釋摩訶衍論 2.71

2.71

論曰：阿梨耶識總有十種。所以者何？於契經中別別說故。云何為十？一者名為大攝主阿梨耶識，所謂即是總相大識，義如前說。二者名為根本無明阿梨耶識，所謂根本無明別立以為阿梨耶故。十種妄想契經中作如是說：剎奢只多提王識直是妄法，不能了達一法界體。一切染法阿梨耶識以為根本，出生增長無斷絕時。若無提王識，黑品眷屬永無所依、不能生長故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：所言不覺義者，謂不如實知真如法一故，不覺心起而有其念，乃至廣說故。三者名為清淨本覺阿梨耶識，所謂自然本智別立以為阿梨耶故。本覺契經中作如是說：自體淨佛阿梨耶識，具足無漏圓滿功德，常恒清淨、常恒決定，無受熏相、無變異相，智體不動具足白品，是故名為獨一淨識故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：復次覺體相者有四種大義，與虛空等，猶如淨鏡，乃至廣說故。四者名為染淨本覺阿梨耶識，所謂不守自性陀羅尼智別立以為阿梨耶故。本因緣起契經中作如是說：爾時光嚴童子即白佛言：「尊者！以何因緣故，難入未曾有會中作如是說，隨他緣起陀羅尼智名為楞伽王識。云何名為楞伽王？以之為喻示彼緣起陀羅尼智？」於是尊者告光嚴童子言：「此楞伽王常在大海摩羅山中，率十萬六千鬼神之眾以為眷屬。如是諸眷屬皆乘化宮殿遊於諸剎，皆悉承賴彼楞伽王方得遊行。所謂諸鬼神眾作如是言：『我等神眾無有威德無有氣力，於諸所作無有其能。如宜大王！我等眾中與堪能力。』彼楞伽王即隨其時與殊勝力，不相捨離而共轉故。謂楞伽王雖非分身，而能遍滿諸神眾中，各各令得全身之量。於一切時於一切處共轉不離。不守自性智亦復如是，能受一切無量無邊煩惱染法鬼神眾熏，不相捨離而俱轉故。以此因緣故，我難入會中作如是說，隨轉覺智名為楞伽王識故。」此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：自性清淨心，因無明風動，心與無明俱無形相、不相捨離，乃至廣說故。五者名為業相業識阿梨耶識，所謂根本業相及與業識別立以為阿梨耶故。本性智契經中作如是說：阿梨耶識無能了作、無所了作，不可分析，不可隔別，唯由精動隱流義故，名為鍵摩故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：復次依不覺故生三種相，與彼不覺相應不離。云何為三？一者無明業相，以依不覺故心動說名為業，覺則不動。動則有苦，果不離因故。六者名為轉相轉識阿梨耶識，所謂能見境界之相及與轉識別立以為阿梨耶故。大無量契經中作如是說：阿梨耶識有見見轉無見見起故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：二者能見相，以依動故能見，不動則無見故。七者名為現相現識阿梨耶識，所謂境界之相及與現識別立以為阿梨耶故。實際契經中作如是說：別異別異現前地轉，相異相異具足行轉，是故名為阿梨耶識。復次此阿梨耶識，真是異熟無記之法，淨白相故，或名成就故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：三者境界相，以依能見故境界妄現，離見則無境界故。八者名為性真如理阿梨耶識，所謂正智所證清淨真如別立以為阿梨耶故。諸法同體契經中作如是說：有識是識，非識識攝，所謂如如阿梨耶識故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？所謂清淨般若質境真如攝故。九者名為清淨始覺阿梨耶識，所謂本有清白始覺般若別立以為阿梨耶故。果圓滿契經中作如是說：佛告菩提樹王言：「自然始覺阿梨耶識當常不離清淨本覺，清淨本覺當常不離始覺淨識。隨是彼有，隨彼是有，或非同種或非異種故。」此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：本覺義者對始覺說，以始覺者即同本覺故。十者名為染淨始覺阿梨耶識，所謂隨緣始覺般若別立以為阿梨耶故。果圓滿契經中作如是說：復次樹王！如始覺淨識及白淨本覺說染淨始覺阿梨耶識，不守自性緣起本覺亦復如是故。此阿梨耶識當何決擇攝？於本論中作如是說：始覺義者依本覺故而有不覺，依不覺故說有始覺。又以覺心原故名究竟覺，不覺心原故非究竟覺，乃至廣說故。如是等義，至自決擇自當備演。十種末那六種意識，於後文中隨次釋故，今略而已。已說藏識剖字門、分相門，次說總識攝生圓滿門。此識有二種義，能攝一切法、能生一切法。云何為二？一者覺義、二者不覺義者，而總顯示本識殊勝圓滿相故。此義云何？所謂具足二種圓滿故。云何為二？一者功德圓滿、二者過患圓滿。功德圓滿者，覺義字句能攝一切無量無邊過於恒沙不離不斷諸功德故，能生一切無量無邊過於恒沙不離不斷諸功德故。過患圓滿者，不覺義字句能攝一切無量無邊過於恒沙若離若脫諸過患故，能生一切無量無邊過於恒沙若離若脫諸過患故。如是種種攝生熏習差別之相，至彼別相決擇分中分明顯示。

The commentary states: In general, there are ten kinds of ālayavijñāna. Why is that? Because they are explained separately in various sūtras. What are the ten? First is the ālayavijñāna named the Great Gathering Lord, which is the great consciousness of the general characteristic, the meaning of which is as explained before. Second is the ālayavijñāna named fundamental avidyā, because fundamental avidyā is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on the Ten Kinds of Conceptualisations it is said: 'The consciousness of King Kṣa-cha-zhi-duo-ti is purely false phenomena, unable to comprehend the essence of the single dharmadhātu. With the ālayavijñāna of all defiled dharmas as its root, its generation and growth have no interruption. If there were no consciousness of King Ti, the defiled retinue would forever have no basis and could not grow.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The meaning of non-awakening refers to the mind of non-awakening arising and having its thoughts because of not knowing the oneness of the dharma of tathatā in accordance with reality,' and so forth at length. Third is the ālayavijñāna named pure original awakening, because the innate original wisdom is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on Original Awakening it is said: 'The intrinsically pure Buddha-ālayavijñāna is fully endowed with untainted, complete merits; it is eternally pure and eternally determinate, free from the characteristic of being perfumed, free from the characteristic of alteration; its wisdom-essence is immovable and fully endowed with the pure portion; therefore it is named the Sole Pure Consciousness.