Contemplating the Five Aggregates and Eliminating the View of Self (Part I) (Second Edition)

Chapter 6 The Relationship Between the Five Aggregates and the Eighth Consciousness

Section 1 The Connotation of the Two Types of Non-Self Dharma

I. The Meaning of Non-Self

The term "non-self" (wú wǒ) carries different meanings in different contexts. Only by clarifying these meanings can one understand what non-self truly refers to and know how to begin cultivation. The non-self of the deluded mind (the seven consciousnesses) has two aspects: one refers to the absence of non-arising-and-ceasing nature, the absence of permanence, and the absence of true sovereignty; the other refers to the absence of the emptiness nature (śūnyatā) characteristic of the Eighth Consciousness. The non-self of the true mind (the Eighth Consciousness) also has two aspects: one refers to the absence of the self-nature and selfishness characteristic of the seven consciousnesses; the other refers to the absence of the sovereignty and controlling nature characteristic of the seven consciousnesses.

Only by clarifying these concepts can one understand the true meaning of self and non-self, thereby guiding one's own cultivation. Extricating oneself from these concepts is also not easy. A single term or concept can have multiple meanings; if the meanings are not clarified, one remains confused and unable to begin cultivation. For example, the term "real" (zhēnshí) represents different meanings in different contexts: one meaning refers to the real mark of the Eighth Consciousness, which is unborn and unceasing, originally existent; another meaning refers to phenomena in the conventional world that accord with facts, but these are phenomena subject to arising and ceasing, not the originally existent dharma.

II. Distinguishing the Two Types of Non-Self Nature

Through contemplating the dharma of suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self, one ultimately verifies that the five aggregates and eighteen elements (āyatanas) of the conventional realm are all impermanent, non-self dharmas subject to arising and ceasing. Only by verifying that the five aggregates are indeed characterized by arising and ceasing can one know they are non-self, and gradually cease the meaningless, evil, and unwholesome activities of the five aggregates. Initially, one reduces the activities of the five aggregates, becoming disinterested in them because one knows the five aggregates are non-self, characterized by arising and ceasing, change, emptiness, and meaninglessness.

The purpose of investigating the Eighth Consciousness is to verify the Eighth Consciousness within the five aggregates. After verification, one can directly perceive the relationship between the five aggregates and the Eighth Consciousness, ultimately verifying the one deluded and the one true, observing how the deluded is deluded and how the true is true. Upon realizing the true, eternal existence of the Eighth Consciousness and observing its purity within the five-aggregate body, one verifies the non-self nature of the Eighth Consciousness. Simultaneously, by observing how the Eighth Consciousness specifically gives rise to the five aggregates, one verifies that the five aggregates are indeed false, unreal, and non-self.

The two types of non-self nature point to different things. The non-self nature characterized by suffering, emptiness, and impermanence corresponds to the non-existent self associated with arising, ceasing, and impermanence. This non-existent self is the self of the seven consciousnesses, a false self, a self that can be extinguished. The self of the Eighth Consciousness corresponds to the unborn and unceasing, to true reality, and to purity. The non-self nature of the Eighth Consciousness signifies that within the mind of the Eighth Consciousness, there is no recognition of self, no selfishness, no self-mind. These two types of non-self must absolutely not be confused or conflated; otherwise, correct cultivation is impossible. The non-self of the deluded mind inevitably arises, ceases, and changes, while the non-self of the Eighth Consciousness is eternally unborn and unceasing.

The two types of non-self have two meanings. The non-self of the seven consciousnesses lacks true reality but possesses destructiveness. The non-self of the Eighth Consciousness is characterized by selflessness, absence of self-nature, absence of controlling nature, and absence of grasping nature. When the seven consciousnesses, relying on the Eighth Consciousness, cultivate to the state of non-self, they also attain a non-self, selfless, non-grasping nature similar to that of the Eighth Consciousness. Those with a slight sense of self dare to negate themselves, correcting faults as soon as they are known, transforming quickly. Those with a strong sense of self refuse to re-think rationally to clarify their understanding, unwilling to negate themselves even slightly. Such people find it difficult to examine their own faults, cling stubbornly to their views, refuse to correct themselves, and find cultivation extremely difficult.

