Selected Lectures on the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra

Explanation of the Third Volume of the Cheng Weishi Lun (5)

Original Text: Record refers to good and evil, which yield beloved and unbeloved fruits, as well as a distinct self-nature that can be distinctly discerned. Since this (ālaya-vijñāna) is neither good nor evil, it is called non-definitive (avyākṛta).

Explanation: "Record refers to good and evil, which yield beloved and unbeloved fruits." "Record" pertains to the nature of good or evil; it is either good or evil, belonging to the two extremes. Its nature is distinct and extraordinary, hence it can be distinctly discerned and recorded. "Distinct" means to recognize and differentiate. Only a special and extraordinary nature is easy to distinguish and differentiate. If the mind-consciousness is of good nature and creates good karma, it will receive beloved maturational results (vipāka-phala). Good results are extremely delightful; sentient beings all favor the supreme results of good karma. This is called the beloved fruit. If the mind-consciousness is of evil nature and creates evil karma, in the future it will receive the fruit of evil karma, which is the unbeloved maturational result. "Record" refers to these two extremes—either good or evil—which yield beloved and unbeloved fruits respectively.

These two kinds of results are relatively supreme and can be distinctly recorded. The nature of the mental factors (caitta) of good and evil is also special and extraordinary; they possess a distinct self-nature that can be distinctly discerned, not a neutral, ordinary nature. Therefore, they are called "definitive" (vyākṛta). The so-called "ordinary" nature is neither good nor evil; it is very common and unremarkable. However, the ālaya-vijñāna does not belong to the definitive category; it belongs to the non-definitive (avyākṛta) nature. Being neither good nor evil, it has neither beloved maturational results nor results that cause aversion, because it lacks a distinct self-nature that can be discerned.

For example, since the ālaya-vijñāna is not of good nature, it does not create good karma and thus has no beloved maturational results. The ālaya-vijñāna is also not of evil nature; it does not create evil karma and thus has no unbeloved maturational results. However, when sentient beings create good karma, it cooperates with them in creating good karma. Yet when sentient beings receive the supreme results of good karma, the ālaya-vijñāna does not receive the good results.

When sentient beings give alms of the seven treasures filling the sands of the Ganges River and attain the boundless, supremely excellent results of good karma—such great karmic merit—the ālaya-vijñāna does not enjoy even the slightest portion. This is because it lacks the mind that creates good. Although it cooperates in creating good, it lacks the mental volition (cetanā) to create good karma. It merely operates cooperatively, naturally and spontaneously, according to the law of cause and effect, outputting karmic seeds (bīja) to actualize karma. Therefore, it does not enjoy the supreme results of good karma; only the sentient being's five aggregates (skandhas) and seven consciousnesses (vijñāna) enjoy this great karmic merit.

When sentient beings create evil karma, such as killing, arson, or slandering the Triple Gem, the ālaya-vijñāna, lacking an evil mind, does not actively or intentionally commit these evil deeds. However, when sentient beings commit these evil deeds, the ālaya-vijñāna cooperates in their creation. Yet, even while cooperating, it has no evil mind. Therefore, it also does not receive the evil maturational results. Sentient beings, with their evil minds creating karma, receive the unbeloved maturational results. Its cooperation in creating karma is merely spontaneous, operating naturally and according to a certain functional mechanism. Thus, it is non-definitive and has no maturational results.

For example, consider a robot programmed by a human. It acts according to its program, creating either good or evil karma. But whatever good or evil karma is created has no relation to the robot itself, because the robot lacks mental volition. Therefore, it has no merit or demerit; it receives neither reward nor punishment. Rewarding it brings no enjoyment; punishing it—for instance, if judicial authorities attempt to convict it—is impossible. Instead, the person who commanded the robot to create good or evil karma, or the person who designed the robot's program, is held accountable. The commander or designer receives the good or evil karmic results; the robot itself receives no karmic results. Similarly, the ālaya-vijñāna operates like a robot according to a fixed mechanism. It merely cooperates with sentient beings in creating karmic actions; it has no mental volition of its own. All karmic creation stems from the good or evil mental volition of sentient beings, and thus the results are borne by the sentient beings themselves.

