Yongjia’s Song of Actualizing the Way Observing the Mind Awakening from a Dream

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

Butten kōza 42 (Tokyo: Daizō Shuppan, 2001), was of immense help in parsing difficult passages and finding references to other sources. Consulting Ōta's rendition, I especially appreciated the way he outlined the text with headings and subheadings, and I have emulated much of his structure in organizing this translation. Such heading structures are usually not present in Sinitic Buddhist canonical works, but I have found them to be useful for readers so I try to employ them where possible. (4) I then read through my translation in comparison with a partially revised version of Stanley Weinstein's 1965 Ph.D. dissertation, "The Kanjin kakumushō" (an annotated translation is forthcoming).15 This offered an invaluable opportunity to improve the manuscript. Prof. Weinstein has spent decades studying the text and his mastery of its nuances and the care he took in clarifying its discourse is truly something to be emulated. The Weinstein manuscript has almost fifteen hundred endnotes, so it will be an immense scholarly contribution when finally published.

Following standard BDK style, I did my best to keep the number of endnotes to a minimum. Notating all technical terms would have resulted in an unwieldly final manuscript so instead I strove to include all technical terms in an extensive glossary. I have employed brackets for interpolations, indicating words that are implicit but not contained in the text and which are necessary for understanding; for example, "Which afflictions are [eliminated in the] path of seeing, and which afflictions are [eliminated in the] path of cultivation?" Parentheses include explanatory comments that might otherwise be rendered as footnotes; for example, "Response: Afflictions produced by discrimination (i.e., relatively superficial afflictions produced in the present life) are eliminated in the path of seeing, while innate afflictions (i.e., deeply embedded afflictions carried over from former lives) are eliminated in the path of cultivation." The author's interlinear notes, which appear in the source text in a smaller font, are also contained in brackets. In the course of completing this translation, I added or updated all relevant terminology to the DDB. Interested readers are invited to consult it for further information on terminology. An edited version of the source text will also be posted on www.acmuller.net after publication of this translation. I would also like to offer my sincere thanks to the two anonymous peer reviewers who read this manuscript carefully and offered numerous helpful comments, along with correcting many errors.

52

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream By Ryōhen

Preface

If you want to attain bodhi you must first know your own mind. Once you know your own mind, you have entered the doctrinal approach of consciousness-only. Among those who seek the Dharma, who does not study? However, the texts and doctrines of the Yogâcāra system are vast and cannot be learned quickly. So here I will select the essentials among the essentials and do my best to reveal their gist. The order of the topics is as follows: (1) the canonical sources of the tradition, (2) the teaching in terms of the periodization of the Buddha's life, (3) the hundred dharmas and the two kinds of emptiness, (4) the establishment of the four aspects of consciousness, (5) the meaning of the three kinds of objects, (6) seeds and perfuming, (7) the twelve links of dependent arising, (8) the three kinds of intrinsic natures, (9) the three kinds of non-natures, (10) the mutual dependence of the two truths, (11) the two levels of the Middle Way, (12) the doctrinal principles of consciousness-only, and (13) the three incalculable eons contained in an instant. 65a

55

I

The Canonical Sources

of the Tradition

The canonical sources. [Ryōhen: Discussion of the eleven treatises (listed as authorities in the Cheng weishi lun) is omitted here.] The Commentary on Consciousness-only16 says:

This treatise cites from six scriptures: The Flower Ornament Sutra (Huayan jing), the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra, the Rulai chuxian gongde zhuangyan jing (Sutra on the Merit and Adornments of the Appearance of the Tathāgata), the *Mahāyāna-abhidharma-sūtra, the Laṅkâvatāra-sūtra, and the Ghana-vyūha.17

Therefore, these six scriptures are taken to be the canonical sources for the Yogâcāra school. However, among these six, the Saṃdhinirmocana is regarded as the principal source. This is because it accurately elucidates the topics of consciousness-only, the three kinds of natures, the ten grounds (bhūmis), cause and effect, the stages of practice, and it clarifies the distinctive aspects of the middle path of the Great Vehicle. The Zhuangyan jing, the *Mahāyāna-abhidharma-sūtra, and the Ghana-vyūha have not been transmitted to East Asia, even though the Cheng weishi lun often cites them. Question: This being the case, what is the venue of the sermon of the Saṃdhinirmocana? Who delivers its teaching, and who is its audience? Response: The venue of the sermon is the Lotus Store world, its preacher is Vairocana Buddha, and its target audience are the bodhisattvas at the final stage of the Dharma cloud ground. Its doctrine is that of the fully expressed Middle Way—all of which are seen in the sutra. Because of its length I will not cite it here.

57

65b

II

The Classification of the Teachings

in Terms of Periodization

1. Refuting Earlier

Classification Schemes

Scholars of the past proposed various taxonomies of the Buddha's teachings. Some posited a single teaching period, some posited two teaching periods, and so forth, up to five teaching periods.18 But since none of these periods that were established can be confirmed in the scriptural source texts, they cannot be relied upon. Therefore, the Yideng (Lamp of the Expressed Doctrine) says, "People establish the teaching period classifications of one, two, four, and five, but since such assertions lack scriptural support, they cannot be relied upon."19 [Ryōhen: This can be confirmed in the source text.] 2. The Three Periods

of the Teaching

However, the founder of our school (Kuiji) relied on the Saṃdhinirmocanasūtra to articulate his understanding of a three-period taxonomy. This was done using the "No Intrinsic Nature" chapter20 of that sutra. [In that text,] Paramârthasamudgata Bodhisattva questions the Tathāgata regarding the differences between the sutras that emphasize existence and the sutras that emphasize nonexistence. The World-honored One answers him by lecturing on the main import of the teachings of his single lifetime, reconciling these differences. The discussion in the text is complicated and lengthy, but we will summarize it by saying this.

Based on the doctrine of the three kinds of natures, namely, the fabricated nature, the other-dependent nature, and the perfectly real nature, he posited the three types of non-natures: the non-nature of fabricated appearances, the non-nature of the causally produced, and the non-nature of ultimate reality. The lack of nature of fabricated appearances is posited due to the utter lack 59

65c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

of nature in the fabricated. Sky-flowers are an example of the non-nature of appearances.21 The non-nature of the causally produced refers to the nature of the other-dependent as that which is causally produced and does not exist independently. Apparitions are an example of the non-nature of the causally produced.22 The non-nature of ultimate reality refers to the fact that all dharmas are utterly devoid of own-nature, and are distantly removed from all appearance. Space is an example of the non-nature of ultimate reality.23 Based on these three kinds of non-nature, I [the Buddha] teach that all dharmas are utterly devoid of intrinsic nature.

Based on the emptiness of the nonsubstantiality of appearances and the nonsubstantiality of ultimate truth, there is the meaning of intrinsic nature's steadfast permanence, and hence I also teach the unarisen, unextinguished, originally quiescent intrinsic nature of nirvana.24 Based on the other-dependent content of the nonsubstantiality of the causally produced, I also teach the various dharmas of the five aggregates, the Four Truths, and so forth. This being the case, there is no disagreement between earlier and later teachings. [Ryōhen: The above section has been summarized.] "Then, Paramârtha samudgata Bodhisattva deeply understood the Buddha's point. All the teachings of a single lifetime comprise the three periods of the teaching of existence, emptiness, and the Middle Way."25 At that time the Tathāgata gave his emphatic approval to this classification!

The first teaching period refers to when the Tathāgata taught for the first time while staying at the Deer Park, skillfully explaining the aggregates, the truths, and so forth to his direct disciples (śrāvakas). These teachings can be directly correlated with other teachings, such as the teaching of the nonsubstantiality of causally produced phenomena and other dependence. This doctrine being the shallowest, he taught it first to beings of lesser spiritual capacity. The second period occurred in the past when the Tathāgata was staying with the bodhisattvas on Vulture Peak and other places, when he taught that all dharmas are devoid of intrinsic nature, that they do not arise and cease, that they are originally quiescent, and that they have the intrinsic nature of nirvana. This directly corresponds to the doctrine of the three kinds of non-nature. Since these were all incompletely explained (neyârtha) teachings, he taught them gradually to practitioners of middling capacity. Although the 60

II. The Classification of the Teachings

above two kinds of teaching were extraordinary, since they were still incompletely explained, they ended up being called "sources of controversy."26 The third teaching period refers to the present time, in which the Tathāgata, discoursing from the Lotus Store world and such places, posited the doctrine of the three kinds of non-natures based on the detailed explanation of the three kinds of natures, known as the fabricated, other-dependent, and perfectly real. He fully elaborated the empty and existent aspect of the dharmas, and hence it is called the most perfectly complete teaching, which is expounded to the adherents of all vehicles. The Tathāgata's incompletely explained teaching is here fully revealed. Since it is permanently removed from all controversy, it is called the "teaching beyond dispute or doubt." This is a general outline of the three teaching periods.

