The Strength of Nārāyaṇa

What is offering-and-reverence, and so on, at length? One asks: why is this treatise further composed? The answer: although the foregoing has already separately explained the inherent nature of offering and of reverence, it has not yet, taken together, explained their operation with respect to a single object; this treatise now wishes to reveal that these two operate together with respect to a single object, and it is for this reason that this treatise is composed. What is offering-and-reverence? The answer: if there is a certain kind of person who, toward the Buddha, the Dharma, the Saṅgha, his preceptor, his instructor, or any other wise and revered fellow practitioner of the pure conduct,

sets forth offering and reverence and dwells accordingly — wherever there is, in such a case, both offering and reverence — this is called offering-and-reverence. Here, "a certain kind" has the same meaning as stated above, referring either to an ordinary being or to a noble one. One who, toward the Buddha, sets forth offering and reverence and dwells accordingly sets forth only material offering and reverence, not Dharma offering. Why is this so? It is because the Buddha has already attained the ultimate with respect to all dharmas, and no longer needs to receive the Dharma in study from another, and there exists no one able to expound the Dharma to the Blessed One so as to give rise in him to any unprecedented, skillful understanding. As for one who, toward the Dharma, sets forth offering and reverence and dwells accordingly — there are certain versions of the text that do not speak of "offering and reverence" with respect to the Dharma, on the grounds that nirvāṇa admits of no sense of "serving as a condition"; the offering spoken of above means precisely serving as a condition, and, since nirvāṇa admits of no such sense, it is accordingly not mentioned. Yet there are other versions of the text that do speak of it, holding that, although there is, with respect to nirvāṇa, no sense of "growth and increase," there is nonetheless a sense in which it may be made manifest — that is, by offering material goods and the Dharma to nirvāṇa, one causes sentient beings to revere it and to seek its realization, and, through this in due course, cuts off the obstructions and attains realization. Further, the Dharma is of two kinds: first, conventional, referring to the dharmas of name-bodies and the rest; second, ultimate, referring to nirvāṇa itself, the final goal. Although, with respect to the ultimate Dharma, there is no sense of "growth and increase," there is, with respect to the conventional Dharma, a sense of "growth and increase," and it is for this reason that offering and reverence are also spoken of with respect to the Dharma. One asks: as for the objects given in Dharma offering, who ought to receive them? The answer: as for objects given as conventional Dharma, the Dharma-preaching master ought to receive them; or one may, by writing out the true Dharma, thereby offer an object of the ultimate Dharma, which ought to be diligently guarded and protected, exactly as one guards and protects the belongings of a stūpa. As for one who, toward the Saṅgha, sets forth offering and reverence and dwells accordingly, this extends to both kinds of offering, material and Dharma. As for material offering: it refers to making offerings to the assembly of monks with incense, flowers, robes, food, and the like, or to holding such events as a great quinquennial assembly, both of which are called material offering to the Saṅgha. As for Dharma offering: it refers to expounding the true Dharma to the assembly by means of the three modes of recitation, or to debating and resolving points of doctrine within the assembly, or further to praising virtues and expressing one's aspirations before the assembly so as to give them joy — all such things as these are called Dharma offering to the Saṅgha. As for one who, toward his preceptor, his instructor, or any other wise and revered fellow practitioner of the pure conduct, sets forth offering and reverence and dwells accordingly, this too extends to both kinds of offering, material and Dharma. As for material offering: it refers to making offerings of robes, alms bowls, food and drink, medicine, and any other article proper to a monk. As for Dharma offering: it refers to urging him to uphold the three collections of scripture, or to explaining them so as to leave him free of doubt, or further to exhorting and requesting him to cultivate correct practice — all such things as these are called Dharma offering. It is with respect to the superior objects already spoken of above — the Three Jewels, and one's teachers and friends — that offering and reverence are set forth and dwelt in accordingly; in every other object, this is accordingly not fixed, and should be understood exactly as stated above. One asks: in what place are offering and reverence found in their entirety? The answer: they are found in their entirety within the desire realm, not within the form or formless realms; within the desire realm, they are found in their entirety among the four destinies, not within the hells, since the hells possess no material offering, only Dharma offering. One asks: as for this material and Dharma offering, who sets it forth, and who receives it? The answer: the Buddha is able to set forth both material and Dharma offering to every sentient being, who receive it each according to what is fitting; every sentient being, toward the Buddha, is able only to set forth material offering, not Dharma offering, since there exists no one able to expound the Dharma to the Buddha, and since none is able to give rise in the Buddha to any unprecedented, skillful understanding.

A pratyekabuddha, excepting the Buddha, is able to set forth both material and Dharma offering to every sentient being, who receive it each according to what is fitting; every sentient being, toward a pratyekabuddha, is able only to set forth material offering, not Dharma offering. Śāriputra, excepting the Buddha and pratyekabuddhas, is able to set forth both material and Dharma offering to every sentient being, who receive it each according to what is fitting; every sentient being, toward Śāriputra, is able only to set forth material offering, not Dharma offering. Mahāmaudgalyāyana, excepting the Buddha, pratyekabuddhas, and Śāriputra, is able to set forth both material and Dharma offering to every sentient being, who receive it each according to what is fitting; every sentient being, toward Mahāmaudgalyāyana, is able only to set forth material offering, not Dharma offering.

And so on, down to: one of sharp faculties is able to set forth both material and Dharma offering to one of dull faculties, who receives it as is fitting; one of dull faculties is able only to set forth material offering, not Dharma offering, to one of sharp faculties, who receives it as is fitting.

