起信論疏 1.19

1.19

此下第二釋生滅門，於中有二：初正廣釋；「復次有四種熏習」以下，因言重顯。初中有三：一者釋上立義分中是心生滅；二者「復次生滅因緣」以下，釋上生滅因緣；三者「復次生滅相」以下，釋上生滅相。初中有二：一者就體總明、二者依義別解。初中三句：一者標體、二者辯相、三者立名。初中言「依如來藏故有生滅心」者，自性清淨心，名為如來藏；因無明風動作生滅，故說生滅依如來藏。如四卷經言「如來藏為無始惡習所熏，名為識藏。」又言「剎那者，名為識藏」故。「所謂」以下，第二辯相。「不生不滅」者，是上如來藏；不生滅心、動作生滅，不相捨離，名「與和合」。如下文言「如大海水因風波動，水相、風相不相捨離」，乃至廣說。此中水之動是風相、動之濕是水相，水舉體動故，水不離風相；無動非濕故，動不離水相。心亦如是，不生滅心舉體動，故心不離生滅相；生滅之相莫非神解，故生滅不離心相。如是不相離，故名與和合。此是不生滅心與生滅和合，非謂生滅與不生滅和合也。「非一非異」者，不生滅心舉體而動，故心與生滅非異；而恒不失不生滅性，故生滅與心非一。又若是一者，生滅識相滅盡之時，心神之體亦應隨滅，墮於斷邊；若是異者，依無明風熏動之時，靜心之體不應隨緣，即墮常邊；離此二邊，故非一非異。如四卷經云「譬如泥團微塵，非異非不異，金莊嚴具亦如是。若泥團微塵異者，非彼所成，而實彼成，是故非異；若不異者，泥團微塵應無差別。如是轉識、藏識真相若異者，藏識非因，若不異者，轉識滅，藏識亦應滅；而自真相實不滅，是故非自真相識滅，但業相滅。」今此論主正釋彼文，故言非一、非異。此中「業識」者，「因無明力不覺心動」，故名業識；又「依動心轉成能見」，故名「轉識」。此二皆在梨耶識位。如十卷經言「如來藏即阿梨耶識，共七識生，名轉滅相。」故知轉相在梨耶識。自真相者，十卷經云「中真名自相，本覺之心，不藉妄緣，性自神解，名自真相，是約不一義門說也。又隨無明風作生滅時，神解之性與本不異，故亦得名為自真相，是依不異義門說也。」於中委悉，如《別記》說也。第三立名，名為「阿梨耶識」者，不生滅與生滅和合，非一非異，故總名為阿梨耶識。翻名釋義，是如《楞伽宗要》中說。就體總明，竟在於前。

From here below is the second [section], explaining the gate of arising and ceasing, within which there are two [parts]: first, properly and extensively explaining; and second, from "Furthermore, there are four kinds of vāsanā" onward, re-elucidating on that basis. Within the first there are three: first, explaining "this mind arises and ceases" from the section on establishing the thesis above; second, from "Furthermore, the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing" onward, explaining the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing mentioned above; third, from "Furthermore, the aspects of arising and ceasing" onward, explaining the aspects of arising and ceasing mentioned above. Within the first there are two: first, an overall elucidation in terms of essence; second, a distinct explanation according to meaning. In the first there are three sentences: first, indicating the essence; second, distinguishing the aspects; third, establishing the name. In the first, where it says "based on the tathāgatagarbha there is the mind of arising and ceasing": the naturally pure mind is called the tathāgatagarbha; moved by the wind of avidyā to act as arising and ceasing, it is therefore said that arising and ceasing are based on the tathāgatagarbha. As the four-fascicle sūtra says: "The tathāgatagarbha, perfumed by evil vāsanā from beginningless time, is called the repository consciousness." It also says: "The momentary is called the repository consciousness." From "the so-called" onward is the second, distinguishing the aspects. "Neither arising nor ceasing" refers to the tathāgatagarbha above; the unarisen and unceasing mind is moved to act as arising and ceasing, and they do not separate from one another, which is called "combined with." As the text below says: "Just as the water of the great ocean is stirred into waves due to the wind, and the aspect of water and the aspect of wind do not separate from one another," and so forth extensively. Here, the movement of the water is the aspect of wind, and the wetness of the movement is the aspect of water; because the water in its entirety moves, the water is not separate from the aspect of wind; because there is no movement that is not wet, the movement is not separate from the aspect of water. The mind is also like this: the unarisen and unceasing mind moves in its entirety, so the mind is not separate from the aspect of arising and ceasing; none of the aspects of arising and ceasing are other than spiritual awareness, so arising and ceasing are not separate from the aspect of mind. Being thus inseparable, it is called combined with. This is the unarisen and unceasing mind combining with arising and ceasing, not arising and ceasing combining with the unarisen and unceasing. "Neither one nor different": the unarisen and unceasing mind moves in its entirety, so mind and arising and ceasing are not different; yet it never loses its unarisen and unceasing nature, so arising and ceasing and mind are not one. Furthermore, if they were one, when the aspects of the arising and ceasing consciousness are extinguished, the essence of the mental spirit would also be extinguished along with them, falling into the extreme of annihilation; if they were different, when it is perfumed and stirred based on the wind of avidyā, the essence of the tranquil mind would not follow conditions, falling into the extreme of permanence; free from these two extremes, it is therefore neither one nor different. As the four-fascicle sūtra says: "Just as a lump of clay and fine particles of dust are neither different nor non-different, and ornaments of gold are also like this: if the lump of clay and the fine particles of dust were different, [the former] would not be made of the latter, yet it is indeed made of it, therefore they are not different; if they were not different, there would be no distinction between a lump of clay and fine particles of dust. In the same way, if the evolving consciousness and the true aspect of the repository consciousness were different, the repository consciousness would not be the cause; if they were not different, when the evolving consciousness ceases, the repository consciousness would also cease; yet its own true aspect in fact does not cease, therefore it is not that the consciousness of its own true aspect ceases, but only that the karmic aspect ceases." Now, the author of this treatise is precisely explaining that passage; thus he says "neither one nor different." Here, "karmic consciousness": "due to the power of avidyā, the unenlightened mind moves," hence it is called karmic consciousness; again, "based on the moving mind, it turns to become the capacity to see," hence it is called "evolving consciousness." Both of these are at the stage of the ālayavijñāna. As the ten-fascicle sūtra says: "The tathāgatagarbha is the ālayavijñāna; arising together with the seven consciousnesses, it is called the aspect of evolving and ceasing." Therefore we know that the evolving aspect is within the ālayavijñāna. Regarding "its own true aspect": the ten-fascicle sūtra says, "The inner truth is called the proper aspect; the mind of original enlightenment does not rely on false conditions, and is by nature spiritually aware, so it is called its own true aspect—this is spoken according to the meaning of not being one. Furthermore, when it acts as arising and ceasing following the wind of avidyā, the nature of spiritual awareness is not different from the original, so it can also be called its own true aspect—this is spoken based on the meaning of not being different." The details therein are as explained in the Separate Record. Third, establishing the name: regarding the name "ālayavijñāna," the unarisen and unceasing combines with arising and ceasing, being neither one nor different, and is therefore collectively named ālayavijñāna. The translation of the name and the explanation of its meaning are as stated in the Essentials of the Laṅkāvatāra. The overall elucidation in terms of essence has ended above.