T43n1831_成唯識論掌中樞要

大正藏第 43 冊 No. 1831 成唯識論掌中樞要

No. 1831 [cf. No. 1585]

成唯識論掌中樞要捲上(本)

大慈恩寺翻經沙門基撰

第一卷

今解論文略作五門分別。

┌一敘古┬一敘說

┌一明時┤ └二斥非

│ └二述今┬一述文

一明時益┤ └二示教

│ ┌一敘文┬一敘別

└二明益──┤ └二會文

└二屬教┬一立宗

└二屬教

┌二異宗┬一外道

┌一辨宗──┤ └二小乘

│ └二同宗┬一邊宗

二辨宗體┤ └二中道

│ ┌一異體┬一外道

└二辨體──┤ └二小乘

└二同體┬一邊體

└二中體

┌一敘名┬一敘古

┌一歸名──┤ └

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 大正藏第 43 冊 No. 1831 《成唯識論掌中樞要》

No. 1831 [cf. No. 1585]

《成唯識論掌中樞要》捲上(本)

大慈恩寺翻經沙門基 撰

第一卷

現在解釋論文，略作五門分別：

一、明時益

• 一、明時
  • 一、敘古
    • 一、敘說
    • 二、斥非
  • 二、述今
    • 一、述文
    • 二、示教
• 二、明益
  • 一、敘文
    • 一、敘別
    • 二、會文
  • 二、屬教
    • 一、立宗
    • 二、屬教

二、辨宗體

• 一、辨宗
  • 一、異宗
    • 一、外道（tirthika，非佛教的修行者）
    • 二、小乘（Hinayana，佛教的一個主要分支，注重個人解脫）
  • 二、同宗
    • 一、邊宗
    • 二、中道（Madhyamaka，佛教哲學的一個學派，強調空性）
• 二、辨體
  • 一、異體
    • 一、外道（tirthika，非佛教的修行者）
    • 二、小乘（Hinayana，佛教的一個主要分支，注重個人解脫）
  • 二、同體
    • 一、邊體
    • 二、中體

三、歸名

• 一、敘名
  • 一、敘古
  • 二、...

【English Translation】 English version Taisho Tripitaka Volume 43, No. 1831, Essentials of the Treatise 'Consciousness-Only'

No. 1831 [cf. No. 1585]

Essentials of the Treatise 'Consciousness-Only', Volume 1 (Original)

Composed by the Sramana (monk) Ji of the Translation Bureau of Da Ci'en Temple

Volume 1

Now, explaining the text, I will briefly make distinctions in five sections:

I. Clarifying the Time and Benefits

• I. Clarifying the Time
  • I. Narrating the Past
    • I. Narrating the Teachings
    • II. Refuting the Incorrect
  • II. Relating the Present
    • I. Relating the Text
    • II. Showing the Doctrine
• II. Clarifying the Benefits
  • I. Narrating the Text
    • I. Narrating Separately
    • II. Assembling the Text
  • II. Assigning to the Teaching
    • I. Establishing the Tenet
    • II. Assigning to the Teaching

II. Distinguishing the Tenet and Substance

• I. Distinguishing the Tenet
  • I. Different Tenets
    • I. Tirthikas (tirthika, non-Buddhist practitioners)
    • II. Hinayana (Hinayana, a major branch of Buddhism, focusing on individual liberation)
  • II. Same Tenet
    • I. Extreme Tenet
    • II. Middle Way (Madhyamaka, a school of Buddhist philosophy emphasizing emptiness)
• II. Distinguishing the Substance
  • I. Different Substances
    • I. Tirthikas (tirthika, non-Buddhist practitioners)
    • II. Hinayana (Hinayana, a major branch of Buddhism, focusing on individual liberation)
  • II. Same Substance
    • I. Extreme Substance
    • II. Middle Substance

III. Returning to the Name

• I. Narrating the Name
  • I. Narrating the Past
  • II. ...

二敘今

│ └二歸名┬一名歸

三歸名乘┤ └二意歸

│ ┌一敘乘┬一敘異

└二歸乘──┤ └二會同

└二歸乘┬一辨義

└二正歸

┌一敘藏┬一異計

┌一攝藏──┤ └二自宗

│ └二攝藏┬一義辨

四攝藏分┤ └二正歸

│ ┌一敘分┬一敘相

└二攝分──┤ └二純雜

└二攝分┬一義辦

└二攝分

┌一敘因┬一敘時

五敘因釋┤ └二敘生

└二正釋┬一正料

└二正釋

又解論文初以三門分別

┌──一輪益┬──先異計

┌一教益有殊┤ └──後大乘

│ └──二義益┬──先異計

│ └──後大乘

│ ┌──一敘古┬──初敘說

├二時利差別┤ └──後斥非

│ └──二述今┬──初述文

一彰論同異┤ └──後示教

│ ┌一異宗┬──初外道

├三詮宗各略┤ └──後小乘

│ └一同宗┬初邊宗

│ └後中宗

│ ┌──一異體┬──初外道

└四體性不同┤ └──後小乘

└──二同體┬──初邊體

└──後中體

┌────一敘名┬──先古名

┌一歸名┤ └──後今名

│ └────二歸名┬──先歸大

│ └──後歸末

│ ┌────一敘藏┬──初敘異

├二歸藏┤ └──後大乘

│ └────二歸藏

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 │ ┌──一敘古┬──初敘說 ├二時利差別┤ └──後斥非 │ └──二述今┬──初述文 一彰論同異┤ └──後示教 │ ┌一異宗┬──初外道（指非佛教的宗派） ├三詮宗各略┤ └──後小乘（佛教中的一個派別） │ └一同宗┬初邊宗（佛教中的一個派別） │ └後中宗（佛教中的一個派別） │ ┌──一異體┬──初外道（指非佛教的宗派） └四體性不同┤ └──後小乘（佛教中的一個派別） └──二同體┬──初邊體（佛教中的一個派別） └──後中體（佛教中的一個派別） ┌────一敘名┬──先古名 ┌一歸名┤ └──後今名 │ └────二歸名┬──先歸大 │ └──後歸末 │ ┌────一敘藏┬──初敘異 ├二歸藏┤ └──後大乘（佛教中的一個派別） │ └────二歸藏

【English Translation】 English version │ ┌──One explaining the old┬──First explaining ├Two times benefit difference┤ └──Later refuting the wrong │ └──Two stating the present┬──First stating the text One showing the similarities and differences of the arguments┤ └──Later showing the teachings │ ┌One different school┬──First non-Buddhist schools (referring to non-Buddhist schools) ├Three explaining each school briefly┤ └──Later Hinayana (a branch of Buddhism) │ └One same school┬First extremist school (a branch of Buddhism) │ └Later Madhyamaka school (a branch of Buddhism) │ ┌──One different substance┬──First non-Buddhist schools (referring to non-Buddhist schools) └Four different natures of substance┤ └──Later Hinayana (a branch of Buddhism) └──Two same substance┬──First extremist substance (a branch of Buddhism) └──Later Madhyamaka substance (a branch of Buddhism) ┌────One explaining the name┬──First old name ┌One returning to the name┤ └──Later present name │ └────Two returning to the name┬──First returning to the great │ └──Later returning to the end │ ┌────One explaining the collection┬──First explaining the differences ├Two returning to the collection┤ └──Later Mahayana (a branch of Buddhism) │ └────Two returning to the collection

┬──初義解

二歸教所在┤ └──後正歸

│ ┌────一敘分┬──先敘相

├三歸分┤ └──後純相

│ └────二歸分┬──初義辨

│ └──後正歸

│ ┌────一敘乘┬──初敘異

└四歸乘┤ └──後同會

└────二歸乘┬──初義辨

└──後正歸

┌一敘因緣┬───一敘本因

│ └───二敘末因

├二敘年主┬───一敘年

三敘釋所因┤ └───二敘主

├三釋分段┬───一本分

│ └───二末分

└四釋論文┬───一釋本

└───二釋末

然初五門．十義仍以三門總勒。一彰論同．異。二教歸所在。三敘釋題．文 彰同．異中略復開三。一為對異宗顯自宗別。二為對異教顯自教體。三為被機感廣說時機 教歸在

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： ┬──初義解（對『初義』的解釋）

二歸教所在（兩種歸宿的教義所在）┤ └──後正歸（最終歸宿）

│ ┌────一敘分（第一種敘述）┬──先敘相（首先敘述表相） ├三歸分（三種歸宿的劃分）┤ └──後純相（之後純粹是表相） │ └────二歸分（第二種歸宿的劃分）┬──初義辨（最初的意義辨析） │ └──後正歸（最終歸宿）

│ ┌────一敘乘（第一種敘述的乘法）┬──初敘異（首先敘述差異） └四歸乘（四種歸宿的乘法）┤ └──後同會（之後相同之處的匯合） └────二歸乘（第二種歸宿的乘法）┬──初義辨（最初的意義辨析） └──後正歸（最終歸宿）

┌一敘因緣（第一種敘述因緣）┬───一敘本因（首先敘述根本原因） │ └───二敘末因（其次敘述末端原因） ├二敘年主（第二種敘述年和主）┬───一敘年（首先敘述年份） 三敘釋所因（第三種敘述解釋原因）┤ └───二敘主（其次敘述主導者） ├三釋分段（第三種解釋分段）┬───一本分（首先是根本部分） │ └───二末分（其次是末端部分） └四釋論文（第四種解釋論文）┬───一釋本（首先解釋根本） └───二釋末（其次解釋末端）

然初五門．十義仍以三門總勒。（然而最初的五個方面，十個意義仍然用三個方面來總括。）一彰論同．異。（一是闡明論點的相同和不同。）二教歸所在。（二是教義歸宿所在。）三敘釋題．文（三是敘述解釋題目和文章。） 彰同．異中略復開三。（在闡明相同和不同之中，又略微展開三個方面。）一為對異宗顯自宗別。（一是爲了針對不同的宗派，彰顯自己宗派的差別。）二為對異教顯自教體。（二是爲了針對不同的教義，彰顯自己教義的體系。）三為被機感廣說時機（三是爲了適應眾生的根機和感應，廣泛地講述時機。） 教歸在（教義歸宿在於）

【English Translation】 English version: ┬──Explanation of Initial Meaning

Twofold Return of Teaching's Location┤ └──Later Correct Return

│ ┌────First Narrative Division┬──First Narrative of Appearance ├Threefold Return Division┤ └──Later Pure Appearance │ └────Second Return Division┬──Initial Meaning Discrimination │ └──Later Correct Return

│ ┌────First Narrative Vehicle┬──First Narrative of Difference └Fourfold Return Vehicle┤ └──Later Concordant Meeting └────Second Return Vehicle┬──Initial Meaning Discrimination └──Later Correct Return

┌First Narrative of Cause and Condition┬───First Narrative of Root Cause │ └───Second Narrative of Branch Cause ├Second Narrative of Year and Lord┬───First Narrative of Year Third Narrative Explaining the Cause┤ └───Second Narrative of Lord ├Third Explanation of Sections┬───First Section of Root │ └───Second Section of Branch └Fourth Explanation of Treatise┬───First Explanation of Root └───Second Explanation of Branch

However, the initial five aspects and ten meanings are still summarized by three aspects. First, to clarify the similarities and differences of the arguments. Second, to locate where the teachings return. Third, to narrate and explain the title and text. In clarifying similarities and differences, three more aspects are briefly opened up. First, to distinguish one's own school by contrasting it with different schools. Second, to reveal the essence of one's own teaching by contrasting it with different teachings. Third, to widely explain the timing in response to the faculties and sensitivities of beings. The return of the teachings lies in

中復開為三。一十二分教。何分所攝。二二．三藏等。何藏所攝。三一．二乘等。何乘所攝 釋題文中又開為三。一敘論年．主。二釋論題目。三解論本文 又解此論三門辨釋。一敘論所因。二解論題目。三判釋本文 敘論所因者。瑜伽論釋略作是言。諸有情類無始時來。於法實相無知僻執。起惑發業輪迴五趣。如來出世隨宜為說處中妙理。令諸有情了達諸法非空非有。遠離疑執起處中行隨應滅障。各自修滿得三菩提證寂滅樂。佛涅槃後。因彼大天部執競興多著有見。龍猛菩薩證極喜地。採集大乘無相空教造中論等。究暢真要除彼有見。聖提婆等諸大論師。造百論等弘闡大義。由是眾生復著空見。無著菩薩亦登初地證法光定。得大神通事大慈尊請說此論。理無不窮。事無不盡。文無不釋。義無不詮。疑無不遣。執無不破。行無不修。果無不證。正為菩薩令于諸乘境．行．果等皆得善巧。勤修大行證大菩提。廣為有情常無倒說。兼為余乘令依自法修自分行得自果證。所以中宗五分盛行於四主。相應十丈傳流於五印 時有筏蘇畔徒菩薩。唐言世親。無著菩薩同母弟也。位居明得道鄰極喜。亦博綜於三乘。乃遍游于諸部。知小教而非極。遂回趣于大乘。因聞誦華嚴十地品．阿毗達磨攝大乘品。悔謝前非流泣先見。持刀截舌用

{ "translations": [ "現代漢語譯本：", "中復開為三（將內容再次展開為三個部分）。一十二分教（十二分教，佛教經典分類方法之一）。屬於哪一部分所包含的內容？", "二二．三藏（佛教經典分為經、律、論三藏）。屬於哪個藏所包含的內容？", "三一．二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。屬於哪個乘所包含的內容？", "解釋題目時又展開為三個部分。一敘述著作的年代和作者。二解釋題目的含義。三解釋論著的本文。", "又解釋此論有三個門徑可以辨析。一敘述寫作的原因。二解釋論著的題目。三判斷並解釋本文。", "敘述寫作的原因：瑜伽論釋略微這樣說，一切有情眾生從無始以來，對於法的真實相狀無知並且有偏頗的執著，因此產生迷惑，造作惡業，在五趣中輪迴。如來佛出世，根據眾生的根器和情況，為他們宣說中道的微妙道理，使一切有情眾生明瞭通達諸法既不是空也不是有，遠離疑惑和執著，開始修行中道之行，隨著情況消除業障，各自修習圓滿，獲得三菩提（三種覺悟）證得寂滅之樂。佛陀涅槃之後，因為那些大天部（指部派佛教中的一些派別）的執著競爭興起，大多執著于有見。龍猛菩薩證得極喜地（菩薩修行階位的第一地），採集大乘佛教的無相空教，造作《中論》等論著，徹底闡明真要，消除他們的有見。聖提婆等各位大論師，造作《百論》等論著，弘揚闡述大義。由於這樣，眾生又執著于空見。無著菩薩也登上初地，證得法光定，獲得大神通，請示大慈尊（彌勒菩薩）宣說此論。此論在理上沒有不窮盡的，在事上沒有不完備的，在文字上沒有不解釋的，在意義上沒有不詮釋的，在疑問上沒有不消除的，在執著上沒有不破除的，在修行上沒有不修習的，在果證上沒有不證得的。主要是爲了菩薩，使他們在諸乘的境界、修行、果證等方面都能夠善巧通達，勤奮修習大行，證得大菩提，廣泛地為有情眾生恒常無顛倒地宣說。也兼顧其他的乘，使他們依據自己的法門修習自己的行，得到自己的果證。所以中宗（中觀宗）的五分（五種不同的解釋或分類）在四主（四個主要的論師或傳承）中盛行，相應十丈（十種不同的解釋或傳承）流傳於五印（古印度五個地區）。", "當時有筏蘇畔徒菩薩（Vasubandhu，世親菩薩），用唐朝的話說就是世親。是無著菩薩同母的弟弟。位居明得道（菩薩修行階位）鄰近極喜地（菩薩修行階位的第一地）。也廣泛地研究了三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）。於是遍游各個部派。知道小乘佛教並非究竟。於是迴轉心意趨向大乘佛教。因為聽聞誦讀《華嚴經》十地品、《阿毗達磨攝大乘品》，後悔之前的錯誤見解，流著眼淚懺悔之前的看法。拿著刀想要割掉舌頭，用來...", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "", "",

表深衷。其兄處遠三由旬。遙舒一手止其自割說以利害。汝雖以舌謗法。豈截舌而罪除。早應贊釋大乘以悔先犯。菩薩敬從兄諾。因歸妙理。兄乃囑以十地經。制以攝大乘本。令其造釋。故此二論菩薩創歸大乘之作。既而文蘊玄宗情恢奧旨。更為宏論用暢深極。采撮幽機提控精邃。遂著唯識三十頌。以申大乘之妙趣也。萬象含於一字。千訓備於一言。道超群典譽光眾聖。略頌既畢廣釋方陳。機感未符杳從冥往 後有護法等菩薩。賞玩頌文各為義釋。雖分峰昆岫疏干瓊枝。而獨擅光輝穎標芳馥者。其惟護法一人乎。菩薩果成先劫位克今賢。撫物潛資隨機利見。春秋二十有九。知息化之有期。厭無常以禪習。誓不離於菩提樹。以終三載之年。禪禮之暇注裁斯釋。文邁旨遠智曠名高。執破畢於一言。紛解窮於半頌。文殊水火則會符膠漆。義等江湖則疏成清濁。平郊弭弭聳層峰而接漢。堆埠峨峨夷穹隆以坦蕩。俯鉆邃而無底。仰尋高而無際。疏文淺義派演不窮。浩句宏宗陶甄有極。功逾千聖道合百王 時有玄鑒居士。識鳳雞之斂羽。委麟龍之潛跡。每磬所資恒為供養。深誠固志物竭積年。菩薩誘掖多端。答遺茲釋。而試之曰。我滅之後凡有來觀即取金一兩。脫逢神穎當可傳通。終期既漸奄絕玄導。菩薩名振此洲。論釋聲超彼土

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 表達深切的悔意。他的哥哥處在三由旬（yojana，古印度長度單位）遠的地方，遙遙地伸出一隻手阻止他自割舌頭，並用利害關係勸說他。你雖然用舌頭誹謗佛法，難道割掉舌頭就能消除罪過嗎？應該早點讚揚和解釋大乘佛法，以懺悔之前的過錯。菩薩恭敬地聽從了哥哥的勸告，因此迴歸到妙理之中。他的哥哥於是囑咐他學習《十地經》（Daśabhūmika Sūtra），並以《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）為準則，讓他為之作解釋。所以這兩部論著是菩薩最初回歸大乘佛法時的作品。後來，文章蘊含著玄妙的宗旨，情感恢弘而意義深奧，更進一步寫成宏大的論著，用來暢達深奧的道理，採摘幽微的玄機，提煉控制精微的要義，於是撰寫了《唯識三十頌》（Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā），來闡述大乘佛法的妙趣。萬象包含在一個字中，千條訓誡完備在一句話中，道理超越所有典籍，美譽光照所有聖賢。簡略的頌文寫完後，才開始廣泛地解釋。由於機緣感應尚未契合，於是悄然離去。後來有護法（Dharmapāla）等菩薩，欣賞玩味這些頌文，各自為之作義理上的解釋。雖然像分出崑崙山脈的支脈，疏散瓊樹的枝條，但唯獨護法一人的解釋獨佔光輝，穎悟超群，芬芳馥郁。菩薩在過去劫就已經成就果位，在當今賢劫也功德圓滿。撫慰萬物，暗中資助，隨機應變，有利則見。在二十九歲時，知道停止教化的期限將至，厭惡無常，通過禪定修行，發誓不離開菩提樹，以度過三年的時間。禪定禮拜之餘，撰寫這部解釋。文章氣勢宏大，旨意深遠，智慧曠達，名聲高遠。執著的破除完畢於一句話，紛繁的解釋窮盡於半首頌文。文殊（Mañjuśrī）的水火可以融會貫通如同膠漆，義理如同江湖則可以疏通成為清濁。平坦的郊野綿延不絕，高聳的山峰直插雲霄。堆積的土丘高大雄偉，平坦開闊。俯身鉆研深邃而沒有底，仰頭尋找高遠而沒有邊際。疏通文句，闡發淺顯的義理，派生演繹無窮無盡。浩大的語句，宏偉的宗旨，陶冶化育達到極致。功德超過千位聖人，道理符合百位帝王。當時有玄鑒居士，認識到鳳凰和雞收斂羽毛，麒麟和龍潛藏軌跡。每次傾盡所有資財，總是用來供養。深厚的誠意和堅定的志向，耗盡了多年的積蓄。菩薩引導扶持，多次贈送這部解釋，並且試探他說：『我滅度之後，凡是有人來觀看這部解釋，就收取黃金一兩。如果遇到有神異穎悟的人，應當可以傳通。』最終期限漸漸到來，悄然斷絕了玄妙的引導。菩薩的名聲震動這個洲，論著和解釋的聲音超越那個國土。

