Padmakara Translation Group

Chapter 23 - An Examination of Mistakes

.

1. Desire, aversion, ignorance

Derive, the teachings say, from thought—

Arising in dependence upon that which is attractive,

Unattractive, and mistaken.

.

2. Since what arises in dependence

On the attractive, unattractive, and mistaken

Does not exist by its intrinsic nature,

Defilements are devoid of real existence.

.

3. In no way has the existence

Or the nonexistence of the self been proved.

And without the self, how is the existence

Or the nonexistence of defilements proved?

.

4. Defilements must be someone's,

But this "someone" is not proved.

In the absence of this "someone"

Defilements do indeed belong to none.

.

5. As with the view of one's own body,

In five ways defilements are not found in the defiled.

As with the view of one's own body,

In five ways the defiled is not found in defilements.

.

6. If the attractive, unattractive, and mistaken

Don't exist by their intrinsic being,

What defilements are there that depend

On the attractive, unattractive, and mistaken?

.

7. Form and sound and taste and touch,

Odor and the objects of the mind.

These six are thought of as the basis

Of desire, aversion, and confusion.

.

8. Yet form and sound and taste and touch,

Odor and the objects of the mind

Are like the cities of gandharvas;

They're like mirages and dreams.

.

9. In those who are like phantom beings,

In [objects] that are like reflections,

How could the attractive and the unattractive

Possibly arise?

.

10. The attractive so-called is imputed

Based upon the unattractive,

Which from the attractive is not independent.

Therefore the attractive is not tenable.

.

11. The so-called unattractive is imputed

Based on the attractive,

Which from the unattractive is not independent.

Thus the unattractive is not tenable.

.

12. If the attractive is not found,

How can there be desire?

If the unattractive is not found,

How can there be aversion?

.

13. Suppose it's wrong to apprehend

That "the impermanent is permanent."

But since there's no impermanence in what is empty,

How is such an apprehension incorrect?

.

14. Suppose it's wrong to apprehend

That "the impermanent is permanent";

How is it not wrong to apprehend and say

That "what is empty is impermanent"?

.

15. The apprehension and the mode thereof,

The apprehender and the apprehended

All subside

And thus there is no apprehension.

.

16. If there is no apprehension,

Whether wrong or right,

Who will have mistaken concepts?

Who will then be unmistaken?

.

17. In one who is mistaken

Mistakes cannot occur,

In one who's unmistaken

Mistakes cannot occur.

.

18. In one who's making a mistake

Mistakes cannot occur.

Who therefore can be mistaken?

That you should examine for yourself.

.

19. If mistakes have not arisen,

How can they exist?

If mistakes do not arise,

How can there be someone who's mistaken?

.

20. Real existent [errors] are not self-produced,

And they are not produced from something else.

Since they are not produced from self, nor from another,

How can there be someone who's mistaken?

.

21. If the self, the pure,

The permanent, the happy all exist,

The self, the pure, the permanent,

The happy-none of these are errors.

.

22. If the self, the pure,

The permanent, the happy don't exist,

The no-self, the impure, the impermanent,

The unhappy-these do not exist.

.

23. Thus by halting these mistakes,

Ignorance is likewise halted.

And if ignorance is halted,

Actions and the rest are also halted.1

.

24. If an individual's defilements

Exist by their intrinsic being,

How indeed can they be banished?

Who can banish what exists?

.

25. If an individual's defilements

Don't exist by their intrinsic being,

How indeed can they be banished,

Who can banish what does not exist?

Garfield

Chapter 23 - Examination of Errors

.

1. Desire, hatred and confusion all

Arise from thought, it is said.

They all depend on

The pleasant, the unpleasant, and errors.

.

2. Since whatever depends on the pleasant and the unpleasant

Does not exist through an essence,

The defilements

Do not really exist.

.

3. The self's existence or nonexistence

Has in no way been established.

Without that, how could the defilements'

Existence or nonexistence be established?

.

4. The defilements are somebody's.

But that one has not been established.

Without that possessor,

The defilements are nobody's.

.

5. View the defilements as you view your self:

They are not in the defiled in the fivefold way.

View the defiled as you view your self:

It is not in the defilements in the fivefold way.

.

6. The pleasant, the unpleasant, and the errors

Do not exist through essence.

Which pleasant, unpleasant, and errors

could the defilements depend upon?

.

7. Form, sound, taste, touch,

Smell, and concepts of things: These six

Are thought of as the foundation of

Desire, hatred, and confusion.

.

8. Form, sound, taste, touch,

Smell, and concepts of things: These six

Should be seen as only like a city of the Gandharvas and

Like a mirage or a dream.

