Section Two   The Second Inquiry into the Mind—The Mind Resides Outside the Body

Original Text: Ānanda bowed and addressed the Buddha, saying: "Having heard the Tathāgata’s Dharma teaching, I realize that my mind truly resides outside my body. Why is this so? For example, when a lamp is lit in a room, its light must first illuminate the interior of the room, then pass through the door to reach the courtyard. Similarly, all sentient beings cannot see within their own bodies but only perceive what is outside, just like a lamp placed outside a room cannot illuminate its interior. This principle is clear and beyond doubt. Does this accord with the Tathāgata’s ultimate meaning, without any fallacy?"

Explanation: After paying homage to the World-Honored One, Ānanda said to the Buddha: "Having heard the Tathāgata’s teaching, I finally understand that my mind indeed resides outside my body. Why do I say this? Just as when a lamp is lit in a room, its light appears within the room. The light must first illuminate the interior, then pass through the door to shine upon the surrounding courtyard. All sentient beings cannot see inside their bodies but only perceive what is outside, much like a lamp placed outside a room cannot illuminate its interior. This principle is evident and easily understood, leaving no room for doubt. Does this reasoning of mine align with your ultimate truth, World-Honored One? Is it free from error?"

Ānanda proposed that the discerning mind resides outside the body—this is his thesis. What is his evidence? He gives an example: just as a lamp inside a room first illuminates the interior before the exterior, he means that since the discerning mind is outside the body, it cannot perceive the body’s interior.

After proposing a thesis, one must provide evidence to prove its validity. This is Buddhist logic (hetuvidyā). A thesis must be supported by evidence, which serves to demonstrate its correctness. To prove a thesis, it is best to substantiate it from both positive and negative perspectives, ensuring logical rigor so that the thesis stands firm and cannot be easily refuted. If one aspect fails to support the thesis, it becomes untenable.

If a thesis can be proven correct from one perspective but neglects another, others may expose flaws from the neglected angle, disproving the thesis. Ultimately, the thesis remains unestablished. Therefore, when bodhisattvas compose treatises or debate with sentient beings, they must master Buddhist logic. When proposing a thesis, they must be able to demonstrate its validity from positive, negative, and all other perspectives, with ample evidence that leaves no room for refutation. Only then can the opponent be convinced and taught. As future bodhisattvas, we should all learn Buddhist logic.

Original Text: The Buddha told Ānanda: "These bhikṣus have just returned to the Jetavana Grove after following me to beg for alms in Śrāvastī. I have already finished my meal. Observe these bhikṣus: when one of them eats, do the others feel full?" Ānanda replied: "No, World-Honored One. Why? Although these bhikṣus are Arhats, their bodies are distinct. How could one person’s eating make everyone full?"

Explanation: The Buddha told Ānanda: "The bhikṣus have just followed me to beg for alms throughout Śrāvastī and returned to the Jetavana Grove to eat. I have already finished my meal. Observe these bhikṣus: if one bhikṣu eats food into his stomach, do the others feel full?" Ānanda replied that the others do not feel full, because although these bhikṣus are Arhats, their bodies are distinct. How could one person’s eating satisfy everyone?

There is a deeper mystery here: how is food consumed? It is certainly consumed through the discerning mind. Without the discerning mind, the body alone cannot eat. Since a bhikṣu can eat and feel full, he uses his body to eat, but the body itself cannot eat—it is the discerning mind utilizing the body. The discerning mind and body function together to consume food into the stomach. Then, both the body and the discerning mind sense fullness: the body feels it, and the discerning mind perceives that the stomach has food and is full. This is the combined function of the discerning mind and body; they cannot be separated. If separated, one cannot eat or feel full. The sensation of fullness and the perception of food in the stomach involve both body and mind—neither can function alone. Moreover, all bodily sensations are perceptions of the body consciousness, which is still the discerning mind.

However, the World-Honored One did not refute this point. Instead, he asked Ānanda whether one person eating and feeling full could satisfy others who did not eat—whether one person could eat on behalf of others. He meant to ask Ānanda whether this individual and others are connected. Certainly, they are not. Two bodies and two discerning minds mean two separate individuals with no connection. What one individual experiences belongs solely to that individual; what another experiences belongs solely to the other. The discerning mind and body cannot be shared or substituted for one another.

The Buddha used this analogy to illustrate that distinct individuals cannot substitute for one another. If the discerning mind and body are separated, the discerning mind is one individual and the body another—two distinct entities that cannot combine to function. Then, what the discerning mind perceives, the body does not know; what the body senses, the discerning mind does not know. For example, if the eye consciousness is outside the body and sees an external object, but the eye faculty has no perception, then seeing the form has no relation to the eye faculty, and the act of seeing does not exist. Therefore, the discerning mind and body cannot be separated.

