How the Six Objects Combine

Expounded by the Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai.

Second, the opening and combining of the various objects: first, taking the ten suchnesses as the head. Why is this? Because this present sūtra, in naming this section, singles out the ten suchnesses alone for its unqualified praise. Now, having gone on to teach five further objects, how do they agree and differ with the ten suchnesses? As for the opening and combining of the twelve links and the ten suchnesses: since their names differ, they are said to be "opened"; since their sense is the same, they are said to be "combined." The link of ignorance combines with "such a nature." The link of volitional formation combines with "such a mark." Consciousness, name-and-form, the six sense-fields, contact, and sensation combine with "such an essence." Craving combines with "such a condition." Grasping combines with "such a power" and "such an activity." Becoming combines with "such a cause." Birth, and old age and death, combine with "such a fruit" and "such a retribution," and the rest, and so on.

Again, combining them differently: "such a mark" combines with the two links of volitional formation and becoming. "Such a nature" combines with the three links of ignorance, craving, and grasping. "Such an essence" combines with the seven links of consciousness, name-and-form, down through old age and death. "Such a power" is, again, the three links of the path of affliction — ignorance, craving, and grasping, able to generate the power of karma. "Such an activity" is, again, the two links of volitional formation and becoming, able to construct the karma that produces suffering. "Such a cause" is, again, the two links of volitional formation and becoming, serving as the cause of the seven kinds of suffering. "Such a condition" is, again, the three links of ignorance, craving, and grasping, able to moisten karma and draw forth suffering. "Such a fruit" is, again, the habituated fruit of volitional formation and becoming. "Such a retribution" is, again, the karma of volitional formation and becoming, summoning the retribution of name-and-form and the rest. These two rounds together, in general, apply to the conceivable twelve links, combined with the ten suchnesses of the six destinies.

Next, using the inconceivable twelve links, combined with the ten suchnesses of the four kinds of sages: the link of ignorance, transformed, becomes clarity — clarity is precisely the revealing cause, forming the sage's own "such a nature." The link of evil action, transformed, becomes good action — good action is precisely the conditioning cause, forming the sage's own "such a mark." Consciousness, name-and-form, and the rest, the path of suffering transformed, become the Dharma-body, forming the sage's own "such an essence." The two links of craving and grasping, transformed, become the sage's own bodhi-mind — this is precisely "such a power." The link of becoming, containing its own fruit, transformed, becomes the practice of the six pāramitās, forming the sage's own "such an activity," and likewise transformed into the sage's own "such a cause." This transformation of the link of becoming is of two kinds: the correct path transformed becomes "such a cause," and the assisting path transformed becomes the sage's own "such a condition." The link of old age and death, transformed, becomes the eternal abiding of the dharma-nature, forming the sage's own "such a fruit" and "such a retribution," and so on. Again, taken all together: the three dharmas of essence, power, and activity are simply affliction, karma, and suffering, transformed into the Dharma-body, the bodhi-mind, the practice of the six pāramitās, and the rest. Diligently cultivating these three dharmas: internally, this forms the nature; externally, this forms the mark; correct intention forms the essence; the vow, deep and far-reaching, forms the power; establishing practice forms the activity; drawing forth the fruit forms the cause; mutual assistance forms the condition; and the eventual manifestation forms the fruit and the retribution, and so on. If the four kinds of sages were finely differentiated, each step would show its own particular differences — here, taking only the broad outline, a general explanation alone is given. The sūtra says: "The vow of omniscience remains present, never lost" — this general explanation may be applied to the two vehicles as well.

As for the four kinds of Four Noble Truths combined with the ten suchnesses: the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of suffering and its arising are the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. "Such a mark" and "such a nature" are the arising. "Such an essence" is suffering. "Such an activity," "such a power," "such a cause," and "such a condition" are, again, the arising. "Such a fruit" and "such a retribution" are, again, suffering, and so on. The arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of the path and cessation are the ten suchnesses of the analytical and embodying two vehicles and the shared teaching's bodhisattva. "Such a mark" and "such a nature" are precisely the path. "Such an essence" is precisely cessation. "Such a power," "such an activity," "such a cause," and "such a condition" are all the path. "Such a fruit" and "such a retribution" are, again, cessation. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of suffering and its arising are precisely the ten suchnesses of the four kinds of sages' fruit-retribution beyond the three realms. The truth of arising is precisely the mark, nature, power, activity, cause, and condition beyond the three realms. The truth of suffering is precisely the essence, fruit, and retribution beyond the three realms, and so on. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of the path and cessation are precisely the ten suchnesses of the four kinds of sages' nirvāṇa beyond the three realms. The truth of the path is precisely nirvāṇa's own nature, mark, power, activity, cause, and condition, and the rest — this is also prajñā and liberation. The truth of cessation is precisely nirvāṇa's own essence, fruit, and retribution, and the rest — this also forms the eternally abiding Dharma-body, and so on.

As for the four kinds of Four Noble Truths combined with the four kinds of twelve links: the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of suffering and its arising are precisely the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links. The arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of the path and cessation are precisely the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links read as the extinguishing of ignorance down through the extinguishing of old age and death. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of suffering and its arising are precisely the two inconceivable kinds of the twelve links. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of the path and cessation are precisely the two inconceivable kinds of the twelve links read as the extinguishing of ignorance down through the extinguishing of old age and death — this may be understood accordingly.

As for the seven kinds of two truths combined with the ten suchnesses: the Tripiṭaka, shared, distinct, and perfect-entering-shared teachings' four conventional truths are all, alike, the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. The Tripiṭaka and shared teachings' two real truths are the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The distinct and perfect-entering-distinct teachings' two conventional truths: their "existent" side is the ten suchnesses of the six destinies; their "nonexistent" side is the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The perfect teaching's own conventional truth here extends generally through all nine dharma-realms. The distinct-entering-shared, perfect-entering-shared, distinct, perfect-entering-distinct, and perfect teachings' five real truths are all, alike, the ten suchnesses of the buddha-dharma-realm.

As for the seven kinds of two truths combined with the four kinds of twelve links: the Tripiṭaka, shared, distinct, and perfect-entering-shared teachings' four conventional truths are precisely the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links. The Tripiṭaka and shared teachings' two real truths are precisely the conceivable twelve links read as the extinguishing of ignorance down through the extinguishing of old age and death. The distinct and perfect-entering-distinct teachings' two conventional truths: their "existent" side is the conceivable twelve links; their "nonexistent" side is the conceivable twelve links read as extinguishing. The perfect teaching's own conventional truth extends generally through all four kinds of the twelve links, within and beyond the three realms alike. The distinct-entering-shared, perfect-entering-shared, distinct, perfect-entering-distinct, and perfect teachings' five real truths are precisely the inconceivable twelve links beyond the three realms, read as the extinguishing of ignorance down through the extinguishing of old age and death.

As for the seven kinds of two truths combined with the four kinds of Four Noble Truths: the really-existent two truths are precisely the arising-and-ceasing Four Noble Truths. The illusorily-existent two truths are precisely the non-arising Four Noble Truths. The distinct-entering-shared and perfect-entering-shared teachings' two conventional truths are, again, the non-arising suffering and its arising. The distinct-entering-shared's real truth is the immeasurable path and cessation. The perfect-entering-shared's real truth is the uncreated path and cessation. The distinct teaching's conventional truth, and the perfect-entering-distinct's conventional truth, are the immeasurable suffering and its arising. The perfect teaching's own conventional truth is the uncreated suffering and its arising. The distinct teaching's real truth is the immeasurable path and cessation. The perfect-entering-distinct's real truth, and the perfect teaching's own real truth, are the uncreated path and cessation.

As for the five kinds of three truths combined with the ten suchnesses: the distinct-entering-shared and perfect-entering-shared teachings' two conventional truths are the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. The distinct teaching's conventional truth and the perfect-entering-distinct's conventional truth: their "existent" side is the ten suchnesses of the six destinies; their "nonexistent" side is the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The perfect teaching's own conventional truth, in sense, extends generally through all nine realms, and so on. The five real truths are all, alike, the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles and bodhisattvas; the five middle truths are all, alike, the ten suchnesses of the buddha-realm.

As for the five kinds of three truths combined with the four kinds of twelve links: the distinct-entering-shared and perfect-entering-shared teachings' two conventional truths are the conceivable twelve links of the six destinies. The distinct and perfect-entering-distinct teachings' two conventional truths: their "existent" side is the conceivable arising of the twelve links of the six destinies; their "nonexistent" side is the conceivable extinguishing of the twelve links. The perfect teaching's own conventional truth, in sense, extends generally, and so on. Here, taking up these four kinds of twelve links: the five real truths are precisely the conceivable extinguishing of the twelve links, and are likewise precisely the inconceivable arising of the twelve links. The five middle truths are precisely the inconceivable extinguishing of the twelve links.

As for the five kinds of three truths combined with the four kinds of Four Noble Truths: the distinct-entering-shared and perfect-entering-shared teachings' two conventional truths are precisely the non-arising suffering and its arising. The distinct teaching's conventional truth, the perfect-entering-distinct's conventional truth, and the perfect teaching's own conventional truth are, in general, the non-arising suffering and its arising, and are also the non-arising path and cessation, and are also the immeasurable suffering and its arising. The distinct-entering-shared and perfect-entering-shared teachings' two real truths, taken originally from their bare-emptiness side, are the non-arising path and cessation. The distinct teaching's real truth, and the perfect-entering-distinct's real truth, are precisely the non-arising path and cessation, while, in terms of the immeasurable, they are suffering and its arising. The perfect teaching's own real truth, in terms of the non-arising, is the path and cessation, while, in terms of the immeasurable and the uncreated, it is suffering and its arising. The distinct-entering-shared's middle truth is the immeasurable path and cessation. The perfect-entering-shared's middle truth is the uncreated path and cessation. The distinct teaching's middle truth is the immeasurable path and cessation. The perfect-entering-distinct's middle truth is the uncreated path and cessation. The perfect teaching's own middle truth is precisely the uncreated path and cessation.

As for the five kinds of three truths combined with the seven kinds of two truths: the first two kinds of two truths are set aside, not combined here. As for the next two kinds of two truths: their two conventional truths are precisely the five kinds of three truths' own five conventional truths. Of their two real truths, the bare-emptiness side is precisely the five kinds of three truths' own real truth; the not-empty side is precisely the five kinds of three truths' own middle truth. As for the last three kinds of two truths: their three conventional truths, on the empty side, are precisely the five kinds of three truths' own real truth; on the existent side, they are precisely the five kinds of three truths' own conventional truth. Their three real truths are precisely the five kinds of three truths' own middle truth. Stated in yet another way: just as the first two kinds of two truths are set aside and not combined, the latter five conventional truths contain both a real and a conventional aspect within them, and the latter five real truths contain both a real and a middle aspect within them.

As for the one real truth combined with the ten suchnesses: each single dharma-realm already possesses all ten realms within it; setting aside the other nine, it is identical only with the buddha-dharma-realm. Setting aside the three kinds of twelve links, it is identical only with the single kind of the twelve links read as extinguishing. Setting aside the three kinds of Four Noble Truths, it is identical only with the one real truth's own Four Noble Truths. Setting aside the seven kinds of two truths, it is both identical and not identical with the five real truths. Setting aside the five kinds of three truths, it is identical only with the five middle truths, and so on. As for saying that the truth of no-truth cannot be spoken at all: combined with the ten suchnesses, since the name "thus" admits no distinction, this is itself empty quiescence; that "the marks of speech are themselves quiescent and extinct," unable to be shown or spoken of, is precisely the sense that all ten are, alike, "thus." That ignorance is extinguished, down through old age and death being extinguished — this sense is exceedingly deep, and this very depth is identical with the truth of no-truth. "Arising-arising cannot be spoken," down to "non-arising-non-arising cannot be spoken," is likewise identical with the truth of no-truth. All seven kinds of real truth cannot be spoken at all. That the very first real truth cannot be spoken is as Śāriputra says: "I have heard that, within liberation, there is nothing that can be spoken" — how much more so, then, the remaining six! Neither birth-and-death nor nirvāṇa, being neither of the two extremes, and likewise without any middle way either — this is precisely the five middle truths being identical with the truth of no-truth. The one real truth is named empty space; empty space has no "one" within it — how, then, could there be any "real" at all? This, too, is identical with the truth of no-truth. The truth of no-truth has, of itself, nothing that abides within it — the equal, great wisdom has nothing manifold about it at all. Yet, though without anything manifold, its manifold immeasurability, unfolded, fills the entire dharma-realm, and one cannot know from where it comes. Immeasurable and without anything manifold, gathered in, none can know what it possesses, and one cannot know to where it goes. Neither coming nor going — this is precisely the Dharma-buddha, and so on.

Moreover, the seven kinds of two truths, responding to conditions, opening and combining, turn and enter into one another in succession, and each single one, in turn, likewise carries its own senses of according with feeling, feeling-and-wisdom, and wisdom alone. The remaining five objects, by the same pattern, ought likewise to carry these senses — I do not set them all down here in full. Why is this? Because the Buddha, with a single voice, expounds the Dharma, and sentient beings, each according to their own kind, attain their own understanding accordingly. Reflect on this for yourself!

Question: Since the principle of all these objects is already fused together as one, why does it still appear so multifariously varied, each further restricting and entering into the others? Answer: The Tathāgata observes and knows the nature and mark of the ten realms, and finds among them those already ripened and those not yet ripened. For a great capacity not yet ripe, he does not let slander arise; for a small capacity, once ripe, he does not let the moment be lost. According with what is fitting for each, whether a single teaching or a compound one is called for, the partial and the perfect enter into one another and bring each capacity to ripeness — hearing it, the hearer at once gains benefit. The Avataṃsaka, though it, too, surveys all ten realms, ripens beings through the distinct and perfect teachings alone, since only these two realms are ripe at that time. The Tripiṭaka teaching, too, surveys all ten realms, ripening beings through the arising-and-ceasing scheme, since the two vehicles' own nature and mark are ripe. The Vaipulya period, too, surveys all ten realms, ripening beings through four kinds of mutual entering, since four realms are ripe. The Prajñā period, too, surveys all ten realms, ripening beings through three kinds of mutual entering, likewise since four realms are ripe. The Lotus, too, surveys all ten realms, ripening beings through the single, perfect truth alone, since a single nature and mark is ripe. If there were no skillful means, no appearing and vanishing to bring beings to ripeness, how could object and wisdom ever come to be fused into the wondrous? It is like a painter, who is able to blend the five colors together to produce every kind of image — how much more so, then, the Buddha, the Dharma-king, sovereign and at ease with respect to the Dharma, should be unable to interweave his teaching in every variety of way to tame and ripen sentient beings!

Question: As explained above, these six objects — might it be that this present sūtra permits their names to be absent, while their sense is still present? Answer: The name and sense of the ten suchnesses have already been fully treated above. As for the four kinds of the twelve links: the "Phantom City" chapter clarifies the arising-and-ceasing twelve links. "Parable," which says only to leave falsehood behind, is the non-arising twelve links. "Skillful Means" says: "The buddha-seed arises through conditions" — this is the two kinds of twelve links beyond the three realms, the immeasurable and the uncreated. As for the four kinds of the Four Noble Truths: "Parable," where all suffering's own cause has desire as its root, is the arising-and-ceasing Four Noble Truths. "Medicinal Herbs," fully understanding the dharma of emptiness, is the non-arising Four Noble Truths. Again, where it speaks of the unsurpassed path, and where "Skillful Means" speaks only of the unsurpassed path, of the Tathāgata's own extinction, and the rest, this is the two kinds of Four Noble Truths beyond the three realms, the immeasurable and the uncreated. The differentiation among the ten suchnesses is the conventional truth. "Only buddha together with buddha is able to fathom the true mark of all dharmas fully" is precisely the real truth. "Peaceful Practices" says: "Nor does he differentiate the conditioned and the unconditioned, the real and the unreal dharmas" — existence is the conventional truth; nonexistence is the real truth; "nor does he differentiate" screens out the two extremes and reveals the middle way. The "Lifespan" chapter says: "Neither identical nor different" — "not different" is not the conventional; "not identical" is not the real — this is the sense of the three truths. "Skillful Means" says: "Further employing other skillful means, I help to reveal the truth of ultimate meaning" — this is the one real truth. And again it says: "Only this one matter is real." Where it is said: "Teaching a dharma beyond all differentiation," and again: "All dharmas bear the mark of quiescent extinction, and cannot be proclaimed in words" — this is the sense of the truth of no-truth.