Without meditative concentration (dhyāna), thinking becomes coarse and illogical, utterly unable to unravel the right and wrong, the confusions and errors within these Dharma principles; the mind is chaotic. If encountering particularly complex Dharma principles, one feels lost and unable to proceed. Therefore, meditative concentration is extremely important.

III. The Delusional Self and the True Self Are Not Equivalent

"I do not learn the Buddha-Dharma, I do not cultivate, I do not uphold precepts, I do not cultivate concentration, I do not develop wisdom, I do not seek liberation, I am carefree and at ease, acting spontaneously and naturally." What does this "I" refer to? It refers to the Eighth Consciousness. Can the subject "I" here be replaced by the seven consciousnesses? Can the seven consciousnesses and five aggregates also be like the Eighth Consciousness in this way—not learning the Buddha-Dharma, not cultivating, not upholding precepts, not cultivating concentration, not developing wisdom, not seeking liberation, acting spontaneously and naturally? Clearly not, unless after becoming a Buddha, when consciousness is ultimately transformed into wisdom, and the nature of the seven consciousnesses becomes similar to that of the Eighth Consciousness.

Some say that since one should learn from the Eighth Consciousness, rely on the Eighth Consciousness, and transform based on the Eighth Consciousness, one should be like the Eighth Consciousness. Is this statement correct? It is both correct and incorrect. One must have rigorous logical thinking, clearly distinguishing in which aspects one should learn from the Eighth Consciousness, in which aspects one should not, when to learn from the Eighth Consciousness, and when not to. After becoming a Buddha, the seven consciousnesses are the same as the Eighth Consciousness—not learning the Buddha-Dharma, not upholding precepts, not cultivating concentration, not developing wisdom, not seeking liberation, not seeking Buddhahood. Before Buddhahood, while still a sentient being, one must learn the Buddha-Dharma, uphold precepts, cultivate concentration, develop wisdom, seek liberation, and seek Buddhahood. Before Buddhahood, one must learn the purity and absence of greed, hatred, and delusion characteristic of the Eighth Consciousness in its operation within the five-aggregate body. After becoming a Buddha, the seven consciousnesses are as pure as the Eighth Consciousness, so there is no longer a need to learn the purity of the Eighth Consciousness, because a Buddha is one who has nothing more to learn. Clarifying these two "I"s is essential for cultivation. If they are conflated, cultivation becomes impossible, and accomplishment cannot be achieved.

IV. The Contemplation Practices of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna Should Not Be Confused

"Let go of the self, attain non-self." What do these two "I"s refer to? Both refer to the delusional self. If the logical relationship between the delusional self and the true self is not understood, cultivation in both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna becomes difficult. If one practices Hīnayāna contemplation but fails to reach the Hīnayāna conclusion of non-self, how is this contemplation practiced? If one practices Mahāyāna contemplation but only reaches a Hīnayāna conclusion, it is because one's capacity is still insufficient. Generally, for those who have not yet realized the mind (ming xin), or are still some distance from it, it is advisable to focus solely on Hīnayāna contemplation. This should not be mixed with Mahāyāna Chan (Zen) investigation, because with insufficient capacity and limited wisdom, it is highly unlikely to yield a correct contemplative result, and one cannot truly sever the view of self.

Non-self does not always refer to the Eighth Consciousness of Mahāyāna Dharma. Some say that only by transforming based on the Eighth Consciousness can one attain non-self, but this is not so. For example, how do people in the secular world who do not understand the Buddha-Dharma attain non-self? Like Lei Feng and other heroic figures who achieved so-called "non-self" in secular endeavors—did they all transform based on the Eighth Consciousness? None did. Did Hīnayāna practitioners from the first fruit (Srotāpanna) to the fourth fruit (Arhat) all transform based on the Eighth Consciousness? None did. Therefore, it is inappropriate to rigidly apply the concept of non-self solely to the Eighth Consciousness; one must also engage in actual contemplation and realization. As long as Hīnayāna practitioners genuinely attain the fruits (of Stream-enterer, etc.), they will inevitably reach a reasonable and true conclusion, without veering off into Mahāyāna to draw a Mahāyāna conclusion.

