The Ten Karmic Paths Analyzed in Full, and Every Destination They Produce
A rigorous Abhidharma-style analysis of the ten unwholesome and wholesome paths — twenty distinctions applied to each, then a further twelve tracing origin, cause, and fruit — followed by every specific destination they produce, from the eight great hells through every heaven up to the peak of existence. The fascicle closes by asking a sharper question: of those who walk this same ten-path road, which ones arrive at the śrāvaka path specifically, and why.
Which Acts Are Bodily, Verbal, or Mental
分別二地業道品之餘
菩薩住此地，自然不行惡，深樂善法故，自然行善道。
問曰：十不善道自然不作，自然行十善道。此二種道，幾是身行？幾是口行？幾是意行？
答曰：身意二三種，口四善亦爾，略說則如是，此應當分別。
不善身行有三種：所謂奪他命、劫盜、邪婬。
不善口行四種：妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語。
不善意行三種：貪取、瞋惱、邪見。
善身行亦有三種：離奪命、劫盜、邪婬。
善口行亦四種：離妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語。
善意行有三種：不貪取、不瞋惱、正見。身口意業道，是善不善應須論議，令人得解。
初奪命不善道者：所謂有他眾生，知是眾生，故行惱害，因是惱害則失壽命；起此身業，是名初奪命不善道。
離此事故，名為離奪命善行。
劫盜者：所謂屬他之物，知是物屬他，生劫盜心，手捉此物，舉離此處，若劫若盜，計是我物，生我所心，是名劫盜行。
離此事者，名為離劫盜善行。
邪婬者：所有女人，若為父母所護、親族所護、為姓所護、世法所護、戒法所護；若他人婦，知有鞭杖惱害等障礙，於此事中生貪欲心，起於身業；或於自所有妻妾，若受戒、若懷妊、若乳兒、若非道，是名邪婬。
遠離此事，名為善身行。
妄語者：覆相、覆心、覆見、覆忍、覆欲；知如是相而更異說，是名妄語。
遠離此事，名為遠離妄語善行。
兩舌者：欲離別他，以此事向彼說，以彼事向此說；為離別他故，和合者令別離，別離者則隨順樂為別離、憙別離、好別離，是名兩舌。
離如此事，名為遠離兩舌善行。
惡口者：世間所有惡語、害語、苦語、麁語、弊語，令他瞋惱，是名惡口。
遠離此事，名為離惡口善行。
散亂語者：非時語、無利益語、非法語、無本末語、無因緣語，是名散亂語。
遠離此事，名為離散亂善行。
貪取者：屬他之物，他所欲，他田塢、他財物，心貪取，願欲得。
於此事中，不貪、不妬、不願欲得，是名不貪善行。
瞋惱者：於他眾生瞋恨心、礙心，發瞋恚作是念：「何不打縛殺害！」是名瞋惱。
離如此事，名為無瞋惱善行。
邪見者：言無布施、無有恩報、善惡業無果報、無今世無後世、無父母、無沙門無婆羅門能知此世後世了了通達自身作證，是名邪見。
正見者：為有施者、有恩報、有善惡業報、有今世後世、世間有沙門婆羅門知此世後世了了通達自身作證，是名正見善行，是菩薩如是入正見道。
Distinguishing the Karmic Path of the Second Ground Chapter, Continued
"The bodhisattva, dwelling within this ground, naturally never practices evil, since they deeply delight in the wholesome dharma; they thereby naturally practice the wholesome path."
Question: One naturally never commits the ten unwholesome paths, and naturally practices the ten wholesome paths. Of these two kinds of path, how many belong to bodily conduct? How many to verbal conduct? How many to mental conduct?
Answer: "The body and mind each have three kinds, speech four for the wholesome likewise — briefly stated, this is so; this ought now to be distinguished in full."
Unwholesome bodily conduct is of three kinds: namely, taking another's life, robbery and theft, and sexual misconduct.
Unwholesome verbal conduct is of four kinds: false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech.
Unwholesome mental conduct is of three kinds: craving and grasping, anger and affliction, and wrong view.
Wholesome bodily conduct is likewise of three kinds: departing from taking life, robbery and theft, and sexual misconduct.
Wholesome verbal conduct is likewise of four kinds: departing from false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech.
Wholesome mental conduct is of three kinds: freedom from craving and grasping, freedom from anger and affliction, and right view. This karmic path of body, speech, and mind, whether wholesome or unwholesome, ought now to be discussed in full, so that it may be genuinely understood.
As for the very first unwholesome path, "taking another's life": namely, there exists another sentient being; knowing them to be a sentient being, one deliberately inflicts harm upon them, and, through this very harm, they lose their own life — giving rise to this bodily karma is what is called the unwholesome path of taking life.
Departing from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing from taking life.
As for "robbery and theft": namely, an object belonging to another; knowing this object belongs to another, giving rise to a mind of robbery and theft, seizing this object with one's own hand, and removing it from its own place — whether through robbery or theft, reckoning it now as one's own object, giving rise to a thought of "mine" — this is called the conduct of robbery and theft.
Departing from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing from robbery and theft.
As for "sexual misconduct": whatever woman is protected by her own parents, protected by her own kin, protected on account of her caste, protected by the law of this world, or protected by the very law of the precepts; or another man's own wife, knowing that there exists the obstruction of the whip, the rod, and every such affliction — giving rise, toward this very matter, to a mind of craving desire, and giving rise to this bodily karma; or, toward one's own wife or concubine, whether she has received the precepts, is pregnant, is nursing a child, or through an improper orifice — this is called sexual misconduct.
Departing far from this very matter is what is called wholesome bodily conduct.
As for "false speech": concealing what is genuinely the case, concealing one's own mind, concealing what one has seen, concealing what one accepts, concealing what one desires — knowing this very matter to be so, and yet speaking of it otherwise, is what is called false speech.
Departing far from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing far from false speech.
As for "divisive speech": wishing to separate another from someone else, speaking of this very matter to that person, and speaking of that very matter to this person; for the sake of separating them from one another, causing those in harmony to become separated, and, once separated, according with and delighting in this very separation, taking joy in this separation, favoring this separation — this is called divisive speech.
Departing from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing far from divisive speech.
As for "harsh speech": every evil word, harmful word, painful word, coarse word, and corrupt word found within this world, causing another to become angry and afflicted — this is called harsh speech.
Departing far from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing from harsh speech.
As for "idle speech": speech at an improper time, speech bringing no benefit whatsoever, speech contrary to the Dharma, speech without any beginning or end, speech without any cause or condition — this is called idle speech.
Departing far from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of departing from idle speech.
As for "craving and grasping": toward an object belonging to another, what another desires, another's own field or dwelling, another's own wealth — the mind craves and grasps at it, wishing and desiring to obtain it.
Toward this very matter, being free of craving, free of envy, and free of any wish or desire to obtain it, is what is called the wholesome conduct of freedom from craving.
As for "anger and affliction": toward another sentient being, a mind of anger and resentment, a mind of obstruction, giving rise to anger, reflecting thus: "Why should I not strike, bind, and slay them!" — this is called anger and affliction.
Departing far from this very matter is what is called the wholesome conduct of freedom from anger and affliction.
As for "wrong view": claiming there exists no giving, no recompense for kindness, that wholesome and unwholesome karma bear no fruit in recompense, that there exists no present life and no life to come, no parents, no ascetic and no brahmin able to know this present world and the world to come, thoroughly and directly, and personally bear witness to it — this is called wrong view.
As for "right view": holding that there does exist giving, that there does exist recompense for kindness, that there does exist a fruit in recompense for wholesome and unwholesome karma, that there does exist a present life and a life to come, that there does exist within this world an ascetic and a brahmin able to know this present world and the world to come, thoroughly and directly, and personally bear witness to it — this is called the wholesome conduct of right view; the bodhisattva, in this way, enters the very path of right view.
The precision here — protection by parents, by kin, by caste, by secular law, and by monastic precept named as five distinct grounds making a woman off-limits, or five separate ways speech can conceal what is genuinely the case — reflects this chapter's own stated purpose: not merely to list the ten paths as familiar categories, but to make each one "genuinely understood" through careful definition before subjecting all ten to the far more technical twentyfold and twelvefold analyses that follow.
The Twenty-Fold Analysis, Applied First to Killing
善道不善道，各二十分別；知何處起等，十二種分別。
菩薩於十不善道、十善道等種種別相，知二十種分別。
又於是二十種分別，善知「從何處起」等十二種分別。
於此十不善道中，有二十種分別：所謂不離奪他命罪：一、是不善。二、欲界繫。三、有漏。四、非心數法。五、心不相應。六、不隨心行。
七、或共心生、或不共心生。何等共心生？實有眾生，知是眾生，以身業故奪其命，是名共心生。云何名不共心生？若人欲殺眾生，捉持牽挽撲著地已，然後能死，是名不共心生。又！身不動，口不言，但生心「我從今日當作殺眾生」者，如是奪他命罪，是名不共心生。又！是不離奪他命者，若睡、若覺，常積習增長，亦名不共心生。
八、或色、或非色：初共心生殺罪是色，第二殺罪、第三、第四非是色。
九、或作、或非作：有色是作，餘者無作。
十、或有緣、或無緣：色是有緣，餘者是無緣。
問曰：是心為有緣，為無緣？
答曰：非有緣。
問曰：若心非有緣，身不動、口不言時，但心生念「我從今日當作殺眾生」者，如是罪業云何名為非緣？
答曰：若殺罪是心，則應有緣；今實殺罪，非是心。若心是殺罪，即是身業；而心實非身業，是故殺生罪不名有緣。但殺生罪共心在身中生，以是無作，故言非緣。
十一、是業。十二、非業相應。十三、不隨業行。十四、或共業生、或不共業生：如共心生無異，但除心與思共生為異。
十五、非先世業報。十六、不可修。十七、應善知。十八、應以慧證，不以身證。十九、可斷。二十、可知見。
"The wholesome path and the unwholesome path each receive a twenty-fold analysis; knowing 'from what place a given deed arises' and the rest is a further twelve-fold analysis."
The bodhisattva, toward every particular mark distinguishing the ten unwholesome and ten wholesome paths, knows this twenty-fold analysis.
