大方廣佛華嚴經疏 14.11

14.11

四會相違者，問：若爾，《瑜伽》等中異熟賴耶從業惑種辦體而生，非如來藏隨緣所成，如何會釋？答：《瑜伽》等中對於凡小，約就權教隨相假說。《楞伽》、《密嚴》對大菩薩，依於實教盡理而說。既機有大小、法有淺深、教有權實，故不相違。故《密嚴》云「佛說如來藏，以為阿賴耶。惡慧不能知，藏即賴耶識。」此明守權拒實訶為惡慧。又彼經云「如來清淨藏，世間阿賴耶，如金與指環，展轉無差別。」《楞伽》中真識現識，如泥團與微塵，非異非不異，金莊嚴具亦復如是，皆此義也。又彼經云「如來藏為無始惡習所熏，名為藏識。」又《入楞伽》云「如來藏名阿賴耶識，而與無明七識共俱。」又《起信論》云「不生不滅與生滅和合，非一非異，名阿賴耶識。」又如《達磨經》頌云「無始時來界，為諸法等依。」《攝論》等就初教釋云「界者因義，即種子識。」《寶性論》翻此頌云「此性無始時」等。彼論就實教釋云「性者謂如來藏性。如《聖者勝鬘經》說，依如來藏故有生死，依如來藏故有涅槃。」以此等文，故知兩宗不同，淺深可見。又唯識等亦說真如是識實性，但後釋者定言不變，失於隨緣，過歸後輩耳。

Fourth, resolving the contradictions: Question: If so, in the Yogācārabhūmi and other texts the vipāka-ālaya is produced from the karmic and affliction seeds that constitute its entity, and is not formed by the tathāgatagarbha in accordance with conditions; how do you resolve and explain this? Answer: In the Yogācārabhūmi and other texts, for the sake of ordinary beings and followers of the Hīnayāna, provisional designations are made according to phenomenal marks in reliance on the expedient teachings. The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra and Ghanavyūha-sūtra, for the sake of great bodhisattvas, speak exhaustively of the principle in reliance on the definitive teaching. Since the capacities are great or small, the Dharma is shallow or deep, and the teachings are expedient or definitive, they do not contradict each other. Thus the Ghanavyūha states: "The Buddha spoke of the tathāgatagarbha as being the ālayavijñāna. Those of evil intellect cannot understand that the garbha is precisely the ālaya consciousness." This clarifies that clinging to the expedient and rejecting the definitive is rebuked as evil intellect. Furthermore, that sūtra states: "The pure garbha of the Tathāgata and the worldly ālaya are like gold and a finger ring, without difference between them." In the Laṅkāvatāra, the true consciousness and the manifestation-consciousness are like a lump of clay and dust particles, neither different nor not different, and gold ornaments are also like this; all share this meaning. Furthermore, that sūtra states: "The tathāgatagarbha, perfumed by beginningless evil habit-energy, is named the storehouse consciousness." And the Dharmakṣema translation of the Laṅkāvatāra states: "The tathāgatagarbha is called the ālayavijñāna, and it coexists with ignorance and the seven consciousnesses." The Awakening of Faith also states: "The unproduced and unceasing unites with production and cessation, neither one nor different, and is named the ālayavijñāna." Moreover, as the verse in the Abhidharmamahāyānasūtra states: "The beginningless realm is the common support of all dharmas." The Mahāyānasaṃgraha and other texts explain this according to the initial teaching: "'Realm' means cause, that is, the seed-consciousness." The Ratnagotravibhāga translates this verse as: "This nature from beginningless time..." and that treatise explains it according to the definitive teaching: "'Nature' means the nature of the tathāgatagarbha. As the Noble Śrīmālādevī-sūtra says, 'Relying on the tathāgatagarbha, there is saṃsāra; relying on the tathāgatagarbha, there is nirvāṇa.'" From these passages, we know that the two traditions differ, and their shallowness and depth can be seen. Furthermore, the Consciousness-Only school and others also say that tathatā is the true nature of consciousness, but later commentators determinately asserted that it is immutable and failed to recognize that it accords with conditions, so the fault belongs to those later figures.