第 2 頁，共 3 頁
The Two Entrances mark the essence of mind;
The Four Practices gather the gates of practice.
Though true nature is equally revealed,
It is obscured by the delusion of adventitious dust.
The Two Truths disclose degrees of depth and shallowness;
The Five Contemplations dispel the dust of attachment.
Though Chan and Yogācāra follow different tracks,
They return alike to truth free from grasping.
Although there are many gates for entering the Way, in brief they do not go beyond awakening to principle and cultivating practice. Bodhidharma’s Treatise on the Two Entrances and Four Practices establishes “Entrance through Principle” and “Entrance through Practice” as its framework. Entrance through Principle means relying on the teaching to awaken to the source, deeply trusting that all beings share one true nature, though it is obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts. Entrance through Practice gathers all cultivation into four practices: enduring karmic retribution, adapting to conditions, seeking nothing, and acting in accordance with Dharma. This is an essential teaching of early Chan concerning the pacification of mind and the arousing of practice.
In the Yogācāra tradition of Dharma-character, Master Kuiji extensively unfolded the fourfold Two Truths, dividing both the conventional and the ultimate into four levels. Through the sequence of name and thing, phenomena and principle, depth and shallowness, expression and purport, he revealed how truth and convention are neither identical nor separate. He also established the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only: dismissing the false and preserving the real, abandoning the mixed and retaining the pure, gathering the derivative and returning to the root, concealing the inferior and revealing the superior, and dismissing appearances to realize nature. Through these successive discernments of dharmas, one finally realizes the perfected nature.
Now, viewed according to Yogācāra meaning, although the Two Entrances and Four Practices does not explicitly establish the eight consciousnesses, the four divisions, the hundred dharmas, or the three natures, its purport is by no means unconnected with Yogācāra. Why? Because its themes of abandoning delusion and returning to truth, leaving marks and acting in accordance with Dharma, and encountering conditions without attachment, all accord with the meaning of dismissing the imagined nature, understanding the dependent nature, and realizing the perfected nature.
What is Entrance through Principle? It means relying on the teaching to awaken to the source and realizing that all beings share one true nature. Here, “one true nature,” if interpreted through Yogācāra, may be understood as close to the perfected nature. “Obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts” may be understood as close to the deluded discrimination arising from the imagined nature. “Abandoning delusion and returning to truth” means dismissing the false and turning toward the real. Entrance through Principle in the Two Entrances and Four Practices emphasizes “abiding firmly in wall contemplation, without self or other, ordinary and sage equal.” Its purpose is to leave behind distinctions of grasper and grasped, self and other, ordinary and sage, and to merge silently with principle.
Yet Yogācāra masters do not merely speak of leaving discrimination; they also clarify what gives rise to discrimination. Therefore, Kuiji’s Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only first dismisses the falsity of the imagined nature while preserving the reality of dependent arising and perfected reality. Then, through successive discernment of mind and object, essence and function, mind-king and mental factors, phenomena and principle, one reaches the dismissal of appearances and the realization of nature.
Thus, from this perspective, Chan’s Entrance through Principle tends toward directly pointing back to the source, while Yogācāra’s Five Contemplations tend toward analytical entry into principle. Chan speaks of “abiding firmly in wall contemplation”; Yogācāra speaks of “dismissing appearances to realize nature.” Though the words differ, their purport may be mutually understood. The former emphasizes direct contemplation; the latter emphasizes gradual sequence. The former takes pacifying the mind as primary; the latter takes discernment as essential.
What is Entrance through Practice? It consists of four practices: enduring karmic retribution, adapting to conditions, seeking nothing, and acting in accordance with Dharma. All four are cultivated amid everyday circumstances. When suffering arrives and one does not resent it, this is the practice of enduring karmic retribution. When joy arrives and one does not cling to it, this is the practice of adapting to conditions. When one does not give rise to craving toward objects of desire, this is the practice of seeking nothing. When one practices the six perfections without marks in accordance with the principle of pure nature, this is the practice of acting in accordance with Dharma.
Viewed through Yogācāra, the practices of enduring karmic retribution and adapting to conditions directly reveal the dependent nature. The suffering and joy of beings arise in dependence upon karmic conditions. Gain and loss, honor and disgrace, appear temporarily through causes and conditions. If one falsely clings to a real self and real dharmas upon dependent phenomena, this becomes the imagined nature. If one understands dependent arising as illusory, arising and ceasing through conditions, one can avoid resentment and delight. Thus the practice of enduring karmic retribution breaks anger, while the practice of adapting to conditions breaks craving. Both prevent the practitioner from giving rise to substantial attachment toward circumstances.
The practice of seeking nothing is especially close to dismissing the imagined nature. Ordinary people crave and cling everywhere; this is called seeking. The wise understand that all existence is empty and therefore put an end to conceptual seeking. The Two Entrances and Four Practices says, “All seeking is suffering; to seek nothing is bliss.” This does not mean that practitioners abandon all action. Rather, it means they do not chase objects with a mind of craving.
The practice of acting in accordance with Dharma is closest to Yogācāra’s “dismissing appearances to realize nature.” Practicing the six perfections while having no practice to grasp, benefiting beings while not grasping the mark of beings—this means not falling into imagined marks within dependent practices, but giving rise to markless wondrous activity based on the principle of the perfected nature. This may mutually illuminate the final stage of the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only, namely dismissing the appearances and functions of dependent arising and realizing the perfected nature.
Question: If the Two Entrances and Four Practices already reveals true nature, why is it necessary to judge it by means of the fourfold Two Truths?
Answer: Not so. Chan language is concise, while Yogācāra doctrine is detailed. Concise language is easy to enter; detailed doctrine is easy to discern. If one merely speaks of true nature, people may grasp it as a real entity. If one merely speaks of seeking nothing, people may fall into abandoning practice. Therefore it is necessary to distinguish by means of the Two Truths, so that one understands that truth and convention are not separate.
Within the fourfold Two Truths, the first level is the Two Truths of name and thing, distinguishing between what has name but no reality and what appears through essence and function. The second level is the Two Truths of phenomena and principle, distinguishing phenomena such as aggregates and sense-fields from principles such as the Four Noble Truths. The third level is the Two Truths of depth and shallowness, distinguishing provisional establishment from revealing reality through a gate. The fourth level is the Two Truths of expression and purport, distinguishing provisional naming and non-establishment from abandoning expression and directly discussing purport. The final ultimate of ultimates is wondrous in essence, beyond language, and inwardly realized by noble wisdom.
