攝大乘論

In the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra, bodhisattvas who had skillfully entered and abided in the Mahayana, wishing in the presence of the Tathagata to elucidate the teachings of the Mahayana, explained on the basis of the Mahayana scriptures that the Tathagata has ten kinds of subtle and supreme discourse.

What are these ten? First, discourse on the basis of knowledge; second, discourse on the characteristics of knowledge; third, discourse on entering the characteristics of knowledge; fourth, discourse on entering cause and effect; fifth, discourse on cultivating cause and effect after entry; sixth, discourse on the distinctions in cultivating higher discipline; seventh, discourse on higher mind; eighth, discourse on higher wisdom; ninth, discourse on elimination; and tenth, discourse on knowledge.

Thus, this passage in the sutra demonstrates that the Mahayana was taught by the Buddha.

How does it demonstrate this?

These ten kinds of discourse are not taught in the Hinayana scriptures; they are elucidated only in the Mahayana. That is to say, the alaya consciousness is spoken of as the basis of knowledge in relation to phenomena. There are three natures: first, the other-dependent nature; second, the nature of imagined discrimination; and third, the perfected nature.

Because these are the characteristics of knowledge, the teaching of Consciousness-Only speaks of entering the characteristics of knowledge as entering the six paramitas. Entering the matter of its cause and effect refers to the bodhisattva’s ten bhumis and the cultivation of that cause and effect. The distinctions in undertaking the bodhisattva precepts constitute higher discipline within the distinctions of cultivation.

The Shurangama Samadhi, the Space-like Samadhi, and so forth are samadhis of higher mind. To speak of non-discriminating knowledge is to speak of the higher mind that does not abide in nirvana. To speak of the fruit of elimination is to speak of the three kinds of Buddha-body: first, the true body; second, the recompense body; and third, the transformation body.

These constitute the fruit of knowledge.

These ten statements are not taught in the Hinayana teachings,

but only in the Mahayana, where their supreme meaning is elucidated. Therefore, on this basis, the Tathagata taught this meaning for the sake of the bodhisattvas. For this reason, according to the Mahayana teaching, it should be known that all Buddhas, the Tathagatas, taught ten kinds of subtle and supreme discourse.

Why are the characteristics of these ten kinds of subtle and supreme discourse taught?

They are taught to demonstrate clearly that the Mahayana was spoken by the Buddha and to refute the view that this is Hinayana rather than Mahayana. These ten meanings are not found in the Hinayana sutras but are taught only in the Mahayana. Moreover, these ten meanings are capable of leading to the realization of bodhi and are certainly free from contradiction, because through them one attains the knowledge of omniscience. A verse here says:

The basis of knowledge and its characteristics,

Its cause and its effect,

Its distinctions throughout the three realms,

Its fruit and its elimination,

Knowledge and the supremely wondrous vehicle—

Through cultivation one advances directly toward them.

What is taught is nowhere else to be found;

Seeing the supreme cause, one reaches bodhi.

The Buddha’s words within the Mahayana teaching

Are the ten supreme statements in this sutra.

For what reason are these ten statements taught in this sequence?

When bodhisattvas first begin to train in the path, they must initially rely upon the causes and effects of dharmas. Having relied upon cause and effect, they must skillfully accomplish the causes and conditions. With regard to conditionally arisen dharmas, they must skillfully understand how to relinquish them.

Having skillfully pacified every obstruction, bodhisattvas who are skillful in apprehending characteristics must realize what is to be learned, thereby freeing the mind from all obstructions. After entering the characteristics of knowledge, they first cultivate the six paramitas. Once body and mind have truly become pure, they embrace the six paramitas with a purified mind, cultivating them distinctly throughout the ten bhumis over three asamkhya kalpas.

Thereafter, they perfect the three kinds of bodhisattva precepts. Having perfected them, they realize the fruit of nirvana and attain unsurpassed, complete, perfect enlightenment. This is the sequential order in which the ten meanings of the Tathagata’s subtle and wondrous discourse are taught.

Within them, the entire meaning of the Mahayana has been stated in brief.

Of these ten discourses, the subtle and supreme discourse on the basis of knowledge is taught first. In the sutra, the Tathagata calls this the alaya consciousness. Since the expression “alaya consciousness” has been used, the term alaya consciousness will now be explained. In the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra, the Tathagata spoke this verse:

Its nature has existed since beginningless time,

Serving as the basis of all dharmas.

When it exists, all destinies exist,

And its realization is nirvana.

The same sutra also says:

It is the storehouse of all dharmas,

Containing the seeds of consciousness.

Therefore, it is called the storehouse consciousness;

The wise should understand this.

These are scriptural citations.

But why is it called the alaya consciousness?

When dharmas arise, it receives and retains all defiled dharmas as their result, and it is also that which the other consciousnesses take as their cause; therefore, it is called the alaya consciousness. Alternatively, because sentient beings appropriate it as their self, it is called the alaya consciousness. The alaya consciousness is also called the adana consciousness.

What evidence is there for this?

As stated in the Sutra Explaining Liberation Through Continuity:

The adana consciousness is extremely profound;

Its seeds are like waves within a current of water.

I do not teach it to ordinary people,

Fearing they would grasp it as a self.

For what reason is it called the adana consciousness?

Because this consciousness depends upon all the physical faculties and appropriates the entire individual existence, the physical faculties upon which it depends do not decay until the life faculty comes to an end, for they continue in conformity with it. Furthermore, when a new body is received in a future life, this consciousness is capable of appropriating the body of birth. Therefore, it is called the adana consciousness.

This consciousness is also called mind. Thus, the Buddha spoke of mind, mentation, and consciousness. Here, mentation has two bases. The first is the immediately preceding condition: a consciousness that has just ceased serves as the cause for the arising of mental consciousness. The second is defiled mentation, which is associated with four afflictions—view of self, conceit of self, attachment to self, and ignorance—and together with mental consciousness gives rise to defilement. If the arising of consciousness within a single body is being discussed, the second kind of mentation means consciousness belonging to the defiled realm. These two kinds of mentation are taught according to the meanings of proximity and non-discrimination. As the following verses state:

Defilement obstructed by ignorance,

Dharmas of the same kind, and the five kinds;

Samadhi or a supreme state—

If so explained, faults would arise.

If self-arising occurs in non-perception,

Its conforming activity in birth would be endless.

If the proximate conformity gives rise to the mark of self,

None of these could be established.

Freedom from defilement would be without mind;

The second and third would contradict each other.

It is not present in every place,

Yet grasping establishes the various meanings of self.

Because mind accords with the correct meaning,

They always conform without contradiction.

All occur together,

And are said never to be apart from ignorance.

Apart from the alaya consciousness, the mind and the third body have no other basis. For this reason, the alaya consciousness is explained as the mental basis that follows the seeds.

For what reason are that mentation and mental consciousness called the mind of manifold dharmas?

Because of the meaning that the various seeds gather together and are perfumed.

For what reason did the Buddha not call that mind the alaya consciousness and the adana consciousness in the Hinayana sutras?

Because it encompasses the extremely subtle meaning of knowledge. The shravakas do not train in or practice the knowledge of the omniscient one. Therefore, when knowledge was taught among them, they understood it as liberation, and so the Buddha did not teach this consciousness to them. Bodhisattvas are those who cultivate the knowledge of the omniscient one; therefore, the Buddha taught this consciousness to them. If it were not taught, then apart from this consciousness it would be impossible to train in and practice the knowledge of the omniscient one.

