Ajita Rebuked, Maitreya Praised

Question: as it is said, the bodhisattva perfects the four pāramitās — namely the pāramitā of giving, the pāramitā of moral discipline, the pāramitā of diligence, and the pāramitā of wisdom — only after passing through three incalculable eons. At what point in time, precisely, should each pāramitā be said to reach perfection? Answer: some say: when the bodhisattva practices giving and is no longer overcome by stinginess, his pāramitā of giving should be said to be perfected; when he upholds pure moral discipline and is no longer corrupted by immoral conduct, his pāramitā of moral discipline should be said to be perfected; when he arouses diligence and is no longer defeated by laziness, his pāramitā of diligence should be said to be perfected; when he cultivates wisdom and is no longer clouded by faulty understanding, his pāramitā of wisdom should be said to be perfected. Some say:

When the bodhisattva, moved solely by compassion, is able to give every kind of thing to everyone — down to his own body, life, head, eyes, marrow, and brain — with not the slightest trace of attachment remaining, up to that point is named the perfection of the pāramitā of giving. When the bodhisattva, wrongfully assailed by some being who severs his hands and feet, cuts off his ears and nose, or hacks apart his body until not even a mustard-seed's worth remains intact, gives rise to not a single thought of anger, let alone any wish for retaliation, up to that point is named the perfection of the pāramitā of moral discipline. When the bodhisattva, through the valor of his own mind, stands on one foot for seven days and nights without blinking, gazing steadily, praising the Buddha with a single verse, without a single thought of weariness, up to that point is named the perfection of the pāramitā of diligence. When the bodhisattva, named Gopaka, diligently seeks awakening, foremost in intelligence, unrivaled in debate, universally acclaimed by the world, up to that point is named the perfection of the pāramitā of wisdom. Some say:

— up to the point of sitting on the vajra seat and entering the vajra-like concentration, on the very verge of realizing unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, only at that point is the pāramitā of wisdom named perfected. According to this latter view, all such statements speak only with reference to a single occasion, naming as "perfected" whatever single practice happens to predominate at that time; as for the true meaning, these four pāramitās are only truly perfected at the moment the knowledge of exhaustion is attained. Foreign masters say there are six pāramitās, adding patience and dhyāna to the foregoing four. The masters of Kashmir say that the latter two pāramitās are subsumed under the first four — patience being subsumed under moral discipline, and dhyāna under wisdom — since, once moral discipline and wisdom are perfected, those two are thereby also named perfected. There is yet another account of six pāramitās, adding learning and patience to the foregoing four: when the bodhisattva is able to uphold in full the twelvefold division of the Tathāgata's teaching, up to that point the pāramitā of learning is named perfected; when the bodhisattva, as he himself once proclaimed regarding his patience, has his limbs cut apart by King Kalirāja without a single thought of resentment or anger ever arising, and instead vows with words of loving-kindness to benefit him, up to that point the pāramitā of patience is named perfected. These two are likewise subsumed under the first four — patience as already explained, and learning subsumed under wisdom. Although every virtue could in principle be named a pāramitā, it is with reference to what is manifest and predominant that this is spoken of, and hence there are only four. Question: while cultivating these four pāramitās, how many Buddhas does one encounter and serve within each single eon-asaṃkhyeya? Answer: within the first eon-asaṃkhyeya, one encounters and serves seventy-five thousand Buddhas, the very first named Śākyamuni and the last named Ratnaśikhin; within the second eon-asaṃkhyeya, one encounters and serves seventy-six thousand Buddhas, the very first being Ratnaśikhin and the last named Dīpaṃkara; within the third eon-asaṃkhyeya, one encounters and serves seventy-seven thousand Buddhas,

the very first being Dīpaṃkara and the last named Viśiṣṭadarśin. Within the ninety-one eons of cultivating the karma that ripens into the excellent marks, one encounters and serves six Buddhas, the very first being Viśiṣṭadarśin and the last named Kāśyapa. It should be understood that this is spoken with reference to the bodhisattva Śākyamuni specifically; for other bodhisattvas it is not fixed. Thus, at the time of the Buddha Kāśyapa, the bodhisattva Śākyamuni had already perfected the four pāramitās, each in its own measure, and now had also thoroughly perfected the karma that ripens into the excellent marks. From there he passed away from Jambudvīpa and was reborn in the Tuṣita heaven, undergoing his final ripening as a heavenly being. Question: why does the bodhisattva undergo his final heavenly ripening specifically in the Tuṣita heaven, and not in some other heaven? The Venerable Pārśva said: this ought not to be asked — were he reborn either higher or lower, doubt would arise either way; yet being reborn in that heaven does not contradict the characteristic of the Dharma. Some say: the Tuṣita heaven is, among the heavenly destinies of a thousand world-systems, something like the median measure, and it is for this reason that the bodhisattva is reborn there alone. Some say: the lower heavens are heedless and the higher heavens dull of faculty.

