Comprehensively Breaking Through Every Dharma

The Great Calming and Contemplation, Fascicle Six, Upper Part
Spoken by the Great Master Zhiyi of Tiantai, of the Sui dynasty
Recorded by his disciple Guanding

Second, embodying and breaking through habituated thought, thereby entering emptiness from the provisional: this comprises three parts — first, defining habituated thought; second, clarifying the embodying contemplation; third, clarifying its stages. "Habituated thought" refers to greed, anger, delusion, and pride — these are named "the dull hindrances," and also "the genuine three poisons." Spread across the three realms, they number ten. Further, reckoned across the three realms' nine grounds, each ground has nine categories, making eighty-one categories in all — every one of them capable of moistening karma and drawing rebirth within the three realms. Even the first fruit has not yet exhausted its remaining seven returns, like a lamp about to go out that flares up all the brighter first. Though desire may still remain, one will not commit lewdness apart from one's own spouse; though anger may still remain, one will till the ground without killing what lives there; though folly may still remain, one no longer calculates that things have a fixed nature. The power of the precepts conascent with the path operates spontaneously in just this way, which is why these are called "the genuine afflictions." They are not like the affliction of views, which spreads without any fixed direction, giving rise to attachment the instant it meets any object at all. They are named "habituated thought" because the name derives from understanding itself: contemplating the real for the first time, while still shallow, still leaves phenomenal obstruction in place; only after repeated, weighty reflection on the real is this affliction actually removed — hence the name "the affliction of habituated thought." Abhidharma masters say: "In the desire realm it is called greed; in the higher realms it is called love." Masters of the *Tattvasiddhi* object to this claim: "The higher realms have the greed for the flavor of dhyāna, the lower realm has the love of desire — love and greed both apply everywhere, so why divide them this way in particular? If one says the lower realm's greed is heavy and the higher realms' greed is light, could something merely lighter in degree cease to be greed at all?" This too is simply one more instance of the same problem: the Buddha, on different occasions, speaks differently to different conditions, and provisional names are never fixed — how, then, could one insist on a single rule? The moment an affliction is identified for what it is, it must simply be broken through — why trouble to dispute over "greed" versus "love"? It is like clearing away dung: pushing the filth aside comes first, and distinguishing its finer qualities is not the urgent matter. What matters for entering the path lies in skillful means; names and marks are secondary to that. Should one wish to know this in full detail, the *Abhidharma* and the *Tattvasiddhi* treat it exhaustively, and one may go there to look into it. The contemplation of emptiness and the provisional is what is under discussion here.

Second, clarifying the embodying contemplation: within the gate of generation-and-extinction, one first uses analytical wisdom to sever view, and afterward again uses analytical wisdom, reflecting repeatedly, to sever habituated thought. Within the gate free of generation-and-extinction, one first uses the embodying contemplation of view to enter emptiness, and afterward again uses the embodying contemplation of habituated thought, reflecting repeatedly — there is no further separate path beyond this. As for now embodying the provisional of desire in order to enter emptiness: the nine categories of the affliction of desire each, as they arise, carry the threefold provisional. Thus a woman is said to have six kinds of desire — desire for form, desire for appearance, desire for bearing and manner, desire for speech and voice, desire for smooth touch, and desire for the human form itself — each distinguished in turn. Should these six desires come into contact with a practitioner, they are able to defile every faculty, stirring the blood and vital channels within, so that the mark of craving appears outwardly. Even one at the first fruit has not yet severed this entirely — how much less an ordinary person? Nanda's own residual habituation, on seeing a woman among the assembly and first exchanging words with her, stirred his remaining habituation of desire — how much more, then, in one still possessed of the affliction itself? The *Lotus Sūtra* says: "Not taking hold, in a woman's body, of any mark capable of giving rise to the thought of desire, and only then teaching the Dharma." Should one grasp at this mark, the dust-object stirring the mind-faculty and giving rise to the mind of desire — this is composite arising; the thought, once arisen, continuing on without interruption until it results finally in the deed itself — this is continuity; the mark of the mind possessing desire, differing from the mind without desire — this is mutual relativity. The provisional is empty and unreal, and in the end is never to be reckoned as though it were a real principle. Contemplating this mind of desire: does it arise from the faculty? Does it arise from the dust-object? Does it arise from both together? Does it arise apart from both? If it arises from the faculty, then before ever meeting the dust-object, the mind ought to arise of itself. If it arises from the dust-object, then, the dust-object being other than oneself, what could it possibly have to do with oneself? If it arises from both together, then two minds ought to arise. If it arises without any cause at all, this is simply impossible. Pursuing desire through these four propositions, desire has no place it comes from; and having no place it comes from, it likewise has no place it goes to. With no desire and no proposition that holds, with no coming and no going, it is, in the final analysis, empty and quiescent. When a person of sharp capacity contemplates in this way, one category of the affliction of habituated thought departs, and a portion of the real becomes manifest. Should this not yet be achieved, one uses the four siddhāntas, shifting between faith and dharma, skillfully regulating calming-and-contemplation, until correspondence is achieved — one category of habituated thought is severed, and a portion of the real becomes manifest.

Should the person be of dull capacity, and the first category not yet removed through the contemplation of composite arising, one contemplates further through continuity: does it arise from the prior thought's ceasing? Does it arise from its not ceasing? Does it arise from both ceasing and not ceasing at once? Does it arise from neither ceasing nor not ceasing? If it arises from ceasing, then what has ceased cannot give rise to anything. If it arises from not ceasing, then what has not ceased is thereby not yet arisen at all. If it arises from both ceasing and not ceasing, this is because their natures contradict one another. And arising apart from both is simply impossible. Through these four propositions there is no desire, and no fourth proposition that holds either. Contemplating in this way, one ought to attain entry, accomplishing the twin emptiness of person and dharma. Should one not yet enter, one skillfully cultivates through the four siddhāntas; and should cultivation still fail to bring entry, one contemplates further through mutual relativity, following the same pattern as before and understood accordingly. As the first category proceeds in this way, so too do the remaining eight. As the nine categories of greed are broken through in this way, so too are the nine categories of anger, delusion, and pride, each understood by the same pattern, and not recorded here in full. The manifestation of the real across all nine categories is "the unborn nature"; the exhaustion of affliction across all nine categories is "the unborn cause"; the desire realm's fruit no longer arising is "the unborn fruit"; and being unborn and therefore unceasing is "the forbearance of the unborn dharma."

Question: is the desire realm's affliction necessarily fixed at nine categories? Answer: according to the *Tattvasiddhi*, the uninterrupted path subdues it and the path of liberation severs it, discussing only nine categories. According to the *Abhidharma*, there are two paths — the path of skillful means and the path of superior advancement — that subdue it, while the uninterrupted path severs it and the path of liberation realizes it, verifying the state free of affliction. Most sūtras follow this latter account, and it is what we follow here for now. Should one enter contemplation from the affliction of views, the uncontaminated mind moves swiftly, and one does not remain outside contemplation while severing — the categories and their order are not even discussed in that case. The cultivation of the path proceeds at ease, admitting of skillful means, skillfully cultivated, shifting between faith and dharma, advancing into ever more superior categories. Should one advance repeatedly in this way, one should know that the categories, too, are in fact many — how could there be merely nine? "Nine" is simply a way of speaking in broad terms.

Next, breaking through the nine categories in the form realm: one may use either mundane wisdom or uncontaminated wisdom. Thus a person liberated through wisdom alone may have no mundane dhyāna at all, and attains the stage beyond further training using only uncontaminated wisdom. One at the first fruit who has no dhyāna advances by repeated reflection on principle, likewise using uncontaminated wisdom. One liberated in both ways may use either uncontaminated wisdom or mundane wisdom. Here we proceed for convenience according to mundane wisdom, taking the case of one who has attained dhyāna. When one first practices dhyāna, breaking through phenomenal obstruction brings forth the desire realm's own samādhi; breaking through the obstruction of nature brings forth form-realm samādhi. Hence it is said: "phenomenal obstruction belongs to the not-yet-arrived state; the obstruction of nature is the very root." Once the obstruction of nature is removed, the dharma of the first dhyāna arises. The eight sensations touch the body, and the five branches of merit are born — these are the marks of the first dhyāna. Within this there is a flavor, named "greed"; regarding those who have not attained it lightly is named "pride"; not knowing the suffering and its origin within dhyāna is named "delusion." These three afflictions, in turn, each have nine categories, and each category has the threefold provisional: the eight sensations of form touching the mind-faculty of the desire realm and the rest is composite arising; being discerned as an object of contemplation, moment after moment without interruption, is continuity; this arising of the mind of dhyāna, differing from its not having arisen, is mutual relativity. Should one fail to contemplate and break through this, one follows the dhyāna into rebirth — how, then, could this be called "non-arising"? One now uses the four propositions of calming-and-contemplation, skillfully cultivated, advancing by skillful means: one category of affliction severed is named "the uninterrupted path"; the realization of the state free of affliction is "the path of liberation." A portion of affliction removed means cause and fruit alike become unborn — this is called "entering emptiness from the provisional." Continuity and mutual relativity, contemplated through the four contemplations to enter emptiness from the provisional, proceed in just the same way. As the first category is broken through, so too are the remaining eight; as greed is broken through, so too are pride and delusion, each through their nine categories.

Should the first dhyāna's phenomenal obstruction be broken through and the intermediate state arise, one who dies at this point will not be reborn into the second dhyāna. This is just as when the desire realm's obstruction of nature is not yet removed, one is not reborn into the first dhyāna. Now, once the first dhyāna's obstruction of nature is broken through, the second dhyāna arises at once, born together with joy — pliancy, joy, bliss, and the fourth branch, and so on. Within this too there is a flavor — there is greed, there is pride, there is delusion — each with its nine categories. Each category has the threefold provisional: the inwardly pure dharma-object uniting with the mind-faculty is composite arising; the inwardly pure mind's own continuity is what allows it to arise; its being contrasted against the absence of inward purity to establish the presence of inward purity is mutual relativity — these together are the threefold provisional. Should one fail to contemplate and examine this, one follows the dhyāna into rebirth. One now uses calming-and-contemplation, cultivating and advancing by skillful means, severing affliction on the uninterrupted path, realizing the real on the path of liberation, entering the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Should one not yet have entered, one contemplates continuity and mutual relativity further, in just the same way. The remaining eight categories proceed just the same; delusion and pride, too, proceed just the same.

The second dhyāna likewise has both a phenomenal obstruction and an obstruction of nature. Once the phenomenal obstruction is gone, the intermediate state arises; once the obstruction of nature is gone, the third dhyāna arises, born together with bliss. This bliss is profound and subtle — sages are able to relinquish it, while for ordinary beings, relinquishing it is difficult. Within this there is craving, pride, and delusion, in every case nine categories, each category having the threefold provisional: bliss meeting the mind-faculty, the mind of bliss continuing on, and its being contrasted against the absence of bliss to establish the presence of bliss. Should one fail to contemplate this, one follows the dhyāna into rebirth. One now uses the contemplative wisdom of the four propositions to break through it, advancing by skillful means, severing affliction on the uninterrupted path, realizing the real on the path of liberation, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Should one not yet have removed it, one cultivates continuity and mutual relativity, and the remaining eight categories, further, in just the same way; the nine categories of delusion and pride, too, proceed just the same. The third dhyāna likewise has both obstructions, phenomenal and of nature. Once the obstruction of nature is broken through and equanimity arises together with it, this too is furnished with craving, pride, and delusion, likewise having nine categories. The threefold provisional here does not move: dharma-objects meeting the mind-faculty is composite arising, and the rest follow accordingly. Should one fail to contemplate this, one follows the dhyāna into rebirth. One now uses calming-and-contemplation, advancing by skillful means, severing on the uninterrupted path and liberating on the path of liberation, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Should one not yet have removed it, one contemplates continuity and mutual relativity further, in just the same way; the remaining eight categories, and delusion and pride as well, proceed just the same.

As for the Heaven of No-Thought: form is retained while mind is extinguished, hence the name "no-thought." Though it is claimed there is no thought, thought remains present in full — this is just as when the phenomenal obstruction is severed while the obstruction of nature still remains, one never actually leaves form behind; this is named the heaven of the non-Buddhist paths. Since the view-mind was already broken through earlier, and has long since departed, one ought not to be reborn into this heaven — unless, through some causal circumstance, the mind gives rise to this samādhi, in which case the threefold provisional is present just as before, and is likewise broken through using the four contemplations, continuity and mutual relativity proceeding in just the same way. As for the five heavens of the non-returners: refining the four dhyānas further, using the uncontaminated to interfuse and cultivate the contaminated, the form-realm samādhi grows ever more luminous, and its retribution grows ever more excellent. When this superior samādhi arises, it too carries the affliction of craving, pride, and delusion in nine categories with the threefold provisional. One uses the four contemplations to embody and penetrate it, achieving liberation without obstruction, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Should one not yet have removed it, one cultivates continuity and mutual relativity further, in just the same way; the remaining eight categories proceed just the same, and delusion and pride, too, proceed just the same. The thirty-six categories across the form realm's four dhyānas and nine grounds are hereby brought to non-arising.

Next, breaking through the nine categories of the formless realm: when one wishes to extinguish the threefold form of resistance and the rest, this is the moment the phenomenal obstruction is broken through and the not-yet-arrived state arises; breaking through the obstruction of nature, one enters the base of space. The samādhi of the base of space likewise carries craving, pride, and delusion, and is likewise broken through using the four contemplations, advancing by skillful means, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Should one not remove it, one cultivates continuity and mutual relativity further, in just the same way; the eight remaining categories, and delusion and pride as well, proceed just the same. Taking space as the object at first, when space grows too expansive the mind scatters; abandoning space and taking consciousness as the object, one then attains the samādhi of consciousness, corresponding with the mind, and this too carries the afflictions of craving, pride, and delusion, likewise broken through using the four contemplations, advancing by skillful means, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle — the rest may be known by the same pattern. Taking consciousness as the object at first, when consciousness grows too abundant the concentrated mind becomes scattered; abandoning the excess of consciousness as object, one arrives at nothing-whatsoever. But if one is still taking some lesser consciousness as object, how could this be called "nothing whatsoever"? And since one is still using this lesser consciousness, how could it be called "the base of non-utilization"? Now, taking nothing-whatsoever as the object and entering samādhi, this dharma corresponds with mind, and likewise carries the threefold provisional and the rest, and is likewise broken through using the four contemplations — the rest may be known by the same pattern.

Compared to what came before, the base of consciousness is like a boil, and the base of nothing-whatsoever is like an open sore; and there is a still more excellent samādhi beyond it, named "neither thought nor non-thought." The *Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā* says: "This is not the no-thought of the Heaven of No-Thought, nor is it the presence of thought found in the three formless bases — hence it is called 'neither thought nor non-thought.'" A certain master says: "No-thought belongs to a different realm within the form heavens, and this base ought not to be named after it merely because the name is shared. Explaining the name within its own proper realm instead: the prior base of nothing-whatsoever has already removed thought; this base further removes even no-thought. Both thought and no-thought are relinquished — hence it is called 'neither thought nor non-thought.'" The *Great Treatise* says: "One [base] is always contaminated; the other three must be distinguished case by case." The first three [formless bases] are both contaminated and uncontaminated at once, being able to give rise to supramundane wisdom, and are thus named "also uncontaminated." This fourth samādhi does not give rise to the uncontaminated, and is purely contaminated. The teaching, addressing itself to its audience, speaks now concealingly, now openly, giving rise to statements framed this way. Should there be someone who does in fact give rise to the uncontaminated within this very samādhi, what, then, should be said of this? For now we simply follow the teaching as given. Though this samādhi lacks any coarse affliction, it accomplishes ten kinds of subtle dharma, as explained in the *Chan Approaches*. One should know that this samādhi, too, carries the threefold provisional in full. One now breaks through it using uncontaminated wisdom exclusively, advancing by skillful means, achieving liberation without obstruction, accomplishing the non-arising of both phenomena and principle. Its nine categories proceed in just the same way, following the pattern already given. Severing the afflictions of habituated thought using mundane wisdom is named "the wisdom of exhaustion"; severing them using uncontaminated wisdom is named "the wisdom of non-arising." This is named "the embodying contemplation of habituated thought" — breaking through all eighty-one categories of habituated thought across the three realms' nine-times-nine, this is named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma."

Third, clarifying the stages of breaking through habituated thought, entering emptiness from the provisional, comprises four parts: first, the Tripiṭaka teaching's own stages of breaking through habituated thought; second, the shared teaching's own stages of breaking through habituated thought; third, borrowed names naming the shared teaching's own stages; fourth, borrowed names naming the shared teaching's own bodhisattva stages. As for the Tripiṭaka teaching's own stages of breaking through habituated thought: the *Tattvasiddhi* clarifies that the sixteen mind-moments are precisely the stage of the first fruit, while other schools clarify that the sixteen mind-moments are the stage of the path of cultivation. Here we follow the path of cultivation for now: severing one category of the desire realm's affliction, and in sequence continuing until the fifth category is exhausted, this whole span is named "heading toward the once-returner"; should one instead leap ahead and sever straight through to the fifth category, this is named "family to family." Next, severing the sixth category completely is named "the fruit of the once-returner"; leaping ahead to sever the sixth category completely is named "a single return." Next, severing the seventh category through the eighth is named "heading toward the non-returner"; leaping ahead to sever the eighth category is named "a single remaining seed." Next, severing the ninth category completely is named "the fruit of the non-returner," never again to return to the desire realm. Next, severing the first category of the first dhyāna all the way through the eighth category of the neither-thought-nor-non-thought base — seventy-one categories in all — this entire span is named "heading toward the arhat," the six kinds of non-returner's stage being contained within it. The ninth uninterrupted path severs the ninth category of the neither-thought-nor-non-thought base's affliction completely, and the ninth path of liberation realizes it — this is named "the fruit of the arhat." Once habituated thought across the three realms is exhausted, one attains the wisdom of exhaustion and the wisdom of non-arising, named "affliction no longer arising"; one realizes the eighty-one portions of the real emptiness, named "principle no longer arising"; genuine wisdom becomes complete, named "wisdom no longer arising"; and one no longer receives birth-and-death, named "retribution no longer arising." As for the pratyekabuddha, the only difference is a further slight erosion of habituation itself brought to non-arising. This is, in brief outline, the stages of severing habituated thought according to the analytical method of the provisional.

Second, the shared teaching's own account of the ten grounds shared by all three vehicles for embodying and breaking through habituated thought: as the Larger Sūtra clarifies, the ground of dry wisdom and the ground of nature, up through the sixth ground, are shared with the śrāvakas; up to the seventh ground, shared with the pratyekabuddhas; up to the eighth and ninth grounds, shared with the bodhisattvas; and the bodhisattva ground turns, at the tenth, into what is named "the buddha ground." As for why these shared grounds are said to differ in height: the Treatise says, "The three kinds of person alike sever the genuine affliction, alike entering nirvāṇa with and without remainder" — hence they are called "shared." Yet, as when burning wood yields both charcoal and ash, there is still a difference in degree between them. The ground of dry wisdom is precisely the stage of the three worthies: first, the five methods of stilling the mind; second, the specific foundations of mindfulness; third, the general foundation of mindfulness — all of these together are the ordinary person still outside the path, hence it is named "the ground of dry wisdom." "Nature" refers to the stage of the four wholesome roots: by the power of the general foundation of mindfulness, wholesome, contaminated aggregates are brought forth, named "warmth"; advancing through the beginning, middle, and final minds of this, one enters the summit, forbearance, and the supreme mundane dharma — all together named "the ordinary person within the path," hence it is named "the ground of nature." Both of these stages together subdue the affliction of views. The "eight kinds of person" are the eight forbearances; turning from the supreme mundane dharma into the uninterrupted samādhi, this is named "the eight kinds of person." "Seeing" means seeing the real: severing the affliction of views across the three realms, the eighty-eight fundamental afflictions all exhausted, hence it is named "the ground of seeing." "Thin" means removing the desire realm's six categories of habituated thought, hence it is named "the thin ground." "Free of desire" means removing all nine categories of the desire realm, hence it is named "the ground free of desire." "Accomplished" means removing all seventy-two categories of the form and formless realms — like fire burning wood down to charcoal — hence it is named "the ground of accomplishment." The pratyekabuddha's merit and wisdom are profound and sharp, able to erode away even habituation itself, like wood burnt further down to ash. The bodhisattva's merit and wisdom are profound and sharp, the path and its contemplation flowing together as one, severing habituation and the ignorance of both form and mind, attaining the Dharma-eye and the wisdom of the path's every kind, roaming freely in spiritual powers, purifying buddha-lands, studying the Buddha's own powers, fearlessnesses, and the rest, the remaining habituation nearly exhausted, like the last remaining trace of ash. "The buddha ground" means the great merit that nourishes sharp wisdom, attaining the wisdom that corresponds instantly to a single thought, habituation forever exhausted, like the fire that burns through an entire kalpa, leaving neither charcoal nor ash. This, then, is the stage at which the ten grounds shared by all three vehicles sever the affliction of habituated thought.

