Cremated Yet Unharmed: The Elder Revived

As the sūtra states: one abiding in the attainment of cessation cannot be burned by fire, swept away by water, harmed by poison, injured by a blade, or killed by another. One might ask: why does one abiding in this attainment enjoy such extraordinary benefits? The Venerable Vasumitra explains: because this attainment is itself a dharma of non-harm, one abiding within it can neither harm nor be harmed. Another position holds that this attainment carries great and awesome power, protected by mighty and awesome spirits, and so cannot be harmed. Another position holds that one who has obtained dhyāna possesses the very domain of dhyāna, and one who possesses supernormal power possesses the very domain of supernormal power, both alike beyond ordinary comprehension, and so cannot be harmed. Another position holds that this attainment, being mindless rather than genuinely without mind altogether, still admits of birth and death, and so cannot be harmed. The sūtra concerning the elder Revived is the very occasion that gave rise to this present discussion. Long ago, there was a Buddha named Krakucchanda, who had a foremost pair of disciples, one named Vidūra and the other named Revived. The Venerable Revived had once taught extensively within a certain city, becoming widely known and respected there; afterward, at a spot frequented by many people just outside that city, he entered the attainment of cessation. At that time, herders, woodcutters, and other travelers, seeing him there, all exclaimed: "how extraordinary, that this venerable one should sit upright and pass into final extinction!" — and they resolved to cremate him in reverence, gathering every manner of dried cattle dung and firewood, piling it around his body, setting it ablaze, and then departing. The following morning, the venerable one rose from his attainment, shook out his robes, and, in the early part of the day, took up his begging bowl and walked slowly into the city to beg for alms. Those who had cremated him, seeing this, cried out in alarm: "we burned his body just yesterday, and yet here he is again, come begging for food!" And the people of the city all proclaimed together: "this monk has died, and yet has come back to life!" — and it was for this reason that he came to be called the Venerable Revived. It should be understood that his body was not burned through the power of the attainment of cessation itself, while his robes were not burned through the power of his own supernormal ability. Another position holds that both his body and his robes alike were left unburned

entirely through the power of the attainment of cessation. It is for this reason that this particular sūtra serves as the very occasion giving rise to the present discussion.

A traditional teaching-simile states: whoever receives an offering from one who has just emerged from the attainment of cessation will invariably create karma whose fruit ripens within this very life. One might ask: why should offering to one just emerged from this attainment invariably yield its fruit within this very life? Answer: this need not necessarily be reconciled at all, for the simple reason that this account does not derive from the sūtras or the Vinaya proper, but is merely a traditional teaching-simile from the Abhidharma school, and such teaching-similes may or may not hold true in every case. If one nonetheless insists on reconciling it, one should understand that such an offering may yield its fruit either within this very life or as a great fruit later on, the simile speaking only in terms of what accords with worldly expectation and so mentioning only the immediate fruit. One might ask: why, then, does an offering to one emerged from this attainment sometimes yield its fruit within this very life and sometimes yield a great fruit instead? Answer: whoever offers to one emerged from this attainment is, in effect, offering to one emerged from every dhyāna, liberation, concentration, and attainment at once — for whoever enters and emerges from the attainment of cessation must first give rise to a wholesome desire-realm mind, then enter the first dhyāna, and so on in turn up through the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, entering the attainment of cessation immediately from there; and upon emerging from that attainment, one gives rise once more to the mind of the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, or of the sphere of nothing-at-all, and so on in turn back down to the first dhyāna once more, and finally to a wholesome desire-realm mind again — and it is through this thorough saturation of one's own continuity with such manifold merit that the giver may come to receive either an immediate or a great fruit. Another position holds that one emerged from this attainment carries himself with such calm and settled deportment in coming and going, in speech, in dress, and in eating and drinking, that pious elders and brahmins, upon seeing him, are filled with a sense of the truly extraordinary, and it is through the sincerity and purity of the mind with which they then offer him provisions that they come to receive either an immediate or a great fruit. Another position holds that one who has obtained this attainment enjoys a reputation surpassing every other kind of attainment, and pious elders and brahmins, hearing of this, are filled with a sense of the truly remarkable, and it is through the sincerity and purity of the mind with which they then offer him provisions that they come to receive either an immediate or a great fruit. Another position holds that one abiding in this attainment has entirely severed every form of nourishment; whoever offers to one emerging from it is, in effect, offering to one who has no nourishment at all — for one abiding in an attainment that possesses mind and is merely contaminated, though he has cut off physical morsel-food, still retains the contaminated forms of contact-food, volition-food, and consciousness-food; one abiding in an uncontaminated attainment, though he has cut off the genuine fourfold nourishment altogether, still retains their resembling counterparts in contact, volition, and consciousness; but one abiding in the attainment of cessation has none of these whatsoever — and it is for this reason that offering to one emerging from this attainment is, in effect, offering food to one who has no food at all, and it is through this very cause that one comes to receive either an immediate or a great fruit. Another position holds that whoever offers to one emerging from this attainment is, in effect, offering food to one who has already reached nirvāṇa and returned from it, since this attainment so closely resembles nirvāṇa itself — for exactly as one who has entered the realm of nirvāṇa without remainder extinguishes every mind and mental factor that takes any object whatsoever, neither arising nor ceasing again, so too one abiding in the attainment of cessation likewise extinguishes every mind and mental factor that takes any object whatsoever, neither arising nor ceasing — and it is on account of this very resemblance to nirvāṇa that offering to one emerging from this attainment is, in effect, offering food to one who has reached nirvāṇa and returned, and it is through this cause that one comes to receive either an immediate or a great fruit. Furthermore, it is not only offering to one emerged from this attainment that can yield an immediate fruit — offering to any of five kinds of persons can likewise yield such a fruit: first, one emerged from the attainment of cessation; second, one emerged from the concentration of loving-kindness;

