大乘起信論廣釋卷第三．四．五 4.12

4.12

Treatise: "The meaning of 'non-conjoined' is [...] [because it does not have identical] characteristics of perception and condition." Commentary: That the latter three defilements and fundamental avidyā are called "non-conjoined" also has three meanings. Regarding that based on primary mind and mental factors: although these latter three defilements are the moving mind, they are subtle and have never been distinct from non-awakening. If it were the coarse phenomenal consciousness, it would be distinct from non-awakening: the moving mind would be the primary mind and non-awakening would be the mental factor. Now, because this characteristic of the moving mind is subtle, it is constantly without distinction from non-awakening. Therefore it says that arising from non-awakening, the three kinds of characteristics are never separated from that non-awakening. Thereby there is no distinction between primary mind and mental factors; hence it says, "the mind itself is non-awakening and constantly without distinction." This reveals the absence of the meaning of equality of substance. Since there is no distinction of primary mind and mental factors with equality of substance, how could there be the meaning of identical perception and identical condition? Therefore it says, "not having identical characteristics of perception and condition." This reveals the absence of equality of perception and equality of condition. It inverts the previous "conjoined" to reveal the meaning of "non-conjoined"; it does not mean that there is equality of substance while perception and condition are different. If so, why does the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra say that the ālayavijñāna is conjoined with primary mind and mental factors? Answer: This is said in terms of the subtle, completely harmonious principle: the mind and non-awakening are harmoniously blended as if one, indivisible. Because they are not yet distinct, there are no defiled cetasikas, and thus it is called non-conjoined. That [text] speaks in terms of the coarse, superficial, established principle: it says that there are indeterminate, omnipresent mental factors of primary mind and cetasika existing together, and thus it constitutes conjunction. Each relies on one meaning and they do not contradict each other. Regarding that based on mind and object: this moving mind is itself in substance non-awakening; it is not that it conjoins with an object and only then becomes non-awakening, for non-awakening is located right on the moving mind. Therefore it says, "the mind itself is [non-]awakening." "Not having identical characteristics of perception and condition": this is to distinguish it from the previous "conjoined", in which there are greed and so on that have identical perception and identical condition. If so, the fundamental consciousness should not manifest objects, which would extremely contradict the various teachings. Answer: Although it merely manifests objects, it does not grasp them. Because it can manifest them, it is said to be able to condition objects; it does not mean that being able to manifest implies being able to grasp. If it were not so, how would it differ from phenomenal consciousness? Therefore, it does not conjoin with objects.