As soon as many people speak, one can see whether they have undergone actual cultivation and realization. Their language reveals whether their conclusions come from genuine cultivation and realization or are merely theories pieced together through emotional thinking, intellectual understanding, or parroting. When an ordinary person (prithagjana) teaches the Dharma and immediately speaks of the cultivation of First Bhūmi or Eighth Bhūmi Bodhisattvas, it shows this person fundamentally does not understand actual cultivation, does not know how to begin cultivation, and thus leads others on convoluted paths without a clear roadmap. One cannot have a clear roadmap for a path one has not walked oneself. Everyone should still diligently cultivate concentration; without meditative concentration, thinking lacks logic and is neither clear nor thorough.

V. What Conclusion Should Hīnayāna Contemplation Reach?

If, after contemplating the five aggregates through the Four Noble Truths (suffering, origin, cessation, path), one reaches the conclusion that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness, what does this signify? It signifies that all ordinary sentient beings, since beginningless time, have always mistaken the five aggregates for the Eighth Consciousness. Then, encountering the Buddha-Dharma and desiring liberation, through contemplation and thinking, they correct their previous erroneous cognition, changing the wrong view to the right view, saying: "The five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness; the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness, nor are they not the Eighth Consciousness." Is this so? Does the phrase "nor are they not the Eighth Consciousness" include the meaning that the five aggregates *are* also the Eighth Consciousness?

If so, then what is wrong with ordinary sentient beings since beginningless time always considering the five aggregates to be the Eighth Consciousness? Is it a wrong view? There's nothing wrong! If ordinary sentient beings since beginningless time truly always mistook the five aggregates for the Eighth Consciousness, then there would be no view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi) and no self-attachment (ātma-grāha), no ignorance (avidyā) and no afflictions (kleśa). The Buddha would not have needed to come to Sahā world eight thousand times to save sentient beings. Sentient beings recognizing the Eighth Consciousness "I" would not recognize the five aggregates "I," and thus would not create evil karma. The most crucial point is: Have ordinary sentient beings since beginningless time *really* mistaken the five aggregates for the Eighth Consciousness?

If ordinary sentient beings since beginningless time have always mistaken the five aggregates for the Eighth Consciousness, then all ordinary sentient beings are Ground Bodhisattvas (Bhūmi), possessing the Wisdom of Consciousness-Only (vijñāna-jñāna). Because only Ground Bodhisattvas, through direct perception based on the Wisdom of Consciousness-Only, can observe that the five aggregates in their entirety are the Eighth Consciousness—just as a cloth doll is entirely cloth, a clay figure is entirely clay, a gold ornament is entirely gold. Then all sentient beings since beginningless time are Ground Bodhisattvas. In that case, is there still a need to sever the view of self, sever the view of the Eighth Consciousness as self, sever the view of "my" Eighth Consciousness?

If ordinary sentient beings since beginningless time did not know of the existence of the true self, the Eighth Consciousness, and did not consider the five aggregates to be the Eighth Consciousness, then when ordinary sentient beings encounter the Dharma of liberation, contemplate the Four Noble Truths (suffering, origin, cessation, path), and contemplate suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self, can they ultimately reach the conclusion that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness self, not my Eighth Consciousness? Is this a case of equivocation? If it is equivocation, then no one can truly sever the view of self; all Hīnayāna practitioners cannot attain the pure Dharma-eye, cannot attain liberation.

Those who truly and genuinely cultivate the Thirty-seven Aids to Enlightenment and engage in contemplation correctly, when severing the view of self and attaining the fruit (of Stream-entry, etc.), fundamentally do *not* reach the conclusion that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness. Giving such a conclusion stems from emotional thinking and intellectual understanding about actual cultivation; it is purely a theory arrived at through research, without undergoing the process of genuine contemplation and thinking. Only after severing the view of self and then contemplating from the Mahāyāna perspective can one reach the conclusion that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness.

