They neither last nor disappear.
Hence all these six, the eyes and such,
Possess no nature of their own.
This is the inner emptiness. (6.182)
To give a brief quote:
Which internal things are indicated by the emptiness of the internal? The eyes, ears, nose tongue, body and mind are the internal. These do not constantly remain, nor do they disappear; eye is therefore empty of eye. Why? Because that is its nature.1
For things to constantly remain2
would mean they wouldn’t lose their nature. Since they also remain for time a before changing, it is stated that they ‘don’t just disappear.’ As these statements show, any entity having a nature would by necessity be neither constantly remaining nor simply disappearing. As stated:
A true nature originating due to causes
And conditions, is not tenable.
A true nature coming from causes
And conditions would be fabricated.
And how could it be acceptable to say
That a true nature is something created?
A true nature cannot be something created,
And cannot not rely on anything else.3
One may ask whether a nature as specified by the Master in the Treatise exists as it is asserted by the Master? As the Illustrious One taught it:
Whether the tathāgatas appear or not, the nature of reality remains the same.
When it says the nature of reality, whatsoever that may be, it is the nature of the eyes and so forth. And what is their nature? It is that which is unfabricated and not reliant on others, the nature itself that is realised by a mind that is free from the cataracts of ignorance. And if one asks whether this is something existent or non-existent? If it doesn’t exist, for what purpose do the bodhisattvas practice the path of the perfections? It is precisely in order to realise this reality of things that the bodhisattvas undergo all of these immense hardships. As is stated:
O son of good family. The ultimate does not arise, does not cease, does not disappear, does not come, does not go, and cannot be expressed in words. It cannot be put into words and cannot be conceptualised. The ultimate, O son of good family, is something ineffable known through the discriminative wisdom of noble ones who are at peace. The ultimate, O son of good family, is unaffected by whether tathāgatas appear or not; by whether bodhisattvas shave off their hair and beards, don the saffron robes, leave householder life with genuine faith and go forth into homelessness for the sake of it; nor after having gone forth by their degree of diligence they demonstrate, as if their hair or robes were on fire, in order to attain this reality of things. If, son of good family, the ultimate did not exist, a life of purity would be meaningless, and it would be pointless for the tathāgatas to appear. Since the ultimate exists, bodhisattvas can be said to be knowledgeable about the ultimate.4
Title
Chapter 1: Pramuditā
