Śūraṅgama Sūtra, Volume Three: The Manas and Mental Sense-Objects Are Illusory

Original text:阿难。汝常意中。所缘善恶。无记三性。生成法则。此法为复。即心所生。为当离心。别有方所。阿难。若即心者。法则非尘。非心所缘。云何成处。若离于心。别有方所。则法自性。为知非知。知则名心。异汝非尘。同他心量。即汝即心。云何汝心。更二于汝。

Explanation: Ānanda, the dharmas that your mind faculty (manas) constantly grasps at—dharmas of the three natures of wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral (avyākṛta)—generate the dharmas and their principles. Is this mental sense-object (dharma-dust) born within the mind faculty's mind, or does it arise in a separate location apart from the mind faculty? Ānanda, if the mental sense-object is produced from within the mind faculty's mind, then it is not a sense-object (dust), and the mind faculty could not condition it; how then could it become a site of contact between faculty and object? If the mental sense-object exists in a separate location apart from the mind faculty, then does its self-nature possess knowing or not? If it possesses knowing, it should be called a mind. A mind other than you, which is not a sense-object, would be the same as another being's mind-consciousness. If it is you, that is, your mind, then why would your mind have a second one apart from you?

Original text:若非知者。此尘既非。色声香味。离合冷暖。及虚空相。当于何在。今于色空。都无表示。不应人间。更有空外。心非所缘。处从谁立。是故当知。法则与心。俱无处所。则意与法。二俱虚妄。本非因缘。非自然性。

Explanation: If the mental sense-object lacks knowing, it is not a mind but a sense-object. Yet this mental sense-object is not form, sound, smell, or taste; it has none of the five sense-object appearances of contact and separation, warmth and coolness, nor does it have the appearance of empty space. Where, then, does it reside? Now, it cannot be represented at all by either form or space. It should not be that in the human world there exists a mental sense-object beyond empty space—beyond empty space there are no dharmas. A mental sense-object apart from the mind faculty cannot be conditioned by the mind faculty, and thus no site can be established for it: the mind faculty is not the site of the mental sense-object, and the mental sense-object is not the site of the mind faculty. Therefore it is said that both the mental sense-object and the mind faculty have no site of their own; both the mind faculty and the mental sense-object are illusory. They are fundamentally not of the nature of dependent arising (causes and conditions), nor of the nature of naturalness—they are all the nature of the tathāgatagarbha.

The mind faculty contacts the mental sense-object and gives rise to the mind consciousness. The mental sense-object includes the mental sense-objects on the five sense-objects and the Image-Only Object, and its dharmas are of three natures: wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral. For example, when someone performs a good deed of generosity (dāna), the tathāgatagarbha manifests this mental sense-object and transmits it to the mind faculty. The mind faculty contacts this mental sense-object and thus conditions it. If the mind faculty is interested, it will give rise to the mental consciousness accompanying the five sense consciousnesses (pañcavijñāna-sahagata-manovijñāna) to further discern this mental sense-object; if not interested, this accompanying mental consciousness will not arise. When the tathāgatagarbha manifests yesterday's fight and transmits it to the mind faculty, the mind faculty contacts this Image-Only Object; if interested, it will give rise to the solitary mental consciousness to discern and deliberate upon this mental sense-object of the Image-Only Object. Therefore, the mind faculty must always be together with the mental sense-object, in the same location, and they cannot be separated; otherwise, there would be no mental sense-object, and the mind faculty would not condition it.