Derge Kangyur/Tengyur e-text, Esukhia/Barom edition — public domain (mechanical reproduction)
This commentary provides a technical analysis of the definitive teaching on empowerment, focusing on the intersection of tantric ritual, somatic experience, and Madhyamaka philosophy. The author seeks to reconcile the experiential aspects of Vajrayana—specifically the four joys, the role of the action seal (karmamudrā), and the manipulation of subtle energy (bindu)—with the non-conceptual realization of the Middle Way. By analyzing the nature of bliss and the non-arising of signs, the text argues that the highest states of tantric practice are not distinct from the ultimate nature of mind. The work commits the reader to a rigorous understanding of how ritual forms, such as seed-syllables and the four mudrās, serve as supports for realizing the non-dual state. It warns against misconceptions regarding desire and existence, insisting that true empowerment is found in the abandonment of conceptual proliferation and the recognition of the coemergent nature of reality.
Provenance
About this text
A commentary on the definitive teaching on empowerment, the Sekanirdeśapañjikā belongs to the tradition of the General Unexcelled Yoga Tantra Works. The work is attributed to the Indian author Rāmapāla. It was translated into the Tibetan language by Samantabhadrapāda and nag tsho, and is preserved in the Tengyur (vol. ཝི), where it extends over 36 pages. The text provides a technical analysis of empowerment, focusing on the intersection of tantric ritual, somatic experience, and Madhyamaka philosophy. It seeks to reconcile the experiential aspects of Vajrayana—specifically the four joys, the role of the action seal, and the manipulation of subtle energy—with the non-conceptual realization of the Middle Way. By analyzing the nature of bliss and the non-arising of signs, the author argues that the highest states of tantric practice are not distinct from the ultimate nature of mind. A scholar or serious reader consults this work today to understand how ritual forms, such as seed-syllables and the four mudrās, serve as supports for realizing the non-dual state, and to examine the text's warnings against misconceptions regarding desire and existence in the pursuit of true empowerment.
Cite thisAnuvāda, “A Commentary on the Difficult Points of “A Teaching on Empowerment”” (Toh 2253), machine draft, 2026.https://naxiai.com/tibetan/works/toh2253
Summary & commentary
Significance
The work is significant for its attempt to provide a philosophical grounding for the somatic and ritual practices of the Hevajra tradition. It demonstrates the integration of high-level Buddhist epistemology with the specific technicalities of empowerment, making it a crucial resource for understanding how tantric bliss is interpreted as a vehicle for emptiness.
Structure
Passages
Section
Description
1-5
Preliminary Homages and Ritual Foundations
Initial invocations and the significance of seed-syllables and ritual forms.
6-13
The Nature of Bliss and the Four Joys
Analysis of the psychological and somatic states of joy, distinguishing between desire and the absence of pleasure.
17-41
Philosophical Grounding in the Middle Way
Discussions on non-arising, the refutation of nihilism and eternalism, and the role of valid cognition in realizing emptiness.
42-49
The Four Mudrās and Subtle Body Realization
Technical explanation of the four mudrās, the nature of the bindu, and the integration of mantra with the reality of the deity.
Themes
Non-duality of Bliss and Emptiness (6, 9, 42, 44)
Somatic and Subtle Energy Systems (11, 25, 30, 44)
The Middle Way and Non-arising (8, 12, 38, 39)
Ritual Symbolism and Seed-Syllables (4, 5, 25, 46)
The Four Mudrās (47, 49)
Summary, significance and provenance note generated by gemma4:31b from the translation and the catalogue record.
AnuvādaA Commentary on the Difficult Points of “A Teaching on Empowerment”·
In the language of India: Sekanirdeśapañjikā. In the language of Tibet: dBang bskur ba nges par bstan pa’i dka’ ’grel (The Commentary on the Difficult Points of the Definitive Teaching on Empowerment). Homage to Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta!
To the protector whose very nature is the dharmadhātu, the sphere of activity of the bodhisattvas, the guru who acts for the benefit of beings—to that unsurpassed one, I pay respectful homage. I lack the supreme confidence and skillful means to explain the scriptures of the sublime Dharma to others. Nevertheless, at the urging of my guru, I have composed this explanation; it is appropriate to write it down. Although it is not for the sake of others, it is solely for the purpose of my own easy recollection. Yet, for the sake of others who seek this meaning, I shall write a little for those like myself.
Here, the great scholar, the illustrious protector Maitreya, having thoroughly trained himself, desires to compose a definitive teaching on empowerment by following the Caturmudrā-niścaya (The Definitive Teaching on the Four Seals) composed by the unsurpassed guru, the master Nāgārjuna, regarding the Kriyā, Caryā, Yoga, Anuttarayoga, and Unsurpassed Yoga Tantras. First, wishing to state the subject matter, he bows to the essence of method and wisdom, the form of Evaṃ, which is the initial meaning of the introductory words of the scriptures or the condensed summaries. The phrase "In the form of Evaṃ" and so forth refers to bowing to the essence of the dharmamudrā (phenomenal seal) through the two syllables E and Vaṃ, which are the nature of sound; this is a bowing of body, speech, and mind. For what purpose? It is for the sake of accomplishing enlightenment.
It is for the sake of attaining the state of a perfectly complete Buddha. The form of Evaṃ is of great significance and great benefit. As it is said in the Questions of Śakra, Lord of the Gods, addressed to the Blessed One:
"O Lord of the Gods, listen to the sequence
Of how the All-Seeing One first spoke these words:
The eighty-four thousand heaps of Dharma
Are all shown to have these two syllables as their basis and their parents.
The syllable E is the mother,
And Vaṃ is known as the father.
The bindu is their union,
A union most wondrous.
E is the lotus,
And Vaṃ is the vajra itself.
The bindu is the seed therein,
From which the three worlds arise.
E is the two-fold insight,
And Vaṃ is the lord of supreme joy.
The bindu is the indestructible reality,
From which the syllables themselves are born.
Whoever knows these two syllables,
The mudrā of Dharma,
Will turn the wheel of Dharma
For all sentient beings.
Those who constantly recite these two syllables
Without knowing their meaning
Are like outsiders who have abandoned the application
To the Buddha’s teachings.
Since the Omniscient One dwells here
Within the illusion of the two syllables Evaṃ,
Evaṃ was explained at the very beginning
Of the teaching of the sublime Dharma.
Therefore, Śakra, Lord of the Gods,
If you desire the state of permanence,
Remember the illusion of these two syllables
And hold the sublime Dharma as your guru."
Thus it was said.
Since this is the subject matter relevant to the present occasion, it shall therefore be explained. Regarding the phrase, "That which is the cause of the four moments": the "four" are the moment of variety, the moment of ripening, the moment of discernment, and the moment free from characteristics. That which is the cause of these is the "agent." Because the syllables E-Vaṃ are the essence of the Dharma-mudrā, and by familiarizing oneself with the Dharma-mudrā, one abandons the afflictions along with their habitual tendencies. The specific quality of that abandonment is the specific quality of the moments themselves. Therefore, that which is the cause of the moments is E-Vaṃ.
Furthermore, to explain it in that same way: "In which joy is born," and so forth. From that very nature of wisdom and method, the specific moments of joy—namely, joy, supreme joy, the joy of separation, and the coemergent joy—arise distinctly and without confusion as the primordial wisdom of the path. Then, because it is the cause of the four moments, and from that very source the distinctions of joy arise, that is the form of E-Vaṃ. "I prostrate to the achiever of enlightenment" is the summarized meaning; this is the explanation according to the nature of the words.
Now, the explanation of the underlying intent of the question shall be given. According to the guru’s oral instructions, the form of E-Vaṃ is the syllable; it is a prostration to the form of E-Vaṃ, the essence of the source of phenomena (dharmodaya). Alternatively, having removed the prefix, "the form of E-Vaṃ" means the form of E-Vaṃ.
