Derge Kangyur/Tengyur e-text, Esukhia/Barom edition — public domain (mechanical reproduction)
Engaging in the Practices of Self-attainment is a technical treatise on the realization of the self as the non-dual nature of mind. The text argues against conceptual extremes and the notion that causal efficiency defines existence, instead advocating for a direct realization of emptiness through the non-differentiation of one's own mind. It posits that the practitioner must transform ordinary mental movements and sensory perceptions into the nature of deities, mandalas, and the perfections. By analyzing the mind as the essence of the Sugata and the dharmadhātu, the author claims that the practitioner can eliminate conceptual stains and cultivate omniscient wisdom. The work commits the reader to a rigorous process of mental engagement (manasikāra) and analytical discernment, where the reversal of discordant factors and the abandonment of superimpositions lead to the mirror-like wisdom. Ultimately, it frames the cultivation of selflessness and the integration of method and wisdom as the only means to achieve a state free from the distortions of ordinary perception.
Provenance
About this text
Entering the Realization of the Self, or Ātmasādhanāvatāra, is a treatise belonging to the classical Tibetan tradition. Attributed to the Indian author Buddhaśrījñānapāda, the work was translated into Tibetan by Jetahandu Śāntibhadra and lo tsa ba ’gos lhas btsas. It is preserved in the Tengyur, volume དི, where it comprises 21 pages and is situated within the canonical collection of the Guhyasamāja and Related Tantras. The work argues against conceptual extremes and the notion that causal efficiency defines existence, advocating instead for a direct realization of emptiness through the non-differentiation of one's own mind. It posits that practitioners must transform ordinary mental movements and sensory perceptions into the nature of deities, mandalas, and perfections. By analyzing the mind as the essence of the Sugata and the dharmadhātu, the author claims that one can eliminate conceptual stains and cultivate omniscient wisdom. A scholar or serious reader consults this text today for its rigorous process of mental engagement and analytical discernment, wherein the reversal of discordant factors and the abandonment of superimpositions are intended to lead the practitioner toward mirror-like wisdom.
Cite thisAnuvāda, “Engaging in the Practices of Self-attainment” (Toh 1860), machine draft, 2026.https://naxiai.com/tibetan/works/toh1860
Summary & commentary
Significance
The work is significant for its integration of Madhyamaka-style emptiness with the tantric practice of deity yoga and the transformation of the sense bases. It demonstrates a sophisticated attempt to reconcile the voidness of phenomena with the active, non-dual realization of the practitioner's own nature as a Buddha. For the modern reader, it provides insight into the cognitive mechanisms used in Indo-Tibetan Buddhism to shift identity from a conventional self to an enlightened essence.
Structure
Passages
Section
Description
1-4
Epistemological and Ontological Foundations
Critique of conceptualization and the definition of existence, arguing against causal efficiency as the primary marker of existence.
5-7
The Path of Compassion and Method
Discussion on the necessity of compassion and specific methods to generate omniscient wisdom.
8-12
Direct Realization and Mental Engagement
Analysis of the non-differentiation of the mind, the role of habituation, and the nature of mental engagement with the Sugata.
13-19
Transformation of Perception and Deities
The process of identifying the yogi's mind and sensory experiences with the deities of the mandala and the four doors of liberation.
20-29
Ethics, Discipline, and Pure Perception
Examination of bodhisattva ethics, the transformation of virtuous and non-virtuous acts through skillful means, and the overcoming of sensory attachment.
Themes
Non-differentiation of Mind (8, 11, 14)
Transformation of Ordinary Perception (15, 16, 18, 26)
Skillful Means and Ethics (22, 23, 25)
Emptiness and Conceptualization (1, 5, 20)
Summary, significance and provenance note generated by gemma4:31b from the translation and the catalogue record.
AnuvādaEngaging in the Practices of Self-attainment·
In the language of India: Ātmasādhanāvatāra-nāma. In the language of Tibet: Bdag sgrub pa la ’jug pa zhes bya ba (Entering the Realization of the Self). Homage to the Bodhisattva Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta.
To that which is free from all stains of conceptualization, which arises from the absence of all discursive thought, and whose nature is the mind of all wandering beings that does not abide in any fixed state—to that beautiful stream of mental continuity, the body of the assembly, the state of definitive excellence, I prostrate. I shall now correctly explain that which cuts off the harms of successive births.
This entire nature, which is inextricably linked to mere conceptualization, is characterized solely by immeasurable suffering. Since nirvāṇa is simply the reversal of the experience of existence, which consists of a succession of moments passing from one to the next, one must strive diligently to achieve it. As it has been said:
"There is nothing whatsoever called 'saṃsāra' other than conceptualization. Therefore, by being free from conceptualization, you are eternally in nirvāṇa."
