攝大乘論本

Part One: General Outline

In the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra it is said that bodhisattvas who have skillfully entered the Mahayana, wishing to elucidate the greatness of the Mahayana, relying upon the Mahayana and in the presence of the Buddha, declared that the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, possess ten supreme modes of expression. First is the supremacy of the support of the knowable. Second is the supremacy of the characteristics of the knowable.

Third is the supremacy of entry into the characteristics of the knowable. Fourth is the supremacy of entry into cause and effect. Fifth is the supremacy of the differentiated cultivation of causes and effects.

Sixth is the supremacy of higher discipline within differentiated cultivation. Seventh is the supremacy of higher mind. Eighth is the supremacy of higher wisdom.

Ninth is the supremacy of the fruit of abandonment. Tenth is the supremacy of the fruit of knowledge. From the passages spoken by the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, in the sutras, it is evident that the Mahayana was indeed taught by the Buddha.

How is this evident? It is because the ten supreme characteristics mentioned above are nowhere taught in the Shravaka Vehicle, whereas they are taught extensively in many places within the Mahayana. Namely, alaya is taught as the essential nature of the support of the knowable.

The three self-natures—first, the other-dependent self-nature; second, the imagined self-nature; and third, the perfectly accomplished self-nature—are taught as the essential nature of the characteristics of the knowable. Consciousness-only is taught as entry into the essential nature of the characteristics of the knowable. The six paramitas are taught as the essential nature of entry into cause and effect.

The ten bodhisattva bhumis are taught as the essential nature of the differentiated cultivation of causes and effects. The bodhisattva discipline is taught as the essential nature of higher discipline. The Shurangama, Akashagarbha, and other samadhis are taught as the essential nature of higher mind.

Nonconceptual knowledge is taught as the essential nature of higher wisdom. Non-abiding nirvana is taught as the essential nature of the fruit of abandonment. The three Buddha bodies—first, the essential-nature body; second, the enjoyment body; and third, the transformation body—are taught as the essential nature of the fruit of knowledge.

Through these ten supreme matters, it is evident that the Mahayana differs from the Shravaka Vehicle. It is also evident that the Blessed One explained them only to bodhisattvas. Therefore, one should know that only in reliance upon the Mahayana are these ten supreme characteristics of the Buddhas, the Blessed Ones, taught.

Furthermore, why did the Tathagata speak of supreme expression through these ten supreme characteristics, thereby also making evident that the Mahayana is truly the word of the Buddha?

It was to prevent the notion that the Shravaka Vehicle is the nature of the Mahayana. These ten characteristics are nowhere taught in the Shravaka Vehicle but are taught extensively only in the Mahayana. That is, these ten modes of supreme expression possess great power to bring forth great bodhi, establish excellent concordance, remain free from contradiction, and enable attainment of omniscient knowledge. Here are two verses:

The support and characteristics of the knowable,

Entry into cause and effect, and cultivation of cause and effect,

The three trainings, the fruit of abandonment, and the fruit of knowledge—

Being the supreme vehicle, these are supreme.

This teaching is not found elsewhere;

It is the supreme cause of bodhi.

Therefore, the Mahayana was taught by the Buddha,

For it teaches these ten supreme meanings.

Furthermore, why are these ten meanings taught in this sequence?

Bodhisattvas must first understand the causes and conditions of dharmas, so that they may understand the principle of dependent arising. Next, regarding dharmas arisen through conditions, they must clearly discern their characteristics and skillfully avoid the two extremes of superimposition and diminution. Next, having cultivated skillfully in this way, bodhisattvas must correctly penetrate the characteristics of what is apprehended, enabling the mind to be liberated from its obstructions.

Next, having penetrated the characteristics of the knowable, they must first, through attaining the six paramitas at the stage of preparatory practice, fully accomplish and purify their higher aspiration. Next, after purifying their aspiration through the six paramitas, they must cultivate successive distinctions throughout the ten bhumis. This means that they must pass through three incalculable great kalpas.

Next, they must perfect the bodhisattva’s three trainings. Having perfected them, they must directly realize the fruits of nirvana and unsurpassed complete and perfect bodhi. The ten meanings are taught in this sequence, and within them the Mahayana is presented in full.

Part Two: The Support of the Knowable

Among the ten supreme meanings, the support of the knowable—the basis upon which all knowable dharmas depend—is taught first. It is the alaya-consciousness.

Where did the Blessed One teach that the alaya-consciousness is called the alaya-consciousness?

In a verse in the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra, the Blessed One said:

The realm beginningless in time

Is the common support of all dharmas.