【English Translation】 English version: He expressed deep remorse. His elder brother, being three yojanas (yojana, an ancient Indian unit of distance) away, extended a hand from afar to stop him from cutting off his own tongue, and persuaded him with the advantages and disadvantages. Although you have slandered the Dharma with your tongue, can cutting off your tongue remove the sin? You should have praised and explained the Mahāyāna (Great Vehicle) teachings earlier to repent for your previous offenses. The Bodhisattva respectfully obeyed his brother's advice, and thus returned to the wonderful principle. His brother then instructed him to study the Daśabhūmika Sūtra (Ten Stages Sutra), and used the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (Compendium of the Mahāyāna) as a standard, asking him to write an explanation for it. Therefore, these two treatises are the Bodhisattva's initial works upon returning to the Mahāyāna. Later, the writing contained profound principles, and the emotions were grand and the meaning was profound. He further wrote grand treatises to express the profound doctrines, extracting subtle mechanisms and controlling precise essentials, and thus composed the Triṃśikā-vijñaptimātratā (Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only) to expound the wonderful interest of the Mahāyāna. All phenomena are contained in one word, and thousands of instructions are complete in one sentence. The doctrine surpasses all scriptures, and the reputation illuminates all sages. After the brief verses were completed, the extensive explanation was then presented. Because the opportunity for interaction had not yet arrived, he quietly departed. Later, there were Bodhisattvas such as Dharmapāla (Protector of the Dharma), who appreciated and savored these verses, each providing their own interpretations of the meaning. Although like dividing the branches of the Kunlun Mountains, or scattering the branches of the jade tree, it was Dharmapāla alone whose interpretation possessed unique brilliance, outstanding intelligence, and fragrant richness. The Bodhisattva had already achieved the fruit in past kalpas (aeons), and perfected his virtue in the present kalpa. He soothed all things, secretly assisted, adapted to circumstances, and appeared when beneficial. At the age of twenty-nine, he knew that the time to cease teaching was approaching, and,厭惡無常，通過禪定修行，發誓不離開菩提樹，以度過三年的時間。禪定禮拜之餘，撰寫這部解釋。文章氣勢宏大，旨意深遠，智慧曠達，名聲高遠。執著的破除完畢於一句話，紛繁的解釋窮盡於半首頌文。文殊（Mañjuśrī）的水火可以融會貫通如同膠漆，義理如同江湖則可以疏通成為清濁。平坦的郊野綿延不絕，高聳的山峰直插雲霄。堆積的土丘高大雄偉，平坦開闊。俯身鉆研深邃而沒有底，仰頭尋找高遠而沒有邊際。疏通文句，闡發淺顯的義理，派生演繹無窮無盡。浩大的語句，宏偉的宗旨，陶冶化育達到極致。功德超過千位聖人，道理符合百位帝王。當時有玄鑒居士，認識到鳳凰和雞收斂羽毛，麒麟和龍潛藏軌跡。每次傾盡所有資財，總是用來供養。深厚的誠意和堅定的志向，耗盡了多年的積蓄。菩薩引導扶持，多次贈送這部解釋，並且試探他說：『我滅度之後，凡是有人來觀看這部解釋，就收取黃金一兩。如果遇到有神異穎悟的人，應當可以傳通。』最終期限漸漸到來，悄然斷絕了玄妙的引導。菩薩的名聲震動這個洲，論著和解釋的聲音超越那個國土.

。有靈之類誰不懷欽。朝聞夕殞豈吝金壁。若市趨賢如岳疊貨。五天鶴望未輒流行 大師睿發天資識假修謁。無神蹟而不瞻禮。何聖教而不披諷。聞斯妙理。殷俯諦求。居士記先聖之遺言。必今賢之是屬。乃奉茲草本並五蘊論釋。大師賞玩猶睹聖容。每置掌中不殊真說。自西霏玉牒東馳素馬雖復廣演微筌。賞之以為秘決。及乎神棲別館景阻炎輝。清耳目以淵思。蕩心靈而繹妙。乃曰。今者方怡我心耳。宣尼言。我有美玉蘊柜藏之。誰為善估。我今沽諸 基夙運單舛。九歲丁艱。自爾志托煙霞。加每庶幾緇服。浮俗塵賞幼絕情分。至年十七遂預緇林。別奉 明詔得為門侍。自參預三千即欣規七十。必諧善愿後承函丈。不以散材之質。遂得隨伍譯僚。事即操觚餐受此論。初功之際十釋別翻。昉．尚．光．基四人同受。潤飾．執筆．撿文．纂義。既為令范務各有司。數朝之後基求退跡。大師固問。基殷請曰。自夕夢金容晨趨白馬。英髦間出。靈智肩隨。聞五分以心祈。攬八蘊而遐望。雖得法門之糟粕。然失玄源之淳粹。今東出策賚。並目擊玄宗。幸復獨秀萬方穎超千古。不立功于參糅。可謂失時者也。況群聖製作。各馳譽於五天。雖文具傳於貝葉。而義不備於一本。情見各異稟者無依。況時漸人澆。命促惠舛。討支離而頗究

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：有靈性的生物，誰不懷著敬佩之心呢？早上聽到（佛法），即使晚上就死去，又怎麼會吝惜金錢和珍寶呢？像市場一樣聚集賢才，像山一樣堆積貨物。（玄奘）在印度被人們像仙鶴一樣仰望，但他的學說還沒有廣泛流行。大師（窺基）天資聰穎，很早就懂得通過修行來拜謁佛。沒有神蹟不瞻仰禮拜，沒有聖教不披閱諷誦。聽到這種精妙的道理，就認真地探求。居士（玄奘）記載了先聖的遺言，一定是因為（窺基）是當今的賢才。於是（窺基）奉上草稿和《五蘊論釋》。大師（玄奘）欣賞把玩，就像見到佛的容顏一樣，常常放在手中，和真正的佛說沒有差別。自從（玄奘）從西方帶著玉牒（佛經）回來，東方就奔走著白馬（馱經的馬），即使廣泛地闡述精微的義理，（玄奘）也認為（窺基的著作）是秘訣。等到（玄奘）在別館安息，光輝被阻隔，（窺基）就清靜耳目，深入思考，滌盪心靈，闡釋精妙的義理。於是說：『現在（這部著作）才讓我心滿意足啊！』宣尼（孔子）說：『我有一塊美玉，藏在櫃子里，誰能善於估價呢？我現在要把它賣掉。』 窺基早年的命運多舛，九歲時就遭遇父親去世。從此立志寄託于山水雲霞，更加希望能夠出家。年幼時就斷絕了世俗的塵緣，到了十七歲就進入了僧團。另外奉了皇上的詔令，得以在（玄奘）門下侍奉。自從參與翻譯工作，就欣羨七十位譯經人的規模。一定能夠實現美好的願望，將來繼承（玄奘）的衣缽。不因為自己是平庸的材質，就不能跟隨在翻譯的隊伍中。從事筆耕，學習這部《五蘊論》。最初開始的時候，十次解釋，另外翻譯。昉（法昉）、尚（玄尚）、光（普光）、基（窺基）四個人一同學習。潤飾文字、執筆記錄、檢查文句、編纂義理。已經成為典範，各項事務都有專人負責。幾天之後，窺基請求退出。大師（玄奘）堅決地詢問。窺基懇切地說：『自從晚上夢見金色的佛像，早上就奔向白馬（寺）。傑出的人才不斷涌現，聰明的智慧緊隨其後。聽聞五分法身，用心祈求；掌握八識，遙寄希望。雖然得到了佛法的糟粕，但是失去了玄妙源頭的純粹。現在向東出行，帶著賞賜，並且親眼目睹玄奘大師的宗風。有幸再次獨自秀出，超越千古。不在參與翻譯工作中建立功勛，可以說是錯失良機啊！況且眾多聖人的著作，各自在五天竺享有盛譽。雖然文字完整地記錄在貝葉經上，但是義理並不完備在一本書中。人們的理解各有不同，沒有可以依靠的。況且時代漸漸衰敗，人心浮躁，壽命短促，智慧不足。即使探討細枝末節，也難以徹底瞭解。』

【English Translation】 English version: Who among sentient beings does not harbor reverence? If one hears (the Dharma) in the morning, how can one begrudge gold and jewels even if one dies in the evening? Gathering talents like a marketplace, piling up goods like a mountain. (Xuanzang) was looked upon like a crane in India, but his teachings have not yet become widely popular. The Great Master (Kuiji) was intelligent by nature and understood early on to pay homage to the Buddha through practice. There is no miracle that he does not admire and worship, no sacred teaching that he does not read and recite. Upon hearing such profound principles, he earnestly seeks them out. The layman (Xuanzang) recorded the last words of the ancient sages, surely because (Kuiji) is a worthy person of the present. Therefore, (Kuiji) presented the draft and the 'Commentary on the Five Skandhas'. The Great Master (Xuanzang) appreciated and cherished it as if seeing the Buddha's face, often holding it in his hands, no different from the true words of the Buddha. Since (Xuanzang) returned from the West with the jade tablets (sutras), white horses (carrying the scriptures) have been running in the East. Even if he extensively expounds on subtle meanings, (Xuanzang) considers (Kuiji's work) to be a secret key. When (Xuanzang) rested in a separate residence and his brilliance was obscured, (Kuiji) purified his ears and eyes, pondered deeply, cleansed his mind, and elucidated the profound meanings. Then he said, 'Now (this work) truly satisfies my heart!' Xuan Ni (Confucius) said, 'I have a beautiful jade hidden in a cabinet; who can skillfully appraise it? Now I want to sell it.' Kuiji's early life was fraught with misfortune; he lost his father at the age of nine. From then on, he aspired to devote himself to the mountains and clouds, and he hoped even more to become a monk. He severed worldly ties from a young age, and at the age of seventeen, he entered the monastic order. In addition, he received an imperial decree to serve under (Xuanzang). Since participating in the translation work, he has admired the scale of the seventy translators. He will surely realize his good wishes and inherit (Xuanzang's) mantle in the future. Not because he is of mediocre talent, he cannot follow in the ranks of translators. He engaged in writing and studied this 'Treatise on the Five Skandhas'. At the beginning, he explained it ten times and translated it separately. Fang (Fa Fang), Shang (Xuan Shang), Guang (Pu Guang), and Ji (Kuiji) studied together. Polishing the text, taking notes, checking sentences, and compiling meanings. It has become a model, and each task has a dedicated person in charge. After a few days, Kuiji requested to withdraw. The Great Master (Xuanzang) firmly inquired. Kuiji earnestly said, 'Since I dreamed of the golden Buddha image at night, I have been rushing to the White Horse (Temple) in the morning. Outstanding talents are constantly emerging, and intelligent wisdom follows closely behind. Hearing the five aggregates of the Dharma body, I pray with my heart; grasping the eight consciousnesses, I send my hopes afar. Although I have obtained the dregs of the Dharma, I have lost the purity of the mysterious source. Now I am traveling east, carrying rewards, and witnessing the teachings of Master Xuanzang. Fortunately, I can once again stand out alone, surpassing the ages. Not establishing merit in participating in translation work can be said to be missing an opportunity! Moreover, the works of many sages are renowned in the five regions of India. Although the texts are completely recorded on palm-leaf manuscripts, the meanings are not complete in one book. People's understandings are different, and there is nothing to rely on. Moreover, the times are gradually declining, people are impetuous, life is short, and wisdom is insufficient. Even if we discuss trivial matters, it is difficult to fully understand.'

。攬初旨而難宣。請錯綜群言以為一本。揩定真謬權衡盛則。久而遂許。故得此論行焉。大師理遣三賢獨授庸拙 此論也。括眾經之秘。苞群聖之旨。何滯不融。無幽不燭。仰之不極。俯之不測。遠之無智。近之有識。其有隱括五明披揚八藏。幽關每權。玄路未通。囑猶豪毳岳盈投之以炎爍。霜冰澗積沃之以煨景。信巨夜之銀輝。昏旦之金鏡矣。雖複本出五天。然彼無茲糅釋。直爾十師之別作鳩集猶難。況更摭此幽文誠為未有。斯乃此論之因起也。

釋題目者。梵云毗若底(丁爾反識也)摩咀刺多(唯也)悉提(成也)奢薩呾羅(論也)應云識唯成論。順此唐言成唯識論。梵音成唯識于女聲內以呼之。或毗若底摩呾剌多毗輸度迦(凈也)奢薩呾羅。應言識唯凈論。今云凈唯識論。此論第十卷末解云此論三分成立唯識。故此論名成唯識論。則本名唯識。釋論名成。然依世親三十論本。于題目下別注之。云此論亦名成唯識論。以三十論教成立唯識也。如說無垢稱經佛告名云說無垢稱不可思議解脫法門經。然經題云說無垢稱經。題下別注云亦名不可思議解脫。此亦如是。別亦名成。且如天親所造二十唯識下末頌。云我已隨自能略成唯識義亦名成唯識。然今護法所造之釋。多與本論立名不同。二十唯識釋名唯識道論。此

論名成釋論之稱。故論末云此本論名三十唯識 又云此論三分成立唯識。故知唯識本論之名。今釋名成。成非本稱。但取本論正名。不取別註名也。或有唯本非釋名。如辨中邊。或有唯釋非本名如唯識道論。或有本．釋二名。如雜集論。今唯釋名。或是通名。

其成唯識。唯識之成。蘇漫多聲中第六屬主者。則八轉聲。其此聲論辨此聲中。蘇字居後。漫多是後義。則是蘇字居後聲也。底彥多聲有十八囀。辨此聲中。底字居後。彥多．是後義。則是底字居後聲也。為簡此聲言蘇漫多。殺三磨娑釋中依主釋也。殺者六也。三磨娑合也。則六合釋。初離後合故 因論生論。一字既無詮表。如何殺言可是六也。今依梵本有沙吒多三字。合之方成殺言。故非一字有詮表也。

成乃能成之稱。以成立為功。唯識所成之名。以簡了為義者。安教立理名之曰成。識謂能了。詮五法故 唯有三義。識詮五有。唯簡二空。唯謂簡持。有心空境是唯義也。簡去境持取心故說簡持是唯義也。亦決定義。及顯勝義 了謂了別。詮辨作用是識義也。了別於境是識用故 此言唯者。安惠一分唯。難陀二分唯。陳那三分唯。于中有實有假二說。護法四分唯。論多依三分。教．理有四分。

釋唯識名。如章中解。合有十義釋成唯識 一

經言唯識。論解名成 二本論名唯識。釋論名成 三經及本論俱稱唯識。今釋名成 四宗稱唯識。因．喻曰成。論本略舉所立名宗。今義廣成故名因．喻。具述所以引同異法以成所立。二十論云。安立大乘三界唯識。陳那釋云。因．喻成宗名為安立。此中名成義亦同也 五體名唯識。義釋名成。本論略標其體未識差別。今廣明義具顯差別故名為成 六略名唯識未解深義。廣曰能成具陳指實。此後二解依瑜伽論攝釋分解。凡釋經法。初體後義。初略後廣故 七以教成教 八以教成理 九以理成教 十以理成理 問此後四釋依何得知 答論末頌云已依聖教及正理。又云此論三分成立唯識。故知能成通教及理。論初頌云我今釋彼說。說則本論所立之教。或所說之理。二義皆通。論末又云以三十頌顯唯識理極明凈故。頌云分別唯識性相義。義則是理。故知所成亦通教．理。

論者俱舍云。教誡學徒故稱為論。瑜伽釋云。問答抉擇諸法性相故稱為論 初解依悲。利眾生故。後解依智。辨諸法故。成唯識則論。成唯識之論。準義應知。

何故此論名成唯識不名成余。亦成余義故 欲令證得唯識理智而成立之。如瑜伽論。此通教．理。從多唯識為名 或復今者無倒成立唯識妙理。如成實論。亦通教．理從所詮為名 或破

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：經文中說的是『唯識』（Vijnaptimatrata，一切唯心），論著的解釋就叫做『成』。兩本根本論都叫做『唯識』，解釋的論著就叫做『成』。 如果三部經和根本論都稱為『唯識』，那麼現在的解釋就叫做『成』。如果宗派稱為『唯識』，那麼因和喻就叫做『成』。根本論只是簡略地提出了所要建立的宗義的名稱，而現在論述的意義更加廣泛和完備，所以叫做『因』和『喻』，詳細地闡述了引證相同和不同事物的方法，來成就所要建立的宗義。《二十唯識論》中說：『安立大乘三界唯識』，陳那（Dignaga）解釋說：『因和喻成就宗義，就叫做安立』。這裡所說的『成』，意義也是相同的。 如果本體叫做『唯識』，那麼義理的解釋就叫做『成』。根本論只是簡略地標明了它的本體，沒有詳細說明差別，現在廣泛地闡明義理，詳細地顯示差別，所以叫做『成』。如果簡略地稱為『唯識』，就沒有理解深刻的意義，廣泛地論述就叫做『能成』，詳細地陳述指明真實。後面的兩種解釋是依據《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra）的解釋來分解的。凡是解釋經文，先說本體，後說義理，先簡略，後廣泛，所以這樣說。 七、用教義來成就教義。 八、用教義來成就真理。 九、用真理來成就教義。 十、用真理來成就真理。 問：後面的四種解釋依據什麼得知？ 答：論的結尾的偈頌說：『已經依據聖教和正理』，又說：『這部論從三個方面成立唯識』，所以知道『能成』貫通教義和真理。論的開頭的偈頌說：『我現在解釋他的說法』，『說法』就是根本論所建立的教義，或者所說的真理，兩種意義都貫通。論的結尾又說：『用三十頌來顯示唯識的道理極其明白清凈』，偈頌說：『分別唯識的體性和相狀的意義』，『意義』就是真理，所以知道所成就的也貫通教義和真理。 論師俱舍（Vasubandhu）說：『教誡學徒，所以稱為論』。《瑜伽師地論》解釋說：『問答抉擇諸法的體性和相狀，所以稱為論』。第一種解釋依據的是悲心，爲了利益眾生。第二種解釋依據的是智慧，爲了辨別諸法。『成唯識』就是論，『成唯識』的論，按照這個意義應該知道。 為什麼這部論叫做『成唯識』，不叫做『成余』（成就其他的）呢？因為它也成就其他的意義。 想要使人證得唯識的理智而成立它，如《瑜伽師地論》。這貫通教義和真理，從多數的唯識作為名稱。 或者現在沒有顛倒地成立唯識的微妙道理，如《成實論》（Satyasiddhi-sastra）。這也貫通教義和真理，從所詮釋的內容作為名稱。 或者破斥...

