The Nine Bonds

Chapter 5, Part 3. We have now discussed the anuśayas together with their entanglements, which the Blessed One calls outflow, flood, and the rest. Is this all, or are there further names? Verse: through the distinctions of bond and the rest, five further kinds are spoken of. Explanation: these same afflictions, through the distinctions of bond, bondage, anuśaya, secondary affliction, and entanglement, are spoken of under five further kinds. What, then, is "bond"? Verse: bond has nine items; equal in what is taken, view and clinging are established as two bonds, since these two alone are unwholesome and arise with independent potency; among the entanglements, only jealousy and stinginess are established as bonds, either because these two occur frequently, because they cause low status and poverty, because they pervasively manifest secondary afflictions, or because they trouble both communities. Explanation: bond has nine kinds — first, the bond of craving; second, the bond of hatred; third, the bond of conceit; fourth, the bond of ignorance; fifth, the bond of views; sixth, the bond of clinging; seventh, the bond of doubt; eighth, the bond of jealousy; ninth, the bond of stinginess. Among these, the bond of craving refers to greed of the three realms; the rest should be explained analogously, as appropriate. The bond of views refers to the three views; the bond of clinging refers to the two kinds of clinging. On this basis, it is said: is there something associated with view that is bound by the craving-bond, not the view-bond, yet does not lack latent increase by the view-anuśaya? Yes. How is this? At the stage where the cognition of the origin has arisen but the cognition of cessation has not yet arisen, dharmas associated with the two kinds of clinging abandoned by seeing cessation and the path are bound, with respect to their object, by the craving-bond, not the view-bond, since the pervasive view-bond has already been permanently abandoned — [these dharmas are] not bound by the non-pervasive view-bond either, since neither the object nor the association [for that] exists. Yet they still have latent increase by the view-anuśaya, since the view-anuśaya of the two clingings undergoes latent increase there. Why are the three views separately established as the view-bond, and the two clingings separately established as the clinging-bond? Because the three views and the two clingings are equal in item-count — that is, the three views have eighteen items, and the two clingings likewise, hence called "equal in items." The three are what is taken, the two are what takes, hence called "equal in taking" — since what is taken and what takes are distinct, they are established as two bonds. Why, among the entanglements, are only jealousy and stinginess established as bonds, and not the others? Because these two alone are unwholesome and arise with independent potency. Only these two fully possess both qualities; the rest do not, hence only these two are established. If entanglements were only eight, this explanation would hold; but since ten entanglements are accepted, this explanation does not suffice, since malice and concealment likewise possess both qualities. Hence, if ten entanglements are accepted, it should further be said that jealousy and stinginess are especially grave in fault, since these two occur frequently. Moreover, these two are the cause of low status and poverty; they pervasively manifest [as accompaniments to] secondary afflictions of both sorrow and joy; they trouble both the monastic and lay communities; or they trouble both gods and asuras; or they trouble both superior destinies of humans and gods; or they trouble both others and one's own community.

The Buddha, elsewhere, on the basis of a different classificatory approach, speaks of five kinds using the term "bond" as well. Verse: there are also five conducive to the lower portion — through two, one does not transcend desire; through three, one returns below — [the teaching] encompasses [these] by category and by root; or, [these correspond to] unwillingness to set out, being led astray on the path, and doubt regarding the path, which obstruct the attainment of liberation, hence only three are said to be severed. Explanation: what are the five? Namely, the view of a self, precept-and-vow attachment, doubt, desire-greed, and hatred. Why are these five called conducive to the lower portion? Because these five favor and reinforce the lower portion's realm — that is, only the desire realm receives the name "lower portion," and these five are able to favor and reinforce [attachment to] it. Through the latter two, one is unable to transcend the desire realm; even should one be able to transcend it, through the former three one is drawn back below, like a prison guard or patrol officer. Other teachers say: "lower" refers to lower sentient beings, namely ordinary beings, and to the lower realm, namely the desire realm. The former three obstruct lower sentient beings from transcending [their condition]; the latter two cause one not to transcend the lower realm — hence all five obtain the name conducive to the lower portion. Those who attain stream-entry have severed six afflictions — why, then, does the teaching speak only of severing three bonds? In truth, it should be said that six afflictions are severed, but, encompassing them by category and by root, only three are spoken of. That is, among what is severed, there are three types — one extends through two categories, [others] through four categories — and speaking of three types encompasses these three categories. Moreover, among what is severed, three ride upon three others in turn — that is, extreme views ride upon self-view, view-attachment rides upon precept-and-vow attachment, wrong view rides upon doubt. Speaking of three as severed encompasses these three roots — hence speaking of three severed already expresses six severed. Some explain it this way: one setting out toward a different place faces three obstacles — first, unwillingness to set out; second, being led astray onto a wrong path, relying on a mistaken road; third, doubt regarding the correct path. One seeking liberation likewise has three similar obstacles — that is, through self-view, fearing liberation, one is unwilling to set out; through precept-and-vow attachment, relying on and clinging to a wrong path, one loses the correct route; through doubt regarding the path, one harbors deep uncertainty. The Buddha reveals that a stream-enterer has permanently severed these obstacles to attaining liberation, hence speaks of three as severed. The Buddha, in another sūtra, just as with "conducive to the lower portion," speaks of "conducive to the upper portion" as likewise having five kinds. Verse: conducive to the upper portion also has five — the two cravings of form and formless, restlessness, conceit, and ignorance — since these prevent one from transcending the upper [realms]. Explanation: these five, when not yet abandoned, are able to prevent sentient beings from transcending the upper realms. Since they favor and reinforce [attachment to] the upper realms, they are named bonds conducive to the upper portion.