Viewed in this light, the phrase “relying on the teaching to awaken to the source” in Entrance through Principle belongs to revealing principle through expression. “No longer following words and teachings” is close to abandoning expression and directly realizing purport. Among the Four Practices, enduring karmic retribution, adapting to conditions, and seeking nothing are still cultivated within conventional dependent arising. Acting in accordance with Dharma enters truth through convention and gives rise to practice based on truth. Therefore, although the Two Entrances and Four Practices does not explicitly list the fourfold Two Truths, its movement proceeds from conventional cultivation toward inward realization of ultimate truth.
Some say: Bodhidharma’s Chan and Yogācāra doctrine are different and should not be forcibly harmonized.
I say: They cannot be regarded as entirely the same, nor can they be regarded as entirely different. They cannot be entirely the same because Chan does not establish elaborate Dharma-character categories, does not discuss the eight consciousnesses and four divisions in detail, and does not use the hundred dharmas and three natures as an explicit framework. Yogācāra, by contrast, emphasizes the establishment of names and marks, doctrinal classification, and stages of contemplative practice. Yet they cannot be entirely different because both break attachment to self and dharmas, both reveal that deluded thoughts obscure truth, and both take leaving discrimination and realizing reality as their final aim.
The strength of the Two Entrances and Four Practices lies in its simplicity and directness. It places practice directly amid suffering and joy, gain and loss, making practitioners contemplate the mind in the very presence of circumstances. The strength of Kuiji’s Yogācāra lies in precision. It can distinguish what is imagined falsity, what is dependent arising, and what is perfected reality, thereby preventing practitioners from falling into eternalism or annihilationism, existence or non-existence.
Thus, if one clings only to Chan and abandons Yogācāra, one may become direct but lack discernment. If one clings only to Yogācāra and abandons Chan, one may become dense in terminology but fail to touch body and mind. A good student should use Yogācāra to clarify the doctrinal path and Chan contemplation to spur actual practice.
Therefore one should know:
Thus the verse says:
Chan values direct entry;
Yogācāra values precision and detail.
Direct entry guards against empty quietism;
Precision guards against vagueness.
If both can be used together,
Principle and phenomena mutually shine.
When meeting conditions, the mind abides nowhere;
Acting in accordance with Dharma is true constancy.
Though the Two Truths are one in meaning,
Their depth and shallowness differ.
Name and thing are first distinguished;
Phenomena and principle follow next.
Depth and shallowness open cultivation and realization;
Expression and purport reveal the true source.
From convention one gradually enters the ultimate;
By abandoning expression, one accords with the Middle.
The Buddhas teach the Dharma through the gate of the Two Truths. Relying on convention, they establish names and words; relying on the ultimate, they reveal real principle. Yet convention and ultimate are not each of a single fixed form. According to capacities and degrees of depth, their meanings differ. Therefore Master Kuiji of Ci’en, relying on Yogācāra Dharma-character, opened the Two Truths into four levels: name and thing, phenomena and principle, depth and shallowness, expression and purport. This means that four kinds of convention and four kinds of ultimate are paired to form the fourfold Two Truths.
The four kinds of convention are: worldly convention, rational convention, convention of realization, and ultimate convention. The four kinds of ultimate are: worldly ultimate, rational ultimate, ultimate of realization, and ultimate of ultimates. When the earlier is compared with the later, the shallower is called convention and the deeper is called truth. When the later is compared with the earlier, the superior is called ultimate and the inferior is called worldly. Therefore one should know that the Two Truths are not two fixed dharmas. They are established according to the depth of wisdom and object, the presence or absence of verbal expression, and differences in provisional designation.
The world abounds in provisional names;
Names exist, but real substance does not.
Though aggregates and sense-fields are not self,
Essence and function provisionally support each other.
The first level of the Two Truths pairs worldly conventional truth with worldly ultimate truth and is called the Two Truths of name and thing.
What is worldly conventional truth? It refers to ordinary beings’ conceptual construction based on emotion and imagination. Upon the temporary conjunction of the five aggregates, they provisionally establish self, person, sentient being, and life-span. Upon the temporary conjunction of conditions, they provisionally establish names such as jar, garment, cart, army, and forest. These have only provisional names and no real substance. They conceal true principle and exist according to worldly sentiment. Thus they are called worldly convention. This may also be called “truth of having name but no reality.”
What is worldly ultimate truth? It refers to dharmas such as the five aggregates, twelve sense-fields, and eighteen elements. Although they are not ultimately real, compared with provisional names such as self, person, jar, and cart, they still have distinctions of essence and function and can be known by noble wisdom. Thus they are called worldly ultimate. This ultimate is only superior to the first convention and is not the ultimate in the final sense.
Question: If the five aggregates, sense-fields, and elements are also conditioned and impermanent, how can they be called ultimate?
Answer: The “ultimate” here does not mean the ultimately ineffable suchness. It is called ultimate only in relation to the first level of provisional naming. Self, person, jar, and cart are only provisionally established and have no distinct self-substance. Aggregates, sense-fields, and elements can still be analyzed according to phenomenal characteristics and possess causal essence and function. Therefore they are superior to the first convention. Because superiority and inferiority are relative, they are called ultimate.
Thus one should know that the first level of the Two Truths aims to break the coarse attachment to names held by ordinary beings, making them understand that provisional names are not real, while preventing them from falling into nihilistic emptiness. This is the gate of “breaking name and establishing thing.”
Aggregates and sense-fields differ according to phenomena;
The Four Noble Truths reveal principle universally.
Through phenomena one may know principle;
The meaning of cause and result is inexhaustible.
The second level of the Two Truths pairs rational conventional truth with rational ultimate truth and is called the Two Truths of phenomena and principle.
What is rational conventional truth? It refers to the Buddha’s establishment of Dharma-character categories according to the differences among dharmas, such as the five aggregates, twelve sense-fields, eighteen elements, and hundred dharmas. This enables practitioners to understand that body, mind, and world are not one real self, but a conjunction of many dharmas, each with its own distinction. Although these are established according to Buddhist reasoning, they still belong to differentiated phenomenal marks, with names and forms. Thus they are called rational convention.
What is rational ultimate truth? It refers to the Four Noble Truths—suffering, arising, cessation, and path—as well as distinctions of knowing, abandoning, realizing, and cultivating, and the causal differences of defilement and purity. These are objects of the noble one’s undefiled wisdom and enable practitioners to know suffering, abandon its arising, realize cessation, and cultivate the path. Therefore they are superior to the preceding classification of phenomena and are called rational ultimate.
Question: If the Four Noble Truths are also verbal teachings and provisional establishments, why are they called ultimate?
Answer: Although they are established provisionally, they express the causal structure of defilement and purity and the sequence of cultivation and realization. They are not merely analyses of aggregates, sense-fields, and elements. Through them one can abandon delusion, realize truth, and proceed toward liberation. Therefore they are superior to rational convention.
