The Night Māra Lost

One asks: among the six superknowledges, how many are clarity but not instructive guidance? How many are instructive guidance but not clarity? How many are both clarity and instructive guidance? How many are neither clarity nor instructive guidance? The answer: two superknowledges are clarity but not instructive guidance — namely, the superknowledge of the recollection of former abodes, and the superknowledge of the knowledge of death and rebirth. Two superknowledges are instructive guidance but not clarity — namely, the superknowledge of miraculous transformation, and the superknowledge of the knowledge of others' minds. One superknowledge is both clarity and instructive guidance — namely, the superknowledge of the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows. One superknowledge is neither clarity nor instructive guidance — namely, the superknowledge of the divine ear. One asks: for what reason, among the six superknowledges, are three instructive guidance, and three not so? The answer: manifesting a rare and marvelous matter, causing others to believe and submit, drawing them into the true dharma, is what is named instructive guidance; three of them possess this same meaning, the remaining three do not — that is, were one to declare of himself, I am capable of hearing at a distance, I am capable of seeing at a distance, I am capable of recollecting every matter of former abodes, others would, in every case, give rise to doubt as to whether this is false or true, and would not thereby immediately believe and submit — and it is for this reason that these are not instructive guidance. It has once been heard that there was a certain lay devotee who had faith in the outside-path teaching, and who, bowing low, invited a disciple of the Nirgrantha ascetics, together with his own following, to come to his own house, providing them with food and drink. The Nirgrantha disciple, upon entering the house, at once broke into a faint smile. The lay devotee, puzzled, asked him: master, being free of restlessness, why do you now smile? He thereupon replied: I possess a wondrous virtue — how could you, a mere householder, ever fully know it? At this, the lay devotee earnestly questioned him further, and he then told him: beside the river Narmadā, there were two monkeys, who, fighting without cease, both fell into that same river and were swept away and drowned by the water — it was on account of this matter that I, in compassion, smiled at them. The lay devotee praised him, saying: how truly marvelous — the great master's own divine eye is pure to such a degree! When the mealtime arrived, the lay devotee thought to himself: I shall now, by means of this meal, put to the test whether this is false or true. He thereupon covered a bowl of meat curry with rice, and first offered it to the master, while giving the curry poured over rice to that same master's disciple. At that time, this same disciple, upon receiving it, at once ate, while the master alone did not eat. The lay devotee asked him: great master, for what reason do you alone not eat?

He said: there is no curry — how could I eat it? The lay devotee mockingly said: how marvelous, this divine eye — capable of seeing far away, yet incapable of observing what is near at hand! The teacher and his disciples, at that time, were overcome with deep shame. It is for this reason that the divine eye and the remaining two are not instructive guidance — declaring of oneself that one hears at a distance, or is capable of recollecting at a distance, likewise does not cause others to immediately believe and submit, and, since they do not believe and submit, how could this ever draw them into the true dharma? It is for this reason that these three are, in every case, not instructive guidance. If it is in order to display the superknowledge of miraculous transformation, transforming one into many, or many into one, and so on, up through, possessing self-mastery of supernormal power even to the Brahmā world, causing many sentient beings to believe and submit with a deep mind, and thereby drawing them into the true dharma, this is named instructive guidance. If it is in order to display the superknowledge of the knowledge of others' minds, recording and describing the distinctions of another's own mental thought exactly as it genuinely is, without falsehood, causing many sentient beings to believe and submit with a deep mind, and thereby drawing them into the true dharma, this, too, is named instructive guidance.

If it is in order to display the superknowledge of the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows, instructing and teaching according to what is fitting, swiftly causing one to see the truths, becoming free of dust and free of defilement, giving rise to the pure dharma-eye with respect to the various dharmas, proceeding onward until every outflow is eternally exhausted, causing many sentient beings to believe and submit with a deep mind, and thereby drawing them into the true dharma, this, too, is named instructive guidance. One asks: for what kind of person ought one to manifest a supernormal transformation? The answer: for whoever is decisively confident in the Buddha's own teaching, and for whoever is decisively without such confidence, one ought not to manifest it; for whoever is undecided, one ought to manifest it, in order to draw him into the true dharma — apart from this, there exists no further expedient means. How is this to be known as so? Exactly as the scripture states: at one time, the Buddha was dwelling beside the city of Nāṭikā, within the Āmra grove that encircled it. There was a certain lay devotee's own son, named Kaivarta, who came before the Buddha, bowed with his head at the Buddha's own two feet, and, withdrawing to stand to one side, addressed the Buddha, saying: at present, this city is peaceful and prosperous, and its own many people possess a deep faith and reverence for the treasure of the Buddha, the dharma, and the saṅgha — I only wish that the Bhagavān would leave a single disciple constantly dwelling in this same place, so that, before the various ascetics and brāhmaṇas, he might, from time to time, manifest a supernormal transformation, displaying a dharma beyond that of an ordinary person, causing those in this city who already have faith in the Buddha's own teaching to have their own firm faith redoubled, and causing those who do not yet believe, coming and going for a time, to come to believe and accept the Buddha's own teaching. At that time, the Buddha said to this same lay devotee's son:

I have never once caused my own disciples, before the various ascetics and brāhmaṇas, to manifest any supernormal transformation displaying a dharma beyond that of an ordinary person — I constantly cause my own disciples, instead, to conceal their own good and reveal their own faults. At that time, the lay devotee's son further addressed the Buddha, saying: if, when the Buddha's own disciples, before the various ascetics and brāhmaṇas, manifest a supernormal transformation displaying a dharma beyond that of an ordinary person, there exists some fault in this, such that the Buddha does not permit it — then, if the Buddha's own disciples conceal their own good and reveal their own faults, what virtue can there be in this, such that the Buddha permits it? At that time, the Bhagavān said to the lay devotee's son:

I shall now ask you a question — answer according to your own thought. Were my own disciples, before the various ascetics and brāhmaṇas, to manifest a supernormal transformation, transforming one into many, or many into one, and so on, up through, possessing self-mastery of supernormal power even to the Brahmā world, those who have faith in the Buddha's own teaching, having seen this same matter, would say to those without faith: how marvelous — the various noble disciples of the Bhagavān are capable of manifesting so rare a matter as this! At that time, those without faith would say to those with faith: what is rare about this? There exists, in the world, a bright incantation named Gāndhārī, and whoever skillfully upholds it, too, is capable of displaying such an illusory deception as this — what wise person would ever display so base a matter as this?

