[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [釋摩訶衍論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668) › 4.62 # 釋摩訶衍論 4.62 釋摩訶衍論 4.62 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [4.62](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4.62) 此楞伽經凡明幾識？即有二門。云何為二？一者略說門、二者廣說門。如是二門中，三本各異說。云何異說？謂一本分流楞伽契經中作如是說：大慧！略說有三種識，廣說有八種相。何等為三？謂真識、現識、分別事識。又一本分流楞伽契經中作如是說：大慧！廣說有八種識，略說有二種識。何等為二？一者了別識、二者分別事識。又一本分流楞伽契經中作如是說：大慧！略說有四種識，廣說有七種識。云何為四？謂業識、轉識、現識、分別事識。如是三經直是真說，當應歸依何等楞伽？因緣楞伽、沙羅楞伽、盤尸多楞伽等此四種經，即是偽假說，故不可歸依。今當依彼十萬六千嗢拕南頌大本楞伽，三經異相安立會釋，如其次第應審觀察。初契經中第一真識，直是根本無明所熏本覺真心。第二現識，直是現相阿梨耶識。第三分別事識，直是意識麁分，意識細分即末那故。何故此經意識細分末那陀識？三細之中，業識、轉識且略不示，即有二門。云何為二？一者舉兩顯三備數門、二者率上達下備數門。初門云何？謂舉麁強顯細劣故。此義云何？於三細中麁是現識，於七識中強是意識。舉麁現識顯細業轉，唯言現識；舉強意識示劣末那，唯言意識，是故言略而義圓耳，是名舉兩顯三備數門。後門云何？謂渾前後滿名字故。此義云何？經上文言諸識有三種相，謂轉相、業相、真相。第一轉相，即是三細所攝轉識。第二業相，即是三細所攝業識。第三真相，即是意識細分所攝之末那識。率此經文及於下文，圓滿名字義理具足，是名率上達下備數門。此契經中八種識者，謂阿梨耶、末那、意識及五識身，是名為八。何故成八？一意識中分七種故。中契經中第一了別識，直是現相阿梨耶識；第二分別事識，直是意識，義如前說，同說末那。彼初經中名言真相，此中經中智相識者，異名同義。末那位中始有慧數，分別於塵名智相識。如是智識所緣境中，作真實之相解而轉，故名真相。此中八識比前可知。後契經中四種識法，文相明故且略不說。言七識者，末那意識總為一故，麁細雖別唯一識故。法界法輪契經中作如是說：第六意識分別六塵境界時，中必依末那為所依根方得生起。是故意識當是能依，彼末那識當是所依。能依所依不能一種，何故今說一體無別？經意別故，無相違過。謂彼經中立別種故，今此經中立同種故。以何文故，分明現知分別事識，不依末那而得生起？楞伽經中明了說故。彼契經中云何說耶？謂分流楞伽中作如是說：大慧！了別事識、分別事識，彼二種識無有差別，迭共為因。又一本分流楞伽中作如是說：大慧！現識及分別事識，此二壞不壞相展轉為因。由此文故，明知意識唯以現相阿梨耶識為內所依，生起動轉不依末那。復次大本楞伽契經中作如是說：爾時妙嚴菩薩則白佛言：「麁相意識、細相意識，以何為因、以何為緣相續而轉？」佛言：「如是麁細意識，以現鏡識而為其因，以六塵境而為其緣，相續而轉故。」以此義故，第七末那緣六塵境為所緣轉，義已成立。何以故？經伽他中作如是說：境界風所動，七識波浪轉故。復次若有眾生，經現識者即是末那，是故意識以之為因。咄哉此言，不可指南。 > In total, how many consciousnesses does this Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra elucidate? There are two approaches. What are the two? First is the approach of brief explanation; second is the approach of broad explanation. Within these two approaches, three recensions speak differently. How do they speak differently? In one branch-stream recension of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, it is said: 'Mahāmati! Briefly explained, there are three kinds of consciousness; broadly explained, there are eight kinds of marks. What are the three? Namely, the true consciousness, the manifesting consciousness, and the consciousness of distinguishing objects.' Furthermore, in another branch-stream recension of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, it is said: 'Mahāmati! Broadly explained, there are eight kinds of consciousness; briefly explained, there are two kinds of consciousness. What are the two? First, the perceptual consciousness; second, the consciousness of distinguishing objects.' Furthermore, in another branch-stream recension of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, it is said: 'Mahāmati! Briefly explained, there are four kinds of consciousness; broadly explained, there are seven kinds of consciousness. What are the four? Namely, the karma consciousness, the revolving consciousness, the manifesting consciousness, and the consciousness of distinguishing objects.' These three sūtras are truly genuine teachings; to which Laṅkāvatāra should one take refuge? The Hetu-pratyaya Laṅkāvatāra, Śāla Laṅkāvatāra, Paṃśu-dāna Laṅkāvatāra, and the like—these four kinds of scriptures are spurious and false teachings, so one cannot take refuge in them. Now one should rely upon that Great Root Laṅkāvatāra of one hundred and six thousand udāna verses, to establish, reconcile, and explain the different characteristics of the three scriptures, which should be carefully examined in their proper order. In the first sūtra, the first, the true consciousness, is directly the true mind of original awakening perfumed by fundamental ignorance. The second, the manifesting consciousness, is directly the ālaya consciousness with the mark of manifestation. The third, the consciousness of distinguishing objects, is directly the coarse aspect of the mental consciousness, because the subtle aspect of the mental consciousness is manas. Why does this sūtra \[call\] the subtle aspect of the mental consciousness the manodhātu consciousness? And among the three subtleties, why are the karma consciousness and revolving consciousness temporarily omitted and not shown? There are two approaches. What are the two? First is the approach of citing two to reveal three to complete the count; second is the approach of following what precedes to reach what follows to complete the count. What is the first approach? It means citing the coarse and strong to reveal the subtle and inferior. What does this mean? Among the three subtleties, the coarse is the manifesting consciousness; among the seven consciousnesses, the strong is the mental consciousness. By citing the coarse manifesting consciousness to reveal the subtle karma and revolving \[consciousnesses\], it speaks only of the manifesting consciousness; by citing the strong mental consciousness to indicate the inferior manas, it speaks only of the mental consciousness; therefore, the words are brief while the meaning is complete; this is called the approach of citing two to reveal three to complete the count. What is the second approach? It means blending what precedes and what follows