The Wondrous Medicine King in the Poisonous Body

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has taught, beings' own buddha-nature is exactly like space — what, exactly, is meant by this likeness?" "Good son, space's own nature is neither past, nor future, nor present, and buddha-nature is exactly the same. Good son, space is not past. Why is this? Because it has no present. Were a dharma present, it could then be said to have become past — but, since space has no present, it has neither a past nor a present. Why is this? Because it has no future. Were a dharma future, it could then be said to become present — but, since space has no future, it has neither a present nor a future. Why is this? Because it has no present or past. Were there a present and a past, there would then be a future — but, since it has no present or past, it has no future either. On account of this very reasoning, space's own nature is not encompassed by the three times. Good son, it is because space does not exist at all that it has no three times — it is not because it exists that it has no three times. Exactly as a flower in the sky, not being an existent thing, has no three times, space, too, is exactly the same: not being an existent thing, it has no three times. Good son, what is meant by 'no thing at all' is simply space itself, and buddha-nature is exactly the same. Good son, space, because it does not exist, is not encompassed by the three times; buddha-nature, because it is permanent, is not encompassed by the three times. Good son, the Tathāgata, having already attained supreme, perfect awakening, possesses a buddha-nature and every buddha-dharma that are forever unchanging — and it is on account of this very reasoning that they have no three times, exactly like space. Good son, space, because it does not exist, is neither internal nor external; buddha-nature, because it is permanent, is neither internal nor external — and it is for this reason that buddha-nature is said to be exactly like space. Good son, exactly as, in the world, a place free of any obstruction at all is called space, the Tathāgata, having attained supreme, perfect awakening, is already free of any obstruction at all with regard to every buddha-dharma — and it is for this reason that buddha-nature is said to be exactly like space. It is on account of exactly this reasoning that I teach that buddha-nature is like space."

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, the Tathāgata, buddha-nature, and nirvāṇa, though not encompassed by the three times, are called existent. Space, too, is not encompassed by the three times — why, then, can it not likewise be called existent?" The Buddha said: "Good son, 'nirvāṇa' is named for what is not nirvāṇa; 'Tathāgata' is named for what is not the Tathāgata; and 'buddha-nature' is named for what is not buddha-nature. What is meant by 'what is not nirvāṇa'? It is simply every conditioned dharma of affliction — and it is precisely to break through this very conditioned affliction that the name 'nirvāṇa' is given. 'What is not the Tathāgata' refers to everyone from the icchantika up through the pratyekabuddha — and it is precisely to break through this range from icchantika to pratyekabuddha that the name 'Tathāgata' is given. 'What is not buddha-nature' refers to every wall, tile, and stone, every insentient thing — and it is precisely by departing from insentient things of this kind that the name 'buddha-nature' is given. Good son, there is no place at all in the entire world that is not space, set against space itself." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, there is likewise no place in the world that is not set against the four great elements, and yet the four great elements are still called existent. Why, then, can space, having no counterpart at all, not likewise be called existent?" The Buddha said: "Good son, should it be said that, since nirvāṇa is not encompassed by the three times, space must be the same, this reasoning does not hold. Why is this? Nirvāṇa is existent — it can be seen, it can be realized, it is form, it is a footprint, it is a passage of teaching, it is existence, it is a mark, it is an object of the mind, it is a place of refuge; it is stillness, light, peace, and the far shore — and it is for this very reason that it can be said to fall outside the three times. Space's own nature possesses none of these qualities at all, and it is for this reason that it is called non-existent. Were there some further thing, apart from qualities of this kind, that still deserved the name 'existent,' it ought to be encompassed by the three times. Should space share the same status as an existent dharma, it could not fail to be encompassed by the three times. Good son, exactly as people in the world say, space is called formless, without any counterpart, and impossible to behold — and, being formless, without counterpart, and impossible to behold, it would then simply be a mental factor. Should space share the same status as a mental factor, it could not fail to be encompassed by the three times — and, being encompassed by the three times, it would then simply be one of the four aggregates. Therefore, apart from the four aggregates, there is no such thing as space at all."

"Further, good son, various non-Buddhist schools say that space is simply light itself — and, being light, it would then be a material dharma. Were space, being a material dharma in this way, then it would be impermanent, and, being impermanent, it would be encompassed by the three times — so how, then, can these non-Buddhist schools claim it falls outside the three times? Should it be encompassed by the three times, it would then not be space at all — or else one might equally say that space is permanent. Good son, there are, further, those who say that space is simply a location — and, having a location, it would then be a material dharma; yet every location is impermanent, encompassed by the three times, while space, too, is said to be permanent, outside the three times — and, should one speak of it as a 'location,' one thereby knows there is no such thing as space at all. There are, further, those who say that space is simply sequence itself — and, being a sequence, it would then be a countable thing; and, being countable, it would be encompassed by the three times — and, being encompassed by the three times, how could it possibly be called permanent? Good son, there are, further, those who say that space cannot be separated from three states: emptiness, solidity, and both emptiness and solidity together. Should it be said to be emptiness, one should know that space is thereby an impermanent dharma — why is this? because, wherever space is, solidity is absent. Should it be said to be solidity, one should know that space, too, is impermanent — why is this? because, wherever space is, emptiness is absent. Should it be said to be both emptiness and solidity together, one should know that space, too, is impermanent — why is this? because both are absent in the very place the other is present. It is for this very reason that space is called non-existent. "Good son, exactly as it is said that space is something that can be constructed — as when one speaks of removing a tree or a house to 'make' space, of leveling ground to 'make' space, of covering space, of building above space, or of painting the color of space, as with the great ocean — space is, on this account, something that can be constructed. Yet everything constructed is impermanent, exactly like a clay pot — and space, being constructed in this way, ought likewise to be impermanent. "Good son, people in the world say that, among every dharma, the place free of any obstruction at all is called space. Is this unobstructed place present, then, in its entirety at every single location, or only in scattered portions? Were it present in its entirety at every location, one should then know that no other location could possibly lack space. And were it present only in scattered portions, it would then be a countable thing, divided between this place and that — and, being countable, one should know it to be impermanent. Good