13 The Integration of Mind-Only

GENERAL EXPLANATION

Śāntarakṣita’s Ornament for the Middle Way says:

The non-existence of external objects should be known

Through relying on mind-only.

[Then] relying on this [Mādhyamika] mode, it should be known

That this [mind] too is completely selfless.¹

The commentary following that says:

Through relying on mind-only, things that are asserted to be external to the mind, such as I and mine, subject and object, etc.,² are just effortlessly realized to be without a nature [of a difference of entity between subject and object].³

Thus, this indicates two steps: initially, one ascertains the selflessness of persons and then ascertains the suchness which is the emptiness of duality [of subject and object]. The same text also says:

Regarding this mode [mentioned in the stanza above], though one has realized that the mind is without a nature [of a difference of entity between subject and object] because it is not self-arisen, in order to realize the middle path which is an abandonment of all extremes, one thoroughly realizes the absence of a nature [of true existence] due to [the mind’s] being devoid of a nature of one or many.⁴

Thus, three stages of ascertaining suchness are explained. After the first two stages [of ascertaining the selflessness of persons and the emptiness of duality of subject and object], when those with very great intelligence and effort analyze whether that mind is inherently one or many, they see that not even a particle of ultimate establishment (paramārthasiddhi, don dam par grub pa) exists. They thereby realize the middle path which is an abandonment of all extremes.

Proof that this is the Thought of Sutras

A sutra [the Chapter on the Supramundane (Lokottaraparivarta)] says:

Furthermore, O Children of the Conqueror, having realized that the three realms are mind only, realize that the three times [past, present, and future] are similar to mind as well. Understand that mind is also without extremes and middle.⁵

The Compendium of Doctrine (Dharmasaṃgīti) says, “Supramundane Victor, all phenomena are imaginary in essence. They are exhausted in mind only, without substance, like illusions, rootless.”⁶ The Descent into Lāṅka Sūtra says:

Through relying on mind-only

One does not conceive of external objects.

Abiding in correct observation

One passes beyond mind-only as well.

Having passed beyond mind-only

One passes beyond non-appearance [of true existence temporarily].

A yogi who abides in non-appearance

See the Mahāyāna.⁷

[The Yogācāra-Svātantrikas] assert that such statements are teachings that present the ascertainment of the modes of suchness in the stages explained above.

Thus, it is asserted that the Mahāyāna is attained by way of two modes:

1  of consciousness only, which is an emptiness of external objects conventionally,

2  of the non-existence of the entityness of all phenomena ultimately.

Śāntarakṣita’s Ornament for the Middle Way says:

Those who, having mounted the chariot of the two modes,

Grasp the reins of reasoning

Thereby attain the state of a Mahāyānist

Exactly as it is.⁸

The attainment of the Mahāyāna through these two modes is also the thought of the Conqueror because the autocommentarv [to this stanza] says:

The Descent into Lāṅka Sūtra says that the brief teaching of the Mahāyāna is included into two modes as follows:

All of the Mahāyāna is included in

The five phenomena,⁹ nature,

The eight collections of consciousness,

And the existence of the two selflessness.¹⁰

Nevertheless, the Yogācāra-Svātantrikas do not assert, as do the Cittamātrins, that consciousness is truly established, or that the suchness which is the emptiness of duality [of subject and object] is truly established even conventionally. The Yogācāra-Svātantrikas also do not assert a mind-basis-of-all (ālayavijñāna, kun gzhi rnam par shes pa) that is a separate entity from the six consciousnesses, and from this it can be understood that they also do not assert an afflicted mind (kliṣṭamanas, nyon yid).

Question: Is this mind-onlv mode of the non-existence of external objects an assertion of the protector Nāgārjuna or not? If it is [his assertion], you must say which texts of the protector Nāgārjuna indicate this [mind-only] mode.

Answer: This is shown by his Sixty Stanzas of Reasoning (34) where it says:

Those explained as the great elements and so forth

Are completely included within consciousness.

Knowing that, if they lack [true existence],

Are they not wrongly imagined?

The first two lines indicate that the elements (bhūta, ’byung ba) and elemental evolutes do not exist as objects separate from consciousness and that they are posited just as the appearance of consciousness in the aspect of those [objects], whereby they are included in consciousness.

The commentary following the stanza in Śāntarakṣita’s Ornament for the Middle Way that begins, “Those who, having mounted the chariot of the two modes,” says:

Those engaged in inference that works by the power of things realize that all things are without inherent existence through the Mahāyāna which is included within the expression of the two modes and by which the Tathāgatas go and will go. Like those mounted on great chariots grasping the reins well, they thoroughly attain the “meaningful Mahāyāna.”¹¹

Thus, he says that Bodhisattvas mount the chariot of the two modes—the mode of mind-only conventionally and the mode of the middle wav of non-inherent existence ultimately—and grasping the reins of stainless reasoning, attain possession of the Mahāyāna that has the meaning of suchness.

Although in the system of these Svātantrikas there are many minor divisions which have different modes of assertion among themselves, all are similar in asserting the corpus of the presentation for ascertaining suchness as just explained. In Āryavimuktisena’s Illumination of the (Perfection of Wisdom in) Twenty-Five Thousand Stanzas (Pancaviṃśatisāhasrikālokā), Haribhadra’s Illumination of (Maitreya’s) “Ornament for Clear Realization” (Abhisamayālamkārāloka), Eight Chapters (Le’u brgyad ma),¹² Commentary for Easy standing on the Difficult Points of the Condensed (Perfection of Wisdom Sutra) (Sañcayagāthāpañjikā-subodhinī), Buddhajñānapāda’s texts on texts on the perfection [of wisdom], and Abhayākaragupta’s Moonbeams of Essentials (Marmakaumudī) and Ornament for the Thought of the Subduer (Munimatālaṃkāra) the mode of ascertaining the view is presented in just this way. The foremost ominscient one, Tsong-kha-pa, asserts that although a few who asserted the system of these Svātantrikas appeared prior to Śāntarakṣita and his spiritual son [Kamalaśīla], such as Āryavimuktisena, the founder of the Mādhyamika tenet system of the mode of the non-existence of external objects is the master Śāntarakṣita.