【English Translation】 English version: The sutra speaks of 'Vijnaptimatrata' (Consciousness-only), and the commentary's explanation is called 'Cheng' (Establishment). The two fundamental treatises are both called 'Vijnaptimatrata', and the explanatory treatise is called 'Cheng'. If the three sutras and the fundamental treatise are all called 'Vijnaptimatrata', then the current explanation is called 'Cheng'. If the school is called 'Vijnaptimatrata', then the Hetu (reason) and Drstantanta (example) are called 'Cheng'. The fundamental treatise only briefly puts forward the name of the doctrine to be established, but now the meaning of the discussion is more extensive and complete, so it is called 'Hetu' and 'Drstantanta', detailing the methods of citing the same and different things to achieve the doctrine to be established. The 'Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only' says: 'Establish the Consciousness-Only of the Three Realms of Mahayana', Dignaga explains: 'Hetu and Drstantanta achieve the doctrine, which is called establishment'. The 'Cheng' mentioned here has the same meaning. If the substance is called 'Vijnaptimatrata', then the explanation of the meaning is called 'Cheng'. The fundamental treatise only briefly indicates its substance without explaining the differences in detail. Now, it extensively explains the meaning and shows the differences in detail, so it is called 'Cheng'. If it is briefly called 'Vijnaptimatrata', then the profound meaning is not understood. Extensive discussion is called 'Enabling Achievement', detailing and pointing out the truth. The latter two explanations are based on the explanation of the 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra' to decompose. Whenever explaining the scriptures, first the substance, then the meaning, first briefly, then extensively, so it is said. 7. Using doctrine to achieve doctrine. 8. Using doctrine to achieve truth. 9. Using truth to achieve doctrine. 10. Using truth to achieve truth. Question: How do we know the latter four explanations? Answer: The verse at the end of the treatise says: 'Already based on the holy teachings and correct reasoning', and also says: 'This treatise establishes Consciousness-Only from three aspects', so we know that 'Enabling Achievement' connects doctrine and truth. The verse at the beginning of the treatise says: 'I am now explaining his statement', 'statement' is the doctrine established by the fundamental treatise, or the truth said, both meanings are connected. The end of the treatise also says: 'Using thirty verses to show that the principle of Consciousness-Only is extremely clear and pure', the verse says: 'Distinguish the meaning of the nature and characteristics of Consciousness-Only', 'meaning' is the truth, so we know that what is achieved also connects doctrine and truth. The commentator Vasubandhu said: 'Instructing students, so it is called a treatise'. The 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra' explains: 'Questioning and answering to determine the nature and characteristics of all dharmas, so it is called a treatise'. The first explanation is based on compassion, for the benefit of sentient beings. The second explanation is based on wisdom, for distinguishing all dharmas. 'Cheng Weishi' is the treatise, the treatise of 'Cheng Weishi', according to this meaning, it should be known. Why is this treatise called 'Cheng Weishi' and not called 'Cheng Yu' (achieving other things)? Because it also achieves other meanings. Wanting to enable people to attain the intellectual wisdom of Consciousness-Only and establish it, such as the 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra'. This connects doctrine and truth, taking the majority of Consciousness-Only as the name. Or now, without reversing, establishing the subtle principle of Consciousness-Only, such as the 'Satyasiddhi-sastra'. This also connects doctrine and truth, taking the content being explained as the name. Or refuting...

執實心外有境。不能信學唯識妙理而成立之。如成假論。亦通教．理。成是立義 或復此論依于唯識甚深理智而成立之。如水陸華。對法論等依彼起故 或恐唯識妙理散滅。今者略攝廣散義故成立之。如攝大乘 又一切法中心最為勝。如華嚴云心如工畫師。畫種種五蘊。一切世間中。無法而不造等。所以成立。

問準下正宗。或分為二。一因二果。或分為三。如疏中解 或分為四。初一頌半總標綱要分。第二十四頌半廣陳能變分。第三有九頌結釋外難分。第四有五頌依修獲益分 或分為五。前第三分中開一頌為重陳變義分。如是諸釋則是成立隨所應義 何故但名成唯識論 答從初所明為名。彼依識所變故。如瑜伽論。又從初二段為名。中分亦有唯識言故。謂是諸識轉變等也 或從初中後所明為名。第三段云乃至未起識求住唯識性等故。或後二段意欲解釋初略標故。或雖所明通一切法無非唯識。故不名余。又本欲成立唯識義故。此上立成唯識名之意歸也。

釋題目中。有五唯識為所觀。三惠為能觀。又境．教．理．行．果五種唯識。如章中解。境唯識中處處經中就機種種異說。或依所執。或就雜染。或隨所執及有為。或但隨有為。或隨指事。或隨空有一切諸法以明唯識。各有誠文。義如章說 依境．教．理

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：

執著於心外有境，不能相信和學習唯識的精妙道理，因此成立此論。如同《成唯識論》的『成假論』部分，也通達教和理。『成』是成立義。

或者，此論是依據唯識甚深的理智而成立的，如同《水陸華》和《對法論》等，都是依此而起。

或者，恐怕唯識的精妙道理散失泯滅，現在略微攝取廣為散佈的意義，因此成立此論。如同《攝大乘論》。

又，一切法中，心最為殊勝。如《華嚴經》所說：『心如工畫師，畫種種五蘊（色、受、想、行、識五種構成要素）。一切世間中，無法而不造。』等等。所以成立此論。

問：按照下面的正宗分，或者分為二，一為因，二為果。或者分為三，如疏中的解釋。或者分為四，初一頌半總標綱要分，第二十四頌半廣陳能變分，第三有九頌結釋外難分，第四有五頌依修獲益分。或者分為五，前第三分中開一頌為重陳變義分。如此種種解釋，都是爲了成立隨應的意義。

為什麼只名為《成唯識論》？答：從最初所闡明的內容來命名，因為它依據識所變現的緣故，如《瑜伽師地論》。又從最初的兩段來命名，中間部分也有『唯識』的言語，說的是諸識的轉變等等。或者從初、中、後所闡明的內容來命名，第三段說『乃至未起識求住唯識性』等等。或者後兩段意欲解釋最初的略標。或者雖然所闡明的內容通達一切法，無一不是唯識，所以不名為其他。又，本來想要成立唯識的意義，因此才立名為《成唯識論》。以上是成立《成唯識論》名稱的意義歸結。

解釋題目中，有五種唯識作為所觀，三種智慧作為能觀。又有境唯識、教唯識、理唯識、行唯識、果唯識五種唯識，如章疏中的解釋。境唯識中，處處經中就眾生的根機有種種不同的說法，或者依據所執著的，或者就雜染的，或者隨所執著以及有為法（有生滅變化的法），或者只隨有為法，或者隨所指的事，或者隨空有的一切諸法來闡明唯識。各有誠實的經文依據，意義如章疏所說。依據境、教、理

【English Translation】 English version:

Clinging to the existence of objects outside the mind prevents one from believing in and learning the profound principles of Vijnanavada (唯識, Consciousness-only), hence the establishment of this treatise. Similar to the 'Cheng Jia Lun' (成假論, Treatise on Establishing the Provisional) section of the Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論, Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only), it also comprehends both doctrine and reason. 'Cheng' (成) means 'to establish'.

Alternatively, this treatise is established based on the profound wisdom of Vijnanavada, just as the Shuilu Hua (水陸華) and Duifa Lun (對法論, Abhidharma treatises) and others arise from it.

Or, fearing that the profound principles of Vijnanavada might be scattered and lost, this treatise is established to briefly gather and widely disseminate its meaning, like the She Dachenglun (攝大乘論, Compendium of the Mahayana).

Furthermore, among all dharmas, the mind is the most supreme. As the Huayan Jing (華嚴經, Avatamsaka Sutra) says: 'The mind is like a skilled painter, painting various skandhas (五蘊, five aggregates of existence: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness). In all the worlds, there is nothing that it does not create,' and so on. Therefore, this treatise is established.

Question: According to the following main section, it can be divided into two parts: one is the cause, and the other is the effect. Or it can be divided into three, as explained in the commentary. Or it can be divided into four: the first one and a half verses generally outline the essentials; the second twenty-four and a half verses extensively elaborate on the transforming consciousness; the third has nine verses concluding and explaining external difficulties; and the fourth has five verses on the benefits gained through practice. Or it can be divided into five, with one verse in the previous third section opened up as a section restating the meaning of transformation. Such various explanations are all for the purpose of establishing the appropriate meaning.

Why is it only named Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論, Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only)? Answer: It is named after the content initially explained, because it is based on what is transformed by consciousness, like the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論). Also, it is named after the first two sections, as the middle section also contains the words 'Consciousness-only', referring to the transformations of the various consciousnesses, and so on. Or it is named after the content explained in the beginning, middle, and end, with the third section saying 'until the consciousness has not arisen, seeking to abide in the nature of Consciousness-only,' and so on. Or the latter two sections intend to explain the initial brief outline. Or, although the content explained encompasses all dharmas, none of which are not Consciousness-only, it is not named otherwise. Moreover, the original intention was to establish the meaning of Consciousness-only, hence the name Cheng Weishi Lun (成唯識論, Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only). The above is the conclusion of the meaning of establishing the name Cheng Weishi Lun.

Explaining the title, there are five types of Consciousness-only as the object of observation, and three types of wisdom as the subject of observation. There are also five types of Consciousness-only: object Consciousness-only, doctrine Consciousness-only, reason Consciousness-only, practice Consciousness-only, and result Consciousness-only, as explained in the commentaries. Within object Consciousness-only, there are various different explanations in the sutras everywhere according to the capacities of sentient beings, either based on what is clung to, or based on defilement, or according to what is clung to and conditioned dharmas (有為法, dharmas that arise and cease), or only according to conditioned dharmas, or according to what is pointed to, or according to all dharmas of emptiness and existence to explain Consciousness-only. Each has reliable scriptural basis, and the meaning is as explained in the commentaries. Based on object, doctrine, and reason

．行．果五唯識中。此論有義但明境唯識。舍離外取境。一切境不離心故。如文具顯 有義但說教唯識。成論本教釋彼說故 有義但取理唯識。成立本教所說之理。分別唯識性相義故 有義但取行唯識。明五位修唯識行故 有義但取果唯識。求大果故。安樂．解脫身．大牟尼名法身故 今依正義五種皆是。雖依第三分。云已依聖教及正理。分別唯識性相義。及云我今釋彼說唯取教．理。說依教．理成彼性相。性相則攝一切盡故。一切皆取于理為勝 問何故四依勸依智不依識。此論名唯識。不名唯智耶。問餘三依亦如是 如唯識章釋名中釋 又釋論名法。如宗輪述記說。

所被機中有三。初述異。次會同。後被機。

初述異者。法華經說。十方佛土中。唯有一乘法。無二亦無三。除佛方便說 以教準機唯有一機。涅槃亦言。師子吼者是決定說。一切眾生悉有佛性。眾生亦爾悉皆有心。凡有心者悉皆當得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提。故諸眾生唯有佛性 準天親攝論云。上乘．下乘有差別故。菩薩．聲聞各有三藏。不論獨覺．不定．無性。有別廣教則分為二。獨覺．無性皆無別藏。十力等中根上下智力。亦唯有二。準善戒經．持地論文立為二。一有性。二無性 無始法爾六處殊勝有性也 唯以人天善根而成就之無性也

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於『行』、『果』在五重唯識觀中的位置：此論點認為，有一種觀點只闡明了境唯識（Vijñapti-mātratā，唯識），即捨棄對外境的執取，因為一切外境都不離於心。正如經文所明確顯示的那樣。 有一種觀點只闡述了教唯識，因為《成唯識論》的根本教義就是解釋這個觀點。 有一種觀點只採取理唯識，即成立根本教義所說的道理，分別唯識的體性和相狀的意義。 有一種觀點只採取行唯識，闡明修習唯識行的五個階段。 有一種觀點只採取果唯識，因為追求偉大的果實，即安樂、解脫身，以及被稱為法身的大牟尼（Mahāmuni，偉大的聖人）。 現在依據正確的觀點，這五種觀點都是正確的。即使依據第三部分，也說『已經依據聖教和正理，分別唯識的體性和相狀的意義』，並且說『我現在解釋他們的說法，只採取教和理』。說依據教和理成就唯識的體性和相狀，體性和相狀就涵蓋了一切。一切都採取理作為最殊勝的觀點。 問：為什麼四依（catvāri-pratisaranāni，四種依靠）勸人依靠智慧而不依靠識？這部論典名為《唯識》，而不名為《唯智》呢？問：其餘三種依靠也是如此嗎？ 如《唯識章》的釋名中解釋的那樣。 又解釋論典的名稱為『法』，如《宗輪述記》所說。

所教化的對象有三種。首先是陳述不同之處，其次是會合相同之處，最後是教化對象。

首先陳述不同之處：《法華經》說：『在十方佛土中，唯有一乘法（ekayāna，唯一的交通工具），沒有二乘也沒有三乘，除非是佛陀方便說法。』以教義來衡量眾生的根機，只有一種根機。涅槃經也說：『獅子吼是決定之說，一切眾生都有佛性（Buddha-dhātu，成佛的潛能），眾生也是如此，都有心。凡是有心者，都應當證得阿耨多羅三藐三菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上正等正覺）。』所以諸位眾生只有佛性。 依據天親（Vasubandhu）的《攝大乘論》所說，上乘和下乘有差別，菩薩和聲聞各有三藏。不論獨覺、不定、無性，有特別廣泛的教義就分為兩種。獨覺和無性都沒有特別的藏。十力（daśa-balāni，如來的十種力量）等之中，根器有上下，智力也有上下，也只有兩種。依據《善戒經》、《持地經》的論文，可以分為兩種：一是有性，二是無性。 無始以來，法爾如是，六處殊勝，這是有性。 僅僅以人天善根而成就，這是無性。

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the 『Practice』 and 『Fruition』 in the Fivefold Vijñapti-mātratā (Consciousness-Only) perspective: This argument posits that one view only elucidates the Vijñapti-mātratā of objects (境唯識), which is to abandon attachment to external objects, because all external objects are inseparable from the mind. As the text clearly shows. One view only expounds the Vijñapti-mātratā of doctrine, because the fundamental teaching of the Vijñapti-mātratā-siddhi (成唯識論) is to explain this view. One view only adopts the Vijñapti-mātratā of principle, which is to establish the principle stated by the fundamental teaching, distinguishing the meaning of the essence and characteristics of Vijñapti-mātratā. One view only adopts the Vijñapti-mātratā of practice, elucidating the five stages of cultivating the practice of Vijñapti-mātratā. One view only adopts the Vijñapti-mātratā of fruition, because it seeks the great fruit, which is bliss, the body of liberation, and the Mahāmuni (大牟尼, great sage) called Dharmakāya (法身, Dharma body). Now, according to the correct view, all five views are correct. Even according to the third part, it says, 『Having already relied on the holy teachings and correct reasoning, distinguishing the meaning of the essence and characteristics of Vijñapti-mātratā,』 and it says, 『I now explain their statements, only adopting doctrine and principle.』 It says that relying on doctrine and principle accomplishes the essence and characteristics of Vijñapti-mātratā, and the essence and characteristics encompass everything. Everything adopts principle as the most superior view. Question: Why do the four reliances (catvāri-pratisaranāni, 四依) encourage reliance on wisdom and not on consciousness? Why is this treatise named Vijñapti-mātratā (唯識, Consciousness-Only) and not Vijñapti-jñāna (唯智, Wisdom-Only)? Question: Are the other three reliances also like this? As explained in the explanation of the name in the chapter on Vijñapti-mātratā. Also, the name of the treatise is explained as 『Dharma,』 as stated in the Zonglun Shuji (宗輪述記).

There are three types of beings to be taught. First, state the differences; second, reconcile the similarities; and third, teach the beings.

First, stating the differences: The Lotus Sutra says, 『In the Buddha-lands of the ten directions, there is only the One Vehicle (ekayāna, 一乘), there are no two or three vehicles, except for the Buddha's expedient teachings.』 Measuring beings' capacities by the teachings, there is only one capacity. The Nirvana Sutra also says, 『The lion's roar is the definitive statement that all beings have Buddha-nature (Buddha-dhātu, 佛性), and beings are also like this, all have minds. All who have minds should attain anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (阿耨多羅三藐三菩提, unsurpassed perfect enlightenment).』 Therefore, all beings only have Buddha-nature. According to Vasubandhu's (天親) Mahāyānasaṃgraha (攝大乘論), there are differences between the Superior Vehicle and the Inferior Vehicle, and Bodhisattvas and Śrāvakas each have three baskets (Tripiṭaka). Regardless of Pratyekabuddhas, the Undetermined, and the Natureless, if there are particularly extensive teachings, they are divided into two. Pratyekabuddhas and the Natureless do not have separate baskets. Among the ten powers (daśa-balāni, 十力) and so on, capacities are superior and inferior, and intellectual powers are also superior and inferior, and there are only two. According to the treatises of the Śīlaskandha Sutra (善戒經) and the Dhāraṇīśvararāja Sutra (持地經), they can be divided into two: one is with nature, and the other is without nature. From the beginningless past, naturally and thus, the six places are supremely excellent; this is with nature. Accomplished solely by the roots of goodness of humans and devas; this is without nature.

準法華經亦可說有三。求三乘者授以三乘。故彼論云。四種聲聞不為趣寂增上慢者而受記故。有果乘故但說有三 依涅槃經亦有三。如病人有三。一若遇不遇良醫決定可差菩薩也。二遇則差。不遇不差二乘也。三遇與不遇皆不可差無性人也 依大般若經第五百九十三第十六會云。在自鷺池側說時。善勇猛菩薩請言。唯愿世尊哀愍我等。為具宣說如來境智。若有情類于聲聞乘性決定者。聞此法已速能證得自無漏地。于獨覺乘性決定者。聞此法已速依自乘而得出離。于無上乘性決定者。聞此法已速證無上正等菩提。若有情類雖未已入正性離生而於三乘性不定者。聞此法已皆發無上正等覺心。唯愿如來為答所問。此經唯說有種性人入聖道者。故無第五無種性人．大悲闡提。又斷善人未能入聖。此亦不說 又勝鬘經云。謂離善知識無聞非法眾生。以人天善根而成就之。求聲聞者授聲聞乘。求緣覺者授緣覺乘。求大乘者授以大乘。是名攝受正法堪能荷負四種重任。此中以通從別。有性為三。無性為一 又依十卷楞伽經中第二卷末。四卷者第一卷說。大分亦同。佛告大惠。有五種性證法。一聲聞乘性。二辟支佛乘性。三如來乘性。四不定乘性。五者無性謂一闡提。此有二種。一者焚燒一切善根。則謗菩薩藏。二者憐愍一切眾生。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於《準法華經》，也可以說有三種根性。對於尋求聲聞乘（Śrāvakayāna，通過聽聞佛法而解脫的修行方式）、緣覺乘（Pratyekabuddhayāna，通過自身觀察因緣而解脫的修行方式）和大乘（Mahāyāna，以利益一切眾生為目標的修行方式）的人，分別傳授相應的法門。因此，《瑜伽師地論》中說，四種聲聞（Śrāvaka）中，那些沒有增上慢（adhimāna，未證言證的傲慢）且不追求寂滅的人，不會被授記（vyākaraṇa，佛對未來成佛的預言）。因為有果乘（phalayāna，以獲得果位為目標的乘），所以只說有三種根性。 依據《涅槃經》（Nirvāṇa Sūtra），也有三種根性，就像病人有三種情況：第一種，無論是否遇到良醫，最終都能痊癒，這比喻菩薩（Bodhisattva，發願成佛的修行者）；第二種，遇到良醫就能痊癒，遇不到就無法痊癒，這比喻二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）；第三種，無論是否遇到良醫都無法痊癒，這比喻無性人（agotrika，沒有成佛根性的人）。 依據《大般若經》（Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra）第五百九十三卷第十六會所說，在自鷺池旁說法時，善勇猛菩薩（Śūrasamādhi Bodhisattva）請示說：『唯愿世尊（Bhagavān，佛的尊稱）慈悲憐憫我們，為我們詳細宣說如來（Tathāgata，佛的稱號）的境智（viṣaya-jñāna，佛的境界和智慧）。如果眾生中，屬於聲聞乘根性決定的人，聽聞此法後，能夠迅速證得自己的無漏地（anāsrava-bhūmi，沒有煩惱的境界）；屬於獨覺乘（Pratyekabuddha）根性決定的人，聽聞此法後，能夠迅速依靠自己的乘而得出離；屬於無上乘（anuttarayāna，即大乘）根性決定的人，聽聞此法後，能夠迅速證得無上正等菩提（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi，無上的正覺）。如果眾生中，雖然還沒有入正性離生（samyaktva-niyāma-avakrānti，進入聖道），但對於三乘根性不定的人，聽聞此法後，都能發起無上正等覺心（anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi-citta，追求無上正覺的心）。』唯愿如來為我們解答所問。這部經只說了有種性的人進入聖道的情況，所以沒有第五種無種性人（沒有根性的人）和大悲闡提（mahā-karuṇā-chandika，具有大悲心的一闡提）。此外，斷善根的人未能進入聖道，這裡也沒有提及。 此外，《勝鬘經》（Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra）中說：『指遠離善知識（kalyāṇa-mitra，引導人們走向正道的良師益友）、沒有聽聞正法（dharma）的眾生，以人天善根（manuṣya-deva-kuśala-mūla，人道和天道的善業）來成就他們。對於尋求聲聞乘的人，傳授聲聞乘；對於尋求緣覺乘的人，傳授緣覺乘；對於尋求大乘的人，傳授大乘。這叫做攝受正法（saddharma-parigraha，接受和護持正法），堪能荷負四種重任（caturvidha-bhāra-dhāraṇa，能承擔四種重大的責任）。』這裡是從總相上來說，實際上有差別。有根性的人分為三種，無根性的人為一種。 此外，依據十卷本《楞伽經》（Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra）中第二卷末尾（四卷本的第一卷也有類似說法），佛告大慧（Mahāmati，菩薩名）：『有五種根性證法（pañca gotrāṇi dharma-prativedhasya）：一是聲聞乘根性，二是辟支佛乘（Pratyekabuddhayāna）根性，三是如來乘（Tathāgatayāna）根性，四是不定乘根性，五是無性，指一闡提（icchantika，斷滅善根的人）。』這種一闡提有兩種：一種是焚燒一切善根，從而誹謗菩薩藏（bodhisattva-piṭaka，菩薩的教法）；另一種是憐憫一切眾生。