And, further, toward this very twenty-fold analysis, skillfully knows "from what place a given deed arises" and the rest, a further twelve-fold analysis.
Within these ten unwholesome paths, there exists a twenty-fold analysis: namely, regarding the offense of never departing from taking another's life: first, it is unwholesome. Second, it is bound to the desire realm. Third, it is accompanied by outflows. Fourth, it is not a mental factor. Fifth, it is dissociated from mind. Sixth, it does not follow the conduct of mind.
Seventh, it may either arise together with mind, or arise apart from mind. What is meant by "arising together with mind"? A sentient being genuinely exists; knowing them to be a sentient being, one takes their own life through this very bodily karma — this is called arising together with mind. What is meant by "arising apart from mind"? Should a person, wishing to kill a sentient being, seize, drag, and throw them down upon the ground, so that they die only afterward — this is called arising apart from mind. And further: the body remaining motionless, the mouth remaining silent, and yet merely giving rise to this very thought — "from this day forward, I shall kill sentient beings" — this very offense of taking another's life is likewise called arising apart from mind. And further: one who has never departed from taking life, whether asleep or awake, constantly accumulates and increases this very tendency — this too is called arising apart from mind.
Eighth, it may either possess form, or be without form: the very first instance of this offense of killing, arising together with mind, possesses form; the second, third, and fourth instances of this offense of killing are without form.
Ninth, it may either be an active deed, or not an active deed: whatever possesses form is an active deed; every remaining instance is not an active deed.
Tenth, it may either possess an object, or be without an object: what possesses form has an object; every remaining instance is without an object.
Question: Is this very mind itself something that possesses an object, or is it without one?
Answer: It does not possess an object.
Question: Should the mind be without any object, and, at the very moment the body remains motionless and the mouth remains silent, merely give rise to this thought — "from this day forward, I shall kill sentient beings" — how, then, can this very karmic offense be called "without an object"?
Answer: Should this offense of killing be identical with the mind itself, it ought then to possess an object; yet this offense of killing, in truth, is not identical with the mind. Should the mind itself be this offense of killing, it would then be bodily karma; yet the mind, in truth, is not bodily karma at all — it is for this reason that the offense of killing cannot be called something that possesses an object. It is only that this offense of killing arises together with the mind, present within the body — since this is a non-active deed, it is therefore said to be without an object.
Eleventh, it is karma. Twelfth, it is not associated with karma. Thirteenth, it does not follow the conduct of karma. Fourteenth, it may either arise together with karma, or arise apart from karma: this is no different from arising together with or apart from mind, except that mind and volition arising together is what makes the distinction.
Fifteenth, it is not the fruit and recompense of a past-life karma. Sixteenth, it cannot be cultivated. Seventeenth, it ought to be skillfully known. Eighteenth, it ought to be realized through wisdom, not realized through the body directly. Nineteenth, it can be severed. Twentieth, it can be known and seen.
The distinction drawn here between an offense "arising together with mind" and one "arising apart from mind" addresses a genuinely difficult question in Buddhist ethics: does the wrongness of killing require the killer's own conscious intention present at the exact moment of death, or does merely setting a lethal chain of events in motion — dragging a victim toward their death, or even privately resolving in advance to become a killer — already constitute the same offense? The treatise's own answer treats both as equally real instances of "taking another's life" as a karmic path, even though only the first involves mind and object in the technical sense this analysis requires.
The Same Analysis Applied to Every Remaining Unwholesome Path
不離劫盜罪、不離邪婬罪、不離妄語罪中：但一、共心生，二、不共心生。一、有色，二、無色。一、作，二、無作。一、有緣，二、無緣。
餘如殺中說。不離兩舌、不離惡口，亦如是。
不離散亂語：或不善、或無記：從不善心生是不善，從無記心生是無記。
或欲界繫、或色界繫：欲界繫者，以欲界身心散亂語，是欲界繫；色界繫亦如是。餘如妄語中說。
貪取：欲界繫。是有漏。心數法。非心相應。非隨心行。心共生。無色。無作。有緣。非業相應。非隨業行。非共業生。非先世業報，除因報。非可修。應善知。應以慧證、身證。可斷。可見知。
瞋惱：或心相應、或心不相應：纏所攝名心相應，使所攝名心不相應。隨心行、不隨心行，亦如是。
共心生、不共心生：有覺眾生，與心共生；無覺眾生，不與心共生。
如心相應、隨心行、共心生，業相應、隨業行、共業生亦如是。
如心不相應、不隨心行、不共心生，業不相應、不隨業行、不與業共生亦如是。餘分別，如貪取中說。
如瞋惱，邪見亦如是。
Within the offense of never departing from robbery and theft, the offense of never departing from sexual misconduct, and the offense of never departing from false speech: only first, arising together with mind; second, arising apart from mind; first, possessing form; second, without form; first, being an active deed; second, not an active deed; first, possessing an object; second, without an object.
Every remaining point is as already explained under killing. The offense of never departing from divisive speech, and the offense of never departing from harsh speech, are likewise so.
As for the offense of never departing from idle speech: it may be either unwholesome or indeterminate — arising from an unwholesome mind, it is unwholesome; arising from an indeterminate mind, it is indeterminate.
It may be either bound to the desire realm, or bound to the form realm: as for being bound to the desire realm, this refers to idle speech spoken through a body and mind belonging to the desire realm — this is bound to the desire realm; being bound to the form realm is likewise so. Every remaining point is as already explained under false speech.
As for craving and grasping: it is bound to the desire realm. It is accompanied by outflows. It is a mental factor. It is not dissociated from mind. It does not fail to follow the conduct of mind. It arises together with mind. It is without form. It is not an active deed. It possesses an object. It is not associated with karma. It does not follow the conduct of karma. It does not arise together with karma. It is not the fruit and recompense of a past-life karma, apart from being its own causal recompense. It cannot be cultivated. It ought to be skillfully known. It ought to be realized through wisdom, and realized through the body as well. It can be severed. It can be known and seen.
As for anger and affliction: it may be either associated with mind, or dissociated from mind — what is subsumed within an active entanglement is called associated with mind; what is subsumed within an underlying tendency is called dissociated from mind. Following, or not following, the conduct of mind is likewise so.
As for arising together with mind, or apart from mind: toward a sentient being one is conscious of, it arises together with mind; toward a sentient being one is not conscious of, it does not arise together with mind.
Being associated with mind, following the conduct of mind, and arising together with mind — being associated with karma, following the conduct of karma, and arising together with karma are likewise so.
Being dissociated from mind, not following the conduct of mind, and not arising together with mind — being dissociated from karma, not following the conduct of karma, and not arising together with karma are likewise so. Every remaining distinction is as already explained under craving and grasping.
As with anger and affliction, wrong view is likewise so.
This section's own repeated "as already explained" and "likewise so" is not a shortcut around thoroughness but the source text's own deliberate compositional method: having established the full twenty-fold framework in exhaustive detail for the offense of killing, every subsequent unwholesome path is analyzed only where it genuinely diverges from that established pattern — a technique this treatise has used throughout its own technical passages, letting the reader hold the full structure in mind while the text itself economizes on repetition.
The Twenty-Fold Analysis of the Wholesome Paths
十善道中離奪他命：是善性。或欲界繫、或不繫三界：欲界繫者，以欲界身離奪他命，是欲界繫；非三界繫者，學無學人八聖道所攝離殺生正業。
是或有漏、或無漏：欲界繫是有漏，非三界繫是無漏。
非心數法。非心相應。非隨心行。
或共心生、或不共心生：何等是共心生？如行人見虫而作是念「我當身業遠離不傷害」，是名離奪命善行共心生。
何等是離殺生善不共心生？有人身不動、口不言、但心念「從今日不殺生」，是名不共心生。
又！有人先遠離殺生，若睡若覺心緣餘事，於念念中不殺生，福常得增長，亦不共心生。
或是色、或非色：一、是色，二、非色。一、是作，二、非作。一、有緣，二、無緣。
是業。非業相應。不隨業行。
或共業生、或不共業生：如共心生、不共心生，除心與思為異。
非先業報，除因報。可修。可善知。可以身證、慧證。
或可斷、或不可斷：有漏則可斷，無漏不可斷。可知見，亦如是。
離劫盜，離邪婬，離妄語，離兩舌，離惡口亦如是。
離散亂語：或欲界繫、或色界繫、或不繫三界：欲界繫者，以欲界身心離散亂語；色界繫亦如是。不繫三界者，如不殺中說。
或有漏、或無漏：有漏者繫，無漏者不繫。餘如離妄語中說。
不貪取者：是善性。或欲界繫、或非繫三界：欲界繫者，欲界凡夫不貪取及賢聖不貪取善行，是欲界繫。非三界繫者，諸賢聖不貪取無漏善行。
是或有漏、或無漏：欲界繫是有漏，不繫三界是無漏。
是心數法。心相應。隨心行。共心生。無色。無作。有緣。非業。業相應。隨業行。共業生。非先業報，除因報。可修。可善知。可以身證、慧證。
或可斷、或不可斷：有漏可斷，無漏不可斷。知見，亦如是。
離瞋惱：是善性。或欲界繫、或色界繫、或無色界繫、或不繫三界：欲界繫者，欲界不瞋惱善根；餘二界亦如是。不繫者，餘不繫。
是或有漏、或無漏：繫三界者是有漏，餘是無漏。
心數法。或心相應、或心不相應：與纏相違不瞋善根與心相應，與使相違不瞋善根與心不相應。隨心行，共心生亦如是。
無色。無作。或有緣、或無緣：心相應是有緣，心不相應是無緣。非業。或與業相應、或不與業相應，或隨業行、或不隨業行，或共業生、或不共業生：亦如心說。
非業報，除因報。可以身證、慧證。
或可斷、或不可斷：有漏可斷，無漏不可斷。可知見，亦如是。
正見：是善性。或欲界繫、或色界繫、或無色界繫、或非三界繫：欲界繫者，若凡夫若賢聖欲界念相應正見；是色、無色界亦如是。不繫三界者，賢聖無漏正見。
或有漏、或無漏：三界繫是有漏，不繫是無漏。
心數法。心相應。隨心行。共心生。無色。無作。有緣。非業。
業相應。隨業行。共業生。非先業報，除因報。可以身證、慧證。
或可斷、或不可斷：有漏可斷，無漏不可斷。可見可知，亦如是。
是名善等二十種分別。
Among the ten wholesome paths, as for "departing from taking another's life": it is wholesome in nature. It may be either bound to the desire realm, or bound to none of the three realms: being bound to the desire realm refers to departing from taking life through a body belonging to the desire realm — this is bound to the desire realm; being bound to none of the three realms refers to the right action of departing from killing, subsumed within the eightfold noble path, belonging to the trainee or the one beyond training.
