宗鏡錄 57

English (machine translation) 57

Language: English

57.1

Compiled by Yanshou, Chan Master Zhijue, Abbot of Huiri Yongming Monastery.

Question: Now, regarding the three kinds of consciousness explained in the *Laṅkāvatārasūtra*—namely, the true consciousness, the manifesting consciousness, and the consciousness that discriminates objects—how are these three consciousnesses distinguished among the eight consciousnesses?

57.3

Answer: 'True' refers to original enlightenment; 'manifesting' refers to the eighth [consciousness]; the remaining seven are all named 'consciousness that discriminates objects'. Although the seventh consciousness does not perceive external dust [objects], because it perceives the eighth, it is named 'discriminating objects'. 'True refers to original enlightenment' means the nature of the eight consciousnesses. In sūtras, where nine consciousnesses are explained, positing the name of a ninth consciousness apart from the eight consciousnesses, that is precisely the true consciousness. If subsumed according to nature, it is also not separate from the eight consciousnesses, because nature is omnipresent.

57.4

Question: Merely explaining the eight consciousnesses, such as the ālayavijñāna, already manifests conventional truth. Why speak of eleven kinds of consciousness? Furthermore, pointing ultimately to what they return to, there is only the single true nature. Why then speak of the various consciousnesses in broad and condensed terms?

57.5

Answer: Revealing nature by means of characteristics is not without reason; gathering the branches to return to the root naturally has its ground. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha states: 'If one does not definitively clarify that all dharmas are consciousness only, the true nature cannot be manifested. If one does not fully explain the eleven consciousnesses, the explanation of conventional truth will not be exhaustive. If one only explains the first five consciousnesses, one will only grasp the root of conventional truth, and not grasp the differentiated meanings of conventional truth. If the explanation of conventional truth is not comprehensive, the true consciousness will not be clear. If the true is not clear, then conventionalities will not be completely eliminated. Therefore, one fully explains the eleven consciousnesses, comprehensively encompassing conventional truth.' Thus, understanding that conventionalities lack inherent nature is precisely to penetrate true emptiness. Although true emptiness is empty, it does not destroy characteristics; although conventional existence exists, its substance is constantly empty. Hence we know that the ultimate truth, which is nonexistent according to conditions, is constantly manifested without being distinct from phenomena; conventional truth, which is not nonexistent in quiescence, is constantly established without being distinct from the real. The two consciousnesses, three consciousnesses, eight consciousnesses, nine consciousnesses, eleven consciousnesses, and so forth cited above do not depart from the source of the one mind. Therefore the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'Among all gates of the pāramitās, the Buddha-citta is foremost.' It also says: 'The Buddha's words take citta as the source, and having no gate as the Dharma-gate.' That which is called the 'source' refers to the real locus of the mind. In terms of the nature of its true mind, in accordance with its meaning, the two gates of substance and function are opened, which is identical to the Awakening of Faith establishing the gate of the mind as tathatā and the gate of the mind as arising and ceasing. Tathatā is substance; arising and ceasing is function. However, the various consciousnesses do not depart from the two minds of substance and function: first, the mind of substance, which is the quiescent mind, namely the substance of the ninth consciousness; second, the mind of function, which is the arising and ceasing mind, namely the function of the preceding eight consciousnesses. When substance and function are hidden or manifested, they are spoken of as two minds. Because function is precisely substance, arising and ceasing is precisely non-arising and non-ceasing; because substance is precisely function, non-arising and non-ceasing is precisely arising and ceasing. Because arising and ceasing has no inherent nature, function is not multiple; because quiescence accords with conditions, substance is not one. Being neither multiple nor one, substance and function are constantly merged; yet being both one and multiple, substance and function are constantly manifest. The nature of consciousness is substance; the characteristics of consciousness are function. Substance and function mutually complete each other, and all return to the mirror of the source. The Commentary on the Treatise on Consciousness-Only says: 'The nature of consciousness and the characteristics of consciousness—there are none that do not return to citta. The mind-king and mental factors are both called consciousness-only.' This means that the perfectly accomplished nature is the nature of consciousness, and the dependent nature is the characteristics of consciousness; neither departs from the mind. Alternatively, all unconditioned dharmas are called the nature of consciousness, while the states of attainment and so forth, as well as the transformations of matter and so on, are the characteristics of consciousness; none depart from the mind. That which is associated with consciousness is called the mental factors; the intrinsic nature of consciousness is called the mind-king. The mind-king is supreme and is called the master. Gathering the mental factors to follow the mind is called 'returning to the mind.' Gathering the states of attainment and so forth, together with the transformations of matter and so on, to return to the darśanabhāga and so on, is called 'eradicating characteristics.' Nature and characteristics are not separate from each other, and are collectively called consciousness-only.

57.6

Question: If objects do not depart from consciousness and consciousness does not depart from objects, why say only 'consciousness-only' and not call it 'object-only'?

57.7

Answer: Although they mutually generate each other, objects are transformed from consciousness. Furthermore, an ancient commentary explains: Objects only arise through discrimination by the mind; because they arise from the mind, it is called 'consciousness-only.' Consciousness does not arise through discrimination by objects; because it is not from objects, it cannot be called 'object-only.'

57.8

Question: The mind is the sovereign condition for objects; objects arise dependent on the mind, hence it is called 'consciousness-only.' Objects are the object-condition for the mind; the mind arises dependent on objects, so should it not be called 'object-only'?

57.9

Answer: Grasping at objects apart from the mind is illusory; to ward off the false mind, it is called 'consciousness-only.' Awakening to the selflessness of the mind frees one from sinking [in saṃsāra]; it is not termed 'object-only' with reference to the two conditions. Furthermore, whether there is an object or no object, both are one's own mind, and that mind arises in all cases: First, if the mind arises with reference to an existent object, that is precisely the nimittabhāga of one's own consciousness. All real objects do not depart from the mind that cognizes them; outside one's own consciousness, there is truly no object. Second, if the mind arises with reference to a nonexistent object, as when the solitary dispersed mental consciousness cognizes the past, the future, sky-flowers, rabbit horns, and all nonexistent dharmas, the mind also arises. As the Commentary on the Hundred Dharmas states: 'The ancient view that deliberation does not arise when taking nonexistence as an object is not correct.'

