Selected Lectures on the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra
Lecture on Volume Three of the Cheng Weishi Lun (2)
Original text: 作意谓能警心为性。于所缘境引心为业。谓此警觉应起心种。引令趣境。故名作意。虽此亦能引起心所。心是主故。但说引心。有说令心回趣异境。或于一境持心令住。故名作意。彼俱非理。应非遍行。不异定故。
Explanation: Manaskāra (attention) is the ability to alert and arouse the mind. It is like a sprinter preparing to start a race: the mind is alert, waiting to hear the gunshot; once the gunshot is heard, he immediately dashes out of the starting line. The mental factor of manaskāra is like this: it is preparing to be born onto the corresponding sense object. That is to say, the consciousness has not yet been generated and is about to be generated, but there must be a direction and a place of birth before the consciousness-seeds can be transmitted out and consciousness can arise; it cannot be born arbitrarily and aimlessly into just any place.
The place where the mind consciousness is to be born is the object of cognition, that is, the sense object of manaskāra. Therefore, manaskāra operates at the seed stage, within the Ālayavijñāna: before the consciousness-seeds have been born, it is already preparing to be born onto the corresponding place — a place of interest, or one might call it a place of concern and attention, a place related to the mind consciousness. That is why manaskāra occurs; otherwise there would be no manaskāra.
If the mind consciousness clearly does not want to look at a floral garment, there will be no manaskāra directed at the floral garment. Manaskāra is like this: I am going out; I am still in the room and have not left yet, but I must know where to go and in which direction and toward what target to walk. The mind thinking about the target and direction is manaskāra. The person has not yet gone out the door — this is like consciousness being at the seed stage within the Ālayavijñāna. After manaskāra occurs, there is a target; once the Ālayavijñāna knows it, He gives birth to the consciousness-seeds at the place targeted by manaskāra; He cannot arbitrarily and randomly give birth to consciousness-seeds. It would not happen that the mind consciousness is interested in the sofa, yet the Ālayavijñāna gives birth to the consciousness-seeds on the table, or on the sound of a car.
Manaskāra is called "drawing the mind toward the object." It draws the mind to turn toward the corresponding sense object. Although manaskāra can also cause the arising of the mental factor of contact, manaskāra still takes drawing the mind as its main function, not drawing the mental factors; the mental factors are the companions of the mind, its assisting attendants, aiding the mind's operation; the mind is the principal. Therefore manaskāra is drawing the mind toward the object.
Some say manaskāra makes the mind consciousness turn back to another state; others say manaskāra is the mind consciousness maintaining itself unchanged on one object. Both claims are wrong. If it were so — the mind consciousness remaining unchanged on one object — the mind consciousness could not operate universally; when seeing one form, it could not see another form or other forms. This would be identical to the samādhi of the mind consciousness, and would not be the operation of a mental factor.
Whereas the mental factor of manaskāra is alert and attentive to all related and interesting sense objects, not maintaining itself unchanged on only one object. If the manaskāra of the mind consciousness were to remain unchanged on only one object, that would be the samādhi of the mind consciousness — the mental factor of meditative concentration (samādhi), not the mental factor of manaskāra. Only when cultivating meditative concentration is it so, and it needs to be so; when not cultivating concentration, the manaskāra of the mind consciousness is not like this. Cultivating concentration means not letting the mind consciousness branch off and disperse; the consciousness-seeds are made to be born as much as possible onto one place; only then is the force of consciousness great, the discernment clear and thorough, and the mind consciousness has wisdom. For example, a surging, mighty great river, divided into many streams, no longer has the power of a great river. The mind consciousness is the same; that is why cultivating concentration is needed.
If manaskāra were called manaskāra because the mind consciousness turns back to another state, then on the present state there would be no discerning function of the mind consciousness, and the mind consciousness would not be operating universally. In fact, the mind consciousness can simultaneously be born and discern at different places, can simultaneously attend to multiple targets and contact multiple states. Therefore the claim that manaskāra is the mind consciousness turning back to another state is wrong.
