攝大乘論釋

Chapter Three: Supporting Evidence

Section 1: The Impurity of the Afflictions

Explanation: This chapter has six sections: 1. the impurity of the afflictions, 2. the impurity of karma, 3. the impurity of birth, 4. mundane purity, 5. supramundane purity, and 6. conformity with correct reasoning.

Treatise: The Alaya-consciousness has been established through its various names and essential characteristics.

Explanation: Thus, regarding the fundamental consciousness, its various names have been stated and its essential characteristics established. These two principles are properly established only with respect to the fundamental consciousness, not with respect to the other consciousnesses. Now, in order to clarify these two principles, the masters debate what accords with reason and what does not.

Treatise: But how is it known that the Alaya-consciousness is designated by those names? The Tathagata likewise taught its essential characteristics, but did not speak of the arising consciousness.

Explanation: They maintain: “Such names and essential characteristics also exist within our doctrine; only the Alaya-consciousness does not exist. How can it be said that these names and essential characteristics definitely belong to the Alaya-consciousness and not to the other consciousnesses?” To answer this question, it is said:

Treatise: Because, apart from establishing this Alaya-consciousness through these names and characteristics, the categories of impurity, purity, and so forth cannot be established.

Explanation: If, apart from the fundamental consciousness, you assign these names and essential characteristics to the other consciousnesses, that establishment cannot be accomplished. Why? Because three principles would be contradicted.

These three principles are the Tathagata’s true Dharma-siddhanta: namely, the categories of purity and impurity and correct reasoning. These principles are established on the basis of the fundamental consciousness. If you deny the existence of the fundamental consciousness, these three principles will have no basis upon which to be established and therefore cannot be established.

What the Tathagata established is firm, true to reality, and fully accomplished, whereas it contradicts what you maintain. Your position is untenable. Therefore, these names and essential characteristics are inseparable from the fundamental consciousness.

Treatise: Thus, the category of the impurity of the afflictions, the category of the impurity of karma, the category of the impurity of birth, the category of mundane purity, and the category of supramundane purity likewise cannot be established.

Explanation: Because the three sections are expanded into six sections, these names are stated again.

Treatise: Why can the category of the impurity of the afflictions not be established?

The perfuming of the root afflictions and the subsidiary afflictions into seeds cannot be established within the six consciousnesses. Why? When, for example, the eye-consciousness and desire arise, the major and minor afflictions arise and cease together with it.

Explanation: Because desire arises in dependence upon the mind, it arises and ceases together with the mental continuum. This is stated to clarify the mind perfumed by desire and so forth.

Treatise: This eye-consciousness is perfumed by the afflictions and thereby forms seeds. The other consciousnesses are not so.

Explanation: This eye-consciousness arises and ceases together with desire and so forth; because it is repeatedly perfumed, seeds are formed. The ear-consciousness and so forth, however, are not perfumed, because they are interrupted by the other consciousnesses.

Treatise: Once this eye-consciousness has ceased, if other consciousnesses arise in between, neither the perfuming nor the basis upon which the perfuming depends can be found.

Explanation: If one is in a state without consciousness, as in the attainment of non-perception and so forth, the consciousness is said to have ceased. Or, if one is in a conscious state and the ear-consciousness and so forth arise in between, the eye-consciousness ceases. In both of these states called cessation, neither the perfuming that produces seeds nor the supporting basis of the eye-consciousness can be found.

Treatise: The eye-consciousness of the preceding moment has been lost and presently possesses no real existence. If it is said that other consciousnesses arise in between, it is incorrect and impossible to establish that desire arises together with what has already ceased.

Explanation: If the two things of the preceding moment—the eye-consciousness and desire—have already ceased, then neither the eye-consciousness nor the substance of desire exists in the present. Once they have ceased, there is no principle whereby a later eye-consciousness arising together with desire could use the previously ceased eye-consciousness and desire as seeds for the arising of the present eye-consciousness and desire. This principle cannot be established. Why? Because they have already ceased and disappeared.

Treatise: It is like karma from the past that has completely ceased: its resultant retribution cannot arise.

Explanation: Past karma is of two kinds: that which retains efficacy and that which does not. If its resultant retribution has already matured, it no longer retains efficacy. Such karma has two characteristics: first, it has passed away; second, it has completely ceased.

There is no principle whereby a fruit of retribution could arise from such karma. Desire and eye-consciousness are likewise so; it cannot be said that seeds arise from what has ceased. If someone maintains that a consciousness that previously ceased still exists because past dharmas exist, as the Vaibhashika masters maintain, this assertion has words alone but no meaning.

Why? If a dharma exists, how can it be called a past dharma? For this reason, it is contrary to reason to say that a fruit of retribution arises, because no perfuming exists.

Treatise: Alternatively, if it is said that the eye-consciousness and desire and so forth arise simultaneously and effect perfuming, this cannot be established.

Explanation: Before the eye-consciousness of the preceding moment entered the attainment of the cessation of mind and before it was interrupted by other consciousnesses, it arose together with desire. After it entered the attainment of the cessation of mind or was interrupted by other consciousnesses, the perfuming could not be established.

Treatise: Why? Because these seeds cannot abide within desire, since desire depends upon consciousness. Moreover, although desire forms a continuum, it does not abide firmly.

Explanation: If seeds are to abide, they must depend upon something autonomous and a continuum that abides firmly. Neither of these two characteristics is present in desire; therefore, desire is not a supporting basis for seeds.

Treatise: Nor does this desire perfume the other consciousnesses, because their supporting bases differ and because the other consciousnesses do not arise and cease together with it.

Explanation: If the seeds cannot abide within desire, they would have to abide within the other consciousnesses, but such a statement is likewise meaningless. Why? Because their supporting bases differ, and they do not arise and cease together.

That their supporting bases differ means that the eye-consciousness depends upon the eye faculty, the ear-consciousness depends upon the ear faculty, and so on, up to the mental consciousness, which depends upon the mental faculty. Thus, the supporting bases of the consciousnesses do not correspond with one another. Therefore, the perfuming of one consciousness cannot abide within another consciousness.

That they do not arise and cease together means that their faculties, objects, and acts of attention are all different; therefore, there is no principle whereby they could arise and cease together. Since their arising and cessation do not occur simultaneously, how could one consciousness perfume another? For this reason, none of the principles of perfuming can be established.

If you say that these seeds abide within a consciousness of the same kind, that statement is likewise incorrect. Why?

Treatise: Things of the same kind cannot perfume one another, because they do not arise and cease together at the same time.

Explanation: One eye-consciousness cannot perfume another eye-consciousness. Why? Two eye-consciousnesses cannot arise simultaneously. If they do not arise together, they do not cease together; therefore, the principle of perfuming cannot be established.

Treatise: Therefore, the eye-consciousness is not perfumed by desire, nor is it perfumed by the major and minor afflictions, nor by consciousnesses of the same kind.

Explanation: For the reasons given above, the eye-consciousness is neither perfumed by things of a different kind nor by things of the same kind.

Treatise: Having reasoned in this way concerning the eye-consciousness, one should reason likewise concerning the other consciousnesses.

Furthermore, when sentient beings from the Heaven of Non-Perception and above fall back and are born in a lower realm, their first consciousness is defiled by the major and minor afflictions. When this consciousness arises, it would have to be without seeds.

Explanation: When one falls from an upper realm and takes birth in a lower realm, the consciousness newly taking birth must be defiled by afflictions. From what seeds do this consciousness and these afflictions arise? If it is said that they arise from the upper realm, this is not tenable. Why? Because the two realms, upper and lower, are opposed to each other and do not arise together; therefore, they cannot mutually perfume one another. If it is said that the first mind arising in the lower realm is born from the preceding mind before attainment of concentration in the upper realm, this too is not tenable.