Yet the Hinayana scriptures also speak of that consciousness under other names. Thus, the Ekottara Agama speaks of worldly beings delighting in alaya, taking pleasure in alaya, being established in alaya, and seeking alaya; therefore, when the Tathagata teaches the Dharma, they must draw near, listen attentively, and receive the true Dharma and its auxiliary teachings with a compliant mind. When the Tathagata appears in the world and teaches this rare Dharma for the world, the Arthavargiya Sutra speaks in accordance with this meaning.

For this reason, the Hinayana scriptures also use other names for this alaya consciousness. The Ekottara Agama of the Mahasanghika school also calls that consciousness the root, just as a tree stands supported by its roots. The Mahisasaka school likewise speaks of it, even calling it the uninterrupted worldly aggregates; such other names also refer to that consciousness.

At times, form and mind may cease, but this does not mean that alaya consciousness ceases, for it is the seed. Therefore, that upon which cognition depends—the adana consciousness, mind, alaya, the root consciousness, and even what is called the worldly aggregates—refers to that alaya consciousness. Alaya consciousness is the clearest of all, like the great royal highway traveled by a king.

Some say that mind, mentation, and consciousness have one and the same meaning and differ only in name. But this assertion is incorrect. Since mentation and consciousness are seen to have different meanings, mind must likewise have a distinct meaning.

Some say that in the Agamas the Tathagata spoke of worldly beings delighting in alaya. According to this interpretation, the five skandhas are alaya.

Some say that pleasant feeling, together with craving and the like, is alaya consciousness. Others say that the view of a self in the body is alaya. Yet these people are deluded concerning alaya consciousness. What they say on the basis of what they have heard and interpreted is established through distinctions drawn according to the scriptural teachings of the Hinayana. Because of their delusion, however, they also fail in making and establishing these distinctions. Once such distinctions have been made, alaya consciousness becomes even clearer because these divergent theories have been formulated.

How is it said to become clearer?

It becomes clear because, if the five skandhas are born in an evil destiny, then, while continually experiencing suffering, one should become disenchanted with them. Yet to say that one is continually disenchanted with and abandons them is also incorrect. If it is said that there is both aversion and delight, then one would constantly seek to reject them while also craving the enjoyment of pleasure.

From the Fourth Dhyana upward, however, there is no longer any aversion or renunciation. Thus, that upon which the beings there depend could not be established. If alaya consciousness were said to be identical with the view of a self in the body, then those who believe in no-self within the Buddha-Dharma would reject it; therefore, the claim that it is their basis of support could not be established.

Alaya consciousness itself, however, may be born in a realm of unmitigated suffering and seek liberation from the aggregates of suffering; and although alaya consciousness itself bears the characteristic of liberation, and although from the Fourth Dhyana upward one may simultaneously crave pleasurable enjoyment or be averse to suffering, alaya consciousness still gives rise to self-love. Thus, although those who believe in no-self within the Buddha-Dharma reject the view of a self in the body, alaya consciousness still bears the characteristic of attachment to one’s own person.

In this way, the analysis of alaya consciousness becomes clear.

As for its other names and the distinctions by which it is established, the characteristics of alaya are, in brief, of three kinds: first, the distinctive characteristic of its own nature; second, its distinctive characteristic as cause; and third, its distinctive characteristic as result. Here, the meaning of alaya’s own characteristic is that it is the place in which all defiled dharmas are perfumed, and that it contains the seeds that serve as causes for the arising of dharmas. Its distinctive characteristic as cause is that the seeds retained by alaya serve at all times as causes for the arising of all defiled dharmas. Its distinctive characteristic as result is that alaya consciousness retains the perfuming of all defiled dharmas from beginningless time.

What is perfuming, and in what sense is it called perfuming?

It means that, in dependence upon a certain dharma, the two arise and cease together, and from that arising and ceasing such a condition comes to exist. It is like sesame seeds scented with flowers: the two arise and cease together, and the sesame seeds acquire the fragrance of the flowers. Or, as it is said, a lustful person is perfumed by lust: because lust arises and ceases together with the mind, a mind resembling it subsequently arises. As it is said, a learned person is perfumed by learning: because recollection of what has been learned arises and ceases, the causal characteristic of learning subsequently arises. Thus, this perfuming means being a receptacle for dharmas and is also called preserving dharmas. The perfuming within alaya consciousness is likewise so.

Furthermore, are the seeds of defiled dharmas and so forth within that alaya consciousness distinct or not distinct?

They are not distinct like separate objects, yet their abiding place is not without distinction. In this way, that alaya consciousness gives rise to them, and they give rise to that alaya consciousness; because of these superior powers, it is said to contain all seeds.

Why do alaya consciousness and those defiled dharmas simultaneously serve as causes for one another?

They are like a lamp flame and its wick, which simultaneously serve as causes for one another. They are also like a cluster of reeds that stand without falling because they support one another. So it is here: alaya consciousness and the defiled dharmas serve as causes for one another, without any other cause or condition.

Why does alaya perfume dharmas without discrimination and yet serve as the cause of differentiated dharmas?

It is like a garment that has been dyed in various colors: the individual colors can no longer be separately discerned. Yet while the garment is being dipped successively into vats of colored dye, different colors can be seen, because there is not merely one vat of dye. Likewise, alaya consciousness is without differentiation while being perfumed, but when it produces results, each kind emerges according to its own kind, manifesting its characteristic clearly. This is precisely the extremely profound and subtle principle of causation within the Mahayana.

This causation is of two kinds: first, distinction in nature; and second, distinction between desirable and undesirable results. Here, in dependence upon this alaya consciousness, the arising of dharmas constitutes distinction in their own natures; that is, the discriminated individual natures arise manifestly through causes and conditions. Regarding alaya consciousness, those deluded about the first kind of causation say that inherent nature is the cause, or that a primordial creator is the cause, or that the sovereign power of transformation is the cause, or that the characteristic of a self is the cause, or that there is neither cause nor condition.

Those deluded about the second kind of causation maintain either that the self is the agent or that the self is the experiencer. It is like people blind from birth who have never seen an elephant. If an elephant is brought before them, one may touch its trunk, another its tusk, or its ear, leg, tail, or back.

When they are later asked what an elephant looks like, one replies that it is like a plow handle, another that it is like a pestle, or like a basket, a pillar, a broom, or a large rock. Those who, through ignorance, do not understand these two kinds of causation are like those born blind: they grasp at inherent nature, a primordial cause, a sovereign creator, the self, absence of cause, an agent, or an experiencer. Alaya consciousness is like the elephant.

Because they do not understand the nature and characteristics of its own essence, they form such attachments.

This is a brief explanation of alaya consciousness as causal consciousness, resultant consciousness, retributive consciousness, and the consciousness possessing the nature of all seeds. Therefore, throughout the three realms, alaya consciousness encompasses the bodies of all sentient beings and every course of samsaric existence. Thus, there are the following five verses:

Within and without are not distinctly known,

Yet characteristics conforming to phenomena are taught.

All those are true;

They are said to be the six kinds of seeds.

Emptiness and identity with the great elements—

Those too are taught as conforming accordingly.

In concentration, when conditions are lost,

And regarding one’s own future result,

That is perceived yet remains indeterminate,

Or conforms to it without remainder.

Its perfuming is nowhere else,

Yet that itself is the characteristic of accumulation.

As for the six, conformity has no meaning,

Because the three contradict one another.

Because the thoughts are not the same,

And because the various conforming states arise,

The seeds within and without

Are said to be causes of arising.

If their discontinuation were extinction,

Then death would occur naturally.