The Buddha said to the lay devotee's son: what do you think — would there exist those without faith who would speak in this way, mocking those with faith? The lay devotee's son said: there does indeed exist such a matter. The Bhagavān, further, said to the lay devotee's son: were my own disciples to record and describe another's own mental thought and its own distinctions, exactly as recorded and described, without any falsehood, those who have faith in the Buddha's own teaching, having known this same matter, would say to those without faith: how marvelous — the various noble disciples of the Bhagavān possess so rare a matter as this! At that time, those without faith would say to those with faith: what is rare about this? There exists, in the world, a bright incantation named Kṣaṇika, and whoever skillfully upholds it, too, is capable of fashioning such an illusory deception as this — what wise person would ever perform so base a matter as this? The Buddha said to the lay devotee's son: what do you think — would there exist those without faith who would speak in this way, mocking those with faith? The lay devotee's son said: there does indeed exist such a matter. At that time, the Bhagavān said to the lay devotee's son: it is because there exists such a fault as this that I do not permit my own disciples, before the various ascetics and brāhmaṇas, to manifest a supernormal transformation displaying a dharma beyond that of an ordinary person; it is because there exists such a virtue as this — according with the noble dharma, praised by the world — that I permit my own disciples to conceal their own good and reveal their own faults.

It is by virtue of this that it is known that whoever is decisively confident, or decisively without confidence, ought not to have a supernormal transformation manifested for him; whoever is undecided ought to have it manifested for him, as an expedient means of drawing him into the Buddha's own true dharma.

Within this same scripture, the Buddha, for the sake of the lay devotee's son, spoke of three kinds of instructive guidance — first, the instructive guidance of supernormal transformation; second, the instructive guidance of recording the mind; third, the instructive guidance of instruction and teaching. One asks: for what reason is it named instructive guidance? The answer: "instructive" refers to manifesting and displaying; "guidance" refers to leading and directing — manifesting a rare and marvelous matter, and thereby drawing one into the true dharma, is what is named instructive guidance, exactly as a gatekeeper earns the name "one who instructs and guides" — that is, a gatekeeper manifests inner matters in order to direct outer persons, and manifests outer matters in order to direct inner persons. As for manifesting inner matters in order to direct outer persons: this refers to the fact that, should the awaited king not yet be bathing, resting, or eating, or observing his own treasures, the gatekeeper accordingly manifests and presents this same information. As for manifesting outer matters in order to direct inner persons: this refers to the fact that the gatekeeper, observing that some outer tribute of rare and singular objects, or trusted goods, has arrived, guides the inner persons to accept it. In just the same way, manifesting the subtle and wondrous virtues present within the Buddha's own true dharma, and thereby, through skillful means, guiding and directing the sentient beings to be transformed, causing them to enter into it, is what is named instructive guidance. This same scripture, further, states: the bodhisattva, during the first, middle, and last watches of the night, each gave rise to superknowledge and clarity; having given rise to superknowledge and clarity, at the very moment the morning star appeared, he realized unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. One asks: for what reason did the bodhisattva, during the first, middle, and last watches of the night, each give rise to superknowledge and clarity? The answer: for a bodhisattva in his own final body, who has already crossed beyond as many kalpas as there are grains of sand in the river Gaṅgā, and who is about to realize the great awakening, the dharma necessarily requires this to be so. Further, it is because he wishes, during the first, middle, and last watches of the night, each to give rise to superknowledge and clarity, that his own body becomes a fitting vessel for the dharma. Further, it is because he wishes to manifest his own thorough mastery of both supernormal transformation and comprehension that superknowledge is capable of manifesting supernormal transformation, and clarity is capable of thorough comprehension, and it is for this reason that superknowledge and clarity are given rise to. Further, it is exactly as the uninterrupted path and the path of liberation — superknowledge is like the uninterrupted path; clarity is like the path of liberation — and it is for this reason that superknowledge and clarity are given rise to. Further, it is exactly as the path of seeing and the path of cultivation — superknowledge is like the path of seeing; clarity is like the path of cultivation — and it is for this reason that superknowledge and clarity are given rise to. Further, it is because he wishes to display that the wholesome contaminated, the neutral-and-unobscured, both the contaminated and the undefiled, and the undefiled dharmas alike possess present function that superknowledge and clarity are given rise to — as for the wholesome contaminated dharma: this refers to the superknowledge of miraculous transformation, and the superknowledge and clarity of the recollection of former abodes; as for the neutral-and-unobscured dharma:

this refers to the two superknowledges of the divine eye and the divine ear; as for the dharma that pervades both the contaminated and the undefiled: this refers to the superknowledge of the knowledge of others' minds; as for the undefiled dharma: this refers to the superknowledge and clarity of the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows. Further, it is in order to subdue Māra, the enemy, in sequence, that superknowledge and clarity are given rise to during the first, middle, and last watches of the night. It has once been heard that the bodhisattva, already having come to know that the cultivation of painful austerity was not the genuine path, thereupon accepted the milk-porridge, possessing sixteen virtues and fragrant with honey, offered by the sisters Nandā and Nandabalā; having eaten it, his own body and mind became tranquil and possessed of strength. He received auspicious grass from an auspicious person, and, arriving beneath the bodhi tree, spread it out with his own hand, and, exactly as the nāga king Vāsuki coils his own body, sat cross-legged, and, once seated, thereupon uttered a firm and resolute vow, saying:

were I, here, not to exhaust every outflow and realize unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, I vow never to rise from this seat. At that time, the great earth, the great oceans, and the various mountains all shook in six ways, exactly as a light vessel upon the sea rises and falls with the waves, so too were even the palaces of the heaven of mastery over others' emanations shaken through and through, exactly as a fierce wind blows a banana leaf. Māra, the king, startled and alarmed, observed the cause of this same tremor, and thereupon beheld the bodhisattva sitting beneath the bodhi tree, his own body upright and unmoving, vowing to seize awakening. He swiftly emerged from his own palace and went to the bodhisattva's own place, saying to the bodhisattva: son of a kṣatriya, you may arise from this seat — in this present age of defilement and evil, sentient beings are obstinate and unyielding, and you will most certainly be incapable of realizing unsurpassed awakening; you ought instead to manifest and receive the very throne of a wheel-turning king, and I shall offer you the seven treasures in homage. The bodhisattva addressed him, saying: what you now say is like one enticing a child — the sun, the moon, the constellations, and the stars might sooner be made to fall,