We have discussed bond. What is bondage? Verse: bondage is three, corresponding to the three feelings. Explanation: bondage has three kinds — first, the bondage of craving, meaning craving in general; second, the bondage of hatred, meaning hatred in general; third, the bondage of delusion, meaning delusion in general. Why are only these three established as bondage? Because bondage is spoken of corresponding to the three feelings, there are three. That is, with respect to pleasant feeling, the bondage of craving undergoes latent increase, both as object and through association. With respect to painful feeling, hatred; with respect to neutral feeling, delusion — this should be understood analogously. Although craving and hatred can also occur with respect to neutral feeling, this determination is made with reference to one's own continuum, taking pleasant and the other three feelings as bondage's object, according to the predominant pattern. We have now distinguished bondage. What is anuśaya? Verse: anuśaya has already been explained above. Explanation: anuśaya has six, or seven, or ten, or ninety-eight, as already explained. Anuśaya having been explained, what is secondary affliction? Verse: secondary affliction is this and what remains, the aggregate of mental factors operating with a defiled mind. Explanation: these afflictions are also called secondary afflictions, since they all trouble and disturb the mind. There are, further, other [factors] distinct from these afflictions, included within the aggregate of mental factors operating with a defiled mind, which, arising in dependence on the afflictions, are also called secondary afflictions, though not called afflictions [in the strict sense], since they are not fundamental. Their characteristics will be listed at length in the [chapter on] miscellaneous topics; only a brief discussion is given here.

As for what belongs to entanglement and affliction-stain, we should first discuss the characteristics of entanglement. Verse: entanglement is eight — lack of shame and conscience, jealousy, stinginess, together with remorse and drowsiness, and restlessness and torpor; or ten, adding malice and concealment. Lack of shame, stinginess, and restlessness all arise as outflows of greed; lack of conscience, drowsiness, and torpor arise from ignorance; jealousy and malice arise from hatred; remorse [arises] from doubt, concealment from contention. Explanation: root afflictions are also called entanglements, since the sūtras speak of the entanglement of desire-greed as a condition. The Prakaraṇapāda states there are eight entanglements; the Vaibhāṣika tradition states there are ten, adding malice and concealment to the previous eight. Lack of shame and lack of conscience have been explained previously. Jealousy means being unable to bear others' flourishing success. Stinginess means being possessively attached to wealth or the Dharma, opposed to skillful giving. Remorse is identical to regret, as already discussed. Drowsiness has, as its nature, causing the mind to become dull and contracted, without the power to sustain the body. Remorse and drowsiness, as entanglements, refer only to their defiled forms. Restlessness and torpor are as explained previously. Excluding hatred and harm, agitation of mind toward sentient or insentient objects is called malice. Hiding one's own faults is called concealment. Among these ten entanglements, lack of shame, stinginess, and restlessness are outflows of greed; lack of conscience, drowsiness, and torpor are outflows of ignorance; jealousy and malice are outflows of hatred; remorse is an outflow of doubt. Some say concealment is an outflow of greed; some say it is an outflow of ignorance; some say it is an outflow of both, corresponding to cases of knowing [the fault, yet concealing it out of greed] and not knowing [its gravity, out of ignorance], respectively.

What are the characteristics of the remaining affliction-stains? Verse: the six affliction-stains are vexation, harm, resentment, flattery, deceit, and arrogance; deceit and arrogance arise from greed; harm and resentment arise from hatred; vexation arises from view-attachment; flattery arises from views. Explanation: vexation is a stubborn clinging to matters that are already at fault, on account of which one does not accept correction or admonition that accords with reason. Harm is the capacity to oppress others, on account of which one carries out striking, reviling, and the like. Resentment is repeatedly dwelling upon the object of one's malice, forming a grudge and not releasing it. Flattery is crookedness of mind, on account of which one cannot genuinely reveal oneself as one truly is — either falsely denying what is so, or employing some device to keep the matter unclear. Deceit is misleading others. Arrogance has been explained previously. These six arise from the afflictions, and, being defiled and coarse in character, are called affliction-stains. Among these six affliction-stains, deceit and arrogance are outflows of greed; harm and resentment are outflows of hatred; vexation is an outflow of view-attachment; flattery is an outflow of views. As the saying asks, "what is crooked?" — it refers to wrong views; hence flattery is definitively an outflow of views. These stains, together with the entanglements, arise from the afflictions, and so are all given the name secondary affliction. By what are these stains and entanglements abandoned? Verse: among the entanglements, lack of shame, lack of conscience, drowsiness, torpor, and restlessness are abandoned by both seeing and cultivation; the rest, together with the affliction-stains, arise with independent potency, and so are abandoned only by cultivation. Explanation: among the ten entanglements, lack of shame and the other four [just named] are abandoned by both seeing and cultivation, since these are able to arise in association with afflictions of either category — whichever category the affliction they accompany is abandoned by, they are said to be abandoned by that same category. The remaining [entanglements] — jealousy, stinginess, remorse, malice, and concealment — together with the affliction-stains, arise with independent potency, and so are abandoned only by cultivation, since they are associated only with afflictions abandoned by cultivation through the independent power of ignorance — this is what is meant by "arising with independent potency."

