T1585 Three Texts on Consciousness Only

Chapter IV

Manas

Having thus explained the characteristics of the first transforming consciousness, what are the characteristics of he second transforming consciousness?

N ext, the second transforming consciousness; This consciousness is called m a n a s . It evolves supported by that [ALAYA} and with that AS ITS OBJECT,

A nd has the nature and character of thinking. It IS ALWAYS ACCOMPANIED BY FOUR PASSIONS: Delusion about self, view of self, Self conceit, and self-love,

A long with others such as contact. It is defiled and morally neutral A nd bound by the place of birth. In the arhat, the s a m a d h i of cessation, A nd the supram undane path , it does not exist. Following the discussion of the first transforming consciousness, consciousness as retribution, it is necessary to explain the characteristics of he transforming consciousness that is thinking {manas). This consciousness is given the special name of manas in holy teachings because it surpasses all other forms of consciousness in constantly thinking. How does its name differ from that of the sixth, mental consciousness? Its name "manas consciousness" is a [Sanskrit compound named] karma-dharaya, like the compound alayavijfiana ("consciousness that is alaya"), because the consciousness 19b

113

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

is the alaya. The name of the other [mano-vijnana] is a tatpurusa [compound] similar to the term "consciousness of the eye," because the consciousness is not the same as the manas [but means the "manas consciousness"]. Holy teachings, fearful of confusing [manas] with the other [mano-vijnana], refer to the seventh consciousness simply as manas. It is also called manas in order to distinguish it from mind [that is alaya consciousness] and the [first six] consciousnesses, because it is weaker than those in its power to accumulate [seeds] and discriminate. It is only named manas out of a need to show that it is the immediate support of mental consciousness.

It e v o l v e s s u p p o r t e d b y t h a t indicates its support. T h a t refers to the preceding transforming consciousness [i.e., alaya], because the holy teachings say that this consciousness is supported by the store consciousness. There is an interpretation [by Nanda] that this manas has the seeds of the other [store consciousness] as its support, not the actual consciousness, because it is not discontinuous and does not require a simultaneous support in an actual consciousness to be born. There is another interpretation [by Dharmapala] that it is supported by both the actual [eighth] consciousness and by its seeds, because even though it is not discontinuous, it does evolve easily and is referred to as an evolving consciousness, and it is born through the simultaneous support of the actual consciousness. E v o l v e s refers to perpetual movement and indicates that this consciousness is perpetually supported by that [alaya] consciousness, because it grasps it as its object. 1. Meaning of "Support"

Mind and its activities have supports, and these are, in general, of three kinds. The first is support in the form of a condition as cause, which consists of its own seeds. All conditioned dharmas depend on this support, because they cannot occur in the absence of their own condition as cause.

The second is support in the form of a dominant condition, consisting of the six internal sense bases (ayatana). All mind and 114

Chapter IV

mental activities depend on this support, because in the absence of simultaneous organs they do not evolve.

The third is support in the form of a similar and immediately antecedent condition (samanantara-pratyaya), which refers to the extinct prior [moment of] manas. Mind and its activities depend on this support, because they do not appear apart from the organ that opens up and guides. Only mind and its activities, and no other dharma, have these three kinds of supports and are called "having a support."

2. Support as Causal Condition

As for the first support, the seeds, it is said that the seeds must have already perished before the present result is born, because th eAbhidharmasamuccaya speaks of "already born without seeds," and because seeds do not exist simultaneously with the sprouts, etc. There is an opinion [by Dharmapala] that this does not prove the point, because [the above text] says that the support attracts and engenders subsequent seeds. Also, the point that seeds produce sprouts is not an ultimate truth, that the sprout appears when a seed has perished is not exhaustively demonstrated, and [we have the example of] the flame and the torch being simultaneous causes for each other.

However, there is no simultaneity of cause and effect among seeds of the same species, but seeds and actual dharmas do generate each other and unquestionably exist simultaneously. Therefore, as for the meaning of "causal condition," the Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says, "Impermanent dharmas are causes of [things of] another nature and are causes of a subsequent moment of their own nature." "Own nature" shows that the prior seeds are causes for subsequent seeds of like kind, while the words "another nature" means that seeds and actual dharmas act as mutual causes. The Mahayanasamgraha says, "The store consciousness and impure dharmas act as causal conditions for each other, just as bundles of reeds [supporting each other] exist simultaneously." It also says, "The seeds and their results must exist simultaneously." 115

i9c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

Therefore seeds as supports are definitely not sequential. Even supposing that some sources say that there is a sequence in seeds and their results, you must realize that these sources are concessional. Thus [each of] the eight forms of consciousness and their activities have specific seeds as support.

3. Support as Simultaneous Condition

Next is the simultaneous support (sahabhu-asraya). [Nanda says that] mind (manas) is the support of the five consciousnesses such as visual consciousness, because they must have it as a support when they are present. Organs such as the eye are not separate, simultaneous supports [for the five consciousnesses] because the five organs are seeds. A passage from Vasubandhu's "Twenty Verses" says, Consciousness is born of its own seeds

And evolves appearing as an external realm of objects. To establish [the distinction of] internal and external sense bases,

The Buddha has said that there are ten.

The verse means that because the World-Honored One is establishing the twelve sense bases (ayatana), he speaks of the seeds of the five [material] forms of consciousness as being the visual organ, etc., and the perceived aspect of these five forms of consciousness as being material objects, etc.; and therefore the visual organs, etc., are seeds of the five forms of consciousness. [Dignaga's Alambana-pariksa] says,

Energies of form in consciousness are called the "five organs";

Energies and objective form have been mutual causes from beginningless time.

This verse means that the seeds in consciousness as retribution, that are able, as eyes, etc., to generate the consciousness of form, are referred to as "energies of form. " These are called the "five organs," and there are no separate eyes, etc. [apart from them]. 116

Chapter IV

The seeds and consciousness of form constantly act as causes for each other, because the seeds and the perfuming [consciousness] alternate as causes. The seventh and eighth consciousnesses do not have this special support, because, perpetually evolving in a series, their own power is superior. The sixth, mental consciousness, has a special support, because it requires the support of mind (:manas) in order to appear.

There is an interpretation [by Sthiramati] that says that the above explanation contradicts both scripture and reason. If the five material organs are seeds of the five forms of consciousness, there will be confusion and disorder among seeds of the eighteen sense fields. The eighteen sense fields are each said to have its own seeds, which is confirmed in many places in scripture. Also, the seeds of the [first] five consciousnesses have different powers to generate either the seen part or the seeing part. Which of them do you refer to as "visual organ," etc.? If you mean the seeds of the seeing part, it must be included in the aggregate of consciousness (vijnana-skandha). If ou mean the seen part, it must be included in the external sense base (ayatana). In either case, you contradict the holy teaching that the five material consciousnesses are the aggregate of form (rupa-skandha) categorized as an internal sense base.

Moreover, if the five organs are seeds of the [corresponding] five forms of consciousness, then the five organs must be the causal condition of the five consciousnesses, and we must not say that they are the dominant condition. Also, if the organs of nose and tongue are seeds of the two [corresponding] consciousnesses, then smell and taste must exist only in the realm of desire, or the two consciousnesses will be found throughout the realm of form; and to assent to either point contradicts holy teachings. Also, if the organs of eye, ear, and body are seeds of the three [corresponding] consciousnesses, the same difficulty arises with respect to the two stages [realm of desire and first dhyana] and five stages [realm of form and four dhyanas]. Moreover, since the seeds of the five consciousnesses are both good and bad, the five 117

20a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

material organs must not be merely indeterminate. Again, the seeds of the five consciousnesses will be categorized as unappropriated, and the five organs will also not be appropriated. Also, if the five material organs are seeds of the five consciousnesses, then the seed of the mental consciousness must be manas, because its relationship to mental consciousness is the same as that between the five organs and their forms of consciousness. Also, the Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says that visual consciousness, etc., have a triple support. If the five material organs are seeds of their [corresponding] consciousnesses, [visual consciousness, for example,] will have two supports. Also, holy teachings say that the organs of the eye, etc., are both actual dharmas and seeds. To restrict them to the meaning of just seeds is a contradiction with all the holy scriptures.

