The Art of Leaping Between States

"If one first enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna" — and so on in full. "First" is of four kinds: first, the first entry into correctly determined liberation from birth; second, the first attainment of a fruit; third, the first freedom from defilement; fourth, the first refining of one's faculties. This passage's own question is composed with reference to two of these kinds of "first" — namely, first attaining a fruit and first refining one's faculties.

As for first attaining a fruit: this refers to the moment the arhat's fruit is first attained, at the knowledge of exhaustion. As for first refining one's faculties: this refers to the moment a time-liberated arhat refines his faculties into becoming an unshakeable one, at the final path of liberation. Question: why does this passage compose its question with reference to only two of the four kinds of "first"? Answer: because it is precisely at these two moments that one cultivates the excellent qualities of every ground at once, and it is with reference to this fact that the question is composed — since only these two particular "first" occasions permit cultivation in this all-encompassing way, the question is composed with reference to them. "If one first enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as accompanied by investigation and reflection?" Answer: they may be accompanied by both investigation and reflection, or by reflection alone without investigation, or by neither investigation nor reflection. As for being accompanied by both investigation and reflection: this refers to the stage of proximate access and the first dhyāna thereby cultivated. As for being accompanied by reflection alone without investigation: this refers to the meditative interval thereby cultivated.

As for being accompanied by neither investigation nor reflection: this refers to the upper three dhyānas and the lower three formless spheres thereby cultivated. "If one first enters the uncontaminated second dhyāna, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as associated with the joy-faculty?" Answer: they may be associated with the happiness-faculty, the joy-faculty, or the equanimity-faculty. As for being associated with the happiness-faculty: this refers to the third dhyāna thereby cultivated. As for being associated with the joy-faculty: this refers to the first and second dhyānas thereby cultivated. As for being associated with the equanimity-faculty: this refers to the stage of proximate access, the meditative interval, the fourth dhyāna, and the lower three formless spheres thereby cultivated. "If one first enters the uncontaminated third dhyāna, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as associated with the happiness-faculty?" Answer: they may be associated with the happiness-faculty, the joy-faculty, or the equanimity-faculty — the meaning is as explained above. "If one first enters the uncontaminated fourth dhyāna, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as associated with the equanimity-faculty?" Answer: they may be associated with the happiness-faculty, the joy-faculty, or the equanimity-faculty — the meaning is as explained above. "If one first enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as subsumed under the sphere of infinite space?" Answer: they may be subsumed under the sphere of infinite space, the sphere of infinite consciousness, or the sphere of nothing-at-all. As for being subsumed under the sphere of infinite space: this refers to the sphere of infinite space thereby cultivated. As for being subsumed under the sphere of infinite consciousness: this refers to the sphere of infinite consciousness thereby cultivated. As for being subsumed under the sphere of nothing-at-all: this refers to the sphere of nothing-at-all thereby cultivated. "If one first enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite consciousness,

are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as subsumed under the sphere of infinite consciousness?" Answer: they may be subsumed under the sphere of infinite space, the sphere of infinite consciousness, or the sphere of nothing-at-all — the meaning is as explained above. "If one first enters the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, are all the other future uncontaminated minds and mental factors thereby obtained at that moment to be spoken of as subsumed under the sphere of nothing-at-all?" Answer: they may be subsumed under the sphere of infinite space, the sphere of infinite consciousness, or the sphere of nothing-at-all —

the meaning is as explained above. Question: why does this passage ask about "association" for the dhyānas, but about "subsumption" for the formless spheres? Answer: this is simply what the author of this treatise intended, and the question is composed according to that very intention — so long as it does not contradict the characteristics of the dharmas involved, no objection should be raised. Some hold: both "association" and "subsumption" ought to have been asked for the dhyānas and the formless spheres alike, and this passage's omission should be understood as an incompleteness in the text. Others hold: this is done in order to display a variety of wordings and a variety of expositions, since a variety of wordings and expositions makes the meaning easier to grasp. Others hold: this is done in order to display two gateways, two summaries, two stages, two torches, two lights, two illuminations, and two textual reflections — just as "association" is spoken of for the dhyānas, so too could it be spoken of for the formless spheres, and just as "subsumption" is spoken of for the formless spheres, so too could it be spoken of for the dhyānas. Others hold: the dhyānas are coarse, manifest, and easy to see and know, and it is for this reason that "association" is asked of them; the formless spheres are subtle and difficult to comprehend and perceive,

