宗鏡錄 68.3

68.3

Answer: Broadly speaking, there are three types of objects. The verse says: / “The nature-object does not follow the mind; / The solitary image derives solely from the seeing; / The substance-bearing [object] connects both the subjective feeling and the archetype; / Nature, seed, and so forth are determined as appropriate.” / As for “the nature-object does not follow the mind”: Regarding the nature-object, “nature” means real entity; it refers to the nimittabhāga objects such as the real sense-faculties, sense-data, the four great elements, and the real forms produced by samādhi. Saying that it “does not follow the mind” means that because these nimittabhāgas of faculties and sense-data are each produced from their own real seeds, they do not follow the generation from the seeds of the darśanabhāga that apprehends them. As for “the solitary image derives solely from the seeing”: An image is a shadow-image, which is an alternative name for nimittabhāga. Because this nominal nimittabhāga has no seed to accompany it and arises purely by itself, it is named “solitary image.” That is, nominal shadow-image phenomena such as sky-flowers, hare’s horns, past, and future—these are transformed and generated solely from the apprehending darśanabhāga, sharing the same seed as the darśanabhāga; hence it is called “a solitary image deriving solely from the seeing.” As for “the substance-bearing [object] connects both the subjective feeling and the archetype”: That is, one half of the nimittabhāga is produced from the same seed as the archetype, and the other half is produced from the same seed as the darśanabhāga; therefore it is said to “connect both feeling and archetype.” “Feeling” is the apprehending darśanabhāga; “archetype” is the apprehended substance. As for saying “nature, seed, and so forth are determined as appropriate”: “As appropriate” indicates an undetermined meaning; it means that within the three objects, according to what is appropriate, there are undetermined distinctions regarding nature, seed, realm-bondage, the three categories, vipāka, and so forth. Furthermore, an expanded explanation states: As for the nature-object, having a substantial, real nimittabhāga is called a nature-object. That is, the real forms apprehended by the first five consciousnesses, the eighth mental king, and the direct-perception sixth consciousness, grasping the specific characteristic of the object without carrying verbal designations and without an estimating mind—only this object is named a nature-object. Also, when fundamental cognition cognizes tathatā, it is likewise a nature-object, because it functions naturally without discrimination. Saying that it “does not follow the mind” means there are five kinds of not-following: First, nature not following: the apprehending darśanabhāga connects to the three natures, whereas the apprehended nimittabhāga object is exclusively of the morally indeterminate nature; thus it does not follow the apprehending darśanabhāga in connecting to the three natures. Second, seed not following: the darśanabhāga is generated from its own darśanabhāga seed, and the nimittabhāga is generated from its own nimittabhāga seed; because it is not generated from the mind-seed of the apprehending darśanabhāga, it is called “seed not following.” Third, realm-bondage not following: for example, when the clear manovijñāna cognizes objects of odor and taste, these two objects of odor and taste are bound exclusively to the desire realm, not following the clear manovijñāna in connecting to the bondage of the higher realms. Again, for example, when the eighth consciousness of the desire realm cognizes the object of seeds, the apprehending eighth consciousness is bound exclusively to the desire realm, whereas the apprehended seeds connect to the three realms; thus the sixth and eighth consciousnesses have “realm-bondage not following.” Fourth, the three categories not following: first, regarding the five skandhas not following, the darśanabhāga of the five consciousnesses is subsumed under the consciousness seed, whereas the nimittabhāga of the five sense-data is subsumed under the form skandha—this is the skandha category not following. Regarding the twelve āyatanas not following, the darśanabhāga of the five consciousnesses is subsumed under the mental āyatana, whereas the nimittabhāga of the five sense-data is subsumed under the five object āyatanas—this is the āyatana category not following. Regarding the eighteen dhātus not following, the darśanabhāga of the five consciousnesses is subsumed under the five consciousness dhātus, whereas the nimittabhāga of the five sense-data is subsumed under the five object dhātus—this is the three categories not following. Fifth, vipāka not following: for example, the darśanabhāga of the eighth consciousness is of the nature of vipāka, whereas the apprehended nimittabhāga of the five sense-data is not of the nature of vipāka—this is called “vipāka not following.” As for the solitary-image object, it means that the nimittabhāga and the darśanabhāga are produced from the same seed; this is named “a solitary image deriving solely from the seeing.” This is, for example, when the sixth consciousness cognizes