Homage to the mudrā of the source of phenomena, the casket of all buddhas. The Blessed One praised that which possesses such a form as the source of phenomena, saying: "The excellent form of E, adorned in the center by the syllable Vaṃ, is the abode of all bliss, the precious casket of the buddhas." If one asks, "What is the result of paying homage to this?" it is said: "That which is the cause of the four moments." The four moments are the diverse, the ripening, the analytical, and the one devoid of characteristics. "Cause" means the producer. That cause is the diverse, and it extends up to the culmination of production. Nevertheless, the scriptures should be explained in detail. Because of an intense aspiration for the result, one pays homage to the cause; as it is said: "Just as the reality of the cause is seen, so too is the reality of the result." Furthermore, to demonstrate a second reason for paying homage, it is said: "That in which joy arises through differentiation." Joy, supreme joy, special joy, and coemergent joy are the divisions of joy. Since that from which they arise without being mixed is the nature of the producer, the fifth case (ablative) would be appropriate; however, the use of the seventh case (locative) in "in which" indicates the locus, because that in which they arise is firmly established there. Furthermore: "The wisdom of the moment, the wisdom of bliss, is firmly established in the form of E-vaṃ."
And likewise: "The vow of all the Buddhas is perfectly established in the form of E-Vaṃ." And likewise: "Oṃ padma sukha dhara mahārāga sukhaṃ dada caturānanda bhaga viśva hūṃ hūṃ hūṃ kuryaṃ kuruṣva me." This is the homage to the support. It is by the words: "I prostrate to that place where the Sugatas dwell, where they walk, where they stand, and where they sleep like lions." Why does one prostrate? It is for the sake of accomplishing awakening—that is, for the sake of accomplishing thorough knowledge exactly as it is, up until the state of a perfectly complete Buddha. The phrase "that which becomes the cause of the four moments" indicates the cause for prostrating. If one asks, "What arises from that?" it is the four moments. If one asks, "What is their sequence?" for that reason, the words beginning with "variegated" (viśva) are spoken. If one asks, "If the sequence taught in the Tantra is set aside here, how can the third be asserted as being devoid of characteristics?" for that reason, the words "by abandoning the fierce application" are stated. In that context, the "fierce application" is as follows: "variegated" (viśva) refers to various aspects, such as the embrace of the nature of the apprehended and the apprehender. "Ripening" (vipāka) is the opposite of that: it is not variegated, and it generates the wisdom of bliss without an apprehended object. "Thoroughly crushing" (vimarda) is the bliss of non-conceptual non-seeing, up to the point of the pervasive ultimate of the jewel. The "other" is that which is devoid of characteristics.
It is a state of being definitively filled by the absence of pleasure, having completely abandoned desire. Yet, it is not the absence of desire, because the pleasure experienced is remembered. Nor is it the presence of desire, because that would lead to a downfall. As it is said:
"Various and manifold aspects are described,
Such as embracing, kissing, and so forth.
The ripening is the reverse of those;
The consumer is the wisdom of bliss.
'Pressing' is described as investigation.
The investigation of the wisdom of bliss
Is other than the three that are devoid of characteristics.
It is the complete abandonment of desire and the absence of desire."
According to the system of those who propound the absence of aspects, this very experience of the jewel abides definitively as self-cognizing bliss alone, free from the turbidity of all aspects such as blue and so forth, like the center of an autumn sky free from clouds at midday. The valid cognition that refutes aspects—namely, that they are devoid of being one or many—is not elaborated upon here for fear of excessive prolixity. As it is said:
"Therefore, in the wisdom of the object,
There is no appearance of its own nature.
Oneness is thoroughly refuted,
And multiplicity does not occur.
Regarding the parts that appear as external,
Whatever distinctions are fully determined
Are merely the deluded appearances
Arising from the indivisible wisdom."
This very state is the dharmakāya. Following that, the wisdom of the aspects of the maṇḍala of the wheel of activity and so forth is the saṃbhogakāya.
The forms of the elements and their derivatives, such as Śākyamuni and others, are the nirmāṇakāya (emanation body). Their single essence is the svabhāvikakāya (nature body). Likewise, thorough refinement is the dharma (dharma body). Maturation is the saṃbhogakāya (enjoyment body). The various aspects are the nirmāṇakāya. Being devoid of characteristics is the svabhāvikakāya. Furthermore, as it is taught in the Mahāyānottaratantra-śāstra: "The form bodies are the latter." Since it is taught that one should meditate as long as [the object] remains non-apprehended, by meditating for a long time without interruption with these very examples as illustrations and with devotion, the saṃbhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya, such as the maṇḍala circle and so forth, will be definitively perfected through the power of previous aspirations. Alternatively, "bliss" refers to experience; it arises clearly of its own accord from meditating with devotion and so forth. As it is taught: "Therefore, whether it be real or unreal, whatever is meditated upon, when the power of meditation is perfected, the result is a clear, non-conceptual cognition." Here too, the two form bodies arise through the power of the specific distinctions of previous aspirations. There are two methods for entering this very [state], as it is said: "By the method of the maṇḍala circle and so forth, and also by the stage of self-consecration." This very [state] should also be described as the meaning of the Middle Way.
"The continuum of self-awareness is uninterrupted,
Blue and so forth do not appear,
And since signs do not arise,
One has entered the Middle Way."
Here, the non-arising of signs indicates the absence of clinging. Because there is no clinging to existence, non-existence, and so forth, it is the very state of being free from the four extremes. Regarding the fourth [empowerment] here, it is by the words, "In that way, the fourth is likewise." In that context, "in that way" refers to the experience at the time of insight, which is a perception without aspects. "Likewise" means it should be understood just like the wisdom of insight.
If those who propound that [consciousness] possesses aspects argue that a consciousness without aspects is not experienced even in dreams, they say: "A mind that has abandoned the wheel of aspects does not function. Regarding that, the powerful refutation is the glorious, extensive system of the Middle Way. If this is not a refutation, then this non-duality is manifold; from what state is the mind asserted to be without aspects?"
One should not think in that way. If it is argued that because the aspects are not clearly manifest, the aspects did not exist previously, [we reply]: since it is impossible to manifest what does not exist, and because the appearance is ascertained following the experience, blue and so forth do exist. As it is said: "Whatever consciousness appears for as long as it does, it is experienced in that way. The very nature of the manifold aspects is what is called the single essence."
Thus, by this [statement], there exists the supreme feeling that is non-dual with the mind. Here, for fear of excessive prolixity, an analysis of the valid cognitions that establish or refute [this] has not been performed. In that way, the meaning of the Middle Way, which is free from the four extremes, will be established:
"It is not a non-existent luminous entity, nor is it something other than that. It is not one, not two, not both, and not neither. If beings are thus liberated from the four extremes, what difference is there between the systems of the Sākāravāda and the Middle Way?"
There is a distinction based on the isolates of the saṃbhogakāya and so forth: the vimarda is the dharmakāya; the vipāka is the saṃbhogakāya; the vicitra is the nirmāṇakāya; and that which is free from characteristics is the svābhāvikakāya. The wisdom that serves as the indicator is prajñājñāna. Likewise, that which is to be cultivated is expressed by the word "again" (yang). That which possesses the seven limbs is intended as the object of accomplishment.
In that regard, the seven limbs are: the feeling of the saṃbhogakāya; the union of yuganaddha; the nature of great bliss; the absence of conceptualization; compassion that is definitively filled [with the power of previous aspirations] to act for the benefit of sentient beings through the saṃbhogakāya and so forth; the uninterrupted continuity; and the lack of cessation, meaning the continuum is never severed. Furthermore:
"Enjoyment, union, great bliss, and the absence of intrinsic nature; compassion, that which is filled, the uninterrupted, and the unceasing."
"This object of accomplishment, endowed with the seven limbs, is asserted by the mantrin to be the nature of the mind that meditates upon the signs." Thus it is taught. Alternatively, what is the use of the yoga of accomplishing the seven limbs? There is no certainty here. For is not the meditation on the wheel of Nairātmyā-yoginī also a cause of buddhahood? Here, the yoga is not the Nairātmyā-yoginī because of the absence of union (saṃpuṭa). As it is said:
"If this object of accomplishment, endowed with the seven limbs, is indeed the object to be accomplished, why is it not accepted that the wheel of Nairātmyā-yoginī is realized?"
