T1585 Three Texts on Consciousness Only

Chapter II

The Evolutions of Consciousness

Though the forms of the evolutions of consciousness are many, the consciousness that evolves is of three kinds. The first is called retribution or different results (vipaka); that is, the eighth consciousness, so called because its nature is that of many different results. The second is called thought;that is, the seventh consciousness (manas), because it constantly judges and thinks. The third is called perception of the external realm;that is, the first six consciousnesses, because the objects that they perceive are gross. The word and [in the second stanza of the "Thirty Verses," see p. 377] shows that the first six consciousnesses form a single form of consciousness. These three together are called the "consciousness that transforms. " It is of two kinds. The first is transformation as cause; that is, the two causal habit energies (vasana) of the eighth consciousness: habit energy of similar species (nisyanda-vasana) and habit energy of retribution (vipaka-vasana). Habit energy of similar species is produced and made to grow by good, bad, and indeterminate perfuming influences in the first seven forms of consciousness. Habit energy of retribution is produced and made to grow by impure good and bad perfuming in the first six forms of consciousness. The second kind, transformation as result (phala), means that as a result of the power of the above two forms of causal energy, the eight forms of consciousness are born and exhibit their various characteristics. Because habit energy of similar species is the cause, the substance and characteristics of the eight forms of consciousness are born in their diversity. The name "result of similar 45

7c

Chapter III: The Store Consciousness (Alaya-Vijnana)

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

species" (nisyanda-phala) derives from the fact that the result is similar to the cause. Habit energy of retribution is the dominant condition (adhipati-pratyaya). It is called "retribution" because of its power to influence the eighth consciousness to repay karma leading to a specific form of rebirth (aksipaka-karma) from past lives, and because it exists as a continuous series. It also stirs the first six forms of consciousness to repay karma that fills out the details (paripuraka-karma) inherited from the past lives. It is called "born of retribution" (vipakaja) rather than simply "retribution" (■ vipaka) because it is intermittent. That is, the above "retribution" and "born of retribution" are called "result of retribution" because the result differs from the cause. Here, only the consciousness that harbors self-attachment, holds the impure seeds, and transforms the results is called "retribution." This does not mean that all forms of consciousness are retribution. 46

Chapter III

The Store Consciousness

(Alaya-Vijnana)

We have already discussed briefly the names of the three forms of consciousness that transform, but we have yet to discuss their three characteristics. What are the characteristics of the first transforming consciousness? The "Thirty Verses" says, First, the alaya is also retribution and the holder OF ALL SEEDS.

That which it grasps and holds,its location,and its PERCEPTIONS ARE IMPERCEPTIBLE.

It is always associated with mental CONTACT, Attention,feeling, conceptualization, and volition. In it the only feeling is one of indifference. It is undefiled and morally neutral,

And the same is true of mental contact,etc. It always evolves like a flowing stream And is abandoned in the stage of arhatship. The first transforming consciousness is called alaya by both the Great and Small Vehicles, because (1) this consciousness stores, (2) it is subject to having seeds stored in it, and (3) it is the store that is the object of attachment. That is, it and moral impurities act as conditions for each other, and sentient beings grasp it as an inner self. The term store shows the specific characteristic of this first transforming consciousness, because its specific character is 47

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

that of being both cause and effect. Although the states of the specific character of this consciousness are many [depending on the spiritual stage of development], the term s t o r e is used broadly for all its states, because of its serious fault [of storing seeds of future delusion].

It is called r e t r ib u t io n because it is the result of retribution for good and bad action {karma) that draws an individual to a certain realm (dhatu), destination {gati), and form of birth {yoni). Apart from it, there is no vital principle or other factor that always continues in an unbroken series and is the dominant fruit of retribution. The term r e t r ib u t io n shows the characteristics of the fruit of this first transforming consciousness. Though there are many states and varieties of fruit of this consciousness, it is referred to broadly as "retribution" and "fruit" because the terms apply to all states, though not common to all.

Because this [eighth consciousness] holds all seeds (bija) of all dharmas and does not allow them to be lost, it is called h o l d e r o f 8a a l l s e e d s . Apart from it, no other dharma capable of holding the seeds of all dharmas can be found. This term h o l d e r o f a l l s e e d s shows the causal aspect of this first consciousness. Though there are many ways in which consciousness is causal in its nature, nothing else holds the seeds, and for that reason it is called "holder of all seeds." Though the substance and characteristics of this transforming consciousness are many, it is said that it only has these three characteristics.

1. The Seeds

Now we must specify what is meant by "all seeds." What are the dharmas that are called "seeds"? They are different energies in the fundamental consciousness that immediately engender their own fruit or results. These seeds are neither the same as, nor different from, the fundamental consciousness and their fruit, because the principle must be so regarding substance and function, and cause and effect. Although they are neither identical with, nor different from, [the eighth consciousness,] they really exist, 48

Chapter III

because a fictional dharma is as if nonexistent and cannot be a causal condition. [Sthiramati says that] being neither identical with nor different from all dharmas, they must be only conventionally and not actually real, like pots, etc. But if this were so, then ultimate reality (tathata) must also exist only conventionally, and to concede that would mean that there would be no real ultimate truth. However, the seeds are only existent from the point of view of conventional, worldly truth; they are not the same as ultimate reality.

Even though the seeds are supported on the substance of the eighth consciousness, they are nothing but the seen part of this consciousness. [As Dharmapala] says, this is because the seeing part always takes them as its objects. Because there is no distinction in substance between impure seeds and consciousness as retribution, the seeds are morally indeterminate, but their causes and results are good, bad, etc., and they are therefore said to be "good," "bad," etc. Since the pure seeds are not included in the nature of consciousness as retribution, and since their causes and results are categorized as good, then they are said to be only good. But if this is so, why does the Viniscayasamgraha [section of the Yogacarabhumi Sastra] say that all twenty-two faculties (indriya) have seeds of retribution and are all born of retribution? Even though they are called "retribution," they are not indeterminate. They are called "seeds of retribution" because they are supported by the consciousness that is retribution. Different kinds of consciousness support each other, such as visual consciousness, etc. Also, pure seeds get the name "retribution" [or "maturation"] because they mature and evolve through the power of perfuming, but they are not retribution categorized as indeterminate by nature. 2. The Origin of the Seeds

There is an interpretation [by Candrapala] of the origin of seeds to the effect that all seeds exist naturally and primordially and are not produced by perfuming. They can be said to increase and grow through the power of perfuming. According to a scripture, 49

8b Demonstration of Consciousness Only

"All sentient beings, from beginningless time, have within them diverse kinds of elements (dhatu), like seeds in a myrobalan fruit, that exist by the nature of things." Here, "elements" is another name for seeds. Also, a scripture says, "From beginningless time, elements are the support of all dharmas, etc." "Elements" mean "cause." The Yogacarabhumi Sastra says, "Though the substance of the seeds exists from beginningless time in a natural and fundamental way, they are perfumed and develop anew by pure and impure [actions]." Also, "Beings predestined for nirvana possess all the seeds, but if they are not predestined for nirvana they lack the seeds of awakening." Many other texts make similar statements. Also, it is said [in the Lahkavatara Sutra] that sentient beings are naturally divided into five families [one of which cannot attain nirvana], which must mean that seeds must exist by the nature of things and do not result from perfuming. According to the Yogacarabhumi Sastra, beings in the purgatories are provided with three pure faculties (indriya), but these exist as seeds and not as actual faculties. Another text speaks of natural, innate families [of bodhisattvas, etc.] that exist by the nature of things and continue in an unbroken series from beginningless time. Consequently, as a result of these proofs, pure seeds exist naturally, by the nature of things, and are not born from perfuming. Impure seeds also must be seeds that exist naturally. They increase and grow as a result of perfuming, but are not born from perfuming. Thus cause and effect are established without confusion. There is also an interpretation [by Nanda and Srlsena] that all the seeds are born as a result of perfuming. Both that which is perfumed [i.e., the eighth consciousness] and that which perfumes [i.e., actual dharmas] exist from beginningless time, and therefore there is no beginning for the formation of seeds. Since seeds are another name for "habit energy," habit energy must exist as a result of perfuming, just as the odor of sesame seeds is produced by the perfuming odor of the flowers.

As a scripture says, "The minds of sentient beings are perfumed by pure and impure dharmas and consequently are accumulations of countless seeds." A treatise says, "Internal seeds 50

Chapter III

must be perfumed, but external seeds are sometimes perfumed, sometimes not. " Also, the three kinds of perfuming—names, words, etc.—generally include all the seeds of impure dharmas. Since these three result from perfuming, impure seeds must be born as a result of perfuming. The birth of pure seeds must also be the result of perfuming, because it is said, "When the True Dharma, which flows from the pure realm of the Dharma, is heard, perfuming that results from hearing is produced." Also, it is the nature of seeds in the mind of one who has transcended the world. 3. Refutation

The distinction of families of sentient beings existing primordially does not result from either the existence or the nonexistence of pure seeds but arises according to whether or not there are obstacles (avarana). According to the Yogacarabhumi Sastra, "To that class of beings who will not attain nirvana belong those who are obstructed by the seeds of the two obstacles to the realm of the ultimate [i.e., moral and cognitive faults]. Those who have the cognitive obstacle to the ultimate but not the [obstacle of the] passions belong either to the family of disciples (sravaka) or to the family of pratyekabuddhas. One without seeds of the obstacles to the ultimate belongs to the family of Tathagatas. " Thus the distinction of families with different capacities existing from beginningless time is the result of the presence or absence of the two obstacles, not the presence or absence of pure seeds. The reference in the above text [to beings in the purgatories] having pure seeds refers to seeds that will be born, not to already existing seeds.

There is another interpretation [by Dharmapala], which holds that seeds are of two kinds. The first consists of primordial seeds. This refers to different energies in consciousness as retribution that have existed since beginningless time by the nature of things, and which give birth to aggregates, sense bases, and sense fields. The World-Honored One has accordingly said, "All sentient beings since beginningless time have within them diverse elements 51

8c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

resembling seeds of the myrobalan fruit that exist by the nature of things." These and other quotations are similar to [Candrapala's] earlier statement. These seeds are called "naturally existing seeds." The second kind of seeds consists of those that originate at some point in time. This means that they exist as a result of perfuming by actual dharmas, repeated over and over since beginningless time. The World-Honored One accordingly said, "Due to perfuming of the minds of beings by good and bad dharmas, they are accumulations of countless seeds. " Various treatises say that pure and impure seeds are bom as a result of perfuming by pure and impure dharmas. These seeds are called "seeds created by perfuming." [We reply to Candrapala] that if seeds are only innate and natural, the [first seven] evolving consciousnesses must not be conditions as cause of the alaya. According to a scripture, Dharmas [i.e., the first seven consciousnesses] approach C alaya) consciousness;

{Alaya] consciousness approaches the dharmas.

They are reciprocally of the nature of effect,

And always reciprocally of the nature of cause. The meaning of this verse is that at all times, the alaya consciousness and the first seven consciousnesses generate each in a steady process and are reciprocally cause and effect. The Mahayanasamgraha says, 'Alaya consciousness and pure and impure dharmas are reciprocally conditions as cause, just as a candle and a flame produce heat, and just as bundles of reeds support each other. Conditions as cause are found only in the relationship between seeds and alaya, because no other conditions as cause can be found. " If seeds were not produced as a result of perfuming, how could the first seven forms of consciousness act as conditions as cause for the alaya? These first seven forms of consciousness are not called conditions as cause because they perfume seeds and make them grow, because in that case good and bad actions would be conditions as cause for the fruit of retribution, the eighth consciousness. Also, holy teachings say that there are seeds born of perfuming, and that contradicts this interpretation. Therefore, the 52

Chapter III

idea that seeds are only natural and innate contradicts reason and scripture.

Also, if seeds only originate with a beginning [and are not innate], there would be no conditions as cause for conditioned, pure dharmas, and therefore they would not originate. Impure dharmas cannot be the causes of pure ones, because a pure seed must not be born from an impure one. To concede that they can would mean that Buddhas would produce impure dharmas again, and good seeds would create bad ones.

4. Originally Pure Mind

The Vibhajyavadins say that the nature of mind is intrinsically pure and is soiled by adventitious defilements [not innate ones], and that for that reason it is called "soiled." When separated from the passions, it is pure again. Therefore there is a cause for pure dharmas. [We ask,] what does "nature of mind" mean? If it refers to the principle of emptiness (sunyata), emptiness is not the cause of mind, because an eternal dharma certainly is not the seed of dharmas, because its substance remains unchanged before and after. Is the nature of mind mind itself? This would resemble the theory of the Samkhyas, which is that although the characteristics of mind change, the substance remains the same. But if it is intrinsically pure, bad or indeterminate minds would remain good, and if you concede that, then mind would be associated with such things as faith. If you do not concede it, then mind does not have the substance of good mind. You could not say it is good, much less pure. The impure but good mind is called "defiled," and like a bad mind it is not pure by nature. Therefore it cannot be the cause for pure dharmas, because it must not be that good and bad can be causes for each other.

If the nature of an impure mind is pure, then the nature of a pure mind must be impure, because it would be impossible to dis- tinguish causal conditions. What is more, if the minds of ordinary beings are basically pure, then pure dharmas would be active when one is still in the stage of ordinary beings, and such ordinary 53

9a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

beings would be called "holy ones. " And, if you claim that the reason beings are said to be pure is that although the minds of beings are innately pure, the characteristics are impure, but the nature of mind does not have these faults, then the seeds of this mind are not pure. Why does your treatise say that there are ordinary beings who possess pure seeds? The nature and characteristics of seeds and dharmas in activity are the same.