Third, borrowed names naming the shared teaching's own shared stages: it has been said, in the past, that "the third ground severs view," or that "the fourth ground severs view," or that "the sixth ground exhausts habituated thought," or that "the seventh ground exhausts habituated thought." Examining these claims now: to say that both the third and fourth grounds sever view is for that master not to understand the sense of the shared teaching at all. Why is this? The stage shared by all three vehicles enters the uninterrupted samādhi together, severing view without ever stepping outside contemplation — how, then, could both the third ground and the fourth ground possibly sever view? Should one hold only that the third ground severs view, then the fourth ground ought to sever habituated thought instead. Should one hold only that the fourth ground severs view, then the third ground ought not yet to have severed view at all. Should both grounds sever view, is this accomplished by stepping in and out of contemplation, or without ever stepping outside it? If without stepping outside contemplation, then there could be no such thing as "two grounds" at all; and if by stepping in and out of contemplation, then this is not the stage of severing view in the first place. A certain master defends this by saying, "The sūtra states it this way" — but this master fails to grasp the sūtra's actual meaning. Here we say: the sūtra is simply borrowing the distinct teaching's own sense in order to reveal the shared teaching. The distinct teaching's own sense of "view" spans a longer stretch, discussed across a third and fourth ground; the shared teaching's own sense of "view" is far briefer, accomplished without ever stepping outside contemplation. The name, then, may indeed be borrowed from the distinct teaching, but the sense must still follow the shared teaching. Explained, then, without any stepping in or out of contemplation: speaking of "the third ground" refers to the beginning of severing view; speaking of "the fourth ground" refers to its completion — neither ever stepping outside contemplation. This is just like the sixteenth mind-moment, of which it is said, at times, to be the path of seeing, and at other times, the path of habituated thought. As for borrowing the distinct teaching's own names to name the shared teaching's stages: the ordinary person outside the path's own three worthies are the ground of dry wisdom, yet are named the ten faiths. The ordinary person within the path's own four wholesome roots are the ground of nature, yet are named the ten abidings, the ten practices, and the ten dedications. The eight kinds of person and the ground of seeing are the stream-enterer, yet are named the initial ground of joy. The thin ground is the once-returner; the once-returner has both a heading-toward and a fruit — the heading-toward is established as the ground free of defilement, and the fruit as the luminous ground. The ground free of desire is the non-returner; the non-returner has both a heading-toward and a fruit — the heading-toward is established as the blazing ground, and the fruit as the ground difficult to surpass. The ground of accomplishment is the arhat; the arhat has both a heading-toward and a fruit — the heading-toward is established as the ground of manifestation, and the fruit as the ground of far-going. The pratyekabuddha's stage is established as the immovable ground; the bodhisattva ground is established as the ground of skillful wisdom. Some, further, take the bodhisattva ground's own final mind as the cloud-of-dharma ground, and others take the buddha ground itself as the cloud-of-dharma ground. The Larger Sūtra says, "The bodhisattva of the tenth ground is as good as the Buddha himself" — this explanation, too, may be given. Should one judge the stage shared by all three kinds of person using these borrowed names: the first ground severs the affliction of views; the second ground severs one or two categories of the desire realm's habituated thought; the third ground severs six categories; the fourth ground severs the seventh and eighth categories; the fifth ground severs the ninth category; the sixth ground severs seventy-one categories; the seventh ground severs seventy-two categories; the eighth ground and beyond erode habituation and sever ignorance and the rest, understood following the same pattern as before. Fourth, borrowing the distinct teaching's own names to name the shared teaching's own bodhisattva stages: dry wisdom is the ordinary person outside the path; the ground of nature is the ordinary person within the path. The eight kinds of person are the first ground; the fifteen mind-moments are the second ground; the sixteenth mind-moment is the third ground. All three of these grounds sever the affliction of views without ever stepping outside contemplation. The four forbearances are the first ground; the four wisdoms are the second ground; the four comparative forbearances are the third ground; the four comparative wisdoms are the fourth ground. All four of these grounds, too, sever the affliction of views without ever stepping outside contemplation. Explained this way — how could this possibly agree with the older account? The thin stage is the fifth ground, severing six categories of habituated thought; the stage free of desire is the sixth ground, severing nine categories; the stage of accomplishment is the seventh ground, severing habituated thought across the form and formless realms in full. The pratyekabuddha is the eighth ground, and on through the buddha ground, severing habituation and ignorance, following the same pattern as before. It has been said, in the past, that "the sixth ground exhausts habituated thought, equal to the arhat," or, citing the *Humane Kings Sūtra*, that "the seventh ground is equal to the arhat." But the sixth ground is named "free of desire," meaning only the desire realm's nine categories are removed — this can, at most, equal the non-returner. Even allowing for one who carries a fruit while still heading toward the next, the ninth category of the neither-thought-nor-non-thought base still remains, and this, too, cannot be made equal to the arhat. Should the seventh ground be "accomplishment," this could hold true with respect to the fruit — but if what is "heading toward" belongs already to the fruit, then the first category of the first dhyāna already belongs to the seventh ground, and at that point the name "accomplishment" could be given. Now, should one wish to take the more convenient explanation, reckoned in terms of the ten perfections: the sixth, prajñā, is the wisdom of entering emptiness, severing affliction completely, equal to the arhat; the seventh, skillful-means prajñā, is the function of emerging into the provisional to transform beings — this is given the name of "convenience." Should one instead take the seventh ground as equal to the arhat, reckoned in terms of each ground matched against a fruit or a heading-toward, the seventh ground precisely equals the fourth fruit. All of these are, in each case, only a single provisional way of matching one thing against another — the sūtras and treatises are not fixed on this, and it must still be weighed with care, not clung to rigidly.

Question: the sense of the shared severance among the three vehicles has already been made clear — on what basis, then, does one further single out an independent set of bodhisattva grounds? Answer: the Great Treatise distinguishes three places for the "scorched wick," giving three kinds of bodhisattva severance of affliction. Dry wisdom is the subduing of affliction, and can still count as the first flame; here we take the eight kinds of person's own genuine severance as the first flame instead — what fault could there be in this? Further, the Larger Sūtra clarifies that "the bodhisattva of the tenth ground is as good as the Buddha himself" — and since the final ground is thereby shown to border on the very ultimate, how could there fail to be middle grounds, or an initial ground, as well? Reasoning from this, independently distinguishing the bodhisattva's own ten grounds incurs no fault at all. Were there no ten grounds, the sūtra ought not to say, "The bodhisattva cultivates and perfects the karma of each ground, and from the first ground through the tenth, each ground has its own several Dharma-gates." The Great Treatise, further, says: "The ground of dry wisdom, with respect to the bodhisattva's own dharma, is the forbearance of subduing; the ground of nature, with respect to the bodhisattva's own dharma, is the forbearance of gentle compliance; the ground of the eight kinds of person, with respect to the bodhisattva, is the forbearance of the unborn; the ground of seeing, with respect to the bodhisattva, is the fruit of the forbearance of the unborn; the thin ground, with respect to the bodhisattva, is named the purity of freedom from desire; the ground free of desire, with respect to the bodhisattva, is named roaming freely in spiritual powers; the ground of accomplishment, with respect to the śrāvaka, is named the buddha ground, while with respect to the bodhisattva, it is the forbearance of the unborn dharma." Hence the Larger Sūtra says, "Whatever wisdom, whatever severance the stream-enterer attains is itself already the bodhisattva's own forbearance of the unborn dharma; and so too, all the way up to the pratyekabuddha's own wisdom and severance." Since this discussion already treats the matter distinctly, with reference to the bodhisattva specifically, and what is given here follows exactly this same reasoning, what further fault could there possibly be? Question: the desire realm, too, is broken through in nine categories — why, then, are so many more fruits distinguished there than elsewhere? Answer: it is like a place of many dangers requiring many city walls — a realm of many dangers requires correspondingly many resting-points marked as fruits. If so, should a realm with much scattering also require the establishing of many dhyānas? Answer: the desire realm is not a realm of concentration, and no dhyāna can be established within it; but since the uncontaminated pervades it freely, a fruit can indeed be established there. Question: since the three vehicles are equal in wisdom and severance, why are the two lesser vehicles named by "wisdom and severance," while the bodhisattva is named by "forbearance"? Answer: forbearance is the cause, and wisdom is its fruit — hence the fifteenth mind-moment is named "forbearance," and the sixteenth is named "wisdom." Further, the two lesser vehicles take direct realization as their goal, and so are properly named by wisdom and severance; the bodhisattva, looking toward buddhahood, still remains within the cause, and so receives only the name "forbearance." Further still, once the bodhisattva has exhausted a single category of habituated thought, a corresponding portion of freedom in rebirth is thereby produced — category by category one dies, category by category one is reborn — able to bear the toil and hardship of birth-and-death without entering nirvāṇa, and hence named "forbearance." Should one clarify the stages of breaking through habituated thought according to the distinct teaching: the initial breaking-through of view corresponds precisely to the first abiding; from the second abiding through the seventh abiding is the breaking-through of habituated thought. Should one wish to divide these into finer categories and stages, mapping them against the ten abidings in detail, this may be known by the same pattern as before. The eighth, ninth, and tenth abidings are precisely where habituation itself is eroded away. The ten practices are precisely the stage of actually emerging into the provisional, and no longer bear upon what came before. Should one clarify the stages of breaking through habituated thought according to the perfect teaching: the initial breaking-through of the affliction of views corresponds precisely to the first degree of faith; from the second degree of faith through the seventh is the breaking-through of habituated thought. Should one wish to divide these into finer categories mapped against the degrees of faith in detail, this too may be known by the same pattern. From the eighth through the tenth degree of faith, habituation itself is severed completely. The *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* says: "At the moment the mind first arises, the genuine affliction and its habituation are both exhausted at once, with nothing whatsoever remaining." [But this refers only to what lies within the three realms —] the genuine affliction lying beyond the three realms is not yet exhausted; only the genuine affliction within the three realms is exhausted. The *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* says: "Once the mind has first arisen, one has already surpassed even the Sage of Silence [Śākyamuni] himself" — this is exactly that same sense. In what way does one surpass him? Since the genuine affliction and its habituation are both exhausted, one is able to manifest the eight aspects and accomplish buddhahood — in this respect, the two are equal. But since the three contemplations are cultivated all at once and in full, this, then, surpasses him. If this is so, should there not also be a śrāvaka who surpasses a bodhisattva? Yet on the buddha-path, the śrāvaka plainly falls short of the bodhisattva. Furthermore, though the breaking-through of the provisional at every prior stage shares the same name and takes the same principle as its object, the wisdom applied differs in each case: when the two lesser vehicles of the Tripiṭaka and shared teachings break through the provisional, at the moment of death within the mundane truth, they are unable to emerge into the provisional again, having no freedom in rebirth; when the bodhisattva of the shared teaching breaks through the provisional, at the moment of death within the mundane truth, he is still able to emerge into the provisional, freely taking rebirth, and once the conditions for transforming beings are exhausted, his ashen body realizes emptiness; when the distinct teaching breaks through the provisional, at the moment of death within the mundane truth, one is likewise able to emerge into the provisional, freely taking rebirth, in order to reveal the middle way, never finally abiding in emptiness; when the perfect teaching breaks through the provisional, the very seeing of the real is already the entering of the provisional, is already the entering of the middle, subduing ignorance completely all at once. Should one say that the two lesser vehicles and the bodhisattva are alike in wisdom and severance, differing only in their capacity to transform others, this is simply the shared teaching's own sense, compared against itself; should one say that the two lesser vehicles and the bodhisattva differ in wisdom yet are alike in severance, this is the distinct and perfect teachings' own sense, compared against themselves.

Question: in breaking through habituated thought to enter emptiness, all eighty-one categories, nine-times-nine, are broken through — how, then, could there still be any sense in which the fruit is leapfrogged? Answer: what has been distinguished above, in sequence, gives the count of categories as they stand in order, but a practitioner need not necessarily proceed strictly category by category in sequence. Within the Tripiṭaka teaching, after the sixteenth mind-moment, there can be a single thought that leaps the fruit all the way to the non-returner, or leaps all the way to the arhat — how, then, could this still be reckoned gradually, category by category, as counted above? Though the categories are not traversed in sequence, all the categories of affliction are nonetheless exhausted, and every category's own samādhi is thereby brought forth. Further, it is like the Tripiṭaka's own Buddha: in a single thought that corresponds instantly, views and habituated thought are exhausted at once, and the Buddha's own merit manifests all at the same time. Because his capacity is sharp, he does not proceed by category and sequence at all. Though sharpness leapfrogs the categories, the categories themselves are not thereby abolished. Why is this? Because this is simply how the teaching-gate of every buddha actually works. Question: if sharp capacity is able to leapfrog, then Śāriputra, sharpest of all, why did he not leapfrog? Answer: the Hīnayāna is meant to draw in the dull, and proceeds category by category, resting along the way — this is why he did not leapfrog. Śāriputra's own great wisdom made him fit to serve as the general who turns the Dharma-wheel, distinguishing the categories and their sequence in detail — hence it is said he did not leapfrog for seven days, or, by another account, for fifteen days. Ānanda did not leapfrog because he was serving as an attendant, not for any lack of wisdom or capacity. The bodhisattva of the shared teaching has sharp wisdom, and the two lesser vehicles, too, ought to have some capacity for leapfrogging in that teaching as well; but since he must shoulder the burden of sentient beings and serve as their guide, requiring extensive distinctions to be made, leapfrogging is not discussed there either. The distinct and perfect teachings proceed in just the same way. Whether there is leapfrogging or not, in every case this is still comprehensively breaking through habituated thought. Leapfrogging the fruit comes, in all, in four kinds: first, leapfrogging from an original severance; second, minor leapfrogging; third, major leapfrogging; fourth, the greatest leapfrogging. One originally at the ordinary stage who has attained the concentration of neither-thought-nor-non-thought, now giving rise to the uncontaminated, upon the sixteenth mind-moment's completion attains the non-returner directly. One originally at the ordinary stage who has attained the first dhyāna, or the second, third, or fourth, likewise, upon the sixteenth mind-moment's completion, attains the non-returner. One originally at the ordinary stage who has severed some portion of the desire realm's nine categories using mundane wisdom, upon the sixteenth mind-moment's completion, leapfrogs the fruit according to that original severance — all of these are named "leapfrogging from an original severance." Should one at the ordinary stage not yet have attained dhyāna, and upon the sixteenth mind-moment's completion leapfrog so as to remove several of the desire realm's categories at once, two or three categories, say — this is "family to family," "a single remaining seed," and the like, and is named "minor leapfrogging." One originally at the ordinary stage who, hearing the Dharma and hearing the call "welcome, well come," becomes an arhat on the spot — this is named "major leapfrogging." As with the Buddha's own single thought, in which the genuine affliction and its habituation are both exhausted at once — this is named "the greatest leapfrogging." The perfect teaching's own practitioner has the sharpest capacity of all, and is, moreover, taught the real truth directly, with no categories or sequence at all — this, then, is most capable of leapfrogging of all. The *Yingluo Sūtra* clarifies "sudden awakening as the Tathāgata"; the *Lotus Sūtra* says "in a single instant, one accomplishes correct awakening" — reasoning from this sense, there is indeed leapfrogging. Yet compassion and the weight of the vow are themselves so great that, in this respect, there is no leapfrogging at all. The Vimalakīrti Sūtra says, "Though he has already accomplished the buddha-path, he still delivers sentient beings and carries out the bodhisattva path" — in this respect, there is both leapfrogging and no leapfrogging at once. With respect to the principle of true reality itself, there is neither leapfrogging nor non-leapfrogging: following capacity, it moves everywhere at once; resting in principle, it is forever quiescent.

Third, distinguishing the four gates: the two afflictions of views and habituated thought obstruct the two principles of the shared and distinct teachings — unless the obstruction is broken through and principle revealed by way of a gate, there is no way through at all. The *Abhidharma* clarifies: "Self, person, and sentient being are like a tortoise's hair or a hare's horn — sought for, they cannot be found; only real dharmas exist." Being deluded about these real dharmas, one gives rise to views and habituated thought without any fixed direction. Views and habituated thought are impermanent, never remaining still from one thought-moment to the next; and real dharmas, too, shift and move, arising and perishing moment by moment. Contemplating in this way, one is able to break through the single, compound, and complete views, and likewise break through all eighty-one categories of habituated thought across the three realms, bringing cause and fruit, affliction and wisdom, alike to non-arising — this is named the sense of the Tripiṭaka teaching's own gate of existence, breaking through dharmas. When the Deer Park was first opened, the five companions of Kauṇḍinya were the first to attain purity; and when Aśvajit spoke the three truths, Śāriputra broke through view, and after seven days attained arhatship. The twelve hundred and the rest, for the most part, saw the ultimate truth by way of the gate of existence. The Great Treatise says: "Should one attain the skillful means of prajñā, entering the Abhidharma, one does not fall into the extreme of existence." The Great Collection Sūtra says: "One who holds the view of permanence speaks of cessation by different, successive thoughts — this is precisely the sense of the ford-crosser severing his own bondage." How could this not be the sense of the gate of existence breaking through the provisional? How, then, could masters of the *Tattvasiddhi* dismiss this as a mere expedient for regulating the mind, incapable of attaining the path at all?

As for what the *Tattvasiddhi* itself clarifies: "Self and person are, from the outset, without any real existence; though there are real dharmas, these too are but insubstantial and unreal." Should one be deluded about this very insubstantiality, one gives rise to views and habituated thought without fixed direction, revolving through birth-and-death. Contemplating these views and this habituated thought, all of them being the insubstantiality of the threefold provisional, the provisional and the real being alike without existence — this is named "equal emptiness." Cultivating a contemplation of this kind, one breaks through the single, compound, complete, and boundless views, and likewise breaks through the eighty-one categories of habituated thought, bringing affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit alike to non-arising — this is named the sense of the Tripiṭaka teaching's own gate of emptiness, breaking through dharmas. Hence that treatise itself says: "What I now truly wish to clarify is the real meaning within the Tripiṭaka teaching" — and this real meaning is precisely emptiness. The *Āgama Sūtra* says: "'This is old age and death' and 'who undergoes old age and death' are both, alike, deviant views." "This is old age and death" is precisely the emptiness of dharmas; "who undergoes old age and death" is precisely the emptiness of the person. It further says: "The Buddha's own Dharma-body is itself emptiness." Subhūti's own wisdom of emptiness being especially clear, he was able to see the Buddha's Dharma-body within a stone chamber — hence, within the Larger Sūtra, he alone is empowered to expound emptiness, while Śāriputra alone is empowered to expound prajñā. The Buddha, wishing to pair the great emptiness with the lesser emptiness, and great wisdom with lesser wisdom, thereby had the two of them exchange teaching roles. The Great Treatise says: "Should one fail to attain the skillful means of prajñā, entering emptiness, one falls into the extreme of nothingness." The Great Collection Sūtra says: "One who holds the view of annihilation speaks of cessation by a single thought" — how could this not be the very sense of "equal emptiness"? One should know that the Tripiṭaka teaching, too, expounds a gate of emptiness. How, then, could Ābhidharmika masters dismiss this, sweepingly, as "the meaning of Mahāyāna emptiness" alone? As with Kātyāyana expounding the gate he himself had entered, composing the *Piṭaka Treatise* and transmitting it to South India — the provisional and the nonexistent here are the same as before, but the real dharmas are held to be both existent and nonexistent at once. Should a fixed mark be given rise to, one gives rise to views and habituated thought without fixed direction. Contemplating these real dharmas, moving freely between existence and nonexistence, this too breaks through the single, compound, and other views and the eighty-one habituated thoughts, bringing affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit alike to non-arising — this is named the sense of the Tripiṭaka teaching's own gate of both existence and nonexistence, breaking through dharmas. Hence the Great Treatise says: "Should one attain the skillful means of prajñā, entering the gate of the *Piṭaka Treatise*, one does not fall into either the extreme of existence or of nonexistence."

