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

XI

Two Levels of the Middle Way

1. General Explanation

Question: In the tenets of our school, what kind of doctrinal approach is called "Middle Way?"

Response: In the principle of the Middle Way as elucidated in the Essay on the Forest of Meanings, there are two levels. The first is the discursive Middle Way, in which the essences of the dependently arisen dharmas are not utterly nonexistent. The essence of this dependently arisen deluded fabrication of everything is utterly nonexistent. Within dependent arising, the only thing that exists is empty-natured thusness, which is free from all fabrications. Within that empty nature, the existence of dependently arisen dharmas is also obtained. Hence, all dharmas are neither empty nor nonempty. In this way, it is in the contrast among the three kinds of natures that the meaning of the Middle Way is articulated.

The second is the nondiscursive Middle Way. This means that the essences of all dharmas, whether existent or nonexistent, are in real ultimate truth cut off from thought and language, and therefore it is called the Middle Way. If we discuss these two levels in terms of their dharma essence, there are no differences. However, this is the doctrinal approach of neither identity nor distinction among the three kinds of nature. If we discuss this doctrine from the perspective of another approach, however, then self and dharmas do not exist and emptiness and consciousness are not nonexistent. Since one is free from both existence and nonexistence, it is called the Middle Way. This is the discursive approach. If one abides in inner realization and stops conceptualization, this is the single reality of the nondiscursive Middle Way. Question: The meaning of the Middle Way is that a single dharma essence is free from the two extremes. What has been posited here is the emptiness of the fabricated and the existence of the dependent and the perfectly real. Is the contrast between the former and latter called the Middle Way? If so, 159

83c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

this is a doctrinal approach that distinguishes between approaches. How can there be a single dharma that is neither empty nor existent? Especially since the essence of the fabricated is utterly nonexistent, it is not this dharma essence. This dharma essence only exists in reference to the real two natures of other-dependent and perfectly real. Therefore, all dharma essences end up remaining in the single extreme of existence. How could this be the ultimate principle of the Middle Way?

Response: Your objections are without basis. Who said that the three kinds of natures are distinguished into separate dharma essences? The meaning of the Middle Way is that within a single dharma there is neither existence nor nonexistence. But even though there is this interpretation of the Middle Way in as single dharma, the doctrinal approach of the three kinds of natures is taught precisely because the three levels of shallow-to-deep of deluded fabrication, dependent arising, and ultimate reality are clearly distinguished without confusion. Therefore the Cheng weishi lun says:

Are these three different or nondifferent? It must be said that they are neither, because they have no separate essences and because of the distinction among the fabricated, the dependently arisen, and ultimate reality.116 What intelligent person is going to encounter a text that advocates no distinct essence and misconstrue it as a doctrinal approach positing separate essences with a definite difference? Rather, the three kinds of natures are in fact a single nature, and a single nature is the same as the three kinds of nature. Neither three nor one, yet also three and also one. This is the doctrinal principle of the three kinds of nature. The above is the gist of the position that the fabricated nature is empty and the other-dependent and perfectly real exist. If we discuss it more carefully, when we say that something is empty, this emptiness is also existence. A real self and real dharmas are perceived by ordinary people, and if we deny this aspect, we fall into annihilationism. Yet speaking according to proper reason, their essence is completely nonexistent. If we do not discern this approach, we end up reifying. Thus, we can say that the fabricated nature is neither empty nor existent.

The other-dependent and perfectly real natures are said to be existent, yet this existence is also empty. This is because the essential nature of the real and the conventional that are fabricated is empty. If, because of saying that 160

XI. Two Levels of the Middle Way

the other-dependent and the perfectly real exist, we further claim that the other-dependent and perfectly real are exclusively existent, then this is deluded attachment, which is none other than reification. Yet in the sphere of holy cognition the essence of the dharma essence that is removed from language is also not nonexistent. If you reject this, this is also annihilationism. Therefore, the two natures of other-dependent and perfectly real are also, in the same way, neither empty nor existent. This is still just the overall gist. If we delve into this in further detail, within the fabricated nature's nonexistence in principle, there is also the connotation of neither empty nor existent. Since the appearances of the so-called reification and annihilation are all removed, one is able to put an end to exclusive existence as well as exclusive emptiness. How could this be an utter denial of emptiness? Thus, within the ordinary unenlightened level of consciousness there is also the connotation of neither empty nor existent. Take for example a person who at the moment is deludedly attached to exclusive existence. Even though this appearance seems at the moment to be exclusive existence, if one sees the totality of the situation from the perspective of enlightenment, the appearance to the ordinary unenlightened consciousness is not necessarily the same, because another type of person might also take it as exclusive emptiness. Thus, we can clearly understand that the nature of these appearances of exclusive existence is originally indeterminate. Or for example, there is another person who is at the moment deludedly attached to exclusive emptiness. If one sees the totality of the situation from the perspective of enlightenment, the appearance to the ordinary unenlightened consciousness is not necessarily the same, because another person might also take it as exclusive existence. We can thus clearly understand that the nature of these appearances of exclusive emptiness is originally indeterminate. These deluded thoughts can take place because there are no set appearances. To reiterate: the attached views of deluded consciousness reify or annihilate according to the moment. Therefore, neither of the two appearances that are attached to are set appearances, as it were. When we are theorizing in this way, the mundanely cognized appearances are not determined to be either exclusively existent or exclusively empty. How could this not be the doctrine of the Middle Way? In the case of the approach of denying the existence of the other-dependent and the perfectly real, there is also the connotation of 84a

161

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

neither empty nor existent. Because of the doctrine that frees one from all deluded attachments, one is also freed from reification and annihilationism. This is the meaning of "middle."

In the same way, in the case of the approach of denying the emptiness of the other-dependent and the perfectly real, there is also the connotation of neither empty nor existent. This is the nondiscursive approach, so who can distinguish between existence and nonexistence? If one exclusively denies emptiness, how can one not be attached to dharmas? If one is attached to dharmas, how can it be called other-dependent or perfectly real? The principle of the way is clarified: what else is there like this?