However, when the scripture says that mind is pure by nature, it is referring to the ultimate reality revealed by the emptiness of the mind, because ultimate reality is the mind's true nature. Or, they mean that because the substance of mind is not afflicted, it can therefore be called "pure by nature." They do not mean that it is called "fundamentally pure " because the nature of an impure mind is pure.

As a result, we may believe that from beginningless time sentient beings possess pure seeds that are not the result of perfuming, and that they possess them by the nature of things. Later, in the spiritual stage of "Superior Progress," the pure seeds are made to increase and grow through perfuming. The pure seeds that come into being have these seeds as their cause. When pure dharmas come into being, they subsequently perfume in turn and create new seeds. The seeds of impure dharmas can be understood in the same way. Even though holy teachings say that the internal seeds are definitely perfumed, they do not say that the seeds are produced as a result of perfuming. How can they be understood to deny natural seeds? However, these natural seeds are made to increase and grow as a result of perfuming and can then produce results. For this reason, these texts say that internal seeds are perfumed. [The Mahayanasamgraha says that] perfuming produced from hearing [the Dharma] is not simply impure [when occurring in an ordinary person], [We reply that] when one hears the True Dharma, innate pure seeds are made to increase gradually and develop to the point where they produce a supramundane thought; for that reason, texts speak of these seeds as "perfumed by hearing. " The impurity of perfuming by hearing is eliminated at the stage of 54

Chapter III

cultivation. This perfuming results in a superior retribution with respect to supramundane dharmas, and it is a superior dominant condition (adhipati-pratyaya). On the other hand, the purity of this perfuming by hearing is not to be eliminated [at the stage of cultivation] and is properly the condition as cause (hetu-pratyaya) of supramundane dharmas. This proper condition as cause is subtle, obscure, and difficult to comprehend. These texts are only concerned with gross, obvious dominant conditions and therefore say, as an expedient, that these conditions are the seeds of supramundane thought.

5. Families and Seeds

As for the idea of families being distinguished on the basis of obstacles, the Yogacarabhumi Sastra says that families of beings are distinguished according to the presence or absence of pure seeds. That is, if one is wholly lacking in pure seeds, the seeds of the two obstacles can never be destroyed, and that puts one in the family of those who will never attain nirvana. If one possesses the pure seeds of the two vehicles, the seeds of the obstacle to that which is to be known can never be destroyed, and part of this family is assigned to the family of disciples (sravaka) and part is assigned to the family of pratyekabuddhas. If one possesses the pure seeds of a Buddha, both obstacles can be destroyed, and one is assigned to the family of Tathagatas.

Consequently, whether or not the [two] obstacles can be removed depends on the presence or absence of pure seeds. However, pure seeds are subtle, obscure, and difficult to comprehend, and therefore this treatise distinguishes families on the basis of [the more obvious causes of] obstacles. If it were not for pure seeds, what other cause would there be for the destructibility of the obstacles? If you say that the obstacles exist naturally, then why not admit the same possibility for the seeds of pure dharmas? If seeds of pure dharmas are fundamentally and wholly nonexistent, then the holy paths will not arise. Who then will be able to destroy the seeds of the two obstacles, and how could it be said 55

9b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

that families are distinguished on the basis of obstacles? Since the holy paths could not arise, it makes no sense to claim that it would. But, in place after place in the scriptures, it is said that there are innate seeds, and all contradict this position of the Yogacarabhumi Sastra. Therefore, to say that seeds are only born at some moment in time contradicts reason and scripture. Consequently, you must understand that seeds are of two kinds: the innate, and those that originate in time.

6. The Characteristics of Seeds

In summary, seeds have six characteristics.

(1) They are instantaneous. Only those things can be seeds whose substance perishes without interval as soon as they are born and that possess superior power. This excludes eternal dharmas, because they are eternal and changeless and therefore cannot be said to have the ability to generate activity.

(2) Seeds exist simultaneously with their fruit. Only those things that are present with the fruit already functioning actively and in union with it can be seeds. This excludes dharmas prior to or anterior to the fruit, as well as those that are not related to the fruit. Actualities and seeds of dissimilar species can coexist with no contradiction. Within an individual, seeds presently existing coexist with the generating power. They are unlike seeds of the same kind, which, being mutually contradictory, cannot coexist. Even though the cause may or may not exist simultaneously with the result [in different cases], still only those present can exert a causal function, because dharmas that do not yet exist or that have already perished have no self-nature. The term "seed" applies to those things that produce actual, present dharmas, not to things that produce their own kind, and hence it must be said that a seed exists simultaneously with its resultant fruit. (3) Seeds always continue in a series. Only those things are seeds that continue in a single species over a long time, until the bodhisattva reaches the ultimate stage of development. This excludes the [first six] evolving consciousnesses that change and are discontinuous, 56

Chapter III

because they are not associated with seeds. This expression shows that seeds of the same species are produced in a series. (4) The nature of seeds is determinate [as to moral species]. Those things are seeds that produce good, bad, and indeterminate [actual dharmas] according to the power of the [seed] causes. This excludes doctrines of other schools of Buddhism that hold that a cause of one nature can have a causal relation to a result of another nature.

(5) Seeds require multiple conditions. Only those things are seeds that require a number of conditions uniting so that their power is overwhelming. This refutes the non-Buddhist idea that a spontaneous cause produces a result suddenly, without need for other conditions. It also excludes other Buddhist doctrines to the effect that conditions are always present. This characteristic shows that the required conditions are not always present, and therefore seeds do not always produce their fruit suddenly. (6) Seeds attract their own results. Those things are seeds that attract results such as form, mind, etc., in accordance with the specific type of causal seed. This excludes the non-Buddhist idea that a single cause may produce all results of all kinds. This also excludes other Buddhist ideas to the effect that form, mind, etc., are causes for each other. Those, and only those, are seeds that exist as species of potentialities within the fundamental [store] consciousness and that satisfy these six requirements. Seeds external to consciousness, such as wheat seeds, rice seeds, etc., are developments of consciousness itself and, though referred to metaphorically as "seeds," are not real seeds. The power of these seeds to produce a proximate or true fruit is called the "productive cause" (abhinirvrtti-hetu). The power of these seeds to attract distant and decaying fruits and prevent them from perishing immediately is called the "attracting cause" (avahaka-hetu). 7. Internal and External Seeds

Internal seeds must be perfumed in order to arise and mature and for new seeds to produce fruits. These are the conditions as cause. 57

9c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

External seeds may or may not be perfumed. These are the dominant conditions for the fruit. The real causes of resulting dharmas are the internal seeds, because they are fruit born of seeds of like characteristics [in the store consciousness],

8. Perfumer and Perfumable

On the basis of what characteristics can we speak of "perfuming"? We speak of "perfuming" on the basis of four characteristics of that which is perfumed and that which perfumes that cause seeds to be born and grow. What are the four meanings of "perfumable"? First, with regard to that which is perfumable, it is enduring. It is perfumable if a dharma continues from beginning to end as a single kind in an unbroken series and can for that reason hold perfuming. This excludes the [first six] consciousnesses, as well as wind, sound, etc. They are not enduring by nature and therefore not perfumable.

Second, the dharma that is perfumable is indeterminate. It is perfumable if it is neither morally good nor bad, does not conflict with good or bad, and holds perfuming. This excludes good and bad, which, being strong by nature, cannot hold perfuming and therefore are not perfumable. Consequently, this excludes the purified eighth consciousness of a Tathagata, which holds old seeds but does not receive new perfuming.

Third, it is perfumable by nature. It is perfumable if it is independent and not resistant and dense. This excludes mental functions and unconditioned dharmas, which are not perfumable because they are, respectively, dependent [on consciousness per se] and immutable.

Fourth, it is in close union with the perfumer. A dharma is perfumable if it exists simultaneously with that which perfumes, shares the same place, and is neither the same nor different. This excludes the bodies of others, and prior and subsequent moments, because there is no union. These are not perfumable. Only the [eighth] consciousness as retribution, which satisfies these four requirements, is perfumable, not such things as mental activities. 58

Chapter III

As for the requirements of the perfumer, first, it is born and then perishes. That dharma is able to perfume if it is impermanent, if it can function, and if it produces and nourishes habit energy. This excludes unconditioned dharmas, which never change and do not produce or nourish.

Second, it has a superior functioning. It can perfume if it is born and perishes, has great creative power, and can attract habit energy. This excludes the [eighth] consciousness as retribution and mental activities, etc., because their power is slight and they are therefore unable to perfume.

Third, it increases and decreases. A dharma can perfume if it possesses superior functioning, can increase and decrease, and can hold and implant habit energy. This excludes the perfect, good dharmas of Buddhahood, which neither increase nor decrease and therefore cannot perfume. If they could perfume, they would not be perfect, and the fruit of Buddhahood would consist of different grades of strong and weak in the beginning and later. Fourth, it is united with that which it perfumes and evolves along with it. A dharma can perfume if it exists simultaneously with the perfumable, exists in the same place, and is neither identical with nor different from it. This excludes other bodies and prior and subsequent moments, where there is no union and hence no ability to perfume.

The only things satisfying these four requirements and thus able to perfume are the first seven consciousnesses and their mental activities, which possess a superior functioning and increase and decrease. Perfuming occurs when these seven forms of consciousness as perfumers are born with and perish with the consciousness that is perfumed. The seeds in the perfumed consciousness are made to be generated and grow, like perfumed sesame, hence the name "perfuming. "

When the consciousness that perfumes, etc., is born from seeds, it is capable of being a cause and perfuming and creating seeds. Three dharmas [the engendering seed, consciousness in action, and the created seeds] evolve together and act as simultaneous 59

10a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

causes and results of each other, just as a candle wick produces flame and flame produces a burning wick, or just as bundles of reeds support each other. Cause and result are simultaneous, with no violation of reason. The perfumer creates seeds, the seeds create actual dharmas, just as the two reciprocal and simultaneous causes produce a result useful to man [according to the Small Vehicle]. Seeds produce other seeds of the same species, which is similar to causes of the same species (sabhaga-hetu) attracting results of similar species (nisyanda-phala). These two forms of generation are of the nature of conditions as cause for the result, and apart from them no other dharmas are causes. To call something else a cause is merely a metaphorical use of the term. These are the characteristics of all seeds in summary.

9. Mode of Activity and Perceptions

What is the mode of activity and object [of perception] of this [alaya] consciousness? [Vasubandhu says,]

T h a t w h ic h it g r a s p s a n d h o l d s , its l o c a t io n , a n d its PERCEPTIONS ARE IMPERCEPTIBLE.

P e r c e p t io n s are its mode of activity, because the mode of activity of this consciousness is to perceive. L o c a t io n means "place." It is the world receptacle, because it is the supporting location of sentient beings. T h a t w h ic h it g r a s p s is twofold: the seeds and the body provided with organs. "Seeds" refer to images, names [or words], and the perfuming of imagination. "Body provided with organs" refers to physical organs and the support of the organs. These two are what is grasped by consciousness. They are incorporated into the substance [of consciousness] and share its tranquility and dangers. Both that which is grasped and the location are its objects. 10. The Two Parts of Consciousness

When, due to the power of causes and conditions, the substance of alaya consciousness is born, it transforms internally into seeds and the body provided with organs, and externally into the world 60

Chapter III

receptacle. These things that are its transformations become its own object of perception (alambana), because its mode of activity appears in reliance on them. The term p e r c e p t io n means that the eighth consciousness as retribution has the function of perceiving its objects. The function of perceiving is the seeing part of this consciousness.

When the substance of this consciousness is born in an impure state, it appears resembling two parts: an apparent object or seen part and as the apparent subject or seeing part. The same occurs with mental activities. In short, it appears [when transformed] as both dharmas and as cognition. As apparent object it is the seen part, and as the apparent subject it is the seeing part. If mind and its activities did not have the seen part, they would not have the ability to take their own objective realm as an object. Or, each would take as an object every kind of object, and one objective realm would be like all others. If mind and its activities did not have the seeing part, they would know nothing, just as space does not, or else we would have to concede that space is a knowing subject. Consequently, mind and its activities must have these two parts. As a scripture says, "Everything is consciousness only; there is no [real] object of consciousness. The subjective and objec- tive parts of consciousness evolve naturally." 11. Three Parts of Consciousness

As for the doctrine that there is an objective realm apart from consciousness, this means that (1) the external realm is the object of consciousness, (2) the seen part of consciousness is its mode of activity, and (3) the seeing part of consciousness is the thing itself, because [seeing] is the character of the very substance of mind and its activities. Mind and its activities have the same support and object, because their mode of activity and objective images are similar. Associated objects are equal in number [i.e., one to one], but their characteristics are different, because [activities of mind such as] consciousness, feeling, thought, etc., are different in their activity.

61

iob

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

[However,] if we grasp the fact that there is no objective realm apart from consciousness, then we must say that the seen part of consciousness is the object and the seeing part is the mode of activity. The substance that serves as support for both the seeing and seen parts of consciousness is called the "self-authenticating part" (svasamvitti-bhaga) of consciousness. If this did not exist, there would be no recollection of mind and its activities, just as there would be no recollection of objects never perceived. Mind and its activities have the same objective basis. The characteristics of their objects are similar, but their modes of activity differ, because the functions of perceptions, etc., are different. The things in question [i.e., consciousness and its activities] are equal in number [one activity, one object], but their characteristics differ, because the substances of consciousness, thought, etc., are different. When mind and its activities are born one after another, a rational analysis will show that each has these three parts, because the known, the means of knowing, and the fruit of knowing are different, and besides, the image and the knower must have a supporting substance. According to a verse in the Pramana-samuccaya, The image that resembles an external object is the known object;

That which grasps the image and that which is selfauthenticating Are the knower and the fruit of knowing.