Original text: 受谓领纳顺违俱非境相为性。起爱为业。能起合离非二欲故。
Explanation: The meaning of feeling (vedanā): accepting, receiving, experiencing, feeling. The emotional feeling is the three kinds of feeling within the aggregate of feeling. Feeling — its contents are just these: the initial feeling after contact must be acceptance, receiving, experiencing; it is not the emotional three kinds of feeling; only afterward are the emotional three kinds of feeling born — that is the aggregate of feeling.
Feeling is experiencing, receiving, accepting, taking in. For example, when someone hands us something, we first must accept it, take it, contain it, and only then can there be the next step of discernment, only then can we know what the object is. After the mind consciousness contacts the object, the mind consciousness first accepts the object, and only then comes the next step: the discernment of the mental factor of perception, and the deliberation and decision of the mental factor of volition.
The mental factor of feeling takes as its self-nature the experiencing of favorable objects, the experiencing of adverse objects, and the experiencing of objects that are neither favorable nor adverse. After experiencing, the mind of love and delight, the mind of aversion and rejection, and the neutral mind of neither loving nor rejecting arise; then karmic actions of greed, aversion, and neither greed nor aversion are performed. It can give rise to the desire to unite with the object — the mental action of craving the object; it can give rise to the desire to leave the object — the mind of aversion that shuns, turns away from, and escapes the object; it can give rise to the mental action of the neutral thought that neither craves nor is averse.
Original text: 有作是说。受有二种。一境界受。谓领所缘。二自性受。谓领俱触。唯自性受。是受自相。以境界受。共余相故。
Explanation: Some say that feeling is of two kinds: one is the feeling of objects, which is the experiencing of the object cognized by the mind. This claim is correct. The second is the feeling of self-nature. The meaning of feeling of self-nature is that the mental factor of feeling has its own self-nature, its own characteristics, and autonomy.
But this person says the mental factor of feeling refers only to the second, the feeling of self-nature, not the first. He says feeling is the experiencing of the co-arising contact between the mind consciousness itself and the object — it feels the contact, not the object. This person says the feeling of self-nature is the experiencing of co-arising contact, a feeling of the mental factor of contact; feeling is not the experiencing of objects, not the experiencing and reception of objects; it is the mind consciousness feeling its own contact. Only this feeling of self-nature is the self-nature characteristic of the mental factor of feeling. His reason is that the feeling of objects must combine with other object-aspects, adding an object-mark, and thus it would not be the self-nature of feeling. This claim is unreasonable and is called a misinterpretation.
What is co-arising contact? It means the mental factor of contact is the co-arising support of the mental factor of feeling; because there is the mental factor of contact, the mental factor of feeling is born; therefore the mental factor of feeling is born accompanied by the mental factor of contact. "Co-arising" means the arising of feeling is induced by contact; the mental factor of contact is the co-arising support of the mental factor of feeling; without contact there is no feeling. Hence it is called co-arising.
Original text: 彼说非理。受定不缘俱生触故。若似触生名领触者。似因之果应皆受性。又既受因。应名因受。何名自性。
Explanation: The claim of the feeling of self-nature is wrong and unreasonable. Why is it wrong? Because the mental factor of feeling definitely does not cognize the co-arising contact; it does not receive or feel the mental factor of contact; it definitely receives the marks of the six sense objects.
The mental factor of feeling certainly does not cognize the mental factor of contact; it does not experience the contact-mark of itself with the object. Just like when a person touches an object and then feeling arises: this feeling certainly accepts and experiences the object, not the touching of the hand itself upon the object. Therefore the second claim of the feeling of self-nature is wrong.
If the arising and functioning of the mental factor of feeling, which resembles the mental factor of contact, is receiving the mental factor of contact, then the effect (the mental factor of feeling) resembling its cause (the mental factor of contact) would all be the self-nature of feeling. This is wrong here. If because of contact there is the birth of feeling, and feeling must receive and feel contact, then because of manaskāra there is the birth of contact, so contact should contact manaskāra, not the faculties and objects. Furthermore, because of feeling there is the birth of perception, so perception should discern feeling, not discern objects; then consciousness would not know the object-marks and would know nothing at all of the six sense objects.