In establishing his various teachings, the Buddha began with those doctrines which were shallow and progressed to those which were profound. This means that the shallowest teaching was expounded first, continuing up to the teaching of neither emptiness nor existence, which, being the most profound, was taught third. This progression in depth of the doctrine was delivered according to the audience at a particular period of time, and occurred in a chronological order. Taking these chronological periods and applying names to them, they are called the three periods of teaching. Thus, when we seek to know the course of the development of the doctrine, it goes from shallow to deep; when we discuss the naming of the teachings, it is in the order of their chronological sequence.

Using this kind of rationale, the ordering of shallow-to-deep is not at odds with the chronological ordering. With the terminology and the doctrine properly matched, taxonomy by time period can be established. Therefore, there is no contradiction when the Flower Ornament Sutra is included in the third period, while the Sutra of the Deathbed Injunction is included in the first period, and so forth.

Question: What does it mean to say that the terminology of the ordering according to the shallowness and depth of the doctrine is not incongruous with the terminology of chronological order?

Response: In the Extracts of the Yogâcārabhūmi there is an explanation of the terms "timely death" and "untimely death" in the context of the 61

III. One Hundred Dharmas and Two Kinds of Emptiness

66a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

Yogâcārabhūmi: "'Timely' means 'according to natural law.' It can also mean 'according to divisions of time.'"27 So clearly the word "timely" originally includes the meaning of natural law. Hence, "time" has the meanings of position, correspondence, and regularity, which in turn also correspond to the meaning of natural law. Thus, what is emphasized is that even though the "three times of teaching" are based on the temporality of months and years, the word "time" includes these three levels of the teaching. Furthermore, the founder of our school (Kuiji) distinguished the teachings into two main approaches [of sudden and gradual]. The reason why the approach of sudden enlightenment only refers to a single teaching period is because people of sudden predispositions hear all teachings and awaken to the Middle Way. Thus, it was the Buddha's intention in the first period of the teaching to explain that "existence" was the existence from the perspective of the Middle Way. This is because this "existence" was that of the otherdependent and the perfectly real among the three kinds of natures. The "emptiness" of the second period was also the emptiness of the Middle Way. Among the three kinds of natures, this is the emptiness of the fabricated nature. Prior to sudden awakening there is no distinction of the three time periods. The second is the approach of gradual enlightenment, in the context of which there are three periods of the teaching. Because the faculties of gradually enlightened people are gradually matured, in these stages they attain enlightenment and understanding of the three periods of the teaching of existence, nonexistence, and the Middle Way, and therefore the Buddha had to develop his teaching in three levels. Because of this, the sequential introduction of the Āgamas, the Prajñāpāramitā sutras, the Saṃdhinirmocana, and so forth is a distinction in teaching especially applied to those of predispositions for the gradual path, and therefore, the three time divisions are taken as basic. Yet in the practice of the establishment of these teaching periods, there is no teaching that is not exhausted. Therefore, it definitely includes the Flower Ornament Sutra and so forth.

Hence, in the approach of sudden enlightenment, all of the teachings from the lifetime of the Buddha are subsumed in one time period. In the approach of gradual enlightenment, all of the teachings from the lifetime of the Buddha are included in the three time periods. With both arguments being without fault, the doctrine and the path are perfectly complete. 62

III

One Hundred Dharmas and Two

Kinds of Emptiness

1. Overview

The teaching of the one hundred dharmas was established in order to refute attachment to emptiness. The teaching of two kinds of no-self was established in order to refute attachment to existence.

2. The Hundred Dharmas

I will first discuss the hundred dharmas in terms of their categorization into five groups. The first are the mind dharmas, called citta in Sanskrit. This is a term for the mind, with the connotations of "accumulation" and "collectively arising."

Second are the "mental attributes" (mental function dharmas, also called "mental factors"). Being the property of the "house of the mind," they are called "possessions of the mind."

Third are the dharmas of material form, whose implications are that of material obstruction.

Fourth are the dharmas of dispositions not concomitant28 with mind. "Dispositions" (saṃskāra) refers to the aggregate of dispositions [among the five aggregates] (saṃskāra-skandha). Within the aggregate of dispositions there are two kinds: concomitant dispositions and non-concomitant dispositions. Here the former is omitted, so we are talking about the nonconcomitant dispositions. Fifth are the unconditioned dharmas. "Conditioned" means "created." These dharmas abide eternally, apart from creation, and therefore are called "unconditioned."

Within this group are: (1) the ruling consciousnesses,29 called such because they predominate all other mental functions; (2) the mental functions, which function concomitantly with [the ruling consciousnesses]; (3) the dharmas of material form, which are the images displayed by the ruling consciousnesses 63

66b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

and their mental functions; (4) the nonconcomitant factors, which includes mental states unrelated to the mind, mental functions, and form dharmas; and (5) the unconditioned dharmas, which are revealed as distinct from mind, mental functions, form, and nonconcomitant factors. This is the sequence. A. The Eight Mind Dharmas

The first group, the dharmas of mind, are arranged into eight kinds. [Ryōhen: When the five sense consciousnesses are functioning the (sixth consciousness) manovijñāna also functions without fail. But when the mano vijñāna is functioning, the five sense consciousnesses do not necessarily function. The five sense consciousnesses also do not necessarily function concurrently with each other.]30

i. The Five Sense Consciousness

1. The first is visual consciousness. It is based on the visual faculty (eye) and takes the four visible colors31 as its objects. It is produced from distinct seeds and functions in all three modes of karmic moral quality.32 It exists in the first meditation heaven of the desire realm, and it has four supports. The first is the visual organ, the second is the manovijñāna,33 the third is the manas (defiled ego-consciousness), the fourth is the ālayavijñāna (store consciousness). In terms of the three means of cognition, it is capable of direct perception (pratyakṣa). Although it functions with thirty-four of the mental functions, it does not function with all of them simultaneously; thus, it is partially concomitant to some extent. This will be clarified below. 2. The second is auditory consciousness. It is based on the auditory faculty (ear) and takes sounds as its objects. The number of its concomitant factors and its other attributes are the same as explained in the prior consciousness. 3. The third is olfactory consciousness. It is based on the olfactory organ (nose) and takes odors as its objects. Its other aspects are like the aboveexplained sense consciousnesses, except for the fact that in terms of its binding to the three realms it is limited to the desire realm.

4. The fourth is gustatory consciousness. It is based on the gustatory faculty (tongue) and apprehends flavors as its objects. The rest of its properties are the same as the above consciousnesses.

5. Fifth is tactile consciousness. It is based on the bodily faculty (skin) and takes tangible things as its objects. The rest of its properties are the same 64

III. One Hundred Dharmas

as the above consciousnesses, except that in terms of its binding to the three realms it is the same as the visual and auditory consciousnesses. ii. The Manovijñāna

Sixth is the manovijñāna.34 It is based on the mental faculty (manas) and takes dharmas35 as its objects. "Dharmas" refers to "all dharmas" (all phenomena). "Mental faculty"36 refers to the seventh consciousness, manas. The manovijñāna is produced from its own distinct seeds; it functions in all three modes of karmic moral quality; it is bound to all three realms; it has two supports: the mental faculty (manas) and the eighth consciousness (ālaya vijñāna). It functions through all three modes of cognition and is able to function together with all mental functions, although not necessarily with all of them concurrently. This will be clarified below.

iii. The Manas

Seventh is the manas, also translated as "mental consciousness." While the term for the sixth consciousness is a dependent compound (tatpuruṣa) word, this one is a compound word in which there is equality of dependence between the terms (karmadhāraya), thus the two usages of the term "mental consciousness" (Jp. ishiki) are distinguished. It functions beyond the other consciousnesses in that it is continuously examining and assessing, and therefore it is particularly named as manas. It is produced from its own distinct seeds and is of merely impedimentary character (i.e., it is not of unwholesome character). It functions bound to all three realms and takes the eighth consciousness as its basis. It cognizes only mistakenly (apramāṇa). It takes only the cognizing aspect of the eighth consciousness as its object. It functions concurrently with eighteen mental functions.

