1050. According to Ratnākara (F.163.b), conceiving of “things” means conceiving of constituents of experience, elements, and so on. This is their “mental perception.” He or she does the same as before to “eliminate” that. Thus, the attainment of emptiness means being free of mental perceptions. The method/means is being free of mental perceptions based on any connection with that conception. RK: dharmasaṃjñā skandhadhātvādisaṃjñā| sa upalambhaḥ | tatprahāṇāye tyādi pūrvavat| evaṃ śūnyatā disamāpat tir anupalambhaḥ| tadyogād anupalambha upāyaḥ.
1051. According to Ratnākara (F.163.b), the “conception of conventional signs” refers (for example) to “woman,” “man,” “visible form,” or “sound.” To eliminate that, one proceeds as described previously. RK: strī pumān rūpaṃ śabda iti nimittasaṃjñā | tatprahāṇāye tyādi pūrvavat.
1052. RK: evam animittasamāpat tir ānimittam| tadyogād ānimitta upāyaḥ.
1053. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), an “inclination” is a desire for some worldly pleasure—for instance, to become the universal emperor Śakra, the powerful god. A “mistake” is the root of that desire. For this reason, one “eliminates” the four mistakes as described previously. The meditative concentration on freedom from inclinations is free of inclinations. The method/means is freedom from inclinations due to any connection with that. RK: devaḥ śakraś cakravarttī syām ityādir bhavabhogābhilāṣaḥ praṇihitam| tasya mūlaṃ viparyāsāḥ| tasmāc caturviparyāsaprahāṇāye tyādi pūrvavat| evam apraṇihitasamādhir apraṇihitam tadyogād apraṇihita upāyaḥ.
1054. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), the methods/means of freedom from mental perceptions and so on are taught to be three gateways of complete liberation as the objective scope (of mental concentration). Next (in this paragraph), he explains the additional objective scopes and (and after that) unerroneous nature as the freedom from conditionings and so on. RK: anupalambhādīnām upāyā vimokṣamukhatrayaṃ viṣaya uktaḥ| sāṃpratam eṣām anabhisaṃskārādikam adhikaṃ viṣayam amoghatāṃ ca bravīti.
1055. According to Ratnākara’s (F.156.a) previous comments in chapter 18 (see n.938), the nature (bhāva) of all things as they appear and the nature of them as they truly are is “emptiness.” It itself is the “freedom from signs” because signs cease in the experience of it. It itself is “freedom from inclinations” because those who experience it have no aspiration for the three realms. It itself is “freedom from conditioning” because those who experience it do not perform karmic deeds that lead to rebirth. It itself is “freedom from arising” because those who experience it do not have arisings due to any karmic deeds. It itself is “freedom from birth” because those who experience it know (that things are) unborn by nature. It itself is “freedom from any state of being” because it is insubstantial. RK: g ambhīram itītyādi| sarvadharmāṇāṃ yathāpratibhāsam bhāvo yathātattvaṃ ca bhāvaḥ śūnyatā| saivānimittaṃ tadvedane nimittanirodhāt| saivāpraṇihitaṃ tadvidāṃ traidhātuke ’praṇidhānāt| saivānabhisaṃskāras teṣāṃ punarbhavāya karmākaraṇāt| saivānutpādas teṣāṃ tena karmaṇā’nutpādāt| saivājātis teṣāṃ prakṛtyajātatājñānāt| saivābhāvo ’dravyatvāt.
1056. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), the phrase “fall into an unconditioned state” means into the disciples’ lesser awakening. The phrase “within the three realms” means in cyclic existence. RK: anabhisaṃskāre pated iti hīnabodhau| traidhātukene ti saṃsāreṇa.
1057. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), “a bodhisattva great being who wishes to realize unsurpassed, perfect awakening should ask (paripraṣṭavya) a second bodhisattva great being” who knows. RK: samyaksambodhikāmena bodhisattvena vijño bodhisattvaḥ praṣṭavyaḥ.
1058. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), if the question is “For perfect awakening, what should I cultivate and how should I cultivate it?” then one should cultivate the emptiness that has been seen and should actualize the acquaintance with the mother (i.e., the transcendent state of wisdom). In relation to that, the “mindset of not abandoning all sentient beings” and so on (as mentioned below) is the means/method. (Mentioning) this is a mark of an explainer who is beyond regressing. The means is (indirectly expressed) in the mark of the explainer. RK: samyaksambodhaye kiṃ bhāvayeyaṃ kathaṃ ca bhāvayeyam iti| saced ācakṣītaśūnyatādikam eva bhāvaya tac ca parijayaṃ mātuḥ sākṣātkārṣīḥ| tatropāyaḥ sarvasattvāparityāgacitt ādir iti| etat tasyākhyātur avaivartikatve liṅgam| tasmāt tasya liṅgam asminn iti talliṅga upāyaḥ. Note: Ratnākara’s clarification here also gives an untranslated grammatical explanation of the Sanskrit adjectival compound.
1059. This translation has followed the Sanskrit uttapta here, even though it is omitted in the Tibetan: dge ba’i rtsa ba ’bar ba skyed par.
1060. According to Ratnākara (F.164.a), that he or she sees while dreaming that everything is like a dream, but does not actualize awakening, is the first mark (i.e., characteristic, of a bodhisattva beyond regressing). RK: svapnāntaragato pi svapnopamān sarvadharmān paśyati na ca sākṣātkarotīti prathamaṃ liṅgam. Note: This is a reference to lucid dreaming that serves an example of how a bodhisattva meditates on emptiness but does not wake up. In the language of this scripture, he or she knows everything is empty, but does not actualize the disciples’ awakening, i.e., a bodhisattva eschews the disciples’ pinnacle of reality in favor of the pinnacle of reality experienced by a buddha.
1061. For the remainder of the chapter from this point on, the content corresponds to the first part Chapter 45 in the Twenty-Five Thousand (down to 45.8) and Hundred Thousand, and to Chapter 55 in the Eighteen Thousand (down to 55.9).
1062. Note: The translation has followed the Sanskrit agnidāhe, even though *agnidāhaghate might be suggested by the Tibetan: ’brog me shor ba’i gnod pa byung ngam.
1063. Generally in the Mahāyāna, when buddhas attain awakening they also create around themselves one of three types of buddhafields: pure, impure, and mixed. A buddhafield without any lower realms is considered to be a pure one. The aspiration of a bodhisattva beyond regressing is the thing that “refines” the future buddhafield. For more info, see the entry on pariśuddhabuddhakṣetra (“purified buddhafield”) in Buswell and Lopez 2014, p. 630.
1064. According to Hari (767), “the karmic deed is ripened” means the karmic deed that is the rejection of the sublime Dharma that leads to his or her present life’s failure is experienced through their mental dissatisfaction due to their failure to perform an act of truth. “As a result of that” means due to having accumulated that karmic deed in a previous life. Hari: karma vipacyata iti saddharmapratyākhyānaṃ dṛṣṭadharmasaṃvartanīyam eva karma satyādhiṣṭhānāniṣpatter daurmanasyādinānubhūyate. tata eve ti janmāntarasaṃgṛhītāt.
1065. According to Ratnākara (F.165.a), if someone is “taken over”—i.e., controlled “or possessed,” i.e., inhabited “by an malevolent spirit”—then the bodhisattva should “perform an act of truth” in response to that. RK: yadi kaścit sattvo ’manuṣyeṇa gṛhīto ’dhiṣṭhitaḥ āviṣṭo vā antaḥpraveśāt| tatra bodhisattvaḥ satyādhiṣṭhānaṃ kuryāt. Note: The notion of “an act of truth” here is that a bodhisattva can perform a miracle merely by stating a true fact, such as that he or she will realize awakening.
1066. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), this is the twenty-first chapter, on Māra’s activities. What is this chapter introducing about them? It is introducing the fact that (a) there are many Māras for a bodhisattva who recently set out on the path, because they can develop a deluded sense of grandeur due to accomplishing results through their (seemingly effortless) performance of acts of truth and so on, and (b) a bodhisattva makes heroic advances (parākramo) against them. RK: ayam ekaviṃśati tamaḥ parivarto mārakarmā ṇām. kas teṣāṃ prastāvaḥ ? navayānasaṃprasthitasya bodhisattvasya satyādhiṣṭhānaphalasampādanādinā mithyāmānotpādanāya bahudhā mārāḥ| parākramata ity ayam eṣāṃ prastāvaḥ. Note: Even though the Sanskrit title mārakarmaparivarta is the same as chapter 11, “On Māra’s Activity,” to distinguish the two chapters this chapter has been called “The Chapter Detailing Māra’s Activities” following Ratnākara’s gloss the end of the chapter. RK: mārakarmā ṇām abhidhāyakaḥ parivartas tathoktaḥ.
1067. The beginning of this chapter corresponds to a point within Chapter 45 in the Twenty-Five Thousand (starting at 45.9) and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 55 in the Eighteen Thousand (starting at 55.10). The content of the chapter continues to a later point still within the same chapters, 45.22 in the Twenty-Five Thousand and 55.27 in the Eighteen Thousand.
1068. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), “on that topic” is referring to the act of truth that was described just before (at the end of the previous chapter where the bodhisattva said, in effect, the same thing). RK: tatre tyanantarokte satyādhiṣṭhāne.
1069. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), he will “exert himself” means he will make an effort to do a (harmful) deed to someone in whom he finds an opportunity. RK: autsukyam iti prāptāvasarasya karmaṇaḥ karaṇārtham utsāhaḥ.
1070. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), “strenuously” refers to the power of his effort and “energetically” refers to the power of his might. RK: balam utsāhaśaktiḥ| tejaḥ prabhāvaśaktiḥ| kathaṃ tejovattaram iti yāvat| tasau matvartha iti bhatvāspadatvaṃ nāstīti bhatvena na bhavitavyam| tadyathā āyuṣmān sarasvān iti| evaṃ tarhi dīptyarthā[F.] dravateḥ śatrantāt tarap| tejasā dīptataraṃ tejovattaram iti. Note: This translation of Ratnākara’s comments essentializes them and omits his Sanskrit etymological explanation of how the word tejovattaram is formed.
