Does the manas only take as its object the dharma objects that are significant changes on the five sense objects?

The Buddha said that the mind, like the sharp edge of a sword or blade, cannot cut itself—this refers to the seventh consciousness, the manas, also called the mind faculty (manas). The Buddha called this seventh consciousness the mind faculty because it is the driving force by which the seeds of the mind consciousness arise and manifest from the eighth consciousness; the mind consciousness can only arise depending on the manas' attention (manaskāra), and after arising, it operates entirely according to the manas' attention, hence it is said that the manas is the root of the mind consciousness. The specific-faculty wisdom (pratyavekṣā) of this mind faculty is extremely weak; it can only make extremely simple discriminations of the mental objects (dharma-viṣaya) upon the five sense objects—for example, whether there are any major changes in the mental objects upon the five sense objects. This seventh consciousness, unlike the mind consciousness—the knowing mind—cannot operate nimbly among the five universal mental factors; it lacks the mental factors of "aspiration (chanda), determination (adhimokṣa), mindfulness (smṛti), and meditative concentration (samādhi)," and its function of the mental factor of wisdom (prajñā, the specific-faculty wisdom) is also extremely weak; it can only make extremely simple discriminations of changes in the mental objects.

Thus, since it cannot even discriminate the five sense objects, and must summon the mind consciousness, and only then, relying on the mind consciousness's specific-faculty wisdom, can it deliberate in various ways upon the various realms—how could it have the ability to introspect upon itself? How could it have the ability to contemplate the various dharmas? How could it have the ability to correct its own mental actions and habitual tendencies? Therefore, although this seventh consciousness is extremely nimble and can universally attend to all dharmas, and can further, relying on the mind consciousness's specific-faculty wisdom, make decisions everywhere and at all times, and can further deliberate and decide various mental actions; nevertheless, if separated from the mind consciousness's specific-faculty wisdom, it can accomplish nothing. Due to such a nature, the Buddha said that the mind (the mind faculty, manas) is like the sharp edge of a sword or blade (a metaphor for its nimbleness in universally attending to all dharmas; the mind consciousness, though possessing specific-faculty wisdom, cannot universally attend to all dharmas), yet cannot cut itself (a metaphor for the fact that, lacking the "self-validating cognition (svasaṃvedana)" of specific-faculty wisdom, it cannot correct its own wholesome and unwholesome mental actions); meaning that for this consciousness to "wish to change its defiled nature and transform into a pure mind faculty," it must rely on the mind consciousness's specific-faculty wisdom and deliberative wisdom in order to undergo transformation; it cannot, by relying solely on its own functions, eradicate the afflictions corresponding to itself. Hence the Buddha said: the mind is like the sharp edge of a sword, unable to cut itself.

Question: Master, something about the passage above always feels off to me—could you explain it?

Answer: Since the mind faculty can universally attend to all dharmas, then it can attend to any dharma whatsoever; there is nothing it cannot attend to. Yet he says the mind faculty only attends to the mental objects upon the five sense objects, and only major changes at that. This is self-contradictory.

If the mind faculty had no aspiration (chanda) and did not wish to engage in activity, the six consciousnesses would not emerge, and none of the myriad dharmas would appear.

When the eye consciousness, amid a mass of colors, selects only the color purple, this is decided by the mind faculty. This shows that the mind faculty also attends to the five sense object realms; only then can it act as the master, letting the six consciousnesses discriminate which five sense object realm.

If there were dharmas the mind faculty could not attend to, then the mind faculty would not be universally attending to all dharmas.

If the mind faculty could not exercise determination (adhimokṣa) and remained perpetually muddled, it could not act as the master to make correct things happen—things that accord with reason, with reality, and with the Dharma. It would then be unable to avoid danger and unable to transform consciousness into wisdom.

If the mind faculty had no mindfulness (smṛti), it could not bring forth the mind consciousness to recite; no dharma could then appear—recollection of the Buddha (buddhānusmṛti) could not be practiced, Chan contemplation would not be desired, and the myriad dharmas would not appear.

If the mind faculty could not deliberate and contemplate, then the mind consciousness's perfuming of the mind faculty would be meaningless; transformation of consciousness into wisdom would be even more impossible, and no wisdom whatsoever would ever appear.

If the mind faculty could not have meditative concentration (samādhi), then no matter how the six consciousnesses cultivated concentration, concentration could never be attained.

If the mind faculty could not cultivate and realize wholesome and unwholesome mental actions, then wholesome and unwholesome mental actions could never be changed—the wholesome would forever be wholesome, the unwholesome forever unwholesome. How then could afflictions be subdued and eradicated? The mind consciousness's perfuming of the mind faculty would likewise have no effect whatsoever, rendering all effort wasted. If the mind faculty had no power of introspection (pratyavekṣā-bala) and no self-validating cognition (svasaṃvedana), yet the Buddha said that all eight consciousnesses possess self-validating cognition. Sentient beings trust themselves so much and are so stubborn—this is precisely the mind faculty's self-validating cognition in function.

The mind faculty has the function of constant, attentive deliberation (恒审思量); all dharmas must pass His review and approval before they can be accepted and choices can be made. If the mind faculty's wisdom were always so lowly, how could it review and approve matters reasonably, how could it make wise choices? If it could not make wise choices, then sentient beings' bodily, verbal, and mental actions would at all times and places manifest foolishness and lack of wisdom—how could there be intelligent people in the world? What use would learning Buddhism be then? How could one open wisdom and become a Buddha?

The whole passage is riddled with errors.