The Small Seven and the Great Seven
Fascicle 184 continues the Single Practice Nyāsa (一行納息第五之二): the exhaustive sixfold analysis of possessing the empty and wishless concentrations in every combination of past, present, and future, the parallel sevenfold analysis for the empty and signless concentrations (whose asynchronous attainment produces its own distinctive cases), and a closing methodological reflection on the "great seven" — combining two concentrations against a third — together with a careful taxonomy of the four interrogative methods this literature uses throughout: single line, running through six, small seven, and great seven. This page carries Ru-Yi's complete translation.
Translation Method
The Chinese source is Xuánzàng's seventh-century translation of the Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā-śāstra (阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論), preserved in the Taishō canon (T1545, vol. 27) via the CBETA digital edition — public domain text, translated directly from the Chinese. The English wording throughout is Ru-Yi's own, and the reading notes are original, grounded in standard Sarvāstivāda scholarship rather than a specific named commentator's lecture transcript.
Fascicle 184 continues the Single Practice Nyāsa (一行納息第五之二) inside the Concentration Aggregate (定蘊第七), directly following fascicle 183's opening of the three concentrations. This fascicle is unusually technical even by this treatise's own standards, consisting almost entirely of an exhaustive combinatorial analysis; the translation follows the source precisely, including its characteristic repetition, since the repetition itself is the argument. Terms established across fascicles 93–183 recur here and are not re-explained at each occurrence.
Classical text is set in the left-hand column below, our English in the right.
1. Empty and Wishless: The Full Sixfold Analysis
Fascicle 184 continues the Single Practice Nyāsa (一行納息第五之二) by extending the previous fascicle's sixfold temporal analysis — does possessing a concentration in the past guarantee possessing it in the future, the present, both, or neither? — from a single concentration to a genuine pair: the empty and the wishless. The treatise works through every combination of possessing one in one time-frame and the other in another, each answer anchored to a precise meditative stage (which mind-moment of which direct realization of which of the four truths, or which noble fruit, or which type of refined faculty a given practitioner must occupy), producing an exhaustive cross-referenced map of exactly when the two concentrations travel together and when they can, briefly, come apart.
若成就過去空彼過去無願耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀三心頃。滅現觀四心頃道現觀三心頃。
Does one who possesses the empty concentration in the past thereby possess the wishless in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones — within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path —
及得預流果阿羅漢果。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起已滅。若得一來果不還果信勝解練根作見至。空無願三摩地已起已滅。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀一心頃。及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。設成就過去無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此位如答次前問說。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集滅現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無願三摩地已起滅不失。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼未來無願耶。答如是。此二決定俱時得故。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集滅現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。若得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。設成就未來無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說若依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀一心頃。若依無願三摩地入正性離生苦集滅現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。
and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry and the fruit of arhatship, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased; and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty and wishless concentrations have already arisen and ceased. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the single mind-moment of the direct realization of origin; and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. And does one who possesses the wishless in the past thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is exactly as explained in answering the immediately preceding question. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones — within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering, the four mind-moments each of the direct realizations of origin and cessation, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path — and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the wishless concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the future? Answer: yes, since these two are necessarily attained together at the same time. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones — within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering, the four mind-moments each of the direct realizations of origin and cessation, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path — and, if one has attained the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, or one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost. And does one who possesses the wishless in the future thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is each of these said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of suffering; or one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones — within the four mind-moments each of the direct realizations of suffering, origin, and cessation, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path — and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship;
若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼現在無願耶。答若現在前。謂若不起空或無相或有漏心亦非無心故言若現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失無願現在前。設成就現在無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生苦集現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失無願現在前。若成就過去空彼過去現在無願耶。答有成就過去空非過去現在無願。有及過去非現在。有及現在非過去。有及過去現在。成就過去空非過去現在無願者。謂空已滅不失無願未已滅。設已滅而失不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。
and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the present? Answer: only if it is currently manifesting before the mind — that is, provided one has not given rise to the empty, or the signless, or a contaminated state of mind, and is not without any mind at all, is it said, "if it is currently manifesting before the mind." Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the wishless in the present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments each of the direct realizations of suffering and origin, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the past and the present? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past but the wishless in neither the past nor the present; a case of possessing it in the past but not the present; a case of possessing it in the present but not the past; and a case of possessing it in both. "Possessing the empty in the past but the wishless in neither the past nor the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, while the wishless has not yet ceased — or, granting it has ceased, has been lost — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering, and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight,
空三摩地已起滅不失無願未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果。轉根故失亦不現在前。及過去非現在者。謂空無願已滅不失無願不現在前。
in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the past but not the present" refers to one in whom the empty and wishless have already ceased and are not lost, yet the wishless is not currently manifesting before the mind.