57.10

Question: Why is it not correct?

57.11

Answer: Because when one cognizes sky-flowers, rabbit horns, and all nonexistent dharmas, the mind also arises. Why then say that deliberation does not arise when taking nonexistence as an object? Therefore, we know that there is the nimittabhāga of the internal mind as a solitary mental image. With respect to the darśanabhāga, this nimittabhāga also constitutes the meaning of the object-condition. If there were no nimittabhāga of the internal mind, that mind would not arise. The Tang Tripiṭaka Master said: 'Though the object is not real, deliberation arises; this proves that there is only consciousness.' Although the imaginary characteristic is not real, it is not the case that there is no nimittabhāga of the internal mind capable of inducing and generating the mind. From this, there is a fourfold analysis: 1. If there is no image but there is external substance, the mind does not arise. 2. If there is an image but no external substance, the mind can arise. 3. If both image and substance are present, the arising of the mind is obvious. 4. If both image and substance are absent, the mind can also arise, which is precisely the fundamental wisdom realizing tathatā. The Treatise on Consciousness-Only says: 'An existent object induces and generates the mind.' If the ultimate principle serves as the object, it can induce and generate the mind of wisdom; if conventional truth serves as the object, it can induce and generate the mind of consciousness. Thus there has never been an object without mind, nor has there ever been a mind without an object.

57.12

Question: Among the eight consciousnesses, in terms of the stage of the path from the first bhūmi onward, how many consciousnesses become undefiled?

57.13

Answer: An ancient master explained: Only the sixth and seventh consciousnesses become undefiled. The sixth is the sixth consciousness: in the gate of the first bhūmi, along with twenty-two mental factors, it becomes the wondrously observing wisdom. The seventh is the seventh consciousness: along with twenty-two mental factors, it becomes the equality wisdom. Associated with these two classes of wisdom, both are free from obstruction and defilement, and thus are called undefiled. As for the five consciousnesses, the eighth, and so forth, they are definitively defiled.

57.14

Question: How does the sixth manage to become undefiled?

57.15

Answer: When entering the undefiled mind on the first bhūmi, it severs the seeds, manifestations, and karmic traces of the two kinds of discriminative obstructions; therefore it is undefiled.

57.16

Question: The sixth can sever afflictions, and by severing afflictions it becomes undefiled. The seventh cannot sever afflictions; for what reason does it also become undefiled?

57.17

Answer: The seventh consciousness is the base relied upon by the sixth, and the sixth is the consciousness that relies upon it. Since the relying consciousness has become undefiled, the seventh that is relied upon also becomes undefiled. When the sixth enters the contemplation of the two kinds of emptiness—of persons and dharmas—the innate grasping at self and dharmas in the seventh consciousness are subdued in their manifest activity so that they do not arise; therefore the seventh becomes undefiled.

57.18

Question: Why is the eighth defiled?

57.19

Answer: The eighth is the master of total retribution, holding seeds and receiving perfuming. If it were to become undefiled while still on the causal stage, all the defiled and impure seeds would be lost and dispersed; one would immediately become a Buddha, so what need would there be for two more kalpas of cultivation?

57.20

Question: Since the first five are not the master of total retribution, why do they not become undefiled?

57.21

Answer: The first five faculties are the direct nimittabhāga of the eighth. Since the eighth, which transforms them, is defiled, the five faculties that are transformed are also defiled. Since the five faculties that are relied upon are still defiled, the five consciousnesses that rely upon them also become defiled. As distinguished above according to sūtras and treatises, the various consciousnesses differ in opening and combining, but all rely on substance and function. In terms of substance, it is differentiated without differentiation, because substance completely embodying function does not obstruct function; in terms of function, it is differentiated yet without differentiation, because function completely embodying substance does not lose substance. Just as taking the ocean as waves does not lose the ocean, and taking the waves as the ocean does not obstruct the waves. Being neither existent nor nonexistent, only then does one fathom the nature of consciousness; being neither one nor different, one can investigate the source of the mind. As an ancient master said: In terms of the gates of the various consciousnesses, although their oneness or multiplicity is not fixed, all are the dependent origination of substance and function, with the root and branches mutually subsuming each other. The root is the ninth consciousness; the branches are the five consciousnesses. Moving from the root toward the branches, it is quiescent yet constantly functioning; moving from the branches toward the root, it is functioning yet constantly quiescent. Being quiescent yet constantly functioning, it is still without stagnation; being functioning yet constantly quiescent, it is active without confusion. Being still without stagnation, tathatā is dependent origination; being active without confusion, dependent origination is tathatā. Because tathatā is dependent origination, there is no nirvāṇa that is not saṃsāra, which is the eighth and ninth being the sixth and seventh. Because dependent origination is tathatā, there is no saṃsāra that is not nirvāṇa, which is the sixth and seventh being the eighth and ninth. Because there is no saṃsāra that is not nirvāṇa, the dharmadhātu is entirely saṃsāra. Because there is no nirvāṇa that is not saṃsāra, the dharmadhātu is entirely nirvāṇa. Because the dharmadhātu is entirely nirvāṇa, saṃsāra is not disordered. Because the dharmadhātu is entirely saṃsāra, nirvāṇa is not motionless quiescence. Saṃsāra is not disordered: sentient beings are precisely the Buddha. Nirvāṇa is not motionless quiescence: the Buddha is precisely sentient beings. Therefore, when the dharmadhātu is contrary, one says that nirvāṇa is saṃsāra, which is principle functioning in accordance with sentiment; when the dharmadhātu is compliant, one says that saṃsāra is nirvāṇa, which is sentiment functioning in accordance with principle. When clarified in this way, it is said that sentiment is not outside principle, and principle is not outside sentiment. Because sentiment is not outside principle, one speaks of the sixth and seventh as the eighth and ninth on the basis of reality. That which is real is substance. Because principle is not outside sentiment, one speaks of the eighth and ninth as the sixth and seventh on the basis of the provisional. That which is provisional is function. Because provisional and real are unobstructed, both persons and dharmas are empty. Because substance and function are unobstructed, emptiness has nothing to be emptied. Because both persons and dharmas are empty, it is called absolute. Because emptiness has nothing to be emptied, it is called wondrous function. Explaining it in this way is also words to dismiss sentiment. Concerning its utmost reality, it cannot be grasped through names and characteristics; concerning its utmost limit, it cannot be distinguished through the two truths. Because it cannot be grasped through names and characteristics, it is not something that words and images can express; because it cannot be distinguished through the two truths, it is not something that existence and nonexistence can state. Therefore it is said: 'The ultimate principle is without words; the worthy and holy remain silent. The path of speech is cut off; the place of the mind's operation is extinguished.' It can only be met with the spirit; it cannot be sought with the mind.