Because it exists, there are the destinies

And the attainment of nirvana.

There is also this verse:

Because it gathers and contains all dharmas

And serves as the consciousness of their seeds,

It is called alaya;

This I teach to superior persons.

Thus it has been established by citation from the Agama.

But for what reason is this consciousness called alaya?

Because all defiled dharmas that arise are contained within it as effects, and this same consciousness contains those dharmas as causes, it is called alaya. Alternatively, because sentient beings appropriate this consciousness as their self, it is called alaya.

Furthermore, this consciousness is also called the adana-consciousness. As stated in the Samdhinirmocana Sutra of the Agama:

The adana-consciousness is exceedingly subtle;

Its seeds are like a rushing stream.

I do not teach it to ordinary beings,

Fearing they would grasp it as a self.

For what reason is it also called the adana-consciousness?

Because it takes up and sustains all material faculties, using its own entity as their support. Why is this? Because the material faculties sustained by it continue throughout life without being destroyed. Moreover, it maintains continuity and, at the time of rebirth-linking, appropriates the body as its own entity. Therefore, this consciousness is also called the adana-consciousness.

This consciousness is also called mind. Thus the Blessed One spoke of mind, mentation, and consciousness. Here, mentation is of two kinds. The first serves as the immediately antecedent condition and as the nature of a support; namely, the consciousness that has just ceased can provide a support for mental consciousness. The second is defiled mentation, which is always associated with four afflictions: the view of a real personality, self-conceit, self-love, and ignorance. This is the consciousness that serves as the support of defilements. Consciousness also arises in dependence upon it, according to the first meaning, and cognizes defiled objects, according to the second. Thus, because it has the meanings of immediate succession and deliberation, mentation is of these two kinds.

Furthermore, how is it known that defiled mentation exists?

If this defiled mentation did not exist, there would be no exclusive ignorance, which would be a fault. The five analogous factors would also not exist, which would be a fault. Why?

Because the five sense consciousnesses must have the eye and so forth as their simultaneous supports. Moreover, the etymological explanations would not hold, which would be a fault. Furthermore, there would be no distinction between the absorption of non-perception and the absorption of cessation, which would be a fault.

In the absorption of non-perception, defiled mentation clearly remains, whereas in the absorption of cessation it does not. Otherwise, there would be no distinction between these two absorptions. Moreover, throughout rebirth among the non-percipient gods there would have to be no defilement, which would be a fault.

Yet if self-grasping and self-conceit were absent, or if self-grasping could manifest at all times—that is, in wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate states of mind—then, otherwise, it would be associated only with unwholesome mind, because when the afflictions of self, what belongs to self, and the associated afflictions are manifest, the state is neither wholesome nor indeterminate. Therefore, if one establishes that they manifest simultaneously but are not associated in the same manner, this fault does not arise.

Here is a verse:

If exclusive ignorance,

The five analogous factors,

Etymology, and the distinction between two absorptions

Were absent, faults would follow in every case.

To say that among the non-percipient gods

There is no self-grasping is a fault.

Self-grasping constantly follows

All kinds of states; if it did not,

There would be no undefiled mentation,

And two or three factors would contradict one another.

Without this, in every state

Self-grasping would likewise be absent.

The mind taking ultimate meaning constantly arises

And constantly acts as an obstruction.

Present within all consciousness,

It is exclusive ignorance.

Because mentation is defiled, its nature is obscured-indeterminate, and it is always associated with the four afflictions. It is like the afflictions of the Form and Formless Realms, which are obscured-indeterminate. Because the afflictions of the Form and Formless Realms are contained by shamatha, this mentation always remains present in a subtle manner.

The third is mind, which cannot exist apart from the alaya-consciousness. Therefore, the alaya-consciousness is established as the essential nature of mind, and this mind serves as the seed from which mentation and the active consciousnesses arise.

For what reason is the alaya-consciousness also called mind?

Because it is the place in which the perfumed seeds accumulate.

Furthermore, why is this mind not called the alaya-consciousness or the adana-consciousness in the Shravaka Vehicle?

Because this is an exceedingly subtle domain. Why? Because the cognition of shravakas does not engage all objects. Therefore, even though the alaya-consciousness was not separately taught to them, they could still gain realization and accomplish liberation; hence the Buddha did not teach it. The cognition of bodhisattvas, however, necessarily engages all objects, and therefore the Buddha taught it to bodhisattvas. Apart from this realization, it is not easy to attain omniscient knowledge.