No matter how many times we go over this, the matter will not be exhausted. Why? Take, for example, the approach of removing reification within the nonexistence in principle of the fabricated. Even if because of rejecting existence we advocate nonexistence, we have rejected exclusive existence but have not rejected a balanced view of existence; how then could there be exclusive emptiness? Therefore, there is indeed the connotation of neither empty nor existing. The rest of the individual doctrinal approaches can be repeated according to this same pattern, again and again until we run out of words. 2. Resolving the Issue Relying

on the Three Natures

Yet no matter how many times you go through these repeated arguments for nonexistence, if you wrap them up together they all return to the category of emptiness of the fabricated. And no matter how many times you go through these repeated arguments for not-empty, if you wrap them up together they all fall into the category of existence of the other-dependent and perfectly real. Why is this? It is merely because of the nonidentity and nondistinction among the three kinds of nature. The emptiness of the fabricated and the existence of the other-dependent and the perfectly real return and enter in the same reality. They have this kind of inexhaustible meaning. This being the case, your position that the emptiness of the fabricated must be exclusive emptiness, and the existence of the other-dependent and the perfectly real must be exclusive existence, and the position that exclusive existence and exclusive emptiness merge to taken as the Middle Way, and you still doubt this interpretation, how could your doubt merit attention? 162

XI. Two Levels of the Middle Way

What would it mean to say that the rejection of all fabrications is the rejection of the ephemeral? How could you not refute all biased attachments of exclusive existence and exclusive emptiness established on the other-dependent and perfectly real? Once this kind of refutation is finished and you clearly grasp the other-dependent and the perfectly real, how could this be a dharma of exclusive existence? If it is not exclusive existence, it is definitely the existence of the Middle Way; how could it be stuck in existence? If the above is seen to be like this even from the standpoint of the discursive Middle Way, how much more is it so from the perspective of the subtle, ultimate single reality of the nondiscursive discussion of reality that is the ultimate truth of the ultimate truth?

3. Analyzing through Questions

and Answers

A. The Middle Way of the Other-dependent and the Perfectly Real Question: In this discussion, the other-dependent and perfectly real are discussed in contrast with the doctrinal approach of emptiness of the fabricated. If we discuss the other-dependent and the perfectly real separately, can each one be interpreted as having its own meaning of Middle Way? Response: Indeed, each one has this meaning. Since the content of the other-dependent is ephemeral, it is not really existent yet is also not utterly nonexistent. Since the marvelous principle of the content of the perfectly real is without characteristics, there are no characteristics of existence, nor characteristics of nonexistence. Therefore, each one contains the meaning of the Middle Way. Thus, if we iterate through the interpretations of each approach, in terms of the various approaches such as that of the nonidentity and nondistinction of phenomena and principle can all be wrapped as we have done above.

B. The Middle Way of the Basic Verse

Question: Which aspect of the Middle Way is referred to in the two-line verse spoken by Maitreya? [This refers to the line "There is false discrimination, yet here these two do not exist. . . ."]117 If it is the discursive approach, then why does Maitreya expound such a shallow approach? If it is the nondiscursive approach, the text has already explained the meaning of emptiness 163

84b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

and existence in terms of the contrast among the three kinds of nature. How could this not be the approach of the discursive Middle Way? Response: In this verse Maitreya is instructing Asaṅga and others regarding the principle of the Middle Way. Hence it is the discursive approach and not the nondiscursive approach. The nondiscursive approach directly points to the inner realization. This is not the teaching formulated according to the capacities of individual listeners. Yet within this verse the revelation of the nondiscursive approach is hidden. Through this profound means one can receive the oral transmission.

C. Three Natures in a Single Dharma

Question: I still cannot understand the position that the relationship of the three natures represents the Middle Way of a single dharma. Can you clarify it fully?

Response: The three kinds of natures of pervasively fabricated and so forth are originally the three kinds of natures of a single dharma. Thus, if we investigate the intrinsic nature of a single object in the form realm, what kind of dharma is the intrinsic nature of this object? Since it is already dependently arisen it is illusory and ephemeral. It is neither truly existent nor utterly nonexistent. Yet the false imaginations of the foolish create confusion; thus, some fabricate its real existence and some fabricate its utter nonexistence. These forms that are deludedly attached to are one of the intrinsic natures contained within the object. Yet the content of the dharma is produced from myriad conditions; even though it is not independently existent, being dependently arisen it is not empty. This is also one of the intrinsic natures of this object. Within these dependently arisen, dependently produced phenomena, there must be a marvelous principle that is far removed from all deludedly fabricated characteristics of exclusive existence and exclusive emptiness. This principle is real and incontrovertible. This is also the one of the intrinsic natures of this object. Within this single object, this single form, there are these three levels of nature of false, ephemeral, and real. All three of these levels are this material dharma and beyond them there is no other dharma. Therefore, even though we say there are three, it is at the same time only a single entity. This is the intrinsic nature of this single material object. All dharmas can be understood in this way. How can this not be the meaning of the Middle Way of a single dharma?

164

XI. Two Levels of the Middle Way

Therefore, we should say that all the reality of dharmas in our school is eternally abiding. They seem to arise and cease but a really existing, arising and ceasing essential nature is utterly nonexistent. How can these natures of real, ephemeral, and nonexistent be separated from each other? Therefore, they are originally a single essence.

165

XII

The Doctrinal Principles

of Consciousness-only

Question: Which is the most essential teaching among all the doctrinal approaches described above?

Response: If we select the most essential based on the most important in terms of the conditioned, it is that all dharmas are consciousness-only. If we select the most essential based on what is most important in terms of the unconditioned, then it is that all dharmas are thusness. If we chose the most vital based on what is most important in terms of discernment, then all dharmas can be known through prajñā (the wisdom of emptiness). Question: Among these three, which doctrinal approach is most essential? Furthermore, does consciousness-only refer to tainted or untainted consciousness? Response: Among these three, consciousness-only is most important, since through this approach all others are encompassed. Furthermore, consciousness-only is based on tainted consciousness. Why? If you are aware that all dharmas arise from your own mind, the realization that all dharmas are like a dream suddenly becomes evident. Once you know that they are like a dream, the erroneous notions of a real self and real dharmas are quickly removed. The real self and real dharmas, which are denied or reified, considered to be existent and nonexistent, the same and different, are all false fabrications.

When these false fabrications are all stopped, nondiscriminating cognition suddenly appears and merges with the principle of the single realm of reality. When we say "from your own mind" here, this means "from your own deluded mind," which is the tainted consciousness. The nondiscriminating cognition is the ultimate form of discernment, which is contemplative prajñā. The single realm of reality is the thusness of all dharmas. By being able to know that all dharmas are produced from our own minds, we automatically take 167

84c

85a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

refuge in prajñā and take refuge in thusness. How could this not be the most essential?