We may ignore the above problems [raised by Sthiramati] and stick to the thesis that the organs are seeds. The five material organs are seeds of karma in the form of dominant conditions within consciousness as retribution that influence the [corresponding] five forms of consciousness, and thus they are not seeds as the causal condition that generates the five consciousnesses. This both conforms to the verses [quoted above] and is in harmony with the Yogacarabhumi \Sastra].

[Sthiramati says that] these are words without real significance, for the following reasons: (1) the five material organs must not be indeterminate; (2) they must not be exclusively appropriated; (3) they must not be categorized solely as the aggregate of form; (4) they must not be exclusively internal sense bases; (5) nose and tongue must be found only in the realm of desire, and the three [other] organs [eye, ear, and body] must not be found in the five stages; (6) the karma that influences mental consciousness must be the manas; (7) eye, etc., would not be common to both actual dharmas and seeds; (8) they must not be material organs; (9) if the five consciousnesses are influenced by karma, then they must be categorized as indeterminate; and (10) since the five consciousnesses that are good, etc., are not influenced by karma, 118

Chapter IV

the eye, etc., must not be their simultaneous support. Therefore the claim [that the organs are seeds] does not help very well. Also, [says Sthiramati,] many places in the holy teachings say that the alaya consciousness transforms to resemble the material organs, supporting bases for the organs, world receptacle, etc., so how can you deny material organs? To admit that visual consciousness, etc., transform to resemble form, etc., but not to admit that visual consciousness, etc., are transformations of the store consciousness, is to be profoundly deluded [about both store consciousness and seeds] and to contradict both teachings and reason. However, as for the statement [in the "Twenty Verses" and the Alambanapariksa] that the energies or seeds are called "five organs," its purpose is to block [the notion that] there are real material organs apart from consciousness. The names "seeds" and "energies of form" are metaphorically applied to apparent eyes, ears, etc., that are transformations of consciousness, because they function to generate the five forms of consciousness. It does not mean that material organs are karmic seeds of consciousness. Also, [continues Sthiramati,] the clearly discerning mental consciousness that has the five material realms as objects must have the five kinds of consciousness as its simultaneous support, because it must be simultaneous with the five forms of consciousness. If it does not have visual consciousness, etc., as a support, it will not be a support for them, because both have equal power, etc., to support each other.

Also, even though the seventh consciousness is not interrupted, it changes easily on the path of insight and elsewhere, and thus like the [first] six consciousnesses it must have a simultaneous support. Otherwise it would not be included among the evolving consciousnesses, and this would contradict the holy teachings that there are seven evolving consciousnesses. Therefore you must admit that it has a simultaneous support, which is the actual, present, eighth consciousness.

According to the Yogacarabhumi [,Sastra], "There is a store consciousness; therefore, there is a manas; and with manas as a 119

20b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

support, mental consciousness evolves." What this means is that it is with the actual store consciousness as its support that the manas exists, not as a result of its seeds. Otherwise, you would have to say that because there is a store consciousness, the mental consciousness evolves. Consequently, that interpretation contradicts scripture and reason.

Therefore [concludes Sthiramati] we must say that the first five forms of evolving consciousness must each have two simultaneous supports: the five material organs and, at the same time, mental consciousness. The sixth evolving consciousness always has one simultaneous support, the seventh consciousness. When it occurs simultaneously with the five forms of [material] consciousness, it also has them as a simultaneous support. The seventh evolving consciousness has only one simultaneous support, the eighth consciousness. Only the eighth consciousness is always unchanging, because it can stand alone and has no simultaneous support. There is another interpretation [by Suddhacandra] that finds the above interpretation still not totally reasonable. Since the eighth kind [of consciousness] and the others are all by nature consciousnesses, why not admit that [like them] it has a simultaneous support? And, since the seventh and eighth consciousnesses always evolve together, what is the error in admitting that they support each other? If you concede that the present consciousness is supported by seeds, you must admit that the seeds have the actual consciousness as support. The perfuming [consciousnesses] and [consciousness as] retribution are the support of birth, growth, and duration, because apart from them the seeds of consciousness cannot be born, grow, and endure.

Also, consciousness as retribution appropriates the body in the [two] realms of form and evolves with the [five] material organs as its support. As a scripture says, "The alaya consciousness is disturbed by the winds of karma and perpetually evolves everywhere in a series supported by the organs." The Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says, "Because the six consciousnesses—visual, etc.—each have separate supports, they cannot appropriate a body provided with organs. " 120

Chapter IV

If consciousness as retribution does not universally depend on the material organs for support, then, like the six consciousnesses, it must be unable to appropriate. Otherwise, the thesis [of the Yogacarabhumi Sastra] has the error of indefiniteness. Therefore if the store consciousness is actually functioning, it definitely has a support, the seventh consciousness. In the realm of form, it is also supported by material organs. The seeds of consciousness definitely have a support, which is consciousness as retribution. In the preliminary state of perfuming, they are also supported by the perfumer. The rest is as previously explained [by Sthiramati]. An opinion [by Dharmapala] finds all the above points to be unreasonable, because they do not thoroughly distinguish "support" and "supported." "Supported" means that all dharmas that are born and perish are born and endure relying on a cause and depending on conditions. All those things that are relied on are called "supports," just as a king and his ministers support each other, etc. If a dharma is necessary, has an object, is sovereign, and causes mind and mental activities to grasp their own objects, it is a support; i.e., the six internal sense bases. Other dharmas do not have objects, are not necessary, and do not act in a sovereign manner. These [internal sense bases] are only like sovereigns, not like ministers, etc. Therefore in the holy teachings only mind and mental activities are referred to as "having a support," while dharmas such as form are not, because they have no objects. [The text] speaks only of mental activities having mind as a support and does not say that mental activities are the support of mind, because they are not sovereign. However, there are sources that say that the support is the supported and vice versa, but all speak hypothetically in accordance with the circumstances. Consequently, the five [material] consciousnesses have a simultaneous support that is fourfold: the five material organs and the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses, because if one of them is missing, [the five material consciousnesses] do not evolve. The supports differ, because of a common object [the five organs], because of discrimination [by the sixth consciousness], because of 121

20c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

2ia impurity and purity [in the seventh consciousness], and because of being the root [on the part of the eighth consciousness]. As for the holy teachings saying that [the first five consciousnesses] are supported only by the five organs, this is because they are special supports and because they must have common objects, because they are proximate, and because they agree. The simultaneous support of mental consciousness is twofold; i.e., the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, because if one is missing, it certainly does not evolve. Even though the five consciousnesses are simultaneous with it in grasping objects clearly, they do not always necessarily exist, and therefore they are not the support [of mental consciousness]. When holy teachings only say that it is supported by the seventh consciousness, it is because [the latter] is the impure and pure support, is categorized equally as an evolving consciousness [like the sixth], is proximate, and agrees with [the sixth],

[Manas,] the seventh consciousness, has a single simultaneous support, which is the eighth consciousness, because it never evolves without the presence of the store consciousness. A verse says, Supported by alaya, manas evolves;

Supported by mind [alaya] and manas, the evolving consciousnesses are born.

Alaya consciousness has a single simultaneous support, also, which is the seventh consciousness, because without it, [alaya] does not function. A text says, "Because store consciousness always evolves simultaneous with manas. " It also says, "Store consciousness is always supported by impurity," which refers to the manas. Also, it says that there is no manas in three states [such as the samadhi of cessation], but this refers to soiled manas. It also says, for instance, that alaya is also absent in four states, but the eighth consciousness [itself] is not absent, and the same is so here [concerning manas]. Even though [the eighth consciousness] is supported by the five organs in the realm of form, they do not always exist, however, and therefore are not considered to be its support. Seeds are unable presently to grasp objects of their own, and therefore they 122

Chapter IV

are considered to be supported but not to be supports. As for mental activities, it should be said that they are supported by corresponding consciousnesses, in addition to their own corresponding moments of mind. Put in this way, it conforms very well to scripture and reason.

