The Six Kinds of Arhat

As already explained, the immovable-lineage arhat gives rise to the knowledge of non-arising immediately following the first knowledge of exhaustion. Do arhats, like stream-enterers and the others, likewise admit of further distinctions? Yes, indeed. What are they? Verse: there are six kinds of arhat, from retrogressible up through immovable; the first five arise from the convinced-through-faith lineage, collectively called timely liberation; the last is non-timely liberation, arising from the attained-through-seeing lineage. Explanation: the sūtras state that arhats, owing to differences in lineage, are of six kinds: retrogressible-dharma, thought-dharma, protective-dharma, stable-dharma, capable-of-penetrating-dharma, and immovable-dharma. Among these six, the first five arise from the convinced-through-faith nature already possessed at the stage of being a noble-one-in-training; these are collectively called timely, cherished liberation of mind, since they must constantly cherish and protect their attainment. They are also called timely liberation, since they must wait for suitable time in order to attain liberation — the fuller term abbreviated, just as one might shorten ghee-pot to pot. It is for this reason that they must wait for the right time to enter concentration, waiting until favorable conditions converge — adequate provisions, freedom from illness, a suitable place — before they are able to enter. The immovable-dharma nature, spoken of last, is called immovable liberation of mind, since it involves no retrogression or disturbance. It is also called non-timely liberation, since it need not wait for any particular time to attain liberation — its concentration manifests whenever desired, without needing to wait for favorable conditions to converge. Alternatively, the names timely and non-timely liberation are established with reference to temporary versus final liberation, since the former admits of times when retrogression is possible, while the latter does not; this last type arises from the attained-through-seeing nature.

Regarding these six kinds of arhat-lineage just explained, are they always already possessed beforehand, or can they also be newly attained afterward? Neither exclusively — it is not fixed. How so? Verse: some are already possessed as a prior lineage; others are attained afterward through the refining of faculties. Explanation: the retrogressible-dharma lineage is always already possessed beforehand; the remaining five, including thought-dharma, can also be newly attained afterward. That is, some possess the thought-dharma nature already from the start, while others possess the retrogressible-dharma nature at first and later attain thought-dharma through the refining of faculties — and the same pattern should be understood, as appropriate, all the way up through immovable-dharma. Retrogressible-dharma means one who, upon encountering even a slight adverse condition, immediately retrogresses from what has been attained, unlike the thought-dharma type and the rest. Thought-dharma means one who, fearing the loss of their attainment through retrogression, constantly contemplates ending their own life. Protective-dharma means one who, delighting in what has been attained, actively guards and protects it. Stable-dharma means one who, apart from especially strong conditions for retrogression, does not retrogress even without actively guarding their attainment, yet, apart from especially strong effort, likewise does not advance further. Capable-of-penetrating-dharma means one whose nature is capable of skillfully cultivating the refining of faculties, swiftly reaching the immovable stage. Immovable-dharma means one who will certainly never retrogress.

Among these six lineages, at the earlier stage of being a noble-one-in-training, the first two lack both constant and reverent effort, distinguished from each other by a difference in faculty. The third possesses constant effort alone. The fourth possesses reverent effort alone. The fifth possesses both, yet remains of dull faculty. The sixth, of sharp faculty, possesses both kinds of effort. The retrogressible-dharma lineage does not necessarily always retrogress, nor does the capable-of-penetrating type necessarily always reach the immovable stage — these names are established merely with reference to the possibility, not the certainty, of such outcomes. Hence, all six kinds of arhat can be found across all three realms. If, however, one holds that retrogressible necessarily means certain retrogression, and capable-of-penetrating necessarily means certain attainment of immovability, then, on this view, all six kinds exist fully only within the desire realm, while the form and formless realms contain only the stable and immovable types, since beings there lack occasion for retrogression, self-harm, self-protection, or the cultivation of faculty-refining, and so only these two types exist there.

Among these six kinds of arhat, who retrogresses from what — from their lineage, or merely from their fruit? Verse: four retrogress from their very lineage; five retrogress from their fruit, but never from what came before. Explanation: the immovable lineage certainly admits of no retrogression. The preceding five kinds all admit of the possibility of retrogression; among these, the latter four can retrogress from their very lineage itself, while the retrogressible-dharma type alone has no lineage left to retrogress from, since this lineage already occupies the very lowest position. All five admit of the possibility of retrogressing from their fruit, though, even where retrogression occurs, it is never from what came before. The lineage that a now-arhat had already possessed at the earlier stage of being a noble-one-in-training — from that lineage, such a person cannot retrogress, since it has been made firm by both the path of training and the path of no-more-learning. Likewise, the lineage a noble-one-in-training had already possessed at the still-earlier stage of being an ordinary worldling cannot be retrogressed from, since it has been made firm by both worldly and transcendent paths. However, the lineage of thought-dharma and the other three, when newly attained through the refining of faculties, does admit of the possibility of retrogression. For one who already possessed the thought-dharma nature or the like at either of the two earlier stages, such a person certainly cannot retrogress from the fruit thereby attained — retrogression from the fruit applies only to one whose original lineage was retrogressible-dharma. Moreover, one can never retrogress from an earlier-attained fruit; only the later-attained fruit admits of retrogression, and it is for this reason that one can never retrogress from the fruit of stream-entry. On this basis, a retrogressible-dharma arhat has three possible subsequent courses: advancing further, retrogressing to noble-one-in-training, or remaining at their current position and eventually attaining nirvāṇa. The thought-dharma type has four courses, the same three plus retrogressing all the way to retrogressible-dharma. The remaining three types have, respectively, five, six, and seven possible courses, each successive type gaining one more. When the thought-dharma type and the other three retrogress to noble-one-in-training and later regain arhatship, they return specifically to the retrogressible lineage, nothing else — were this not so, it would actually constitute an advance, not a retrogression.

