(Dwelling in complete freedom and openness.
Śāriputra: “I am practicing concentration in order
to dwell in bliss for this life and to dwell in non-forgetfulness.”)

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī - 212

(Dwelling without dwelling in the indescribable / inconceivable Ground / Basis / Source /
Suchness / True nature & dynamic of Reality as it is here & now as pointed by concepts like:
the Non-duality / Union of the Two Truths free from all extremes & middle about all dharmas [U2T];
the Non-duality / Union of the three spheres [U3S / U2T-3S];
the Non-duality / Union of apparent opposites of any duality / triad / quad / etc. [Uopp / U2T-opp];
the Non-duality / Union of the Two Truths about the two truths themselves [U2T-2T];
the Non-duality / Union of the Ground and its manifestations [UGM / U2T-GM];
the primordial equality / purely / perfection / divinity / completeness / freedom / awakening of all dharmas;
the true Buddha. – Non-dual: not many, not one, not both together, not neither. –
Dwelling in no absolute.)

Source: https://read.84000.co/translation/toh196.html

SUMMARY

Source: https://read.84000.co/translation/toh196.html

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī first presents a dialogue between Mañjuśrī and Śāriputra
regarding the activity of “dwelling” (vihāra) during meditation,
the nature of dharmas, and the “true nature” (tathatā).

This opens into a conversation between Mañjuśrī and a large gathering of monks whereby
Mañjuśrī corrects the monks’ misinterpretations.

Mañjuśrī then instructs Śāriputra
on the enduring and indestructible nature of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality.

Finally, the power of Mañjuśrī’s teaching is explained and reiterated by the Buddha.

INTRODUCTION

Source: https://read.84000.co/translation/toh196.html

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī opens with the Buddha Śākyamuni residing in Rājagṛha on Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain together with a great monastic assembly of five hundred monks and a multitude of bodhisattvas. After the Buddha has delivered a Dharma teaching, Mañjuśrī walks through the monastic quarters of the area and sees Śāriputra engaged in meditation among the residences of the five hundred monks.

There follows a dialogue between Mañjuśrī and Śāriputra
regarding the activity of “dwelling” during meditation,
the nature of dharmas, and the “true nature.”

(i.e. About the “true nature”:
Wikipedia: Tathātā (/ˌtætəˈtɑː/; Sanskrit: तथाता; Pali: tathatā) is a Buddhist term variously translated as "thusness" or "suchness," referring to the nature of reality free from conceptual elaborations and the subject–object distinction. While also used in Theravada, it is a significant concept in Mahayana Buddhism. … Tathatā in the East Asian Mahayana tradition is seen as representing the base reality and can be used to terminate the use of words.)
-
(i.e. Tathātā / Suchness / Dharmata / Dharmadhatu / Genuine-emptiness / Buddha-nature is the inconceivable unique all-pervading timeless unborn unconditioned unchanging unceasting pristine Ground / Basis / Source / True nature & dynamic of Reality as it is … as pointed by concepts like the inconceivable Union of the Two Truths free from all extremes & middle about all dharmas [U2T / U2T-3S / U2T-opp / U2T-2T / U2T-GM].)

This opens into a conversation between Mañjuśrī and the five hundred monks in which Mañjuśrī corrects the monks’ misinterpretations.
Finally, Mañjuśrī instructs Śāriputra on the non-decrease and non-increase of the realm of sentient beings (sattvadhātu) and the realm of reality (dharmadhātu)‍ ‍— an instruction that indicates the non-conceptual, immutable, and indestructible nature of awakening.
Because this nature, symbolized by Mañjuśrī himself,
does not dwell anywhere [in absolute terms],
it is without any dwelling place [in absolute terms],
in other words without any determinate location or foundation.

(i.e. Dwelling without dwelling: The Ground / Basis / Source / Dharmata / Dharmadhatu / Genuine-emptiness / Buddha-nature / Suchness / True nature & dynamic of Reality as it is / Union of the Two Truths … is indescribable / inconceivable for our limited flawed conditioned dualistic conceptual minds. It is beyond all extremes & middle, beyond all dualistic conceptual proliferations, beyond all defining limitations, beyond all conditioning / karma (physical, conceptual, mental; individual, collective, cosmic); beyond all description, differentiation, causality / production, form / matter-energy, space & time. So nobody can really perceive / know / rely & dwell on it in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.)

The power of Mañjuśrī’s teaching is explained and reiterated by the Buddha (summary in verse).
The sūtra concludes with the Buddha predicting the future awakening of the five hundred monks and eighty thousand gods who are present in the audience.

The sūtra is not extant in Sanskrit but is preserved in Chinese, Tibetan, and Mongolian versions. There are two Chinese versions: the 文殊師利巡行經 Wén shū shī lì xún xíng jīng translated by Bodhiruci ca. 508–535 ᴄᴇ (Taishō 470) and the 文殊尸利行經 Wén shū shī lì xíng jīng translated by Jñānagupta in 586 ᴄᴇ (Taishō 471). The Tibetan version is preserved in Dunhuang manuscripts and in Tibetan Kangyur editions. A recently published critical edition of the Tibetan version of this sūtra identifies two extant Dunhuang Tibetan manuscripts and three fragments and utilizes seventeen available Kangyur and proto-Kangyur editions. The Dunhuang manuscripts contain an early Tibetan edition that was translated before the implementation of codified rules and principles for translating Buddhist texts issued by the Tibetan emperor Trisong Detsen (r. 800–815 ᴄᴇ). Still, the Dunhuang manuscripts and the canonical Kangyur versions contain the same recension of the sūtra, with some minor differences in terminology and idiomatic expressions. The Chinese versions generally match the Tibetan version, though they do contain several terms that point to different Sanskrit originals as well as portions that are missing from the Tibetan.

