Distinguishing the Characteristics — False Discrimination, the Three Natures, and the Sixteen Emptinesses

What does this mean? This treatise speaks only of these seven topics: first, characteristics; second, obstructions; third, reality; fourth, the cultivation of every remedy; fifth, the stages of this very cultivation; sixth, the fruit attained; seventh, the unsurpassed vehicle. Here, we first distinguish its characteristics.

What does this mean? "False discrimination exists" means: the discrimination of the grasped and the grasper exists. "Within it, the two are entirely absent" means: within this very false discrimination, the two natures of the grasped and the grasper are forever absent. "Within this, there is only emptiness" means: within false discrimination there is only the emptiness that is free of the grasped and the grasper. "And within that, too, this exists" means: within that very emptiness, too, there is only this false discrimination. Where this — the grasped and the grasper — is absent, one observes it, by that very absence, as empty; and what remains is not itself non-existent, so one truly knows it as existent. If one understands it this way, one is then able to display the character of emptiness without any inversion.

What does this mean? "All dharmas" means all conditioned and unconditioned dharmas — false discrimination being the conditioned, and the emptiness of the two graspings being the unconditioned. By the reasoning just given, it is said that all these dharmas are neither empty nor not empty: because emptiness and false discrimination both exist, they are said to be not empty; because the natures of the grasped and the grasper do not exist, they are said to be not not-empty. "Existence" means: emptiness and false discrimination exist. "Non-existence" means: the two natures of the grasped and the grasper do not exist. "And again existence" means: within false discrimination there is emptiness, and within emptiness there is false discrimination. "This accords with the Middle Way" means: all dharmas are neither wholly empty nor wholly not empty — this principle marvelously accords with the Middle Way, and agrees well with the Prajñāpāramitā and other scriptures' teaching that all dharmas are neither empty nor existent.

What does this mean? "Transforms and appears as if it were an object" means it appears in the nature of form and the other sense-objects. "Transforms and appears as if it were a sentient being" means it appears in the nature of the five sense-faculties of one's own body and others' bodies. "Transforms and appears as if it were a self" means the defiled manas, constantly conjoined with self-delusion and the rest. "Transforms and appears as if it were cognition" means the remaining six consciousnesses, whose aspect of cognizing is coarse. "This apparent object is not, in truth, real" means: the apparent object and the apparent faculties have no [genuinely cognizing] aspect at all, and the apparent self and apparent cognition do not truly appear as what they seem — so none of these four are, in truth, real. "Since the object does not exist, [such] consciousness does not exist" means: since the four objects grasped — the object, and the rest — do not exist, the consciousnesses that grasp them, [taken as truly external-object-grasping realities,] likewise are not truly real.

What does this mean? By this reasoning, false discrimination is established as not truly real — since what arises and appears within it does not truly exist as it appears. Yet it is also not utterly non-existent — since within it, a confused consciousness does, to some small extent, actually arise. Why is it not accepted that this nature is utterly non-existent? Because its cessation is accepted as liberation. Were it otherwise, bondage and liberation alike would have to be non-existent — and this would amount to the fault of denying both defilement and purity altogether.

What does this mean? In dependence on false discrimination's object, the discriminated, attached-to nature is spoken of. In dependence on false discrimination's own nature, the dependent nature is spoken of. In dependence on the emptiness of the grasped and the grasper, the perfectly accomplished nature is spoken of.

What does this mean? In dependence on the apprehension there is in Consciousness-Only, there first arises the non-apprehension of the object; and in further dependence on this non-apprehension of the object, there afterward arises the non-apprehension of consciousness itself. By this skillful means, one is able to enter the signlessness of the grasped and the grasper.

What does this mean? When Consciousness-Only arises, it appears as various false objects — this is called "having apprehension." Since the apprehended object has no real nature, the real nature of the apprehending [consciousness] likewise cannot be established. And since the apprehending consciousness thereby also has no apprehension, the grasped and the grasper — both formerly "having apprehension" — equally come to share the same nature of non-apprehension.

