起信論疏 1.25

1.25

次釋不覺，於中有三：先明根本不覺、次顯枝末不覺、第三總結本末不覺。初中亦二：先明不覺依本覺立、後顯本覺亦待不覺。初中有三，謂法、喻、合。初中言「不如實知真如法一故」者，根本無明，猶如迷方也。「不覺心起而有其念」者，業相動念，是如邪方，如離正東無別邪西，故言「念無自相不離本覺」，喻合之文，文相可見也。次明本覺亦待不覺，於中有二：初言「以有不覺妄想心」者，無明所起妄想分別，由此妄想「能知名義」，故有言說，說於真覺，是名真覺之名待於妄想也。「若離不覺則無真覺自相可說」者，是明所說真覺必待不覺。若不相待則無自相，待他而有亦非自相；自相既無何有他相？是顯諸法無所得義。如下文言「當知一切染法、淨法皆悉相待，無有自相可說。」《智度論》云「若世諦如毫釐許有實者，第一義諦亦應有實。」此之謂也。此下廣顯枝末不覺，於中有二：先明細相，後顯麁相。初中亦二：總標、別釋。初中言「與彼不覺相應不離」者，本末相依，故曰相應。非如王數相應之義，此為不相應染心故。別釋中言「無明業相」者，依無明動，名為業相故。起動義是業義，故言心動說名為業也。「覺則不動」者，舉對反顯。得始覺時，則無動念，是知今動只由不覺也。「動則有苦」者，如得寂靜即是極樂，故今云動即是苦也。業相是無苦，無明是無集，如是因果俱時而有，故言「果不離因故」。然此業相雖有動念，而是極細、能所未分，其本無明當知亦爾。如《無想論》云「問：此識何相何境？答：相及境不可分別，一體無異。問：若爾，云何知有？答：由事故知有此識，此識能起一切煩惱業果報事；譬如無明常起，此無明可欲分別不？若可分別，非謂無明；若不可分別，則應非有而是有非無；亦由欲瞋等事，知有無明，本識亦爾。」故此等文意，正約業相顯本識也。第二「能見相」者，即是轉相。依前業相轉成能緣，故言「以依動能見」；依性靜門則無能見，故言「不動則無見」也，反顯能見要依動義。如是轉相雖有能緣，而未能顯所緣境相，直是外向非託境故。如《攝論》云「意識緣三世，及非三世境。」是則可知此識所緣境不可知故。此言不可知者，以無可知境故，如說十二因緣始不可知。此亦如是，是約轉相顯本識也。第三「境界相」者，即是現相，依前轉相能現境界，故言能見故境界妄現。如四卷經言「大慧！略說有三種識，廣說有八相。何等為三？謂真識、現識、分別事識。譬如明鏡持諸色像，現識處亦復如是。」又下文言「譬如藏識，頓分別知自心現身及身安立受用境界。」此論下文明現識云「所謂能現一切境界，猶如明鏡現於色像，現識亦爾。以一切時任運而起，常在前故。」如是等文，約於現相以顯本識。如是現相既在本識，何況其本轉相業相反在六七識中說乎？「以有」已下，次明麁相。於中亦二：總標、別釋。初言「以有境界緣」者，依前現識所現境故，起七識中六種麁相。是釋經言「境界風所動，七識波浪轉」之意也。次別釋中，初之一相，是第七識；次四相者，在生起識；後一相者，彼所生果也。初言「智相」者，是第七識麁中之始，始有慧數分別我塵，故名智相。如《夫人經》言「於此六識及心法智，此七法剎那不住。」此言心法智者，慧數之謂也。若在善道，分別可愛法，計我我所；在惡道時，分別不愛法，計我我所。故言「依於境界，心起分別愛與不愛故」也。具而言之，緣於本識計以為我，緣所現境計為我所，而今此中就其麁顯，故說依於境界心起。又此境界不離現識，猶如影像不離鏡面，此第七識直爾內向計我我所，而不別計心外有塵，故餘處說還緣彼識。問：云何得知第七末那非但緣識亦緣六塵？答：此有二證，一依比量、二聖言量。言比量者，此意根必與意識同境，是立宗也。不共所依故，是辨因也。諸是不共所依，必與能依同境，如眼根等，是隨同品言也。或時不同境者，必非不共所依，如次第滅意根等，是遠離言也。如是宗因譬喻無過，故知意根亦緣六塵也。若依是義，能依意識緣意根時，所依意根亦對自體，以有自證分故無過。亦緣自所相應心法，以無能障法故得緣。諸心心所法皆證自體，是故不廢同一所緣。此義唯不通於五識，依色根起不通利故，但對色塵非餘境故。聖言量者，有經有。《金鼓經》言「眼根受色，耳根分別聲，乃至意根分別一切諸法。」大乘意根即是末那，故知遍緣一切法也。又《對法論》十種分別中言「第一相分別者，謂身所居處所受用義，彼復如其次第，以諸色根器世界色等境界為相；第二相顯現分別者，謂六識身及意，如前所說取相而顯現故。此中五識，唯現色等五塵；意識及意，通現色根及器世界色等境界。」設使末那不緣色根器世界等，則能現分別，唯應取六識；而言及意，故知通緣也。且置傍論，還釋本文。第二「相續相」者，是生起識，識蘊是麁分別，遍計諸法得長相續；又能起愛取，引持過去諸行不斷；亦得潤生，能令未來果報相續。依是義故名相續相，不同前說相續心也。「依於智」者，依前智相為根所生故。所依是細，唯一捨受；能依是麁，具起苦樂，故言「生起苦樂」也。又所依智相，內緣而住，不計外塵，故是似眠。此相續識，遍計內外，覺觀分別，如似覺悟，以之故言「覺心起念」，起念即是法執分別。識蘊與此麁執相應，遍馳諸境，故言「相應不斷故」也。第三「執取相」者，即是受蘊，以依識蘊，分別違順，領納苦樂，故言「依於相續乃至住苦樂」等也。第四「計名字相」者，即是想蘊，依前受蘊，分別違順等名言相，故言「依妄執乃至名言相故」也。第五「起業相」者，即是行蘊，依於想蘊所取名相，而起思數，造作善惡，故言「依於名字乃至造種種業故」也。第六「業繫苦相」者，依前行蘊所造之業，而受三有、六趣苦果，故言「依業受果不自在故」也。「當知」以下，第三總結。如前所說六種麁相，依於現相所現境起，三種細相，親依無明，如是六三，總攝諸染，是故當知無明住地，能生一切染法根本。以諸染相雖有麁細，而皆不覺諸法實相，不覺之相是無明氣，故言「一切染法皆是不覺相故」。

Next, the explanation of non-enlightenment contains three [parts]: first, explaining fundamental non-enlightenment; second, revealing branch non-enlightenment; third, concluding with fundamental and branch non-enlightenment together. The first also has two [parts]: first, explaining that non-enlightenment is established based on original enlightenment; second, revealing that original enlightenment also depends on non-enlightenment. The first has three parts: doctrine, simile, and application. In the first part, the statement that "because of not truly knowing the oneness of the realm of reality (tathatā)" means that fundamental ignorance is like losing one's sense of direction. "The unenlightened mind arises and has its thoughts": the karmic aspect stirs thought, which is like mistaking directions; just as apart from true east there is no separate false west, thus it says: "thoughts have no self-aspect, not departing from original enlightenment." The text of the simile and application can be clearly seen. Next, explaining that original enlightenment also depends on non-enlightenment has two [parts]: first, saying "because there is the unenlightened deluded mind": the deluded discrimination aroused by ignorance; due to this deluded thought, "it can know names and meanings," hence there is verbal discourse which speaks of true enlightenment; this is called the name of true enlightenment depending on deluded thought. "If one is free from non-enlightenment, then there is no self-aspect of true enlightenment that can be spoken of": this reveals that what is called true enlightenment necessarily depends on non-enlightenment. If they are not mutually dependent, then there is no self-aspect; that which exists depending on another is also not a self-aspect; since self-aspect does not exist, how could there be other-aspect? This reveals the principle that all dharmas are unobtainable. As the subsequent text states: "One should know that all defiled dharmas and pure dharmas are mutually dependent, with no self-aspect that can be spoken of." The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: "If worldly truth had reality to the extent of a hair's breadth, then ultimate truth would also have reality." This is what it means. Below this, branch non-enlightenment is explained at length, in which there are two [parts]: first, explaining the subtle aspects; second, explaining the coarse aspects. The first also has two [parts]: general introduction and specific explanation. In the general introduction, "associated without departing from that non-enlightenment": the fundamental and the branch depend on each other, hence it is called "associated." It is not like the meaning of mental king and mental factors being associated, because this refers to non-associated defiled mind. In the specific explanation, "the karmic aspect of ignorance": depending on ignorance it stirs, therefore it is called the karmic aspect. The meaning of arising and stirring is the meaning of karma, so it is said that the mind stirring is named karma. "Enlightened, then it does not stir": this brings up the opposite to reveal it. When attaining initial enlightenment, there is no stirring thought; from this we know that present stirring is merely due to non-enlightenment. "Stirring, then there is suffering": just as attaining quiescence is supreme bliss, so now it says that stirring is suffering. The karmic aspect is non-[cessation of] suffering; ignorance is non-[cessation of] accumulation; cause and fruit thus exist simultaneously, hence it says "because fruit is not separated from cause." However, although this karmic aspect has stirring thought, it is extremely subtle, subject and object not yet separated; one should know that fundamental ignorance is also like this. As the Wuxiang lun (Treatise on Non-conceptualization) says: "Question: What are the aspect and object of this consciousness? Answer: Aspect and object cannot be differentiated; they are of one essence without difference. Question: If so, how is it known to exist? Answer: From its functions it is known that this consciousness exists; this consciousness can give rise to all afflictions, karmic activities, and retributions. For example, ignorance constantly arises; can this ignorance be differentiated? If it can be differentiated, it is not called ignorance; if it cannot be differentiated, then it should be non-existent, yet it exists and is not non-existent. Also, through matters like desire and anger, we know there is ignorance; the fundamental consciousness is also like this." Therefore, the intention of these passages directly takes the karmic aspect to reveal the fundamental consciousness. Second, "the aspect of being able to see": this is the evolving aspect. Based on the preceding karmic aspect, it evolves into the subject that perceives, hence it says "because depending on stirring, it can see"; based on the gate of quiescent nature, there is no seeing, hence it says "without stirring, there is no seeing," which inversely reveals that being able to see necessarily relies on the meaning of stirring. Although this evolving aspect has subjective perceiving, it cannot yet manifest the aspect of objective conditions; it merely faces outward without relying on an external sphere. As the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: "Mental consciousness perceives the three periods of time and non-temporal objects." From this, it can be known that the object perceived by this consciousness cannot be known. Saying it cannot be known means that there is no knowable object, just as the beginning of the twelve links of dependent origination cannot be known. This is also like that; this takes the evolving aspect to reveal the fundamental consciousness. Third, "the aspect of the objective realm": this is the manifesting aspect. Depending on the preceding evolving aspect, it can manifest the objective realm, hence it says that because it can see, the objective realm falsely manifests. As the four-fascicle [Laṅkāvatāra] Sūtra says: "Śūramgama! In brief there are three kinds of consciousness, and in detail there are eight aspects. What are the three? The true consciousness, the manifesting consciousness, and the consciousness that discriminates phenomena. Just as a bright mirror reflects various forms and images, so too is the sphere of manifesting consciousness." Also, a later passage states: "Just as the storehouse consciousness instantaneously discriminates and knows the body manifested by its own mind, as well as the objective realms