Aaaaaaa
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as imbued with happiness or suffering
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as a self or
not a self constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as a self or not a self constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as empty or
not empty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as empty or not empty constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as with signs or signless constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as with signs or signless constitute a
bodhisattva?”[F.44.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as having
aspirations or lacking aspirations constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as having aspirations or lacking
aspirations constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as calm or
not calm constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as calm or not calm constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
5. 69
5. 70
5. 71
5. 72
5. 73
5. 74
5. 75
5. 76
5. 77
5. 78
5. 79
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as void or
not void constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as void or not void constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as afflicted
or purified constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as afflicted or purified constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra! [F.44.b] Do you think that the designation of the eyes as
arising or ceasing constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as arising or ceasing constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the eyes as entities
or non-entities constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty as entities or non-entities constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights constitutes a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as permanent
or impermanent constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as permanent or impermanent
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
5. 80
5. 81
5. 82
5. 83
5. 84
5. 85
5. 86
5. 87
5. 88
5. 89
5. 90
5. 91
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as imbued
with happiness or suffering constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as imbued with happiness or
suffering constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as a self or not
a self constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do [F.45.a] you think that the designations of sounds,
odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as a self or not a self
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as empty or
not empty constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as empty or not empty constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as with signs
or signless constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as with signs or signless constitute
a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as having
aspirations or lacking aspirations constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[F.45.b]
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as having aspirations or lacking
aspirations constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[B5]
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as calm or not
calm constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as calm or not calm constitute a
bodhisattva?”
5. 92
5. 93
5. 94
5. 95
5. 96
5. 97
5. 98
5. 99
5. 100
5. 101
5. 102
5. 103
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as void or not
void constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as void or not void constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as afflicted or
purified constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as afflicted or purified constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as arising or
ceasing constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”[F.46.a]
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as arising or ceasing constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of sights as entities or
non-entities constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as entities or non-entities
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designation of the sensory element
of the eyes constitutes a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the sensory
element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element
of visual consciousness constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“In the same vein, do you think that the designations [of all the remaining
sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
5. 104
5. 105
5. 106
5. 107
5. 108
5. 109
5. 110
5. 111
5. 112
5. 113
5. 114
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of the sensory
element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element
of visual consciousness as permanent or impermanent constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“In the same vein, do you think that the designations [of all the remaining
sensory elements], up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness as permanent or impermanent, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that [F.46.b] the designations of [all the
sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as imbued with happiness or suffering,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as a self or not a self, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as empty or not empty, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as with signs or signless, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
5. 115
5. 116
5. 117
5. 118
5. 119
5. 120
5. 121
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as having aspirations or lacking
aspirations, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as calm or not calm, constitute a
bodhisattva?”[F.47.a]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as void or not void, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as afflicted or purified, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as arising or non-arising, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of [all the sensory
elements], starting from the sensory element of the eyes, the sensory
element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness, and
continuing in the same vein as far as [the designation of] the sensory
element of mental consciousness, as entities or non-entities, constitute a
bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
5. 122
5. 123
5. 124
5. 125
5. 126
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as permanent or
impermanent, constitute a bodhisattva?”[F.47.b]
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as imbued with happiness
or suffering, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as a self or a non-self,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as empty or not empty,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as with signs or signless,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as having aspirations or
lacking aspirations, constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as calm or not calm,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
5. 127
5. 128
5. 129
5. 130
5. 131
5. 132
5. 133
5. 134
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as void or not void,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as afflicted or purified,
[F.48.a] constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as arising or ceasing,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!”
“Śāradvatī putra, do you think that the designations of fundamental ignorance and, in the same vein, of [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, as entities or non-entities,
constitute a bodhisattva?”
“No, Reverend Lord!” he replied.