son, should anyone say that space, being unobstructed, is somehow joined together with existent things, or, further, say that space exists within a thing the way a fruit exists within a container, neither of these holds. Why is this? Should one speak of 'joining together,' this is, in turn, of three kinds: joining through distinct actions, as a flying bird alights upon a tree; joining through shared action, as two rams butt against one another; and joining that is already joined and jointly joined, as when two fingers of a pair are pressed together side by side. Should one speak of joining through distinct actions, this 'distinctness' is, in turn, of two kinds: the action of the thing itself, and the action of space itself. Should space's own action join with a thing, space would thereby become impermanent. Should the thing's own action join with space, the thing would then fail to be all-pervading — and, failing to be all-pervading, it, too, would be impermanent. Should it be said that space is permanent, its own nature unmoving, and yet joins with a moving thing, this reasoning does not hold. Why is this? Were space permanent, the thing, too, ought to be permanent; and were the thing impermanent, space, too, would be impermanent. To say that space is both permanent and impermanent at once — there is no such possibility. Should one speak, instead, of joining through shared action, this reasoning, too, does not hold. Why is this? Space is called all-pervading — and, should it join with an action, this action, too, ought to be all-pervading; and, being all-pervading, it ought to pervade everything equally; and, pervading everything equally, it ought to be joined to everything equally, with no room left to speak of joining here but not joining there. Should one speak, instead, of joining that is already joined and jointly joined, as with two fingers pressed together, this reasoning, too, does not hold. Why is this? Because there was, at first, no joining, and only afterward did the joining occur — and, being originally absent and now present, this is an impermanent dharma; and it is for this reason that one cannot say space is a joining that is already joined and jointly joined. Exactly as, in the ways of the world, whatever is originally absent and now present is thereby an impermanent thing, space, being exactly the same, ought likewise to be impermanent. Should it be said that space exists within a thing, the way a fruit exists within a container, this reasoning, too, does not hold. Why is this? Before this very container existed, where, exactly, did this space dwell? Were there some place it dwelled, space would then be manifold. And, being manifold, how could it possibly be called permanent, called one, called all-pervading? And should space, apart from space itself, have some other dwelling-place, then an existent thing, too, ought to be able to dwell apart from space — and therefore one should know that there is no such thing as space at all. Good son, should anyone say that the place a pointing finger indicates is called space, one should know that space is thereby an impermanent dharma. Why is this? A finger has four directions, and, having four directions, one should know that space, too, would have four directions — yet every permanent dharma is entirely without any directional location at all, and, having a directional location, space would thereby be impermanent. And, being impermanent, it could not be separate from the five aggregates — yet, once truly separated from the five aggregates, there is nothing there at all."

"Good son, should any dharma abide dependent upon causes and conditions, one should know that this dharma is thereby impermanent. Good son, it is exactly like how every being and every tree abides dependent upon the earth — and, the earth itself being impermanent, whatever depends upon the earth is, in due sequence, impermanent as well. Good son, exactly as the earth depends upon water, and, water being impermanent, the earth, too, is impermanent; and as water depends upon wind, and, wind being impermanent, water, too, is impermanent; wind, in turn, depends upon space — and, were space impermanent, wind, too, would be impermanent. Were it truly impermanent, how, then, could it be said that space is permanent, pervading every location equally? It is precisely because space does not exist at all that it is neither past, future, nor present — exactly as a rabbit's horn, being no thing at all, is neither past, future, nor present. It is for this very reason that I teach that buddha-nature, because it is permanent, falls outside the three times, while space, because it does not exist, likewise falls outside the three times. Good son, I never, in the end, dispute with the world at all. Why is this? Wherever the wise of the world say a thing exists, I, too, say that it exists; and wherever the wise of the world say a thing does not exist, I, too, say that it does not exist."

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, endowed with how many dharmas does the bodhisattva mahāsattva never dispute with the world, nor become defiled by any worldly dharma?" The Buddha said: "Good son, the bodhisattva mahāsattva, endowed with ten dharmas, never disputes with the world, nor becomes defiled by any worldly dharma. What are these ten? First, faith; second, possessing the precepts; third, drawing close to good spiritual friends; fourth, wise reflection within; fifth, being endowed with diligence; sixth, being endowed with right mindfulness; seventh, being endowed with wisdom; eighth, being endowed with right speech; ninth, delighting in the true Dharma; and tenth, feeling compassion for beings. Good son, the bodhisattva, endowed with these ten dharmas, never disputes with the world, nor becomes defiled by any worldly dharma, exactly like the blue lotus." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has taught, wherever the wise of the world say a thing exists, you, too, say that it exists, and wherever the wise of the world say a thing does not exist, you, too, say that it does not exist — what, exactly, is meant by the wise of the world saying something exists or does not exist?" The Buddha said: "Good son, should the wise of the world say that form is impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, and, all the way through, that consciousness is exactly the same — good son, this is what is meant by the wise of the world saying something exists, and I, too, say that it exists. Good son, should the wise of the world say that form lacks permanence, bliss, self, and purity, and that feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are exactly the same — good son, this is what is meant by the wise of the world saying something does not exist, and I, too, say that it does not exist." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, the wise of the world are simply the buddhas, the bodhisattvas, and every noble one — and, should these very noble ones hold that form is impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, how, then, can the Tathāgata teach that the Buddha's own bodily form is permanent, everlasting, without any change at all? The wise of the world speak of it as a non-existent dharma — how, then, can the Tathāgata say that it is existent? The Tathāgata, the World-Honored One, having spoken in this way, how can he still say that he does not dispute with the world, and is not defiled by any worldly dharma? The Tathāgata has already departed from the three kinds of inversion — the inversion of perception, of mind, and of view — and so ought to teach that the Buddha's own form is, in reality, impermanent; yet he now teaches that it is permanent instead — how, then, can this be called departing from inversion, and not disputing with the world?" The Buddha said: "Good son, an ordinary being's own form arises from affliction, and it is for this reason that the wise teach that form is impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self. The Tathāgata's own form is forever departed from affliction, and it is for this reason that it is taught to be permanent, everlasting, without any change at all."

