轉識論

The transformation of consciousness has two kinds: the first is on account of sentient beings, the second is on account of dharmas. All objective supports do not go beyond these two kinds. These two kinds in truth do not exist; it is only through consciousness transforming and evolving that they become the two characteristics.

Next it is made clear that the perceiving subject has three kinds. The first is the retribution-consciousness, that is, the ālaya-consciousness. The second is the grasping-consciousness, that is, the ādāna-consciousness.

The third is the sense-object-consciousness, that is, the six consciousnesses. The retribution-consciousness is so called because it is brought about by karma and the afflictions, hence it is called retribution; it is also called the root-consciousness. Because it is the support upon which all conditioned dharmas rely, it is also called the abode-consciousness.

Because it is the resting place where all seeds dwell, it is also called the storehouse-consciousness, that is, the place where all seeds lie latent. Question: What is the characteristic of this consciousness, and what is its object? Answer: One cannot distinguish its characteristic and its object, because they are one substance and not different.

Question: If so, how does one know that it exists? Answer: Through the various affairs one knows that this consciousness exists. This consciousness is able to produce the various affairs of retribution belonging to all karma and afflictions.

It is like ignorance. At the very moment ignorance arises, it is able to distinguish characteristic and object; if it did not distinguish, then it would not be ignorance. If it cannot distinguish, then it is non-existent.

Yet this existence that is not non-existence is also known, through such affairs as craving and hatred, to be the existence of ignorance. The root-consciousness is likewise: its characteristic and object are not different. It is only through the various affairs that one knows it exists.

Within this consciousness there are altogether eight kinds of distinctions called the support-consciousness and so forth, as is fully explained in the meaning of the nine consciousnesses. Furthermore, it is associated with five mental dharmas, which are: 1. Contact, 2.

Attention, 3. Sensation, 4. Volition, 5.

Perception. Faculty, sense-object, and consciousness — the harmonious combination of these three affairs produces contact. The mind constantly moving is attention.

The sensation here is only the sensation of equanimity. To deliberate and calculate what should be done and what should not be done, causing the mind to become wrong or to become right, is volition. Attention is like a horse.

Volition is like the rider. The horse only goes straight ahead and does not know how to avoid, hence it errs. The rider directs the horse to avoid the wrong place and go to the right place.

Volition is likewise able to cause attention to depart from uncontrolled wantonness. This consciousness and its mental dharmas are only of an indeterminate self-nature; thought-moment after thought-moment they continue on like the flowing of waves upon water. The root-consciousness is like a stream of water, the five dharmas like the waves.

Even up to the attainment of the fruit of the Arhat, this flowing current is still not extinguished. This is called the first consciousness. Relying upon and conditioned by this consciousness, there is the second consciousness, the grasping-consciousness.

It is so called because this consciousness takes grasping as its substance and is associated with the four delusions, namely ignorance, the view of self, self-conceit, and self-love. This consciousness is called obscuring-indeterminate; it too has five kinds of mental dharmas associated with it, named the same as before, but whereas the former are subtle, these are coarse and manifest. This consciousness and the dharmas associated with it are, at the stage of the Arhat, ultimately and completely extinguished, and upon entering the mindless concentration they are likewise all extinguished.

If one realizes the truths and destroys the afflictions of consciousness and the mental dharmas, then one attains the sixteen practices of the supramundane path which ultimately and completely extinguish them, with only the residue not yet exhausted being those things that pertain to deliberation. This is called the second consciousness. The third is the sense-object-consciousness.

The consciousness transforms like dust-motes, becoming the six kinds of consciousness that revolve resembling dust-motes. As stated before, its substance pervades the three natures, it is associated with ten kinds of mental dharmas and the ten wholesome and unwholesome, and it further includes the major and minor delusions together with the full three sensations. The ten kinds of mental dharmas are contact and so forth, the five as before, except that here they are very coarse and manifest.

The latter five are desire, comprehension, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. Where it speaks here of comprehension, this is what was anciently called the factor of liberation. The ten wholesome dharmas are: 1. faith, 2. cultivation, 3. shame, 4. non-greed, 5. non-hatred, 6. diligence, 7. tranquility, 8. non-heedlessness, 9. non-harming, and 10. equanimity.

These ten kinds pervade throughout the three realms. The mind and the outflow-free mind are called the great ground. These are wholesome by self-nature; the reverse of these ten kinds are unwholesome by self-nature.

