The First Turning at Vārāṇasī

What is the Dharma-wheel? — and so on at length. Question: why is this treatise composed? Answer: in order to elucidate the meaning of a sūtra passage — for a sūtra states that the World-Honored One turns the Dharma-wheel, and that no other being in the world, whether ascetic, brahmin, god, māra, or Brahmā, is able to turn it in accordance with the Dharma. Although the sūtra speaks in this way, it does not explain the matter — what is the Dharma-wheel, and at what point should one say that the Dharma-wheel has been turned? 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. What is the Dharma-wheel? Answer: the eightfold noble path. When taken together with its conjoined and concomitant factors, it is of the nature of the five aggregates. This is the intrinsic nature of the Dharma-wheel — that is, its own substance, its own characteristic, its own nature, and its own inherent nature.

Its intrinsic nature has now been explained; what is to be explained next follows. Question: why is it named the Dharma-wheel? Answer: this wheel is accomplished by the Dharma, and the Dharma constitutes its intrinsic nature, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel — just as, in the world, a wheel made of gold or the like, gold or the like constituting its nature, is named a golden wheel or the like; it is the same in this case. Some say:

this wheel is able to discern, and discern thoroughly, the nature of every dharma, and is able to awaken, and awaken thoroughly, to it, realizing and directly witnessing it, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: this wheel is able to purify the noble wisdom-eye of the Dharma, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: this wheel is able to counteract the non-Dharma-wheel, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel — the non-Dharma-wheel referring to the wheel of the eight wrong path-factors turned by the six teachers, such as Pūraṇa and the rest. Question: why is it named a "wheel"? What is the meaning of "wheel"? Answer: the meaning of turning without remaining still is the meaning of "wheel"; the meaning of leaving one place to proceed toward another is the meaning of "wheel"; the meaning of being able to subdue one's enemies is the meaning of "wheel" — it is on account of such meanings as these that it is named "wheel." As the Sūtra of the Forty Great Dharma-Gateways states: there are twenty wholesome categories and twenty unwholesome categories, and this is named the Brahmā-wheel, and so on at length. Question: the twenty wholesome categories may well be so, but how can the twenty unwholesome categories be named the Brahmā-wheel? Answer: it is not the Buddha's own intention to name those the Brahmā-wheel; rather, he speaks only of the turning of patient acceptance and cognition with respect to both the wholesome and unwholesome categories of dharmas as being named the Brahmā-wheel.

Question: why is this named "Brahmā"? Answer: because it is utterly tranquil, free of calamity, without the burden of fault, and causes no harm, it is named "Brahmā."

Question: why is it named the Brahmā-wheel? Answer: because the Brahmā world is both the first ground attainable and complete with the noble path, it is named the Brahmā-wheel. The second and third dhyānas are neither the first ground attainable nor complete with the noble path; and although the fourth dhyāna is the very first ground the Buddha's own body attained, it is not complete with the noble path, and hence is not named "wheel." Only the Brahmā world is both the first ground attainable and also complete, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it is found within the mental continuum of those who cultivate pure conduct, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it counteracts what is not pure conduct, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it counteracts the impure afflictions abandoned by seeing across all three realms, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it is on account of being turned at the entreaty of the Brahmā king that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: the Buddha is himself the great Brahmā, and it is what the Buddha proclaims and expounds with careful analysis, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it is expounded in the Brahmā-voice, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel. Some say: it is only the noble path of the Brahmā world that is able to counteract the many things that are not pure conduct, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel — "the many things that are not pure conduct" referring to the afflictions abandoned by seeing and by cultivation across all three realms, whether unwholesome or neutral afflictions, whether afflictions that ripen into a fruit or do not,

whether afflictions that give rise to two results or only one result, whether conjoined or not conjoined with shamelessness and lack of conscience, whether afflictions with or without an external basis, and whether afflictions counteracted by patient acceptance or by cognition — all such as these are named the many things that are not pure conduct. Some say: only the Brahmā world possesses the many fruits of pure conduct, and it is for this reason that it is named the Brahmā-wheel — "the many fruits of pure conduct" referring to the four fruits of the ascetic life; the upper three dhyānas possess only two of these fruits, and the formless realm possesses only one, whereas only the Brahmā world possesses all four fruits complete. Or, with respect to the nine kinds of full understanding: the upper three dhyānas possess only five of these, and the formless realm possesses only two, whereas only the Brahmā world possesses all nine complete. Or, with respect to the eighty-nine varieties of the ascetic fruit: only the Brahmā world possesses them complete, not any of the higher grounds — and it is for this reason that the noble path is named the Brahmā-wheel. Question: why is it said that the path of seeing alone, and no other, is named the Dharma-wheel? Answer: as explained before, the meaning of turning without remaining still is the meaning of "wheel"; the path of seeing is a swift path, a path that does not arise through a fixed span of time, and is most perfectly in accord with turning without remaining still, and it is for this reason that it alone is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say:

