The Ten Kinds of Knowledge

The previous chapter, at its outset, spoke of the various forbearances and knowledges, and later on also spoke of right view and right knowledge. Is there forbearance that is not knowledge? Is there knowledge that is not view? Verse: among noble wisdom, forbearance is not of the nature of knowledge, and the knowledges of exhaustion and non-arising are not of the nature of view; the remaining two groups are entirely of the nature of knowledge, and six are of the nature of view. Explanation: wisdom is of two kinds, contaminated and uncontaminated; only uncontaminated wisdom is given the name "noble." Among this noble wisdom, the eight forbearances are not of the nature of knowledge, since the doubt regarding what they themselves are to sever has not yet been fully severed at that point; they are, however, included within the nature of view, since they are of an investigative nature. The two knowledges, exhaustion and non-arising, are not of the nature of view, since the mind's seeking has already ceased, and they no longer investigate. The remaining knowledges are all common to both the nature of knowledge and the nature of view, since they have already severed their own doubt and remain of an investigative nature. All contaminated wisdom is included within the nature of knowledge; among these, only six are also of the nature of view — namely, the five defiled views, together with mundane right view, making six. Thus both the noble wisdom and the contaminated wisdom just discussed, since both consist in the discernment of dharmas, are alike included within the nature of wisdom.

How many kinds of knowledge are there, and what distinguishes their individual character? Verse: knowledge, ten in total, reduces to two by nature — contaminated and uncontaminated differ; the contaminated is called worldly; the uncontaminated is named dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge. Worldly knowledge takes everything universally as its object; dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge, respectively, take the desire realm's and the upper realms' four truths as their object. Explanation: knowledge is of ten kinds, encompassing every kind of knowledge: worldly knowledge, dharma knowledge, subsequent knowledge, knowledge of suffering, knowledge of origination, knowledge of cessation, knowledge of the path, knowledge of others' minds, knowledge of exhaustion, and knowledge of non-arising. These ten kinds, taken altogether, reduce to only two, since they differ in nature between contaminated and uncontaminated. These two, further distinguished in character, come to three: worldly knowledge, dharma knowledge, and subsequent knowledge. The former, contaminated knowledge, is entirely named worldly, since it mostly takes worldly objects such as pots and the like. The latter, uncontaminated knowledge, divides into the distinct categories of dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge. Among these three, worldly knowledge is universal, since it takes every conditioned and unconditioned thing as its object. Dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge, respectively, take the four truths of the desire realm and of the upper realms as their object.

Within these two kinds of knowledge, verse: dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge, according to differences in their object, are given the four names beginning with suffering; each is common to being named exhaustion or non-arising; but their first arising is exclusively of the suffering- and origination-subsequent-knowledge type. Explanation: dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge, according to differences in their object, divide into the four knowledges of suffering, origination, cessation, and path. Among these six knowledges, whenever they are included within a non-trainee's possession and are not of the nature of view, they are named exhaustion and non-arising instead. When these two — exhaustion-knowledge and non-arising-knowledge — first arise, they are exclusively of the suffering- and origination-subsequent-knowledge type, since they take as their object the peak-of-existence aggregates as contemplated through the six aspects of suffering and origination. Does the diamond-like concentration share this same object? With respect to suffering and origination, the cause is the same; with respect to cessation and path, it differs.

Among the nine other kinds of knowledge already discussed, verse: dharma-knowledge, subsequent-knowledge, path-knowledge, and worldly knowledge can constitute knowledge of others' minds; but minds superior in ground, faculty, or stage, and minds in the past or future, are not known by it. The dharma-type and subsequent-type do not know each other. Śrāvakas, the rhinoceros-horn-like pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha, respectively, know the path of seeing to the extent of two moments, three moments, and all of it. Explanation: dharma-knowledge, subsequent-knowledge, path-knowledge, and worldly knowledge can constitute knowledge of others' minds; the rest cannot. This knowledge has a fixed, determinate character with respect to its object — namely, it does not know minds that are superior to its own, nor minds in the past or future. "Superior mind" is of three kinds: by ground, by faculty, and by stage. By ground: knowledge belonging to a lower ground does not know the mind of a higher ground. By faculty: knowledge belonging to the convinced-through-faith or timely-liberated type does not know the mind of the attained-through-seeing or non-timely-liberated type. By stage: the ranking runs non-returner, arhat, pratyekabuddha, and the greatly-awakened Buddha — the knowledge of each earlier stage does not know the mind of one at a later, superior stage. This knowledge does not know past or future minds, since it takes as its object only the currently-arising, objectively-cognizing mind and mental factors within another's present mental continuum. Moreover, the dharma-type and subsequent-type do not know each other: the knowledge-of-others'-minds included within dharma-knowledge does not know a subsequent-type mind, and that included within subsequent-knowledge does not know a dharma-type mind, since dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge each take the complete counteragent for the desire realm or the upper realms, respectively, as their own restricted object.

This knowledge of others' minds does not occur during the path of seeing itself, since the path of seeing contemplates the principle of the truths as a whole, proceeding extremely swiftly; nevertheless, minds at the path of seeing can all serve as the object of this knowledge. When sentient beings are about to enter the path of seeing, śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas who wish to know their minds cultivate preparatory effort in advance. Once those beings enter the stage of the path of seeing: if a śrāvaka's preparatory effort for the dharma-portion is complete, they know the first two mind-moments of that person's path of seeing. If, wishing to further know the subsequent-portion mind as well, the śrāvaka separately cultivates preparatory effort until complete, by the time it is complete that person has already progressed all the way to the sixteenth mind-moment — and although the śrāvaka then knows this mind, this is no longer knowing a mind at the path of seeing, since the sixteenth moment already belongs to the path of cultivation. For a rhinoceros-horn-like pratyekabuddha: if their preparatory effort for the dharma-portion is complete, they likewise know the first two mind-moments. If, wishing to further know the subsequent-portion mind, they separately cultivate preparatory effort until complete, they come to know that person's eighth mind-moment, the subsequent-knowledge-of-origination moment — since even their separately cultivated effort remains only of a lesser grade. Some say instead that a pratyekabuddha knows the first two moments and the fifteenth. The Blessed One, wishing to know, needs no preparatory effort at all — with respect to that person's path of seeing, he is able to know every single moment directly.

