宗鏡錄 52.18

52.18

答。有四義。古德云。一是主者。謂前六識無明是客。有間斷故。第七無明是主。無間斷故。二恒行者。有漏位中。常起現行。不間斷。故名恒行。三不共者。不同第六識獨頭。名不共。第六不共。但不與餘九煩惱同起。名為不共。若第七名不共者。障無漏法勝故。又恒行不間斷故。四前六識通三性心時。此識無明。皆起現行。謂前六識善性心時。於施等不能亡相者。皆是第七恒行不共無明內執我。令六識等行施時。不能達三輪體空。又以有不共無明。常能為障。而令彼當生無漏智不生。此無明與第七識俱有故。至今不捨。故名俱行。又經云。眼色為緣。生於眼識。乃至意法為緣。生於意識。若無此識。彼意非有。眼根色境為二緣。能發引得眼識。乃至意識法境為二緣。能發得意識。若無第七識者。即應第六識唯有一法境為緣。應無所依根緣也。既有俱有根者。明知即是第七識與第六識為俱有根。小乘云。我宗取肉團。與第六識為依。何要別執有第七識耶。論主破云。亦不可說第六依於色故。第六必依意有。說意非是色故。又說第六有三分別。隨念計度自性分別故。若許第六依色而住者。即同前五識。無隨念計度二種分別。救云。我宗五識。根先識後故。即前念五根。發後念五識。論主破云。但有根者。如葉依種起。芽種俱時。影藉身生。身影同有。識依根發。理必同時。無前念根。發後念識故。既若五識有俱有根。將證第六亦須有俱有根。即第七識是也。引理證者。教中說有思量者。即是第七識。小乘云。但是第六等無間。名思量意。何要別說第七為思量意耶。論主破云。且如第六意識現在前時。念等無間意。已滅無體。如何有思量用名意耶。且如第六識。若居現在時。雖有思量。恒名為識。不名意故。要待過去。方名意故。須信有第七識。具恒審思量。方得名意。意者。依止義。若等無間意。依此第七假得意名。俱有依止思量用故。又第七識與四惑俱。名為染污。恒審思量。名之為意。常有恒行不共無明。故名染污。正是有覆性。即覆真緣義。蔽淨妙智。恒審思量者。此揀第八前六識。恒者。不間斷。審者。決定執我法故。

Answer: There are four meanings. An ancient worthy said: First, being the master: the avidyā of the first six consciousnesses is a guest because it is intermittent, whereas the avidyā of the seventh is the master because it is uninterrupted. Second, constantly operating: in the stage of outflows, it constantly produces active manifestations without interruption, hence it is called constantly operating. Third, unshared: it is not like the solitary [avidyā] of the sixth consciousness that is called unshared; the unshared of the sixth is merely called unshared because it does not arise together with the other nine afflictions, whereas if the seventh is called unshared, it is because its obstruction of undefiled dharmas is preeminent, and also because it operates constantly without interruption. Fourth, when the first six consciousnesses range across the minds of the three moral natures, the avidyā of this [seventh] consciousness always produces active manifestations: that is, when the first six consciousnesses are minds of wholesome nature, their inability to forget characteristics in giving and so forth is entirely due to this constantly operating unshared avidyā of the seventh internally grasping at a self, causing the six consciousnesses and so forth, when practicing giving, to be unable to realize that the three wheels are empty in substance. Furthermore, because there is unshared avidyā, it is constantly able to serve as an obstruction, preventing that undefiled wisdom which ought to arise from arising. Because this avidyā coexists with the seventh consciousness and is not abandoned up to the present, it is called 'co-operating.' Furthermore, a sūtra says: 'Conditioned by the eye and form, eye consciousness arises; ... up to: Conditioned by manas and dharmas, manovijñāna arises.' If this [seventh] consciousness did not exist, that manas would not exist. The eye faculty and the object of form serve as two conditions able to engender and lead to the eye consciousness; up to: the manas faculty and the object of dharmas serve as two conditions able to engender and produce the manovijñāna. If the seventh consciousness did not exist, the sixth consciousness would have only the single object of dharmas as condition and would lack a supporting faculty condition. Since there is a coexistent faculty, one clearly knows that it is precisely the seventh consciousness that serves as the coexistent faculty for the sixth consciousness. The Hīnayāna says: 'Our school takes the physical heart-flesh as the support for the sixth consciousness; why is it necessary to separately posit the existence of a seventh consciousness?' The author of the treatise refutes this, saying: One also cannot say that the sixth depends on form, because the sixth must exist depending on manas, and manas is said not to be form. Furthermore, it is said that the sixth has three conceptualizations: conceptualization by recollection, conceptualization by calculation, and intrinsic conceptualization. If one conceded that the sixth abided depending on form, it would then be identical to the first five consciousnesses and would lack the two kinds of conceptualization—recollection and calculation. In defense, they say: 'In our school, for the five consciousnesses, the faculty comes first and the consciousness comes later; thus, the five faculties of the previous moment engender the five consciousnesses of the subsequent moment.' The author of the treatise refutes this, saying: Wherever there is a faculty, just as a leaf arises depending on a seed, sprout and seed are simultaneous; a shadow is produced by relying on a body, and shadow and body exist together. When consciousness arises depending on a faculty, in principle they must be simultaneous; there is no such thing as a faculty of the previous moment engendering a consciousness of the subsequent moment. Since the five consciousnesses have coexistent faculties, this is used to prove that the sixth must also have a coexistent faculty, which is precisely the seventh consciousness. To cite reasoning as proof: what is said in the teachings to possess pondering is precisely the seventh consciousness. The Hīnayāna says: 'It is merely the immediately preceding [moment of the] sixth that is named the pondering manas; why is it necessary to separately state that the seventh is the pondering manas?' The author of the treatise refutes this, saying: Take, for instance, when the sixth manovijñāna is present: the mind of the immediately preceding moment has already ceased and lacks substance; how could it have the function of pondering to be named manas? Take, for instance, the sixth consciousness: when it resides in the present, although it has pondering, it is constantly named vijñāna and not named manas; it must wait until it is in the past before it is named manas. One must have faith that there is a seventh consciousness, which possesses constant and deliberate pondering, before it can be named manas. 'Manas' has the meaning of support. As for the immediately preceding manas, it only metaphorically receives the name of manas by depending on this seventh, because [the seventh] possesses the function of coexistent support and pondering. Furthermore, the seventh consciousness is accompanied by the four afflictions, hence it is called defiled; it constantly and deliberately ponders, hence it is named manas. It constantly possesses the constantly operating unshared avidyā, hence it is called defiled. This is precisely the veiled [morally indeterminate] nature, which has the meaning of veiling the real conditions and obscuring the pure, wonderful wisdom. As for 'constantly and deliberately pondering,' this distinguishes it from the eighth and the first six consciousnesses: 'constantly' means without interruption; 'deliberately' means decisively grasping at self and dharmas.