Synthesizing the above analysis and argumentation, it is clear that the ālaya-vijñāna does not belong to the good, nor does it belong to the evil; it belongs to the category of neither-good-nor-evil. Therefore, it is called non-definitive. Earlier, it was also said to be non-obstructive (anivṛta); it is undefiled, neither good nor evil. Among these four dharmas (good, evil, non-obstructive non-definitive, obstructive non-definitive), it belongs to the non-obstructive and non-definitive. Good dharmas and non-good dharmas belong to the mental activities of the six consciousnesses, while the obstructive non-definitive dharmas belong to the mental activities of the seventh consciousness, the manas. Thus, the dharmas created by the eight consciousnesses are divided into these four categories. The ālaya-vijñāna belongs to the non-obstructive and non-definitive.

Original Text: "The same applies to contact, etc." means that just as the ālaya-vijñāna is solely included within the non-obstructive non-definitive nature, so too are contact, attention, sensation, perception, and volition. All concomitant dharmas must necessarily be of the same nature.

Explanation: The previous section explained the non-obstructive non-definitive nature of the ālaya-vijñāna. This section begins to discuss the five universal mental factors (pañca sarvatraga caitta) of the ālaya-vijñāna, primarily to refute a wrong view regarding the cognition of these five universal mental factors. Some say that since the ālaya-vijñāna is non-obstructive and non-definitive, then the five universal mental factors of the ālaya-vijñāna—such as contact (sparśa), attention (manaskāra), sensation (vedanā), perception (saṃjñā), and volition (cetanā)—should also be non-obstructive and non-definitive, following the ālaya-vijñāna. The entirety of this section refutes this wrong view.

This wrong view holds that "all concomitant dharmas must necessarily be of the same nature." What are concomitant dharmas? These mental factors are concomitant with the eight consciousnesses. Dharmas concomitant with the mind-consciousness are called concomitant operational dharmas (saṃprayukta-saṃskāra); dharmas not concomitant with the mind-consciousness are called dharmas not concomitant with mind (citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra). There are fifty-one mental factors (caitta) in total that are concomitant with the eight consciousnesses. Additionally, there are twenty-four dharmas not concomitant with the eight consciousnesses. Some dharmas are concomitant with the eight consciousnesses; some are not.

The mental factors concomitant with the ālaya-vijñāna are five, called the five universal mental factors. This means that as long as the ālaya-vijñāna exists, these five universal mental factors assist and accompany its operation. Only then can the ālaya-vijñāna produce all dharmas. This is the function of the five universal mental factors.

As long as the ālaya-vijñāna exists, the five universal mental factors operate alongside it. The five universal mental factors depend on the ālaya-vijñāna to exist; they lack their own self-nature (svabhāva). They are auxiliary tools for the operation of the mind-consciousness. Only when the mind-consciousness exists can mental factors exist and function; without consciousness, mental factors cannot exist or function. Mental factors lack self-nature; they have not existed since beginningless time. They must depend on the ālaya-vijñāna to exist and operate. The ālaya-vijñāna, however, does not depend on any dharma; it can exist and operate independently. Mental factors cannot do this; all mental factors of the eight consciousnesses must depend on their corresponding consciousness to exist and operate. Without consciousness, they cannot exist or operate.

For example, the mental factors of the six consciousnesses: if the six consciousnesses cease, the mental factors also cease along with them; they cannot exist separately. This is because mental factors lack self-nature and lack initiative (pravṛtti). Although the six consciousnesses similarly lack self-nature, they possess initiative and motivational force. Mental factors lack this; they must depend on the motivational force of the six consciousnesses to exist, making them even more devoid of self-nature. The six consciousnesses, after all, have their own characteristics and functional utility; they are consciousnesses directly produced by the ālaya-vijñāna.