The major delusions have ten kinds: 1. desire, 2. hatred, 3. delusion, 4. conceit, 5. stinginess, 6. greed, 7. self, 8. arrogance, 9. the five views, and 10. doubt. The minor delusions have twenty-four kinds: 1. wrath, 2. bound enmity, 3. concealment, 4. not relinquishing evil, 5. jealousy, 6. miserliness, 7. deceit, 8. flattering crookedness, 9. extreme intoxication, 10. harming, 11. lack of contrition, 12. shamelessness, 13. lack of tranquility, 14. agitated frivolity, 15. lack of faith, 16. indolence, 17. heedlessness, 18. forgetfulness, 19. distraction, 20. lack of comprehension, 21. anxious regret, 22. drowsiness, 23. applied thought, and 24. sustained thought.

Within the minor delusions there are two kinds: the first is attention that is universally functioning, and the second is that which is not universally functioning. The five consciousnesses, with respect to the sixth mental consciousness and the root-consciousness and the grasping-consciousness, among the three roots, in accordance with causes and conditions, sometimes arise together and sometimes arise in succession. Taking attention as the cause and the external sense-object as the condition, the consciousness is then able to arise.

If attention first wishes to grasp the two sense-objects of form and scent, then afterward the two consciousnesses of eye and ear arise simultaneously and obtain the two sense-objects. If attention wishes to go to some place to see form, hear sound, and grasp scent, then afterward the three consciousnesses arise simultaneously and obtain the three sense-objects. And so it is up to the five consciousnesses arising simultaneously as well.

Or if before and after, in succession, only one consciousness arises, then only one sense-object is obtained, all in accordance with causes and conditions, hence they are not the same. In this way, within the ālaya-consciousness, the seven consciousnesses all arise in association, like the various images appearing within a mirror, like the waves within water. Question: In what cases does this mental consciousness not arise?

Answer: There are six cases in which the mental consciousness does not arise: the concentration without perception, the heaven without perception, deep sleep without dreaming, fainting, and momentary death. Thus it is said that the transformation of consciousness does not go beyond two meanings: that which is able to distinguish and that which is distinguished. Without that which is distinguished, that which is able to distinguish also does not exist; without an object that can be grasped and attained, consciousness cannot arise.

For this reason the meaning of consciousness-only is established. How is the meaning of consciousness-only established? The intent is fundamentally to dispel the object and to dispel the mind.

Once the realm of objects is gone, consciousness-only too is lost. Thus the meaning of consciousness-only is accomplished. This is the pure category, in which the afflictions and the realm of objects are both absent.

Furthermore, it is said that the meaning of consciousness-only is accomplished as the seed-consciousness of all dharmas. Thus and thus, the operations revolve and proceed, whether with respect to oneself or with respect to others, pursuing one another and giving rise to the various kinds of that which distinguishes and that which is distinguished. By this meaning, apart from consciousness all affairs are not accomplished.

This is the impure category, which only dispels the object before it, and is not yet the absence of consciousness.

Explanation: Where it says "the seed-consciousness of all dharmas," this is the ālaya-consciousness. It is the seed of the dharmas and the seed of the other seven consciousnesses, and is further able to produce immeasurable dharmas of its own class, hence it is called "that which is jointly the seed of all dharmas." Where it says "thus and thus," the meaning is that because these consciousnesses are able to revolve and operate, they produce immeasurable dharmas.

Some are transformed into faculties, some are transformed into sense-objects, some are transformed into self, some are transformed into consciousness. In this way the various kinds of differences are all produced by consciousness, hence it is said "they revolve and operate thus." Where it says "whether with respect to oneself or with respect to others, pursuing one another," the meaning is that with respect to oneself it transforms into the five aggregates, or within the form-aggregate up to the consciousness-aggregate.

And with respect to others, it transforms into those who are enemies or kin, the many kinds being not the same. With respect to one's own five aggregates, therefore, the others are so called. In this way self and other transform and create for one another, before and after not the same, hence it is called "pursuing one another." The various things that are created are all consciousness, and there is no other realm of objects.

Where it says "giving rise to the various kinds of distinction," the meaning is that within each and every consciousness there is fully both the perceiving subject and the perceived object. That which is able to distinguish is consciousness. That which is distinguished is the object.

The subject is the other-dependent nature, the object is the imagined nature. Therefore it is said that "giving rise to the various kinds of that which distinguishes and that which is distinguished" derives from this meaning. Apart from consciousness there is no other object whatsoever.

Only the meaning of consciousness is accomplished. Not yet having clearly dispelled consciousness, one has not yet removed the delusion and confusion, hence it is called the "impure category." Question: Removing the object while consciousness remains can be called the meaning of consciousness-only. When both object and consciousness are dispelled, what consciousness does this become?