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the Śūraṅgama Sūtra, it can also be said that there are three kinds of dispositions. For those who seek the Śrāvakayāna (the vehicle of hearers, those who attain liberation through listening to the Dharma), Pratyekabuddhayāna (the vehicle of solitary realizers, those who attain liberation through their own observation of conditions), and Mahāyāna (the Great Vehicle, the path aiming to benefit all beings), the corresponding teachings are imparted. Therefore, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra states that among the four types of Śrāvakas, those who do not have adhimāna (false pride, claiming attainment without having attained it) and do not seek quiescence are not given predictions (vyākaraṇa, prophecies of future Buddhahood). Because there is a phalayāna (fruit vehicle, a vehicle aimed at attaining a specific result), only three dispositions are mentioned. According to the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, there are also three kinds of dispositions, like three types of patients: first, whether or not they encounter a good doctor, they will definitely recover, which is analogous to Bodhisattvas (beings who aspire to Buddhahood); second, they will recover if they encounter a good doctor, but will not recover if they do not, which is analogous to the two vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna); third, whether or not they encounter a good doctor, they will not recover, which is analogous to agotrikas (those without the potential for Buddhahood). According to the Mahāprajñāpāramitā Sūtra, Chapter 16 of the 593rd fascicle, when speaking at the side of the Self-Egret Pond, the Bodhisattva Śūrasamādhi requested: 'May the Bhagavan (Blessed One, an epithet of the Buddha) have compassion on us and explain in detail the realm and wisdom (viṣaya-jñāna, the sphere and wisdom of the Buddha) of the Tathāgata (Thus Gone One, an epithet of the Buddha). If sentient beings whose disposition is definitely for the Śrāvakayāna hear this Dharma, they will quickly attain their own anāsrava-bhūmi (untainted ground, a state without defilements). If sentient beings whose disposition is definitely for the Pratyekabuddha hear this Dharma, they will quickly attain liberation by relying on their own vehicle. If sentient beings whose disposition is definitely for the anuttarayāna (the unsurpassed vehicle, i.e., Mahāyāna) hear this Dharma, they will quickly attain anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi (unsurpassed perfect enlightenment). If sentient beings who have not yet entered samyaktva-niyāma-avakrānti (entry into the stream of the noble path) but whose disposition for the three vehicles is not fixed, upon hearing this Dharma, will all generate the anuttarā-samyak-saṃbodhi-citta (mind of unsurpassed perfect enlightenment). May the Tathāgata answer our questions.' This sutra only speaks of those with dispositions entering the noble path, so there is no mention of a fifth type, those without dispositions, or mahā-karuṇā-chandikas (icchantikas with great compassion). Furthermore, those who have severed their roots of goodness and have not entered the noble path are not mentioned here. Furthermore, the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra states: 'It refers to sentient beings who are separated from kalyāṇa-mitras (good spiritual friends, beneficial teachers who guide people to the right path) and have not heard the Dharma, who are accomplished through the kuśala-mūlas (roots of goodness, meritorious deeds) of humans and devas (gods). For those who seek the Śrāvakayāna, the Śrāvakayāna is taught. For those who seek the Pratyekabuddhayāna, the Pratyekabuddhayāna is taught. For those who seek the Mahāyāna, the Mahāyāna is taught. This is called saddharma-parigraha (embracing the true Dharma, accepting and upholding the true Dharma), capable of bearing the caturvidha-bhāra-dhāraṇa (four heavy burdens, the ability to shoulder four significant responsibilities).' Here, it is spoken of generally, but there are differences. Those with dispositions are divided into three types, and those without dispositions are one type. Furthermore, according to the end of the second fascicle of the ten-fascicle Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra (and similarly in the first fascicle of the four-fascicle version), the Buddha told Mahāmati (a Bodhisattva's name): 'There are pañca gotrāṇi dharma-prativedhasya (five kinds of dispositions for the realization of Dharma): first, the disposition for the Śrāvakayāna; second, the disposition for the Pratyekabuddhayāna; third, the disposition for the Tathāgatayāna; fourth, the disposition for the indeterminate vehicle; fifth, the absence of disposition, referring to icchantikas (those who have severed their roots of goodness).』 There are two types of icchantikas: one who burns all roots of goodness, thereby slandering the bodhisattva-piṭaka (the teachings of the Bodhisattvas); the other who has compassion for all sentient beings.

作盡一切眾生界愿。是菩薩也。若眾生不入涅槃我亦不入。大惠白佛。此二何者常不入涅槃。佛言菩薩常不入涅槃。非焚燒一切善根者。以知諸法本來涅槃。不捨一切諸眾生故 大莊嚴論第一卷種性品。說五種種性。三乘定及不定四同瑜伽。第五性中說有二種。一時邊。二畢竟。時邊有四。頌曰。一向行惡行。普斷諸白法。無有解脫分。善少．亦無因。畢竟無者以無因故。此中時邊應云暫時。梵云涅迦羅阿波利匿縛喃達磨涅者暫也。迦羅時也。阿名無也。波利圓也。匿縛喃寂也。達磨法也。則暫時無圓寂法。若時邊等者。應云迦羅案多阿波利匿縛喃。案多是邊故。余義同前 瑜伽所說五性如疏。

次敘同者。余文如前自更和會。楞伽所說二種闡提。初是斷善根具邪見者。後是菩薩具大悲者。初者有入涅槃之時。後必不爾。以眾生界無盡時故。無性有情不成佛故。大慈菩薩無成佛期。然第五性合有三種。一名一闡底迦。二名阿闡底迦。三名阿顛底迦。一闡底迦是樂欲義。樂生死故。阿闡底迦是不樂欲義。不樂涅槃故。此二通不斷善根人。不信．愚癡所覆蔽故。亦通大悲菩薩。大智大悲所熏習故。阿顛底迦名為畢竟。畢竟無涅槃性故。此無性人亦得前二名也。前二久久當會成佛。後必不成。楞伽但說具前二名有性闡

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『發願窮盡一切眾生界，這是菩薩。如果眾生不能進入涅槃，我也不進入。』大慧菩薩問佛：『這兩種情況，哪一種是永遠不入涅槃呢？』佛說：『菩薩是永遠不入涅槃的，但不是焚燒一切善根的人。因為菩薩了知諸法本來就是涅槃，並且不捨棄一切眾生。』《大莊嚴論》第一卷種性品，說到五種種性：三乘定性、三乘不定性、四同瑜伽，第五種性中說有兩種：一是時邊，二是畢竟。時邊有四種，偈頌說：『一向行惡行，普遍斷絕各種善法，沒有解脫的份，善少，也沒有善因。』畢竟無性是因為沒有善因的緣故。這裡所說的時邊，應該說是暫時。梵語涅迦羅阿波利匿縛喃達磨，涅者是暫時的意思，迦羅是時間的意思，阿是無的意思，波利是圓滿的意思，匿縛喃是寂靜的意思，達磨是法的意思。那麼，暫時沒有圓滿寂靜的法。如果說是時邊等，應該說是迦羅案多阿波利匿縛喃，案多是邊的意思，其餘的意思和前面相同。《瑜伽師地論》所說的五種性，就像疏文中解釋的那樣。 接下來敘述相同的情況，其餘的文字和前面一樣，自己再融會貫通。《楞伽經》所說的兩種闡提，第一種是斷絕善根、具有邪見的人，後一種是具有大悲心的菩薩。第一種人有進入涅槃的時候，後一種人必定不會進入涅槃，因為眾生界沒有窮盡的時候。無性有情不能成佛的緣故，大慈菩薩沒有成佛的期限。然而，第五種性合起來有三種：一名一闡底迦（icchāntika，斷善根者），二名阿闡底迦（acchantika，不願涅槃者），三名阿顛底迦（atyantika，永不涅槃者）。一闡底迦是樂欲的意思，因為他們樂於生死。阿闡底迦是不樂欲的意思，因為他們不樂於涅槃。這兩種情況都包括不斷善根的人，因為他們被不信和愚癡所矇蔽。也包括大悲菩薩，因為他們被大智大悲所熏習。阿顛底迦名為畢竟，因為他們畢竟沒有涅槃的自性。這種無性的人也可以得到前兩種名稱。前兩種人久而久之應當會成佛，後一種人必定不能成佛。《楞伽經》只說了具有前兩種名稱的有性闡提。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Making the vow to exhaust all realms of sentient beings, this is a Bodhisattva. If sentient beings do not enter Nirvana, I will not enter either.' Mahamati (Great Wisdom) asked the Buddha, 'Which of these two will never enter Nirvana?' The Buddha said, 'Bodhisattvas will never enter Nirvana, but not those who burn all good roots. Because they know that all dharmas are originally Nirvana, and they do not abandon all sentient beings.' The first volume of the Mahāvyutpatti (Great Treatise on Ornamentation), in the chapter on Lineage, speaks of five kinds of lineages: those fixed in the Three Vehicles, those unfixed in the Three Vehicles, the Four Samenesses of Yoga, and in the fifth lineage, it speaks of two kinds: one is temporary, and the other is ultimate. The temporary has four kinds, as the verse says: 'Always engaging in evil deeds, universally cutting off all white dharmas, having no share of liberation, little goodness, and no cause.' The ultimately without-nature are without cause. Here, the temporary should be said to be temporary. The Sanskrit is Nirākārāparinirvāṇadharmā, where nirā means temporary, kāla means time, a means without, pari means complete, nirvāṇa means quiescence, and dharma means law. So, temporarily without the dharma of complete quiescence. If it is said to be temporary, it should be Kālānta-aparinirvāṇa, where anta means end, the rest of the meaning is the same as before. The five natures spoken of in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (Stages of Yoga Practice) are as explained in the commentary. Next, narrating the similarities, the remaining text is the same as before, reconcile it yourself. The two kinds of icchantika (those who desire) spoken of in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra (Descent into Lanka Sutra), the first is those who have cut off good roots and have wrong views, the latter is Bodhisattvas who have great compassion. The first kind has a time to enter Nirvana, the latter certainly will not, because the realm of sentient beings has no end. Because sentient beings without nature cannot become Buddhas, Great Compassionate Bodhisattvas have no time limit for becoming Buddhas. However, the fifth nature combines three kinds: one is called icchantika (those who desire, meaning those who cut off good roots), the second is called acchantika (those who do not desire, meaning those who do not desire Nirvana), and the third is called atyantika (ultimate, meaning those who never enter Nirvana). Icchantika means 'desiring', because they desire birth and death. Acchantika means 'not desiring', because they do not desire Nirvana. These two include those who do not cut off good roots, because they are obscured by disbelief and ignorance. They also include Great Compassionate Bodhisattvas, because they are influenced by great wisdom and great compassion. Atyantika is called ultimate, because they ultimately have no Nirvana nature. These without-nature people can also be given the first two names. The first two will eventually become Buddhas, the latter will certainly not. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra only speaks of icchantikas with the first two names.

提。莊嚴通說有性．無性二種闡提。瑜伽．楞伽二種斷善果必當成。因現未成斷善根故。楞伽大悲因現定成果必不成。以眾生界無盡時故。無種性者現．當畢竟二俱不成 合經及論闡提有三。一斷善根。二大悲。三無性。起現行性有因有果。由此三人及前四性四句分別。一因成果不成。謂大悲闡提。二果成因不成。謂有性斷善闡提。三因果俱不成。謂無性闡提．二乘定性。四因果俱成。謂大智增上．不斷善根而成佛者 總而言之。涅槃據理性及行性中少分一切唯說有一。攝論據有性利鈍根。以明但分上下。善戒經依有．無類別。說有．無二性。又涅槃依有性利鈍以分二。無性為一。故病分三。法華化不定不別分別。總相說三。般若說請問入道。說有性非無性。勝鬘喻負四類擔隱不定性。以通從別不超三類故。楞伽依有性以辨當成不成。雖說有五不說無性。莊嚴論中具別分別因果之性俱不現行。第五離二不說大悲。瑜伽總談生類性之有無。雖陳五種第五之中不說大悲及斷善者 大乘有性眾所共許。定性二乘及無性者人所不悉。如瑜伽六十七抉擇中說 問何故楞伽不說無性。瑜伽不說大悲闡提 答教所被機時眾別故。楞伽為顯大悲菩薩是第五性。五種種姓皆談有故。遂隱五中無性不論。瑜伽據理五性類別。縱斷善者入前性

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 提（闡提，指斷善根者）。莊嚴經論中通常說有有性（具有成佛的可能性）和無性（不具有成佛的可能性）兩種闡提。瑜伽師地論和楞伽經中認為斷善根者最終必定會成佛，因為他們現在和未來都會不斷地種下善根。楞伽經認為具有大悲心的闡提現在必定不會成就佛果，因為眾生界是無盡的。而無種性者，現在和未來都永遠不可能成就佛果。 綜合經論來看，闡提有三種：一是斷善根者，二是大悲闡提，三是無性闡提。起現行性（開始修行並顯現其本性）是有因有果的。由此三人與之前的四種根性可以進行四句的分別：一是因能成而果不能成，指的是大悲闡提；二是果能成而因不能成，指的是有性斷善闡提；三是因果都不能成，指的是無性闡提和定性二乘；四是因果都能成，指的是大智慧增上、不斷善根而最終成佛的人。 總而言之，涅槃經根據理性和行性中的少部分，認為一切眾生都具有佛性。攝大乘論根據有性眾生的根器利鈍，只區分上下兩種根性。善戒經根據有性和無性的類別，說有有性和無性兩種。涅槃經又根據有性眾生的根器利鈍來區分兩種，並將無性歸為一種，所以區分出三種情況。法華經教化不定性的眾生，不作特別區分，總的來說是三種。般若經中說請問入道，只說有性，不說無性。勝鬘經用四種負擔來比喻，隱藏了不定性，因為從類別上來說，它不會超出三種。楞伽經根據有性來辨別當成佛和不能成佛的情況，雖然說了五種根性，但沒有說無性。莊嚴經論中詳細區分了因果之性都不顯現的情況。第五種情況中沒有說大悲。瑜伽師地論總的談論眾生根性的有無，雖然陳述了五種，但在第五種中沒有說大悲和斷善根者。 大乘有性是大家普遍認可的。定性二乘和無性這兩種情況，人們不太瞭解。正如瑜伽師地論第六十七卷抉擇中所說。 問：為什麼楞伽經不說無性，瑜伽師地論不說大悲闡提？ 答：因為教化所針對的根機、時機和對像不同。楞伽經是爲了彰顯大悲菩薩是第五種根性，五種種姓都談論有性，所以就隱藏了五種中的無性而不論。瑜伽師地論根據理來區分五性類別，即使是斷善根者也歸入前面的根性中。

【English Translation】 English version Ti (Chantika, refers to those who have severed their roots of goodness). The Śūraṅgama-sūtra and Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra generally speak of two types of icchantikas: those with inherent potential (for Buddhahood) and those without. The Yoga-bhūmi and Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra hold that those who sever their roots of goodness will inevitably attain Buddhahood because they continuously plant seeds of goodness in the present and future. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra believes that icchantikas with great compassion will definitely not achieve Buddhahood in the present because the realm of sentient beings is endless. As for those without inherent potential, they will never be able to achieve Buddhahood in the present or future. Combining the sutras and treatises, there are three types of icchantikas: first, those who sever their roots of goodness; second, icchantikas with great compassion; and third, icchantikas without inherent potential. Those who begin to cultivate and manifest their nature have both cause and effect. From these three types of people and the previous four types of natures, four distinctions can be made: first, the cause can be achieved but the effect cannot, referring to icchantikas with great compassion; second, the effect can be achieved but the cause cannot, referring to icchantikas with inherent potential who have severed their roots of goodness; third, neither cause nor effect can be achieved, referring to icchantikas without inherent potential and those of the fixed Śrāvaka and Pratyekabuddha vehicles; fourth, both cause and effect can be achieved, referring to those with great wisdom who increase their understanding and attain Buddhahood without severing their roots of goodness. In summary, the Nirvana Sutra, based on rationality and a small portion of behavioral nature, believes that all sentient beings possess Buddha-nature. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha distinguishes only between superior and inferior natures based on the sharpness or dullness of the faculties of sentient beings with inherent potential. The Śīlaskandha Sutra distinguishes between those with and without inherent potential, saying that there are two types: those with and those without inherent potential. The Nirvana Sutra also distinguishes between two types based on the sharpness or dullness of the faculties of sentient beings with inherent potential, and classifies those without inherent potential as one type, thus distinguishing three situations. The Lotus Sutra teaches those of uncertain nature without making special distinctions, generally speaking of three types. The Prajñā Sutra speaks of asking questions to enter the path, only speaking of those with inherent potential and not those without. The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sutra uses the metaphor of four types of burdens, concealing the uncertain nature, because in terms of categories, it does not exceed the three types. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra distinguishes between those who will attain Buddhahood and those who will not based on inherent potential, although it speaks of five types of natures, it does not speak of those without inherent potential. The Śūraṅgama-sūtra elaborately distinguishes the situation where neither the cause nor the effect of nature manifests. The fifth situation does not mention great compassion. The Yoga-bhūmi generally discusses the existence or non-existence of the nature of sentient beings, although it presents five types, it does not mention great compassion or those who have severed their roots of goodness in the fifth type. The inherent potential of the Mahayana is universally recognized. The two situations of fixed Śrāvaka and Pratyekabuddha vehicles and those without inherent potential are not well understood. As stated in the sixty-seventh volume of the Yoga-bhūmi. Question: Why does the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra not speak of those without inherent potential, and why does the Yoga-bhūmi not speak of icchantikas with great compassion? Answer: Because the faculties, timing, and objects of the teachings are different. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra is to highlight that Bodhisattvas with great compassion are the fifth type of nature, and all five types of lineages speak of inherent potential, so it conceals the non-inherent potential among the five and does not discuss it. The Yoga-bhūmi distinguishes the five types of natures based on reason, and even those who have severed their roots of goodness are classified into the previous natures.

