成唯識論掌中樞要 1.49

1.49

後雙敬菩提及涅槃者，唯識性是涅槃，滿、分清淨是菩提，意顯涅槃本性淨故，不言滿分。其大菩提四智品法因時已得而不圓明，今唯取果滿、分淨者，故各別也。下第九云：「由數修習無分別智，斷本識中二障麁重，故能轉捨依他起上遍計所執，及能轉得依他起中圓成實性。由轉煩惱得大涅槃，轉所知障，證無上覺」。成立唯識，意為有情證得如斯二轉依果，故今歸敬。明欲釋論但敬菩提、涅槃二果，不敬餘也。故下序云：「斷障為得二勝果故，乃至廣說，由前證故。故本論師所以作論」。今既釋論敬意須同，即以所趣為所敬法，若不敬之，便不趣故。雖有七解歸所敬田，然依本義唯取疏四解中人，而非法本、釋二師。以唯識性第七轉聲中說所於聲也，非所依聲，以第七聲通根、境故。此為能差別，滿、分淨者為所差別。第四轉中說，以一切所敬皆以第四所為聲說。若唯識性亦所敬者，應第四攝。然依蘇漫多聲說，即是八囀也。一、儞利（上二字合聲）提勢（此云體聲，亦云汎說聲）；二、鄔波提舍（書我反）泥（此云業聲，亦云所說聲）；三、羯咥（都詰反）唎（上二字合聲）迦（上聲）囉（上囀舌）泥（奴皆反。此云能作具聲，亦云能說聲）；四、三鉢囉（上二字合聲）陀儞雞（居梨反。此云所為聲，亦云所與聲）；五、褒（補高反）波陀泥（此云所從聲）；六、莎弭婆（上聲）者儞（平聲。此云所屬聲）；七、珊儞陀那（長聲）囉梯（上二字合聲，此云所依聲）；八、阿曼怛羅（上二字合聲）泥（放皆反。此云平聲）上說總八囀。此中各有一言、二言、多言之聲，合有二十四聲；又有男聲、女聲、非男非女聲；更各有二十四，合總別有九十六聲。男聲八囀者：一、婆（上重聲讀之，下皆准此）婆那；二、婆婆那擔；三、婆婆多；四、婆婆羝；五、婆婆多褒；六、婆婆那多阿；七、婆婆底（都耳反）；八、於初囀上加「醯」字則是。女聲八囀者：一、婆婆那帝（底音讀之）；二、婆婆那底摩；三、婆婆那底夜（上二字合聲，羊鵝反）；四、婆婆那帶；五、婆婆那底夜（二字合）褒；六、婆婆那底夜（二字合）阿；七、婆婆那底夜（二字合）摩；八、於初囀上加「醯」字即是。非男非女聲八囀者：一、婆婆多；二、婆婆䫂；第三囀下稍近男聲，既無別字，所以不出。脚注「上字」等者，依四聲呼之；注「返」者，以翻字法讀之；注「二合」者，兩字連聲讀之；注「輕重」者，隨輕重聲讀之。其間亦有全聲、半聲，恐煩不迷，但是「婆」字皆上聲讀之。然《瑜伽》第二卷，七囀聲亦名「七例句」，依一男聲中，唯詮一丈夫之七囀故，除第八呼。前是男聲中總目一切，故此不同。彼論亦名「七言論句」。一、補盧沙（夾夫體）；二、補盧衫；三、補盧崽拏；四、補盧沙耶；五、補盧沙䫂；六、補盧殺婆；七、補盧鎩；第八、迦呼聲云「醯補盧沙」。若云「迷履底」，是別女聲體；若云「納蓬（去聲呼之）索迦」，是別非男非女聲體。然有別目，但唯七囀。第八乃是汎爾呼聲，更無別詮。唯識性言既。境第七，略有二解：一、依三性；二、依二諦。依三性者，《唯識》第九云：「謂唯識性略有二種：一、虛妄，謂計所執；二、真實，謂圓成實性。復有二種：一、世俗，謂依他起；二、勝義，謂圓成實」。故知三性並名唯識性。三性有二體：一、常無常門。常為圓成，唯真如是，一切有為皆依他起。二、有漏無漏門。一切無漏皆圓成實，諸有漏法皆依他起，菩提、涅槃並圓成故。如《論》第八自有此文。

