Observing the Five Aggregates to Cut Through the View of Self (Part 2)
Chapter One: What Does the "Self" Within the Five Aggregates Refer To?
1. Which "Self" View Is to Be Eradicated in the Eradication of the View of Self?
The eradication of the view of self (satkāya-dṛṣṭi-prahāṇa) means eradicating the knowledge and view of which "self"? Only by clarifying this question can one eradicate the view of self. If one does not even know which "self's" knowledge and view is to be eradicated, then one cannot eradicate the view of self; with an unclear target, the target naturally cannot be achieved. What has the view of self is certainly the five aggregates (pañca-skandha), namely the seven consciousness-minds within the five aggregates, mainly referring to the sixth and seventh consciousnesses. Whatever dharmas the sixth and seventh consciousnesses take as self, one must make the sixth and seventh consciousnesses negate those dharmas, not acknowledge them as self, or in other words, confirm that those dharmas are not self—only then is the view of self eradicated. In short, it is the eradication of the sixth and seventh consciousnesses' view of self.
Some people mistakenly believe that it is the view of self of the eighth consciousness that is to be eradicated, but in fact the eighth consciousness has no view of self; He does not take any dharma as the eighth consciousness itself, nor does He take the eighth consciousness itself as being Himself, so the eighth consciousness has no view of self. Even if the eighth consciousness had a view of self, how would one go about eradicating it? There is simply no way to begin; the sixth and seventh consciousnesses cannot communicate or exchange with the eighth consciousness, so how could they make the eighth consciousness eradicate its view of self? Therefore, the subjects of the "self" in eradicating the view of self are the sixth and seventh consciousnesses within the five aggregates, and one must find ways to make the sixth and seventh consciousnesses eradicate their view of self in order to attain liberation from the birth-and-death of the sixth and seventh consciousnesses within the five aggregates. Some others believe that the aggregate of form also has a view of self and that the aggregate of form's view of self should also be eradicated, but the aggregate of form is material form (rūpa); material form is not a consciousness-mind, has no thoughts or views, and has no concept of self, so how could the aggregate of form eradicate a view of self? It is the sixth and seventh consciousnesses that regard the aggregate of form as self, so it is the sixth and seventh consciousnesses' view of self that takes the aggregate of form as self which must be eradicated.
2. What Does the Non-Self of the Five Aggregates Negate?
"Self" means sovereignty, self-mastery, permanence and immutability, and reality, yet the five aggregates lack such characteristics and properties; therefore the five aggregates are not self. The five aggregates cannot be controlled, have no sovereignty, cannot act autonomously, are not permanent and unchanging, and are not real. The five aggregates signify destructibility, damage, decay, and emptiness (śūnyatā). Through contemplative practice (vipaśyanā-caryā), when one realizes these principles, one realizes that the five aggregates are without self and are not self.
Here the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha, has nothing to do with it. Śrāvakas who merely know that there is an eighth consciousness that neither arises nor ceases and is that upon which the five aggregates depend can completely eradicate the view of self. Those non-Buddhists who encountered the Buddha and, after listening to the Buddha's teaching for just a few minutes, realized the fourth fruit of the great arhat had no time to understand the eighth consciousness at all, did not know what the eighth consciousness meant, and certainly had no time to contemplate the relationship between the five aggregates and the eighth consciousness. They could not possibly contemplate and realize through practice that the five aggregates are without the eighth consciousness or that the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness, and could not arrive at such a conclusion, yet they did indeed realize the fruit of arhatship, and some even entered nirvāṇa before the Buddha while in His presence.
In the Sūtra on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, the Buddha taught his disciples to practice contemplation and realize the fruits. From beginning to end, the entire sūtra never mentions that the basis of the five aggregates is the eighth consciousness. Throughout the entire contemplative process, the disciples never touched upon the eighth consciousness, never contemplated the eighth consciousness, and never contemplated the five aggregates in connection with the eighth consciousness. In the end, many disciples realized that the five aggregates are suffering, empty, impermanent, and without self, and attained the pure dharma eye from the first fruit to the fourth fruit. Therefore, the conclusion of non-self contains no meaning whatsoever of "the five aggregates are without the eighth consciousness." The non-self of the five aggregates does not negate the eighth consciousness, but negates subjecthood, sovereignty, and permanence.
3. What Does the "Self" in "The Five Aggregates Are Without Self" Refer To?
"The five aggregates are self," "the five aggregates are not self"—what does this "self" refer to? Ordinary beings believe the five aggregates are self; sages believe the five aggregates are not self. What exactly does this "self" refer to?
Some say this "self" refers to the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha. Is this claim correct? If it were correct, then ordinary beings, because they have a self, would believe the five aggregates are the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha. Do ordinary beings have such cognition, such thoughts and views? Certainly not. If they had such views, none of them would be ordinary beings anymore; they would directly leap over the three stages of the thirty-seven aids and become noble bodhisattvas at the bhūmi stages. Because only bodhisattvas at the bhūmi stages have the ability to observe that all aspects of the five aggregates and eighteen realms are entirely the nature of the tathāgatagarbha, that in essence they are all the tathāgatagarbha, having realized one portion or many portions of the nature of the one true dharma realm. If one could realize that the entire dharma realm is the one true dharma realm, that would be a Buddha.