iv. The Ālayavijñāna

The eighth is the ālayavijñāna. Ālaya is here translated as "store." Since it has the connotations of "storer," "the stored," and "appropriated store," it is called the "store consciousness." It is produced from its own distinctive seeds and has only a nonimpedimentary karmic moral nature. Within the nonimpedimentary nature are four kinds of [undefiled] karmic indeterminacy,37 but this consciousness only has the undefiled karmic morally indeterminate ripening. It functions throughout the three realms and has the seventh consciousness as 65

66c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

its support. Among the modes of cognition, it uses only direct perception (pratyakṣa). It has three kinds of objects: seeds, the five faculties, and the natural world. It functions with only the five omnipresent functions.38 The seeds that produce all dharmas reside within this store consciousness. B. The Six Categories of Mental Functions

Second are the mental functions, which are classified into six types. [Ryōhen: When a ruling consciousnesses is active its mental functions are necessarily active, and when mental functions are active their ruling consciousness is necessarily active. This is the explanation from the perspective of taking all as a single aggregate.] There are five omnipresent functions. Since they can definitely be observed to function in all states of mind, they are said to be omnipresent.

There are five object-contingent factors; since each one of these arises only in connection with a distinct object, they are said to be object-contingent. There are eleven wholesome factors. Since they can only arise in wholesome states of mind, they are said to be wholesome. There are six afflictions. Because their natures are included in the fundamental afflictions, they are called afflictions. There are twenty derivative afflictions. Because they are derived from the afflictions, they are called derivative afflictions.

There are four indeterminate mental functions, said to be indeterminate because the wholesomeness or defilement of their karmic moral quality is not determined.

C. The Five Omnipresent Factors

[Ryōhen: These five definitely arise in all states of mind.]39 1. Attention (manaskāra). Its nature is that of alerting the mind, and its function is to draw the mind to perceptual objects. It is produced from distinct seeds and functions concomitantly in all three modes of karmic moral quality; it functions in all three realms, through all three means of cognition, and throughout the eight consciousnesses. Its supports and perceptual objects, as well as its moral quality, realms, and modes of perception and so forth, are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning. 2. Contact (sparśa). Its nature is that of merging the three [components: faculties, objects, and consciousness], distinguishing and transforming, and 66

III. One Hundred Dharmas

bringing mind and mental functions into contact with objects. It functions to support sensation, ideation, volition, and so forth. In terms of its production from distinct seeds, the three moral qualities and so forth, it is like the previous dharma.

3. Sensation (vedanā). Its nature is to experience the appearances of objects as agreeable, disagreeable, and neither agreeable nor disagreeable; it functions to give rise to craving. In terms of its production from distinct seeds and so forth it is like the previous dharma. From it spring the five sensations of sorrow and joy (referring to mental experience); pain and pleasure (referring to physical experience), and indifference.

4. Ideation (saṃjñā). Its nature is that of the abstraction of images from objects, and it functions to designate various linguistic expressions. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma.

5. Volition (cetanā). Its nature is to cause the mind to act, and it functions to make the mind work toward cultivating wholesome qualities. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas.

D. Five Object-contingent Mental Functions

There are five object-contingent mental functions. [Ryōhen: These five dharmas do not necessarily act concurrently. Sometimes one, sometimes two, or up to all five are active at once. They operate in thirty-one general and specific combinations.]

1. Desire (chanda). Its nature is constituted by a yearning for perceptual objects, and it functions as the support for the mental factor of effort (vīrya). It arises from distinct seeds and functions in all three modes of karmic moral value, in all three realms, and through all three means of cognition. It can function with any of the first six consciousnesses but not the seventh or eighth consciousnesses. Its supports and so forth are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning. 2. Ascertainment (adhimokṣa). Its nature is to make an accurate determination and resolution of a specific object. It functions to resist distraction. In its being produced from distinct seeds and so forth it is like the preceding dharma. 3. Focus (smṛti). Its nature is to cause the mind to clearly recognize a familiar object and not lose it. It functions as a support for concentration. The rest of its characteristics are like the preceding dharma. 67

67a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

4. Concentration (samādhi). Its nature is to make the mind focus without distraction on the object being observed. It functions as a support for intelligence; in other respects, is like the preceding dharmas. 5. Intelligence (prajñā). Its nature is to enable determinations regarding the object under observation. Its function is to eliminate doubts. It functions in any of the seven forthcoming consciousnesses but not the eighth. Its other characteristics are like the preceding dharmas.

E. Eleven Wholesome Factors

Next are the eleven wholesome factors [Ryōhen: Among these, ten always function concurrently, except for pliancy.]

1. Faith (śraddhā). With mental purification as its nature, it is described as the capability to strive for truth and merit with profound patience. It functions to counteract faithlessness and causes the mind to seek for wholesomeness. It is produced from distinct seeds and has only a wholesome karmic quality that operates within all three realms. It functions in direct perception and inference, operating throughout the first six consciousnesses but not the seventh and eighth. Its supports and so forth are the same as those of the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning.

2. Diligence (vīrya). Cultivating wholesome qualities and ridding oneself of unwholesome qualities, it has as its nature unflagging courage in the midst of affairs. It functions to counteract indolence and encourage wholesome behavior. The rest of its attributes are the same as the previous dharma. 3. Conscience (hrī). It has the nature of profoundly respecting wise and wholesome behavior relying on the power of oneself and the Dharma. It functions to counteract lack of conscience and to stifle unwholesome behavior. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma. 4. Shame (apatrāpya). It has the nature of disdain for inflicting of harm on others, relying of the power of worldly norms. It functions to counteract shamelessness and to stifle unwholesome behavior. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma. 5. Noncraving (alobha). Its nature is nonattachment to existence and things. It functions to counteract craving and create wholesomeness. The rest of its characteristics are like the preceding dharmas. 6. Nonhatred (adveṣa). Its nature is lack of antipathy toward displeasure 68

III. One Hundred Dharmas

and the displeasing; it functions to counteract hatred and develop wholesomeness. The rest of its characteristics are like the preceding dharmas. 7. Nondelusion (amoha). Its nature is a clear understanding of principles and phenomena; it functions to counteract folly and to stimulate wholesome behavior. The rest of its characteristics are like the preceding dharma. [Ryōhen: The above three dharmas are also known as the three wholesome roots.] 8. Pliancy (praśrabdhi) has the nature of adaptability; freeing oneself from debilitation, body and mind are harmonized. Its function is to counter torpor and to transform the basis of the mind. Its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas, except that it only operates in the two realms (of form and formlessness); it does not function in the desire realm. 9. Vigilance (apramāda) has the nature of the vigorous application of the three wholesome roots toward the cultivation that eliminates bad influences and the cultivation that wards off bad influences. It functions to consummate all mundane and supramundane wholesome activities. It is not produced from distinct seeds and it operates in all three realms. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. 10. Equanimity (upekṣā) has effortless abiding as its nature. One's mind becomes serene and correct based on the energetic cultivation of the three wholesome roots. It acts to counter agitation and to allow the mind to abide serenely. It does not have distinct seeds and in its other characteristics is like the preceding dharmas.

11. Noncruelty (ahiṃsā) means that one does not inflict harm on other sentient beings. It has nonhatred as its nature. It has the counteracting of harm and kind caring as its function. Like the preceding dharma, it does not have distinct seeds and so forth. "Nonhatred" refers to "kindness" and "noncruelty" refers to "caring."40 F. The Afflictions

There are six afflictions. [Ryōhen: Here the names of the six are expanded into ten afflictions, as is clarified below. Among these ten afflictions there are different varieties: some that function concurrently, and some that do not function concurrently, as is explained in the sixth fascicle of the Cheng weishi lun. When nescience is active, the others are not necessarily active. But when the others are active, nescience must be active.]