Later, regarding both bodhi and nirvāṇa being revered together: the nature of vijñapti-mātra is nirvāṇa, and the fully and partially pure is bodhi. The intention is to show that nirvāṇa is inherently pure in its fundamental nature, and so full and partial [degrees] are not spoken of. As for the dharmas comprising the four wisdoms of great bodhi, they have already been attained at the causal stage but are not yet fully illuminated; here one takes only the fully and partially pure of the result, and so they are distinguished individually. Below, the ninth [fascicle] states: "Through repeatedly cultivating non-conceptual wisdom, one severs the coarseness and heaviness of the two hindrances within the root consciousness; thus one is able to transform and abandon the imagined nature upon the dependent nature, and is able to transform and attain the consummated nature within the dependent nature. Through transforming the afflictions, one attains great nirvāṇa; through transforming the cognitive hindrance, one realizes unsurpassed awakening." The intention in establishing vijñapti-mātra is for sentient beings to realize and attain these two fruits of the transformation of the basis; therefore, obeisance is paid now. It clarifies that in seeking to explain the treatise, one pays reverence only to the two fruits of bodhi and nirvāṇa, and does not pay reverence to the rest. Thus the preface below states: "Severing the hindrances is for the purpose of attaining the two superior fruits, and so forth in detail, because they were realized previously. For this reason, the author of the root treatise composed the treatise." Now, since one explains the treatise, the intention of reverence must be the same: that which is aimed at is taken as the revered Dharma; for if one does not revere it, one will not aim at it. Although there are seven explanations of the field of reverence, relying on the primary meaning, one takes only the person in the four explanations of the commentary, and not the two masters of the root text and the commentary on the Dharma. For the nature of vijñapti-mātra is stated in the seventh case, expressing the locative case, not the source [ablative] case, because the seventh case applies to both faculties and cognitive objects. This is the qualifier, and the "fully and partially pure" is that which is qualified. It is stated in the fourth case, for all objects of reverence are expressed in the fourth dative case. If the nature of vijñapti-mātra were also an object of reverence, it would be subsumed under the fourth case. However, explained according to nominal inflection (subanta), there are eight vibhaktis: 1. nirdeśe (the case expressing essence, also called general designation); 2. upadeśane (the accusative case, also called that which is expressed); 3. kartṛ-karaṇe (the instrumental/agent case, also called that which can express); 4. sampradānīye (the dative case, also called that for which something is done); 5. apādāne (the ablative case, expressing that from which); 6. svāmi-vacane (the genitive case, expressing ownership); 7. saṃnidhānārthe (the locative case, expressing basis or location); 8. āmantraṇe (the vocative case). The above explains the eight vibhaktis in general. Among these, each has singular, dual, and plural forms, making twenty-four forms in total; moreover, there are masculine, feminine, and neuter genders; each again has twenty-four, making a combined total and detail of ninety-six forms. The eight vibhaktis in the masculine gender are: 1. bhavān; 2. bhavantam; 3. bhavatā; 4. bhavate; 5. bhavataḥ; 6. bhavataḥ; 7. bhavati; 8. adding the word "he" to the first case is it. The eight vibhaktis in the feminine gender are: 1. bhavatī; 2. bhavatīm; 3. bhavatyā; 4. bhavatyai; 5. bhavatyāḥ; 6. bhavatyāḥ; 7. bhavatyām; 8. adding the word "he" to the first case is it. The eight vibhaktis in the neuter gender are: 1. bhavat; 2. bhavat; from the third case downward it is slightly close to the masculine, and since there are no distinct words, they are not presented. The footnoted "falling tone" and so on are pronounced according to the four tones; those noted "fan" are read using the fanqie method; those noted "two combined" are read with the two characters sounded together; those noted "light/heavy" are read according to the light or heavy sound. Among them there are also full sounds and half sounds, but for fear of confusion they are not elaborated; all occurrences of the character "po" are to be read in the falling tone. However, in the second fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi, the seven case forms are also called the "seven standard expressions" because, based on a single masculine noun, they express only the seven cases of a single man (puruṣa), excluding the eighth, the vocative. The preceding was a general designation of everything within the masculine gender, hence it is not the same. That treatise also calls them "the seven spoken phrases": 1. puruṣaḥ (the essence of a man); 2. puruṣam; 3. puruṣeṇa; 4. puruṣāya; 5. puruṣāt; 6. puruṣasya; 7. puruṣe; the eighth vocative case is he puruṣa. If one says mūrttī, this is the essence of a distinct feminine noun; if one says napuṃsaka, this is the essence of a distinct neuter noun. Though they have distinct designations, there are only seven cases. The eighth is merely an ordinary vocative sound, without any distinct signification. Since the phrase "the nature of vijñapti-mātra" is the seventh case of the cognitive object, there are briefly two explanations: first, relying on the three natures; second, relying on the two truths. Relying on the three natures, the ninth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratā states: "There are briefly two kinds of nature of vijñapti-mātra: first, the false, which refers to the imagined nature; second, the real, which refers to the consummated nature. Furthermore, there are two kinds: first, the conventional, which refers to the dependent nature; second, the ultimate, which refers to the consummated nature." Therefore we know that all three natures are called the nature of vijñapti-mātra. The three natures have two aspects of substance: first, the gate of permanence and impermanence: the permanent is the consummated nature, which is solely tathatā; all conditioned phenomena are the dependent nature. Second, the gate of tainted and untainted: all untainted phenomena are the consummated nature, and all tainted phenomena are the dependent nature, because bodhi and nirvāṇa are both the consummated nature. This passage appears in the eighth fascicle of the treatise itself.