and it is for this reason that only "subsumption" is asked of them. Others hold: the dhyānas possess a variety of characteristics, mutually dissimilar to one another, and it is for this reason that "association" is asked of them, whereas the formless spheres do not,

and it is for this reason that only "subsumption" is asked of them. Others hold: the dhyānas possess a variety of feelings and a variety of faculties, and it is for this reason that "association" is asked of them, whereas the formless spheres do not. Others hold: the dhyānas possess many excellent qualities and many advantages, and it is for this reason that "association" is asked of them, whereas the formless spheres do not. Others hold: the dhyānas possess a knowledge capable of universally taking every ground as its object, and it is for this reason that "association" is asked of them, whereas the formless spheres possess only a knowledge capable of taking their own ground and the ground above as its object, and it is for this reason that only "subsumption" is asked of them. Question: why does this passage, in speaking of the dhyānas, also subsume the formless spheres under them, while, in speaking of the formless spheres, it does not subsume the dhyānas under them? Answer: this is simply what the author of this treatise intended — and so on in full. Some hold: both the dhyānas and the formless spheres ought to have been mutually subsumed, and this passage's failure to speak of such subsumption should be understood as an incompleteness in the text. Others hold: this is done in order to display a variety of wordings and a variety of expositions, since a variety of wordings and expositions makes the meaning easier to grasp. Others hold: this is done in order to display two gateways, two summaries, two reflections, and two lights — and so on in full. Others hold: the formless spheres are subordinate to the dhyānas, since the dhyānas are attained first, and the formless spheres only afterward, and it is for this reason that the formless spheres are subsumed under the dhyānas, while the dhyānas, not being subordinate to the formless spheres, are not subsumed under them. Others hold: the dhyānas, too, do not really subsume the formless spheres, since the very phrase "neither investigation nor reflection" and the like carries its own distinct sense — that is, "neither investigation nor reflection" speaks only of the last three dhyānas, while "associated with the equanimity-faculty" speaks only of the stage of proximate access, the meditative interval, and the fourth dhyāna — since the dhyānas and the formless spheres each have their own distinct characteristics, and, although each can serve to cultivate the other, neither actually subsumes the other. Others hold: the formless spheres, too, ought to subsume the dhyānas, and it ought to be said that a given dhyāna is subsumed under the stage of proximate access, and so on down to being subsumed under the sphere of nothing-at-all — yet this is not said, precisely in order to make clear that the formless spheres are not themselves a preparatory practice for entering a dhyāna, since a dhyāna's own presence does not necessarily depend on a formless attainment. Others hold: one born in a dhyāna-ground is capable of giving rise to a formless attainment, whereas one born in a formless ground is incapable of giving rise to a dhyāna. Others hold: a noble one, once born in a dhyāna-ground, may well come to be born in a formless ground afterward, whereas, once born in a formless ground, there is no possibility of being born in a dhyāna-ground afterward.

It is for this reason that the dhyānas subsume the formless spheres, while the formless spheres do not subsume the dhyānas.

"The flavor-associated first dhyāna" — and so on in full. Question: why is this treatise composed? Answer: in order to check the intention of the Sautrāntikas, who, being unclear as to the very nature of the conditions, hold that the conditions are not genuinely real entities. This treatise now wishes to make clear each condition's own intrinsic nature, so that it may be known that every condition is indeed a genuinely real entity, and it is for this reason that it is composed. "How many conditions does a flavor-associated first dhyāna serve as, with respect to a flavor-associated first dhyāna?" Answer: it serves, with respect to its own ground's flavor-associated dharma, as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the causal condition: this comprises three kinds of cause, namely the associated cause, the co-existent cause, and the homogeneous cause.

As for the immediately-preceding condition: this refers to the moment when, immediately following a flavor-associated first dhyāna, another flavor-associated first dhyāna becomes currently manifest. As for the object-condition: this refers to a flavor-associated first dhyāna taking a flavor-associated first dhyāna as its own object. As for the dominant condition: this refers to not obstructing its arising,

and simply not obstructing it. Here, the causal condition is like the way a seed functions; the immediately-preceding condition is like the way clearing a path functions; the object-condition is like the way a walking-stick functions; and the dominant condition is like the way granting consent functions. As for its own ground's pure dharma: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the immediately-preceding condition: this refers to the moment when, immediately following a flavor-associated first dhyāna, a pure first dhyāna becomes currently manifest — just as craving, view, conceit, and doubt directed at a higher dhyāna,

