大乘義章 3.70

3.70

第三料簡根塵有無。於中兩門：第一約就事妄及真三種識中料簡有無、二約真妄共相三識料簡有無。就初門中，曲更有二：第一料簡根塵有無、二明所依麁細不同。根塵有無，三門分別：一通別分別。六識別故，有根有塵；七八通故，不說根塵。何故如是？六識別故，彼此互起。以互起故，生必有依。依有強弱，強者為塵，故說有之。問曰：《楞伽》宣說六識境界俱至、一時並用，云何說言六識互起有根有塵？此如上辨，今更論之。《楞伽》所說境界俱至一時並用，准《起信論》，是妄識中第四現識。於此識中，境界俱至、諸識並用，不關事識。事中六識，無並用義。問曰：何故妄中六識一時並用，事識不爾？釋言：於彼妄識之中，說一切法皆是心作，心外無境。心所作法與心無隔，易可辨了，故得並照。於事識中，心外有法，法非心造。非心作法，與心別體，難可辨了，故不並知。不並知故，前後間起，故立根塵。七八常有，體不互起，則無依託。無依託故，不得說言強者為根、弱者為塵，是以七八不說根塵。此就凡時料簡有無。若就聖時，七識八識緣起法身無量根塵。問曰：前六依根了塵，可名為識。後二常通，不說依根了別諸塵，云何名識？釋言：後二雖無隨事了別之用，而是眾生神知之性、了別之體，故名為識。問曰：神知了別體名之為識，體是識不？釋言：此二心識之體，體即是識。問曰：若使心識體故名為識者，根之與塵亦應有體，以何義故不說根塵？釋言：良以根雖有體，得名為根，而非對塵生識之用。塵雖有體，得名為塵，而非對根生識之用。識雖有體，得名為識，而非依根了塵之用。以此識體不依根用，故不說根；不了塵用，故不說塵。問曰：向說根塵有體，何者是本？真妄二心所作根塵，能為事本，是其體也。通別如是。二真妄分別。前七妄識有根有塵，第八真識不說根塵。前六事識，根塵可知。第七妄識，無常法故，念念生滅。生有依託，故說有根。性是分別，攀緣法故，說之為塵。真識常法，體無起滅。以無起故，無所依託，故不說根；性非分別攀緣法故，不說有塵。三就通分別。八俱有根，亦通有塵。故《楞伽》云「依境及根識，故有八識生。」有相如何？前六可知。第七識中，有體有用。論其體也，無常流注，藉前生後，義說為根。性是無明，迷覆真法，真法即是所迷之塵。論其用也，還以眾生眼等為根，色等為塵。是義云何？即前事識所依根塵，以理窮之，皆是妄想自心所現，其猶夢中所現根塵。此妄根塵，還為妄想六識所依，名七識中用根塵也。第八識中有體有用。論其體也，就如來藏同體法中，義說根塵。彼如來藏，非宜是其心識之體，亦是根體，故經說言「眾生身中，有如來眼、如來耳」等。如來藏中恒沙佛法，為心所照，即名為塵。故馬鳴言「從本已來，遍照一切法界之義」，論其用也。還以眾生眼等為根、色等為塵，是義云何？即前事識所託根塵，窮實皆是真心所作，如人夢中根之與塵皆報心作。此真所作，還為真用六識所依，名真識中集用根塵。通有如是。問曰：八識通有根塵，何故經中但就事識說根說塵？以前事識體別互起，依託義顯，故約根塵以別六識。後二體通，始終常有，依託義微，所以不說。有無如是。次明所依麁細不同。於中略以四句分別：一以麁依細，謂依真識起於妄識，依於妄識起六事識，復六識中依於意識起於五識，此皆名為以麁依細。二以細依麁，謂依色根生於五識，心通細法依於五識生於意識，此等名為以細依麁。三同類相依，謂意識中得有多念相續之義，前後相望，同類說依。第七識體生滅相起，亦是同類，以說依也。四同體相依，第八識體還依自體如實法界。事妄及真三識根塵有無如是（此一門竟）。

Third is the analysis of the presence or absence of sense faculties and sense objects. Here there are two sections: first, analyzing presence and absence with respect to the three consciousnesses of phenomenal, deluded, and true; second, analyzing presence and absence with respect to the three consciousnesses characterized by the combination of the true and the deluded. Within the first section, there are further two subdivisions: first, analyzing the presence and absence of sense faculties and sense objects; second, explaining the coarse and subtle differences of their bases. The presence and absence of sense faculties and sense objects is distinguished through three gates: First is the distinction between common and distinct. Because the six consciousnesses are distinct, they possess sense faculties and sense objects; because the seventh and eighth are common, sense faculties and sense objects are not spoken of. Why is this? Because the six consciousnesses are distinct, they arise reciprocally. Arising reciprocally, their arising must have a support. Because supports are strong or weak, the stronger serves as the faculty and the weaker serves as the object, so they are said to have them. Question: The Laṅkāvatāra expounds that the sense spheres of the six consciousnesses all arrive simultaneously and operate alongside each other at one time; how then can you say that the six consciousnesses arise reciprocally and have sense faculties and sense objects? This was explained above, and will now be discussed further. That the sense spheres all arrive simultaneously and operate alongside each other at one time, as spoken of in the Laṅkāvatāra, refers according to the Awakening of Faith to the fourth, the manifesting consciousness, within the deluded consciousness. In this consciousness, sense spheres arrive simultaneously and the consciousnesses operate alongside each other; this does not pertain to phenomenal consciousness. Among phenomenal consciousnesses, the six consciousnesses do not operate alongside each other. Question: Why do the six consciousnesses within delusion operate alongside each other at one time, whereas phenomenal consciousnesses do not? Answer: Within that deluded consciousness, all dharmas are described as made by the mind, with no external sense object outside the mind. Dharmas made by the mind have no separation from the mind and are easy to discern, so they can illuminate simultaneously. In phenomenal consciousness, there are dharmas outside the mind, and dharmas are not made by the mind. Dharmas not made by the mind have a different substance from the mind and are difficult to