Verse II.25

Ratnagotravibhāga Root Verse II.25

Previous Verse

Next Verse

Verse II.25 Variations

नाशश्चतुर्विधो ज्ञेयो ध्रुवत्वादिविपर्ययात्
पूर्तिर्विकृतिरुच्छित्तिरचिन्त्यनमनच्युतिः

E. H. Johnston as input by the University of the West.^[1]

nāśaścaturvidho jñeyo dhruvatvādiviparyayāt
pūrtirvikṛtirucchittiracintyanamanacyutiḥ

E. H. Johnston as input by the University of the West.^[2]

།འཇིག་པ་རྣམ་བཞིར་ཤེས་བྱ་སྟེ།
།བརྟན་སོགས་དག་ལས་བཟློག་ཕྱིར་རོ།
།མྱགས་དང་རྣམ་འགྱུར་ཆད་པ་དང་།
།བསམ་མི་ཁྱབ་འགྱུར་འཕོ་བ་སྟེ།

Dege, PHI, 125-126

Destructibility is to be understood as four kinds
By virtue of the opposites of "everlasting" and so on,
Which are putridity, sickness, extinction,
And death in an inconceivable manner.

When the Clouds Part, Brunnhölzl, 420 ^[3]

La destruction présente quatre aspects

Qui sont les contraires de la stabilité et ainsi de suite

La dégradation, le changement, l’interruption

Et la transmigration avec ses métamorphoses inconcevables.

Charrier, Christian and Patrick Carré. Traité de la Continuité suprême du Grand Véhicule. Plazac: Éditions Padmakara, 2019.

RGVV Commentary on Verse II.25

Tibetan
English
Sanskrit
Chinese

Full Tibetan Commentary
Full English Commentary
Full Sanskrit Commentary
Full Chinese Commentary

།ཚིགས་སུ་བཅད་པ་གསུམ་པོ་འདིའི་དོན་ནི་མདོར་བསྡུ་ན། ཚིགས་སུ་བཅད་པ་བརྒྱད་ཀྱིས་རིག་པར་བྱ་སྟེ། མདོར་ན་ཡེ་ཤེས་གཉིས་པོ་ཡི། །ལས་སུ་འདི་ནི་ཤེས་བྱ་སྟེ། །འགྲོ་བའི་སྐུ་ནི་རྫོགས་པ་དང་། །ཆོས་ཀྱི་སྐུ་ནི་སྦྱོང་བའོ། །རྣམ་གྲོལ་ཆོས་ཀྱི་སྐུ་དག་ནི། །རྣམ་གཉིས་རྣམ་གཅིག་ཤེས་བྱ་སྟེ། །ཟག་པ་མེད་ཕྱིར་ཁྱབ་པའི་ཕྱིར། །འདུས་མ་བྱས་པའི་གནས་ཉིད་ཕྱིར། །ཉོན་མོངས་རྣམས་ནི་བག་ཆགས་དང་། །བཅས་པ་འགགས་ཕྱིར་ཟག་མེད་དེ། །ཆགས་མེད་ཐོགས་པ་མེད་པའི་ཕྱིར། །ཡེ་ཤེས་ཁྱབ་པ་ཉིད་དུ་འདོད། །གཏན་དུ་འཇིག་པ་མེད་པ་ཡི། །རང་བཞིན་ཡིན་ཕྱིར་འདུས་མ་བྱས། །འཇིག་མེད་ཆོས་ནི་བརྟན་པ་སྟེ། །བསྟན་སོགས་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་འདི་བཤད་དོ། །འཇིག་པ་རྣམ་བཞིར་ཤེས་བྱ་སྟེ། །བསྟན་སོགས་དག་ལས་བཟློག་ཕྱིར་རོ། །མྱགས་དང་རྣམ་འགྱུར་ཆད་པ་དང་། །བསམ་མི་ཁྱབ་པར་འཕོ་བ་སྟེ། །དེ་མེད་ཕྱིར་ནི་བརྟན་ཞི་དང་། །རྟག་དང་འཕོ་མེད་ཤེས་པར་བྱ། །དྲི་མེད་ཤེས་དེ་དཀར་པོ་ཡི། །ཆོས་ཀྱི་རྟེན་ཡིན་ཕྱིར་ན་གནས། །ཇི་ལྟར་རྒྱུ་མིན་ནམ་མཁའ་ནི། །གཟུགས་མཐོང་བ་དང་སྒྲ་དང་དྲི། །རོ་དང་རེག་དང་ཆོས་རྣམས་ནི། །ཐོས་ལ་སོགས་པའི་རྒྱུ་