Second, the wondrous of wisdom: the ultimate principle is profound and subtle — without wisdom, it cannot be revealed; wisdom is able to know what it knows only in relation to its object — without the object, it cannot be fused into the wondrous. Since the object has already been fused into the wondrous, wisdom, too, corresponds to it, the two being like a shadow and its echo — hence, following the object, wisdom is discussed next. Wisdom itself has two parts: first, a general discussion of the various kinds of wisdom; second, discussing wisdom in relation to its object. The general discussion of wisdom has six parts: first, enumeration; second, classification; third, characterization; fourth, illumination; fifth, judgment; sixth, opening.

As for enumeration: first, worldly wisdom. Second, the wisdom of the five methods for stilling the mind and the four applications of mindfulness. Third, the wisdom of the four good roots. Fourth, the wisdom of the four fruits. Fifth, the pratyekabuddha's wisdom. Sixth, the wisdom of the six pāramitās. Seventh, the śrāvaka's wisdom of embodying dharmas. Eighth, the pratyekabuddha's wisdom of embodying dharmas. Ninth, the bodhisattva's wisdom of embodying dharmas as a skillful means for entering the real. Tenth, the bodhisattva's wisdom of embodying dharmas in emerging into the provisional. Eleventh, the distinct teaching's wisdom of the ten stages of faith. Twelfth, the wisdom of the thirty preliminary minds. Thirteenth, the wisdom of the ten grounds. Fourteenth, the Tripiṭaka teaching's buddha-wisdom. Fifteenth, the shared teaching's buddha-wisdom. Sixteenth, the distinct teaching's buddha-wisdom. Seventeenth, the perfect teaching's wisdom of the disciples of the five ranks. Eighteenth, the wisdom of the purification of the six sense-faculties. Nineteenth, the wisdom from the initial abiding through to the stage of virtual enlightenment. Twentieth, the wisdom of subtle awakening.

Second, as for classification: worldly wisdom is without the path, false calculation and deluded attachment, mental activity operating entirely outside principle, without faith and without entry — hence it forms one class by itself. The five methods for stilling the mind and the four applications of mindfulness have already entered the initial worthy stage's own flavor of the buddha-dharma, and are both still outer ordinary beings — hence they form one class together. The four good roots are likewise both inner ordinary beings — hence they form one class. The four fruits alike see the real — hence they form one class. The pratyekabuddha's own particular-mark contemplation is able to encroach upon habituated tendencies — hence it forms one class by itself. The six pāramitās' wisdom regarding principle is weak, while its wisdom regarding phenomena is strong — hence it forms one class by itself. The shared teaching's skillful-means śrāvaka has a superior wisdom of embodying dharmas — hence it forms one class by itself. The pratyekabuddha, again, is slightly superior still — hence it forms one class by itself. The shared teaching's bodhisattva's wisdom, as a skillful means for entering the real, studies universally through all four gates — hence it forms one class by itself. The shared teaching's bodhisattva's wisdom in emerging into the provisional takes the conventional as its direct object — hence it forms one class by itself. The distinct teaching's wisdom of the ten stages of faith already knows the middle way beforehand, superior to what precedes it and inferior to what follows — hence it forms one class by itself. The distinct teaching's thirty preliminary minds are all, alike, inner ordinary beings — hence they form one class together. The ten grounds are alike sagely wisdom — hence they form one class together. The Tripiṭaka teaching's buddha-wisdom is the name for the teacher's own stage, superior to the three vehicles' disciples — hence it forms one class by itself. The shared teaching's buddha-wisdom, its severance of affliction and illumination of capacities superior — hence it forms one class by itself. The distinct teaching's buddha-wisdom, again superior still — hence it forms one class by itself. The perfect teaching's disciples of the five ranks alike still possess the nature of affliction, yet are able to know the Tathāgata's own secret treasury — hence they form one class together. The wisdom of the purification of the six sense-faculties draws near to the real — hence it forms one class by itself. From the initial abiding through to virtual enlightenment, all alike break through ignorance — hence they form one class together. The subtle-awakening buddha-wisdom is unsurpassed, the most venerable of all — hence it forms one class by itself. Grouping them in this way, according to their similarity of kind, some separated and some combined, they are judged, in total, as twenty, and so on.

Third, characterization: in India, worldly wisdom reaches, at its utmost extent, only up to the level of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. What is honored in this land centers instead on loyalty and filial devotion, the five constant virtues, the six arts, astronomy, geography, medicine, divination and physiognomy, the arts of war, and the ways of commerce, knowing by name a thousand kinds of plants and trees and ten thousand kinds of birds and beasts. It also includes such things as anointing one side while cutting the other without either resentment or attachment, attaining the fundamental concentrations, and giving rise to the five supernormal powers — stopping a river's flow within one's own ear, transforming Śakra into a sheep, inhaling and exhaling wind and cloud, or reaching up to touch the sun and moon. Its dharma is a worldly dharma; its concentration is an unmoving concentration; its wisdom is an unmoving departure. Since it seeks fame and profit and increases views and craving, and is known only to the mind of the world, it is called worldly wisdom.

As for the five methods for stilling the mind and the four applications of mindfulness: since they involve concentration, they are called "stilling"; since they involve wisdom, they are called "contemplation." Contemplation is able to overturn deluded views; concentration is able to restrain disorder. Counting the breath counters distraction; contemplating impurity counters desire; loving-kindness counters anger; contemplating dependent origination counters delusion; and mindfulness of the Buddha counters obstacles to the path. The applications of mindfulness are the four kinds of wisdom that contemplate the truth of suffering, countering the four inverted views — the four inverted views do not arise because of these four contemplations. Since they first overturn the four inverted views but have not yet entered the sagely principle, they are called the wisdom of outer ordinary beings.

The dharma of warmth: taking the Four Noble Truths as its object, wisdom arises; subduing affliction, this wisdom further increases and forms the sixteen kinds of contemplative wisdom. It is like a fire-drill, upper and lower resting upon one another, giving rise to fire that burns the firewood. Because there is wisdom that knows there is an object, it is able to generate the wisdom of warmth, which causes what exists to wither and fade — like gathering flowers in summer into a heap: the flowers generate their own warmth, which, in turn, causes them to wither by themselves. Again, relying on the aggregates and contemplating the aggregates, the fire of wisdom is kindled, and this fire, in turn, burns the aggregates — like two bamboo stalks rubbing against each other and producing fire, which then burns the bamboo grove itself. The Venerable Ghoṣaka says: "In seeking the fire of the wisdom of liberation, warmth comes first of all — just as, with fire, smoke appears first as its sign." The fire of untainted wisdom likewise takes the dharma of warmth as what comes first, as its sign — just as, with the sun, the sign of its brightness appears first. For this reason, it is called warmth.

Faith arising with respect to the true Dharma and the vinaya: to cherish and revere the true Dharma takes the truth of the path as its object; to have faith in the vinaya takes the truth of cessation as its object. Faith at the stage of warmth is able to take all Four Noble Truths as its object — why, then, does it speak only of two? Answer: These two are the most excellent, and so are spoken of first. Furthermore, the true Dharma is the remaining three truths, while the vinaya is the truth of cessation. It is like when the Buddha said to Pūrṇa: "I have a teaching in four clauses; I shall now explain it to you — do you wish to know it? I leave it entirely to you." The four clauses are precisely the Four Noble Truths. That giving and upholding the precepts are all directed toward liberation — this is its underlying intent. That the concentrations of the form realm arise — this is its basis. That, prior to one's own stage, wholesome roots have already arisen — this is its resembling cause and condition. With respect to the Four Noble Truths, the summit stage is its functional fruit. The resemblance within one's own stage, and the wholesome roots that arise afterward, are its basis-fruit. The five aggregates of the form realm are its retribution. The determinate cause of nirvāṇa, and the unbroken continuity of wholesome roots, are its benefit. The sixteen aspects are its practice, which is generated by conditions and is a wisdom cultivated through practice. Bound to the three samādhis of the form realm, and to the three faculties as has been explained, when it is joined with a great many minds, this is regression.

Warmth is of three kinds: lower-lower, lower-middle, and lower-upper. Summit is of three kinds: middle-lower, middle-middle, and middle-upper. Forbearance is of two kinds: upper-lower and upper-middle. The supreme worldly dharma is of one kind: upper-upper. Speaking of these four good roots in terms of three grades, warmth is the lower grade, summit is the middle grade, and forbearance and the supreme worldly dharma are the upper grade. There is also another account: warmth has two kinds, lower-lower and lower-middle; summit has three kinds, lower-upper, middle-lower, and middle-middle; forbearance has three kinds, middle-upper, upper-lower, and upper-middle; the supreme worldly dharma has one kind, upper-upper. Speaking of these, too, in terms of three grades: warmth is lower-lower, summit is lower-middle, forbearance is middle-upper, and the supreme worldly dharma is upper-upper. Ghoṣaka says: "Warmth has three lower grades; summit has six, from lower-lower through middle-upper; forbearance has eight, from lower-lower through upper-middle; the supreme worldly dharma is only upper-upper. Speaking of these in terms of three grades: the dharma of warmth is of one kind, the lower; the dharma of summit is of two kinds, the lower and the middle; forbearance is of three kinds, the lower, the middle, and the upper; the supreme worldly dharma is of one kind, the upper." Warmth has two kinds of forsaking: forsaking through leaving the realm and stage, and forsaking through regression. When forsaken through regression, one falls into the hells, commits the five acts of immediate retribution, yet does not sever one's wholesome roots. Summit is the same. Forbearance has only the one kind of forsaking, and one does not fall into the hells thereby, and so on.

As for the dharma of summit: among the wholesome roots of the form realm, there are those that move and those that do not move, those that abide and those that do not abide, those subject to difficulty and those not subject to difficulty, those that are cut off and those that are not cut off, those that regress and those that do not regress. Among those that move, down through those that regress, there are two: the lower is warmth, and the upper is summit. Among those that do not move, down through those that do not regress, there are likewise two: the lower is forbearance, and the upper is the supreme worldly dharma. There is also another account, which holds that it should be called the "lower summit." Why is this? Because it stands at the summit of the dharma of warmth, it is called "summit"; because it stands below the dharma of forbearance, it is called "lower." There is yet another account: it is like the path over a mountain's summit, upon which a traveler does not linger for long. If there is no difficulty, one is bound to pass over it and reach the other side; if one encounters difficulty, one at once turns back and retreats. The practitioner, too, abides at the summit only briefly: if there is no difficulty, he is bound to reach forbearance; if there is difficulty, he turns back and retreats to warmth. It is just like the summit of a mountain — hence it is called "summit."

What, then, is meant by contemplation at the stage of summit? A small measure of faith arises with respect to the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. It is called a "small" measure of faith because this state of faith does not remain for long, hence it is said to be lesser and small. This faith, arising with respect to the Buddha, generates a small faith that takes the truth of the path as its object; arising with respect to the Dharma, it generates a small faith that takes the truth of cessation as its object. Question: This faith should properly be able to take all Four Noble Truths as its object — why, then, does it speak only of taking two truths as its object? Answer: Because the path and cessation are superior. They are pure and without fault; they are wondrous; they are freedom. They are able to give rise to a basis for faith, because they generate a mind of faith and joy in those who are to be converted. If the World-Honored One had taught that suffering and its arising were what one ought to believe in and revere, then there would be no one to be converted at all — for how could this affliction, evil conduct, wrong view, and inversion possibly be revered and believed in? "I am forever oppressed by these," one would say. Those who are to be converted give rise to joy and delight with respect to the path and cessation — this is why only these two are spoken of. There is also another account, which holds that faith in the Buddha and the Saṅgha takes the path as its object, while faith in the Dharma takes all three remaining truths as its object — in which case, all Four Noble Truths are, in the end, encompassed by faith.

Question: One who abides at the summit has faith in the aggregates, faith in the Three Jewels, and faith in the truths alike — why, then, does the text speak only of faith in the Three Jewels? Answer: The Three Jewels are the basis from which faith and reverence arise. It is simply according to the practitioner's own disposition: delight arising with respect to the aggregates is called warmth; delight arising with respect to the Three Jewels is called summit; delight arising with respect to the truths is called forbearance. Question: Why does the text speak of regression at the summit, but not of regression at warmth? Answer: Since there is regression at the summit, regression at warmth ought likewise to be spoken of. It is simply that, while the practitioner is at the summit, affliction and karma present him with a great many obstacles and difficulties. Afflictions and the like think to themselves: "If this practitioner reaches forbearance, then in whose body shall we produce our fruit and retribution?" At the moment of leaving the desire realm, they likewise think: "If this practitioner departs from the desire realm, then in whose body shall we give rise to our fruit and retribution?" At the moment of leaving the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, they likewise think: "If this practitioner, having left that desire, no longer receives a body at all, then in whose body shall we give rise to our fruit and retribution?" At these three moments, there are a great many such obstacles and difficulties. When one regresses because of these obstacles and difficulties, one suffers great distress and anguish — like a man who, seeing a treasure-store, rejoices greatly, but loses it the very moment he tries to take it. One who abides in the dharma of summit thinks to himself: "Before long, I shall attain forbearance, forever cut off the evil destinies, and gain a great and weighty benefit, becoming just like a sage" — and yet, when he suddenly regresses and loses this attainment, he suffers great distress and anguish. This is why it is called "regression at the summit."

If one is able to draw near to good friends, and, hearing from them the accordant and skillful teachings, rightly contemplates within one's own mind, having faith in the Buddha's awakening, faith in the well-taught Dharma, and faith in the Saṅgha's pure merit — this is called faith in the Jewels. Teaching that form is impermanent, down through teaching that consciousness is impermanent — this is called faith in the aggregates. Knowing that there is suffering, its arising, its cessation, and the path — this is called faith in the truths. If one proceeds in this way, one abides at the summit; if one does not proceed in this way, one regresses from the summit.

As for the contemplation of the dharma of forbearance: one rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm, and the suffering of the form and formless realms; the arising of the formations of the desire realm, and the arising of the formations of the form and formless realms; the cessation of the formations of the desire realm, and the cessation of the formations of the form and formless realms; cutting off the path of the formations of the desire realm, and cutting off the path of the formations of the form and formless realms. These thirty-two mind-moments are called the lower forbearance. Afterward, the practitioner gradually reduces both the objects and the aspects of contemplation: he again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm and the suffering of the form and formless realms, down through contemplating the cutting off of the path of the formations of the desire realm, but omits contemplating the cutting off of the path of the formations of the form and formless realms — from this point on, this is called the middle forbearance. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm, contemplates the suffering of the form and formless realms, down through contemplating the cessation of the formations of the form and formless realms, but omits contemplating the cessation of all remaining paths. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm and the suffering of the form and formless realms, down through contemplating the cessation of the formations of the desire realm, but omits the cessation of the formations of the form and formless realms. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm, down through contemplating the arising of the formations of the form and formless realms, but omits contemplating the cessation of all remaining cessations. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm, down through contemplating the arising of the formations of the desire realm, but omits the arising of the formations of the form and formless realms. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire, form, and formless realms, but omits all remaining arisings. He then again rightly contemplates the suffering of the desire realm, but omits the suffering of the form and formless realms. He then again rightly contemplates the desire realm as constant, its continuity unbroken, without any further departure from it. Contemplating in this way, a deep sense of weariness and aversion arises, and he further reduces still more, forming, at last, only two mind-moments contemplating a single aspect — resembling the forbearance regarding the dharma of suffering and the wisdom regarding the dharma of suffering of the path of vision. This right contemplation is called the middle forbearance. He then contemplates the suffering of the desire realm with a single mind-moment alone — this is called the upper forbearance.

Next, the supreme worldly dharma arises; and after the supreme worldly dharma, the forbearance regarding the dharma of suffering arises next in turn. It is like a man who wishes to travel from his own country to another country: having many possessions, unable to carry them all with him, he exchanges his goods for money; still finding money burdensome, he exchanges it for gold; still finding gold burdensome, he exchanges it for a single treasure of great value, and travels on to the other country with that alone. In just this way, the practitioner, gradually relinquishing more and more, in unbroken continuity, gives rise to the upper forbearance. After the upper forbearance, the supreme worldly dharma arises. After the supreme worldly dharma, the forbearance regarding the dharma of suffering arises.