One asks: if there is no one who offers the Dharma to the Buddha, then how is what the sūtra states to be reconciled? As it is stated: "Monk, excellent, excellent! You are indeed able, with a gentle, clear, subtle, distinct, easily understood, beautiful and resonant voice, to chant the true Dharma, causing me to rejoice." The answer: the Blessed One, wishing to cause Śroṇa Koṭikarṇa to attain fearlessness, spoke in this way; it was not that the Buddha received Dharma offering from him. That is, his preceptor Kātyāyana had sent him to where the Buddha was, in order to request, on behalf of the monks dwelling in the cold border regions, five matters: first, to bathe constantly; second, to use a hide as bedding beneath the body; third, to be permitted to constantly wear shoes covering the whole foot; fourth, to be permitted, in the case of one who upholds the vinaya, to be counted as the fifth person needed for the full ordination ceremony; fifth, to be permitted that, if a monk should send someone bearing a robe to another monk, and that monk should decline to accept it, they might then decide for themselves how to dispose of the robe. Śroṇa Koṭikarṇa, receiving his preceptor's instruction, came to where the Buddha was; yet the Blessed One's majesty and weight are such that even Śakra, Brahmā, and the guardians of the world are unable to draw near and look upon him directly — how much less would he presume to make such a request? The Buddha, knowing this, said to Ānanda: you may bring him to my own sleeping chamber, arrange bedding there, and settle him in. Ānanda did as instructed, and the Buddha dwelt together with him. Toward the latter part of the night, knowing that Śroṇa Koṭikarṇa had grown weary and was resting, the Buddha said to him: you should chant for me the Dharma you have mastered. Śroṇa Koṭikarṇa then, in the three modes of recitation, chanted the Dharma he had mastered. The Blessed One rejoiced, and, wishing to cause him to attain fearlessness and to be able to voice his request, therefore praised him, saying "excellent, excellent," and so on, at length. There are those who say: the Blessed One praised the purity of the karmic path he had cultivated in the past, which had brought about such a beautiful and wondrous voice, pleasing to hear, and it was for this reason that he spoke thus — not because he received Dharma offering from him. There are other masters who say: the Blessed One praised him for his skillful recitation and upholding of the Pārāyaṇa and the Satyadarśana-sūtra and the like, and it was for this reason that he spoke thus — not because he received Dharma offering from him. There are yet others who say: it was because this monk performed the Buddha's own works in the country of Śroṇāparānta,

and the Blessed One praised him so as to cause the countless sentient beings of that country, in turn, to revere and receive the Dharma, and it was for this reason that he spoke thus — not because he received Dharma offering from him. There are yet other masters who say: the Buddha's praise of his disciples has many causes, and is not for the sake of receiving the Dharma — sometimes it is in order that the disciple attain a mind free of fear,

exactly as with the present praise of Śroṇa Koṭikarṇa; sometimes it is in order to put a stop to some slanderous matter against him — as when the Buddha told Aniruddha, "my back now aches; you may expound to the monks the Dharma of drawing near to firmness — you alone are able to speak of such a superior matter"; sometimes it is in order to cause his words to carry authority and solemnity — as when the Buddha told Maudgalyāyana, "you alone are able to expound the subtle and wondrous Dharma to the Śākyas of Kapilavastu"; sometimes it is in order to display the greatness of his virtue —

exactly as the Buddha praised Śāriputra, saying: "you are able to expound the Dharma like the roar of a lion; what you have spoken is a determined teaching." One asks: how is what a further sūtra passage states to be reconciled? As it is stated: the Buddha said to Ānanda, "excellent, excellent! As you have said, through diligence one swiftly realizes unsurpassed enlightenment — hearing your words, I feel deep joy." The answer: the Buddha spoke these words because Ānanda's own words happened to be apt to that moment, not because he received the Dharma. That is, the Blessed One, having once traveled a long road for the sake of transforming sentient beings, grew weary, and his back ached, so he approached a tree, and, folding a robe of seven strips fourfold as bedding, and covering his body with a robe of five strips, resting his head on his outer robe, lay down on his right side like a lion king, and said to Ānanda: you should expound the Dharma to the monks — you should not let the time pass in vain. At that time, Ānanda, in accordance with the Buddha's noble intent, expounded the seven limbs of enlightenment to the assembly of monks, saying: "Venerable ones, the limb of enlightenment that is mindfulness — this was what our Blessed One himself awakened to and himself proclaimed, resting on renunciation, on dispassion, on cessation, and turning toward relinquishment" — and so on, in the same way, down through the limb of enlightenment that is equanimity, expounded at length in just the same manner. When the Blessed One heard him speaking of diligence, he gave rise to the knowledge and vision that recollects what came before, thinking: in the past, across three incalculable eons, through the power of diligence, I brought my cultivated practice swiftly to completion, and swiftly realized unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment. Having recollected this, a superior joy arose in him, and, through the power of this joy, his backache was immediately healed. He then rose, straightened his robes, sat in the cross-legged posture, and said to Ānanda: were you expounding diligence to the great assembly? Ānanda said to the Buddha: yes indeed, Blessed One. The Buddha praised him, saying, "excellent, excellent — through diligence I swiftly realized enlightenment, and, now that you have spoken of it, I therefore rejoice." This praise was for the aptness of his words to the moment, not for receiving an offering. One asks: how is what the Vinaya states to be reconciled? As it is stated: "Ānanda, I now feel the greatest joy at the growth of the wholesome dharmas leading to renunciation" — if the Buddha does not receive Dharma offering from others, then how could such wholesome dharmas leading to renunciation grow through them? The answer: the Buddha treats another's own affair as his very own affair, and so, when another's wholesome dharma grows, he speaks in this way. That is, there are many kinds of sentient beings who, in dependence on the Buddha's own Dharma, go forth from household life with pure faith, receive the full precepts, uphold the three collections of scripture in recitation, dwell in the forest wilderness in still reflection, enter into correct and determined progress, attain the fruit, depart from desire, and even exhaust every contaminant, or else plant the seed of birth among the gods or the seed of liberation. The Buddha, knowing this matter, feels the greatest joy, and thinks: it is through my own power that countless sentient beings' worldly and transcendent wholesome dharmas grow and increase — what they accomplish is precisely my own affair, and is deeply cause for rejoicing — and it is for this reason that he speaks in this way. Yet the Blessed One most certainly does not receive Dharma offering from another, since the merit of his Dharma-body is already utterly complete; it is only because his physical body necessarily depends on provisions such as clothing and food that there is a sense in which he receives material offering from another. What is bodily strength, and so on, at length? One asks: why is this treatise composed? The answer: it is composed in order to refute other schools and to reveal the correct meaning — that is, there are those who hold that bodily strength and bodily weakness possess no distinct substance of their own,

