[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大乘義章](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851) › 5.36 # 大乘義章 5.36 大乘義章 5.36 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.36](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5.36) 第五門中辨其即心異心之義。此約解心明其即異。隨相別分，四住之惑一向異心，不與一切解心俱故。無明即心，細闇得與麁解俱故。問曰：若言四住之惑不與解俱名異心者，見解起時修惑未斷，是時修惑豈可不與見解俱乎？釋言：不俱。解惑兩心不並起故。若不並起，彼見諦解應治修惑。釋言：非治。心不並緣，故不並起。雖不並起，修道惑得與見解俱，故不名治。問曰：若言心不並緣，修惑見解不起俱起者，無明與解亦應如是，何緣得並？釋言：不類。修道之惑是起煩惱，故與起解不得俱生。無明是其任性無知，非作意起，故得與彼起解同體。分相如是。隨義通論，四住無明皆有即心異心之義。彼四住中有麁有細，麁者對緣作意現生，一向不與解心同體；細者與彼無明同體，任性成就，得與麁解同體之義。無明之中亦有麁細，異相無明說之為麁，自性無明說以為細。於諸法中迷而不了，相返明解，名為異相。妄識心體性是無知，設於諸法緣照分明，猶是闇惑，名性無明。如人夢中雖有所了，性是昏睡闇昧之心，亦如樂受性是行苦，此亦如是。此二無明皆有即心異心之義，異相無明望前品治，一向即心，前治起時後無明猶在心故；望自品治及上品治，一向異心，彼治起時前品無明已斷滅故。自性無明，望前品治及自品治，一向即心，此治起時自性無明未斷滅故；望上品治，一向異心，後治起時前念無明已斷滅故。問曰：若言自性無明與自品治得同體者，云何能斷？釋言：此斷非是解生惑滅名斷。由同體智順真力故，令其即體自性無明更不牽後，故說為斷。此義如後斷結章中具廣分別。 > The fifth section distinguishes their being identical with or different from mind. This clarifies identity and difference with reference to the understanding mind. When differentiated according to distinctive characteristics, the afflictions of the four entrenchments are consistently different from the mind, because they do not coexist with any understanding mind. Ignorance is identical with the mind, because its subtle darkness can coexist with coarse understanding. Question: If you say that the afflictions of the four entrenchments being termed "different from mind" means they do not coexist with understanding, then when the understanding of vision arises, the afflictions of cultivation have not yet been severed; at that time, how could the afflictions of cultivation not coexist with the understanding of vision? Explanation: They do not coexist. The two minds of understanding and affliction do not arise concurrently. If they do not arise concurrently, then that understanding of the vision of the truths should counter the afflictions of cultivation. Explanation: It does not counter them. Minds do not take conditions concurrently, and therefore they do not arise concurrently. Although they do not arise concurrently, the afflictions of the path of cultivation can coexist with the understanding of vision, and therefore it is not called countering. Question: If you say that because minds do not take conditions concurrently, the afflictions of cultivation and the understanding of vision do not arise concurrently, then ignorance and understanding should also be like this; why could they be concurrent? Explanation: They are not of the same kind. Afflictions of the path of cultivation are active afflictions, and therefore they cannot arise concurrently with an active understanding. Ignorance is spontaneous nescience, not arising through intentional mentation; therefore, it can share the same substance with that active understanding. Such is the distinction of characteristics. Broadly discussed according to principle, both the four entrenchments and ignorance have the senses of being identical with mind and different from mind. Within those four entrenchments there are coarse and subtle: the coarse actively arise facing conditions through intentional mentation, and are consistently not of the same substance as the understanding mind; the subtle share the same substance with that ignorance, being established by nature, and have the sense of being able to share the same substance with coarse understanding. Within ignorance there are also coarse and subtle: ignorance of differentiated characteristics is explained as coarse, and intrinsic ignorance is explained as subtle. Being confused and lacking clear comprehension regarding dharmas, running contrary to luminous understanding, is called differentiated characteristics. The substance of the deluded consciousness's mind is by nature nescience; even if its cognitive illumination regarding dharmas is distinct, it is still dark delusion, and is called intrinsic ignorance. Just as when a person is in a dream, although there is something comprehended, its nature is a somnolent and darkened mind, and just as the nature of pleasant sensation is the suffering of conditioning, this too is like this. Both of these two kinds of ignorance have the senses of being identical with mind and different from mind. Differentiated-characteristics ignorance, viewed in relation to the counteragent of the preceding grade, is consistently identical with mind, because when the preceding counteragent arises, the subsequent ignorance is still present in the mind; viewed in relation to the counteragent of its own grade and the counteragent of the superior grade, it is consistently different from mind, because when that counteragent arises, the ignorance of the preceding grade has already been severed and extinguished. Intrinsic ignorance, viewed in relation to the counteragent of the preceding grade and the counteragent of its own grade, is consistently identical with mind, because when this counteragent arises, intrinsic ignorance has not yet been severed and extinguished; viewed in relation to the counteragent of the superior grade, it is consistently different from mind, because when the subsequent counteragent arises, the ignorance of the preceding thought-moment has already been severed and extinguished. Question: If it is said that intrinsic ignorance can share the same substance with the counteragent of its own grade, how can it be severed? Explanation: This severing is not that an understanding arises and the affliction is extinguished, which would be called severing. Due to the power of the wisdom of the same substance conforming to the true, it causes the intrinsic ignorance of that very substance no longer to drag along what follows, and therefore it is spoken of as severing. This meaning will be fully and extensively distinguished below in the chapter on severing fetters. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.35](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5.35) - [Next: 5.37](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5.37) - [Up: 5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851~en-mt.5.36) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5.36](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1851.5.36) · Pramāṇa