What is the difference in character between the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising? Verse: with respect to the four noble truths, the knowledge that knows "I have already known suffering" and so on is, respectively, exhaustion; the knowledge that further knows "there is no need to know it again" and so on is non-arising. Explanation: as the root treatise states, what is the knowledge of exhaustion? At the non-trainee stage, if one directly knows for oneself: I have already known suffering, I have already severed the origin, I have already realized cessation, I have already cultivated the path — whatever knowledge, seeing, clarity, awakening, understanding, wisdom, illumination, and insight accompanies this is called the knowledge of exhaustion. What is the knowledge of non-arising? It is directly knowing for oneself: I have already known suffering, and need not know it again — stated fully, up through I have already cultivated the path, and need not cultivate it again — whatever accompanies this, stated fully as before, is called the knowledge of non-arising. How can uncontaminated knowledge make such a first-person judgment? The Kashmiri masters say: it is within the subsequently-attained knowledge arising after emerging from these two knowledges that such a judgment is made, hence there is no fault in the description. Because this subsequently-attained pair of knowledges differ from each other, this reveals the distinction between the two knowledges within the preceding direct contemplation itself. Others say: uncontaminated knowledge itself does indeed make such a judgment directly, and the description in terms of subsequently-attained knowledge is merely a convenient manner of speaking, or reflects how the uncontaminated knowledge operates by directly illuminating the principle of the truths in the present moment. It is on this basis that the root treatise makes this statement. These knowledges, moreover, are likewise instances of view.

How do these ten knowledges include one another? Worldly knowledge includes one kind entirely and a portion of one other. Dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge each include one entirely and portions of seven others. The knowledges of suffering, origination, and cessation each include one entirely and portions of four others. Path-knowledge includes one entirely and portions of five others. Knowledge of others' minds includes one entirely and portions of four others. The knowledges of exhaustion and non-arising each include one entirely and portions of six others.

Why are the two original kinds of knowledge established as ten? Verse: by intrinsic nature, by counteragent, by aspect, by aspect-and-object, by preparatory effort, by task-completion, and by cause-fulfillment — on these grounds, the ten kinds of knowledge are established. Explanation: on seven grounds, the two are established as ten. First, by intrinsic nature, worldly knowledge is established, since its intrinsic nature is not that of ultimate knowledge. Second, by counteragent, dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge are established, since each is able to fully counteract affliction in the desire realm or the upper realms, respectively. Third, by aspect, the knowledges of suffering and origination are established, since these two knowledges' objects are not distinct in substance from each other, only in the aspect under which each contemplates that same object. Fourth, by both aspect and object, the knowledges of cessation and path are established, since, for these two, both aspect and object are distinct from each other. Fifth, by preparatory effort, knowledge of others' minds is established — not that it fails to know others' mental factors as well as their minds, but because the original preparatory effort was undertaken specifically in order to know others' minds; although, once this knowledge is fully accomplished, it also comes to know mental factors, it is named knowledge of others' minds with reference to that original preparatory aim. Sixth, by task-completion, the knowledge of exhaustion is established, since it is the very first knowledge to arise within one whose task has been accomplished. Seventh, by cause-fulfillment, the knowledge of non-arising is established, since it arises only once every noble path serving as its cause has been fully completed.

As stated above, dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge each fully counteract the desire realm and the upper realms, respectively — but does either extend even a small portion into the other's domain? Verse: dharma-knowledge taking cessation or the path as its object, at the stage of the path of cultivation, additionally counteracts what is severed by cultivation in the upper realms; subsequent-knowledge, however, has no ability to counteract the desire realm. Explanation: the cessation- and path-type dharma-knowledge included within the path of cultivation is additionally able to counteract what is severed by cultivation in the upper realms, since the desire realm's cessation and path surpass those of the upper realms — having already eliminated the nearer enemy, it is able to additionally handle the farther one as well. For this reason, subsequent-knowledge has no corresponding ability to reach back down and counteract the desire realm.

Among these ten kinds of knowledge, which possesses which aspects? Verse: dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge each possess all sixteen aspects. Worldly knowledge has these as well as others. The four truth-specific knowledges each have their own truth's four aspects. Uncontaminated knowledge of others' minds has only the four aspects pertaining to the path; contaminated knowledge of others' minds takes its object's own particular characteristic directly — both kinds, in every case, take only a single thing as their object. Exhaustion and non-arising each have fourteen, excluding "empty" and "non-self." Explanation: dharma-knowledge and subsequent-knowledge, each individually, possess all sixteen aspects — impermanent, suffering, and so on; the sixteen aspects will be explained fully later. Worldly knowledge has these as well as still others, since it is able to take every dharma's particular and shared characteristics, and more, as its object. The four knowledges of suffering and the rest each individually have the four aspects belonging to contemplating their own respective truth. Among knowledge of others' minds: if uncontaminated, it has only the four aspects pertaining to taking the path as object, since this portion is precisely included within path-knowledge; if contaminated, it takes as its object the particular characteristic of the mind and mental factors that are its object directly, and its aspect is correspondingly particular rather than general — hence this is not included among the sixteen aspects just described. Both of these two kinds, at every moment, in a single mind-moment, take only a single thing as their object: when taking mind as object, they do not simultaneously take mental factors as object, and when taking feeling and the like as object, they do not simultaneously take perception and the like as object.

If this is so, why does the Blessed One state: one truly knows a mind with attachment, and so on? It does not grasp attachment and mind simultaneously as two separate things, just as one does not grasp a garment and its stain as two separate things simultaneously. "A mind with attachment" carries two possible senses: associated with attachment, or bound by attachment. A mind associated with attachment satisfies both senses; other contaminated minds satisfy only the sense of being bound by attachment. Some say: the sūtra's phrase refers only to the first sense, a mind associated with attachment at that very moment. "A mind free of attachment" refers to a mind that counteracts attachment. If merely not being associated with attachment at a given moment were enough to be called free of attachment, then a mind associated with some other affliction would also have to be called free of attachment. If, instead, we require it to actively counteract attachment, then a mind that is not itself a counteragent to attachment, yet is undefiled in nature, would have to be granted as neither with attachment nor free of attachment. For this reason, one should accept what other teachers say instead: being bound by attachment, in the broader sense, is what is called a mind with attachment — and the same reasoning applies through to with delusion and free of delusion.