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī is also recorded in the Denkarma and Phangthangma inventories of Tibetan imperial translations, so we can establish that it was first translated from Sanskrit into Tibetan no later than the early ninth century, as the Denkarma is dated to 812 ᴄᴇ. The late thirteenth-century catalog of the Tibetan Kadampa master Darma Gyaltsen (1227–1305), commonly known as Chomden Raldri, lists the sūtra as The Noble Sūtra “The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī.” A listing of texts appended to the history of Buddhism in India and Tibet composed by Butön Rinchen Drup (1290–1364) lists the work under the same title but adds that it was translated by Yeshé Dé and consists of one hundred and forty ślokas. Among Kangyurs that have a colophon, the translators listed are the Indian preceptor Surendrabodhi and the translator in charge of the revision, Bandé Yeshé Dé.

The sūtra enjoyed some popularity in eighth- and ninth-century Tibet, a fact attested to by its inclusion among the one hundred and four titles of Buddhist scriptures found in Mahāvyutpatti §1329 and the number of extant Tibetan Dunhuang fragments. The sūtra was also cited in several early Tibetan treatises from Dunhuang and two times by Vimalamitra (eighth century) in his commentary on non-conceptual meditation. The sūtra is also sporadically cited in later Tibetan commentaries and was briefly analyzed by Pekar Sangpo (sixteenth century) in his overview of the sūtras preserved among Tibetan Kangyurs.

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī (in Sanskrit Mañjuśrīvihāra) is a discourse that plays on the Sanskrit word vihāra, which can variously mean (1) dwelling place, (2) condition of existence, (3) walking about, (4) monastery, (5) pleasure ground, (6) sport, (7) arrangement, or distribution. The Chinese translators understood the title of the term in the sense of (3), with Bodhiruci translating the title as Mañjuśrī’s “going around” (巡行) and Jñānagupta translating the nearly synonymous Mañjuśrī’s “wandering” (行). This connotation refers to the opening scene, in which Mañjuśrī wanders about the monastic residences. This sense is not captured in the Tibetan translation gnas pa, which corresponds only to connotations (1) or (2) among the possibilities listed above. Without a Sanskrit manuscript of the text, we cannot be sure of the exact connotation of vihāra, but the context throughout
the sūtra implies that the “dwelling place” of Mañjuśrī is not a determinate place.
The dwelling place that Mañjuśrī explains to Śāriputra and the five hundred monks is the realm of reality, which is beyond time, unlocalized, immovable, and inaccessible to conceptual thought.
Awakening in this sūtra is characterized as the non-conceptual awareness of the infinite realm of reality.

In the first half of the sūtra, Mañjuśrī criticizes various presuppositions underlying Śāriputra’s conceptual understanding of concentration and its role in spiritual practice (1.3), the past, present, and future (1.5, 1.11), comprehension (1.16), and the “dwelling place” of an arhat (1.18). Although difficult to verify, the presuppositions of Śāriputra may well represent the mainstream Buddhist understandings of a person following the Abhidharma of the Sarvāstivādin ordination lineage, particularly Śāriputra’s advocacy of the practice of standing firm in the past, present, and future. According to Pekar Sangpo, the concise meaning of this part of the sūtra is that Śāriputra is taught, as a response to Mañjuśrī’s questions, the emptiness [U2T] that by nature is free from the conceptual fabrication of anything.

The second half (1.21–1.41) of the sūtra consists of a dialogue that develops between Mañjuśrī and the five hundred monks in the audience. The five hundred monks are initially disturbed by and reject Mañjuśrī’s teaching and move away from him, but the monks then return upon Mañjuśrī’s further instruction to Śāriputra. Mañjuśrī’s additional instruction to Śāriputra is the cause for four hundred of the monks’ minds to be liberated from the pollutions. However, one hundred monks fall into a deep hell realm due to being greatly disturbed by Mañjuśrī’s instruction. Śāriputra then questions Mañjuśrī’s motives and mode of teaching. The Buddha comes to the defense of Mañjuśrī and explains the great karmic benefit of hearing the profound Dharma for these monks, even if they doubt it. The Buddha predicts that the monks will swiftly be reborn in Tuṣita heaven after their instructive interlude in hell and that they will then become arhat disciples under the future Buddha Maitreya. Tibetan scholars like Situ Penchen Chökyi Jungné (1700–1774) cite this episode as an example of the power of the profound Dharma to bring great positive effects, even for those who have doubt and do not follow the instruction.