immediately following that defilement, a pure concentration directed at the higher ground becomes currently manifest — this is only a general statement. Stated more precisely: the pure is of four kinds — conforming to regression, conforming to abiding, conforming to advancement, and conforming to penetration. Here, some hold that, immediately following the flavor-associated, only the portion conforming to regression becomes currently manifest; others hold that the portion conforming to abiding can arise as well. As for the object-condition: this refers to a flavor-associated first dhyāna taking a pure first dhyāna as its own object. As for the dominant condition: this refers to not obstructing its arising and simply not obstructing it. As for why it is not the causal condition: because a defiled dharma does not function toward a wholesome dharma in the manner of a seed. For this reason, the flavor-associated, with respect to its own ground's pure dharma, serves, if stated generally, as three conditions; if stated more precisely, as either three or two — that is, it serves as three conditions with respect to the first two portions, and as two conditions with respect to the last two portions. As for its own ground's uncontaminated dharma: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition. As for the object-condition: this refers to taking the class-knowledge-and-class-patient-acceptance-of-suffering-and-origin class as its own object. As for the dominant condition: as stated above. As for why it is not the causal condition: because a contaminated dharma does not function toward an uncontaminated dharma in the manner of a seed. As for why it is not the immediately-preceding condition: because a defilement is never immediately followed by the noble path becoming currently manifest. For this reason, the flavor-associated, with respect to its own ground's uncontaminated dharma, serves, if stated generally, as two conditions; if stated more precisely, as either two or one — that is, it serves as two conditions with respect to the class-knowledge-and-class-patient-acceptance-of-suffering-and-origin class, and as one condition with respect to the class-knowledge-and-class-patient-acceptance-of-cessation-and-the-path class, and every dharma-knowledge-and-dharma-patient-acceptance class. As for the pure and uncontaminated upper three dhyānas: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition.

As for the object-condition: because these take the lower ground's flavor-associated dharma as their own object. As for the dominant condition: because they do not obstruct its arising and simply do not obstruct it. As for why it is not the causal condition: because a defiled dharma does not function toward an undefiled dharma in the manner of a seed. As for why it is not the immediately-preceding condition: because it is only once one has already become free from a lower ground's defilement that a higher ground's own pure or uncontaminated fundamental attainment can arise at all. As for everything else: it serves as one condition, the dominant condition — "everything else" here referring to the flavor-associated upper three dhyānas and every formless attainment, the meaning of the dominant condition being as explained above. As for why it is not the causal condition: because a dharma belonging to a different realm or ground is cut off from any cause-and-effect relationship, and because a dharma of a different class does not function as a seed. As for why it is not the immediately-preceding condition: because it is only once one has already become free from a lower ground's defilement that a higher ground's defilement itself becomes currently manifest, and because the two are mutually opposed. As for why it is not the object-condition: because a higher ground's defilement, and a formless fundamental attainment, do not take a lower ground's contaminated dharma as their own object. "How many conditions does a pure first dhyāna serve as, with respect to a pure first dhyāna?" Answer: it serves, with respect to its own ground's pure dharma, as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the causal condition: this comprises three kinds of cause, namely the associated cause, the co-existent cause, and the homogeneous cause. As for the immediately-preceding condition: this refers to the moment when, immediately following a pure first dhyāna, another pure first dhyāna becomes currently manifest. As for the object-condition: this refers to taking a pure first dhyāna as its own object. The meaning of the dominant condition is as explained above. This is only a general statement. Stated more precisely: the pure is of four portions. The portion conforming to regression, with respect to the portion conforming to regression, serves as four conditions; and likewise with respect to the portion conforming to abiding; with respect to the remaining two portions, it serves as three conditions, excluding the immediately-preceding condition. The portion conforming to abiding, with respect to the portion conforming to abiding, serves as four conditions; and likewise with respect to the portion conforming to advancement; with respect to the portion conforming to penetration, it serves as three conditions, excluding the immediately-preceding condition; with respect to the portion conforming to regression, it serves as three conditions, excluding the causal condition, since a superior portion cannot serve as the cause of an inferior one. The portion conforming to advancement, with respect to the portion conforming to advancement, serves as four conditions; and likewise with respect to the portion conforming to penetration; with respect to the portion conforming to regression — some hold: it serves only as the object-condition and the dominant condition, since the portion conforming to regression never becomes currently manifest immediately following the portion conforming to advancement; according to this latter account, it can indeed become currently manifest immediately following, and so it serves as three conditions with respect to the portion conforming to regression, excluding the causal condition, since that portion is inferior; and likewise with respect to the portion conforming to abiding. The portion conforming to penetration, with respect to the portion conforming to penetration, serves as four conditions; with respect to the portion conforming to regression, it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition; with respect to the portion conforming to abiding — some hold: it serves only as the object-condition and the dominant condition, since the portion conforming to abiding never becomes currently manifest immediately following the portion conforming to penetration;

