大乘義章 5.81

5.81

第一釋名。八妄想義，出《地持論》。謬執不真，名之為妄。妄心取相，目之為想。心法非一，以何義故偏言妄想，不說妄受及餘心法？分別取相，是其想義，故偏說之。雖復說想，餘亦皆隨。妄想不同，分為八種，始從自性乃至俱相違。言自性者，取法自體，名為自性。法實無性，妄謂有之，故云妄想。言差別者，於自性處，取諸法相，相別彼此，故云差別。攝受積聚者，於前自性差別法中，取其和合業用之相，此業用中攝受多法，故云攝受。此攝受中，積聚多法，故曰積聚。取此之心，名為攝受積聚妄想。我我所者，於彼攝受積聚法中，有內有外，於內法中妄謂有人，名我妄想。於外法中謂有我所，名我所妄想。念妄想者，於前所取我所法中，取違順中三種境別。取順境界，用為順情，可愛可念，名念妄想。言不念者，取違境界，以為違情，不可愛念，名為不念。非謂不緣說為不念，蓋乃對於貪心以名，不為貪心所愛念故，名為不念。若對瞋心，違境是其瞋心所念，亦名為念。言俱違者，中容境界返彼前二，名曰俱違。取有俱違，名為妄想。名義如是。

First, explaining the names. The meaning of the eight false conceptualizations comes from the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* (*Dichi lun*). Erroneously grasping what is not real is called "false." The false mind grasping at marks is designated as "conceptualization" (saṃjñā/vikalpa). Mental factors are not single; for what reason does it exclusively speak of false conceptualization, and not of false feeling or the remaining mental factors? Distinguishing and grasping at marks is the meaning of conceptualization; hence it is exclusively mentioned. Although conceptualization alone is mentioned, the others also follow. False conceptualizations are distinct and divided into eight kinds, beginning with intrinsic nature and extending up to being contrary to both. As for intrinsic nature: grasping the self-substance of dharmas is called intrinsic nature. Dharmas are truly devoid of intrinsic nature, yet one falsely conceives them to have it; hence it is called false conceptualization. As for differentiation: with respect to that intrinsic nature, grasping the marks of dharmas and distinguishing them as this or that; hence it is called differentiation. As for appropriation and accumulation: within the aforementioned dharmas of intrinsic nature and differentiation, grasping the marks of their combination and active function; within this active function many dharmas are appropriated, hence it is called appropriation. Within this appropriation, many dharmas are accumulated, hence it is called accumulation. The mind that grasps this is called the false conceptualization of appropriation and accumulation. As for self and belonging to self: within those appropriated and accumulated dharmas, there are internal and external; within internal dharmas, falsely conceiving that there is a person is called the false conceptualization of self; within external dharmas, conceiving that there is what belongs to oneself is called the false conceptualization of what belongs to self. As for the conceptualization of pleasant recollection: within the aforementioned apprehended dharmas belonging to self, grasping the three distinct objects—agreeable, disagreeable, and neutral. Grasping an agreeable object, treating it as conforming to one's desires, lovely and recollected with pleasure, is called the conceptualization of pleasant recollection. As for unpleasant recollection: grasping a disagreeable object, treating it as contrary to one's desires, unlovely and not recollected with pleasure, is called unpleasant recollection. This does not mean not cognizing it; rather, it is named in contrast to the greedy mind: because it is not loved or recollected by the greedy mind, it is called unpleasant recollection. If viewed in contrast to the mind of aversion, a disagreeable object is precisely what the mind of aversion is mindful of, and so it could also be called recollection. As for contrary to both: neutral objects reverse the former two and are called contrary to both. Grasping the existence of what is contrary to both is called false conceptualization. The names and meanings are such.