As for the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence: as the Treatise clarifies, Chandaka's own mind having grown gentle and pliant, he was taught the *Nāradakātyāyana Sūtra*, transcending both existence and nonexistence, and only then was he able to attain the path. This contemplation, too, is able to break through the single, compound, and other views, and the eighty-one habituated thoughts; entering emptiness from the provisional, it brings affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit alike to non-arising — this is precisely the sense of the Tripiṭaka teaching's own gate of neither existence nor nonexistence, breaking through the provisional. One should know that Chandaka attained only the Hīnayāna path by this means, and this should not be conflated, indiscriminately, with the Mahāyāna's own gate of the middle way. These four gates are, every one, named "attaining the path at the ford-crossing," since the ford-crosser is the first fruit. As for what is superior among them, each receives its own separate name, giving rise to a further threefold distinction, though all are still, in general, the ford-crossing: the gate of existence is the impermanent ford-crossing; the gate of nonexistence is the ford-crossing of equal emptiness; the gate of both existence and nonexistence is the ford-crossing of free movement; the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence is the ford-crossing of the double negation. The ford-crossing is, in every one of the four gates, the first fruit. The four gates' own contemplations differ, but their seeing of the real truth is the same — like a city with four gates, each leading, once passed through, to the very same place. Hence the Great Collection Sūtra says: "One who holds the view of permanence speaks of cessation by different thoughts; one who holds the view of annihilation speaks of cessation by a single thought — though the two differ, discussed in terms of attaining the path, there is, in the end, no difference between them at all." In the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, five hundred monks each give their own account of the body's cause, and not one of these accounts fails to be correct. Bhadanta Dharmottara says: "Every treatise has its own different starting-point, yet in cultivating the practice, the principle admits of no duality; one who clings one-sidedly gives rise to contentions of right and wrong, while one who has truly penetrated it has no dispute at all." At that time, the house of Song was vigorously promoting the *Tattvasiddhi*, and rival factions arose in contention, composing verses to mock one another. Yet the real truth itself is silent and still, in truth never merely one or merely four. Śāriputra himself said: "I have heard that within liberation there are no words at all" — how, then, could it possibly be labeled by four gates? Should a fixed attachment be given rise to, none of the four attains the path at all — why single out the gate of existence alone for blame? Should the affliction of views and habituated thought be dispelled, all four gates attain it equally — why single out the gate of emptiness alone for praise? One ought not to claim, one-sidedly, that the treatise-master's own sense succeeds while the Ābhidharmika masters' own sense fails. Should one grasp the sense of the four siddhāntas, both the treatise and the Abhidharma alike succeed; failing to grasp that sense, both alike fail — and the same holds true even for the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence.

Should one claim that the gate of existence clarifies the coarser marks of dharmas while the gate of emptiness clarifies their subtler marks, weighing skill against clumsiness to decide success or failure, then all three remaining gates alike fall short, not merely the one. Why, then, do the four gates so readily disparage one another? It is simply because the two lesser vehicles, seeking their own liberation alone, enter directly by a single path, clinging one-sidedly without any wider integration — and later students, coming after, give rise to error precisely on this account. The bodhisattva of the Tripiṭaka teaching does not fall into this at all: through analytical emptiness, subduing affliction, he studies all four gates without exception, and, precisely for the sake of transforming others, comes to know the marks of every dharma extensively — at the moment of buddhahood, this is named "correct and universal knowing." Hence the Treatise, citing Kātyāyanīputra's own account of the meaning of "bodhisattva," says: "When the bodhisattva Śākyamuni first encountered the Buddha Śākyamuni and gave rise to the resolve, continuing through to the Buddha Ratnaśikhin, this is the first incalculable eon; his mind did not yet know he would become a buddha, nor did his mouth speak of it. Continuing next to the Buddha Dīpaṃkara, this is the second; to the Buddha Vipaśyin, the third." The perfection of the six pāramitās, each has its own proper season — as when Śibi took the pigeon's place, this is the perfection of giving; and when the minister Kūpina divided up all of Jambudvīpa, this is the perfection of prajñā. Across a hundred kalpas he planted the seeds of the thirty-two marks — discussed in terms of cause, this points to Śākyamuni; discussed in terms of fruit, this points to Maitreya. Practicing the path of all four gates throughout, he subdues and thins his affliction. Nāgārjuna raises this objection: "'Thinning' is itself already 'severing' — as when the once-returner, having eroded six categories of habituated thought, is named 'the thin ground.' Since you yourself have not severed it, how could you claim to be 'thinned'?" One should know, then, that this is simply the path of subduing, discussed in terms of "thinning" alone; only at the thirty-fourth mind-moment is it properly named "severing." Though this account is possible, it remains, even so, only a statement of the initial teaching's own skillful means. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra names this "the half-word"; the Lotus Sūtra names it "the twenty years spent constantly clearing away dung"; the Treatise names it "the clumsy physician"; the Vimalakīrti Sūtra names it "the dharma the poor delight in"; Vasubandhu calls it "the inferior vehicle" — all of these point to these same four gates, and none of them is what is used here.

Next, the shared teaching's own distinct four gates: should one clarify that every provisional and real dharma arises from ignorance, ignorance being like an illusion, then everything born from it is likewise, in every case, like an illusion. Though the illusion-like is like empty space, there is still an illusion-like contemplation that breaks through the provisional. Though it is like empty space, it nonetheless arises in the manner of empty space itself, hence it is said: "Dharmas themselves do not arise, and yet prajñā is born." A contemplative wisdom of this kind is able to break through every view and every habituated thought, bringing affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit alike to non-arising — this is named the sense of the gate of existence's own contemplation. Should one say that every provisional and real dharma has, as its own essence, the manner of an illusion or a magical transformation, then even nirvāṇa itself is likewise like an illusion or transformation. The illusory is an emptiness easily understood; nirvāṇa is an emptiness difficult to understand — raising the easy case to illuminate the difficult one, both the difficult and the easy alike are empty. It is also like a conjured person doing battle with emptiness itself: both the contemplating and the contemplated, in their very nature, are alike quiescent. A wisdom of emptiness of this kind embodies every view and habituated thought as, at once, illusory and yet real, and is able to bring affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit to non-arising — this is named the sense of the gate of emptiness, breaking through the provisional. Should one clarify that every dharma is like a reflection in a mirror, seen and yet not truly seeable — being seen, it is thus also existent; not truly seeable, it is thus also nonexistent. Though nonexistent, it is existent; though existent, it is nonexistent. Contemplating in this way, one is able to break through every dharma's own views and habituated thoughts, bringing affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit to non-arising — this is named the sense of the gate of both existence and nonexistence, the contemplation that breaks through the provisional. Since it is already said to be illusion and transformation, how could it properly be said to be existent or nonexistent at all? Since it ought not to be existent, it does not arise from existence into existence; since it ought not to be nonexistent, it does not arise from nonexistence into nonexistence. A contemplative wisdom of this kind is able to break through every dharma's own views and habituated thoughts, bringing affliction, wisdom, cause, and fruit alike to non-arising — this is named the sense of the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence, the contemplation that breaks through the provisional. Whereas the Tripiṭaka teaching gives rise to view with respect to real, substantial form, using the ford-crosser's own analytical contemplation to negate both views at once, as though breaking through a real pillar as though it were truly real, the shared teaching gives rise to view with respect to illusion-like form, using the embodying contemplation of emptiness-identity to negate both views at once, as though discussing the breaking-through of a pillar reflected in a mirror — hence it is said to be "neither existence nor nonexistence." Though this is not yet the middle way, it is still the embodying method's own insubstantial interfusion, purifying every attachment to view. Hence the Treatise says: "The perfection of prajñā is like a great blazing flame — it cannot be grasped from any of its four sides." That verse already contains the sense of all four gates within it, and examining it closely makes this entirely clear of itself. It further says: "Prajñā has four kinds of mark." And further: "The four gates lead into the cool, refreshing pond." All of these are genuine proof of the four gates. Should one not cling with attachment, one is able to pass through by way of any of them; should one cling with attachment, one is instead burned by that very flame. The Buddha, wishing to show people the Dharma free of contention, taught this contemplation of the four gates.

Question: where does the Buddha ever show people a Dharma of contention? Answer: the Buddha never shows people a Dharma of contention — it is simply that sentient beings, failing to understand, cling and thereby create contention out of it. The Tripiṭaka teaching is shallower and closer at hand, and its four gates readily obstruct one another, so that clinging and contention easily arise there. Thus masters of the *Tattvasiddhi* dismiss the *Abhidharma*, saying, "This is merely an expedient for regulating the mind, and attains the path not at all"; while Ābhidharmika masters say, "Only the seeing of existence attains the path; emptiness belongs to the Mahāyāna alone." Both of these treatise-masters have lost the very sense of the four gates, sweeping and blocking wildly, their attachment to view clanging against one another, contentious calculation readily arising — this is what is named "showing people a Dharma of contention." The shared teaching's own embodying method, being like an illusion or transformation, has no real, substantial form left in it at all, but only names. Names are easily seen as empty, supporting and according with one another without contradiction, and give rise to little contentious calculation. The Great Treatise, contrasting this with the Tripiṭaka teaching, says: "Other sūtras, for the most part, show people a Dharma of contention; the *Prajñāpāramitā* shows people a Dharma free of contention, also named 'the skillful crossing that accords with reality.'" The *Middle Treatise* says: "The true mark of every dharma is attained in common by all three kinds of person." The Larger Sūtra names this "the persons of the three vehicles alike severing affliction and seeing the ultimate truth by the very same path beyond words," also named "the shared prajñā." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra names this "the three beasts fording the river." All of these are the sense of the shared teaching's own four gates, and this, too, is not what is used here.

Next, the distinct teaching's own four gates: these contemplate the distinct principle and sever the distinct affliction, differing from what came before; they cultivate and realize this in sequence, differing from what follows after. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Hearing that the great nirvāṇa holds the unsurpassed path, the great assembly practiced correctly, gave rise to the resolve and left home, upheld the precepts and cultivated concentration, contemplated the wisdom of the Four Noble Truths, and attained the twenty-five samādhis." The phenomenal sequence here is no different from the Tripiṭaka teaching, but it is guided through every dharma by the mind of the great nirvāṇa itself — this is what differs from what came before; and it is gradually cultivated through the five practices — this is what differs from what follows after — hence it is named "distinct." As for what is meant by its four gates: contemplating that the illusory views and habituated thought, and the empty, unreal form, are exhausted, and that there is a distinct, sublime form beyond them, named "buddha-nature." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Emptiness of emptiness itself is the non-Buddhist path; liberation is precisely not-emptiness, precisely the true, wholesome, sublime form. The Tathāgata's own secret treasury is neither attained nor possessed." It further says: "The self is precisely the tathāgatagarbha; the tathāgatagarbha is precisely the buddha-nature." The Tathāgatagarbha Sūtra says: "Silk and cloth wrapping gold; an earthen mold containing an image within" — with ten similes of this kind in all — this is precisely the gate of existence. As for the gate of emptiness, the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "The Kapila city is empty, the tathāgatagarbha is empty, the great nirvāṇa is empty." It further says: "Causing every sentient being to attain the great, formless parinirvāṇa." Nirvāṇa is not existent, and is named "nirvāṇa's own existence" only on account of worldly convention. Nirvāṇa is neither form nor sound — how, then, could it be said to be seen or heard? This is precisely the gate of emptiness. As for the gate of both emptiness and existence, the wise see both emptiness and not-emptiness at once. Should one say it is empty, then there is no permanence, bliss, self, or purity; should one say it is not empty, then who could possibly receive this very permanence, bliss, self, and purity? Like water, wine, cream, or a vessel — one cannot properly say it is empty, nor that it is not empty. This is named the gate of both emptiness and existence. As for the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence, it cuts off all four propositions, transcends every hundred variants, the path of words entirely cut off, incapable of being shown or spoken at all. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Neither permanent nor annihilated — this is named the middle way" — this is precisely that gate. Grasping the true sense of these four gates, one penetrates through into true reality itself; failing to grasp that sense, they remain merely an expedient for subduing affliction, taken in strict sequence. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra names this "the bodhisattva's own sagely practice"; the Larger Sūtra names this "the prajñā not shared with the other vehicles." All of this is the sense of the distinct teaching's own four gates, and this, too, is not what is used here.

The perfect teaching's own four gates speak the sublime principle all at once, differing from the two teachings that came before; perfectly interfused and unobstructed, differing from what is gradually distinguished stage by stage. What, then, are these four gates? Contemplating that the provisional of views and habituated thought is itself the dharma-realm, complete with the Buddha's own Dharma in full; and that every dharma is itself the causal arising of the Dharma-nature, so that even the ultimate meaning itself is likewise causal arising. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "By the extinguishing of ignorance as cause, one attains the blazing lamp of the threefold bodhi." This is named the gate of existence. As for the gate of emptiness: contemplating that the illusory views and habituated thought, and every dharma, dwell in neither cause nor condition. The self and nirvāṇa, both of these are empty — there is only the sickness of emptiness, and this sickness of emptiness, too, is itself empty. This is precisely the emptiness of all three truths at once. What, then, is the gate of both emptiness and existence? Though the illusory views and habituated thought have no true reality, distinguishing their provisional names cannot be exhausted. It is like a great sūtra-scroll contained within a single mote of dust, and yet the ultimate meaning itself remains unmoved; skillfully able to distinguish the marks of every dharma, it is also like the single earth able to give rise to every kind of sprout; within what has no name or mark, provisional names and marks are still spoken of — even the Buddha himself has, in the end, only a name. This is the gate of both existence and nonexistence. What, then, is the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence? Contemplating that the illusory views and habituated thought are themselves the Dharma-nature. The Dharma-nature is inconceivable — not mundane, and hence not existent; not supramundane, and hence not nonexistent. A single form, a single fragrance — none of these is anything other than the middle way; one instance of the middle contains the whole of the middle. Vairocana pervades every place without exception — how, then, could views and habituated thought exist as anything other than a real dharma? This is the gate of neither existence nor nonexistence. And how is a single gate itself the same as all three others? A single gate is already every dharma — how could it stop short at merely three? Why is this? Contemplating the dharma born from causes and conditions is the first gate, and every dharma without exception is already this first gate; this first gate is itself emptiness, one emptiness being every emptiness, and this is precisely the second gate; this same first gate is itself the provisional, one provisional being every provisional, and this is precisely the third gate; this same first gate is itself the middle, one instance of the middle being the whole of the middle, and this is precisely the fourth gate. Since the first gate is already the same as the other three, and the three gates are themselves already the one gate, it is only for convenience that a single gate is taken as the name. Though there are four names, in principle there is no separation between them at all. As explained above, relying on the gate of the unborn to break through views and habituated thought is itself already the gate of emptiness — one gate is every gate, and this is not something unique to the gate of the unborn alone; breaking through one thing breaks through everything at once, and this is not limited merely to breaking through views and habituated thought alone; entering emptiness from the provisional, one emptiness is every emptiness, and this is not merely emptying birth-and-death alone. A sense of this kind is precisely the perfect teaching's own four gates, and this is exactly what is used here.

If this is so, then what further use was there for all the various distinctions given before? It is simply that ordinary sentiment is dim and dull, unable to know without first being told — one must first entice and open the way, and only afterward lead into the correct path. The Lotus Sūtra says: "Though I speak of every kind of path, in truth it is all for the sake of the one vehicle alone." Grasping this sense, one may make distinctions the entire day long and yet distinguish nothing at all. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra names this "there is, further, one single practice that is the Tathāgata's own practice." The Lotus Sūtra names this "directly setting aside every skillful means, and speaking only of the unsurpassed path." The Larger Sūtra names this "the wisdom of all modes, knowing every dharma." The Vimalakīrti Sūtra names this "entering the campaka forest, and no longer smelling any other fragrance." The Avataṃsaka Sūtra names this simply "the dharma-realm." This is precisely the sense of these four gates. As for the gate of the unborn above, breaking through the provisional — grasping its true sense, this is indeed the perfect teaching's own gate, and not a mere expedient gate at all, which is exactly why it is named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma."

Second, entering the provisional from emptiness, comprehensively breaking through every dharma: this comprises four parts — first, the intent of entering the provisional; second, clarifying the causes and conditions for entering the provisional; third, clarifying the contemplation of entering the provisional; fourth, clarifying the stages of entering the provisional. As for the intent of entering the provisional: there are those who simply enter the provisional from emptiness; and there are those who, knowing that emptiness is not merely emptiness, break through emptiness itself in order to enter the provisional. Now, the wisdom and severance attained by the two lesser vehicles likewise realize the real, yet, lacking great compassion, they are not named bodhisattvas. The *Avataṃsaka Sūtra* says: "The true nature and mark of every dharma — the two lesser vehicles, too, attain this in full, and yet are not named buddhas." Considered in terms of one's own practice, entering emptiness has its proper place; but considered in terms of transforming beings, emerging into the provisional is altogether absent from it. The bodhisattva, entering emptiness from the provisional, breaks through his own bondage and attachment, unlike the ordinary being; entering the provisional from emptiness, he breaks through the bondage and attachment of others, unlike the two lesser vehicles. Dwelling within existence yet unstained by it, the Dharma-eye discerning the medicine needed, compassion meeting each illness in turn, a love broad and boundless, benefiting others together without ever growing weary, the mind's own function entirely free — his skillful means are like planting a tree within empty space itself, or like shooting arrows straight upward into the sky, each notch resting against the one before it, never allowing any to fall to the ground. Should one remain dwelling in emptiness alone, this brings no lasting benefit to sentient beings whatsoever. Holding fast to the resolve to benefit others — this is precisely the intent of entering the provisional.

As for the causes and conditions for entering the provisional, briefly stated, there are five. First, a heavy weight of compassion: at the moment the provisional was first broken through, seeing every sentient being bound in the prison of inverted views, unable to find their way out, one gave rise to great compassion, loving them as one's own only child. Now, having already severed affliction and entered emptiness, this same fellow-feeling and sorrow grows only more intense still — putting others before oneself, ever more earnestly pulling them out and rescuing them. Second, remembering one's original vow: one originally raised the vast vow to pull out suffering and bestow bliss, bringing beings to safety and peace. Now sentient beings suffer in such abundance, not yet delivered — should one alone escape, this would betray one's own original resolve. Never forgetting this original intent, how could one possibly abandon sentient beings? One enters the provisional, sharing their very own circumstances, in order to guide them. Even in their first undertakings, the two lesser vehicles are not without some knowledge of the Dharma, and do possess a great vow of their own — yet across the interval of rebirth this is forgotten, and they retreat from the great vehicle to take up the lesser one instead, a fault for which every sage rebukes them. The bodhisattva is not like this: like a mother who, on obtaining food, constantly remembers her own child. Third, fierce and sharp wisdom: at the very moment of entering emptiness, one already recognizes the fault, within emptiness itself, of abandoning others. Why is this? Should one remain dwelling in emptiness, then purifying buddha-lands, transforming sentient beings, and perfecting the Buddha's own Dharma in full could none of them ever be accomplished. Recognizing this fault already, one does not remain in emptiness, but enters the provisional instead. Fourth, skillful means: able to enter the mundane world, the afflictions of birth-and-death are unable to diminish one's own wisdom in the slightest; every obstruction and hindrance only further assists the path of transforming others. Fifth, the power of great diligence: though the buddha-path is long and distant, one does not regard it as far away at all; though sentient beings are so vast in number, the resolve remains full of courage. The mind stands firm without retreat, advancing in diligence, never once growing weary or lax. These are named "the five conditions." These same five points of sense accord exactly with the Vimalakīrti Sūtra. That text gives three kinds of consolation: first clarifying the contemplation of the body's own impermanence and the rest is the consolation of entering emptiness; and the final passage, saying "one should become a king of physicians," is the consolation of entering the middle; what lies in between is the consolation of entering the provisional. And within this middle passage there are exactly five points of sense: taking one's own illness to grieve over the illness of another is precisely great compassion, one in essence with the other. Recognizing the countless kalpas of suffering across past lives — is this not exactly one's original vow? Reflecting on how to enrich and benefit every sentient being — is this not exactly the fault recognized within emptiness itself? Recalling the merit one has cultivated, and reflecting on a pure livelihood, is precisely skillful means. Giving rise to no worry or vexation, constantly arousing diligence, is precisely the fifth point of sense. This sense corresponds precisely, point for point, with that very text.

