person, proponents of eternity, proponents of nothingness, or of whatever it may be, are in error. Śāriputra, the thus-gone ones and the thus-gone ones’ hearers are not proponents of a self, not proponents of a being, not proponents of a life force, not proponents of a person, not proponents of eternity, and not proponents of nothingness, and that is called the correct view of the thus-gone ones and the thus-gone ones’ hearers.
“Except for those who have the correct view, those who have the unmistaken view, and those who have the view that is how things are, everyone else is ranked among immature ordinary beings. Why is that? Śāriputra, they are immature ordinary beings because there are some who lack the correct view, while there are others who may have the acceptance that concords with the truth and thus have parts of the correct view, but still do not see things as they really are. Thus, Śāriputra, there are both correct and mistaken views, in that it is because of seeing correctly that there is the correct view, and because of generosity with worldly possessions that there is an increase in prosperity.
“Śāriputra, the worst of phenomena, which deceives and causes circling in saṃsāra, the Thus-Gone One has said to be merely conventional pure conduct. Śāriputra, I have not said, ‘This is the correct view, and that is the wrong view,’ for it is not the case. Why is that? Śāriputra, regarding any view there may be, its being wrong is to apprehend it. Śāriputra, whoever it may be who thinks, ‘This is the correct view, and that is a wrong view,’ that in itself is a wrong view. Why is that? Śāriputra, in this Dharma-Vinaya of the noble ones, like space and the palm of the hand, all views there may be are dismissed, and all conventions are annihilated, for such is the Dharma of the mendicants.”
This was chapter 3, “The Virtuous Friend.”
“Śāriputra, what is the noble saṅgha? It refers to those who have the acceptance that engages in the absence of cessation, the absence of origination, the absence of distinguishing marks, the absence of characteristics, and the absence of elaboration—those who have a particular conviction in it, correctly teach it, and provide the proper conditions for understanding it. Those with that particular conviction in the absence of characteristics do not even apprehend a self, let alone apprehending stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, and worthy ones; apprehending something as a phenomenon; apprehending men, women, and paṇḍakas; apprehending something as an imputation; or apprehending something as a basis. The saṅgha does not apprehend any such things.
“Nevertheless, Śāriputra, few have conviction in the absence of characteristics, the absence of cessation, and the absence of origination. Śāriputra, those who have conviction in the absence of characteristics, the absence of cessation, and the absence of origination can understand everything else, too, because their understanding is unmistaken. Their proper understanding of whatever else there is allows them to explain things thoroughly and to be absorbed in what is true. When they teach on whatever other matters there are, they do not apprehend even the slightest entity whatsoever, and are not included among all the worldly beings who are bound by the apprehending of a truth and cling to it. Being those who remain embodied in the true, they are called the noble saṅgha. Although they can perceive things from the perspective of conventions, they give instructions on the absence of characteristics, and provide thorough instructions on the absence of elaboration using names and distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, they are the Jewel of the Saṅgha that is worthy of receiving offerings, and it is because they are unmistaken in these respects that they are known as the saṅgha.
“Śāriputra, similarly, a monk who instructs and teaches others while knowing that the very topics he focuses on are empty of inherent characteristics is called a virtuous friend; those who have eliminated conventions, Śāriputra, are referred to as the noble saṅgha. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, they do not even apprehend those conventions that have been correctly designated regarding the noble Dharma-Vinaya. Therefore, Śāriputra, those who have eliminated conventions are known as the noble saṅgha.
“In that respect, Śāriputra, how is it that the expression the conventional designation ‘saṅgha’ is applied to them? In saying that they are those about whom not even any correctly designated conventions are apprehended, Śāriputra, I have also said that those who are called the saṅgha are those who—in not apprehending their understanding of how things really are and their professing not to have the distinguishing marks of attachment to be actual entities of any kind—all have the same intelligence, the same acceptance, and the same taste. But even that designation of unity is expressed merely in terms of worldly conventions; ultimately there is no saṅgha whatsoever.
“There is nothing with the four properties of being permanent, stable, eternal, and unchanging to be apprehended. Indeed, the noble ones even deny that the term phenomena is a correctly designated convention. But those who cast that view far away and apprehend phenomena as being all sorts of underlying things, making such statements as ‘this is a man,’ ‘this is a woman,’ ‘this is a paṇḍaka,’ ‘this is a god,’ ‘this is a nāga,’ ‘this is a yakṣa,’ ‘this is a gandharva,’ ‘this is a kumbhāṇḍa,’ ‘this is a phenomenon,’ or ‘this is not a phenomenon,’ and along with such statements say, ‘Come, monk, sit here; sleep there; this is such and such a person,’ are applying untrue words and using conventional designations in terms of names and distinguishing marks. Why is that so? Because, Śāriputra, there are no phenomena with names and distinguishing marks, none with characteristics, and none on which attention can be engaged. Śāriputra, what do you think: could any phenomenon on which attention cannot be engaged be directly described using a conventional designation?”
“No, Blessed One, it could not.”
“Śāriputra, those who say ‘this is a man,’ ‘this is a woman,’ ‘this is a paṇḍaka,’ ‘this is a god,’ ‘this is a nāga,’ ‘this is a yakṣa,’ ‘this is a gandharva,’ ‘this is a kumbhāṇḍa,’ ‘this is a phenomenon,’ or ‘this is not a phenomenon’ are certainly saying something untrue and subscribing to a conclusion that is incorrect, and for that reason they cannot be called the saṅgha. Śāriputra, those referred to as the noble saṅgha are so called for the very reason that they subsist in what is unmistaken. Furthermore, Śāriputra, one should understand that to be momentarily nonvirtuous is to have been apprehended as so being, since it is names and distinguishing marks that are the root of all nonvirtues.
“Śāriputra, in the noble Dharma-Vinaya, all names and distinguishing marks are interrupted, so those who do not give rise to conceits in terms of names—such as ‘this is what the saṅgha is; that is the noble saṅgha; this is the relative saṅgha; that is the saṅgha of those come to fruition; this is a quickly assembled saṅgha; that is a resident saṅgha; this is a saṅgha of monks; that is a saṅgha of nuns; this is a conforming saṅgha; that is a nonconforming saṅgha’—those who have let go of all such conceits, and who have interrupted them, are known as the noble saṅgha. They are those who are without names and distinguishing marks, are without conventional designation, are without engagement, who have interrupted conventional designation, and—because it has been described as the best of all these—who do not apprehend any such entities.
“Śāriputra, if one apprehends the conventions of names and distinguishing marks after thorough analysis, one is attached to various types of heretical views. This is because someone who strictly adheres to the five aggregates and the idea that the aggregates are the cause from which existence originates maintains a wrong view. There is no one among the noble hearers who grasps at false ideas and then grasps at a false perception of the aggregates, grasps at the lower realms, grasps at apprehending, grasps at the wrong path, and grasps at error. The noble saṅgha does not include all those who do not understand that the three realms are apprehended in error.
“Śāriputra, those who cling to various false terms cannot be regarded as part of the noble saṅgha. Ultimately, Śāriputra, the noble hearers do not apprehend clinging to various false terms such as clinging to a self, a being, a life force, a person, humans, nonhumans, women, men, gods, the hell realms, the animal realm, the world of the Lord of Death, the aggregates, the elements, the sense fields, origination, or destruction; to the sounds of conch shells, great drums, gongs, clay drums, lutes, songs, or any manner of musical sounds; to the terms earth, water, fire, or wind; to the terms discipline or violated discipline; to the terms path or mistaken path; to the terms arrogance, affliction, or purification; to the terms concentration, absorption, or attainment; to the terms eighth stage, stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, or worthy ones; to the terms knowledge, liberated, or attainment of the fruition; to the terms Buddha, Dharma, or Saṅgha; or to the terms nirvāṇa or parinirvāṇa. Though it is the case that there are various terms, and many types of clinging to various terms, they all are characteristic of a single wisdom, and it is without characteristics.
“Those who do not agree with the absence of distinguishing marks entertain false ideas, but those who possess an unmistaken acceptance are known as the noble saṅgha. They possess unmistaken acceptance, because they lack characteristics, distinguishing marks, attachment, yearning, grasping, birth, and cessation. For those who naturally engage as such, there is no meditation, cultivation, weariness, thinking, conceptualization, nonconceptualization, or contradiction. They are called the noble saṅgha because they realize the characteristic that lacks this side, that side, concepts, and thoughts. They are known as the noble saṅgha, Śāriputra, because they have eliminated all formations.
“Śāriputra, I have said that to see phenomena is to see me. Śāriputra, I could never be a phenomenon. Śāriputra, the ignorant Devadatta and all the other non-Buddhists see me as the body of form, but those who see the Thus-Gone One as a physical form do not see him. The same should be applied to his not being sound. Śāriputra, the words of those who propose that ‘one has seen the Thus-Gone One having seen him as the body of form’ have no more real essence than just words, because they are not the correct understanding. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, those who see the Thus-Gone One as a physical form do not see him.
