Distinguishing the Unsurpassed Vehicle — Ten Vajra-Verses, and the Treatise's Own Name

What does this mean? The practice according with the Dharma is, in brief, of two kinds: first, the transformation into freedom from distraction; second, the transformation into freedom from inversion. Bodhisattvas should correctly understand these. Here, being free of six kinds of distraction is called freedom from distraction. The six distractions are: first, distraction of own-nature; second, external distraction; third, internal distraction; fourth, distraction of characteristic; fifth, distraction of heaviness; sixth, distraction of attention.

What does this mean? Here, "leaving concentration" occurs through the five sense-consciousnesses — this should be known as distraction of own-nature. "Flowing out toward objects" means scattering out toward external conditions — this is external distraction. "Relishing torpor and agitation" means relishing concentration itself while torpor and agitation are present — this is internal distraction. "Feigning" is distraction of characteristic, since one feigns an outward sign [of attainment] before actually cultivating the practice of concentration. "Self-attachment" is distraction of heaviness, since, through the power of this heaviness, self-conceit becomes active. "A base-minded aspiration" is distraction of attention, since one's attention arises in dependence on an inferior vehicle. Bodhisattvas should fully understand these six characteristics of distraction, and should swiftly eliminate them.

What does this mean? In dependence on true knowledge and vision regarding these ten matters, the ten names of non-inversion should be understood as established.

What does this mean? If, regarding any text, one is able to recite it in unbroken succession and in proper order, this is called concordance. That this name is commonly accepted to designate only this one thing, remembered again and again from time immemorial, is called habituation. Only through these two does a text come to have meaning; where they are contravened, a text comes to lack meaning. Truly knowing and seeing these two kinds of text should be understood as non-inversion regarding the text.

"Appearing as if it had a twofold nature" means it appears as if it had the nature of the grasped and the grasper, since the confused consciousness arises with an aspect resembling them. "Not truly existing as it appears" means it does not truly exist in the way it appears. "Free of existence" means this meaning's nature as grasped and grasper does not exist. "Free of non-existence" means that confused consciousness appears as if it existed. Truly knowing and seeing the meaning here should be understood as non-inversion regarding meaning.

The habituation of the language of "grasped" and "grasper" is called the attention rooted in language; this very attention is the basis for the discrimination of the grasped and the grasper, since it is the cause capable of making the two graspings appear. Since this attention is habituated by the conceptual proliferation of linguistic ideation, it is called the attention rooted in language. Truly knowing and seeing this attention should be understood as non-inversion regarding attention.

It was said above that these meanings are free of both existence and non-existence, since, like an illusion and the rest, they are neither existent nor non-existent. Just as an illusion conjures elephants, horses, and the like that are not truly real, yet the nature of these elephants and horses is not utterly non-existent either — since the confused consciousness arises appearing as those elephants and horses — so too these meanings have no fixed, real nature as the apparent grasped and grasper, yet are not utterly non-existent either, since the confused consciousness appears as that grasped and grasper. The word "and the rest" indicates a mirage, a dream-object, the moon reflected in water, and the like, as should be understood accordingly. Through the ability to truly contemplate these meanings as like an illusion, the mind is unmoved and undistracted with respect to either existence or non-existence. Truly knowing and seeing this non-agitation should be understood as non-inversion regarding non-agitation.

Truly knowing and seeing that the eye, form, and so forth, up to mind and dharmas, are all only names, one is thereby able to counteract every discrimination — this should be understood as non-inversion regarding own-character. This is spoken of in dependence on the own-character of the ultimate; with respect to the conventional, it is not the case that only a name can be apprehended, since there are various distinct characters conventionally.

Since there is not a single dharma apart from the selflessness of dharmas, the true dharma-realm is subsumed under the universal character of all dharmas. Truly knowing and seeing this universal character should be understood as non-inversion regarding the universal character.

Where the inverted attention has not yet been cut off, at that time the dharma-realm is called defiled; when it has already been cut off, it is called pure. Truly knowing and seeing this defilement and purity, in order, is non-inversion regarding defilement and purity.

The dharma-realm's own nature is pure like space; by this, it should be known that the two distinct characters — first defiled, later pure — are adventitious, not its master. Truly knowing and seeing this adventitious character should be understood as non-inversion regarding the adventitious.

Since the person and dharmas alike do not exist, their natures as defiled and pure likewise do not exist. Since the meanings of defilement and purity are both unattainable, the defiled and pure classes neither decrease nor increase; hence, within this, there is neither fear nor pride. Truly knowing and seeing this freedom from fear and pride should be understood as non-inversion regarding these two.