57.22

Question: The ocean of awakening is a clear source, the one mind serenely quiescent. How do the waves of the various consciousnesses initially arise?

57.23

Answer: Although we speak of waves of consciousness, the place where they arise has nowhere from which it comes. Being beginningless and unborn, one can exhaust the nature of consciousness. It is merely called unawareness (avidyā): suddenly thoughts arise, just as on a clear wave wind abruptly stirs up. Neither going out nor entering in, surging billows flood heaven; neither inside nor outside, the mad mind of inverted views pervades its objects. The Awakening of Faith says: 'Because one does not know the oneness of the true Dharma, the mind does not correspond; suddenly thought moves, which is termed avidyā.' This reveals fundamental avidyā: it is extremely subtle; there is as yet no distinction between subjective and objective [factors] or between principal mind and mental factors, and thus it is called 'non-corresponding'—it is not the same as the correspondence of the principal mind and mental factors. Only this avidyā is the origin of defiled dharmas; being extremely subtle, there is no other defiled dharma that can serve as its root, which is why it says 'suddenly thought arises.' Prior to avidyā, there is no other separate dharma to serve as the root of its initial accumulation; therefore it is said to be 'beginningless,' which is precisely the meaning of 'sudden'—it does not speak of suddenly arising in terms of a temporal period, because it has no beginning. Furthermore, the Shi Moheyan lun says: '"Because of not knowing the oneness of the tathatā-dharma in accordance with reality, the unaware mind arises": this shows the causes and conditions for the arising of fundamental unawareness. Due to what causes and conditions does fundamental unawareness arise and exist? Because of "not being in accordance [with reality]," it arises and exists. In which dharmas is it not in accordance? It means being not in accordance with three dharmas. What is the meaning of "not being in accordance"? It means the sense of contravening and opposing. What are the three dharmas? The first is the single dharma of knowing in accordance with reality; the second is the single dharma of tathatā; the third is the single dharma of the one mind. These are called the three. The dharma of knowing in accordance with reality refers to all-encompassing awakening, namely the discerning wisdom. The dharma of tathatā refers to the principle of equality, namely the discerned objective realm. The dharma of the one mind refers to the one dharmadhātu, namely the underlying substance. Contravening all these three dharmas, avidyā originally arises. Therefore it is said: "Because of not knowing the oneness of the tathatā-dharma in accordance with reality, the unaware mind arises." These three dharmas all abide in oneness and are never separated; hence they are generally named "one."' Furthermore, that treatise says: 'Through the perfuming power of avidyā, the unaware mind moves, initially forming its karma-consciousness. Based on this karma-consciousness, it further gives rise to the evolving consciousness and so on.' The commentary on the treatise states: 'The initial unawareness is called the first, the karma-aspect: there is no distinction between seer and seen, and the principal mind and mental factors cannot be differentiated; there is only the sense of subtle movement and hidden flow, and therefore it is named karma. Such flowing movement is caused solely by unawareness. The second is the evolving aspect: taking the thought of the karma-aspect as its support, it evolves into an active perceiver, flowing to become the aspect of cognition. The third is the manifesting aspect: taking cognitive evolving as its support, the objective realms of conceptual elaboration fully appear before it, and the objective perceived aspects (nimittabhāga) are completely laid out. Dependent upon this seeing aspect (darśanabhāga), those perceived aspects manifest.' Moreover, as for the moving aspect: movement is the karma-consciousness, whose principle is extremely subtle. This means the intrinsically awakened mind, due to the wind of avidyā, stirs slightly in its entirety. The aspect of slight stirring is not yet able to cognize external objects; precisely because of unawareness, it means that unawareness is generated from intrinsic awakening, which constitutes the karma-aspect. This is like slight ripples on the sea, stirring faintly from stillness, but not yet shifting from the ocean's fundamental mass. As for the evolving aspect: relying on the power of avidyā to support the karma-aspect, it turns into an active perceiver, possessing the function of seeing, which arises toward the outside; this is called the evolving aspect. Although there is an evolving aspect, it cannot yet manifest the objective aspects of the five sense data. It is like the waves on the sea, relying on the power of the wind to further aid the slight movement, whereupon waves clash and arise in motion. As for the manifesting aspect: from the evolving aspect, the manifesting aspect is formed, and only then are there material sense data, mountains, rivers, the great earth, the receptacle world, and so on. The Humane King Prajñā Sūtra says: 'At that time the World-Honoured One addressed King Prasenajit: "You previously asked: 'By observing what characteristics should one abide?' Bodhisattva-mahāsattvas should observe like this: using an illusory body to view what is illusory, properly abiding in equality, without this or that. Observing in this manner, transform and benefit sentient beings. However, all sentient beings, in the first moment of consciousness throughout distant kalpas, are distinct from wood and stone; having born-defilement and born-purity, each is capable of being the root of immeasurable, innumerable defiled and pure consciousnesses. From that first moment across inexpressible kalpas up to the final moment of the Vajrasamādhi, there are inexpressibly inexpressible consciousnesses that generate the two dharmas of matter and mind for sentient beings. Matter is called the form skandha, and mind is called the four [mental] skandhas; all are of an accumulative nature and obscure the true reality."' An ancient commentary says: 'Regarding "the first moment of consciousness is distinct from wood and stone": some say that the initial consciousness refers to the eighth consciousness at the very first moment in the state of rebirth in whatever realm of existence one takes birth. Consciousness possesses cognitive reflection, so it is distinct from wood and stone. Some say that the initial consciousness is as the Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: "Consciousnesses have three kinds of aspects, namely the evolving aspect, the karma-aspect, and the true aspect." The "true aspect" means the true mind of intrinsic awakening; not relying on false conditions, it is named its own true aspect. The "karma-aspect" means fundamental avidyā, which stirs stillness and makes it move, movement being the karma-consciousness, which is extremely subtle. The "evolving aspect" is the aspect of seeing; based on the preceding karma-aspect, it evolves into an active perceiver, yet although it has an active perceiver, it cannot yet reveal the objective realm. The "manifesting aspect" is the aspect of the objective realm; based on the preceding evolving aspect, it is able to manifest objects.' It also says: 'Instantaneously distinguishing and knowing the body manifested from one's own mind, and the objective realms established for the body's enjoyment, these in turn are the sense faculties with the body, the external receptacle world, and the five sense data such as form; because they manifest spontaneously at all times, these are the three subtleties, which are the fundamental consciousness itself. The initial karma-consciousness is taken as the beginning, as they are sequenced according to the approach of origination. Furthermore, in the time of distant kalpas, there is no initial beginning; past and future have no substantial entity; in perfuming, the false thought of the mind alone is the beginning, because it arises in contravention of the true. Moreover, arising from stillness into movement is named "karma"; going from inside toward outside is named "evolution." The nature of tathatā cannot be increased or decreased; it is called the "true aspect," and is also called the "true consciousness." This true consciousness is itself the three natures of karma, evolving, and manifesting, namely the nature of spiritual comprehension; not being the same as empty space, it is generically called "consciousness." It is also called the "own-characteristic," because it does not rely on another to be accomplished; it is also called the "characteristic of wisdom," because its nature is to awaken and illumine. Therefore it is said: "The true mind of intrinsic awakening does not rely on false conditions," because the substance of the true mind is intrinsic awakening itself; it is not the aspect of movement or evolution, but is the nature of awakening. Furthermore, the commentary explains: '"The consciousness of the first moment is distinct from wood and stone": this means that a single thought of consciousness possesses sentience and sensation, and therefore is distinct from wood and stone. That is, it reveals that within the previous thought there is the final mind [of the intermediate existence]; the red and white impurities seen by it are identical to external receptacle kinds of wood and stone. When this consciousness arises, it grasps them to form a body, and hence it is distinct from wood and stone.'