Mental factors, however, depend entirely on consciousness to exist and operate; they lack an independently existing substance. This is because mental factors are assistants to consciousness, helpers that aid the operation of the mind-consciousness, akin to a crutch—hence called "associates" (parivāraka). Since the five universal mental factors lack self-nature, they are completely illusory dharmas, lacking substantial reality. Therefore, they cannot be equal to consciousness; the two are not dharmas of the same nature.

Original Text: Moreover, contact and the other four, like the ālaya-vijñāna, are also maturational (vipāka). Their perceived objects and modes of operation are both unknowable. They perceive three kinds of objects. Five dharmas are concomitant. They are non-obstructive and non-definitive. Therefore, it is said that "the same applies to contact, etc."

Explanation: The nature of the ālaya-vijñāna is non-obstructive and non-definitive. However, some believe that the five universal mental factors of the ālaya-vijñāna—contact, attention, sensation, perception, and volition—should follow the ālaya-vijñāna and also be non-obstructive and non-definitive, because the two must share the same nature. They also believe that contact and the other four dharmas, like the ālaya-vijñāna, should also be maturational (vipāka).

The maturational nature of the ālaya-vijñāna enables it to record and store the karmic seeds (bīja) of sentient beings, and to be perfumed by these karmic seeds. Once perfumed, it can later output these karmic seeds, which are then the perfumed ones. For example, if a sentient being creates the evil karma of killing, this karmic seed is stored in the ālaya-vijñāna. The ālaya-vijñāna receives this karmic seed, stores it, and becomes perfumed, taking on a nature that is neither pure nor impure. Once perfumed, it can later output this evil karmic seed. After outputting it, the sentient being receives the maturational result of the evil karma. What it outputs are the defiled seeds and the mental activities of the sentient being corresponding to evil—this is the result of being perfumed.

Again, for example, if a sentient being has greed, giving rise to defiled mental activity, and then creates the karmic action of greed, the defiled seeds are stored in the ālaya-vijñāna. The ālaya-vijñāna stores them and becomes perfumed, containing this evil karmic seed. When the conditions ripen in the future, it outputs this seed, and the sentient being manifests defiled karmic activity—still greedy, still prone to theft.

The ālaya-vijñāna produces the greedy, defiled, thieving behavior of sentient beings. This is called being perfumed. It is not that the ālaya-vijñāna itself has this behavior; rather, it outputs the perfumed seeds of greed, causing them to manifest. Whatever sentient beings store within it, it outputs. This is called being perfumed (vāsanā). Therefore, the ālaya-vijñāna has a maturational nature. This wrong view, however, claims that the five universal mental factors also have this maturational nature, that they too can record, store, and output the karmic seeds of sentient beings, actualizing their causal karmic results. This is irrational; it fails to understand the nature and function of mental factors and confuses the nature and function of the mind-consciousness. Mental factors lack self-nature; they are not substantial entities. They are merely auxiliary tools utilized by the mind-consciousness; they lack discerning capacity and cannot perform the functions of consciousness.

This erroneous view holds that mental factors concomitant with the ālaya-vijñāna must share the same nature as the ālaya-vijñāna. Since the ālaya-vijñāna is non-obstructive and non-definitive, mental factors should also be non-obstructive and non-definitive. Since the ālaya-vijñāna has a maturational nature, the five universal mental factors should also, like the ālaya-vijñāna, have a maturational nature.