69

67b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

1. Craving (rāga). Its nature is defiled attachment to existence and existent things. It functions to obstruct noncraving and produce suffering. It is produced from distinct seeds, and operates in the two karmic moral qualities of unwholesome and indeterminate-impedimentary. It functions within all three realms, as well as all three means of cognition; it functions within the seven forthcoming consciousnesses but not the eighth consciousness. Its supports and so forth are the same as those of the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning. 2. Hatred (pratigha) has the nature of antipathy toward displeasure and unpleasant things. It has the function of obstructing nonhatred, and serves as a support for unease and unwholesome activity. It is produced from distinct seeds, it is solely of unwholesome karmic moral quality, and only exists in the desire realm. It functions in all three modes of cognition and throughout the six consciousnesses, but not in the seventh and eighth consciousness; its bases and perceptual objects are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning.

3. Pride (māna). Its nature is to presume oneself to be better than others. It functions to obstruct nonpride and produce suffering. It is produced from distinct seeds and has the karmic moral qualities of unwholesome and impedimentary indeterminacy; it is tied to the three realms and never operates through direct perception. It functions in the sixth and seventh consciousnesses, but not the first five or the eighth. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. It has the same supports and so forth as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning. Within the category of pride there are also seven and nine specific kinds of pride.41

4. Nescience (avidyā). Its nature is confusion in regard to principles and phenomena. It functions to obstruct the mental factor of nondelusion and serves as a support for all defilements. In terms of the distinctiveness of its seeds, its karmic moral quality, and its binding to the three realms, it is the same as the preceding affliction. It functions through all three means of cognition and throughout the seven forthcoming consciousnesses, but not the eighth consciousness. Its supports and so forth are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning.

5. Doubt (vicikitsā). Its nature is that of uncertainty regarding Buddhist truths and principles. It functions to obstruct the wholesome qualities of the mental factor of nondoubt. In terms of its seeds, karmic moral quality, and 70

III. One Hundred Dharmas

realms, it is the same as the above affliction. It never functions in the cognitive modes of direct perception and inference and only operates in the sixth consciousness. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. 6. Incorrect view (asad-dṛṣṭi) has as its nature defiled intelligence that makes distorted assumptions regarding truths and principles. It functions to obstruct wholesome views and invites suffering. It does not have distinct seeds; its karmic moral quality and the realms in which it functions are the same as the preceding dharma. It functions only through mistaken perception and only operates in the sixth and seventh consciousnesses, not in the first five or the eighth. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. It is distinguished into five types of views [described below]. [Ryōhen: These five views do not necessarily function concurrently.] (1) Identity-view (satkāya-dṛṣṭi) reifies the appropriated five aggregates into "I" and "mine." It serves at the basis for the arising of all views. (2) View of attachment to extremes (antagrāha-dṛṣṭi). This means that one attaches according to the circumstance to annihilationism or eternalism. Thus, it functions to obstruct the practice of the Middle Way and liberation. (3) Mistaken view (mithyā-dṛṣṭi). This means that one denies cause and effect, their functional activity, and real events, and includes all other mistaken attachments not covered by the other four views.

(4) Attachment to views (dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa). This means that one clings to various religious and philosophical views as well as their supporting constituents, attaching to them as the most excellent approach that is able to bring one to a state of purity. It functions to serve as the support for all disputes. (5) Attachment to the precepts (śīlavrata-parāmarśa). This means that one follows the precepts and their constituents derived from all kinds of mistaken views, clinging to them as the most excellent approach that is able to bring one to a state of purity. It functions to support futile asceticism. G. Derivative afflictions

Next are the derivative afflictions, of which there are twenty. [Ryōhen: Among these twenty, there are some that function concurrently, and some that do not. They are distinguished below.]

i. Minor Derivative Afflictions

1. Anger (krodha). As it is the tendency for agitation, anger occurs when 71

67c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

one is faced with objects perceived as unfavorable to oneself. It functions to obstruct non-anger and cause one to seize a weapon. Since it is derived from hatred it does not have its own seeds. It is solely of unwholesome karmic moral character and arises only in the desire realm. It never has direct perception as its cognitive mode and functions only in the sixth consciousness. Its supports and referents and so forth are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning.

2. Hostility (upanāha). Preceded by anger, hostility is the tendency to hold to malice by dwelling on a prior injustice, not letting it go. It functions to obstruct the mental function of nonhostility and intensify vexation. It is also a derivative of hatred. Like the preceding dharma, it does not have its own seeds and so forth.

3. Vexation (pradāsa). Preceded by anger and hostility, vexation is the tendency for burning rage and acrimony regarding a past or present incident. It acts to obstruct the mental function of nonvexation and to inflict pain on others. It is also a derivative of hatred. In its lack of distinct seeds and so forth it is like the preceding dharma.

4. Dissimulation (mrakṣa) is the tendency to conceal one's misdeeds when one is afraid that one will lose advantage or prestige as a result. It functions to obstruct nondissimulation and bring regret. As a derivative of craving and delusion it does not have its own seeds; in other respects, it is the same as the preceding dharma.

5. Deceit (māyā) is the tendency for fraudulence through which one makes a pretense of having virtue in order to garner profit and prestige. It functions to obstruct the mental function of nondeceit and has wrong livelihood as its function. It operates with the karmic moral qualities of unwholesome and nonimpedimentary indeterminacy. It also functions in the desire realm and the first meditative level [of the form realm]. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma.

6. Guile (śāṭhya) is the tendency to devious, through which one feigns a different character in order to ensnare others. It functions to obstruct the mental function of nonguile, and to lead others [in the way one wants].42 Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. 7. Arrogance (mada) is the tendency to be deeply attached to, intoxicated with, and boastful about one's own successes. It obstructs the mental function 72

III. One Hundred Dharmas

of non-arrogance and serves as a support for defilement. It is a derivative of craving and can function in any of the three realms. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma.

8. Cruelty (pratigha) is the tendency to heartlessly inflict pain on sentient beings. Its function is to obstruct the mental function of noncruelty and to torment others. As a derivative of the mental function of hatred, it is entirely of unwholesome karmic moral quality. It is only involved in the desire realm and the rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas. 9. Envy (īrṣyā) is the tendency to be jealous, experienced by one who seeks prestige and wealth and cannot stand to see the success of others. It obstructs the mental function of nonenvy and to bring misery. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas.

10. Parsimony (mātsarya) is the tendency toward incapacity for generosity—to be stingy due to intense clinging to material assets or the Dharma. It functions to obstruct nonparsimony, encouraging selfish hoarding. It is a derivative of craving and the rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma.

[Ryōhen: Each of the above ten dharmas arises independently, and are therefore called the minor derivative afflictions.]

ii. Middling Derivative Afflictions

11. Lack of conscience (āhrīkya) is the tendency to disdain wise and wholesome people while not reflecting on oneself or the Dharma; it functions to obstruct the mental factor of conscience and to encourage unwholesome behavior. It is produced from distinct seeds; it manifests only with unwholesome karmic moral quality; it is involved only in the desire realm; it functions through all three means of cognition as well as throughout the six consciousnesses, but not in the seventh and eighth consciousnesses. Its supports and so forth are the same as those of the ruling consciousness with which is its functioning.

12. Shamelessness (anapatrāpya) is the tendency to prize cruelty without heed for secular norms. It functions to obstruct shame and to generate wrong actions. The rest of its characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma. [Ryōhen: Because the above two dharmas are omnipresent in unwholesome mental states they are called "middling derivative afflictions."] 73

68a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

iii. Major Derivative Afflictions

13. Faithlessness (aśraddha) is the tendency to be mentally polluted, seen in intolerance, nonenjoyment, and the lack of desire for reality, merit, or ability.43 It functions to obstruct pure faith and to support negligence. It arises from its own seeds; it operates in unwholesome, impedimentary, and indeterminate mental states; it functions in all three realms and operates throughout the seven forthcoming consciousnesses, but not with the eighth. Its other aspects are the same as the preceding mental function.

14. Indolence (kausīdya) is the tendency to be idle in one's efforts toward cultivation of wholesomeness and elimination of unwholesomeness. It functions to hinder effort and increase defilement. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas.

15. Dissipation (pramāda) is the tendency toward licentiousness, rendering one incapable of fending off pollution and cultivating purity. It acts to obstruct vigilance, nurturing the supports of unwholesomeness while impairing the supports of wholesomeness. It is derived from the four factors of indolence, craving, hatred, and nescience, and does not have its own seeds. Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharmas.

