Ultimate Truth, the Three Natures, and Taking Refuge

The exposition: the five items are mark, name, discrimination, suchness, and correct knowledge.

Mark: in brief, that on which all speech rests. Name: the designation applied to marks. Discrimination: all the mind and mental factors comprised in the three realms. Suchness: what is displayed by the selflessness of phenomena, the range of noble knowledge, and that on which no speech whatever rests. Correct knowledge: of two kinds in brief — the purely transcendent, and that which is both worldly and transcendent.

Purely transcendent correct knowledge: that by which śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas penetrate suchness. And when bodhisattvas, with knowledge both worldly and transcendent, train diligently in the five sciences, then because the knowledge of all-pervading suchness is frequently manifest, they swiftly realize purity from the obstruction to what is to be known. Correct knowledge that is both worldly and transcendent: when śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas have first penetrated suchness, then by the power of that first, purely transcendent correct knowledge and by the subsequently attained knowledge that is both worldly and transcendent, they give rise, with respect to the established truths, to a mind that is weary and fearful of the three realms and that relishes the still places beyond them; and because that correct knowledge is frequently manifest, they swiftly realize purity from the obstruction of the afflictions.

The three natures are the three own-natures: the imagined, the dependent, and the perfectly accomplished. The imagined own-nature: an own-nature nominally established in dependence on names and words, in order to accord with worldly speech. The dependent own-nature: the own-nature of things produced from conditions. The perfectly accomplished own-nature: the suchness of things, the range of noble knowledge, the domain of noble knowledge and what noble knowledge takes as its object — in order to realize utter purity, in order that one may be liberated from the two bondages of signs and of coarse heaviness, and in order to bring forth the good qualities.

Which is further to be known as fourfold: the real is of four kinds — the real as the world has it; the real as reasoning has it; the real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction of the afflictions; and the real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction to what is to be known.

The real as the world has it: that understanding, knowledge, and vision which all the world arrives at through habituation in the various matters, and jointly sets up as conventional — as with earth, that it is just earth and not fire, and so on. So too with water, fire, and wind; with visible form, sound, smell, taste, and touch; with food, clothing, and conveyances; with ornaments, household goods, incense, garlands, and cosmetics, song, dance, and music, companions, men and women, the postures and activities, fields, houses, property, and pleasure and pain — that pain is pain and not pleasure, that pleasure is pleasure and not pain. Or, stated briefly: that this is this and not that, and that that is that and not something else. Whatever matters are the range of a settled conviction among the beings of the world, established by names handed down from of old, distinguished as self and other, and held in common to be real — not what is seized by false conjecture and speculation — this is called the real as the world has it.

The real as reasoning has it: that which has the sense of reasoning for those of correct knowledge. It is the knowable matter that is the range of the utterly well-discerning knowledge of the clever, the sharp-witted, the inquiring, the examining, those abiding on the level of investigation, those possessed of their own eloquence, those in the position of ordinary beings, and those who proceed by observation — relying on the three means of knowledge: direct perception, inference, and authoritative testimony. Because it is established by the reasoning of demonstration, it is called the real as reasoning has it.

The real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction of the afflictions: the objective domain of all the uncontaminated knowledge of means, uncontaminated correct knowledge, and uncontaminated subsequently attained worldly knowledge of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas. By taking this as object, knowledge becomes pure of the obstruction of the afflictions, and afterward one realizes and abides in unobstructedness. Question: what here is the real? Answer: the four noble truths displayed by the names suffering, origin, cessation, and path; for by discerning these four one enters the stage of direct realization, and in that stage the knowledge of the real arises.

The real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction to what is to be known: what obstructs knowledge with respect to the knowable is called the obstruction to what is to be known; and the real nature that is the objective domain of the knowledge liberated from it is so called. And what is it? For the bodhisattvas and the buddhas — for those entering the selflessness of phenomena, and for those already entered and utterly pure — it is the objective domain of the non-discriminating knowledge of sameness, which rests on the ineffable own-nature of all things beneath their nominally spoken own-nature: namely, supreme suchness, the ultimate nature of what is unsurpassedly to be known. This nature no discernment of any true teaching can turn back or pass beyond. This is the real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction to what is to be known.

The four investigations are: investigation of the name, of the thing, of the nominally established own-nature, and of the nominally established distinctions.