as the Vibhajyavādins maintain, saying: when the mind possesses power, this is spoken of as bodily strength; when the mind lacks power, this is spoken of as bodily weakness — and thus bodily strength and weakness possess no distinct substance of their own. This treatise refutes that position and reveals that bodily strength and weakness do possess a distinct substance of their own, subsumed under the sense-object of touch. Further, there are those who hold that

bodily strength's own substance is precisely diligence, and bodily weakness's own substance is precisely laziness, as the Dharmaguptakas maintain; this treatise, in order to refute that position, reveals that there exist distinct bodily strength and bodily weakness that are not diligence and the rest. There are those who hold that bodily strength and bodily weakness possess no fixed substance of their own, as the Dārṣṭāntikas maintain, saying: an elephant's strength exceeds a horse's, and a horse's strength exceeds an ox's, and therefore it is known that strength and weakness possess no fixed substance. This treatise, in order to refute that position, reveals that bodily strength and weakness do possess a fixed substance of their own, subsumed under the sense-object of touch, since the inherent nature of all dharmas is fixed, and every conditioned dharma possesses a determined substance of superiority or inferiority — just as, with respect to visible form, the eye's seeing may be clear, in which case it is called superior seeing, or unclear, in which case it is called inferior seeing, and so on, at length, down to the mind's cognizing of dharmas, which is likewise so, each possessing, within it, a determined nature of superiority or inferiority — and it should be understood that bodily strength and weakness are likewise so. One asks: if bodily strength and weakness each possess a determined nature of their own, then how is the Dārṣṭāntikas' objection to be reconciled? The answer: although, in the case of an elephant, a horse, and the rest, the name given to their relative superiority or inferiority is not fixed, they nonetheless possess a determined substance — that is, a horse, compared to an elephant, is inferior, having many great elements but little strength; a horse, compared to an ox, is superior, having few great elements but much strength — and it should be understood that the same holds for a horse compared to other kinds as well, since strength and weakness and the great elements are each distinct, so that, though the name given in relative comparison is not fixed, the substance remains forever distinct. It is in order to refute such alien and divergent positions as these, and in order to reveal that bodily strength and bodily weakness truly possess a distinct substance of their own, that this treatise is composed.

What is bodily strength? The answer: whatever bodily vigor, firmness, robustness, and agility there is, able to accomplish what needs to be done — this is called bodily strength. This treatise's own author, being skilled in the various wordings of the meaning, expresses bodily strength through a variety of wordings, though its substance is not thereby distinct. What is bodily weakness? The answer: whatever absence of bodily vigor, firmness, robustness, and agility there is, unable to accomplish what needs to be done — this is called bodily weakness. This treatise's own author, being skilled in the various wordings of the meaning, expresses bodily weakness through a variety of wordings, though its substance is not thereby distinct. Bodily strength and bodily weakness are subsumed under how many sense-bases, and cognized by how many kinds of consciousness? The answer: they are subsumed under a single sense-base — namely, the sense-object of touch — and are cognized by two kinds of consciousness — namely, body-consciousness and mental consciousness. Here, body-consciousness cognizes only their own particular characteristic, while mental consciousness cognizes both their own particular characteristic and their shared characteristic. This statement thereby refutes the Vibhajyavādins' position that bodily strength and weakness possess no distinct substance of their own, revealing that these two do possess a distinct substance — for, if they possessed no substance of their own, they could not be subsumed under the sense-object of touch nor cognized by these two kinds of consciousness, since whether or not the mind possesses power is not subsumed under the sense-object of touch nor cognized by these two kinds of consciousness. Just as, when two wrestlers grapple with one another, the very instant their wrists cross, each knows the other's relative strength or weakness — here, the author of the treatise adduces this concrete simile so as to let both the ignorant and the wise alike come to understand. By this same statement, the position of the Dharmaguptakas, that bodily strength is diligence and bodily weakness is laziness, is likewise refuted, revealing that bodily strength and weakness are not diligence and the rest — for, were it not so, how could the mere crossing of wrists reveal relative strength at that very instant? Diligence and laziness cannot be known through the mere touch of the hands. And just as, when a strong man seizes a weak one, the relative superiority of their strength is likewise known at once — here, the author of the treatise adduces this second simile to reinforce and clarify this same meaning, making it easy to understand. By this same statement, the Dārṣṭāntikas' position, that bodily strength and weakness possess no fixed substance of their own, is likewise refuted, revealing that these two do possess a fixed substance of their own — for, were it not so, the mere grasping of hands ought not immediately to reveal their relative superiority, since a merely relative and provisional designation could never be known through body-consciousness. One asks: what do bodily strength and weakness take as their own nature? There are those who say: they take the great elements as their own nature. One asks: which great element's increase is called bodily strength, and which great element's increase is called bodily weakness? There are those who say: it is not that any one great element is unevenly increased, but rather that, among the four great elements, whichever are robust and superior are spoken of as bodily strength, and whichever are feeble and weak are spoken of as bodily weakness. There are those who say: it is the increase of the element of earth that is called bodily strength, and the increase of the element of water that is called bodily weakness — and the same holds for external objects as well, since things such as a mountain-bearing beam, in which the element of earth is increased, have a firm and solid substance, while things such as a willow branch, a melon, or a gourd, in which the element of water is increased, have a hollow and weak substance. There are other masters who say: bodily strength and weakness are not the four great elements themselves, but rather derivative touch. One asks: among the seven kinds of derivative touch, which one's increase is called bodily strength, and which one's increase is called bodily weakness? There are those who say: it is the increase of heaviness that is called bodily strength, and the increase of lightness that is called bodily weakness — and the same holds for external objects as well, since what is heavy has a firm substance, and what is light has a weak substance. There are those who say: these two are themselves a kind of derivative touch not included among the seven, since, beyond the seven external kinds, there exists a further, distinct derivative touch called bodily strength and bodily weakness. The verdict: it ought to be said that it is precisely the four great elements together with derivative touch that together constitute the nature of bodily strength and bodily weakness — that is, when they are harmoniously balanced, this is called bodily strength; when they are not harmoniously balanced, this is called bodily weakness.