“Śāriputra, those who do not entertain thoughts about phenomena that lack characteristics, distinguishing marks, the three types of mental engagement, effort, cessation, origination, and elaboration do not entertain thoughts about nirvāṇa. They do not think in terms of nirvāṇa. They do not delight in nirvāṇa, think of it, or conceptualize it. Conviction in the single characteristic of all phenomena leads to freedom from characteristics.
“Śāriputra, this is the case for both the Thus-Gone One and seeing the Thus-Gone One. What is meant by seeing the Thus-Gone One? It is the absence of effort, elaboration, origination, concepts, clinging, craving, and names; it is without distinguishing marks, the absence of distinguishing marks, and action related to distinguishing marks; it lacks grasping at conventions, and it lacks action related to imputation. Therefore, not thinking about the absence of entities or the elimination of conventions is the best way to see the Thus-Gone One.
“Śāriputra, what is it that the Thus-Gone One says one sees when one looks and sees the Thus-Gone One? It is the absence of distinguishing marks, absence of wishes, absence of elaboration, absence of clinging, and the constant nonapprehending of any conventions, as well as not entertaining conceits about nirvāṇa. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, I do not entertain conceits about nirvāṇa, I do not entertain conceits about attaining nirvāṇa, nor do I take delight in nirvāṇa, so why would I say that you should entertain conceits about nirvāṇa, that you should entertain conceits about attaining nirvāṇa, or that you should take delight in nirvāṇa? Śāriputra, if someone apprehends nirvāṇa, I say one should not go forth as their follower. You should know, Śāriputra, that in this Dharma-Vinaya, the teachers under whom one should go forth as a follower should be those who possess the Teacher’s Dharma and who are its protectors.
“You should know that there are those who disparage this Dharma-Vinaya, and there are those who argue against this Dharma-Vinaya. Śāriputra, they are just like the terrible bandits in markets, towns, and cities. Why is that? Śāriputra, if those foolish people even apprehend nirvāṇa as if it were an apprehended object, that they apprehend things in terms of a person goes without saying. Śāriputra, I am not their teacher, and they are not my disciples. Those foolish beings do not belong in the assembly of my saṅgha of hearers, so I expel them with a hand gesture. Śāriputra, all phenomena are without a primary cause, are without mental engagement, are without distinguishing marks, are unrelated to acceptance, and are not perfect awakening. If one cannot even apprehend nirvāṇa itself, it goes without saying that one cannot apprehend the nirvāṇa of someone. Śāriputra, what the Thus-Gone One has said about seeing phenomena is that if this is what one sees, one is seeing the Thus-Gone One. What is the Thus-Gone One, Śāriputra? Śāriputra, the term Thus-Gone One refers to suchness, unmistaken suchness, the one and only suchness.
“Furthermore, those who have no hesitations and do not entertain doubts about the Dharma are known as noble hearers. Those who abide in the absence of concepts, the freedom from concepts, the absence of elaboration, and the absence of distinguishing marks are holy beings; they are known as the noble saṅgha.
“Long ago, Śāriputra, there was a childish being who had never seen a monkey before and wanted to see one, so he walked into a dense jungle. He came across a large group of monkeys that had gathered there, and when he saw that large group of monkeys he thought, ‘I have heard that there are beings called “the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.” These must be those gods!’ Excited and overwrought, he quickly ran back to his town. At that time, a large group of people had gathered in town, so he asked them, ‘Have you ever seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three?’ They replied, ‘Friend, we have never seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.’ Then he said, ‘Learned ones, I have seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three! Would you like to see them too?’ They replied, ‘Friend, we want to see the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three as well!’ So, the group of townspeople followed him into the dense jungle, where he showed them the large group of monkeys and exclaimed, ‘Learned ones, look at the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three!’ They replied, ‘Alas, these are not the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three! These are just monkeys living in the forest. You are wrong and mistaken. You don’t know anything about monkeys or the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three!’
“Śāriputra, in the future there will be monks just like that deluded being who so pointlessly deceived that group of people, and they will approach householders and ask them, ‘Do you wish to see the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers and listen to the words of the Buddha?’ Śāriputra, the householders will be overjoyed and reply, ‘Yes, we want to see the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers and listen to the words of the Buddha!’
“Śāriputra, there will be monks who put great effort into preaching and will go to households and groves where the saṅgha resides and give teachings. There will be monks who are learned in exoteric knowledge, put great effort into words, are learned in words, follow words, rely upon words, and put their trust in words. They will conform to this activity and that one, follow them, and be influenced by mere words.
“Such mendicants who put great effort into words and are a misrepresentation of the community will be regarded as shepherds. They will enjoy preaching, crave it, apply themselves joyfully to it, stray into an incorrect extreme, frequently preach it to others, and make a living using evil spells. They will be experts in the various Lokāyata teachings. They will practice and teach an impure Dharma, think only of their speeches, sink into worldly paths, have little vitality, and have bad complexions. They will run out of analogies and reject the virtues of keeping silent. Placing great importance on the lack of meditative concentration, they will take joy in arguing, whether at night, during the day, or both night and day. They will rest on fine beds and padded pillows and lie on soft carpets and blankets. Applying themselves to concentration is not an idea that will occur to them even once, so it is needless to say much about their attaining the result—it is simply impossible.
“Having prepared themselves for slumber by placing their attention on the Lokāyatas, they will fall asleep with that mindset. They will not give rise to the acceptance that concords with the truth during any of the three parts of the night. They will place their greatest efforts into their inferior, erroneous sermons and acquire robes, alms, sleeping places, medicine, and requisites. Why is that so? Because evil Māra expends great effort to gather such unholy beings, so they become fond of evil Māra and direct their efforts toward him. They will exert themselves in their ordinary speeches, take pleasure in them, and never strive for the ultimate. Not being coherent, they will fail to uphold definitive teachings like this one but instead will be afraid, scared, and terrified of them. They will discard the essence of the teachings and uphold as correct ones that are like sparks flying off hot iron, and they will feel glad when other immature, unholy beings see the esteem they accord them. They will think, ‘We too should pursue teachings like these right now and perfect them!’ With this thought in mind, they will forsake the unsurpassed Dharma-Vinaya.
“Śāriputra, those monks who will appear in the future will not find the path. They will follow a mistaken path and be defiled and outcast mendicants. Any householders who learn of them will think of going to see them. While they are in the company of those unholy people, the latter will proclaim the praises of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha, just to make a living. But the householders will keep making offerings to them because they are concerned about their own livelihood, enslaved by material things, and motivated by getting food and clothing.
When Śāriputra voices amazement at how the Buddha uses words to point out the inexpressible ways in which nothing has true existence, the Buddha responds with an uncompromising teaching on how the lack of true existence and the absence of a self are indeed not simply philosophical views but the very cornerstone of the Dharma. To have understood, realized, and applied them fully is the main quality by which someone may be considered a member of the saṅgha and authorized to teach others and to receive offerings. Those who persist in perceiving anything—even elements of the path and its results—as having any kind of true existence are committing the most serious of all violations of discipline (śīla), and since they fail to follow the Buddha’s core teaching in this way they should not even be considered his followers. The Buddha’s dialogue with Śāriputra continues on the consequences of monks’ violating their discipline more broadly, and he gives several prophecies about the future decline of the Dharma that will be caused by the misbehavior of such monks.
An initial translation by Nika Jovic for the Dharmachakra Translation Committee was completed under the patronage and supervision of 84000: Translating the Words of the Buddha. Andreas Doctor, Adam Krug, and John Canti revised and edited the translation and the introduction, and Dion Blundell copyedited the text. Martina Cotter was in charge of the digital publication process.
The generous sponsorship of Zhou Tian Yu, Chen Yi Qin, and LZ which helped make the work on this translation possible, is most gratefully acknowledged.
Repudiating Those Who Violate the Discipline is located in the General Sūtra section of the Degé Kangyur and is structured in eight chapters followed by a long epilogue. Although it purports to be a text on discipline and how it is violated, its main doctrinal thrust is to set out a view of Buddhist practice based uncompromisingly on the ultimate view of emptiness. To practice or teach others in ways that do not fully embrace that ultimate view turns out to be the transgression of discipline to which the sūtra’s title refers, and the Buddha goes even further in insisting that those who follow such mistaken ways are not only failing to follow his teachings correctly but are also not qualified to receive offerings and are not even to be considered members of the Buddhist saṅgha.
The sūtra begins with Śāriputra expressing his astonished admiration of how the Buddha has been able to formulate and express teachings about what is intrinsically inexpressible—the nature of his awakening to how phenomena are uncompounded, unarisen, and devoid of distinguishing marks and characteristics. The Buddha then uses various analogies to reinforce how paradoxical it is indeed that there can be any teachings at all on emptiness free of apprehending, and he elaborates on the ultimate nature of phenomena.