according to this latter account, it can indeed become currently manifest immediately following, and so it serves as three conditions with respect to that portion, excluding the causal condition; and likewise with respect to the portion conforming to advancement. As for its own ground's uncontaminated dharma: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the immediately-preceding condition: this refers to the moment when, immediately following a pure first dhyāna, an uncontaminated first dhyāna becomes currently manifest — this occurs only from the portion conforming to penetration; some hold: it can also occur from the portion conforming to advancement.

As for the object-condition: this refers to taking an uncontaminated first dhyāna as its own object. As for the dominant condition: as stated above. As for why it is not the causal condition: because a contaminated dharma is not the cause of the uncontaminated. As for its own ground's flavor-associated dharma: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the immediately-preceding condition: just as craving, view, conceit, and doubt directed at a higher dhyāna become currently manifest immediately following a pure concentration — it should be understood that this arises from the portion conforming to regression, or from the portion conforming to abiding, since there is a genuine difference between one who has already become free from his own ground's defilement and one who has not yet done so in the way each gives rise to his own ground's defilement. As for the object-condition: because it savors and clings to its own ground's pure dhyāna. The remainder is as stated above. As for the pure and uncontaminated second and third dhyānas: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the immediately-preceding condition: because one enters the second in proper sequential order, and enters the third by way of a preparatory arising — it should be understood that one enters the pure dhyāna above only from the portion conforming to advancement, and from no other. The remainder is as stated above. As for the pure and uncontaminated fourth dhyāna: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition. As for why it lacks the immediately-preceding condition: because it is too far removed. The remainder is as stated above. As for everything else: it serves as one condition, the dominant condition — "everything else" here referring to the flavor-associated upper three dhyānas and every formless attainment, the meaning of the dominant condition being as explained above. The one difference here is that, with respect to the pure and uncontaminated formless attainments,

it does not serve as the immediately-preceding condition, since it is too far removed. The remainder is as stated above. Question: there is also, in fact, an immediately-preceding condition here — namely, the moment when a first dhyāna's own wholesome mind, at the moment of death, is reborn in a higher ground — why is this not mentioned here? Answer: this ought indeed to have been stated as its immediately-preceding condition and dominant condition, and its omission should be understood as an incompleteness in the text. Others hold: this Concentration Aggregate speaks only of death occurring within a settled wholesome or settled defiled state, whereas the bond of rebirth is itself merely birth-produced wholesome or birth-produced defiled, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned. Others hold: this Concentration Aggregate speaks only of death occurring within a fundamental wholesome or defiled state, whereas the bond of rebirth abides only within a proximate-access ground, never within a fundamental ground, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned. "How many conditions does an uncontaminated first dhyāna serve as, with respect to an uncontaminated first dhyāna?" Answer: it serves, with respect to its own ground's uncontaminated dharma, as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the causal condition: this comprises three kinds of cause, namely the associated cause, the co-existent cause, and the homogeneous cause. As for the object-condition: this refers to taking the class of the patient acceptance and knowledge of the path as its own object. The remainder is as stated above. This is only a general statement. Stated more precisely: the dharma-knowledge class, with respect to the dharma-knowledge class, serves as four conditions; with respect to the class-knowledge class, it serves as three conditions, excluding the object-condition. The class-knowledge class, with respect to the class-knowledge class, serves as four conditions; with respect to the dharma-knowledge class, it serves as three conditions, excluding the object-condition. The knowledge class of suffering, origin, and cessation, with respect to itself, serves as three conditions, excluding the object-condition; with respect to the knowledge class of the path, it serves as four conditions. The knowledge class of the path, with respect to itself, serves as four conditions; with respect to the knowledge class of suffering, origin, and cessation, it serves as three conditions, excluding the object-condition. The yet-unknown faculty class, with respect to itself, serves as four conditions; and likewise with respect to the already-known faculty class; with respect to the complete-knowledge faculty class, it serves as three conditions, excluding the immediately-preceding condition. The already-known faculty class, with respect to itself, serves as four conditions; and likewise with respect to the complete-knowledge faculty class; with respect to the yet-unknown faculty class, it serves as two conditions, excluding the causal and immediately-preceding conditions. As for excluding the causal condition: because what arises later can never serve as the cause of what arose earlier. As for excluding the immediately-preceding condition: because the path of seeing never becomes currently manifest immediately following the path of cultivation. The complete-knowledge faculty class, with respect to itself, serves as four conditions;

