宗鏡錄 51.17

51.17

答。釋摩訶衍論云。阿賴耶識。總有十種。所以者何。於契經中別別說故。一者。名為大攝主阿賴耶識。所謂即是總相大識。義如前說。二者。名為根本無明。別立以為阿賴耶識。故十種妄想。契經中作如是說。剎闍只多提王識。直是妄法。不能了達一法界體。一切染法。阿賴耶識。以為根本。出生增長。無斷絕時。若無提王識。黑品眷屬。永無所依。不能生長故。此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。所言不覺義者。謂不如實知真如法一故。不覺心起而有其念。乃至廣說故。三者。名為清淨本覺阿賴耶識。所謂自然本智。別立以為阿賴耶。故本覺契經中。作如是說。自體淨佛阿賴耶識。具足無漏圓滿功德。常恒決定。無受熏相。無變異相。智體不動。具足白品。是故名為獨一淨識。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。復次覺體相者。有四種大義。與虛空等。猶如淨鏡。乃至廣說故。四者。名染淨本覺阿賴耶識。所謂不守自性陀羅尼智。別立以為阿賴耶識。故本因緣起。契經中。作如是說。爾時光嚴童子。即白佛言。尊者。以何因故。難入未曾有會中。作如是說。隨他緣起陀羅尼智。名為楞伽王識。云何名為楞伽王。以之為喻。示彼緣起陀羅尼智。於是尊者告光嚴言。童子。此楞伽王。常在大海摩羅山中。率十萬六千鬼神之眾。以為眷屬。如是諸眷屬。乘華宮殿。遊於諸剎。皆悉承賴彼楞伽王。方得遊行。所謂諸鬼神眾。作如是言。我等神眾。無有威德。無有氣力。於諸所作。無有其能。如宜大王。我等眾中。與堪能力。彼楞伽王。即隨其時。與殊勝力。不相捨離。而共轉。謂楞伽王。雖非分身。而能遍滿諸神眾中。各各令得全身之量。於一切時。於一切處。共轉不離。不守自性智。亦復如是。能受一切無量無邊煩惱染法。鬼神眾熏。不相捨離。而俱轉故。以此因緣故。我難入中。作如是說。隨轉覺智。名為楞伽王識。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。自性清淨心。因無明風動。心與無明。俱無形相。不相捨離。乃至廣說故。五者。名為業相業識阿賴耶識。所謂根本業相。及與業識。別立以為阿賴耶。故本性智契經中。作如是說。阿賴耶識。無能了作。無所了作。不可分析。不可隔別。唯由精動隱流義故。名為鍵摩。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。復次依不覺故。生三種相。與彼不覺。相應不離。云何為三。一者無明業相。以依不覺故心動。說名為業。覺則不動。動則有苦。果不離因故。六者。名為轉相轉識阿賴耶識。所謂能見境界之相。及與轉識。別立以為阿賴耶。故大無量契經中作如是說。阿賴耶識。有見見轉。無見見起。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中作如是說。二者能見相。以依動故能見。不動則無見故。七者。名為現相識阿賴耶識。所謂境界之相。及與現識。別立以為阿賴耶。故實際契經中作如是說。別異別異。現前地轉。相異相。具足行轉。是故名為阿賴耶識。復次此阿賴耶識。真是異熟無記之法。白淨相故。或名成就。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。三者境界相。以依能見故。境界妄現。離見則無境界故。第八者。名為性真如理阿賴耶識。所謂正智所證清淨真如。別立以為阿賴耶故。故諸法同體契經中作如是說。有識。是識。非識識攝。所謂如如阿賴耶識。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。所謂清淨般若質境真如攝故。九者。名為清淨始覺阿賴耶識。所謂本有清白始覺般若。別立以為阿賴耶。故果圓滿。契經中作如是說。佛告菩提樹王言。自然始覺阿賴耶識。常當不離清淨本覺。清淨本覺。常當不離始覺淨識。隨是彼有。隨彼是有。或非同種。或非異種故。此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。本覺義者。對始覺者。即同本覺故。十者。名為染淨始覺阿賴耶識。所謂隨緣始覺般若。別立以為阿賴耶。故果圓滿。契經中作如是說。復次樹王。如始覺淨識。及自本覺。說染淨始覺阿賴耶識。不守自性。緣起本覺。亦復如是。故此阿賴耶識。當何決擇攝。於本論中。作如是說。始覺義者。依本覺故而有不覺。依不覺故而有始覺。又以覺心原故。名究竟覺。不覺心原故。非究竟覺。乃至已說藏識剖字別相門。次說總識攝生圓滿門。此識有二種義。能攝一切法。生一切法。一者覺義。二者不覺義者。而總顯示大識殊勝圓滿相故。此義云何。所謂具足二種圓滿故。一者功德圓滿。二者過患圓滿。功德圓滿者。覺義字句。能攝一切無量無邊。過於恒沙不離不斷諸功德故。能生一切無量無邊。過於恒沙不離不斷諸功德故。過患圓滿者。不覺義字句。能攝一切無量無邊。過於恒沙若離若脫諸過患故。能生一切無量無邊。過於恒沙若離若脫諸過患故。

Answer: The *Shi Moheyan lun* states: "There are altogether ten kinds of ālayavijñāna. Why is this? Because they are explained separately across the sūtras. First is the ālayavijñāna named 'Great Sovereign of Inclusion,' which refers precisely to the great consciousness of the universal characteristic, the meaning of which is as explained before. Second is that named 'Fundamental Ignorance,' established separately as the ālayavijñāna. Thus, in the sūtra on the ten kinds of conceptual elaboration, it is stated: 'The king-consciousness of *chajizhiditi* is entirely a false dharma; it cannot comprehend the substance of the one dharmadhātu. All defiled dharmas take the ālayavijñāna as their root to be produced and to grow without interruption. If there were no such king-consciousness, the retinues of the dark category would forever have no basis and could not grow.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'What is called the meaning of non-enlightenment is that, because one does not truly know the oneness of the dharma of tathatā, an unenlightened citta arises and has thoughts,' up to extensive explanations. Third is the ālayavijñāna named 'Pure Original Enlightenment,' which refers to the spontaneous original wisdom, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of original enlightenment, it is stated: 'The ālayavijñāna of the intrinsically pure Buddha is fully endowed with uncontaminated, complete virtues; it is eternal, constant, and determinate, devoid of the characteristic of receiving perfuming and devoid of the characteristic of alteration; the substance of its wisdom is unmoved and fully endowed with the white category; therefore it is named the uniquely pure consciousness.