57.24

Question: Since distant kalpas are beginningless, why is it called the 'initial consciousness'?

57.25

Answer: Past and future have no substantial entity; momentary perfuming belongs only to the present. The very time when false thought arises in the present, with false thought contravening the true, is called the 'initial consciousness.' It does not mean that there was a consciousness originally arising in the past that is called the 'initial consciousness.' Hence we know that horizontally encompassing all places and vertically extending through limitless time, everything is just the one mind of the present moment; there is no other principle. Therefore, the Lotus Sūtra says: 'I view distant kalpas as if they were today.' Then the sentiments concerning the three periods of time vanish, tallying with the correct norm of timelessness; the one true path appears, verifying the perfect source of mere-consciousness.

57.26

Question: The sūtra explains that 'the consciousness of the first moment is distinct from wood and stone; having born-defilement and born-purity, each is capable of being the root of immeasurable, innumerable defiled and pure consciousnesses. From that first moment across inexpressible kalpas up to the final moment of the Vajra[samādhi], there are inexpressibly inexpressible consciousnesses that generate the two dharmas of matter and mind for sentient beings.' Thus there is defilement and purity, arising and ceasing. In terms of the gate of arising and ceasing, how many kinds of arising and ceasing does this consciousness have?

57.27

Answer: The gate of the true conforms with the nature, marvelously joining with the unborn; worldly characteristics follow conditions, seemingly dividing into arising and ending. The Laṅkāvatārasūtra says: 'Bodhisattva-mahāsattva Mahāmati addressed the Buddha, saying: "World-Honoured One, how many kinds of arising, abiding, and ceasing do the consciousnesses have?" The Buddha told Mahāmati: "Consciousness has two kinds of arising, abiding, and ceasing that are not known by deliberation: namely, flowing arising, abiding, and ceasing; and characteristic arising, abiding, and ceasing."' An ancient commentary says: 'As for "flowing": it designates only the eighth [consciousness]; its three aspects are subtle and hidden, and seeds and actual manifestations are uninterrupted, so it is called "flowing." Conditioned by avidyā, it initially gives rise to the karma-consciousness, and hence is said to arise. Continuing across long kalpas, it is called abiding. When reaching the Vajrasamādhi, in a single thought of equal awakening, fundamental avidyā is severed; this is called the ceasing of the flowing. As for "characteristic arising, abiding, and ceasing": it refers to the remaining seven consciousnesses; mind and objects are coarse and apparent, so they are called "characteristics." Although the seventh conditions the eighth and is subtle compared to the sixth, it possesses the four afflictions, so it is also said to be coarse. Relying on that manifesting consciousness, its own seeds, and various objects, when conditions combine and generate the seventh, it is described as characteristic arising. Perfuming through long kalpas is called characteristic abiding. Proceeding from branch to root, it is gradually subdued and severed; upon reaching the completion of the seventh stage (bhūmi), it is called characteristic ceasing. Based on the former arising and ceasing, the basis of delusion and enlightenment is established; based on the latter arising and ceasing, the basis of defilement and purity is established. The latter is short and the former is long; functionally they are divided into two distinct types. These are precisely flowing arising, abiding, and ceasing, and characteristic arising, abiding, and ceasing.' Therefore, when seawater encounters wind, it turns into the characteristics of waves; when the water of the mind encounters objects, it secretly becomes a flowing arising. Preceding waves draw along subsequent waves, stirring the ocean without cessation; new thoughts continue old thoughts, surging across the ocean of the mind in constant rising. From this, the clear source is turbidly disturbed, and the ocean of awakening is darkened. One thereby knows that due to the true, the false arises, through unawareness of the stirring of avidyā—just as when water becomes waves, it is entirely the beating of the external wind. Internal and external combining in harmony, causes and conditions sprout forth; thereupon the mind of the active seer is formed, and immediately the observed objective realm appears. Because of illumination, the mirror of wisdom abruptly arises; because of wisdom, the attractive and repulsive are distinguished. From this, the sentiments of taking and discarding divide, and the mind of love and hate alters. Regarding the objects of the five sense data, attachment is firm and solid; toward the six emotional faculties, it continues uninterruptedly. Because of this, one sinks without sorrow beneath the waves of the river of attachment, and burns without fear amidst the flames of desire. Willingly one undergoes the extreme suffering of the black city, unaware and uncomprehending; staking one's life, one craves the fleeting glory of the burning dream-house, difficult to sober up from and difficult to awaken to. If one can comprehend the initial single thought—whence it arises and ceases—and abruptly enter the unborn, returning to the original true awakening, then dust upon dust is silenced and extinguished, so that the cage of the six destinies can hardly restrain one; thought after thought is empty and profound, so that the netting of the nine fetters ceases to ensnare. It is just like the great ocean when the wind ceases: not a slight ripple arises; examining the aspect of movement, it is fundamentally empty; seeing that what is arisen from conditions has no substantial entity, one exhausts the source of the watery nature, crystal-clear and cool, and the myriad phenomena stand out radiantly clear. Therefore the Bhadrakalpika-samādhi-sūtra says: 'Comprehending all as empty is called the one mind.'