It may be either accompanied by outflows, or free of outflows: being bound to the desire realm, it is accompanied by outflows; being bound to none of the three realms, it is free of outflows.
It is not a mental factor. It is not associated with mind. It does not follow the conduct of mind.
It may either arise together with mind, or arise apart from mind: what is meant by "arising together with mind"? As when a practitioner, beholding an insect, reflects thus: "I ought, through my own bodily karma, depart far from harming it" — this is called the wholesome conduct of departing from taking life, arising together with mind.
What is meant by "the wholesome conduct of departing from killing, arising apart from mind"? There exists a person whose own body remains motionless, whose own mouth remains silent, and who merely holds this thought in mind: "from this day forward, I shall not kill" — this is called arising apart from mind.
And further: there exists a person who has already departed far from killing in the past, and, whether asleep or awake, their own mind attending to some other matter, within thought after thought they do not kill, and this very merit constantly increases — this too is called arising apart from mind.
It may either possess form, or be without form: first, possessing form; second, without form. First, being an active deed; second, not being an active deed. First, possessing an object; second, being without an object.
It is karma. It is not associated with karma. It does not follow the conduct of karma.
It may either arise together with karma, or arise apart from karma: this is as with arising together with or apart from mind, except that mind and volition arising together is what makes the distinction.
It is not the fruit and recompense of a past-life karma, apart from being its own causal recompense. It can be cultivated. It can be skillfully known. It can be realized through the body, and realized through wisdom.
It may either be severable, or not severable: what is accompanied by outflows can be severed, while what is free of outflows cannot be severed. It can be known and seen, in just this same way.
Departing from robbery and theft, departing from sexual misconduct, departing from false speech, departing from divisive speech, and departing from harsh speech are likewise so.
As for "departing from idle speech": it may be either bound to the desire realm, bound to the form realm, or bound to none of the three realms: being bound to the desire realm refers to departing from idle speech through a body and mind belonging to the desire realm; being bound to the form realm is likewise so. Being bound to none of the three realms is as already explained under departing from killing.
It may be either accompanied by outflows, or free of outflows: what is accompanied by outflows is bound to a realm, and what is free of outflows is bound to none. Every remaining point is as already explained under departing from false speech.
As for "freedom from craving and grasping": it is wholesome in nature. It may be either bound to the desire realm, or bound to none of the three realms: being bound to the desire realm refers to the ordinary being's own wholesome conduct of freedom from craving and grasping within the desire realm, and the noble one's own wholesome conduct of freedom from craving and grasping — this is bound to the desire realm. Being bound to none of the three realms refers to every noble one's own outflow-free wholesome conduct of freedom from craving and grasping.
It may be either accompanied by outflows, or free of outflows: being bound to the desire realm, it is accompanied by outflows; being bound to none of the three realms, it is free of outflows.
It is a mental factor. It is associated with mind. It follows the conduct of mind. It arises together with mind. It is without form. It is not an active deed. It possesses an object. It is not karma. It is associated with karma. It follows the conduct of karma. It arises together with karma. It is not the fruit and recompense of a past-life karma, apart from being its own causal recompense. It can be cultivated. It can be skillfully known. It can be realized through the body, and realized through wisdom.
It may either be severable, or not severable: what is accompanied by outflows can be severed, while what is free of outflows cannot be severed. Knowledge and vision of it are likewise so.
As for "freedom from anger and affliction": it is wholesome in nature. It may be either bound to the desire realm, bound to the form realm, bound to the formless realm, or bound to none of the three realms: being bound to the desire realm refers to the very root of goodness of freedom from anger and affliction within the desire realm; the remaining two realms are likewise so. Being bound to none refers to whatever remains unbound.
It may be either accompanied by outflows, or free of outflows: what is bound to any of the three realms is accompanied by outflows, and every remaining instance is free of outflows.
It is a mental factor. It may be either associated with mind, or dissociated from mind: this very root of goodness of freedom from anger, contrary to an active entanglement, is associated with mind; this very root of goodness of freedom from anger, contrary to an underlying tendency, is dissociated from mind. Following, or not following, the conduct of mind, and arising, or not arising, together with mind, are likewise so.
It is without form. It is not an active deed. It may either possess an object, or be without an object: what is associated with mind possesses an object; what is dissociated from mind is without an object. It is not karma. It may either be associated with karma, or not associated with karma; may either follow the conduct of karma, or not follow the conduct of karma; may either arise together with karma, or not arise together with karma — this is likewise so, exactly as explained for mind.
It is not the fruit and recompense of karma, apart from being its own causal recompense. It can be realized through the body, and realized through wisdom.
It may either be severable, or not severable: what is accompanied by outflows can be severed, while what is free of outflows cannot be severed. It can be known and seen, in just this same way.
As for "right view": it is wholesome in nature. It may be either bound to the desire realm, bound to the form realm, bound to the formless realm, or bound to none of the three realms: being bound to the desire realm refers to right view associated with mindfulness within the desire realm, whether belonging to the ordinary being or the noble one; the form and formless realms are likewise so. Being bound to none of the three realms refers to the noble one's own outflow-free right view.
It may be either accompanied by outflows, or free of outflows: what is bound to any of the three realms is accompanied by outflows, and what is bound to none is free of outflows.
It is a mental factor. It is associated with mind. It follows the conduct of mind. It arises together with mind. It is without form. It is not an active deed. It possesses an object. It is not karma.
It is associated with karma. It follows the conduct of karma. It arises together with karma. It is not the fruit and recompense of a past-life karma, apart from being its own causal recompense. It can be realized through the body, and realized through wisdom.
It may either be severable, or not severable: what is accompanied by outflows can be severed, while what is free of outflows cannot be severed. It can be seen and known, in just this same way.
This is what is called the twenty-fold analysis for the wholesome and the rest.
The distinction drawn for "departing from killing" between an ordinary desire-realm instance and one "subsumed within the eightfold noble path, belonging to the trainee or the one beyond training" marks a genuine doctrinal subtlety: the very same outward act of refraining from killing can be either an ordinary wholesome deed, still bound to a realm and accompanied by outflows, or, once integrated into a noble one's own path attainment, an outflow-free instance of right action itself — the identical restraint carrying a categorically different status depending entirely on the wisdom that accompanies it.
The Twelve-Fold Analysis: Origin, Cause, and Fruit
從何起等十二論者：一、從何起，二、起誰，三、從何因起，四、與誰作因，五、何緣，六、與誰作緣，七、何所緣，八、與誰作緣，九、何增上，十、與誰作增上，十一、何失，十二、何果。
殺罪，從何起者：從三不善根起；又從邪念起；又隨以何心奪眾生命，從是心起。
起誰者：從殺罪邊所有諸法，已生、今生、當生。是因，緣亦如是。
何所緣者：緣眾生；又因何心奪眾生命，亦緣此心。
與誰作緣者：因殺罪邊所有諸法，若已生、若今生、若當生，是法緣於殺生罪。
何失者：今世惡名，人所不信等。
何果者：墮地獄、畜生、餓鬼、阿修羅等及餘惡處，受苦惱報。
增上，與誰增上者：如從「何處起」中說。
劫盜、邪婬、妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語、貪取、瞋惱、邪見亦如是，但所緣有異：劫盜罪緣所用物，邪婬緣眾生，妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語緣於名字，貪取緣所用物，瞋惱緣眾生，邪見緣名字。
餘殘亦如上。
不殺生，從三善根起；又從正念起；又隨以何心離殺生，從是心起。
起誰者：從是法所有諸法，若已生、若今生、若當生，是因，緣亦如是。
所緣者：緣於眾生。
與誰作緣者：因是不殺生邊所有諸法，若已生、若今生、若當生，緣於不殺生。
增上者：諸善根增上；正念亦增上；隨以何心不殺生，是心亦增上。
與誰作增上者：於是不殺生邊所有諸法，若已生、若今生、若當生。
何利益者：與殺罪相違，是名為利。
何果者：與殺生相違，名為果。
不劫盜、邪婬、妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語、不貪、不恚、正見亦如是，但所緣有異：不劫盜緣所用物。不邪婬緣眾生。不妄語、不兩舌、不惡口、不散亂語緣名字。不貪取緣所用物。不瞋惱緣眾生。
正見或緣名字、或緣義：有漏緣於名字，無漏緣於義。
是菩薩於善等論及起等十二論，行十善道，應如是分別知。
As for the twelve-fold analysis of "from what place a given deed arises" and the rest: first, from what place it arises; second, what it gives rise to; third, from what cause it arises; fourth, for what it serves as a cause; fifth, what condition it depends upon; sixth, for what it serves as a condition; seventh, what object it takes; eighth, for what it serves as an object; ninth, what predominant factor it depends upon; tenth, for what it serves as a predominant factor; eleventh, what fault it brings; twelfth, what fruit it bears.
As for "from what place the offense of killing arises": it arises from the three unwholesome roots; and further arises from wrong mindfulness; and further, according to whatever mind takes a sentient being's own life, it arises from this very mind.
As for "what it gives rise to": every dharma belonging to this very offense of killing, whether already arisen, presently arising, or yet to arise. Its own causes and conditions are likewise so.
As for "what object it takes": it takes the sentient being as its own object; and further, whatever mind serves as the cause of taking a sentient being's own life, it likewise takes this very mind as its own object.
As for "what it serves as an object for": on account of every dharma belonging to this very offense of killing, whether already arisen, presently arising, or yet to arise, these very dharmas take this offense of killing as their own object.
As for "what fault it brings": an evil reputation in this present life, being distrusted by others, and the like.
As for "what fruit it bears": falling into hell, the animal realm, the realm of hungry ghosts, the realm of the asuras, and every other evil place, undergoing a recompense of suffering and affliction.