the mountains, forests, and the great earth might sooner be made to rise into empty space — there is certainly no possibility that, wishing now to seize the great awakening, I should ever arise from this seat. At that time, the evil Māra king said to the bodhisattva: if you will not heed my own gentle, sweet words, then, in but a moment, I shall cause you to behold a matter of great terror. Having spoken thus, he scattered flowers and returned to his own palace, and, proclaiming throughout all six heavens: you must all swiftly ready your bows, crossbows, blades, swords, combat-wheels, snares, spears, halberds, and every other weapon of war —

I have a great enemy at the bodhi tree; together, we shall go at once and cut him down. The bodhisattva, at that time, gave rise to this same thought: even a contest with an ordinary person ought not to be taken lightly, how much less one with the very lord of self-mastery among the gods of the heaven of mastery over others' emanations — having thought this, he swiftly cultivated the path of becoming free of desire's own defilement, and, becoming free of the desire realm's own defilement, gave rise to the superknowledge of miraculous transformation belonging to the first dhyāna, transformatively creating every manner of superior implement to oppose his own foe. Should Māra's own army come in the form of birds, I ought to transform myself into the form of a cat to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of cats, I ought to transform myself into the form of a dog or wolf to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of dogs or wolves, I ought to transform myself into the form of a jackal or leopard to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of jackals or leopards, I ought to transform myself into the form of a tiger to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of tigers, I ought to transform myself into the form of a lion to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of lions, I ought to transform myself into the form of a dragon or unicorn to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of dragons or unicorns, I ought to transform myself into a raging fire to oppose them;

should Māra's army come in the form of a raging fire, I ought to transform myself into a violent rainstorm to oppose them; should Māra's army come in the form of a violent rainstorm, I ought to transform myself into a great canopy to oppose them — every such kind of opposing form as this is measureless in its variety. He further transformed a firm platform of lapis lazuli, and, although his own body remained seated in the center of it, he became capable of seeing far into the ground below his own seat, transformatively creating a great being capable of giving rise to a thunderous roar. Having made these transformations, he further reflected to himself: let it not be that I, in a former life, obstructed another's own cultivation of the wholesome — and he thereupon gave rise to the recollection-of-former-abodes clarity, and beheld of himself that, in his own former lives, he had never once obstructed those who cultivated the wholesome,

but had, instead, with every manner of implement for cultivating the wholesome, assisted them in it. He further reflected: let it not be that my own wholesome karma is inferior to that of Māra himself — having reflected thus, he then beheld that Māra, the king, in a former life, had held but a single unrestricted feast of giving, at which same feast there was a certain solitary-realizer, and it was through this same wholesome karma that Māra now attained rebirth as a god; he beheld, of his own former lives, that he himself had held unrestricted feasts numbering hundreds of thousands of koṭis, difficult to know their true number, and that, at these same feasts, buddhas and solitary-realizers, too, numbered hundreds of thousands of koṭis, difficult to know their true number. He, further, reflected to himself: my own merit of giving alone is not even to be compared and measured against his own,

how much less his own measureless further merit of precepts, concentration, and the rest, of which he possesses no portion whatsoever. Having given rise to this same thought, he sat with his own body upright and his own mind composed, solemn and unmoving. Afterward, Māra, the king, together with thirty-six koṭis of his own demonic army, each manifesting every manner of fearsome form, brandishing weapons of war of boundless variety,

filling the entire span of thirty-six yojanas, all together rushed at once toward the place beneath the bodhi tree. At that time, the bodhisattva said to Māra, the king: you, in former times, held but a single great feast of giving, and even this same supernormal power still remains — I, in ages past, held unrestricted feasts of giving numbering hundreds of thousands of koṭis, difficult to know their true number,

how much less every remaining virtue of mine, of which you possess no portion at all — for what reason have you come here, wishing to trouble me? At that time, the evil Māra king said to the bodhisattva: my own virtue has you yourself as its witness — who, then, will bear witness to your own virtue? The bodhisattva thereupon extended his own hand, adorned with the major marks, and struck the ground before his own seat.

At that moment, the ground below thundered and roared, shaking in six ways with a great sound. Māra's army, hearing this, was startled and alarmed, and scattered in retreat, each knowing themselves no match for him, and returning to their own palaces. The bodhisattva's own karma-born eye and ear were capable of seeing and hearing only to the distance of a single yojana; Māra's army being now far away, wishing to hear what discourse they might make of this, he thereupon gave rise to the divine ear, and, having heard their own sound, wishing to observe what form they had taken, he further gave rise to the divine eye, and, having seen their own form, wishing to know what thought was in their own mind, he gave rise to the knowledge of others' minds, and thereby knew that the assembly of the god Śakra's own retinue felt joy and celebration in their own minds, while Māra's own retinue felt envy and vexation in their own minds. The bodhisattva, at this, further carefully reflected: for what reason has Māra's own faction given rise to this same evil matter? He came to know that the giving rise to this evil matter is, in every case, on account of the five desires; that indulgence in the five desires is, in every case, on account of affliction; and, having grown weary of affliction, he thereupon exhausted every outflow, and realized unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. It is for this reason that, wishing to subdue Māra, the enemy, in sequence, he gave rise to superknowledge and clarity during the first, middle, and last watches of the night.