Therefore, ordinary beings cannot possibly have the wise cognition that the five aggregates are the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha. In fact, ordinary sentient beings do not have such thoughts, views, or cognition. Even among ordinary beings who study Buddhism, most do not know of the existence of the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha, and among those who know of it, many do not acknowledge the reality and non-illusoriness of the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha, and certainly have not realized it, so they would not take the five aggregates as the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha. Especially beings in the three evil destinies—even less can they connect the five aggregates with the eighth consciousness. Yet beings in the three evil destinies all have the view of self, all take their five-aggregate bodies as self and as belonging to self, and protect them accordingly. Especially animals, who are utterly ignorant, with no concepts whatsoever in their minds—they only know that the five-aggregate body is self, and they do not even have the concept of "self," yet this does not hinder animals' protection of themselves, because the manas knows, without language, words, or deliberation, that the five-aggregate body is this self, and knows nothing else.
In that case, ordinary sentient beings have absolutely no need, through studying the Four Noble Truths and contemplating the five aggregates, to negate the "absolute truth" that the five aggregates are the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha, and arrive at the erroneous conclusion that the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha. This conclusion directly negates the profound great wisdom of consciousness-only of the bodhisattvas at the bhūmi stages, contradicts the correct principles of consciousness-only (Yogācāra), and also contradicts the correct principle of the one true dharma realm taught in the Huayan Sūtra. Therefore, attaining realization with the conclusion that "the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness, the tathāgatagarbha" means one has not attained realization at all, has not performed truthful contemplative practice, and has no genuine process of cultivation. Those who have genuinely cultivated could never arrive at such a conclusion. This is a deviant path in the contemplative practice of eradicating the view of self; it cannot yield the true fruit of eradicating the view of self, cannot attain the pure dharma eye, and cannot attain liberation.
Those who have attained realization regard the five aggregates as suffering, empty, impermanent, not permanent and unchanging, not real, not autonomous, and not sovereign. They then gradually abandon such five aggregates and gradually cease grasping such five aggregates; afflictions gradually diminish and cease, and thus they attain liberation. After truly eradicating the view of self, these statements no longer have much meaning; one's own personal experience is the most real, reliable, and trustworthy—without words, one knows in the mind what it is all about.
4. What Does the "Self" in "The Five Aggregates Are Self" and "The Five Aggregates Are Without Self" Refer To?
The contemplative practice for eradicating the view of self is extremely important, and clarifying which "self" takes the five aggregates as self is extremely important. If one cannot even clarify which "self" within the five aggregates has the view of self, how can one eradicate the view of self? Those with the view of self are the mind consciousness and the manas; the eighth consciousness absolutely has no view of self. Therefore, eradicating the view of self means eradicating the view of self of the mind consciousness and the manas, making the mind consciousness and manas confirm that the five aggregates are neither self nor belonging to self. The "self" in "not my self" of course also refers to the mind consciousness and manas, not to the eighth consciousness.
The self of the five aggregates and the sixth and seventh consciousnesses has destructibility and decay, is subject to arising, ceasing, and change; therefore the five aggregates and the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are not self and are without self. The eighth consciousness is not destructible, not subject to decay, is permanently abiding and imperishable; conventionally it may be called "self," but it has no self-nature, none of the sovereign self-nature that the seven consciousnesses have; therefore the eighth consciousness is also without self. Thus, contemplating that the five aggregates are without self means contemplating the destructibility, decay, and arising-ceasing mutability of the five aggregates and the sixth and seventh consciousnesses; upon confirmation, the view of self and view of what belongs to self, whereby the sixth and seventh consciousnesses take the five aggregates as self, is eradicated. If one takes the "self" in "without self" to be the eighth consciousness, that is substituting one concept for another, and the result is that the view of self cannot be eradicated.
Since beginningless kalpas, the manas has always taken the five aggregates as the real self and grasped onto them; the mind consciousness, influenced by the manas's conditioning, likewise takes the five aggregates as the real self and as belonging to self. Why does this "self" refer to the mind consciousness and manas, not to the eighth consciousness? Because since beginningless kalpas, sentient beings have not known of the principle-substance of the eighth consciousness and could not possibly treat the five aggregates as the eighth consciousness; in their minds there is no view of self such as "the five aggregates are the eighth consciousness." Therefore, eradicating the view of self does not mean contemplating that the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness. If sentient beings could take the five aggregates as the eighth consciousness, they would empty the five aggregates, would not grasp the five aggregates, would have no view of self and no self-grasping, and there would be no transmigration through the six destinies—this is what all Buddhas and bodhisattvas would delight to see.
If it were so, all the Buddhas would not need to come to the Sahā world to teach the Dharma and ferry those lost across. Therefore, the result of contemplating that the five aggregates are without self is not realizing that the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness or that the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are not the eighth consciousness, but realizing that the five aggregates in their entirety are subject to decay, are all subject to arising, ceasing, and change, and that there is no so-called thing called "self" existing. Then one will no longer grasp the five aggregates, and self-grasping will gradually melt away.