with respect to the yet-unknown and already-known faculty classes, it serves as two conditions, excluding the causal and immediately-preceding conditions. The non-trainee's own dharma-knowledge class, with respect to the trainee's own class-knowledge class, serves as one condition, the dominant condition; the non-trainee's own class-knowledge class, with respect to the trainee's own dharma-knowledge class, likewise serves as one condition, the dominant condition. It is for this reason that, stated generally, one speaks of it serving as four conditions with respect to its own ground's uncontaminated dharma; stated more precisely, it may be four, three, two, or one, as described above. As for the uncontaminated second and third dhyānas: it serves as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition, since an uncontaminated dharma is never confined to a single realm — the causal condition across different grounds is as explained above. As for its own ground's pure dharma, and the pure second and third dhyānas: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. Here, with respect to its own ground's pure dharma, some hold: excluding the portion conforming to regression, it serves as the immediately-preceding condition with respect to the remaining three portions; others hold: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition only with respect to the latter two portions — and the very same holds with respect to a higher ground's pure dharma. According to this latter account, when entering in gradual sequence, it also serves as the immediately-preceding condition with respect to the portion conforming to advancement; when entering by leaping over grounds, it serves as the immediately-preceding condition only with respect to the portion conforming to penetration. Question: why is it that, when entering by leaping over grounds, only the portion conforming to penetration and the uncontaminated path mutually serve as each other's immediately-preceding condition, whereas this does not hold at other times? Answer: at the moment of leaping over a ground, only a fierce, vigorous, and firmly rooted wholesome root is capable of mutually drawing forth a portion conforming to penetration that is itself fierce, vigorous, and firmly rooted — no other portion can do this. As for the pure fourth dhyāna and the pure formless attainments: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition, since the first dhyāna's own class-knowledge class serves as the antidote for the formless attainments, and so it also serves as an object for the pure formless attainments. The remainder is as stated above. As for the uncontaminated fourth dhyāna and the uncontaminated formless attainments: it serves as the causal condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition, since the formless spheres' own class-knowledge-class path also takes the first dhyāna's own class-knowledge class as its object. The remainder is as stated above. As for everything else: it serves as the dominant condition — "everything else" here referring to every flavor-associated dharma, the meaning of the dominant condition being as explained above. Since the uncontaminated is utterly opposed to the flavor-associated, it lacks the immediately-preceding condition; since craving cannot take an uncontaminated dharma as its own object, it is not the object-condition; since the uncontaminated and the defiled do not function as a seed toward one another, it is not the causal condition. Question: if the uncontaminated is utterly opposed to the flavor-associated, how can it serve as its dominant condition? Answer: although the two are indeed utterly opposed at the moment of their immediate succession, at the very moment of their actual arising there is no obstruction to their passing back and forth, and so they can indeed mutually serve as each other's dominant condition.

"How many conditions does a flavor-associated second dhyāna serve as, with respect to a flavor-associated second dhyāna?" Answer: with respect to its own ground's flavor-associated dharma,

it serves as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the pure first and second dhyānas: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for every uncontaminated dhyāna, and the pure third and fourth dhyānas: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition. As for everything else: it serves as one condition, the dominant condition — "everything else" here referring to the flavor-associated first, third, and fourth dhyānas, and every formless attainment. Here, as for serving as the immediately-preceding condition for the pure first dhyāna: this refers to a yoga practitioner who, immediately following a second-dhyāna pure concentration, gives rise to a defilement — his mind, burning with distress as though scorched by fire, thereupon takes refuge in the pure first dhyāna. Hence a sūtra states: better to give rise to a wearying disposition accompanied by the first dhyāna, than to give rise to an inferior disposition accompanied by the second dhyāna. Question: which kind of pure first dhyāna does he give rise to? Some hold: he gives rise to the portion conforming to abiding, since it is the easiest to arouse. Others hold:

he gives rise to the portion conforming to advancement, in order to guard the higher ground. And, as already stated, it serves as one condition, the dominant condition, with respect to the flavor-associated first dhyāna.