The untainted consciousness is something that foolish worldlings are unable to access. The false objects in the three realms do not arise from it. When you want to understand the inexpressible doctrine that reveals that all realms manifested by beginninglessly deluded unenlightened imagination are all like the contents of a dream, you contemplate that it is your own deluded mind that produces all dharmas and you can enter into the profound nondiscursive reality. Hence, for suddenly transforming the beginninglessly deluded mind, quickly realizing the unproduced nature of existence, and entering into the stage of great enlightenment, there is nothing like the contemplation of consciousness-only! Question: This being the case, how do we know that all dharmas arise from our own mind?

Response: This could be explained in numberless ways but there are basically two approaches: (1) the principle of perfuming and (2) the principle of transformation.

(1) The principle of perfuming: All conditioned real dharmas without exception produce seeds, all of which were perfumed by one's own mind. This means that the essence of the self-witnessing aspect itself perfumes, and that the functions of the two aspects of objective and cognizing also perfume. The cognizing aspect perfumes cognizing seeds. The objective aspect perfumes cognized seeds. As for these cognized seeds, all the seeds of all the mental and material distinctions that end up constituting cognized objects without exception perfume them. This means that when one cognizes forms, one perfumes seeds of form; when one apprehends mind, one perfumes seeds of mind. Within form, there are various differences; within mind, various distinctions—the dharma of each individual cognition perfumes that dharma's seeds. Thus, perfumings are all the productions empowered and given rise to by our own mind's discrimination of distinct essences. So how could the dharmas produced from these seeds not be produced from our minds? (2) The principle of transformation: Already the substance aspect118 of the consciousness has generated the objective and cognizing aspects, as explained above. All cognizing dharmas must have something to cognize. That which is cognized is all corresponding dharmas. If a cognition is bound to a set 168

XII. The Doctrinal Principles of Consciousness-only

object, how could the cognizing dharma (i.e., the mind) lack transforming power? This principle is certain. Therefore, the empowerment from the substance of one's own mind is able to transform and manifest all objective realms. The above two principles should be believed as the doctrine of "only mind and no objects."

Question: I still do not understand how the mind transforms into objects. How can we know this for certain?

Response: It is like when you close your eyes and think of a color such as blue, yellow, and so forth. At that time these thoughts of blue and so forth generate the images of blue and so forth that appear to the mind. This is definitely the case. At that time, even though these perceptions by ordinary unenlightened cognition are fabricated images, since they must arise as manifestations within the mind, one can infer the manifestation within the mind by the ordinary unenlightened cognition. Even though these thoughts of blue and so forth are the cognizing aspect, since the cognizing aspect must arise from the substance aspect, one can infer the transformation of the substance aspect by the function of the cognizing aspect. Through this one can infer all other cases. Therefore, when you open your eyes and see actual colors such as blue and so forth, the appearances of blue and so forth that float on the surface of our mind are without a doubt nothing but the thoughts of this mind, transformed into its objects. The raw sensate object (bimba) that appears now is the indirectly cognized object of the subjectively cognizing mind. When the mind avails itself of this cognizing thought of the color blue and so forth, the mind's substance aspect then transforms and generates the images of the color blue and so forth, which are manifested before the mind. That which is manifested in the mind at this point is a proper perceptual object. This directly perceived object is none other than the objective aspect of consciousness. Even though this raw sensate object is not the transformation of this present subjectively cognizing mind, it is the direct objective aspect manifested in the mind as a transformation of the substance of the eighth consciousness. What appears before the eighth consciousness is like a dream. At that time the eighth consciousness is also the basis of the observing mind, existing together in the midst of one's one mind. How could these transformed images reside outside of our own minds? Therefore, all objects are the transformations of our own mind.

169

85b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

Question: Even though I now understand that based on the principles of perfuming and transformation all dharmas are the production of the mind, I still don't fully understand the teaching that the myriad dharmas that are based on the mind are like a dream.

Response: The dream of the Upright Man lasted for sixty-five years.119 As long is this seems, it was actually only a single night's phantasm. It is only from the discriminations of one's own mind that one gives rise to and brings forth various painful and pleasurable objective fields, which then lead one to attach to them. Sometimes it is described as a sensation of pain, sometimes it is described as a sensation of pleasure. Sometimes it is described as dying here, sometimes it is described as being born there. Sometimes it is described as exclusive existence, sometimes it is described as exclusive nonexistence; sometimes it is said that it is definitely both existent and nonexistent, sometimes it is said that it is definitely neither existent nor nonexistent. It is thus deludedly fabricated; this is its way of appearing. When one awakens from this dream, none of this exists. There is instead nothing but ephemeral, inconceivable objects. The objects in a dream and the objects when we are awake are nothing but the existence and nonexistence of the discriminations of our deluded mind.

The causes and conditions of all dharmas are like this. The knowledge that all dharmas arise from our mind and that they are to be regarded as being like a dream is a necessary principle. All doctrinal approaches such as the hundred dharmas without exception take the mind as the basis. All spring from the mind, and this principle is evident. All are as has been described above. Therefore, when we discuss the hundred dharmas, they are established from one's own mind. If we scrutinize the one mind, the hundred dharmas are evident. This is also true for the twelve causes and conditions of birth and death, which are called nescience, formation (and so forth)—all of these are the functions of one's own mind. What is called desire and what is called grasping are both the afflictions of one's own mind. The seeds of the five limbs of consciousness and so forth120 are all perfumed by one's own mind. How could the two effects of birth and death not arise from one's own mind? The present body-as-basis, the natural world (i.e., "container world"), food and drink, clothing, and other things are all produced as the accumulation of impressions from various discriminations generated from within our minds 170

XII. The Doctrinal Principles of Consciousness-only

from prior lifetimes. Due to our ignorance of this principle we transmigrate through birth and death. Once we are awakened to this principle, birth and death are forever let go of. Focus the mind in one place and contemplate this principle. How can you not extinguish your beginningless crimes and folly? Questions: (1) The Flower Ornament Sutra says, "The three realms are only mind; outside of the mind there are no separate phenomena,"121 "Mind, buddhas, and sentient beings—there is no distinction between these three."122 Is the consciousness-only doctrine that has been posited here the same as this? (2) Furthermore, in what category are fivefold consciousness-only and the intrinsic characteristics of consciousness included within the five kinds of consciousness-only?

