華嚴經內章門等雜孔目章 1.52

1.52

六約緣生義成有本識者，有其十門：一約三種緣生證唯有識，顯體相用，謂自性緣生即是體也，為識是緣生通因故。二愛非愛緣生，即是相也。三受用緣生，即是用也。二舉迷顯正成唯有識，如論中說，舉六師迷馬，即其事也。如《涅槃經》，舉六執等迷於佛性。今此六執迷於緣生，當知緣生即佛性也。何以故？為佛性體隨其流處有種種味故，餘義可知。三記無記辨唯有識者，內種子阿賴耶識即有無記，或善惡性、或染污清淨為二，餘法則無，由識以外只是遍計即體空故。四約假實辨者，梨耶是實，餘法是假。何以故？一切法唯有識，故內種子則是真實。何以故？一切法以識為本故。五約內成六義辨者，即念念滅，俱有隨逐，至治際決定觀因緣，如引顯自果，必須具六方，是正因義，若闕者即非正義。外道聲聞無有此法，若外種子即是假說，餘如問答中釋。六約熏成不成辨差別者，梨耶是種子必熏成，若餘法為種子即不熏成，不熏成故即非實種。問：若如是者，穀麥等種非是薰成，應非種義。答：外穀麥等從梨耶熏變，故穀麥等假說為種。若定是種，種穀麥等定應齊得；既不齊成，當知業為正種，故穀麥等是其假因，此義不疑。故論文舉內為外本，證內有熏。其熏習之義，梨耶具四德，方堪受熏：一堅謂理實故堅。識外餘法，依識不自在，並皆不堅。問：若諸法無堅，何以故引苣勝為堅？答：苣勝似堅而不是堅。何以故：不久散壞故。梨耶則不如是。果報亦不堅，以依緣成即不自在，何得是堅？道理不可。二無記義，方得受薰。何以故？無記者即是無分別義，如來藏中方有此法。若爾，何以故果報為無記？答：此為聲聞智淺，引其近位說報受熏。果報無體用，識為體故，說果報無有究竟實無記義。道理如此。三可熏者，唯如來藏不守自性，隨諸法緣起成似義，故是可熏。餘法不爾，以被緣縛，何得更轉受諸法薰？為此餘法不成可薰。問：義若如此，何故說衣堪得受薰？答：衣亦是假，非實堪薰。所以知之。如香薰衣，壞衣香在，當知薰絹不薰於衣。以此驗之，言薰衣者指位語也，但絹四塵等受薰。以次推之，四塵等亦不受薰。何以故？以香薰時，香成即是果義。因果道理乃是如來藏德，離藏更無。所以知者？但諸法中辨因果者，並轉理門，非實義也。四與能薰相應者，唯如來藏有應諸法義，餘法則無。何以故？以不守自性故。若爾，何故說鏡與質相應？答：鏡亦不相應。但鏡應外質，即是正因果理。正因果理即無自性，無自性故即無我真如。故知鏡應質者，是其假說轉理之門也。