Question: when a defiled mind belonging to the second dhyāna dies and is reborn in the first dhyāna, there is indeed an immediately-preceding condition here — why is this not mentioned? Answer: this ought indeed to have been stated as its immediately-preceding condition and dominant condition, and its omission should be understood as an incompleteness in the text. Others hold: this Concentration Aggregate speaks only of death occurring within a settled defiled state, whereas the bond of rebirth is itself birth-produced defilement, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned. Others hold: this Concentration Aggregate speaks only of death occurring within a fundamental ground's defilement, whereas the bond of rebirth abides only within a proximate-access ground's own defilement, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned. The remainder, as appropriate, is as explained above. "How many conditions does a pure second dhyāna serve as, with respect to a pure second dhyāna?" Answer: it serves, with respect to its own ground's pure dharma, as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for every uncontaminated dhyāna, and the pure first, third, and fourth dhyānas, together with its own ground's flavor-associated dharma: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for everything else: it serves as one condition, the dominant condition. This too should, as appropriate, be worked out in full detail just as before. "How many conditions does an uncontaminated second dhyāna serve as, with respect to an uncontaminated second dhyāna?" Answer: with respect to every uncontaminated dhyāna, it serves as the causal condition, the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for every pure dhyāna: it serves as the immediately-preceding condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for the pure formless attainments: it serves as the object-condition and the dominant condition.

As for the uncontaminated formless attainments: it serves as the causal condition, the object-condition, and the dominant condition. As for everything else: it serves as one condition, the dominant condition. This too should, as appropriate, be worked out in full detail just as before.

From the third dhyāna clear through the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, there are questions and answers involving five, three, one, and two conditions respectively — these should be understood as fully explained in the base treatise itself. Question: when becoming free from the defilement of the fourth dhyāna and the lower three formless spheres by means of the mundane path, every uninterrupted path takes a lower ground as its object — why, then, is it not said that the fourth dhyāna's and the lower three formless spheres' own flavor-associated and pure dharmas serve as the object for a higher ground's pure dharma? Answer: this too ought to have been stated, and its omission should be understood as an incompleteness in the text. Others hold: this Concentration Aggregate speaks only of the fundamental ground, whereas the nine uninterrupted paths belong only to a proximate-access ground, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned. Question: which kind of uncontaminated third or fourth dhyāna serves as the immediately-preceding condition for the pure and uncontaminated formless attainments? Answer: the class-knowledge class alone. Question: why not the dharma-knowledge class? Some hold: because the dharma-knowledge class is based on a lower ground and takes a lower ground as its own object — that is, the dharma-knowledge class is based only on the desire realm, and takes as its object only the desire realm's own formations, together with their cause, their cessation, and the path that serves as their antidote; the pure and uncontaminated formless attainments are not of this kind, and it is for this reason that the dharma-knowledge class does not serve as their immediately-preceding condition. Others hold: the dharma-knowledge class takes as its object only the desire realm and its own cessation and path — and, immediately following its taking the desire realm and its cessation and path as its object, it cannot then immediately take a formless ground's own object, since this is too far removed. It is for this reason that the dharma-knowledge class does not serve as the formless attainments' immediately-preceding condition. Others hold: because a formless ground is not the dharma-knowledge class's own basis, object, or ground — that is, although the four dhyānas are not the dharma-knowledge class's own basis or object, they are nonetheless the dharma-knowledge class's own ground; and although the desire realm is not the dharma-knowledge class's own ground, it is nonetheless the dharma-knowledge class's own basis and object — whereas none of the formless grounds bear any such relationship to it at all, and it is for this reason that the dharma-knowledge class cannot arise immediately preceding them. Question: why is it that the pure and uncontaminated formless attainments take as their object only the lower ground's own class-knowledge-class path, and not the dharma-knowledge-class path? Answer: because the dharma-knowledge-class path is not the antidote for that ground. Question: does the dharma-knowledge-class path not also serve as an antidote for it? Answer: although it does indeed serve as an antidote for it, it is neither its fundamental antidote nor its complete antidote, and it is for this reason that it is not mentioned — that is, although it is indeed the antidote for that ground's own dharma abandoned by cultivation, it is not the antidote for that ground's own dharma abandoned by seeing; and although the dharma-knowledge of cessation and of the path does indeed serve as its antidote, the dharma-knowledge of suffering and of origin does not. Others hold:

the class-knowledge class is that ground's own principal antidote, while the dharma-knowledge class is merely its guest antidote, and it is for this reason that it is not taken as its object. In general, however, a pure or uncontaminated dhyāna or formless attainment can arise immediately following either a lower or a higher one. Arising from a lower one is called "forward sequential" or "forward leaping"; arising from a higher one is called "reverse sequential" or "reverse leaping"; arising from the same class is called "pure"; arising from a different class is called "mixed"; arising immediately from an adjacent ground is called "sequential ground"; arising with an intervening gap is called "leaping" — and such a leap can never skip more than a single ground. This, then, is the brief exegesis on this passage.