The substance of these three is not differentiated. 12. Four Parts of Consciousness

If we make an even finer distinction concerning mind and its activities, we can say that there are four parts. Three are as explained above, and the fourth is the part that authenticates self-authentication (svasamvitti-samvitti-bhaga). If this fourth part did not exist, what would authenticate the third part, self-authentication? The knowing part also must be authenticated! Also, the self-authenticating part would have no fruit, and knowers must have results, or fruit. It cannot be said that the seeing part of consciousness is the 62

Chapter III

fruit of the third part, because the seeing part is sometimes categorized as nondirect perception. Consequently, the seeing part of consciousness does not authenticate the third part, because that which authenticates its own substance must be direct perception. Of these four parts, the first two are external, and the latter two are internal. The first part [the seen part] is only an object of perception, while the last three are both subject and object. Although the second [seeing] part always has the first part as an object, it may function as a means of knowing or it may not, and sometimes it knows through direct perception and sometimes through inference.

The third part of consciousness can have as its object both the second and the fourth parts. The part that authenticates selfauthentication has only the third part as its object, never the second part, because there is no need for it to do so. The third and fourth parts are both categorized as direct perception. Therefore the mind and its activities are formed from the union of these four parts, which form subject and object, without falling into an infinite regression. They are neither identical nor different, and therefore the principle of consciousness only (vijnaptimatra) is demonstrated. Thus a verse from the Ghanavyuha Sutra says, The minds of being are of two natures,

All divided into internal and external.

They are bound up with apprehending and being apprehended. The seeing part is distinguished in several ways. The verse says that beings' minds are composed of the union of the two parts. Whether the parts are internal or external, they are bound up with apprehending and being apprehended. The varieties of seeing include knowing or not knowing, either direct perception or inference. Here "seeing" refers to the seeing part of consciousness. These four parts may be seen only as three, because the fourth part may be included in the third part. Or the four may be reduced to two, because the last three are all subjects with objects; that is, all three are the seeing part. "Seeing" means having 63

ioc

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

objects. Or they all may be reduced to one, because they are one in substance. A verse in the Lankavatara Sutra says, Mind, attached to itself,

Evolves resembling an external realm.

What is perceived by mind does not exist,

And therefore there is nothing but mind.

Thus in many places in the scriptures it is said that there is only the one mind. "One mind" also includes mental activities. Therefore the mode of activity of consciousness is perception, and perception is the seeing part of consciousness.

13. The Object of Perception

The word l o c a t io n [in the "Thirty Verses"] means that as a result of the maturation of its common seeds, the consciousness that is retribution transforms to resemble images of an external world, such as form, [sound,] etc.; that is, the external great elements and their derivatives. Although the worlds transformed by various beings are different for each, their characteristics are similar, so that there is no difference in the place [that they perceive], just as the light of many assembled lamps seems to be the same light. Whose consciousness as retribution transforms into these characteristics? One interpretation is that it is everyone's consciousness. Why? A scripture says, "They arise all together through the overwhelming power of the action of living beings." We refute this by saying that if this were so, then the consciousness of Buddhas and bodhisattvas would transform into this impure world, and the consciousness of ordinary beings would transform into the pure wonderful lands of this realm and elsewhere. Also, the holy ones, disgusted with the world of form and removed from it, born in the formless world and never departing it, would have consciousnesses that transform into this [impure] world, and what would be the point of that? Therefore it is the consciousnesses of beings born in this world, or who will be born into it, that transform into this apparent world. The scripture quoted above means only a part of 64

Chapter III

sentient beings when it mentions "all," because, their karma being the same, the transformation of consciousness is common to all.

However, there is an objection. If this were so, then when the world receptacle is destroyed [at the end of the eon], and no one is left, nor anyone to be reborn in it, whose consciousness as retribution would transform into this realm? Also, beings who are disgusted with the realm of form and have left it to be reborn in the formless realm have immaterial bodies, so of what use would it be for them to evolve a world in advance of rebirth? If we concede [with the Mahasamghikas] that there are distinctions of gross and subtle, etc., between those with immaterial bodies and different world receptacles, with no mutual support, then what would be the value of a consciousness in the formless realm transforming into one of these world receptacles? However, the world receptacle that evolves is basically the support of, and is for the use of, those material bodies, and therefore the world evolves in such a way that it can support and be used by those bodies. Consequently, we affirm that a consciousness born in a certain world can be born in the same kind of world elsewhere by transforming into that world. Thus a world receptacle about to be destroyed or about to appear, even without any sentient beings in it, can exist [because of the transformation of consciousness in another world]. With regard to this world being the support of, and being used by, beings in common, demons, celestials, and humans see the world differently and thus enjoy it differently, but you can understand this on the same principle as above.

"Seeds" refers to all the impure seeds held by the consciousness that is retribution. They are included in the nature of this consciousness and are therefore its object of perception. Although pure seeds are connected with this consciousness, they are not included in its nature, and therefore they are not its perceptual object. Even though they are not its object of perception, they are not apart from it, just as ultimate reality is not, so this does not conflict with the principle of consciousness only. 65

lla

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

"Body provided with organs" means that because of the power of the maturation of seeds in the consciousness that is retribution that are not common to all individuals, consciousness evolves into the material organs and the place [i.e., body] that supports the organs; in other words, the internal great elements and their derivatives. Because of the power of the maturation of common seeds, consciousness evolves into the apparent existence of other beings. If this were not so, one would not experience other people. There is an opinion that consciousness evolves into the apparent sense organs of others, because the MacLhyantavibhaga says that "it appears as the five sense organs of oneself and others." However, there is another opinion: even though consciousness evolves as if it were a supporting body, the organs of someone else are of no use to oneself. The statement of the above treatise that "the five organs of oneself and others appear" means that oneself and others evolve the organs from their own individual consciousnesses. Therefore when one is reborn in another world or enters nirvana, the surviving corpse is still visible to us.

The distinction of internal body, world receptacle, realms, and spiritual stages is the result of the evolution of consciousness through the power of karma. If world receptacle and body evolve through the power of samadhi and the like, then there is nothing definite causing realms, stages, self and others, etc. The body and world receptacle that evolve in most cases continue in an unbroken series, but light, sound, etc., that evolve from consciousness often last only a short time, because their appearance is the result of contemporary conditions.

This has been a brief discussion of the objects that evolve from consciousness; i.e., the impure seeds, the ten "material" sense bases (rupa-ayatana), and the real form that falls into the category of the sense base for dharmas (dharma-ayatana).

Why does this consciousness not evolve as mind, mental activities, etc., and take them as objects? The transformation of defiled consciousness is of two kinds: transforming due to the power of causes and conditions, and transforming due to the power of imagination. The first transformation must have a function, and 66

Chapter III

the second is always an objective realm. The transformation of consciousness that is retribution always obeys causes and conditions, but the form, etc., that transform from it must have a real function. If consciousness transformed into mind [and its activities], they would have no real function, because, as the seen part of consciousness, they would have no perceptual objects. Indeed, the real function of mind, etc., is born from the eighth consciousness. Nor does this consciousness transform into unconditioned dharmas [such as space], which also has no real function. Therefore consciousness as retribution does not have mind and mental activities as objects. When this consciousness arrives at the stage of purity, it is associated with a superior wisdom, and although there is no discrimination, still, since it is pure, we say that it has no real function. Still, however, it manifests those images [of unconditioned dharmas, etc.]. If this were not the case, Buddhas would not be all-knowing.

Therefore in the stage of impurity, this consciousness as retribution takes as its object only the world receptacle and the body, as well as impure seeds. While in the realm of desire (kama-dhatu) or the realm of form (rupa-dhatu), it still has these three perceptual objects. In the formless realm (arupya-dhatu), it has as an object only the impure seeds. Because one is separated from form in this realm, one has no form resulting from action, but one does have form resulting from meditation, which makes sense. The eighth consciousness has this form as its perceptual object. The term im p e r c e p t ib l e [in Vasubandhu's verses] means that the mode of activity of this consciousness is extremely subtle and fine and therefore difficult to know thoroughly. Or, we may say that it is hard to know because the internal objects that it grasps and holds are extremely subtle, while the extent of the external world is hard to fathom. Why are the objects it grasps and the mode of activity of this consciousness difficult to know, [and how do we therefore know that it even exists]? Like consciousness that does not depart the body during the samacLhi of cessation [of perception], it must be trusted to exist. You must admit that during this samadhi there is a consciousness, because the meditator is 67

11b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

still classified as a sentient being, just as when the mind is functioning in a normal way. It is the same even at the final stages of the cessation of thought [in samadhi].

14. Mental Activities Associated

with the Store Consciousness

With how many mental activities is this [store] consciousness associated (samprayukta)? [Vasubandhu says, in the "Thirty Verses,"] It is a lw ays a s s o c ia t e d w it h m e n t a l c o n t a c t , ATTENTION, FEELING, CONCEPTUALIZATION, AND VOLITION. From beginningless time up to the time of its final transformation, the alaya consciousness in all its states is always associated with these five mental activities, because they are categorized as universal mental activities (sarvatraga-caitta). A. Mental Contact

M e n t a l c o n t a c t (sparsa) means the "union of the three," "replica," and "transformation," and it causes contact between mind and its activities and their object. Its action is to serve as a support for feeling, conceptualization, volition, etc. The "union of the three" refers to the conformability of an organ, an object, and the resulting consciousness. Contact occurs in dependence on these three factors; it causes them to unite and is therefore called the "union of the three." In a state of union, they conform to each other and have the power to generate mental activity, and this power is called "transformation. " Contact resembles the appearance of what is transformed and is therefore called its "replica" (pariccheda), because it is similar in power to the three transformed things. The power of the transformation of the organ predominates in the arising of mental contact. Thus the Abhidharmasamuccaya, etc., merely say that it is the "replication of the transformation of the organ." The nature of contact is to unite mind and its activities and cause them to come into contact together with the object. Being similar to the power [of the organ, etc.] 68

Chapter III

to conform and produce mental activity, its activity is to be the support of feeling, etc. The Sutra of Birth and Extinction says, "Contact is the condition for such aggregates as feeling, conceptualization, and volition." This is why the scripture says that consciousness, contact, feeling, etc., are born as a result of the union of two, three, or four [factors, respectively]. As for the Yogdcarahhumi Sastra saying that it is the support of only feeling, conceptualization, and volition, this is because volition is the dominant factor in the aggregate of the karmic predispositions, and thus to mention it is to include the other karmic predispositions. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says that contact is the sup- port of feeling, but this is because contact is the proximate and principal factor in the generation of feeling. That is, the characteristics of agreeableness, etc., grasped through contact are extremely close to the characteristics of advantageousness, etc., grasped by feeling, and for that reason, contact is the most important factor in arousing feeling. The nature of contact is real, not fictional, because it is a mental activity included among the traditional six hexads, because it is categorized as a form of nutriment, and because it is one of the conditions [among the twelve elements of conditioned arising (pratityasamutpada)], just as feeling, etc., are, so it is not simply [a conventional name for] the union of three elements.

B. Attention

A t t e n t io n (manaskara) has as its nature the arousing of mind, and its activity is that of directing mind to the objective realm. It arouses and awakens the seeds of the mind that will come into existence and leads this mind and makes it approach its object; hence, its name a t t e n t io n . Even though it is also able to direct and generate the mental activities, it is only said to direct mind, because mind is the principal factor. One explanation is that attention makes mind turn toward different objects. Another explanation is that it holds the mind fixed on a single object and therefore is called "attention." Neither explanation is correct, because [in 69

lie

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

the first case] it would no longer be omnipresent, and [in the second case] it would not differ from samadhi.

C. Feeling

F e e l in g (vedana) has as its nature the experience of objects that are agreeable, disagreeable, or neither, and its activity is that of arousing craving because it creates a desire for union, separation, or neither one. There is an explanation [by Samghabhadra] that says that feeling is of two kinds: feeling objects, which means experiencing the object of perception, and the feeling of self-nature, which means experiencing simultaneous mental contact. Only the second kind is real feeling, because feeling the objective realm is shared by other characteristics [of consciousness]. This theory, however, is not reasonable, because feeling certainly does not have as its object the contact that is born with it. If you claim that it is called "experiencing contact" because it is similar to contact, then all results resembling their cause would be called "feeling nature." Also, since feeling feels its cause, you ought to call it "feeling its cause," not "feeling self-nature." If you claim that feeling experiences the nature of the feeling born from contact in the same way that a ruler consumes his kingdom and is therefore called [feeling of] self-nature, your reasoning is faulty, because it goes against your own doctrine of the impossibility of self-authentication. If you call it the feeling of self-nature because it does not abandon its self-nature, then all dharmas would be called "feeling of self-nature." Therefore this explanation of Samghabhadra only fools infants. However, the feeling of the objective realm is not shared by other mental activities, because the feeling of agreeableness, etc., which is unique to itself, is what we are calling "feeling the objective realm," and this is not shared by other mental activities.

D. Conceptualization

The nature of c o n c e p t u a l iz a t io n (sarnjna) is that of grasping images of objects, and its activity is that of displaying and producing 70

Chapter III

various names and words. When distinct characteristics [green, etc.,] of the object are established, then various names and words are produced accordingly.

