251
-- Chapter 14 - Refuting Extreme Conceptions [of inherent existence and complete non-existence .
-- Chapter 14 - Refuting Extreme Conceptions [of inherent existence and complete non-existence .
Aryadeva - Four Hundred Verses
Consequence that it is present if substantially established]
L6: [d. Consequence that impermanence is impossible if all three times are substantially existent] L5: [2. Refuting a substantially established past]
L5: [3. Detailed refutation of the future]
L6: [a. Refuting the assertion of Vaibhasikas and so forth]
L7: [(1) Refutation by examining whether the future is produced or unproduced]
L8: [(a) Actual meaning]
L8: [(b) Refuting the rejoinder]
L7: [(2) Consequence that impermanence is impossible if the two times are substantially established] L7: [(3) Showing that the existence of future functional things is absurd]
L7: [(4) Consequence that things already produced are produced again]
L7: [(5) Refuting that Yogic perception of wished for objects directly perceives future things]
3 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L8: [(a) Actual meaning]
L8: [(b) Consequence that fresh restraint from non-virtue and so forth are unnecessary if the future is substantially existent]
L8: [(c) If impermanent it is contradictory for something to exist prior to its production]
L6: [b. Refuting the assertions of Sautrantikas and so forth]
L4: [B. Refutation by examining whether the effect exists or not]
L4: [C. Refuting a truly existent present]
L3: [II. Refuting the proof [of substantially established time]]
L4: [A. Refuting existence of substantially established functional things as a basis for time]
L5: [1. Refutation by examining whether or not things have duration]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Proving that duration is not inherently existent]
L5: [2. Refutation by examining whether or not time has duration]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining whether things and impermanence are one or different]
L5: [4. Refutation by examining which is stronger, duration or impermanence]
L6: [a. Consequence that subsequent reversal is unfeasible if impermanence is weaker]
L6: [b. Consequence that nothing will have duration if impermanence is stronger]
L6: [c. Consequence that what was permanent will later be impermanent if duration is stronger]
L5: [5. Refuting that both exist together]
L4: [B. Refuting proof based on memory of the past]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 12 - REFUTING WRONG VIEWS - WE NEED A GRADUAL PATH COMBINING VIRTUOUS METHODS AND WISDOM. THERE IS NO FINAL VIEW TO ARRIVE TO. -- P. 239]
L3: [I. Why most ordinary people do not follow this teaching]
L4: [A. Difficulty of finding a listener with the prerequisite qualities]
L5: [1. Prerequisite qualities of the listener]
L5: [2. Disadvantages of not possessing the prerequisite qualities]
L5: [3. Eliminating arguments]
L6: [a. Proving the Subduer's omniscience]
L7: [(1) Appropriateness of being glad about the teaching of emptiness which annihilates suffering and its sources] L7: [(2) Why there is no liberation in any teaching other than the Teacher's]
L7: [(3) Means to gain certainty regarding extremely hidden matters taught by the Teacher]
L6: [b. Showing that others' teachers are not authentic]
L4: [B. Difficulty of understanding the meaning of the fundamental mode of existence]
L5: [1. Why emptiness is feared]
L6: [a. Why some, although seeking liberation, follow the Forders]
L6: [b. Recognizing a person who fears emptiness]
L6: [c. Why childish people fear emptiness]
L5: [2. Faults of impeding others' understanding of emptiness]
L5: [3. Taking care to lapse from the view of suchness]
L5: [4. Stages leading towards suchness]
L5: [5. Recognizing suchness]
L6: [a. Recognizing the fundamental mode of existence]
L6: [b. Why fear arises in the weak]
L4: [C. The profound is not taught for the sake of argument]
L5: [1. Although not taught for the sake of debate this very teaching burns up wrong contentions]
L5: [2. Why this is so]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Why the Exalted do not experience fear]
L5: [3. Appropriateness of compassion for those following wrong paths]
L4: [D. Showing the comparative subtlety and coarseness of our own and others' teaching]
L5: [1. General explanation of why those of inferior intelligence value others' teaching but not the Buddha's]
L5: [2. Specific explanation]
L6: [a. Those seeking liberation should not try these systems]
L6: [b. How those of inferior intelligence develop respect]
L6: [c. Why those systems are not excellent teaching]
L3: [II. Exposition of good explanation in brief]
4 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L4: [A. Actual meaning]
L4: [B. Why outsiders do not appreciate the Teacher's doctrine]
L3: [III. Advising those who seek emancipation to adopt good explanations] L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 13 - REFUTING TRULY EXISTENT SENSE ORGANS AND OBJECTS - REFUTING DIRECT OBJECTIVE PERCEPTION OF AN EXTERNAL REALITY INDEPENDENT OF THE MIND AND KARMA. EVERYTING IS LIKE AN ILLUSION. - P. 251]
L3: [I. Extensively explaining the reasoning that refutes true existence]
L4: [A. Refuting true existence of that which is apprehended: the sense objects]
L5: [1. General refutation]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L7: [(1) Refuting that a sense consciousness directly perceives a pot existing by way of its own character] L7: [(2) Applying this reasoning to other instances]
L7: [(3) Absurdity of positing that other parts are seen because visible form existent by way of its own character is seen]
L7: [(4) Refuting direct perception of just visible form existent by way of its own character]
L7: [(5) Showing that the proof and what is to be proved are alike]
L7: [(6) Showing other lines of reasoning]
L5: [2. Individual refutations]
L6: [a. Refuting that sense organs apprehend objects existing by way of their own entity]
L7: [(1) Refuting truly existent visible objects]
L8: [(a) Refuting objects]
L9: [1: Refuting our own sectarians' contentions]
L9: [a: Refutation by examining whether the color and shape constituting a visible form existing by way of its own character taken as object of apprehension by a visual consciousness are inherently one or different]
L9: [b: Refutation through the consequence that because the elements are present, a visual consciousness taking a visible form as its object would apprehend both]
L9: [c: Showing what invalidates this contention]
L9: [2: Refuting contentions of other sectarians]
L8: [(b) Refuting that which perceives objects]
L9: [1: Refuting that the eye is by way of its own entity an instrument of looking at form]
L9: [2: Refuting consciousness as agent]
L9: [3: Refuting the eye as agent]
L9: [a: Absurdity if the eye travels to look at visible form]
L9: [b: Purposelessness if it travels to look at the form after it is seen]
L9: [c: Consequence that all objects would be seen if the eye by way of its own entity perceived form without traveling] L9: [4: Consequence that the eye is an instrument of looking in relation to the eye]
L9: [5: Refuting a combination of three factors as the instrument of looking at visible form]
L7: [(2) Refuting truly existent auditory objects]
L8: [(a) Refutation by examining whether sound is a maker of noise]
L8: [(b) Refutation by examining whether or not sound is apprehended through contact]
L8: [(c) Showing the flaws of this contention]
L6: [b. Refuting apprehension by mental consciousness]
L4: [B. Refuting true existence of that which perceives objects]
L5: [1. Defining the aggregate of recognition]
L5: [2. Refuting it true existence]
L4: [C. Showing that lack of true existence is, like magic, a cause for amazement]
L3: [II. Showing that emptiness of true existence is like magical illusions and so forth]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 14 - REFUTING EXTREME CONCEPTIONS [OF INHERENT EXISTENCE AND COMPLETE NON-EXISTENCE . . . ] - THE PERFECTION OF WISDOM: NON-DUALITY OF DEPENDENT ORIGINATION AND EMPTINESS - P. 265]
L3: [I. Proving that functional things are empty of inherent existence]
L4: [A. Brief exposition]
L4: [B. Extensive explanation]
L5: [1. Refuting a truly existent composite by examining the four possibilities [same, different, one owning the other or
5 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
vice versa]]
L6: [a. Exposition]
L6: [b. Explanation]
L7: [(1) Refuting other sectarians]
L8: [(a) Refuting the characteristics]
L9: [1: Refuting the substantial entity as basis for a distinct generality]
L9: [2: Refuting it as a basis for distinct attributes]
L9: [a: Actual meaning]
L9: [b: Inconsistency with the assertion that one attribute cannot rely on another attribute]
L8: [(b) Refuting that which is characterized]
L7: [(2) Refuting our own sectarians]
L8: [(a) Extensively refuting the composite as a truly existent single unit]
L9: [1: Refutation by examining for oneness or difference]
L9: [2: Refuting the composite as a truly existent single unit through the coming together of its constituents]
