Every Illusion, the Same Discovery

Sūtra: "Ānanda, you still do not understand: every floating, insubstantial, illusory, transformed appearance arises in its own proper place, and ceases entirely in that same place — these are called mere illusory, false appearances, yet their true nature is the very substance of wondrous, enlightened brightness itself."

Commentary: What follows now harmonizes the four categories — the five aggregates, the six sense-entrances, the twelve sense-fields, the eighteen elements — showing, for each and every phenomenon within them, that examined as mere appearance, arising and ceasing are entirely false, while examined as nature, this very falseness is, in every case, true. From this point on, the sūtra no longer speaks of "the essence of seeing" or "the nature of seeing," but instead calls it the tathāgatagarbha, the wondrous, true nature of suchness — "the nature of seeing" names this in terms of a single sense-faculty, a specific instance; "the tathāgatagarbha nature" names this in terms of all six sense-faculties together, the general case — general and specific are simply different names for one and the same substance.

"Floating" describes an insubstantial, unreal object of perception. What did not exist and suddenly appears is called "illusory"; what exists and then abruptly vanishes is called "transformed" — like flowers conjured in space, a reflection in a mirror, or a scene in a dream. "Arises in its own proper place" means it arises from nowhere else at all; "ceases entirely in that same place" means it ceases to nowhere else at all — it is nothing but an illusory, false name and appearance, with no real substance to be found anywhere. As for "yet their true nature is the very substance of wondrous, enlightened brightness itself": though the appearance is false, its nature was, from the start, true — this illusory, transformed appearance never departs from its own nature, and that nature is exactly the sentient being's own substance of wondrous, enlightened brightness; having no fixed appearance of its own, yet able to manifest every appearance, it is therefore called "wondrous." This passage offers this most insubstantial of all phenomena as a general example, to illustrate what follows — the aggregates, entrances, fields, and elements, which seem to be real, substantial phenomena — so that one may recognize, in every single case, that the appearance is false while the nature is true: phenomenon and principle being, in this sense, exactly the same thing.

Sūtra: "And so it goes, on through the five aggregates, the six sense-entrances, and, from the twelve sense-fields to the eighteen elements: through the coming together of causes and conditions, they falsely appear to arise; through the separation of causes and conditions, they falsely appear to cease. Yet no one seems able to recognize that this arising and ceasing, this coming and going, is, at root, the tathāgatagarbha itself — ever-abiding, wondrously bright, unmoving, all-pervading, the wondrous, true nature of suchness. Within this true, ever-abiding nature, seeking after coming or going, delusion or awakening, birth or death, one finds, in the end, nothing at all to be had."

Commentary: "And so it goes" is a phrase pointing back to what has just been said, continuing directly: if even the most insubstantial, illusory phenomenon already shows this same pattern — false appearance, true nature — then every phenomenon in the world, extending through the aggregates, entrances, fields, and elements, follows this identical pattern as well. However numerous these phenomena may seem, the four categories together leave nothing out, since every phenomenon whatsoever falls under either mind or matter — the specific groupings simply expand or condense according to the audience's own capacity.

"Through the coming together of causes and conditions, they falsely appear to arise" refers to the mental and material phenomena within these four categories, none of which stands apart from cause and condition. The true mind itself, beyond every opposition, still and constant, needs no cause or condition at all — yet the six kinds of defiled mind, falsely arising and ceasing, must depend on cause and condition to appear. The Buddha-realm's own true, good, wondrous form, its nature originally pure, needs no cause or condition either — yet the defiled being and environment of the nine other realms, falsely arising and ceasing, must likewise depend on cause and condition. "Through the separation of causes and conditions, they falsely appear to cease" means: should a sentient being, relying on the inward permeation of original awakening, give rise to the wisdom of initial awakening, and no longer cling to their conditioned objects as genuinely real, then, causes and conditions having separated, both defiled mind and defiled form alike cease. In sum, every mental and material phenomenon is nothing but a manifestation of mind alone, belonging entirely to the dependently-arisen nature — dependently arisen phenomena only appear to exist; examined as mere appearance, they are, at root, false, falsely seen to arise and cease within what was never, in truth, subject to arising or ceasing at all.