4. Similar and Immediately Antecedent Support and Initiating- Guiding Support

With regard to the initiating and guiding support [kranta-asraya], there is an opinion [by Nanda] that only the sixth consciousness is the initiating and guiding support of the five [material] consciousnesses, because the latter do not continue in a series and must be attracted and generated by the sixth consciousness. Because the sixth, mental consciousness, continues in its series and is also attracted and generated by the five consciousnesses, its initiating and guiding support consists of the first six consciousnesses. Because the seventh and eighth consciousnesses continue in their own series, and because it cannot be imagined that they are generated by the other consciousnesses, they have as their initiating and guiding support only themselves.

There is an opinion [by Sthiramati] that the above argument is less than perfect. The argument can be accepted if [the five consciousnesses] are not in the stage of mastery [on the spiritual path], do not abruptly encounter [an object], or do not encounter an object that is overwhelming. With regard to the stage of mastery, it is a matter of Buddhas, etc., who extend mastery over the objective realm and whose sense organs are interchangeable [in function], spontaneous, decisive, and free of applied and sustained thought. Do the five consciousnesses not continue in a series? Also, inasmuch as the five kinds of consciousness that are results of a similar cause are attracted and generated by the power of an act of attention that is decisive, pure or impure, and [inasmuch as the five,] absorbed in their objects, cannot cease for even a second, why not admit that they continue in a series for a number of moments?

123

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

Therefore the Yogacarabhumi [Sa.stra] says that impure or pure [consciousness] occurs after [an instant of] decisive mentality, and, subsequent to this, visual consciousness, as consequence, either good or not good, occurs. Yet this is not the result of its own power of discrimination. As long as mental [consciousness] is not drawn to another object, for a period of time, the eyes and mental consciousness evolve in a series that is either good or not good. Other forms of consciousness—bodily consciousness, etc.—are definitely generated in the same way as visual consciousness. The meaning of this is that for a prolonged period of time, visual and mental consciousness evolve simultaneously in a series [without interruption]. Since the period of time when visual consciousness exists is not without mental consciousness, the two consciousnesses do not continue in a series and engender each other. If an outstanding object presents itself for a series of moments, the body and mind, overawed and dazzled, cannot suddenly free themselves. At such a time, the five [material] consciousnesses must, in principle, form a series, just as they do in the burning purgatories and among the celestials whose constant pleasure makes them forget truth and goodness (kridapradusika-deva). For that reason, the Yogacarabhumi [Sasira] says that when the [active] six forms of consciousness act as the similar and immediately antecedent condition for [succeeding] forms of themselves, they are called "mental faculty" (mana-indriya). If there were nothing but mental consciousness prior to and subsequent to the five consciousnesses, the Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] ought to say that this single consciousness is the similar and immediately antecedent condition for those [subsequent] six consciousnesses. Or, it should say that these [present] consciousnesses are the similar and immediately antecedent conditions for that [succeeding] single [mental] consciousness. Since this is not so, we know that the [first] five consciousnesses form a continuous series [without the conditioning presence of mental consciousness].

When the five consciousnesses are born, mental consciousness must exist so that it can attract a subsequent moment of mental 124

Chapter IV

consciousness and make it appear, so why imagine that the five consciousnesses are its initiating and guiding support? In mindless states, sleep, and fainting, etc., mental consciousness ceases, and, when it appears again, the store consciousness and manas must be its initiating and guiding support, since they always continue in a series. If [mental consciousness] has as its initiating and guiding support its own prior state, why not admit the same regarding the five consciousnesses? If the latter is not so, how can the former be?

When manas associated with the knowledge of sameness (.samata-jnana) appears for the first time, it necessarily results from the sixth, mental consciousness. It must, therefore, have [mental consciousness] as its initiating and guiding support. [Also,] the sixth and seventh consciousnesses must precede perfect mirror knowledge, associated with the purified eighth consciousness, before it can appear. Also, mind as retribution is supported by defiled manas [seventh consciousness]. Otherwise, [in bodhisattvas,] it is associated with a good mind supported by vows of compassion. This being the case, it must be admitted that the eighth consciousness has the sixth and seventh consciousnesses as its initiating and guiding support, and consequently the above argument [by Nanda] is not completely acceptable. We must say that the five consciousnesses [of eye, etc.] have as their initiating and guiding support any among the first six consciousnesses in accordance with their functions. The sixth, mental consciousness, uses its own previous species or the seventh and eighth as its initiating and guiding support. The seventh, manas, has either its own previous species or the sixth consciousness as its initiating and guiding support. Adana consciousness has as its initiating and guiding support its own previous species and the sixth and seventh consciousnesses. None of this conflicts with reason, for reasons given earlier. [Dharmapala] is of the opinion that the above argument is not correct. "Initiating and guiding support" refers to dharmas that have objects, that act as sovereigns, and that can act as similar and immediately antecedent conditions. That is an initiating and 125

21b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

guiding support that initiates, attracts, and guides so that the subsequent consciousness and mental activities are born. It is restricted to just mind and does not include mental activities. If [the previous moment of mind] does not occur simultaneously with that [subsequent moment,] we can say that the former has the power of initiating and guiding the latter. Since in one individual the eight consciousnesses occur simultaneously, how can a different species act as the initiating and guiding support? If you admit that it is a support, then [different consciousnesses] must not appear simultaneously, and different minds are not born together. Also, several consciousnesses appear simultaneously in a single individual, in various numbers, with nothing definite [as to number], and if you allow them to act as similar and immediately antecedent conditions for each other, the same would occur with form, etc. This contradicts the holy teaching that says that only mind and mental activities are similar and immediately antecedent conditions. However, as for the statement in the Mahayanasamgraha to the effect that form may act as a similar and immediately antecedent condition, that is said rather indulgently and as a precaution. That is, it says this for the sake of argument, conceding the Small Vehicle doctrine that form is the similar and immediately antecedent condition of mind in order to forestall an argument that the former moment is a condition as cause. Otherwise, [if the statement in that treatise] is taken at face value, the prefix sam ["similar"] in samanantara would be pointless. If you say that the prefix sam has nothing to do with quantity but only concerns similar kinds, then you contradict your own thesis that consciousnesses of different kinds are similar and immediately antecedent conditions [for each other].

Therefore each of the eight forms of consciousness is the initiating and guiding support for its own kind only. This agrees profoundly with teachings and reason, because [dharmas of] the same kind never occur simultaneously. Mental activities are also this kind of support for the same reasons as given for consciousness. Even though mind and mental activities are of different kinds, they are born together, are mutually associated, combine like a 126

Chapter IV

unity, arise and cease simultaneously, and must be alike in their activity; and when one initiates and guides, the others do likewise. Therefore [mental activities] unfold as similar and immediately antecedent conditions [for each other], but this is not the case with various forms of consciousness, so [mental activities] should not be used as a model.

However, mental activities are not initiating and guiding supports for the reason that they are not sovereign with respect to that which is to be attracted and generated. [Moreover,] if mind and mental activities are similar and immediately antecedent conditions for only their own species, then when the seventh and eighth consciousnesses first undergo transmutation of the support, this condition will be lacking for [such mental activities as] associated faith. This would contradict the holy teaching that mind and mental activities are generated by four conditions [including the similar and immediately antecedent condition].

Furthermore, even though mental consciousness ceases in mindless states, sleep, fainting, etc., when it reappears, its initiating and guiding support is its own former species. The same is true of the five [material] consciousnesses that have stopped, because "immediately antecedent" means that there is no break in the same species of consciousness in the interval. The reason is that when it has perished, it has already become the initiating and guiding support for the present consciousness. Why take the trouble to make a different kind [of consciousness] the initiating and guiding support?

However, when holy teachings say that the first six consciousnesses attract and generate each other, or that the seventh and eighth consciousnesses are born with the sixth and seventh as supports, this is said with reference to the special dominant condition, not with respect to the similar and immediately antecedent condition. Hence there is no disagreement.