L9: [a: Actual refutation]
L9: [b: Refuting the rejoinder]
L9: [3: Showing other reasoning which refutes the composite as a truly existent single unit]
L9: [a: Consequence that everything is a pot if the pot has true existence]
L9: [b: Consequence that the eight substantial particles of the pot are one]
L9: [4: Refuting truly existent production of the pot from its causes]
L9: [5: Refuting truly existent production by virtue of dependence on parts]
L8: [(b) Briefly refuting that though there are many components, the composite is a truly existent single unit]
L5: [2. Refuting truly existent components]
L6: [a. Just as a composite does not exist truly apart from visible form, smell and so forth, there are no truly existent elemental derivatives that do not rely on the elements]
L6: [b. Refuting truly existent elements]
L6: [c. Refuting the rejoinder]
L6: [d. Refuting a fire particle as truly existent fire]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining for singleness or plurality]
L6: [a. Refuting truly existent functional phenomena through the reason of being neither one nor many]
L6: [b. This fallacy equally applies to other sectarians]
L5: [4. Applying reasoning which negates the four possibilities in [all] other cases [, with any duality. ]]
L3: [II. Showing the cause for mistaking functional things as permanent and truly existent]
L3: [III. Briefly showing the reasoning that establishes absence of true existence]
L3: [IV. Showing the need to understand absence of true existence]
L4: [A. Inherently existent dependent arising is not seen by the Exalted]
L4: [B. Release from worldly existence is gained through understanding emptiness]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 15 - REFUTING TRULY EXISTENT CHARACTERISTICS [OF PRODUCTS] - PRODUCTION / ORIGINATION, DURATION, CESSATION - P. 277]
L3: [I. Extensively establishing dependent arising which are not inherently produced as existing in the manner of a magicians's illusions]
L4: [A. Specific refutation of inherent production]
L5: [1. Extensive explanation]
L6: [a. Refutation by examining whether that which exists or does not exist is produced] L7: [(1) Reason refuting production of that which exists or does not exist]
L7: [(2) Establishing its mode [of operation]]
L7: [(3) Refutation by examining the time of production]
L7: [(4) Refutation by examining the thing itself and another thing]
L6: [b. Refutation by examining the beginning, middle and end]
L6: [c. Refutation by examining both self and other]
L6: [d. Refutation by examining sequentiality and simultaneity]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Refuting proof of inherent production]
L6: [e. Refutation by examining the three times]
L5: [2. Summarized meaning: showing the effects of refuting production]
L4: [B. General refutation of inherently existent production, duration and disintegration]
6 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [1. Refutation of inherently existent characteristics by examining sequentiality and simultaneity] L5: [2. Refutation through the consequence of infinite regress of the characteristics]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining whether they are one or different]
L5: [4. Refutation by examining whether they are existent or non-existent by way of their own entity] L6: [a. Refuting that production is truly existent because there are truly existent producing causes] L6: [b. Production and so forth are neither truly existent things nor non-things]
L4: [C. Refuting that what is in the process of being produced is being produced inherently] L5: [1. Brief explanation]
L5: [2. Extensive explanation]
L6: [a. Refutation by examining that which is in the process of being produced]
L6: [b. Refuting the assertion that a thing existing between past and future is that which is in the process of being produced]
L6: [c. Refuting the assertion that a thing before it is produced is what is in the process of being produced]
L6: [d. Refuting the assertion that the unproduced is what is in the process of being produced]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Refuting the justification]
L7: [(3) Necessity of accepting that the unproduced is being produced, if that which is in the process of being produced is produced by way of its own entity]
L5: [3. Summarized meaning]
L3: [II. Concluding summary of the refutations of inherent existence [of production / origination, duration, cessation] ] L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L1: [SECTION II - B : SHOWING HOW TO MEDITATE ON SETTLING [THE PROCEDURE BETWEEN] SPIRITUAL GUIDES AND STUDENTS BY WAY OF [EXPLAINING] THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTERS AND ELIMINATING REMAINING COUNTER-ARGUMENTS BY MISGUIDED OPPONENTS. ]
L2: [CHAPTER 16 - REFUTING REMAINING COUNTER-ARGUMENTS - THE DHARMA DOOR OF NON- DUALITY AND THE IRREFUTABILITY OF THE MIDDLE WAY - P. 289]
L3: [I. Briefly explaining the purpose of writing these chapters]
L3: [II. Eliminating remaining counter-arguments raised by misguided opponents]
L4: [A. Refuting reasoning to negate emptiness]
L5: [1. Impossibility of refuting the thesis of emptiness]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Refutation by virtue of parity]
L5: [2. Impossibility of proving the thesis of non-emptiness]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Refuting the justification]
L5: [3. Refuting other reasoning]
L6: [a. Invalidity of negating emptiness of true existence by reason of direct perception]
L6: [b. Since emptiness exists, its opposite, true existence, is not feasible]
L4: [B. Refuting adherence to theses which fall into extremes]
L5: [1. Actual refutation - [the dharma door of non-duality]]
L6: [a. Refuting that the non-thesis is a thesis]
L6: [b. Refuting proof that there are truly existent things]
L7: [(1) It is not feasible that there is true existence on the grounds that specific functional things are truly existent] L7: [(2) Refuting the four extremes by reasoning]
L7: [(3) Not even the smallest particle of true existence can be observed]
L6: [c. Showing that everything is equally free from extremes]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Inappropriateness of asserting differentiation of truly existent and not truly existent with regard to any phenomenon]
L5: [2. Refuting the justification]
L6: [a. Appropriateness of accepting the thesis of emptiness of true existence]
L6: [b. Difficulty of finding a thesis refuting emptiness of true existence]
L4: [C. Showing parity of reasoning with regard to true existence or lack of true existence]
L5: [1. Both emptiness of true existence and true existence are either equally established or not established merely by words]
L5: [2. Mere designation as truly existent will not make it so]
7 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [3. If there were true existence because ordinary people use the verbal convention that things are truly existent, then being conventionally existent they could not exist as their own suchness]
L4: [D. Refuting non-existence as the thesis]
L5: [1. Refuting that negation of truly existent things makes things utterly non-existent]
L5: [2. As there are no truly existent things that which is non-functional cannot be truly existent either]
L4: [E. Refuting that things are not empty because analogies and reasons to establish emptiness exist]
L5: [1. Showing the invalidity in the form of absurd consequences [of asserting that] there is true existence because there are reasons]
L5: [2. Showing the invalidity in the form of absurd consequences [of asserting that] things are not empty because there are analogies]
L4: [F. Explaining the purpose of teaching emptiness]
L4: [G. Showing that conceptions of extremes of existence are erroneous]
L4: [H. Impossibility of refuting through reasoning that which is free from extremes]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L1: [THE COLOPHON - P. 301]
L1: [DEDICATION]
L1: [NOTES]
L1: [ABBREVIATIONS]
L1: [MY RE? SUME? S]
L2: [RE? SUME? OF ALL CHAPTERS TOGETHER]
L2: [RE? SUME? OF EACH CHAPTER]
L3: [PART I - Explaining the Stages of the Paths dependent on CONVENTIONAL TRUTHS (accumulation of merit)] L4: [SECTION I - A : Showing how the aspiring altruistic intention is generated after training in the attitudes of a person of intermediate capacity by explaining elimination of the four errors. ]
L4: [SECTION I - B : Explaining how to train in the deeds, having generated the practical altruistic intention. ]
L3: [PART II - Explaining the stages of the paths dependent on ULTIMATE TRUTH (accumulation of wisdom)]
L4: [SECTION II - A - Extensively explaining ultimate truth. ]
L4: [SECTION II - B - Showing how to meditate on settling [the procedure between] spiritual guides and students by way of [explaining] the purpose of the CHAPTERs and eliminating remaining counter-arguments by misguided opponents. ]
L2: [RE? SUME? TABLE:]
8 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
.