Thus one should know that the second level of the Two Truths aims to enter principle through phenomena. The first level breaks names and establishes things; the second level relies on things to clarify principle. If one only knows aggregates, sense-fields, and elements but does not know suffering, arising, cessation, and path, one may break self-clinging but not necessarily proceed toward realization. If one understands the causality of the Four Noble Truths, one can enter cultivation through Dharma-character.
Skillful means open cultivation and realization;
Provisional establishment becomes the gate of entry.
Relying on emptiness, real principle is revealed;
The two graspings gradually leave no trace.
The third level of the Two Truths pairs conventional truth of realization with ultimate truth of realization and is called the Two Truths of depth and shallowness.
What is conventional truth of realization? It refers to the Buddha’s provisional establishment of stages such as knowing, abandoning, realizing, and cultivating in order to lead beings into realization. He reveals defiled and pure causality, distinctions between ordinary and noble beings, and stages of cultivation. These enable practitioners to proceed toward realization and are therefore called “realization.” Yet they still involve what can be known, what can be cultivated, and what can be realized. Therefore they are called conventional.
What is ultimate truth of realization? It refers to twofold emptiness and suchness revealed by noble wisdom through the verbal gate of emptiness. Through contemplating the emptiness of self, one reveals the suchness disclosed by self-emptiness. Through contemplating the emptiness of dharmas, one reveals the suchness disclosed by dharma-emptiness. This is not merely a matter of describing skillful means for cultivation and realization; it reveals real principle through a skillful gate. Therefore it is called ultimate truth of realization.
Question: Since twofold emptiness and suchness have already been spoken of, why is this still not the ultimate in the final sense?
Answer: Because it is still revealed through the “gate of emptiness.” Wherever there is a gate relied upon, there remains a skillful expression. Although this is superior to marked cultivation and realization, it has not yet left behind the marks associated with verbal expression. Therefore it is called ultimate, but not the ultimate of ultimates.
Within these Two Truths of depth and shallowness, the meaning of Yogācāra cultivation is especially clear. Why? Yogācāra teaches that to enter reality, one must first dismiss the imagined nature, understand the dependent nature, and only then realize the perfected nature. In the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only, the first four levels mostly contemplate the principle of consciousness-only through dependent consciousness-appearances. The fifth level dismisses appearances and realizes nature, thereby realizing the perfected nature.
Thus one should know that the third level of the Two Truths aims, through skillful cultivation and realization, to enter twofold emptiness and suchness. Without provisional establishment, ordinary beings have no way to enter the path. If one clings to provisional means as real, one again falls into Dharma-attachment. Therefore one must rely on skillful means without abiding in them.
The ultimate still relies on expression;
Names and words have not yet left their source.
Abandoning words, one directly realizes the purport;
Noble wisdom becomes perfectly unobstructed.
The fourth level of the Two Truths pairs ultimate conventional truth with ultimate ultimate truth and is called the Two Truths of expression and purport.
What is ultimate conventional truth? It refers to such doctrines as twofold emptiness and suchness, the perfected nature, and the real nature of consciousness-only. Although these are wondrous dharmas known by noble ones, when they are provisionally established through names and revealed through words, they are still not the ineffable self-realized essence. Therefore they are called ultimate convention. Here, the ultimate is what is expressed, while language is what expresses. What is expressed is superior, but the expressing medium remains conventional.
What is ultimate ultimate truth? It refers to suchness and real nature, wondrous in essence and beyond language, transcending all conceptual proliferation. It is neither existent nor non-existent, neither one nor many, and is beyond the measurement of ordinary discrimination. It is inwardly realized only by noble wisdom. It is superior to all conventions and also superior to the preceding three ultimates. Therefore it is called the ultimate of ultimates.
Question: If it is beyond words and marks, why speak of “ultimate ultimate”?
Answer: It is provisionally named in order to dismiss attachment. If it were not spoken of, beings would have no way to know that there is an ineffable real principle. If one clings to what is spoken, one contradicts the ineffable. Therefore it is spoken without attachment to speech, expressed so that expression may be abandoned. This is like pointing at the moon: the finger is not the moon, but through the finger one sees the moon, and upon seeing the moon one forgets the finger.
Some say: If the ultimate of ultimates is beyond words and marks, then all the preceding Two Truths should be discarded.
Refutation: Not so. Without the preceding conventions, there would be no way to guide ordinary beings into sagehood. Without the preceding three ultimates, there would be no way gradually to dismiss coarse and subtle Dharma-attachments. Therefore the earlier levels are skillful means for the later, and the later levels are the destination of the earlier. Relying on convention, one enters truth; truth does not depart from convention. Through expression one realizes purport; purport does not remain stuck in expression. Therefore one should not destroy the previous skillful means, nor cling to them.
Thus one should know that the fourth level of the Two Truths aims to enter purport through expression and reveal the ineffable through names and words. At this point the meaning of the Two Truths reaches its culmination. The path of language is cut off; the activity of mind ceases. This is not that there is nothing realized; rather, it is realization of the principle beyond speech.
First, attachment to names is broken;
Next, the gate of phenomena and principle is clarified.
Third, one enters through cultivation and realization;
Fourth, expression is abandoned and truth is met.
Though shallow and deep differ,
Truth and convention are not separated.
If understood in this way,
The principle of Yogācāra is heard.
These fourfold Two Truths are not spoken as separate and scattered categories; they are sequentially related.
The first level, the Two Truths of name and thing, breaks attachment to the reality of worldly provisional names, making one understand that self, person, jar, cart, and the like have only provisional names and no real self-substance, while dependently arisen phenomena such as aggregates, sense-fields, and elements may be relatively established. This is the gate of breaking coarse attachment.
The second level, the Two Truths of phenomena and principle, relies on the phenomena of aggregates, sense-fields, and elements, and further clarifies the causality of the Four Noble Truths, cultivation, abandonment, realization, and attainment. This is the gate of entering principle through phenomena.
The third level, the Two Truths of depth and shallowness, relies on skillful means of cultivation and realization to reveal twofold emptiness and suchness, so that practitioners do not remain stuck in marked cultivation but can enter reality through the gate of emptiness. This is the gate of revealing reality through a gate.
The fourth level, the Two Truths of expression and purport, recognizes that even speaking of suchness and the perfected nature remains verbal expression and provisional designation. Ultimately one must abandon expression and discuss purport, inwardly realized by noble wisdom. This is the gate of realizing reality beyond words.
Therefore one should know that the establishment of the fourfold Two Truths is neither mere terminology nor purely doctrinal classification. It is truly a ladder for practitioners to move from ordinary beings to noble wisdom, from name to thing, from thing to principle, and from expression to purport. If students merely cling to the names, they fall into Dharma-attachment. If they skillfully understand the meaning, they can use names to dismiss names and rely on expression to forget expression.
