Selected Lectures on the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra
Explanation of Volume Three of the Cheng Weishi Lun (5)
Original text:记谓善恶。有爱非爱果。及殊胜自体。可记别故。此非善恶。故名无记。
Explanation: "Record" refers to wholesome and unwholesome, which have lovable and unlovable retributions, and have a distinctive self-substance that can be recorded and distinguished. This is not wholesome or unwholesome, and therefore is called indeterminate (avyākṛta). "Record" means the nature is either wholesome or unwholesome — not wholesome in nature, then unwholesome in nature — belonging to the two extremes, with a nature that is special, not ordinary, and therefore can be recorded and distinguished, clearly marked down; "distinguish" means to identify and differentiate, for only a special and extraordinary nature is easy to discern and differentiate. If the consciousness-mind is wholesome in nature and creates wholesome karma, there will be lovable karmic retribution (vipāka); wholesome retribution is extremely endearing, and sentient beings all delight in the supreme wholesome retribution — this is called the lovable fruit. If the consciousness-mind is unwholesome in nature and creates unwholesome karma, there will in the future be the retribution of unwholesome karma, which is the unlovable karmic retribution. "Record" refers to the two extremes — either wholesome or unwholesome — and one will receive lovable and unlovable retributions.
Both of these retributions are relatively supreme and can be clearly recorded; the natures of the wholesome and unwholesome mental factors are also rather special, not ordinary, having a distinctive self-substance that can be clearly recorded, not a neutral middle nature — hence it is called "with record" (sāvākaraṇa). What is called "ordinary" is neither wholesome nor unwholesome, very common and plain, not special. The Ālayavijñāna, however, does not belong to the with-record nature; He belongs to the indeterminate nature, neither wholesome nor unwholesome in nature. Therefore He has no lovable karmic retribution, nor any karmic retribution that would cause revulsion, because He has no distinctive self-substance that can be recorded and distinguished.
For example, since the Ālayavijñāna is not wholesome in nature, He does not create wholesome karma and has no lovable wholesome karmic retribution. The Ālayavijñāna is also not unwholesome in nature; He does not create unwholesome karma, and thus has no unlovable unwholesome karmic retribution. But when sentient beings create wholesome karma, He cooperates with them in creating wholesome karma; yet when sentient beings receive the supreme wholesome retribution, the Ālayavijñāna does not receive the wholesome retribution.
When sentient beings give away the seven treasures of worlds as numerous as the sands of the Ganges, obtaining boundless, supremely supreme retribution of wholesome karma — retribution of such great merit — the Ālayavijñāna will not enjoy even a fraction of it. Because He has no mind of creating goodness, although He cooperates in creating goodness, He has no mental action of creating wholesome karma; He merely cooperates and operates in accordance with conditions, as is the Dharma-nature, and outputs the karmic seeds according to the law of cause and effect, realizing cause and effect. Therefore He does not enjoy the supreme wholesome retribution; it is only the sentient being's five aggregates and seven consciousnesses that enjoy this great meritorious retribution.
When sentient beings create unwholesome karma — for instance, killing, arson, or slandering the Three Jewels — the Ālayavijñāna, having no unwholesome mind, will not actively and intentionally create these unwholesome deeds. But when sentient beings create these unwholesome deeds, the Ālayavijñāna cooperates in creating them together; although He cooperates in the creation, He has no unwholesome mind, and therefore He also does not receive the unwholesome karmic retribution. Only when sentient beings create karma with an unwholesome mind is there unlovable karmic retribution. His cooperation in creating karma is merely following conditions, operating as is the Dharma-nature, merely running according to some operating mechanism; therefore He is indeterminate, without karmic retribution.
For example, take a robot: a person designs a program for it, and it then creates wholesome or unwholesome karma according to the program. But whatever wholesome or unwholesome karma it creates has nothing to do with the robot itself, because the robot has no mental action; therefore it has neither wholesome karma nor sinful karma, and receives neither reward nor punishment. If you reward it, it cannot enjoy the reward; if you punish it — for example, if the judicial authorities wish to convict it — they cannot convict it; rather, they must convict the person who directed the robot to create wholesome or unwholesome karma, or the person who designed the program for the robot. The one who directed and designed will receive wholesome retribution or unwholesome retribution, while the robot itself receives no retribution. This Ālayavijñāna is like the robot, operating according to a fixed mechanism; He merely cooperates with sentient beings in creating karmic actions, and has no mental action of His own; it is all the wholesome and unwholesome mental actions of sentient beings that are created, and so the retribution is received by the sentient beings.