At the very moment of the direct realization of the truths, in which does one first attain confirmed purity — the Buddha, the dharma, or the sangha? One asks: for what reason is this treatise composed? The answer: it is in order to put a stop to what other schools maintain, and to display the correct principle — that is, there are those who say: with respect to the four noble truths, one attains direct realization all at one and the same time, as the Vibhajyavādins hold. One asks: for what reason does this same school say so? The answer: they rely upon the scripture — exactly as the Bhagavān states: if, with respect to the truth of suffering, one is without any doubt or hesitation, then, with respect to the truths of accumulation, cessation, and the path, one is likewise without any doubt or hesitation — since one is, all at once, without doubt with respect to all four truths, it is thereby known that direct realization is certainly all at once, not gradual. In order to put a stop to this same intention, and to display that, at the very moment of direct realization, one proceeds definitely gradually through the four noble truths, not all at once — for, were this not so, it would then contradict the scripture, exactly as the scripture states:

Elder Anāthapiṇḍika came before the Buddha, bowed with his head at the Buddha's own feet, and addressed the Buddha, saying: Bhagavān, do the various practitioners of yoga, with respect to the four noble truths, undergo direct realization all at once, or gradually? The Buddha addressed the householder, saying: the various practitioners of yoga, with respect to the four noble truths, most certainly undergo direct realization gradually,

exactly as one gradually ascends a four-runged ladder. One asks: if direct realization proceeds gradually through the four truths, then how is one to properly reconcile the scripture cited by the Vibhajyavādins? The answer: the scripture they cite ought rather to have been stated as follows: if, with respect to the truth of the path, one is without any doubt, then, with respect to the truths of suffering, accumulation, and cessation, one is likewise without any doubt — and that it is not so stated should be understood to carry a separate underlying intent — that is, that same scripture speaks of one who has already attained the fruit: if, with respect to the truth of suffering, he is without any doubt, then, with respect to the remaining three truths, he is likewise without any doubt, since the doubt that deludes one with respect to all four truths has, in every case, already been cut off. The Venerable Vasumitra speaks as follows: that same scripture's own underlying intent is that doubt does not manifestly operate — that is, the practitioner of yoga, if, with respect to the truth of suffering, he has already entered direct realization, is without any doubt; with respect to the remaining three truths, whatever doubt still remains, although not yet cut off, no longer manifestly operates, since it has already attained a non-analytical cessation with respect to them.

The Great Virtuous One speaks as follows: at the very moment one first enters right determinacy freed from birth, one is, with respect to every one of the noble truths' own treasures, named as having presently believed. One asks: this same Great Virtuous One, too, states that, at the very moment of attaining direct realization with respect to the four noble truths, this proceeds gradually, not all at once — for what reason, then, does he now speak in this way? The answer: this same teacher speaks as follows: at the very moment the forbearance regarding suffering, a dharma-cognition, is present, were one not, with respect to all four truths, to attain a measure of belief, there would necessarily be no meaning of "abiding" at all — exactly as a clay vessel, carried up to a high tower and cast down to the ground, although it has not yet reached the ground, is, since it must necessarily break, already given the name "broken" — this, too, is just the same, and it is for this reason that this treatise is composed in order to put a stop to what other schools maintain, and to display the correct principle.

Here, "the Buddha" refers to the various non-learner dharmas present within the Buddha's own body — the undefiled belief that takes these as its object is named confirmed purity in the Buddha. Here, "the dharma" refers to

the three undefiled faculties and the like, belonging to both the learner's and the non-learner's own stage, present within the solitary-realizer's own body, together with the two undefiled faculties and the like, belonging to the learner's own stage, present within the bodhisattva's own body, together with the three truths of suffering, accumulation, and cessation — the undefiled belief that takes these as its object is named confirmed purity in the dharma. Here, "the sangha" refers to the learner's and non-learner's own dharmas present within the disciple's own body — the undefiled belief that takes these as its object is named confirmed purity in the sangha. The undefiled precepts are named confirmed purity in precepts, since these are, by their own very nature, pure, and, relying upon confirmation, arise — and it is for this reason that they, too, are named confirmed purity.

If, during the direct realization of suffering, accumulation, and cessation, one first attains confirmed purity in the dharma, then, during the direct realization of the path, one first attains confirmed purity in the Buddha, the dharma, and the sangha.

Here, as for attaining confirmed purity in the dharma first, at the very moment of the direct realization of suffering: this refers to the fact that undefiled belief is attained with respect precisely to the dharma of suffering. The Venerable Pārśva says: at that very time, with respect to suffering, one's own belief carries the sense of calamity, and, with respect to the cessation of suffering, one's own belief carries the sense of excellence — that is, this same cessation of suffering is exceedingly pure and wondrous;

thus, how excellent indeed is this cessation of what is base, vile, and impure! As for attaining confirmed purity in the dharma first, at the very moment of the direct realization of accumulation: this refers to the fact that undefiled belief is attained with respect precisely to the dharma of accumulation. The Venerable Pārśva says: at that very time, with respect to accumulation, one's own belief carries the sense of calamity, and, with respect to the cessation of accumulation, one's own belief carries the sense of excellence — that is, this same cessation of accumulation is exceedingly pure and wondrous; thus, how excellent indeed is this cessation of what is base, vile, and impure! As for attaining confirmed purity in the dharma first, at the very moment of the direct realization of cessation: this refers to the fact that undefiled belief is attained with respect precisely to the dharma of cessation, one's own belief in the excellence of cessation being exceedingly pure and wondrous — that is, the contaminated dharma's own ultimate quiescence is exceedingly excellent. One asks: at the very moment of direct realization with respect to the three noble truths, each in turn, one attains, in each case, two kinds of confirmed purity — that is, belief and precepts — for what reason, then, does this treatise speak solely of attaining belief? The answer: this ought indeed to speak of attaining both, and that it does not so speak should be understood to be a case whose meaning has been left over for elsewhere. Further, this treatise does not merely ask who attains how many confirmed purities, but asks who attains how many confirmed purities taking which treasure as their object —