One might ask: "Are not form and so forth perceived as having their own intrinsic nature? How then can saṃsāra be of the nature of mere conceptualization?" It is not so. Form and so forth are not established as the very objects of cognition; for apart from the perception of the appearance of form and so forth, no other apprehended object or apprehending subject is observed in the slightest. Furthermore, without the cognition of an object, the conventional designation of an existing intrinsic nature is not established.
Because it would lead to an extreme absurdity. Nor is it the case that by realizing another entity connected to it, that [entity] is realized, for a connection is not established with something that is utterly beyond the nature of direct perception. If it is argued that the appearance of one's own pleasure and so forth, which manifests internally, is the grasper, while the characteristic of blue and so forth being realized as external forms is the grasped, that is not so; for the function of pleasure and so forth is not established in blue and so forth. If "grasper" were to apply even without the function of conceptualization, then it would follow that external forms and so forth would also be the grasper. One does not observe a distinct, determinate aspect such that among things appearing simultaneously and independently, some are the grasped and some are the grasper. The notion that "I am the knower of blue and so forth" is also merely a conceptual construction, because it is understood that those things appearing independently as external or internal are simply manifestations. This entire stream of conceptualizations, such as "grasper" and so forth, is intent upon demonstrating an independent experience, because the manifestations are in fact entities devoid of the function of mutual grasping. Therefore, there is no such thing as "X being grasped by Y." Thus, it is extensively taught: "Subhūti, a dharma does not fully know a dharma."
As for the statement, "Whatever is apprehended is known by two types of cognition," and so forth, there is no fault, for that is similar to the occasional teaching of a "person" and so on in relation to the mere conceptual adherence to forms and the like. Even if that were granted, since all beings are of the nature of mere cognition, characterized by the absence of apprehended object and apprehending subject, and since that [nature] is irreversible, one might ask: "By what is the mere reversal of that called nirvāṇa?" It is not so, because consciousness itself is devoid of a nature of being either one or many.
In this regard, it is not one, because it perceives a variety of objects through the distinctness of blue and so forth. Even a single color such as white appears with distinct parts—beginning, middle, and end—and because the application of causal efficiency is distinct, multiplicity is the very definition of that [consciousness]. Nor is it many, because the aspects appearing as white and so forth are not realized as atoms through conceptualization. There is no other mode besides being one or many, because these two are mutually exclusive and contradictory.
If one asks, "Is it not the case that all things are selfless? Why then is the distinction of causal efficiency made regarding the experience of things?" it is taught that this is because [the object] is merely the prior conceptualization of an unexamined, singular identity, and there is nothing other than the realization of that. If that were granted, it would follow that the essence of all things exists as a reality.
If it is argued that an existent thing is defined by its capacity for causal efficiency, that is not so. This is because there is no contradiction in accepting that things exist as mere appearances, and because they are devoid of the characteristics of the stages previously explained. This is merely an establishment of selflessness; it is not a denial of mere appearance, for it has been taught in detail: "Subhūti, form is not one thing and emptiness another; rather, form is empty of the intrinsic nature of form." For that very reason, since all conventional entities appear through the distinction of preceding and succeeding moments, one should not suspect them of being permanent. Furthermore, as for the statement, "O Son of the Conqueror, these three realms are mere cognition," that too is intended only to reverse the clinging of those who are intensely attached to real entities to the external object; for from that, it is possible to clarify even the clinging to pleasure and so forth as being mere mind. Thus it is said: "Relying upon mind-only, one does not conceptualize external objects. By focusing on suchness, one should transcend even mind-only." Therefore, the birth of beings, which is of the nature of conceptual constructions such as "I" and "mine," is contradicted by the vision of selflessness in the manner just explained.
In order to deliver those beings who have fallen under the power of misconceptions, one should first direct oneself toward the emptiness of all phenomena, having generated the supreme intention of compassion. Although [virtue] is distinguished by compassion, the stream of virtues such as generosity—which is distinguished by the apprehension of objects such as giving—is not capable of accomplishing the state of non-conceptuality in the slightest, because it involves the conceptualization of self and other. This is because erroneous attachment is the cause for the arising of conceptualizations that accord with it.
As it is said:
"If these five perfections lack the eye of wisdom,
They cannot reach enlightenment without a guide."
If one is attached to the selflessness of all things without exception, that is itself a conceptualization; yet, because it is by nature an attachment to its own non-erroneous object, it is realized to be in direct contradiction with all erroneous conceptualizations without exception. Whatever is seen to be contradictory at the same time will, through thorough cultivation, utterly eliminate its own opposite—just as heat eliminates cold from fire. Otherwise, if one were to suspect error, all conventional discourse would become untenable.