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, what is meant by form arising from affliction?" "Good son, affliction is of three kinds: the leak of desire, the leak of becoming, and the leak of ignorance. The wise ought to contemplate the faults belonging to each of these three leaks. Why is this? Because, once these faults are known, one is thereby able to depart from them — exactly as a physician first examines the pulse of an illness, learns where the illness lies, and only then administers medicine. Good son, it is exactly like a person who leads a blind man into a thicket of thorns, and then abandons him and turns back — the blind man, afterward, finds it exceedingly difficult to emerge, and, should he manage to emerge at all, his body is entirely torn and ruined. Ordinary beings in the world are exactly the same: unable to know or see the faults of these three leaks, they simply follow along wherever they lead. Should one actually see these faults, one is thereby able to depart from them — and, having known these faults, though one may still receive their fruit, this fruit becomes light and slight. Good son, there are four kinds of people: one whose karmic act is heavy yet whose retribution is light; one whose karmic act is light yet whose retribution is heavy; one whose karmic act is heavy and whose retribution is likewise heavy; and one whose karmic act is light and whose retribution is likewise light. Good son, should a person be able to contemplate affliction's own faults, this person's karmic act and its received fruit are both made light. Good son, a wise person reflects in this way: 'I ought to depart from leaks of this kind, and, further, ought never to commit vile and evil deeds of this kind — why is this? Because I have not yet escaped the retribution of hell, of the hungry ghosts, of the animal realm, of humans and gods. Should I cultivate the path, I shall, through this very power, be able to destroy every such suffering.' This person, having reflected in this way, finds his own craving, hatred, and delusion grow weak; and, seeing his own craving, hatred, and delusion thus lightened, his mind rejoices, and he reflects, further: 'What I have now become is entirely due to the power of cultivating the path — it is this that has allowed me to depart from unwholesome dharmas and draw close to wholesome ones, and it is for this very reason that I now behold the true path in the present, and ought to diligently exert myself in cultivating it further.' This person, through the very power of this diligent cultivation, departs from countless evil afflictions, and likewise departs from the retribution of hell, of hungry ghosts, of the animal realm, and of humans and gods. It is for this very reason that I have taught, in the scriptures, that one ought to contemplate every defiled affliction together with its own cause. Why is this? Because a wise person, should he contemplate only the leak itself without contemplating its cause, would be unable to sever any affliction at all. Why is this? The wise person contemplates that the leak arises from this very cause — and, should I now sever the cause, the leak will thereby fail to arise. Good son, it is exactly like that physician, who first cuts off the illness's own cause, so that the illness thereby fails to arise — the wise person, first severing affliction's own cause, is exactly the same. A wise person first contemplates the cause, and next contemplates the fruit, knowing that a wholesome cause gives rise to a wholesome fruit, and an unwholesome cause gives rise to an unwholesome fruit. Having contemplated the fruit, he departs from the unwholesome cause. Having contemplated the fruit, he ought, further, to contemplate the relative weight of each affliction — and, having contemplated their weight, he departs first from the heaviest, and, having departed from the heaviest, the lighter ones depart of their own accord."

"Good son, should a wise person know affliction, affliction's own cause, affliction's own fruit, and affliction's own relative weight, this person, at that very moment, diligently cultivates the path, never resting and never regretting it, drawing close to good spiritual friends and listening to the Dharma with utmost sincerity, all for the sake of extinguishing every such affliction. Good son, it is exactly like a sick person who, knowing his own illness to be light and certain to be cured, never regrets taking even a bitter medicine — a wise person is exactly the same, diligently cultivating the noble path, joyful and free of sorrow, never resting and never regretting it. Good son, should a person be able to know affliction, its own cause, its own fruit, and its own relative weight, and, for the sake of removing affliction, diligently cultivate the noble path, this person's own form no longer arises from affliction — and, all the way through, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are exactly the same. Should a person be unable to know affliction, its own cause, its own fruit, and its own relative weight, and fail to diligently cultivate the path, this person's own form does arise from affliction — and, all the way through, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are exactly the same. Good son, one who knows affliction, its own cause, its own fruit, and its own relative weight, and who cultivates the path in order to sever affliction, is simply the Tathāgata himself — and it is on account of exactly this that the Tathāgata's own form is permanent, and, all the way through, consciousness, too, is permanent. Good son, one who does not know affliction, its own cause, its own fruit, or its own relative weight, and who is unable to cultivate the path, is simply an ordinary being — and it is for this reason that an ordinary being's own form is impermanent, and feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are all impermanent as well. Good son, the wise of the world, every noble one, every bodhisattva, and every buddha teach these very two meanings, and I, too, teach these very same two meanings — and it is for this very reason that I say I do not dispute with the wise of the world, and am not defiled by any worldly dharma." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha, further: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has taught, these three kinds of leak — what, exactly, is meant by the leak of desire, the leak of becoming, and the leak of ignorance?" The Buddha said: "Good son, the leak of desire is this: an unwholesome, internal train of thought, on account of some external condition, gives rise to the leak of desire. It is for this very reason that I once, while in the city of Rājagṛha, said to Ānanda: 'Ānanda, the verse you have just now received from this woman was, in fact, already proclaimed by every buddha of the past.' It is for this reason that every unwholesome, internal train of thought, together with its external causes and conditions, is called desire, and this is called the leak of desire. The leak of becoming is this: every unwholesome, internal dharma of the form and formless realms, together with its external causes and conditions, excepting only the desire realm's own external conditions and internal trains of thought — this is called the leak of becoming. The leak of ignorance is this: being unable to fully understand the self and what belongs to the self, and failing to distinguish internal from external — this is called the leak of ignorance. Good son, ignorance itself is the very root of every leak. Why is this? Because every being, on account of this very ignorance, conceives a notion and constructs a mark within the aggregates, sense-bases, and elements, calling it 'a being' — and this is called the inversion of perception, of mind, and of view; and it is on account of exactly this that every leak arises. It is for this very reason that I have taught, in the twelve divisions of the scriptures, that ignorance itself is the very cause of craving, the cause of hatred, and the cause of delusion." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, the Tathāgata has previously taught, in the twelve divisions of the scriptures, that unwise reflection is the cause and condition giving rise to craving, hatred, and delusion — for what reason, then, does he now speak of ignorance instead?" "Good son, these two dharmas serve, mutually, as each other's cause and fruit, each increasing the other in turn. Unwise reflection gives rise to ignorance, and ignorance, as cause and condition, gives rise to unwise reflection. Good son, whatever is able to give rise to and increase affliction is entirely called a cause and condition of affliction — and drawing close to a cause and condition of affliction of this kind is itself called ignorance. Unwise reflection is like a seed giving rise to a sprout — the seed is the near cause, the four great elements the far cause — and affliction is exactly the same." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has taught, ignorance is itself a leak — how, then, can it also be said that, because of ignorance, every leak arises?" The Buddha said: "Good son, as I have taught, the leak of ignorance refers to internal ignorance itself. Speaking of every leak arising because of ignorance refers to both the internal and external causes together. To speak of the leak of ignorance is to name an internal inversion — the failure to recognize impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and no-self. To speak of every cause and condition of affliction is to name the failure to know the external self and what belongs to the self. To speak of the leak of ignorance is to name what is without beginning and without end, from which the aggregates, sense-bases, and elements all arise."

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, as the Buddha has taught, a wise person knows the leak's own cause — what, exactly, is meant by knowing this very cause?" "Good son, the wise ought to contemplate: for what cause and condition does this affliction arise? Through what activity is this affliction produced? At what time does this affliction arise? Dwelling together with whom does this affliction arise? In what place does this affliction arise? Having contemplated what matter does affliction then arise? Receiving whose dwelling, bedding, food and drink, clothing, or medicine does affliction then arise? For what cause and condition does a lower grade of it turn into a middle grade, a middle grade turn into an upper grade, a lower karmic act turn into a middle one, and a middle karmic act turn into an upper one? The bodhisattva mahāsattva, contemplating in this way, is thereby able to depart from the very causes and conditions that give rise to the leak. Contemplating in this way, affliction not yet arisen is thereby prevented from arising, and affliction already arisen is thereby eliminated and extinguished. It is for this very reason that I have taught, in the scriptures, that the wise ought to contemplate the cause that gives rise to affliction." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, a being has but a single body — how, then, is it able to give rise to every kind of different affliction?" The Buddha said: "Good son, it is exactly like a single container holding every kind of different seed — once it receives water and rain, each seed sprouts on its own. Beings are exactly the same: though the container is but one, on account of craving, they are able to give rise to and grow every kind of different affliction." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, how, then, does the wise person contemplate the fruit?" "Good son, the wise ought to contemplate that these very leaks, as cause and condition, are able to produce hell, the realm of hungry ghosts, and the animal realm. These very leaks, as cause and condition, produce a human or heavenly body, which is itself impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, and, within this very vessel of a body, one receives three kinds of suffering and three kinds of impermanence. These very leaks, as cause and condition, are able to cause beings to commit the five heinous crimes, to receive every evil retribution, to sever their own wholesome roots, to violate the four gravest precepts, and to slander the three jewels. The wise ought to contemplate: having already received a body of exactly this kind, I ought never to give rise to affliction of this kind, and thereby receive every evil fruit." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, there is said to be an undefiled fruit, and yet it is also said that the wise sever every fruit of retribution — is this undefiled fruit, then, included among what is severed, or not? Every one who has attained the path possesses this very undefiled fruit; and, since the wise themselves seek this undefiled fruit, how, then, can the Buddha teach that every wise person ought to sever the fruit of retribution altogether? And, were it truly severed, how, then, could any noble one exist at all today?" "Good son, the Tathāgata, at times, teaches the fruit in terms of the cause, and, at other times, teaches the cause in terms of the fruit. Exactly as people in the world say that clay is itself a pot, or that thread is itself a garment — this is called teaching the fruit in terms of the cause. Teaching the cause in terms of the fruit is exactly like saying that a cow is itself grass and water, or that a person is himself food. I, too, am exactly the same, teaching the fruit in terms of the cause: I have previously said, in the sūtras, that I travel from mind-body — so called because the mind moves the body — all the way to the edge of the Brahmā heaven; this is called teaching the fruit in terms of the cause. Teaching the cause in terms of the fruit is exactly like saying that these very six sense-bases are called past karma; this is called teaching the cause in terms of the fruit. Good son, in truth, no noble one possesses any undefiled fruit of retribution at all in the literal sense — the noble ones' own fruit of cultivating the path simply no longer gives rise to any further leak, and it is for this very reason that it is called an undefiled fruit of retribution. Good son, a wise person, contemplating in this way, thereby attains the eternal extinguishing of affliction's own fruit of retribution. Good son, the wise person, having contemplated in this way, cultivates the noble path in order to sever this very fruit of affliction's retribution — and the noble path is simply emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness. Having cultivated this path, one is thereby able to extinguish every fruit of affliction's retribution."

Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, every being alike receives his own fruit of retribution from affliction — and affliction itself is simply called evil. The affliction produced from this very evil affliction is likewise called evil. Affliction of this kind is, in turn, of two aspects: cause, and fruit. Because the cause is evil, the fruit is evil; and because the fruit is evil, the seed it produces is likewise evil — exactly as the nimba fruit, its own seed being bitter, has flower, fruit, stem, and leaf all bitter alike; or exactly as a poisonous tree, its own seed being poisonous, produces a fruit that is likewise poisonous. The cause is itself a being, and the fruit, too, is itself a being; the cause is itself affliction, and the fruit, too, is itself affliction — affliction's own cause and fruit are themselves simply beings, and beings are themselves simply affliction's own cause and fruit. If this reasoning holds, how, then, can the Tathāgata previously have used the simile of the Himalayas, where poisonous grasses grow yet a wondrous medicine king grows there as well? Should it be said that affliction is itself beings, and beings are themselves affliction, how, then, can it also be said that a wondrous medicine king exists within beings' own bodies?" The Buddha said: "Excellent, excellent, good son! Countless beings alike share this very doubt, and you are now able, for their sake, to raise this request and seek its resolution — and I, too, am able to resolve it. Listen closely, listen closely, and reflect well upon it, for I shall now explain and distinguish it for you. Good son, the simile of the Himalayas is simply beings themselves; the poisonous grasses are simply affliction itself; and the wondrous medicine king is simply pure, holy conduct itself. Good son, should any being be able to cultivate pure, holy conduct of this kind, this is called having a wondrous medicine king within his own body." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, how, then, does a being come to possess pure, holy conduct?" "Good son, it is exactly like how, in the world, a fruit is produced from a seed — and this very fruit may, in turn, be able to serve as the cause of a further seed, or may be unable to do so. Where it is able to do so, it is called both fruit and seed together. Where it is unable to do so, it is called only fruit, and cannot be called a seed. Every being is exactly the same, and is, in all cases, of two kinds: one whose affliction's fruit is itself a further cause of affliction, and one whose affliction's fruit is not itself a further cause of affliction. This latter — affliction's fruit that is not itself a further cause of affliction — is precisely what is called pure, holy conduct."

"Good son, a being who contemplates feeling comes to know it as the near cause of every leak, both internal and external. On account of feeling, one is unable to sever every leak entirely, and unable to escape the very prison of the three realms. It is because of feeling that beings become attached to a self and to what belongs to a self, giving rise to the inversion of mind, of perception, and of view — and it is for this very reason that beings ought first to contemplate feeling. Feeling of this kind serves as the near cause for every kind of craving, and it is for this reason that the wise, wishing to sever craving, ought first to contemplate feeling. Good son, every act, wholesome or unwholesome, that beings perform within the twelve links all occurs at the very moment of feeling — and it is for this reason that I said to Ānanda: 'Ānanda, every wholesome or unwholesome act performed by any being occurs entirely at the moment of feeling.' It is for this reason that the wise ought first to contemplate feeling; and, having contemplated feeling, they ought, further, to contemplate: from what cause and condition does this very feeling arise? And should it arise from a cause and condition, from what, in turn, does this very cause and condition arise? And should it arise without any cause at all, why, then, does the absence of a cause not simply produce the absence of feeling instead? One further contemplates that this feeling is not produced by Īśvara, is not produced by any primordial person, is not produced by atoms, is not produced by mere timing, is not produced by conception, is not produced by any inherent nature, does not arise of itself, does not arise from another, does not arise from both together, and does not arise without any cause — this feeling arises, in every case, entirely from the coming together of conditions. This very cause and condition is simply craving itself — and, within this very coming-together, there is neither an existent feeling nor a non-existent feeling; and it is for this reason that I ought to sever this very coming-together, since, once the coming-together is severed, feeling thereby fails to arise. "Good son, the wise, having contemplated the cause, next contemplate the fruit. It is because of feeling that beings receive the fruit of hell, of hungry ghosts, of the animal realm, and, all the way through, the countless sufferings of the three realms. It is because of feeling that impermanent pleasure is received. It is because of feeling that wholesome roots are severed. And it is because of feeling that liberation is attained. Contemplating in this way, one no longer creates the cause of feeling. What is meant by no longer creating the cause of feeling? It means distinguishing feeling itself: which kind of feeling is able to serve as craving's own cause, and which kind of craving is able to serve as feeling's own cause? Good son, should beings be able to contemplate deeply in this way the cause of craving and the cause of feeling, they thereby become able to sever the self and what belongs to the self. Good son, should a person be able to contemplate in this way, he ought then to distinguish exactly where craving and feeling actually cease. Once he sees that craving and feeling have even a small place where they cease, he should know that there must likewise be a place of their final, complete cessation — and, at that very moment, he gives rise to faith in liberation. Having given rise to this faith, by what means, then, is this very place of liberation to be attained? Knowing that it comes from the noble eightfold path, he then cultivates it. What, exactly, is meant by the noble eightfold path? This path observes that feeling has three marks: suffering, pleasure, and neither suffering nor pleasure — and these three, together, are able to increase both body and mind. For what cause and condition are they able to increase them? Through the cause and condition of contact. This very contact is, in turn, of three kinds: the contact of ignorance, the contact of wisdom, and the contact of neither wisdom nor ignorance. The contact of wisdom is simply the noble eightfold path itself; the remaining two kinds of contact increase body and mind, together with the three kinds of feeling — and it is for this reason that I ought to sever the cause and condition of these two kinds of contact, since, once contact is severed, the three kinds of feeling thereby fail to arise. Good son, feeling of this kind is, in one sense, called a cause, and, in another sense, called a fruit — and the wise ought to contemplate it as both a cause and a fruit at once. In what sense is it a cause? Because craving arises from feeling as its cause, it is called a cause. In what sense is it a fruit? Because it arises from contact as its own cause, it is called a fruit. It is for this reason that this very feeling is both a cause and a fruit at once. The wise, having contemplated feeling in this way, next contemplate craving, which is called craving precisely because it is the fruit of feeling's own retribution. The wise, contemplating craving, find it to be, further, of two kinds: mixed with grasping, and free of grasping. Craving mixed with grasping is the cause of birth, old age, sickness, death, and every state of becoming. Craving free of grasping severs birth, old age, sickness, death, every state of becoming, and craving itself, giving rise to the undefiled path. The wise ought, further, to reflect in this way: 'Should I give rise to this very craving mixed with grasping, I shall be unable to sever birth, old age, sickness, and death. And, though I now crave the undefiled path itself, should I fail to sever the cause of feeling, I shall be unable to attain the fruit of the undefiled path — and it is for this reason that I ought first to sever this very contact. Once contact is severed, feeling thereby ceases of itself; and, once feeling has ceased, craving, too, ceases along with it.' This is called the noble eightfold path. Good son, should any being be able to contemplate in this way, then, though he possesses a poisonous body, there is, within it, a wondrous medicine king as well — exactly as, within the Himalayas, though poisonous grasses grow there, a wondrous medicine grows there too. Good son, beings of this kind, though they receive their own fruit of retribution from affliction, find that this very fruit no longer, in turn, serves as a further cause of affliction — and this is precisely what is called pure, holy conduct."