As the sūtra states: the Bodhisattva's body possesses the strength of Nārāyaṇa. What is the measure of this strength? There are those who say: ten strengths of an ordinary ox equal one strength of a hairy ox; ten strengths of a hairy ox equal one strength of a black ox; ten strengths of a black ox equal one strength of an ordinary elephant; ten strengths of an ordinary elephant equal one strength of a fragrant elephant; ten strengths of a fragrant elephant equal one strength of a great Nāga elephant; ten strengths of a great Nāga elephant equal one strength of a Balāsthāma; ten strengths of a Balāsthāma equal half the strength of Nārāyaṇa; two half-strengths of Nārāyaṇa equal one full strength of Nārāyaṇa — and the Bodhisattva's own bodily strength equals this strength. There are other masters who say: this measure is far too small, and it ought rather to be said: ten strengths of an ordinary ox equal one strength of a hairy ox; ten strengths of a hairy ox equal one strength of a black ox; ten strengths of a black ox equal one strength of an ordinary elephant; ten strengths of an ordinary elephant equal one strength of a wild elephant; ten strengths of a wild elephant equal one strength of a Kanaruha elephant; ten strengths of a Kanaruha elephant equal one strength of an Ārāḍaka elephant; ten strengths of an Ārāḍaka elephant equal one strength of a Gaṅgeya elephant; ten strengths of a Gaṅgeya elephant equal one strength of a Himalayan elephant; ten strengths of a Himalayan elephant equal one strength of a fragrant-mountain elephant; ten strengths of a fragrant-mountain elephant equal one strength of a blue-mountain elephant; ten strengths of a blue-mountain elephant equal one strength of a yellow-mountain elephant; ten strengths of a yellow-mountain elephant equal one strength of a red-mountain elephant; ten strengths of a red-mountain elephant equal one strength of a white-mountain elephant; ten strengths of a white-mountain elephant equal one strength of an Utpala elephant; ten strengths of an Utpala elephant equal one strength of a Kumuda elephant; ten strengths of a Kumuda elephant equal one strength of a Padma elephant; ten strengths of a Padma elephant equal one strength of a Puṇḍarīka elephant; ten strengths of a Puṇḍarīka elephant equal one strength of a Padmaka elephant; ten strengths of a Padmaka elephant equal one strength of a great Padmaka elephant; ten strengths of a great Padmaka elephant equal one strength of a great fragrant elephant; ten strengths of a great fragrant elephant equal one strength of a great Balāsthāma; ten strengths of a great Balāsthāma equal one strength of a Balāsthāma; ten strengths of a Balāsthāma equal one strength of a Sāraṅga; ten strengths of a Sāraṅga equal one strength of a Balaṅga; ten strengths of a Balaṅga equal one strength of a Caṇḍūra; ten strengths of a Caṇḍūra equal one strength of a Balacaṇḍūra; ten strengths of a Balacaṇḍūra equal half the strength of Nārāyaṇa; two half-strengths of Nārāyaṇa equal one full strength of Nārāyaṇa — and the Bodhisattva's own bodily strength equals this strength. There are yet others who say: this measure, too, is still too small, and it ought rather to be said that within the Bodhisattva's body there are eighteen great joints, each possessing a full strength of Nārāyaṇa. There are yet others who say: this measure, too, is still too small, and it ought rather to be said that within the Bodhisattva's body there are eighteen great joints, each possessing eighteen strengths of Nārāyaṇa. There are yet others who say: this measure, too, is still too small, and it ought rather to be said that within the Bodhisattva's body there are, in all, three hundred twenty joints both great and small, the smallest joint possessing one strength of Nārāyaṇa, and each successively greater joint possessing double the strength of the one before it, increasing progressively in this way. There are yet others who further say: this measure, too, is still too small, and it ought rather to be said that the Bodhisattva's own bodily strength equals the strength of a thousand Airāvaṇa dragon-elephant kings. What is the measure of the strength of this elephant king? This elephant king's whole body is fresh and white, like the color of a white Kumuda lotus; his seven limbs stand firm and well-established, and he possesses six tusks; his head is a ruddy red, like the color of the Indragopaka insect; his left and right flanks each measure two and a half yojanas; the front and rear portions of his body each measure one yojana; the circumference of his body measures seven yojanas; his height measures one and a half yojanas. This is his ordinary body, which transforms without fixed limit. He has eight thousand dragon-elephants as his retinue, each fresh and white like him, possessing six tusks and seven well-established limbs, their heads a ruddy red like burnt rouge above. When a wheel-turning king appears in the world,

