大方廣佛華嚴經疏 46.8

46.8

今初。標云他心者，智以他心為所緣故。若直就所緣，應名心差別通，若所若王種類多種皆能知故，並依主受名。然智緣他心，諸說不同。安慧論師云：「佛智緣他心，緣得本質，餘皆變影。」護法論師則佛亦變影，若緣本質得心外法，壞唯識故，但極似本質，有異因人。依唯識宗，護法為正。以今經望，前亦未失，以攝境從心不壞境故，能所兩亡不礙存故。第一義唯心非一非異，正緣他時即是自故。以即佛心之眾生心非即眾生心之佛心為所緣，以即眾生心之佛心非即佛心之眾生心為能緣，如是鎔融，故非一非異。若離佛外別有眾生更須變影，却失真唯識義。二「知一」下釋相，中二：初知一剎、後「如一」下以少類多。前中三，初總、次「所謂」下別、後「如是」下結。別中有三十類心，闕第三無記，晉經具有。於中，前十約相總顯、後二十心約人別顯。前中，初二約性，總該諸心；次二約行，兼濟獨善故；次二約報，天大人小故。上四唯善。次二約向背，而順通三性善惟有漏，背唯是善通漏無漏。約人辨中，初六約乘，前三是果、後三是因，即前背生死心及廣狹心；次八部約類，即前順生死及大小心。地獄等約趣，亦順生死是不善心。餘並可知。

First is the initial [supernormal power]. The heading says 'the minds of others' because this wisdom takes the minds of others as its cognitive object. If termed directly by the cognitive object, it should be called 'the supernormal power of distinctions of mind,' because whether [mental] states or primary minds, it can know their manifold types; both designations are tatpuruṣa compounds. However, regarding wisdom cognizing the minds of others, various theories differ. Master Sthiramati states: 'The Buddha's wisdom cognizing the minds of others directly cognizes the actual basis (vastu); all others project reflections.' Master Dharmapāla holds that the Buddha also projects a reflection: if he were to cognize the actual basis, he would apprehend a dharma outside mind, which would destroy vijñapti-mātra; it is merely that it extremely resembles the actual basis, differing from that of an ordinary practitioner. According to the Vijñaptimātra school, Dharmapāla is correct. Yet viewed from the present sūtra, the former view is also not in error, because subsuming objects into mind does not destroy objects, and the obliteration of both subject and object does not obstruct their preservation. The ultimate truth of mind-only is neither one nor different: at the very moment one cognizes another, it is oneself. Because sentient beings' minds, which are identical with the Buddha's mind, are not the Buddha's mind identical with sentient beings' minds, they serve as the cognitive object; because the Buddha's mind, which is identical with sentient beings' minds, is not sentient beings' minds identical with the Buddha's mind, it serves as the cognizing subject. Being blended and fused in this way, they are neither one nor different. If there were sentient beings distinct and outside the Buddha, requiring further projection of reflections, that would conversely lose the true meaning of vijñapti-mātra. Second, from 'knows one [kṣetra]' onwards, is the explanation of the characteristics, within which there are two parts: first, knowing one kṣetra; second, from 'just as one [kṣetra]' onwards, using the few to analogize the many. In the former there are three parts: first, a general statement; next, from 'that is to say' onwards, the particulars; last, from 'in this way' onwards, the conclusion. Among the particulars, there are thirty classes of mind, lacking the third, indeterminate [minds], which is present in full in the Jin dynasty translation. Therein, the first ten broadly reveal them according to characteristics; the latter twenty minds specifically reveal them according to persons. In the former, the first two pertain to nature, broadly subsuming all minds; the next two pertain to practice, because of benefiting others alongside oneself versus solitary goodness; the next two pertain to karmic retribution, because devas are great and humans are small. The above four are purely wholesome. The next two pertain to compliance and opposition, where compliance pervades the three natures with wholesome [minds] being exclusively defiled, while opposition is exclusively wholesome and pervades both defiled and undefiled. In distinguishing them according to persons: the first six pertain to the vehicles, where the first three are fruitions and the latter three are causes, which correspond to the aforementioned minds opposing saṃsāra and minds of broad versus narrow scope; the next eight classes of beings pertain to categories, which correspond to the aforementioned minds complying with saṃsāra and great versus small minds. Hell beings and the like pertain to destinies, which also comply with saṃsāra and are unwholesome minds. The rest can all be understood.