成唯識論了義燈 6.158

6.158

三本性滅者，《辨中邊》云：謂垢寂二即擇滅及真如。法師《中邊疏》云：安惠云：垢寂二種，一、染垢寂，即煩惱障斷，謂擇滅；二、不染垢寂，即所知障斷，謂真如或。總解云：由垢寂故總得二，謂擇滅及真如。或垢寂故得擇滅，或性寂故即真如。總含二種，故言垢寂二。然《成唯識》說二取滅即是擇滅，《辨中邊》說擇滅即本性收。二論說別者，《中邊》約所依、所得二各別故。所依依他，假名為二取滅，或所得屬本性。唯識不約所依，但辨所得，假名依他，故分擇滅。此意以《中邊論》云二二取滅，即能取二取，二取不生，三本性滅。謂垢、寂二即擇滅及真如，以《辨中邊》說所依，即能所取為二取滅，說所得即斷二取，已所得擇滅，故分為二。唯識不說所依二取，但辨所得斷二取已，所得擇滅，假名依他，實是擇滅。故於本性滅中，分出擇滅名二取滅，即諦實也。《辨中邊論》說所依二取無名二取滅，即彼所滅名之為滅，實依他起，性實諦假。若依識變名為擇滅，亦同此釋，本性滅者，依《中邊論》擇滅為本性。性、諦俱實，真如二說，若唯據詮性實諦假，詮、旨合說，性、諦俱實。准《涅槃經》，諦攝法盡，真如非滅，即攝法不盡故，或滅之實性真如名本性滅，亦性、諦俱實。

[Regarding] the third, cessation of fundamental nature: the Madhyāntavibhāga says: "It refers to the two quietings of defilement, namely pratisaṃkhyānirodha and tathatā." The Master's Madhyāntavibhāga-ṭīkā says: Sthiramati says: "There are two kinds of quieting of defilement: first, the quieting of defiled stains, which is the severance of the affliction obstacle, called pratisaṃkhyānirodha; second, the quieting of undefiled stains, which is the severance of the cognitive obstacle, called tathatā." Or, to explain generally: "Due to the quieting of defilements, one obtains two collectively, namely pratisaṃkhyānirodha and tathatā. Or, due to the quieting of defilements one obtains pratisaṃkhyānirodha, or due to natural quieting it is just tathatā. Because it collectively encompasses the two, it says 'the two quietings of defilement'." However, the Cheng weishi lun says that the cessation of the two graspers is just pratisaṃkhyānirodha, whereas the Madhyāntavibhāga says that pratisaṃkhyānirodha is subsumed under fundamental nature. The difference between the two treatises is because the Madhyāntavibhāga differentiates the basis and what is attained as distinct. Paratantra as the basis is nominally called the cessation of the two graspers, or what is attained belongs to fundamental nature. The Vijñapti-mātra does not refer to the basis, but merely distinguishes what is attained as nominally paratantra, thus distinguishing pratisaṃkhyānirodha. The meaning here is that because the Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra says the second, cessation of the two graspers, refers to the two graspers of subject and object, where the two graspers do not arise; the third, cessation of fundamental nature, refers to the two quietings of defilement, namely pratisaṃkhyānirodha and tathatā. Because the Madhyāntavibhāga explains the basis, namely subject- and object-grasping as the cessation of the two graspers, and explains what is attained, namely the pratisaṃkhyānirodha attained after severing the two graspers, it divides them into two. The Vijñapti-mātra does not speak of the two graspers as the basis, but merely distinguishes the pratisaṃkhyānirodha attained after severing the two graspers as nominally paratantra, while in reality it is pratisaṃkhyānirodha. Therefore, from within the cessation of fundamental nature, it separates pratisaṃkhyānirodha and calls it the cessation of the two graspers, which is truth-real. The Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra says that the absence of the two graspers as the basis is called the cessation of the two graspers; that which is ceased by them is called cessation, which is in reality paratantra, nature-real and truth-nominal. If it is called pratisaṃkhyānirodha based on consciousness-transformation, it is also the same as this explanation. As for the cessation of fundamental nature, based on the Madhyāntavibhāga-śāstra, pratisaṃkhyānirodha is fundamental nature; both nature and truth are real. Regarding tathatā, there are two explanations: if solely based on designation, it is nature-real and truth-nominal; if designation and meaning are stated together, both nature and truth are real. Following the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, the truths exhaustively subsume phenomena; if tathatā were not cessation, then they would not exhaustively subsume phenomena. Or, the true nature of cessation, tathatā, is called cessation of fundamental nature, which is also both nature- and truth-real.