As for "what predominant factor it depends upon, and for what it serves as a predominant factor": this is as already explained under "from what place it arises."
Robbery and theft, sexual misconduct, false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, idle speech, craving and grasping, anger and affliction, and wrong view are likewise so, except that the object each takes differs: the offense of robbery and theft takes the very object used as its own object; sexual misconduct takes the sentient being as its own object; false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech take names and words as their own object; craving and grasping takes the very object used as its own object; anger and affliction takes the sentient being as its own object; wrong view takes names and words as its own object.
Every remaining point is likewise as explained above.
As for "not killing": it arises from the three wholesome roots; and further arises from right mindfulness; and further, according to whatever mind serves as the cause of departing from killing, it arises from this very mind.
As for "what it gives rise to": every dharma belonging to this very matter, whether already arisen, presently arising, or yet to arise; its own causes and conditions are likewise so.
As for "what object it takes": it takes the sentient being as its own object.
As for "what it serves as an object for": on account of every dharma belonging to this very matter of not killing, whether already arisen, presently arising, or yet to arise, these take this not-killing as their own object.
As for "what predominant factor it depends upon": every root of goodness serves as this very predominant factor; right mindfulness likewise serves as this predominant factor; and further, whatever mind serves as the cause of not killing, this very mind likewise serves as this predominant factor.
As for "what it serves as a predominant factor for": every dharma belonging to this very matter of not killing, whether already arisen, presently arising, or yet to arise.
As for "what benefit it brings": being contrary to the offense of killing, this itself is called its own benefit.
As for "what fruit it bears": being contrary to killing, this itself is called its own fruit.
Not committing robbery and theft, sexual misconduct, false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, or idle speech, and freedom from craving, freedom from anger, and right view are likewise so, except that the object each takes differs: not committing robbery and theft takes the very object used as its own object. Not committing sexual misconduct takes the sentient being as its own object. Not speaking falsely, not speaking divisively, not speaking harshly, and not speaking idly take names and words as their own object. Freedom from craving and grasping takes the very object used as its own object. Freedom from anger and affliction takes the sentient being as its own object.
Right view may take either names and words, or the very meaning itself, as its own object: what is accompanied by outflows takes names and words as its own object, while what is free of outflows takes the very meaning itself.
This bodhisattva, toward this twenty-fold analysis of the wholesome and the rest, and this twelve-fold analysis of what a deed gives rise to and the rest, in practicing the ten wholesome paths, ought to distinguish and know them in just this way.
The closing distinction — right view accompanied by outflows taking mere names and words as its own object, while outflow-free right view takes the very meaning itself — recalls the bowl-of-oil teaching from Fascicle 7 and the treatise's own repeated insistence that words function as a genuine but provisional surface. Even within right view, the most cognitively sophisticated of the ten wholesome paths, this same gap persists: an ordinary practitioner's right view still operates through concepts and language, while a fully liberated practitioner's right view engages reality directly, unmediated by the names that merely point toward it.
Three Roots: Greed, Anger, and Delusion Behind Each Deed
又知！七種不善處，以貪瞋癡生；及四門分別，業眾生各二。
是菩薩知七不善業道，以貪瞋癡生，而分別於世。
又知七種不善業中，四門分別。
是殺罪，或從貪生，或從瞋生，或從癡生。
從貪生者，若人見眾生生貪著心，從是因緣，受用好色聲香味觸，或須齒角毛皮筋肉骨髓等，是人生如是貪心故奪他命，是名從貪生殺罪。
若人瞋心不喜殺眾生，是名從瞋生。
若人邪見，不知後世善惡業殺眾生，是名從癡生殺罪。
或以為福德故，或欲使度苦故而殺，如西方安息國等；復有取福德因緣故殺，以是殺業因緣故，欲得生天，如東天竺人於天寺中殺生，以此事故欲生天上，是名從癡生。
復有人以貪心故取他物，作是念：「以我當隨意，得好色聲香味觸」，是名從貪生。
復有人以瞋心不喜彼人故劫盜財物，欲令其惱，是名從瞋生。
復有人邪見，不知果報劫盜他物，是名從癡生。
如諸婆羅門說世間財寶皆是我物，我力弱故諸小人等以非法取用，若我取者，自取其物無有過罪，以如是心劫盜他物者，是亦從癡生。
若人貪著色因緣故而邪婬，是名從貪生。
若人瞋不喜，作是念：「是人犯我母婦姊妹女等，我亦還以婬事污彼母婦姊妹女等。」是名從瞋生邪婬。
若人邪見，不知果報而故犯者，是名從癡生。
如有人言：「人中無有邪婬，何以故？女人皆為男子故生，如餘所用物，如有所須若與從事，無邪婬罪。」以是心作婬欲者，是名從癡生。
如劫盜罪，妄語亦如是。
為貪財故妄語，是名從貪生。
為欲誑彼令得苦惱，是名從瞋生。
邪見不知業果報故妄語，是名從癡生。
兩舌、惡口、散亂語亦如是。
三不善道則是根本，從是分別生七種身口業果。
"One further ought to know: seven of the unwholesome matters arise from craving, anger, and delusion, and receive a further fourfold analysis, this karma and this sentient being each of two kinds."
This bodhisattva knows that the seven unwholesome karmic paths arise from craving, anger, and delusion, and distinguishes them accordingly throughout this world.
And further knows the fourfold analysis within these seven unwholesome deeds.
This very offense of killing may arise from craving, may arise from anger, or may arise from delusion.
As for "arising from craving": should a person, beholding a sentient being, give rise to a mind of craving attachment, and, through this very cause and condition, wish to receive and enjoy their own fine form, sound, fragrance, taste, or touch, or require their own tooth, horn, fur, hide, sinew, flesh, or marrow — this person, giving rise to this very mind of craving, thereby takes their own life; this is called the offense of killing arising from craving.
Should a person, through a mind of anger, take no pleasure in a sentient being and kill them, this is called arising from anger.
Should a person, through wrong view, not knowing the wholesome and unwholesome karma of the life to come, kill a sentient being, this is called the offense of killing arising from delusion.
Whether killing for the sake of merit, or killing wishing to liberate the victim from suffering, as among the peoples of the western land of Parthia and the like; or further killing for the sake of gaining merit through this very cause and condition, wishing, through the very cause and condition of this karma of killing, to be reborn among the devas, as when a person of eastern India kills within a temple of the devas, wishing, through this very matter, to be reborn in the heavens — this is called arising from delusion.
There is, further, a person who, through a mind of craving, takes another's own possession, reflecting thus: "Through this, I shall obtain fine form, sound, fragrance, taste, and touch exactly as I wish" — this is called arising from craving.
There is, further, a person who, through a mind of anger, taking no pleasure in another person, steals their own wealth, wishing to afflict them — this is called arising from anger.
There is, further, a person who, through wrong view, not knowing its own fruit and recompense, steals another's own possession — this is called arising from delusion.
Just as certain brahmins claim that every treasure of this world genuinely belongs to themselves, and, since their own strength is weak, every lesser person makes wrongful use of it — should they themselves take it, they take only their own object, and there is no offense whatsoever in this — one who commits robbery and theft with a mind such as this is likewise arising from delusion.
Should a person commit sexual misconduct through the very cause and condition of craving attachment to physical form, this is called arising from craving.
Should a person, through anger, taking no pleasure, reflect thus: "This person has violated my own mother, wife, sister, or daughter — I too shall, in turn, defile that person's own mother, wife, sister, or daughter through this very act of sexual misconduct" — this is called sexual misconduct arising from anger.
Should a person, through wrong view, not knowing its own fruit and recompense, deliberately commit this offense, this is called arising from delusion.
As there are those who say: "There exists no genuine sexual misconduct among humans — and why is this so? Because every woman is born for the very sake of men, just as any other object put to use; should there be some need, and should intercourse follow accordingly, there is no offense of sexual misconduct in this at all" — one who commits this act of sexual desire with a mind such as this is likewise called arising from delusion.
As with the offense of robbery and theft, false speech is likewise so.
Speaking falsely for the sake of craving wealth is called arising from craving.
Speaking falsely wishing to deceive another, causing them suffering and affliction, is called arising from anger.
Speaking falsely through wrong view, not knowing the fruit and recompense of karma, is called arising from delusion.
Divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech are likewise so.
These three unwholesome paths of craving, anger, and delusion are themselves the very root, from which, distinguished in turn, the seven kinds of bodily and verbal karmic fruit arise.
The examples given for killing motivated by delusion are pointed rather than abstract — naming a specific outside people's own sacrificial practice, and a specific practice of temple killing among Indian devotees seeking heavenly rebirth — treating sincerely religious motivation for killing as no less an instance of delusion than crude ignorance of karmic consequence. The brahmin argument that all worldly wealth already belongs to brahmins by right, so taking it back is no theft, receives the same classification: a rationalized doctrine functions here exactly like simple ignorance, since both equally obscure the genuine fruit and recompense the act will bring.