中。據用雖無種體有故。大悲．斷善則是第一或第四中。但說無性為第五中。所以不說大悲菩薩。抉擇六十七。有五難無性有情一說無疑起難。二有情無根難。三諸界平轉難。四應具諸界難。五無應轉有難 答即有六。一教．理並違答。二假設非例答。三非喻乖理答。四平喻無別答。五背法不齊答。六縱轉不成答 謂有難言。云何而有畢竟無般涅槃法耶。應詰彼言。諸有情類種種界性．無量界性．下劣界性．勝妙界性為有．為無。若言有者無有畢竟無涅槃法者不應道理 此亦違理。則唯識云有性法爾。無此不然 若言無者經言諸有情類有種種界性乃至勝妙界性不應道理。此亦違經。無性即是下劣界攝。復有難言。有情雖有種種界性乃至勝妙界性。而言無有無根有情。如是無涅槃法何故不爾。或應許有無根有情。應詰彼言。諸無根者為是有情。為非有情。若是有情外無根物應是有情。假設為難。非他所許 若非有情。而言何不許有無根有情者不應道理。性非無根何得例難。復有難言。如作剎帝利已後作婆羅門．吠舍．戍達羅。如是乃至作那落迦已。或乃至作天。如是何故不作無涅槃法已。或時後作有般涅槃法耶。應詰彼言。諸類相轉為有一切界。為獨有一耶。若有一切喻不相似。彼無一切故為非喻。若獨有一。先是剎帝

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 中。雖然從作用上來說好像沒有各種體性，但實際上是有的。『大悲』、『斷善』的情況，則是在第一類或第四類中。但說『無性』是在第五類中。所以不說『大悲菩薩』。《抉擇》六十七中說，對於五難（針對無性有情的五種質疑）的迴應有六種：一、教理並違答（教證和理證都相違背的回答）；二、假設非例答（假設性的提問不能作為例子的回答）；三、非喻乖理答（比喻不恰當，違背道理的回答）；四、平喻無別答（用平等的比喻無法區分的回答）；五、背法不齊答（背離佛法，不整齊的回答）；六、縱轉不成答（即使轉變也無法成立的回答）。 有人提出質疑說：『怎麼會有畢竟沒有般涅槃之法呢？』應該反問他們：『各種有情，有種種界性（各種不同的根性），無量界性（無法計量的根性），下劣界性（低劣的根性），勝妙界性（殊勝美妙的根性），這些是存在還是不存在？』如果說存在，那麼說沒有畢竟沒有涅槃之法就不合道理了。這也違背了道理，因為唯識學說，有自性的法本來如此，沒有自性的法就不是這樣。 如果說不存在，那麼經文說各種有情有種種界性乃至勝妙界性就不合道理了。這也違背了經文。『無性』就屬於下劣界所攝。又有人提出質疑說：『有情雖然有種種界性乃至勝妙界性，但說沒有無根的有情。這樣沒有涅槃之法為什麼不行呢？或者應該允許有無根的有情。』應該反問他們：『那些無根者是有情還是非有情？』如果是有情，那麼外在的無根之物也應該是有情。這種假設性的提問，不是他人所認可的。 如果是非有情，那麼說為什麼不許有無根的有情就不合道理。因為自性不是沒有根的，怎麼能用它來作比呢？又有人提出質疑說：『就像做了剎帝利（統治者）之後可以做婆羅門（祭司）、吠舍（商人）、戍達羅（奴隸），像這樣乃至做了那落迦（地獄眾生）之後，或者乃至做了天人。像這樣為什麼不能做了沒有涅槃之法後，有時又做了有般涅槃之法呢？』應該反問他們：『各種類別的轉變，是有一切界（一切種類）還是隻有一種？』如果有一切種類，那麼這個比喻就不相似。因為那裡沒有一切種類，所以不是一個恰當的比喻。如果只有一種，那麼先前是剎帝利

【English Translation】 English version: In. Although from the perspective of function, it seems like there are no various inherent natures, in reality, they exist. The cases of 'Great Compassion' and 'Severed Goodness' fall within the first or fourth category. However, 'Non-nature' is said to be in the fifth category. Therefore, 'Great Compassion Bodhisattva' is not mentioned. In the 'Discernment' sixty-seventh section, it is said that there are six responses to the five difficulties (five questions directed at sentient beings without inherent nature): 1. Teaching and Reason Contradiction Response; 2. Hypothetical Non-Example Response; 3. Inappropriate Analogy Response; 4. Equal Analogy No Difference Response; 5. Deviating from Dharma Uneven Response; 6. Even if Transformed, Unachievable Response. Someone raises a question: 'How can there be a Dharma that ultimately has no Parinirvana?' They should be questioned in return: 'Various sentient beings, having various natures (various different dispositions), immeasurable natures (innumerable dispositions), inferior natures (lowly dispositions), and superior natures (supreme and wonderful dispositions), do these exist or not?' If they say they exist, then saying that there is ultimately no Dharma without Nirvana is unreasonable. This also contradicts reason, because the Yogacara school says that the Dharma with self-nature is inherently so, and the Dharma without self-nature is not like that. If they say they do not exist, then the sutra saying that various sentient beings have various natures, up to superior natures, is unreasonable. This also contradicts the sutra. 'Non-nature' is included in the inferior realm. Someone else raises a question: 'Although sentient beings have various natures, up to superior natures, it is said that there are no sentient beings without roots. Why can't it be like this with the Dharma without Nirvana? Or it should be allowed that there are sentient beings without roots.' They should be questioned in return: 'Are those without roots sentient beings or non-sentient beings?' If they are sentient beings, then external rootless things should also be sentient beings. This hypothetical question is not accepted by others. If they are non-sentient beings, then saying why not allow sentient beings without roots is unreasonable. Because self-nature is not without roots, how can it be used as an analogy? Someone else raises a question: 'Just like after being a Kshatriya (ruler), one can become a Brahmin (priest), Vaishya (merchant), or Shudra (slave), like this, even after being a Naraka (hell being), or even becoming a Deva (heavenly being). Like this, why can't one, after having a Dharma without Nirvana, sometimes have a Dharma with Parinirvana?' They should be questioned in return: 'Various kinds of transformations, are there all realms (all kinds) or only one kind?' If there are all kinds, then this analogy is not similar. Because there are not all kinds there, so it is not an appropriate analogy. If there is only one kind, then previously being a Kshatriya

利等。乃是轉為余類不應道理。乖正理故。復有難言。如剎帝利等具一切界。如是無般涅槃法。何故不有般涅槃法界耶。應詰彼言。有界．無界為互相違為不爾耶。若互相違。而言無法何故不有般涅槃法不應道理。互相違故。若不相違。則此有情是無。亦有般涅槃法不應正理。無別體故。復有難言。現見一地。於一時間無金種性。或時則有。乃至一時無鹽種性。或時則有。或於一時有諸界性。或時則無。如是先無般涅槃法種性。何故不於一時成有般涅槃法種性耶。應詰彼言。如地方所。先無此性。後有此性。或先有此性後無此性。如是先有聲聞種性。後無是性。乃至先有大乘種性。後無是性。先有不定性。後無是姓耶。若言爾者。順解脫善應空無果。又若爾者。立種性定不應道理。若不爾者。汝言先住無性後住有性。如地方所。有種性者先住有性。後住無性。如地方所不應道理。又應責彼。無涅槃法下劣界者。為則此生轉成有性。為於後生。若則此生彼遇緣已於現法中。為能起順解脫分善。為不能耶。若言能者。現起善根而言無性不應道理。若言不能。彼遇良緣現法不能起順解脫善。而言轉成般涅槃法者不應道理。若言後生方成有姓。彼為先生積集善根後生遇緣方起彼善。為先不集。若言先集。彼於此生值遇良緣能起

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 利等，這是轉變為其他類別，不符合道理，因為違背了正確的道理。還有人提出疑問，例如剎帝利（Kshatriya，古印度社會中的武士階層）等具備一切界（dhatu，構成要素），這樣沒有般涅槃法（parinirvana-dharma，完全寂滅之法）。為什麼沒有般涅槃法界呢？應該反問他們，『有界』和『無界』是互相違背還是不互相違背呢？如果互相違背，那麼說沒有法，為什麼沒有般涅槃法，就不符合道理，因為互相違背。如果不互相違背，那麼這個有情（sattva，眾生）是『無』，也有般涅槃法，就不符合正理，因為沒有別的本體。還有人提出疑問，現在看到一塊土地，在某個時間沒有金的種性（gotra，潛在能力），有時則有；乃至某個時間沒有鹽的種性，有時則有；或者某個時間有各種界性，有時則沒有。這樣，先前沒有般涅槃法的種性，為什麼不能在某個時間成為有般涅槃法的種性呢？應該反問他們，像地方一樣，先前沒有這種性質，後來有這種性質，或者先前有這種性質，後來沒有這種性質。這樣，先前有聲聞（sravaka，聽聞佛法者）的種性，後來沒有這種性質；乃至先前有大乘（Mahayana，佛教宗派）的種性，後來沒有這種性質；先前有不定性，後來沒有這種性質嗎？如果說是這樣，那麼順解脫（moksha，解脫）的善行就應該空無果報。而且如果這樣，建立種性決定就不符合道理。如果不是這樣，你說先前安住于無性，後來安住于有性，像地方一樣，有種性的人先前安住于有性，後來安住于無性，像地方一樣，就不符合道理。又應該責問他們，沒有涅槃法（nirvana-dharma，寂滅之法）的下劣界（hina-dhatu，低劣的構成要素）的人，是這一生轉變成有性，還是在後世？如果是這一生，那麼他遇到因緣後，在現世中，是能夠生起順解脫分的善行，還是不能呢？如果說能，那麼現在生起善根，卻說沒有種性，就不符合道理。如果說不能，那麼他遇到好的因緣，現世不能生起順解脫的善行，卻說轉變成般涅槃法的人，就不符合道理。如果說後世才成為有性，那麼他是先生積集善根，後世遇到因緣才生起那些善行，還是先前沒有積集？如果說先前積集了，那麼他在此生值遇好的因緣，能夠生起

【English Translation】 English version: …benefits, etc. This is transforming into other categories, which is unreasonable because it contradicts the correct principle. Furthermore, there is a difficult question: such as Kshatriyas (Kshatriya, the warrior class in ancient Indian society) possessing all dhatus (dhatu, elements), thus lacking parinirvana-dharma (parinirvana-dharma, the Dharma of complete extinction). Why is there no parinirvana-dhatu? One should question them, 『Are 『having dhatu』 and 『not having dhatu』 mutually contradictory or not? If they are mutually contradictory, then to say there is no Dharma, why is there no parinirvana-dharma, is unreasonable, because they are mutually contradictory. If they are not mutually contradictory, then this sentient being (sattva, being) is 『nothing,』 and also has parinirvana-dharma, which is not in accordance with the correct principle, because there is no separate entity. Furthermore, there is a difficult question: now seeing a piece of land, at one time there is no gold gotra (gotra, potential), but sometimes there is; even at one time there is no salt gotra, but sometimes there is; or at one time there are various dhatu-s, but sometimes there are not. Thus, previously not having the parinirvana-dharma gotra, why can't it become having the parinirvana-dharma gotra at one time? One should question them, like a place, previously not having this nature, later having this nature, or previously having this nature, later not having this nature. Thus, previously having the sravaka (sravaka, listener of the Dharma) gotra, later not having this nature; even previously having the Mahayana (Mahayana, Buddhist school) gotra, later not having this nature; previously having the indeterminate nature, later not having this nature? If one says so, then the good deeds of moksha (moksha, liberation) should be empty and without result. Moreover, if so, establishing the determination of gotra would be unreasonable. If not so, you say previously abiding in non-nature, later abiding in having nature, like a place, those with gotra previously abiding in having nature, later abiding in non-nature, like a place, would be unreasonable. Furthermore, one should question them, those of inferior dhatu (hina-dhatu, inferior element) without nirvana-dharma (nirvana-dharma, the Dharma of extinction), is it that this life transforms into having nature, or in a later life? If it is this life, then after encountering conditions, in the present life, are they able to generate good deeds that contribute to moksha, or are they not able to? If one says able, then now generating good roots, yet saying there is no gotra, is unreasonable. If one says not able, then encountering good conditions, the present life cannot generate good deeds that contribute to moksha, yet saying they transform into parinirvana-dharma people, is unreasonable. If one says it is only in a later life that they become having nature, then do they first accumulate good roots and then encounter conditions in a later life to generate those good deeds, or did they not accumulate them previously? If one says they accumulated them previously, then encountering good conditions in this life, they are able to generate

善根。而言後生方成有性。不應道理。又如彼因應空無果。若先不集。是則此人前後相似俱未集善。而言後生方成有性非此生者。不應道理。

證二乘定性者云。華嚴第四十世間品云。佛子菩薩摩訶薩。于兜率天臨命終時。有十種果現。第三于右手掌中放大光明名凈境界。悉能嚴凈大千世界。此世界中若有無漏諸辟支佛覺斯光者。即舍壽命入于涅槃。若不覺者光明力故。移置他方余世界中 莊嚴論第一卷云。餘人善根涅槃時盡。菩薩善根不爾 又云。三乘眾生由界差別故種性差別 涅槃經云。我于經中為諸比丘。說一乘．一道．一行．一緣。如是一乘乃至一緣。能為眾生作大寂靜。永斷一切繫縛．愁苦．苦．及苦因。令一切眾生至於一有。我諸弟子聞是說已。不解我意唱言。如來說須陀洹乃至阿羅漢皆得佛道。

又攝大乘為十義故說一乘。引攝不定姓故。又法華論中四種聲聞。不為趣寂受記故。楞伽．瑜伽五姓差別如是非一。量云。二乘之果。應有定姓。乘所被故如大乘者。

無種姓人證者。涅槃三十六云。善男子若說一切眾生定有佛性。是人名為謗佛法僧。若說一切定無佛性。此人亦名謗佛法僧 又涅槃云。譬如病人有其二種。一者若遇良醫妙藥及以不遇。必當得差。二者若遇即差。不遇不差。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 善根。如果說後世才成就種性，這不合道理。又如那原因應是空無結果的，如果先前沒有積聚善根，那麼這個人前後相似，都沒有積聚善根，卻說後世才成就種性，不是今生所成就的，這不合道理。

爲了證明二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）有其固定的種性，有人引用： 《華嚴經》第四十世間品說：『佛子菩薩摩訶薩，在兜率天臨命終時，有十種果報顯現。第三種是于右手掌中放出大光明，名為凈境界，能夠莊嚴清凈大千世界。這個世界中如果有無漏的辟支佛（Pratyekabuddha，獨覺佛）覺悟到這光明，就捨棄壽命進入涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）。如果不能覺悟，就因為光明力量的緣故，被移置到其他世界的余處。』 《莊嚴論》第一卷說：『其他人的善根在涅槃時就窮盡，菩薩（Bodhisattva，菩提薩埵）的善根不是這樣。』 又說：『三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）眾生由於境界的差別，所以種性也有差別。』 《涅槃經》說：『我于經中為諸比丘（Bhikkhu，出家男眾）說一乘（Ekayana，唯一乘）、一道、一行、一緣。像這樣的一乘乃至一緣，能夠為眾生帶來大寂靜，永遠斷除一切繫縛、愁苦、苦以及苦因，令一切眾生到達唯一的存在。我的弟子們聽了這些話後，不理解我的意思，就說，如來說須陀洹（Srotapanna，入流果）乃至阿羅漢（Arhat，無學）都能成佛。』

又《攝大乘論》爲了十種意義的緣故說一乘，是爲了引導攝受不定種性的人。又《法華論》中說四種聲聞，不爲了趣向寂滅而接受授記。 《楞伽經》、《瑜伽師地論》中說五種姓的差別，像這樣不是單一的。 可以用量論來論證：二乘的果位，應該有固定的種性，因為是被乘所攝受的，就像大乘一樣。

爲了證明沒有種性的人，有人引用：《涅槃經》第三十六說：『善男子，如果說一切眾生一定有佛性（Buddha-nature），這個人就叫做誹謗佛法僧。如果說一切眾生一定沒有佛性，這個人也叫做誹謗佛法僧。』 又《涅槃經》說：『譬如病人有兩種，一種是無論遇到良醫妙藥或者沒有遇到，必定會痊癒。另一種是遇到就痊癒，不遇到就不會痊癒。』

【English Translation】 English version Good roots. If it is said that the potentiality is only achieved in later lives, it is unreasonable. Furthermore, if that cause should be empty and without result, and if good roots have not been accumulated beforehand, then this person is similar in both previous and subsequent lives, and has not accumulated good roots. To say that the potentiality is only achieved in later lives, and not in this life, is unreasonable.

To prove that the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) have fixed lineages, some cite: The fortieth chapter, 'Worldly Abode' of the Avataṃsaka Sūtra says: 'When a Bodhisattva-Mahāsattva (Bodhisattva, great being) is about to die in the Tuṣita Heaven, ten kinds of fruits appear. The third is that a great light, called Pure Realm, is emitted from the palm of the right hand, which can adorn and purify the great thousand world system. If there are any Arhats (Pratyekabuddha, solitary Buddha) in this world who awaken to this light, they will abandon their lives and enter Nirvana (Nirvana, extinction). If they do not awaken, they will be moved to other parts of other worlds by the power of the light.' The first volume of the Treatise on Ornamentation says: 'The good roots of other people are exhausted at the time of Nirvana, but the good roots of Bodhisattvas (Bodhisattva, enlightenment being) are not like this.' It also says: 'The beings of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna) have different lineages because of the difference in realms.' The Nirvana Sutra says: 'In the sutras, I have spoken to the Bhikkhus (Bhikkhu, monks) about the One Vehicle (Ekayana, the only vehicle), one path, one practice, and one condition. Such a One Vehicle, even one condition, can bring great tranquility to sentient beings, forever cutting off all bonds, sorrows, suffering, and the causes of suffering, leading all sentient beings to the one existence. My disciples, after hearing these words, did not understand my meaning and said that the Tathagata (Tathagata, thus-gone one) said that Srotapannas (Srotapanna, stream-enterer) and even Arhats (Arhat, worthy one) can all attain Buddhahood.'

Furthermore, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha speaks of the One Vehicle for ten reasons, in order to guide and embrace those of uncertain lineage. Also, the Treatise on the Lotus Sutra says that the four types of Śrāvakas are not given predictions for the sake of attaining quiescence. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra and the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra speak of the differences in the five lineages, which are not singular like this. It can be argued using logic: The fruit of the Two Vehicles should have a fixed lineage, because it is embraced by the vehicle, just like the Mahayana.

To prove that there are people without lineage, some cite: The thirty-sixth chapter of the Nirvana Sutra says: 'Good man, if it is said that all sentient beings definitely have Buddha-nature (Buddha-nature), this person is called a slanderer of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. If it is said that all sentient beings definitely do not have Buddha-nature, this person is also called a slanderer of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.' Also, the Nirvana Sutra says: 'For example, there are two types of patients. One is that whether they encounter a good doctor and medicine or not, they will definitely recover. The other is that they will recover if they encounter them, but will not recover if they do not encounter them.'