Furthermore, the alaya-consciousness is also taught in the Shravaka Vehicle by other expressions or through hidden intent. Thus, the Ekottarika Agama says: Sentient beings in the world love alaya, delight in alaya, rejoice in alaya, and take pleasure in alaya. In order to abandon such alayas, when the Tathagata teaches the true Dharma, they listen respectfully, establish their minds in seeking the Dharma, and practice in accordance with it.

Thus the appearance of the Tathagata in the world is exceedingly wondrous, and the rare true Dharma appears in the world. In the Sutra of the Four Qualities, the alaya-consciousness is also revealed through another expression and hidden intent. In the Agama of the Mahasamghika school, this consciousness is likewise called, through another expression and hidden intent, the root-consciousness, like the root of a tree.

In the Mahishasaka school, this consciousness is likewise called, through another expression and hidden intent, the aggregate that lasts throughout samsara. Although at certain places and times material form and mind are seen to disappear, their seeds within the alaya-consciousness do not disappear.

Because alaya is thus the support of knowable dharmas, the alaya-consciousness is described as its nature, the adana-consciousness as its nature, mind as its nature, alaya as its nature, the root-consciousness as its nature, the aggregate lasting throughout samsara as its nature, and so forth. Through different presentations and hidden intentions, the alaya-consciousness became a distinctive mode of explanation employed by the Great Dharma King.

There is also a kind of explanation asserting that mind, mentation, and consciousness have different names but one meaning. This is incorrect. Since mentation and consciousness have two distinct meanings, one should know that mind also has a distinct meaning.

Another group says that when the Blessed One declared that sentient beings love alaya, and so forth at length, he was referring to the five aggregates subject to appropriation as alaya.

Others say that craving together with pleasant feeling is alaya, while still others say that the view of a real personality is alaya. Because these teachers lack clarity regarding the teaching and realization of the storehouse consciousness, they establish such views. The name alaya established according to the Shravaka Vehicle is likewise unreasonable. If, without confusion, one establishes the storehouse consciousness and names it alaya, that establishment is supreme.

How is it supreme?

If the five aggregates were alaya, sentient beings born in the lower destinies, where they experience exclusively painful and repugnant suffering, would never develop love for them; thus it would be unreasonable to call them what is grasped as a storehouse. If craving together with pleasant feeling were alaya, these would be absent from the fourth dhyana upward, and beings in those realms constantly reject them; thus it would be unreasonable to call them what is grasped as a storehouse.

If the view of a real personality were alaya, those who have faith in and understand selflessness within the true Dharma constantly reject it; thus it would be unreasonable to call it what is grasped as a storehouse. The alaya-consciousness bears the character of selfhood. Therefore, even those born in lower destinies, experiencing exclusively painful suffering and wishing to escape the aggregate of suffering, remain constantly bound to the storehouse consciousness by self-love and never wish to abandon it.

Although those born from the fourth dhyana upward constantly reject craving and pleasant feeling, they remain constantly bound to the storehouse consciousness by self-love. Although those within this true Dharma who have faith in and understand selflessness reject the view of self, they remain constantly bound to the storehouse consciousness by self-love. Therefore, establishing the alaya-consciousness and giving it the name alaya is supreme.

Thus the establishment of the alaya-consciousness has been explained. How, then, are its characteristics established?

Briefly, its characteristics are established in three ways: first, the establishment of its intrinsic characteristic; second, the establishment of its causal characteristic; and third, the establishment of its resultant characteristic.

The establishment of the intrinsic characteristic of the alaya-consciousness means that, because it can retain the corresponding seeds, it is the basis upon which all defiled dharmas perfume it as causes from which those dharmas arise.

The establishment of the causal characteristic of the alaya-consciousness means that, at all times, all the seeds within the alaya-consciousness act as causes for the presently manifest categories of defilement.

The establishment of the resultant characteristic of the alaya-consciousness means that the alaya-consciousness arises continuously on the basis of defiled dharmas that have perfumed it since beginningless time.

Furthermore, what is perfuming? “Perfuming” is the expression; what does it designate?

It means that a dharma arises and ceases together with another dharma upon which it depends, and within that other dharma it produces a potency capable of generating something else as its result. This is what the term designates. It is like sesame seeds scented with flowers: the sesame and flowers arise and cease together, and the sesame thereby acquires the fragrance of the flowers.

Again, when one speaks of a practitioner possessed of craving, craving perfumes the mind; depending upon craving and arising and ceasing together with it, that mind arises bearing the cause from which craving will arise. Or, in the case of a learned person, learning perfumes the mind; depending upon attentive hearing and arising and ceasing together with it, that mind arises bearing that cause. Because this perfuming has the power to preserve what was received, such a person is called one who preserves the true Dharma.

