In The Questions of Gaṅgottarā, a laywoman named Gaṅgottarā leaves her home in the city of Śrāvastī and visits the Buddha Śākyamuni in Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park. The Buddha asks her from where she has come, sparking a dialogue on the true nature of things. Among other things, they discuss the fact that, from the perspective of ultimate truth, all things, including Gaṅgottarā herself, are like magical creations, and thus no one comes or goes or pursues nirvāṇa. After their dialogue, the Buddha smiles. When Ānanda asks him why, he explains that a thousand tathāgatas of the past have already taught this discourse at this same location to a thousand different laywomen, all named Gaṅgottarā; and that through it they have all achieved nirvāṇa. The sūtra concludes with a brief explanation of the reasons why the present laywoman named Gaṅgottarā received this teaching and how it should be remembered in the future.
The Translation
Homage to all buddhas and bodhisattvas!
Thus did I hear at one time. The Blessed One was dwelling in Prince Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park, near Śrāvastī. At that time a laywoman named Gaṅgottarā was living in the great city of Śrāvastī.10
One day, the laywoman Gaṅgottarā left Śrāvastī and went to Prince Jeta’s Grove, Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park.11 When she arrived, she bowed down before the Blessed One with her head at his feet and, then she sat to one side.
Once she had sat down, the Blessed One asked the laywoman Gaṅgottarā a question, even though he already knew the answer:12 “From where have you just come, Gaṅgottarā?”
“Blessed One,” Gaṅgottarā replied, “if someone were to ask a magically created being, ‘From where have you just come?’ what would be the answer?” [F.222.b]
“Gaṅgottarā,” responded the Blessed One, “a magically created being neither stands nor sits. It does not lie down. It does not come or go. It does not die. It is not born. So, how could one declare that it has come from some place?”
“Blessed One,” asked Gaṅgottarā, “are all things like magical creations?”
“It is so, Gaṅgottarā.”13
“Blessed One,” she responded, “if all things are like magical creations, why do you ask, ‘Laywoman Gaṅgottarā, from where have you just come?’ ”
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One answered, “since magically created beings14 do not go to the lower realms, and they do not go to higher realms, and they do not go to parinirvāṇa, do you, too, Gaṅgottarā, not go to the lower realms, or go to the higher realms, or go to parinirvāṇa?”
“Blessed One,” Gaṅgottarā replied, “if I truly saw the laywoman Gaṅgottarā as being different in nature from a magical creation, then it would not be appropriate for me to compare myself to a magically created being by saying, ‘The laywoman Gaṅgottarā does not go to the lower realms, does not go to the higher realms, and does not go to parinirvāṇa.’ Nevertheless, Blessed One, I do not see myself as being different in nature from a magical creation.15 Since I do not see myself in that way, Blessed One, how can I declare in this way that the laywoman Gaṅgottarā goes to the lower realms, goes to the higher realms, or goes to parinirvāṇa?
“Even with this being the case, Blessed One, it is in accordance with the presence of mental straying, mental conceit, mental agitation, and vain imagining that one thinks the thoughts, ‘I go to the lower realms,’ ‘I go to the higher realms,’ and [F.223.a] ‘I go to parinirvāṇa.’16 Blessed One, the state of nirvāṇa17 is such that it never goes to the lower realms, it never goes to the higher realms, and it never goes to parinirvāṇa. The laywoman Gaṅgottarā has a similar state, Blessed One.”18
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One responded, “have you not set out for parinirvāṇa?”19
“Blessed One,” Gaṅgottarā replied, “if someone were to ask what is not born, ‘Have you not set out for parinirvāṇa?’ what would be the answer?”
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One said, “since the phrase ‘what is not born’ is a designation for nirvāṇa, what would be the answer?”20
“Blessed One,” Gaṅgottarā replied, “are all things the same as nirvāṇa?”
“It is so, Gaṅgottarā,” he said. “All things are the same as nirvāṇa.”