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'Furthermore, regarding the substance and characteristic of enlightenment, there are four great meanings, equal to empty space, like a clean mirror,' up to extensive explanations. Fourth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Defiled and Pure Original Enlightenment,' which refers to the dhāraṇī-wisdom that does not preserve its own nature, established separately as the ālayavijñāna. Thus, in the sūtra on the conditioned arising of the root cause, it is stated: 'At that time the youth Prabhāvyūha said to the Buddha: "O Venerable One! For what reason is it stated in the assembly of the difficult-to-enter unprecedented that the dhāraṇī-wisdom of conditioned arising following other [conditions] is called the king-of-Laṅkā consciousness? Why is it named the king of Laṅkā, using it as an analogy to show that dhāraṇī-wisdom of conditioned arising?" Thereupon the Venerable One said to Prabhāvyūha: "O youth! This king of Laṅkā constantly abides in Mount Malaya in the great ocean, leading an assembly of one hundred and six thousand ghosts and spirits as his retinue. These retinues, riding flower palaces and roaming through the various realms, all depend on that king of Laṅkā in order to roam. That is to say, the assembly of ghosts and spirits say: 'We spirits have no majesty and virtue, no energy and strength, and have no ability in whatever we do. As appropriate, Great King, grant capability and power amidst our assembly.' That king of Laṅkā then, according to the time, grants supreme strength, not abandoning them but operating together with them. This means that although the king of Laṅkā does not divide his body, he can pervade the assembly of spirits, enabling each to obtain the measure of a whole body, operating together without departing at all times and in all places. The wisdom that does not preserve its own nature is also like this: it can receive the perfuming of the ghost-and-spirit assembly of all immeasurable and boundless kleśas and defiled dharmas, not abandoning them but operating together." For this reason, in the difficult-to-enter [assembly] I stated: "The awakened wisdom that operates in accordance [with conditions] is called the king-of-Laṅkā consciousness."' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'The intrinsically pure citta is stirred by the wind of avidyā. Both citta and avidyā are without physical form, and are not separated from each other,' up to extensive explanations. Fifth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Karmic Characteristic and Karmic Consciousness,' which refers to the fundamental karmic characteristic together with the karmic consciousness, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of intrinsic nature wisdom, it is stated: 'The ālayavijñāna has nothing that can actively cognize, nothing that is actively cognized, cannot be analyzed, and cannot be separated; solely due to the meaning of subtle motion and hidden flowing, it is called *karman*.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'Furthermore, dependent on non-enlightenment, three kinds of characteristics are produced, which are associated with and not separated from that non-enlightenment. What are the three? The first is the karmic characteristic of avidyā: because of reliance on non-enlightenment, the citta is stirred, which is called karma. When enlightened, it is unmoved; when moved, there is suffering, because the fruit is not separated from the cause.' Sixth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Transforming Characteristic and Transforming Consciousness,' which refers to the characteristic of being able to perceive the objective realm together with the transforming consciousness, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of the great immeasurable, it is stated: 'In the ālayavijñāna, seeing transforms with seeing, and seeing arises without seeing.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'The second is the characteristic of the perceiver: because of reliance on motion, it can perceive; if unmoved, there is no seeing.' Seventh is the ālayavijñāna named 'Manifesting Characteristic and Consciousness,' which refers to the characteristic of the objective realm together with the manifesting consciousness, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of the actual limit, it is stated: 'Distinctly and differently, it transforms present before the ground; differing in characteristics, it transforms operating with completeness; therefore it is named the ālayavijñāna. Furthermore, this ālayavijñāna is truly a vipāka and indeterminate dharma; because of its white and pure characteristic, it is sometimes named accomplishment.