16. Dullness (styāna) is the tendency of the mind to be unable to react to objects. It functions to obstruct pliancy and the practice of vipaśyanā (analytical) meditation and is produced from its own seeds. In other respects, it is like the above afflictions.

17. Agitation (auddhatya) is the tendency for the mind to become overly excited in regard to objects. It functions to hinder equanimity and the practice of śamatha (calm abiding) meditation. In other ways it is the same as the above afflictions.

18. Loss of focus (muṣita-smṛti) is the tendency to be unable to focus on the object of perception. It functions to obstruct accurate focus and is a support for distraction. It is derived from the mental factors of focus and nescience and does not have its own seeds. In other respects, it is the same as the above afflictions.

19. Nondiscernment (asaṃprajanya) is the tendency to misconstrue objects of scrutiny. It functions to hinder accurate discernment and promote the commission of transgressions. It is derived from the mental factors of intelligence 74

III. One Hundred Dharmas

and nescience and does not have its own seeds. In other respects, it is the same as the above afflictions.

20. Distraction (vikṣepa) is the tendency for the mind to wander about among the objects of perception. It functions to hinder stable concentration while serving as the basis for nonintelligence. It is produced from its own seeds and its other characteristics are the same as those of the above afflictions. [Ryōhen: Since the above eight dharmas pervasively defile the mind they are called the "major derivative afflictions." Since they defile the mind, it means that they are of unwholesome and impedimentary moral quality.] H. Four Indeterminate Mental Functions

[Ryōhen: Among these four, the former two and either of the latter two sometimes function concurrently. The latter two never function concurrently.] 1. Drowsiness (middha) brings about a lack of free movement and makes the mind muddled, and this serves to obstruct the practice of clear observation (vipaśyanā) meditation. Produced from its own seeds it functions in all three types of moral quality. It is limited in its function to the desire realm; it never operates through direct perception; it only functions within the sixth consciousness. Its perceptual objects are the same as the ruling consciousness with which it is functioning.

2. Remorse (kaukṛtya) is the tendency to feel regret after having committed an evil act; it functions to obstruct calm abiding meditation (śamatha). Its other characteristics are the same as the preceding dharma. 3. Rough apprehension (vitarka) is the tendency of mind to pursue objects of thought and speech and apprehend them approximately. It is derived from the mental factors of volition and intelligence, and thus does not have its own seeds. It functions in the desire realm and the level of the first meditation of the form realm, as well as through all three means of cognition. 4. Scrutiny (vicāra) is the tendency of the mind to pursue objects of verbal expression and analyze them in detail. It functions in states of mind up to the intermediate level of meditation.44 Its other aspects are the same as the preceding dharma. These two function together to support both stable and unstable states of body and mind.

75

68b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

I. Dharmas of Form (Material Dharmas)

Generally speaking, there are eleven kinds of form dharmas. i. Five Faculties

1. The visual faculty45 (associated with the eyes) is defined as that which "illuminates and guides." Being produced from its own seeds, it is not a derivative dharma. It is a support for the visual consciousness and is transformed by the ālayavijñāna (store consciousness). It is also sometimes a support for the sixth, manovijñāna, and sometimes also serves at its perceptual object. This means that when the five consciousnesses function in tandem with the manovijñāna, it relies on them. The manovijñāna functioning independently of the other faculties cognizes them. Its raw sensate data (bimba) all are brought to awareness by the ālayavijñāna.

2. The auditory faculty (associated with the ears) is defined as that which hears. It is the support for auditory consciousness. In other respects, it is the same as the preceding dharma.

3. The olfactory faculty (associated with the nose) is defined as that which smells. It is the support for olfactory consciousness. 4. The gustatory faculty (associated with the tongue) is defined as that which tastes. It is the support for gustatory consciousness. 5. The tactile faculty (associated with the body) has the two meanings of "cluster" and "support." It is the support for tactile consciousness. In other respects, it is the same as the eyes and ears.

The above five dharmas are collectively known as the "five faculties." "Faculty" (indriya) has the meanings of "compelling" and "producing," because it is the faculties that empower the visual and other consciousnesses. ii. Five Objects

6. Form (rūpa), which has three aspects. The first is color, such as blue, yellow, and so forth. These are not derivative dharmas since each has its own seeds. Its raw data (bimba) is brought into awareness at the level of the ālaya vijñāna; its projected images (pratibimba) are brought to awareness by the visual consciousness. Color is also sometimes also taken as an object by the sixth consciousness, manovijñāna. The second aspect is shape, i.e., long, short, etc. The third aspect is expression (of intent), referring to going, stopping, 76

III. One Hundred Dharmas

and so forth. The aspects of shape and expression do not have their own seeds and are objects of the sixth consciousness.

7. Sound (which has six aspects): sounds caused by the sentient, sounds caused by the insentient, sounds arising as a combination (of the prior two categories), pleasant sounds, unpleasant sounds, and sounds that are neither pleasant nor unpleasant. Each of these six aspects has its own seeds, so they are not derivative factors. Their raw data is subliminally apprehended at the level of the eighth consciousness. Their consciously apprehended derivatives46 (pratibimba) are brought to awareness by the auditory consciousness, and sometimes sound is cognized by the sixth consciousness, manovijñāna. 8. Odor is distinguished into the three categories of pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral, each of which has its own seeds. Its consciously apprehended derivatives (pratibimba) are brought to awareness by the olfactory consciousness; its other aspects are the same as the preceding dharmas. 9. Flavor refers to the tastes such as bitter, sour, pungent, sweet, salty, and insipid. Each of these has its own seeds and their consciously apprehended derivatives (pratibimba) are brought to awareness by the gustatory consciousness. The rest of its aspects are the same as the preceding dharmas. 10. The tangibles refers to earth, water, fire, and wind, which are together called the four elements. Each of these four is produced from its own seeds. These four elements produce all remaining kinds of form. The four data fields and the five faculties are all created from these; hence they are called "creators." Its consciously apprehended derivatives (pratibimba) are brought into awareness by the tactile consciousness. Smoothness, roughness, lightness, heaviness, and so forth are derived from the four elements, so they do not have their own seeds. They are cognized by the sixth consciousness; in other respects, they are the same as the preceding dharmas.

The above five factors are called the "five objects"; they are also called the "five fields." Among them there are internal and external. The internal are the body on which sentient beings rely; the external are the substance of the natural world.

11. Form restricted to the field of conceptualization. Within this category there are five kinds: minute form, particulate form, undertaken form, fabricated form, and form induced by meditation. Within this group, the first four types 77

68c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

are always hypothesized and do not have their own seeds. Forms induced by meditation can be both hypothesized and real. Those that are real are produced from their own seeds; the hypothesized do not have their own seeds. These five kinds of form are all objects of the sixth consciousness. These real forms that are produced by meditation can also be cognized by the visual and other sense consciousnesses.

Minute form refers to atomic particles.

Particulate form is form in suspension (such as cloud particles and so forth). Undertaken (of the precepts) form is unexpressed (avijñapti).47 Fabricated form is like reflections of the moon on the surface of water or images in a mirror.

Forms induced by meditation are the five sense fields when they are generated by the power of meditation. J. Dharmas Not Concomitant with Mind

Briefly, there are twenty-four dharmas not concomitant with mind. 1. Acquisition (prāpti) means "fully obtaining." It is a derivative of form and mind and is not produced from its own seeds. It is an object of the sixth consciousness.

2. Life faculty (jīvitêndriya) means that the period of one's stay in this world is determined. It is derived from seeds contained in the ālayavijñāna. In other respects, it is the same as the preceding dharma. 3. Commonality of sentient beings (sabhāga) means "similarity." It is derived from the bodies and minds of various sentient beings. 4. Ordinariness (pṛthag-janatva) refers to those who have not attained the noble path. It is derived from the seeds of conceptual errors in the three realms (which are dealt with in the path of seeing).