Question: Does the supreme worldly dharma come in three grades? Answer: In a single person, no; but among many people, yes. Śāriputra's was of the upper grade, Maudgalyāyana's of the middle grade, and all others' of the lower grade. Taken with respect to buddhas, pratyekabuddhas, and śrāvakas, it forms three grades.

As for the supreme worldly dharma: this mental factor and its associated mental factors are, with respect to all other dharmas, the foremost, the superior, the exalted, the venerable, the highest, and the wondrous. It is superior both partially and wholly. As for partial superiority: it is superior to worldly dharmas, but not superior to the vision of the truths. This is because the vision of the truths and its retinue are inseparable from one another, because the power of wisdom is especially abundant in it, and because the meditative practice it perfumes does not arise together with ordinary beings in the same place. At the moment of the wisdom of exhaustion, all wholesome roots are forever separated from every defiling obstruction. As for the three samādhis, and even the untainted states that ordinary beings disdain as lowly — how much more so, then, the tainted states — how could it not be superior to all of these? Being partially superior to the dharmas of warmth, summit, and forbearance, it, too, ought to be called "supreme" — one should properly say it is "partially superior," superior to warmth, summit, forbearance, and every meditative attainment, immeasurable liberation, and sphere of mastery attained by ordinary beings. Some, however, say it is wholly superior — not meaning that it is superior in every activity and undertaking, but only that it alone is able to open the gate to the path of the sages. The vision of the truths and the like are not able to open the gate to the path of the sages; it is the supreme worldly dharma that opens the gate to the path of the sages, so that the vision of the truths and its associated dharmas are then able to be cultivated. What is thus able to be cultivated is entirely the functional effect of the supreme worldly dharma. As for the name and meaning of this supreme worldly dharma: the sense of being "most excellent" is the sense of "foremost"; attaining a wondrous fruit is the sense of "foremost" — like the very summit of a tall banner, above which there is nothing higher at all — this, too, is the sense of "foremost."

Question: Do these various senses carry any distinction among themselves? Answer: These are all terms of praise extolling its supreme and wondrous quality, yet they do carry a distinction. With respect to the contemplation of impurity and mindfulness of the breath, it is called "most excellent"; with respect to the wisdom of hearing, it is called "superior"; with respect to the wisdom of reflection, it is called "exalted"; with respect to warmth, it is "venerable"; with respect to summit, it is "highest"; with respect to forbearance, it is "wondrous." Again, relying on the stage of approach to the first dhyāna, it is "most excellent"; relying on the first dhyāna, it is "superior"; relying on the intermediate stage, it is "exalted"; relying on the second dhyāna, it is "venerable"; relying on the third dhyāna, it is "highest"; relying on the fourth dhyāna, it is "wondrous." Such various accounts as these follow the explanation given in the Vibhāṣā — those who wish to know them in full detail should consult that text directly.

The first fruit involves the eight forbearances and eight forms of wisdom. The third fruit, reconsidering and taking the real as its object once more, involves nine uninterrupted paths and nine forms of the wisdom of liberation. The pratyekabuddha makes use of both the general characteristic and the particular characteristics — as when, taking the three time periods, one clarifies suffering and its arising, and differentiates the twelve links, this is precisely the contemplation of particular characteristics. In the six pāramitās, the wisdom that takes principle as its object is weak, subduing affliction without yet cutting it off, while the wisdom that takes phenomena as its object is strong, able to relinquish body, life, and property without the least regret or attachment. Although the śrāvaka is able to give rise to the real and accomplish sagehood, he still speaks of "my robe" and "my bowl" — hence the mutual discussion of their relative strength and weakness, and so on.

The shared teaching's śrāvaka, through the single gate of the general characteristic, penetrates the conventional as identical with the real. The shared teaching's pratyekabuddha is able, within the single gate, to contemplate both the general characteristic and the particular characteristics, and thereby penetrates the conventional as identical with the real. The shared teaching's bodhisattva is able, throughout all four gates, to contemplate both the general characteristic and the particular characteristics, penetrating the conventional as identical with the real; he is also able, comprehensively through all four gates, to emerge into the provisional and teach and transform sentient beings. The ten stages of faith have faith in the true suchness and true mark at the very culmination of the fruit, and, in seeking this principle, give rise to the mind of the ten stages of faith. The ten abidings correctly cultivate entry into emptiness, while incidentally cultivating the provisional and the middle. The ten practices correctly cultivate the provisional, while incidentally cultivating the middle. The ten transferences correctly cultivate the middle. The first ground realizes the middle; from the second ground upward, one reconsiders the middle once more. The Tripiṭaka teaching's buddha, in a single sitting, employs the thirty-four mind-moments — the eight forbearances, the eight forms of wisdom, the nine uninterrupted paths, and the nine paths of liberation — cutting off both the primary afflictions and their habituated residue entirely. The shared teaching's buddha, seated beneath the bodhi-tree, with the wisdom corresponding to a single thought-moment, cuts off the remaining habituated tendencies. The distinct teaching's buddha, with the final mind of the vajra-like samādhi, cuts off the last remaining portion of ignorance and, in the end, exhaustively becomes a buddha. Some say: the moment of this cutting-off is itself the stage of virtual enlightenment, and the buddha himself has nothing further to cut off, but simply realizes and attains perfect and complete bodhi in its fullness. The perfect teaching's disciples of the five ranks, without cutting off the five desires, purify their sense-faculties; possessing the very nature of affliction, they are yet able to know the Tathāgata's own secret treasury. The stage of the purification of the six sense-faculties attains a resemblance to the wisdom of the middle way. The initial abiding attains the Tathāgata's own single body as immeasurable bodies, entering the ocean-like stream of the Dharma and moving within it, flowing forth spontaneously and without obstruction. The later stages may be understood accordingly, and are not further recorded here.

Fourth, clarifying how wisdom illuminates its object: as for whether wisdom illuminates the object, or the object gives rise to wisdom, all four such positions fall into debating an inherent nature, as is recorded in a separate treatise, and so on. If object and wisdom are instead established through the causes and conditions of the four siddhāntas, then they have names alone, and so on.

Question: Wisdom is able to illuminate its object — is the object, too, able to illuminate wisdom? Answer: If one explains this according to the inconceivable, then the two mutually illuminate one another, and there is no harm in this sense either. The Benevolent Kings Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "Both the teaching of wisdom and the sphere of wisdom are alike called prajñā." It is like the surfaces of two mirrors mutually reflecting each other, or like the single earth, which is able to give rise to every kind of sprout, while the sprout, too, gives rise to the single earth — but let this sense be set aside for now. Worldly wisdom illuminates the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. From the wisdom of the five methods for stilling the mind up through the wisdom of embodying dharmas — seven kinds of wisdom in all — illuminate the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The wisdom of the six pāramitās, and the shared teaching's bodhisattva's wisdom of emerging into the provisional, belong to both: seeking upward, they illuminate the ten suchnesses of the bodhisattva; transforming below, they illuminate the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. The wisdom of the forty minds likewise belongs to both, in the same way. The wisdom of the ten grounds belongs to both: illuminating in sequence, it illuminates the ten suchnesses of the bodhisattva; illuminating not in sequence, it illuminates the ten suchnesses of the buddha. From the five ranks onward — four kinds of wisdom in all — all illuminate the ten suchnesses of the buddha-realm. Given here only in broad summary; the fine distinctions are recorded elsewhere, and so on.

As for how the twenty kinds of wisdom illuminate the four kinds of twelve-link objects: worldly wisdom, the five methods, the four applications of mindfulness, the four fruits, down through the pratyekabuddha, the six pāramitās, and the Tripiṭaka teaching's buddha — seven kinds of wisdom in all — illuminate the conceivable arising-and-ceasing twelve links as their object. The shared teaching's three vehicles' wisdom as a skillful means for entering the real, the wisdom of emerging into the provisional, and the wisdom of the buddha — five kinds of wisdom in all — illuminate the conceivable non-arising-and-non-ceasing twelve links as their object. The distinct teaching's ten stages of faith, thirty minds, ten grounds, and buddha — four kinds of wisdom in all — illuminate the inconceivable arising-and-ceasing twelve links as their object; within this, there is no lack of further particular senses, but here only the broad classification is followed. The perfect teaching's four kinds of wisdom illuminate the inconceivable non-arising-and-non-ceasing twelve links as their object.

As for how the twenty kinds of wisdom illuminate the four kinds of Four Noble Truths: the preceding seven kinds of wisdom belonging to the Tripiṭaka teaching and the rest illuminate the arising-and-ceasing Four Noble Truths as their object. Next, the shared teaching's five kinds of wisdom illuminate the non-arising-and-non-ceasing Four Noble Truths as their object. Next, the distinct teaching's four kinds of wisdom illuminate the immeasurable Four Noble Truths as their object. Next, the perfect teaching's four kinds of wisdom illuminate the uncreated Four Noble Truths as their object.

Next, as for how the twenty kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths: the preceding seven kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths of emptiness reached through analysis. Next, the five kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths of emptiness reached by embodying dharmas directly. Next, the eight kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths of revealing the middle. Where the distinct and perfect teachings interpenetrate one another within this, it may be grasped by reflection, and so on.

Next, clarifying how the twenty kinds of wisdom illuminate the three truths: the preceding seven kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths without the middle — this is the dharmas produced through causes and conditions, all of which belong under the conventional. Next, the five kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths containing the middle — the single phrase "empty" here belongs entirely under the real truth. Next, the distinct and perfect teachings' eight kinds of wisdom illuminate the two truths of revealing the middle — this is precisely the provisional name, also called the middle way; both phrases belong entirely under the truth of the middle way.

Next, as for how the twenty kinds of wisdom illuminate the one real truth: this requires citing the Treatise's clarification of the four siddhāntas, all of which are called "real" — real by virtue of the mundane, real all the way to real by virtue of ultimate meaning. One should know that the word "real" likewise extends through all four kinds of the Four Noble Truths: real by virtue of arising-and-ceasing, real by virtue of non-arising-and-non-ceasing, real by virtue of the immeasurable, real by virtue of the uncreated. The preceding seven kinds of wisdom belonging to the Tripiṭaka teaching illuminate the real of arising-and-ceasing. Next, the shared teaching's five kinds of wisdom illuminate the real of non-arising-and-non-ceasing. Next, the distinct teaching's four kinds of wisdom illuminate the real of the immeasurable. Next, the perfect teaching's four kinds of wisdom illuminate the real of the uncreated. The various senses of "real," earlier and later, and so on.

Next, as for how the twenty kinds of wisdom relate to the truth of no-truth, which is without illumination: the truth of no-truth has no separate principle of its own — if one attains awakening with respect to the four kinds of Four Noble Truths, one no longer sees any distinction between truth and non-truth, and so the truth of no-truth, too, extends throughout. The preceding seven kinds of wisdom illuminate the no-truth of arising-and-ceasing, because "arising-arising cannot be spoken." Next, the five kinds of wisdom illuminate the no-truth of non-arising-and-non-ceasing, because "arising-non-arising cannot be spoken." Next, the four kinds of wisdom illuminate the no-truth of the immeasurable, because "non-arising-arising cannot be spoken." Next, the four kinds of wisdom illuminate the no-truth of the uncreated, because "non-arising-non-arising cannot be spoken." The earlier no-truth is the provisional; the later no-truth is the real — this is spoken from the standpoint of verbal teaching. But if spoken from the standpoint of the wondrous awakening identical to what is illuminated within the sage's own mind, then one no longer sees any provisional or real at all — hence it is neither provisional nor real. An empty fist is used to fool a small child, in order to draw all beings onward through it: the provisional is taught as a skillful means, and the real, too, is taught as a skillful means. At the moment principle is fused together, there is no longer any provisional or real remaining — hence it is called "neither provisional nor real," and this is the wondrous.

Fifth, clarifying the coarse and the wondrous: the preceding twelve rounds of wisdom are coarse; the latter eight rounds of wisdom are wondrous. Why is this? The buddhas of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings are themselves impermanent, and do not themselves teach the eternal — how, then, could the two vehicles and the bodhisattvas of those teachings ever hear of the eternal, believe in the eternal, or cultivate the eternal? Hence, this is coarse. The distinct teaching's ten stages of faith, from their very outset, have already heard of the eternal, and have faith in and cultivate the eternal — already surpassing those buddhas, how much more so, then, everything that follows! Hence, this is wondrous. The common account holds that the Lotus does not clarify the eternal, but this is merely the sense of the Tripiṭaka teaching. Here, clarifying that the ten stages of faith's own knowledge of the middle has already surpassed the Muni, the latter eight rounds are, accordingly, wondrous.

Again, among the distinct teaching's four kinds of wisdom, three are coarse and one is wondrous; among the perfect teaching's four kinds of wisdom, all without exception are called wondrous. Why is this? A master of the Dilun school says: "The middle way is something the fruition alone is able to reveal; the beginning student, looking up, has faith in this principle only as a lotus-thread hung from a mountain." Hence it is said that both faith and practice in the distinct teaching fall short of the perfect teaching's own intent. Therefore, the wisdom of the ten stages of faith is coarse. The ten abidings correctly cultivate emptiness, while incidentally cultivating the provisional and the middle. The ten practices correctly cultivate the provisional, while incidentally cultivating the middle. The ten transferences begin to correctly cultivate the middle. Within all of this, there is principle alone, without the dharmas being fully present within it — hence, all of this is coarse. The wisdom of ascending to the grounds breaks through ignorance and sees the middle way; once realized, this becomes wondrous. This resembles the case of the shared and Tripiṭaka teachings: both attain the path, and yet the Tripiṭaka teaching's own approach is clumsy. So, too, here with the distinct teaching: its teaching-gate is entirely a skillful means, and yet its realization is wondrous, and so on. As for why the perfect teaching's four kinds of wisdom are all, without exception, wondrous: as the dharma's own mark is spoken of, so one has faith in it; as principle itself is, so one practices it — beginning with the discussion of the five ranks, and ending with subtle awakening, it is real and not provisional, and hence all of it is wondrous. This is what is called speaking of the wondrous wisdom in relation to the coarse wisdom.

Again, as for clarifying the coarse and the wondrous in terms of knowing and seeing: what is the difference between knowing and seeing? There are, in fact, four distinctions: neither knowing nor seeing; knowing but not seeing; seeing but not knowing; and both knowing and seeing. First explained from the standpoint of the Tripiṭaka teaching, and afterward from the standpoint of the perfect teaching, with the intervening cases to be understood by the same pattern. The ordinary being, not having heard the teaching, does not know; not having realized it, does not see. From the five methods and four applications of mindfulness up through the supreme worldly dharma, having heard the teaching, this is called knowing; not yet having realized it, this is not seeing. The pratyekabuddha, not having heard the teaching, is said not to know; realizing it spontaneously, this is seeing. The four fruits, having heard the teaching, are likewise knowing; having realized it, are likewise seeing. Judging the coarse and the wondrous by successive transmission in this way may be understood accordingly. Explained from the standpoint of the perfect teaching: the seven expedient stages, not having heard the perfect teaching, do not know; not yet having realized it, do not see. The five ranks and the six sense-faculties, having heard it, know; not yet having realized it, do not see. One who brings forth a habituation from a former life is called seeing, though, not arising from hearing in this life, is called not knowing. One who, having received the teaching, realizes and enters it, both knows and sees. This, too, is judged as coarse and wondrous, step by step in succession.