As it is also said:
"If one analytically discerns the selflessness of phenomena,
And if one meditates upon that discernment,
That is the cause for the fruit of nirvāṇa;
By no other cause will one be liberated."
Thus it is said. If even the cultivation of selflessness were devoid of the specific methods, it would be unable to generate the omniscient wisdom that is free from all stains of conceptualization and acts for the benefit of all beings without exception. Therefore, one must strive intensely to bring the methods into full manifestation. The nature that benefits all beings without exception is omniscient wisdom, and such benefit arises from that which is ultimately vast. The cause of that is the cultivation of method alone, because the cultivation of selflessness has as its result the mere abandonment of conceptualization. As it is said:
"Because of the profound and the vast,
Because of non-conceptuality and full maturation,
Since these two are taught herein,
Therefore, it is the unsurpassed method."
Consequently, the bodhisattva’s engagement in unerring generosity and the other perfections is the method; for if these are fully dedicated toward omniscience itself, they become the very causes of perfect enlightenment. As it is said:
"Dedicate generosity, ethical discipline, patience,
And likewise diligence, meditative concentration, and wisdom to enlightenment.
Do not hold them as supreme through attachment to the aggregates of enlightenment—
Thus should it be taught to those who are beginners."
That is not the case [if one lacks method], because there is no meditation that accords with the direct realization of the cultivation of perfect enlightenment through the cultivation of dissimilar causes.
The result, which is profound and vast in its very nature, is an activity to be accomplished through its own inherent nature; yet, a cause possessing that same nature does not exist here. This is because the mental states of generosity and so forth are for the most part subjects that are not vast by nature. Furthermore, since the aspiration itself is a subject whose scope is the greatness of a perfect Buddha, it is separated by an immense distance of time and thus cannot serve as an antidote to the conceptualization of a non-vast nature. For an ordinary nature is not beneficial to immeasurable beings and must therefore be abandoned by those possessing compassion. Even if one engages in the antidotes of the heroic mind, such as generosity and so forth, which act as companions to the aspiration, if their continuity is not reversed, from what could one truly gain confidence that they will be reversed at some other time? This is because one does not perceive any such state in which the discordant factors are exhausted through attachment to the profound. It is not the case that by meditating on the "other"—selflessness, which is the opposite of one's own [nature]—one can thoroughly establish the stainlessness of the conceptualization of a self-entity, for that [meditation] does not function because it is contradictory to the conceptualization of one's own nature.
When one directly realizes the emptiness of aspects such as grasping by way of the non-differentiation of one’s own mind, at that time, through the great increase of familiarity with such meditation—which is the very antidote to all unreal conceptualizations—one will generate the state that eliminates all conceptualization without exception. Because it is a conceptualization, it becomes the object of engagement for those who proceed with prior conceptualization. Therefore, since it is not the side of the antidote to the direct perception of a self-entity that is not vast, the aspiration prayers such as, "May I attain buddhahood for the sake of the world," are not the actual cause for attaining perfect buddhahood. As it is said: "Son of noble family, if you do not directly know the suchness of all the Tathāgatas, how can you think, 'I shall manifest complete awakening in unsurpassed, perfect, and complete enlightenment,' while being enthusiastic about practicing austerities?" Therefore, one should meditate on the vast nature of one's own essence as being non-different from selflessness.
If one asks: "Is the vast not also non-existent? How can that which is to be meditated upon accomplish the desired result?" It is not so; for even the cultivation of meditation on the unreal, such as the totalities of earth and so forth, is the very cause for clear appearance.
If one asks, "In what way is this not authentic?" [the response is:] "Because engaging with one's own nature—which is devoid of the aspects of the body of a perfect Buddha—by superimposing its essence upon it is precisely what is meant by 'mental engagement through aspiration'." If that were the case, then even mental engagement with suchness would not be authentic, because it would not engage with the object exactly as suchness is. Furthermore, it is not a case of mental engagement with suchness characterized by non-conceptuality in that manner, because at the stage of a beginner, it engages by way of the very nature of conceptualization. Even though it is accompanied by conceptualization, since suchness is ascertained by it through the very fact that things abide exactly as they are, it should be established as being "mental engagement with suchness." Any other [engagement] is designated as "mental engagement through aspiration" because it superimposes an essence upon that which is utterly non-existent; for it mentally engages with the ordinary self as if it were suchness, even though the aspect of the Supreme Sage does not exist in that ordinary self. That is not the case. For if, through mental engagement with selflessness, one takes as an object the abiding of one's own nature exactly as it is, does one mentally engage with it as appearing distinctly as its own object, or as an object of erroneous conceptualization? Regarding that, according to the first position, that mental engagement through aspiration would be the same as the other.