third, one emerged from the concentration free of contention; fourth, one emerged from the path of seeing; and fifth, one who has just newly obtained the knowledge of exhaustion. Furthermore, offering to any of a further five kinds of persons can yield a great fruit: one's own father, one's own mother, one who is ill, a teacher of the Dharma, and a Bodhisattva close to Buddhahood.

One might ask: does this attainment of cessation serve to draw forth a new class of rebirth, or merely to bring one's present class of rebirth to full completion? Answer: it merely brings one's present class of rebirth to full completion; it cannot itself draw forth a new class of rebirth, since only karma can draw forth a class of rebirth, and this attainment is not itself karma. One might ask: does this attainment ripen its fruit within this very life, in the immediately following life, or only in some later life still further beyond, or does it ripen indeterminately? Answer: it may ripen its fruit in the immediately following life, or in some later life still further beyond, or indeterminately, but never within this very life, since one who has already reached the peak of existence never gives rise to this attainment there. One might ask: in precisely what place, and through precisely what kind of ripening-fruit, is this fruit actually received? Answer: it is received within the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception itself, as the ripening-fruit of the four aggregates there. One might ask: does whoever possesses this attainment of cessation also possess its own ripening-fruit? Answer: this calls for a tetralemma. There is one who possesses the attainment of cessation yet not its ripening-fruit — namely, one born in the desire or form realm who has already obtained the attainment and has not regressed from it, whose ripening-fruit of cessation has not yet become present at death, and who is then reborn into the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. There is one who possesses this attainment's ripening-fruit yet not the attainment itself — namely, one who, having already obtained this attainment, has regressed from it, and, at death, is reborn into the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception with the attainment's own ripening-fruit becoming present. There is one who possesses both the attainment and its ripening-fruit together — namely, one who, having already obtained this attainment without regressing from it, is, at death, reborn into the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception with the attainment's own ripening-fruit becoming present. And there is one who possesses neither — namely, one born in the desire or form realm who has never obtained this attainment, or who obtained it but has since regressed, and who is reborn into the sphere of infinite space, of infinite consciousness, or of nothing-at-all; or one who has never obtained this attainment and is reborn into the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; or one who obtained it but has since regressed and is, at death, reborn into that same sphere with the attainment's own ripening-fruit not becoming present. One might ask: does whoever regresses from this attainment of cessation also regress from the fruit of arhatship? Answer: this too calls for a tetralemma. There is one who regresses from the attainment of cessation yet not from the fruit of arhatship — namely, a trainee who regresses from this attainment, or one beyond training who regresses from it without giving rise to any fetter. There is one who regresses from the fruit of arhatship yet not from this attainment — namely, an arhat liberated through wisdom who regresses, or one who, while still a trainee, gave rise to this attainment and, having obtained the fruit of arhatship, then regresses through the arising of a higher-stage fetter. There is one who regresses from both together — namely, one who, while still a trainee, gave rise to this attainment and, having obtained the fruit of arhatship, then regresses through the arising of a lower-stage fetter, or one beyond training who, having given rise to this attainment, regresses through the arising of a fetter belonging to any of the three realms. And there is one who regresses from neither — namely, every remaining case beyond those already described. There are six kinds of arhat — the regressive type, the aspiring type, the guarding type, the abiding type, the advancing type, and the immovable type. One might ask: are all of the regressive type also liberated in both respects? Answer: this calls for a tetralemma. There is one of the regressive type who is not liberated in both respects — namely, a regressive-type arhat who has not obtained this attainment. There is one liberated in both respects who is not of the regressive type — namely, one of the aspiring type up through the immovable type who has already obtained this attainment. There is one both of the regressive type and liberated in both respects — namely, a regressive-type arhat who has already obtained this attainment. And there is one neither of the regressive type nor liberated in both respects — namely, one of the aspiring type up through the immovable type who has not obtained this attainment. Exactly as with the regressive-type arhat set against being liberated in both respects, so too, mutatis mutandis, with each of the remaining five kinds of arhat set against being liberated in both respects — yielding six such tetralemmas altogether. Exactly as the path of the one beyond training comprises these six kinds of arhat, so too the path of the trainee comprises six corresponding dispositions — the regressive-type disposition, up through the immovable-type disposition. One might ask: are all trainees of the regressive-type disposition also bodily witnesses? Answer: this too calls for a tetralemma. There is a trainee of the regressive-type disposition who is not a bodily witness — namely, one of the regressive-type disposition who has not obtained this attainment. There is a bodily witness who is not of the regressive-type disposition — namely, one of the aspiring-type disposition up through the immovable-type disposition who has already obtained this attainment. There is one both of the regressive-type disposition and a bodily witness — namely, one of the regressive-type disposition who has already obtained this attainment. And there is one who is neither of the regressive-type disposition nor a bodily witness — namely, one of the aspiring-type disposition up through the immovable-type disposition who has not obtained this attainment. Exactly as with the regressive-type disposition set against being a bodily witness, so too, mutatis mutandis, with each of the remaining five dispositions set against being a bodily witness — yielding six further tetralemmas.

