Commentary on the Four Hundred Verses

The eye refers to the eye consciousness; since it is the function of the eye faculty and inseparable from it, it is also named "eye." If this eye consciousness were to travel to the location of the form, why is it that when perceiving distant forms, the seeing is not delayed? How is it that the moon in the sky and nearby forms can be seen simultaneously upon raising the eyes, without any difference in speed? Never has it been seen in the world that a moving thing can arrive simultaneously at two places, one near and one far. For this reason, an inference should be established: the seeing that illuminates distant forms does not reach the distant forms; the seeing that illuminates nearby forms occurs without any difference in time.

Explanation: "Eye" means eye consciousness. It is what the eye faculty uses, inseparable from the eye faculty, hence it is named "eye" (consciousness). If eye consciousness could go to the location of the form-object, then why is it said that when perceiving distant form-objects, the seeing by eye consciousness is not later than for nearby forms? Why can the moon in the sky and nearby forms right before the eyes be seen simultaneously upon looking up, without any difference in speed? It has never been observed in the world that any moving thing can arrive simultaneously at two places, one near and one far. (Therefore, eye consciousness does not move; it does not go to the location of the form-object. This means that the eye does not reach the form, yet seeing occurs. Why is this so?) For this reason, it should be established as inferential cognition: eye consciousness illuminates distant forms and sees, yet does not reach the distant forms; eye consciousness illuminates nearby forms and sees, yet does not reach the nearby forms. Seeing distant and near forms occurs without any temporal difference.

Why does eye consciousness perceive distant and near forms simultaneously? The eye does not reach the form, the form does not reach the eye, yet seeing can occur. The ear does not reach the sound, the sound does not reach the ear, yet the nature of hearing exists. This is truly inconceivable. If explained using the concept of the indriya (subtle sense faculty), it becomes easily understandable. What the six consciousnesses perceive are all the six objects within the indriya. The internal six objects are all within the indriya—how can there be any distinction between near and far? Regardless of how far or near a form-object is, once transmitted into the indriya, there is no distinction between near and far; all are merely reflections. The conscious mind recognizes and simultaneously cognizes the reflections; it does not cognize the substantial, external form-objects. If it cognized the external form-objects, then the distinction between near and far would apply. However, the Tathāgatagarbha can cognize the external form-objects, yet for the Tathāgatagarbha, there is also no distinction between near and far regarding the external form-objects.