This is because it functions by fully apprehending the aspect that has become its own object. Otherwise, it would follow that the mental engagement of conviction (adhimukti-manasikāra) would be impaired. An object that has not been realized by consciousness is not the object of the conventional term "conviction," because all cognition is characterized by the conceptualization of the aspect desired as its own object.
In that regard, the second position is also illogical, because the cognition of selflessness does not take [the ordinary self] as its object through the clinging of grasping and so forth. Since there is nothing other than cognition that can be called its "subject," how could it be shown that the other [the ordinary self] is taken as an object? Therefore, just like the mental engagement of suchness (tattva-manasikāra), the object is merely the aspect of one's own cognition; how then could the conviction in the vast be incorrect?
This ordinary nature does not function by superimposing the aspect of the vast, because the aspect of the Buddha’s body is not taken as an object by the conviction in the ordinary nature itself; thus, superimposition upon what is not an object is impossible. The ordinary nature is characterized by the appearance of ordinary conceptualization, whereas the mental engagement with the sphere of the Sugata’s aspect is extremely powerful and does not appear as that [ordinary] nature.
If one asks: "If the nature of the non-vast does not superimpose even the slightest other aspect upon its own nature, how can it serve as the antidote to this [ordinary nature]?"
This is because the nature of the mental engagement that appears as the essence of the Sugata arises as a non-ordinary nature itself, and because the arising of a cognition of a similar type through the habituation of uninterrupted meditation is the very cause of extreme clarity. At the time when that vast cognition arises, the other—the object of experience consisting of ordinary aspects—is not experienced by that cognition. Furthermore, it is impossible to ascertain that the ordinary nature exists as a reality, because it is determined to be of the nature of mere conceptualization. Therefore, one who meditates on the identity of Samantabhadra, who has abandoned all conceptualization and radiates all rays of light without exception, is the very vessel for enlightenment. As it is said: "By whatever ritual of the mudrā, buddhahood which is not attained even in countless tens of millions of eons, shall be attained in this very life. One should examine the self therein," and so on, up to: "Therefore, through the yoga of oneself as the deity, one should contemplate the self." Thus, in dependence upon correct mental engagement itself, the Blessed One, through his perfectly complete wisdom, also highly praised the practice of the yoga of suchness, because devotion to the perfect Buddha is held to be inseparable from the yoga of perfection.
One who is without grasping at the supreme will not engage in mental engagement with the Sugata as a self, because the Blessed One has abandoned all adherence to distinctions. Furthermore, conceptualization that clings to the intrinsic nature of the Blessed One’s aspects as being devoid of their defining characteristics does not result in a faultless fruit. Therefore:
The Victor’s body is limitless;
The mind, free from the stains of self and other-clinging,
Is equal to all Buddhas, the supreme intelligence;
It becomes the siddhi that fulfills the hopes of all beings without exception.
In this regard, if one meditates while facing directly toward the state of being deprived of wisdom—the supreme characteristic of the authentic method—by which the Sage possesses immeasurable rays of light and serves as the basis for the infinite excellence of oneself and others, one will not attain all forms of excellence without exception. Therefore, one should maintain a mind that is unerring regarding its own nature. This is because stainless excellence arises precisely from wisdom and method. Although these two share the single characteristic of an unerring, vast mind, they are distinguished by the adherence to conventional designations of difference.
Thus, wisdom should be understood as the nature that reverses the mind’s perversion regarding suchness, while method is taught as the reversal of the lack of capacity for one’s own result.
Through the embrace of all branches of wisdom,
The experience of supreme joy is cultivated.
The nature of excellence is the branch that becomes the method; the wise should meditate upon it without interruption. Following that:
"From the emergence of wisdom and method,
The emanations of inseparable focal points radiate.
Through appearance, the objects are established;
One perfectly offers the body of the object itself."
Having actualized one's own essence, which consists of wisdom and method according to the sequence explained, one should manifest the essence that is inseparable from one's own nature for as long as mastery over those emanations is attained. This is because, by being non-erroneous and capable of producing its own result, it is of a single definition as the nature of wisdom and method, and because the continuum is also of an inseparable nature. A continuum is a stream of conceptualization arising from each preceding conceptualization. Furthermore, what is called an "emanation" is not something else; it is likewise merely an imputation.
If one asks, "Since it has a diverse nature due to the differences in color and so forth, how can it be called 'one'?"—if that were the case, nothing at all would be one. Even a single deity's body has a diverse identity because it consists of many parts, and a partless entity is not perceived.