Then, the Blessed One addressed the venerable Śāradvatī putra in the
following words: “Śāradvatī putra, why do you say that the designation of
physical forms does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the
designations of feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and
consciousness do not constitute a bodhisattva? Why do you say that the
designation of physical forms as permanent or impermanent does not
constitute a bodhisattva? Similarly, why do you say that the designation of
physical forms as imbued with happiness or suffering, their designation as a
self or not a self, their designation as empty or not empty, their designation
as with signs or signless, their designation as having aspirations or lacking
aspirations, their designation as calm or not calm, their designation as void
or not void, their designation as afflicted or purified, their designation as
arising [F.48.b] or ceasing, and their designation as entities or non-entities
[do not constitute a bodhisattva]? In the same vein, why do you say that
these same designations, made with respect to feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness, up to and including their
designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“In like manner, why do you say that the designation of the eyes does not
constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of the ears, the
nose, the tongue, the body, and the mental faculty do not constitute a
bodhisattva? Likewise, why do you say that the designation of the eyes as
5. 135
5. 136
5. 137
5. 138
5. 139
5. 140
permanent or impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly,
that the designations of the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body, and the
mental faculty as permanent or impermanent does not constitute a
bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do you say that these [remaining]
designations made with respect to the eyes, up to and including their
designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and
similarly, that these [remaining] designations made with respect to the ears,
nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty, up to and including their
designation as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“In like manner, why do you say that the designation of sights does not
constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the designations of sounds,
odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena do not constitute a
bodhisattva? Why do you say that the designation of sights as permanent or
impermanent does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the
designations of sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena as
permanent or impermanent do not constitute a bodhisattva? In the same
vein, why do you say that the [remaining] designations made with respect to
sights, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities, do
not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the [remaining] designations
made with respect to sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena, up to and including their designation as entities or non-entities,
do not constitute a bodhisattva?
“Why do you say that the designation of the sensory element of the eyes,
[F.49.a] the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness does not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the
designations [of the remaining sensory elements], up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
Why do you say that the designation of the sensory element of the eyes, the
sensory element of sights, and the sensory element of visual consciousness
as permanent or impermanent, does not constitute a bodhisattva, and, in the
same vein, that the designations of the [remaining] sensory elements, up to
and including the sensory element of mental consciousness, [as permanent
or impermanent], do not constitute a bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do
you say that the [remaining] designations made with respect to the sensory
element of the eyes, the sensory element of sights, and the sensory element
of visual consciousness, up to and including their designation as entities or
non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva, and similarly, that the
[remaining] designations made with respect to the [other] sensory elements,
up to and including the designation of the sensory element of mental consciousness, as entities or non-entities, do not constitute a bodhisattva?
5. 141
5. 142
“Why do you say that the designation of fundamental ignorance does not
constitute a bodhisattva, and in the same vein, that the designations [of the
remaining links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death, do not constitute a bodhisattva? In like manner, why do you say that
the designation of fundamental ignorance as permanent or impermanent
does not constitute a bodhisattva, and, in the same vein, that the
designations [of the other links of dependent origination], up to and
including the link of aging and death, as permanent or impermanent, do not
constitute a bodhisattva? In the same vein, why do you say that the
[remaining] designations made with respect to fundamental ignorance, up to
and including its designation as entity or non-entity, do not constitute a
bodhisattva, and similarly, that [the remaining] designations made with
respect to the [other links of dependent origination], up to and including the
designation of aging and death, as entities or non-entities, do not constitute
a bodhisattva?”