One might ask: whatever dharma serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind — is that dharma itself "mind's own immediately following state"? Answer: this calls for a tetralemma. There is a dharma that serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind, yet is not itself mind's own immediately following state — namely, apart from the very first instant of the attainment of cessation, every other instant of that attainment occurring while mind is otherwise present, together with the mind and mental factors of emerging from the attainment. There is a dharma that is mind's own immediately following state, yet does not serve as the immediately preceding condition for mind — namely, the very first instant of the attainment of cessation, together with every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present, and their own characteristics of arising, aging, abiding, and impermanence. There is a dharma that both serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind and is itself mind's own immediately following state — namely, the very first instant of the attainment of cessation, together with the mind and mental factors of every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present. And there is a dharma that is neither — namely, apart from the very first instant of the attainment of cessation and every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present, every remaining instant of the attainment together with the mind of emergence, along with their own characteristics of arising, aging, abiding, and impermanence. One might ask: whatever dharma serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind — is that dharma itself "the attainment of cessation's own immediately following state"? Answer: this too calls for a tetralemma. There is a dharma that serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind, yet is not the attainment of cessation's own immediately following state — namely, the very first instant of the attainment of cessation, together with the mind and mental factors of every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present. There is a dharma that is the attainment of cessation's own immediately following state, yet does not serve as the immediately preceding condition for mind — namely, apart from the very first instant of the attainment and every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present, every remaining instant of the attainment together with the mind of emergence, along with their own characteristics of arising, aging, abiding, and impermanence. There is a dharma that both serves as the immediately preceding condition for mind and is the attainment of cessation's own immediately following state — namely, apart from the very first instant of the attainment and every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present, every other instant of the attainment together with the mind and mental factors of emergence. And there is a dharma that is neither — namely, the very first instant of the attainment together with every other instant occurring while mind is otherwise present, along with their own characteristics of arising, aging, abiding, and impermanence. How many faculties are extinguished upon rebirth into the no-perception heaven? Answer: eight — the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, life, mind, and equanimity faculties. One might ask: this passage describes rebirth arising from what prior state, into the no-perception heaven?

Answer: it describes rebirth arising specifically from the no-perception intermediate state into the no-perception rebirth-existence itself. One might ask: at that very moment, faith and its four companion faculties likewise become present and then cease — why does the passage fail to mention them? Answer: this passage ought properly to have stated: eight, or thirteen — eight if the very last mind of the intermediate state is neutral, thirteen if it is wholesome — and that it was not so phrased should be understood as a further point still to be drawn out. Another position holds that this passage speaks only with reference to the moment of cessation itself —

faith and its four companions are present only at the moment of cessation, never at the moment of rebirth itself, and it is for this reason that they go unmentioned. One might ask: to which realm are the mind and mental factors that cease here bound? Answer: to the form realm. "How many faculties become present?" Answer: eight, exactly as already described. "To which realm are the mind and mental factors that become present here bound?" Answer: to the form realm, since death and rebirth invariably give rise to a mind belonging to one's own present ground. "How many faculties are extinguished upon dying out of the no-perception heaven?" Answer: eight, exactly as already described. "To which realm are the mind and mental factors that cease here bound?" Answer: to the form realm. "How many faculties become present?" Answer: eight, nine, or ten — eight if of no sexual form, namely the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, life, mind, and equanimity faculties; nine if of a single sexual form, adding whichever one of the male or female faculty applies; and ten if of dual sexual form, adding both the male and female faculties together. "To which realm are the mind and mental factors that become present here bound?" Answer: to the desire realm. From this it is thereby known that one dying out of the no-perception heaven is invariably reborn into the desire realm. One might ask: is it fixed and certain into precisely what place one is then reborn? One position holds that one is reborn fixedly into the hells; another position holds that one is reborn fixedly into some evil destiny. As the assessors conclude, it is not fixed and certain into precisely what place one is reborn — one may be reborn into any evil destiny, or among the gods, or among human beings.

