The Dharma Unobservable to Consciousness Does Not Imply Nonexistence

The analysis of the mental faculty (manas) and consciousness (vijnana) has some distinctions. The analysis of consciousness is relatively subtle, with clear lines of thought, whereas the mental faculty cannot achieve such meticulousness; it can only grasp the general outline, consider the rough idea, and know the coarse situation. If there are dharmas that the mental faculty cannot contact, the six consciousnesses are even less capable of contacting and discerning them. The mental faculty can perceive all dharmas; all dharmas are the perceived aspect (nimitta) of the mental faculty. The five aggregates and eighteen elements (dhatus) can all be perceived by consciousness, and the mental faculty can perceive them even more so. Therefore, the five aggregates and eighteen elements are the perceived aspect of the mental faculty.

If the mental faculty experiences various sensations (vedana), can consciousness observe them? For example, if a mute person eats coptis (a bitter herb) and feels the bitterness without speaking, can others know that he feels bitter? Bitterness is a sensation experienced within one's own mind; others can only speculate. If no one even knows that the mute ate coptis, there is not even room for speculation. If the person who ate the coptis has impaired taste, he will not feel the bitterness, and others' speculation that he feels bitter will certainly be wrong. When consciousness lacks wisdom, its speculation about the mental activities (caitasika) and sensations (vedana) of the mental faculty will often also be mistaken.

All actions of the mental faculty must manifest through consciousness for either oneself or others to know. If the mental faculty does not manifest through consciousness, can we conclude that the mental faculty has no mental states or activities? Can we say that dharmas unknown to consciousness and unobservable by it do not exist? Clearly, we cannot. Ordinary beings, unable to observe the Tathagatagarbha, claim that the Tathagarbha does not exist and is not real – this is not truthful speech. Similarly, it is also inappropriate for consciousness, unable to observe the mental state of the mental faculty, to draw definitive conclusions about it. Bodhisattvas before the first ground (bhumi), without guidance from a bodhisattva possessing experiential realization (adhigama), cannot directly perceive (pratyaksa) the mental state of the mental faculty. Therefore, drawing definitive conclusions about the mental faculty is inappropriate, especially for those who have not yet attained enlightenment. Only after the obscurations of afflictions (klesa) are severed, and after consciousness and the mental faculty are transformed from consciousness into wisdom (jnana), can consciousness, endowed with wisdom, gradually engage in direct perception (pratyaksa) of the functioning and mental states of the mental faculty. However, even then, it may not necessarily observe very much or with great accuracy.