Instruction on the Three Natures

by Vasubandhu

V
asubandhu’s dates are still the subject of much contro-

T versy among modern scholars, some even holding that there

were two Vasubandhus. There seems to be agreement,
though, that there was a Vasubandhu living in the fourth
century. In several Chinese and Tibetan biographical accounts,188 Vasu-
bandhu is said to have been one of the two younger half-brothers of
Asaºga. Previously, their mother had been a nun, but became very con-
cerned about the decline of the mah›y›na teachings during her lifetime.
In those times, as a woman, there was nothing she could do herself to rem-
edy that, so she decided to give up her robes and have sons who could
uphold and restore this tradition. Vasubandhu was born in Puru˝apura
(present-day Peshawar) and his Brahman father was his first teacher. Later,
he entered the Sarv›stiv›din order and studied the philosophical system
of the Vaibh›˝ikas at their main seat in Kashmir for four years.189 After
having returned to Puru˝apura, Vasubandhu composed his famous Treas-
ury of Abhidharma (largely based on the Mah›vibh›˝a), which presents the
orthodox Vaibh›˝ika view, whereas his autocommentary criticizes that
view from the position of the Saut›ntrikas. Vasubandhu’s commentary
was fiercely rejected by his former Sarv›stiv›din colleagues, particularly
by Saºghabhadra in his *Abhidharmany›y›nus›ra (Taisho 1562). After
some years of roaming from place to place, Vasubandhu moved to Ayo-
dhy›, the capital of the new Gupta Empire, where he taught the king and
many others.
Up to that point, it is said, Vasubandhu disrespected the mah›y›na in
general and Asaºga’s works in particular. T›ran›tha reports that he had
read the Yog›c›rabhÒmi and then remarked, “Alas! Though Asaºga med-
itated for twelve years in the forest, instead of attaining success in his med-
44 straight from the heart

itation he has composed a work [without meaning, but heavy enough] to

be an elephant’s load.”190
Thereupon, Asaºga sent two of his students to recite The SÒtra of the
Teaching of Ak˝ayamati and The SÒtra of the Ten BhÒmis in front of Vasu-
bandhu. Having heard those scriptures, he was convinced that the
mah›y›na indeed was sound in both view and practice. Worried that he
had committed a greatly negative action by not appreciating those teach-
ings before, he was ready to cut off his tongue. Asaºga’s two disciples pre-
vented him from doing so and said that his elder brother could help him.
Thus, they all went to Asaºga, who taught Vasubandhu the scriptures of
the mah›y›na and told him to recite the dh›ra˚ı of U˝˚ı˝avijay› a hun-
dred thousand times. Vasubandhu became particularly fond of the
prajñ›p›ramit› sÒtras, reciting them many times. His literary output was
enormous, including commentaries on many sÒtras and treatises of other
masters (mainly Maitreya and Asaºga) as well as a number of independ-
ent works on various topics, such as his “eight discourses”191 and the
Instruction on the Three Natures. Throughout his life, Vasubandhu seems
to have traveled a lot, and both Butön and T›ran›tha report that he lived
for some time in Nepal at the end of his life, teaching the dharma. Accord-
ing to the former, one day Vasubandhu visited the monk Handu, but
found him drunk, carrying a big pot of alcohol on his shoulder. Seeing
this deterioration of the teachings, Vasubandhu recited the dh›ra˚ı of
U˝˚ı˝avijay› backwards and thus passed away.192 T›ran›tha says that this
happened upon Vasubandhu seeing a monk who lived in a farm house
and was ploughing his fields.193 According to Tibetan tradition, Vasu-
bandhu died at Svayambhun›th in the Kathmandu Valley.194 His main
disciples were Dign›ga, Sthiramati, Gu˚aprabha, and Vimuktasena. It is
said that those disciples, in due order, surpassed Vasubandhu’s expertise
in the teachings on valid cognition, abhidharma, vinaya, and prajñ›-
p›ramit›, but none of them had Vasubandhu’s vast scope of knowledge
that encompassed all teachings.
Vasubandhu’s Instruction on the Three Natures was probably his last
work and there is no written commentary on it. Thus lacking a recog-
nized line of transmission, unfortunately, this beautiful and profound
work is almost never studied or taught in contemporary Buddhist cen-
ters of learning. It gives a terse, yet very illuminating, presentation of the
three natures and their mutual relations, how delusion manifests and
 instruction on the three natures 45