E. Volition

The nature of v o l it io n (cetana) is that of making the mind work, and its activity is that of bending the mind toward good, etc. When it grasps the characteristics of an object as causes of good, etc., it urges the mind to create good, etc.

These five mental activities are categorized as being universal activities and are therefore definitely associated with the store consciousness. The characteristic of universality will be explained later at length. These five mental activities, contact, etc., although different from the mode of activity of this consciousness as retribution, are similar to it in terms of time of occurrence, support, object, etc., and for that reason are said to be associated. The mode of activity of this consciousness is extremely inacute, unable to discriminate the character of objects as agreeable or disagreeable; it is subtle and fine, of a single species, and evolves in a continuous series; and for these reasons it is said [by Vasubandhu] that it is o n ly a s s o c ia t e d w it h th e f e e l in g of in d if f e r en ce. The feeling associated with this consciousness is retribution only, because it evolves in accordance with karma projected from a previous existence, does not depend on present conditions, and evolves due to the power of good and bad action, so there is only the feeling of indifference. The two feelings of pain and pleasure are born as a result of retribution but are not themselves retribution, because they depend on present conditions and thus are not associated with this consciousness.

Since this consciousness is constant and always the same, sentient beings always grasp it as an inner self. If it were associated with the two feelings of pleasure and pain and thus changed, how could it be grasped as the [changeless] self? Therefore it is only associated with the feeling of indifference. But if this is so, how can this consciousness be retribution for karma? Since it is 12a

71

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

admitted that good action can arouse feelings of indifference, bad action must be able to also. The feeling of indifference is not opposed to the classes of pain and pleasure, just as the indeterminate occurs along with good and bad.

Why is this consciousness not associated with mental activities with special objects, such as desire, etc.? Because these activities and this consciousness are opposed to each other. Desire arises from hope for something enjoyable, but this consciousness is unconcerned and hopes for nothing. Resolve comes from ascertainment of definite things, but this consciousness is dull and does not ascertain. Memory only occurs when one clearly remembers something known or practiced, but this consciousness is weak and dull and remembers nothing. Meditation is the ability to keep mind fixed on a single object, but this consciousness is unconcerned and has different objects of perception from instant to instant. Discernment occurs when there is an examination of such things as qualities, but this consciousness is subtle and dull and cannot examine. Therefore this consciousness is not associated with mental activities with special objects. Being nothing but retribution, it is not associated with such things as good, defilement, etc. As for the four indeterminate dharmas, such as shame, etc., these are intermittent and decidedly not retribution.

15. The Nature of the Eighth Consciousness

Dharmas are of four kinds: good, bad, indeterminate and veiled [i.e., defiled], and indeterminate and unveiled. In which kind is the alaya consciousness included? It is only indeterminate and unveiled, because its nature is that of retribution. If retribution were good, soiled, etc., then rebirth in samsara would not occur, nor would return [to nirvana] and extinction occur. Also, because this consciousness is the support of good, defiled dharmas, if it were itself good or defiled, it and dharmas would be contradictory and it could not act as the support for these two dharmas. Also, because this consciousness is by nature perfumable, then, if it were good or defiled, like something with a very fragrant 72

Chapter III

odor, it could not take perfuming. If there were no perfuming, then impure or pure causes and results would not occur. Therefore this consciousness is morally indeterminate and unveiled only.

The term "veiled" refers to a soiled dharma, because it constitutes an obstacle [like a veil] to the holy path, and also because it obscures mind and prevents purification. This consciousness is not soiled, and so it is said to be unveiled. "Determinate" means either good or bad, because good and bad have desirable or undesirable results and consequently, being of exceptionally strong natures, can be determined [as one or the other]. This consciousness is neither good nor bad; therefore, it is called "indeterminate." 16. The Nature of Mental Activities

[Vasubandhu's verses continue,] a n d t h e s a m e is t r u e o f m e n t a l c o n t a c t , e t c . This means that contact is like the eighth conscious- ness in being morally indeterminate and undefiled. Contact, attention, feeling, conceptualization, and volition are like it because associated dharmas must have the same moral nature. Or, the verse means that these five, such as contact, are like the alaya consciousness in being retribution, in the way that their mode of activity and objects are unknowable, in having as object three kinds of things, in being associated with five dharmas, and in being morally indeterminate and undefiled.

There is another interpretation [by Nanda] to the effect that the similarity of contact, etc., to the alaya is that both are retribution and contain all the seeds, and are indeterminate and undefiled, etc., and thus the word s a m e is unrestricted in its reference. This is unreasonable. Why? Because contact, etc., are supported by the eighth consciousness and are not independent. Like covetousness, faith, etc., are not perfumable, so how can they hold seeds in the way the eighth consciousness does? Also, if contact, etc., can be perfumed, would not sentient beings each have six kinds of substance? If that were the case, from what seeds would the results be born? Reason cannot allow that 73

12b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

results can come from six different seeds, because we never see a sprout born from six different seeds. If you claim that the result is produced from only one seed, then what is the use of the other five? Nor can it be said that seeds produce results in succession, because perfuming occurs simultaneously and has the same power, etc. Nor can you say that six results are born simultaneously, because no sentient being has six visual consciousnesses born at the same time in the space of an instant.

[Nanda replies,] I never said that contact, etc., can be perfumed and hold seeds. [Dharmapala says,] if that is not so, then how can contact, etc., like the eighth consciousness, be called "possessing all seeds"? [Nanda replies,] I mean that contact, etc., can be called "possessing all seeds" in the sense that these five mental activities have characteristics similar to seeds. They have the same objects as consciousness, and contact in the formless realm has an object, and [since there is no form,] a proximate objective condition [in the form of seeds] must exist. These quasiseeds are not the causes that engender actual consciousness, just as contact, etc., in the formless realm, like visual organs, etc., are not the support of consciousness. They are like the semblance of fire, which has no function of burning. [Dharmapala replies,] that solution to your problem is unreasonable, because if contact, etc., have the images of quasi-seeds, etc., as objects, that which they grasp and their place will be mixed with the eighth consciousness [which Yasubandhu says alone holds seeds]. Consequently, the expression "all seeds" is to be taken as meaning that it takes perfuming and holds seeds. If that is not so, then Vasubandhu's verse is guilty of needless repetition. Also [Nanda's statement] that the words "the same" are not restrictive and lead to a mixture [of functions] is not proved. The five mental activities, such as contact, are incapable of discrimination, and what is more, contact, etc., would end up being associated activities of the same contact, etc. Consequently, we know that the expression "the same" means "in the appropriate cases," not "in all cases. "

74

Chapter III

17. Evolving Like a Flowing Stream

Is the alaya consciousness constant or discontinuous? It is neither constant nor discontinuous, because it a l w a y s e v o l v e s . A lw ays means that from beginningless time, this consciousness has remained a homogeneous series, constant, without inter- ruption, because it serves as the origin of the three realms, the five paths of rebirth, and the four forms of birth, and because its nature is that of firmly holding the seeds and preventing their loss.

E v o l v e s means that from beginningless time, this consciousness is born and perishes from instant to instant and changes from its former state to a subsequent state. The cause perishes and the result is born, and therefore it is never the same, and for that reason it can be perfumed by the other evolving consciousnesses and create new seeds.

The word a lw ays denies cessation, while the word e v o l v e s shows that it is not constant. The simile l ik e a f l o w in g s t r e a m indicates the very nature of causation. Just as the water of a flowing river is neither constant nor discontinuous, and continues for a long time along with things that float in it or sink in it, so this consciousness, which since beginningless time is born and perishes in a continuous stream, is neither constant nor discontinuous, and carries with it floating and sinking sentient beings who cannot escape from it. Just as a flowing stream is not interrupted when a wind whips it into waves, so does this consciousness always continue on in a stream even though it encounters various conditions and generates visual consciousness and the like. Also, just as fish, plants, etc., float in the stream and follow it without being lost, so does this consciousness always follow its evolving course, carrying along its internal perfuming and external contact, etc. These similes show that this consciousness has been cause and effect from the beginning and is neither interrupted nor constant. That is, from beginningless time the nature of this consciousness is such that from instant to instant the result is born as the cause perishes. Because a result is born, there is no interruption; because 75

12c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

the cause perishes, there is no constancy. Its being neither discontinuous nor constant is the principle of conditioned arising. Therefore Vasubandhu says that this consciousness alw ays e v o l v e s l ik e A FLOWING STREAM.

18. Incorrect Doctrines

[The Sarvastivadins ask,] if [according to you] past and future do not really exist, you may still affirm nonpermanence, but how can you affirm noncessation? If there is only cessation, how can you conform to the correct principle of conditioned arising (pratityasamutpada)? [We reply,] if [according to you] past and future really exist, you can affirm nondiscontinuity, but how can you affirm nonconstancy? If there is only continuity, how can you conform to the correct principle of conditioned arising? [They reply,] how do you affirm your own interpretation by merely reviling ours? [We reply,] it is difficult to demonstrate the truth without first refuting the false. When the prior cause is in a state of cessation, the subsequent result is born, just as when one side of a scale sinks, the other side ascends. Thus cause and effect continue like a stream. Why argue a fictional past and future in order to avoid the error of cessation? [The Sarvastivadins object:] When the cause is actually present but the following result does not yet exist, of what is the cause a cause? When the result is present and the prior cause is extinct, of what is the result a result? If there are no causes or results, who avoids the errors of cessation and permanence? [We reply,] if the subsequent result already exists when the cause still exists, then since the result already exists on its own, what is the use for the prior cause? Since there is no meaning of cause, how can you hold to the notion of a result? If there are no causes or results, how can you avoid the errors of cessation and constancy? [They reply,] our interpretation of cause and effect rests on the activity of dharmas, and therefore your objection does not compromise our teaching. [We reply,] if the substance [of a dharma] exists on its own in advance, then its activity must also, because the causes and conditions that are required also would 76

Chapter III

exist on their own in advance. Consequently, the cause and effect you advocate do not exist, and you should believe in the correct principle of conditioned arising as held by the Mahayana. The correct principle is profound, subtle, and difficult to articulate. Such words as "cause" and "effect" are all metaphorical designations. When we contemplate an actual dharma that will later attract a functioning [dharma], we metaphorically posit a future dharma and say, with respect to it, that there is a present cause. When we contemplate a present dharma as corresponding to a former characteristic, we metaphorically posit a past cause and say with respect to it that there is a present result. "Metaphorically" means that present consciousness appears with the character of past and future. In this way, the principle of cause and effect is quite clear. It avoids the two extremes [of cessation and permanence] and conforms to the Middle Way. All wise people should follow this principle, practice it, and study it. [The Sthaviras say that] although past and future do not exist, still, there are causes and effects that continue in a series. Though the present stream of dharmas is extremely rapid, still each dharma in the series has two phases of existence, a former state and a subsequent one, a period of birth and a period of extinction. When it is born, it repays its cause; when it perishes, it attracts a result. Although there are these two phases or times, the substance of the dharma is unitary. Just as the prior cause perishes, the subsequent result is born, and although substance and characteristics are distinct, both occur simultaneously. Thus cause and effect are not metaphors. However, there are no errors of cessation and permanence, nor any of the problems cited earlier. Who of the wise would reject this and believe the other? [We reply,] your words are just vain chatter and meaningless. How can instantaneous dharmas exist in two times? The characteristics of birth and cessation are contradictory, so how can they coexist? If cessation is presently occurring, then birth must be in the future. "Existence" is called "birth," since it is in the present, and "nonexistence" is called "cessation," so it must be in the past. 77

13a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

If cessation is not nonexistence, then birth must be nonexistence, and since birth is present existence, cessation must be present nonexistence. Also, if the two characteristics are mutually contradictory, how can their substance be unitary? We do not see such things with contradictories such as pain and pleasure. If birth and cessation are one, they cannot occur in two different times. If birth and cessation are different, how can you claim that their substance is the same? Therefore the principle that birth and cessation are simultaneously in the present and have the same single substance as support is certainly not established.

The Sautrantika principle of the continuity of cause and effect is also not established, because it does not admit the existence of the alaya consciousness that holds the seeds. Consequently, you should believe in the correct principle of conditioned arising as the continuity of cause and effect as taught by the Mahayana. 19. Cessation of the Store Consciousness

From beginningless time, this consciousness has evolved like a stream. At what point is it utterly abandoned? It is a b a n d o n e d in t h e s t a t e o f a r h a t s h ip . Arhats are saints at the time when they terminate the obstacle of the passions (klesa-avarana) utterly. They are said to a b a n d o n [alaya consciousness] because at that time, the coarse and heavy class of passions is forever removed. The a r h a t refers to those of all three vehicles who have progressed beyond the stage of learning (saiksa); they are so called because they have slain the enemies who are the passions, because they are deserving of receiving the world's special veneration, and because never again will they experience birth [and death] by allotment [due to karma]. How do we know that this is so? Because some commentators, quoting the Viniscayasamgraha, say, "Arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and Tathagatas are not provided with an alaya consciousness." In the Abhidharmasamuccaya it says, "At the moment the bodhisattva attains bodhi, he suddenly cuts off the passions and the obstacle to that which is to be known and becomes an arhat and a Tathagata."