The Yogâcarabhümi [Sâstra] says, "If various consciousnesses are born immediately after this [present moment of] consciousness, the latter is their similar and immediately antecedent condition. " Also, when it says that "These six consciousnesses are the similar 127

2ic

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

and immediately antecedent condition of those [later] six consciousnesses and are called 'mental organ','' the words are general, but the intention is specific, and there is no contradiction. Therefore the support [of a specific consciousness] is its own [prior] kind, and this conforms closely to teachings and reason. Having examined other treatises, we must return now to the right one. Even though this transforming consciousness [the manas] has three supports, still [Vasubandhu's verse] refers only to the first two when it says that it e v o l v e s s u p p o r t e d b y t h a t , because it tries to show that the support and object of this consciousness are the same; because the first two supports have the predominant functions; or because the initiating and guiding support is easy to comprehend.

5. The Object of Manas

Having discussed the support of this consciousness, what is its object? [Vasubandhu's verse] says, w it h th a t a s o b je c t . T h a t refers to the previous consciousness as support, because the holy teachings say that this consciousness has the store consciousness as its object. One interpretation [by Nanda] is that the object of manas is the substance of that consciousness and its associated dharmas, because a treatise says that manas is always associated with attachment to "me" and "mine." Taking as its object the substance [of store consciousness] and its associated dharmas, it grasps them as "me" and "mine" respectively. Because [associated] mental activities are not separate from consciousness, there is no contradiction with doctrine, in the same way the term "consciousness only" does not contradict [the fact that both consciousness and associated dharmas are included in the term].

Another interpretation [by Citrabhanu] is that that explanation is incorrect, because nowhere in scriptures is it said that manas has as its object such things as contact (sparsa). You must say that manas only takes as its object the seeing (darsana) and seen (nimitta) parts of this [store] consciousness and conceives them respectively as "me" and "mine." Consciousness is the substance 128

Chapter IV

of both the perceiving and the perceived, so this explanation does not contradict the holy teaching [that says that the object of manas is the store consciousness].

[Sthiramati says that] this explanation [by Citrabhanu] is also incorrect, because the objects of the five material organs are not included in the aggregate of consciousness, because, like the five consciousnesses, manas would have external objects as its objects, because, like mental consciousness, [manas] would have as its object a common object [rather than a special one], and because those born in the formless realms would not be attached to [the notion of] "mine" because [the consciousness of] those born there with a disgust for form does not evolve into form.

It should be said, rather, that manas has as its object only the store consciousness and its seeds, and these are grasped respectively as "me" and "mine. " Since seeds are [in reality] the energies of that consciousness and not really existing things, this explanation does not contradict the holy teaching [that the object of manas is the store consciousness],

[Dharmapala] believes that the above explanations are incorrect, because seeds of form (rupa-bija), etc., are not included in the aggregate of consciousness. Also, the [ Yogacarabhumi] Sastra says that seeds are real, because if they do not exist, they would not act as causal conditions. Also, this [manas] consciousness is bom with the view of a self and freely continues in a series as a single kind, so how do you suppose that it independently grasps a self or "mine"? Two objects, such as eternity and cessation, etc., cannot be grasped separately [and simultaneously] by a single mind. Nor should it be said that it grasps the two successively, because it has functioned with a single character since beginningless time.

You must understand [says Dharmapala] that [manas] has as an object only the seeing part of the store consciousness, not the others, because from beginningless time it has been a homogeneous series resembling something constant and unitary, and because it is always the support of all dharmas. [Manas] only grasps 129

22a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

that as its own inner self. The reference to "mine" [in texts] is only a manner of speaking. Or it grasps [the store consciousness] as its own self, and, therefore, the two expressions ["me" and "mine"] refer to that single seeing part. This explanation accords well with teaching and reason, because many passages speak only of the view of a self, because grasping a self and grasping a "mine" do not occur simultaneously.

When [manas] is still in a nontransmuted stage, it has only the store consciousness as its object, but when the transmutation of the support has occurred, it also has as its objects true suchness and other dharmas. This is because realization of the knowledge of sameness acquires ten kinds of sameness, and it realizes the differences of resolve among sentient beings and manifests itself in the images of various Buddhas. Here, [in Vasubandhu's verse,] it only speaks of [manas] that is not transmuted, and therefore it says that this h a s t h a t store consciousness a s it s o b j e c t , because it must be the case that awakening and delusion are free and confined [respectively], and objects of absence of self and self are universal and nonuniversal [respectively]. How can this consciousness have as its object its own support? In the same way that a subsequent consciousness takes the prior manas as its object, and since this creates no problem, why is there any problem [with manas having the eighth consciousness as both support and object]?

6. Nature and Character of Manas

The verses [of Vasubandhu] say, it h a s th e n a t u r e a n d ch a r a c te r o f t h in k in g . These two [i.e., nature and character] refer to the self-nature and mode of activity of this consciousness, because its self-nature is that of thinking, and it uses it as its mode of activity. It gets the special name of manas because it examines and thinks. When one has not yet undergone a transmutation of the support, it always examines and thinks about the characteristics of the self that it grasps, but once transmuted, it examines and thinks about the characteristics of the absence of a self. 130

Chapter IV

7. Dharmas Associated with Manas

With how many mental activities is manas associated? [Vasubandhu's verses] say, it is alw ays a c c o m p a n ie d b y f o u r p a s s io n s . Here, the term a c c o m p a n ie d means "associated with." That is, from beginningless time up to the time of transmutation, manas freely and perpetually takes the store consciousness as its object and is associated with four fundamental passions; i.e., d e l u s io n a b o u t s e l f , v ie w o f s e l f , s e l f -c o n c e it , a n d s e l f -l o v e . D elu sio n a b o u t self means "ignorance." It is called "delusion about self" because of ignorance about the character of "self " and because of delusion about the principle of no self. V ie w o f self means "grasping a self." It is called "view of self" because one falsely posits a self in dharmas where there are no selves. S e l f -conceit means "haughtiness." It is called "self-conceit" because the mind is exalted through pride in the self that is grasped. S elf-lo ve means "craving the self." It is called "self-love" because one generates a deep attachment to the self that is grasped. A l o n g w it h shows that conceit and love accompany views, and love accompanies conceit, which contradicts the opinion of other Buddhists that they are not associated.

These four constantly appear to disturb and pollute internal consciousness, causing the [other] external consciousnesses to be perpetually defiled; as a consequence of this, sentient beings undergo the cycle of birth and death, unable to free themselves, and for this reason they are referred to [literally] as "afflictions" (klesa). There are [actually] ten [passions], so why are there only four [listed]? Because of the presence of belief in a self, the other views (drsti) do not occur, because two discernments (prajna) do not exist simultaneously in a single mind.

Why must this [manas] have a view of self? Because the two attachments [to opinions and to the belief in the value of mere morality and ritual] and wrong views (mithya-drsti) are born of discrimination only, and they end only with insight (darsana), but these innate passions are natural and innate, ending only with cultivation (bhavana). The extreme view of a "mine" occurs 131

22b

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

in dependence on the view of a self, but the view associated with this [manas] does not occur in dependence on that. It perpetually grasps an inner self and for that reason must have a view of a self. [Furthermore,] as a result of the firmness of views, doubt cannot occur. Because of the love for and attachment to a self, antagonism cannot occur. Thus there are only four passions associated with this consciousness.

Why do the three, view of a self, conceit, and [self-]love occur together? Because their modes of activity are not contradictory, so there is no reason why they cannot occur together. The Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says that covetousness humbles the mind while conceit exalts it, and is that not a contradiction? [No,] there is no contradiction between that text and this position, because that text and this one make distinctions. The treatise refers to discrimination, an external realm, of contempt [for others], and the gross, while we speak of the innate [passions], an interior realm, exaltation, and the subtle.