"Further, good son, the wise ought to contemplate: from what cause and condition do feeling and craving, these two things, arise? They come to know that these arise from perception as their cause. Why is this? Beings, upon seeing form, do not, in themselves, give rise to craving; nor, upon experiencing feeling, do they, in themselves, give rise to craving. It is only when an inverted perception arises with regard to form — taking form to be permanence, bliss, self, and purity, and taking feeling to be everlasting and never subject to change — that, on account of this very inverted perception, craving, hatred, and delusion arise. It is for this reason that the wise ought to contemplate perception itself. How is perception to be contemplated? One ought to reflect in this way: every being who has not yet attained the true path possesses an inverted perception. What is meant by inverted perception? Giving rise to a perception of permanence with regard to what is not permanent; giving rise to a perception of bliss with regard to what is not blissful; giving rise to a perception of purity with regard to what is not pure; and giving rise to a perception of self with regard to what is empty of self. And, with regard to what is not truly male or female, large or small, day or night, year or month, clothing, dwelling, or bedding, giving rise to the perception of male and female, all the way through to bedding itself. This perception is, in turn, of three kinds: small, great, and boundless. Through a small cause and condition, a small perception arises; through a great cause and condition, a great perception arises; and through a boundless cause and condition, a boundless perception arises. There is, further, a small perception, referring to one who has not yet entered concentration; a great perception, referring to one who has already entered concentration; and a boundless perception, referring to the ten universal bases of concentration. There is, further, a small perception, referring to every perception belonging to the desire realm; a great perception, referring to every perception belonging to the form realm; and a boundless perception, referring to every perception belonging to the formless realm. Once these three kinds of perception cease, feeling thereby ceases of itself — and, once both perception and feeling have ceased, this is called liberation." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, it is the cessation of every dharma that is called liberation — why, then, does the Tathāgata teach that the cessation of perception and feeling alone is what is called liberation?" The Buddha said: "Good son, the Tathāgata, at times, teaches by way of beings, so that the listener thereby understands the Dharma; and, at other times, teaches by way of the Dharma, so that the listener thereby understands what applies to beings. What is meant by teaching by way of beings, so that the listener understands the Dharma? It is exactly as when I once said, for Mahākāśyapa's sake: 'Kāśyapa, when beings themselves cease, wholesome dharmas thereby cease as well.' This is called teaching by way of beings, so that the listener understands the Dharma. What is meant by teaching by way of the Dharma, so that the listener also understands what applies to beings? It is exactly as when I once said, for Ānanda's sake: 'I do not teach that every dharma ought to be drawn close to, nor do I teach that every dharma ought not to be drawn close to. Should a dharma, once drawn close to, cause wholesome dharmas to weaken and unwholesome dharmas to flourish, a dharma of this kind ought not to be drawn close to; and should a dharma, once drawn close to, cause unwholesome dharmas to weaken and cease and wholesome dharmas to increase, a dharma of this kind ought to be drawn close to.' This is called teaching by way of the Dharma, so that the listener also understands what applies to beings. "Good son, though the Tathāgata speaks of the cessation of these two, perception and feeling, this already amounts to a complete statement of everything that can be severed. The wise, having contemplated perception in this way, next contemplate perception's own cause: from what does this boundless perception actually arise? They come to know that it arises from contact as its cause. This very contact is, in turn, of two kinds: contact caused by affliction, and contact caused by liberation. Contact caused by ignorance is called the contact of affliction; contact caused by wisdom is called the contact of liberation. Contact caused by affliction gives rise to inverted perception; contact caused by liberation gives rise to perception free of inversion. Having contemplated perception's own cause, one next contemplates its fruit." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, if inverted perception arises on account of this very affliction-caused perception, then every noble one, who genuinely still has some form of perception that could be called 'inverted' in an ordinary sense, would seem to still have this inverted perception yet lack any affliction at all — what is the meaning of this?" The Buddha said: "Good son, in what sense does a noble one possess inverted perception at all?" Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said: "World-Honored One, every noble one, seeing a cow, forms the perception of a cow, and says, too, that it is a cow; seeing a horse, forms the perception of a horse, and says, too, that it is a horse — and, with regard to male and female, large and small, house and vehicle, coming and going, exactly the same holds true; this is called inverted perception." "Good son, every ordinary being has two kinds of perception: the perception of ordinary worldly convention, and the perception of attachment. Every noble one has only the perception of ordinary worldly convention, and is entirely without the perception of attachment. Every ordinary being, on account of unwholesome discursive thought, gives rise to the perception of attachment with regard to ordinary worldly convention. Every noble one, on account of wholesome discursive thought, never gives rise to the perception of attachment with regard to ordinary worldly convention. It is for this very reason that an ordinary being's perception is called inverted, while a noble one's perception, though he too knows a cow as a cow, is never called inverted at all. The wise, having contemplated perception's own cause in this way, next contemplate its fruit: the fruit of unwholesome perception is received in hell, among hungry ghosts, among animals, and among humans and gods. Exactly as, in my own case, through severing unwholesome discursive thought, the contact of ignorance was severed, and, on this account, perception itself was severed, and, perception having been severed, its fruit of retribution, too, was severed. The wise, in order to sever this very cause of perception, cultivate the noble eightfold path. Good son, should anyone be able to contemplate in this way, this is called pure, holy conduct. Good son, this is what is meant by a being possessing a wondrous medicine king within his own poisonous body, exactly as, within the Himalayas, though poisonous grasses grow there, a wondrous medicine grows there too."