Distinguishing "Karma" from "the Path of Karma"
問曰：不離殺生，皆是殺生罪不？若殺生罪，皆是不離殺生耶？
答曰：有不離殺生即是殺生罪，有不離殺生非殺生罪。
何等是不離殺生即是殺生罪？
若有眾生，知是眾生，故殺奪命起身業，是名不離殺生亦是殺生罪。
何等是不離殺生非殺生罪？
此人先雖作殺因緣，而眾生不死。
又！身不動、口不說，但心念「我從今日當殺眾生」，是名不離殺生，非殺生罪。
是二門分別，為四種分別，所謂善、不善各二種。
不但善不善，身心二種業，亦復應當知，更有餘分別。
除身殺生、劫盜、邪婬，餘殘打、縛、閉、繫、鞭、杖、牽、挽等，但不死而已，如是不善身業，非奪命等所攝。
善中迎送、合掌、禮拜、恭敬、問訊、洗浴、按摩、布施等善身業，非不殺生等所攝。
意業中除貪取、瞋惱、邪見，餘所有不守攝心、諸結使等不善法。
又！意業中除不貪取、不瞋惱、正見，餘善守攝心、信、戒、聞、定、捨、慧等善法。
七業亦業道，三業道非業。
殺生、劫盜、邪婬、妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語七：是業，即業道。
貪取、瞋惱、邪見：是業道，非業。此三事相應思，是業。
問曰：前七事何故亦是業，亦是業道？
答曰：習行是七事轉增故，至地獄、畜生、餓鬼，以是故名為業道；是七能作，故名業。
三是業道，非業者：是不善業根本，以是故名三業道，非業。
善中亦如是，所謂離殺生、劫盜、邪婬、妄語、兩舌、惡口、散亂語：亦業，亦業道。
餘三不貪取、不瞋惱、正見：是業道，非業。此三相應思，是業。
問曰：前七事何故是業，亦業道？
答曰：常修習此事故，能至人天好處名為道。是七能作故，名為業。
問曰：餘三何故但業道，非業耶？
答曰：三是諸善業根本，諸善業從中行故，名為業道，非業。
復次——戒法即是業，業或戒非戒。
業及於業道，有四種分別。
身口業：是戒。意業：是業，非戒。
業及於業道，四種分別者：有業非業道，有業道非業，有業亦是業道，有非業非業道。
業，非業道者：三種不善身業，業道所不攝，所謂手拳鞭杖等；及三種善身業，業道所不攝，所謂迎逆敬禮等，是二善、不善業，非業道所攝。
或有人言：「亦是業道，何以故？是二業或時至善惡處故，名為業道；以不定故，不說業道。」
業道，非業者：後三不善及三善。
是煩惱性故，非業；能起業故，名為業道。
三善是善根性故，非業；能起善業故，名為業道。
亦業，亦業道者：所謂殺生、不殺生等七事。
是非業，非業道者：餘法是。
Question: Is everyone who never departs from killing thereby guilty of the offense of killing? And should one be guilty of the offense of killing, does this mean one has never departed from killing?
Answer: There exists never departing from killing that is genuinely the offense of killing, and there exists never departing from killing that is not the offense of killing.
What is meant by "never departing from killing, and genuinely the offense of killing"?
Should there exist a sentient being, and, knowing them to be a sentient being, one deliberately kills them, taking their own life through this bodily karma — this is called never departing from killing, and likewise the offense of killing.
What is meant by "never departing from killing, yet not the offense of killing"?
This refers to a person who, though they have already created the very cause and condition of killing, the sentient being nonetheless does not die.
And further: the body remains motionless, the mouth remains silent, and yet the mind merely holds the thought, "from this day forward, I shall kill sentient beings" — this is called never departing from killing, yet not the offense of killing.
This twofold distinction becomes a fourfold analysis, namely, the wholesome and the unwholesome each of two kinds.
"Not only the wholesome and unwholesome, twofold karma of body and mind — one ought further to know that there exists yet another distinction besides."
Apart from bodily killing, robbery and theft, and sexual misconduct, every remaining act — striking, binding, confining, restraining, whipping, beating with a rod, dragging, pulling — merely fails to cause death, and this kind of unwholesome bodily karma is not subsumed within taking life and the rest.
Among wholesome deeds, welcoming and seeing off, joining the palms, prostrating, showing reverence, offering greeting, bathing, massaging, giving, and every such wholesome bodily karma is not subsumed within not killing and the rest.
Within mental karma, apart from craving and grasping, anger and affliction, and wrong view, there remain every other unwholesome dharma of failing to guard and restrain the mind, and every underlying tendency and the like.
And further: within mental karma, apart from freedom from craving and grasping, freedom from anger and affliction, and right view, there remain every other wholesome dharma of skillfully guarding and restraining the mind — faith, the precepts, learning, concentration, relinquishment, wisdom, and the like.
"Seven of these are both karma and the path of karma; the remaining three are the path of karma, but not karma itself."
Killing, robbery and theft, sexual misconduct, false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech — these seven are karma, and are likewise the path of karma.
Craving and grasping, anger and affliction, and wrong view are the path of karma, but are not karma itself. The very volition associated with these three matters is itself the karma.
Question: Why, then, are these first seven matters both karma and the path of karma?
Answer: Through cultivating and practicing these seven matters, this very tendency grows and increases, leading to hell, the animal realm, and the realm of hungry ghosts — it is for this reason that they are called the path of karma; and, since these seven are themselves capable of being enacted, they are called karma.
As for the three that are the path of karma, but not karma itself: these are themselves the very root of unwholesome karma — it is for this reason that these three are called the path of karma, but not karma itself.
Among the wholesome, this is likewise so — namely, departing from killing, robbery and theft, sexual misconduct, false speech, divisive speech, harsh speech, and idle speech: these are both karma, and the path of karma.
The remaining three — freedom from craving and grasping, freedom from anger and affliction, and right view — are the path of karma, but not karma itself. The very volition associated with these three is itself the karma.
Question: Why, then, are these first seven matters both karma and the path of karma?
Answer: Through constantly cultivating and practicing these matters, one is able to reach a good place among humans and devas — this is why they are called the path. Since these seven are themselves capable of being enacted, they are called karma.
Question: Why, then, are the remaining three merely the path of karma, and not karma itself?
Answer: These three are themselves the very root of every wholesome karma — since every wholesome karma proceeds from within them, they are called the path of karma, but not karma itself.
Furthermore: "The dharma of the precepts is itself karma; karma may be either the precepts, or not the precepts."
Karma and the path of karma receive a fourfold analysis.
Bodily and verbal karma are themselves the precepts. Mental karma is karma, but not the precepts.
As for the fourfold analysis of karma and the path of karma: there is karma that is not the path of karma; there is the path of karma that is not karma; there is what is both karma and the path of karma; and there is what is neither karma nor the path of karma.
As for "karma, but not the path of karma": the three kinds of unwholesome bodily karma not subsumed within the path of karma — namely, a mere blow of the fist, a stroke of the rod, and the like; and the three kinds of wholesome bodily karma not subsumed within the path of karma — namely, welcoming, showing reverence, and the like — these two, wholesome and unwholesome karma, are not subsumed within the path of karma.
There are those who say: "These too are the path of karma — and why is this so? Because these two kinds of karma sometimes lead to a good or evil place, they are thereby called the path of karma; yet, since this is not fixed or certain, the text does not name them the path of karma."
As for "the path of karma, but not karma": the latter three unwholesome matters, and the three wholesome ones.
Since these are of the very nature of the afflictions, they are not karma; since they are able to give rise to karma, they are called the path of karma.
These three wholesome matters, being of the very nature of a root of goodness, are not karma; since they are able to give rise to wholesome karma, they are called the path of karma.
As for "both karma, and the path of karma": namely, these seven matters — killing, not killing, and the rest.
As for "neither karma, nor the path of karma": every remaining dharma.
The distinction between "karma" (the actual enacted deed) and "the path of karma" (the tendency or route that either produces or results from such deeds) resolves an ambiguity easy to overlook in ordinary speech about the ten paths: craving, anger, and wrong view are themselves purely mental states, never literally "enacted" the way killing or theft are, so the treatise locates the actual karma in the volition (cetanā) associated with them, while the states themselves remain merely the path leading toward or away from this karma. The four-cell logical grid this section builds — karma without path, path without karma, both together, neither — is a recognizable Abhidharma technique for exhaustively mapping a conceptual distinction rather than leaving it as a loose intuitive pairing.
The Threefold Purity That Marks the Second Ground
復次——菩薩初地邊，以三種清淨，安住十善道，則生決定心。
是菩薩於第二地中，了了分別知如是十善、十不善道。知已，以三種清淨住十善道：所謂自不殺生，不教他殺，於殺生罪心不喜悅；乃至正見，亦如是。
問曰：菩薩初地中已住十善道，此中何故重說？
答曰：初地中非不住十善道，但此中轉勝增長，以三種清淨故。先初住中雖作閻浮提王，不能行此三種清淨，是故此中說三種清淨，菩薩住是二地。
知如是分別諸業，生決定心：世所有惡道，皆十不善生；世所有善道，因於十善生。
世間所有惡道者：所謂三種地獄道，熱地獄、冷地獄、黑地獄；三種畜生道，水行畜生、陸行畜生、空行畜生；種種鬼道，有飢餓鬼者、食不淨鬼者、火口者、阿修羅、夜叉等——皆由行十不善道，有上、中、下因緣故。
出世間所有善道，若天、若人，皆由行十善道生，三界所攝。
天，有二十八；人者，四天下人是。
如是決定知已，作是念：「我欲自生善處，亦令眾生生於善處。」是故我自應，住於十善道；亦令餘眾生，即住此善道。
若生善處、若生惡處，皆屬十善、十不善道；我知是世間諸業因緣有，無有定主，是故我應先自行十善道，然後令諸眾生亦住十善道。
問曰：何以故要先自住十善道，後乃令他住耶？
答曰：行於惡業者，令他善不易，自不行善故，他則不信受。
若惡人自不行善，欲令他行善者，則為甚難。何以故？是人自不行善，他人不信受其語。如偈說：若人自不善，不能令他善；若自不寂滅，不能令他寂。
以是故汝當，先自行善寂，然後教他人，令行善寂滅。
是菩薩當如是行善法。
Furthermore: "The bodhisattva, at the very border of the first ground, through this threefold purity, abides securely within the ten wholesome paths, and thereby gives rise to a resolute mind."
This bodhisattva, within the second ground, thoroughly and clearly distinguishes and knows these very ten wholesome and ten unwholesome paths. Having known this, through this threefold purity, they abide within the ten wholesome paths: namely, never killing themselves, never teaching another to kill, and holding no delight whatsoever toward the offense of killing; right up through right view, likewise so.
Question: The bodhisattva has already abided within the ten wholesome paths since the first ground — why, then, does the text speak of this once more here?
Answer: It is not that the first ground fails to abide within the ten wholesome paths — it is only that, within this very second ground, this abiding grows ever more supreme and increases, through this very threefold purity. Earlier, while abiding within the first ground, though one might become a king of Jambudvīpa, one was not yet able to practice this threefold purity — it is for this reason that this very threefold purity is explained here, as the bodhisattva abides within this second ground.
Knowing this very distinction among every karmic deed, one gives rise to a resolute mind: "Every evil path existing within this world arises from these ten unwholesome deeds; every wholesome path existing within this world arises through these ten wholesome deeds."