Original text: 若谓如王食诸国邑。受能领触。所生受体。名自性受。理亦不然。违自所执。不自证故。若不舍自性。名自性受。应一切法皆是受自性。故彼所说但诱婴儿。
Explanation: If someone says, just as a king born in his own kingdom must live in his own kingdom — using this as an analogy: since the mental factor of feeling exists because of the mental factor of contact, the mental factor of feeling must accept and feel contact and cannot feel objects; only the feeling that receives the mental factor of contact is the feeling of self-nature and has the self-nature of feeling — then this claim is wrong; it violates the self-nature of the mental factor of feeling, which is the feeling of objects. If feeling is not directed at objects and does not feel objects, then there is no self-cognition (svasaṃvitti) of consciousness, and consciousness cannot receive and discern objects.
If a dharma, being born guided by another dharma, must then receive that other dharma in order to have self-nature, then since all dharmas are born guided by another dharma, all must receive and feel the dharma that guided their birth, and then all dharmas would be of the nature of feeling. Such a claim is clearly wrong. For example, because of manaskāra there is the birth of contact; if contact, after being born, must receive manaskāra, how could contact still have its self-nature?
Perception is born guided by feeling. If the mental factor of perception, after being born, must receive the mental factor of feeling, how could the mental factor of perception still have self-nature? Then there would be no self-nature of perception; in that case, what would be called perception? Volition is born guided by perception; if after birth it receives perception, how could the mental factor of volition have its function? The mental factor of volition would have no self-nature, and the self-nature of volition would not exist. Therefore the claim that the self-nature of feeling is the experiencing of co-arising contact and not the receiving of objects is wrong; it is merely used to coax and beguile infants.
Original text: 然境界受。非共余相。领顺等相。定属己者。名境界受。不共余故。
Explanation: Someone says: because the feeling of objects shares the object-aspect with other mental factors, the mental factor of feeling is not the feeling of objects. This claim is wrong. Yet the mental factor of feeling is precisely the receiving of objects, not shared with other mental factors. Receiving the marks of favorable objects, receiving the marks of adverse objects, receiving the marks of objects neither favorable nor adverse — these definitely belong to the function of the mental factor of feeling, because it is not mixed and used in common with other dharmas and other mental factors.
Original text: 想谓于境取像为性。施设种种名言为业。谓要安立境分齐相。方能随起种种名言。
Explanation: The self-nature of the mental factor of perception is the ability to grasp the image of an object. Grasping means taking in the object and discerning the object. After discerning the object, it establishes various designations (names and words) for the discerned object. For example, when the eye consciousness and mind consciousness simultaneously contact a tree, they first accept it, experiencing the image of the tree. After experiencing it, they grasp the tree-mark, knowing the tree's visible color, shape, expressive gesture, and non-expressive marks. Then in the mind there arise the names and concepts such as the tree's color, the tree's shape, the tree's growth rings, whether the tree is tall or small, and so on.
Then in the mind there will be inner verbal sounds and thoughts, or language will be used to express and describe it. This establishes the object-mark of a tree, knowing exactly which kind of form-dust it belongs to, fixing its position. Only after establishing and positioning can various designations arise in succession, forming various languages and words. Therefore the function of the mental factor of perception is first to take in the object-image, establish the object-image, and after positioning the object-image, give rise to various designations to express and display it, so that others may jointly receive and know it.
Original text: 思谓令心造作为性。于善品等役心为业。谓能取境正因等相。驱役自心令造善等。
Explanation: The self-nature of the mental factor of volition is the ability to drive the mind consciousness to act. For example, the volition of the eye consciousness: after the eye consciousness discerns form-dust, greed, aversion, or a neutral mind arises. Then the mental factor of volition becomes manifest, deciding whether to continue discerning, to move away and avoid, or to follow conditions. After the decision, action is performed: either continuing to look, or moving away to look at other form-dust. The volition of the ear consciousness: after the ear consciousness discerns sound-dust, it decides whether to continue discerning, to avoid, or to follow conditions, and then acts according to the decision.