The Two Truths distinguish truth and convention;
The Five Contemplations dismiss deluded attachment.
One enters through verbal teaching;
One clarifies within consciousness.
Dismissing the false and preserving the real,
Dismissing appearances, one realizes nature.
Though the two gates speak differently,
They share the perfected realm as their aim.
The fourfold Two Truths mainly clarify the depth and shallowness of truth and convention. The Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only mainly clarifies the sequence of contemplative practice. The five are: dismissing the false and preserving the real consciousness-only; abandoning the mixed and retaining the pure consciousness-only; gathering the derivative and returning to the root consciousness-only; concealing the inferior and revealing the superior consciousness-only; and dismissing appearances to realize nature consciousness-only. These five are established according to the three natures. First one dismisses the falsity of the imagined nature and preserves the reality of the dependent and perfected natures. Then, through successive discernment of mind and object, essence and function, mind-king and mental factors, phenomena and principle, one finally dismisses the appearances and functions of dependent arising and realizes the perfected nature.
When the fourfold Two Truths are compared with the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only, their meanings may be mutually related. The first level of the Two Truths breaks attachment to the reality of provisional names and is close to dismissing the false and preserving the real. The second level enters principle through phenomena and may assist the contemplations of abandoning the mixed and retaining the pure, and gathering the derivative and returning to the root. The third level reveals twofold emptiness and suchness through skillful cultivation and realization, and may assist concealing the inferior and revealing the superior. The fourth level enters purport through expression and accords most closely with dismissing appearances to realize nature. However, this is only a skillful correspondence in meaning; it does not mean the two have identical names or structures. The fourfold Two Truths are a gate of doctrinal classification, while the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only is a gate of contemplative practice.
Therefore, those who skillfully study Yogācāra should use the fourfold Two Truths to distinguish the depth of truth and convention, and use the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only to dismiss deluded grasping toward mind and object. Once truth and convention are clarified, one does not fall into emptiness or existence. Once contemplative practice is established, one does not remain stuck in names and words.
Entrance through Principle awakens through teaching;
Entrance through Practice cultivates according to conditions.
Enduring retribution removes anger;
Adapting to conditions calms deluded seeking.
Acting in accord with Dharma is markless;
Wall contemplation accords with the true stream.
If judged through the Two Truths,
One enters profundity through convention.
The Two Entrances and Four Practices establishes Entrance through Principle and Entrance through Practice. Entrance through Principle means relying on the teaching to awaken to the source, deeply trusting that all beings share one true nature, though obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts. If one abandons delusion and returns to truth, abides firmly in wall contemplation, without self or other, ordinary and sage equal, one silently accords with principle. Entrance through Practice refers to the four practices: enduring karmic retribution, adapting to conditions, seeking nothing, and acting in accordance with Dharma.
If judged by the fourfold Two Truths, the initial phrase in Entrance through Principle, “relying on the teaching to awaken to the source,” means revealing purport through expression. The later phrase, “no longer following words and teachings,” means abandoning expression and realizing principle. This is close to the fourth level, the Two Truths of expression and purport. The practices of enduring karmic retribution and adapting to conditions clarify that suffering and joy, gain and loss, all arise from karmic conditions; they are close to conventional dependent arising and rational causality. The practice of seeking nothing contemplates all existence as empty and does not follow craving; it is close to entering the ultimate through the conventional. The practice of acting in accordance with Dharma practices the six perfections without grasping marks, based on the principle of pure nature; it is close to giving rise to markless wondrous practice based on twofold emptiness and suchness.
However, the Two Entrances and Four Practices does not analyze the fourfold Two Truths in detail, nor does it establish the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only. Its meaning is concise and direct, valuing pacification of mind. Kuiji’s Dharma-character teaching is doctrinally detailed, valuing discernment. Concision enables practitioners to practice immediately; precision prevents practitioners from falling into wrong understanding. The two complement each other and are not contradictory.
The four levels open the Two Truths;
Layer by layer they dismiss attachment.
Name and thing first remove self;
Phenomena and principle next clarify causes.
Depth and shallowness connect cultivation and realization;
Expression and purport enter the nameless.
If one knows the purport beyond words,
The nature of consciousness-only is perfected.
Therefore one should know: Kuiji’s fourfold Two Truths do not merely distinguish terms and marks. They are truly a skillful means by which ordinary views enter noble wisdom. First, the Two Truths of name and thing break attachment to provisional names. Next, the Two Truths of phenomena and principle clarify the principle of cultivation and realization. Third, the Two Truths of depth and shallowness lead one into twofold emptiness and suchness. Fourth, the Two Truths of expression and purport cause one to abandon expression and inwardly realize.
If one clings only to convention, one falls into ordinary emotion. If one clings only to ultimate terminology, that too becomes Dharma-attachment. Therefore one must rely on convention to enter truth and use expression to realize purport. Once the purport is realized, one does not destroy convention yet does not abide in convention; one does not depart from the ultimate yet does not cling to the ultimate.
Thus the essence of the fourfold Two Truths may be summarized as follows:
Take convention as skillful means and the ultimate as destination.
Take verbal expression as a bridge and the ineffable as real realization.
Break attachment through layered distinctions,
And complete realization by abandoning expression and realizing purport.
This is the middle way revealed by Yogācāra Dharma-character through the gate of the Two Truths.
In summary, the purpose of Kuiji’s fourfold Two Truths is not to multiply distinctions of names and marks. Rather, through layered discernment, they guide ordinary beings from coarse attachment into subtle contemplation, and from convention toward the ultimate. The first level, the Two Truths of name and thing, breaks attachment to the reality of worldly provisional names, making one understand that self, person, jar, cart, and the like are all established according to emotional construction. The second level, the Two Truths of phenomena and principle, opens the causality of the Four Noble Truths based on phenomena such as aggregates and sense-fields, enabling practitioners to know cultivation, abandonment, realization, and attainment through analysis of dharmas. The third level, the Two Truths of depth and shallowness, reveals twofold emptiness and suchness through provisional establishment, preventing cultivation and realization from remaining stuck in marked Dharma-gates. The fourth level, the Two Truths of expression and purport, clarifies that even ultimate terms such as suchness, perfected nature, and consciousness-only nature remain expressions. One must use expression to realize purport and abandon expression to realize reality; only then is it the ultimate of ultimates.