“If all things are the same as nirvāṇa, then why, Blessed One, do you ask, ‘Gaṅgottarā, have you not set out for parinirvāṇa?’ Blessed One, if someone were to ask a magically created being, ‘Have you not set out for parinirvāṇa?’ what would be the answer?”21
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One responded, “this question does not have an objective basis.”22
Gaṅgottarā inquired, “Do the words that the Blessed One has spoken have some connection to an objective basis?”23
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One answered, “even though this question does not have an objective basis, nevertheless, asking it will be of great benefit to the noble sons and noble daughters who are gathered here in this assembly.24 Why is this? When the Tathāgata had not awakened directly and completely even to what is called the true nature of things, Gaṅgottarā, how much less would there be a thing arising from it that remains in parinirvāṇa?”25 [F.223.b]
“If the Tathāgata had not awakened directly and completely even to what is called the true nature of things, and even less would there be a thing arising from it,” she replied, “how did the Blessed One properly plant roots of virtue in order to achieve awakening?”26
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One responded, “a root of virtue is not something that has an objective basis. During the time when the Bodhisattva was planting the roots of virtue, he never let go of inconceivability. During the time when he was not planting them, he also did not let go of inconceivability.”27
“With respect to the inconceivable,” Gaṅgottarā asked, “Blessed One, why is the inconceivable called the inconceivable?”28
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One answered, “this teaching is not to be attained by the mind; it cannot be attained by the mind.29 Why is this? According to this teaching, when not even the mind itself has an objective basis, how much less so would the things that arise from the mind?30 The mind’s lack of an objective basis, Gaṅgottarā, is what is called the continuous stream of the inconceivable.31 That which is the continuous stream of the inconceivable is not attained. It is not fully realized. It is not known. It is not something to be experienced directly. It is not something to be attained. It is not afflicted. It is not purified. Why is this? It is because, Gaṅgottarā, the Tathāgata knows with certainty that all things are like space. All things, Gaṅgottarā, are unobstructed, just like space.”32
“Blessed One,” Gaṅgottarā asked, “if all things are unobstructed, just like space, then why does the Blessed One use verbal expressions like ‘form,’ ‘feeling,’ ‘conception,’ ‘formation,’ and ‘consciousness,’ as well as verbal expressions like ‘the aggregates,’ ‘the elements,’ and ‘the sense spheres’; ‘dependent arising’; ‘the intoxicated’ and ‘what is free of intoxication’; ‘the afflicted’ and ‘the purified’; and ‘saṃsāra’ and ‘nirvāṇa’?”33 [F.224.a]
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One replied, “just as one uses the expression ‘self’ even though the self has no objective basis at all, in precisely the same way, Gaṅgottarā, I use the expression ‘form,’ even though form has no objective basis at all. In the same way, too, I use the expressions ‘feeling,’ ‘conception,’ ‘formation,’ and ‘consciousness,’ even though consciousness has no objective basis at all. I also use the expressions ‘the aggregates,’ ‘the elements,’ and ‘the sense spheres’; ‘dependent arising’; ‘the intoxicated’ and ‘what is free of intoxication’; ‘the afflicted’ and ‘the purified’; and ‘saṃsāra’ and ‘nirvāṇa,’ even though nirvāṇa has no objective basis at all.34
“Gaṅgottarā, just as a mirage does not produce water and has no objective basis at all, in precisely the same way, Gaṅgottarā, I use the expression ‘form,’ even though form has no objective basis at all. In the same way, too, I use the expressions ‘feeling,’ ‘conception,’ ‘formation,’ and ‘consciousness,’ even though consciousness has no objective basis at all. I also use the expressions ‘the aggregates,’ ‘the elements,’ ‘the sense spheres’; ‘dependent arising’; ‘the intoxicated’ and ‘what is free of intoxication’; ‘the afflicted’ and ‘the purified’; and ‘saṃsāra’ and ‘nirvāṇa,’ even though ultimately not one of these things exists or has any objective basis.35