150
Then, the venerable Śāradvatī putra replied to the Blessed One, “Reverend
Lord, if [F.49.b] physical forms are invariably non-apprehensible, how could
the designation of physical forms become a bodhisattva? The same goes for
feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as permanent or
impermanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings,
perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as imbued with happiness
or suffering is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings,
perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as a self or not a self is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as empty or not empty is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as with signs or signless is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
5. 143
5. 144
5. 145
5. 146
5. 147
5. 148
5. 149
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as having aspirations or
lacking aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the
designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes
for feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as calm or not calm is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as void or not void is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
[F.50.a] formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as afflicted or purified is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as arising or ceasing is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms
as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings, perceptions,
formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of physical forms as entities or non-entities
is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of physical forms as such become a bodhisattva? The same goes for feelings,
perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the eyes are invariably non-apprehensible, how could
the designation of the eyes become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the
ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as permanent or impermanent is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as
impermanent become a bodhisattva? [F.50.b] The same goes for the ears,
nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as imbued with happiness is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the eyes as
imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears,
nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as a self is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as a non-self become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
5. 150
5. 151
5. 152
5. 153
5. 154
5. 155
5. 156
5. 157
5. 158
5. 159
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as empty is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as not empty become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as with signs is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as signless become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as having aspirations is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation [of the eyes] as
lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as calm is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as not calm become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as void is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as not void become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as afflicted is invariably nonapprehensible,
[F.51.a] how could the designation of the eyes as purified
become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and
mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as arising is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as ceasing become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the eyes as entities is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the eyes as non-entities
become a bodhisattva? The same goes for the ears, nose, tongue, body, and
mental faculty!
“Reverend Lord, if sights are invariably non-apprehensible, how could the
designation of sights become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds,
odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as permanent is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as impermanent become
a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and
mental phenomena!
5. 160
5. 161
5. 162
5. 163
5. 164
5. 165
5. 166
5. 167
5. 168
5. 169
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as imbued with happiness is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as
imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds,
odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as a self is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as a non-self become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as empty is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as not empty become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena![F.51.b]
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as with signs is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as signless become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as having aspirations is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of sights as
lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors,
tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
151
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as calm is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as not calm become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as void is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as not void become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as afflicted is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as purified become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as arising is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as ceasing become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, and mental phenomena!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of sights as entities is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of sights as non-entities become a
bodhisattva? The same goes for sounds, odors, tastes, tangibles, [F.52.a] and
mental phenomena!
5. 170
5. 171
5. 172
5. 173
5. 174
5. 175
5. 176
5. 177
5. 178
5. 179
“Reverend Lord, if the sensory element of the eyes is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of the sensory element of the eyes
become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements],
starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as
permanent is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
the sensory element of the eyes as impermanent become a bodhisattva? The
same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory
element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and
including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as
imbued with happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the
designation of the sensory element of the eyes as imbued with suffering
become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other sensory elements],
starting from the sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as a self is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory
element of the eyes as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same applies to
[all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights
and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as empty
is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory
element of the eyes as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same applies to
[all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights
and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as with signs is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the
sensory element of the eyes as signless become a bodhisattva? [F.52.b] The
same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory
element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and
including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as having
aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
the sensory element of the eyes as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva?
5. 180
5. 181
5. 182
5. 183
5. 184
5. 185
5. 186
The same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the
sensory element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness,
up to and including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as calm is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory
element of the eyes as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same applies to
[all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights
and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as void is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory
element of the eyes as not void become a bodhisattva? The same applies to
[all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights
and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as
afflicted is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the
sensory element of the eyes as purified become a bodhisattva? The same
applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element
of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and
including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as arising
is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of the sensory
element of the eyes as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same applies to
[all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory element of sights
and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and including the
sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of the sensory element of the eyes as an
entity is invariably non-apprehensible, [F.53.a] how could the designation of
the sensory element of the eyes as a non-entity become a bodhisattva? The
same applies to [all the other sensory elements], starting from the sensory
element of sights and the sensory element of visual consciousness, up to and
including the sensory element of mental consciousness!