Just as in the conventional sense a single substance is established as one, so too, with respect to the diverse nature of other modes, by depending on the realization of that essence, one engages in mental engagement through the non-differentiated adherence that "all are the self." By these [statements], the superior conviction in the equality of all things is explained, because they are identical in every respect, being free from aspects such as grasping and so forth. Otherwise, there is no other "all" that serves as the basis for the convention [of "all"] apart from the objects of superior adherence to those appearances; for since those too are of a nature realized simultaneously, they cannot be differentiated, and thus it is shown that there is no other characteristic of oneness. Therefore, for one who is intent on the individual realization of the actual nature of things as they are, the knowledge will engage [with the thought] that "all are equal in self" within this mere conventionality; however, it is impossible for anyone to take any entity as an object as either different or non-different. This is because all cognitions, by abiding in their own essence alone, do not apprehend the essence of another, and without making [the other] an object, conventions such as "different" and so forth are untenable.
In this way, each movement of the yogi’s own mind should be individually analyzed as being the very nature of all the deities of the maṇḍala, because it is by its very essence the reversal of every discordant factor without exception. This is because the meditative absorptions (samādhi) of each respective deity demonstrate the non-apprehension of those various distortions.
Since the nature of the mind itself is free from aspects such as grasping and so forth, it is the nature of the dharmadhātu. Since that very nature is luminosity (prabhāsvara) due to being free from adventitious stains, and since it is the very cause for generating other wisdoms, it is the identity of the mirror-like wisdom (ādarśa-jñāna). Because it is the identity of non-apprehending compassion and so forth, and because it lacks the grasping of other mental continua as distinct, it is the wisdom of equality (samatā-jñāna). Because it is non-erroneous regarding all objects of knowledge, it is the wisdom of individual discernment (pratyavekṣaṇā-jñāna). Because it is the very cause for the benefit of all beings without exception, it is the identity of the wisdom of all-accomplishing action (kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna). Therefore, these are respectively the natures of the lords, such as Vairocana and the others.
By being the very antidote to apprehension, it is the characteristic of the door of liberation of emptiness (śūnyatā-vimokṣamukha). Likewise, by being the antidote to signs, wrong aspirations, and erroneous formative activities, it is respectively the identity of the doors of liberation of signlessness (ānimitta), wishlessness (apraṇihita), and non-formation (anabhisaṃskāra).
Therefore, in their respective order, they are the nature of the consorts of the families, such as Vajrasattvī and so forth. Because they focus upon the dharmadhātu through the four doors of liberation, such as emptiness and so forth, they are the very cause for the arising of all meditative absorptions (samādhi).
Because they are the antidotes to internal misconceptions, they have the aspect of internal emptiness; because external objects are not perceived, they have the nature of external emptiness; because their basis is not perceived, they possess the identity of internal-external emptiness; and because they are free from attachment to the vessel-like world, they have the characteristic of great emptiness.
Therefore, they are the nature of the meditative absorptions of Vajrasattva and the others, which rely upon the mirror-like wisdom (ādarśa-jñāna). This is because the mirror-like wisdom, which is the transformation of the latencies of name and form and so forth, is the very basis for the non-perception of the internal and so forth. Just as each serves as the antidote to its respective misconception, they are the cause for the arising of bodhicitta, for leading [others], for attachment [to the path], and for the expression of "well done."
Likewise, the wisdom of emptiness is the emptiness of emptiness because it is signless; it is the emptiness of the ultimate because there is no grasping at the ultimate as a sign; and it is the emptiness of the conditioned because there is no grasping at the signs of the conditioned accumulation of merit.
Because there is no apprehension of signs even regarding the unconditioned factors of enlightenment, it is the emptiness of the unconditioned. Therefore, it is the nature of the four—Vajraratna and the others—of the wheel of the wisdom of equality. This is because, by way of apprehending the wisdom of equality, which is the nature of the transformation of the afflicted mind, there is no apprehension of signs as previously described; and because it is the cause for conferring empowerment, increasing majesty, definitively engaging in the perfection of generosity, and causing great enthusiasm, by way of abandoning their respective discordant factors.
Furthermore, because there is no clinging to a longing for the welfare of sentient beings, it is the emptiness of that which transcends limits. Because there is no taking up a vow such as, "I shall completely cast off the beginning and end of cyclic existence," it is the emptiness of that which has no beginning or end. Because there is no clinging to the thought, "I shall not completely cast off even the virtues within the sphere of my own nirvana without remainder," it is the emptiness of non-rejection. Because it is free from the pursuit of the thought, "I shall completely purify my own specific lineage of characteristics," it is the emptiness of intrinsic nature.
