IV. CAUSALITY OF BIJAS AND ACTUAL DHARMAS
The Bijas of the root consciousness (Mulavijnana),
in the generation of actual 'forms of distinction' (Vikalpas),1
i.e., all the impure Cittas-Caittas consist of three Pratyayas, to the
exclusion of Samanantarapratyaya (antecedent).
1. In reality, every parent-Bija is the
Hetupratyaya (cause) of that which proceeds from it. [All dharmas,
nimittabhaga, darsanabhaga, etc., proceed from Heptupratyaya which is
2. The Bijas are the Alambanapratyaya
(object) of the Citta-Caittas which perceive them as their object. [They
are always the object of the darsanabhaga of the eighth consciousness,
sometimes of the darsanabhaga of the sixth; never of the nimittabhaga
nor of the svasamvittibhaga of the eighth.]
3. They are the Adhipatipratyaya
(contributory factor) of those dharmas in respect of which they are
effective, contributory influences or which they do not impede. [The
organ-bijas (indriyabijas) are effective helping factors in respect of
the development of the consciousness-bijas (vijnanabijas); the
'attention-bijas' (manasikarabijas) are effective helping influences in
respect of consciousnesses; the Bija of a certain consciousness does not
represent an obstacle to a different consciousness, etc.]
Such is the causality of Bijas in relation to
defiled actual Vikalpas (forms of distinction). Their causality in the
generation of pure actual Vikalpas is similar.
The actual Vikalpas can, in relation to one
another, be three kinds of Pratyaya, because they are never Hetupratyaya.
(1) With reference to various different
sentient beings, their Vikalpas may, between themselves, be Alambana and
Adhipatipratyaya, but not Samanantarapratyaya.
(2) With reference to a single person, the
eight groups of consciousness are, between themselves, neither
Hetupratyaya nor Samanantarapratyaya. They are Adhipatipratyaya to one
another; they are or are not Alambanapratyaya.
The eighth is the Alambana of the seven others.
The seven are not the Alambana of the eighth,
because they are not the archetype on which the eighth is based.
The seventh is not the Alambana of the Five; it is
the Alambana of the sixth. The first six are not the Alambana of the
The sixth is not the Alambana of the Five; because
the Five are based solely on the nimitta of the eighth. [They do not
take as their object the Rupa developed from the sixth.] The Five are
the Alambana of the sixth.
(3) With reference to the successive moments of
the same species, i.e., the successive moments of the same kind of
consciousness, the earlier sixth consciousness, in relation to the later
sixth, is Samanantara, Alambana, and Adhipatipratyaya; but the seven
other earlier consciousnesses are not Alambana of the later seven,
because the seven take only one present object, [Nevertheless Dinaga, in
Alambanapariksa: 'or else the nimitta of the preceding consciousness is
the Pratyaya of the subsequent consciousness…’.] There are therefore
masters for whom the later darsanabhaga of the Five perceive the earlier
nimittabhaga. For these masters, the earlier moments of the Five and the
seventh are therefore three kinds of Pratyaya of the later moments, as
is the case with the sixth. Further, according to the same Dignagian
principle, the earlier moments of the Seven are Alambana of the eighth,
because the Seven create (by perfuming) the Bijas of nimittabhaga and
darsanabhaga of the eighth.
(4) In regard to dharmas of the same group but
of different nature, for example, the eye-consciousness and its related
mental activities (Caittas), there are two opinions:
a. They are, between themselves, exclusively
Adhipatipratyaya, [There is no question of their being Hetupratyaya or
Samanantarapratyaya; but are they not Alambanapratyaya? No,] because the
associated dharmas do not take each other as their object and, if it is
said that they have the same Alambana, it is because the same archetype
serves as the supporting basis for their nimittabhaga.
b. [According to Dignaga, who is mistaken,] it is
darsanabhaga regarding which it is stated
and its Caittas do not take each other as their object [among the non-Buddhas]'.
But Citta and Caittas do take, mutually, their mmittabhagas as their
objects. The nimittabhagas of Citta and Caittas are born by taking each
other as archetypes, just as the Bijas of the eighth consciousness are
the archetype of the nimittabhaga of its five mental associates, mental
contact, etc. In fact, if the dharma-Bijas of Mulavijnana were not the
archetype for the mmittabhagas of the five mental associates, the five
would find themselves without an object in the course of an Arupya
Even if it is admitted, with the second masters,
that the eighth consciousness of the Arupyadhatu develops into the Rupa
of an inferior Dhatu, it is still necessary for the Caittas of this
consciousness to have a bearing on the Bijas, because, as noted by the
first masters, if it were otherwise the immediate object of the
darsanabhagas of Citta and the Caittas would not depend on the same
(5) In regard to an individual consciousness
a. The nimittabhaga is Alambanapratyaya and
Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga.
b. The darsanabhaga is exclusively
Adhipatipratyaya of the nimittabhaga.
c. The same is true of the relations between
the darsanabhaga and the svasamvittibhaga: the darsanbhaga is
Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya of the svasamvittibhaga, while the
svasamvittibhaga is exclusively the Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga.
[The darsanabhaga is only the Adhipratipratyaya of the
svasamvitti-samvittibhaga; it is also its distant Alambanapratyaya.]
d. The last two Bhagas (the svasamvittibhaga and
the svasamvittisamvittibhaga) are, between themselves, Alambanapratyaya
When we say that the nimittabhaga is only
Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga, we do not
forget that Bijas may form part of the nimittabhaga and that they are
Hetupratyaya. But we are here concerned solely with the causal relations
of the actual dharmas.
(6) The pure eight consciousnesses are
Alambanapratyaya of one another, because they are all-perceiving. The
same is true of the Bhagas of each of them. We must, however, exclude
the darsanabhaga, which is not the Alambanapratyaya of the nimittabhaga,
the latter being deprived of the function of taking an object.
Since the actual Vikalpas are born by reason of
the Bijas and the actual Vikalpas, the Bijas should also be born by
reason of the actual Vikalpas and the Bijas. What are the causal
relations between the actual Vikalpas and the Bijas on the one hand and
among the Bijas on the other?
Bijas are not born by reason of the two
intermediate Pratyayas, Samanantarapratyaya (antecedent) and
Alambanapratyaya (object), because these two Pratyayas are established
in dependence upon Cittas and Caittas, which are actual dharmas.
Among non-Buddhas, the actual Vikalpa, in relation
to the parent-Bija (or immediate Bija) [that is to say, in relation to
the Bija which it creates and perfumes], discharges the function of
Hetupratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya; and in relation to the non-immediate
Bija, the function of Adhipatipratyaya only.
The Bija which is the anterior moment, in relation
to the immediate Bija (i.e., the Bija which it engenders) discharges
the function of Hetupratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya; and in relation to
the non-imiriediate Bija, the function of Adhipatipratyaya only.
It is therefore established by both Scripture and
Pure Reason that the causal succession of Cittas-Caittas is the result
of the functioning of the reciprocal causality of internal dharmas,
i.e., consciousnesses, either actual or in a Bija-state. If we suppose
that the so-called external Pratyayas of the Lesser Vehicle really
exist, then they will serve no purpose. Besides, they are at variance
with Pure Reason and the texts. Why, then, do you affirm their existence
in such an opinionated manner?
The term Vikalpa (form of distinction), broadly
speaking, designates the Cittas-Caittas of the three Dhatus (that is to
say, all the impure mental activities). Yet, on account of the
importance of certain Vikalpas, the sacred teaching has established
various lists: 2, 3, 4, 5 Vikalpas and more. These lists are explained
in other treatises.
1 See definition at the end of this Section.