5. The True Meaning of the Non-Self of Persons
The non-self of persons is the view held by both Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna sages. They have realized, to varying degrees and from different angles, that the five aggregates are not self. Those who have completely realized the non-self of the five aggregates are the arhats of the fourth fruit, the pratyekabuddhas, and the great bodhisattvas of the eighth bhūmi and above. Opposed to the non-self of persons is the self of persons—the view that the person of the five-aggregate body has self-nature, is self and belongs to self. This is the incorrect view of ordinary sentient beings, and such wrong view (mithyā-dṛṣṭi) can invite the suffering of birth-and-death transmigration through the six destinies.
If sentient beings take the five-aggregate body as the five-aggregate body, believing the five-aggregate body truly exists, is self and belongs to self, that is the ignorant, deviant view of birth-and-death. If sentient beings do not take the five-aggregate body as the five-aggregate body, but regard it as born of the eighth consciousness, as the functions and activities of the eighth consciousness, essentially being the eighth consciousness, then such a being has destroyed the view of self that takes the five aggregates as self, and has realized that the five aggregates are not self—the five aggregates have no real attributes of their own; all their attributes belong to the eighth consciousness. This is the view of Mahāyāna bodhisattvas. In this way, the karmic seeds of birth-and-death in the six destinies will gradually be exhausted, and one can attain liberation from transmigration through the three realms, though bodhisattvas will not leave the three realms.
A bodhisattva who has eradicated the view of self has realized the non-self of persons: not taking a person as a person, not taking the aggregate of form as the aggregate of form, not taking the aggregate of feeling as the aggregate of feeling, not taking the aggregate of perception as the aggregate of perception, not taking the aggregate of volitional formations as the aggregate of volitional formations, not taking the six faculties as the six faculties, not taking the six sense-objects as the six sense-objects, not taking the six consciousnesses as the six consciousnesses, but taking all of them as attributes of the eighth consciousness, as the functions and activities of the eighth consciousness. The five aggregates and eighteen realms are precisely the eighth consciousness, so "the five aggregates are not self" does not mean "the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness."
Therefore, the true meaning of the non-self of persons is not that a person is not the eighth consciousness, but that a person lacks the attributes of a person—that the person is not the self of "person," that the attributes of personhood do not hold, that the functions of personhood are not real, that the functions of personhood are impermanent, arising and ceasing, mutable, and are also bestowed by the eighth consciousness. Thus, after eradicating the view of self, one no longer acknowledges the five-aggregate body as self or as having self, no longer regards the five-aggregate body as belonging to self, and in the mind there is no so-called self. Sentient beings have self-grasping only because they take the five aggregates as self, and hence the suffering of birth-and-death transmigration; if sentient beings all acknowledged the five aggregates as the eighth consciousness, they would realize non-self and no longer have self in their minds. After there is no self in the mind, grasping at self will gradually lessen, until finally self-grasping is completely eradicated; without grasping there is no birth-and-death, and one will escape the suffering of transmigration.
6. "The Five Aggregates Are Not the Eighth Consciousness" Is Not the Conclusion of Hīnayāna Contemplative Practice
Since sentient beings, since beginningless kalpas, have not known that there is an unarising and unceasing eighth consciousness permanently abiding within the five-aggregate body, sentient beings have no view of self that "the five aggregates are the eighth consciousness." When contemplating the five aggregates to eradicate the view of self, there is no need to compare the five aggregates with the eighth consciousness, saying the five aggregates are impermanent while the eighth consciousness is permanent, the five aggregates arise and cease while the eighth consciousness does not arise or cease, and thereby infer that the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness, and thereby eradicate the view of self that the five aggregates are the self of the eighth consciousness. Such comparison and inference are entirely unnecessary; without the premise, there is no subsequent conclusion.
Even if there were such a premise—that all sentient beings take the five aggregates as the eighth consciousness—this still would not be a view of self; on the contrary, it would be a cognition without the view of self, a cognition of non-self. When Mahāyāna Chan practitioners investigate Chan and break through to realize the eighth consciousness, the Chan-practicing bodhisattvas then know that the five aggregates are born of the eighth consciousness, are a part of the eighth consciousness, and are precisely the eighth consciousness. And after bodhisattvas enter the first bhūmi, they gradually observe that all dharmas are the tathāgatagarbha, the eighth consciousness; the five aggregates all the more are the eighth consciousness—the whole is precisely the tathāgatagarbha, the eighth consciousness, dharmas within the one true dharma realm. If sentient beings, since beginningless kalpas, had a view of self taking the five aggregates as the self of the eighth consciousness, then sentient beings would have been bhūmi-stage bodhisattvas since beginningless kalpas, possessing the seed-wisdom of consciousness-only, and could not have birth-and-death transmigration through the six destinies.
