The Profound Meaning of the Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sutra from the Consciousness-Only Perspective (Second Edition)

Chapter 10  The Ninth Division on the Markless Single Mark

Why should a Srotāpanna not have the thought of having attained the Srotāpanna fruit?

Original Text: Subhūti, what do you think? Can a Srotāpanna have the thought: ‘I have attained the Srotāpanna fruit’? Subhūti said: No, World-Honored One. Why? Srotāpanna means ‘one who has entered the stream,’ yet there is nothing entered. He does not enter form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharmas. That is why he is called a Srotāpanna.

Explanation: Subhūti, what is your view on this matter? Can a first-fruit Srotāpanna have such a thought: ‘I have realized the Srotāpanna fruit’? Subhūti said: He cannot have such a thought, World-Honored One. Why? Srotāpanna means having entered the stream of the Noble Path. One who has entered the stream of the Noble Path does not enter into worldly dharmas; he does not enter the form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharmas of the worldly realm. Only thus is he truly worthy of the name Srotāpanna.

The first-fruit Srotāpanna has just severed the view of self; he does not regard the dharmas within the Five Aggregates and Eighteen Realms as being the self or as real. Having eliminated the view of self and the mark of self, he also does not believe there is an ‘I’ who severed the view of self and became a Srotāpanna. There is no person who severed the view of self, no Srotāpanna person, and no Srotāpanna fruit. Therefore, the Srotāpanna fruit is a provisional designation, not a truly existent dharma, and should not be grasped as real. If one grasps it as real, then there is the view of self and the view of dharmas, and one is not a Srotāpanna. If a person has the thought, ‘I am a Srotāpanna,’ the mark of self is clearly present in this person, so he is not a Srotāpanna.

Therefore, those who constantly proclaim, ‘I have realized the fruit!’ or ‘I have understood the mind!’, broadcasting and boasting everywhere, can be clearly seen to have heavy self-view, possess the mark of self, and are undoubtedly ordinary people. A person who frequently clings to thoughts like ‘I am a sage,’ ‘I am a person of such-and-such fruit,’ ‘I am a Bodhisattva of the Three Sagely Stages,’ ‘I am a Bodhisattva of such-and-such ground,’ ‘I have cultivated such-and-such,’ ‘In my past lives I was such-and-such,’ ‘I have done such-and-such for sentient beings,’ spreading it around everywhere, fearing others do not know, hoping others will revere him, hoping others will prostrate in admiration, hoping his fame will spread far and wide — these behaviors clearly show this person has heavy self-view, possesses the mark of self, possesses the marks of an ordinary person, and is utterly an ordinary being.

Since the view of self has already been severed, there is no mark of self, no mark of ‘I’ having severed the view of self. The mind is empty of self and also empty of the fruit. In the actual state of principle, there is no such thing as severing the view of self, no such person as a Srotāpanna. Only when the unconditioned mind appears is one a Srotāpanna who has realized the unconditioned dharma. If there is an ‘I’ or a mark of self, then it is not unconditioned, nor is there an unconditioned fruit. Therefore, to judge whether a person has severed the view of self, one can also observe his words and actions — whether his speech, actual conduct, and actions reflect an empty mind, whether he is low-key, whether he dislikes ostentation. If this person likes to put ‘I’ on his lips and show off everywhere, then the mark of self is present, he has not severed the view of self, and is not a Srotāpanna.

Why should a Sakṛdāgāmin not have the thought of having attained the Sakṛdāgāmin fruit?

Original Text: Subhūti, what do you think? Can a Sakṛdāgāmin have the thought: ‘I have attained the Sakṛdāgāmin fruit’? Subhūti said: No, World-Honored One. Why? Sakṛdāgāmin means ‘one who comes once more,’ yet there is actually no coming. That is why he is called a Sakṛdāgāmin.