57.28

Question: When searching out the profound in the Mirror of the Source, how is consciousness explained?

57.29

Answer: It is simply because the nature of consciousness is profound and obscure, difficult to fathom from beginning to end; only a Buddha can fully comprehend it, while those of lower stages cannot know it. Taking formlessness and tracklessness as the root of the myriad existences, uniquely deep and wondrous, it serves as the source of all sages. As the Sūtra of the Bodhisattva Dwelling in the Womb, in the chapter "Investigating Consciousness in the Five Destinies," states:
'At that time, the World-Honoured One wished to demonstrate the destinies to which consciousness tends: worldly consciousness, supramundane consciousness, conditioned consciousness, unconditioned consciousness, defiled consciousness, undefiled consciousness, flower-consciousness, fruit-consciousness, retributive consciousness, non-retributive consciousness, deva consciousness, nāga consciousness, ghost, spirit, asura, garuḍa, kiṃnara, mahoraga, human, and non-human consciousness, extending upward to the consciousness of the twenty-eight heavens and downward to the consciousness of the Avīci Hell without salvation. At that time, the World-Honoured One, right from within the womb, manifested interlaced skeletons filling the trichiliocosm. The Buddha said to Ajita, "Can you distinguish the consciousness of these skeletons?" He replied, "I cannot distinguish it. Why is that? Because I have not attained complete penetration and my power of practice has not reached it." The Buddha said to the Bodhisattva Maitreya, "In this heaven of yours, have you not attained supernormal powers?" Maitreya said to the Buddha, "There are those who have accomplished them, and those who have not accomplished them." The Buddha said to Maitreya, "Observe these interlaced skeletons, and enable all the assembly to know where their consciousness has gone, distinguishing and settling it so they have no doubts or hesitations." At that time, Bodhisattva Maitreya rose from his seat, held a diamond divine staff of seven jewels in his hand, stirred the interlaced skeletons, and listening to the sound of those bones, immediately said to the Buddha, "When this person's life ended, he had abundant fetters of anger; his consciousness has fallen among nāgas." Next he stirred the bones again: "In this person's previous life, he was fully equipped with the ten good tracks of practice; he has attained birth in the heavens." Next he stirred the bones again: "In this person's previous life, he broke the precepts and violated monastic discipline; he has been born in hell." In this manner he stirred the bones—defiled and undefiled, conditioned and unconditioned, from the twenty-eight heavens down to the hell without salvation—knowing where the consciousness tended, good and evil karmic retributions, and the retributions of white and black actions. There was one complete body of relics without any deficiency. At that time, Maitreya stirred it with his staff, searching for this consciousness, but could not know its place at all. Stirring it three times in this way, he stepped forward and said to the Buddha, "This person's consciousness cannot be known at all. Could it be a Tathāgata who entered nirvāṇa?" The Buddha said to Maitreya, "You will succeed to the position of a Buddha; in a future age, you will become a Buddha and achieve the unexcelled path. Why do you stir the relics and yet not know the place of the consciousness?" Maitreya said to the Buddha, "The Buddha is inconceivable and immeasurable, beyond the realm that our kind can calculate. Now I have doubts; I only wish that the World-Honoured One would explain it. I am able to know all the consciousnesses of the five destinies, where their good and evil tend; I dare not have any doubt. Yet regarding the Tathāgata, now these relics are without any deficiency; please speak of this consciousness so that we may know it." The Buddha said to Maitreya, "The relics of past, future, and present Buddhas are widely dispersed; it is not a realm that can be distinguished by your kind. Why is that? These relics are my relics. How could you investigate and fathom the consciousness of a Tathāgata? Now I shall distinguish for you: the Tathāgata's superior, middling, and inferior consciousnesses up to sarvajñatā are each different. Bodhisattvas of the First Abode have not yet established faculties, virtues, and powers, though they have attained supernormal powers. Bodhisattvas of the Second Abode, observing with the divine eye, know where consciousnesses tend, whether stages are retrogressing or non-retrogressing, and also observe those in the desire realm, form realm, and formless realm; or again, they observe those born in Buddha-lands in the eastern direction as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, making offerings to the Buddhas and upholding the precepts without hindrance, and also know the number of kalpas until their prediction, whether one kalpa, two kalpas, or up to hundreds of thousands of koṭis of kalpas. Or there are bodhisattvas who, at the stage of the Third Abode, observe relics and know where the consciousness tends in nirvāṇa with remainder and nirvāṇa without remainder, yet they do not see the practices or the destinations of consciousness of the Fourth Abode. Bodhisattvas of the Fourth Abode see the dharmas of consciousness of the First, Second, and Third Abodes, yet they do not see where the consciousness-dharmas of the relics of the Fifth Abode tend; and so on, until only a Buddha knows the thoughts of a Buddha's consciousness.' Furthermore, a verse states: / 'Consciousness is a formless dharma, / taking the five great elements as its home. / Distinguishing good and evil conduct, / its departures and arrivals distinguish the true from the false. / Consciousness indicates the place of good paths, / permanently arriving at the peaceful and secure path. / Consciousness is the sixth king, / the remaining great elements are completely inferior to it.'