how it is dissolved. Indian Yog›c›ra texts in general display a consider-

able variety of accounts on the three natures and how they relate. From
the Yog›c›ra School’s fundamental point of view—that whatever we
encounter is always nothing but an experience in our mind—the three
natures can be summarized as follows. The imaginary nature stands for
our habitual way of misperceiving the other-dependent nature—depen-
dently-originating mere appearances in our minds. We insist that these
are real in just the way they appear, existing as distinct entities of inter-
nal consciousness and its external objects. Although such dependent
dualistic appearances (the other-dependent nature) lack any self-suffi-
cient existence, they cannot simply be claimed to be nothing, as they
keep appearing and being experienced due to our habitual mental ten-
dencies. The perfect nature basically refers to perceiving the unity of
dependently-originating mere appearances and emptiness. This means
realizing that any imaginary subject-object duality and all superimposi-
tions of personal and phenomenal identities never existed in other-
dependent appearances. However, this does not mean to reify either the
other-dependent or the perfect nature as some truly existent remainder
after duality has been removed.
Thus, the three natures are not three different “things.” It is not
through taking away one (the imaginary nature) from the other (the
other-dependent nature), that the third (the perfect nature) is obtained.
Rather, Yog›c›ra takes the other-dependent nature as the experiential
ground for a dynamic process of disillusioning and refining the way we
see ourselves and the world, with the imaginary nature and the perfect
nature being the two poles of mistaken and pure perception, respectively,
right within that experiential ground. Thus, the other-dependent nature
stands for the continuity of experience, which is impure when blurred by
the superimpositions of the imaginary nature and pure or perfected when
this imaginary nature has been seen through and let go. However, since
the realization of the perfect nature is an experience as well and not some-
thing abstract or just some nothingness, it is also said that the other-
dependent nature in its pure aspect is the perfect nature. In this way,
“other-dependent nature” is just a term for the compound meaning of the
imaginary nature and the perfect nature, which points to the underlying
experiential continuity of a mind stream that becomes increasingly aware
of its own true nature.
46 straight from the heart

In brief, to solidify any of the three natures means to entirely miss the
point. As The SÒtra of the Arrival in Laºka says:

When scrutinized with insight,

Neither the imaginary, nor the dependent,
Nor the perfect [nature] exists.
So how could insight conceive of an entity?195

As for Vasubandhu’s text, it not only gives a succinct, yet dazzlingly

intricate, picture of the three natures, but masterfully touches upon virtu-
ally all central Yog›c›ra notions, such as the eight consciousnesses, “mere
mind,” nonconceptual wisdom, the four yogic practices, and—through
the notion of “mastery”—the “complete change of state” from an ordinary
being’s dualistic outlook to buddhahood (for details, see below). Still, as
said above, Vasubandhu treats those notions as mere soteriological tools
to aid beings on the path in curing their delusion, all of which are to be
left behind once that purpose is accomplished, just like the famous raft on
the other side of the river. The text playfully oscillates between different
levels of discourse, such as the viewpoints of seeming and ultimate reality,
and puts forward various stances only to dissolve them shortly thereafter.
Through frequently phrasing things in ways that look blatantly paradox-
ical, alternating deconstructive with affirmative rhetoric, and making sur-
prising turns in both language and philosophical content, Vasubandhu
creates a tension in the minds of his readers that cannot but be understood
as a skillful attempt to dismantle the rigid “either-or” tendencies of dual-
istic mind. The text is also a great piece of Sanskrit poetry, its full flavor
unfortunately being impossible to mirror in English.
A brief topical outline of the text is as follows (verse numbers):

Description of the three natures (1-5)

Explaining the other-dependent nature as the eight consciousnesses
(6-9)
Profundity of the three natures (10), due to each being characterized as
• existence and nonexistence (11-13)
• duality and unity (14-16)
• not being different in terms of the characteristics of what is afflicted
and purified (17-21)
 instruction on the three natures 47

Specific order of the three natures (22), in terms of

• convention (23)
• penetrating them (24-25)
The three natures are nondual and ungraspable (26)
Illustrating the three natures through the simile of a magical illusion
(27-30)
Realizing the three natures in terms of knowing, relinquishment, and
attainment (31-34)
Arguments for the nonexistence of real outer objects (35)
The four yogic practices (36-37ab)
Fruition: enlightened qualities and the three k›yas (37cd-38)

Instruction on the Three Natures196

The Stanzas on the Three Natures, composed by master Vasubandhu, are
written [here] in New›ri characters, stemming from an ancient manuscript.

Homage to the protector Mañju[Ÿrı].

The imaginary, the other-dependent,197

And the perfect as well—
The three natures are held to be
The profound object to be understood by the wise. [1]

What appears is the other-dependent

And the way it appears is the imaginary,
Since it comes about through being subject to conditions
And since it exists as mere imagination.198 [2]

The fact of the invariable absence

Of the way it appears in what appears
Is to be known as the perfect nature,
Since it is never otherwise. [3]

What appears here? The imagination of what is nonexistent.199

How does it appear? By way of having the character of duality.
48 straight from the heart

What is its nonexistence with that [duality]?

The very nature of nonduality in it. [4]

What is the imagination of the nonexistent here?