Investigation of the name: bodhisattvas see, in a name, nothing but a name. Investigation of the thing: they see, in a thing, nothing but a thing. Investigation of the nominally established own-nature: they see, in a nominally established own-nature, nothing but a nominal establishment. Investigation of the nominally established distinctions: they see, in nominally established distinctions, nothing but nominal establishment.

These bodhisattvas observe the two, name and thing, sometimes with their aspects apart and sometimes with their aspects joined; and it is by observing name and thing joined that they penetrate the nominally established own-nature and the nominally established distinctions.

The four knowledges in accordance with reality are those drawn forth by each of the four investigations in turn.

The knowledge drawn forth by investigating the name: having investigated the name and found nothing but a name, bodhisattvas know the name as it really is — that this name is set up with respect to this thing for the sake of this meaning, in order that the world may form conceptions, views, and speech. If, with respect to the conceived thing that is form and the rest, the name "form" and the rest were not set up, then no one in all the world could conceive of this thing; and if there were no conceiving of form and the rest, none could give rise to superimposition and clinging; and if there were no clinging, there would be no speech. Knowing this as it really is, this is the first knowledge, drawn forth by investigating the name.

The knowledge drawn forth by investigating the thing: having investigated the thing and found nothing but a thing, bodhisattvas know as it really is that the nature of the conceived thing that is form and the rest is apart from all speech and cannot be spoken. This is the second.

The knowledge drawn forth by investigating the nominally established own-nature: having investigated the nominally established own-nature of the conceived thing that is form and the rest, and found it to be nothing but nominal establishment, bodhisattvas penetrate as it really is that the nominally established own-nature is not the actual own-nature of that thing, yet appears as though it were the own-nature of that thing. And they can know that the own-nature of that thing is like a conjuring, a reflected image, an echo, a light-shadow, the moon in water, a mirage, a dream, an illusion — having the semblance of a substantial nature. This is the third, the knowledge whose range is the profound meaning.

The knowledge drawn forth by investigating the nominally established distinctions: having investigated the nominally established distinctions and found them to be nothing but nominal establishment, bodhisattvas are well able to penetrate the sense of non-duality within the nominally established distinctions of the conceived thing that is form and the rest. That is, those things are neither existent in nature nor non-existent in nature: because the own-nature that can be spoken is not accomplished, they are not existent in nature; and because the own-nature that cannot be spoken is accomplished, they are not non-existent in nature. Just so, there is no form, since it is by ultimate truth; and there is not no form, since form is nominally established within conventional truth. As with existent and non-existent, and with form and no form, so with visible and invisible and every other approach through nominally established distinctions — all of them should be exhaustively understood by this same principle. To know as it really is this non-dual sense within the nominally established distinctions is the fourth. Thus have been displayed the matter to be entered, the cause by which one enters, and the state of having entered.

The exposition: the establishment, differences, function, hidden sense, use as means, subsumption, and distinctness of those three natures should each be understood as of many kinds. As for the many kinds of establishment, this will be expounded at length in the chapter on Establishing Naturelessness.

Differences. Question: how many kinds has the imagined own-nature? Answer: as many as the differences of nominally established own-nature found within the dependent own-nature — and therefore the imagined own-nature should be known to be without limit. Further, within the dependent own-nature there are two kinds of discrimination of an imagined own-nature: that which follows a dominant awareness, and that which follows the latent tendencies perfumed by repeated habituation. Question: how many kinds has the dependent own-nature? Answer: as many as the many differences of the marks — the mark of form, the mark of mind, the mark of mental factors, the mark of what is dissociated from mind, and so on. Further, in brief, the dependent own-nature is of two kinds: that arisen from the discrimination of an imagined own-nature, and that not so arisen. Question: how many kinds has the perfectly accomplished own-nature? Answer: since the perfectly accomplished own-nature is of one taste everywhere, no differences can be established in it.

Function. Question: how many functions can the imagined own-nature perform? Answer: five — it can produce the dependent own-nature; it gives rise to all speech within it; it can produce the clinging to persons; it can produce the clinging to phenomena; and it takes up the coarse heaviness perfumed by those two clingings. Question: how many can the dependent own-nature perform? Answer: five — it can produce the substance of all defilement; it can serve as the support of both the imagined and the perfectly accomplished own-natures; it can be the support of clinging to persons; the support of clinging to phenomena; and the support of the coarse heaviness perfumed by those two clingings. Question: how many can the perfectly accomplished own-nature perform? Answer: five — since it serves as the object by which the counteragents to those two sets of five functions arise.