(3) Furthermore, are the meditations practiced by bodhisattvas in the stage of applied practices, such as the four kinds of investigation and so forth, the same as the meditations of consciousness-only? If it is the case, then in what sense is this so?

(4) Furthermore, is "consciousness-only" only found in tainted consciousness? Or is it mainly included in the conditioned? If it is found in the untainted and is mainly included in the unconditioned, wouldn't that render it meaningless? Responses: (1) What has been set forth here is precisely the doctrine of nondistinction between the three, [one's own mind, the minds of buddhas, and the minds of other sentient beings]. Why? If now, based on principles such as those of perfuming and transformation, you have understood that things are only mind and like a dream, this means that there are already no determined selves or dharmas. In contrast to what could there be a real other? Therefore, beyond the mind there are absolutely no sentient beings, and in the same way there are no real mundane realms. This being the case, in contrast to what could there be an actual buddha realm? Hence, beyond the mind there are also no buddha realms. This is because all things are like an illusion, like a dream, and have no set reality. A determinate, real self and other, a determinate, real worldling and sage, are nothing but delusive images presented to a deluded consciousness. Since these are all gotten rid of, the emptiness of their nature is none other than the equal dharma-nature. In the above ephemeral, illusory phenomena, cognizer and cognized are neither the same nor different; raw data and their perceived images are neither the same nor different; buddha realms and mundane realms are neither the same 171

85c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

nor different; essence-function and cause-effect are neither the same nor different. Therefore, we know conclusively that the three realms are nothing but the one mind. The principle of these three nondifferences is naturally proved. Based on this doctrine, in this approach of nondifference, the bodies and minds of buddhas, the bodies and minds of sentient beings, and the bodies and minds of practitioners are completely equal. This is the one mind from which the myriad phenomena arise. Since it is like a phantasm with no set reality, characteristics are not determined characteristics and its nature is markless. The expression "a universe in a grain of dust, originally without obstruction" has this meaning.

(2) The above-presented brief summary, when expanded, opens out into five levels. That is, based on the principles of perfuming and transformation, we are able to grasp the main point of all phenomena being nothing but mind. Phenomena and principle, nature and characteristics are unfathomably retained, while the attachments of reification and annihilation are expelled without attachment. This is the first of the five levels. It is called "the consciousnessonly meditation of expelling the false and retaining the real." Furthermore, since the collection of myriad dharmas is taken as consciousness-only, even though there are internal objects we do not say that there are "objects only." This is the second level. It is called "the consciousness-only meditation of abandoning the disordered and retaining the simple." Furthermore, it is already the case that all material and mental dharmas with myriad distinctions rise into activity based on the empowerment and perfuming of seeds coming from the fabrications of one's own mind. When one knows this, the mental and material dharmas that are gathered have the two functions of cognizing and being cognized. One's own mind embraces both of these as the mind's substance. This is the third level. This is called "the consciousness-only meditation of gathering the branches and returning them to the root."

Furthermore, since this is a reliance on the one mind, one does not discuss mental functions. This is the fourth level. It is called "the consciousnessonly meditation of hiding the inferior and showing the superior." Furthermore, when one relies in this way on the essence of the one mind, all is like a dream, with no characteristics that can be grasped. That which is realized is nothing but the nondiscursive single real objective realm. This 172

XII. The Doctrinal Principles of Consciousness-only

is the fifth level. This is called "the consciousness-only meditation of expelling characteristics and realizing the nature."

Next, the five kinds of consciousness-only, such as the consciousnessonly of intrinsic characteristic and so forth, also reside within this. Viz., (1) depending on the principles of perfuming and transformation, when one gathers all dharmas and returns to the one mind, this mind's substance is its own characteristic of consciousness. (2) Within this, the mental functions are concomitant with their consciousness. (3) All objective realms are transformed by consciousness. (4) The nonconcomitant factors are the derivations of consciousness. All of these fall under the rubric of consciousness-only. (5) Fully revealing the marvelous principle of the equality of the real nature is the consciousness-only of the real nature of consciousness. (3) Next, the four kinds of investigation are identical to the contemplation of consciousness-only. All dharmas based in one's own mind are nominally existent but in reality nonexistent. Hence, confirming that grasper and grasped are empty, one enters into the real nature of consciousness-only. Yet, within all teachings there are signifying words and signified meanings. These words have distinctions in intrinsic nature, and their meanings also have distinctions in intrinsic nature. These distinctions in the intrinsic natures of words and meanings and four kinds of dharmas manifest from our own minds as nominally existent but in reality are nonexistent. Contemplate like this. At a shallow level, this meditation is called four kinds of investigation. At a deep level it is called four kinds of cognition of things as they really are. These kinds of meditation are based on principles such as perfuming and transformation, since all things are like the contents of a dream. Hence, what has been established above applies directly to this meditation. Next are the five kinds of consciousness-only and the six aspects of consciousness-only, regarding which there are various explanations. The wide variety of different teaching approaches taught by Śākyamuni over the course of his lifetime are all different names for consciousness-only. The Essay on Consciousness-only fully elaborates these many different terms, which you can see if you take a look.123 This being the case, one must rely on the untainted and unconditioned aspects.

However, at the stage of taint, cognition is weak and consciousness is strong. In the stage of no taint, cognition is strong and consciousness is weak. 173

86a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

Hence, even though the tainted and untainted stages both contain the two dharmas of consciousness and cognition, the term "consciousness" is usually used in reference to the tainted level.

Furthermore, consciousness discriminates; thusness is not subject to discrimination. If we discuss the nature of discrimination, it is true discrimination. The "thusness of consciousness-only" among the seven aspects of thusness reflects this kind of connotation. Therefore, the Essay on the Forest of Meanings says that in some cases consciousness includes both principle and phenomena,124 and in some cases it is called the consciousness of the perfectly real nature.125 Nonetheless, the place where the term discrimination is properly applied is solely within the mental dharmas of tainted cognitive objects. Because of this framework, the term consciousness-only is used exclusively when talking about tainted deluded mind. [Ryōhen: The material cited above has been abridged.]

Therefore, the Cheng weishi lun starts from the point of view of the perfuming of self and dharmas, elucidating the doctrinal approach of the three subjective transformations of consciousness, which is exactly the same as the teaching of the three realms as mind-only of the Flower Ornament Sutra. Also, the Madhyântavibhāga calls it "delusive fabrication." Whether you say the three realms are mind-only or say that they are delusive fabrication, all fall under the purview of the tainted mind. Therefore, it is the principal method for unenlightened worldlings to analyze their own minds and quickly arrive at the stage of enlightenment. The path to the sudden realization of bodhi truly resides in this teaching.