In the final analysis, the twenty kinds of wisdom discussed above, spoken of in brief, do not go beyond the two kinds of wisdom, the provisional and the real. As the sūtra says: "The Tathāgata's skillful-means knowledge and vision, and the pāramitās, are all, alike, fully complete" — this gathers up, in total, all the preceding kinds of provisional wisdom. "The Tathāgata's knowledge and vision are vast, great, deep, and far-reaching" — this gathers up, in total, all the preceding kinds of real wisdom. Since the skillful means are themselves already complete, what is there that is not encompassed by them? Since the knowledge and vision are themselves already vast, great, deep, and far-reaching, what is there that is not gathered within them? The depths of the object are without bound; the waters of wisdom cannot be fathomed; only buddha together with buddha is able to fathom them fully. Such knowledge and vision as this is precisely the eye of wisdom: the eye is the full complement of the five eyes; the wisdom is the three kinds of wisdom in a single mind. The wisdom knowing all modes knows the real; the remaining two kinds of wisdom know the provisional. The buddha-eye sees the real; the remaining four eyes see the provisional. This very knowing is precisely this very seeing; this very seeing is precisely this very knowing. Set against all the preceding kinds of wisdom, which are coarse, this very knowledge and vision is what is called the wondrous.

If one grasps the sense within this knowledge and vision, one need no longer discuss the five eyes separately at all. But for those who remain confused and have not yet understood, the coarse and the wondrous are clarified once more in terms of the eyes themselves. It is like the physical eye when blind and closed — by what means could it see forms at all? To merely hear another person's account and give rise to one imagining or another is, in the end, never true seeing. If one wishes the eye to open, one must treat the film over it — how could keeping the eye closed and clinging to disputation be of any benefit at all? An eye closed, imagining, is coarse; an eye opened, seeing, is wondrous. When the heavenly eye has not yet opened, not seeing beyond obstructions is coarse; but cultivating the power of meditative concentration and the wisdom of aspiration, one is able to bring forth the pure form, penetrating through obstruction both within and without, its brightness and darkness no longer separated. When the wisdom-eye has not yet opened, one forever treads the path toward death; even supposing one has feelings and imaginings, these, too, are not yet real, and hence this is coarse; but when the taintless bursts suddenly forth, this is called wondrous, and because the principle of the truths is fully clear, this, too, is called wondrous. When the dharma-eye has not yet opened, one teaches the Dharma mismatched to the capacity at hand — as when Śāriputra taught wrongly, or Pūrṇa mistook a foul vessel — this is called coarse; but breaking through the obstruction so as to penetrate what was formerly unknown, and discerning which remedy fits which illness, this is called wondrous. When the buddha-eye has not yet opened, one does not see the true mark — hence the text says: "What is not knowable by those of the two vehicles, by those newly resolved in mind, or even by bodhisattvas who have not yet regressed" — and so all four remaining eyes are coarse. Except for those bodhisattvas among the great assembly whose power of faith is firm and resolute, who, through faith, are able to enter, and who resemble the buddha-eye, able to open the true buddha's own knowledge and vision — only this may be called wondrous. The various teachings, for the most part, speak only of the four eyes, or speak of the buddha-eye while still bearing the four eyes along with it — hence, this is coarse. The present sūtra alone speaks of the buddha-eye by itself — hence, this is wondrous. This is what is meant by the wondrous in relation to the coarse.

Sixth, clarifying opening the coarse to reveal the wondrous: as for the preceding sixteen rounds of wisdom, if they are not opened up and made fully clear, they remain merely coarse wisdom; but once they are opened up and made fully clear, all of them become wondrous wisdom. Why is this? It is like King Wonderful Adornment, who was, at first, possessed only of the worldly wisdom of an outside path; upon hearing the Lotus Sūtra, he was at once opened up and made fully clear — taking his very deviant marks and entering them into the correct marks, he cultivated the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment without shifting from any of his former views, and entered the eightfold correct path without abandoning the eightfold deviant path. This is precisely the opening up of worldly wisdom, entering into wondrous wisdom. Some are thereby brought level with the five ranks, some are brought level with the resemblance stage, and some are brought level with the stage of a partial attainment — entry occurs, step by step, at every stage, and the sense may be worked out in fine detail, and so on.

As for the wisdom of the five methods as a skillful means, down through the shared teaching's buddha-wisdom and the rest — if they are not opened up and made fully clear, they remain simply coarse wisdom. Now, opening the provisional to reveal the real, "that which you all practice is the bodhisattva path," brings them into the wondrous stage. Each and every one of the twelve rounds of wisdom must be brought, one by one, into the perfect teaching's own wondrous four kinds of wisdom, or brought into the wisdom of the five ranks, the resemblance stage, the stage of partial attainment, and the rest, and so on.

Again, opening up and making fully clear the distinct teaching's wisdom, distinguished stage by stage, brings it into wondrous wisdom: as it stands in its own essence, it is such-and-such a stage; as it advances further, it becomes such-and-such a further stage, worked out in fine detail, and so on. All sixteen kinds of coarse wisdom become wondrous wisdom, with no coarse remaining against which to set it — this is precisely the wondrous of wisdom read in the absolute sense.

Moreover, as for opening the coarse eyes to reveal the wondrous eye: although the other sūtras speak of the five eyes, the five eyes remain unfused with one another there — hence, this is coarse. The present sūtra opens up and makes fully clear the four lesser eyes, causing them to enter into the buddha-eye. The text says: "The eyes given by one's father and mother thereupon attain purity." For one who studies the Mahāyāna, though he still has the physical eye, it is named the buddha-eye — this is precisely opening up and making fully clear the physical eye, naming it the buddha-eye. The Vimalakīrti [Sūtra] says: "Who among the worldly truly possesses the heavenly eye? Only the buddhas, the world-honored ones, who see all buddha-lands without any duality of appearance" — this is precisely opening up and making fully clear the heavenly eye, which is itself the buddha-eye. "I wish to attain a wisdom-eye as pure as the World-Honored One's own, the foremost of all" — this is precisely opening up and making fully clear the wisdom-eye, able to enter the wondrous. As for opening up the dharma-eye to enter the wondrous, this is the fullness of the wisdom of the utmost limit. The four eyes are fused and enter into the buddha-eye, quiescent and yet ever illuminating — hence the text says: "Opening up and making fully clear the dharma of the śrāvakas, this is the king of all sūtras." The five eyes, fully complete, accomplish bodhi, opening the Buddha's own knowledge and vision — hence, this is called wondrous.

Question: When the buddha-eye is opened, this alone is called wondrous — but if the six sense-faculties, though purified, have not yet reached the buddha-eye, how can this, too, be wondrous? Answer: Even though the buddha-eye has not yet opened, one is already able to study comprehensively and have faith comprehensively. It is like the kalaviṅka bird: although still within its eggshell, its call already surpasses that of every other bird — this is precisely the wondrous of the nominal and the resemblance stages, and the like. Once it does open, this is precisely the wondrous of a partial attainment, and the wondrous of the ultimate, and so on.

Second, discussing wisdom in relation to its object, which is likewise of two kinds: first, in relation to the five objects; second, wisdom illuminating its object through successive mutual reflection. First, wisdom ought to be discussed in relation to the object of the ten suchnesses — but since this is already the present sūtra's own governing sense, spoken of everywhere throughout it, it may be understood without further explanation here.

Next, discussing wisdom in relation to the four kinds of twelve links: the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "There are four kinds of contemplation of the twelve links: through the contemplation of lower wisdom, one attains the bodhi of the śrāvaka. Through the contemplation of middle wisdom, one attains the bodhi of the pratyekabuddha. Through the contemplation of upper wisdom, one attains the bodhi of the bodhisattva. Through the contemplation of the highest wisdom, one attains the bodhi of the buddha." Why is this so? The twelve links are, in their basis, a single object, but since the understanding brought to bear upon them differs, they open out into four kinds. Now, explaining this according to the sense of the Four Teachings: the Tripiṭaka teaching possesses all three kinds of persons, and all of them contemplate the phenomena of the twelve links within the three realms through the wisdom of analysis, as their initial gate; yet the wisdom of analysis is shallow and weak, and, among the three kinds of persons, the śrāvaka is the most inferior — since an inferior person marks out a shallow dharma, it is called the lower wisdom. The shared teaching likewise possesses three kinds of persons, who alike contemplate the principle of the twelve links within the three realms through the wisdom of embodying dharmas directly; though the embodying of dharmas is deep, compared to the Tripiṭaka teaching it is skillful, yet compared to the distinct teaching it is not yet skillful — and, among these three kinds of persons, the pratyekabuddha occupies the middle position; since a middling person names a shared dharma, it is called the middle wisdom. The distinct teaching's buddha and bodhisattva both know the phenomena of the twelve links beyond the three realms; the bodhisattva, progressing in sequence, compared to the buddha, is not yet upper, yet compared to the shared and Tripiṭaka teachings, is indeed an upper dharma — hence it is properly named the upper wisdom. The perfect teaching's buddha and bodhisattva both contemplate the principle of the twelve links beyond the three realms, and, from the very outset of their initial resolve, phenomena themselves are identical with the middle; since this dharma is the most excellent of all, it is properly named after the buddha, and is called the contemplation of the highest wisdom. Explaining the four contemplations by means of the Four Teachings in this way accords properly with their sense, and so on.

As for what is called the contemplation of lower wisdom: one contemplates that sensation arises from contact, contact from the six sense-fields, the six sense-fields from name-and-form, name-and-form from consciousness, consciousness from volitional formation, and volitional formation from ignorance. Ignorance, being inverted and lacking wholesome reflection, brings about unwholesome action, which draws forth the consciousness, name-and-form, and the rest of the four evil destinies; if reflection is wholesome, it brings about wholesome action, which draws forth the consciousness, name-and-form, and the rest of humans and gods. Contemplating this ignorance, moment after moment it is impermanent, never abiding either before or after; the good and evil it produces shift and change, swiftly decaying; the name-and-form it receives declines and passes away in succession. Affliction, karma, and suffering, each in turn a cause and condition for the other, never pause even for a moment. The two causes of the past bring forth the five fruits of the present; the three causes of the present bring forth the two fruits of the future — the three periods of time turning and returning, just like the wheel of a cart. Since the root of delusion and confusion is itself impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, ignorance is thereby extinguished; and because ignorance is extinguished, all the formations are extinguished, down through old age and death being extinguished. If the fire is no longer kindled, there is then no more smoke — this is called the severance of the bondage of the child. Where there is no child, there is no fruit either — the wisdom that brings extinction and the body reduced to ash, departing from the twenty-five states of existence — this is called the severance of the bondage of the fruit. This, then, is the contemplation of the twelve links through lower wisdom, attaining the bodhi of the śrāvaka.

As for the middle wisdom: one contemplates that sensation arises from contact, down through volitional formation arising from ignorance. Ignorance is simply a single deluded thought-moment of mind; mind has no form or substance, but only a name. Sought within, without, or in between, this name cannot be found at all — this name neither abides nor does it fail to abide; it is just like a magical illusion, deceiving the eye in vain. The essential mark of ignorance is, from the outset, itself without any being at all, arising only through the coming-together of false thought as cause and condition; because it has no being whatsoever, it is provisionally named "ignorance." Unwholesome reflection is fashioned by the activity of mind; because one fails to penetrate that ignorance is like a magical illusion, one gives rise to wholesome or unwholesome reflection, and there is then wholesome or unwholesome action, receiving wholesome or unwholesome name-and-form, contact, and sensation. Now, penetrating that ignorance is like an illusion, the formations, too, are all like a transformation; consciousness, name-and-form, and the rest, arising from illusion, are all likewise like an illusion. Craving, grasping, becoming, and birth, turning through the three periods of time, are illusory transformations, shifting and changing, entirely without any reality. A person of wisdom ought not to give rise to craving or aversion in the midst of any of this. Since ignorance is itself unattainable, ignorance does not arise; and, not arising, it does not cease either. The formations, and old age and death, likewise neither arise nor cease. Because they do not arise, they are not new; because they do not cease, they are not old. Since they are not old, there is no old thing that need come to an end; since they are not new, there is no new thing that need be constructed. Since there is nothing new, the bondage of the child is severed; since there is nothing old, the bondage of the fruit is severed. This is called the contemplation of the twelve links through the middle wisdom, attaining the bodhi of the pratyekabuddha.

As for the contemplation of the upper wisdom: one contemplates that sensation arises from contact, down through volitional formation arising from ignorance. Ignorance is simply a single deluded thought-moment of mind; because the mind is deluded, it branches out into affliction; from affliction, it branches out into the various karmas; from karma, it branches out into the various forms of suffering. Contemplating this affliction, its kinds and distinctions are not the same; because they are not the same, the karma they produce is not the same; and because the karma is not the same, the suffering is not the same. The formations are manifold, and name-and-form differ from one case to the next; the various kinds of the three paths are immeasurable and boundless, distinguished without confusion. Knowing that, because of this particular affliction, this particular karma arises, and this particular suffering is obtained, entirely unrelated to any other karma or any other affliction — contemplating the three paths in this way, one sees that they cover over and obstruct the three virtues. The skillful means for breaking through this obstruction are likewise immeasurable: if ignorance is broken through, prajñā is thereby revealed; if karma is broken through, liberation is thereby revealed; if consciousness and name-and-form are broken through, the Dharma-body is thereby revealed — and craving, grasping, becoming, and old-age-and-death are, in just the same way, broken through as well. Having thus liberated himself, one is then further able to transform others; with respect to every kind, knowing every dharma, one gives rise to the wisdom of the paths, guiding and benefiting sentient beings. This is called the contemplation of the twelve links through the upper wisdom.

As for the contemplation of the highest wisdom: one contemplates that sensation arises from contact, down through volitional formation arising from ignorance, and knows that the three paths of the twelve links are themselves precisely the three virtues — how, then, could one cut off and break through the three virtues, only to seek the three virtues once more? This would destroy the very mark of all dharmas. The path of affliction is itself prajñā — one should know that affliction is not itself dark; prajñā is itself affliction — prajñā is not itself bright. Since affliction is not itself dark, what further need is there to cut it off? Since prajñā is not itself bright, what is there for it to break through? What is dark was, from the outset, never truly dark, and has no need of brightness at all — it is like Jīvaka, who took poison itself and made of it a medicine: how, then, could one abandon this and grasp at that? As for the path of karma being itself liberation, one should know that the path of karma is not itself bondage; liberation is itself karma — liberation is not itself freedom. Since karma is not itself bondage, what is there to be freed from? Since liberation is not itself freedom, what is there to be attained? It is like a person with supernormal powers — how could he possibly avoid the one and go toward the other? As for the path of suffering being itself the Dharma-body, one should know that suffering is not itself birth-and-death; the Dharma-body is itself birth-and-death — the Dharma-body is not itself happiness. Since suffering is not itself birth-and-death, what is there to grieve over? Since the Dharma-body is not itself happiness, what is there to rejoice in? It is like empty space itself — without gain and without loss, neither delighting nor grieving. Contemplating in this way, the three paths are no different from the three virtues, and the three virtues are no different from the three paths; and, within the three paths themselves, every buddha-dharma is already fully present. Why is this? The three paths are themselves the three virtues, and the three virtues are precisely the great nirvāṇa, named the secret treasury — this is itself the fullness of the buddha-fruit; and the deep contemplation of the twelve links is itself the very sitting beneath the bodhi-tree — this is itself the fullness of the buddha-cause. The buddha-cause and the buddha-fruit are both, alike, entirely fulfilled — the remaining cases may be understood by the same pattern. This is called the contemplation of the twelve links through the highest wisdom, attaining the bodhi of the buddha.

According to this, one ought to judge the coarse and the wondrous, and open the coarse to reveal the wondrous — the sense of this may be understood, and so it is not recorded in detail here. Again, the four kinds of wisdom illuminate the four objects: if the object is not transformed, the wisdom that illuminates it remains coarse; once the four objects are transformed into the wondrous object, the coarse wisdom, too, becomes wondrous wisdom — this, too, carries the sense of the relative and the absolute, and so on.

Second, discussing wisdom in relation to the four kinds of Four Noble Truths: the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "As for the wisdom that knows the noble truths, there are two kinds: the middle wisdom and the upper wisdom. The middle wisdom belongs to the śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha; the upper wisdom belongs to the buddhas and bodhisattvas." If one follows this text, then gathering together embodying and analysis, they are jointly called the middle; gathering together the sharp and dull faculties of the Mahāyāna, they are jointly called the upper.