Which of these secondary afflictions have which moral quality? Verse: in the desire realm, three [drowsiness, torpor, restlessness] may be either; the rest are unwholesome; in the upper realms, all are neutral. Explanation: drowsiness, torpor, and restlessness, bound to the desire realm, are each capable of being either unwholesome or neutral; all the rest are exclusively unwholesome. Whatever exists, as appropriate, in the two upper realms is entirely of a neutral nature. To which realms are these secondary afflictions bound? Verse: flattery and deceit [belong to] the desire realm and the first absorption; three [belong to] all three realms; the rest [belong to] the desire realm. Explanation: flattery and deceit exist only in the desire realm and the first absorption. How is it known that flattery and deceit exist in the Brahma-world? Because the great Brahmā king, concealing his own state of mind, presented a deceptive appearance to deceive the monk Aśvajit. Although these two have already been distinguished earlier, since the point is directly relevant, we discuss it again here. Torpor, restlessness, and conceit occur throughout all three realms; all the rest exist only in the desire realm — that is, among the sixteen [secondary afflictions discussed], five follow the pattern just explained, and the remaining eleven are bound only to the desire realm. We have now discussed the anuśayas and secondary afflictions.

We have now discussed the anuśayas and secondary afflictions. Among these, how many arise only at the level of mental consciousness? How many are capable of arising in dependence on the six consciousness-bodies? Verse: conceit and drowsiness abandoned by seeing, [and] the secondary afflictions arising with independent potency, all arise only at the level of mental consciousness; the rest are capable of arising in dependence on the six [consciousnesses]. Explanation: in brief, it should be understood, with respect to what is abandoned by seeing and by cultivation, that all conceit and drowsiness among what is abandoned by seeing, and all secondary afflictions that arise with independent potency, arise only in dependence on mental consciousness, since they are incapable of arising in dependence on the five consciousness-bodies. All the rest are capable of arising in dependence on the six consciousnesses — that is, cultivation-abandoned greed, hatred, and ignorance, together with their associated secondary afflictions, namely lack of shame, lack of conscience, torpor, and restlessness, together with the remaining factors included within the category of the major-affliction mental factors, are all capable of arising in dependence on the six consciousness-bodies.

Speaking in terms of a general association applicable to all, every affliction is also associated with the feeling of equanimity, since, at the stage where the anuśaya's continuum is severed, its power has grown weak and faint, and it necessarily abides in equanimity. This being so for the desire realm, what of the upper stages? Each, as appropriate, is pervasively associated with whatever feelings arise together with the consciousness of its own stage — that is, in a stage possessing all four consciousnesses, the afflictions arising in connection with each consciousness are each pervasively associated with the feelings arising together with that consciousness. In stages possessing only mental consciousness, the afflictions arising there are pervasively associated with the feeling arising together with mental consciousness. The number of feelings in the upper stages has already been explained previously, and so is not separately restated here. Explanation: among the desire-realm afflictions, greed is associated with joy and pleasure, since it operates through a jubilant mode pervading the six consciousnesses. Hatred is associated with distress and pain, since it operates through a distressed mode pervading the six consciousnesses. Ignorance is pervasively associated with the preceding four, since its jubilant or distressed mode pervades the six consciousnesses. Wrong view is associated with either distress or joy, since its jubilant or distressed mode operates only at the mental level. Why does wrong view operate through either a jubilant or distressed mode? Because it may, respectively, have previously committed unwholesome or wholesome karma as its basis. Doubt is associated with distress, since its distressed mode operates only at the mental level, since one harboring uncertainty, seeking definite knowledge, has a sorrowful mind. The remaining four views, and conceit, are associated with joy, since their jubilant mode operates only at the mental level. This has been stated with reference to each affliction's specific association.

Verse: among the secondary afflictions, jealousy, remorse, wrath, and vexation, harm and resentment arise together with distress; stinginess is associated with joy; flattery, deceit, drowsiness, and concealment arise together with either distress or joy; arrogance is associated with joy or with pleasure; the remaining four are pervasively associated [with all feelings]. Explanation: among the secondary afflictions, the six — jealousy and the rest — are all associated with the distress faculty, since they operate through a distressed mode confined to mental consciousness. Stinginess is associated with joy, since it operates through a jubilant mode confined to mental consciousness; it operates jubilantly because the character of stinginess closely resembles that of greed. Flattery, deceit, drowsiness, and concealment are associated with distress or joy, since their jubilant or distressed mode is confined to mental consciousness; by "jubilant or distressed" is meant that at times one practices flattery and the rest with a joyful mind, and at other times with a distressed mind. Arrogance is associated with joy or pleasure, since its jubilant mode is confined to mental consciousness; within the third dhyāna it is associated with pleasure, while in the stages below it is associated with joy. All the secondary afflictions described above are also associated with equanimous feeling, since at the moment their continuity is severed they all abide in equanimity, there being a mode of operation confined to the equanimity-only stage. There is no barrier to equanimity's being associated with all of them, just as ignorance is universally associated [with all feelings]. The remaining four — lack of shame, lack of conscience, torpor, and restlessness — are all pervasively associated with the five feelings, since the first two are included among the major-unwholesome mental factors, and the latter two are included among the major-affliction mental factors.