precepts, having no object, are, although attained, not spoken of here. There are those who say: as for attaining confirmed purity first with respect to the dharma, this does not mean attaining solely a confirmed purity taking the dharma as its object — it means, rather, attaining confirmed purity with respect to the dharma, since belief and precepts alike are attained through the treasure of the dharma, and both are thereby named confirmed purity in the dharma. As for attaining, during the direct realization of the path, confirmed purity in the Buddha, the dharma, and the sangha, first: the Western teachers speak as follows: during the three moments of the direct realization of the path, it is precisely the present belief, together with the precepts that follow in its train, that ought to be understood to fully possess the meaning of all four confirmed purities — that is, this same belief, taking as its object the non-learner's own dharmas present within the Buddha's own body, is named confirmed purity in the Buddha; this same belief, further, taking as its object the learner's and non-learner's own dharmas present within the solitary-realizer's own body, and the learner's own dharmas present within the bodhisattva's own body, is named confirmed purity in the dharma; this same belief, further, taking as its object the undefiled dharmas present within the disciple's own body, is named confirmed purity in the sangha; this same precept that follows in the belief's own train is named confirmed purity in precepts. The verdict: this ought not to be said, since the present belief, taking, all together, the undefiled dharmas of all three vehicles as its object, is gathered solely within the mixed-object confirmed purity in the dharma. Yet, at the very moment this same belief manifests in the present, one likewise cultivates many further moments of belief belonging to the future; among these measureless moments of belief, there exists that which takes solely the Buddha's own non-learner dharmas as its object, named confirmed purity in the Buddha; there exists that which takes solely the undefiled dharmas of the solitary-realizer and the bodhisattva as its object, this being gathered within the unmixed-object confirmed purity in the dharma; there exists that which takes solely the learner's and non-learner's own dharmas present within the disciple's own body as its object, named confirmed purity in the sangha; there exists that which takes, mixed together, the undefiled dharmas present within the Buddha's and the solitary-realizer's and the bodhisattva's own bodies as its object; there exists that which takes, mixed together, the undefiled dharmas present within the Buddha's and the disciple's own bodies as its object; there exists that which takes, mixed together, the undefiled dharmas present within the solitary-realizer's and the bodhisattva's and the disciple's own bodies as its object; there exists that which takes, mixed together, the undefiled dharmas present within the Buddha's and the solitary-realizer's and the bodhisattva's and the disciple's own bodies as its object — every one of these is gathered within the mixed-object confirmed purity in the dharma. The present and future belief, together with the precept that follows in its train, is confirmed purity in precepts. Exactly as with the three moments of the path, during the path of seeing, so too should it be understood at the very moment of the subsequent knowledge of the path, with the following distinction: during these same three moments, one cultivates solely the various belief and precepts that take the path as their object; at the very moment of the subsequent knowledge of the path, one cultivates the various belief and precepts that take all four truths as their object.

One asks: the truths of cessation and the path are dharmas of purity, matters worthy of belief — at the very moment of their direct realization, confirmed purity may well be attained; but the truths of suffering and accumulation are dharmas of defilement, not matters worthy of belief, being the very ground upon which every affliction, inverted view, and evil conduct depends — how, then, is confirmed purity likewise attained at the very moment of their direct realization? The answer: it is by virtue of two conditions that confirmed purity is attained — first, by virtue of being worthy of belief; second, by virtue of being worth seeking. With respect to the truths of cessation and the path, confirmed purity is attained by virtue of both conditions in full; with respect to the truths of suffering and accumulation, confirmed purity is attained by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking — exactly as a person digs into a place where there exists treasure and the like: with respect to that same place, he possesses both belief and seeking; if a person digs into a place where there exists no treasure at all, he possesses, with respect to that same place, belief but no seeking, since, although that same place possesses no treasure, water, or the like, there is nonetheless some purpose that leads him to dig there — this, too, is just the same, and it is for this reason that there is no fault here. The Venerable Ghoṣa speaks as follows: the various practitioners of yoga, having first seen the calamity of suffering and accumulation, afterward see the excellence present in cessation and the path — that is, this same cessation and path are exceedingly pure and wondrous, permanently setting to rest and removing so vile and evil a thing as this truth of suffering and accumulation.

It is by virtue of this that the practitioner, although he has nothing to seek with respect to the truths of suffering and accumulation, nonetheless attains confirmed purity there as well. The Venerable Pārśva speaks as follows: the various practitioners of yoga, pressed and afflicted by the truths of suffering and accumulation, thereupon see an excellence present in cessation and the path — exactly as a person, pressed by wind and rain, thereupon sees that a roofed dwelling is something to which he may take refuge — and it is for this reason that, although he has nothing to seek with respect to suffering and accumulation, he nonetheless attains confirmed purity there as well.

The various practitioners of yoga, with respect to the truth of cessation, in every case attain confirmed purity by virtue of two conditions — first, by virtue of being worthy of belief; second, by virtue of being worth seeking; it is not with respect to the truth of the path that they all, in every case, attain confirmed purity by virtue of two conditions — that is, one who follows through faith attains confirmed purity, with respect to the path belonging to one who follows through faith and to one who follows through the dharma alike, by virtue of both conditions; one who follows through the dharma attains confirmed purity, with respect to the path belonging to one who follows through the dharma, by virtue of both conditions in full, while, with respect to the path belonging to one who follows through faith, he attains confirmed purity by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking. One with faith transformed into resolve, with respect to the path belonging to faith transformed into resolve, and to one who has arrived at insight, alike attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions; one who has arrived at insight, with respect to the path belonging to one who has arrived at insight, attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions in full, while, with respect to the path belonging to faith transformed into resolve, he attains confirmed purity by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking. One liberated in time, with respect to the path belonging to one liberated in time, and to one liberated beyond time, alike attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions; one liberated beyond time, with respect to the path belonging to one liberated beyond time, attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions in full, while, with respect to the path belonging to one liberated in time, he attains confirmed purity by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking. One belonging to the disciple vehicle, with respect to the path belonging to all three vehicles, attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions;

one belonging to the solitary-realizer vehicle, with respect to the path belonging to his own vehicle above, attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions, while, with respect to the path belonging to the disciple vehicle, he attains confirmed purity by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking; every one belonging to the buddha vehicle, with respect to the path belonging to the buddha vehicle, attains confirmed purity by virtue of both conditions in full, while, with respect to the path belonging to the two lesser vehicles, he attains confirmed purity by virtue of a single condition alone — that is, being worthy of belief, but not being worth seeking.

One asks: if undefiled belief arises taking as its object the non-learner dharmas present within Śāriputra's own body, is this confirmed purity in the dharma, or confirmed purity in the sangha? Suppose either were so — what fault would there be?