One should know that the meaning of perfuming in the alaya-consciousness is the same.

Furthermore, are the seeds of defiled dharmas within the alaya distinct and separately existent, or are they not different?

Those seeds are not real, separately existent entities; yet within the alaya they are also not entirely without distinction. Because the alaya-consciousness possesses the distinct capacities to produce them, it is called the consciousness of all seeds.

Furthermore, how is it known that the alaya-consciousness and those defiled dharmas simultaneously serve as causes of one another?

It is like the light of a lamp: the lamp flame burns the wick while producing light, and these occur simultaneously. It is also like a bundle of reeds standing upright by simultaneously supporting one another. The principle of mutual causation here should be contemplated in the same way. Just as the alaya-consciousness is the cause of defiled dharmas, defiled dharmas are also the cause of the alaya-consciousness. Only in this way is the meaning of cause and condition established; there is no other meaning of causation.

Why, although the perfumings are neither distinct nor intermixed, can they serve as causes of dharmas that are distinct and intermixed?

It is like a cloth being dyed. When it is first placed in the dye, diverse distinctions are not yet present, but after the dyeing is complete, its colors, lines, and patterns appear. The alaya-consciousness is the same. The dharmas that perfume it are diverse. Although their various characteristics cannot be seen during the perfuming, when the results arise, innumerable diverse categories become manifest.

The dependent arising of dharmas thus revealed in the Mahayana is exceedingly profound and subtle. Briefly, dependent arising is of two kinds: first, dependent arising that distinguishes intrinsic natures; and second, dependent arising that distinguishes desirable and undesirable states.

Here, the arising of dharmas in dependence upon the alaya-consciousness is dependent arising that distinguishes intrinsic natures, because the distinct intrinsic natures serve as the nature of its conditions.

Dependent arising is also analyzed into twelve links. This is called dependent arising that distinguishes desirable and undesirable states, because in fortunate and unfortunate destinies it distinguishes desirable and undesirable individual existences as the nature of its conditions.

Regarding the alaya-consciousness, those who are deluded about the first kind of dependent arising may discriminate intrinsic nature as the cause, grasp past action as the cause, grasp transformations wrought by a sovereign deity as the cause, grasp a real self as the cause, or maintain that there is neither cause nor condition. Those who are deluded about the second kind of dependent arising grasp the self as the agent and the self as the experiencer.

It is like a group of people blind from birth who have never seen an elephant. Someone brings an elephant and lets them examine it. One blind person touches its trunk, another its tusk, another its ear, another its leg, another its tail, and another its back.

When asked what an elephant is shaped like, one says it is like a plow handle, another like a pestle, another like a basket, another like a mortar, another like a broom, and another like a mountain rock. Those who do not clearly understand these two kinds of dependent arising are like those blind people in their ignorance. They may grasp intrinsic nature as the cause, grasp a real self as the cause, grasp that there is neither cause nor condition, or grasp the self as the agent and the self as the experiencer.

The causal nature and resultant nature of the alaya-consciousness are like the elephant’s nature, which the blind people do not know.

Briefly stated, the alaya-consciousness is the resultant consciousness of maturation. All seeds constitute its intrinsic nature, and it can encompass every individual existence and every destiny within the three realms. Here are five verses:

The external and internal are not clearly understood,

Conventionally or ultimately.

Seeds possess six characteristics:

Momentary cessation and simultaneous existence;

One should know that they continuously follow along.

They are determinate, await conditions,

And can produce only their own results.

Stable, indeterminate, and capable of being perfumed,

They correspond with that which perfumes.

The perfumed is not something else;

These are the characteristics of perfuming.

The six consciousnesses do not correspond,

Because they differ in three respects.

Earlier and later are not simultaneous;

To say they are of the same kind entails error.

The external and internal seeds

Possess the powers to generate and sustain.

Like a withered tree or a dead person,

Their continuity ceases only later.

To clarify how internal seeds are unlike external seeds, there are two verses:

External seeds may exist without perfuming,

But internal seeds are not like this.

If learning did not perfume the mind

Yet still produced results, that would be unreasonable.

What is done would be lost, and what was not done obtained;

Such contradictions would constitute faults.

External seeds depend on internal conditions,

For they arise through being perfumed by them.

Furthermore, the other active consciousnesses, which pervade every individual existence throughout all destinies, are called the consciousnesses of experience. As a verse in the Madhyantavibhaga Shastra says:

The first is the causal consciousness;

The second is the consciousness of experience.

Within the latter are the experiencer,

Discrimination, and mental factors.