Compared with the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only, the fourfold Two Truths mainly judge the depth and shallowness of truth and convention, while the Fivefold Contemplation mainly clarifies the sequence of contemplative practice. The former prevents students from confusing convention and ultimate; the latter guides practitioners step by step through dismissing the false, abandoning the mixed, gathering the derivative, revealing the superior, and realizing nature. Compared with the Two Entrances and Four Practices, Bodhidharma’s teaching is simple, direct, and concise, valuing pacification of mind amid circumstances and non-attachment according to conditions. Kuiji’s teaching is precise and careful, valuing discernment of names and marks and the removal of mistaken attachments. Although their traditions differ, both take abandoning delusion and revealing truth, leaving attachment and realizing principle, as their shared destination.
Therefore one should know: without relying on convention, there is no way to establish cultivation. If one clings to convention, one cannot enter the ultimate. Without relying on verbal expression, there is no way to point to suchness. If one remains stuck in verbal expression, one remains forever separated from ineffable real nature. A good student should discern the nameless purport within names and marks, see ultimate principle within convention, leave the grasping of subject and object within cultivation, and complete real realization in the place beyond words. In this way, although the fourfold Two Truths, the Fivefold Contemplation of Consciousness-only, and the Two Entrances and Four Practices differ in expansion and contraction, all may be brought back to one meaning: relying on skillful means without abiding in skillful means, entering the ultimate without destroying convention, dismissing deluded marks and realizing real nature, and completing the Yogācāra middle way within all circumstances.
If original awakening is spoken of as mind,
Its meanings must be carefully distinguished.
Suchness is called real nature;
It is not the karma of arising-and-ceasing consciousness.
The storehouse consciousness holds all seeds
And is classified as unobscured and indeterminate, as resultant maturation.
If one clings to it as a permanent ruler,
It becomes attachment to self and dharmas.
The expression “original awakening and true mind” found in various treatises has different meanings. According to the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna, one mind opens into two gates: the gate of mind as suchness and the gate of mind as arising and ceasing. It also says, “Based on this Dharma-body, it is called original awakening.” Original awakening is established in contrast to initial awakening; when initial awakening is perfected, it is identical with original awakening. This is the doctrine of Tathāgatagarbha dependent arising and true mind as original awakening.
However, in the Dharma-character Yogācāra transmitted by Xuanzang and Kuiji, “original awakening and true mind” is not used as a central positive category. Instead, the system establishes the causal sequence of defilement and purity, cultivation and realization, through the eight consciousnesses, three natures, three non-natures, twofold emptiness, suchness, perfected nature, and transformation of basis. The Cheng Weishi Lun clearly says, “The ultimate of these dharmas is also suchness; because it is always such as it is, it is the real nature of consciousness-only.” This establishes the highest reality as suchness and the real nature of consciousness-only.
Therefore one should know: when speaking of “true mind,” one cannot speak indiscriminately. If it means suchness disclosed by twofold emptiness, the perfected nature, then Yogācāra permits it. If it means that ālaya-consciousness is the ultimate true mind, this is not the correct meaning. If one clings to a single permanent ruling mind that can generate all dharmas, one falls into attachment to self and dharmas.
The imagined nature has no substance;
The dependent arises provisionally.
The perfected is free from deluded grasping;
This is called Yogācāra truth.
Yogācāra establishes the three natures: the imagined nature, the dependent nature, and the perfected nature. The imagined nature means falsely clinging to real self and real dharmas upon dependent phenomena; its substance is ultimately non-existent. The dependent nature means consciousnesses and mental factors arising from conditions, existing like illusions. The perfected nature means the real nature of all dharmas revealed by twofold emptiness, in which the imagined self and dharmas are always absent upon the dependent nature.
If someone speaks of “true mind,” one should examine what is meant. If it refers to the perfected nature, namely the ultimate of dharmas, suchness, and the real nature of consciousness-only, it does not contradict Yogācāra. The Cheng Weishi Lun says of suchness: “True means real, showing that it is not false; such means always thus, indicating non-change.” Therefore suchness is the real nature of dharmas, not false discrimination.
If, however, one claims that apart from the three natures there is a permanent ruling mind that acts, receives, and gives rise to all dharmas, this is not the correct Yogācāra meaning. Why? The Cheng Weishi Lun opens by refuting real self and real dharmas. It states that the selves and dharmas spoken of in worldly and sacred teachings are all provisionally established and are not truly existent. The appearances of self and dharmas are provisionally designated based on transformations of consciousness.
Therefore, the “true mind” accepted by Yogācāra should be understood as the perfected nature. One must not establish, outside the dependent consciousnesses, a separate substantial true self.
The storehouse consciousness holds seeds;
It constantly turns like a waterfall.
Its nature is unobscured and indeterminate;
It is not pure, nor a cultivated defiled essence.
Question: If all dharmas are consciousness-only, and ālaya-consciousness is the basis of all dharmas, why is it not called the ultimate true mind?
Answer: Although ālaya-consciousness is the first transforming consciousness, holds seeds, and serves as the basis for defiled and pure dharmas, in the stage of ordinary beings it belongs to the dependent nature, not the perfected nature. It is called ālaya because it has the meanings of active storing, being stored, and being grasped as a store. It mutually conditions defiled seeds and is grasped by the seventh consciousness, manas, as the inner self. Therefore it is called storehouse consciousness.
This consciousness is also called resultant maturation consciousness, being the maturation result of wholesome and unwholesome karma, and it sustains one lifetime’s continuity. Yet the Cheng Weishi Lun clearly says that this consciousness is “only unobscured and indeterminate, because it is resultant maturation.” If this consciousness were wholesome or defiled, then saṃsāric continuity and liberation through practice could not be established. If it could not be perfumed, then defiled and pure causes and effects could not be established.
From this one knows that ālaya-consciousness is the basis of saṃsāric continuity and liberative transformation, but not the ultimate pure true mind. At the stage of arhatship and bodhisattva transformation of basis, the name ālaya is abandoned. This does not mean the substance of consciousness is annihilated, but that its defiled meaning of being grasped as a store is abandoned and transformed into pure wisdom-function.
Therefore one should not say, “Ālaya-consciousness is original awakening and true mind.” If one clings in this way, one confuses dependent consciousness-appearance with the perfected nature and has not understood Yogācāra well.
If original awakening is spoken of as nature,
Undefiled seeds are its cause.
Initial awakening is revealed through cultivation;
Ordinary beings are not already Buddha-bodies.
Some say: All beings possess original awakening; therefore ordinary beings presently possess Buddha-wisdom, and practice merely requires recognizing the original mind.
I say: If interpreted according to the Awakening of Faith, this may be spoken of in such a way: based on original awakening there is initial awakening, and perfected initial awakening is identical with original awakening. However, according to Yogācāra of Dharmapāla, Xuanzang, and Kuiji, further distinctions must be made.