Hidden sense: one should interpret every scripture of non-explicit meaning according to the sense of the three natures, since all the hidden speech of all the Tathāgatas in measureless scriptures, and all the hidden speech of all the bodhisattvas, can only be entered into by way of the three natures.

Question: the scriptures speak of the three doors of liberation — how are they established? Answer: by the three natures. By the imagined own-nature the door of emptiness is established; by the dependent own-nature the door of wishlessness; by the perfectly accomplished own-nature the door of signlessness. Question: the scriptures speak of the forbearance for the non-arising of things — how is that established? Answer: by the three natures. By the imagined own-nature is taught the forbearance for what is originally unarisen; by the dependent own-nature, the forbearance for what is spontaneously unarisen; by the perfectly accomplished own-nature, the forbearance for the non-arising of the stains of affliction and suffering. These three forbearances should be understood as belonging to the stage of non-retrogression. By such differences of sense, all other hidden speech likewise should be interpreted according to the three natures.

Use as means: understanding these three natures can serve as the means to all that śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas attain, and to unsurpassed perfect enlightenment.

Subsumption: the mutual subsumption of the three natures and the five items — mark, name, discrimination, and the rest. Question: how many of the five items does the first nature subsume? Answer: none. Question: the second? Answer: four. Question: the third? Answer: one.

Distinctness: the imagined own-nature is only to be known. The dependent own-nature is to be known and to be cut off. The perfectly accomplished own-nature is to be known and to be realized. Thus one enters into both conventional and ultimate truth.

The exposition: hearing the twelvefold teaching means hearing the sacred teaching as discourse, mingled verse, prediction, verse, spontaneous utterance, occasioned teaching, simile, past events, birth stories, extensive teachings, marvels, and exposition.

Discourse: those scriptures in which the Buddha, the Blessed One, at various times and places and according to the differing disciplines of the various beings to be trained, teaches the things comprised in the aggregates, in the elements, in the sense fields, in dependent arising, in the nutriments, in the truths, in what belongs to śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and Tathāgatas; or the things comprised in the establishments of mindfulness, the right exertions, the bases of supernormal power, the faculties, the powers, the factors of awakening, and the limbs of the path; or the things comprised in the contemplation of impurity, mindfulness of breathing, the trainings, the confirmed faiths, and the rest. When the Tathāgata had spoken thus, those who compiled the canon received it with joy and reverence and, in order that the sacred teaching might long endure, compiled and arranged it in order with fine words, phrases, and syllables as was fitting. Because it strings together and draws forth benefit and the various good senses of the holy life, it is called discourse.

Mingled verse: where in a scripture, whether in the middle or at the end, verses restate what was said; and also the statements of non-explicit meaning in the scriptures. Prediction: where a scripture records the differing places of rebirth of disciples after death; and also the statements of explicit meaning. Verse: where a scripture speaks not in direct prose but in composed lines — two, three, four, five, or six lines. Spontaneous utterance: where a scripture does not name any petitioner, and the teaching is delivered of itself, so that the true Dharma and the sacred teaching may long endure. Occasioned teaching: where a scripture names the petitioner before the teaching is delivered; and also the teachings comprised in the Vinaya that have an occasion, such as the Prātimokṣa precept scriptures.

Simile: where a scripture speaks by simile, so that the underlying sense becomes plain. Past events: the recounting of matters belonging to former lives. Birth stories: where a scripture recounts the Tathāgata's practice of the bodhisattva conduct amid the births and deaths of past ages. Extensive teachings: where a scripture sets forth the bodhisattva paths by which unsurpassed enlightenment is realized, causing them to attain the ten powers, unobstructed knowledge, and the rest. Marvels: where a scripture sets forth the qualities, shared and unshared, of the buddhas and their disciples — monks, nuns, probationers, novices of both kinds, and laymen and laywomen — and other supreme, extraordinary, astonishing, and profound teachings. Exposition: all the mātṛkās and Abhidharma, investigating and explaining the meaning of the scriptures.