1071. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), “with his or her exertion” means with a lofty opinion of him- or herself. In this sentence, to “treat disrespectfully” means to disrespect; being “smug” means smiling to oneself inwardly; being “sarcastic toward them” means doing the opposite with one’s mind; to “pick at their faults” means to highlight their faults; and to “criticize” means to explain their faults. RK: autsukyam iti| ātmani bahumānam| avamaṃsyata ityādi| avamān o ’nādaraḥ| uccagghānam antarhāsaḥ| ullāpan aṃ manasānyatkaraṇam| kutsanaṃ doṣadarśitā| paṃs anaṃ doṣavāditā.
1072. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b), “increasing” means causing it to come to the fore; “becoming stubborn” means causing it to be unmovable; “being fed” means fostering; and “flaring up” means getting intense. RK: jananam utpādanam| vardha naṃ puraḥsarīkaraṇam| stambha naṃ sthirīkaraṇam| bṛṃhaṇa paripuṣṭiḥ| utpāda nam uccair nayanam.
1073. According to Ratnākara (F.165.b–66.a), it was previously taught that “pride,” in general, is the swelling up of one’s own mindset with a sense of being better than others. But particular types of it are explained here: “pride” means the swelling up compared to someone inferior to him or her; “self-superiority” is compared to someone absolutely equal; “arrogance” is compared to someone more excellent; “conceitedness” is thinking to have attained the state beyond regressing even though one has not attained it; and the “deluded sense of grandeur” is furthermore thinking “I am a possessor of positive qualities” in connection with falsely supposed positive qualities beyond regressing. RK: mānene tyādi| anyebhyo ’dhikatvena cittasyonnatiḥ sāmānyena mānaḥ sa pūrvam uktaḥ| iha tu tadviśeṣā ucyante| yā tasya hīnād unnatiḥ sa mānaḥ | yādṛśād eva so ’timānaḥ | yo punaḥprakṛṣṭāt sa mānātimānaḥ| aprāpte ’vaivartikatve prāptaṃ mayeti so ’bhimānaḥ| yā punar abhūtair avaivartikaguṇair guṇavān asmīti sa mithyāmānaḥ. Note: For similar descriptions, see Vasubandhu’s Pañcaskandhaka, 4.1.23 in Kramer 2014.
1074. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “assigning a title” means labeling (i.e., with a name, title, or epithet). RK: nāmāpadeśaḥ saṃjñākathanam. According to Hari (774), “assigning a title” means saying his or her name/title; “corroborating it with names” means reciting the names of his or her mother and so on (as described below). Hari: nāmāpadeśene ti tannāmakathanena. nāmādhiṣṭhānene ti mātrādināmavyapadeśena. Note: The word nāma (in the Sanskrit compound word nāmāpadeśaḥ) can be translated simply as a “name” but also refers to an epithet, title, or other type of designation. To capture the thrust of the problem described in the passage, it has been translated as “giving a title” (in the sense of a specified title expressing rank, office, or character).
1075. These names of the bodhisattva include past and future.
1076. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), the following sentence beginning “an ascetic who dwells in the forest” and so on describes the (fourteen) qualities of a pure ascetic. RK: āraṇyakatvādayo dhutaguṇāḥ. Note: These qualities are practices. In some texts, they number twelve and in others thirteen. In the main text there are fifteen clauses, but the last three were combined into one, because the commentators either do not mention them or suggest they are part of the thirteenth one. The translation of each subsequent ascetic practice has attempted to follow Hari’s or RK’s commentary, but the reader should keep in mind that they are interpreted differently elsewhere; cf. descriptions in other sūtras from dhūtaguṇa in 84000’s cumulative glossary, 84000’s (forthcoming) The Teaching on the Purification Practices from the Path to Liberation (Toh 306), and dhutaṅga in Buswell and Lopez 2014, pp. 255–56.
1077. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who dwells in the forest” stays only in the forest area more than two miles outside the village. RK: grāmād bahiḥ krośāt param araṇyam| tatraiva sthānāt āraṇyakaḥ.
1078. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who seeks alms” eats only what has been offered as alms (into a begging bowl). RK: piṇḍapātasyaiva bhojanāt piṇḍapātikaḥ.
1079. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who wears rags” is clad only in a collection of rags from a dust-heap. RK: pāṃsukūlasyeva prāvaraṇāt pāṃsukūlikaḥ.
1080. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who never eats later” only eats around midday. RK: madhyāhnasyopānta eva bhojanāt khalu paścād bhaktikaḥ.
1081. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who uses a single seat” uses only one single seat (to eat meals and so on). RK: ekāsana eva bhuṅkte ekāsanikaḥ.
1082. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who accepts what is offered” always sleeps on whatever (grass mat) is available (where he or she happens to be at dusk). RK: sakṛdāstīrṇe nityaṃ śayanāt yāthāsaṃstarikaḥ.
1083. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who has three robes” abandons any more than three robes. RK: tricīvarād adhikatyāgāt traicīvarikaḥ.
1084. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who lives in charnel grounds” stays only in the area of the charnel grounds. RK: śmaśānasamīpa eva sthānāt śmāśānikaḥ.
1085. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who lives at the foot of a tree” stays only at the foot of a tree. RK: vṛkṣamūla eva sthānāt vṛkṣamūlikaḥ.
1086. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who stays upright” continues through the night (i.e., sleeps) sitting upright. RK: niṣadyayā rātrinayanān naiṣadyikaḥ.
1087. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who lives in the open air” stays only in the open air, i.e., an outdoor space without shelter. RK: acchanno ’vakāśo ’bhyavakāśaḥ| tatraiva sthānāt ābhyavakāśikaḥ.
1088. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who wears felt” wears only felt garments made of wool, hemp, and so on. RK: aurṇakaśānakāder eva prāvaraṇāt nāmantikaḥ.
1089. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), “an ascetic who lives in seclusion, contented with few desires” has “few desires,” i.e., wishes for little; is “content” with just that much; and lives “in seclusion” as a recluse. RK: alpaiṣaṇāt alpecchaḥ| tāvataiva santoṣāt santuṣṭaḥ| ekākitvāt praviviktaḥ. According to Hari (774–75), “an ascetic who lives in seclusion, contented with few desires” lacks any “desire” for more; is “content” with having just that much; lives “in seclusion” in order to be free from offenses (against monastic rules or vows); and due to having few desires, “goes barefoot.” Hari: adhikābhilāṣābhāvād alpecchaḥ. tāvanmātreṇa saṃtoṣāt saṃtuṣṭaḥ. āpattirahitatvena praviviktaḥ. alpecchatvād apagatapādam rakṣaṇaḥ. Note: Three seemingly distinct sentences in the Sanskrit text have been combined into one here because the commentators seem to count them as one. The phrase apagatapādam rakṣaṇaḥ is not in any other list. Although Hari comments on it briefly, RK ignores it. The Tibetan translation (F.211.b) has rkang pa skud pa dang bral ba, which is probably a mistake or hyperedit for rkang pa skung ba dang bral ba or rkang pa skyong ba dang bral ba. The English rendering “goes barefoot” takes the Sanskrit as being equivalent to *apagatapādarakṣaṇaḥ, i.e., one who is free of foot coverings/shoes.
1090. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a), here “corroborating” means revealing. RK: adhiṣṭhānam āviṣkaraṇam.
1091. According to Ratnākara (F.166.a–b), in the phrase “overcome with stubbornness,” the word “stubborn” means lacking devotion to teachers (guru). RK: stambhābhibhūta iti stambho guruṣv agauravam.
1092. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), the latter two terms “pondered” (anuvitarkitam) and “mulled over” provide an explanation of the very first “considered” (anuvartitam<anuvicintitam). He or she “pondered” (anuvitarkitam) means thinking what their name will be, and “mulled over” means thinking this is what my name should be. Māra “predicted” means he declared it. RK: anuvartitam ity anuvicintitam| asyaiva nirdeśa uttarābhyām| anuvitarkitaṃ kiṃ me nāma bhaved iti| anuvicāritam idaṃ me nāma bhaved iti| vyākariṣyatī ty ākhyāsyati Māraḥ.
1093. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), “subtlest” means it is difficult to perceive. RK: sūkṣmasūkṣmāṇī ti durlakṣyāṇi.
1094. This next section features a play on two etymologically related Sanskrit terms that are later contrasted to two others. In English, some of the punning and play on the relationship between these pairs of terms and their wider connotations has had to be sacrificed to make the meaning clear. The noun viveka we have translated here as “seclusion,” and the adjective vivikta as “secluded from.” However, the word play depends on the fact that viveka can mean not only “isolated place” or “seclusion,” but also, more broadly, “voidness”—i.e., “emptiness”—and vivikta can mean “devoid of” or “isolated.” Indeed, everywhere else in this scripture the term viveka, rendered as “void” or “voidness,” is used as an almost perfect synonym of emptiness, while vivikta, for the most part, has been rendered simply as “lacking” or “devoid of.” Hence “living in seclusion” here most literally means living completely isolated from others, but living in voidness also means being in the void state, i.e., realizing emptiness. These two terms are later contrasted with the opposite terms “mingling” (saṃkīrṇa)—either in the sense of “mixed up with” (confused or polluted by) or “mingling together with others”—and “crowded” (ākīrṇa).
1095. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), living “in seclusion” means apart (from others). RK: vivikto rahitaḥ.
1096. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), “living around a village” can mean either on the border of a village or in one part of it. RK: grāma syāntaḥ samīpam ekadeśo vā.
1097. It is not clear from the Sanskrit text whether the forest area is “two hundred miles wide” (as translated here) or “at a distance of two hundred miles” (locative of distance; cf. Macdonell 203j). Either way, the “two hundred miles” is simply emphasizing the remoteness.
1098. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), “depended” with moderate habitual fixation; “relied” with medium habitual fixation; “dwelled” with excessive fixation; and “devoted him- or herself” through regularly exalting themselves with it. RK: mṛdunā abhiniveśena niśritaḥ| madhyena ālīnaḥ| adhimātreṇa adhyavasitaḥ| tenaivātmotkarṣaṇāt adhyavasāyam āpannaḥ.
