Discussion on Whether the Mind Faculty Is Neutral (Avyākṛta)

Look at this: why is this female dog capable of educating and managing her offspring? Why does she surpass many human parents and teachers? What is meant by "rules etched into the bones"? What is etched into the bones is innate, brought from past lives, and inherent in the mind-base (manas). Such habitual tendencies are wholesome habits. This female dog was a human in a past life, once a parent who understood social rules and etiquette. Therefore, she fulfilled her duty in educating her own children, to the extent that this behavior became ingrained in her bones as a habit, carried life after life. No matter which realm she transmigrates into, she strictly adheres to rules, is well-mannered, and is also capable of education, teaching her young through her own words and actions. The habitual tendencies of the female dog's mind-base are entirely wholesome and wise, not merely neutral and indeterminate.

With such wholesome habits, when she transmigrates again into the human realm, she will become a very responsible parent and teacher. To have such parents and teachers is extremely fortunate and blessed. Therefore, everyone should strive to form wholesome connections with virtuous people and to form wholesome connections with those of great wisdom. In the future, you will fully enjoy their grace, bathe in the light of wisdom, enhance your overall qualities, and increase the likelihood of obtaining a human rebirth. How fortunate this is!

Ru Hua: Indeed, the mind-base is not merely neutral and indeterminate. Ordinary people have a great many thoughts deep in their minds every day—some wholesome, some unwholesome, and some neither wholesome nor unwholesome. In fact, by examining one's own habitual tendencies of the mind-base, one can clearly see this.

Ru Zhao: Yes, Master. My disciple’s kitten is only a little over two months old. It was well taught by its mother cat from a young age. From the moment it arrived home, it knew to find a place to relieve itself, would dig a pit with its paws, cover it up after finishing, and even clean its paws before coming out, then groom itself. However, many cats have not developed good habits from a young age because the mother cat did not teach them well; they relieve themselves anywhere. From such a simple matter, one can see that even the mind-base of an animal is not neutral and indeterminate.

Suzhou: Whether the mind-base is neutral and indeterminate or not cannot be clarified through logic alone, just as it is impossible to explain the concept of "colorful" to a blind person using logic. For ordinary people without the ability of direct realization, this matter must be set aside for now, without comment. But can a Bodhisattva with the ability of direct realization overturn the unreliable logic of ordinary people? If not, then it truly is two different worlds!

Ru Zhao: The afflictions of greed, hatred, and delusion in sentient beings are so heavy—how can one not directly realize them? One's own afflictions and attachments are also plainly evident. If the mind-base were neutral and indeterminate, one would not kill living beings to eat meat, seize resources, or engage in arson and plunder. If one's own mind-base were neutral and indeterminate, one would not chase after fame and profit, but would only do what is meaningful for oneself. These things are not observable only by Bodhisattvas on the grounds; they can be observed by anyone with discerning observation. Otherwise, one is either ignorant or refuses to acknowledge one's own afflictions, falsely elevating oneself.

Commentary: Regarding the observation of the mind-base, if one has not learned the correct, profound, and detailed teachings on the mind-base, it is truly difficult for ordinary people to observe the characteristics and habitual tendencies of the mind-base, and also difficult to understand. They cannot distinguish between the consciousness (mano-vijñāna) and the mind-base, conflating the two without differentiation, making misunderstanding inevitable. Having learned incorrect doctrines on the mind-base, it becomes even more difficult to understand and observe the true characteristics and habitual tendencies of the mind-base.

Suzhou: Are these phenomena a case of the consciousness observing the mind-base, or the consciousness observing itself? I now observe that I am argumentative. Having heard the Dharma, I understand that this is the mind-base instructing the consciousness; the source is the mind-base. Thus, I judge that my mind-base is argumentative. Is this judgment based on knowledge the same as direct observation?

Commentary: When the consciousness, based on the direct observation of one's own words, actions, and thoughts, draws a conclusion, this is called direct perception (pratyakṣa pramāṇa). If one possesses wisdom, a correct conclusion will be drawn; if wisdom is insufficient, an erroneous conclusion will be drawn. Regarding the same currently existing phenomenon, people with different levels of wisdom will have different bases for judgment and will draw different conclusions. These phenomena clearly originate from the habits of the mind-base. Although they are created by the six consciousnesses, a person with discerning consciousness will observe the source and root from the surface, rather than merely observing superficial phenomena. The wisdom of the consciousness comes, first, from external learning, and second, from what is endowed by the mind-base, and is influenced by the mind-base.