金光明經文句記 4.156

4.156

初、釋心識。學斯宗者要知境觀，若論觀者須明三識，謂第九菴摩羅是不動識，當正因佛性，可為中觀；第八阿刺耶是無記無明識，無明之性即了因佛性，可為空觀？第七阿陀那是分別識，是惑性故，當緣因佛性，可為假觀。此之三識既與三德無二無別，是祕密藏，何法不收？何處不遍？修圓觀者必能了知一心一塵無非三識，即是所顯妙理，復是能觀妙觀。若論境者，唯尚近要，秖以第六見思之識而為境界，知妙三識未始暫離一見一思，故即此心為妙三觀、顯妙三諦。雖唯一識，未甞不用三識為觀，未甞不以三識為境。若謂今宗不明三識，但於第六顯三諦理；今之釋題及彼《妙玄》示其三識為妙三法，將何用耶？於一識心以何而為三諦三觀？故無通見，難議圓宗。今明集境，故引論文通小之說，但於第六辨心意識一法三能立三名字。對數名心者，對通大地等一切數故，名曰心王也。能生名意者，意是依義，依之能起一切因果，以具三性故也。分別名識者，以能了別所緣之境，故名識也。「又言」下，雖秖一識，約三時異而立三名，不同前釋秖約一時有對數能生分別之義也。前是橫釋，此乃豎釋。初起極微、次起漸著、後起彌顯，豈非豎耶？

First, explaining the mind-consciousness. Those who study this school must understand object and contemplation. If discussing contemplation, one must clarify the three consciousnesses: the ninth, amala, is the unmoving consciousness, corresponding to the Buddha-nature as direct cause, and can serve as the Middle contemplation; the eighth, ālaya, is the indeterminate ignorant consciousness, and since the nature of ignorance is precisely the Buddha-nature as revealing cause, it can serve as the contemplation of emptiness; the seventh, ādāna, is the discriminating consciousness, and being of the nature of delusion, it corresponds to the Buddha-nature as conditioning cause, and can serve as the contemplation of provisionality. Since these three consciousnesses are non-dual and undivided from the three virtues, being the secret treasury, what dharma do they not contain? What place do they not pervade? One who cultivates the perfect contemplation will definitely be able to understand that a single thought and a single dust mote are nothing other than the three consciousnesses, which are both the wonderful principle that is revealed and the wonderful contemplation that can contemplate. If discussing the object, one values only what is close and essential: one takes merely the sixth consciousness of views and thoughts as the object, knowing that the wonderful three consciousnesses have never for a moment been separate from a single view or a single thought. Thus, this very mind serves as the wonderful threefold contemplation and reveals the wonderful threefold truth. Although it is only a single consciousness, it never fails to use the three consciousnesses as contemplation, and never fails to take the three consciousnesses as the object. If one were to claim that this school does not explain the three consciousnesses, but only reveals the principle of the threefold truth in the sixth [consciousness], then what purpose would be served by the present commentary's explanation of the title and that Miaoxuan showing that the three consciousnesses are the wonderful three dharmas? In a single mind-consciousness, what would serve as the threefold truth and threefold contemplation? Therefore, without a comprehensive view, it is difficult to discuss the Perfect School. Now, in clarifying the object of origination, the text cites the treatise's explanation shared with the Hīnayāna, merely distinguishing within the sixth [consciousness] the three names established for the three capacities of the single dharma of mind, mentation, and consciousness (citta, manas, vijñāna). Being named "citta" in relation to mental factors is because it is relative to all mental factors that pervade the great grounds and so forth, and is thus called the "mind-king." Being named "manas" through being able to produce means that manas has the sense of "reliance," and relying on it, all causes and fruits can arise, because it possesses the three natures. Being named "vijñāna" through discrimination means that because it can cognize the objective realms that are grasped, it is named "consciousness." From "It is also said" downward: although it is only a single consciousness, three names are established in terms of the differences of three times, which is unlike the previous explanation that merely in terms of a single time has the meanings of being relative to mental factors, being able to produce, and discriminating. The former was a horizontal explanation, while this is a vertical explanation: first arising extremely subtly, next arising gradually more apparent, and later arising ever more distinct—is this not vertical?