Next, the Buddha differentiates between virtuous friends and evil ones, emphasizing that evil friends are those who cause others to apprehend phenomena mistakenly. This teaching is followed by a discussion on the meaning of recollecting the Buddha, which is described here as a state in which all directing of the attention on an object or notion of any kind is avoided. The Buddha then explains how a virtuous friend must teach others, insisting on the nature of the correct view. He elaborates on the meaning of the noble saṅgha, revealing that there will be monks in the future who will deceive householders with wrong teachings in the pursuit of their own livelihood. The Buddha also warns against the many groups of non-Buddhists who will reject the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the buddhas, and thus cause the Dharma Jewel to disappear.
This is followed by a detailed presentation of ten faults that lead monks who violate their discipline to rebirth in the lower realms. The Buddha gives predictions of monks who will teach an impure Dharma in the future, supporting these predictions with a lengthy discussion of badly behaved monks who became highly influential in the past and spread mistaken interpretations of the Dharma in the world. Śākyamuni then discusses several of his past lives in which he worshiped and pleased countless other buddhas with the wish to attain awakening but lacked the view of emptiness free of apprehending. Finally, the epilogue highlights the need to abandon all clinging to the view of a self, and it cautions against the numerous non-Buddhists and badly behaved monks who will lead immature beings astray.
As the title suggests, one of the primary concerns of this sūtra is the identification and repudiation of those who have violated their discipline. The Buddha makes it clear that what determines the purity of one’s discipline is not just how one maintains the formal vows one has taken, but is even more a question of whether one has a proper understanding of emptiness in terms of the nonapprehending of phenomena, as he has taught.
Not to follow properly the teachings he has been at pains to formulate on this crucial point is a betrayal of them, to the point that people who fail to take full notice of them are not worthy of offerings made to the saṅgha, and are not to be considered his followers at all. The Buddha argues throughout that such people must be excluded from the monastic saṅgha, because their presence compromises one of the saṅgha’s primary functions as the proper recipient of gifts that are given through faith. In this regard the sūtra makes frequent mention of the necessary qualities seen as criteria for the worthiness of the saṅgha to be an object of refuge overall, for the worthiness of members of the saṅgha to be recipients of offerings individually, and by extension for their worthiness to teach and guide others—these qualities being most often mentioned in the context of their absence in those who violate discipline. When such people hide in the monastic ranks, we are told, they are no better than thieves and robbers who steal the Dharma. The worst of them are those members of the Buddhist saṅgha who teach a corrupted Dharma based on their misunderstanding or rejection of the doctrine of emptiness as nonapprehending. The severity of the negative karmic consequences that these beings incur is compounded by the fact that their teachings lead beings further from awakening and result in the corruption, suppression, and destruction of the Dharma.
This sūtra is notable for how it places the view of emptiness and nonapprehending firmly in the realm of discipline (śīla). While discipline is usually explained more in terms of placing restraint on physical and verbal behavior through the observation of rules and precepts—the training of the mind being rather the domain of meditative absorption (samādhi) and wisdom (prajñā)—this text makes it clear that the commitment to follow the Buddha’s instructions and through them attain awakening is also a precept in the domain of discipline, yet has to be accompanied by a profound understanding of the nature of that awakening.
Translations of this sūtra survive in both Chinese and Tibetan, but no Sanskrit source has been identified to date. The Tibetan translation was completed in the late eighth or early ninth century by the Indian scholar Dharmaśrīprabha and the translator-monk Palgyi Lhünpo at the Lhenkar (Tib. lhan dkar ma) Palace, and it is included in the Lhenkarma (or Denkarma) royal catalog of works that was compiled in the early ninth century. Both translators also worked on the Tibetan translation of the vinaya literature, and Palgyi Lhünpo is given the title “chief editor” (zhu chen) in other colophons.
The Chinese translation (Taishō 653) was completed by the renowned translator Kumārajīva (344–413
Both the Tōhoku and Taishō canonical catalogs link Taishō 653 to another Tibetan sūtra translation, Toh 123, which appears to be a direct translation of the Chinese in Taishō 653, rather than of a Sanskrit source, as seems to have been the case with our text, Toh 220. Based on a cursory comparison of Toh 123 and Toh 220, we can say that their content and structure are generally very similar. However, these two Tibetan translations also differ in many respects, including their titles, their length, the number of chapters, the initial settings, and the literary styles and lexicons.
Repudiating Those Who Violate the Discipline does not rank among the best-known sūtras extensively quoted in Buddhist literature, and does not seem to have received attention in Indian treatises. However, it has been mentioned or cited by a range of Tibetan authors over the centuries, including Gampopa and Drolungpa Lodrö Jungne in the eleventh, Tsongkhapa in the fourteenth, Pawo Tsuklal Trengwa in the sixteenth, Karma Chagmé and Drigung Chungtsang in the seventeenth, Yongdzin Yeshé Gyaltsen in the eighteenth, and Shabkar and Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé in the nineteenth. Nevertheless, most of these citations refer to the later chapters that speak of the decline of the Dharma that will be caused in the future by monks whose discipline is corrupted in general, i.e., mostly in an outer sense, and do not seem to take account of the important and profound points that the Buddha makes in the earlier chapters about the much more far-reaching “inner” corruption of discipline in terms of wrong views of emptiness. Kongtrül cites this sūtra to show how distractions can lead to suffering over innumerable lifetimes. In modern scholarship, Jonathan Silk has cited it to highlight criticism of monastic greed and illegitimate practices. Jason McCombs refers to the scripture in his discussion of the practice of making donations, and he points to concerns related to monastic corruption expressed in the text. Robert Morrell quotes the sūtra’s warning against monks who take ordination merely to escape secular duties. And finally, Wendi Adamek has quoted the sūtra in reference to monks who pretend to be genuine Dharma teachers when they are not.
This English translation is based on the Degé Kangyur edition, in consultation with the Comparative Edition (dpe bsdur ma) and the Stok Palace Kangyur.
[B1] Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas.
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was residing in the Deer Park of Ṛṣipatana at Vārāṇasī, together with a great saṅgha of five hundred monks who had exhausted their defilements, completed their tasks, done their duties, laid down their burdens, accomplished their goals, and eliminated the bonds binding them to existence. Their minds were fully liberated by perfect understanding, their insight was fully liberated, and they had attained mastery. They were all worthy ones, except for one person—Venerable Ānanda.
At that time, Venerable Śāradvatīputra, Venerable Maudgalyāyana, Venerable Mahākāśyapa, Venerable Subhūti, Venerable Bakkula, Venerable Pūrṇa Maitrāyaṇīputra, and Venerable Ānanda rose from their afternoon meditative seclusion and went to the place where the Blessed One was staying. They bowed down at his feet and took seats to one side.
Śāriputra said to the Blessed One, “The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!”
The Blessed One replied, “Śāriputra, what prompted you to say, ‘The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!’?”
“Blessed One, when I was alone in the forest in meditative seclusion, the thought came up in my mind, ‘How is it that the Blessed One uses names and distinguishing marks to explain things that have no names and distinguishing marks, and describes things that are utterly indescribable?’ Blessed One, when I thought about what this really meant, I was astonished. Blessed One, it was when I had seen what this really meant that I said, ‘The thus-gone, worthy, perfect, blessed Buddha has perfectly explained how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out. Blessed One, this is astonishing! Well-Gone One, it is astonishing!’ ”
“It is indeed, Śāriputra,” replied the Blessed One. “Śāriputra, this point is indeed astonishing. This point is most astonishing! For such is the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the thus-gone, worthy, perfect buddhas.
“Śāriputra, imagine that in the open sky, where nothing stays and nothing can be apprehended, a painter or a painter’s skilled apprentice were to draw a multitude of forms in various colors and shapes. Would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing!” replied Śāriputra. “Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra,” continued the Blessed One, “much more astonishing are the things that the Thus-Gone One has explained after fully awakening to unsurpassed and perfect buddhahood. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, such matters as an absence of characteristics, an absence of mental engagement, an absence of effort, an absence of movement, an absence of attainment, an absence of activity; a giving up of attainment, a nonattainment of attainment, an interruption of nonattainment, an attainment that is not subsequently attained, a relinquishment of attainment, a true nonattainment of attainment; an absence of purification, an absence of anything to be purified, a not being subject to purification; a not thought of, a not to be thought of, a not thought of as wholesome; a not elaborated, a not to be elaborated, a not elaborated as wholesome; a not imputed, a not to be imputed, a not imputed as wholesome; and a not confused, a not to be subsumed, a not subsumed, an absence of foundation, an absence of apprehending, a not departing, an absence of anything to depart, a not departing into the wholesome, an intrinsic emptiness, an intrinsic lack of essential nature, an intrinsically not pointed out, an intrinsically not to be pointed out, an intrinsically not to be pointed out as wholesome, a difficult to believe for the whole world, and an absence of names or distinguishing marks identified nonetheless just as they are in terms of names and distinguishing marks—all these matters that are indescribable he has described in words. How all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that, Śāriputra, is the most astonishing!
