Derge Kangyur/Tengyur e-text, Esukhia/Barom edition — public domain (mechanical reproduction)
This commentary presents a polemical and instructional defense of a non-conceptual realization of the nature of mind, positioning it against both non-Buddhist views and various Buddhist methodologies. The author argues that liberation cannot be achieved through the conceptual frameworks of the common vehicles, the mere practice of compassion, or the ritual and meditative constructions of the generation and completion stages. Instead, the text commits the reader to a direct recognition of the unborn, non-dual nature of mind, which is described as spontaneously present and beyond the dichotomy of subject and object. The argument proceeds by first invalidating external systems—such as fire rituals and conceptual meditations—and then detailing the internal experience of the dharmakāya. By framing the nature of mind as analogous to space and the conceptual mind as 'flowers in the sky,' the work asserts that true enlightenment is not a produced result of effort but the recognition of an innate, luminous purity that transcends both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa.
Provenance
About this text
A commentary on the song of the essential meaning of the treasury of dohas, the Dohakoṣahṛdaya arthagītāṭīkā is a work of the General Unexcelled Yoga Tantra tradition. It is attributed to the Indian author Avadhūtipa Advayavajra. The work is preserved in the classical Tibetan tradition within the Tengyur, specifically in volume ཞི, where it extends over 83 pages. The Tibetan title is rendered as do ha mdzod kyi snying po don gyi glu'i 'grel pa. The text enacts a polemical defense of non-conceptual realization, positioning the direct recognition of the unborn, non-dual nature of mind against both non-Buddhist views and various Buddhist methodologies. It specifically invalidates external systems, such as the fire rituals of those who hold a view of a self, and argues that liberation cannot be achieved through conceptual frameworks or ritual constructions. A scholar or serious reader consults this work today to examine how the author frames the nature of mind as analogous to space and the conceptual mind as 'flowers in the sky,' thereby detailing the internal experience of the dharmakāya while rejecting the efficacy of meaningless rituals and the dichotomy of subject and object.
Cite thisAnuvāda, “A Commentary on the Song of the Meaning of the Essence of the Treasury of Dohās” (Toh 2268), machine draft, 2026.https://naxiai.com/tibetan/works/toh2268
Summary & commentary
Significance
The work is significant for its representation of the Mahāmudra or Dzogchen-style approach to sudden enlightenment, where the focus shifts from gradual cultivation to the recognition of an innate state. It provides a critical perspective on the limitations of conceptual meditation and ritualism within the broader Indo-Tibetan Buddhist landscape.
Structure
Passages
Section
Description
1-8
Critique of Other Systems
An examination of non-Buddhist views and the limitations of common Buddhist vehicles, including ritual fire offerings and conceptual meditation.
9-35
The Nature of Non-Dual Realization
Discussion on the non-duality of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, the role of the dharmakāya, and the state of equal taste beyond conceptual mind.
43-68
The Nature of Mind and its Manifestations
Analogies comparing the nature of mind to space and a critique of directing the mind toward specific realms or conceptual emptiness.
77-99
Training and the Spontaneously Present State
Guidance on avoiding conceptual mindfulness and the assertion that enlightenment is a spontaneously present quality rather than a product of effort.
Themes
Non-duality of Saṃsāra and Nirvāṇa (10-11)
Critique of Conceptual Meditation (5, 7, 8, 94)
Spontaneous Presence of Enlightenment (95, 99)
The Unborn Nature of Mind (18, 26, 92, 93)
Summary, significance and provenance note generated by gemma4:31b from the translation and the catalogue record.
AnuvādaA Commentary on the Song of the Meaning of the Essence of the Treasury of Dohās·
In the language of India: Dohakoṣahṛdayārthagītiṭīkā-nāma. In the language of Tibet: Dohazod kyi snying po don gyi glu’i ’grel pa zhes bya ba (The Commentary on the Song of the Essential Meaning of the Treasury of Dohās). Homage to Mañjuśrī Kumārabhūta!
I prostrate with devotion through my three doors to the dust of the feet of the glorious Saraha, who perfectly realized the intention of the emanated Bodhisattva Ratnamati and the glorious, great lord of yogins, the Archer (Saraha).
Since the essential meaning is not an object of the intellect, one such as I is very far from the actual meaning even if I were to express it in words. Although there is no connection between the words and the meaning, nevertheless, this commentary on the meaning based on this lamp of mindful awareness does not disparage the systems of others, such as the non-Buddhists. If they were realized, they would not deviate from the essential meaning; however, because they are misunderstood, they do not lead to liberation. Since there is no purpose in the literal sense, I have not explained them in detail. I shall explain the root verses following the systems of others, and I shall write the root verses following the explanations of my own tradition.
Furthermore, I shall not cite the scriptural words of the Piṭakas, nor will I write the scriptural words of the Mantras and Tantras, for they are inexhaustible. Relying solely on the intended meaning of the glorious Śavaripa, I shall write this memorandum of the drops of the nectar of his speech for the sake of myself and those like me who have devotion, condensing only the instructions on the essential meaning.
In this regard, for the time being, this Dohakoṣagīti has two parts: the challenge to those who have not realized the essential meaning, and...
This clarifies the realization. As for the challenge to those who have not realized it, there are the non-Buddhist outsiders and the Buddhist insiders. Regarding the outsiders who hold the view of a self, they assert four attributes: permanence, bliss, pervasiveness, and singularity. They maintain that the unmanifest sign and the manifest sign are the fourth state. From that, having perceived the four types of lineages for the sake of sentient beings, he emanated four teachers: Brahmā, Maheśvara, Viṣṇu, and the terrifying Rudra. Furthermore, these were for the sake of the four castes in future times: the Brahmin, the Vaiśya, the Kṣatriya, and the Śūdra.
Regarding that, the permanent self was spoken from the mouth of Brahmā; the blissful self was spoken from the mouths of the father and mother of Maheśvara; the all-pervading self was spoken from the mouth of Viṣṇu; and the singular self was spoken from the mouth of the terrifying Rudra. In that regard, although the four Vedas were spoken from the four mouths of Brahmā for the sake of the Brahmins, because they did not realize the ultimate view, they did not understand that very reality. Thus:
"The Brahmin who does not know that reality,
Recites the four Vedas in vain:
The Ṛgveda, the Yajurveda,
The Sāmaveda, and the Atharvaveda.
By practicing the mere rituals of the four Vedas, they do not realize it. Through the conduct of the cord that purifies the body, the water that purifies the speech, the kuśa grass that purifies the mind, and the thread that purifies the nature, they do not realize it. Although they do not part from the life-force of the outer and inner fire offerings, they burn the aggregates in the fire."
Because they have not realized the ultimate fruit, they remain in the household and perform fire offerings. In this life, there is no purpose in the suffering of heat and so forth, and in future lives, they will be unable to attain liberation. Thus, performing meaningless fire rituals is a failure to realize the correct view. Since only obscurations harm me, [I see that] the smoke harms people more [than the fire]. Now, regarding the teachings of the Vaiśya class spoken from the mouth of Maheśvara: they challenge the practices of Bhairava, Daṇḍin, Bheda, and Haṃsavṛtti. Whether by calculating external sticks for the sun and moon, or by relying on the pleasure of the male organ, they see a "perfect liberation." They meditate on the three-stick Bhairava as father and mother, or they associate like a male swan, or they desire liberation by knowing the wind to be like a swan. Regarding the teachings of Bheda and faith: if one experiences the pleasure of the male organ or the movement of the wind-sticks, there is no difference between virtuous and non-virtuous dharmas. Not knowing the difference between dharma and non-dharma, they are equal; and by thinking that what is not ultimate bliss is the ultimate, beings stray into falsehood itself. Now, regarding the teachings of the Kṣatriya class spoken from the mouth of Viṣṇu: they challenge the pervasive erila [ash] of the stable and the moving. Because they have not realized suchness, they smear their bodies with cow dung or human bone ash. Having smeared their bodies with erila ash, they practice while imagining Viṣṇu is on their head, and thus they carry a burden of matted locks upon their heads.
Regarding meditation: it is like a lamp at the heart, with four inner lamps and an outer house. Having lit lamps in the house, four women are stationed at the four corners. One stands in the center with the liṅga erect, and sitting at the junction, one rings a bell. When the lamp at the heart is suddenly stirred by the wind according to the pith instructions, one sits cross-legged and closes the eyes. At the time of placing the ear to the heart of a disciple who is like one's own heart, by the sound of the nine haṃs, one whispers into the ear: "This deceives people." If one asks, "What is it that is deceived?" it is because they are stubborn due to a lack of skillful means, or hairless due to a lack of understanding. "Show such a hairless wife to others!" When merely hearing the sound of A and Haṃ at the heart is asked about, they say, "I have received the empowerment," and desire a fee. They confer empowerments and take the guru's fees.
Spoken from the mouth of the fierce Bhairava: "The commoners who cross the Sāṃkhya [path] and those people distracted by desire have trimmed and polished their nails. I, for the sake of abandoning desire, have long nails and my body is covered in grime. The ascetics, because they are recognized, wear dharma robes and shave their hair with a razor. I, because ultimate shame does not exist, am devoid of clothes and pluck out my hair. As for the view, by looking at the autumn sky, the mind becomes attached. Since inflicting harm upon oneself is the path, the sky-minded one is the form of the path that inflicts harm. If one says that by making oneself and other beings suffer, liberation is attained, then one deceives oneself and others for the sake of liberation." Thus, those who cross over are understood. This is the challenge to the Buddhists who have not realized reality.
Furthermore, because the ultimate truth—which is unstained by the mud of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa—is not recognized, even if one practices the six perfections through the common vehicles alone, one is not liberated. Thus:
"Deprived of the reality of bliss,
And failing to realize the pith instructions on the asceticism of the mind,
One is not liberated by physical asceticism alone;
Thus, possessing only physical asceticism..."
Regarding the three vehicles, the four abidings, and the nine applications, their meaning—view, conduct, meditation, and the stains of dhyāna—is clarified elsewhere and has not been written here.
In that regard, the three levels of śrāvakas—lesser, middling, and superior—are called the "monks of the elder lineage." As for the pratyekabuddhas who practice in groups or are like rhinoceroses, the bhikṣus have likewise gone forth.
Regarding the lesser Mahāyāna sūtras, some remain engaged in explaining the sūtras. The middling Cittamātra, both with and without aspects, does not depart from the experience of the mind; thus, some perceive the mode of the mind as "one taste." The superior Madhyamaka proponents assert that all phenomena are like illusions and non-dual. Since the non-enumerated [Madhyamaka] is the Causal Vehicle of the Utterly Non-Abiding nature of phenomena, some engage in this Mahāyāna as a mere fabrication.
In that regard, concerning the establishment of the objects of knowledge through scripture, treatises, and valid cognition, because one has entered the textual systems for many eons, that is the authoritative treatise of the textual tradition.
As for the Vajrayāna, it is the Cakrasaṃvara or...
By meditating on the generation stage of Hevajra and so forth, one also meditates on the entire maṇḍala wheel without exception. Furthermore, because the completion stage—the pith instructions on the four drops within the fourth wheel—is explained in reliance upon the fourth empowerment, some enter into an explanation of the meaning of the fourth. Others, by seeing the śamatha of emptiness, appear to conceptualize the element of space. Still others, by viewing the manifold and emptiness as inseparable, view emptiness. Others say, "Appearances are not inanimate matter, and consciousness is not mere awareness; therefore, there is no connection between the maṇḍala of the deity and consciousness." Thus, most have entered into discordant positions.
Why is that? Because by recognizing the three types of coemergence of all phenomena, there is no liberation through anything else. "Apart from coemergence, by what else [is there liberation]?" Furthermore, because one does not see liberation through a one-sided śamatha, [it is said]: "Whoever meditates on whatever nirvāṇa, this is śamatha; this is vipaśyanā; this is meditative equipoise; this is post-meditation." Because one does not touch the ultimate through such conceits, "none of them touch the ultimate." Since the ultimate cannot be touched by the intellect, it is beyond expression; therefore, because it cannot be designated by a name and is not an object of knowledge, the other [the conceptual] will not be established. The other is not touched by the intellect, whereas śamatha and so forth involve intellectual interest. Because one is interested in whatever one is interested in, it is not the authentic [reality].
Since the intention of the Buddha is not attained, will a practitioner of meditative concentration attain liberation? If one realizes the correct view, then since the forms of offerings, luminosity, emptiness, or non-conceptuality are unnecessary, what need is there for lamps or ritual cakes? If one realizes the authentic reality just as it is, then since external mantras such as wrathful mantras, internal mantras such as focusing the mind on the movement of the winds, and secret mantras that protect the mind are unnecessary, what is to be done with them? What need is there to rely on secret mantras? Just as non-Buddhists do not need to rely on riverbanks or go into the forest to perform austerities, so too, there is no need for the descent of bodhicitta through the stages of the internal wheels, nor for the "staircase" of the wheel stages, nor for the reversal of that very bodhicitta upward, nor for the inexpressible austerities associated with those. What need is there for going to riverbanks or performing austerities? Just as non-Buddhists do not attain liberation through ritual bathing, nor do practitioners of mantra attain liberation by meditating on the impure as pure, will one attain liberation by entering water? Entering into a state of calm abiding that is a mere emptiness devoid of method, appearance, mindfulness, bliss, and clarity is not the goal. Therefore: "Entering into emptiness devoid of compassion / Does not see the uncommon path of Mahāmudrā; / Thus, the supreme path is not found by that." Alternatively, even if there are many varieties of method, if one realizes the perfection of the mind or the perfection of wisdom, then meditation is merely the "this side."
However, if one meditates on compassion alone, because that meditation is a mental engagement, one will not be liberated from the three realms; thus, while remaining in this saṃsāra, liberation will not be attained. Up to this point, the systems of others have been presented. Now, one’s own system shall be clearly explained. In that regard, from the view and so forth, up to the conclusion regarding the hope and fear of the result, these shall be summarized by thirty-five examples, which in turn are to be subsumed under the root example.
Those thirty-five are as follows: the example of the unchanging view remaining in the palm of the hand for one who has not mentally engaged with the essential meaning; the example of water poured into water for the inseparability of mistaken and unmistaken conduct; the example of embracing the Net of Magical Illusion in one’s lap for teaching one’s own system after transcending attachment to meditation; the example of space for the result that cannot be characterized; the example of the wish-fulfilling jewel for the nature of mind; the example of space for the four applications of its qualities; the example of a cup filled with water for realizing uninterrupted meditative concentration; the example of a camel for the fresh, natural, and relaxed state; the example of the yoga of wood for teaching one’s own system after transcending the yoga of the winds; the example of a small child for being free from hope and fear; the example of a young maiden’s bliss for having experienced it oneself but being unable to show it to others; the example of the utpala flower for being unstained by the mud of objects; the example of a venomous snake with a mantra for not being harmed by the afflictions; the example of an elephant in rut for the inseparability of meditative equipoise and post-meditation; and the example of a crow flying from a ship for not wavering from the dharmakāya.
Binding by the defects of the two objects is illustrated by the example of seeing a rope as a snake. Binding by the five sensory qualities is illustrated by the examples of the fish, the moth, the elephant, the bee, and the deer. Although one enjoys sensory qualities, they do not cause harm when the nature of phenomena is realized; this is illustrated by the example of water and its waves. Adventitious conceptual thoughts subside into the dharmakāya; this is illustrated by the example of dust. The single taste of the manifold is illustrated by the example of water poured into water. The yoga of immediate encounter is illustrated by the example of a flame spreading through a forest. Contradiction with whatever one is attached to is illustrated by the example of the husk of a sesame seed. The similarity and difference between sensory direct perception and yogic direct perception are illustrated by the example of a pig and an elephant. Performing the benefit of beings even without [conceptual] knowledge is illustrated by the example of a wish-fulfilling jewel. The vessel being permanent or unable to be remembered is illustrated by the example of a kalakuṭa [poison]. Not losing the taste of the nature of phenomena is illustrated by the example of salt dissolving in water. The inseparability of mind and mental factors is illustrated by the example of a lamp in water. Since the manifold does not waver from the dharmakāya, it is illustrated by the example of a king shown a magical illusion. Knowledge being consumed as food is illustrated by the example of a wife consuming her husband. Samsara and nirvana being the coemergent vow is illustrated by the example of fire-crystal and water-crystal. The dharmakāya seems to be touched by the intellect but is not touched; this is illustrated by the example of the Vedas of an outcaste. If one seeks the saṃbhogakāya without realizing it, it is like the example of water in a mirage. If the pith instructions of the fourth are realized, it is illustrated by the example of a moonstone. Having realized the nirmāṇakāya, the mind is left loose; this is illustrated by the example of tending an elephant. Realizing the essence to be inseparable is illustrated by the example of a bubble.
To clarify those examples: first of all, one must realize the view of the intention of the Sugatas of the three times, which is not an object to be realized [by conceptual thought]. Furthermore, one must know that all phenomena, such as saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, are non-dual. There are many points to be expressed regarding this, which should be learned from the mouth of the guru. In that regard, according to the inferior, middling, and superior yogas: for the inferior, the view is the inseparability of appearance and emptiness, the meditation is the inseparability of bliss and emptiness, and the result is the inseparability of the three kāyas.
The middling yogi says: The inferior yoga is merely a name given to conceptual thought. Since that conceptual thought is also just mindfulness, through the pith instructions, one experiences the mirror-like wisdom; through the experience of non-mindfulness, the wisdom of equality; through the teaching on the unborn ground, the discriminating wisdom; through the realization of being free from activity, the all-accomplishing wisdom; and through the utterly pure state beyond thought, the utterly pure expanse of reality (dharmadhātu). By experiencing these through the pith instructions, it is called the middling yoga.
The superior yogi says: What the middling yogi labels as "wisdom" is merely the non-dual union of illusion-like mindfulness and non-mental engagement, a state of non-abiding. That which is without mindfulness and without mental engagement is the non-abiding emptiness; that which is unborn and unceasing is the non-abiding equanimity; and that which is not known by the intellect because it is beyond thought is the non-abiding cessation.