Answer: The establishing of consciousness-only is to pass through the single dispelling of the object, and the mind that remains is what must be discussed. Dispelling the object is to make the mind empty — that is the correct intent. Therefore the fact that both object and consciousness are lost is the accomplishment of that meaning.

That in which both object and consciousness are lost is the true nature. The true nature is the amala-consciousness. One may also say that the ultimate end is the amala-consciousness.

Verse: Through the two kinds of past-karma perfuming and the two kinds of habit-energy, the truth of origination is made, establishing birth-and-death. The two kinds of past-karma perfuming are the seeds of the various karmas. The first is past-karma perfuming, the second is past-karma perfuming grasped.

Past-karma perfuming is that which is distinguished, being the imagined nature. Past-karma perfuming grasped is that which is able to distinguish, being the other-dependent nature. The object is the realm of objects, the subject is consciousness.

The names of these two kinds of karma resemble the truth of origination, and are able to produce the five aggregates. The two kinds of habit-energy are the various afflictions. The first is the habit-energy of characteristic, the second is the habit-energy of coarse heaviness.

The characteristic is the substance of the afflictions, being the other-dependent nature, and is able to encompass the prior appearances. The coarse heaviness is the object of the afflictions, being the imagined nature, its realm of objects being coarse and manifest. The names of these two afflictions are the truth, and are able to gather together and cause the future five aggregates to arise through these two kinds of truths of origination, the self and the true.

If the past karma is exhausted, one then receives another retribution. Explanation: As for the two kinds of past-karma perfuming, each and every seed possesses fully two meanings. That which is distinguished is past-karma perfuming.

That which is able to distinguish is past-karma perfuming grasped. The object is the imagined nature, which is able to give rise to the dharma-gate of seeds. This dharma-gate that is spoken of is called past-karma perfuming; it has a name but no substance.

The subject is the other-dependent nature, which is precisely the seed that produces karma, called past-karma perfuming grasped; it has substance but is not truly real. The two kinds of habit-energy are likewise. Each and every affliction has two meanings.

That which is distinguished is the habit-energy of coarse heaviness, which is the dharma-gate that produces the afflictions, having a name but no substance. That which is able to distinguish is precisely the substance of the affliction, which also exists but is not truly real, being the other-dependent nature. Yet what is here called the imagined and the other-dependent is not the same as the names within the three natures of non-nature.

Within the three natures of non-nature it speaks of the kind of name-and-characteristic of the imagined. The other-dependent nature is called coarse heaviness because the substance of the imagined nature exists, and its kind of characteristic is able to create the dharma-gate of the afflictions, hence it is named the affliction. The other-dependent nature is precisely the substance of the affliction, and is able to obtain the retribution of birth-and-death, hence it is called coarse heaviness.

Now here, in order to make clear the coarse-heavy kind of characteristic of the imagined nature, it is called coarse heaviness. The other-dependent nature is able to grasp the prior kinds of characteristics, hence it is called characteristic — each having its own intent. If one wishes to convert these here into the names within the three natures of non-nature of the self, that too is permissible.

Verse: Imagining thus and thus, if one imagines such kinds, then these kinds are called the imagined nature. It has only a name and no real substance. This imagining arises in dependence upon something else, hence it is called the other-dependent nature.

These two natures, the former and the latter, have never once departed from one another — this is the truly real nature; if they departed from one another, the meaning of consciousness-only would not be accomplished. There is the object and there is the consciousness which are different, but because they do not depart from one another, therefore there is only consciousness and no realm of objects. With no realm of objects, consciousness too becomes empty.

Because the object is empty and consciousness is empty, the meaning of consciousness-only is established. Therefore the former nature, with respect to the latter nature, is neither one nor different. If one were to say they are one or are different, what fault would there be?

If the imagined and the other-dependent are one, then the imagined nature would surely not be encompassed by the five dharma-stores. The other-dependent nature too would be forever non-existent. If so, then there would be no precepts, no wholesome or unwholesome, no liberation or birth-and-death.

This is something that cannot be. Since it is not so, the imagined nature and the other-dependent nature cannot be said to be one. If one says they are different, then the imagined nature could not dispel the other-dependent nature.

Since it is by contemplating the imagined nature as without any existence that one then sees the other-dependent nature as also without any existence, therefore they cannot be said to be different. Furthermore, if one says the imagined nature is the other-dependent nature, then the substance of the imagined nature would have to exist and would not be forever non-existent. If one were able to say they are different and non-existent, why then reason and assert that they are different?

Therefore one says only that they are neither one nor different. One cannot affirm definitively that they are one or different. Just as impermanence and conditioned dharmas also cannot be affirmed definitively as one or different.