There are six evolving consciousnesses, yet in every realm they all constitute a single body that undergoes retribution, as stated in the Madhyāntavibhāga:

The first consciousness serves as a condition;

The second undergoes retribution.

Those who discriminate and undergo retribution

All give rise to their own minds.

Because the consciousnesses act as conditions for one another, it is said in a verse from the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra:

The support of all dharmas—

Thus, those consciousnesses

In turn become one another’s results,

And all likewise become causes.

If these consciousnesses successively produce one another as results through causes and conditions, what are the first condition and the second condition?

They are dominant conditions.

Yet through how many conditions do these six consciousnesses arise?

They arise through dominant conditions and through conditions in due sequence. Thus, these three kinds of causes and conditions—worldly existence, what is desirable, and what is undesirable—together with the undergoing of retribution, constitute four conditions by which this alaya consciousness is clearly distinguished.

Yet there are other names and characteristics. How can it be known that they refer only to the alaya consciousness and not to the six evolving consciousnesses? In this way, the alaya consciousness has already been established through these distinctions.

Therefore, without the alaya consciousness, neither defilement nor purification could be established; afflictions could not be established; karmic defilement could not arise; and even the pure karma of the mundane and supramundane realms could not be established.

Why could the mixed defilement of the afflictions not be established?

Because the seeds of the mixed defilement of the afflictions cannot be perfumed within the sixfold body of consciousness. For example, eye-consciousness and the affliction of craving arise and cease together, but the seed perfumed by craving into that consciousness does not cease together with eye-consciousness. The other consciousnesses are neither what is perfumed nor the support of perfuming.

The preceding eye-consciousness has already ceased and no longer exists, and the craving that arose together with it in the visual object likewise no longer exists; therefore, perfuming in the past cannot be established. Although a past karmic result arises, that eye-consciousness arose together with craving and so forth and therefore cannot serve as what is perfumed. Though it is the support of craving, craving is not stable; and because craving is not a distinct entity apart from the consciousnesses, and because the consciousnesses arise and cease simultaneously with it, it cannot possess an independent nature.

Since these natures arise and cease together, eye-consciousness cannot be perfumed into the seeds of craving and the other afflictions; nor can that consciousness be both the perfumer and that which is perfumed. What has been explained regarding eye-consciousness should likewise be understood of all six evolving consciousnesses.

One should know that when a being above the Heaven of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception ceases there and is born in this realm, at the moment of initial birth the consciousness has neither the seeds of the mixed defilement of the afflictions nor a support for them, because the past perfumings no longer remain. When a consciousness that counteracts the afflictions arises, all mundane consciousnesses cease entirely. It would be incorrect to say that the alaya consciousness and the seeds of the afflictions exist within that counteractive consciousness, because its nature is liberation from the afflictions and they no longer arise and cease together.

When mundane consciousness subsequently arises again, the former consciousness has long since ceased and no longer exists; therefore, the perfumed seeds and their support cannot be present there. If the alaya consciousness is excluded, the defilement of the afflictions cannot be established.

Why could karmic defilement not be established?

Because this would not accord with the meaning of formations conditioning consciousness. Nor could existence conditioned by grasping be established, because that too would not accord with the meaning.

Why could the defilement of birth not be established?

Because the meaning of taking a subsequent body would not be tenable. When one who has not entered a meditative realm dies and dwells in the intermediate state, a consciousness accompanied by defiled thought takes the subsequent body. Yet that defiled mental consciousness ceases within the intermediate state when the kalala becomes lodged in the mother’s womb.

If mental consciousness alone entered the womb, then after it had entered, relying upon its power, there would have to be within the mother’s womb another consciousness on which activity depended. Thus, there would have to be two kinds of mental consciousness within the mother’s womb. Because they would coexist, the consciousness entering and taking support there cannot be mental consciousness.

Mental consciousness arises upon the defiled body and accords with the consciousness of thought. Although there is a consciousness that enters and takes support, once mental consciousness relies upon it, that consciousness must possess all seeds and must function in accordance with that body. If it is the consciousness that enters and takes support there, it is therefore the consciousness possessing all seeds.

Consequently, it is precisely the alaya consciousness. Its other names and distinctions are likewise established on the basis of this consciousness.

However, if that which it relies upon possesses all seeds, upon what does that consciousness rely as its cause? If it relies upon another, it cannot itself possess all seeds. And if it is said to possess all seeds merely because it depends upon resultant phenomena, that too is meaningless. Therefore, this explanation establishes that the consciousness which enters and takes support is not mental consciousness but the retributive consciousness; hence, it possesses all seeds.

Because it takes a subsequent body, it must take hold of the material faculties. What retributive consciousness is not evident to mental consciousness? Mental consciousness and its causes are unstable.

The other consciousnesses take hold of the material faculties, for nothing immaterial could accomplish this. Consciousness and material form support one another like a bundle of reeds. Nor can their activity establish an intermediate retributive consciousness, because the great elements cannot be established merely through the meaning of increase.

Sentient beings are not the retributive consciousness, the intermediate consciousness, or the six consciousnesses; wherever they are born within the three realms, the great elements arise accordingly. Sentient beings serve as the basis of their increase. After dying here, although one enters birth through meditative concentration, one does not enter concentration through defilement.

Mental consciousness takes the subsequent body, but it is not a concentrated mind; in that state, it cannot contain the seeds of the defiled intermediate retributive consciousness. Moreover, when one is born in the Formless Realm, there are no seeds of defilement or awakened wholesome roots serving as a support for the intermediate retributive consciousness possessing all seeds. When a mind with defiled wholesome roots is obtained, the supramundane mind again manifests there.

After the other mundane minds have vanished, the karmic formations must arise again in the sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception. When the supramundane mind is not employed, one must return to those two courses. That supramundane consciousness is neither perception nor non-perception; it reaches the state where there is no support.

Having no support for karmic formations, it becomes the support of the path to nirvana.

When one is about to relinquish the body, signs appear upon the body according to the wholesome or unwholesome karma one has created, proceeding gradually either from above downward or from below upward. The body becomes cool as the vital warmth ceases. Without the alaya consciousness, this could not be established; nor could the defilement of birth within the retributive consciousness possessing all seeds be established.

Why could mundane purification not be established?

Suppose a person has become detached from sensual desire but has not yet attained a mind of the Form Realm, having attained only a wholesome mind of the Desire Realm. That person becomes disenchanted with and renounces desire, but this is still a mind within the Desire Realm. When it subsequently serves as the basis for a mind of the Form Realm, it does not arise and cease together with that Form-Realm mind.

Therefore, the former mind cannot be perfumed with the seed of the latter, since it is not itself a mind of the Form Realm. Because immeasurable past kalpas intervene, that former mind cannot enter the concentrated mind and serve as its seed. It no longer accords with it.

The retributive consciousness possessing all seeds, within which that concentrated mind of the Form Realm enters, has continued evolving gradually from the distant past; afterward, the causes and conditions of cultivating wholesome conduct serve as dominant conditions for that mind. One should understand that disenchantment and renunciation at the various levels likewise proceed in accordance with this principle. Therefore, without the retributive consciousness possessing all seeds, mundane purification cannot be established.

Why could supramundane purification not be established?

As the Buddha said, upon hearing an external sound, one reflects upon it in inward tranquility, and from this right view arises. This is because, when that sound is heard, it may perfume the ear-consciousness, or perfume the mental consciousness, or perfume both. Meanwhile, phenomena are quiescent; because of reflection and recollection, the ear-consciousness does not arise.