8. Other Associated Dharmas

Are there only four mental activities associated with manas? No, because [Vasubandhu] says, A l o n g w it h o th ers su ch a s c o n ta c t. One interpretation is that this manas has only nine mental activities: the four passions mentioned above, plus the five dharmas that include contact. These are contact, attention, feeling, conceptualization, and volition, because manas is really associated with these universal [dharmas]. Previously [in Vasubandhu's verses] it was said that contact, etc., are associated with consciousness as retribution, and out of concern [that contact associated with manas] would be thought to be unsoiled, [as in store consciousness,] the word o th ers is used to show that they are different from these. The word a n d has the function of combining, because the former four [passions] are combined with the latter five as always associated with manas.

Why has this manas no other mental activities? Desire (chanda) is hope for something as yet unattained, but this consciousness 132

Chapter IV

is content in taking something already attained as its object. It does not hope for anything and therefore knows no desire. Resolve (iacLhimoksa) is acknowledgement of something still pending. This consciousness has, beginninglessly, always had something fixed as an object and therefore has no resolve. Recollection (smrti) is simply remembering an event that took place in the past. This consciousness always has as an object something being experienced in the present and therefore has nothing to remember. Therefore there is no recollection. Samadhi holds mind steadily onto an object. This consciousness freely distinguishes its object moment by moment, and since it does not concentrate, it is devoid of samadhi. Discernment (prajha) is the same as the view of a self and therefore it is not considered separately.

Since good [dharmas] are pure, they do not accompany this consciousness. The secondary passions originate and differentiate in successive states of the [basic] passions. This consciousness is only associated with four passions that remain in a homogeneous state in their sequence, and therefore there are no secondary passions among the associates of this consciousness.

Regret (kaukrtya) is remorse for something done previously. This consciousness unconcernedly and perpetually takes a present event as an object and does not regret former actions. Therefore it has no regret. Torpor (middha) sometimes occurs for a while as a result of heaviness and dullness of mind and body due to external events, but this consciousness is beginninglessly homogeneous and uniformly attached to something within and does not rely on an external object, and therefore torpor does not occur. Applied and sustained thought (vitarka-vicara) take place with respect to an external world. These are [respectively] shallow and deep investigation [of objects] and are expressed grossly or subtly in speech. This consciousness is unassociated with it, because it evolves dependent on internal matters, homogeneously attached to a self. There is an interpretation that the [former] explanation of o t h ers is not correct, because [Vasubandhu's] verse says elsewhere that this [manas] is categorized as defiled. Also, that interpretation 133

22c

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

omits [the fact that] manas is associated with secondary passions (upa-klesa). Passions must be accompanied by secondary passions, and therefore the word o t h e r s points to the secondary passions.

With regard to this, there is an interpretation that five secondary passions are universally associated with all impure minds. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says that torpor, agitation, faithlessness, indolence, and thoughtlessness are always associated with all defiled classes [of minds], because in the absence of such things as inability, defiled natures do not occur. When passions occur, the mind is defiled; therefore, mind in a defiled state must have these five [secondary passions]. The reason is that if passions occur, it is due to inability [i.e., torpor], agitation, faithlessness, indolence, and thoughtlessness. Even though agitation is found universally among defiled minds, still it increases when accompanied by craving and is therefore spoken of as a component of craving, just as regret and drowsiness, though found universally in minds of all three natures [good, bad, and undetermined], are always said to be components of delusion, because they increase in a state of delusion. Even though some sources say that either six or ten secondary passions are found in defiled minds, this universality is discussed from a different point of view and does not really mean universally present in all defiled minds.

Six secondary passions among the twenty are mentioned by separating out gross and subtle, indeterminate and bad, and obstacles to samadhi and discernment. Ten are mentioned among the twenty-two [of one list] by separating the two natures of gross and subtle, so those texts do not contradict our interpretation. This manas is associated with fifteen mental activities; i.e., the previous nine dharmas, five secondary passions, and discernment among the mental activities with specific objects (aniyata). Even though the view of a self is categorized as discernment among mental activities with specific objects, still the two are distinguished in the list of fifty-one mental activities and are considered to be two [different activities].

134

Chapter IV

Why is this manas devoid of the other mental activities? The ten [mental activities] such as anger are gross in their modes of activity, but this consciousness is subtle in its discernment and is therefore unassociated with [anger, etc.]. Shamelessness (ahrikya) and heedlessness of blame (anapatrapya) are not good only, while this [manas] is indeterminate and therefore unassociated. Distraction (viksepa) makes the mind move out to external objects, but this [manas] arises perpetually grasping an internal object of ust one kind and without concern for externals. Therefore it is not associated [with distraction]. Incorrect knowing (asamprajanya) generates external activities of body, speech, and mind, contradicting and exceeding the rule, but this [manas] only grasps internally and is therefore not associated [with inaccurate knowing]. Other mental activities missing are as discussed above. There is an interpretation that six secondary passions are associated with all impure minds. The Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says, "Faithlessness, indolence, thoughtlessness, forgetfulness, distraction, and inaccurate knowing are associated with all impure minds." In the absence of forgetfulness, distraction, and inaccurate knowing, the mind cannot generate the passions, because passions such as craving only appear when there is forgetfulness or wrong judgement regarding various kinds of objects already experienced. When passions arise, the mind necessarily roams about heedlessly, and [passions arise] as a result of distraction concerning some object. The mode of activity of agitation and torpor are mutually contradictory and cannot occur universally in all minds. When the treatise says that five dharmas are found in all defiled minds, it is because it distinguishes gross and subtle, dharmas that contradict only good dharmas, those that are purely secondary passions, and those that are common to both natures [of bad and indeterminate]. With regard to the matter of ten universals, this has been explained above.

Manas is associated with nineteen mental activities: the previously mentioned nine dharmas [such as contact], six secondary passions, along with memory, samadhi, discernment, and torpor. 135

23a

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

23b Special mention of memory can be explained as discernment was earlier. Samadhi is included because [manas] concentrates on one single kind of thing, the self that is grasped as object, and never lets it go. Torpor is included because consciousness is very seriously associated with ignorance, making it torpid. Agitation is not included because it conflicts with torpor. The absence of other mental activities can be understood as previously explained. There is another explanation that ten secondary passions are generally associated with all defiled minds. The Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says, "Ten passions—thoughtlessness, agitation, torpor, faithlessness, indolence, wrong desires, wrong resolution, wrong memory, distraction, and inaccurate knowing—occur in all defiled minds, because they are bound to all places in all three realms. " When wrong desires and wrong resolution are not present, mind is unable to generate the passions, because passions such as craving only occur if there is satisfaction in union with, or separation from, experienced objects, along with determination of the characteristics of the object. Those who are doubtful about principles [such as suffering] are certainly not in doubt concerning such things as form. Therefore doubt is associated with resolution. With regard to doubt about things that are perceived, this is not doubt as a passion, just as doubt that a person is a post is not. These two universals [i.e., secondary passions, wrong desire and wrong resolution] are not given as universals in other texts, because a mind that has as its object an undesirable thing or is associated with doubt does not manifest these [two] in a coarse manner. The other [mental activities that are or are not associated with manas] have already been discussed. This thinking mind has twenty-four mental activities; the nine previously mentioned, ten secondary passions, plus five that arise with specific objects. They can be understood according to previous principles. Other mental activities missing [from this list] can be understood in the same way as previously explained.

There is an opinion [by Dharmapala] that all the above interpretations fail to be completely reasonable. How can one who doubts the existence of other worlds have desires or resolution? [Also,] if 136

Chapter IV

there is no torpor when a state of passion arises, there will be no inability. If there is no agitation, there will be no clamor, and then, as in the case of good, etc., these will not be defiled conditions. When there is no distraction in a defiled mind, it will not go rushing out [to objects] and is not a defiled [state of] mind. And if there is no loss of recollection or inaccurate knowing, how can the passions occur in one's presence? Therefore it is certain that defiled minds are associated with eight secondary passions: torpor, agitation, lack of faith, indolence, thoughtlessness, forgetfulness, distraction, and inaccurate knowing.

As for forgetfulness and inaccurate knowing being of the nature of memory and discernment, they are not found universally in [all] defiled minds, because not all defiled minds have as their objects things already experienced nor do they contain examination. If their nature is ignorance, they occur in all defiled minds, for reasons already given.