One might ask: why is it that dying out of the no-perception heaven fixedly means rebirth into the desire realm? Answer: it is simply through the sheer power of the ripening-cause itself operating in this way — whatever power that ripening-cause happens to possess, it can only ever give rise to precisely this kind of ripening-fruit. Other masters hold instead that, once the karma determining the lifespan of the no-perception heaven has been exhausted, no karma determining a lifespan in any other place has yet been accumulated and increased — that is to say, the karma determining the earlier lifespan of the no-perception heaven had already been accumulated and increased, but no karma determining a lifespan anywhere else had been accumulated and increased beforehand, and it is for this reason that, dying out of that heaven, one is fixedly reborn into the desire realm. One might ask: such a being had also, at some point, given rise to the lower three dhyānas — why, then, does the karma for those grounds' own lifespans not draw forth their fruit instead? Answer: although such a being had indeed given rise to the lower three dhyānas at some point, he had never firmly grasped onto them, and so their lifespan is not drawn forth; only the fourth dhyāna was ever firmly grasped and clung to, and it is for this reason that its lifespan alone is drawn forth. Another position holds that, although such a being had indeed given rise to the lower three dhyānas at some point, these were never what he was actually seeking — he sought only the fourth dhyāna itself. Another position holds that, although such a being had indeed given rise to the lower three dhyānas at some point, these were merely the road he happened to travel along, never his actual destination — the fourth dhyāna alone was his true destination, not merely a road traveled, and it is for this reason that its lifespan alone is drawn forth. Another position holds that whoever creates the karma yielding rebirth into the no-perception heaven in the immediately following life will, as a natural matter of course, also create the karma yielding rebirth into the desire realm in the life after that — exactly as whoever creates the karma yielding rebirth into Uttarakuru in the immediately following life will, as a natural matter of course, also create the karma yielding rebirth among the gods of the desire realm in the life after that. Another position holds that the desire realm is the very place to which every sentient being who regresses ultimately returns — for whatever beings, through the power of karma or the power of cultivation, travel up into the form or formless realm, once that karma is exhausted, inevitably fall back down into the desire realm once more, exactly as the great earth is the very place to which every bird that has fallen ultimately returns — for whatever birds, through the power of their own wings, soar up into the open sky, once that wing-power is exhausted, inevitably fall back down onto the earth once more. Another position holds that beings of the no-perception heaven pass five hundred eons dwelling in that state of no-perception, as though in a deep sleep, and, upon awakening, are no longer able to draw forth any further ripening-fruit,

and so fall down into the desire realm — exactly as a person sleeping perched at the very end of a tree branch, leaning against it, may, after a long while, suddenly awaken with the hand having forgotten its own grip, and thereupon fall straight to the ground; the same holds true here as well. Another position holds that one who seeks the state of no-perception mistakenly grasps the attainment of no-perception as the true path and its own ripening-fruit as nirvāṇa itself, all the way up until actually being reborn into that heaven — and this same mistaken grasping then continues to follow him even as he emerges from the no-perception state and approaches the very moment of death, at which point, seeing the signs of his own impending rebirth appear before him, he reflects: "there can surely be no such thing as nirvāṇa — for if there truly were, I would already have realized it myself; why, then, do these signs of future rebirth now appear before me?" — and it is through this very act of slandering both nirvāṇa and the noble path itself that, dying from that place, he is reborn into some evil destiny. The Venerable Ghoṣa likewise holds this same position — that it is precisely because such a being slanders nirvāṇa and the noble ones that he is fixedly reborn into an evil destiny upon dying from that place.

One might ask: what is the difference between the "attainment of no-perception" and the "no-perception event"? Answer: their very names already differ, one being called the attainment of no-perception and the other the no-perception event.

Furthermore, the attainment of no-perception is a cause, while the no-perception event is its fruit; furthermore, the attainment of no-perception is the very dharma that ripens, while the no-perception event is what that ripening actually yields; furthermore, the attainment of no-perception is wholesome, while the no-perception event is neutral; furthermore, the attainment of no-perception is an attainment, while the no-perception event is a rebirth; furthermore, the attainment of no-perception arises through preparatory effort, exertion, and deliberate attention, while the no-perception event does not arise through any such preparatory effort, exertion, or deliberate attention at all;

furthermore, the attainment of no-perception may pervade both this world and that other world, obtained here and becoming present there, or obtained there and becoming present here, whereas the no-perception event exists only in that other world, obtained there and becoming present only there;

furthermore, the attainment of no-perception is obtained through preparatory effort, while the no-perception event is obtained through birth — these, then, are the differences between the attainment of no-perception and the no-perception event. One might ask: to which category does the no-perception heaven itself belong? The foreign masters hold that, within the fourth dhyāna's own nine distinct locations, the no-perception heaven constitutes one of them, a separate location in its own right. The Vaibhāṣika masters of Kashmir hold instead that it is simply included within the Bṛhatphala heaven, given its own separate name solely on account of its exceptional loftiness and stillness — exactly as a hermitage on the edge of a village, though technically still within the village boundary, is given its own separate name on account of its own stillness. One might ask: what is the bodily stature of the beings there? Answer: five hundred yojanas. One might ask: what is their lifespan? Answer: five hundred eons. One might ask: in what deportment do they abide there? One position holds that they sit cross-legged, exactly as a monk of the Śākya clan; another position holds that they sit reclined backward, exactly as a brahmin. As the assessors conclude, whatever deportment one held upon first entering this attainment is precisely the deportment in which one then abides for the full five hundred eons there.