The mental consciousness is also interrupted by other consciousnesses; therefore, when tranquil reflection arises, that former consciousness has long since ceased. That impermanent mental consciousness and the hearing that was perfumed are likewise no longer present. Where, then, is its mental seed?

The tranquil reflection that follows is an activity of the mundane mind. That right view, however, accords with the supramundane mind, and at times arises and ceases together with it. Therefore, it does not perfume it.

Because there is no perfuming, it does not become a seed. Thus, supramundane purity does not become a seed within the resultant consciousness that contains all seeds. Consequently, it is inappropriate to say that it is included among those seeds.

Furthermore, why do all seeds and the resultant consciousness constitute the cause of defilement?

Because they cannot counteract the seeds of the mundane mind. The supramundane mind has never previously existed, and therefore originally has no perfuming. Since there has been no such perfuming, from what seed could it arise? It should be said that all pure and wholesome qualities of the dharmadhatu arise from seeds produced by the perfuming of hearing.

Since the perfuming of hearing exists, is it then of the nature of the alaya-consciousness? If it is of the nature of the alaya-consciousness, how could it counteract its seeds? If it is not of that nature, upon what basis can the seeds produced by the perfuming of hearing be known to exist?

When the Buddhas attain bodhi, all the perfuming of hearing that arises in accordance with body and mind within the resultant consciousness is blended with it like water and milk. Yet it is not that alaya-consciousness, because it counteracts its seeds. Therein, middling perfumings arise in dependence upon subtle perfumings, and higher perfumings arise in dependence upon middling perfumings.

This generally accords with the meaning of hearing, reflection, and cultivation. Although the seeds of hearing, reflection, and cultivation may be subtle, middling, or higher, and although they are seeds of the Dharma-body, they are opposed to the alaya-consciousness and are not included within it. Because they are the causal potential of the pure and wholesome supramundane dharmadhatu, they serve as seeds of both the mundane and supramundane mind.

Yet before the supramundane mind has been attained, they counteract the manifest force of the afflictions, counteract following the evil destinies, counteract and eliminate all evil, and conduce to drawing near to Buddhas and bodhisattvas. They are also included in the Dharma-body of beginners in the world, included in the liberation-body of bodhisattvas, and included in the body of Dharma-liberation from that alaya-consciousness possessed by shravakas and pratyekabuddhas.

According to circumstances, they become increasingly dominant, progressing from subtle to middling and higher levels. In this manner, the resultant consciousness also gradually transforms from an inferior body, transforming the body at all times. When every transformation of the body has been completed, all seeds within that resultant consciousness depart from the state of seeds and are entirely extinguished for all time.

How, then, does this occur? The alaya-consciousness is like water mixed with milk. If so, is it not the alaya-consciousness that performs the same function?

At all times it is broken down, just as a goose drinks the milk from water. Whether one enters mundane disenchantment, enters concentration in which cessation is cultivated, enters concentration in which cultivation increases as the body is transformed, or enters the various attainments of cessation, although there is no attachment to consciousness, mere grasping does not depart; hence it does not become the attainment of cessation.

Its antidote can produce appropriation, but it is not the case that, after that consciousness has arisen, it arises again. Once the resultant consciousness has been cut off, no other state can appropriate what accords with it.

If one further maintains that there is mind in the attainment of cessation, then that mind must also be wholesome or unwholesome. Since it is indeterminate and cannot arise, it likewise cannot be established.

If it is further said that form and mind arise afterward, then the seeds of previously discriminated phenomena have not yet arisen, and neither form nor the formless can arise. Their cessation, subsequent emergence from the attainment of cessation, and the final mind of an arhat likewise cannot be established, except when they are established solely through conditions occurring in sequence. Thus, all seeds within the resultant consciousness are neither defiled nor pure. Therefore, to explain how this characteristic is established, there is the following verse:

The pure mind of a bodhisattva,

Apart from the five consciousnesses,

Apart from all defiled phenomena—

How could that mind arise?

The turning back of the antidote,

In immeasurable cases, cannot be established.

The discrimination of cause and effect,

Its cessation is in accord;

Apart from seeds, there is no phenomenon.

If one appropriates the phenomenon of transformation,

Neither of the two phenomena exists,

And transformation cannot be established.

Why is this so? One should know that the distinctions of this alaya-consciousness are, broadly speaking, of three kinds and four kinds. The three kinds are three distinctions of perfuming: 1. the distinction of the perfuming of verbal expression; 2. the distinction of the perfuming of the view of a self; and 3. the distinction of the perfuming of causes and conditions.

The four distinctions of perfuming are: 1. the distinction of the time of appropriation; 2. the distinction of result; 3. the distinction of the object of recollection; and 4. the distinction of characteristics. The distinction of the time of appropriation means that, because there are no perfumings that produce it, consciousness conditioned by formations and existence conditioned by appropriation cannot be established.

The distinction of result means that, because conditioned formations exist, if the results experienced in the various destinies did not exist, subsequent birth would not exist, and the arising of phenomena could not be established. The distinction of the object of recollection means that, within thought, there is the characteristic of a self; if the mind did not conceive of one’s own body, it would not appropriate phenomena.

The distinction of characteristics means that it possesses characteristics of sameness or difference: the seed of birth apart from the characteristic of sameness; the seed of birth possessing the characteristic of sameness; the differing seeds of the external world as receptacle; and the seeds of the internal ayatanas. What is the same is that, apart from the seed of birth, its antidote arises. What is different is the cessation of obstructions.

What is the same is also that one discriminatively and delusively appropriates the view of purity; the causal formations within a single phenomenon believe what they themselves perceive. Here there is the following verse:

Difficult to destroy are realization and bondage;

These are said to be the same phenomenon.

Causal formations disturb the mind;

One imagines that the external is destroyed.

Purity is not contradictory;

Truly seeing purity.

The Buddha-realm is pure;

The Buddhas perceive purity.

The reason there are not identical seeds producing a common birth is that, if they did not exist, sentient beings in the world and the world’s accord with superior phenomena could not be established. Furthermore, there are the characteristic of coarseness and the characteristic of tranquility. The characteristic of coarseness consists of the seeds of the afflictions and latent tendencies.

The characteristic of tranquility consists of the seeds of wholesome, contaminated dharmas. If these did not exist, action and non-action in a superior body could not be established. Furthermore, regarding the characteristics of experiencing and not experiencing, the characteristic of experiencing consists of the seeds that bring about wholesome and unwholesome results, while the characteristic of not experiencing consists of seeds perfumed by the course of verbal expression.

Because there are immeasurable discriminated seeds that accord with them, if these did not exist, then when wholesome and unwholesome karma was acquired, the meaning of experiencing its results could not be established, nor could the production of seeds newly perfumed by verbal expressions be established. Furthermore, there are illustrative characteristics such as magical illusions, shimmering heat, dreams, diseased vision, and so forth.

If at that time the alaya-consciousness did not exist, then, because it is the seed of false discrimination, the characteristics of phenomena could not be established. Furthermore, there are also the complete common characteristic and the distinct characteristic. For those in bondage, it is the common characteristic of the world; for those free from desire, it is the characteristic of disintegration.

For shravaka trainees and bodhisattvas who share the same meaning and the same basis, it is the characteristic of elimination. For arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and Tathagatas, all afflictive obstructions possess the characteristic of elimination. The afflictive obstructions, the cognitive obstructions, and the characteristic of eliminating both are such that, in accordance with them, the afflictions are not gradually extinguished.

For what reason?