The Vaibhāṣika masters explain it thus: a contracted mind is a wholesome mind, since it does not run scattered with respect to its object; a scattered mind is a defiled mind, since it arises associated with agitation. The Western masters explain it differently: a mind associated with sleep is called contracted; every other defiled mind is called scattered. This is not reasonable, since, on this view, any defiled mind associated with sleep would have to count as both contracted and scattered at once. It would, moreover, contradict what the root treatise states — that truly knowing a contracted mind is accomplished, in full, by four kinds of knowledge: dharma-knowledge, subsequent-knowledge, worldly knowledge, and path-knowledge. A sunken mind is a defiled mind, since it arises associated with laziness; a braced mind is a wholesome mind, since it arises associated with right diligence. A small mind is a defiled mind, since it is what those of little purity delight in cultivating; a great mind is a wholesome mind, since it is what those of abundant purity delight in cultivating. Alternatively, they are named small and great owing to differing amounts of root, worth, retinue, accompanying activity, and functional power. A defiled mind has few roots, since at most it is associated with two of the unwholesome roots at once; a wholesome mind has many roots, since it is constantly associated with all three wholesome roots. A defiled mind has little worth, since it is accomplished without genuine effort; a wholesome mind has great worth, since it is accomplished through great provisions. A defiled mind has a small retinue, since it generates no cultivation for the future; a wholesome mind has a large retinue, since it does generate cultivation for the future. A defiled mind has little accompanying activity, since it involves only three aggregates; a wholesome mind has much accompanying activity, since it extends through all four. A defiled mind has little functional power, since the wholesome roots it severs will certainly reconnect again; a wholesome mind has great functional power, since the noble forbearance permanently severs the latent afflictions once and for all. It is on this basis that defiled and wholesome minds receive the names small and great.

An agitated mind is a defiled mind, since it is associated with restlessness; an unagitated mind is a wholesome mind, since it counteracts that. Uncalm and calm mind should be understood in just the same way. An unconcentrated mind is a defiled mind, since it is associated with scattered agitation; a concentrated mind is a wholesome mind, since it counteracts that. An uncultivated mind is a defiled mind, since it is included within neither possession-cultivation nor practice-cultivation; a cultivated mind is a wholesome mind, since it admits of both kinds of cultivation. An unliberated mind is a defiled mind, since its own intrinsic continuum is not liberated; a liberated mind is a wholesome mind, since its own intrinsic continuum admits of liberation.

This explanation does not accord with the sūtra, nor is it able to distinguish the individual meanings of each term. How does it fail to accord with the sūtra? The sūtra states: what is an internally contracted mind? It is a mind that either proceeds together with torpor and sleep, or is internally associated with calm but lacking insight. What is an externally scattered mind? It is a mind that wanders among the five wondrous objects of desire, following its own scattering and drifting, or is internally associated with insight but lacking calm. But does this not entail the same fault noted earlier — that a single defiled mind associated with sleep would count as both contracted and scattered at once? Although this may be said, it is not sound, since one need not grant that every defiled mind associated with sleep counts as scattered. But does this not then contradict what the root treatise states? Better to contradict that secondary treatise's text than to contradict what the sūtra itself says. How, then, does the earlier explanation fail to distinguish the individual meanings of each term? Because, relying on that explanation, one cannot clearly distinguish the eight distinct characteristics of scattered, contracted, and the rest. Relying on my own explanation, however, one is not unable to distinguish these eight distinct meanings within the sūtra: although scattered and the rest are all alike defiled minds, my reading displays their distinct faults; and although contracted and the rest are all alike wholesome minds, my reading displays their distinct merits — hence, on the basis of eight distinct senses, eight separate names are established. Since the earlier explanation cannot reconcile with what it contradicts in the sūtra, its claimed distinguishing of these terms' meanings is likewise unfounded. Moreover, if a sunken mind were simply identical to an agitated mind, the sūtra should not distinguish: when, at a given time, the mind is sunken, cultivating the three awakening-factors of calm, concentration, and equanimity, out of fear of further sinking, is called untimely cultivation; when, at a given time, the mind is agitated, cultivating the three awakening-factors of discernment, diligence, and joy, out of fear of further agitation, is likewise called untimely cultivation. How could cultivating the awakening-factors admit of any such distinction if there were no real difference between the two? This is stated with reference to intending, through mental application, to cultivate something — called cultivation in that sense — not cultivation actually manifesting in the present moment, hence there is no fault in the distinction.

But does what I say not also avoid contradicting the sūtra? Although all defiled minds alike could be called sunken or agitated, the sūtra speaks of a sunken mind specifically where laziness predominates, and an agitated mind specifically where restlessness predominates; with reference to their constant association, I say their substance is one and the same — who could refute a statement made according to its own intended meaning? But this is genuinely not what the sūtra actually means. It was stated earlier that every mind bound by attachment is called a mind with attachment. What, precisely, is the meaning of bound by attachment? If it means accompanied by the possession of attachment, then a trainee's uncontaminated mind would have to be called with attachment too, since it remains accompanied by that possession. If it means serving as an object attachment can take, then a non-trainee's contaminated mind would have to be called with attachment too, since it can serve as such an object. If one does not grant that it can serve as such an object, how could that mind even count as contaminated in the first place? If one replies that it should instead be called with delusion, since it can serve as the object of a shared-characteristic affliction — but knowledge of others' minds does not take the possession of attachment as its object, nor can it be said to take, as object, a mind together with the attachment that takes that mind as object. How, then, could one ever know another's mind to be with attachment under either reading? Hence, bound by attachment, in either of these senses, is not what is meant by a mind with attachment. If that is so, what then is the correct meaning? Examining the sūtra's intent carefully, a mind is called with attachment because it is associated with attachment; a mind is called free of attachment because it is not associated with attachment, and likewise for hatred and delusion. If this is so, why does a further sūtra state that a mind free of attachment, hatred, and delusion does not fall back into the three realms of existence? This is stated with reference to the possession of separation, hence there is no fault. But was this position not already refuted earlier — that a mind associated with some other affliction would also have to receive the name free of attachment, since it too is not associated with attachment? If we rely on this more careful, moment-by-moment sense, granting this consequence involves no real contradiction after all. It is simply not the ordinary way of speaking to call such a mind free of attachment, since it is more properly classified as with hatred or with delusion instead.