Treatise: Why? Because the perfuming by the afflictions, together with its supporting basis, has already ceased in the past and no longer exists.

Explanation: This initial consciousness would then have to arise without a cause. Since both the perfuming and its supporting basis ceased long ago, they cannot be taken as its cause.

Treatise: Furthermore, when the consciousness that counteracts the afflictions has arisen and all mundane consciousnesses have ceased, if there were no alaya-consciousness in which the counteractive consciousness and the seeds of both greater and lesser afflictions coexist, this would be impossible.

Explanation: If you deny that there is a fundamental consciousness, there are two faults from which you cannot escape. First, the proposition that the afflictions continue to exist in a practitioner of intermediate capacity who is proceeding toward the noble path cannot be established. If these afflictions did not exist, cultivation of the paths would be useless, and among those on the four paths there would be no person approaching the third fruit, but only those beyond training.

This contradicts the true teaching, and the fault cannot be avoided. Second, after the undefiled consciousness has ceased, when the mundane mind is about to arise again, there would be no cause capable of bringing it forth. If a defiled mind could arise causelessly and spontaneously after an undefiled mind, there would be no persons beyond training.

This fault likewise cannot be avoided. For example, precisely when a stream-enterer who is proceeding toward the fruit gives rise to the path of counteraction through seeing the truths, the six mundane consciousnesses, being opposed to that path, cannot arise together with it; therefore, all mundane consciousnesses have ceased. The remaining afflictions are established in dependence upon their supporting basis, and thus their capacities would also cease.

Consequently, the proposition that the counteractive consciousness coexists with the seeds of the greater and lesser afflictions cannot be established. If so, what purpose would cultivation of the path serve?

Treatise: Why? Because their intrinsic natures are liberated, the undefiled mind and the afflictions cannot arise and cease together.

Explanation: Being of the same kind is called intrinsic nature. For example, a consciousness may be afflicted, whereas an undefiled consciousness is unafflicted. Although they differ in being afflicted or unafflicted, both belong to the class of consciousness; therefore, this is called intrinsic nature. Liberation means separation. If an afflicted consciousness and an undefiled consciousness arose together, their intrinsic natures would not be liberated, because when an undefiled consciousness arises, the other consciousnesses necessarily cannot arise. Since they are separated from one another, this is called liberation.

Treatise: Furthermore, immediately after emerging from contemplation, the mundane mind arises.

Explanation: After trainees such as stream-enterers have attained the path and emerge from contemplation, do they give rise to a supramundane mind or to a mundane mind? If they give rise to a supramundane mind, there would be no meaning to emerging from contemplation. If they give rise to a mundane mind, from what cause could that mind arise?

Treatise: The perfuming by the afflictions ceased long ago.

Explanation: Previously, when they entered contemplation, the perfuming by the afflictions ceased. How, then, could the mundane mind arise without a cause?

Treatise: It would follow that a defiled mental consciousness arises without a seed.

Explanation: If this consciousness did not arise from a cause, the meaning of liberation could not be established. The afflicted minds of persons beyond training would likewise have to arise without a cause.

Treatise: Therefore, apart from the alaya-consciousness, the defilement of the afflictions cannot be established.

Explanation: If you deny that this consciousness exists, how could the defilement of the afflictions be established?

Chapter 2: The Defilement of Karma

Explanation: If one denies that there is a fundamental consciousness, one will have no principle whatsoever by which the meaning of defilement can be established.

Treatise: Furthermore, why can the defilement of karma not be established?

Because the meaning of consciousness arising in dependence upon formations cannot be established.

Explanation: Formations are of three classes: meritorious, non-meritorious, and imperturbable. They arise and cease from moment to moment. Apart from the fundamental consciousness, where could their capacities be established? If you say that they are established within the six consciousnesses, this is not tenable. The six consciousnesses cannot retain the capacities of the various karmas. This meaning was already explained fully above in the section on the defilement of the afflictions.

Treatise: If this meaning did not exist, then the meaning of existence arising in dependence upon clinging could likewise not be established; therefore, the defilement of karma could not be established.

Explanation: If there were no consciousness containing the capacities of karma, neither the proposition that consciousness arises in dependence upon formations nor that existence arises in dependence upon clinging could be established by any reasoning. Why? This consciousness is perfumed by the three kinds of formations and subsequently conforms to the four kinds of clinging.

Thus, when the perfuming is complete, consciousness becomes existence. If this consciousness ceases or is interrupted by other consciousnesses, its substance is lost, and its capacities are also lost with it. Where else could they be established?

These formations possess the capacities of the two kinds of karma; therefore, without this consciousness, the defilement of karma cannot be established. It is called defiled because this karma is associated with the afflictions. It is also called defiled because it arises from defilement.

Because it is capable of bringing about the defiled karmic results of birth and death within the six destinies, it is called defiled.

Chapter 3: The Defilement of Birth

Explanation: Apart from the fundamental consciousness, the defilement of birth is unreasonable and untenable. This will now be explained.

Treatise: Furthermore, why can the meaning of the defilement of birth not be established? Because the conjunction that brings about birth cannot be established.

Explanation: When this life ends through the capacity of karma, it is said that the subsequent retribution is linked to and succeeds the preceding retribution. Without the fundamental consciousness, this meaning cannot be established. Why?

Treatise: If a person falls back from a higher state of meditative stillness, while in the intermediate existence the person first gives rise to a defiled mental consciousness and only then takes birth.

Explanation: To fall from a higher state of meditative stillness, leaving the former birth and descending into a subsequent birth, is called falling back. There are two modes of taking birth: either there is an intermediate existence or there is no intermediate existence. Here, taking birth through an intermediate existence is discussed specifically. While in the intermediate existence, when one is about to take birth, one must first give rise to a defiled consciousness and only then takes birth.

Treatise: This defiled consciousness ceases within the intermediate existence.

Explanation: The defiled consciousness of the intermediate existence takes a conditioned object of birth as its object. This consciousness ceases within the intermediate existence. Why? Because the consciousness of the birth-existence is not defiled.

Treatise: This consciousness enters the kalala, transforms, unites with it, and takes birth in the mother's womb.

Explanation: “This consciousness” means the mental consciousness. At a single moment, it becomes associated with the kalala; therefore, it is said to enter the kalala. This resultant consciousness differs from the preceding defiled consciousness; therefore, it is said to transform. Stirred by the capacity of karma from the previous life as though by wind, the red and white elements unite and become conjoined with consciousness; therefore, it is said to unite. This is called taking birth.

Treatise: If mental consciousness alone transformed and became the supporting basis of the kalala and so forth, then while this mental consciousness remained in the mother's womb, another mental consciousness would have to arise.

Such a thing is impossible.

Explanation: If you maintain that this consciousness, which takes its support in the kalala, is merely the mental consciousness, then is this mental consciousness, which arises from a faculty and its object, the same as or different from the other mental consciousnesses? If it is the same, then when this consciousness ceases, the kalala should also cease with it. If you do not say that they are the same, then it should not be called mental consciousness.

Why is this? The mental consciousness takes all three classes of consciousness as its faculty, whereas this consciousness takes only the defiled consciousness as its faculty. The mental consciousness takes the three times as its objects, whereas the object-realm of this consciousness cannot be known.

The mental consciousness sometimes arises and sometimes does not, whereas this consciousness is continually present, without arising or subsiding; therefore, it is not the same as the mental consciousness. Furthermore, if they were the same, this consciousness should not be present in a state devoid of consciousness. If this consciousness were absent, it should not be said that, upon entering the concentration without mind, consciousness does not separate from the body.