1099. There is a double meaning in the Sanskrit phrase vihārena vihārati, which means abiding either in (a) an abode or dwelling place, or (b) a state or condition. Up until now, it has been translated as “state” since that can more easily stretch to include both meanings. But below it will be translated where necessary as “abode.”
1100. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b), the “mixed-up state” refers to (an abode) with householders and monastic renunciants. The “crowded state” means (an abode) crowded with only monastic renunciants. RK: saṃkīrṇo gṛhipravrajitaiḥ| ākīrṇaḥ pravrajitair eva. According to Hari (783), it is a “mixed-up state” (viz. a polluted state) because it involves the states of directed mental attention of disciples and so on. It is a “crowded state” (viz. an abode among the crowds) because it falls outside the dimension of the Mahāyāna. Hari: saṃkīrṇavihāreṇe ti śrāvakādimanaskāropetatvāt. ākīrṇavihāreṇe ti mahāyānād bahirgatavihāratvāt. Note: The commentators diverge on how to interpret the words here beyond the aforementioned play on the words saṃkīrṇa—i.e., (a) “mixed together” as in combined and (b) “mixed up with” in the sense of polluted or confused by—and ākīrṇavihāra, i.e., (a) an abode “full of people” or (b) abiding in crowds (i.e., filled with common people).
1101. The “superhuman spirit” refers to Māra who, in disguise, reproached and warned them earlier in the chapter to remain in an empty place.
1102. The assumption is that he is a forest dweller, proud about getting advice from spirits.
1103. According to Ratnākara (F.166.b–67.a), someone like this is “an outcaste” because others should not live with them; “a corrupter” because they corrupt others with their own faults: “a mere likeness” because they physically look like (bodhisattvas but are not); “a false imitation” because they have a similar name (to bodhisattvas but are not); “a poor decoy “ because their (duck-like) blackness does not resemble the whiteness of those swans (i.e., real bodhisattvas); “a thief” because they use the disguise of ascetics to get hold of the teachings; “a user” because bodhisattvas do not consent to this; and “a usurper of the world with its gods” because they act in a way worthy of veneration but falsely. RK: bodhisattvacaṇḍālaḥ tair asaṃvāsyatvāt| bodhisattvadūṣī svadoṣeṇa teṣāṃ dūṣaṇāt| bodhisattvapratirūpako dehasāmyāt| bodhisattvaprativarṇiko nāmasāmyāt| bodhisattvakāraṇḍavakaḥ haṃseṣv iva teṣv akṛṣṇeṣu kṛṣṇatvāt| cauraḥ śramaṇaveṣeṇa dharmagrahaṇāt| cauro bodhisattvānām asammatatvāt| cauraḥ sadevakasya lokasya mithyādakṣiṇīyatvāt. Note: The Sanskrit term caura is rendered here with three different translations based on the three different connotations that Ratnākara highlights.
1104. According to Hari (783), they have “no teacher” because they are bereft of a spiritual friend. Hari: kalyāṇamitravirahād anācāryāḥ. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), they are “ignoble,” i.e., evil. RK: anāryāḥ pāpāḥ. Note: There are two different Sanskrit manuscript readings attested: (1) having “no teacher” (anācāryāḥ ) in the present Tibetan edition and Hari, and (2) being “ignoble” (anāryāḥ) in the Sanskrit of the sūtra and in Ratnākara. The translation in the main text follows the Tibetan, but both commentators’ comments are reported here for comparison.
1105. This translation has followed the Tibetan yid mi skrag pa (*anuttrastamānasena) rather than the Sanskrit uttrastamānasena (Vaidya and Wogihara).
1106. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), “this all” and so on is just a final summary of the activities of Māra (described in the chapter). RK: idam apī tyādinā paścimamārakarmopasaṃhāraḥ.
1107. According to Ratnākara (F.168.b), the “Chapter on Virtuous Friends” is a chapter about virtuous friends and so on. RK: kalyāṇamitrādiḥ parivarto kalyāṇamitraparivartaḥ.
1108. The beginning of this chapter corresponds to a point within Chapter 45 in the Twenty-Five Thousand (starting at 45.23) and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 55 in the Eighteen Thousand (starting at 55.28). The content of the chapter corresponds to the remainder of those same chapters.
1109. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), “the transcendent state of wisdom, in particular” is highlighted because it is the main one, and “the six transcendent states in fact” since that one comes along with the six. lRK: prajñāpāramitaive ti prādhānyād avadhāraṇam| yathā ca saikā tathā sahitāḥ ṣaṭ.
1110. According to Hari (787), the six transcendent states are the “teacher” at the stage of the fruit. Hari: phalāvasthāḥ ṣaṭ pāramitāḥ śāstāḥ. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), only those who have reached the end are the “teacher,” i.e., the final fruit. RK: tā eva niṣṭhāṃgatāḥ śāstā yaḥ paramaṃ phalam.
1111. According to Hari (787), they are the “path” at the stage of gaining the sight because they show the path to the realization of the first level (in the warmth phase on the path of preliminary practice). Hari: prathamādhigamamārgasaṃdarśanāl labdhālokāvasthā mārgah. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), only prior to that (fruit) are they “the path.” RK: tataḥ pūrvānta eva mārgaḥ.
1112. According to Hari (787), they are “sight” at the stage of the ripening of seeing because they offer higher sight (in the peak phase on the path of preliminary practice). Hari: adhikālokarūpatvāt vṛddhālokāvasthā ālokaḥ. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), they alone are also the “sight,” i.e., the spiritual knowing on the delighted phase (i.e., the first level of a bodhisattva). RK: āloko lokottaraṃ jñānaṃ pramuditāyāṃ so pi tā eva. Note: It may not be clear up until this point that Ratnākara is disagreeing with Hari about which stage or phase of the bodhisattva’s path each metaphor or epithet is supposed to refer to. However, Ratnākara is giving a different interpretation of each one all along the way.
1113. According to Hari (787), they are the “torch” at the stage of extending (that sight) to a part of the ultimate truth, because they help a bodhisattva enter into one part of the ultimate emptiness of a perceiving subject or perceived object (in the phase of acceptance on the path of preliminary practice). Hari: grāhyagrāhakābhāvatattvaikadeśapraviṣṭatvāt tattvārthaikadeśaprasṛtāvasthā ūlkā. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a), they alone are also the “torch” that is the path involving effort on the stainless levels and so on (i.e., the second through seventh impure levels of a bodhisattva). RK: ulkā prayatnavāhī mārgo vimalādibhūmiṣu ṣaṭsu sopi tā eva.
1114. According to Hari (787), they are the “torch” at the stage of meditative concentration that immediately precedes (insight), because they cause a bodhisattva to know reality right afterward (in the pinnacle of worldly things phase on the path of preliminary practice). Hari: anantaratattvajñānodayād ānantaryasamādhyavasthā avabhāsaḥ. According to Ratnākara (F.167.a–b), they alone are also the “radiance”—i.e., heavenly light—that is the path involving no effort on the unmoving levels and so on (i.e., the eighth through tenth pure levels of a bodhisattva). For this reason, they alone are also the Three Jewels, and hence (the next four epithets, namely “shelter”), “refuge,” “ultimate resort,” and “island,” which were explained previously (by Ratnākara in an earlier chapter). RK: avabhāso divasālokaḥ| sa cāyatnavāhī mārgo ’calādiṣu bhūmiṣu so pi tā eva| ataś ca tā eva trīṇi ratnāni| tasmāt tā eva śaraṇaṃ yāvat dīpaḥ| padārthaḥ pūrvavat.
1115. According to Hari (787), they are the “shelter” on the first bodhisattva level because they block out all possible misfortunes. Hari: sarvopadravanivāraṇāt prathamāyāṃ bhūmau trāṇaṃ.
1116. According to Hari (787), they are the “refuge” on the second bodhisattva level because they are the place (of refuge) to go to so that practice with an altruistic disposition is never fruitless. Hari: tadāśayaprayogāvandhyatvapadasthānena dvitīyāyāṃ śaraṇam.
1117. According to Hari (787), they are the “sanctuary” on the third bodhisattva level because they are the site of faultless pleasure. Hari: niravadyarativastutvāt tṛtīyāyāṃ layanaṃ.
1118. According to Hari (787), they are the “ultimate resort” on the fourth bodhisattva level because they are the place to go to in order to reach the supreme state of a noble being. Hari: paramāryatvāgamanapadasthānena caturthyāṃ parāyaṇam.
1119. According to Hari (787), they are the “island” on the fifth bodhisattva level because they are delimited from the three realms. Hari: traidhātukaparicchinnatvāt pañcamyāṃ dvīpaḥ.
1120. According to Hari (787), they are the “mother” on the sixth bodhisattva level because their nature is the transcendent state of wisdom. Hari: prajñāpāramitāsvabhāvatvāt ṣaṣṭhyāṃ mātā. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), they are the “mother” because they carry and feed (bodhisattvas on the noble path). RK: tā eva mātā dhāraṇāt poṣaṇāc ca.
1121. According to Hari (787), they are the “father” on the seventh bodhisattva level because their nature is the method (i.e., skillful means). Hari: upāyarūpatvāt saptamyāṃ pitā. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), they are the “father” because they provide the seed (for bodhisattvas). RK: tā eva pitā bijādhānāt.
1122. According to Hari (787), they “lead to knowledge” on the eighth bodhisattva level because their nature consists in (pure) aspirations, and they “lead to realization” on the ninth bodhisattva level because they are characterized by the transcendent perfection of strength. They “progress to unsurpassed, perfect awakening” at the tenth bodhisattva level because the transcendent perfection of knowing is unequaled. These are the different meanings (of these epithets). Hari: praṇidhānātmakatvād aṣṭamyāṃ jñānāya, balapāramitālakṣaṇatvān navamyāṃ bodhāya, jñānapāramitātiriktatvena daśamyām anuttarāyai samyaksambodhaye saṃvartanta ity arthabhedaḥ. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), they “lead to knowledge,” i.e., the path of seeing (on the first bodhisattva level), and “lead to realization,” i.e., the path of cultivation (on the next nine bodhisattva levels). RK: jñānāyet i darśanāya| bodhāye ti bhāvanāmārgāya.
