Sutra of Queen Śrīmālā Commentary (勝鬘經義記)

Now I will explain the "Four Wisdoms" more fully. There are two parts: First, to clarify that the Two Vehicles do not attain the Four Wisdoms; second, to clarify that the Tathāgata attains them when it comes to the cessation of all suffering. Someone might ask: "Since the purpose here is to show that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas have fear, we should only explain that those two do not attain them. Why is it necessary to also say that the Tathāgata attains them?" The explanation has two aspects: First, to use the Tathāgata as a contrast to the Two Vehicles, making their non-attainment clear; second, to indicate the place that the Two Vehicles have entered, thus it is necessary to discuss this. In the previous *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*, it first explains the Buddha's attainment, then explains that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas do not attain it. Here, it first explains that the Two Vehicles do not attain it, then explains that the Buddha attains it. The order of the text is reversed.

Regarding the explanation of why the Two Vehicles do not attain it, it first clarifies that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas do not attain it; then, under the point "bodhisattvas in their final body are still covered by the stage of ignorance," it explains the reason why they do not attain the Four Wisdoms, because they have not accomplished all virtues. In the previous *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*, it first explains the reason the Two Vehicles do not attain it, then states that they do not attain it. In the current explanation of the Four Wisdoms, it first explains the hindrance and non-attainment, then explains the reason the Two Vehicles do not attain it. This arrangement is also complete, just the text's order is reversed.

Within the first part (on non-attainment), there is a general and a specific explanation. Initially, "the teaching of expedient means with remainder, which is not the ultimate meaning," is the general part; the rest is the specific explanation. In the general part, first comes the quotation of the previous statement, then under "The Tathāgata's former words," it refutes this. Regarding the former statement: The Tathāgata formerly said that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas are wise people. They observe liberation and the perfection of the Four Wisdoms as the characteristics of the Four Wisdoms. The noble wisdom of the adept (aśaikṣa) is liberation, and liberation is the very essence of the Four Wisdoms. When Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas emerge from meditative concentration and enter the state of existence, they observe that liberation and develop thoughts of the perfection of the Four Wisdoms. This is called "observing liberation as the perfection of the Four Wisdoms." The time of this perfection is called the place of rest. They have transcended the death of discrete segments, therefore it is called "rest." They no longer come and go within the six realms, therefore it is called "cessation." The text then clarifies this. "It is also the Tathāgata's expedient teaching with a remainder, which is not the ultimate meaning." This is similar to what was said in the *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*, therefore it says "it is also" an expedient teaching leading to attainment. A commentary says: Expedient means to say they can attain it, but in reality they cannot. Therefore it is called "a teaching of expedient means with remainder, which is not the ultimate meaning."

Regarding the subsequent specific explanation, it begins with "Why is this?" (科上, this is a quotation), taking up the previous statement and introducing the next one. "If the Tathāgata formerly said this is ultimate, why do I now say it is an expedient teaching with a remainder, which is not the ultimate meaning?" Under "there are two kinds of death," it provides an explanation in reply. Within this, it first clarifies "My births have been exhausted," this is the expedient aspect; under "Having attained what remains," it clarifies based on the establishment of the pure practice (brahmacarya), explaining its expedient nature; under "As for ordinary people," it clarifies based on what has been done (kṛtya-kṛtya), explaining its expedient nature; under "The defilements that are cut off cannot be... further," it clarifies based on "no more future existence" (aparapratisaṃdhi), explaining its expedient nature.

Regarding the first expedient explanation with a remainder under "My births have been exhausted," it first clarifies the two kinds of death, and then uses them to reveal the former expedient teaching. In clarifying the two kinds of death, it first states the two categories, "There are also two kinds of births," but here it only speaks of death. Then it separately names them, first asking a question then listing them. The meanings of these two categories are vast, and their explanation of death is a different chapter. This should be fully discussed, but for now we will explain their names. The death of discrete segments (pṛthag-death): The results of actions in the six realms differ across the three times; this is called "discrete segments." Complete destruction is called "death," therefore it is called "death of discrete segments." The death of transformation (pariṇāma-death) is generally explained in three ways:

1. Subtle arising and ceasing, the preceding transforms and the later changes; this is called "transformation." Transformation itself is death, called "death of transformation." For this reason, in the *Bodhisattva-bhūmi* (Sūtra on the Stages), the suffering of arising, change, and cessation is called the suffering of transformation. This meaning pervades both ordinary beings and noble ones. 2. The Dharmakāya attained through the unconditioned wisdom that illuminates conditions, where spiritual transformation is free and effortless, capable of transforming and changing; therefore it is called "transformation." Its nature is subject to death, so it is called "death of transformation." This meaning exists for noble ones but not for ordinary beings. 3. The Dharmakāya of true realization (truth-realization Dharmakāya), which is freely hidden and manifest, is called "transformation." Transformation itself is not death, but this transformation is still accompanied by the death-nature of impermanence. Based on this dharmakāya of transformation, birth and death are discussed, called "death of transformation." This meaning exists for the Greater Vehicle but not for the Lesser.

The current discussion is based on the second meaning, stating that the noble ones' stainless (anāsrava) Dharmakāya is subject to birth and death, therefore it is called "inconceivable" (acintya). The text then clarifies it based on beings. "Death of discrete segments" takes up the first meaning. Under "these are false and unreal," it defines it based on persons. In the Lesser Vehicle, this refers to ordinary beings and learners. In the Greater Vehicle, this refers to ordinary beings of the external level and those of wholesome inclinations. These all receive birth in the three realms based on false love, therefore they are called "false and unreal." The birth and death that these false and unreal beings undergo is called "death of discrete segments." "Death of transformation" takes up the latter meaning. Under "said to be Arhats, etc.," it defines it based on persons. The distinction between Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas can be understood. Who are the "powerful ones"? They are the bodhisattvas of the lineage and the path of practice (āgatā-gocara). What meaning do they have? They have not completely cut off the two types of defilements (afflictions and knowledge-obsessions), but they are not dragged by those defilements. Moreover, they are free to be born in the three realms. Therefore they are called "powerful ones."

Question: The *Nirvāṇa Sūtra* declares that the stage before the bhūmis (dāśabhūmi) is that of ordinary beings possessing the nature of defilement. How can they be deemed equal to Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas in terms of death of transformation? Explanation: Although they have partly cut off the birth and death of the six realms without reaching completion, they are declared ordinary. Among the five stages (pañca-vastuka) of delusion, they have not fully exhausted any, so they are described as possessing defilement. But if they are compared to the Two Vehicles, they are great sages with pure two hindrances (vāsanā). Why doubt their death of transformation?

Question: The *Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-upadeśa* (Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra) declares that the stage before the bhūmis is subject to discrete segment birth. How does this sūtra say they are subject to death of transformation? Explanation: Before the bhūmis, there are five types of bodies: 1. The Dharmakāya of nature (prakṛti-dharmakāya), of the lineage-stage (gotra) and the pure practitioner of the path. 2. The Vipāka-kāya (resultant body) of the training-stage (śikṣā) and preparatory practices. 3. The Nirmāṇa-kāya (transformation body) manifested to beings based on the previous two. 4. The birth-death-transformation Dharmakāya, the resultant realm (viṣaya) of unconditioned wisdom like a mirror. 5. The discrete segment body, the tainted (sāsrava) resultant realm without beginning. Among these five, the first three are not subject to birth and death, the last two are. The Lotus Commentary declares the discrete segment body based on the fifth, while this sūtra declares the death of transformation based on the fourth. There is no contradiction.

"What is the physically-formed body of will?" This refers to all bodhisattvas from the first bhūmi onward. Their birth is unobstructed, self-determined, like mind or will. Therefore it is called "body of will." What is the meaning of will? Will has three meanings: swiftness, reaching everywhere, and unobstructedness. The birth of bodhisattvas on the bhūmis is like this. This continues until the attainment of supreme enlightenment, clarifying its extent.

Having established the two kinds of death above, the text now clarifies the expedient teaching based on these two deaths. Among the two kinds of death, because the practitioners of the Two Vehicles have cut off discrete segment death, the Tathāgata says of them "My births have been exhausted." Therefore, this is an expedient teaching.