Only the Tuṣita heaven is free of these two faults; the bodhisattva, fearing heedlessness and abhorring dullness of faculty, is therefore reborn there alone. Some say:

the afflictions of the lower heavens are sharp, while the afflictions of the higher heavens are frequent; the Tuṣita heaven is free of both these kinds, and the bodhisattva, abhorring both these classes of affliction,

is therefore reborn in that heaven. Some say: the bodhisattva has created and augmented only the karma for rebirth in that particular heaven, and is therefore reborn there alone. Some say: only the lifespan of the Tuṣita heaven corresponds precisely to the time when the bodhisattva's own attainment of Buddhahood coincides with the ripening of the karma by which the people of Jambudvīpa come to see the Buddha — that is, after a span in the human world of fifty-seven koṭi and sixty thousand years, the wholesome roots of both the one who converts and those to be converted ought to ripen, and this span is precisely the lifespan of the Tuṣita heaven.

It is for this reason that the bodhisattva is reborn in that heaven alone. Were he reborn in a higher heaven, its lifespan would not yet be exhausted while the wholesome roots had already ripened; were he reborn in a lower heaven, its lifespan would already be exhausted while the wholesome roots had not yet ripened — and it is for this reason that he is not reborn there. Some say: it is in order to convert the countless Dharma-loving bodhisattvas of the Tuṣita heaven —

that is, within that heaven there are nine cloistered halls, each hall measuring twelve yojanas, perpetually filled with Dharma-loving bodhisattvas, and the bodhisattva destined for the next Buddhahood ceaselessly teaches the Dharma to them throughout the six watches of day and night — no heaven above or below has anything of the kind. Some say: the bodhisattva always delights in following the middle path, and it is for this reason that, for his final rebirth, he is born in Tuṣita, which occupies the middle position among the heavens; from there, once he passes away, he is born in the city of Kapilavastu in central India, and in the middle of the night crosses over the city wall to go forth; relying on the middle path he attains complete, perfect awakening; and for the sake of sentient beings he teaches the middle-path Dharma;

and in the middle of the night he enters parinirvāṇa. It is for this reason that he is reborn in the Tuṣita heaven alone, and in no other heaven. Question: why is it that, in his final existence, the bodhisattva passes away only from a heaven, and not from a human birth? Answer: some say: among all the destinies, the heavenly destiny is supreme. Some say: coming down from heaven is what people hold in esteem. Some say: when he comes from heaven there are miraculous manifestations, whereas coming from the human destiny has nothing of the kind.

Some say: no human lifespan corresponds so precisely to the time of the ripening of wholesome roots as does that of Tuṣita. Some say: it is the dominant force of the karma of the Dharma-loving bodhisattvas of the Tuṣita heaven that causes this bodhisattva necessarily to be reborn in that heaven, in order to teach them the Dharma. Some say: the bodhisattva must necessarily undergo the karma he already possesses for rebirth in that heaven. Some say: were the bodhisattva to attain Buddhahood after being reborn repeatedly among humans, this would give rise to disdain and refusal to accept conversion. Question: why does he not attain complete, perfect awakening right there in the Tuṣita heaven, but must instead come to the human world? Answer: it is in accordance with the Dharma of all Buddhas — that is, all the Blessed Buddhas throughout as many world-systems as there are grains of sand in the River Gaṅgā have attained complete awakening among humans. Furthermore, a heavenly body is not a fit support for unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. Furthermore, it is only human wisdom and insight, being so keen, that is capable of attaining unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. Furthermore, the gods, being addicted to exquisite sensual pleasures, do not excel at entering the fixed nature of the noble ones, attaining the fruits, and becoming free from defilement. Furthermore, the faculties of the human destiny are keen and for the most part able to receive the Tathāgata's true Dharma, whereas the heavenly destiny is not so. Furthermore, a bodhisattva in his final existence must undergo birth from a womb, whereas the heavenly destiny is only born spontaneously. Furthermore, there are two conditions present wherever a Buddha appears in the world:

first, a mind of aversion toward saṃsāra; second, keen wisdom — and it should be understood that these two are found only in the human destiny. Furthermore, both humans and gods alike are fit vessels for the Dharma;

and, in order to gather in both at once, he comes to the human world — for were he to remain in heaven, humans would have no way to go there, nor is it possible for him to attain Buddhahood in heaven and then come to the human world to convert humans, since they would then suspect the Buddha to be some illusory apparition and would not accept his Dharma. It is for this reason that the bodhisattva attains Buddhahood in the human world. Now, while the bodhisattva dwells in his palace in Tuṣita, as his lifespan there nears its end and he is about to descend and be reborn, he first observes four matters: first, the time; second, the place; third, the lineage; and fourth, the fit vessel. Observing the time: he observes at what time in the world a Buddha ought to appear, and comes to know that a Buddha ought to appear at any point from when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years down to when it is a hundred years, and that now is precisely that time. Observing the place: he observes in which region of the world a Buddha ought to appear, and comes to know that a Buddha ought to appear in central India, within Jambudvīpa,