1123. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), “What is the cause for this?” asks the question why the transcendent state of wisdom alone has the qualities described, not the others. What follows is the reply. RK: tat kasya hetor iti kutaḥ prajñāpāramitaiva yathoktaguṇā netarā ity arthaḥ| atra hī tyādinā parihāraḥ.
1124. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), he says these sentences in order to explain the fact that the state of complete knowing belonging to the buddhas of the three times issues forth from these (transcendent states). “Born” means accomplished. RK: traiyadhvikabuddhānāṃ ca sarvajñatā tatprasūtaivety ākhyātum āha| yepī tyādi| nirjātā niṣpannā.
1125. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), “they include” means they respectively contain. RK: antargatā iti yathāyogam antarbhūtāḥ.
1126. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), one should connect their becoming “a protector (upakāribhūto) to all sentient beings” with the series of words “the knowing of a buddha” and so on mentioned in the immediately previous paragraph. RK: buddhajñānā dipadāni pūrvam eva vyākhyātāni| sarva bhūtānāṃ upakāribhūto bhavatī ti sambandhaḥ.
1127. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), since the “transcendent state of wisdom is the leader,” he or she will “not be led astray by others.” Not being led astray is the tenth characteristic thus far. RK: yasmāt iyam eva praṇāyikā tasmāt aparapraṇeyatā ityādi| tasmād aparapraṇeyatā daśamaṃ liṅgam.
1128. According to Hari (790), “the defining characteristic of nonattachment” means it has the nature of freedom from habitual fixation. Hari: asaṅgalakṣaṇe ti anabhiniveśasvabhāvā. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), a “defining characteristic of nonattachment” means a defining characteristic free of any mental perception, because the defining characteristics of all things are not mentally perceived in that transcendent state of wisdom. The same is also true of physical forms and so on, because they are empty and void. RK: asaṅgalakṣaṇe ty anupalambhalakṣaṇā| sarvadharmasvalakṣaṇānāṃ tasyām anupalambhāt| tathā rūpādayo pi śūnyatvād viviktatvāt.
1129. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), he raises a controversy with the words “If all things…” If it were not a controversy, it would instead mean “definitely not so!” RK: yadī tyādinā codyaṃ, na codyaṃ na hīty arthaḥ.
1130. According to Hari (790), “of what you have described” means the teaching on voidness and emptiness in relation to the nonarising of defilement and so on. Hari: asya bhāṣitasye ti saṃkleśādyanupapattau viviktaśūnyatādeśanāyāḥ.
1131. According to Ratnākara (F.167.b), it is “conceptual grasping” of a conventional sign. “Habitual fixation” is reifying that (i.e., grasping it as real). So, the defining characteristic of the transcendent state of wisdom and things is nonattachment in this way. RK: udgraho nimittasya| abhiniveśo vastutvena grāhaḥ| tad evam asaṅgalakṣaṇā bhagavatī dharmāś ca.
1132. According to Hari (790–91), this is what he is saying: All things are (ultimately) empty. But since there is a relationship between cause and effect at the conventional level, defilement appears when there is habitual fixation, and one discerns the purification (of that) when there is no habitual fixation. Hari: etad uktaṃ: śūnyatve ’pi sarvadharmāṇāṃ saṃvṛtyā karmaphalasambandhasya vidyamānatvād yathā ’bhiniveśas tathā saṃkleśo, yathā cānabhiniveśas tathā vyavadānaṃ ca prajñāyata iti.
1133. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “cannot be conquered” means cannot be led astray. RK: anavamardanīya ity asaṃhāryaḥ.
1134. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “dedicate those gifts” that they gave to sentient beings and the buddhas “to unsurpassed, perfect awakening.” RK: tad dānam iti yad buddhebhyo sarvasattvebhyaḥ.
1135. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), he or she “abides in the attentive mental states” focused on increasing it. RK: manasikāraiḥ viharatī ti vivṛddhisaṃgṛhītaiḥ.
1136. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “why is that” asks the question why the buddhas are excluded. RK: tat teṣāṃ sthāpanaṃ kasya hetoḥ?
1137. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “on the way to their slaughter” means on the way to the slaughterhouse. RK: vadhyagatān ive ti vadhyasthānagatān iva.
1138. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “wasting their good fortune” as though they had never obtained it. RK: virāgayata ity aprāptavataḥ. According to Hari (795), “wasting their good fortune” means losing the human state and so on through doing harmful deeds. Hari: kṣaṇāṃś ca virāgayata iti pāpānuṣṭhānena manuṣyādibhāvān nāśayataḥ.
1139. The translation follows the Sanskrit edition rather than the Tibetan, which differs slightly here by including an extra, redundant description of the bodhisattva as “being wise.”
1140. According to Hari (795), “such attentiveness” means the attentiveness that has the (just mentioned) nature of pointing out the path to sentient beings and so on. Hari: anena manasikāreṇe ti sattvānāṃ mārgopadeśādisvabhāvena.
1141. According to Hari (795), “attentive to nothing but this” means that when a bodhisattva is focusing on the mother transcendent state of wisdom with its great skill in means, he or she is only being attentive to the benefit of beings. Hari: sa eve ti mahopāyakauśalāyā mātur ālambane sa eva sattvopakāramanaskāraḥ.
1142. According to Hari (795), can “spend,” i.e., pass his or her time, “in the attentivenesses,” whose nature is benevolence, compassion, and so on. Hari: yathāyam iti maitryādisvabhāvo manaskāraḥ. kṣapayed ity atikrāmayet.
1143. According to Hari (795), “until he or she were to find either that very same one or a different one” means “the same” transcendent state of wisdom or “another one,” such as the King of Samādhis Sūtra and so on, where (a definitive explanation of) the true nature of things can be found. Some scholars say that the phrase “same one or a different one” depends (rather on a distinction between) book copies. Hari: yāvat sā vānyā vā pratilabdhā bhavatīti sā vā prajñāpāramitānyā vā samādhirājādisūtrāntadharmatāprāptā bhavati. pustakāpekṣayā sā vānyā ve ti kecit. According to Ratnākara (F.168.a), “he or she would seek” the transcendent state of wisdom scripture “with a mind set on never lacking…” The phrase “same one or a different one” is based on a difference of book copies. RK: avirahitasarvajñatācittena| avirahitāt pūrvaṃ manasikāra śabdaḥ kvacit paṭhyate| sā vānyā ve ti pustakabhedāt. Note: Ratnākara also gives here a technical note that some versions of the scripture read “never lacking attentiveness” (as the modern Sanskrit edition does, whereas others do not).
1144. The content of this chapter corresponds to the beginning of Chapter 46 in the Twenty-Five Thousand (46.1–10) and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 56 in the Eighteen Thousand (56.1–10).
1145. According to Ratnākara (F.168.b), the “Śakra chapter” means the chapter spoken by him. RK: śakreṇoktaḥ parivartaḥ śakraparivartaḥ. Ratnākara gives practically no comments on this chapter.
1146. Here, the plural “those bodhisattvas” has been made into the singular “such a bodhisattva great being” throughout Śakra’s speech in order to make the contrast between subject and object pronouns clearer. Interestingly, he started and ended speaking of a bodhisattva in the singular but somehow changed to plural midway.
1147. The beginning of this chapter corresponds to a point within Chapter 46 in the Twenty-Five Thousand (46.10) and Hundred Thousand, and within Chapter 56 in the Eighteen Thousand (56.11), and its content corresponds to the remainder of those chapters.
1148. This chapter, the “Chapter on Conceitedness,” is the chapter that is synecdochic for (upalakṣitaḥ) a bodhisattva’s “conceitedness,” which is the cause of many setbacks to becoming (a bodhisattva) beyond regressing. RK: yo ’yam avinivartanīyo ’bhimāno bodhisattvasya bahvanarthahetus tadupalakṣitaḥ parivarto ’bhimānaparivartaḥ. Note: Ratnākara gives very few comments on this chapter.
1149. Cf. MW pratirūpa, model for imitation, exemplary in conduct, worthy of imitation.
1150. There is the diminutive or pejorative –ka in the term sahāyaka (i.e., sahāya+ ka) that is difficult to translate. One might freely translate this diminutive or pejorative aspect sarcastically as “my personal friend” since he or she might not call their own friend “my little friend” or “my despicable friend.” Cf. BHSD sahāyaka, which cites a parallel passage from the Eight Thousand (that differs slightly) and translates it “he is my despicable companion, and I have many others too, but they do not fulfil my purpose; however, here I have got a suitable companion.” See also Conze 1958, p. 168: “I am his adherent, and in all things he does not abandon me. [418] There are many other bodhisattvas whom I might adhere to, but they do not suit me. I have taken this one as my fitting companion and he will suit me.”
1151. According to Ratnākara (F.169.a), the meaning here is “In it, there is no way to apply oneself as the Tathāgata taught in other sūtras. (I myself do not find any) ‘bottom to it,’ i.e., firm basis in it, or ‘enjoyment in it,’ ” i.e., appeal in it. RK: yathānyasūtreṣu tathāgatabhāṣitaṃ yujyamānaṃ evam atra nāstīty arthaḥ| gādhaḥ pratiṣṭhā| āsvādo ruciḥ. According to Hari (814), “there is no applying oneself to it” means that there is nothing to strive for that is explained in this scripture in the way that is explained in other scriptures. So, since what is described is impossible to realize by means of the knowledge from study and contemplation, I cannot obtain, respectively, any “bottom to it” or “enjoyment” from that. Hari: na hy evam atra yujyamānam iti yathānyeṣu sūtrānteṣu bhāṣitaṃ tathā naivātra ghaṭamānavastu nirdiṣṭam, ato ’sya bhāṣitasya śrutacintāmayajñānena boddhum aśakyatvād yathākramam āgādham āsvādaṃ ca na prāpnuyām ity arthaḥ.
1152. According to Ratnākara (F.169.a), this is just like before (i.e., it is a reference to the first part of chapter 21, “Describing Māra’s Activities,” 21.2; where) Māra announces a bodhisattva great being’s names and lineage, and praises his or her practice of ascetic qualities. RK: nāmagotragrahaṇaṃ dhutaguṇakīrtanaṃ ca pūrvavat.