L1: [Part II - Explaining the stages of the paths dependent on ultimate truth (accumulation of wisdom)] .
-- SECTION A : Extensively explaining ultimate truth
-- SECTION B : Showing how to meditate on settling [the procedure between] spiritual guides and students by way of [explaining] the purpose of the chapters and eliminating remaining counter-arguments by misguided opponents.
.
[GENERAL REFUTATION OF TRUE EXISTENCE ]
.
By cleansing the mind stream with the flowing water of means by which to understand suchness, the previous chapters have made it a vessel fit for the nectar of suchness. The remaining chapters will explain how products which arise and disintegrate do not have even the slightest essence of inherent existence.
.
(i. e. They are like figures seen in clouds, like swirls at the surface of the ocean. All merely imputed by the mind, but not from the mind only. Not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither. All equal and pure in emptiness; non-dual: not two, not one. )
.
L1: [Section II - A : Extensively explaining ultimate truth]
.
-- Chapter 9 - Refuting Permanent Functional Phenomena - Everything is both cause and effect, whole and part, merely imputed by the mind - the Middle Way in causality: no absolute causality / path, no absence of causality - P. 203
-- Chapter 10 - Refuting Misconceptions of the Self - There is nothing permanent that is having rebirths, or is being Liberated - P. 215
-- Chapter 11 - Refuting Truly Existent Time - There is no truly existing absolute time, duration or impermanence - P. 227
-- Chapter 12 - Refuting Wrong Views - We need a gradual path combining virtuous methods and wisdom. There is no final view to arrive to - P. 239
-- Chapter 13 - Refuting Truly Existent Sense Organs and Objects - Refuting direct objective perception of an external reality independent of the mind and karma. Everyting is like an illusion - P.
251
-- Chapter 14 - Refuting Extreme Conceptions [of inherent existence and complete non-existence . . . ] - The perfection of wisdom: non-duality of dependent origination and emptiness - P. 265
-- Chapter 15 - Refuting Truly Existent Characteristics [of products] - Production / origination, duration, cessation - P. 277
.
L2: [Chapter 9 - Refuting Permanent Functional Phenomena -
Everything is both cause and effect, whole and part, merely imputed by the mind -
the Middle Way in causality: no absolute causality / path, no absence of causality - P. 203]
.
(i. e. General refutation of true existence by refuting permanent functional phenomena. .
ASSUMPTION: some things are both functional and permanent, really existing:
-- like permanent without being a cause and an effect: ex. from space to mind
-- or permanent and causal without being an effect: ex. particles.
ANSWER: Everything is both cause and effect, nothing is permanent. )
.
-- ALL PHENOMENA ARE FUNCTIONAL, produces an effect; EVERYTHING IS A CAUSE,
-- without a function it is as non-existent
-- without a function it is not perceptible directly or indirectly
.
-- A CAUSE NECESSARILY IS ALSO AN EFFECT, because all cause are dependent on other conditions.
-- It cannot be a permanently active cause, it needs other conditions to activate it . . .
-- It changes from being non-active, active, then no more active
-- It must have parts, directional and functional; the whole and the parts are not one, not separate
-- It is interdependent with its characteristics; the characterized and the characteristics are not one, not separate -- It is merely imputed by the mind; it is not one with the mind, not separate; concepts are inter-dependent
.
9 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
-- EVERYTHING IS BOTH A CAUSE AND AN EFFECT. There is not limits to this in both direction. -- Because all functional things are in interdependence, everything is impermanent.
-- Cause and effect cannot exist simultaneously; one stops, one starts
-- Cause and effect cannot exist separately
-- Because everything is cause & effect, everything is impermanent
-- Nothing last even a moment, everything is continually changing, a continuous flow of interdependence.
-- So everything is just an illusion, everything is empty of inherent existence.
-- BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS DEPENDENTLY ARISING, EVERYTHING IS EMPTY OF INHERENT EXISTENCE -- It is the mind that puts names on the flow, and then thinks things really exist on their own.
.
-- About liberation & a liberated self
-- Liberation is, like space, a negation, not a functional thing. Otherwise as an effect, it would also be a cause, and there would be no end.
-- No self imputed on the aggregates is liberated, thus no real functional liberation; it is just a concept.
-- There would be no need for consciousness at liberation; and there is no person without consciousness
-- at liberation there is no more seed of consciousness either
-- There no need to speculate about anything after liberation, after the cessation of those illusions
-- There is no other self outside of the aggregates that could be liberated
-- So thinking about liberating a self is a mistake
-- To maintain morality, the belief in a self may be necessary for beginners).
.
L3: [I. Refuting permanent functional phenomena in general ] L4: [A. Actual meaning]
.
\ ###
\ 201.
\ ALL ARE PRODUCED FOR THEIR EFFECT,
\ THUS NONE ARE PERMANENT.
\ There are no Tathagatas other than
\ Subduers [who know] things as they are.
.
(i. e. Everything is a cause and an effect, thus impermanent. First, without being a cause of something / functional, anything would be as if non-existent - not even perceptible by the six senses; and there were be no need to talk about it. So everything produced is a cause / functional.
-- Second, since their causing-action is necessarily triggered and modulated by their own causes and conditions, all causes are also an effect.
-- Beside being dependent on other causes and conditions, and having a triggered beginning for its casing function, there is necessary an end to this causing-action, thus they are all impermanent. )
.
(i. e. All is functional phenomena = causing an effect, and being dependent on other causes & conditions, thus nothing is permanent -- this apply to space, time, mind, self, particles . . . Functional things are by definition the causes of some effects, their functions, and are themselves the results of causes and conditions, because there is no absolute cause producing an absolute result 100% of the time whatever happen. There are always mitigating conditions. Thus functional phenomena are both cause and effect. And they are not permanent, because as effect they cannot be there before the production, and as cause they have to go away after the production otherwise there would be continuous production.
-- This means that the division of the categories of existent phenomena into permanent and functional / impermanent is artificial.
-- Everything is functional / impermanent.
-- There is absolutely nothing permanent.
-- The four types of permanent phenomena (see bellow) are thus not valid: space, analytical cessation, non-analytical cessation, and even suchness.
-- And all functional phenomena -- form, sense organs, objects, consciousness, mind, mental factors, self, karma, concepts . . . -- are all both cause and effect, impermanent, not independent, not self
-- Everything is in dependence, everything is empty of inherent existence
-- So "permanent" and "functional" are contradictory terms. )
.