“One who practices the holy life without holding onto the Dharma as the final word, Gaṅgottarā, dwells in the practice of the holy life according to the well-stated Dharma and Discipline.36 [F.224.b] There are some who have self-conceit, Gaṅgottarā, who practice the holy life while thinking that their abiding by it has an objective basis, and I say that their practice of the holy life is not completely purified.37 When they hear a profound teaching such as this one on cutting off the continuous stream, those who do not practice the holy life with complete purity become terrified, and they do not become free from birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, suffering, distress, and conflict; they receive their share of suffering, I say.38
“Whether now or after I have passed away,39 Gaṅgottarā, there will be those who teach this kind of profound teaching on cutting off the continuous stream,40 and ignorant people will come to conceive the idea that they have the intent to kill them. Due to their misunderstanding, these ignorant people thus come to generate a homicidal hatred and go to the lower realms.”41
“ ‘Cutting off the continuous stream, cutting off the continuous stream,’ ” Gaṅgottarā replied. “Blessed One, what is it that you call cutting off the continuous stream?”42
“Gaṅgottarā,” the Blessed One answered, “this teaching does not cut off the continuous stream; it is not the disintegration of it; it is not the destruction of it. For this reason, it should be called cutting off the continuous stream. It should also be called the ultimate endpoint. It should be called the continuous stream of the inconceivable.”43
Then, at that moment, the Blessed One displayed a smile. Various multicolored rays of light issued from the Blessed One’s mouth in such a way that blue, yellow, red, white, rose madder, crystalline, and silvery rays of light spread throughout endless, limitless world systems, reaching as far as the Brahmā realm, and then they returned and disappeared into the Blessed One’s mouth.44
At that point, the venerable Ānanda draped his upper robe over one shoulder, knelt on his right knee, and then, joining his palms together in a gesture of respect toward the Blessed One, he paid homage to the Blessed One [F.225.a] and said this: “Blessed One, the tathāgatas do not display their smile without a reason. What is the cause? What is the condition? Why have you displayed your smile?”45
“Ānanda,” the Blessed One replied, “I have direct knowledge of the fact46 that, in this very place, one thousand tathāgatas have taught this formulation of the Dharma, always starting with a single laywoman whose name was always Gaṅgottarā. All those laywomen went forth and achieved parinirvāṇa—that is, the state of parinirvāṇa without any remaining aggregates.”47
The venerable Ānanda then asked the Blessed One, “What is the name of this formulation of the Dharma, Blessed One? How should it be remembered?”
“Ānanda,” the Blessed One replied, “you may call this formulation of the Dharma Stainless. Remember it as the one you may call Stainless.”48
When this Dharma discourse was taught, the minds of seven hundred monks and four hundred nuns were freed from the intoxicants and did not grasp any more. Then the gods of the desire realm and the gods of the form realm magically created divine flowers and sandalwood powder and strewed them over the Blessed One while saying, “It is marvelous that such a laywoman lives in the city of Śrāvastī! Not only does she converse with the Tathāgata but also her body does not become weary from it. In the very same way, this laywoman Gaṅgottarā has served victors of the past, generated roots of virtue, practiced virtue for a long time, practiced the holy life for a long time, and venerated many buddhas!”49
“So it is, divine ones,” the Blessed One said. “For a long time, she has served victors of the past, generated roots of virtue, [F.225.b] and practiced the holy life.”50
After the Blessed One had spoken these words, the laywoman Gaṅgottarā was delighted, and so was the world with its gods, humans, asuras, and gandharvas, and they rejoiced at what the Blessed One had said.
Thus concludes “The Chapter of the Questions of Gaṅgottarā,” the thirty-first of the one hundred thousand chapters of the formulation of the Dharma known as “The Noble Great Heap of Jewels.”51