The nose, tongue, and body consciousnesses are all like this. The mind consciousness is also like this, with two kinds of volition: the volition together with the five consciousnesses, and the volition that alone discerns mental objects. The volition of the manas is especially important: He not only directly makes decisions Himself, but also dominates the actions of the six consciousnesses, and can drive the actions of the eighth consciousness; He is the bridge and bond linking the six consciousnesses and the eighth consciousness.
As for the volition of the eighth consciousness, it is of the first importance, extremely crucial. Because all dharmas come from the eighth consciousness, when the eighth consciousness gives rise to the mental factor of volition, of course the eighth consciousness begins to act; once the eighth consciousness acts, the corresponding dharmas are produced. Without the volition of the eighth consciousness, no dharmas would be born; therefore the volition of the eighth consciousness is extremely important. Part of the eighth consciousness's volition is induced by the volitions of the seven consciousnesses; especially the volition of the manas causes the mental factor of volition of the eighth consciousness to become manifest, thereby performing action in the true sense — this is true action, dharmas are truly produced.
Another part of the eighth consciousness's mental factor of volition operates by itself, unrelated to the seven consciousnesses. For example, in discerning sentient beings' karmic seeds: if evil karmic seeds mature, He will make sentient beings' evil retribution become manifest, producing various illnesses, calamities, and disasters. When sentient beings' wholesome karmic seeds mature, He lets them receive wholesome retribution — suddenly getting rich, being promoted, and so on. All these are beyond the imagination of the seven consciousnesses; moreover, the retribution of evil karma is not what the seven consciousnesses wish for; the seven consciousnesses would not decide to receive evil retribution and make themselves suffer. The eighth consciousness operates thus naturally, by its own nature; this is His rule, and no one can do anything about it. The eighth consciousness's volition regarding the body faculty and the material world is also not swayed by the manas and has nothing to do with the volition of the seven consciousnesses. The volitions of the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses are all very complex and cannot be fully described.
The function of the mental factor of volition can drive one's own mind to create wholesome karma, unwholesome karma, and neutral (avyākṛta) karma that is neither wholesome nor unwholesome. The mental factor of volition first deliberates and grasps various object-marks, or deliberates and grasps various object-aspects; after deliberation, it decides to act. Then the bodily, verbal, and mental actions of the six consciousnesses appear — wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral. The volition and action of the eighth consciousness are purely neutral karma, not belonging to wholesome or unwholesome. However, the eighth consciousness at the buddha-stage corresponds with the eleven wholesome mental factors, and the mental factor of volition of the eighth consciousness creates wholesome karma. After the transformation of consciousness into wisdom, the seven consciousnesses also mostly create wholesome karma as their main activity, gradually corresponding with wholesome dharmas, departing from unwholesome dharmas, departing from defilement. When defilement is truly departed from, one may have reached the bhūmi of an eighth-stage bodhisattva.
Original text: 此五既是遍行所摄。故与藏识决定相应。其遍行相。后当广释。此触等五。与异熟识行相虽异。而时依同。所缘事等。故名相应。
Explanation: These five mental factors belong to the universal mental factors; whenever the mind consciousness operates, the five universal mental factors become manifest simultaneously, operating at the same time and place as the mind consciousness. Therefore the five universal mental factors are absolutely corresponding with the treasury consciousness, that is, the eighth consciousness; therefore the eighth consciousness, the vipāka-consciousness, has the five universal mental factors. As for how the five universal mental factors are universal and how they operate, and what their operating characteristics are, this will be extensively explained later.
These five mental factors — contact, manaskāra, feeling, perception, and volition — their operating characteristics differ somewhat from the operating characteristics of the vipāka-consciousness; they are not completely identical. But the times of their manifestation are simultaneous, and the object-matters they rely upon are the same. Then what is the operating characteristic of the vipāka-consciousness? "Operation" means running, functioning; "characteristic" means the appearance and state of the operation. The operating characteristics of the five universal mental factors differ from those of the vipāka-consciousness. When the eighth consciousness, the vipāka-consciousness, is manifest, it is completely without form and without mark, and completely such and unconditioned.