Moreover, when the Buddha taught the Āgama sūtras, he first told his disciples that within the five-aggregate body there is a permanently abiding dharma, neither arising nor ceasing, upon which the five aggregates of sentient beings depend. After hearing the Buddha say this, the disciples believed and accepted what the Buddha taught, knowing there is a permanent eighth consciousness that does not perish, while the five aggregates arise and cease and are impermanent, and the five aggregates are fundamentally not the permanent eighth consciousness. That is why they needed to cultivate meditative concentration and contemplate that the five aggregates are impermanent, suffering, empty, and without self, confirming that the five aggregates are destructible, that the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are destructible, and that there is no self and nothing belonging to self. Therefore, the conclusion of the contemplative practice that eradicates the view of self is not "the five aggregates are not the self of the eighth consciousness," but that the five aggregates are impermanent, decaying, and suffering—not (the manas) self, and not (the manas's) belonging-to-self.
7. Why the Five Aggregates Have No Self and No Belonging-to-Self
Because the five aggregates and eighteen realms arise and cease moment by moment, are illusory, false appearances, and have no sovereignty of their own, they are not self. For example, a pile of wood, earth, and water mixed together according to a certain principle forms a house; this house is an arising-ceasing, illusory false appearance with no autonomy—it collapses as soon as it collapses—and cannot be taken as a real, autonomous dharma and grasped as a house.
Likewise, the so-called self of the five aggregates is also composed of the combined seeds of the seven great elements; it is also an arising-ceasing, unreal dharma, without autonomy, without self-sovereignty; it cannot be taken as self, nor as belonging to self. Therefore the five aggregates are not self and not belonging-to-self; there is no self and no belonging-to-self; there is no need to crave and grasp, to cling and seize; do not take dharmas assembled from various components as a self to rely upon and depend on. Then, after no longer relying on and depending on dharmas assembled from combinations, what happens? One no longer grasps the five aggregates and eighteen realms—then what remains? If in the mind there is this thought, wondering what remains, then the view of self has not been fully eradicated; there is still grasping, still seeking, and thus there is still birth-and-death, still suffering.
If the "self" in eradicating the view of self is not understood clearly, one cannot truly eradicate the view of self. If one arrives at a conclusion such as "the five aggregates are not the eighth consciousness, are not the eighth consciousness, and are not different from the eighth consciousness," then one has not eradicated the view of self, nor has one performed truthful, principled contemplation of the five aggregates and eighteen realms; in the mind there still exists the self of the five aggregates and eighteen realms—the self of the five aggregates and eighteen realms has not been abolished; it is merely that the mind consciousness believes the five aggregates and eighteen realms are not the eighth consciousness. "Empty"—this meaning is extremely important. At the end of contemplative practice, one knows the five aggregates and eighteen realms are empty. What is empty? Tracing to the root, what is empty is what is without self. If there is something not empty, then there is self. Who could take an empty dharma as (the manas) self? Only someone who has not contemplated the emptiness of the five aggregates.
8. Who Is the "Self" That Takes the Body as Self?
The body is not self, nor belonging-to-self; I lodge in this body, and once the body disappears, I must go find another body to lodge in. Who does the "self" here refer to? Whoever takes the body as self and belonging-to-self—that is who this "self" refers to. First, the tathāgatagarbha certainly does not take the body as self or belonging-to-self; He has no intention of using the body to do or not do anything, and is without mind regarding the operation of worldly dharmas, so this "self" does not refer to the tathāgatagarbha.
Since beginningless kalpas, it is the seventh consciousness, the manas, that has taken the body as self; since beginningless kalpas, it is the seventh consciousness, the manas, that has continuously grasped the body as self. So this "self" primarily refers to the seventh consciousness. Within the five aggregates, the minds of the five sense consciousnesses are extremely coarse, with almost no concept or view of self. The mind consciousness has thoughts and views of self, but at conception, when seeking a body to lodge in, the mind consciousness is powerless; the mind consciousness's lodging in the body is not continuous, and it cannot exercise sovereignty over the body or bear primary responsibility, so this "self" mainly refers to the manas. Having something to abide in and maintain, having something to make use of—these are what the manas cares about and grasps most; conceiving and taking birth, possessing a material body—these are what the manas cares about and grasps most; the functions and activities of the five aggregates are what the manas most wants to seize and hold. Therefore the manas's view of self is deeply rooted and most obstinate. Once the manas believes the material body and five aggregates are not self and not belonging-to-self, its obstinate grasping at the material body and five aggregates will gradually be fully eradicated, and it will gradually be liberated from all suffering feelings within the world of the five aggregates.
Because the Chinese vocabulary is not rich enough, the terminology of Buddhadharma and worldly usage cannot be separated, and many dharma meanings cannot be expressed accurately, leading to much misunderstanding. For example, the word "true" (真) is used in both worldly dharma and Buddhadharma. What does "true" mean in worldly dharma, and what does it mean in Buddhadharma? Most people simply cannot distinguish them and often confuse them. Especially those who have studied the Mahāyāna tathāgatagarbha dharma—whenever "true" is mentioned, they assume it refers to the true mind and true reality of the tathāgatagarbha. In worldly dharma, people also have the term "true heart" (真心) and use the word "real" (真实), but these have nothing to do with the tathāgatagarbha. For example, when A asks B: "Do you truly (真心) want to do this? Are you truly willing? What are your real thoughts? Is this matter real? Is this thing genuine?"—not a single sentence has anything to do with the tathāgatagarbha. Yet these people who study the tathāgatagarbha dharma pin everything onto the tathāgatagarbha—but the tathāgatagarbha has no head, so how can anything be pinned on it?