These two consciousnesses also condition one another. Thus, a verse in the Mahayana Abhidharma Sutra says:

All dharmas in relation to the storehouse consciousness,

And the storehouse consciousness in relation to all dharmas,

Constantly serve as one another’s results

And also serve as one another’s causes.

If, in the first kind of dependent arising, the two consciousnesses act as causal conditions for one another, then in the second kind of dependent arising, what conditions serve as dominant conditions? Moreover, by how many conditions are the six consciousnesses produced?

They are produced by dominant conditions, object conditions, and immediately antecedent conditions. Thus, the three kinds of dependent arising—continuity throughout samsara, desirable and undesirable destinies, and the capacity for experience—together possess all four conditions.

Thus the characteristics and distinct intrinsic characteristics of the alaya-consciousness have been established. But how is it known that these distinct intrinsic characteristics and their defining features exist exclusively in the alaya-consciousness and not in the active consciousnesses?

Because if the established alaya-consciousness were absent, defilement and purification could not be accomplished. That is, if the defilements of affliction, karma, and birth could not be accomplished, neither worldly purification nor supramundane purification could be accomplished.

Why could the defilement of afflictions not be accomplished?

Because it is unreasonable to say that the seeds produced through the perfuming of the primary and secondary afflictions abide within the six consciousnesses. Why? Suppose eye-consciousness and primary afflictions such as craving, together with the secondary afflictions, arose and ceased together.

The seeds would then be perfumed by this eye-consciousness and those primary and secondary afflictions, and by nothing else. But after this eye-consciousness had ceased and other consciousnesses intervened, no support for the perfuming could be found. When other consciousnesses intervene, the preceding consciousness no longer possesses a real present entity.

Therefore, it is unreasonable to say that eye-consciousness arises together with craving and so forth, because that eye-consciousness has already passed and no longer has a real present entity. It is likewise unreasonable to say that past karma, which no longer has a real present entity, produces a result of maturation. Furthermore, it is also incorrect to say that perfuming occurs because eye-consciousness arises together with craving and so forth.

This perfuming cannot depend upon craving, because craving is dependent, unstable, and incapable of remaining. Nor can it be said to abide in other consciousnesses, because those consciousnesses have distinct supports and do not necessarily arise and cease together with it. Nor can it abide in its own entity, because its own entity certainly does not arise and cease together with itself.

Therefore, it is unreasonable to claim that eye-consciousness is perfumed by primary afflictions such as craving and by the secondary afflictions; nor is this consciousness perfumed by another consciousness. One should know that what applies to eye-consciousness applies equally to the other active consciousnesses.

Furthermore, when someone dies in a higher realm, such as among the non-percipient gods, and is reborn in this realm, the primary and secondary afflictions then defile the first consciousness. Yet when that consciousness arises, it should have no seeds, because both the support and that which had been perfumed have become past and no longer possess a real present entity.

Furthermore, when a consciousness that counteracts the afflictions arises, all worldly consciousnesses cease. At that time, apart from the alaya-consciousness, it is unreasonable to say that the seeds of the primary and secondary afflictions abide within the counteractive consciousness, because the intrinsic nature of the counteractive consciousness is liberation and it does not arise and cease together with the primary and secondary afflictions.

Later, worldly consciousness arises again. At that time, apart from the alaya-consciousness, the perfumed consciousnesses and their support have long since become past and no longer possess a real present entity; thus the worldly consciousness that arises again would have no seeds. Therefore, apart from the alaya-consciousness, the entire defilement of afflictions could not be accomplished.

Why could karmic defilement not be accomplished?

Because formations condition consciousness, and without this alaya-consciousness, neither could appropriation condition existence in a coherent manner.

Why could the defilement of birth not be accomplished?

Because the continuity of rebirth-linking would be unreasonable. Consider a person who is not in meditative absorption and who, upon dying, is to be reborn in this realm. In the intermediate existence, a defiled mental consciousness arises and establishes the continuity of rebirth-linking.

When that defiled mental consciousness in the intermediate existence ceases, it becomes the consciousness conjoined with the kalala in the mother’s womb. If the mental consciousness were thus conjoined with the kalala and, after that conjunction, another mental consciousness arose in the mother’s womb in dependence upon this consciousness, two mental consciousnesses would then have to arise simultaneously in the mother’s womb.

Furthermore, it is unreasonable for the consciousness conjoined with the kalala to be mental consciousness, because it depends upon a defiled state, because there is no temporal interval, and because mental consciousness has no object at that time. Suppose that the conjoined consciousness were mental consciousness. Would that conjoined mental consciousness itself be the support of the consciousness of all seeds, or would it be called the consciousness of all seeds because other mental consciousnesses arise from it?

