眾生濁

I. What This Concept Expresses

1. The Position of the Defilement of Sentient Beings among the Five Defilements

In the framework of the 五濁 (pañca-kaṣāya, "five defilements") articulated in the *Miaofa lianhua jing wenju* (《妙法蓮華經文句》, Words and Phrases of the Lotus Sutra), the five defilements are not five parallel items, but rather a causal chain that arises sequentially:

煩惱濁與見濁為根本 → 從此二濁成於眾生濁 → 從眾生有連持之命濁 → 四經於時即成劫濁 *The defilement of afflictions and the defilement of views serve as the root → From these two defilements is formed the defilement of sentient beings → From sentient beings arises the sustained defilement of lifespan → When these four extend through time, they constitute the defilement of the age.*

That is to say, first there are the roots of greedy, angry, and ignorant 煩惱濁 (kleśa-kaṣāya, "defilement of afflictions") and erroneous 見濁 (dṛṣṭi-kaṣāya, "defilement of views"); only then is a sentient being reified as real "formed." Once this sentient being is established, it is inevitably accompanied by a continuity called "lifespan" (命濁, āyur-kaṣāya, "defilement of lifespan"). When all of this unfolds across time, it constitutes the defilement of the entire era (劫濁, kalpa-kaṣāya, "defilement of the age"). The 眾生濁 (sattva-kaṣāya, "defilement of sentient beings") occupies the central place in this chain; it is the crucial link transitioning from "inner mental defilement" to "an existing living entity undergoing suffering."

Master Zhiyi (智者大師) further paired the 四悉檀 (catvāri siddhāntāni, "four modes of teaching") with the five defilements, assigning each defilement a pedagogical place:

- Kalpa-kaṣāya and āyur-kaṣāya — 世界悉檀 (loka-siddhānta, "mundane mode of teaching") (explaining that the world is like this) - Sattva-kaṣāya and dṛṣṭi-kaṣāya — 為人悉檀 (pratipudgala-siddhānta, "individualized mode of teaching") (spoken in accordance with the spiritual capacities of individuals) - Kleśa-kaṣāya — 對治悉檀 (pratipakṣa-siddhānta, "counteractive mode of teaching") (directly counteracting afflictions)

The first three modes of teaching are expedient means to "eliminate the five defilements," whereas true purity is attained only through the 第一義悉檀 (paramārtha-siddhānta, "supreme-meaning mode of teaching") (the ultimate truth of Mahāyāna). This means that merely recognizing the existence of sattva-kaṣāya is insufficient; one must arrive at the supreme meaning—that is, seeing that "sentient beings" are inherently mere provisional names—to truly transcend defilement.

2. The Core Definition: "Grasping Form and Mind to Establish a Single Sovereign Controller"

This single phrase serves as the backbone of the entire concept; not a single word can be overlooked:

- Grasping (攬) — Gathering things together, like assembling scattered parts into a machine. - Form and mind (色心) — "Form" refers to 色陰 (rūpa-skandha, "aggregate of form") (all form composed of the 四大 [mahābhūta, "four great elements"], including physical body, external realm, sound objects, form objects, etc.), while "mind" refers to the four aggregates of 受 (vedanā, "sensation"), 想 (saṃjñā, "perception"), 行 (saṃskāra, "mental formations"), and 識 (vijñāna, "consciousness"). This is the binary classification of the 五陰 (pañca-skandha, "five aggregates"). - Establishing (立) — Artificially setting up or concocting. - A single sovereign controller (一主宰) — A "self" capable of being the master and exerting control.

Therefore, the meaning of this phrase is: Ordinary ignorant beings temporarily gather together the body, external environments, sensations, thoughts, volitions, and consciousness, concocting a "sovereign self" out of them. This is not a description of reality, but an erroneous addition—the five aggregates themselves do not claim "I am me"; it is the ordinary sentient being who overlays the label of "sovereign controller" upon them.