These twelve genres contain the three baskets of Sūtra, Vinaya, and Abhidharma. Of these, discourse, mingled verse, prediction, verse, spontaneous utterance, simile, past events, birth stories, extensive teachings, and marvels are the Sūtra basket. Occasioned teaching is the Vinaya basket. Exposition is the Abhidharma basket.

The three supreme refuges are the three places of resort: the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. The three trainings are the higher discipline, the higher mind, and the higher wisdom. The three enlightenments are those of the śrāvaka, of the pratyekabuddha, and unsurpassed perfect enlightenment.

Taught for the purification of beings: in order that beings may attain purity, these three kinds of teaching are set forth in order — that which sustains, the means, and the fruit. That which sustains: hearing, and taking refuge. The means: the three trainings. The fruit: the three enlightenments.

The exposition: hearing is distinguished six ways — by its field, by its collection, by its purity, by its practice, by its approach, and by its meaning.

By its field: the five sciences — the inner science, the science of reasoning, the science of language, the science of medicine, and the science of crafts.

By its collection: two — what is comprised in the śrāvaka canon, and what is comprised in the bodhisattva canon.

By its purity: ten kinds of purity. There are five purities of teaching: that it is spoken by one who speaks well; that it is spoken with plain words and phrases; that it is spoken exhausting the knowable sense and according with the knowable sense; that it is spoken so that practice is easy of means; and that it is spoken so as to deliver from all suffering. And five purities of listening: that one listens without a mind that seeks faults; that one listens with a mind that seeks nirvāṇa; that one listens with utmost attention; that one listens discerning most carefully by way of words, phrases, syllables, and meaning; and that one listens with a mind intent on right practice.

By its practice: the ten Dharma practices.

By its approach: there are six approaches — the approach of the truly real, and so on down to the approach of intent. Of these, the first three are to be understood as explained by the latter three: the approach that departs from the two extremes explains the approach of the truly real; the approach of the inconceivable explains the approach of realization; and the approach of intent explains the approach of guidance. Here, the truly real is itself the approach, and so it is called the approach of the truly real; and so on down to intent. Being without distortion in each respective place is the sense of "approach."

The approach of the truly real is, in brief, of six kinds: the real as the world has it, and so on down to the real that is the range of knowledge purified of the obstruction to what is to be known — and then the established real and the non-established real. The first four have been distinguished above.

The established real: the four noble truths. Because suffering is truly suffering it is established as suffering, and so on down to: because the path is truly the path it is established as the path. Question: for what reason is it called "established"? Answer: because it is established by three kinds of convention — worldly convention, conventions of reasoning, and conventions of realization. Worldly convention: establishing fields, houses, pots, basins, armies, forests, numbers, and the rest, and establishing a self, a being, and so on. Convention of reasoning: establishing the aggregates, elements, sense fields, and the rest. Convention of realization: establishing the fruit of stream-entry and the rest, and the states on which they rest. There is also a fourth kind of establishment beyond these three: by the convention of the ultimate, one establishes that the nature of ultimate truth cannot be established — since it is inwardly realized for oneself; and in order to accord with and draw forth that knowledge, one establishes it in dependence on convention. The non-established real: the true nature, suchness, of all things.

The approach of realization is, in brief, of four kinds: the realization that is the karmic recompense of all beings; the realization of the śrāvaka vehicle; of the pratyekabuddha vehicle; and of the Great Vehicle.

The karmic recompense of all beings: all beings perform pure and impure karma, and in dependence on their own karma they bring about and undergo the various ripened results as they flow on through the five destinies.

The realization of the śrāvaka vehicle: from first taking the three refuges, down to the adornment that rests on hearing, one obtains five realizations — of stage, of knowledge, of confirmed faith, of fruit, and of good qualities. Of stage: three stages, the stage of seeing, of cultivation, and the final stage. Of knowledge: nine knowledges — knowledge of things, inferential knowledge, knowledge of suffering, of origin, of cessation, of the path, the conventional knowledge subsequently attained, knowledge of exhaustion, and knowledge of non-arising. Of confirmed faith: the four confirmed faiths. Of fruit: the four fruits of the renunciant. Of good qualities: the measureless minds, liberations, bases of mastery, totalities, non-contention, the knowledge of vows, the analytic knowledges, the supernormal powers, and the rest. Further, the support of realization within the śrāvaka vehicle is this: first one cultivates the worldly path and becomes free of craving; next one cultivates the wholesome roots conducive to liberation; and last the wholesome roots conducive to penetration.

