攝大乘論釋論

One Should Know the Distinguishing Characteristics and the Supreme Teaching, Part 2–1

Chapter 1: Characteristics

The Treatise says: The basis has already been explained. What, then, are the characteristics? Briefly, there are three: the dependent characteristic, the imagined characteristic, and the perfected characteristic. What is the dependent characteristic? The Alaya-consciousness is the seed of false discrimination and encompasses all consciousnesses.

What are these consciousnesses? They are the body-consciousness, the consciousness of the embodied subject, the consciousness of the experiencing subject, the consciousness of what is to be experienced, the consciousness that experiences, the temporal consciousness, the numerical consciousness, the spatial consciousness, the verbal consciousness, the consciousness of distinctions between self and others, and the consciousness of birth and death in the two destinies of good and evil.

Among these, the body-consciousness, the consciousness of the embodied subject, the consciousness of the experiencing subject, the consciousness of what is to be experienced, the consciousness that experiences, the temporal consciousness, the numerical consciousness, the spatial consciousness, and the verbal consciousness arise from seeds perfumed by verbal expressions. The consciousness of distinctions between self and others arises from seeds perfumed by the view of self.

The consciousness of birth and death in the two destinies of good and evil arises from seeds perfumed by the factors of existence. These consciousnesses encompass all realms of existence, destinies, afflictions, and so forth, and appear on the basis of the dependent characteristic of false discrimination. These consciousnesses encompass every false discrimination.

They are nothing but consciousness-only; their objects are nonexistent and unreal, yet they appear through dependence. This is the dependent characteristic.

Explanation: The dependent characteristic will now be explained. “Briefly” means in summary. It is said to “encompass all false discrimination” because false discrimination is its essential nature.

Here, the body-consciousness consists of the five dhatus beginning with the eye. The consciousness of the embodied subject is the defiled mind. The consciousness of the experiencing subject is the mind-dhatu.

The consciousness of what is to be experienced consists of the six external dhatus beginning with form. The consciousness that experiences consists of the six consciousness-dhatus. Temporal consciousness is the uninterrupted continuity of birth and death.

Numerical consciousness is calculation. Spatial consciousness is the receptacle-world. “Verbal consciousness” means the four kinds of verbal expression: what is seen, heard, cognized, and known.

These nine consciousnesses all have as their cause the distinct perfume-seeds of names and words concerning their bases, seeing, hearing, and so forth. The consciousness of distinctions between self and others depends upon distinctions among bodies and takes perfume-seeds of the view of self as its cause. The consciousness of birth and death in the two destinies of good and evil refers to the innumerable courses of birth and death and arises from seeds perfumed by the factors of existence.

“These consciousnesses” continues the discussion of the consciousnesses previously mentioned. “Encompassing the afflictions of all realms and destinies” means the afflictions within the three realms and five destinies. “Encompassing” means that these are the essential nature of those consciousnesses.

“The dependent characteristic” means that its essence depends upon something else. Here, being encompassed by false discrimination is its essential nature. “The nonexistent and unreal appear through dependence” means that dependence is the cause for the appearance of what is nonexistent and unreal.

Here, “nonexistent” means lacking a real essence. The self and objects, for example, are unreal. One grasps what does not exist; for example, although a self does not exist, the characteristic of a self appears.

The dependence here is called the dependence of appearance. “Dependence” means causality; therefore, this is the dependent characteristic.

The Treatise says: What, here, is the imagined characteristic? It is the object that appears within mere consciousness, although no such object exists.

Explanation: In the imagined characteristic, “no object exists” means, for example, that no real self exists. “Mere consciousness” means that an appearance manifests where no object exists. For example, a self is only the appearance of something resembling a self. “The object that appears” is the appearance of the characteristic of the apprehended object. For example, although there is no self, the characteristic of a self appears.

The Treatise says: What, here, is the perfected characteristic? It is the ultimate nonexistence, within the dependent characteristic, of the object-characteristic attributed to it.

Explanation: The perfected characteristic is this nonexistence—the absence of a real object. Within the cause of appearance, no real object appears, because it does not exist. The characteristic of a self, for example, appears as though real but does not exist, whereas selflessness does exist.

The Treatise says: Here, the body-consciousness, the consciousness of the embodied subject, and the consciousness of the experiencing subject should be understood as the six internal dhatus beginning with the eye. The consciousness of what is to be experienced should be understood as the six external dhatus beginning with form. The consciousness that experiences consists of the six consciousness-dhatus beginning with eye-consciousness.

The remaining consciousnesses are distinctions within these consciousnesses. One should know that these consciousnesses are mere representation, because their objects do not exist. What example illustrates this?