Furthermore, because those who do not abide [in extremes] are inseparable from non-mental engagement, the power of the union of those two [means and wisdom] is such that the three aspects of saṃsāra and the three aspects of nirvāṇa are the emanations of mind and wisdom. Whatever is mind and wisdom is without entity. Because it is without entity, one should not abide in a non-entity. One should not abide in this arising of mind—the unarisen nature of phenomena (dharmatā)—nor should one abide in the mind itself, which is the object of non-recollection, because it does not abide. Thus: "Neither abiding in saṃsāra, nor abiding in nirvāṇa."
That non-arising is realized by depending on both recollection and non-recollection. For example, fire will remain as long as the fuel is not exhausted, but when the fuel is exhausted, the fire has no place to abide. Likewise, as long as recollection and non-recollection are not exhausted, one will abide in what is called "non-arising." When those two are known to be like the illusions of a dream, because that non-arising is non-apprehendable, it is like a blind man and is thus inexpressible. "O, abandon the blind man of whatever is spoken, for it is false!" The appearances to the mind depend on the conditions of habitual tendencies; the emptiness of the mind depends on relative phenomena; and the non-arising of the mind depends on those two. Therefore, let go of whatever attachment there is to appearance, emptiness, or non-arising. By realizing all phenomena in their meeting without mental engagement, if one realizes them, that is it. Since non-mental engagement is unsurpassed, even if it is shown through signs and methods, it is not the actual sign. For example, if one says, "Call the one who is not a Brahmin," [the Brahmin himself is called].
Just as the other is unidentifiable, so too, because it is not an object to be known by another, no one can know anything other than that. Furthermore, it is the reading, the grasping, and the meditation that consist of the three bodies of the wisdom of hearing, the wisdom of reflection, and the wisdom of meditation. That very reality is unchanging from the beginningless past; since existence, attachment, and even the treatises on them are not other than that, the treatise held in the heart is also that. When the sublime guru points out the view of non-mental engagement through signs and methods, if one fails to realize the unchanging view by mentally engaging in other conceptual thoughts, there is no view that does not point to that. If that view which is mentally engaged were something to be realized, it would be an object of knowledge; if it is not realized, it is an affliction. Therefore, because it can be shown by the lineage gurus and the direct guru through special signs and methods, it nevertheless depends entirely upon the guru’s oral instructions. The lineage guru shows it through signs, while the direct guru brings realization through methods. Because it abides in the center of the heart, when what the lineage guru has spoken enters the heart of the direct guru, what is it like? It is like a wish-fulfilling jewel, or like the palms of the hands of a person who has accomplished the deity of wealth, where whatever is thought of is accomplished. Likewise, if the unchanging view is realized, because it is neither exhausted nor increased, it is like seeing a treasure in the palm of one’s hand. Now, the conduct of the yogi who has realized the view shall be shown by the analogy of water poured into water.
Furthermore, although delusion and non-delusion appear as two, they are non-dual within the primordial state. When the innate, genuine, coemergent nature exists within childish ordinary beings, if one realizes it without mental engagement at the time it is not indicated, then because the innate nature is not indicated by fabrication, that very expanse of the innate, uncontrived, and naturally pure reality is not indicated by symbols but is merely indicated by sounds and conventions. Because of delusion, one is deceived by the child through training and fabrication—thinking "this is clean" and "this is unclean," "this is virtuous" and "this is non-virtuous," and so forth. Therefore, Saraha says, "Delusion deceives the child." Since that ultimate coemergence is not something to be meditated upon, and there is nothing superior to it, there is no meditative concentration and no renunciation.
If one asks, "In that case, must one abandon objects and the joy of objects?" it is not so. While dwelling in the house of mindfulness, without being separated from the three types of insight—the consort who is non-mindfulness—one dwells in the house together with the consorts. If one asks, "Are not the five sensory objects of the external world and the objects of the internal world bound by mindfulness?" if one realizes this, one is liberated. If one is not liberated because one is bound by the joy of objects, and one exerts effort by taking that very thing to heart, Saraha says, "I, Saraha, know that very reality."
If one realizes the four uninterrupted meditative concentrations, there is no need for meditative concentration involving mental engagement. Thus, he says, "If it is manifest, what is the use of meditative concentration?" Alternatively, if one does not realize the uninterrupted meditative concentration taught by the sublime guru, mental engagement fades away. Thus, he says, "If it is hidden, one measures the darkness."
In that regard, if one realizes the ultimate coemergent nature—the place of origin, the place of abiding, and the place of cessation of all phenomena—one might ask: is that very coemergent nature something accompanied by mindfulness, or is it something without mindfulness? It is neither. It is neither an entity nor a non-entity. Because the uninterrupted meditative concentration of the entire mind is not recognized, Saraha constantly exerts himself in lamentation: "All sentient beings are ignorant, and through that, they undergo birth, aging, sickness, and death. That very ignorance, which is taken up and becomes the locus of birth and death, vanishes into the expanse of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā). At that time, ignorance itself is the dharmakāya; because it is untouched by the intellect, it is the ultimate. Taking that very thing, one accomplishes supreme great bliss." Furthermore, that great bliss unstained by mud is, in symbolic language, the manifestation of the nirmāṇakāya, the sambhogakāya, and the sublime dharmakāya. Because it is not realized, although Saraha speaks with a loud voice, the sentient beings of the three realms do not recognize what they themselves possess. "How can the world of animals understand?" If one asks, "If it is understood and realized, is there then something to be thought?"—meditation, reflection, and mindfulness are conceptualizations. Since the ultimate transcends thought and meditation, that expanse untouched by the intellect—being free from meditative concentration—what is there to be thought? If one then asks, "If it cannot be thought, is there a relationship of teacher and student in the explanation?"—because it has not become an object of the intellect, it cannot be expressed by words. Since it is inexpressible, how can it be explained?
If one is to explain this, one must remember: the conceptualization of mindfulness is saṃsāra, and because that very state is not recognized as vanishing, all beings without exception are deceived by the seal of existence. Mindfulness vanishes by its very nature; since it is not the innate object of knowledge, no one has ever grasped the innate nature. In the innate, authentic, coemergent state, there are no three or five continua, no outer, inner, or secret mantra. Because there is no object of meditation or meditator based upon that, there is no continuum, no mantra, no object of thought, and no meditative concentration. Meditation, thought, mindfulness, and mental engagement—all these are causes that delude one's own mind. Since the stains of the knower and the known and so forth are naturally pure, they cannot be corrupted by contrived meditative concentration. Therefore, the naturally pure mind is not to be corrupted by meditative concentrations. Although one may experience the bliss of body, mind, and appearances through the bliss experienced in empowerment, because these are adventitious, do not remain attached to that bliss or be tormented by it. Regarding that, the pith instructions on the nine Brahmās of non-delusion shall be taught. What are they? They are: the gaṇacakra, the action seal (karmamudrā), the dharma seal (dharmamudrā), the great seal (mahāmudrā), the commitment seal (samayamudrā), the ultimate body, the ultimate speech, the ultimate mind, and their indivisibility. Regarding the gaṇacakra, there are the outer, inner, and secret. The outer is when male and female yogis, as consorts, gather to eat, drink, and delight in union; the perception of the body as the deity, the perception of speech as mantra, and—
By meditating on the generation stage without being separated from the perception of the suchness of that mind, one constantly and repeatedly fills the wheel. If one realizes the generation stage of the Resultant Vajrayāna and so forth exactly as they are, through such a dharma, the next world will be accomplished; if one does not realize it, one has gone while trampling the heads of the deluded with one's feet. As for the inner feast, one eats the five nectars and the five meats, and drinks with the pith instructions on the vajra-water. By eating and drinking through the indivisibility of bliss and emptiness, and rejoicing in union, one fills the wheels in successive order with the bliss of bodhicitta; thus, one constantly and repeatedly fills the wheel. If one realizes the pith instructions of the sublime method, through such a dharma, the next world will be accomplished; if one does not realize such a dharma, one has gone while trampling the heads of the deluded world with one's feet. As for the secret feast, one eats mindfulness as food and drinks mindfulness as drink. Through the indivisibility of the unborn, one eats and drinks and rejoices in union. Since mindfulness and the emanation of mindfulness are the nirmāṇakāya, and the unborn, untouched by the intellect, is the dharmakāya, one constantly and repeatedly fills the wheel. If one correctly realizes such a nature of phenomena (dharmatā), through such a dharma, the next world will be accomplished; because one has not realized the nature of phenomena that transcends the intellect, one has gone while trampling the heads of the deluded world with one's feet. Now, regarding the example and the meaning of the action seal (karmamudrā): the example of the action seal has already been explained by others. As for the meaning of the action seal:
One’s own bodhicitta consists of four types of bindu. When the time comes to teach through the pith instructions: mindfulness is the bindu of saṃsāra; non-mindfulness is the bindu of nirvāṇa, characterized by non-arising. Because one does not engage the mind, at the time of not engaging the mind—which is the characteristic of that which transcends the intellect—conceptual thoughts do not circulate and awareness does not circulate. Where wind and mind do not circulate, at that time the sun of mindfulness does not appear, and the moon of non-mindfulness does not appear. When the sun and moon do not enter, there is neither the knowable nor the unknowable. At the time the pith instructions are taught, the mind is at rest. Mindfulness and non-mindfulness are the relief of the Tathāgata; non-arising is the relief of Vajradhara; and that which transcends the intellect is the relief of Great Bliss. The ignorant should find relief in that state. Since the pith instructions of the guru and disciple can be taught, Saraha, having taught all the pith instructions, departed.
Regarding the two: the symbolic dharmamudrā and the ultimate dharmamudrā—the symbolic aspect of the mudrā has already been explained by others. As for the ultimate dharmamudrā: all phenomena without exception are gathered within the mind, and that mind is within the three channels. The channel of mindfulness is like a musician; it is the lalanā. The channel of non-mindfulness abides in equanimity; it is the rasanā. Other than these two, there is the non-arising, which is pointed out but cannot be identified; it is the avadhūtī. Although mindfulness and non-mindfulness arise from that, within that expanse, one should not make two, but make them one. Mindfulness is the family of the Body (kāya).
The family of non-recollection is the speech; the family of the unborn is the mind. Since they are inseparable from that expanse, do not differentiate between the families. If one is attached to recollection, it is the cause of the desire realm; if one is attached to non-recollection, it is the cause of the form realm; and if one is attached to the unborn, it is the cause of the formless realm. Because these are the magical displays of the mind, do not grasp them as being truly real. Therefore, all these three realms without exception are the bliss untouched by the conceptual mind, as taught by the sublime guru. Since all phenomena do not waver from that state, transform them all into the single color of great passion. The Mahāmudrā, which is naturally pure, cannot be illustrated by examples; its meaning cannot be pointed out as being "like this." Nevertheless, as soon as it is shown by the instructions of the sublime guru, that yogic direct perception, untainted by the three conditions, abides as the nirmāṇakāya, the equality of the three times. In that state, there is no beginning, middle, or end. Because the saṃbhogakāya abides in the unborn expanse where existence and nirvāṇa are one, it is said: "There is no existence, yet it is not nirvāṇa." Since it is unstained by the mud of either saṃsāra or nirvāṇa, the dharmakāya is like the moon in water—merged yet unmixed. This should be understood from the mouth of the guru. Furthermore, because this supreme great bliss is untainted by the three conditions, and because the two purposes of self and others are not established, it is not differentiated by the nature of the non-establishment of self and other. It is the nirmāṇakāya of the nature that has not arisen from adventitious recollection.
The saṃbhogakāya of the essence that is non-recollection and non-arising, and the dharmakāya of the essence that is non-birth and non-arising, are not established as self or other; thus, "self and other do not exist." Regarding the samaya-mudrā in terms of both example and meaning: the example has already been explained by others. As for the meaning: because this present mindfulness appears as a variety of things, it is Vairocana in the foreground. Because the appearance of non-recollection pervades beyond that, it is the movement of Amitābha. Because a variety arises from the inseparability of those two like a wish-fulfilling jewel, it is Ratnasambhava. Because it performs the benefit of beings from that very variety, it is Amoghasiddhi. Because it does not waver from its own essence, it is Akṣobhya. Realizing that saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are from the beginning without a cause and are of a single cause is Maitreya. The method that brings about the realization of what was not realized is compassion. The joy of being inseparable from that once realized is joy. That very state, which transcends the objects of the intellect, is equanimity. Because these are not mentally constructed, they are Vajrasattva—thus there are ten. However one looks at them, they do not waver from that state: "In front, behind, and in the ten directions." Furthermore, to show where they are delivered: the appearance in one's own cognition is the aggregate of form, Vairocana; one's own feeling is the aggregate of feeling, Ratnasambhava; because it exists as that very perception, it is the aggregate of perception, Amitābha; and the aspect of such formations is the aggregate of formations, Amoghasiddhi.
Because it is not realized by ordinary cognition, the aggregate of consciousness, Akṣobhya, consists of the five wisdoms, which are the five mundane aggregates. That which is taught through the pith instructions is the absence of recollection and the absence of mental engagement; that is the aggregate of ethical discipline, Vairocana. That very state, being uninterrupted, is the aggregate of meditative concentration, Ratnasambhava. That very state, being untouched by the intellect, is the aggregate of wisdom, Amitābha. That very state, being unbound by anything, is the aggregate of liberation, Amoghasiddhi. Since the enlightened intent of the Buddha resides in that very state which is unbound by anything, it is the aggregate of the vision of the wisdom of liberation, Akṣobhya. These, when sealed by the five wisdoms, are the five supramundane aggregates, which are the domain of only a few yogins. If not realized, one associates with the mundane aggregates; if realized, one is together with the supramundane aggregates. Between the two paths of attachment and liberation, which are like an illusion: the five mundane aggregates abide on the path of attachment, and the five supramundane aggregates abide on the path of liberation. Thus, whether looking in front, behind, or in the ten directions, one is never separated from suchness, which is free from mental engagement. Whatever is seen is that very suchness. At the time when the sublime guru points this out through symbols, one realizes the meaning exactly as it is, without even a hair’s breadth of doubt. "Today, the protector, confusion is severed." Questions and answers are merely recollection; the other is forever beyond mental engagement.
Now, one should not ask anyone else. Regarding the coemergent body, there are two aspects: the example and the meaning. As for the coemergent body of the example, the white and red drops lack the eye faculty and so forth. Regarding the coemergent body of the meaning, there are also two: the example and the meaning. The example consists of that which is with habitual tendencies and that which is without habitual tendencies. That which is with habitual tendencies is when, at the time the mind looks at a form, that body lacks any flesh, blood, or faculties. The example of the body without habitual tendencies is that because one cannot look with the mind at a place one has not physically gone to, there is no mental form, and thus no faculties. When one perceives the equality of the three times not indicated by those [faculties], one abides in the three times free from a root. This is the body of the meaning, as taught by the sublime lineage gurus:
"Wherein the faculties dissolve,
It is not established by the nature of 'I' and 'mine,' and so forth;
Thus, its own essence also perishes."
In that way, failing to realize the intention of the Sugatas of the three times, which is not an object of mental engagement, is non-realization. Since these mental engagements do not achieve liberation from saṃsāra, they are spiritual friends of negativity. Because the ultimate cannot be mentally engaged, if one realizes the coemergent, that is a spiritual friend. Therefore, friends, that is the coemergent body. Furthermore, as soon as it is indicated by the symbolic gestures of the sublime lineage gurus, one should not have doubts regarding the actual guru through mental gestures. Without asking about the coemergent of the example, since the coemergent of the meaning depends upon the sublime guru, ask clearly at the mouth of the sublime guru.
Present speech arises from vowels, consonants, the mind, and the movement of the winds, and thus seeks to express the meaning as it is; yet that which is as it is is not an object of expression. Furthermore, by the power of the illustrative coemergent state, when the mental wind does not move between the white and red drops, appearance subsides and emptiness has not yet arisen. In the same way, in ultimate speech, the winds of memory of the mind, the intellect, awareness, and consciousness do not move. Where does the mind go? Where does the wind vanish? In that regard, because it is the basis for the qualities of a Buddha in the form of the kāyas, it is said: "All limbs abide here upon the earth." If one asks where this is to be known: it is inexpressible between the two illustrative drops, white and red, or between the sun and moon. By knowing it at the boundary between memory and non-memory of the ultimate drop, it is said: "It should be fully known at the boundary of dreaming." Furthermore, that which is neither the knower nor the known is the profound and inexpressible itself; by knowing that, the ocean of delusion is severed. Because the present mind is transformed by conditions, habitual tendencies, and so forth, it should be understood as a mere illustration. The ultimate mind is unchanging and free from conceptualization. Since that lack of conceptualization is beginningless, it is unstained by either the mud of adventitious memory or the mud of non-memory. This is the supreme great bliss. The destination for yogins of realization is as follows: the place where the body dissolves is the nirmāṇakāya of non-memory; the place where speech dissolves is the sambhogakāya of the unborn; and the place where the mind dissolves is the dharmakāya beyond the intellect, as taught through the pith instructions.
Saraha teaches: "I shall go." If one asks, "Is there then something to be shown?" it is by relying on the lamp of this very mindfulness that the unborn, non-recollective state beyond the intellect is pointed out: "Kye ho! This is self-awareness." Regarding the essence of the ultimate meaning, there is no delusion. However, through the power of not realizing it, one is deluded by the delusions of mindfulness. If, through the power of realization, mindfulness is purified into the expanse and does not become an object of the intellect, then one has no doubt; therefore, do not be deluded by this. The intention of the Sugatas of the three times is such that by taking things as they are to mind, one is bound; and by taking non-things, emptiness, as they are to mind, one is also bound. Thus, both things and non-things are the Sugatas' bondage, for as long as there is subject and object, that is cyclic existence. Even if one takes it to mind that "there is no subject and object," that is still mindfulness and one's own cyclic existence. Not taking the essence of phenomena to mind is equanimity. Since what is called "equanimity" is a mere name, do not differentiate between cyclic existence and equanimity. The innate, natural, coemergent nature is beyond being taken to mind. Conceptualization is the mind, and thus it is mindfulness. Since that mindfulness vanishes like mist, O yogi, let the innate mind remain as one. Furthermore, if you are attached to this very non-recollection, it is like a drop of oil remaining on water; it is still accompanied by conceptual elaboration. If you understand this very mindfulness, all phenomena dissolve into the nature of phenomena (dharmatā); understand it to be like water poured into water.