Let us set aside this digression and return to stating the main thesis. Does the knowledge of others' minds explained here also grasp the object that another's mind takes, and also grasp the cognitive aspect under which that mind cognizes it? It is able to grasp neither: when knowing another's mind, one does not thereby observe the object that mind takes, nor the aspect under which it cognizes. That is, one knows only that the other's mind is, say, with defilement, without knowing the form or other object that defilement is directed toward, and without knowing the aspect under which that mind cognizes it. Were this not so, knowledge of others' minds would have to take form and the like as its object directly, and would, moreover, incur the fault of being able to take itself as its own object. Every instance of knowledge of others' minds has a fixed, determinate character: it is able to take as its object only a single real particular characteristic — a mind or mental factor of the same general category, currently present within another's mental continuum, whether bound to the desire or form realm, or unbound. It is not associated with the empty or signless gates of liberation; it is not included among exhaustion or non-arising knowledge; it does not occur during the uninterrupted paths of the path of seeing. Apart from these specific exclusions, it may occur as appropriate, wherever not otherwise ruled out.

The knowledges of exhaustion and non-arising, excluding empty and non-self, each possess the remaining fourteen aspects. Because of this, although these two knowledges are included within the uncontaminated, ultimate sense, they nonetheless extend into worldly expression, wishing to set aside empty and non-self — that is, through their power, at the time of emerging from meditative absorption, one makes statements such as: my births are exhausted, the holy life has been established, what was to be done has been done, there is no further becoming. Is there any uncontaminated dharma that exceeds these sixteen aspects, being included under some further, different aspect? Verse: on the pure reading, nothing exceeds the sixteen; others say there is something further, citing the root treatise. Explanation: the Kashmiri masters say there is no uncontaminated aspect exceeding these sixteen. The foreign masters say there are yet further uncontaminated aspects exceeding the sixteen. How is this known? By the root treatise itself.

As the root treatise states: is there an unbound mind capable of discerning desire-realm-bound dharmas? Answer: it is capable — as impermanent, as suffering, as empty, as non-self, as cause, as origin, as arising, as condition, and as there being an occasion, and as there being a matter — discernment induced through proper reasoning. If one claims that this passage does not mean to show that, apart from the eight aspects already explained, there exists a further, separate there-being-an-occasion and there-being-a-matter aspect, but rather merely means to show that, in producing any of the eight aspects, there is indeed such an occasion and such a matter — this explanation is not correct, since this same phrase is not stated elsewhere in an analogous passage. That is, if the root treatise intended this merely confirmatory meaning, it should state this same phrase elsewhere too; yet a further passage in that same text states only: is there a seeing-abandoned mind capable of discerning desire-realm-bound dharmas? Answer: it is capable — as self, as what belongs to self, as annihilated, as permanent, as causeless, as agentless, as diminishing, as venerable, as superior, as supreme, as foremost, as capable of purifying, as capable of liberating, as capable of leading to renunciation, as afflicted, as doubtful, as hesitant, as attachment, as hatred, as conceit, as delusion — discernment induced improperly. This passage, too, should include the phrase there being an occasion and so on if that reading were correct — since it does not, the merely confirmatory explanation is unreasonable.

Among the sixteen aspects, how many real substances are there? What, precisely, is meant by aspect, able to function, and what is functioned upon? Verse: the aspects are, in real substance, sixteen; their substance is wisdom alone; able to function applies to whatever has an object; what is functioned upon is every existent dharma. Explanation: other teachers say that, though the sixteen aspects number sixteen by name, their real substance is only seven — those taking the truth of suffering as object number four both in name and substance, while those taking each of the remaining three truths as object number four in name but only one in substance. On the correct account, however, the real substances are likewise sixteen. The noble truth of suffering has four aspects: impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self — impermanent, since it depends on conditions; suffering, since it has the nature of oppression; empty, since it contradicts the view of what is mine; non-self, since it contradicts the view of self. The noble truth of origination has four aspects: cause, origin, arising, and condition — cause, in the manner of a seed; origin, in the manner of causes manifesting equally in the effect; arising, in the manner of an unbroken continuity; condition, in the manner of bringing about completion, just as a lump of clay, a wheel, a cord, water, and other manifold conditions, coming together, bring about the completion of a pot. The noble truth of cessation has four aspects: cessation, calm, excellence, and release — cessation, since the aggregates are exhausted; calm, since the three fires are extinguished; excellence, since it is free of every affliction; release, since it is liberated from every calamity. The noble truth of the path has four aspects: path, suchness, practice, and deliverance — path, in the sense of a thoroughfare; suchness, since it accords with correct principle; practice, since it rightly proceeds toward its goal; deliverance, since it is capable of permanently transcending saṃsāra.

Alternatively: impermanent, since not ultimate; suffering, like bearing a heavy burden; empty, since internally free of any agent; non-self, since not self-governing. Cause, in the sense of drawing forth; origin, in the sense of manifesting; arising, in the sense of nourishing into being; condition, in the sense of serving as a support. Cessation, since the continuity of continuation is severed; calm, since free of the three conditioned marks; excellence, since good in the ultimate sense; release, since supremely secure. Path, since it counteracts wrong paths; suchness, since it counteracts what is not thus; practice, since it proceeds into the palace of nirvāṇa; deliverance, since it abandons all conditioned existence. Since these traditional explanations are themselves not univocal, let me, according to my own preference, offer a further, separate explanation. Impermanent, since it arises and ceases; suffering, since it goes against the noble mind's wish; empty, since there is no self within it; non-self, since it is not itself a self. Cause, origin, arising, and condition are as a sūtra explains them: the five aggregates subject to grasping have craving as their root, craving as their origin, craving as their class, and craving as their arising — only this last term, "arising," ought properly to be stated last, differing here from how the root treatise orders them.

What is the difference in substance among these four terms? According to differing stages, the craving involved differs in four ways: first, grasping a present, total self gives rise to craving for a total present self-embodiment; second, grasping a future, total self gives rise to craving for a total future existence; third, grasping a future, particular self gives rise to craving for a particular future existence; fourth, grasping a continuously-reborn self gives rise to craving at the moment of continuous rebirth. Alternatively: grasping a karma-creating self gives rise to craving at the moment of creating karma. The first, being the initial cause with respect to suffering, is called cause — like a seed with respect to its fruit. The second brings about the accumulation of suffering, and so is called origin — like a sprout with respect to its fruit. The third serves as a particular condition for suffering, and so is called condition — like a field with respect to its fruit, since it is through the power of the field, water, fertilizer, and the like that the fruit's flavor, potency, ripeness, and other distinct qualities come to arise. The fourth is capable of proximately generating suffering, and so is called arising — like a flower's pistil with respect to its fruit. Alternatively, as a sūtra states, there are eighteen craving-activities constituting these four kinds of craving. Grasping a present, total self has five distinct forms: grasping that I definitely exist now; that I exist now in such-and-such a way; that I exist now, subject to change; that I exist now; and that I do not exist now. Grasping a future, total self likewise has five distinct forms: that I will definitely exist; that I will exist in such-and-such a way; that I will exist, subject to change; that I will exist; and that I will not exist. Grasping a future, particular self has four distinct forms: that I will have a particular existence; that I will definitely have a particular existence; that I will have a particular existence in such-and-such a way; and that I will have a particular existence, subject to change. Grasping a continuously-reborn self likewise has four distinct forms: that I too will exist; that I too will definitely exist; that I too will exist in such-and-such a way; and that I too will exist, subject to change.