any one of these elephants comes in response to him. When the Trāyastriṃśa gods are about to go forth to sport in their pleasure garden, then, through the power of their heavenly merit, the very instant they raise this thought, they cause the great elephant king's tusks to display a changed color, whereupon he thinks: Śakra and the rest now need to ride upon me to enter the garden and sport. He then, from this very Jambudvīpa, vanishes and reappears before the palace of Śakra, lord of the gods, his body manifesting thirty-two transformed heads, each possessing six tusks colored just as his own original head.

These heads, together with the original one, number thirty-three in all. Upon each tusk, he manifests, by transformation, seven pools; within each pool, seven lotus flowers; upon each flower, seven jeweled courtyards; within each courtyard, seven jeweled terraces; within each terrace, seven jeweled canopies; within each canopy, seven heavenly maidens; for each heavenly maiden, seven attendants; for each attendant, seven dancing girls performing every kind of music. Having accomplished this transformation, Śakra, lord of the gods, together with his retinue, mounts the original head, while the thirty-two gods, together with their retinues, mount the thirty-two transformed heads, and the remaining families of gods from the ten thousand cities mount upon his back. His body rises light and buoyant, just as a whirlwind lifts a lotus leaf, or sends a birch-bark scroll aloft, and, traversing the sky, they proceed to the pleasure garden where they will sport. At that time, none among the gods perceives themselves as being either ahead of or behind the others. Having arrived, they all descend together and proceed each to the sporting groves, there to take their joy and pleasure. At that time, this dragon-elephant likewise transforms his own body into the form of a young god, and joins in the sport and pleasure. Such is the strength of Airāvaṇa. There are those who say that this strength, too, is still too small, and that it ought rather to be said that within the Bodhisattva's body there are eighteen great joints, each possessing a strength equal to a thousand Airāvaṇa dragon-elephant kings. There are yet others who further say that this strength, too, is still too small, and that it ought rather to be said that within the Bodhisattva's body there are, in all, three hundred twenty joints both great and small, the smallest joint possessing a strength equal to a thousand times that of the Airāvaṇa dragon-elephant king,

and each successively greater joint possessing double the strength of the one before it, increasing progressively in this way. The Great Virtuous One says: this strength, too, is still too small, and it ought rather to be said that the Bodhisattva's mental strength is boundless, and his bodily strength is likewise so. How is this known to be so? It is related that, in the past, the Bodhisattva, having received auspicious grass from an auspicious man, proceeded to the bodhi tree, spread it out for himself as a seat, and, sitting in the cross-legged posture, made this firm vow: unless every contaminant is permanently exhausted and unsurpassed enlightenment is realized, I shall never rise from this seat.

As unsurpassed enlightenment was, from the future, about to enter into the present, at that time, the great chiliocosm of a thousand million worlds shook in six ways, and yet not a single hair upon the Bodhisattva's body so much as stirred. From this, it is known that the Bodhisattva's bodily strength is, like his mental strength, boundless in its measure. One asks: if so, then why does the sūtra speak of the Bodhisattva's body as possessing the strength of Nārāyaṇa? The answer: this strength is one commonly revered throughout the world, and it is for this reason that it is used as a simile, though the reality is not actually so. One asks: for what reason did the Bodhisattva gather this bodily strength? The answer: it was in order to manifest that everything he possessed was supreme — that is, that his form, strength, lineage, mastery, retinue, wealth and rank, virtue, and renown, wisdom and vision, and majestic valor were all supreme, so that arrogant sentient beings might be brought to submission and receive the Dharma. Further, it was in order to serve as the very support for unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment that he gathered this bodily strength — that is, the Buddha's unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment necessarily depends on this body in order to abide securely; were unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment to be placed upon the very summit of Mount Sumeru, the king of mountains, that summit would shatter and crumble to dust just as readily as fine powder,

so exceedingly weighty and revered are his powers, his fearlessnesses, and the rest. It is for this reason that, within this great chiliocosm of a thousand million worlds, in Jambudvīpa alone, there exists the vajrāsana, reaching up to the very limit of the earth above and resting upon the golden wheel below — the Bodhisattva, seated upon it, accomplishes right and perfect enlightenment, and there exists no other place of support firm enough for this besides it. It is for this reason that, when the Bodhisattva first attained buddhahood and was about to walk in meditative pacing, the moment he gently set his foot down upon the ground, the great earth at once shook in six ways, whereupon he gave rise to a resolute conviction, and only then was he able to walk. Further, it was in order to draw in and gather the sentient beings to be transformed, just as one might send forth an emissary, that he gathered this strength — that is, the unsurpassed enlightened one sent forth this strength as his emissary, to subdue their pride, and only thereafter to bring them across to liberation. It was for this reason that, while yet a householder, in contending in strength of every kind with the various Śākya youths, there was none he did not overcome; and, when about to enter final nirvāṇa, he likewise used his bodily strength to subdue certain strongmen and thereby bring them across to liberation. That is, the Blessed One, his conditions for transforming beings nearly exhausted and about to enter final cessation, journeyed toward the town of Pāpā, in the city of Kuśinagara. Five hundred strongmen, hearing of this, undertook to clear the road for the Buddha's passage. Upon that road there lay a great boulder, sixty cubits in length and thirty cubits in breadth. These strongmen wished to roll it away, but, exerting the whole of their bodily strength, were unable to move it in the least. When the Blessed One arrived and saw this, he asked them: what are you young men trying to do? Hearing themselves addressed thus, they were taken aback, and secretly thought to themselves: our own strength is foremost throughout Jambudvīpa — how is it that the Blessed One calls us "young men"? Having thought this, they together said to the Buddha: we are clearing the road for the Blessed One's passage,