Why is it that one can certainly never retrogress from an earlier-attained fruit? Because what is severed by seeing is grounded in no real basis. Self-view operates by taking a presumed self as its basis; the afflictions abandoned by seeing all have this view as their root. Since the substance of self does not actually exist, these are said to be grounded in no real basis, and, precisely because they lack any real basis, there is certainly no possibility of retrogressing into them. If this is so, one ought to say that these afflictions take nothing as their object — no, that is not so; their object is not literally nothing, since the truths themselves genuinely serve as their object. However, with respect to the object of the truths, this affliction fails to grasp it accurately — but is this not equally true of every affliction? Although this is true of all afflictions alike, there remains a real difference: cultivation-abandoned afflictions each have their own distinct basis, namely, being pleasing or displeasing and so forth, and this characteristic is genuinely not absent from the object they take. Seeing-abandoned afflictions, by contrast, imagine there to be a self, yet the object of the truths does not actually possess any characteristic of self at all, and it is precisely because of this complete lack of any real basis that seeing-abandoned afflictions differ from cultivation-abandoned ones. With respect to an object such as form, self-view falsely superimposes an agent, an experiencer, a sovereign controller operating there, none of which reflects the object's true nature. Extreme views and the rest arise following upon this same self-view, and so are likewise described as grounded in no real basis. Cultivation-abandoned greed, hatred, conceit, and delusion, by contrast, merely give rise to attachment, aversion, arrogance, and confusion with respect to a genuinely present characteristic, and so are described as grounded in a real basis.

Moreover, seeing-abandoned afflictions grasp, with respect to the principle of the truths, notions such as self, what belongs to self, annihilation, and permanence, yet the truths themselves contain not the slightest trace of any such self — and seeing-abandoned greed and the rest arise by taking these false notions as object, hence they are all called afflictions grounded in no real basis. Cultivation-abandoned afflictions, by contrast, regard objects such as form as beautiful or ugly, yet such objects are not entirely without at least some genuine trace of such distinctions, hence these can rightly be called afflictions grounded in a real basis. Moreover, seeing-abandoned afflictions arise through confusion regarding the principle of the truths, hence grounded in no real basis; cultivation-abandoned afflictions arise through confusion regarding coarser, more concrete matters, hence grounded in a real basis. The principle of the truths is genuinely real and provides a fixed basis to rely upon — once a noble one's wisdom has realized it, there is certainly no possibility of retrogression. Superficial phenomena, by contrast, are unstable and provide no fixed basis, and so, even after severing the confusion concerning them, a lapse of mindfulness leading to retrogression can still occur. Alternatively: cultivation-abandoned afflictions arise without careful deliberation, being dull in nature; seeing-abandoned afflictions arise through careful deliberation, being reasoned in nature. A noble one who fails to deliberate carefully can lapse into a mindfulness-failure regarding coarse matters, but not when deliberation is careful, just as one might mistake a rope for a snake only in a careless glance. Hence noble ones can experience retrogression with respect to cultivation-abandoned affliction, but seeing-abandoned affliction can never arise merely through carelessness. If a noble one deliberates carefully, they simply see the truth-principle correctly, hence a noble one's severance by seeing certainly admits of no retrogression.

The Sautrāntika masters say: there is likewise no possibility of retrogression from arhatship itself. This position accords with reason. How is this known? By both scripture and reasoning. What is the scriptural basis? A sūtra states: Monks! Severance of affliction by noble wisdom is called true severance. A further sūtra states: I say that noble-ones-in-training should be diligent — not arhats. Although there is a sūtra in which the Buddha tells Ānanda, I say that gain and honor can also obstruct an arhat, this does not state that the arhat retrogresses from the fruit of arhatship — it states only that they lose their joyful abiding in the present life. A sūtra states: the immovable liberation of mind, personally realized within the body — I definitely say there is no cause or condition by which one retrogresses from this. If it is claimed that retrogression does occur, on the grounds that the sūtra speaks of timely, cherished liberation, I too grant that much — but one should carefully examine what exactly retrogresses: is it the very nature of being a worthy one, or merely something like the dhyāna-concentrations? In fact, that root-level dhyāna-concentration must wait for suitable conditions before it can manifest, hence it is called timely. Such a person, in order to attain joyful abiding in the present life, repeatedly hopes for its manifestation, hence it is called cherished. Some say instead: this concentration is what is cherished and savored, but the liberation that is the very nature of the arhat-fruit constantly accompanies the person without interruption, and so ought not to be called timely, and, since one no longer needs to seek it further, it ought not to be called cherished either. If the very nature of being a worthy one admitted of retrogression, why would the Blessed One speak only of the realized joyful abiding as admitting the possibility of retrogression? From this it can be proven that the liberation that is the very nature of arhatship itself is certainly immovable.

However, owing to the disturbing fault of attachment to gain and the like, there are those who lose their mastery over the attained joyful abiding in the present life — namely, those of dull faculties; those of sharp faculties never lose it. Hence, with respect to the attained joyful abiding, some retrogress and some do not, and it is on this basis that they are named retrogressible-dharma and the rest. The thought-dharma type and so on should likewise be understood by the same reasoning. What is the difference between non-retrogressing, stable, and immovable? What is attained without the refining of faculties is called non-retrogressing; what is attained through the refining of faculties is called immovable. For both, the superior meditative attainments they give rise to admit of no retrogression at all, even should adverse conditions arise. The stable-dharma type, by contrast, is merely able to avoid losing whatever superior qualities have already been attained, without being able to newly generate further ones, and should they nevertheless generate something further, that newly generated quality remains subject to retrogression. As for the Venerable Godhika: formerly, while still a noble-one-in-training, being extremely attached to the flavor of his timely liberation, and being of dull faculties, he repeatedly lost this attainment, and, deeply reproaching himself, took up a knife and ended his own life. Because he held no attachment whatsoever to his own body or life, at the very moment of death he attained arhatship and immediately entered parinirvāṇa, hence Godhika, too, never actually retrogressed from the fruit of arhatship. A further sūtra states: there is one dharma that should be brought forth, timely, cherished liberation of mind; there is one dharma that should be personally realized, immovable liberation of mind. If the very nature of being a worthy one were called timely, cherished liberation of mind, why would this sūtra speak of the worthy-one's-nature twice? Moreover, nowhere is the fruit of arhatship ever described as something to be brought forth — it is only ever described as something to be realized.

