Comment. The Four Points of Argumentation are here employed to refute the doctrines of existence of dharmas.38 Whether the logic is sound or not, it cannot be denied that Buddhist thinking is rational and methodical, absolutely contrary to the common belief, even among some scholars, that the only mental activity of the Buddhist is intuition. It is significant that in a school chiefly concerned with the thinking process, the rationalistic and methodical elements are so strong.
3. The First Transformation of Consciousness
From what is said above it is clear that the self and dharmas separated from consciousness conceived by the heterodoxical and other schools are all unreal. . . . From this we ought to know that there is really no external sphere of objects. There is only inner consciousness which produces what seems to be the external sphere. . . .
The characters transformed by consciousness are infinite in variety, but the consciousnesses that transform can be divided into three kinds. The first is the consciousness where fruits ripen at a later time. It is the eighth consciousness. [It is so called] because it possesses in abundance the nature to ripen at later times. The second is called deliberation. It is the seventh consciousness. [It is so called] because it is continuously in the process of deliberation. The third is called the consciousness that discriminates spheres of objects. It is the same as the first six consciousnesses (the five sense-consciousnesses and the sense-center consciousness). [It is so called] because it discriminates gross spheres of objects. . . .
2b. First of all, the storehouse consciousness (ālaya),
Which brings into fruition all seeds (effects of good and evil deeds).
3. [In its state of pure consciousness] it is not conscious of its clingings and sensations.
In both its objective and subjective functions it is always associated with contact,
Volition, sensation, thought, and cognition.
But it is always indifferent to its associations.
4. It is not affected by the darkness of ignorance or by an indifference to good and evil.
The same is true in the case of touch and so forth.
It is always flowing like a torrent,
And is renounced in the state of the arhat (a saint who enters Nirvāṇa).39
The Treatise says:
The first transformation of consciousness is called storehouse in both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. . . . Why are the seeds so called? They mean that functions and differentiations in the root consciousness (the eighth) spontaneously produce their own fruition. These are neither the same with nor different from the root consciousness itself or their fruition. . . . (ch. 2, tsd, 31:7-8)
In this way the other consciousnesses which “perfume” (affect) it and the consciousness which is perfumed arise and perish together, and the concept of perfuming is thus established. The act of enabling the seeds that lie within what is perfumed (the storehouse consciousness) to grow, as the hemp plant is perfumed, is called perfuming. As soon as the seeds are produced, the consciousnesses which can perfume become in their turn causes which perfume and produce seeds. The three dharmas (the seeds, the manifestations, and perfuming) turn on and on, simultaneously acting as cause and effect. . . . (ch. 2, tsd, 31:9-10)
Comment. Did this idea of seeds as a generative force have any influence on Ch’eng Hao (Ch’eng Ming-tao, 1032-1085) and his brother Ch’eng I (Ch’eng I-ch’uan, 1033-1107) who saw the universe as a process of “production and reproduction” and jen40 (humanity) as growth (sheng)?41 The Consciousness-Only School was still active in the city of Lo-yang where the Ch’eng brothers lived. Furthermore, they both studied Buddhism for almost a decade before they returned to Confucianism. They had Buddhist friends. Their pupil Hsieh Liang-tso (1050-1103) came very close to Buddhism and actually said that “the seeds of peaches and apricots that can grow are called jen because they produce.”42 Ch’eng I himself said, “The mind is like seeds of grain. Their nature of growth is jen.”43 The resemblance of these ideas to those of Buddhism is amazing.
It can be argued, of course, that there is a fundamental difference between Buddhism and Neo-Confucianism in this respect. In Buddhism the seeds mutually “perfume” one another and hence the process is circular, whereas in Neo-Confucianism jen is a continuous development. Furthermore, the Ch’engs and Hsieh were critical of Buddhism.44 Most important of all, there is no evidence that they had derived the idea of seeds from any Buddhist text or Buddhist thinker.
Nevertheless, Buddhist influence on Neo-Confucianism is deep and extensive. There is at least an evidence of contact. Hsieh specifically pointed out that the Buddhists knew the meaning of seeds although he criticized them for ignoring moral efforts in cultivating them.45 In the opinion of Professor Paul Demiéville, there is no doubt that the idea is taken from Buddhist philosophy in which it was so common that no precise reference is needed.46
Does the storehouse consciousness come to an end or is it eternal? It neither comes to an end nor is eternal, for it is in perpetual transformation. By “perpetual” is meant that this consciousness, from time immemorial, has continued in the same way without any interruption. For it is the basis of the constructions in the [four] realms [which form the substance of existence], the [five] stages of transmigration, and the [four] kinds of living beings,47 and its nature is so firm that it holds the seeds without losing them. By “transformation” is meant that this consciousness, from time immemorial, comes into and goes out of existence every moment and changes both before and after, for while it goes out of existence as cause, it comes into existence as effect, and thus is neither permanent nor one. In this way it can be perfumed by the other transforming consciousnesses and produce seeds. The term “perpetual” denies the idea that things come to an end, while the term “transformation” affirms the idea that things are not eternal. It is like a violent torrent, for it is naturally so because of cause and effect. Being like a violent torrent, it neither comes to an end nor is eternal. As it continues for a long time, some sentient beings will float and others will sink. It is the same with this consciousness. . . .