If this conjoined consciousness were the consciousness of all seeds, it would itself be the alaya-consciousness, which you have merely called mental consciousness by another name. If the dependent consciousness were the consciousness of all seeds, then the supporting causal consciousness, rather than the dependent resultant consciousness, would be the consciousness of all seeds. The alternative would be unreasonable.

Therefore, the established conjoined consciousness is not mental consciousness; it is the resultant consciousness of maturation, the consciousness of all seeds.

Furthermore, after continuity has been established at rebirth, if there were no resultant consciousness of maturation, the appropriation and maintenance of the material faculties could not occur. This is because the other consciousnesses each possess distinct supports and are not stable. The material faculties cannot be separated from consciousness.

If there were no resultant consciousness of maturation, consciousness and name-and-form could not evolve while mutually supporting one another like a bundle of reeds standing by mutual support.

Apart from the resultant consciousness of maturation, sentient beings, once born, could not subsist upon consciousness as nutriment. Why? Because none of the six consciousnesses can serve as the nutriment of consciousness for sentient beings born in the three realms.

When one dies in this realm and is reborn in a higher realm, rebirth-continuity is not established by the defiled mental consciousness of that higher realm, because it is not a defiled mind belonging to the higher realm. Since it is not a defiled mind of the higher realm, apart from the resultant consciousness of maturation, no other entity possessing seeds can be found.

Furthermore, if beings born in the Formless Realm lacked a resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds, there would be no seeds for their defiled and wholesome minds, and those defiled and wholesome minds would have no support to sustain them.

Furthermore, in that Formless Realm, when a supramundane mind became manifest, all worldly minds would cease. At that time, the being would consequently have to die and depart from that Formless Realm.

If one were born in the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception or in the sphere of nothingness, when a supramundane mind became manifest, one would have to die and depart from both those realms. This supramundane consciousness does not take the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception as its supporting realm, nor does it take the sphere of nothingness as its supporting realm, nor is nirvana its supporting realm.

Furthermore, when a person is about to die, because of wholesome or unwholesome deeds, the body gradually becomes cold either from below upward or from above downward. If one did not accept the existence of the alaya-consciousness, such a phenomenon could not occur. Therefore, without the resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds, the defilement of this life could not be accomplished.

Why could worldly purification not be accomplished?

A person who has not yet abandoned the craving that binds one to the Desire Realm and has not yet attained a mind belonging to the Form Realm uses a wholesome mind belonging to the Desire Realm to aspire to the concentration associated with freedom from desire, and diligently applies effort in cultivation. Because the cultivating mind belonging to the Desire Realm and the concentrated mind belonging to the Form Realm do not arise and cease together, the latter cannot be perfumed by the former, and it is unreasonable to call the former the seed of the latter.

Furthermore, a concentrated mind belonging to the Form Realm from many past lives, having been separated by the intervention of other minds, cannot serve as the seed of the present concentrated mind, because it no longer exists. Therefore, in producing a concentrated mind belonging to the Form Realm, the resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds, transmitted continuously in succession, serves as the present causal condition, while the wholesome mind of preparatory cultivation serves as the dominant condition.

One should know that freedom from desire at every level occurs in the same way. Such is worldly purification. Apart from the resultant consciousness of maturation, the possession of all seeds could not be established.

Why could supramundane purification not be accomplished?

As the Blessed One said, relying upon words spoken by another and upon correct attention within one’s own mind, right view is produced from those causes.

Does the correct attention occasioned by another’s words perfume auditory consciousness, perfume mental consciousness, or perfume both?

When one contemplates that Dharma correctly, auditory consciousness does not arise at that time, and mental consciousness is also interrupted by the various distractions of other consciousnesses. When mental consciousness associated with correct attention subsequently arises, the mental consciousness perfumed by hearing and that perfuming have already ceased and become past, certainly no longer possessing real present entities. How, then, could they still serve as seeds producing a later mind associated with correct attention?

Furthermore, the mind associated with correct attention is worldly, whereas the mind associated with right view is supramundane. These two have never once arisen and ceased together. Therefore, this mind is not perfumed by that mind. Since it has not been perfumed, it is unreasonable to call it the seed of that mind. Thus, apart from the resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds, supramundane purification likewise could not be accomplished. For here, hearing, perfuming, and retention do not correspond with the seeds of that supramundane mind.

Furthermore, how can the resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds be the cause of defilement and yet also possess a supramundane antidote, while the seed of that purified mind is supramundane mind? Since it has never previously been perfumed, it certainly has not been perfumed by that mind. If it has not been perfumed, from what seed does it arise?