Question: what, then, is the preparatory practice for the leaping-concentration described above? Answer: when cultivating the leaping-concentration, the practitioner first gives rise to a desire-realm wholesome mind, and, immediately following this, enters the contaminated first dhyāna; next enters the contaminated second dhyāna; and, proceeding on in sequence, enters clear through the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; then, returning from there, re-enters the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the contaminated first dhyāna. Cycling through these grounds again and again in cultivation, until it becomes as thoroughly practiced and well-worn as a royal highway, he then enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated second dhyāna, and, proceeding on in sequence, enters clear through the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all; then, returning from there, re-enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite consciousness, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the uncontaminated first dhyāna. Cycling through these grounds again and again in cultivation, until it becomes as thoroughly practiced and well-worn as a royal highway, he then re-enters the contaminated first dhyāna. From the contaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he leaps back into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated first dhyāna. Cycling through these grounds again and again in cultivation, until it becomes as thoroughly practiced and well-worn as a royal highway, he then enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna. From the uncontaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he leaps back into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated first dhyāna. Cycling through these grounds again and again in cultivation, until it becomes as thoroughly practiced and well-worn as a royal highway — at this point, the preparatory practice for the leaping-concentration is complete. From here, he re-enters the contaminated first dhyāna. From the contaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna.

From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he leaps back into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated first dhyāna. This, then, is called the leaping-concentration's own completion. Other masters hold that, when cultivating the leaping-concentration, one first gives rise to a desire-realm wholesome mind, and, immediately following this, enters the contaminated first dhyāna; next enters the contaminated second dhyāna; and, proceeding on in sequence, enters clear through the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; then, returning from there, re-enters the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the contaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds, he then enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated second dhyāna, and, proceeding on in sequence, enters clear through the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all; then, returning from there, re-enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite consciousness, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the uncontaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds, he then re-enters the contaminated first dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated second dhyāna; next enters the contaminated third dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated fourth dhyāna; next enters the contaminated sphere of infinite space; next enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite consciousness; next enters the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all; then, returning from there, re-enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite consciousness, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the contaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds, he then re-enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna; next enters the contaminated second dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated third dhyāna; next enters the contaminated fourth dhyāna; next enters the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space; next enters the contaminated sphere of infinite consciousness; next enters the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all; next enters the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.

Then, returning from there, he re-enters the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, and, proceeding on in sequence, returns again to the uncontaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds, he then re-enters the contaminated first dhyāna. From the contaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he returns into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space,

he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds, he then re-enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna. From the uncontaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna.

From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he returns into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated first dhyāna. Having thoroughly habituated himself to these grounds in cultivation, this is called the leaping-concentration's own preparatory practice reaching completion. From here, he re-enters the contaminated first dhyāna. From the contaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of infinite space.

From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the uncontaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he leaps back into the contaminated sphere of infinite space. From the contaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the uncontaminated third dhyāna. From the uncontaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated first dhyāna. From here, he re-enters the uncontaminated first dhyāna. From the uncontaminated first dhyāna, he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all. From the contaminated sphere of nothing-at-all, he leaps back into the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space. From the uncontaminated sphere of infinite space, he leaps into the contaminated third dhyāna. From the contaminated third dhyāna, he leaps into the uncontaminated first dhyāna. This, then, is called the leaping-concentration's own completion. Yet other masters hold that everything described above is merely the preparatory practice —