When the Buddha taught the Four Noble Truths to his disciples, he first told them: Within the five aggregates there is the true self, the Eighth Consciousness, unborn and unceasing; even if the five aggregates and eighteen elements are extinguished, the Eighth Consciousness does not cease. Thus, the disciples all accepted the Buddha's words in faith, knowing there is the unceasing; after parinirvāṇa without residue, it is not annihilation or utter nothingness; that true self is useful. Hearing the Buddha's words, the disciples immediately knew that the five aggregates and eighteen elements can cease, but the Eighth Consciousness does not cease; they knew the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness. However, this knowing is the knowing of the mental consciousness (mano-vijñāna); the mental faculty (manas) has not verified it. Verification would make them Mahāyāna Bodhisattvas. They also would not go seeking the Eighth Consciousness; they only contemplate the suffering, origin, cessation, and path of the five aggregates. They would not say that after arduous contemplation, they reach the conclusion: "The five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness."

If it were so, then they have not contemplated rationally. This conclusion should have been known in their minds when the Buddha spoke of the true self. And ordinary sentient beings, before the Buddha taught about the Eighth Consciousness Tathāgatagarbha, did not know of the Eighth Consciousness, so they would not have the notion that the five aggregates *are* the Eighth Consciousness, necessitating the severing of the view of self to eradicate the notion that the five aggregates are the Eighth Consciousness. Therefore, contemplating the five aggregates but concluding that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness is wrong contemplation; one has not genuinely contemplated the Hīnayāna Dharma and has not severed the view of self.

In the Āgama Sūtras, the Buddha taught the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta: Contemplate the body as impure, contemplate feelings as suffering, contemplate the mind as impermanent, contemplate dharmas as non-self. If a person genuinely and truly engages in this contemplation, spending several years doing so, and upon severing the view of self, can they reach the conclusion: "The body is not the Eighth Consciousness, feelings are not the Eighth Consciousness, the mind is not the Eighth Consciousness, dharmas are not the Eighth Consciousness"? If they reach such a conclusion, one asks: How did this person contemplate? Did they contemplate according to the content taught by the World-Honored One? This person is drawing conclusions based on imagination, not genuinely contemplating rationally. If Hīnayāna practitioners truly verified that the five aggregates are not different from the Eighth Consciousness Tathāgatagarbha, then they would not fear suffering and rush to extinguish the five aggregates to enter parinirvāṇa without residue. Because they verified that the five aggregates are all illusory appearances manifested by the Eighth Consciousness, without substantial reality, without true suffering, they would not seek to avoid or escape suffering.

VI. The Meaning of Suffering as Non-Self

After contemplating the non-self of the five aggregates, if one reaches the conclusion: "Form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are suffering; what suffers is not the Eighth Consciousness nor non-Eighth Consciousness," is this logically coherent?

Upon verifying that form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are suffering and not the Eighth Consciousness, can one gradually become disenchanted with form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, losing fondness for them? If so, then one would turn to crave and be fond of the Eighth Consciousness, taking delight in the Eighth Consciousness. Can Hīnayāna noble disciples take delight in the Eighth Consciousness, crave and be fond of the Eighth Consciousness? Does this phenomenon exist? If it does, then Arhats, due to delighting in the Eighth Consciousness, would continue to cultivate the Bodhisattva path, benefiting self and others, and would not enter parinirvāṇa without residue; they would not disappear from the threefold world.

Theoretically, one can know that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness; anyone can know this immediately upon hearing the Buddha introduce the Eighth Consciousness. Many people, upon reflection, also know that the form aggregate arises, ceases, comes, and goes incessantly; of course, it is not the real self, nor the real Eighth Consciousness. There is no need to go through immense hardship contemplating and thinking that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness; this deviates too severely from the topic.