Therefore, it is the nature of the four—Vajradharma and the others—based upon the discriminating wisdom, which is characterized by the transformation of the conceptualizing mind.
The discerning wisdom, characterized by the transformation of the conceptual mind, is the very discernment of the suchness of phenomena because it is free from the aforementioned distortions. Furthermore, by way of that, it is the cause for never turning back from the naturally pure nature of phenomena, from insight, and from wisdom; and it is the cause for thoroughly knowing the intended meaning in its entirety. Because it is without attachment to the form body, which consists of the major and minor marks, it is the emptiness of its own characteristics. Because it is without attachment to the dharmakāya, which is the nature of the powers, the fearlessnesses, and so forth, it is the emptiness of all phenomena. Because it does not superimpose a person or phenomena and does not deprecate the characteristics of emptiness as they have been explained, it is the emptiness of the nature of non-entities. Therefore, it is the essence of the four [deities] such as Vajradharma, who rely upon the all-accomplishing wisdom. The all-accomplishing wisdom, which is the essence of the transformation of the consciousnesses of the eye and so forth, is the cause of the wisdom of the emptiness of the body and so forth, because it performs the offering, protection, and removal of obstacles for all the Sugatas without exception by way of abandoning the aforementioned distortions. Likewise, [it is the cause of the wisdom of the emptiness of] avarice, immoral conduct, impatience, and...
Because it is the very antidote to laziness, it is the nature of the perfections of generosity, ethical discipline, patience, and diligence. Therefore, it is the nature of the four secret offerings; for, by the power of the purity of one's own doors of liberation, the accomplishment of the mirror-like wisdom and so forth produces the desired distinctions in a spontaneously present manner.
Because it abandons distraction, corrupted insight, incorrect aspirations, and non-expedient means, it is the nature of the four outer offerings characterized by the perfections of meditative concentration, insight, aspiration, and expedient means; for it is the nature of entering the realm of phenomena (dharmadhātu) with joy through the path of effort.
Because it is the essence of faith, diligence, mindfulness, and meditative absorption, it is the nature of the four guardians of the four gates; for it is the cause of conviction, engagement, complete joy, and continuity regarding the Great Vehicle of the Great Vehicle.
That very [nature], in dependence upon the mere purity of insight, is the nature of the sixteen meditative absorptions such as loving-kindness by way of the divisions of emptiness as previously explained. In dependence upon expedient means alone, it is the nature of all mundane meditative absorptions without exception. That very [nature] is the [nature of] the aggregates, elements, and... of the thoroughly afflicted [factors].
Because one is free from superimposing [existence] upon the sense bases, one should understand the characteristics of the aggregates of purification and so forth. Having abandoned all superimpositions through the mind that conceptualizes that very [reality] without exception, one should rely correctly upon it for as long as one conceptualizes it as suchness. This is because, by clinging to it as its very essence, it is the authentic basis for its arising, and it is held to be that which generates the primordial wisdom of the yogi.
Having viewed that very [reality] as non-different from the self of all things without exception, one should offer correctly with all objects of appearance, such as form and so forth. If one asks, "How is it appropriate to offer to the self? Is it not the case that all slight experiences of form and so forth are also prohibited?" it is not so, because in every respect, the self alone is the object of offering. This is because here, there is no other desired self apart from the mind, nor is there any object of offering other than the mind. Even the essential nature of a cast statue and so forth is a superimposition by the mind upon the very deity one desires. There is nothing more than mere individual appearance; it is similar to the teaching that the very self, superimposed as the deity upon oneself, is the unsurpassed fruit.
Furthermore, the claim that "it is because all slight experiences are prohibited" is also illogical, because the general application of a prohibitive statement is negated by the establishment of a specific [positive] instance.
Affirmation and negation are contradictory only with respect to a single object, not with respect to multiple objects. If it is argued that it is untenable for an action to have multiple objects without a distinction in its own nature, this is not so; for through the distinction of the collection [of causes], it is consistent with producing both desired and undesired results. Thus, the undesired result is the object to be negated. It is not the case that everything becomes so merely by clinging to its nature, for we do not observe the capacity for death and so forth to arise from poison that has been purified by mantras and the like when it is consumed. Similarly, although actions such as those directed outward from the body are generally prohibited elsewhere, here, because they are motivated by extraordinary compassion and so forth, they do not become undesired results. This is like causing harm through actions such as abandoning out of affection for individuals who have become so, or like rescuing a woman being carried away by water and so forth by perceiving her as one's own mother. For Bodhisattvas, any action engaged in through mental engagement with virtue and so forth is an object of manifest appearance, because it is the very definition of the Bodhisattva path. As it is said: "Because of compassion and love, there is no fault in a virtuous mind," and "When one who possesses compassion sees the welfare of others, even prohibited acts are permitted for them." Furthermore, from the Bodhisattva-saṃkalpa: [The actions of a Bodhisattva arise from conceptualization...]