As for the evil paths existing within this world: namely, the three kinds of hell-path — the hot hells, the cold hells, and the dark hells; the three kinds of animal-path — aquatic creatures, terrestrial creatures, and airborne creatures; every kind of ghost-path — those who hunger, those who eat what is impure, those with a mouth of fire, the asuras, the yakṣas, and the like — all of these arise through the practice of the ten unwholesome paths, through causes and conditions of a superior, middling, or inferior degree.
Every wholesome path transcending this world, whether among the devas or among humans, arises through the practice of the ten wholesome paths, subsumed within the three realms.
Among the devas, there are twenty-eight; among humans, this refers to the people of the four continents.
Having thus resolutely known this, one reflects thus: "I wish both to be reborn myself in a good place, and to cause every sentient being likewise to be reborn in a good place." It is for this reason: "I myself ought to abide within the ten wholesome paths, and further cause every other sentient being to abide within this same wholesome path."
Whether reborn in a good place or an evil place, both belong entirely to the ten wholesome and ten unwholesome paths; I know that every karmic cause and condition of this world truly exists, yet possesses no fixed master over it — it is for this reason that I ought first to practice the ten wholesome paths myself, and only afterward cause every sentient being likewise to abide within the ten wholesome paths.
Question: Why must one necessarily abide within the ten wholesome paths oneself first, and only afterward cause another to abide within them?
Answer: "One who practices unwholesome karma finds it no easy matter to cause another to become wholesome; since they themselves fail to practice what is wholesome, another will not accept their own words with trust."
Should an evil person, who does not themselves practice what is wholesome, wish to cause another to practice what is wholesome, this becomes exceedingly difficult. And why is this so? Because this person themselves fails to practice what is wholesome, another person will not accept their own words with trust. As the verse says: "Should a person themselves be unwholesome, they are unable to cause another to become wholesome; should they themselves fail to attain tranquil cessation, they are unable to cause another to attain it.
"It is for this reason that you ought first to practice wholesomeness and tranquil cessation yourself, and only afterward teach another person, causing them to practice wholesomeness and tranquil cessation."
This bodhisattva ought, in just this way, to practice the wholesome dharma.
The observation that karmic causes and conditions "truly exist, yet possess no fixed master over it" makes a precise point within this treatise's own Madhyamaka commitments: rebirth in a good or evil place is genuinely determined by the ten paths, real cause producing real effect, and yet this causal chain operates without any controlling agent standing behind it and directing outcomes — neither a cosmic judge nor an unchanging self accumulating merit, only the deeds themselves and their own consequences. This closes the fascicle's own extended technical analysis of the ten paths; the next section turns from analyzing the deeds themselves to mapping every specific destination they produce.
Every Destination the Ten Deeds Produce, from Hell to the Heavens
從阿鼻地獄，乃至於有頂，分別十業果，及其受報處。
當如是正知，下從阿鼻地獄，上至非有想非無想處，皆是善不善種種業受果報處。於中習行上十不善道故，生阿鼻地獄；小減生大炙地獄、小減生小炙地獄、小減生大叫喚地獄、小減生小叫喚地獄、小減生僧伽陀地獄、小減生大陌地獄、小減生黑繩地獄、小減生活地獄、小減生劍林等小眷屬地獄中，亦應如是轉小分別。
行中十不善道，生畜生中；畜生中亦應轉少分別。
行下不善道，生餓鬼中。
如是總相說，是中應廣分別差別：有諸阿修羅夜叉生鬼道中，有諸龍王生畜生中，所受快樂或與諸天同；是諸眾生以不善因緣故生，生已受善業果報。
行最下十善道，生閻浮提人中，在貧窮下賤家，所謂栴陀羅、邊地、工巧、小人等。
轉勝生居士家，轉勝生婆羅門家，轉勝生剎利家，轉勝生大臣家，轉勝生國王家。
於十善道轉復勝者生瞿陀尼，轉勝生弗婆提，轉勝生欝單越。
轉勝生四天王處，轉勝生忉利天，炎摩天，兜率陀天，化樂天。
習行上十善道，生他化自在天。
於是中亦應種種分別小大差別：如人中小王、大王、閻浮提王、轉輪聖王；四天王處有四天王，忉利天中有釋提桓因，炎摩天上有須炎摩天王，兜率陀天上有珊兜率陀天王，化樂天上有善化天王，他化自在天上有他化自在天王。
過是以上，要行禪定思，得生上界。
問曰：若以禪定思得生上界者，何以故說「乃至非有想非無想處，皆以十善道故得生」？
答曰：雖修禪定生色界、無色界，要當先堅住十善道，然後得修禪定。
以是故，彼處以十善業道為大利益。以是故說：「乃至非有想非無想處，皆以十善道因緣故得生。」所以者何？
先行清淨十善道離欲，修初禪下思得生梵眾天，修初禪中思生梵輔天，修初禪上思故得生大梵天；修二禪下思生少光天，修二禪中思得生無量光天，修二禪上思得生妙光天；修三禪下思得生小淨天，修三禪中思故得生無量淨天，修三禪上思得生遍淨天；修四禪下思故生阿那婆伽天，修四禪中思故生福生天，修四禪上思故生廣果天；修無想定中思得生無想天。
以無漏熏修四禪下思故生不廣天，以無漏熏修四禪勝思故生不熱天，以無漏熏修四禪勝思故生喜見天，以無漏熏修四禪勝思故生妙見天，以無漏熏修四禪最上思故生阿迦膩吒天。
修虛空處定相應思得生空處天，修識處定相應思得生識處天，修無所有處定相應思得生無所有處天，修非有想非無想處定相應思得生非有想非無想處天，是名生死世間，眾生往來之處。
"From the Avīci hell up to the very peak of existence, one distinguishes the fruit of the ten deeds, and every place where their recompense is undergone."
One ought rightly to know, in this way, that, from the Avīci hell below up to the realm of neither perception nor non-perception above, every one of these is the place where wholesome and unwholesome karma of every kind undergoes its own fruit and recompense. Within this, cultivating and practicing the very worst of the ten unwholesome paths, one is reborn within the Avīci hell; slightly less than this, one is reborn within the Great Roasting hell; slightly less, within the Lesser Roasting hell; slightly less, within the Great Wailing hell; slightly less, within the Lesser Wailing hell; slightly less, within the Saṅghāta hell; slightly less, within the Great Highway hell; slightly less, within the Black-Rope hell; slightly less, within the Reviving hell; slightly less, within the Sword-Forest and every other such minor, subsidiary hell — this distinction ought likewise to be understood as growing progressively smaller in just this way.
Practicing the middling degree of the ten unwholesome paths, one is reborn among the animals; among the animals too, this distinction ought likewise to be understood as growing progressively smaller.
Practicing the lesser degree of the unwholesome paths, one is reborn among the hungry ghosts.
Having thus described this in general terms, one ought here to distinguish the particular differences at greater length: there exist asuras and yakṣas reborn within the ghost-path, and there exist nāga kings reborn among the animals, whose own experience of joy may equal that of the devas themselves; these very sentient beings, though born through an unwholesome cause and condition, once born, undergo the very fruit and recompense of their own wholesome karma.
Practicing the very lowest degree of the ten wholesome paths, one is reborn among humans within Jambudvīpa, within a poor and lowly family — namely, an outcast, a borderland dweller, an artisan, or one of low station.
A degree yet more supreme, one is reborn within a householder's own family; more supreme still, within a brahmin's own family; more supreme still, within a kṣatriya's own family; more supreme still, within a minister's own family; more supreme still, within a king's own family.
A degree of the ten wholesome paths more supreme still, one is reborn within Godānīya; more supreme still, within Pūrvavideha; more supreme still, within Uttarakuru.
More supreme still, one is reborn within the realm of the Four Heavenly Kings; more supreme still, within the Trāyastriṃśa heaven, the Yāma heaven, the Tuṣita heaven, and the Nirmāṇarati heaven.
Cultivating and practicing the very highest degree of the ten wholesome paths, one is reborn within the Paranirmitavaśavartin heaven.
Within this too, one ought to distinguish every degree of lesser and greater difference — just as, among humans, there exists a lesser king, a great king, a king of Jambudvīpa, and a wheel-turning sage king; within the realm of the Four Heavenly Kings there exist these four kings themselves; within the Trāyastriṃśa heaven there exists Śakra, the lord of the devas; above the Yāma heaven there exists the deva-king Suyāma; above the Tuṣita heaven there exists the deva-king Santuṣita; above the Nirmāṇarati heaven there exists the deva-king Sunirmita; above the Paranirmitavaśavartin heaven there exists the deva-king Paranirmitavaśavartin himself.
Beyond this point, one must necessarily practice the very cultivation of meditative absorption in order to attain rebirth within the upper realms.
Question: Should rebirth within the upper realms be attained through the cultivation of meditative absorption, why, then, does the text state that "even up to the realm of neither perception nor non-perception, rebirth is attained entirely through the very cause and condition of the ten wholesome paths"?
Answer: Though one cultivates meditative absorption to be reborn within the form realm or the formless realm, one must necessarily first firmly abide within the ten wholesome paths, and only afterward is one able to cultivate meditative absorption at all.
It is for this reason that, within these very realms, the ten wholesome karmic paths serve as this great benefit. It is for this reason that the text states: "Even up to the realm of neither perception nor non-perception, rebirth is attained entirely through the very cause and condition of the ten wholesome paths." And why is this so?
First practicing the ten wholesome paths in purity, departing from desire, cultivating the lesser degree of the first dhyāna's own contemplation, one attains rebirth within the Brahmā-multitude heaven; cultivating the middling degree of the first dhyāna's own contemplation, one is reborn within the Brahmā-minister heaven; cultivating the highest degree of the first dhyāna's own contemplation, one attains rebirth within the Great Brahmā heaven; cultivating the lesser degree of the second dhyāna's own contemplation, one is reborn within the heaven of lesser light; cultivating the middling degree, one attains rebirth within the heaven of immeasurable light; cultivating the highest degree, one attains rebirth within the heaven of radiant sound; cultivating the lesser degree of the third dhyāna's own contemplation, one attains rebirth within the heaven of lesser purity; cultivating the middling degree, one attains rebirth within the heaven of immeasurable purity; cultivating the highest degree, one attains rebirth within the heaven of universal purity; cultivating the lesser degree of the fourth dhyāna's own contemplation, one is reborn within the Anabhraka heaven; cultivating the middling degree, one is reborn within the Puṇyaprasava heaven; cultivating the highest degree, one is reborn within the Bṛhatphala heaven; cultivating the very contemplation of the absorption of non-perception, one attains rebirth within the heaven of non-perception.