1153. The qualities here are those of a bodhisattva beyond regressing. Note: The translation of this sentiment is free. The Sanskrit idiom might be expressed more literally as “they are not similar to those qualities that I am similar to.” The Skt reads na khalv ete teṣu dharmeṣu saṃdṛśyante, yatrāhaṃ saṃdṛśya iti.
1154. According to Ratnākara (F.169.a), “overcrowded” means abundantly furnished with “hordes,” i.e., heaps, (of beings). RK: utsadā upacitāḥ kāyā rāśayaḥ.
1155. According to Hari (814), some scholars say that he uses these four terms “unadvised, undesired, unpleasing, and joyless” because they (respectively) lead to (rebirth in) the realms of hell, animals, hungry ghosts, and asuras. Hari: aniṣṭatvāye tyādipadacatuṣṭayaṃ narakatiryakpretāsuragatisaṃvartanīyatvād iti kecit.
1156. According to Hari (814–15), regarding his “donning the armor,” the idea is that assuming he or she did not completely abandon the state of complete knowing, then they will need to practice heroic perseverance for a duration of eons delimited by the time length in that “mindset” in order to eliminate the harm of such flare ups, such as fighting and so on. Hari: saṃnāhaḥ saṃnahya iti yadi sarvajñatāparityaktā tadā kalahādisamutthapāpāpanayanārthaṃ cittotpāde saṃkhyāvacchinnakalpapramāṇaṃ vīryaṃ karaṇīyam ity arthaḥ.
1157. According to Hari (815), the meaning of Ānanda’s question is whether a “remedy” is possible given the gravity of the harmful deed (i.e., the offense). Hari: gurutaratvāt pāpasya niḥsaraṇam asambhāvayan praśnārtham āha : asti bhagavann ityādi.
1158. According to Hari (815), he says this in order to communicate the following general principle: “There is a (remedial) quality that works to counteract absolutely everything that forms a part of any possible behavior.” Hari: sambhavapratipattipakṣatvena sarveṣāṃ eva sampratikarmako dharma iti vyāptam āvedayann āha : saniḥsaraṇa ityādi.
1159. According to Hari (815), he or she “confesses”—i.e., confesses the harm he or she has done—“and subsequently practices restraint” by taking a vow not to do it (again). Hari: kṛtapāpadeśanān na deśayati. akaraṇasaṃvarākaraṇān nāyatyāṃ saṃvarāya pratipadyate.
1160. According to Hari (815), he or she should develop that mindset that “it is a loss for me”—meaning “when I myself lash back against (pratijalpāmi) what is said to me,” these fights and so on are the “loss for me,” because they are not praiseworthy. Hari: durlabdhā iti yo ’ham jalpite sati parasmin pratijalpāmy amī kalahādayo ’praśastatvena durlabdhā ity evaṃ cittam utpādayatīty arthaḥ.
1161. Conze 1958, p. 170: “When I should be to all beings a bridge across the sea of birth-and-death, I nevertheless say to another, (‘the same to you’), or return a harsh and rough answer.”
1162. This translation “cannot hear or speak” (Sanskrit eḍamūka; Pāli eḷamuga) follows Cone 2010, Part I, p. 549 eḷamuga, which settles the dispute over whether the term means MW “deaf and dumb” or simply BHSD “dumb like a sheep.” Cone shows these two interpretations to be simply two of the three usages of the term.
1163. The exclamation bata has been translated as “remember” in this context, since he or she is talking to themselves.
1164. Conze: “Wherein they should be trained, that is the method by which I should be trained.”
1165. The commentators do not explain the term “mixed-up (vyavakīrṇa) state” here, but it is a reference to chapter 22 on voidness where a bodhisattva great being must not get “mixed up with” (viz. polluted or confused by) the dualistic, object-oriented attentiveness associated with the paths of a disciple or solitary realizer. See notes n.1094 and n.1100.
1166. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), the “Chapter on the Training” is the chapter that articulates the training. RK: śikṣāyā vācakaḥ parivartaḥ śikṣāparivartaḥ.
1167. This chapter corresponds to the whole of Chapter 47 in the Twenty-Five Thousand and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 57 in the Eighteen Thousand, though with certain differences in how the points it contains are discussed.
1168. According to Ratnākara (F.169.a), (in other words) the actual nature of a tathāgata, due to which there is a tathāgata, does not dissipate, because dissipation is undissipating. RK: yā hi tathāgatasya tathatā yayā sau tathāgataḥ na sā kṣīyate ’kṣayatvāt kṣayasya.
1169. According to Ratnākara (F.169.a–b), he explains the path with the phrase “a bodhisattva great being training in this way trains in the transcendent state of wisdom.” He explains the fruit with the phrase “train in the level of a buddha” (and so on). RK: evaṃ śikṣamāṇaḥ prajñāpāramitāyāṃ śikṣata ity anena mārgam āha|| buddhabhūmau śikṣata ity anena phalam āha.
1170. Neither commentator explains precisely what this “field” (gocara) refers to. As in many other texts, there are two ways in which it can be understood: either as the field of knowing (i.e., what a Buddha sees), or as the field of activity (i.e., where a Buddha does what he does).
1171. Note that, as before in chapter 7, this phrase is not referring to the “three turnings” of the Dharma Wheel. For details see n.493 and The Sūtra of the Wheel of Dharma, 1.13.
1172. We have followed the Tib. and emended sarvadhātu (Vaidya, Wogihara) to sattvadhātu. Cf. BHSD dhātu 6, sattvadhātu, masses of beings.
1173. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “deathless dimension” means the dimension of liberation. RK: amṛtadhātur mokṣadhātuḥ.
1174. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “wish to become the protectors” means wish to achieve the state of a protector. RK: nāthakāmā iti nāthatvakāmāḥ.
1175. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “the highest state” means the most excellent state. RK: abhyudgatate ty utkṛṣṭatā|
1176. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “fowlers” kill birds; “hunters” kill wild animals; “fishermen” catch fish; and “sheep butchers” kill sheep. RK: śakunīn ghnanti śākunikāḥ| niṣādā mṛgayavaḥ| dhīvarāḥ kaivartāḥ| urabhrā meṣāḥ| tān ghnantīti aurabhrikāḥ.
1177. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), the “blind” lack proper organs to see; the “deaf” lack proper organs to hear; the “one-eyed” have a single eye; the “deformed” have crooked limbs; and the “hunchbacked” have broken (or collapsed) backs. RK: andho ’cakṣuḥ| badhiro ’śrotraḥ| kāṇa ekākṣaḥ| kuṇṭho vakrabāhuḥ| kubjo bhagnapṛṣṭhaḥ.
1178. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “crippled hands” means deformed hands; “knock knees” means knees that hit each other; “paralysis” means impaired movement; and “dim wit” means lacking in mental clarity. RK: kuṇiḥ karavikalaḥ| laḍgaḥ saṃhatajānuḥ| khañjo vikalagatiḥ| jaḍo niṣpratibhaḥ.
1179. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), “unable to walk steadily” means having unstable feet; “unable to speak clearly” means having a dysfunctional tongue; “unable to hear well” means hearing (only) loud words; “disabled limbs” means faulty limbs; “missing limbs” means lost limbs; and “disfigured limbs” means limbs that do not look human. RK: lolo ’sthirapadaḥ| lallo ’karmaṇyajihvaḥ| kalla uccaiḥ śabdaśrāvī| hīnāṅgo ninditāṅgaḥ| vikalāṅga ūnāṅgaḥ| vikṛtāṅgo manuṣyavisadṛśāṅgaḥ.
1180. The idea here is that a bodhisattva attains the meditative states that normally lead to rebirth in realms of gods with long lives, rather than to liberation. But since he or she practices the meditative concentration in “this skill in means,” i.e., the transcendent state of wisdom, such a bodhisattva is not involuntarily reborn in those god realms by virtue of having practiced those meditative states. Rather, a bodhisattva can deliberately choose his or her place of rebirth.
1181. According to Ratnākara (F.169.b), he or she “brings about,” i.e., causes them to ripen, and “subsequently attains them all,” i.e., attains the complete purity of the powers and so on. RK: nigacchatī ti niṣpādayati| tām anuprāpnotī ti bal ādipariśuddhim.
1182. According to Hari (822), Subhūti asks this question because accomplishing the purity of the powers and so on is impossible due to the natural purity (of all things). Hari: asti hi tasye tyādi. prakṛtipariśuddhitvena balādiviśuddhyādhigamo nopapadyata ity āha : yadā Bhagavann ityādi.
1183. According to Hari (822), the Blessed One answers “True” and so on (to Subhūti’s rhetorical question), because there is accomplishment at the conventional level. Yet what he is saying is that although all things are pure by nature, sentient beings do not know they are naturally pure. So, they must meditate upon things being like an illusion in order to give rise to the knowing of how things truly are. By doing so, they attain, at the conventional level, the complete purity of the powers and so on. Hari: samvṛtyadhigamād āha : evam etad ityādi. pūrvavat tat kasya hetor ity āśaṅkyāha: sarvadharmā hī tyādi. etad uktaṃ : prakṛtipariśuddhatve ’pi sarvadharmāṇāṃ svabhāvaśuddhadharmāparijñānavatāṃ sattvānāṃ tathābhūtajñānotpādanārthamāyopamadharmabhāvanayāsaṃsīdanatvena samvṛtyā balādipariśuddhiṃ prāpnotīti.
1184. “Without rock” suggests a place where these metals are found in streams or on the ground. Note: The translation “gold” follows Ratnākara (F.169.b), who explains that the combination of Sanskrit words—i.e., suvarṇaṃ and jātarūpaṃ and so on—forms a pleonasm (i.e., more words than necessary to describe the one thing “gold”). RK: suvarṇajātarūpā dayaḥ gobalīvardanyāyena.
1185. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), “mental obstructions” refers to the attachment, hatred, and confusion that block the growth of virtuous fruits; “doubt” refers to being of two minds about the Three Jewels; and “envy” means being angry about another’s success. The rest of the terms here are forces counterproductive to the six transcendent states. RK: kuśalasasyaprarohavirodhino rāgadveṣamohāḥ khilāḥ| vicikitsā satyaratneṣu vimatiḥ| īrṣyā parasampattau vyāroṣaḥ| śeṣāḥ ṣaṭ pāramitāvipakṣāḥ.