After Śāriputra praises Mañjuśrī on his eloquence in explaining the Dharma, Mañjuśrī proceeds to instruct the audience on the “non-decrease and non-increase” (anūnatvāpūrṇatva) of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality (1.27). The topic of “non-decrease and non-increase” is an important theme in a number of Mahāyāna sūtras, such as The Perfection of Wisdom in Seven Hundred Lines (Toh 24), The Questions of Suvikrāntavikrāmin (Toh 14), and The Absorption That Encapsulates All Merit (Toh 134), along with various sūtras of the Heap of Jewels (Ratnakuṭa) (Toh118) class and even the Heart Sūtra (Toh21). The Anūnatvāpūrṇatvanirdeśaparivarta, a discourse that bears the name of this topic and is preserved only in Chinese, connects this topic with the teaching of Buddha nature (tathāgatagarbha).

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī, however, equates the non-increasing and non-decreasing true nature with the realm of reality and the realm of sentient beings. The non-increase and non-decrease of the realm of sentient beings and the realm of reality is explained in The Questions of Suvikrāntavikrāmin, where both realms [T1] are said to lack any intrinsic essence [T2] [U2T], are infinite, and are designated through conventional expressions [U3S]. The Buddha explains to Suvikrāntavikrāmin that “non-decrease and non-increase” is a synonym for the vision of how things are in a non-conceptual manner.

(i.e. Not increasing, not decreasing; not defiled, not purified; nothing to accept / reject / change in absolute terms:
-
All dharmas – including the two truth themselves, and the Ground / Reality as it is & its manifestations – are empty of inherent existence [T2] <==> because of being conventionally dependently co-arisen (interdependent) relatively functional ever-changing impermanent appearances / tools / adaptes skillful means / antidotes / counterpoints [T1], merely labeled / imputed by the mind in dependence of its past experiences / conditioning / karma [U3S].
And vice versa, one aspect / truth implies / enables / supports / is in harmony with the other [U2T].
All dharmas are all like space, illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, magical tricks: ‘There, but not there.’ [U2T].
-
All dharmas are
– not really existent, not completely non-existent, not both together, not neither;
– not different / separate / multiple / dual, not identical / united / one / non-dual, not both together, not neither;
– not permanent / continuous / eternal, not impermanent / discontinuous / annihilated,
not both together, not neither;
– not really arisen / lasting / evolving / changing / functioning / ceasing,
not completely non-arisen / non-lasting / non-evolving / non-changing / non-functioning / non-ceasing,
not both together, not neither;
– not increasing, not non-increasing, not both together, not neither;
– not decreasing, not non-decreasing, not both together,
– not increasing, not decreasing, not both together, not neither; not neither;
– not defiled, not non-defiled, not both together, not neither;
– not purified, not non-purified, not both together,
– not defiled, not purified, not both together, not neither;
– not dependent / caused, not independent / uncaused, not both together, not neither;
– not empty, not non-empty, not both together, not neither;
– not dependently co-arisen [T1], not empty of inherent existence [T2],
not both truths together as if different / separate / in opposition [2T],
not neither of the two truths as if identical / one [1T];
– not ‘this’, not ‘non-this’, not both together, not neither, and there is no fifth – for whatever ‘this’ is.
-
Meaning the true nature & dynamic of all dharmas is
– indescribable / inconceivable for our flawed conditioned dualistic conceptual minds;
– beyond all extremes & middle,
– beyond all dualistic conceptual proliferations,
– beyond all defining limitations,
– beyond all conditioning / karma.
-
So the true nature & dynamic of all dharmas has to be personally spontaneously non-dualistically non-conceptually directly perceived / realised / experienced in the here & now.
That is the role of meditation: Union of samatha / calm-abiding & vipassana / insight.
That is abiding without abiding in the inconceivable true nature & dynamic of Reality as it is here & now.)

The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī concurs with this understanding, where the text reads,
“that which is uncurtailed in this way is awakening.
Awakening is liberation.
Liberation is non-conceptual.
The non-conceptual is unfabricated and immutable.
The unfabricated and immutable is wholly beyond suffering.”
Because this non-conceptual nature, which is symbolized by Mañjuśrī himself,
does not dwell anywhere, it is without a fixed dwelling place,
in other words without any metaphysical foundation.

The Prajñāpāramitā literature seems to have also exerted an influence on The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī, as there are several themes found in the sūtra that are redolent of earlier Prajñāpāramitā discourses. For example, the sūtra mentions that arhats are “constituted by the unconditioned,” a phrase found throughout the Prajñāpāramitā literature and particularly well known from The Sūtra on the Perfection of Wisdom “The Diamond Cutter” (Toh 16).

At the conclusion of The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī, the Buddha predicts that the audience will achieve complete buddhahood “in the eon called Star-like,” a prediction that is also given in a number of Prajñāpāramitā discourses. We also note that a parallel to the episode of the monks falling into hell is found in the sūtra Teaching the Practice of a Bodhisattva (Toh 184).

The Translation

Source: https://read.84000.co/translation/toh196.html

Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas!

Thus did I hear at one time. The Bhagavān was staying at Rājagṛha, on Gṛdhrakūṭa Mountain, together with a large community of a full five hundred monks and a great congregation of bodhisattvas. At that time, the Bhagavān, after emerging in the late afternoon from secluded meditation, surrounded and honored by a great assembly, taught the Dharma.