In worldly dharma there is a "self," and in Buddhadharma there is also a "self," but the meanings of these two "selves" differ enormously. Yet after studying the tathāgatagarbha, people become confused and cannot distinguish which "self" is meant; whenever they encounter the word "self," they assume it refers to the tathāgatagarbha. Could eradicating the view of self mean eradicating the view of the tathāgatagarbha? "The five aggregates are self"—does that mean the five aggregates are the tathāgatagarbha? "The five aggregates are not self"—must it mean the five aggregates are not the tathāgatagarbha?
9. The Content and Result of the Contemplative Practice for Eradicating the View of Self
The "self" in eradicating the view of self refers to the manas's innate view of self and the mind consciousness's discriminated view of self, not to eradicating the tathāgatagarbha's view of self. The tathāgatagarbha has no view of self and needs no eradication. One must simply have the mind consciousness and manas contemplate that this portion of dharma—the five aggregates and eighteen realms—is suffering, empty, and impermanent, so that the manas and mind consciousness can confirm that the five aggregates and eighteen realms are not self and not belonging-to-self—not making the tathāgatagarbha confirm that the five aggregates and eighteen realms are not self and not belonging-to-self. "Without self" does not deny the existence of the tathāgatagarbha's self, but denies the real existence of the five aggregates and eighteen realms.
Precisely because the five aggregates and eighteen realms are not really existing, unchanging dharmas in the worldly realm, one has the mind consciousness and manas confirm that the five aggregates and eighteen realms are without self, and to stop acknowledging the five aggregates and eighteen realms as self and belonging-to-self. The result of the contemplation is not to have the mind consciousness and manas confirm that the tathāgatagarbha is without self or that there is a tathāgatagarbha self, nor to have the tathāgatagarbha confirm that it is without self. Before the contemplation, one may acknowledge the existence of a tathāgatagarbha self, but the result of the contemplation should not land on the tathāgatagarbha, because what is being contemplated is the five aggregates and eighteen realms, not the tathāgatagarbha; the content of contemplation must not be confused, otherwise the result will be confused, resulting in failure to truthfully eradicate the view of self.
10. What Is the True Character of Form, Feeling, Perception, Volitional Formations, and Consciousness?
The true character of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness is impermanent, mutable, unsteady, empty, suffering—not self, not different from self, not mutually containing. Since they are without self, how can one say "I am superior," "I am inferior," "I am no worse than others"? Two or more dharmas that are "not self" and have no self, two or more empty dharmas, two or more suffering dharmas, two or more unreal dharmas—how can they be compared? How can one say which is higher and which is lower, or that they are equal? Empty dharmas, unreal dharmas—how can they be taken for comparison? How can one compare the length of a rabbit's horns? How can one compare whether a turtle's fur is beautiful or not? How can one say "I am stronger than you, you are weaker than me"? How can one say "I am as healthy and wealthy as you"? Worldly people, ignorant and inverted, have long since become accustomed to this as if it were natural, not knowing that what they say is utterly meaningless, all mere jest. Even language and sounds are empty and insubstantial.
When two people hurl abuse at each other, did the abuse actually reach anyone? Did it land on the aggregate of form, or the aggregate of feeling, or the aggregate of perception, or the aggregate of volitional formations, or the aggregate of consciousness? Where did the sound of the abuse go? The abused person feels uncomfortable—what is it that feels uncomfortable? Which dharma feels uncomfortable? What is called "uncomfortable"? Do dharmas called "comfortable" and "uncomfortable" exist? The abuser feels pleased and vented—what is it that feels vented? Is there such a dharma as "venting"?
Contemplating and examining these dharmas within profound meditative concentration (samādhi), at a certain point the mind will empty these dharmas away, and body and mind will drop off. This too is a kind of feeling, also unreal, yet it is liberation. Without meditative concentration, even if one understands these dharmas, no matter how many books one writes, it is all empty talk, without substantial benefit.
11. The Meaning of the Falsity of the Five Aggregates
What is falsity? Falsity means false and unreal; it also means empty, meaning the matter and its principle do not exist. For example, everyone spreads the rumor that so-and-so has become king, but in fact no such thing happened; so-and-so did not become king. This is a false rumor; the matter of so-and-so becoming king is false, is falsity, is empty, is unreal. After sentient beings know this is not a real matter, they no longer spread it, no longer take it seriously; the mind is relieved, and the mind becomes empty.
Likewise, sentient beings since beginningless kalpas have all taken the five aggregates as real and truly existent, as self, as belonging to self. Through contemplative practice, they finally confirm that the five aggregates are not real, are false, are empty, are without self, and do not belong to self. Then they no longer take the five aggregates as themselves; the mind becomes empty, relieved, liberated; they gradually let go and cease grasping, and no longer create karmic actions for the sake of the false self, the empty self, of the five aggregates—and suffering disappears.