三者遇與不遇要不可差。初是定性大乘。次為不定性。第三即是定性二乘及與無性 又涅槃云。善男子如是諍訟是佛境界。非諸聲聞．緣覺所知。若人於此生疑心者。猶能摧壞無量煩惱如須彌山。若於是中生決定者是名執著。如是執著不名為善 又三十六云。善男子我雖說言一切眾生悉有佛性。眾生不解佛如是等隨自意語。善男子。如是語者後身菩薩尚不能解。況於二乘．其餘菩薩 又恒河七人。第七常沒 又善戒經種性品云。無種性人雖復發心勤行精進。終不能得無上菩提 又彼經云。無種姓人但以人天善根而成就之 又莊嚴論無涅槃法有二。一時邊。二畢竟等。如前已說 又勝鬘云。離善知識無聞非法眾生。以人天善根而成就之等 金剛經云毛道生。今云愚夫生。梵云婆羅(去聲)此云愚夫。本錯云縛羅。乃言毛道 無性量云。所說無性。決定應有。有無二性隨一攝故。如有性者。或聖所說故。如說有性。

諸經論中。或唯有正宗無序．流通。如瑜伽等。或唯有初．中無後。如顯揚等。或唯有中．後無初。如集論．二十唯識等。或三分具有。如成唯識等。真諦所翻二十唯識三分具有。菩提流支所譯與大唐同無初有餘二。無唯初後無中分者。以造論者必有所明故。

釋稽首義。如章中釋。

釋諸

【現代漢語翻譯】 三者（三種根性的人）遇與不遇（遇到佛法與否）的結果不會有差別。第一種是定性大乘（必定證悟大乘佛果的人），第二種是不定性（可能證悟大乘或小乘佛果的人），第三種是定性二乘（必定證悟小乘佛果的人）以及無性（沒有佛性的人）。 《涅槃經》又說：『善男子，這樣的諍訟是佛的境界，不是聲聞（聽聞佛法而證悟的人）、緣覺（通過觀察因緣而證悟的人）所能瞭解的。如果有人對此產生懷疑，還能摧毀如須彌山般無量的煩惱。如果有人對此產生決定性的看法，這叫做執著。這樣的執著不能稱為善。』 《三十六品經》又說：『善男子，我雖然說一切眾生都有佛性（成佛的可能性），但眾生不理解佛的這種隨順他們意願的說法。善男子，這樣的話語，後身的菩薩（修行到很高階段的菩薩）尚且不能理解，更何況二乘（聲聞和緣覺）和其他菩薩呢？』 又說恒河七人渡河的故事，第七個人總是沉沒在水中。 《善戒經·種性品》說：『沒有種性的人，即使發心勤奮精進修行，最終也不能證得無上菩提（最高的覺悟）。』 該經又說：『沒有種性的人，只能以人天善根（在人道和天道所修的善業）來成就。』 《莊嚴論》說沒有涅槃法（沒有證悟涅槃的可能性）有兩種情況：一是時邊（在一定的時間內），二是畢竟等（永遠沒有可能性）。這在前面已經說過了。 《勝鬘經》說：『離開善知識（指導修行的善友），沒有聽聞正法的眾生，只能以人天善根來成就。』等等。 《金剛經》說『毛道生』，現在說是『愚夫生』。梵文是『婆羅(去聲)』（Bala），這裡翻譯為『愚夫』。原本錯誤地寫成『縛羅』，就變成了『毛道』。 無性宗的論量說：『所說的無性，決定是存在的。因為有性和無性，必定被其中一種所包含。就像有性的人，或者是因為聖人所說，所以說是有性。』 在各種經論中，有的只有正宗分（正文），沒有序分（序言）和流通分（結尾）。例如《瑜伽師地論》等。有的只有序分和正宗分，沒有流通分。例如《顯揚聖教論》等。有的只有正宗分和流通分，沒有序分。例如《集論》、《二十唯識論》等。有的三部分都具備。例如《成唯識論》等。真諦（Paramārtha）所翻譯的《二十唯識論》三部分都具備。菩提流支（Bodhiruci）所翻譯的版本與唐朝的譯本一樣，沒有序分，只有其餘兩部分。沒有隻有序分和流通分而沒有正宗分的情況，因為造論者必定有所要闡明的內容。 解釋『稽首』的含義，如章疏中所解釋的。 解釋各種...

【English Translation】 The outcomes for the three types of individuals (those of three different capacities), whether they encounter (the Dharma) or not, will not differ. The first is those of definitively Mahāyāna nature (those certain to attain Mahāyāna Buddhahood), the second is those of indefinite nature (those who may attain either Mahāyāna or Śrāvakayāna Buddhahood), and the third is those of definitively Śrāvakayāna nature (those certain to attain Śrāvakayāna Buddhahood) as well as those without any nature (those without Buddha-nature). Furthermore, the Nirvana Sutra states: 'Good son, such disputes are the realm of the Buddhas, not known by the śrāvakas (those who attain enlightenment by hearing the Dharma) and pratyekabuddhas (those who attain enlightenment through observing conditions). If someone has doubts about this, they can still destroy immeasurable afflictions like Mount Sumeru. If someone has a definitive view on this, it is called attachment. Such attachment is not called good.' Furthermore, the Thirty-Six Chapters Sutra states: 'Good son, although I say that all sentient beings have Buddha-nature (the potential to become a Buddha), sentient beings do not understand the Buddha's words spoken in accordance with their own intentions. Good son, even bodhisattvas (those on the path to Buddhahood) in later lives cannot understand such words, let alone śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and other bodhisattvas.' It is also said in the story of the seven people crossing the Ganges River, the seventh person always sinks. The Śīlaskandha Sutra, in the chapter on Lineage, states: 'Those without lineage, even if they generate the aspiration and diligently practice with vigor, will ultimately not attain Anuttarā-samyak-sambodhi (supreme enlightenment).' That sutra also states: 'Those without lineage can only be accomplished with the roots of virtue of humans and gods (meritorious deeds performed in the human and deva realms).' The Ornament of the Sutras states that there are two situations where there is no nirvana Dharma (no possibility of attaining nirvana): one is time-bound, and the other is absolutely equal (never any possibility). This has already been discussed earlier. The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sutra states: 'Sentient beings who are separated from good spiritual friends (those who guide practice) and have not heard the correct Dharma can only be accomplished with the roots of virtue of humans and gods,' and so on. The Diamond Sutra says 'hair-pore born', now it is said 'foolish person born'. The Sanskrit is 'Bala' (fool), which is translated here as 'foolish person'. Originally, it was mistakenly written as 'Vara', which became 'hair-pore'. The non-nature school's reasoning states: 'What is said to be without nature, is definitely existent. Because having nature and not having nature must be included in one of the two. Just like those who have nature, or because it is said by the sages, therefore it is said to have nature.' In various sutras and treatises, some only have the main section (the core content) without the introductory section (preface) and concluding section (epilogue). For example, the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, etc. Some only have the introductory section and main section, without the concluding section. For example, the Abhidharmasamuccaya, etc. Some only have the main section and concluding section, without the introductory section. For example, the Compendium of Topics, the Twenty Verses on Representation-Only, etc. Some have all three sections. For example, the Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only, etc. The Twenty Verses on Representation-Only translated by Paramārtha has all three sections. The version translated by Bodhiruci is the same as the Tang Dynasty version, without the introductory section, only the remaining two sections. There is no case where there is only the introductory section and concluding section without the main section, because the author of the treatise must have something to clarify. The meaning of 'obeisance' is explained as in the commentaries. Explaining the various...

歸敬三寶中。有唯歸佛非法僧者。舊地持云。敬禮過去未來世現在一切佛世尊 發菩提心論云。敬禮無邊際。去．來．現在佛。等空不動智。救世大悲尊 俱舍初頌亦唯歸佛 有唯敬僧非佛．法。辨中邊云。稽首造此論。善逝體所生。及教我等師。當勤顯斯義 無唯敬法。古所翻二十唯識初唯敬佛法雲。修道不共他。能說無等義。頂禮大乘理。當說立及破 有唯敬佛．僧無法。龍樹十住論云。敬禮一切佛及諸菩薩眾．聲聞．辟支佛無我我所者 有唯敬法．僧無佛。世親金剛波若論云。法門句義及次第。世間不解離明惠。大智通達教我等。歸命無量功德身 法救雜心亦云。敬禮尊法勝。所說我頂受。我達磨多羅。說彼未曾說。此皆敬論主及所造論。

有三寶通敬。即顯揚．對法．攝論．佛地．及四分律等如是非一。于唯敬佛中。有唯敬法身非餘二。般若燈論初歸敬頌。楞伽初云。歸命大智海毗盧舍那佛。此雖經主所置。唯敬法身也 涅槃經云。若能計三寶常住同真諦。佛即是法。法則是僧 勝鬘又云。歸依說一乘道法及三乘眾。此二種非究竟歸依。若有眾生如來調伏。乃至歸依法．僧。是二歸依非二歸依。是歸依如來。何以故。無異如來。無異二。歸依如來即三歸依。此是如來正師子吼。有唯敬受用非餘二。發菩

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 在歸敬三寶中，存在只歸敬佛和法、不歸敬僧的情況。《舊地持論》說：『敬禮過去、未來、現在一切佛世尊。』《發菩提心論》說：『敬禮無邊際，過去、未來、現在佛，等同虛空不動的智慧，救世大悲尊。』《俱舍論》的開篇頌文也只歸敬佛。 存在只敬僧、不敬佛和法的情況。《辨中邊論》說：『稽首（qǐ shǒu，一種古代的跪拜禮）造此論的善逝（shàn shì，佛的稱號之一）之體所生，以及教導我等的老師，應當勤奮地闡明此義。』 沒有隻敬法、不敬佛和僧的情況。古人翻譯的《二十唯識論》的開篇只敬佛法，說：『修道不與他人相同，能說無與倫比的意義，頂禮大乘之理，應當闡述建立和破斥。』 存在只敬佛和僧、不敬法的情況。龍樹（Nāgārjuna）的《十住論》說：『敬禮一切佛及諸菩薩眾、聲聞（Śrāvaka）、辟支佛（Pratyekabuddha），沒有我（ātman）和我所（ātmanīya）的執著。』 存在只敬法和僧、不敬佛的情況。世親（Vasubandhu）的《金剛般若論》說：『法門句義及次第，世間不解離明惠，大智通達教我等，歸命無量功德身。』法救（Dharmatrāta）的《雜心論》也說：『敬禮尊法勝，所說我頂受，我達磨多羅（Dharmatrāta），說彼未曾說。』這些都是敬論主及所造的論。 存在三寶（Triratna）都普遍敬的情況，即《顯揚聖教論》（Abhidharmasamuccaya）、《對法論》（Abhidharma）、《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）、《佛地經論》（Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra）以及《四分律》（Dharmaguptaka Vinaya）等，像這樣並非只有一種情況。在只敬佛中，存在只敬法身（Dharmakāya）、不敬其他二寶的情況。《般若燈論》（Prajñāpradīpa）的開篇歸敬頌和《楞伽經》（Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra）的開篇說：『歸命大智海毗盧舍那佛（Vairocana）。』這雖然是經主所設定的，但只是敬法身。 《涅槃經》（Nirvāṇa Sūtra）說：『若能認為三寶常住，與真諦（paramārtha-satya）相同，佛即是法，法則就是僧。』 《勝鬘經》（Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra）又說：『歸依說一乘（ekayāna）道法及三乘（triyāna）眾。』這兩種並非究竟的歸依。如果有眾生被如來（Tathāgata）調伏，乃至歸依法、僧，這兩種歸依不是兩種歸依，是歸依如來。為什麼呢？沒有與如來不同的，沒有與二寶不同的，歸依如來就是三歸依。』這是如來真正的獅子吼。 存在只敬受用身（saṃbhogakāya）、不敬其他二寶的情況。《發菩提

【English Translation】 English version: Among the acts of taking refuge in the Three Jewels (Triratna), there are instances of only taking refuge in the Buddha and the Dharma, without taking refuge in the Sangha. The old Bhūmi-dhāraṇī Sūtra states: 'I pay homage to all Buddhas, World Honored Ones, of the past, future, and present.' The Bodhi-citta-utpāda-śāstra states: 'I pay homage to the boundless Buddhas of the past, future, and present, the unwavering wisdom equal to space, the great compassionate saviors of the world.' The initial verse of the Abhidharma-kośa also only takes refuge in the Buddha. There are instances of only revering the Sangha, without revering the Buddha and the Dharma. The Madhyānta-vibhāga-bhāṣya states: 'I bow my head to the one who composed this treatise, born from the essence of the Sugata (Buddha), and to the teachers who taught us. We should diligently reveal this meaning.' There are no instances of only revering the Dharma, without revering the Buddha and the Sangha. The opening of the ancient translation of the Twenty Verses (Viṃśatikā) only reveres the Buddha and the Dharma, stating: 'The practice of the path is not shared with others, able to speak of unparalleled meaning, I bow to the principle of the Mahayana, I should explain the establishment and refutation.' There are instances of only revering the Buddha and the Sangha, without revering the Dharma. Nāgārjuna's Daśa-bhūmika-vibhāṣā states: 'I pay homage to all Buddhas and all Bodhisattvas, Śrāvakas, Pratyekabuddhas, those without self (ātman) and what belongs to self (ātmanīya).' There are instances of only revering the Dharma and the Sangha, without revering the Buddha. Vasubandhu's Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra Śāstra states: 'The phrases, meanings, and order of the Dharma-gate, the world does not understand the separation from clear wisdom, great wisdom penetrates and teaches us, I take refuge in the body of immeasurable merit.' Dharmatrāta's Saṃyukta-abhidharma-hṛdaya-śāstra also states: 'I pay homage to the venerable Dharma, the superior, what is spoken I receive on my head, I, Dharmatrāta, speak what he has never spoken.' These all revere the author of the treatise and the treatise he composed. There are instances of universally revering the Three Jewels (Triratna), such as the Abhidharmasamuccaya, Abhidharma, Mahāyānasaṃgraha, Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra, and Dharmaguptaka Vinaya, and so on, there are not only one case like this. Among those who only revere the Buddha, there are instances of only revering the Dharmakāya, without revering the other two. The opening verse of reverence in the Prajñāpradīpa and the opening of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra state: 'I take refuge in Vairocana, the great ocean of wisdom.' Although this was set by the master of the sutra, it only reveres the Dharmakāya. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra states: 'If one can consider the Three Jewels as permanent and identical to the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya), the Buddha is the Dharma, and the Dharma is the Sangha.' The Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra also states: 'I take refuge in the Dharma that speaks of the One Vehicle (ekayāna) path and the assembly of the Three Vehicles (triyāna).' These two are not ultimate refuges. If there are sentient beings tamed by the Tathāgata, and even take refuge in the Dharma and the Sangha, these two refuges are not two refuges, they are taking refuge in the Tathāgata. Why? There is no difference from the Tathāgata, there is no difference from the two jewels, taking refuge in the Tathāgata is taking the three refuges.' This is the true lion's roar of the Tathāgata. There are instances of only revering the saṃbhogakāya, without revering the other two. The *Bodhi-

提心論是。唯敬佛之實智．悲故。有唯敬化非餘二。寶積雲因凈修廣如青蓮華等。有通報．化非法身。古地持云。敬禮過去．未來世．現在一切佛世尊。有通敬三身。顯揚云。善逝．善說．妙三身。對法．佛地初敬皆同。有唯同體三寶。涅槃．勝鬘是。有同體．別體通。對法等是。無唯敬別體非同體。及唯敬任持三寶者。

歸敬福田中。又有三釋。一敬涅槃而非菩提。二敬菩提而非涅槃。三俱敬涅槃．菩提 初敬涅槃而非菩提。涅槃四義。體皆真如。並唯識性。此通在纏．出纏二位。體性雖凈在纏名因分。分者位也。今之所敬意歸滿位。以真如性為迷悟依。迷故生死。悟故涅槃。有舍有得。真雖性凈。離雜染時假說新凈。說為轉依。雖亦得菩提。而今非所敬。第九卷說二乘滿位名解脫身。在大牟尼名法身故。今唯識性是滿分凈者。簡于因位不名法身故 又此涅槃隨其假實總有四種。唯識性者自性清凈涅槃。滿清凈者。有餘．無餘二種涅槃。要果圓時方證得故。分清凈者。即無住處涅槃。許十地位已證得故。涅槃雖四體總真如。又下論云又為開示謬執我法迷唯識者令達二空。于唯識理如實知故。此以真如迷悟依故偏敬之也。又二乘涅槃唯假擇滅。大般涅槃三事圓滿。三事有二。一體三名三事。二義三名三事。能觀

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《提心論》中說，只有恭敬佛的真實智慧和慈悲。因此，只有恭敬化身佛，而不是其他二身（法身、報身）。《寶積經》說，因為清凈修行廣大如青蓮花等，所以有通於報身和化身，而非（通於）法身。《古地持論》說，恭敬頂禮過去、未來、現在一切佛世尊，這是通於恭敬三身。《顯揚論》說，善逝（如來）、善說（佛語）、妙三身，對法論和《佛地經》最初的恭敬都相同，這是隻有同體三寶。《涅槃經》、《勝鬘經》是同體、別體都通。《對法論》等是（同體、別體都通）。沒有隻恭敬別體三寶而非同體三寶，以及只恭敬任持三寶的情況。

在歸敬福田中，又有三種解釋：一、恭敬涅槃而非菩提；二、恭敬菩提而非涅槃；三、同時恭敬涅槃和菩提。首先說恭敬涅槃而非菩提。涅槃有四種含義，其體性都是真如，並且是唯識的體性。這通於在纏（未解脫）和出纏（已解脫）兩種狀態。體性雖然清凈，但在纏時稱為因分，分是指位。現在所恭敬的是指圓滿的果位。因為真如的體性是迷和悟的所依，迷惑所以有生死，覺悟所以有涅槃，有捨棄和獲得。真如雖然體性清凈，但離開雜染時，假說為新凈，稱為轉依。雖然也能得到菩提，但現在不是所恭敬的。第九卷說二乘的圓滿果位稱為解脫身，在大牟尼（佛）處稱為法身。現在說唯識的體性是圓滿清凈的，是爲了區別于因位，因位不能稱為法身。另外，這種涅槃隨著它的假和實，總共有四種。唯識的體性是自性清凈涅槃，圓滿清凈是（指）有餘涅槃和無餘涅槃，要果位圓滿時才能證得。分清凈是指無住處涅槃，允許十地菩薩已經證得。涅槃雖然有四種，但體性總歸是真如。另外，下論說，爲了開示錯誤執著我法，迷惑于唯識的人，使他們通達二空，對於唯識的道理如實了知，這是因為真如是迷惑和覺悟的所依，所以偏重恭敬它。另外，二乘的涅槃只是假立的擇滅，大般涅槃是三事圓滿。三事有兩種：一體三名三事，二義三名三事。能觀

【English Translation】 English version: In the Tixin Lun, it says that there is only reverence for the Buddha's true wisdom and compassion. Therefore, there is only reverence for the Nirmāṇakāya (transformation body) and not the other two bodies (Dharmakāya and Sambhogakāya). The Ratnakūṭa Sūtra says that because pure practice is as vast as a blue lotus flower, there is a connection to the Sambhogakāya and Nirmāṇakāya, but not to the Dharmakāya. The Ancient Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, 'Reverently prostrate to all the Buddhas, World Honored Ones, of the past, future, and present.' This is a general reverence for the Trikāya (three bodies). The Abhidharmasamuccaya says, 'Sugata (Tathāgata), well-spoken (Buddha's words), the wonderful Trikāya.' The initial reverence in the Abhidharmakośa and the Buddhabhūmi Sūtra are the same, which is only for the Trikāya of the same essence. The Nirvana Sutra and the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra are connected to both the same essence and different essences. The Abhidharmakośa etc. are (connected to both the same essence and different essences). There is no case of only revering the different essence of the Three Jewels and not the same essence, nor is there a case of only revering the sustaining Three Jewels.