Moreover, if there were no consciousness, the body would have to decay. Therefore, this cannot be said to be the mental consciousness. If you say that this mental consciousness cannot discriminate, and that the consciousness arising from a faculty and its object depends upon it, while another mental consciousness arises in the mother’s womb, that position is incorrect.

Why is this?

Treatise: It is untenable that two kinds of mental consciousness should arise simultaneously in the mother’s womb.

Explanation: This statement proves the preceding meaning that it is not the mental consciousness. Two mental consciousnesses of the same class do not arise together, because they do not share the same act of attention. This consciousness takes its support in the kalala and shares the same basis as the combined red and white elements.

If this consciousness were to produce another mental consciousness that arose simultaneously with it, then this kalala-consciousness could not be established as mental consciousness. Why is this? It continually takes the defiled consciousness as its support.

The consciousness upon which it depends is defiled by craving and so forth, and arises with conditioned existence as its object. The consciousness that depends upon it, being a karmic result, is solely of an indeterminate nature. Moreover, its object cannot be known, so it cannot be established as mental consciousness.

If this were established as mental consciousness, the two could not arise together. If they did arise together, they would have to be alike in cognition and alike in becoming entirely extinct. If they were alike in cognition, there could be no concentration of mental cessation, because one cognizing mind would cease while another cognizing mind remained.

If they were alike in becoming entirely extinct, nirvana would occur naturally and without effort, because the mind would never arise again.

Treatise: The mental consciousness has already undergone a transformation.

Explanation: The consciousness that has newly taken rebirth has transformed into the kalala.

Treatise: It cannot be established as mental consciousness.

Explanation: For three reasons in all, the consciousness that has newly taken rebirth cannot be established as mental consciousness.

Treatise: Because its support is impure.

Explanation: The mental consciousness in samsara is a mind of the three natures. The consciousness that has newly taken rebirth necessarily arises from the defiled consciousness; thus, its support is impure.

Treatise: Because over a long period of time it continually takes an object.

Explanation: From beginning to end, the consciousness that has newly taken rebirth continually takes an object. The mental consciousness easily disengages from its object and is not stable.

Treatise: Its object cannot be known.

Explanation: The object of the consciousness that has newly taken rebirth cannot be known. The objects of the mental consciousness—the three times and that which does not belong to the three times—can be known. Because they differ in these three respects, it cannot be established as mental consciousness.

Treatise: If this mental consciousness has already undergone a transformation,

Explanation: If rebirth has already been taken, the mental consciousness combines with the red and white elements, transforming the former consciousness into the subsequent consciousness; the subsequent consciousness differs from the former consciousness.

Treatise: then at that time the mental consciousness becomes the kalala.

Explanation: Because it becomes the kalala, it undergoes a transformation.

Treatise: To make this consciousness the seed of all dharmas, the support from which the other consciousnesses arise, is to make it the seed of all dharmas.

Explanation: This means taking the consciousness that has newly taken rebirth as the seed of all dharmas, making it the support upon which the consciousness that has taken rebirth produces the other consciousnesses, and making it the seed of all dharmas.

Treatise: If you maintain that the consciousness which has undergone transformation is the consciousness containing all seeds, then it is precisely the alaya-consciousness; you yourself have merely established it under another name, calling it the mental consciousness.

Explanation: If you maintain that the consciousness which has taken rebirth is the seed-consciousness, then this has the same meaning as what I have stated: the alaya-consciousness is the seed-consciousness. You simply do not use the name alaya-consciousness, but establish it under another name, calling it the mental consciousness.

Treatise: If you hold that the consciousness which depends upon it is the consciousness containing all seeds,

Explanation: The consciousness that depends upon the consciousness which has taken rebirth, and which in turn gives rise to the other consciousnesses, is the dependent consciousness and is the consciousness containing all seeds.

Treatise: then this consciousness must, through its dependence upon another, become a different cause.

Explanation: Since the other consciousness has arisen from something else, it cannot itself be the seed. Therefore, only through dependence upon the consciousness that has newly taken rebirth does this consciousness become a seed and thus become a different cause.

Treatise: If this supporting consciousness is not the consciousness containing all seeds, yet that which depends upon it can be called the consciousness containing all seeds, then this proposition cannot be established.

Explanation: The other consciousness cannot itself be the seed, but becomes a seed through dependence upon something else. If the supporting consciousness that has taken rebirth is itself not the seed, how could another consciousness, by depending upon it, be established as the seed? How could such a proposition be tenable?

Treatise: Therefore, this consciousness that takes rebirth and undergoes transformation to become the kalala is not the mental consciousness.

Explanation: This consciousness is precisely the alaya-consciousness and cannot be called the mental consciousness.

Treatise: It is solely karmic retribution and is also that which contains all seeds. This meaning has now been established.

Explanation: Because it arises from seeds, it is called the karmic-retribution consciousness. Because it is capable of gathering and preserving the seeds, it is also called the seed-consciousness. Only when stated in this way is the proposition tenable.

Treatise: Furthermore, once sentient beings have taken rebirth, if they were separated from the karmic-retribution consciousness, the other material faculties could not be preserved.

Explanation: The correct meaning of taking rebirth has already been clarified above. Now the meaning of what occurs after rebirth has been taken is further clarified. Previously, sentient beings in the womb were discussed. Now sentient beings who have emerged from the womb are discussed. To say that sentient beings have taken rebirth means that, once they have taken rebirth, three characteristics must certainly be present: first, sustaining without abandoning; second, encompassing and preserving all the faculties; and third, being in essence an indeterminate karmic result. Apart from the alaya-consciousness, these three characteristics cannot be found.

Treatise: Why is this? The other consciousnesses each have a distinct support.

Explanation: The words “Why is this?” are spoken in order to introduce reasoning as proof. Whichever one of the six consciousnesses is being discussed, the remaining ones are called the other consciousnesses. The eye-consciousness necessarily takes the eye faculty as its support, and so on through the body-consciousness, which necessarily takes the body faculty as its support. Clearly, because their supports are distinct, they cannot preserve all the faculties together.

Treatise: Moreover, they do not remain firmly for a long time.

Explanation: Among the five consciousnesses, if one were capable of preservation, it could preserve only the faculty that it takes as its support. This consciousness does not remain firmly for a long time, because it continually changes and ceases. It may cease in a state devoid of consciousness, or it may cease when interrupted by the arising of the other consciousnesses.

Treatise: If these material faculties were not preserved by consciousness, they could not continue to exist.

Explanation: As in the case of a dead person, material faculties that are not preserved by consciousness decay. If the faculties were separated from the preserving consciousness, they would likewise decay. Thus, this proposition also cannot be established.

Treatise: Furthermore, this consciousness and name-and-form depend upon each other, like a bundle of reeds that stands through mutual support. This consciousness also cannot be established.

Explanation: In the sutra, the Buddha says that consciousness arises in dependence upon name-and-form, and name-and-form arises in dependence upon consciousness. “Name” refers to the four non-material skandhas. “Form” is the kalala.

What depends upon name-and-form? Consciousness takes this name-and-form as its support and continues from moment to moment like an uninterrupted stream of water, being capable of sustaining name-and-form so that it develops and does not decay. This consciousness is called the consciousness dependent upon name-and-form.

If one rejects the existence of the fundamental consciousness and takes the six consciousnesses to be this consciousness, this position also cannot be established. If the alaya-consciousness is excluded, which of the six consciousnesses is this consciousness? What is this question intended to clarify?