What does this mean? False discrimination's differentiated aspect is simply the minds and mental factors of the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm. Its synonym aspect: that which cognizes an object's general character alone is called "mind"; that which also cognizes its particulars is called the mental factors — feeling and the rest.

What does this mean? "The conditioning consciousness" means the storehouse consciousness, since it is the condition for the arising of the other consciousnesses. The evolving consciousnesses, arisen in dependence on the storehouse consciousness as their condition, are called "the experiencer," since they are the master of experiencing. Among these consciousnesses, feeling experiences, perception discriminates, and volition, attention, and the other conjoined formations impel the consciousnesses; these three assist the mind, and so are called mental factors.

What does this mean? "By concealing" means: ignorance conceals the truth of reality and obstructs the seeing of it as it truly is. "By establishing" means: the formations plant, within the root consciousness, the habituation of karma. "By leading onward" means: consciousness bound up with grasping leads sentient beings on to the place of their next birth. "By encompassing" means: name-and-form encompasses a sentient being's own body. "By perfecting" means: the six inner sense-fields bring a sentient being's body to its full completeness. "By threefold discrimination" means: contact discriminates the faculty, the object, and the consciousness — the three — and accords with the three kinds of feeling. "By experiencing" means: through the link of feeling, one takes in what is agreeable or disagreeable. "By giving rise" means: through the power of craving, the later existence already drawn by prior karma is caused to arise. "By binding together" means: grasping causes consciousness, conditioned by desire and its like as agreeable, to arise bound together [with what is to come]. "By becoming present" means: through the power of becoming, the karmically ripened fruits already bestowed by past deeds are made to become present. "By being the fruit of suffering" means: birth, old age, and death have, by their nature, an oppressive character — the recompense of prior causes. It is these twelve links alone, as described, that afflict and oppress the world, allowing it no peace.

The threefold defilement: first, the defilement of affliction — ignorance, craving, and grasping; second, the defilement of karma — formations and becoming; third, the defilement of birth — the remaining links. The twofold defilement: first, the defilement of cause — affliction and karma; second, the defilement of effect — the remaining links. The sevenfold defilement means seven kinds of cause: first, the cause of inversion — ignorance; second, the cause of impelling — formations; third, the cause of leading onward — consciousness; fourth, the cause of encompassing — name-and-form and the six sense-fields; fifth, the cause of experiencing — contact and feeling; sixth, the cause of giving rise — craving, grasping, and becoming; seventh, the cause of dread — birth, old age, and death. None of these defilements ever arise and grow apart from false discrimination.

What does this mean? "The two" [being absent] means the grasped and the grasper are absent. "This absence exists" means the non-existence of the two graspings exists. This shows that emptiness takes non-existence itself as its own nature — so the character of emptiness is neither existent nor non-existent. Why is it not existent? Because the two, in existing, are absent. Why is it not non-existent? Because the non-existence of the two exists. This shows the character of emptiness is neither existent nor non-existent. This emptiness and that false discrimination are neither different nor identical. Were they different, a dharma's nature would have to differ from the dharma itself — contradicting correct reasoning, as with the nature of suffering. Were they identical, emptiness could not be the object of pure wisdom, nor could it be a universal character. This shows that emptiness and false discrimination are free of both the character of identity and the character of difference.

What does this mean? This object of knowledge, emptiness: by virtue of the meaning of being without change, it is called suchness (tathatā) — its true nature is constantly thus, without alteration. By virtue of the meaning of being without inversion, it is called the reality-limit — it is not the basis on which any of the inversions depend. By virtue of the meaning of the cessation of characteristics, it is called signlessness — within it, every characteristic is forever cut off. By virtue of the meaning of the object of noble wisdom, it is called the ultimate nature — it is the object practiced by the most excellent wisdom. By virtue of the meaning of the cause of all noble dharmas, it is called the dharma-realm — since every noble dharma arises in dependence on it. Here, "realm" (dhātu) carries the meaning of "cause."