Synthesizing the above analysis and argumentation: the Ālayavijñāna is neither wholesome nor unwholesome; He belongs to the neither-wholesome-nor-unwholesome nature, and is therefore called indeterminate in nature. It was also said earlier that He is non-obscured (anivṛta): He has no defilement, and He has neither wholesome nature nor unwholesome nature; among these four categories, He belongs to the non-obscured and indeterminate. Wholesome dharmas and unwholesome dharmas are mental actions possessed by the six consciousnesses, while obscured-indeterminate dharmas are the mental actions of the manas, the seventh consciousness. Thus the dharmas created by the eight consciousnesses are divided into these four categories; the Ālayavijñāna belongs to the non-obscured and indeterminate nature.
Original text:触等亦如是者。谓如阿赖耶识。唯是无覆无记性摄。触作意受想思亦尔。诸相应法。必同性故。
Explanation: The previous passage discussed the non-obscured indeterminate nature of the Ālayavijñāna; this passage begins to discuss the five universally operative mental factors of the Ālayavijñāna, mainly to refute a wrong view regarding the understanding of the five universally operative mental factors. Some say: since the Ālayavijñāna is non-obscured indeterminate in nature, the Ālayavijñāna's five universally operative mental factors — such as contact, attention, feeling, perception, and volition — should likewise, following the Ālayavijñāna, be non-obscured indeterminate in nature. This entire passage refutes this wrong view.
This wrong view holds that "all associated dharmas must be of the same nature." What are associated dharmas? That is to say, these mental factors are associated with the eight consciousnesses; dharmas associated with the consciousness-mind are called associated conditioning dharmas, while those not associated with the consciousness-mind are called conditioning dharmas disassociated from mind. There are altogether fifty-one dharmas associated with the eight consciousnesses, called the fifty-one mental factors; and there are also dharmas not associated with the eight consciousnesses — the twenty-four disassociated conditioning dharmas. Some dharmas are associated with the eight consciousnesses, and some are not.
There are five mental factors associated with the Ālayavijñāna, called the five universally operative mental factors; that is to say, as long as the Ālayavijñāna exists, the five universally operative mental factors will assist and accompany the Ālayavijñāna in its operation, and only thus can the Ālayavijñāna produce all dharmas — this is the function performed by the five universally operative mental factors.
As long as the Ālayavijñāna exists, the five universally operative mental factors will accompany its operation; the five universally operative mental factors depend on the Ālayavijñāna in order to exist. They have no self-nature of their own; they are auxiliary tools for the operation of the consciousness-mind. Only with the existence of the consciousness-mind can the mental factors exist and function; without consciousness, the mental factors cannot exist, nor can they function. The mental factors have no self-substance; they have not existed since beginningless kalpas, and must depend on the Ālayavijñāna in order to exist and operate. The Ālayavijñāna, however, does not need to depend on any dharma; He can exist and operate independently. The mental factors cannot do this: all the mental factors of the eight consciousnesses must depend on their corresponding consciousness in order to exist and operate; without consciousness, they cannot exist or operate.
For example, take the mental factors of the six consciousnesses: if the six consciousnesses cease, the mental factors cease along with them and cannot exist independently. Because the mental factors have no self-substance and no capacity for agency — although the six consciousnesses likewise have no self-substance, the six consciousnesses do have agency and a driving impetus, whereas the mental factors do not, and must depend on the six consciousnesses that possess driving impetus in order to exist — they are even more devoid of self-substance. The six consciousnesses, after all, still have their own particular characteristics and functional utilities; they are consciousness-bodies personally produced by the Ālayavijñāna.
The mental factors, however, depend entirely upon consciousness in order to exist and operate; they have no body of independent existence. Because the mental factors are the assistants of consciousness, helpers aiding the operation of the consciousness-mind, belonging to the category of things like crutches, they are called "assistants" (anugata). Since the five universally operative mental factors have no self-substance, they are utterly illusory dharmas without substantial reality. Therefore they cannot be equated with consciousness; the two are not dharmas of the same category of nature.