If one thinks: "In that case, there is also the method of the khaṭvāṅga and the union. As it is said: 'The goddess in union with the khaṭvāṅga possesses the sambhogakāya and so forth. Why is it not established that the wheel of Nairātmyā-yoginī is realized?'" This is what is taught. That too is not beautiful. Even in the Pāramitāyāna, although the aforementioned union is absent, because there is the union of bodhicitta consisting of method and insight, it would follow that the object of accomplishment endowed with the seven limbs is established according to the way of Secret Mantra. If, setting aside the special union, one conceives of it otherwise, it would also follow for the emptiness and the natural union of other vehicles. Therefore, in this case as well, it is logical that the practitioner is indeed endowed with the seven limbs.
As for the claim: "Because if the breasts are abandoned, they become the vajra; they abide in the center of the lotus. Having transformed the two cheeks into the bell, the anthers themselves become the vajra," this is also not beautiful. Why? Because all of these are not the state of accomplishment, but rather the time of practice. Therefore, even without such means of accomplishment in the Pāramitāyāna, it would follow that the seven-limbed accomplishment would be achieved. Furthermore, it is difficult to refute the Pāramitāyāna in this regard, for if perfection occurs without the initial union, then that [union] would exist. If we also accept such a thing, the method of accomplishment is simply different. Others state: "These very things are like an illusion, non-dual." Just as in a dream, after experiencing joy together with a lover, one subsequently experiences the dream-objects as they were examined in the dream; thus, because they are experienced, they are not false. Yet they are not true either, because they lack the non-deceptiveness of a substance that is correctly cognized as self and other, performing a function as perceived during the waking state. As it is said: "If the dream is like a dream, the mind itself becomes various and false; because it is neither true nor logical, it is not attachment, but becomes clear." Even so, this variety is not utterly false, for it is logical. Nor is it the ultimate truth.
Regarding the phrase "not possessing an arising of existence or non-existence," and so forth: because an unarisen mind does not exist in the ultimate sense—which is the very non-arising of that which is clung to as dependent origination—it is as it has been said: "Whatever arises dependently, that is by nature unarisen. How can that which is by nature unarisen be said to 'arise'?" Here too, the presentation of the fourth [joy] and its possession of the dharmakāya and so forth should be understood as before.
If one asks, "What is the nature of this 'separation from awareness' up to the point where it is said to be produced by the power of the fierce empowerment?" it shall be explained. In order to show that [your position] contradicts the scriptures, it is said: "Point out and show the mark in the midst of the supreme joy and the separation." By this, it is intended here that [the mark] is in the middle of both. That is not found in your own system. That is not so, for the meaning of this is otherwise. Even so, this is the sixth [case] of definite determination; therefore, the meaning is this: between these two, that which is primary should be grasped here, and the primary is the separation itself. If one says, "There is not even the slightest thing that is not excellent," then it would also not accord with: "The first separation is the limit of the supreme; the Heruka of the empty and the non-empty."
Therefore, this is the system [of interpretation] which states that "the first [joy] is the end of the joy of separation." However, that is not the case, because its meaning is otherwise: "the first of the joy of separation" means that which is both the joy of separation and the first, for the "first" is in relation to the coemergent [joy]. If it is argued that this [interpretation] is therefore well-established, then how is it that [the text] says: "The first of the joy of separation is to be characterized; it is the very absence of the three purities"? Here too, the phrase "it is both the joy of separation and the first" is as before. Even so, how is it that [the text] says: "The crushing is said to be the investigation; it is the very consuming of one's own bliss"? Here too, the words "crushing" and so forth must be clearly understood as being of the nature of conceptualization. If that is so, then how could it be designated here as "non-conceptual"? Therefore, it is contradicted by worldly renown. Furthermore, in the world, one thinks of "crushing," "striving," "shaking," "investigating," and so forth, as being mental deliberations regarding their purposes and the like. Moreover, it is said: "The first joy is variety; the supreme joy is ripening; the joy of separation is crushing; the coemergent is devoid of characteristics." Here too, it is certain that the joy of separation itself is called "crushing." Furthermore: "The first joy is the world itself; likewise, the supreme joy is also the world; the joy of separation is also the world itself."
Regarding the statement, "The three coemergents are not observed," since the joy-free [joy] is also the very nature of transmigrating beings, it is taught as the nature of saṃsāra. This is taught as being merely the conceptualization of saṃsāra; it would thus be taught as being possessed of conceptualization. However, if one asserts that the coemergent is non-conceptual, that too would not be established. Furthermore, the claim that this is so because of the statement, "Whatever is the essence of coemergent joy, it is the first of the joy-free at the end of the supreme," is also untenable. In the Yoginī Tantras, that which is to be accomplished is also the so-called coemergent great bliss, which is to be indicated through effort at the beginning of the joy-free at the end of the supreme joy; thus, such [assertions] are also untenable. Moreover, regarding the statement: "The vase empowerment is the first; the secret supreme is the second; the wisdom-gnosis is the third; likewise, the fourth is also so," the claim that the conferral of the wisdom-gnosis empowerment is the conferral of the coemergent empowerment would thereby be undermined. Therefore, because it would undermine the core of the treatise and because it is a conceptualization that contradicts the scriptures, one should not assert it as the third. For in that [state], because there is the experience of non-conceptuality itself, that very [state] is the excellent summary of [the empowerment] together with its retinue. Therefore, the lines beginning with "It is logical that it is free from characteristics" are easy to understand. If it is argued that it is not contradicted by worldly renown...
If you ask, "Does the passage beginning with 'Thus, it is described as the [stage of] thorough churning' demonstrate a contradiction?"—that which you have stated is the result of not understanding my intention. This is because the scriptural citations that purport to demonstrate the contradiction—such as the contextually relevant statement that "the [stage of] thorough churning is the very nature of the transition"—are all unestablished. The contradiction is actually demonstrated by the passage beginning with "Thorough churning is universal investigation." For that very reason, the noble Nāgārjuna also, in his Arrangement Following the Four Mudrās, demonstrated the contradiction by stating, "Point it out and show it as being indicated in the interval between supreme joy and the joy of separation," and so forth; yet this is not found in your own system.
Regarding the passage: "The bliss of joy is slight bliss; supreme joy is greater than that; the joy of separation becomes free from passion; the innate joy is the remainder," how is this to be understood? It should be understood as follows: joy, supreme joy, and the joy of separation itself constitute the "slight bliss." Because they involve the grasping of superior passion, the "remainder" becomes the most superior; thus, one should understand that the innate joy is that which is other than the three. Furthermore, while joy, supreme joy, the joy of separation, and the innate are established according to their sequential order, that which is to be realized is the innate joy as the third.
As for the claim that the Blessed One did not teach the properly conferred empowerment in any [scripture] whatsoever:
Why is it that for those with many afflictions, the fierce empowerment is taught through the sequence of joy, supreme joy, the joy of separation, and coemergent joy? It is not because of that; rather, this sequence is explained in order to refute those who would become learned merely through books and who lack reliance upon a spiritual friend. As it is said: "That enlightenment depends upon a spiritual friend," and from another source: "By pleasing the guru, the stages are attained." Here, because there is a slight contradiction with scripture, this is intended to refute the fierce empowerment and the inferior empowerment; it is not a refutation of the establishment of the "thoroughly rubbing" and so forth, for that would merely contradict the context. Therefore, one should understand that the entire system of the excellent empowerment, which is the essence of the consolation of Vajradhara, is established here. This is taught for the purpose of explaining that to those who propound the fierce empowerment according to their own tenets. Having taught that, immediately thereafter, in order to show the inferior empowerment, it says "kissing" and so forth. From the view onwards, as far as whatever external activities there may be, that is the "variegated." From the union of the vajra and lotus until the movement that arises as the "moon in the jewel," that is the "ripened."
