Form, Visibility, Resistance, Contamination
Four more paired categories, each with the same fixed structure: what has form and what does not, what is visible and what is not, what is resistant and what is not, and — opening the treatise's account of defilement proper — what is contaminated and what is uncontaminated.
1. Having Form, Versus Being Formless
云何有色？幾是有色？為何義故觀有色耶？謂色自性故、依大種故、憙集故、有方所故、處遍滿故、方所可說故、方處所行故、二同所行故、相屬故、隨逐故、顯了故、變壞故、顯示故、積集建立故、外門故、內門故、長遠故、分限故、暫時故、示現故，是有色義。一切皆是有色。或隨所應，為捨執著有色我故，觀察有色。
What has form? How much of everything has form? For what purpose is this examined? Twenty senses make up what "having form" means: being form by its own nature; depending on the great elements; being an object of relish; having a location; pervading a place; being describable by location; operating within a location; being the shared object of two beings at once; being bound up with what has form; being followed by what has form; being disclosed; undergoing alteration; being disclosed through speech; being established through accumulation; belonging to the outward-facing gate; belonging to the inward-facing gate; extending across a long span; being bounded by a limit; being merely temporary; and being a mere manifestation. Everything whatsoever has form, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as having form.
T1606 works through all twenty senses; a few are worth singling out. "Being form by its own nature" is form's most basic sense — form itself, not merely something associated with form. "Being an object of relish" refers specifically to a kind of relish that has already been shaped by past experiences of contact and feeling, not present-moment craving. "Being the shared object of two beings at once" distinguishes form sharply from mental states: two people can both look at the very same physical object together, in a way no one can directly experience another person's own private feeling. "Belonging to the outward-facing gate" names desire-realm form, arisen from craving for the five fine sensual pleasures; "belonging to the inward-facing gate" names form-realm form, arisen instead from a concentrated mind's own craving — which is why beings there are traditionally called "mind-made bodies." And "being a mere manifestation" names the deliberately unreal forms a buddha or advanced bodhisattva displays for teaching purposes — form that looks real but is not.
2. Being Formless
云何無色？幾是無色？為何義故觀無色耶？謂有色相違，是無色義。一切皆是無色。或隨所應，為捨執著無色我故，觀察無色。
What is formless? How much of everything is formless? For what purpose is this examined? The reverse of having form is what "formless" means. Everything whatsoever is formless, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as formless.
3. Visible Versus Invisible
云何有見？幾是有見？為何義故觀有見耶？謂眼所行境，是有見義，餘差別如有色說。一切皆是有見。或隨所應，為捨執著眼境我故，觀察有見。
What is visible? How much of everything is visible? For what purpose is this examined? Whatever falls within the eye's own range is what "visible" means — its remaining distinctions follow the same pattern already given for "having form." Everything whatsoever is visible, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as the eye's own object.
云何無見？幾是無見？為何義故觀無見耶？謂有見相違，是無見義。一切皆是無見。或隨所應，為捨執著非眼境我故，觀察無見。
What is invisible? How much of everything is invisible? For what purpose is this examined? The reverse of visible is what "invisible" means. Everything whatsoever is invisible, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as not the eye's object.
T1606 notes that "visible" (having form the eye directly sees) is genuinely narrower than "having form" — sound, smell, taste, and touch all have form without being visible at all — but that everything can still, in a broader applicable sense, be called visible, since even invisible things can be visible indirectly, by being bound up with something that the eye does directly see (as tangible objects are still spoken of as visible through their association with visible shape and color).
4. Resistant Versus Non-Resistant
云何有對？幾是有對？為何義故觀有對耶？謂諸有見者皆是有對。又三因故說名有對，謂種類故、積集故、不修治故。種類者，謂諸色法互為能礙、互為所礙。積集者，謂極微已上。不修治者，謂非三摩地自在轉色。又損害依處是有對義。一切皆是有對。或隨所應，為捨執著不遍行我故，觀察有對。
What is resistant? How much of everything is resistant? For what purpose is this examined? Whatever is visible is also resistant. Further, resistance is established through three causes: by kind, by aggregation, and by not being mastered through concentration. By kind means that physical dharmas mutually obstruct and are mutually obstructed. By aggregation means anything from the level of an atom upward. By not being mastered through concentration means form that has not been brought under the free control of concentrative mastery. Further, being a basis for causing harm is also what resistance means. Everything whatsoever is resistant, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as not pervading everything.