Through the outflow-free cultivation and permeation of the fourth dhyāna's own lesser contemplation, one is reborn within the Avṛha heaven; through the outflow-free cultivation and permeation of the fourth dhyāna's own superior contemplation, one is reborn within the Atapa heaven; through the outflow-free cultivation and permeation of the fourth dhyāna's own superior contemplation, one is reborn within the Sudṛśa heaven; through the outflow-free cultivation and permeation of the fourth dhyāna's own superior contemplation, one is reborn within the Sudarśana heaven; through the outflow-free cultivation and permeation of the fourth dhyāna's own very highest contemplation, one is reborn within the Akaniṣṭha heaven.
Cultivating the contemplation associated with the concentration of the sphere of infinite space, one attains rebirth within the heaven of the sphere of space; cultivating the contemplation associated with the concentration of the sphere of infinite consciousness, one attains rebirth within the heaven of the sphere of consciousness; cultivating the contemplation associated with the concentration of the sphere of nothingness, one attains rebirth within the heaven of the sphere of nothingness; cultivating the contemplation associated with the concentration of the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception, one attains rebirth within the heaven of the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception — this is called the very world of birth and death, the place through which sentient beings come and go.
This section's own exhaustive mapping — hells scaled downward by "slightly less," human rebirths scaled upward through caste and rank, heavens scaled through the four dhyānas and the formless absorptions up to the peak of existence itself — makes explicit the answer to a question raised and set aside in Fascicle 9's own account of the ten wholesome paths: not just that these deeds bear fruit, but precisely where along this entire cosmological ladder each particular degree of practice lands. The dialogue's own resolution near the middle — that even rebirth in the formless realm, technically achieved through meditative absorption, still depends on the ten wholesome paths as its own necessary foundation — closes off any reading in which meditation alone, detached from ethical conduct, could substitute for this foundation.
Which Practitioners the Ten Wholesome Paths Lead to the Śrāvaka Path
分別聲聞辟支佛品第二十九
問曰：是十善業道，但是生人、天因緣，更有餘利益耶？
答曰：有。所有聲聞乘，辟支佛、大乘，皆以十善道，而為大利益。
凡出生死因緣，唯有三乘：聲聞、辟支佛、大乘。是三乘皆以十善道為大利益。何以故？是十善道能令行者至聲聞地，亦能令至辟支佛地，亦能令人至於佛地。
問曰：是十善道能令何等眾生至聲聞地？
答曰：隨他無大悲，畏怖於三界，樂少功德分，其志甚劣弱。
心樂於厭離，常觀世無常，及知一切法，皆亦無有我。
乃至一念頃，不樂於受生，常不信世間，而有安隱法。
觀大如毒蛇，陰如拔刃賊，六入如空聚，不樂世富樂。
貴於堅持戒，而為禪定故，常樂於安禪，修習諸善法。
唯觀於涅槃，第一救護者，常求盡苦慧，樂集行解脫。
但貴於自利，一一勝處來，善道令是人，能至聲聞地。
隨他音聲者，聞他所說，隨順而行，不能自生智慧。
問曰：十善道能令一切從他聞者皆作聲聞耶？
答曰：不爾！若無大悲心，十善道能令此人至聲聞地；若有菩薩從諸佛聞法，以有大悲心故，十善道不能令至聲聞地。
問曰：一切無大悲心者，十善道皆能令至聲聞地耶？
答曰：不然！怖畏三界者，十善道能令此人至聲聞道。餘不怖畏者，令生人、天善處，以樂三界故。
問曰：一切怖畏三界者，十善道皆能令至聲聞地。若爾者，菩薩亦怖畏三界，為身故，復為眾生，勤行精進，求於涅槃，如是十善道亦應令至聲聞地。
答曰：不必一切怖畏三界者，盡墮聲聞地。何等為墮？樂習行功德少分者，於佛所教化六波羅蜜中，受行少分，如是之人墮聲聞地。
若人能取諸佛功德、遍學智慧，十善道必令此人徑至佛道。
隨他聞聲、怖畏三界，取功德少分，是人有二種：十善道能令至聲聞地者、至辟支佛地者。
問曰：是人云何俱從他聞，怖畏三界，取功德少分，十善道能令至聲聞地，至辟支佛地？
答曰：志劣弱者，作阿羅漢；小堅固者，作辟支佛。
問曰：十善道令一切志劣弱者至聲聞地？
答曰：不然！何以故？所謂志弱、樂厭離生死者；非但志劣、無厭離者。
問曰：觀何事，得知樂厭離心？
答曰：觀「有為法無常、一切法無我」，當知是必樂於厭離。
問曰：已知樂厭離，菩薩亦如是觀「有為無常、一切法無我」，是十善道何得不令此人墮聲聞地耶？
答曰：是人深厭離，離大悲故，乃至一念中不樂受生，不信世間有安隱相。
如《經》中佛告諸比丘：「譬如少糞尚臭穢不淨，何況多也？如是一念中受生尚苦，何況多也？諸比丘！當學斷生，莫令更受。」聲聞人信受是語故，乃至一念中不樂受生。
是人復作是念：「世間無常，於所作事及受命，都無安隱相。死常逐人，誰能知死時節？不知死時為受何業果報？為生何心？如是事中不安隱故，不可信故，當疾求盡苦。」
菩薩則不爾——於恒河沙無量阿僧祇劫受生，為得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提，度諸眾生。
是故〈偈〉中說：「乃至一念頃，不樂於受生」——善道令是人能至聲聞地。
Distinguishing the Śrāvaka and the Pratyekabuddha Chapter
Question: Are these very ten wholesome karmic paths merely the cause and condition for rebirth among humans and devas, or is there some further benefit besides?
Answer: There is. "Every one of the śrāvaka vehicle, the pratyekabuddha vehicle, and the Great Vehicle takes the ten wholesome paths as their own great benefit."
Every cause and condition for escaping birth and death consists solely in these three vehicles: the śrāvaka, the pratyekabuddha, and the Great Vehicle. All three of these vehicles take the ten wholesome paths as their own great benefit. And why is this so? These very ten wholesome paths are able to bring the practitioner to the ground of the śrāvaka, and are likewise able to bring them to the ground of the pratyekabuddha, and are likewise able to bring a person to the very ground of buddhahood.
Question: What kind of sentient being do these ten wholesome paths bring to the ground of the śrāvaka?
Answer: "One who follows another, lacking great compassion, dreading the three realms, delighting only in a small portion of merit, their own resolve exceedingly weak and feeble.
"Their own mind delighting in weariness and renunciation, constantly contemplating this world's own impermanence, and knowing that every dharma whatsoever is without self.
"Even for the mere span of a single thought, taking no delight in undergoing rebirth, constantly disbelieving that this world contains any dharma of genuine peace and security.
"Contemplating the four great elements as a venomous serpent, the aggregates as a bandit with a drawn blade, the six sense-bases as an empty village, taking no delight in the wealth and pleasure of this world.
"Valuing firmly upholding the precepts for the sake of meditative concentration, constantly delighting in peaceful meditative absorption, cultivating and studying every wholesome dharma.
"Contemplating nirvāṇa alone as the very foremost refuge, constantly seeking the wisdom that exhausts suffering, delighting in gathering and practicing liberation.
"Valuing only their own benefit, having come from each of these excellent places in turn — the wholesome path causes this very person to be able to reach the ground of the śrāvaka."
As for "one who follows another's own voice": this refers to hearing what another has taught, and, according with it, practicing accordingly, without being able to give rise to wisdom of their own.
Question: Do these ten wholesome paths cause every single person who hears the teaching from another to become a śrāvaka?
Answer: Not so! Should one lack great compassion, these ten wholesome paths are able to bring this person to the ground of the śrāvaka; should there exist a bodhisattva who hears the Dharma from every buddha, since they possess great compassion, these ten wholesome paths are unable to bring them to the ground of the śrāvaka.
Question: Do these ten wholesome paths bring every single person who lacks great compassion to the ground of the śrāvaka?
Answer: Not so! One who dreads the three realms — these ten wholesome paths are able to bring this person to the śrāvaka path. Every remaining person who does not dread them is caused to be reborn in a good place among humans and devas, since they still delight in the three realms.
Question: Do these ten wholesome paths bring every single person who dreads the three realms to the ground of the śrāvaka? If this is so, the bodhisattva too dreads the three realms, and yet, for the sake of their own body, and further for the sake of sentient beings, diligently applies effort, seeking nirvāṇa — ought not these very ten wholesome paths likewise bring them to the ground of the śrāvaka?
Answer: It is not necessarily so that every single person who dreads the three realms entirely falls into the ground of the śrāvaka. What, then, is meant by "falling into" it? One who delights in cultivating and practicing only a small portion of merit, receiving and practicing only a small portion of the six pāramitās the Buddha himself teaches and transforms others through — a person such as this falls into the ground of the śrāvaka.
Should a person be able to take up every buddha's own merit, universally studying wisdom, these ten wholesome paths shall necessarily bring this very person directly to the path to buddhahood.
As for "following another, hearing their own voice, dreading the three realms, taking up only a small portion of merit" — this person is of two kinds: one whom the ten wholesome paths are able to bring to the ground of the śrāvaka, and one whom they are able to bring to the ground of the pratyekabuddha.
Question: How, then, can this same person, alike in following another, dreading the three realms, and taking up only a small portion of merit, be brought by these ten wholesome paths to the ground of the śrāvaka in one case, and to the ground of the pratyekabuddha in another?
Answer: "One whose own resolve is weak and feeble becomes an arhat; one whose own resolve is slightly more firm becomes a pratyekabuddha."
Question: Do these ten wholesome paths bring every single person of weak and feeble resolve to the ground of the śrāvaka?