3. That Piece of Birdlime: The Central Metaphor of Sattva-kaṣāya

The *Miaofa lianhua jing wenju* offers an extraordinarily vivid metaphor for this concocted "self":

「攬色心立一主宰，譬如黐膠無物不著，流宕六道處處受生。」 *“Grasping form and mind to establish a single sovereign controller is like sticky glue that adheres to everything it touches, drifting through the six realms and taking birth everywhere.”*

黐膠 (birdlime / sticky glue), made from tree resin or bird excrement, was used by ancients who applied it to tree branches to catch birds—once a bird landed on it, it could never fly away. This metaphor must be preserved in its entirety without compression:

- "Adheres to everything it touches" — Once stuck, it cannot fall off; once the "self" is established, there is nothing it cannot adhere to. Body, name, property, relationships, stance, past, opinions, identity numbers, social media accounts... all can be smeared with this layer of glue. - "Drifting through the six realms" — This "self" is not static; it drifts everywhere throughout the 六道 (ṣaḍ-gati, "six realms of rebirth"); being human in this life, falling into hell in the next, arising from hell to be born in heaven, cycling endlessly. - "Taking birth everywhere" — The emphasis lies on "everywhere," not a single fixed location. The characteristic of sattva-kaṣāya is "changing places to stick," shifting from one scene to stick to another.

This piece of glue possesses two features that are often overlooked: First, it does not inherently exist—the five aggregates are merely a temporary harmonious combination, and no single component of the five aggregates is itself the "self"; second, its stickiness is self-imagined—ordinary beings think they choose to stick to things, but in reality, they adhere unconsciously due to ignorance.

4. The Threefold Meaning of the Name "Sentient Being"

Master Zhiyi deliberately enumerated the three meanings of the name "sentient being" (眾生) in the *Wenju*, because every aspect of this name corresponds to a level of sattva-kaṣāya:

The First Meaning: Called "sentient beings" because many are born together in the world. Citing the *Madhyama-āgama* (《中阿含經》), it describes how at the beginning of a kalpa, beings from the Ābhāsvara Heaven descended to the earth when their merit was exhausted. At that time, there was no distinction of gender or social status; everyone was born together in one place, hence they were called "sentient beings." This is spoken from the perspective of initial naming: originally, this name merely described "many people gathered together," containing no notion of a "substantial self."

The Second Meaning: Having a provisional name by grasping the multitude of aggregates. Gathering the five aggregates together and temporarily calling them "Person A" or "Person B," this is spoken from the perspective of undergoing a single period of karmic retribution: the combination of the five aggregates in this life is given a name, and this name carries the karmic retribution of the present life.

The Third Meaning: Taking birth everywhere. Due to karmic force, dying and being born, being born and dying, changing locations and changing bodies, this is spoken from the perspective of transmigration through the five paths: this "sentient being" is actually an ongoing process of shifting scenes, rather than a fixed entity.

Taking all three meanings together, the term "sentient being" itself is a provisional name born of causes and conditions, not a real "thing." Yet when ordinary beings hear the words "sentient being," they immediately feel that it refers to a genuinely existing life—this is the deepest aspect of sattva-kaṣāya: taking even a "provisional name" as a "substantial reality."

5. Erroneously Calculating the Five Aggregates as the Four Virtues: How Sattva-kaṣāya Obstructs the Mahāyāna

The text next points out the most critical problem of sattva-kaṣāya:

「眾生濁重，妄計五陰為四德。」 *“The defilement of sentient beings is heavy, erroneously calculating the five aggregates to be the four virtues.”*

The five aggregates (form, sensation, perception, mental formations, consciousness) are the raw materials from which sattva-kaṣāya concocts the "self." Ordinary beings not only fashion them into a "self," but further affix four labels onto this "self"—常 (nitya, "permanence"), 樂 (sukha, "bliss"), 我 (ātman, "self"), and 淨 (śubha, "purity"):

- Permanence: Imagining that this "self" is stable and unchanging—that the self today is essentially identical to the self ten years ago. - Bliss: Imagining that this "self" ought to be happy, and that all unhappiness is a problem belonging to "me." - Self: Imagining that this "self" is an independent and autonomous subject capable of controlling its own life. - Purity: Imagining that this "self" is pure and worthy of love, and that bad things on the outside have nothing to do with "me."