Dreams and the like are used as examples. In a dream, apart from consciousness there are no objects. Various things—forms, sounds, odors, flavors, tangible objects, houses, mountains, and so forth—appear with characteristics resembling objects, yet no real objects exist therein.

From this example one should know that everywhere there is only consciousness, with consciousness foremost. There are also other examples, such as illusions, mirages seen by a thirsty deer, diseased vision, and so forth. One should understand them as one understands a dream: upon awakening, all things are seen to be nothing but consciousness.

If, as in a dream, everything is only consciousness, why does such an understanding not arise upon waking? It does arise in those possessing knowledge of true awakening. Just as this understanding does not arise while one is dreaming but arises only upon awakening, so too this knowledge does not arise before true awakening has been attained. Once true awakening is attained, this knowledge immediately arises. If true awakening has not yet been attained, how can one infer and know that there is consciousness-only? It can be known through the Agamas and through reasoning. As for the Agamas, in the Ten Stages Sutra the Blessed One said that the three realms are mind-only. Furthermore, in the Sutra Unraveling the Profound Meaning, the Blessed One said:

At that time, Bodhisattva Maitreya asked the Blessed One: “Can the images seen in samadhi and the mind abiding in concentration be said to be different or not different?”

The Blessed One told Maitreya: “They are not different.

“Why is this? The object upon which the concentrated mind focuses is manifested by consciousness-only. I therefore say that it is consciousness.”

“Blessed One! If the images in samadhi are not different from the mind abiding in concentration, how does that mind apprehend itself?”

“Maitreya! No dharma apprehends another dharma. Nevertheless, when that mind arises in such a way, it also appears in such a way. It is like seeing a reflection based upon one’s own face and saying, ‘I see a reflection,’ as though the reflection seen were different from one’s own face. The arising of that mind is likewise. Within that very mind, one speaks of another object that can be seen.” Thus it is clearly established through the Agamas and through reasoning.

Explanation: “This is only consciousness” is taught in the Ten Stages Sutra and the Sutra Unraveling the Profound Meaning. Because this object of cognition is manifested by consciousness-only, I say it is consciousness-only. That is, the object of cognition is manifested by consciousness-only.

What does this mean? It shows that consciousness-only is consciousness apart from any object. Therefore, everything is encompassed by consciousness.

The Buddha said, “I say it is consciousness that appears”; that samadhi-object is consciousness. Yet it arises in this manner because it arises in the likeness of that type of characteristic. The phrase “within it, it is taken as a separate object” means that within the samadhi-object, the image of that consciousness is called a separate thing, apprehended as though it possessed its own essence.

The Treatise says: Thus, when the mind is tranquil, if one sees an image of blue, one is seeing one’s own mind; there is no separate blue object. Through this reasoning, a bodhisattva should infer and know that all consciousnesses are mere representation. Furthermore, the blue that is seen is not recalled by memory-consciousness, because the object being seen is presently before one. Therefore, the consciousness that remembers what has been heard and contemplated, although it cognizes objects of the past, is likewise consciousness-only. Through this inference and examination, although one has not yet attained the knowledge that awakens to suchness, one can still infer and know the principle of consciousness-only.

Explanation: The blue and other images within this samadhi-object are not produced by memory-consciousness. Why? Because they are not merely remembered as things seen previously; rather, they are cognized right there because they are presently manifest.

Memory-consciousness is obscure, whereas these are seen clearly and immediately. If it is said that what has been repeatedly perfumed through hearing and contemplation, although past, later arises upon recollection just as before, the words “this is also so” mean that what was heard and contemplated belongs to the past and no longer exists. If it arises again within that nonexistence, this is a consciousness arising in resemblance to it; it is not the hearing and contemplation that ceased in the past.

Therefore, this principle demonstrates that external objects apart from consciousness cannot be established.

The Treatise says: As previously stated, the various consciousnesses are like dreams and so forth. Among them, the essential nature of eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses is consciousness-only. But the essential nature of the eye faculty and the other faculties is form.

How, then, can the principle of consciousness-only be perceived in them according to the Agamas and the reasoning previously stated? If they are essentially consciousness, why do they appear like form? Because they continuously evolve as a stable and uniform series.

They are sustained by afflictions and delusions. If it were otherwise, the delusion of taking nonobjects to be objects could not be established. If the defilements of the afflictive obstructions and cognitive obstructions did not exist, neither could purity be established when they are absent.

Therefore, the eye and the other faculties arise in this manner. A verse says:

Explanation: The essential nature of eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses is not form; hence they can be established as consciousness-only. But the essential nature of the eye faculty and the other faculties is form; how can they be established as consciousness-only? This has already been clearly explained through the Agamas and reasoning.

