(1) The Buddha then asked Vimalakirti:

“You spoke of coming here to see the Tathagata, but how do you see Him impartially?”

Vimalakirti replied:

“Seeing reality in one’s body is how to see the Buddha. I see the Tathagata did not come in the past, will not go in the future, and does not stay in the present. The Tathagata is seen neither in form (rupa, the first aggregate) nor in the extinction of form nor in the underlying nature of form. Neither is He seen in responsiveness (vedana), conception (sanjna), discrimination (samskara) and consciousness (vijnana) (i.e. the four other aggregates), their extinction and their underlying natures. The Tathagata is not created by the four elements (earth, water, fire and air), for He is (immaterial) like space. He does not come from the union of the six entrances (i.e. the six sense organs) for He is beyond eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and intellect. He is beyond the three worlds (of desire, form and formlessness) for He is free from the three defilements (desire, hate and stupidity). He is in line with the three gates to nirvana and has achieved the three states of enlightenment (or three insights) which do not differ from (the underlying nature of) unenlightenment. He is neither unity nor diversity, neither selfness nor otherness, neither form nor formlessness, neither on this shore (of enlightenment) nor in mid-stream when converting living beings. He looks into the nirvanic condition (of stillness and extinction of worldly existence) but does not dwell in its permanent extinction. He is neither this nor that and cannot be revealed by these two extremes. He cannot be known by intellect or perceived by consciousness. He is neither bright nor obscure. He is nameless and formless, being neither strong nor weak, neither clean nor unclean, neither in a given place nor outside of it, and neither mundane nor supramundane. He can neither be pointed out nor spoken of. He is neither charitable nor selfish; he neither keeps nor breaks the precepts; is beyond patience and anger, diligence and remissness, stillness and disturbance. He is neither intelligent nor stupid, and neither honest nor deceitful. He neither comes nor goes and neither enters nor leaves. He is beyond the paths of word and speech. He is neither the field of blessedness nor its opposite, neither worthy nor unworthy of worship and offerings. He can be neither seized nor released and is beyond ‘is’ and ‘is not’. He is equal to reality and to the nature of Dharma (Dharmata) and cannot be designated and estimated, for he is beyond figuring and measuring. He is neither large nor small, is neither visible nor audible, can neither be felt nor known, is free from all ties and bondage, is equal to the All-knowledge and to the (underlying) nature of all living beings, and cannot be differentiated from all things. He is beyond gain and loss, free from defilement and troubles (klesa), beyond creating and giving rise (to anything), beyond birth and death, beyond fear and worry, beyond like and dislike, and beyond existence in the past, future and present. He cannot be revealed by word, speech, discerning and pointing.

(2) Vimalakirti said:

“Hey Sariputra, he who searches for the Dharma does not even cling to his body and life, still less to a seat, for the quest of Dharma is not related to (the five aggregates): form (rupa), sensation (vedana), conception (sanjna), discrimination (samskara) and consciousness (vijnana); to the eighteen fields of sense (dhatu: the six organs, their objects and their perceptions); to the twelve entrances (ayatana: the six organs and six sense data that enter for or lead to discrimination); and to the worlds of desire, form and beyond form. Sariputra, a seeker of the Dharma, does not cling to the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha. A seeker of the Dharma does not hold the view of suffering, of cutting off all the accumulated causes, thereof, to put an end to it by treading the path to nirvana (i.e. the four noble truths). Why is it so? Because the Dharma is beyond all sophistry. For if one says:

‘Because I see suffering, I cut off its accumulated causes to wipe it out by treading the path thereto’, this is mere sophistry and is not the quest of the Dharma.

(1) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “If a disciple asserts that the Lord Buddha comes or goes, sits or reclines, obviously he has not understood the meaning of my discourse. And why? Because, the idea ‘Buddha’ implies neither coming from anywhere, nor going to anywhere, and hence the synonym ‘Buddha!’”

(12) That Buddha warned them:

“You may go there but hide your fragrance, if not, the people give rise to the wrong thought of clinging to it. You should also change your appearance in order not to provoke their self-abasement. To avoid wrong views do not slight them. Why? Because all worlds in the ten directions are (fundamentally immaterial) like space and because all Buddhas wishing to convert those of the small vehicle do not reveal completely to them their own pure and clean lands.”