Cessation, since the flow of transmigration is severed; calm, since every suffering is stilled — as it is said, monks, all formations are suffering, nirvāṇa alone is the most tranquil. Excellence, since nothing surpasses it; release, since it never retrogresses. Path, since it is a right road; suchness, since it operates in accordance with reality; practice, since it certainly leads onward to its goal — as it is said, this path is able to reach purity, no other view could ever possibly reach purity. Deliverance, since it permanently departs from conditioned existence.

Moreover, in order to counteract the views of permanence, pleasure, mine, and self, one cultivates the aspects of impermanent, suffering, empty, and non-self, respectively. In order to counteract the views of no cause, a single cause, a transforming cause, and a foreknown cause, one cultivates the aspects of cause, origin, arising, and condition. In order to counteract the view that liberation is mere non-existence, one cultivates the aspect of cessation. In order to counteract the view that liberation is itself a kind of suffering, one cultivates the aspect of calm. In order to counteract the view that the pleasure of the dhyānas and meditative attainments is already excellent, one cultivates the aspect of excellence. In order to counteract the view that liberation is something repeatedly subject to retrogression and fall, not permanent, one cultivates the aspect of release. In order to counteract the views of no path, a wrong path, some other inferior path, and a retrogressible path, one cultivates the aspects of path, suchness, practice, and deliverance.

Thus these aspects have wisdom as their substance. If this is so, should wisdom itself then be without any aspect, since wisdom is not associated with another instance of wisdom? For this reason, one should say instead: whatever distinct category a mind or mental factor uses to apprehend its object is what is called its aspect. Wisdom, together with every other mind and mental factor, since each has an object, is thereby able to function. Every existent dharma is what is functioned upon. On this basis, these three categories differ in scope, broader and narrower: wisdom spans all three — aspect, able to function, and what is functioned upon; other minds and mental factors are only able to function and what is functioned upon; every other existent dharma is only what is functioned upon.

Having distinguished the aspects belonging to the ten knowledges, we should now distinguish their inclusion by moral nature, and their dependence on ground and body. Verse: by nature, worldly knowledge is common to all three, the remaining nine are wholesome. By dependence on ground: worldly knowledge depends on all; knowledge of others' minds only on four; dharma-knowledge on six; the rest on nine. As for the body they arise dependent upon: knowledge of others' minds depends on the desire or form realm; dharma-knowledge depends only on the desire realm; the remaining eight extend through bodies of all three realms. Explanation: as for these ten knowledges' inclusion within the three moral natures — worldly knowledge is common to all three natures; the remaining nine knowledges are exclusively wholesome. As for their difference in dependence on ground: worldly knowledge depends on the entire range from the desire realm up through the peak of existence; knowledge of others' minds depends only on the four root dhyānas; dharma-knowledge depends on these four dhyānas plus the not-yet-attained stage and the intermediate dhyāna; the remaining knowledges depend on these six grounds plus the lower three formless spheres. As for their difference in dependence on body: knowledge of others' minds can manifest depending on a body of either the desire or the form realm; dharma-knowledge manifests only depending on a body of the desire realm; the remaining eight knowledges can manifest depending on a body of any of the three realms.

Having distinguished nature, ground, and body, we should now distinguish which foundation of mindfulness the knowledges belong to. Verse: as for which foundation of mindfulness the knowledges belong to, cessation-knowledge belongs only to the last; knowledge of others' minds belongs to the last three; the remaining eight are common to all four. Explanation: cessation-knowledge is included within the dharma-foundation of mindfulness alone. Knowledge of others' minds is included within the last three foundations. The remaining eight are all common to all four.

Among these ten knowledges, considered reciprocally against one another, how many of the others can each individually take as its object? Verse: as for how the knowledges take each other as object, dharma-, subsequent-, and path-knowledge each take nine; the knowledges of suffering and origination each take two; four knowledges all take ten; cessation-knowledge takes none. Explanation: dharma-knowledge is able to take nine knowledges as its object, excluding subsequent-knowledge. Subsequent-knowledge is able to take nine knowledges as its object, excluding dharma-knowledge. Path-knowledge is able to take nine knowledges as its object, excluding worldly knowledge, since worldly knowledge is not included within the path. The two knowledges of suffering and origination, each individually, are able to take only two knowledges as their object — worldly knowledge and knowledge of others' minds. Worldly knowledge, knowledge of others' minds, exhaustion-knowledge, and non-arising-knowledge all take all ten knowledges as their object. Cessation-knowledge does not take any other knowledge as its object at all, since it takes only cessation-through-discernment as its object.

Among the objects taken by the ten knowledges, how many dharma-categories are there in total, and how many does each knowledge take as its object? Verse: the objects, in total, number ten — the three realms and the uncontaminated, each further split into associated and unassociated; the unconditioned, likewise split in two. Worldly knowledge takes all ten; dharma-knowledge takes five; subsequent-knowledge takes seven; the knowledges of suffering and origination each take six; cessation-knowledge takes one; path-knowledge takes two; knowledge of others' minds takes three; exhaustion and non-arising each take nine. Explanation: the ten knowledges' objects total ten dharma-categories — conditioned dharmas divide into eight kinds, since dharmas bound to the three realms, plus the uncontaminated conditioned, each have an associated and an unassociated variety. The unconditioned divides into two kinds, distinguished as wholesome or neutral. Worldly knowledge takes all ten categories as its object. Dharma-knowledge takes five: the desire realm's two, the uncontaminated path's two, and the wholesome unconditioned. Subsequent-knowledge takes seven: the form and formless realms' four, the uncontaminated path's two, and the wholesome unconditioned. The knowledges of suffering and origination each take the six categories bound to the three realms. Cessation-knowledge takes one: the wholesome unconditioned. Path-knowledge takes two: the uncontaminated path's associated and unassociated pair. Knowledge of others' minds takes the desire realm's, form realm's, and uncontaminated's three associated categories. Exhaustion-knowledge and non-arising-knowledge each take the eight conditioned categories plus the wholesome unconditioned.