78

Chapter III

But if this is so, the seeds of the passions are still not utterly destroyed, and therefore they are not arhats. They must be provided with alaya consciousness. But, [it is asked,] why does the Viniscayasamgraha say that the nonregressing bodhisattva is not provided with an alaya consciousness? Because it says that those who have progressed beyond learning in the two [non-Mahayana] vehicles have a change of heart and turn toward great awakening; and because they do so they never regress or arouse the obstacle of passions. That is, they are called "nonregressing bodhisattvas" and are not provided with alaya consciousnesses. They are categorized as arhats, so these passages do not contradict our interpretation. Also, [according to Dharmapala,] in bodhisattvas from the [eighth] stage [of bodhisattvas, named] "Immovable" on, the passions are never again active, [hence they are said to be nonregressing]. They are also called "nonregressing bodhisattvas" because they proceed effortlessly in the rapid stream of the Dharma, they are able to engender practice among all activities, and they evolve and progress from instant to instant. However, even though these bodhisattvas have not utterly terminated the seeds of the passions in the consciousness as retribution, when they are aware of their own consciousnesses, the view of self and self-love, etc., never again grasp the store consciousness as an inner self. As a consequence, this consciousness loses the name of alaya for good, and therefore it is said that these bodhisattvas are not provided with alaya consciousnesses. These bodhisattvas are what is meant by "arhats. "

There is another interpretation [by Nanda] that says that from the very first stage on, the bodhisattva has realized the principle revealed by the two-fold emptiness [and is therefore said to be nonregressing]. He is also called that because he has acquired the two kinds of superior knowledge, he has eliminated the two heavy obstacles of discrimination, and he arouses various practices within a single activity. Even though he produces various passions in order to benefit [other beings], there are no transgressions involved in these passions, and for that reason he is called a "nonregressing 79

13b

13c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

bodhisattva. " Even though the bodhisattva has not eliminated innate passions utterly, when he recognizes his own consciousness, the view of self and self-love never again grasps this consciousness as an inner self. Consequently, it loses the name alaya, and it is said that he is not provided with alaya consciousness and that he is an arhat. Therefore the Abhidharmasamuccaya says that even though the bodhisattva in the ten stages (bhumi) has not forever exterminated all the passions, these passions are like poison that has been subdued by mantras and medicines, and so they do not give rise to transgressions associated with passions. He is called an arhat because in all stages of the bodhisattva he is like an arhat who has totally exterminated the passions.

[The two former masters reply to Nanda,] this explanation is unreasonable. In the first seven bodhisattva stages, there remain innate views of self and self-love that grasp the store consciousness as an inner self, so how can that consciousness lose its name of alaya? [Nanda replies,] it can be said that the name of alaya is lost if the views of self and self-love arising from discrimination never again attach to the store consciousness. [We reply that] in that case, the name must be abandoned in connection with streamwinners (srota-apanna), etc., who are still in the learning stage, and if you agree with that, it contradicts all the treatises. [Nanda replies,] passions in the bodhisattva in the ten stages are the result of true wisdom, so they are not transgressions. Stream-winners and the like cannot have passions of this kind, so how can they be compared with bodhisattvas? [We reply,] even though passions generated in the sixth consciousness are the result of true wisdom and are not transgressions, still the seventh consciousness in its state of impurity spontaneously acts and grasps the store consciousness [as a self], so how are these bodhisattvas not like stream-winners? Consequently, we know that [Nanda's] interpretation is not correct. Now, because the arhat totally and completely eliminates the gross and heavy class of passions in this [seventh] consciousness, he never again grasps the alaya consciousness as an inner self. Consequently, this consciousness forever loses the name of alaya, 80

Chapter III

which is said to be a b a n d o n e d [in Vasubandhu's verses]. The arhat does not abandon the whole substance of the eighth consciousness, for it must not be that at the moment when he is without a consciousness holding the seeds he enters nirvana without remainder (nirupadhisesa-nirvana).

20. Names and Types of the Eighth Consciousness

Even though all sentient beings are provided with an eighth consciousness, it has different names in accordance with the meaning. It may be called "mind" (citta) because it accumulates seeds perfumed by various dharmas. It may be called adana, or "maintaining" consciousness, because it holds the seeds and material organs and prevents their destruction. It may be called "support of the knowable" (jneya-asraya), because it is the support of dharmas that are known, whether impure or pure. It may be called "seed consciousness" (bija-vijnana), because it universally holds mundane and supramundane seeds. These names are suitable to all states [of spiritual development].

It is also called alaya, because it stores all defiled dharmas and prevents their loss, and because views of self, self-love, etc., grasp the store as an inner self. This name, however, applies only to ordinary beings and learners, because those beyond the learning stage, and nonregressing bodhisattvas, are not attached to impure dharmas. It is also called "consciousness as retribution" (vipaka-vijnana), because it is the result, in the form of retribution, of good and bad action that attracts the cycle of death and rebirth. This name applies only to ordinary beings, two-vehicle saints, and bodhisattvas, because at the stage of a Tathagata there are no indeterminate dharmas in the form of retribution. Finally, it is called "immaculate consciousness" (amala-vijnana), which is extremely pure, because it is the support of all unsoiled dharmas. This name only applies to consciousness in the stage of a Tathagata, because among bodhisattvas, [saints of] the two vehicles, and ordinary people, consciousness holds seeds and can be perfumed, and these people have not yet acquired an eighth consciousness that is 81

14a Demonstration of Consciousness Only

purified, etc. As a scripture says, "The immaculate consciousness of a Tathagata is the realm of purity and nondefilement, free of all obstacles, and corresponding to perfect mirror knowledge." The name alaya is extensively discussed in this treatise because its transgressions are serious and because it is the first to be abandoned. The substance of consciousness as retribution is abandoned by bodhisattvas as they are about to attain awakening and by disciples andpratyekabuddhas at the time they enter nirvana without remainder. At no time is immaculate consciousness abandoned, because there is no time when there is an end to benefitting beings and making them happy. Terms such as "mind," etc., apply generally to all states and should be used depending on the context.

However, generally speaking, the eighth consciousness exists in two states. The first is its impure state, which is indeterminate, associated only with five dharmas, such as contact, and has as an object the aforementioned things it grasps and holds (upadi), location (sthana), etc. The second is its pure state. Its nature is only good. It is associated with twenty-one mental activities: five universal activities, five activities with special objects, and eleven good activities. This is because the universal activities are always associated with all minds, and [regarding activities with special objects,] it is [always associated with desire] because it desires to experience and know what is perceived; [resolve,] because it always ascertains an object that is being contemplated; [memory,] because it always clearly records what has been previously experienced; [samadhi,] because the World-Honored Ones are never without unified minds; and [discernment,] because it always clearly discerns all dharmas. It is associated with eleven good mental activities because pure consciousness is always associated with pure faith, etc., because it is lacking in impurity, and because it is undistracted and unmoved. It is also associated with the feeling of indifference, because it spontaneously evolves evenly at all times. It has as its object all the dharmas, because perfect mirror knowledge universally has all dharmas as its object.

82

Chapter III

21. Proof of the Existence of the Eighth Consciousness How do we know that apart from visual consciousness, etc., the eighth consciousness has a separate, independent substance? Through holy teaching and proper reasoning. It says in the Mahayana-abhidharma Sutra, "From beginningless time, there has existed an element (,dhatu) that is the support of all dharmas, etc. From it come all the paths of existence and the attainment of nirvana." A. First Explanation

The eighth consciousness is very subtle by nature and is manifested only through its activity. The first half of the above passage shows that the eighth consciousness functions as cause and condition; the second half shows it functioning as the support of flowing and evolving [in samsara] and returning [to nirvana] and cessation. "Element" means "cause"; that is, from beginningless time, the seed consciousness has evolved in a continuous series [of causes and effects], producing all the dharmas spontaneously, and for that reason it is called a "cause."

The word "support" means "condition." As the "maintaining" consciousness, it has been the support of all dharmas since beginningless time, and for this reason it is their condition. That is, it is a support because it maintains the seeds, it is the support of actual, active dharmas, and it transforms into them. "Transforms into them" means that it transforms into a world receptacle and a body provided with organs. "Is their support" means that it acts as a support for the other evolving consciousnesses. That is, it holds and maintains the five material organs, and therefore the five kinds of consciousness—visual, etc.—evolve supported by it. And, because it is the support of manas, the sixth consciousness, manas consciousness also evolves supported by it. Because manas and manas consciousness are forms of evolving consciousness, they must, like visual consciousness, etc., be supported by organs existing simultaneously with them. The eighth consciousness, being a form of consciousness by nature, must also have a 83

i

t Demonstration of Consciousness Only

simultaneous support in the manas, or seventh, consciousness. This means that the function of this consciousness is that of being a cause.

The expression "from it" in the verse means "from this consciousness." "Come all the paths of existence" means "come good and bad paths of existence." This means that the eighth consciousness is responsible for holding all the dharmas conforming to transmigration in samsara and causes beings to transmigrate in samsara. Even though delusion, karma, and forms of birth are all transmigration, the verse only refers to "paths of existence," because they are the principal part of the result. Or the words "paths of existence" refer to both the places where one wanders in transmigration and to those things that cause one to transmigrate. Those things that accompany and assist the paths [such as the receptacle world] can also be called "paths of existence." Delusion, karma, and forms of birth are supported by this consciousness that acts as a support for transmigration.

The phrase "and the attainment of nirvana " means that as a result of this consciousness, there is the attainment of nirvana. This means that an eighth consciousness exists that holds all the dharmas favorable to return and cessation, and that causes the cultivator of the path to attain nirvana. The passage says only that one can experience and acquire the path, because nirvana does not exist dependent on this consciousness. Or it may speak only of the nirvana that is to be realized, because it is what the cultivator of the path really seeks. Or it may speak of both nirvana and the path to it, because both are in the category of returning and cessation. In other words, the word "nirvana" indicates the cessation that is realized, and the following "attains" refers to the path that attains. As a result of the path that cuts off, one cuts off delusions that are to be cut off, and at the ultimate, final stage, one fully attains nirvana. That which cuts off, that which is cut off, and the realization all depend on this [eighth] conciousness, which performs the function of supporting the returning and cessation.

84

Chapter III

B. Second Explanation

Also, the first quarter (pada) of the above verse shows that the self-nature of this consciousness is beginningless and always existent, while the last three quarters of the verse indicate, generally and specifically, that this consciousness is the support of both impure and pure dharmas. "Impure dharmas" means the truths of suffering and the origination of suffering [in the four noble truths]; i.e., the paths of existence and that which leads one into the paths, or, alternately, birth, and karma and delusion. "Pure dharmas" means the truth of cessation and the path to cessation; i.e., that which is realized and that which realizes, or nirvana and the path to it. Both dharmas exist in dependence on this consciousness, because it makes no sense to think that they are supported by the other [seven] evolving consciousnesses.

C. Third Explanation

The first quarter of the verse indicates the substance of this consciousness as being beginningless and continuous, while the last three quarters of the verse indicate that it is the support of the "three natures" (trisvabhava). These are the dependent on others (paratantra-svabhava), the falsely imagined (parikalpita-svabhava), and the perfected (parinispanna-svabhava), in that order. Now nothing mentioned in this verse can be found apart from the eighth consciousness. The Abhidharma Sutra says, "The consciousness that contains all the seeds is called alaya, because it embraces and stores all dharmas. I have revealed it to the superior ones. " That is, since this fundamental consciousness contains the seeds, it embraces and stores all impure dharmas. The name alaya comes from this. It is not like the superior nature [of the Samkhyas] evolving into Mahat, etc., because the seeds are not identical with the substance of the result [i.e., fundamental consciousness], The reason for this is that the support and that which is supported are born and perish together. It is also called alaya because impure dharmas and it embrace and harbor each other, and sentient beings grasp it as a self.

85

14c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

The hosts of bodhisattvas who have entered the path of insight and obtained actual contemplation of reality (tattvaabhisamaya) are called "superior ones" [in the verse]. They have the ability to realize and comprehend the alaya consciousness, and for that reason our World-Honored One properly revealed it. On the other hand, all bodhisattvas are called "superior ones." Even though prior to the path of insight they are unable to realize and comprehend the alaya consciousness, they are still capable of believing in, understanding, and seeking the transmutation of the support, and the Buddha was also referring to them. Other evolving consciousnesses do not have this meaning.

In the Samdhinirmocana Sutra, the Buddha says, "The adana consciousness is deep and subtle, and all the seeds [in it] resemble a flowing stream. I do not teach it to ordinary people or fools, fearing they will discriminate and grasp it as a self. " This consciousness is called adana ("maintaining") because it grasps and holds the seeds of dharmas, it grasps and holds the support that is material organs, and it grasps and holds the bond to rebirth and the continuity [of cause and effect]. It therefore says that this consciousness is called adana. Beings without hope of nirvana (agotraka) cannot glimpse its depths, and therefore it is said to be "extremely deep." Members of the family of those who seek rest [in nirvana] are unable to grasp it, and therefore it is said to be "extremely subtle. " It is the real seed of all dharmas. Moved by conditions, it produces the "waves" of the various evolving consciousnesses, but it continues on without interruption, like a flowing stream.

"Ordinary people" are those who belong to the family of those not destined to be awakened, and "fools" refers to those who seek rest. Fearful that they will discriminate and grasp it, fall into evil paths of existence, or encounter obstacles to the holy paths, our World-Honored One does not teach it to them. Only the eighth consciousness has these characteristics.

In the Lankavatara Sutra, the Buddha says, "Just as the ocean encounters the condition of wind and produces many waves but rolls on uninterrupted just as it is, so is it that the ocean of the store consciousness, battered by the wind of objects and perpetually 86

Chapter III

producing the waves of various forms of consciousness, rolls on without interruption just as it is." Visual consciousness, etc., is unlike a great ocean that always flows on in a stream while producing waves, and therefore we know that there is a separate eighth consciousness.

