大乘百法明門論開宗義記 1.20.2

1.20.2

最極清淨廣大殊勝諸無漏法所依止故。 無垢即識持業釋也。 此名唯在如來地有。 菩薩二乘及異生位持有漏種可受熏習。 未得善淨第八識故。 此等皆是別中別名。 或有教立別中通名。 其前六識通名受用。 受用六塵生苦果故。 雜集論中名生起識。 數從本識而生起故。 若兼第七通名轉識。 見道等中有間轉故。 若第八識通前三名。 及一切位有四種名。 或名根本識。 是前七識染淨諸法生根本故。 或名阿陀那。 執持種子及諸色根令不壞故。 或名所知依。 能與染淨所知諸法為依止故。 或名種子識。 能遍任持世出世間諸種子故。 此等並是別中通名。 或有教說通中通名。 謂即此前別中通名。 更通名為心意識故。 此前通義通名心者。 緣慮集起。 通諸識故。 故前標云。 心法有八。 或通諸義皆名為意。 皆有能生依止義故。 故處門中通名意處。 或此諸義通名為識。 皆能了別諸境相故。 故五蘊中皆識蘊攝。 而論列中並名識也。 小乘通依三世眼等。 未來名心。 積集義故。 入現名識。 能了別故。 過去名意。 開導依故。 心起必有心所相應。 隨心性類與彼俱起。 謂八識性有善不善有覆無記無覆無記。 能於此世他世順益故名為善。 人天樂果雖於此世能為順益。 非於他世故不名善。 能於此世他世違損故名不善。 惡趣苦果雖於此世能為違損。 非於他世故非不善。 於善不善損益事中不可記別故名無記。 若性染污能蔽於心障礙聖道故名有覆。 若非染污不能蔽心不障聖道故名無覆。 第八唯是無覆無記。 以此識是異熟性故。 異熟若是善染污者。 流轉還滅應不得成。 又此識是善染依故。 若善染者互相違故。 應不與二俱作所依。 又此識是所熏性故。 若善染者如極香臭應不受熏。 無所熏故染淨因果俱不成立。 既信貪等是唯善染。 故與此識定不相應。 惡作等四無記別境性者有間斷故亦不相應。 其別境五緣別別境。 謂欲希望所樂事轉。 此識任運無所希望。 勝解即持決定事轉。 此識瞢昧無所印持。 念唯明記曾習事轉。 此識昧劣不能明記。 定能令心專注一趣。 此識任運剎那別緣。 慧唯簡擇德等事轉。 此識微昧不能簡擇。 故此不與別境相應。 其觸作意受相思五。 以是遍行心所法故。 若無此五心必不生。 無觸受等不名心故。 其遍行相後當廣說。 第七唯是有覆無記。 性是染污障礙聖道隱蔽自心故名有覆。 一類內執不起此世他世損益故名無記。 故唯十八心所相應。 謂觸等五。 別境中慧我癡我見我慢我愛。 八大隨惑。 意與遍行定相應故。 執我法者必有慧故。 愚於我相迷無我故。 於非我法妄計度故。 恃所執我生高舉故。 於所執我深耽著故。 八大隨惑遍染心故。 何故此識無餘心所。 我見常起無餘見故。 無一心中有二慧故。 慧與我見義用別故。 由見審決不猶豫故。 愛所執我不憎恚故。 恒緣合境無希望故。 恒緣定事無印持故。 恒緣現境無記憶故。 剎那別緣不專一故。 善唯是淨。 此染污故。 小十麁猛。 此審細故。 中二不善。 此無記故。 恒緣定境非悔先故。 眠依外緣。 此內起故。 尋伺麁細此一類故。 故唯十八心所相應。 第六意識通一切性。 具諸分別內外門轉。 於損益性皆可記故。 所起染污雖為定伏。 性非損益障聖道故。 滿業所招異熟果心性非染污。 不障道故。 故容一切心所相應。 雖非一時一切俱起。 隨起三性即彼相應。 眼等五識隨外門轉。 亦同意識通其四性。 由無計度隨念分別。 唯三十四心所相應。 謂五遍行及五別境。 十一善法三本煩惱。 中二大八十隨煩惱。 觸等遍與心相應故。 能微劣緣別別境故。 亦有翻染諸善法故。 有貪嗔癡不善根故。 無慚無愧通不善故。 掉舉等八遍染心故。 所餘心所何不相應。