Do mental factors have a maturational nature? No, they do not. Because the five universal mental factors lack self-nature and cannot exist independently, it is impossible for them to be perfumed or to hold seeds. They cannot actualize the maturational results of sentient beings. Therefore, mental factors lack a maturational nature; they cannot record, store, or output the karmic seeds of sentient beings; they cannot actualize the causal karmic results of sentient beings. Mental factors cannot perform these functions because they are not substantial entities; they are not autonomous. The ālaya-vijñāna is a substantial entity with the functions of being able to store (saṃbhoga), being stored (āśraya), and grasping (upādāna). It is like an invisible great storehouse, capable of containing endless karmic seeds, storing immeasurable karmic seeds. Therefore, it possesses the maturational nature.

The five universal mental factors, not being substantial entities, lack the capacity to store, the state of being stored, or the function of grasping. Therefore, mental factors cannot be perfumed; they cannot record, store karmic seeds, output karmic seeds, or actualize the causal karmic results of sentient beings. Mental factors lack substantial reality; they depend on the ālaya-vijñāna to manifest and operate. Without the ālaya-vijñāna, mental factors would not exist. Mental factors depend on the ālaya-vijñāna to manifest; therefore, they lack the maturational nature.

The perceived objects (ālambana) of the ālaya-vijñāna, as well as its modes of operation (ākāra), are not easily known by the mind-consciousness. The same is true for mental factors; their perceived objects and modes of operation are not easily perceived by the mind-consciousness. "Perceived objects" means the dharmas that the ālaya-vijñāna perceives. It perceives karmic seeds, the body with its sense faculties (ādhipatipratyaya), the material world (bhājana-loka), and the seven consciousnesses. Therefore, it can discern karmic seeds, discern the mental activities of the seven consciousnesses, and discern the body and material world. The ālaya-vijñāna can apply attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition to these dharmas. It can record the karmic actions created by the seven evolving consciousnesses (pravṛtti-vijñāna), store karmic seeds, be perfumed by the karmic seeds created by the first seven evolving consciousnesses, and then actualize the causal karmic results of sentient beings' good, evil, and non-definitive actions. This is the maturational nature.

Some, however, believe that the five universal mental factors also have a maturational nature, share the same perceived objects and modes of operation as the ālaya-vijñāna, and can also discern the mental activities of the seven consciousnesses, discern the body and material world, discern karmic seeds, apply attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition, record karmic actions, store karmic seeds, and actualize causal karmic results. The perceived objects and modes of operation of mental factors differ from those of the ālaya-vijñāna itself. They believe that the perceived objects and modes of operation of the ālaya-vijñāna cannot be accessed by the mind-consciousness and thus cannot be specifically known, and that the same applies to the perceived objects and modes of operation of the five universal mental factors—the mind-consciousness cannot access them and cannot specifically know them. However, we should understand that the perceived objects and modes of operation of the principal consciousness and the tool it utilizes cannot be the same, because one has initiative and the other does not.

They also believe that the five universal mental factors can perceive three kinds of objects (trisvālambana). What are the three kinds of objects? The first is the real object (vastu-pratyakṣa-ālambana), the second is the object with semblance (sābhāsa-ālambana), and the third is the mental image (parikalpita-ālambana). These three kinds of objects are what the ālaya-vijñāna can perceive. They claim that since the ālaya-vijñāna can perceive them, the five universal mental factors can also perceive them. This view is irrational. Only the principal consciousness can perceive these dharmas; only dharmas with discerning nature can perceive other dharmas. Mental factors are merely tools utilized by the mind-consciousness; tools are not consciousness and cannot have the functions of consciousness. It is like a person using a broom to sweep the ground—it is not the broom that sweeps, but the person who sweeps, because the person has initiative. The inanimate broom lacks initiative; it is merely a tool. Mental factors are the same. In short, their belief that the five universal mental factors, being concomitant with the ālaya-vijñāna, are also non-obstructive and non-definitive, is certainly irrational.

Original Text: Some hold the view that contact and the others, like the ālaya-vijñāna, are also maturational and contain all seeds. They elaborate extensively, even stating they are non-obstructive and non-definitive. The phrase "the same applies" lacks discrimination. Their assertion is irrational.

