[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) › [大乘起信論別記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845) › 1.125 # 大乘起信論別記 1.125 大乘起信論別記 1.125 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.125](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1.125) 問：如《集量論》諸說「心心法皆證自體，是名現量。若不爾者，如不曾見，不應憶念。」此中經說云「不自見」，如是相違云何會通？答：此有異意，欲不相違。何者？此經論意，欲明離見分外無別相分，相分現無所見，亦不可說即此見分反見見分，非二用故，外向起故，故以刀指為同法喻。《集量論》意，雖其見分不能自見，而有自證分用，能證見分之體，以用有異故，向內起故，故以燈炎為同法喻。由是義故，不相違背。又復此經論中「為顯實相故，就非有義，說無自見。」《集量論》主為立假名故，依非無義說有自證。然假名不動實相，實相不懷假名，不懷不動，有何相違？如此中說「離見無相故，見不見相」，而餘處說「相分非見分，故見能見相分」，如是相違，何不致怪？當知，如前亦不相懷。又說「為顯假有故，說有相有見，為顯假無故，說無相無見。假有不當於有故，不動於無。假無不當於無故，不懷於有。不懷於有故，宛然而有，不動無故，宛然而無。」故如是甚深因緣道理，蕭焉靡據，蕩然無礙，豈容違諍於其問哉！ > Question: In the Pramāṇasamuccaya and elsewhere it is said: 'Mind and mental factors all witness their own essence; this is called direct perception. If it were not so, then just as with what has never been seen, there could be no recollection.' Here the sūtra says: 'It does not see itself.' How are such contradictions to be reconciled? Answer: There are different intentions here, which are not meant to contradict each other. Why? The intention of this sūtra and treatise is to clarify that apart from the seeing aspect (darśanabhāga) there is no separate object aspect (nimittabhāga); the object aspect is currently nothing seen, nor can it be said that this seeing aspect turns back to see the seeing aspect, because there are not two functions and it arises facing outward; therefore, the blade and finger are used as similar examples. The intention of the Pramāṇasamuccaya is that although the seeing aspect cannot see itself, there is the function of the self-witnessing aspect (svasaṃvittibhāga) that can witness the essence of the seeing aspect; because its function is different and arises facing inward, the flame is used as a similar example. By this principle, they do not contradict each other. Furthermore, in this sūtra and treatise, 'in order to reveal the true characteristic, based on the sense of non-existence, it is said that there is no self-seeing.' The author of the Pramāṇasamuccaya, in order to establish conventional designations, relies on the sense of non-non-existence to say that there is self-witnessing. Yet conventional designations do not disturb the true characteristic, and the true characteristic does not undermine conventional designations; neither undermining nor disturbing, what contradiction is there? Just as here it says: 'Because apart from the seeing there is no object, the seeing does not see the object,' while elsewhere it says: 'Because the object aspect is not the seeing aspect, the seeing can see the object aspect'—why not be astonished by such a contradiction? One should know that, as before, they do not undermine each other. Furthermore, it says: 'To reveal conventional existence, it says there are objects and seeing; to reveal conventional non-existence, it says there are no objects and no seeing. Conventional existence does not equate to \[real\] existence, so it does not disturb non-existence; conventional non-existence does not equate to \[real\] non-existence, so it does not undermine existence. Because it does not undermine existence, it exists vividly; because it does not disturb non-existence, it is non-existent vividly.' Thus, such profound principles of causes and conditions are desolate and without support, boundless and unobstructed; how could there be room for contradiction and dispute between them! > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.124](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1.124) - [Next: 1.126](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1.126) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845~en-mt.1.125) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1.125](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1845.1.125) · Pramāṇa