Subsequently, the youthful Mañjuśrī was walking about, going from residence to residence among all five hundred monks. When he went to the residence where the elder Śāriputra lived, Mañjuśrī saw him sitting alone in solitude, practicing concentration while in meditative seclusion.

____________________________________________________

[A. Dwelling without dwelling in any dharma in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively:]

When he saw him, he said the following words to the elder Śāriputra:
“Honorable Śāriputra, are you practicing concentration?”

“Yes,” replied Śāriputra, “it is so, Mañjuśrī.”

“Honorable Śāriputra,” said Mañjuśrī,
“are you concentrating in order to abandon afflictions that have already been abandoned?
Or are you concentrating in order to abandon those that have not yet been abandoned?

“Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the past?
Are you concentrating while dwelling on the future?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the present?
Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on bodily form?
Are you concentrating while dwelling on feelings, perceptions, volitional formations, or consciousness?
Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the eye?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the nose, ear, tongue, body, or mind?
Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on visible form?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on sound, smell, taste, touch, or other phenomena?
“Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the desire realm?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the form realm or the formless realm?
“Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the internal?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the external?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the internal and external?
Honorable Śāriputra, are you concentrating while dwelling on the body?
Or are you concentrating while dwelling on the mind?”

“Mañjuśrī,” replied Śāriputra,
“I am practicing concentration in order to
dwell in bliss for this life and to dwell in non-forgetfulness.”

Mañjuśrī then asked, “Honorable Śāriputra,
do you apprehend any dharmas (subject) that dwell in bliss in this life,
or that dwell in bliss in what is not this life,
or that are without forgetfulness?”

[The Middle Way: Acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling without acting / practicing / dwelling in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively. Thus acting more and more in accord with the two inseparable aspects of Reality as it is, with the inconceivable Union of the Two Truths, with the Non-duality / Sameness / Union of all apparent opposites.:]

“Mañjuśrī,” Śāriputra replied,
“I truly do not observe or apprehend any dharmas (subject) that dwell (action)
in bliss in this life (object) or that dwell in bliss in what is not this life [T2].
However, Mañjuśrī, I rely and dwell on what the Tathāgata taught
to śrāvakas as the doctrine of disengagement [T1] [U2T].”

Mañjuśrī then asked, “Honorable Śāriputra, what is it that the Tathāgata taught to śrāvakas as the doctrine of disengagement and that you, honorable Śāriputra, rely and dwell on?”

Śāriputra replied, “In this regard, Mañjuśrī, a monk relies and dwells on the past, relies and dwells on the future, and relies and dwells on the present. In brief, as mentioned before, one should understand that he relies and dwells as mentioned before all the way up to the mind. Mañjuśrī, the Tathāgata taught these śrāvakas that these dharmas are disengaged, and I rely and dwell on these dharmas.”
-
[T1 - Acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling … in conventional / relative / inter-subjective terms – because all dharmas are not completely non-arisen / non-existent / non-changing / non-functional / non-ceasing / useless / meaningless.]

(i.e. Acting without acting: Because the true nature of all dharmas – including the three spheres of subject, action and object, and all apparent opposites – is the inconceivable Union of the Two Truths free from all extremes & middle [U2T / U3S / Uopp / U2T-2T / UGM], then there is nothing to perceive or not-perceive, to apprehend or not-apprehend, to rely on or not, to dwell on or not, to differentiate or not-differentiate, to accept or reject, to affirm or negate, to seek or abandon, to do or not-do, to understand or not-understand, to describe or not-describe, to conceive or not-conceive … Not in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.)

Mañjuśrī then asked, “Honorable Śāriputra, why do you say, ‘I rely and dwell on the past, rely and dwell on the future, rely on the present, dwell in disengagement, and, in brief, rely on and dwell in disengagement as mentioned before all the way up to the mind’?

It is like this, honorable Śāriputra:
a true nature of the past does not exist.
A true nature of the future does not exist.
A true nature of the present does not exist.
-
[T2 - Not acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling … in absolute terms – because all dharmas are not really arisen / existent / changing / increasing / decreasing / defiled / purified / functional / ceasing.]
-
In this way, if these dharmas do not exist, then how can the elder Śāriputra say,
‘I rely and dwell on the past, rely and dwell on the future, and rely and dwell on the present’?
Dharmas that do not exist have no basis.
“Further, honorable Śāriputra,
there is nothing that is a true nature of the past and a true nature of the future and the present.
Nor are phenomena caused by anything.
Nor do they belong to anything.
They are not based anywhere.
There is nothing apprehended as a basis of what is not based anywhere.
-
[T2 - Not acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling … in absolute terms – because all dharmas are not really arisen / existent / changing / increasing / decreasing / defiled / purified / functional / ceasing.]
“Further, honorable Śāriputra,
those who speak of a ‘true nature of the past, the future, and the present’ and who thus propound stability deprecate the Tathāgata.
Why is this?
It is because a true nature is immovable and without vain imaginings.
It is because a true nature is uncorrupted.
It is because true nature is empty, without signs, and wishless.
-
[T2 - Not acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling … in absolute terms – because all dharmas are not really arisen / existent / changing / increasing / decreasing / defiled / purified / functional / ceasing.]
“Further, honorable Śāriputra,
a true nature of the past cannot be apprehended.
A true nature of the future cannot be apprehended.
A true nature of the present cannot be apprehended.
And, in brief, the true nature of everything up to mind cannot be apprehended.
However, honorable Śāriputra, besides the true nature,
one does not apprehend any other dharma capable of being shown or explained.”
-
[T2 - Not acting / perceiving / knowing / practicing / teaching / dwelling … in absolute terms – because all dharmas are not really arisen / existent / changing / increasing / decreasing / defiled / purified / functional / ceasing.]

