四分律行事鈔資持記 2.2049

2.2049

唯識中三科同上，觀境可解。能觀中。外塵謂一切境界也。言本無者有二義：一者境即心故，《占察經》云：一切境界，從本已來體性自滅，未曾有故；因如此義，是故但說一切諸法依心為本；當知一切諸法，悉名為心；以體不異，為心所攝故。二者虛妄見故，經云：但以眾生無明癡暗熏習因緣，現妄境界，令生念著；又云：若無覺知能分別者，則無十方三世一切境界差別之相；《唯識論》云：唯識無境界，以無塵妄見；如人目有翳，見毛如月等事。實唯有識者，言唯則遮於外境，言識則表於內心。或真妄和合為阿梨耶識，謂真能隨緣與妄俱起故。或云真識即是常住本淨真心，即是中道一實境界。然修觀有二：一者直爾總觀，謂觀念性即是真識，其體清淨平等周遍，含攝諸法，出生無盡；究竟一相，寂然常住。二者歷事別觀：一切時中隨緣動念，衣食四儀，若善若惡，皆能了知一識流變。若前總觀，乃彼上智深位所修；末世初心，唯後別觀，是所機教。判位中，上二句彰勝。對前麁淺，故云深妙。《業疏》云：初淺滯教，謂境是空（即小菩薩）；了境本非，性唯識也（即今位也）；又鈔云：鈍見空時，不分別色（謂小菩薩不同二乘析色故）；智知唯識，不分別空（即簡相空），三觀相望，淺不知深，深必兼淺，故後唯識即為圓觀。次二句正判。大菩薩者，初地已去也。故下，引證。彼以五十二位總為四位，論云：一切法以識為相，真如為境（境即是體）；依此境界，隨心信樂，入信樂位（此收加行十信十住十行十迴向四十位）；如理通達，得入見位（即初地也）；能對治一切障，得入修位（二地至七地）；出離障垢，得入究竟位（八地至佛地）。初位所修，名影像唯識；後三所修，名真唯識。（有人將前小菩薩對加行者，不知觀行不同也。）問：有人云：唯識觀，南山判位太高；又云：深位無罪，豈須懺悔！其意云何？答：論文自云唯識通四位，那責南山判耶！此蓋特舉深位以彰理妙，當知悔法正為下凡；故下勸令任智強弱，隨事觀緣；豈令果佛而悔罪耶？前修率爾，不無小疵；後進狂簡，便生輕謗。寄言有識，詳而慎之。又有人云：題云懺六聚法，那出事理懺乎？答：此又不曉化行二教罪懺相須；若唯依化懺，則制罪不亡；若專據制科，則業道全在；故當化行齊用，則使業制俱除。下云五眾犯罪，理事兩緣；又云篇聚依教自滅，業道任自靜思是也。舉宗無濫，故以六聚標題；以類相從，何妨二懺兼述！儻懷通鑒，無事專隅。

In [the contemplation of] consciousness-only, the three headings are the same as above; the object of contemplation is understandable. Within the contemplating wisdom: 'External dust' refers to all objective realms. In saying 'originally non-existent,' there are two meanings: First, because the object is identical with the mind, the Zhan Cha Jing says: 'All objective realms have, from the beginning, had a nature that is inherently extinguished and have never existed. For this reason, it is merely said that all phenomena take the mind as their foundation. One should know that all phenomena are called mind, because their substance is not different and they are subsumed by mind.' Second, because of false perception, the sutra says: 'It is merely through the causal condition of the perfuming of sentient beings' ignorance and darkness that false objective realms are manifested, causing thoughts of attachment to arise.' It also says: 'If there were no awareness capable of discrimination, there would be no distinct marks of all objective realms in the ten directions and the three times.' The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi says: 'Consciousness-only is without objective realms, for without dust there is false perception, like a person whose eyes have cataracts seeing hairs, multiple moons, and such things.' As for 'truly there is only consciousness': saying 'only' excludes external objects; saying 'consciousness' manifests the inner mind. Alternatively, the combination of the true and the false constitutes the ālaya-vijñāna, meaning that the true is able to accord with conditions and arise together with the false. Alternatively, it is said that true consciousness is simply the eternally abiding, fundamentally pure true mind, which is the single real realm of the Middle Way. However, cultivating the contemplation has two forms: First, directly and comprehensively contemplating, meaning one contemplates that the nature of mental thoughts is simply true consciousness, whose substance is pure, impartial, and pervasive, containing and subsuming all phenomena, endlessly giving rise [to them], ultimately possessing a single mark, tranquil and eternally abiding. Second, individually contemplating across phenomena: at all times, following conditions and the stirring of thoughts, in food, clothing, and the four deportments, whether wholesome or unwholesome, one is able to know that all are the fluctuations and transformations of the single consciousness. The former comprehensive contemplation is cultivated by those of superior wisdom and profound stages; for beginners in the final age, only the latter individual contemplation is the teaching suited to their capacity. In determining the stage: the first two lines demonstrate its superiority. In contrast to the coarse and shallow before, it is called profound and subtle. The Karma Commentary says: 'The initial shallow [contemplation] adheres to the teaching and considers the object to be empty (that is, the minor bodhisattva); understanding that the object is fundamentally non-existent, its nature is consciousness-only (that is, the present stage).' The Manual also says: 'When the dull sees emptiness, they do not discriminate matter (meaning that the minor bodhisattva is unlike the two vehicles who analyze matter); when the wise knows consciousness-only, they do not discriminate emptiness (which distinguishes it from mark-emptiness).' Comparing the three contemplations, the shallow does not know the profound, but the profound necessarily encompasses the shallow; hence, the final consciousness-only is the perfect contemplation. The next two lines directly determine [the stage]. 'Great bodhisattva' refers to the first bhūmi and above. 'Therefore...' cites proofs below. That [treatise] summarizes the fifty-two stages into four stages. The treatise says: 'All phenomena take consciousness as their mark and tathatā as their object (the object is the substance); relying on this objective realm, according to the mind's faith and joy, one enters the stage of faith and joy (this subsumes the forty stages of the preparatory stages: ten faiths, ten abodes, ten practices, and ten dedications); penetrating in accordance with the principle, one attains entry into the stage of seeing (that is, the first bhūmi); being able to counteract all hindrances, one attains entry into the stage of cultivation (the second to the seventh bhūmi); transcending hindrances and defilements, one attains entry into the ultimate stage (the eighth bhūmi to the Buddha stage).' That which is cultivated in the first stage is called 'image consciousness-only'; that which is cultivated in the latter three is called 'true consciousness-only.' (There are those who equate the aforementioned minor bodhisattva with the preparatory stage, not knowing that their contemplative practices differ.) Question: Someone says: 'Regarding the consciousness-only contemplation, Nanshan determined the stage too high. Furthermore, in profound stages there is no sin, so how could there be a need for deśanā? What is the meaning of this?' Answer: The text of the treatise itself says that consciousness-only runs through four stages; why blame Nanshan's determination? This is merely specially bringing up the profound stage to manifest the subtlety of the principle. One should know that the repentance method is precisely for lower ordinary beings; hence below it encourages one to measure whether wisdom is strong or weak and contemplate conditions in accord with phenomena. How could it cause a resultant Buddha to repent of sins? Earlier practitioners were hasty, not without slight blemishes; latecomers are rash and unrefined, easily giving rise to flippant slander. I address those with discerning knowledge to examine it carefully. Also, someone says: 'The title says