Original text:又触等五。如阿赖耶。亦是异熟。所缘行相。俱不可知。缘三种境。五法相应。无覆无记。故说触等。亦如是言。
Explanation: The nature of the Ālayavijñāna is non-obscured indeterminate; however, some hold that the Ālayavijñāna's five universally operative mental factors — contact, attention, feeling, perception, and volition — should follow the Ālayavijñāna and also be non-obscured indeterminate in nature, because the two must have the same intrinsic nature. They also hold that the five dharmas such as contact, like the Ālayavijñāna, should also be of vipāka nature.
The vipāka nature of the Ālayavijñāna is the ability to record and store the karmic seeds of sentient beings, and to be perfumed by the karmic seeds; after being perfumed, He can in the future output the karmic seeds, and what is output is what was perfumed. For example, when a sentient being creates the unwholesome karma of killing, this karmic seed is stored in the Ālayavijñāna; the Ālayavijñāna receives this karmic seed, and after storing it, He is perfumed and becomes of a nature that is neither defiled nor pure (na saṃkleśo na vyavadānam). Only after being perfumed can He in the future output this seed of unwholesome karma; once it is output, the sentient being receives the retribution of the unwholesome karma. What He outputs are the defiled seeds, as well as the sentient being's mental actions corresponding to unwholesomeness — this is the result of being perfumed.
Another example: when a sentient being has greed and gives rise to defiled mental actions, creating the karmic action of greed, the defiled seeds are stored into the Ālayavijñāna; after the Ālayavijñāna stores them, He is perfumed and comes to contain this seed of unwholesome karma. When the conditions ripen in the future, He outputs this seed, and the sentient being manifests defiled karmic actions — he is still greedy, still habitually given to stealing.
The Ālayavijñāna produces the sentient being's greedy, defiled, thieving behavior — this is called being perfumed. It is not that the Ālayavijñāna Himself has this behavior; rather, He outputs these seeds of greed and defilement into manifestation. Whatever sentient beings store in, He outputs — this is called being perfumed; hence it is said the Ālayavijñāna has vipāka nature. This wrong view holds that the five universally operative mental factors also have this vipāka nature, and can also record, store, and output the karmic seeds of sentient beings, realizing their causes, conditions, and retributions. This is an unreasonable assertion, showing ignorance of the nature and function of mental factors, and confusing the nature and function of the consciousness-mind. The mental factors have no self-substance; they are not substantial entities, but merely auxiliary tools utilized by the consciousness-mind; they have no discriminating capacity and cannot perform the functional role of consciousness.
This erroneous view holds that the mental factors associated with the Ālayavijñāna must be of the same intrinsic nature as the Ālayavijñāna: the Ālayavijñāna is non-obscured indeterminate, so the mental factors should also be non-obscured indeterminate; the Ālayavijñāna has vipāka nature, so the five universally operative mental factors should likewise, like the Ālayavijñāna, have vipāka nature.
Do the mental factors have vipāka nature? They do not, because the five universally operative mental factors have no self-substance and cannot exist independently; therefore they cannot be perfumed and hold seeds, and cannot realize the karmic retributions of sentient beings. Hence the mental factors have no vipāka nature; they cannot record, store, or output the karmic seeds of sentient beings, and cannot realize their causes, conditions, and retributions. The mental factors cannot do these things, because they are not substantial entities, not self-existent. The Ālayavijñāna is a substantial entity, having the functions of the able-storing, the stored, and the grasped-storing; like an invisible great storehouse, He can contain endless karmic seeds and store immeasurable karmic seeds — hence He has vipāka nature.
The five universally operative mental factors are not substantial entities, so they have no capacity of able-storing or being-stored, no grasped-storing nature; therefore the mental factors cannot be perfumed, cannot record and store karmic seeds, cannot output karmic seeds, and still less can they realize the causes, conditions, and retributions of sentient beings. The mental factors have no substance; they must depend on the Ālayavijñāna in order to manifest and operate; without the Ālayavijñāna, the mental factors would not exist. Since the mental factors must depend on the Ālayavijñāna in order to manifest, they have no vipāka nature.