5. Nonideational concentration (asaṃjñisamāpatti) refers to the tranquilization of the body. It is derived from the seeds of the attitude of disillusionment. However, the nonideational concentration cultivated by non-Buddhists only silences the activity of the first six consciousnesses. 6. Concentration of cessation (nirodha-samāpatti) also has the meaning of tranquilizing the body and mind and is also derived from the seeds of the attitude of disillusionment. This is the nonconceptualizing concentration cultivated by the noble ones. It silences both the six consciousnesses and the afflicted manas. 78

III. One Hundred Dharmas

7. The condition of nonideation (asaṃjñika) is the commensurate effect caused by cultivation of no-thought. It is derived from the seeds of the mental state resulting from the sixth stage of the heaven without conceptualization. 8. Assemblages of nouns (nāma-kāya) means the intrinsic nature of the verbalization of [the teachings]. They are derived from the field of sound. This can refer to one noun, two nouns, or many nouns. 9. Assemblages of phrases (pada-kāya) means the distinctions [in the teaching] that are articulated. These are also derived from the field of sound; there can be one, two, or many phrases.

10. Assemblages of syllables (vyañjana-kāya) means that both nouns and phrases rely on syllables. These are also based on the field of sound. There can be one, two, or many syllables.

11. Birth (jāti) means that something originally did not exist and now it does. It is derived from dharmas of form and mind.

12. Aging (jarā) means "instability." It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

13. Duration (sthiti) means that something is temporarily functional. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

14. Impermanence (anitya) means that things subsequently vanish. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

15. Continuity (pravṛtti) refers to the inseparability of cause and effect. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

16. Differentiation (pratiniyama) refers to the fact that there are differences between wholesome and unwholesome causes and effects. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

17. Concomitance (saṃyukta) means that cause and effect correspond. It is also derived from the dharmas of form and mind.

18. Rapidity (jāva) refers to the swiftness with which all conditioned phenomena [arise and cease]. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind. 19. Sequence (anukrama) means that things are arranged in order. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

20. Direction (diś) means that there are delimitations in terms of location. It is derived from form dharmas.

21. Time (kāla) is what is calculable based on delimitation. It is derived from dharmas of form and mind.

79

69a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

22. Number (saṃkhyā) means the quantification of phenomena. It is also derived from dharmas of form and mind.

23. Compatibility (sāmagrī) refers to a situation in which factors do not interfere with each other.

24. Incompatibility (asāmagrī) is the opposite of the above compatibility. None of the above twenty-four have their own seeds; they are all objects of the sixth consciousness (i.e., conceptual objects). K. Unconditioned Dharmas

There are briefly six kinds of unconditioned dharmas. [Ryōhen: They constitute the inner nature of the prior ninety-four dharmas.] 1. Space (ākāśa). Because it is free from obstruction it is called space. Within this category there are two kinds: (1) that which is based on being brought into conscious awareness. These are the characteristics of absence of hindrance apprehended by the mind. They are simulacra, and thus they are in reality conditioned; (2) those that are based on the Dharma-nature— reality. They are not characteristics that are apprehended by the mind, and thus they are really unconditioned.

2. Analytical cessation (pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha). This means that one uses the power of analysis to extinguish all defilements and to consummate enlightenment; hence it is called analytical cessation. There are two kinds: (1) that which is based on being brought into conscious awareness, that is, the appearances of the unconditioned state of analytical cessation as apprehended by the mind; (2) the other type is the same as the preceding dharma. 3. Nonanalytical cessation (apratisaṃkhyā-nirodha). This is [the attainment of consummate enlightenment based on one's fundamental purity] without relying on the power of analysis. Sometimes it appears without referents; hence it is called nonanalytical cessation. Within this category there are two kinds: the first is the nonanalytical cessation that is apprehended by the mind; the second is the same as explained in the preceding dharma. 4. Imperturbability (āniñjya). It is called imperturbability because sensations of pain and pleasure have been extinguished. This is the state experienced in the fourth level of meditation. It is also distinguished into the same two types as the preceding dharmas.

5. Cessation of perception and sensation (saṃjñā-vedita-nirodha). It is called cessation of perception and sensation because perception and sensation 80

III. One Hundred Dharmas

no longer function. This occurs in the concentration of extinction (nirodhasamāpatti). Its distinction into two types is the same as the preceding dharmas. The above five are all hypothesized based on thusness.

6. Thusness (tathatā). It is principle without distortion; hence it is called "thusness." The ideograph shin means "true," expressing the connotation of nonfalsity. The ideograph nyo means "always like this," expressing changelessness. It includes the same two types of aspects as the preceding dharma. Thusness is also a metaphorical term.

L. The Two Hindrances

i. Definition

Question: What are the two hindrances of affliction and cognition?48 Response: The afflictive hindrances (kleśâvaraṇa) are precisely all of the afflictions that have been elaborated above. The cognitive hindrances exist within each of the afflictions. Confusions in regard to function are called afflictive hindrances and confusions that take dharmas as essences are called cognitive hindrances. Therefore, the two hindrances are in essence not separate. The part that is confusion in regard to function refers to the function of the production of present karma and the nourishing of rebirth. These torment sentient beings and compel them to transmigrate through birth and death; hence they are called "afflictions."

The part that is delusion derived from taking dharmas as essences does not function to produce present karma or nourish rebirth. It simply obscures the knowable objects such that one is unable to attain bodhi. These are called cognitive hindrances (jñeyâvaraṇa), written both as shochi shō and chi shō49 Hence, the afflictive hindrances obstruct the attainment of true nirvana; the cognitive hindrances obstruct the attainment of great bodhi. The former are eliminated by the insight into emptiness of person. The latter are eliminated by the insight into the emptiness of dharmas. The noble path50 contains distinctions in the capacity of practitioners along these lines;51 hence they are called two hindrances although they are actually the same in essence. If we define them from the perspective of the six afflictions, then when one gives rise to desire toward a sentient being from within the state of the affliction of craving, the desire for this designated being is called affliction, whereas attachment to its dharma essence is called a cognitive hindrance. 81

69b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

The five aggregates are essence; what is nominally designated is the function. The function of the dharma essences of the five aggregates as gathering and coalescing, appearing to be permanent, unitary, and autonomous, is called "sentient being." If you understand that the five aggregates are illusory and ephemeral, how could you give rise to desire toward this nominal designation of amalgamated dharmas? One errs by taking dharmas to have actual substance, and then pursues this erroneous nominal designation to produce this attachment. This why we can say that the arising of the afflictive hindrances is dependent on the cognitive hindrances. Hence, this state of craving must contain cognitive hindrances. The case is the same with each of the remaining afflictions.

ii. The Two Hindrances in the Context of the Paths of Seeing and Cultivation Question: Among the afflictions, there are the afflictions eliminated in the path of seeing and the afflictions eliminated in the path of cultivation. Which afflictions are [eliminated in the] path of seeing, and which afflictions are [eliminated in the] path of cultivation?

Response: Afflictions produced by discrimination (i.e., relatively superficial afflictions produced in the present life) are eliminated in the path of seeing, while innate afflictions (i.e., deeply embedded afflictions carried over from former lives) are eliminated in the path of cultivation. Since coarse afflictions are easier to remove, they are removed in the path of seeing. Since subtle afflictions are difficult to remove, they are removed in the path of cultivation. Among the ten afflictions, doubt and the latter three views are produced only by discrimination; hence they are called "afflictions removed in the path of seeing." The remaining afflictions are eliminated in both paths. This means that within the factor of craving, discriminated craving is eliminated in the path of seeing, while innate craving is eliminated in the path of cultivation. The remainder, including hatred, conceit, and so forth, can all be understood in the same way.

Question: Does the same kind of distinction of removal of hindrances in the paths of seeing and cultivation exist within the cognitive hindrances? Response: They also have this distinction. This means that the cognitive hindrances contained within the afflictions removed in the path of seeing are cognitive hindrances removed in the path of seeing. Cognitive hindrances 82

III. One Hundred Dharmas

contained in the afflictions removed in the path of cultivation are cognitive hindrances removed in the path of cultivation. However, this is only discussed in the case of bodhisattvas, since the adherents of the two vehicles do not eliminate the cognitive hindrances.52 There is some overlap with the hindrances to deep concentration but they do not really eliminate them, merely suppress them. iii. The Two Hindrances and the Three Kinds of Karmic Moral Quality Question: Among the afflictions, which are unwholesome and which are merely impedimentary [indeterminate moral quality]?