However, the false self, the illusory self, does exist at the level of worldly appearances; it merely lacks real substance and is essentially empty. Those who have attained the pure dharma eye will still use this false five aggregates to cultivate and live thereafter, but their inner thoughts and views have changed, resulting in afflictions becoming slight or even fully eradicated; the karmic seeds of transmigration through the six destinies are eliminated, and they gain the ability to escape the suffering of birth-and-death—this is the merit of the Hīnayāna samādhi of the equal cultivation of Samādhi and Prajñā.
12. The Appearance of Self-Nature
In which region of the world do sentient beings have the heaviest view of self and the strongest self-grasping? Sentient beings who emphasize the self have the heaviest view of self and the greatest self-grasping. Buddhadharma originated in India and later spread to China (Zhendan), whereupon the Buddhadharma of India in the West gradually declined, while the Buddhadharma of China grew ever more flourishing. Patriarch Bodhidharma, observing in the West that China had the disposition for the Great Vehicle, risked his life, flew from India in the West to China, transmitted the Dharma, and ferried the deluded, and thus the Mahāyāna Buddhadharma spread widely, with Mahāyāna talents flowing forth in abundance. Then came the birth of the Sixth Patriarch of the Chan school, and together with the twenty-eighth patriarch of the West abiding in the world, the Mahāyāna Buddhadharma stood as stable as Mount Tai.
Why did Buddhadharma not spread to Western and other countries, but instead spread to China (Zhendan)? It stems from differences in cultural heritage and humanistic cultivation of nations and regions. China has cultural foundations such as Confucianism and Daoism, the Middle Way, revealing the root of human nature. Only with human nature can there be bodhisattva-nature and Buddha-nature; without human nature, still less is there bodhisattva-nature. Judging from the current global pneumonia pandemic, with such a severe infectious disease, the people of those countries and regions still demand freedom and human rights, caring only for their own pleasure, completely disregarding the safety of others' lives—this is the selfish view of self and self-grasping. What does the freedom those people demand represent? What does the human rights they advocate represent? Entirely self—the view of self, self-grasping.
Even that so-called freedom, if it does not harm others' interests, still entirely represents self-nature, emphasizing the self. The so-called human rights are all about asserting the rights of the self, highlighting the self—all self-nature. To be independent, to have autonomy, to demand equality, freedom, rights, status—these demands all originate from a deeply rooted self, emphasizing one's sense of self-existence, pursuing the release of the self, refusing to suppress that self. Such heavy self-nature will not attract the Mahāyāna Buddhadharma; the conditions for sentient beings' liberation are not mature.
Likewise, for a single individual, if self-nature is very strong, with greed, anger, jealousy, and intense self-assertion, the conditions for liberation are also not mature. Even if such a person encounters Buddhadharma, in this life they will not eradicate the view of self or attain liberation. Buddhist practitioners should maintain vigilance at all times, constantly observing their own mental activities and dispositions. Upon discovering self-consciousness rearing its head, one should use Buddhadharma principles to reason with and guide oneself, to channel oneself, not letting the self run rampant until it becomes a disaster beyond control. One should carefully understand the manifestations of self-nature, the appearance of self-nature, the characteristics of self-nature, the environments where self-nature easily emerges; then, at the right moment, seize that self, contemplate it, straighten it out, reason with it, educate it, persuade it, subdue it, until finally eradicating it—then you are a true hero standing tall between heaven and earth, at the summit of the world, a hero among people. How delightful that would be!
13. Only by Discovering the Self Can One Eradicate the View of Self
To eradicate the view of self, one must first know what the so-called "self" refers to, matching it against all of one's own functions and attributes—being able to identify which self is manifested in each kind of physical and mental activity, which self is manifested in each moment of each physical and mental activity, which self is manifested in the physical and mental activities within each dharma. Being able to identify so many "selves" is already extremely difficult; such wisdom and observational power are truly remarkable. Being able to catch the thief at all times and places presages that one will never be robbed again, never again lose the family treasure—truly worthy of congratulation. Regardless of whether the thief is punished, catching him counts as half or more than half the success.
14. Why Is Excluding Others a Characteristic of Ordinary Beings' Worldliness?
Those who engage in excluding others are ordinary people replete with afflictions. Because such people have self, other, the four marks, matters and principles in their minds; their minds are not at all empty—it is all self-nature. Such people are not good at cultivation. If they further adopt unreasonable means, or unscrupulous means, always trying to trample others underfoot, then such a person has heavy afflictive knots, is no ordinary worldling, and cannot eradicate the view of self and attain realization.
Excluding others belongs to bodily, verbal, and mental actions—improper bodily, verbal, and mental actions. One who has eradicated the view of self will no longer do this, because of preliminary non-self; the mind accords with non-self and no longer creates heavy unwholesome karmic actions. Therefore, to judge whether a person has attained realization and has the Way, one must judge from the bodily, verbal, and mental actions of the seven consciousnesses—the more specific, the better; apart from this there is no other criterion of judgment. One cannot judge the realization and cultivation of the seven consciousnesses from the mental activities of the eighth consciousness, nor judge only from verbal claims. Actions best reveal a person's realization and cultivation; faking with the mouth is easiest—countless are the affairs of using false words to deceive. Although sometimes bodily actions can also be faked, the scope is too limited and cannot be sustained.