as explained before, the meaning of leaving one place to proceed toward another is the meaning of "wheel"; within the path of seeing, one leaves the direct realization of suffering to proceed toward the direct realization of origin, and so on up to leaving the direct realization of cessation to proceed toward the direct realization of the path, and it is for this reason that the path of seeing alone is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: it is on account of four matters that it is named "wheel": first, leaving this; second, proceeding toward that; third, subduing what has not yet been subdued; and fourth, guarding what has already been subdued. Within the path of seeing this is likewise so: "leaving this" refers to leaving the direct realization of suffering; "proceeding toward that" refers to proceeding toward the direct realization of origin; "subduing what has not yet been subdued" refers precisely to the direct realization of origin; and "guarding what has already been subdued" refers precisely to the direct realization of suffering — and so on likewise through cessation and the path — and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: the meaning of revolving is the meaning of "wheel," just as a cart-wheel turns round and round; in just this way, the path of seeing's own patient acceptances and cognitions cycle round — that is, after a patient acceptance a cognition manifests before the mind, and after that cognition a patient acceptance again manifests before it — and the cycling of the dharma-class and the subsequent-class categories is likewise so, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: the meaning of ascending and descending is the meaning of "wheel," just as a cart-wheel turns now upward, now downward; in just this way, the path of seeing takes its object now ascending, now descending — that is, having taken the desire realm as its object, it then takes the peak of existence as its object, and, having taken the peak of existence as its object, it again takes the desire realm as its object — and the same is said of its counteraction, ascending and descending, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: the path of seeing is spoken of as a "wheel" because it resembles the spokes, hub, and rim of an actual wheel — just as, in a cart-wheel, the hub sits at the very center, the spokes depend upon and rest in the hub, and the rim gathers in the spokes; in just this way, within the path of seeing, the patient acceptances and cognitions with respect to suffering and origin are like the spokes, the patient acceptance and cognition of cessation are like the hub, and the patient acceptance and cognition of the path are like the rim, since the path pervasively takes all as its object. Some further say: the patient acceptances and cognitions with respect to suffering, origin, and cessation are like the spokes; the three truths are like the hub; and the truth of the path is like the rim. Some further say: the patient acceptances and cognitions with respect to the three truths are like the spokes; the patient acceptance and cognition of the path are like the rim; and the four truths are like the hub. Some further say: right view, right intention, and right effort are like the spokes; right speech, right action, and right livelihood are like the hub; and right mindfulness and right concentration are like the rim. Some further say: right intention, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration are like the spokes; right speech, right action, and right livelihood are like the hub; and right view is like the rim. Some further say: only right concentration is like the rim, the rest as explained before. Some say: the meaning of subduing the four quarters is the meaning of "wheel,"

just as a wheel-turning king's own wheel-treasure subdues every enemy across the four continents, so too does the practitioner, by means of the wheel of the path of seeing, subdue every affliction with respect to the four truths, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. Some say: the afflictions abandoned by seeing are named the non-Dharma-wheel, since they are able to give rise to the eight wrong path-factors; the path of seeing is the proximate counteraction to these, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel. The Venerable Ghoṣa states: the trainee's eightfold path, coalescing together, turns all at once within another's own mental continuum, and it is for this reason that it is named the Dharma-wheel; and, since the path of seeing is the supreme stage of this eightfold path, it alone is named the Dharma-wheel. At what point should one say that the Dharma-wheel has been turned? Answer: at the very moment the Venerable Ājñāta-Kauṇḍinya sees the Dharma. Question: why is this treatise composed again? Answer: although the intrinsic nature of the Dharma-wheel has already been displayed above, its function has not yet been displayed; it is in order to display this that the treatise is now composed. Some say:

