Taking the Knowing of Consciousness as Knowledge Is Avidyā

What is the meaning of the auto-confirming self-witnessing portion (自证分) of each consciousness? Can you know the content of the self-witnessing portion (自证分) of each consciousness? For example, the Eighth Consciousness has the perceiving portion (见分), which is the capacity to perceive; the perceived portion (相分) of the Eighth Consciousness is the object perceived by the Eighth Consciousness, such as seeds (bīja); the self-witnessing portion (自证分) of the Eighth Consciousness is the Eighth Consciousness itself perceiving the perceived portion, the seeds, thereby knowing and cognizing the seeds; the auto-confirming self-witnessing portion (证自证分) of the Eighth Consciousness is the Eighth Consciousness confirming and realizing its own self-witnessing portion, knowing that it has cognized the seeds of the perceived portion, knowing that it has completed the cognition of the seeds of the perceived portion, knowing that it has cognized the seeds of the perceived portion. What the Eighth Consciousness itself does, It knows clearly; the sixth and seventh consciousnesses do not know, unless one possesses very profound wisdom of the path (道种智).

Do we know clearly whether the Eighth Consciousness has cognized the seeds of the perceived portion? We do not know. The Eighth Consciousness does not substitute for the knowing of the mental consciousness (意识); what the mental consciousness does not know does not mean 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's ignorance does not mean A is ignorant. The auto-confirming self-witnessing portion of A does not represent that of B; B's lack of clarity regarding the perceived portion realized by A does not mean A has not realized it, nor does it mean A does not know. There is also much knowledge of the manas (意根) that the mental consciousness is unaware of; since it is unaware, one should not say the manas is also unaware.

The knowledge of sentient beings mostly takes the knowledge of the mental consciousness as the standard; what the mental consciousness does not know, they say "I do not know," or say that something did not happen, does not exist. In fact, the seventh consciousness (manas) knows that something happened, knows that thing. However, the seventh consciousness lacks the function of language and words; it cannot express itself and cannot 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 realize the manas, cannot observe the manas; thus, it does not acknowledge the existence of the self-witnessing portion and auto-confirming self-witnessing portion of the manas. The manas has self-reflective capability, the ability to introspect upon its own cognizing; the mental consciousness does not know this, cannot observe it, yet claims the manas has no reflective power, no auto-confirming self-witnessing portion, and even lacks certain self-witnessing portions. When the mental consciousness thinks this way, it precisely demonstrates its own ignorance, delusion, dullness, shallow and limited knowledge, and numerous misunderstandings, all while being unaware of them. The Buddha said, "Be cautious not to trust your mind, your mind is not to be trusted." Why? Because ignorance is profound.