Worldliness also manifests in desires. Some people, as they study Buddhism, have ever greater desires, wanting to quickly attain realization and see the mind, by any means whatsoever, wanting any fruit whatsoever—even a fake fruit is fine, as long as they have the reputation of having attained realization and seen the mind. Once they gain the reputation, they directly become superior people, obtaining all benefits—desires greatly indulged. It doesn't matter through what channel they obtain the fruit; they try every means to obtain it—this is a very strange notion. Having this notion is precisely the strongest, most solidified self—how could one still hope to eradicate the view of self and attain realization? Treating Buddhadharma as a tool for gaining worldly fame and profit, with greed clouding the mind, blinded by profit, such people can hardly walk out of darkness and transmigration. In short, the worldliness of sentient beings is inexhaustible to describe, making one sigh with regret. Such lack of awakening makes transmigration entirely understandable—the pitiable must have their hateful aspects.
15. How to Judge Whether a Person Has Self or Is Without Self?
Judging whether a person has self or is without self cannot simply be based on whether the word "I" appears in their speech with others, because the Buddha also used the word "I" when speaking with people and teaching the Dharma; the word "I" cannot be avoided, otherwise there would be no subject for expressing thoughts, and one could not express one's views clearly. The Buddha also said "I" such-and-such when speaking, yet the Buddha's mind was without self. Some people, though their speech contains no "I," are full of self between the lines, with a heavy flavor of self. One must observe and analyze whether the "I" in their words and language is an objective noun-concept, or contains a very substantial, real self—because there is self in the mind, there is grasping and attachment, extreme protectiveness, or subjective emotions full of pride, arrogance, inferiority, and so on.
Rely on the meaning, not the words. Savor the true meaning and true direction of each person's language, and only then can one judge whether there is self in that person's mind, and whether the flavor of self is light or heavy. To judge whether a person has eradicated the view of self, do not judge from the surface meaning of their verbal accounts—what they point you to may not be real. Carefully discern the tone and flavor of speech, observe what they do, and see whether it accords with what they say, or is forced. This can be disguised, but disguise cannot last long; there will always be a moment when the truth is exposed.
16. The Various Manifestations of the View of Self and Self-Grasping
If a person is single-mindedly determined to be themselves, must be different from everyone else, insists on going their own way, refuses to be manipulated or arranged by anyone, and is unwilling to comply with anyone—then is this person one who has eradicated the view of self and is without self, or one with especially heavy self-grasping? A person with self in the mind will emphasize their own feelings and sensations, care about their own privileges and attributes, care about their own uniqueness, be unwilling to merge themselves into the crowd, unwilling to hide and extinguish the self, firmly grasping self in the mind and refusing to let go. One who is unwilling to accommodate anyone's requests, unwilling to be managed or arranged, does not obey leadership, and cannot discipline themselves—such a person has a very heavy view of self; even if they can discipline themselves, they still have a heavy view of self.
The great arhat Mahāmaudgalyāyana, who had fully eradicated self-grasping, after attaining realization, had absolutely no sense of self-existence in his mind, completely according with the minds of sentient beings: if beings wished him to act one way, he acted that way; if they did not wish it, he did not. Even when beings' demands were all unreasonable and overbearing, he obeyed without any complaint, never resisting. After eradicating the view of self, one is a person without self; inwardly there is no self, nor the marks of person, sentient being, or life span. And one who is single-mindedly determined to be themselves—is that not running exactly counter to this? Absolutely counter. Without self, what "self" is there to be? This is increasing the view of self and self-grasping; thus the view of self and self-grasping lead to endless transmigration through birth-and-death, and willful people are bound to suffer.
One who strongly emphasizes their sense of self-existence and is unwilling to comply with even the slightest wish of others is an intense egoist. One who never yields or softens has very strong self-nature; one who sees everything as inferior to themselves and speaks sharply to others—such people grasp self very severely, and those with heavy self-grasping find it hard to eradicate the view of self. If a person always insists "I am right, you are wrong," with clear-cut judgments of right and wrong, not knowing how to yield or accommodate, showing themselves to be unkind and ungenerous, they are a person with extremely severe view of self and self-grasping, lacking the bodhisattva's disposition of according with sentient beings.
If a person lives caring only about their own feelings, focused on their own sensations, pursuing inner comfort, wild and unrestrained, regardless of the people and affairs around them, regardless of the world, subject to no constraints whatsoever—such a person has extremely heavy view of self and self-grasping, indeed extremely, extremely heavy, and eradicating the view of self in this life will be very difficult.
Everyone should frequently turn back and introspect, constantly self-examine and self-observe. To achieve self-examination and self-observation, one must pay more attention to one's inner world. Every mental moment should be introspected and checked; upon discovering mental moments not according with the Way, quickly turn them around and extinguish them, not letting them run rampant—this is cultivation. A true bodhisattva neither follows convention nor violates it. How to grasp the measure in between depends on the bodhisattva's cultivation and wisdom and skillful means. Ordinary bodhisattvas lack such skillful means of worldly wisdom for dealing with the world, and thus encounter some obstacles in worldly dealings.