because it is the basis for all pristine, vast, and supreme uncorrupted dharmas. 'Immaculate' is consciousness itself, [interpreted as] a karmadhāraya compound. This designation exists solely on the Tathāgata stage. In the stages of bodhisattvas, the two vehicles, and ordinary beings, possessing corrupted seeds, they can receive perfuming, because they have not yet attained the well-purified eighth consciousness. These are all specific names within the specific.

Alternatively, some teachings establish common names within the specific. The first six consciousnesses are commonly called 'experiencing', because they experience the six sense-objects and produce results of suffering. In the Abhidharmasamuccaya they are called 'arising consciousnesses', because they repeatedly arise from the basic consciousness. When including the seventh, they are commonly called 'transforming consciousnesses', because they undergo interruption and change in the path of seeing and elsewhere. As for the eighth consciousness, it shares the previous three designations, and in all stages it possesses four kinds of names: it is sometimes called the 'root consciousness', because it is the root from which the defiled and pure dharmas of the previous seven consciousnesses arise; it is sometimes called the 'ādānavijñāna', because it appropriates and holds the seeds and the material sense faculties, keeping them from perishing; it is sometimes called the 'basis of the knowable', because it can serve as the support for all defiled and pure knowable dharmas; and it is sometimes called the 'seed consciousness', because it can universally sustain all mundane and supramundane seeds. These are all common names within the specific.

Alternatively, some teachings state common names within the common; that is, the aforementioned common names within the specific are further commonly designated as citta, manas, and vijñāna. The reason that the aforementioned common meaning is universally called citta is that perceiving and gathering-and-arising are common to all consciousnesses. Therefore, the preceding heading stated: 'The dharmas of mind are eight.' Or, universally through all these senses, they are all called manas, because they all possess the meaning of being an originative support; therefore, within the gateway of the āyatanas, they are commonly called the manāyatana. Or, in all these senses, they are commonly called vijñāna, because they can all cognize the marks of various objects; therefore, within the five aggregates, they are all subsumed under the consciousness aggregate. In the enumeration of the treatise, however, they are all called vijñāna. The Hīnayāna, generally relying on the eyes and so forth across the three periods of time, calls the future citta, because of the meaning of accumulation; entering the present it is called vijñāna, because it can cognize; and in the past it is called manas, because it is the equal-and-immediate support.

When mind arises, it necessarily has caittas associated with it; according to the nature and category of the mind, they arise together with it. That is, the natures of the eight consciousnesses comprise wholesome, unwholesome, obscured-unspecified, and unobscured-unspecified. Being able to benefit adaptively both in this world and in other worlds is called 'wholesome'. Although the pleasant fruits of gods and humans can provide benefit in this world, they do not do so in other worlds, and thus are not called wholesome. Being detrimental and injurious both in this world and in other worlds is called 'unwholesome'. Although the painful fruits of the wretched destinies are detrimental in this world, they are not so in other worlds, and thus are not unwholesome. What cannot be determined as having the characteristics of benefit or detriment among the wholesome and unwholesome is called 'unspecified'. If its nature is defiled and can veil the mind, obstructing the noble path, it is called 'obscured'. If it is non-defiled, cannot veil the mind, and does not obstruct the noble path, it is called 'unobscured'.

The eighth is solely unobscured-unspecified, because this consciousness is of the nature of karmic maturation. If karmic maturation were wholesome or defiled, saṃsāric wandering and its pacification could not be established. Furthermore, because this consciousness is the support for the wholesome and the defiled, if it were wholesome or defiled, they would mutually conflict, and it could not serve as the support for both. Furthermore, because this consciousness is of a nature that receives perfuming, if it were wholesome or defiled, like extreme fragrance or stench it would not receive perfuming; having nothing to perfume, the causes and fruits of defilement and purity would both fail to be established. Since faith, greed, and the like are exclusively wholesome or defiled, they are definitely not associated with this consciousness. Regret and the other three [indeterminates], being intermittent and of an unspecified or object-determining nature, are likewise not associated with it.

