The Mind Base Has Covering but Only the Three Attributes of Good, Evil, and Neutral

The term "obscured indeterminacy" (有覆无记) refers to the nature of being covered and obstructed. Who is covered? It is the mind-organ, the seventh consciousness (意根, manas). What does it cover? It covers the pure wisdom of the mind-organ's own mind, preventing it from recognizing the true principles, truths, and ultimate reality of the Mahayana and Hinayana teachings. Why does this covering function occur? Because of the ignorance and afflictions of the mind itself. Thus, the mind-organ, possessing ignorance and afflictions, and being the primary agent of decision-making, leads to the cycle of birth and death in the six realms. Since the mind-organ has ignorance and afflictions and is the consciousness that makes decisions, are the physical, verbal, and mental actions—including evil deeds—produced by the five aggregates (五阴身) not created under the mind-organ's direction? Of course, they are created under the mind-organ's direction. These actions all manifest the mind-organ's mental activities and nature; evil deeds manifest the mind-organ's unwholesome mental factors and afflictive mental factors. Can the mind-organ then be merely an indeterminate mind that is neither wholesome nor unwholesome? Absolutely not. The mind-organ possesses wholesome minds, unwholesome minds, and minds that are neither wholesome nor unwholesome. The foundation of spiritual cultivation is to cultivate the mind-organ. If the mind-organ had no unwholesome mind, afflictive mind, or ignorant mind, what need would there be for cultivation? The six consciousnesses would then have no unwholesome mind, afflictive mind, or ignorant mind. In that case, sentient beings, even if not Buddhas, would be close to Buddhahood.

The statement that the mind-organ has the nature of "obscured indeterminacy" does not originate from the Buddhist scriptures but from the treatises of ancient Yogācāra masters. Moreover, if one's wisdom has not reached the level of a Bodhisattva on the grounds (地上菩萨), one cannot directly perceive and contemplate the nature of the mind-organ's mind, due to insufficient meditative concentration and wisdom. Therefore, Yogācāra masters are not necessarily equal to Bodhisattvas on the grounds; they do not necessarily possess the direct perceptual insight and the wisdom of the path's seed-knowledge (道种智) or the Yogācāra seed-knowledge (唯识种智) for profound Yogācāra doctrines. Consequently, the treatises they compose may not be perfect, and it is not surprising that they contain flaws.

I began teaching Yogācāra in 2016. At that time, my wisdom was still relatively shallow, and I did not have a thorough understanding of Yogācāra doctrines. Some people asked me questions about Yogācāra, extracted from treatises like the *Cheng Weishi Lun* (成唯识论). At that time, I could not engage in independent thinking and contemplation apart from these treatises, so I treated these views as absolutely correct and provided answers accordingly. Later, I gradually discovered some inconsistencies and contradictions that could not be reconciled. Consequently, I gradually abandoned the original treatises and engaged in my own contemplation. I had originally planned to explain the entire *Cheng Weishi Lun*, but after identifying problems, I only explained a few passages and stopped. This is because following the treatise would lead me to make errors and mislead others, while deviating from the treatise would invite accusations of contradicting it, both resulting in unfavorable outcomes. In my initial explanations of Yogācāra doctrines, some points that followed the Yogācāra treatises contained errors. When compiling the materials later, I tried my best to correct them.

Ancient Yogācāra treatises state that the mind-organ only experiences neutral feeling (舍受). I had doubts about this at the time because observing the feelings in body and mind reveals contradictions and inconsistencies with reality. If the mind-organ only had neutral feeling, then a person's mind would be extremely peaceful and calm, almost like the *tathāgatagarbha* (如来藏), without emotions, without contention or grasping, without retaliation or revenge, without liking or disliking. Would such a mind still need cultivation? Could it still create evil karma, even grave evil karma?

The activities of the consciousness mind (意识心) are superficial and, with a bit of mental refinement, can be observed. Because initial observation is always done by the consciousness mind, it is easy for the consciousness mind to observe and understand itself, which is why it is said to be relatively shallow and superficial. However, for the consciousness mind, the mind-organ is a different consciousness, distinct from the consciousness mind itself. Observing and understanding it is not so easy; in fact, it is extremely difficult. Without the first *dhyāna* (初禅定) and profound Yogācāra wisdom, one cannot directly observe the mental activities of the mind-organ. Even a person who has attained awakening can directly observe the coarse operations of the eighth consciousness but cannot observe the mental activities of the mind-organ. Therefore, one should not think that the mind-organ is easy to observe or understand.

Qingfeng: Secondary afflictions (随烦恼) like dullness (昏沉) and restlessness (掉举) should be classified under "obscured indeterminacy." Although they are indeterminate, they can obstruct the noble path. The ten minor secondary afflictions belong to afflictive habits and are dormant in the seventh consciousness. They can only be eradicated after attaining the Bodhisattva grounds. These should all be classified under "obscured indeterminacy." Previously, I saw a fanatic online using these to attack the Master's teachings, treating all afflictions of the seventh consciousness as "obscured indeterminacy."

It seems that in the *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra* (瑜伽师地论), self-view (我见), self-love (我爱), self-conceit (我慢), and self-ignorance (我痴) are defined as having the nature of "obscured indeterminacy." For example, self-view is the mistaken view of regarding the body as the true self. This is a wrong view, merely an erroneous understanding, which obstructs the noble path and prevents us from eradicating self-view. It is understandable to classify it as "obscured indeterminacy." However, regarding self-conceit, for instance, when a non-Buddhist sees the Buddhist scriptures and, failing to understand them, considers them deceptive, as if he is superior to the Buddha himself—such people are not uncommon today. This involves self-conceit and constitutes slander of the Buddha and the Dharma. This should not be considered indeterminate. Therefore, "obscured indeterminacy" should probably refer to those afflictive habits that are more subtle.

Comment: Secondary afflictions are afflictive mental factors. Since they are afflictions, they are unwholesome, not wholesome, and not neither wholesome nor unwholesome. How can they be considered indeterminate? Such simple and clear terminology is very easy to understand and should not be confused. Whether afflictions or afflictive habits, they are all unwholesome, not wholesome, and not indeterminate. Similarly, conceit and ignorance are afflictive mental factors; they are unwholesome, not wholesome, and not indeterminate. In summary, the mind-organ possesses all wholesome and unwholesome mental factors; it does not have only the single attribute of indeterminacy.

Rutao: Most people only recite books and are deeply attached to emotional biases. Once they are implanted with preconceived views, it is very difficult to change them. Mencius said, "It is better to have no books than to believe all of them completely," which aims to break people's superstition about books. In the Dharma, the principle of relying on the Dharma and not on the person, I feel, is also set to target this significant weakness in human nature.