Lacking any of these four conditions — compassion, vow, wisdom's recognition of the fault, and diligence, from which skillful means results — one could never possibly emerge into the provisional at all. Sharp capacity alone is not sufficient, and this should now be distinguished: one who remains dwelling in emptiness as a śrāvaka is not necessarily of dull capacity; and one who enters the provisional as a bodhisattva is not necessarily of sharp capacity. Śāriputra, for instance, was sharp in wisdom and yet did not emerge into the provisional. This should be explained through four propositions: there is sharp capacity that remains dwelling in emptiness; there is dull capacity that remains dwelling in emptiness; there is sharp capacity that enters the provisional; and there is dull capacity that enters the provisional. It is like a person whose body is weak and without strength, and yet whose courage is fully accomplished — entering danger, breaking through the enemy, with no opposing line before him he cannot overcome; and there is one whose bodily strength is grand and mighty, whose courage is likewise strong, thrusting left and right, with none able to withstand him; and there is one whose bodily strength, though considerable, is timid and fearful, so that, however good his strength, he loses his nerve the moment he faces the battle-line; and there is one with neither strength nor courage at all, both qualities lacking — how could such a person ever accomplish anything? Now, those who dwell in emptiness likewise fall into two such kinds, and those who emerge into the provisional do as well. One furnished with the five conditions is like one who has a bond of kinship, a firm resolve, a strategy, strength, and courage all at once, and is thus able to enter the provisional. Even should one's capacity for wisdom be dull, the four conditions can still enable one to enter the provisional. The śrāvaka, though possessed of sharp wisdom, is entirely without these four conditions, and is thus unable to enter the provisional at all.

Third, clarifying the contemplation of entering the provisional: this comprises three parts — first, knowing the illness; second, identifying the medicine; third, administering the medicine. Knowing the illness means knowing the illness of "view" and of "habituated thought." One knows the root of view, the causes and conditions giving rise to view, the duration since view arose, and the sheer multiplicity of the affliction of view. How does one know the root of view? The view of self is the root of every other view; a single thought-moment of the deluded mind is the root of the view of self. From this deluded mind arise boundless views, spreading in every direction, thick and dense, beyond all reckoning. On account of this view, one creates every manner of binding karma, falling and plunging into the three evil destinies, sinking and turning without end. It is like a spinning wheel of fire — should one wish to bring it to rest, one need only stop one's own hand. Knowing that mind has no fixed mind of its own, one recognizes that mind arises on account of false imagining; and knowing that self has no fixed self, one recognizes that self is born on account of inversion. Once inversion and false imagining are brought to rest, the very root itself is brought to rest, and every branch and twig departs of itself. How does one know the causes and conditions giving rise to view? Causes and conditions differ from one case to the next, and the views they give rise to differ accordingly. How can this be known? It is known through outward and inward marks. As for these outward marks: sentient beings differ in where they dwell, in the season's own cold or heat, in the land's own height or lowness, in the coarseness or refinement of their birth and upbringing, in the richness or plainness of their food, and, their places differing, their retributions differ accordingly — though these arise from local soil and custom, in accumulation or dispersal, abundance or scarcity, presence or absence, gain or loss, poverty or wealth, hunger or fullness, and so on. Their bodily form and appearance differ: short or tall, handsome or ugly, robust or gaunt, healthy or ill, and so on. Their inborn inclinations of delight and aversion differ: suddenly abandoning glory and rank for the humble joy of the woodcutter or fisherman; herding cattle or seeking high office; devoted wholly to letters or wholly to arms; indulging in wine or delighting in fine flavor; excessive in greed, excessive in extravagance, excessive in anger, excessive in joy, excessive in delusion, excessive in cunning — differing and varying in a hundred, a thousand, ten thousand kinds. Confined merely to the human realm, each is already utterly distinct from the next — how much more so, then, among the different species of being, beyond all possibility of full account! Such various differences in dependent and direct retribution alike must be known to arise from differing karma; and since karma differs, the views that arise from it differ as well. This, then, is seeing the branch and thereby knowing the root, seeing the outward and thereby recognizing the inward. How does one know the duration since view arose? One knows that a given view has accumulated across many layers, not confined to a single lifetime alone; one knows that a given view arose only in some recent lifetime; one knows that a given view has only just now arisen, in this very life; and one knows that a given view is yet to flourish, only in some future time.

How does one know the sheer multiplicity of view? From a single view of existence branch out the threefold provisional; and from the threefold provisional branch out the four propositions — the threefold provisional together yields twelve propositions. And from the four propositions branch out the four siddhāntas — the twelve propositions together yield forty-eight siddhānta-instances. And from each single siddhānta-instance branch out emptiness of nature and emptiness of mark — the forty-eight siddhānta-instances together yield ninety-six instances of emptiness of nature and mark. Each single one of these, in turn, has both calming and contemplation, together yielding one hundred ninety-two instances of calming-and-contemplation. Combined with the root itself, this comes, in all, to three hundred forty-eight propositions. This is so for the practitioner of faith; it is likewise so for the practitioner of dharma. The practitioner of faith turning into the practitioner of dharma is likewise so; the practitioner of dharma turning into the practitioner of faith is likewise so. Taken across these four kinds of person, this comes, in all, to one thousand three hundred ninety-two propositions. This is reckoned for a single view of existence alone; the view of nonexistence is likewise so; the view of both existence and nonexistence is likewise so; the view of neither existence nor nonexistence is likewise so. Taken across these four views, this comes to five thousand five hundred sixty-eight propositions. This is so for the single fourfold view; the compound fourfold view is likewise so; the complete fourfold view is likewise so. Taken across these three kinds of fourfold view, this comes, in all, to sixteen thousand seven hundred four propositions of the view beyond words. As with the initial view of existence, which alone yields one thousand three hundred ninety-two propositions, this comes, altogether, to eighteen thousand ninety-six propositions. This is so for what is broken through; what does the breaking-through is likewise so — combining what is broken through and what breaks through, this comes to thirty-six thousand one hundred ninety-two propositions. This is so for one's own practice; transforming others is likewise so — combining one's own practice and transforming others, this comes, altogether, to seventy-two thousand three hundred eighty-four propositions. Should one reckon this further still, in terms of the sixty-two views and the eighty-eight fundamental afflictions, discussing the threefold provisional and the four propositions across each of these, the resulting number would be boundless and inexhaustible beyond all reckoning. The marks of this illness are limitless, and the bodhisattva knows every one of them: knowing how many propositions together constitute this particular view, and how many together constitute that one; discerning their depth and shallowness, their weight and lightness, skillfully and without the slightest distortion — this is named "knowing the origin." Having already known the origin, one is thereby also able to know the suffering itself. Suffering and its origin, revolving in transmigration, are thoroughly understood in both their roots and their branches.

Moreover, before entering emptiness, one contemplates views and habituated thought comprehensively, knowing every mark of this illness in full, as the very means of later emerging into the provisional — only afterward using a single gate to sever affliction and enter emptiness. Should one, at the time of emerging into the provisional, already distinguish views and habituated thought in this way, illuminating them becomes easy; cultivating calming-and-contemplation only lightly, the Dharma-eye already shines forth clear. The two lesser vehicles, entering emptiness, rely exclusively upon a single gate, without any of this preliminary groundwork at all, and so, when teaching two disciples, mistakenly administer the wrong medicine. Lacking, further, the five points of sense described above, how could they possibly enter the provisional? But the bodhisattva's own skillful means, great compassion, original vow, and great power of diligence — whether by stilling every mental image so that the Dharma-eye is brought forth, thereby discerning and knowing the illness of view directly, or by contemplating and penetrating the dharma of view so that the wisdom of the path's every kind is brought forth, thereby clearly understanding the dharma of affliction. Should one not yet awaken to it directly, one simply applies the power of diligence, diligently refining calming-and-contemplation; once the inward cause has ripened, and is met, outwardly, by the empowering grace of the buddhas, whether concealed or manifest, one suddenly awakens, and every illness of view, proposition by proposition, becomes entirely clear — as though seeing every form and image reflected in a mirror, recognizing oneself and recognizing others alike, examined thoroughly and without obstruction.

Next, clarifying the root of the illness of habituated thought, the causes and conditions giving rise to habituated thought, the duration since habituated thought arose, and the sheer multiplicity of the illness of habituated thought. The first three points of sense may be known by the same pattern as the illness of view; habituated thought takes delusion as its own root. As for its multiplicity: across the nine grounds there are eighty-one categories. The first single category alone has the threefold provisional, and the four propositions of calming-and-contemplation; the threefold provisional together yields twelve propositions. Each single proposition, in turn, has both faith-understanding and direct-attainment, each applying the four siddhāntas; faith and dharma each have eight combinations, giving sixteen rounds. Since faith and dharma each, in turn, have their own converting sense, this becomes sixteen again — combined with what came before, this yields thirty-two propositions. Each single proposition already being thirty-two, and the threefold provisional's twelve propositions together yielding twelve, this comes to three hundred eighty-four propositions. Each single one of these, in turn, has both emptiness of nature and emptiness of mark, together yielding seven hundred sixty-eight propositions; adding what came before, this comes to one thousand one hundred fifty-two. Including the root itself, this comes to one thousand one hundred sixty-four. This is so for a single category; across nine categories, this comes, altogether, to ten thousand four hundred seventy-six propositions. This is so for the desire realm's nine categories alone; across the three realms' nine-times-nine categories, this comes, altogether, to ninety-four thousand two hundred eighty-four propositions. This is so for what is broken through; what does the breaking-through is likewise so — combining what is broken through and what breaks through, this comes to one hundred eighty-eight thousand five hundred sixty-eight propositions. This is so for one's own practice; transforming others is likewise so — combined, this comes, altogether, to two hundred seventy-seven thousand one hundred thirty-six instances of calming-and-contemplation. Reckoned even more minutely, each single category, in turn, has boundless further categories, and each single dhyāna, in turn, has boundless further dhyānas. Setting aside entirely the penetrating brightness, the eightfold liberations, and the rest, even the arising of the ordinary dhyānas alone already cannot be fully expressed — how much less, then, dhyāna after dhyāna, category after category? And within each and every category, there is, further, the threefold provisional and the four contemplations and their propositions, whose number can scarcely be known at all. Reckoned against the affliction of views' own forty-league river, this affliction of habituated thought, bearing on but a single truth, ought to be a river of merely ten leagues. Since it does not arise without fixed direction, it is likened to but a single drop; yet its own multiplicity, too, is exceedingly great, and might likewise be reckoned at ten leagues. The two lesser vehicles, entering directly, make no such distinctions; the bodhisattva, having just broken through the affliction of habituated thought, has already made this his own skillful means. Having first known it comprehensively in this way, one now, in emerging into the provisional to cultivate contemplation and assist in opening the Dharma-eye, applies calming-and-contemplation throughout as the very gate to knowing the provisional. Cultivated separately, each has its own proper method: stilling every conditioned thought is named "calming"; taking this habituated thought as the object is named "contemplation." Through great compassion, one's original vow, and the power of great diligence, empowered by the majesty of the buddhas, one suddenly opens into understanding, attaining the Dharma-eye's own sight and the wisdom of the path's own knowing, distinguishing the marks of the illness of habituated thought with perfect clarity. Though the multiplicity of view and habituated thought explained above is so elaborate, what harm is there in knowing it fully? Just as the five divisions of the vinaya need not be memorized word for word in one's own chest, and yet, meeting the actual circumstance, one is still able to act correctly and correct others as well — studying these various propositions, one puts them immediately into practice and immediate use, one's own practice and the transformation of others alike proceeding freely, without any obstruction at all.

Second, identifying the medicine for entering the provisional: the marks of illness are limitless, and the medicines, too, are limitless. Briefly stated, there are three: first, worldly dharma-medicine; second, supramundane dharma-medicine; third, supreme supramundane dharma-medicine. The Larger Sūtra speaks of three kinds of Dharma-giving: "The three refuges, the five precepts, the ten wholesome ways, the four dhyānas, the immeasurable states of mind, and the rest are named worldly Dharma-giving; second is supramundane Dharma-giving; third is supreme supramundane Dharma-giving" — this may be understood accordingly. The Treatise says: "Why is worldly Dharma-giving used as kindness? It is like a prince falling from a great height — the king, his father, loving and cherishing him, has silk and cotton heaped up on the ground to catch him, so that he may be spared the pain. Sentient beings are just the same: bound to fall into the three evil destinies, the sage, out of compassion, uses worldly wholesome dharmas as an expedient to catch and receive them, so that they may be spared the evil destinies." Yet the ordinary and the foolish do not, of themselves, know how to bestow this dharma-medicine at all — every instance of it is a sage manifesting a trace identical to the ordinary, appearing in an age without a buddha, in order to guide and instruct the still-unlearned. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Every worldly scripture of the non-Buddhist paths is itself spoken by the Buddha, not spoken by the non-Buddhist paths at all." The Sūtra of Golden Light says: "Every wholesome treatise found anywhere in the world derives from this very sūtra." Should one deeply recognize worldly dharma, this is itself already the Buddha-dharma. Why is this? Gathered together, the ten wholesome ways are precisely the five precepts; and, understood deeply, the sense of the five constant virtues and the five conducts likewise resembles the five precepts. Humaneness — compassion and nurturing care, doing no harm to others — is precisely the precept against killing; righteousness — deference and integrity, giving of oneself to benefit others — is the precept against stealing; propriety — regulation and proper order, binding up the hair in marriage — is precisely the precept against sexual misconduct; wisdom — clear and sharp discernment, acting always with uprightness, hitting exactly upon what is proper — is precisely the precept against drinking; and trustworthiness — honoring one's word and true record, sincere integrity without deceit — is the precept against false speech. The Duke of Zhou and Confucius established these five constant virtues as a worldly dharma-medicine, to heal and treat the illnesses of humankind. Further, the five conducts resemble the five precepts: not killing guards against excess of wood; not stealing guards against metal; not committing sexual misconduct guards against water; not speaking falsely guards against earth; not drinking guards against fire. Further, the five classics resemble the five precepts: the Book of Rites clarifies moderation and restraint, guarding against drink; the Book of Music harmonizes the mind, guarding against sexual excess; the Book of Odes satirizes through poetry, guarding against killing; the Book of Documents clarifies righteousness and deference, guarding against theft; the Book of Changes fathoms yin and yang, guarding against false speech. Worldly wisdom of this kind, refined to its utmost limit, has nothing that surpasses it, nothing that outdoes it, causing all to believe and submit to it, taking it as their teacher and guide. Should the bodhisattva emerging into the provisional wish to know this dharma, he should apply himself diligently to its cultivation, distinctly, within the contemplation of penetrating brightness. Through great compassion and vow, and diligence without laxity, empowered by the majesty of the buddhas, he suddenly gains clear understanding, and is forever free of doubt or hesitation regarding this worldly dharma-medicine. Yet worldly dharma-medicine is not an ultimate cure — however far one bends and moves one's steps forward, though one draws close to exhausting the three states of existence, one will still, in the end, retreat and fall back. Hence it is said: "Though the ordinary being cultivates the contaminated dhyānas, his mind and conduct leak through them like a vessel full of holes; though he may be reborn into the neither-thought-nor-non-thought base, he will still, in the end, retreat and fall back, like a many-colored robe left out in the rain, its colors mottled and fading." The worldly physician, though he may cure the illness, sees it return again — this is exactly that same sense.

Next, clarifying the knowledge of supramundane dharma-medicine: as the Nirvāṇa Sūtra says, "Some speak of faith as the path; some speak of aspiration; some speak of non-laxity; some speak of diligence; some speak of mindfulness of the body; some speak of correct concentration; some speak of cultivating the contemplation of impermanence; some speak of dwelling in the forest; some speak of teaching the Dharma for others' sake; some speak of upholding the precepts; some speak of drawing near to good friends; some speak of cultivating loving-kindness, and so on." And so too, in the various sūtras, at times a single path alone serves as the medicine, as with the one-practice samādhi. As the Buddha told the monks: "Take nothing that belongs to another — every dharma is itself something belonging to another; and not appropriating any dharma at all is what makes an arhat." As already clarified above, this means not appropriating the single or compound views in any of their forms. At times two paths serve as the medicine — concentration and craving, wisdom and its skillful strategy, the two wheels held in balance; at times three dharmas serve as the medicine, namely precepts, concentration, and wisdom; at times four dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the four foundations of mindfulness; at times five dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the five powers; at times six dharmas, namely the six recollections; the seven factors of awakening, the eightfold path, the nine contemplations, the ten kinds of wisdom — increasing in number through teachings of this kind, all the way up to the eighty-four thousand, beyond all reckoning. At times a great many single dharmas, or a boundless number of single dharmas, or an inexpressible number of single dharmas, serve as the medicine. At times a great many groups of ten dharmas, or a boundless number of groups of ten dharmas, or an inexpressible number of groups of ten dharmas, serve as the medicine. Each and every one of these dharmas has its own manifold name, its own manifold mark, and its own manifold cure, and the bodhisattva emerging into the provisional must know and recognize every one of them. Gathering every dharma-medicine for the sake of sentient beings, he is like the great guide upon the ocean — should he not know them, he could never benefit any being at all. Wishing to know them fully, he cultivates calming-and-contemplation with a single mind, through great compassion and vow and the power of diligence; empowered by the majesty of the buddhas, the Dharma-eye opens and unfolds, and he is able to understand every one of them completely, as clearly as gazing at a fruit held in the palm of his own hand.

Further, as for knowing the supreme supramundane dharma-medicine, taking calming-and-contemplation as a single dharma-medicine: this is named the one real truth. When the ignorant mind unites with the Dharma-nature, every mark of illness thereby arises. Contemplating this Dharma-nature, one finds it lacks even a Dharma-nature of its own — how much less, then, ignorance and every other dharma? At times two dharmas serve as the medicine, namely calming and contemplation, which embody and penetrate the mind's own nature, so that its very emptiness and falseness are brought to rest. At times three dharmas serve as the medicine, namely calming, contemplation, and the precept that accords with the path, spontaneously guarding and protecting. There are, further, the three samādhis: entering emptiness from the provisional is named the emptiness samādhi; not even seeing the mark of emptiness itself is named the markless samādhi; the karma of birth-and-death brought to rest is named the wishless samādhi. At times four dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the four foundations of mindfulness. Every view depends upon form, and this form is neither defiled nor undefiled; feeling every view and habituated thought is neither suffering nor bliss; the perception and formation of every view is neither self nor non-self; and the mind of every view and habituated thought is not even mind at all — how, then, could it be either permanent or impermanent? At times five dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the five faculties. Cultivating calming-and-contemplation without doubt is named the faculty of faith; constantly bearing calming-and-contemplation in mind, without thinking of anything else, is the faculty of mindfulness; calming-and-contemplation never resting is the faculty of diligence; the mind fixed one-pointedly in concentration is the faculty of concentration; and, through the four propositions, embodying and penetrating the fact that they have no fixed nature at all, is the faculty of wisdom. These five faculties, grown to fullness, are named "the five powers." At times six dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the six recollections. Using calming-and-contemplation to awaken to the fact that the affliction of views and habituated thought is itself already the Buddha's own dharma-realm, not breaking apart the Dharma-body, is named "mindfulness of the Buddha"; constantly bearing calming-and-contemplation in mind, without distinguishing whether calming and contemplation are one thing or different, is named "mindfulness of the Dharma"; calming-and-contemplation's own principle being harmonious, being an unconditioned mark, is named "mindfulness of the Saṃgha"; calming-and-contemplation possessing the precept that accords with the path is named "mindfulness of the precepts"; calming-and-contemplation being itself the ultimate meaning is named "mindfulness of the heavens"; and calming-and-contemplation relinquishing the affliction of views and habituated thought is named "mindfulness of relinquishment." At times seven dharmas serve as the medicine: calming is the three awakening-factors of removal, relinquishment, and concentration; contemplation is the awakening-factors of discrimination, joy, and diligence; mindfulness pervades both categories at once. At times eight dharmas serve as the medicine: the four propositions breaking through the provisional are named "correct view"; the stirring forth of correct view is named "correct thought"; cultivating practice on this basis is named "correct action"; expounding this calming-and-contemplation is named "correct speech"; not nourishing the body through deviant flattery is "correct livelihood"; neither departing from nor forgetting it is named "correct mindfulness"; calming itself is named "correct concentration"; and uninterrupted mindfulness is named "correct effort." At times nine dharmas serve as the medicine: the four views are the defiled five aggregates, and the five aggregates' own transformation and decay is named "the contemplation of form's own transformation," and so on up through nine. At times ten dharmas serve as the medicine, namely the ten kinds of wisdom. The twofold provisional of views and habituated thought is the wisdom of suffering and its origin; calming-and-contemplation is the wisdom of the path; the twenty-five states of existence no longer arising is the wisdom of cessation; knowing that the three realms are, every one, just so, is the wisdom of inference; speaking in terms of worldly names and conventions is precisely mundane wisdom; knowing that other sentient beings are likewise so is the wisdom that knows others' minds; knowing the distinctions among every dharma is the wisdom of equality; knowing that suffering and its origin are exhausted is named the wisdom of exhaustion; and the uncontaminated wisdom is named the wisdom of non-arising. One should know that calming-and-contemplation, benefiting sentient beings, increases or decreases according to their capacity — able to become these ten, it is equally able to become as many dharmas of the Buddha as the sands of the Ganges.