The realms cognized by the Ālayavijñāna, as well as the operational characteristics (ākāra) of the Ālayavijñāna's functioning, are not easily known by the mind consciousness; the same is true of the mental factors — the realms they cognize and the operational characteristics of their functioning are not easily known by the mind consciousness. "Object" (ālambana) means what kind of dharmas the Ālayavijñāna cognizes: He cognizes karmic seeds, the faculties and the material world, and the minds of the seven consciousnesses; therefore He can discriminate karmic seeds, discriminate the mental actions of the seven consciousnesses, and discriminate the faculties and the material world. Toward these dharmas the Ālayavijñāna can attend, contact, feel, perceive, and deliberate; He can record the karmic actions created by the seven transforming consciousnesses, store karmic seeds, and be perfumed by the karmic seeds created by the preceding seven transforming consciousnesses, and then realize the wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate causes, conditions, and retributions of sentient beings — this is vipāka nature.
But some hold that the five universally operative mental factors also have vipāka nature, also have the same objects as the Ālayavijñāna and the same operational characteristics, can also discriminate the mental actions of the seven consciousnesses, discriminate the faculties and the material world, discriminate karmic seeds, can also attend, contact, feel, perceive, and deliberate, can also record karmic actions, store karmic seeds, and realize causes, conditions, and retributions. The objects and operational characteristics of the mental factors' functioning differ from the objects and characteristics of the Ālayavijñāna substance itself. They hold that the objects and operational characteristics of the Ālayavijñāna cannot be touched by the mind consciousness, and therefore cannot be specifically known; the objects and characteristics of the five universally operative mental factors are the same — the mind consciousness also cannot touch them, nor specifically know them. But we should know that the objects and characteristics of the principal consciousness and the tools it employs cannot possibly be the same, because one has agency and the other does not.
They also hold that the five universally operative mental factors can cognize three kinds of realms. What are the three kinds of realms? The first is the real-object realm, the second is the reflected-essence realm, and the third is the subjectively imagined realm. These three realms are what the Ālayavijñāna can cognize; they say that because the Ālayavijñāna can cognize them, the five universally operative mental factors can also cognize them. This view is unreasonable: only the principal consciousness can cognize these dharmas; only dharmas possessing the nature of discrimination can cognize other dharmas, whereas the mental factors are merely tools employed by the consciousness-mind. A tool is not consciousness and cannot have the functions of consciousness — just as when a person takes a broom to sweep the floor, it is not the broom that sweeps the floor but the person who sweeps it; the person has agency, while the inanimate broom has no agency and is merely a tool. The mental factors are likewise. In short, they hold that the five universally operative mental factors, being associated with the Ālayavijñāna, are also non-obscured indeterminate in nature — this assertion is of course unreasonable.
Original text:有义，触等如阿赖耶。亦是异熟。及一切种。广说乃至。无覆无记。亦如是言。无简别故。彼说非理。
Explanation: This wrong view holds that since the Ālayavijñāna is non-obscured indeterminate in nature, the five universally operative mental factors associated with Him should also belong to the non-obscured indeterminate nature. Their view is not correct, yet they say "contact and the rest are also thus," and should also have the non-obscured indeterminate nature — this assertion has no rationale whatsoever. Because they lack the corresponding wisdom to discern these dharma meanings, lacking the wisdom to carefully deliberate on what the true meaning ultimately is, they give rise to these erroneous views. The five universally operative mental factors have no self-substance; they are not substantial entities but auxiliary tools, and therefore cannot be equated with the Ālayavijñāna, cannot have those intrinsic natures of the Ālayavijñāna.
The intrinsic natures possessed by the Ālayavijñāna are not possessed by the five universally operative mental factors. The Ālayavijñāna is the king of the eight consciousnesses, like an emperor or a king: the emperor or king is wealthy and noble, having whatever he wants, able to do anything; whereas the ministers beside the emperor, or the auxiliary officials and the like, are those who help and assist the king in his work — they themselves do not possess such wealth, nor such power, but merely rely on the king to help govern the affairs of state; their power and status can in no way be mentioned in the same breath as the king's.
They merely handle affairs on behalf of the king and help him govern the state; they cannot sit as equals with the king. The gold, silver, and treasures in the national treasury also belong to the king; the ministers merely help manage them and have no real authority. The relationship between the five universally operative mental factors and the Ālayavijñāna is the same as this principle. The Ālayavijñāna has self-substance; He is a substantial entity; He can be perfumed, can hold seeds, and can manifest all dharmas. The five universally operative mental factors cannot do this: the mental factors are not self-existent and have no self-substance, so they cannot do these things, cannot have these intrinsic natures, and can only assist the Ālayavijñāna in its operation; therefore they have no vipāka nature, nor are they non-obscured indeterminate in nature.