"When a being of the no-perception heaven is reborn, should it be said that it possesses perception at that moment, or that it lacks perception, and so on, as stated at length?" One might ask: why raise this discussion at all?

Answer: to block a rival school's own position and to make clear this treatise's own view. Some hold that a being of the no-perception heaven possesses neither perception nor mind at either birth or death. To block this position and to make clear that such a being does indeed possess perception and mind at both birth and death, since there is indeed a genuine birth and a genuine death involved, the present discussion is raised. Still others hold that

such a being possesses mind at birth but lacks it at death. To block this position and to make clear that such a being possesses perception and mind at death as well, since a genuine death is indeed involved, the present discussion is raised. Still others hold that such a being possesses mind at both birth and death alike, yet only for a single thought-moment each time, without any further continuity. To block this position and to make clear that at birth, once born, mind continues on for some considerable time before no-perception finally sets in, and that, upon emerging from no-perception, mind likewise continues on for some considerable time before death finally occurs, the discussion states things as it does. One might ask: is there any place where mind is present for only two single thought-moments — namely, at the very moment of rebirth-linking and at the very moment of death? Answer: it should be said that there is no such place. The Venerable Ghoṣa says that there is indeed such a place — namely, the no-perception heaven itself. One might ask: is there any place where the mind of rebirth-linking serves as the immediately preceding condition for the mind of death to arise? Answer: it should be said that there is no such place. The Venerable Ghoṣa says that there is indeed such a place — namely, the no-perception heaven itself. One might ask: is there any place where the mind of rebirth-linking serves as all four conditions for the mind of death to arise? Answer: it should be said that there is no such place. The Venerable Ghoṣa says that there is indeed such a place — namely, the no-perception heaven itself. It is precisely in order to block positions such as these that the present discussion is raised. "When a being of the no-perception heaven is reborn, should it be said that it possesses perception at that moment, or that it lacks perception?" Answer: it should be said that it possesses perception. This blocks the view of those who hold that a being of the no-perception heaven possesses no mind at all at the moment of rebirth. As the World-Honored One himself declared, it is precisely through the arising of perception that such beings eventually die and depart from that place. "At the very moment of dying and departing from that place, should it be said that this perception ceases, or that it does not cease?" Answer: it should be said that it ceases. This blocks the view of those who hold that a being of the no-perception heaven possesses no mind at all at the moment of death. "In what location should it be said that this perception ceases?" Answer: it should be said that it ceases in that very same location. This blocks the view of those who hold that a being of the no-perception heaven possesses mind for only a single thought-moment each at birth and at death alone. One might ask: for such a being, are there more instants of mind before entering no-perception, or more instants of mind afterward, upon emerging from it? One position holds that there are more instants of mind before, and fewer afterward, since, before entering the state of no-perception,

the sheer force of the ripening-continuity is still exceptionally vigorous, requiring a considerable span of mind-moments before finally entering no-perception; but once emerged from no-perception, the force of that ripening-continuity has already grown weak and depleted, and so only a brief span of mind-moments follows before death occurs. Another position holds that there are more instants of mind afterward, and fewer before, since, before entering the state of no-perception, one's own eager aspiration toward no-perception is itself especially keen, and so only a brief span of mind-moments precedes entry into it; but once emerged from no-perception, with no further aspiration left to pursue, a considerable span of mind-moments follows before death finally occurs. As the assessors conclude, this matter is not fixed either way — sometimes more precede and fewer follow, and sometimes fewer precede and more follow, the difference depending entirely on each individual being's own particular inclination.

One might ask: should that perception be called wholesome, or neutral? Answer: it may be either wholesome or neutral. "By how many underlying tendencies does it increase?" Answer: by however many underlying tendencies take the form realm's own contaminated dharmas as their object. "By how many fetters is it bound?" Answer: by six. That "perception" refers to the perception that emerges from the state of no-perception. "May be either wholesome or neutral" means: wholesome when it is a naturally-born wholesome perception, and neutral when it is either obscured-neutral or unobscured-neutral. "Takes the form realm's own contaminated dharmas as its object" means —

specifically, the underlying tendencies that take the fourth dhyāna's own contaminated dharmas as their object. One might ask: why do the underlying tendencies that take the uncontaminated as their object fail to increase upon this perception? Answer: such a being holds the no-perception state itself to be nirvāṇa, and the attainment of no-perception to be the true path, from the very moment of rebirth there all the way to the moment of death — and, throughout, this very same mistaken grasping simply continues to revolve, never once actually slandering true cessation or the true path as non-existent; and it is for this reason that the underlying tendencies taking the uncontaminated as their object never arise at that time. "Bound by six fetters" means: excluding hatred and envy and stinginess, it remains bound by the remaining fetters. One might ask: is the perception that emerges from the state of no-perception cut off by all five categories, or only by cultivation alone? And if the latter, what fault would follow?