57.30

Question: Regarding the two names 'citta' and 'consciousness,' what is their superiority and inferiority?

57.31

Answer: Citta is the nature of tathatā of the tathāgatagarbha-citta. Consciousness is what is produced from citta. There is not a single dharma that does not arise from the nature of the true citta. Therefore, the Śūraṅgamasūtra states: 'Whatever dharmas are produced are only what is manifested by citta.' Citta is the root and is thus superior; consciousness is what is dependent and is thus inferior. As the Commentary on the Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment says: 'Produced dharmas are fundamentally non-existent; everything is consciousness-only. Consciousness is like an illusion or a dream; it is merely the one mind.'

57.32

Question: Supposing consciousness has no substance of its own, how can it be citta?

57.33

Answer: Because consciousness is fundamentally constituted by citta. Therefore, if consciousness lacks substance, it is simply the one mind. How is this different from objects being produced from consciousness, such that objects are gathered back into consciousness? If we discuss it comprehensively: fundamentally there is only the one mind; citta transforms into consciousness, and consciousness transforms into the various objects. For this reason, objects are gathered back into consciousness, and consciousness is gathered back into citta.

57.34

Question: Previously, the characteristics of consciousness have been extensively explained. What is wisdom?

57.35

Answer: Distinction is consciousness; non-distinction is wisdom. As the Mahāratnakūṭasūtra states: 'The Buddha said: What is called "consciousness" refers to being able to distinguish form known by the eye, sound known by the ear, fragrance known by the nose, taste known by the tongue, touch known by the body, and dharmas known by the mind; this is called consciousness. What is called "wisdom" is tranquil within and does not operate externally; relying solely on wisdom, it does not produce distinctions or diverse distinctions with respect to any single dharma; this is called wisdom. Furthermore, Śāriputra: arising from sensory objects is called consciousness; arising from mental attention is called consciousness; arising from distinction is called consciousness. Being free from grasping and clinging, having no objective support, having no distinguishing, and having no discrimination is called wisdom. Furthermore, Śāriputra: what is called consciousness abides in conditioned dharmas. Why is that? In unconditioned dharmas, consciousness cannot operate. If one can comprehend unconditioned dharmas, this is called wisdom.' Again, a verse in the Samādhirājasūtra states: / 'What is not tranquil is conception; / what is tranquil and extinguished is wisdom. / If one knows the self-nature of conception, / one is immediately freed from all conceptions. / If there is a conception that can be dispelled, / then that is still conception. / One who practices the conceptual proliferation of conception, / such a person is not freed from conception. / If a person generates this thought: / By whom was this conception arisen? / Who can realize this conception? / Who can extinguish this conception? / The dharmas that give rise to conceptions / cannot be found by any Buddha. / It is precisely here that there is / non-self, free from grasping and clinging. / If that mind is not produced, / by what means could conception arise? / If the mind attains liberation, / it will have no means to arise. / If one realizes liberation, / the mind is then inconceivable. / Because the mind is inconceivable, / it accomplishes the inconceivable. / Formerly I made this resolution: / having stably dwelt in the mind-ground, / abandoning all minds, / I vow to accomplish the inconceivable / retribution of pure dharmas, / and behold the unconditioned. / In a single thought one can know / the thoughts of all sentient beings. / Sentient beings are precisely citta; / citta is precisely the Tathāgata. / The inconceivable of all Buddhas / is clearly manifested in this citta.'

57.36

Question: The wondrous meaning of the citta-king and the true source of the eight consciousnesses have revealed the correct principle with perfect clarity, based on the sacred teachings as the definitive standard. Principle and phenomena have both been set forth, completely severing subtle doubts. How is the gate of mental factors to be expounded?

57.37

Answer: This explains the second [category], the dharmas associated with citta. These mental factors have six categories, comprising fifty-one dharmas in total: five omnipresent, five specific, eleven wholesome, six fundamental afflictions, twenty secondary afflictions, and four indeterminate. The 'omnipresent' are omnipresent in four kinds of all-inclusiveness. The four kinds of all-inclusiveness are: first, all-inclusiveness of nature, which refers to the three natures: first, wholesome; second, unwholesome; third, indeterminate, and so forth. Second, all-inclusiveness of ground, which refers to the nine grounds: first, the ground of the five destinies of the desire realm; the four grounds of the four dhyānas of the form realm; and the four grounds of the four formless attainments of the formless realm. Third, all-inclusiveness of time: 'time' refers to the very same single kṣaṇa; these five mental factors, such as mental attention, all arise simultaneously, hence it is called all-inclusiveness of time. Fourth, all-inclusiveness of coexistence: 'coexistence' means being present with all cittas and so forth, coexisting with the eight consciousnesses. The meaning is: when these five omnipresent factors, such as mental attention, arise together with the citta-kings of the eight consciousnesses, they must have the five factors corresponding simultaneously. Furthermore, whenever the eight consciousnesses arise together, they all possess the five omnipresent factors, hence it is called all-inclusiveness of coexistence. Thus the four kinds of all-inclusiveness are what is traversed and what is pervaded; the five factors such as contact are what can traverse and what can pervade. 'Pervasive' means complete; 'traversing' means moving through, meaning taking objects as conditions. It only takes the darśanabhāga as capable of conditioning the four kinds of all-inclusiveness, not the inner two divisions; the inner two divisions only condition each other and cannot externally condition all things. Furthermore, as for the five specific factors such as desire, they have traversing but not pervasiveness: traversing is the capable of conditioning, while pervasiveness is the object conditioned—namely, the four objects such as what is desired. Because the four objects cannot cause the conditioning desire and so forth to pervade all objects, it is called having traversing but not pervasiveness. They should be distinguished with four propositions: 1. It is traversing but not pervasive, which is the specific factors; 2. It is pervasive but not traversing, which is tathatā; 3. Both, which is the omnipresent factors; 4. Neither, which is form and so forth. The Xianyang lun states: 'As for the dharmas associated with citta, they refer to dharmas that are produced from seeds in the ālaya, arise dependent on citta, and operate together and correspond with citta. What then are they? They are the five omnipresent factors: first, mental attention (manaskāra), whose nature is being able to alert the mind, and whose function is directing the mind toward its objective support.'