Next, concerning the establishment of pure practice (brahmacarya) to clarify the expedient teaching: "Pure practice has been established" refers to the wisdom of realizing cessations (nirodha). Cessation has two types: "With remainder" (sopadhiśeṣa) and "without remainder" (nirupadhiśeṣa). The end of discrete segment death is called "cessation with remainder." The end of death of transformation is called "cessation without remainder." The Two Vehicles only attain the end of discrete segment death, called "attainment with remainder." Based on this, the Tathāgata says their "pure practice is established." Therefore, this is an expedient teaching.

Next, regarding the accomplishment of what is to be done (kṛtya-kṛtya) to clarify the expedient teaching: "What has to be done has been accomplished" refers to the wisdom of cultivating the path (mārga). The path has two types: One is the antidote to discrete segments, the other is the antidote to transformation. The Two Vehicles only begin to cultivate the antidote to discrete segments. Based on this, the Tathāgata says they have "accomplished what has to be done." Therefore, this is an expedient teaching.

The text contains two sentences: first, comparing with persons to reveal the former expedient teaching; second, comparing with hindrances to reveal the former expedient teaching. "Ordinary people do not accomplish, the seven types of learners have not done what is to be done." This is the comparison with persons. Ordinary people are unable to accomplish the noble path of the adept (ahu, aśaikṣa). Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, compared to them, are said to have "accomplished what is to be done." Not seeing from the Greater Vehicle perspective, therefore it is an expedient teaching. The seven types of learners have not been able to undertake the noble path of the adept. Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, compared to them, are said to have "done what is to be done." Not seeing from the Greater Vehicle perspective, therefore it is an expedient teaching. The seven types of learners refer to the three fruits and four prefatory states (śrota-āpanna, etc.). Looking back from the fruit, they are the ones who precede. If they previously did not do what is to be done, how do they now do it? Explanation: The seven types of learners currently still have not done what belongs to the adept. As for the current Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, what was previously not done by them as learners, they have now done. Having now done it completely, they are called adept.

Question: Among ordinary people and the seven types of learners, none can do or accomplish the adept's fruit. Why does it specifically say "ordinary people do not accomplish" and "the seven types of learners have not done what is to be done (kṛtya-kṛtya)"? It is a matter of revealing and concealing. If it is revealing and concealing, why not say "ordinary people have not done" and "Learners do not accomplish"? Explanation: If we only say "ordinary people do not accomplish," it is understood that they have also not done what is to be done. If we say that the seven types of learners "do not accomplish," it might be mistakenly thought that they can do what is to be done for the adept. To prevent this doubt, it is not said that the seven types of learners do not accomplish.

Under "These false and unreal..." is the second sentence, revealing the expedient teaching by comparing with hindrances. All defilements (kleśas) are false and unreal. Among them, the false love that receives birth represents the extreme of falseness, so it is particularly called "false and unreal." The Tathāgata says that the noble path cultivated can cut off such false defilements, therefore he says it has "accomplished what is to be done." Not seeing from the perspective of ignorance (avidyā), therefore it is an expedient teaching.

Next, concerning "no more future existence" (aparapratisaṃdhi) to clarify the expedient teaching with a remainder that is not the ultimate meaning. "No more future existence" is the wisdom of ceasing actions (samudaya). Actions have two kinds: the cause of discrete segments and the cause of transformation. Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas cut off the cause of discrete segments; the remaining cause is not cut off. The Tathāgata, based only on the cutting off of discrete segment causes, says they are "no more future existence." Therefore, it is an expedient teaching.

The text first says "The defilements that are cut off, no more future existence, are called no more future existence." The hindrance of the former expedient teaching, under "This is not the ultimate meaning," reveals the current meaning of having a remainder and not being the ultimate teaching. Following the same pattern, all should equally clarify the expedient teaching with a remainder. But because the earlier part was brief, it is necessary to clarify the expedient nature, without explicitly mentioning the meaning of having a remainder and not being ultimate.

In clarifying the expedient nature, it says the defilements cut off by Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas are "no more future existence." What is cut off are the four stations (catu-saṃjāti), which are utterly annihilated, and there is no future existence in the discrete segment body. Based on this, the Tathāgata says they have attained "no more future existence."