but, working together, we are unable to move this boulder — might the Blessed One, out of compassion, be able to remove it for us? The Buddha said: I am able. You should all withdraw to a distance. He then, with the tip of his toe, flipped it up into his own palm, tossed it up into the empty sky, and, as it fell, caught it again, blew upon it with his mouth so that it scattered like fine dust, then gathered it back together exactly as it had been before and set it down again at the side of the road. The strongmen, astonished, having witnessed what they had never seen before, reverently bowed, joined their palms, and said further to the Buddha: what manner of supernormal power is this of the Tathāgata's? The Blessed One told them: the lifting of the boulder into my palm, the tossing of it into the empty sky, and the catching of it again, and the setting of it down again at the side of the road — all of this was the strength of my own physical body, born of father and mother; the scattering of it into fine dust by my breath was the power of supernormal ability; and the gathering of it back together exactly as before was the power of resolute conviction. Hearing this, the strongmen rejoiced and leapt for joy, and said further to the Buddha: is there yet some further strength able to surpass even these strengths of the Blessed One? The Buddha answered: there is — namely, the strength of impermanence. The Buddha told the strongmen: this strength of my physical body born of father and mother, this power of supernormal ability, and this power of resolute conviction, will all, this very day, by midnight, be destroyed and undone by the strength of impermanence. At that time, the strongmen, hearing what the Buddha had said, all gave rise, in that very world, to a profound sense of world-weariness and renunciation,

and the Buddha thereupon expounded to them the essentials of the Dharma appropriate to their condition, causing these strongmen and countless other gods and humans there present to attain the pure Dharma-eye, forever departing from the evil destinies and from the eighth kind of existence and the rest — and it was for this reason, in order to draw in and gather the sentient beings to be transformed, just as one might send forth an emissary, that he gathered this bodily strength. One asks: at what age is the Bodhisattva's bodily strength brought to its full completion? The answer: at twenty-five years of age. From this point onward, up through the completion of his fiftieth year, his strength undergoes no diminishment; only after this does the Blessed One's bodily strength gradually decline. There are those who say that the Blessed One's bodily strength undergoes no diminishment whatsoever, being, like his mental strength, free of any decline. The verdict: although the Tathāgata's Dharma-body undergoes no decline, his physical body's strength must necessarily undergo some diminishment, since every fruit of ripened karmic retribution is subject to decline — and it is for this reason that the Venerable Udāyin has said: I now see the Blessed One's physical strength diminished, and his faculties changed — that is, his five material faculties. One asks: do other sentient beings possess this strength? The answer: this strength is not shared by all sentient beings — only the bodhisattva in his very last existence possesses it. Given that, as first stated, even the very smallest measure of the Bodhisattva's own strength is already exceedingly difficult to attain, how much more so the second or third measure stated, and every other kind of sentient being besides? Yet, at the time when this fortunate eon's world first came into being, there existed sentient beings possessing the strength of Nārāyaṇa, or possessing half the strength of Nārāyaṇa, or possessing the strength of a Balāsthāma, or possessing the strength of a great Mahānagna — such strongmen as these filled the world at that time, and, from that point onward, their numbers have gradually diminished, until, at the present time, this kind of strength has vanished entirely. In the time when the Buddha was in the world, there were three of the Śākya clan who possessed the strength of a Balāsthāma — namely, Ānanda, Śākya Śāma, and the Śākya woman Gopā; at that time, there were likewise countless people possessing the full strength of a Mahānagna, or elephant-strength, or horse-strength, or ox-strength. A rhinoceros-horn-like pratyekabuddha likewise possesses the strength of Nārāyaṇa; as for a congregation-dwelling pratyekabuddha, his strength cannot be fixed with certainty, since most such beings belong to the lineage of a śrāvaka who, encountering some further condition, attains the fruit of arhatship — and, although they delight in stillness, they nonetheless dwell together with others, as when five hundred sages together attain the fruit in a single place. As for the rhinoceros-horn type, his faculties are of the very highest excellence, and he delights in solitary emergence — one should know that, just as with a buddha, there can never be two such beings arising in the world at the same time; even Śāriputra had no equal arising alongside him, how much more so the rhinoceros-horn type, who surpasses him many times over. The strength of ordinary śrāvakas is not fixed, as is said of the congregation-dwelling type of pratyekabuddha. The strength of wheel-turning kings is likewise not fixed: one who rules four continents possesses the strength of Nārāyaṇa; one who rules three continents possesses the strength of a Balaṅga; one who rules two continents possesses the strength of a Balāsthāma;

one who rules a single continent possesses the strength of a great Mahānagna. These four kinds of wheel-treasure likewise possess their own distinctions: one who rules four continents possesses the golden wheel-treasure,