to complete the names. What does this mean? The preceding text of the sūtra states that the consciousnesses have three kinds of marks, namely, the mark of revolving, the mark of karma, and the mark of truth. The first, the mark of revolving, is the revolving consciousness subsumed under the three subtleties. The second, the mark of karma, is the karma consciousness subsumed under the three subtleties. The third, the mark of truth, is the manas consciousness subsumed under the subtle aspect of the mental consciousness. Following this text of the sūtra and continuing to the text below, the names are fulfilled and the meaning and principle are complete; this is called the approach of following what precedes to reach what follows to complete the count. As for the eight consciousnesses in this sūtra, they are the ālaya, manas, mental consciousness, and the five consciousness-bodies; these are called the eight. Why do they constitute eight? Because within the single mental consciousness, seven kinds are divided. In the middle sūtra, the first, the perceptual consciousness, is directly the ālaya consciousness with the mark of manifestation; the second, the consciousness of distinguishing objects, is directly the mental consciousness, whose meaning is as previously explained, also expressing manas. What was called the 'mark of truth' in that first sūtra is the 'consciousness of the mark of cognition' in this middle sūtra; these are different names for the same meaning. At the stage of manas, the mental factor of wisdom begins to exist; distinguishing sense objects is called the consciousness of the mark of cognition. In the cognitive objects of such a cognitive consciousness, it operates by understanding them as real marks, hence it is called the mark of truth. The eight consciousnesses here can be known by comparison with the preceding. In the latter sūtra, the four kinds of consciousness are obvious in textual mark, so they are temporarily left unsaid. What is called the seven consciousnesses is because manas and the mental consciousness are combined into one, for although coarse and subtle differ, they are only a single consciousness. In the Dharmadhātu-dharmacakra Sūtra, it is said: 'When the sixth mental consciousness distinguishes the objects of the six sense fields, it must inwardly rely on manas as its supporting faculty before it can arise.' Therefore, the mental consciousness should be the supported, and that manas consciousness should be the support. The supported and the support cannot be of one kind; why then does it now say they are of one substance without distinction? Because the sūtras' intents differ, there is no fault of contradiction: in that sūtra, distinct seeds are established, whereas in this sūtra, identical seeds are established. By what text is it clearly and directly known that the consciousness of distinguishing objects can arise without relying on manas? Because the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra explains it clearly. How does that sūtra speak? In a branch-stream Laṅkāvatāra, it is said: 'Mahāmati! The perceptual object-consciousness and the object-distinguishing consciousness—those two consciousnesses are without difference, reciprocally serving as causes for each other.' Furthermore, in another branch-stream Laṅkāvatāra, it is said: 'Mahāmati! The manifesting consciousness and the object-distinguishing consciousness—these two, in their destructible and indestructible marks, turn into causes for each other.' By this text, we clearly know that the mental consciousness has only the ālaya consciousness of the manifesting mark as its internal support, and its arising and revolving does not rely on manas. Furthermore, in the Great Root Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, it is said: 'At that time, the Bodhisattva Vicitrālaṃkāra said to the Buddha: "By what cause and by what condition do the coarse mental consciousness and the subtle mental consciousness revolve in succession?" The Buddha said: "Such coarse and subtle mental consciousnesses revolve in succession by having the manifesting mirror-consciousness as their cause and by having the six sense objects as their condition."' By this meaning, the seventh, manas, taking the six sense objects as its cognitive domain to revolve, has its meaning already established. Why? In a gāthā of the sūtra it is said: 'Moved by the wind of sense objects, the seven consciousnesses roll like waves.' Furthermore, if there are sentient beings who \[claim that\] the manifesting consciousness of the sūtra is just manas, and that the mental consciousness therefore takes it as its cause—alas, such words cannot serve as a guide! > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 4.61](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4.61) - [Next: 4.63](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4.63) - [Up: 4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668~en-mt.4.62) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4.62](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1668.4.62) · Pramāṇa