Is it coherent to say that the five aggregates are suffering, not the Eighth Consciousness, nor belonging to the Eighth Consciousness? The mental faculty (manas) certainly considers the five aggregates to be "mine" (belonging to self), not the Eighth Consciousness's; only then does it grasp the five aggregates as self, leading to immeasurable suffering in birth and death. If the mental faculty of an ordinary person considered the five aggregates to belong to and be owned by the Eighth Consciousness, would the mental faculty of an ordinary person still have the view of self and self-attachment? Would it still have the nature of parikalpita (imagined nature)? If nothing is one's own, what is left for the mental faculty to grasp?

The five aggregates are essentially the Eighth Consciousness; the six great seeds forming the five aggregates all originate from the Eighth Consciousness; they are the five aggregates invested in and produced by the Eighth Consciousness; thus, the five aggregates certainly belong to the Eighth Consciousness. How, after contemplation, could one instead conclude that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness? Isn't this strange? Theoretical speculation always reaches an end, always encounters a day when it cannot proceed, unable to justify itself. But those who have verified realization can explain things coherently from any angle; it all makes sense, and no one can refute it.

VII. Which "Self" is Referred to in "The Five Aggregates Are Not Self"?

Originally, the sixth and seventh consciousnesses took the five aggregates as self. After contemplation severs the view of self, one no longer takes the five aggregates as self. When the mental faculty took the form aggregate as self, it took the feeling aggregate as "mine," considering the form aggregate to be within the feeling aggregate, or the feeling aggregate within the form aggregate. Let us observe: Is the feeling aggregate within the form aggregate? Is the form aggregate within the feeling aggregate? Neither; the two do not intermingle. Similarly, when the mental faculty takes the feeling aggregate as self, it takes the form, perception, formation, and consciousness aggregates as "belonging to me," considering the feeling aggregate to contain the form, perception, formation, and consciousness aggregates, and vice versa. In reality, the aggregates neither separate from nor intermingle with each other. Through specific observation of the five aggregates, one can verify this principle.

If one could find feeling within the body, or find form within feeling, then corpses would also have feeling, wood would also have feeling. If feeling contained form, then feeling *is* form; feeling would have form. If feeling had form, it would not be the formless functional activity of the consciousness mind. The other aggregates should be observed similarly. If one contemplates Mahāyāna principles simultaneously with Hīnayāna principles while contemplating the Hīnayāna principle of non-self, contemplation becomes impossible. Simultaneously contemplating Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna principles causes confusion in thinking, which is somewhat detrimental to severing the view of self through Hīnayāna practice. After understanding Mahāyāna principles, when specifically contemplating Hīnayāna, do not incorporate Mahāyāna; otherwise, one cannot proceed.

If one wishes to contemplate that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness, not different from the Eighth Consciousness, and not mutually existent with the Eighth Consciousness, let everyone diligently try: Can you contemplate this? Do you have any line of thought? Unless one investigates Chan and verifies the Eighth Consciousness, and only when prajñā wisdom is very deep, is it possible; with shallow wisdom, it cannot be done. The Heart Sūtra says it is only when practicing the profound prajñāpāramitā that one can illuminate and see the five aggregates are all empty; when practicing shallow prajñāpāramitā, one cannot yet illuminate and see, let alone when not practicing prajñāpāramitā at all. Follow the methods taught by the Buddha in the Āgama Sūtras for contemplation; the line of thought is very clear. Do not invent your own methods.

VIII. Whose View of Self is Severed When Severing the View of Self?

The "self" considered to be the consciousness aggregate (six consciousnesses)—is it the true self, the Eighth Consciousness, or the delusional self, the mental faculty? Does severing the view of self mean causing the mental faculty to sever the view that the consciousness aggregate is self, or causing the Eighth Consciousness to sever the view that the consciousness aggregate is self? At the culmination of contemplation, is it the mental faculty that considers the consciousness aggregate non-self, or the Eighth Consciousness that considers the consciousness aggregate non-self? The result of severing the view of self is causing the mental faculty to consider the consciousness aggregate and five aggregates as "not self" and "not mine." It is not causing the Eighth Consciousness to consider the consciousness aggregate and five aggregates non-self and not-mine. Views of self and views of mine have nothing to do with the Eighth Consciousness.

