Taking the Knowing of Mind Consciousness as Knowing Is Precisely Ignorance

What does the self-validating cognition (svasaṃvedana) of each consciousness mean? As for the object-aspect (nimitta) that each consciousness self-validates, do you know what its content is? For example, the eighth consciousness has a perceiving-aspect (darśana-bhāga), which is the capacity to see; the object-aspect of the eighth consciousness is what the eighth consciousness sees, for example, the seeds; the self-cognition (svasaṃvitti) of the eighth consciousness is that the eighth consciousness itself has seen the object-aspect seeds, has known and discerned the object-aspect seeds; the self-validating cognition (svasaṃvedana) of the eighth consciousness is that the eighth consciousness has verified and realized its own self-cognition, knowing that it has discerned the object-aspect seeds, knowing that it has completed the discernment of the object-aspect seeds, knowing that it has discerned the object-aspect seeds. Whatever the eighth consciousness itself has done, He Himself is clear about it, whereas the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are not clear about it, unless one possesses very deep wisdom of the varieties of paths.

Are we clear about whether the eighth consciousness has discerned the object-aspect seeds? We are not clear. The eighth consciousness does not know on behalf of the mind consciousness; what the mind consciousness does not know does not mean that other consciousnesses do not know. One cannot use the mind consciousness's not-knowing to substitute for the knowing of other consciousnesses. If the eighth consciousness is represented by A and the mind consciousness by B, the dharmas that A knows are not necessarily known by B; that B does not know does not mean that A does not know. A's self-validating cognition does not represent B's self-validating cognition; that B is not clear about the object-aspect that A has realized does not mean that A has not realized it, nor does it mean that A does not know. There are also many instances of the manas's knowing that the mind consciousness is not clear about; since it is not clear about them, one should not say that the manas also does not know.

For sentient beings, most knowing is judged by the standard of the mind consciousness's knowing; what the mind consciousness does not know, they say "I do not know," and say that such a thing did not happen, that it does not exist. In fact, the seventh consciousness knows that such a thing happened, knows that thing. But the seventh consciousness has no function of language and words, cannot express it, and has no way to make the mind consciousness know. The mind consciousness then feels that what it does not know does not exist, and that the other consciousnesses likewise do not know it either. To conclude in this way is extremely arbitrary and unreasonable.

To what degree is the mind consciousness of ordinary sentient beings arbitrary? The mind consciousness itself cannot realize the manas and cannot observe the manas, so it refuses to acknowledge that the manas has a self-cognition and a self-validating cognition. The manas has an introspective nature (pratyavekṣā-lakṣaṇa) toward itself, has the capacity for introspection, and can introspect its own discernment; the mind consciousness does not know this and cannot observe it, yet it says that the manas has no power of introspection (pratyavekṣā-bala), no self-validating cognition, and that certain self-cognitions are also absent. When the mind consciousness thinks this way, it precisely demonstrates its own foolishness, ignorance, and dullness—how little and how shallow what it knows is, and how many misunderstandings it has—without knowing it itself. The Buddha said, "Take heed not to believe your mind; your mind is not to be believed." Why? Because ignorance is deep and heavy.