Response: The afflictions of the upper realms (the form and formless realms) are all impedimentary. The discriminatively arisen afflictions of the desire realm are exclusively unwholesome. The innate afflictions of the desire realm that give rise to unwholesome behavior are also exclusively unwholesome; the remainder are merely impedimentary. The cognitive hindrances are only impedimentary, they are never unwholesome. However, in the case of the two vehicles, the cognitive hindrances are also said to be nonimpedimentary, because they do not obstruct the practices of the adherents of those vehicles. [Ryōhen: This concludes the discussion of the hundred dharmas.] 3. The Two Kinds of

Emptiness

[Ryōhen: The one hundred dharmas are all discussed as delusory fabrications. From here we enter into the discussion of reality.]

The first kind of emptiness is the emptiness of beings. This refers to the selflessness of an enduring person (pudgala-nairātmya). Pudgala is translated into Chinese as "beings subject to transmigration," which is a term for the conception of "person." This conception of person includes the implications of mastery and autonomy. Yet since there is actually no real mastery or autonomy, we say "no-self." "Self" means "being," "no-self" means "emptiness"; hence it is called "emptiness of beings."

The second type of emptiness is the emptiness of dharmas, i.e., "selflessness of dharmas." "Dharma" means "a pattern that is sustained." "Pattern" means a paradigm that can make beings understand. "Sustained" means preserved, not relinquishing intrinsic nature. Yet since there is no real intrinsic nature or compelling function, it is called "selflessness of dharmas." "Selflessness" is the same as "emptiness"; hence it is called "emptiness of dharmas." 83

69c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

A. Emptiness of Person

Question: In our present world there are various kinds of sentient beings— humans, animals, and other forms are all appear vividly before our eyes. So if you say there is no self, who will believe you?

Response: What is the substance of the so-called person? If we say that form is the substance, how could form then be impermanent? And how could there be sickness and suffering? If this were the case then the self should be autonomous; hence the remaining organs of ears, nose, and so forth should be understood in the same way. If you take length, shortness, and so forth as substance, since length and shortness are derived from molecular structure they have no substance of their own. Other aspects of form, such as the tactile objects of smoothness and roughness, should also be understood in the same way. If we say that mind is the substance, then how could the mind be impermanent? And how could there be suffering? Each of the fifty-one factors associated with the consciousnesses of the eight consciousnesses is like this. This being the case, what sort of thing is the "substance" that is being referred to by the word "self"? If you scrutinize the various parts of the body, from head to feet, from the skin to the marrow, the six bowels, the five viscera, bones, flesh, veins and so forth, as well as the states of mind, awareness, and thoughts—a real substance of that which is indicated by the words "self," and "person" is in the end unknowable, utterly nonexistent. However, there is the impermanent, painful, constrained form, sound, odor, and so forth; hence it is called "no-self."

Question: This being the case, then why is the term "self" used in both conventional language and the scriptures? The conventional self is called "sentient being," "those having life," and so forth.53 The self in the holy teachings is indicated by such terms as "stream-enterer" (srotaāpanna), "once-returner" (sakṛdāgāmin), and so forth. If people were utterly devoid of such a substance, from where do these nominal designations arise? Even though that which is conventionally designated is erroneous, how could that which is referred to in the scriptures be utterly nonexistent? And even in the case of conventional deluded thinking, if there is no basis whatsoever they should not be able to arise.

Response: The beings that are accepted both conventionally and in the holy teachings are merely based on nominal designation; they do not have 84

III. One Hundred Dharmas

actual substance. That which is nominally designated as the result is the created effect of the transformation by consciousness of the gathering and amalgamation of the various factors of the five aggregates, which resembles a permanent, unitary, and autonomous being. This resembling aspect is called the "nominal self." If you reject it, you fall into the extreme of annihilationism. If you intensify it, you fall into reification. Thus we can say that this self exists only nominally and is actually nonexistent. It is by contemplating the nominal existence of sentient beings that the buddhas, with their great compassion, rescue them, bringing them to the shore of enlightenment. By awakening to their actual nonexistence, great wisdom dissolves this mistaken fabrication, enabling the revelation of reality. Yet the foolish, being deluded in regard to these seeming selves since the beginningless past, determine them to be real. Expressing this unenlightened understanding, they use such words as "sentient being" (sattva), "living being" (jīva), and so forth. These are what people conventionally grasp to as selves. The noble ones, aware that these are appearances, do not say that they are real. Referring to this nominal self, they use such words as "stream-enterer," "oncereturner," and so forth. This is the "self" spoken of in the holy teachings. Question: If this is the case, then why did you say earlier that there is no substance of person whatsoever?

Response: In the prior case, the practitioner is being warned away from thinking that the self is real; our purpose is not to object to its nominal status. How much more so with the case of the nominal, which is still the function of dharmas. Reality is in the category of dharmas, and outside of dharmas there is absolutely nothing; hence we say "no-self."

Question: The meaning of the amalgamated five aggregates appearing to be permanent, unitary, and so forth is still obscure. I beg you to clarify it. Response: If the five faculties, the five sense fields, the mind, mental functions, and so forth are not amalgamated, how could there be the appearance and activity of a person and so forth? It is because of amalgamation that there exists this appearance and activity. Nonetheless, these appearances and activities have no substance outside of the dharmas. They are nothing but the individual functions of form and mind. It is only because of amalgamation that there seem to be these characteristics of permanence, unity, and autonomy, and sovereignty. This is why the holy teachings call this seeming aspect "nominally designated." 85

70a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

Let's look at it another way. Take the case of a man who uses an axe to cut down trees and so forth. His shape, body, energy, and movements seem to transcend the standard categories of color, odor, and such factors but, in reality, they don't go beyond them. Why? The activity of swinging the axe is the function of the four elements, thus it resides within the tactile field. The desire to move and apply effort are none other than the mind and mental functions of desire, volition, and so forth. The hands and feet are none other than modes of shape and color from the field of form. As a whole, they are the factors that comprise the five aggregates and there is nothing that lies beyond them. Thus, we know it is merely this amalgamation of the five aggregates that emerge as this single being. If they are not amalgamated then the person could not exist. It is because they are amalgamated that the man seems to exist. [Ryōhen: End of the example.]

If you think this through, you should not end up either reifying or denying a self. If you are able to attain this middle view you will go on to discard existence and nonexistence. Here the four logical positions are severed and all metaphysical disputations are forgotten. This reality is called the nondiscursive ultimate reality of emptiness of self. The aspect revealed here is none other than that of the no-self of the person (pudgala-nairātmya). B. Emptiness of Dharmas

Question: This being the case, although there is no self, there are some who say that substantive dharmas really exist. By what line of reasoning do you also posit the selflessness of dharmas? And furthermore, what does it mean to say that there is "no-self" in the context of the nonexistence of dharmas?

Response: Substantive dharmas are provisionally said to exist to counter the view of person. The phrase "In order to enter emptiness of self we teach the sixty-two dharmas"54 expresses this point. This is the treatment of dharmas as conventional nominal designations. If we approach it from the perspective of reality, the five faculties, the five sense fields, the consciousnesses, and the mental functions are all like the contents of a dream; they do not exist, yet they seem to exist. There is in the end no real intrinsic nature or excellent function. They are merely ephemeral phenomena formed in other-dependence from myriad conditions.

86

III. One Hundred Dharmas

This principle of the dependent arising of form and mind is real, constant, without arising or ceasing, and is thus called "unconditioned." There is no other unconditioned with a real, separate essence. Already there is no real conditioned or unconditioned; hence it is called the emptiness of dharmas. However, the notion of "no-self" counteracts the notion of independent existence. "Independent existence" is precisely the meaning of ātman. Question: It is acceptable to assert that there is no essential nature to be found in a person. The tangibility of the dharma substances of the five aggregates is obvious. One can see, hear, and conceive of these dharma substances and their functions, that they each exist. Yet you now say that they are empty. How can this be believed?

Response: Although dharma substances are numberless they are all formed through the four kinds of causation. Mental functions are formed through all four, while material factors are formed through two. The principle of dependent arising is indeed, in this case, the principle of our school. Since there is already no independent nature, who can say that there is an intrinsic nature? Question: If it is the case that dharmas have no intrinsic nature, then what are the substances of the forms, sounds, and so forth that are seen, heard, and conceived of?