It is the mind that imagines in certain ways what [does
not exist],
[But its] referents, which it imagines like that,
Are absolutely never found in these ways. [5]

Through being either cause or result,

The mind is held to be twofold:
The consciousness called “›laya”
And the one called “operating,”200 which is sevenfold. [6]

The first is called mind, since it is accumulated201

By the seeds of the latent tendencies of afflictions,
While the second [is called] mind,
Since it operates under various aspects.202 [7]

In brief, this false imagination

Is considered as threefold:
As maturational; likewise, as having characteristics;203
And the other as involving appearances. [8]

The first refers to the root-consciousness,

Since its character is the maturation [of latent tendencies].
The other refers to the operating consciousness,
Since it functions as cognition [with the duality] of seeing
and what is seen.204 [9]

Due to existence and nonexistence,205 due to duality and unity,

And due to the nondifference in the characteristics
Of what is afflicted and what is purified,
Those natures are held to be profound. [10]

Since it is apprehended as being existent,

While being utterly nonexistent,
 instruction on the three natures 49

Thus, the imaginary nature

Is thought of as having the characteristics of existence and
nonexistence. [11]

Since it exists as something present through delusion,

But not in the way it appears,
Thus, the other-dependent nature
Is thought of as having the characteristics of existence
and nonexistence. [12]

Since it exists as nonduality

And is the very nonexistence of duality,
Thus, the perfect nature
Is thought of as having the characteristics of existence
and nonexistence.206 [13]

Because of the dual state of the imaginary referent207

And because of its being one due to the nonexistence of that
[duality],
The nature imagined by childish beings
Is thought of as having the character of duality and unity. [14]

Because of its appearance as dualistic being

And because of its being one due to being mere delusion,
The nature called “other-dependent”
Is thought of as having the character of duality and unity. [15]

Because of being the nature of dualistic being

And because of being the single nature that is nonduality,
The perfect nature
Is thought of as having the character of duality and unity. [16]

The imaginary and the other-dependent

Should be understood as the characteristic of what is afflicted,
While the perfect is held
To be the characteristic of what is purified. [17]
50 straight from the heart

Because the nature [of the imaginary] is nonexistent duality

And because the nature [of the perfect] is the nonexistence
of that [duality],
The characteristic of the perfect not being different
From the imaginary nature is to be understood. [18]

Because the nature [of the perfect] is nonduality

And because the nature [of the imaginary] is the nonexistence of
duality,
The characteristic of the imaginary not being different
From the perfect is to be understood. [19]

Because [the other-dependent] does not exist the way it appears

And because the nature [of the perfect] is nonexistence in that
way,
This is the characteristic of the perfect not being different
From the nature called “other-dependent.” [20]

Because [the perfect] is the nature of nonexistent duality

And because [the other-dependent] does not have a nature as it
appears,
The characteristic of the other-dependent not being different
From the perfect is to be understood. [21]

[Still,] a difference in the order of these natures—

In terms of the conventional
And in terms of penetrating them—
Is taught for the sake of accomplishing [such penetration].208 [22]

The imaginary has the character of the conventional,

The other[-dependent] has the character of what creates the
conventional,
And the complete extinction of the conventional
Is held to be the other nature, [the perfect]. [23]

First, one penetrates the other-dependent,

Which has the character of the nonexistence of duality.
 instruction on the three natures 51

Next, one penetrates the mere imagination in that,

Which is nonexistent duality. [24]

Then, one penetrates the perfect in it,

The existence of the nonexistence of duality.
Thus, at that point, just the [perfect]
Is said to exist and not exist. [25]

Still, these three natures

Have the characteristics of being nondual and ungraspable,
Since [the first] is nonexistent, since [the second] is nonexistent in
the way [it appears],
And since [the third] is the nature of such nonexistence. [26]

Something magically created through the force of a mantra

May appear as if it had the character of an elephant,
But there is merely an appearing aspect there
And no elephant at all exists. [27]

The elephant is the imaginary nature,

Its appearance is the other-dependent,
And the nonexistence of the elephant there
Is held to be the perfect. [28]

Likewise, the imagination of what is nonexistent

Appears from the root-mind as having the character of duality—
There is absolutely no duality there,
But a mere appearance does exist. [29]

The root-consciousness is like the mantra,

Suchness is regarded as similar to the wood,
Imagination is to be considered like the appearing aspect of the
elephant,
And duality is like the elephant.209 [30]

Once the true reality of things is realized,

Corresponding to the order of the [three] characteristics,210
52 straight from the heart

The processes of knowing, relinquishment, and attainment

Are held to be simultaneous. [31]

Here, knowing is nonobservation,

Relinquishment is held to be nonappearance,
And observation without characteristics
Is attainment, direct realization. [32]

Through the nonobservation of duality,

The dualistic appearing aspect vanishes,
And since that vanishes, the perfect—
The nonexistence of duality—is discovered.211 [33]

This is just as the nonobservation of the elephant,

The vanishing of its appearing aspect,
And the observation of the wood
In the magical illusion are simultaneous. [34]

Because of mind being the cause for what is contrary,

Because of mind seeing vain nullities,
Because of being in accord with the three wisdoms,
And because of the effortless arising of liberation,212 [35]

Through the observation of it being merely mind,

A knowable object is not observed.
Through not observing a knowable object,
Mind is not observed [either]. [36]

Through not observing both,

The dharmadh›tu is observed.213
Through observing the dharmadh›tu,
Mastery is observed.214 [37]
 instruction on the three natures 53

Having gained mastery,

Through accomplishing the welfare of oneself and others,
The wise attain unsurpassable enlightenment
With its nature of the three k›yas. [38]

Thus ends [the Instruction on] the Three Natures, authored by the venera-
ble master Vasubandhu.