It is like Shennong tasting every herb to establish his prescriptions — sometimes a single medicine, sometimes two, all the way up to ten medicines forming a single prescription, or a great many medicines forming a single prescription; establishing a prescription for an illness is never done without cause and reason. The bodhisattva who has entered the provisional is exactly the same: knowing every Dharma-gate, a single dharma, two dharmas, all the way up to boundless dharmas, at times for a single illness, at times for illnesses held together in combination. It is also like the various medicines themselves: skin, flesh, sap, fruit, root, stem, branch, and leaf, each is used in its own way; mountain and sea, water and land, the soil of every quarter, each yields its own particular substance; and the gathering and digging, whether dried or fresh, each has its own proper season. One knows, further, that each medicine has its own particular cure. The bodhisattva who has entered the provisional, knowing sentient beings' own capacities and recognizing the dharma suited to each, proceeds in exactly the same way: knowing that this single dharma, or these many dharmas, are what a given being delights in and desires; knowing that that single dharma, or those two dharmas, are not what that being delights in; knowing that this dharma, or these two dharmas, are convenient for one being and not for another; are an antidote for one and not for another; lead into the ultimate meaning for one and not for another — all of this examined and recognized in full. Wishing to cure a single illness, a single medicine alone suffices; wishing to become a great physician, one must have every medicine at one's disposal. The two lesser vehicles, treating their own affliction, need only a single dharma; the bodhisattva's great vow requires knowing everything without exception. It is also like the great earth producing its medicines in fixed proportions to form a prescription, or like a great river's water measured out in precise proportion, neither exceeding nor falling short. The dharma-medicine is exactly the same: from a single quiescent concentration, boundless kinds of calming unfold; from a single great wisdom, boundless kinds of contemplation unfold — all of this entirely real, not empty in the least. It is also like how the causes of sentient beings' illnesses differ endlessly from one to the next; the pain and suffering of every illness differs; the treatment of every medicine differs; and the conditions for an illness's cure differ as well. Decoctions to drink, purgatives to induce vomiting or evacuation, needles, moxibustion, pills, and powders — the conditions by which a cure is finally reached are, likewise, never merely one. The bodhisattva who has entered the provisional is exactly the same: knowing that the accumulation of every sentient being's own affliction of views and habituated thought differs, this is knowing the origin of suffering; knowing that every sentient being's own wholesome and unwholesome deeds and their painful fruits differ, this is knowing suffering itself; knowing every Dharma-gate, this is knowing the path; knowing that every sentient being's own entry into realization differs, this is knowing cessation. The manifold Four Noble Truths — there is nothing the bodhisattva who has entered the provisional does not know in full.

Furthermore, Shennong's own original prescriptions, applied to treat later generations, need not necessarily bring the same benefit. Hua Tuo and Bian Que, observing the times and observing the medicines, established new prescriptions of their own instead. Why is this? Because regions differ between north and south, people differ in robustness and frailty, foods differ in saltiness and blandness, medicines differ in strength and mildness, and illnesses differ in severity — treating strictly according to the original prescription may bring no effect at all, while adapting and establishing a new one according to the season can still bring about a cure. When the Buddha first appeared in the world, sentient beings' capacities were ripe, and, meeting their capacity directly, he taught the Dharma such that there was no one who failed to awaken. In later generations, grown thin and corrupted, sentiment and delusion having shifted and changed, applying the Buddha's own scriptures directly may bring no benefit at all. The bodhisattva, observing capacity, penetrates the scriptures and composes treatises, so that sentient beings may still attain awakening. Only bringing about actual awakening and benefit for others is the true intent of entering the provisional — how, then, could one cling rigidly to the old and thereby obstruct the very path of transformation? The Treatise says: "Relying on the scriptural Dharma, broadly establishing names and constructing their meaning — this is named Dharma-giving." The bodhisattva, in order to cultivate wisdom of this kind, through great compassion and vow, diligent in the power of effort, thoroughly cultivates calming-and-contemplation; empowered by the majesty of the buddhas, he suddenly gains clear and luminous discernment, and attains complete freedom in the wisdom of entering the provisional. Third, administering medicine appropriate to the illness: having already known the illness of suffering and its origin, one further recognizes the medicine of the path and cessation. Should sentient beings lack any supramundane capacity, their own nature too weak and frail to bear profound transformation, one administers only worldly medicine. Thus Confucius and the Duke of Zhou, establishing the relation between ruler and subject, fixing that between father and son, brought about reverence toward superiors and love toward inferiors, and the world was thereby greatly well-ordered. Ritual regulation and proper measure, rank and precedence held in order — this supports the precepts; music harmonizing the mind, transforming customs and altering habits for the better — this supports concentration; the former kings' own utmost virtue and essential way — this supports wisdom. In the primordial chaos of remotest antiquity, it was not yet fitting for a buddha to appear in the world; and among peoples of remote and outlying capacity, there was no resonance capable of moving a buddha to arise. And so the Buddha dispatched three sages to transform this Land of Zhen Dan [China] instead — ritual and righteousness opened the way first, so that the sūtras of the greater and lesser vehicles might only afterward be believed. As it was for the Land of Zhen Dan, so it is in every direction — hence worldly dharma is administered first, and only afterward is the true teaching bestowed.

Further, as for administering supramundane medicine: sentient beings' own natures, formed by ten kinds of cause and condition, differ from one another, and their illnesses differ accordingly. According to the illness, the medicine administered differs as well — lower, middling, upper, and supreme capacity. The lower capacity has four defining qualities: first, aspiration and delight are narrow and inferior; second, the strength to act is faint and weak; third, the obstruction of the five turbidities is heavy; fourth, wisdom is extremely dull. Because they delight in a lesser dharma, generation-and-extinction is taught to them; because their strength to act is faint and weak, they cultivate the six pāramitās as phenomenal practice; because the obstruction of the five turbidities is heavy, they apply diligent and painstaking antidotes; and because wisdom is dull, severing lust, anger, and delusion is what is named "liberation" for them. This is the medicine of the dharma born from causes and conditions, administered to treat the illness of lower capacity. Though all of the same lower capacity, their delight and aspiration still differ, and the sages, in their treatises, further open this into four. For those who delight in hearing of existence, the *Abhidharma* is taught, giving rise to their own small measure of goodness, breaking through the five turbidities, and by this expedient means seeing the ultimate truth. For those who delight in hearing of nonexistence, the *Tattvasiddhi* is taught, giving rise to their own small measure of goodness, breaking through evil to enter the real. For those who delight in hearing of both existence and nonexistence, the *Piṭaka Treatise* is taught, giving rise to goodness and breaking through evil to enter the real. For those who delight in hearing of neither existence nor nonexistence, the *Sūtra of Transcending Existence and Nonexistence* is taught, giving rise to goodness and breaking through evil to enter the real. This is the bodhisattva who has entered the provisional composing four treatises, expounding the four gates, and administering four medicines, to treat every illness in turn. Next, as for administering medicine to the person of middling capacity: this person's own resolve is somewhat firmer, his strength to act somewhat superior, and he is fit to give rise to goodness grounded in principle; the obstruction of the five turbidities is lighter for him, and his wisdom is somewhat sharper. Meeting his own delight and aspiration, causal arising's own identity with emptiness is taught to him; hearing this, goodness grounded in principle arises, breaking through the cause of evil, and he sees the ultimate meaning. This is administering the medicine of emptiness-identity to treat the person of middling capacity. This too divides into four — lower, middling, upper, and supreme — precisely the four gates entering the very same pool, following the same pattern as before. Next, as for administering medicine to the person of upper capacity: his delight and aspiration are broad, his wholesome roots wide and expansive, the five turbidities already removed, and his wisdom, further, great. The boundless Four Noble Truths are administered to him, giving rise to goodness beyond the three realms; severing the five abodes of affliction in sequence, he enters the middle way. This is administering the medicine of provisional-identity to treat the person of upper capacity. This too divides into four, being the medicine administered through the four gates, understood following the pattern above. Next, as for administering medicine to the person of supreme capacity: this person's delight and aspiration, and even his wisdom, have nothing whatsoever equal to them, hence he is named "the supreme." For him, principle is spoken directly as it is: goodness arises like emptiness itself, and obstruction is extinguished like emptiness itself, entering the ultimate path. This is named administering the medicine of middle-identity to treat the person of supreme capacity. This too has medicine administered through four gates, treating every illness in turn. Should one enter the contemplation of emptiness, there is not even a single dharma remaining — how, then, could there be any further dharmas at all? Here, then, sixteen aspects of the path and cessation are administered, to treat sixteen aspects of suffering and its origin — this is precisely entering the provisional. According to each being's own kind of voice, a sublime sound proclaims itself everywhere, arousing that being's own auditory consciousness, conveyed and transmitted into the mind, so that it is taken up and put into practice, each attaining benefit in turn — like a single cloud raining down, and yet every plant and tree, each according to its own kind, receiving growth.

Fourth, clarifying the stages of entering the provisional: first, surveying the stages across the teachings; second, clarifying the benefit; third, concluding the comprehensive breaking-through. It is commonly said, "First remove the affliction of views, and only afterward turn to habituated thought" — the fruit of entering emptiness already lies so far in the distance, and emerging into the provisional to transform beings seems altogether beyond one's own capacity. Gazing at so steep a cliff, one despairs of it entirely! Here, then, the differing stages of the provisional should be distinguished. Now, at the very outset of the three vehicles, none are ignorant of the Dharma, and all wish to seek buddhahood; yet, wearied and troubled by birth-and-death, they readily retreat and turn back. It is like a person who hears that some distant land holds a mountain of seven treasures, and, heart raised high, binds up his own legs to set forth — but on reflecting how perilous the road is, he retreats and goes no further. The practitioner is exactly the same: fearing birth-and-death, he retreats from the great vehicle and sinks into emptiness instead. Only later, on hearing of the bodhisattva's own supreme and sublime merit, does he reflect on himself as a ruined seed, weeping so that it moves the great chiliocosm itself, overcome with regret and sorrow before even understanding the cause of it. Should one hold to this account alone, there would be only entering emptiness, and no such thing as entering the provisional at all. According to the Tripiṭaka teaching's own bodhisattva, at first he cultivates emptiness like a wolf, subduing the sheep of affliction without yet severing their very bondage. Should he sever that bondage, there would be no accumulated merit of the six pāramitās to fatten his own body — this is the stage of the first incalculable eon. In the second incalculable eon, the fat of affliction is consumed away, and merit grows ever fatter still. In the third incalculable eon, he properly enters the stage of the provisional, benefiting sentient beings — this is the person of lower capacity. The person of middling capacity, having already subdued affliction by the second incalculable eon, his body already fattened by the six pāramitās, is thereby able to transform beings at once — how could he possibly need to wait for the third? The person of upper capacity, at the very moment he first gives rise to the resolve, vows to deliver every being and seek buddhahood; on hearing another's teaching, his mind is already clearly understood, deeply recognizing the true principle; and, for the sake of delivering others, he does not seek his own severance and realization. His mind, turning once more, thinks: "I ought to deliver others — I ought not to fail to deliver them"; and he diligently distinguishes every medicine and every illness. Why is this? Because the five matters described above as the causes of entering the provisional weigh heavily upon him. It is like a person leading a child across dangerous terrain — once he himself is safely across, how could he possibly abandon the child behind? Though he himself already knows emptiness, he does not abandon others on that account — this is the initial resolve itself already able to enter the provisional, without needing to wait until the second incalculable eon at all.

As for the shared teaching's own stages: many cling to the sūtra's saying that "the eighth ground cultivates emerging into the provisional," or that "the sixth or seventh ground, having severed bondage and become equal to the arhat, only then cultivates emerging into the provisional." This is only a single, provisional way of speaking, and cannot be entirely correct. Rather, the Buddha distinguishes this according to three capacities. The person of lower capacity, only once affliction is severed entirely, is able to emerge into the provisional. In the Lotus Sūtra, the Buddha breaks through this very mind that clings to nirvāṇa, urging the arising of the unsurpassed path and the arousal of the wisdom of skillful means. Since this holds for the two lesser vehicles, it ought likewise to hold for the bodhisattva of the very dullest capacity — and this, here, is judged to be the person of lower capacity. As for the person of middling capacity: once the affliction of views is severed, birth-and-death already loosens somewhat, and habituated thought is severed of its own accord. The second ground is named "the bodhisattva's own spiritual powers," and from this point onward he is already able to enter the provisional. As for the person of upper capacity: from the very first resolve, through the wisdom of hearing alone, he is already able to embody and penetrate that views and habituated thought are themselves already emptiness, and has already become a refuge for sentient beings — why, then, would he need to wait until the seventh ground before emerging into the provisional at all? Should one insist on the seventh ground, this is precisely what is criticized in the Larger Sūtra. There is a great bird, its body three hundred yojanas in length and yet without either wing, falling from the heavens, meeting either death or something equal to death. The bodhisattva is exactly the same: cultivating emptiness alone, single-mindedly, from the very outset, all the way through the sixth ground, this is precisely the threefold emptiness fattening the body while the wings of the provisional fail to grow. Should he fall into the expedient path of the two lesser vehicles, this is named "something equal to death"; should he fall into the first fruit, this is named simply "death." Complete exhaustion of view is "something equal to death"; being beyond further training is "death" itself. Should this bird then wish to return to the heavens, could it possibly manage to go? Once fallen into the stage beyond further training, wishing to give rise to the bodhisattva's own resolve, it could never possibly attain this at all — like a person who has been castrated, incapable of the five desires any longer. Neither the Avataṃsaka nor the Larger Sūtra is able to cure this condition; only the Lotus Sūtra is able to cause one beyond further training to give rise once more to wholesome roots, and thereby attain buddhahood — and this is precisely why it is called "sublime." Further, the icchantika, still possessing mind, can yet still become a buddha; but the two lesser vehicles, their wisdom extinguished, cannot give rise to that mind at all. The Lotus Sūtra is able to cure even this — and this, too, is again why it is called "sublime."

As for the distinct teaching's own practitioner: after the mind of the ten abidings, at the stage of the ten practices, he cultivates the expedient means of the provisional. Why is this? Entering into the prajñā of principle is named "abiding"; and the merit born from abiding is named "practice." This is the person of lower capacity. The very first mind of the ten abidings is already able to enter the provisional — having already attained the uncontaminated, and this attainment never regressing, he is already able to emerge and function at once — why, then, would he need to wait until the ten practices before giving rise to great compassion at all? This is the person of middling capacity. Further, the distinct teaching's own first mind is not ignorant of the Dharma, and, penetrating the understanding that every merit is like an illusion or transformation, cultivates skillful means without ever becoming fixed on mere names, furnished with the five causes and conditions described above to benefit sentient beings — this is the person of upper capacity. In the perfect teaching, when the six faculties are purified at the ten degrees of faith, one already sees and hears the affairs of the ten dharma-realms everywhere at once. Were this entering emptiness alone, there would not even be a single thing left to perceive at all — and since it is already said that the six faculties function interchangeably with one another, this is already the stage of entering the provisional. Further, the disciple of the five grades already practices the six pāramitās directly and is already able to expound the Dharma broadly — this, too, is already the stage of entering the provisional; why, then, would one need to wait until the purification of the six faculties at all? Further still, the person of the very first resolve, already able to know the Tathāgata's own secret treasury, perfectly contemplating the three truths, is already able to be identical with the middle — how, then, could he fail to be identical with the provisional as well? The Larger Sūtra says: "The very moment he first sits at the seat of enlightenment, he already accomplishes correct awakening, turns the Dharma-wheel, and delivers sentient beings." Further, the very framework of the six identities already contains the sense of emerging into the provisional — why, then, would one need to wait until the five grades of disciple at all? Every teaching surveyed above holds three such stages — should one insist on a single, fixed judgment, the lower capacity's own account should be taken to clarify the stage in question. There are two reasons for this: first, because it follows the teaching most directly; second, because it is decisively free of any regression. Once the practice of entering the provisional is accomplished, the middling and upper capacities may still show some fluctuation of advance and retreat, and this is exactly why their stage is not taken as the standard account. Given that there are these three capacities for emerging into the provisional, should there not, correspondingly, be three capacities for entering emptiness as well? These are named: entry through sentiment, entry through resemblance, and entry through the real. Entry through sentiment means one who, touched, is able to enter — though this does not mean scattered sentiment. The contemplation that takes the truth as its object, prior to both the resemblance and the real, still corresponds with the dust-object of emptiness. If this is so, what benefit does it bring? This brings the benefit belonging to sentiment. If it brings benefit, is there then no regression? It does not regress altogether all at once; and even should regression occur, one is still able to recollect it and cultivate it again and again, eventually bringing about great benefit.

Question: since the upper capacities of both the shared and distinct teachings are able to enter emptiness and emerge into the provisional, how does this differ from the perfect teaching? Answer: the shared teaching's practitioner enters and emerges without ever being identical with the middle; the distinct teaching's practitioner enters and emerges in strict sequence, without ever achieving a single mind. The perfect teaching's practitioner enters and emerges with a single mind, and is, further, able to enter and emerge distinctly as well — namely: entering the middle more, entering the two truths less; or entering the two truths more, entering the middle less; entering emptiness and the middle more, entering the provisional less; or entering the provisional more, entering emptiness and the middle less; entering the provisional and the middle more, entering emptiness less; or entering emptiness more, entering the provisional and the middle less. Though distinctly varying in this way, none of the three truths is ever missing. If this is so, is this then not simply the same as the sequential distinction found elsewhere? And yet it is still able to constitute a superior kind of distinction — how much more so, then, could it fail to constitute merely an inferior one?

Second, clarifying the benefit of entering the provisional: the bodhisattva does not, at root, esteem emptiness for its own sake in cultivating emptiness — he cultivates emptiness, at root, entirely for the sake of sentient beings. Because he does not esteem emptiness, he does not remain fixed within it; because he must benefit sentient beings, he must emerge from it. Hence there is a response arising from the real, the Dharma-eye matching itself to each capacity. Should a being be delivered by the body of a buddha, he becomes at once the body of a buddha, teaching the Dharma and administering medicine; should a being be delivered by the form of a bodhisattva, a member of the two lesser vehicles, or one of the eight kinds of heavenly and dragon beings, he manifests in that very form for them. Bringing sentient beings to accomplishment, and purifying buddha-lands — this alone is named "benefit." The Tripiṭaka teaching's own bodhisattva, though he too emerges into the provisional, his spiritual powers are still contaminated, not a genuine response arising from the real; his own worldly wisdom of discrimination is not the illumination of the Dharma-eye. Though he benefits sentient beings, this is not yet true accomplishment; though he performs the deeds of a buddha, this is not yet the purification of a buddha-land. It is merely a small portion of transformation, and the benefit brought about is exceedingly slight. As for the shared teaching's own entry into the provisional: though he too distinguishes illness and medicine, he still relies only on the two truths, and his diagnosis of illness is not profound, his recognition of medicine not far-reaching — this is merely spiritual power exercised by conscious intention, not a genuine response arising from the real. A genuine response has both a beginning and an end: acting as parent or teacher across lifetime after lifetime, forming karmic bonds, subduing beings everywhere he goes, spanning countless incalculable eons. Once his wholesome roots have ripened, he is born into a royal palace; beneath the tree of enlightenment he becomes a buddha, delivering beings gradually or all at once, all the way through to entering nirvāṇa, his relics remaining in the world thereafter. Benefiting beings across such a long span, having both a beginning and an end — only this is properly named "response." Something that suddenly appears where there was nothing, briefly emerging and then vanishing again, is therefore not a genuine response. A momentary, partial benefit is not named "accomplishment"; an ashen body entering extinction is not the purification of a buddha-land.

The distinct teaching's own ten practices, entering the provisional, has the same sense of benefit as the shared teaching. But once he ascends to a ground proper, he attains the Tathāgata's own single body as boundless bodies, responding to everything with perfect clarity. At that point, knowing illness, he exhausts the very wellspring of illness itself; at that point, recognizing medicine, he exhausts the entire treasury of medicine; at that point, administering medicine, it is as exact as a seal's own impression, never once mistaken. This is the wisdom of the genuine path in every kind, the most excellent Dharma-eye, whatever response and transformation is called for, spontaneously reaching everywhere at once. Blending his own light with the world's own dust marks the beginning of forming karmic bonds; manifesting the eight aspects to accomplish the path marks its very end. This is named both "transformation" and "response." Whoever sees or hears him receives benefit without exception; whatever he undertakes is itself the purification of a buddha-land — the benefit of entering the provisional is, in every respect, entirely real, never empty. As it is at the point of ascending to a ground, so it is, following the same pattern, at every later ground as well. All the way through to the perfect teaching's own first abiding, entering the provisional brings genuine and real benefit; and all the way through to its very final mind, this remains exactly the same. Grasping this sense, one is able to distinguish genuine transformation from counterfeit, and thereby recognize the true from the false. Why is this? Because even Māra is able to use a contaminated mind to fashion an uncontaminated form, transforming himself into the very likeness of a buddha. Laozi's own "ascent to the west" is likewise said to have transformed into a buddha to convert the barbarians; and various non-Buddhist paths transform Śākyamuni into a sheep — these are merely rumors that have lingered on, like water stagnating by a riverbank. Worldly wisdom and the five mundane spiritual powers can accomplish anything at all, and deviant transformations of this kind are boundless and without limit. Since even these fall short of the Tripiṭaka teaching's own five spiritual powers' transformation, how, then, could they possibly be mistaken for the distinct or perfect teachings' own spontaneous and genuine transformation? Accounts of transformation come in many kinds, and those without discerning eyes mistakenly come to believe and accept them. One who is able to observe deeply must never lump these together indiscriminately. One should therefore know that it is only from the very ground of the Dharma-body that a being descends and responds throughout the ten dharma-realms to deliver sentient beings — only this constitutes entering the provisional as a truly beneficial stage.