Now, the distinction between mistaken and non-mistaken meditation shall be shown by the analogy of embracing the Net of Illusion. By mentally engaging in meditative concentrations such as appearance-emptiness, bliss-emptiness, clarity-emptiness, awareness-emptiness, or union, liberation will not be attained. Through mental engagement, one is unable to transcend the three realms. Some say that if one rests in calm abiding and then, without distraction, realizes the very nature of the wisdom of special insight and the post-meditative state exactly as it is, liberation will be attained. However, if one does not recognize that it is a state of constant meditative equipoise, then liberation will not be attained through a meditative equipoise that is merely a mental construct; thus, false meditative concentration does not find liberation.
If one does not know the uninterrupted meditative concentration, then a meditative concentration based on occasional recollection is like the following tales: the story of a magician deceiving a painter; the story of the merchant’s son who went to the Island of Jewels and was deceived by a prostitute named Māyā; and the story of the merchant’s son Drava who was deceived by the monkey and the prostitute Māyā. In the same way, calm abiding deceives special insight, special insight deceives calm abiding, meditative equipoise deceives the post-meditative state, and the post-meditative state conceals meditative equipoise. Appearance deceives emptiness, and emptiness deceives appearance. How then can the Net of Illusion be embraced in the lap?
If one knows their nature exactly as it is, it is like a magician who, for the sake of a king or a wise and learned person, conjures and displays horses, elephants, men, and beautiful young women.
One will not be captivated by it. Why? Because one knows it to be an illusion. Likewise, when the sublime guru teaches uninterrupted meditative concentration through symbols and skillful means, one sees the ultimate truth and will no longer place trust in the conventional truth as being merely an illusion. Because the sublime guru has shown that the meditative concentration of the three kāyas exists within oneself, one gains conviction. Thus, through realization free from doubt, one trusts in the truth of the sublime guru’s word. The symbols taught by the sublime gurus of the lineage cannot be designated by the conventions of permanence or nihilism, bliss or emptiness, or saṃsāra and nirvāṇa; therefore, Saraha says: "It is not something that can be expressed by the mind."
Now, the result, which is free from hope and fear and beyond indication, shall be shown by the example of space. Space is not stained by any conventions such as existence or non-existence. Since "space" is merely a name assigned to it, it is a mere name. Because space is not a functional entity, it is not perceived by the feelings and so forth arising from the contact of the eye with forms and so on. If space were a functional entity, it would not be a feeling such as pleasure or pain. Since space is unstained by arising, ceasing, and so forth, it is the primordially pure nature of space. When one looks at the ultimate nature of the mind itself at a time when no conditions have arisen, one knows it as mindful awareness. Looking again, one knows it as unborn. Looking once more, the intellect touches it; as one looks and looks, seeing itself ceases.
By realizing that very state, the dharmakāya, the knower and the known cease; at that very moment, it becomes cessation. If one does not realize that the innate phenomena are beyond mental engagement, but instead thinks, "This mental engagement is the resultant dharmakāya," one is deceived by the child of the defects of the innate mind.
Thinking, "I shall free the sentient beings of the three realms from the obscurations of the afflictions," one develops a superior intention. Yet, by excessively disparaging all beings, if one disparages them through the afflictions, then disparaging them through the known is like having escaped from a prison only to be cast back inside. If one does not know how that very pride regarding the known dissolves into that which transcends the intellect, one cannot point out that reality due to the defect of pride.
Because the entire world of the three realms does not realize the meditative concentration that exists within itself, the entire world is deluded by meditative concentration. The yogic intent of the naturally pure dharmatā, which is free from all conceptual elaborations, cannot be illustrated by example or meaning; since it is not realized through mental fabrication, the innate nature cannot be pointed out by anyone.
The mind is the root of all phenomena. Since the mind is not established by way of its own nature, the root cannot be pointed out, and thus the root of the mind is not pointed out. These mental factors that appear in this way arise from the initial state of non-recollection. Because they abide in non-recollection and dissolve into non-recollection, the coemergent appearance is that which is experienced within non-recollection. When the mind is in a state where conditions have not arisen, it is non-recollection, which is emptiness.
First, because it is born from the unborn, abides in the unborn, and dissolves into the unborn, the coemergent emptiness is that which can be experienced as the unborn. At the time when the nature of mind has not arisen as either mindfulness or non-mindfulness, that very nature of mind is free from arising and ceasing. Having transcended the objects of the intellect, since it is born from, abides in, and dissolves into that essence of the three times—the dharmatā of all phenomena—one realizes the inconceivable through the coemergent unborn. If one realizes the mind through these three types of coemergence, then appearance, emptiness, and the unborn cease at the very moment they arise; where then could they arise, and where could they subside? Since the dharmatā of phenomena cannot be found when sought, one does not clearly know where it abides. Because sentient beings have no fundamental basis, the fundamental basis of the buddhas' wisdom has no root. This rootlessness is the root of bodhicitta. Since it is without objective reference, it is the reality free from a root. If one realizes the nature of bodhicitta, then as soon as the sublime guru teaches the pith instructions on coemergence, there is neither mindfulness nor forgetfulness; that attainment of the guru’s pith instructions is sufficient. If one asks, "Is it sufficient to remain wandering in saṃsāra?"—one wanders if the nature of mind is not known. For example, during the time of a dream, pleasure, pain, and so forth arise from the mind and nothing else exists. At the time of waking, the waking consciousness, the dreaming, and the non-arising of the dream-consciousness are not distinct. Likewise, the mindfulness arising from the mind—
The mind is without recollection, and the nature of mind is inseparable from the unborn. Since samsara and nirvana are the magical display of the unborn nature of mind, it is said that the nature of samsara is the very essence of mind. Thus, by abandoning the knowledge of the nature of mind through extraordinary means, the deluded are addressed by Saraha: "Know this!" The purpose of yoga is the innate; since that is untouched by the intellect, it cannot be expressed in words. From verbal expression, recollection arises; however, that which is not expressed in words does not give rise to recollection. Even if the innate nature is described in words, such a reality is seen by the sublime guru merely by bestowing the single, stainless eye of primordial wisdom. Thus, through the master’s pith instructions, it is seen. At the time of such realization, when the knower and the known are incinerated, what need is there to mention virtuous and non-virtuous phenomena? Having consumed both dharma and non-dharma, one thinks: "Well then, do virtuous phenomena benefit or do non-virtuous phenomena harm?" Since that is not the case, there is not even a speck of fault in this. Now, the meaning of the nature of mind, which transcends the domain of the intellect, shall be shown through the analogy of the wish-fulfilling jewel from which various things arise. Furthermore, although the nature of mind is naturally pure, these adventitious recollections arising from the mind solidify the knower, the known, the afflictions, and so forth, and do not bring liberation from samsara. Desiring liberation from those, one should...
By meeting again and again in the presence of a guru who possesses the oral instructions of the lineage, one is brought under the power of mindfulness of the primordial coemergent—the ground of all phenomena, the very essence of omniscience—as spoken from the mouths of the lineage gurus. Although it is unstained by the mire of mindfulness, if the stains of mental engagement are not cleansed, one will not encounter it. Therefore, the meeting of the past, future, and present as the emptiness of intrinsic nature is the realization of yogis. As for the mind of mindfulness arising from the coemergent nature of phenomena: when the innate mind has been purified of all clinging to things as real, at that time, through knowing that the qualities of the Sugatas of the three times do not waver from the dharmakāya, the qualities of the guru will enter the heart. Thus, when one realizes that which is without mindfulness and without arising, untouched by any conceptual mind, this is the song of the realization of the Buddhas because it is an uninterrupted flow. If one realizes it in this way, Saraha sings this song; if one realizes it thus, it does not depend on anything other than the instructions of the sublime guru. It is not a training of the mind in the outer, inner, or secret mantras, nor is it a matter of following scriptures and citing the five classes of tantra as sources. No matter where one cites scripture, it is possible for reasoning to arise in any way; since the oral instructions apply to anything at all—
Non-mental engagement is inexpressible through scripture, reasoning, or pith instructions, yet it can be indicated through symbols and methods. Therefore, not a single mantra or tantra is seen [as the ultimate]. Individuals who do not realize it in this way are like silkworms: thinking that their own conceptual recollections are the ultimate, they exert effort. Because they do not see suchness, beings become individually bound, just as children build and destroy sand castles, regarding them as virtuous or non-virtuous. If one does not grasp at the ripening of virtuous and non-virtuous karma as the ultimate, then when liberated from karma, one’s own mind is liberation. The sentient beings of the six realms, according to the pace of their efforts, strive after the ripening of their respective karma and do not achieve liberation from the cycle of existence. The yogi of realization, like a lotus born from the impure mud of recollection, experiences through non-recollection; when one’s own continuum is liberated, there is certainly no other [path]. That very fruition, the unchanging and non-conceptual Dharmakaya, is the attainment of supreme nirvana. If the Dharmakaya is not realized, one wanders in samsara; if it is realized, one is in nirvana. That expanse of the unborn is the single nature of mind, the seed of all. Because its own essence is unchanging, from it the emanations of existence and nirvana arise. In the utterly pure expanse of the nature of mind, unstained by the adventitious defilements of recollective awareness, the conditions of appearance—
Because anything can arise through the conditions of habitual tendencies and the conditions of signs, it bestows the desired results. If one asks, "How do the two form bodies (rūpakāya) arise from the dharmakāya, which is devoid of recollective awareness?"—the wish-fulfilling tree, the excellent vase, or the wish-fulfilling jewel have no recollective awareness, nor are they sentient beings. Likewise, because realized yogis do not meditate, they are inconceivable. With the ultimate body, speech, and mind of the yidam deity, I prostrate to the mind that is like a wish-fulfilling jewel.
Now, if the four applications are realized, the nature of mind is neither bound nor liberated. However, if one clings to the adventitious recollections that arise from the mind, then by being bound, the mind becomes bound. If that very [mind] is grasped as the ultimate and is self-liberated within the state of the utterly pure expanse (dharmadhātu), then if that is liberated, there is no doubt. Since those who have not realized [this] are bound by the afflictions, "Whatever binds the fool, that very thing, when brought to the dharmadhātu, is swiftly liberated by one skilled in the instructions of the sublime guru in this very life."
If one asks, "How should the mind be grasped?"—because it pervades the sky of the expanse of non-recollection, the mind should be grasped as being like space. Just as space has no shape, color, or recollective awareness, yet various things arise from it without benefit or harm, likewise, when various recollections arise from the nature of mind, there is no benefit or harm. Therefore, the nature of mind should be grasped as the nature of space. If one knows that all phenomena that are mentally engaged are actually non-engaged, and if one realizes this:
If that mind is made non-mind, then through that, the nirmāṇakāya which is capable of arising as anything from non-recollection, the saṃbhogakāya which abides in the unborn expanse, and the dharmakāya which is beyond the intellect and thus without meditation—by these, one will attain unsurpassed enlightenment. Since in space no conventions of saṃsāra or nirvāṇa are observed, by binding the winds of conceptual thought, if one acts like space, the winds are thoroughly bound. Since buddhas and sentient beings are not distinct within the expanse, the thorough knowledge of equality is completely absorbed. If one knows that the nature of mind abides without wavering from the three kāyas during the time of speech, as Saraha said: "When one possesses the power, the six classes of beings bound by the recollecting mind that arises from the mind, which is the nature of the wheel of saṃsāra and impermanent, will quickly abandon that impermanent fluctuation if they realize the mind abides in the expanse of non-recollection."
The four applications are: the four applications of the action mudrā; the four applications of the wisdom of the time of death; the four applications for realizing the natural mode of the nature of mind; and the four physical applications, which are: gathering the four continents, joining the ocean to Mount Meru, placing the tongue against the palate, and turning the eyes upward. The four verbal applications are: ĀḤ at the navel, HŪṂ at the heart, OṂ at the throat, and HAṂ at the crown. The four mental applications are: focusing the consciousness in that manner. At that time, as the upper wind, the lower fire, and the powerful bindu are blocked, the wind, fire, and powerful [bindu] are blocked.
When the winds and mind are gathered within the central avadhūtī channel, at the time of the flow of nectar, the wind enters the mind. When the four applications enter a single location within the state of great bliss, at the time of delivering the conventional bodhicitta bliss into the haṃ drop, the supreme great bliss cannot be contained within the expanse of space.
Regarding the four applications of the Atyayajñāna: appearance ceases into emptiness, emptiness ceases into appearance, the sense faculties cease into the great power, and the mind ceases into mere mindfulness. At that time, when wind, fire, and the great power cease, the four ultimate great elements are: mindfulness as the earth element, non-mindfulness as the water element, non-arising as the fire element, and that which transcends the intellect as the wind element. At the time of the flow of the nectar of no birth or death, the wind enters the mind. When the four ultimate elements enter a single location within the state of the dharmakāya, the body of great bliss is unstained by any mud. Just as space is immeasurable, so too is suchness immeasurable; thus, supreme great bliss cannot be contained within the expanse of space.
Regarding the four applications of the natural state of the mind itself, they are illustrated by four examples: hatred is a snake, ignorance is a pig, attachment is an elephant, and fearlessness is a lion. The poisonous snake of the mind of mindful hatred is to be devoured by the pig of non-mindful ignorance. The pig of non-mindful ignorance is to be devoured by the elephant of non-arising attachment. The elephant of non-arising attachment...
One should consume [the realization] like a lion, fearless and beyond the intellect. Thus, for the yogi who has realized the natural state of the mind, the conceptual winds are ceased by the mere recollection of that very great power of non-conceptuality. When the winds, the fire, and the great power are ceased, through the realization of non-recollection and forgetting, the nectar of no-birth-and-death flows. Because the conceptual winds arising from the mind enter the non-recollecting mind, at the time the nectar flows, the winds enter the mind. When, through the symbols and extraordinary methods of the sublime guru, one enters the state of the inconceivable, and when the four applications enter into a single state, being unpolluted by the three conditions, the supreme great bliss cannot be contained within the expanse of space.
Now, at the time of realization, the uninterrupted meditative concentration shall be illustrated by the analogy of a cup filled with water. If one does not realize it in this way, there is no difference from a creature of mere recollection; thus, the external house of objects and the internal house of sentient beings and recollection are discussed. Yet, though one speaks of those houses and what is within them, because it transcends thought and expression, the state of great bliss is not fully known. Since all beings without exception do not know their own meditative concentration, Saraha says: "All beings are refuted by their own thoughts." Because there is no one at all who realizes the inconceivable that transcends the intellect, there is no one at all who achieves the inconceivable. Such a state exists within all sentient beings; though it exists in all living creatures as the intention of the Sugatas of the three times, it is not realized.
At the time of realization, because all is of one taste in equality, and because all is of the nature of equal taste, that very state—beyond mindfulness, beyond arising, and beyond the conceptual mind—is the unsurpassed wisdom; thus, it is the inconceivable, unsurpassed wisdom.
If one thinks that such realization depends on another time—whether in the past, future, or present; or in terms of "today," "tomorrow," or "another day"—and desires to gradually attain the qualities of a Buddha, such as the major and minor marks, then one desires the perfection of phenomena. However, individuals who have not realized the continuity and the lack of decline are like those distracted by external objects. For example:
"Alas! A fine face with a cup filled with water, though it leaks continuously, does not decline; one does not even notice the leaking."
Because the mind of saṃsāra performs actions through mindfulness, while the mind of nirvāṇa performs no actions through the absence of mindfulness:
"Performing actions and not performing actions—by realizing saṃsāra and nirvāṇa to be mere illusions, if one realizes with certainty, there is neither bondage nor liberation."
Since it is not an object of the intellect, it cannot be expressed in words:
"Though it is without letters, they desire to explain it."
Artificial yogis claim that mindfulness alone is yoga. However, because mindfulness depends on conditions, it is absent in deep sleep, fainting, or unconsciousness; therefore, it is not the ultimate truth.
That which is not established by the intellect and is uninterrupted:
"Whomsoever among a hundred yogis, a few may point it out."
Now, the mind that is not bound by the tether of mindfulness shall be shown through the analogy of a camel left to roam free. Furthermore, if one does not realize the uncontrived suchness and remains only in conceptual mindfulness, this mind bound by the tether is as follows: the tether of attachment to the five external objects and the tether of attachment to the internal bliss, wind, and emptiness. If one realizes at this very moment that there is neither mindfulness nor forgetfulness, one is liberated; thus, there is no doubt that by relaxing, one is liberated. If one does not realize this, one is bound by this very mindfulness. As it is said: "By which of the two types of entities is the deluded one bound? If the entity of the nature of phenomena is not realized, one knows that one is distracted by this very mindfulness; the wise are liberated by that." If realized, the mind is left to roam in its own natural state. Because of not knowing that, one is bound by the rope of mindful awareness—the rope of saṃsāra—and thus becomes the six classes of beings. As it is said: "Those who are bound strive to go in the ten directions." If the meaning of the nature of mind is realized, although mindfulness is left to roam as an adventitious state, it will return to the expanse of non-mindfulness. As it is said: "If it is released, it remains steady and unmoving." Just as a camel that is bound does not walk, and if released does not go [anywhere else], so too, if the nature of mind is meditated upon, it is distracted. By realizing non-distraction in that very instant, when one is bound by the rope of the mind, one wanders and roams through the three realms. If the mind is resolved, the wandering and roaming of saṃsāra are severed. Therefore, O friends, I have realized this reversal like a camel. Whether this is so or not, ask the sublime gurus.