What is meant by describing the dull-faculty worthy one's attainment as something to be brought forth? If this indicates that such a person is capable of bringing it into present manifestation, sharp-faculty practitioners would be even more capable of doing so. If it indicates that such manifestation ought to be brought forth, sharp-faculty practitioners would likewise be even more suited to bringing it forth. Hence, timely liberation cannot be identical with the very nature of being a worthy one. If this is so, why does the sūtra speak of timely liberation in connection with the worthy one at all? Because there exist worthy ones whose faculties are dull, and who, for this reason, must wait for suitable conditions before their concentration can manifest; whoever is the opposite is called non-timely liberation. The Abhidharma texts likewise state that the anuśaya of desire-craving arises from three conditions: the anuśaya not yet being severed and fully understood, a conducive teaching being present, and improper mental application actually arising. This concludes the scriptural evidence. As for the argument from reasoning: if an arhat has already generated the counteragent path capable of ensuring that affliction never arises again, it should not be possible for affliction to arise again through retrogression. If an arhat has not yet generated this path, then, being unable to permanently uproot the seed of affliction, such a person should not be considered to have exhausted all contaminants — and if not, how could they be called a worthy one at all? This concludes the argument from reasoning.

If this is so, one ought to explain the charcoal simile sūtra. It states: a learned noble disciple, whether walking or standing still, may, at certain places and times, lose mindfulness and thereby give rise to evil, unwholesome thoughts. This sūtra speaks specifically of the fruit of arhatship — for this same sūtra states: that noble disciple's mind has, for a long night of practice, been inclined toward seclusion, and so on, at length, up to approaching entry into nirvāṇa. A further sūtra directly states that this quality of being inclined toward seclusion is called the power of a worthy one. Moreover, this sūtra states: that person has already been able to permanently expel all that conduces to contamination, and has already attained coolness. From this it can be certainly known that the person described is indeed an arhat. It is true that the person described in the latter part is indeed an arhat — yet the passage describing the earlier lapse refers to a time before that person had yet fully and thoroughly penetrated the teaching; even while walking or standing, such a lapse remains possible at that earlier stage. That is, while still a noble-one-in-training, one may, through a lapse of mindfulness, give rise to affliction, but once that same person has become one beyond training, no such arising is possible any longer. The earlier passage refers to the stage of being a noble-one-in-training, and it is for this reason that there is no fault in our position. The Vaibhāṣika masters, however, firmly maintain: the fruit of arhatship does indeed admit of retrogression.

Do only arhats possess these six lineages, or do noble-ones-in-training and ordinary worldlings also possess six kinds? And can all of them cultivate the refining of faculties? Verse: noble-ones-in-training and ordinary worldlings likewise have six; faculty-refining does not occur during the path of seeing. Explanation: noble-ones-in-training and ordinary worldlings likewise possess six lineages, since the six kinds of worthy one derive from these as their prior basis. However, during the stage of the path of seeing, there is certainly no faculty-refining, since this stage allows no room for the arising of the necessary preparatory effort. Only at the stage of an ordinary worldling already convinced through faith is one able to cultivate faculty-refining in advance, just as at the stage of no-more-learning. As a sūtra states: I say that, among the four kinds of superior joyful abiding in the present life thereby realized, any one of them may admit of retrogression — but with respect to the attained immovable liberation of mind personally realized within the body, I definitely say there is no cause or condition by which one retrogresses from this. How, then, can the immovable-dharma type retrogress from joyful abiding in the present life? Verse: it should be understood that retrogression is of three kinds — from what has been attained, from what has not yet been attained, and from actual enjoyment. The Buddha possesses only the last; sharp-faculty types have the latter two; the remaining, duller-faculty types have all three.

Explanation: it should be understood that retrogression is, in total, of three kinds. First, retrogression from what has been attained — losing a superior quality already attained. Second, retrogression from what has not yet been attained — being unable to attain a superior quality. Third, retrogression of enjoyment — a superior quality already attained simply fails to manifest in the present moment. Among these three, the Blessed One possesses only the third, retrogression of enjoyment, since, possessing every quality in full, it is simply not possible for all of them to manifest simultaneously and instantaneously at every moment.

The remaining immovable-dharma type possesses both retrogression of enjoyment and retrogression from what has not yet been attained, since, with respect to qualities superior to their own, they too have not yet attained these. The remaining five lineages may possess all three kinds, since they may also retrogress from qualities already attained. With reference to retrogression of enjoyment, then, saying the immovable-dharma type retrogresses from joyful abiding in the present life involves no contradiction. The no-retrogression theorists say as follows: every uncontaminated liberation is called immovable. As for why a sixth, separate immovable-dharma type is established, this has already been resolved as explained above, and should not be raised again as an objection.

Since arhats are granted to retrogress from the fruit, does such a person come to be reborn in the meantime? And would such a person do, during retrogression, something they would not do while properly abiding in the fruit? Neither. Why not? Verse: in every case of retrogression from the fruit, one certainly does not die in the interval; what one would not do while abiding in the fruit, one also does not do even while retrogressed, since one's sense of shame is increased. Explanation: there is no case of dying in the interval after retrogressing from the fruit, since, having retrogressed, one certainly regains it again within a mere moment. As a sūtra states: Monks, you should know that when such a learned noble disciple loses right mindfulness, he swiftly regains it again, and is able to make what arose through that retrogression utterly vanish and be eliminated. If this were not so, the fruit of cultivating the holy life would not be a secure, trustworthy refuge. Moreover, deeds contrary to what befits abiding in the fruit — deeds one would not do while abiding in the fruit — one also certainly does not commit even during a brief retrogression, since one's sense of shame is increased, just as a strong warrior, though he may stumble, does not thereby collapse.