A person who is dreaming knows it is a dream and that they must awaken from it. If those of us who are presently living in the dream of birth and death repeatedly contemplate on the principle of the dreamlike consciousness-only, our arrival at the morning of awakening will certainly be nearby. Therefore, the Cheng weishi lun says:

If in this way one knows the meaning of "consciousness only," one will be able to be without error, be well provided with the essentials for practice, quickly penetrate the emptiness of dharmas, realize supreme awakening, and aid sentient beings trapped in the cycle of birth and death.126 174

XII. The Doctrinal Principles of Consciousness-only 1. The Practice of Calm Abiding

and Clear Observation

Question: This being the case, when one is cultivating this meditation, how can we know how to practice calm abiding (śamatha) and clear observation (vipaśyanā)?

Response: The method of practicing calm abiding and clear observation in consciousness-only is fully presented in the chapter "Analyzing Yoga" in the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra,127 so if you read that you should be able to understand it.

Question: What you have elucidated up to now is still a bit overwhelming. I would appreciate it if you could point out the essentials of the beginning practices and the most relevant methods according to the situation. Response: The verse of instruction of the great saint Maitreya says: The bodhisattva in the state of samādhi

Contemplates images as being mind-only.

The characteristic of meaning having been eliminated, He examines them as only his own thoughts.

Abiding in this way within the mind,

He realizes that the grasped does not exist;

Then, that the grasper is also nonexistent;

Finally, he contacts [that state in which] nothing is obtained.128 "The grasped" (grāhya; i.e., the known) includes all set characteristics such as existence and nonexistence, sameness and difference, concurrence and nonconcurrence, and so forth. "The grasper" (grāhaka; i.e., the knower) is all the states of mind that grasp these characteristics. Since these mental states and objects spring forth from one's own mind, they are like the contents of a dream. Before the enlightened cognition, what can be attained? This is the point of the verse. However, if you correctly contemplate according to this orientation you can still conceive of it.

86b

175

XIII

Three Incalculable Eons

in an Instant

1. Outline of the Stages

of Practice

Question: What is the sequence of progress for Yogâcāra practitioners? Response: The Cheng weishi lun says:

[What is gradual awakening to and entering consciousness-only?] It means that in the stage of preparation [the bodhisattva] is able deeply to believe and understand the characteristics and nature of consciousness. In the state of application of effort he is able gradually to subdue the mental functions of grasped and grasper (grāhya-grāhaka) and bring about an accurate view. In the stage of insight he comprehends according to reality. In the stage of cultivation he cultivates repeatedly the principles he has perceived and subdues remaining hindrances. Arriving at the final stage he escapes from the hindrances with perfect clarity. He is able to the end of time to convert varieties of sentient beings and cause them to awaken to and enter the characteristics and nature of consciousness-only.129 2. The Three Paths

A. The Path of Seeing

Question: At what stage are the seeds of the three paths of seeing, cultivation, and no more applied practice developed, and at what stage do they produce visible results? And how are they cultivated? Response: First one hears the teachings that are a continuity of sameness throughout the Dharma realm. Due to the perfuming power of repeated hearings of this teaching, one produces the profound and firm aspiration for enlightenment, after which one perfumes and enhances primordial untainted seeds. This continues up to the stage of the highest mundane mental state. 177

86c

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

At this time the untainted seeds in the path of seeing ripen and their efficacy is completed.

From here one instantaneously enters the ground of joy (the first bhūmi). In this first instant one attains the nondiscriminating cognition of the true path of seeing. Next, one enters the instantaneous path and the path of liberation. At the stage of the instantaneous path one directly removes all varieties of the two hindrances that are produced from discrimination. At the stage of the path of liberation one realizes their extirpation. Even though one passes through many moments during this time, in each moment one is able to match wisdom and underlying reality. Since wisdom and underlying reality have been equalized, they are summarized in the term "one mind." After the path of liberation is finished, one enters the stage of the path of seeing from three perspectives. This is the post-enlightenment cognition. Yet since one still perceives thusness, it is nonpositing cognition. Even though it is nonpositing it apprehends characteristics, and therefore it is called the path of seeing from perspectives. The three perspectives are: (1) internal knowledge that expels the ephemeral object of sentient beings, i.e., the postenlightenment cognition of selflessness of beings, which is the meditation of the thusness of the emptiness of beings; (2) internal knowledge that expels the ephemeral object of dharmas, i.e., the post-enlightenment cognition of selflessness of dharmas, which is the meditation of the thusness of the selflessness of dharmas; and (3) comprehensive knowledge that expels the ephemeral objects of sentient beings and dharmas, i.e., the post-enlightenment cognition of both kinds of selflessness, which is the meditation of the thusness of the two kinds of selflessness. Here, the simple and combined explanation of the three perspectives is finished. Next one enters into the path of seeing with aspects including sixteen mental states.

The sixteen mental states are counted based on there being four types of cognition for each of the Noble Truths such as suffering and so forth; thus, there are sixteen. In this case there are also two kinds of sixteen. The first are the sixteen mental states of grasped and grasper: the eight meditations on thusness and the eight meditations of accurate cognition. The second are the sixteen mental states of the higher and lower eight truths. Eight of these contemplate the thusness of the Four Noble Truths of the lower realm, and eight contemplate the thusness of the higher realms. These two kinds of 178

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

sixteen [mental states] are interpreted differently by the scholars of various schools. Some prioritize the approach of grasped and grasper; some prioritize the approach of the higher and lower eight truths. Some follow in accordance with the situation as seems fitting, without holding to any set position. The above-discussed one mind, three mental states, and sixteen mental states are all produced from lower-intensity untainted seeds. B. The Path of Cultivation

Having passed through the stations of these three levels of mind, one next enters into the path of cultivation. In the beginning one is still in the ground of joy (the first bodhisattva ground). The lack of taint at this point is produced from medium-intensity untainted seeds. These medium-intensity seeds are increased in every moment of the practice in the path of seeing. Because they are increased by repeated perfuming, one directly attains the production of the cognition of the first thought-moment of the path of cultivation. At this time the lower-intensity seeds from the path of seeing are also upgraded into medium-intensity seeds. Hence, once one has entered into the path of cultivation there are no lower-intensity seeds.