Contemplating the suffering, emptiness, impermanence, and non-self of the consciousness aggregate should involve contemplating the arising, ceasing, changing, impermanent nature of the consciousness aggregate, and its non-self nature, unreality—that it is not a false self, not owned by a false self; in reality, there is no false self or delusional self; all is empty. It is not about contemplating that the consciousness aggregate or five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness.

Who is doing this contemplation? It is not the Eighth Consciousness contemplating; it is the mental faculty, based on the contemplation of the mental consciousness, personally engaging in contemplation. Ultimately, the mental faculty verifies that the consciousness aggregate is "not self" and "not different from self" (meaning it is not something other than self, not "mine" external to self). "Not different" means not separate, not other. The consciousness aggregate is neither self nor mine; both "I" and "mine" are to be severed.

Who verifies that the consciousness aggregate is non-self, not self? Who verifies that the form aggregate is non-self? Who verifies that the feeling aggregate is non-self? Who verifies that the perception aggregate is non-self? Who verifies that the formation aggregate is non-self? Who severs the view that these aggregates are self? Whose view is the view of self? Which "self" does the "self" in "view of self" refer to? The view that the five aggregates are self is a wrong view; the view that the five aggregates are not self is a right view. Who has the wrong view? Who has the right view? Which "self's" wrong view is severed? Which "self" gains the right view? Who considers the five aggregates not self? Who considers the five aggregates self?

The "self" in "the five aggregates are self"—which self does this refer to? Is this view right or wrong? Whether right or wrong view, the Eighth Consciousness has neither. The Eighth Consciousness itself does not give rise to views; it does not learn the Buddha-Dharma, does not cultivate, has no view-delusions or affliction-delusions, and thus has no need to sever view-delusions or affliction-delusions. Therefore, initially, it is the sixth and seventh consciousnesses that engage in contemplation. At the culmination of contemplation, the sixth and seventh consciousnesses no longer recognize the five aggregates as self and also know there is no so-called self; the five aggregates and eighteen elements are non-self.

If one says that the culmination of contemplation leads to the conclusion that the five aggregates are not the Eighth Consciousness, then before attaining the fruit, one would have considered the five aggregates to *be* the Eighth Consciousness. However, sentient beings since beginningless time fundamentally lack such awareness; they do not know of the true self, the Eighth Consciousness. They all consider the five aggregates to be the delusional self, belonging to and used by self. Whoever has the view of self, let that one sever the view of self. The mental consciousness and mental faculty have the view of self; therefore, to sever the view of self, one must sever the view of self held by the mental consciousness and mental faculty. Severing the view of self is rejecting the false; realizing the mind (ming xin) is recognizing the true. The mental faculty and mental consciousness deny the false, then can recognize the true.

IX. Is the Material Body Not the Eighth Consciousness?

From the perspective of conventional phenomena, the material body is form dharma with characteristics; of course, it is not the formless, markless Eighth Consciousness. But from the perspective of ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), from the perspective of Consciousness-Only, the substance of the material body is the Eighth Consciousness. After the Eighth Consciousness gives birth to the sentient being's material body, how does the present material body exist? Is it still being produced by the Eighth Consciousness? Is the Eighth Consciousness still continuously producing the material body? If one cannot answer this question, how can one know whether the material body is not the Eighth Consciousness, not different from the Eighth Consciousness, or not mutually existent with the Eighth Consciousness?

When the Eighth Consciousness initially produces the material body, it transmits the seeds of the four great elements (earth, water, fire, wind), simultaneously transmits the consciousness seeds of the mental faculty, and then transmits the consciousness seeds of the mental consciousness. After the material body is born, the Eighth Consciousness continues to transmit the seeds of the four great elements incessantly, equivalent to the Eighth Consciousness continuously producing the material body. Once the Eighth Consciousness ceases transmitting the seeds of the four great elements, the material body will cease and no longer exist.