This consciousness has been in perpetual transformation like a torrent from time immemorial. In what state will it be finally renounced? Only in the state of the arhat will it be finally renounced. It means that saints are called arhats when they completely cut off all obstacles of defilement. At that time all seeds of defilement in this consciousness are forever eliminated. . . . (ch. 3, tsd, 31:12-13)
Comment. The theory that consciousness is a constant stream of ideas inevitably reminds one of Hume. The comparison between him and the Consciousness-Only School has been made by Fung Yu-lan, among others.48 Both the school and Hume hold that the mind is nothing but a stream of ideas, that ideas are governed by a causal relationship, and that the external world is ultimately unreal. But Buddhism is free from the skepticism of Hume, for Nirvāṇa is realizable through spiritual cultivation. Furthermore, in Buddhism, but not in Hume, the source of ideas is known and can be controlled.
4.--The Second Transformation of Consciousness
5. The second transformation of consciousness
Is called the thought-center consciousness,
Which transforms with that [storehouse consciousness] as the basis and has it as an object.
It has the nature and character of deliberation.
6. It is always accompanied by the four evil defilements,
Namely, self-delusion, self-view [as being real and permanent],
Self-conceit, and self-love,
And by contact and so forth [volition, feeling, sensation, thought, and cognition].
7. It is free from an indifference to good and evil but not from the darkness of ignorance.
It follows its objects in their emergence and dependence,
In [the state of] the arhat, in the state of complete extinction [of thought and mental qualities of the thought-center consciousness]
Or in the stage free from mundane delusions, [these defilements] do not exist.
<
br /> The Treatise says:
. . . Spontaneously this thought-center consciousness perpetually takes the storehouse consciousness as an object and is associated with the four basic defilements. What are the four? They are self-delusion, selfview, self-conceit and self-love. These are the four. Self-delusion means ignorance, lack of understanding of the character of the self, and being unenlightened about the principle of the non-self. Therefore it is called self-delusion. Self-view means clinging to the view that the self exists, erroneously imagining certain dharmas to be the self that are not the self. Therefore it is called self-view. Self-conceit means pride. On the strength of what is clung to as the self, it causes the mind to feel superior and lofty. It is therefore called self-conceit. Self-love means a greedy desire for the self. It develops deep attachment to what is clung to as the self. It is therefore called self-love. . . . These four defilements constantly arise and pollute the inner mind and cause the [six]49 other transforming consciousnesses to be continuously defiled. Because of this, sentient beings are bound to the cycle of life and death and transmigration and cannot be free from them. Hence they are called defilements. . . . (ch. 4, tsd, 31:19-22)
5. The Third Transformation of Consciousness
8. Next comes the third transforming consciousness
Which consists of the last six categories of discrimination (the consciousness of touch, sight, hearing, smell, taste, and the sense-center consciousness).
Their nature and character consist in the discrimination of spheres of objects.
They are neither good nor evil.
Comment. Note the equal emphasis on the nature and characters of dharmas, here as well as in verse 5. This equal emphasis gives special meaning to the school’s acceptance of the doctrine of Two Levels of Truth.50 However, the primary concern of the school has always been on characters of dharmas. In accepting them as real, the school is not quite Mahāyāna and has therefore been regarded as quasi-Hīnayāna which, generally speaking, accepts the external world as real. One wonders if the Chinese refusal to regard the world as illusory did not have something to do with the school’s position.
With how many mental qualities are these six consciousnesses associated? The verse says:
9. The mental qualities are: general mental qualities,
Particular mental qualities, good mental qualities, mental qualities of defilement,
Derived mental qualities of defilement, and indeterminate mental qualities.51
They are all associated with the mind which is impressed in three ways [of joy, of sorrow, and of indifference].
10. First, general mental qualities are touch and so forth (volition, feeling, thought, cognition).
Next, particular mental qualities refer to desire,
Resolve, remembrance, calmness, and wisdom.
The things that constitute their objects are not the same.
11. Good mental qualities refer to belief, sense of shame, sense of integrity.
The three roots of absence of covetousness and so forth (absence of anger and absence of delusions),
Diligence, repose of mind, vigilance,
Equanimity, and non-injury.
12. Mental qualities of defilement are covetousness, anger,
Delusion, conceit, doubt, and false view.
Derived mental qualities of defilement are fury,
Enmity, concealment, affliction, envy, parsimony.
13. Deception, fraudulence, injury, pride,
Absence of a sense of shame, absence of a sense of integrity, Agitation, low-mindedness,
Unbelief, indolence.
14. Idleness, forgetfulness,
Distraction, and non-discernment.