As stated above, faculty-refining yields results at both the non-trainee and trainee stages. When actually refining the faculties, how many uninterrupted paths and how many liberation paths does each conversion involve? What nature do they belong to? What do they depend upon? Verse: faculty-refining at the non-trainee stage takes nine uninterrupted and nine liberation paths, owing to long habituation; at the trainee stage, one each — both uncontaminated, depending on the three continents' humans. Non-trainees depend on nine grounds; trainees depend on only six. Both involve either relinquishing a fruit or the path of a superior fruit, since only the fruit itself, not the path leading toward it, is what is thereby attained. Explanation: one who seeks a superior lineage and cultivates faculty-refining, at the non-trainee stage, converts from each nature to the next through nine uninterrupted paths and nine liberation paths in every case, just as in attaining arhatship. Why is this? Because that dull-faculty nature, having been habituated over a long period, cannot be converted through only a small amount of effort — it has been made firm by both the path of training and the path of no-more-learning. At the trainee stage, converting from each nature takes only one uninterrupted path and one liberation path in every case, just as in attaining the first fruit, the opposite situation from above. The preparatory path, at each of these stages, likewise counts as only one. All these uninterrupted and liberation paths, without exception, belong exclusively to the uncontaminated nature — a noble one certainly never uses a contaminated path to convert their faculties, since a contaminated path lacks the necessary dominant power to do so. "Depend upon" refers to the body and the ground. As for the body depended upon, it is exclusively that of humans of the three continents, since beings elsewhere cannot retrogress and so have no occasion for this. As for the ground depended upon: for non-trainees, it extends through all nine grounds — the stage of not-yet-attained, the intermediate dhyāna, the four dhyānas, and three of the formless spheres. Trainees depend on only six, excluding the latter three. Why is this? Because one who converts faculties may either relinquish a lower fruit or attain a superior fruit's path, but what is thereby attained is only the fruit itself, never merely the path leading toward it — and no trainee-fruit belongs to the formless-realm grounds, hence a trainee's faculty-refining depends only on six grounds.

Among individuals at the non-trainee stage, how many kinds are there in total, and by what basis do they differ? Verse: seven kinds of śrāvaka and two kinds of buddha; the distinction rests on nine grades of faculty. Explanation: noble ones abiding at the non-trainee stage number nine in total — the seven kinds of śrāvaka and the two kinds of awakened one. Retrogressible-dharma and the four kinds following it, together with immovable-dharma divided into two (owing to the distinction between the type attained earlier, directly from the start, and the type attained later, through faculty-refining), make seven kinds of śrāvaka. Pratyekabuddhas and the greatly-awakened one, the Buddha, are called the two kinds of awakened one. It is owing to the nine grades of faculty, from lowest-of-the-low on upward, that the non-trainee noble ones come to differ into these nine kinds.

Among trainees and non-trainees, there are seven kinds of noble one, within which every noble one without exception is included: faith-follower, dharma-follower, convinced-through-faith, attained-through-seeing, body-witness, wisdom-liberated, and both-liberated. On what basis are these seven established, and how many distinct substances do they involve? Verse: by preparatory effort, by faculty, by attaining cessation-concentration, and by kind of liberation, these come to seven; their distinct substances number only six, since three paths each yield two names. Explanation: on the basis of a difference in preparatory effort, the first two kinds are established — on the basis of having, at an earlier time, relied either on another person's guidance or on the teaching itself in cultivating preparatory effort toward the sought-for goal, the names faith-follower and dharma-follower are established. On the basis of a difference in faculty, the next two kinds are established — on the basis of whether the dull faith-root or the sharp wisdom-root predominates, these are named, respectively, convinced-through-faith and attained-through-seeing. On the basis of attaining cessation-concentration, the name body-witness is established, since such a person personally attains cessation-concentration through the body. On the basis of a difference in liberation, the last two kinds are established — on the basis of one liberated from the affliction-obstruction through wisdom alone, the name wisdom-liberated is established; on the basis of one who is also liberated from the liberation-obstruction by additionally attaining concentration, the name both-liberated is established. Though these names number seven, their distinct substances number only six: at the path of seeing there are two noble ones, faith-follower and dharma-follower; these same two, upon reaching the path of cultivation, receive two further names, convinced-through-faith and attained-through-seeing; these same two, upon reaching the non-trainee stage, receive yet two further names, timely-liberated and non-timely-liberated.

It should be understood that, within this scheme, the faith-follower alone comes to three by faculty (lower, middling, and upper); comes to five by lineage (retrogressible-dharma and the rest); comes to fifteen by path-moment (the eight forbearances and seven knowledges of the path of seeing); comes to seventy-three by degree of prior freedom from defilement (from being fully bound, through having freed oneself from the afflictions of up to eight grounds); and comes to nine by bodily basis (the three continents and the desire realm's heavens). If faculty, lineage, path-moment, freedom from defilement, and bodily basis are all multiplied together, this yields a combined total of one hundred million, forty-seven thousand, eight hundred and twenty-five kinds. The dharma-follower and the rest should be reasoned through in the very same way.

