by Red Pine
5. As dreams, illusions, or strands of hair / mirages or gandharvan cities / such are the things of the world / they appear but without a cause
6. To refute doctrines of causation / I proclaim the truth of non-arising / because I proclaim non-arising / the Dharma continues unbroken / but the radiance of no causation / frightens the followers of other paths.”192
Mahamati then asked in verse:
7. “How and caused by what / and why do things arise / and how do they come together / according to this doctrine of no causation?”
The Bhagavan then replied in verse:
8. “When created things are examined / as neither having nor not having a cause / the doctrine of arising and cessation / is undone by what one sees.”
Mahamati then asked in verse:
9. “Does non-arising mean nonexistence / or does it wait upon a cause / a name should not mean nothing / could you please explain?”193
The Bhagavan then replied in verse:
10. “Non-arising isn’t due to nonexistence / nor does it wait upon a cause / nor does a name mean something exists / nor does a name have no meaning
11. Beyond the reach of other paths / pratyeka-buddhas and shravakas / beyond the seven stages / this is the realm of non-arising194
12. Beyond causes and conditions / likewise beyond all actions / resting on nothing but mind / this I say is non-arising195
13. Things not arising from causes / neither existing nor not existing / beyond perceiver and perceived / this I say is non-arising196
14.1he mind without an object / beyond the two modes of reality197 / transforming one’s very ground198 / this I say is non-arising
15. No external existence or nonexistence / no grasping by the mind / putting an end to every view / this I say is non-arising
16. When something is thus distinguished / as empty and without self-existence / it isn’t empty because it’s empty / it’s empty because it doesn’t arise
17. When causes and conditions combine/ something arises and something ceases / aside from causes and conditions / nothing else arises or ceases
18. Aside from causes and conditions / there isn’t something else that exists / something the same or different / despite what other schools say
19. Existence or nonexistence doesn’t arise / there is no existence or nonexistence / except when combinations change / neither of these apply199
20. It is only according to convention / mutual dependence becomes a chain / apart from the chain of causation / arising has no meaning
21. Arising doesn’t arise if it doesn’t exist / the error of other paths is thus avoided / I only speak of a chain of causation / when fools can’t understand
22. As for something else arising / apart from the chain of causation / this is the doctrine of no causation / which denies the meaning of the chain
23. Just as a lamp illuminates forms / perception of the chain does the same / thus apart from the chain / something else would exist200
24. What doesn’t arise doesn’t exist / its existence is like that of space / apart from the chain of causation / the wise find nothing to see201
25. But there is something that doesn’t arise / something attained by the wise / the arising of which doesn’t arise / the forbearance of non-arising202
26. If in every world / whatever you see is a chain / everything as a chain / from this you will attain samadhi203
27. Ignorance, desire, and karma / these are the interior chain / a bow drill, a lump of clay, a wheel / and seeds make up the outsides 204
28. If something else existed / something arising from causes / this would negate the chain’s meaning / and thus it wouldn’t succeed205
29. If something arose that didn’t exist / which link would be its cause / things give rise to each other / this is what causation means
30. Solidity, moisture, heat, and movement206 / these are the projections of fools / nothing else exists but their combinations / thus I teach no self-existence
31. Like doctors who treat diseases / don’t have particular doctrines / because diseases differ / they prescribe different cures
32. For the sake of other beings / to rid them of afflictions / I gauge their level of understanding / before I decide what to teach
33. But different afflictions and understandings / don’t mean different teachings / I only teach one path / the path of the Mahayana. ”207
LXXIX208
Mahamati Bodhisattva once more asked the Buddha, “Followers of other paths all give rise to projections of impermanence. The Bhagavan also teaches that all phenomena are impermanent, that they arise and they cease. What does this mean? Is this wrong? Or is this right? And how many kinds of impermanence are there?”
The Buddha told Mahamati, “Followers of other paths have seven kinds209 of impermanence, none of which are taught by me. And what are the seven? Some say impermanence is when something is created and then abandoned.210 Some say impermanence is the destruction of shape. Some say impermanence is form.211
Some say impermanence is the process during which form changes and that because it involves an uninterrupted dissolution, like the transformation of milk to curds, the process of change is imperceptible but that impermanence destroys whatever is there. Some say impermanence is something that exists. Some say impermanence is something that exists and does not exist. And some say impermanence is something that does not arise but is inherent in all phenomena.212
“Mahamati, according to impermanence as something that exists and does not exist, the individual characteristics of the four elements and what they comprise are destroyed, but the self-existence of the four elements is imperceptible and does not arise.
“According to impermanence as something that does not arise, neither the existence nor nonexistence of anything arises, and even the most careful analysis yields nothing, neither permanence nor impermanence. This is the meaning of what does not arise, not of what does arise. This is what characterizes impermanence as something that does not arise. Those who don’t understand this fall prey to the view of followers of other paths that impermanence is something that arises.