It is intended to clarify that none of those consciousnesses can truly serve as this consciousness, that is, none is capable of sustaining and nourishing it.

Treatise: Furthermore, if the retributive consciousness were absent, consciousness as nutriment could not be established for any beings seeking birth or already born.

Explanation: This statement is intended to show that the fundamental consciousness has the function of serving as consciousness-nutriment for name-and-form. Why is this? The Buddha taught that there are four kinds of nutriment through which beings seeking birth or already born are continuously sustained.

The four kinds of nutriment are: edible nutriment, consumed by chewing and swallowing; contact as nutriment; volition as nutriment; and consciousness as nutriment. Edible nutriment has transformation as its characteristic. Why is this?

These morsels of food are transformed into nourishment that sustains the body. Contact as nutriment has reliance upon sense objects as its characteristic, meaning that engagement with various visible objects can nourish the body. Volition as nutriment has expectation as its characteristic.

The power of expectation can sustain life. It is like a hungry and thirsty person who reaches a place where food and drink are available and hopes to eat and drink: while expecting to eat and drink, that person’s life can be sustained. Consciousness as nutriment has appropriation and maintenance as its characteristic.

Because this consciousness appropriates and maintains the body, the body does not decay. Without a consciousness that appropriates and maintains it, the body would decay like that of a dead person. You must therefore also accept and believe in the meaning of this consciousness-nutriment, which is able to benefit the body.

Of these four kinds of nutriment, contact as nutriment belongs to the six consciousnesses; volition as nutriment belongs to the intention that desires something; and edible nutriment belongs to form and is unrelated to mind. To which of these three categories does consciousness as nutriment belong? If you do not assert the existence of the alaya-consciousness, on what basis can you speak of this consciousness as nutriment?

Furthermore, during dreamless sleep, unconsciousness, entry into the absorption of cessation of mind, and so forth, the six consciousnesses have ceased. Moreover, the other three kinds of nutriment—edible nutriment, contact as nutriment, and volition as nutriment—are absent. What dharma, then, sustains this body and prevents it from decaying?

If the alaya-consciousness did not preserve it, this body would decay. Therefore, it is known with certainty that the alaya-consciousness serves as consciousness-nutriment.

Treatise: Why is this? If the retributive consciousness were absent, none of the eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses, whichever one might be selected, could perform the function of nourishing beings who have taken birth in the three realms.

Explanation: If the fundamental consciousness were absent, none of the six consciousnesses, whichever one might be selected, would have the capacity to sustain and nourish beings who have taken birth in the three realms. Therefore, it is known that the other consciousnesses cannot be said to serve as consciousness-nutriment.

Treatise: If a person relinquishes life in this realm and is born in a higher meditative realm, that person takes birth in that realm through a distracted and defiled mental consciousness.

Explanation: In a meditative realm, apart from the fundamental consciousness, taking birth cannot be established. If a person takes birth, it must be through a defiled mind. If one takes birth in a meditative realm, it must be through a defiled and distracted mind.

“Defiled” means being tainted by an affliction belonging to that meditative realm itself. What is the characteristic of this affliction? It savors the taste of absorption and so forth; this affliction necessarily belongs to the meditative realm.

It is impossible for a person who dies in a distracted realm to take birth in a higher realm by means of a mind belonging to the lower distracted realm. Why is this? All taking of birth occurs while the mind is distracted; therefore, apart from the fundamental consciousness, there can be no distracted consciousness.

If that person is free from sensual desire, that person is born from this Desire Realm into the Form Realm or Formless Realm. As for being defiled, afflictions belonging to the higher realm arise in the intermediate-state mind. As for being distracted, this refers precisely to the consciousness at the time birth is taken.

“Takes birth in that realm” refers both to the preparation for birth and to birth itself.

Treatise: It is impossible that this distracted and defiled consciousness, in a meditative realm and apart from the retributive consciousness, could retain seeds.

Explanation: If birth itself is taken, four meanings must necessarily be present: defilement as the root, distraction as the state, retribution as the essence, and remaining seeds as the capacity. Apart from the fundamental consciousness, these four meanings cannot be present; therefore, one must believe that the alaya-consciousness exists. Why is this? Within this consciousness, the perfumings of the mind of the meditative realm, accumulated since beginningless time, remain and have not been exhausted. Through this capacity, the meditative realm contains the seeds of the distracted retributive consciousness that takes birth there.

Treatise: Furthermore, if a being is born in the Formless Realm,

Explanation: This makes clear that the being has been liberated from the Form Realm.

Treatise: apart from the retributive consciousness containing all seeds,

Explanation: If there were no fundamental consciousness—if, although it truly exists, you rejected it and said that it does not exist—it would therefore be called “apart from.”

Treatise: and if a defiled mind or a wholesome mind arises,

Explanation: This means that, while in absorption, a defiled mind that savors the taste of absorption arises, or a wholesome outflowing mind belonging to the higher realm arises.

Treatise: then there would be no seeds, nor would there be a consciousness serving as the support for either defilement or wholesomeness.

Explanation: To have no seeds means to have no cause. Because there is no cause, there is no support. Furthermore, if there are no seeds, there is no cause; and if there is no cause, from where could these minds arise? If there is no support, how could they continue to abide? Why is this? These two minds are contained within the fundamental consciousness. Therefore, they arise from their own seeds and, because they rely upon the fundamental consciousness, they are able to continue to abide.

Treatise: If, in the Formless Realm, an uncontaminated mind arises, all other mundane minds have entirely ceased; thus, this course would have to be abandoned.

Explanation: If a person who has taken birth in the Formless Realm gives rise to a supramundane mind, the mundane mind must entirely cease. If the fundamental consciousness were absent, that person would have to abandon the retribution of the Formless Realm and, without further effort, immediately enter nirvana without remainder. Since this is impossible, one cannot reject the existence of this consciousness.

Treatise: If a being born in the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception gives rise to a mind of the Sphere of Nothingness and an uncontaminated mind, that being thereby abandons both spheres.

Explanation: If a noble one is born in the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception, that noble one may at times rely upon the Sphere of Nothingness to give rise to an uncontaminated mind, because the mind of the Sphere of Nothingness is clear, whereas the mind of the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception is dim. In this state of clarity and lucidity, the person cultivates the uncontaminated mind. If that person succeeds in cultivating the uncontaminated mind, the two stages—the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception and the Sphere of Nothingness—are thereby abandoned.

Treatise: Why is this? Because the uncontaminated mind is supramundane, it does not take the path of the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception as its support, nor does it take the path of the Sphere of Nothingness as its support,

Explanation: The first and second paths are mundane dharmas and cannot serve as supports for the uncontaminated mind. This person is born in other stages and separately apprehends the minds of those other stages. Neither of these two paths is the support of this mind. Why is this? Because this mind is lucid, it does not rely upon the first path; and because the second path has already been abandoned, the second path also cannot serve as the support of this mind.

Treatise: nor does it take proceeding directly to nirvana as its support.

Explanation: Because an uncontaminated mind is present and afflictions still remain, it is clear that these three meanings cannot constitute its support. If the fundamental consciousness were absent, upon what would this uncontaminated mind rely?

Treatise: Furthermore, if a person has created wholesome karma or unwholesome karma,

Explanation: If people in the world perform the ten wholesome karmas, such as refraining from killing, they will certainly receive the retribution of birth among humans or devas. If they perform the ten unwholesome karmas, such as killing, they will certainly receive the retribution of birth in the four evil destinies.