What, precisely, is meant by both-liberated and wisdom-liberated? Verse: both-liberated is defined by attainment of cessation-concentration; the rest are named wisdom-liberated. Explanation: those arhats who have attained cessation-concentration are called both-liberated, since they are liberated from both the affliction-obstruction and the liberation-obstruction through the combined power of wisdom and concentration. The remaining arhats, who have not attained cessation-concentration, are called wisdom-liberated, since they are liberated from the affliction-obstruction through the power of wisdom alone. As the Blessed One said: even once the five lower afflictions are severed such that one cannot be dragged back by them, one is not yet called a fulfilled trainee. At the trainee and non-trainee stages, respectively, by how many causes is one uniquely called fulfilled within one's own stage? Verse: a trainee is called fulfilled by three possible causes — faculty, fruit, and concentration; a non-trainee attains the name fulfilled by only two — faculty and concentration. Explanation: a trainee, uniquely attaining the name fulfilled at the trainee stage, does so by three causes in full: faculty, fruit, and concentration. There are trainees who attain the name fulfilled by faculty alone — namely, those of the attained-through-seeing type who have not yet become free from desire-realm defilement. There are trainees who attain it by fruit alone — namely, convinced-through-faith non-returners who have not yet attained cessation-concentration. There are trainees who attain it by faculty and fruit together — namely, attained-through-seeing non-returners who have not yet attained cessation-concentration. There are trainees who attain it by fruit and concentration together — namely, convinced-through-faith non-returners who have attained cessation-concentration. There are trainees who attain it by all three together — namely, attained-through-seeing non-returners who have attained cessation-concentration. No trainee attains the name fulfilled by concentration alone, or by faculty and concentration together without fruit. Non-trainees, at the non-trainee stage, attain the name fulfilled uniquely by the two causes of faculty and concentration; at the non-trainee stage there is no fulfillment apart from the fruit itself, hence no separate fulfilled-name is established by fruit alone. There are some called fulfilled by faculty alone — namely, the non-timely-liberated who has not yet attained cessation-concentration. There are some called fulfilled by concentration alone — namely, the timely-liberated who has attained cessation-concentration. There are some called fulfilled by both together — namely, the non-timely-liberated who has already attained cessation-concentration.

Broadly speaking, the distinctions among paths are countless — worldly and transcendent, seeing and cultivation, and so on. Stated briefly, how many categories of path suffice to encompass them all? Verse: it should be understood that every path, stated briefly, comes to only four — preparatory, uninterrupted, liberation, and supplementary-advancement paths. Explanation: the preparatory path is that from which, immediately following, an uninterrupted path arises. The uninterrupted path is that which is able to sever the obstruction that ought to be severed. The liberation path is that which arises first, immediately upon having become liberated from the obstruction that ought to be severed. The supplementary-advancement path is whatever remains beyond these three. What is the meaning of "path"? It is the road to nirvāṇa, since, mounting it, one is able to travel to the city of nirvāṇa. Alternatively, "path" means seeking a support, since, depending on it, one seeks the fruit of nirvāṇa. How can the liberation and supplementary-advancement paths be called "path," if they themselves do not sever any obstruction? Because they belong to the same class as the uninterrupted path, each advancing to an ever-higher grade; or because the power of each earlier moment reaches through to each later one in unbroken succession; or because they too are capable of leading into the state without remainder. Elsewhere, "path" is given the name "conduct," since it is able to thoroughly penetrate and proceed toward nirvāṇa.

How many kinds of this are there, and on what basis is it established? Verse: conduct is of four kinds — pleasant conduct depends on the root dhyānas, painful conduct depends on the remaining grounds, and each is further slow or quick according to dull or sharp faculty. Explanation: a sūtra states that conduct is, in total, of four kinds: painful-slow conduct, painful-quick conduct, pleasant-slow conduct, and pleasant-quick conduct. A path arising in dependence on the four root dhyānas is called pleasant conduct, since, with its branch-factors fully gathered in, calm and insight operate in balance, spontaneously. A path arising in dependence on the formless attainments, the not-yet-attained stage, or the intermediate dhyāna is called painful conduct, since, its branch-factors not fully gathered in, calm and insight operate unevenly and with difficulty — in the formless concentrations, insight is diminished and calm excessive; in the not-yet-attained stage and the intermediate dhyāna, insight is excessive and calm diminished. Within each of these two kinds of conduct, pleasant and painful, the dull-faculty practitioner's conduct is called slow, and the sharp-faculty practitioner's is called quick — when one is delayed in thoroughly penetrating the object, this is called slow conduct, and the reverse of this is called quick. Alternatively: conduct arising in one who is slow and dull is itself called slow conduct, and quick conduct is the reverse of this.

Path is also called "the dharmas that are limbs of awakening." How many kinds are there, and what is the meaning of this name? Verse: the limbs of awakening number thirty-seven — the four foundations of mindfulness and so on; "awakening" refers to the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising; because these accord with awakening, they are called its limbs. Explanation: a sūtra states that the limbs of awakening number thirty-seven — the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right exertions, the four bases of supernormal power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of awakening, and the eightfold noble path. The knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising are together called awakening. According to who attains it, three kinds of awakening are separately established: śrāvaka awakening, pratyekabuddha awakening, and unsurpassed awakening. Because the slumber of ignorance is permanently severed, and because one truly knows that what has been done is done and need not be done again, these two knowledges are called awakening. Since the thirty-seven dharmas accord with and lead toward awakening, they are all called the dharmas that are limbs of awakening.

Are these thirty-seven each a distinct substance? No. How, then? Verse: their real substances number only ten — wisdom, diligence, concentration, faith, mindfulness, joy, equanimity, pliancy, and precept and inquiry serve as their substance. Explanation: though the limbs of awakening number thirty-seven by name, their real substances number only ten, namely wisdom, diligence, and the rest. The four foundations of mindfulness, the wisdom-faculty, the wisdom-power, the discernment-of-dharmas awakening-factor, and right view have wisdom as their substance. The four right exertions, the diligence-faculty, the diligence-power, the diligence awakening-factor, and right effort have diligence as their substance. The four bases of supernormal power, the concentration-faculty, the concentration-power, the concentration awakening-factor, and right concentration have concentration as their substance. The faith-faculty and the faith-power have faith as their substance. The mindfulness-faculty, the mindfulness-power, the mindfulness awakening-factor, and right mindfulness have mindfulness as their substance. The joy awakening-factor has joy as its substance. The equanimity awakening-factor has formational equanimity as its substance. The pliancy awakening-factor has pliancy as its substance. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood have precept as their substance. Right intention has inquiry as its substance. Thus the limbs of awakening's real substances number only ten — precisely the five faculties and powers of faith and the rest, with joy, equanimity, pliancy, precept, and inquiry further added. The Vaibhāṣika masters say there are eleven instead, since, bodily karma and verbal karma not being mixed together, precept is divided into two; the remaining nine are the same as before.