“Mahamati, as for impermanence being something that exists, this is a projection of one’s own mind and not of the existence of permanence or impermanence. What does this mean? It means that the existence of impermanence itself is not destroyed. Mahamati, the nonexistence of what exists is the result of impermanence. Except for impermanence, there is nothing that can cause what exists not to exist. It is like a club or a roof tile213 or a rock. It breaks things.
“Clearly it is no different for anything else. For in terms of existence and impermanence, there is no difference between cause and effect. If this is impermanence, and this is the effect, and there is no difference between cause and effect, then everything that exists would be permanent, as nothing would exist as a cause. Mahamati, the nonexistence of what exists does have a cause, but not one fools are aware of. A cause does not produce an unrelated effect. If it did, anything that exists could be impermanence. And if the effect were unrelated, there would be no difference between cause and effect, even though they were clearly different.
“In the case of impermanence as something that exists, this would amount to the existence of an effect-producing cause. But if that were so, whatever exists would never end. If everything that exists amounted to an effect-producing cause, then impermanence itself would be impermanent. And because impermanence would be impermanent, everything that exists would not be impermanent but permanent.
“As for impermanence being inherent in whatever exists, this is contradicted by the three periods of time. Either it is destroyed along with past forms, or it does not arise in the future because such forms do not arise, or it is destroyed along with present forms. Forms are different combinations of the four elements, and the essential nature of the four elements and what they comprise is not subject to destruction, as it neither varies nor does it not vary. But while according to followers of
other paths, the four elements are indestructible, it is common knowledge that the four elements and all the forms they comprise throughout the three realms arise and cease to exist. Where then do the followers of such paths conceive of impermanence as existing apart from the four elements and what they comprise if the four elements do not arise and their essential nature is not subject to destruction?
“As for impermanence existing apart from initial creation, there are no other four elements than the four elements because among the individual characteristics of their different characteristics, no differences can be found. Since they don’t dif fer, they don’t create something that does. This kind of impermanence, you should know, involves the non-arising of dualities.
“As for impermanence being the destruction of shape, this means that the four elements and what they comprise are not destroyed. They are never destroyed. Mahamati, if one analyzes objects into the finest particles, one observes their destruction, as the shapes of the four elements and what they comprise cannot avoid appearing to differ in terms of their dimensions. But this is not true of the four elements. The four elements are not destroyed. It is the shapes that appear to be destroyed. This falls under the doctrine of the Samkhyas.214
“As for impermanence consisting in form, this means form itself is impermanence. But what is impermanent are shapes, not the four elements. If the four elements were impermanent, this would deny worldly convention. The denial of worldly convention falls under the doctrines of the Lokayatas,215 who view whatever exists as nothing but words and individual characteristics as not arising.
“As for impermanence consisting in change,216 this means that the existence of form appears to differ, not the four elements. For example, when we use gold to make ornaments, its appearance changes, but the nature of gold is not destroyed. It is only the ornaments that are subject to destruction. Thus, changes in whatever else exists are also like this.
“Such are the various views of impermanence held by followers of other paths who imagine that when fire destroys the four elements,217 their individual characteristics are not destroyed. If their individual characteristics were destroyed, the four elements and what they comprise would cease to exist.
“Mahamati, my teaching is that what arises is neither permanent nor impermanent. And how so? Because external existence cannot be determined, I teach that the three realms are nothing but mind and do not teach the arising or ceasing of their different characteristics. As for the four elements coming together and differentiating, the four elements and what they comprise are projections of the duality of subject and object. By understanding that dualistic views are projections, one gets free from the dualistic views of external existence and nonexistence, and one sees them as nothing but perceptions of one’s own mind.
“Projections arise when you think about doing something, not when you do nothing. Avoid projections of the existence or nonexistence of the mind. All mundane, metaphysical, and transcendent dharmas are neither permanent nor impermanent. Those who fail to perceive them as merely perceptions of their own mind end up attached to erroneous, dualistic views. But because followers of other paths do not perceive them as their own projections, such fools have no means by which to know that all mundane, metaphysical, and transcendent dharmas are the result of their own projection of words. This is not something fools are aware of.”
The Bhagavan then repeated the meaning of this in verse:
1. “Something separate from what is created / differences of shape / impermanence of form or existence / these are what other schools see218
2. In the indestructibility of what exists / the persistence of the elements / other schools see impermanence / immersed in a myriad views
3. For all such schools as these / there is no arising or cessation / but if the elements last forever / what does impermanence mean?
4. Everything is nothing but mind / from this dualities flow / among the grasping and the grasped / there is no self or its possessions
5. From Brahma’s heaven to the roots of trees / throughout their world-encircling branches / what I teach is this / it is all nothing but mind.”219
1 Chapter Three. We hear more about what distinguishes buddhahood and the path leading thereto, with the Buddha taking the lead and Mahamati continuing to ask questions.
