The mind and the seer

What this passage does

Having shown that objects are real, the text shows that the knower is too, and distinct from the mind. The mind's movements are always known, so their knower does not change (4.18). The mind cannot know itself (4.19–4.21). Awareness knows the mind when the mind takes its form (4.22–4.23), and the mind exists for that other (4.24). Vyāsa argues against Buddhist positions; Buddhist thinkers answered with arguments of their own.

Learning goals

• Lay out the case that the mind cannot be its own knower (4.18–4.21).
• Explain the two readings of how awareness comes to know the mind (4.22).
• Explain why the mind 'exists for another' (4.24) and how this completes the argument begun at 4.14.

The argument, step by step

1. The mind's movements are always known to their master, the self, because the self does not change.
2. The mind is not self-illuminating, because it is something seen.
3. Nor can it grasp both itself and its object at the same moment.
4. If each act of mind were seen by another, there would be an endless regress and confused memory.
5. Awareness does not pass into anything, yet when it takes on that form, it knows its own mind.
6. Coloured by both seer and seen, the mind can take in everything.
7. Though patterned by countless tendencies, the mind exists for another, because it works by combination.

The sūtras

1. 4.18 sadā jñātāś cittavṛttayas tatprabhoḥ puruṣasyāpariṇāmitvāt
   The movements of the mind are always known to their master, the self, because the self does not change.
2. 4.19 na tat svābhāsaṃ dṛśyatvāt
   The mind is not self-illuminating, because it is something seen.
3. 4.20 ekasamaye cobhayānavadhāraṇam
   Nor can it grasp both itself and its object at the same moment.
4. 4.21 cittāntaradṛśye buddhibuddher atiprasaṅgaḥ smṛtisaṃkaraś ca
   If the mind were seen by another act of mind, there would be an endless regress of cognitions of cognitions, and memory would be confused.
5. 4.22 citer apratisaṃkramāyās tadākārāpattau svabuddhisaṃvedanam
   Awareness does not pass into anything; yet when it takes on that form, it knows its own mind.
6. 4.23 draṣṭṛdṛśyoparaktaṃ cittaṃ sarvārtham
   Coloured by both seer and seen, the mind can take in everything.
7. 4.24 tad asaṃkhyeyavāsanābhiś citram api parārthaṃ saṃhatyakāritvāt
   Though patterned by countless latent tendencies, the mind exists for another, because it works by combination.

Study

Having shown that objects are real, the text shows that the knower is real too, and is not the mind.

The first stage (4.18–4.21) shows that the mind cannot know itself. It opens with an observation: 'The movements of the mind are always known to their master, the self, because the self does not change' (4.18). Vyāsa reasons that if the knower changed as the mind does, the mind's movements would be sometimes known and sometimes not, like sounds (Woods p. 328). They are always known, so the knower is changeless. Three arguments then rule out a self-knowing mind. It is not self-illuminating, because it is something seen (4.19). Vyāsa sets aside fire as a counter-example, since fire does not light up its own form as if that form had been dark, and he points to how we speak: 'I am angry, I am afraid' (pp. 328–329). Nor can the mind grasp both itself and its object in one moment (4.20); Vyāsa aims this at the momentarists, for whom a thing's very being is its action (p. 330). Nor can each act of mind be known by another, for then each knower needs another without end, and memory would be confused (4.21). Vyāsa presses this against those he calls vaināśikas, 'destructionists', usually taken to be Buddhists (p. 331).

The second stage (4.22–4.24) explains how the seer knows the mind. 'Awareness does not pass into anything; yet when it takes on that form, it knows its own mind' (4.22). Readings differ on 'that form'. The passage Vyāsa quotes, usually assigned to Pañcaśikha, has awareness seem to take on the form of the mind's movements; Vācaspati has the mind take on the form of awareness. Vyāsa then quotes a verse: the eternal is hidden not in an underworld or ocean depth, but in the working of the mind when it is not told apart from the self (p. 333). 4.23 says the mind, coloured by both seer and seen, can take in everything, like a crystal (p. 334). Vyāsa adds that this likeness misleads some into calling the mind conscious and others into saying all is mind, and that they deserve compassion. Vācaspati names both as Buddhist schools and takes the compassion as a reason to teach them.

The consequence is 4.24: however richly patterned, 'the mind exists for another, because it works by combination'. Like a house, Vyāsa says, it is built of parts, and what is built of parts serves someone else's experience and freedom (p. 336). This restates 2.21 and 3.35, and completes the case begun at 4.14.

As in the passage before, this is one side of a real debate. Buddhist thinkers answered these arguments with arguments of their own, and a teacher should say so.

For practice, the argument points to something any meditator can check. Every state, however strong, is known. Noticing that it is known, without trying to watch oneself watching, is a direct form of the discernment the whole text asks for.

For discussion

1. Why does Vyāsa think that the mind's movements being always known (4.18) shows the knower does not change?
2. Which of the three arguments in 4.19–4.21 do you find strongest, and why?
3. Explain the two readings of 'that form' in 4.22. Does the difference matter for practice?
4. What does the image of the house (4.24) say about what the mind is for?

A common misreading

That 4.22 teaches the sacred is found in mental activity. The verse Vyāsa quotes says the mind's working, when it is not told apart from the self, is the hiding place, the very thing that conceals the eternal.

A practice for the room

Sit with eyes lowered for six minutes. Every minute or so, the teacher asks quietly, 'Is this being known?' Whatever is present, a thought, a sound, a blank, an ache, the answer is yes, and nobody answers aloud. Between questions, rest. Do not try to watch yourself watching; if the mind starts chasing itself, come back to the plain fact of knowing (4.21). End with one ordinary breath and open eyes.