Now, if one instead opens this out according to sharp and dull faculties, and phenomenal and principial objects both within and beyond the three realms, it forms four: the śrāvaka's faculty is dull, and takes the phenomena of the Four Noble Truths as its object — this is the arising-and-ceasing wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. The pratyekabuddha's faculty is sharp, and takes the principle of the Four Noble Truths as its object — this is the non-arising wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. The bodhisattva's wisdom is shallow, and takes the inconceivable as phenomena as its object — this is the immeasurable wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. The buddhas' wisdom is deep, and takes the inconceivable as principle as its object — this is the uncreated wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. This is one passage from the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra. It also says: "The ordinary being has suffering but no truth; the śrāvaka has suffering, and also has the truth of suffering." The ordinary being does not see the principle of suffering, hence it is said he has no truth; the śrāvaka is able to see impermanence, suffering, and emptiness, hence it is said he has the truth — this is precisely the arising-and-ceasing wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. It also says: "The bodhisattva understands suffering as without suffering, and yet has the real truth" — this is precisely embodying suffering as not suffering, hence it is said he has no suffering; and, being identical with phenomena, real, hence it is said he has the truth — this is precisely the non-arising wisdom of the Four Noble Truths belonging to the gate of the Mahāyāna. It also says: "Knowing that the aggregates are suffering, knowing that the sense-fields are a gateway, this, too, is called suffering; knowing that the elements are a differentiation, this, too, is called nature, and is also called knowing — this is called the middle wisdom." According to the earlier account, this belongs to the śrāvaka. Differentiating the immeasurable marks of suffering, the sense-fields, the elements, and the rest — "in that other sūtra, I did not, in the end, teach this" — this is called the upper wisdom. Sensation, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness are likewise so; this is not the province of any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha, and thus differs from the two preceding senses. Since it is called the upper wisdom, and yet is not the province of the two vehicles, is this not precisely the distinct teaching's bodhisattva contemplating the principle of the tathāgatagarbha, as numerous as the sands of the Ganges? This is the immeasurable wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. It also says: "The Tathāgata is neither suffering, nor its arising, nor its cessation, nor the path, nor a truth at all — this is real; empty space is neither suffering nor a truth — this is real." "Not suffering" means not the false birth-and-death; "not a truth" means not the two vehicles' own nirvāṇa; "real" means precisely the true mark, the middle way, buddha-nature itself. It also says: "There is suffering, there is the cause of suffering, there is the exhaustion of suffering, there is the counter to suffering; the Tathāgata is neither suffering nor any of the rest — hence, he is real." Since this clarification of the sense already differs from the preceding three rounds, is this not precisely the uncreated wisdom of the Four Noble Truths?

Following this pattern for the one truth of suffering made into four, the remaining three truths ought likewise to be so: that is, there is arising, there is the fruit of arising, there is the exhaustion of arising, there is the counter to arising; there is cessation, there is the cause of cessation, there is the obstruction to cessation, there is the mark of the obstruction to cessation; there is the path, there is the fruit of the path, there is the obstruction to the path, there is the mark of the obstruction to the path. The Tathāgata is neither any of these four sets of four, sixteen in all — he is simply the real, and so on.

Kinds of wisdom such as these contemplate the Four Noble Truths; as long as the truths themselves are not yet fused together, both the wisdom and the truths remain coarse. Only "not suffering," "not a truth," and "real" alone are wondrous. If the truth itself is perfect, the wisdom, too, follows it into perfection, and all of this becomes the Tathāgata's own wondrous wisdom of "not suffering," "not a truth," and "real" — this, too, carries the double sense of the relative and the absolute, and so on.

Expounded by the Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai.

Third, discussing wisdom in relation to the object of the two truths: this is the provisional and real, the two kinds of wisdom. Since the real and conventional two truths, as discussed above, were already opened into seven kinds, the provisional and real two kinds of wisdom likewise form seven rounds: four in which the inward and the outward are either identical or not identical with one another, and three more formed by their mutual reception, making seven in all. Matched against the numbering given above: the analytical two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real; the embodying two kinds of wisdom; the embodying two kinds of wisdom that contain the middle; the embodying two kinds of wisdom that reveal the middle; the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom; the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom containing the perfect; and the perfect teaching's two kinds of wisdom. The seven rounds discussed above for the two truths were each opened into according-with-feeling, feeling-and-wisdom, and wisdom-alone, forming, in total, twenty-one kinds of truth. So, too, these seven rounds of the two kinds of wisdom are each opened into three kinds: that used in teaching others, that of one's own practice set against teaching others, and that of one's own practice alone — forming, in total, twenty-one kinds of provisional and real wisdom.

As for the analytical two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real: illuminating the manifold array of phenomena through differentiation is the provisional wisdom; exhausting the manifold array of phenomena through differentiation is the real wisdom. Teaching these two kinds of wisdom, meeting each of the various conditions, one makes each of the various kinds of explanation, according with each of the various desires, each of the various fitting circumstances, each of the various remedies, and each of the various awakenings, each according to what a given being can bear, differentiated according to the conditions at hand. Though manifold in this way, all of it is subsumed under the analytical provisional and real wisdom — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others, being explanation that follows conditions, is entirely gathered together as the provisional wisdom; whereas the realization attained inwardly, whether provisional or real, is, in either case, a real realization, and is gathered together as the real wisdom. Setting the inward against the outward, together they form the two kinds of wisdom — hence, this forms the provisional and real two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice set against teaching others. With respect to the provisional and real attained through one's own realization alone, understood by oneself alone, unseen by anyone else, this is further judged into provisional and real — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice alone. Now, explaining this once more specifically in terms of the Tripiṭaka teaching: this buddha, in transforming the two vehicles, for the most part uses the real wisdom in teaching others; the two vehicles, receiving this real wisdom taught to others, cultivate it into the real wisdom of their own practice — hence the Buddha sealed Kāśyapa's own attainment, saying: "You and I alike sit upon the very same bed of liberation" — this is precisely this sense. If transforming bodhisattvas, he for the most part uses the provisional wisdom in teaching others; they, receiving this provisional wisdom taught to others, cultivate and study it until they attain the provisional wisdom of their own practice, and the Buddha likewise seals this, saying: "I, too, am just as you are," and so on. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the embodying two kinds of wisdom, are all, alike, provisional. Hence Nāgārjuna refutes this, saying: "How could one possibly cultivate the path to bodhi within an impure mind? It is just like a poisoned vessel, unfit to hold food — whoever eats from it is killed." This is precisely a refutation of the analytical approach's own intent — hence, all of it is provisional, and so on.

As for the embodying two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real: embodying the manifold array of form directly, it is itself precisely emptiness. Taking form as it is to be provisional wisdom; taking emptiness as it is to be real wisdom. The Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "Form as it is, is itself emptiness — it is not that form is extinguished into emptiness." This is precisely this very sense. Teaching these two kinds of wisdom for the sake of conditions, since the conditions differ from case to case, the teaching, too, takes many forms; though the explanations differ, all of them are subsumed under the provisional and real wisdom used in teaching others — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. Since this wisdom used in teaching others already follows feeling, all of it is gathered as the provisional; the provisional and real wisdom attained through inward realization, being self-realized, is entirely named the real. Setting one's own real against another's provisional, this forms the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice set against teaching others. With respect to what is attained through self-realization, this is further divided into provisional and real — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice alone. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the two kinds of wisdom that contain the middle, are, once again, all named provisional. Why is this? Because they lack the middle way, and so on.

As for the embodying two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real, that contain the middle: embodying form, it is itself both empty and not empty. Illuminating form is the provisional wisdom; emptiness-and-not-emptiness is the real wisdom. Teaching these two kinds of wisdom, meeting immeasurable conditions, one explains them variously according to feeling; though immeasurable, all of this is subsumed under the two kinds of wisdom that contain the middle — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others is, from the outset, meeting particular capacities, and so is entirely named provisional; the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization are entirely named real. Within the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization, these are further divided into provisional and real, forming the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the two kinds of wisdom that reveal the middle, are all, alike, provisional. Why is this? Because they still carry the true truth of emptiness and the skillful means of the path of teaching.

Again, as for the embodying two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real, that reveal the middle: embodying form, it is itself both empty and not empty, and all dharmas converge upon emptiness and not-emptiness. Fully understanding form is the provisional wisdom; emptiness-and-not-emptiness, and all dharmas converging upon emptiness and not-emptiness, is the real wisdom. Teaching these two for the sake of conditions, since the conditions are themselves immeasurable, the teaching, too, is immeasurable; the immeasurable teachings are all subsumed under the two kinds of wisdom that reveal the middle — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others, following conditions as it does, is entirely named provisional; the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization, being what is attained through realization, are entirely named real. Setting oneself against another, this forms the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice set against teaching others. Within the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization, these are further divided into provisional and real. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real, are all, alike, provisional. Why is this? Because they still carry identity-with-emptiness and the skillful means of the path of teaching.

As for the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real: embodying form, it is itself both empty and not empty; form and emptiness together are the provisional wisdom; not-emptiness alone is the real wisdom. Using these two kinds of wisdom, according with a hundred and a thousand conditions, one differentiates them variously; though the differentiations are many, all of them are subsumed under the two kinds of wisdom taught in sequence — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others is entirely for the sake of conditions, and so is entirely named provisional; the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization, being what is attained through realization, are entirely named real. Setting oneself against another, this forms the two kinds of wisdom of self and other. Within the provisional and real wisdom of self-realization, this is itself further divided into two kinds of wisdom, forming the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom containing the perfect, are, once again, all provisional. Why is this? Because they proceed in sequence, and because they still carry the path of teaching.

As for the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real, containing the perfect: form is empty and not empty, and all dharmas converge upon not-emptiness. Form-and-emptiness is named the provisional wisdom; all dharmas converging upon not-emptiness is the real wisdom. Using these two kinds of wisdom according with a hundred and a thousand conditions, one differentiates them variously; though the differentiations are many, all of them are subsumed under the distinct teaching's two kinds of wisdom containing the perfect — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others, being for the sake of conditions, is entirely provisional; the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization, being what is attained through realization, are entirely named real. Setting self against other, together they form the two kinds of wisdom. Within self-realization, this is further divided into provisional and real, forming the two kinds of wisdom of one's own practice. These three kinds of the two wisdoms, set against the perfect teaching's own two kinds of wisdom, are, once again, all provisional. Why is this? Because they still carry sequence and the path of teaching.

As for the perfect teaching's own two kinds of wisdom, provisional and real: form itself is empty and not empty, and all dharmas converge upon form, upon emptiness, and upon not-emptiness. All dharmas converging upon form and upon emptiness is the provisional wisdom; all dharmas converging upon not-emptiness is the real wisdom. In this case, the real wisdom is itself precisely the provisional wisdom, and the provisional wisdom is itself precisely the real wisdom — without duality and without distinction. In order to transform sentient beings, one follows the various conditions, the various desires, the various fitting circumstances, the various remedies, and the various awakenings; though the teaching is manifold, all of it is subsumed under the perfect teaching's own two kinds of wisdom — hence, this forms the two kinds of wisdom used in teaching others. This wisdom used in teaching others, following feeling as it does, is, once again, entirely provisional; the two kinds of wisdom of self-realization are entirely named real. Within self-realization, this is further divided into two kinds of wisdom, and so there are three kinds that are not the same. This pair of wisdoms does not carry along the eighteen kinds of two-wisdom skillful means from the analytical approach onward — there is only the true provisional and the true real, named the buddha's own provisional and real wisdom. As the sūtra says: "The Tathāgata's knowledge and vision are vast, great, deep, and far-reaching; the skillful means and the pāramitās are all, alike, fully complete." This alone is called wondrous; set against what precedes it, this is coarse.

Again, from the analytical two kinds of wisdom up through the two kinds of wisdom that reveal the middle — twelve kinds of the two wisdoms in all — set against what precedes them, all are called coarse, while revealing the middle is wondrous. Why is this? Because this wondrous is no different from the wondrous that follows it. Again, from the two kinds of wisdom taught in sequence — nine kinds of the two wisdoms in all — set against what precedes them, they are coarse, while what is not taught in sequence is wondrous. Again, the preceding eighteen kinds of the two wisdoms are all coarse, and only the three kinds not taught in sequence are wondrous. Again, of the two kinds not taught in sequence, two are coarse, and the one that remains is wondrous.

Again, passing through the Five Flavors of teaching: the milk teaching possesses three kinds, or nine kinds, of the two wisdoms. The cream teaching possesses one kind, or three kinds. The curdled-butter teaching possesses four kinds, or twelve kinds. The clarified-butter teaching possesses three kinds, or nine kinds. The present sūtra possesses only two kinds, or three kinds. In the cream teaching, the provisional and the real are both, alike, coarse; in the ghee teaching, the provisional and the real are both, alike, wondrous. In the remaining three flavors, the provisional and the real each have their coarse and their wondrous aspects, which may be worked out by reflection.

If one does not explain the various kinds of wisdom as has been done above, the differing accounts found across the sūtras and treatises become difficult to understand. Why is this? The Avataṃsaka Sūtra, explaining the mind of the initial abiding, says: "The buddhas of the three periods of time do not know the wisdom of the initial abiding." Worldly interpreters explain this, saying: "As for the wisdom of thusness-as-real, even the buddha himself does not know his own wisdom of thusness-as-real, nor does he know the wisdom of thusness-as-real belonging to the initial abiding." This explanation considers itself, in principle, to be a coherent reading, but it is, in fact, not correct. If the buddhas of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings do not even discuss the wisdom of thusness-as-real at all, how could it be said that they fail to know their own wisdom of thusness-as-real? And if the distinct teaching's own initial abiding does not attain the wisdom of thusness-as-real at all, how could it be said that it is unknown to it? If one grasps the sense of the various kinds of wisdom discussed above, then it is the buddhas of the Tripiṭaka teaching across the three periods of time who do not know the wisdom of the perfect teaching's own initial abiding — and, read this way, both the phenomenal and the principial explanations proceed without any obstruction. Within this, the sense embraces two things: first, the differentiation of the twenty-one kinds of the provisional and the real; second, discussing the wondrous in relation to the coarse, as explained above.

As for opening the coarse to reveal the wondrous: since all the skillful-means truths have already been fused together into the wondrous truth, the wisdom established in relation to the truth, too, is no longer coarse at all. It is like the dwelling of a lowly person: if a king should happen to pass through it, that very dwelling becomes adorned and magnificent; or like the many streams flowing into the sea, all alike becoming of a single salty taste. Opening up all the various kinds of coarse wisdom, they become, in just this way, wondrous wisdom.

The two kinds of wisdom bear upon a great many matters, and their categories must be worked out and cross-referenced with care. Here, matching them against the seven kinds of two truths, the twenty-one kinds of the provisional and the real have been clarified, to serve as the governing chapter-outline. If one grasps this sense, then, taken in relation to the object of dependent origination, the same pattern ought likewise to apply: that is, the analytical wisdom of dependent origination, the embodying wisdom of dependent origination, the wisdom of dependent origination that contains the middle, the wisdom of dependent origination that reveals the middle, the wisdom of dependent origination taught in sequence, the wisdom of dependent origination that carries sequence along with it, and the wisdom of dependent origination not taught in sequence — each and every one of these, in turn, has its own threefold differentiation of that used in teaching others, that of one's own practice set against teaching others, and that of one's own practice alone, forming, in total, twenty-one kinds; and the coarse and the wondrous are to be differentiated among them, the proportion among the Five Flavors judged, and the relative and the absolute discussed, just as before. The Four Noble Truths, the three truths, the one truth, and the rest ought likewise to be treated in just this way. One should reflect on this for oneself — why should it need to be recorded here in its entirety?

Question: Why is it that the truths that accord with feeling, and the wisdom used in teaching others, are said to be immeasurable, while the truth that accords with wisdom, and the wisdom of one's own practice, are said not to be many? Answer: Simply take a single person: before he has attained the path, his deluded mind arises awry, and his wrong attachments are endless — how much more so, then, among many people, each differing from the others in every way! For this reason, according with feeling is many. Wisdom, however, sees principle directly, and principle is only ever of a single kind — it cannot admit of any variation, and so on. The distinctions among the two truths have already been explained as above.

