[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814) › 3.34 # 大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 3.34 大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 3.34 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.34](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3.34) 論。云何為三至不離因故　釋曰。次分別釋。於中三細。即分為三。此初也。無明業相者。標其名也。謂由無明心起動故。謂無明即名業相。但是依主非持業釋。依不覺者。釋標中無明也。心動名業者。釋標中業字。業有二義。一動作義。故云依不覺故心動名業。覺則不動者反舉釋成。既始覺時則無動念。是知今動只由不覺。二為因義。故云動即有苦。如得靜時即是涅槃妙果。故知今動則有生死苦患。果不離因者。顯動即苦。動因苦果無別時故。此雖動念而極微細。緣起一相能所不分。故無相論云。問。此識何相何境。答。相及境界不可分別。一體無異。此依黎耶業相說也。 > Treatise: "What are the three? ... because it is not separated from its cause." Commentary: Next is the distinctive explanation. Within it, the three subtle characteristics are divided into three. This is the first. "The karmic characteristic of ignorance" is the indication of its name. That is, due to ignorance the mind is stirred to arise; to say that ignorance itself is named the karmic characteristic is only a determinative compound (tatpuruṣa), not an appositional compound (karmadhāraya). "Based on non-awakening" explains the "ignorance" in the heading. "The agitation of the mind is called karma" explains the word "karma" in the heading. Karma has two meanings: First, the meaning of movement and action; hence it says: 'Based on non-awakening, the agitation of the mind is called karma.' 'When awakened, it does not move' is an inverse statement to explain and establish it: since at the time of initial awakening there is no stirring thought, one knows that the present agitation is solely due to non-awakening. Second, the meaning of cause; hence it says: 'When it moves, there is suffering.' Just as when stillness is attained, it is the wondrous fruit of nirvāṇa, so one knows that present agitation entails the affliction of suffering in saṃsāra. 'The fruit is not separated from its cause' reveals that moving is itself suffering, because the cause of moving and the fruit of suffering occur at no different time. Although this is a stirred thought, it is extremely subtle; conditioned arising is a single mark where subject and object are not divided. Hence the Lakṣaṇābhāva Treatise says: 'Question: What mark and what realm does this consciousness have? Answer: Its mark and objective realm cannot be distinguished; they are of one substance without difference.' This is spoken based on the karmic characteristic of the ālayavijñāna. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.33](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3.33) - [Next: 3.35](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3.35) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814~en-mt.3.34) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (2) - [大乘起信論義記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1846.2.206) — Classical Chinese - [大乘起信論略述](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2813.1.110) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3.34](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2814.3.34) · Pramāṇa