Among the afflictions and secondary afflictions already discussed, there is a further way of classifying them that the Buddha spoke of as "hindrances." We should now examine what a hindrance is. Verse: the five hindrances exist only in the desire realm, because [each pair's] food, cure, and function are the same; though each consists of two factors, each is established as a single hindrance; and because they obstruct the [foundational] aggregates, there are only five. Explanation: in the sūtras the Buddha spoke of five hindrances — first, the hindrance of desire-and-greed; second, the hindrance of ill will; third, the hindrance of torpor-and-drowsiness; fourth, the hindrance of restlessness-and-remorse; fifth, the hindrance of doubt. Are torpor, restlessness, and doubt, as spoken of here, confined to the desire realm as desire-greed, ill will, drowsiness, and remorse are, or do they pervade all three realms? It should be understood that these three are likewise confined to the desire realm alone, since the sūtras state that these five kinds together form a purely and completely unwholesome grouping. The form and formless realms contain nothing unwholesome; since these five are purely unwholesome, they exist only in the desire realm, not in the form or formless realms. Why are torpor-and-drowsiness and restlessness-and-remorse, each consisting of two distinct factors, each established as a single hindrance? Because their food, their cure, and their function are respectively the same, each pair is established as a single hindrance. "Food" means that which is fed upon, also called its provisions. "Cure" means what counteracts it, also called its non-food. "Function" means its actual operation, also called its capacity. It is on this basis that the sūtras speak as they do. Although torpor and drowsiness are two factors, their food and non-food are the same. What is the food of the hindrance of torpor-and-drowsiness? Five things: lethargy, displeasure, physical stretching from fatigue, an imbalance from food, and a dulled, weakened state of mind. What is the non-food of this hindrance? The perception of light. In these two respects their function is likewise the same, namely that both cause the nature of the mind to sink into dullness. Although restlessness and remorse are two factors, their food and non-food are the same. What is the food of the hindrance of restlessness-and-remorse? Four things: thoughts of one's relatives, thoughts of one's homeland, thoughts of not dying, and recollecting the various past occasions of play, amusement, and flattering service one has experienced. What is the non-food of this hindrance? Calm-abiding. In these two respects their function is likewise the same, namely that both cause the mind to be unable to settle. It is on this basis — that their food, cure, and function are the same — that torpor-and-drowsiness and restlessness-and-remorse are each combined into a single hindrance.

All afflictions in general carry the sense of a hindrance — why then does the Tathāgata speak of only these five? Because only these five are capable of serving as the foremost obstruction to the five aggregates. That is, the hindrances of greed and ill will obstruct the aggregate of moral discipline; torpor and drowsiness obstruct the aggregate of wisdom; restlessness and remorse obstruct the aggregate of concentration; and because one then lacks concentration and wisdom, doubt arises regarding the four noble truths — and because of this doubt, one is prevented from giving rise to liberation and to the knowledge-and-vision of liberation at all. It is for this reason that only these five are established as the hindrances. But if the sūtra's intent is explained in this way, restlessness-and-remorse ought logically to be stated before torpor-and-drowsiness, since wisdom can only arise in dependence on concentration, and so the obstruction to concentration ought likewise to be mentioned before the obstruction to wisdom. On this reasoning, other teachers hold that, among these five hindrances, torpor-and-drowsiness and restlessness-and-remorse respectively obstruct the aggregate of concentration and the aggregate of wisdom — and it is on this basis that the sūtras say: one who cultivates concentration fears torpor-and-drowsiness, and one who cultivates the discrimination of dharmas fears restlessness-and-remorse. Still other teachers give a separate account, establishing exactly five causes. What is this account? During the stage of active engagement, one first grasps, among the various objects such as visible form and the rest, the two aspects of the pleasing and the displeasing; afterward, in the stage of settling in, on the basis of that same prior cause, the two hindrances of desire-and-greed and ill will then arise. These two obstruct the mind that is about to enter concentration, and because of this, when one subsequently actually enters the stage of concentration, one is unable to properly cultivate calm-abiding and insight. Because of this, torpor-and-drowsiness and restlessness-and-remorse then arise, respectively obstructing calm-abiding and insight from arising, in that order. Because of this, afterward, in the stage of emerging from concentration, when one is investigating the dharmas, doubt in turn becomes an obstruction. It is for this reason that the hindrances are established as being exactly these five.