From this point onward one eliminates innate seeds of the cognitive hindrances at every ground (bhūmi). One repeatedly cultivates nondiscriminating cognition up to the level of the adamantine absorption. At this time all innate afflictions as well as seeds of extremely subtle cognitive hindrances are completely eliminated. C. The Path of No More Applied Practice

When one practices this way during the tenth ground, one perfumes highintensity seeds in every moment. By this effort one finally arrives at the first thought-moment of buddhahood. At this point one rids oneself of all nonimpedimentary taint as well as weak nontaint; high-intensity seeds make their first visible appearance, and all remaining medium-intensity seeds are converted into high-intensity seeds. Therefore, at the buddha stage there are no low or medium-intensity seeds—only the most high-intensity seeds. Among these high-intensity seeds are included every single one of the most excellent untainted seeds of the consciousnesses of the eight consciousnesses, every single one of the seeds of the twenty-one kinds of concomitant mental functions, every one of the seeds of every objective aspect of these 179

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

87a

minds and mental functions, along with all the seeds of the five faculties and five objects within the objective aspect. Light emanating from excellent bodily characteristics pervades perfectly without limit. Such bodies as the pure lands adorned with countless jewels, and seeds of the five sense fields of the most extremely wholesome nature, are all retained within. In summary, these are the untainted seeds of the eighteen spheres of the cognitive realm. At the first moment these seeds enter into buddhahood, they become visibly active. It is like the sun when it first rises from beyond the mountains—a thousand rays and ten thousand beams are fully present all at once. Since it is like this, every one of the faculties, characteristics, and signs of the buddhas are without limit. The limits of their bodies and number of lands are unknowable, and all of their works are beyond conception. This is none other than the cultivation of countless and limitless times the number of grains of sand in the Ganges of provisions for virtue and wisdom. Because it is a place where unlimited wholesome roots are acquired, in every single mark and sign, up to the tip of a hair, there are none up to the number of grains of sand in the Ganges that are not completed. This is called the body of personal enjoyment.

The Dharma body is the full and perfect thusness realized through this cognition. The body of enjoyment by others and the transformation body are the objective-aspect Buddha made visible by this cognition. Within this transformation are numberless, limitless bodily forms of various types manifest in response to their environment. These include such various bodies as tigers, wolves, jackals, and apes, as well as bodies in the human world, the heaven of desire, the heaven of form, and so forth.

These bodies of enjoyment by others and transformation bodies repeatedly appear in the world, each one containing such factors as the five aggregates, the eighteen cognitive spheres, and so forth. Each has eight consciousnesses and they all have mental functions. When they appear as ordinary beings they fully possess the ten afflictions, the twenty derivative afflictions, and other defiled dharmas. Their substance is other-dependent and each one has potent seeds. These material and mental seeds that are manifested all reside in the midst of beginninglessly possessed primordial untainted seeds. Having come to fruition, they are kept by the pure consciousness that functions with the mirror cognition of the body of self-enjoyment.

180

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

Even though these minds and mental functions are in essence produced from seeds and are of other-dependent nature, since they are the objective aspect of mind and not the mind itself, none of them conceptualize. Hence, even though they are filled with afflictive and cognitive hindrances they are not really mundane. They are actually untainted, pure dharmas. At this stage, the purified eight consciousnesses and their mental functions all mutually cognize self and other. This means that the consciousness and mental functions of the cluster of the visual consciousness pervasively perceive the consciousnesses and mental functions of all eight consciousnesses. The same is true through the rest of the consciousnesses up to the consciousness and mental functions of the eighth consciousness, which pervasively perceive the consciousnesses and mental functions of all the eight consciousnesses. There is no obstruction among one cluster of consciousness and mental functions and other consciousnesses and mental functions—they are able to perceive each other pervasively. Furthermore, at this stage, the four aspects of cognition inconceivably perceive each other. This means that the cognizing aspect pervasively perceives all four aspects. The self-witnessing aspect also pervasively perceives the four, and the same is true for the corroborating aspect. However, in the same way that it is impossible for a sword to cut itself, none of the four aspects are able to directly perceive themselves. Each can only perceive itself by taking the image of its own aspect as rendered by another aspect as its raw sensate data and transforming it into an objective aspect from which it obtains its own perception.

What are the implications of this? For example, when the consciousness and mental functions of a single cluster perceive each other, the image that is rendered in receiving a mental function's perception of the objective aspect of the consciousness is none other than this consciousness's taking those images as raw sensate data, and therefore it renders those images to perceive a view of itself. The rest of the cases can be understood by this example. [Ryōhen: Although there are two explanations regarding this, I have chosen the better one.]

Furthermore, these cognitions of various qualities witness various combinations of real and conventional. The mirror cognition and the cognition of intrinsic equality always combine the observation of both real and conventional 181

87b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

objects.130 The marvelous observing cognition apprehends objects freely according to the situation. Sometimes it observes only principle, sometimes it observes only phenomena, and sometimes it observes both. The cognition with unrestricted activity is the cognition that accomplishes works, so its main function is conventional observation. Knowledge of supernatural transformations and miracles are the special function of this consciousness. Since each concomitant consciousness and mental function has the same referent, they should also be understood in the same way.

Furthermore, although each of these modes of cognition is able to fully perceive all dharmas, their function differs. Viz., the mirror cognition manifests the appearance of the body of self-enjoyment and its pure land. The cognition of intrinsic equality manifests the appearances of the body of enjoyment for others and its pure land. The marvelous observing cognition observes the merits and faults of self and others. The cognition that accomplishes works manifests the appearance of transformation bodies and lands. Furthermore, all species of sentient beings from time immemorial have all sorts of primordial interrelationships. Sometimes many beings are related to one buddha; sometime one being is related to many buddhas. In the case when those who are taught share affinities with a buddha, even though the buddhas with whom one has affinities may be countless, at the same time and in the same place they manifest bodies and lands with similarities in appearance that do not interfere with each other. They become mixed together as overwhelming contingencies, bringing about the birth of those to be taught. This means that for a single buddha land there is a single buddha body that manifests supranormal powers to preach the Dharma and bring benefit to sentient beings. All of these workings are inconceivable. Yet these three bodies (the self-enjoyment body, the other-enjoyment body, and the transformation body) are actually a single buddha body. Since they are not like separately distinguished buddha bodies, the noncognizing objective aspect of mind and the cognizing actual mind that is the body of self-enjoyment are eternally merged. With that (other-enjoyment body and transformation body) being function, and this (self-enjoyment body) being essence, they carry out various beneficial works.

