Derge Kangyur/Tengyur e-text, Esukhia/Barom edition — public domain (mechanical reproduction)
The Treatise on Liberation from Bondage is a philosophical work focused on the negation of the self and the reconciliation of emptiness with dependent origination. The text argues that the perceived self cannot be located within the physical or mental aggregates—specifically body, speech, wind, and mind—as none of these serve as a definitive locus for a permanent identity. It employs a dialectical method to demonstrate that even if the mind is identified as the self, its luminous and objectless nature would render it selfless. By establishing that all phenomena in saṃsāra and nirvāṇa are devoid of self-nature, the text commits the reader to a view where appearance and emptiness are non-dual. The work concludes that because all embodied beings are equally free from conceptual elaboration and stainless, the distinctions between arising and ceasing are neutralized, leading to liberation from the bonds of conceptual attachment.
Provenance
About this text
A treatise on the nature of liberation from bonds, the Śrībandhavimuktaśāstra is a work of the General Unexcelled Yoga Tantra tradition. Attributed to the Indian author Niṣkalaṅkapāda, the text entered the Tibetan language through the efforts of Kaśmīri Buddhaśrībhadra, Mitrayogin, and lo chung gnubs tshul khrims shes rab. It is preserved in the Tengyur, volume ཟི, where it extends over six pages. The work addresses the tension between emptiness and dependent origination, arguing that these two are not distinct. Through a dialectical examination of body, speech, wind, and mind, it asserts that no definitive locus for a permanent self can be established, concluding that the mind is by nature empty and selfless. A scholar or serious reader consults this text today to engage with its analysis of how phenomena appear vividly like a rainbow yet remain devoid of inherent existence, and to study the philosophical reconciliation of appearance and emptiness as a means of liberation.
Sanskrit title
Śrībandhavimuktaśāstra
Indian author
Niṣkalaṅkapāda
Tibetan translators
Kaśmīri Buddhaśrībhadra, Mitrayogin, lo chung gnubs tshul khrims shes rab
Cite thisAnuvāda, “A Treatise on Liberation from Bondage” (Toh 2463), machine draft, 2026.https://naxiai.com/tibetan/works/toh2463
Summary & commentary
Significance
The work is significant for its synthesis of Madhyamaka-style negation of the self with the conceptualization of luminous mind. Its attribution to the Kashmiri Paṇḍita Buddhashribhadra and translation by Nub Tsultrim Sherab suggests it represents an important transmission of Indian Buddhist philosophy into the early Tibetan tradition.
Structure
Passages
Section
Description
1-2
Introduction
Opening homage and the conceptual framing of the non-duality of emptiness and dependent origination.
3-4
Analysis of the Self
A systematic examination of the body, speech, wind, and mind to prove the absence of a permanent self.
5-6
Scope of Non-Self
Extension of the non-self argument to all phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa and the resulting state of conceptual freedom.
7
Colophon
Details regarding the author, the witness, and the Tibetan translator.
Themes
Non-duality of Emptiness and Dependent Origination (2)
Negation of the Self (Anātman) (3-5)
Nature of Mind (4)
Freedom from Conceptual Elaboration (6)
Summary, significance and provenance note generated by gemma4:31b from the translation and the catalogue record.
In the language of India: Śrībandhavimuktaśāstra. In the language of Tibet: Dpal 'ching ba rnam grol gyi bstan bcos (The Treatise on the Glorious Liberation from Bonds). Homage to the Blessed One, the Lord of the World.
That which is uncomprehended is difficult to realize; yet when realized, it is the very moment of suchness. It is the terrible bond that is so difficult to liberate, yet through it one becomes liberated. This path of the perfect Buddha, which fulfills the welfare of oneself and others—this wonder I shall explain in order to deliver wandering beings.
Like the jewel of a wrestler and so forth, that essence abides as nothing other than itself. Because everything is its own self, it both binds and is liberated. Here, there is no bond whatsoever; that which is the bond is itself liberation. It is the engagement of emptiness and dependent origination; therefore, the destitute do not realize it.
