back to questions
Triṃśikā (Vasubandhu) with Sthiramati's bhāṣya · 29
acitto 'nupalambo 'sau jñānaṃ lokottarañ ca tat āśrayasya parāvṛttir dvidhādauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ
Translation. That nonapprehension of an apprehended object (anupalambha) is without an apprehending mind (acitta);
and it is supramundane knowledge (lokottara-jñāna).
Immediately thereafter comes transformation of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti),
from eliminating its twofold unworkability (dauṣṭhulya): that of the afflictive obstruction (kleśāvaraṇa) and the cognitive obstruction (jñeyāvaraṇa).
Grammar check: 9 words pass / 1 flagged / 1 beyond the checkerPāṇini-verified
Every word's claimed grammar is re-derived with vidyut-prakriya, software implementing Pāṇini's rules. Flags are shown, never hidden; some are the text taking epic or Vedic liberties the classical rules do not generate.
Word by word
| surface | lemma | grammar |
|---|
| acittaḥ | acitta | pass |
| anupalambaḥ | anupalambha | fail |
| asau | adas | pass |
| jñānam | jñāna | pass |
| lokottaram | lokottara | pass |
| ca | ca | pass |
| tat | tad | pass |
| āśrayasya | āśraya | pass |
| parāvṛttiḥ | parāvṛtti | pass |
| dvidhā | dvidhā | pass |
| dauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ | dauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ | unsupported |
How the commentary settled it
Where the verse alone is ambiguous, the reading follows Sthiramati's commentary; the deciding lines are quoted below each decision.
Translate acittaḥ as ‘without an apprehending mind,’ qualifying the nonapprehension, and anupalambhaḥ as nonapprehension specifically of an apprehended object. Acitta does not mean unconsciousness or generic inconceivability here.→ ‘That nonapprehension of an apprehended object is without an apprehending mind.’
trbh [1507, 1508]grāhakacittābhāvād grāhyārthānupalambhāc cācitto 'nupalambho 'sau
Because of the absence of an apprehending mind and because of the nonapprehension of an apprehended object, that nonapprehension is without mind.
Render lokottara as the technical ‘supramundane,’ not merely ‘extraordinary’: the commentary derives it from passing beyond the world and associates that status with nonconceptuality and absence from ordinary worldly operation.→ ‘supramundane knowledge (lokottara-jñāna)’
trbh [1509, 1510]anucitatvāl loke samudācārābhāvān nirvikalpatvāc ca lokād uttīrṇam iti jñānaṃ lokottarañ ca tad iti
Because it is unfamiliar, because it does not operate in the world, and because it is nonconceptual, it has passed beyond the world; hence, ‘and that is supramundane knowledge.’
Respect the verse’s two concord sets: masculine asau, acittaḥ, and anupalambhaḥ form the first predication, while neuter tat, jñānam, and lokottaram form the second. The second clause identifies the same realization as knowledge rather than forcing the masculine forms to agree directly with jñānam.→ Two linked predications concerning the same realization.
trbh [1508, 1510, 1511]cācitto 'nupalambho 'sau jñānaṃ lokottarañ ca tad iti tasya jñānasyānantaraṃ āśrayasya parāvṛttir bhavatīti
‘That nonapprehension is without mind; and that is supramundane knowledge.’ Immediately after that knowledge, transformation of the basis occurs.
Construe āśrayasya as a possessive genitive with parāvṛttiḥ and identify āśraya technically as the all-seeded store consciousness. Also represent the commentary’s explicit temporal relation: transformation occurs immediately after the supramundane knowledge.→ ‘Immediately thereafter comes transformation of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti).’
trbh [1511, 1512]tasya jñānasyānantaraṃ āśrayasya parāvṛttir bhavatīti jñāpanārtham āha āśrayasya parāvṛttir iti
To indicate that transformation of the basis occurs immediately after that knowledge, he says, ‘transformation of the basis.’
trbh [1513, 1514]āśrayo 'tra sarvabījakam ālayavijñānam tasya parāvṛttir yā
Here the basis is the all-seeded store consciousness; its transformation is that which...
Give dvidhā immediate semantic scope over dauṣṭhulya: the unworkability is twofold, belonging respectively to the afflictive and cognitive obstructions. The commentary subsequently explains that the corresponding transformation of basis is itself twofold according to which obstruction is eliminated.→ ‘its twofold unworkability: that of the afflictive obstruction and the cognitive obstruction’
trbh [1520, 1521, 1522, 1523]dvidheti kleśāvaraṇadauṣṭhulyaṃ jñeyāvaraṇadauṣṭhulyañ ca dauṣṭhulyam āśrayasyākarmaṇyatā tat punaḥ kleśajñeyāvaraṇayor bījam
‘Twofold’ means the unworkability belonging to the afflictive obstruction and the unworkability belonging to the cognitive obstruction. Unworkability is the basis’s incapacity to function; that, in turn, is the seed of the afflictive and cognitive obstructions.
trbh [1529]dvidhā āvaraṇabhedena sottarā niruttarā cāśrayaparāvṛttir uktā
According to the distinction between the obstructions, transformation of the basis is said to be twofold: surpassable and unsurpassable.
Analyze dauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ as a causal tasil indeclinable, ‘from/because of elimination of dauṣṭhulya,’ based on the genitive tatpuruṣa dauṣṭhulya-hāni. The commentary’s question with prahāṇāt and its repeated construction hānitaś ca prāpyate rule out a nominative adjective hānitaḥ.→ ‘from eliminating its twofold unworkability’
trbh [1517, 1518, 1519]sā punar āśrayaparāvṛttiḥ kasya prahāṇāt prāpyate ata āha dvidhādauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ
From the abandonment of what is that transformation of the basis obtained? Therefore he says: ‘from eliminating the twofold unworkability.’
trbh [1525, 1527]āśrayaparāvṛttiḥ śrāvakādigatadauṣṭhulyahānitaś ca prāpyate bodhisattvagatadauṣṭhulyahānitaś ca prāpyate
Transformation of the basis is obtained from eliminating the unworkability present in śrāvakas and others, and it is obtained from eliminating the unworkability present in bodhisattvas.