When that which dwells constantly within oneself is granted to disciples who are like one's own children, it is said: "Children, you too should perceive and look at it in that same way. Why look? Because the mental faculty, which is completely contained by the pith instruction of the self-reversing faculties—O, look at the faculty! At this time, it is free from the conventions of 'experiencing' or 'not experiencing.' I have realized nothing other than this. By being liberated from the ripening of karma through that very non-realization, and by possessing the pith instructions of the lineage, one is a person who has finished the work. As long as the rope of the mind is not cut, for that long one falls into the state of a sentient being possessed of a mind. Just as a monkey, though bound by a rope, moves up and down a tree but cannot escape the tree, so too, if sentient beings are not free from perception, they lack liberation despite being in high or low states. Later, in the presence of one who knows how to kill the mind, the rope of the mind must be cut.
Now, for those who have not realized the pith instructions of the lineage and who train in the winds, the example of a yogi crossing a mountain pass by means of wood will be shown. Furthermore, while a yogi of the fabricated path who relies on the channels and winds merely sees the reflections of bliss, clarity, and emptiness, yogis of realization are liberated if they realize the ultimate even without training in the channels and winds. Do not think of binding the winds yourself. For a yogi, there are twenty-one thousand six hundred channels; if condensed, there are three; and if condensed further, they are contained within the avadhūtī. Wherever the channels reside, there is the wind; wherever the wind resides, there is the bodhicitta."
It is said that wherever the bodhicitta abides, there is bliss; and wherever bliss abides, that is the Buddha. Since that is not the case, do not remain at the tip of the nose in the yoga of the wood. If one asks, "Is it not the experience of physical bliss?" it is not. Because the yoga of realization is distinguished by the coemergent, [it is said]: "Ema ho! Do not be attached to the supreme coemergent. Abandon completely the binding of the tip of the nose of the form of appearances, the tip of the nose of the time of the unborn, the tip of the nose of the experience of bliss, and the tip of the nose of existence of the action seal."
To mentally engage with it because of a predominance of conceptual thought—having conviction in the four joys, the four moments, and the entry of the winds into the avadhūtī—is as follows: "Here, the gathered mind is a wave of wind. Although qualities are attained through the yoga of wind, it becomes unstable, wavering, and extremely unruly."
Since all phenomena are subsumed within appearance, emptiness, and the unborn, and once one realizes their place of arising, place of abiding, and place of cessation, if one realizes the nature of the coemergent: "Through such realization, there is the vajra-like samādhi that is immovable. By that, one's own nature becomes stable."
When the mind, the intellect, awareness, mindfulness, and thoughts have ceased: "When the mind has completely ceased, since the mind is bound by the body of present birth, aging, sickness, and death, if one realizes the ultimate body, the bonds of the body will be completely severed."
Since external phenomena are like illusions and dreams, all internal experiences—whether remembered or unremembered—are of one taste in the unborn. When one is of equal taste with the coemergent: [it is said]: "When one is of equal taste with the coemergent..."
The low caste and cyclic existence, and the Brahmin caste and nirvāṇa, are equal when realized; at that time, there is neither low caste nor Brahmin. Now, when the sublime body is realized, it is shown by the example of abiding in the manner of a small child, free from hope and fear.
Therefore, the non-Buddhist outsiders say: "This purity of body and mind is to be achieved by purifying the body through ritual bathing, specific times, and special locations." They say the mind is purified by the intention and the objects of worship. Thus, by bathing in the Ocean of the Moon and so forth, and at the time of the full moon, going to places such as the kṣetra and upakṣetra, they claim that meditating on the bodily bliss of the padma and so forth, and making offerings to Brahmā and others, constitutes the virtue of the mind.
However, the yogi who realizes that which is not the domain of the ultimate intellect understands that appearances lack inherent existence, like the moon in water. Since the Ocean of the Moon itself and the various dharmatā expanse are indivisible, by knowing emptiness to be indivisible:
"Here, the Ocean of the Moon itself and the Ganges Ocean itself..."
Just as a Brahmin who has vomited wine is carried away by water, purity and impurity do not exist as having or not having existed from the beginningless start. "This Prayāga at Vārāṇasī, the moon in the empty night and the light that clarifies the day—here, the moon is the clarifier itself."
Since all phenomena are like the twenty-four places of birth, abiding, and cessation, the kṣetra, upakṣetra, and so forth, are realized in a manner that is without coming or going. Thus:
"Having gone there, what is said to be realized by looking..."
If one realizes that the body of ultimate meaning pervades all, there is no other abiding limit similar to that body. Since it is non-virtuous when conceptualized and virtuous when conceptualized, I have seen virtue with certainty. Some outsiders or certain insiders say: within the body, there are four or six wheels, with lotus petals and stalks and filaments according to their respective numbers. In the center of the stalk and filaments of the petal-endowed lotus, the very joy and bliss experienced from that is extremely subtle, possessing the scent and color of the natural state. Because it is a limited time, at the time of gain and loss, through the sorrow of specific occurrences and delusion, one does not know the unconditioned Dharmakāya that abides continuously. Do not, through the torment of the conditioned, make it fruitless. The outsiders say: if one exhausts the ripening of non-virtuous karma, one will become happy by worshipping Brahmā and the others. However, the yogi of realization [knows that] Great Ignorance is Brahmā, the Dharmakāya; Great Hatred is Viṣṇu, the Nirmāṇakāya; and Great Attachment is the Three-Eyed One, the Saṃbhogakāya. Since these are the basis of the three realms and the three bodies, wherever Brahmā, Viṣṇu, and the Three-Eyed One are the basis of the entire world without exception, when the afflictions are purified, there is no differentiation into castes. Since it is unstained by white or black karma, if one worships that which is without caste, the accumulation of the ends of karma will be perfectly exhausted. What is that? At the time of teaching a disciple who is a suitable vessel, the state of bliss unstained by mud should be shown to one who is like a son; it is not to be shown to others.
"Kye ho! Son, listen! The flavor of dispute truly abides as joy." By this, if that is not realized, then even the stability of Mount Meru and so forth, the moving beings of the six realms, the tantras, sūtras, and melodies—because these do not realize it, one cannot know it through the recitation and chanting of beings. If one asks, "Well then, is it apart from beings?" it is not so; the nature of beings is the mind. Furthermore, the stable is non-recollection, and the moving is the various aspects of recollection. That unborn state is like a son. "Kye ho! Son, listen! This flavor of authentic knowledge, which is not corrupted by the conditions of diversity, cannot be shown. That very authentic knowledge is not the object of the intellect of logicians. Since it is not the conceptualization of the Buddha, it is the abandonment of realizing the supreme state of bliss. Since the nature of beings does not arise from elsewhere, it is just like the very arising of beings. When the intellect, mind, awareness, and recollection have naturally ceased and the mental consciousness has vanished into the expanse, the intellect is utterly ceased and the mind is defeated. Since the pride and conceit of the knowable have been purified into the expanse, the pride of manifestation is severed. Through recollection one wanders in saṃsāra; if one does not waver from non-recollection, that is nirvāṇa. Furthermore, one does not know that conceptualization is an illusion, and one does not know that non-conceptuality is a dependent phenomenon, and so one exerts effort. Knowing that recollection and non-recollection are merely illusion, and that their nature is unborn, dissolving into the expanse untouched by the intellect—that is particularly sublime."
For the yogi of realization, the various types of awareness are the enumerations of saṃsāra, while the transcendence of mindfulness and non-mindfulness is nirvāṇa. The transcendence of non-mindfulness and non-arising is nirvāṇa. The transcendence of non-arising and the unreachability of the intellect is nirvāṇa. Furthermore, regarding both the abandonment of saṃsāra and the attainment of nirvāṇa, one realizes their supreme nature to be that of an illusion. If one realizes the natural state of the mind, there is nothing that does not become meditative concentration (dhyāna), because mindfulness is a condition-dependent samādhi that is like an illusion. Beyond that, non-mindfulness is the samādhi of the lion’s stretch, because it is free from any anxiety. Beyond that, the non-arising śūraṅgama samādhi does not abide in either saṃsāra or nirvāṇa. Because the movement of the mind and mental factors is the vajra-like samādhi, which is unchanging once it has transcended the intellect, that itself is the four meditative concentrations; therefore, what use are the fetters of concentration? The natural state of the mind is like space, and the mindfulness of mental factors is like mist, which vanishes. If the arising of things is utterly pacified like space, the arising of things is not separate from the mind; it arises either from mindfulness or from non-mindfulness. Beyond the abandonment of those two, what could possibly arise? If things arise after having abandoned all entities, what could possibly arise? If they arise from a non-arising that has been non-arising since beginningless time, it is said that even flowers in the sky would arise.
All these appearances should be understood as flowers in the sky. Why is that? Because space arises gradually and appears in various ways, it is like a flower in the sky. Likewise, the nature of mind is like space, and the mindfulness arising from the mind is like a flower in the sky; therefore, one should not harbor hope or fear regarding the cultivation of mindfulness. For that which is unpolluted by either mindfulness or the absence of mindfulness is the primordial, unborn nature.
The three signs of appearance—the signs of the body, the signs of speech, and the signs of the mind—are the signs of appearance. At the time when emptiness and the unborn are indicated by signs, one realizes them through the teaching of the glorious Guru Protector today. As for the qualities of realization, at the time when one does not mentally engage with any phenomena, one sees, hears, touches, and remembers through the signs of mindfulness regarding forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile objects. Through the signs of the absence of coming and going—clean and dirty, walking and staying—and through the signs of asking questions and answering them, when one engages in idle chatter and conversation, because the nature of the mind itself does not waver from that which transcends the intellect, if one says, "This is the mind," it does not move from the single aspect of that.
Thus, as soon as it is indicated by way of the signs of Mahāmudrā, one realizes that which is like nectar, free from birth and death. Whoever [drinks] the nectar-water of the Guru’s pith instructions, [crosses] the vast plain of saṃsāra which is extremely difficult to traverse, where the thieves of the afflictions are many, and which is plagued by the heat of birth, aging, sickness, and death for countless eons.
One does not find the lotus-lake at the feet of the sublime guru. Even if one were to find it, seeing the non-delusory as delusory, one does not take it upon the crown of the head. One does not drink the nectar-water of the oral instructions with the ears, nor does one place it within the lotus of the heart. Thus, one does not drink to one's satisfaction the cooling relief from suffering. If one asks what that is like: it is like a desolate plain of sorrow, the vast plain of saṃsāra so difficult to cross. Since one cannot skillfully reach that lotus-lake which is never parted from the feet of the sublime guru, even if one is learned in the words and conventions of grammar, logic, scripture, and treatises, it is all in vain. Therefore:
Though one wails with the intense thirst of sorrow over many treatises, it is like seeing a bee in a dry carcass; one merely lives parched by thirst upon the plain of treatises.
The sublime guru will teach through symbols and skillful means, but not through scripture and treatises. If it were in the scripture and treatises, it would not be the pith instruction; if it is inconsistent with them, it is the pith instruction. Because the pith instruction of the suchness of the authentic meaning is not an object of the intellect, it cannot be expressed by words. Thus:
That which is not expressed by the guru’s teaching cannot be mentally grasped by the disciple as being "like this." Understanding is the cognitive obscuration; because it is not the authentic truth, non-understanding is the afflictive obscuration. Since that very thing is not the truth of the knowable, the knowing is also not the truth. Nevertheless, by relying on the lamp of the knower and the knowable, [one proceeds].
It is not as if mindfulness understands through the act of understanding; rather, that very absence of understanding is what is meant. It is not that the disciple understands it; for all phenomena arise from non-arising, abide from non-abiding, and cease from non-ceasing. This is the coemergent taste of nectar. Furthermore, the mind cannot be pointed out by the mind, and the intellect cannot be made to attend to itself. How, then, can it be shown? Even if it were shown to one who has not realized it, by the power of those who grasp at the authority of treatises on grammar and logic, they are skilled in conventions such as conceptualization but unskilled in the actual meaning. Thus, the fool finds only distinctions; at that time, by the power of such unskill, they strive in mere mindfulness and are not liberated from obscurations.
The other is untouched by the intellect and is like an outcaste; at that time, one enjoys the home of the outcaste. Furthermore, abiding in the expanse of non-meditation—which is like the sun’s orb purified of the two stains—one is nevertheless unstained by defilements. Having obtained such a jewel of purified stains in one’s hand, one fails to recognize it. For example, it is like a mountain hermit who, having cast away a precious gem in his hand that is difficult to pierce with the eye, takes up a common olma-si flower which is easier to handle and uses it as an ornament. Likewise, thinking that the realization of the Buddhas of the three times is difficult for the intellect to pierce, the sentient beings of the three realms take to heart only this mindfulness of the realization of others, and having identified with their own respective objects, they strive in virtuous dharmas.
Although the realization of a yogi is inconsistent with worldly phenomena, and although that which transcends the world is difficult for the mind to penetrate, once one has obtained the precious instructions of the sublime guru, which are like a diamond, that penetration through the specific symbolic signs is what is meant by "taking up what the world despises." If you ask what that is like: when the world uses and discards things, who would have any hope for the fragments of a discarded clay bowl from the street? Likewise, when ordinary people discard the state of mere mindfulness, if the Three Bodies (trikāya) were to pick up that very state which is beyond the intellect—non-recollection and non-arising—then that is precisely what must be picked up. When one picks it up, one uses the clay bowl from the street; since that very Three Bodies is the inexhaustible treasure of the precious Jewels, one does not despise the king of the outsiders. If one is oneself the king, what else is there to do? At the time of realization, when one looks in all directions without exception with the eye of primordial wisdom (jñāna), there is no distinction in suchness (tathatā) such as "these are saṃsāra" and "these are nirvāṇa." Having completely abandoned such distinctions and abiding in that very state, the nature of the dharmakāya is unwavering and free of conceptualization. Thus, the nature is unwavering, equanimous, and spontaneously present. Therefore, emptiness is beautiful as the ornament of appearance, and appearance is beautiful as the ornament of emptiness. Since the non-conceptual nirvāṇa is even more suitable as a dwelling place for the existence of realization, it is beautiful to dwell in nirvāṇa while remaining in existence.
By meditating on the non-conceptuality of mental engagement, if one remains undistracted from the reality thus realized, the diseases of the afflictions will be pacified. For example, that which is burned by fire must be treated with fire; that which is caused by wind must be treated with wind itself; and when water has entered the ear, it is appropriate to use drops of water. In the same way, the pacification of the disease of attachment is the inseparability of bliss and emptiness; the pacification of hatred is the maṇḍala of the deity; and the pacification of ignorance is the śamatha of emptiness. Therefore, one should not apply other medicines for other diseases. To see meditation as something other than remaining undistracted from such a state is not [the correct path]. Since the essence of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) cannot be mentally engaged, one should abandon both the thinker and the object of thought. In a manner free from hope and fear, and without notions of pure or impure or acceptance and rejection, one should abide in the manner of a small child.
Now, although this is experienced by oneself, it cannot be described to others; this shall be shown by the analogy of a young maiden’s bliss. Furthermore, for a person who lacks conviction in many scriptures and treatises, but who gains conviction in the pith instructions through the signs and methods of a sublime guru, that meditative concentration which abides continuously and without interruption—if one meditates according to the guru’s oral instructions and applies oneself with devotion—then, through the unerring emergence of the three coemergent natures of all phenomena, there is no doubt that the coemergent will arise. Moreover, that coemergent has no color such as blue and so forth, nor the qualities of sattva, rajas, and tamas, nor lightness and so forth.
Because it cannot be illustrated by words, conventions, or examples such as illusions, it is beyond color, qualities, and letters. This experience is not non-existent like the horns of a rabbit, nor is it eternally existent like the horns of an ox; it is the uninterrupted meditative concentration that is beyond the intellect, free from existence and non-existence, and without recollection or birth. As for this experience: "It cannot be spoken; I indicate it only vaguely." How is it to be known? At the moment a young girl gives birth and the umbilical cord is cut, there is the syllable Oṃ abiding [at the navel], and the syllable Haṃ arising from the father abiding at the crown. These two are the white and red drops (bindu) of the letters of wisdom and method. When the time and conditions for these two meet, the two drops encounter at the heart, and through that joy the infant smiles while asleep. Alternatively, when the drop of recollecting the meaning and the drop of non-recollection meet in the expanse of non-arising, it cannot be explained to others. Or, when a young girl in her prime and a handsome young man enter into union, the three joys—the joy, the supreme joy, and the joy beyond joy—can be explained to others; however, the coemergent joy that clings to the heart cannot be explained. Just like the joy of the young girl clinging to her heart, the ultimate coemergent is the ground of all phenomena and is untouched by the intellect. Having overwhelmed the hearts of all that are established by the intellect, it masters the three times and the three realms; thus, it cannot be experienced by any intellect whatsoever.
Who is able to point out that supreme Lord? If there were no such entity as the aspect of mindfulness arising from the mind, then no one would ever realize the experience of non-existence or the absence of mindfulness. For example, if the sky did not provide the basis for various understandings, one would not realize it as "vast space." Likewise, if this mindfulness arising from the mind did not exist, no one would ever realize the experience of the mind's lack of mindfulness. Therefore, when the entity of mindfulness arising from the mind and the mind itself—being without conditions—dissolve into the unborn state of non-existence, all phenomena of mental engagement are completely severed as being of an unstable and shifting nature. Thus, all wandering beings without exception dissolve into that. Since all phenomena of mental engagement are impermanent and shifting by nature, at the time when one realizes the meaning of non-mental engagement, when the mind is unwavering and remains in its own stable state, although saṃsāra continues to turn, saṃsāra arises from the hardness and stability of conceptual thoughts of mental engagement. If one then asks, "If one meditates on emptiness, one attains liberation," [the answer is that] by meditating on emptiness, one is born into the four sense bases. However, when there is no mental engagement, it is the equality of the three times; since there is no entity of wandering in saṃsāra, one is self-liberated. It is like a snake whose foot has entered its own coils: if it remains without moving, it is self-liberated.
