An Explanation of the Verses on the Delineation of the Eight Consciousnesses (I)

Original text: 前五识颂。性境现量通三性。

Explanation: First, let us explain the terms and concepts involved in the original text. The first five consciousnesses are the eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, and body consciousness.

"Nature-object" (性境) refers to the five sense-objects of form, sound, smell, taste, and touch, which arise within the supreme faculties and are composed of the real seeds of the five great elements—earth, water, fire, wind, and space—possessing the functional properties of real material form, and corresponding to the five consciousnesses. Before a nature-object enters the supreme faculty, it is not confronted by the five consciousnesses and is not discerned by them; rather, it is pervasively contacted by the manas. If the manas could not contact it, there would be no capacity for foreknowledge; when encountering sudden situations, the manas would be unable to react in time and quickly deal with the problem. If the manas could not contact it, then there would be dharmas it does not contact, and it would lack the nature of pervasive contact, which would contradict the statement in the Śūraṅgama Sūtra that it pervasively contacts all dharmas.

Taking the object of form among the five sense-objects alone: it is composed of the seeds of the five great elements—earth, water, fire, wind, and space—and is confronted by the eye consciousness and discerned by it. The object of form is not only discerned by the eye consciousness in terms of its colors; its shapes (saṃsthāna-rūpa), expressive gestures (vijñapti-rūpa), and non-expressive form (avijñapti-rūpa) are simultaneously discerned by the mental consciousness accompanying the five sense consciousnesses (pañcavijñāna-sahagata-manovijñāna). This portion of dharmas is called the mental object (dharma-āyatana) or form subsumed under the Dharmāyatana, and is also called the object of attached essence (tadālambana). It carries the essence of the seeds of the five great elements, but it is not a real dharma; it is an illusory dharma. How is it an illusory dharma? For example, the seeds of the five great elements combine to form particles; particles continuously accumulate into minute matter, and then further accumulate into larger and greater material form. At this point, the material form comes to possess shapes such as long, short, square, and round—its shapes, expressive gestures, and non-expressive form. The matter itself is a real dharma, a nature-object; but the shape, size, squareness, and roundness manifested after the matter becomes larger and more numerous are not real dharmas. They possess no seeds of the five great elements or their functional properties; they exist dependently upon the nature-object, and thus are illusory dharmas, also called objects of attached essence—indeed, false objects of attached essence, also called form subsumed under the Dharmāyatana. True objects of attached essence are contacted by the manas.

What functional properties does the nature-object of form possess? For example, a stone has the property of hardness, the properties of warmth such as coolness and heat, the properties of roughness and smoothness, and the property of movement—these are real functional properties. But the mental object of attached essence that depends upon the object of form is a manifested illusory appearance, and does not possess these properties. For example, a large mountain and a small mountain are both mountains in essence; their size is due to the greater or lesser quantity of accumulated dust particles. There is no other dharma existing apart from the dust and the object of form. Therefore, the mental object corresponding to the mind consciousness is an illusory, false appearance.

The concept of "direct perception" (现量) means discerning an object that exists presently before one: if it exists, it exists; if it does not, it does not—without engaging in thought, imagination, analysis, or conjecture. When the five consciousnesses discern the five sense-objects, that is direct perception; indeed, they can only operate through direct perception: what exists is there, what does not is absent; whatever something is, it is determined to be exactly that, without confusion. If there is confusion, it must be confusion of the mind consciousness, and specifically of the solitary consciousness (mano-vijñāna-eka-citta). The mental consciousness accompanying the five sense consciousnesses is only responsible for discerning the shapes, expressive gestures, and non-expressive form of the object of form, and, following the five consciousnesses, also discerns through direct perception. On this basis, the solitary consciousness engages in thinking, analysis, inference, and judgment regarding the mental object through inference and mistaken perception; it may then misidentify, judge confusedly, or muddle concepts—mistaking the long, short, square, round, large, and small, and the properties of things—or even misjudge what the five consciousnesses have discerned. When this is uploaded to the manas, the manas will misjudge, leading to disordered bodily, verbal, and mental actions, and mental illness may arise.

The "three natures" refer to the wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral (indeterminate, avyākṛta) natures of mind and consciousness. In terms of the characteristics of the five consciousnesses' own operation: their functions are extremely singular and narrow; they only perform direct-perception discernment of the five sense-objects composed of the real seeds of the five great elements, without engaging in thinking, analysis, speculation, or imagination, and they have no other mental activities—those belong to the domain of the mind consciousness, and specifically of the solitary consciousness. The eye consciousness simply cannot give rise to wholesome or unwholesome thoughts; its function is set only to automatically and singularly discern, like a robot—indeed even more singular and pure than a robot, with even more simplified functions. How could it give rise to a wholesome or unwholesome mind?