17. The State of Fully Eradicating the View of Self
If one takes the tathāgatagarbha as the real self, the view of self has not been fully eradicated—this is still a kind of view of self. Because in the dharma realm there is fundamentally no self of the seven consciousnesses; since there is no self, how could there be a "tathāgatagarbha as true self"? Without the fundamental self-nature of the seven consciousnesses, there is no self-nature of any kind. If one establishes the view that "the tathāgatagarbha is the true self," one simultaneously establishes a self of the seven consciousnesses; only with a self of the seven consciousnesses would one take the tathāgatagarbha as the real self. Without the seven consciousnesses, one would not take any dharma as self. Therefore, as long as one sees dharmas, it is false seeing; when there is no false seeing, one will certainly become a Buddha. When cultivating to the third gate of the Chan school, if one still grasps a tathāgatagarbha self in the mind, one cannot pass the third gate of Chan, cannot realize nirvāṇa with remainder (sopadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa), and cannot escape birth-and-death.
In Guanyin Bodhisattva's dharma gate of perfect penetration through the ear faculty, cultivated to the end, everything that can be relinquished is relinquished, everything that can be emptied is emptied—even relinquishing itself is relinquished, even emptiness is emptied. What can relinquish and what is relinquished, what can empty and what is emptied, and the emptiness of emptiness—all are emptied; there is nothing more to empty. Only the solitary tathāgatagarbha remains, which cannot be relinquished, is not to be relinquished, cannot be emptied, is not to be emptied, and there is no one who relinquishes, no one who empties Him—then one has arrived home, accomplishing the thirty-two response bodies, named the greatly compassionate Guanyin Bodhisattva.
18. Grasping at Fruition and Attainment Is Also a Manifestation of the View of Self
Now look outside: those claiming enlightenment and realization number in the hundreds and thousands; the streets are nearly crowded with sages. Yet so many "sages," in terms of mental disposition and afflictions, show no difference whatsoever after their "enlightenment" compared to before—no elevation of thought, no samādhi states either; their bodily, verbal, and mental actions are as before, even more defiled than before, with arrogance even heavier than before. How can it be proven whether those people have truly attained realization and seen the mind? It cannot be proven at all. The thirty-seven aids to enlightenment have not been cultivated; precepts, concentration, and wisdom are completely lacking. Many people are merely at the level of the mind consciousness's understanding—an intellectual grasp and comprehension of knowledge; more still do not even possess or complete the theoretical knowledge, cannot even correspond to or reach the level of the mind consciousness, let alone the manas.
Therefore, nowadays there are far, far too many committing gross false speech. Why commit gross false speech? Only those with heavy view of self, those grasping self as right, would commit gross false speech. Those with slight view of self would be extremely cautious, extremely careful, extremely truthful and factual; they would seek verification everywhere—whether their state of cultivation is truly realization. They would not blindly exalt themselves, saying "I am such-and-such." If a person with heavy view of self believes they have attained realization, and you tell them that is not realization, they will immediately become agitated. Why agitated? Because they are extremely attached to the matter of attaining realization, extremely attached to being a sage, extremely attached to being different from others, extremely attached to fruition and status, deeply concerned about their own fruition and identity.
This attachment shows there is still that self in their mind, same as before, or even heavier. If you tell them that the mind consciousness attaining realization is not true realization, that emotional understanding, intellectual interpretation, reasoning, and guessing do not count as realization—that realization must be by the manas—then, to protect their fruition and reputation, they will oppose, refute, and attack in various ways, completely without thinking or reflection, completely disregarding facts, and even less reflecting on themselves. Because in their mind there is a self—that self that "attained realization," an extraordinary self, a self different from others, a self high above—taking such a self as truly existent, they will especially protect it, and also take the fruition as truly their own and especially protect it. This shows this person's view of self exists in full—they have not attained realization at all. After truly eradicating the view of self, as wisdom gradually grows, one gains the ability to judge whether various people's mental activities contain self, whether they are a person who has eradicated the view of self, what degree of view of self they have, and whether it is severe.
19. What Is the Perishing of Both Subject and Object?
"The perishing of both subject and object": the subject refers to the mind of the seven consciousnesses; the object refers to the dharmas cognized by the mind of the seven consciousnesses; "perishing" means ceasing. When the mind of the seven consciousnesses no longer takes the seven consciousnesses as a real, sovereign self, and no longer takes the dharmas cognized by the seven consciousnesses as possessed by the seven consciousnesses, acknowledging the falsity and unreality of both subject and object—that is the perishing of both subject and object.
Realizing the mind's emptiness does not mean the body has become empty and the six sense-object realms have disappeared, but rather correctly cognizing that the body is empty, the five aggregates are empty, the six sense-object realms are empty—the mind's views have changed, no longer regarding the five-aggregate body as a real self with self-nature. The body becoming empty and disappearing is a state of meditative concentration; the six sense-object realms disappearing is a state of meditative concentration; states of meditative concentration are subject to arising, ceasing, and change—after the concentration dissipates, the body and realms will reappear.