not in some outlying border region among the mleccha barbarians. Observing the lineage: he observes into which lineage in the world a Buddha ought to be born, and comes to know that a Buddha ought to be born into either the kṣatriya or the brāhmaṇa lineage, and is born into whichever of the two is at that time the stronger and more prevailing. Observing the fit vessel: he observes what kind of woman in the world has both parents of pure lineage, and a womb broad and spacious, free of every fault, able to bear for ten full months a body possessed of the strength of Nārāyaṇa formed by the bodhisattva, and comes to know that within Jambudvīpa there is such a woman, of such-and-such a name, fit to serve as that vessel. Having observed these four matters, the bodhisattva then tells the deva of the way: "Go and proclaim to the assembly of the Tuṣita heaven that, seven days from now, the bodhisattva destined for the next Buddhahood will pass away from here and be reborn in the city of Kapilavastu in central India, within Jambudvīpa, there to perform the great work of a Buddha; let whoever wishes to follow make the vow to go there as well." The deva of the way, rejoicing, respectfully assented,

and, by means of his own swift supernormal power, proclaimed to the entire assembly of the Tuṣita heaven, saying: "Heavenly sages, know this: seven days from now the bodhisattva destined for the next Buddhahood will descend to Jambudvīpa, to be born in the city of Kapilavastu in central India, there to perform the great work of a Buddha; let you heavenly hosts who wish to follow along make the vow to go there as well." At that, five hundred devas, upon hearing this, at once made the vow to follow him down into rebirth. When the seventh day arrived, the bodhisattva, together with those five hundred devas, all at once passed away from the Tuṣita heaven, and were born together in the city of Kapilavastu in central India, within Jambudvīpa, all of them born into the Śākya clan to assist in proclaiming the Buddha's work. It should be understood that this account speaks of the bodhisattva Śākyamuni specifically;

for other bodhisattvas, this happens however is fitting to each.

As it is said, "Maitreya, in a future life you shall attain Buddhahood," and so on at length. Question: why is this treatise composed? Answer: in order to elucidate the meaning of a sūtra passage. As the World-Honored One states: in a future age, when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years, this Jambudvīpa will be broad and spacious, its people numerous, secure, and abundantly prosperous, its villages, towns, and cities so close together that a cock's crow will carry from one to the next, and women will not marry until the age of five hundred. At that time, although people's bodies will be excellent and beautiful, they will still suffer three afflictions: first, the need to urinate and defecate; second, cold, heat, hunger, and thirst;

and third, lust, aging, and sickness. There will be a wheel-turning king named Śaṅkha, who by his might subdues the four quarters and governs the world according to the Dharma, possessed of the seven treasures — namely, the wheel-treasure, the elephant-treasure, the horse-treasure, the jewel-treasure, the woman-treasure, the treasurer-minister-treasure, and the general-minister-treasure — with a full thousand sons, valiant and handsome, able to crush every enemy. The earth will extend to the very edge of the great ocean, level as the palm of a hand, without hills, pits, gravel, or thorns; people will all live in harmony, treating one another with kindness, having no need for weapons of war, maintaining themselves through righteousness alone. The king will have a jeweled tower a thousand fathoms high and a sixteenth of that in breadth,

possessed of every kind of adornment, serving as a field of merit for those who give to it, thereby fostering great stores of merit. Not long afterward, he shaves his beard and hair and, out of faith, goes forth, diligently cultivating pure conduct, and in that very life attains arhatship, knowing for himself: "my birth is exhausted, pure conduct has been established, what was to be done has been done, there is no further existence to be undergone" — he attains parinirvāṇa.

When the Buddha had spoken these words, the monk Ajita, in the assembly, rose from his seat, respectfully joined his palms, and said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, may I, in that future life, attain the very position of that wheel-turning king Śaṅkha, subduing the four quarters by my might and governing the world according to the Dharma," and so on at length, down to attaining parinirvāṇa. The World-Honored One then rebuked him, saying: "Foolish man, how is it that, not content to die once, you seek a second death, wishing in your future life to become the wheel-turning king Śaṅkha?" — and so on at length. "Yet, Ajita, exactly as you have wished, you shall indeed, in your future life, become that wheel-turning king Śaṅkha, subduing the four quarters and governing the world according to the Dharma," and so on at length, down to attaining parinirvāṇa.