The Eighth Consciousness produces all dharmas. As long as a dharma exists, the Eighth Consciousness is continuously producing that dharma. After a dharma appears, its subsequent production is called sustaining and maintaining; in reality, it is still production, uninterrupted. The seeds of the four great elements are produced and then cease, produced again and cease again, continuously arising and ceasing in cycles; thus, the material body continues to exist and constantly changes. The function of the Eighth Consciousness regarding the material body is the continuous transmission and withdrawal of the seeds of the four great elements and consciousness seeds. The function of the Eighth Consciousness regarding all dharmas is to transmit seeds, continuously producing dharmas, i.e., sustaining the existence and change of dharmas, causing dharmas to arise, abide, change, and cease. The entire material body is composed solely of the seven great seeds output by the Eighth Consciousness. Thus, the material body is like a holding limited liability company solely invested in by the Eighth Consciousness, or one could call it a wholly-owned enterprise. It just doesn't yield harvest or profit, but also has no loss. Prosperity or decline, success or failure, the Eighth Consciousness is indifferent because it does not take the material body as self or mine.

From the perspective that the Eighth Consciousness wholly invests in and controls the material body, is the material body not the Eighth Consciousness? No! Is the material body not different from the Eighth Consciousness (meaning not belonging to the Eighth Consciousness)? No! Is the material body not mutually existent with the Eighth Consciousness? No! The seeds of the material body all originate from the Eighth Consciousness; a portion of the seeds within the Eighth Consciousness constitute the material body. The material body *is* the Eighth Consciousness, belonging to the Eighth Consciousness. The material body in its entirety is Suchness (tathatā)! This is the One True Dharma Realm! Every conditioned phenomenon in the world, which one is not the Eighth Consciousness? The entirety is Suchness, the One True Dharma Realm!

Since the material body in its entirety is constituted by seeds from the Eighth Consciousness, and the material body is regulated and controlled by the Eighth Consciousness, then is the material body mutually existent with the Eighth Consciousness, or not mutually existent? How can the boss leave his own company? But is the material body truly solely invested in by the Eighth Consciousness, with no partners or co-investors? Are there no second boss, third boss? No! There is a false boss who superficially manages and controls it, thinking the material body is self and belongs to self, subject to self's decisions.

What does the Eighth Consciousness base its transmission of the seven great seeds for investment and control on? Of course, on karmic seeds. Where do karmic seeds come from? They are obtained through actions performed by the six consciousnesses directed by the mental faculty. If the mental faculty directs the six consciousnesses to perform wholesome karma, one obtains a favorable material body, an excellent company that creates profit. If the mental faculty directs the six consciousnesses to perform unwholesome karma, one obtains a material body in the evil destinies, a disaster-ridden material body, a loss-making, declining company. The prosperity or decline, success or failure of the material body company is borne by the mental faculty, which assumes the risk and responsibility; profit belongs to the mental faculty, loss also belongs to the mental faculty.

The Eighth Consciousness is a hands-off investor; after investing, it does not manage the rest. When the company needs funds, it will invest again, as long as there is inventory. To put it another way, the investment funds of the Eighth Consciousness all come from the inventory account. Where do the funds in inventory come from? They are income created by the seven consciousnesses. So, does the material body company deposit profits into the treasury? If deposited, when the company operates poorly, debts are the responsibility of the mental faculty, offset by deposits in the treasury. If the treasury is depleted, the material body lives as a beggar; the second boss (mental faculty) and third boss (six consciousnesses) become slaves. The big boss (Eighth Consciousness) is indifferent, suffering no loss whatsoever.

X. Hīnayāna Correctly Observes the Five Aggregates and Eighteen Elements as Non-Self

When observing that the five aggregates are not self, one first observes that the form aggregate is not self. If one substitutes this "self" with the Eighth Consciousness, then one is contemplating that the form aggregate is not the Eighth Consciousness. May I ask: What is the purpose of observing this? How does one observe it? Is it necessary to observe it? Is it correct observation? When observing that the feeling aggregate is not self, one instead observes that the feeling aggregate is not the Eighth Consciousness. What is the purpose of observing this? How does one observe it? Is it necessary to observe it? Is it correct observation?