If it is confirmed purity in the dharma, then, since this arises taking the disciple's own non-learner dharma as its object, how can it be named confirmed purity in the dharma? If it is confirmed purity in the sangha, then how can a single, solitary individual be named a multitude? The answer: it ought to be said that this is confirmed purity in the sangha. One asks: since he is solitary, how can he be named a multitude? The answer: this same Śāriputra, being the very most supreme within the disciple vehicle, is, although he is a single, solitary individual, nonetheless confirmed purity in the sangha, established in reliance upon the dharma, not upon an individual counted one by one — since undefiled belief arises taking the undefiled dharma belonging to the disciple vehicle as its object,

not because undefiled belief takes some merely conventionally existent sentient being as its object.

If, in dependence upon the not-yet-arrived concentration, one causes a not-previously-attained confirmed purity in the Buddha to manifest in the present, he cultivates two confirmed purities in the present, and four confirmed purities in the future; if he causes a previously attained confirmed purity in the Buddha to manifest in the present, he cultivates two confirmed purities in the present, and none in the future; and so on, up through, the same should be understood in dependence upon the fourth dhyāna. If, in dependence upon a formless attainment, one causes a not-previously-attained confirmed purity in the Buddha to manifest in the present, he cultivates a single confirmed purity in the present,

and four confirmed purities in the future; if he causes a previously attained confirmed purity in the Buddha to manifest in the present, he cultivates a single confirmed purity in the present, and none in the future — exactly as with confirmed purity in the Buddha, so too should it be understood for the remaining three confirmed purities, with the following distinction: within the formless attainments, there exists no confirmed purity in precepts.

One asks: how are the four confirmed purities established? Is it by their own substance, or by their own object? If by their own substance, there ought to be solely two —

namely, belief and precepts. If by their own object, there ought to be solely three — namely, confirmed purity in the Buddha, the dharma, and the sangha, since precepts possess no object. The answer: it ought to be said that the four confirmed purities are established both by their own substance and by their own object — that is, confirmed purity in precepts is established by its own substance, since precepts possess no object; the remaining three confirmed purities are established by their own object, since belief takes the three treasures as its object — this is how they are established by their own substance and by their own object. That they are established by their own substance, by the three treasures, and by recollection, should be understood in just the same way. This is named the very own-nature of confirmed purity, its own substance, own inherent nature, and own characteristic. Having already stated its own-nature, what it is so named for ought now to be stated. One asks: for what reason is it named confirmed purity? What, precisely, is the meaning of "confirmed purity"? The answer: "purity" refers to the fact that belief and precepts are free of every stain and impurity; it is by separately observing, separately deliberating upon, and separately awakening to and confirming the four noble truths that this same purity is attained, and it is for this reason that it is named confirmed purity. The Venerable Pārśva speaks as follows: this ought rather to be named unbreakable — "unbreakable" refers to the fact that it is not broken or destroyed by unbelief or by any evil precept; "pure" refers to genuine purity, since belief is the very characteristic of the mind's own purity, and precepts are the very characteristic of the great elements' own purity. The Venerable Vasumitra speaks as follows: this ought rather to be named unceasing purity — that is, once one has attained this, there exists no force, whether of an ascetic, a brāhmaṇa, or the like, capable of drawing it away or causing it to cease and be destroyed, exactly as the scripture states: this is named vision as its own root, belief associated with the direct realization of knowledge,

which the ascetics, brāhmaṇas, and the rest of the world are incapable of drawing away or causing to cease and be destroyed. The Great Virtuous One speaks as follows: were one incapable of observing, deliberating upon, and awakening to and confirming the truths with respect to the Buddha's own teaching, the belief and precepts he thereby attained would be easily swayed and overturned, exactly like a boat upon the water; were one capable of carefully observing, deliberating upon, and awakening to and confirming the truths with respect to the Buddha's own teaching, the belief and precepts he thereby attained would be incapable of being swayed and overturned, exactly like an imperial banner — and it is for this reason that this ought rightly to be named unshakeable purity. The Venerable Ghoṣa speaks as follows: these four kinds ought to be named vision-purity, since it is by seeing the four noble truths that one attains this same purity, or ought to be named wisdom-purity, since noble wisdom turns together with it.

One asks: for what reason does the Bhagavān speak first of confirmed purity in the Buddha, and, and so on, up through, speak last of confirmed purity in precepts? The answer: were one to say that this accords with a sequence of skillful and elegant phrasing — further, that this accords with a sequence convenient for the speaker, the listener, and the one who upholds it. Further, the Buddha, being himself capable of speaking, ought to come first; belief in the dharma, being what is spoken of, ought to come next; belief in the sangha, being what is spoken for the sake of, ought to come next; belief in precepts, being what the sangha abides upon, is spoken of last. Further, the Buddha is like a skilled physician, and ought to come first; belief in the dharma is like being free of illness, and ought to come next; belief in the sangha is like the one who tends the patient, and ought to come next; belief in precepts is like the wondrous medicine, and is spoken of last. Further, the Buddha is like the caravan's own leader, capable of showing the road, and ought to come first; belief in the dharma is like the isle of treasure, being the very destination one genuinely proceeds toward, and ought to come next; belief in the sangha is like the caravan's own fellow travelers, capable of serving as companions, and ought to come next; belief in precepts is like the provisions, capable of properly sustaining one, and is spoken of last. Further, the Buddha is like the ferryman, and ought to come first; belief in the dharma is like the far shore, and ought to come next; belief in the sangha is like a fellow passenger, and ought to come next; belief in precepts is like the raft or ferry, and is spoken of last. It is by virtue of such conditions as these that the four confirmed purities follow this same sequence. Exactly as the scripture states: the noble-cherished precepts, unbroken, unpierced, unmixed, unstained, received and used by the noble ones, not taken up by the ordinary being,

praised by the wise, capable of genuinely reaching completion, capable of genuinely being drawn forth. One asks: for what reason are they named the noble-cherished precepts? The answer: it is because they are the very ground upon which every virtue depends — that is, the noble ones cherish and delight in virtue, and it is for this reason that they cherish these same precepts, exactly as a person cherishes a treasure, and likewise cherishes the vessel that holds the treasure — the noble ones, in just the same way, cherish the treasure of the pure dharmas conducive to enlightenment, and thereby likewise cherish the very vessel of precepts that holds it. Further, the noble ones detest the various broken precepts and evil precepts; since these same precepts are capable of counteracting broken and evil precepts, the noble ones cherish them.