it is in order to refute the Mahāsāṃghika school's claim that the very words expressing the Dharma constitute the intrinsic nature of the Dharma-wheel, which holds that every word of the Buddha is itself the Dharma-wheel — for, were the noble path itself said to be the Dharma-wheel, then the Dharma-wheel would already have been turned beneath the Bodhi tree; why, then, is it only upon reaching Vārāṇasī that it is named the turning of the Dharma-wheel? It is in order to refute this position that the treatise displays that the substance of the Dharma-wheel is precisely the noble path, and not the nature of the Buddha's own words — for, were it the Buddha's own words, then the Dharma-wheel ought already to have been turned when he taught the Dharma to the merchants beside the Bodhi tree; why, then, is it only afterward, upon reaching the country of Vārāṇasī, that the turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of? It should therefore be understood that it is only at the very moment the noble path arises within another's own body that the turning of the Dharma-wheel is named, since the noble path constitutes the very substance of the Dharma-wheel — and it is for this reason that the turning of the Dharma-wheel by the Buddha is said to occur precisely at the moment Ājñāta-Kauṇḍinya sees the Dharma. Question: if so, then the Buddha ought already to have been named as having turned the Dharma-wheel beneath the Bodhi tree — why, then, is it in the country of Vārāṇasī that the first turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of? Answer: the turning of the Dharma-wheel is of two kinds: first, turning within one's own mental continuum,

and second, turning within another's mental continuum. What occurred beneath the Bodhi tree was the turning of the Dharma-wheel within the Buddha's own continuum; what occurred at Vārāṇasī was the turning of the Dharma-wheel within another's continuum.

Because the Buddha takes benefiting others as his own proper task, it is with reference to turning it within another's continuum that the first turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of. Some say: turning the Dharma-wheel is of two kinds, shared and unshared — the Dharma-wheel turned beneath the Bodhi tree, concerning the dharma of benefiting oneself, is shared with the two vehicles, whereas the Dharma-wheel turned in the country of Vārāṇasī, concerning the dharma of benefiting others, is not shared with the two vehicles; and it is with reference to what is unshared that it is said that the first turning of the Dharma-wheel occurred there. Some say: the reverse is meant by "shared" and "unshared," and it is with reference to what is shared that its turning is spoken of — and the same holds for what is shared/unshared and what is previously experienced/never before experienced. Some say: it is only when the turning surpasses that of a pratyekabuddha that it is called the first turning — that is, pratyekabuddhas, too, are able to turn it within their own continuum, but are unable to turn it within another's, whereas the Buddha alone is able to turn it within another's continuum as well. Some say: it is only when there is someone present to serve as witness to the turning that the first turning is spoken of — that is, it was only once the five monks had realized the truth of non-self that they became capable of serving, for the Buddha, as witnesses to the turning of the Dharma-wheel. Some say: the Dharma-wheel turned at Vārāṇasī is the very fruit of the labor of the austerities the Buddha had cultivated over three incalculable eons in the past, and it is for this reason that it is called the first turning. Why is this? Because, had the Buddha wished to attain parinirvāṇa in the presence of some past Buddha, he could have done so at will; the very reason he instead spent three incalculable eons diligently cultivating a hundred thousand austerities, seeking skill with respect to the aggregates, sense-fields, and elements, was entirely for the sake of benefiting the sentient beings he was to convert, constantly making this vow: "once I realize unsurpassed awakening, I shall open the gate of the deathless for sentient beings, causing them all to be liberated from the prison of birth-and-death." Hence what is now turned is precisely the fruit of those past austerities. Some say: it is only when one is able to subdue the affliction within another's own body that this is properly named the true function of the Dharma-wheel — just as a king's own wheel-treasure subdues foreign lands, not merely the palace in which he himself resides; the Tathāgata's own Dharma-wheel is likewise so, and it is with reference to this that the first turning of the Dharma-wheel by the Buddha is spoken of. Question: if the turning of the Dharma-wheel is named precisely at the moment the noble path arises within another's own body, why is it said that the Buddha turns the Dharma-wheel? Answer: this is said with reference to the causal agency of the one who turns it — that is, had the World-Honored One not extended, as it were, the hand of his own speech to turn it for him, the noble path within that person's own body could never have arisen at all from any other cause; its arising is entirely due to the Buddha's own power, and it is for this reason that the Buddha is said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel — just as, before a wheel-turning king has placed his own wheel-treasure in his left or right hand and turned it, not even the gods themselves are able to turn it; only once the king has turned it are they able to turn it as well, and it is for this reason that the wheel-king alone is said to be able to turn it, and not they — it is the same in this case. Some say: this is said with reference to the condition of awakening — that is, although the noble path is indeed present within that person's own body, so long as it is not touched and illumined by the light of the Buddha's own words, it has no way of arising; its arising is entirely due to the Buddha's own power, and it is for this reason that the Buddha is said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel — just as, among the various lotuses, such as the blue utpala, growing in a pond, so long as they are not touched and illumined by the light of the sun, they neither open, nor bloom, nor give off fragrance, whereas, once illumined by sunlight, they open, bloom, and give off fragrance — it is the same in this case. Some say: this is said with reference to the condition of removing obstruction — that is, although the noble path is indeed present within that person's own body, were the Buddha not to remove, by means of his own unprecedented skillful names, phrases, and syllables, whatever obstruction is present within that person's own body, the noble path could have no way of arising; its arising is due to the Buddha's own removal of obstruction, and it is for this reason that the Buddha is said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel. Some say: this is said with reference to the condition of assistance — that is, although the noble path is indeed present within that person's own body, were the Buddha not to water it with the water of the Dharma, the sprout of the noble path could have no way of arising; its actual arising is due to the Buddha's own assistance, and it is for this reason that the Buddha is said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel — just as a seed stored in a granary, lacking the many necessary conditions, will not sprout, and it should be understood that a sprout's arising is due to the power of assistance — it is the same in this case. Some say: this is said with reference to the condition of guidance and instruction — that is, although the noble path is indeed present within that person's own body, without the Tathāgata's own words to guide and instruct him, the noble path within his own body would not turn; it is because the Buddha reveals and instructs that this noble path turns, and it is for this reason that the Buddha is said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel — just as, in a dark room, once a lamp illumines it, one is then able to see the various objects that can be taken up — it is the same in this case. Some say:

there are two causes and two conditions from which right view is born: first, hearing the sound of another's teaching of the Dharma; and second, proper mental application. It is with reference to hearing the sound of another's teaching that the Buddha's own first turning is spoken of; it is with reference to proper mental application that another's own turning is spoken of. Some say: one who is complete with four dharmas is named one who has accomplished much.

That is, drawing near to a good friend, hearing the true Dharma, applying the mind properly, and practicing the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma. It is with reference to drawing near to a good friend and hearing the true Dharma that the Buddha's own turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of; it is with reference to applying the mind properly and practicing the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma that another's own turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of.

Question: at the very moment Kauṇḍinya abode in the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of suffering, the Buddha ought already to be said to have first turned the Dharma-wheel — why, then, is it only at the moment of the subsequent cognition of the path that it is named the turning? Answer: although it may already be named a turning at the moment of the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of suffering, it is not yet complete; it is only at the moment of the subsequent cognition of the path that the turning is complete. Some say:

it is at the moment of the subsequent cognition of the path that three causal conditions are complete, and it is for this reason that it is named the turning — first, relinquishing the path previously experienced; second, attaining the path never before experienced; and third, the uniform realization of the severance of the fetters.

Some say: it is at the moment of the subsequent cognition of the path that five causal conditions are complete, and it is for this reason that it is named the turning — first, relinquishing the path previously experienced; second, attaining the path never before experienced; third, the uniform realization of the severance of the fetters; fourth, the simultaneous attainment of the eight cognitions; and fifth, the simultaneous cultivation of the sixteen modes of activity. "Relinquishing the path previously experienced" refers to relinquishing the path of seeing; "attaining the path never before experienced" refers to attaining the path of cultivation; "the uniform realization of the severance of the fetters" refers to realizing the severance, abandoned by seeing across all three realms, of what pertains to origin; "the simultaneous attainment of the eight cognitions" refers to the simultaneous attainment of the four cognitions of the Dharma and the four subsequent cognitions; and "the simultaneous cultivation of the sixteen modes of activity" refers to simultaneously cultivating the four modes of activity with respect to suffering, and so on up to the four modes of activity with respect to the path. Some say: it is at the moment of the subsequent cognition of the path that every affliction abandoned by seeing has already been severed — the afflictions without an external basis, those counteracted by patient acceptance, having eternally destroyed the very nature of wrong view — and it is only at that moment that it is spoken of as the turning. Some say: this word "turning" is spoken of with reference to the stage of arriving at a fruit that can be named and enumerated, one possessing a characteristic that can be described, with respect to which a dharma or person can be posited and spoken of; it is not that it was not already named a turning before that point. Some say:

this word "turning" is spoken of with reference to the place of rebirth one would take were one to die at that very moment; it is not that it was not already named a turning before that point.