"Further, good son, the wise contemplate desire — desire being simply form, sound, smell, taste, and touch. Good son, this is itself the Tathāgata's own habit of teaching the fruit in terms of the cause; desire actually arises from these five things, and is not, in itself, identical to them at all. Good son, the foolish crave and seek to grasp them, giving rise to an inverted perception with regard to form, and, all the way through, an inverted perception with regard to touch as well — and, on account of this very inverted perception, feeling then arises; and it is for this reason that the world speaks of ten kinds of perception arising from inverted perception as their cause. On account of desire, one receives an evil fruit of retribution in this very world, doing harm to one's own father and mother, to śramaṇas and brahmins, committing what ought never to be committed, without any regard for one's own body or life. It is for this reason that the wise contemplate that desire's own mind arises from this very cause and condition of unwholesome perception. The wise, having contemplated desire's own cause in this way, next contemplate its fruit: this very desire has many evil fruits of retribution — hell, the realm of hungry ghosts, the animal realm, the human realm, and the heavens — this is called contemplating the fruit. Should this very unwholesome perception be extinguished, this desiring mind would, in the end, never arise at all. Being free of a desiring mind, one no longer receives an evil feeling; and, being free of an evil feeling, there is then no evil fruit — and it is for this reason that I ought first to sever unwholesome perception, and, having severed unwholesome perception, dharmas of this kind naturally cease of themselves. It is for this reason that the wise, in order to extinguish unwholesome perception, cultivate the noble eightfold path — and this is precisely what is called pure, holy conduct. This is what is meant by a being possessing a wondrous medicine king within his own poisonous body, exactly as, within the Himalayas, though poisonous grasses grow there, a wondrous medicine grows there too. "Further, good son, the wise, having contemplated desire in this way, next contemplate karma. Why is this? A wise person ought to reflect in this way: feeling, perception, contact, and desire are themselves simply affliction — and this very affliction is able to produce the karma of generation, though it does not, in itself, produce the karma of reception. Affliction of this kind, proceeding together with karma, is thus of two kinds: the karma that generates, and the karma that receives — and it is for this reason that the wise ought to contemplate karma itself. This very karma is of three kinds: bodily, verbal, and mental. Good son, bodily and verbal karma are both called karma and also called the fruit of karma; mental karma alone is called karma, and is not called a fruit, since, being the very cause of karma, it is simply called karma itself. Good son, bodily and verbal karma are called external karma; mental karma is called internal. These three kinds of karma, proceeding together with affliction, thereby produce two kinds of karma: the karma that generates, and the karma that receives. Good son, true karma is simply mental karma itself; anticipated karma refers to bodily and verbal karma. Because it arises first, it is called mental karma; and, since bodily and verbal karma arise from this very mental karma, it is for this reason that mental karma alone is properly called 'true.' The wise, having contemplated karma, next contemplate karma's own cause — karma's own cause being simply the contact of ignorance. On account of the contact of ignorance, beings seek continued becoming; and the cause and condition of this very seeking is simply craving itself — and, on account of this very craving, the three kinds of bodily, verbal, and mental karma are then performed. Good son, the wise, having contemplated karma's own cause in this way, next contemplate its fruit. This fruit is of four kinds: the black-black fruit of retribution; the white-white fruit of retribution; the mixed-mixed fruit of retribution; and the fruit of retribution that is neither black nor white, neither black nor white. The black-black fruit of retribution is this: the karmic act performed was defiled, and its fruit of retribution is likewise defiled. The white-white fruit of retribution is this: the karmic act performed was pure, and its fruit of retribution is likewise pure. The mixed-mixed fruit of retribution is this: the karmic act performed was mixed, and its fruit of retribution is likewise mixed. The fruit of retribution that is neither black nor white, neither black nor white, is called undefiled karma." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, it was previously taught that the undefiled has no fruit of retribution at all — how, then, can it now be said to have a fruit that is neither black nor white?" The Buddha said: "Good son, this matter is of two aspects: one that is both a fruit and a retribution together, and one that is only a fruit, and not a retribution at all. The black-black fruit is called both fruit and retribution: because it is produced from a defiled cause, it is called a fruit; and because it is, in turn, able to serve as a further cause, it is also called a retribution — and the pure and mixed fruits are exactly the same. The undefiled fruit, however, arises from a defiled cause, and so is called a fruit; yet, since it does not, in turn, produce any further cause, it is not called a retribution at all — and it is for this reason that it is called only a fruit, and never a retribution." Bodhisattva Kāśyapa said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, this undefiled karma is not itself a black dharma — for what reason, then, is it not simply called white?" "Good son, because it has no retribution at all, it is not called white. It is called white only in the sense that it serves as the antidote to black — I have, until now, always spoken of the receiving of a fruit of retribution as what is properly called white, and, since this undefiled karma receives no retribution at all, it is not, in the strict sense, called white, but is instead called stillness itself. Karma of this kind has a fixed place of retribution: exactly as the ten unwholesome dharmas are fixed to hell, the realm of hungry ghosts, and the animal realm, the ten wholesome karmic acts are fixed to the human and heavenly realms. The ten unwholesome dharmas are, further, of upper, middle, and lower grades: through the upper cause and