"Whether it be virtuous or even if it be non-virtuous, because it is under the influence of that [mind], it is entirely virtuous," so it has been said. This is because, apart from skillful means, one is established in the definite turning away from acts such as taking life; however, skillful means is that which grants permission for such acts. As stated in the Trāyastriṃśa Sūtra and the Abhisambodhi: "In this regard, all Bodhisattvas must turn away from taking life in every respect; however, if they see sentient beings who are harming the Three Jewels," and so forth; and likewise, "they must turn away from taking what is not given; however, if they see sentient beings who are miserly," and so forth; and likewise, "if they do not even give rise to a covetous mind toward the wives of others who are protected by others, let alone engaging in sexual union, then for those who are to be tamed by such means," and so on in detail. Thus, one should examine the sections of all the trainings. Physical and verbal actions motivated by a mind of attachment are non-virtuous because they have the result of total affliction, but they are not so by their own nature, for they are neutral. Furthermore, that which is undertaken with the intention to benefit others is the very nature of the Bodhisattva's training, as it produces the unsurpassed result.
Maintaining one’s own ethical discipline does not constitute a transgression for a bodhisattva. As the Blessed One said:
“Whatever dharma causes the qualities of awakening to arise for those who are certain, this is the meaning of ethical discipline for those possessing virtuous qualities. Whatever dharma causes the qualities of awakening to decline for those who are beneficial, this is called ‘corrupt ethical discipline’ by the Leaders.”
Furthermore, the Noble Akṣayamatinirdeśa states: “Through skill in means, one should not disparage anything.” This is because, although the enjoyment of objects such as form is the same, the distinction between what is with transgression and what is without transgression is established by the power of attachment.
Enjoying the five objects of the senses while being attached to them through the nature of the afflictions constitutes enjoying the objects of the afflictions; however, when there is no afflicted intention, it is not afflicted. Moreover, there are three types: that which accords with worldly results, that which accords with one’s own nirvāṇa, and that which accords with the unsurpassed result.
Regarding these, the first is the mental engagement of offering objects as they are obtained to gods and others in order to attain higher realms and so forth. The second is the pursuit of the awakening of the śrāvakas and others, which is the analytical discernment of form and so forth in terms of impermanence and so forth in their suchness.
As it is said in the Saṃyukta Āgama: "Monks, when a monk sees forms with the eye, he overcomes the forms; the forms do not overcome him." This is taught in detail, up to: "Because he dwells having perceived them as impermanent, the forms do not overcome him."
Third, there are also four aspects: entering through devotion to aspiration, entering through the individual investigation of suchness alone, entering through an object of observation that is merely vast, and entering through both the profound and the vast. In that regard, for those who have attained illumination through forms and so forth, they follow the experience of their own nature and are oriented toward the intention that brings benefit to all beings without exception. From the complete purification of the sphere of activity, when a bodhisattva here sees a form that is a basis for mental pleasure with the eye, they should generate the thought: "May all sentient beings attain the supreme body of a tathāgata." When they see a form that is a basis for mental displeasure, they should generate the thought: "May all sentient beings become weary of the suffering of saṃsāra." When they see a form that is a basis for equanimity, they should generate the thought: "May all sentient beings have minds of equanimity toward all dharmas." This is what was taught extensively, and likewise in the Sūtrālaṃkāra:
"In whatever way the compassionate one engages in the sphere of the senses, in that very way, abiding in whatever is appropriate and harmonious, he manifests [the Dharma] to sentient beings out of compassion." Thus it was said.
The second [point] is the mental engagement of the analytical discernment of selflessness toward all objects of enjoyment without exception, while regarding the realm of sentient beings with compassion. As the Blessed One extensively taught: "Noble son, when the wicked Māra, in order to create obstacles, displays forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile objects that transform the mind to a Dharma-preaching monk, he should, through skillful means and wisdom, overcome them and then enjoy them." This is because the mental engagement of suchness is the very antidote for the arising of all faults without exception.
For even the performance of undesirable actions is diminished and exhausted by the analytical discernment of suchness. Since the power to produce desirable results is thereby destroyed, how could there be any opportunity for afflicted karma in one who has realized forms and so forth as being of the nature of authentic analytical discernment? Afflicted karma, which is a particular state of a distorted mind, cannot arise simultaneously with that analytical discernment of selflessness, as the two are contradictory.