云何無對？幾是無對？為何義故觀無對耶？謂有對相違，是無對義。一切皆是無對。或隨所應，為捨執著遍行我故，觀察無對。
What is non-resistant? How much of everything is non-resistant? For what purpose is this examined? The reverse of resistant is what "non-resistant" means. Everything whatsoever is non-resistant, in one or another of these applicable senses. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as pervading everything without obstruction.
T1606 notes a genuine exception folded into "resistance by kind": light and similar phenomena are classed as resistant even though they only ever obstruct — they are never themselves obstructed by anything else — which is why the treatise's own wording carefully says "mutually able to obstruct, mutually able to be obstructed" rather than simply "mutually obstruct," leaving room for this asymmetric case. "Not mastered through concentration" picks out ordinary physical form specifically, as opposed to the freely interpenetrating forms an accomplished meditator in a state of perfect equanimity, such as certain gods, can manifest at will without any of the usual physical obstruction.
5. Contaminated Versus Uncontaminated
云何有漏？幾是有漏？為何義故觀有漏耶？謂漏自性故、漏相屬故、漏所縛故、漏所隨故、漏隨順故、漏種類故，是有漏義。五取蘊、十五界、十處全，及三界二處少分，是有漏。為捨執著漏合我故，觀察有漏。
What is contaminated? How much of everything is contaminated? For what purpose is this examined? Six senses make up what "contaminated" means: being a contaminant's own nature; being bound up with a contaminant; being fettered by a contaminant; being followed by a contaminant; according with a contaminant; and belonging to a contaminant's own kind. The five grasped aggregates, the fifteen elements and ten sense fields entire, and a portion of the remaining three elements and two sense fields, are contaminated. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as fused with contamination.
云何無漏？幾是無漏？為何義故觀無漏耶？謂有漏相違，是無漏義。五無取蘊全，及三界二處少分，是無漏。為捨執著離漏我故，觀察無漏。
What is uncontaminated? How much of everything is uncontaminated? For what purpose is this examined? The reverse of contaminated is what "uncontaminated" means. The five ungrasped aggregates entire, and a portion of the remaining three elements and two sense fields, are uncontaminated. This is examined in order to abandon clinging to a self conceived as free of contamination.
T1606 unpacks the six senses concretely: a contaminant's own nature is a contaminant simply being what it is; "bound up with" names the mental factors that co-arise with a contaminant, along with the faculties a contaminant depends on; "fettered by" names wholesome-but-contaminated dharmas, which draw further rebirth precisely through a contaminant's own power even while remaining wholesome; "followed by" names dharmas belonging to some other realm that are nonetheless trailed by that realm's own underlying, dormant contaminants; "according with" names the aids to penetration — a stage of practice still technically followed by affliction's dormant residue, yet already established as belonging to the uncontaminated side, since it runs directly counter to everything conditioned existence stands for; and "belonging to a contaminant's own kind" names an arhat's remaining contaminated aggregates, still present only because of afflictions generated in some earlier lifetime, now spent. This last, subtle case — a genuinely liberated being whose present aggregates are technically still "contaminated" in origin though no longer capable of generating further affliction — is a useful reminder that this whole hundred-gate analysis is tracking precise technical senses, not simply sorting people into the "still deluded" and "already free."
Part 12 Complete
Four more paired categories are now examined: having form and formlessness, visibility and invisibility, resistance and non-resistance, contamination and its absence. Part 13 turns to conflict, defilement, and indulgence — three further paired categories that examine craving, hatred, and delusion's grip from three closely related angles before the treatise turns to the conditioned and the unconditioned.
Continue to Part 13 — Conflict, Defilement, and Indulgence →