57.38

Question: Does mental attention alert the mind in the stage of seeds, or does it alert the mind in active manifestation?

57.39

Answer: It is capable of alerting the citta while in the seed state. Because the self-nature of attention (manaskāra) is lucid and acute, even while in the seed state, if an object arrives, it can alert the seeds of citta and caitta, causing them to arise into manifestation. To give an analogy: it is like many people lodging together in a single room. When a thief comes outside, among the crowd there is one person whose nature is to sleep lightly, and thus he can alert the other people. Although this person himself has not yet gotten up, he can alert the other people, causing them to arise. It is also like the internal nimittabhāga of the citta: although it arises simultaneously with the darśanabhāga, by the very nature of things it possesses the functional capacity to pull the citta. Here, attention is also like this. Its seed of attention, having alerted the seeds of those cittas and caittas to produce manifestation, the manifest attention can then also lead the manifest citta to direct itself toward the object in front. Thus this attention has two functional capacities: first, when citta has not yet arisen, it can alert it, causing it to arise; second, once it has arisen, it can lead it, causing it to direct itself toward the object. The former is its substance and nature; the latter is its activity and function. Second, contact (sparśa): meaning the harmonious union of the three things—indriya, viṣaya, and vijñāna—taking discrimination as its substance and serving as the support for feeling (vedanā) as its activity. Moreover, the harmonious union of the three is the cause, and contact is its fruit. Causing the citta and caittas to touch the object is its nature; serving as the support for feeling, conception (saṃjñā), volition (cetanā), and so on, is its activity. If contact does not arise, the other caitta of feeling also cannot arise. Bringing together into harmony all citta and caittas, causing them to touch the object before them simultaneously, is the self-nature of contact. Thus, when the various caittas grasp an object, it is all the functional capacity and self-nature of contact. Thus this contact resembles that harmonious union of the three, serving as the support for feeling and so on; this is the activity and function of contact. Third, feeling (vedanā): taking experiencing as its substance, and serving as the condition for craving (tṛṣṇā) as its activity. Fourth, conception (saṃjñā): meaning taking the perfuming of nāmakāya, padakāya, and vyañjanakāya as condition, taking the grasping of marks as substance, and producing speech and discourse as its activity. Moreover, conception can establish the boundaries and limits of its own object. If this conception were not present when citta arises, one would not be able to grasp the marks of the boundaries and limits of the object. Taking the grasping of an image of the object as its nature, and setting up various names and speech as its activity; various names and speech all depend on conception—this is the functional capacity of conception. Fifth, volition (cetanā): meaning the mind of intentional action, taking the fabrication of all general and specific retributions of good and bad as the substance of volition, and directing the citta toward wholesome states and so on as its activity. These five dharmas of contact and the rest are necessarily present whenever citta arises; therefore they are omnipresent (sarvatraga). The others are not omnipresent. There are five object-determined [factors] (viniyata), because desire and the rest do not pervade all citta. Because of the distinction of the four objects, they are named object-determined. First, desire (chanda): meaning, with respect to a desired object, taking longing as its substance and serving as the support for diligence as its activity. Moreover, in all matters where one desires to observe, because there is longing; if one does not desire to observe, and spontaneously grasps according to the momentum of the causal condition and object, then there is entirely no desire. Due to this reasoning, desire is not omnipresent. Second, resolve (adhimokṣa): meaning, with respect to a determined object, according to what is appropriate, taking decisive apprehension as its substance and being unshakeable as its activity. Moreover, it means that by the force of right or wrong teaching, reasoning, and realization, one carefully determines and decisively holds to the object grasped; because of this, other conditions cannot shake it. Thus, toward an ambiguous object, resolve is entirely absent; in a mind that is not carefully decisive, there is also no resolve; [hence] it is not included among the omnipresent. Third, mindfulness (smṛti): meaning, with respect to a habituated object, taking causing the citta to clearly remember without forgetting as its substance, and serving as the support for samādhi as its activity. Moreover, toward objects whose substances or types were never previously experienced, one does not cause mindfulness to arise; even if previously experienced, if one cannot clearly remember, mindfulness also does not arise. Therefore, mindfulness is definitely not included among the omnipresent. Mindfulness serves as the support and as the activity and function for samādhi, being able to produce correct samādhi; therefore it is said that serving as the support for samādhi is its activity. Fourth, concentration (samādhi), also called samādhi (děngtí): meaning, with respect to the observed object, taking focused attention on a single condition as its substance, causing the citta not to be distracted, and serving as the support for wisdom (jñāna) as its activity. Moreover, because concentration causes the citta to be focused and undistracted, relying on this, discriminating wisdom arises. If one does not tie the citta to focus on the stage of the object, then concentration does not arise; therefore it is not omnipresent. Fifth, discernment (prajñā/mati): meaning, with respect to the observed object, taking selection and evaluation as its substance, and severing doubt as its activity. Moreover, with respect to non-observed objects and in an ignorant and benighted citta, because there is no selection and evaluation, it is not included among the omnipresent. These five object-determined [factors] exist or not depending on the state, and the perceived object and perceiving [subject] are not definitely concomitant. There are eleven wholesome [factors] (kuśala). First, faith (śraddhā): meaning, toward what