翻譯名義集 6.37

6.37

[Hṛdaya] Also called muhūrta; here translated as "firm and solid mind." A commentary on the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: "It refers to the supreme-truth mind, like the solid core of a tree; it is not conceptual thought, but the nature inherently possessed by all living beings." Furthermore, the Mahāyāna Treatise establishes ten kinds of consciousness that subsume all consciousnesses. What are the ten? To the previous nine, it adds the consciousness of the single mind of everything. Earlier in the treatise it says: "That is to say, with the single mind-consciousness, it pervades the two kinds of mastery, leaving nothing unestablished." As the Buddha told Mañjuśrī: "I establish only one kind of consciousness; I do not establish the remaining consciousnesses. Why is this? The one kind of consciousness is the manifold single consciousnesses. This consciousness has various powers and can produce all various names, yet it is solely one consciousness, with no other phenomena at all. Therefore, I say that I establish one kind of consciousness." Now I say that "consciousness of the single mind of everything" is the phrasing of this land; its proper Sanskrit name is hṛdaya. Question: "How are the consciousness of the single mind of everything and the amala distinguished?" Answer: "In terms of the principle realized by all buddhas, the name amala is established. In terms of the source about which sentient beings are deluded, the title hṛdaya is designated. Why is this? The sūtra says: 'And transforms the various consciousnesses to enter the amala'; thus we know that in the fruit stage it is named amala. As for the consciousness of the single mind of everything, the treatise says: 'It can produce all various names,' which shows it is the source about which living beings are deluded. I venture this distinction; later sages may examine it in detail." (Formerly, when I lived at Dajue, Prime Minister Li paid a visit and asked: "In the Śūraṅgama-sūtra, 'the nature-enlightenment is wondrously bright, and original enlightenment is brightly wondrous'—is this one phenomenon or two phenomena? If you say two phenomena, nature-enlightenment is just original enlightenment; if you say one phenomenon, why does the upper line say wondrously bright, and the lower line say brightly wondrous?" I answered at once: "One phenomenon with two meanings: the upper line speaks of the nature; the substance of the nature is quiescent yet ever luminous, hence called 'wondrously bright.' The lower line speaks of enlightenment; the function of enlightenment is luminous yet ever quiescent, hence called 'brightly wondrous.'") The Book of Rites says: "That humans are born quiescent is the nature of Heaven; to be stirred through contact with things is the desire of the nature." This is the Confucian taking the stillness of non-movement as nature, and that which is stirred and then penetrates as sentiment. Our school takes the luminous, quiescent true mind as nature, which is inherently possessed in principle; and the murky, agitated false thoughts as sentiment, which is constructed through phenomena. Hence the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: "From beginningless time, the continuation of birth and death has all been due to not knowing the constantly abiding true mind, the naturally pure and luminous substance, and using various false thoughts." Because these thoughts are not real, there is transmigration; through this distinction of sentiment and nature, the ten consciousnesses are differentiated here. The former eight consciousnesses all pertain to sentiment; the ninth and tenth consciousnesses correspond to nature. Question: "What is the identity or difference between mind and nature?" Answer: "They are sometimes identical and sometimes different. That they are sometimes identical: as the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says, 'The constantly abiding true mind, the naturally pure and luminous substance'—here both denote the real. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra says, 'The two natures of mind and consciousness are restless and never cease'—here both refer to the false. That the two names are different: as the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says, 'Though the nature of Śūnyatā may perish, the vajra mind does not vacillate'—here mind is real and nature is false. The Dayi says: 'Because it follows conditions without changing, it is nature; because it does not change while following conditions, it is mind'—here nature is real and mind is false. National Preceptor Zhong said: 'In delusion, nature congeals into mind; in awakening, mind is released into nature.' However, regarding the two minds—true and false—explained in the sūtras and treatises, there are broadly four meanings: First, solely the true mind, as the Awakening of Faith says: 'It is solely the one mind, hence named suchness.' Second, solely the false mind, as the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: 'Waves of various consciousnesses leap and turn, arising successively.' Third, the false arising from the true, as the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: 'The tathāgatagarbha is the cause of good and non-good, and can extensively give rise to all destinies and rebirths.' Fourth, pointing out that the false is itself the true, as the Śūraṅgama-sūtra says: 'Then what you now have is the quintessence of consciousness, originally luminous.' Also, the Vimalakīrti-nirdeśa says: 'The company of afflictions is the seed of the Tathāgata.' What is stated across the texts is exhausted by these four. However, regarding these consciousnesses, diverse theories have proliferated in the Western Regions and the Eastern Land. Now I shall first state the differing assertions, and then explain their reconciliation. First, regarding the differing assertions: the two schools of nature and characteristics first diverged in India, and the factions of north and south flourished even more in the Qi dynasty. Thus at Nālandā Monastery in the Western Regions, the Venerable Śīlabhadra, distantly inheriting from Maitreya and Asaṅga and closely following Dharmapāla and Nanda, relied on sūtras such as the Saṃdhinirmocana and treatises such as the Yogācārabhūmi to establish the Dharma-Characteristics school. 