10 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
-- In the world it is accepted that when a laborer work hard for his wage, it is for the result and not because it is his nature to do so. Similarly all external and internal functional phenomena do not arise of their own accord. Since they are produced solely through a multifarious aggregation of factors consisting of interrelated causes and effects, functional things are produced for their effects. They therefore are not permanent, inherently produced or truly existent. They do not have an essence able to sustain analysis, nor do they exist as things in and of themselves.
Only Subduers, because they have the abilities of perfected body, speech and mind, directly know impermanence, emptiness and all things without exception as they are. Since no one else does, there are no other Tathagatas. Moreover the Teacher said, "Whatever is produced inevitably ceases, for aging and death are conditioned by birth. " Thus, since production is for the sake of disintegration, nothing endures by way of its own entity.
Some refute permanence and true existence by virtue of autonomous reasons. The unfeasibility of this is explained in Candrakirti's commentary. There is no commonly appearing subject, such as a sprout, posited by tenets, in relation to which a direct valid cognition perceiving it is valid, since all except Prasangikas assert that it is valid in relation to a sprout existing by way of its own character. Prasangikas assert this is impossible.
.
L4: [B. Refuting the rejoinder]
.
\ ###
\ 202.
\ There is not anywhere anything
\ That ever exists without depending.
\ Thus never is there anywhere
\ Anything that is permanent.
.
(i. e. There is no exception. All functional things are dependent, an effect, thus impermanent -- dependent on other causes and conditions, on parts, on their characteristics, on the mind conceptualizing them. Thus, all causes are also effects. This applies to all dharmas without any exception at all, including: self, space, cessations, time, particles, liberation . . . even if some are presented as permanent in other adapted skillful teachings. )
.
(-- Some people argues that there are certain phenomena which are both functional and permanent and are neither produced by other factors nor give rise to effects, while others are causes but no effects. It is impossible for anything to be permanent and also a functional thing as is claimed, for whatever arises in dependence upon other factors, i. e. causes and conditions, is not permanent.
-- Vaisesika assertion: Although things that are produced for their effect are not permanent, functional things --
-- from space to the mind, which lack both the feature of being produced and that of being producers;
-- and the smallest particles which, though they are producers, are not produced are permanent and truly existent.
-- Answer: Never, at any time or in any place, is there any chance of finding a functional thing that does not depend on relatedness. Thus never is there anywhere a permanent functional phenomenon. Since whatever exists only exists dependently, it does not have even the slightest existence by way of its own entity. )
.
L3: [II. Refuting them individually (Self, space, cessations, time, particles, liberation. )] L4: [A. Refuting a personal self (a permanent cause without being an effect)]
L5: [1. Actual meaning]
.
\ ###
\ 203.
\ THERE IS NO FUNCTIONAL THING WITHOUT A CAUSE,
\ NOR ANYTHING PERMANENT WHICH HAS A CAUSE.
\ THUS THE ONE WHO KNOWS SUCHNESS SAID WHAT HAS
\ COME ABOUT CAUSELESSLY DOES NOT EXIST.
.
(i. e. The case of the permanent self: There is no absolute cause, primary cause. Nothing is without its own causes and conditions. All cause must be triggered, and do not last, thus have their own causes and conditions, and are impermanent. This applies to the self; the self is not a primary permanent cause of decisions without being an effect, without dependence. There is no absolute free will - nor is it total determinism with no possibility of Liberation. The self is a cause, but also an effect, thus impermanent. All choices and actions issued from the self have their own causes and conditions, but there is a way to transcend it all. )
.
11 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
(-- A functional thing always has a cause, while that which is permanent never has. It is impossible for a functional thing to be neither cause nor effect, nor for it to be only a cause but not itself an effect as is claimed, since both are contrary to the normal operation of cause and effect. Anything that undergoes a transformation to produce an effect cannot be permanent, nor can a cause and an effect have totally disparate natures such that the one is permanent and the other impermanent.
-- Assertion: Dependently arising phenomena like pleasure and so forth exist, and the self is the cause that attracts them. Thus the self exists and, moreover, is permanent.
-- Answer: There is no personal self since that which has no producing cause is not a functional thing, nor is there anything permanent which has a cause. [Buddha], the one who knows suchness, said phenomena that come into being causelessly do not exist:
~ Phenomena with causes and conditions are known.
~ Phenomena without causes and conditions do not exist. ) .
L5: [2. Refuting the rejoinder]
.
\ ###
\ 204.
\ If the unproduced is permanent
\ Because impermanent [things] are seen to be products,
\ Seeing that the produced exists
\ Would make the permanent non-existent.
.
(i. e. Refuting a proof bases on word association that makes no sense. )
.
(Showing that the following particular method of reasoning gives absurdity when applied to something else:
-- If produced --> impermanent
means that an unproduced self --> is permanent;
-- Then if produced --> exist
would that mean that a permanent / non-produced self --> is non-existent. That is absurd. Thus this proof is invalid.
-- If on seeing that a pot and pleasure are impermanent and produced, one asserts that the self and so forth are by implication permanent, it would follow that because of seeing that a pot and so forth are produced and exist, whatever is permanent like the self should be non-existent like a sky flower. )
.
L4: [B. Refuting three substantial existent uncompounded phenomena
(i. e. three permanent existent phenomena types: space, analytical cessations, non-analytical cessations)] L5: [1. General refutation]
.
\ ###
\ 205.
\ That space and so forth are permanent
\ Is a conception of common beings.
\ For the wise they are not objects perceived
\ Even by conventional [valid cognition].
.
(i. e. The case of space, and the two types of cessations: Space is not a permanent functional thing, it is not a real thing, it is a negation. There is no such things as permanent functional things as proved above. Cessations are also mere negations, the stopping of illusions based on ignorance, not something existing that would be permanent. - Nirvana is the removal of ignorance, or obstructions, like space; it is not a permanent really existing thing. )
.
(-- Assertion: The treatises of knowledge say space, individual analytical cessations, and non-analytical cessations are permanent and substantially existent. Any refutation of this is invalidated by your own assertions.
-- Answer: That is not so. Not understanding the significance of applying the term "space" to a mere absence of obstructive contact and so forth, common people think that uncompounded space and so on are permanent [functional phenomena]. Those who are wise concerning the suchness of functional phenomena, far from thinking they exist ultimately, do not regard permanent functional phenomena even as objects perceived by conventional valid cognition. Only that which does not change is termed permanent. What sutra says is not primarily stated to establish [substantial existence, but to refute the existence of permanent functional things]. )
12 / 117
.
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [2. Specifically refuting permanent omnipresent space (a permanent thing without being a cause or an effect)]
.
\ ###
\ 206.
\ A single direction is not present
\ Wherever there is that which has direction.
\ That with directions therefore clearly
\ Also has other directional parts.
.
(i. e. Space is not absolute, permanent, since in depends on directional parts: Some think that space is a real permanent functional thing, not an effect - inherently existing. But a real permanent thing existing on its own would not be dependent on its parts. Since space obviously can be decomposed into parts and directions, and cannot be defined without talking about objects, movement, directions, . . . it is not an independently existing thing - inherently existing. There is no absolute referential; it is always relative. Space is an effect dependent on the mind conceiving it. Space and objects, like Nirvana and samsara, are co-dependently arisen concepts, forming an apparent duality that needs to be transcended . . . seen through. )
.
(-- Assertion: Space is permanent because it is omnipresent. Whatever is impermanent like a pot is not omnipresent.
-- Answer: The following (the four lines) refutes permanence by refuting omnipresence.