The foundations of mindfulness and the other two groups have no separately dedicated substance of their own — how, then, can they each be said to consist specifically of wisdom, diligence, and concentration? Verse: the four foundations of mindfulness, the right exertions, and the bases of supernormal power, according to whichever quality predominates, are said to be wisdom, diligence, and concentration — though in reality each consists of every preparatory wholesome dharma. Explanation: these three groups of wholesome dharmas — the four foundations of mindfulness and the rest — in substance actually encompass every preparatory wholesome dharma; however, according to whichever wholesome root of the same category predominates within each, they are said, respectively, to be wisdom, diligence, and concentration. Why is the name "foundation of mindfulness" established with reference to wisdom specifically? The Vaibhāṣika masters explain it thus: wisdom, through the power of mindfulness, is held in place and made to abide. In reality, however, it is wisdom that causes mindfulness to abide on its object, since one who sees truly is thereby able to clearly retain it in memory, as already established at length in the earlier discussion of the foundations of mindfulness. Why is diligence called "right exertion"? Because, at the stage of properly cultivating the cultivation of severance, the power of this diligence is able to sever laziness. Alternatively it is named "right superior effort," since, in properly urging on body, speech, and mind, this quality is foremost. Why is the name "base of supernormal power" established with reference to concentration? Because concentration is the support for every wondrous, marvelous quality. Other teachers say instead: "supernormal" is itself concentration, while "base" refers to aspiration and the rest. On their view, the limbs of awakening's real substances should number thirteen, since mind and aspiration would then be added as further substances. This, moreover, contradicts what the sūtra states — as a sūtra says: I shall now explain to you the bases of supernormal power, and so on — supernormal refers to enjoying various supernormal manifestations, dividing oneself as one into many, and so on, at length; base refers to the four kinds of concentration produced by aspiration and the rest. Here the Buddha states that the fruit of concentration is called supernormal, while the concentration produced by aspiration and the rest is called base.

Why are faith and the rest spoken of first as faculties, and only later named powers? Because these five dharmas, according to their lower and higher grades, divide into an earlier and a later stage, and also according to whether they can be overwhelmed by opposing factors or cannot be overwhelmed. Why do faith and the rest occur in just this sequence? With respect to cause and effect, one first gives rise to faith, cultivating the cause for the sake of the effect; next, one gives rise to diligence; through diligence, mindfulness then abides on its object; through the power of mindfulness holding the mind in place, one then attains concentration; and because the mind is concentrated, one is then able to know truly. It is for this reason that faith and the rest occur in precisely this sequence.

At which stage should it be said that which limb of awakening predominates? Verse: at the initial-practice stage, at the aids-to-penetration stages, and at the stages of cultivation and seeing, it should be understood that the seven groups — foundations of mindfulness and the rest — successively predominate, each at its own stage. Explanation: at the initial-practice stage, one is able to carefully illuminate the four objects — body and the rest; since the function of wisdom predominates there, the foundations of mindfulness are said to predominate. At the stage of heat, one is able to realize superior qualities of a different, higher kind; since the function of diligence predominates, the right exertions are said to predominate. At the stage of the peak, one is able to hold onto the superior, wholesome quality of never retrogressing; since the function of concentration predominates, the bases of supernormal power are said to predominate. At the stage of forbearance, one certainly does not retrogress or fall; since the wholesome roots have become firm, attaining the sense of dominance, the faculties are said to predominate. At the stage of being supreme in the world, one cannot be overwhelmed by afflictive worldly dharmas; since one attains the sense of being unable to be overwhelmed, the powers are said to predominate. At the stage of the path of cultivation, being close to the stage of awakening, the function of assisting awakening predominates, hence the awakening-factors are said to predominate. At the stage of the path of seeing, one turns swiftly and rapidly; the function of conduct predominates, hence the path-factors are said to predominate. However, in the sūtras, these are stated in ascending numerical order, first the group of seven, then the group of eight — this is not the sequence of actual cultivation. Among the eight path-factors, right view is both path and a path-factor; the rest are path-factors but not themselves called path. Among the seven awakening-factors, discernment of dharmas is both awakening and an awakening-factor; the rest are awakening-factors but not themselves awakening. This is what the Vaibhāṣika masters say.

Other teachers, without contradicting the sequence stated in the sūtra, establish the foundations of mindfulness and the rest on a different basis: when a practitioner is about to practice, the mind runs scattered among many objects, so one first cultivates the foundations of mindfulness to subdue and control the mind. Hence a sūtra states: these four foundations of mindfulness are able to bind the mind to its object, and to properly eliminate mindfulness rooted in indulgence — this is why the foundations of mindfulness are said to come first. Through the force of this, diligence then increases and grows; in order to accomplish the four tasks of right exertion, one properly urges on and sustains the mind, hence the right exertions are said to come second. Through diligence, the mind becomes free of worry and regret, and one then becomes capable of cultivating and perfecting superior concentration, hence the bases of supernormal power are said to come third. With superior concentration as a basis, faith and the rest then serve as the dominant condition for transcendent dharmas, hence the five faculties are said to come fourth. Once the sense of faculty is established, one is able to properly subdue and eliminate the currently active afflictions to be counteracted, drawing forth the arising of noble dharmas, hence the five powers are said to come fifth. At the stage of the path of seeing, the awakening-factors are established, since one truly awakens to and knows the four noble truths there. The path-factors, however, are established as pertaining to both the path of seeing and the path of cultivation together, since both alike lead directly to the city of nirvāṇa. As a sūtra states: one who has perfectly cultivated the eight path-factors has, thereby, also perfectly cultivated everything from the four foundations of mindfulness up through the seven awakening-factors. A further sūtra states: Monks, you should know — proclaiming true words is a simile for teaching the four noble truths; causing one to travel the original road swiftly and exit is a simile for causing one to cultivate the eightfold noble path. Hence it is known that the eight path-factors are spoken of as pertaining to both stages together. Since the sequence, spoken of according to which stage each factor predominates in, has now been explained in this way, this is genuinely what should be said.