The manas is associated with eighteen mental activities: the first nine dharmas [such as contact and feeling], eight secondary passions, and [one] with specific objects, discernment. As for those mental activities that are absent [from this list] that are included in the three passages from the treatises, they should be explained as above. Done in this way, there is no disagreement with teachings or reason.

9. The Feeling of Manas

With what feeling is defiled manas associated? One interpretation is that it is associated only with the feeling of satisfaction, because it perpetually clings within to a self and feels satisfaction and love.

Another interpretation denies this, because it affirms that the feeling of satisfaction exists all the way to the peak of existence C bhavagra), which would contradict holy teachings. It must be said that manas is associated with four feelings. Born in the evil destinies, it is associated with the feeling of dissatisfaction, because its object is the fruit attracted by bad karma. Among humans, celestials 137

23c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

of [the realm of] desire, and the first two trances (dhyana), it is associated with the feeling of satisfaction, because its object is the fruit of good karma of the stages [of development] that involve satisfaction. In the third trance state, it is associated with joy, because its object is the fruit of good karma of the stages that involve joy. In the fourth trance and up to the peak of existence, it is associated with the feeling of indifference, because its only object is the fruit of good karma of the stage that involves indifference. There is an interpretation that rejects the above explanation, because from beginningless time, this [manas] has been perpetually unchanging in freely and exclusively grasping an inner self and is not associated with feelings [that involve] change and differentiation. Moreover, when this [manas] differs from the first [store] consciousness, it is distinctly mentioned. If it were associated with those four feelings, it would have been mentioned. Since it is not, manas is certainly the same [as store consciousness] in being associated with only indifference.

In its state prior to transmutation, manas is associated with the above-mentioned mental activities. Once transmuted, it occurs only with twenty-one mental activities: the [five] universals, the five with specific objects, and the eleven good ones. Like the eighth consciousness, once transmutation takes place, it is associated only with the feeling of indifference, because it always evolves spontaneously, always impartial vis-à-vis objects. 10. Moral Nature of Manas

What is the moral species of the mental activities of manas ? They are defiled and indeterminate, and that is all. Because the four passions, etc., associated with manas are impure dharmas, they are obstacles to the holy path and obscure the mind, and hence they are said to be defiled. They are indeterminate because they are neither good nor not good. Just as in the upper two realms the passions are said to be indeterminate because they are embraced by the power of samadhi, so also, because the support of the defiled dharmas associated with [manas] is fine and subtle, and because 138

Chapter IV

they evolve freely, they are said to be indeterminate. Upon the transmutation of the support, the nature of manas is only good. 11. Mental Activities and Spiritual Stages

To what stage (bhumi) are the mental activities of manas connected? [The "Thirty Verses" say,] a n d b o u n d t o t h e p la c e of b ir t h . When [manas] is born in the realm of desire, the mental activities associated with the presently functioning manas are bound to the realm of desire, and so on, all the way to the peak of existence. The reason is that they freely and perpetually take as their object the store consciousness of that stage and grasp it as an inner self, not [the store consciousness of] other stages. If the store consciousness originates as the retribution of a certain stage, it is referred to as "born in that stage." The defiled manas that takes it as its object and grasps it as a self is bound to it and is referred to as "bound to that." Another possibility is that [manas] is bound by the passions, etc., of that stage and is therefore said to be "bound to them." Once it has undergone transmutation of the support, [manas] is no longer bound.

12. The Cessation of Manas

Defiled mind {manas) has continued in a series since beginningless time. In what state does it either eternally or temporarily end? [Vasubandhu says in the "Thirty Verses,"] in t h e a r h a t , t h e S A M A D H I OF CESSATION, AND THE SUPRAMUNDANE PATH, IT DOES NOT e x ist . A r h a t refers generally to those in the state of post-learner among the three vehicles. In this state, the seeds of defiled mind {manas) and mind itself in its actual form are eternally exterminated, and therefore [Vasubandhu] says it d o e s n o t e x is t . In the state of learner it is temporarily subdued during the samadhi of cessation and on the supramundane path, and therefore [Vasubandhu says] it d o e s n o t e x is t .

Since beginningless time, defiled manas has evolved subtly, freely, and uniformly and cannot be subdued by the impure paths. 139

24a Demonstration of Consciousness Only

The holy paths of the three vehicles subdue it, because the understanding of true no self [occurring on the paths] contradicts attachment to a self. When pure subsequently acquired [knowledge] (prsthalabdha-anasrava-jhana) is actually present, as the pure outflow [of knowledge of no self], it also contradicts manas. Because both the knowledge of true no self and its subsequently acquired [knowledge] are both pure, they are called the s u p r a m u n d a n e p a t h .

T h e s a m a d h i o f c e s s a t io n is the outflow of the holy paths and is complete calm, so this [manas] does not exist. However, since the seeds [of manas] have not yet been eternally exterminated, when one arises from the samadhi of cessation and the holy paths, [manas] becomes active again as long as [the seeds] have not been destroyed. Passions associated with this defiled mind are innate and therefore are not exterminated on [the path of] insight, but since they are impure, they are not to be exterminated. The seeds of the passions are extremely subtle and are suddenly and simultaneously exterminated, along with the lowest of the three grades of passions, at the peak of existence, because they are the same in their power. During the Diamond-like Samadhi (vajropamasamadhi) one suddenly exterminates these seeds and becomes an arhat. Therefore they never again appear in the post-learner [i.e., arhat]. If the post-learners of the two vehicles convert to the Mahayana, then from the first arousal of the thought [of enlightenment] up to the point where they become Buddhas, even though they are bodhisattvas, they are called "arhats" [in the "Thirty Verses"]. Even though they are not singled out especially, they fit the definition [of an arhat].

13. Nondefiled Manas

There is an interpretation [by Sthiramati] that manas is only associated with the obstacle of the passions, because all holy teachings say that it does not exist in three states, that it is always associated with four passions, and that it is the support of the various defilements of consciousness.

140

Chapter IV

Another interpretation claims that that explanation contradicts both teachings and reason, because a scripture says that a supramundane manas exists, and because an undefiled mental consciousness, just as when it is defiled, definitely must have a support that is born with it and is special. A treatise says that store consciousness definitely always functions together with a consciousness, which is manas, when mental consciousness occurs, [store consciousness] appears with two consciousnesses, mental consciousness and manas. It functions with three when one of the first five consciousnesses appears, and, finally, sometimes it occurs with all seven, when all five consciousnesses operate together. If the seventh consciousness is absent in the samadhi of cessation, then at that moment, the store consciousness will not be accompanied by another consciousness and therefore is not always definitely evolving in association with one consciousness. Lacking the seventh [consciousness] at the time of the holy paths, the store consciousness must be associated with one consciousness, and, in that case, how can [the Yogacarabhumi Sastra] say that when mental consciousness appears, store consciousness definitely appears with two consciousnesses? The Aryadesandvikhyapana Sastra says that manas is always associated with four passions, or functions in association with their contraries, in either superiority or in equality, and therefore we know that manas can be either defiled or nondefiled. If one concludes that arhats have no seventh consciousnesses, because, according to the [Yogacarabhumi] Sastra, they are devoid of a defiled manas, one must also conclude that they also must have no eighth consciousness, because treatises also say that they have no dlaya. However, since the latter cannot be so, is not the former also not so? Also, various treatises say that knowledge of sameness occurs upon the transmutation of the seventh consciousness, and, like any knowledge, must have as a support a pure consciousness with which it is associated. If this consciousness is missing [in arhats], that form of knowledge must also not exist in them, because in the absence of a support, there is nothing to be supported. It may not be claimed that that [knowledge] is supported by the six 141

24b Demonstration of Consciousness Only

evolving consciousnesses [such as visual consciousness], because it is conceded that [this knowledge] is constant in Buddhas, just as mirror knowledge is [while the six consciousnesses constantly change].