____________________________________________________

[B. The Ground / Reality as it is is non-dual / awakening / the true Buddha – not many, not one –. We need to transcend all apparent opposites / dualities (including any opposition or identity between impure / defilements / samsara and pure / buddha-qualities / nirvana, between the two truths themselves, and between the Ground and its manifestations); and we need to act more and more in accord with the two inseparable aspects of Reality as it is [U2T / U2T-3S / U2T-opp / U2T-2T / U2T-GM].:]

[The Ground / Reality as it is is the inconceivable Union of the Two Truths [U2T / U3S / Uopp / U2T-2T / UGM]. And it is possible to act in more and more accord with it – without accepting / rejecting changing anything in absolute terms.:]
-
“Honorable Śāriputra,” Mañjuśrī replied,
“if a true nature does not exist [T2],
then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach the Dharma [T1]?
Honorable Śāriputra, if the Dharma also does not exist [T2],
then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach the Dharma [T1]?
If the Tathāgata also does not exist [T2],
then how can the Tathāgata reside in the true nature and teach the Dharma [T1]?
All dharmas [T1] do not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2].
The Tathāgata [T1] also does not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2].

[The Ground / Reality as it is is non-dual, beyond all opposites / dualities.:]
-
When his Dharma is taught, it is like this:
it is without distinction between either apprehending or not apprehending.
The Tathāgata himself is not distinguished by the expressible or the inexpressible.
Why is this?
Because, honorable Śāriputra, the Tathāgata
is completely cut off from expression, involves no designation,
and is not something that can be designated.”

Śāriputra then asked, “Mañjuśrī, who will become a recipient for a Dharma teaching such as this?”

Mañjuśrī said, “Honorable Śāriputra,

one who is not disturbed in the conditioned realm [T1] and who does not desire complete nirvāṇa [T2] [U2T] will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching like this.
One who does not apprehend [T2] dharmas [T1] [U2T] of the past,
does not comprehend dharmas of the past,
does not apprehend dharmas of the past, present, or future,
and does not comprehend dharmas of the past, present, or future
will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching such as this.
One who neither sees nor appropriates [opposites like] defilements and purifications
will be a recipient for a Dharma teaching such as this.
One who does not pursue either self [existence] [T1] or non-self [non-existence] [T2]
and who does not pursue acquiring and relinquishing (without acceptation and rejection)
is a recipient for a Dharma teaching such as this.
That one will comprehend the meaning of this exposition.”
(i.e. No absolute to grasp:
There is nothing to perceive / comprehend / know / teach / dwell on in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.
The Ground / Reality as it is / U2T is non-dual, beyond all opposites / dualities, indescribable, inconceivable.)

“Mañjuśrī, in this regard, what is comprehended?” asked Śāriputra.

Mañjuśrī then asked, “Honorable Śāriputra,

if there were to be something that constitutes the meaning of this exposition [in absolute terms],
then ask, ‘In this regard, what is comprehended?’ ”
“Mañjuśrī, this profound Dharma teaching is rarely directly perceived,” said Śāriputra.
“It is rarely fully apprehended.
Mañjuśrī, if even arhats, those in training,
and those beyond training grow discouraged regarding this location (dwelling place),
how much more so are childish ordinary beings.”
(i.e. No absolute to grasp:
There is nothing to perceive / comprehend / know / teach / dwell on in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.
The Ground / Reality as it is / U2T is non-dual, beyond all opposites / dualities, indescribable, inconceivable.)

“Honorable Śāriputra,” said Mañjuśrī,

“arhats do not have a dwelling place (i.e. grasp at no absolute).
Why is this?
Because if even arhats do not exist, in what place would an arhat dwell?
Arhats are thus distinguished by being without dwelling place (i.e. grasp at no absolute).
Arhats are distinguished by being without apprehension.
Arhats are distinguished by having fully cut off the expressible and inexpressible.
Why is this?
Because as arhats have fully cut off the expressible and inexpressible, they are free from designation.
Arhats are free from distinctions concerning [dwelling] places.
(i.e. No absolute to grasp:
There is nothing to perceive / comprehend / know / teach / dwell on in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.
The Ground / Reality as it is / U2T is non-dual, beyond all opposites / dualities, indescribable, inconceivable.)
“They are distinguished by the unconditioned.
They are without engagement.
They are distinguished by the unconditioned because if arhats are unconditioned and without dwelling place (i.e. grasp at no absolute), what would be the dwelling place of arhats?
(i.e. No absolute to grasp:
There is nothing to perceive / comprehend / know / teach / dwell on in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.
The Ground / Reality as it is / U2T is non-dual, beyond all opposites / dualities, indescribable, inconceivable.)
“Arhats are not distinguished by name and form.
Childish ordinary beings conceptualize name and form.
Name and form are understood by arhats to be without conceptions and without conceptualizing.
Therefore, arhats are not distinguished by name and form.
Even childish beings are not apprehended.
The qualities of childish beings, arhats, and arhat qualities are also not apprehended.
At the time they are not apprehended, they are not conceived.
They are not dealt with.
Without being dealt with, they are unelaborated and peaceful.
“One does not accept their ‘existence,’ nor does one accept their ‘non-existence.’
One also does not accept that they are both existent while existing and nonexistent while not existing.
Nor does one accept that they are neither existent nor nonexistent.
When one does not accept any of these, there is no apprehension.
Being free from all apprehensions‍ ‍— without thought and free from thought‍
(i.e. Tetralemma: Beyond dualities like: acting / thinking / conceptualising / differentiating,
not-acting / not-thinking / not-conceptualising / not-differentiating, both together, neither) ‍—
we speak of one who dwells in the quality of spiritual practice [T1]
by way of being without dwelling place [T2] [U2T].”