To be non-existent before and non-existent after is the meaning of impermanence. The five aggregates are conditioned dharmas. If impermanence and conditioned dharmas were definitively one, then impermanence would be non-existent.

All dharmas would be non-existent. Since they would all be non-existent, they cannot be said to be one. If one says they are different, then when contemplating impermanence one should not include the conditioned dharmas at all, for since it is shared, they cannot be said to be different.

This is precisely neither one nor different. All dharmas are likewise. Just as form and so forth, with the vase, are neither one nor different.

If form and the vase were one, then scent and so forth would not constitute the vase. The vase would then be truly real. If one says form is different from the vase, then in seeing form one should not say one sees the vase.

Therefore one does not say definitively one or different. The two doctrines are likewise the same. If one does not see the imagined nature, then one does not see the other-dependent nature.

Therefore they are neither one nor different. Yet all dharmas have only three natures which encompass all. The Tathāgata, for the sake of sentient beings, teaches that the dharmas are without nature, which also has three kinds.

The three natures are as stated before: the former two are conventional truth, the latter one is ultimate truth. The two truths, ultimate and conventional, encompass all dharmas. The three natures of non-nature do not depart from the prior three natures.

The imagined nature is called the nature of non-characteristic, because it has no substantial characteristic. The other-dependent nature is called the nature of non-arising. Its substance and its cause-and-effect are without any existence.

Its substance resembles the characteristic of a subtle dust-mote. The dust-mote is the imagined nature. Since the imagined is non-existent, the substance too is non-existent.

Where it says the cause too is absent, the meaning is that it is fundamentally through the imagined nature serving as object that the fruit of consciousness is able to arise. Since the realm of objects is non-existent, how then can the fruit arise? It is like a seed that is able to sprout.

Since there is no seed, from where would the sprout arise? Therefore there is no arising. The truly real nature is the nature of non-nature.

There is no existent-nature and no non-existent-nature. With respect to person and dharma, there is no existent-nature. With respect to the two emptinesses, there is no non-existent-nature.

That is, it is neither existent-nature nor non-existent-nature, hence it is again called the nature of non-nature. These three natures of non-nature are the truly real of all dharmas. Because it departs from existence, it is called permanent.

In order to reveal these three natures of non-nature, the meaning of consciousness-only is made clear. If a person cultivating the path has wisdom that does not yet abide firmly in this meaning of consciousness-only, then the two graspings and their latent tendencies give rise to the various delusions which are not extinguished and not departed from, because the root is not extinguished. For this meaning, the One Vehicle is established for the study of the Bodhisattva path.

If one holds that there is only consciousness present and gives rise to this grasping, then so long as one has not yet relinquished this grasping one cannot enter into consciousness-only. If one is a wise person who does not condition this object again, then both do not manifestly arise, and at that time the practitioner is said to enter consciousness-only. Why is this?

Because the cultivation of contemplation has become thoroughly mature, and all the kinds of confused grasping are exhausted, it is called non-attainment, neither mind nor object. That wisdom is called the supramundane non-discriminating wisdom. That is, object and wisdom are without difference, which is called the wisdom of suchness, also called the transformation of the basis, the relinquishing of the basis of birth-and-death.

Because it relies only upon the principle of suchness, both coarse heaviness and grasping are exhausted. Coarse heaviness is the imagined nature, grasping is the other-dependent nature. When both kinds are exhausted, it is called the outflow-free realm, called the inconceivable, called the truly real wholesome, called the permanently abiding fruit, called supramundane bliss, called the body of liberation, that is, the dharma-body among the three bodies.

Explanation: The two graspings and their latent tendencies produce fruit, or cannot be extinguished and cannot be departed from — that is, the two graspings, the latent tendencies, and the afflictions are able to serve as seeds, producing immeasurable higher minds, all of which take the root-consciousness as their root. So long as the root is not extinguished, the branches and shoots are not exhausted. As the Śrīmālā Sūtra says: If one does not cut off the ground of the abode of ignorance, then it is not ultimate.

If one does not cut off the boundless four grounds of abode, then it is not ultimate. If the wise person does not condition this object again, then the two emptinesses are manifestly revealed. This object is the object of consciousness-only.

Consciousness-only being scattered, because there is no object there is no consciousness. Since this consciousness is non-existent, the conditioning mind of consciousness-only is also non-existent, and therefore the two emptinesses are manifestly revealed. These two refer only to the objects present before the two consciousnesses.

Since the objects before them are non-existent, it is called the category of the transformation of consciousness being ultimate./.

TREATISE ON THE TRANSFORMATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS

(The End)