Further, the noble ones detest the various perilous, evil destinies; since these same precepts are capable of transcending the perilous, evil destinies, the noble ones cherish them. Further, the noble ones detest the circulation of birth-and-death; since these same precepts are capable of transcending the circulation of birth-and-death, the noble ones cherish them. Further, the noble ones cherish nirvāṇa; since these same precepts are capable of proceeding toward nirvāṇa, the noble ones cherish them, exactly as the scripture states: these precepts are capable of proceeding by successive stages toward nirvāṇa, and the noble ones cherish and delight in them. One asks: as for "unbroken, unpierced, unmixed, unstained" — what distinction is there among these four terms? There are those who say: there is no distinction at all — these four kinds of term, although differing in sound, are no different in meaning, exactly as the *Saṅgītiparyāya* states: with respect to these same precepts, one constantly practices and constantly turns, urging others to practice and to turn — this, too, is named unbroken, is also named unpierced, is also named unmixed, is also named unstained, and it is thereby known that these four terms, though differing in sound, are the same in meaning. There are those who say: these four, too, carry a distinction — that is, a distinction of name alone: this is named unbroken; this is named unpierced; this is named unmixed; this is named unstained. Further, not transgressing against the first category of offense is named unbroken; not transgressing against the second category of offense is named unpierced; not transgressing against the third and fourth categories of offense is named unmixed; not transgressing against the fifth category of offense is named unstained. Further, not transgressing is named unbroken; not depending upon craving is named unpierced; not depending upon aversion is named unmixed; not depending upon delusion is named unstained. Further, not transgressing is named unbroken; depending upon non-attachment is named unpierced; depending upon non-aversion is named unmixed; depending upon non-delusion is named unstained. Further, not transgressing is named unbroken; depending upon tranquility is named unpierced; depending upon insight is named unmixed; being capable of cutting off affliction is named unstained. Further, not transgressing is named unbroken; not being damaged by evil thought is named unpierced;

being firmly established in one's own very substance is named unmixed; being utterly pure is named unstained. Further explained here: as for "received and used by the noble ones": this refers to the fact that this is the very ground upon which every virtue depends. As for "not taken up by the ordinary being": this refers to the fact that no ordinary being clings to this pure precept as the genuine path. As for "praised by the wise": this refers to the fact that the Buddha and his disciples extol and praise it. As for "capable of genuinely reaching completion": this refers to the fact that it is perfected all together, at one and the same time. As for "capable of genuinely being drawn forth": this refers to the fact that it is capable of summoning forth a cherished fruit.

Exactly as the scripture states: there exists a great dragon-elephant, with faith as its own trunk, equanimity as its own tusks, wisdom as its own head, and mindfulness as its own neck,

gathering the wholesome dharmas upon its own two shoulders. One asks: for what reason does the Bhagavān speak of faith as the trunk? The answer: because it grasps the wholesome dharmas — exactly as an elephant, possessing a trunk, is capable of grasping both sentient and non-sentient objects, so too do the noble ones, possessing the trunk of faith, become capable of grasping every manner of subtle and wondrous wholesome dharma, and it is for this reason that the Bhagavān speaks of faith as the trunk.

Exactly as the scripture states: monks, you should know that, among the gods, there arise, from time to time, four kinds of sound. What are these four? That is, should there exist, in this world, a noble disciple who accomplishes and abides much in confirmed purity in the Buddha, then, at that very time, whichever god has already accomplished confirmed purity in the Buddha rejoices and leaps with joy, proclaiming in a loud voice: I, formerly, having accomplished confirmed purity in the Buddha, came to be born in this place — now this same noble disciple, too, having accomplished and abiding much in confirmed purity in the Buddha, will likewise come to be born within my own common class of existence, to become my own companion — how truly excellent this is! Accomplishing and abiding much in each of the remaining three confirmed purities is likewise stated fully in just the same way. One asks: this same noble disciple, and those various gods, all alike fully accomplish the four confirmed purities — for what reason, then, does it speak of accomplishing and abiding much in confirmed purity in the Buddha, and so on, up through, speak of accomplishing and abiding much in confirmed purity in precepts? The answer: this is spoken with reference to the very time of cultivating preparatory effort and entering the dharma — that is, there is the practitioner who seeks confirmed purity in the Buddha, diligently cultivating preparatory effort, and thereby enters the noble path; and so on, up through, there is the practitioner who seeks confirmed purity in precepts, diligently cultivating preparatory effort, and thereby enters the noble path, and it is for this reason that it is spoken of in this way. Further, this is spoken with reference to whichever mental application one delights in most — that is, there is the practitioner who, for the most part, delights in the mental application taking the Buddha as its object; and so on, up through, there is the practitioner who, for the most part, delights in the mental application taking precepts as its object, and it is for this reason that it is spoken of in this way.

Exactly as the scripture states: the Buddha said to a monk: if there exists one who has faith in and delights in what you say, you ought, out of compassion, through skillful means, teach him the four confirmed purities, urging him to abide firmly in them, and thereby to tame and subdue himself. For what reason is this so? The four great elements can be made to change and become other than they are, yet whoever has accomplished these same four confirmed purities will, in the end, never change or become other. One asks: for what reason did the Bhagavān speak this same scripture? The answer: it is to display the proper deportment of one who teaches the dharma as a dharma-master — that is, there are those who say: not knowing whether the recipient is a fitting vessel or not, one teaches him carelessly and lightly, causing this same recipient to give rise either to arrogance, or to timidity and fear, gaining nothing at all — and it is for this reason that the Bhagavān states: if there exists one who has faith in and delights in what you say, you ought, out of compassion, through skillful means, teach him — do not do so carelessly and lightly. Further, this is to display one who genuinely repays kindness — for it is a genuine repayment of kindness, exactly as another scripture states: monks, you should know

that, were there a filial son who carried his own father upon one shoulder and his own mother upon the other, journeying everywhere for the span of a hundred years, this would still not be a genuine repayment of his own father's and mother's kindness. If there exists a filial son who is capable of urging his own father and mother, with respect to the Buddha, the dharma, and the sangha, and the dharmas of cause and effect, and the like, to believe if they have not yet believed, and to increase their own faith if they have already believed; who is capable of urging them, if they possess no pure precept, to receive and uphold the precepts; who is capable of urging them, if they are covetous and miserly, to practice generosity; who is capable of urging them, if they possess no supreme wisdom, to cultivate supreme wisdom,

