大乘起信論義記 3.45

3.45

後三及無明皆名不相應者，亦二釋也。初、約王數釋中云即心不覺常無別異者，此顯根本無明動靜心體。即此動心是不覺相，更無王數之別，故云即心不覺常無別異，此翻前心念法異也。不同知相緣相者，既無王數之別，何有同知同緣？翻前可見。以此三種依不覺起，不異不覺故云即也。上文云「依不覺故生三相，與不覺不捨離」者，是此即心之不覺，故云不離，非是相應而不離也。下文亦云「無明滅故不相應心滅。」二、亦約心境釋中言即心不覺等者，謂此無明即此染心而無別體，不約與外境相應，方為此不覺；但在本心之上，故云即心等也。不同知相等者，揀前相應也，此不相應心既是梨耶識，於中不分王數義，及不與外境相應義，并有覺不覺義等，並與諸論相違，和會如《別記》中說。

That the latter three as well as avidyā are all called 'unconjoined' also has two explanations. First, in the explanation in terms of the mind and mental factors, 'the non-enlightened mind itself is constantly without difference': this shows that fundamental avidyā stirs the quiet essence of the mind. This stirred mind itself is the mark of non-enlightenment, without any further distinction between mind and mental factors, hence it is said that 'the non-enlightened mind itself is constantly without difference'—this inverts the earlier 'the dharmas of mind and mental factors are different'. 'Not being identical in its aspects of knowing and aspects of objective support': since there is no distinction between mind and mental factors, how could there be identical knowing and identical objective support? This can be seen by inverting the earlier. Because these three kinds arise based on non-enlightenment and are not distinct from non-enlightenment, it is said to be 'itself'. As the text above says, 'Relying on non-enlightenment, three marks are produced, which do not separate from non-enlightenment'; this refers to this non-enlightenment of the mind itself, which is why it is said to 'not separate', not that it is conjoined and does not separate. The text below also says: 'Because avidyā is extinguished, the unconjoined mind is extinguished.' Second, in the explanation in terms of mind and realm, 'the non-enlightened mind itself and so on' means that this avidyā is itself this defiled mind without a separate substance; it is not by being conjoined with external realms that it becomes this non-enlightenment, but it is just present upon the fundamental mind, hence it is said 'the mind itself and so on'. 'Not being identical in its aspects of knowing and so on': this sets it apart from the conjoined above. Since this unconjoined mind is the ālayavijñāna, within it the meaning of not differentiating mind and mental factors, the meaning of not conjoining with external realms, and its having aspects of enlightenment and non-enlightenment are all in contradiction with various treatises; their reconciliation is as explained in the *Separate Record*.