In setting forth these seven kinds of the provisional and real, and these twenty-one kinds of the provisional and real, does this in any way make use of the senses the worldly cling to? Does it in any way match what the worldly themselves say? Does it in any way make use of the senses established by the various treatises? It follows neither the worldly, nor any commentarial literature — it is, specifically, an explanation reached by directly weighing the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna sūtras against one another. Whether refuting or establishing, all of it carries the Lotus's own intent. Where the skillful and the clumsy are set in contrast, the shared teaching's own two kinds of wisdom refute the Tripiṭaka teaching's own two kinds of wisdom; and on down to where the sequential and the non-sequential are set in contrast, the perfect teaching's own two kinds of wisdom refute the distinct teaching's own two kinds of wisdom. Since the various skillful-means sūtras' own clarification of wisdom is itself already coarse, how could the treatises expounding the shared teaching's sūtras possibly be wondrous? Since the sūtras and treatises are already thus, what need is there for those who propagate these sūtras and treatises to attack one another? Let each account stand as it is spoken — each will, of itself, fall where it falls.

If one interprets the provisional and the real according to arising-and-ceasing, one falls into the first round; if one interprets them according to non-arising-and-non-ceasing, one falls into the second round; and so on, down through the seventh round, which may likewise be understood accordingly. And even if one broadly cites the sūtras and treatises to adorn and support one's own position, one still cannot go beyond the first round's own provisional and real wisdom, used in teaching others according with feeling within the two truths — how much less, then, could one go beyond the first round's own second and third kinds of the provisional and real! If one cannot even go beyond the first round's own three kinds of the provisional and real, how much less, then, the seventh round's own three kinds! If one merely uses the first round's two kinds of wisdom to refute, in broad outline, all worldly attachment born of feeling, then, even granting that one thereby enters the phantom city, this is still merely the real wisdom of one's own practice — one has not even attained the provisional wisdom used in teaching others, how much less, then, could one attain any of the later rounds' own kinds of wisdom!

If one examines the twenty-one kinds of the two wisdoms, one must ask: how many outside views does each, in total, refute? How many skillful-means sūtras and treatises does each, in total, refute? How many does it, in turn, reveal to be correct, and how many skillful-means sūtras and treatises does it, in turn, establish? Only then may one properly speak of the wondrous provisional and the wondrous real. The worldly do not recognize even the sense of one or two kinds of the provisional and real at all, and yet, within their own feeling, they at once reckon themselves to possess wisdom. If one is truly wise, what delusion has one refuted? What principle has one seen? Not yet having seen principle, and not yet having refuted delusion, birth-and-death remains vast and boundless — if this is not feeling, then what is it? Now, if one speaks of the wondrous wisdom in relation to all the preceding kinds of coarse wisdom, this is precisely the Lotus's own sense of refutation-in-relation. But if one gathers them all together, then every truth and principle clarified by all the skillful-means sūtras and treatises becomes, itself, the wondrous principle, and there is nothing that is not the very ground of wisdom; gathering together all the two kinds of wisdom clarified by all the skillful-means sūtras and treatises, there is nothing that is not wondrous wisdom — all of it is the great cart. Such refutation and such gathering-together as this, deep and vast as it is, should not be compared with the Middle Treatise's own approach — one ought to reflect on this carefully, and so on.

Fourth, discussing wisdom in relation to the three truths: the five kinds of three truths have already been clarified above; here, they are differentiated once more.

The three kinds of wisdom illuminate the ten dharma-realms, gathering the ten into three: the tainted, the untainted, and neither tainted nor untainted. These three dharmas interpenetrate one another, and are differentiated into five configurations: the first holds that what is neither tainted nor untainted enters the untainted, and, set against the tainted and the untainted, forms three dharmas.

The second holds that all dharmas enter the untainted, and, set against the tainted and the untainted, form three dharmas. The third holds that the tainted, the untainted, and what is neither tainted nor untainted themselves form three dharmas. The fourth holds that all dharmas converge upon what is neither tainted nor untainted, and, set against the tainted and the untainted, form three dharmas.

The fifth holds that all dharmas converge upon the tainted, converge upon the untainted, and converge upon what is neither tainted nor untainted, forming three dharmas.

Having thus explained the five configurations of the object, discussing the five kinds of the three wisdoms in relation to these five configurations: this refers to the wisdom that knows all things, the wisdom of the paths, and the wisdom knowing all modes. The interpenetration of the three kinds of wisdom likewise differs in five ways: first, the wisdom of the middle enters the wisdom of emptiness, and, set against the wisdom of the path, forms three. Next, the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha enters the wisdom of emptiness, and, set against the wisdom of the path, forms three. Next, the wisdom of the middle, set against the other two, forms three kinds of wisdom. Next, the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha enters the wisdom of the middle, and, set against the other two kinds of wisdom, forms three. Next is the perfect teaching's own three kinds of wisdom. These are the five distinctions.

As for the wisdom of the middle entering the wisdom of emptiness, differentiated into three kinds of wisdom: first, relying on the untainted, the wisdom that knows all things is brought forth; next, relying on the tainted, the wisdom of the paths is brought forth; and afterward, deeply contemplating the emptiness of the untainted, knowing that emptiness, too, is itself empty, the wisdom knowing all modes is brought forth. Yet the initial mind does not know the emptiness of emptiness; the next, though it attains emptiness, still does not empty that very emptiness; only the last is able to deeply contemplate emptiness, emptying the earlier emptiness itself. But since the two kinds of emptiness share the same name, and their two objects, too, coincide, they are said to interpenetrate one another. Now, if one differentiates them: the emptiness of the untainted is the wisdom that knows all things; the emptiness of the tainted is the wisdom of the paths; the emptiness of the middle way is the wisdom knowing all modes. Worldly interpreters, drawing on the sense of the sūtras and treatises, say: at the sixth ground, affliction is cut off, becoming level with the arhat; at the seventh ground, the path of skillful means is cultivated; at the eighth ground, the contemplation of the path flows in two streams at once, breaking through ignorance and becoming a buddha — this is precisely this same sense.

As for the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha entering the wisdom of emptiness, differentiated into three kinds of wisdom: relying on the tainted and the untainted, the wisdom that knows all things and the wisdom of the paths are brought forth, no different from before. But, afterward, rather than relying on any separate object to further cultivate the wisdom of the middle, one simply contemplates emptiness deeply, and is thereby able to see the not-empty — the not-empty is itself the tathāgatagarbha. Since the tathāgatagarbha and emptiness coincide, they are said to interpenetrate one another. Because one deeply contemplates emptiness and sees the not-empty, the wisdom knowing all modes is brought forth. The earlier wisdom of the middle way merely reveals a distinct, separate principle — principle and wisdom there do not contain all dharmas within them. The principle and wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha, however, contain all dharmas — hence, this differs from what came before. Setting the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha against the other two kinds of wisdom, this forms three kinds of wisdom. The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "The śrāvaka sees only emptiness, and does not see the not-empty"; "the wise see both emptiness and the not-empty." The Larger Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "The wisdom that knows all things is the śrāvaka's own wisdom; the wisdom of the paths is the bodhisattva's own wisdom; the wisdom knowing all modes is the buddha's own wisdom" — this is precisely this same sense. As for the wisdom of the middle, set against the other two, forming three kinds of wisdom: each takes a single object, and each brings forth a single wisdom, proceeding in sequence, deep and shallow, without becoming confused with or intruding upon one another. Hence the Bodhisattva Stages says: "When a bodhisattva of the proper lineage first resolves his mind, wishing to remove the two obstructions, then, whether or not a buddha appears in the world, he is certainly able to cut off the various afflictions in sequence" — this is precisely this same sense.

As for the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha entering the wisdom of the middle, forming three kinds of wisdom: the first two kinds of wisdom are no different from before, but the wisdom knowing all modes differs slightly. Why is this? The earlier clarification of the object of the middle merely pointed directly at the principle of the middle and nothing more; in wishing to reveal this principle, one ought to cultivate the myriad practices — and the wisdom that reveals this principle is, accordingly, named the wisdom knowing all modes. Here, however, the principle of the tathāgatagarbha already contains all dharmas within it, and it is not merely the wisdom that reveals principle directly that is named the wisdom knowing all modes — herein it differs from what came before. Using this wisdom, set against the preceding two, forms three kinds of wisdom. Hence a master of the Dilun school says: "Conditioned cultivation reveals true cultivation; when true cultivation is brought forth, conditioned cultivation is no longer needed." The preceding two kinds of wisdom are precisely conditioned cultivation; when the latter wisdom is brought forth, this is precisely true cultivation — true cultivation already contains all dharmas, and needs nothing further. This is precisely this same sense, and so on.

As for the perfect teaching's own three kinds of wisdom: the tainted is itself precisely the dharmas produced through causes and conditions, and is itself empty, itself provisional, and itself the middle; the untainted, too, is itself the provisional and itself the middle; what is neither tainted nor untainted is, likewise, itself empty and itself the provisional. The single dharma is itself the three dharmas, and the three dharmas are itself the single dharma; the single wisdom is itself the three kinds of wisdom, and the three kinds of wisdom are itself the single wisdom. Wisdom is itself the object, and the object is itself wisdom, fused together without any obstruction. Such a threefold wisdom as this — how could it be the same as what came before? The Treatise says: "The three kinds of wisdom are attained within a single mind" — without any before or after; it is only for the sake of explaining this to others, so as to make it easier to understand, that the names of three kinds of wisdom are spoken of at all. This is precisely this same sense, and so on.

If one wishes to reveal wisdom, contemplation must first be brought to completion. Speaking of it in a general way, contemplation and wisdom both extend through cause and fruit alike; speaking of it in a particular way, contemplation is the cause and wisdom is the fruit. It is like buddha-nature, which likewise extends through both cause and fruit: speaking of it particularly, the cause is named buddha-nature, and the fruit is named nirvāṇa. Here, following the particular sense, contemplation is taken as the cause, bringing about the fruit of wisdom. As the Necklace Sūtra says: "Entering emptiness from the provisional is called the contemplation of the two truths; entering the provisional from emptiness is called the contemplation of equality; these two contemplations serve as the expedient path, through which one attains entry into the contemplation of the middle way as ultimate meaning." Here, using the contemplation of entering emptiness from the provisional as cause, one attains its fruit, named the wisdom that knows all things; using the contemplation of entering the provisional from emptiness as cause, one attains the fruit of the wisdom of the paths; using the contemplation of the middle as cause, one attains the fruit of the wisdom knowing all modes.

What has been clarified above concerning wisdom amounts, in brief, to five kinds; since wisdom is brought about through contemplation, contemplation, too, ought likewise to be of five kinds — this may be worked out in fine detail. The sense of cultivating contemplation is as set forth in the Mohe Zhiguan, and so on.

As for speaking of the coarse and the wondrous: although the buddhas of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings possess the very name "the wisdom knowing all modes," they have no further, separate principle beyond it, and do not break through any distinct affliction — this wisdom, therefore, is not truly accomplished, and so is not made use of here. As for the wisdom of the middle entering the wisdom of emptiness: although the cause of the middle way is spoken of, it is accomplished as two kinds of wisdom within the gate of the shared teaching, and its later illumination of the middle way carries no broad, expansive function; since its cause lies in a clumsy teaching, and its fruit, too, remains unfused, this is, accordingly, coarse. Next, as for the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha entering the wisdom of emptiness: although the teaching's fruit and principle are fused together, its cause still lies in the gate of the shared teaching — hence, this, too, is called coarse. As for the wisdom of the middle set against the other two, forming three kinds of wisdom: although it does not depend on the shared teaching, the three kinds of wisdom remain distinctly different from one another, and the teaching's own fruit is not yet fused together — hence, this, too, is coarse. As for the wisdom of the tathāgatagarbha entering the wisdom of the middle: although its fruit is fused together, its cause still lies in the gate of the distinct teaching — hence, this cause, too, is coarse. As for the perfect teaching's own three kinds of wisdom: its cause is perfect and its fruit is perfect, its cause is wondrous and its fruit is wondrous, the truth is wondrous and the wisdom is wondrous — directly setting aside all skillful means, it teaches only the unsurpassed path alone. Hence, this alone is wondrous wisdom.

As for passing through the Five Flavors of teaching: the milk teaching has three kinds of the threefold wisdom; the cream teaching has one kind of the threefold wisdom; the curdled-butter teaching possesses all five kinds of the threefold wisdom; the clarified-butter teaching likewise possesses all five kinds of the threefold wisdom — the coarse and the wondrous among them may be understood accordingly. The Lotus possesses only the one kind of the threefold wisdom — this is the Lotus's own sense of refutation, which is precisely the wondrous read in the relative sense. As for opening the coarse to clarify the wondrous: even worldly wisdom, though without any path-dharma of its own, may still, through its very deviant marks, enter into the correct marks; managing one's livelihood and one's trade are, none of them, at odds with the true mark; bowing one's head, or raising one's hand — opening the coarse to reveal the wondrous, all of it becomes the buddha path — how much more so, then, the wisdom of the three vehicles that transcends the world! Hence the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "The śrāvaka and the pratyekabuddha are both real and unreal at once: because they have cut off affliction, they are called real; because they are not eternally abiding, they are called unreal." The ordinary being, not yet having cut off affliction, has no reality at all, but only unreality — and yet even he, opening the coarse into the wondrous, is precisely the Mahāyāna itself; how much more so, then, the wisdom of the two vehicles! Even the wisdom of the two vehicles — though its roots be broken and its mind as if dead, it can still be brought back to life — how much more so, then, the wisdom of the paths! When opened up in this way, all of it, without exception, becomes wondrous, and there is nothing that is not the true mark. The great cart adorned with the seven treasures, immeasurable in number — this is the Lotus's own sense of gathering-together, which is precisely the wondrous read in the absolute sense.

Fifth, discussing wisdom in relation to the one truth: this is precisely the wisdom of thusness-as-real. The Treatise says: "All the various waters, entering the sea, become of a single salty taste; all the various kinds of wisdom, entering the wisdom of thusness-as-real, lose their own original names." Hence one should know that the wisdom of thusness-as-real gathers up all the various kinds of wisdom into itself, purely illuminating a single object, just as all the many waters together become of a single salty taste. If it is set in relation to the ten prior kinds of wisdom, they are coarse and the wisdom of thusness-as-real alone is wondrous; if it is set in relation to the various kinds of real wisdom, those various kinds of real wisdom are called coarse, and the middle way's own wisdom of thusness-as-real alone is called wondrous. If the coarse is opened to reveal the wondrous, then it is not only the various kinds of real wisdom that are wondrous — the ten kinds of wisdom, too, are, likewise, called wondrous, and so on.

As for the truth of no-truth, which is beyond speech: since it is already spoken of as no-truth at all, there is, likewise, no wisdom either. If one passes through the various stages to clarify this no-truth, then the remaining skillful means' own no-truth and no-wisdom are coarse, while the middle way's own no-truth and no-wisdom are wondrous. But if one takes "no-truth, no-wisdom" in the sense of closing the mouth and cutting off all speech entirely, then there is neither coarse nor wondrous at all, neither the relative nor the absolute — passing through every dharma whatsoever, there is, throughout, neither coarse nor wondrous.

Second, as for successive mutual reflection: the six rounds of wisdom, passed on in succession, illuminate the various preceding objects and the conceivable twelve links. The lower and middle wisdoms illuminate the nature, mark, and the rest of the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. The lower and middle wisdoms, contemplating the extinguishing of the twelve links, illuminate the nature, mark, and the rest of the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The upper wisdom illuminates the nature, mark, root, and branch of the bodhisattva. The highest wisdom illuminates the nature, mark, root, and branch of the buddha-dharma-realm. As for the four kinds of wisdom of the Four Noble Truths illuminating the ten dharma-realms: the arising-and-ceasing and the non-arising kinds of wisdom of suffering and its arising illuminate the mark and nature of the ten suchnesses of the six destinies. The arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of wisdom of the path and cessation illuminate the mark and nature of the ten suchnesses of the two vehicles. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of wisdom of suffering and its arising illuminate the nature, mark, and the rest of the bodhisattva-realm. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of wisdom of the path and cessation illuminate the mark, nature, root, and branch, and the rest, of the buddha-dharma-realm.

As for the four kinds of wisdom of the Four Noble Truths illuminating the four kinds of the twelve links: the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of wisdom of suffering and its arising illuminate the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links. The arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of wisdom of the path and cessation illuminate the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links read as extinguishing. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of wisdom of suffering and its arising illuminate the two inconceivable kinds of the twelve links. The immeasurable and uncreated kinds of wisdom of the path and cessation illuminate the two inconceivable kinds of the twelve links read as extinguishing.