If the ear consciousness outside the body hears a sound, but the ear faculty does not perceive it, then hearing has no relation to the ear faculty, and the act of hearing does not exist. If the nose consciousness outside the body smells an odor, but the nose faculty has no perception, then smelling has no relation to the nose faculty, and the act of smelling does not exist. If the body consciousness outside the body feels cold or thirsty, but the body has no sensation (since they are two separate, unrelated entities), then the sensations of cold and thirst do not exist.

Original Text: The Buddha told Ānanda: "If your perceiving, knowing, and discerning mind truly resides outside the body, then body and mind are external to each other and unrelated. What the mind knows, the body cannot sense; what is sensed at the body, the mind cannot know."

Explanation: The Buddha said to Ānanda: "If your mind capable of perception, knowing, and discernment truly resides outside the body, then body and mind are separate—unconnected and unrelated. What the discerning mind perceives, the body cannot sense; what the body senses, the discerning mind cannot know."

For example, when a flower contacts the eye faculty, can you see it? If the eye faculty and eye consciousness are separated, and the body lacks the discerning mind, you cannot see the flower. Though the flower is before you and contacts the eye faculty, the eye consciousness does not contact the flower, so you do not see it. It is as if you did not see the flower. If the discerning mind outside the body sees the flower, but the body remains unaware, then seeing the flower has no relation to the body—again, it is as if you did not see it. The eye faculty and eye consciousness cannot jointly contact a single form object; body and discerning mind cannot function together, and their functions cannot substitute for one another. Otherwise, even a corpse could see a flower.

The same applies to the ear consciousness: if a sound contacts the ear faculty but the ear consciousness outside the body does not hear it, then hearing does not occur—it is as if no sound was heard. Otherwise, even a corpse could hear sounds. This is because the ear faculty and ear consciousness are two separate entities; they cannot jointly contact a single sound object. If an odor contacts the nose faculty but the nose consciousness is outside the body, it cannot smell the odor. Therefore, if someone slaps you and the tactile object contacts your body faculty, but the body consciousness is outside the body, you would not feel the slap or the pain. If all five consciousnesses (or six) are outside the body, it would be no different from being a corpse. If the five consciousnesses outside the body have perception but the body does not, it is equivalent to having no perception.

Original Text: "I now show you my Dola silk hand. When your eyes see it, does your mind discern it?" Ānanda replied: "Yes, World-Honored One." The Buddha told Ānanda: "If both perceive simultaneously, how can it be outside? Therefore, you should know that your statement—that the perceiving, discerning mind resides outside the body—is incorrect."

Explanation: The Buddha said: "Ānanda, I show you my Dola silk hand. When your eyes see my hand, did your discerning mind perceive it?" Ānanda said: "Yes, World-Honored One. My discerning mind perceived it; I saw the Buddha’s hand." The Buddha told Ānanda: "If both the eyes and the discerning mind perceive it simultaneously, how can the discerning mind be outside the body? Therefore, you should know that your claim—that the perceiving, discerning mind resides outside the body—is fundamentally incorrect. Since you saw my hand, it means not only did your eye faculty contact the appearance of my hand, but your discerning mind simultaneously contacted and perceived the appearance of my hand. This shows that your eye faculty and discerning mind function together as one entity. The discerning mind is not outside your body; the claim that it resides outside is untenable."

In studying the Buddha’s teachings, we must learn the Buddha’s great wisdom—his rigorous, meticulous, and precise logical reasoning. We see that the Buddha’s logical reasoning is extremely thorough, leaving no room for refutation by anyone. When the Buddha propagated the Dharma in the world, he often debated with non-Buddhists. Yet whenever the Buddha proposed a thesis and presented evidence, non-Buddhists could never refute him. Conversely, the Buddha could dismantle all their theses and evidence. Thus, the Buddha’s Buddhist logic is perfectly comprehensive and rigorous, capable of refuting all non-Buddhist doctrines. Non-Buddhists could never overturn the Buddha’s own established theses. This is the Buddha’s accomplishment of great wisdom, demonstrating his complete mastery of Buddhist logic and his attainment of the state beyond study regarding all dharmas.

We, too, should diligently learn Buddhist logic from the Buddha. When composing treatises, first propose a correct and true thesis, then find evidence to prove its validity. The evidence must clearly substantiate the thesis, making it irrefutable. This way, opponents cannot dismantle your thesis or find any flaw. When proving a thesis, provide evidence not only from the positive perspective but also from negative and other angles. Evidence from all aspects must be thorough to demonstrate the correctness of your thesis. If opponents find no flaws in any aspect and cannot refute your thesis, they have no choice but to acknowledge your view as correct. In this way, you liberate sentient beings.