
Chapter Ten: Refuting Misconceptions of the Self
When the inner self is not Female, male or neuter, It is only out of ignorance That you think your own self male. [10.226] When all the elements are not Male, female or neuter, How is that which depends on them Male, female or neuter? [10.227] Your self is not my self and thus there is No such self, since it is not ascertained. Does the conception not arise In relation to impermanent things? [10.228] From one rebirth to another The person changes like the body. It is illogical for yours to be Separate from the body and permanent. [10.229] Intangible things do not Produce so-called motility. Thus the life force is not Agent of the body’s movements. [10.230] Why [teach] non-violence and wonder about Conditions for a permanent self? A diamond never has to be Protected against woodworm. [10.231] If your self is permanent Because of remembering other lives, How can your body be impermanent When you see a scar previously formed? [10.232] If the self when possessing that Which has mind is a knower, By that [same argument] that which has mind would be Mindless and the person permanent. [10.233] A life force which has pleasure and so forth Appears as various as pleasure and so forth. Thus like pleasure it is not Suitable as something permanent. [10.234] If consciousness is permanent An agent is superfluous. If fire is permanent Fuel is unnecessary. [10.235] A substantial entity, unlike an action, Does not alter until it disintegrates. Thus it is improper to claim The person exists but consciousness does not. [10.236] At times one sees potential consciousness, At other consciousness itself. Because of being like molten iron The person undergoes change. [10.237] Merely [a small part with] mind is conscious But the person is as vast as space. Therefore it would seem as though Its nature is not to be conscious. [10.238] If the self is in everyone then why Does another not think of this one as “I”? It is unacceptable to say that It is obscured by itself. [10.239] There is no difference between The insane and those for whom The attributes are the creator But are never conscious. [10.240] What is more illogical Than that the attributes should always Know how to construct homes and so forth But not know how to experience them? [10.241] The active is not permanent. The ubiquitous is actionless. [10.242ab] The actionless is like the non-existent. Why do you not prefer selflessness? [10.242cd] Some see it as ubiquitous and for some The person is the mere [size of the] body. Some see it as a mere particle. The wise see it as non-existent. [10.243] How can what is permanent be harmed, Or the unharmed be liberated? Liberation is irrelevant For one whose self is permanent. [10.244] If the self exists it is inappropriate To think there is no self And false to claim one attains nirvana Through certain knowledge of reality. [10.245] If it exists at liberation It should not be non-existent before. It is explained that what is seen Without anything is its nature. [10.246] If the impermanent discontinues How could there be grass at present? If, indeed, this were true, No one would have ignorance either. [10.247] Even if the self exists Form is seen to arise from other [causes], To continue by virtue of others And to disintegrate through others. [10.248] Just as the sprout which is a product Is produced from a product, the seed, Similarly all that is impermanent Comes from the impermanent. [10.249] Since functional things arise There is no discontinuation And because they cease There is no permanence. [10.250]
|