“Reverend Lord, if fundamental ignorance is invariably nonapprehensible,
how could the designation of fundamental ignorance become
a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as permanent is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as impermanent become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all
5. 187
5. 188
5. 189
5. 190
5. 191
5. 192
5. 193
the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as imbued with
happiness is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
fundamental ignorance as imbued with suffering become a bodhisattva? The
same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and
including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as a self is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as a non-self become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as empty is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as not empty become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as with signs is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as signless become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as having
aspirations is invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of
fundamental ignorance as lacking aspirations become a bodhisattva? The
same applies to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and
including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as calm is
invariably non-apprehensible, [F.53.b] how could the designation of
fundamental ignorance as not calm become a bodhisattva? The same applies
to [all the other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as void is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as not void become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as afflicted is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as purified become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as arising is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as ceasing become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
5. 194
5. 195
5. 196
5. 197
5. 198
5. 199
5. 200
5. 201
5. 202
“Reverend Lord, if the notion of fundamental ignorance as an entity is
invariably non-apprehensible, how could the designation of fundamental ignorance as a non-entity become a bodhisattva? The same applies to [all the
other links of dependent origination], up to and including aging and death!
As indicated [above] in the context of the psycho-physical aggregates, the
same refrain should be applied extensively to all [those other
phenomenological categories].”
The Blessed One replied, “Śāradvatī putra, it is so! It is so! Great
bodhisattva beings who abide accordingly in this transcendent perfection of wisdom do not apprehend the designation of physical forms, and in the
same vein, they do not apprehend [all the other designations concerning
physical forms] up to and including the designation of physical forms as
non-entities. Likewise, they do not apprehend the designations of feelings,
perceptions, formative predispositions, and consciousness, and in the same
vein, they do not apprehend [their further designations], starting from there
and continuing up to the designation of consciousness as a non-entity. In
the same vein, they do not apprehend the designation of fundamental ignorance, and they do not apprehend [the designations of the other links of
dependent origination], up to and including the designation of aging and death. In the same vein, they do not apprehend the designation [of these
links of dependent origination] as non-entities and so forth. As stated
[above] in the context of the psycho-physical aggregates, the same refrain
should also be applied extensively to all [those other phenomenological
categories]. [F.54.a] It is in this way that they should train in the transcendent perfection of wisdom.”
This completes the fifth chapter from “The Transcendent Perfection of Wisdom in Ten
Thousand Lines,” entitled “Designation of a Bodhisattva.”152
5. 203
5. 204
5. 205
Chapter 6
TRAINING
“Śāradvatī putra, you said that you do not consider any phenomenon which
may be designated by the term ‘bodhisattva.’ Indeed, Śāradvatī putra,
phenomena do not consider phenomena. Nor, Śāradvatī putra, do
phenomena consider the expanse of reality. The sensory element of sights
does not consider the expanse of reality. Nor does the expanse of reality
consider the sensory element of sights, and in the same way, the expanse of
reality does not consider [any other sensory elements] up to and including
the sensory element of consciousness. Nor does the sensory element of consciousness and so forth consider the expanse of reality.
“Śāradvatī putra, the sensory element of the eyes does not consider the
expanse of reality; nor does the expanse of reality consider the sensory
element of the eyes. In the same vein, [the other sensory elements] up to and
including the sensory element of the mental faculty do not consider the
expanse of reality; nor does the expanse of reality consider [those other
sensory elements up to and including] the sensory element of the mental faculty. The sensory element of visual consciousness does not consider the
expanse of reality; nor does the expanse of reality consider the sensory
element of visual consciousness. [The other sensory elements] up to and
including the sensory element of mental consciousness do not consider the
expanse of reality; nor does the expanse of reality consider [those other
sensory elements up to and including] the sensory element of mental consciousness. If you ask why, Śāradvatī putra, it is because conditioned
elements do not consider unconditioned elements, and because
unconditioned elements do not consider conditioned elements. Śāradvatīputra,
unconditioned elements cannot be designated except in terms of
conditioned elements, [F.54.b] and conditioned elements cannot be
designated except in terms of unconditioned elements.”
6.