He further told the assembly: "In a future age, when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years, a Buddha will appear in the world, named Maitreya, the Tathāgata, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One, Perfect in Wisdom and Conduct, the Well-Gone One, Knower of the World, the Unsurpassed One, Tamer of Beings, Teacher of Gods and Humans, the Buddha, the Blessed One — complete with the ten epithets, exactly as I now possess them. That Buddha, too, will himself declare, in the presence of the gods, māras, Brahmās, ascetics, brahmins, and the multitudes of gods and humans of this world: 'I am the Tathāgata, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One,' down to 'the Buddha, the Blessed One,' fully realized in mastery and the superknowledges, likewise knowing for himself, 'my birth is exhausted, pure conduct has been established, what was to be done has been done, there is no further existence to be undergone,' and will attain the great nirvāṇa. He will, moreover, proclaim the true Dharma to sentient beings, revealing its excellence at the beginning, the middle, and the end, its wording and meaning skillful, its practice pure, complete, and undefiled, opening the pure conduct for gods and humans and causing them to cultivate it widely; surrounded by hundreds of thousands of countless followers, attended by countless disciples of the Maitreya lineage, bringing about great benefit — exactly as I myself now, in this world, before the gods, māras, and great Brahmās," and so on at length, down to "attended by countless disciples of the Śākya lineage, bringing about great benefit."

When the Buddha had spoken these words, the bodhisattva Maitreya, in the assembly, rose from his seat, respectfully joined his palms, and said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, may I, in that future life, attain the very position of that Tathāgata Maitreya, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One," and so on at length, down to "exactly as the present World-Honored One is attended by countless disciples of the Śākya lineage, bringing about great benefit."

At that time the World-Honored One, having heard these words, gave rise to the cognition of the prior limit, and carefully examined whether Maitreya had, over three incalculable eons, perfected the cultivation of the four pāramitās, and truly knew that he had indeed already perfected them all. He further carefully examined whether, within the hundred great eons, Maitreya had perfected the cultivation of the karma that ripens into the excellent marks, and truly knew that all were perfected except for the karma of the golden-colored mark. On account of this, the Buddha told Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī: "You may now give this golden robe as an offering to the assembly of monks — for to make offerings to the assembly is to be understood as making offerings to me as well." At the time the Buddha, foreknowing that once the assembly had received this golden robe, this very causal condition would fittingly lead to Maitreya obtaining it, and that once Maitreya had obtained it he would certainly offer it to the Buddha — and so on at length. It is by means of this causal condition that the karma of the golden mark is perfected. Some say, in this connection, that the Buddha, wishing to have that karma of the golden mark perfected, told Ānanda: "You may seek out for me a new golden robe; I wish to give it to Maitreya." Ānanda, as instructed, at once obtained one, and promptly knelt and presented it. Once the World-Honored One had received it, he bid Maitreya: "You may take this new golden robe." Maitreya, though he received the command, did not dare to take it. The Buddha said: "Simply take it, and you may then offer it up to the foremost of the Buddha's assembly of monks — for it is by means of this very merit that, in the future, you shall benefit the world." Maitreya respectfully assented, took it, and offered it up to the foremost of the Buddha's assembly of monks; and by means of this causal condition, the karma of the golden mark was perfected. Some say: Maitreya's karma for the golden-colored mark had, in fact, already been perfected beforehand, and the Buddha's having him offer the golden robe was only in order to display that, although his merit and virtue were already complete, he was still without any trace of complacency, so as to encourage others to do likewise.

Once the World-Honored One had given rise to the cognition of the prior limit and examined Maitreya's own prior limit, he further gave rise to the cognition of the posterior limit, and carefully examined whether, at the future time when the human lifespan would be eighty thousand years, Maitreya would possess a body fit to serve as the support for unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, and knew that he indeed would; he further carefully examined whether, at that time, Maitreya would be capable of attaining awakening, and knew that he indeed would be capable of it. Having thus examined both Maitreya's prior and posterior limits, the World-Honored One then praised the bodhisattva Maitreya, saying: "Excellent, excellent! That you are able to give rise to so vast a resolve and aspiration, for the sake of bringing benefit to countless sentient beings, is truly, truly good." He further told Maitreya: "Exactly as you have wished, you shall indeed, in your future life, when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years, attain Buddhahood, named the Tathāgata Maitreya, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One," and so on at length, down to "attended by countless disciples of the Maitreya lineage, bringing about great benefit —

exactly as I myself am now attended by countless disciples of the Śākya lineage, bringing about great benefit." Question: Ajita and Maitreya both sought, alike, a body in that future time when the lifespan will be eighty thousand years — why, then, did the World-Honored One rebuke Ajita while praising Maitreya? Answer: the monk Ajita gave rise to worldly aspiration, worldly resolve, worldly yearning, worldly hope, and worldly seeking with respect to conditioned existence itself, and it was for this that the Buddha rebuked him; the bodhisattva Maitreya did not give rise to aspiration and the rest with respect to conditioned existence itself, but rather gave rise to aspiration and the rest with respect to the matter of benefiting and bringing happiness to sentient beings, and it was for this that the Buddha praised him. Furthermore, Ajita sought a worldly position as wheel-turning king, and it was for this that the Buddha rebuked him; Maitreya sought the position of a supramundane Dharma-wheel-turning king, and it was for this that the Buddha praised him.