For example, when the eye consciousness sees an object of form, how could it be wholesome or unwholesome? What other intentional mental activities could it have? Regarding the object of form, it has no thought at all about how to handle it, nor any thought of concealing or exaggerating; it merely mechanically makes contact and mechanically determines the color of the object of form. There is no greater room for activity—all of that is the affair of the mind consciousness, and specifically of the solitary consciousness. Even the mental consciousness accompanying the five sense consciousnesses does not have so many permissions and functions; it only assists the five consciousnesses in discernment, and that is direct-perception discernment, without any wholesome or unwholesome attributes. It is the solitary consciousness that has wholesome and unwholesome mental actions and intentions. The solitary consciousness corresponds to the Image-Only Object, and discerns through inference and mistaken perception; the conditions required for its arising and operation are very few, its permissions are very many, it is extremely lively and untrammeled, boundlessly free, interweaving wholesome and unwholesome, extremely complex, and difficult to control.

The first five consciousnesses have absolutely no autonomy; their arising, ceasing, and alteration are determined by the manas. They are the manas's tools for discerning the five sense-objects, all discerning sense-objects together with the mind consciousness, and their range of discernment is very narrow and relatively singular, with a discernment process akin to mechanization. Because the five consciousnesses are like video recorders, audio recorders, or geological detectors, operated by the manas, they have no autonomy or power of choice: which portion of audio-visual content to record, how long to record, the angle and orientation, and so on, are all controlled by the manas; what content to detect, and the direction, angle, and duration of detection, and so on, are all chosen by the manas. The five consciousnesses are merely obedient tools, less flexible, less authorized, and less multifunctional than a robot—so how could they be wholesome or unwholesome? Even a robot with extremely many functions has no wholesome or unwholesome attributes; how could the five consciousnesses, with their singular functions, have wholesome or unwholesome attributes? Therefore, the five consciousnesses possess only the neutral nature (avyākṛta).

How are the five consciousnesses tools? For example, if the manas wishes to see a certain form, the tathāgatagarbha cooperates and gives rise to the mental consciousness accompanying the five sense consciousnesses and the eye consciousness with respect to that form; at other objects of form there is no mind consciousness or eye consciousness, because the manas makes no choice and has no intention to see them. If the manas wishes to see a certain part of a certain form, the eye consciousness and the accompanying mind consciousness must focus on that part; for the remaining parts there is no mind consciousness or eye consciousness. These two consciousnesses absolutely turn in accordance with the intentions and thoughts of the manas; otherwise there would be no necessity for them to arise. They cannot arise autonomously, cannot arise freely; their arising is conditional—there must be the precondition of the manas's choice, and they must turn according to the manas's will. Wherever the manas points, they must strike; otherwise, on what basis would the tathāgatagarbha give rise to these two consciousnesses?

In the process of discerning material form, if the manas has a wholesome thought wishing to cultivate wholesome dharmas, the accompanying mind consciousness and the eye consciousness operate according to the manas's intention, but the eye consciousness still has no wholesome nature, and even the accompanying mind consciousness may have no wholesome nature; yet the solitary consciousness definitely has a wholesome nature, otherwise it would be unwilling to cooperate in doing good. Likewise, if the manas has an unwholesome mind wishing to create unwholesome karma, the accompanying mind consciousness and the eye consciousness operate according to the manas's malicious intent; the eye consciousness likewise has no unwholesome nature, and even the accompanying mind consciousness may have no unwholesome nature, but the solitary consciousness definitely has an unwholesome mind, otherwise it would resist and be unwilling to cooperate. The solitary consciousness is fully endowed with all three natures—wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral. The accompanying mind consciousness has the neutral nature, though it may also have wholesome and unwholesome natures when attached to the manas—this is to be observed later. The five consciousnesses definitely have no wholesome or unwholesome natures, only the neutral nature.

When observing the essential natures or attributes of the seven consciousnesses, one must observe the seven consciousnesses separately and not lump them together. Observing them together observes the characteristics and attributes of the seven consciousnesses as a whole, not the attributes of any individual consciousness; then one cannot distinguish the functional attributes of each individual mind-consciousness. If one takes the attributes of multiple consciousnesses operating in combination as the attributes of a single consciousness, that is a mistake, and the resulting conclusion will be inaccurate, or even inverted. 

Of course, ordinary people can only observe a portion of the coarse, shallow attributes and mental activities of the solitary consciousness; even the accompanying mind consciousness is difficult to observe. Due to insufficient meditative concentration and wisdom, there is no way to directly observe the attributes and mental activities of the first five consciousnesses and the manas. A person with sufficient meditative concentration and wisdom who is capable of observing the essential natures of the first five consciousnesses and the manas must be a bhūmi-attained bodhisattva possessing the seed-wisdom (种智) of Yogācāra. Hence, regarding profound dharmas, there is great divergence and controversy.