“Śāriputra, imagine that someone placed Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, in his mouth, chewed it three times, swallowed it as if it were food without feeling the slightest discomfort, and then walked off in midair. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that man’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a great fire of dung about one league high and one league wide burned, blazed, and flared up in a great firestorm. Imagine that the crackling sound of that fire filled the four directions, and its flames, roaring in the four directions, rose up about four leagues high into the air. Imagine then that a person carrying a big bundle of grass were to enter that fire. As he enters it, great gusts of wind begin to blow from the four directions; yet, when the flames hit him, neither his body nor the grass is consumed by the fire, so that when he emerges from the fire, not even a single blade of grass is scorched. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that man’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing. Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person wanted to cross a great ocean, and he traveled from one shore to the other on a large raft made of stones. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing. Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to lift this world with its four continents and its oceans, mountains, vegetation, and water, and then climb up to the Brahmā abodes using a ladder made of the legs of bees. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to hoist Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, with a thread that dangles in the wind and hold it up in the sky. What do you think, Śāriputra, would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: is the great Ganges River huge, wide, deep, and boundless?”
“Yes, Blessed One, it is.”
“Śāriputra, imagine that a deluge as large as the great Ganges River were falling on this trichiliocosm and that, while it was falling from the sky, someone were to catch this great downpour in one hand, without letting a single drop of water fall to the ground. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: is Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, huge and immense?”
“Blessed One, yes, it is huge. Well-Gone One, it is immense!”
“Śāriputra, imagine that a great rain of boulders as large as Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, were to fall on this trichiliocosm, and that while it was falling from the sky, someone were to catch this great rain of boulders in one hand, without letting even the smallest pebble the size of a mustard seed slip from their hand and fall to the ground. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that when the great eon of incineration comes about, a person were to extinguish that great, blazing mass of fire by spitting on it, and then restore the entire universe, including the celestial mansions, with a single breath. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, without conditioning, and cannot be pointed out are the very things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out—that is more astonishing still.
“Śāriputra, imagine that a person were to place all sentient beings in the palm of one hand, and with the other lift up this trichiliocosm with its oceans, mountains, continents, forests, landscapes, vegetation, and water, hold them in midair, and cause all those sentient beings to have a single thought and a single mind. Śāriputra, what do you think: would that person’s actions be astonishing?”
“Blessed One, they would be astonishing! Well-Gone One, they would be most astonishing!”
“Śāriputra, the things that the Thus-Gone One has pointed out after fully awakening to unsurpassed and perfect buddhahood—how all conditioned things are without production, without coming about, without cessation in three ways, without ownership in eight ways, without intrinsic nature in six ways, without intrinsic existence in seven ways, intrinsically empty in eight ways, and yet believed in by the entire world in nine ways—are much more astonishing still.
“Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, these teachings are without characteristics and have relinquished characteristics; they are without mental engagement and do not possess mental engagement; they are without effort, without coming, without going, and without arrangement; they are without elaboration and are free of elaboration; they are without torment and are free of torment; they have no far side, no near side, no shore, and no absence of a shore; they are without valleys, without plains, without rivers, and without an absence of rivers; they are without freedom, without liberation, without confusion, without the absence of delusion, without delusion, and without the net of delusion; they are without being just as they are, without a validly perceived object, without an object of analysis, and have no conceptual domain; they are without movement and without wandering; they are without nonsound and without harsh words; they are without recollection and they put an end to recollection; they are without intention and put an end to intention; they are without mental faculty and put an end to mental faculty; they are without liberation and without utter liberation; they are without falsehood and without the quality of falsehood; they are without deception, without the quality of deception, and without the net of deception; they are without names, without distinguishing marks, without conventions, and without the absence of conventions; they are without designations and without not being designations; they are without a full extent and without not being a full extent; they are without guidance, without a path, and without freedom from the fruition of a path; they are free of confusion, and have relinquished conceptual thought, the absence of thought, the thorough absence of thought, the utter absence of thought, and discursive thought; they are without adulteration, without grasping, without thorough grasping, without holding, and without anything to be thoroughly held; they are without attainment and without something to be attained; they eliminate truth, eliminate desire, eliminate anger, and eliminate delusion; they are without truth and without falsity; they are without permanence, without impermanence, without clarity, without the absence of clarity, without light, and without darkness; they are without possessiveness, without their own essence, without an object of their own essence, and empty of their own essence; and they are without liberation, without mental engagement, and without death. Being ultimate reality, they overcome Māra’s army, overcome the afflictions, overcome the aggregates, overcome the elements, overcome the sense fields, overcome notions in terms of aggregates, overcome notions in terms of elements, overcome notions in terms of sense fields, overcome notions in terms of a self, overcome notions in terms of a being, overcome notions in terms of a life force, overcome notions in terms of persons, overcome notions in terms of existence, overcome notions in terms of real entities, and overcome wrong views and mistaken comprehensions.
“Śāriputra, they overcome and destroy all forms of clinging, among which, Śāriputra, they overcome and destroy those notions regarding phenomena that are held by beings who are not sublime. Śāriputra, they also overcome and destroy the doctrines of those who find inspiration in suchness or in the one and only suchness, but who are not sublime and take hold of the Thus-Gone One’s words in the wrong way. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, whoever is a proponent of a self, a being, a life force, a person, eternity, nothingness, existence, nonexistence, names, distinguishing marks, or imputations, and anyone who apprehends entities, Śāriputra, holds beliefs not in agreement with the Thus-Gone One. Śāriputra, those who hold beliefs not in agreement with the Thus-Gone One are mistaken. Those who are mistaken are not my disciples, and those who are not my disciples hold beliefs not in agreement with nirvāṇa; they hold beliefs not in agreement with the Buddha, hold beliefs not in agreement with the Dharma, and hold beliefs not in agreement with the Saṅgha. Śāriputra, I do not allow those who hold such views to go forth or take full ordination. Śāriputra, I do not allow even small cups of water to be donated as gifts out of faith to those who hold such views. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, all such people hold to belief in an unwholesome intrinsic nature of that sort.
“Śāriputra, those who have let go of belief in such an unwholesome intrinsic nature go forth in the teachings as follows: they do not think about entering nirvāṇa, they do not think about nirvāṇa, and they do not cling to nirvāṇa. They are not afraid, scared, or terrified of emptiness. Since they strive to let go of all phenomena, it goes without saying that they do not hold to a belief in such an unwholesome intrinsic nature. Since their attention is not turned to any of those kinds of belief, such as belief in a self, belief in a being, belief in a life force, or belief in a person, they are steeped in the absorption free of distinguishing marks. Without holding on to distinguishing marks, they understand that all distinguishing marks have a single characteristic—the absence of characteristics—and that, Śāriputra, is the acceptance of what concords with the truth. Śāriputra, because the monks who possess such an acceptance are my disciples, they should receive and make use of gifts that are given out of faith.
“Those people have attained freedom from delusion. Why is that? Śāriputra, it is because this Dharma is without going and coming, without something to be apprehended, and without something to be thoroughly apprehended; without something to cling to and without something external; without conventional terms and without designations; it is without joy, without something to be enjoyed, and has overcome joy; it is without gathering together and free of gathering together; it is without going, without coming and going, and puts an end to all movement; it ends all conventions; it is without seeing, without observation, without apprehending, without adulteration, without convention, without truth, without falsity, without permanence, without impermanence, without the sky, without light, and without atmosphere; it is without inclusion, without exclusion, and without belief; it is without something to be taught and without something to be definitively taught; it is without multiplicity and without the lack of multiplicity; it is without movement, without conceits, without designation, without investigation, without composure, without afflictions, and not subject to purification; it is without names, without distinguishing marks, without actions related to distinguishing marks, and without an object of thought; it is without the female gender and without the male gender; it is without gods, without nāgas, without yakṣas, without gandharvas, and without kumbhāṇḍas; it is without nothingness, without eternality, without being, without a life force, without a soul, and without a person; it is without a descendant of Manu and without a child of Manu; it is without permanence, without transmigration, and without the lack of transmigration; it is not harmful; it is without discipline and without contravened discipline; it is without affliction, without purification, without absorption, without attainment, without the faculty of absorption, without concentration, and without the result of concentration; it is without knowing, without seeing, without apprehended object, and without the lack of apprehended object; it is without a path and without the fruition of a path; it is without insight and without the faculty of insight; it is without knowledge and without ignorance; it is without liberation, without the lack of liberation, and without complete liberation; it is without fruition and without the attainment of fruition; it is without power, without weakness, without anxiety, and without fearlessness; it is without recollection and without the faculty of recollection; it is without abiding and without dwelling; it is without envy, without the path of envy, without conceptualization, without nonconceptualization, and without discursiveness; it is without awakening and without the factors of awakening; it is without understanding and without not understanding; it is without earth, without water, without fire, without wind, and without space; it is without wholesome actions and without unwholesome actions; it is without phenomena and without the absence of phenomena; it is without happiness and without suffering; it destroys all elaborations and is free of destroying all elaborations; and it is cooling, without humility, and without composure. It destroys all wrong views, desires, bonds, pride, names and distinguishing marks, and conceits. It ends all conventions, and it is without conceptual imputations and without distinguishing marks.