We should now consider: for afflictions universal to other realms, and for the afflictions abandoned by seeing cessation and the path that take conditioned objects, at the very stage where they are severed one does not yet fully know their object, and when one does come to fully know their object, they are not yet severed there. By what cause, then, is such an affliction severed? It is not necessarily the case that it is severed simply by fully knowing its object. If so, by how many causes in total is an affliction severed? Verse: [an affliction is severed] because its object is fully known; because what takes it as object is severed; because its object is severed; because a counteragent arises. Explanation: as for the afflictions abandoned by seeing [the truths], they are severed by the first three of these causes: first, by fully knowing their object — this refers to the afflictions taking objects within one's own realm abandoned by seeing suffering and its origin, and the afflictions taking unconditioned objects abandoned by seeing cessation and the path. Second, by severing what takes them as object — this refers to the afflictions taking objects in another realm abandoned by seeing suffering and its origin; since the afflictions taking objects within one's own realm are themselves capable of taking these as their own object, once what takes them as object is severed, they too are severed accordingly. Third, by severing their object itself — this refers to the afflictions taking conditioned objects abandoned by seeing cessation and the path; since an unconditioned object can serve as their object's basis, once that object is severed, they too are severed accordingly. As for the afflictions abandoned by cultivation, they are severed by the last of these causes alone — namely, they are severed simply because the fourth cause, the arising of a counteragent, occurs. For once the counteragent path belonging to a given grade arises, all the afflictions of that grade are severed at once. Which afflictions, of which grade, does which counteragent counter? The afflictions of the highest-of-the-highest grade are countered by the path of the lowest-of-the-lowest grade; and, in turn, the afflictions of the lowest-of-the-lowest grade are countered by the path of the highest-of-the-highest grade. This point will be discussed at length later.

How many kinds of counteragent are there in total? Verse: there are four kinds of counteragent — severance, maintenance, distancing, and aversion. Explanation: there are four kinds of counteragent in total. First, the counteragent of severance, namely the path of uninterrupted progress. Second, the counteragent of maintenance, namely the path that follows it, since that path is capable of maintaining the attainment of that severance. Third, the counteragent of distancing, namely every path that comes after the path of liberation, since that path is able to make the affliction thus severed grow ever more distant. Other teachers say that the path of liberation itself also counts, since the path of liberation, like the paths after it, is likewise able to make the affliction thus severed grow more distant. Fourth, the counteragent of aversion, namely any path through which one perceives the faults of this realm and generates a deep sense of aversion toward it. If, however, one wishes to state these counteragents well, the true order ought rather to be as follows: first, the counteragent of aversion, namely the preparatory path that takes suffering and its origin as its object; second, the counteragent of severance, namely the path of uninterrupted progress that takes all [four truths] as its object; third, the counteragent of maintenance, namely the path of liberation that takes all [four truths] as its object; fourth, the counteragent of distancing, namely the path of continued advancement that takes all [four truths] as its object.

When afflictions attain final severance, what precisely does this proceed from? Verse: it should be understood that afflictions can be severed only with respect to their object. Explanation: it should be understood that when an affliction attains final severance, it cannot be made to separate from the mental factors associated with it; rather, it can only be made to become permanently separated from its object, such that it no longer arises with respect to that object. Severing a future affliction can reasonably be understood in this way, since it is indeed possible to prevent it from ever arising again with respect to its object. But how, then, can a past affliction be said to be severed? If one supposes that the verse's phrase "with respect to its object" means that it is severed simply by one's now fully knowing its object, this too is not correct, since that account is not universally applicable. It should therefore be said instead that the severance of an affliction is properly determined as follows: in the case of afflictions within one's own mental continuum, severance consists in one's attainment of separation from them. In the case of afflictions within another's continuum, and of all form dharmas and undefiled dharmas, their severance consists simply in this: that every affliction within one's own continuum capable of taking them as its object has itself been finally severed.

As for the counteragent of distancing spoken of earlier — how many kinds of distance are there? Verse: distance is of four kinds — characteristic, counteragent, place, and time — exemplified by the great elements, moral discipline, different directions, and the two [other] times, and so forth. Explanation: it is said that distance is, in total, of four kinds. First, distance of characteristic: as with the four great elements, although they arise together within a single aggregation, because their characteristics differ from one another, they are also called distant. Second, distance of counteragent: as with keeping the precepts and violating them, although both occur within a single body, because they counteract one another, they are also called distant. Third, distance of place: as with the eastern sea and the western sea, although both exist within a single world, because they are separated by direction and location, they are also called distant. Fourth, distance of time: as with the past and future, although both are established with respect to a single dharma, because they are separated by their temporal divisions, they are also called distant. Distant with respect to what? With respect to the present. But the moment just extinguished and the moment just about to arise are immediately adjacent to the present — how can they be called distant? They obtain the name distant because their temporal nature differs, not because they must have occurred long ago or will occur far in the future to earn the name.