Treatise: Precisely when one relinquishes the life faculty and the alaya-consciousness departs, the body upon which it depends gradually becomes cold, either from above downward or from below upward. If there were no alaya-consciousness, this phenomenon would not occur.

Explanation: When this person is dying, if wholesome karma is present, the coldness will certainly proceed from below upward; if unwholesome karma is present, the coldness will certainly proceed from above downward. If you do not believe that there is a fundamental consciousness, how could there be this process of coldness descending or ascending through the body upon which it depends? If there were no fundamental consciousness, how could the five faculties be sustained by it? When the fundamental consciousness departs, coldness gradually occurs in accordance with the parts of the body it leaves, and thus the body becomes a corpse.

Treatise: Therefore, defiled birth apart from the retributive consciousness containing all seeds cannot be established.

Explanation: Defiled birth means taking birth and coming into existence. Dependence, sustaining, and so forth are defiled causes and effects, and are therefore collectively called defiled. Moreover, samsara is called defiled in relation to nirvana. The fundamental consciousness is called the seeds because it belongs to the truth of origination; it is called retribution because it belongs to the truth of suffering. As one kind of cause, it is called the seeds; as another kind of effect, it is called retribution. Defiled birth apart from this consciousness is impossible.

Chapter 4: Mundane Purity

Explanation: According to this principle, the category of mundane purity cannot be established. This will now be explained.

Treatise: Why can the category of mundane purity not be established?

For if a sentient being has not yet abandoned desire in the Desire Realm and has not yet attained a mind of the Form Realm,

Explanation: If a person wishes to attain a mind of the Form Realm by becoming free from desire in the Desire Realm, that person cultivates preparatory practices. There are two kinds of practitioners of this sort. The first is one who is already practicing contemplation; the second is one who has only just aroused the resolve to practice.

One already practicing contemplation is at the stage of wisdom derived from hearing and reflection. The wisdom of hearing and the wisdom of reflection each have three grades. Cultivation that causes them to increase is called preparatory practice.

One who has only just aroused the resolve to practice has only just begun cultivating the wisdom of hearing. Neither of these two persons has yet become free from desire in the Desire Realm, and therefore neither has yet attained the preliminary concentration. The preliminary concentration is a mind of the Form Realm.

Treatise: One first gives rise to a wholesome mind of the Desire Realm, seeks to become free from desire in the Desire Realm, and cultivates contemplative mental practice.

Explanation: If a person has not yet attained a mind of the Form Realm and remains within the wisdom of hearing, this is called first giving rise to a wholesome mind of the Desire Realm. The contemplative mind within the wisdom of hearing that seeks freedom from desire in the Desire Realm is the wisdom cultivated through reflection. To become free from desire in the Desire Realm, one therefore cultivates the wisdom of reflection.

Treatise: This preparatory mind of the Desire Realm neither arises nor ceases together with the mind of the Form Realm, and therefore cannot perfume it.

Explanation: The wisdom of hearing and the wisdom of reflection each have three grades, which constitute the preparatory practices. Why does this mind neither arise nor cease together with the mind of the Form Realm? First, they differ in coarseness and subtlety; second, they differ in activity and stillness; third, they differ in the cultivation of their intrinsic natures; and fourth, they differ in bondage and liberation. Therefore, they cannot arise and cease together. Since they do not coexist, the mind of the Form Realm cannot perfume the mind of the Desire Realm.

Treatise: Therefore, the wholesome mind of the Desire Realm is not the seed of the wholesome mind of the Form Realm.

Explanation: Since the mind of the Desire Realm has not been perfumed by the mind of the Form Realm, it is not the seed of the mind of the Form Realm. Consequently, the arising of a mind of the Form Realm would have no cause and condition. If there were no cause and condition, how could it arise? Suppose you say that, in beginningless samsara, a mind of the Form Realm arose in the past, that its retribution has not yet matured, and that its seed has not yet perished, so it can serve as the cause of the present mind of the Form Realm. This reasoning is incorrect. Why is this so?

Treatise: The past mind of the Form Realm has, over many lifetimes, been separated by other minds; afterward, it cannot be established as the seed of tranquil consciousness, because it no longer exists.

Explanation: You take a mind of the Form Realm that previously arose in beginningless samsara as the seed. Since this seed was not preserved, it has disappeared. Throughout the six destinies, there have already been immeasurably many births, and within every lifetime, immeasurably many minds have arisen in between, separating one from the previously arisen minds. This seed perished long ago; how could it be established as the cause of the mind of the Form Realm?

Treatise: Therefore, this meaning is established.

Explanation: Because the principle you assert cannot be established, the meaning I assert is established. How is it established?

Treatise: Namely, the retributive consciousness containing all the seeds of the tranquil mind of the Form Realm has been continuously transmitted in succession and is established as its cause and condition.

Explanation: Since beginningless samsara, the preliminary concentration and the four dhyanas have been attained and have perfumed the fundamental consciousness, becoming seeds. Preserved by the fundamental consciousness, they have been continuously transmitted in succession until the present without perishing. Therefore, they are established as the cause and condition of the tranquil mind of the Form Realm. When a tranquil mind of the Form Realm arises, it arises from its own seed. Thus, unlike what you maintain, it is not without a cause and condition. If a seed from a previous life is taken as the cause and condition, then what purpose does the present cultivation of the wisdom of hearing and reflection serve?

Treatise: This wholesome preparatory mind is established as the dominant condition.

Explanation: This preparatory mind is not without function. Through its dominant power, a mind of the Form Realm arises. Without this preparatory mind, desire in the Desire Realm could not be overcome. If desire in the Desire Realm were not extinguished, the previous seed of the Form Realm could not produce the present mind of the Form Realm. Therefore, preparatory practice can serve only as the dominant condition for the mind of the Form Realm; it cannot serve as its cause and condition.

Treatise: It should be understood that the same principle applies to all stages of freedom from desire. This is what is meant by the category of mundane purity. If one dispenses with the retributive consciousness containing all seeds, it cannot be established.

Explanation: Whether one uses the four dhyanas to become free from desire in the Desire Realm, or the four formless attainments to become free from desire in the Form Realm, the causes and conditions and the dominant conditions of the mind of the Form Realm, as well as the causes and conditions and the dominant conditions of the mind of the Formless Realm, must be understood in this way.

Chapter 5: Supramundane Purity

Treatise: Why can the category of supramundane purity not be established apart from the alaya-consciousness?

Explanation: This meaning will now be explained.

Treatise: The Buddha, the Blessed One, said: Through hearing the words of others and properly reflecting for oneself, right view arises from these two causes.

Explanation: Within the category of purity, right view is foremost. What dharmas does this right view take as its dominant conditions? Hearing the words of others and proper reflection—these two causes are the dominant conditions of right view.

Each of these two causes has four meanings. First, the right view included in the wisdom of hearing takes hearing the words of others as its cause, while the right view included in the wisdom of reflection takes proper reflection as its cause. Second, the right view of a shravaka takes hearing the words of others as its cause, while the right view of a pratyekabuddha or bodhisattva takes proper reflection as its cause.

Third, the first statement refers to those of dull faculties, while the second refers to those of sharp faculties. Fourth, the first statement refers to the wisdom of reflection, while the second refers to the wisdom of cultivation. Through these two causes, right view arises.

These two causes are the dominant conditions of right view. Here, the word “cause” is used in a general sense, encompassing both conditions and causes.

Treatise: Hearing the words of others and proper reflection cannot perfume the ear-consciousness and the mental consciousness, whether separately or together.