Original text:所以者何。触等依识。不自在故。如贪信等。不能受熏。如何同识。能持种子。
Explanation: Why is this view unreasonable — why do the mental factors have no vipāka nature and lack the non-obscured indeterminate nature? "Contact and the rest depend on consciousness and are not self-existent." The five universally operative mental factors depend on the Ālayavijñāna in order to exist and operate; they have no self-substance and no self-existence, cannot exist independently by themselves, and therefore cannot, like the Ālayavijñāna, be perfumed and hold the various karmic seeds.
For example, the greed factor among the fundamental afflictions and the faith factor among the wholesome dharmas are both not self-existent; they can disappear at any time and place, and cannot be manifest at all times. When a sentient being cultivates to the third fruit (anāgāmin), the greed factor will be severed and never arise again; a sentient being originally lacking the wholesome dharma of faith only develops faith in the Three Jewels after cultivating to a certain degree, and if karmic obstructions manifest, the faith mental factor can still disappear. Therefore the mental factors cannot be perfumed; perfuming them is useless — they cannot ripen the karmic conditions of sentient beings, still less realize their karmic retributions.
The five universally operative mental factors are likewise and cannot be perfumed. When a sentient being's mind gives rise to greed and craving, or gives rise to faith, generating pure faith in the Three Jewels, the mental actions of greed and faith cannot perfume the five universally operative mental factors. The mental factors cannot record and store karmic seeds, so they cannot be perfumed, still less realize the retributions of sentient beings' greed and faith; only the Ālayavijñāna can be perfumed, store the karmic seeds of greed and faith, and realize the retributions.
When a sentient being has the greed factor and creates the karma of greed, this karma of greed must be recorded and stored by the Ālayavijñāna; after it is stored, the karmic seed of greed perfumes the Ālayavijñāna, making the Ālayavijñāna as a whole neither defiled nor pure. Then in the future the Ālayavijñāna can release this karmic seed of greed, and can also cause the sentient being to be defiled by greed and create greed karma again — this is the result of the Ālayavijñāna being perfumed.
But the five universally operative mental factors cannot do this: they cannot store seeds, cannot be perfumed, cannot hold seeds, still less output karmic seeds to produce the karmic actions of sentient beings; they cannot manifest sentient beings, cannot manifest the myriad dharmas. Therefore greed and faith, and all the mental actions of sentient beings, cannot perfume the five universally operative mental factors, because the mental factors are not substantial entities. Since they cannot be perfumed, the five universally operative mental factors cannot, like the Ālayavijñāna, be perfumed and hold seeds.
Original text:又若触等。亦能受熏。应一有情。有六种体。若尔。果起从何种生。理不应言。从六种起。未见多种。生一芽故。
Explanation: If the five universally operative mental factors could hold seeds, then it would be a disaster: one sentient being would then have six seed-holding substances. Originally the Ālayavijñāna can hold the seeds of the karma created by sentient beings; whether the karmic seeds of sentient beings are wholesome, unwholesome, or indeterminate karma, at the moment of creation the Ālayavijñāna records and stores them.
If the five universally operative factors could also record and store, then when a sentient being creates a karma — whether wholesome, unwholesome, or indeterminate — at the moment of creation, the five universally operative mental factors would simultaneously store and record it, and the Ālayavijñāna would also store and record it; then there would be six substances simultaneously storing the sentient being's karmic actions and seeds. How then would these karmic seeds be reckoned in the future? When the karmic seeds ripen in the future, when the sentient being is due to receive retribution, would the six substances simultaneously output the karmic seeds and simultaneously form the sentient being's karmic fruit?
For example, if a sentient being created unwholesome karma and should become an animal, would the Ālayavijñāna transform the sentient being into an animal, and then the attention mental factor transform this being into an animal again, and the contact mental factor also transform this being into an animal again — would that not produce six animals? This is absolutely impossible. Or the Ālayavijñāna and the five mental factors each output five karmic seeds, which then jointly form one animal body — this is also impossible; six karmic seeds cannot produce one retributive body. Therefore the five universally operative mental factors are not the same as the Ālayavijñāna: they cannot be perfumed, cannot grasp and hold seeds, cannot store seeds, and cannot output seeds.