“Śāriputra, in the Dharma to which the Thus-Gone One has perfectly and completely awakened there is no permanence, no impermanence, no happiness, no suffering, no affliction, no purification, no nihilism, no eternalism, no being, no life force, no soul, no primordial man, no person, no descendant of Manu, no child of Manu, no celestial fixed pole, and no gandharva; no entity, no absence of entity, no cessation, no noncessation, no attainment, and no nonattainment; no transmigration, no oppression, no birth, and no arising; no past, no future, no present, no birth, no old age, no sickness, no death, no sorrow, no wailing, no pain, no unhappiness, and no disturbance; no perfect awakening and no absence of perfect awakening; no past, no future, no center; no being at peace, no being tamed, no decrease, no increase, no engagement, no imputation, no nonimputation, and no imputation and nonimputation combined; and no space, no opportunity, no distress, no freedom from desire, no cessation, and no nirvāṇa.
“Why is that? Śāriputra, that the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any phenomenon whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. That the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any convention whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. That the Thus-Gone One does not apprehend any entity whatsoever is itself what nirvāṇa is. Śāriputra, the Thus-Gone One has no conceits about nirvāṇa. Because he has passed into nirvāṇa he has no conceits. Of those who have passed into nirvāṇa, none have conceits. They do not adhere to nirvāṇa. They do not delight in nirvāṇa. That is why, Śāriputra, the fact that the Thus-Gone One, after fully awakening to unsurpassed perfect buddhahood, taught a Dharma about all conditioned phenomena being uncompounded, unarisen, devoid of distinguishing marks, devoid of characteristics, unconditioned, and impossible to teach is truly astonishing!”
This was chapter 1, “The Setting.”
“Blessed One,” Śāriputra then inquired, “according to this Dharma discourse, what are the ways in which an evil friend gives instructions and teachings, and what are the ways in which a virtuous friend gives instructions and teachings?”
“Śāriputra,” the Blessed One replied, “a monk might instruct and teach another monk as follows: ‘Come, monk. Engage your attention on the Buddha, engage your attention on the Dharma, and engage your attention on the Saṅgha. Engage your attention on recollecting moral discipline. Engage your attention on recollecting giving. Engage your attention on recollecting the gods. Come, monk. Observe the body as being the body and sustain that observing. To keep hold of the distinguishing marks of sustaining, engage your attention on the body’s impure characteristics. Come, monk. Engage your attention on the fact that all formations are impermanent and are suffering. Engage your attention on the fact that all phenomena lack a self and are empty. Come, monk. Hold fast to the distinguishing marks you have observed and keep them in mind. Bear the distinguishing marks you have observed in mind so that the mind will not wander. Come, monk. Reflect upon and work to acquire wholesome qualities. Do not hold on to the distinguishing marks of unwholesome qualities. Generate enthusiasm to help you to not hold on to them and to abandon them instead. Remain vigilant about the distinguishing marks that indicate that you have abandoned nonvirtues, so that they do not arise in the future. Come, monk. Carefully consider and direct your attention to the aspects of the aggregates, the sense fields, and the elements as repulsive. Come, monk. Bear in mind the distinguishing marks that indicate wholesome and unnwholesome qualities. Then, engage your attention on these key points to abandon them: To abandon desire, engage your attention on impurity. To abandon anger, engage your attention on love. To abandon delusion, engage your attention on dependent origination. Come, monk. Engage your attention on pure moral discipline. Engage your attention on the distinguishing marks related to absorption. Engage your attention on pure insight. Direct your effort toward the four concentrations. Reflect upon and work to acquire the result you should attain. Engage your attention without considering unwholesome qualities. Engage your attention and rely on virtuous qualities. Strive to cultivate the path. Bear those distinguishing marks that indicate virtuous qualities perfectly in mind and engage your attention on the fact that nirvāṇa is happiness and peace. Work to acquire this view, so that you can attain nirvāṇa.’ When a monk instructs and teaches another with such statements and also says, ‘Engage your attention on purity,’ he is encouraging him to hold a mistaken understanding. The notion that this is to view things correctly will encourage him to view things wrongly.
“Śāriputra, those who instruct and teach others in such a manner are evil friends, and they are deprecating me. They are speaking in the false and incorrect terms of non-Buddhists. They are teaching the positions that non-Buddhists preach. Śāriputra, I do not authorize the donation of the offerings of the faithful to be used by such unholy beings, not even as little as a small cup of water.
“Śāriputra, it is for the sake of those who give instructions that I am saying this, but those people are not instructing and teaching others in accordance with my words. Why is that? Those who give such instructions and teachings are mostly those who have fallen victim to pride. Śāriputra, even if those ignorant monks do not give up this position in each and every one of all its aspects for five years, expending a great deal of effort in those false words but not questioning the monks in the assembly who hold the view of nonapprehending or gaining understanding from them, Śāriputra, I say that those monks who maintain a false practice of diligence for five years are mixed in the purview of non-Buddhists, and are behaving just like the members of Māra’s hordes.
“On the other hand, Śāriputra, there are also monks who hear the teachings on emptiness and nonapprehending related to such instructions and teachings, accept them in accord with those instructions, and engage their attention on emptiness. They have no doubts or reservations about the teaching of nonapprehending and emptiness. If they engage in it, understand it, contemplate it, and develop conviction in it, without it being based in the view of personhood in any way whatsoever, Śāriputra, I say that those monks are pure and observe pure conduct. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, those monks have mastered the acceptance of nonapprehending, and they can reach nirvāṇa in this very lifetime.
“Śāriputra, I prophesy that such monks who possess the qualities related to the acceptance of nonapprehending will constitute the first great assembly during the lifetime of the blessed Maitreya. I prophesy that the blessed Maitreya will proclaim three times, ‘Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime! Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime! Amazing! This great assembly mastered the conduct related to nonapprehending during Śākyamuni’s lifetime!’ Śāriputra, that is how I prophesy that householders and renunciants who master such an acceptance will reach nirvāṇa in this world.
“Furthermore, Śāriputra, other monks, when instructed and taught the teachings on nonapprehension and emptiness, may feel afraid, scared, or terrified on hearing them; if so, they will be reborn in the hell realms without a lord, refuge, and teacher. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, what completes the conditions for their lower rebirth is to be afraid of the Buddha’s teachings. Moreover, Śāriputra, when I say that some of them will take rebirth in the lower realms, why is that? Śāriputra, the nonexistence that they have imputed as being the Buddha’s teachings is in fact a nonexistence they have imputed in what they apprehend.
“Śāriputra, for someone even to commit the five deeds entailing immediate retribution is not worse than it is to hold a view with respect to a self, to hold a view with respect to a being, to hold a view with respect to a life force, to hold a view with respect to a person, to hold a view with respect to the aggregates, to hold a view with respect to the elements, to hold a view with respect to the sense fields, to hold a view with respect to origination, to hold a view with respect to destruction, to hold a view with respect to discipline, to hold a view with respect to an essence of discipline, to hold a view with respect to an essence of concentration, to hold a view with respect to a pure essence of concentration, to hold a view with respect to the marks of the Buddha, to hold a view with respect to engaging one’s attention on accomplishing the Dharma, or to hold a view with respect to a person as the conventional designation of the Saṅgha.
“Śāriputra, why is that? It is because the teachings of the Thus-Gone One declare that someone who maintains the view of a person cannot be counted as included in the saṅgha. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers is without persons, without concepts, and free of thoughts. Śāriputra, there is not the slightest nonvirtue within the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers. Their discipline is free of being spoiled. Their conduct is free of being spoiled. Their livelihood is free of being spoiled. Their view is free of being spoiled.
“Śāriputra, what is virtue? For the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers it is like this: factors concurrent with the mind, concepts about nonentities, concepts about distinguishing marks, apprehending in terms of names, apprehending in terms of persons, and even, Śāriputra, any mind-related conventions at all about virtuous or unwholesome phenomena—not to apprehend any of these, that is what virtue is taught to be in the Dharma-Vinaya of the noble ones.
“Why is that, Śāriputra? Because one should know that where there is happiness, there is also suffering. Śāriputra, the quality of the Thus-Gone One’s perfect buddhahood is peace. Śāriputra, the quality of the Thus-Gone One’s perfect buddhahood is that in it there is no desire, no nondesire, no happiness, no suffering, no mind, no intention, no perception, and no feeling. Śāriputra, there is not even emptiness. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, when a notion of emptiness is present, notions of a self, notions of a being, notions of a life force, notions of a person, notions of eternity, notions of nothingness, notions of origination, and notions of destruction will also arise. That is why, Śāriputra, it is said that as long as there is a perceiver, there will also be beliefs in perceptions involving distinguishing marks, and that for that reason it is wrong.