Sixth, in establishing that the fundamental consciousness exists through the meaning of conditioned arising, there are ten portals. First, proving consciousness-only through the three kinds of conditioned arising reveals its essence, characteristics, and function. That is to say, self-nature conditioned arising is its essence, because consciousness is the universal cause of conditioned arising. Second, conditioned arising of the agreeable and disagreeable is its characteristics. Third, conditioned arising of experiential enjoyment is its function. Second, exposing error to reveal the correct to establish consciousness-only: as stated in the treatises, adducing the six teachers' delusion regarding the horse is an example of this. As in the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, where the six attachments and so forth are adduced to show delusion regarding the Buddha-nature; here, these six attachments are deluded regarding conditioned arising, and one should know that conditioned arising is itself the Buddha-nature. Why is this? Because the essence of the Buddha-nature possesses various flavors in accordance with the places it flows; the remaining meanings may be understood accordingly. Third, discerning consciousness-only through the determined and the indeterminate: the internal seed ālayavijñāna has the indeterminate, or the two of good or evil nature, or defiled and pure. Other phenomena lack this, because outside of consciousness there is only the imagined (parikalpita), which is empty in essence. Fourth, discerning through the conventional and the real: the ālaya is real, and other phenomena are conventional. Why is this? All phenomena are consciousness-only; therefore, internal seeds are truly real. Why? Because all phenomena take consciousness as their basis. Fifth, discerning through the fulfillment of the six aspects internally: namely, moment-to-moment cessation, co-existing accompaniment, persisting up to the stage of the antidote, certainty, looking to causes and conditions, and manifesting one's own result as adduced. One must possess all six aspects before it constitutes the meaning of a correct cause; if any are missing, it is not the correct meaning. Heterodox paths and śrāvakas lack this principle; external seeds are merely conventional designations, with the remainder explained in the questions and answers. Sixth, discerning differences through whether perfuming is accomplished or not: the ālaya is a seed that is necessarily accomplished through perfuming; if other phenomena serve as seeds, they are not accomplished through perfuming, and because they are not accomplished through perfuming, they are not real seeds. Question: If it is so, seeds such as grain and barley are not accomplished through perfuming, so they should not have the meaning of a seed. Answer: External grain and barley are perfumed transformations from the ālaya; therefore, grain, barley, and the like are conventionally called seeds. If they were definitively seeds, planting grain, barley, and the like should unfailingly yield them equally; since they do not mature equally, one should know that karma is the correct seed, and therefore grain and barley are conventional causes—of this meaning there is no doubt. Hence the text of the treatise adduces the internal as the basis of the external to prove that there is internal perfuming. Regarding the meaning of this perfuming, the ālaya must possess four virtues before it is fit to receive perfuming: First, solidity: meaning that because it is real in principle, it is solid. Other phenomena outside consciousness rely on consciousness and lack independence, and all of them are not solid. Question: If all phenomena lack solidity, why is sesame seed cited as being solid? Answer: Sesame seed appears solid, but is not solid. Why? Because after a short time it disperses and is destroyed. The ālaya is not like this. Karmic retribution is also not solid; relying on conditions to be accomplished, it lacks independence, so how could it be solid? In principle, that cannot be. Second, the meaning of being indeterminate before it can receive perfuming. Why? The indeterminate is the meaning of non-conceptualization; only in the tathāgatagarbha is there this principle. If so, why is karmic retribution indeterminate? Answer: This was spoken for śrāvakas of shallow wisdom, referring to their provisional stage to say that retribution receives perfuming. Karmic retribution lacks essence and function; since consciousness is its essence, it is said that karmic retribution lacks the ultimate, real meaning of being indeterminate. Such is the principle. Third, that which can be perfumed: only the tathāgatagarbha does not preserve its own nature, but in accordance with the conditioned arising of all phenomena comes to have a resembling meaning; therefore, it can be perfumed. Other phenomena are not like this; being bound by conditions, how could they further transform and receive the perfuming of all phenomena? For this reason, other phenomena are not capable of being perfumed. Question: If the meaning is thus, why is it said that clothing is capable of receiving perfuming? Answer: Clothing is also conventional, not truly capable of receiving perfuming. How is this known? Just as when incense perfumes clothing, if the clothing is destroyed the scent remains; one should know that the silk is perfumed, not the clothing. Testing it by this, to say that clothing is perfumed is an expression referring to its provisional state; it is merely that the four dusts [i.e., sense objects] of the silk receive the perfuming. Inferring further by sequence, the four dusts also do not receive perfuming. Why? Because when the incense perfumes it, the completion of the fragrance is the meaning of a result. The principle of cause and effect is indeed a virtue of the tathāgatagarbha, and apart from the garbha there is no other. How is this known? Whenever cause and effect are discerned among phenomena, they are all portals of provisional reasoning, not the real meaning. Fourth, being concordant with that which can perfume: only the tathāgatagarbha has the meaning of being concordant with all phenomena; other phenomena lack this. Why? Because it does not preserve its own nature. If so, why is it said that a mirror is concordant with an external object? Answer: A mirror is also not concordant. It is merely that the mirror's responding to the external object is the principle of the correct cause and effect. The principle of the correct cause and effect is itself without self-nature, and because it is without self-nature, it is the true suchness of non-self. Therefore, one should know that the mirror responding to the object is a conventional expression, a portal of provisional reasoning.