of sustained enjoyment." The text below this treatise explains the manifesting consciousness, saying: "That which can manifest all objective realms, just as a bright mirror reflects forms and images, so too is the manifesting consciousness. Because it arises spontaneously at all times, constantly in the forefront." Such passages rely on the manifesting aspect to reveal the fundamental consciousness. Since such a manifesting aspect resides in the fundamental consciousness, how much more should its root evolving aspect and karmic aspect not be spoken of as residing in the sixth and seventh consciousnesses? From "Because there is..." onward, it next explains the coarse aspects, in which there are also two [parts]: general introduction and specific explanation. First, saying "because there is the condition of the objective realm": relying on the realm manifested by the preceding manifesting consciousness, the six coarse aspects within the seven consciousnesses arise. This explains the sūtra's meaning: "Stirred by the wind of external realms, the waves of the seven consciousnesses roll." In the specific explanation, the first aspect belongs to the seventh consciousness; the next four aspects reside in the arising consciousness; the final aspect is the fruit produced by them. First, "the aspect of wisdom": this is the beginning of the coarse [aspects] in the seventh consciousness; the mental factor of wisdom begins to discriminate the self and objects, hence it is named the aspect of wisdom. As the Śrīmālādevī Sūtra says: "Regarding these six consciousnesses and the mental factor of wisdom (citta-dharma-jñāna), these seven dharmas do not abide for a kṣaṇa." What is called the mental factor of wisdom refers to the mental factor of understanding (prajñā). If in a wholesome destiny, it discriminates desirable dharmas and grasps at self and what belongs to self; when in an unwholesome destiny, it discriminates undesirable dharmas and grasps at self and what belongs to self. Hence it says "because relying on the objective realm, the mind gives rise to discrimination of the desirable and undesirable." Speaking fully, it grasps the fundamental consciousness, taking it as self, and grasps the manifested realm, taking it as what belongs to self; but now here, in terms of coarse manifestation, it is said that the mind arises relying on the objective realm. Moreover, this objective realm does not depart from the manifesting consciousness, just as a reflection does not depart from the surface of a mirror; this seventh consciousness simply turns inward to grasp self and what belongs to self, without separately grasping external objects outside the mind, which is why other places state that it returns to grasping that consciousness. Question: How is it known that the seventh manas not only grasps consciousness but also grasps the six dust-objects? Answer: There are two proofs: first, relying on inference (anumāna); second, relying on scriptural testimony (āptāgama). As for inference: this mental sense-faculty necessarily shares the same realm as the mental consciousness—this is the thesis (pratijñā). Because it is an unshared basis—this explains the reason (hetu). Whatever is an unshared basis necessarily shares the same realm as that which is based on it, like the eye faculty, etc.—this is the statement of positive concomitance (sādharmya). If at times they did not share the same realm, it would definitely not be an unshared basis, like the immediately antecedent mental faculty, etc.—this is the statement of negative concomitance (vaidharmya). Thesis, reason, and example being without flaw, we therefore know that the mental faculty also grasps the six dust-objects. If according to this meaning, when the supported mental consciousness grasps the mental faculty, the supporting mental faculty also faces its own substance, because it possesses the self-verifying part (svasaṃvitti-bhāga), there is no flaw. It also grasps its own associated mental factors, because there are no dharmas capable of obstructing it, it can grasp them. All minds and mental factors verify their own substances, therefore this does not preclude having the same objective referent. This principle does not apply only to the five consciousnesses, because arising dependent on material faculties they are not keenly penetrating, directly confronting material dust and not other objects. As for scriptural testimony, it exists in sūtras and śāstras. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra says: "The eye faculty receives form; the ear faculty discriminates sound... up to the mental faculty discriminates all dharmas." In the Mahāyāna, the mental faculty is precisely manas, hence we know that it universally grasps all dharmas. Furthermore, among the ten kinds of discrimination in the Abhidharmasamuccaya, it says: "First, discrimination of characteristics: refers to the physical place of residence and objects of enjoyment, which in turn successively take the material faculties, the vessel world, form, and other realms as their characteristics; second, discrimination of manifest characteristics: refers to the six consciousness bodies and manas, because as previously stated they take characteristics and manifest them. Here, the five consciousnesses only manifest the five dusts such as form; the mental consciousness and manas both manifest material faculties, the vessel world, form, and other realms." Suppose that manas did not grasp material faculties, the vessel world, etc., then the discriminating [consciousness] capable of manifesting should only take the six consciousnesses; yet it says "and manas," so we know it comprehensively grasps them. Setting aside side discussions, let us return to explaining the root text. Second, "the aspect of continuity": this is the arising consciousness; the aggregate of consciousness is coarse discrimination, conceptually superimposing all dharmas so that it achieves prolonged continuity; it also can give rise to craving and grasping, sustaining past activities without interruption; it also can moisten rebirth, causing future karmic results to continue. Based on this meaning it is called the continuous aspect, distinct from the continuous mind mentioned previously. "Relying on wisdom": because it is produced with the preceding aspect of wisdom as its root. The support is subtle, possessing only equanimity (upekṣā); that which is supported is coarse, fully giving rise to pain and pleasure, hence it says "producing pain and pleasure." Furthermore, the supporting aspect of wisdom abides grasping inwardly and does not grasp external dust, hence it is like sleep. This continuous consciousness conceptually superimposes inner and outer, engaging in vitarka and vicāra discrimination, like waking up; therefore it says "awakening mind gives rise to thought"; giving rise to thought is precisely the discrimination of dharma-attachment. The aggregate of consciousness associates with this coarse grasping, running everywhere toward realms, hence it says "because of associating without interruption." Third, "the aspect of grasping": this is the aggregate of feeling (vedanā), because relying on the aggregate of consciousness, it discriminates between the agreeable and disagreeable, experiencing suffering and pleasure, hence it says "relying on continuity... up to abiding in suffering and pleasure." Fourth, "the aspect of reckoning names": this is the aggregate of perception (saṃjñā), relying on the preceding aggregate of feeling to discriminate nominal characteristics such as the agreeable and disagreeable, hence it says "relying on false grasping... up to nominal characteristics." Fifth, "the aspect of initiating karma": this is the aggregate of formations (saṃskāra), relying on the names and characteristics grasped by the aggregate of perception to give rise to the mental factor of volition (cetanā), performing good and evil, hence it says "relying on names... up to performing various kinds of karma." Sixth, "the aspect of suffering bound by karma": relying on the karma created by the preceding aggregate of formations, one undergoes the bitter fruits of the three realms of existence and six destinies, hence it says "relying on karma, one receives retribution without self-mastery." From "One should know..." onward is the third [part], concluding. As previously stated, the six coarse aspects arise based on the realms manifested by the manifesting aspect; the three subtle aspects directly rely on ignorance; these six and three collectively encompass all defilements. Therefore one should know that the entrenchment of ignorance is the root that produces all defiled dharmas. Because although all defiled aspects have coarse and subtle, none of them are enlightened to the true nature of all dharmas; the aspect of non-enlightenment is the air of ignorance, hence it says "all defiled dharmas are aspects of non-enlightenment."