These four labels combined form a complete image of the "sense of self." **The goal of the 大乘 (Mahāyāna, "Great Vehicle") is to contemplate that all five aggregates are empty (*Heart Sūtra*), whereas "erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues" is precisely the greatest obstacle on this path**—because once you regard the five aggregates as the "real self," you can no longer see that they are actually empty, compounded, and impermanent.

This is why Master Zhiyi, in his analysis of the five defilements, specifically distinguished between "obstructing the Mahāyāna" and "obstructing the 小乘 (Hīnayāna, 'Lesser Vehicle')": those obstructed in the Hīnayāna have shallower capacities, while those obstructed in the Mahāyāna have deeper capacities. Sattva-kaṣāya is listed independently precisely because it is the core bottleneck that obstructs the principle of the Mahāyāna.

6. Ten Kinds of Sentient Beings and Suffering Aspects of the Five Paths

The *Wenju* further cites the *Saddharmasmṛtyupasthāna Sūtra* (《正法念處經》) to elaborate on the features of ten kinds of sentient beings—long, short, square, round, triangular, blue, yellow, red, white, and purple. These ten aspects are not listed at random, but describe the shapes and colors manifested by sentient beings when reborn in different realms:

- Hell beings — Suffering is incomprehensible: copper pillars, iron beds, molten copper poured into mouths, freezing ice pressing upon bodies; - Animal beings — Devouring one another, the weak falling prey to the strong, having no language to voice grievances; - Hungry ghost beings — Endless kalpas of hunger and thirst, viewing clear water as pus and blood; - Human beings — Though having superior conditions, still roasted by the eight sufferings; - Heavenly beings — Indulging in and defiled by the six sensory objects, wanton and playful, falling back down once merit is exhausted.

These ten aspects and sufferings of the five realms are not merely "cosmological descriptions," but are meant to let people see: How fragile and terrifying are the contents adhered to by this provisional name "I." The "self" of a hell being and the "self" of a heavenly being are the exact same piece of sticky glue, merely applied to different locations.

7. Hetoḥ Prajñapti / Upādāya Prajñapti / Saṃtatya Prajñapti: Three Levels of Provisional Names

Master Zhiyi further analyzed provisional names with extreme precision from the perspective of causes and conditions:

- Sentient being — 因成假 (hetoḥ prajñapti, "provisionality of causes," formed by the combination of various causes and conditions) and 受假 (upādāya-prajñapti, "provisionality of mental grasping," a provisional name that receives a single period of karmic retribution). - Lifespan — 相續假 (saṃtatya-prajñapti, "provisionality of continuity," continuing moment to moment, assigned the provisional name of "lifespan"). - The provisionality of these four factors combines at a single moment, and karma operates within them.

It is worth noting that this provisional name "applies to both ordinary beings and sages"—it is not that only ordinary beings have the name "sentient being"; sages also use the name "sentient being" to refer to themselves or others. The only difference lies in: ordinary beings cling to this provisional name as a reality (this is sattva-kaṣāya), whereas sages use this provisional name without clinging (this is transcending sattva-kaṣāya). Evidently, the issue has never been "whether a name exists," but rather "whether one adheres to it or not."

II. Inspection in Daily Life

An inspection is not about reciting concepts, but using contemporary eyes to take the points—"grasping form and mind to establish a single sovereign controller," "sticky glue adhering to everything it touches," and "erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues"—and walking through them within concrete scenarios. Below, five common scenarios are selected, each rigorously following the classical definition without substitution or reduction.

Scenario 1: On the Commute, the Sense of Existence of that "Self"

You wake up at 7:30 in the morning, look at that face in the mirror, and the thought arises in your mind: "I have to go to work today." At this moment, the word "I" adheres to three things:

1. That face in the mirror — This is the aggregate of form (the physical appearance of the body). 2. That thought of "going to work" — This is the collaboration of perception (identifying characteristics), mental formations (volitional impulse), and consciousness (the continuing stream of awareness). 3. The entire identity behind the name "I" — Company, title, salary, seniority.