The same distinction applies to seeking a position that perpetuates the round of existence versus seeking a position that brings it to cessation. Furthermore, Ajita sought his own benefit and happiness, and it was for this that the Buddha rebuked him; Maitreya sought the benefit and happiness of others, and it was for this that the Buddha praised him. The same distinction applies to seeking one's own benefit versus seeking the benefit of others. Although the sūtra states, "Maitreya, in a future life, when the human lifespan is eighty thousand years, you shall attain Buddhahood, named the Tathāgata Maitreya, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One," and so on at length, it does not explain what kind of cognition this is, or with respect to what it operates. Since the sūtra serves as the very foundation this treatise relies upon,

what it leaves unexplained ought now to be explained, and it is for this reason that this treatise is composed. Question: as it is said, "Maitreya, in a future life you shall attain Buddhahood, named the Tathāgata Maitreya, the Worthy One, the Perfectly and Completely Awakened One" — what kind of cognition is this? Answer: causal cognition and path cognition — namely, the Tathāgata's own cognition examining Maitreya's prior and posterior limits. Question: with respect to what does this operate? Answer: one operates with respect to the karma that ripens into the excellent marks, and by this it is named causal cognition; the other operates with respect to the attainment of unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening by means of the untainted faculties, powers, awakening-factors, and path-factors, and by this it is named path cognition. This refers precisely to the Tathāgata's own cognition examining, with respect to Maitreya's prior limit, whether the karma that ripens into the excellent marks was perfected — this cognition of perfection operates with respect to the cause, and hence is named causal cognition; and to his examining, with respect to Maitreya's posterior limit, the attainment of unsurpassed, perfect awakening by means of the untainted faculties, powers, awakening-factors, and path-factors — this cognition operates with respect to the path, and hence is named path cognition. Yet both of these cognitions are subsumed under conventional cognition, since they are not cognitions possessing the sixteen modes of activity. There may be a body possessing the thirty-two marks yet without the noble Dharma — namely, an ordinary wheel-turning king; there may be a body possessing the noble Dharma yet without the thirty-two marks — namely, a śrāvaka who is not a wheel-turning king, and the like; there may be a body possessing both the thirty-two marks and the noble Dharma, yet not a Buddha — namely, a king such as Śaṅkha who has attained the noble path; and there may be a body possessing neither the thirty-two marks nor the noble Dharma — namely, every other ordinary being. Every Buddha's body, without exception, possesses both the unsurpassed thirty-two marks and the unsurpassed noble Dharma — that is, complete, perfect awakening. Question: why is it said here only that the cognition operating with respect to the karma that ripens into the excellent marks is named causal cognition, and not said that the cognition operating with respect to the four pāramitās is likewise named causal cognition? Answer: where something ought to be stated yet is not stated, it should be understood that there is a further reason. Furthermore, the karma that ripens into the excellent marks is proximate, whereas the four pāramitās are remote; here, the proximate is spoken of, and the remote is not. Furthermore, when the karma that ripens into the excellent marks is being cultivated, it is manifest and known to both gods and humans alike, whereas the four pāramitās are not so; here, only what is manifest is spoken of. Furthermore, at the time of cultivating the karma that ripens into the excellent marks, both one's awakening and one's orientation toward it are determined, whereas at the time of cultivating the four pāramitās, although one's awakening is determined, one's orientation toward it is not yet determined, and it is for this reason that this is not stated. Furthermore, what is spoken of here is the proximate cause of the body and the proximate cause of awakening: the karma that ripens into the excellent marks is the proximate cause of the body, while the untainted faculties, powers, and the rest are the proximate cause of awakening; the four pāramitās, the contemplation of impurity, and the like are the proximate cause of neither, and it is for this reason that they are not stated.