Although Yogācāra recognizes that beings have the possibility of becoming Buddhas, it explains the causal sequence through “gotra,” “undefiled seeds,” “perfuming,” and “the five stages of practice.” The Cheng Weishi Lun states that Mahāyāna gotra has two types: first, the naturally abiding gotra, meaning the beginningless undefiled Dharma-causes naturally obtained in dependence upon the root consciousness; second, the gotra formed through cultivation, meaning what is formed by hearing teachings that flow from the Dharma-realm and by subsequent perfuming through hearing and contemplation. Only when both are complete can one gradually enter consciousness-only.
Furthermore, entry into consciousness-only is briefly divided into five stages: the stage of provisions, the stage of preparation, the stage of penetration, the stage of cultivation, and the stage of ultimate attainment. In the stage of provisions, one develops deep faith and understanding. In the stage of preparation, one gradually subdues the two graspings. In the stage of penetration, one truly penetrates reality. In the stage of cultivation, one repeatedly cultivates according to the principle seen and subdues and cuts off remaining obstacles. Only in the ultimate stage does one emerge from obstruction in complete clarity.
Therefore, if Yogācāra harmonizes the idea of “original awakening,” it should be understood as beings possessing undefiled Dharma-causes and the possibility of realizing suchness. It should not be understood as ordinary beings already fully possessing the wisdom and virtues of Buddhahood without needing to cut off obstacles through cultivation. If one does not cultivate the twofold emptiness contemplation or cut off the afflictive and cognitive obstacles, but merely says “originally awakened,” one risks falling into conceited overestimation.
Suchness is always such;
It is beyond words and beyond mind.
What realizes is called correct wisdom;
What is realized is not a causal producer.
Question: If suchness is the real nature of consciousness-only, why not say that suchness gives rise to all dharmas?
Answer: In Yogācāra, suchness is an unconditioned dharma and the principle realized. Conditioned dharmas arise through seeds within ālaya-consciousness and through various conditions. If suchness were said to act and generate like a ruler, it would be confused with the non-Buddhist divine self. Therefore one must distinguish clearly: suchness is the real nature of dharmas, not an agent of creation.
The perfected nature is revealed by twofold emptiness; it is not something separate existing outside dharmas. The Cheng Weishi Lun says that the perfected nature is established through the absence of the imagined self and dharmas. Just as great empty space pervades forms, yet is revealed through the absence of obstruction by those forms, this analogy clarifies that suchness does not create dharmas separately. Rather, it is the reality revealed upon dependent dharmas when deluded grasping is absent.
If one says “true mind gives rise to all dharmas,” the meaning must be examined. If it means that dharmas are transformed through consciousness-seeds and their manifestations, this is acceptable. If it means that a permanent true mind produces dharmas like a creator, this is unacceptable. Yogācāra says that consciousness is the basis for the provisional objects and is also ultimately existent in a relative sense, but this consciousness remains dependently arisen and must not be grasped as a permanent unitary substance.
Therefore suchness is called real nature, not creator. Correct wisdom realizes suchness, but does not take suchness as self.
True nature is obscured by dust;
Through consciousness it may be clarified.
Dismissing grasping, one returns to the perfected;
Wall contemplation subdues the two graspings.
Bodhidharma’s Two Entrances and Four Practices says: “Deeply trust that all beings share one true nature, but it is obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts and cannot be manifest. If one abandons delusion and returns to truth, abiding firmly in wall contemplation…” This statement is close to the language of Tathāgatagarbha, Buddha-nature, and intrinsically pure mind.
If interpreted through Dharma-character Yogācāra, “one true nature” may be harmonized with suchness revealed by twofold emptiness and the perfected nature. “Obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts” may be harmonized with the imagined nature, grasper and grasped, and the afflictive and cognitive obstacles obscuring suchness. “Abandoning delusion and returning to truth” means dismissing the imagined nature and realizing the perfected upon the dependent. “Abiding firmly in wall contemplation” may be understood as the skillful practice of śamatha-vipaśyanā that subdues the two graspings and gives rise to true seeing.
However, one should know that Bodhidharma’s language is concise and direct, while Yogācāra doctrine is precise and detailed. If one takes Bodhidharma’s “true nature” and clings to it as a substantial true mind, one violates the meaning of “without self or other, ordinary and sage equal, without discrimination,” and also contradicts Yogācāra’s refutation of attachment to self and dharmas.
Thus the two traditions may be harmonized but not confused. Harmonizing means understanding true nature as the perfected nature. Not confusing means not taking ālaya-consciousness or a falsely grasped true mind as ultimate Buddha-nature.
Clinging to mind as real self,
Mistaking consciousness for suchness,
Saying ordinary beings are already perfect Buddhas—
These three errors must all be removed.
Furthermore, regarding “original awakening and true mind,” there are three misunderstandings that should be refuted separately.
First, clinging to original awakening as a permanent unitary ruler. This is attachment to self. Yogācāra refutes real self by showing that the imagined self is neither identical with the aggregates, nor apart from the aggregates, nor both identical and different from them. All self-grasping relies on the appearances of the five appropriated aggregates transformed by inner consciousness and falsely grasps them as self. Therefore a permanent unitary ruling mind cannot be established.
Second, mistaking ālaya-consciousness for suchness. This is attachment to dharmas. Ālaya-consciousness is dependent, conditioned, resultant maturation, unobscured and indeterminate, and capable of holding seeds and receiving perfuming. Suchness is unconditioned, perfected, and the real nature of consciousness-only. The two belong to different categories and must not be confused.
Third, saying that ordinary beings’ original awakening is already the perfect fruit of Buddhahood. This is conceited overestimation. Yogācāra establishes gradual cultivation through the five stages. One must subdue and cut off the two graspings and two obstacles, penetrate suchness, cultivate transformation of basis, and only in the ultimate stage attain great awakening. If one has not cut off obstacles but claims ultimate awakening, this is not the correct Yogācāra meaning.
Therefore the three errors must be removed: self-attachment, Dharma-attachment, and the conceit of claiming realization without realization.
True mind is real nature;
Original awakening is explained as cause.
Consciousness-appearance is dependent;
Suchness becomes perfected.
Do not grasp mind as self;
Do not depart from consciousness in practice.
Through twofold emptiness one realizes transformation of basis;
This is the orthodox Yogācāra path.
From this one should know that Yogācāra neither completely rejects “original awakening and true mind” nor accepts it according to ordinary attachment.
If “true mind” means suchness revealed by twofold emptiness, the perfected nature, and the real nature of consciousness-only, then it may be established. If “original awakening” means that beings possess undefiled Dharma-causes and the possibility of realizing suchness and attaining Buddhahood through perfuming and cultivation, it may be skillfully harmonized. But if one says ālaya-consciousness is the ultimate true mind, or that there is a permanent ruling mind that gives rise to all dharmas, it must not be accepted.