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'The third is the characteristic of the objective realm: because of reliance on the perceiver, the objective realm falsely manifests; apart from the perceiver, there is no objective realm.' Eighth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Principle of the Nature of Tathatā,' which refers to the pure tathatā realized by correct wisdom, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of the identical substance of all dharmas, it is stated: 'There is a consciousness; this consciousness is not included within the consciousness of consciousness; it is the so-called tathatā-ālayavijñāna.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? It is included within the pure prajñā-ground-of-essence tathatā. Ninth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Pure Initial Enlightenment,' which refers to the originally existing, pure, and white prajñā of initial enlightenment, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of the fulfillment of the fruit, it is stated: 'The Buddha told the Bodhi Tree King: "The natural initial-enlightenment ālayavijñāna is always inseparable from pure original enlightenment; pure original enlightenment is always inseparable from the pure consciousness of initial enlightenment. Following the existence of that, this exists; following the existence of this, that exists; they are neither of the same kind nor of a different kind."' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'Regarding the meaning of original enlightenment, in contrast to initial enlightenment, it is identical with original enlightenment.' Tenth is the ālayavijñāna named 'Defiled and Pure Initial Enlightenment,' which refers to the prajñā of initial enlightenment that accords with conditions, established separately as the ālaya. Thus, in the sūtra of the fulfillment of the fruit, it is stated: 'Furthermore, Tree King, just as the pure consciousness of initial enlightenment and its own original enlightenment are spoken of, the defiled and pure initial-enlightenment ālayavijñāna, not preserving its own nature, is the conditioned arising of original enlightenment; it is also like this.' Under what determination and inclusion does this ālayavijñāna fall? In the root treatise it is stated: 'Regarding the meaning of initial enlightenment: dependent on original enlightenment, there is non-enlightenment; dependent on non-enlightenment, there is initial enlightenment. Moreover, because of awakening to the source of citta, it is named ultimate enlightenment; because of not awakening to the source of citta, it is non-ultimate enlightenment.' Having thus explained the gate of analyzing the characters and distinct characteristics of the storehouse consciousness, next is explained the gate of the universal consciousness's inclusion and production of completeness: 'This consciousness has two meanings, which can include all dharmas and produce all dharmas: the first is the meaning of enlightenment, and the second is the meaning of non-enlightenment,' which universally displays the supreme and complete characteristic of the great consciousness. What is this meaning? It refers to being fully endowed with two kinds of completeness: the first is the completeness of merits, and the second is the completeness of faults. Regarding the completeness of merits: the words and phrases of the meaning of enlightenment can include all immeasurable, boundless merits that exceed the sands of the Ganges, inseparable and uninterrupted; and they can produce all immeasurable, boundless merits that exceed the sands of the Ganges, inseparable and uninterrupted. Regarding the completeness of faults: the words and phrases of the meaning of non-enlightenment can include all immeasurable, boundless faults that exceed the sands of the Ganges, both separate and detached; and they can produce all immeasurable, boundless faults that exceed the sands of the Ganges, both separate and detached."