In the following clarification of the meaning of having a remainder and not being ultimate, it first opens two doors, then extensively explains. The two doors are: "Not having completely exhausted the defilements" is the first door: not having cut off the body of actions (samudaya). "Not having completely exhausted birth" is the second door: not having cut off the potential of actions (samudaya). In the extensive explanation, it asks: "Why is this?" Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas have destroyed the two types of defilements (afflictions and knowledge-obsessions) and their births within the three realms are exhausted. Why now say they have not completely exhausted the defilements and not completely exhausted birth?

Under "There are defilements...", it provides an explanation in reply. It first clarifies "not having completely exhausted all defilements"; then under "Furthermore, as it is explained...", it extensively clarifies that they have not completely exhausted all births. In the earlier part on not having completely exhausted all defilements, it says "There are defilements that Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas have not cut off." This briefly indicates not having completely exhausted all defilements. Under "There are two kinds...", it extensively clarifies not having completely exhausted all defilements. Within this, it first clarifies all defilements. Under "What Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas have not cut off...", it reveals their non-exhaustion. In the former part, we should first explain the meaning of the five stages (pañca-vastuka) of defilements, then explain the text. The meaning of the five stages is broad, as in a different chapter. The text has three parts: first, it separately clarifies the four stations (catu-samudaya-saṃjāti); second, under "The mind's non-corresponding dharmas (viprayukta-saṃskāra) without beginning...", it separately clarifies ignorance (avidyā); third, under "These four forces...", it relates and differentiates the four stations and ignorance.

In the former part on the four stations, "ground" (bhūmi) and "arising" (udaya) are related and differentiated. "Defilements have two..." is a general statement. Then it lists the two names, first asking then listing. "Ground-stations (vāsanā-bhūmi) are the essence of the four stations." "And what arises" are what arises from the four stations. What are these? Generally explained in four ways:

1. Distinction between nature (prakṛti) and events (vastu). In the consciousness of past events, the defilement that grasps nature is called "defilement of nature," called ground-stations. The rest, such as views (dṛṣṭi) and feelings (vedanā) that arise from engaging with objects, are called "defilements of events," known as "arising." This grasping of nature is called "grasping signs" in the Awakening of Faith, also called "defilement of sign-grasping." The rest, views and desires, are called "counting names," seeking self through names and generating knots. 2. Distinction between root (mūla) and branch (śākha). Among the preceding events, "the ten errant views (dṛṣṭi)" are the ground-stations. The remainder "knots and defilements" are the arising. 3. Distinction between condition (pratyaya) and efficacy. All defilements based on past habit-nature are equally called "ground-stations." Those that arise based on conditions are called "arising." 4. Distinction between past and present. All defilements that precede and cause later ones are via their names as "ground-stations." Those that arise based on preceding ones are likewise named via previous ones.

The text explains their characteristics, first explaining the essence of "ground-stations." "Ground-stations are four..." takes up the number. Then lists their names, first asking then listing. "Seen in one place" refers to the five sharp errant views

The first five chapters clarify the practice of the One Vehicle; the next eight chapters clarify the principle of the One Vehicle. This principle is the nature of the Tathāgata-garbha (the Buddha-nature). Within these eight, the first three indicate the essence of the Garbha, and the later five explain its meaning.

Regarding the first three: The first explains the Holy Truth. The Truth is the expression of the Garbha, so it is addressed first. The second chapter explains the Garbha itself. The Garbha is the true reality of the Truth, so it is discussed next. The third chapter clarifies the Dharmakāya (the Dharma-body) to reveal the essence of the Garbha. How does it reveal the Garbha? The principle of the Garbha is hidden, while the Dharmakāya manifests with attributes. What is hidden is difficult to understand; what manifests with attributes is easy to see. Therefore, by presenting the Dharmakāya, which is free from defilement and beyond all attributes, the hidden and hard-to-grasp Garbha is revealed. Hence the later text says: "Such a Dharmakāya, not separate from afflictions, is called the Tathāgata-garbha."

