大乘起信論內義略探記 1.45

1.45

問：此識境界寬狹云何？如此論中，但說五塵。《楞伽》云「阿梨耶識分別現境，自身資生器世間等，一時而有，非是前後。」《瑜伽》云「此識由了別，二種境故轉。一由了別內執受者，謂了別遍計所執自性妄執習氣，及諸色根根所依處，謂有色界；若無色界，唯有妄執習氣了別。二了別外無分別相器者，謂了別依止緣內執受阿梨耶識故，於一切時無有間斷器世間相。謂如燈炎，生時內執受職，外發光明。如是阿梨耶識，內緣執受，受境外緣，器世界境生起道理，應知亦爾。」《中邊》云「此識四種境界，謂塵根識及識所攝取。既無能緣本識，亦不得生。」若依《中遍》及《楞伽》，即習氣等非此識境；若依《瑜伽》，聲塵及七識等非其所緣；若依此論，根及識等亦非此識所現境界。如是相違，云何和會？答：此非相違，唯言緣此法，不言餘法，非境界故。

Question: What is the breadth or narrowness of this consciousness's objective realm? As in this śāstra, it only mentions the five sense-objects. The Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: "The ālayavijñāna discriminates manifesting objects: one's own body, resources for life, the receptacle world, and so on; they exist simultaneously, not sequentially." The Yogācārabhūmi says: "This consciousness transforms through discerning two kinds of realms: First, through discerning internal appropriation, meaning discerning the vāsanā of false clinging to the imaginary nature and the physical sense-faculties with their bodily bases—this refers to the form realm; if in the formless realm, there is only the discernment of the vāsanā of false clinging. Second, through discerning the external receptacle [world] of non-conceptual characteristics, meaning discerning the characteristics of the receptacle world uninterrupted at all times, relying upon and taking as object the internally appropriated ālayavijñāna. Like the flame of a lamp: when it arises, internally it takes hold of the wick, and externally it emits illumination. In this way, the principle of the arising of the ālayavijñāna—internally taking appropriation as object and receiving objects externally, taking the receptacle world as object—should be known to be likewise." The Madhyāntavibhāga says: "This consciousness has four kinds of objective realms: sense-objects, faculties, consciousness, and what is grasped by consciousness. Since there is no perceiving fundamental consciousness, it also cannot arise." If one relies on the Madhyāntavibhāga and the Laṅkāvatāra, then vāsanā and so forth are not the realm of this consciousness; if one relies on the Yogācārabhūmi, sound-objects and the seven consciousnesses are not its perceived objects; if one relies on this śāstra, faculties and consciousnesses are also not the realm manifested by this consciousness. Being contradictory like this, how are they reconciled? Answer: This is not contradictory; it merely speaks of taking these phenomena as objects, and does not say that the remaining phenomena are not its objective realm.