1186. The sixty-two erroneous beliefs are listed in the Dīgha Nikāya’s Brahmajāla-sutta, its Dīrghāgama equivalent in Chinese, the Tibetan tshangs pa’i dra ba’i mdo, (Toh 352), and other parallel texts. Bhikkhu Anālayo’s comparative study can be found in Anālayo 2010.
1187. The sustenance of the “vital faculty” is the thing that keeps a being alive.
1188. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), “ignorance” is the opposite of the transcendent state of wisdom. RK: ajñāna iti prajñāpāramitāvipakṣe.
1189. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), “foremost in merit” means foremost due to his or her merits. RK: puṇyāgraḥ puṇyair agraḥ.
1190. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), “domain of a buddha” means the totality of a buddha’s qualities; a buddha’s “great majesty” means the state of having authoritative power; a buddha’s “playful display” is through his performing miraculous feats; a buddha’s roaring the “lion’s roar” is through his miraculous guidance of others (that instantly destroys their vices); and the “attainments” of buddhas are to be practiced by both types of noble saṅghas. RK: buddhaviṣayo buddhadharmasākalyam| vaśavartī vṛṣabhiḥ| tadbhāvastattā| vikrīḍitaṃ ṛddhiprātihāryeṇa| siṃhanāda nadanam anuśāsanīprātihāryeṇa| buddhānāṃ sampattir ubhayāryasaṃghaiś caryam.
1191. According to Ratnākara (F.170.a), he or she “does not reject them” through not being committed to those qualities. RK: na ca prativahati teṣv anavasthānāt.
1192. According to Ratnākara (F.175.a), “Chapter on the Magical Illusion” is a synecdochic chapter title for the magical illusion-like mind. RK: māyopama cittopalakṣitaḥ parivarto māyopama parivartaḥ.
1193. The beginning of this chapter corresponds to the beginning of Chapter 48 in the Twenty-Five Thousand and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 58 in the Eighteen Thousand, and its content corresponds to the whole of those chapters.
1194. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), regarding the phrase “even just by going about his or her life,” one may ask in what does he or she go about life? He or she goes about life in increasing their practice of generosity and so forth. RK: carann apīti kva caran ? vivṛddhau| kiṃ caran? dānādīn.
1195. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), their “mindset takes a step toward” means it grows more clear. They “develop the mindset” when they think, “Ah! I should definitely realize this transcendent state of wisdom!” RK: cittaṃ krāmatī ti gacchatīti prasīdatīty arthaḥ| cittam utpāditam ity aho batāham enām adhigaccheyam iti.
1196. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), “adrift” means floating (in that ocean); to the “smooth”—i.e., faultless—“shore at the other side” means to nirvāṇa. RK: uhyamānān iti hriyamānān| same yukte nirdoṣe| pārime tīra iti nirvāṇe. According to Hari (830), “adrift” means pushed along (in that ocean). It is “smooth” because it has no faults or unevenness. The “shore at the other side” means nirvāṇa, i.e., buddhahood. Hari: uhyamānān iti preryamāṇān. sarvadoṣavaiṣamyābhāvāt same. pārime tīre nirvāṇe buddhatva iti yāvat.
1197. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), the sentence “may they be successful in this” should be connected with the other development of the proper mindset (just stated). RK: samṛdhyantāṃ teṣām iti cittotpādā iti pareṇa sambandhaḥ.
1198. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), “desired” means held dear; “fully considered” means developed again and again; “embraced” means by means of not letting it go. RK: abhīpsitāḥ prītikaratvāt| paricintitāḥ punaḥ punar utpādanāt| parigṛhītā aparityāgayogena. According to Hari (830), regarding the three verbs “desired,” “fully considered,” and “embraced,” some scholars say they refer, respectively, to obtaining success in benefiting oneself, others, and both together. Other scholars say these words refer, respectively, to actualizing the three types of complete knowing. Hari: svaparobhayārthasampatsampādakatvena yathākramam abhīpsitāḥ paricintitāḥ parigṛhītā iti kecit. trisarvajñatāniṣpādakatvenety anye.
1199. According to Ratnākara (F.170.b), the “qualities of a buddha” means the qualities of a buddha in the sense of a completely knowing being. The first wish is the general statement. But the detailed explanation of that statement is in the three wishes based on his complete knowing, i.e., his being completely aware. That is to say, he has complete knowing because of his “state of complete knowing,” his “self-existent being,” and “not being led astray.” Among these, the “state of complete knowing,” in this context, means his perfect knowing of all things in all their aspects. His “self-existent being” means for him those things are absolutely self-arising, i.e., to his mind alone, and hence it means he has perfect control (over them). For him, these things are the ones included in his being “self-existent.” He “cannot be led astray” because he does not get carried away—meaning that he is free of all obscurations and their latent impressions. “May they fulfill these” means all his qualities included in his not being led astray—all this describes their fulfillment. RK: buddhadharmāṇām iti buddhaḥ sarvajñaḥ| tasya dharmāṇām ity ayam uddeśaḥ| tasya nirdeśas tribhiḥ sarvajñatvaiḥ sarvajñabhāvaiḥ yataḥ sa sarvajño bhavati sarvajñatā ca svayambhūtvaṃ ca asaṃhāryatā ca| tatra sarvākārasarvadharmasamyagjñānam iha sarvajñatā| svayam eva cittād eva bhavanty asya dharmā iti svayaṃbhūḥ| sarvadharmavaśavartītyarthaḥ| tasya dharmāḥ svayaṃbhūtvena ye saṃgṛhītāḥ| nāsya saṃhāram astīti asaṃhāryaḥ| savāsanasarvāvaraṇanirmukta ity arthaḥ| tasya dharmā ye ’saṃhāryatvena saṃgṛhītās teṣāṃ sarveṣāṃ paripūraṇāya bhavantv iti iyatā paripūrir uktā. According to Hari (830), the first words, “qualities of a buddha,” are the general statement. The following three sentences are explained according to the divisions, such the state of complete knowing and so on, referring to (a) the qualities connected with complete knowing, (b) the qualities of self-existent being, and (c) the qualities of not being led astray. So, in this way, he explains the supreme fulfillment of all the qualities of the three types of the state of complete knowing. Hari: buddhadharmāṇām ity uddeśapadaṃ. sarvajñatāpratisaṃyuktadharmāṇāṃ svayambhūdharmāṇām asaṃhāryadharmāṇām iti sarvākārajñatādibhedena nirdiṣṭaṃ. tad evaṃ trisarvajñatādharmāṇām anuttarā paripūriḥ kathitā syāt. Note: All commentators agree that the term “state of complete knowing” generally (in this scripture) can refer to the knowing achieved by a disciple, solitary realizer, or buddha. Here, Ratnākara seems to suggest that all three qualities (described in the three different sentences) are exclusive to a buddha. Hari seems to suggest that they are the qualities of each kind of awakening, and that a buddha (cumulatively) possesses them.
1200. According to Ratnākara (F.171.a), the stabilization of the “mindset” (from the Ornament V.iii) is to be explained here, i.e., the meditative concentration (associated with rejoicing). RK: citta sya saṃsthitiḥ| sā vaktavyā| samādhir ity arthaḥ. Note: It is not uncommon for early texts to use the word “mindset” (citta) as a synonym for meditative concentration (samādhi). Ratnākara goes on to explain how the Ornament uses that term in describing this point.
1201. According to Ratnākara (F.171.a–b), he says this sentence so that beings make their rejoicing complete by the absence of all negative attitudes, and to chastise those who are do not do so. “Under Māra’s magical influence” means the extremely pernicious Māra has sapped their energy. They do not “listen” to it based on the words; “understand it” based on the meaning; or “see it” based on respect. They “do not keep it to mind” means they do not turn themselves directly toward (rejoicing). RK: anumodanāyāḥ paripūr aṇārthaṃ tām akurvatāṃ ca nindārtham āha| evam ityādi| mārādhiṣṭhitā iti māreṇa mahāpāpena nirutsāhīkṛtāḥ| na śṛṇvanti śabdataḥ| na jānanty arthataḥ| na paśyanty ādarataḥ| na samanvāharantī ti nābhimukhīkurvanti.
1202. According to Ratnākara (F.171.b), “members of Māra’s demon cohort” are beings in his cohort, because, in a very similar way, they create obstacles to the great benefit of beings. They “fall into Māra’s realms” means they become nothing but Māras, because they are absolutely the same as he is. RK: | mārapakṣe bhavāḥ mārapākṣikāḥ | tadvad eva mahataḥ sattvārthasya vighātakaraṇāt| mārabhavanebhyaś cyutā iti mārā eva atyantaṃ tatsādharmyāt.
