成唯識論述記 1.12

1.12

若依自識，有漏心現，即似無漏文、義為體；無漏心現，即真無漏文、義為體，此即如來實不說法。故《大般若》四百二十五、《文殊問經》等，佛皆自說：我成佛來，不說一字，汝亦不聞。論說聚集，顯現為體，此即無性、佛地一師作如此解。護法、親光等云：或宜聞者本願緣力，如來識上文、義相生，實能、所詮，文、義為體。若依本說，即真無漏文、義為體。故《瑜伽論》六十四卷引《叔攝波葉喻經》云：我未所說，乃有爾所。《二十論》說：展轉增上力，二識成決定。是故世尊實有說法，言「不說」者，是密意說。此論根本既是佛經，故出體者應如經說。此釋雖二，然此論主無不說法，取後解也。總論出體略有四重：一、攝相歸性，皆如為體。故經說言：一切法亦如也，至於彌勒，亦如也。二、攝境從心，一切唯識，如經中說「三界唯心」。三、攝假隨實。如不相應，色、心分位，《對法論》說是假立故也。四、性用別論。色、心假、實，各別處收。《瑜伽論》說色蘊攝彼，十處全等。上來第二、第四體訖。自識所變，則是第二攝境從心。并言佛說，乃是第四、性用別論。聞者似法，說者真教，俱淨法界平等所流。約本為言，此教亦以真如為體，此即第一、攝相歸性。能說、能聽所有名等，聲上屈曲，離聲無體。故假從實，體即是聲，此即第三、攝假隨實。《對法論》云：成所引聲，謂諸聖說。

If considered according to one's own consciousness: when manifested by a sāsrava mind, its substance is resembling-anāsrava text and meaning; when manifested by an anāsrava mind, its substance is true anāsrava text and meaning. In this way, the Tathāgata in reality does not preach the Dharma. Therefore, in the four hundred and twenty-fifth fascicle of the Great Prajñāpāramitā-sūtra, the Mañjuśrīparipṛcchā-sūtra, and elsewhere, the Buddha himself says: 'Since I became a Buddha, I have not spoken a single word, nor have you heard one.' The śāstra says that aggregation appearing [in the mind] is the substance; this is the explanation given by a master such as Asvabhāva or the commentator on the Buddhabhūmi[-sūtra]. Dharmapāla, Bandhuprabha, and others say: by the conditioning power of the fundamental vow of those who ought to hear, there arise upon the Tathāgata's consciousness the appearances of text and meaning, and the true expresser and expressed, text and meaning, serve as the substance. If spoken of from the source, true anāsrava text and meaning serve as the substance. Thus, the sixty-fourth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra cites the Śiṃśapā-patra-upamā-sūtra: 'What I have not preached is as vast as this.' The Viṃśikā states: 'By mutual predominant power, two consciousnesses become determined.' Therefore, the World-Honoured One truly preaches the Dharma; the statement that he 'does not preach' is an intentional teaching (sandhyā-bhāṣita). Since the foundation of this treatise is Buddha-sūtras, the presentation of its substance should follow what the sūtras explain. Although there are these two interpretations, this treatise master does not accept that there is no preaching of the Dharma, and adopts the latter explanation. In discussing the presentation of the substance in general, there are briefly four levels: First, subsuming marks into the nature: all take tathatā as their substance. Thus a sūtra says: 'All dharmas are also tathatā, and even Maitreya is also tathatā.' Second, subsuming objects under mind: all is vijñapti-mātra, as when it is said in a sūtra, 'The three realms are mind-only.' Third, subsuming the provisional under the real: as in the case of citta-viprayukta-saṃskāras, which are divisions of matter and mind, for the Abhidharmasamuccaya states that they are established provisionally. Fourth, discussing nature and function separately: matter and mind, provisional and real, are each subsumed under separate categories. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra states that the aggregate of matter subsumes them, completely covering the ten āyatanas, and so on. Up to here, the second and fourth substances have been completed. What is transformed by one's own consciousness is the second, subsuming objects under mind. Stating both that it is spoken by the Buddha is the fourth, discussing nature and function separately. The resembled dharma of the hearer and the true teaching of the speaker both flow equally from the pure dharmadhātu. Speaking in terms of the source, this teaching also takes tathatā as its substance; this is the first, subsuming marks into the nature. The names and so forth belonging to the speaker and the hearer are modulations upon sound, having no substance apart from sound. Therefore, taking the provisional to follow the real, their substance is simply sound; this is the third, subsuming the provisional under the real. The Abhidharmasamuccaya states: 'Sound induced by accomplishment refers to the speech of the noble ones.'