“Continuously evolving as a stable and uniform series” means “uniform” because it remains similar, and “stable” because it persists over a long period. Because the deluded afflictions belonging to the afflictive and cognitive obstructions serve as their causes, they are sustained; “sustained” thus means caused. Apart from their arising in this manner, the deluded mind that takes a nonobject to be an object could not exist.

Without the defilement of the afflictive obstructions and the defilement of the cognitive obstructions, they would not exist. This principle is revealed by the verse. “The cause of disorder and disorder itself” refer respectively to the form-nature of consciousness and the non-form nature of consciousness.

In this order, the form-nature of consciousness is the cause of disorder, while the non-form nature of consciousness is disorder itself. If the causal essence, the form-nature of consciousness, did not exist, then the resultant essence, the non-form nature of consciousness, would likewise not exist.

Chapter 2: Distinctions

The Treatise says: Why do the body-consciousness, the consciousness of the embodied subject, the consciousness of the experiencing subject, the consciousness of what is to be experienced, and the consciousness that experiences arise together in combination in all embodied beings? It is so that the enjoyment necessary for life may be complete.

Why do the temporal consciousness and the other previously mentioned consciousnesses arise in various forms? Because the beginningless flow of birth and death continues without interruption; because the realms of sentient beings are innumerable; because worlds are innumerable; because languages and activities are innumerable; because reception and enjoyment have innumerable distinctions; because the experience of karmic results, both agreeable and disagreeable, has innumerable distinctions; and because the experiences of birth, aging, and death have innumerable distinctions.

Why are these consciousnesses established as consciousness-only? Briefly, this is established through three characteristics. First, mere representation, because nothing exists as an object.

Second, mere duality, meaning that there are only the two aspects: the appearance-aspect of consciousness and the seeing-aspect of consciousness. Third, mere multiplicity, meaning that many different characteristics arise. Because these consciousnesses have no objects, they are called mere representation.

The consciousnesses beginning with eye-consciousness possess an appearance-aspect and a seeing-aspect. Forms and so forth constitute their appearance-aspect, while those consciousnesses themselves constitute the seeing-aspect, up to and including body-consciousness as the seeing-aspect. Mental consciousness takes the essential nature of all consciousnesses, beginning with eye-consciousness and extending through the consciousness of dharmas, as its appearance-aspect, and takes mental consciousness itself as its seeing-aspect, because mental consciousness can discriminate and also arises in the likeness of all consciousnesses.

A verse says:

Explanation: What constitutes the complete enjoyment of the bodily constituents? It consists precisely of the five consciousnesses: the body-consciousness, the consciousness of the embodied subject, the consciousness of the experiencing subject, and so forth. “One should know that all embodied beings” means that these are all present simultaneously; “coexistent” means that they arise together at the same time.

“To make clear” means to establish the essential causal basis for the three aspects of consciousness-only, as revealed in the prose and verse of the main text. In the prose, “mere representation” means that there is only the measure of consciousness; therefore, all consciousnesses are only the measure of consciousness. Why?

Because the objects of consciousness are nonexistent. Only two aspects—the appearance-aspect and the seeing-aspect—are established as existent. Thus, one part of this single consciousness becomes the appearance-aspect, and the second part becomes the seeing-aspect.

Eye-consciousness and the others are each divided into these two parts. “Establishing various distinctions” means that this originally single consciousness, according to its actual manifestations, produces many distinct characteristics in one part, while its second part functions as that which apprehends. As for what mental consciousness apprehends, eye-consciousness and the others, extending through the consciousness of dharmas, form its appearance-aspect, while this mental consciousness itself is the seeing-aspect.

“Various” means that mental consciousness alone performs this function, because its objects are not fixed. The objects of the other consciousnesses are fixed. Furthermore, because they do not discriminate, that which discriminates is called the seeing-aspect.

Through this reasoning, consciousness-only is established. The verse’s “entering mere representation” is because there are no objects; “entering mere duality” is because consciousness has an appearance-aspect and a seeing-aspect; and “entering multiplicity” is because consciousness produces various forms and characteristics. “The contemplative practitioner enters and realizes them” means a practitioner engaged in corresponding cultivation.

Why, when one enters and realizes mind-only, is that mind itself also abandoned and ceased? Because at the very time one enters and realizes mind-only, the object does not exist, and consciousness likewise does not exist. When the apprehended object does not exist, how could an apprehending mind be obtained?

“Mere duality and multiplicity” are mentioned only to explain the causes and conditions for entering mere representation; the other meanings are as previously explained.

The Treatise says: Some masters of the treatises say that there is only this single mental consciousness, which receives different names according to the basis upon which it arises, just as the volitional karma of the mind is called bodily karma or verbal karma. This mental consciousness arises with various characteristics upon all its bases. It arises as though dual and as though it were an object. Because it resembles discrimination, it arises everywhere as though there were contact. In the Form Realm, mental consciousness depends upon the body, just as the other material faculties depend upon the body.