(13) The Bodhisattva Narayana said: “The mundane and the supra-mundane are a duality but the underlying nature of the mundane is void (or immaterial) and is but the supra-mundane, which can be neither entered nor left and neither overflows (like the stream of transmigration) nor scatters (like smoke). This is initiation into the non-dual Dharma.”

(1) The Lord Buddha interrogated Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Is it possible that by means of his physical body, the Lord Buddha may be clearly perceived?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! It is impossible that by means of his physical body, the Lord Buddha may be clearly perceived. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as a physical body, is in reality not merely a physical body.” Thereupon the Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “Every form or quality of phenomena is transient and illusive. When the mind realises that the phenomena of life are not real phenomena, the Lord Buddha may then be clearly perceived.”

(51) The Buddha said: “Sariputra, because of their (spiritual) blindness, living beings do not see the imposing majesty of the Tathagata’s pure land; this is not the fault of the Tathagata. Sariputra, this land of mine is pure but you do not see its purity.”

(3) “Sariputra, the Dharma is called nirvana (the condition of complete serenity and ultimate extinction of reincarnation); if you give rise to (the concept of) birth and death, this is a search for birth and death and is not the quest of Dharma. The Dharma is (absolute and) immaculate, but if you are defiled by the (thought of) Dharma and even that of nirvana, this is pollution which runs counter to the quest of Dharma. Dharma cannot be practiced and if it is put into practice, this implies something (i.e. an object) to be practiced and is not the quest of Dharma. Dharma is beyond grasping and rejecting, and if you grasp or reject it, this is grasping or rejecting (something else) but not the quest of Dharma. Dharma is beyond position but if you give it a place, this is clinging to space but not the quest of Dharma. Dharma is formless but if you rely on form to conceive the Dharma, this is search for form but not the quest of Dharma. Dharma is not an abode but if you want to stay in it this is dwelling in (an objective) Dharma, but not the quest of (absolute) Dharma. Dharma can be neither seen, nor heard nor felt nor known but if you want to see, hear, feel and know it, this is the functioning of your (discriminatory) seeing, hearing, feeling and knowing but not the quest of Dharma. Dharma is (transcendentally) inactive (wu wei) but if you are set on worldly activities, this is a search for the worldly way of life but not the quest of Dharma. Therefore, Sariputra, the quest of Dharma does not imply seeking anything whatsoever.”

(4) The Lord Buddha yet again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Arhat (having attained to absolute quiescence of mind) thus meditate within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, there is not in reality a condition synonymous with the term Arhat. Honoured of the Worlds! if an Arhat thus meditates within himself, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’ there would be obvious recurrence of such arbitrary concepts as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Honoured of the Worlds! When the Lord Buddha declared that in absolute quiescence of mind, perfect observance of the Law, and true spiritual perception, I was pre-eminent amongst the disciples, I did not cogitate thus within myself, ‘I am an Arhat, freed from desire!’ Had I thus cogitated, ‘I have obtained the condition of an Arhat,’ the ‘Honoured of the Worlds’ would not have declared concerning me, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka’; but, in reality, Subhuti was perfectly quiescent and oblivious to phenomena; hence the allusion, ‘Subhuti delights in the austerities practised by the Aranyaka.’”

(1) The Lord Buddha said unto Subhuti: “If you think thus within yourself ‘The Lord Buddha did not, by means of his perfect bodily distinctions, obtain supreme spiritual wisdom,’ Subhuti, have no such deceptive thought! Or if you think thus within yourself, ‘In obtaining supreme spiritual wisdom, the Lord Buddha declared the abrogation of every Law,’ Subhuti, have no such delusive thought! And why? Because, those disciples who obtain supreme spiritual wisdom, neither affirm the abrogation of any Law, nor the destruction of any distinctive quality of phenomena.”

(6) The Lord Buddha, thereupon, addressed Subhuti, saying: “Thus it is with an enlightened disciple: if he were to expatiate after this manner, ‘I must become oblivious to every idea of sentient life,’ he could not be described as fully enlightened. And why? Because, there is no Law whereby a disciple can be approved as ‘fully enlightened.’ Therefore, the Lord Buddha declared that within the realm of spiritual Law, there is neither an entity, a being, a living being, nor a personality.”

(1) The Lord Buddha enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May a Scrotapatti (having entered the stream which bears on to Nirvana) thus moralise within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits commensurate with the merit of a Scrotapatti’?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Scrotapatti is simply a descriptive term signifying ‘having entered the stream.’ A disciple who avoids the seductive phenomena of form, sound, odour, taste, touch, and Law, is named a Scrotapatti.”