Whereas the operation of the mental factors has a certain appearance and form; it is conditioned, with the nature of action. Action is the conditioned; actions include manaskāra, contact, feeling, perception, and volition — all are of conditioned nature. Because of the conditioned nature of the mental factors, the eighth consciousness can give birth to all dharmas, producing all conditioned dharmas of the three realms, including the material world and sentient beings' five aggregates and eighteen realms, realizing sentient beings' causes, conditions, and retributions. The eighth consciousness is the combination of unconditioned nature and conditioned nature; the conditioned and unconditioned together constitute the complete nature of the eighth consciousness; neither can be lacking.
Although the operating characteristics of the eighth consciousness and the mental factors differ, the time and support are the same. "Time" means time, moment; "support" means the various object-aspects relied upon. That is, the eighth consciousness, the vipāka-consciousness, and the five universal mental factors operate at the same time and place; whenever the eighth consciousness operates, the mental factors necessarily operate simultaneously, and both rely on the same object-matter; the object-aspect relied upon is the same — the object-aspect is one and the same.
"The objects cognized are equal, hence they are corresponding." "Equal" means equal, same. The vipāka-consciousness and the five universal mental factors cognize the same object-matter — the same, one and the same — hence they are corresponding. If not the same, then they are not corresponding. "Corresponding" means the mental factors correspond with the vipāka-consciousness; the mental factors are five of the fifty-one corresponding mental factors, necessarily corresponding with the mind consciousness, being the assisting companions of the mind consciousness, accompanying and aiding the operation of the mind consciousness. Besides the fifty-one mental factors, there are also twenty-four non-associated conditioning dharmas that do not correspond with the mind consciousness — not corresponding with the time, place, and characteristics of the mind consciousness's operation — hence they are called non-associated conditioning dharmas.
Original text: 此识行相极不明了。不能分别违顺境相。微细一类相续而转。是故唯与舍受相应。又此相应受。唯是异熟。随先引业转。不待现缘。任善恶业势力转故。唯是舍受。苦乐二受是异熟生。非真异熟。待现缘故非此相应。
Explanation: "This consciousness" refers to the eighth consciousness, the vipāka-consciousness. Its operating characteristic is extremely subtle, indistinct, unclear. Unlike the six consciousnesses, which are easy for people to understand and recognize. The operation of the six consciousnesses is relatively coarse; the mind consciousness is easy to observe, whereas the operation of the eighth consciousness is extremely subtle and very hard to discover; one needs merit (puṇya) to be complete to a certain degree. The eighth consciousness does not correspond to the six sense objects and cannot discern the six objects. Whether the six sense objects are favorable or adverse, He does not know; that is, He does not know the good or bad of the six objects, does not know right and wrong, wholesome and unwholesome, because He does not correspond to the six objects, not knowing or seeing the six objects.
The operating characteristic of the eighth vipāka-consciousness is so subtle that the vast majority of people find it very hard to realize Him, and hard to observe His existence and operation. Yet He operates continuously forever, never having stopped, and will never stop operating in the future either. Because He is a mind-substance that is unborn and undying, there will never be a time of interruption. Therefore the eighth consciousness corresponds only with neutral feeling (upekṣā-vedanā), without painful or pleasant feeling. But the neutral feeling of the eighth consciousness differs somewhat from the neutral feeling of the first seven consciousnesses.
The neutral feeling of the first seven consciousnesses is, after discriminating the six sense objects, a feeling toward the six objects that follows conditions, a feeling that may or may not be there, a feeling of indifference and non-attachment. Whereas the neutral feeling of the eighth consciousness is that He fundamentally does not discern the six objects, does not know the six objects, and of course gives rise to no feeling toward the six objects. Like a blind person who cannot see flowers: toward the flowers before him, of course he has no sensation. Like a deaf person who fundamentally cannot hear sounds: when music comes, of course he has no sensation. The eighth consciousness is like this.