Regarding the statement, "From the negation of the jewel until the point of refuting the nihilistic view, it is devoid of characteristics"—if one thinks in that way, it is said, "Even if one is empowered, one truly knows." To say "truly knows" is a joke. In order to refute that, it says "the jewel" and so forth. Because this is peaceful, it is "peaceful." Because this is the Veda, it is the "Veda." If one asks, "Does such a thing exist in the peaceful and so forth?" for that reason it says, "the goddess, the city of jewels." "Jewel" refers to a gem. Its "city" is the place; that which is desired as the essence of bliss is the "city of jewels." The "falling of the anthers" is the state of melting, which is the lack of essence. "Rudra" is the "Well-Accomplished One." "Equal union" is meditative equipoise. "Peaceful" is that which causes virtue to arise. For that very reason, it is "supreme." That itself is "suchness." "Power" is the form of the mind. "Supreme" is that very principal. Its own essence is stated as "characteristics" and so forth, which is easy to understand. To show that that very thing exists as the essence of the manifold, it says, "It does not exist as the suchness of existence," and so forth. "Existence" refers to external forms and so forth. "As suchness" means it does not exist in the ultimate sense. If one asks, "In that case, what is the appearance of blue and so forth?" for that reason it says, "If one meditates on the form of power..."
Thus it is said: it has become the essence of the mind’s capacity; this is the meaning of "having become the essence of the mind." If one asks, "Even so, would that itself truly exist?" for that reason, in order to refute those [positions], it is said: "The capacity to see them as empty." This is easy to understand. To demonstrate that such a state is the Middle Way, free from the four extremes, it is taught in the Vajraśekhara Tantra:
"Neither true, nor false, nor both true and false,
Nor is it the negation of both;
The state of that is difficult to realize—
What could be more supreme than this?"
To demonstrate that same point in another way, it is said, "Peaceful," and so forth, [referring to] "abiding in the center of the jewel," which means abiding in the center of the gem. To demonstrate the culmination of the yogi’s realization of such primordial wisdom (jñāna), it is said, "The nectar of primordial wisdom," and so forth; this is easy to understand.
Now, if one were to speak according to the sequence of the systems of the Vedānta that are about to be explained, then in order for them to realize bliss and to abandon [what is not bliss], the first half is stated: "The sense faculties transcend the objects," and so forth:
"That which is superior to the sense faculties is the mind;
That which is beyond the mind is the intellect (buddhi);
That which is beyond the intellect is the Self (ātman)."
The remainder is easy to understand.
In order to illustrate the philosophical tenets of Bhavya through the analogies of the Vedas, and to provide a detailed explanation of what was previously taught, it is said: "The meeting with the capacity," and so forth. "Capacity" refers to the iḍā channel. "Meeting with it" is the union. "Stirring" is the subsequent arousal. "The culmination of the empowerment of capacity" means possessing the branches of capacity. "Empowerment" is intense attachment, which is the progressive passion. "Its culmination" is the bliss that reaches the limit of that. "The reality of Brahmā" is the reality of the wisdom of empowerment. "By that bliss" means by oneself; it is expressed as "by me." In that way, they become equal to those residing in the center of the vajra, its tip, the middle, and the skull-cup. Just as they arise from the iḍā, the perfect awareness that arises at the time of inexhaustible joy is the meaning of the statement: "It arises from the systems originating from the Vedas." To show their own nature, it is said: "By the absence of the arising of suffering," which is easy to understand. To show that the nature of these beings is one, it is said: "Whatever little is seen," and so forth, which is also easy to understand. Following that, in order to praise the iḍā itself as a distinction of wisdom, it is said: "Seeing the beloved," and so forth. "Seeing the beloved" is the act of seeing, by means of this and the liberation one desires. The remainder is easy to understand.
By these [statements], having set aside other explanations, it is shown that one must certainly desire to see the example of the solitary [path] itself. Having entered in that way, because all forms of clinging are abandoned, it is said: "Having abandoned dharma and non-dharma," and so forth, which is easy to understand. To demonstrate the state of being free from the four extremes, it is said: "Entities do not truly exist," and so forth, which is also easy to understand. Having thus spoken in a manner consistent with the systems of others, in order to demonstrate the contradiction with one's own system, it is said: "Furthermore," and so forth. Here, the meaning of the analysis of the Madhyamaka and other systems is to be demonstrated through the deity yoga of the result in the way of Secret Mantra. Therefore, by the statement: "Whatever is sealed by whatever, that becomes the essence of that," the four aggregates of form and so forth, which are the objects to be grasped, are abandoned; thus, the four subjects such as Vairocana are shown to be the essence of the dependent nature. It is stated that Akṣobhya is the perfected nature, empty of subject and object, for the purpose of being sealed by those [deities]. If that were the case, it would contradict the mudrā of Vajrasattva taught in the scriptures. For if the perfected nature of bodhicitta, which resides in the center of the jewel, were to become the essence of Akṣobhya, it would not become the established tenet composed by the Buddha without the mudrā of Vajrasattva. Why is that?
This is because it would be identical to the tenets of the non-Buddhists. Regarding this, the venerable one clad in woolen robes (the Buddha) said:
"Having thoroughly analyzed everything as being equal,
And having reached the limit with a mind that views the subtle,
If one distinguishes between Buddhists and outsiders,
Not even one is observed; therefore, I teach emptiness.
One does not abide in mere cognition (vijñapti-mātra).
Therefore, by means of reaching the point of destruction,
Having taught the various phenomena,
The phenomena of emptiness are taught once again."
Thus it was said. Furthermore, from the scriptures:
"In the Vedas and all their tenets,
In the works of Īśvara and the like,
And in the mantra tantras of the Buddhas,
There is a distinction regarding emptiness."
By this, the distinction between the proponents of emptiness as imagined by others and the emptiness taught by the Tathāgata through intentional terminology (saṃdhyābhāṣā) was not explicitly stated. If that is so, why was it explained in this way? For that reason, the words "In this way" and so forth were spoken. This is the "consolation" (āśvāsa) of the Tathāgata. The Tathāgata is Vairocana. By the sense of being illustrated by him, Ratnasambhava and the others are also included; thus, Ratnasambhava, Amitābha, and Amoghasiddhi are also to be understood. Their consolation is to be known by consciousness, as it is sealed by Akṣobhya; it should be understood in that way.
As it is said in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra:
"Relying upon mind-only,
One does not perceive external objects.
By focusing upon suchness,"
"One should transcend even Mind-Only. Having transcended Mind-Only, one should transcend the non-apparent. The yogi who abides in the non-apparent sees the Mahāyāna." Thus it is said.
Now, in order to show in which locations and against which opponents the arguments arise, [the text] says: "The interior of the vajra," and so forth. "The interior of the vajra is with aspects; at its tip is the aspectless itself." Alternatively, its tip is with aspects, and its interior is aspectless. That which is like this is the Middle Way. My guru does not accept that praise. Why does he not accept it? He says: "The interior of the vajra and its tip," and so forth. Because that which is like this exists eternally in the form of Akṣobhya, it is devoid of the seal of Vajrasattva. Let alone being devoid of the seal of Vajrasattva in these [contexts of] the middle and the skull-cup, there is not even the supreme bliss that is desired. Because the apprehended and so forth exist, it is also devoid of the seal of Akṣobhya. By these [arguments], it is implicitly established that it is devoid of the previously mentioned seal of Vajrasattva.
If that is so, from what is suchness to be known? "That very [suchness] is known from the mouth of the guru." In this context, this is the pith instruction regarding the state of the Bhagavatī who holds the drop of the half of sixteen. Furthermore: "Having passed beyond the two, the two are equal; from the vajra, it falls and touches the lotus."
"Fallen from the Akṣobhyavajra, touching the vajra-lotus; the result is sealed by the cause, and the cause is also sealed by the result. This is the King of Great Bliss." By this, these are Vajrasattva through the essence of the vajra and the essence of the sattva; they are to be understood by the names of emptiness, compassion, insight, method, nirvāṇa, existence, and so forth. The meaning of this very point is also taught by the Blessed One in the generation stage (utpattikrama) as the two drops (bindu) in the form of the moon and sun situated between them, appearing above and below. "Perfected" (niṣpanna) refers to the meaning of the empowerment as it has been taught. "Completely perfected" (pariniṣpanna) is to recognize the form of the melted vajra abiding in the sun, which possesses the nature of insight and method, the essence of emptiness and compassion, and the nature of the dharmadhātu. In order to symbolize the essence of the time of that state of awareness, the Blessed One stands touching the seat with a single big toe.