“Śāriputra, emptiness is so called because no attention is engaged on an emptiness related to perceptions involving distinguishing marks. It is called emptiness because it is also empty of attention being engaged on emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because there is thus neither virtue nor nonvirtue in emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because there is not even a perception of emptiness. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because in common with how all compounded phenomena should be known there is no knowing, no cognizing, no comprehending, no investigating, and no dwelling. Śāriputra, it is called emptiness because—since no one is able to engage their attention on emptiness—it is not in the absence of distinguishing marks, it is not in the absence of wishes, and it is not in the absence of engaging attention on distinguishing marks.
“Śāriputra, why is the term dwelling with emptiness so called? When no attention is engaged on any distinguishing marks, even distinguishing marks of emptiness, that it is called dwelling with emptiness. It is when distinguishing marks have been let go that one can speak of the absence of distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, it is when no attention whatsoever is engaged on any such distinguishing marks, when there is no engagement of attention, no distinguishing mark, and no signal, that one can speak of the absence of distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, I have taught that the slightest belief in distinguishing marks or apprehending of distinguishing marks is a wrong view. Why is that? Śāriputra, if it is wrong even to apprehend this Dharma-Vinaya as being at peace, is it not worse to so designate it, designate it as something, or have something as its designation?
“Śāriputra, why do the blessed ones teach so extensively that designations are wrong? Śāriputra, you may not know that these designations are untrue, but the thus-gone ones understand that they are wrong and do not apprehend even the slightest designation whatsoever. Śāriputra, that is why they have taught that designations are wrong views. Śāriputra, the unsurpassed and perfect awakening of the thus-gone ones is without recollection and without attention. Why is that? Śāriputra, it is because the thus-gone ones, with regard to any dharma, do not apprehend a suchness intrinsic to it, they do not apprehend an essential nature intrinsic to it, do not apprehend an essential nature extrinsic to it, do not apprehend a sameness, and do not apprehend a lack of sameness.
“Śāriputra, why is the application of mindfulness so called? As I have said, Śāriputra, an apprehended application of mindfulness, an apprehended intrinsic nature, an apprehended suchness intrinsic to something, and an apprehended intrinsic enduring state would be baseless and spurious, and it is in order to ensure the proper understanding of how dharmas are empty of their own inherent characteristics that the Thus-Gone One has spoken of the application of mindfulness. Dharmas are without clinging, without craving, have no location, have no presence, do not endure, and are free of remaining, so there can be no actual mindfulness of them—let alone the application of mindfulness. For that reason it is called the application of mindfulness.
“Śāriputra, if any dharma had any intrinsic suchness—even if it was no bigger than a hundredth part of a hair-tip—the Thus-Gone One would not have appeared in the world and taught that all dharmas are devoid of intrinsic nature. However, Śāriputra, since he knows that all dharmas are devoid of intrinsic nature, are empty of intrinsic nature, have but a single characteristic, and lack characteristics, the Thus-Gone One has taught the application of mindfulness and called it the application of mindfulness. As something that has no location and is not based on anything, is without recollection and without any act of recollection, is without concepts and without thoughts, is without intention and without any act of intention, is without mind and without any act of mind, is without phenomena and any notion of phenomena, is without any notions of anything believing anything whatsoever, and is without dualistic activity, without dwelling, and without enduring—for all these reasons the nonthought of the noble ones is called the application of mindfulness. That whole set of items comprised by what the Thus-Gone One taught to be the application of mindfulness is referred to as the application of mindfulness.
“Furthermore, Śāriputra, what is recollecting the Buddha? Seeing that there are no entities is called recollecting the Buddha. Also, that the Buddha is inconceivable, that he is without compare, and that his intention comprises suchness is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, what does his intention comprises suchness mean? The blessed buddhas are without concepts, have no thought, and are the absence of concepts and thoughts—that is why one speaks of recollecting the Buddha. To see that intrinsic essence is to see the Buddha.
“What does to see that intrinsic essence mean? To see the absence of entities in the absence of entities is to recollect the Buddha. It is because one sees the Buddha without apprehending even the slightest act of recollection with the dharmas of the mind and mental states that it is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, since it is not easy to recollect using a recollecting that is to abstain from designation and to put an end to any engaging of attention, that is why this teaching is called recollecting the Buddha. Śāriputra, this teaching is to be at peace from all engaging of attention. For those who exert themselves in it, recollecting the Buddha does not mean engaging their attention on the distinguishing marks of the Thus-Gone One’s physical form. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, it is consciousness that is always focused just on the distinguishing marks of form. The absence of any entity apprehending the absence of form, that is recollecting the Buddha. To be without concepts, to have no thoughts, and to be without grasping is therefore referred to as recollecting the Buddha.”
This was chapter 2, “The Teaching on Recollection.” [B2]
“Blessed One,” Śāriputra then inquired, “how must one explain these teachings so that one does not become an evil friend? Blessed One, how must one instruct and teach to be referred to as a virtuous friend?”
“Śāriputra,” replied the Blessed One, “a monk should instruct and teach another monk about this as follows: ‘Come, monk. Cultivate recollecting the Buddha and have conviction in it. Do not engage your attention on some state that is attained. Since there are no entities when you see correctly, you must have the convinction that the intrinsic nature of phenomena is not an object of correct seeing, and let go of the notion that something lacking intrinsic nature possesses any essence.
“ ‘Let go of the notion that it has distinguishing marks, while at the same time do not apprehend any entity that is without distinguishing marks—let alone any act of recollection. Because you thus let go of its not having any essence, of its not having any distinguishing marks, and of the very notion of distinguishing marks, it has nothing added, but it is also not an absence of anything added—that, the cessation of all phenomena, is the cultivation of recollecting the Buddha. Because it is without thoughts of virtuous and unwholesome qualities or any examination of them, you therefore let go of concepts and analysis; the Buddha is thus the absence of conceptual thought, and it is without conceptual thought that you should direct your attention to the Buddha. To be without concepts, analysis, or distinguishing marks is to recollect the Buddha, and that is a matter of there being not even the slightest act of recollecting dharmas that are mental states—let alone physical acts, let alone verbal acts, let alone mental acts—for there is no place for them. To let go of characteristics, without movement, without distinguishing marks, without characteristics, and without any engagement of attention is to recollect the Buddha. To be without names, without distinguishing marks, without possessiveness, without reflection, without attainment, without acquisition, and without attitudes involving concepts and analysis is to recollect the Buddha.’
“Why is that? Śāriputra, as long as the engagement of attention continues, there is grasping at distinguishing marks, and that, Śāriputra, is a wrong view. But, Śāriputra, as long as there are no distinguishing marks, no discernment, no entities, no concepts, no analysis, no signs, no cessation, no origination, no movement, no arising, and the acceptance of nonarising, this is called recollecting the Buddha. Moreover, that which is without attachments, without cravings, without noncessation, without refutations, without names, and without distinguishing marks—that, Śāriputra, is recollecting the Buddha. It is the absence of characteristics and conventions, and involves not even the slightest act of recollection, let alone any physical or verbal actions, for there is no place for them. Where there are no acts of body, no acts of speech, and no acts of mind, there is no craving, no grasping, no clinging, no noncessation, no refutation, no origination, no birth, no separating, no coming together, no extension, no entities, and where all aspects of concepts and analysis are interrupted, that likewise is what is called recollecting the Buddha.
“Those who possess just such a recollection of the Buddha can, if they wish, transform this entire great trichiliocosm, or overcome trillions of demons, so what they can do for those who apprehend and are motivated by ignorance, which is baseless and not the truth, goes without saying. Once you have understood for yourself, without getting corrupted by Māra or Māra’s attendants, that phenomena are without distinguishing marks, without elaboration, without nonelaboration, without cessation, without refutation, without characteristics, without conventions, without designation, without appearance, and without clarity, since this is therefore recollecting the Buddha, while instructing and teaching it using mere conventions, do not engage your attention on even the slightest belief in distinguishing marks. Do not conceptualize. Do not think. Do not elaborate. Why is that? This teaching that is without entities has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention. It is because it has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention that it is called recollecting the Buddha, and so it is—it has no distinguishing marks, has no characteristics, and is not engaged by attention. Why is that? Because the buddhas are not something on which attention is engaged through their physical distinguishing marks, nor through concepts, nor through thoughts, nor through clinging, nor through nonclinging, nor through absorption, nor through wisdom, nor through knowledge, nor through the absence of knowledge. Why is that? Because the thus-gone ones are without designations, are inconceivable, entirely inconceivable. Therefore, do not grasp at distinguishing marks. Without clinging even in the slightest to letting go of, attaining, or cultivating any dharma, do not apprehend even the thus-gone ones themselves—let alone an act of recollection.