Among the resultant dharmas of wholesome and unwholesome actions, the result is indeterminate and neutral. Because it is neutral in this way, it does not oppose either the wholesome or the unwholesome. If it opposed the wholesome or the unwholesome, the transformation of wholesome and unwholesome afflictive phenomena could not be established. Therefore, the resultant consciousness is only indeterminate and neutral.

The basis of knowledge has been explained. What, then, is the characteristic of knowledge?

Briefly, there are three kinds: 1. The characteristic of other-dependent nature, 2. The characteristic of delusive conceptual discrimination, 3. The characteristic of accomplishment.

What is the characteristic of other-dependent nature?

It is the consciousness that contains all the seeds of delusive discrimination within the Alaya-consciousness. It also includes the consciousnesses pertaining to the body and its experience: the experiencing consciousness, consciousness of time, consciousness of number, the conceptual consciousness that distinguishes directions and places, consciousness discriminating self and other, and consciousness of birth and death in fortunate and unfortunate destinies.

Among these, the consciousness of the body and its experience, the consciousness of what is used, and the experiencing consciousnesses involving time, number, and conceptual discrimination arise with seeds perfumed by words and speech as their cause. The consciousness discriminating self and other has seeds perfumed by the view of a self as its cause. Birth and death in fortunate and unfortunate destinies have seeds perfumed by causes and conditions as their cause.

These consciousnesses encompass all sense objects and all afflictions throughout the destinies of sentient beings. It is called the characteristic of other-dependent nature because it manifests as delusive discrimination. This manifest discrimination comprises the delusive discriminations within the consciousnesses and is consciousness-only, without relying upon any other object.

This is the characteristic of other-dependent nature.

What is the characteristic of delusive discrimination?

It means that there are no sense objects; they merely arise as manifestations of consciousness and are apprehended as sense objects.

What is the characteristic of accomplishment?

It means that, within that very characteristic of other-dependent nature, the characteristic of sense objects is eternally nonexistent. Among these, the body, the eye, and so forth—the six inner consciousnesses of experience—should be understood as its experiencing consciousnesses. The six external sense objects, such as form and so forth, should be understood as the objects experienced by those consciousnesses. The six kinds of consciousness, such as eye-consciousness and so forth, should be understood as their various distinct consciousnesses.

Furthermore, these consciousnesses are merely consciousness and are devoid of objects, for where else could anything be seen?

This should be understood through what is seen in dreams and so forth. That is, in a dream, apart from sense objects, there is only consciousness. Yet various sense objects—forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tangible objects, houses, forests, earth, wind, mountains, and so forth—appear with perceptible characteristics. In that dream there are no sense objects, yet they are seen. In the same way, all things are consciousness-only; this is known according to one’s comprehension of their meaning. “And so forth” refers to illusions, mirages, a thirsty deer’s vision of water, and defective vision.

Yet when that person awakens from the dream, everything is likewise only consciousness. Why is this? In a dream, only mental consciousness arises. Thus, when one does not truly engage there but, upon awakening and knowing it, engages in reality, one acts truly.

How can those who have not awakened know consciousness-only?

They know it from the Agamas and explanations consistent with their meaning. As the Buddha says in the Ten Stages Sutra within the Madhyama Agama, the three realms are created by mind alone. In the Sutra on the Continuous Liberation, Bodhisattva Maitreya asked the Buddha:

“World-Honored One! Are the images seen within the sphere of samadhi different or not different from the mind?”

The Buddha said: “Maitreya! They are not different. Why is this? By recollecting consciousness-only, what I have said becomes clear.”

“World-Honored One! If the images within the sphere of samadhi are not different from the mind, how can that mind apprehend that very mind?”

The Buddha said: “Maitreya! There is no dharma that can apprehend a dharma, yet that mind arises in this manner. Because it arises in this manner, it sees in this manner.

For example, when an image serves as the condition, one sees only an image, yet says that one sees one’s own image. Since the intervening object is not separate from that image, one sees an intervening image resembling it. In this manner that mind arises, and in this manner one speaks of seeing what is between.” Thus this has been demonstrated by the Agamas.

When a mind in meditative concentration sees the color blue and knows that blue is present, seeing the appearance of blue is the mind, free from sense objects, seeing blue, and so forth. Through this explanation consistent with reason, a bodhisattva examines the consciousnesses and knows them to be consciousness-only, rather than there being some blue color brought into consciousness by recollection. As for recollections arising from what has been seen, heard, contemplated, and cultivated, consciousness likewise takes past recollections as present appearances of consciousness-only.

Through this analogy, the principle of consciousness-only can be demonstrated. A bodhisattva who has not yet realized the wisdom that awakens to suchness can know it by analogy through the meaning of consciousness-only, as when the consciousnesses are compared to dreams and so forth. Among these, the establishment of consciousnesses such as eye-consciousness and so forth is accomplished through the meaning of consciousness-only.

Eye-consciousness and so forth are consciousnesses that have form as their object. How can it be known that they have the meaning of consciousness-only?

It is as stated in the Agamas and the preceding explanations.

If all consciousnesses are consciousness-only, how do the appearances of forms manifest and endure for a long time?

They do so because they are the causes of defiled afflictions produced by inverted activities. At other times, since they are not sense objects, there is no delusion concerning sense objects. If they did not exist, then the defilements, afflictions, afflictive obstructions, and cognitive obstructions would not exist. If these did not exist, purification likewise could not be accomplished. This meaning accords with reason. Here is a verse:

Delusive recollections and delusive thoughts

Are called the form-consciousnesses,

And also the formless consciousnesses.

If this does not exist, neither does that.

Why are time and the other kinds described above operative, while karma has no time?

Because worldly transmigration flows on without interruption; because the worlds of sentient beings are innumerable; because the worlds of the Buddhas are innumerable; because the activities conceptually designated by provisional names are innumerable; because the distinctions in receiving and experiencing are innumerable; because the distinctions in experiencing the agreeable and disagreeable fruits of karma are innumerable; and because the distinctions in undergoing birth and death are innumerable.

How is the meaning of consciousness-only established for these consciousnesses?

Briefly, it is explained through three characteristics: First, there is consciousness-only, and apart from it no other object exists. Second, consciousness has only two aspects. Third, it assumes many forms, like a painter painting many different images. Thus there are only consciousnesses and no sense objects. All consciousnesses have a seeing aspect and an appearance aspect. Eye-consciousness and so forth, together with forms and so forth, and the seeing aspects of those consciousnesses, up to the seeing aspect of body-consciousness, are only mental consciousness. All dharmas—the eye and so forth—are consciousness, taking mental consciousness as their seeing aspect; discrimination within mental consciousness and all consciousnesses arise as manifest appearances. Here is a verse:

There are only those two kinds;

The practitioner enters mental consciousness.

Having entered that mind alone,

Through its power, this comes to be.

That mental consciousness alone performs many kinds of activity and is named according to each, just as the various activities of body, speech, and so forth are all within the body, like the work of a painter. The two manifest aspects of activity are the manifest appearance of the sense object and the manifest appearance of discrimination. Everywhere and in every place, appearances manifest through contact. Activities having forms as their sense objects depend upon the body. Mental consciousness and the faculties of form depend upon the body. Here is a verse:

Because it travels far, alone,

Bodiless, dwelling in a cave,

One who tames the mind, so hard to subdue,

I call a practitioner of purity.

As it is said, the five faculties form the spheres that condition mental consciousness and give rise to sensation. Yet they depend upon the mind. Furthermore, as stated concerning the twelve ayatanas, the sutra speaks of six seeds of consciousness; the seed-consciousness is the mind ayatana.