If the innate, uncontrived reality is realized through the guru’s pith instructions, then because mindfulness is self-liberated, at that time one becomes self-liberated from the phenomena of saṃsāra. While the notions of "self" and "mine" exist in relation to the mind and mental factors, their substantial reality is not truly established. Since, in the ultimate sense, a Buddha is not established for the sake of a self, when self and other are fully understood, the mindfulness arising from the mind vanishes. By attaining the supreme nirmāṇakāya body, the supreme saṃbhogakāya body which is without arising or ceasing, and the supreme dharmakāya body which cannot be posited by any intellect, one then attains the supreme body.
Now, the example of the utpala petal, which is unstained by the mud of the mind and mental factors, shall be shown. What is it? At the time when it is indicated by the signs of the sublime guru, and at the time when it is not indicated by signs, that which is beyond the known and the knower, luminous by its very nature, is free from even a speck of the pain of delusion. Thus, being certain and undeluded regarding that very indication, and without depending on anything else, that meditative concentration which abides continuously within oneself—by relying on any suitable method and through mindfulness of that very reality—the three kāyas, which are unstained and exist within oneself, are properly recognized by oneself. Since all external phenomena are not established as substantial entities, and since all particles and internal and external phenomena are not established as substantial entities, that very desire is subsumed within the maṇḍala.
Regarding the gathering of the mind upon the nāda of the bindu of syllables: to describe it as a mind free from conceptual elaboration, like a subtle particle or an autumn sky at midday free from impurities, is the position of the Cittamātra. However, even they have not realized the yogi’s actual intent. Thus: "It is not a particle, nor is it free from particles, nor is it the mind."
The intent of the authentic yogi is as follows: because appearances, emptiness, non-arising, and the sphere of the mind are not [inherently existent], one is free from attachment to their entities. One is free from attachment to the past because it has been forgotten; free from attachment to the future because it has not been recalled; and free from attachment to present cognition because it depends upon conditions. Therefore, those entities are primordially and always free from attachment.
Furthermore, although the terms "mind" (yid), "mental engagement" (yid la byas pa), and "non-mental engagement" (yid la ma byas pa) are merely designated names for the continuum of karma, afflictions, and birth, what is "created" is impermanent, and what is "uncreated" is nameless. For example, last night’s dream, though experienced, is not established as a real entity; and tonight’s dream, though not yet experienced, is not established as a non-entity. Likewise, even if experienced through recollection, there is no "non-mental engagement"; and even if experienced without recollection, there is no "non-mental engagement." That which transcends thought and expression is exactly what Saraha has said.
If one asks, "Is then the meditative concentration of non-mental engagement something stained?" [The answer is:] If it is not realized, even the afflictions will become afflictive, and even the objects of knowledge will become obscurations.
The analogy for the yogi of realization is like the orb of the sun. On the day of the new moon, the moon does not become cool because it has dissolved into the expanse of the sun. On the day of the full moon, the sun does not become hotter because it is far from the moon. In the same way, because the yogi’s realization is free from the two stains of adventitious afflictions and the lack of mindfulness regarding the objects of knowledge, [it is said]: "Kye ho! Son, understand the stainless ultimate without exception!"
If, thinking that the bliss arising from an external consort is the ultimate, one exerts effort through such attachment to the various categories of conceptualization and non-conceptualization, one fails to recognize the meditative concentration that constantly abides within oneself—a state beyond effort and achievement. Thus, one searches outside for that which is already in the house. Because one does not recognize the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) that exists within oneself, one asks about mindfulness externally. Because one does not recognize the inner master of the house—the unborn nature of mindfulness and non-mindfulness—one asks about the conceptual thoughts of mindfulness, which are like guests who have arrived adventitiously. It is said: "Having seen the master of the house, one asks the guests."
Such a state is not something to be touched by the intellect or expressed in words. It is not realized through the lamp of mindfulness—the symbolic instructions of the sublime guru. Saraha said: "Understand yourself as that which is not realized." If one asks how it is to be understood: it is not like the ordinary person’s objects of thought, meditative concentration, recitations, chanting, or expressions.
Because it transcends expression, the meditative concentration of the foolish is not the object of meditation or recitation. Furthermore, as soon as the sublime guru has pointed it out, there is no recollection and no forgetting, no finding and no losing, no arising and no ceasing, and no meditation or non-meditation. Even if it is taught that one should remain in that state continuously, if doubt is not severed, then even though the guru has pointed it out and one has understood all things as true, one should look and examine it in this way: by causing any suitable condition to be remembered, at the time of experiencing non-recollection through the pith instructions, one should know that such recollection is like a mere drop of water. Beyond that, the non-arising of any conceptualization whatsoever should be known as being like the ocean. Non-conceptuality should be known as being like the ocean, and non-recollection should be known as being like space. Since non-recollection is to be known as being like space, that which transcends the objects of the knower and the known cannot be illustrated by example or meaning. Not recognizing this is, for example, like a small child who, when the moon is pointed out with a finger, looks at the finger instead of looking at the moon. Likewise, individuals who have not realized suchness do not direct their intention toward the meaning of the tathāgatagarbha of the three times, but instead practice meditation on the conceptualizations of recollection. Therefore, although it is pointed out by means of recollection, because the meaning of being unstained by the mud of recollection is not realized, how could I attain liberation through mere conceptual investigation? Well then, the external objects are the five sensory qualities, and the internal object is recollection.
Even if one engages in such practices, one does not know the authentic reality. By perceiving the outer and inner as a maṇḍala of gods and goddesses, one traverses objects and is afflicted by the torment of those objects. Yet, the coemergent deity is not brought to mind. Since a deity brought to mind is non-virtuous, the coemergent is not found and one accumulates sin. If one knows the coemergent—the ground of all phenomena—to be beyond mental engagement, then by relying on objects, one is not stained by them. For example, the utpala, padma, puṇḍarīka, and saugandhika flowers, with their pleasing colors, soft textures, and sweet fragrances, are able to captivate the minds of some. However, these are not the qualities of the flowers themselves; rather, those qualities are the result of the conditions of the impure lake of villages, cities, and so forth. Since those flowers are not stained by the defects of impurity, likewise, even if mindfulness arises toward outer and inner objects, because the yogis know the authentic reality as it is, they are not stained by the mud of objects. Just as an utpala is taken up without being stained by the mud or the water, they realize the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) without being stained by mindfulness. As it is said: "Just as the petals of the utpala are not touched by water." If one realizes it in this way, the accumulation of primordial wisdom and the accumulation of merit become the yogi’s refuge. This should be illustrated by the example of one who possesses a poison-neutralizing mantra. The example of the mādu luṅga for the uninterrupted accumulation of primordial wisdom that corrects the root, and the example of the adu ra for the accumulation of merit that corrects the flower:
Regarding the madura flower: if one treats the flower's nectar with any dye whatsoever and then plants the seed once it has ripened, the flower will turn the color of that dye. Likewise, by accumulating the collection of merit, the fruit will ripen after incalculable eons. Regarding the mātuluṅga fruit: if one skillfully applies any dye to the root of the flower-bearing tree, it will quickly turn that color. Likewise, if a yogi realizes the root of the nature of mind, the fruit of the Dharmakāya will ripen. Thus: "In whatever way, the yogi takes refuge in the root."
A yogi who has such realization is like one who has mastered a poison mantra; by eating poison, they are not harmed. Likewise, they cannot be affected by the poison of sensory objects. "How could one who possesses the poison mantra be harmed by poison?" Having understood this, one should demonstrate the inseparability of meditative equipoise and post-meditation, or śamatha and vipaśyanā, through the analogy of an elephant crossing a ford.
Furthermore, during the time of post-meditation, by making offerings to external temples and so forth, and making offerings to the internal celestial mansion, one will, through those qualities, directly behold the face of the deity’s maṇḍala. Just as an old woman is tormented by the death of her only son, if one constantly brings the deity’s maṇḍala to mind, one will see it. To the objection that this is not the case: "Even if one makes tens of thousands of offerings to the deity, if one knows this, through the inner and outer manifest awakenings..."
Meditating on the objects and sense faculties as a maṇḍala of gods and goddesses, and meditating on bliss-emptiness through inner manifest enlightenment, are like being bound by white and black ropes; what is the use of such conceptualizations of mindfulness that only bind oneself?
If one asks: "Well then, by training in the accumulation of merit through manifest enlightenment and the accumulation of wisdom through knowing that very [merit] as emptiness, will one meet with gurus and disciples again and again in future lives?"
The answer is: Such a state does not transcend birth, aging, sickness, and death; it does not sever this cyclic existence. If one asks: "Well then, having been liberated from the three types of cyclic existence, one should manifest the three kāyas," [the reply is]: Realize that innate, genuine, coemergent [nature] through the instructions of a sublime guru. If the nature of the mind is realized, one will transcend cyclic existence. For those who have not realized it, they cannot transcend it without realizing the innate nature.
If one asks: "Well then, since that innate nature is the actual Buddha and performs the benefit of beings, is there no need for offerings?" It is not so. One should understand the twenty-five offerings. When they vanish like mist or the breath on a mirror, since nothing else arises from that very [nature], even if various thoughts arise, they are the waves of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā). If one knows they arise from that and subside into that, appearances are not blocked and non-appearance is not established.
As it is said: "The eyes do not blink, the mind is blocked, and the pervasive wind and the realizing wind—both are gathered into mere mindfulness." Since that too depends on other conditions, awareness (vidyā) is naturally blocked.
When the guru of the lineage of the expanse of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) teaches, the glorious guru realizes the cessation of the winds. At the time when discursive thoughts move in the manner of mindfulness, if one realizes that very non-conceptuality to be the meaning of being without birth or death, one does not waver from it. When the winds move, they are not wavering; thus, once the depth of this realization is attained, there is no need to "deceive death." If one deceives birth, one is liberated from both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. Since what is called "death" is merely the fading of mindfulness, the instructions for the moment of death are not spoken of here.
Others maintain that it refers to the intermediate state (bardo). Through the pith instructions of focusing the consciousness on the yidam deity, one becomes accustomed to the gradual dissolution of the elements and seeks liberation from the knower and the known. However, in the ultimate sense, since the knower and the known are not established, this is not liberation.
Some say that by gathering the winds and bodhicitta through mindfulness, and fearing that they might fall through the lower gate into the lower realms, one should gradually open the gates. They desire to liberate the winds and consciousness into the expanse of the syllable Haṃ at the Brahma-aperture through the pith instructions on the fading of the winds and bodhicitta; this is not correct.
Others say that one should meditate on one's own body as the yidam deity, complete with the major and minor marks. Since both [the body and the deity] are without mind, one knows them to be merely mental forms. By knowing that one's own birth, sickness, and death appear to the mind as such mental reflections, one should recognize them as the reflections of the deity. If one becomes accustomed to seeing the cities of the six classes of beings, [one is liberated].
Furthermore, the desire to meditate on the form of a deity during the intermediate state is also untenable. If one asks, "Then what is it?" the four elements that arise from the mind and abide in the body, and the four elements that abide in the mind, are as follows: the mind’s mindfulness is the solidity of earth; the mind itself abiding in the expanse of non-mindfulness is the water of expansive awareness; the mind itself burning like the fire at the end of an eon is the heat of fire; and the mind itself, having transcended the objects of the intellect and being pure and ungraspable, is the wind. Having purified these into the expanse, one should understand them through the pith instructions transmitted from ear to ear and mouth to mouth, but one should not practice them through ordinary cognitive awareness. If one practices through such awareness, one will not be liberated from the afflictions of saṃsāra, which are nothing other than the obscurations to knowledge.
If one realizes the ultimate perfection of wisdom, or the perfection of the intellect, one knows that the perfection of bliss itself is the Mother of the Tathāgatas of the three times. Therefore, since the bliss arising from an external consort is not required, and one does not seek instructions for the time of death elsewhere, what need is there for a yoginī at the time of death? To clarify that very point: there is no confusion when distracted by objects, and there is no confusion when the mental faculty of the moment of death falls into the cities of the six classes of beings. Realizing this is as follows: as long as one falls into the cities of the objects of the senses, that very non-arising is unmoved by the ripening of karma. Because it expands into the equality of the three times, as long as one is fully expanded within oneself, there is no karma. If one realizes the meaning of non-arising, one does not know where one will go in the next life.
Since you do not know what to do now, O friends, consider what you are doing and where you are going! Those who have realized the meaning of the absence of birth and death cannot teach it to others. It is said that if one experiences that which is beyond the intellect—the non-recollection and non-arising—then it is not "non-recollection," yet if there is no recollection, it is not an experience. Likewise, since that non-arising and that which transcends the intellect is the enlightened intent (buddha-dhātu) of the Buddha, it is inexpressible. Therefore, one enters through the most difficult of intents. One does not see the enlightened intent of the Buddha that abides within oneself. To hope for liberation by merely imitating the stories of the twelve deeds of the Buddha through conceptual thought alone is, for example, like children who do not see the Palace of Victory (Vaijayanta) and fail to reach it despite watching the spectacle. Because one does not see the Buddha abiding within oneself, it is said: "Whoever abides in what, or whoever abides in the state of the equality of one's own mind, does not truly perceive form." Until it is pointed out by a sublime guru, it is like a body and its shadow: one does not see it in the darkness. Just as it becomes visible when shown by the sun, the moon, or a lamp, so too, because the inconceivable dharmadhātu is not seen, one does not see it there. Seeing that is being skilled in the ultimate meaning; if one does not see that, then regarding the words and conventions of the scriptures and treatises, all those who are skilled in explaining treatises do not see the nature of mind (cittatā) that abides in the body.
Not realizing the immeasurable qualities of the buddha-body, speech, and mind that abide within the nature of mind is like a poor woman not realizing the universal monarch in her womb, a casket of precious jewels, or a wrestler who has lost his precious gem. One fails to realize the inconceivable nature of mind that exists naturally within oneself. By striving in meditation on the colors of the deities, their hand-symbols, and so forth, one does not realize that the Buddha is present within the body. If one realizes this, there is not even a grain of difference between formal meditative equipoise and the post-meditative state.
When realized in this way, the mind is at ease. For example, it is like the story of the old brahmin, the elephant, the man who could subdue the elephant, and the hook-wielder. Discursive thoughts are like the elephant; non-recollection and non-conceptuality are like the man; the unborn expanse is like the hook; and the realization of that which is beyond the intellect—neither increasing nor decreasing—is like the wealth found by the man. When the mind is tamed by capturing the elephant of discursive thought, the yogi who realizes this is like a rope that has been cut. Discursive thoughts and memories are brought into the expanse, and there is no hope or fear. Since that which is merely designated as "Buddha" has no coming or going from anywhere, it is a state of rest where coming and going are severed.
If one realizes this uninterrupted meditative concentration abiding within oneself, there is no need to seek elsewhere. Having realized this, there is nowhere to ask. Even if one is learned in external scriptures, treatises, and the like—
Because no progress is made through the pride of mere recollection, even if one applies oneself to the words, realization of the meaning will not occur. Thus: "The wise, being shameless, do not realize it." That which is not an object of conceptualization is itself beyond birth, aging, sickness, and death, for it does not depend on causes and conditions and is therefore independent. "Whoever is alive and has not undergone transformation," being free from the designations of words such as "beginningless," "existence," and "non-existence," how could such a one grow old and die? Furthermore, through the instruction of the sublime guru, realizing the inseparability of meditative equipoise and post-meditation is not harmed by the obscurations of karma, afflictions, or the knowable. Thus: "The stainless intellect taught by the guru," although it engages in the single suchness of the sentient beings of the three realms and the Sugatas of the three times, it neither exhausts nor increases. Like the elephant’s fodder, that itself is the treasure; what else could it be?
Now, this shall be illustrated by the example of the crow flying from a boat. There are two types of objects. As for external objects, such as forms and so forth, since they are not established as real entities, the mind should not rely upon them. As for internal objects, since they depend on conditions, one should not rely on recollection either. Recollection is known as emptiness accompanied by signs; even the internal object is itself utterly pure and is not to be taught. As for signless emptiness, by way of attending solely to the absence of recollection: "One should practice with emptiness alone." Since the knowable is not established, there is no abiding place for the knower.
Since the knower and the known are not established, the name "mind" is not established. Although recollection arises from that, at that time one does not direct the mind toward its characteristics. For example, just as merchants wishing to cross to the far shore of the ocean place a crow upon a boat, so too, yogis wishing to go to the far shore of saṃsāra must use the crow of mindfulness as a lookout. Just as a crow flying from a boat lands back on the boat if it does not see any land, so too the crow of mindfulness circles and circles again, landing once more in that very state of non-recollection, the unborn, which transcends the intellect.
Now, this shall be illustrated by the analogy of seeing a snake in a rope. In that regard, when an artificial yogi meditates on and abandons unpleasant external objects, yet clings to the experience of internal mindful awareness, this is like a black rope formed by joining two strands of awareness, which is not established as a substantial entity. Meditating on unpleasant objects is like a black snake; since delusion is not established, the black rope is like a venomous snake. Furthermore, regarding one’s own cognition cursing itself: it is like a skilled, expert painter who has painted a terrifying image of a wrathful deity and then becomes terrified upon seeing it himself. Similarly, some individuals become terrified merely by seeing the objects of knowledge that have arisen from themselves. Understand that the knower and the known are similar; yet, by grasping at the object of knowledge as ultimate, one grasps at the object of knowledge as a substantial entity when it is actually without entity, just as a noble companion [is perceived].