L6: [d. Consequence that impermanence is impossible if all three times are substantially existent] L5: [2. Refuting a substantially established past]
L5: [3. Detailed refutation of the future]
L6: [a. Refuting the assertion of Vaibhasikas and so forth]
L7: [(1) Refutation by examining whether the future is produced or unproduced]
L8: [(a) Actual meaning]
L8: [(b) Refuting the rejoinder]
L7: [(2) Consequence that impermanence is impossible if the two times are substantially established] L7: [(3) Showing that the existence of future functional things is absurd]
L7: [(4) Consequence that things already produced are produced again]
L7: [(5) Refuting that Yogic perception of wished for objects directly perceives future things]
3 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L8: [(a) Actual meaning]
L8: [(b) Consequence that fresh restraint from non-virtue and so forth are unnecessary if the future is substantially existent]
L8: [(c) If impermanent it is contradictory for something to exist prior to its production]
L6: [b. Refuting the assertions of Sautrantikas and so forth]
L4: [B. Refutation by examining whether the effect exists or not]
L4: [C. Refuting a truly existent present]
L3: [II. Refuting the proof [of substantially established time]]
L4: [A. Refuting existence of substantially established functional things as a basis for time]
L5: [1. Refutation by examining whether or not things have duration]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Proving that duration is not inherently existent]
L5: [2. Refutation by examining whether or not time has duration]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining whether things and impermanence are one or different]
L5: [4. Refutation by examining which is stronger, duration or impermanence]
L6: [a. Consequence that subsequent reversal is unfeasible if impermanence is weaker]
L6: [b. Consequence that nothing will have duration if impermanence is stronger]
L6: [c. Consequence that what was permanent will later be impermanent if duration is stronger]
L5: [5. Refuting that both exist together]
L4: [B. Refuting proof based on memory of the past]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 12 - REFUTING WRONG VIEWS - WE NEED A GRADUAL PATH COMBINING VIRTUOUS METHODS AND WISDOM. THERE IS NO FINAL VIEW TO ARRIVE TO. -- P. 239]
L3: [I. Why most ordinary people do not follow this teaching]
L4: [A. Difficulty of finding a listener with the prerequisite qualities]
L5: [1. Prerequisite qualities of the listener]
L5: [2. Disadvantages of not possessing the prerequisite qualities]
L5: [3. Eliminating arguments]
L6: [a. Proving the Subduer's omniscience]
L7: [(1) Appropriateness of being glad about the teaching of emptiness which annihilates suffering and its sources] L7: [(2) Why there is no liberation in any teaching other than the Teacher's]
L7: [(3) Means to gain certainty regarding extremely hidden matters taught by the Teacher]
L6: [b. Showing that others' teachers are not authentic]
L4: [B. Difficulty of understanding the meaning of the fundamental mode of existence]
L5: [1. Why emptiness is feared]
L6: [a. Why some, although seeking liberation, follow the Forders]
L6: [b. Recognizing a person who fears emptiness]
L6: [c. Why childish people fear emptiness]
L5: [2. Faults of impeding others' understanding of emptiness]
L5: [3. Taking care to lapse from the view of suchness]
L5: [4. Stages leading towards suchness]
L5: [5. Recognizing suchness]
L6: [a. Recognizing the fundamental mode of existence]
L6: [b. Why fear arises in the weak]
L4: [C. The profound is not taught for the sake of argument]
L5: [1. Although not taught for the sake of debate this very teaching burns up wrong contentions]
L5: [2. Why this is so]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Why the Exalted do not experience fear]
L5: [3. Appropriateness of compassion for those following wrong paths]
L4: [D. Showing the comparative subtlety and coarseness of our own and others' teaching]
L5: [1. General explanation of why those of inferior intelligence value others' teaching but not the Buddha's]
L5: [2. Specific explanation]
L6: [a. Those seeking liberation should not try these systems]
L6: [b. How those of inferior intelligence develop respect]
L6: [c. Why those systems are not excellent teaching]
L3: [II. Exposition of good explanation in brief]
4 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L4: [A. Actual meaning]
L4: [B. Why outsiders do not appreciate the Teacher's doctrine]
L3: [III. Advising those who seek emancipation to adopt good explanations] L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 13 - REFUTING TRULY EXISTENT SENSE ORGANS AND OBJECTS - REFUTING DIRECT OBJECTIVE PERCEPTION OF AN EXTERNAL REALITY INDEPENDENT OF THE MIND AND KARMA. EVERYTING IS LIKE AN ILLUSION. - P. 251]
L3: [I. Extensively explaining the reasoning that refutes true existence]
L4: [A. Refuting true existence of that which is apprehended: the sense objects]
L5: [1. General refutation]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L7: [(1) Refuting that a sense consciousness directly perceives a pot existing by way of its own character] L7: [(2) Applying this reasoning to other instances]
L7: [(3) Absurdity of positing that other parts are seen because visible form existent by way of its own character is seen]
L7: [(4) Refuting direct perception of just visible form existent by way of its own character]
L7: [(5) Showing that the proof and what is to be proved are alike]
L7: [(6) Showing other lines of reasoning]
L5: [2. Individual refutations]
L6: [a. Refuting that sense organs apprehend objects existing by way of their own entity]
L7: [(1) Refuting truly existent visible objects]
L8: [(a) Refuting objects]
L9: [1: Refuting our own sectarians' contentions]
L9: [a: Refutation by examining whether the color and shape constituting a visible form existing by way of its own character taken as object of apprehension by a visual consciousness are inherently one or different]
L9: [b: Refutation through the consequence that because the elements are present, a visual consciousness taking a visible form as its object would apprehend both]
L9: [c: Showing what invalidates this contention]
L9: [2: Refuting contentions of other sectarians]
L8: [(b) Refuting that which perceives objects]
L9: [1: Refuting that the eye is by way of its own entity an instrument of looking at form]
L9: [2: Refuting consciousness as agent]
L9: [3: Refuting the eye as agent]
L9: [a: Absurdity if the eye travels to look at visible form]
L9: [b: Purposelessness if it travels to look at the form after it is seen]
L9: [c: Consequence that all objects would be seen if the eye by way of its own entity perceived form without traveling] L9: [4: Consequence that the eye is an instrument of looking in relation to the eye]
L9: [5: Refuting a combination of three factors as the instrument of looking at visible form]
L7: [(2) Refuting truly existent auditory objects]
L8: [(a) Refutation by examining whether sound is a maker of noise]
L8: [(b) Refutation by examining whether or not sound is apprehended through contact]
L8: [(c) Showing the flaws of this contention]
L6: [b. Refuting apprehension by mental consciousness]
L4: [B. Refuting true existence of that which perceives objects]
L5: [1. Defining the aggregate of recognition]
L5: [2. Refuting it true existence]
L4: [C. Showing that lack of true existence is, like magic, a cause for amazement]
L3: [II. Showing that emptiness of true existence is like magical illusions and so forth]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 14 - REFUTING EXTREME CONCEPTIONS [OF INHERENT EXISTENCE AND COMPLETE NON-EXISTENCE . . . ] - THE PERFECTION OF WISDOM: NON-DUALITY OF DEPENDENT ORIGINATION AND EMPTINESS - P. 265]
L3: [I. Proving that functional things are empty of inherent existence]
L4: [A. Brief exposition]
L4: [B. Extensive explanation]
L5: [1. Refuting a truly existent composite by examining the four possibilities [same, different, one owning the other or
5 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
vice versa]]
L6: [a. Exposition]
L6: [b. Explanation]
L7: [(1) Refuting other sectarians]
L8: [(a) Refuting the characteristics]
L9: [1: Refuting the substantial entity as basis for a distinct generality]
L9: [2: Refuting it as a basis for distinct attributes]
L9: [a: Actual meaning]
L9: [b: Inconsistency with the assertion that one attribute cannot rely on another attribute]
L8: [(b) Refuting that which is characterized]
L7: [(2) Refuting our own sectarians]
L8: [(a) Extensively refuting the composite as a truly existent single unit]
L9: [1: Refutation by examining for oneness or difference]
L9: [2: Refuting the composite as a truly existent single unit through the coming together of its constituents]
L9: [a: Actual refutation]
L9: [b: Refuting the rejoinder]