If the Alaya-consciousness exists, then within it are the sense-object consciousness and discriminating consciousness. All other consciousnesses—the consciousness of their recollections and perceptions—should be understood to be mental consciousness alone and alike to be its seeing aspect, because only the consciousnesses of recollection and perception are the causes that produce that seeing aspect. The aspect manifesting as sense objects and the seeing aspect both arise in mutual dependence.

Thus all consciousnesses are established as abiding in consciousness-only.

Why, then, are sense objects seen if it is said that they do not exist?

As the Buddha taught, a bodhisattva accomplishes four dharmas. First is the wisdom that comprehends the unreality of the objects of consciousness, because the appearances of consciousness contradict one another. Hungry ghosts, animals, human beings, devas, and so forth encounter the same phenomenon, yet what they see differs.

Second is the wisdom that knows that consciousness can exist without an object, as with appearances of the past and future and appearances in dreams. Third is the wisdom that knows that, when distorted attention is applied, an object is regarded as existing, whereas undistorted consciousness arises without exertion. Fourth is the wisdom attained in conformity with the three kinds of wisdom.

Thus, bodhisattvas and those who have attained meditative concentration, whose minds have gained mastery and possess the power of retention, manifest such things and attain shamatha. Practitioners who contemplate phenomena in accordance with insight merely recollect and directly perceive them, and they attain nonconceptual wisdom. Wherever they dwell, all objects appear.

Thus, these three kinds of wisdom accord with their objects. These objects, being compatible with the four foregoing points, are fundamentally nonexistent.

If so, how does the manifestation of consciousness-only depend upon the characteristic of the other-dependent nature? In what sense is the other-dependent nature called “other-dependent”?

It arises from seeds produced by its own perfuming and is other-dependent in respect to conditions. Once it has arisen, it cannot remain for even a single instant through its own power; therefore it is called the other-dependent nature. It is imaginary discrimination and not a nature serving as a basis, because an object of perception has never existed.

Why is it imaginary discrimination? In what sense is it called imaginary discrimination?

Because it discriminates innumerable characteristics, distorted appearances arise. It is called imaginary discrimination because it has no intrinsic characteristic and exists only through deluded perception; hence it is called imagination.

If the perfected characteristic is eternally without an intrinsic characteristic, how can it be perfected? In what sense is it called perfected?

Because no object is apprehended, it is called perfected. Because pure mindfulness directed toward conditions is the cause of the sublime meaning of all roots of virtue, and because it is also the supreme meaning, it is called perfected.

Furthermore, because there are discrimination and nondiscrimination, it is called the discriminated nature.

Within this, what discriminates? What is discriminated? What are the discriminated natures?

Discriminating mental consciousness is that which discriminates. Yet because it is perfumed by its own seeds of language and by the seeds of all consciousnesses, it has no discriminated characteristics; because it universally discriminates all imaginary discriminations, it is called discrimination.

Furthermore, the other-dependent nature exists in conformity with imaginary thought. “The imagination of the other-dependent nature” means the imagined intrinsic nature within it.

Furthermore, by what does imaginary discrimination discriminate, and how? Through what notion does it apprehend what notion? Through what conceit? Through what provisional designation? Through what does it establish names and meanings?

Through notions; therefore, within that other-dependent nature, thought apprehends views, and through that conceit, discrimination gives rise to verbal karma.

Views and the other three are activities of worldly karma. Thus, although there is no referent, one speaks of its establishment; this is imaginary discrimination.

Do these three natures arise together or not together? Are they different or not different?

They should be said to be different in meaning yet closely related. The characteristic of the other-dependent nature is another meaning of the other-dependent nature. It is also another meaning of imaginary discrimination.

Is it also another meaning of the perfected nature?

The other-dependent nature serves as the seed that perfumes the other-dependent nature and as the cause from which the other-dependent nature arises.

Does it have any other designation or meaning?

It is that imaginary discrimination, together with the causes of discrimination.

What meaning does it possess?

In accordance with how it discriminates and with what is thus discriminated, that object is eternally nonexistent.

How many kinds of other-dependent characteristics are there?

In brief, there are two: 1. the other-dependent characteristic of perfumed seeds; 2. the other-dependent characteristic in which the nature of defilement or purity is not established. Because there are these two kinds of other-dependent characteristics, it is called the other-dependent characteristic.

The nature of imaginary discrimination is also of two kinds: 1. the discriminated nature; 2. superior discrimination. Therefore, it is discrimination.

The perfected nature is also of two kinds: 1. the perfected nature; 2. purified perfection.

Discrimination is further of four kinds: 1. discrimination of nature; 2. superior discrimination; 3. perceptive discrimination; 4. nonperceptive discrimination.

Perceptive discrimination is a clear and skillful understanding of meaning. Nonperceptive discrimination is the failure to understand meaning skillfully and clearly.

There are also five kinds: 1. Discriminating a meaning on the basis of a name—that is, when the name is such, the meaning is such. 2. Discriminating a name on the basis of a meaning—that is, this meaning has this name. 3. Discriminating this name in relation to another name—that is, discriminating the name without determining the meaning. 4. Discriminating this meaning in relation to another meaning—that is, discriminating the meaning without yet determining the name. 5. Discriminating on the basis of both—that is, this meaning is such, and its embodiment has such a name.

Because they encompass all meanings, there are further ten kinds of discrimination: 1. Fundamental discrimination, namely the alaya-consciousness. 2. Discrimination of appearances, namely visual consciousness and so forth. 3.

Discrimination of presently manifest thoughts, namely the consciousnesses that arise in dependence upon eye-consciousness and so forth. 4. Discrimination by thought, namely transformations involving such things as aging, craving for pleasant sensations, being disturbed, various courses of existence, and the various objects of the Desire Realm. 5. Discrimination of events as they appear, namely discrimination produced by speaking of various distinctive characteristics, as in those who have not heard the true Dharma and those who hear the true Dharma with discriminating minds. 6.

Untranquil contemplation, which refers to those who have not heard the true Dharma, such as adherents of non-Buddhist paths. 7. Tranquil contemplation, which refers to those who together hear the true Dharma. 8. Incorrect discrimination, namely improper mental contemplation, the view of a self, and the other sixty-two views.

Discrimination that concurs with these is discursive discrimination. That is to say, bodhisattvas have ten kinds of discursive discrimination: discursiveness concerning nonexistent characteristics; discursiveness concerning existent characteristics; discursiveness concerning correct establishment; slanderous discursiveness; one-sided discursiveness concerning phenomena; discursiveness concerning different phenomena; discursiveness concerning nature; discursiveness that follows names and meanings; and discursiveness that follows meanings and names.

The objects of discursiveness in these ten statements are taught in order to counteract them through nonconceptual wisdom. Such obstacles and their antidotes are taught throughout all the Prajnaparamita teachings. One should fully understand the Prajnaparamita.

Thus the closely related meanings of the three kinds of characteristics of the other-dependent nature have now been explained.

How is it that the three natures, being undifferentiated, are not established?

According to one distinct meaning, the other-dependent nature is not that imaginary discrimination and therefore is not established. According to another distinct meaning, imaginary discrimination is not that other-dependent nature and therefore is not established. According to a different designation, the perfected nature is thus neither the other-dependent nature nor imagination.

How can it be known that the characteristic of the other-dependent nature appears through the nature of false discrimination and does not truly possess such an essence?

Because the original designation is devoid of wisdom and is the cause of its own cessation; because there are many names; because it is the cause of many mutually contradictory embodiments; and because indeterminate names are the cause of mutually contradictory defiled embodiments. A verse here says:

Because the original designation lacks wisdom,

Because names are many and indeterminate,

It produces its own many embodiments,

Because defiled embodiments contradict one another.