condition, one receives a hell-body; through the middle cause and condition, one receives an animal body; and through the lower cause and condition, one receives the body of a hungry ghost. The human karma of the ten wholesome deeds is, further, of four kinds: lower, middle, upper, and upper-upper. Through the lower cause and condition, one is born in Uttarakuru. Through the middle cause and condition, one is born in Pūrvavideha. Through the upper cause and condition, one is born in Aparagodānīya. Through the upper-upper cause and condition, one is born in Jambudvīpa. A wise person, having contemplated in this way, then reflects: 'How, then, am I to sever this very fruit of retribution?' And reflects, further: 'This very karma arises from the cause and condition of the contact of ignorance — and, should I sever ignorance together with this very contact, karma's own fruit will thereby be extinguished and fail to arise.' It is for this very reason that the wise, in order to sever the cause and condition of the contact of ignorance, cultivate the noble eightfold path — and this is precisely what is called pure, holy conduct. Good son, this is what is meant by a being possessing a wondrous medicine king within his own poisonous body, exactly as, within the Himalayas, though poisonous grasses grow there, a wondrous medicine grows there too."

"Further, good son, the wise, having contemplated karma and affliction, next contemplate the very fruit these two together produce. This fruit of these two is itself simply suffering — and, once one knows it to be suffering, one is thereby able to relinquish every further receiving of birth. The wise, further, contemplate that affliction, as cause and condition, gives rise to further affliction; that karma, as cause and condition, likewise gives rise to affliction; that affliction, as cause and condition, gives rise, in turn, to karma; that karma, as cause and condition, gives rise to suffering; that suffering, as cause and condition, gives rise to affliction; that affliction, as cause and condition, gives rise to becoming; that becoming, as cause and condition, gives rise to suffering; that becoming, as cause and condition, gives rise to further becoming; that becoming, as cause and condition, gives rise to karma; that karma, as cause and condition, gives rise to affliction; that affliction, as cause and condition, gives rise to suffering; and that suffering, as cause and condition, gives rise to further suffering. Good son, should the wise be able to contemplate in this way, one should know that this person is able to truly contemplate karma and suffering together. Why is this? What has been contemplated above is simply the twelve links of birth and death themselves. Should a person be able to contemplate these twelve links of birth and death in this way, one should know that this person creates no new karma, and is able to destroy his own past karma as well. Good son, a wise person contemplates the suffering of hell, from a single hell all the way through to the full one hundred and thirty-six hells, each single hell possessing every kind of different suffering, all arising from the very cause and condition of afflicted karma. Having contemplated hell, he next contemplates the suffering of hungry ghosts and animals; and, having contemplated in this way, he further contemplates every suffering possessed by humans and gods — and every such suffering, in every case, arises from the very cause and condition of afflicted karma. Good son, though there is no great affliction to be found among the heavens, the gods' own bodies are soft and delicately smooth, and, when the five signs of decline appear to them, they suffer greatly, no different at all from the suffering of hell. Good son, the wise contemplate deeply that every suffering of the three realms, in every case, arises from the very cause and condition of afflicted karma. Good son, it is exactly like an unfired clay vessel, easily broken and destroyed — a being who has received a body is exactly the same, for, having received this very body, he has thereby received a vessel filled entirely with suffering. It is exactly like a great tree, its flowers and fruit abundant, yet destroyed by a flock of birds; or exactly like a great mass of dry grass, consumed by even a small fire — a being who has received a body, destroyed by suffering, is exactly the same. Good son, should the wise be able to contemplate suffering's own eight forms, exactly as taught in the Noble Practices chapter, one should know that this person is able to sever every suffering. Good son, the wise, having deeply contemplated these eight sufferings, next contemplate suffering's own cause. Suffering's own cause is simply craving and ignorance. This craving and ignorance is, in turn, of two kinds: seeking a body, and seeking wealth. Both seeking a body and seeking wealth are themselves suffering — and it is for this reason that one should know that craving and ignorance are themselves the very cause of suffering. Good son, this craving and ignorance is, further, of two kinds: internal, and external. The internal is able to produce karma; the external is able to increase it. And, further, the internal produces karma, while the external produces karma's own fruit. Once internal craving is severed, karma is thereby severed; once external craving is severed, the fruit is thereby severed. Internal craving gives rise to the suffering of a future life; external craving gives rise to the suffering of this present life. The wise contemplate craving as itself the cause of suffering; and, having contemplated the cause, they next contemplate its fruit. Suffering's own fruit is simply grasping itself. Craving's own fruit is called grasping, and the cause and condition of this very grasping is simply internal and external craving — and it is from this that the suffering of craving arises. Good son, the wise ought to contemplate that craving is the cause and condition of grasping, and that grasping is the cause and condition of craving. Should I be able to sever both craving and grasping, I would then create no further karma, and would receive no further suffering at all — and it is for this reason that the wise, in order to sever the suffering of craving, cultivate the noble eightfold path. Good son, should any person be able to contemplate in this way, this is precisely what is called pure, holy conduct. This is what is meant by a being possessing a wondrous medicine king within his own poisonous body, exactly as, within the Himalayas, though poisonous grasses grow there, a wondrous medicine grows there too."