ཡིན་ལྟར། །དེ་བཞིན་སྐུ་གཉིས་སྒྲིབ་མེད་པའི། །སྦྱོར་བས་བསྟན་པའི་དབང་དོན་ལ། །ཟག་མེད་པ་ཡི་ཡོན་ཏན་དག །སྐྱེ་བ་ཡི་ནི་རྒྱུ་ཡིན་ནོ། །ཇི་སྐད་དུ། སངས་རྒྱས་ནམ་མཁའི་མཚན་ཉིད་དོ། །ཞེས་བྱ་བ་བཤད་པ་དེ་ནི་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པ་རྣམས་ཀྱི་མ་འདྲེས་པའི་དོན་དམ་པའི་མཚན་ཉིད་ལ་དགོངས་ནས་གསུངས་པ་ཡིན་ཏེ། གང་གི་ཕྱིར་གལ་ཏེ་སྐྱེས་བུ་ཆེན་པོའི་མཚན་སུམ་ཅུ་རྩ་གཉིས་ཀྱིས་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པ་ལྟ་བར་གྱུར་ན་ནི། དེས་ན་འཁོར་ལོས་སྒྱུར་བའི་རྒྱལ་པོ་ཡང་དེ་བཞིན་གཤེགས་པར་འགྱུར་རོ་ཞེས་གསུངས་སོ།

Other English translations[edit]

Obermiller (1931) ^[7]

Now, evanescence is known to be of 4 kinds,

Which are the reverse of firmness, &c.,—

Putrification, the changes caused by illness, birth,

And migration which takes place in an inconceivable way.

Takasaki (1966) ^[8]

The 'Evanescence' is to be known as of four kinds,

Being the counterparts of 'everlasting' and the rest,

[They are namely]: 'putridity', 'disease',

'Annihilation' and 'death in an inconceivable way'.

Fuchs (2000) ^[9]

"Destructibility" is to be understood [in terms of] four aspects,

since it constitutes the contrary of "steadfastness" and so on.

These are decay, drastic change, being cut-off, and transmigration,

which is inconceivable [and] a transformation [in various] ways.

Textual sources[edit]

Commentaries on this verse[edit]

Academic notes[edit]

Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon Unicode Input
Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon Unicode Input
Brunnhölzl, Karl. When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sūtra and Tantra. Boston: Snow Lion Publications, an imprint of Shambhala Publications, 2014.
I follow dvidhaikedhā in MA/MB and VT (fol. 14r6) as well as DP rnam gnyis rnam gcig against J dvir ekadhā.
With Schmithausen, I take the three ablatives in II.22.cd as predicative ablatives.
For the last two lines, C has "It is the matrix because it has the nature of stainless wisdom and pure attributes" (corresponding to amalajñānaśukla°), which is the preferred reading of Schmithausen. However, my translation follows MB padaṃ tad amalajñānam (MA amalaṃ jñānam) śukla°, which is confirmed by DP dri med shes de dkar po yi / chos kyi rten yin phyir na gnas /. In the Yogācāra system in general, as exemplified by Mahāyānasaṃgraha I.48, the usual distinction between the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya is that the former designates the removal of only the afflictive obscurations as attained by śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha arhats, while the latter represents the removal of both afflictive and cognitive obscurations as well as the possession of all buddha qualities. Thus, when speaking about the dharmakāya as the actual state of buddhahood in a general sense, it is understood that both types of obscurations have been relinquished in it, and it is in this sense that it can be said that the dharmakāya includes the vimuktikāya. Here, the Uttaratantra describes these two kāyas as the two aspects of relinquishment (purity) and realization (wisdom), respectively, of unconditioned perfect buddhahood, without relating them to any distinction between buddhas and arhats (more commonly, it is the svābhāvikakāya that is said to represent the aspect of the purity or the relinquishment of all obscurations). Note, however, that VT (fol. 14r5–6) glosses the vimuktikāya as "the sambhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya free from the latent tendencies of the afflictions and so on" and its "perfection" (II.21c) as "the production of the accumulation of generosity and so on."Likewise, the vimuktikāya’s being "understood in two ways" (II.22b) is glossed as "as the difference between sambhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya." As for II.21–26, most Tibetan commentaries agree that the nonconceptual wisdom of meditative equipoise (familiarizing with the wisdom of knowing suchness) perfects the vimuktikāya (the ultimate relinquishment), while the wisdom of subsequent attainment (training in the wisdom of knowing variety) purifies the stains of the dharmakāya (the ultimate realization). As for "the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya being understood in two ways and in one way,"RYC (148–49) relates the two ways to the vimuktikāya (its being liberated from both afflictive and cognitive obscurations), while the one way pertains to the dharmakāya and consists of consummate wisdom. GC (479–80) agrees with describing the vimuktikāya in two ways and the dharmakāya in one way, saying that the former is uncontaminated (because of being free from the afflictive obscurations and their latent tendencies) and all-pervasive (because of lacking the obscurations of attachment and obstruction with regard to all knowable objects). The dharmakāya is unconditioned because it has the nature of being absolutely indestructible. YDC (344–45) explains that the vimuktikāya refers to buddhahood in terms of its aspect of relinquishment, while the dharmakāya refers to it in terms of the aspect of its qualities. Therefore, though śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas make efforts in familiarizing with the lack of a self, they do not train in the entire variety of knowable objects and therefore only attain the vimuktikāya but not the dharmakāya. As for "being understood in two ways,"the vimuktikāya is to be understood in one of these two ways—being uncontaminated because afflictive and cognitive obscurations including their latent tendencies have ceased. The dharmakāya is to be understood in the other one of these two ways—being the wisdom that pervades all knowable objects because it engages them through lacking the obscurations of attachment that obscure suchness and the obscurations of obstruction that obscure variety. Both the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya are to be understood furthermore in the one way that is common to them both—being unconditioned because they have the nature of being absolutely indestructible. Therefore, YDC says, through the Uttaratantra ’s verses on the nature and the function of awakening, it is clearly taught that buddhas have the wisdom of self-appearance and that this existent wisdom is unconditioned, which is to be understood well by the intelligent. JKC (137–40) agrees with YDC on the vi-muktikāya’s being uncontaminated because it is endowed with the relinquishment of lacking any contaminations. The dharmakāya is all-pervasive because it is endowed with the realization of pervading all knowable objects (Rong ston shes bya kun gzigs 1997, 161 and ’Ju mi pham rgya mtsho 1984b, 448.4 also show the same pattern). Both kāyas are unconditioned because they have the nature of not being produced by causes and conditions. Rongtön, GC, YDC, and JKC agree that these three characteristics of the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya represent one’s own welfare, while both kāyas are also the foundation of all pure attributes, which represents the welfare of others (RYC speaks only of the dharmakāya as being that foundation). Still, lines II.30ab "one’s own welfare and that of others is taught through the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya"are taken by all commentaries to mean that the vimuktikāya represents one’s own welfare and the dharmakāya the welfare of others (which is basically just another way of looking at this). For the meanings of "everlasting," "putridity," and so on, in II.24cd–26ab, see CMW.
Obermiller, E. "The Sublime Science of the Great Vehicle to Salvation Being a Manual of Buddhist Monism." Acta Orientalia IX (1931), pp. 81-306.
Takasaki, Jikido. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra): Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Serie Orientale Roma 33. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (ISMEO), 1966.
Fuchs, Rosemarie, trans. Buddha Nature: The Mahayana Uttaratantra Shastra. Commentary by Jamgon Kongtrul and explanations by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. Ithaca, N. Y.: Snow Lion Publications, 2000.

[1] Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon Unicode Input

[2] Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon Unicode Input

[3] Brunnhölzl, Karl. When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sūtra and Tantra. Boston: Snow Lion Publications, an imprint of Shambhala Publications, 2014.

[4] I follow dvidhaikedhā in MA/MB and VT (fol. 14r6) as well as DP rnam gnyis rnam gcig against J dvir ekadhā.

[5] With Schmithausen, I take the three ablatives in II.22.cd as predicative ablatives.