____________________________________________________

[C. This teaching is deep / non-absolutist / non-dualistic / inconceivable,
thus hard to understand, easily misunderstood. Not everybody is ready for it.]

Once this teaching had been explained by the youthful Mañjuśrī,
the five hundred monks of the retinue got up from their seats saying,
“We do not see the youthful Mañjuśrī.
We do not hear the youthful Mañjuśrī.
Any location where the youthful Mañjuśrī could dwell should be abandoned.
Why is that?
The youthful Mañjuśrī has shown in a blatant manner that
the defilements and purifications have a single characteristic [U2T / Uopp].”
They thought that he had thereby said something that was not [the Buddha-]Dharma, and thinking,
-
[Their problem:] “How can we thus train in the doctrine that is well spoken by the Bhagavān
and practice pure moral conduct?” they departed.

(i.e. Problem: They are grasping at an opposition / duality between the two truths [2T]: The five hundred monks think ‘emptiness [T2]’ denies ‘conventional / relative / in-tersubjective truths, concepts, views, methods, practices, goals [T1] [2T]. They think the two truths are different / separate / dual / in opposition; one truth being superior to the other. They think that one truth has to be accepted while the other is rejected; that one truth has to win over the other truth. That is dualistic thinking about the two truths.
-
The solution is to realise the Non-duality / Sameness / Union of the Two Truths about all dharmas [U2T / U2T-2T]: to realise that the two truths – dependent origination / relative functionality / appearances and emptiness of inherent existence) are more like inseparable, interdependent, co-defined, co-relative, co-dependent, co-emergent, co-evolving, co-ceasing / co-transcended, in harmony, dependently co-arisen relatively functional tools, merely co-labeled / imputed by the mind <==> thus both empty of inherent existence [U2T-2T], never absolute. They are both like space, illusions, reflections, mirages, dreams, echos, magical tricks: ‘There, but not there.’ [U2T]. They are extremely pure: not ‘this’, not ‘non-this’, not both together, not neither, and there is no fifth – for whatever ‘this’ is; ex. not existent, not nonexistent, not both together, not neither; not different / separate / multiple / dual, nt identical / united / one / non-dual, not both together, not neither. Meaning indescribable / inconceivable. Meaning there is nothing to accept / reject / change / oppose / unite / differentiate / not-differentiate … in absolute terms about them.)

The elder Śāriputra then asked the youthful Mañjuśrī,
“Mañjuśrī, do you not teach the Dharma so that sentient beings may comprehend the Dharma?”
(i.e Is there still something to comprehend / practice / obtain,
or should we drop everything: all activities, all thinking / ideas, all conceptualising / concepts, all differentiating / dualities, all views, all methods, all paths, all goals?)

Mañjuśrī replied, “Yes, Honorable Śāriputra.”

Śāriputra said, “Having arisen from their seats, those five hundred monks have spoken disparagingly and unpleasantly, and they have departed.”

“Honorable Śāriputra, it is good,” said Mañjuśrī,
“it is good that those five hundred monks said,
‘We do not see the youthful Mañjuśrī.
We do not hear the youthful Mañjuśrī.
Any location where youthful Mañjuśrī could dwell should be abandoned.’
Śāriputra, the words of these monks are well spoken.
Why is that?
Because the youthful Mañjuśrī [T1] does not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2] [U2T].
That which does not exist and cannot be apprehended cannot be seen and cannot be heard.
-
Any location where the youthful Mañjuśrī could dwell should be abandoned.
(i.e. Not grasping at any absolute; not dwelling on any absolute.)
Why is that?
Because, since the youthful Mañjuśrī [T1] does not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2] [U2T],
any place he could dwell [T1] also does not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2] [U2T].
And one should not try to rely on (dwell on) what does not exist and cannot be apprehended.”
(i.e. Not in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.)

When those five hundred monks had heard this teaching by the youthful Mañjuśrī,
they again returned to their places and said the following words to the youthful Mañjuśrī:
“Mañjuśrī, why do we not understand what you just taught?”