As it is said, "this monk shall, in this very life, come to know the noble aim," and so on at length. Question: why is this treatise composed? Answer: in order to elucidate the meaning of a sūtra passage — for the Pravāraṇā sūtra states, "this monk shall, in this very life, come to know the noble aim, and be able to know for himself: 'my birth is exhausted, pure conduct has been established, what was to be done has been done, there is no further existence to be undergone,' and attain parinirvāṇa." Although that sūtra speaks in this way, it does not explain what kind of cognition this is, or with respect to what it operates. Since that sūtra serves as the very foundation this treatise relies upon, what it leaves unexplained ought now to be explained, and it is for this reason that this treatise is composed. Question: as it is said, "this monk shall, in this very life, come to know the noble aim" — what kind of cognition is this? Answer: path cognition. Question: with respect to what does this operate? Answer: this operates with respect to the eternal exhaustion of every contaminant by means of the untainted faculties, powers, awakening-factors, and path-factors, and by this it is named path cognition. This refers precisely to the Tathāgata's own cognition observing that a given monk has eternally exhausted every contaminant by means of the untainted faculties, powers, awakening-factors, and path-factors — this cognition operates with respect to the path, and hence is named path cognition. This, too, is subsumed under conventional cognition, since it is not an untainted cognition possessing the sixteen modes of activity. Question: why is causal cognition not mentioned here? Answer: some say: here it ought to be stated as follows — what kind of cognition is this? Answer: causal cognition and path cognition. With respect to what does this operate? Answer: one operates with respect to the wholesome roots conducive to liberation and the like, and by this it is named causal cognition; the other operates with respect to the eternal exhaustion of every contaminant by means of the untainted faculties, powers, awakening-factors, and path-factors, and by this it is named path cognition — yet, since it is not stated in this way, it should be understood that there is a further reason. Some say:

the preparatory practice for unsurpassed awakening is so vast — accomplished only after three incalculable eons and a hundred further eons — that its own cause is worthy of special note, and this is why the cognition observing it is spoken of; whereas the preparatory practice for a śrāvaka's awakening is comparatively narrow, since even the very swiftest attain it within three lifetimes — the first life planting the seed, the second life bringing it to maturity,

and the third life bringing liberation — since its own cause is not worthy of such special note, the cognition observing it is not spoken of. Some say: it is because the lineage and the rest that the bodhisattva's karma of the excellent marks depends upon are fixed and determinate that the cognition knowing it is spoken of, whereas the lineage and the rest that a śrāvaka's wholesome roots conducive to liberation depend upon are not fixed and determinate, and hence the cognition knowing them is not spoken of. Some say: the Buddha excels in two respects — his supporting body, and the awakening he attains — and hence, with respect to the causes of both, both kinds of causal cognition are spoken of and known; a śrāvaka excels only in the awakening attained, not in his supporting body, and hence only the causal cognition knowing his awakening is spoken of. Some say: the cognition knowing the wholesome roots conducive to liberation and the like was likewise not spoken of earlier, and so this question ought not to be raised here.

What is wish-knowledge? — and so on at length. Question: why is this treatise composed? Answer: although the function of wish-knowledge has already been discussed above, its own intrinsic nature has not yet been explained; it is in order to explain this that the treatise is now composed. Question: what is wish-knowledge? Answer: it is like an arhat who, having accomplished the superknowledges and attained mastery of mind, gives rise to a proper wish to know some matter he desires to know, and thereupon enters the terminal fourth dhyāna; upon rising from that concentration, he then knows, exactly as he had wished, everything he sought. As for "wishing to know some matter": Question: why does an arhat wish to know some matter? Answer: for three reasons: first, in order to benefit his disciples; second, in order to sustain the Buddha's Dharma; third, in order to know whether the world is at peace or not. Benefiting disciples: that is, when an arhat is guiding his disciples in the cultivation of contemplative practice, it is proper for him to observe how soon or how long it will be before each enters the noble path — whether, before my own lifespan is exhausted, such-and-such a disciple will be able to enter the fixed nature of the noble ones, and, should he not be able to, whether, after my own death, there will be someone else able to teach him and bring him to enter it. All such things are known by means of wish-knowledge. These are what is called benefiting one's disciples.

Sustaining the Buddha's Dharma: that is, when an arhat is engaged in constructing a stūpa, a vihāra, a saṅghārāma, or other affairs of the Buddha, the Dharma, or the Saṅgha, it is proper for him to observe how soon or how long it will be before the work is completed — whether it can be completed before my own lifespan is exhausted, and, should it not be completed, whether, after my own death, there will be someone else able to carry it through to completion. Or, should some king, minister, elder, or merchant-leader intend to do harm to the Buddha's Dharma, an arhat, wishing to convert him, will observe whether he can indeed be converted, and, if so, how soon or how long it will take — whether the work of conversion will bear fruit before my own lifespan is exhausted, and, should it not, whether, after my own death, there will be someone able to carry it on. All such things, too, are known by means of wish-knowledge. Such matters as these are called sustaining the Buddha's Dharma.