[6] For the last two lines, C has "It is the matrix because it has the nature of stainless wisdom and pure attributes" (corresponding to amalajñānaśukla°), which is the preferred reading of Schmithausen. However, my translation follows MB padaṃ tad amalajñānam (MA amalaṃ jñānam) śukla°, which is confirmed by DP dri med shes de dkar po yi / chos kyi rten yin phyir na gnas /. In the Yogācāra system in general, as exemplified by Mahāyānasaṃgraha I.48, the usual distinction between the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya is that the former designates the removal of only the afflictive obscurations as attained by śrāvaka and pratyekabuddha arhats, while the latter represents the removal of both afflictive and cognitive obscurations as well as the possession of all buddha qualities. Thus, when speaking about the dharmakāya as the actual state of buddhahood in a general sense, it is understood that both types of obscurations have been relinquished in it, and it is in this sense that it can be said that the dharmakāya includes the vimuktikāya. Here, the Uttaratantra describes these two kāyas as the two aspects of relinquishment (purity) and realization (wisdom), respectively, of unconditioned perfect buddhahood, without relating them to any distinction between buddhas and arhats (more commonly, it is the svābhāvikakāya that is said to represent the aspect of the purity or the relinquishment of all obscurations). Note, however, that VT (fol. 14r5–6) glosses the vimuktikāya as "the sambhogakāya and the nirmāṇakāya free from the latent tendencies of the afflictions and so on" and its "perfection" (II.21c) as "the production of the accumulation of generosity and so on."Likewise, the vimuktikāya’s being "understood in two ways" (II.22b) is glossed as "as the difference between sambhogakāya and nirmāṇakāya." As for II.21–26, most Tibetan commentaries agree that the nonconceptual wisdom of meditative equipoise (familiarizing with the wisdom of knowing suchness) perfects the vimuktikāya (the ultimate relinquishment), while the wisdom of subsequent attainment (training in the wisdom of knowing variety) purifies the stains of the dharmakāya (the ultimate realization). As for "the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya being understood in two ways and in one way,"RYC (148–49) relates the two ways to the vimuktikāya (its being liberated from both afflictive and cognitive obscurations), while the one way pertains to the dharmakāya and consists of consummate wisdom. GC (479–80) agrees with describing the vimuktikāya in two ways and the dharmakāya in one way, saying that the former is uncontaminated (because of being free from the afflictive obscurations and their latent tendencies) and all-pervasive (because of lacking the obscurations of attachment and obstruction with regard to all knowable objects). The dharmakāya is unconditioned because it has the nature of being absolutely indestructible. YDC (344–45) explains that the vimuktikāya refers to buddhahood in terms of its aspect of relinquishment, while the dharmakāya refers to it in terms of the aspect of its qualities. Therefore, though śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas make efforts in familiarizing with the lack of a self, they do not train in the entire variety of knowable objects and therefore only attain the vimuktikāya but not the dharmakāya. As for "being understood in two ways,"the vimuktikāya is to be understood in one of these two ways—being uncontaminated because afflictive and cognitive obscurations including their latent tendencies have ceased. The dharmakāya is to be understood in the other one of these two ways—being the wisdom that pervades all knowable objects because it engages them through lacking the obscurations of attachment that obscure suchness and the obscurations of obstruction that obscure variety. Both the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya are to be understood furthermore in the one way that is common to them both—being unconditioned because they have the nature of being absolutely indestructible. Therefore, YDC says, through the Uttaratantra ’s verses on the nature and the function of awakening, it is clearly taught that buddhas have the wisdom of self-appearance and that this existent wisdom is unconditioned, which is to be understood well by the intelligent. JKC (137–40) agrees with YDC on the vi-muktikāya’s being uncontaminated because it is endowed with the relinquishment of lacking any contaminations. The dharmakāya is all-pervasive because it is endowed with the realization of pervading all knowable objects (Rong ston shes bya kun gzigs 1997, 161 and ’Ju mi pham rgya mtsho 1984b, 448.4 also show the same pattern). Both kāyas are unconditioned because they have the nature of not being produced by causes and conditions. Rongtön, GC, YDC, and JKC agree that these three characteristics of the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya represent one’s own welfare, while both kāyas are also the foundation of all pure attributes, which represents the welfare of others (RYC speaks only of the dharmakāya as being that foundation). Still, lines II.30ab "one’s own welfare and that of others is taught through the vimuktikāya and the dharmakāya"are taken by all commentaries to mean that the vimuktikāya represents one’s own welfare and the dharmakāya the welfare of others (which is basically just another way of looking at this). For the meanings of "everlasting," "putridity," and so on, in II.24cd–26ab, see CMW.

[7] Obermiller, E. "The Sublime Science of the Great Vehicle to Salvation Being a Manual of Buddhist Monism." Acta Orientalia IX (1931), pp. 81-306.

[8] Takasaki, Jikido. A Study on the Ratnagotravibhāga (Uttaratantra): Being a Treatise on the Tathāgatagarbha Theory of Mahāyāna Buddhism. Serie Orientale Roma 33. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (ISMEO), 1966.

[9] Fuchs, Rosemarie, trans. Buddha Nature: The Mahayana Uttaratantra Shastra. Commentary by Jamgon Kongtrul and explanations by Khenpo Tsultrim Gyamtso. Ithaca, N. Y.: Snow Lion Publications, 2000.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]