The five object-determining [caittas] take specific, distinct objects: aspiration operates by desiring a pleasing matter, whereas this consciousness operates spontaneously without aspiration; resolve operates by holding decisively onto a matter, whereas this consciousness is obscure and holds no conviction; mindfulness operates solely by distinctly remembering things previously experienced, whereas this consciousness is dim and inferior, incapable of distinct remembrance; concentration can make the mind focus on a single object, whereas this consciousness operates spontaneously, taking distinct objects from moment to moment; discernment operates solely by selecting and investigating qualities and the like, whereas this consciousness is subtle and dim, incapable of investigation. Therefore, this [eighth consciousness] is not associated with the object-determining [caittas].

As for the five—contact, attention, sensation, perception, and volition—because they are universal caittas, if these five are absent, mind definitely does not arise; without contact, sensation, and the rest, it cannot be called mind. Their universal characteristics will be explained in detail later.

The seventh is solely obscured-unspecified. Its nature is defiled, obstructing the noble path and veiling one's own mind, and hence it is called 'obscured'. Its unvarying inner clinging does not initiate benefit or detriment in this world or other worlds, and hence it is called 'unspecified'. Therefore, it is associated with only eighteen caittas: the five universals; discernment from among the object-determining; self-delusion, self-view, self-conceit, and self-love; and the eight secondary afflictions of the greater category. Because the manas is definitely associated with the universals; because one who grasps at self and dharmas necessarily has discernment; because one is foolish regarding the marks of a self and deluded about selflessness; because one falsely conceptualizes what is non-self as dharmas; because one relies on the grasped self to produce haughtiness; because one deeply indulges in and clings to the grasped self; and because the eight secondary afflictions of the greater category universally defile the mind.

Why is this consciousness without the remaining caittas? Because self-view is constantly active and there are no other views; because in a single mind there cannot be two discernments; because discernment and self-view differ in meaning and function; because through view there is decisive certainty without hesitation; because one loves the grasped self and harbors no hatred; because it constantly perceives a conjoined object and has no aspiration; because it constantly perceives a determined matter without conviction; because it constantly perceives a present object without memory; because it perceives distinctly from moment to moment without single-pointed concentration; because the wholesome is exclusively pure, whereas this is defiled; because the ten minor [secondary afflictions] are coarse and violent, whereas this is subtle and scrutinizing; because the two medium [secondary afflictions] are unwholesome, whereas this is unspecified; because it constantly perceives a fixed object and does not regret the past; because sleep relies on external conditions, whereas this arises inwardly; and because vitarka and vicāra are coarse and fine, whereas this is uniform in type. Therefore, it is associated with only eighteen caittas.

The sixth mental consciousness pervades all natures; it possesses all conceptualizations, operates through both internal and external gateways, and can be determined in both beneficial and detrimental natures. Although the defilements it produces may be suppressed by concentration, their nature is non-detrimental, yet they obstruct the noble path. The mind that is the maturation fruit brought about by completing karma is non-defiled in nature, because it does not obstruct the path. Therefore, it admits association with all caittas. Although not all arise together at one time, according as any of the three natures arises, it is associated with them.

The five consciousnesses of the eye and so forth, operating through the external gateway, also share the four natures with the mental consciousness. Because they lack conceptualization by deliberation and conceptualization by recollection, they are associated with only thirty-four caittas: the five universals and the five object-determining; eleven wholesome dharmas; three root afflictions; and the two medium and eight greater secondary afflictions, totaling ten secondary afflictions. This is because contact and the rest universally associate with mind; because they can subtly and feebly perceive specific, distinct objects; because they also have the various wholesome dharmas that counter defilement; because they possess the unwholesome roots of greed, anger, and delusion; because shamelessness and unconscionableness pervade the unwholesome; and because restlessness and the other seven universally defile the mind. Why are the remaining caittas not associated?