Explanation: “The sounds of others” means the Dharma teachings established by Buddhas and bodhisattvas. To hear the sounds of others means to understand correctly in accordance with what is heard; this is the wisdom of hearing. Correct reflection means correctly discerning what is right and wrong in what has been heard; this is the wisdom of reflection. These two kinds of wisdom are not individually perfumed into the ear-consciousness and the mental consciousness, nor are they perfumed into them simultaneously.

Treatise: Why is this so?

Explanation: Why can these two kinds of wisdom not perfume the ear-consciousness and so forth?

Treatise: When a person has heard, understood, and correctly reflected, at that time the ear-consciousness cannot arise.

Explanation: After a person has heard the sounds of others, when the wisdom of hearing and reflection subsequently arises, that wisdom of hearing and reflection is mental consciousness. At that time the ear-consciousness does not arise; therefore, the wisdom of hearing and reflection cannot perfume the ear-consciousness.

Treatise: The mental consciousness also cannot arise.

Explanation: When correct view is about to arise, the mental consciousness associated with the wisdom of reflection also cannot arise.

Treatise: Because it is interrupted by various distracted, discriminating consciousnesses.

Explanation: Why can it not arise? Because various distracted, discriminating consciousnesses arise in the interval and interrupt it, this wisdom of reflection cannot arise.

Treatise: Because it is interrupted by those various distracted, discriminating consciousnesses.

Explanation: Why can it not arise? Because various distracted, discriminating consciousnesses arise in the interval and interrupt it, the wisdom of reflection cannot arise.

Treatise: If it arises in association with correct reflection,

Explanation: This refers to the wisdom of reflection at the time when the faculty of coming to know what is not yet known is about to arise.

Treatise: then this mental consciousness has already ceased long before.

Explanation: The wisdom of reflection that arose initially has long since ceased.

Treatise: Both that which was perfumed—the hearing—and the perfuming itself no longer exist.

Explanation: The wisdom of reflection that had previously been perfumed by extensive hearing, together with the perfuming itself, has already passed into the past.

Treatise: How, then, can the former consciousness subsequently serve as the seed that gives rise to the later consciousness?

Explanation: The wisdom of reflection that was first attained cannot give rise to the later wisdom of reflection, because the former wisdom of reflection ceased long ago and was interrupted in the interval by other states of mind. The efficacy of the former wisdom of reflection cannot be transmitted into the later wisdom of reflection. The later wisdom of reflection is weak and cannot induce correct view; nor can it be said to be the seed that produces the consciousness of correct view. Here it is explained that earlier and later moments cannot perfume one another; the impossibility of simultaneous mutual perfuming has not yet been discussed.

Treatise: Furthermore, the mundane mind associated with correct reflection and the supramundane purified mind associated with correct view never arise and cease together.

Explanation: This refers to the stage of the wisdom of correct reflection and correct cultivation, extending from the Four Foundations of Mindfulness to the Highest Mundane Dharma. Because this mind has not yet realized the Four Noble Truths, it is called a mundane mind. Once the Four Noble Truths have been realized, it is called supramundane.

Being free from the intrinsic nature of dharmas and being attained through cultivation, it is called the purified mind. Correct view is the first factor among the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. This correct view is inseparable from the thirty-seven factors of awakening.

Through attaining the purified mind by cultivation, the thirty-seven factors arise. Through the arising of the thirty-seven factors, one attains the supramundane. Since beginningless time, the mundane mind and the supramundane mind have never arisen and ceased together, because their natures are opposed.

Treatise: Therefore, this mundane mind has no connection with the perfuming of the purified mind.

Explanation: Since they do not arise and cease together, they cannot perfume one another.

Treatise: Since it is not perfumed, it cannot become a supramundane seed.

Explanation: If the wisdom of reflection were perfumed by the supramundane mind, it could become a supramundane seed. Since it is not perfumed, it does not become a supramundane seed.

Treatise: Therefore, apart from the retributive consciousness containing all seeds, the supramundane purified mind likewise cannot be established.

Explanation: If separated from the fundamental consciousness, the supramundane mind has no causes and conditions and therefore cannot be established.

Treatise: Why is this so? Here, the perfuming of hearing and reflection cannot possibly contain the seeds of supramundane perfuming.

Explanation: “Here” means within the wisdom of reflection. Within the wisdom of reflection there is the perfuming of extensive hearing. If, in the past, the supramundane mind had already arisen and perfumed it, then this wisdom of reflection could contain supramundane perfuming as its seed. Since the supramundane mind has never previously arisen to perfume the wisdom of reflection, there is no reason to say that the wisdom of reflection contains supramundane perfuming as its seed.

Treatise: How can the retributive consciousness containing all seeds be the cause of the impure class?

If it can serve as the antidote to defilement, it is instead the cause of the supramundane purified mind.

Explanation: The fundamental consciousness should not be regarded as the cause of the impure class. If the fundamental consciousness is established as the antidote to defilement and as the cause of the supramundane, it cannot also be regarded as the cause of the impure class. The impure class consists of the truth of origin and the truth of suffering.

It consists of the seeds of karma and afflictions; therefore, this truth of origin can produce birth and death, namely the suffering whose defilement is eliminated by its antidote. Alternatively, if it serves as the cause of the supramundane mind, it produces the path that extinguishes delusion. The arising of the path is opposed to the impure class.

Since it has already been established as the antidote to defilement and as the cause of the supramundane mind, it should not again be said to be the cause of the impure class.

Treatise: Yet this supramundane mind has never previously arisen or been cultivated; therefore, it certainly has no perfuming.

Explanation: Since beginningless time, the supramundane mind has never arisen. Since it has not even arisen, how could it have been cultivated? Therefore, it is certain beyond doubt that the supramundane mind has not been perfumed into the fundamental consciousness.

Treatise: If there is no perfuming, from what cause does this supramundane mind arise?

Explanation: If there were perfuming serving as its seed, the supramundane mind would have a cause. Since there is no perfuming, the supramundane mind would arise without a cause.

Treatise: You should now answer:

Explanation: Since no principle establishing a cause has yet been shown, one is challenged and required to answer.

Treatise: Because correct hearing, flowing from the utterly purified dharmadhatu, perfumes as a seed, the supramundane mind is able to arise.

Explanation: To distinguish it from the dharmadhatu attained by the practitioners of the Two Vehicles, it is called the utterly purified dharmadhatu. How does its attainment differ from that of the Two Vehicles? Because both the afflictive obstructions and the cognitive obstructions pertaining to this dharmadhatu have been completely extinguished without remainder, it is called utterly purified.

The dharmadhatu has as its essence knowledge in accordance with principle and knowledge in accordance with extent, encompassing the three absences of intrinsic nature. “Flowing from it” means the correct exposition of the true Dharma, namely the twelve divisions of scripture. “Correct hearing” means listening single-mindedly and reverently to the true Dharma with an undeluded mind.

From this correct hearing, six kinds of perfuming arise within the fundamental consciousness. Whenever the supramundane mind arises, it necessarily arises through this cause.

Treatise: Is this perfuming by the wisdom of hearing of the same nature as the alaya-consciousness, or is it of a different nature?

Explanation: If so, what fault would follow?

Treatise: If it is of the nature of the alaya-consciousness, how can it become a seed that counteracts this consciousness? If it is not of the same nature, upon what dharma does this seed of the wisdom of hearing depend?

Explanation: If it is of the nature of the fundamental consciousness, how can an intrinsic nature serve as the antidote that extinguishes that very intrinsic nature? If it is of a different nature, then this perfuming by the wisdom of hearing must have some other support.

Treatise: Until the unsurpassed bodhi of the Buddhas is attained, this perfuming by the wisdom of hearing arises and depends upon a certain support. Within that support, it arises together with the retributive consciousness.