If one asks: "Is it not taught that one should also meditate on the tathatā of the syllable HŪṂ abiding in the center of the vajra-maṇḍala? If so, what is it like? If you say that the meaning of 'abiding in the center of the vajra-maṇḍala' is not established here, the meaning of this is otherwise." Even so, it is the tathatā called HŪṂ abiding in the center of the supreme limbs of insight and method within the anthers of the vajra. The syllable HA is the empty cause.
"U" means free from conceptual construction. "A" means non-abiding. "Meditate" means to realize. If one asks, "How is it that one should realize the jewel when it has entered within the jewel?" it shall be explained: the meaning of this is also different. Furthermore, "jewels" refers to the lotus and the vajra, which are to be realized. This also becomes well-established. If one asks, "How is this to be understood? Why are the meanings of both expressed here?" it shall be explained:
"In the lotus-space, the vajra filaments,
In the place pressed by the vajra posture,
The jewel of the mind should be made to enter within.
Whatever wisdom arises is the form of inexpressible wisdom."
Thus it is said in the Śrīparamādya. The meaning of this is as follows: "Lotus-space" is the empty space in the center of the lotus. "Jewel filaments" refers to the center of the lotus and the vajra. "Place pressed" means the place of movement. Regarding "vajra posture," the vajra completely pervades everywhere. "Oṃ ākaṭa" is used as an indicator. If it were made the fifth [case], it would express merely the external touch of the vajra. When it is taught that the mind enters within the jewel, consciousness arises; that is the meaning of "the own-nature of consciousness." Furthermore, from the Vajrāmṛta:
"The sphere of activity covered by the filaments..."
"The goddess dwells in the center of the navel; having arisen in the form of the seminal fluid, she resides in the center of the bhaga and liṅga." Thus it is said. Also, from the Hevajra: "The vowels are the moon, the consonants the sun; the seed-syllable resides in their center." Thus it is said. Furthermore:
"As long as the stream of seminal fluid—the cool light of the nature of luminosity—has not fallen, the assembly of Victors, of equal and single taste, within the petals of the lotus goddess, is the cause of beings through the indivisible compassion projected to the tip of the vajra. For that long, by the power of the glory of compassion, the pervasive lord is called the 'coemergent form.'
When the three vajras are burned within the vajra-jewel, and the lunar transformation resides in the wind, and one desires to dissolve into the interior of the house of the lotus aperture—at that time, having abandoned the elements, self, other, and so forth, the mind is free from inferior activity. That very coemergent wisdom is also clarified by scripture and reasoning.
The lotus of insight and the vajra union abide as the remainder of supreme joy. As long as the pure drops, free from movement, abide in the moon, at that time the eyes do not move and the flow of the winds is exhausted. One does not hear with the ears, the eyes become steady, and one is devoted to Mahāmudrā.
Thus it is said: 'The coemergent, which cannot be expressed by others, is not found from anywhere else. It is known through the guru’s timely methods and by one’s own merit.' If one asks what is meant by 'the guru’s timely methods,' here it refers to the 'vajra methods.'"
If it is argued that this does not connect with the meaning of the term "time of reliance" because there is no actual reliance, it is not so. The word "near" (upani) is a term for being in close proximity; thus, it is precisely the reliance upon the exterior of the vajra that is being expressed.
If one asks, "In that case, how is it that it is said: 'By the method of the vajra sense base, the vajra bliss is Mahāmudrā'?"—here too, whatever is the vajra bliss is Mahāmudrā. If it is argued that the sense base of the vajra itself is the location and does not connect with the meaning of "method," it is not so. The vajra bliss, Mahāmudrā, and the location of the vajra sense base are the supreme joy (paramānanda); that is precisely what is taught as the "method."
Furthermore, according to our own tradition, it will be well-established in the passage beginning with: "Then the secret shall be explained, in brief and not extensively; the supreme secret..." Here, "secret" (rahasya) is connected with "the secret shall be explained." Regarding the term rahasye: the letters ra and ha refer to the vajra and the lotus, respectively, and the space between the two. Sya means "in every way." Ya means "exactly as it is." A means "non-dual." I means "beyond this." Furthermore, it is said: "The letter ra is explained as the vajra; the letter ha is explained as the lotus."
Now, in order to properly establish the various aspects, the passage beginning with "various joys" (vicitrānanda) and so forth is stated.
Regarding the phrase "the guru," and so forth, the instruction of the sublime guru is what is to be presented here. It is taught: "Various, of various aspects, embracing, kissing, and so forth." Here, by the word "and so forth," it is expressed as being of various aspects up to the culmination of movement. If one asks, "How is the phrase 'up to the culmination of movement' to be understood?" it is taught: "To a sixteen-year-old wisdom consort, with the vajra and bell joined together, embracing with both hands—this should be known as the master initiation." By this teaching, the union of the vajra and lotus is shown to be the "touching of the vajra and lotus." If this is the master initiation, from what is it known that the first is called "various"? It is extensively taught: "The number of initiations is four; one should know the sequence of joy and so forth." Thus, the four—joy and so forth—should be understood according to their respective order: the master, the secret, the wisdom-gnosis, and likewise the fourth. "Joy is the moment of the various aspects itself" means that the various aspects are the culmination of movement. "The ripened is the reverse of that; it is the tasting of the gnosis of bliss," thus it is briefly shown. Up to the tip of the jewel, the essence of bliss is "supreme joy."
If one asks, "How is supreme joy to be understood as the very nature of bliss?" it is because it is taught in detail: "In the moment when variety is abandoned, supreme joy is perfectly attained. O Great Being, as the Guru has declared, perfectly grasp great bliss." Here, the meaning of the phrase "in the very moment when variety is abandoned," and so forth, is entirely well-established just as it occurs. The meaning of "having entered within the jewel," and so forth, has already been explained.
If the culmination of movement is joy, and that is the master initiation (ācāryābhiṣeka); and if the interior of the jewel is supreme joy, and that is the secret [initiation]; then how is it that it is said: "The master is the purity of laughing, and the secret is likewise the view; wisdom is in embracing, and that is the union of the two"? This refers to the external generation stage (utpattikrama). If so, what is the nature of those things taught as the master initiation, such as the water initiation and so forth? Those too should be understood as the external generation stage. Through the profound generation stage, joy is the master initiation, which is the encouragement (āśvāsa) of the Tathāgatas. In the completion stage (niṣpannakrama), joy is the encouragement of Vajradhara. Regarding the system of the four mudrās, the master initiation is the very state of complete perfection, to be realized through the action mudrā (karmamudrā). If it is said that the vase initiation is [attained] by the six, [it is as follows:]...
If one asks, "In what sense is it said that 'all engage in the activity of the vase'?" the word "vase" is an illustration of the sound of "holding water." Because it is the very activity of holding water, this is appropriate. To demonstrate all of these, it says, "Whatever joy of laughing and so forth," and so on; the meaning of this has already been explained.
Now, in order to establish the four joys, it says, "Because of the variety of aspects," and so forth. "Variety" refers to the joy (ānanda) that exists in the nature of the apprehended and the apprehender. "At the time of churning" means the culmination of the churning. "Bodhicitta" refers to the contact up to the vicinity of the jewel. Through these, one will find what is called "supreme joy" (paramānanda) in the city of the jewel. "Filled with bliss" means the presence of bliss. "Supreme" refers to the city of the jewel, up to the tip of the precious [organ]. The meaning of "the guru [explains] that very [reality]" has already been explained. "Separation from joy" (viramānanda) means being separated. "Separation" means the falling of the bodhicitta. "Thoroughly rubbing" means the experience of bliss. "My own activity" means investigation; such is "separation from joy."
Regarding the phrase, "In that way, the fourth is also likewise": "In that way" refers to the nature of the essence of the wisdom-gnosis (jñāna). "Also" refers to the nature of transformation, which is of the character of dependent origination. "Likewise" means that it should be understood in that same manner as the previous ones. That becomes the fourth.
These [points] concern the four joys of the action seal (karmamudrā) from the perspective of an external possessor of parts. Regarding the presentation of the four seals, the action seal is so called because the joys abide as one. This should be understood according to the presentation of the proponents of non-aspectarianism (nirākāravāda) and as taught in the context of the wrathful empowerment.
