What is meant by destroying
the Alayavijndna?
Akiko
Osaki
"To destroy the alayavijnana"(破 壊 阿 頼 耶 識)is the phrase1)which apPears
in the passage of the Nimpaya-samgraha-sastza(決 定 蔵 論), Volume I, that ex-Plains the state of the alayavtjnana's extinction. The Nirnaya-samgraha-sastza
coincides with the"Viniscaya-sarhgraha"(摂 決 択 分)in the Yogacarya-bhuami-sastra(喩 伽 師 地 論, Volumes LI-LIV)and both are said to be translated from the same original:the former was translated by Paramartha(真 諦), while the tlatter by 玄 舞. Having referred to the state of the azayavijnana's
transmigra-tion, the Nirnaya-samgraha-sastra continues to state thus:
The alayavijnana is the very cause from which all afflictions (klesa) arise, however, it extinguishes, if one exercises the good d harmas... If one attains the eye of the dharma, perceiving the Four Noble Truths, the alayavijnana is positively "destroyed."
In the Tibetan translation of the Yogacarya-bhumi-S'astra the Tibetan rtogs pa is equivalent to Paramartha's 破 壊 and 玄 舞's 通 達. In this connection, in the Tibetan translation of the Yogacarya-bhumi-sasti a the word rtogs pa is used four times in the passage which explains the state of the alayavijnana's
extinction, and 玄 舞's translations from Sanskrit are, in turn, 通 達, 達, 通 達 and 通 達, while Paramartha's are 破 壊, 通 達, 見 and 通 達. The Sanskrit
gati, adhyavasti, avagati, avabuddhatva and avabodha, each of which means perceive or grasp, may probably be synonymous with rtogs pa.
Then, what does the perception of the alayavijnana mean ? It is not to grasp, not to see, not to understand, not to cling to the object of cognition outside the Mind. The Vijnaptimatra vada stands for "representations-only" (vijnaptimatra): it holds that the whole sphere of phenomenon, both non-mental and mental, arises from one's discrimination; and that any object discriminated
-1069-(16) What is meant by destroying the Aaayavijnana ? (A. Osaki)
is void of reality. Here is an absolute denial of the idea that our cognition should be limited and controlled by and taken from transcendental objects aloof from our consciousness. However, this is not the final goal of achieve-ment; there still exists the objectified recognition of the vijnaptimatra theory;, the object is merely immanenciated in the representations (vijnapti) as long as. the object is being grasped by the subject. When the subject-object-duality is sublated, the alayavijnana, which is the cause of all false phenomenal worlds, manifests itself. Then the alayavijnana sees not the object but the subject, the, alayavijnana itself, and this means to perceive or grasp the alayavijnana.
The above mentioned short passage of the Nirnaya-sarizgraha-sastra is fol-lowed by the description which says:
By an increase in the wisdom to perceive the tathata, with the achievement
of the avinivartaniya-bhami(不 退 地), the alayavijana is cut off; the
quality and attribute of the unenlightened are transformed or cast aside, and thereby the alayavijnana is extinguished.
Judging from this assertion, the alayavijnana must not be destroyed before entering the avinivartaniya-bhumi. Therefore, "to destroy the alayavijnana" does not mean to destroy the alayavijnana itself; it means to destroy the seeds (bija, potentialities) of afflictions and false knowledge.
A question may occur here as to the state of one's consciousness when he cuts off the seeds of afflictions and false knowledge. Sthiramati(安 慧), in his commentary on the Ttimsika-vijnanpti-karika(唯 識 三 十 頗), states concerning
this question: "His mind comes to abide in its own natural state (svacitta dhar-matayam pratisthito bhavati)."2) The Trimsika-vijcapti-karika itself says, with reference to the matter in question, that "It is the state which may be called acitta (the inconceivable), anupalambha (the unattainable) and jfana-lokottara-(the transcendental supramundane wisdom)." Again, Sthiramaiti comments, in the same commentary, that "It is the state of non-discrimination, because there is no more discriminating;" and that "It is the state of non-perception, because one does not recognize the object neither inside nor outside his mind; " and that "It is called the transcendental supramundane wisdom, because it does not conform to the world."3)
What is meant by destroying the Alayavijnana ? (A. Osaki) (17) As previously stated, "to destroy the alayavijflana," in the stage of intensified discernment, means to cut off the two types of adherence (grahya, grahaka, that which is grasped and that which grasps). Then, here follows another question as to how the alayavijnana is actually destroyed. The Nirnayasamgraha-sastra reads, in this connection, as the following:
By the exercise to increase the wisdom to perceive the tathata, and as the result of the bodhisattva's practice in self-cultivation, the alayavijnana is cut off; namely, the quality and attribute of the worldling are abandoned and the alayavijnana is uprooted. Hence the disapperance of all afflictions. With the alayavijflana being extinguished one is able to realize the
vijnana.
The Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra, however, reads in a different way thus: If one practices hard continually to attain the knowledge which recognizes the tathata, he will experience the asraya-paravrtti (the inner transformation). Immediately after acquiring the asraya-paravrtti one is aware of the vijnana being abandoned. In consequence of its abandonment all afflictions will be completely ceased. The asraya-paravrtti counteracts the alayavijnana
to its extinction.4)
In the Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra the alayavijnana is uprooted immediately after the asraya-paravrtti, while in the Nirnaya-samgraha-sastra the amalavijnana is attained after the destruction of the alayavijnana. This amalavijnana is
regarded as 如 来 蔵 自 性 清 浄 心 and considered to be the nineth consciousness
by the followers of Paramartha.