Answer: Not so! And why is this so? This refers specifically to one whose own resolve is weak, and who delights in weariness and renunciation toward birth and death — not merely to one whose own resolve is weak, without any weariness or renunciation at all.
Question: By contemplating what matter does one come to know a mind that delights in weariness and renunciation?
Answer: Contemplating that "every conditioned dharma is impermanent, and every dharma whatsoever is without self" — one should thereby know that this person necessarily delights in weariness and renunciation.
Question: Having already known this delight in weariness and renunciation — the bodhisattva likewise contemplates in just this same way, that "every conditioned dharma is impermanent, and every dharma whatsoever is without self" — how, then, do these ten wholesome paths fail to cause this very person to fall into the ground of the śrāvaka as well?
Answer: This person's own weariness and renunciation is deep, yet departs entirely from great compassion, so that, even for the mere span of a single thought, they take no delight in undergoing rebirth, disbelieving that this world contains any mark of genuine peace and security whatsoever.
As the sūtra states, the Buddha told the monks: "Suppose even a small quantity of excrement is already foul, defiled, and impure — how much more so, then, a great quantity! In just this same way, undergoing rebirth even for a single thought is already suffering — how much more so, then, undergoing it repeatedly! Monks! You ought to study the very severing of rebirth, so that you never undergo it again." The śrāvaka, accepting these very words with faith, thereby takes no delight in undergoing rebirth even for the span of a single thought.
This person further reflects thus: "This world is impermanent, and, within whatever is undertaken and whatever life is received, there exists no mark of genuine peace and security whatsoever. Death constantly pursues every person — who could possibly know the very moment of their own death? Not knowing this moment of death, what fruit and recompense of karma shall then be undergone? What mind shall then arise? Since there exists no peace or security within matters such as these, and since they cannot be trusted, one ought swiftly to seek the very exhaustion of suffering."
The bodhisattva, however, is not so — undergoing rebirth across immeasurable asaṃkhyeya kalpas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, for the sake of attaining unsurpassed, perfect, complete awakening, liberating every sentient being.
It is for this reason that the verse states: "Even for the mere span of a single thought, taking no delight in undergoing rebirth" — the wholesome path causes this very person to be able to reach the ground of the śrāvaka.
This chapter's own central puzzle — that both the śrāvaka and the bodhisattva contemplate the identical truths of impermanence and non-self, and yet arrive at entirely different destinations — is resolved not through any difference in what is seen, but through what accompanies the seeing: the śrāvaka's own weariness with rebirth is unaccompanied by great compassion, so that even a single further thought's worth of rebirth becomes intolerable, while the bodhisattva's own identical clarity about impermanence and non-self is held together with a compassion vast enough to embrace immeasurable further kalpas of rebirth willingly. The following section names exactly what this weariness contemplates in specific, image-rich detail.
Four Similes for Weariness, and the World's Own Blaze
問曰：是人樂修集何事故，不樂受生？
答曰：是人觀地水火風四大，憙生瞋恨故、不淨臭穢、不知恩故，生毒蛇想。
「色、受、想、行、識」五陰，能奪智慧命故，生怨賊想。
眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意入，離常、離「不動、不變、不壞」，無我、無我所故，生空聚想。
若人於世間一切受生及資生樂具，以無常、虛誑、無須臾住故，不生喜悅心。
如是之人於一切生處，生無安隱想，但涅槃一法能為救護。
如《經》中說：「諸比丘！世間皆是熾然。所謂眼然、色然、眼識然、眼觸然，及眼觸因緣生受，皆亦是然。以何事故然？所謂貪欲火、瞋恚火、愚癡火，生、老、病、死、憂悲苦惱火之所熾然。耳、鼻、舌、身、意亦如是。觀一切有為法皆是熾然，唯涅槃寂滅法能為救護。」貴涅槃一法故，捨一切事，勤習坐禪。
Question: Through delighting in cultivating and gathering what very matter does this person come to take no delight in undergoing rebirth?
Answer: This person contemplates the four great elements — earth, water, fire, and wind — since these readily give rise to anger and resentment, are impure and foul, and know no gratitude, giving rise to a thought of them as a venomous serpent.
The five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness are able to seize away the very life of wisdom, giving rise to a thought of them as a hostile bandit.
The eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, together with their own sense-bases, depart from permanence, depart from being "unmoving, unchanging, and indestructible," being without self and without anything belonging to self, giving rise to a thought of them as an empty village.
Should a person, toward every experience of rebirth throughout this world, and every article of livelihood and pleasure, recognize them as impermanent, illusory and false, never remaining even for the briefest moment, they thereby give rise to no mind of delight toward them whatsoever.
A person such as this, toward every place of rebirth, gives rise to a thought of it as free of any peace or security whatsoever, with nirvāṇa alone, this single dharma, able to serve as a genuine refuge.
As the sūtra states: "Monks! This entire world is ablaze. Namely, the eye is ablaze, form is ablaze, eye-consciousness is ablaze, eye-contact is ablaze, and the very feeling that arises through the cause and condition of eye-contact is likewise ablaze. Through what matter is it ablaze? Namely, ablaze with the fire of craving, the fire of anger, the fire of delusion, and the fire of birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, grief, suffering, and affliction. The ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind are likewise so. Contemplating every conditioned dharma as entirely ablaze in this way, only the dharma of nirvāṇa, tranquil cessation itself, is able to serve as a genuine refuge." Valuing this single dharma of nirvāṇa, one relinquishes every other matter, and diligently practices sitting in meditation.
The sūtra quoted here on the world's own blaze is among the most celebrated discourses in the entire early canon, traditionally understood as delivered to a thousand fire-worshipping ascetics whose own prior devotion to literal fire made its central image especially pointed — every sense faculty, its object, and the contact and feeling arising between them are themselves burning, not with the sacred fire these ascetics once tended, but with craving, anger, and delusion. The four similes preceding it — elements as venomous serpent, aggregates as bandit, sense-bases as empty village — build toward this same image cumulatively, each contemplation stripping away a different form of false comfort before the fire sermon names what all of them are actually burning with.
The One or Two Excellent Places Each Arhat Came From
問曰：若「觀一切有為法皆是熾然，唯涅槃寂滅能為救護」者，十善道皆令至聲聞地耶？
答曰：不然！佛所結戒，為禪定故，貴重此戒。有決定心而不毀犯，捨一切事，但樂坐禪。求盡苦智，常勤修習解脫因緣。於先世中，或從一勝處來、二勝處來者，十善道能令此人至聲聞地。何以故？持戒清淨，則心不悔；心不悔故，得歡喜；得歡喜故，身輕軟；身輕軟故，心快樂；心快樂故，攝心得定；攝心得定故，生如實智慧；生如實智慧故，即生厭；從厭生離，從離得解脫。
若一、若二勝處來者，如尊者羅睺羅從諦勝處來；如尊者施曰羅從捨勝處來；如尊者離跋多從寂滅勝處來；如尊者舍利弗從慧勝處來。
或從諦、捨二勝處來；或從諦、寂滅二勝處來；或從諦、慧二勝處來；或從捨、寂滅二勝處來；或從捨、慧二勝處來；或從寂滅、慧二勝處來。
如是十善道，能令至聲聞地。
Question: Should one merely "contemplate every conditioned dharma as entirely ablaze, with nirvāṇa, tranquil cessation itself, alone able to serve as a genuine refuge," do the ten wholesome paths thereby bring every such person to the ground of the śrāvaka?
Answer: Not so! The very precepts the Buddha established are valued and honored for the sake of meditative concentration. Possessing a resolute mind, never once transgressing them, relinquishing every other matter, delighting only in sitting in meditation. Seeking the very wisdom that exhausts suffering, constantly and diligently cultivating and practicing the causes and conditions of liberation. Should this person, in a former life, have come from one of the excellent places, or from two of them, these ten wholesome paths are able to bring this very person to the ground of the śrāvaka. And why is this so? Through upholding the precepts in purity, the mind thereby holds no regret; through this freedom from regret, one attains delight; through this delight, the body becomes light and gentle; through this lightness of body, the mind becomes joyful; through this joy of mind, one gathers the mind and attains concentration; through this concentration, one gives rise to wisdom that knows things as they truly are; through this true wisdom, one thereby gives rise to weariness and renunciation; from this weariness arises detachment, and from this detachment one attains liberation.
As for those who have come from one, or from two, of these excellent places: just as the venerable Rāhula came from the excellent place of truth; just as the venerable Śroṇa came from the excellent place of relinquishment; just as the venerable Revata came from the excellent place of tranquil cessation; just as the venerable Śāriputra came from the excellent place of wisdom.
There are, further, those who have come from the two excellent places of truth and relinquishment together; or from truth and tranquil cessation together; or from truth and wisdom together; or from relinquishment and tranquil cessation together; or from relinquishment and wisdom together; or from tranquil cessation and wisdom together.
These ten wholesome paths, in this way, are able to bring one to the ground of the śrāvaka.
The "four excellent places" — truth, relinquishment, tranquil cessation, and wisdom — are the same fourfold framework this treatise first introduced in Fascicle 13's own simile of grass sustaining a traveler's horse along the good road, here applied to explain why different arhats, each named individually, arrived at liberation through recognizably different emphases: Rāhula through truthfulness, Śroṇa through relinquishment, Revata through tranquil cessation, and Śāriputra, unsurprisingly given his own reputation, through wisdom. That a given arhat might combine two of these four excellent places rather than embodying only one closes this fascicle's own extended technical account of exactly what conditions bring a practitioner to the śrāvaka path specifically.
Fascicle 14 Complete
This closes Fascicle 14: the rigorous twenty-fold and twelve-fold Abhidharma analysis of the ten unwholesome and wholesome paths, the threefold roots of craving, anger, and delusion behind each unwholesome deed, the technical distinction between karma and the path of karma, the threefold purity marking genuine entry into the second ground, every specific destination these ten deeds produce from the Avīci hell through the peak of existence, and the question of which practitioners, walking this same road, arrive specifically at the śrāvaka path — resolved not by what is contemplated but by whether great compassion accompanies it, closing with the four excellent places named through specific arhats each known for embodying one or two of them. Fascicle 15 continues this same distinction for the pratyekabuddha and the bodhisattva.
Continue to Fascicle 15 →