As for the seven kinds of the two wisdoms illuminating the ten dharma-realms: the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of provisional wisdom, together with the two entering-shared kinds, four kinds of provisional wisdom in all, illuminate the nature and mark of the six destinies. The arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of real wisdom illuminate the nature and mark of the two vehicles. The distinct teaching's own provisional wisdom, and the perfect-entering-distinct's provisional wisdom: their "existent" side illuminates the nature and mark of the six destinies; their "nonexistent" side illuminates the nature and mark of the two vehicles. The perfect teaching's own provisional wisdom illuminates, generally, the nature and mark of all nine realms. The distinct-entering-shared's real wisdom: its empty side is the nature and mark of the two vehicles; its not-empty side is the nature and mark of the bodhisattva. The perfect-entering-shared's real wisdom: its empty side is the nature and mark of the two vehicles; its not-empty side illuminates the mark and nature of the buddha-realm. The distinct teaching's own real wisdom illuminates the nature and mark of the bodhisattva.

The perfect-entering-distinct's real wisdom, and the perfect teaching's own real wisdom, both, alike, illuminate the mark and nature of the buddha-dharma-realm.

As for the seven kinds of the two wisdoms illuminating the four kinds of the twelve links: the preceding four kinds of provisional wisdom illuminate the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links. The distinct teaching's provisional wisdom, and the perfect-entering-distinct's provisional wisdom: their "existent" side illuminates the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links; their "nonexistent" side illuminates the two conceivable kinds read as extinguishing. The perfect teaching's own provisional wisdom illuminates, generally, all four kinds, and so on. The distinct-entering-shared's real wisdom: its empty side illuminates the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links read as extinguishing; its not-empty side illuminates the inconceivable twelve links. The perfect-entering-shared's real wisdom: its empty side is the same as above; its not-empty side illuminates the two inconceivable kinds read as extinguishing. The distinct teaching's own real wisdom illuminates the two inconceivable kinds read as extinguishing. The perfect teaching's own real wisdom illuminates both inconceivable kinds read as extinguishing, and the rest. The preceding four kinds of provisional wisdom illuminate the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of suffering and its arising; and, again, three kinds of provisional wisdom illuminate the immeasurable and uncreated kinds of suffering and its arising. The two kinds of real wisdom illuminate the two conceivable kinds of the path and cessation; and, again, five kinds of real wisdom illuminate the two inconceivable kinds of the path and cessation.

As for the five kinds of the three wisdoms illuminating the ten dharma-realms: the five kinds of the wisdom of the paths illuminate the nature, mark, root, and branch, and the rest, of the six destinies. The five kinds of the wisdom that knows all things illuminate the nature, mark, root, and branch, and the rest, of the two vehicles and the bodhisattva. The five kinds of the wisdom knowing all modes illuminate the mark and nature, and the rest, of the ten suchnesses of the buddha-dharma-realm.

Again, as for the five kinds of the three wisdoms illuminating the four kinds of the twelve links: the five kinds of the wisdom that has objects illuminate the two conceivable kinds of the twelve links. The five kinds of the wisdom that knows all things illuminate the two conceivable kinds read as extinguishing, and also illuminate the inconceivable twelve links. The five kinds of the wisdom knowing all modes illuminate the two inconceivable kinds read as extinguishing.

As for the five kinds of the three wisdoms illuminating the four kinds of the Four Noble Truths: the five kinds of the wisdom of the paths illuminate the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of suffering and its arising. The five kinds of the wisdom that knows all things illuminate the arising-and-ceasing and non-arising kinds of the path and cessation, and also illuminate the immeasurable and uncreated kinds of suffering and its arising. The five kinds of the wisdom knowing all modes illuminate the immeasurable and uncreated kinds of the path and cessation.

As for the five kinds of the three wisdoms illuminating the seven kinds of two truths: the five kinds of the wisdom of the paths illuminate the four kinds of conventional truth. The five kinds of the wisdom that knows all things illuminate the two kinds of real truth, and also illuminate the distinct, perfect-entering-distinct, and perfect teachings' own three kinds of conventional truth. The five kinds of the wisdom knowing all modes illuminate the five kinds of real truth.

The one wisdom of thusness-as-real illuminates the nature and mark of the ten suchnesses of the buddha-realm, and also illuminates the inconceivable twelve links, and also illuminates the uncreated Four Noble Truths, and also illuminates the five kinds of real truth, and also illuminates the five kinds of the middle way as ultimate meaning.

The truth of no-truth, beyond speech, coincides with the ten suchnesses' own mark, nature, and thusness; coincides with the inconceivable extinguishing of the twelve links; coincides with the four kinds of the non-arising of the non-arising; coincides with the real truth that is beyond all verbal expression; and coincides with the middle way that is neither birth-and-death nor nirvāṇa.

Kinds of wisdom such as these, passed on in succession, illuminate the truths; if the truth itself is fused together, the wisdom, too, is fused together, and wisdom and truth, fused as one, are named the wondrous. All such talk as this remains merely a skillful means of speech, calling something wondrous or not wondrous. At the moment principle is truly seen, there is no longer any provisional or real remaining, neither provisional nor real, nor is there any wondrous or not-wondrous either — it is only for this reason that it is called the wondrous. The seven kinds of two truths, and the five kinds of three truths, interpenetrate one another in turn, and the remaining objects, too, carry this same sense. Since the seven kinds of the two wisdoms and the five kinds of the three wisdoms likewise interpenetrate one another in this way, the remaining kinds of wisdom, too, carry this same sense — the pattern may be worked out by oneself accordingly, and so on.

Third, the wondrous of practice: this is of two kinds — first, the general approach to practice by increasing enumeration; second, practice by increasing enumeration according to each of the Four Teachings.

Now, "practice" names advancing and progressing forward — without wisdom, one cannot advance. The understanding of wisdom guides practice; without the object, that understanding is not correct. Wisdom is the eye and practice is the feet — by these, one arrives at the cool pond. Yet understanding is the very root of practice, and practice, in turn, is able to accomplish wisdom — hence, when practice is fulfilled, wisdom, too, becomes perfect and complete; and wisdom is able to reveal principle, yet when principle itself is exhausted, wisdom, too, comes to rest. Practice that depends upon these others in this mutual way is not yet the wondrous practice. The wondrous practice is one in which a single practice is every practice. As the sūtra says: "From the very outset, following countless buddhas, I fully practiced every path" — and again: "In the presence of immeasurable buddhas, I practiced the deep and wondrous path" — and again: "I practiced to the very end every path-dharma possessed by all the buddhas." Since it is thus complete, and also deep, and also exhaustive — "complete" is precisely its breadth; "deep" is precisely its height; "exhaustive" is precisely its ultimacy. This wondrous practice, together with the object and the wisdom discussed before it, may be spoken of as one considered as three, and as three considered as one.

The object discussed before this is spoken of as the mark of the dharma-as-it-is, and this mark, too, possesses three aspects, named the secret treasury. The wisdom discussed before this is the understanding of the dharma-as-it-is, and this understanding, too, possesses three aspects, like the three eyes upon a single face. Now, this practice is what is practiced, the practice as it is spoken of, and it, too, possesses three aspects, named the three dots of the Siddhaṃ letter i.

Whether taken as three or as one, nothing is ever lacking or diminished — hence, it is called the wondrous practice. Just as wisdom was discussed above in relation to its object, so, too, practice ought now to be discussed in relation to wisdom. But if one were to discuss practice by increasing enumeration in relation to only a single kind of wisdom, the practices would already be as numerous as motes of dust, more than could ever be spoken of in full — how much more so, then, if one discusses it in relation to every kind of wisdom, each guiding its own multitude of practices! This would then be as vast and boundless as empty space itself — one may only grasp the sense of it and set aside the words, for it can no longer be spoken of in full. The Treatise says: "When the bodhisattva practices prajñā, he takes a single dharma as his practice, and thereby gathers in every practice; or he takes countless single dharmas as his practice, and thereby gathers in every practice. Or he takes two dharmas as his practice, and thereby gathers in every practice; or he takes countless pairs of dharmas as his practice, and thereby gathers in every practice — and so on, up through ten dharmas, a hundred dharmas, a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred million dharmas as his practice, gathering in every practice; or countless tens, hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, hundred millions of dharmas as his practice, gathering in every practice." Though practices are thus manifold, wisdom remains their very root: wisdom is like the leading merchant, and practice is like the company of traders that follows; wisdom is like the sharp needle, and practice is like the long thread that trails behind it; wisdom drives the ox that draws the cart, and the cart thereby travels safely, able to arrive at its destination. Using these practices by increasing enumeration, guided by the wisdom of the ten suchnesses discussed earlier, down through the wisdom of the one real truth — if one grasps this sense, using correct wisdom to guide the multitude of practices into the correct object, this sense can only be intuited from a distance; it cannot be set down and recorded in full, and so on.

Second, practice by increasing enumeration according to each teaching: as for the Tripiṭaka teaching's own account of practice by increasing enumeration, the Āgama records the Buddha telling the monks: "Cultivate this one practice alone, and I shall confirm for you the four fruits of the śramaṇa — that is, guarding the mind against heedlessness. If you are able to guard the mind's own practice of non-heedlessness, extending and proclaiming it broadly, then what is to be done will already be done, and nirvāṇa will be attained." He also told the monks: "Cultivate this one practice alone — that is, take nothing that belongs to another." A monk said to the Buddha: "I already understand this." The Buddha said: "How do you understand it?" The monk said to the Buddha: "What belongs to another means form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and mental objects." The Buddha said: "Excellent! If you are able to take none of these six, then what is to be done will already be done, and nirvāṇa will be attained." As for what is meant by "extending and proclaiming it broadly": with the mind of non-heedlessness, passing through every dharma whatsoever — that is, remaining without heedlessness throughout the three realms and the six sense-objects alike — one attains nirvāṇa.

As for practice increased to two dharmas: the Āgama says: "A forest-dwelling monk should cultivate two dharmas as his practice — that is, cultivating calming and cultivating contemplation. When he cultivates calming, he is thereby able to bring every evil to rest, and the precepts, the monastic bearing, and every observance and restraint are, none of them, ever lost, and every merit is thereby accomplished. When he cultivates contemplation, he is thereby able to contemplate suffering and know it truly as it is — contemplating suffering's arising, its exhaustion, and the way out of suffering, and knowing these truly as they are, he exhausts every taint and no longer receives further existence. The Tathāgata cultivates in exactly this same way." As for practice increased to three dharmas: this refers to the precepts, concentration, and wisdom — these three are the very stairway leading beyond the world, the governing rule of the Buddha's own teaching. The Prātimokṣa Sūtra says: "To refrain from every evil, to uphold and practice every good, and to purify one's own mind of itself — this is the teaching of all the buddhas." "Every evil" refers to the seven branches of transgression, whether light or heavy, whether a direct violation or not — the Five Vinaya Schools clarify their marks in full detail; evils such as these are what the precepts are meant to prevent and restrain.

"Every good" refers to the wholesome three karmic activities, whether in a state of distraction or of stillness, and to the various expedient means, both preliminary and subsequent, and the ancillary merits that surround them — all of these rise up in purity, and hence are called "good." "Purifying one's own mind of itself" refers precisely to breaking through every deviant inversion, fully understanding the causes and effects of both the mundane and the world-transcending, and, through the correct and the auxiliary dharma-gates, being able to dissolve away the defilements of the mind and purify every blemish and impurity — how could anything possibly surpass wisdom in this? The Buddha's own teaching is as vast as an ocean, yet these three alone gather it in, entirely and without remainder. If one grasps this sense, then four, five, six, seven, and on up through a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred million dharmas as one's practice, gathering in every practice, follow this same pattern precisely. This is what is called practice guided by the lower wisdom.

As for the shared teaching's own account of practice by increasing enumeration: since the canonical divisions do not fix any settled boundary for the shared teaching, one simply takes the dharma-gate shared in common study by the three vehicles, and points to this as "shared." Here, the Treatise's own account of increasing enumeration is cited, to display its mark. The Treatise says: "When the bodhisattva practices prajñā, though he knows that all dharmas share a single mark, he is nonetheless also able to know the various marks of every dharma; and though he knows the various marks of every dharma, he is nonetheless also able to know that all dharmas share a single mark. How does one contemplate that all dharmas share a single mark? This means contemplating that all dharmas are without any mark at all — just as the four great elements, though each is inseparable from the others, are such that, where there is water, fire, and wind within earth, it is simply because earth predominates that it is named 'earth'; and water, fire, and wind are exactly the same." Contemplating in this way, there is, in fact, no such distinct mark to be found at all: if the three remaining great elements were present within fire, then all three great elements ought to burn equally hot together; but if the three great elements were present within fire while the other two remained un-hot, this could then no longer be named "fire" at all. And if all three great elements burned equally hot together, then all three would have abandoned their own individual natures and be named, alike, "fire," with no further three great elements remaining at all. And if one says that the three great elements are present, only too subtle to be known, how does this differ at all from their simply not being present? If the coarse aspect were attainable at all, one could then know that a subtler aspect, too, exists; but if there is no coarse aspect to begin with, then no subtler aspect exists either. In just this way, no mark whatsoever can be found within fire, nor can the mark of any dharma be found at all — hence, all dharmas share, alike, a single mark. This uses the single mark to break through the various distinct marks; and then uses no-mark to break through the single mark as well, so that even no-mark, too, extinguishes itself of its own accord — just as, when fire has already consumed all the firewood before it, it, too, in turn, burns itself away. This is what is meant by contemplating that all dharmas share a single mark, and that this single mark is itself without any mark at all. In just this way, immeasurable and every dharma whatsoever, all alike, share a single mark, and this single mark is itself without any mark. Or one may take two dharmas as one's practice, gathering in every practice — and so on, up through a hundred dharmas, a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred million dharmas as one's practice, gathering in every practice — this may be worked out by reflection, and need not be recorded here in full.

As for the distinct teaching's own account of practice by increasing enumeration: as when Sudhana, entering the dharma-realm, is said to have, at each good friend's side in turn, heard a single dharma as his practice — whether the illusion-like samādhi, or throwing himself from a cliff or into fire, or counting grains of sand, or marking moles, or resolving the mind toward bodhi, and every other such single practice — each good friend, in every case, saying: "The Buddha's own teaching is as vast as the ocean; I know only this single dharma-gate, and nothing beyond it." On through all one hundred and ten good friends, each and every dharma-gate is exactly the same in this respect. Each and every one of these single practices breaks through ignorance and enters deep into its own realm. If it were two dharmas, or three dharmas, or a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred million dharmas, this ought likewise to be so, and so on.

As for the perfect teaching's own account of practice by increasing enumeration: as the Sūtra of Mañjuśrī's Questions clarifies, the bodhisattva cultivates the samādhi of a single practice, seated cross-legged within a quiet chamber, binding his attention to the dharma-realm, holding the dharma-realm in a single thought, so that every inverted ignorance is forever stilled, like empty space. This single practice is precisely that of the one who is unobstructed in every respect, the single path by which one leaves birth-and-death; entering into every dharma whatsoever through the contemplation of equality alone, the mind of understanding and wisdom is utterly still, without peer throughout the three realms — this, then, is a single practice that gathers in every practice.

Increased to two dharmas as one's practice, gathering in every practice, this refers to calming and contemplation. Increased to three dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to hearing, reflection, and cultivation, or to the precepts, concentration, and wisdom. Increased to four dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the four applications of mindfulness. Increased to five dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the five approaches to dhyāna. Increased to six dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the six pāramitās. Increased to seven dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the seven wholesome dharmas. Increased to eight dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the eightfold correct path. Increased to nine dharmas, gathering in every practice, this refers to the nine kinds of great dhyāna. Increased to ten in number, gathering in every practice, this refers to the ten objects, or to the ten contemplations that accomplish the vehicle, and the rest. Increased to a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred million, or to as many dharma-gates as the grains of sand of the Ganges, beyond all telling — how could these possibly all be set down in full? If one grasps the sense of it, the pattern may be understood by the same example throughout.