As the sūtra states, when the Buddha taught this Dharma-gateway, the Venerable Kauṇḍinya, together with eighty thousand devas, became free of dust, free of stain, and gave rise to the pure Dharma-eye with respect to all dharmas. Here, "free of dust" refers to being free of the latent tendencies; "free of stain" refers to being free of the defilement of the entanglements; "with respect to all dharmas" refers to with respect to the four noble truths; and "giving rise to the pure Dharma-eye" refers to the arising of the pure Dharma-eye that sees the four noble truths. Question: when the Buddha taught this Dharma-gateway, all five monks alike saw the Dharma — why, then, is only Kauṇḍinya spoken of? Answer: because Kauṇḍinya saw the Dharma first — that is, Kauṇḍinya had already entered the path of seeing, while the other four still remained in the stage of the wholesome roots conducive to penetration. Some say: the World-Honored One had a former vow with respect to him, and, taking him as the foremost, turned the Dharma-wheel — and it is for this reason that he alone is specifically mentioned. On this account the Buddha said to Kauṇḍinya, "have you now understood?" and he replied, "I have understood"; and the second and third times were likewise so, and it is on this account that he was given the name Ājñāta ["he who has understood"]. Question: why did the World-Honored One question him three times? Answer: once Kauṇḍinya had seen the noble truths, the World-Honored One gave rise to the cognition of the prior and posterior limits and made this observation: "are the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields of the continuum that Kauṇḍinya would otherwise have had to undergo in the evil destinies more numerous, or are the moments, instants, and periods of time I myself passed through over my three incalculable eons in the past more numerous?" Having observed this, he saw that the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields of the continuum that Kauṇḍinya would otherwise have had to undergo in the Avīci hell were indeed more numerous than the moments, instants, and periods of time he himself had passed through over his three incalculable eons in the past. Having seen this, he reflected: "I cultivated countless hundreds of thousands of difficult austerities over three incalculable eons, and have now attained unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening; yet merely to cause Kauṇḍinya to abide, for so vast a span of continuum in the Avīci hell, in a state where such rebirth no longer arises — even were I to enter parinirvāṇa this very instant, the fruit of my own toil would already be fulfilled, let alone accomplishing anything further" — and it was out of this deep and joyful satisfaction that he questioned him three times over. Furthermore, the Buddha saw that, from an inconceivably distant original limit onward, Kauṇḍinya had bound all sentient beings through the fetters of affliction, and all sentient beings had likewise bound Kauṇḍinya through the fetters of affliction; and he further saw that Kauṇḍinya had taken conception within the continuum of every sentient being, and every sentient being had likewise taken conception within Kauṇḍinya's own continuum, each mutually harming and devouring the other — and the same account applies to the posterior limit as to the prior limit. Having seen this, the Buddha reflected: "merely to free this one person, Kauṇḍinya, from all such entanglement with every sentient being is already sufficient to fulfill the fruit of the austerities I cultivated over three incalculable eons — how much more so, then, were I to bring benefit to countless further sentient beings!" — and it was out of this deep and joyful satisfaction that he questioned him three times. Some say: it was in order to put an end to slander that he questioned him three times over. How did this come about? It has been heard that, in the past, when the Buddha, as a bodhisattva, grew weary of old age, sickness, and death, and left the city of Kapilavastu to seek unsurpassed wisdom, King Śuddhodana dispatched five men of the Śākya clan to follow and attend upon him — two on his mother's side, and three on his father's side. The two on his mother's side held that purity was attained through the fulfillment of desire; the three on his father's side held that purity was attained through austerities. When the bodhisattva was cultivating austerities, the two on his mother's side, unable to bear it, departed; the bodhisattva, knowing that austerities were not, after all, the path, gave them up and took milk-gruel, soup, and rice, anointed his body with oil, and accustomed himself to the middle way of practice. The three on his father's side, all supposing the bodhisattva to have gone mad and lost his senses, likewise departed; whereupon two women, namely Nandā and Nandabalā, came instead to attend upon him.

At that time the bodhisattva reflected: "were those five men not to have abandoned me, how could I now let these women come near me?" The bodhisattva, having received sixteen portions of milk-rice, felt his bodily strength gradually increase; and, having received grass from an auspicious person, he went to the Bodhi tree, spread out his grass seat, and sat down cross-legged, making this vow: "I shall not rise from this seat until I have subdued the armies of Māra, eternally severed every contaminant, and realized unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening." Having made this vow, he at once crushed thirty-six koṭi of Māra's own evil armies, and, with thirty-four mind-moments, attained unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening. With his Buddha-eye he surveyed every world-system to see who ought to be the very first to hear his true Dharma, that he might teach him; having observed this, he knew that the son of Rudraka Rāmaputra ought to hear his Dharma first. At that time a deva reported to the Buddha: "the son of Rudraka Rāmaputra passed away yesterday" — some say, seven days before. The World-Honored One then likewise gave rise to knowledge and insight confirming his death, and, grieving, exclaimed: "he has lost a great benefit — had he heard the Dharma I taught, he would surely have attained true understanding." The World-Honored One further observed, setting him aside, who else ought to be the very first to hear his Dharma, that he might teach him; having observed this, he knew that Ārāḍa Kālāma ought to hear his Dharma first. The deva again reported: "Ārāḍa Kālāma passed away seven days ago" — some say, yesterday. The World-Honored One then likewise gave rise to knowledge and insight confirming his death, and, grieving, exclaimed: "he has lost a great benefit — had he heard the Dharma I taught, he would surely have attained true understanding." Question: at the very moment the Buddha first attained unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, why did he not teach the Dharma to these two men, allowing them instead to die without ever hearing it — was this not a missed opportunity for conversion? Some say: the World-Honored One, having only just become a Buddha, had not yet given rise to the intention of teaching the Dharma to others, nor had he yet extended his great compassion to embrace the whole realm of sentient beings, and hence there was no fault of a missed opportunity for guidance. The Venerable Ghoṣa states: at the very moment the Buddha first attained unsurpassed awakening, so deeply did he cherish the Dharma that he spent many days lost in contemplation, scarcely even giving rise to the thought of food or drink, let alone the thought of teaching others the Dharma. Others further say: at the moment he first became a Buddha, he had not yet established the distinction among the three categories of sentient beings, and, not yet knowing who was and was not fit to be converted, there was no fault involved. Some say: at that time, these two men's own wholesome roots were not yet ripe, and they were not yet capable of hearing the Dharma. Why is this? Because, once the Buddha had attained the path, the first of the two, had he lived fifty-seven more days, would have been capable of hearing the Dharma — some say