For example, just as a painter might look upon a portrait of his own beautiful and attractive wife and develop a sense of attachment toward his own painting, so too some yogis, by relying on external objects, assert the inseparability of appearance and emptiness, and by relying on internal objects, assert the inseparability of awareness and emptiness; thus, they become bound by the defects of these two types of objects. To clarify this, it is shown through the analogy of being bound by the five sensory qualities. Because they do not realize that very reality, they do not escape the cycle of existence through attachment to external and internal objects, and are thus like the deluded. The yogi who has realization knows that both the external and internal are dependent upon conditions and therefore lack inherent existence. In that way, non-realization binds one through attachment, whereas realization does not become bound by attachment.
If some ask, "Should one be attached to the bliss arising from external objects?" [the answer is:] Since the external objects of the senses, such as forms and so forth, and the internal object of awareness, which is bliss-emptiness, are similar, do not be bound by attachment to objects. Since the ultimate truth is not something to be meditated upon, regarding that earnestly, the deluded Saraha said: "If you do not believe that, the five common examples are easy to understand." The uncommon objects are: attachment to the taste of bliss like a fish; attachment to the maṇḍala of gods and goddesses like a butterfly; taking the experience of the wisdom of insight as the actual goal like an elephant; and attachment to the scent of emptiness like a bee.
These four are taught for the sake of experiential realization. Regarding the method by which one is not bound even while engaging with objects through the instructions of a sublime guru—likened to a fish, a moth, an elephant, and a bee: the instruction is like the sun, the object is like a scattered flower, and mindfulness is like the bee; by engaging with the object, one flees into the expanse of reality (dharmadhātu). Those who delight in the terminology of many bees, sounds, valid cognitions (pramāṇa), scriptures, and treatises are like a young woman whose secret talk has been leaked; they are prevented from experiencing the Buddha’s intention—the secret talk of the three-line instruction—by means of so many conventional terms. View such people as being like deer.
Now, if one realizes this, it shall be shown by the analogy of water and waves. Furthermore, the awareness (vidyā) of the mind and mental factors is not other [than itself], nor are emptiness, bliss, and clarity other [than it]. Since whatever thoughts and recollections there may be are not other [than it], whatever emanates from the mind cannot possibly arise from the mind as something separate from the nature of phenomena (dharmatā). Therefore, realizing that these are not mentally fabricated: "As long as that is the nature of the Protector, even if thoughts arise from the mind when prompted by adventitious conditions, they are like bubbles arising from water and dissolving back into the water, or like clouds arising from the sky and dissolving back into the sky. Although the manifold arises from the profound expanse of the nature of phenomena, are the water and the waves—this inseparable analogy—different? Since the three aspects of cyclic existence and equality are without distinction, existence and equality are the nature of space."
Arising from that very state and dissolving back into that very state, this shall be shown by the analogy of dust.
When the ultimate reality is realized, it is like possessing the divine eye, the divine ear, and the knowledge of others' minds. Why is this? That which is called "mind" is the non-duality of the sentient beings of the three realms and the Sugatas of the three times; that which is unstained by the habitual tendencies of this side is called the "mind of the other side." The nature of the mind itself, endowed with such qualities, exists in all sentient beings, yet this is not known. Knowing only the partial conceptualizations arising from the mind is not called knowing the mind itself. The mind that is beyond perception is transcendent of the mind; since what is seen and heard does not transcend the state of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā), whatever is relied upon or heard, the yogi who realizes the ultimate, intending the welfare of others, does not perceive the two form bodies (rūpakāya). When the sublime intention is fulfilled, although they appear in the world-realms through the power of aspiration, these are merely conventional, like dust motes in a sunbeam. Whatever thoughts and recollections the yogi has—whether virtuous or non-virtuous—are like the dust motes in the sunbeam that vanish. Since the form body is not the perfectly complete Buddha, it passes into nirvāṇa; since the truth body (dharmakāya) is that very state transcending the intellect, nirvāṇa does not exist elsewhere. Even if recollection arises for the yogi, it dissolves into non-recollection, and thus it subsides into the heart. Now, this shall be illustrated by the analogy of water placed in water. The yogi who realizes that very reality is non-dual with the expanse of phenomena (dharmadhātu) in a manner where there is no accepting or rejecting of discordant factors and their remedies.
Just as water poured into water, because the expanse of all phenomena without exception is utterly pure, although multiplicity arises in the mind, there is no difference in their flavor. For example, even if the forms of horses, elephants, and so forth are fashioned from molasses, the flavor is not lost. Likewise, although various thoughts arise within the coemergent nature of phenomena, they dissolve into the expanse of suchness. Thus, as many as there are, they become of one taste in water.
Because this is not realized, through stinginess and so forth, or through improper mental engagement and latent tendencies, one is driven by desire and so on. Through such aversion, one wanders in saṃsāra; this is the fault of entering the paths of the lower realms. Conversely, by practicing the perfections such as generosity without distraction, and by familiarizing oneself with the sublime abodes and so forth through proper mental engagement for the sake of attaining the qualities of the infinite body, speech, and mind, such as the first bhūmi and beyond, one achieves those qualities.
Regarding the mind endowed with both faults and qualities: for a person who must either abandon faults or accomplish qualities, although they are ripened by the ripening of those very things, because they do not see reality itself, no protector can see [the truth].
Now, this shall be illustrated by the example of a fire spreading through a forest. At the time of non-realization, one wanders in saṃsāra due to ignorance. At the time of realization, that very ignorance is the dharmakāya; therefore, yogis maintain the realization by not mentally engaging with any phenomena. When ignorance, lack of knowledge, and non-realization are no longer perceived, that which is shown by the sublime guru through symbols and skillful means is the generosity of abandoning recollection.
Non-recollection is ethical discipline; non-arising is patience; inseparability is diligence; uninterrupted continuity is meditative concentration; that which transcends the intellect is insight; that which is to be realized is method; and the subduing of the māras to attain the three kāyas is aspiration. Since this is the perfection of wisdom, the enlightened intent of the buddhas, one does not seek an antidote elsewhere: "For the deluded, there is no antidote whatsoever." Because everything is incinerated by the fire of the emptiness of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā), there is nothing that does not become emptiness. Furthermore, at the moment of meeting the expanse of the nature of mind (cittatā) which transcends the intellect, there is nothing to be mentally engaged with. Meeting appearances is mindfulness; meeting emptiness is non-recollection; meeting the unborn is the very state of non-arising. For the yogi who has attained realization, whatever is encountered is like a flame spreading through a forest. Having understood this through the pith instructions on the three doors of liberation, there is nothing to be accepted or rejected regarding the various things that arise before one. Thus, all these appearances that have fallen upon the face: the root of all phenomena is the mind, and the mind is emptiness. Whatever is emptiness is not an object of the intellect; and whatever is not an object of the intellect is not something to be meditated upon. Therefore, make the root of the mind one with emptiness. Now, the fault of attachment will be shown by the example of the sesame husk. In that regard, by mentally engaging with [objects], one will not be liberated from the three realms. Furthermore, if one mentally engages with the experiences of power, that is the desire realm.
If one directs the mind toward the maṇḍala of gods and goddesses, one will be drawn into the form realm; if one directs the mind toward the śamatha of emptiness, one will be drawn into the formless realm. Thus, whatever pleasant mind one becomes attached to, it will result in the suffering of the three realms: the desire realm for those who crave pleasure, the form realm for those who seek clarity, and the formless realm for those who seek non-conceptuality. If one becomes attached to any of these, one cannot bear to be parted from them. Cherishing them in the heart, the noble ones perceive even the peak of existence as suffering, whereas the sentient beings of saṃsāra view even a rest in hell as happiness. The wise are like the eye; they do not become attached even to the husk of a sesame seed. The unwise are like the head and body; they view conceptualization as happiness. Therefore, although the Teacher’s word states that one is liberated by meditating on emptiness, this is for the sake of individuals who are attached to appearances. If one becomes conceited even about emptiness, then even the sting of a sesame husk will cause harm. Not to direct the mind is not to realize; directing the mind alone becomes the cause of saṃsāra, resulting only in suffering. Now, this shall be shown by the examples of the pig and the elephant. There are two parts: showing through the direct perception of the senses and the direct perception of yoga; and showing through the example of the pig, which has no acceptance or rejection, and the example of the elephant, which has no fear. Thus, having established the direct perception of the senses:
Have the mind recall anything whatsoever. At the moment when the mental faculty focuses its awareness on that which appears yet lacks inherent existence, the inseparability of appearance and emptiness is the direct perception of the senses, but it is not the direct perception of yoga. It is said that the direct perception of yoga does not occur at this present time; however, if the sublime guru points it out through a symbolic gesture, it is present right now. Because it is pointed out by way of symbols and pointed out by way of speech, it is called "pith instruction." Symbols consist of physical symbols, verbal symbols, and mental symbols. Furthermore, one should understand them through the symbol of appearance, the symbol of emptiness, and the symbol of non-arising. Through speech, one gains conviction that there is the experience of recollection, the experience of non-recollection, the vision of non-arising, and that which transcends the intellect. This is also by way of the four types of direct perception. While recollection is the direct perception of the senses, that which transcends the intellect is the direct perception of yoga. Although they appear similar, the difference between a pig and an elephant is what is called upadeśa. Upa means to indicate through a symbol, and deśa means the object. Furthermore, that which the mind cannot mentally engage with—whatever is non-recollection, non-arising, and transcends the intellect—is the domain of the Buddha. Whatever is the domain of the Buddha is not to be meditated upon by sentient beings. Whatever is not to be meditated upon by sentient beings is the heart-pledge of yogis. If one asks, "Are then sentient beings, yogis, Buddhas, and the nature of phenomena distinct?" it is not so; for the nature of phenomena is one.
Sentient beings perceive the conceptual thoughts of mindfulness as ultimate, whereas the yogi perceives that very mindfulness as adventitious. Therefore, the appearance of sentient beings is the inseparability of appearance and emptiness, but it is not the inseparability of bliss and emptiness of the yogi. Alternatively, one understands appearance to be empty through the investigation of appearance; one understands appearance to be appearance through the experience of diversity arising from emptiness. The inseparability of these two is the direct perception of the senses, but because it is not the path that brings about the attainment of liberation, it is not that [path]. Such is the case, yet it is not that [path]. This is like the pith instructions of the Nāgārjuna-śekhara-maṇi-alaṃkāra. It is not difficult to put into practice; rather, because one desires to constantly behold suchness through the kindness of the sublime guru’s speech, one is like a pig in being without notions of clean or dirty, and like an elephant in being without apprehension. Just as in the narrative of the two friends who gave different names to the same person they did not see, by not falling into partiality, look to the pig and the elephant as friends. Now, this shall be shown by the example of the wish-fulfilling jewel. If mind, intellect, consciousness, awareness, and mindfulness are absent, how can the intention of a sentient being be maintained? Until those are present, one is called a "sentient being." When all those are purified into the expanse and are no longer present to the mind, one emanates as a body for the sake of beings and for the sake of beings' welfare, just like the intention of the wish-fulfilling jewel. Delusion is the individual conceptualization of sentient beings, and that, too, is solely the mindfulness arising from the mind.
Yogis recognize mindfulness as adventitious; by realizing that there is no constant mindfulness and no mental engagement, delusion is naturally pacified, and the buddha-mind is spontaneously accomplished. By knowing the actual mode of being of the minds of sentient beings, the wise who have dismantled delusion are truly wondrous.
If one asks, "To whom and by whom should this be shown?" it should be known by oneself, abiding within oneself. The nature of the mind is luminosity, unstained by the adventitious web of defilements. By abiding in the state of great bliss—which is the habitual tendency of uninterrupted meditative concentration beyond the intellect—at the moment one realizes the form of that habitual tendency of one's own great bliss, the mindfulness arising from the mind vanishes like a cloud. Like the autumn sky, pure of the stains of midday sun, by abiding in equanimity at all times, everything then becomes equal to space.
Now, this shall be illustrated by the analogy of the kālakūṭa poison. Kālakūṭa is the momentary accumulation of a black heap. Regarding this, there is the narrative of finding a treasure of gold in a vessel to be examined; the narrative of eating a snake's egg as an example of one's own experience being impossible to recall; and the fact that it is beyond the domain of the intellect and thus inexpressible in words. As for the delusion of labeling with a name what is nameless in the utterly pure state, it is like the narrative of the five brothers where four have died and only one remains, who then constantly faints.
When the ocean was churned, last of all the kālakūṭa poison emerged; Maheśvara placed it around his neck, and as an antidote, the nāga king Vāsuki was made his earring. This is the narrative tradition. Furthermore, there is the narrative tradition of the poisonous rat that bites, causing pain merely by being remembered; and the narrative tradition of the indivisibility of the ashes resulting from burning together the poisonous tree and its antidote, the sandalwood known as "snake-heart." In short, although the intention of the perfectly enlightened Buddha is a metaphorical designation that cannot be measured by the knower and the known, even so, the kindness of the sublime guru is an understanding without [ordinary] understanding, a realization without [conceptual] realization, and a knowledge without [dualistic] knowledge. At the time of indicating this through symbols, that which transcends the intellect, transcends words, and transcends conventions cannot be remembered or expressed. Thus, the kālakūṭa is beyond mention. If it cannot be remembered, how is it to be remembered? Its nature is such that just as clouds and the like arise from space, dissolve into it, and are purified within it, so too, from the mind that is equal to space, all phenomena of the expanse—however many positive or negative thoughts of recollection there may be—are purified. By the mind that is equal to the expanse of nature, all phenomena that are mentally engaged are non-virtuous; if one knows how to bring all phenomena that are not mentally engaged to the intention of the Buddha, that mind is made into a non-mind. The ground of all phenomena is the coemergent.
The coemergent is naturally pure and is Samantabhadra; thus, the natural coemergent is supremely beautiful. Since all external and internal objects, as well as all that is expressed and the expression itself, are not established apart from the coemergent, it is said: "Bliss is expressed within every house." Because beings do not recognize this sublime state of great bliss in which sentient beings and buddhas are indivisible, it is said: "The state of great bliss is not fully known." If one asks why this is so: these wandering beings have loaded their own minds with the burden of their own recollective conceptualizations and migrate from village to village within the towns of the six classes of beings. Thus, Saraha says: "All beings carry the burden of mental anxiety." If one does not allow oneself to be led into the towns of the six classes of beings, one must realize the non-recollection that is beyond thought and beyond meditation. Just as any individual weighed down by the heavy burden of mere conceptual realization might cast off that load, one should become free from the connection to recollective conceptualization. Because the inconceivable that bestows the unsurpassed fruit is not realized, it is said: "That inconceivable is not realized by anyone." Now, the state of not losing the flavor shall be shown by the analogy of salt dissolving in water. The enlightened intent of the Buddha is not something sentient beings know how to meditate upon; rather, it is the natural mode of the dharmakāya of bliss, the sambhogakāya of secrecy, and the nirmāṇakāya of the limbs, which is by its very essence free from conceptual elaboration. Thus: "When bliss, secrecy, and the limbs are completely abandoned," the meditation of ordinary beings is merely conceptual thought.
Intention is recollection; recollection is conceptualization; conceptualization is saṃsāra; and saṃsāra is stirred by impermanence and the like. Yogis do not practice a meditation that is a continuous stream. By not practicing, there is no intention; by no intention, there is no recollection; by no recollection, there is no conceptualization; and by no conceptualization, there is no saṃsāra. Because there is no saṃsāra, there is no movement; since there is no distinction between meditating and not meditating, there is no conceit of thinking, "I am in meditative equipoise" or "I have arisen." I see that meditation and non-meditation are indivisible.
Based on external objects, one experiences internal objects through recollection. Just as in the example of calling for a non-Brahmin to come, in the interval of being distracted from that, there is no other recollection; yet, being pointed out by the object, one thinks of something else. That which is the non-movement of the mind and mental factors is recognized as such through the oral instructions. Since conceptualization and recollection vanish by their very nature, by contemplating that very state, the nature of conceptualization is ceased. If the nature of the mind is without recollection and without conceptualization, and if the mental factor of recollection is not separate from the mind, then it is pointed out by that; thus, the mind points out the mind.
At the time of such realization, the ālaya-vijñāna, the manas, and those adventitious recollections caused by external conditions, remain stable and unmoving within the expanse of unwavering samādhi. The essence of phenomena cannot be touched by the intellect.
The intellect and awareness are adventitious because they depend upon conditions. That which is adventitious is without substantial reality. Although things are perceived during the time of delusion, the flavor of bliss in the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) that was never seen is not lost. Just as salt dissolves into water, so too all mental states and mental factors dissolve into the unborn expanse (dhātu). In this way, the mind dissolves into its own nature. Awakening for one's own sake is the unborn dharmakāya. Awakening for the sake of others is not a separate state, as one abides in the equality of the two form bodies (rūpakāya); because self and sentient beings and so forth are not perceived, at that time self and other are seen as equal. Since equality is without temporal distinction, it is not attained through effort and exertion. It is merely being untainted by mindfulness through the realization that conduct is indeterminate. Since meditative concentration (dhyāna) does not occur through striving for mindfulness, what is the use of striving to practice concentration? Now, this shall be illustrated by the analogies of water and a lamp. Because the ground of phenomena is non-recollection, the path is non-arising, and the fruit transcends the intellect, the primordial nature of mind—the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) characterized by space, which cannot be designated by any name—is that which was never corrupted by causes and conditions from the beginning; that is called "the deity" (deva). Such a state appears as many deities according to the individual inclinations of the sentient beings of the three realms. To realize it in that way, some assert two truths: the relative truth is not true, and the ultimate truth is non-referential.
That very reality cannot be measured by scripture, reasoning, or treatises. Gods, in a single moment, see many bodies. Because they are drawn by views such as eternalism and nihilism, and by their own preferred tenets, they do not realize the god-nature itself. For example, it is like the way the perceptions that arose in the minds of people who had previously seen an elephant while touching it in the darkness were not true; many of their own desires appear clearly. But when that very elephant is brought out from the darkness into the light, it is unlike anything [they imagined]. Likewise, because the holy guru has shown it, those who are learned in grammar, logic, scripture, and treatises have not realized it. The Protector is the sole identity; others are contradictory.