Explanation: Some bodhisattvas wish to establish that only a single mental consciousness arises in succession. This will now be clarified. The volitional karma of the mind is called bodily karma or verbal karma; that is, the volitional karma of the mind that issues through the body is called bodily karma, while that which issues through the mouth is called verbal karma.

Mental karma is likewise. Thus, if a single mental consciousness arises dependent upon the eye, it is called eye-consciousness. In the same way, when it arises dependent upon the body, it is called body-consciousness.

Apart from mental consciousness, no other consciousness exists here, with the sole exception of the Alaya-consciousness. If you say that the eye and other faculties do not discriminate and that mental consciousness arising dependent upon them must therefore also be nondiscriminating—just as consciousness arising dependent upon the defiled mind is defiled because its basis is defiled—the same should apply here. Yet there is no contradiction, for, as the Treatise says, on every basis it arises with various characteristics, as though dual; it is merely like an object and therefore resembles discrimination.

Here, “on every basis” means depending upon bases such as the eye and so forth. “It arises with various characteristics, as though dual,” means that it is merely like an object and thus resembles discrimination. These two statements make the meaning understandable.

They indicate that one part of a single consciousness arises merely in the likeness of an object, while its second part arises within that object-likeness in the semblance of discrimination. Therefore, the previous explanation is faultless. Furthermore, “everywhere it arises as though there were contact” means that in the domain of form, while the mind abides in concentration and the five consciousnesses are not manifestly active, internal sensations arise within the material body.

“Just as the other material faculties depend upon the body” means just as the eye faculty and so forth depend upon the body. Because these faculties depend upon the body, they can benefit or harm that very body. Mental consciousness is likewise: because it depends upon the body, it causes benefit or harm to the body.

One should also understand another meaning: just as the body faculty depends upon the body, when an external condition comes into contact with it, an appearance resembling contact arises within the body faculty itself. When this appearance resembling contact arises, it immediately benefits or harms the body upon which it depends. Mental consciousness is likewise: because it depends upon the body, when an appearance resembling contact arises, it immediately benefits or harms the body.

The Treatise says: A verse says:

Explanation: To establish what those bodhisattvas have said, a verse from the Agamas is cited. “It travels far” means that it cognizes every object. “It travels alone” means that there is no second companion. “Bodiless” means apart from a material body. “Dwelling in an empty cave” means hidden within the hollow cave of the material body. “To tame” indicates its freely functioning activity. “Difficult to tame” indicates all forms of evil.

The Treatise says: As the sutra states, mental consciousness can experience all the objects reached by the five faculties, because it is their basis.

Explanation: The Agamas also say that mental consciousness can experience all the objects reached by the five faculties. That which the faculties reach is their object. Because this mental consciousness can discriminate all dharmas, it experiences each and every object and is therefore said to be capable of experiencing them. The faculties depend upon mental consciousness because mental consciousness is the causal essence for the arising of those faculties. Why? If the mind is engaged with another object, eye-consciousness and the others do not arise.

The Treatise says: Furthermore, as the sutra states, among the twelve ayatanas, the six groups of consciousnesses constitute the mind-ayatana.

Explanation: The Agamas also say that the six groups of consciousnesses are called “mind,” because there is no separate name for another consciousness. The Buddha said that the six groups of consciousnesses are called the mind-ayatana. Therefore, it is known that there is only mind alone.

The Treatise says: If the essential nature of consciousness is established as the meaning of the Alaya-consciousness, then within it the essential nature of all established consciousnesses constitutes the appearance-aspect, while the essential nature of mental consciousness and all its bases constitutes the seeing-aspect. One should know that they are the consciousness-essences of appearances and are the causes that generate the corresponding seeing-aspect. The appearance of an object-likeness is the basis that generates the corresponding seeing-aspect.

Explanation: The Alaya-consciousness is also established as the two consciousness-aspects of appearance and seeing. Mental consciousness and its bases constitute the seeing-aspect of the Alaya-consciousness. The essential nature of eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses, together with all dharmas, constitutes its appearance-aspect.

Because these are the essential nature of the Alaya-consciousness, they are said to be the consciousness-essences of appearances—that is, the causal essence that generates eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses and becomes their cognitive object. “They are the causes that generate the corresponding seeing-aspect” means that the seeing that arises in relation to them is called their seeing-aspect. Because they reveal what appears as the objects seen by it, they can serve as the cause for the seeing-aspect of mental consciousness to abide continuously and without interruption.

Therefore, they are said to be capable of serving as the basis for the generation of the seeing-aspect.