The asraya-paravrtti is the turning-up of one's basis; namely, it is the conversion of the alayavijnana which restores all seeds. The passage5) of the Tebetan translation of the Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra, in which the difference between the alayavijnana and the asraya-paravrtti is explained, defines the asraya-paravrtti thus:
1. It is everlasting and has no more name-and-word-seeds, because it is acquired by the wisdom which grasps the tathata.
2. It abandons all afflictive seeds.
the Holy Path taking place.
4. It is absolutely free from all kinds of good and neutral (neither good nor evil) dharmas.
The interpretations, with reference to the above subject, of the Yogacarya-bhurni-sastra and the Nirnaya-samgraha-sastra are identical with the Tibetan
translation except for Item One. The Nirnaya-samgraha-sastra says, in Item One, "to have an immediate perception of the tathata," which suggests the standpoint of non-dualism (the tathata and the wisdom are non-dual), while the Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra says, "to cognitively grasp the tathata." The asraya-paravrtti, as long as it is understood to be a counteracting dharma to the alayavijnana, does not merely mean the alayavijnana turning up; it is required to be one d karma independent from the alayavijnana. When the subject-object-duality is elevated, the alayavijnana will see itself, not the object. In the
beginning of the Vimstika-vijnapatimtrata-siddhi(唯 識 二 十 論)the term matra
is defined as negation of the cognitive object, and the same treatise makes a proposition that one's own seeds should manifest themselves appearing just like the object. The object internalized in the manifestation and transformation of the consciousnesses is by all means an externalizing self; here still remains the subject-object-duality. To get rid of the two types of hindrance (hindrance of afflictions and hindrance that disturbs Absolute Knowledge) means not to grasp the object outside the Mind, but that the Mind sees itself, and that the Mind returns to its own source and abides in its natural state. At this stage one sees the object just as it is or in its suchness so that the recognition in action here is not false but real.
The Vijfiaptimatra vada does not agree itself in interpreting the nature of the alayavi j nana: the one says the alayavijnana is a wholly defiled consciousness, while the other says it is a consciousness comprising pure and defiled seeds. The passage that explains the aspect of the a layavijnana's destruction g ves us the idea that the alayavijnana should be the defiled, and through attaining the asraya-paravrtti the highest Reality reveals itself in individuals. In the fif ty-fourth volume of the Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra, however, the word pudgala,
What is meant by destroying the Alayavijnana ? (A. Osaki) (19) immutable Noesis, appears, and further we read: "The counteracting consci-ousness to the alayavijnana is a pure consciousness." Again, in the second volume of the said treatise the alayavi j nana is defined as the consciousness restoring all kinds of seeds including innate and primordial pure seeds.
Paramartha may probably have rendered, influenced by the theory that the phenomenal world occurs from the tathata through the action of conditional
causation, asraya-pazavrtti into阿 摩 羅 識(amazavijnana). This amazavijnana
is not mere intellect that recognizes the tathata but Absolute Wisdom. The amalavijnana is explained to be equivalent to Parinispanna (Ultimate Reality in his translation of the Trinihsvabhava-sastra. It reads: "Where there is no more fallacious discrimination, there are no more occurences from causes and conditions; there is only the amalavijnana existing, clearing away all defiled attributes; therefore it is called suchness. "6)
It is said that Paramartha introduced the tathagata-garb ha theory into Vi jflaptimatra vada. Preceding Paramartha, however, the
Mahayana-samgraha-sastra(摂 大 乗 論)chooses the Dasabhumi-sutra(十 地 経)as its grounds of the
theory. And Vasubandhu quotes, in the beginning of the Viriisatika-vijnapti-matrata-siddhi, the proposition from the Dasabhumi-sutra: "The three worlds are nothing but representations arising from the Mind."
The saMdhinizmocana-sutza(解 深 密 経)defines the seeds as the perfuming
act of form, name and discrimination; namely, the seeds are of impure d harmas. The Yogacarya-bhumi-sastra admits pure seeds inherently abiding in the alaya-vijnana, and says that the relation between the alayavijnana and pure seeds
is that of the possessor and the possessable. The interpretation brings up the question of whether the alayavijnana, which is of the impure, is capable of retaining pure seeds; or whether pure seeds, that have a nature counter to the alayavijnana, can coexist with the alayavijnana. The same treatise does not mention anyting of it; it only says, as regards the Holy Path, that the tathata holds the Holy Path and makes it continuous and active in series, and succeeds by depending on the tathata. Again, the same treatise does not refer to the per-f umable place that may receive pure seeds perfumed by the Holy Path. This became a solemn and difficult problem which the Vijnaptimatra vada had to
-1065-struggle to solve thereafter.
1) 正 蔵, vol. I, p. 1020b.
2) The Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi, Lsvi Sanskrit Text, p. 43-1. 15. 3) Ibid., P. 44. 11. 2-5.
4)正 蔵, vol. LI, p. 581c.
5) The Peking Edition., No. 5539. p. 238-1-4∼7. 6)正 蔵, vol. XXXI, p. 872a.