Mañjuśrī replied, “This is good, monks, this is good.
Such are the activities of the Teacher’s hearers.
In this regard, monks,
there is nothing to comprehend and there is nothing to cognize [in absolute terms].
Why is this?
Because this realm of reality is the very state of dwelling in the manner of being without dwelling place. (i.e. Dwelling without dwelling in absolute terms, because:)
That which is the realm of reality [T1] is not a realm [T2] [U2T].
That which does not exist and cannot be apprehended is also immovable
and without death and rebirth (i.e. There are no real three stages of becoming for anything.).
That which is immovable and without death and rebirth
is not something comprehensible. It is not something cognizable.
Those who are without the vain imaginings of comprehension and cognition are called hearers of the Teacher.
They are called those who have attained the supreme, leaders, and those worthy of offerings.”

Upon explaining this teaching, among the five hundred monks

the minds of four hundred monks were liberated from the pollutions without any further clinging.
The minds of one hundred monks grew increasingly disturbed,
and their bodily existences and mental states were plunged into the great hell of Howling.

Venerable Śāriputra then said to the youthful Mañjuśrī,
“Mañjuśrī, I am shocked that one hundred monks have all gone to ruin
because you did not teach a Dharma that protects sentient beings.”

Thereupon the Bhagavān replied to the elder Śāriputra,
“Śāriputra, do not say such things.
Why?
Śāriputra, those one hundred monks will come into contact with the great hell of Howling for only a moment, and they will then take rebirth together among the gods of Tuṣita heaven.
Śāriputra, if these monks had not heard this Dharma discourse, they would undoubtedly have gone to hell, and having exhausted their karma, some would have taken rebirth as humans.
But since they have relied upon this Dharma discourse, even those deeds that would cause other beings to experience hell for an eon will, for them, cause that experience for only a short while
Therefore, Śāriputra, those one hundred monks will be included among the initial hearers of the tathāgata Maitreya and become arhats who have exhausted their pollutions.
Since that is so, Śāriputra, for this Dharma discourse to be heard by those who have doubt is excellent indeed, in a way that is not the case for the attainment of the four meditative concentrations, in a way that is not the case for the four immeasurables, and in a way that is not the case for the cultivation of the four formless attainments.
Why is that?
Because without hearing such a Dharma discourse, one will not be liberated from cyclic existence, nor will one be liberated from birth, aging, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, sadness, and agitation.”

____________________________________________________

[D. There are no real three stages of becoming for anything in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively – ex. (i) dependent origination / beginning / coming / before / past, (ii) duration / abiding / existence / during / present / evolution / change / functionality / increasing / decreasing / rebirths / defilement / pollution / purification, (iii) cessation / ending / going / after / future / elimination / stopping / extinction / emptiness –. Why? Because of the Union of the Two Truths about all dharmas.]

The venerable Śāriputra then said to the youthful Mañjuśrī,
“Mañjuśrī, it is amazing how you have matured sentient beings
through your eloquent explanation of this Dharma discourse.”

“Honorable Śāriputra,” replied Mañjuśrī,
“the true nature does not diminish, nor does it increase.
The realm of reality does not diminish, nor does it increase.
The realm of sentient beings does not diminish, nor does it increase.
They are not defiled, nor are they purified.
-
Why is this?
Because these things [T1] do not exist and cannot be apprehended [T2] [U2T].
They are nothing at all [T2], as they amount to nothing but mere conventions [T1] [U2T].
-
They are not caused by anything at all.
They do not dwell anywhere at all and are without dwelling place.
-
Honorable Śāriputra,
that which is uncurtailed in this way is awakening.
Awakening is liberation.
Liberation is non-conceptual.
The non-conceptual is unfabricated and immutable.
The unfabricated and immutable is wholly beyond suffering.”

Thereupon, the Bhagavān said to the elder Śāriputra,
“Śāriputra, it is just as the youthful Mañjuśrī has taught.
True nature does not diminish, nor does it increase.
The realm of reality also does not diminish, nor does it increase.
The realm of sentient beings does not diminish, nor does it increase.
It is not defiled, nor is it purified.
Why is this?
Because these things do not exist and cannot be apprehended.
They are nothing at all, as they amount to nothing more than mere conventions.
They are not caused by anything at all.
They do not dwell anywhere at all and are without dwelling place.”

____________________________________________________

[E. Summary verses by the Buddha:
We need to realise, and act in accord with, the Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: existence & non-existence, difference & identity, many & one, duality & non-duality, permanence & impermanence, continuity & discontinuity, subject & object, cause & effect, name & form, movement & rest, acting & non-acting, perceiving & non-perceiving, thinking & non-thinking, conceptualising & non-conceptualising, differentiating & non-differentiating, describing & non-describing, accepting & rejecting, pure & impure, samsara & nirvana, defilements & buddha-qualities, the Ground & the true Buddha, appearances / conventionalities / causality / relativity / functionality & emptiness, virtuous methods & wisdom, ignorance & wisdom, the Ground & its manifestations, ‘this’ & ‘non-this’ for whatever ‘this’ is. It is the way our flawed conditioned dualistic conceptual ordinary minds work, the karmic cycle [U3S], that we are trying to purify / transcend / transmute by directly perceiving how it actually is working here & now.]

At that time, the Bhagavān [in order to reveal this meaning again] uttered these verses:

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of the two truths: conventionality / causality / relativity vs. emptiness:]
[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: existence vs. non-existence:]
[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: manyness vs. oneness:]
Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: ‘this’ vs. ‘non-this’:]
“We speak of dharmas

Of the past, present, and future.

