成唯識論掌中樞要 1.160

1.160

又思量者簡他識，如《疏》。又簡自，何故此名意？有二義：一者依止名意；二者思量名意。何故名思量，不名依止？依止之名是共他故，今不共故；又依止名兼他顯自，以能依止顯所依故；思量之名自行相義，以行顯體，以緣多故，相續恒起；行相緣遠名之為審，故以思量行相而顯自性，不名依止。又現正思量名之為意。《對法》第二無間覺義是意，即次第滅根。今此思量是現正思量，簡無間故，言恒故，顯此思量恒現在故。又簡自名，何故不名心識，而獨名意？《百法》等說識有八種，有心地說八，並名心故。以恒審思量之義，勝餘名故。若恒集起，名心，不及第八；若了境，名識，不及餘六。故以意各而標自稱，不說心、識。由此簡他識有二義，此餘識非恒及非審故，如《疏》解。第二此中心、識不及八、六，恒自識思量之用勝心、識故。簡自名中亦有二：一、不唯依止解意，非諸論中依止之義，行之其名；二、顯常、現在，非無間覺。

Furthermore, 'cogitation' differentiates it from the other consciousnesses, as [stated in] the Commentary. Furthermore, it differentiates it from [other designations of] itself. Why is this named manas? There are two meanings: first, that which is relied upon is named manas; second, cogitation is named manas. Why is it named cogitation and not that which is relied upon? The name 'that which is relied upon' is common to others, whereas here it is uncommon. Furthermore, the name 'that which is relied upon' reveals itself by including others, revealing the support through that which relies upon it. The name 'cogitation' is the meaning of its own mode of activity (ākāra), revealing the entity through the activity. Because its cognitive objects are many, it arises continuously and constantly. Its mode of activity takes distant cognitive objects, which is called 'deliberate'. Therefore, its intrinsic nature is revealed through the mode of activity of cogitation, and it is not named 'that which is relied upon'. Furthermore, presently cogitating right now is named manas. Fascicle two of the Abhidharma[-samuccaya] states that the meaning of 'immediately subsequent awareness' is manas—that is, the immediately preceding sense organ. Here, this cogitation is present, active cogitation: to exclude the immediately preceding [condition] it says 'constant', showing that this cogitation is constantly present. Furthermore, to differentiate its own name: why is it not named citta or vijñāna, but uniquely named manas? The Treatise on the Hundred Dharmas and others state that there are eight kinds of consciousness, and the Stage with Mind states that all eight are named citta. Because the meaning of constantly and deliberately cogitating surpasses the other names: if 'constantly accumulating and giving rise' were named citta, it would not equal the eighth; if 'discerning objects' were named vijñāna, it would not equal the other six. Therefore, it establishes its own designation with 'manas' specifically, and does not speak of citta or vijñāna. By this, differentiating other consciousnesses has two meanings: because these other consciousnesses are not constant and not deliberate, as explained in the Commentary. Second, within this, citta and vijñāna do not equal the eighth and the six, because the function of constant cogitation in its own consciousness surpasses citta and vijñāna. Differentiating its own name also has two points: 1. not explaining manas merely as 'that which is relied upon', for the meaning of 'that which is relied upon' across the treatises does not apply its name [here]; 2. showing it is constant and present, not the immediately subsequent awareness.