.

9. How could the

Pleasant and unpleasant arise

In those that are like an illusory person

And like a reflection?

.

10. We say that the unpleasant

Is dependent upon the pleasant,

Since without depending on the pleasant there is none.

It follows that the pleasant is not tenable.

.

11. We say that the pleasant

Is dependent upon the unpleasant.

Without the unpleasant there wouldn't be any.

It follows that the unpleasant is not tenable.

.

12. Where there is no pleasant,

How can there be desire?

Where there is no unpleasant,

How can there be anger?

.

13. If to grasp onto the view

"The impermanent is permanent" were an error,

Since in emptiness there is nothing impermanent,

How could that grasping be an error?

.

14. If to grasp onto the view

"The impermanent is permanent" were an error,

Why isn't grasping onto the view

"In emptiness there is nothing impermanent" an error?

.

15. That by means of which there is grasping, and the grasping,

And the grasper, and all that is grasped:

All are being relieved.

It follows that there is no grasping.

.

16. If there is no grasping,

Whether erroneous or otherwise,

Who will come to be in error?

Who will have no error?

.

17. Error does not develop

In one who is in error.

Error does not develop

In one who is not in error.

.

18. Error does not develop

In one in whom error is arising.

In whom does error develop?

Examine this on your own!

.

19. If error is not arisen,

How could it come to exist?

If error has not arisen,

How could one be in error?

.

20. Since an entity does not arise from itself,

Nor from another,

Nor from another and from itself,

How could one be in error?

.

21. If the self and the pure,

The permanent and the blissful existed,

The self, the pure, the permanent,

And the blissful would not be deceptive.

.

22. If the self and the pure,

The permanent and the blissful did not exist,

The nonself, the impure, the permanent,

And suffering would not exist.

.

23. Thus, through the cessation of error

Ignorance ceases.

When ignorance ceases

The compounded phenomena, etc., cease.

.

24. If someone's defilements

Existed through his essence,

How could they be relinquished?

Who could relinquish the existent?

.

25. If someone's defilements

Did not exist through his essence,

How could they be relinquished?

Who could relinquish the nonexistent?

Batchelor

Chapter 23 - Investigation of Error

.

1. It is said that desire, hatred, stupidity arise from conceptuality; they arise in dependence on the pleasant, the unpleasant and confusion. [they arise in dependence on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant]

.

2. Whatever arises in dependence upon the pleasant, the unpleasant and confusion, (whatever arises in dependence on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant) they have no own-nature, therefore, afflictions do not really exist (do not exist in themselves).

.

3. The existence or non-existence of self is not established in any way. Without that, how can the existence or non-existence of afflictions be established?

.

4. These afflictions are someone's. But that [someone] is not established. Without [someone], the afflictions are not anyone's.

.

5. Like [the self apprehended in] the view of one's own body, the afflictions do not exist in five ways in the afflicted. Like [the self apprehended in] the view of one's own body, the afflicted does not exist in five ways in the afflictions.

.

6. If confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant does not exist from its own nature, what afflictions can depend on confusion about the pleasant and unpleasant?

.

7. Colour/shape, sound, taste, tactile sensation, smell and dharmas: these six are conceived as the basis of desire, hatred and stupidity.

.

8. Colour/shape, sound, taste, tactile sensation, smell and dharmas: these are like gandharva-cities (dri za'i grong khyer) and similar to mirages, dreams.

.

9. How can the pleasant and unpleasant occur in those [things] which are like phantoms and similar to reflections?

.

10. Something is called "pleasant" in dependence on the unpleasant. Since that would not exist without relation to the pleasant, therefore, the pleasant is not tenable.

.

11. Something is called "unpleasant" in dependence on the pleasant. Since that would not exist without relation to the unpleasant, therefore, the unpleasant is not tenable.

.

12. If the pleasant does not exist, how can desire exist? If the unpleasant does not exist, how can hatred exist?

.

13. If such an apprehension as "the impermanent is permanent" is confused, since impermanence does not exist in the empty, how can such an apprehension be confused?

.

14. If such an apprehension as "the impermanent is permanent" is confused, how would the apprehension "there is impermanence in the empty" also not be confused?

.

15. [The means] by which one apprehends, the apprehension [itself], the apprehender and the apprehended: all are completely pacified, therefore there is no apprehending.

.

16. If there is neither confused nor right apprehension, who is confused and who is not confused?

.

17. Confusions do not occur for those who are [already] confused; confusions do not occur for those who are not [yet] confused;

.