Also, if post-learners have no seventh consciousness, the eighth consciousness must lack a simultaneous support, but it must have this support, because it is by nature like other forms of consciousness. Also, just as attachment to a self always occurs in one who has not yet realized the nonexistence of a personal self, so also attachment to the selfhood of dharmas always occurs in one who has not yet realized the unreality of dharmas. If [manas] is absent, by what consciousness is this [attachment] supported? Not the eighth consciousness, because it lacks discernment. Consequently, we must trust that this [seventh] consciousness always occurs in the holy paths of the two vehicles, in the samadhi of cessation, and among post-learners, because these [people] have not yet realized the selflessness of dharmas.

Also, it is proven in various treatises that the seventh consciousness is the support of the sixth, because the [first] five consciousnesses are likewise supported by the sixth. If, when the holy paths arise, and when one is a post-learner, the seventh consciousness does not support the sixth, both the main point and the reasoning [of the treatises] are in error. Alternatively, the five [material] consciousnesses must lack a support, but they are always supported, and so must the sixth be supported. Therefore it is clear that in the three states mentioned above [post-learner, etc.] there must always be a nondefiled manas. When it is said [in some texts] that it does not exist, they speak of defiled manas [that does not exist, not the undefiled manas], just as, when they say that in four states there is no dlaya, they do not mean that there is no eighth [consciousness]. The same is the case here. 14. Three Kinds of Manas

There are, in short, three different kinds of manas. The first is [manas] associated with a view of a personal self. The second kind 142

Chapter IV

is associated with a view of the selfhood of dharmas. The third kind is that associated with the knowledge of sameness. The first is common to continuities of all ordinary beings, learners of the two vehicles, and one kind of bodhisattva of impure mind prior to the seventh [bodhisattva] stage. This [manas] takes as object alaya consciousness and generates a view of a personal self. The second is common to the continuities of all ordinary beings, disciples (sravaka) and pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas in the state when the fruit of the knowledge of the emptiness of dharmas is not present. This [manas] takes consciousness as retribution for an object and generates the view of he selfhood of dharmas. The third is common to the continuities of all Tathagatas and to bodhisattvas in the path of insight, and to those for whom the fruit of the knowledge of the emptiness of dharmas is present in the path of cultivation. [The manas] takes as an object nondefiled consciousness as retribution, etc., and generates the knowledge of sameness. In the state when the view of a personal self occurs, the view of the selfhood of dharmas must also be present, because attachment to a self occurs supported by attachment to dharmas, just as the notion that there is a person, etc., occurs when we misapprehend a post, etc., in the dark. Even though the functioning of the two views of selves and dharmas is different, they are not contradictory, and both have the same discernment as a support, in the same way that even though the various consciousnesses such as visual are alike in substance, their many functions of distinguishing blue, etc., are not contradictory. It is the same here [with the two views].

Even though attachment to dharmas remains only among learners of the two vehicles on the holy paths and in the samadhi of cessation, among bodhisattvas who awake suddenly on the path of cultivation, and among learners who awaken gradually and for whom the fruit of the knowledge of the emptiness [of the person] is present, attachment to a self has been subdued. Even though there is attachment to dharmas only among learners of the two vehicles, those gradually awakened, and those for whom the fruit 143

24c Demonstration of Consciousness Only

of the knowledge of the emptiness of dharmas is not present, the attachment to a self has been eliminated.

From the eighth stage on, attachment to a self is forever inactive among all bodhisattvas, because it is either forever eliminated or forever subdued. Even though attachment to dharmas occurs when the fruit of the knowledge of the emptiness of dharmas is not present, there is no contradiction. As a scripture says, "From the eighth stage on, none of the passions is ever active again. There remains only the obstacle to that which is to be known as the support." It is this obstacle that remains, not the seeds. Otherwise, the passions would exist also.

Even though the manas associated with attachment to dharmas is said to be undefiled as far as the two vehicles are concerned, it is said to be defiled as far as bodhisattvas are concerned, because it is an obstacle to their knowledge [of reality]. Consequently, it is said to be defiled and indeterminate. As far as the two vehicles, etc., are concerned, it is unsoiled, because it does not obstruct their knowledge. [Manas] is categorized as "born of retribution." It is so called because it is perpetually born from retribution consciousness (vipaka-vijnana). It is not "fruit of retribution" (vipaka-phala; i.e., result of good and bad), because this name [fruit of retribution] is common [to all indeterminate dharmas], in the same way that all conditions are dominant conditions except those excluded [such as condition as cause].

15. Proofs of the Existence of Manas

How must we know that the seventh consciousness has a separate substance of its own, apart from such consciousnesses as visual consciousness? Through the established means of knowledge of holy teachings and proper reasoning.

In many places in the scriptures, the Blessed One says that mind (citta), thought (manas), and consciousness (vijnana) have three distinct meanings. That which accumulates [seeds] and generates [an apparent world] is called "mind." That which thinks 144

Chapter IV

and reasons is called "thought. " That which discriminates is called "consciousness." These are the three distinct meanings. Though these three meanings are used for all eight forms of consciousness, if we take into account the preeminent character of each, the eighth [consciousness] is called "mind" because it accumulates the seeds of dharmas and produces all dharmas. The seventh consciousness is called "thought" because it takes the eighth consciousness, etc., as an object and constantly thinks about it as a self, etc. The remaining six [forms of consciousness] are called "consciousness" because they evolve discriminating six different kinds of objects in a manner that is gross, unstable, and intermittent. A verse in the Lankavatara Sutra says,

Store consciousness is called "mind";

That of a thinking nature is called "thought"; That which discriminates the characteristics of objects Is called "consciousness. "

Also, many places in Mahay na scriptures specifically speak of a seventh consciousness; therefore, it exists separately. As already mentioned at length, Mahay na scriptures are the means of knowledge (pramana) of supreme teachings; we need not prove that again.

Also, the Vimoksa Sutra specifically mentions the seventh consciousness. A verse says,

Defiled mind at all times

Is born with and perishes with the passions.

Once liberated from the passions,

They exist not in the past or future.

The scripture itself explains the verse, saying, "Since beginningless time, defiled manas has been born with and perishes with four passions: the view of a self, self-love, conceit in self, and delusion about self. Once the antidote appears and the passions have been exterminated, this manas is accordingly liberated from those. At that time, passions associated with manas not only no longer exist at present, they will have no past or future, because past and future have no 145

25a Demonstration of Consciousness Only

self-nature." There are teachings like this among many schools of Buddhism, but we will stop here out of concern for prolixity. 16. The Problem of Special Ignorance

Now that we have quoted the scriptures, we display proper reasoning. A scripture says, "Special ignorance (avenika-avidya) is subtle and perpetually active and obscures reality." If this consciousness did not exist, neither would that [ignorance]. That is, ordinary beings of all moral kinds perpetually generate deluded reasoning, a special ignorance, that obscures reality and obscures the eye of holy discernment. A verse says,

When the mind of reality is about to occur,

It is always obscured.

It accompanies all moral kinds of mind

And is called "special ignorance."

Therefore a scripture says, "Beings of all kinds live perpetually in a long night, blinded by ignorance, and, their minds stupefied and intoxicated, they will never awaken. " If ordinary beings occasionally did not generate this ignorance, the scripture would be contradicted, because it does not stand to reason that among ordinary beings, delusive reasoning and ignorance are sometimes active and sometimes not. It is not possible [for ignorance] to be supported by the six [sense] consciousnesses, because [since they are intermittent] ignorance would be intermittent and [the six consciousnesses] would always be defiled [which is not the case]. These problems are eliminated if the existence of manas is admitted. Defiled manas is always associated with four passions. Why is the ignorance associated [with manas] referred to as "special"? One interpretation is that the associated view of self, pride in self, and self-love are not fundamental passions (mula-klesa), so there is no problem in referring to ignorance as "special." Another interpretation is that the above explanation violates reason and teachings, because these three [such as self-pride] are not referred to as pure secondary passions, because they are 146

Chapter IV

included among the six or ten passions. Many places in scripture say that defiled manas is always associated with four passions. You should say that of the four passions, ignorance is predominant, and that although it arises with the other three it is called "special." [Manas], from beginningless time, has perpetually stupefied and deluded, without ever being aware, because of the predominance of delusion. Those existing with it, such as the view [of a self], should be called "associates," but if they are predominant, they must be called "special," because there is no error in conceding that they are like ignorance.