discern, so they are not known simultaneously. Because they are not known simultaneously, they arise sequentially with intervals; hence sense faculties and sense objects are established. The seventh and eighth are constant; their substances do not arise reciprocally, and so they have no reliance. Having no reliance, one cannot say that the stronger is the sense faculty and the weaker is the sense object; therefore, sense faculties and sense objects are not spoken of for the seventh and eighth. This is an analysis of presence and absence with respect to the time of ordinary beings. If considered with respect to the time of the noble ones, the seventh and eighth consciousnesses dependently originate the immeasurable faculties and objects of the dharmakāya. Question: The former six consciousnesses discern sense objects based on sense faculties, so they can be called 'consciousnesses'. The latter two are constantly common and are not said to discern objects based on faculties; how then are they called 'consciousnesses'? Answer: Although the latter two lack the function of discerning according to particular phenomena, they are sentient beings' nature of spiritual awareness and substance of discernment; therefore they are called consciousnesses. Question: If the substance of spiritual awareness and discernment is called a consciousness, is this substance itself consciousness? Answer: The substance of these two mental consciousnesses is itself consciousness. Question: If they are called consciousness because of the substance of mind and consciousness, sense faculties and sense objects should also have their substances; for what reason are sense faculties and sense objects not spoken of? Answer: Precisely because, although a sense faculty has a substance and can be called a faculty, it lacks the function of producing consciousness in relation to a sense object. Although an object has a substance and can be called an object, it lacks the function of producing consciousness in relation to a faculty. Although a consciousness has a substance and can be called a consciousness, it lacks the function of discerning an object based on a faculty. Because this substance of consciousness does not depend on the function of a faculty, a faculty is not spoken of; and because it does not have the function of discerning an object, an object is not spoken of. Question: Just now you said that sense faculties and sense objects have substance; what is their fundamental basis? The sense faculties and sense objects produced by the two minds of the true and deluded can serve as the basis for phenomenal things; that is their substance. Such is the distinction between common and distinct. Second is the distinction between the true and the deluded. The former seven deluded consciousnesses have sense faculties and sense objects, while the eighth true consciousness is not said to have sense faculties and sense objects. For the former six phenomenal consciousnesses, faculties and objects are known. The seventh deluded consciousness, being an impermanent dharma, arises and ceases thought-moment by thought-moment. Arising with a reliance, it is said to have a sense faculty. Its nature is conceptual discrimination, grasping at dharmas, so it is said to have sense objects. The true consciousness is an eternal dharma, its substance without arising or ceasing. Because it lacks arising, it has no reliance, and therefore a sense faculty is not spoken of; because its nature is not that of conceptual discrimination grasping at dharmas, sense objects are not said to exist. Third is the distinction according to their commonality. All eight have sense faculties, and all commonly have sense objects. Thus the Laṅkāvatāra says, 'Conditioned by objects, faculties, and consciousness, the eight consciousnesses arise.' What are their characteristics? The former six are known. Within the seventh consciousness, there are substance and function. In terms of its substance, its impermanent stream relies on what precedes to produce what succeeds, which is conceptually called a faculty. Its