大乘起信論別記 1.164

1.164

問：此識自相，為當一向染緣所起，為當亦有不從緣義？若是一向為緣所起，則染緣盡時，自相亦滅。若便自相義門，不從染緣而成，則此自相自然而有。或有說者，心體但是業惑所辨，是異熟法故，或業盡時，本識頓盡。然於佛果，亦有福惠二行，所辨鏡智，相應淨識，雖復業惑，福惠所減之義不同，而其心義二處無異，由是義說，心至佛果耳。或有說者，自相心體，舉體為彼無明所起，而有是動靜令起，非是辨無合有，所以此心之動，因無明動名為業相。此動之心，本自為心名為自相，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，是故雖無自然之過，而有不滅之理。無明盡時，業相即滅，心隨始覺還歸本源。評曰：二師所說皆有道理，皆依聖教之所說故。何者？若依顯了門，如前說者好，是得《瑜伽論》等意故。若依隱密門，如後說者好，得此《起信論》等意故。是不可偏執一隅，又亦不可如言取義。何以故？若如初說現而取義者，即是法我見。若後說而取義者，即謂人我執。故彼二義，皆不可說，雖不可說，而亦可說，以雖無所然，而非不然故。

Question: Does this self-characteristic of consciousness exclusively arise from defiled conditions, or does it also have an aspect of not arising from conditions? If it exclusively arises from conditions, then when defiled conditions are exhausted, the self-characteristic will also cease. If the aspect of self-characteristic is not established from defiled conditions, then this self-characteristic exists spontaneously. Some say: The essence of mind is merely produced by karma and affliction, being a vipāka dharma; therefore, when karma is exhausted, the fundamental consciousness is completely exhausted. However, in the fruit of Buddhahood, there is also the mirror-like cognition produced by the two practices of merit and wisdom, and its corresponding pure consciousness; although the meaning of being produced by karma and affliction versus merit and wisdom is different, the meaning of mind in both places is without distinction. It is in this sense that it is said that mind extends to the fruit of Buddhahood. Others say: The essence of mind as self-characteristic, in its entirety, is stirred to arise by that avidyā, and its existence is a matter of stirring stillness to make it arise, not producing existence out of non-existence. Therefore, this mind's motion, moving due to avidyā, is called the karmic characteristic. This moving mind is originally in itself mind, and is called the self-characteristic; the aspect of self-characteristic does not derive from avidyā. However, this very mind stirred by avidyā also has the aspect of generating its own kind; therefore, although it is free from the fault of spontaneous existence, it possesses the principle of non-ceasing. When avidyā is exhausted, the karmic characteristic immediately ceases, and the mind, following actualized enlightenment, returns to the original source. Appraisal: What both masters say has reason, because both rely on what is taught in the sacred teachings. How so? If one relies on the explicit gate, what the former said is good, as it captures the intent of the Yogācārabhūmiśāstra and so on. If one relies on the implicit gate, what the latter said is good, as it captures the intent of this Awakening of Faith and so on. Therefore, one must not be biased in clinging to one side, nor should one take the meaning literally according to the words. Why? Because if one takes the meaning literally as in the first explanation, it is the view of a self of dharmas. If one takes the meaning as in the latter explanation, it is the grasping of a self of persons. Therefore, neither of the two meanings can be expressed; although they cannot be expressed, they can also be expressed, because although there is nothing so, it is not not so.