Question: How are the five stages of the path distributed among the three incalculably long eons?

182

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

Response: The two stages of preparation and application of effort that take place before the bodhisattva grounds together require one great incalculably long eon. The stages from the first ground to the seventh ground together take up a second incalculably long eon. The stages from the eighth through the tenth ground take up a third incalculably long eon. The stage of the adamantine absorption, occurring at the end of the tenth ground, is equivalent to virtual enlightenment. The hundred eons of assimilating the excellent bodily characteristics and signs are also included here. Question: Are there any types of practitioners who are able to skip over these three great eons?

Response: There are some bodhisattvas who have excellent vigor who are able to skip over many of the middling-length eons. And there are some who are able to skip over many great eons. But there are certainly none who are able to skip over an incalculably great eon.

D. Reaching the Goal

Question: If this is so, then this is certainly a very long time. On what day, at what time, is buddhahood attained?

Response: The Basic Commentary to the Cheng weishi lun presents this question and provides its own answer: "Those in a dream say that it is many years. It is like the Mahāyānasaṃgraha-śāstra explains at length. . . ."131 If we have a look at the Mahāyānasaṃgraha-śāstra it explains the rapid attainment of bodhi, "Those in a dream say that it is many years. For the awakened it is an instant. Therefore, even though the length of time is incalculable it is contained in an instant."132 Scholars have various opinions regarding the interpretation of this passage.

One interpretation says that the Dharma body is illusory and the three divisions of time are a single moment. A single instant of the present contains endless numbers of eons from the past; it also contains endless years into the future. Thus, when a dharma of the present moment responds to a previous image, it is nominally designated as the past. But this is actually just a prior cause—it is not really the past. When a function is drawn in, it is nominally designated as the future, but this nothing but an effect that is to come; it is not really the future. From the perspective of this dharma of the present, if you look forward or backward it is nominally designated as effect or nominally designated as cause. There are not really two present dharmas of cause and effect. 183

87c

88a

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

In this way, the positing of the illusory three times, which exist nominally but not actually, is inconceivable. Therefore, a long time is not determined and a short time is not real. If you say there is a real long time or if you say there is a real short time, this is all deluded fabrication. If you are able to attain the mind-only realization that all is illusory, then there is no definite, real number of three incalculably long eons. Therefore, once you have given rise to the cognition of marvelous enlightenment, the number of eons in the three incalculably long limitless eons are like the contents of a dream; they are the objective aspect contained in a single instant. There is no difference between raw sensate data and their projected images, and no conflict between subject and object.

Therefore, fabricating the three incalculable eons as being lengthy is nothing but the delusion in our own minds. If you contemplate repeatedly, this principle of mind-only will gradually convert these delusions regarding set realities, and bit by bit all will be rid of this "long time"! Why should you waste time troubling yourself over the passage of time?

E. Partial Realization

Question: What has been posited here is the doctrine that from the perspective of meditation on the principle of as-illusion, the three incalculably long eons are contained in an instant, and thus one removes the rigid attachment to length of time. For now let's leave this here. Is it the position of our school that that there is such a thing as attainment of buddhahood in this very body before arriving at the stage of marvelous enlightenment, when one arrives to the stage of preparation and so forth?

Response: If we are talking about partial enlightenment, this interpretation might be possible. That is, if there are beings of superior faculties and superior intelligence who vigorously cultivate the consciousness-only meditations, they can in their present body enter into the abode of arousal of the intention for enlightenment.133 The founding teachers of our school say that in this abode of arousal of the intention for enlightenment one is able to display the eight signs of the Buddha's career. Therefore, this period can be interpreted as having the meaning of attaining enlightenment in this very body. This means that one has given rise to this partial enlightenment and wisdom. Even though this enlightenment is of the quality of partially attained cognition 184

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

within the sixth consciousness, since the eight consciousnesses within a single body are neither the same nor different, in this aspect of nondifference there is no obstruction between this single body and those eight consciousnesses. This lack of separation is nominally designated as the bodhi of the four purified forms of cognition.

For example, it is like when the eighth consciousness undergoes defiled perfuming from the other defiled consciousnesses (i.e., the manas) and transforms, seeming to be a self and dharmas. The doctrine of inferring purity from defilement is beyond doubt. The body-as-basis and the bodily characteristics and signs are all transformations of the mind. Since transformer and transformed, supported and support, are also neither identical nor different, we should call it a buddha's body. The principle that is contemplated is none other than the single realm of reality that has the nature of consciousnessonly. We can also propose to call this the Dharma body. When making this provisional explanation of partial attainment, the principle that the Buddha's essence fully contains all three bodies is certain. Once you attain this cognition, even when you have not manifested the eight signs of achieving enlightenment you can usually be called enlightened. Thus, since the dharma essence, the illusory, and the ephemeral have no obstruction among them, once one has attained enlightened cognition we can call this a buddha, with no room for objection.

However, those beings possessed of superior faculties and intelligence who have repeatedly cultivated these practices in prior lifetimes have the great capacity in this lifetime to enter into the abode of arousal of the mind intent on enlightenment. In the age of the degenerate Dharma, such people are quite rare indeed!

Even if one does not gain this partial enlightenment, if one cultivates in a focused manner they may experience the benefits according to their ability, according to their capacity. This is because the power of the Dharma of the Great Vehicle is inconceivable and the principle of reality is miraculously powerful. In any case, it will at least stop the useless net of doubt and encourage diligent cultivation! If we look at the world now, we see the distinctions between those holding right views, those holding wrong views, those of sharp faculties, and those of dull faculties. It is certain that if those straightforward people of sharp 185

88b

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

faculties grasp hold of firm faith and practice with concentrated mind, they will gain benefit bit by bit. If through hearing the Dharma they are partially able to gain a new understanding from what they had before, and diminish the three poisons and such faults by even a little bit, this is benefit attained according to their ability.

However, one feels great despair regarding one's own foolishness, thinking, "In what life will I attain an appropriate level of understanding? The only thing I can wish for is that by this minor encounter with the teachings I will attain awakening in the future. How can I, in my stupidity, extend myself to the world? That in the age of the extinction of the Dharma there is an entry into [correct] view is the explanation of the founders of our school." The clear person of right views must not waver!