Now, in order to demonstrate the presentation of cause and effect, it is said, "the action seal," and so forth. "Action" (karman) refers to the activities of body, speech, and mind, which are of the nature of the coemergent (sahaja). "Seal" (mudrā) means a sign or a characteristic; thus, it is the "action seal." By designating it as such based on its support, it is used to indicate the very object it represents, and it may also be referred to as the "feet." Based on the seal, the nature of the wisdom-gnosis (jñāna) is praised; furthermore, that is solely the nature of the substance of transformation. By the phrase "conforming to the coemergent reflection," it is described as the result that is concordant with the cause of coemergence. Such various aspects of the concordant result are the joys themselves.
Then, the phenomena of blue, yellow, and so forth, through the five awakenings (abhisambodhi) and the purity of the deity, are free from grasping and so on. That which has come through the practice of the nature of the dharmadhātu—the essence of supreme joy, the singular beauty, the means, and the non-abiding nature—is the "dharma seal" (dharmamudrā). Since this is the continuum itself, inseparable from the great seal (mahāmudrā), it is the path.
The very ripening into something extraordinary is the ripened fruit (vipākaphala). That moment of ripening is supreme joy (paramānanda). Then, because it is sealed by the three mudrās, it is both "great" (mahā) and a "seal" (mudrā). Through the continuous and respectful cultivation of the path-wisdom—the essence of which is non-abiding and arrived at through analysis—one realizes that which is without entity. By abandoning the obscurations of the knowable and so forth, it becomes the basis for all perfections without exception. This single body of great bliss, whose nature is the unity of existence and nirvāṇa, and which possesses the body of non-referential great compassion, is Mahāmudrā. This is the stainless fruit, free from all obscurations. It is the moment free from characteristics (lakṣaṇa), the innate joy (sahajānanda). Then, for the sake of the benefit of sentient beings and through the symbols of the samaya, whatever emanations there are in the form of Heruka and so forth, or in the form of Vajradhara, consisting of the nature of the Sambhogakāya and Nirmāṇakāya, that is the samaya-mudrā. This is the fruit of human effort (puruṣakāraphala). In that context, "thoroughly rubbing" is the joy of separation (viramānanda). In this regard, the mudrās are causes in relation to each preceding one, and they are fruits in relation to each succeeding one. To show that each individual mudrā is the essence of the four joys, it is said: "Joy in each individual mudrā," and so forth. Regarding the phrase "mudrā and in each individual mudrā," one should understand that the four joys exist in each individual mudrā.
It is not the case for Mahāmudrā. The meaning of these [terms] is taught through the three causes, beginning with "scripture" and "one's own reasoning." Regarding the teaching by scripture: "The first joy is the manifold; the supreme joy is the ripening; the joy of separation is the investigation; the coemergent joy is devoid of characteristics." Thus, in the Hevajra Tantra and other texts, starting with the manifold joy, they are taught in successive order. Therefore, wherever the manifold and so forth occur, it is in that very place that joy and the rest are established. These also arise from the three mudrās themselves, but not from Mahāmudrā. This very nature of the manifold, which is about to be explained, is the clarity of the nature of one's own awareness. The pith instructions of the sublime guru will explain the term "manifold" and so forth. In order to show the nature of the four joys: having described the nature of the four joys in the physical activity of the action mudrā (karmamudrā), in order to show the essence of the four joys in the speech dharma mudrā (dharmamudrā), the words beginning with "manifold" are spoken. Because the manifold conceptualizations appear as the nature of wandering beings through the reasons of the action mudrā and the words of the pith instructions of the sublime guru, it is the "manifold" (vicitra). Through the meditation on that very [manifold], the manifestation of the manifold that was oriented toward certainty subsides; this is the "ripening" (vipāka).
In that regard, the meditation on the nature of the world that reaches the ultimate limit, which relies upon the non-appearance of anything whatsoever, is devoid of characteristics. Thus, regarding what is called "emptiness endowed with the supreme of all aspects," which relies upon the nature of the world, the yogi who meditates, having established a firm conviction in non-abiding and remaining within the conventional reality of suchness, the observation of the world is analytical investigation; that is the "thorough rubbing." These various aspects and so forth should be applied to the four joys in their proper order. Here too, "likewise, the fourth is also such" is as explained previously. Because the single supreme joy of intense delight is definitively categorized as four in number, at that time, when all are of the nature of the coemergent, the four joys of the dharma-mudrā become one, which is the supreme joy.
Having taught the dharma-mudrā, in order to teach the mahāmudrā, which is the nature of the mind as one with the coemergent essence, it is said: "Not abiding in anything," and so forth. "In anything" refers to the aggregates, elements, sense bases, and so forth, which are dependently originated. "Not abiding" means the absence of mental engagement and the absence of superimposition. As it is said in the scriptures: "The dharma of mental engagement is virtuous, and the dharma of non-mental engagement is non-virtuous." Likewise: "That which is not examined by conceptualization, which does not abide in the mind, is without recollection and without mental engagement."
"Homage and praise to the non-referential"—thus it is taught. Here, one should not say, "I am unable to practice according to the pith instructions of the Takṣaka-śiromaṇi-ratnālaṃkāra (The Jewel Ornament of the Crown of the Takṣaka)," for by the grace of the feet of the sublime guru, one is certainly able to directly realize Mahāmudrā, which is characterized by the excellence of all aspects.
If one asks, "In this context, why is it not the nature of the four moments?" it is said: "Because it is stainless and because it is self-knowing." The "stainless" refers to the fact that the three moments, such as the "variegated" and so forth, are accompanied by stains and thus do not occur here. Likewise, the three joys also do not occur.
To dispel the doubt that "if the non-abiding is the inconceivable itself, then if it is conceived, it becomes an obscuration and thus becomes stained," it is said: "That wisdom which is effortless," and so forth. Furthermore, because it is without a basis, that inconceivable wisdom does not arise from analysis. How so? It is "effortless," meaning it arises spontaneously. How so? When there is no conceptualization of that which is to be conceived, at that time, for what reason would a conception of it not arise?
As it is said in the Jñānasiddhi:
"Because the Buddha-wisdom is spontaneously present,
It is therefore described as non-conceptual.
Since there is no causal agent for conception,
It is not that conception is non-existent."
Now, in order to refute the assertions of the Proponents of Cognition (Vijñānavādin) and to avert the assertions of the view of nihilism, it is said: "Whoever, having seen suchness..." and so forth. Suchness is the ultimate reality (bhūtakoṭi). "Whoever sees" means whoever realizes it directly. "Following the meaning of the Middle Way" means being free from the four extremes. "That wealthy one" is one who knows suchness. If one asks, "Will that then become annihilated?" it is not so; "that lineage" refers to self-awareness. That which is the complete abandonment of all conceptual constructions without exception is the direct experience of suchness. One should understand that the grace of the feet of the sublime guru is the experience and realization of that which possesses the nature of the two truths, is free from the two extremes, and is the inseparable unity of emptiness and compassion, the very essence of insight and skillful means.
To demonstrate that very point as summarized in the Middle Way, it is said: "However many superimpositions..." and so forth. This is because, through whatever superimpositions there may be, not a single object of excessive clinging exists. If one asks, "If the non-existence of all those is the meaning of the Middle Way, then the Proponents of Cognition also assert such a non-existence of superimpositions," it is said in response: "Everything everywhere..." and so forth. In the system of the Proponents of Cognition, there exists a substantial reality of cognition that is superimposed and imputed; here, however, that is not the case, because all superimpositions are absent. By this, it is also clearly shown that even the "illusion-like" extreme is a superimposition. How so?
Setting aside for a moment the nature of that which is called "the removal of the clinging of all conceptual constructions," since the superimpositions of the aspectless [proponents] and the imputations of the Proponents of Cognition (Vijñānavāda) do indeed exist, the meaning of the Middle Way is the absence of superimposition—that is, freedom from conceptual proliferation (niṣprapañca). However, there is this distinction: the Proponents of Cognition maintain that the non-conceptual consciousness taught for a time is an existing entity, and that appearances exist through the power of ignorance; they hold that such a non-conceptual mind is itself self-cognizing. The subsequent apprehension of feeling is indeed clarity. If you should say, "Even for you, all conceptual constructions exist immediately thereafter," it is not so; for although there is no basis [for them], it is only from the perspective of sentient beings through conventional terminology. Therefore, in that regard, what is there to be removed or established? The meaning is that there is none. If one asks, "If that is so, how is the appearance of clearly manifest entities to be understood?" for that reason it is said, "Knowledge and the object of knowledge," and so forth. Even if one thinks that the world is of a nature empty of the superimposition of knowledge and the object of knowledge, even when accompanied by conceptualization, it is nothing other than conceptualization and the absence of conceptualization. How is that so? Just as all appearances are such when suchness is not known, so it is also when suchness is known. As it is said: "In this, there is nothing to be removed, and nothing to be added. One should look truly at the truth."