Now, if one asks, "Is the philosophical tenet something established apart from external and internal objects?" it is not so. Since external objects such as form and internal objects such as memory and attachment do not need to be sought as tenets apart from themselves, that tenet is established within the house and the home. Conventional phenomena are subsumed within memory alone. Since the past is forgotten and the future is not yet remembered, there is nothing to be remembered apart from the present. By knowing that very memory as food, there is no need to think of anything else. It is like a pile of cotton wool burned by fire; memory is consumed. Just as one who has previously eaten sour food does not need to taste it again upon merely seeing it later, so too, by knowing the nature of one thing, the nature of all is known. If the suchness of form is known, the concise and extensive [teachings] of all phenomena will be known. By eating one, all others are consumed.
Failing to realize this, to meditate on mere mindfulness of conceptual thoughts is no different from the outsiders. As it is said: "Going outside to search for the householder." The actual reality of the authentic nature of phenomena is without coming or going. Since it is not an object of the intellect or of ordinary awareness, even if one comes, it is not seen; even if one goes, it is not absent. Like a body and its shadow, it is always accompanied by the bliss of freedom from conceptual elaboration. Yet, because one does not recognize it, one remains in a state of non-recognition. It cannot be disturbed by the winds of the afflictions, by distraction toward forms and sounds, by distraction toward meditative experiences, or by the waves of the objects of knowledge. By gaining mastery over the ocean of the wisdom of emptiness endowed with the supreme of all aspects, one becomes the supreme lord free from waves. Since it is not corrupted by the three types of conditions, it is free from any obscuration by latent tendencies. Having become the yoga of the effortless, continuous flow of a river, it becomes the meditation free from turbidity. Just as the reflections of the moon and a lamp appear within undisturbed water, yet are not the water itself, so too, although various thoughts arise from the clarity of the yogi’s mind, they are that very [clarity] itself. Therefore: "Leave the water and lamp in their own self-luminous oneness." Because one is a yogi who has realized it in this way, one neither accepts nor rejects anything. Since everything appears as the magical display of the nature of phenomena, coming and going in every way, I neither reject nor accept coming and going.
That which has existed from beginningless time, free from the conventions of existence and non-existence, is the great bliss that transcends the objects of the intellect. It is the ground, the very mind, intellect, and awareness of all yogis, capable of stealing away mindfulness. When the sublime guru points this out, it is like meeting a hitherto unknown beautiful woman; if one lies with that captivating beauty, because the mind has no foundation, that which relies on the supportless does not fall to the ground, like a bird in the sky. Yogis do not trust in adventitious mindfulness; the sleeping mind relies on the groundless. Even so, it is not devoid of variety. For example, when one is in union with a captivating woman during a dream, one experiences bliss, yet upon waking, nothing exists apart from oneself. Likewise, since nothing is established apart from the non-recollection of the nature of mind, do not view it as separate from your own form. If one realizes this, one is the spontaneously present Buddha, unmoved from the three kāyas; thus, the Buddha is placed in the palm of one's hand. Just as the two drops are inseparable from body, speech, and mind during the time of the illustrative coemergent, when the ultimate body is realized, at that time body, speech, and mind are inseparable. Since the ultimate coemergent cannot be conceptualized, the nature of coemergence is beautiful at that time. How so? When awareness has consumed mindfulness and one enjoys the three realms through non-recollection, it is like a householder who, having consumed [the food], enjoys the mistress of the house.
Since the nature of the mind abiding in that way is like the characteristic of space, there is no anxiety regardless of what recollections arise; therefore, one should engage with whatever objects are seen. Now, this shall be illustrated by the analogy of being deceived by an illusion. These include the lineage of stories of King Siṃhacandra, the lineage of stories of a king being deceived by a magician, and the lineage of stories of a yogi performing a joke. In that regard, there is knowing the illusion as an illusion and not knowing it. Because the true meaning of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) is unchanging, there is no contradiction in realizing it even though it appears in various ways. Those who do not realize it see the various appearances but do not see the unchanging nature of phenomena. Thus, regarding my performance of a play: ordinary beings, becoming attached to both external and internal objects, carry the burden of the ripening of their respective karma, and so the childish grow utterly exhausted. From the ground of phenomena, which is non-recollection, the forms of recollection arise; yet because that very ground is free from conceptual elaboration, it is the Mother, the Perfection of Wisdom, the birthplace of the Sugatas of the three times. Because that very ground is not realized, it is the birthplace of the sentient beings of the three realms. Therefore: "The child is not born from another mother." The conduct of a Mahāmudrā yogi, like the secret conduct, the conduct of awareness, and the conduct of Samantabhadra, is not restricted by time. Just as space has no time of formation or destruction, and is merely a name assigned to what is non-existent, so too Mahāmudrā is non-existent and cannot be illustrated by any example.
Therefore, the practitioner of yoga is beyond examples. Now, the wisdom of awareness (vidyā-jñāna) shall be illustrated by the example of a master eating. Just as a woman in a foreign land seeks a husband from elsewhere, the practitioner’s experience depends upon conditions; thus, that experience is not the ultimate truth. Because the essence of the nature of phenomena (dharmatā) is naturally wondrous and transcends the intellect, it is said: "The master eats and his nature is beautiful."
Although the nature of mind (cittatā), which is free from conceptual elaboration (niṣprapañca), may be filled with the attachment of mindfulness, it does not waver from that very state. Thus, the mind filled with the objects of attachment is the bindu of mindfulness, the supreme joy of passion; the bindu of non-mindfulness is the joy of freedom from passion. Since the nature of phenomena is unborn and beyond abandonment, one enters the innate state by abandoning both passion and freedom from passion.
In the naturally pure nature of phenomena, free from conceptual elaboration, even the name "mind" does not exist. Since the yoginī, the source of all phenomena, is without mind, I, the yoginī, see the "destruction of mind." If one asks whether the nature of that can be conceived by yogins: know that mindfulness is adventitious and thus the food. Know that non-mindfulness is the taste of the equality of the nature of phenomena, which is the object of dependence. There is no need to conceive of these two. Therefore, by not meditating on anything: "Eating and drinking, there is nothing to conceive."
The nature of mind is free from conceptual elaboration, like the sky. The mindfulness arising from the mind is like a cloud and is not a companion; it is only by associating with that which is like the pure sky.
"Friend, whatever appears to the mind, the outsiders claim to be the recollection of the mind's suchness. Yet the mind is without recollection and without conceptualization; since it cannot be characterized by anything, I see that the external mind cannot characterize it. Its nature is like the dream of an illusory person; it is inexpressible as being 'like this.' Those who have not realized the wisdom of awareness (vidyā-jñāna) exert themselves, but the Yoginī of the ultimate meaning knows awareness as food. The Yoginī of illusion is beyond examples. Now, I shall demonstrate this through the analogy of fire and water arising from a stainless crystal ball due to conditions. Furthermore, the stainless ground of the sentient beings of the three realms and the Sugatas of the three times is one; since it has no place of origin and no place of abiding, it does not abide or arise anywhere in the three worlds. Just as fire arises through the meeting of the sun's rays, a crystal ball, and tinder, so too, from the yogi’s mind—which is luminous and unceasing in all its outer and inner aspects—various experiences arise through the power of conditions. Yet, by knowing them to be without substantiality, fire burns in the tinder itself through conditions. Just as water drips when that very crystal ball meets the nearby moon and is held in a clean vessel, so too, as soon as it is shown to a person who possesses the vessel, they involuntarily and continuously experience Mahāmudrā; thus, the moon drips water and the jewel is without autonomy. Furthermore, through the skillful means of bringing both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa under one's own control..."
Just as a kingdom is brought under control, through skillful means one gains mastery over the entire realm. The luminous nature of the mind, unstained by the impurities of recollection, is called "the nature of mind" (cittatā). Since that very [nature] is inseparable from the accomplishment of yoga, this Mother Prajñāpāramitā who gives birth to all phenomena is the accomplished Yoginī of that very nature of mind. All phenomena are subsumed within the three: appearance, emptiness, and non-arising. Furthermore, there is no phenomenon whatsoever that exists apart from one's own mind; since these are conceptualizations of good, bad, and so forth, they are merely recollection. That recollection exists only conventionally and is the cause of forgetfulness. That forgetfulness is the absence of recollection; since it is the source from which the yogi’s various [experiences] arise, it is the coemergent of appearance. That absence of recollection is eternally non-arising; since it is the source of emptiness, it is the coemergent of emptiness. That non-arising is eternally beyond the domain of the intellect; since it is the source of that very non-arising, it is the coemergent of non-arising. In terms of the three vows, this is taught as the understanding of the ultimate coemergent vow. One should understand the coemergent vow. Now, the result of these, the Dharmakāya, shall be shown by the analogy of the outcaste’s Veda. Regarding that, first, for those who have not realized the Dharmakāya which transcends conventional designations and has passed beyond them: since it is the conventional designation of all beings without exception, some follow after the designation of recollection.
It does not bring about the attainment of liberation from saṃsāra for all. Some, by becoming skilled in the words arising from grammar, logic, scripture, and treatises, only cause the path to liberation to become longer. Others, having meditated on dhyāna, samādhi, śamatha, and meditative equipoise, and having practiced yoga, perceive liberation for themselves. Because these have not transcended mindfulness, all beings without exception are merely the various names applied to the conventions of mindfulness. Since they do not recognize the reality that is free from conventions, there is not a single thing that is without letters. The ultimate truth cannot be established by the intellect, and that which cannot be expressed by words is "without letters." Until it is shown by a sublime guru, the mind is not distracted from letters and conventions. Once it has been shown through symbols and methods, that non-distraction is the state where "as long as it becomes without letters." That very state, free from all expression, is the source of all the Buddha’s scriptures; therefore, "as long as one thoroughly knows the letters, one thoroughly knows the letters of rubbed ink." Internally, there is nothing at all that can be read as a letter. Although there is no reading of what is written in the scriptures, it is not something else. Likewise, because the dharmakāya is not to be meditated upon, it is not to be seen. Apart from that, there is no activity for the benefit of beings. There is no reading by rubbing ink. The activity for the benefit of beings is performed by an emanation acting upon an emanation; the dharmakāya has neither an act of doing nor a lack of doing. Just as a non-Brahmin reciting the Vedas is meaningless, "reciting the Vedas meaninglessly leads to ruin."
Although one may know the ultimate, which is not an object of the conceptual mind, if one does not know it as non-cognition, then even if the aspects of appearance, emptiness, and arising from non-arising manifest as all phenomena, they do not waver from that nature. Thus, from where do they arise and where do they subside? These external objects are like illusions; likewise, the internal awareness and mindfulness are unreal aspects. Just as it is with the external, so it is with the experience of awareness and mindfulness. Although others may see it as continuously abiding, mindfulness does not abide continuously. The desire realm consists of the six classes of beings; the form realm consists of the four meditative concentrations; and the formless realm consists of the four bases, making fourteen. In that regard, because the immovable state of the Vajra Holder abides continuously, one abides continuously on the fourteenth stage. The body that abides continuously on that stage is both the example and the meaning. Just as the mind cannot be found when searching from the soles of the feet up to the crown of the head within this body, so too on the fourteenth stage, the body of the meaning of equanimity is utterly pure. The mind of the meaning hidden within the body cannot be found, just as the mind is hidden within the body of a sentient being. What is hidden within the three kāyas is the "body hidden in a body without a body." Just as one knows that sentient beings lack an essence, the Buddha does not possess ultimate primordial wisdom. Therefore, as for what is attained and by whom it is attained, that does not exist. Consequently, yogis are liberated simply by the holy guru pointing out that suchness which is untouched by the conceptual mind, in the manner of non-attainment.
Whoever knows that will be liberated. Regarding the training, one must train in the four syllables. Furthermore, these are the four syllables of the aspiration, "May I accomplish [it]." In terms of the actual meaning, one should understand as many subjects of expression as there are. Since all the dharmas of the Buddha are to be trained in through E-Vaṃ-Mā-Yā, the essence of the natural state of phenomena is shown from the very beginning; thereafter, all phenomena are to be understood through the pith instructions of the four sets of four. Moreover, one should practice exactly as it is, yet not dwell [on it]. A beginner should train in the pith instructions of the four syllables, but should not dwell [on them]. Since the syllables are a conventional designation for that which is without syllables, I first recited the four syllables of accomplishment. At the time of such realization, if one is to drink the essence of the yoga of the ultimate meaning, the yogi who has realized that which transcends the domain of the intellect subsumes all phenomena under the two: mindfulness and forgetfulness. Since that mindfulness also depends upon habitual tendencies or conditions, it is merely conventional illusion. Ordinary beings are like those who eat the dregs of phenomena, for they engage in mindfulness alone. Yogis are like those who drink the discarded essence of phenomena, for they engage in forgetfulness alone. "By drinking the essence, I shall become forgetful." This forgetfulness is for the purpose of not remaining in mindfulness; the mind is both mindfulness and forgetfulness. That very non-arising, which has no cause for anything to arise—whosoever knows even one syllable of that...
Although "non-arising" is the essence of all phenomena, it is for the purpose of exhausting the appearances of arising. Once one has transcended such conventions, that which is free from the subject and object of the mind cannot be named by anything at all; therefore, its name is unknown. The ultimate reality (bhūtakoṭi) of the Sugatas of the three times is that which is unpolluted by conditions and beyond mental engagement. Regarding the three conditions-free syllables, they are a single syllable. From that, the syllables associated with outflows (sāsrava) are the body, speech, and mind of the sentient beings of the three realms; these exist as long as there is mindfulness. The untainted (anāsrava) is that very mind which is non-recollection, non-arising, beyond the intellect, and identifiable as being free from identification. Since its nature is not something to be mentally engaged with, it is known as the yidam deity itself. Because the yogis of realization direct their intention toward that, it is said: "The deity is in the midst of the three untainted." That very deity cannot be touched by the intellect. Even if mindfulness of the tainted arises from that, if one knows it without being separated from the other, then: "As for the third, the tainted, in the ultimate sense it is not to be meditated upon." Meditation is merely the intellect's placement of an object and then wandering into mindfulness; it is artificial. For example, it is like the story of an outcaste who, having been made into a Brahmin, recited the Vedas; although he was initially untouchable, in the middle he thought he was touchable, and in the end he became untouchable again. Likewise, the other, the authentic reality, cannot be touched by the intellect.
In the interim, it seems as though the intellect can touch it, but in the end, it cannot be touched; thus, it is like the Vedas of the outcastes. Regarding that, the saṃbhogakāya, which is not understood, shall be shown by the example of a mirage. First, the challenge of not understanding: because the nature of all beings without exception is pervaded by non-arising, those who do not understand that very nature are those who do not understand the nature of all things. If one does not understand the blessing of Mahāmudrā, then at the time of the wisdom-knowledge empowerment, it is not great bliss. To accomplish great bliss during the kunturu [sexual union] by focusing the mind on the experience of the action seal (karmamudrā) is not Mahāmudrā. Just as one who is thirsty pursues a mirage, not being satisfied by the perception of water where there is no water, if one does not understand Mahāmudrā—which is free from diverse perceptions, like space, and inconceivable—then by pursuing that which is desired as the ultimate through thought and recollection, one will die of thirst even if one finds the water of space. The two, the vajra and the lotus, are limited locations; the bodhicitta arising from them is a limited cause, and because it does not exist other than at that moment, it is a limited time. Furthermore, when two of the four drops are lost, the scent of passion fades; when the two are equal, it is not the absence of passion. Moreover, at the time when one drop remains at the tip of the vajra and one drop remains on the anthers of the lotus, the bliss residing between the two, the vajra and the lotus, is merely the illustrative coemergent (dṛṣṭānta-sahaja).
Thinking that it is the ultimate truth and striving [for it], one asks: "How is it that the play of whatever bliss is not [the goal]?" If one asks why, it is because the bliss of Mahāmudrā, like space, does not depend on anything, and thus becomes the support for all phenomena. The bliss of "losing both and equalizing both" is a limited bliss; because it lacks the capacity to be a support, if it lacks the capacity to be a support, then the bliss of Mahāmudrā without mental engagement fulfills the hopes of the three realms. However, the bliss of "losing both and equalizing both" belongs only to the desire realm, so how could it fulfill the hopes of the three levels? Since the momentary bliss free from characteristics is the third empowerment, it is illustrated by the wisdom of the example; yet, because one must also remember the mudrā of the actual wisdom, it becomes a mere method. Alternatively, it is the momentary bliss of method, or it exists only when remembered and does not exist when not remembered; thus, it becomes twofold. When the sublime guru points it out, one knows that very remembrance to be the resting of the mind. Through the guru's kindness, once again: without remembrance and without mental engagement, the nature of Mahāmudrā is not the domain of mind, intellect, consciousness, memory, awareness, or wisdom. It will be known by those of the lineage instructions, but it is not something to be known by others. Perhaps a few will know it. The qualities of knowing should be illustrated by the example of the moonstone. Realizations are the companions of the lineage, and like the ocean, they are profound.
As vast as space, O friends, it is profound and vast. In such a state, because one is free from the apprehension of self and other, it is neither other nor is it the self. At what time is this? It is at the time of the empowerment of Mahāmudrā, when one is free from all mental engagement; that itself is the third. Since the third empowerment is the non-recollection, the unborn, that which transcends the intellect, by knowing it through the pith instructions of the fourth without wavering from that, it is the time of the fourth, the coemergent. That very state, having transcended the intellect, is the innate that abides perpetually and continuously. To experience it through such realization is "known through the experience of the innate." If one asks what it is like: the obscurations of afflictions and the knowable are like a dense, pitch-black darkness. That which destroys them is like the moonstone from the land of the nāgas—the pith instructions of the sublime guru—which bring about the realization of what was not previously realized. Just as the moonstone does not need to drive away the great darkness to somewhere other than itself, so too, the afflictions and the knowable do not need to be abandoned. Just as it causes [the light] to arise, so too, unstained by the mire of saṃsāra or the mire of nirvāṇa, the supreme, uncommon great bliss is shown. Immediately upon seeing the Buddha’s intention in a single instant, it is said: "In a single instant of supreme great bliss." Mental engagement is the sin of conceptual thought, while non-engagement is the virtue of non-meditation; thus, one knows the mind to be resting from the conceptualizations of mindfulness.
