宗鏡錄 50.7

50.7

答。夫論生滅之事。必住散動之心。經云。有念即魔網。不動即法印。魔網立生死之道。法印成涅槃之門。故知散亂寂靜二途。皆依本識而有。論云。契經說。諸有情類受生命終。必住散心。非無心定。若無此識。生死時心不應有故。謂生死時身心惛昧。如睡無夢。極悶絕時。明了轉識心不現起。又此位中。六種轉識行相所緣。不可知故。如無心位。必不現行。六種轉識行相。所緣。有必可知。如餘時故。真異熟識極微細故。行相所緣。俱不可了。是引業果。一期相續。恒無轉變。是散有心。名生死心。不違正理。又說。五識此位定無。意識取境。或因五識。或因他教。或定為因。生位諸因既不可得故。受生位意識亦無。乃至又將死時。由善惡業。下上身分冷觸漸起。若無此識。彼事不成。轉識不能執受身故。眼等五識各別依故。或不行故。第六意識不住身故。境不定故。遍寄身中恒相續故。不應冷觸由彼漸生。唯異熟心。由先業力恒遍相續。執受身分。捨執受處。冷觸便生。壽煖識三不相離故。冷觸起處。即是非情。雖變亦緣。而不執受。故知定有此第八識。又契經說。識緣名色。名色緣識。如是一一法。展轉相依。譬如束蘆。俱時而轉。若無此識。彼識自體不應有故。謂彼經中自作是釋。名。謂非色四蘊。色。謂羯邏藍等。此二與識。相依而住。如二束蘆。更互為緣。恒俱時轉不相捨離。眼等轉識攝在名中。此識若無。說誰為識。亦不可說名中識蘊為五識身。識。為第六。羯邏藍時無五識故。又諸轉識有間轉故。無力恒時執持名色。意說恒與名色為緣故。彼識言。顯第八識。

Answer: Discussion of birth and death necessarily concerns a distracted, agitated citta. A sūtra says: 'Having thought is the snare of Māra; being unmoving is the seal of the Dharma.' The snare of Māra establishes the path of birth and death; the seal of the Dharma completes the gateway of nirvāṇa. Thus we know that both paths, distraction and quietude, exist depending on the fundamental consciousness. A śāstra states: 'A sūtra says: "All sentient beings, when taking birth or dying, necessarily abide in a distracted citta, not in an unconscious meditative absorption." If this consciousness did not exist, the citta at the time of birth and death could not exist. This is because at the time of birth and death, body and mind are dim and faint, like dreamless sleep or extreme fainting; the clearly discerning transforming consciousnesses do not actively arise. Furthermore, in this state, the modes of activity and the cognitive objects of the six transforming consciousnesses cannot be known; as in an unconscious state, they definitely do not operate. When the six transforming consciousnesses have modes of activity and cognitive objects, these can definitely be known, as at other times. Because the true maturational consciousness is extremely subtle, both its mode of activity and its cognitive object are incomprehensible. Being the fruit of directing karma, it continues for a single life-period and is eternally without change. It is a distracted, existent citta, termed the citta of birth and death, which does not contradict correct principle. It is also said: "The five consciousnesses are definitely absent in this state. The manovijñāna apprehends objects either caused by the five consciousnesses, or caused by instructions from others, or caused by meditative concentration. Since these causes cannot be found in the state of taking birth, the manovijñāna is also absent in the state of taking birth." And further, when about to die, due to wholesome or unwholesome karma, a cold touch gradually arises in the lower or upper parts of the body. If this consciousness did not exist, that event could not occur. This is because the transforming consciousnesses cannot appropriate the body. The five consciousnesses, eye and the rest, each have their distinct bases, or else they do not operate. The sixth manovijñāna does not reside in the body, its objects are unfixed, and because it relies pervading the body constantly in succession, the gradual arising of cold touch cannot be caused by it. Only the maturational citta, through the force of prior karma, is eternally, pervadingly continuous and appropriates the body. Where it relinquishes its appropriation, cold touch then arises. Because the three—lifespan, warmth, and consciousness—do not depart from one another, the place where cold touch arises is insentient. Although it transforms, it also cognizes, yet it does not appropriate. Thus we know this eighth consciousness definitely exists.' Furthermore, a sūtra says: 'Consciousness conditions name-and-form, and name-and-form conditions consciousness. Each factor thus mutually depends upon the other, like a bundle of reeds, operating simultaneously.' If this consciousness did not exist, the substance of that consciousness could not exist. That sūtra itself provides this explanation: 'Name refers to the four non-material aggregates; form refers to the kalala and so forth. These two and consciousness abide in mutual dependence, like two bundles of reeds, serving as conditions for each other, always operating simultaneously without departing from each other.' The transforming consciousnesses, eye and the rest, are included within name. If this consciousness did not exist, what could be called consciousness? Nor can it be said that the consciousness aggregate within name refers to the group of the five consciousnesses, and 'consciousness' refers to the sixth, because at the stage of the kalala the five consciousnesses do not exist. Furthermore, because the transforming consciousnesses have interruptions and alterations, they lack the power constantly to sustain name-and-form. The intention is that it constantly serves as a condition for name-and-form; therefore, the word 'consciousness' indicates the eighth consciousness.