In these various Mahayana scriptures, it is said that this eighth consciousness exists. All Mahayana scriptures conform to the teaching of no self and contradict the notion of persons. They reject transmigration in samsara and turn toward returning [to nirvana] and cessation, they praise the Buddha, his Teaching, and Community of followers and condemn non-Buddhist [methods], and they teach the aggregates (skandhas) and deny [the existence of] originating beings. Those that adhere to the Mahayana affirm that these texts are among those that reveal the truth without distortion, and thus these are included as orthodox in the agamas, like the Ekottaragama, etc.

Also, Arya Maitreya demonstrates that the Mahayana scriptures are really the teachings of the Buddha by means of seven reasons: 1. Not predicted at the beginning. If Mahayana scriptures were preached by someone else after the Buddha's nirvana in order to destroy the True Dharma, why did the World-Honored One not predict it, as he predicted other calamities?

2. Mahayana and Hinayana have been active together from the beginning. The teachings of the two vehicles have occurred together from the beginning, so how does one know that just the Great Vehicle alone is not the word of the Buddha? 3. Mahayana teachings are not accessible to others. The teachings of the Mahayana are vast and extremely profound, are not the domain of speculation by non-Buddhists, etc., and they have not been taught in their scriptures; and even if they were taught, they are not believed. Therefore, it is false that Mahayana scriptures are not the words of the Buddha.

4. Mahayana teachings are totally established. If you claim that the Mahayana is the teaching of other Buddhas but not of the present Buddha, the principle that Mahayana teachings were taught by a Buddha is totally established.

87

15a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

5. Consequences of the existence or nonexistence of the Mahayana. If there is a Mahayana, then we must trust that these Mahayana teachings came from the Buddha, because no Mahayana can be found apart from them. If there is no Mahayana, then the teachings of the disciples must not exist either, because without the Mahayana, no one would become a Buddha. In that case, who would appear in the world to teach the vehicle of the disciples? Therefore that the vehicle of the disciples was taught by the Buddha but that the teachings of the Mahayana were not is not proper reasoning. 6. It is an antidote. Practitioners who make an effort based on Mahayana scriptures are able to obtain the nondiscriminatory insight that serves as an antidote to all the passions, and therefore they must be the teachings of the Buddha.

7. The meaning is different from the letter. The purport of the Mahayana teachings is extremely profound. The meaning cannot be construed simply by going by the letter of the text and then slandering it and denying its genuineness. Therefore the Mahayana is truly the teaching of the Buddha. As a verse in the Sutralamkara says, ["The Mahayana is the word of the Buddha] because of lack of prediction, simultaneous occurrence, not being accessible to others, total establishment, consequences of the existence or nonexistence [of Mahayana], being an antidote, and differing from the literal meaning. "

Scriptures of other Buddhist schools also teach the existence of an alaya consciousness that has a distinct self-nature, but they use a hidden meaning. For instance, the agama of the Mahasamghikas teaches this consciousness, using a hidden meaning, and calls it "root consciousness" (mula-vijnana). It is the support of visual and other forms of consciousness in the same way that the roots of a tree are the foundation for branches, etc. Visual consciousness does not function in this way.

Scriptures of both the Sthaviras and the Vibhajyavadins, using a hidden meaning, call this consciousness bhavafiga (bhava + anga) consciousness. Bhava means "existence," referring to the three realms of existence. Ahga means "cause," and only this 88

Chapter III

consciousness, being permanent and everywhere [including the formless realm, in which visual consciousness does not exist], can be a cause for the three realms of existence.

The Mahisasakas call this consciousness the "aggregate that lasts up to the end of samsara." Apart from this consciousness, there is no other aggregate or dharma that persists without interruption up to the end of samsara. In the formless realm, form is disrupted, and among the unconscious celestials (asamjhika-deva), etc., other forms of consciousness are extinct, and we have already exhaustively established that apart from form, mind, etc., the associated mental activities have no distinct substances of their own; and therefore this [alaya consciousness] is what is meant by the "aggregate that lasts up to the end of samsara." The Sarvastivadins also, using a hidden meaning, speak of this consciousness as an alaya. The Ekottaragama speaks of "love of alaya, pleasure in alaya, joy in alaya, and delight in alaya." That is, the alaya consciousness is the object, generally and specifically, of desire during the past, future, and present. Sen- tient beings grasp it as a real inner self, and it continues to generate sensual attachment up to the point when it is eliminated. Therefore the alaya is the real basis of sensual attachment. Beings are not attached to the other five aggregates that are grasped [as self]. When they are born in circumstances exclusively painful, they do not become attached to the other five aggregates that are grasped, but only hate them, thinking, "When will I be rid of this life, this that is common to all bodies, this suffering body and mind, and be allowed to be free and happy?"

Nor are the objects of the five kinds of consciousness the real basis of sensual attachment, because even though those who are free of desire do not desire or grasp after the five wonderful objects of desire, they still love the self. Likewise, pleasant feelings are not the real basis of sensual attachment, because even though those who are detached from the impurities of the third trance state (dhyana) are disgusted with pleasure, they still love the self. Nor is the view of real selfhood the real basis of sensual 89

15b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

attachment, because even though those who are not yet beyond the stage of learning believe that there is no self, and do not arouse any desire or love for the belief in a self, they nevertheless still arouse love for an inner self. Nor are the [other] evolving consciousnesses the real basis of sensual attachment, because even though those who are not yet post-learners and seeking the cessation of mind are disgusted with the other evolving consciousnesses, etc., they still love the self. Nor is the material body the real basis of sensual attachment, because even though those who are detached from the impurity of form are disgusted with the material body, they still love the self. Unassociated dharmas (viprayukta-samskara) have no distinct substance apart from form, mind, etc., and therefore cannot be the real basis of sensual attachment.

When ordinary people and those still learning [the Way] arouse self-love, whether they love the other aggregates or not, they still generate a self-love with this [alaya] consciousness as its object, and therefore only this consciousness is the real basis of sensual attachment. Consequently, when the Ekottaragama speaks of an alaya, it is indicating this, and only this, alaya consciousness. We have quoted the holy scriptures and now shall resort to correct reasoning. A scripture says, "It is that which has accumulated and created the seeds of impure and pure dharmas, and for that reason it is called citta ["mind," from the Sanskrit root ci, meaning "to accumulate"], because without this consciousness there is no mind to hold the seeds. "

22. A Sautrantika Position

[In opposition to the Sautrantikas, who believe that the first six forms of consciousness contain the seeds, we reply that] those evolving consciousnesses are disrupted in the samadhi of cessation (:nirodha-samapatti); they are born from sense organs, objects, [different acts of] attention, and vary as to moral species; and they easily dissipate, and being fleeting, like flashes of lightning, they do not endure. Therefore, they cannot be perfumed, they cannot 90

Chapter III

hold seeds, and they are not the mind that accumulates impure and pure seeds.

The eighth consciousness is a single species and is not interrupted, like the sesame seed that endures and can be perfumed, and therefore corresponds to the mind spoken of in the scriptures. If you do not admit the existence of a mind that can hold seeds, you not only contradict the scriptures, you also violate correct reasoning. Active dharmas of the classes "pure" and "impure" could not perfume and create seeds [in the absence of a consciousness that is perfumable], and if that were the case, the existing dharmas would quickly lose their power. Also, if presently existing pure and impure dharmas are born without seeds as cause, this would result in the spontaneous generation held by non-Buddhists. Form and other dharmas not associated with mind, like sound and light, etc., are not mind, and in principle are not perfumed by internal pure and impure dharmas, so how can they hold seeds? Also, they have no self-existence apart from consciousness itself, so how can they be considered to be the support of internal seeds? [In conclusion, then,] the evolving consciousnesses and their associated mental activities are interrupted as consciousness [in the meditative states of cessation], easily appear and disappear, are not independent [of form and mind], are not of the nature of mind, cannot hold seeds, and do not accept perfuming. Therefore reason demands that some other mind must exist that holds seeds.

23. A Divergent Sautrantika Position

Another [Sautrantika] theory is that although the first six forms of consciousness have changed from state to state since beginningless time due to the organs and their objects, they remain unchanged as the species (jati) [consciousness] and are therefore perfumable and can hold seeds [since they remain unchanged as the species "consciousness"]. As a result, impure and pure causes and effects are created, so what need is there for insisting on an eighth consciousness?

91

i5c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

[We reply,] your position makes no sense. Why? If your species (jati) is real, this is the same as what non-Buddhists teach. If you admit that the species is a fiction, then it has no particular function and must not have the ability to hold real seeds of internal dharmas. Also, in what category is your species, consciousness, included? If you categorize it as good or bad, it is unable to take perfuming, because you admit that it is determinate, like the cessation resulting from discrimination (pratisamkhya-nirodha, which, being good by nature, cannot be perfumed). If it is indeterminate, then when mind is either good or bad, there will be no nondetermined mind, and the species will be interrupted. If the actual mind is good or bad, the species cannot be indeterminate, because the particular species must be the same as the particular thing itself. Also, this species definitely does not exist in the mindless states [of samadhi], and since there is an interruption its nature is not firm and stable, so how can it be maintained that it holds seeds and takes perfuming? Moreover, since the minds of arhats and ordinary people would be of the same species, they would be perfumed by soiled and pure dharmas. To agree with this is a mistake. Finally, organs such as the eye, etc., would be of the same species as other dharmas, such as visual consciousness, and other organs, and would therefore perfume each other. You will not admit this, and so you should not hold the opinion that the species "consciousness" takes perfuming.

24. A Darstantika Opinion

Also, since two successive moments of the [first] six consciousnesses, whether as a species or as individuals, are not simultaneous, like two separate moments, they do not perfume each other, because the perfumer and the perfumed must be simultaneous. 25. The Mahasamghikas

As for the Mahasamghika opinion that the [first] six consciousnesses evolve simultaneously, [we reply that] they are not perfumable, for reasons given earlier, and therefore they also do not qualify as being able to hold seeds.

92

Chapter III

26. The Sthaviras

There is an opinion that prior form or mind becomes subsequent seeds of their own species without interruption, thus establishing the principle of cause and effect. Therefore the previously mentioned [eighth consciousness] is not established. This opinion is unreasonable, because it does not involve perfuming. Since the species of those [form and mind] are not perfumed, how can you maintain that the former becomes the seed of the latter? Also, if there is an interruption, [the dharma] is not born again. Those of the two vehicles who have progressed beyond the learning stage will have no final aggregates, because form and mind at the point of death become seeds for afterwards [when they cease in nirvana]. You must not say that form and mind alternate as seeds for each other, because, as previously mentioned, the evolving consciousnesses and form are not perfumable. 27. The Sarvastivadins There is also an opinion that the dharmas of the three times [past, etc.] exist, so that cause and effect move forward with no difficulty, so what is the point of holding the opinion that there is a consciousness that holds seeds? When a scripture says that mind is a seed, it means that it generates impure and pure dharmas and its energy is powerful.

This is not reasonable, because past and future are neither eternal nor present, and, like [imaginary] flowers in the sky, they do not really exist. Also, they have no function, because they cannot be held to possess the nature of causality. If there is no consciousness that holds impure and pure seeds, none of the causes and effects are established.

28. Bhavaviveka

There is an opinion that the Mahayana doctrine of emptiness as the denial of characteristics is absolute. Based on faulty inference, [Bhavaviveka] denies the existence of this consciousness as well 93

16a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

as all dharmas. He is in strong contradiction with the abovequoted scripture. To hold as unreal knowledge [of suffering], extinction [of its cause], realization [of nirvana], and practice [of the path], as well as defiled and pure causes and results, is to hold a terribly false view, because the non-Buddhists, slandering [the principle of] defiled and pure cases and results, also do not claim that [defiled and pure dharmas] are utterly nonexistent but only unreal.

If none of the dharmas really exists, bodhisattvas would not energetically cultivate and accumulate the equipment for bodhi in order to abandon samsara. What wise person would seek out the sons of a stone woman to use as an army in order to repel phantom armies? Therefore you must believe that there is a mind that holds seeds and that defiled and pure causes and results are based on it. That mind is the eighth consciousness. 29. Mind as Retribution

A scripture speaks of a mind that is retribution, influenced by good and bad karma. If this consciousness does not exist, mind as retribution must not exist. That is because visual consciousness, etc., is interrupted, and because it is not always the result of karma, then, being like a lightning flash, it is not mind as retribution. This is because [dharmas that are] retribution do not continue in a series after stopping. The "life principle," etc., are not like this. The six consciousnesses, such as the visual consciousness, that are agitated by karma, resemble sounds, etc., because they are not constant or continuous, and they are born of retribution, not retribution per se. It must be granted that there is a real mind as retribution that repays projected karma, that is found in the three realms, is not interrupted, that changes into the body and world receptacle, and acts as a support for sentient beings. [We argue this] because (1) apart from mind, body and world receptacle are in fact nonexistent; (2) dharmas not associated with mind have no real substance; and (3) the evolving consciousnesses, etc., do not always exist. Without this consciousness, what changes into a body and 94

Chapter III

world receptacle? Based on what dharmas can sentience be always established [in samadhi, etc.]?

Also, in states of samadhi, or not in those states, whether or not there is discriminative thought, there is, in fact, much physical feeling. Without it, the individual later would [upon leaving samadhi] not experience well-being or fatigue. If a real mind as retribution does not always exist, how can these physical sensations exist in that state? When non-Buddhists generate other thoughts that are good, etc., they must be actually generating a real mind as retribution, just as it is admitted that they generate them at other times, because they are not Buddhas but sentient beings. Consequently, there is always a real mind as retribution, and it is the eighth consciousness.