L9: [3: Showing other reasoning which refutes the composite as a truly existent single unit]
L9: [a: Consequence that everything is a pot if the pot has true existence]
L9: [b: Consequence that the eight substantial particles of the pot are one]
L9: [4: Refuting truly existent production of the pot from its causes]
L9: [5: Refuting truly existent production by virtue of dependence on parts]
L8: [(b) Briefly refuting that though there are many components, the composite is a truly existent single unit]
L5: [2. Refuting truly existent components]
L6: [a. Just as a composite does not exist truly apart from visible form, smell and so forth, there are no truly existent elemental derivatives that do not rely on the elements]
L6: [b. Refuting truly existent elements]
L6: [c. Refuting the rejoinder]
L6: [d. Refuting a fire particle as truly existent fire]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining for singleness or plurality]
L6: [a. Refuting truly existent functional phenomena through the reason of being neither one nor many]
L6: [b. This fallacy equally applies to other sectarians]
L5: [4. Applying reasoning which negates the four possibilities in [all] other cases [, with any duality. ]]
L3: [II. Showing the cause for mistaking functional things as permanent and truly existent]
L3: [III. Briefly showing the reasoning that establishes absence of true existence]
L3: [IV. Showing the need to understand absence of true existence]
L4: [A. Inherently existent dependent arising is not seen by the Exalted]
L4: [B. Release from worldly existence is gained through understanding emptiness]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L2: [CHAPTER 15 - REFUTING TRULY EXISTENT CHARACTERISTICS [OF PRODUCTS] - PRODUCTION / ORIGINATION, DURATION, CESSATION - P. 277]
L3: [I. Extensively establishing dependent arising which are not inherently produced as existing in the manner of a magicians's illusions]
L4: [A. Specific refutation of inherent production]
L5: [1. Extensive explanation]
L6: [a. Refutation by examining whether that which exists or does not exist is produced] L7: [(1) Reason refuting production of that which exists or does not exist]
L7: [(2) Establishing its mode [of operation]]
L7: [(3) Refutation by examining the time of production]
L7: [(4) Refutation by examining the thing itself and another thing]
L6: [b. Refutation by examining the beginning, middle and end]
L6: [c. Refutation by examining both self and other]
L6: [d. Refutation by examining sequentiality and simultaneity]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Refuting proof of inherent production]
L6: [e. Refutation by examining the three times]
L5: [2. Summarized meaning: showing the effects of refuting production]
L4: [B. General refutation of inherently existent production, duration and disintegration]
6 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [1. Refutation of inherently existent characteristics by examining sequentiality and simultaneity] L5: [2. Refutation through the consequence of infinite regress of the characteristics]
L5: [3. Refutation by examining whether they are one or different]
L5: [4. Refutation by examining whether they are existent or non-existent by way of their own entity] L6: [a. Refuting that production is truly existent because there are truly existent producing causes] L6: [b. Production and so forth are neither truly existent things nor non-things]
L4: [C. Refuting that what is in the process of being produced is being produced inherently] L5: [1. Brief explanation]
L5: [2. Extensive explanation]
L6: [a. Refutation by examining that which is in the process of being produced]
L6: [b. Refuting the assertion that a thing existing between past and future is that which is in the process of being produced]
L6: [c. Refuting the assertion that a thing before it is produced is what is in the process of being produced]
L6: [d. Refuting the assertion that the unproduced is what is in the process of being produced]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Refuting the justification]
L7: [(3) Necessity of accepting that the unproduced is being produced, if that which is in the process of being produced is produced by way of its own entity]
L5: [3. Summarized meaning]
L3: [II. Concluding summary of the refutations of inherent existence [of production / origination, duration, cessation] ] L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L1: [SECTION II - B : SHOWING HOW TO MEDITATE ON SETTLING [THE PROCEDURE BETWEEN] SPIRITUAL GUIDES AND STUDENTS BY WAY OF [EXPLAINING] THE PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTERS AND ELIMINATING REMAINING COUNTER-ARGUMENTS BY MISGUIDED OPPONENTS. ]
L2: [CHAPTER 16 - REFUTING REMAINING COUNTER-ARGUMENTS - THE DHARMA DOOR OF NON- DUALITY AND THE IRREFUTABILITY OF THE MIDDLE WAY - P. 289]
L3: [I. Briefly explaining the purpose of writing these chapters]
L3: [II. Eliminating remaining counter-arguments raised by misguided opponents]
L4: [A. Refuting reasoning to negate emptiness]
L5: [1. Impossibility of refuting the thesis of emptiness]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Refutation by virtue of parity]
L5: [2. Impossibility of proving the thesis of non-emptiness]
L6: [a. Actual meaning]
L6: [b. Refuting the justification]
L5: [3. Refuting other reasoning]
L6: [a. Invalidity of negating emptiness of true existence by reason of direct perception]
L6: [b. Since emptiness exists, its opposite, true existence, is not feasible]
L4: [B. Refuting adherence to theses which fall into extremes]
L5: [1. Actual refutation - [the dharma door of non-duality]]
L6: [a. Refuting that the non-thesis is a thesis]
L6: [b. Refuting proof that there are truly existent things]
L7: [(1) It is not feasible that there is true existence on the grounds that specific functional things are truly existent] L7: [(2) Refuting the four extremes by reasoning]
L7: [(3) Not even the smallest particle of true existence can be observed]
L6: [c. Showing that everything is equally free from extremes]
L7: [(1) Actual meaning]
L7: [(2) Inappropriateness of asserting differentiation of truly existent and not truly existent with regard to any phenomenon]
L5: [2. Refuting the justification]
L6: [a. Appropriateness of accepting the thesis of emptiness of true existence]
L6: [b. Difficulty of finding a thesis refuting emptiness of true existence]
L4: [C. Showing parity of reasoning with regard to true existence or lack of true existence]
L5: [1. Both emptiness of true existence and true existence are either equally established or not established merely by words]
L5: [2. Mere designation as truly existent will not make it so]
7 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [3. If there were true existence because ordinary people use the verbal convention that things are truly existent, then being conventionally existent they could not exist as their own suchness]
L4: [D. Refuting non-existence as the thesis]
L5: [1. Refuting that negation of truly existent things makes things utterly non-existent]
L5: [2. As there are no truly existent things that which is non-functional cannot be truly existent either]
L4: [E. Refuting that things are not empty because analogies and reasons to establish emptiness exist]
L5: [1. Showing the invalidity in the form of absurd consequences [of asserting that] there is true existence because there are reasons]
L5: [2. Showing the invalidity in the form of absurd consequences [of asserting that] things are not empty because there are analogies]
L4: [F. Explaining the purpose of teaching emptiness]
L4: [G. Showing that conceptions of extremes of existence are erroneous]
L4: [H. Impossibility of refuting through reasoning that which is free from extremes]
L3: [The summarizing stanza:]
L1: [THE COLOPHON - P. 301]
L1: [DEDICATION]
L1: [NOTES]
L1: [ABBREVIATIONS]
L1: [MY RE? SUME? S]
L2: [RE? SUME? OF ALL CHAPTERS TOGETHER]
L2: [RE? SUME? OF EACH CHAPTER]
L3: [PART I - Explaining the Stages of the Paths dependent on CONVENTIONAL TRUTHS (accumulation of merit)] L4: [SECTION I - A : Showing how the aspiring altruistic intention is generated after training in the attitudes of a person of intermediate capacity by explaining elimination of the four errors. ]
L4: [SECTION I - B : Explaining how to train in the deeds, having generated the practical altruistic intention. ]
L3: [PART II - Explaining the stages of the paths dependent on ULTIMATE TRUTH (accumulation of wisdom)]
L4: [SECTION II - A - Extensively explaining ultimate truth. ]
L4: [SECTION II - B - Showing how to meditate on settling [the procedure between] spiritual guides and students by way of [explaining] the purpose of the CHAPTERs and eliminating remaining counter-arguments by misguided opponents. ]
L2: [RE? SUME? TABLE:]
8 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
.