and it is only after this stage that one can freely and unimpededly cycle and leap through the various concentrations without any obstruction whatsoever that this is properly called "completion." Yet even so, one can never leap into the fourth ground beyond an adjacent one. Question: why can one never leap two grounds at once? Answer: as many Buddhas, World-Honored Ones, and noble disciples as there are grains of sand in the Ganges have all leapt through the concentrations in exactly this same manner, and so this question ought not even to be asked. Some hold: whoever leaps through concentrations must originally arise in gradual succession — if one leaps by means of that same underlying method, one can only ever leap a single ground at a time, since its own force cannot exceed that; just as, when climbing a staircase, one must also ascend gradually, and whoever attempts to skip a step can never manage to skip two at once, since the force required exceeds what is available. Others hold: since the very path one later takes must follow the very same route established before, one can only ever leap a single ground — that is, when a meditator first practices the leaping-concentration, he enters the five-factored ground from a five-factored ground, and the four-factored ground from a four-factored ground, their number of factors being equal, and so easily leapt into; and the same holds afterward, and so he cannot leap two grounds at once. Others hold: because of how the object-condition itself works, one can only ever leap a single ground — that is, a meditator lacking deliberate attention can only ever leap a single ground with respect to the object-condition. Question: how, exactly, does a meditator leap with respect to his object? Answer: because he lacks deliberate attention, when taking the first dhyāna, he individually takes each of the nine grounds' own objects one at a time,

and, among these, he can only ever leap over a single ground's own object — that is, immediately following taking the desire realm as his object, he can, moving upward, take the first dhyāna or the second dhyāna as his object, and no other; immediately following taking the first dhyāna as his object, he can, moving downward, take the desire realm as his object, and, moving upward, take the second dhyāna or the third dhyāna as his object, and no other;

immediately following taking the second dhyāna as his object, he can, moving downward, take the desire realm or the first dhyāna as his object, and, moving upward, take the third dhyāna or the fourth dhyāna as his object, and no other; immediately following taking the third dhyāna as his object, he can, moving downward, take the first dhyāna or the second dhyāna as his object, and, moving upward, take the fourth dhyāna or the sphere of infinite space as his object, and no other; and so on clear through immediately following taking the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as his object, he can, moving downward, take the sphere of infinite consciousness as his object,

or the sphere of nothing-at-all as his object, and no other. Just as with the first concentration, so too with each of the remaining concentrations — the full account should, as appropriate, be worked out in detail with respect to the object-condition. Just as one can never leap over two grounds' worth of object, so too with the leaping-concentration itself, and it is for this reason that one cannot enter a fourth ground beyond an adjacent one. Question: if so, why is it said that the pure liberation gives rise, in turn, to five minds — the pure liberation's own mind taking the desire realm as its object, while the fourth dhyāna's own universally-operating latent defilement can take its own ground and everything above it, clear up through the peak of existence, as its object — is this not a case of leaping over two grounds' worth of object? Answer: what is said to be incapable of leaping over two grounds is specifically an undefiled mind — that latent defilement's mind, being itself defiled, is not in conflict with this principle. Question: just as the knowledge of suffering-in-the-Dharma, immediately following taking the desire realm as its object, gives rise to the patient acceptance of suffering-in-class, and so on clear through taking the peak of existence as its object — how, then, can it be said that an undefiled mind cannot leap over two grounds? Answer: that case is merely a general, all-encompassing taking of an object, and is not properly called "leaping" at all, since it takes every other ground as its object simultaneously as well — and so this poses no real objection.

Question: in what place can one practice the leaping-concentration? Answer: in the desire realm, not in the form or formless realm; in the human destiny, not in any other destiny; in three of the four continents, not in the northern continent. Both men and women alike are capable of the leaping-concentration. The Venerable Saṃghavasu states: only in Jambudvīpa, and only men, are capable of the leaping-concentration — the other continents and women, having an inferior basis, are incapable of it. According to this latter account, however, the other continents and women too are capable of the leaping-concentration,

since they too are able to attain mastery of mind over concentration. Question: what kind of person is capable of the leaping-concentration? Answer: a noble one, not an ordinary worldling; a non-trainee, not a trainee; and, among non-trainees, one who is non-time-liberated, not time-liberated. Among the non-time-liberated, one must have attained such excellent qualities as wish-knowledge and boundary concentration before one is capable of leaping. Question: why is it that only a non-time-liberated non-trainee is capable of the leaping-concentration? Answer: only one whose mental continuum is entirely free of defilement, and who has attained mastery over concentration, is capable of leaping — a trainee's own continuum still retains defilement, and a time-liberated one has not attained mastery over concentration, and so neither is capable of leaping. Question: immediately following what wholesome root is one capable of leaping? Answer: immediately following a wholesome root belonging to the immeasurables, the liberations, the bases of totality, the totality-bases, or the superknowledges, one is never capable of leaping — it is only immediately following a wholesome root taking the aspect of impermanence and the like that one is capable of leaping. Why so? Because only a fierce, vigorous, and dominant wholesome root is capable of the leaping-concentration.