In the later five chapters, the meaning of emptiness, which conceals and covers, explains the "container" (the Garbha that contains the true nature). Because emptiness conceals reality, it is called a "garbha" (a store/womb). "One truth, one support" explains what is contained. "One truth" is the essence of the Garbha; "one support" is its function. The essence is truly equal, hence "one truth." The function involves purity and impurity, and when impurity arises, it relies on this support, hence "one support." "Delusion and reality" explains the earlier meaning of emptiness. Since the essence of the Garbha is pure, how can emptiness arise to conceal it? This is explained later: Because of the interplay of delusion and reality, there is a self-nature that is pure. This further explains the previous "one truth, one support." If the essence is pure, it should not be defiled. Yet if it relies on conditions and becomes defiled, then its essence would seem impure. The text later explains: The mind and afflictions do not mix, so the essence is always pure. However, because it is stained by adventitious afflictions, it becomes defiled. This principle — pure yet defiled, defiled yet not truly defiled — is difficult to understand. So we defer to the Tathāgata, and the Tathāgata then praises this understanding.

In the first three chapters, there are two explanations. The first is a brief explanation. In the sections beginning with "On the Tathāgata's inconceivable realm" and "On skillful means," he sets aside provisional teachings to reveal the ultimate truth, pointing directly to the Dharma-body. In this first brief explanation, the Holy Truth is addressed first. From the section beginning with "The Holy Truth speaks of profound meaning," the Tathāgata-garbha is explained. From the section "If within countless affliction-stores," the Dharmakāya is clarified.

For the first chapter, it is explained in four parts.

First: Explaining the chapter title. This chapter is named "The Unlimited Holy Truth." Suffering, Accumulation, Cessation, and the Path — being true and real, are called "Truths." "Holy" refers to the Buddhas. Because the Truth is explained from the perspective of the Holy Ones, it is called "Holy Truth." Truths can be limited or unlimited. Limited and restricted are called "having a limit"; unlimited and vast are called "unlimited."

Second: Explaining the reason for this chapter. Why must it be explained? The answer: The One Vehicle is accomplished by understanding suffering, cutting off its cause, realizing cessation, and cultivating the path. Therefore, the Four Holy Truths are explained. Furthermore, the One Vehicle is accomplished through the Garbha, and the Truth is the expression of the Garbha, so the Truth must be clarified.

Third: Explaining why Queen Śrīmālā speaks spontaneously, without being asked or told. In the previous chapter on "Receiving the Dharma," she spoke by relying on the Buddha's power. In the chapter on the "One Vehicle," the Buddha told her to speak. Why is it different now? The answer: At the start of the previous One Vehicle chapter, the Buddha commanded her to speak on the "Dharma correctly received, as taught by the Buddhas." The previous topic (One Vehicle) is what the Buddha receives; the subsequent topics are the correct Dharma. Since the Buddha had already made that pronouncement, from this point on, she speaks on her own initiative.

Fourth: Explaining the text. One should first understand the meaning of the Four Truths, then interpret the text. The meaning is as explained in other chapters. The text has two parts: First, it clarifies the Holy Wisdom. Second, from "Holy meaning," it uses wisdom to explain the "Holy" and the "Truth." Question: Why not directly explain the Holy Truth, but first speak of wisdom? Answer: Only one with wisdom can be called "Holy"; what wisdom knows is then a "Truth." Regarding the clarification of wisdom, it is divided according to the person: the wisdom of the Tathāgata and the wisdom of the Two Vehicles. Why speak of the wisdom of the Two Vehicles here, when the aim is to use the Tathāgata's wisdom to clarify the Unlimited Truth? Answer: The small is mentioned to highlight the great, and also to distinguish the small from the great in order to embrace the great. The text has eight lines, forming four pairs of distinctions.

First pair: Distinguished by the Truth. Second pair: Distinguished by the principle. Third pair: Distinguished by the obstacles. Fourth pair: Distinguished by the result.