What does this mean? The general meaning of non-inverted practice: through non-inversion regarding the text, one correctly penetrates the two aspects of calm-abiding and insight; through non-inversion regarding meaning, one correctly penetrates every inverted character; through non-inversion regarding attention, one correctly abandons the causes and conditions of inversion; through non-inversion regarding non-agitation, one correctly grasps their character; through non-inversion regarding own-character, one cultivates the non-discriminating path that remedies them; through non-inversion regarding the universal character, one correctly penetrates original purity; through non-inversion regarding defilement and purity, one knows the obstruction not yet cut off, and already cut off; through non-inversion regarding the adventitious, one truly knows the two characters of defilement and purity; and through the two non-inversions of freedom from fear and pride, every obstruction is severed and one attains permanent liberation.

These ten non-inversions are, in order, established within those ten vajra words. What are the ten vajra words? Existence and non-existence; non-inversion; the basis; the illusion and other similes; non-discrimination; original purity; defilement and purity; the simile of space; no decrease; and no increase. To gather these ten vajra words, there are two verses: "One should know existence and non-existence, non-inversion, the basis, the illusion and the rest, non-discrimination, original constant purity, and defilement and purity, whose purity of nature is likened to space, and no decrease and no increase — these are the ten vajra words."

Now, first, we explain the establishment of these ten vajra words. Their own nature comes about through four reasons: through own-nature; through being an object; through non-discrimination; and through resolving objections. "Through own-nature" means the three natures — the perfectly accomplished, the discriminated and attached-to, and the dependent — corresponding, in order, to the first three words. "Through being an object" means these same three natures. "Through non-discrimination" means: through this, non-discrimination — namely, non-discriminating wisdom; and with respect to this non-discrimination, original purity. In this order, it should be understood that object and wisdom are established — namely, the three natures and non-discrimination. "Through resolving objections" means the remaining words.

Now, an objection may be raised: if the characters of the discriminated, attached-to nature and the dependent nature are truly non-existent, how can they be apprehended at all? And if they are truly existent, then it should not be said that all dharmas are originally pure by nature. To resolve this objection, the simile of illusion and the rest is spoken of: just as an illusory thing, though truly non-existent, can nevertheless be apprehended as appearing. A further objection may be raised: if all dharmas are originally pure by nature, how can there be first defilement and then purity? To resolve this objection, defilement-and-purity and the simile of space are spoken of: just as space, though pure by nature, nevertheless has times of being defiled and times of being purified. A further objection may be raised: there are immeasurable buddhas appearing in the world, each one liberating immeasurable sentient beings, causing them to leave saṃsāra and enter nirvāṇa — how, then, can saṃsāra suffer no diminishment, and the realm of nirvāṇa incur no increase? To resolve this objection, no decrease and no increase in defilement and purity are spoken of — and moreover because the realm of sentient beings and the class of the purified are both without limit.

Second, we explain the establishment of their own nature, as a verse says: "The object, own-nature, and cause of confusion; the own-nature and object of non-confusion; the fruits of confusion and non-confusion; and the limit of these two."

What does this mean? If, regarding form and the rest, one holds that the self is different from them, or holds that it is identical to them, each is an extreme; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — the contemplation of non-self, up through "the young nurtured one," since one who sees a self necessarily falls into this attachment, holding the self either different from the body or identical to it.

If, regarding form and the rest, one holds them to be permanent, this is the extremist's extreme; holding them to be impermanent is the śrāvaka's extreme; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — the contemplation of form and the rest as neither permanent nor impermanent.

Definitely holding there is a self is the extreme of exaggerating the person; definitely holding there is no self is the extreme of denying the person, since this also denies the conventionally existing person; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — wisdom situated within the middle of the two extremes of self and non-self.

Definitely holding that mind truly exists is the extreme of exaggerating dharmas; definitely holding that mind does not truly exist is the extreme of denying dharmas; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — that here there is no mind, no thought, no intellect, and no consciousness [as ultimately real entities, though conventionally functioning].

Holding that the unwholesome and other defiled dharmas [truly] exist as what is to be treated is one extreme; holding that the wholesome and other pure dharmas [truly] exist as what treats them is the other extreme; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — not following either extreme in one's contemplation or one's speech.

Regarding the person and dharmas, definitely holding they exist is the extreme of permanence; definitely holding they do not exist is the extreme of annihilation; to depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — wisdom situated within the middle of these two extremes.