Knowing whether the world is at peace or not: that is, an arhat may at times observe, with respect to the land he dwells in and the season, whether there will be abundance or scarcity, danger or safety, peace or plague, and the like, and, wishing to let himself and others know how to act accordingly, gives rise to wish-knowledge in order to know it. As, once, in this land of Kashmir, there was a king named Śāka, whose territory was invaded and plundered by the king of Bactria. King Śāka then mustered his troops, intending to give battle; but that king, being by nature compassionate and benevolent, and ever fearful of evil karma, privately reflected: "I do not know whether, if I now go to war, I shall surely win and keep my throne, or whether, should I fail, I shall have needlessly slaughtered my own people and thereby incurred further sin, dying and falling into hell. I have heard that in a certain saṅghārāma there is an arhat who has attained the sublime wish-knowledge; I shall go and ask him." Having so reflected, he went at once, and with sincere reverence paid his respects and asked him to resolve his doubt. That arhat replied to the king: "Although I have indeed attained this cognition, my supporting conditions are lacking, and my bodily strength is so weak that it has long failed to manifest." The king then supplied him with every kind of food, drink, and excellent provision. Before long, the venerable one was able to give rise to wish-knowledge and thereupon made his observation; he saw that the king of Bactria would indeed succeed in seizing King Śāka's throne, and would bring about great benefit thereby. Having seen this, he reported to King Śāka: "Your Majesty is destined to lose your kingdom; you would do well to consider this and act accordingly." King Śāka respectfully accepted this, and at once led his retinue and family away, abandoning his kingdom and taking refuge in another land. It is by means of causal conditions such as these that arhats wish to know some matter.

As for "entering the terminal fourth dhyāna": Question: why is it named the terminal fourth dhyāna? Answer: with respect to the fourth dhyāna, it serves as its outward sign, its utmost point, and its dense thicket, and it is for this reason that it is named the terminal fourth dhyāna — that is,

it is the meaning of the supreme grade of the fourth dhyāna, just as the topmost point of a tree, being the finest part of the tree, is called the tree's own "edge" or terminus. Some say: this is called "sign" because it is the outward

sign, utmost point, and dense thicket for the qualities of supreme cognition, utmost cognition, thicket-like cognition, and other such virtuous dharmas — hence it is named the terminal fourth dhyāna, since it is only after one's mental continuum has been suffused by the immeasurables and other such various virtues that this concentration then arises. With reference to the qualities that arise dependent on this concentration, it serves, among all such qualities, as their sign, their utmost point, and their dense thicket — just as ghee is supreme among the flavors derived from milk. Some say: this ought to be named the posterior-limit fourth dhyāna. "Limit" is of three kinds: the prior limit, the middle limit, and the posterior limit — these three being, respectively, the past, the present, and the future. Here, the prior limit is known by two cognitions, namely the cognition of recollecting former abodes, and wish-knowledge; the middle limit, too, is known by two cognitions, namely the cognition of others' minds, and wish-knowledge; the posterior limit is known by wish-knowledge alone, since, with respect to future objects, only this cognition applies — and it is for this reason that this cognition is named posterior-limit cognition, and the concentration that gives rise to it is named the posterior-limit fourth dhyāna. Some say: this ought to be named the not-yet-arrived-limit fourth dhyāna. "Limit" is of three kinds: the not-yet-arrived limit, the arrived limit, and the already-arrived limit — these three being, respectively, the future, the present, and the past.

Corresponding to each in turn: the cognition that knows the present is named arrived-limit cognition, and the cognition that knows the past is named already-arrived-limit cognition; and, since this cognition for the most part knows the future, it is named not-yet-arrived-limit cognition, and the concentration that gives rise to it is named the not-yet-arrived-limit fourth dhyāna. Some say: this ought simply to be named the terminal fourth dhyāna. Why is this? Because "terminus" refers to the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields of the present, while "limit" refers to the past and future; just as, with respect to the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields of the present, a cognition of direct perception operates, so too, with respect to the past and future, a cognition of direct perception likewise operates,

and it is for this reason that this cognition is named terminal cognition, and the concentration that gives rise to it is named the terminal fourth dhyāna. As for "upon rising from that concentration, he then knows, exactly as he had wished, everything he sought": Question: does he know while still in concentration, or only upon rising from it? And, granting either, what difficulty follows? If he knows while still in concentration, why does the passage say that upon rising from concentration he then knows as he had wished? If he knows only upon rising from concentration, why must he enter the terminal fourth dhyāna at all? Answer: he is indeed able to know while still in concentration. Question: then why does the passage say that upon rising from concentration he then knows as he had wished? Answer: it is at the moment of speaking of it that it is called "knowing," since the speaking makes the knowing manifest; furthermore, it is because, at that moment, he causes others to know that it is spoken of as "knowing." Some say: he knows only upon rising from concentration. Question: then why must he enter the fourth dhyāna at all? Answer: the terminal fourth dhyāna is the means to that knowledge, since this cognition arises only upon entering that concentration. According to this latter view: the first account is to be preferred, since it holds that he is able to know while still in concentration, even though the passage speaks of rising from concentration.