Awakening, one sees all phenomena,

And sees all defilement and purity;

Know them to be like magical illusions,

And also like empty space.

Furthermore, in what sense, when things exist in this way, is the characteristic of the other-dependent nature said to be entirely unestablished? If it did not exist, the perfected nature would also not exist. Thus, nothing whatsoever would be established. If the other-dependent nature and the perfected nature were nonexistent, defilement and purity would be nonexistent; yet defiled and purified phenomena are seen to exist. Therefore, not everything is nonexistent. A verse here says:

If the other-dependent nature were nonexistent,

The perfected nature and all things

Would perpetually be nonexistent

Within all defilement and purity.

Because it is so, the Buddhas, the Tathagatas, taught this in the Vaipulya scriptures of the Mahayana.

How can the nature of imaginary discrimination be known as it is?

It cannot be known through any single corresponding name or meaning.

Then how can the characteristic of the other-dependent nature be known?

This should be understood through such analogies as an illusion, a mirage, a dream, an image in a mirror, an echo in a deep valley, the moon’s reflection in water, and so forth.

How is it known that the perfected nature has four kinds of pure Dharma?

The four pure Dharmas are: 1. Essential purity, namely suchness, emptiness, the ultimate reality, signlessness, the true meaning, and the dharmadhatu. 2. Purity free from defilement, namely its freedom from all obstructing defilements. 3. Purity attained through practice, namely all the factors of enlightenment, the paramitas, and so forth. 4. Purity that produces mindfulness, namely the teaching of the Mahayana Dharma. Thus, because they are causes of purity, they are not false imagination; and because they are causes that purify the dharmadhatu, they are not the other-dependent nature. These four Dharmas thus encompass all pure Dharmas. A verse here says:

Illusions and the like are said to arise;

False attachment is said not to exist.

These four Dharmas of purity

Are true purity.

Essential purity is free from the defilements of conceptual thought, volitional activity, and karma, and encompasses those four meanings of purity.

Furthermore, for what reason is the characteristic of the other-dependent nature compared to illusions and the like?

It is because there are various inverted conceptions and false attachments regarding the characteristic of the other-dependent nature.

What are the inverted doubts concerning the characteristic of the other-dependent nature?

They are doubts such as this: Why does something devoid of real meaning appear as an objective realm?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of an illusion is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, do mind and mental factors arise?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of a mirage is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, is there the experience of desirable and undesirable things?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of a dream is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, are there pure and impure karma, agreeable and disagreeable results, and favorable and unfavorable circumstances?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of an image in a mirror is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, are there consciousnesses that arise in conformity with conditions and objects?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of a reflection of light is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, are there various conventional names and expressions?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of an echo is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, can the objective realm of samadhi actually be apprehended?

To dispel this doubt, the analogy of the moon’s reflection in water is given.

Why, when there is no real meaning, do bodhisattvas apprehend things without inverted thought and take birth in order to benefit sentient beings?

To dispel this doubt, they perform deeds like those of transformation bodies.

What is the meaning of this?

As stated in the Brahma King Sutra: “I do not perceive samsara, nor do I realize nirvana.” Because false discrimination within the characteristic of the other-dependent nature and the cause of the perfected nature are involved, samsara and nirvana are said to be no different. Thus, false discrimination regarding the characteristic of that other-dependent nature is called samsara, while the perfected nature is called nirvana.

As stated in the Abhidharma, the Buddha taught that there are three aspects: the defiled aspect, the pure aspect, and the aspect comprising both.

What is the meaning of this statement?

It means that the falsely imagined nature within the other-dependent nature is the afflicted aspect. The perfected nature is the pure aspect. The other-dependent nature itself comprises both aspects. It is because of this meaning that this was taught.

In explaining this meaning, why is the analogy of gold contained in earth presented?

In gold contained in earth, three things may be perceived: first, the element of earth; second, earth; and third, gold. Because the element of earth is present, both earth and gold are perceived. If it is placed in fire, the earth is no longer perceived and only the gold is seen.

When the element of earth is perceived as earth, that is not right perception. When gold is perceived, it is not yet true perception, because the element of earth comprises two aspects. Likewise, when the fire of non-discriminating wisdom comes into contact with that consciousness, if that consciousness perceives the nature of false discrimination, it does not perceive the perfected nature.

When the fire of non-discriminating wisdom comes into contact with that consciousness, it truly perceives the perfected nature and does not perceive the nature of false discrimination. Thus, false-discriminating consciousness and the characteristic of the other-dependent nature constitute two aspects, just as gold is contained in gold-bearing earth.

The Tathagata sometimes says that all Dharmas are permanent, sometimes says that all Dharmas are impermanent, and sometimes says that they are neither permanent nor impermanent.

For what intent are they said to be permanent? The characteristic of the other-dependent nature, when distinguished from the perfected nature, is said to be permanent. Because of false discrimination, it is said to be impermanent. Because it comprises both aspects, it is neither permanent nor impermanent.

With this intent, permanence and impermanence are said to be nondual; suffering and happiness are nondual; purity and impurity are nondual; emptiness and non-emptiness are nondual; self and no-self are nondual; the definite and the indefinite are nondual; existence of nature and absence of nature are nondual; arising and non-arising are nondual; cessation and non-cessation are nondual; constant certainty and absence of constant certainty are nondual; the nature of cessation and absence of the nature of cessation are nondual; and samsara and nirvana are nondual. Such distinct expressions are all esoteric sayings of the Buddhas. These statements concerning the three natures should be understood accordingly. A verse here speaks of permanence and the other expressions as follows:

Because all Dharmas are empty,

And what is seen is not one,

Dharma and what is not Dharma

Are taught as nondual in meaning.

One aspect is the characteristic of a thing,

And is called the characteristic of a thing.

The two aspects are not called a thing;

They are truly called not a thing.

What is seen is not as it exists;

Therefore it is said to be seen.

That, too, is perceived in this way;

Therefore it is said to be empty.

Its own essence does not exist of itself,

Nor does it abide in the characteristic of a thing.

The apprehended has from the beginning been nonexistent;

Therefore it is said to be without intrinsic nature.

Thus is established the meaning of absence of intrinsic nature,

According to the supreme and ever higher meaning.

There is neither arising nor cessation,

Because its nature is eternally quiescent and ceased.

There are, moreover, four intentions and four kinds of esoteric sayings of the Buddha, which will now be explained in sequence:

1. The intention of identity in Dharma. This means: “From immeasurable and boundless ages past, I have borne the name Vipasyin, the Perfectly True and Completely Enlightened One.”

2. The intention concerning time. This means that if one invokes the name of the Tathagata Prabhutaratna, one will assuredly attain anuttara-samyak-sambodhi. As stated in the Sutra of Infinite Life: “If sentient beings aspire to be born in the World of Infinite Life, they will immediately attain birth there.”

3. The intention concerning the meaning heard. As a sutra states: “Only after making offerings to and drawing near as many beings as the sands of the Ganges does one understand the meaning of the Mahayana.”

4. The intention that accords with the minds of sentient beings. This means that, for certain sentient beings, the practice of generosity is first praised and later criticized. Generosity is taught in this way; moral discipline is likewise taught, and the other practices are taught in the same manner.

Thus the four kinds of intention are taught.

The four kinds of esoteric sayings, in sequence, are:

1. The gradual encouragement to set forth. This means that, because the Dharma-nature in the Mahayana is superior to that in the Sravaka Vehicle, it is taught progressively in accordance with the reasoning of conventional truth.