Is there any single moment of knowledge that takes all dharmas as its object? No. But does the knowledge that contemplates non-self not know that all dharmas are non-self? Even this knowledge is unable to take all dharmas as its object. Which dharma does it fail to take? And what, precisely, is its own substance? Verse: worldly knowledge, excluding its own category, takes all other dharmas as object under the aspect of non-self; such knowledge is accomplished only through hearing and reflection. Explanation: when worldly knowledge contemplates all dharmas as non-self, it still excludes its own category — its own category meaning its own essential nature, together with the dharmas associated with and co-existent with it — since an object must be distinct from what cognizes it. Because these excluded dharmas share the very same object as the cognizing knowledge itself, and because they are too intimately proximate to it, they cannot themselves be the object of this same knowledge. This knowledge belongs exclusively to the desire and form realms, and is accomplished through hearing and reflection, not through cultivation, since cultivation-accomplished wisdom takes objects restricted by its own meditative ground. Were this not so, one would have to become instantly free of all defilement in a single thought.

Having explained the objects of the ten knowledges, we should further consider: who possesses how many of them? Verse: an ordinary being, or a noble one at the first instant of the path of seeing, definitely possesses one; at the second instant, one definitely possesses three; across the following four instants, one gains an additional knowledge at each; at the path of cultivation, one definitely possesses seven; having become free of desire, one gains knowledge of others' minds in addition; a non-trainee of dull faculty definitely possesses nine, and one of sharp faculty possesses all ten. Explanation: at the stage of an ordinary being, and at the very first instant of a noble one's path of seeing, one definitely possesses only one knowledge — worldly knowledge. At the second instant, one definitely possesses three knowledges, adding dharma-knowledge and suffering-knowledge. At the fourth, sixth, tenth, and fourteenth instants, respectively, one successively gains, one after another, subsequent-knowledge, origination-knowledge, cessation-knowledge, and path-knowledge. At every stage not yet reaching one of these increases, the count remains as it was before; hence, at the stage of the path of cultivation, one definitely possesses seven. At any of these stages, if one has already become free of desire, each gains one further knowledge — knowledge of others' minds — with the sole exception of an ordinary being reborn in the formless realm. A timely-liberated arhat definitely possesses nine knowledges, adding exhaustion-knowledge. A non-timely-liberated arhat definitely possesses all ten, adding non-arising-knowledge as well.

At which stage does one suddenly cultivate how many knowledges at once? Let us first consider the fifteen mind-moments of the path of seeing. Verse: when forbearance or knowledge arises during the path of seeing, that same type is thereby cultivated for the future. At the three subsequent-knowledge moments specifically, one additionally cultivates, for the future, the worldly knowledge adjacent to direct realization — though this does not arise dependent on one's own ground or a lower one. Explanation: at the stage of the path of seeing, whichever forbearance or knowledge arises, that very same type is thereby cultivated for the future, and, moreover, one fully cultivates every aspect and foundation of mindfulness belonging to that same truth. Why is it that, during the path of seeing, only the same type is cultivated? Because one has never previously attained this lineage before, and because both the counteragent and its object are fixed and determinate at each moment. Only at the three moments of subsequent-knowledge regarding suffering, origination, and cessation is one able to additionally cultivate, for the future, the worldly knowledge adjacent to direct realization. It is only at the final edge of directly realizing each individual truth that one is able to cultivate this additionally — hence its name — and it is for this reason that no other stage is able to cultivate it in addition.

Why does one not cultivate this at the moment of subsequent-knowledge regarding the path? Because worldly knowledge has never, with respect to the path specifically, had any prior matter of direct realization. Moreover, there is certainly no complete matter of direct realization with respect to the path at all — that is, with respect to suffering, origination, and cessation, complete knowing, severing, and realizing are possible, but with respect to the path, complete cultivation is certainly not yet possible at this point. Although, at the edge of origination and cessation, complete severing and realizing have not occurred in any absolute sense, still, with respect to their own respective stage, the severing and realizing appropriate to that stage are already complete. The path is not like this, since its associated lineages are many. Some say: this worldly knowledge belongs to the retinue of the path of seeing, and its counterpart for the path truth is included within the path of cultivation instead, hence it cannot be cultivated here. This reasoning, however, is not fully established, and should not be taken as proof.

This worldly knowledge is a dharma that does not arise, since there is no opportunity for it to arise at any point during this stage. If this is so, why is it called cultivation? Because, not having been possessed before, it is only now newly possessed. But since it cannot actually arise, on what basis does possessing it rest? It is simply through possession itself that it is called possessed — through this possession, one comes to possess what was never directly experienced before, hence the account of cultivation as present, active practice does not hold up here. As the ancient masters say, however, the meaning of cultivation can still be established. What do they say? Through the power of the noble path, worldly knowledge is cultivated; after emerging from meditative absorption, a superior worldly knowledge taking the truths as object does manifest — and because one has thereby obtained the basis for this knowledge's arising, one is said to have already obtained it, just as obtaining a deposit of gold ore is loosely called obtaining gold.

The Vaibhāṣika masters do not favor this explanation. Rather, depending on whatever ground the path of seeing manifests in, one is able to cultivate, for the future, dharmas belonging to one's own ground and to the grounds below it: relying on the path of seeing manifesting at the not-yet-attained stage, one is able to cultivate, for the future, seeing-path dharmas of one ground and worldly knowledge of two grounds; extending up through relying on the path of seeing manifesting at the fourth dhyāna, one is able to cultivate, for the future, seeing-path dharmas of six grounds and worldly knowledge of seven grounds. At the edge of directly realizing suffering and origination, what is cultivated is included within all four foundations of mindfulness; at the edge of cessation, what is cultivated belongs only to the dharma-foundation of mindfulness. Whichever truth's edge of direct realization one cultivates at, the resulting worldly knowledge takes precisely that truth's aspects as its object, since it is obtained through the power of the path of seeing. It is attained only through preparatory effort; since the wisdom element predominates within it, it is named knowledge; including its accompanying retinue of associated mental factors, its own nature consists of the desire realm's four aggregates, or the form realm's five.