If so, the present too ought to obtain the name distant, since, with respect to the past and future, its temporal nature likewise differs from theirs. If one holds that the past and future are called distant because they lack activity, being apart from function, then unconditioned dharmas are likewise said to be without function — why, then, are they called near? If one holds that unconditioned dharmas are called near because they can be universally attained in the present, the past and future, by the same reasoning, ought likewise to be so — yet how can space, an unconditioned dharma, be called near? If one holds that the past and future, considered relative to each other, are called distant because the present lies between them, while the present, considered relative to both other times, is immediately adjacent to each and, being without any gap, is therefore near to both — then, by the same reasoning, the past and future, being adjacent to the present with nothing intervening, and yet having something intervening when considered relative to each other, ought properly to carry both names at once, rather than being called distant without qualification. According to the correct principle, it should instead be said that the past and future are called distant because they are separated from a dharma's own intrinsic characteristic — the future, because it has not yet attained its own intrinsic characteristic; the past, because it has already relinquished its own intrinsic characteristic. The word "and so forth" indicates that the examples given are not exhaustive.

It was said earlier that an affliction is severed through the arising of its counteragent path — as the path advances further, is the severed affliction severed again? Is the separation thereby attained ever attained anew? Verse: no affliction is ever severed a second time, but its separation may be attained anew — at the arising of the counteragent, the attainment of a fruit, and the refining of the faculties, within six times. Explanation: once an affliction obtains the path capable of severing it, that affliction is severed all at once by that path; there is necessarily no sense in which it is severed again at a later time. Although the separation thereby attained does not itself gradually improve in step with the path's advancement, it is nevertheless possible, as the path advances, for that superior attainment to arise anew. At how many times, in total, can this re-attainment occur? At six times in total. What are the six? The arising of the counteragent path, the attainment of a fruit, and the refining of the faculties. The time of the counteragent path's arising refers to the path of liberation. The time of attaining a fruit refers to attaining the fruit of stream-entry, once-returning, non-returning, or arhatship. The time of refining the faculties refers to the time of converting one's faculties. At these six times, the separation from the various afflictions gives rise anew, as the path advances, to a superior attainment.

It should be understood, however, that as is appropriate to each case, some instances of separation give rise to a superior attainment at all six times, while others give rise to it at only two. Namely, the separations belonging to what is bound to the desire realm and abandoned by seeing the four truths, and to what is abandoned in the form and formless realms by seeing three of the truths, attain it at all six times. The separations in the form and formless realms abandoned by seeing the truth of the path attain it at only five times, since, at the moment the counteragent arises, the fruit is attained simultaneously, so this should not be divided into two separate times. The separations of the desire realm's cultivation-abandoned afflictions, for the first five grades, likewise attain it at five times, excluding the fruit of stream-entry. The sixth separation attains it at only four times, since, of the preceding five, one further time is excluded, because the attainment of a fruit and the arising of the counteragent occur without distinction. The seventh and eighth grades likewise attain it at four times, since, of the four fruits, the first two are excluded. The ninth separation attains it at only three times, since, of the preceding four, one further time is excluded, as here too the arising of the counteragent and the attainment of a fruit occur simultaneously. Among the form and formless realms' cultivation-abandoned afflictions, with the sole exception of the ninth separation of the peak of existence, all the remaining separations likewise attain it at three times, since, of the four fruits, the first three are excluded. The ninth separation of the peak of existence attains it at only two times, since, of the preceding three, one further time is excluded, as here too the arising of the counteragent and the attainment of the fruit occur simultaneously. This account, however, has been given only in terms of what is generally possible in principle. For a practitioner of sharp faculties, the refining-of-faculties time is excluded at every one of the preceding stages, since sharp-faculty practitioners never need to convert their faculties; and for those who enter the noble path by leaping over certain stages, the corresponding fruits are, as appropriate, likewise excluded. It is at each of these respective stages that the various separations obtain the name "full understanding."

There are two kinds of full understanding: first, understanding-by-knowledge; second, understanding-by-severance. Understanding-by-knowledge refers to undefiled knowledge. Understanding-by-severance refers to the severances themselves, this being a case of naming an effect after its cause. Is a single full understanding established for all severances? No. What, then, is the scheme? Verse: understanding-by-severance is of nine kinds — in the desire realm, the first two [truths'] severance [counts as] one; the [remaining] two each [count as] one, together three; the upper realms are likewise three; the remaining [three, tied to cultivation, are named after] the five lower-portion [bonds, for the desire realm]; [craving for] form, [and, for the formless realm, the totality of bonds]. Explanation: all severances are classified in total into nine kinds of full understanding — the severances of the afflictions bound to the three realms and abandoned by seeing the truths are classified into six kinds of full understanding, while the remaining severances of the afflictions bound to the three realms and abandoned by cultivation are classified into three kinds of full understanding. How are the severances abandoned by seeing the truths classified into six? Within the desire realm, the severance of the first two parts is established as a single full understanding — "the first two parts" referring to what is abandoned by seeing suffering and by seeing its origin. The severance of each of the remaining two parts is established as its own single full understanding — "the remaining two parts" referring to what is abandoned by seeing cessation and by seeing the path. In this way, the severances of what is abandoned by seeing the truths within the desire realm are classified into three full understandings. Just as there are three in the desire realm, so too in the upper realms: for what is bound to the form and formless realms, likewise, the severance of the first two is one, and each of the remaining two is its own one, together three — this is the sense in which the severances of what is abandoned by seeing suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path are together classified into three. In this way, the severances of what is abandoned by seeing the truths across the three realms are named the six kinds of full understanding. How are the remaining severances, abandoned by cultivation, classified into three? The severance of what is bound to the desire realm and abandoned by cultivation is established as a single full understanding, to be understood as the full understanding of the exhaustion of the five lower-portion bonds, established together with what precedes it. The severance of what is bound to the form realm and abandoned by cultivation is established as a single full understanding, to be understood as the full understanding of the exhaustion of craving for form. The severance of what is bound to the formless realm and abandoned by cultivation is established as a single full understanding, namely the full understanding of the eternal exhaustion of all bonds, likewise established as a single unity together with what precedes it. In this way, the severances of what is abandoned by cultivation across the three realms are named the three kinds of full understanding. For what reason are the severances abandoned by cultivation in the form and formless realms established as separate full understandings, rather than being grouped with what is abandoned by seeing? Because the counteragents proper to what is abandoned by cultivation differ from those proper to what is abandoned by seeing.