Now, since practice by increasing enumeration takes different practices as its object in each case, the coarse and the wondrous must be judged accordingly. The Tripiṭaka teaching's own practices by increasing enumeration, guided by the wisdom of arising-and-ceasing, aim only at escaping suffering, coming to rest within the phantom city — hence, this is coarse. The shared teaching's own practices by increasing enumeration, though the wisdom of embodying dharmas directly is skillful, likewise guide only toward escaping suffering, no different in the end from ashes and extinction. The distinct teaching's own practices by increasing enumeration, though guided by a far-reaching wisdom, advancing step by step from the shallow to the deep, nonetheless keep the various practices set apart from one another, so that phenomena and principle are not fused together — hence, this, too, is coarse. The perfect teaching's own practices by increasing enumeration, with practice fused together and wisdom made perfect and complete, are, accordingly, wondrous.

The present sūtra belongs to the perfect teaching's own increasing enumeration: as the Sūtra of Meditation says: "Throughout three periods of seven days, with a single-minded diligence" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of a single dharma. "Whether walking or sitting, reflecting upon this sūtra" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of two dharmas. "If one hears this sūtra, reflects upon it, cultivates it, and skillfully practices the bodhisattva path" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of three dharmas. "The four peaceful practices" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of four dharmas. "The disciples of the five ranks" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of five dharmas. "The purification of the six sense-faculties" — this discusses the wondrous of practice in terms of six dharmas. All such passages as these discuss the wondrous in relation to the coarse.

As for opening the coarse to discuss the wondrous: bowing one's head, or raising one's hand, or piling up dirt, or playing with sand as a child — all of these become the buddha path. Though the teaching speaks of manifold dharmas, in reality, all of it is for the sake of the one vehicle alone — every practice, without exception, is wondrous, with no coarse remaining against which to set it. Once there is nothing to set it against, the relative itself is exhausted into the absolute.

Again, discussing the wondrous of practice in terms of the number five: this, too, is of two kinds — first, clarifying the distinct teaching's own five practices; next, clarifying the perfect teaching's own five practices.

As for the distinct teaching: the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra says: "There are five kinds of practice — the holy practice, the brahma practice, the heavenly practice, the infant practice, and the sick practice." The holy practice has three parts: precepts, concentration, and wisdom. As the sūtra says: "If the bodhisattva hears of the great nirvāṇa, and, having heard it, gives rise to faith, he reflects thus: the buddhas, the world-honored ones, possess the unsurpassed path, possess the great correct Dharma, and possess the correct practice of the great assembly." From this, practice is established. "If he hears of the great nirvāṇa" is precisely faith in the fruit, and is also faith in cessation. From "possesses the unsurpassed path" onward is the practice of faith that reveals the fruit: "the unsurpassed path" is faith in wisdom; "possesses the great correct Dharma" is faith in concentration; "the correct practice of the great assembly" is faith in the precepts — this is called faith in the cause, and faith in the path. Injuring oneself and all sentient beings, breaking the precepts, and committing transgressions, so as to lose the happiness of humans and gods and the happiness of nirvāṇa alike — this is precisely knowing the arising of suffering. Wandering back and forth through birth-and-death, receiving the retribution of the evil destinies — this is precisely knowing suffering itself. Since suffering and its arising stand opposed to the precepts, concentration, and wisdom, there is, accordingly, no path; and since there is no path, nirvāṇa cannot be attained, and so there is, accordingly, no cessation either.

The bodhisattva, wishing to root out suffering and its arising, gives rise to great compassion and raises up two vows accordingly; wishing to bestow the path and cessation, he gives rise to great loving-kindness and raises up two further vows accordingly. Having raised these vows, he then proceeds to cultivate practice. Reflecting that life in the household is as oppressive as a prison, so that one cannot, for the whole of one's life, purely cultivate the brahma practice within it, while leaving the household is spacious and unconfined, like empty space itself — he thereupon abandons his household and renounces desire, and, through the fourfold formal proceeding, upholds both the precepts of grave inherent wrong and the precepts against what the world finds objectionable, without any distinction between the two, never taking hold of the float of the precepts as a raft to be discarded through craving or attachment to views, as is explained in the Mohe Zhiguan. Through this upholding of the precepts, he becomes complete in the pure precept of the fundamental karmic act, the pure precept of its former and latter accompanying factors and remainder, the pure precept of being free from every evil discursive thought, the pure precept of guarding correct mindfulness thought by thought, and the precept of dedicating himself, complete and entire, to the unsurpassed path. "Fundamental" refers to the ten wholesome inherent precepts, the very root of every precept, upheld by the untainted mind — hence, it is called "pure." As for the pure precept of the former and latter accompanying factors and remainder: the offenses of grave transgression and the like are its former accompanying factors; the thirteen saṅghāvaśeṣa offenses and the like are its latter accompanying factors; and what remains, not issuing from the vinaya-canon itself, but restricted by the various sūtras — such as the twenty-four precepts of the Vaipulya class — is named the "remainder" precept.

These first two branches belong to the monastic discipline's own formal proceeding — precepts received and obtained through a formal act. The latter three branches are not obtained through any formal proceeding, but are obtained through the dharma itself — it is at the very moment the dharma is obtained that these precepts are brought forth.

As for the pure precept of being free from every evil discursive thought: this is precisely the precept accompanying concentration. If śīla is not pure, samādhi does not manifest before one. Because the precepts are pure, the phenomenal obstruction is removed, and the preliminary concentration of the desire realm is brought forth; and the inherent obstruction is removed, and the fundamental concentration is brought forth. Extinguishing evil discursive and reflective thought — this is named the precept accompanying concentration.

As for the pure precept of guarding correct mindfulness thought by thought: this is precisely the four applications of mindfulness. Contemplating principle with correct mindfulness, although the real has not yet been brought forth, through a resembling mindfulness one is nonetheless able to bring forth the real path, accomplishing the precept accompanying the path — hence, it is named the pure precept of correct mindfulness thought by thought.

Again, the precept accompanying concentration is brought forth by relying on the concentrated mind, and belongs to the sense of the good of stilling; the precept accompanying the path is brought forth by relying on the discriminating mind, and belongs to the sense of the good of practice. Whether moving or unmoving, both alike are the vinaya. Why is this? The precepts are spoken of in terms of prevention and restraint: once one attains the mind accompanying concentration, evil no longer arises; once one attains the true realization accompanying the path, one is forever free of transgression — hence, both alike are the precepts.

As for the precept of dedicating oneself, complete and entire, to the unsurpassed path: this is precisely the bodhisattva's own fulfillment, within all the precepts, of the four universal vows and the six pāramitās, resolving his mind through a vow, and dedicating it to bodhi — hence, this is named the Mahāyāna precept. The universal vows are as explained before. As for the six pāramitās: renouncing evil to leave the household, relinquishing what one holds dear — this is precisely giving. Not transgressing in the slightest, resisting the demon that would tempt one to break the precepts — this is precisely moral discipline. Being able to govern body and mind, and calmly enduring beating and abuse — this is called the forbearance toward sentient beings. Enduring the eight winds, cold and heat, greed and anger, and the rest — this is called the forbearance toward the dharma. Craving and attachment to views being unable to harm one — this is precisely patience. Guarding the precepts so that no transgressing mind ever arises — this is precisely diligence. Resolving to uphold the precepts, never being deceived by any doubt or hesitation, single-mindedly unmoving — this is called meditative concentration. Clearly discerning cause and effect, knowing that the precepts are the very root of correctly according with liberation, giving rise to every sage of the three vehicles, and are not the sixty-two heretical views nor precepts such as those of the cattle or the dog — this is called prajñā.

Again, he raises particular vows, in order to restrain his own mind: "I would rather lay this body down upon burning iron than accept another's bed or seat while breaking the precepts" — twelve such vows restrain his own mind. He further raises a vow, wishing that all sentient beings may attain the guarding and upholding of the restraining precepts, the pure precept, the good precept, the unbroken precept, the unanalyzed precept, the Mahāyāna precept, the unretreating precept, the accordant precept, the ultimate precept, and the precept complete with every pāramitā. Through these ten vows, he guards and protects sentient beings. The bodhisattva's single mind of upholding the precepts is adorned by however many vows and practices as these — and every other mind of practice ought likewise to be so adorned.

Now, these ten precepts for guarding others issue forth from the five branches of one's own practice: from the two branches of the fundamental and its accompanying factors issue the restraining precept, the pure precept, and the good precept. Why is this? The formal proceeding by category and collection is precisely the restraining precept; once the restraining precept brings forth the unmanifest karmic potential, it is then named "pure" — this purity is precisely the good of stilling; and speaking of it as the "good precept" is precisely the good of practice.

From the pure precept of being free from every evil discursive thought is opened out the unbroken precept. Why is this? Although the seven branches are guarded and protected, false thoughts still arise repeatedly, bringing about breaches and lapses; but once the preliminary concentration of the desire realm is brought forth, the phenomenal practice is unbroken, and once the fundamental concentration is attained, the inherent practice, too, is unbroken.

From the pure precept of guarding correct mindfulness thought by thought is opened out the unanalyzed precept, which is precisely the precept accompanying the path. Extinguishing form to enter emptiness is the analytical method's own precept accompanying the path; here, however, embodying form directly to enter emptiness, it is accordingly named "unanalyzed." Again, having the precept accompanying the path within oneself, one's own category of precepts thereby becomes firm and secure, and cannot be broken apart or analyzed away.

From the precept of dedicating oneself, complete and entire, to the unsurpassed path are opened out the Mahāyāna precept, the unretreating precept, the accordant precept, the ultimate precept, and the precept complete with the pāramitās. As for the Mahāyāna precept: the bodhisattva upholds the precepts of grave inherent wrong and against what the world finds objectionable without any distinction between the two. Seeking the buddha path for himself, the precept of grave inherent wrong is urgent; transforming sentient beings, the precept against what the world finds objectionable is likewise urgent — whereas, for the Hīnayāna practitioner, disciplining only himself, the precept of grave inherent wrong alone is urgent, and, since he does not undertake to save others, the precept against what the world finds objectionable is treated more leniently. The bodhisattva upholds both kinds together in full — hence, this is named the Mahāyāna precept. As for the unretreating precept: practicing amid what is not the path, through skillful means, entering brothels and wine-shops and other unlawful places precisely in order to save people there, and yet never suffering any loss or retreat with respect to the restraining precepts — like a physician treating disease, who is never himself stained by the disease he treats — hence, this is named the unretreating precept. As for the accordant precept: according with what is fitting for each being's own capacity, and according with the principle of the path — hence, this is named the accordant precept. As for the ultimate precept: this is the vertical, ultimate, unsurpassed dharma itself. As for the precept complete with the pāramitās: this is the horizontal completeness of every aspect at once, with no dharma whatsoever left unprovided.

The Treatise likewise clarifies ten kinds of precepts: the four kinds — unbroken, unlapsed, unpierced, and unmixed — are precisely the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra's own restraining precept, pure precept, good precept, and unbroken precept, all within the fundamental branch. The Treatise's "precept according with the path" is precisely the Sūtra's own unanalyzed precept, within the branch of guarding correct mindfulness. The Treatise's "precept free of attachment" is precisely the Sūtra's own unretreating precept, within the branch of dedication. The Treatise's "precept praised by the wise" is precisely the Sūtra's own Mahāyāna precept. The Treatise's "precept of freedom" is precisely the Sūtra's own precept of freedom. The Treatise's "precept according with concentration" is precisely the Sūtra's own accordant precept. The Treatise's "complete precept" is precisely the Sūtra's own pāramitā precept. Where the Sūtra clarifies the "ultimate" and the Treatise speaks of "according with concentration," these are largely the same with only a minor difference — and this involves no loss of sense between them.

The Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra, wishing to distinguish the bodhisattva's own sequential holy practice, accordingly sets out in full the shallow and the deep, the beginning and the end, and the completeness of these various precepts. Skillfully upholding them, one enters the initial ground of non-movement, unmoving, unretreating, unfalling, and undistracted — this is called the precept holy practice. Since the precept holy practice proceeds from the shallow at the outset to the deep in the end, its coarse and wondrous aspects may accordingly be judged. The three precepts — the restraining, the pure, and the good — belong to the monastic discipline; the monastic discipline generally encompasses the entire assembly, and so it fixes the ranking of senior and junior and the order of one's own standing within it. Though there are bodhisattvas, buddhas, and the rest, no separate assembly is set up for them — hence, the dharma of the precepts is the same throughout, differing only in the bodhi-mind of the buddha. One should therefore know that these three precepts of the monastic discipline belong to the Tripiṭaka teaching. The unbroken precept is the precept accompanying concentration; the fundamental dhyāna is a phenomenal matter, and likewise belongs to the Tripiṭaka teaching — hence, this, too, is coarse. The unanalyzed precept is the precept of embodying dharmas directly, accompanying the path, and belongs to the shared teaching. The Mahāyāna precept, the unretreating precept, and the rest belong to the distinct teaching, though also shared in part with the shared teaching — for the shared teaching, too, has its own emerging into the provisional, according with capacity and conforming to principle, unretreating with respect to the path. Yet, relying only on the real truth, it does not match the distinct teaching's own practitioner — the distinct teaching's own practitioner is the wondrous one here. The accordant precept, the ultimate precept, the complete precept, and the rest belong to the perfect teaching. Not rising from the concentration of cessation, and yet manifesting every manner of bearing; not abandoning the dharma of the path, and yet manifesting the affairs of an ordinary being — this is named "accordant." Only the buddha alone possesses the pure precept in its fullness; everyone else is named a defiler of the precepts — hence, this is named the ultimate precept. The precepts are themselves the dharma-realm, complete with every buddha-dharma and every dharma of sentient beings, reaching the far shore of śīla — hence, this is named the precept complete with the pāramitās. The Vimalakīrti [Sūtra] says: "One who is able to be thus is named one who truly upholds the vinaya, and is named one who has truly and skillfully understood it." The present sūtra says: "Through the long night, we have upheld the Buddha's own pure precepts; within the Dharma-king's own Dharma, we have long cultivated the brahma practice — only today, for the first time, do we obtain its fruit and retribution." And again: "Rāhula's own hidden practice — I alone am able to know it." Is this not precisely setting all the preceding precepts as coarse, with only the perfect teaching's own precept alone as wondrous? Again: upholding the initial precept is like milk; the intermediate stages are like the three intervening flavors; the final precept is like ghee — ghee alone is wondrous, and so on.

As for opening the coarse to reveal the wondrous: others say, "The Brahma Net Sūtra teaches the bodhisattva precepts." Here, we must ask: "Whose bodhisattva precepts are these?" If they answer, "They are the bodhisattva precepts of the Tripiṭaka or shared teachings," then there ought to be a separate assembly of bodhisattvas apart from the others. But since the assembly itself is not separate, how could the precepts differ? Again, if the bodhisattva precepts are clarified as something separate and distinct, what, then, would separately constitute the pratyekabuddha's own precepts? Here, it is clarified that the Tripiṭaka teaching's three vehicles have no separate assembly at all, and so there cannot be any separate precepts for the bodhisattva or the pratyekabuddha within it. If, however, one interprets this in terms of the distinct or perfect teaching's own bodhisattva, this is indeed possible — why is this? Because, beyond the assembly shared in common by the three vehicles, there exists a bodhisattva set apart, and so there exist precepts set apart for him as well.

Question: If, beyond the assembly shared by the three vehicles, there exist separate precepts for the bodhisattva, what, then, of the pratyekabuddha's own precepts? Answer: Beyond the assembly shared by the three vehicles, there exists no separate pratyekabuddha at all — but this account still remains only the wondrous set in relation to the coarse. As for opening the coarse: one who studies the vinaya is precisely one who studies the Mahāyāna's own discipline. This discipline is precisely the light of the Mahāyāna's own ultimate meaning — neither blue, nor yellow, nor red, nor white — and the three refuges, the five precepts, the ten wholesome actions, and the two hundred and fifty precepts are, all of them, alike, the Mahāyāna itself. How, then, could there be any coarse precept set apart from the wondrous precept at all! Since the precepts themselves are already wondrous, the persons who hold them are, likewise, wondrous as well. "You are, in truth, my own child" — this is precisely this same sense. This is called the wondrous precept read in the absolute sense.