Suppose the five universally operative mental factors — attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition — could also be perfumed; if they can be perfumed, they can hold seeds, for only seed-holders can be perfumed. Then every sentient being should have six substances: not only the Ālayavijñāna, but also the five universally operative mental factors — all of these would be substances. Then when a sentient being creates karma, these six substances simultaneously record and store it, and in the future the six substances simultaneously produce the sentient being's retribution. When the sentient being's eye consciousness is produced, these six substances simultaneously produce the eye consciousness — then six eye consciousnesses could be produced, six eye faculties produced, six sets of eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, and form, sound, smell, taste, touch, and dharma produced — that would produce six sentient beings, which is absolutely impossible.
For example, a sentient being now has one substantial entity; the sentient being thus born has one material body, only one set of five aggregates. It is impossible for there to be six seeds — seeds and karmic seeds output from the Ālayavijñāna, seeds output from the contact mental factor, seeds output from the feeling or attention mental factors — six seeds simultaneously manifesting the same sentient being. This is also impossible.
Six seeds should produce six sprouts, not one sprout. Now every sentient being is one sprout, one set of five aggregates; this shows that this set of five aggregates is produced and manifested solely by the Ālayavijñāna itself, independently, and has nothing to do with the five universally operative mental factors. Therefore the five universally operative mental factors cannot hold seeds or be perfumed; they differ from the Ālayavijñāna and should not be treated as of the same substance. The mental factors of the Ālayavijñāna are just mental factors, and the substantial entity is just the substantial entity itself; their functions and roles cannot be equal and identical.
Original text:若说果生。唯从一种。则余五种。便为无用。亦不可说。次第生果。熏习同时。势力等故。又不可说。六果顿生。勿一有情。一刹那顷。六眼识等。俱时生故。
Explanation: If it is said that the karmic fruit of sentient beings is born — the five aggregates and eighteen realms of the sentient being produced — from only one seed-containing substance, then the other five seed-containing substances would be useless. For example, if the seeds producing the sentient being's five-aggregate body were produced from the contact mental factor, then the Ālayavijñāna would be useless, the attention mental factor would be useless, and the feeling, perception, and volition mental factors would also be useless — the seeds they stored would all be useless.
If only the single contact mental factor could produce the sentient being, then the existence of the Ālayavijñāna would be unnecessary, and the other four mental factors would also have no need to exist. By the same reasoning, if the sentient being's five-aggregate body were born from the perception mental factor, then the Ālayavijñāna and the other mental factors would be useless — clearly unreasonable. From the above analysis, holding that the five universally operative mental factors can be perfumed and hold seeds is a wrong view, an incorrect assertion with no rationale whatsoever.
Nor can it be said that these six substances (the five universally operative mental factors plus the Ālayavijñāna) produce the sentient being's five aggregates and eighteen realms sequentially — one substance producing a 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 and store seeds simultaneously; these six substances should simultaneously produce the sentient being's retributive body, simultaneously produce the sentient being — they cannot sequentially produce only one sentient being; they would have to simultaneously produce six sentient beings.
Producing six sentient beings would be even more unreasonable, and it also could not be one sentient being — six sets of faculties, objects, and consciousnesses, including six eye consciousnesses and so on, simultaneously born. Six substances producing one sentient being is also unreasonable. Therefore the five universally operative mental factors cannot, like the Ālayavijñāna, be perfumed and hold seeds. That is to say, the five universally operative mental factors lack the functional nature of being perfumed and producing the causes, conditions, and retributions of sentient beings; their intrinsic nature is essentially different from the Ālayavijñāna's, with essentially different functions.
Original text:谁言触等。亦能受熏。持诸种子。不尔。如何触等如识。名一切种。谓触等五。有似种相。名一切种。
Explanation: Who could say that the contact and other mental factors can also be perfumed by the karmic actions of the seven consciousnesses, and can also grasp and hold the seeds of the karma created by the seven consciousnesses? It is fundamentally not so. How could the five universally operative mental factors such as contact, like the Ālayavijñāna, be called the all-seed consciousness, containing all seeds? They erroneously hold that the five mental factors have a similar characteristic of holding seeds: as the mental factors operate in manifestation along with the Ālayavijñāna, they can, like the Ālayavijñāna, store karmic seeds, be perfumed by karmic seeds, and hold karmic seeds — hence called "all seeds." This is incorrect.