Of these nine kinds of full understanding just established, we should distinguish how many belong to which path as their fruit. Verse: among these, six are the fruit of patience; the remaining three are the fruit of knowledge. The preparatory-stage fruit is all [nine]; the root-stage fruit is five or eight. Explanation: among these nine, we should first distinguish which are the fruit of the path of patience and which of the path of knowledge. Six are the fruit of patience — the six full understandings belonging to the severances of what is abandoned by seeing the truths across the three realms. Three are the fruit of knowledge — the full understanding of the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds, of craving for form, and of all bonds — since these three full understandings are the fruit of the path of cultivation. How can something that is the fruit of patience be spoken of as full understanding? Because every patience is itself an attendant of knowledge, just as a king's attendants may provisionally be called by the king's own name. Or, alternatively, because patience and knowledge share one and the same fruit. Next we should distinguish which are the fruit associated with the preparatory stage of dhyāna and which with its root stage. The preparatory stage of dhyāna has all nine as its fruit, since one can rely on this stage to sever the afflictions abandoned by both seeing and cultivation across all three realms. The root stage of dhyāna has five or eight as its fruit. As for the account of five: the Vaibhāṣika masters say that the root stage is capable of eternally severing only the afflictions belonging to the form and formless realms, and that the severance of the afflictions bound to the desire realm is admitted to be the fruit of the preparatory stage alone. As for the account of eight: the Venerable Ghoṣaka says that the root stage, too, serves as a counteragent severing the afflictions of the desire realm. For one who has already become free of desire-realm defilement beforehand, when that person enters the seeing of the truths by relying on the root stage, the severance of what is abandoned by seeing within the desire realm is admitted to bring about an undefiled attainment by way of a distinct path — and so this, too, counts as the fruit of that path of seeing. The sole exception is the full understanding of the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds, since that is the fruit of the preparatory stage alone, there being no possibility of cultivating its counteragent at the root stage.

Next we should distinguish which are the fruit associated with the formless realm's border stage and which with its root stage. The formless border-stage fruit is only one, namely the full understanding of the exhaustion of craving for form, attained by relying on the path of the preparatory stage bordering on the sphere of boundless space. The fruit of the first three root formless attainments is likewise only one, namely the full understanding of the eternal exhaustion of all bonds, attained by relying on the first three root formless attainments. Next we should distinguish which are the fruit of the worldly path and which of the noble path. The worldly path's fruit is two, namely the full understanding of the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds and the full understanding of the exhaustion of craving for form, since the power of the worldly path can attain only these. The noble path's fruit is nine, since the power of the noble path is able to universally and eternally sever the dharmas of all three realms. Next we should distinguish which are the fruit of dharma-knowledge and which of analogy-knowledge. The fruit of dharma-knowledge is three, since the power of dharma-knowledge is able to sever what is abandoned by cultivation across the three realms, thereby attaining the latter three fruits. The fruit of analogy-knowledge is two, since the power of analogy-knowledge is able to eternally sever only what is abandoned by cultivation in the form and formless realms, thereby attaining the latter two of those fruits. Next we should distinguish the fruits belonging to the class of paths sharing the same category as dharma-knowledge and analogy-knowledge respectively. The fruit of the dharma-knowledge class is six, namely the six fruits attained by the dharma-knowledges and dharma-patiences discussed earlier. The fruit of the analogy-knowledge class is five, namely the five fruits attained by the analogy-knowledges and analogy-patiences discussed earlier — the word "class" here being used to cover both knowledge and patience together.