Thus the correct Yogācāra meaning may be summarized in four lines:
Suchness is real nature, not real self.
Storehouse consciousness is dependent, not perfected.
If original awakening is taken as Buddha-cause, it may be provisionally spoken of.
If one grasps it as already perfected Buddha-substance, it should be refuted by twofold emptiness.
Therefore, students wishing to harmonize Chan true mind, Tathāgatagarbha original awakening, and Dharma-character Yogācāra should judge them through the three natures, purify them through twofold emptiness, and complete them through transformation of basis. If one can dismiss imagined attachment within dependent consciousness-appearances and realize the perfected nature through contemplation of twofold emptiness, then what is called “original awakening and true mind” will not fall into divine self, nor into nihilistic emptiness, but will accord with the Yogācāra middle way.
Though the name original awakening is excellent,
Its meaning must be carefully distinguished.
If understood according to suchness-principle,
It becomes the perfected nature.
If understood according to undefiled seeds,
It is the natural cause of bodhi.
If one clings to a permanent mind-substance,
It becomes attachment to self and dharmas.
The term “original awakening” is interpreted differently by different traditions. According to the Awakening of Faith in the Mahāyāna, one mind opens into two gates: the gate of mind as suchness and the gate of mind as arising and ceasing. It also says, “Based on this Dharma-body, it is called original awakening.” Original awakening is established in contrast to initial awakening, and perfected initial awakening is identical with original awakening. This is the meaning of original awakening as taught within the gate of Tathāgatagarbha dependent arising.
However, Ci’en Kuiji inherited the Dharma-character Yogācāra of Xuanzang and Dharmapāla. He did not take “original awakening” as the doctrinal center, but instead established the causal sequence of defilement and purity, cultivation and realization, through the eight consciousnesses, three natures, three non-natures, twofold emptiness, suchness, perfected nature, and transformation of basis. In his Commentary on the Cheng Weishi Lun, Kuiji follows the Cheng Weishi Lun in clarifying the middle way of the third-period teaching of consciousness-only, refuting attachment to truly existent external objects and also refuting the nihilistic denial of inner consciousness.
Therefore, if one wishes to harmonize “original awakening” with Ci’en’s meaning, one must first distinguish its meanings. If original awakening is spoken of as the principle realized, it is included within suchness and the perfected nature. If it is spoken of as the cause of Buddhahood, it is included within the naturally abiding gotra and undefiled Dharma-causes. If it is grasped as a permanent ruling true mind, it is the imagined nature and should be refuted through the contemplation of twofold emptiness. The Cheng Weishi Lun clearly says, “The ultimate of these dharmas is also suchness; because it is always such as it is, it is the real nature of consciousness-only.” Thus the ultimate reality established by the Ci’en school is properly called suchness and the real nature of consciousness-only, not a separate substantial true mind.
Suchness is always such;
Free from delusion, the perfected is revealed.
If one speaks of the essence of original awakening,
One should know it is what is realized.
Question: If original awakening is the awakening-nature inherently possessed by beings, does the Ci’en school allow it?
Answer: Two meanings should be distinguished. If original awakening means suchness revealed by twofold emptiness, the real nature of dharmas, it may be provisionally allowed. Why? Yogācāra establishes three natures: the imagined nature, whose essence and marks are ultimately non-existent; the dependent nature, which arises through conditions and exists like an illusion; and the perfected nature, which is the suchness revealed by twofold emptiness upon the dependent nature when the imagined self and dharmas are absent.
This suchness is not a false dharma, nor is it an arising-and-ceasing consciousness. The treatise says, “True means real, showing it is not false; such means always thus, indicating non-change.” Therefore suchness is always such in all stages and is called the real nature of consciousness-only.
Yet suchness is the principle realized; it is not a ruling mind that acts and receives. If “original awakening” means realized suchness, then it should be included within the perfected nature. If “original awakening” means a substantial mind capable of giving rise to all dharmas, then it does not accord with Ci’en Yogācāra.
Thus one should know:
When original awakening is spoken of according to principle, it is suchness and the perfected nature;
It is not a single permanent ruling real mind.
Beginningless undefiled seeds
Naturally abide in dependence upon consciousness.
Only through hearing and perfuming do they grow;
Gradually one realizes the gate of truth.
Question: If all beings possess original awakening, does this mean ordinary beings already possess the full wisdom and virtues of Buddhahood?
Answer: No. Although Ci’en Yogācāra teaches that beings have the possibility of Buddhahood, it does not say that ordinary beings presently possess the full virtues of Buddha-fruit. What it allows is the beginningless undefiled Dharma-cause dependent upon the root consciousness, called the naturally abiding gotra. Furthermore, through hearing teachings that flow from the Dharma-realm and through the perfuming of hearing, reflection, and cultivation, there arises the gotra formed through cultivation. Only by possessing both gotras can one gradually enter consciousness-only.
Therefore, if “original awakening” means the basis for attaining Buddhahood, it may be harmonized with the naturally abiding gotra and undefiled Dharma-causes. This is only the cause of Buddha-fruit; it is not the Buddha-fruit already manifest. If one clings to “original awakening” while abandoning hearing-perfuming, preparation, cutting off obstacles, and transformation of basis, one contradicts the Yogācāra doctrine of the five stages of practice.
Furthermore, the Cheng Weishi Lun establishes five stages for entering consciousness-only: the stage of provisions, the stage of preparation, the stage of penetration, the stage of cultivation, and the stage of ultimate attainment. In the stage of provisions, one develops deep faith and understanding. In the stage of preparation, one subdues the two graspings. In the stage of penetration, one truly penetrates reality. In the stage of cultivation, one repeatedly cultivates according to the principle seen and subdues and cuts off remaining obstacles. Only in the ultimate stage does one emerge from obstruction in complete clarity.
Thus, in Ci’en’s meaning, if original awakening is spoken of as cause, it should be understood as follows:
There is originally a cause by which Buddhahood can be attained;
It is not that one is originally already the Buddha-fruit.
The storehouse consciousness holds all seeds;
Defilement and purity rely upon it mutually.
Its nature is unobscured and indeterminate;
It is not the luminous essence of awakening.
Some say: The eighth ālaya-consciousness holds all seeds and is the root of all dharmas. It should therefore be original awakening and true mind.
Refutation: Not so. Although ālaya-consciousness is the first transforming consciousness, possesses the meanings of active storing, being stored, and being grasped as store, holds seeds, and serves as the basis of defiled and pure dharmas, in the stage of ordinary beings it is a conditioned dharma of the dependent nature. It is not the unconditioned suchness of the perfected nature.
