起信論疏 2.1.2

2.1.2

初法中「所言滅者」，如入無想等時，說諸識者，但滅麁識之相，非滅阿梨耶心體，故言「唯心相滅」。 又復上說因滅故不相應心滅者，但說心中業相等滅，非謂自相心體滅也。 喻中別顯此二滅義，「如風依水而有動相」者，喻無明風依心而動也； 「若水滅者，則風斷絕無所止，以水不滅風相相續」者，喻於入無想等之時，心體不滅，故諸識相續也。 是答初問也。 「唯風滅故動相隨滅」者，到佛地時無明永滅，故業相等動亦隨滅盡； 而其自相心體不滅，故言「非是水滅」也。 是答後問，明究竟滅。 合中次第合前二義，「非心智滅」者，神解之性名為心智。 如上文云「智性不壞」，是明自相不滅義也，餘文可知。 問：此識自相，為當一向染緣所起、為當亦有不從緣義？ 若是一向染緣所起，染法盡時自相應滅； 如其自相不從染緣故不滅者，則自然有。 又若使自相亦滅同斷見者，是則自相不滅還同常見？ 答：或有說者，梨耶心體是異熟法，但為業惑之所辨生，是故業惑盡時，本識都盡； 然於佛果，亦有福慧二行所惑大圓鏡智相應淨識，而於二處心義是同，以是義說心至佛果耳。 或有說者，自相心體，舉體為彼無明所起，而是動靜令起，非謂辨無令有，是故此心之動因無明起，名為業相。 此動之心，本自為心，亦為自相，自相義門不由無明。 然即此無明所動之心，亦有自類相生之義，故無自然之過，而有不滅之義，無明盡時動相隨滅，心隨始覺還歸本源。 或有說者，二師所說皆有道理，皆依聖典之所說故。 初師所說得《瑜伽》意，後師義者得《起信》意，而亦不可如言取義。 所以然者，若如初說而取義者，即是法我執； 若如後說而取義者，是謂人我見。 又若執初義墮於斷見，執後義者即墮常見，當知二義皆不可說； 雖不可說而亦可說，以雖非然而非不然故。 「復次有四種法熏習義故」以下，廣釋生滅門內有二分中，初正廣釋竟在於前，此下第二因言重明。 何者？ 如上文言，此識有二種義：能攝一切法、生一切法。 然其攝義前已廣說，能生之義猶未分明，是故此下廣顯是義。 文中有五：一者舉數總標、二者依數列名、三者總明熏習之義、四者別顯熏習之相、第五明盡不盡義。 舉數、列名，文相可知。 第三之中，先喻、後合。 合中言「真如淨法」者，是本覺義； 「無明染法」者，是不覺義，良由一識含此二義，更互相熏，遍生染淨，此意正釋經本所說不思議熏、不思議變義也。 問：《攝大乘》說，要具四義，方得受熏，故言常法不能受熏。 何故此中說熏真如？ 解云：熏習之義有其二種：彼論且約可思議熏，故說常法不受熏也； 此論明其不可思議熏，故說無明熏真如、真如熏無明。 顯意不同，故不相違。 然此文中生滅門內性淨本覺說名真如，故有熏義； 非謂真如門中真如，以其真如門中不說能生義。 「云何」以下第四別明，於中有二：先染、後淨。 染中亦二：先問、後答。 答中有二：略明、廣顯。 略中言依真如法有無明者，是顯能熏所熏之體也。 以有無明熏習真如者，根本無明熏習義也。 以熏習故有妄心者，依無明熏有業識心也。 以是妄心還熏無明，增其不了，故成轉識及現識等，故言「不覺念起現妄境界」。 以是境界還熏現識，故言「熏習妄心」也； 「令其念著」者，起第七識也； 「造種種業」者，起意識也； 受一切苦者，依業受果也。 次廣說中，廣前三義，從後而說，先明境界。 「增長念」者，以境界力增長事識中法執分別念也。 「增長取」者，增長四取煩惱障也。 妄心熏習中，「業識根本熏習」者，以此業識能熏無明，迷於無相，能起轉相現相相續。 彼三乘人出三界時，雖離事識分段麁苦，猶受變易梨耶行苦，故言受三乘生滅苦也。 通而論之，無始來有，但為簡麁細二種熏習，故約已離麁苦時說也。

In the first dharma, what is meant by "cessation": as when entering [the concentration] without thought and so forth, when speaking of the consciousnesses, it is only the aspects of coarse consciousness that cease, not that the essence of the ālaya mind ceases; hence it says, "only the aspect of mind ceases." Furthermore, what was stated above, that because the cause ceases, the non-associated mind ceases, merely states that the karmic aspect and so forth within the mind cease; it does not mean that the essence of the mind's self-aspect ceases. In the analogy, these two meanings of cessation are distinctively revealed: "Just as wind, relying on water, has moving aspects" is an analogy for the wind of avidyā moving in reliance on the mind. "If the water ceases, the wind would be cut off and have nowhere to abide; because the water does not cease, the aspect of the wind continues" is an analogy for how, when entering [the concentration] without thought and so forth, because the essence of the mind does not cease, the consciousnesses continue. This answers the first question. "Only because the wind ceases do the moving aspects accordingly cease": upon reaching the Buddha-stage, avidyā is permanently extinguished; hence the motions such as the karmic aspect are also extinguished accordingly. Yet the essence of the mind's self-aspect does not cease; hence it says, "it is not that the water ceases." This answers the subsequent question, explaining ultimate cessation. In the application, it applies the previous two meanings in succession: "not that the mind's wisdom ceases"—the nature of spiritual comprehension is called "the mind's wisdom." As the text above says, "the nature of wisdom is indestructible," this clarifies the meaning that the self-aspect does not cease; the rest of the text is clear. Question: Is this self-aspect of consciousness entirely produced by defiled conditions, or does it also possess the meaning of not proceeding from conditions? If it is entirely produced by defiled conditions, when defiled phenomena are exhausted, the self-aspect ought to cease; if its self-aspect does not proceed from defiled conditions and therefore does not cease, then it would exist