fifty-six days, some say forty-nine; and the second man, had he lived fifty-one more days, would have been capable of hearing the Dharma — some say fifty days, some say forty-three. On this account, this was not a missed opportunity for the Buddha's own conversion of beings — for, although the World-Honored One is at times able to prolong his own life-formation to await one he is to convert, as he did in waiting for Subhadra and the like, it is impossible for him to prolong another's life-formation on their behalf. Question: why, then, did the Buddha grieve and sigh? Answer: the Buddha had formerly taken these two men as his teachers, cultivating merely worldly concentration and failing to attain the true Dharma; now that the Buddha had himself realized the unsurpassed true Dharma, he wished to let them know it, and to benefit them by means of what he himself had realized — yet, since they had already died, he grieved and sighed. Question: it was said earlier that, had they heard his Dharma, they would have attained true understanding — at what stage is this "attaining true understanding" said to occur? Some say: this refers to entering the fixed nature of the noble ones; some say: to abiding in the stage of the wholesome roots conducive to penetration; some say: to giving rise to the wholesome roots conducive to liberation. According to this latter view: it refers to the point at which one is caused to relinquish every overweening pride regarding omniscience, and comes to know that the Buddha, the World-Honored One, alone possesses omniscience — it is at that point that one is named as having attained true understanding. The World-Honored One further observed, setting these two men aside as well, who else ought to be the very first to hear his Dharma, that he might teach him; having observed this, he knew that Kauṇḍinya and the other four ought to hear his Dharma first. He then reflected: "these are all my own father's and mother's kin, who came before to serve and support me with reverence — where, now, might I find them, that I may repay their kindness?" A deva then reported: "they are now in the Deer Park of the Sages, in the country of Vārāṇasī."

The World-Honored One likewise gave rise to knowledge and insight confirming their whereabouts, and, leaving the Bodhi tree, set out on foot for Vārāṇasī. Question: the Buddha possesses the most supreme supernormal feet — why, then, did he travel there on foot? Answer: it was out of reverence for the Dharma that he did not make use of his supernormal power; yet, as he walked, his feet always remained some four finger-widths above the ground, and each and every one of his footprints bore a joyfully whorling, auspicious, and lovely pattern, the mark of the thousand-spoked wheel distinct and clear as though painted. Wherever the shadow of his body touched, for as long as seven days afterward, any sentient being who came to that spot would find all their faculties put at ease and delighted. Gradually, in this manner, he made his way to Vārāṇasī.

At that time the five men, suddenly beholding the Buddha from afar, together agreed among themselves: "that Gautama, indolent, full of craving, mad and out of his senses, gained nothing at all — and now he comes again, wishing to entice us. Let none of us speak with him or greet him with reverence; we shall simply spread out a single ordinary seat and let him sit there or not, as he pleases." As the World-Honored One gradually drew near, overwhelmed by his own majestic power, they found themselves, against their own resolve, unconsciously rising all at once from their seats, hastening forward to welcome him, joining their palms in reverence. Among them, some spread a fresh, clean seat, some took the Buddha's own robe, some took his bowl, some offered water, and some washed his feet, all saying to him together: "please, do be seated." The Buddha reflected: "such foolish men, having set up their own resolution, have already broken it within a single moment." The Buddha then took his seat, sitting calmly and composedly, his majestic radiance as extraordinary as Mount Sumeru itself. At that time the five men, although now reverent, still addressed the Buddha as "venerable sir," or else called him by the name "Gautama." The Buddha at once told them: "do not address the Tathāgata as merely 'venerable sir,' nor call him directly by his clan name; if you persist in doing so, you will, through the long night of saṃsāra, gain nothing of benefit, and undergo every manner of extreme suffering. Why is this? Because the Tathāgata has already realized unsurpassed awakening and secure nirvāṇa, has crossed beyond birth, old age, sickness, and death, has awakened to the nature of every dharma, rescues and protects all beings, is honored throughout the three realms, and has accomplished boundless virtues and dharmas." The five men then said: "venerable sir, you are still the same Gautama as before — your bodily form and conduct are no different from days past: indolent, full of craving, mad and out of your senses, having abandoned austerities to take fine food and drink, anointing your body with oil so that your skin has grown full and glossy. Though we hear you, venerable sir, proclaim yourself to have realized unsurpassed awakening and secure nirvāṇa, who could possibly believe this?