The Cheng Weishi Lun clearly states that ālaya-consciousness is “only unobscured and indeterminate, because it is resultant maturation.” Kuiji’s commentary explains that if this consciousness were wholesome or defiled, saṃsāric continuity and liberation through practice could not be established. Moreover, because this consciousness serves as the basis for wholesome and defiled dharmas and can receive perfuming, it must be unobscured and indeterminate.
If ālaya-consciousness were original awakening and true mind, it should be constantly pure and constantly awakened. It should not receive perfuming, should not serve as the basis of defiled seeds, and should not be grasped by the seventh manas as the inner self. Since it has the meanings of active storing, being stored, and being grasped as store, and since it is resultant maturation consciousness, unobscured and indeterminate, it cannot be called ultimate original awakening.
Thus one should know:
Ālaya-consciousness is the basis of defilement and purity, not the ultimate awakened essence.
It is dependent consciousness-appearance, not perfected nature.
Initial awakening returns to original awakening—
The Awakening of Faith speaks in this way.
Ci’en clarifies transformation of basis;
When the two obstacles are exhausted, perfection is complete.
Question: The Awakening of Faith says that initial awakening is identical with original awakening. Why does the Ci’en school not establish its doctrine on this basis?
Answer: This is a difference in doctrinal formulation. The Awakening of Faith explains delusion and awakening through the two gates of one mind. Based on original awakening it speaks of initial awakening, and perfected initial awakening is identical with original awakening.
The Ci’en Dharma-character school, however, relies on the Cheng Weishi Lun to clarify twofold emptiness, the two obstacles, and the two fruits. At the beginning of the treatise, it says that the treatise was composed to give rise to correct understanding in those confused about the twofold emptiness. By realizing twofold emptiness, one cuts off the afflictive obstacle and the cognitive obstacle. By cutting off the afflictive obstacle one realizes true liberation; by cutting off the cognitive obstacle one attains great bodhi.
Therefore Ci’en cultivation does not primarily speak of “returning to original awakening,” but takes transformation of basis as essential. Through the wisdom of twofold emptiness, one turns away from the defiled basis and obtains the pure basis. By this, the eight consciousnesses are transformed into the four wisdoms, and the two supreme fruits of bodhi and nirvāṇa are accomplished. The doctrine of the Dharma-character school likewise takes transforming consciousness into wisdom as the ultimate aim of practice.
Thus one should know:
The Awakening of Faith speaks of initial awakening coinciding with original awakening.
The Ci’en school speaks of cutting off the two obstacles through twofold emptiness and accomplishing wisdom through transformation of basis.
The two may be skillfully harmonized, but their doctrinal formulations must not be confused.
One is principle, two is cause, three is deluded grasping;
These three gates must be distinguished and not confused.
Principle returns to the perfected; cause returns to seeds.
Deluded grasping is to be sought within the imagined.
Furthermore, if original awakening is judged according to Ci’en’s meaning, it may be summarized in three types.
This refers to suchness revealed by twofold emptiness, always such as it is, namely the real nature of consciousness-only. This may be included within the perfected nature. If original awakening means the principle free from delusion, the truth realized, there is no fault.
This refers to beginningless undefiled Dharma-causes dependent upon the root consciousness, namely the naturally abiding gotra. This is the cause by which bodhi can be realized, not the already accomplished fruit of bodhi. It must await hearing-perfuming and cultivation, giving rise to the gotra formed through practice, before one can gradually enter consciousness-only.
This refers to ordinary beings falsely grasping, under the name “original awakening,” a permanent unitary ruling true mind that can generate all dharmas, act, and receive. This is the imagined nature and should be refuted through the contemplations of selflessness of persons and selflessness of dharmas. The Cheng Weishi Lun opens by refuting real self and real dharmas, stating that self and dharmas are only provisionally established based on transformations of consciousness and are not truly existent.
Thus the three meanings must not be confused. If deluded original awakening is mistaken for principle original awakening, one falls into eternalism. If cause original awakening is mistaken for perfect fruit awakening, one falls into conceited overestimation. If one denies the real nature of suchness altogether, one falls into misapprehended emptiness.
True nature is obscured by dust;
Yogācāra can also explain it.
When imagined grasping is fully dismissed,
The perfected nature is complete.
Bodhidharma’s Two Entrances and Four Practices says: “Deeply trust that all beings share one true nature, but it is obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts and cannot be manifest.” This statement is close to teachings of Tathāgatagarbha, Buddha-nature, and intrinsically pure mind.
If interpreted through Ci’en Yogācāra, “one true nature” may be harmonized with suchness revealed by twofold emptiness and the perfected nature. “Obscured by adventitious dust and deluded thoughts” may be harmonized with the imagined nature, grasper and grasped, and the afflictive and cognitive obstacles obscuring suchness. “Abandoning delusion and returning to truth” means dismissing the imagined nature and realizing the perfected nature upon the dependent.
However, Bodhidharma’s language is concise and direct, while Ci’en’s doctrine is precise and detailed. If one uses Bodhidharma’s phrase “true nature” to grasp a substantial true mind, one violates the meaning of “without self or other, ordinary and sage equal,” and also contradicts Yogācāra’s refutation of self-attachment and Dharma-attachment.
Thus the way of harmonization should be stated as follows:
Bodhidharma’s true nature, according to Ci’en meaning, may be harmonized with the perfected nature;
But it must not be grasped as a permanent real self.
If original awakening returns to principle,
It is suchness.
If original awakening returns to cause,
It is named undefiled seed.
If original awakening becomes grasping,
Twofold emptiness should break that attachment.
Ci’en’s middle-way meaning
Is completed through transformation of basis.
Therefore one should know that Kuiji neither wholly rejects original awakening nor directly accepts it as ordinary attachment understands it. If original awakening refers to suchness-principle, it is included within the perfected nature. If it refers to the possibility of Buddhahood, it is included within the naturally abiding gotra and undefiled Dharma-causes. If it is grasped as a permanent unitary ruling substantial mind, it is included within the imagined nature and should be refuted through contemplation of twofold emptiness.
The reason the Ci’en school does not establish its doctrine around “original awakening” is to prevent students from giving rise again to Dharma-attachment toward ultimate terms such as “mind,” “awakening,” and “suchness.” Therefore it uses the three natures to clarify truth and delusion, twofold emptiness to refute self and dharmas, the five stages to show cultivation and realization, and transformation of basis to accomplish Buddhahood. This is the correct meaning of the Yogācāra middle way.
Thus it is said:
Do not destroy the skillful name of original awakening;
But block the substantialist grasping of original awakening.
Do not deny the ultimate nature of suchness;
But clarify that suchness is not a ruling self.
Do not deny the cause of Buddhahood in beings;
But one must perfume, cultivate, cut off obstacles, and transform the basis.
This is Ci’en Kuiji’s judgment on original awakening.