“Śāriputra, a monk should instruct and teach other monks as follows: ‘Come, monks. Phenomena having their own intrinsic characteristics—you should break that down. Do not engage your attention on notions of phenomena.’ They will take delight in the very absence of clinging to their attention being engaged in that way, in the very absence of attachment, in the very absence of phenomena, in the very absence of entities, and in the single characteristic itself. They will not entertain any notion of phenomena at all—let alone the notion of a person, for there is no place for that.
“Śāriputra, what do you think: if one does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that one could give rise to a notion of phenomena?”
“No, Blessed One, one could not.”
“If one does not engage one’s attention on a notion of phenomena and does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that there would be any phenomena to break down?”
“No, Blessed One, there would be none.”
“Śāriputra, on a tree that had no roots, could it be that any branches, leaves, or bark would grow?”
“No, Blessed One, they would not.”
“Similarly, Śāriputra, if one does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that a notion of phenomena would arise?”
“No, Blessed One, it would not.”
“If one does not engage one’s attention on a notion of phenomena and does not apprehend phenomena, could it be that there would be any phenomena to break down?”
“No, Blessed One, there would be none.”
“Likewise, if one does not apprehend and engage one’s attention on phenomena or the notion of phenomena, there will be no noncessation and no nonproduction to analyze, and only by not conceptualizing phenomena, not thinking about them, not negating them, not stopping them, not engaging with them, and not reversing them can it be said that one has reached the suchness that is their intrinsic nature.
“Śāriputra, those who instruct and teach in these terms are called virtuous friends, though ultimately they have neither virtue nor nonvirtue. Śāriputra, those who possess such characteristics are rare in the world. The unmistaken and correct view possessed by those of this kind is accordingly known as the correct view. Indeed, Śāriputra, the correct view, correct acceptance, and correct conviction, as unmistakenly and correctly observed by those of this kind, comprise what is said by the Thus-Gone One to be the correct view.
“Śāriputra, the view of those who do not have this unmistaken and correct view, whoever they may be, is not the correct view. Śāriputra, proponents of a self, proponents of a being, proponents of a life force, proponents of a person, proponents of eternity, proponents of nothingness, or of whatever it may be, are in error. Śāriputra, the thus-gone ones and the thus-gone ones’ hearers are not proponents of a self, not proponents of a being, not proponents of a life force, not proponents of a person, not proponents of eternity, and not proponents of nothingness, and that is called the correct view of the thus-gone ones and the thus-gone ones’ hearers.
“Except for those who have the correct view, those who have the unmistaken view, and those who have the view that is how things are, everyone else is ranked among immature ordinary beings. Why is that? Śāriputra, they are immature ordinary beings because there are some who lack the correct view, while there are others who may have the acceptance that concords with the truth and thus have parts of the correct view, but still do not see things as they really are. Thus, Śāriputra, there are both correct and mistaken views, in that it is because of seeing correctly that there is the correct view, and because of generosity with worldly possessions that there is an increase in prosperity.
“Śāriputra, the worst of phenomena, which deceives and causes circling in saṃsāra, the Thus-Gone One has said to be merely conventional pure conduct. Śāriputra, I have not said, ‘This is the correct view, and that is the wrong view,’ for it is not the case. Why is that? Śāriputra, regarding any view there may be, its being wrong is to apprehend it. Śāriputra, whoever it may be who thinks, ‘This is the correct view, and that is a wrong view,’ that in itself is a wrong view. Why is that? Śāriputra, in this Dharma-Vinaya of the noble ones, like space and the palm of the hand, all views there may be are dismissed, and all conventions are annihilated, for such is the Dharma of the mendicants.”
This was chapter 3, “The Virtuous Friend.”
“Śāriputra, what is the noble saṅgha? It refers to those who have the acceptance that engages in the absence of cessation, the absence of origination, the absence of distinguishing marks, the absence of characteristics, and the absence of elaboration—those who have a particular conviction in it, correctly teach it, and provide the proper conditions for understanding it. Those with that particular conviction in the absence of characteristics do not even apprehend a self, let alone apprehending stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, and worthy ones; apprehending something as a phenomenon; apprehending men, women, and paṇḍakas; apprehending something as an imputation; or apprehending something as a basis. The saṅgha does not apprehend any such things.
“Nevertheless, Śāriputra, few have conviction in the absence of characteristics, the absence of cessation, and the absence of origination. Śāriputra, those who have conviction in the absence of characteristics, the absence of cessation, and the absence of origination can understand everything else, too, because their understanding is unmistaken. Their proper understanding of whatever else there is allows them to explain things thoroughly and to be absorbed in what is true. When they teach on whatever other matters there are, they do not apprehend even the slightest entity whatsoever, and are not included among all the worldly beings who are bound by the apprehending of a truth and cling to it. Being those who remain embodied in the true, they are called the noble saṅgha. Although they can perceive things from the perspective of conventions, they give instructions on the absence of characteristics, and provide thorough instructions on the absence of elaboration using names and distinguishing marks. Śāriputra, they are the Jewel of the Saṅgha that is worthy of receiving offerings, and it is because they are unmistaken in these respects that they are known as the saṅgha.
“Śāriputra, similarly, a monk who instructs and teaches others while knowing that the very topics he focuses on are empty of inherent characteristics is called a virtuous friend; those who have eliminated conventions, Śāriputra, are referred to as the noble saṅgha. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, they do not even apprehend those conventions that have been correctly designated regarding the noble Dharma-Vinaya. Therefore, Śāriputra, those who have eliminated conventions are known as the noble saṅgha.
“In that respect, Śāriputra, how is it that the expression the conventional designation ‘saṅgha’ is applied to them? In saying that they are those about whom not even any correctly designated conventions are apprehended, Śāriputra, I have also said that those who are called the saṅgha are those who—in not apprehending their understanding of how things really are and their professing not to have the distinguishing marks of attachment to be actual entities of any kind—all have the same intelligence, the same acceptance, and the same taste. But even that designation of unity is expressed merely in terms of worldly conventions; ultimately there is no saṅgha whatsoever.
“There is nothing with the four properties of being permanent, stable, eternal, and unchanging to be apprehended. Indeed, the noble ones even deny that the term phenomena is a correctly designated convention. But those who cast that view far away and apprehend phenomena as being all sorts of underlying things, making such statements as ‘this is a man,’ ‘this is a woman,’ ‘this is a paṇḍaka,’ ‘this is a god,’ ‘this is a nāga,’ ‘this is a yakṣa,’ ‘this is a gandharva,’ ‘this is a kumbhāṇḍa,’ ‘this is a phenomenon,’ or ‘this is not a phenomenon,’ and along with such statements say, ‘Come, monk, sit here; sleep there; this is such and such a person,’ are applying untrue words and using conventional designations in terms of names and distinguishing marks. Why is that so? Because, Śāriputra, there are no phenomena with names and distinguishing marks, none with characteristics, and none on which attention can be engaged. Śāriputra, what do you think: could any phenomenon on which attention cannot be engaged be directly described using a conventional designation?”
“No, Blessed One, it could not.”
“Śāriputra, those who say ‘this is a man,’ ‘this is a woman,’ ‘this is a paṇḍaka,’ ‘this is a god,’ ‘this is a nāga,’ ‘this is a yakṣa,’ ‘this is a gandharva,’ ‘this is a kumbhāṇḍa,’ ‘this is a phenomenon,’ or ‘this is not a phenomenon’ are certainly saying something untrue and subscribing to a conclusion that is incorrect, and for that reason they cannot be called the saṅgha. Śāriputra, those referred to as the noble saṅgha are so called for the very reason that they subsist in what is unmistaken. Furthermore, Śāriputra, one should understand that to be momentarily nonvirtuous is to have been apprehended as so being, since it is names and distinguishing marks that are the root of all nonvirtues.
“Śāriputra, in the noble Dharma-Vinaya, all names and distinguishing marks are interrupted, so those who do not give rise to conceits in terms of names—such as ‘this is what the saṅgha is; that is the noble saṅgha; this is the relative saṅgha; that is the saṅgha of those come to fruition; this is a quickly assembled saṅgha; that is a resident saṅgha; this is a saṅgha of monks; that is a saṅgha of nuns; this is a conforming saṅgha; that is a nonconforming saṅgha’—those who have let go of all such conceits, and who have interrupted them, are known as the noble saṅgha. They are those who are without names and distinguishing marks, are without conventional designation, are without engagement, who have interrupted conventional designation, and—because it has been described as the best of all these—who do not apprehend any such entities.
“Śāriputra, if one apprehends the conventions of names and distinguishing marks after thorough analysis, one is attached to various types of heretical views. This is because someone who strictly adheres to the five aggregates and the idea that the aggregates are the cause from which existence originates maintains a wrong view. There is no one among the noble hearers who grasps at false ideas and then grasps at a false perception of the aggregates, grasps at the lower realms, grasps at apprehending, grasps at the wrong path, and grasps at error. The noble saṅgha does not include all those who do not understand that the three realms are apprehended in error.