6. 1
6. 2
Then, the venerable Śāradvatī putra asked the Blessed One as follows:
“Reverend Lord, if phenomena do not consider phenomena, and in the same
vein, [all other sensory elements] up to and including the sensory element of
mental consciousness do not consider the expanse of reality, then in that
case, Reverend Lord, what is the meaning of the term ‘great bodhisattva
being’?”
The Blessed One then addressed the venerable Śāradvatī putra as follows:
“Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is a meaningless
term. If you ask why, Śāradvatī putra, it is because the meaning of the term
‘bodhisattva’ is without identity. For this reason, the meaning of the term
‘bodhisattva’ is a meaningless term. Śāradvatī putra, just as tracks of birds in
the sky are non-existent, in the same way the meaning of the term
‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent. Śāradvatī putra, just as a dream has no basis, in
the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is nonexistent.
Śāradvatī putra, just as a magical display is without foundation, in
the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is nonexistent.
Śāradvatī putra, just as a mirage is without foundation, in the same
way, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent.
Śāradvatī putra, just as an echo, an optical aberration, the reflection of the
moon in water, and a phantom emanation of the tathāgatas are without
foundation, in the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term
‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent. Śāradvatī putra, just as the real nature is
without foundation, and in the same way, the unmistaken real nature, the
reality, the expanse of reality, and maturity with respect to all things are
without foundation, likewise, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term
‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent. Śāradvatī putra, just as [F.55.a] the finality of
existence is without foundation, in the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the
meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as the physical form of an illusory person is without
foundation, and in the same way, the aggregate of feelings, the aggregate of perceptions, the aggregate of formative predispositions, and the aggregate of consciousness are without foundation, likewise, Śāradvatī putra, the
meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as the eyes of an illusory person are without
foundation, and in the same way, [their other sense organs] up to and
including the mental faculty are without foundation, and the same goes for
the [external] sense fields, which are also without foundation, starting from
the sense field of sights through to the sense field of mental phenomena,
likewise, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ is nonexistent.
6. 3
6. 4
6. 5
6. 6
“Śāradvatī putra, just as [the notion of] an illusory person engaging in the emptiness of internal phenomena is without foundation, in the same way,
Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva
being, abiding in the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent. In
the same vein, just as [the notion of] an illusory person engaging in [all the
other aspects of emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of non-entities, is without foundation, in the same way,
Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva
being, abiding in the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as [the notion of] an illusory person practicing the
ten powers of the tathāgatas is without foundation, in the same way,
Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva
being, abiding in the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent. In
the same vein, just as [the notion of an illusory person] practicing [all the
other fruitional attributes], up to and including the eighteen distinct qualities
of the buddhas, is without foundation, in the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the
meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva being, abiding in
the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as [the notion of] the physical forms of a tathāgata,
arhat, and completely perfect buddha [F.55.b] is without foundation, and in
the same way, feelings, perceptions, formative predispositions, and
consciousness are without foundation, likewise, Śāradvatī putra, the
meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva being, abiding in
the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent. Śāradvatī putra, just
as [the notion of] the eyes of a tathāgata, arhat, and completely perfect
buddha is without foundation, and in the same way, [the notions of their
other sense organs], up to and including the mental faculty, are without
foundation, likewise, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning of the term ‘bodhisattva’
as a great bodhisattva being, abiding in the transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as [the notion of] a tathāgata, arhat, and completely
perfect buddha engaging in the emptiness of internal phenomena is without
foundation, and, in the same vein, just as [the notion of a tathāgata, arhat,
and completely perfect buddha] engaging in [all the other aspects of
emptiness], up to and including the emptiness of the essential nature of nonentities,
is without foundation, in the same way, Śāradvatī putra, the meaning
of the term ‘bodhisattva’ as a great bodhisattva being, abiding in the
transcendent perfection of wisdom, is non-existent.
“Śāradvatī putra, just as [the notion of] a tathāgata, arhat, and completely
perfect buddha having the four applications of mindfulness is without
foundation, and, in the same vein, just as [the notion of a tathāgata, arhat,
6. 7
6. 8