has reality, what has virtue, and what has capability, taking clarity of citta as its substance, and severing the obstacle of non-faith, being able to obtain the fulfillment of the provisions for bodhi, as its activity. Moreover, the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra says: 'Faith takes clarity of citta as its nature. This nature is clear and pure, and can purify citta and so on. Because citta is superior, it is given the name "clarity of citta", just as a water-clearing jewel can clear muddy water.' The commentary explains: 'Only faith is that which can purify; the other wholesome [factors] and so on are that which is purified. Therefore, taking the citta-king as principal, it only speaks of "clarity of citta" and does not speak of caittas. Water is an analogy for citta and so on; the clearing jewel is an analogy for the substance of faith. Because the jewel is thrown in, the muddy water becomes clear; because faith is present, that citta consequently becomes pure.' Second, shame (hrī): meaning, relying on the dominance of oneself and the dominance of the Dharma, taking feeling shame at faults and evils as its substance, and severing the obstacle of shamelessness as its activity. Third, bashfulness (apatrāpya): meaning, relying on the dominance of the world, taking feeling bashful at faults and evils as its substance, and severing the obstacle of unbashfulness as its activity. Fourth, non-attachment (alobha): meaning, toward existence and the requisites for existence, taking disgust and detachment without grasping, not hoarding and not loving, and being without attachment as its substance, and being able to sever the obstacle of rāga as its activity. Fifth, non-hatred (adveṣa): meaning, toward all sentient beings, taking a citta free of harm and filled with benevolence and pity as its substance, and being able to sever the obstacle of dveṣa as its activity. Sixth, non-delusion (amoha): meaning taking the correct understanding of reality as its substance, and being able to sever the obstacle of moha as its activity. Seventh, diligence (vīrya): meaning taking the citta being courageous and free of laxity, not looking down on oneself, as its substance, and severing the obstacle of indolence as its activity. Eighth, pliancy (praśrabdhi): meaning, being free from coarse heaviness (dauṣṭhulya), taking the body and mind being harmonious and smooth as its substance, and severing the obstacle of coarse heaviness as its activity. Ninth, non-heedlessness (apramāda): meaning, taking non-attachment, non-hatred, and non-delusion along with diligence as its substance, and severing the obstacle of heedlessness as its activity. Tenth, equanimity (upekṣā): meaning taking non-attachment, non-hatred, and non-delusion as its substance; relying on this equanimity, one attains impartiality of citta, attains uprightness of citta, and citta without stirring; taking severing the obstacle of stirring as its activity. Eleventh, non-harming (ahiṃsā): meaning, by not distressing and harming sentient beings, taking grief, sorrow, and pity for creatures as its substance, and being able to sever the obstacle of harm as its activity. There are six root kleśas (mūlakleśa). First, attachment (rāga): meaning, toward the five grasping aggregates, taking loving, concealing, cherishing, and clinging as its substance, and harming oneself and others and being able to direct one toward the bad destinies as its activity. Second, anger (dveṣa): meaning, toward sentient beings, taking the desire to cause harm as its substance, and being able to obstruct non-hatred as its activity. Third, pride (māna): meaning, considering others inferior to oneself and reckoning oneself superior, taking causing the citta to be haughty as its substance, and being able to obstruct non-pride as its activity. Fourth, ignorance (avidyā): meaning taking not correctly understanding reality as its substance, and being able to obstruct correct understanding as its activity. Fifth, corrupt views (dṛṣṭi): meaning taking the five views as its substance. 1. The satkāyadṛṣṭi: meaning, toward the five grasping aggregates, reckoning a self and what belongs to a self, taking defiled discernment as its substance, and being able to obstruct the non-erroneous understanding of no-self as its activity. 2. The view of extreme grasping (antagrāhadṛṣṭi): meaning, toward the five grasping aggregates, clinging and reckoning annihilation or permanence, taking defiled discernment as its substance, and being able to obstruct the non-erroneous understanding of impermanence as its activity. 3. Corrupt view (mithyādṛṣṭi): meaning slandering cause and effect, taking defiled discernment as its substance, arising solely through discrimination, and being able to obstruct right view as its activity. 4. Attachment to views (dṛṣṭiparāmarśa): meaning, toward the previous three views and the aggregates on which the views rely, reckoning them as supreme and foremost, taking defiled discernment as its substance, arising solely through discrimination, and being able to obstruct the non-erroneous understanding of suffering and impurity as its activity. 5. Attachment to precepts and vows (śīlavrataparāmarśa): meaning, toward the previous views and the aggregates on which the views rely, reckoning them as purification, liberation, and transcendence, taking defiled discernment as its substance, arising solely through discrimination, and being able to obstruct the non-erroneous understanding as before as its activity. The commentary explains: 'Satkāyadṛṣṭi is translated here as "view of the body" (shēnjiàn). As for attachment to views, the treatise also says: "Taking serving as the support for all dispute as its activity." This grasps views and the aggregates on which they rely as supreme and as able to attain the pure dharma of nirvāṇa; this is attachment to views. Because of these mutual clingings to the superiority of various views and so on, all disputes of the non-Buddhists arise from this. As for attachment to precepts and vows, it also says: "Taking serving as the support for useless arduous toil as its activity." It means that relying on the precepts received under these views, one speaks of these precepts as supreme and as able to attain nirvāṇa; due to these precepts, all non-Buddhists undertake useless arduous toil such as plucking out hair.' Sixth, doubt (vicikitsā): meaning, toward the truths, taking indecisive hesitation as its substance, arising solely through discrimination, and being able to obstruct non-doubt as its activity.

First 39 of 44 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

宗鏡錄 — Classical Chinese