Explanation: This wrong view holds that since the ālaya-vijñāna is non-obstructive and non-definitive, the five universal mental factors concomitant with it should also belong to the non-obstructive non-definitive nature. With incorrect understanding, they say "the same applies to contact, etc.," meaning they should also possess the non-obstructive non-definitive nature. This assertion has no basis. Because they lack the corresponding wisdom to discern these dharmas, lack the wisdom to carefully contemplate the true meaning, they give rise to these erroneous views. The five universal mental factors lack self-nature; they are not substantial entities but auxiliary tools. Therefore, they cannot be equated with the ālaya-vijñāna; they cannot possess the same nature as the ālaya-vijñāna.

The nature possessed by the ālaya-vijñāna is absent in the five universal mental factors. The ālaya-vijñāna is the sovereign of the eight consciousnesses, like an emperor or king. An emperor or king is noble and wealthy; he has everything and can do anything. The ministers or advisors around the emperor assist and support the king in governance. They themselves do not possess such wealth or power; they merely depend on the king to assist in governing state affairs. Their authority and status cannot be compared to the king's.

They merely act on behalf of the king, assisting in governing the country; they cannot sit as equals with the king. The gold, silver, and treasures in the national treasury belong to the king; ministers merely assist in management without actual ownership. The relationship between the five universal mental factors and the ālaya-vijñāna follows the same principle. The ālaya-vijñāna has self-nature; it is a substantial entity. It can be perfumed, hold seeds, and manifest all dharmas. The five universal mental factors cannot do this. Mental factors are not autonomous; lacking self-nature, they cannot perform these functions or possess these natures. They can only assist the operation of the ālaya-vijñāna. Therefore, they lack the maturational nature and are not non-obstructive non-definitive.

Original Text: Why is this so? Contact and the others depend on consciousness; they are not autonomous. Like greed, faith, etc., they cannot be perfumed. How then can they, like consciousness, hold seeds?

Explanation: Why is this view irrational? Why do mental factors lack the maturational nature and are not non-obstructive non-definitive? "Contact and the others depend on consciousness; they are not autonomous." The five universal mental factors depend on the ālaya-vijñāna to exist and operate; they lack their own self-nature and autonomy. They cannot exist independently. Therefore, they cannot be like the ālaya-vijñāna, which can be perfumed and hold various karmic seeds.

For example, the mental factor of greed among the fundamental afflictions (kleśa) and the mental factor of faith among the wholesome dharmas are both non-autonomous; they can disappear at any time and are not always manifest. When sentient beings attain the third fruit of śrāvakas (anāgāmin), the mental factor of greed is eradicated and never arises again. Sentient beings who initially lacked the wholesome dharma of faith may develop faith in the Triple Gem upon reaching a certain stage of practice. However, if karmic obstacles arise, the mental factor of faith may disappear again. Therefore, mental factors cannot be perfumed; perfuming them is useless. They cannot ripen the karmic conditions of sentient beings, much less actualize their karmic results.

The five universal mental factors are the same; they cannot be perfumed. When sentient beings' minds give rise to greed or generate faith—for instance, generating pure faith in the Triple Gem—the mental activities of greed and faith cannot perfume the five universal mental factors. Mental factors cannot record and store karmic seeds; therefore, they cannot be perfumed, much less actualize the karmic results of sentient beings' greed and faith. Only the ālaya-vijñāna can be perfumed, store the karmic seeds of greed and faith, and actualize the results.

When sentient beings possess the mental factor of greed and create greedy karma, the ālaya-vijñāna records and stores this greedy karma. Once stored, the karmic seed of greed perfumes the ālaya-vijñāna, causing the entire ālaya-vijñāna to become neither pure nor impure. Later, the ālaya-vijñāna can release this seed of greed, causing sentient beings to become greedily defiled again and recreate greedy karma. This is the result of the ālaya-vijñāna being perfumed.