Question: what is the intrinsic nature of wish-knowledge? Answer: its intrinsic nature is wisdom; and just as its intrinsic nature is such, so too are its own substance, its own characteristic, and its own inherent nature. Its intrinsic nature has now been explained; what is to be explained next follows. Question: why is it named wish-knowledge? Answer: because it knows in accordance with a wish, it is named wish-knowledge. Question: does it know in accordance with one's own wish, or in accordance with another's wish? Answer: it knows in accordance with one's own wish, and it also knows in accordance with another's wish, since it is able to know whatever wish there may be. Furthermore, it is because it knows whatever wishes there are that it is named wish-knowledge. Wishes are of two kinds: the wish for awakening, and the wish for continued existence. The wish for awakening is exemplified by Maitreya's own wish; the wish for continued existence is exemplified by Ajita's own wish. It is because it knows such wishes as these that it is named wish-knowledge. Furthermore, it is because this cognition arises in accordance with a wish that it is named wish-knowledge — that is, this cognition is so excellent that it must necessarily be drawn forth by a prior wish, mental application, and effortful practice; although the Tathāgata has no need of mental application or effortful practice, he too must necessarily have a prior mental wish. Some say: this ought to be named "anticipatory cognition," since its objective sphere is so subtle and profound that one must necessarily form a definite anticipation before one is able to know it. Some say: this ought to be named "sublime cognition," since, among all cognitions, this one is supreme — just as the world speaks of "sublime food" or "sublime clothing," applying the word "sublime" to whatever is finest of its kind; it is the same in this case. As for this wish-knowledge: with respect to realm, it belongs to the form realm; with respect to ground, it is situated in the ground of the fourth dhyāna; with respect to its support, it depends upon a body of the desire realm;

with respect to its mode of activity, it operates through the sixteen modes of activity, or through other modes of activity as well; with respect to its objective support, it takes every dharma as its object; with respect to the mindfulness-foundations, it pertains to all four.

with respect to what kind of cognition it is, the masters of the ancient Abhidharma say it is conventional cognition alone; other masters say its nature comprises eight cognitions, excluding only the cognition of exhaustion and the cognition of non-arising — why is this? Because those two are not of the nature of view, whereas wish-knowledge is of the nature of view. According to this latter view, however, it is conventional cognition alone. With respect to whether it is conjoined with concentration, it is not conjoined with concentration, since it is solely contaminated. With respect to its conjoined faculty, it is conjoined with the equanimity faculty. With respect to time, it falls within the three times,

and takes as its object what falls within the three times as well as what is beyond time. With respect to whether it is wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral, it is wholesome, taking all three as its object. With respect to whether it is bound to the three realms or unbound, it is bound to the form realm alone, yet takes as its object what is bound to all three realms as well as what is unbound. With respect to whether it is a trainee's, a non-trainee's, or neither, it is neither a trainee's nor a non-trainee's, taking all three as its object. With respect to whether it is abandoned by seeing, by cultivation, or not abandoned at all, it is abandoned by cultivation, taking all three as its object. With respect to whether it takes names or meanings as its object, it takes both names and meanings as its object equally. With respect to whether it takes its own mental continuum, another's, or neither as its object, it takes all three equally as its object. With respect to where it arises, it arises in the desire realm, not in the form or formless realms; within the desire realm, only in the human destiny, not elsewhere; within the human destiny, only on the three continents, not on the northern continent; and on all three continents, it is able to arise in both male and female bodies alike. The Venerable Ghoṣavarman states: it is able to arise only in Jambudvīpa, not on the other continents, and only in a male body, not a female one — why is this? Because wish-knowledge is so excellent that it must necessarily depend upon a body of superior, keen faculties, and the bodies of the other two continents, as well as the female body, are all comparatively feeble. According to this latter view, however, the first account is to be preferred, since the male and female bodies of all three continents are alike of superior, keen faculties, all being able to attain mastery of mind and mastery in concentration. Were it not so, the sūtra ought not to state that Mahāprajāpatī Gautamī, together with the five hundred nuns under her leadership, all at once relinquished their life-formations and entered parinirvāṇa on a single day — for, had they not attained the terminal fourth dhyāna, they could not have relinquished their life-formations; and, having attained this, how could they alone have been incapable of giving rise to wish-knowledge? Question: what kind of person is able to give rise to this cognition?

Answer: a noble one, not an ordinary worldling; among the noble ones, a non-trainee, not a trainee; and, among non-trainees, only the one liberated regardless of time, not the one liberated dependent on time. Why is this? Because only one who has attained mastery in concentration, and whose mental continuum is no longer held in the grip of affliction, is able to give rise to wish-knowledge,

whereas ordinary worldlings and those liberated by conviction possess neither of these two qualities; one who has arrived through insight, though he has attained mastery in concentration, still has his mental continuum held in the grip of affliction; and the one liberated dependent on time, though his mental continuum is no longer held in the grip of affliction, has not yet attained mastery in concentration — and it is for these reasons that none of them is able to give rise to it. Only the one liberated regardless of time, having attained mastery in concentration and having a mental continuum no longer held in the grip of affliction, is able to give rise to wish-knowledge.