This is precisely what the text calls "grasping form and mind to establish a single sovereign controller": you gather together the face (form), the emotion upon waking up (sensation), the judgment that you must go to work (perception), the volition to snooze the alarm (mental formations), and the continuous awareness throughout the day that "I am going to the office" (consciousness), concocting a "self" out of them. Then this piece of "self" begins to stick in all directions—sticking to transportation (subway, bus, shared bike), office desk, meeting room, and KPIs. There is nothing it does not stick to; this is "sticky glue adhering to everything it touches."

Scenario 2: Scrolling on the Phone, that "Self" in the Comments Section

You swipe past a news story and write down your opinion in the comment section. At this moment, "I" adheres once again:

- Adhering to "my viewpoint"; - Adhering to "my stance" (conservative / liberal / moderate); - Adhering to "my style of expression" (sharp / gentle / sarcastic); - Adhering to "how others see me" (likes, upvotes, shares).

Upon careful inspection, this "I" is actually glued together by a bundle of sensations (emotions after reading the message: anger, admiration, boredom), perceptions (judgments surfacing in the mind: this is right, that is wrong), mental formations (the volition to type and hit send), and consciousness (the continuing awareness of "I am expressing an opinion"). Not a single part can stand alone and say "this is me"—yet you never analyze it this way, because you have long been stuck by the provisional name "I."

Even more critically, this adherence is not something you just picked up today; it began the very first time you learned to use the word "I." This is the "self" within "erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues"—assuming that this entity concocted from the five aggregates is an independent and autonomous subject.

Scenario 3: In Intimate Relationships, that Piece of Glue is Repeatedly Torn Off and Reapplied

"I am my mother's child," "I am my partner's significant other," "I am my child's parent," "I am a member of a certain community." Every relationship is like a surface smeared with sticky glue; once "I" sticks to it, it is very hard to peel off.

When a relationship changes—a breakup, a divorce, a child leaving home, a falling out with a friend—this "I" is suddenly torn apart. At this moment, what you feel is not "a relationship has ended," but rather "a part of me is gone." Behind this feeling lies the operation of sattva-kaṣāya: your "I" was originally glued onto that relationship, and a "self" unattached to relationships has never independently existed.

This is a contemporary miniature version of what the text describes as "drifting through the six realms and taking birth everywhere": you are not literally transmigrating between the heavenly, human, and animal realms, but rather "I" is continuously re-adhering between companies, nuclear families, interest groups, friend circles, and religious communities. Every time you "change tracks" or "start anew," it appears on the surface to be your active choice, but in essence, the old glue has been torn off and a new layer applied.

Scenario 4: Switching Life Stages, "I" Keeps Changing Names

At twenty, "I" am a literary youth; at thirty, "I" am a working mother; at forty, "I" am an entrepreneur; at fifty, "I" am a retiree; at sixty, "I" am a grandparent enjoying family bliss. Every "I" feels like the "real me," to the point where looking back at the "me" in youth feels like "that wasn't me."

This is what the text calls "like poverty named short, or wealth named long—all are provisionally established without concrete reality":

- "Poverty named short" — Young, lacking money, resources, and status, feeling that life is "short" (small, powerless, marginalized); - "Wealth named long" — Having money, resources, and titles, feeling that life is "long" (respected, influential, living meaningfully); - The length of lifespan is a provisionally established label, slapped onto the combination of the five aggregates at different stages.

This is the most insidious aspect of sattva-kaṣāya: it not only sticks to "I," but also affixes labels of varying lengths to "I" based on "my" circumstances. Yet "long" and "short" are actually both provisional names; the combination of the five aggregates itself has no intrinsic length.

Scenario 5: Algorithmic Recommendations, "I" Am Glued Even Tighter by the External Glue

The most concealed site of sattva-kaṣāya in contemporary life is algorithms creating a "profile" based on your digital footprints. The more precise this profile, the more advertisements cater to your preferences, and the more content aligns with your taste.

You gradually discover that the things you like look more and more like what the algorithm thinks you would like. In other words, the algorithm is helping to glue "I" even tighter—gluing it to specific viewpoints, consumer goods, lifestyles, political stances, and values.

This is the most vivid modern version of the "sticky glue" metaphor: it is not that you choose to be stuck, but rather it is designed to make you think you stuck yourself. The entire technological endeavor of algorithms is to make you feel "I originally thought this way" and "I originally liked this." Once this illusion takes hold, "I" is firmly glued inside the algorithm's projection, while you remain blind to the projection itself.