2 Section LVII. The Buddha doesn’t wait for a question but explains one of the fruits of the bodhisattva path: the transformation of the body. Earlier, in sections XXX and LII he linked attainment of a projection body to the eighth stage of the path. Here, he identifies three kinds of such bodies, one attained prior to the eighth stage that realizes the nature of mind, one attained at the eighth stage that realizes the nature of dharmas, and one that realizes the nature of realization and is not associated with any stage—although it could be linked with any or all of the final three stages.
3 The ocean here represents the eighth, or repository, consciousness, while the waves represent the other seven forms of consciousness.
4 While emptiness is often listed as the essential nature of all dharmas, in the foregoing sections emphasis is placed on non-arising and illusoriness. This is the Lankavatara’s solution to spiritual cultivation in light of the absence of a self.
5 In these two verses, the Buddha keeps a foot on either side of the path: self-realization and the liberation of others.
6 Section LVIII. Besides transformation of body, another fruit of the path is transformation of deed. Here the Buddha reinterprets harmful acts committed against our greatest benefactors and redirects them toward our greatest enemies. As Pogo Possum once said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
7 As listed throughout the Buddhist Canon, these are the deeds that guarantee rebirth in Avici Hell and that prevent a person from attaining enlightenment in this life.
8 The Sanskrit avici means “uninterrupted” or “unrelenting.” This is not only the hell in which there is no respite from suffering, it is also the hottest of all hells.
9 Gunabhadra alone has people committing the five avici deeds and not falling into Avici Hell. All other translators and the Sanskrit have the expected: “Those who commit the five avici deeds fall into Avici Hell.” The Buddha’s explanation, however, clearly supports Gunabhadra.
10 Thirst and ignorance are the cause of our appearance on the wheel of life and death. Hence, they are likened to our parents.
11 Our passions lie in hiding until conditions encourage their appearance, which is why they are likened to disease-carrying rodents.
12 Bodhiruchi, Shikshananda, and the Sanskrit have “eight forms of consciousness.” But this must be a mistake, as the teaching of the Lankavatara involves putting an end to the first seven forms of consciousness and in transforming, not destroying, the eighth form of consciousness into buddha knowledge. Here, the seven forms of consciousness embody the buddha one imagines becoming as the result of cultivation.
13 Emptiness, formlessness, and intentionlessness are the three gates of liberation. Our false awareness cannot be killed with kindness. Hence, practitioners show it no mercy.
14 There is a play on words here (and also in the second of the two verses in this section), as avici means “unrelenting.” Apparently the Sanskrit text changed. Bodhiruchi has “this is called realizing the true dharma,” and Shikshananda has “they are able to realize the true dharma.” Suzuki has “there is . . . realization as regards the Dharma.” As elsewhere, I’ve followed Gunabhadra.
15 The idea here is that showing people how reprehensible such deeds are by projecting their appearance, they will not commit them. Here, we see the projection bodies of the previous section in action.
16 Namely, Avici Hell.
17 Section LIX. Implicit in this definition of buddhahood is a reinterpretation of the Four Noble Truths: how can there be suffering if there is no self; how can there be a cause of suffering if there is no obstruction; how can there be a cessation of suffering if there is no death; and how can there be a path leading t
o the cessation of suffering if there is no affliction.
18 The two obstructions are passion and knowledge. Passion is the cause of karmic death. Knowledge is the cause of transformation death.
19 The two kinds of death are karmic death and transformation death, the latter of which is so subtle it is barely noticed.
20 The two afflictions are the senses and what the senses give rise to. It is on the basis of these that attachment to the two kinds of self exist and that the two kinds of obstructions appear and that the two kinds of death occur.
21 In Section LVI, the Buddha says this about the one path: “By the one path I mean the one path to realization. And what does the one path to realization mean? Projections of subject or object do not arise in suchness. This is what the one path to realization means.” Realization changes everything. It changes who or what we are. Thus, shravakas and pratyeka-buddhas also travel the one path because there are no shravakas or pratyeka-buddhas.
22 Section LX. If a buddha’s awareness is based on no self, Mahamati wonders why the Buddha seems to talk in terms of a self, especially a self not limited by space or time. The Buddha sidesteps the issue of personal identity and points Mahamati instead to the nature of buddhahood, about which he just asked. As the Buddha notes in the second verse of the next section, buddhas are buddhas because they are buddhas and not other than buddhas.
23 Once when the Buddha was walking with Ananda, he came upon a stupa and bowed down to pay his respects. When Ananda asked whose stupa this was, the Buddha replied, “This is the stupa of all past buddhas.” Ananda then asked, “And whose disciples were they?” The Buddha replied, “My disciples.” (Quoted by Tseng Feng-yi, pg. 468)