1203. According to Ratnākara (F.171.b), he or she “not only rejoices” in the first development of the mindset and so on, “but also plants them” (avaropitāni) in his or her own mindstream “and accomplishes them.” After rejoicing, one should automatically dedicate that. One should recognize these things to be done as coming from the chapter on rejoicing and dedication. The long Transcendent State of Wisdom scriptures say (about this): “After rejoicing in those roots of virtue, one should dedicate them to unsurpassed, perfect awakening. One should dedicate (that rejoicing mindset) as though there is no mindset that goes about in a mindset or something other than a mindset” and so on (see, for example, the Twenty-Five Thousand, 48.8). So, the (rejoicing mindset that is) the root of virtue is a bodhisattva’s reference point for meditative concentration, while the dedicating (mindset) is his or her meditative perspective (on that). The nature is the continuity of the “mindset” (i.e., the connection between the two mindsets of rejoicing and dedicating). Where is that continuity? (He says) it is “not in the mindset” because it has the characteristic of a grasping subject. It is “not somewhere other than” that, i.e., in any other thing. How is it then? The continuity of a mindset is in the nondual nature of all things. RK: yair apī tyādinā prathamacittotpād ikānām api na kevalam anumoditāni svasantāne cāvaropitāny abhinirhṛtāni ca bhavanti| anumodya cāvaśyaṃ pariṇāmanā kartavyā| yathā ca te kartavye tathā ’numodanāpariṇāmanāparivartād veditavyam| yathoktaṃ mahatyor bhagavatyoḥ —tāni kuśalamūlāni anumodyānuttarāyāṃ samyaksambodhau pariṇāmayitavyāni| tathā ca pariṇāmayitavyāni yathā na cittaṃ citte carati na cānyatra cittāt” ityādi| tad evam anumodanāsahagataṃ kuśalamūlam asya samādher ālambanaṃ samyaksambodhau pariṇāmanam ākāraḥ| cittasaṃsthitiḥ svabhāvaḥ| kva saṃsthitiḥ ? na citte grāhakalakṣaṇena na cānyatre ti na sarvadharmeṣu| kiṃ tarhi ? sarvadharmatathatāyām advayāyām iti cittasaṃsthitiḥ. Note: For those who are interested to know, it may be worth mentioning that Hari and Ratnākara begin here to associate this section, and the whole of the next chapter, with thirty-six conceptualizations (vikalpa) subdivided into four main groups: (1–2) the conceptualizations about grasped objects, respectively, of worldly engagement (pravṛtti) and spiritual disengagement (nivṛtti), and (3–4) the conceptualizations about grasping subjects that are, respectively, really existent (dravyasat) and nominally existent (prajñaptisat). Each of these four has nine kinds of conceptualizations (9 x 4 = 36). The commentators draw these thirty-six from the descriptions in the Ornament (5.5–5.23) and connect those to the main text. The thirty-six conceptualizations form part of the fifth of the Ornament’s eight topics, the culminations, and fall in that fifth topic’s fifth subtopic, the culmination of the path of seeing (see introduction). It would require too much additional explanation to include all Ratnakāra and Hari’s comments and clarify them fully. But some of those comments will be translated in the footnotes going forward just to give readers a basic sense of how Ratnākara and Hari read the main text. While reading the comments on each conceptualization below and in the next chapter, the reader must keep in mind that each successive conceptualization is more subtle and represents some progress, but also something that must be eliminated by the next antidote. Hari connects the thirty-six conceptualizations to the text in a quite different way, but his extensive comments are not translated here because they are easily available in Sparham 2011 (vol. 4), pp. 173–200. Finally, it should be kept in mind that most traditional Buddhist readers would not expect to fully understand the comments by Ratnākara and Hari without a great deal of further study. Note that the conceptualizations mentioned here and in the notes that follow can be found set out—using the term “discriminations”—as subheadings in Conze’s 1975 translation of the long sūtras, pp. 460–80. See also Brunnhölzl vol. 1 pp. 58–9, and vol. 2 pp. 80–84 and 190–200. The first set of nine conceptualizations, about the grasped objects of worldly engagement (see above) is covered in the Twenty-Five Thousand, 48.8–27.
1204. According to Ratnākara (F.172.b), a “magical illusion” refers to an elephant and so on that is conjured up by a magician. A similar but a distinct thing is “like a magical illusion,” which means that what appears is not there as it seems (iha). A mindset is like that, because it has the characteristic of a grasping subject but a grasping subject does not exist. For a grasping subject is not logical when the grasped object does not exist. In response to the question why the grasped object does not exist, if an (external) thing were illuminated by knowing, it would have the quality of being a grasped object. But (such an external thing) is not illuminated, because it is contradictory for (a thing that is) not illuminating to be illuminated (i.e., made to appear as a mental image in the mind). But if that thing is illumination itself, (then there is no contradiction). RK: māyākāranirmitaṃ gajādikaṃ māyā| tadvad anyad api yat khyāti nehāsti tat māyopamam| tathśā ca cittam| grāhakalakṣaṇatvāt grāhakasya cāsattvāt| na hy asati grāhye grāhakaṃ yuktam| grāhyābhāvaḥ katham iti cet| yadi jñānenārthaḥ prakāśyeta syād grāhyatvam| na ca prakāśyeta| aprakāśasya prakāśyavirodhāt| athārthaḥ prakāśātmaiva. Note: Here, Ratnākara is first explaining that a mindset is an illusion, because it appears to have the characteristic of a grasping subject, but cannot be directly observed to exist as such. Next he is suggesting that the mind’s illumination of anything other than itself is illogical, and hence, the “mindset” that is said here to be like an illusion refers only to the grasping subject that is imagined, not to the real mind that consists in nothing but illumination.
1205. According to Ratnākara (F.172.b), “that thing” refers to a self. RK: taṃ dharmam ity ātmānam.
1206. According to Ratnākara (F.172.b), “definitely not” because it is absolutely nonexistent—this is the idea. RK: no hīdam iti tasyātyantam asattvād iti bhāvaḥ.
1207. According to Ratnākara (F.172.b), it cannot be specified (nirdeśaṃ nopaiti) as “there or not there” because it cannot be logically connected either with proving it to be (truly) nonexistent or disproving it to be a form that is (simply) not recognized—this is the idea. RK: astīti nāstīti vā nirdeśaṃ nopaiti| asato ’vijñātarūpasya vidhipratiṣedhābhyām asambandhād iti bhāvaḥ.
1208. According to Ratnākara (F.172.b), it does not “produce”—i.e., achieve—or “accomplish”—i.e., actualize—“anything” such as perfect awakening and so on, because a nonexistent thing cannot do anything at all. RK: nāpyasāv ityādi| kasyacid dharmasye ti samyaksambodhyādeḥ| āvāhaka āhārakaḥ| nirvāhako niṣpādakaḥ| asato ’kiñcitkaratvāt.
1209. According to Ratnākara (F.173.a), “awakening is absolutely void,” as is “the transcendent state of wisdom.” So, his question, “How could a void realize…,” means it actually could not, because the means and the goal are absolutely nonexistent—this is the basic idea. RK: anuttarāpī tyādi| atyantaviviktā prajñāpāramitā vat| kathaṃ bhavatī ti naiva bhavati| atyantāsatoḥ sādhyasādhanatvāyogād iti bhāvaḥ.
1210. According to Ratnākara (F.173.a), “it is only because” means because the fruit resembles the cause. RK: yata eva ata eve ti| hetvanurūpatvāt phalasyety arthaḥ.
1211. According to Ratnākara (F.173.a–b), with this sentence the Blessed One helps to perfect the cause, because if one “conceives” that way, then it would be a conceptualization, not “the transcendent state of wisdom.” RK: sa ced ityādinā hetuṃ paripūrayati| yadi hi saṃjānīte tadā vikalpaḥ syāt na prajñāpāramitā.
1212. According to Hari (839), “thus” means just like its conventional nature, which holds up only when unscrutinized. Then he explains the absolute nature in the second half of the sentence, beginning “also not realized.” Hari: evam avicāraikaramyatvena samvṛtirūpatayeti yāvat. atha eva paramārtham adhikṛtyāha: nāpi subhūte prajñāpāramitām ityādi. According to Ratnākara (F.173.b), the word “thus” begins a brief summary. It is “also not realized” because realization is not conceptualizing—this is the basic idea. RK: evam ityādinopasaṃhāraḥ| nāpy abhisaṃbudhyata ity abhisaṃbodher avikalpanād iti bhāvaḥ.
1213. According to Hari (839), the Blessed One says “a bodhisattva great being does realize” and so on as a summary at the conventional level. Hari: saṃvṛtyopasaṃharann āha : abhisambudhyate ce tyadi. According to Ratnākara (F.173.b), “a bodhisattva great being does realize” because these three (i.e., the bodhisattva, the transcendent state of wisdom, and awakening) do not exist in their imagined nature, but they do exist in the nature of representations (vijñapti), which is empty—this is the idea. These (three) are (or can be called) conventional because they are similar in how they appear (as illusions). But their ultimate reality is emptiness. RK: abhisabudhyate ce tyādi| parikalpitena hi rūpeṇa trayam idaṃ nāsti, tacchūnyena tu vijñaptirūpeṇāstīti bhāvaḥ| tathāpi saṃvṛttir eṣāṃ yathāpratibhāsasamatvāt| śūnyatā tu paramārthaḥ.
1214. According to Hari (839), the point referred to as “what he has just taught” is that it is both not realized (ultimately) and not realized (conventionally). Hari: bhāṣitasye ti nābhisambudhyate ’bhisambudhyate cety asya. According to Ratnākara (F.173.b), he or she “is going about life in the profound point” because in this “point” he or she cannot go about life with other (points). RK: gambhīre ’rthe caratī ti yato ’sminn arthe na śakyate ’nyaiś caritum. Note: The translation of artha as “point” in this context is to capture this word’s semantic range from “meaning” to “object” to “purpose” to “goal”—all of which seem intended in this passage.
1215. According to Ratnākara (F.173.b), (he or she is actually) “performing difficult noble deeds,” for even the Blessed One, who would be capable of actualizing (fully the point just discussed), does not actualize it out of his care for sentient beings. “The point of what you just said” means the intended meaning (behind it). So the idea (behind saying that he or she is “not performing difficult noble deeds”) is simply that what others find difficult, a bodhisattva finds easy. Why easy? Because of his or her skill in means, i.e., the means that simply consist in the transcendent state of wisdom. RK: duṣkarakāraka iti yataḥ sa bhagavān sākṣātkartuṃ śakto pi na sākṣātkaroti sattvāvekṣayā| bhāṣitasyārtham iti ābhiprāyikam artham| duṣkaram anyeṣāṃ sukaraṃ bodhisattvasyeti bhāvaḥ| kutaḥ sukaram ? upāyakuśalatvāt| sa copāyaḥ prajñāpāramitaiva.
1216. According to Ratnākara (F.173.b), “any thing that actualizes” refers to a bodhisattva; “any thing that is actualized” refers to a profound point; and “any thing that serves as a means to actualize” refers to what is called the transcendent state of wisdom. RK: ya iti bodhisattvaḥ| ya iti gambhīro ’rthaḥ| yene ti prajñāpāramitākhyena.