There is another interpretation that says that this delusion is named "special" because, like "special Buddha dharmas" [i.e., reserved for Buddhas], it is found only in this consciousness. In that case, passions associated with other forms of consciousness but absent in this consciousness should [by analogy] be called "special." [But, it is replied,] the name "special" is applied as a result of its special nature, not because of its absence [or presence]. The ignorance associated with the seventh consciousness from beginningless time is always functioning, obstructing the knowledge of reality. Such a preeminent function is absent in the other consciousnesses, and since it exists only in this consciousness it is therefore named "special. "

But if this were the case, the [other] three associated with manas ought to be called "special." [However,] ignorance is predominant and alone has this name. Even admitting that the other three are also special, we speak of [ignorance] as special in contrast to other delusions [such as that of the sixth consciousness]. This special ignorance is, in general, of two kinds. The first is special ignorance that is perpetual, which does not exist in other forms of consciousness. The second kind is special ignorance that is isolated, which does not exist in this [seventh] consciousness. Therefore the Yogacarabhumi [Sastra] says that there are two kinds of ignorance. When it is accompanied by craving, etc., it is called "associated ignorance. " When not accompanied by craving, etc., it is called "isolated ignorance." That which is isolated and 147

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

25b predominant is eliminated (heya) only by [the path of] insight (darsana). As a scripture says, "Those saints who are still learners have already eliminated special ignorance and therefore do not accumulate new karma." That which is isolated but not predominant is eliminated {heya) by [the path of] cultivation (bhavana), because anger [and other secondary passions] are eliminated by both insight and cultivation. Other schools of Buddhism do not recognize special ignorance that is perpetual, but both [Mahayana and Hinayana] recognize special ignorance that is isolated. 17. Mental Consciousness and Its Two Conditions

A scripture says, "With the eyes and forms as its conditions, visual consciousness is born," etc., ending with "with mind (manas) and dharmas as its conditions, mental consciousness is born. " If this [seventh] consciousness did not exist, neither would mental consciousness. That is, just as the five [material] consciousnesses must have eyes, etc., as a dominant, special, and simultaneous support, mental consciousness, as one of the first six kinds of consciousness, must also have such a support. If this consciousness did not exist, how could [the sixth] be supported? It cannot be said that form is its support, because manas is not form, and [if it were,] mental consciousness would be deprived of the two discriminations of memory and conjecture. Nor can it be claimed that the five [material] consciousnesses have no simultaneous support, because they do evolve simultaneously with the five organs, just as a sprout and its shadow do. Also, consciousness must have the same perceptual object as the organ and, like mind and mental activities, must also occur simultaneously.

It follows from this reasoning that mental consciousness, which has been amply demonstrated, like visual consciousness, etc., must have a support that is special, that is the sense base (ayatana) of its name (mana-ayatana), is not categorized as an immediately antecedent condition, and is a dominant condition, because [mental consciousness] has been shown to be without doubt one of the [first] six consciousnesses.

148

Chapter IV

18. The Name of Manas

A scripture says, "Thinking is called manas." If this consciousness did not exist, neither would that [thinking], [In reply to a suggestion that manas refers to past mind,] when mental consciousness is present, the manas that is similar and antecedent has perished and no longer exists [and therefore it cannot think], because past and future do not really exist, and therefore the functioning of thought certainly cannot be present. This being so, how can we speak of that as manas? [As for speaking metaphorically of past manas as thinking,] to say that the expression, "thought," is used metaphorically makes no sense, because if there is no thinking per se, what is the basis of the metaphor? If it is claimed that thought was present [at a previous moment] and that is what manas is, then if it was called "consciousness" at that time, how can you call it manas [since it no longer exists]? Thus we know that there is a separate seventh [consciousness], manas, that perpetually judges and thinks, and we may properly refer to it as manas. We may metaphorically speak of manas when it has perished and, on the basis of this, speak of it as [present, real] manas.

19. The Two Samadhis

A scripture speaks of the samadhi of nonconceptualization (asamjnika-samapatti) and that of cessation (nirodha-samapatti). If defiled manas did not exist, there would be no distinction between the two [since manas ceases in the second but not in the first]. Both samadhis alike stop the six [sense] consciousnesses and mental activities, with no difference in the substance or number [of mental activities] that cease. Lacking a defiled manas, how could the two samadhis be distinguished, since one has it and one does not? If you distinguish on the basis of preparatory practices, real, stage, support, etc., this is not good enough, because the basis for the distinction is the existence [of manas]. Absent this manas, the reason [for these distinctions] would not exist either. It is certain that there is a separate manas.

149

25c

n

Demonstration of Consciousness Only

Also, a scripture says the minds and mental activities of sentient beings without thought [in the higher realms of the celestials] cease for their entire lifetimes. If this consciousness did not exist, they would have no defilement. These beings are without the six evolving consciousnesses for a long time, and without a manas there would also be no self-attachment. There is no other place where, for an entire lifetime, beings still in bondage are lacking in self-attachment. If they had no self-attachment, their existence would resemble nirvana, not what sages and virtuous people alike disparage and loathe.

[The Sarvastivadins claim that] there is [thought] at the beginning and end [of the lives of the unconscious celestials] and that therefore there is no such error. [We reply,] for a long time during the interval [of their existences] there is none, and therefore, there is an error. [They reply,] it exists in the past and future, so there is no error. [We reply] that [past and future attachment] is neither present nor eternal and that since it does not exist, the error remains. There can be no acquisition because there is nothing to be acquired. [Replying to the Mahasamghikas,] we have already disproved unassociated dharmas [as a basis for self-attachment], [In reply to the suggestion that seeds serve as the basis for attachment,] since [in their opinion] there is no such thing as a store consciousness, perfuming cannot take place either, and we have refuted the notion that other dharmas can take perfuming. Therefore there must be a separate, defiled manas. The attachment to a self occurs perpetually among the unconscious celestials [because of its persistence], which is why that state is disparaged and loathed by sages and the virtuous.

20. Absence of Self-Attachment

A scripture says when the minds of sentient beings are good, defiled, or indeterminate, they are perpetually caught up in selfattachment. If this [seventh] consciousness did not exist, neither would that [attachment].

150

Chapter IV

When the minds of sentient beings are of these [above] three natures, they always become attached to an inner self, no matter what kinds of external acts they perform. As a result of this attachment to a self, such acts as giving (dana) that arise in the six consciousnesses are unable to be free from the image [of a self]. Therefore the Yogacarabhumi [Sdstra] says that defiled manas is the support of the [first] six consciousnesses, and until it ends [the seeing part] cannot be freed from bondage to the seen part. Once manas ceases, [the seeing part] is liberated from bondage to the seen part.

"Bondage to the seen part" means the inability to comprehend thoroughly that images of objects are like illusions, etc. Consequently, the seeing part is bound by the seen part, and this is called "bondage to the seen part." For this reason, a verse says, Such a defiled manas

Is the support of consciousness;

Until this manas ceases,

The bonds of consciousness are never severed.

Also, when a mind is good, undefiled, and indeterminate, it will not be contaminated if there is no self-attachment, because the passions of the [first] six consciousnesses as part of a [personal] series cannot exist simultaneously with a mind that is good, etc., because the truth is that [this good mind] cannot be bound by past or future conditions, which really are nonexistent. Also, [good mind] is not soiled by the passions of another, nor does it become pure as a result of someone else's liberation. Nor can it be said that there exist separate propensities in the form of [dharmas] unassociated [with mind] that appear in a series and that good [minds], etc., become soiled as a result of them. These do not really exist, as we have already amply demonstrated. Nor can it be said that good, etc., become soiled because they are born of soiled seeds, because there is no reason for these seeds to become soiled. [Mind that is good, etc.,] does not become soiled because of soiled seeds, because it is not clear how an unsoiled mind becomes soiled. 151