Explanation: Subhūti, what is your view on this matter? Can a Sakṛdāgāmin have such a thought: ‘I have realized the Sakṛdāgāmin fruit’? Subhūti replied: A Sakṛdāgāmin cannot have such a thought, World-Honored One. Why is this said? Sakṛdāgāmin means ‘one who goes and returns once between heaven and earth,’ yet in reality there is no such thing as going and returning; it is merely named Sakṛdāgāmin.

This passage shares the same meaning as the previous explanation regarding the first fruit. Truly realizing the second fruit, one’s mind is even emptier regarding the self of the Five Aggregates. There is no concept of ‘I have attained the second fruit,’ much less clinging to ‘I have attained the second fruit,’ constantly remembering it, broadcasting it everywhere, fearing others do not know. If others do not believe, he may get angry and ignore them. Such deep clinging is clearly the emotional attachment of an ordinary being and has nothing to do with the first or second fruit.

The Sakṛdāgāmin, the second-fruit saint, has subtler afflictions than ordinary beings or Srotāpannas. After death, he is born in heaven once, returns to the human realm once, and then attains the fourth fruit of Arhatship, achieving liberation from the cycle of rebirth. He similarly does not regard the Five Aggregates and Eighteen Realms as self; his mind has no concept of ‘I.’ Therefore, he does not believe there is an ‘I’ who realized the Sakṛdāgāmin fruit, nor that ‘I’ can realize the Sakṛdāgāmin fruit. The Sakṛdāgāmin no longer regards the realms of the desire realm as truly existent dharmas; these all belong to the realm of the six dusts and are all illusory. Thus, when he goes to heaven, there is no place gone to; when he returns to the human realm, there is no place returned to. There is no Sakṛdāgāmin composed of the Five Aggregates who can travel between heaven and earth. Therefore, there is actually no coming and going.

One who has realized the second fruit, after the end of this life, will be born in the desire realm heavens to continue cultivation. After the end of that life in the desire realm heavens, he returns to the human realm to continue cultivation. After realizing the fourth fruit of Arhatship, he enters Nirvana upon death and is no longer reborn in the Three Realms to suffer, liberated from the suffering of birth and death in the Three Realms. This is the ‘one coming and going’ between heaven and earth for the Sakṛdāgāmin. Is there actually coming and going? There is no coming and going. Matters of coming and going are all illusory and unreal. The Five Aggregates in heaven and the Five Aggregates in the human realm are both illusory and unreal, mere false appearances, not true reality. Therefore, the Sakṛdāgāmin is not truly a Sakṛdāgāmin; the mark of Sakṛdāgāmin is also markless, merely provisionally named Sakṛdāgāmin. We need not cling to a false name-mark, vainly exhausting our minds. We should extinguish the mark of self and the mark of Sakṛdāgāmin. Whatever achievements are attained, remain unmoved, without generating clinging thoughts. Otherwise, one sinks into the cycle of birth and death, unable to escape.

Why should an Anāgāmin not have the thought of being a third-fruit person?

Original Text: Subhūti, what do you think? Can an Anāgāmin have the thought: ‘I have attained the Anāgāmin fruit’? Subhūti said: No, World-Honored One. Why? Anāgāmin means ‘non-returner,’ yet there is actually no non-returning. That is why he is called an Anāgāmin.

Explanation: Subhūti, what is your view on this matter? Can an Anāgāmin have the thought: ‘I have attained the Anāgāmin fruit’? Subhūti replied: An Anāgāmin cannot have such a thought. Why is this said? Because Anāgāmin means ‘non-returner,’ yet in reality there is no such dharma-mark as non-returning, meaning there is no such thing as attaining the Anāgāmin fruit. Anāgāmin is merely a provisional name.