Next, regarding the path of cultivation's stage of becoming free of defilement: verse: at the first instant of the path of cultivation, one cultivates six or seven knowledges; at the uninterrupted paths severing the eight lower grounds, and at the remaining paths still having desire, and at the first eight liberation-paths at the peak of existence, each cultivates seven; at the uninterrupted path of the peak and its remaining paths, one cultivates, respectively, six and eight. Explanation: the first moment of the path of cultivation is the sixteenth moment, the moment of subsequent-knowledge regarding the path, at which one presently cultivates two knowledges. One who has not yet become free of desire cultivates, for the future, six — dharma- and subsequent-knowledge, and the four truth-knowledges of suffering, origination, cessation, and path. One who has already become free of desire cultivates seven, adding knowledge of others' minds, but does not cultivate worldly knowledge, since this counteracts what belongs to the peak of existence specifically. At the nine uninterrupted paths and eight liberation-paths that sever desire-realm defilement, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, and dharma-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At the uninterrupted paths severing the upper seven grounds, the four subsequent-knowledges, worldly knowledge, and cessation- and path-dharma-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At the preparatory paths severing desire, and the supplementary-advancement paths occurring while desire remains, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, and subsequent-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At all these stages, one cultivates, for the future, seven knowledges: worldly, dharma, subsequent, suffering, origination, cessation, path. At the first eight liberation-paths severing the peak-of-existence ground, the four subsequent-knowledges and the two dharma-knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; here too, one cultivates, for the future, only seven, but excluding worldly knowledge and adding knowledge of others' minds instead. At the nine uninterrupted paths severing the peak-of-existence ground, the four subsequent-knowledges and two dharma-knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates dharma-, subsequent-, and the four truth-knowledges — six in total. At the ninth liberation-path severing desire, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, and dharma-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At the liberation-paths severing the upper seven grounds, the four subsequent-knowledges, worldly knowledge, and cessation- and path-dharma-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At the ninth supplementary-advancement path severing desire, and at the preparatory paths severing the upper eight grounds, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, and subsequent-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate. At the supplementary-advancement paths severing the upper seven grounds and the eight grades at the peak of existence, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, subsequent-knowledge, and knowledge of others' minds are presently cultivated as appropriate. At all these latter stages, one cultivates, for the future, eight knowledges: worldly, dharma, subsequent, the four truths, and others'-minds.

Next, let us discuss attaining the non-trainee stage upon completing freedom from defilement. Verse: at the first instant of the non-trainee stage, one cultivates nine or ten, according to the distinction between dull and sharp faculty; the supplementary-advancement path is likewise so. Explanation: the first moment of the non-trainee stage is the ninth liberation-path severing the peak of existence, at which suffering-subsequent-knowledge, origination-subsequent-knowledge, and exhaustion-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate, since this moment takes the peak of existence as its object. At the supplementary-advancement path that follows, nine or ten knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates, as appropriate, either nine or ten — a dull-faculty practitioner excludes only non-arising-knowledge, while a sharp-faculty practitioner cultivates non-arising-knowledge as well.

Next, let us discuss how many knowledges are cultivated at the remaining stages. Verse: at faculty-refining's uninterrupted paths, a trainee cultivates six, a non-trainee seven; the remaining trainee stages cultivate six, seven, or eight; a non-trainee, eight or nine; mixed cultivation's uninterrupted path holds throughout — a trainee cultivates seven, a non-trainee eight or nine; the remaining paths, a trainee cultivates eight, a non-trainee nine or all ten; whatever further qualities a noble one gives rise to, and the stages of an ordinary being, how many knowledges are cultivated in each case should be reasoned through in just the same way. Explanation: at a trainee's uninterrupted paths of faculty-refining, the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates six — the four truths' dharma- and subsequent-knowledge — since this resembles the path of seeing, one does not cultivate worldly knowledge, and since it is capable of severing obstruction, one does not cultivate knowledge of others' minds. At the liberation-paths, the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types are presently cultivated as appropriate; one not yet free of desire cultivates, for the future, six — the four truths' dharma- and subsequent-knowledge; one already free of desire cultivates seven, adding knowledge of others' minds. Other teachers say that, at the stage of the liberation-path, one also cultivates worldly knowledge. At the preparatory paths, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, and subsequent-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate; one not yet free of desire cultivates, for the future, seven; one already free of desire, eight, adding knowledge of others' minds. At the supplementary-advancement paths: if not yet free of desire, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, and subsequent-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate, and one cultivates seven for the future as well; if already free of desire, worldly knowledge, the four truth-knowledges, dharma-, subsequent-knowledge, and knowledge of others' minds are presently cultivated as appropriate, and one cultivates eight for the future as well.

At a non-trainee's faculty-refining, at the uninterrupted paths, the four subsequent-knowledges and the two dharma-knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates seven — the four truths' dharma- and subsequent-knowledge, plus exhaustion-knowledge — and does not cultivate worldly knowledge, since this resembles counteracting the peak of existence. At the first eight liberation-paths of the five conversions, the four subsequent-knowledges and two dharma-knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates eight — the four truths' dharma- and subsequent-knowledge, knowledge of others' minds, and exhaustion-knowledge. At the ninth liberation-path of the four remaining conversions, suffering- and origination-subsequent-knowledge and exhaustion-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates nine. At the final liberation-path, suffering- and origination-subsequent-knowledge and exhaustion-knowledge are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates all ten. At the preparatory paths, present cultivation is as for a trainee; for the future, one cultivates nine. At the supplementary-advancement paths, a dull-faculty practitioner presently cultivates nine knowledges as appropriate, and cultivates nine for the future as well; a sharp-faculty practitioner presently cultivates ten knowledges as appropriate, and cultivates ten for the future as well.

At a trainee's mixed cultivation of the dhyānas, at the uninterrupted paths, the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types, together with worldly knowledge, are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates seven. At the liberation-paths, only the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types are cultivated; at the preparatory paths, worldly knowledge is additionally included. At the supplementary-advancement paths, knowledge of others' minds is further added, presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, one cultivates eight throughout. At a non-trainee's mixed cultivation, at the uninterrupted paths, present cultivation is as for a trainee; for the future, a dull-faculty practitioner cultivates eight, a sharp-faculty practitioner cultivates nine. At the liberation-paths, only the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types are cultivated; at the preparatory paths, worldly knowledge is additionally cultivated as appropriate; for the future, a dull practitioner cultivates nine, a sharp practitioner cultivates ten. The supplementary-advancement paths are the same as for faculty-refining.

