大乘起信論內義略探記 1.42

1.42

問：《瑜伽》等論說阿梨耶是異熟識，一向生滅。何故此論乃說此俱含二義？答：各有所述，不相違背。謂此微細心，略有二義：若其為無明所熟義邊，熏靜令動，動靜一體。今此論者，依《楞伽經》為治真俗別體之執，說不生滅與生滅和合，非一非異；又不分王數差別，及與外境相應義，並有覺不覺等也。若論業煩惱所感義邊，辨無令有，一向生滅，波《雜雜論》等依《深密經》為除是常是一之見，說此識一向生滅，心心數法差別而轉體。然此業煩惱所感，彼無明所動，二意雖異，識體無二也。

Question: Treatises such as the Yogācārabhūmi say that the ālayavijñāna is the retribution consciousness (vipākavijñāna) and is unequivocally arising and ceasing. Why does this śāstra then state that it contains both meanings? Answer: Each has what it sets forth, and they do not contradict each other. That is, this subtle mind has broadly two meanings: On the side of its being matured by avidyā, it perfumes stillness to make it move, movement and stillness being of one essence. Now this śāstra, relying on the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra to remedy the clinging to ultimate and conventional as having separate essences, states that the non-arising-and-ceasing unites with the arising-and-ceasing, being neither one nor different; furthermore, it does not divide the distinctions of primary mind and mental factors, nor the meaning of their correspondence with external objects, and it possesses both awakening and non-awakening. On the side of its being induced by karma and afflictions, discerning non-existence to make it exist, it is unequivocally arising and ceasing; texts such as the Miscellaneous Śāstras, relying on the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra to eliminate the view of it being permanent and being singular, say that this consciousness is unequivocally arising and ceasing, with distinctions of mind and mental factors transforming in essence. However, being induced by karma and afflictions and being moved by that avidyā—though these two ideas differ, the essence of consciousness is not two.