(3) The Lord Buddha once again enquired of Subhuti, saying: “What think you? May an Anagami (having entire immunity from reincarnation) thus reflect within himself, ‘I have obtained the fruits which accord with the merit of an Anagami?’” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! And why? Because, Anagami is merely a designation meaning ‘immunity from reincarnation’; but in reality there is no such condition as ‘immunity from reincarnation,’ hence Anagami is merely a convenient designation.”

(5) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? Can the Lord Buddha be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions?” Subhuti replied, saying: “No! Honoured of the Worlds! the Lord Buddha cannot be perceived by means of his thirty-two bodily distinctions. And why? Because, what the Lord Buddha referred to as his ‘thirty-two bodily distinctions,’ are not in reality ‘bodily distinctions,’ they are merely defined as ‘bodily distinctions.’”

(3) There is danger of doing this. I do not mean that no trouble is to be taken, but the right behaviour lies in the middle way between being and non-being. If one can attain purposelessness through purpose, then the thing has been grasped. Supreme and without confusion, one goes along in an, independent way. Furthermore, one must not fall victim to the ensnaring world. The ensnaring world is whc e the tive kinds of dark demons disport themselves.

(57) Sariputra retorted: “There is no such thing as myself (a holy man at the sravaka stage) returning to the worldly way of life.”

(19) The pure and clean Buddha land, silence with neither word nor speech, neither pointing, discerning, action nor activity. Thus, Ananda, whatever the Buddhas do by either revealing or concealing their awe-inspiring majesty, is the work of salvation.

(1) The Lord Buddha addressed Subhuti, saying: “What think you? You disciples, do not affirm that the Lord Buddha reflects thus within himself, ‘I bring salvation to every living being.’ Subhuti, entertain no such delusive thought! And why? Because, in reality there are no living beings to whom the Lord Buddha can bring salvation. If there were living beings to whom the Lord Buddha could bring salvation, the Lord Buddha would necessarily assume the reality of such arbitrary concepts as an entity, a being, a living being, and a personality. Subhuti, what the Lord Buddha adverted to as an entity, is not in reality an entity; it is only understood to be an entity, and believed in as such, by the common, uneducated people. Subhuti, what are ordinarily referred to as the ‘common, uneducated people,’ these the Lord Buddha declared to be not merely ‘common, uneducated people.’”

(1) “By this wisdom shall enlightened disciples be enabled to bring into subjection every inordinate desire! Every species of life, whether hatched in the egg, formed in the womb, evolved from spawn, produced by metamorphosis, with or without form or intelligence, possessing or devoid of natural instinct—from these changeful conditions of being, I command you to seek deliverance, in the transcendental concept of Nirvana. Thus, you shall be delivered from an immeasurable, innumerable, and illimitable world of sentient life; but, in reality, there is no world of sentient life from which to seek deliverance. And why? Because, in the minds of enlightened disciples there have ceased to exist such arbitrary concepts of phenomena as an entity, a being, a living being, or a personality.”

(31) “What is the Bodhisattva not staying in the supra-mundane state (nirvana)? It means studying and practicing the immaterial but without abiding in voidness; studying and practicing formlessness and inaction but without abiding in them; studying and practicing that which is beyond causes but without discarding the roots of good causation; looking into suffering in the world without hating birth and death (i.e. samsara); looking into the absence of the ego while continuing to teach all living beings indefatigably (relentlessly); looking into nirvana with no intention of dwelling in it permanently; looking into the relinquishment (of nirvana) while one’s body and mind are set on the practice of all good deeds; looking into the (non-existing) destinations of all things while the mind is set on practicing excellent actions (as true destinations); looking into the unborn (i.e. the uncreate) while abiding in (the illusion of) life to shoulder responsibility (to save others); looking into passionlessness without cutting off the passion-stream (in order to stay in the world to liberate others); looking into the state of non-action while carrying out the Dharma to teach and convert living beings; looking into nothingness without forgetting about great compassion; looking into the right position (of nirvana) without following the Hinayana habit (of staying in it); looking into the non-reality of all phenomena which are neither firm nor have an independent nature, and are egoless and formless, but since one’s own fundamental vows are not entirely fulfilled, one should not regard merits, serenity and wisdom as unreal and so cease practicing them.