At a trainee's cultivation of the supernormal powers, at the uninterrupted paths, worldly knowledge is presently cultivated, and one cultivates seven for the future — this applies equally to recollection of past lives and supernormal locomotion, at both of their liberation-paths. At the five preparatory paths, worldly knowledge is presently cultivated; for knowledge of others' minds specifically, worldly, dharma-, subsequent-, path-knowledge, and knowledge of others' minds itself are presently cultivated at its own preparatory path. At all the supplementary-advancement paths, worldly knowledge together with the knowledges of suffering, origination, and cessation are presently cultivated as appropriate; at all these stages, one cultivates eight for the future. At a non-trainee's cultivation of the supernormal powers, at the uninterrupted paths, present cultivation is as for a trainee; for the future, a dull-faculty practitioner cultivates eight, a sharp-faculty practitioner cultivates nine. At the liberation- and preparatory-paths, present cultivation is as for a trainee; for the future, a dull practitioner cultivates nine, a sharp practitioner cultivates ten. The supplementary-advancement paths are the same as for faculty-refining. The divine eye and divine ear, and their two liberation-paths, being of neutral moral nature, are not called cultivation at all.

When a noble one gives rise to the remaining cultivation-accomplished contaminated virtues — the four immeasurables and the like — in the present, one cultivates only a single knowledge, worldly knowledge. For a trainee, looking to the future: one not yet free of desire cultivates seven; one already free of desire, eight. For a non-trainee, looking to the future: a dull-faculty practitioner cultivates nine, a sharp-faculty practitioner ten — excepting the subtlest-of-the-subtle mind, since, at that specific moment, only worldly knowledge is cultivated for the future. If one gives rise to the remaining uncontaminated virtues included within the dhyānas, the four truth-knowledges' dharma- and subsequent-types are presently cultivated as appropriate. For those included within the formless attainments, only the four subsequent-knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, what is cultivated is the same as in the contaminated case just described. For an ordinary being becoming free of defilement, one presently cultivates worldly knowledge at the three concentrations that sever desire. At the ninth liberation-path, and at the preparatory effort for the supplementary-advancement path of becoming free of defilement arising in dependence on the four root dhyānas, one cultivates two for the future, adding knowledge of others' minds; at every other stage, one cultivates, for the future, only worldly knowledge.

When cultivating the five supernormal powers: at the preparatory paths and two of the liberation-paths, worldly knowledge is presently cultivated; at the remaining liberation-path, worldly knowledge and knowledge of others' minds are presently cultivated. At the supplementary-advancement paths, two knowledges are presently cultivated as appropriate; for the future, in every case, one cultivates both kinds. At the five uninterrupted paths, both present and future cultivation involve only worldly knowledge. Relying on the root dhyānas to cultivate other virtues, one presently cultivates worldly knowledge throughout, and cultivates two for the future. Only the aids to penetration certainly do not cultivate knowledge of others' minds, since these belong to the near retinue of the path of seeing. Relying on concentration of the remaining grounds to cultivate other virtues, in every case only worldly knowledge is cultivated, both in the present and for the future.

As for future cultivation, how many grounds does it extend to? Is every instance of possession that arises thereby an instance of cultivation? Verse: whatever path depends on and possesses a given ground cultivates that ground's contaminated dharmas for the future. For the sake of becoming free of a ground, possessing and giving rise to a path there cultivates the uncontaminated of that ground and every ground below it. Only the very first moment of exhaustion-knowledge cultivates comprehensively the contaminated virtues of all nine grounds; being born in a higher realm, one does not cultivate the lower; what has already been possessed before is not cultivation. Explanation: whatever path depends on a given ground, at the time it comes to possess that ground, is able to cultivate, for the future, that ground's contaminated dharmas. When a noble one, for the sake of becoming free of a given ground, comes to possess that ground, together with whatever path presently arises within it, is able to cultivate this same ground and every ground below it with respect to the uncontaminated. The phrase "for the sake of becoming free of" here applies across all four kinds of path. Only when the very first instant of exhaustion-knowledge actually manifests in the present is its power able to comprehensively cultivate the contaminated virtues of all nine grounds at once, since the immeasurable virtues such as the contemplation of impurity — capable of binding countless afflictions — are, at that moment, severed without remainder, just as when what binds a thing is finally cut, the thing's vital circulation flows freely everywhere at once. It is also as though one's own mind has just ascended to the kingly throne, and every wholesome dharma, upon arising, comes to pay court — just as when a great king ascends the throne through the water-sprinkling consecration, every territory within his domain comes to pay tribute. However, one born in a higher realm certainly does not cultivate the lower grounds even at this same moment. The phrase "the very first exhaustion-knowledge" refers to the ninth liberation-path severing the peak of existence, occurring both at the ordinary attainment of arhatship and at each of the five faculty-refining stages.

Whatever is called cultivation refers only to what was not previously possessed but is now caused to arise and newly possessed — that is, if one did not possess it before but possesses it now, and it is obtained through genuine effort, only then does it count as what is cultivated. If a dharma was previously possessed and then relinquished, even though one now regains possession of it, this does not count as cultivated, since it is not obtained through applying fresh toil this time around. If one did not previously possess it, and, through applying effort, it now manifests in the present, one is able to cultivate it for the future, since the causal power involved is superior. But a dharma that has been possessed before and now merely arises again is not cultivated for the future, since it does not arise through great effort, its causal power being inferior.

Is cultivation spoken of solely with reference to possession? No. How, then, should it be understood? Cultivation is of four kinds: possession-cultivation, practice-cultivation, counteragent-cultivation, and elimination-cultivation. On what basis are these four established? Verse: possession-cultivation and practice-cultivation are established with reference to wholesome conditioned dharmas; counteragent-cultivation and elimination-cultivation are established with reference to contaminated dharmas. Explanation: possession-cultivation and practice-cultivation depend on wholesome conditioned dharmas — when cultivated for the future, only possession-cultivation applies; when manifesting in the present, both are complete together. Counteragent-cultivation and elimination-cultivation depend on contaminated dharmas; hence a contaminated wholesome dharma possesses all four kinds of cultivation in full. Uncontaminated conditioned dharmas, and the remaining contaminated dharmas, possess, respectively, only the first two or only the latter two kinds.

The foreign masters say cultivation is of six kinds, adding guarding-cultivation and contemplating-cultivation on top of the previous four — guarding and protecting the faculties, and contemplating the body, respectively. As a sūtra states: what is cultivating the faculties? It is skillfully guarding and skillfully protecting the six faculties — stated fully, at length. A further sūtra states: what is cultivating the body? It is contemplating, with respect to one's own body, the hair, body hair, and nails — stated fully, at length. The Kashmiri masters, however, say: guarding-cultivation and contemplating-cultivation are already included within counteragent-cultivation and elimination-cultivation.