起信論疏筆削記 8.51

8.51

又若下，二、約諸識分齊以結成。諸識等者，即本事二識也。然此二識分齊行相各不相是，以本識是體，事識屬用。今以二本是體，宜在體分，以梨耶無始相續，具覺不覺，行相相順，是故二本皆在其中。故下文云：以如來藏無前際故，無明之相亦無有始。餘二等者，始覺悟時，方有六麁託境而生。行相麁浮宜在麁分，是故此二在生起識中。此則攝四覺歸二識也。若約本下，攝事識歸本識。以體用不二，如波與水，是故四義俱不離本識也。此即同前一生滅門耳，但前約門說，今約識論也。故云下，結。由是廣之成八，攝之成二，二義皆從一識中出，故今論云：此識有二義。

"Furthermore, if...", second, concluding based on the delimitation of the various consciousnesses. Regarding "the various consciousnesses...", this refers to the fundamental and the factual consciousnesses. However, the delimitations and modes of activity of these two consciousnesses do not agree with each other, for the fundamental consciousness is essence and the factual consciousness pertains to function. Now, since the two roots are essence, they properly belong to the division of essence; because the ālaya is continuous from beginningless time, possessing enlightenment and non-enlightenment, its modes of activity correspond with each other, and therefore both roots reside within it. Hence the text below says: "Because the tathāgatagarbha has no prior limit, the marks of avidyā likewise have no beginning." Regarding "the remaining two...": only when actualized enlightenment awakens are the six coarse marks produced by relying on objects. Their modes of activity are coarse and superficial, and properly belong to the coarse division; therefore these two reside within the originating consciousness. This then subsumes the four enlightenments back into the two consciousnesses. Under "If in terms of the fundamental...", the factual consciousness is subsumed back into the fundamental consciousness. Because essence and function are not two, like waves and water, therefore all four meanings are not separate from the fundamental consciousness. This is identical to the one approach of arising and ceasing mentioned earlier; however, the former was spoken in terms of approaches, while this is discussed in terms of consciousness. Therefore, under "Thus it says...", it concludes. Because of this, expanding them forms eight, and gathering them forms two; both meanings emerge from within the one consciousness. Thus the treatise now says: "This consciousness has two meanings."