"No one seems able to recognize that this arising and ceasing, this coming and going, is, at root, the tathāgatagarbha itself — ever-abiding, wondrously bright, unmoving, all-pervading, the wondrous, true nature of suchness": since body, mind, and world all belong to this dependently-arisen nature, arising and ceasing in dependence on conditions, false and without substance — one should nonetheless understand that this falseness never departs from truth; its whole substance is exactly the perfectly accomplished, true nature itself. "Tathāgatagarbha" is the substance of original awakening that every sentient being equally possesses: "tathā" (如, "thus") names the true suchness's own unchanging substance; "gata" (來, "come" or "gone") names that same true suchness's wondrous function, following every condition; "garbha" (藏, "womb" or "storehouse") means it contains and holds every wholesome merit and virtue, mundane and transcendent alike, lacking nothing at all. "Ever-abiding, wondrously bright, unmoving, all-pervading" describes exactly the virtuous qualities of this tathāgatagarbha nature: never coming or going is called "ever-abiding"; belonging to neither delusion nor awakening is called "wondrously bright"; never arising or ceasing is called "unmoving"; present everywhere without exception is called "all-pervading" — together, these four virtues make up the wondrous, true nature of suchness.

"Within this true, ever-abiding nature, seeking after coming or going, delusion or awakening, birth or death, one finds, in the end, nothing at all to be had": because one does not understand that the ten thousand phenomena are mind alone, one seems to see all manner of distinctions, and so perceives marks of coming and going, sage and ordinary being, delusion and awakening, birth and death from beginning to end — exactly like a diseased eye falsely seeing flowers conjured in space. Yet once one recognizes that the appearance is false while the nature is true, seeking such marks as coming and going within the tathāgatagarbha's own true, ever-abiding nature yields nothing at all — exactly like a person who dreams of traveling a thousand miles, and, upon waking, finds themselves never to have left their own bed at all: how could there be any mark of coming or going to be found there? Or like a person mistaking east for west, who suddenly, shown the truth by someone else, comes to understand — how could there be any mark of delusion or awakening to be found there? Or like a person who dreams of being born into the human world, growing old from youth, until their allotted span ends and they die — how could there be any mark of birth or death to be found there? This whole passage matches, point for point, the treatise's own verse: "Whatever arises through causes and conditions, I declare to be empty; it is also called a provisional name; it is also called the meaning of the middle way" — reflecting on this makes the point clear on its own.

Sūtra: "Ānanda, how is it that the five aggregates are, at root, the tathāgatagarbha, the wondrous, true nature of suchness?"

Commentary: The passage above offered a general example; what follows now demonstrates each specific case. The Buddha begins with the five aggregates, showing that they are, in their entirety, false appearance that is, at the very same time, true nature. Form, sensation, perception, formations, and consciousness are, on their own terms, ordinary, conditioned phenomena of the world — so, having just declared them to be the tathāgatagarbha, the Buddha must now pose the question directly and explain it clearly. "Aggregate" (陰) carries the sense of "covering," since it covers over the true nature; the newer translation, "heap" (蘊), carries the sense of "accumulation," since conditioned things accumulate together. "At root, the tathāgatagarbha" means: though the appearance of the five aggregates is false, their nature was, from the start, true. "The wondrous, true nature of suchness": what cannot be conceived of in ordinary terms is called "wondrous," since a single substance contains within it ten thousand functions, and none of those ten thousand functions ever departs from that single substance — exactly as stated further on, "one becomes countless, and countless become one." It is like a single measure of gold capable of being shaped into countless different vessels, none of which is ever apart from that same gold: one truth, and every truth follows; the five aggregates are, every one, true. One suchness, and every suchness follows; the five aggregates are, every one, suchness. Every appearance is, in its entirety, this very nature — hence, "at root, the tathāgatagarbha, the wondrous, true nature of suchness."

Sūtra: "Ānanda, it is like a person who, with clear eyes, gazes at a clear, open sky — nothing there but open clarity, utterly empty. If, for no reason, this person holds his eyes fixed and unmoving until they grow strained, he will see, apart from the sky itself, wild flowers appear in the empty space, along with all manner of wild, disordered, unreal shapes. You should know that the aggregate of form is exactly the same. ... If these flowers came from empty space, then, having come from space, they should return into space — but if they truly went in and out like this, then space would no longer be truly empty. ... If they came out of the eye, then, having come from the eye, they should return into the eye. ... You should therefore know that the aggregate of form is false — originally neither a matter of causes and conditions, nor of any spontaneous nature."

Commentary: This analogy reveals that the aggregate of form is exactly the tathāgatagarbha, drawn from the same subject matter it illustrates. "A person" stands for the original person before a single thought has yet stirred; "clear eyes" stand for undeluded, true wisdom; "a clear, open sky" stands for the still, silent, true principle itself. Before a single thought has stirred, true wisdom illuminates true principle, principle and wisdom perfectly one — nothing but the tathāgatagarbha nature, pure and undefiled from the very start, without the slightest speck of dust — how, then, could the nine other realms' own being and environment ever be found there at all? "For no reason, this person holds his eyes fixed and unmoving" stands for the very first, groundless moment when true suchness failed to maintain its own nature, and, unaware, a single thought stirred, giving rise to ignorance. "Grow strained" stands for karmic consciousness falsely becoming "bright awareness"; "strain" itself refers to strained seeing, standing for the "turning appearance" — turning the originally possessed light of wisdom into the seeing-portion capable of seeing at all. "He will see, apart from the sky itself, wild flowers appear in the empty space": space itself originally has no flowers in it at all — straining the eyes falsely produces them, exactly as the treatise says, "because there is a capacity for seeing, its objects falsely appear." "All manner of wild, disordered, unreal shapes": the inward four elements bring birth, old age, sickness, and death; the outward four elements bring arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing — wild and disordered, never settled, ultimately all empty — hence, "unreal shapes."

