Taking the Knowing of Consciousness as Knowledge is Avidyā

What is meant by the auto-confirming portion (pratyātmavedya) of each consciousness? Can you know the content of the objective portion (nimitta) that each consciousness witnesses? For example, the eighth consciousness has a perceiving portion (darśana-bhāga), which is its perceiving nature. The objective portion of the eighth consciousness is what the eighth consciousness perceives, such as seeds (bīja). The auto-witnessing portion (svasaṃvitti) of the eighth consciousness is the eighth consciousness itself perceiving the objective portion of seeds, knowing that it perceives and discerns the objective portion of seeds. The auto-confirming portion (pratyātmavedya) of the eighth consciousness is the eighth consciousness confirming and realizing its own auto-witnessing portion, knowing that it perceives and discerns the objective portion of seeds, knowing that it has completed the discernment of the objective portion of seeds, knowing that it perceives and discerns the objective portion of seeds. What the eighth consciousness itself does, He Himself knows clearly.

But are we aware that the eighth consciousness discerns the objective portion of seeds? We are not aware. The eighth consciousness does not substitute for the knowing of the mental consciousness (mano-vijñāna). What the mental consciousness does not know does not mean that other consciousnesses do not know. One cannot use the ignorance of the mental consciousness to represent the knowledge of other consciousnesses. Using A to represent the eighth consciousness and B to represent the mental consciousness, the dharmas known by A are not necessarily known by B. B not knowing does not mean A does not know. The auto-confirming portion of A does not represent the auto-confirming portion of B. B not being clear about the objective portion realized by A does not mean A has not realized it, nor does it mean A does not know it.

The knowing of sentient beings mostly takes the knowing of the mental consciousness as the standard. What the mental consciousness does not know, they say "I do not know," or claim that a certain thing did not happen, does not exist. In reality, the seventh consciousness (manas) knows that a certain thing happened, knows that thing. But the seventh consciousness lacks the function and capacity for language and words; it cannot express itself and is unable to make the mental consciousness know. The mental consciousness then assumes that what it does not know does not exist, and that other consciousnesses similarly do not know. To conclude thus is extremely arbitrary and unreasonable.

To what extent is the mental consciousness of ordinary sentient beings arbitrary? The mental consciousness itself cannot directly realize the mental faculty (manas), cannot observe the mental faculty. It does not admit the existence of the auto-witnessing portion and auto-confirming portion of the mental faculty. The mental faculty has self-reflective capacity, the ability to introspect upon its own discernment. The mental consciousness is unaware of this, cannot observe it, yet claims that the mental faculty lacks introspective power, lacks an auto-confirming portion, and even lacks certain auto-witnessing portions. When the mental consciousness thinks this way, it precisely demonstrates the mental consciousness's own ignorance, delusion, darkness, dullness, its extremely shallow and limited knowledge, its numerous misunderstandings, all while being unaware of them. The Buddha said: "Be cautious, do not trust your mental consciousness. Be cautious, do not trust your mental consciousness. Your mental consciousness is not to be trusted." Why? Because of profound ignorance.