When observing that the perception aggregate is not self, one instead observes that the perception aggregate is not the Eighth Consciousness. What use is such observation? How does one observe it? Is it necessary to observe it? Is it correct observation? When observing that the formation aggregate is not self, one instead observes that the formation aggregate is not the Eighth Consciousness. What is the purpose of observing this? Is it necessary to observe it? How does one observe it? Is it correct observation? When observing that the consciousness aggregate is not self, one instead observes that the formation aggregate is not the Eighth Consciousness. What is the purpose of observing this? Is it correct observation? Is it necessary to observe it? How does one observe it?

Then, further observing that the six sense bases are not self, one instead observes that the eye base, ear base, nose base, tongue base, body base, and mind base are not the Eighth Consciousness. Is this necessary to observe? Who doesn't know that the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind bases are fundamentally not the Eighth Consciousness? Yet, through arduous cultivation of concentration to contemplate, one reaches the conclusion that the six bases are not the Eighth Consciousness. Who doesn't know that the eye base, ear base, nose base, tongue base, and body base are not the Eighth Consciousness? Who doesn't know that the mind base is not the Eighth Consciousness? Observing the six sense objects is the same. What is the purpose of insisting on observing that the six sense objects are not the Eighth Consciousness? Who doesn't know that forms, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and dharmas are not the Eighth Consciousness? Is it necessary to observe this? Everyone knows this; isn't it drawing legs on a snake—superfluous? What relation does it have to the impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self of the five aggregates?

Hīnayāna contemplation of the five aggregates is precisely to contemplate the impermanent nature, changing nature, empty nature, and suffering nature of the five aggregates and eighteen elements, thereby confirming that they are not the self we have clung to since beginningless time; there is fundamentally no self whatsoever to cling to. In this way, the view of self is severed. Such contemplation is correct contemplation. Any other contemplation is wrong contemplation.

XI. What Doubt Does Hīnayāna Sever?

The severing of doubt in Hīnayāna means severing doubt about whether the Four Noble Truths taught by the Buddha can lead to liberation, severing doubt about whether oneself has severed the view of self, and severing doubt about whether others have severed the view of self. After severing doubt, one can correctly judge whether the Buddha-Dharma spoken by someone can enable sentient beings to sever the view of self and attain liberation, can correctly judge whether oneself and others have severed the view of self, and no longer harbor doubts about the Dharma, oneself, or others. However, because they have not verified the Mahāyāna Dharma, they still have extremely many afflictions of knowledge obstruction (jñeyāvaraṇa), so they still have doubts about the Mahāyāna Dharma that are not yet resolved.

XII. The Meaning of the Four-Line Verse on "All Conditioned Phenomena Are Impermanent"

"All conditioned phenomena are impermanent, They are dharmas of arising and ceasing." All dharmas existing and functioning in the world are impermanent. Why are they impermanent? Because these conditioned phenomena all exist depending on the Tathāgatagarbha; they are manifested by the Tathāgatagarbha based on various karmic conditions; they are dependently originated. When conditions are exhausted, they cease. Therefore, they are subject to arising and ceasing; what arises and ceases is impermanent.

"When arising and ceasing are extinguished, Quiescent extinction is bliss." When cultivation reaches the point of severing self-attachment, severing all craving for dharmas of the threefold world—that is, upon attaining the fourth fruit of Arhatship—one gains the capability to extinguish all conditioned phenomena within the world. When the fourth-fruit Arhat extinguishes all these functioning dharmas, he also extinguishes his own five aggregates and eighteen elements. But there is one thing that is unceasing and can never be extinguished: that is the Arhat's Eighth Consciousness Tathāgatagarbha. Thus, having extinguished the five aggregates and eighteen elements, there is no longer the Arhat as a person, no longer the six sense bases, six sense objects, and six consciousnesses, no objects, and no conscious mind. Consequently, there is no suffering feeling, nor any pleasant feeling. And the Tathāgatagarbha also has no feeling of suffering or pleasure; it abides in the quiescent extinction state where no objects are perceived, no dharmas are perceived—utterly still, empty and vast, without a trace of suffering feeling. This is conventionally called the bliss of quiescent extinction (nirvāṇa), though in reality, there is no bliss either.