Regarding the field of merit of taking refuge and reverence, there are three explanations: 1. Reverence for Nirvana but not Bodhi; 2. Reverence for Bodhi but not Nirvana; 3. Reverence for both Nirvana and Bodhi. First, regarding reverence for Nirvana but not Bodhi. Nirvana has four meanings, and their essence is all Suchness (Tathātā), and it is the nature of Vijñaptimātratā (consciousness-only). This applies to both the entangled (unenlightened) and disentangled (enlightened) states. Although the essence is pure, it is called the causal aspect when entangled, and 'aspect' refers to the state. What is being revered now refers to the complete state. Because the nature of Suchness is the basis for delusion and enlightenment, delusion leads to birth and death, and enlightenment leads to Nirvana, with abandonment and attainment. Although Suchness is inherently pure, it is provisionally said to be newly pure when separated from defilements, and it is called transformation of the basis (āśrayaparāvṛtti). Although Bodhi can also be attained, it is not what is being revered now. The ninth chapter says that the complete state of the Two Vehicles is called the liberation body (vimuktikāya), and in the Great Sage (Buddha) it is called the Dharmakāya. Now, saying that the nature of Vijñaptimātratā is completely pure is to distinguish it from the causal state, which cannot be called the Dharmakāya. Furthermore, this Nirvana, depending on its provisional and real aspects, has a total of four types. The nature of Vijñaptimātratā is self-nature pure Nirvana (prakṛti-pariśuddha-nirvāṇa), complete purity refers to Nirvana with remainder (sopadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa) and Nirvana without remainder (nirupadhiśeṣa-nirvāṇa), which can only be attained when the fruit is perfected. Partial purity refers to Nirvana without abiding (apratiṣṭhita-nirvāṇa), which is allowed to be attained by Bodhisattvas of the Ten Bhumis. Although there are four types of Nirvana, their essence is ultimately Suchness. Furthermore, the lower treatise says, 'To reveal to those who mistakenly cling to self and dharma and are deluded about Vijñaptimātratā, so that they may understand the two emptinesses, and truly know the principle of Vijñaptimātratā.' This is because Suchness is the basis for delusion and enlightenment, so it is particularly revered. Furthermore, the Nirvana of the Two Vehicles is only a provisional cessation through discrimination (pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha), while the Mahāparinirvāṇa is complete with three aspects. There are two types of three aspects: one essence with three names is called three aspects, and two meanings with three names is called three aspects. The ability to observe

智惠．所觀法身．離諸繫縛假擇滅等。名為解脫名體三事。一真如上惠本性故名摩訶般若。出纏之位功德法本名曰法身。性離生死縛名曰解脫。一體之上義有三故名義三事隨其所應二乘唯得一解脫故。三乘同座。今歸大般涅槃名滿分凈者 次敬菩提而非涅槃者。菩提即是四智品法。二智在因得。謂妙觀．平等。二智果中得。總而言者菩提因已得。今顯所敬意取滿分。雖通二乘果位。今取大乘二障都盡名清凈者。以菩薩者意趣菩提不趣涅槃。所以斷障唯斷所知障。猶留煩惱障。涅槃通得菩提獨成。今顯所敬異於二乘。及顯得果異於二乘。故唯敬菩提不敬涅槃也 攝論頌云。煩惱伏不滅。如毒咒所害。留惑至惑盡。證佛一切智。今論所言唯識性者。此是菩提事唯識性。又即真如。顯是菩提所證體性。而意取彼能證菩提 又菩提言通因果智。因中二智分清凈者。果中二智滿清凈者。故皆歸敬 後雙敬菩提及涅槃者。唯識性是涅槃。滿．分清凈是菩提。意顯涅槃本性凈故不言滿分。其大菩提四智品法。因時已得而不圓明。今唯取果滿．分凈者。故各別也。下第九云。由數修習無分別智。斷本識中二障粗重。故能轉舍依他起上遍計所執。及能轉得依他起中圓成實性。由轉煩惱得大涅槃。轉所知障證無上覺。成立唯識意為有情證得

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 智慧所觀的法身（Dharmakāya，佛的法性之身），遠離各種束縛，如假擇滅（false cessation obtained by reasoning）等，被稱為解脫，這是從名稱、本體和作用三個方面來理解的。在真如（Tathātā，事物的真實本性）之上，智慧是其本性，因此稱為摩訶般若（Mahā-prajñā，偉大的智慧）。從煩惱纏縛中解脫出來的位置，功德之根本被稱為法身。本性遠離生死束縛，稱為解脫。因為一個本體上有三種含義，所以稱為義三事。根據情況，二乘（Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）只能獲得一種解脫，而三乘（Triyāna，三種成佛的途徑）同座。現在歸於大般涅槃（Mahāparinirvāṇa，偉大的完全寂滅），稱為滿分凈者。 接下來是尊敬菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）而不是涅槃（Nirvāṇa，寂滅）的原因。菩提就是四智品法（four wisdoms），兩種智慧在因位獲得，即妙觀察智（wonderful observing wisdom）和平等性智（wisdom of equality）。兩種智慧在果位獲得。總而言之，菩提在因位已經獲得，現在顯示尊敬菩提的意義在於取其滿分。雖然菩提也通於二乘的果位，但現在取大乘二障（two obscurations）都斷盡，稱為清凈者。因為菩薩（Bodhisattva，追求覺悟的眾生）的意趣在於菩提，而不是涅槃，所以斷除障礙只斷所知障（obscuration of knowledge），仍然保留煩惱障（obscuration of afflictions）。涅槃是共通獲得的，而菩提是獨自成就的。現在顯示尊敬菩提不同於二乘，以及所得的果位不同於二乘，所以只尊敬菩提而不尊敬涅槃。 《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）的頌文說：『煩惱被伏而未滅，如同被毒咒所害。』保留迷惑直到迷惑斷盡，證得佛的一切智（omniscience of the Buddha）。現在論中所說的唯識性（Vijñaptimātratā，唯識的性質），這是菩提的事，唯識性又即是真如，顯示這是菩提所證的體性，而意在取其能證菩提。 此外，菩提一詞通於因果之智。因中的兩種智慧是分清凈者，果中的兩種智慧是滿清凈者，所以都歸於尊敬。後面雙重尊敬菩提和涅槃，唯識性是涅槃，滿分清凈是菩提。意思是顯示涅槃的本性是清凈的，所以不說是滿分。而大菩提的四智品法，在因位時已經獲得，但不圓滿光明，現在只取果位的滿分凈者，所以各有區別。下文第九品說：『由於數數修習無分別智（non-discriminating wisdom），斷除本識（Ālayavijñāna，阿賴耶識）中二障的粗重，所以能夠轉變捨棄依他起性（dependent nature）上的遍計所執性（imagined nature），以及能夠轉變獲得依他起性中的圓成實性（perfected nature）。』由於轉變煩惱而獲得大涅槃，轉變所知障而證得無上覺（supreme enlightenment）。成立唯識的意義是爲了有情眾生證得。

【English Translation】 English version Wisdom, observing the Dharmakāya (the body of the Dharma, the nature-body of the Buddha), is free from all bondages, such as false cessation obtained by reasoning, etc., and is called liberation, which is understood from the three aspects of name, essence, and function. Above the Tathātā (suchness, the true nature of things), wisdom is its inherent nature, hence it is called Mahā-prajñā (great wisdom). The state of being liberated from the entanglements of afflictions, the root of merits, is called Dharmakāya. The nature of being free from the bondage of birth and death is called liberation. Because there are three meanings on one entity, it is called the three aspects of meaning. Depending on the situation, the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) can only obtain one liberation, while the Three Vehicles (Triyāna) share the same seat. Now returning to the Mahāparinirvāṇa (great complete extinction), it is called the one with complete purity. Next is the reason for respecting Bodhi (enlightenment) rather than Nirvāṇa (extinction). Bodhi is the four wisdoms. Two wisdoms are obtained in the causal stage, namely the wonderful observing wisdom and the wisdom of equality. Two wisdoms are obtained in the fruition stage. In summary, Bodhi has already been obtained in the causal stage, and now showing respect for Bodhi means taking its completeness. Although Bodhi is also common to the fruition stage of the Two Vehicles, now taking the Great Vehicle's two obscurations (two obscurations) to be completely eliminated is called purity. Because the intention of Bodhisattvas (beings seeking enlightenment) is in Bodhi, not in Nirvāṇa, they only cut off the obscuration of knowledge, still retaining the obscuration of afflictions. Nirvāṇa is commonly obtained, while Bodhi is uniquely achieved. Now showing that respecting Bodhi is different from the Two Vehicles, and that the fruit obtained is different from the Two Vehicles, so only Bodhi is respected and not Nirvāṇa. The verse in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha (Compendium of the Mahāyāna) says: 'Afflictions are subdued but not extinguished, like being harmed by a poisonous mantra.' Retaining delusion until delusion is exhausted, one attains the Buddha's omniscience. Now what the treatise speaks of as Vijñaptimātratā (consciousness-only nature) is the matter of Bodhi, and Vijñaptimātratā is also Tathātā, showing that this is the nature of what Bodhi realizes, and the intention is to take what can realize Bodhi. Furthermore, the term Bodhi encompasses the wisdom of cause and effect. The two wisdoms in the causal stage are partially pure, and the two wisdoms in the fruition stage are fully pure, so all are returned to respect. Later, Bodhi and Nirvāṇa are doubly respected, Vijñaptimātratā is Nirvāṇa, and complete purity is Bodhi. The meaning is to show that the nature of Nirvāṇa is pure, so it is not said to be complete. As for the four wisdoms of Great Bodhi, they have already been obtained in the causal stage, but they are not fully luminous, and now only the complete purity of the fruition stage is taken, so they are different. The ninth chapter below says: 'Because of repeatedly cultivating non-discriminating wisdom, one cuts off the coarse heaviness of the two obscurations in the Ālayavijñāna (store consciousness), so one can transform and abandon the imagined nature on the dependent nature, and can transform and obtain the perfected nature in the dependent nature.' Because of transforming afflictions, one obtains Mahāparinirvāṇa, and because of transforming the obscuration of knowledge, one attains supreme enlightenment. Establishing consciousness-only is for sentient beings to attain.

如斯二轉依果。故今歸敬。明欲釋論但敬菩提．涅槃二果不敬余也。故下序云。斷障為得二勝果故。乃至廣說。由前證故。故本論師所以作論。今既釋論敬意須同。即以所趣為所敬法。若不敬之便不趣故。雖有七解歸所敬田。然依本義唯取疏四解中人而非法本．釋二師。以唯識性第七轉聲中說所于聲也。非所依聲。以第七聲通根．境故。此為能差別。滿．分凈者為所差別。第四轉中說。以一切所敬皆以第四所為聲說。若唯識性亦所敬者應第四攝。

然依蘇漫多聲說。即是八囀也。一你利(上二字合聲)提勢(此云體聲。亦云泛說聲)二鄔波提舍(書我反)泥(此云業聲。亦云所說聲)三羯咥(都詰反)唎(上二字合聲)迦(上聲)啰(上囀舌)泥(奴皆反。此云能作具聲。亦云能說聲)四三缽啰(上二字合聲)陀你雞(居梨反。此云所為聲。亦云所與聲)五褒(補高反)波陀泥(此云所從聲)六莎弭婆(上聲)者你(平聲。此云所屬聲)七珊你陀那(長聲)啰梯(上二字合聲此云所依聲)八阿曼怛羅(上二字合聲)泥(放皆反。此云平聲)上說總八囀。此中各有一言．二言．多言之聲。合有二十四聲。又有男聲．女聲．非男非女聲。更各有二十四。合總別有九十六聲 男聲八囀者。一婆(上重聲讀之下皆準此)

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 像這樣的二轉依果（兩種轉化所依賴的果），所以現在歸敬。表明想要解釋的論著，只是敬重菩提（覺悟）和涅槃（寂滅）這兩種果，而不敬重其他的。所以下面的序文中說：『爲了斷除障礙而獲得兩種殊勝的果』，乃至廣說。由於前面的證明，所以本論師才著作此論。現在既然解釋此論，敬意必須相同，即以所趣向的為所敬重的法。如果不敬重它，便不會趣向它。雖然有七種解釋歸所敬重的田，但依據本義，只取疏四解中的人，而不是法本和釋論的兩位論師。因為在唯識性的第七轉聲中，說的是『所于』聲，而不是『所依』聲。因為第七聲通根和境。這是能差別。滿和分凈是所差別。在第四轉中說。因為一切所敬重的，都用第四『所為』聲來說。如果唯識性也是所敬重的，應該被第四轉所攝。 然而依據蘇漫多聲說，那就是八囀了。一 你利提勢（合聲，此云體聲，也叫泛說聲），二 鄔波提舍泥（此云業聲，也叫所說聲），三 羯咥唎迦啰泥（此云能作具聲，也叫能說聲），四 三缽啰陀你雞（此云所為聲，也叫所與聲），五 褒波陀泥（此云所從聲），六 莎弭婆者你（此云所屬聲），七 珊你陀那啰梯（此云所依聲），八 阿曼怛羅泥（此云平聲）。上面說總共有八囀。這其中各有一言、二言、多言之聲，合起來有二十四聲。又有男聲、女聲、非男非女聲，各自又有二十四聲，合起來總共有九十六聲。男聲八囀是：一 婆。

【English Translation】 English version: Such are the two 'transformation-dependent' fruits (two kinds of fruits that rely on transformation), therefore now we pay homage. It clarifies that the treatise to be explained only reveres the two fruits of Bodhi (enlightenment) and Nirvana (cessation), and does not revere others. Therefore, the following introduction says: 'In order to eliminate obstacles and obtain two supreme fruits,' and so on. Due to the previous proof, the author of this treatise composed it. Now that we are explaining this treatise, the reverence must be the same, that is, what is approached is the Dharma to be revered. If it is not revered, it will not be approached. Although there are seven explanations for returning to the field of reverence, according to the original meaning, only the person in the four explanations of the commentary is taken, not the two teachers of the Dharma text and the commentary. Because in the seventh case-ending of the nature of consciousness-only, it is said to be the 'locative' case, not the 'instrumental' case. Because the seventh case includes both the root and the object. This is the distinguishing characteristic. 'Full' and 'partially pure' are the distinguished characteristics. It is said in the fourth case. Because everything that is revered is expressed by the fourth 'dative' case. If the nature of consciousness-only is also revered, it should be included in the fourth case. However, according to the 'Sumanta' case-endings, there are eight cases. First, 'Nirti-disha' (combined sound, meaning 'substantive case', also called 'generic case'), second, 'Upa-disha-ni' (meaning 'accusative case', also called 'objective case'), third, 'Katri-karani' (meaning 'instrumental case', also called 'agentive case'), fourth, 'Sampradanaya' (meaning 'dative case', also called 'benefactive case'), fifth, 'Apada-ni' (meaning 'ablative case'), sixth, 'Svami-bhajani' (meaning 'genitive case'), seventh, 'Sandhi-dharati' (meaning 'locative case'), eighth, 'Amantrani' (meaning 'vocative case'). The above describes a total of eight cases. Among them, there are one-word, two-word, and multi-word sounds, totaling twenty-four sounds. There are also masculine, feminine, and neuter sounds, each with twenty-four sounds, totaling ninety-six sounds. The eight masculine cases are: first, 'Bha'.

婆那。二婆婆那擔。三婆婆多。四婆婆羝。五婆婆多褒。六婆婆那多阿。七婆婆底(都耳反)八于初囀上加醯字則是 女聲八囀者。一婆婆那帝(底音讀之)。二婆婆那底摩。三婆婆那底夜(上二字合聲羊鵝反)。四婆婆那帶。五婆婆那底夜(二字合)褒。六婆婆那底夜(二字合)阿。七婆婆那底夜(二字合)摩。八于初囀上加醯字即是 非男非女聲八囀者。一婆婆多。二婆婆䫂。第三囀下稍近男聲。既無別字所以不出。腳註上字等者依四聲呼之。注返者以翻字法讀之。注二合者兩字連聲讀之。注輕重者隨輕重聲讀之。其間亦有全聲半聲。恐煩不迷。但是婆字皆上聲讀之。然瑜伽第二卷。七囀聲亦名七例句。依一男聲中唯詮一丈夫之七囀故。除第八呼。前是男聲中總目一切。故此不同。彼論亦名七言論句。一補盧沙(夾夫體)二補盧衫。三補盧崽拏。四補盧沙耶。五補盧沙䫂。六補盧殺婆。七補盧鎩。第八迦呼聲云醯補盧沙。若云迷履底是別女聲體。若云納蓬(去聲呼之)索迦是別非男非女聲體。然有別目但唯七囀。第八乃是泛爾呼聲。更無別詮。

唯識性言。既境第七。略有二解。一依三性。二依二諦。依三性者。唯識第九云。謂唯識性略有二種。一虛妄。謂計所執。二真實。謂圓成實性 復有二種。一世俗

。謂依他起。二勝義。謂圓成實。故知三性併名唯識性。

三性有二體。一常無常門。常為圓成。唯真如是。一切有為皆依他起。二有漏無漏門。一切無漏皆圓成實。諸有漏法皆依他起。菩提．涅槃並圓成故。如論第八自有此文。

依初三性略有十重 一唯說真如為圓成名本實性。證此清凈名內證凈 二總說無漏為圓成。菩提．涅槃皆是唯識性。名菩提性．獲悟凈。菩提．菩提斷皆名菩提故 三總說有為依他。事識性．悟俗凈 四唯說有漏依他。幻識性．斷除凈 五唯說所執。妄取性．遣之凈 六圓成對依他。真俗性．斷得凈 七圓成對所執。真妄性．遣證凈 八以依他對所執心境性．遣斷凈 九以圓成對依他．所執幻實性．取捨凈 十以圓成．依他對所執。空有性．遣悟凈。但無以圓成．所執對依他為唯識性。以隔越故。又理無故 依後二諦辨唯識性者。瑜伽六十四云。世俗有四。一世間世俗。二道理世俗。三證得世俗。四勝義世俗。唯識第九云。勝義諦有四。一世間勝義。二道理勝義。三證得勝義。四勝義勝義 今者略為三類。一總別相對。二別．余相對。三總．余相對。四重二諦如章中解 第一總別相對。應為四句。一以俗總對真別有一句。過四俗之真唯有後一故。謂安立．非安立唯識性。第二以

俗別對真總有四句。勝俗之真四皆是故。一以初俗對四真。遣悟性。二以第二俗對三真。斷知性。三以第三俗對二真。解修性。四以第四俗對一真。覺證性。三以俗總對真總唯有一句。謂真俗唯識性。四以俗別對真別有四句。一一次第各各相望為四句。一心境性。二事理性。三別總性。四證旨性。初俗為境初真為心。第二俗為事。第二真為理。第三俗為別。理四諦故。第三真為總。理二空故。第四俗為詮。依空門故。第四真為旨。廢詮論故。如是相對合成十句 第二別．余相對有二類。初類有四句。謂以初俗對真如名妄如。以第二俗對名事如。以第三俗對名理如。以第四俗對名觀如 後類有十句。謂以初俗對四別真為四句。以第二俗對三別真為三句。以第三俗對二別真為二句。以第四俗對一別真為一句。如是合有十四句 第三總．余相對中有三類。第一以二俗對真有十句。以初二俗別對真中一有三句。不對初真即第二俗故。勝俗名真。彼齊等故。即以此二俗對二真有二句。亦除初真。以此二俗對三真有一句。如是合有六句。次以第二．第三俗。對真中一有二句。對真中二有一句。無對三者亦齊均故。如是合有三句。次以第三．第四俗對真唯一句。余真齊均及體劣故不可為句。第二以三俗對真有四句。謂以初三俗對真一

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 俗諦與真諦的總體關係有四句：勝義俗諦與四種真諦皆是如此。 一、以第一俗諦（初俗）對應四種真諦，是爲了遣除悟性。 二、以第二俗諦對應三種真諦，是爲了斷除知性。 三、以第三俗諦對應兩種真諦，是爲了解脫修性。 四、以第四俗諦對應第一真諦，是爲了覺悟證性。 以俗諦總體對應真諦總體，只有一句：即真俗唯識性。 以俗諦的差別對應真諦的差別，有四句： 一、依次序各自相對，形成四句：一心境性、二事理性、三別總性、四證旨性。 第一俗諦為境，第一真諦為心。 第二俗諦為事，第二真諦為理。 第三俗諦為別（區分四諦），所以說第三俗諦為別。第三真諦為總（總括二空），所以說第三真諦為總。 第四俗諦為詮（詮釋），因為依賴空門。第四真諦為旨（宗旨），因為廢除詮釋議論。 這樣相對合成十句。 第二種差別：其餘相對關係有兩類。 第一類有四句：以第一俗諦對應真如（Tathata）名為妄如，以第二俗諦對應名為事如，以第三俗諦對應名為理如，以第四俗諦對應名為觀如。 後一類有十句：以第一俗諦對應四種差別真諦，形成四句；以第二俗諦對應三種差別真諦，形成三句；以第三俗諦對應兩種差別真諦，形成兩句；以第四俗諦對應一種差別真諦，形成一句。這樣合起來有十四句。 第三種總體關係：其餘相對關係中有三類。 第一，以兩種俗諦對應真諦，有十句。以第一、第二俗諦分別對應真諦中的一種，有三句。因為不對第一真諦，即是第二俗諦的緣故。勝義俗諦名為真諦，因為它們齊等。 即以此兩種俗諦對應兩種真諦，有兩句，也除去第一真諦。以此兩種俗諦對應三種真諦，有一句。這樣合起來有六句。 其次，以第二、第三俗諦，對應真諦中的一種，有兩句；對應真諦中的兩種，有一句。沒有對應三種的，也因為齊等均一的緣故。這樣合起來有三句。 其次，以第三、第四俗諦對應真諦，只有一句。其餘真諦齊等均一，並且本體低劣的緣故，不可以作為一句。 第二，以三種俗諦對應真諦，有四句。即以第一、第二、第三俗諦對應第一真諦。

【English Translation】 English version There are four statements regarding the relationship between conventional truth and ultimate truth: The supreme conventional truth and the four ultimate truths are all like this.