The realization of the pratyekabuddha vehicle is, in brief, of three kinds: by having previously obtained the wholesome roots conducive to penetration; by having previously obtained genuine uncontaminated realization; and by obtaining it in due sequence. Of these, one who realizes by the first two is called a solitary who is not alone; one who realizes by the last is called an awakened one like the rhinoceros horn.

The realization of the Great Vehicle: the realization of great compassion, of generating the aspiration, of the perfections, of the means of attraction, of the grounds, of reaching through to suchness within the five measureless attentions, of inconceivable majesty, and of the qualities a buddha holds in common with none. All of these should be understood as distinguished above.

The approach of guidance is comprised, in brief, in three places: what is comprised in the baskets; what is comprised in the mātṛkās; and what is comprised in both. Comprised in the baskets: the śrāvaka-vehicle canon and the Great Vehicle canon. Comprised in the mātṛkās: the seventeen grounds and the four compilations. Comprised in both: in brief, ten kinds — the ten meanings distinguished above. Because this subsumes everything comprised in the baskets and everything comprised in the mātṛkās, it is called the summary mātṛkā.

There are further twelve kinds of teaching. First, teaching by matter: setting forth all things individually — form and the rest, eye and the rest. Second, teaching by difference of concept: setting forth the aggregates, elements, sense fields, dependent arising, what is possible and impossible, the faculties, the truths, the establishments of mindfulness, having form and formless, visible and invisible, resistant and unresistant, and so on at length — the Blessed One's measureless teachings by difference of concept. Third, teaching that examines one's own school: the teachings of discourse, mingled verse, prediction, and the rest, as displayed in the summaries and commentaries. Fourth, teaching that examines other schools: the teaching that, relying on the seven topics of logic, overthrows others' doctrines and establishes one's own; the seven topics of logic being the substance of a debate, the setting of a debate, and the rest, to be distinguished later. Fifth, teaching of non-explicit meaning: where in discourse, mingled verse, prediction, and the rest, the Blessed One marks out the sense only briefly without distinguishing it at length, so that it requires further disclosure. Sixth, teaching of explicit meaning: understood as the reverse.

Seventh, teaching of conventional truth: whatever is displayed by any avenue of speech is all called conventional truth; and the marks, names, and discriminations that arise through the dominance of name, conception, and speech are also conventional truth. Eighth, teaching of ultimate truth: the teaching of the four noble truths, and the teaching of suchness, the true limit, and the nature of things. Ninth, hidden teaching: for the most part, the teachings of the śrāvaka canon. Tenth, plain teaching: for the most part, the teachings of the Great Vehicle canon. Eleventh, teaching on what can be declared: as in the teaching of the four summary marks of the Dharma — that all formations are impermanent, and so on down to: nirvāṇa is peace.

Twelfth, teaching on what cannot be declared: someone asks, "Is the world permanent, or impermanent?" and the Tathāgata is then silent and does not declare, but tells him only: I say that this matter cannot be declared. And so on down to: "After the Tathāgata's passing, is he neither existent nor non-existent?" — and again he is silent and does not declare, but says only: I say that this matter cannot be declared.

Four reasons should be understood for teaching that a matter cannot be declared. First, because it has no substance. As when someone asks: is the self the same as the aggregates or different, permanent or impermanent? And the like. Second, because it would lead to no benefit. As the Siṃśapā Leaves Sūtra says: there are measureless things that I have realized and awakened to, and have not proclaimed. Why? Because those things would lead to no benefit. Third, because it is profound. As when someone asks: does a self exist or not? This cannot be declared. Why? If the Tathāgata declared that a self exists, that person would grasp either a self within the aggregates or a self apart from them; and if he declared that a self does not exist, that person might deny even the conventional speech of "I." And so with the questions whether after the Tathāgata's passing he exists, does not exist, both, or neither — by reason of profundity none of them is declared. Fourth, because such is the nature of the mark itself. Whether the suchness of things is the same as those things or different cannot be declared, since it is simply the nature of that mark of suchness that neither difference nor non-difference can be established of it.