Third, concluding the comprehensive breaking-through: before the real is brought forth, whatever one grasps at and calculates upon, in its hundred thousand myriad kinds, is entirely named "view" — like a blind person asking about milk, and what is described being nothing like milk's own true color at all, whether a rope or a pestle, what could this possibly have to do with the actual matter of an elephant? The view expressed in such delirious talk is itself already the provisional, and this is exactly why it is traced through the single, compound, and complete forms in order to contemplate and break through it. Should this breaking-through fail to be comprehensive, one cannot enter emptiness; only once view and habituated thought are both exhausted is this properly named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma." Discussed merely in terms of the written word, this is indeed how it stands — but the actual sense is not so simple. Views and habituated thought are themselves already ignorance; and ignorance is itself already the Dharma-nature. The breaking-through of views and habituated thought is itself already the breaking-through of ignorance; and the breaking-through of ignorance is itself already the seeing of the Dharma-nature. Entering the emptiness of true reality itself — only this is properly named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma." Entering the provisional from emptiness, comprehensively breaking through every dharma, is exactly the same. The provisional holds boundless dharmas of illness, dharmas of medicine, and dharmas of administering medicine; should one's distinguishing of these three fail to penetrate them fully, this is not named "comprehensively breaking through." Before the Dharma-eye has yet been brought forth, though there is already some distinguishing, what is thereby seen remains only partial, and this is not named "comprehensively breaking through." Once the six faculties are purified, distinguishing that a single illness has so many kinds, understanding a single phrase of the Dharma so as to penetrate boundless further phrases, receiving and upholding the teachings of every buddha throughout the ten directions all at the very same moment — this is a portion resembling the genuine breath of it. Only once the obstruction of ignorance's own blockage is broken through, and the two truths are illuminated at once, is this properly named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma." Stated in essence: breaking-through accomplished in strict sequence is not properly named "comprehensive"; only breaking-through accomplished without any fixed sequence at all is properly named "comprehensive." Since the methods of contemplation given above are already so numerous and overlapping, and for fear that this might confuse the reader, this conclusion on comprehensively breaking through every dharma is given here, following upon the two contemplations already discussed.

Third, clarifying the middle way's own calming-and-contemplation, comprehensively breaking through every dharma: what was discussed before — the calming-and-contemplation of "arising broken through by non-arising," breaking through every dharma — provisionally resembles one's own practice alone; what was discussed next — the calming-and-contemplation of "non-arising giving rise to arising," breaking through every dharma — provisionally resembles the transformation of others; and now, the calming-and-contemplation of "non-arising and non-arising," breaking through every dharma, provisionally resembles negating both self and other at once, and also illuminating both self and other at once. "Arising broken through by non-arising" is itself already "non-arising giving rise to arising," and is itself also "non-arising and non-arising"; self is itself non-self, and is also neither self nor non-self. "Non-arising giving rise to arising" is itself already "arising broken through by non-arising," and is itself also "non-arising and non-arising"; other is itself non-other, and is also neither other nor non-other. "Non-arising and non-arising" is itself already "arising broken through by non-arising," and is itself also "non-arising giving rise to arising"; and is itself also the negation of both at once, and is itself also the illumination of both at once. These various distinctions are made only in order to render this easier to understand, and are stated in the manner given above for that reason alone.

Under this heading there are four parts: first, the intent of cultivating the middle contemplation; second, the conditions for cultivating the middle contemplation; third, the actual cultivation of the middle contemplation; fourth, clarifying the stages and their benefit. As for its intent: the Tripiṭaka teaching's own bodhisattva relies one-sidedly on worldly wisdom to illuminate the mundane; the two lesser vehicles rely one-sidedly on the analytical method to enter the real; only the Buddha, the two truths fully complete within him, differs from his disciples, and so a third contemplation is provisionally established for him alone. Should one construct a further account of "transcending existence" and "transcending nonexistence," this is simply transcending the two views of existence and nonexistence — there is, in truth, no further, separate principle to contemplate beyond this, and so a third contemplation is not actually needed here. In the shared teaching, the two lesser vehicles rely one-sidedly on the embodying method to enter the real; the bodhisattva, through compassion, enters the provisional; only the Buddha illuminates both at once, the path and its contemplation flowing together, differing from his disciples, and so a third contemplation, too, is provisionally established for him — yet there is, likewise, no further, separate principle differing from the real truth here either. What the Kaishan school clings to, that "the fruit of buddhahood does not lie outside the two truths," is precisely this same sense. Though there is no further, separate principle, one may still speak of "the real" — like an illusion, like a transformation, neither arising nor ceasing — and this may be given the name "the middle way." One may, further, have a genuine sense of "the middle way" here as well: the Buddha's own complete-word gate penetrates both the shared-with-shared and the shared-with-distinct. The dull of capacity can penetrate only the shared-with-shared, unable to penetrate the shared-with-distinct, and this is exactly why this teaching admits of the sense of being "grafted onto by the distinct." The sharp of capacity, being grafted in this way, apply the middle way further still; those not so grafted have no need of a third contemplation at all. The sense of this grafting is explained in the section on revealing the essence. Should the distinct teaching construct either the two truths or the three truths, in either case it already, fundamentally, knows the middle way. Constructing the three truths, this is readily understood. Constructing the two truths instead, the middle way serves as the real, and existence and nonexistence serve as the mundane. Illuminating these two truths, moving freely between them and hitting exactly upon the mean, is named "the middle way"; applying both without partiality to either is named "illuminating both at once." Though two different names are given, the principle of the middle is thereby revealed all the same. Yet this principle is profound and deep, while capacity is dull and obstruction heavy — like a person whose eyes are dim, unable to thread a needle precisely. How, then, does one thread this needle? For the sake of the constant principle, one first breaks through the grasping at marks, the eye of wisdom seeing emptiness; next one breaks through ignorance itself, the Dharma-eye seeing the provisional; advancing further to cultivate the middle way, one breaks through a single portion of ignorance, opens a single portion of the buddha-eye, and sees a single portion of the middle — only this is the genuine cause. Cause and fruit both brought to fullness, only then is one named a buddha. The two truths are not yet the correct intent, and are hence not named "the cause." This is just as, in the Hīnayāna, subduing affliction by expedient means without yet seeing the real is not named "cultivating the path"; only after the truth is seen, cultivating the genuine path in full, is this properly the genuine cause, with the stage beyond further training as its genuine fruit. The distinct teaching proceeds according to the very same pattern: since the first two contemplations are themselves already an expedient means, they must still lead into the middle; and though this is indeed necessary, it still requires the two prior contemplations first. Should these two contemplations not yet be accomplished, there is likewise no room yet for the third contemplation at all.

The perfect teaching's own initial knowledge of the middle way likewise breaks through the same two afflictions beforehand, differing only in speed and duration. Why is this? The distinct teaching removes the two afflictions across the full span of the thirty minds, spanning kalpa after kalpa, and only afterward does it finally break through ignorance itself. The perfect teaching is not like this: within this very body alone, it breaks through both afflictions at once, entering the middle way directly, accomplished within a single lifetime. It is like a thief guarded by three successive walls: one person, his weapons dull, his bodily strength weak, and his strategy meager, must first break through two walls, then regroup his forces before breaking through the third — and so this takes him a long stretch of days and months. Another person, his body strong, his weapons sharp, and his tactics abundant, breaks through all three walls in a single day, without waiting for any further time at all. This simile makes the sense of the matter plain. It is also like two pieces of iron: one requires repeated forging and tempering before it becomes useful; the other is already an ancient pearl of iron, sharp the very moment it is forged. For this same reason, the perfect teaching's own first mind cultivates all three contemplations at once, without waiting for the first two to be accomplished first. And for this same reason, the third contemplation must now be clarified in full.

Second, the conditions for cultivating the middle contemplation, briefly stated, are five: first, for the sake of unconditioned compassion; second, to fulfill the vast vow; third, to seek the Buddha's own wisdom; fourth, to study great skillful means; fifth, to cultivate firm and resolute diligence. First, unconditioned compassion is precisely the Tathāgata's own compassion. This compassion shares the very same essence as true reality itself: it does not grasp at the mark of sentient beings, and is hence free of both craving and view; it does not grasp at the mark of nirvāṇa, and is hence not mere emptiness and quiescence. Being not mere emptiness and quiescence, it is not compassion conditioned upon dharmas alone; being free of craving and view, it is not conditioned upon sentient beings alone. Free of the marks of both extremes, it is thus named "unconditioned." The Great Sūtra says: "That which takes the Tathāgata himself as its object is named 'the unconditioned.'" Universally covering the entire dharma-realm, it pulls out the very root of suffering, and bestows ultimate bliss. The compassion of the two contemplations discussed above has its own boundary and limit; the Tathāgata's own compassion has no such boundary or limit at all. The compassion of the two contemplations discussed above is shared with the bodhisattva; unconditioned compassion belongs to the Tathāgata alone. The two prior compassions contain nothing further within them; the Tathāgata's own compassion is complete with every dharma of the Buddha, the ten powers, and the fearlessnesses — it is the tathāgatagarbha itself, the very ocean gathering in every dharma. Hence the Great Sūtra says: "Whether compassion is existent, or nonexistent, or neither existent nor nonexistent, a compassion of this kind is precisely the very state of every buddha and tathāgata." One should know that compassion, too, is complete with all three truths. Kāśyapa praises this, saying: "Now I wish to praise this with a single dharma alone, namely the mind of loving-kindness roaming throughout the world. This loving-kindness is itself already the great gathering of every Dharma! This loving-kindness is itself already true liberation! And liberation is itself already the great nirvāṇa!" The compassion discussed above is accomplished only through deliberate mental effort; this compassion functions spontaneously, without ever being invoked. It is like reaching out one's own hand to draw forth a lion, causing it to be tamed; or like a lodestone drawing iron to itself, taking hold of it without any conscious intention at all. Now, iron placed beyond the reach of any obstruction — the stone is unable to draw it in. Sentient beings' own mind-nature is itself already unconditioned compassion, yet the obstruction of ignorance stands between them, preventing it from spontaneously drawing in everything at once. Here, then, one wishes to break through the obstruction of ignorance, revealing the Buddha's own lodestone of compassion, spontaneously drawing in boundless dharmas of the Buddha and boundless sentient beings alike. Wishing to cultivate this compassion — who else but the contemplation of the middle way could ever open this path? It is like how water gives rise to fire, and yet water itself cannot extinguish that very fire — one must, instead, use fire itself to extinguish it. This obstruction of ignorance arises dependent upon the two contemplations already discussed, and these same two contemplations are unable to remove it; only the contemplation of the middle way is able to break through it. For this cause and condition, the third contemplation is cultivated.

Second, fulfilling the original vast vow: at the very moment the resolve first arose, the four universal vows were raised, equal in scope to empty space itself. The two contemplations of emptiness and the provisional, knowing suffering and severing its origin, are still only like branches and leaves; what remains still unknown and unsevered is like the very root itself. The two contemplations of emptiness and the provisional, cultivating the path and realizing cessation, are still only like a lit torch, unable to illuminate the deep darkness of every mountain valley. Though these two contemplations are cultivated, the vow itself remains unfulfilled. It is like how a hundred rivers together cannot overflow the ocean, and yet a single downpour from the dragon-king Sāgara upon a mountain spring can fill it to the brim at once. The direct contemplation of the middle way is exactly the same: knowing every suffering, severing the origin throughout the entire dharma-realm, cultivating the unsurpassed path, and realizing ultimate cessation. In order to fulfill this original vow, the third contemplation must be cultivated.

Third, seeking the Buddha's own wisdom: this is precisely the wisdom of all modes' own knowing, and the buddha-eye's own seeing — vast and profound, understanding both horizontally and vertically, complete in the very ultimate. The eye and wisdom of the two contemplations discussed above, compared against the Buddha's own dharma, are like a blind person imagining a painting in the dark, unable to actually see anything at all — falling into a pit or ditch, how could he possibly move forward? Should one cultivate the middle way, it is like having both eyes and feet, arriving at a cool and refreshing pond, removing the feverish distress of both extremes; awakening and resting there, drinking its own water — cool, smooth, fragrant, and sweet — this is named "the Buddha's own wisdom-knowing." Seeing that pond's own shape, whether round or square, its depth and shallowness, the water's color pure and clear — this is named "the buddha-eye's own seeing." Wishing to attain the Tathāgata's own eye and wisdom of true reality, this cannot be accomplished apart from calming-and-contemplation, and this is why the third contemplation is cultivated.

Fourth, studying great skillful means: this is precisely the Tathāgata's own effortless skillful expedience, his boundless great function, abiding in the Śūraṅgama samādhi, manifesting himself in every conceivable way. His inconceivable and skillful power of expedient means shows sentient beings a wind within empty space, or carrying grass unburned through the fire that consumes an entire kalpa — matters of the greatest difficulty, and hence requiring the utmost skill. Thus Maitreya, at first, taught a certain son of heaven the practice of non-regression, and Vimalakīrti immediately rebuked him, saying: "Is bodhi something attained through arising from suchness? There is no bodhi to be attained in this way — do not give rise to such a view." Having thus broken through this view, he then taught that quiescent cessation is itself bodhi, that non-duality is itself bodhi, that every sentient being is itself already bodhi. That son of heaven, hearing this profound teaching, awakened to the forbearance of the unborn. These two great beings, striking one another like hammer and anvil, caused one who was difficult to awaken to awaken, realizing a dharma difficult to realize. Without skillful means, how could either possibly benefit the other at all? Further, when the Tathāgata first appeared in the world, he did not immediately teach the great vehicle, but used every kind of skillful means, similes, and figures of speech to guide sentient beings, causing them to leave behind every attachment, and only afterward opened the Buddha's own knowledge and vision, revealing to them the one vehicle. This is exactly why skillful means is praised so earnestly and so often. The genuine and the real are revealed precisely through the merit of skillful expedience — hence it is said: "Though I speak of every kind of path, in truth it is all for the sake of the one vehicle alone"; "further employing various different skillful means, to help reveal the ultimate meaning"; "the Buddha's own wisdom is inconceivable, his skillful means spoken exactly as suited to the occasion"; "the Buddha's own intent is difficult to fathom, and none is able to comprehend it fully." Through a hundred thousand skillful means, he causes even the dullest of capacity to enter sublimely into the very center of the truth. The wisdom of the two contemplations discussed above has only a slight and feeble function by comparison — as when Pūrṇa, transforming a certain non-Buddhist follower, was instead met with mockery in return; or when Mañjuśrī, upon a brief visit, caused both teacher and disciple to scatter like wind. Wishing to attain this very skillful means of the Tathāgata's own — unless it is by way of the middle contemplation, this could never be accomplished at all — and this is why the third contemplation is cultivated.

Fifth, great diligence: wishing to accomplish a great task, one applies great effort and strength. The Lotus Sūtra says: "It is like one of great courage and strength, able to accomplish the most difficult of tasks." Unmoved, never retreating — only this is properly named "a being of great resolve." Giving no thought even to one's own body or life, how much less, then, to mere wealth or possessions? Even having already attained bodhi, one still does not rest — how much more so, then, before it is attained? The merit of the two contemplations discussed above is slight, and its reward small; the merit of the middle contemplation covers the entire world, its reward as great as the very jewel unbound from the crown of one's own topknot. For the sake of great diligence, the third contemplation is cultivated. The causes and conditions for cultivating the middle way are exceedingly numerous — matched against the contemplation of emerging into the provisional, only five are briefly stated here.

Third, the actual cultivation of the middle contemplation: this contemplation directly breaks through ignorance. Ignorance is utterly remote and cut off, neither seen nor known by any faculty of sight or thought — how, then, could it possibly be contemplated at all? Take, for example, the first contemplation, contemplating the real: the real has no form or image, and no fixed location either, and yet one simply contemplates the threefold provisional affliction of the mind within the aggregates, entries, and elements, pursuing it through the four propositions, skillfully cultivating calming-and-contemplation, until the uncontaminated is brought forth — this is named "seeing the real." Next, the contemplation contemplating the provisional: what, then, is this "provisional"? One simply contemplates that the wisdom of emptiness is able to render itself no longer merely empty, and, within a single mind, points to and displays the ten thousand practices — the Dharma-eye is thereby brought forth, comprehensively knowing both medicine and illness, and this is why it is named "the contemplation of the provisional." Contemplating ignorance now proceeds in exactly the same manner. Contemplating the wisdom of these two contemplations, insofar as it breaks through affliction, it is named "wisdom." But now, measured against the middle way, this very wisdom itself becomes, in turn, an affliction. This affliction is precisely the obstruction belonging to the middle way's own wisdom, and is hence named "the intellectual obstruction." Further, this intellectual obstruction obstructs the middle way's own wisdom, preventing that wisdom from being brought forth, and this, too, is why it is named "the intellectual obstruction." What was said first names wisdom as that which obstructs; what is said now names this same wisdom as that which is itself obstructed. This is just as with the sixty-two views: view itself is named "the nature of discernment," discernment being simply mundane wisdom; yet, measured against the uncontaminated, this very nature of discernment, uniting with views and habituated thought, is able to obstruct the real. This wisdom of the two truths, uniting with ignorance, obstructs the middle way in exactly the same manner. Further, what obstructs is affliction, and what is obstructed is the middle way's own wisdom — discussed together, what obstructs and what is obstructed, this is exactly why it is named "the intellectual obstruction." How, then, does one contemplate that these two wisdoms are themselves already ignorance? Were this actually illumination, the wisdom of every mode would already be manifest, thoroughly discerning every buddha's own ten powers and fearlessnesses, every dharma completely and fully awakened to — only then could this properly be called illumination. But it is not yet so now — how, then, could this fail to be ignorance itself? Contemplating this ignorance comprises three passes: first, contemplating ignorance itself; second, contemplating the Dharma-nature; third, contemplating the real and the conditioned.

First, contemplating ignorance itself: the wisdom of emptiness and of the provisional corresponds with the mind. Contemplating these two wisdoms: do they arise from the Dharma-nature? Do they arise from ignorance? Do they arise from the union of the Dharma-nature and ignorance together? Or do they arise apart from both? If they arise from the Dharma-nature, the Dharma-nature has no arising at all. If they arise from ignorance, ignorance is itself unreal, and has, moreover, nothing to do with the middle way. If they arise from the union of both together, this incurs two separate faults at once. And if they arise apart from both, then there is no cause or condition for their arising at all. The Middle Treatise says: "No dharma arises of itself..." Refuted at length in exactly this way, as already explained above in the section on composite arising. Performing this contemplation, one becomes utterly dissolved and pure, the mind resting on nothing whatsoever, clinging to nothing at all, neither perceiving nor knowing anything in particular — both the contemplating and the contemplated become like empty space itself, incapable of being shown or spoken. Though the real has not yet been brought forth, one is decisively free of any attachment to the four propositions. It is like gazing from a distance, in the dark, at a tree stump, unable to tell whether it is a person or merely a stump. A person should show the six-part marks of movement; a stump has no such six parts, and shows the mark of stillness instead. Gazing at it for a long while, the mind takes it to be a stump, and yet this, too, is still not entirely clear. Giving rise to attachment to the four propositions is likened to the mark of movement; movement is likened to the mark of impermanence, and stillness to the mark of permanence. Contemplating without pause for a long while, one comes to know with certainty that it is permanent, no longer giving rise to any of the four attachments — and yet, ignorance not yet broken through, this still remains not entirely clear. Though not entirely clear, one knows with certainty that one permanence is every permanence, and travels the great, direct road, without hindrance or difficulty. Views, habituated thought, and the dust-and-sand afflictions having already, long since, been thoroughly penetrated, only the wisdom of these two contemplations remains, likened here to the vajra itself. Contemplation that breaks through the intellectual obstruction is named "the contemplation that pierces through"; settling the mind upon this very principle is named "the contemplation that reaches through." This principle is inconceivable, and is named "the emptiness of the ultimate meaning." Compared against the two lesser vehicles' own fixed and inert object of emptiness, this is named "wisdom" instead; and yet this Dharma-nature itself is neither wisdom nor non-wisdom — this is precisely the middle contemplation. It is complete with all three of these senses at once.