They are actually not so [T2], for these are mere conventions [T1] [U2T].

They do not have the characteristics of being one or many. {1}
(i.e. Not ‘this’, not ‘non-this’, not both together, not neither – for whatever ‘this’ is.)

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: characteristics vs. no-characteristics:]
“What is conceptualized as being without characteristics

Will itself become a characteristic.

What is without characteristics is non-conceptual;

Conceptuality is not a characteristic either. {2}
(i.e. Do not grasp at any apparently absolute mark: not even ‘impermanence / dependent origination / relativity’, ‘emptiness’, both truths together, neither; or at ‘extreme purity’ (tetralemma), of the Ground / Union of the Two Truths ….)

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: samsara vs. nirvana:]
“That which is conceptualized as conditioned (samsara)

And that which is conceptualized as nirvāṇa [T1]

Are both explained by the wise

As the workings of Māra. (i.e. The results of the karmic cycle, karma.) {3}

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: name vs. form, appearance vs. emptiness:]
“All of the aggregates, sensory media, and elements [all forms]

Are formulated by name [T1].

The names [T1] and the unproduced [the empty form] [T2]

Are both of a single characteristic [U2T]. {4}

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites
like: action / thinking / conceptualisation vs. non-action / non-thinking / non-conceptualisation:]
“What is properly conceptualized [in absolute terms]

Is itself not proper.

The wise do not conceptualize even a little bit‍ ‍—
(i.e. Never in absolute terms, just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively.)

Their sphere of activity is actually empty. {5}

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: movement vs. rest:]
“Those who conceptualize waver about;

Those who do not conceptualize are unwavering.

Concepts produce wavering (samsara);

Being without concepts is nirvāṇa. {6}

[The Ground / Reality as it is is the inconceivable
Non-duality / Sameness / Union of the Two Truths [U2T / U2T-3S / U2T-opp / U2T-2T / U2T-GM]:]
“Those who understand this nature

Are known as wisdom bearers.

On that account they have attained cessation.

That is non-conceptual wisdom. {7}
(i.e. Wisdom beyond all opposition / dualities: ex. Not describable / conceivable / conceptual / dualistic,
not indescribable / inconceivable / non-conceptual / non-dualistic, not both together, not neither.)

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: ignorance vs. wisdom:]
“With wisdom is wisdom proclaimed [T1].

Even proclamations of wisdom are vain [T2] [U2T].

Those who have acceptance via such [non-dual] wisdom

Are known as wisdom bearers. {8}

[Non-duality / Sameness / Union of apparent opposites like: methods vs. wisdom / emptiness:]
“The acceptance by which one accepts a holy Dharma of this sort

Is the supreme acceptance

Superior to the generosity

Of filling the trichiliocosms with jewels as offerings. {9}

[The superiority of virtuous activities / views / practices / methods / goals
combined with more and more wisdom / emptiness. One aspect supporting the other.:]
“Practicing, for incalculable millions of eons,

Giving, morality, forbearance,

Diligent effort, and concentration

Is not equal to this sūtra. {10}

[The benefits of relying on Mahayana Teachings, on the Middle Way,
without apprehending / opposing / differentiating anything in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively:]
“This Dharma and this vehicle

Were taught by the perfectly complete Buddha.

When relying on this sūtra

All will become tathāgatas.” {11}

When this Dharma discourse had been explained, one hundred thousand living beings purified the Dharma eye with regard to dharmas so that it was dustless and stainless.
The minds of five hundred monks were liberated from the pollutions without any further clinging.
Eighty thousand gods belonging to the form realm generated the mind set on unexcelled, perfectly complete awakening.
The Bhagavān predicted that they would all realize unexcelled, perfectly complete awakening in the eon called Star-like and that all of them would then bear the same name: the tathāgata, arhat, perfectly complete buddha Flower.
When the Bhagavān had said this, the youthful Mañjuśrī, the venerable Śāriputra, and the world with its gods, humans, asuras, and gandharvas rejoiced and praised the proclamation of the Bhagavān.

This concludes The Noble Mahāyāna Sūtra “The Dwelling Place of Mañjuśrī.”

Colophon

It was translated, edited, and finalized by the Indian preceptor Surendrabodhi and the editor-translator Bandé Yeshé Dé.

Middle Way Buddhism Blog

Wednesday, December 14, 2022

The Dwelling Place of Manjusri

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The Translation

[A. Dwelling without dwelling in any dharma in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively:]

[C. This teaching is deep / non-absolutist / non-dualistic / inconceivable,
thus hard to understand, easily misunderstood. Not everybody is ready for it.]

Colophon

Wednesday, December 14, 2022

The Dwelling Place of Manjusri

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The Translation

[A. Dwelling without dwelling in any dharma in absolute terms,just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively:]

[C. This teaching is deep / non-absolutist / non-dualistic / inconceivable,thus hard to understand, easily misunderstood. Not everybody is ready for it.]

Colophon

[A. Dwelling without dwelling in any dharma in absolute terms,
just conventionally / relatively / inter-subjectively:]

[C. This teaching is deep / non-absolutist / non-dualistic / inconceivable,
thus hard to understand, easily misunderstood. Not everybody is ready for it.]