3. Conclusion

If the above articulated doctrine, inference, and partial explanations match reality, we wish you would offer it to sentient beings, and vow to give rise to the aspiration for enlightenment together with those with whom you have affinity, to be born together in a pure land and fully accomplish the buddha way. When it comes to avoiding all sins, disparaging the Dharma deserves the greatest attention. If because you happen to believe in a certain teaching you disparage other teachings, all such acts will lead you to hell, just as the Daśacakra-kṣitigarbha-sūtra says.134 That which should be of concern and that which should be regarded with caution cannot be disregarded. Have you not seen that the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra explains this point, and the other [texts] do not dispute it? Know for certain that this is not disputed by the golden mouth of Vairocana. The Yogâcārabhūmi explains this point and the world has not doubted it. Know for certain that this is undoubtedly the lamp transmitted by the upcoming Buddha (Maitreya). We already know for certain that this is the Buddha's intention. How can faith and disparagement, gain and loss, be taken lightly? Slander doesn't necessarily have to be blatant revilement; taking others lightly and rejecting them are also forms of disparagement.

Yet adherents of other schools and small-minded, biased scholars refer to ours as the "expedient school," in fact meaning that our teachings are divorced from the Dharma-nature. They have not yet made it clear what they 186

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

mean, however. Do they call it "expedient" because among these dharmas there are utterly none of these kinds of natures and characteristics, and that the Tathāgata merely taught about them to guide sentient beings according to their capacity? Or is it called "expedient" because even though these dharmas really exist, they are not the underlying reality but rather simply phenomenal appearances? If it is the former position, how could the Tathāgata bring benefit to sentient beings with falsehoods? How could sentient beings believe in nonsense and attain liberation? If you say that it is because expedient teachings are all like this, how could all expedient teachings be falsehoods? This is not the position of our school. We maintain that expedient teachings contain truth and that esoteric teachings must match with the fully revealed. Therefore, prior to the appearance of the language of subitism the Middle Way teachings fully explained the Dharma-nature. This has already been explicated above. We have never seen nor heard of falsehood in the holy teachings. This means that you are making this kind of error because you are mistaken about the doctrines of your own school, as well as other schools. If you follow the latter explanation, how do the most profound principles of your school go beyond the [Hossō] nondiscursive teaching? If you regard identity of phenomena as superior, why do you relegate the phenomenal to the status of "expedient?" If you take exclusive identity as superior, how can you take the extreme position to refute the middle? If you say that our strategy of making clear distinctions is not the Middle Way, don't you recall our prior discussion of "neither identical nor different?" If you say there are scholars who claim that we advocate clear distinctions, how can you take the misunderstandings of scholars as the shortcomings of our school? And how could we regard your exclusive attachment to mutual identity as the error of our school? You might say that the problem is not that the teaching is false, nor that it focuses on phenomenal appearances, which is a shallow teaching, and is not the real doctrine. Yet the gamut of dharmas do not fall outside of three levels: phenomena, principle, and thusness. If it is not false speech then it should definitely discourse on one of these three levels. If they are not phenomenal appearances, however, and are not are false, then what kinds of teachings are they? If they are fabricated, how could the Buddha teach the fabricated and bring benefit to all sentient beings? If you say that even though 187

Observing the Mind, Awakening from a Dream

88c

it is phenomena it is not a profound phenomenon, what would this profound phenomenon be?

Do you mean that there is an ineffable phenomenal appearance that transcends the material and the immaterial? If you regard the eternal abiding of dharmas utterly without arising and ceasing as your profound doctrine, and the ephemeral arising and ceasing as being shallow, then you are talking about underlying reality, not phenomenal appearances. Thus, you mistakenly take principle as phenomena. Furthermore, our school discusses the doctrine completely and is not limited to the other-dependent, taking as its final destination the ultimate principle of the nondiscursive single reality. If you take mutual identity as your most profound doctrine, the problems are the same as we have just discussed. Arbitrarily making these criticisms is without doubt disparaging the Dharma. Thus, evil persons are able to pluck out the correct wisdom eyes of innumerable sentient beings, and poisonous words are able to harm the decree of the marvelous Dharma of buddhas as numerous as grains of sand in the Ganges. Alas! Based on a single morning's illusion one blindly turns the inexhaustible wheel of suffering. In general, among straightforward people in the ages of the semblance Dharma and the degenerate Dharma, there are some who practice meditation who say that the study of nature and characteristics is shallow, and some who study nature and characteristics who say that meditation practice is frivolous speculation. This is because differentiation appears shallow, and therefore others misunderstand its deeper principles. Meditation practice resembles frivolous speculation, and therefore people miss its true merits. Among these, advocates of the Meditation school claim that the object of meditation is the ultimate essential. This is because the methods of meditation are all done in this way. If it were not so, one could not attain enlightenment. Consequently, one advances mental focus and does not advance the clinging partial views. Thus, returning to disparage the other approach of doctrinal study is simply the failure of scholars. We can say that they do not discern the intentions of our founding teacher and do not draw on contemplative wisdom, but instead draw on cunning.

For those who promulgate the teaching of nature and characteristics, the final goal is the comprehensive understanding of all things. The path of nature and characteristics is definitely suitable for this. If it were not suitable it 188

XIII. Three Incalculable Eons in an Instant

would not eliminate doubts. Thus, one promotes careful explication and does not promote rigid attachment, and if one reverts to the criticism of the approach of practice it is simply the failure of scholars. Thus, we can say that if you do not discern the original purport of our school and do not exhaust its various approaches, you will end up being stuck in a limited approach. The Dharma waters of a single flavor become muddied by this, and the unobstructed light of wisdom disappears because of this. This is the most pitiful of the pitiful; why does it have to be like this?

If you think of it like this, nothing is better than believing and understanding nature and characteristics and at the same time practicing meditation! The tenets followed by meditation practitioners are not the same, and their nonsameness is seen at the level of skill-in-means. In reality they are not different. Therefore, deeply matured meditators do not disparage the approach of nature and characteristics. Those who have mastered the approach of nature and characteristics do not disparage meditative practice. Those who disparage are nothing but shallow fellows. When we hear about the past and observe the present, they are all like this.

If I reflect and examine myself, I also must be concerned about having done this. What a pity! Why did I not just shut my mouth, collect my thoughts, and stably meditate on the correct principle? Still, being completely silent is a cheap imitation of the true Dharma. If there is someone to be helped why should I remain silent? We cannot but be cautious, we cannot but reflect. Saying that and saying this, calmly we can examine it.

189