Exposing the Common Pitfalls of Misinterpretation

Having walked through these five scenarios, three errors that contemporary people most easily fall into require specific clarification:

1. Narrowing "sentient beings" to "human beings" — Sentient beings in the scriptures encompass all five realms: hell, animal, hungry ghost, human, and heaven. When many modern people say "sentient beings," they think only of "mankind," or even just "me and him." This severely shrinks the "sattva-kaṣāya" among the five defilements. Even a stray cat on the street, an influencer's account on a phone, or someone long dead in history can all be places where the provisional name "sentient being" adheres.

2. Treating "erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues" as an abstract slogan — Many have heard the four terms "permanence, bliss, self, purity," but few actually inspect them: In which moment are you treating the body as "permanent"? In which moment are you treating sensations as "bliss"? In which moment are you treating thoughts as "self"? In which moment are you treating your persona as "pure"? Without inspection, these four words remain mere nouns, incapable of being untied.

3. Narrowing "five aggregates" to "five types of mental activities" — The five aggregates are form, sensation, perception, mental formations, and consciousness. Form is not just the physical body; it includes all forms made of the four great elements—the screen in front of your eyes, the chair you sit on, the air you breathe, the decor of your room, the objects in your home are all form. Contemporary people are most prone to thinking of "five aggregates" as "five kinds of mental activities," turning "erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues" into "don't take your mood too seriously." But this completely leaks out the external environment. In reality, the illusion of "I" is concocted together from the entire internal and external world of form and mind—you do not merely regard "my thoughts" as "me," but also treat "my room," "my car," and "my social media account" as "me."

III. Why Contemporary People Need It

1. Contemporary Culture's "Self-Reinforcement" Actually Exacerbates Sattva-kaṣāya

Contemporary society everywhere emphasizes the "self"—finding yourself, being yourself, loving yourself, realizing self-worth, living out your true self. These expressions are not inherently bad, but if one fails to perceive that "I" is actually a provisional name concocted from the five aggregates, the "self" will be glued thicker and thicker, harder and harder.

The "self-concept" in psychology, "role identity" in sociology, and "subjectivity" in philosophy each capture a certain aspect of "I." However, these aspects combined do not equal a "substantial self." If contemporary people only listen to psychological and sociological descriptions without inspecting the layer of "grasping form and mind to establish a single sovereign controller," they can easily mistake provisional names—which should be loosened—for immovable truths.

2. Social Media is an Industrialized Assembly Line for "Sticky Glue"

In ancient times, sticky glue was applied by hand onto tree branches, catching one bird at a time. Contemporary social media is an industrialized assembly line of sticky glue—likes, follows, shares, comments, stories, and algorithmic recommendations collectively form a system that repeatedly applies fresh glue onto "I."

Every like is a stroke of sticky glue. Every story update is a re-adhesion of "I." Every recommended piece of content is a re-confirmation of "I" by the algorithm. This is not to say social media itself is evil, but rather that the structure of this system precisely mirrors the characteristic of sattva-kaṣāya: "adhering to everything it touches."

3. The Illusion of a "Sovereign Controller" is Amplified in the Tech Age

Modern people are far more obsessed with "sovereign control" than ancients—believing they can firmly master life through technology, wealth, status, psychology, pharmaceuticals, gene editing, and AI. This is precisely the extreme modern version of the definition "grasping form and mind to establish a single sovereign controller":

- Believing one can "become a better self" through continuous optimization (self-growth, productivity tools, health management); - Believing one can "make oneself safer" through continuous accumulation (wealth, knowledge, networking); - Believing one can "precisely master oneself" through data tracking (sleep, heart rate, steps, blood sugar).

Behind these behaviors lies the assumption of a "sovereign controller"—that there is an "I" standing there, capable of optimizing, managing, and controlling this "I" through various means. Yet this is the very core of sattva-kaṣāya.