causing them to be well established and to tame and subdue themselves — this alone is named a genuine repayment of one's own father's and mother's kindness, and it is for this reason that, within this same scripture, one is taught to teach the dharma in this way. One asks: within the Buddha's own teaching, there exist measureless kinds of virtue, the treasure of the dharma — every one of these ought to be taught to another through skillful means — for what reason, here, is it solely the four confirmed purities that one is caused to teach? The answer: it should be understood that, here, confirmed purity is treated as the very head, causing one to teach, in general, every treasure of virtue. The Venerable Pārśva speaks as follows:

here, the Bhagavān, using the term "confirmed purity," speaks of the various noble paths — that is, the various noble paths are either associated dharmas, or co-existent dharmas; if one speaks of belief, this should be understood to speak, in general, of the associated noble path; if one speaks of precepts, this should be understood to speak, in general, of the co-existent noble path. Further, here, what is briefly displayed is the very gateway of entry into the dharma — that is, within the Buddha's own teaching, the treasure of virtue is either of form, or is not of form; if one speaks of precepts, this should be understood to speak, in general, of the treasure that is of form; if one speaks of belief, this should be understood to speak, in general, of the treasure that is not of form. Exactly as form and non-form, so too should this be understood of associated and dissociated, possessing a support and lacking a support, possessing an object and lacking an object, possessing an aspect and lacking an aspect, possessing alertness and lacking alertness,

being a faculty and not being a faculty, and the rest. Further, these four confirmed purities possess the characteristic of being unbreakable and the characteristic of purity, and it is for this reason that they alone are spoken of.

Further, it is in reliance upon the four confirmed purities that the outflows they draw forth are established, and the supreme four fruits of the ascetic life are thereby set forth, and it is for this reason that they alone are spoken of. Further, these four confirmed purities are capable of warding off both the fear of an evil destiny and the fear of poverty, since precepts are capable of warding off the fear of an evil destiny, and belief is capable of warding off the fear of poverty — and, although undefiled belief and precepts do not themselves summon forth a ripened fruit, undefiled belief and precepts necessarily draw forth and give rise to contaminated belief and precepts in turn, and it is by virtue of this that they are capable of warding off these two kinds of fear. Further, it is in order to provide an expedient means of guiding those outside-path sentient beings capable of being transformed into the Buddha's own teaching that

this is spoken of — that is, there are monks who have certain kinsmen who were formerly outside-path followers, who, out of familial affection, come to console and inquire after them; if, at that time, these same monks, without heeding their kinsmen's own feelings, praise the Buddha's own teaching and disparage the outside path, this would cause them to grow resentful, moving still further away from the Buddha's own teaching, and it is for this reason that the Bhagavān states: you monks,

being without the strength, the fearlessness, the great compassion, and the other virtues of a buddha, and not knowing the faculties, the desires, the nature, and the conduct of sentient beings, ought not to teach the dharma to another carelessly and lightly — if there exists one who has faith in and delights in what you say, you ought, out of compassion, through skillful means, teach him the four confirmed purities, urging him to abide firmly in them, and thereby to tame and subdue himself.

For what reason is this so? The four great elements can be made to change and become other than they are, yet whoever has accomplished these same four confirmed purities will, in the end, never change or become other. One asks: the very own-nature of every dharma whatsoever is without any change or alteration — for what reason, then, does it speak solely of the four great elements? The answer: it is because it wishes to display one set of four dharmas by means of another set of four dharmas. Further, the various practitioners of yoga, having first observed that the great elements possess no characteristic of change or alteration, afterward observe that the very own-nature of the various dharmas, too, is without change or alteration, and their own mind thereby gives rise to joy, and it is for this reason that this is singled out and spoken of. Further, it is because the four great elements are capable of sustaining every sentient and non-sentient dharma that this is singled out and spoken of. Further, it is because the four great elements are capable of sustaining the whole of the circulation of birth-and-death that this is singled out and spoken of. Further, it is because the four great elements are capable of sustaining the five aggregates, causing them not to be severed and cut off, that this is singled out and spoken of. Further, the various outside paths state that the great elements number five, and that their own nature abides permanently — it is in order to counter this same claim that the Buddha states that they number solely four, and are impermanent — even were one to grant, hypothetically, that the great elements, which you yourself cling to as permanent, could be made to change, one who has attained confirmed purity will, in the end, never change.

Exactly as the scripture states: King Ajātaśatru was capable of accomplishing rootless faith. One asks: among the conditioned dharmas, there is none without some root whatsoever — for what reason, then, is his own faith spoken of as rootless? The answer: this same faith lacks the very root of the path of seeing, exactly as the scripture states: this is named vision as its own root, belief associated with the direct realization of knowledge — that is, King Ajātaśatru's own accomplished faith did not rely upon the path of seeing, and it is for this reason that it is named rootless, and yet this same faith of his was firm and unyielding, difficult to destroy, exactly as though it relied upon the path of seeing. Further, King Ajātaśatru's own accomplished faith could not be altered or changed, exactly like undefiled faith, and yet it possessed no root at all, since every undefiled faith relies upon an undefiled faculty, taking undefiled knowledge and undefiled wholesome roots as its very foundation. Further, this same faith is without any homogeneous cause, and it is for this reason that it is named rootless — that is, from beginningless time, he had never before attained so firm and forceful a faith as this — exactly as there exists a tree that grows dependent upon another's own stem, itself possessing no root, and is thereby named a rootless tree. Further, King Ajātaśatru's own accomplished faith, being firm by its own very nature, did not arise through drawing near to the Buddha and his disciples, and it is for this reason that it is named rootless — it was by virtue of the force of this same faith that, whether riding upon an elephant or a horse, or standing atop a high tower, the moment he caught sight of the Bhagavān from afar, he would at once throw himself down, bowing his head at the Bhagavān's own two feet, and, by the force of this same firm faith, or by the Buddha's own majestic, spiritual power, he came to no harm at all. Further, King Ajātaśatru's own accomplished faith is named rootless because he had not yet escaped the evil destinies, since, at the very end of his own life, he briefly fell into hell, and, having undergone a small suffering there, was afterward born in heaven.