Holding that there is a grasped and a grasper with respect to ignorance is each an extreme; holding that there is a grasped and a grasper with respect to [true] knowledge is likewise each an extreme. In this way, holding that there is a grasped and a grasper with respect to the formations and the rest that are to be treated, and the unconditioned that treats them, up through old age and death and the very path that extinguishes them, is each an extreme. This "what is to be treated" and "what treats it," this "grasped" and "grasper," are precisely the distinction between the black class [of defilement] and the white class [of purification]. To depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught — that knowledge and ignorance are neither two nor divided into two, and so on as fully explained, since a grasped and a grasper with respect to knowledge, ignorance, and the rest are none of them real.

What does this mean? Discriminating existence and discriminating non-existence are each an extreme, since one holds that emptiness is established in order to annihilate a truly existing person — or, regarding non-self, discriminates it as bare nothing. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the Middle Way is taught: emptiness is not established in order to annihilate the person, but rather that very emptiness is, by its own nature, empty — empty in its former limit, empty in its later limit, and empty in its middle — and so on, as fully explained.

Discriminating what is pacified and discriminating what pacifies it are each an extreme, since one holds there is a real thing relinquished and a real relinquishing agent, dreading emptiness. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the simile of space is taught.

Discriminating what is dreaded and discriminating the fearsome thing arising from it are each an extreme, since one holds that the discriminated, attached-to form and the rest can arise as an object of dread, and holds that the suffering dharma arising from it can arise as an object of fear. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the simile of the painter is taught. The earlier simile of space was spoken for śrāvakas; this simile of the painter is spoken for bodhisattvas.

Discriminating the grasped and discriminating the grasper are each an extreme. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the simile of the magician is taught. From the wisdom of Consciousness-Only arises the wisdom that there is no [external] object; from the arising of the wisdom that there is no object, one further relinquishes even Consciousness-Only itself. Since the object of this wisdom does not exist, consciousness too does not exist [as an object-grasping reality], for consciousness necessarily arises only in dependence on an object it takes as condition. In this way, the thing illustrated and the illustration share the same principle.

Discriminating a correct nature and discriminating a mistaken nature are each an extreme, since one holds that authentic contemplation must be either correct or mistaken in nature. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the simile of two sticks generating fire is taught: just as two sticks, though bearing no trace of fire, can generate fire through rubbing, and the fire, once generated, then burns up the two sticks — so too this authentic contemplation, though it bears no trace of the noble path's true nature, is nonetheless able to give rise to the true, noble wisdom; and once this true, noble wisdom has arisen, it is able, in turn, to dispel this very authentic contemplation. In this way, the thing illustrated and the illustration share the same principle. Yet, although authentic contemplation bears no trace of a correct nature, since it accords with that correct nature, it likewise bears no trace of a mistaken nature.

Discriminating that it has use and discriminating that it has no use are each an extreme, since one holds either that noble wisdom must first involve discrimination in order to remove defilement, or that it has no use whatsoever. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the first simile of a lamp is taught.

Discriminating that it will never arise and discriminating that it requires an equal duration are each an extreme, since one holds either that the remedy will ultimately never arise at all, or that, if it does arise, it must require as long a duration as the defilement it remedies took to accumulate. To depart from this twofold discrimination, the second simile of a lamp is taught.

What does this mean? Defilement is threefold: afflictive defilement, karmic defilement, and defilement of birth. Afflictive defilement is further threefold: first, [wrong] views; second, the character of greed, hatred, and delusion; third, craving for future existence. The remedy for this is: the wisdom of emptiness, the wisdom of signlessness, and the wisdom of wishlessness. Karmic defilement means wholesome and unwholesome deeds performed. The remedy for this is the wisdom of non-doing. Defilement of birth is threefold: first, future birth itself; second, mind and mental factors arising moment to moment once born; third, the continuity of future existence. The remedy for this is: the wisdom of non-arising, the wisdom of non-origination, and the wisdom of no [inherent] nature.

The removal of these three kinds of defilement is called purity. The object of the wisdom of emptiness and the rest is emptiness and the corresponding dharmas. It is not that the wisdom of emptiness and the rest, respectively, makes the three kinds of defilement into emptiness and the rest — rather, it is because their own nature already is emptiness and the rest, since the dharma-realm is, from the outset, by nature free of defilement. If, regarding the dharma-realm, one holds either that it is defiled or that it is pure, each is an extreme, since its own nature is free of defilement, being neither defiled nor pure. To depart from this attachment, the Middle Way is taught: it is not that emptiness empties a dharma — rather, the dharma's own nature is, itself, already empty; and so on, as fully explained.