Those seized by inferior or false spiritual friends, who are attached to merit and diligence, and whose power of training and intelligence is small—such people find it difficult to realize. One should seek a sublime spiritual friend who possesses realization, compassion, and skill in the pith instructions. One should serve them with stainless devotion in every way, even at the cost of life, body, and wealth.
As long as one’s own mind remains steadfast, one should follow them like a shadow follows the body. Their instruction is the nectar-water of dependent origination and emptiness. Like cool water for one tormented by thirst, one should drink it with joy, satisfaction, and pure faith. Other paths are not the perfect renunciation; knowing this is the method and the insight. This is the gateway to all doors of Dharma, the sublime path that realizes what is difficult to realize.
Since it is merely dependent origination, how could it not be empty? How could it not be empty?
Because it is emptiness, it is unceasing like space. Why then would dependent origination not occur? Therefore, these two are not two. In that regard, what is dependent origination? And what is its emptiness? Listen: these entities that appear in this way, vividly clear like a rainbow, the various pleasures, sufferings, and so forth—these do not arise without a cause. They do not have another cause, nor are they indeterminate; they have their own causes, such as sweetness, sourness, and bitterness. The nature of the mind is dependently originated, just like clouds in the sky. Alas! In the forest of existence, the fruits and foliage of suffering have grown large; it has branches of misdeeds and the flowers of grasping are in full bloom. Its cause is the trunk of improper attachment and aversion, with the firm root of the view of self. It is produced from the great earth of the elements, the warmth and moisture of ignorance along with its habitual tendencies. Just as the vessel-world appears in space, how marvelous! It is the supreme stability of those things that are dependently originated, yet lack a support. If the support is not established for a moment, how could the supported be logically posited? If selflessness is not true, then where and how could the karma of attachment and so forth, produced by that, be determined? If that is not established, what is suffering? And who could be said to experience it? Just as when the root of a tree is pulled out, the act of cutting is accomplished, so too, by reversing the conceptualization of a foundational self, the wise destroy existence. Like gold that is refined by burning, cutting, and rubbing, how could the designations "self" and "other" possibly have a basis or a location?
Examine the nature and characteristics:
In that regard, body, speech, wind, and mind,
Whether outer, inner, or in between—
No one can ever definitively establish
That these serve as the support or the locus [of the self].
If that self were suitable to appear,
Since it is not observed despite being observable,
It does not appear; as for "mind" and "non-mind,"
Mind is by nature empty and selfless.
Non-mind is impermanent and dependently originated;
When analyzed, it is free from conceptual proliferation.
Because activity is contradictory in what is permanent,
Show where and what kind of self is taught!
In short, I shall not speak much here:
Apart from one's own three doors,
What purpose is served by this self here?
Even the faults, like wounds from a weapon,
Are but the self-characteristics of the childish
And the disputes of those with perverted cravings.
If those are not other [than the self],
How could any of them be the self?
If it is not that, what is its support or its locus?
Furthermore, analyze the way in which these
Are its support and its locus;
By this method, the reality of the self
And the characteristics of the self are shown
To be well-established as being like an illusion.
Look at this way: it is like a plantain tree;
Speech is like an echo, mind is like space.
Since not even a speck of an object is observed,
How can a self be imputed here?
The outer is not the outer, nor is the inner other;
Therefore, the "in-between" is also not it.
Furthermore, it is not white and so forth;
Long and short, thick and thin,
Dense and thin, and so on—
Its characteristics cannot be definitively established.
If you say it dwells invisibly,
Supported by the ālaya or by habitual tendencies,
Like a creeper clinging to a tree,
Then analyze its appearance and non-appearance.
That very [self] is likewise subject to the same analysis as before, whether it is called "mind" or "non-mind." If you say, "Whatever is the mind, that itself is the self," then because the mind is objectless and luminous, that self would now be selfless.