問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。
Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom
空無願三摩地已起滅不失。無願不現在前。及現在非過去者。謂空已滅不失無願現在前。未已滅設已滅而失。問此說在何位。答此說若依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀一心頃。及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願未已起滅先已起滅者。
the empty and wishless concentrations have already arisen and ceased without being lost, yet the wishless is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the present but not the past" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind, though it has not yet ceased, or, granting it has ceased, has been lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of origin, and up through attaining the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased,
由得果轉根故失而現在前。及過去現在者。謂空無願已滅不失無願現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生集道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無願三摩地已起滅不失無願現在前。設成就過去現在無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃集現觀四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無願三摩地已起滅不失。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失無願現在前。若成就過去空彼未來現在無願耶。答未來成就現在。若現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀四心頃。
it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty, yet is currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in both the past and the present" refers to one in whom the empty and wishless have already ceased and are not lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of origin and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and wishless concentrations have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the wishless in the past and present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the wishless concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the future and the present? Answer: he possesses it in the future; as for the present, only if it is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin,
道現觀三心頃及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失無願現在前。設成就未來現在無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生苦集現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。
and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the wishless in the future and the present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments each of the direct realizations of suffering and origin, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship;
若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失無願現在前。若成就過去空彼過去未來無願耶。答未來成就過去。若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答未來成就過去。若已滅不失則成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀三心頃。滅現觀四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果阿羅漢果。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。若得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空無願三摩地已起滅不失。若未已起滅。設已起滅而失則不成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀一心頃。及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願未已起滅先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。設成就過去未來無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此位如答次前問說。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集滅現觀各四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無願三摩地已起滅不失。空未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼過去未來現在無願耶。答有成就過去空及未來無願非過去現在。有及未來現在非過去。有及過去未來非現在。有及過去未來現在。成就過去空及未來無願。非過去現在者。謂空已滅不失無願未已滅設已滅而失不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。
and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the past and the future? Answer: he possesses it in the future; as for the past, if it has already ceased and is not lost, then he possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then he does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that he possesses it in the future, and in the past if it has already ceased and is not lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry and the fruit of arhatship, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty and wishless concentrations have already arisen and ceased without being lost. That he does not possess it in the past if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the single mind-moment of the direct realization of origin, and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the wishless in the past, the future, and the present? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past and the wishless in the future but not the past or the present; a case of possessing it in the future and the present but not the past; a case of possessing it in the future and the past but not the present; and a case of possessing it in all three together. "Possessing the empty in the past and the wishless in the future but not the past or the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, while the wishless has not yet ceased — or, granting it has ceased, has been lost — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering,
及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失亦不現在前。及未來現在非過去者。謂空已滅不失無願現在前。非已滅設已滅而失。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生集現觀一心頃。及得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。而現在前及過去未來非現在者。謂空無願已滅不失無願不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說若依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果阿羅漢果。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願不現在前。若得一來果不還果。
and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the future and the present but not the past" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind, though it has not yet ceased, or, granting it has ceased, has been lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of origin, and, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the wishless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet is currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the past, the future, and the present" refers to one in whom the empty and wishless have already ceased and are not lost, and the wishless is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry and the fruit of arhatship, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is not currently manifesting before the mind; or, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return,
信勝解練根作見至。空無願三摩地已起滅不失。無願不現在前。及過去未來現在者。謂空無願已滅不失。無願現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生集道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果阿羅漢果。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無願現在前。若得一來果不還果。信勝解練根作見至。空無願已起滅不失。
or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty and wishless concentrations have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the past, the future, and the present" refers to one in whom the empty and wishless have already ceased and are not lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of origin and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry and the fruit of arhatship, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind; or, if one has attained the fruit of once-return or non-return, or is one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, in whom the empty and wishless have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the wishless
無願現在前。設成就過去未來現在無願彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說若依無願三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無願已起滅不失。空未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失無願現在前。
is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the wishless in the past, the future, and the present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering, the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the wishless concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet the wishless is currently manifesting before the mind.