For the first pair: It first clarifies the wisdom of the Two Vehicles in observing the Truth — this is called "initial" but not "supreme." Then it clarifies the Buddha's wisdom — this is "supreme" but not "initial." In clarifying the Two Vehicles: Hearers and Solitary Realizers initially observe the Holy Truth. This is a general statement. Compared to the Tathāgata's "unconditioned" observation of the Truth, theirs is called "initial." Question: Solitary Realizers observe the twelve links of dependent origination; why are they said to observe the Truth here? Answer: The conditions observed by Solitary Realizers are included within Suffering and Accumulation, so they are observing the Truth. Also, Solitary Realizers, with respect to the twelve links, practice the forty-four wisdoms, which are themselves a contemplation of the Four Truths, so they are said to observe the Truth. (The forty-four wisdoms: the twelve links produce eleven pairs sequentially; for each link, one observes the four truths from that perspective, totaling forty-four.) "With one wisdom" etc. clarify the meaning of "initial." There are three points:

1. "One wisdom cuts off the grounds" means the Two Vehicles use only the first conditioned wisdom of the Truth to cut off the four abodes of defilement, and do not use the unconditioned wisdom to cut off the abode of ignorance. Hence it is called "initial." 2. "One wisdom into four" means the Two Vehicles, solely within the first conditioned wisdom, distinguish four knowledges, not within the unconditioned. Hence it is "initial." (Opening one conditioned wisdom into four: "Cutting off" is cutting off Accumulation. "Knowing" is knowing Suffering. "Merit" is cultivating the Path. "Realizing" is realizing Cessation.) In other texts, the fruit precedes the cause; here, following the order of contemplation, the cause precedes the fruit. 3. "Also skillfully" means the Two Vehicles use only the first conditioned wisdom to know the Four Truths individually, and do not use the unconditioned wisdom to perceive the Truth-principle as a whole. Hence "initial." The previous "one wisdom" cut their own Accumulation and realized their own Cessation; now, with one and the same wisdom, they also know the Four True Realities. "Individually," not holistically, hence "skillfully know the meaning of the four dharmas."

In clarifying the Buddha's wisdom: The text says, "There is no supreme worldly wisdom, gradual attainment of four wisdoms, gradual attainment of four conditions." This is an inverted sentence. The correct meaning is: The supremely supra-mundane wisdom has no gradual attainment of four wisdoms or four conditions. The phrase "There is no" is placed at the beginning, affecting the whole sentence. The Bodhisattva's wisdom is supra-mundane; the Buddha's wisdom surpasses that, hence called "supremely supreme." The Tathāgata holistically perceives the principle of the Four Truths. Because of this holistic perception, his ability to perceive has no gradual attainment of four wisdoms, and what is perceived has no gradual attainment of four conditions. The final "no gradual attainment" clarifies that non-gradual wisdom alone is "supreme," due to its deep holistic contemplation.

Second pair: For convenience of speech, the Buddha's wisdom is explained first as the "supreme meaning," followed by the Two Vehicles' wisdom as not so. In clarifying the Buddha's wisdom: The "Diamond Simile" is the supreme meaning, illustrating the essence through its function. Like a diamond in the world, it can destroy all things; similarly, the Buddha's wisdom can destroy all knots of defilement. Such a simile is called the "Diamond Simile." This wisdom can extinguish ignorance and see the supreme meaning, hence it is called the "Wisdom of the Supreme Meaning." In clarifying the Two Vehicles: The text says, "It is not that Hearers and Solitary Realizers do not cut off ignorance; their initial Holy Truth wisdom is the supreme." This is an inverted sentence. The correct meaning is: Hearers and Solitary Realizers do not cut off ignorance, so their initial Holy Truth wisdom is not the Wisdom of the Supreme Meaning. The "not" is placed at the beginning. The initial contemplation of the Two Vehicles does not eliminate ignorance; ignorance covers the mind, preventing them from seeing the truth. Hence it is not the Wisdom of the Supreme Meaning.

Third pair: For convenience of speech, the incomplete cutting off of obstacles by the Two Vehicles is explained first, then the complete cutting off by the Buddha. In clarifying the Two Vehicles: "They cut off the grounds with no second wisdom" means the Two Vehicles, using only the first conditioned wisdom, cut off the four abodes, but because they lack the second unconditioned wisdom, they do not eliminate ignorance. In clarifying the Buddha's completeness: "The Tathāgata, the Equal Enlightenment" is the subject. "It is not within the domain of Hearers and Solitary Realizers" clarifies the nature of this wisdom, contrasting the inferior. "Unthinkable Emptiness Wisdom" precisely names the essence of this wisdom. "Cuts off all" means it can completely eliminate all obstacles. All five abodes are destroyed, hence "cuts off all."

