大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 4.18

4.18

論。二種境界至義故　釋曰。次辨所依。於中有二。初順辨生緣。後逆顯義。此初也。文中二義。通緣別因。通而言之。麁細二識皆依無明住地而起。以本無明熏起三細現六塵境轉起三麁。是故論云。二種生滅皆依無明熏習有也。別而言之。依無明生三種細心。依境界緣生三麁心。故云依因者不覺義故等。此中文略各舉一因。若具說者。如楞伽云。不思議熏及不思議變是現識因。取種種塵及無始妄相熏是分別事識因。不思議熏者。謂本無明能於真如不可熏處而能熏故。不思議變者。謂真如心受無明熏。不可變異而變異故。又熏即不熏。不熏即熏。變即不變。不變即變。是亦名為不思熏變。勝鬘經中不染而染染而不染難了知者。謂不思議熏及變也。以此熏變甚微隱故。所起現識行相微細。無所及境成不相應心。於中亦有轉識業識。舉麁兼細但說現識。種種塵者即此現識所現境界。還能動彼現識心海起識浪。無始妄起即未無明。從無始來熏習本識為緣引發事識。妄心於六塵境虛妄分別。妄根及塵麁而且顯故。其所起分別事識行相麁顯。成相應心欲明現識。依不思議熏故得生。依不思議變故得住。分別事識依境界緣故得生。依妄熏因故得住。今論文略不說因住故。於細中唯說無明。麁中單舉境界緣也。

[Treatise:] The two kinds of objects... because of the meaning [of avidyā as the cause].
[Commentary:] Next is the explanation of what they depend on. Herein there are two [parts]: first, explaining in the forward order the conditions for arising; later, revealing the meaning in the reverse order. This is the first. In the text there are two senses: the general condition and the specific causes. Generally speaking, both the coarse and the subtle consciousnesses arise by depending on the entrenchment of avidyā (avidyā-vāsanā-bhūmi). Because fundamental avidyā perfuses, giving rise to the three subtleties, manifesting the objects of the six sense-dusts, and in turn giving rise to the three coarsenesses. Therefore the treatise says: 'Both kinds of arising and ceasing exist by depending on the perfuming of avidyā.' Specifically speaking, depending on avidyā, the three kinds of subtle mind arise; depending on the conditions of objects, the three coarse minds arise. Therefore it says, 'Depending on the cause is because of the meaning of non-awakening,' and so forth. Here the text is abridged, each time adducing only one cause. If explained fully, as the Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra says: 'Inconceivable perfuming and inconceivable transformation are the causes of the manifesting consciousness; grasping various sense-dusts and beginningless perfuming of false characteristics are the causes of the phenomenal consciousness of discrimination.' 'Inconceivable perfuming' means that fundamental avidyā is able to perfume tathatā, which is an unperfumable place. 'Inconceivable transformation' means that the mind of tathatā receives the perfuming of avidyā, and though untransformable, it transforms. Furthermore, perfuming is non-perfuming, and non-perfuming is perfuming; transformation is non-transformation, and non-transformation is transformation; this is also called inconceivable perfuming and transformation. That which in the Śrīmālā-sūtra is 'untainted yet tainted, tainted yet untainted, and difficult to comprehend' refers to inconceivable perfuming and transformation. Because this perfuming and transformation are extremely subtle and concealed, the mode of activity of the manifesting consciousness that arises is subtle; having no [dualistic] object, it forms the non-corresponding mind. Within this there are also the evolving consciousness and karmic consciousness; mentioning the coarse to subsume the subtle, it speaks only of the manifesting consciousness. The 'various sense-dusts' are the objects manifested by this manifesting consciousness; they in turn are able to stir the ocean of mind of that manifesting consciousness to raise the waves of consciousness. 'Beginningless false arising' is the branch avidyā. From beginningless time it perfumes the fundamental consciousness, serving as a condition to bring forth the phenomenal consciousness; the deluded mind makes false discriminations regarding the objects of the six sense-dusts. Because the deluded faculties and sense-dusts are coarse and evident, the phenomenal consciousness of discrimination that arises has a coarse and evident mode of activity, forming the corresponding mind. Intending to clarify that the manifesting consciousness arises depending on inconceivable perfuming and abides depending on inconceivable transformation, while the phenomenal consciousness of discrimination arises depending on the condition of objects and abides depending on the cause of false perfuming, now the treatise text is abridged and does not speak of causes for abiding; hence regarding the subtle it speaks only of avidyā, and regarding the coarse it adduces only the condition of objects.