The answer is that it arises from the seed perfumed by hearing the true Dharma, which flows forth from the supremely pure dharmadhatu.

Is this perfuming by hearing the intrinsic nature of the alaya-consciousness, or is it not the intrinsic nature of the alaya-consciousness? If it were the intrinsic nature of the alaya-consciousness, how could it be a seed that counteracts the alaya? If it were not the intrinsic nature of the alaya, where could the support of the seed perfumed by hearing be found, up to the attainment of the bodhi of the Buddhas?

This perfuming by hearing evolves in dependence upon a single support, resides within the resultant consciousness of maturation, and evolves in conjunction with it like water mixed with milk. Nevertheless, it is not the alaya-consciousness, because it is a seed whose nature counteracts the alaya. Here, lower perfuming develops into middling perfuming, and middling perfuming develops into higher perfuming because, through hearing, reflection, and cultivation, it is for the most part perfected by cultivation.

Furthermore, one should know that the lower, middling, and higher seeds perfumed by hearing the true Dharma are all seeds of the Dharma body. They oppose the alaya-consciousness and are not included within the alaya-consciousness, because their nature is a supramundane outflow of the supremely pure dharmadhatu. Although they are worldly, they possess the nature of seeds of supramundane mind.

Furthermore, although this supramundane mind has not yet arisen, it already possesses the power to counteract the bonds of the afflictions, counteract dangerous lower destinies, and cause evil karma to decay. It also enables one to follow and serve all Buddhas and bodhisattvas. One should know that although it is worldly, it is also the Dharma body attained by beginning bodhisattvas, while for shravakas and pratyekabuddhas it is merely the liberation body.

Furthermore, this perfuming does not belong to the alaya-consciousness but is included within the Dharma body and liberation body. As this perfuming gradually increases from lower to middling and from middling to higher, the resultant consciousness of maturation correspondingly diminishes in stages; this is the transformation of the support. When the support of its seeds has been wholly transformed, the resultant consciousness of maturation and all its seeds are transformed until no seeds remain; thus all its seeds are forever exhausted.

Furthermore, what is meant by saying it is like milk mixed with water?

It means that although it is not the alaya-consciousness, it evolves together with the alaya-consciousness in the same location. As all the seeds of the alaya-consciousness are exhausted, all seeds that do not belong to the alaya-consciousness increase. It is like a goose drinking the milk from a mixture of milk and water. It is also like the worldly process of becoming free from desire, in which perfumings not belonging to levels of meditative equipoise gradually diminish, while perfumings belonging to levels of meditative equipoise gradually increase, thereby bringing about transformation of the support.

Furthermore, upon entering the absorption of cessation, consciousness does not leave the body, as the Buddha taught. Here it must be the resultant consciousness of maturation that does not leave the body, rather than a consciousness newly produced as an antidote in this absorption of cessation.

Nor does this consciousness arise anew upon emergence from the absorption. Since, if the resultant consciousness of maturation had been interrupted, continuity at rebirth-linking would have been severed, it could not arise again.

If someone maintains that the absorption of cessation is said to possess mind because mental consciousness remains, this mind cannot be established: because it cannot arise; because it lacks the activity and characteristics of an object; because there would be the fault of its association with wholesome roots; because for it to be unwholesome or indeterminate would be unreasonable; because there would be the fault that perception and feeling were manifest; because contact would be present; because it would exercise a function regarding samadhi; because there would be the fault that only perception was extinguished; because there would be the fault that wholesome roots such as volition and faith were manifest;

because it is unreasonable for the dependent to be expelled and separated from its support; because there is an analogy; and because, as in this case, no non-universal mental factor is present.

Furthermore, if one asserts that this absorption has mind because mental consciousness is present, it is unreasonable, since this mind cannot be established as wholesome, unwholesome, or indeterminate.

If one further maintains that material form and the immediately preceding mind serve as the seeds of dharmas, this cannot be established, as explained above.

Furthermore, death from the Formless heavens or from among the non-percipient gods, and emergence from the absorption of cessation or the absorption of non-perception, would be unreasonable. Moreover, the final mind of an arhat could not be established; it could only be accepted as an immediately antecedent condition.

Thus, apart from the resultant consciousness of maturation possessing all seeds, neither defilement nor purification could be accomplished. Therefore, in accordance with the characteristics explained above, the alaya-consciousness certainly truly exists. Here are three verses:

When bodhisattvas dwell in purified mind,

Separated from the five consciousnesses,

If there were no mind serving as the transformed support,

What could be taken as that support?