If it is cut off by all five categories, how, then, is the account already given through the ten gateways to be reconciled — namely, that a past dharma serves as the immediately preceding condition giving rise to two kinds of mind? And if it is cut off by cultivation alone, how, then, is the statement to be reconciled that this same perception increases through underlying tendencies taking the form realm's own contaminated dharmas as object? Some hold that it is indeed cut off by all five categories. One might ask: how, then, is the account given through the ten gateways to be reconciled? Answer: that passage ought properly to have stated that a past dharma serves as the immediately preceding condition giving rise to six kinds of mind — five belonging to the form realm and one to the formless realm — and as for why it was not so phrased, one should understand that this is because that passage speaks only with reference to the mind of emergence from the two mindless attainments, never with reference to the state of no-perception itself, since the two mindless attainments arise through preparatory effort, exertion, and deliberate attention, while the state of no-perception does not arise in this way at all. Other masters hold instead that it is cut off by cultivation alone. One might ask: how, then, is this present statement to be reconciled? Answer: this statement ought properly to have said that this perception increases through underlying tendencies pervading the form realm's own contaminated dharmas, together with those cut off by cultivation — and as for why it was not so phrased, one should understand that this passage speaks of the combination taken as a whole, since the mind at the very moment of death may itself belong to any of the five categories, and this is mentioned here together with it, this passage speaking not merely of the perception emerging from no-perception alone, since the mind at death is itself already included among its own retinue. As the assessors conclude, the earlier account should be preferred as correct, since there is no other principle capable of blocking every other kind of mind otherwise. As the World-Honored One himself declared: every sentient being is sustained by nourishment — by what nourishment, then, is a being of the no-perception heaven sustained? Answer: by contact, volition, and consciousness. One might ask: why raise this discussion at all? Answer: to resolve a doubt for those who remain uncertain. Beings of the no-perception heaven certainly lack physical morsel-food, and their contact-, volition-, and consciousness-food have likewise entirely ceased without remainder — and one might thus doubt that such beings are sustained without any nourishment whatsoever, which would seem to contradict the World-Honored One's own statement that every sentient being is sustained by nourishment. To dispel this doubt, and to make clear that the no-perception state, though lacking physical morsel-food, does indeed possess the remaining three kinds of nourishment, consistent with what the sūtra itself states, the present discussion is raised. One might ask: at that very stage, the three kinds of nourishment have likewise ceased — how, then, can it still be said that such beings possess nourishment at all? Answer: nourishment is of two kinds — that which draws forth beforehand, and that which presently sustains. Although that stage lacks any presently sustaining nourishment, it does possess the nourishment that drew it forth beforehand, and it is on this basis that it is said to possess nourishment. Another position holds that there are three kinds of nourishment operating there — karmic nourishment, rebirth-nourishment, and immediately-following-condition nourishment. Karmic nourishment refers to the karma previously created that draws forth rebirth into that very ground; rebirth-nourishment refers to the mind of rebirth-linking together with its co-existent dharmas,

drawing forth that entire single lifespan's continuity so that it continues on without interruption; and immediately-following-condition nourishment refers to the contact, volition, and consciousness present upon entering the no-perception state, which serve as the immediately preceding condition capable of drawing forth the very mind and mental factors of emergence from no-perception, ensuring that they will surely arise and are never permanently cut off. It is on this basis that it is said that every sentient being is sustained by nourishment. "How many faculties does the eye-faculty include, and so on, up through how many faculties does the faculty of complete knowledge include?" One might ask: why raise this discussion at all? Answer: to block the view of those who hold that every dharma includes only another's own nature, making clear instead that every dharma includes its own nature as well, and it is for this reason that the present discussion is raised. "The eye-faculty includes the eye-faculty" is spoken only in terms of category, comprehensively; speaking more precisely, the eye itself is of two kinds, left and right — the left includes the left, and the right includes the right. The left eye is further of two kinds — nourished-and-grown, and ripening-produced.

The nourished-and-grown includes the nourished-and-grown; the ripening-produced includes the ripening-produced. The ripening-produced is further of two kinds — the ripening-fruit of wholesome karma, and the ripening-fruit of unwholesome karma. The ripening-fruit of wholesome karma includes the ripening-fruit of wholesome karma; the ripening-fruit of unwholesome karma includes the ripening-fruit of unwholesome karma. The ripening-fruit of wholesome karma is further of two kinds — human and divine. The human includes the human; the divine includes the divine. The divine is further of two kinds —

desire-realm and form-realm. The desire-realm includes the desire-realm; the form-realm includes the form-realm. The form-realm is further of four kinds — the four dhyānas. The first dhyāna includes the first dhyāna, and so on up through the fourth dhyāna including the fourth dhyāna. The ripening-fruit of unwholesome karma is further of three kinds —