That two concentrations shown, only a fascicle earlier, to be attained simultaneously and to counteract the very same afflictions can nonetheless diverge in their temporal possession — one already ceased and lost while the other still manifests before the mind — reveals a subtlety this tradition insists on preserving: simultaneous attainment at the moment of arising does not collapse two distinct dharmas into a single fate thereafter, and each retains its own separate career across past, present, and future even after being born in the very same instant.
2. Empty and Signless: The Full Sevenfold Analysis
The same exhaustive method is now applied to the empty and the signless concentrations — a pairing with its own distinctive rhythm, since the signless is attained only later, at the specific moment the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of cessation arises, rather than simultaneously with the empty from the very outset. This asynchrony ripples through the entire combinatorial analysis, producing cases unique to this pairing — such as possessing the empty in the past while the signless has "not yet been attained" at all, a genuinely different condition from the signless having already arisen and then been lost — and the section closes by noting that the same sevenfold method, run in full for the empty against the signless, applies equally to the wishless against the signless.
若成就過去空彼過去無相耶。答若已滅。不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀四心頃。滅現觀一心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。設成就過去無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此位如答次前問說。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生滅道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無相已起滅不失。空未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼未來無相耶。答若得此謂已得名得即滅法智忍已生。問此說齊何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。設成就未來無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已。滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼現在無相耶。答若現在前謂不起空。或無願或有漏心亦非無心故。言若現在前。問此說在何位。答此說若依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。
Does one who possesses the empty concentration in the past thereby possess the signless in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of cessation and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering, the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, and the single mind-moment of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. And does one who possesses the signless in the past thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is exactly as explained in answering the immediately preceding question. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of cessation and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the signless has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the future? Answer: if one has attained it — "attained" here meaning already attained, that is, once the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of cessation has already arisen. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost. And does one who possesses the signless in the future thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation and the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the present? Answer: only if it is currently manifesting before the mind — that is, provided one has not given rise to the empty, or the wishless, or a contaminated state of mind, and is not without any mind at all, is it said, "if it is currently manifesting before the mind." Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type,
空三摩地已起滅不失。無相現在前。設成就現在無相彼過去空耶。
in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the signless in the present thereby possess the empty in the past?