One who realizes the third fruit has a mind even emptier than that of the second-fruit saint. He has even fewer thoughts of ‘I am this or that.’ Therefore, he does not constantly think ‘I am an Anāgāmin.’ If he did, his mind would not be empty, and he would not have realized Anāgāmin. An Anāgāmin possesses meditative concentration at least at the level of the first dhyāna. After death, he is born in the Five Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa) in the form realm to continue cultivating the Path. In the Five Pure Abodes, he realizes the fourth fruit of Arhatship and directly enters the remainderless Nirvana, never returning to the human realm. Therefore, he is called the non-returning fruit, also known as the Anāgāmin fruit. In reality, there is no such thing as ‘not returning to the human realm.’ Coming and going do not actually occur; both are illusory false appearances. This false appearance is then given the name Anāgāmin, called the third fruit. Therefore, one should not believe there truly exists an Anāgāmin fruit to be attained, nor that a third-fruit person is a real entity. One should not give rise to a grasping mind or a conceited mind. If one does, he is not a third-fruit person.

Why should an Arhat not have the thought of having attained Arhatship?

Original Text: Subhūti, what do you think? Can an Arhat have the thought: ‘I have attained Arhatship’? [Subhūti said:] No, World-Honored One. Why? Truly, there is no dharma called Arhat. World-Honored One, if an Arhat has the thought: ‘I have attained Arhatship,’ then he is attached to the marks of self, person, sentient being, and life span.

Explanation: Subhūti, what is your view on this matter? Can an Arhat have the thought: ‘I have attained the fruit of Arhatship’? Subhūti replied: An Arhat cannot have such a thought, World-Honored One. Why is this said? Because truly there is not a single dharma that can be called Arhat. World-Honored One, if an Arhat thinks thus in his mind: ‘I have attained the fruit of Arhatship,’ then he clings to the mark of self, the mark of person, the mark of sentient being, and the mark of life span. He is then not an Arhat.

If any person has the thought: ‘I am such-and-such,’ believing there truly exists an ‘I’ who is such-and-such, then he clings to the mark of self, and the other three marks immediately appear as well. It is the same for an Arhat. If he believes he has attained Arhatship, then within his mind there is the mark of self. Consequently, the marks of person, sentient being, and life span clearly exist. Such a person is not an Arhat. Truly, within the world, there is not a single dharma called Arhat. The Arhat’s physical body and consciousness-mind, composed of the Five Aggregates, are subject to birth, death, change, and illusion; they are not truly existent dharmas and cannot be called Arhat. The Arhat fruit is merely a state and a realm; there is no substantial fruit to be obtained or seen. The act of realizing the Arhat fruit is an illusory dharma subject to birth, death, and change; it is not a truly existent dharma. If it were a truly existent dharma, it would exist permanently, and one would constantly realize the Arhat fruit without cultivation.

Therefore, an Arhat does not have the thought ‘I have realized the Arhat fruit.’ After realizing the Arhat fruit, the mind is empty and still, without even a trace of the four marks. Walking in the human world, he is like an empty shell, free from any disputes or conflicts. Ordinary beings are the opposite. Afflicted by the view of self, the four marks are rampant, and they are constantly mired in troubles and disputes. The heavier a person’s view of self, the heavier his mark of self, the more unsettled his mind, the heavier his afflictions, and the more disputes and conflicts he has. Conversely, the lighter they are, the more pure and free from disputes he becomes.

Why does Subhūti not have the thought of being a desire-free Arhat?

Original Text: World-Honored One, the Buddha says I have attained the samādhi of non-contention, being foremost among humans, the foremost desire-free Arhat. I do not have the thought: ‘I am a desire-free Arhat.’ World-Honored One, if I had the thought: ‘I have attained Arhatship,’ then the World-Honored One would not say that Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of solitude. Because Subhūti truly practices nothing, he is named Subhūti, the one who delights in the practice of solitude.