What does this mean? Where, across the ten grounds, the ten perfections are cultivated with any one of them predominant, this should be known as differentiated practice. Where generosity and the other ten perfections are cultivated equally across every ground, such practice is called undifferentiated practice.

The general meaning of the six correct practices: it is precisely this class of things that is supreme [supreme practice]; by this, one reflects on the Great Vehicle's dharmas as they have been set forth [the practice of intention]; by this same class, one cultivates calm-abiding through the transformation into freedom from distraction, and cultivates insight through the transformation into freedom from inversion [the practice according with the Dharma]; for the sake of this same meaning, one cultivates the Middle Way and seeks liberation [the practice free of the two extremes]; and, across the ten grounds, one cultivates differentiated and undifferentiated practice. This concludes the supremacy of correct practice.

What does this mean? The object relied on has twelve kinds: first, the object of the established Dharma as expounded; second, the object of the dharma-realm; third, the object that is established; fourth, the object that establishes; fifth, the object of holding; sixth, the object of affirming; seventh, the object of inward holding; eighth, the object of penetration; ninth, the object of increase; tenth, the object of partial realization; eleventh, the object of equanimous carrying; twelfth, the supreme object.

Here, the first means the various established Dharma-gateways, such as the perfections and the rest, as expounded. The second means suchness. The third and fourth, in order, are these same two — the established Dharma-gateways such as the perfections and the rest — since they are accomplished only through penetrating the dharma-realm. The fifth means the object of the wisdom accomplished through hearing, since it holds the text. The sixth means the object of the wisdom accomplished through reflection, since it affirms the meaning. The seventh means the object of the wisdom accomplished through meditative cultivation, since it holds it inwardly and distinctly. The eighth means the object of the path of seeing in the first ground. The ninth means the object of the path of cultivation, up through the seventh ground. The tenth means the object of the partial realization, ground by ground, of the many kinds of mundane and supramundane path within the seventh ground. The eleventh means the object of the eighth ground. The twelfth means the object of the ninth and tenth grounds and the tathāgata-ground. It should be understood that these are, in every case, simply the first [the Dharma] and the second [suchness], each receiving its own name according to the specific meaning and stage involved.

What does this mean? Realization through cultivation is, in total, of ten kinds: first, the realization of the spiritual lineage, since its conditions are without deficiency. Second, the realization of confident understanding, since one does not slander the Great Vehicle. Third, the realization of arousing the mind of bodhi, since one is not shaken by an inferior vehicle. Fourth, the realization of correct practice, since the perfections are brought to completion. Fifth, the realization of entering freedom from birth, since the noble path arises. Sixth, the realization of maturing sentient beings, since firm good roots are accumulated over a long time. Seventh, the realization of a pure land, since the mind becomes pliant. Eighth, the realization of attaining the stage of non-regression and receiving the prediction [of future buddhahood], since one is not attached to either saṃsāra or nirvāṇa, and so is turned back by neither. Ninth, the realization of the buddha-ground, since one is free of the two obstructions. Tenth, the realization of manifesting bodhi, since this activity is without rest.

What does this mean? The general meaning of the unsurpassed vehicle is, in brief, threefold: the supremacy of correct practice itself; the supremacy of what correct practice relies on and holds in mind; and the supremacy of correct practice's fruit.

What does this mean? This treatise is able to distinguish the conduct that is central and the conduct that is extreme — hence it is named "Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes," which is to say, it clearly displays the sense of central and extreme conduct as it operates on its objects. Again, this treatise is able to distinguish the objects that are central and the objects that are extreme — hence it is likewise so named, displaying the sense of central and extreme objects as they are relied on. Or again, it correctly distinguishes the Middle Way dharma, free of both the earlier and the later extremes — hence it is named "Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes" for this reason too.

What this treatise distinguishes is a profound and hidden meaning, since it is not the domain of ordinary reasoning. It is a firm and true meaning, since it is able to overcome others' arguments and is never overcome by them. It is a vast meaning, since it is able to distinguish the affairs of benefiting and delighting oneself and others. It is a universal meaning, since it is able to fully resolve the teachings of all three vehicles. And it is further able to remove every inauspicious thing, since it permanently severs both the afflictive obstruction and the cognitive obstruction.