2. The gradual disclosure of characteristics. This means that, in accordance with the characteristics of Dharmas, the characteristics of the three natures are revealed.

3. The gradual application of antidotes. This means that the 84,000 modes of practice are taught in accordance with the dispositions of sentient beings.

4. The gradual arousing of aspiration. This means that various meanings, and the meanings of language, sounds, and written characters, are taught as appropriate. A verse here says:

What is unreal is taken to be real,

And beings dwell skillfully within inversion.

Because they are adept in defiling afflictions,

They attain unsurpassed bodhi.

To explain the Mahayana scriptures, three distinct characteristics must be employed. In brief, they are: 1. Teaching dependent arising. 2. Teaching the characteristics of Dharmas arising from causes and conditions. 3. Teaching how meaning is heard and understood through language.

Here, the gathering of causes and conditions is explained by saying that Dharmas arise through perfuming, and the Dharmas thus produced, within that resultant consciousness, arise again in mutual conformity with their own conditions. They in turn conform to consciousness as the characteristic of Dharmas, being of the nature of cognition that perceives them in a single thought. Yet they possess the characteristic of retention, the characteristic of discrimination, and the characteristic of the essential nature of Dharmas. Therefore, these are used to clarify the characteristics of the three natures. When cognition that perceives them in a single thought is spoken of, it means that cognition knows the three characteristics.

Why does that characteristic further explain the characteristic of discrimination?

In the other-dependent nature, it exists. In the perfected nature, it does not exist. In both together, it both exists and does not exist. There is awakening and non-awakening, seeing and non-seeing, while reality remains the same. These depend upon the other-dependent nature.

It is not that beings discriminate; rather, beings bring it to perfection. Because that activity is awakened, it is not unawakened. As stated concerning perfection within the discriminated nature and the other-dependent nature, therein are both non-awakening and awakening.

Briefly stated, this explains the meaning of the two extremes: the preceding sentence has already stated it, and the other sentences elucidate that discrimination, whether through the enhancement of qualities or the enhancement of meaning.

The enhancement of qualities means that the qualities of the Buddha are described as follows: wisdom of excellent awakening; nondual conduct; the signless Dharma; the ultimate conduct of a Buddha; attainment of all Buddha-dharmas; arrival at the path free from obstruction; the Dharma of non-retrogression; an unobstructed sphere; abiding in the inconceivable; attainment of a body pervading all worlds throughout the three times; freedom from doubt concerning all dharmas; knowing with certainty the wisdom that accomplishes all things; knowing all dharmas and knowing non-discrimination; the wisdom of right absorption of all bodhisattvas; the nondual conduct of a Buddha; attainment of the supreme ultimate; never being separated from the Tathagata; liberation through the knowledge of exhaustion;

arrival at the boundless Buddha-ground; penetration of the dharmadhatu; and reaching the limit of the realm of space.

The Buddha’s excellent awakening should be understood as the sentence explained by the other sentences. Thus the essence of the Dharma is well expounded. This wisdom of excellent awakening should be understood as comprising nineteen qualities of all Buddhas, the Tathagatas: the quality of non-discrimination; complete freedom from obstruction in wisdom; the quality of the utmost purity of suchness with respect to the two characteristics of what is and what is not the case; the unceasing, spontaneous performance of a Buddha’s activities; the quality of non-discrimination in the activities of body and mind within the Dharma-body; the quality of counteracting all obstructions; the quality of subduing all non-Buddhist teachings;

the quality of being born in the world without being defiled by worldly dharmas; the quality of abiding in the true Dharma; the quality of bestowing predictions; the quality of manifesting the enjoyment-body and transformation-body in all worlds; the quality of resolving doubts; the quality of entering through manifold practices; the quality of giving rise to knowledge of future dharmas; the quality of manifesting in accordance with beings’ faith; the quality of manifesting immeasurable bodies to transform and liberate beings; the quality of accomplishing the paramitas in conformity with the Dharma; the quality of manifesting other Buddha-fields in accordance with beings’ faith; the quality of the three kinds of Buddha-bodies teaching the Dharma without interruption;

and even immeasurable qualities that enable all beings to attain peace and happiness in the worldly realm.

It is on this account that these are taught.

The enhancement of meaning is as stated in the sutra: A bodhisattva who perfects thirty-two dharmas is therefore called a bodhisattva. With a profound intention to assist, benefit, and bring happiness, the bodhisattva leads all beings to enter omniscience; extinguishes arrogance in their own mind; possesses a profound, sincere, and generous mind; maintains an impartial mind, creating neither affectionate attachment nor enmity; is always friendly; even until nirvana, always first presents a smiling countenance and never abandons this attitude; fulfills every promise without ceasing; does not shrink from weariness; never tires of hearing the meaning of the teachings; sees their own faults and does not speak of the faults of others; in every deportment practices with the mind of a bodhisattva;

gives without seeking recompense from others; cultivates and observes the precepts without aiming at any path that remains within samsara; practices patience without anger toward any being; gathers all wholesome root-dharmas in order to practice diligence; relinquishes the meditative absorptions of the Formless Realm; accords with the wisdom of skillful means; employs the four means of attraction to embrace all skillful means; harbors no duality of mind toward those who break the precepts and those who observe them; diligently listens to the true Dharma; delights in secluded places; does not delight in worldly pleasures; is not infatuated with the Lesser Vehicle; sees the Great Vehicle as greatly beneficial;

keeps far away from unwholesome spiritual friends and draws near to virtuous spiritual friends; purifies the four brahma-conducts; freely employs the five superknowledges; relies upon wisdom; does not abandon beings whether their conduct is right or wrong; speaks decisively; esteems truthful speech; and, as a bodhisattva, takes the mind as foremost.

Thus, the sentences contain the particulars of the first sentence. It should be understood that the profound intention to assist and bring happiness is precisely the profound intention to assist and bring happiness to all beings. It has sixteen distinct kinds of activity.

These sixteen are: Acting continuously. Acting without retreating. Acting on one’s own without waiting for others’ exhortation.

Acting without anger. Acting without seeking recompense. Three sentences concern expecting no recompense: whether beneficial or not beneficial, one is neither angry nor pleased, and this remains so even in later lives; the same applies to verbal karma.

Two sentences concern being nondual amid suffering and happiness and acting impartially. Acting without timidity. Acting without retrogression.

Acting with skillful means. Acting to remove obstructions. Two sentences concern acting continuously and without interruption, mindful of that intention.

Acting until the result is attained. Seven sentences concern the right practice of cultivating the six paramitas and encompass all right practices. Acting to perfect conduct.

Six sentences concern drawing near to spiritual friends. Listening to the true Dharma. Delighting in secluded places.

Abandoning unwholesome thoughts. The quality of right mindfulness. Two sentences concern the qualities of the Great Vehicle.

Two sentences concern the accomplishment of activities. Three sentences concern immeasurable purity, the attainment of strengthening power, and the realization of qualities. Causing others to abide in the four activities.

Employing the qualities of beings to dispel doubts. Teaching the mind to embrace material gifts and the Dharma. A mind free from admixture.

It should be understood that these sentences explain the distinctions within the first sentence. As the sutra states: Based upon the first sentence, there are sentences that speak of the qualities. Based upon the first sentence, there are sentences that explain other meanings.

Thus the characteristic of wisdom has been explained.

TREATISE ON THE SUMMARY OF THE GREAT VEHICLE

Upper Fascicle

(End)