— yet you forbid us even to address you by your own name and clan." The World-Honored One told them: "look now at my own countenance, my majestic radiance, my faculties, and my bearing — are these truly the same as before?" The five men replied: "looking at you now, venerable sir, you are indeed different from before." The Buddha said: "had I not realized the Dharma, how could I appear thus? You ought, on this very evidence, to recognize that I have attained unsurpassed awakening — why, then, do you still harbor disbelief toward the Tathāgata?" The World-Honored One then gradually won them over and brought them to submission. In the first part of each day, he taught, admonished, and instructed two of them, while the remaining three went into the village to beg for alms, the alms they gathered being sufficient for all six; in the latter part of each day, he taught, admonished, and instructed three of them, while the remaining two went to beg for alms, the alms they gathered being sufficient for all five — for it is the World-Honored One's own nature never to eat at an improper time. Teaching them in this way for three months — some say four — he caused the wholesome roots of these five men to ripen, and, on the eighth day of the bright half of the month of Kārttika, the Tathāgata turned the true Dharma-wheel for them. At that time Kauṇḍinya was the very first to see the Dharma. The Buddha then asked him three times, "have you understood?" — meaning by this: "do you now see me as indolent, full of craving, mad and out of my senses, one who has not realized unsurpassed awakening and nirvāṇa, and is deceiving you?" — and it was for this reason that he asked three times whether he understood. Kauṇḍinya, in turn, replied three times over, "I have understood" — meaning by this: "I now see the Buddha to be truly neither indolent nor full of craving,

nor mad nor out of your senses, but truly having realized awakening and nirvāṇa, and not deceiving me at all; I now serve as your own witness" — and it was for this reason that he replied three times, "I have understood." It is therefore in order to put an end to this very slander that the Buddha questioned him three times. Some say: it was in order to display the fulfillment of a former vow that he questioned him three times. How did this come about? It has been heard that, once, in the past, within this present fortunate eon, there was a king named Kalirāja, and at that time there was a sage called Kṣāntivādin, dwelling in a forest, diligently cultivating austerities. At that time King Kalirāja, having dismissed all men from his company, went with the women of his inner palace to make music and revelry in the forest, indulging his heart's desire in play, and, growing weary after a long while, fell asleep. The women of his inner palace, wandering the forest in search of flowers and fruit, beheld the sage from afar, sitting upright in quiet contemplation in his own dwelling-place, and hastened toward him; all of them gathered about him, and, upon arriving, paid him reverent homage and sat down around him. The sage then spoke to them of the faults of sensual desire — that every desire is an impure, foul, and filthy thing, worthy of censure and of aversion,

and asked, what wise person would draw near to it? All you sisters ought to grow weary of it and cast it aside. The king, waking from his sleep and finding the women gone, thought to himself: "could someone not have enticed and stolen them away?" and, drawing his sharp sword, searched everywhere for them, until at last he found the women seated in a circle around the sage. Overcome with great rage, he thought, "what great demon is this, enticing away my women?" and, going up to him, demanded: "who are you?" He replied: "I am a sage." The king further asked: "what are you doing here?" He replied: "I am cultivating the path of patient forbearance." The king thought to himself: "this man, seeing my own anger, simply claims to be cultivating patient forbearance — I shall now put him to the test," and asked him further: "have you attained the concentration of the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception?"