its measure exactly equal to four krośas; one who rules three continents possesses the silver wheel-treasure, its measure exactly equal to three krośas; one who rules two continents possesses the copper wheel-treasure, its measure exactly equal to two krośas; one who rules a single continent possesses the iron wheel-treasure, its measure exactly equal to one krośa. Just as the four wheel-treasures possess these distinctions, so too should it be understood that the other treasures possess their own superiority and inferiority — that is, one who rules four continents possesses the most superior of the other treasures, and so on, down to one who rules a single continent, who possesses the most inferior of the other treasures. One asks: given that sentient beings differ in bodily strength, is there also a corresponding difference in how their bones and joints are arranged? The answer: there is indeed a difference. That is, in one of ordinary strength, the bones and joints are set apart from one another; in one possessing elephant- or horse-strength, the bones and joints are set close together; in one possessing the strength of a Mahānagna, the bones and joints are joined together as though fitted like boards; in one possessing the strength of a Balāsthāma, the bones and joints are hooked into one another; in one possessing the strength of Nārāyaṇa, the bones and joints are linked together in a chain. The Bodhisattva's own bones and joints, one intertwined with another in turn, are coiled together like a dragon, and it is for this reason that his strength is supreme above all. Having now explained the Buddha's bodily strength, his mental strength shall next be explained — that is, the Blessed One accomplishes the ten powers, the four kinds of fearlessness, great compassion, the three foundations of mindfulness, and other inconceivable and boundless virtues, and, according to the distinctions of their function, he establishes for them a variety of names; taken as ten in number, they are called mental strength. What are these ten? First, the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not; second, the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation; third, the power of the knowledge of the arising of defilement and purity through the dhyānas, liberations, concentrations, and attainments; fourth, the power of the knowledge of the various elements; fifth, the power of the knowledge of the various resolute convictions; sixth, the power of the knowledge of the superiority and inferiority of the faculties; seventh, the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies; eighth, the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes; ninth, the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth; tenth, the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants. One asks: what do these ten powers take as their own nature? The answer: they take knowledge as their own nature — that is, the Buddha's mental powers are accomplished through knowledge, taking knowledge as their substance, since they are subsumed under knowledge, exactly as the sūtra states: with respect to what is possible and what is not, he truly and fully knows — and so on, at length. Their own nature having now been explained, the reason for this shall now be stated. One asks: why are they called "powers"? What is the meaning of "power"? The answer: the sense of being unbendable is the meaning of "power"; the sense of being unsubduable; the sense of being unbreakable; the sense of being unharmable; the sense of being unshakable; the sense of being uncoverable; the sense of being able to comprehend fully; the sense of being able to bear the burden; the sense of firmness; the sense of supremacy; the sense of being able to master others — these constitute the meaning of "power." As for their realm: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth are bound to the form realm; the remaining powers, where contaminated, are bound to the three realms, and, where uncontaminated, are unbound. As for their stage: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth exist within the four fundamental dhyānas, since these are of a shared nature; the approach-stages, the formless absorptions, and the stage of unfixed attention are not the support of this shared nature, and so these two powers do not exist there. The remaining powers, where contaminated, exist within eleven stages — namely, the desire realm, the four dhyānas, the four formless absorptions, and the not-yet-arrived stage together with the dhyāna-interval; where uncontaminated, they exist within nine stages. As for their support: all are supported by the great and heroic body of a human being of the desire realm, in Jambudvīpa, since it is only in dependence on this body that buddhahood is attained. As for their aspects: the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not, and the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies, possess sixteen aspects, or other aspects; the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation possesses the eight aspects of suffering and origin, or other aspects; the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth powers possess the twelve aspects of suffering, origin, and the path, or other aspects; the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth possess other aspects, not the sixteen aspects.

As for the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants: for those who hold that it is called "the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants" because it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, they say that it possesses the four aspects of cessation, or other aspects; for those who hold that it is called "the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants" because it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, they say that it possesses the sixteen aspects, or other aspects.

As for their objects: the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not takes all dharmas as its object; the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation takes only suffering and origin as its object; the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth powers take the three truths, excepting the truth of cessation, as their object; the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies takes only the four truths as its object; the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes takes the five aggregates of the preceding period within the desire and form realms as its object; the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth takes visible form as its object; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes the truth of cessation as its object, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes all dharmas as its object. As for the establishments of mindfulness: the power of the knowledge of the various resolute convictions and the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes are only the establishment of mindfulness with respect to dharmas; the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth is only the establishment of mindfulness with respect to the body; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, is the establishment of mindfulness with respect to dharmas,

and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, is all four establishments of mindfulness; the remaining powers are all the four establishments of mindfulness. As for the kinds of knowledge: the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not, and the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies, are subsumed under all ten kinds of knowledge; the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation is subsumed under only eight kinds of knowledge, excepting the knowledge of cessation and of the path; the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth powers are subsumed under only nine kinds of knowledge, excepting the knowledge of cessation; the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth are subsumed under only conventional knowledge; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, is subsumed under only six kinds of knowledge — namely, dharma-knowledge, subsequent knowledge, the knowledge of cessation, the knowledge of exhaustion, the knowledge of non-arising, and conventional knowledge — and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, is subsumed under all ten kinds of knowledge. As for their conjunction with concentration: the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not, and the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies, may be conjoined, or may not be conjoined, with the three concentrations; the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation, taking suffering and origin as its object, may be conjoined, or may not be conjoined, with emptiness and wishlessness; the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth powers, taking suffering, origin, and the path as their object, may be conjoined, or may not be conjoined, with emptiness and wishlessness; the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth are not conjoined with any of the three concentrations; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, may be conjoined, or may not be conjoined, with signlessness, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, may be conjoined, or may not be conjoined, with all three concentrations. As for their association with the faculties: taken together, all are associated with the three faculties — namely, pleasure, joy, and equanimity. As for past, future, and present: all ten of these powers extend through all three time-periods. As for taking the past, future, and present as their object: the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not, and the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies, take the three time-periods, and what is beyond time, as their object; the second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth powers take the three time-periods as their object; the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes, in its past and present aspects, takes the past as its object, and, in its future aspect, takes all three time-periods as its object; the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth, in its past aspect, takes the past as its object, and, in its present aspect, takes the present as its object, and, with respect to a future dharma yet to arise, takes the future as its object, and, with respect to a dharma not yet to arise, takes all three time-periods as its object; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes what is beyond time as its object,

