大乘起信論義記別記 1.33

1.33

問：餘論中說，梨耶自體白覆無記，一向捨受相應，故堪受熏。若起煩惱，即是雜染，豈堪受熏？答：餘論中約教就麁相說，而實此識迷無相真如義邊，故有根本無明住地；若不爾者，即應常緣第一義諦，即一眾生半迷半悟，謂六七迷，而第八識悟也。文若其佛地與圓鏡智相應者，則知凡地必與無明相應。何以故？與上相違故。若言凡地餘識無明與相應故非本識自有者，亦應佛地鏡智非本識起；既佛地起者，則知凡地起愚，故不疑也。文若一向無煩惱，則不得成無記法。何以故？若無煩惱，則一向清淨，不得名無記。是故一向清淨者，即名為善；一向染者，則名不善。染淨無二故，則非染淨名無記法。良以淨屬真分、染屬妄分，二分不二，名為和合剌耶無記識也。若此位中無染細者，以何簡淨成於無覆無記？既無記非淨，故知有染細也。剋實言之，唯真如是體，是故梨耶異就唯是位也。引迴心聲聞，故假說也。又意識起惑於業有三義：一、起見道無明，約緣造業；二、起修道惑，愛求潤未熟業令熟；三、又起見愛，引已熟業令受生相續無差違也。《起信》中相續識內，唯有後二義，准論知之。

Question: Other treatises state that the self-nature of the ālayavijñāna is anivṛtāvyākṛta, exclusively concordant with neutral sensation (upekṣāvedanā), and therefore capable of receiving perfuming. If it gives rise to defilement, it would be defiled; how could it be capable of receiving perfuming? Answer: Other treatises speak according to the teachings in terms of coarse characteristics; in reality, however, with respect to the aspect of this consciousness being deluded about markless tathatā, there is the fundamental ignorance ground (avidyāvāsabhūmi). If this were not so, it would constantly condition the paramārthasatya, meaning that a single sentient being would be half-deluded and half-awakened—namely, the sixth and seventh [consciousnesses] would be deluded, while the eighth consciousness would be awakened. Furthermore, if on the Buddha-stage it is concordant with ādarśajñāna, one knows that on the ordinary stage it must be concordant with avidyā. Why? Because it contradicts the above. If one claims that on the ordinary stage, the avidyā of other consciousnesses is concordant with it, and thus it is not intrinsic to the fundamental consciousness itself, then likewise on the Buddha-stage ādarśajñāna would not arise from the fundamental consciousness; since it does arise on the Buddha-stage, one knows that on the ordinary stage it gives rise to ignorance, so there is no doubt. Furthermore, if it were entirely without defilement, it could not constitute an avyākṛta dharma. Why? If it were without defilement, it would be entirely pure and could not be called avyākṛta. Therefore, what is entirely pure is called wholesome; what is entirely defiled is called unwholesome. Because defilement and purity are not two, being neither defiled nor pure is called an avyākṛta dharma. It is precisely because purity pertains to the true component and defilement pertains to the false component, and the two components are non-dual, that it is called the composite, avyākṛta ālayavijñāna. If in this stage there were no subtle defilement, by what would one distinguish the pure to form anivṛtāvyākṛta? Since avyākṛta is not pure, one knows that subtle defilement exists. Speaking strictly in truth, only tathatā is the essence; therefore, ālayavijñāna is differentiated merely as a stage. It is spoken of provisionally to guide śrāvakas who turn their minds [to the Mahāyāna]. Moreover, the manovijñāna giving rise to delusion in relation to karma has three meanings: 1. It gives rise to the avidyā of the path of seeing, creating karma in relation to conditions; 2. It gives rise to the defilements of the path of cultivation, nurturing unripened karma with craving and seeking to make it ripen; 3. It gives rise again to views and craving, leading ripened karma to take rebirth in unbroken continuity without discordance. Within the continuing consciousness in the Awakening of Faith, only the latter two meanings are present; one should know this by reference to the treatise.