"It is said: 'When one sees correctly, one is liberated.' Likewise, it is taught in other sources: 'The thorough knowledge of existence itself is called nirvāṇa.' Alternatively, regarding the phrase 'Just as it was before, so it is now,' one should understand that just as the coemergent essence is not realized [by the ordinary mind], so too all beings should be known to be realized as the essence of suchness. As it is said: 'As it was before, so it is later; the mind is awakened in suchness.' And from other sources: 'All phenomena are coemergent conceptualization; therefore, one does not abandon saṃsāra through them.' Similarly: 'The Buddhas abide in suchness, the unarisen nature of phenomena,' and so forth, as it appears in detail. However, there is this distinction: just as the mind previously clung to the grasped and the grasper, later it does not exist [in that way]. As it is taught: 'These phenomena are nirvāṇa, appearing as saṃsāra through delusion.' In this way, delusion is the excessive clinging to the grasped and the grasper. Likewise, from other sources: 'Oḍḍiyāna said: "Meditation is just as it is; it is not as it is conceptualized."' Thus, having cognized beings through wisdom, one teaches them as they are: 'The mind of the unborn beings,' and so forth."
Regarding the statement, "It is untenable for existence and non-existence to arise," and so forth: because the mind that directly perceives the world as unarisen is precisely the mind trained in dependent origination. "Mind" (buddhi) refers to definitive discernment; therefore, one is "endowed with mind." "Without effort" means being free from exertion. "Nature" (svabhāva) is the coemergent. "All beings are true" means they are not false. Now, in order to show that even conceptual thought is nirvāṇa, it is said, "meditating on the connection." The absence of meditating on the connection is the conceptualization of not knowing the connection; that is dependent origination. Therefore, that itself is called nirvāṇa. For that reason, do not allow the mind itself to be deluded. Furthermore, as it is taught: "Whatever arises dependently, that you consider to be emptiness." This emptiness taught is called nirvāṇa. To show that the wisdom realizing the unarisen is the attainment of Mahāmudrā exactly as it is, the demonstration of attainment is stated: "Regarding the side of the antidote," and so forth. "Regarding the side of the antidote" means engaging with the nature, qualities, and essence. By not mentally engaging with the collection of conceptualizations that analyze the side of the antidote—the nature of generosity, ethical discipline, patience, diligence, meditative concentration, and insight—one abandons them.
"Non-abiding" refers to the thorough abandonment of the collection of conceptualizations that definitively analyze the side of the remedies. One should also view it as the thorough abandonment of the collection of conceptualizations that definitively analyze the discordant side, which consists of the five appropriated aggregates of contaminated form and so forth. Because those [conceptualizations] are absent, these are definitively non-existent.
"Not attached even to that" means that through the very analysis of the intrinsic nature and so forth, one is without attachment even to the meditative concentration of the collection of conceptualizations that definitively analyze suchness—the nature of emptiness and suchness itself.
"By whom even the fruit is not desired" means that there is no desire whatsoever for contact with the fruit, which is the nature of the collection of analyses for attaining the first bhūmi and so forth, up to omniscience itself.
"By that, the Great Seal is known" refers to attainment. Through these, because one has abandoned attachment to the non-abiding nature of beings, to the superimpositions, to the discordant side and the remedies, to suchness, and to the collection of fruits, being completely liberated from all attachment is called "attaining the Great Seal."
If one asks, "In that case, is there no perfection of generosity and so forth in the Great Seal?" It is not so; for it is the nature of the two accumulations of merit and wisdom, which consist of the perfections and so forth. As it is said:
From the Brahmaviśeṣacintiparipṛcchā Mahāyāna Sūtra: "That which is the abandonment of all afflictions is generosity. That which is without volitional engagement is ethical discipline. That which is free from characteristics is patience. That which is without conceptual analysis is diligence. That which is non-abiding is meditative concentration. That which is without proliferation is insight. Thus, the essence of non-abiding and non-proliferation is the perfection of insight."
Furthermore, from the Saptashatika Prajñāpāramitā, the Blessed One asked: "Mañjuśrī, when you cultivate the perfection of insight, in what do you abide while cultivating the perfection of insight?" Mañjuśrī replied: "Blessed One, when I cultivate the perfection of insight, I cultivate the perfection of insight without abiding." The Blessed One asked: "Mañjuśrī, how can there be a perfection of insight in that which is non-abiding?" Mañjuśrī replied: "Blessed One, the very state of not abiding in anything whatsoever is the cultivation of the perfection of insight."
The Blessed One asked: "Mañjuśrī, when you cultivate the perfection of insight, do any roots of virtue increase or decrease?" Mañjuśrī replied: "Blessed One, at that time..."
There is not even the slightest root of virtue that increases or decreases. Blessed One, in the cultivation of the perfection of insight, there is not the slightest phenomenon that increases or decreases. Blessed One, that should be understood as the cultivation of the perfection of insight. Blessed One, that in which any phenomenon whatsoever is established as increasing or decreasing is not the cultivation of the perfection of insight; it neither abandons the phenomena of ordinary beings nor correctly adopts the phenomena of a Buddha—thus it was said.
Having taught the Mahāmudrā, in order to teach the samaya-mudrā, which is the nature of the all-pervading essence of the four joys, it is said: "Just as with the action-mudrā," and so forth. "By the grace of the Vajra Master" means by the pith instructions of the sublime guru. In that regard, the pith instruction is as follows: the nature of Mahāmudrā, which is the fruit of human effort, is the joy (ānanda) of the conduct arising in the nature of enjoying together with the Blessed Lady of Insight. The "jewel-city" is the supreme joy (paramānanda). Abiding in the center of the perfectly joined moon and sun—the essence of wisdom and method in which great passion has melted—the very nature of the two drops in the form of the upper and lower bindus is the coemergent joy (sahajānanda). As it is said: "Therein, there is no beginning, middle, or end; there is no cyclic existence and no nirvāṇa."
"This is the supreme great bliss; neither self nor other exists," so it is said. The meaning of this is twofold: the provisional meaning and the definitive meaning. Regarding these, the definitive meaning is the non-conceptual awareness at that very moment, free from the characteristics of such ritual procedures. The provisional meaning is the beginning; it is not the previous drop (bindu). It is "without end," meaning it is endless. "Without middle" means it is without middle because it is uninterrupted; thus, it is without middle. "Without existence" means it is not of the nature of existence (bhava). The drop arising from the perfect union of the sun-like method is existence, and that is not suchness. "Without nirvāṇa" means it is not of the nature of nirvāṇa, because of the perfect union with the moon-like insight (prajñā). If one asks what it is then, it should be said: this essence of the single taste of both is the supreme great bliss; one should not conceive of it as self or other. Here, as the coemergent (sahaja) was established based on the previously explained action seal (karmamudrā), one should also understand the establishment of Vajrasattva and the others. Then, immediately after being exhorted by the songs of the four goddesses, Pukkasī and the rest, just as one awakens from a dream, the Blessed One in the form of the Sambhogakāya rises from his seat. For the sake of sentient beings, manifesting the conceptualization of entities for the sake of those in the pure mundane world, whatever he engages in is the joy beyond joy (viramānanda).
Here, too, the fourth is likewise that very same thing. "Likewise" refers to the coemergent that has been found. "Also" means in every respect. "Likewise" means it is to be realized just like the coemergent. Regarding the statement, "The single supreme joy itself must be determined as the fourth," when all phenomena have become the essence of the coemergent, at that time the samaya-mudrā is the single essence, the nature of the joy beyond joy.