If the antidote itself were the transformed support,

Unless it were abandoned, this could not be established.

Cause and effect would be without distinction,

And permanent abandonment would entail error.

Without seeds and without an entity,

If this were called transformation of the support,

Since those two would not exist,

Transformation of the support would be unreasonable.

Furthermore, what are the distinctions of the alaya-consciousness?

Generally stated, they are of three or four kinds. The three are three distinctions of perfuming: first, the distinction of perfuming by names and expressions; second, the distinction of perfuming by the view of self; and third, the distinction of perfuming by the factors of existence. The four are: first, the distinction of projection; second, the distinction of maturation; third, the distinction of the object-characteristic; and fourth, the distinction of aspect.

Here, the distinction of projection is newly arisen perfuming. If it did not exist, formations conditioning consciousness and appropriation conditioning existence could not be established. The distinction of maturation consists of the different resultant consciousnesses of maturation within the destinies of samsara, produced because formations and existence serve as conditions.

If this did not exist, there would be no seeds and no dharmas could arise subsequently. The distinction of the object-characteristic is the characteristic grasped as self by mentation. If this did not exist, defiled mentation would have no object to grasp as self.

The distinction of aspect means that this consciousness possesses common characteristics, uncommon characteristics, the characteristics of seeds that do not undergo rebirth, and the characteristics of seeds that undergo rebirth. The common characteristic consists of the seeds of the world as a receptacle. The uncommon characteristic consists of the distinct seeds contained within individual beings.

The common characteristic is the seeds that do not undergo rebirth. The uncommon characteristic is the seeds that undergo rebirth. When an antidote arises, only the uncommon characteristics are extinguished, whereas the common characteristics are maintained by others and are therefore merely seen as purified.

Thus, different yogic practitioners see and understand the same object in many different ways. Here are two verses:

Because it is difficult to destroy and difficult to comprehend fully,

It is called the common bond.

Yogic practitioners differ

Because of the vast external characteristic.

Though not destroyed by one who is purified,

It is nevertheless seen as purified.

Likewise, a pure Buddha-field

Is pure because the Buddha sees it as pure.

There is another verse concerning the different ways of seeing and understanding mentioned above:

Yogic practitioners, regarding a single object,

Hold many different views and understandings.

Since every kind of understanding is accomplished,

One should know that what is apprehended is consciousness-only.

If this did not exist, the differentiated arising of the receptacle world and the world of sentient beings could not be established.

There are also the characteristic of heaviness and the characteristic of lightness. The characteristic of heaviness consists of the seeds of the primary and secondary afflictions. The characteristic of lightness consists of the seeds of wholesome, contaminated dharmas. If these did not exist, the distinction between the incapacity produced by maturation and the capable support could not be established.

There are also the characteristic whose experience is exhaustible and the characteristic whose experience is inexhaustible. The characteristic whose experience is exhaustible consists of wholesome and unwholesome seeds that have produced their resultant maturation. The characteristic whose experience is inexhaustible consists of seeds perfumed by names and expressions—the various seeds of conceptual proliferation that have flowed on since beginningless time. If these did not exist, the exhaustion of the results of wholesome and unwholesome karma already performed could not be established. Moreover, the arising of new perfumings by names and expressions could not be established.

There are also characteristics illustrated by analogies. The alaya-consciousness is illustrated by analogies such as an illusion, a mirage, a dream, and defective vision. If these did not exist, seeds corresponding to conditions that give rise to unreal, inverted imagination could not be established.

Furthermore, there are the complete characteristic and the incomplete characteristic. The presence of all bonds is called the complete characteristic. Worldly freedom from desire is called the diminished characteristic. Shravakas in training and bodhisattvas have permanently expelled a portion of these characteristics. Arhats and pratyekabuddhas have completely and permanently expelled the characteristics of the afflictive obstructions, while the Tathagatas have completely and permanently expelled the characteristics of both the afflictive and cognitive obstructions. This should be understood accordingly. If these distinctions did not exist, the successive stages of defilement and complete purification described above could not be established.

For what reason can wholesome and unwholesome dharmas produce maturation while the resultant maturation itself is unobscured-indeterminate?

Because the resultant maturation is unobscured-indeterminate, it does not conflict with either the wholesome or the unwholesome and therefore does not oppose either of them. If the nature of the resultant maturation were wholesome or unwholesome, the functions of defilement and complete purification could not be accomplished. Therefore, the resultant consciousness of maturation is exclusively unobscured-indeterminate.

THE MAHAYANA-SAMGRAHA SHASTRA

Upper Fascicle

(End)