Indeterminate mental qualities refer to regret, drowsiness, Inquisitiveness, and investigativeness, the former two composing a different class from the latter.52
15. Based on the root consciousness (the eighth consciousness)
The five consciousnesses (of the senses) manifest themselves in accordance with various causes.
Sometimes [the senses manifest themselves] together, and sometimes not,
Just as waves [manifest themselves] depending on water conditions.
16. The sense-center consciousness always arises and manifests itself,
Except when born in the realm of absence of thought,
In the two forms of calmness, namely, calmness in which there is no more activity of thought [and calmness in which there is the complete extinction of sensation and thought].
In sleep, and in that state where the spirit is depressed or absent.
The Treatise says:
The root consciousness is the storehouse consciousness because it is the root from which all pure and impure consciousnesses grow. . . . By “causes” are meant rising activities of the mind, the sense organs, and spheres of objects. It means that the five consciousnesses arise and manifest themselves, internally based on the root consciousness and externally as a result of a combination of the causes like the rising activities of the mind, the five sense organs, and spheres of objects. These consciousnesses manifest themselves sometimes together and sometimes separately. This is so because the external causes may be combined suddenly or gradually. . . . (chs. 5-7, tsd, 31:26-37)
6. Consciousness-Only
17. Thus the various consciousnesses transform and change.
Both discrimination (consciousnesses) and the object of discrimination
Are, because of this, unreal.
For this reason, everything is consciousness only.
The Treatise says:
“The various consciousnesses” refer to the three transforming consciousnesses previously discussed and their mental qualities. They can all transform and appear as the perceiving and the perceived portions. The term “transformation” is thus employed. The perceiving portion of the transformation is called discrimination because it can grasp the perceived portion (as the object of perception). The perceived portion of the transformation is called the object of discrimination because it is grasped by the perceiving portion. According to this correct principle, apart from being transformations of consciousness, the self and dharmas are both definitely nonexistent, because apart from what grasps and what is grasped, there is nothing else, and because there are no real things separated from the two portions.
Therefore everything produced from causes, everything not produced from causes, and everything seemingly real or unreal, are all inseparable from consciousness. The word “only” is intended to deny that there are real things separated from consciousness, but not to deny that there are mental qualities, dharmas, and so forth inseparable from consciousness. The word “transform” means that the various inner consciousnesses transform and manifest the characters which seem to be the external spheres of the self and dharmas. This process of transformation and change is called discrimination because it is its own nature to make erroneous discriminations [that things are real]. It refers to the mind and mental qualities in the Three Worlds.53 These, what it holds to be spheres of objects, are called objects of discrimination, that is, the self and dharmas which it erroneously holds to be real. Because of this discrimination, which evolves characters which seem to be the external spheres of the false self and dharmas, what is discriminated as the real self and dharmas are all absolutely nonexistent. This theory has been extensively refuted by the doctrines [of our teachers] already cited.
Therefore everything is consciousness only, because erroneous discrimination in itself is admitted as a fact. Since “only” does not deny the existence of dharmas not separated from consciousness, therefore true Emptiness [mental qualities]54 and so forth have the nature of being. In this way we steer far away from the two extremes of holding that dharmas are real [although they have no nature of their own] or holding that dharmas are unreal [although they do function as causes and effects], establish the principle of Consciousness-Only, and hold correctly to the Middle Path.
7. Nine Objections to the Consciousness-Only Doc
trine and Their Answers
(1)--Objection: On the basis of what doctrines is the principle of Consciousness-Only established?
Answer: Have we not already explained? However, the explanations are not sufficient. One’s own principle cannot be established by demolishing those of others. One should definitely present his own doctrine in order to establish it.
The true scriptures55 declare that “in the Three Worlds there is nothing but mind,”56 that objects are but manifestations of consciousness-only,57 that all dharmas are not separated from the mind,58 that sentient beings become pure or impure in accordance with the mind,59 that bodhisattvas60 (saints of the Mahāyāna) who perfected the Four Wisdoms will, following their awakening, penetrate the truth of consciousness-only and the absence of spheres of objects.61
The Four Wisdoms are: first, the wisdom that contradictory consciousnesses are but characters. This means that the same thing perceived by ghosts, human beings, and deities appear differently to them in accordance with their past deeds. If there is really an external sphere, how can this be possible? Second, the wisdom that consciousness takes non-being as its object. This means that the past, the future, images in dreams, and things imagined have no real, objective basis. They are possible because they are manifestations of consciousness. If these objective bases are nonexistent, the rest is also nonexistent. The third is the wisdom that naturally there should be no perversion of truth. This means that if the intelligence of ordinary people is able to perceive the real spheres of objects, they should naturally achieve freedom from perversion and should be able to achieve emancipation without any effort. [Since they are not emancipated, it shows that the objective spheres they perceive are not real at all.]62 The fourth is the wisdom changing with three wisdoms:
A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy Page 47