As it is said:
"The variety of the world is not desire;
The desire of a person's conceptualization is desire."
"Though the world remains diverse in this way, the steadfast should nevertheless abandon desire for it," so it is said. Third, because it focuses on the vast, one's own forms and so forth are themselves the antidote to attachment to ordinary forms; thus, they are the indirect cause for establishing the state of a perfect Buddha, for one enjoys forms and so forth that are concordant with the pride of the essence of a perfect Buddha.
If one objects: "Even if that were granted, the meditation on the Blessed One as one's own essence is not the nature of a perfect Buddha in the ultimate sense," [we reply:] if that were so, there would also be no enjoyment of the ordinary self, because in suchness, forms and so forth do not exist at all. This is similar to the teaching that the forms and so forth taken as objects through the attachment, "I see forms and so forth," do not exist in suchness in that way. Therefore, we see in the scriptures of the Blessed One that some attachments, which do not depend on abiding in suchness, are non-virtuous because they produce what is undesirable, while others are virtuous because they are necessary for the purpose of the supreme person.
For that very reason, it is established that even by way of mere name, the pride of a perfect Buddha is the cause for bringing the supreme perfections to completion. However, it cannot be established that everything becomes virtuous in nature solely through one's own personal enjoyment, because it is by the power of intention that even that becomes virtuous in nature. It is said that if one bodhisattva were to provide all the requisites of happiness to each of eighty thousand monks in the retinue of a Tathāgata for eighty thousand years over many eons, and another bodhisattva were to subsist on alms for the sake of upholding the sublime Dharma, the latter bodhisattva would generate far more merit than the former.
The fourth conceptualization is as follows: because one has abandoned all stains of conceptualizing the very nature and essence of reality, one is of the nature of the Sugata’s body. Through the emanation of various manifestations arising from the gateway of manifold rays of light, one is intent upon acting for the benefit of all beings without exception. To view all things without exception as equal, through the aforementioned distinctions of form and so forth that accord with that [nature], is the singular cause of supreme perfection, because it focuses on the very essence of that which is to be directly realized.
Regarding such forms and so forth, the very suspicion that making offerings to a perfect Buddha—which is of the nature of an indeterminate investigation—is accompanied by a transgression, is not the cause of a great transgression. This is because, by serving as the very antidote to ordinary, distorted mental engagement, it is of the nature of the training in higher ethical discipline (adhiśīla). Since it ceases all mental engagement with the unreal objects of the eyes and so forth, it is the supreme basis for nirvāṇa, and is thus the meaning of supreme restraint. Accordingly, it is said:
"Restraint of the eye is excellent;
Restraint of the ear is excellent.
Restraint of the nose is excellent;
Restraint of the tongue is excellent.
Restraint of the body is excellent;
Restraint of the mind is excellent.
A monk who is restrained in every way
Is completely liberated from all suffering."
Because one perceives oneself and others as the essence of a perfect Buddha, it is of the nature of the training in higher mind (adhicitta). Since it is non-erroneous regarding its own essence, it is also not a mere object of the training in higher wisdom (adhiprajñā). Likewise, the inclusion of all the perfections (pāramitā) and so forth without exception, through the very act of turning away from faults such as avarice, should be understood by following the previous [explanation]. Therefore, those who turn away from the nature that is concordant with generating such a bodhicitta have abandoned the supreme cause and will not become vessels for perfect enlightenment.
Fear of what is not a proper ground is the very cause that produces a succession of meaningless states. For any being who, due to the cause of delusion, becomes afraid of what is not a proper ground, a great mass of non-merit will arise over a long period of time. Because they lack the [spiritual] lineage, lack a [spiritual] friend, have not trained their intellects, and have not previously cultivated virtue, they become afraid of these teachings and thus fall away from this great purpose.
Since perfect enlightenment is the supreme cause for the welfare of others and the basis for various powers, I have explained that the mind of equanimity toward that [enlightenment] is the sole supreme cause. By even a small portion of the stainless merit from this explanation, may beings with the wisdom of a Buddha, free from error, attain enlightenment.
The Introduction to the Practice of Self-Realization, composed by the master Buddhajñānapāda, is hereby complete. It was translated, edited, and finalized by the paṇḍita Śāntibhadra and the translator 'Gos Lhas btsas.
Translation status: Not among 84000's published translations, and not in progress there. Translations published elsewhere have not been searched for, so one may exist. (source: 84000 catalogue + registry; checked 2026-11-10).
Set in Newsreader and EB Garamond; Tibetan in Noto Serif Tibetan; Chinese in Noto Serif SC.