Response: They are given rise to by external factors; they do not have their own essential nature. "External factors" means causes and conditions and so forth; they are the product of numerous conditions. When a phenomenon is produced through all four causes, then an instance of conceptualization is produced. Material phenomena are the combination of only two kinds of causes. Conceptualized phenomena differ among the eight consciousnesses. Material phenomena are distinguished according to the five sense data fields. Each single phenomenon manifests when its commensurate conditions are fulfilled, with each separate phenomenon arising with characteristics distinct from the others. Therefore, the objects of seeing, hearing, and so forth are not the same. What we are referring to here as "emptiness" indicates "no intrinsic nature." Why do you not accept this?

Question: The Sarvâstivādas and others all posit the teaching of the four types of causes and six kinds of causes, but maintain that all dharmas of the three divisions of time continuously exist, and are therefore definitely not illusory, 87

70b

70c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

empty, or ungraspable. Therefore, it is not clear why you claim that phenomena are empty because they are created from the four causes. Response: Those who adhere to the teachings of other [lesser] vehicles do not understand consciousness-only. They do not recognize the four aspects of cognition, and they do not believe in the existence of the ālayavijñāna. Without the ālayavijñāna there are no direct causes. Without direct causes, indirect objects are also not posited. If indirect objects are not posited, dependent arising has no real meaning for adherents of the lesser vehicles. Since it has no real meaning for them, even though they talk about the four causes they end up falling back into the position of self-production. Hence in their view dharma substances are permanent. You should understand that the emptiness of dharmas is proved through consciousness-only. Thus, the statement "In order to introduce the emptiness of dharmas, he spoke later of consciousness only, [because it makes us realize that external dharmas are also nonexistent.]"55 implies this. Question: [You say that] dharmas are produced from conditions, and hence have no intrinsic nature. But what if the conditions that give rise to dharmas exist independently? If this is the case, then the resultant dharmas would not be selfless.

Response: Those conditions arise from other conditions, and these other conditions also arise from other conditions. Therefore, all dharmas are utterly without self because they are produced from causes and conditions, one after another. Hence the saying "Dharmas arising from causes and conditions I declare to be empty"56 truly expresses this principle.

Question: If this is the case and all dharmas are ephemeral, there should be no distinctions between nominal and real. Why did you say earlier that among the material and mental dharmas, etc. there are both nominal and real? Response: This question arises from a mistaken understanding. The reason I have said here that they are ephemeral, illusory, and dreamlike is to open up the way for a course of discussion that leads one into the true approach of the principle of emptiness. If we were to speak from the perspective of conventional truth, then the majority of the dharmas that are produced from their own seeds are called conditioned-but-real dharmas. Now, at this stage, all are said to be nominal dharmas. There is no contradiction whatsoever. 88

III. One Hundred Dharmas

Question: If you enter the discussion from the true perspective that all are without self, why is it that both conventional and holy teachings say there are dharma substances? Conventional dharmas are those such as substance, quality, activity,57 and so forth. Holy dharmas are those such as the aggregates, fields, spheres, and so forth. If they are utterly without intrinsic nature, how can there be this kind of explanation?

Response: The dharmas taught in both conventional and holy doctrine are merely nominally posited—they do not actually have a nature. Their being nominally posited means that the dharmas such as the five aggregates brought forth by consciousness are not form but appear as form; not mind but appear as mind. These semblances are nominal dharmas. Yet the foolish have been confused about these semblances since time immemorial, and cling to them as being real form, sound, odor, and so forth. They call themselves, through their own unenlightened understanding, by such words as form, sound, odor, flavor, and so forth. These are the dharmas spoken of conventionally. The Great Sage, feeling pity for them, while making them aware of the ephemerality of dharmas, took their meanings as a substance in order to go ahead and explain various dharmas such as form, sound, and so forth. These are called the dharmas explained by the holy teaching. Therefore, all dharmas exist nominally but are actually nonexistent. When you are not aware of nominal existence, you give rise to exclusive annihilationism. When you are not aware of real nonexistence, you give rise to exclusive reification. If you think it through carefully you should neither reify nor annihilate. Once you lay hold of the middle, emptiness and existence are both abandoned; the four positions and the hundred disagreements all vanish. This points to the absence of characteristics, which is called "the emptiness of dharmas." The essence of the true principle revealed by this approach of emptiness is nonempty. The path of language is cut off: this is called thusness. This kind of subtlety is unreachable by discrimination. This is precisely the emptiness of dharmas, the nondiscursive ultimate truth. The prior approach of the emptiness of person is one method of the skillful means included in the teaching of emptiness. The present thusness is one aspect of the meaning of thusness. The thusness that is expressed through the two aspects of emptiness is none other than the unconditioned among 89

71a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

the hundred dharmas. The revelatory teaching of emptiness used here is the same as what has been spoken of as the two aspects of emptiness. This emptiness is not simple emptiness. Emptiness and existence are both empty and nonexistent. What we here call emptiness is none other than the Middle Way. Nonexistence and existence, sameness and difference, concurrence and nonconcurrence and so forth are just like sky-flowers and so forth, whose nature and characteristics are utterly nonexistent. This utter nonexistence is the same as this emptiness. This should be contemplated deeply. Question: If this is so, given that you have previously said that lack of intrinsic nature is called emptiness of dharmas, is this not a contradiction? After all, "no intrinsic nature" could be taken as simple emptiness. Response: Who says "no intrinsic nature" is equivalent to nonexistence qua simple nonexistence? Even though the position of "no intrinsic nature" rejects independent existence, it does not in any way reject existence through other-production. Since it does not reject other-production, it is nonexistence that is not different from dependent arising. Dependently arisen dharmas are nominally existent. This is because they are already indistinguishable from the lack of intrinsic nature of nominal existence. Thus, although we say "no intrinsic nature," this is not exclusively nonexistent nonexistence. It is the lack of nature of the unobtainability of the characteristics of both existence and nonexistence. This is the meaning of "all-is-empty" articulated in the Prajñāpāramitā sutras.

C. Nominal Selves and Dharmas

Question: Are the meanings of "nominal" in the case of "nominal self" and "nominal dharmas" equivalent?

Response: Although nominal dharmas are nominal, they are in essence dharmas. Even though nominal selves are selves, in reality they are not selves. This is because in reality they are the emergent aspect of the function of dharmas. Therefore, based on this understanding, from the point of view of reality there are only nominal dharmas, and no characteristics of self whatsoever. Hence, "nominal," when used in the sense of a nominal self, has an exaggerated meaning. Yet although it is exaggerated it is not entirely devoid of any resemblance [to a self]. So if one rejects this, it is also a seriously wrong view. I'm afraid that people with biased attachments will find this difficult to understand! 90

III. One Hundred Dharmas

Question: Are the two kinds of "selves" referred to in "selflessness of dharmas" and "selflessness of persons" equivalent in meaning? Response: "Self" is defined as that which is autonomous and independent. In the case of the self of dharmas, how could we completely deny this? But in the case of the self of person, the meaning is further exaggerated because its characteristics of autonomy and independence are even more pronounced. In the aspect of the meaning of self of dharmas, its meaning is subtle because its characteristics are much more obscure.

The reason for this is that because the essence of each individual dharma of form, sound, odor, and so forth is illusory and dependently arisen, they are fundamentally nonautonomous. Yet the essence and function of baseless clinging arise in every moment, flowing in continually, subtly appearing like something that is independently existent. This is called "not form, seeming to be form" and so forth.

When we are confused regarding this aspect and attach to the dharmas of form, sound, etc. as being real, it is called "view of self in dharmas." It is difficult to say directly that this aspect implies a permanent, singular, autonomous self. Each of the five faculties, five sensory objects, mind, mental functions, etc. are by themselves nothing but ephemeral appearances, since their power as autonomous entities is negligible.

Yet these dharmas harmonize and combine with each other. With the function of each one buttressing the other they seem very much like a single entity, which, without relying on so many conditions, abides for a long time, seemingly self-powered and independent, with distinct sovereign power and influence. Confused by this aspect, people attach to the real existence of persons, animals, and other beings. This is called the "view of selves in persons." This aspect is none other than the permanent, singular, autonomous, exaggerated self. Hence, the two kinds of self are not the same. Question: Are all meditations of consciousness-only meditations of the emptiness of dharmas? And are all meditations of the emptiness of dharmas meditations of consciousness-only?

Response: All meditations of the emptiness of dharmas are meditations of consciousness-only. But all meditations of consciousness-only are not necessarily meditations of the emptiness of dharmas. Why is this the case? Because the emptiness of person is a consciousness-only meditation. 91