答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說若依無願三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失無相現在前。若成就過去空彼過去現在無相耶。答有成就過去空非過去現在無相。有及過去非現在。有及現在非過去有及過去現在成就過去空。非過去現在無相者。謂空已滅不失無相未已滅設已滅而失不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相未已起滅。先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失亦不現在前。及過去非現在者。謂空無相已滅不失無相不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失。無相不現在前。及現在非過去者謂空已滅不失無相現在前。未已滅設已滅而失。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀一心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相未已起滅。先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失無相現在前。及過去現在者謂空無相已滅不失無相現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失無相現在前。設成就過去現在無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生滅現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。無相已起滅不失亦現在前。若成就過去空彼未來現在無相耶。答有成就過去空非未來現在無相。有及未來非現在。有及未來現在。成就過去空非未來現在。
Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the past and the present? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past but the signless in neither the past nor the present; a case of possessing it in the past but not the present; a case of possessing it in the present but not the past; and a case of possessing it in both. "Possessing the empty in the past but the signless in neither the past nor the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, while the signless has not yet ceased — or, granting it has ceased, has been lost — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the past but not the present" refers to one in whom the empty and signless have already ceased and are not lost, yet the signless is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the present but not the past" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind, though it has not yet ceased, or, granting it has ceased, has been lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet is currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in both the past and the present" refers to one in whom the empty and signless have already ceased and are not lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the signless in the past and present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the signless has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the future and the present? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past and the signless in the future but not the past or the present.
無相者。謂空已滅不失未得無相。與已得相違說名未得。即滅法智忍未已生時。問此說齊何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀四心頃非餘位。以彼必成就未來無相故。及未來非現在者。謂空已滅不失。已得無相不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生。道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相不現在前。及未來現在者。謂空已滅不失無相現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相現在前。但成就現在必成就未來故不別說。設成就未來現在無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生滅現觀四心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。無相現在前。若成就過去空彼過去未來無相耶。答有成就過去空非過去未來無相。有及未來非過去。有及過去未來成就過去空。非過去未來無相者。謂空已滅不失未得無相。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。集現觀四心頃。及未來非過去者謂空已滅不失。已得無相未已滅設已滅而失。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀一心頃。
"Not the past or the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, but the signless has not yet been attained — "not yet attained" being said in contrast to "already attained" — that is, the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of cessation has not yet arisen. Question: at what stage is this said to hold, precisely? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin, and no other stage, since such a one necessarily possesses the signless in the future. "Possessing it in the future but not the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and has already attained the signless, but it is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the future and the present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind — and, since one who possesses it in the present necessarily possesses it in the future as well, this is not separately explained. And does one who possesses the signless in the future and the present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the four mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the past and the future? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past but not the signless in either the past or the future; a case of possessing it in the future but not the past; and a case of possessing it in both. "Not the past or the future" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, but the signless has not yet been attained. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering and the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin. "Possessing it in the future but not the past" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and has already attained the signless, though it has not yet ceased, or, granting it has ceased, has been lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of cessation,
及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相未已起滅先已起者由得果轉根故失。及過去未來者謂空無相已滅不失。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。
and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. "Possessing it in both the past and the future" refers to one in whom the empty and signless have already ceased and are not lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of cessation and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship;
若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失。設成就過去未來無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就者。此說依無願三摩地入正性離生滅道現觀各三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無相已起滅不失。空未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。若成就過去空彼過去未來現在無相耶。答有成就過去空非過去未來現在無相。有及未來非過去現在。有及未來現在非過去。有及過去未來非現在。有及過去未來現在。成就過去空。非過去未來現在無相者。謂空已滅不失未得無相。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生苦現觀三心頃。
and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost. And does one who possesses the signless in the past and the future thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments each of the direct realizations of cessation and the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the signless has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the empty has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Does one who possesses the empty in the past thereby possess the signless in the past, the future, and the present? Answer: there is a case of possessing the empty in the past but the signless in none of the three times; a case of possessing it in the future but not the past or present; a case of possessing it in the future and the present but not the past; a case of possessing it in the past and future but not the present; and a case of possessing it in all three together. "None of the three times" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, but the signless has not yet been attained. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of suffering,