sky-flowers, hare’s horns, the past and future, and transforms an image to cognize the unconditioned, as well as cognizing the phenomena of earth realms, or cognizing nominal forms produced by samādhi, the extremely distant, the extremely subtle, and so forth—all of which are nominal shadow-images. These are transformed and produced solely from the darśanabhāga and lack seeds of their own; this is called “deriving from the seeing.” The solitary image has two kinds: The first is the solitary image without an archetype: that is, the nimittabhāgas transformed when the sixth consciousness cognizes sky-flowers, hare’s horns, the past, the future, and so forth. These nimittabhāgas are produced from the same seed as the darśanabhāga of the sixth consciousness, having no archetype such as sky-flowers. The second is the solitary image with an archetype: that is, when the sixth consciousness cognizes the seeds and manifestations of the five sense-faculties, which all arise relying on an archetype. Their nimittabhāgas are also produced from the same seed as the darśanabhāga; they are likewise named solitary-image objects. Third, the substance-bearing [object] is when mind cognizes mind. For example, when the seventh consciousness cognizes the darśanabhāga object of the eighth, its nimittabhāga is not produced from a distinct seed: one half is produced from the same seed as the archetype, and one half is produced from the same seed as the apprehending darśanabhāga. That which is produced from the archetype is of the unobscured [morally indeterminate] nature; that which is produced from the apprehending darśanabhāga is of the obscured [morally indeterminate] nature. Because its subsumption on both ends is indeterminate, it is called “connecting both feeling and archetype.” The “substance” is the apprehending darśanabhāga of the seventh consciousness; the “archetype” is the apprehended darśanabhāga of the eighth consciousness. Furthermore, there is a four-clause analysis: 1. Exclusively of a different seed and not of the same seed: this is the nature-object. 2. Exclusively of the same seed and not of a different seed: this is the solitary-image object. 3. Both [a different and the same seed]: this is the substance-bearing object. 4. Neither: that is, fundamental cognition cognizing suchness; because tathatā is not produced from the seed of the darśanabhāga, it is called “not of the same seed”; furthermore, tathatā is itself unconditioned, revealed only through realization and not a phenomenon produced by a productive cause, so it is called “not of a different seed.” As for saying “nature and seed are spoken of as appropriate”: “nature” is the nature-object, and “seed” means variety. This means that within the three objects, each has different varieties; now, all must be spoken of as is appropriate. Furthermore, distinguishing them with respect to the eight consciousnesses: The first five evolving consciousnesses at all times are exclusively nature-objects, without distinguishing whether they function mutually or not. Between the two kinds of transformation, they are exclusively transformations by causal conditions. Furthermore, they share the same seeds with the five sense-faculties. The sixth manovijñāna has four classes: 1. The clear manovijñāna also connects to the three objects. When it cognizes the real five sense-data together with the five [consciousnesses], in the initial moment of spontaneous mind it is a nature-object. If in subsequent moments of mind it cognizes nominal forms such as round, square, long, and short superimposed on the five sense-data, it is a solitary image with an archetype, also called a pseudo-substance-bearing object. 2. The solitary manovijñāna in the dispersed state also connects to the three objects, mostly being solitary images, because it generally cognizes phenomena of the three periods of time with or without archetypes. When it cognizes the currently active citta and caittas of its own person, it is a substance-bearing object. When it cognizes its own five faculties and cognizes the citta and caittas of others, it is a solitary-image object, also called a pseudo-substance-bearing object. Furthermore, when the solitary manovijñāna in the first kṣaṇa cognizes the five sense-data, cognizing a small portion of real forms, it is also called a nature-object. 3. The manovijñāna in samādhi also connects to the three objects. Because it generally cognizes phenomena of the three periods of time with or without archetypes, it is a solitary-image object. Furthermore, because it can cognize the currently active citta and caittas of its own person, it is a substance-bearing object. Furthermore, in the defiled state of samādhi prior to the seventh bhūmi, because it can also induce the five consciousnesses to cognize the five sense-data, it is a nature-object. 4. The manovijñāna in dreams is exclusively a solitary-image object. The seventh consciousness is exclusively a substance-bearing object. As for the eighth consciousness, its mental king is exclusively a nature-object, because it is transformed by causal conditions; its associated five mental factors such as attention (manaskāra) are pseudo-substance-bearing and true solitary-image objects.