30. Paths of Rebirth and Forms of Birth

A scripture teaches that sentient beings transmigrate in five paths of ebirth (gati) and four forms of irth (yoni), because if his consciousness did not exist, the substance of those paths and forms of rebirth would not exist. The paths and forms of rebirth must exist and be perpetual, universal, and unmixed. Dharmas such as these can be established as truly real paths and forms of rebirth. With dharmas that are not retribution, paths and forms of rebirth would be confused, because, while abiding here [in one place], one would produce dharmas of other paths and forms of rebirth. Form as retribution, along with that which responds to action among the five forms of consciousness, do not constitute a universal [basis of] paths and forms of rebirth, because they do not exist in the formless realm. Good [dharmas] that are innate or responding to actions in the [sixth] thought consciousness, although constituting a universal [basis for] the paths and forms of rebirth, and being unmixed, do not always exist. Dharmas unassociated with mind have no real, independent substance and cannot be said to constitute a real [basis for] the paths and forms of rebirth.

Only mind as retribution and its mental activities are real, constant, universal, and unmixed and thus the real [basis for the] 95

16b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

paths and forms of rebirth. Without this mind, one born in the formless realm and generating [a thought that is] good, etc., would not have a path or form of rebirth. If it is admitted that the paths and forms of rebirth comprise all impurities, then one born in the formless realm and generating an impure mind would not have a path or form of birth, and this contradicts reason. We must avoid both the former and the present errors; therefore only the dharma of retribution is the real [basis for the] paths and forms of rebirth. Therefore the Tathagata is not included in the paths or forms of rebirth, because a Buddha has no indeterminate dharmas as retribution. Nor is he included in the [three] realms, because he has no impurity, because the World-Honored One has abandoned the truths of suffering and its cause, and because he has cut off the seeds of idle discourse (prapanca-bija). Since the [real basis for] paths of rebirth and forms of birth is mind as retribution and its activities, that mind and its activities cannot be established apart from the eighth consciousness, and therefore we know that there is a separate eighth consciousness.

31. Theory of Appropriation

A scripture says that the body provided with organs is "appropriated" [i.e., grasped and held]. If this consciousness did not exist, no appropriator would exist either. That is, only in the present, the five material sense organs and their support are appropriated; this must be the result of a mind that can appropriate them. Even though mind as retribution is attracted by former karma, it is neither good nor bad, it is omnipresent [throughout the three realms], it is of a single species, it is a continuous series, and it appropriates a body provided with organs. The evolving consciousnesses such as visual consciousness do not have these characteristics.

This statement means that the evolving consciousnesses such as visual consciousness are not omnipresent, are not a single species, are not a continuous series, and do not appropriate their own internal body provided with organs. It does not mean that the 96

Chapter III

appropriates is nothing but mind as retribution, because it must not be that the material bodies of Buddhas are not appropriated. Impure material bodies are appropriated only by the mind as retribution, hence the statement in the scripture. This means that the evolving consciousnesses appear as a result of present conditions, like sound, wind, etc., and because when they are good, bad, etc., they are not created by karma, like the cessation resulting from the absence of conditions. Because they are born of retribution and not retribution per se, are not universal supports, and do not continue in a series, like lightning flashes, etc., they cannot appropriate an impure material body.

The words "mind" and "consciousness" include mental activities, because they are definitely associated with the mind, just as the words "consciousness only" [include mental activities]. The material organs and dharmas unassociated with mind cannot appropriate a body provided with organs, because, like space, etc., they have no objects. Therefore there must be a separate mind that appropriates, and it is the eighth consciousness. 32. Life, Heat, and Consciousness

A scripture says that life, heat, and consciousness persist in a series through mutual support. Without this [eighth] consciousness, there would be no consciousness that could hold life and heat and cause them to be always present. The evolving consciousnesses are discontinuous, like sound, wind, etc., and do not have the function of perpetually supporting, so they cannot be established as the consciousness that supports life and heat. Consciousness as retribution alone is uninterrupted and unevolving, and, like life and heat, it supports perpetually, so that it can be established as the consciousness that supports life and heat.

The scripture says that the three dharmas [life, etc.] support each other and that life and heat are a homogeneous series. Is it reasonable to think that consciousness alone is not so? [It is objected,] although the scripture says that the three dharmas support each other, it also admits that only heat is not found throughout 97

16c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

17a the three realms, so why not admit that consciousness by itself evolves intermittently [when heat is absent]? [We reply,] your point does not contradict our former point. Whenever these three dharmas are present and continuous, they support each other constantly. Otherwise, they do not have the function of perpetually supporting each other.

The term "consciousness" that was used to make a logical point earlier as one of the three dharmas does not refer to the evolving consciousnesses, so how does bringing up the matter of heat as nonuniversal conflict with our principles? Our former point is completely proven.

Moreover, since life and heat among these three dharmas is only impure, we also know that consciousness, like them, is definitely not pure. When one is born in the formless realm and produces a pure mind, what consciousness supports that life? Consequently, we know that there is a consciousness as retribution that is a single species, is perpetual and universal, and can support life and heat, and that is the eighth consciousness. 33. Mind at Birth and Death

A scripture says that at birth and death, all kinds of beings are mentally distracted and not in the mindless samadhi. If this [eighth] consciousness did not exist, mind would not exist at the moment of birth or death. At the time of birth or death, body and mind are confused and dull, as they are in a dreamless sleep or deep faint, and the sharply perceiving evolving consciousnesses do not operate. In these states, the mode of activity and objects of these six forms of consciousness cannot be known, and therefore these consciousnesses, as in the mindless state [of samadhi], are not actually present. The existence of the activities and objects of the sixfold evolving consciousnesses must be knowable, just as they are at other times. Because the real consciousness as retribution is extremely fine and subtle, its mode of activity and objects cannot be discerned. It is the result of karma that leads [to rebirth] and for a time continues in a series, is perpetual, and 98

Chapter III

is unchanging. It is a distracted mind, and to refer to it as "mind at birth" or "mind at death" does not violate correct reasoning. There is a theory [by Nanda] that at birth and death the five [material] consciousnesses definitely do not exist. The mental consciousness (mano-vijhdna) grasps its object as a result of the [functioning of the] five [material forms of] consciousness, as a result of teaching, or as a result of samadhi, and since these causes are nonexistent at the time of birth, then the mental consciousness must not exist then either. [We reply,] if this were the case, sentient beings born in the formless realm will be forever without a mental consciousness, because the mind in samadhi arises as a result of the dispersal of the mental consciousness, the five [material forms of] consciousness and teachings by others do not exist in the formless realm, and there is no cause for the appearance of the dispersed mind that brings about samadhi. [Nanda says,] suppose that mind in samadhi suddenly appears later as a result of habitual repetition. [We reply,] why does it not appear as soon as one is bom in the formless realm? Also, the mental consciousness ought to appear by way of habitual repetition in both the realm of desire and the realm of form when one is first born there. If it does not appear during the first moment due to dullness and confusion, then this is the same argument we made earlier, so why bother with some other theory? According to other schools, at the time of birth or death, etc., there is a kind of mental consciousness that is extremely subtle and whose mode of activity and objects are imperceptible. They should realize that this is [really] the eighth consciousness, because the extremely effective mental consciousness is not like this. Also, at the moment of death, a sensation of coldness gradually is felt at the top or bottom of the body as a result of good or bad karma. This would not occur in the absence of the eighth consciousness, because the evolving consciousnesses are unable to appropriate a body, because each of the five forms of material consciousness, such as visual consciousness, has a separate support [such as the material eye], and because they are not active [at death]. The sixth [manas] consciousness is not in the body [at 99

i7b Demonstration of Consciousness Only

all times], its objects are not fixed, and when it fills the body it always continues in a series, so the sensation of cold ought not to arise gradually because of it. Only mind as retribution, through the power of previous karma, is constant, is all-pervading, continues in a series, and appropriates the parts of the body, and when it leaves these areas of the body it appropriates, the sensation of cold appears, because life, heat, and consciousness are not separated. The area where the cold appears is no longer sentient, and even though [the eighth consciousness] changes and has [that part of the body] as an object, it no longer appropriates it. We therefore know for certain that the eighth consciousness exists.

34. Consciousness and Name-and-Form (Ndma-Rupa)

A scripture says that consciousness and name-and-form (namarupa) condition each other. In this way, these two dharmas evolve by supporting each other, like two bundles of reeds, and they evolve simultaneously. In the absence of this [eighth] consciousness, the substance of the other consciousnesses would not exist. The scripture itself explains in the following manner: name {nama) refers to the four nonmaterial aggregates [such as feeling, consciousness, etc.], and form {rupa) refers to the kalala [embryonic material body], etc. These two and consciousness persist through mutual support, like two bundles of reeds supporting each other. They perpetually evolve together, simultaneously, and never separate. The evolving consciousnesses, such as visual consciousness, are included in the category nama, so without this [eighth] consciousness, what supports them? Also, it cannot be said that the aggregate of consciousness included in nama refers to the five [material forms of] consciousness and that by "consciousness, " the scripture means the sixth consciousness, because in the early embryonic state, there are no five [material forms of] consciousness. Also, [all six] evolving consciousnesses are discontinuous and therefore are without the power or continuity to appropriate name-and-form, so how can it be said that they 100

Chapter III

constantly support name-and-form? Therefore the word "consciousness" [in the scripture] refers to the eighth consciousness. 35. The Four Nutriments

A scripture says that all sentient beings are sustained by nutriment. Without this [eighth] consciousness, the substance of nutriment in the form of consciousness would not exist. A scripture lists four kinds of nutriment. The first is the nutriment we consume in mouthfuls, which is characterized by change and destruction. It consists of flavors, smells, and contact in the realm of desire, all serving as food when [the object] changes and deteriorates. Consequently, the sense base of form (rupa-ayatana) is not categorized as food eaten in mouthfuls, because form has no function when it is changing and deteriorating.

The second kind is nutriment as contact, which is characterized by contact with objects. It is impure contact that, at the moment of grasping its object, obtains satisfaction and serves as nutriment. Also, contact is associated with various consciousnesses, but it especially holds the meaning of nutriment in connection with the first six forms of consciousness, because contact with gross, obvious objects, obtaining satisfaction, pleasure, and consoling indifference are especially nourishing.

The third form of nutriment is intention, characterized by wish or aspiration. Impure intention and desire evolving together aspire to a desirable object and thus serve as nutriment. Although this intention is associated with various consciousnesses, it especially holds the meaning of nutriment in connection with mental consciousness, because that consciousness especially aspires towards objects. The fourth kind is nutriment as consciousness, which is characterized by grasping and holding. It is impure consciousness that increases through the power of food eaten in mouthfuls, contact, and intention, and serves as nutriment. Although this kind of consciousness is common to the substances of various forms of consciousness, it especially deserves the meaning of nutriment in connection with the eighth consciousness, because it is homogeneous, 101

17c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

continues in a series, and is preeminent in grasping and holding [seeds]. Thus theAbhidharmasamuccaya speaks of four nutriments comprised in three aggregates, five sense bases, and eleven sense fields.

These four are called "nutriment" because they sustain the bodies and lives of beings and prevent their disruption and destruction. Nutriment in mouthfuls is used only in the realm of desire, and nutriment consisting of contact and intention is found throughout the three realms, but all forms of nutriment depend on the evolving consciousnesses and may or may not exist depending on whether the latter exists.

The evolving consciousnesses such as visual consciousness are intermittent and changeable and are not always and everywhere able to sustain body and life. For instance, they are interrupted in unconscious samadhi, deep sleep, fainting, and among the unconscious celestials (asamjnika-deva). Even in the state of consciousness, these evolving consciousnesses change according to the support, object, nature, realm of existence, and the [spiritual] stage of the individual, etc., and therefore they are not present everywhere or constantly to support life and body. Those who hold the theory that the eighth consciousness does not exist should explain what nutriment it is that the scripture speaks of in saying that all sentient beings are supported by food.

[Refuting the Sarvastivadins, we say that] past and future consciousness, etc., is not nutriment in the unconscious states because it is neither present nor constant. Like [imaginary] flowers in the sky, it has no substance or function. Even if it had substance and function, it is not present, and, like space, etc., it does not function as nutriment. Nor can it be claimed that mind, etc., of someone entering samadhi can be nutriment for sentience in the mindless state, because when one is unconscious, mind ceases to operate, and its past is not nutriment, as we have already amply demonstrated. Nor can it be said that dharmas unassociated [with mind] serve as nutriment in the unconscious samadhi, because they are not included in the list of the four nutriments, such 102

Chapter III

as ordinary food, and because these dharmas have no real existence. There is a theory [of the Sthaviras] that in the samadhi of cessation, the sixth consciousness still exists and serves as food for these beings, but that theory is untenable and will be refuted at length later. We need an explanation as to what the nutriment is for someone with a pure mind [in the realm of form or the formless realm], because pure mind crushes and destroys existence, and therefore it cannot serve as food for that body and life. Nor can it be claimed that impure seeds in the pure consciousness serve as nutriment, because, like nirvana, a pure consciousness cannot hold impure seeds. Nor can it be held that the bodies and lives of sentient beings in the two upper realms sustain each other as nutriment, because body and life are not included in the list of the four nutriments. Also, no body exists in the formless realm, life has no support, and homogeneous existence (nikaya-sabhdgata), etc., are lacking in real substance.