Fourth pair: Following the previous convenience in speech, first the completeness of the Tathāgata's result is explained, then the incompleteness of the Two Vehicles' result. In clarifying the Buddha's wisdom: "Destroys all afflictions" summarizes the preceding and following. "Ultimate wisdom" precisely describes its characteristic. "This is called the first" concludes in relation to the realm. In clarifying the Two Vehicles: "Initial Holy Truth wisdom" notes the wisdom of the Two Vehicles. "Is not ultimate" describes its characteristic. "Directed toward enlightenment" highlights its incompleteness.

Now, following the explanation of the Holy Wisdom, we use this wisdom to clarify the "Holy" and the "Truth." This section has two parts. First, it clarifies that the "Holy" and the "Truth" are not found in the Two Vehicles. Second, from "This Truth," it clarifies that the "Holy" and the "Truth" are found only in the Tathāgata.

In the first part: First, the "Holy" is not in the Two Vehicles. Then, the "Holy Truth" is not a truth of the Two Vehicles. For the first point: The phrase "The meaning of Holy" is a general statement referring to the ultimate great Holy meaning. The text says, "It is not for all Hearers and Solitary Realizers," which is a statement of truth. The ultimate great Holy One is not in the Two Vehicles, hence it is said "not." The text then says, "Hearers and Solitary Realizers, who have attained a limited, partial merit, are also called Holy." This is a flexible, accommodating statement. It prevents a potential objection: If they are not Holy, then why did the Buddha previously call them Holy? The explanation is: Because they have attained a limited, partial merit, they are called Holy. But this mere title of Holy, based on limited merit, means they are not the Great Holy in the ultimate sense. "Limited" is shallow; "partial" is narrow.

Regarding the Truth not being in the Two Vehicles: "The Holy Truth" here refers to the unconditioned truth. "Is not the truth of Hearers and Solitary Realizers" means the object is not part of their Dharma. "Nor is it the merit of Hearers and Solitary Realizers" means the wisdom that perceives it is not their merit.

Following this, for the Buddha: By analogy with the previous structure, it should first state that the Holy is the Buddha, then that the Holy Truth is the Tathāgata's Truth. However, this text slightly omits the first clause and only clarifies that the Truth is the Tathāgata's Truth. There are three points:

1. "This Truth is what the Tathāgata initially awakened to." This shows that the unconditioned truth is what the Buddha realized. Mentioning "the Buddha's initial awakening" immediately reveals that the Two Vehicles originally never awakened to it. 2. "For the eggshell of ignorance," etc., shows that this unconditioned truth is what the Buddha taught. This reveals its difference from the conditioned truth. How is it different? There are two kinds of "eggshells": one is the four abodes of defilement; the other is ignorance. The afflictions of the four abodes cover sentient beings like an eggshell, called the "four-abode eggshell." Ignorance covers them like an eggshell, called the "ignorance eggshell." The beings thus covered are called "the worldly." The conditioned Four Truths were taught by the Tathāgata for the beings in the eggshell of the four abodes. The unconditioned Four Truths were taught by the Tathāgata for the beings in the eggshell of ignorance. Stating that [this text] is "taught for those in the eggshell of ignorance" immediately shows its difference from the conditioned truth. 3. "Therefore, it is concluded" — because this truth is perceived and taught by the Great Holy Buddha, it is called the Holy Truth.

**Next, the second part explains the concept of the Tathagatagarbha (the Womb of the Thus-Come One), which is clarified through three points. First, the title. This chapter is called the "Tathagatagarbha Chapter." The true consciousness encompasses the entire realm of reality and countless teachings, hence it is called a "womb" or "storehouse." Furthermore, because it is concealed by ignorance, it is also called a "storehouse." The Dharma Body (the ultimate reality) of the Thus-Come One exists within this storehouse, which is why it is named the "Womb of the Thus-Come One." Additionally, because the Thus-Come One is born from this storehouse, it is also called the "Womb of the Thus-Come One."

**Second, the purpose of the chapter. Why must this be discussed? The Mahayana path is established based on this storehouse; therefore, it is explained here.