The Treatise says: Having thus established the essential nature of the various consciousnesses as consciousness-only, their objects appear clearly and can be seen.

How can it be known that they are nonexistent?

As the Blessed One said, a bodhisattva endowed with four dharmas can enter, in accord with reality, into the objectlessness of the essential nature of all consciousnesses. First is knowing the differences among the characteristics of consciousness. Hungry ghosts, animals, humans, and devas encounter the same thing, yet perceive it differently because the essential nature of their consciousnesses differs.

Second is knowing that there is no objective domain and that appearances arise from consciousness, as when consciousness cognizes the past or future, or images in dreams. Third is knowing that, if objects truly existed, correct cognition would be obtained without exertion. If consciousness cognized truly existent objects, it would naturally be free from error, and genuine knowledge would be obtained without the effort of applying an antidote.

Fourth is knowledge accordant with the three kinds of wisdom. Bodhisattvas and those who have attained concentration possess mastery of mind; therefore, whatever object they wish appears according to their intention. When a contemplative practitioner has attained shamatha and practices contemplation of a dharma, the object appears merely through mental attention.

Furthermore, when one has attained nonconceptual knowledge and abides in nonconceptuality, all objects cease to appear. Because objects accord with the three kinds of wisdom and the preceding causes and conditions, their nonexistence is thereby established. Six verses concerning this principle should be presented.

They will be given later in the section on the distinguishing characteristic of the higher training in wisdom. They concern hungry ghosts, animals, humans, and so forth.

Explanation: First, “knowing the differences among the characteristics of consciousness” means that these differences are the characteristics resulting from consciousness cognizing objects, and that one knows them within those characteristics. “Knowing that there is no objective domain and that appearances arise from consciousness” means seeing that there is no cognized external object and that appearances arise from consciousness, as in the case of the past and so forth.

“Knowing that correct cognition would be obtained without exertion” means that if objects existed just as they appeared, there would be no need to arouse an antidote in order to obtain freedom from error and understand them as they truly are. “Accordant with the three kinds of knowledge” means that this knowledge understands all objects to accord with these three principles. “Those who have attained concentration” means shravakas, pratyekabuddhas, and so forth.

“Possessing mastery of mind” means being able to act according to one’s mind and according to whatever the mind desires. “That object appears” means, for example, that if one wishes the earth element to become water or fire, it becomes so according to one’s thought. “Having attained shamatha” means having attained samadhi.

“A practitioner of contemplation” means one who practices examination according to the sutras. “The object appears merely through mental attention” means that, regarding a single object, various characteristics appear according to the various modes of attention applied to it. “Having attained nonconceptual knowledge” means that if objects truly existed as they appeared, nonconceptual knowledge could not be attained.

Since this knowledge truly exists, one should know that objects are definitively nonexistent.

Chapter 3: Discrimination

The Treatise says: If the basis upon which objects manifested by consciousness-only appear is called the dependent nature, why and through what causes and conditions is it called “dependent”? Because it arises from its own perfume-seeds, it is dependent. Having arisen dependently, it has no power to remain by itself for even a single moment; therefore, it is called dependent.

Explanation: “The basis upon which objects manifested by consciousness-only appear” means that, apart from objects, the essential nature of consciousness alone is the object, and the cause of its appearance is precisely the essential nature of consciousness as dependent.

If it is contained within itself, why is it called dependent, and through what causes and conditions is it called dependent? Because it is generated by its own causes and, once generated, lacks the power to remain, even this self-contained nature is called “other”; therefore, it is called dependent.

The Treatise says: If the imagined nature depends upon something else and an unreal object appears, how is imagination established? Why is it called imagined? Because it serves as the cause for mental consciousness to produce deluded discrimination regarding innumerable characteristics, it is established as imagined. Because it has no intrinsic characteristic and is seen only through discrimination, it is called imagined.

Explanation: “Depends upon something else” means that it depends upon the dependent nature of consciousness-only. “Unreal” means lacking an essence of its own. “An object appears” means that an object seems capable of being seen. The causes and conditions for calling it imagined will be explained successively below. “Innumerable characteristics” means the characteristics of all objective domains. “Mental consciousness discriminates” means that mental consciousness itself is discrimination. “The cause for producing delusion” means the cognitive cause through which mental consciousness falsely gives rise to delusion. “No intrinsic characteristic” means it has no essence. “Seen only through discrimination” means that only disordered consciousness is seen.

The Treatise says: If, in the perfected nature, the imagined nature is ultimately characterized by nonexistence, how is perfection perfected? For what reason is it called perfected? Because its essence is unchanging, it attains perfection. Because it is the purified objective domain, it is supreme among all wholesome dharmas. Because of this supreme meaning, it is called perfected.