However, the five universal mental factors cannot do this. They cannot store seeds, cannot be perfumed, cannot hold seeds, cannot output karmic seeds to produce the karmic actions of sentient beings, cannot manifest sentient beings, and cannot manifest all dharmas. Therefore, greed, faith, and all mental activities of sentient beings cannot perfume the five universal mental factors because mental factors are not substantial entities. Since they cannot be perfumed, the five universal mental factors cannot, like the ālaya-vijñāna, be perfumed and hold seeds.

Original Text: Furthermore, if contact and the others could also be perfumed, then a single sentient being would have six kinds of substances. If so, from which seed would the result arise? It is irrational to say it arises from six kinds, for it is never seen that multiple seeds produce a single sprout.

Explanation: If the five universal mental factors could hold seeds, that would be problematic. Then a single sentient being would have six substances that hold seeds. Originally, only the ālaya-vijñāna can hold the karmic seeds created by sentient beings. Regardless of whether the karma is good, evil, or non-definitive, at the moment of creation, the ālaya-vijñāna records and stores it.

If the five universals could also record and store, then when a sentient being creates a single karma—whether good, evil, or non-definitive—at the moment of creation, the five universal mental factors would simultaneously store and record it, and the ālaya-vijñāna would also store and record it. Then there would be six substances simultaneously storing the karmic seeds of sentient beings. How would this karmic seed be accounted for in the future? When the karmic seed ripens and the sentient being is to receive the result, would the six substances simultaneously output the karmic seed and simultaneously form the karmic result for the sentient being?

For example, if a sentient being creates evil karma and should become an animal, would the ālaya-vijñāna transform the sentient being into an animal, then the mental factor of attention also transform the sentient being into an animal, and the mental factor of contact also transform the sentient being into an animal? Wouldn't that produce six animals? This is absolutely impossible. Or, if the ālaya-vijñāna and the five mental factors each output a karmic seed, collectively forming a single animal body—this is also impossible. Six karmic seeds cannot produce a single result-body (vipāka-kāya). Therefore, the five universal mental factors are not like the ālaya-vijñāna; they cannot be perfumed, cannot grasp and hold seeds, cannot store seeds, and cannot output seeds.

Suppose the five universal mental factors—attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition—could also be perfumed. If they can be perfumed, they can hold seeds. Holding seeds is necessary for being perfumed. Then each sentient being would have six substances: not only the ālaya-vijñāna, but also the five universal mental factors—all being substances. When sentient beings create karma, these six substances simultaneously record and store it. Later, the six substances simultaneously produce the karmic results for the sentient being. When producing the sentient being's eye-consciousness, the six substances simultaneously produce the eye-consciousness, which would produce six eye-consciousnesses, six eye faculties, six sets of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharmas—resulting in six sentient beings. This is absolutely impossible.

For example, presently, a sentient being has only one substantial entity. The sentient being produced has only one body, only one set of five aggregates (skandhas). It cannot be that there are six seeds: the ālaya-vijñāna outputs seeds and karmic seeds, the contact mental factor also outputs seeds, the sensation mental factor or attention mental factor also outputs seeds—six seeds simultaneously manifesting the same sentient being. This is also impossible.

Six seeds should produce six sprouts, not one sprout. Presently, sentient beings are all one sprout, one set of five aggregates. This shows that this five aggregates is solely produced and manifested by the ālaya-vijñāna alone; it has no relation to the five universal mental factors. Therefore, the five universal mental factors cannot hold seeds or be perfumed; they differ from the ālaya-vijñāna and should not be treated as sharing the same substance. The mental factors of the ālaya-vijñāna are just mental factors; the substantial entity itself is the substantial entity itself. Their functions and roles cannot be equal.

Original Text: If it is said that the result arises solely from one kind, then the other five kinds would be useless. Nor can it be said that they produce the result sequentially, for the perfuming is simultaneous and their power is equal. Nor can it be said that six results arise simultaneously, lest a single sentient being, in a single moment, should have six eye-consciousnesses, etc., arising together.