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'Furthermore, the essential characteristics of awakening have four great meanings, equal to space, like a clean mirror,' and so forth at length. Fourth is the ālayavijñāna named defiled-and-pure original awakening, because the dhāraṇī-wisdom that does not preserve its self-nature is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on Original Dependent Arising it is said: 'At that time the youth Prabhāvyūha addressed the Buddha: "Venerable One! For what reason, in the assembly of the Difficult-to-Enter Unprecedented [Dharma], was it stated that the dhāraṇī-wisdom that arises in dependence on others is named the consciousness of the King of Laṅkā? Why is it named the King of Laṅkā, using it as an analogy to show that dhāraṇī-wisdom of dependent arising?" Thereupon the Venerable One told the youth Prabhāvyūha: "This King of Laṅkā constantly resides in Mount Malaya in the great sea, leading a retinue of one hundred and six thousand spirits. These retinues all ride magical palaces to roam through various realms, and all of them rely upon that King of Laṅkā in order to roam about. That is to say, the assembly of spirits say: 'We spirits possess no majestic virtue and no strength, and have no capability in our deeds. As appropriate, Great King, grant capability into our assembly!' That King of Laṅkā then, according to the time, grants them superior strength, so that they operate together without parting from one another. That is to say, although the King of Laṅkā does not divide his body, he can pervade all the spirits, causing each to obtain the measure of his entire body, operating together without separation at all times and in all places. The wisdom that does not preserve its self-nature is also like this: it can receive the perfuming of the spirits of all immeasurable and boundless afflictions and defiled dharmas, and operates together without parting from them. For this reason, in the Difficult-to-Enter Assembly I stated that the awakening wisdom that operates accordingly is named the consciousness of the King of Laṅkā."' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The intrinsically pure mind, moved by the wind of avidyā—both the mind and avidyā are formless and do not part from each other,' and so forth at length. Fifth is the ālayavijñāna named the karmic characteristic and karmic consciousness, because the fundamental karmic characteristic and the karmic consciousness are established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on the Wisdom of Intrinsic Nature it is said: 'The ālayavijñāna has nothing that can comprehend and act, nor anything that is comprehended and acted upon; it cannot be analysed, cannot be partitioned; solely due to the meaning of subtle movement and hidden flow, it is named karma.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'Furthermore, dependent upon non-awakening, three kinds of characteristics are produced, which are associated with and not separated from that non-awakening. What are the three? The first is the karmic characteristic of avidyā: because of non-awakening, the movement of the mind is called karma; if awakened, it does not move. When it moves, there is suffering, for the fruit is not separated from the cause.' Sixth is the ālayavijñāna named the evolving characteristic and evolving consciousness, because the characteristic of being able to see objects and the evolving consciousness are established separately as an ālaya. In the Great Immeasurable Sūtra it is said: 'The ālayavijñāna has seeing-seeing evolving and non-seeing-seeing arising.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The second is the characteristic of being able to see: because it is based on movement, there is the ability to see; if there is no movement, there is no seeing.' Seventh is the ālayavijñāna named the manifesting characteristic and manifesting consciousness, because the characteristic of objects and the manifesting consciousness are established separately as an ālaya. In the Bhūtakoṭi Sūtra it is said: 'Differently and distinctly operating in the present ground, with distinct characteristics fully operating in practice; therefore it is named ālayavijñāna. Furthermore, this ālayavijñāna is truly an indeterminate dharma of vipāka, having a pure white characteristic, or named accomplishment.