If one asks: "In this context, because it is the very form of the bindu, is it not shown to be the clarity of cognition itself?" It is not so; even then, because the essence of bliss is inexpressible, when the elaborations of all beings without exception are projected, it is a subversion of the aspects.
If one asks: "Even so, why is it born in the form of a bindu, just like the bliss found through the action-mudrā? Furthermore, in this case too, it is appropriate to show the aspects of the hands, feet, and so forth, which are the nature of wisdom and method?" It is said in reply: because of the existence of the bindu-form, it is expressed as having aspects through a transformation of state, just as the form of a vase [is seen] in the form of clay. As it is said: "The Blessed One abides in the form of the bindu."
That very point is expressed: "The conventional is like a kunda flower; the essence is bliss free from obscuration." The conventional that relies upon the action-mudrā is not the ultimate. "Free from obscuration" means without hindrance, which is nirvāṇa.
If it is argued that bliss here is something distinct, that is not the case. As it is said, "Having abandoned bliss, it is not that," because there is no bliss that is distinct from the nature of the bindu. This should be understood from the statement: "Because the great elements are bliss, that bliss is not the bliss of bliss."
Furthermore, if one thinks that the nature of mind itself arises in the form of the various bindus and is thus without aspects, that too is not so. If one were to think this based on the notion of being aspectless, then there would be no need for the mental hesitation arising from the conceptualization of aspectlessness. By abandoning the bindu, which is the cause of doubt, bliss alone would be definitively shown. What is the use of such extensive effort as has been explained? Therefore, for one who asserts that the bindu is aspectless, it does not exist at all.
Because each mudrā just described is the manifestation of each respective joy, the meaning of the passage beginning with "The various karmamudrās" has already been explained.
If it is argued that this very text follows the sequence of the four mudrās and follows the Yoginī Tantras, but does not follow the Yoga Tantras, that is not so. It should be said: here, following the Guhyasamāja, it was taught by the master Nāgārjuna. This is because the tantra teaches the five stages as the four mudrās.
Since the stages are also the forms of mantra, the mind is thoroughly purified according to the sequence of those stages. Furthermore, it is taught as follows: "Even in a single mudrā, when the mind abides in the form of mantra, the bliss of the dharma-mudrā demonstrates the relative truth. The very limit of reality of that truth is called the mahāmudrā. The result, the samaya-mudrā, is non-dual knowledge. The gathering of these reasonings is the divine substance, which bestows the fruit of Buddhahood."
Moreover, from the Pradīpodyotana-nāma-ṣaṭkoṭi-vyākhyā (The Illumination of the Six Limits), the master Candrakīrti states:
"In order to thoroughly accomplish the secret mantra body, the first is the generation stage. Merely focusing on the mind is called the second stage. The teaching of the relative truth is the delightful third stage. The purification of the relative truth is called the fourth stage. The union of the two truths is the fifth, called 'integration' (yuganaddha); this is the supreme branch of accomplishment, the condensed meaning of all tantras. This sequence is also a division; it is the stage of the non-conceptual. These are the authentic summary. Whoever knows this understands the tantra."
And it is also said: "Having understood the condensed meaning of the five stages—mantra, mind, body, purity, and integration—one enters the six limits."
Likewise, the noble Āryadeva also states in the Sūtratantrakalpasamuccaya: "The reality of mantra and..."
The five stages are briefly presented as: the reality of the mudrā, the reality of the self, the reality of phenomena, and the reality of the deity. Regarding these, the "reality of mantra" refers to the forms of Hevajra and so forth, which arise from syllables such as hūṃ. The "reality of the mudrā" refers to the mere training of the mind through the sequence of counting the numbers. In the definitive sense, it arises from the action mudrā. The "reality of the self" is the nature of the various beings as being without intrinsic essence. The "reality of phenomena" is the non-arising of all phenomena. The "reality of the deity" refers to the point up to "being inseparable" by taking the reality of the self and the reality of phenomena as its very identity. These five realities should be applied to the four mudrās through the oral instructions of the guru. The five stages are also presented in their respective order. As for the scriptural passage: "Relying upon the two stages—the stage of generation and the stage of completion—the Vajra-holder teaches the Dharma." If one asks how they are presented in sequence, it shall be explained: in the stage of generation, there are the concise stage and vajra recitation. These are also known by the other names "outer stage of generation" and "inner stage of generation." In the stage of completion, there are self-consecration, manifest enlightenment, and union; these are taught by the other names "completion," "thorough completion," and "the stage of essential nature."
That very [reality] is the authentic nature of the four mudrās; this should be understood as it is taught in the Sarvarahasyatantra. Furthermore, it is taught: "The mahāmudrā is through the mind, the samayamudrā is all-pervading, the dharmamudrā is through speech, and the karmamudrā is of the body."
Now, in order to refute those who are satisfied merely by knowing the consolation of the Tathāgatas and the consolation of Vajradhara regarding the karmamudrā, it is said: "Without knowing the mahāmudrā..." and so forth. Since the reality of the scriptural tradition transmitted from one guru to another appears therein, that very [reality] is the karmamudrā. A yogin who slanders the unsurpassed, perfectly complete Buddha-dharma, such as the dharmamudrā and the rest, will go to the Raurava hell. "Raurava" is an illustration; it should also include other hells such as Avīci. That those who abandon the sublime Dharma will go to hells such as Raurava is clear from sūtras such as the Aṣṭasāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā, and thus it is not explained in detail here.
If one asks, "How is it that the karmamudrā does not become suchness?" it is because of tantric verses such as: "The karmamudrā has anger as its cause; it is sinful and extremely terrifying; it should be abandoned from afar," and likewise: "When the woman is impaired, her bliss also becomes impaired," and so forth. Without seeing the supreme joy...
Regarding the phrase, "Women think it is pleasure," and the example of the reflection of a face appearing in a mirror: the face does not arise [therein], nor was it established previously, nor is it established now; it is merely the appearance of a likeness of another's face. Nevertheless, worldly people experience joy produced by the delusion of thinking, "I see my own face." Similarly, if those of inferior intellect claim that by accomplishing the wisdom of insight (prajñājñāna), they experience the coemergent (sahaja), they will experience a semblance of joy. Yet, as stated by the master Nāgārjuna in the Instruction on the Four Seals, they do not even know the discourse on the dharmamudrā. As it is taught in the Jñānasiddhi:
"The base-born say that the pleasure arising from the two organs is suchness; the Supreme Victor has not said that this is great bliss."
If it is argued that by disparaging the karmamudrā taught in many tantras, one will encounter rebirth in hell, that is not so. This is because the scriptures refute it by stating that it is not the primary suchness. Furthermore, since the intent of the scriptures is to teach that the karmamudrā is the nature of the causal agent—as in the phrase, "Relying upon the karmamudrā," and so forth—how could this be a deprecation? There is no need to say more here. The remainder is easy to understand.
In order to realize the mudrās and to demonstrate the power of one’s chosen deity, it is said: "As long as the four mudrās..." and so forth. The "Hermit" (Ṭakkirāja) is the "Essential One," having attained the siddhi of the glorious Ṭakkirāja. The remainder is easy to understand. Now, in order to conclude with the complete dedication of merit, it is said: "By the ritual of authentic empowerment..." and so forth, which is easy to understand.
"By whichever Blessed One, the glorious Lord of Hermitage (Ṭakkirāja), I was directly cared for; regarding the profound source of the great nectar of the jewel-like unsurpassed nature of phenomena (dharmatā), if those who are dull and ignorant should disparage it, what can I do? For the sake of compassion and wonder, I, such as I am, compose this praise. The sequence of excellent and inferior empowerments, and the difficult sequence of the wrathful, as spoken by the Protector, is a great wonder, for it is not the domain of those with small intellects. Having meditated upon his authorization and analyzed it, I have expressed it by recollecting the scriptures according to my capacity. Through this clear commentary on the profound ocean of the definitive empowerment, may whatever momentary virtue I have accumulated cause all beings without exception to be victorious. This difficult commentary on the fourth stage, which destroys the hosts of those who are deluded, was written by the glorious protector Nandikṣema. The Commentary on the Difficult Points of the Definitive Teaching of Empowerment, composed by the master Nandikṣema, is complete."
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.