Explanation: “It is ultimately characterized by nonexistence” means that the imagined nature has nonexistence as its nature. “How” and “for what reason” are as explained previously regarding the dependent nature. “Its essence is unchanging” means that it is undeceiving and true. Because this objective domain is purified and is supreme among all wholesome dharmas, the essence of this purified objective domain is supreme and is therefore called perfected, just as a garment is called completed when it has been fully made.

The Treatise says: Furthermore, there are that which discriminates and that which is discriminated. Within the imagined nature, what is that which discriminates, what is that which is discriminated, and what is the nature of discrimination? Mental consciousness is that which discriminates.

Because it discriminates, this mental consciousness arises from perfume-seeds of names and words and from the perfume-seeds of the names and words of the essential nature of all consciousnesses. It contains innumerable seeds of discrimination, discriminates everywhere, and possesses this capacity to discriminate; therefore, it is called that which discriminates. Furthermore, the dependent nature is that which is discriminated.

These causes and conditions cause the dependent nature to become that which is discriminated. This is the nature of discrimination: through these causes and conditions, the dependent nature appears as an object resembling a real object. Furthermore, how does that which discriminates perform discrimination?

Upon what does it cognize? What characteristic does it apprehend? How does it become attached?

How does it utter words? How is it circulated, and how does it superimpose? It cognizes names, apprehends the dependent nature as its characteristic, becomes attached through views, and utters words on the basis of initial and sustained thought.

It circulates through the fourfold circulation of seeing and the rest, and superimposes real objects upon what is objectless. Discrimination should be understood in this manner.

Explanation: What is discrimination? Mental consciousness is discrimination. The dependent nature is that which is discriminated.

Through these causes and conditions it becomes discrimination. To reveal this, the Treatise says that it cognizes names and so forth. “Apprehends the dependent nature as its characteristic” means that it apprehends names such as “eye” and so forth within the dependent nature as characteristics.

Why? Having apprehended those characteristics, it produces discrimination. Views are attachment; that is, it decisively considers the characteristics it has apprehended to be just so.

“Initial and sustained thought give rise to verbal expression” means that, in accordance with what has been apprehended, initial and sustained thought serve as the cause for utterance. “The four kinds of verbal expression beginning with seeing” means the things expressed in speech. Seeing, hearing, cognizing, and knowing constitute the four kinds of circulation.

Although the common characteristics circulated in this way have no real objects, they are apprehended as objects; this is superimposition. This means that what is circulated has no real object, yet it is apprehended as possessing an object.

The Treatise says: Furthermore, are the essences of these three natures different or not different? One should say that they are neither different nor nondifferent. Through one principle, this dependent nature becomes dependent. Through another principle, this very nature becomes imagined. Through yet another principle, this very nature becomes perfected.

Through what distinct principle does it become dependent? Because it arises from perfume-seeds, it becomes dependent. Through what distinct principle does it become imagined? Because it serves as the cause and condition for the characteristic of discrimination, it becomes imagined. Through what distinct principle does it become perfected? Because the discriminated object is ultimately nonexistent just as it is imagined. Through what distinct principle does the essential nature of a single consciousness become the characteristics of the essential natures of all the various consciousnesses? The essential nature of the Alaya-consciousness becomes the various characteristics of the arising consciousnesses. One should know that this is because they arise in dependence upon its characteristics.

Explanation: “It serves as the cause and condition for discrimination as a characteristic” means that mental consciousness is that which discriminates. Because this discriminating consciousness arises by apprehending the essence of an objective domain, it itself is discrimination. This mental consciousness discriminates that characteristic and apprehends it as the essence of the discriminated objective domain. For this reason, the dependent nature becomes the imagined nature. At the very time discriminating mental consciousness discriminates what is to be discriminated, this discrimination is entirely nonexistent. For this reason, the dependent nature becomes the perfected nature.

The Treatise says: How many kinds of dependent nature are there? Generally, there are two. First is dependence upon perfumed seeds. Second is dependence in which defilement and purity are not yet perfected. Because of these two kinds of dependence, it is called dependent. The imagined nature is also of two kinds: imagination of intrinsic nature and imagination of distinctions; therefore, it is called imagined. The perfected nature is also of two kinds: perfection as original nature and perfection as purity; therefore, it is called the perfected nature.

Explanation: Because the essence of defilement and purity has not yet been perfected, it is called dependent. This means that the discriminating aspect of the dependent nature becomes defilement, while its nondiscriminating aspect becomes purity. If only one of these two aspects is present, perfection is not attained. Imagination of intrinsic nature means, for example, discriminating the eye and so forth as possessing the intrinsic nature of an eye. Imagination of distinctions means, for example, discriminating the intrinsic nature of the eye and so forth as possessing distinctions such as impermanence. Perfection as original nature is suchness accompanied by defilements. Perfection as purity is immaculate suchness.