namely the hells, animals, and the realm of hungry ghosts. The hells include the hells, and so on up through the realm of hungry ghosts including the realm of hungry ghosts. In just this same way, the left eye and every one of its further subdivisions each span all three time-periods — the past includes the past, the future includes the future, and the present includes the present; and the past itself comprises countless instants, each single instant including only itself — and the same holds true, mutatis mutandis, for the future, and likewise for the right eye. This entire passage speaks only in terms of category, comprehensively. Exactly as with the eye-faculty, so too with the ear, nose, tongue, life, pain, and displeasure faculties, each including only its own single self in this same way. The body-faculty includes three faculties — the body, female, and male faculties. The female faculty includes the female faculty and a portion of the body-faculty; exactly as the female faculty, so too the male faculty. The mind-faculty includes the mind-faculty and a portion of the three uncontaminated faculties — since each of those three has as its own substance nine dharmas, of which the mind-faculty includes only a portion, hence "a portion"; exactly as with the mind-faculty, so too with pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. The faculty of the yet-unknown includes the faculty of the yet-unknown and a portion of nine faculties — namely the mind-faculty, the three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions; these nine faculties all pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this faculty includes only their uncontaminated portion, and, among the uncontaminated, there are further three paths, and this faculty includes only their path-of-seeing portion, hence "a portion." Exactly as with the faculty of the yet-unknown, so too with the already-known faculty and the faculty of complete knowledge. "How many faculties does the power of faith include, up through the power of wisdom, the awakening-factor of mindfulness up through the awakening-factor of equanimity, right view up through right concentration, dharma-knowledge up through the knowledge of the path, and emptiness, the wishless, and the signless, include?" Answer: the power of faith includes one faculty entirely and a portion of three faculties — namely, the three uncontaminated faculties, since each of these three has as its own substance nine dharmas, of which the power of faith includes only a portion, hence "a portion." Exactly as with the power of faith, so too with the remaining four powers. The awakening-factor of mindfulness includes a portion of four faculties — namely, the mindfulness-faculty and the three uncontaminated faculties; the mindfulness-faculty pervades both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this awakening-factor includes only its uncontaminated portion, hence "a portion"; the three uncontaminated faculties, as already explained, are likewise included only in part. Exactly as with the awakening-factor of mindfulness, so too with the awakening-factors of investigation-of-dharmas, diligence, joy, and concentration. The remaining awakening-factors include no faculty at all — namely, the awakening-factors of equanimity and of tranquility include no faculty whatsoever, since they possess no faculty-characteristic of their own. Right view includes a portion of four faculties — namely, the wisdom-faculty and the three uncontaminated faculties. Exactly as with right view, so too with right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. The remaining path-factors include no faculty at all — namely, right thought, right speech, right action, and right livelihood include no faculty whatsoever, since they possess no faculty-characteristic of their own. Dharma-knowledge includes a portion of four faculties — namely, the wisdom-faculty and the three uncontaminated faculties. Exactly as with dharma-knowledge, so too with class-knowledge and the knowledge of suffering, origin, cessation, and the path. The knowledge of others' minds includes a portion of three faculties — namely, the wisdom-faculty, the already-known faculty, and the faculty of complete knowledge. How does it include only a portion of the wisdom-faculty? Because the wisdom-faculty may take a single dharma or many dharmas as its object, whether the object's own particular characteristic or its shared characteristic, present or spanning all three time-periods, belonging to another or to oneself, and either associated or dissociated —

whereas this knowledge includes only the wisdom that takes a single dharma as object, that takes the particular characteristic as object, that is present, that belongs to another, and that is associated, hence "a portion." The two uncontaminated faculties, each having nine dharmas as their own substance, are included here only in their wisdom-portion, and among that wisdom, exactly the same distinctions already described apply, and this knowledge includes only the wisdom taking a single dharma as object and so on, hence "a portion." Mundane knowledge includes a portion of one faculty — namely, the wisdom-faculty, since the wisdom-faculty pervades both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this knowledge includes only its contaminated portion, hence "a portion." Emptiness includes a portion of four faculties — namely, the concentration-faculty and the three uncontaminated faculties; exactly as with emptiness, so too with the wishless and the signless.

"How many faculties is the mind-faculty associated with, up through how many faculties is the faculty of complete knowledge associated with?" and so on, as stated at length. One might ask: why raise this discussion at all?