spontaneously. Furthermore, if the self-aspect also ceased, it would be identical to the nihilistic view; then, if the self-aspect does not cease, would it not revert to being identical to the eternalist view? Answer: Some masters say that the essence of the ālaya mind is a vipāka dharma, brought into being solely by karma and defilement; therefore, when karma and defilement are exhausted, the basic consciousness is entirely exhausted. However, in the Buddha-fruit, there is also the pure consciousness associated with the Great Mirror Wisdom generated by the two practices of merit and wisdom; and in both states the meaning of "mind" is the same. It is on this basis that one speaks of the mind reaching the Buddha-fruit. Other masters say that the essence of the mind's self-aspect is, in its entirety, stirred up by that avidyā; but this is a movement of stillness that causes it to stir, not that it generates something from nothing. Therefore, the stirring of this mind is caused to arise by avidyā and is called the karmic aspect. This stirred mind is originally mind in itself and is also the self-aspect; the conceptual gate of the self-aspect does not arise from avidyā. Yet this very mind stirred by avidyā also has the meaning of producing its own kind in succession. Hence there is no error of spontaneous existence, and it possesses the meaning of non-cessation: when avidyā is exhausted, the moving aspect ceases accordingly, and the mind, following initial enlightenment, returns to its original source. Other masters say that what both masters explain is reasonable, because both rely on what the sacred scriptures teach. The explanation of the first master captures the intention of the *Yogācārabhūmi*; the meaning of the latter master captures the intention of the *Awakening of Faith*. Yet one must not cling to the meaning according to the literal words. Why is this? If one grasps the meaning as in the first explanation, that is the attachment to a self in dharmas (dharma-ātmagrāha); if one grasps the meaning as in the latter explanation, that is called the view of a self in persons (pudgala-dṛṣṭi). Furthermore, if one clings to the first meaning, one falls into the nihilistic view; if one clings to the latter meaning, one immediately falls into the eternalist view. One should know that neither of the two meanings can be expressed in words; though inexpressible, they may also be expressed, because although it is not so, it is also not not so. From "Furthermore, because there is the meaning of perfuming of four kinds of dharmas" onward, this broadly explains the arising and ceasing gate. Of its two parts, the first, which was the broad explanation itself, is finished above; from here on is the second, re-clarifying it on the basis of words. Why? As the text above stated, this consciousness has two meanings: being able to embrace all dharmas and producing all dharmas. But its meaning of embracing has already been broadly explained, while the meaning of being able to produce is not yet clear; therefore, below it broadly displays this meaning. In the text there are five parts: first, stating the number in general; second, listing the names according to the number; third, generally clarifying the meaning of perfuming; fourth, distinctively revealing the aspects of perfuming; fifth, clarifying the meaning of exhaustion and non-exhaustion. Stating the number and listing the names are clear in the text. In the third, there is first an analogy, then the application. In the application, "the pure dharma of tathatā" is the meaning of original enlightenment; "the defiled dharma of avidyā" is the meaning of non-enlightenment. It is precisely because the One Consciousness contains these two meanings