Given these nine full understandings just established, why is a separate full understanding not established for every individual severance, rather than only at the nine stages already described? Verse: because of attaining an undefiled separation-attainment, and being free of the peak of existence, extinguishing the double cause, and transcending a realm — it is for these reasons that nine full understandings are established. Explanation: although the severance of afflicted dharmas occurs across many distinct stages, it is by four conditions that the nine full understandings are established. Of these, the six patience-fruits are established by three conditions: attaining an undefiled attainment of separation; being free of the peak of existence; and extinguishing the double cause. A severance must possess all three of these conditions together in order to be given the name full understanding; if any is lacking, it is not so named. For instance, at the stage of an ordinary worldling, the double cause may indeed be extinguished, but since there is no undefiled attainment of separation, and attachment to the peak of existence is not yet absent, even though a severance is attained there, it is not called full understanding. In the case of a noble one, from the point of entering the seeing of the truths up until the manifestation of the analogy-patience regarding suffering, although an undefiled attainment of separation has already been attained, attachment to the peak of existence is not yet absent, and the double cause is not yet extinguished. By the stage of the analogy-knowledge regarding suffering and the dharma-patience regarding the origin, although attachment to the peak of existence is by then absent, the double cause is still not extinguished, since the universally pervading causes abandoned by seeing the origin have not yet been extinguished. Only by the subsequent stages of dharma-knowledge and analogy-knowledge are all three conditions complete for the severances attained there, and so full understanding is established at each of those individual stages.

The three knowledge-fruits are established through all four conditions together — the same three as before, with the addition of transcending a realm. Transcending a realm means that every afflicted dharma within that realm has been entirely left behind. Some hold that being free of the joint bond is likewise a separate condition, giving five conditions in total for establishing full understanding. Being free of the joint bond means that although a severance has occurred, full understanding is not yet established until one has also become free of the remaining afflictions that might take that same object. But since being free of the joint bond has, in its actual function, no difference from the conditions of extinguishing the double cause and transcending a realm, although its sense differs somewhat, it is not treated as a separate condition here. Although every stage of transcending a realm also involves extinguishing the double cause, it is not the case that every extinguishing of the double cause also amounts to transcending a realm — and so, in addition to extinguishing the double cause, transcending a realm is established as a separate condition, since extinguishing the double cause with respect to the three lower stages of a realm does not by itself establish full understanding.

Who possesses how many full understandings? Verse: at the stage of dwelling in the seeing of the truths, one possesses none, or comes to possess one up to five; at the stage of cultivation, one possesses six, or one, or two; at the stage of no-more-learning, one possesses only one. Explanation: an ordinary worldling certainly cannot possess any full understanding. As for noble ones dwelling at the stage of seeing the truths: from the very beginning up through the dharma-patience regarding the origin, they have not yet come to possess any full understanding. By the stage of the dharma-knowledge regarding the origin and the analogy-patience regarding the origin, they come to possess only one. By the stage of the analogy-knowledge regarding the origin and the dharma-patience regarding cessation, they come to possess two. By the stage of the dharma-knowledge and analogy-patience regarding cessation, they come to possess three. By the stage of the analogy-knowledge regarding cessation and the dharma-patience regarding the path, they come to possess four. By the stage of the dharma-knowledge and analogy-patience regarding the path, they come to possess five. At the stage of cultivation, beginning with the analogy-knowledge regarding the path, up until one has either not yet attained complete freedom from desire-realm defilement or has fallen back from such freedom, one possesses all six.

Once one has attained complete freedom from desire-realm defilement but craving for form is not yet exhausted — or, for one who had already become free of desire beforehand, from the analogy-knowledge regarding the path up until the arising of the superior path that exhausts craving for form — one possesses only one full understanding, namely the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds. From the point where craving for form is exhausted, and also for one who, having reached the stage of no-more-learning, falls back into the bonds of form, one likewise possesses only this same one. For one who still has craving for form, once that craving is eternally exhausted — or, for one who had already become free of form beforehand, from the arising of the path that exhausts craving for form up until complete freedom from craving for the formless is not yet attained — one comes to possess two: the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds and the exhaustion of craving for form. For one who falls back from the stage of no-more-learning into the bonds of the formless, one likewise comes to possess these same two full understandings, named as before. At the stage of no-more-learning, one possesses only one full understanding, namely the full understanding of the eternal exhaustion of all bonds. Why is it that, for the fruits of non-returning and arhatship, all the severances are gathered together and established as a single full understanding? Verse: because of transcending a realm and attaining a fruit, at these two points the full understandings are gathered together. Explanation: because two conditions are both present — transcending a realm, and attaining a fruit — all the severances are gathered together and established as a single full understanding. Only at these two stages are both conditions simultaneously fulfilled, and so at these points the full understandings are gathered together into one.

Who gives up, and who gains, how many kinds of full understanding? Verse: one gives up one, two, five, or six; one gains the same, except five. Explanation: giving up one means falling back, from the stage of no-more-learning or from the point where craving for form is exhausted, into a complete relapse of desire. Giving up two means a non-returner who, from the point craving for form is exhausted, either falls back into the bonds of desire, or attains arhatship. Giving up five means one who had already become free of desire beforehand, upon entering the seeing of the truths and reaching the analogy-knowledge regarding the path, since one then attains the exhaustion of the lower-portion bonds and thereby gives up the previous five. Giving up six means a noble one who had not yet become free of desire, at the moment freedom from desire is attained. Gaining likewise means that there is gaining of one, gaining of two, and gaining of six, only gaining of five does not occur. Gaining one means attaining what was not attained before, and also falling back, from the stage of no-more-learning, into the bonds of form. Gaining two means falling back, from the stage of no-more-learning, into the bonds of the formless realm. Gaining six means falling back from the state of non-returning. With this, the discussion of the anuśayas, undertaken in the course of explaining severance, comes to its conclusion.