集現觀四心頃。及未來非過去現在者。謂空已滅不失已得無相未已滅。設已滅而失不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說若得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相三摩地未已起滅。先已起滅者由得果轉根故失。亦不現在前。及未來現在非過去者。謂空已滅不失。無相現在前未已滅設已滅而失。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀一心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空三摩地已起滅不失。無相未已起滅先已起滅者。
and the four mind-moments of the direct realization of origin. "Possessing it in the future but not the past or present" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and has already attained the signless, but it has not yet ceased — or, granting it has ceased, has been lost — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who has attained the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless concentration has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — and is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the future and the present but not the past" refers to one in whom the empty has already ceased and is not lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind, though it has not yet ceased, or, granting it has ceased, has been lost. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the single mind-moment of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty concentration has already arisen and ceased without being lost, while the signless has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased,
由得果轉根故失而現在前。及過去未來非現在者。謂空無相已滅不失無相不現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生道現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失。無相不現在前。及過去未來現在者。謂空無相已滅不失。無相現在前。問此說在何位。答此說依空三摩地入正性離生滅現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。
it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty — yet is currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in the past and the future but not the present" refers to one in whom the empty and signless have already ceased and are not lost, yet the signless is not currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of the path, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is not currently manifesting before the mind. "Possessing it in all three together" refers to one in whom the empty and signless have already ceased and are not lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: this is said with reference to one who, relying on the empty concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship;
若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。空無相已起滅不失。無相現在前。設成就過去未來現在無相彼過去空耶。答若已滅不失則成就。若未已滅設已滅而失則不成就。問此說在何位。答若已滅不失則成就者。此說即前所說諸位。若未已滅。設已滅而失則不成就者。此說若依無願三摩地入正性離生滅現觀三心頃。及得預流果乃至阿羅漢果。若信勝解練根作見至。時解脫練根作不動。無相已起滅不失亦現在前。空未已起滅先已起滅者。由得果轉根故失。如空對無相作七句。應知無願對無相亦爾。隨其所應盡當知。如小七應知大七亦爾。差別者以二對一。如以過去空無願對過去無相有七。
and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the empty and signless have already arisen and ceased without being lost, and the signless is currently manifesting before the mind. And does one who possesses the signless in the past, the future, and the present thereby possess the empty in the past? Answer: if it has already ceased and is not lost, then one possesses it; if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, then one does not possess it. Question: at what stage is this said to hold? Answer: that one possesses it if it has already ceased and is not lost is said with reference to the same stages already explained above. That one does not possess it if it has not yet ceased, or if, having ceased, it has been lost, is said with reference to one who, relying on the wishless concentration, enters the fixed nature of the noble ones within the three mind-moments of the direct realization of cessation, and up through attaining the fruit of stream-entry, and so on up to the fruit of arhatship; and likewise for one liberated by conviction who has refined his own faculty into one who has arrived through insight, and for one liberated dependent on time who has refined his own faculty into the unshakeable type, in whom the signless has already arisen and ceased without being lost, and is currently manifesting before the mind, while the empty has not yet arisen and ceased — where it has already arisen and ceased, it is lost on account of attaining a fruit or changing one's faculty. Just as this sevenfold set of questions has been run through for the empty concentration against the signless, it should be understood that the same holds for the wishless against the signless as well, applying to each in whatever way is fitting, exactly as explained. And, just as with the "small seven," so too should the "great seven" be understood, the difference being that here two concentrations are set against one — as, for instance, taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past signless, which likewise yields seven combinations.
Distinguishing "not yet attained" from "already attained and then lost" as two genuinely different non-possessions — rather than treating all absence as one undifferentiated category — is exactly the kind of fine-grained discrimination this tradition builds its entire technical vocabulary around: a person who has never yet reached a given attainment and a person who reached it and then regressed are, on this analysis, in meaningfully different states, even though both currently lack the same thing.
3. The Great Seven: Combining Two Concentrations Against One
The fascicle closes with a remarkable methodological reflection: having run the "small seven" (one concentration set against one, across seven temporal combinations), the treatise now considers the "great seven" — two concentrations taken together and set as a single unit against a third, again across seven temporal combinations, which could in principle be run recursively into an unwieldy "sevenfold-sevenfold" structure. After walking through a wasteful, technically correct but practically useless way of generating this structure, the treatise settles on the version that is "of genuine benefit to the text and to the meaning," before closing with a careful terminological taxonomy distinguishing four distinct interrogative methods used throughout this literature: "single line," "running through six," "small seven," and "great seven" — each defined by whether it fixes its terms by time, and whether it sets one term against one or two terms against one.