“Śāriputra, those who cling to various false terms cannot be regarded as part of the noble saṅgha. Ultimately, Śāriputra, the noble hearers do not apprehend clinging to various false terms such as clinging to a self, a being, a life force, a person, humans, nonhumans, women, men, gods, the hell realms, the animal realm, the world of the Lord of Death, the aggregates, the elements, the sense fields, origination, or destruction; to the sounds of conch shells, great drums, gongs, clay drums, lutes, songs, or any manner of musical sounds; to the terms earth, water, fire, or wind; to the terms discipline or violated discipline; to the terms path or mistaken path; to the terms arrogance, affliction, or purification; to the terms concentration, absorption, or attainment; to the terms eighth stage, stream enterers, once-returners, non-returners, or worthy ones; to the terms knowledge, liberated, or attainment of the fruition; to the terms Buddha, Dharma, or Saṅgha; or to the terms nirvāṇa or parinirvāṇa. Though it is the case that there are various terms, and many types of clinging to various terms, they all are characteristic of a single wisdom, and it is without characteristics.
“Those who do not agree with the absence of distinguishing marks entertain false ideas, but those who possess an unmistaken acceptance are known as the noble saṅgha. They possess unmistaken acceptance, because they lack characteristics, distinguishing marks, attachment, yearning, grasping, birth, and cessation. For those who naturally engage as such, there is no meditation, cultivation, weariness, thinking, conceptualization, nonconceptualization, or contradiction. They are called the noble saṅgha because they realize the characteristic that lacks this side, that side, concepts, and thoughts. They are known as the noble saṅgha, Śāriputra, because they have eliminated all formations.
“Śāriputra, I have said that to see phenomena is to see me. Śāriputra, I could never be a phenomenon. Śāriputra, the ignorant Devadatta and all the other non-Buddhists see me as the body of form, but those who see the Thus-Gone One as a physical form do not see him. The same should be applied to his not being sound. Śāriputra, the words of those who propose that ‘one has seen the Thus-Gone One having seen him as the body of form’ have no more real essence than just words, because they are not the correct understanding. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, those who see the Thus-Gone One as a physical form do not see him.
“Śāriputra, those who do not entertain thoughts about phenomena that lack characteristics, distinguishing marks, the three types of mental engagement, effort, cessation, origination, and elaboration do not entertain thoughts about nirvāṇa. They do not think in terms of nirvāṇa. They do not delight in nirvāṇa, think of it, or conceptualize it. Conviction in the single characteristic of all phenomena leads to freedom from characteristics.
“Śāriputra, this is the case for both the Thus-Gone One and seeing the Thus-Gone One. What is meant by seeing the Thus-Gone One? It is the absence of effort, elaboration, origination, concepts, clinging, craving, and names; it is without distinguishing marks, the absence of distinguishing marks, and action related to distinguishing marks; it lacks grasping at conventions, and it lacks action related to imputation. Therefore, not thinking about the absence of entities or the elimination of conventions is the best way to see the Thus-Gone One.
“Śāriputra, what is it that the Thus-Gone One says one sees when one looks and sees the Thus-Gone One? It is the absence of distinguishing marks, absence of wishes, absence of elaboration, absence of clinging, and the constant nonapprehending of any conventions, as well as not entertaining conceits about nirvāṇa. Why is that? Because, Śāriputra, I do not entertain conceits about nirvāṇa, I do not entertain conceits about attaining nirvāṇa, nor do I take delight in nirvāṇa, so why would I say that you should entertain conceits about nirvāṇa, that you should entertain conceits about attaining nirvāṇa, or that you should take delight in nirvāṇa? Śāriputra, if someone apprehends nirvāṇa, I say one should not go forth as their follower. You should know, Śāriputra, that in this Dharma-Vinaya, the teachers under whom one should go forth as a follower should be those who possess the Teacher’s Dharma and who are its protectors.
“You should know that there are those who disparage this Dharma-Vinaya, and there are those who argue against this Dharma-Vinaya. Śāriputra, they are just like the terrible bandits in markets, towns, and cities. Why is that? Śāriputra, if those foolish people even apprehend nirvāṇa as if it were an apprehended object, that they apprehend things in terms of a person goes without saying. Śāriputra, I am not their teacher, and they are not my disciples. Those foolish beings do not belong in the assembly of my saṅgha of hearers, so I expel them with a hand gesture. Śāriputra, all phenomena are without a primary cause, are without mental engagement, are without distinguishing marks, are unrelated to acceptance, and are not perfect awakening. If one cannot even apprehend nirvāṇa itself, it goes without saying that one cannot apprehend the nirvāṇa of someone. Śāriputra, what the Thus-Gone One has said about seeing phenomena is that if this is what one sees, one is seeing the Thus-Gone One. What is the Thus-Gone One, Śāriputra? Śāriputra, the term Thus-Gone One refers to suchness, unmistaken suchness, the one and only suchness.
“Furthermore, those who have no hesitations and do not entertain doubts about the Dharma are known as noble hearers. Those who abide in the absence of concepts, the freedom from concepts, the absence of elaboration, and the absence of distinguishing marks are holy beings; they are known as the noble saṅgha.
“Long ago, Śāriputra, there was a childish being who had never seen a monkey before and wanted to see one, so he walked into a dense jungle. He came across a large group of monkeys that had gathered there, and when he saw that large group of monkeys he thought, ‘I have heard that there are beings called “the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.” These must be those gods!’ Excited and overwrought, he quickly ran back to his town. At that time, a large group of people had gathered in town, so he asked them, ‘Have you ever seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three?’ They replied, ‘Friend, we have never seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three.’ Then he said, ‘Learned ones, I have seen the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three! Would you like to see them too?’ They replied, ‘Friend, we want to see the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three as well!’ So, the group of townspeople followed him into the dense jungle, where he showed them the large group of monkeys and exclaimed, ‘Learned ones, look at the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three!’ They replied, ‘Alas, these are not the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three! These are just monkeys living in the forest. You are wrong and mistaken. You don’t know anything about monkeys or the gods of the Heaven of the Thirty-Three!’
“Śāriputra, in the future there will be monks just like that deluded being who so pointlessly deceived that group of people, and they will approach householders and ask them, ‘Do you wish to see the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers and listen to the words of the Buddha?’ Śāriputra, the householders will be overjoyed and reply, ‘Yes, we want to see the Thus-Gone One’s saṅgha of hearers and listen to the words of the Buddha!’
“Śāriputra, there will be monks who put great effort into preaching and will go to households and groves where the saṅgha resides and give teachings. There will be monks who are learned in exoteric knowledge, put great effort into words, are learned in words, follow words, rely upon words, and put their trust in words. They will conform to this activity and that one, follow them, and be influenced by mere words.
“Such mendicants who put great effort into words and are a misrepresentation of the community will be regarded as shepherds. They will enjoy preaching, crave it, apply themselves joyfully to it, stray into an incorrect extreme, frequently preach it to others, and make a living using evil spells. They will be experts in the various Lokāyata teachings. They will practice and teach an impure Dharma, think only of their speeches, sink into worldly paths, have little vitality, and have bad complexions. They will run out of analogies and reject the virtues of keeping silent. Placing great importance on the lack of meditative concentration, they will take joy in arguing, whether at night, during the day, or both night and day. They will rest on fine beds and padded pillows and lie on soft carpets and blankets. Applying themselves to concentration is not an idea that will occur to them even once, so it is needless to say much about their attaining the result—it is simply impossible.
“Having prepared themselves for slumber by placing their attention on the Lokāyatas, they will fall asleep with that mindset. They will not give rise to the acceptance that concords with the truth during any of the three parts of the night. They will place their greatest efforts into their inferior, erroneous sermons and acquire robes, alms, sleeping places, medicine, and requisites. Why is that so? Because evil Māra expends great effort to gather such unholy beings, so they become fond of evil Māra and direct their efforts toward him. They will exert themselves in their ordinary speeches, take pleasure in them, and never strive for the ultimate. Not being coherent, they will fail to uphold definitive teachings like this one but instead will be afraid, scared, and terrified of them. They will discard the essence of the teachings and uphold as correct ones that are like sparks flying off hot iron, and they will feel glad when other immature, unholy beings see the esteem they accord them. They will think, ‘We too should pursue teachings like these right now and perfect them!’ With this thought in mind, they will forsake the unsurpassed Dharma-Vinaya.
“Śāriputra, those monks who will appear in the future will not find the path. They will follow a mistaken path and be defiled and outcast mendicants. Any householders who learn of them will think of going to see them. While they are in the company of those unholy people, the latter will proclaim the praises of the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha, just to make a living. But the householders will keep making offerings to them because they are concerned about their own livelihood, enslaved by material things, and motivated by getting food and clothing.