L1: [Part II - Explaining the stages of the paths dependent on ultimate truth (accumulation of wisdom)] .
-- SECTION A : Extensively explaining ultimate truth
-- SECTION B : Showing how to meditate on settling [the procedure between] spiritual guides and students by way of [explaining] the purpose of the chapters and eliminating remaining counter-arguments by misguided opponents.
.
[GENERAL REFUTATION OF TRUE EXISTENCE ]
.
By cleansing the mind stream with the flowing water of means by which to understand suchness, the previous chapters have made it a vessel fit for the nectar of suchness. The remaining chapters will explain how products which arise and disintegrate do not have even the slightest essence of inherent existence.
.
(i. e. They are like figures seen in clouds, like swirls at the surface of the ocean. All merely imputed by the mind, but not from the mind only. Not existent, not non-existent, not both, not neither. All equal and pure in emptiness; non-dual: not two, not one. )
.
L1: [Section II - A : Extensively explaining ultimate truth]
.
-- Chapter 9 - Refuting Permanent Functional Phenomena - Everything is both cause and effect, whole and part, merely imputed by the mind - the Middle Way in causality: no absolute causality / path, no absence of causality - P. 203
-- Chapter 10 - Refuting Misconceptions of the Self - There is nothing permanent that is having rebirths, or is being Liberated - P. 215
-- Chapter 11 - Refuting Truly Existent Time - There is no truly existing absolute time, duration or impermanence - P. 227
-- Chapter 12 - Refuting Wrong Views - We need a gradual path combining virtuous methods and wisdom. There is no final view to arrive to - P. 239
-- Chapter 13 - Refuting Truly Existent Sense Organs and Objects - Refuting direct objective perception of an external reality independent of the mind and karma. Everyting is like an illusion - P.
251
-- Chapter 14 - Refuting Extreme Conceptions [of inherent existence and complete non-existence . . . ] - The perfection of wisdom: non-duality of dependent origination and emptiness - P. 265
-- Chapter 15 - Refuting Truly Existent Characteristics [of products] - Production / origination, duration, cessation - P. 277
.
L2: [Chapter 9 - Refuting Permanent Functional Phenomena -
Everything is both cause and effect, whole and part, merely imputed by the mind -
the Middle Way in causality: no absolute causality / path, no absence of causality - P. 203]
.
(i. e. General refutation of true existence by refuting permanent functional phenomena. .
ASSUMPTION: some things are both functional and permanent, really existing:
-- like permanent without being a cause and an effect: ex. from space to mind
-- or permanent and causal without being an effect: ex. particles.
ANSWER: Everything is both cause and effect, nothing is permanent. )
.
-- ALL PHENOMENA ARE FUNCTIONAL, produces an effect; EVERYTHING IS A CAUSE,
-- without a function it is as non-existent
-- without a function it is not perceptible directly or indirectly
.
-- A CAUSE NECESSARILY IS ALSO AN EFFECT, because all cause are dependent on other conditions.
-- It cannot be a permanently active cause, it needs other conditions to activate it . . .
-- It changes from being non-active, active, then no more active
-- It must have parts, directional and functional; the whole and the parts are not one, not separate
-- It is interdependent with its characteristics; the characterized and the characteristics are not one, not separate -- It is merely imputed by the mind; it is not one with the mind, not separate; concepts are inter-dependent
.
9 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
-- EVERYTHING IS BOTH A CAUSE AND AN EFFECT. There is not limits to this in both direction. -- Because all functional things are in interdependence, everything is impermanent.
-- Cause and effect cannot exist simultaneously; one stops, one starts
-- Cause and effect cannot exist separately
-- Because everything is cause & effect, everything is impermanent
-- Nothing last even a moment, everything is continually changing, a continuous flow of interdependence.
-- So everything is just an illusion, everything is empty of inherent existence.
-- BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS DEPENDENTLY ARISING, EVERYTHING IS EMPTY OF INHERENT EXISTENCE -- It is the mind that puts names on the flow, and then thinks things really exist on their own.
.
-- About liberation & a liberated self
-- Liberation is, like space, a negation, not a functional thing. Otherwise as an effect, it would also be a cause, and there would be no end.
-- No self imputed on the aggregates is liberated, thus no real functional liberation; it is just a concept.
-- There would be no need for consciousness at liberation; and there is no person without consciousness
-- at liberation there is no more seed of consciousness either
-- There no need to speculate about anything after liberation, after the cessation of those illusions
-- There is no other self outside of the aggregates that could be liberated
-- So thinking about liberating a self is a mistake
-- To maintain morality, the belief in a self may be necessary for beginners).
.
L3: [I. Refuting permanent functional phenomena in general ] L4: [A. Actual meaning]
.
\ ###
\ 201.
\ ALL ARE PRODUCED FOR THEIR EFFECT,
\ THUS NONE ARE PERMANENT.
\ There are no Tathagatas other than
\ Subduers [who know] things as they are.
.
(i. e. Everything is a cause and an effect, thus impermanent. First, without being a cause of something / functional, anything would be as if non-existent - not even perceptible by the six senses; and there were be no need to talk about it. So everything produced is a cause / functional.
-- Second, since their causing-action is necessarily triggered and modulated by their own causes and conditions, all causes are also an effect.
-- Beside being dependent on other causes and conditions, and having a triggered beginning for its casing function, there is necessary an end to this causing-action, thus they are all impermanent. )
.
(i. e. All is functional phenomena = causing an effect, and being dependent on other causes & conditions, thus nothing is permanent -- this apply to space, time, mind, self, particles . . . Functional things are by definition the causes of some effects, their functions, and are themselves the results of causes and conditions, because there is no absolute cause producing an absolute result 100% of the time whatever happen. There are always mitigating conditions. Thus functional phenomena are both cause and effect. And they are not permanent, because as effect they cannot be there before the production, and as cause they have to go away after the production otherwise there would be continuous production.
-- This means that the division of the categories of existent phenomena into permanent and functional / impermanent is artificial.
-- Everything is functional / impermanent.
-- There is absolutely nothing permanent.
-- The four types of permanent phenomena (see bellow) are thus not valid: space, analytical cessation, non-analytical cessation, and even suchness.
-- And all functional phenomena -- form, sense organs, objects, consciousness, mind, mental factors, self, karma, concepts . . . -- are all both cause and effect, impermanent, not independent, not self
-- Everything is in dependence, everything is empty of inherent existence
-- So "permanent" and "functional" are contradictory terms. )
.