There are four further reasons why the Tathāgata declares a matter undeclarable: because such a matter is what the outsiders speak of; because it is not in accord with reason; because it leads to no benefit; and because it can only give rise to the entanglement of disputation. And two reasons should be understood for why it leads to no benefit: because it is remote from any thinking about cause and effect, and because it is remote from any thinking about defilement and purity.

The approach that departs from the two extremes is, in brief, of six kinds: keeping far from the extreme of superimposing existence on what does not really exist; from the extreme of denying what really does exist; from the extreme of grasping permanence; from the extreme of grasping annihilation; from the extreme of enjoying sensual pleasure; and from the extreme of enjoying self-mortification.

The approach of the inconceivable: in brief, six inconceivable matters — the self is inconceivable; beings are inconceivable; the world is inconceivable; the karmic recompense of all beings is inconceivable; those who attain the absorptions and the domain of the absorptions are inconceivable; and the buddhas and the domain of the buddhas are inconceivable.

The approach of intent: in brief, sixteen intents — the intent to disclose; to bring about dispassion; to exhort; to encourage; to praise and gladden; to bring one in; to remove doubt; to ripen; to settle; to liberate; the intent that rests on a distinct sense; the intent to give faultless joy to one who has aroused realization in practice; the intent to make a practitioner who hears give rise to reverence toward the teacher of the Dharma; the intent that the eye of Dharma should spread; the intent that the wholesome should increase and grow broad; and the intent to demolish all signs.

By its meaning: non-explicit meaning, and explicit meaning.

Refuge is distinguished three ways: by its being accomplished, by its establishment, and by its differences.

Its being accomplished: only the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha are a true refuge, and not the gods or others. Why? For two reasons: because they can do nothing, and because they are not seen.

How can they do nothing? The gods cannot perform what benefits beings — whether because they lack the capacity, or because they wait to be honored with rites, or because they will not endure the fatigue, or because they lack compassion, or because they are themselves obstructed. All such are not a true place of refuge: they lack capacity; they fall into partiality; they avoid their own fatigue and are not free; they have no pity; and their virtue is slight and inferior.

How are they not seen? The gods are not directly witnessed. The world has never seen an unseen master serve as a support — apart from what can be relied on by faith when someone present takes another under his care, every support one relies on is one that is seen. Question: since they are seen in dreams, should they not be a refuge? Answer: what is seen by the mind's wishing may or may not be real. And besides, why are they not seen while awake? Though in a dream one may see a little of the real, that too is made by the mind's wishing; and though various conditions coming together may let a dreamer see a little, most of that is false.

Further, by five reasons the gods are not a place of refuge: by their marks, by their substance, by their activity, by the nature of things, and by cause and effect.

By their marks: the gods are not seen in the world, for there is no conversing with them; their countenance is roused and fearsome; they are habituated to defilement and heedlessness and have craving; they abandon others' benefit and have no pity; and they cannot make out what is to be done and not done, not having penetrated the real meaning. Therefore they cannot be a refuge. And how, by marks, can the Buddha be a refuge? Because he is seen in the world, for there is conversing with him; his countenance is harmonious and still and not fearsome; he is far from heedlessness and without craving; he does not abandon the benefit of others and has great compassion; and he can well make out what is to be done and not done, having penetrated the real meaning. And by five further marks the Buddha can be a refuge: because he realized great enlightenment for the benefit of beings; because he appears amid great assemblies and opens the eye of the true Dharma; because he benefits equally those hostile and those dear; because, with respect to households, whether taking them up or leaving them, his faculties are still; and because he can well remove the net of doubt in all beings.

By their substance: because the Tathāgata has permanently cut off the contaminants and, having tamed himself, also tames others, he can be a refuge. The gods, being possessed of the contaminants, do not even tame themselves, still less others; therefore they are not a place of refuge.

By their activity: because the Tathāgata abides in the vast and stainless activity of the absorptions and the rest, and can moreover act for the benefit of beings, he can be a refuge. The gods abide in the base activity of enjoying desire, and moreover have the activity of killing beings; therefore they are not a place of refuge.

By the nature of things: all the good qualities and benefits of the world and beyond it are obtained in dependence on one's own exertion. Apart from one's own exertion, though one may generate deep reverence and faith toward a god, one still cannot realize them; and though one generate no reverence or faith toward a god, if one exerts oneself one will assuredly realize them. Therefore the gods are not a place of refuge.