Because one experiences the absence of recollection, the mind is overcome, and thus all conceptualized misdeeds are utterly defeated. Now, realization shall be illustrated by the analogy of an elephant left untethered. First, the nirmāṇakāya (emanation body) must be realized. Just as sentient beings tormented by heat cannot bear to gaze directly at the orb of the sun with their eyes, the bodies of certain sentient beings are like eyes; seeing the sun as suffering, they think, "When will it set?" When the sun sets, the moon—the lord of stars that pervades the sky—rises together with the planets and the coolness. Likewise, for yogins, this recollection which is the cause of saṃsāra is like the sun of suffering; thinking, "When will it set?" when the sun that illuminates suffering sets, the full moon rises. Just as when the sun sets, the moon, the stars, and the planets rise together, at the moment the yogin’s recollection sets, the non-recollection that pervades all, the formless unborn, the movement-less that transcends the intellect, rises immediately upon being pointed out by the pith instructions. Thus, the lord of stars rises together with the planets. Abiding thus in the expanse (dhātu) of non-recollection, the unborn, and that which transcends the intellect, the various forms of emanation are emanated from it. By abiding in this way, emanations are emanated. From non-recollection, the various [appearances] arise as the maṇḍala of the nirmāṇakāya, and abiding in the unborn expanse is the realization of the maṇḍala of the saṃbhogakāya (enjoyment body).
Since it transcends the intellect and is beyond meditation, that very maṇḍala of the dharmakāya is the supreme wheel; thus, it is the supreme maṇḍala wheel. Even if one is deluded by the power of ignorance, the pure mind—which is free from subject and object—is non-recollection through the mere recollection of the mind. Since it is not something to be realized, Kye ho! Let alone being liberated from evil views such as eternalism and nihilism by realizing the mind with a deluded mind, even the Cittamātrins and Madhyamikas hold evil views if they do not realize the Mahāmudrā that is not brought to mind. Because the yogi realizes that which cannot be realized by anything else, all evil views are self-liberated. Furthermore, those bound by the two fetters of the knower and the known are the Cittamātrins and Madhyamikas; yogis are not bound by any knower or known. That very omniscience, when shown by the sublime guru, is supreme; since it is not stained by any mud and comes under the power of great bliss, through the power of supreme great bliss, common siddhis arise from the mind’s recollection, meditation, mantras, mudrās, and so forth. However, the uncommon siddhi of Mahāmudrā is the supreme siddhi if one abides in the vajra-like samādhi that does not waver from the state of non-mental engagement. Following such realization, to leave the mind in its own natural state is like [restraining] an extremely unruly elephant.
Just as a powerful hookman does not let go even if the elephant is struck, so too the yogi of realization knows the nature of mind to be unborn. Knowing the nature of the mind to be beyond recollection, do not engage in negation or affirmation regarding the aspects of recollection arising from the mind; let the elephant of the mind roam free. Since the realization of the yogi, who is liberated from both the knower and the known, cannot be sought from others, ask that very state of yourself. In the nature of the nature of mind, which is like space and free from conceptual elaboration, the mountain of the knower and the known is drenched by the flow of the water of non-arising. Thus:
"Drink the water of the mountain of space,
And rest upon its banks as you please."
Furthermore, as long as the mind is accompanied by recollection, know it to be a mere illusion. Know that the shore of saṃsāra and that which is beyond it—non-recollection—is like a dream experienced through the pith instructions. That shore of nirvāṇa is where the mind rests and where weariness of mind ceases. Thus:
"Rest upon the banks of the river of non-arising,
Where the mind is weary and the intellect is exhausted."
In this regard, the object of the mind is recollection, which is like an elephant. Non-recollection is like the master; with the hand of the hook of non-arising, the master of the elephant of the object seizes the elephant of the object. Just as that elephant, though powerful, falls under the control of the skillful hookman, so too the elephant of the mind is slain by skillful means. Since one then becomes forever independent in bliss:
"How is it that the killing appears as independence?"
In that way, the yogi of realization is like one who tames an elephant.
If one knows the nature of mind to be unborn, then the mind is to be treated as something to be weary of in its lack of recollection. Therefore, the yogi is like one tending an elephant: if it is not realized, just as a wild elephant in the forest does not turn back, one will not cross over the forest of saṃsāra. However, for the yogi who has realized it, the mind comes under one's own control; since there is nowhere else to go apart from suchness, one turns back from that very state.
Now, the single essence of all phenomena shall be shown by the analogy of bubbles on a lake. In this regard, although saṃsāra and nirvāṇa appear as two to the mind, there is no root cause for these two. Through knowledge, one circles in saṃsāra, yet because its nature is not established, it is the path of nirvāṇa. Therefore, there is no nirvāṇa on the far side of abandoning saṃsāra; whatever is saṃsāra is certain to be nirvāṇa. Although the nature of mind is designated with terms such as "saṃsāra" and "nirvāṇa," there is not even a single atom of difference in the expanse. Thus, one should not conceive of any other division; because the nature of mind is free from all conceptual elaborations, it is realized as "one," yet it cannot be expressed as such. Therefore: "By its single nature, all divisions are utterly abandoned."
Since the mind is luminous by nature, it is not defiled by adventitious afflictions, nor is it made an object of knowledge by the knowable. Thus: "I have thoroughly realized the stainless." It is said that by meditating on the suchness of that very stainlessness, one attains unsurpassed enlightenment. If it were not stainless, one would not realize it; by meditating on its own suchness, one attains unsurpassed enlightenment.
Meditation involves an object of focus; thus, the mind itself is accompanied by an object. If one asks, "What then of meditating on emptiness?" emptiness is without an object and is therefore not something to be meditated upon. If it were something to be meditated upon, it would be an object of the mental consciousness, and thus not the Buddha. Since the Buddha is the singular dharmakāya, and the dharmakāya is emptiness without an object, if it is emptiness without an object:
If one then asks, "Since the dharmakāya is singular, is it not the case that one meditates by recollecting the mental consciousness?" as long as there is recollection, it is conceptual thought and therefore not meditation. Because the nature of mind is an uninterrupted flow that is without recollection and without mental activity, there is no object of meditation and no meditator, and no mental engagement. Thus, there is neither object nor agent of meditation. If one meditates by means of recollection, it exists at the time of meditation but does not exist at the time of non-meditation; since there is a fault in these two states, the natural, innate state is not an object of the conceptual mind. Therefore, the conventions of "meditating" and "not meditating" do not exist. If one meditates with recollection, one is not a yogi; if one is without recollection, one is not a yogi. What, then, is the meditation of a yogi?
If one meditates by recollecting that very clarity of bliss and emptiness, it is with an object; if one is otherwise without recollection, it is without an object. Thus, meditation is either with or without an object. Through having an object, one wanders in saṃsāra; without an object, it is nirvāṇa. That which is unstained by the mud of these two is the unborn state itself, the bliss of signlessness, the nature of the aspect of bliss.
Therefore, it is superior because it transcends the intellect. Since the unsurpassed [state] arises spontaneously for all sentient beings without exception, the unsurpassed, spontaneously arisen, unsurpassed enlightenment exists in all sentient beings without exception; yet they do not recognize that it exists. At the moment the sublime guru indicates it through symbols, it is known immediately through a special method; thus, it is known by relying on the guru’s timely methods. A yogi who has realized it in that way should not fixate on a location. Likewise, regarding the mind’s state—whether it be like a forest of non-conceptuality or like a house of conceptualization—through the activities of going and staying, [it is said]: "Do not go to the forest, do not enter the house." By knowing that the mind and mental factors realized in that way are all without intrinsic nature, one does not form attachments to them. If one knows how to mentally relinquish everything there, then one should not view them as sentient beings. Since these three realms without exception are enlightenment that abides continuously in the changeless, by realizing the continuous enlightenment of all without exception, one should not harbor doubts or expectations when realizing it in that way. Falling into saṃsāra is this recollection of conceptualization, yet it is not established as a real entity. Falling into nirvāṇa is the non-conceptual state of non-recollection, yet that too is not established as a real entity. "What is saṃsāra? What is nirvāṇa?" Saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are the stains of the mind; if they are pure by nature, they are the coemergent nature of all phenomena. When the stains of the mind are purified, that is the coemergent; since the coemergent nature is utterly pure, [it is so].
When all remedies are perfected without exception, adventitious discordant factors find no opportunity; at that time, there is no engagement with the discordant side. If it is asked, "Does the mindfulness of afflictions not still arise even for a yogi of realization?" [the answer is:] For an ordinary person who has not realized [the truth], the maturation of mindfulness accumulates the pleasure and pain of saṃsāra, and thus they harm themselves. For example, an unwise crocodile living in the ocean sees the shadow of a bird flying in the sky; thinking it is a bird, it pursues it and thereby exhausts itself. A wise makara crocodile, however, even upon seeing the shadow of a bird, recognizes it as merely water and does not pursue it, and thus does not become exhausted. Likewise, ordinary beings who have not realized [the truth] exert themselves in pursuing the stains of mindfulness within the mind, thereby exhausting themselves regarding the ultimate truth. Similarly, a yogi of realization recognizes the stains of mindfulness within the nature of mind as being the nature of mind itself; by meditating thus, they do not pursue them and therefore do not suffer. This very point is clarified by the following: Just as when a stone is thrown into a very clear ocean, a bubble arises and is nothing but water, so too, when an adventitious mindfulness arises in the extremely clear mind of a yogi, it is known to be adventitious as appearance-emptiness; being essence-less and hollow, the bubble dissolves back into the water itself. Knowing its nature is the forest of the śamatha of emptiness.
Since special insight and [calm abiding] are inseparable, like a house and its interior, there is no enlightenment residing in either the forest or the house. Thus, when one is undistracted from mindfulness, one is a buddha; when mindfulness arises [as a conceptual object], one is a sentient being. Having fully understood this distinction, the obscurations of the knower and the known are purified, and the nature of the mind is luminosity. Since the stainless nature of the mind is such that all sentient beings without exception are capable of realizing it, and since it is appropriate to rely on the non-conceptual state that exists within oneself, it is appropriate to rely on non-conceptuality without exception. Since the "I" and "mine" of all sentient beings are not different from suchness, that is the self, and others are likewise so. If one realizes that the meditation and the meditator are non-dual, then because meditation and non-meditation are inseparable: "Whatever is meditated upon and whoever is the meditator—this is meditation." To think, "I am meditating," binds sentient beings through the notions of "I" and "mine." Since there is no "I" or "mine" in the nature of phenomena (dharmatā), one should be free from the bondage of that very distinction. If one realizes that one's own liberation is unborn and inconceivable, one is a buddha for one's own sake; thus, one is oneself completely liberated. Since sentient beings are bound by the delusions of self and other, for that reason: "Do not create delusions of self and other." All sentient beings of the three realms without exception are never separate from the continuous intention of the Buddha; thus, they are the Buddha who abides continuously without exception. When the mind is not purified, it is called a "sentient being," and...
Although the mind is designated by the distinct name "Buddha" because it is naturally pure, the nature of mind (sems nyid) is devoid of any arising and so forth. Since the mind is naturally luminous and pure by its very essence, even that which is called "mind" is a stain. Therefore, to be free from the perception of mind or the perception of non-mind, without exception, is the supreme stainless state. When the unborn nature of mind is grasped by subject and object, one wanders in saṃsāra; when that very same nature is purified into the expanse (dbyings) and abides in equanimity, it is nirvāṇa. Thus, the sublime trunk of non-dual mind is the pure mind, free from recollection and mental engagement. Because it pervades the three realms and the three times, it has gone to pervade the entirety of the three realms without exception. This all-pervadingness is the dharmakāya, which transcends the intellect. Although it possesses no purpose for the benefit of beings, through the power of the delusions of sentient beings, it is thought to have accomplished the welfare of each individual. For example, just as the reflection of the moon appears in many vessels filled with water, compassion, non-conceptuality, and the fruit of benefiting others are held. In that regard, since even the name "dharmakāya" does not exist, it is the source of the two form bodies (rūpakāya); thus, its name is supremely for the benefit of others. In that context, the ultimate emptiness that transcends the objects of the intellect is the dharmakāya. In that regard, the blooming flower is the saṃbhogakāya; thus, the sublime trunk of emptiness has blooming flowers. Furthermore, because it is produced by the own conceptualizations of beings and possesses various perceptions, it possesses manifold and diverse forms of compassion.
It is not produced through effort, but is spontaneously present. The former non-recollection is the cause, and the latter non-recollection is the result. The former recollection is the cause, and the latter non-arising is the result. The former non-arising is the cause, and the latter that which transcends the intellect is the result. Since these do not require effort, they are the spontaneously present result of the latter. That which is free from exertion and transcends the domain of the intellect is itself the nameless mind; it is not the "mind" asserted by others such as the Cittamātrins. Therefore, this bliss is the mind of others. Consequently, in the ultimate emptiness that transcends the intellect, the two form bodies do not exist. Thus: "The supreme trunk of emptiness is not compassion." In such a profound nature of phenomena (dharmatā), there is no root of mind-essence, no trunk of mind, and no leaves of mental factors. Therefore: "There is no root or leaf whatsoever." In that, there is nothing to be apprehended by the intellect or awareness. If it were to be apprehended by the intellect or awareness, then that which performs the apprehension is the expanse (dhātu) beyond meditation. If one meditates, the Sambhogakāya and Nirmāṇakāya will be incomplete; by falling into that, the branches will be broken. Although recollection and non-recollection arise from that which transcends the intellect and is unborn, the nature of mind is unborn. From that, saṃsāra and nirvāṇa appear as two. From a single seed, two trunks arise. Since the Dharmakāya that transcends the intellect has no distinct results, for that reason the result is one. Furthermore, that is the cause of saṃsāra, and it is also the cause of nirvāṇa.
Furthermore, regarding that which is inseparable: the inferior yogi perceives liberation as being from only one side of saṃsāra; the middling yogi perceives liberation as being from mere nirvāṇa. As for the realization of the superior yogi: they neither reject nor accept the conceptual thoughts arising from the mind that dwells in saṃsāra, and they neither reject nor accept abiding in the equanimity of the mind of nirvāṇa. Since the entities of saṃsāra do not exist, there is no fear; since even nirvāṇa is not established as a real entity, there is no hope. This is the suchness of yogis, by which they are liberated from both saṃsāra and nirvāṇa. If an ordinary being, with a mind full of hope, desires to attain buddhahood, they will not encounter the authentic reality. When one encounters nothing at all, at that time one encounters the ultimate authentic reality. Therefore, when an ordinary being comes desiring to encounter the dharmakāya, if that ordinary being is without hope for that dharmakāya and knows the mind to be liberated as the dharmakāya, then if they depart without hope, that hopelessness is what is discarded by the world. What is discarded is what is taken up by the yogi. When that which is taken up by the world through intellect, mind, mentation, and awareness is taken up by the symbolic pith instructions of the sublime guru, it is like taking up a clay bowl that was discarded at the door.
For the yogi of realization, not grasping at this mindfulness—the "housewife" of the mind—is like having abandoned her; yet, having realized the dharmakāya that transcends the intellect, it is appropriate to remain without relying on anything else. It is just as appropriate to remain after having abandoned the housewife. The dharmakāya, which transcends the intellect, possesses neither the conceptual mind nor the wisdom that thinks, "I shall manifest the two rūpakāyas." Although it lacks the wisdom of cognitive awareness (vidyā-jñāna), it does not fail to act for the benefit of beings through the wish-fulfilling tree and so forth; however, these appear as if created by the individual's own conceptual thoughts. Thus, it does not perform the benefit of others in the way they imagine. Those who desire are ordinary beings who desire to attain buddhahood through external and internal objects. Because they have not realized the dharmakāya, they do not grant the gift to the seeker. Since the cause, saṃsāra, and the result, nirvāṇa, are not ultimately established, what is this so-called "result of saṃsāra"? To desire that the cause, sentient beings, become the result, buddhas, is to desire through the continuity of the view of a self. Therefore, it is appropriate to abandon the self. Because one is never separated from the innate, natural, coemergent state, one is a yogi. Because one has mastery over the realization of the Sugatas of the three times, one is a lord (īśvara). Because one has internalized Mahāmudrā, one is the Great One (Mahā). Because all phenomena are non-dual, one is Glorious (Śrī). Because Saraha took as his consort the woman of such realization, he is Saraha. Because it was transmitted from mouth to mouth from the buddhas, bodhisattvas, and yogis, it is the "Oral Tradition" (mukhāgama). It was composed for the sake of those with devotion to the essential meaning in future times, in order to destroy all duality without exception.
The Dohā is the realization of the ineffable meaning. The Kośa is so called because it is sealed with the seven seals. This song, composed as a mgur for the sake of the unshakable nature of phenomena (dharmatā), is complete, having shown all examples and meanings without exception.
The intention of the Sugatas of the three times is peerless; the intention of the glorious mountain-dweller is equal to space itself. Through this non-dual avadhūti mindfulness, which is like a rainbow, I have written this commentary on the meaning of the Dohā-kośa; may the higher ones grant their forgiveness.
This essential meaning, which dwells in the center of the lotus of the heart, was requested with earnest words by a disciple who is like my own heart. I have translated this for the sake of those who have devotion to it. May all sentient beings, without exception, realize this essential meaning and be liberated.
Namo aḥ.
Namo aḥ.
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.