Of these thirty-seven, how many pertain to both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and how many are exclusively uncontaminated? Verse: the seven awakening-factors and the eight path-factors are exclusively uncontaminated; the three groups of four together with the two groups of five — the faculties and powers — are all common to both kinds. Explanation: among these, the seven awakening-factors and the eightfold noble path are exclusively uncontaminated, since they are established only at the stages of the path of cultivation and the path of seeing. Though the mundane world also has dharmas such as right view, these do not receive the name noble path-factor. All the rest pertain to both the contaminated and the uncontaminated.

Among these thirty-seven, how many are present at each ground? Verse: at the first dhyāna, all are present; at the not-yet-attained stage, the joy factor is excluded; at the second dhyāna, inquiry is excluded; at the third and fourth dhyānas and the intermediate dhyāna, both are excluded. At the first three formless spheres, the precept factors are excluded, along with the previous two. In the desire realm and at the peak of existence, the awakening-factors and path-factors are excluded. Explanation: in the first dhyāna, all thirty-seven are complete. At the not-yet-attained stage, the joy awakening-factor is excluded, since practice there proceeds only through exertion, being a preliminary-approach stage, and since one still harbors lingering doubt regarding the lower-ground dharmas about to be abandoned. At the second dhyāna, right intention is excluded, since inquiry is already absent within that dhyāna — on this basis, each of these two grounds has thirty-six. At the third dhyāna, the fourth dhyāna, and the intermediate dhyāna, both joy and inquiry are excluded, leaving thirty-five at each. At the first three formless spheres, the three precept-based path-factors are excluded, together with joy and inquiry, leaving thirty-two at each. In the desire realm and at the peak of existence, the awakening-factors and path-factors are excluded, leaving twenty-two at each, since these two places contain no uncontaminated dharma at all. Whenever the limbs of awakening are actually operating, one necessarily attains confirmed purity.

How many kinds of confirmed purity are there? At what stage is it attained? What is its real substance? Is it contaminated or uncontaminated? Verse: confirmed purity is of four kinds — regarding the Buddha, the Dharma, the Saṅgha, and precepts. Upon seeing three of the truths, one attains it regarding Dharma and precepts; upon the path of seeing's completion, one additionally attains it regarding the Buddha and Saṅgha. Dharma here means the complete set of three truths, together with the entire path of bodhisattvas and pratyekabuddhas. Faith and precept serve as its two real substances; all four are exclusively uncontaminated. Explanation: a sūtra states that confirmed purity is, in total, of four kinds: confirmed purity regarding the Buddha, regarding the Dharma, regarding the Saṅgha, and noble confirmed purity regarding precepts. At the stage of the path of seeing, when one sees each of three of the truths, one attains, in each case, only confirmed purity regarding Dharma and precepts. At the stage of seeing the truth of the path, one additionally attains confirmed purity regarding the Buddha and Saṅgha — namely, at that time, one also attains confirmed purity with respect to the non-trainee dharmas that constitute buddhahood, and the trainee and non-trainee dharmas that constitute the śrāvaka saṅgha. The word "additionally" here shows that, at the time of seeing the truth of the path, one also continues to attain confirmed purity regarding Dharma and precepts. However, the Dharma that is the object of faith is, briefly, of two kinds — particular and general. The general kind pertains to all four truths; the particular kind pertains only to three. The entire path of bodhisattvas and pratyekabuddhas belongs to the general kind, hence, whenever one sees any of the four truths, one always attains confirmed purity regarding Dharma. The precepts cherished by the noble ones arise together with direct realization of any truth, hence, at every moment of the path of seeing, this too is invariably attained. Because the objects of faith differ, the names number four, yet it should be understood that the real substances number only two: the three kinds of confirmed purity regarding the Buddha and the rest have faith as their substance, while noble confirmed purity regarding precepts has precept as its substance — hence only two. These four kinds are exclusively uncontaminated, since a contaminated dharma is never called confirmed purity.

On what basis is the name confirmed purity established? Because one truly awakens to and knows the principle of the four noble truths, it is called confirmation. The Three Jewels that are the objects of faith, together with excellent moral discipline, are all called purity, since they are free from the stain of lack of faith and the stain of broken precepts. Because purity is attained through this confirmation, the name confirmed purity is established. The sequence given follows the order in which the four actually manifest upon emerging from meditative absorption; hence the sequence within direct contemplation itself is stated to be the same. How does this sequence manifest upon emerging from absorption? At the stage of emerging, one first has faith that the Blessed One is a perfectly awakened one; next, that, within the true Dharma and discipline, the teaching is well spoken; and afterward, that the noble ones are of excellent conduct. Right faith in the Three Jewels is thus like faith in a good doctor, good medicine, and a good caregiver, respectively. Because the mind is purified through this, pure moral discipline then arises — hence precept is said to come fourth. Only once pure faith in all three is complete does this pure discipline actually manifest, just as an illness is cured only once all three conditions have come together. Alternatively, these four may be likened to a guide, a road, a fellow traveler, and the vehicle one rides.