Explanation: To corroborate that an Arhat has no thought of ‘I am an Arhat,’ Subhūti said to the Buddha: World-Honored One, the Buddha says I have realized the samādhi of non-contention, being foremost among humans, the foremost desire-free Arhat. However, I do not give rise to such a thought, believing I am a desire-free Arhat. World-Honored One, if I had such a thought, believing I have attained the fruit of Arhatship, then you, World-Honored One, would not say that Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of quietude and solitude. Because Subhūti’s mind is empty and without action, it is said that Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of solitude.

Subhūti is also known as ‘Born of Emptiness’ (Śūnyatājña), able to constantly perceive the emptiness and stillness of the world. Because he realized the samādhi of non-contention, he never disputes with worldly people. Whatever worldly people say is east, it is east; south, it is south; west, it is west; north, it is north. Because whatever worldly people say is empty, there is no need to dispute over high or low, long or short. Subhūti has no desires or thoughts regarding the world. His mind is empty, markless, wishless, and inactive. He is the foremost desire-free Arhat among humans. Yet Subhūti has never had the thought ‘I am a desire-free Arhat,’ much less broadcast it everywhere. He does not cling to the mark of self, nor to the mark of being an Arhat. Otherwise, he would be an ordinary being clinging to marks, and the World-Honored One would not say Subhūti is one who delights in the practice of solitude. Because Subhūti’s mind is constantly empty and still, desireless and seeking nothing, the World-Honored One praised him as one who delights in the practice of solitude.

Ordinary beings are the opposite of Subhūti. Regardless of whether it is true or not, they like to boast about themselves everywhere, to promote themselves, to argue right and wrong with others, to seek the limelight, to be pursued and worshipped by others, to highlight themselves — in short, they like to promote themselves to let the world know, so that their ‘I’ is satisfied. This is the mark of an ordinary being. An ordinary being can do nothing without the mark of self; he lives constantly within the mark of self and the four marks. This is his lifelong spiritual sustenance, indispensable. Once that ‘I’ is suppressed, it is like a fish out of water. In short, whether a person has realized the Path or not can be seen in his affairs; his physical, verbal, and mental actions most clearly illustrate a person’s state of thought and wisdom.

A fourth-fruit Arhat has not only severed the view of self but also severed attachment to the self. The mental faculty’s (manas) craving and clinging to the self of the Five Aggregates are completely exhausted; self-conceit is completely severed. The mind is utterly without self. Since there is no self, he does not argue with others over high or low, right or wrong, long or short, strong or weak. His mind becomes still and cool. This is the samādhi of non-contention. And Subhūti is the most non-contentious, the most still, the most compliant with people and events.

‘Desire-free’ means being free from all kinds of desires, all hopes and cravings of the desire realm, primarily sexual desire, including wealth, sex, fame, food, and sleep — the five desires — and the six dusts of form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas. After realizing the first fruit, one develops the first dhyāna. The realm of the form realm appears, and body and mind experience supreme bliss. Because this blissful contact is far superior to all pleasures of the desire realm, surpassing even the pleasure of sexual desire, one becomes displeased with sexual desire, displeased with the five dusts of the desire realm, displeased with wealth, sex, fame, food, and sleep. Thus, desire is severed. After further severing hatred, the five lower fetters are completely severed, and one becomes a third-fruit person. Then the fourth-fruit Arhat is even more desire-free.

Subhūti severed desire most thoroughly; he is the foremost desire-free person. Yet Subhūti does not have the thought ‘I am a desire-free Arhat.’ If Subhūti had this thought, then he would have an ‘I,’ have the matter of being desire-free, and his mind would not be still or pure. The World-Honored One would then not say Subhūti is one who delights in quiet practice. Because Subhūti’s mind is free of affairs, desireless and inactive, and furthermore sees all dharmas within the Eighteen Realms as empty, he believes all actions are empty. Therefore, Subhūti truly has nothing to practice; within empty, illusory dharmas, there is nothing to be done. All that is done is empty; it has no actual existence. Only thus is Subhūti one who delights in the practice of solitude, one who practices non-action.