that they perfume each other and ubiquitously produce the defiled and the pure. This intention directly explains the meaning of inconceivable perfuming and inconceivable transformation spoken of in the scripture. Question: The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* states that only when four conditions are complete can something receive perfuming; hence it says that eternal dharmas cannot receive perfuming. Why does this text speak of perfuming tathatā? Answer: The meaning of perfuming has two kinds: that treatise deals temporarily with conceivable perfuming, and therefore says that eternal dharmas do not receive perfuming; this treatise clarifies inconceivable perfuming, and therefore says that avidyā perfumes tathatā and tathatā perfumes avidyā. Because the intended meanings revealed are different, they do not contradict each other. However, in this text, the original enlightenment of pure nature within the arising and ceasing gate is called tathatā, and so it possesses the meaning of perfuming; it does not mean the tathatā in the gate of tathatā, because within the gate of tathatā the meaning of being able to produce is not spoken of. From "How is this?" onward is the fourth, distinctively explaining it, in which there are two parts: first defilement, then purity. In defilement there are also two: first a question, then the answer. In the answer there are two: a brief explanation and a broad display. In the brief one, saying that in reliance on the dharma of tathatā there is avidyā reveals the essences of that which perfumes and that which is perfumed. "Because there is avidyā perfuming tathatā" is the meaning of fundamental avidyā perfuming. "Because of perfuming, there is the deluded mind": in reliance on the perfuming of avidyā, there is the mind of karmic consciousness. Because this deluded mind in turn perfumes avidyā, increasing its incomprehension, it therefore forms the evolving consciousness, the manifesting consciousness, and so forth; hence it says, "thoughts of non-enlightenment arise and manifest deluded realms of objects." Because these realms of objects in turn perfume the manifesting consciousness, it says "perfumes the deluded mind." "Causing it to think and attach" refers to the arising of the seventh consciousness. "Creating various karmas" refers to the arising of the mental consciousness. Experiencing all suffering refers to receiving retribution in reliance on karma. Next, in the broad explanation, it expands on the previous three meanings; explaining from the last backward, it first clarifies realms of objects. "Increasing thought" means using the power of realms of objects to increase discriminative thoughts of dharma-attachment within the consciousness of phenomenal affairs. "Increasing grasping" means increasing the defilement hindrances of the four graspings. In the perfuming of the deluded mind, "the fundamental perfuming of the karmic consciousness" means that because this karmic consciousness is able to perfume avidyā, being confused about the signless, it is able to give rise to the evolving aspect, the manifesting aspect, and continuity. When those people of the three vehicles transcend the three realms, although they are free from the coarse suffering of portioned [birth and death] of the consciousness of phenomenal affairs, they still experience the suffering of conditioning of the transformational ālaya; hence it says they experience the suffering of arising and ceasing of the three vehicles. Generally speaking, this has existed from beginningless time, but merely to distinguish the two kinds of perfuming, coarse and subtle, it is spoken of in terms of the time when coarse suffering has already been abandoned.