and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes the three time-periods, and what is beyond time, as its object. As for wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate: all ten of these powers are wholesome. As for taking the wholesome, the unwholesome, and the indeterminate as their object: the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes only the wholesome as its object, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes all three as its object; the remaining nine powers all take all three as their object. There are other masters who say that the third power takes only the wholesome and the indeterminate as its object — this position ought not to be maintained, since this power takes as its object conditioned dharmas of both defilement and purity alike, and, among defiled dharmas, there exist unwholesome ones as well. As for being bound or unbound: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth are bound only to the form realm; the remaining eight powers, where contaminated, are bound to the three realms, and, where uncontaminated, are unbound. As for taking what is bound or unbound as their object: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth take what is bound to the desire and form realms as their object; the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation takes what is bound to the three realms as its object; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes what is unbound as its object, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes what is bound to the three realms, and what is unbound, as its object; the remaining powers all take what is bound to the three realms, and what is unbound, as their object. As for belonging to a learner, one beyond training, or neither: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth belong only to one who is neither a learner nor beyond training; the remaining eight powers, where uncontaminated, belong to one beyond training, and, where contaminated, belong to one who is neither a learner nor beyond training. As for taking as their object what belongs to a learner, one beyond training, or neither: the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation, the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes, and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth take as their object only what belongs to one who is neither a learner nor beyond training; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes as its object only what belongs to one who is neither a learner nor beyond training,

and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes all three as its object; the remaining powers all take all three as their object. As for what is abandoned by seeing, abandoned by cultivation, or neither: the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth are only abandoned by cultivation; the remaining eight powers, where contaminated, are abandoned by cultivation, and, where uncontaminated, are neither abandoned by seeing nor by cultivation. As for taking as their object what is abandoned by seeing, abandoned by cultivation, or neither: the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation and the power of the knowledge that recollects former abodes take as their object what is abandoned by seeing and by cultivation; the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth takes as its object what is abandoned by cultivation; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes as its object what is neither abandoned by seeing nor by cultivation, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes all three as its object; the remaining powers all take all three as their object. As for taking a name or a meaning as their object: the power of the knowledge of the various resolute convictions, the power of the knowledge of the superiority and inferiority of the faculties, and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth take only meaning as their object; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes only meaning as its object, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes both name and meaning as its object; the remaining powers all take both name and meaning as their object. As for taking one's own continuum, another's continuum, or what is not a continuum, as their object:

the power of the knowledge of what is possible and what is not, and the power of the knowledge of the paths leading to all destinies, take all three as their object; the power of the knowledge of the exhaustion of contaminants, where it takes the exhaustion of contaminants as its object, takes as its object what is not a continuum, and, where it depends on a body in which the contaminants are exhausted, takes all three as its object; the remaining powers all take as their object one's own continuum and another's continuum. As for being obtained through preparatory effort or through obtaining freedom from defilement: all ten of these powers may be said to be obtained through preparatory effort, being obtained through the accumulation of superior preparatory effort across three incalculable eons; and all may also be said to be obtained through obtaining freedom from defilement, being obtained, at the moment of the knowledge of exhaustion, through freedom from the defilement of the peak of existence. One asks: what is the preparatory effort for these ten powers? The answer: this preparatory effort is of two kinds: first, proximate preparatory effort, referring to the aids to penetration and the like; second, distant preparatory effort, referring to the initial resolve for enlightenment that never turns back, and the like. One asks: the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation and the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth may both take karma as their object — what distinction is there between them? The answer: proceeding from cause to fruit is the power of the knowledge of karma and its accumulation; proceeding from fruit to cause is the power of the knowledge of death and rebirth — and, exactly as with cause and fruit, so too with subtle and coarse, and with what is directly seen and what is not directly seen, and with what is near and what is far. One asks: how is unmanifest karma known? The answer:

proceeding from fruit to cause, from coarse to subtle, from what is directly seen to what is not directly seen, from what is near to what is far — it is in this way that it is known. One asks: the knowledge that recollects former abodes and the knowledge of death and rebirth are possessed by the two vehicles as well — why, then, does only the Buddha establish these as "powers"? The answer: it has already been stated above that the sense of being unbendable and the rest constitutes the meaning of "power" — the two vehicles, though possessing this knowledge, lack this particular sense, and it is for this reason that it is not called a "power" in their case, exactly as Śāriputra, though he entered the fourth dhyāna, did not know where a certain person would be reborn, or whence he had come. One asks: the two vehicles likewise possess the knowledge of the permanent exhaustion of contaminants — why is this not called a "power"? The answer: the Buddha's knowledge is keen and swift, cutting off affliction, together with its residual traces, in a way the two vehicles cannot. Further, the Buddha's knowledge is able to know, without error, the precise moment at which the contaminants of both his own and others' continua are permanently exhausted — the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas possess no such capacity. Further, it is not on account of knowing his own exhaustion of contaminants that it is called "the power of the exhaustion of contaminants," but rather on account of his ability to know the distinctions in the exhaustion of contaminants among the sentient beings of boundless world-systems belonging to others,

and his ability to expound to them, clearly and without error, the skillful means for exhausting their own contaminants, that it is called "the power of the exhaustion of contaminants" — the śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas possess no such capacity.