宗鏡錄 59.7

59.7

Answer: In terms of the conventional, they seem identical and seem distinct; in terms of the ultimate, they are neither identical nor separate. The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhiśāstra states: "Do these six categories of mental factors have distinct self-natures apart from the substance of mind, or are they simply positional distinctions of mind? Supposing so, what is the fault? Both hold errors. If they have distinct self-natures apart from the substance of mind, how could the sacred teachings say there is consciousness only? Moreover, how could they say: 'The mind wanders far and travels alone; defilement and purification depend on the mind'? And [how could they say] the person consists of six elements? How, further, could the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra be reconciled? As its verse says: 'It is acknowledged that mind appears like two; / likewise it appears as greed and the like, / or appears as faith and the like: / there are no distinct defiled or wholesome phenomena.' If they were simply positional distinctions of mind, how could the sacred teachings speak of association with mind? Association is with other natures, not with self-nature. Moreover, how could they say that mind and mental factors arise simultaneously, like the sun and its light? The Yogācārabhūmiśāstra states that mental factors are not identical to mind. Therefore, one should say that apart from mind they have distinct self-natures. Because mind is superior, it is said to be vijñapti-mātra and so forth. Because mental factors arise by the force and power of mind, they are said to appear resembling it, not that they are identical to mind. Furthermore, the words 'consciousness' and 'mind' also subsume mental factors, because they are constantly associated. Thus the words 'vijñapti-mātra' and so forth, as well as 'appearing resembling it', are both without error. This is according to the conventional. If according to the ultimate truth, mental factors and mind are neither identical nor separate. One should know that the same applies when the various consciousnesses are viewed in relation to one another. This is called the subtle principle of ultimate and conventional in the Mahāyāna." A verse in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Traveling far and wandering alone, / bodiless, slumbering in a cave: / one who tames this mind difficult to tame / is called a true brāhmaṇa." The Commentary on the Hundred Dharmas explains: "The Tathāgata, based on the sense-base of the manas, speaks of 'traveling far' and 'wandering alone'. Following avidyā, the manovijñāna ubiquitously takes all objects as its cognitive conditions, and hence it is called 'traveling far'. Furthermore, because the various [moments of] mind occur in continuous succession one by one, without a real ruler, it is called 'wandering alone'. 'Bodiless' means that the mind has no physical form or substance. 'Slumbering in a cave' means relying on the sense faculties and secretly operating within the body; this is called 'slumbering in a cave'. 'Slumbering' means hiding, referring to the mind being stored within the body. The purport of this verse is to refute the non-Buddhists' grasping at a real self. The World-Honoured One said that it is merely the mind wandering alone without a distinct controller; hence he says 'wandering alone'. Moreover, because from beginningless time it traverses the objects of the six sense-fields, it is called 'traveling far'; because there are no distinct mental factors, it is called 'wandering alone'. One clearly knows that there are no distinct mental factors." Regarding the "person's six elements", the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra states: "The Buddha's teachings all say that the four great elements, space, and consciousness are capable of constituting a sentient being. The three phenomena of matter, movement, and mind are the most supreme, serving as the bases. The basis of matter is the four great elements. The basis of movement is space, meaning internal space, not taking the external: because there is this element of space within the physical body, movement exists; thus it serves as the basis of movement. The basis of mind is consciousness. Thus it is said that the six elements can constitute a sentient being, without speaking of an element of mental factors." The commentary explains: "Regarding 'it is acknowledged that mind appears like two', the word 'like' here means that it appears like the real two parts [of grāhaka and grāhya] and other phenomena conceptualized outside the mind; hence it is called 'like'. Regarding 'there are no distinct defiled or wholesome phenomena', this means that only the mind transforms into the resemblance of the two parts of darśanabhāga and nimittabhāga; apart from mind, the two parts have no distinct existing phenomena. Furthermore, it is said that mind transforms into the resemblance of greed, faith, and so forth; therefore, apart from mind, greed, faith, and the like have no distinct defiled or wholesome phenomena: their substance is the mind itself, just like the two parts. Regarding 'one should say that apart from mind they have distinct self-natures; because mind is superior, it is said to be vijñapti-mātra and so forth': since it is said that apart from mind there are mental factors, why is it said to be vijñapti-mātra, that 'the mind wanders far and travels alone', that 'defilement and purification depend on the mind', and among the six elements only mind is spoken of? Because mind is superior, it speaks of this vijñapti-mātra and so forth. How is it superior? In general, there are four meanings: first, it can serve as the master; second, it can serve as the basis; third, its cognitive mode is general; fourth, it is always determinate, unlike mental factors and the like, which are sometimes indeterminate. Furthermore, if based on the first truth, the manifestation of substance and function, then the principal mind is the substance and the mental factors are the function; thus substance and function are neither identical nor separate. If based on the ultimate truth, it is the truth of the distinction between cause and effect; thus the principal mind and mental factors serve mutually as cause and effect, and are naturally not separate. If based on the third ultimate truth of realization, that which is revealed through designation: if spoken according to the paratantra nature that designates, they are not identical; if spoken according to the principle of the two kinds of selflessness that is designated, the principal mind and mental factors are not separate. If based on the fourth ultimate truth of the ultimate, words are discarded and the purport is discussed; here too one speaks neither of identity nor of separation. That is, the one true dharmadhātu transcends speech and severs characteristics, because the principle of both the principal mind and mental factors equally resolves into the one tathatā."