Furthermore, embodying and penetrating the ignorance of the intellectual obstruction, it has no nature of self, of other, of both together, or of neither — in the final analysis, it cannot be found at all. It is like a precept-upholding monk observing water free of insects: something stirs within it — is it an insect, or merely dust? An insect would show the mark of a living being; dust shows no such living mark. Examining it closely without pause, though one comes to know it is merely dust, this too remains not entirely clear. Should one hold that ignorance has one of the four natures — of self, other, both, or neither — that nature would itself be a mark of arising and movement; but since it has none of these four natures, it has, correspondingly, neither any fixed nature nor any arising or movement at all. Though one knows it does not move, this too is not yet entirely certain; though not yet entirely certain, one nonetheless contemplates with certainty that it abides constant and unmoving. The prior flux of the two extremes, birth-and-death and nirvāṇa, has already been brought to rest by the two contemplations discussed above; only the turning and revolving of ignorance itself has not yet been stilled. Now, penetrating through to the very root-source of mind, ignorance itself grows quiescent — this is named "the calming that stills through resting." Settling the mind upon this very principle is named "the calming that stills through abiding." The principle of constant abiding is itself neither calmed nor uncalmed; only in contrast to impermanent movement is it spoken of as "calmed" — and this, precisely, being neither calmed nor uncalmed, is named "the middle calming." It, too, is complete with all three of these senses at once. Furthermore, within the very mind of the intellectual obstruction there is, likewise, already the threefold provisional and the four propositions of calming-and-contemplation, shifting between faith and dharma, skillfully cultivated through the four siddhāntas — all of this proceeding exactly as explained before. These same four propositions are themselves already the very gate of contemplation; apart from these four, there is no other place from which to cultivate contemplation at all. Through skillful means, one penetrates through by way of this gate, and thereby comes to see the middle way; yet at the very moment the middle way is seen, this is no longer, strictly speaking, identical with any one of the four contemplations. Should one gain entry through any single one of them, every other proposition is thereby already interfused with it, and no further cultivation is needed. Should one not yet have penetrated through, one simply cultivates the four propositions diligently, using skillful means to attain awakening. Should one cling fixedly to these four, one is instead burned by that very flame, obstructed and blocked, unable to pass through; but should one be free of any such clinging attachment, this is itself already contemplating ignorance through the four propositions and attaining awakening thereby.

Second, breaking through ignorance by way of the Dharma-nature: through the four propositions discussed above, contemplating the intellectual obstruction and seeking the arising of ignorance itself, this is, in the final analysis, never to be found at all. One may thereby give rise to a certain kind of understanding, or bring forth a certain state of concentration, and decisively conclude that ignorance is itself already the Dharma-nature. Yet one who calculates in this way has not actually awakened the mind at all — this is merely a contemplative understanding that has arisen. It is like seeing dust in the darkness and decisively concluding that it is merely dust. One should, at this point, shift the contemplation, and contemplate the Dharma-nature itself instead. Does the mind of the Dharma-nature arise once the mind of ignorance has ceased? Does it arise without ignorance having ceased at all? Does it arise through both cessation and non-cessation together? Or does it arise through neither cessation nor non-cessation? Should the mind of the Dharma-nature arise once ignorance has ceased, how could something already ceased possibly give rise to anything at all? Should it arise without ignorance ceasing, then illumination and ignorance would exist side by side at once. Should it arise from both together, this incurs two separate faults. And arising apart from both is simply impossible. It arises neither of itself, nor from another, nor from both together, nor without any cause at all. Through these same four propositions, in each and every one of them, shifting between faith and dharma, skillfully applying the four siddhāntas, one is thereby able to attain awakening, penetrating through the very same pool by way of all four gates. Even should one not yet have attained awakening, one holds with certainty that this contemplative wisdom of the middle way is able to break through ignorance, constantly studying it in exactly this manner, without any further, separate cultivation needed.

Third, breaking through ignorance by way of the real and the conditioned: contemplating this very contemplative wisdom — against what does it depend for its own name? Is it wisdom, or is it not wisdom? Should this dependence be reckoned horizontally, then the buddhas of the ten directions are themselves wisdom, are themselves illumination, and it is against them that I myself am reckoned to lack wisdom, to lack illumination. Should this dependence be reckoned vertically, then I myself, at some future time, will break through this very blindness and obscurity to attain great illumination, and it is against this future attainment that my present state is reckoned to lack wisdom, to lack illumination. Given wisdom and illumination of this kind, are they cultivated through conditions? Are they cultivated through the real itself? Are they cultivated through the union of both the real and conditions? Or apart from both the real and conditions? Should they be cultivated through conditions, conditions are themselves impermanent — how, then, could something permanent possibly arise from them? Should they be cultivated through the real itself, the real ought not to require any cultivation at all. Two schools explain this differently: one says that cultivation through conditions reveals cultivation through the real; the other says that cultivation through conditions itself ceases, and the real then reveals itself spontaneously. Its spontaneous self-revelation is arising of itself; its revelation by way of conditions is arising from another; the union of the real and conditions is arising from both together; and apart from both the real and conditions is arising without any cause at all. Through these four propositions, seeking wisdom, it cannot be found; and yet the absence of wisdom, too, cannot be found. Why is this? "The absence of wisdom" is spoken of only in dependence upon "wisdom" itself — and since wisdom itself has no fixed existence, there is nothing left for its absence to depend upon either, and so the absence of wisdom, too, is itself without existence. Should one cling fixedly to either the real or conditions as correct, this fails to bring forth the middle, and both alike become an obstruction to wisdom. Should one not cling in this way, this is itself already the four gates. Should one come to accord with principle itself, this principle is neither the real, nor conditions, nor both together, nor apart from both — incapable of being shown or spoken at all. Yet, should the occasion and capacity call for it, this too may still be explained through all four propositions. The siddhāntas' own skillful means admit of no fixed clinging at all, speaking differently according to each occasion, so that hearing it, one attains the path directly. This is precisely what is meant by "the permanent arising from the impermanent." The Great Sūtra says: "The cause is impermanent, and yet the fruit is permanent." It further says: "The sandalwood tree grows from the very seed of the eranda plant." At times it is said: "It is born from within the very lineage-seed of the Dharma-king himself" — this is precisely cultivation through the real. At times it is said: "By the very extinguishing of ignorance as cause, one attains the lamp of bodhi" — or it is said: "Neither through inward contemplation nor through outward contemplation does one attain this very wisdom." Attainment through no attainment — taking this very attainment as no attainment at all is the sense of entering emptiness; no attainment being itself already attainment is the sense of entering the provisional; attainment and no-attainment both alike unfindable, illuminating both attainment and no-attainment at once, is the sense of entering the middle. The various bodhisattvas, each expounding one gate one-sidedly — as when Vasubandhu clarifies the ālayavijñāna as the mundane truth, with a separate, distinct suchness beyond it, this being the very central subject of his own treatise, while meditative concentration and its supporting practices serve merely as accompanying adornments to it; or as when the Middle Treatise expounds ultimate emptiness, with emptiness itself as the central subject of that treatise, and everything else serving merely as its supporting practice — other gates, too, ought correspondingly to have their own bodhisattvas composing treatises to expound them. How could treatises composed with differing accounts possibly lie outside these same four gates? Though the gates differ in their point of entry, the accord they reach is never actually different. Grasping this sense, what discord or contention could there possibly be, that one should bitterly stir up such conflict? Should one cultivate contemplation by way of the four gates, one may proceed according to delight, or suitability, or antidote, or direct entry. As it is for one gate, so it is for every other gate as well. Though the contemplative practices differ, how could the attainment of the path itself possibly differ? The sūtras and treatises, addressing differing conditions, have long given rise to disputes difficult to reconcile — yet applying this very explanation, the ice melts and the clouds disperse of themselves. Contemplative practice of this kind accords with the very root-principle of the teaching, matching and according with it in full — what room could there possibly be for right or wrong here at all? One with clear and discerning eyes relies on the meaning, not on the mere words; one who is truly wise will never give rise to doubt over this. Only one without eyes, without understanding, labors in vain, bewildered and astonished — what benefit could this possibly bring?

Question: ignorance is itself already the Dharma-nature, and the Dharma-nature is itself already ignorance. When ignorance is broken through, is the Dharma-nature thereby broken as well? When the Dharma-nature is manifest, is ignorance thereby manifest as well? Answer: in truth, principle itself has no name at all — it is only in contrast to ignorance that it is called "the Dharma-nature." Once the Dharma-nature is manifest, ignorance itself is thereby transformed into illumination; and once ignorance is broken through, there is no longer any ignorance left at all — against what, then, could the Dharma-nature possibly still be discussed at all? Question: since ignorance is itself already the Dharma-nature, and there is no longer any separate ignorance remaining, with what, then, is it "identical"? Answer: it is like explaining to someone who cannot recognize ice, pointing at water and saying "this is ice," or pointing at ice and saying "this is water" — there are, in truth, only the names themselves; how could there possibly be two separate things here actually identical with one another? It is like a single pearl that, turned toward the moon, produces water, and, turned toward the sun, produces fire — turned toward neither, it produces neither water nor fire at all. The single thing has never actually been two, and yet there remains this distinction between water and fire.

Fourth, the stages of cultivating the middle contemplation: the two calmings discussed above are the expedient means of the middle way's own double negation; the two contemplations discussed above are the expedient means of illuminating both at once. Through this negation and illumination together, one enters the middle way, spontaneously flowing as both at once, spontaneously illuminating both at once. Cultivating this double-flowing, there are, in all, three different accounts of where this occurs. Should the distinct teaching graft onto the shared: the seventh ground is where its cultivation is discussed, and the eighth ground is where its realization is discussed. The distinct teaching's own account holds that the ten dedications is where its cultivation is discussed, and ascending to a ground is where its realization is discussed. Cultivation and realization placed this high and this distant, a beginning practitioner cannot even yet cultivate dry wisdom itself — how, then, could he possibly realize the eighth ground at all? This contemplation of the middle way, on such an account, brings no benefit to the ordinary being whatsoever. Further, the beginning practitioner has not even yet entered the ten degrees of faith, let alone reached the ten dedications — and without the ten dedications, how could he possibly cultivate the middle at all? Without cultivation, there is no realization either. This contemplation of the middle way, on such an account, gazing at so distant a cliff, brings the ordinary person no benefit at all. Here, then, it is clarified that the perfect teaching's own very first of the five grades, though it is nothing more than the stage of the ordinary being, is already able to perfectly contemplate the three truths, cultivating the emptiness of the middle, and thereby sit upon the Tathāgata's own very seat; cultivating the forbearance of quiescent cessation, and thereby wear the Tathāgata's own very robe; cultivating the Buddha's own concentration and wisdom, adorning himself with the Tathāgata's own adornment; and cultivating unconditioned compassion, and thereby enter the Tathāgata's own very chamber. Beginning from the first grade and advancing into the fifth, the dharma of resemblance arises: seeing a swan and thereby knowing a pond lies nearby, seeing smoke and thereby confirming there is fire — this is precisely the person at the stage of resemblance, entering the purification of the six faculties. This is just as the non-Buddhist paths, not cultivating the foundations of mindfulness, never attain even the slightest portion of warmth at all. The two contemplations proceed in exactly the same way: without cultivating the middle way, no resemblance of understanding is ever brought forth. Here, now, the five grades cultivating the middle are able to give rise to a resemblance of understanding, and turn thereby into the first abiding, at which point ignorance itself is broken through directly. Hence the Avataṃsaka Sūtra, explaining the first abiding, says: "Undefiled, like empty space itself, the pure and sublime Dharma-body, perfectly clear, responding to everything at once." The genuine affliction and its habituation are both, at that very moment, exhausted entirely, with nothing whatsoever remaining. "The first arising already surpasses the Sage of Silence himself" — this is exactly that same sense. Beginning from the first grade, and ending at the first abiding, this can be cultivated within a single lifetime, and realized within a single lifetime — there is no need to wait until one's stage ascends to the seventh ground before ever beginning to cultivate this at all. What leisure, then, is there to wait so joyfully for the double-flowing to begin only then? The reason the earlier teachings place this stage so high is that theirs is merely a statement of expedient means; the reason the perfect teaching places this stage so low is that its own account is the statement of the genuine truth itself. The Lotus Sūtra says: "A matter such as this is merely my own skillful means — every buddha does exactly the same. Now, then, I shall speak to you of the most genuine matter of all." This is precisely that same sense.

Furthermore, at the very moment the Tripiṭaka teaching's own bodhisattva sits at the seat of enlightenment, he is still possessed of affliction in full, and hence has no double-flowing at all — the stage of double-flowing belongs to the Buddha alone in that teaching. In the shared teaching, for one grafted onto by the distinct, the stage of double-flowing lies at the eighth ground; in the distinct teaching, the stage of double-flowing lies at the first ground — and so, gradually drawing the practitioner onward, its own stage is placed somewhat lower still, and the genuine intent is thereby made ever more manifest. Though it is said that the first abiding, breaking through a single portion of ignorance, is the stage of double-flowing, this is only a brief way of speaking. It is like saying "a sail carries one three thousand leagues in a single day" — this "a single day" is only a brief way of speaking as well. Or it is like the nine grades of dhyāna — this too is only a broad approximation. Thus, when the Buddha attained the fourth dhyāna, Śāriputra did not know it; when Śāriputra entered the fourth dhyāna, Maudgalyāyana did not know it; and when Maudgalyāyana entered the fourth dhyāna, the ordinary monks did not know it. Reasoning in this way, dhyāna itself is by no means confined to merely nine grades. The first abiding is exactly the same: what is spoken of as "a single grade" is likewise, in truth, boundless grades within it. This very stage is already able to pervade the entire dharma-realm, performing the deeds of a buddha, beyond all possible measure or limit. As is explained at length in the Śūraṅgama and Avataṃsaka Sūtras, it already manifests the eight aspects of a buddha's life — how much more, then, could anything else be involved besides! The two contemplations discussed before have already concluded, together, as comprehensively breaking through every dharma, exactly as explained above. Now, the direct contemplation of the middle way, contemplating ignorance and the Dharma-nature, relies on neither of the two extremes, relies on none of the four propositions, is, in the final analysis, utterly pure, resting on nothing, attached to nothing at all. Hence the Vimalakīrti Sūtra says: "I bow my head before that which is like empty space, resting on nothing whatsoever." This wisdom opens wide and clear — breaking through one thing breaks through everything at once, leaving nothing whatsoever left unbroken through — and this is exactly why it is named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma."

Second, clarifying the comprehensive breaking-through by way of other gates: what was discussed above, relying on the single gate of the unborn, cultivated the three contemplations vertically, thoroughly illuminating all three truths, comprehensively breaking through every dharma. Compared against the gate of the unborn, every one of the boundless other gates is horizontal. It is like a set of doors passing straight through, one behind the other — this is named "vertical"; and like doors arranged side by side, winding along in a row — this is named "horizontal." Whether by the horizontal or the vertical, one alike arrives at seeing the king himself — and this is exactly why the contemplation is now discussed in terms of the horizontal, in order to distinguish comprehensively breaking through every dharma by this further means. As for these horizontal gates: as with the Middle Treatise's own eight negations — neither arising, nor ceasing; neither permanent, nor annihilated; neither one, nor different; neither coming, nor going. A single treatise clarifies these eight gates alone, yet across the various sūtras and treatises, such gates are boundless in number. There is neither existent, nor nonexistent; neither defiled, nor pure; neither abiding, nor attached; neither received, nor grasped; neither empty, nor real; neither bound, nor liberated. Teaching-gates and practice-gates of this kind, across every teaching, are boundless in number, and every one of them is equally able to lead through — this is exactly why each is called a "gate." The Middle Treatise says: "Should one contemplate deeply that nothing is permanent, and nothing is annihilated, one thereby enters directly into the very sense of neither arising, nor ceasing." Why is this? Neither arising is itself already neither different; neither ceasing is itself already neither one. "Arising" means gathering into formation, which is precisely the sense of "different"; "ceasing" means dispersing into dissolution, which is precisely the sense of "one." Neither arising is itself neither permanent; neither ceasing is itself neither annihilated. Neither arising is itself neither coming; neither ceasing is itself neither going. Neither arising is itself neither defiled; neither ceasing is itself neither pure. Neither arising is itself neither increasing; neither ceasing is itself neither decreasing. Neither arising is itself neither bound; neither ceasing is itself neither liberated. Neither arising is itself neither existent; neither ceasing is itself neither nonexistent. This is exactly why contemplating deeply that nothing arises and nothing ceases is itself already the very sense of every one of these other gates.

Should the gate of the unborn contemplate the aggregates, entries, and elements in sequence, or not in sequence, all the way through to the three obstructions and the four māras, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate that "the mind is like a skillful painter, creating every kind of aggregate, so that throughout the whole of every world, there is nothing not created by the mind" — one instance of the aggregates, entries, and elements being every instance of them, one instance of nature, mark, substance, and power being every instance of these — every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn give rise to the true and correct bodhi-mind, raising up the four universal vows, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn settle the mind through calming-and-contemplation, in one's own practice and in transforming others, shifting between faith and dharma, skillfully applying the siddhāntas, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn discern existence and nonexistence, breaking through the single, compound, complete, and wordless views, each and every one of them possessing the threefold provisional and the four contemplations, arising neither of itself, nor from another, nor from both together, nor without any cause — every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn break through view by way of the seventy-two thousand three hundred eighty-four instances of calming-and-contemplation, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate that the intellectual obstruction's own self-arising is not actually self-arising, and hence speak of "the emptiness of self-arising"; that this emptiness of self-arising is not itself merely empty, and hence speak of "the provisional of self-arising"; that this self-provisional is not the provisional, and this self-emptiness is not emptiness, and hence speak of "the middle of self-arising"; that this middle of self-arising is not merely the middle alone, but illuminates emptiness and the provisional at once, and hence speak of "the three contemplations in a single mind" — every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate the intellectual obstruction's own other-arising as not actually other-arising, its co-arising as not actually co-arising, its causeless arising as not actually causeless arising, all the way through to the three contemplations in a single mind, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate that the intellectual obstruction's own self-ceasing is not actually self-ceasing, and hence speak of "the emptiness of self-ceasing"; that this self-emptiness is not itself merely empty, and hence speak of "the provisional of self-ceasing"; that this self-provisional is not the provisional, and this self-emptiness is not emptiness, and hence speak of "the middle of self-ceasing"; that this middle of self-ceasing is not merely the middle alone, but illuminates emptiness and the provisional at once, and hence speak of "the three contemplations in a single mind, of self-ceasing" — every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate the intellectual obstruction's own other-ceasing as not actually other-ceasing, its co-ceasing as not actually co-ceasing, its causeless ceasing as not actually causeless ceasing, all the way through to the three contemplations in a single mind, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate that self-relativity is not actually self-relativity, and hence speak of "the emptiness of self-relativity"; that this self-emptiness is not itself merely empty, and hence speak of "the provisional of self-relativity"; that this self-emptiness is not emptiness, and this self-provisional is not the provisional, and hence speak of "the middle of self-relativity"; that this middle of self is not merely the middle alone, but illuminates both truths at once, and hence speak of "the three contemplations in a single mind" — every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn contemplate other-relativity as not actually other-relativity, co-relativity as not actually co-relativity, causeless relativity as not actually causeless relativity, all the way through to the three contemplations in a single mind, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Should the gate of the unborn's own three contemplations conclude as comprehensively breaking through every dharma, every other gate proceeds in exactly the same way. Taking the gate of the unborn, with every dharma explained above, and carrying it over into every other gate, moving freely both horizontally and vertically without any obstruction whatsoever — like a vajra blade, which nothing at all is able to withstand. Grasping this sense, one can thereby explain every sūtra and treatise through it, following its meaning as it turns and shifts, the text and its sense always fitting precisely, agreeing everywhere without exception.