This corresponding neutral feeling that does not discriminate favorable and adverse states of the six objects exists only in the vipāka-consciousness. "It follows the karma projected previously, not awaiting present conditions, operating by the force of wholesome and unwholesome karma; therefore it is only neutral feeling." The vipāka-consciousness follows the karmic actions created by sentient beings in past lives, transmigrating with the seven consciousnesses into this life. And the vipāka-consciousness's feeling toward sentient beings' karmic actions and retributions is also neutral: He does not rejoice because sentient beings create wholesome karma and ascend to heaven to enjoy pleasures, nor does He give rise to painful feeling because sentient beings create unwholesome karma and fall into the three evil destinies and suffer. The vipāka-consciousness has no sensation at all; whatever karmic actions sentient beings create and whatever retributions they receive, He is without joy or sorrow, completely neutral feeling.
When sentient beings do good, the vipāka-consciousness follows the wholesome conditions; when sentient beings do evil, the vipāka-consciousness follows the unwholesome conditions; He is indifferent to both. Wholesome and evil are entirely unrelated to Him; He complies with all; therefore it is completely neutral feeling. But sentient beings' two feelings of pain and pleasure are all vipāka retribution, born from the vipāka-consciousness. Although the two feelings of pain and pleasure are born from the vipāka-consciousness, they are not the true sensations of the vipāka-consciousness itself.
Because these two feelings require corresponding karmic conditions, requiring the present direct and circumstantial retribution — the six sense objects — for the two feelings of pain and pleasure to arise; these are the sensations possessed by the six consciousnesses. The vipāka-consciousness does not have them; the vipāka-consciousness does not correspond with these two sensations, because the vipāka-consciousness does not correspond to the six sense objects and has nothing to do with sentient beings' direct and circumstantial retributive environments. He receives no retribution and feels no objects; therefore He has no mental states, no sensations.
Original text: 又由此识常无转变。有情恒执为自内我。若与苦乐二受相应。便有转变。宁执为我。故此但与舍受相应。若尔。如何此识亦是恶业异熟。既许善业能招舍受。此亦应然舍受不违苦乐品故。如无记法。善恶俱招。
Explanation: Furthermore, because the nature of this vipāka-consciousness is constant and unchanging, sentient beings, since beginningless kalpas, have always been grasping the eighth consciousness as their inner self, appropriating all the functional natures of the eighth consciousness as their own, believing that the manas itself can accomplish all those enterprises, that they are all its own doing.
If the vipāka-consciousness corresponded with painful feeling, He would not let sentient beings go to the three evil destinies to suffer, nor would He follow sentient beings' seven consciousnesses into the three evil destinies. If the vipāka-consciousness corresponded with pleasant feeling, He would let sentient beings live forever in heaven, never dying. When sentient beings create evil karma, the vipāka-consciousness would not record and store it and then output the evil karmic seeds — He would not do this; He would make choices. Then the nature of the vipāka-consciousness would change, no longer the original tranquil mind-substance.
When sentient beings create evil karma, the vipāka-consciousness would not comply and would not output seeds, and then sentient beings' evil karma could not be created. Therefore a vipāka-consciousness that changes back and forth would not be constant and unchanging, and the manas would have no need to grasp Him as self. It is like when the manas once knows that the five aggregates are arising and ceasing, changing, impermanent, false and without self, then the manas will no longer grasp the five aggregates as self — the principle is the same. Therefore the vipāka-consciousness corresponds only with neutral feeling.
If it is so — the vipāka-consciousness corresponding only with neutral feeling — why can this vipāka-consciousness also make evil karma ripen at different times, different places, and in different categories? Answer: Since it is granted that when sentient beings receive the retribution of wholesome karma, the vipāka-consciousness is also in neutral feeling, then when sentient beings receive the evil retribution of unwholesome karma, the vipāka-consciousness should likewise be in neutral feeling. The neutral feeling of the vipāka-consciousness never contradicts or affects the painful and pleasant feelings of sentient beings' seven consciousnesses; the two do not contradict each other, do not conflict with each other. For example, when sentient beings receive the neutral (avyākṛta) retribution that is neither wholesome nor unwholesome, the vipāka-consciousness is in neutral feeling; then when sentient beings receive wholesome and unwholesome retributions, the vipāka-consciousness is still in neutral feeling.