Explanation: If it is said that the karmic result of a sentient being arises, producing the sentient being's five aggregates and eighteen elements (dhātus), solely from one substance holding seeds, then the other five substances holding seeds would be useless. For example, if the seeds producing the sentient being's five-aggregate body arise from the contact mental factor, then the ālaya-vijñāna would be useless, the attention mental factor would be useless, and the sensation, perception, and volition mental factors would be useless. The seeds stored by them would all be useless.

If only the contact mental factor alone could produce a sentient being, then the existence of the ālaya-vijñāna would be unnecessary, and the other four mental factors would also be unnecessary. Similarly, if the sentient being's five-aggregate body arises from the perception mental factor, then the ālaya-vijñāna and other mental factors would be useless. This is clearly irrational. From the above analysis, the view that the five universal mental factors can be perfumed and hold seeds is a wrong view, an incorrect statement with no basis.

It also cannot be said that these six substances (the five universal mental factors plus the ālaya-vijñāna) produce the sentient being's five aggregates and eighteen elements sequentially—each substance producing one part of the five-aggregate body, the six substances producing the complete five-aggregate body in sequence. This is also impossible. Because when sentient beings create karma, they are perfumed simultaneously; the seeds are stored simultaneously. These six substances should simultaneously produce the karmic result-body of the sentient being, simultaneously produce the sentient being. It cannot be that they sequentially produce only one sentient being; they must simultaneously produce six sentient beings.

Producing six sentient beings would be even more irrational. Nor could it be one sentient being simultaneously having six eye-consciousnesses, etc.—six sets of sense faculties, sense objects, and consciousnesses. Nor is it reasonable for six substances to produce one sentient being. Therefore, the five universal mental factors cannot, like the ālaya-vijñāna, be perfumed and hold seeds. That is to say, the five universal mental factors lack the functional nature to be perfumed and produce the causal karmic results of sentient beings. They have a fundamentally different nature and fundamentally different functions from the ālaya-vijñāna.

Original Text: Who says that contact and the others can also be perfumed and hold various seeds? It is not so. How then can contact and the others, like consciousness, be called "all-seeds"? It is said that contact and the other five have a semblance of seed-nature, hence they are called "all-seeds."

Explanation: Who can say that contact and the other mental factors can also be perfumed by the karmic activities of the seven consciousnesses and hold the karmic seeds created by them? It is absolutely not so. How can the five universal mental factors—contact, etc.—be like the ālaya-vijñāna, called the "all-seed consciousness" (sarvabījaka-vijñāna), containing all seeds? They erroneously believe that the five mental factors have a semblance of seed-holding characteristics. As mental factors manifest and operate along with the ālaya-vijñāna, they can, like the ālaya-vijñāna, store karmic seeds, be perfumed by karmic seeds, and hold karmic seeds, hence being called "all-seeds." This is incorrect.

Original Text: Because contact and the others have the same perceived objects as consciousness. Non-material contact and the others have perceived objects. The directly perceived condition must necessarily exist. This semblance of seed-nature is not the causal condition that produces manifest consciousness, etc.

Explanation: Their erroneous view holds that contact and the other mental factors share the same perceived dharmas as the ālaya-vijñāna; therefore, contact and the others have a semblance of seed-characteristics. This is incorrect. For example, when a person uses a broom to sweep the ground, it is actually the person who sweeps; the karmic action is created by the person, and the merit belongs to the person. One cannot say the broom also shares the merit; the broom is merely a tool used by the person; it lacks subjective initiative and thus has no merit or fault. The relationship between the ālaya-vijñāna and the five mental factors is the same. Although mental factors can operate depending on the ālaya-vijñāna, all deeds performed are done by the ālaya-vijñāna; mental factors are merely tools. Therefore, mental factors cannot be perfumed or hold seeds; they are not the all-seed consciousness.