By cause and effect: now let us ask one who serves the gods. Is the very substance of a god brought about by heavenly karma, obtained by making offerings to the god, or obtained without a cause? If it is obtained by heavenly karma, then one should take refuge in karma and not in the god. If it is obtained without a cause, then one should take refuge in causelessness and not in the god. If it is obtained by making offerings to the god, then is it caused by the offering alone, by the god alone, or by both together?

If by the offering alone, then serving the god is useless, and offerings made anywhere at all should bring about a heavenly recompense. If by the god alone, then making offerings is useless, and even without offerings one should obtain a heavenly recompense simply by the god. If by both together, then merely by making offerings and being taken up by the god, everything one prayed for ought to come to pass. But in seven kinds of prayed-for matter the result is not settled, and therefore this is not so: being taken up on the strength of one's offering; being taken up on the strength of one's faith; the arousing of faith in one who has faith in the god so as to bring about the most excellent divine body; the most excellent wealth and pleasure that one might receive; the crushing of enemies such as the asuras; birth; and death.

Establishment. Question: how many refuges are there? Answer: three — the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Saṅgha. Question: why are there only three? Answer: for four reasons only the Tathāgata can be resorted to — because he has well tamed himself; because he well understands every kind of means of taming; because he takes no pleasure in offerings of goods; and because offerings of practice are pleasing to him. Because he possesses these qualities, the Dharma he taught and the community of his disciples can also be a refuge.

Question: at what point is one called one who takes refuge? Answer: one is so called by four causes — because one well knows that there is virtue there; because one well knows the differences among the three; because one undertakes it by one's own vow; and because one resorts to nothing else.

Question: what is the right practice of taking refuge? Answer: four — drawing near to good people; hearing the true Dharma; attending in accordance with principle; and practicing the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma. And four further right practices: gathering the faculties well so that they are not agitated; undertaking the training rules; having compassion for beings; and from time to time making offerings to the Three Jewels as the Dharma requires.

Question: what benefit is there in taking refuge in the Three Jewels? Answer: four benefits — obtaining vast merit; obtaining vast gladness; obtaining excellent concentration; and obtaining good purity. And four further benefits: first, one is fully protected; second, all the obstructions of wrong understanding gradually grow slight and are wholly extinguished; third, one enters among the wise, the rightly arrived, and the good — that is, the great teacher and the community of fellow practitioners of the holy life; fourth, one is delighted in by the gods who have faith in the sacred teaching. For when those gods see someone taking the three refuges, they rejoice greatly and tell one another: it was by accomplishing the three refuges in the past that we all came to be born here when we died there. And this good son too now accomplishes these three refuges and abides in them without abandoning them; before long he will come to be our companion.

Differences. By six causes the differences among the Three Jewels should be understood: by mark, by activity, by confident understanding, by practice, by recollection, and by the merit produced.

By mark: the mark of self-realized awakening is the Buddha Jewel; the mark of the fruit of that awakening is the Dharma Jewel; the mark of rightly practicing according to another's teaching is the Saṅgha Jewel. By activity: the activity of turning the true teaching is the Buddha Jewel; the activity of being the object by which the suffering of affliction is cut off is the Dharma Jewel; the activity of increasing diligence and courage is the Saṅgha Jewel. By confident understanding: toward the Buddha Jewel one should draw near and serve with reverence; toward the Dharma Jewel one should have faith and reverence and realize it; toward the Saṅgha Jewel one should dwell together in the same Dharma, revering, trusting, and drawing near. By practice: toward the Buddha Jewel one should undertake the practice of inviting, welcoming, attending upon, and making offerings; toward the Dharma Jewel, the practice of cultivating by means in accordance with principle; toward the Saṅgha Jewel, the practice of sharing goods and Dharma with one another. By recollection: toward each of the Three Jewels one should undertake its own distinct recollection, as the scripture says: "This Blessed One is the Tathāgata, the Worthy One, the Perfectly Enlightened One," and so on at length. By the merit produced: with respect to the Buddha Jewel, the most excellent merit is produced in dependence on a single being; with respect to the Dharma Jewel, in dependence on a superior teaching; with respect to the Saṅgha Jewel, in dependence on many beings.