He replied: "I have not." The king went on questioning him in succession, down to: "have you attained the first dhyāna?" He replied: "I have not." The king, growing all the more enraged, said: "you are one who has not yet become free of desire — how, then, do you dare freely gaze upon my women?" He again said: "I am one who cultivates patient forbearance." "Then extend one arm, and let us see whether you can truly bear it." The sage then extended one arm, and the king, with his sharp sword, cut it off, and it fell to the ground like a severed lotus-root. The king again demanded: "who are you?" He replied: "I am one who cultivates patient forbearance." The king then had him extend his other arm, and cut that off as well, questioning him again as before; and the sage again answered as before: "I am one who cultivates patient forbearance." In this way he went on to cut off both his legs, and then both his ears, and further cut off his nose, questioning him each time and each time receiving the same reply — until the sage's body lay in seven pieces upon the ground, seven wounds altogether, and only then did the king's own fury subside. The sage said to him: "Your Majesty, why do you now grow weary of your own accord? Even were you to cut my entire body into pieces as small as mustard seeds, or even as fine as dust motes, I would still not give rise to a single moment's anger — patient forbearance, once spoken, admits of no second meaning." He then further made this vow:

"just as you, today, though I am truly innocent, have severed my own body into seven pieces, making seven wounds — so, in a future life, when I attain unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, I shall, with a mind of great compassion, and without waiting even for your own request, be the very first to cause you to cultivate seven kinds of path and sever seven latent tendencies." It should be understood that the sage Kṣāntivādin at that time is none other than the present World-Honored One, Śākyamuni, and that King Kalirāja is none other than the present Venerable Kauṇḍinya. It was for this reason that, once Kauṇḍinya had seen the noble truths, the Buddha, by his own supernormal power, removed the dark obstruction from his mind, causing him to recollect the events of that past life; and he then saw for himself that he had been King Kalirāja, and the Buddha the sage, and that he himself, with a sharp sword, had severed the Buddha's own body into seven parts, making seven wounds — yet the Buddha, far from harboring any resentment, had instead made a vow to benefit him. It was for this reason that the Buddha, the World-Honored One, questioned him three times whether he understood — meaning by this: "have I in any way gone back on my former vow? Has my original vow not now been entirely fulfilled?" Kauṇḍinya, overcome with the deepest shame, joined his palms in reverence and likewise replied three times, "I have understood" — meaning by this: "I now truly know that the World-Honored One has not gone back on his former vow, and that his original vow has now been entirely fulfilled; I, in my former folly, committed so extreme an evil — I beg only for your compassionate forgiveness of my grave offense." It is therefore in order to fulfill his own former vow that the Buddha questioned him three times. Some say: it was in order to display his own skillful power in teaching the Dharma that the World-Honored One questioned him three times — meaning by this: "I cultivated countless hundreds of thousands of difficult austerities over three incalculable eons, and yet, by means of skillful exposition, I have been able to cause this very Dharma I realized to be understood by him in but a single instant" — and it was for this reason that he questioned him three times. Some say:

the World-Honored One questioned him three times so that the remaining four, hearing this, would be inspired to renewed vigor and swiftly enter the path of seeing themselves. Some say: the World-Honored One wished to display that, within a well-taught Dharma, both teacher and disciple are utterly truthful and sincere with respect to the dharma each has realized, free of any overweening pride — unlike outsiders, who, not having attained the dharma at all, still give rise to overweening pride, supposing themselves to have attained it — and it was for this reason that he questioned him three times. Question: at the time of the Buddha's first turning of the Dharma-wheel, eighty thousand devas likewise saw the Dharma together with Kauṇḍinya — why, then, is the turning of the Dharma-wheel spoken of only with respect to Kauṇḍinya and the other four? Answer: what is spoken of here is only the primary intended recipients — the devas came to hear it on account of these five men, but were not themselves the primary intended recipients, and hence are not mentioned. Some say: it is because humans saw the Dharma first that they alone are specifically mentioned. Some say: it is humans, not gods, who are directly, visibly present. Some say: the Buddha's own bodily form, deportment, and conduct among humans are entirely the same as among humans, whereas this is not so among the gods. Some say: wherever it can be said that the Dharma has perished, that same place is where the turning of the Dharma-wheel is properly named — that is, even should there be those among the gods who realize the deathless, if there are none among humans who do so, this is still named the perishing of the Dharma, and it is for this reason that the turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of only with respect to humans. Some say: among humans, the Buddha's disciples are divided into the four assemblies, whereas this is not so among the gods. Some say: the Buddha turns the Dharma-wheel with humans as his witnesses, not with gods as his witnesses. Some say: among humans there are both those able to turn it and those for whose sake it is turned, and it is for this reason that it is spoken of with respect to them; among the gods there are only those for whose sake it is turned, but none able to turn it themselves, and it is for this reason that it is not spoken of with respect to them.

Some say: it is among humans that every kind of surpassing virtue can be attained, whereas this is not so among the gods, and it is for this reason that the turning of the Dharma-wheel is spoken of only with respect to humans.