Sources:
तृष्णा तावदुपादानं नास्ति चेत्संप्रधार्यते। किमक्लिष्टापि तृष्णैषां नास्ति संमोहवत् सती॥
Feeling causes craving, and they do have feeling. A mind which has objects will get stuck on one or another.
རེ་ཞིག་ཉེར་ལེན་སྲེད་པ་ནི། །
མེད་ཅེས་ངེས་པ་ཉིད་ཅེ་ན། ། སྲེད་འདི་ཉོན་མོངས་ཅན་མིན་ཡང་། །
ཀུན་རྨོངས་བཞིན་དུ་ཅི་སྟེ་མེད། །“Only for a while,” you say. “For it is certain
That the causes of rebirth, their cravings, are no more.” They have no craving, granted, through defilement, But like their ignorance, why should they not have
craving undefiled?[p.144]The Way of the Bodhisattva (2006)Blankleder, Helena, and Wulstan Fletcher (Padmakara Translation Group), trans. The Way of the Bodhisattva: A Translation of the Bodhicharyāvatāra. By Śāntideva. Rev. ed. Shambhala Classics. Boston: Shambhala Publications, 2006.
You might argue, “Here it has been determined
That they do not have any craving that appropriates.” Why should they not also have unafflicted craving,
Just as they have basic ignorance? [46]
– Mais il est sûr qu’ils ne sont plus sujets
À la soif d’appropriation. – Cette soif n’est plus émotionnelle, certes,
Mais n’obéit-elle pas encore à l’aveuglement ?
“Por poco tiempo —decís—, pues sin ninguna duda
se han deshecho del aferramiento, la causa de renacer”. Carecen del aferramiento asociado a las emociones aflictivas, pero igual que tienen ignorancia, ¿por qué no iban a tener
aferramiento no aflictivo?
If: ‘You say the craving that takes forcefully,
Is temporarily non-existent. I say it is certain.’ Although this craving is not afflicted,
Why should it not be like ignorance?
It is certain that for the time being, There is no clinging to the aggregates.
Although this clinging is not a defilement, Why would it not exist like a delusion?
རེ་ཞིག་ཉེར་ལེན་སྲེད་པ་ནི། །
མེད་ཅེས་ངེས་པ་ཉིད་ཅེ་ན། ། སྲེད་དེ་ཉོན་མོངས་ཅན་མིན་ཡང་། །
ཀུན་རྨོངས་བཞིན་དུ་ཅི་སྟེ་མེད། །