'Dharma-characteristics' means taking only the karmic characteristics of the eight consciousnesses as the source of the arising of all dharmas. Hence the Dharma-Characteristics school takes the structured arrangement of the characteristics of consciousness as its main purport. At the same monastery and during the same period, the Venerable Jñānaprabha, distantly receiving from Mañjuśrī and Nāgārjuna and closely complying with Piṅgala and Bhāviveka, relied on sūtras such as the Prajñāpāramitā and treatises such as the Madhyamakaśāstra to establish the Dharma-Nature school. 'Dharma-nature' means clarifying that suchness following conditions is the source of defilement and purity. Hence the Single-Nature school takes the unhindered contemplation of the true principle as its gate. When it came to the Eastern Land, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha had the differences between Liang and Tang, and the Daśabhūmika-śāstra had the divergence of north and south. Because the Mahāyānasaṃgraha composed by Bodhisattva Asaṅga was transmitted to this land, the two translations were not identical: Paramārtha of the Liang dynasty established nine consciousnesses, asserting that the eighth consciousness gives rise to all dharmas. As that treatise explains the ten superior characteristics, the first, the superior characteristic of reliance, clarifies that the eighth consciousness produces the twelve links of dependent origination. Next, in the Tang dynasty, Xuanzang's new translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha established only eight consciousnesses, asserting that the ninth is merely a different name for the eighth consciousness. This is the difference between Liang and Tang. When the Daśabhūmika-śāstra composed by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu was translated into this land, the south and north each held their own assertion: the Southern Branch of Xiangzhou asserted that the ālaya is pure consciousness; the Northern Branch of Xiangzhou asserted that the ālaya is ignorance. This is the divergence of north and south. Next, regarding their reconciliation: the Miaoxuan says: 'Now, clarifying the mind of ignorance: it is not from itself, not from another, not from both, and not without cause; all four propositions are inconceivable. This is in terms of one's own practice in breaking attachments, where neither south nor north remains. If there are causes and conditions of the four siddhāntas, it may also be stated. This is in terms of transforming others, where both nature and characteristics are preserved. For within the ālaya, there are seeds of birth and death; when perfumed and cultivated, they increase and form the discriminating consciousness. If within the ālaya there are seeds of wisdom; when perfumed through hearing, they increase and undergo transformation of the basis to become the suchness of the fruition of the Path, named pure consciousness. What is other than these two consciousnesses is merely the ālayavijñāna; this is also discussing three within one dharma, and one within three.' The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: 'Like the defilement and purity of gold and earth: defilement is likened to the six consciousnesses, gold to pure consciousness, and earth to the ālayavijñāna.' Clear scriptural evidence is right here; why labor in bitter contention! Furthermore, the Zongjing says: 'This ālayavijñāna is none other than the true mind. Not abiding in its own nature, it follows defiled and pure conditions; neither combined yet combined, it can contain and store all real and conventional realms, hence named the storehouse consciousness. It is like a clear mirror not uniting with the images, yet containing the images. This is spoken from the side of the meaning of harmonious combination; if spoken in terms of non-combination, its substance is constantly unchanging, hence called suchness. Originally the one true mind, tranquil and immovable. If one does not believe that the ālayavijñāna is itself the tathāgatagarbha and seeks the principle of suchness elsewhere, it is like seeking the mirror apart from the images, which is wicked wisdom. Because one has not comprehended the meaning of unchanging while following conditions and following conditions while unchanging, two attachments arise.' Furthermore, the Zongjing uses the two gates of principle and measure to subsume all nature and characteristics: the wondrous existence of the characteristics of consciousness is the gate of accordance with measure; the true emptiness of the nature of consciousness is the gate of accordance with principle." Question: "The true mind has no form; how can one know that it has an unempty, constantly abiding, tranquil substance?" Answer: "It can be verified through phenomena and discerned through function: phenomena can reveal principle, and function can manifest substance. Just as seeing waves arise lets one know that there is the substance of water, one should contemplate the gates of principle and measure to attain the Path of nature and characteristics."