宗鏡錄 60.45

60.45

答。雖見山河等是實。元是妄執有外山河大地等。理實而論。皆不離自證分故。所以楞伽經偈云。由自心執著。心似外境轉。彼所見非有。是故說唯心。故知離自證分外。無實見相二分。第二難陀論師。立二分成唯識者。初標宗者。即一切心生。皆有見相二分。見相二分。是能所二緣也。若無相分牽心。心法無由得生。若無能緣見分。誰知有所緣相分耶。即有境有心。等成唯識也。見分為能變。相分是所變。能所得成。須具二分。見分相分。是依他起性。有時緣獨影境。即同種生。有時緣帶質境。即別種生。從種生故。非遍計也。若不許者。諸佛不應現身土等種種影像也。安慧却難。汝若立相分。豈不心外有境。何名唯識。難陀言。見分是能緣。相分是所緣。攝所從能。還是唯識。又汝若言無相分。則所立一分唯識不成。何以故。安慧執相分是妄情有。即第八所緣識中相分種子。是相分攝。即種子是能生自證現行。親因緣法。若種子相分是妄情者。何妨所生現行自證分。亦是妄情。不違種子識義也。若不許自證分是妄情者。即能生種子亦是實有。即因果皆實。證相分亦是實有。既有相分。即有見分。能所既成。即二分成立唯識也。又五根是第八識相分。若相分是遍計。豈有遍計根。能發生五識也。安慧云。不假五根發生五識。五識俱自從種子生也。

Answer: Although one perceives mountains, rivers, and the like to be real, this is originally an erroneous attachment to the existence of external mountains, rivers, the great earth, and so forth. In truth, none of them are separate from the svasaṃvittibhāga. Therefore, a verse in the Laṅkāvatārasūtra says:

'Due to the attachment of one's own citta,
Citta turns resembling external objects.
What is seen therein does not exist;
Therefore, it is said to be citta-only.'

Thus we know that apart from the svasaṃvittibhāga, there are no real darśana- and nimitta-bhāgas.

As for the second master, the commentator Nanda, who established two bhāgas to constitute consciousness-only: First, to present his thesis, whenever any citta arises, it necessarily possesses both darśana- and nimitta-bhāgas. The darśana- and nimitta-bhāgas are the active and objective conditions (ālambana). If there were no nimittabhāga to draw the citta, the mental dharmas would have no way to arise; if there were no darśanabhāga as the grāhaka, who would know that there is an objective nimittabhāga? Thus, with both object and citta, they equally constitute consciousness-only. The darśanabhāga is that which transforms, and the nimittabhāga is that which is transformed. For the grāhaka and grāhya to be established, both bhāgas must be present. Both the darśanabhāga and the nimittabhāga belong to the paratantrasvabhāva. Sometimes, when apprehending a 'solitary image' (dvy-ākāra / solitary reflection) object, it arises from the same seed; sometimes, when apprehending an 'interdependent image' object, it arises from a distinct seed. Because it arises from seeds, it is not parikalpita (imputed). If this were not accepted, the Buddhas would not manifest various reflections such as bodies and lands.

Sthiramati in turn objected: 'If you establish a nimittabhāga, does there not exist an object outside citta? How could that be called consciousness-only?'

Nanda replied: 'The darśanabhāga is that which apprehends, and the nimittabhāga is that which is apprehended. Subsuming the apprehended into that which apprehends, it is still consciousness-only. Furthermore, if you say there is no nimittabhāga, then your thesis of a single-bhāga consciousness-only cannot be established. Why is this? You, Sthiramati, grasp the nimittabhāga as existing only through false sentiment. But the seeds of the nimittabhāga within the eighth consciousness—which are the objects it cognizes—are subsumed under the nimittabhāga. That is, the seeds are the direct causal condition (hetupratyaya) that generates the actualized svasaṃvittibhāga. If the seeds of the nimittabhāga are merely false sentiment, what prevents the actualized svasaṃvittibhāga produced by them from also being false sentiment? This would not contradict the meaning of a seed-consciousness. If you do not accept that the svasaṃvittibhāga is false sentiment, then the seeds that generate it must also be real existents. Thus both cause and effect are real, proving that the nimittabhāga is also a real existent. Since the nimittabhāga exists, the darśanabhāga must exist. Since the grāhaka and grāhya are established, consciousness-only is established through the two bhāgas. Furthermore, the five sense faculties are the nimittabhāga of the eighth consciousness. If the nimittabhāga were merely imputed (parikalpita), how could an imputed faculty give rise to the five consciousnesses?'

Sthiramati said: 'The five consciousnesses do not rely on the five faculties to arise; all five consciousnesses arise from their own seeds.'