Issue 276

Editor’s Note: The following is an excerpt from the ‘Driving Force of Subjective Wisdom’ seminar on August, 1988.

Venerable Ananda told the Buddha that he had another opinion. He thought, “Previously, it was wrong to say that the mind is inside, outside, or within the organ of vision. Perhaps the mind and eyes are both inside and outside.” Hence, he said that when the eyes are closed, the visceral organs appear in the darkness, so it is called ‘seeing inside’. That’s enough to prove that seeing and the mind dwells inside. Furthermore, the body has orifices that open to the outside. When one opens one’s eyes, one sees the brightness outside, so the eyes are outside and they’re active. This is called ‘seeing outside’. Therefore, the mind dwells both inside and outside.

Previously, it was already said that ‘it’s not inside and it’s not outside’. Now, he has said that ‘it’s inside and it’s outside’. Ananda was using his mind consciousness to reckon the function of the ‘mind king’. The theories that he set up earlier were decisive, saying, “That’s it”. But those theories were criticized by the Buddha and could not be applied. Failing to uphold his theories, Ananda now employed ambiguity in his response, saying ‘it’s inside and it’s outside’. Finally, he dared not to be decisive in his conclusion. Instead, he said, “How does that principle sound?”, meaning to say “What do you think?” He was beseeching the Buddha. If the Buddha confirms that this is the case, then it would prove him right. However, the Buddha made another comment in the following text.
The Venerable Ananda expended effort seeking outside. He did not truly arrive at the jeweled place and did not genuinely unlock great wisdom. It was because he was fond of erudition and he had neglected samadhi. When samadhi is neglected, precept power is not firm. When precept power is not firm, samadhi power is inadequate. As a result, he could not unlock genuine wisdom and his back-and-forth arguments failed to grasp the ultimate point. Therefore, after we analyze this Shurangama Sutra, we will know what was Ananda’s fault and we will realize we have committed similar faults. All dharmas exist for the sake of curing all ailments. If our ailments are cured, then we can truly understand the Buddhadharma.

End of the ‘Driving Force of Subjective Wisdom’ Seminar

The Buddha said to Ananda, “When you close your eyes and see darkness, does the darkness you experience lie before your eyes? If it does lie before your eyes, then the darkness is in front of your eyes. How can that be said to be ‘within’? If it were within, then when you are in a dark room without the light of the sun, the moon, or lamps, the darkness in the room would constitute your ‘warmers’ and viscera. If it were not before you, how can it be seen?”

Instead of answering Ananda whether his latest theory is right or wrong, the Buddha posed another question. The Buddha told Ananda, “You said that when you close your eyes, you see darkness. At that moment, does the darkness you experience lie before your eyes or not? Speak up! Tell me!”

If it does lie before your eyes, then the darkness is in front of your eyes. How can that be said to be ‘within’? How can you say that to see darkness is ‘seeing inside’?”Explain this to me!

If it were within, the Buddha continues, “If you reason that the darkness before you is actually your insides, then when you are in a dark room without the light of the sun, the moon, or lamps, the darkness in the room would constitute your ‘warmers’ and viscera. That darkness would become your ‘three warmers’ and your visceral organs. Why? Because you cannot see! The whole dark room would turn into receptacles of feces and urine.

There are “three warmers” — the upper, the middle and the lower warmers. The upper warmer is located above the stomach. The middle warmer is located between the stomach and the navel. The lower warmer is located below the navel. These ‘three warmers’ are very important in the human body. If these warmers become ill, it would not be easy to cure.

If it is not before you, how can it be seen? If the darkness is not in front of your eyes, how can you see it? You can only see what is before your eyes. How can you see things that are behind your eyes? Now, what? How is Ananda going to reason with the Buddha?

If you assert that there is an inward seeing that is distinct from seeing outside. In that case, when you close your eyes and see darkness, you would be seeing inside the body. Therefore, when you open your eyes and see light, why can’t you see your own face? If you cannot see your face, then there can be no seeing within. If you can see your face, then your mind that knows and understands and your organ of vision as well must be suspended in space. How could they be part of your body?

Again, the Buddha questioned Ananda. If you assert that there is an inward seeing that is distinct from seeing outside. Suppose that there are two kinds of seeing and that you are able to face inward and see. In that case, when you close your eyes and see darkness, you would be seeing inside the body. Therefore, when you open your eyes and see light, why can’t you see your own face?

Like the analogy that I told you just now, someone may say, “I see my eyes.” But you’ll have to look at the mirror. If you want to see your face and features, you need to look at the mirror. Most likely, there were no mirrors during that time so Ananda didn’t say “I can see my face in a mirror!” Now the Buddha asked him: “You said that to see darkness is to see inside your body. When you open your eyes and see outside, why can’t you take a look and see how your face looks?”

If you cannot see your face, then there can be no seeing within. But if you can’t see your own face with your eyes open, how can you see your insides with your eyes closed. Your theory of seeing inside cannot be validated!

If you can see your face, then your mind that knows and understands and your organ of vision as well must be suspended in space. How could they be part of your body? If you say you actually can see your own face, then your discriminating mind and your eyes wouldn’t be on your face, they’d be out in space. If so, how can you say that your mind and your seeing are inside?