Explanation: From where does the efficacy of this hearing arise, and up to what stage does it continue? From the bodhisattvas at the stage of the ten faiths onward until the attainment of unsurpassed bodhi, the efficacy of this hearing abides continuously without being lost. That which did not previously exist but now exists is called arising. That which has arisen and has not yet ceased is called abiding. This arising and abiding, within the six realms, depend upon the body of the five skandhas in whichever realm one inhabits. Within bodies throughout the six realms, it arises together with the fundamental consciousness and continues without interruption. Although it is not of the same nature as the fundamental consciousness, it arises together with the fundamental consciousness.

The Treatise says: It is like water and milk.

Explanation: Although water and milk are not of the same nature, they blend together and can arise together.

The Treatise says: This perfuming by hearing is not the fundamental consciousness, because it has become a seed that counteracts this consciousness.

Explanation: Because the efficacy of this hearing counteracts the fundamental consciousness, it is not of the same nature as the fundamental consciousness. Although they are not of the same nature, because they are not separate from one another, they always arise together. How does it counteract the fundamental consciousness?

The Treatise says: Here, depending upon the lower perfuming, the middling perfuming arises; depending upon the middling perfuming, the higher perfuming arises.

Explanation: “Here” means within the basis of dependence and within the fundamental consciousness. The efficacy of perfuming by hearing has three grades—lower, middling, and higher. The lower grade is wisdom derived from hearing; the middling is wisdom derived from reflection; and the higher is wisdom derived from cultivation.

There is also another division into three grades, whereby each of these three kinds of wisdom is itself divided into three grades. There is yet another division into three grades: the grade pertaining to the aids to liberation, the grade pertaining to penetration, and the grade pertaining to decisive discernment. Hearing has three meanings: 1. the provisions for hearing, namely the sounds that express names, sentences, and meanings; 2. the essence of hearing, namely ear-consciousness; and 3. the fruit of hearing, namely wisdom derived from hearing and the Dharma gateways clearly understood through that wisdom.

Whenever any one of these three grades of perfuming by hearing arises, it is capable of counteracting one grade of the fundamental consciousness. If the lower grade arises, it can counteract the higher grade of the fundamental consciousness. Thus, up to the arising of the higher grade, which can counteract the lower grade of the fundamental consciousness.

The Treatise says: Why is this so?

Explanation: This question has three meanings: 1. Why are there three grades? 2. Why do they give rise to one another? 3. Why are they capable of counteraction?

The Treatise says: Because hearing, reflection, and cultivation are constantly and diligently practiced.

Explanation: “Constantly” means applying oneself continually and without interruption; it means exerting effort rather than cultivating and studying in a desultory manner. Because of constant diligent practice, there are three grades. They can give rise to one another and can therefore effect counteraction. That constant diligent practice produces the three grades and enables them to give rise to one another is not in doubt. Why does constant diligent practice result in the counteraction of the fundamental consciousness?

The Treatise says: One should know that these lower, middling, and higher grades of perfuming by hearing are the seeds of the Dharma body.

Explanation: What Dharma is the Dharma body? Transformation of the basis is the Dharma body. What is the characteristic of transformation of the basis?

Its characteristic is the meritorious quality of liberation attained through the mature cultivation of the ten bhumis and the paramitas. It is accomplished through the perfuming by hearing of four dharmas. First, joyful faith in the Mahayana is the seed of great purity.

Second, prajnaparamita is the seed of the great self. Third, the Space-Vessel Samadhi is the seed of great bliss. Fourth, great compassion is the seed of great permanence.

Permanence, bliss, self, and purity are the four virtues of the Dharma body. Perfuming by hearing and these four dharmas are the seeds of the four virtues. When the four virtues are perfected, the fundamental consciousness no longer remains.

Because perfuming by hearing and these four dharmas are the seeds of the four virtues, they can counteract the fundamental consciousness. Perfuming by hearing is precisely the seed of the fivefold Dharma body. Perfuming by hearing is a conditioned dharma that did not previously exist but comes into existence; the fivefold Dharma body likewise did not previously exist but comes into existence.

Therefore, it is precisely the seed of the fivefold Dharma body. Perfuming by hearing is only the seed of the path leading to the four virtues. The path leading to the four virtues can reveal the four virtues.

The four virtues have existed intrinsically from the beginning and are not produced by seeds; they are called “seeds” because they receive this designation from their causes.

The Treatise says: Because it arises in counteraction to the alaya-consciousness, it is not included within the nature of the alaya-consciousness.

Explanation: This perfuming by hearing does not arise to increase the fundamental consciousness. It arises through the power that diminishes the fundamental consciousness and can therefore counteract it. Because it is contrary to the nature of the fundamental consciousness, it is not included within the nature of the fundamental consciousness. This makes clear that the Dharma body is the fruit of perfuming by hearing.

The Treatise says: Because it flows forth from the utterly pure supramundane dharmadhatu.

Explanation: It is called supramundane because it transcends the seven kinds of the truth of suffering and extinguishes the three kinds of the truth of origination. That is to say, the three non-natures of true suchness are originally undefiled. Because it subsequently becomes free from the impurities of the three hindrances, it is called utterly pure.

Because the paths of the Three Vehicles arise from this Dharma, it is called the dhatu. Since this perfuming by hearing flows forth from the utterly pure dharmadhatu, it is not included within the nature of the fundamental consciousness. This makes clear that the Dharma body is the cause of perfuming by hearing.

The cause of perfuming by hearing is different from the fundamental consciousness, and the fruit of perfuming by hearing is also different from the fundamental consciousness. Is the essence of perfuming by hearing the same as or different from the fundamental consciousness?

The Treatise says: Although it is also a mundane dharma, it has become a supramundane mind.

Explanation: Although mind-consciousness is a mundane dharma, it can penetrate the Four Truths and true suchness and counteract the hindrances associated with the Four Truths; therefore, it becomes a supramundane mind. Perfuming by hearing is likewise so. Although it is a mundane dharma, because both its cause and its fruit are supramundane dharmas, it too becomes a supramundane mind.

The Treatise says: Why is this so?

Explanation: Why is this so? Because this Dharma is solely supramundane and is not mundane, since it has four kinds of counteraction.

The Treatise says: Before the seed of this pure supramundane mind has arisen, it is already capable of counteracting all manifest delusions,

Explanation: This is the first, the counteraction of revulsion. Through this perfuming by hearing, one clearly understands right principle and recognizes the faults of sensory objects; one therefore develops revulsion toward what is contrary to reason and toward sensory objects. The seed of this counteraction of revulsion is perfuming by hearing.

The bodhisattva’s faculty of one who does not yet know but wishes to know is called the pure supramundane mind. Before this mind arises, it is perfuming by hearing and belongs to the stages of wisdom derived from hearing and reflection. At the stages of hearing and reflection, before wisdom derived from hearing and reflection had been attained, views were inverted and perceptions were inverted; both the afflictions abandoned through seeing and those abandoned through cultivation constantly arose.

These manifest afflictions produced the four kinds of evil karma, bringing about retribution in the four evil realms. Through attaining this Dharma, unarisen afflictions, karmic retribution, and its fruits are all prevented from arising.

The Treatise says: counteracting birth in all evil realms,

Explanation: This is the second, which clarifies the counteraction of eradication. Because perfuming by hearing arises in uninterrupted succession and enables entry into the group established in certainty, as perfuming by hearing arises, it successively extinguishes evil dharmas. It can cut off the four evil realms and lead to birth in the wholesome realms. Evil karma produced in the past would have led to birth in the four evil realms; through this Dharma, however, it is extinguished, and its retribution will not be experienced again.