Consequently, we know that apart from the evolving consciousnesses, there is a consciousness as retribution that is homogeneous, constant, and omnipresent and that serves to sustain body and life and prevent their termination. Therefore the World-Honored One said, "All sentient beings live by means of nutriment. " Even though sentience is established on the basis of the existence of the aggregates that are grasped (upadana-skandha), the Buddha is lacking in impurity [and hence the grasping aggregates] and therefore is not considered to be a sentient being. When it is said that he is a sentient being and exists by means of nutriment, you should understand that this is said concerning [the Buddha's] magical display [of being sentient and requiring nutriment]. Inasmuch as consciousness as retribution has a special nature as nutriment, the consciousness characterized as nutriment is the eighth consciousness.

36. Samadhi of Cessation

A scripture says that the activities of body, speech, and mind of someone in the samadhi of cessation (nirodha-samapatti) are all 103

i8a Demonstration of Consciousness Only

extinguished; yet life does not end, heat does not leave the body, the sense organs do not deteriorate, and consciousness does not leave the body. Apart from this [eighth] consciousness, no consciousness that does not leave the body would exist in someone in this samadhi. Forms of consciousness such as visual consciousness are gross and unstable in their activities and characteristics, and when they occur in relation to the objective realm, there is fatigue and anxiety, so one becomes disgusted with them and seeks to stop them for awhile, subduing them gradually to the point where they cease completely. The samadhi of cessation results from this state; therefore, in this samadhi, these forms of consciousness cease. If you do not admit the existence of a consciousness that is subtle, homogeneous, constant, and omnipresent and sustains life, [heat,] etc., how can [the scripture] speak of a consciousness that does not desert the body?

37. Refutation

If you [Sarvastivadins] claim that consciousness returns later [after samadhi], like a fever that returns after a day [of absence], and that it does not leave the body, then you must not claim that mental activity ceases, because consciousness appears and disappears with such things as thought. Life, heat, and sense organs would be like consciousness [in leaving and reappearing], and that would be a great error. Therefore you must admit that consciousness, like life, heat, etc., really does not leave the body. Also, if consciousness is completely absent in this state, [the body] would resemble roof tiles or stones, not a sentient being, so how could you say that someone in samadhi was sentient?

Also, if consciousness as retribution does not exist in this state [of samadhi], what sustains the sense organs, life, and heat? Without something to sustain them, they would deteriorate and perish. One would be like a corpse, lifeless, without heat, etc. In that case, consciousness could not return. When a scripture says that consciousness does not leave the body, to what is it referring? When consciousness as retribution has left the body, it will not be born 104

Chapter III

again except in other bodies.

[In reply to a Sautrantika theory that holds that form holds the seeds, we say,] if there is no consciousness to hold seeds during this state, how can a post-samadhi consciousness without seeds appear? We have already fully shown that past and future, and dharmas unassociated with mind, do not have real substances. Dharmas such as form do not exist apart from consciousness, and we have refuted the notion that they take perfuming and hold seeds. However, mindless states such as the samadhi of cessation, like samadhi in which consciousness exists, have consciousness provided with sense organs, life, and heat, because those in these states are considered to be sentient beings. From this reasoning we conclude that someone in the samadhi of cessation has a consciousness that does not really leave the body.

[Other Sautrantikas] have a theory that the sixth consciousness (mano-vijhana) exists in this state, and that that is why [the scripture] says that consciousness does not leave the body. This is not reasonable, because this state is also called "unconscious samadhi." If you claim that the reason it is referred to as "unconscious" is that the five [sense] consciousnesses are absent, then all samadhi should be called "unconscious," because all lack these five forms of consciousness. The sixth consciousness is included among the six evolving consciousnesses and, like the [first] five forms, is absent in the samadhi of cessation.

Also, because in this state the mode of activity and objects of this [sixth] consciousness are imperceptible, then, like life, heat, etc., it is not the sixth consciousness [that exists in this state]. [Finally,] if the mode of activity and objects of this consciousness are perceptible in this state, it must resemble other states and not really be samadhi, because the basic purpose for entering this samadhi is to stop those things.

Also, if the sixth consciousness exists in this state, then mind and its activities either exist or do not. If they exist, the scripture could not say that in this state mental activities cease completely. Nor would it be referred to as the "samadhi of the cessation of 105

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

i8b feeling and conceptualization. " [The Sautrantikas say that] in the preparatory stage of this samadhi, one is disgusted only with feeling and conceptualization, and therefore there is cessation of only feeling and conceptualization in this state. Feeling and conceptualization are strong in assisting the mind and therefore are alone called "mental activities," so what is the problem if we speak of the cessation of mental activities? [We reply that] in the samadhi of nonconceptualization, only conceptualization must cease, because the individual is only disgusted with conceptualization, but you do not concede this. Since it is only feeling and conceptualization that are strong in assisting the mind, then when these two cease, so should mind. [The Sautrantikas reply,] just as physical activities cease [in samadhi] but the body itself persists, why insist that mind perishes when its activities cease? [We reply,] in that case, when the vocal activities of reflection and investigation cease, the voice would not cease, but will you admit this? Activities (samskara) of dharmas are either universal or nonuniversal. When a universal activity ceases, the dharma it conditions ceases also. When a nonuniversal activity ceases, the dharma may still exist. An example of nonuniversal activities is inspiration and expiration, because when respiration ceases, the body may still exist. Reflection and investigation in speech are universal activities because if they cease there is no speech. Feeling and conceptualization are also universal activities of mind, because, as you admit, they, like volition, etc., are categorized as activities associated with all thought (mahdbhumika). When feeling and conceptualization cease, mind must cease accordingly. How can it be said that they cease while mind persists?

Also, since you admit that volition, etc., are activities associated with all thought, then when feeling and conceptualization cease, so must they. In that case, such things as faith must also not exist in this state, because when universal activities cease, the others cannot exist either, so how can you claim that they exist? Since you admit that volition, etc., are not nonexistent in this state, the same must be so of feeling and conceptualization, because they 106

Chapter III

are activities associated with all thought.

Also, if volition, etc., exist in this samadhi, then so must contact, because there are none of the other mental activities that are not born through the power of contact. And, if you admit that contact exists [in this state], so must feeling, because feeling is conditioned by contact. And, if you admit that feeling exists in this state, conceptualization must occur also, because they are never separated. [The Sautrantikas reply,] just as feeling conditions craving but not all feeling does so, likewise, contact conditions feeling but not in all cases, and thus consequently your argument is not valid.

This is incorrect, because distinctions need to be made. The Buddha has summed it up by saying that "Feeling conditions and generates craving only when it is born of contact accompanied by ignorance." Nowhere did he say that contact generates feeling. Therefore when contact exists, there will be feeling. The principle that feeling occurs with conceptualization is certain. In other words, feeling and conceptualization must not cease, as in other states, because you maintain that in this state, volition, etc., exist. If you admit this, then you reject the word [of the scripture], "cessation of mental activities, " and consequently lose the sense of "samadhi of the cessation of feeling and conceptualization. " 38. Mind without Mental Activities

[In reply to a Sautrantika claim that mental consciousness without its activities exists in samadhi, we reply] if the mental activities do not exist, neither does consciousness, because no other mind is found apart from mental activity, because when universal mental activities cease, so does the dharma [they characterize], because feeling, etc., would not be activities associated with all thought (mahabhumika), and because this consciousness [argued by the opponents] would not be associated with anything. If you admit this, then this consciousness also has no supporting objects, and will resemble form more than mind.

Also, a scripture says, "Mental consciousness is conditioned 107

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

i8c by and generated by thoughts and dharmas. The union of these three is contact, and simultaneously with that arise feeling, conceptualization, and volition." If mental consciousness exists in samadhi, the three must be united and must therefore include contact. Since contact is always united with feeling, conceptualization, and volition, how can you have consciousness but not mental activities?

[The Sautrantikas reply,] even though at other times the union of the three has power to produce contact and, through contact, generate feeling, etc., [still] as a result of producing disgust with mental activities prior to entering samadhi, in this state these three things have no power and so do not generate contact; thus feeling, etc., also do not occur. [We reply,] in that case, you ought to call it the "samadhi of the cessation of mental activities," not the "samadhi of the cessation of feeling and conceptualization." [The Sautrantikas reply,] when disgust occurs, it is disgust with only feeling and conceptualization, and when these two cease, all other mental activities also cease. The name of the samadhi derives from the prior disgust with feeling and conceptualization. [We reply,] in that case, the mind must cease in this samadhi, because mind is associated with the feeling, etc., with which one is disgusted, just like other mental activities. Otherwise, how can it be called "mindless samadhi "?

Also, what is [the nature of] this mental consciousness that exists in samadhi? It cannot be soiled or indeterminate, for these reasons: (1) these things [impurity, etc.] do not exist in samadhi, which is itself categorized as "good," (2) other impure and indeterminate minds must have mental activities; (3) one cannot generate impurity, etc., by becoming disgusted with good; and (4) one does not give rise to discrimination by seeking stillness. If you claim that [mental consciousness in samadhi] is [morally] good because its associates are good, then it should be associated with such roots of goodness as noncovetousness. This mind is not intrinsically good, nor is it good in the ultimate sense, because that would contradict your own doctrines, since it is not a 108

Chapter III

root of goodness or nirvana. If you claim that this mind is good by virtue of originating from a similar cause, because it is attracted and aroused by the root of goodness of effort, your reasoning is invalid and you contradict your own tenets, because, like other good minds, it is not generated by a similar cause. A good mind may produce three kinds of minds immediately [i.e., good, bad, and indeterminate], so why does a good mind result [necessarily] from a former good mind? Thus a mind is good by virtue of its associates. In this case, it must be associated with the roots of goodness. How can you claim that this mind alone has no activities? Without mental activities, the mind itself would not exist.

We conclude that in the state of samadhi, the evolving consciousnesses such as visual consciousness leave the body, and consequently the statement in the scripture "does not leave the body" refers to the eighth consciousness. When one enters the samadhi of cessation, the samadhi does not end this extremely still and sustaining consciousness. This can also be understood with reference to such states as the samadhi of nonconceptualization (asamjhika-samdpatti).

39. Impure and Pure Dharmas

A scripture says, "Because mind is impure, sentient beings are impure; because mind is pure, sentient beings are pure." If this [eighth] consciousness did not exist, impure and pure minds would not exist. This means that impure and pure dharmas are rooted in minds, because they are born with mind as their cause and they perish with mind as their cause, and also because mind experiences their perfuming and holds their seeds.

There are, generally speaking, three kinds of impure dharmas: the passions (klesa), karma, and results [of karma], because of the distinction of various kinds. Without this eighth consciousness to hold the seeds of the passions, there would be no causes for the changing from one realm or [spiritual] stage to another or for the arising of passions after a pure thought. This is because no other dharmas 19a 109

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

can hold the seeds, and because past and future do not really exist. If you say that passions occur without a cause, then you deny the fruits of learner (saiksa) and post-learner (asaiksa), because [the passions] would appear among those who have eliminated them. Without this consciousness to hold the seeds of karma and its results, the arising of karma and its results would occur without any cause after a change of realm or stage and after a dharma of a different species. We have already refuted other seeds and causes above. If karma and its results are born without a cause, then karma and its results within the three realms will occur in one who has entered nirvana without remainder. Also, the passions would appear without a cause. Also, the conditioning of consciousness by karmic predispositions would be impossible, because we have already refuted the idea that the evolving consciousnesses can hold perfuming. Also, an impure consciousness bound by rebirth does not respond to karmic predispositions, because one would have to say that name-and-form are conditioned by the karmic predispositions. Also, dharmas separated in time and space cannot act as conditions. Since this is impossible, the following [becoming being conditioned by grasping] is also not possible. Pure dharmas are of three kinds, due to the differences of (1) mundane path, (2) supramundane path, and (3) results of elimination [of passions]. In the absence of this consciousness that holds the seeds of mundane and supramundane pure paths, pure dharmas would arise without a cause subsequent to a mind of another kind. We have already made our objections to other kinds of causes. If the two pure paths originate without a cause, then they would occur again after one has entered nirvana without remainder, and its support [which is the physical body] would be born without a cause.

Also, the supramundane path would not initially occur, because there would be no dharma [i.e., eighth consciousness] to hold supramundane seeds, because impure dharmas are of a different type and do not cause it to arise. And, if you believe that [the path] arises without a cause, you are no Buddhist. And, if the first 110

Chapter III

[supramundane] path does not arise, neither will the later one, and in that case there will be no fruit of the paths of the three vehicles.

Without this consciousness to hold the seeds of the passions, the transmutation of the support or fruit of cutting off [of passions] does not occur. That is, when the path arises, neither actual, present passions nor their seeds exist, because impure minds and pure minds do not exist together. The path associated with the mind does not contain the seeds, because their respective natures are different, just as nirvana is [different from the seeds]. [Replying to the Sarvastivadins,] past, future, and [such dharmas as] acquisition do not really exist, and it is not possible for any other dharma to hold seeds. Since [then] there is nothing to be eliminated, neither is there any [path] that can eliminate, and therefore on the basis of what, and as a result of what, can the fruit of elimination [of passions] be established? [They object,] the fruit of elimination [of passions] takes place because, as a result of the power of the path, the passions are not reborn, [but we reply that] in that case, when the path first arises, one will become a post-learner, because, there being no cause, no passions will be born henceforth.

However, if you concede the existence of this [eighth] consciousness, all problems are resolved, because only it can hold impure and pure seeds. There are innumerable reasons that prove the existence of this consciousness, but this discussion has been abbreviated out of concern for prolixity. That this consciousness exists is shown in both the holy teachings and through reason. All wise people should profoundly believe in it and accept it. I l l