大乘起信論別記 1.35

1.35

Question: Above it was said that the One Mind has two gates; now it says that this consciousness has two meanings. What is the distinction between that mind and this consciousness? Explanation: Above, with respect to the ontological essence, it was named the One Mind; because its essence contains the two gates of the meaning of cutting off characteristics and the meaning of following conditions, it was said that the One Mind has two gates. As the sūtra text states: 'That which is quiescent and ceased is named the One Mind; the One Mind is named the tathāgatagarbha.' The meaning is as explained above. Here, this consciousness is spoken of solely within the One Mind's gate of following conditions: principle and phenomenon are non-dual, being exclusively a single spiritual cognition, which is named the one consciousness. Because its essence contains the two meanings of enlightenment and non-enlightenment, it is said that this consciousness has two meanings. Therefore, mind is broad and consciousness is narrow, because mind contains the consciousness of the two gates. Furthermore, gate is broad and meaning is narrow, because the gate of arising and ceasing contains the two meanings. As the Four-fascicle Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: 'That which neither departs nor evolves is named the tathāgatagarbha-consciousness; the seven consciousnesses flow and turn without ceasing. Why is this? Because, with that as cause and conditions as support, all the consciousnesses arise; this is not the realm of practice of śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas.' The Ten-fascicle Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: 'The tathāgatagarbha is not within the ālayavijñāna; therefore the seven consciousnesses have arising and ceasing, while the tathāgatagarbha does not arise and does not cease. Why is this? Those seven consciousnesses arise based on mental contemplation of all sense-objects. The realm of these seven consciousnesses cannot be perceived by any śrāvakas or non-Buddhist practitioners.' Both texts equally clarify the meaning of this consciousness being non-arising and non-ceasing. How so? They intend to clarify that because it is stirred by the wind of sense-objects, the waves of the seven consciousnesses evolve in the ocean of the storehouse consciousness, and therefore the seven consciousnesses have arising and ceasing. The tathāgatagarbha is precisely the storehouse consciousness: although it does not depart from evolving, its essence does not evolve; therefore the tathāgatagarbha does not arise and does not cease. Hence it says that which neither departs nor evolves is named the tathāgatagarbha-consciousness, and so on. The intention of the ten-fascicle version is to clarify that the seven consciousnesses are waves, not that they are not the characteristics of the ocean; being within the ocean of the ālayavijñāna, they therefore have arising and ceasing. The tathāgatagarbha is the ocean and not the waves; it is not within the ocean of the ālayavijñāna [as a wave], and therefore has no arising and ceasing; hence it says that the tathāgatagarbha is not within the ālayavijñāna. As for 'therefore the seven consciousnesses have arising and ceasing' and so on: because the tathāgatagarbha is precisely the ālayavijñāna, it therefore says 'is not within'. If the tathāgatagarbha were not within the arising-and-ceasing ālayavijñāna, it should say below, 'therefore the eight kinds of consciousness have arising and ceasing'; why does it only say 'therefore the seven consciousnesses have arising and ceasing'? One should know that these two sūtra texts are originally one, and it is merely that the translators differed, which resulted in the phrasing not being the same. Furthermore, the Four-fascicle Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: 'The ālayavijñāna is named the tathāgatagarbha, and it is accompanied together with avidyā and the seven consciousnesses, free from the fault of impermanence, and pure in its own nature. The remaining seven consciousnesses do not abide from thought-moment to thought-moment, and are dharmas of arising and ceasing.' Passages such as this equally clarify the meaning of the ālayavijñāna's innate enlightenment being non-arising and non-ceasing. Furthermore, the Four-fascicle Laṅkāvatārasūtra states: 'That which is momentary is called the storehouse consciousness'; the ten-fascicle version states: 'The tathāgatagarbha-ālayavijñāna arises together with the seven consciousnesses, which is termed the characteristic of evolving and ceasing.' Passages such as this reveal the meaning of the ālayavijñāna's arising and ceasing and non-enlightenment. The author of the present treatise now encompasses the overarching intention from beginning to end of that sūtra, and therefore says that this consciousness has two meanings.