宗鏡錄 62.9

62.9

答。前已廣明。今重引證。唯識頌云。是法識轉變。分別。所分別。由此彼皆無。故一切唯識。言轉變者。即八種識。從自證分。轉變似二分現。即所變見分。有能作用。說名為見。所變相分。為所作用。說名為相。即俱依自證分而轉。既若見相二分包一切法盡。即此二分從心體上變起。故知一切諸法。皆不離心。分別所分別者。見分是能分別。相分是所分別。由此彼皆無者。此見相二分上。妄執。彼我法二執是無。即由此見相二分外。妄情執有。心外我法之境皆是無。故云由此彼皆無。故一切唯識者。唯遮境有。識簡心空。除執二邊。正處中道。即將唯字。遮薩婆多執心外有其實境。將識字簡清辯等執惡取空。即破空有二邊。正處中道。故疏云。外則包羅萬像。內則能所俱成。可謂四分一心。理無逾者。又小乘九難。難心外無法唯心之旨。一唯識所因難。諸小乘師云。離心之外。現見色法。是其實境所緣。論主何故包羅歸心。總說名為唯識。一乃色心有異。二又能所不同。關云。色境不牽能緣心。以色從心。可唯識。當情色境外迷心。心被境迷。非唯識義。論主云。只此外邊色境。一是一切有情緣心變。二是一切有情心之所持。根本。皆由於心。是故攝歸唯識。十地經及華嚴經說。三界唯心。意云。三界之法。唯是心之所變。離心之外。更無一物。此亦為遮我法二執。但是妄情執有。舉體全無。唯有內心。故言唯心。

Answer: This was already explained in detail earlier, and now citations are brought forward once more as proof. The *Trimśikā* says:
‘These dharmas are transformations of consciousness. / Discriminated and discriminating: / because of this, both of those are non-existent; / therefore all is consciousness-only.’
‘Transformations’ means that the eight consciousnesses, from their self-verifying part (svasaṃvittibhāga), transform and manifest in the semblance of two parts. That is, the transformed darśanabhāga has an active functioning capacity, and so is termed ‘seeing’; the transformed nimittabhāga is the object of functioning, and so is termed ‘objective image.’ Both evolve in dependence upon the self-verifying part. Since the two parts, seeing and objective image, subsume all dharmas entirely, and these two parts arise through transformation upon the substance of citta, one knows therefore that all dharmas are not separate from citta. ‘Discriminated and discriminating’: the darśanabhāga is that which discriminates; the nimittabhāga is that which is discriminated. ‘Because of this, both of those are non-existent’: upon these two parts of seeing and objective image, through false grasping, those two graspings at self and dharmas are non-existent. That is, outside these two parts of seeing and objective image, objects of self and dharmas that are grasped as existent by deluded sentiment are all non-existent. Therefore it says, ‘because of this, both of those are non-existent.’ ‘Therefore all is consciousness-only’: ‘only’ negates the existence of external objects; ‘consciousness’ sets aside the emptiness of citta. Eliminating grasping at the two extremes, it dwells directly in the Middle Way. That is, using the word ‘only’, it negates the Sarvāstivādins’ grasping that outside citta there are real objects. Using the word ‘consciousness’, it sets aside Bhāviveka and others' grasping and pernicious clinging to emptiness. It thereby refutes the two extremes of emptiness and existence and dwells directly in the Middle Way. Hence the commentary says: ‘Externally, it encompasses the myriad phenomena; internally, both subject and object are established. It can well be said that the four parts are of one citta, and no principle surpasses this.’ Furthermore, the Hīnayāna poses nine objections, challenging the purport that there are no dharmas outside citta and that all is mind-only. The first is the objection regarding the rationale for consciousness-only: The various Hīnayāna masters say, ‘Apart from citta, matter (rūpa) is visibly seen, and it is a real object that is conditions as object (ālambanapratyaya). Why does the author of the treatise encompass it and reduce it to citta, collectively designating it as consciousness-only? First, matter and citta are distinct. Second, subject and object are different.’ The challenge says, ‘External material objects do not draw the cognizing citta along. If matter followed citta, consciousness-only would be acceptable. When, facing sentiments, external material objects outwardly delude citta, and citta is deluded by objects, that is not the meaning of consciousness-only.’ The author of the treatise says: ‘It is simply that these external material objects, first, are transformed by the cognizing citta of all sentient beings, and second, are sustained by the citta of all sentient beings. Fundamentally, they all stem from citta. Therefore they are subsumed into consciousness-only.’ The *Daśabhūmikasūtra* and the *Avataṃsakasūtra* state that the three realms are mind-only. The meaning is: the dharmas of the three realms are solely transformations of citta; apart from citta, there is not a single thing more. This is also to negate the two graspings at self and dharmas. They are merely held to exist by deluded sentiment; their entire substance is completely non-existent. There is only inner citta, hence it is said that all is mind-only.