"These flowers came neither from empty space, nor from the eye": examined this way, body, mind, and world, exactly like flowers in space, have no source they arise from, and no place they return to in ceasing — their very substance is thereby shown clearly to be false. If they came from space... space, if not truly empty, could not possibly allow flowers to arise and cease within it. If they came from the eye... this very nature of the flowers, having come from the eye, ought therefore to be capable of seeing; if it could see, then, once departed to become a flower in space, it ought, upon its return, to see the eye itself; if it could not see, then, once departed, it ought to obscure space itself, and, upon its return, ought to obscure the eye itself. And further: at the very moment of seeing the flowers, the eye ought to be entirely free of any obstruction — so why, then, is a clear, unobstructed sky what earns the name "a clear, healthy eye"? Whether one grants it the capacity to see or not, both possibilities fail — proof enough that the flowers do not come from the eye at all.

"You should therefore know that the aggregate of form is false — originally neither a matter of causes and conditions, nor of any spontaneous nature": by way of this same analogy, one comes to understand the underlying principle — every aggregate of form is nothing but the strained appearance produced by this same turning of consciousness, exactly like these wild flowers, falsely manifested through the eye's own strain. Having no substance from which it truly arises is called "false" [虛]; appearing falsely in accordance with karma is called "illusory" [妄]. Since it is, at root, the tathāgatagarbha, ever-abiding and unmoving, its substance eternally unchanging, it is not a matter of cause and condition; and since it is, at root, the tathāgatagarbha, wondrously bright and all-pervading, its function eternally following conditions, it is not spontaneous either — each and every instance is exactly the wondrous, true nature of suchness. If one is genuinely able to put this mind to good use, giving rise to wisdom and observing directly, personally seeing through to the very root of the aggregate of form, then this aggregate of form alone is already enough to penetrate true reality entirely.

Commentary: In sum, all five aggregates are false, having no real substance of their own at all — their true substance is exactly the tathāgatagarbha nature. If one applies the subtle, hidden contemplation and sees directly that the five aggregates are empty, this breaks through the aggregates themselves and transcends the five turbidities, allowing direct entry into samādhi, walking hand in hand with Avalokiteśvara's own path. Notice, too, that all five aggregates are already present within a single thought: a single thought's own clinging, once it clings, becomes an obstruction — this is exactly the aggregate of form; being aware of suffering or joy, taking it in and holding it within the mind — this is exactly the aggregate of sensation; conditioning upon this same object and forming an image of it in the mind — this is exactly the aggregate of perception; changing and vanishing in an instant, never remaining still — this is exactly the aggregate of formations; remaining vividly, unmistakably, clearly present throughout — this is exactly the aggregate of consciousness. On this reckoning, the whole substance of the five aggregates is nothing but a single thought, and the whole substance of a single thought is nothing but the five aggregates — so that observing thoughtlessness directly is itself the very starting point for breaking through the aggregates. And through śamatha's own subtle, hidden contemplation, observing each of these five aggregates' own false appearance in turn: the aggregate of form is like a reflected image; sensation, like a mirage; perception, like a dream; formations, like a flash of lightning; consciousness, like a magician's illusion. Ceasing to cling to any of them as genuinely real, the tathāgatagarbha nature one has always possessed is no longer covered over by these five aggregates at all, and one may personally behold the very substance of Śūraṅgama samādhi — the unborn, unceasing, wondrous, true nature of suchness itself.

Sūtra: "Further, Ānanda: how is it that the six sense-entrances are, at root, the tathāgatagarbha, the wondrous, true nature of suchness?"

Commentary: The Sanskrit āyatana is rendered "entrance," and also "field." "Entrance" carries two senses: the entrance that enters, since it enters and takes hold of its object; and the entrance that is entered, since it is the very place an object enters into. Given that this passage speaks of "taking hold of" its object, the sense here is "the entrance that enters" — the very place through which the six sense-objects are taken in — hence it is also called a "field." Other sūtras' treatments of mind and matter, whether expanded or condensed, do not include this particular category; this sūtra, because it takes the sense-faculties' own unborn, unceasing nature as exactly the substance of Śūraṅgama samādhi, and exactly the hidden cause by which the Tathāgata attains buddhahood, the very starting point relied upon for cultivating and realizing perfect penetration, specifically adds this category for that reason.