They believe that the non-material mental factors, contact, etc., because they also have perceived dharmas, must necessarily have dharmas that are their own directly perceived objects—dharmas manifested by themselves, which they then perceive. This view is clearly incorrect. Mental factors cannot produce any dharma; they are not seed-consciousnesses; they do not contain seeds. This semblance of seed-consciousness cannot serve as the causal condition (hetu-pratyaya) for producing the manifest seven consciousnesses, etc.

Original Text: Just as on contact, etc., there is a semblance of an eye faculty, etc., which is not the basis for consciousness; also like a semblance of fire, which lacks the capacity to burn. Their defense is irrational.

Explanation: For example, on contact and the other mental factors, there corresponds a semblance of the eye faculty aspect (nimitta). This eye faculty aspect is not the actual eye faculty; therefore, it is not the basis (āśraya) upon which the eye-consciousness depends. Thus, the contact mental factor cannot produce the eye-consciousness; it is also not the basis upon which seeds depend. The perceived dharmas of contact and the other mental factors are not substantial aspects. They are like fire in a mirror, which cannot perform the function of burning. Therefore, seeing fire in a mirror and attempting to extinguish it is an act of folly. Thus, mental factors cannot produce all dharmas.

Original Text: The perceived objects of contact and the others have a semblance of seed-nature, etc. Later, when performing the functions of grasping and sustaining, they should then be comparable to consciousness. Therefore, based on the aforementioned statement "all-seeds," it definitely indicates the meaning of being able to be perfumed and hold seeds.

Explanation: They say that contact and the other mental factors have perceived dharmas with a semblance of seed-consciousness and other dharmas. Only later, when mental factors perform the functions of grasping (upādāna) and sustaining (adhipati), can they be compared to the ālaya-vijñāna and be consistent; only then can it be demonstrated that contact and the other mental factors can also discern the body and material world, be perfumed, and hold seeds. Based on this, there is the previously mentioned statement that contact and the other mental factors are "all-seeds," meaning contact and the other mental factors definitely have the meaning of being able to be perfumed and hold seeds. Such statements are also irrational, as will be discussed below.

Original Text: Otherwise, the root verse would have the fault of redundancy. Moreover, what they said, the phrase "the same applies," lacks discrimination. All such comparisons certainly cannot be proven. Lest contact and the other five could also discern, and contact, etc., could also be concomitant with contact, etc. Therefore, it is known that "the same applies" is stated according to what is appropriate, not meaning everything.

Explanation: The true meaning is not so; this passage has a serious flaw. What they said—"the same applies"—is due to their own lack of wisdom to discriminate and discern. Their claim that contact and the other mental factors, like the ālaya-vijñāna, have the meaning of being perfumed and holding seeds, certainly has no basis for proof. The five mental factors—contact, etc.—cannot have discerning capacity; they cannot discern karmic seeds, the body, or the material world. Contact and the other mental factors also cannot be concomitant with attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition.

For example, the attention mental factor only functions to direct the mind towards an object; it itself cannot again generate the functions of the mental factors attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition. The contact mental factor only functions to make contact; it itself cannot again generate the functional roles of the mental factors attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition. The sensation mental factor only functions to experience and receive; it itself cannot again generate the functions of the mental factors attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition. The perception mental factor only functions to discern and apprehend characteristics; it itself cannot again generate the functions of the mental factors attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition. The volition mental factor only functions to deliberate and choose; it itself cannot again generate the functional roles of the mental factors attention, contact, sensation, perception, and volition. Because they themselves are not consciousnesses, they cannot again have concomitant mental factors.

Therefore, we should know that what they said—that mental factors are the same as the ālaya-vijñāna—is merely stated arbitrarily, without theoretical basis. Contact and the other mental factors are not the all-seed consciousness; they do not contain seeds and cannot be perfumed or hold seeds.