What does this mean? The distinctions of emptiness are, in brief, of two kinds: defiled and pure. It becomes defiled or pure according to the difference in its stage — in the stage where taint is present, it is called defiled; at the time it is freed from taint, it is called pure. Although it is first defiled and afterward becomes pure, this does not amount to the fault of impermanent transformation. Just as water and the rest, once freed of adventitious dust, are called pure without their own nature having changed, emptiness's purity is likewise so: it is not that its nature itself transforms.

What does this mean? The emptiness of the eater: spoken of with respect to the inner sense-fields — this is inner emptiness. The emptiness of the eaten: spoken of with respect to the outer sense-fields — this is outer emptiness. "That on which they depend": the body on which the eater and the eaten both depend; since this body is empty, it is called inner-and-outer emptiness. The various vessel-worlds are called "what one dwells within"; since this character is vast, it is called "great," and since what one dwells within is empty, it is called great emptiness. "The seeing of this" is the wisdom that sees the emptiness of the inner sense-fields and the rest; since this wisdom is itself empty, it is called the emptiness of emptiness. "What accords with reality" means the ultimate — practice as it truly is; the true principle contemplated is itself empty, hence the emptiness of the ultimate. The bodhisattva's practice aims at the two purities — the conditioned and unconditioned wholesome dharmas; since these two are empty, this is the emptiness of the conditioned and the emptiness of the unconditioned. For constantly benefiting sentient beings, one contemplates emptiness — hence ultimate emptiness. Saṃsāra is long and vast, without beginning or end; contemplating this as empty is the emptiness of no boundary. Without contemplating it as empty, one would swiftly grow weary and abandon sentient beings; so as not to abandon this saṃsāra, one contemplates this boundless saṃsāra as empty. For the good one cultivates, all the way to the state of nirvāṇa without remainder, one contemplates it as empty without scattering or abandoning it — hence the emptiness of no scattering.

The self-nature of the noble spiritual lineage is originally possessed, not brought about by habituation — this is called "original nature." The bodhisattva, in order to swiftly attain purity in this regard, contemplates it as empty — hence the emptiness of original nature. The bodhisattva, in order to attain the great being's marks and excellent signs, contemplates this as empty — hence the emptiness of the marks. The bodhisattva, in order that the [ten] powers, [four] fearlessnesses, and all the buddha-dharmas may attain complete purity, contemplates this as empty — hence the emptiness of all dharmas. These fourteen emptinesses are each severally established.

Since neither the person nor dharmas possess a real, [ultimately] existent nature, this is called the emptiness of no nature. Yet this emptiness of no nature is not itself without any nature of its own — since this very emptiness takes no-nature as its own nature, it is called the emptiness of the intrinsic nature of no-nature. As for the fourteen emptinesses spoken of above, beginning with the emptiness of the eater — these are separately established in order to display the character of emptiness. These last two are established, in their proper order, in order to check the exaggerating misapprehension that clings to a real person or real dharmas, and the deprecating misapprehension that denies emptiness itself.

What does this mean? If the dharmas, being empty, were before any remedy has arisen already free of adventitious defilement, then all sentient beings would, without any effort at all, already be spontaneously liberated. And if, even once the remedy had arisen, they still did not become pure, then the effort of seeking liberation would have to be fruitless.

Why is it neither defiled nor undefiled? Because the mind's nature is originally pure. Why is it neither pure nor impure? Because it is tainted by adventitious dust. This is what is meant by establishing the distinction of emptiness.

The foregoing meaning of emptiness comprises, in total, two aspects: character and establishment. Character itself has two aspects: non-existence and existence. Emptiness's character — free of existence, free of non-existence, free of identity, and free of difference — constitutes its character. "Establishment" should be understood as comprising the synonyms and the rest already explained.