Why is this? Should this same sense be applied to explain the Sūtra on the Practice of Non-Action, one converts the sense of the unborn directly into the gate of non-action. Namely: the truth's own non-action, wisdom's own non-action, the bodhi-mind's own non-action, settling the mind in calming-and-contemplation as non-action, breaking through views, habituated thought, ignorance, and the rest as non-action, birth-and-death, nirvāṇa, and everything in between all being non-action, non-active practice, non-active stage, non-active teaching. All of this, every bit of it, is explained entirely within the gate of non-action, complete in the very ultimate. Should one explain the Diamond Sūtra, one likewise converts the sense of the unborn, carrying it over into the gate of non-abiding, with its every kind of non-abiding: giving without abiding in form, giving without abiding in sound, smell, taste, or touch; giving without abiding in either object or wisdom, giving without abiding in compassion, giving without abiding within views and habituated thought, giving without abiding within ignorance and unknowing — this is named "the perfection of giving." Upholding the precepts without abiding in form, all the way through to prajñā itself without abiding in form. One ought not to abide even at the first ground, all the way through to not abiding even at the tenth ground. Though no dharma is ever abided in, it is precisely by way of this very dharma of non-abiding that one abides within prajñā itself — this is entering emptiness; by way of this same dharma of non-abiding, one abides within the mundane truth — this is entering the provisional; by way of this same dharma of non-abiding, one abides within true reality itself — this is entering the middle. This wisdom of non-abiding is itself precisely the vajra samādhi, able to break through the very bedrock and gravel, penetrating through to the ultimate boundary itself. Hence the Humane Kings Sūtra, in three separate places, clarifies the vajra samādhi — at the seventh ground, the first ground, and the first abiding — this being precisely the vajra of non-abiding, explaining the sense of stage across the three teachings. It further says: "Śākyamuni Buddha entered the great, quiescent concentration of the vajra samādhi." If this is so, one ought not, then, follow the ordinary account that says, "The uninterrupted path possesses the vajra, while the path of severance itself has no vajra at all." The sūtra says the Buddha possesses it — is this not, then, precisely the path of severance itself possessing it? Do the treatises of Vasubandhu and Asaṅga, and the extensive explanations of the Kaishan school, ever actually depart from this very sense of the unborn and non-abiding? These two sūtras are cited only briefly here, to show the very starting-point from which every winding path may be straightened out. Grasping this sense, a thousand sūtras and ten thousand treatises alike open up entirely without obstruction. This is the very first chapter of studying contemplation, the very root of reflecting on meaning, the sublime wisdom for explaining apparent difference, and the very compass pointing the way into the path itself. Its framework is vast and expansive, phenomena and principle complete within it — understand this one point, and every other follows from it, the Dharma-gate becoming entirely free and unobstructed.

Question: since the single gate of the unborn already extends throughout the whole of the Buddha's own Dharma, what further need is there for any other gate at all? Answer: the very nature of the dharmas is such that these two senses depend upon one another — different persons differ from one another, each with their own practice, and each accordingly requires a different gate. As in the Vimalakīrti Sūtra, the thirty-two bodhisattvas each speak of their own entry into the gate of non-duality. Should one say that generation-and-extinction is birth-and-death, forming a duality, while neither generation nor extinction is thus free of duality, this is simply the gate of emptiness — what does this have to do with the middle way at all? Here, instead, one understands generation as birth-and-death and extinction as nirvāṇa, and this is the duality; negating both extremes at once, one thereby enters the middle way — this is entering the gate of non-duality. Yet each of these bodhisattvas speaks only of his own gate, and does not speak of any other's. The Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: "I know only this one gate alone" — this is precisely each bodhisattva speaking only of the gate of his own entry, and the gates themselves are, correspondingly, boundless in number. Further, differing conditions call for differing responses, and transformation meeting each is never merely one and the same. The first group of persons, hearing the teaching of neither generation nor extinction, attained awakening thereby; for the rest, this was not what suited them, and hence brought no benefit at all. The next bodhisattva, further teaching neither defiled nor pure as the entry into non-duality, matched precisely what suited them, and, hearing it, they attained the path. This being so, the horizontal gates are boundless in number — eight thousand bodhisattvas, each and every one speaking a different account of his own — how, then, could one possibly insist that a single gate alone suffices? Furthermore, a practitioner relying on the gate of the unborn to cultivate the four samādhis may, at times, receive it with joy and reverence, or give rise to a wholesome mind of faith, or have some evil, attached thought broken through, or feel dazed and on the verge of awakening. Should this occur, then this gate of the unborn is indeed his own proper gate to the path; should it not occur, then it is not his gate at all. He should then, instead, enter by way of the gate of non-cessation — should joy arise, should wholesomeness be brought forth, should attachment be broken through, should he draw near to the path in this way, one should know that the gate of non-cessation is indeed his own proper gate; should it not, then it is not his gate either. Traversing broadly through every gate in this way, testing each one in turn, one is bound to find the one that corresponds. Once the net is spread wide enough, the bird of the mind is bound, of itself, to be caught within it. For this very reason, the horizontal is matched against the vertical, in order to reveal that every gate leads through equally.

Third, clarifying calming-and-contemplation through a single mind, both horizontal and vertical: as explained above, the horizontal and the vertical are so profound and expansive, breaking through every deviant attachment, extending throughout every sūtra and treatise, cultivating every contemplative practice, meeting every capacity and condition, turning without end — the words themselves have grown so elaborate that they become difficult to see through clearly. Here, then, this should be drawn together, so that its correct intent may emerge. Though the gate of the unborn folds and layers itself into a thousand, ten thousand complications, it is, in truth, simply the dharma born from a single thought-moment of ignorance's own causes and conditions — at once empty, at once provisional, at once the middle, the inconceivable three truths; one mind's three contemplations, the wisdom of all modes, the buddha-eye, and every such dharma, nothing more. As it is for the gate of the unborn, so it is for every other horizontal gate as well. Though spoken of in every manner of way, it is, in truth, simply the three contemplations in a single mind, and hence there is neither horizontal nor vertical at all. Yet cultivating calming-and-contemplation through a single mind divides, further, into two: first, clarifying the single mind comprehensively; second, extending this to every other mind. As for the comprehensive account: it simply takes a single thought-moment of ignorance as its object — this very mind is already complete with all three truths; embodying and penetrating a single contemplation, this very contemplation is already complete with all three contemplations. Without having grasped everything explained above, horizontally and vertically, how could this very object and wisdom possibly be understood at all? What was explained before — that a single thought-moment of ignorance, uniting with the Dharma-nature, thereby holds within it every one of a hundred thousand dream-like affairs; one instance of the aggregates, entries, and elements being every instance of them; the boundless single, compound, complete, and wordless views; every category of habituated thought across the nine grounds of the three realms; the sixteen gates of breaking-through, and every such dharma — all of this has already, in sequence, been heard, both horizontally and vertically. Now, hearing that a single mind's own causes and conditions give rise to every dharma, one instantly transcends everything explained before about dharmas born sequentially from causes and conditions, instantly recognizing the inconceivable dharma born from causes and conditions directly. What was explained before — that every dharma is the threefold provisional and the four propositions, and that, proposition by proposition, seeking their reality, none can ever be found; that the single and compound views are all alike empty, that every habituated thought across the nine grounds is alike empty, that all sixteen gates are alike empty — all of this has already been heard before. Now, hearing that the single mind is itself already emptiness, one instantly transcends everything explained before about emptiness taken in sequence, instantly recognizing the inconceivable, ultimate, sublime emptiness directly. What was explained before — the provisional's own manifold, scattered, inverted modes of entry, distinguishing illness, medicine, and administering medicine, and every such dharma — has already been heard before. Now, hearing that the single mind is itself already the provisional, one instantly transcends everything explained before about the provisional taken in sequence, instantly recognizing the provisional that illuminates both truths at once, directly. Now, hearing that this is neither emptiness nor the provisional, one instantly transcends how every prior emptiness was still not ultimate emptiness, and every prior provisional was still not ultimate provisional. Further, what was distinguished before about "neither existent nor nonexistent" throughout — within the single view, neither existent nor nonexistent; within the compound view, neither existent nor nonexistent; within the complete view, neither existent nor nonexistent; within the Tripiṭaka teaching, neither existent nor nonexistent; within the shared teaching's gate, neither existent nor nonexistent; within the distinct teaching's gate, neither existent nor nonexistent — all of this has already been heard before. Now, hearing "neither existent nor nonexistent," one instantly transcends every prior instance of "neither existent nor nonexistent," instantly recognizing the middle way's own inconceivable "neither existent nor nonexistent," directly. One who is able to understand the three truths within a single mind in exactly this way — such a person is difficult indeed to find. Why is this? Discussed in terms of the mind, there is ignorance; and, discussed again in terms of that very same mind, there is the dharma born from causes and conditions — hence there is every dharma explained before. Discussed in terms of the mind, there is emptiness itself — hence there is every emptiness explained before. Discussed again in terms of that very same mind, there is the provisional — hence there is emerging into the provisional and the rest, explained before. And discussed, further, in terms of the mind, there is the dharma-realm itself — hence there is the middle way, neither emptiness nor the provisional. The three truths, complete in full, lie simply within a single mind — distinguished in their differing aspects, they are explained in sequence, exactly as given above.

Considered in terms of principle itself, it lies simply within a single mind — at once empty, at once provisional, at once the middle. It is like a single instant that yet contains three marks — three differing marks: arising, abiding, ceasing, and change. The single mind's three contemplations proceed in exactly the same way: arising is a simile for the existence of the provisional; ceasing is a simile for the nonexistence of emptiness; abiding is a simile for what is neither empty nor existent. The three truths differ from one another, and yet lie within a single thought alone — just as arising, abiding, ceasing, and change lie within but a single instant. The three contemplations, the three wisdoms, the three calmings, the three eyes — all understood by the same pattern. One who contemplates in this way is precisely a sentient being opening the Buddha's own knowledge and vision. As for what is meant by "sentient being": the mind of craving, hatred, and delusion each calculates that there is a self; this very self is precisely "the sentient being"; the self follows upon the arising of mind, and mind's arising, together with the three poisons, is exactly what is named "sentient being." At the very moment this mind arises, it is at once empty, at once provisional, at once the middle — calming-and-contemplation is already complete, following directly upon the very thought that arises. Contemplation is named "the Buddha's own knowing"; calming is named "the Buddha's own seeing"; and, in thought after thought, calming-and-contemplation manifest directly before one — this is precisely a sentient being opening the Buddha's own knowledge and vision. Once this contemplation is accomplished, this is named the first grade of rejoicing; reading, reciting, and giving further support, this contemplation grows ever more luminous, becoming the second grade; expounding the Dharma exactly as one practices it, one's supporting mind grows ever more luminous, becoming the third grade; practicing the six pāramitās as well, one's merit grows ever more profound, becoming the fourth grade; practicing the six pāramitās in full, phenomena and principle undiminished, becoming the fifth grade. The fifth grade turns into the purification of the six faculties, named "the stage of resemblance." Hence the Lotus Sūtra says: "Though the uncontaminated has not yet been attained, the mind-faculty is already pure in exactly this way." From the stage of resemblance, one advances further into the bronze wheel, breaking through ignorance and attaining the forbearance of the unborn across the forty-two stages of the grounds. Hence the Lotus Sūtra says: "One attains a retribution of this kind, uncontaminated and pure." This is also what is meant by "the three worthies and the ten sages abide in retribution, while the Buddha alone dwells within the pure land." Taking the worthies and sages as an analogy for the Buddha, this points to the wondrous enlightenment as itself the reward. As for what the Great Sūtra calls "attaining the unsurpassed reward": since there is a reward manifest in this very life, it is named "the unsurpassed reward"; and since there is no further birth after this, it is said, "the Buddha has no reward" at all. The Great Sūtra likewise speaks of "the child's fruit, and the fruit's child": since there is a reward manifest in this very life, this is like "the child's fruit"; and since there is no further reward to follow after, it is not properly named "the fruit's child." Further, the Sūtra of Golden Light names this "the response-body," the object and the wisdom corresponding to one another. Taken in terms of the object, this is the Dharma-body; taken in terms of wisdom, this is the reward-body; and the function that arises from this is the response-body. On account of attaining the Dharma-body, it is constant and unchanging forever; the Dharma-body is pure, vast as the entire dharma-realm, ultimate as empty space itself, spanning the entire future without limit. The Ratnagotravibhāga says: "Constancy is precisely being unborn; permanence is precisely not aging; purity is precisely being free of illness; changelessness is precisely being deathless." The Dharma-body is the virtue of purity; being vast as the dharma-realm is the virtue of self; being ultimate as empty space is the virtue of bliss; and spanning the entire future without limit is the virtue of constancy. One should therefore know that the Dharma-body of the first abiding is already complete with exactly this constancy, bliss, self, and purity, free of birth, old age, and death.

As for extending the three contemplations to every other mind besides: should the ignorant mind, taken comprehensively, not necessarily suit a given practitioner, one extends this further to other minds — the mind of desire, the mind of anger, the mind of pride. When minds of this kind arise, they are, at once, empty, at once provisional, at once the middle, exactly as explained in the comprehensive account above. Everything explained above, though stated only in terms of contemplating the aggregate of consciousness, applies in exactly the same way to the remaining four aggregates; and to the twelve entries and eighteen elements as well. This is named "comprehensively breaking through every dharma, by way of contemplating the object of the aggregates, entries, and elements" — and is hereby brought to completion. Question: entering the provisional and entering the middle each have their own explicit causes and conditions given — why, then, does entering emptiness have none? Entering emptiness is distinguished through the four gates — why, then, do the provisional and the middle have no such distinction? Answer: entering emptiness has its own causes and conditions as well — they are simply not stated, for the sake of brevity. What are they? Namely: for the sake of liberation, for the sake of freeing others, for the sake of the life of wisdom, for the sake of the uncontaminated, and for the sake of the dharma-stage. Now, the bonds of birth-and-death exhaust one's own very spirit, and apart from emptiness, there is no release from them. Being oneself already bound, there is no possibility whatsoever of freeing another from their own bondage! For the sake of freeing others, one must therefore enter emptiness. The worthy and the sage take wisdom as their very life, and this life of wisdom cannot be established apart from emptiness. Among every kind of spiritual power, the uncontaminated power is supreme, and for the sake of this supreme spiritual power, one must therefore enter emptiness. Further, the dharma-stage cannot be entered apart from wisdom, and the wisdom of emptiness is able to enter the dharma-stage most swiftly of all. The causes and conditions for entering emptiness are, in truth, exceedingly numerous — following the pattern of what comes later, only five are stated here. Now, the contemplation of emptiness is common to both the lesser and greater vehicles, to both the partial and the complete teachings — wishing to distinguish these without confusion, the four gates must be used to make the distinction. The provisional and the middle are not mixed together with the lesser vehicle at all, and so this distinguishing is not needed for them. The contemplation of emptiness itself is of two kinds: analytical emptiness belongs exclusively to the lesser vehicle, while embodying emptiness is shared by both the lesser and greater vehicles. The distinction made here is a distinction specifically within embodying emptiness. Though the very same embodying method is used in both cases, the purpose to which it is put differs, and this is exactly why the distinction must be made. The distinct and perfect teachings, though each has its own four gates, lead through to the very same destination in every case, and so this distinguishing becomes unnecessary for them.

As for "the intellectual obstruction": explanations of this term differ, and here we present the reading of Dharmottara. Affliction is the deluded mind, and this is why affliction is called an obstruction — but wisdom is clear understanding, so how could wisdom itself be called an obstruction? Wisdom is of two kinds: realizational wisdom, and discriminative wisdom. Discriminative wisdom, in its own discrimination, is at odds with the substance of things while according with mere conceptual appearance. Because it accords with appearance, it is named "wisdom"; but because it is at odds with the substance of things through its own discrimination, it obstructs realizational wisdom, and this is why it, too, is named an "obstruction." Further, the Buddha attains liberation from both obstructions at once. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "By severing craving, one attains liberation of mind; by severing ignorance, one attains liberation of wisdom." The Bodhisattvabhūmi says that craving is the very head of affliction, and hence liberation of mind is precisely the antidote to the obstruction of affliction. Being far removed from every defilement of ignorance, and knowing without any obstruction whatsoever with regard to everything knowable, is named "the purity of wisdom" — and this purity of wisdom is precisely liberation through wisdom. Should one name "the intellectual obstruction" from the fact that wisdom's own object of knowledge is obstructed, this is because, on account of ignorance, wisdom itself meets with obstruction — and it is precisely ignorance itself that constitutes the very substance of this intellectual obstruction. The Compendium of the Mahāyāna Treatise says: "Supramundane ignorance is the intellectual obstruction; mundane ignorance, the worthy and the sage have already left far behind" — this refers to the prior severance of the obstruction of affliction. Since both obstructions are, in fact, alike affliction, why is ignorance specifically named "the intellectual obstruction"? Ignorance is precisely the affliction belonging to wisdom itself, taking wisdom as its very substance, and it is precisely in terms of wisdom that this obstruction is spoken of — just as one speaks of "birth-and-death" even in terms of the unconditioned itself, taking "the unconditioned" as the very name for it. Craving is precisely the four abodes of affliction, and it, too, is able to obstruct wisdom; yet this is an affliction belonging to a different mind, and liberation and affliction here do not coincide in the same substance. Its own substance is affliction itself, and hence it is named according to that very substance, as "the obstruction of affliction." Furthermore, craving is able to cause the continuation of every mode of existence, able to trouble the mind, and to cause the mind vexation. Though ignorance, too, is a covering and concealment, rebirth arises specifically through the water of craving, exerting a powerful force in drawing forth rebirth, and this is exactly why craving is named "the obstruction of affliction." Ignorance's own failure to understand stands directly opposed to liberation. Though craving's own nature likewise stands opposed to it, craving nonetheless takes ignorance as its own root. Ignorance's own nature is delusion, and the sense of obstructing wisdom is manifest precisely through it, which is exactly why, named after what it obstructs, it is called "the intellectual obstruction." Ignorance is of two kinds: first, delusion regarding principle; second, delusion regarding phenomena. Which of these, then, is properly "the intellectual obstruction"? The Bodhisattvabhūmi says: "For the two lesser vehicles, the uncontaminated wisdom of the selflessness of persons serves as the pure wisdom that counters the obstruction of affliction; for the buddhas and bodhisattvas, the wisdom of the selflessness of dharmas serves as the pure wisdom that counters the intellectual obstruction." If this is so, both accounts alike take delusion regarding principle as the intellectual obstruction. And should one instead name "the intellectual obstruction" from wisdom's own object of knowledge being obstructed — knowing without obstruction with regard to every dharma is precisely knowing without obstruction with regard to phenomena themselves — then it is delusion regarding phenomena that is properly the intellectual obstruction. If this is so, then which account is the fixed one? The wisdom that illuminates phenomena, and the wisdom that illuminates principle — though wisdom is spoken of as two, these two have no separate substance from one another. The intellectual obstruction and ignorance, likewise, have no two separate natures either. Though two accounts are given, in truth there are not two. Further, as for the mind's own wisdom itself constituting an obstruction: investigating and pursuing discriminative wisdom obstructs what accords with reality as it truly is, preventing realizational wisdom from being attained — this, too, is precisely wisdom itself being an obstruction. On account of extinguishing conceptual thought and extinguishing this very mind, there is a sense in which wisdom itself is said to be severed. Should one relinquish discrimination, one thereby turns toward the very purification of the intellectual obstruction itself. Yet this is not something absolute or categorical, and so wisdom, too, is not actually severed in any final sense. This is exactly why the sūtras speak of "not losing merit" even here. The *Hundred Treatise*, citing the Buddha's own teaching, says: "One who does not fear merit should still practice what assists the path." Should a person construct a single, fixed thesis out of this, there arise, correspondingly, two divergent paths — of severance, and of non-severance — but reckoned rightly, there is no real contradiction here at all, and one should not give rise to any one-sided clinging or contention over it.

Question: the Yingluo Sūtra says, "The third contemplation manifests directly at the first ground" — why, then, is it sometimes said to lie at the eighth ground, and sometimes at the first abiding? Answer: these are borrowed senses, mutually reinforcing one another — at times, a higher stage is borrowed to establish a lower one, and hence "the eighth ground" is spoken of; at times, a lower stage is borrowed to establish a higher one, and hence "the first abiding" is spoken of. The Yingluo Sūtra clarifies the distinct teaching specifically, and this is why it speaks of "the first ground." Question: the contemplations of the provisional and the middle each clarify the cultivated stage for all three capacities — why does the first contemplation alone show no such distinction of cultivated stage? Answer: the later contemplations, once one has already entered a proper stage, only then cultivate the provisional and the middle, and this is exactly why their stage can be distinguished according to the shallow and deep degrees of the three capacities. The first contemplation, however, begins from the stage of the ordinary being itself, where there is no fixed stage by which shallow and deep could possibly be distinguished at all. The Yingluo Sūtra, further, also has a passage saying that the fourth ground is named "the stream-enterer" — this should correspond to the lower capacity; and a passage saying the third ground clarifies the stream-enterer — this should correspond to the middling capacity; or that the first ground clarifies the stream-enterer — this refers to the upper capacity.