[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [唯識二十論述記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834) › 1.79 # 唯識二十論述記 1.79 唯識二十論述記 1.79 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1.79) 答：《成唯識論》第七卷說：非「唯識」言但說一識，若唯一識無他等者，何有十方凡聖、尊卑因果等別？誰為誰說？何法何求？故「唯識」言，有深意趣。識言總顯一切有情，各有八識，六位心所，所變相、見分位差別，及彼空理所顯真如。識自相故，識相應故，二所變故，三分位故，四實性故，如是諸法，皆不離識，總立識名。「唯」言但遮愚夫所執定離諸識實有色等。若如是知唯識教意，便能無倒，善備資糧，速入法空，證無上覺，救拔含識生死輪迴，非全撥無惡取空者，違背教理，能成是事，故定應信一切唯識。知清辨等，所執皆非，由撥依他、圓成無故。《中邊論》中，慈氏尊說：「虛妄分別有，於此二都無，此中唯有空，於彼亦有此。故說一切法，非空非不空，有無及有故，是則契中道。」由此故知說唯識者，契中道義。今言「唯識」，但言三界，且略但依染依他說，妄執分別，唯染污故，理實亦有淨分依他。淨分依他，唯識異說，至下當敘，不繁煩顯。然心、心所，依世俗諦，非真實有，依他起故，如幻事等。若依勝義，非實非不實，心言絕故。依清辨等，破有為空，真性有為空，緣生故，如幻。彼似比量，非真比量。若我真性，離心言故，有為非空。若汝真性，非極成有，唯是空故。故今所說，於理無違。為遣妄執心、心所外實有境故，說唯有識。若執唯識真實有者，如執外境，亦是法執。 > Answer: Fascicle seven of the Cheng weishi lun states: The word "vijñapti-mātra" does not refer to only a single consciousness. If there were only one consciousness and no others, how could there be the distinctions of ordinary beings and noble ones, high and low, cause and effect in the ten directions? Who would teach for whom? What Dharma would be sought? Therefore, the expression "vijñapti-mātra" has a profound meaning. The word "consciousness" synthetically reveals that all sentient beings each possess eight consciousnesses, six categories of mental factors, the division-status distinctions of the transformed object-aspect and seeing-aspect, and the tathatā revealed by their principle of emptiness. Because they are the self-characteristic of consciousness, because they are associated with consciousness, because they are transformed by the two, because they are states of the three, and because they are the real nature of the four—all such dharmas are not apart from consciousness, and are synthetically designated by the name "consciousness". The word "only" merely negates the real form and so on that fools grasp as definitely separated from the consciousnesses. > > If one understands the intent of the vijñapti-mātra teaching in this way, one can without delusion properly prepare the provisions, quickly enter the emptiness of phenomena, realize unsurpassed awakening, and deliver sentient beings from the cycle of birth and death; it is not that nihilists with wrong views of emptiness, who contradict both teaching and reasoning, can accomplish this. Therefore, one must definitely believe that everything is vijñapti-mātra. One should know that the attachments of Bhaviveka and others are all incorrect, because they repudiate paratantra and pariniṣpanna as non-existent. > > In the Madhyāntavibhāga, the venerable Maitreya says: > "Unreal conceptualization exists; / in it, the two are completely absent; > Emptiness alone exists in this, / and in that, this \[emptiness\] also exists. > Therefore it is said that all phenomena / are neither empty nor non-empty, > Because of existence, non-existence, and existence; / this accords with the middle path." > > From this, one knows that those who teach vijñapti-mātra accord with the meaning of the middle path. Now, when saying "vijñapti-mātra," it refers only to the three realms; for now, it is briefly stated based only on the defiled paratantra, because deluded grasping and conceptualization are exclusively defiled. In reality, there is also the purified paratantra. The purified paratantra in vijñapti-mātra is a distinct topic that will be explained below, so we need not elaborate upon it here. However, the mind and mental factors, according to conventional truth, are not truly existent, because they are dependently originated, like illusions and the like. According to ultimate truth, they are neither real nor unreal, because they transcend mind and speech. Following Bhaviveka and others in refuting conditioned dharmas as empty: \[their thesis is that\] conditioned dharmas are empty in their true nature, because they are causally produced, like an illusion. Their inference is a fallacious inference, not a sound inference. If it refers to our true nature, because it transcends mind and speech, conditioned phenomena are not empty. If it refers to your true nature, it is not commonly established as existent, but is solely empty. Therefore, what we now state does not contradict reasoning. In order to eliminate the deluded grasping of real objects existing outside the mind and mental factors, we say that there is only consciousness. If one grasps vijñapti-mātra as truly existent, that is just like grasping external objects, and is likewise a grasping of dharmas. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.78](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1.78) - [Next: 1.80](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1.80) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834~en-mt.1.79) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [成唯識論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.darsana.yogacara.trimsika!vijnaptimatratasiddhi*zh-xuanzang.2.51) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1.79](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1834.1.79) · Pramāṇa