**Third, the division of the text. This chapter has two parts: First, "On the Truths within the Womb," which clarifies the Womb through the Noble Truths. Second, the passage beginning with "Because the Womb is where the Noble Truths are spoken of" clarifies the Noble Truths through the Womb. Question: If the purpose is simply to explain the Womb, would it not be sufficient to directly explain the Noble Truths within the Womb? Why then is it necessary to also explain the Noble Truths from the perspective of the Womb? Answer: These Noble Truths were not originally taught from the perspective of the Womb, so one cannot explain the Womb from their perspective. However, because they *are* taught based on the Womb, it becomes possible to explain the Womb based on them. To support the previous explanation of the Womb within the Truths, this perspective is therefore necessary.

**Within the first part, there are four sections: First, the phrase "The Noble Truths speak of profound meaning." This means clarifying the Womb through the Truths. The Womb transcends ordinary understanding, hence it is described as "profound." Second, the passage beginning with "Subtle and fine" reveals the characteristics of this profundity. Here, the text first states that the Truths are profound because they are difficult to know, then states that from the passage "All worlds" onward, they are profound because they are difficult to believe. Regarding the difficulty of knowing: "Subtle and fine" means it is not an object for the wisdom gained from hearing. "Difficult to know" means it is not an object for the wisdom gained from reflection. "Not an object of reasoning" means it is not an object for the wisdom gained from worldly cultivation. "Known only by the wise" makes clear that it is not an object for the wisdom of the ordinary consciousness born from karmic retribution, but only an object for the wisdom of true realization. According to the *Daśabhūmika Śāstra*, this should be interpreted as follows. Alternatively, one could say: "Subtle, fine, difficult to know" means it is not an object for the wisdom gained from hearing. "Not an object of reasoning" means it is not an object for the wisdom gained from reflection. "Known by the wise" means it *is* an object for the wisdom gained from cultivation. As the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* states, "Understanding the meaning of all teachings depends on the wisdom of cultivation, not on the wisdom of hearing and reflection." According to this explanation, in the context of cultivation through conditions, the wisdom of reflection and cultivation, along with the consciousness that knows, is generally called the wisdom of reflection; while the virtues of true realization and cultivation are what are called the wisdom of cultivation. The difficulty of belief is self-evident.

**Third, why is it so? The passage beginning with "Why is this so?" indicates the true basis for the wisdom of cultivation. "Why" is a question. If the Four Truths are merely the cause and effect of defilement and purity, a rather coarse concept, why are they described as profound? The answer is given by pairing them. It is because the Tathagatagarbha is spoken of in the context of these Truths that they are profound.

**Fourth, the passage beginning with "The Tathagatagarbha is the domain of the Thus-Come One" reveals the profundity by attributing it to a person. It is the domain of the Thus-Come One, showing its excellence from the perspective of the highest. "Not the domain of Voice-Hearers or Solitary Realizers" reveals its profundity by comparing it with the lower. Why are the Two Vehicles alone excluded? Answer: Ordinary beings do not perceive the Truths at all, so it is logically self-evident that these Truths are not their domain. So why is no mention made of bodhisattvas who can believe and know? The reason is that even those on the ground of faith are not said to be capable of belief, and only those on the spiritual grounds are capable of knowledge.

**Now, regarding the second part, the explanation of the Truths within the Womb, there are three distinct phrases. First, "How the Noble Truths are spoken of from the Womb's perspective": This discusses the characteristics from the perspective of reality. The Womb of the Thus-Come One, while being undefiled, appears to be defiled, which forms the First and Second Truths of Suffering and its Origin. While being pure in essence, it appears to be impure, which forms the Third and Fourth Truths of Cessation and the Path. Therefore, the Noble Truths are spoken of from the perspective of the Womb.

**Second, "Profound from the Womb's perspective": Because the Womb is itself profound, it reveals the profundity of the Truths. When the Truths are taken as encompassing the Womb, the Womb becomes the reality of the Truths, and therefore the Truths are profound.

**Third, the passage beginning with "Subtle and fine" reveals the characteristics of the Truths' profundity. Here, it again clarifies that the Truths are profound because they are difficult to know and difficult to believe. The meaning is the same as explained above.**