Answer: to block the view of those confused about association, who hold that associated dharmas are not truly real, making clear instead that the substance of what is associated is indeed real, and it is for this reason that the present discussion is raised. The mind-faculty is associated with ten faculties entirely and a portion of three further faculties — the ten entirely are the five feeling-faculties and faith with its four companions; the three associated only in part are the three uncontaminated faculties, since each of these three has as its own substance nine dharmas, and, excluding the mind-faculty's own substance from association with itself, it is associated with the remaining portion, hence "a portion." Pleasure, joy, and equanimity are each associated with nine faculties only in part — namely, the mind-faculty, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. As for being associated only in part with the mind-faculty and faith with its four companions, these six faculties all co-arise with the five feeling-faculties, whereas pleasure, joy, and equanimity are each associated only with whichever of them co-arises with that faculty's own particular kind, hence "a portion." As for being associated only in part with the three uncontaminated faculties, these three have as their own substance nine dharmas, all co-arising with the three feelings, whereas pleasure, joy, and equanimity are each associated only with whichever of them co-arises with that faculty's own particular kind, hence "a portion." The pain- and displeasure-faculties are each associated only in part with six faculties — namely, the mind-faculty and faith with its four companions. How are they associated only in part with these six? Because these six faculties co-arise with the five feeling-faculties, whereas the pain- and displeasure-faculties are each associated only with whichever of them co-arises with that faculty's own particular kind, hence "a portion." The faith-faculty is associated with four faculties entirely and a portion of nine further faculties — the four are diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom; the nine associated only in part are the mind-faculty, the five feeling-faculties, and the three uncontaminated faculties. As for being associated only in part with the mind-faculty and the five feeling-faculties, these six faculties pervade both the defiled and the undefiled, whereas the faith-faculty is associated only with whichever undefiled and wholesome portion of them applies, hence "a portion." As for being associated only in part with the three uncontaminated faculties, these three have as their own substance nine dharmas, and, excluding the faith-faculty's own substance from association with itself, it is associated with the remaining portion, hence "a portion." Exactly as with the faith-faculty, so too with diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and the wisdom-faculty. The faculty of the yet-unknown is associated with nine faculties only in part — namely, itself. As for being associated with itself only in part, this faculty has as its own substance nine dharmas, and, excluding any one of them from association with itself, it is associated with the remaining portion, hence this same faculty is what is meant throughout. As for being associated only in part with the remaining nine faculties, these are the mind-faculty, the five feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions — how are these nine associated only in part? Because these nine faculties pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and, among the uncontaminated, there are further three paths, whereas this faculty is associated only with the path-of-seeing portion of them, hence "a portion." Exactly as with the faculty of the yet-unknown, so too with the already-known faculty and the faculty of complete knowledge — the stages alone differ, everything else remaining the same.

"How many faculties is the power of faith associated with, up through the power of wisdom, the awakening-factor of mindfulness up through the awakening-factor of equanimity, right view up through right concentration, dharma-knowledge up through the knowledge of the path, and emptiness, the wishless, and the signless, associated with?" Answer: the power of faith is associated with four faculties entirely and a portion of nine further faculties — the four are

diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom; the nine associated only in part are the mind-faculty, the five feeling-faculties, and the three uncontaminated faculties, exactly as already explained. Exactly as with the power of faith, so too with the remaining four powers — diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. The awakening-factor of mindfulness is associated only in part with eleven faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. As for being associated only in part with the mind-faculty, the three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions, these eight faculties pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this awakening-factor is associated only with their uncontaminated portion, hence "a portion." As for being associated only in part with the three uncontaminated faculties, these three have as their own substance nine dharmas, and, excluding the awakening-factor of mindfulness's own substance from association with itself, it is associated with the remaining portion, hence "a portion." Exactly as with the awakening-factor of mindfulness, so too with the awakening-factors of investigation-of-dharmas, diligence, and concentration. The awakening-factor of joy is associated only in part with nine faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties.

As for being associated only in part with the mind-faculty and faith with its four companions, these six faculties pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this awakening-factor is associated only with their uncontaminated portion.

Among the uncontaminated, there are further nine grounds — proximate access, the meditative interval, the four dhyānas, and the three lower formless attainments — and this awakening-factor is associated only with the portion belonging to the first two dhyānas, hence "a portion." As for being associated only in part with the three uncontaminated faculties, these three pervade pleasure, joy, and equanimity together with whatever co-arises with them, and this awakening-factor is associated only with whatever co-arises with joy specifically, hence "a portion." The awakening-factors of tranquility and equanimity are each associated only in part with nine faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. As for being associated only in part with these nine, they pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and these awakening-factors are associated only with their uncontaminated portion, hence "a portion." Right view is associated only in part with eleven faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties, exactly as already explained for the awakening-factor of mindfulness. Exactly as with right view, so too with right thought, right effort, and right concentration — right thought differing only slightly, being associated with the mind-faculty, joy, equanimity, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties, that is, these same eleven. These eleven faculties pervade every ground, yet this path-factor is associated only with the portion belonging to proximate access and the first dhyāna, hence "a portion." Right speech, right action, and right livelihood are not associated with any faculty at all, since they are not themselves associated dharmas. Dharma-knowledge is associated only in part with eleven faculties, exactly as already explained for right view.

Exactly as with dharma-knowledge, so too with class-knowledge and the knowledge of suffering, origin, cessation, and the path. The knowledge of others' minds is associated only in part with ten faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, faith with its four companions, and the already-known and complete-knowledge faculties, exactly as already explained in discussing inclusion. Mundane knowledge is associated only in part with two faculties entirely and a portion of eight further faculties — the two entirely are the pain- and displeasure-faculties; the eight associated only in part are the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. As for being associated only in part with these eight, they pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, and this knowledge is associated only with their contaminated portion, hence "a portion." Emptiness, the wishless, and the signless are each associated only in part with eleven faculties, exactly as already explained for the awakening-factor of mindfulness.