The Treatise says: Furthermore, there are four kinds of discrimination: discrimination of intrinsic nature, discrimination of distinctions, discrimination with awareness, and discrimination without awareness. “With awareness” refers to sentient beings who understand verbal expressions. “Without awareness” refers to sentient beings who do not understand verbal expressions.

Explanation: Understanding verbal expressions means possessing knowledge of language. Not understanding verbal expressions is like cattle and goats: although they discriminate, they have no ability regarding names or written characters.

The Treatise says: Furthermore, there are five kinds of discrimination. First is discriminating an object’s intrinsic nature on the basis of its name, as when one says, “Such a name has such an object.” Second is discriminating a name’s intrinsic nature on the basis of an object, as when one says, “Such an object has such a name.” Third is discriminating the intrinsic nature of one name on the basis of another name, as when one discriminates among names without knowing their objects.

Fourth is discriminating the intrinsic nature of one object on the basis of another object, as when one discriminates among objects without knowing their names. Fifth is discriminating the intrinsic nature of both name and object on the basis of name and object, as when one says, “This object has such an essence and such a name.”

Furthermore, when all forms of discrimination are included together, there are ten. First is fundamental discrimination, namely, the Alaya-consciousness. Second is discrimination of objective characteristics, such as the essential nature of consciousness appearing as form and so forth.

Third is discrimination resembling an object, namely, the essential nature of eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses together with their bases. Fourth is discrimination of altered characteristics, such as aging and so forth, pleasant sensation and so forth, greed and so forth, changes caused by seasons and so forth, transformations in the destinies such as the hells, and transformations in the Desire Realm and the other realms.

Fifth is discrimination resembling those various transformations, namely, the transformations occurring within the transformations just described. Sixth is discrimination concerning what others impart, namely, discrimination caused by hearing improper Dharma and discrimination caused by hearing true Dharma. Seventh is incorrect discrimination, namely, discrimination caused by those outside the Buddha’s Dharma hearing improper Dharma.

Eighth is correct discrimination, namely, discrimination caused by those within the Buddha’s Dharma hearing true Dharma. Ninth is attached discrimination, namely, discrimination caused by incorrect contemplation, rooted in the view of a personal self and associated with the sixty-two views. Tenth is confused discrimination, namely, the ten kinds of discrimination belonging to bodhisattvas.

Explanation: When all forms of discrimination are included together, there are ten kinds. To explain these ten, fundamental discrimination is the fundamental essence of all discriminations; this discrimination is precisely the Alaya-consciousness. Discrimination of characteristics takes appearances as its characteristics; it is discrimination of the essential nature of consciousness appearing as form and so forth.

Discrimination resembling an object means that, among those kinds of characteristics, if a discrimination arises that discriminates among those discriminated objects, it receives this name; it refers to the essential nature of eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses together with their bases. Discrimination of altered characteristics means that when the characteristics that serve as its cognitive objects undergo alteration, discrimination identifies the essence of those altered characteristics.

“Aging,” for example, means that the body weakens and the four great elements change; discrimination occurring in relation to these is called discrimination of altered characteristics. “And so forth” includes illness, death, and the like. “Pleasant sensation and so forth” means that the body undergoes a corresponding change in characteristics.

“And so forth” includes painful sensation and neither-painful-nor-pleasant sensation. The same applies to “greed and so forth”; “and so forth” includes hatred, delusion, and the like. Unexpected calamities and seasonal changes mean that discrimination arises in dependence upon altered bodily characteristics.

Unexpected calamities include killing, binding, and so forth. Seasonal changes are altered characteristics caused by cold, heat, and other seasons. “The hells and so forth”: “and so forth” includes animals and hungry ghosts.

“The Desire Realm and so forth”: “and so forth” includes the Form Realm and Formless Realm. Discrimination resembling transformations means that eye-consciousness and the others, which resemble those objective characteristics, undergo various transformations. Discrimination arises regarding this essence resembling transformation, as in the transformations within aging and the other conditions previously described.

Why? Because when one abides in aging and the other conditions, eye-consciousness and the other consciousnesses likewise undergo transformation. “Discrimination concerning what others impart” refers to what others teach, which is of two kinds: the cause and condition of hearing improper Dharma and the cause and condition of hearing true Dharma.

These two kinds of discrimination concerning dharmas arise through hearing Dharma and become wholesome or unwholesome; they should be explained accordingly. Incorrect discrimination takes the hearing of improper Dharma as its cause. Those outside this Dharma are non-Buddhist renunciants.

Correct discrimination takes the hearing of true Dharma as its cause. Those within this Dharma are those within the Buddha’s Dharma. Attached discrimination takes incorrect contemplation as its cause.