4. Why the Mahāyāna Requires This Diagnosis

The goal of the Mahāyāna is not to deny the existence of "I" (which falls into the view of annihilationism, a common error of non-Buddhist traditions), but to see that "I" is a provisional name born of causes and conditions. Without seeing this, no matter how one practices, one will remain stuck to some form of "I"—"I am practicing," "I am enlightened," "I am the incarnation of a certain Bodhisattva," "I am more awakened than so-and-so."

This is precisely how sattva-kaṣāya obstructs the principle of the Mahāyāna:

- In the Śrāvakayāna (voice-hearer vehicle), the goal is to sever afflictions and realize nirvāṇa. The "I" can be retained as long as afflictions are cut off. - In the Mahāyāna, the goal is not only to liberate oneself, but to cause all sentient beings to be liberated. Here, "an independent self" becomes a massive obstacle—because Mahāyāna compassion is selfless, a matter of "if I do not enter hell, who will?" This "I" must be loosened to a certain extent before true compassion can unfold.

Therefore, Master Zhiyi paired sattva-kaṣāya and dṛṣṭi-kaṣāya under the "pratipudgala-siddhānta" (individualized teaching)—this is spoken specifically for individuals with Mahāyāna capacities. For those with Hīnayāna capacities, the burden of the five defilements is relatively lighter; for those with Mahāyāna capacities, because the path to travel is deeper and farther, the diagnosis of sattva-kaṣāya is especially crucial.

5. A Special Reminder in the AI Era

Finally, it is worth mentioning that advancements in contemporary AI present the concept of "I" with unprecedented challenges: when a language model can pass the Turing test and mimic your tone to write text that sounds more like you than you do, the question "Who am 'I'?" is forced to the surface.

This is not to say that AI proves "non-self" (that would be equating analogy with identity), but rather that AI provides a unique mirror: when we see an entity "devoid of body, sensations, or continuous consciousness" capable of writing the word "I," we are forced to ask—which part of that "I" we have been clinging to actually exists?

The answer to this question lies not on the side of AI, but in each person's honest observation of their own five aggregates.

IV. Common Misreadings and Clarifications

Misreading 1: "Sentient Beings" = "Human Beings"

This is the error modern people commit most frequently. The scriptures state clearly that sentient beings encompass five paths: hell, animal, hungry ghost, human, and heaven (or six when adding asuras). When many modern people say "sentient beings," they think only of "mankind," or even just "me and him."

Clarification: Not only are "humans" sentient beings, even the countless social media accounts, editors, bloggers, and AI assistants you swipe past on your phone are, in a sense, "aspects of sentient beings"—behind every ID, it is treated and clung to as "a complete person." When you get angry at an account, disappointed in an AI assistant, or fascinated by a virtual character, what you are adhering to is precisely a piece corresponding to the provisional name "sentient being."

Misreading 2: "Sattva-kaṣāya" = "Selfishness"

"Heavy sattva-kaṣāya" does not mean a person is very selfish, but rather that this person clings very tightly—grasping the five aggregates as a real "self."

Selfishness is merely one expression of "self-view" (我見), not sattva-kaṣāya itself. A completely unselfish person who constantly cares for others may still be deeply mired in sattva-kaṣāya—as long as he or she still tightly clings to the label "I am a person who cares for others," sattva-kaṣāya remains present.

Clarification: The scope of sattva-kaṣāya is far broader than selfishness; it encompasses all behaviors that cling to any part of the five aggregates as the "real me." Unselfishness, altruism, dedication, and generosity—if one still clings to the label "I am an unselfish person" or "I am a great Bodhisattva"—remain within sattva-kaṣāya.

Misreading 3: "Erroneously Calculating the Five Aggregates as the Four Virtues" is Merely a Theory

Many people have heard the four terms "permanence, bliss, self, purity," but memorize them merely as Buddhist terminology without actually inspecting them.

Clarification: The concrete method of inspection is to reflect on which moments you are clinging:

- In which moment do you wish for "me" not to change (attachment to permanence)? - In which moment do you expect that "I" should be happy (attachment to bliss)? - In which moment do you feel that "I" must be able to control the situation (attachment to self)? - In which moment do you feel that "I" am pure and innocent, and external sufferings have nothing to do with me (attachment to purity)?