Original text:触等与识。所缘等故。无色触等。有所缘故。亲所缘缘。定应有故。此似种相。不为因缘。生现识等。
Explanation: Their erroneous view holds that the contact and other mental factors have the same object-characteristics as the Ālayavijñāna, and therefore the contact and other mental factors have similar seed-characteristics. This is incorrect. For example, when a person takes a broom to sweep the floor, it is actually the person sweeping the floor; the karmic action is created by the person, and the credit belongs to the person — one cannot say the broom also has a share of the credit. The broom is merely a tool used by the person; it has no subjective agency, and therefore has no merit or fault. The relationship between the Ālayavijñāna and the five mental factors is likewise: although the mental factors can operate depending on the Ālayavijñāna, all the deeds performed are done by the Ālayavijñāna; the mental factors are merely tools. Therefore the mental factors cannot be perfumed and hold seeds, nor are they the all-seed consciousness.
They hold that the mental factors such as contact, which are not material form, because they also have object-characteristics that are cognized, must therefore also have the directly cognized object condition (ālambana-pratyaya) of their own substance; and the directly cognized object is the dharma personally manifested by oneself, which one then cognizes. This assertion is clearly also incorrect: the mental factors cannot produce any dharma; they are not the seed consciousness and do not contain seeds. This image resembling the seed consciousness cannot serve as the causal condition for producing the manifest seven consciousnesses and so on.
Original text:如触等上。似眼根等。非识所依。亦如似火。无能烧用。彼救非理。
Explanation: For example, on the contact and other mental factors there correspond similar object-aspects of the eye faculty and so on; this object-aspect of the eye faculty is not the essential eye faculty, and therefore is not the basis upon which the eye consciousness can depend. Then the contact mental factor cannot produce the eye consciousness, and it is not the basis of seeds. The object-characteristics cognized by the contact and other mental factors are all not substantial characteristics — just like fire in a mirror, which has no burning function. Seeing the fire in the mirror and wanting to extinguish it would be an act of folly. Therefore the mental factors cannot produce all dharmas.
Original text:触等所缘。似种等相。后执受处。方应与识。而相例故。由此前说。一切种言。定目受熏。能持种义。
Explanation: They say that the contact and other mental factors have cognized object-characteristics, having characteristics resembling the seed consciousness and so on; only later, when the mental factors perform the function of grasping and experiencing (upādāna), can they be compared with and be consistent with the Ālayavijñāna — only then can it be shown that the contact and other mental factors can also discriminate the faculties and the material world, and can also be perfumed and hold seeds. On this basis comes the earlier statement that the contact and other mental factors have all seeds — that the contact and other mental factors certainly have the meaning of being able to be perfumed and also to hold seeds. Such assertions are also unreasonable, as will be discussed below.
Original text:不尔。本颂有重言失。又彼所说。亦如是言。无简别故。咸相例者。定不成证。勿触等五。亦能了别。触等亦与。触等相应。由此故知。亦如是者。随所应说。非谓一切。
Explanation: The true meaning is not so; this passage has a serious fault of redundancy. Their statement of "also thus" arises from their own lack of wisdom to discern and discriminate. Their assertion that the contact and other mental factors, like the Ālayavijñāna, have the meaning of being perfumed and holding seeds certainly has no basis as proof; the five mental factors such as contact cannot possibly have discriminating nature, cannot discriminate karmic seeds or the faculties and the material world; nor can the contact and other mental factors be associated with attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition.
For example, the attention mental factor only performs the function of drawing the mind toward objects; it cannot itself give rise to the functions of the attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition mental factors. The contact mental factor only performs the function of contacting; it cannot itself give rise to the functional roles of the attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition mental factors. The feeling mental factor only performs the function of receiving and experiencing; it cannot itself give rise to the functions of the attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition mental factors. The perception mental factor only performs the function of discriminating and grasping characteristics; it cannot itself give rise to the functions of the attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition mental factors. The volition mental factor only performs the function of deliberation (manasikāra) and decision; it cannot itself give rise to the functional roles of the attention, contact, feeling, perception, and volition mental factors — because they themselves are not consciousness, they cannot again have accompanying mental factors.
Therefore we should know that their statement that the mental factors are the same as the Ālayavijñāna is merely spoken arbitrarily, without theoretical basis. The contact and other mental factors are not the all-seed consciousness; they do not contain seeds, and cannot be perfumed or hold seeds.