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The third is the characteristic of objects: because it is based on the ability to see, objects falsely manifest; apart from seeing, there are no objects.' Eighth is the ālayavijñāna named the principle of tathatā of nature, because the pure tathatā realised by correct wisdom is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on the Identity of Dharmas it is said: 'There is a consciousness that is consciousness, yet not subsumed under consciousness as consciousness—namely, the tathatā-ālayavijñāna.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? It is subsumed under tathatā as the objective referent of pure prajñā. Ninth is the ālayavijñāna named pure initial awakening, because the innately pure initial awakening prajñā is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on the Perfection of the Fruit it is said: 'The Buddha told the Bodhi Tree King: "The innate initial-awakening ālayavijñāna should constantly not part from pure original awakening, and pure original awakening should constantly not part from the initial-awakening pure consciousness. Accordingly as this one exists, that one exists; accordingly as that one exists, this one exists; neither of the same kind nor of a different kind."' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The meaning of original awakening is spoken of in contrast to initial awakening, because initial awakening is identical to original awakening.' Tenth is the ālayavijñāna named defiled-and-pure initial awakening, because the initial-awakening prajñā that accords with conditions is established separately as an ālaya. In the Sūtra on the Perfection of the Fruit it is said: 'Furthermore, Tree King! Just as the initial-awakening pure consciousness and the white-pure original awakening speak of the defiled-and-pure initial-awakening ālayavijñāna, so too is the dependently arisen original awakening that does not preserve its self-nature.' How should this ālayavijñāna be subsumed in the analysis? In the root treatise it is said: 'The meaning of initial awakening is that dependent upon original awakening there is non-awakening, and dependent upon non-awakening it is said that there is initial awakening. Furthermore, because of awakening to the source of the mind, it is called ultimate awakening; because of not awakening to the source of the mind, it is not ultimate awakening,' and so forth at length. Meanings such as these will be fully expounded when reaching their own analyses. As the ten kinds of manas and six kinds of mental consciousness are explained in order in the subsequent text, they are only briefly noted now. Having explained the gate of dividing the words and the gate of distinguishing the characteristics of the storehouse consciousness, next is explained the gate of the general consciousness gathering, generating, and perfecting. With regard to: 'This consciousness has two meanings, which can gather all dharmas and generate all dharmas. What are the two? First is the meaning of awakening, and second is the meaning of non-awakening'—this generally reveals the supreme, perfect characteristic of the fundamental consciousness. What does this mean? It refers to being fully endowed with two kinds of perfection. What are the two? First is perfection of merits; second is perfection of faults. Regarding perfection of merits: the term 'meaning of awakening' can gather all immeasurable, boundless merits exceeding the sands of the Ganges, which are unseparated and uninterrupted, and can generate all immeasurable, boundless merits exceeding the sands of the Ganges, which are unseparated and uninterrupted. Regarding perfection of faults: the term 'meaning of non-awakening' can gather all immeasurable, boundless faults exceeding the sands of the Ganges, whether separated or released, and can generate all immeasurable, boundless faults exceeding the sands of the Ganges, whether separated or released. Such various distinct characteristics of gathering, generating, and perfuming will be clearly demonstrated when reaching the chapter of analysis of particular characteristics.