nature is ignorance, which covers and obscures true reality, and true reality is the obscured object. In terms of its function, it still takes sentient beings' eyes and the like as faculties, and form and the like as objects. What does this mean? The faculties and objects relied upon by the aforementioned phenomenal consciousnesses, when examined fundamentally, are all manifestations of deluded thoughts of one's own mind, just like the faculties and objects manifested in a dream. These deluded faculties and objects again serve as the bases for the six consciousnesses of deluded thought; they are called the functional faculties and objects of the seventh consciousness. Within the eighth consciousness, there are substance and function. In terms of its substance, sense faculties and objects are conceptually spoken of within the identical-substance dharmas of the tathāgatagarbha. That tathāgatagarbha is not only the substance of mind and consciousness, but is also the substance of the faculties; hence the sūtra says, 'Within the bodies of sentient beings there are the Tathāgata's eyes, the Tathāgata's ears,' and so forth. The Buddha-dharmas, numerous as the sands of the Ganges within the tathāgatagarbha, being illuminated by the mind, are named sense objects. Therefore Aśvaghoṣa says, 'From the beginningless past, its meaning is to illuminate universally all dharmadhātus.' In terms of its function, it still takes sentient beings' eyes and the like as faculties, and form and the like as objects. What does this mean? The faculties and objects upon which the aforementioned phenomenal consciousnesses rely are, when examined fundamentally, all produced by the true mind, just as in a dream a person's faculties and objects are all produced by the mind of karmic retribution. These products of the true mind again serve as the bases for the six consciousnesses of the true mind's function, and are called the functional faculties and objects of the true consciousness. Such is their common presence. Question: If the eight consciousnesses all commonly possess faculties and objects, why do the sūtras speak of faculties and objects only with respect to phenomenal consciousness? Because the substances of the aforementioned phenomenal consciousnesses are distinct and arise reciprocally, and the sense of reliance is evident, the six consciousnesses are distinguished with respect to faculties and objects. The substances of the latter two are common and constantly present from beginning to end, so the sense of reliance is subtle, and for this reason they are not mentioned. Such is presence and absence. Next is to explain the coarse and subtle differences of their bases. Here they are briefly distinguished through four propositions: 1. Relying on the subtle with the coarse, which means that based on the true consciousness arises the deluded consciousness, based on the deluded consciousness arise the six phenomenal consciousnesses, and further within the six consciousnesses, based on the mental consciousness arise the five consciousnesses; these are all called relying on the subtle with the coarse. 2. Relying on the coarse with the subtle, which means that based on material faculties arise the five consciousnesses, and the mind, being a subtle dharma, based on the five consciousnesses produces the mental consciousness; these are called relying on the coarse with the subtle. 3. Mutual reliance of the same class, which means that within the mental consciousness there can be continuous succession across multiple thought-moments; viewed before and after, reliance is spoken of within the same class. The arising and ceasing of the substance of the seventh consciousness in succession is also of the same class, which is called reliance. 4. Mutual reliance of the same substance, which means that the substance of the eighth consciousness relies on its own substance, the true dharmadhātu. Such is the presence and absence of faculties and objects for the three consciousnesses of the phenomenal, the deluded, and the true (this concludes the first gate).