A sūtra states: at the trainee stage, one achieves eight limbs; at the non-trainee stage, one achieves the full ten. Why does it not speak of right liberation and right knowledge as belonging to the trainee stage? And what, precisely, is the substance of right liberation and right knowledge? Verse: because the trainee still has remaining bonds, there is no limb of right liberation or right knowledge for them. Liberation is of two kinds, conditioned and unconditioned — the conditioned kind is resolute understanding, the unconditioned kind is the cessation of affliction. The conditioned kind is the non-trainee's limb; it is precisely the two aggregates of liberation. Right knowledge is as already explained under awakening — the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising. Explanation: at the trainee stage, since bonds still remain unliberated, there is no limb of liberation — one cannot be called liberated merely by having freed oneself from a small amount of bondage, and, lacking a complete liberation-substance, no knowledge of liberation can be established either. A non-trainee, having already freed themselves from every affliction-bond, is further able to give rise to two kinds of clear knowledge of that liberation; owing to these two clarifying modes of knowledge, two further limbs can be established. This is not so for a trainee, hence a trainee achieves only eight. Liberation's substance is of two kinds, conditioned and unconditioned. Conditioned liberation refers to the non-trainee's resolute understanding; unconditioned liberation refers to the cessation of every affliction. Conditioned liberation is what is named the non-trainee's limb, since the name limb is established with reference to conditioned dharmas. The liberation included as a limb is, moreover, of two further kinds — what a further sūtra calls liberation of mind and liberation through wisdom; it should be understood that these two are precisely the aggregate of liberation. If this is so, does this not conflict with what a sūtra states — what is the most excellent, purest liberation? It is the mind's liberation from attachment to desire, and its liberation from attachment to hatred and delusion. With respect to the aggregate of liberation, this describes bringing to fulfillment what is not yet fulfilled, and, once fulfilled, gathering in the further cultivation of aspiration, diligence, and the rest — hence the aggregate of liberation is not simply resolute understanding alone. If so, what is it, then? Other teachers say: through the power of true knowledge dispelling attachment, hatred, and delusion, the mind's very freedom from these defilements is what is called the aggregate of liberation. Thus the substance of right liberation has now been explained. As for the substance of right knowledge, it is as already explained under awakening — the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising discussed there.

In which time is the mind precisely liberated, such that one speaks of the non-trainee mind's liberation? Verse: at the moment the non-trainee mind arises, it is precisely then liberated from obstruction. Explanation: as the root treatise states, the first non-trainee mind, at the time it is about to arise in the future, is liberated from obstruction. What is meant by obstruction? It refers to the possession of affliction, since this is what obstructs this mind from arising. At the very moment the diamond-like concentration is ceasing, that possession is being severed; the first non-trainee mind, at the very moment of arising, is precisely being liberated. At the moment after the diamond-like concentration has already ceased, that possession has already been severed; the first non-trainee mind, at the stage of having already arisen, is called already liberated. Should the non-trainee mind, or an accompanying worldly mind, not yet have arisen, at that same moment it would likewise be named liberated — but here we speak specifically of the mind that definitely will arise, since it is that mind which actually carries the practitioner's continuum forward at that time. From what are the various worldly minds liberated? Likewise from that same obstruction blocking a mind's arising. At the not-yet-liberated stage, could such a worldly mind not also arise? Although it may indeed have already arisen before, it does not resemble the present case — what does that earlier arising resemble? It arose together with the possession of affliction. If a worldly mind arises after this point, it does not arise together with any possession of affliction.

At which stage does the path bring about the severance of the obstruction to this mind's arising? Verse: the path, only at the very moment of its own ceasing, is able to bring about the severance of that obstruction. Explanation: the phrase "at the very moment of ceasing" indicates the path dwelling in the present; "at the very moment of arising," used of the liberated mind, indicates the future. The path is able to sever the obstruction only at the very moment of its own ceasing — at every other stage it certainly has no function of severing obstruction. This is unlike liberation itself, which extends even to what has not yet arisen, since, whether already arisen or not yet arisen, freedom from obstruction is the same for liberation — though severing the obstruction remains a single, punctual act belonging only to the path's final ceasing-moment.

A sūtra speaks of three elements — cessation, separation, and extinction. What is their substance, and what distinguishes them? Verse: the three elements are said to be unconditioned; the element of separation is separation from craving alone; the element of cessation is the severance of the remaining fetters; the element of extinction is the extinguishing of that same underlying-increase activity. Explanation: cessation and the other two elements are simply divisions of the previously explained unconditioned liberation, taken as their own substance. The element of separation refers to separation from craving alone. The element of cessation refers to the severance of the remaining fetters. The element of extinction refers to the extinguishing of the underlying-increase activity of the remaining latent afflictions — craving and the rest. The sūtra's three elements are thus precisely the unconditioned liberation already explained.

If something is capable of producing aversion, must it also be capable of producing separation from it? No, not necessarily. How so? Verse: aversion is the wisdom taking suffering and origination as its object; separation, taking any of the four truths as its object, is what is able to sever affliction; set against each other, the two are broader and narrower in different respects, hence a four-cornered analysis results. Explanation: only the forbearance and knowledge that arise taking suffering and origination as their object are called aversion; the rest are not. Among the forbearance and knowledge arising with respect to any of the four truths, whichever is able to sever affliction receives the name separation — since the two differ in scope, a four-cornered analysis results. There is aversion without separation: the forbearance and knowledge that take suffering and origination as object without thereby severing affliction, since they take an aversion-worthy object but do not separate from defilement. There is separation without aversion: the forbearance and knowledge that take cessation and the path as object and are able to sever affliction, since they take a welcome object yet are still able to separate from defilement. There is both aversion and separation: the forbearance and knowledge that take suffering and origination as object and are able to sever affliction. There is neither aversion nor separation: the forbearance and knowledge that take cessation and the path as object without thereby severing affliction. It should be understood that, for one who has already become free of desire-realm defilement through a prior path before entering the path of seeing the truths, whatever forbearances regarding specific dharmas and knowledges are included within the preparatory, liberation, or supplementary-advancement path do not themselves sever affliction in this case, since that affliction has already been severed beforehand, and such moments are accordingly not functioning as its counteragent.