The Treatise says: counteracting the corruption of all evil conduct,

Explanation: This is the third, which explains the counteraction of removal. Throughout beginningless samsara, evil karma producing later retribution has been created, causing one, when undergoing that later retribution, to fall into the four evil destinies. This Dharma can transform it so that the later retribution does not ripen. This is the meaning of “corruption.”

The Treatise says: and capable of continuing without interruption, causing birth in favorable circumstances, where one encounters and serves the Buddhas and bodhisattvas.

Explanation: This fourth section clarifies the support subsumed under the antidotes. It can cause the continuity of the five skandhas to be reborn in a place where there are Buddhas and bodhisattvas, enabling one to encounter and serve them accordingly. An encounter that is not brought about by intention is called “meeting.” Serving from beginning to end is called “service.” This person relies upon a spiritual friend, for the spiritual friend causes wholesome roots to arise.

The spiritual friend cultivates the means of embracing through giving and affectionate speech in order to mature those wholesome roots; cultivates the means of embracing through beneficial conduct to enable the wholesome roots of liberation to be attained; and cultivates the means of embracing through cooperation. The support subsumed herein clarifies four meanings of great learning: 1. the support of great learning, namely, a spiritual friend; 2. the cause of great learning, namely, the mind of bodhi; 3. the purification of great learning, namely, practicing correctly in accordance with the teachings; and 4. the fruit of great learning, namely, benefiting oneself and others.

The first is the meaning of meeting, while the latter three are the meaning of service. Furthermore, the first three are the supports of the antidotes, while the fourth is the antidote. The fourth antidote subsumes the first three antidotes.

Why is this? Because without a spiritual friend, the first three cannot be accomplished. The first three depend upon the fourth.

Since the first three are precisely the functions of a spiritual friend, they are included in the fourth.

Treatise: Although this perfuming by hearing is a mundane dharma, it is attained by bodhisattvas who have newly begun the cultivation of contemplation. One should know that this dharma is subsumed under the Dharma-body.

Explanation: The ear-consciousness hears sounds and gives rise to the mental consciousness, which relies upon words and phrases to comprehend their meaning. Through continual cultivation and accumulation, a capacity is produced that retains them without loss; this is called perfuming by hearing. For this reason, it is called a mundane dharma.

There are two classes of bodhisattvas: those at the stage of ordinary beings and those at the stage of noble beings. From the initial generation of the mind of bodhi through the Ten Faiths, all are at the stage of ordinary beings. From the Ten Understandings onward, all belong to the stage of noble beings.

Those who have newly begun the cultivation of contemplation are ordinary bodhisattvas. For bodhisattvas who have newly begun the cultivation of contemplation, what is attained through perfuming by hearing is a mundane dharma. Although it is a mundane dharma, because it is a cause leading to the realization of the Dharma-body, it is subsumed under the Dharma-body.

Treatise: If it is attained by shravakas and pratyekabuddhas, it is subsumed under the liberation-body.

Explanation: Even what is attained by those who have reached the ultimate fruit of the Two Vehicles is subsumed under the liberation-body; how much more so that of shravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and bodhisattvas. Why is this? These three classes of persons attain only the liberation-body and do not attain the Tathagata’s Dharma-body.

Through the liberation-body, these three classes of persons are equal to the Tathagata, but not through the Dharma-body. Because the Tathagata has attained the Dharma-body, among all sentient beings there is none who can equal him. Although the fundamental consciousness and perfuming by hearing are associated with suffering and perish together with it, the fundamental consciousness gradually diminishes; it does not continuously increase.

I shall explain this meaning.

Treatise: This perfuming by hearing is not the alaya-consciousness; it is subsumed under the Dharma-body and the liberation-body. In this manner, it gradually increases in sequence from the lower grade to the middle grade and then to the higher grade. Likewise, the resultant consciousness gradually diminishes in sequence.

Explanation: The essence of perfuming by hearing is a supramundane dharma. The cause and fruit of perfuming by hearing are subsumed under the Dharma-body and the liberation-body. The essence of the fundamental consciousness is a mundane dharma.

Its cause is the truth of accumulation, and its fruit is the truth of suffering. These two dharmas are contrary in nature. In this respect, as perfuming by hearing gradually increases, the fundamental consciousness gradually diminishes.

When perfuming by hearing arises at the lower grade, the higher grade of the fundamental consciousness diminishes. When perfuming by hearing increases to the middle grade, the middle grade of the fundamental consciousness diminishes. When perfuming by hearing increases to the higher grade, the lower grade of the fundamental consciousness diminishes.

Treatise: The support is thereby transformed.

Explanation: Because the truth of the path increases, the truth of accumulation diminishes. The truth of the path is merit and wisdom. The truth of accumulation consists of the seeds within the fundamental consciousness. As merit gradually increases, the seeds gradually diminish; therefore, transformation is attained.

Treatise: If the support continues to be transformed, then the resultant consciousness, which contains seeds, becomes devoid of seeds, and all of it is completely exhausted.

Explanation: The support is the Tathagata’s Dharma-body. Its successive, gradual increase produces the path, while the successive, gradual decrease of the truth of accumulation is called relinquishing it in a single, continuous direction. From the first bhumi to the second bhumi, and so forth until the attainment of Buddhahood, this is called transformation. Because karma and afflictions are extinguished, it is said that it “becomes devoid of seeds.” This refers to nirvana with remainder. Because the resultant consciousness is completely extinguished, it is said that all of it is utterly exhausted. This refers to nirvana without remainder. For this reason, although the fundamental consciousness and the path arise together, they differ in that one increases while the other diminishes.

Treatise: If the fundamental consciousness and the other consciousnesses that are not the fundamental consciousness arise and cease together, blending like water and milk, then why, when the fundamental consciousness ceases, do the other consciousnesses that are not the fundamental consciousness not also cease?

Explanation: Earlier, the blending of water and milk was used as an analogy for the blending of the fundamental consciousness with the consciousnesses that are not the fundamental consciousness. Why, then, is this objection raised? Since water and milk, once blended, arise and cease together, it would be impossible for only one of them to be completely extinguished. The blending of the fundamental consciousness with the consciousnesses that are not the fundamental consciousness is likewise; how could one cease while the other remains?

Treatise: It is like a goose drinking the milk from water.

Explanation: An analogy is used to answer the question. Although water and milk are blended together, when the goose drinks, it drinks only the milk and not the water. Therefore, although the milk is exhausted, the water is not. The fundamental consciousness and the consciousnesses that are not the fundamental consciousness are likewise: although they are blended together, one ceases while the other remains.

Treatise: Likewise, in the world, when one becomes free from desire, the perfumings belonging to the unconcentrated planes cease, while the perfumings belonging to the concentrated planes increase. Thus is established the worldly meaning of transformation of the support, and the supramundane meaning of transformation of the support is also like this.

Explanation: The former illustration is an analogy understandable to the world. The latter illustration is an analogy understandable to one possessing worldly wisdom. When a person becomes free from worldly desire, the afflictions of the unconcentrated planes and the seeds of karma within the fundamental consciousness cease, while the perfuming by the wholesome roots and merits of the concentrated planes is perfected.

The support of the lower realm is transformed into the support of the higher realm. The supramundane transformation of the support is likewise. As the capacity of the fundamental consciousness gradually diminishes, perfuming by hearing and so forth progressively increase.

One relinquishes the support of an ordinary being and establishes the support of a noble being. The support that serves as the cause of becoming a noble being consists in taking perfuming by hearing, united with the nature of liberation, as one’s support. All noble beings arise in reliance upon this.