有說。此是大七種性故不應言對過去無相。所以者何。此但是一句故應作是說。如以過去空無願對無相有七。以此中具有七句故。有說。此中不應言有七。所以者何。此但是大七種性故。應作是說。
Some say: this belongs to the class of the "great seven," and hence it ought not to be said to be "set against the past signless" alone. Why is this? Because this is merely a single question, and it ought rather to be stated as: taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the signless, one obtains seven combinations, since this already contains seven distinct combinations within it. Some say: it ought not to be said that there are seven here at all. Why is this? Because this belongs merely to the class of the "great seven," and it ought rather to be stated as follows:
如以過去空無願對過去無相。次對未來。次對現在。次對過去現在。次對未來現在。次對過去未來。後對過去未來現在。
taking the past empty and wishless together, one sets them, in turn, against the past signless, then against the future, then against the present, then against the past and present, then against the future and present, then against the past and future, and last against the past, future, and present together —
無相有七以此中有一七句問。一七句答故。有說。此中所說顯於初句即有七句。所以者何。此中有七七句問七七句答。故如以過去空無願對過去無相作初句。次對未來。次對現在。次對過去現在。次對未來現在。次對過去未來。後對過去未來現在。無相為第七句。
this yields seven combinations for the signless, since there is here a single set of seven questions and a single set of seven answers. Some say: what is stated here in fact displays that the very first combination already yields seven further combinations of its own. Why is this? Because there are here seven sets of seven questions, and seven sets of seven answers — that is, taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past signless as the first combination, then against the future, then against the present, then against the past and present, then against the future and present, then against the past and future, and last against the past, future, and present together as the seventh combination —
復以過去空無願對未來無相作初句。次對現在乃至後對過去無相為第七句。復以過去空無願對現在無相作初句。次對過去乃至後對未來無相為第七句。復以過去空無願對過去現在無相作初句。次對未來現在。乃至後對現在無相為第七句。復以過去空無願對未來現在無相作初句。次對過去未來。乃至後對過去現在無相為第七句。復以過去空無願對過去未來無相作初句。次對過去未來現在。乃至後對未來現在無相為第七句。復以過去空無願。對過去未來現在無相作初句。次對過去乃至後對過去未來無相為第七七句。若作是說則唐捐其功於文無益於義無益。亦不成七七句。若欲於文有益於義有益亦成七七句者。應作是說。如以過去空無願對過去無相作初句。
then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the future signless as the first combination, then against the present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the present signless as the first combination, then against the past, and so on down to setting them, last, against the future signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the future-and-present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the present signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the future-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the past-and-future, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past-and-present signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-and-future signless as the first combination, then against the past-future-and-present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the future-and-present signless as the seventh combination; and then again taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-future-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the past, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past-and-future signless as the seventh combination of this seventh set of seven. Were one to proceed in this way, it would be labor wasted, of no benefit to the text and no benefit to the meaning, and would not even properly constitute the sevenfold-sevenfold set at all. If one wishes it to be of benefit to the text and to the meaning, and to properly constitute the sevenfold-sevenfold set, it ought rather to be stated as follows: taking the past empty and wishless together and setting them against the past signless as the first combination,
次對未來。次對現在。次對過去現在。次對未來現在。次對過去未來。後對過去未來現在無相為第七句。復以未來空無願對未來無相作初句。次對現在乃至後對過去無相為第七句。復以現在空無願對現在無相作初句。次對過去現在乃至後對未來無相為第七句。復以過去現在空無願對過去現在無相作初句。次對未來現在乃至後對現在無相為第七句。復以未來現在空無願對未來現在無相作初句。次對過去未來乃至後對過去現在無相為第七句。復以過去未來空無願對過去未來無相作初句。次對過去未來現在乃至後對未來現在無相為第七句。復以過去未來現在空無願。對過去未來現在無相作初句。次對過去乃至後對過去未來無相為第七七句。若作是說則於文有益於義有益成七七句。應知諸七義則如是。問此中一行歷六小七大七何差別。答名即差別。此名一行乃至此名大七。復次以一行道理為問名一行。以六句為問名歷六。以七句為問以一問一名小七。