10 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
-- In the world it is accepted that when a laborer work hard for his wage, it is for the result and not because it is his nature to do so. Similarly all external and internal functional phenomena do not arise of their own accord. Since they are produced solely through a multifarious aggregation of factors consisting of interrelated causes and effects, functional things are produced for their effects. They therefore are not permanent, inherently produced or truly existent. They do not have an essence able to sustain analysis, nor do they exist as things in and of themselves.
Only Subduers, because they have the abilities of perfected body, speech and mind, directly know impermanence, emptiness and all things without exception as they are. Since no one else does, there are no other Tathagatas. Moreover the Teacher said, "Whatever is produced inevitably ceases, for aging and death are conditioned by birth. " Thus, since production is for the sake of disintegration, nothing endures by way of its own entity.
Some refute permanence and true existence by virtue of autonomous reasons. The unfeasibility of this is explained in Candrakirti's commentary. There is no commonly appearing subject, such as a sprout, posited by tenets, in relation to which a direct valid cognition perceiving it is valid, since all except Prasangikas assert that it is valid in relation to a sprout existing by way of its own character. Prasangikas assert this is impossible.
.
L4: [B. Refuting the rejoinder]
.
\ ###
\ 202.
\ There is not anywhere anything
\ That ever exists without depending.
\ Thus never is there anywhere
\ Anything that is permanent.
.
(i. e. There is no exception. All functional things are dependent, an effect, thus impermanent -- dependent on other causes and conditions, on parts, on their characteristics, on the mind conceptualizing them. Thus, all causes are also effects. This applies to all dharmas without any exception at all, including: self, space, cessations, time, particles, liberation . . . even if some are presented as permanent in other adapted skillful teachings. )
.
(-- Some people argues that there are certain phenomena which are both functional and permanent and are neither produced by other factors nor give rise to effects, while others are causes but no effects. It is impossible for anything to be permanent and also a functional thing as is claimed, for whatever arises in dependence upon other factors, i. e. causes and conditions, is not permanent.
-- Vaisesika assertion: Although things that are produced for their effect are not permanent, functional things --
-- from space to the mind, which lack both the feature of being produced and that of being producers;
-- and the smallest particles which, though they are producers, are not produced are permanent and truly existent.
-- Answer: Never, at any time or in any place, is there any chance of finding a functional thing that does not depend on relatedness. Thus never is there anywhere a permanent functional phenomenon. Since whatever exists only exists dependently, it does not have even the slightest existence by way of its own entity. )
.
L3: [II. Refuting them individually (Self, space, cessations, time, particles, liberation. )] L4: [A. Refuting a personal self (a permanent cause without being an effect)]
L5: [1. Actual meaning]
.
\ ###
\ 203.
\ THERE IS NO FUNCTIONAL THING WITHOUT A CAUSE,
\ NOR ANYTHING PERMANENT WHICH HAS A CAUSE.
\ THUS THE ONE WHO KNOWS SUCHNESS SAID WHAT HAS
\ COME ABOUT CAUSELESSLY DOES NOT EXIST.
.
(i. e. The case of the permanent self: There is no absolute cause, primary cause. Nothing is without its own causes and conditions. All cause must be triggered, and do not last, thus have their own causes and conditions, and are impermanent. This applies to the self; the self is not a primary permanent cause of decisions without being an effect, without dependence. There is no absolute free will - nor is it total determinism with no possibility of Liberation. The self is a cause, but also an effect, thus impermanent. All choices and actions issued from the self have their own causes and conditions, but there is a way to transcend it all. )
.
11 / 117
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
(-- A functional thing always has a cause, while that which is permanent never has. It is impossible for a functional thing to be neither cause nor effect, nor for it to be only a cause but not itself an effect as is claimed, since both are contrary to the normal operation of cause and effect. Anything that undergoes a transformation to produce an effect cannot be permanent, nor can a cause and an effect have totally disparate natures such that the one is permanent and the other impermanent.
-- Assertion: Dependently arising phenomena like pleasure and so forth exist, and the self is the cause that attracts them. Thus the self exists and, moreover, is permanent.
-- Answer: There is no personal self since that which has no producing cause is not a functional thing, nor is there anything permanent which has a cause. [Buddha], the one who knows suchness, said phenomena that come into being causelessly do not exist:
~ Phenomena with causes and conditions are known.
~ Phenomena without causes and conditions do not exist. ) .
L5: [2. Refuting the rejoinder]
.
\ ###
\ 204.
\ If the unproduced is permanent
\ Because impermanent [things] are seen to be products,
\ Seeing that the produced exists
\ Would make the permanent non-existent.
.
(i. e. Refuting a proof bases on word association that makes no sense. )
.
(Showing that the following particular method of reasoning gives absurdity when applied to something else:
-- If produced --> impermanent
means that an unproduced self --> is permanent;
-- Then if produced --> exist
would that mean that a permanent / non-produced self --> is non-existent. That is absurd. Thus this proof is invalid.
-- If on seeing that a pot and pleasure are impermanent and produced, one asserts that the self and so forth are by implication permanent, it would follow that because of seeing that a pot and so forth are produced and exist, whatever is permanent like the self should be non-existent like a sky flower. )
.
L4: [B. Refuting three substantial existent uncompounded phenomena
(i. e. three permanent existent phenomena types: space, analytical cessations, non-analytical cessations)] L5: [1. General refutation]
.
\ ###
\ 205.
\ That space and so forth are permanent
\ Is a conception of common beings.
\ For the wise they are not objects perceived
\ Even by conventional [valid cognition].
.
(i. e. The case of space, and the two types of cessations: Space is not a permanent functional thing, it is not a real thing, it is a negation. There is no such things as permanent functional things as proved above. Cessations are also mere negations, the stopping of illusions based on ignorance, not something existing that would be permanent. - Nirvana is the removal of ignorance, or obstructions, like space; it is not a permanent really existing thing. )
.
(-- Assertion: The treatises of knowledge say space, individual analytical cessations, and non-analytical cessations are permanent and substantially existent. Any refutation of this is invalidated by your own assertions.
-- Answer: That is not so. Not understanding the significance of applying the term "space" to a mere absence of obstructive contact and so forth, common people think that uncompounded space and so on are permanent [functional phenomena]. Those who are wise concerning the suchness of functional phenomena, far from thinking they exist ultimately, do not regard permanent functional phenomena even as objects perceived by conventional valid cognition. Only that which does not change is termed permanent. What sutra says is not primarily stated to establish [substantial existence, but to refute the existence of permanent functional things]. )
12 / 117
.
Aryadeva - The Treatise of the Four Hundred Stanzas on the Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas [3. 2]
L5: [2. Specifically refuting permanent omnipresent space (a permanent thing without being a cause or an effect)]
.
\ ###
\ 206.
\ A single direction is not present
\ Wherever there is that which has direction.
\ That with directions therefore clearly
\ Also has other directional parts.
.
(i. e. Space is not absolute, permanent, since in depends on directional parts: Some think that space is a real permanent functional thing, not an effect - inherently existing. But a real permanent thing existing on its own would not be dependent on its parts. Since space obviously can be decomposed into parts and directions, and cannot be defined without talking about objects, movement, directions, . . . it is not an independently existing thing - inherently existing. There is no absolute referential; it is always relative. Space is an effect dependent on the mind conceiving it. Space and objects, like Nirvana and samsara, are co-dependently arisen concepts, forming an apparent duality that needs to be transcended . . . seen through. )
.
(-- Assertion: Space is permanent because it is omnipresent. Whatever is impermanent like a pot is not omnipresent.
-- Answer: The following (the four lines) refutes permanence by refuting omnipresence.