Once these four reflections are applied to concrete moments, "erroneous calculation" ceases to be an abstract concept and becomes a specific attachment that can be loosened.

Misreading 4: "Sattva-kaṣāya" and "Āyur-kaṣāya" Are the Same Thing

Sattva-kaṣāya is the problem of "the existence of this sentient being," whereas āyur-kaṣāya is the problem of "the length of lifespan of this sentient being." The two are continuous, but operate at different levels.

To make an analogy: In a play, sattva-kaṣāya is the concept of "actor" itself being fixated on by the audience, while āyur-kaṣāya is "how long this play runs." The former concerns "whether a 'self' exists," while the latter concerns "how long the timeline of this 'self' extends."

Modern people often focus on "I don't have enough time," "my life is too short," or "I won't make it in time" (āyur-kaṣāya), yet fail to see "why I feel there is an 'I' occupying this block of time" (sattva-kaṣāya). This misplaced focus causes many to desperately extend time (health regimen, pursuing longevity, fearing death) without ever questioning "what is this 'I' that is worrying?"

Misreading 5: "Five Aggregates" = "Five Types of Mental Activities"

This is the narrowing trap modern people fall into most easily. The aggregate of form among the five aggregates includes all form composed of the four great elements—your physical body, external environments, sounds, colors, odors, tastes, and tactile sensations are all form.

Clarification: Erroneously calculating the five aggregates as the four virtues is not merely "don't take mental activities too seriously," but rather "don't treat the entire internal and external world (internal body and mind + external environment) as 'me.'" Contemporary people not only regard "my thoughts" and "my emotions" as "me," but also treat "my room," "my car," "my Facebook," "my country," and "my generation" as "me." This list of "mine" can extend infinitely, and with every item added, another stroke of sticky glue is applied.

Misreading 6: Treating "Sattva-kaṣāya" as Something that Can Be "Eradicated"

The Mahāyāna does not advocate eradicating the concept of "sentient being" (that would be the view of annihilationism), nor does it advocate eradicating the name "I" (which would lead to chaos in language and behavior); rather, it advocates loosening one's adherence to it.

"Transcending sattva-kaṣāya" means using the name "sentient being" without being stuck to it—like a boat gliding across water leaving no trace; the boat uses the water but does not carry the water away. Sages are also called "sentient beings," but to them, "sentient being" is merely a provisional name, with no substantial "self" hiding behind it.

Clarification: Spiritual practice is not about killing the "self," but allowing the provisional name "I" to return to its original nature—a label formed by causes and conditions. When you sign a letter as "I," this "I" is merely an address; when you sleep, "I" temporarily steps down; when you enter deep meditation, "I" grows even fainter. Everything was inherently fluid to begin with; sattva-kaṣāya merely deludes you into thinking there is a substantial entity behind this label.

Conclusion

The core of sattva-kaṣāya is not an abstract philosophical dilemma, but a concrete process operating every single day: gathering the five aggregates, concocting an "I," and letting this "I" adhere to everything. From commuting to scrolling on your phone, from intimate relationships to life stages, from psychological counseling to social media, this piece of sticky glue has never stopped being smeared.

Seeing this glue is the starting point of Mahāyāna practice. It is not meant to be ripped off painfully, but to know that it is glue—once known, the way one sticks to things will gradually change. In the end, the word "I" remains there, but it is no longer a piece of sticky glue, merely a name.

《心經》云：「照見五蘊皆空，度一切苦厄。」 *The Heart Sūtra states: “Illuminating and perceiving that all five aggregates are empty, one passes beyond all suffering and distress.”*

The moment the five aggregates (which are the five shadows/aggregates) are seen as empty, sattva-kaṣāya is illuminated and shattered—not that "sentient beings" vanish, but the "self" concocted by the provisional name "sentient being" has its original nature seen: compounded by causes and conditions, with no tangible entity to be found, and no sovereign controller to be attained.

This is the position of sattva-kaṣāya within the entire path to liberation: it is that very stickiness between afflictions and nirvāṇa that must be illuminated and shattered. Illuminating and shattering it does not mean destroying it, but seeing that it was inherently empty all along—and from then on, the word "I" can be used lightly, no longer grasped as a reality.