then against the future, then against the present, then against the past and present, then against the future and present, then against the past and future, and last against the past-future-and-present signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the future empty and wishless together and setting them against the future signless as the first combination, then against the present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the present empty and wishless together and setting them against the present signless as the first combination, then against the past-and-present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the future signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past-and-present empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the future-and-present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the present signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the future-and-present empty and wishless together and setting them against the future-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the past-and-future, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past-and-present signless as the seventh combination; then again taking the past-and-future empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-and-future signless as the first combination, then against the past-future-and-present, and so on down to setting them, last, against the future-and-present signless as the seventh combination; and then again taking the past-future-and-present empty and wishless together and setting them against the past-future-and-present signless as the first combination, then against the past, and so on down to setting them, last, against the past-and-future signless as the seventh combination of this seventh set of seven. Proceeding in this way is of genuine benefit to the text and to the meaning, and properly constitutes the sevenfold-sevenfold set — and it should be understood that every such sevenfold structure follows this same principle.
Question: what difference is there among "single line," "running through six," "small seven," and "great seven"? Answer: the very names differ — this one is named "single line," that one "great seven," and so on. Furthermore, questioning by the logic of a single line is named "single line"; questioning by six combinations is named "running through six"; questioning by seven combinations, where one concentration is set against one, is named "small seven";
以七句為問以二問一名大七。復次問不相似法不以世定名一行。問相似法以世定名歷六。問不相似法以世定。以一問一名小七。問不相似法以世定以二問一名大七。一行歷六小七大七是謂差別。
and questioning by seven combinations, where two concentrations are set against one, is named "great seven." Furthermore, questioning about dissimilar dharmas without fixing them by time is named "single line"; questioning about similar dharmas fixed by time is named "running through six"; questioning about dissimilar dharmas fixed by time, where one is set against one, is named "small seven"; and questioning about dissimilar dharmas fixed by time, where two are set against one, is named "great seven." This, then, is the difference among "single line," "running through six," "small seven," and "great seven."
Explicitly rejecting a technically valid but practically wasteful way of generating the sevenfold-sevenfold structure, in favor of the version that is "of genuine benefit to the text and to the meaning," is a rare and valuable moment of methodological self-awareness: the treatise distinguishes formal correctness from actual usefulness, insisting that a combinatorial exercise earn its place in the text by illuminating something, not merely by being logically exhaustive.
Fascicle 184 Complete
This closes fascicle 184 of Ru‑Yi's translation, drawn from the treatise's true CBETA boundary. Fascicle 184 continues the Single Practice Nyāsa (一行納息第五之二): the exhaustive sixfold temporal analysis of possessing the empty and wishless concentrations together, in every combination of past, present, and future, each answer anchored to a precise meditative stage; the parallel sevenfold analysis for the empty and signless concentrations, whose asynchronous attainment (the signless arising only later, at the patient acceptance of the cognition of the Dharma of cessation) produces its own distinctive cases of "not yet attained" versus "already attained and lost"; and a closing methodological reflection distinguishing the "small seven" (one concentration set against one) from the "great seven" (two concentrations set against one), together with a full taxonomy of the four interrogative methods this literature uses throughout — single line, running through six, small seven, and great seven. Fascicle 185 continues within this same Single Practice Nyāsa.