As the sutras state, the view of self serves as the basis for the sixty-two views and so forth, together with discriminations associated with those views. Scattered discrimination consists of the ten kinds of discrimination belonging to bodhisattvas.

The Treatise says: 1. distraction concerning nonexistence of characteristics; 2. distraction concerning existence of characteristics; 3. distraction of superimposition; 4. distraction of denigration; 5. distraction of grasping them as one; 6. distraction of grasping them as different; 7. distraction concerning intrinsic nature; 8. distraction concerning distinctions; 9. distraction of deriving an object from a name; and 10. distraction of deriving a name from an object.

To counteract these ten kinds of distraction, nonconceptual knowledge is taught throughout the prajnaparamita teachings. One should know that these obstructions and their antidotes are all fully contained within the meaning of prajnaparamita. The sutra says: “How does a bodhisattva practice prajnaparamita?

Shariputra! This bodhisattva does not see a bodhisattva in a bodhisattva. Not seeing a bodhisattva, one does not see prajnaparamita, does not see practice, does not see form, and does not see sensation, perception, formations, or consciousness.

Why? The intrinsic nature of form is empty; because it is not nonempty, it is called empty. If form is empty, it is not form; yet form is not other than emptiness.

Therefore, form exists. Form is emptiness, and emptiness is form. Why?

Shariputra! ‘Form’ is merely a name. Its intrinsic nature is unborn and unceasing, undefiled and unpurified. Names are provisionally established and borrowed temporarily to distinguish the various dharmas.

These borrowed names are then circulated, and attachment arises in accordance with their circulation. A bodhisattva does not see any such names whatsoever. Because they are not seen, the bodhisattva does not become attached to them.

As with form, so it is with consciousness.” One should know that this passage on prajnaparamita enables one to penetrate the meaning of these ten kinds of discrimination.

Explanation: Here, “distraction concerning nonexistence of characteristics” means taking this nonexistence as an objective characteristic; this is called distraction. To counteract this distraction, the Prajnaparamita Sutra teaches that a bodhisattva truly exists. “Truly exists” reveals that the bodhisattva truly possesses emptiness as essence.

That very emptiness is the essence and is therefore called the essence of emptiness. Distraction concerning existence of characteristics means taking conditioned characteristics as objects; this is called distraction. To counteract this distraction, that sutra says that no bodhisattva is seen, meaning that no bodhisattva is seen whose essence is the discriminated dependent nature.

With this intention, the distraction of superimposition is counteracted. Therefore, that sutra says, “The intrinsic nature of form is empty,” revealing that the imagined nature of form is empty. The distraction of denigration is counteracted by the sutra’s statement “not nonempty,” meaning that the dharma of form, as it is, is not nonempty.

The distraction of grasping them as one is counteracted by the sutra’s statement that this empty form is not form. Why? If the dependent nature and the perfected nature were one, the dependent nature, like the perfected nature, would also be a purified objective domain.

The distraction of grasping them as different is counteracted by the sutra’s statement that form is not other than emptiness. Why? If these two were different, a dharma and its dharma-nature would also have to be different.

Grasping them as different is incorrect, just as an impermanent dharma and impermanence cannot be different. From the standpoint of the imagined nature, it is said that form is emptiness and emptiness is form. Because the imagined nature of form is nonexistent, it is emptiness.

This emptiness is the nonexistence of form, unlike the relation between the dependent nature and the perfected nature. The distraction concerning intrinsic nature is counteracted by the sutra’s statement: “Shariputra! ‘Form’ is merely a name,” because the intrinsic nature of form is nonexistent. The distraction concerning distinctions is counteracted by the sutra’s statement that its intrinsic nature is unborn and unceasing, undefiled and unpurified.

If it were born, there would be defilement; if it ceased, there would be purification. Because it is unborn and unceasing, it is therefore undefiled and unpurified. Such is the meaning of these statements.

The distraction of deriving an object from a name means apprehending an object according to a name; this is distraction. To counteract it, the sutra says that various names are provisionally established. Discriminating the many distinct dharmas means deriving names from objects; this is distraction.

To counteract it, the sutra says that provisional, borrowed names are established and then circulated, meaning that it is not the intrinsic nature of an object to possess such a name. The Prajnaparamita Sutra is taught to counteract these ten kinds of distraction. Because this teaching serves as the cause, nonconceptual knowledge arises.

The Treatise says: If, through different principles, the dependent nature becomes the three natures, why are these three natures not one? Through one principle it becomes the dependent nature, but not through that same principle does it become imagined and perfected. Through another principle it becomes the imagined nature, but not through that same principle does it become dependent and perfected. Through yet another principle it becomes perfected, but not through that same principle does it become dependent and imagined.