Ema! How difficult this point is to realize! Ema! Ema! How truly marvelous! Ema! It is fit to be known by the wise. Ema! It is the expanse of knowledge free from [ordinary] cognition. Thus, although there is no self in these wandering beings, they are obsessed with "I" and "mine," and these crazed people are overwhelmed by subject and object.
Nevertheless, the eyes of the world are obscured by error, and so subject and object are left just as they appear. Clinging to appearances as they appear, they remain in existence; they are the cause for being turned by the wheel of suffering. Shall we not transcend that?
If you say, "Even if the self is not established, the grasping at it is real," then Ema! This is the unbearable, false bondage of all beings. Just as one would strive to extinguish a fire on one's head, one must quickly and urgently turn away from it.
Friends, when the self is not established here by the very eye of authentic knowledge, then even that which is called "other" does not exist. How and where can we harbor the misconceptions of "I," "I am," "another," or "another's"?
For example, when a son dies in a dream, if the son himself does not exist, then even his death does not truly exist. In the same way, our grasping is also like that. Ema! How truly wondrous this state is! By realizing that which is the single [reality], all are completely liberated.
Who would be afraid of this doubt? Regarding the phenomena of saṃsāra and nirvāṇa—the aggregates, elements, sense bases, and so forth, the paths of renunciation of the three vehicles, and the three vehicles—all without exception are not the self, nor do they belong to the self. Their characteristic is selflessness and emptiness. Since they do not exist, and since they are non-existent, when one has correctly ascertained them as such, alas, what fault is there for you? All the bonds of grasping at "I" and "mine," whether external, internal, or in between, likewise do not exist in body or speech. They are not other than those, nor do they abide in them. Likewise, all mental engagements of attachment, aversion, and so forth, when analyzed, for a moment, where, what, and by whom could there be attachment or aversion? Regarding beautiful forms, pleasant sounds, fragrant scents, sweet tastes, and soft textures—conditions for mental pleasure—who is it that knows them, and what benefit or connection is there? Even for that knower, what is it that becomes attached or intensely attached to those? Is it something external, internal, or in between, or is it some entity such as the body? If it is not, then how could it depend on them, or how could it be born, abide, or cease? Like the horses and elephants of a magical illusion, they are not established in reality. As for the causes by which others treat one with contempt, disparagement, or physical assault, and the resulting mind of aversion or intense hatred—this too, as before, is the mind of the self and the mind of the other, both of which are like space, devoid of signs. Likewise, since the other's speech and body are like echoes and trees, how can there be harm to the self here, like a magical illusion harming a magical king?
Just as my own speech and body are thus, so too are those of all embodied beings. Because they are equal, their arising, abiding, and ceasing are not perceived. Because they are mutually unrelated, because when analyzed everything is free from conceptual elaboration, and because they are stainless in all respects of place and time, they are like the tracks of a bird flying in the sky. In this sphere of emptiness, which is like a dream, a sound, or a rainbow, what could be attached to what, and in what way? Likewise, where could there be any suspicion of hatred? Since father, mother, wife, children, relatives, friends, and enemies are just like an illusion, one should dismantle all grasping. Therefore, how could karma be performed by attachment and the like? The wise should repeatedly examine this as before with firm insight. Consequently, pleasure and suffering are not experienced by an insentient thing, nor do they exist as entities for a conscious one. They are merely limited grasping through delusion, conditioned by habitual tendencies from beginningless time. Since they are non-existent, if those of noble intelligence familiarize themselves with their non-existence, then just as a snake’s knot is untied by itself, those bound by the terrible fetters—like a madman regarding a kinsman as an enemy—will certainly be liberated. The fruit arising from liberation, which is spontaneously present and the marvelous perfection of the two benefits, is like a vase of plenty. This concludes the treatise The Glorious Liberation from Bonds, composed by the great Indian master, the accomplished Śrī Nīlakaṇṭha.
This was finalized by the great Kashmiri Paṇḍita Buddhashribhadra in the presence of the great lord of yogis, Shri Jagatamitrananda, and translated by the young Tibetan translator Nub Tsultrim Sherab.
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.