"At root, [the entrances are] the tathāgatagarbha": "root" here means the fundamental root from which every branch and leaf arises; tracing the six sense-entrances, as branches and leaves, back to their own fundamental root, one finds it is originally the tathāgatagarbha itself — "tathā" (如) names true suchness's own inherent, unchanging substance; "gata" (來) names that same true suchness's wondrous function, following every condition, pervading everywhere; "garbha" (藏) means it contains and holds every wholesome merit and virtue, mundane and transcendent alike, lacking nothing at all, exactly like a treasury. "The wondrous, true nature of suchness" refers to this same tathāgatagarbha's own nature: this nature is both principle and phenomenon at once, entirely false and entirely true at once, clinging to no single phenomenon, yet abandoning no single phenomenon either — hence it is called "wondrous." Since every phenomenon, gathered together, is nothing but this one mind: one truth, and every truth follows, with no phenomenon whatsoever that is not true; one suchness, and every suchness follows, with no phenomenon whatsoever that is not suchness — so, too, are the six sense-entrances themselves the wondrous, true nature of suchness.

Sūtra: "Ānanda, when the eye is stared fixed until it strains, both the eye and the strain alike are marks of bodhi itself straining into fatigue. Dependent on the two false objects of brightness and darkness, seeing arises in between them, taking hold of these objects — this is called the nature of seeing. This seeing, apart from those two objects of brightness and darkness, has, in the end, no substance of its own. ... If it came from brightness, it should vanish along with darkness, and so should not be able to see darkness. If it came from darkness, it should vanish along with brightness, and so should have no seeing of brightness. If it arose from the faculty itself, then, brightness and darkness aside, this essence of seeing would have no nature of its own to begin with. If it emerged from empty space, then, having gazed outward at objects, it should turn and see the faculty itself — and besides, if space itself were doing the observing, what would that have to do with your own entrance of seeing? You should therefore know that the entrance of the eye is false — originally neither a matter of causes and conditions, nor of any spontaneous nature."

Commentary: This draws on the earlier example of the strained, fixed stare from the aggregate of form, revealing that the entrance of the eye is likewise, entirely, false. "Both the eye and the strain": "strain" here refers to the flowers seen in space — the point being that not only are the flowers themselves a strained appearance, but the very eye capable of seeing them, together with that strained appearance seen, are, both alike, marks of this same true, bodhi-nature mind straining into fatigue. Bodhi is the inherently possessed true mind, originally free of any falseness at all — from the very first false stirring of a single thought, dependent on that stirring, a capacity to see arose, and, dependent on that capacity to see, its objects falsely appeared. Tracing this from branch back to root: it is not merely the aggregate of form that is false — the entrance of the eye, too, is exactly this same strained appearance, this same single false stirring, within the bodhi-mind itself.

"Dependent on the two false objects of brightness and darkness, seeing arises in between them, taking hold of these objects — this is called the nature of seeing; this seeing, apart from those two objects, has, in the end, no substance of its own": this entrance of the eye, because of the two objects of brightness and darkness, clings to what was originally still and gives rise to strained seeing, situated between the coarse and superior sense-organs, taking hold of these two objects of brightness and darkness the way a magnet draws iron — this is called the capacity for seeing; this is exactly the bodhi-mind's own strained appearance, belonging entirely to a false manifestation dependent on its object. Apart from these two objects of brightness and darkness, there is, in the end, no substance capable of "entering" to be found at all — this is what is meant by "no substance apart from its object."

"If it came from brightness... if it emerged from empty space, then, having gazed outward at objects, it should turn and see the faculty itself — and besides, if space itself were doing the observing, what would that have to do with your own entrance of seeing?": if one claims the entrance of the eye emerges from empty space, then space itself would be the very root of seeing — going outward, it would gaze at every object before it; returning, it ought to see its own root directly — which is plainly impossible; and even granting it could see, this would only be space observing itself, with nothing at all to do with your own entrance of seeing. "You should therefore know that the entrance of the eye is false — originally neither a matter of causes and conditions, nor of any spontaneous nature": having no real substance is called "false" [虛]; having no true source is called "illusory" [妄] — it is nothing but an illusory, false name and appearance. The first line here states that the appearance is false; the following two lines reveal that the nature is true — meaning that, though the entrance of the eye's own appearance is false, this falseness never departs from truth: its nature, originally unchanging, is not a matter of cause and condition, and, following every condition as it does, is not spontaneous either.