1217. According to Ratnākara (F.173.a–74.a), now, for a bodhisattva “going about life (carati) in the transcendent state of wisdom,” he explains the extent to which he or she goes about in it. In this sentence, “not disheartened” means not divided (about it). This is the general statement. The detailed explanation of that is in the next six descriptions: “not deflated,” i.e., not having a mediocre delight in that transcendent state of wisdom; “not depressed,” i.e., not having weak delight in it; “not discouraged,” i.e., not lacking any delight in it; “not frightened,” i.e., not wishing to abandon it; “not terrified,” i.e., not abandoning it; or “not stricken with terror,” i.e., not abandoning it continuously. So, by refuting these six types of branches (of not being disheartened) in this way, it is implied that whoever absolutely delights in being face to face with that transcendent state of wisdom, “he or she goes about” in it. RK: ath āsyāṃ prajñāpāramitāyāṃ carataḥ sā caryā kiyatā bhavatīty ata āha| sa ced ityādi| na saṃsīdatī ti na bhajyate| ayam uddeśaḥ| asya nirdeśaḥ ṣoḍhā| nāvalīyata iti nāsyāṃ madhyapremā| na saṃlīyata iti nāsyāṃ mṛdupremā| na vipṛṣṭhībhavatī ti nāpremā| nottrasyatī ti naināṃ tyaktukāmaḥ| na saṃtrasyatī ti na tyajati| na saṃtrāsam āpadyata iti na prabandhena tyajati| tad evaṃ ṣaḍvidhabhaṅgapratiṣedhād etad gamyate yo syām abhimukhībhūtāyām atyantaṃ prīyate so ’syāṃ caratī ti.
1218. According to Ratnākara (F.174.a), with these two sentences—namely, “I am close” or “I am far”—he expresses (the conceptions on) one side and the opposite side. In this section, there are nine points (that are conceptualized), such as an inherent nature and so on, because they can be taken in by bodhisattvas in (each) part of the path. Conceptualizations about these nine are confusion or inaccurate knowing (concerning the grasped object of worldly engagement). Among these nine, the first conceptualization is about inherent nature. Such an inherent nature involves its own intention, i.e., the bodhicitta (conception): “I should attain unsurpassed, perfect awakening through this path.” In this, there is conceptualization. There is also unknowing and unconcentrated knowing about the emptiness of the self, awakening, and the transcendent state of wisdom. And there is the conceit of those three (i.e., self, awakening, etc.) in the concentrated knowing: “I am going about” and “I am close,” i.e., my great awakening (is close) or “I am far,” i.e., from the lesser awakening (of the disciples’ path). He explains the antidote to this (trio of conceptualizations) starting from Subhūti’s question, “How could a mindset that is like a magical illusion…” After that, the beginning of the series of analogies marks the end of the section on the first conceptualization about inherent nature. (In the section following this are the other eight conceptualizations). RK: aparam āha sa ced ityādinā| aparam āha| āsanne tyādinā| aparam āha dūrīkṛte tyādinā| iha svabhāvādayo navārthāḥ| pravṛttipakṣe bodhisattvair upādeyatvāt| teṣu vikalpaḥ sammoho ’samyagjñānam| tatrādyaḥ svabhāvavikalpaḥ| svabhāvaḥ svābhiprāyaḥ| aham anuttarāṃ samyaksambodhim adhigaccheyaṃ tanmārgeṇeti| bodhicittam ity arthaḥ| tasmin vikalpaḥ | ātmano bodheḥ prajñāpāramitāyāś ca śūnyatāyāṃ yad ajñānam asamāhitajñānaṃ ca| samāhitajñāne ca tisro manyanā| ahaṃ carāmi āsannā me mahābodhir ahaṃ vā dūre hīnabodheḥ syām iti| asya pratipakṣaḥ kathaṃ bhagavan māyopamaṃ cittam ity ata ārabhya tadyathāpīt y ataḥ prāk| iti svabhāvavikalpaḥ.
1219. According to Ratnākara (F.174.a), the confusion is that my great awakening “is close” or the lesser awakening is “far” because I belong to the spiritual family (gotra) of a buddha. The antidote to this confusion is “the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization” of such belonging to the spiritual family, because it is similar to space. This ends the (second) conceptualization about belonging to the spiritual family. RK: tadyathāpītyādi| āsannā me mahābodhir dūre hīnabodhī yato haṃ buddhagotra iti sammohaḥ| asya pratipakṣaḥ| ākāśa samatvād gotrasya tadvad avikalpā prajñāpāramite ti gotravikalpaḥ.
1220. According to Ratnākara (F.174.a), the confusion is that my great awakening “is close” or the lesser awakening is “far” due to my conduct of progressing along the path. The antidote to this is “the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization” because the conduct is like that of an illusory person. This ends the (third) conceptualization about conduct along the path. RK: tadyathāpī tyādi| asti me pratipattisamudāgamaḥ| tata āsannā me mahābodhir dūre hīnabodhī iti saṃmohaḥ| tasya pratipakṣaḥ samudāgamasya māyāpuruṣo pamatvād avikalpā prajñāpāramite ti pratipatsamudāgamavikalpaḥ.
1221. According to Ratnākara (F.174.b), an appearance is a “reflection.” The knowing of it is due to the appearing of a false appearance in knowing, rather than (due to the appearing) of an object. The object of knowing is a cognitive error that is produced by me. Due to this, there is the confusion that my great awakening “is close” or the lesser awakening is “far”. The antidote to this confusion is “the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization,” which does not get stuck in something delightful or not delightful. This ends the (fourth) conceptualization of the cognitive error of an object. RK: tadyathāpī tyādi| pratibhāsaḥ pratibimbaḥ| jñānapratibhāsasya pratibhāsatvenaiva yadjñānaṃ na tv ālambanasya ca| seha jñānasyālambanā bhrāntiḥ| sā mama jātā| tata āsannā me mahābodhir dūre hīnabodhī iti saṃmohaḥ| tasya pratipakṣaḥ pratibimbavad avikalpā prajñāpāramite ti ālambanābhrāntivikalpaḥ.
1222. According to Ratnākara (F.174.b), the confusion is that an antidote is a destroyer and a counterproductive force is what is to be destroyed. The antidote to this confusion is just as the “delightful and undelightful” do not belong to a tathāgata, just so he or she “goes about in the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization” because the conduct is like that of an illusory person. This ends the (fifth) conceptualization of an antidote and a counterproductive force. RK: tadyathāpī tyādi| pratipakṣo hantā vipakṣo hantavya iti saṃmohaḥ| asya pratipakṣo yathā tathāgatasya priyāpriya u na stas tadvad avikalpāyāṃ prajñāpāramitāyāṃ carato pī ti pratipakṣavipakṣavikalpaḥ.
1223. According to Ratnākara (F.174.b), following the second “Why not?” in this paragraph, the “fabrication” is due to imagining something unreal and the “conceptualization” is due to fabricating a lack of that fabrication. As those two are “exhausted,” he or she “goes about life in the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization” of a tathāgata. The confusion of one’s own attainment is the conceptualization of a lack of a fabrication in that. The antidote to that confusion is “the transcendent state of wisdom that has exhausted all fabrications and conceptualizations.” This ends the (sixth) conceptualization of one’s own attainment. RK: yathaiva hī tyādi abhūtakalpanāt kalpaḥ| tasya vigamakalpanād vikalpaḥ| tau prahīṇau yathā tathāgatasya tadvad avikalpāyāṃ prajñāpāramitāyāṃ carato pi| tatra kalpavigamo vikalpaḥ svādhigamasaṃmohaḥ| tasya pratipakṣaḥ kalpa vikalpaprahīṇā prajñāpāramite ti svādhigamavikalpaḥ.
1224. According to Ratnākara (F.174.b–75.a), due to thinking “I am cultivating the transcendent state of wisdom,” there is the confusion about an agent (in the conception), that my great awakening “is close” or the lesser awakening is “far.” The antidote to this confusion is “the transcendent state of wisdom that is free of conceptualization,” which is exactly like a miraculous creation of an agent. This ends the (seventh) conceptualization about an agent. RK: tadyathāpī tyādi| prajñāpāramitām ahaṃ bhāvayāmi| tata āsannā me mahābodhir dūre hīnabodhī iti kartari sammohaḥ| tasya pratipakṣaḥ| kartus tathāgatanirmito pamatattadvad eva kartari nirvikalpā prajñāpāramite ti kartari vikalpaḥ.
1225. According to Ratnākara (F.175.a), a “tathāgata’s miraculous creation has been created” for a purpose (kṛtyasya) “and it does that” but does not conceptualize that activity. Likewise, a bodhisattva cultivates the transcendent state of wisdom but the antidote is that he or she does not conceptualize it. This is (eighth) conceptualization about the fruits of activities, i.e., the conceptualization of (an agent involved in) awakening. RK: tadyathāpī tyādi| sa ca tathāgatanirmito yadarthaṃ nirmitas tacca kṛtyaṃ karoti| na ca tāṃ kriyāṃ vikalpayati| tadvadbodhisattvaḥ prajñāpāramitāṃ bhāvayati na ca vikalpayatīti pratipakṣaḥ| iti bodhivikalpanaṃ kriyāphalavikalpaḥ.
1226. According to Ratnākara (F.175.a), a carpenter creates a “wooden (dārumayī) man connected to strings” for a purpose (kṛtyasya) “and it does that” but does not conceptualize anything. Likewise, a bodhisattva aims for awakening and does not attain it, but the antidote is that he or she does not conceptualize it. This ends the ( ninth) conceptualization about the fruits of activities as a conceptualization of awakening. RK: tadyathāpītyādi [ā parivartā]ntāt| śilpinā yadarthaṃ dāruyantramayaḥ pumānkṛtaḥ sa tadarthaṃ karoti na vikalpayati| tadvad bodhisattvo bodhaye, na tāṃ bodhiṃ prāpsyati na ca tāṃ vikalpayatīti pratipakṣaḥ| iti bodhivikalpanaṃ kriyāphalavikalpaḥ.
1227. According to Ratnākara (F.181.a), the “Chapter on the Essence” is the chapter that is the essence and so on. RK: sārā diḥ parivartaḥ sāraparivartaḥ.
1228. The beginning of this chapter corresponds to the beginning of Chapter 49 in the Twenty-Five Thousand and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 59 in the Eighteen Thousand, and the content of the whole of those chapters is included. In addition, at the point marked by note 1254, the chapter covers the initial passages of Chapter 50 in the Twenty-Five Thousand and Hundred Thousand, and of Chapter 60 in the Eighteen Thousand.