18. confusions do not occur for those who are being confused. For whom do confusions occur? Examine this by yourself!

.

19. If confusions are not born, how can they exist? If confusions are not born, where can there be someone who has confusion?

.

20. Things are not born from themselves, not born from others. If they are also not from self and others, where can there be someone who has confusion?

.

21. If self and purity and permanence and happiness were existent, self and purity and permanence and happiness would not be confusions.

.

22. If self and purity and permanence and happiness were non-existent, selflessness, impurity, impermanence and anguish would not exist.

.

23. Thus by stopping confusion, ignorance will stop. If ignorance is stopped, impulsive acts etc. will stop.

.

24. If the afflictions of some existed by their own nature, how could they be let go of? Who can let go of what exists by nature?

.

25. If the afflictions of some did not exist by their own nature, how could they be let go of? Who can let go of what does not exist?

Streng

Chapter 23 - An Analysis of Errors (viparyasa) (the perverted views) - 25 verses

.

1. It is said that desire (raga), hate, and delusion are derived from mental fabrication (samkalpa),

Because they come into existence presupposing errors as to what is salutary and unsalutary.

.

2. Those things which come into existence presupposing errors as to what is salutary and unsalutary

Do not exist by their own nature (svabhava); therefore the impurities (klesa) do not exist in reality.

.

3. The existence or non-existence of the individual self (atma) is not proved at all.

Without that [individual self], how can the existence or non-existence of the impurities be proved?

.

4. For impurities exist of somebody, and that person is not proved at all.

Is it not so that without someone the impurities do not exist of anybody?

.

5. In reference to the view of having a body of one's own, the impurities do not exist in what is made impure according to the five-fold manner.

In reference to the view of having a body of one's own, that which is made impure does not exist in the impurities according to the five-fold manner.

.

6. The errors as to what is salutary and non-salutary do not exist as self-existent entities (svabhavatas)

Depending on which errors as to what is salutary and non-salutary are then impurities?

.

7. Form, sound, taste, touch, smell, and the dharmas: this six-fold

Substance (vastu) of desire, hate, and delusion is imagined.

.

8. Form, sound, taste, touch, smell, and the dharmas are

Merely the form of a fairy castle, like a mirage, a dream.

.

9. How will "that which is salutary" or "that which is non-salutary" come into existence

In a formation of a magical man, or in things like a reflection?

.

10. We submit that there is no non-salutary thing unrelated to a salutary thing.

[And in turn] depending on which, there is a salutary thing; therefore, a salutary thing does not obtain.

.

11. We submit that there is no salutary thing unrelated to a non-salutary thing,

[And in turn] depending on which, there is a non-salutary thing; therefore a non-salutary thing does not obtain.

.

12. If "what is salutary" does not exist, how will there be desire [for it]?

And if "what is non-salutary" does not exist, how will there be hatred [for it]?

.

13. Even if the notion "What is permanent is in something impermanent" is in error,

How can this notion be in error since "what is impermanent" does not exist in emptiness?

.

14. Even if the notion "what is permanent is in something impermanent" is in error,

Is not then the notion concerning emptiness, i.e., that it is impermanent, in error?

.

15. That by which a notion is formed, the notion, those who have notions, and that which is grasped [in the notion]:

All have ceased; therefore, the notion does not exist.

.

16. If a notion is not existing either as false or true,

Whose is the error? Whose is the non-error?

.

17. Nor do errors of someone who has erred come into existence.

Nor do errors of someone who has not erred come into existence.

.

18. And errors of someone who is at present in error do not come into existence.

Now you examine of whom do errors really come into existence!

.

19. How in all the world will errors which have not originated come into existence?

And if errors are not originated, how can there be someone involved in error?

.

20. Since no being is produced by itself, nor by something different,

Nor by itself and something different at the same time, how can there be someone involved in error?

.

21. If the individual self, "what is pure," "what is eternal," and happiness really exist,

Then the individual self, "what is pure," "what is eternal," and happiness are not errors.

.

22. But if individual self, "what is pure," "what is eternal," and happiness do not exist,

Then non-individual self, "what is impure," "what is impermanent" and sorrow (dukkha) do not exist.

.

23. From the cessation of error ignorance ceases;

When ignorance has ceased, conditioning forces (samskara) and everything else cease.

.

24. If any kind of self-existent impurities belong to somebody,

How in all the world would they be eliminated? Who can eliminate that which is self-existent?

.

25. If any kind of self-existent impurities do not belong to somebody,

How in all the world would they be eliminated? Who can eliminate that which is non-self-existent?