1. Using the first conventional truth (initial conventional truth) to correspond to the four ultimate truths is to dispel the nature of enlightenment.
2. Using the second conventional truth to correspond to the three ultimate truths is to sever the nature of knowledge.
3. Using the third conventional truth to correspond to the two ultimate truths is to liberate the nature of practice.
4. Using the fourth conventional truth to correspond to the first ultimate truth is to awaken the nature of realization. Using the totality of conventional truths to correspond to the totality of ultimate truths, there is only one statement: namely, the nature of 'consciousness-only' (Vijnaptimatrata) of conventional and ultimate truths. Using the distinctions of conventional truths to correspond to the distinctions of ultimate truths, there are four statements:
5. Each corresponding to each other in sequence, forming four statements: one, the nature of mind and object; two, the nature of phenomena and principle; three, the nature of distinction and totality; four, the nature of the purpose of realization. The first conventional truth is the object, and the first ultimate truth is the mind. The second conventional truth is the phenomena, and the second ultimate truth is the principle. The third conventional truth is the distinction (distinguishing the Four Noble Truths (Aryasatya)), therefore it is said that the third conventional truth is the distinction. The third ultimate truth is the totality (encompassing the two emptinesses (Sunyata)), therefore it is said that the third ultimate truth is the totality. The fourth conventional truth is the explanation (exegesis), because it relies on the gate of emptiness. The fourth ultimate truth is the purpose (essence), because it abandons explanatory arguments. Thus, these are relatively combined to form ten statements. The second distinction: The remaining relative relationships are of two types. The first type has four statements: Using the first conventional truth to correspond to 'Tathata' (真如) is called false suchness; using the second conventional truth to correspond to the name of phenomenal suchness; using the third conventional truth to correspond to the name of principle suchness; using the fourth conventional truth to correspond to the name of contemplation suchness. The latter type has ten statements: Using the first conventional truth to correspond to the four distinct ultimate truths forms four statements; using the second conventional truth to correspond to the three distinct ultimate truths forms three statements; using the third conventional truth to correspond to the two distinct ultimate truths forms two statements; using the fourth conventional truth to correspond to one distinct ultimate truth forms one statement. Thus, combined, there are fourteen statements. The third type of totality relationship: Among the remaining relative relationships, there are three types. First, using two conventional truths to correspond to ultimate truths, there are ten statements. Using the first and second conventional truths to separately correspond to one of the ultimate truths, there are three statements. Because it does not correspond to the first ultimate truth, which is the second conventional truth. The supreme conventional truth is called ultimate truth, because they are equal. That is, using these two conventional truths to correspond to two ultimate truths, there are two statements, also excluding the first ultimate truth. Using these two conventional truths to correspond to three ultimate truths, there is one statement. Thus, combined, there are six statements. Next, using the second and third conventional truths to correspond to one of the ultimate truths, there are two statements; corresponding to two of the ultimate truths, there is one statement. There is no correspondence to three, also because they are equally uniform. Thus, combined, there are three statements. Next, using the third and fourth conventional truths to correspond to ultimate truths, there is only one statement. The remaining ultimate truths are equally uniform, and because the essence is inferior, it cannot be used as a statement. Second, using three conventional truths to correspond to ultimate truths, there are four statements. That is, using the first, second, and third conventional truths to correspond to the first ultimate truth.

有二句。對真二。有一句。除初俗故。以後三俗對真亦唯一句。第三以四俗對真有一句。不對前三真故。如是合有十五句。各有別名恐繁且止。智者思之。如是二諦合有三十九句唯識性。並三性中合有四十九句。無有以俗對真中間隔越為句。亦無以真對俗齊均及劣法為句。便非勝義故。若體空者遣之凈。有漏者斷之凈。無漏者獲悟凈。隨應具知。

此等唯識皆能差別。為所歸之境差別于漏分二凈。若所歸敬為唯識性。唯取三性中初本實性。及第二菩提性。非取一切。余非可敬故。

頌下兩句造論意中。略有五句。一但為法而不為人。欲令法義當廣流等。雖論說言利樂有情。有情利樂令法不滅。以下句釋上句也。如說有情依教修行。三寶種性不斷絕故。由此律云。今演毗尼法。令正法久住。不說利生 二但為有情不為正法。菩薩修行本以利生。雖釋彼說意為利樂諸有情。故顯上句釋下也。顯揚論云。顯揚聖教慈悲故。文約義周而易曉 三雙為法．及利有情。第三．四句如次配之。故佛地論云爲法久住濟群生 四所為無住涅槃。釋說大智。利樂大悲。二種熏修速疾證得無住涅槃。生死．涅槃二俱不住。故對法雲。由悟契經及解釋。爰發正勤乃參綜。此意為得無住涅槃。亦可說言。雙非人．法故。

五者

【現代漢語翻譯】 有兩句是關於兩種真理（二諦）的。有一句是關於去除最初的世俗（初俗）的緣故。之後的三種世俗（後三俗）與真理相對，也只有一句。第三種情況是用四種世俗與真理相對，有一句，因為不針對前面的三種真理。像這樣總共有十五句。每句都有不同的名稱，恐怕過於繁瑣，就此停止。智者可以思考這些。像這樣，兩種真理合起來有三十九句唯識性，加上三種自性（三性），合起來有四十九句。沒有用世俗來對應真理，中間有間隔的情況，也沒有用真理來對應世俗，達到齊平或低劣的法的情況，因為這樣就不是勝義諦了。如果本體是空性的，就去除它使之清凈；如果有煩惱的，就斷除它使之清凈；如果是無煩惱的，就獲得覺悟使之清凈。根據情況應該全面瞭解。 這些唯識都能進行區分。作為所歸依的境界，區分有煩惱的部分和清凈的部分。如果所歸依敬重的是唯識性，就只取三種自性中最初的本實性（真如自性），以及第二種菩提自性，不取一切，因為其餘的不是值得敬重的。 下面的兩句頌文是關於造論的意圖，大致有五句。一是隻爲了法而不爲了人，想要讓法義能夠廣泛流傳等等。雖然論中說利益安樂有情，有情的利益安樂能使法不滅。用下面的句子解釋上面的句子。如說有情依靠教法修行，三寶的種性就不會斷絕。因此律中說，現在演說毗尼法，使正法長久住世，不說利益眾生。二是隻爲了有情而不爲了正法。菩薩修行本來就是爲了利益眾生。雖然解釋他們所說的是爲了利益安樂諸有情，所以顯示上面的句子解釋下面的句子。顯揚論中說，顯揚聖教是因為慈悲的緣故，文字簡略而意義周全且容易理解。三是同時爲了法和利益有情。第三、四句依次對應。所以佛地論中說，爲了法長久住世而救濟眾生。四是爲了無住涅槃。解釋說大智、利益安樂大悲，兩種熏習修持迅速證得無住涅槃。生死和涅槃都不執著。所以對法論中說，由於領悟契經以及解釋，於是發起精進，才能夠參透綜合。這個意思是為獲得無住涅槃。也可以說，同時不是爲了人和法。 五是...

【English Translation】 There are two sentences about the two truths (twofold truth). There is one sentence about removing the initial mundane (first mundane) cause. The subsequent three mundane (later three mundane) in contrast to the truth, there is also only one sentence. The third case is using the four mundane in contrast to the truth, there is one sentence, because it does not target the preceding three truths. Like this, there are a total of fifteen sentences. Each sentence has a different name, fearing it would be too cumbersome, it stops here. The wise can contemplate these. Like this, the two truths combined have thirty-nine sentences of 'Consciousness-only' nature, plus the three natures (three natures), combined there are forty-nine sentences. There is no case of using the mundane to correspond to the truth, with an interval in between, nor is there a case of using the truth to correspond to the mundane, reaching equality or inferior dharma, because that would not be the ultimate truth (paramārtha-satya). If the substance is emptiness, then remove it to purify it; if there are afflictions, then cut them off to purify it; if there are no afflictions, then attain enlightenment to purify it. According to the situation, it should be fully understood. These 'Consciousness-only' are all able to differentiate. As the realm to which one returns, differentiate the afflicted part and the pure part. If what is returned to and revered is the 'Consciousness-only' nature, then only take the initial essential nature (tathatā-svabhāva) among the three natures, and the second Bodhi nature, not taking everything, because the rest are not worthy of reverence. The following two verses are about the intention of writing the treatise, roughly there are five sentences. First, it is only for the sake of the Dharma and not for the sake of people, wanting the meaning of the Dharma to be widely spread, etc. Although the treatise says to benefit and bring happiness to sentient beings, the benefit and happiness of sentient beings can prevent the Dharma from perishing. Use the following sentence to explain the above sentence. As it is said that sentient beings rely on the teachings to practice, the lineage of the Three Jewels will not be cut off. Therefore, the Vinaya says, now expound the Vinaya Dharma, so that the Proper Dharma may abide long, not speaking of benefiting beings. Second, it is only for the sake of sentient beings and not for the sake of the Proper Dharma. The Bodhisattva's practice is originally for the benefit of sentient beings. Although explaining what they say is to benefit and bring happiness to all sentient beings, therefore it shows that the above sentence explains the following sentence. The Śūnyatā-sūtra says, to promote the holy teachings is because of compassion, the words are concise and the meaning is comprehensive and easy to understand. Third, it is simultaneously for the Dharma and to benefit sentient beings. The third and fourth sentences correspond in order. Therefore, the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra says, for the Dharma to abide long and to save sentient beings. Fourth, it is for non-abiding Nirvana. Explaining great wisdom, benefiting and bringing happiness to great compassion, the two kinds of cultivation and practice quickly attain non-abiding Nirvana. Neither birth and death nor Nirvana are clung to. Therefore, the Abhidharma says, due to understanding the sutras and explanations, then generating diligence, one is able to comprehend and synthesize. This meaning is to obtain non-abiding Nirvana. It can also be said that it is simultaneously not for people and the Dharma. Fifth is...

自利．利他令法久住三義故造論。釋說令法久住。利樂益於他。此二既施即為自利。故攝論云。為利自他法久住故。我略釋攝大乘。故為五意而造論也 瑜伽釋云。今說此論所為云何。謂有二緣故說此論。一為正法久住世故。二為利樂諸有情故 復有二緣。一教已沒令重開故。未隱沒者倍興盛故。二諸有情有性修善得自乘果故。無性修善得人天果故。此上二釋隨其次第配頌下二句 復有二緣一于說空不了義經。如言計著憎有教者舍無見故。二于說有不了義經。如言計著憎空教者舍有見故。此釋但為利益有情除二見故。或能學．所學分人．法故。隨二句釋 復有二緣。一為菩薩種性唯依大乘教。遍於諸乘文義行果生巧便智。斷障修善證佛菩提窮未來際常二利故。二為余乘種性及無性者。亦依大教各于自乘文義行果生巧便智。斷伏障修自善。出離三界超惡趣故。此唯識教亦得說為趣一切乘。被空．有故。皆可配二句。並有人．法故 復有二緣。一為外道．小乘愚癡猶豫者生信解故。二為于經意心迷誹毀者生信心故。此但為有情。亦可逆次第配 復有二緣。一為樂略勤修行者。採集眾經廣要法義略分別故。二為樂廣勤說法者。於一一法開示無邊差別義故。二義並通法之與人 復有二緣。一顯實相立正論故。二除妄執破邪論故

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 造論有三種意義：自利、利他、令正法久住。解釋說，使正法長久住世，利益安樂他人，這二者施行即是自利。所以《攝大乘論》說：『爲了利益自己和他人，使正法長久住世，我略微解釋《攝大乘論》。』因此，造論有五種意義。 《瑜伽師地論》解釋說：『現在說這部論的目的是什麼？』因為有兩個原因說這部論：一是為使正法長久住世；二是為利益安樂一切有情眾生。 又有兩個原因：一是已隱沒的教法使其重新開啟，未隱沒的教法使其更加興盛。二是諸有情眾生，有佛性者修習善法，得到自身乘的果報；沒有佛性者修習善法，得到人天果報。以上兩種解釋，可以按照順序對應頌文的後兩句。 又有兩個原因：一是對宣說空性的不了義經典，如執著言語而憎恨有教者，捨棄無見。二是對宣說有性的不了義經典，如執著言語而憎恨空教者，捨棄有見。這種解釋只是爲了利益有情眾生，去除兩種偏見。或者可以按照能學者和所學者，人與法的不同來區分，對應兩句解釋。 又有兩個原因：一是為菩薩種性者，僅僅依靠大乘教法，普遍地對諸乘的文義行果生起巧妙方便的智慧，斷除障礙，修習善法，證得佛菩提，窮盡未來際常行二利。二是為其餘乘種性者以及沒有佛性者，也依靠大乘教法，各自對自身乘的文義行果生起巧妙方便的智慧，斷除和降伏障礙，修習自身善法，出離三界，超越惡趣。這種唯識教法也可以說是通向一切乘，被空有二宗所接受。都可以對應兩句，並且包含人與法。 又有兩個原因：一是為使外道和小乘的愚癡猶豫者生起信心和理解。二是為使對經義心生迷惑誹謗者生起信心。這只是爲了有情眾生，也可以逆序對應。 又有兩個原因：一是為使喜歡簡略勤奮修行者，採集眾多經典中廣博重要的法義，進行簡略分別。二是為使喜歡廣博勤奮說法者，對每一個法開示無邊差別的意義。這兩種意義都貫通法與人。 又有兩個原因：一是顯明實相，樹立正確的理論。二是去除虛妄執著，破斥邪惡的理論。

【English Translation】 English version: The treatise is created for three reasons: self-benefit, benefiting others, and ensuring the Dharma (Law) abides long. The explanation is that enabling the Dharma to abide long benefits and brings happiness to others; performing these two is self-beneficial. Therefore, the Saṃgraha (Compendium of Mahāyāna) says: 'For the sake of benefiting oneself and others, and for the Dharma to abide long, I briefly explain the Saṃgraha.' Thus, there are five reasons for creating the treatise. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) explains: 'Now, what is the purpose of explaining this treatise?' It is because of two reasons that this treatise is explained: first, to ensure the Dharma abides long in the world; second, to benefit and bring happiness to all sentient beings. There are also two reasons: first, to re-open the teachings that have already disappeared, and to make the teachings that have not yet disappeared even more prosperous. Second, for sentient beings, those with Buddha-nature who cultivate good deeds attain the fruit of their own vehicle; those without Buddha-nature who cultivate good deeds attain the fruits of humans and gods. The above two explanations can be matched to the latter two lines of the verse in order. There are also two reasons: first, regarding the sūtras (discourses) that speak of emptiness (śūnyatā) with unclear meaning, such as those who cling to words and hate the teachings of existence (bhava), abandoning the view of non-existence (abhava). Second, regarding the sūtras that speak of existence with unclear meaning, such as those who cling to words and hate the teachings of emptiness, abandoning the view of existence. This explanation is only for the benefit of sentient beings, to remove two extreme views. Or it can be distinguished according to those who can learn and those who are to be taught, people and Dharma, corresponding to the two lines of explanation. There are also two reasons: first, for those with Bodhisattva-nature, relying solely on the Mahāyāna (Great Vehicle) teachings, universally generating skillful and expedient wisdom regarding the meaning, practice, and results of all vehicles, cutting off obstacles, cultivating good deeds, attaining Buddhahood (Buddha-bodhi), and constantly performing the two benefits (self and others) throughout the endless future. Second, for those with other vehicle natures and those without Buddha-nature, also relying on the Mahāyāna teachings, each generating skillful and expedient wisdom regarding the meaning, practice, and results of their own vehicle, cutting off and subduing obstacles, cultivating their own good deeds, escaping the three realms, and transcending the evil destinies. This Consciousness-only (Vijñānavāda) teaching can also be said to lead to all vehicles, being accepted by both the emptiness and existence schools. Both can correspond to the two lines, and include both people and Dharma. There are also two reasons: first, to generate faith and understanding in those who are foolish and hesitant among the non-Buddhists and followers of the Hinayana (Small Vehicle). Second, to generate faith in those who are confused and slander the meaning of the sūtras. This is only for sentient beings, and can also be matched in reverse order. There are also two reasons: first, for those who enjoy brief and diligent practice, collecting the vast and important Dharma meanings from numerous sūtras and briefly distinguishing them. Second, for those who enjoy extensive and diligent teaching, revealing the boundless and differentiated meanings of each and every Dharma. These two meanings both connect Dharma and people. There are also two reasons: first, to reveal the true nature and establish correct theories. Second, to remove false attachments and refute evil theories.

。此但為法。亦可通為人。即能學故 復有二緣一顯遍計所執情有理無。依他．圓成理有情無。令舍增益．損減執故。二顯世間．道理．證得．勝義法門差別。令修二諦無倒解故。此但為法 復有二緣。一為開隨轉．真實理門令知二藏．三藏不相違故。二為開因緣．唯識．無相．真如理門令修觀行有差別故 復有二緣。一為示現境界差別令知諸法自性．相狀．位差別故。二為示現修行差別令知三乘方便．根本．果差別故。此中但為法而非人。亦可通人。即能學故 說總頌曰。法情．開．有空。性通．及內外。略．顯等．三四。二四．境行果。

六十二種有情 頌曰。

五．四．三．三．四 三．二．及三．七 十九．四．四．一 故有情名諸

五趣為五。四姓為四。男．女．非男非女為三。劣．中．妙為三。在家．出家．苦行．非苦行為四。律儀．不律儀．非律儀非不律儀為三。離欲．未離欲為二。邪性定．正性定．不定聚定為三。出家五眾．近事男．近事女為七。習斷者．習誦者．凈施人．宿長．中年．小年．軌範師．親教師．共住近住弟子．賓客．營僧事者．貪利養恭敬者．厭舍者．多聞者．大福智者．法隨法行者．持經者．持律者．持論者為十九。異生．見諦．有學．無學為四。聲聞．

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這僅僅是爲了法（Dharma），也可以通用於人，因為人能夠學習。又有兩種因緣：一是顯示遍計所執（Parikalpita-lakshana）的情有理無，依他起（Paratantra-lakshana）、圓成實（Parinishpanna-lakshana）的理有情無，爲了使人捨棄增益和損減的執著。二是顯示世間、道理、證得、勝義法門的差別，爲了使人修習二諦（Satya-dvaya）時有無倒的理解。這僅僅是爲了法。又有兩種因緣：一是爲了開啟隨轉、真實的理門，使人知道二藏（聲聞藏、菩薩藏）、三藏（經藏、律藏、論藏）不相違背。二是爲了開啟因緣、唯識（Vijñānavāda）、無相（Animitta）、真如（Tathata）的理門，使人修習觀行時有差別。又有兩種因緣：一是為示現境界差別，使人知道諸法的自性、相狀、位的差別。二是為示現修行差別，使人知道三乘（Śrāvakayāna，Pratyekabuddhayāna，Bodhisattvayāna）的方便、根本、果的差別。此中但為法而非人，也可以通人，因為人能夠學習。總頌說：法情、開、有空，性通及內外，略顯等，三四，二四，境行果。

六十二種有情，頌說： 五、四、三、三、四，三、二、及三、七，十九、四、四、一，故有情名諸。

五趣為五（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、人、天）。四姓為四（婆羅門、剎帝利、吠舍、首陀羅）。男、女、非男非女為三。劣、中、妙為三。在家、出家、苦行、非苦行為四。律儀、不律儀、非律儀非不律儀為三。離欲、未離欲為二。邪性定、正性定、不定聚定為三。出家五眾（比丘、比丘尼、沙彌、沙彌尼、式叉摩那）、近事男、近事女為七。習斷者、習誦者、凈施人、宿長、中年、小年、軌範師、親教師、共住近住弟子、賓客、營僧事者、貪利養恭敬者、厭舍者、多聞者、大福智者、法隨法行者、持經者、持律者、持論者為十九。異生、見諦、有學、無學為四。聲聞（Śrāvaka）

【English Translation】 English version: This is solely for the Dharma, but it can also apply to people, because they are capable of learning. Furthermore, there are two reasons: first, to reveal that the conceptualized nature (Parikalpita-lakshana) has emotion but no reason, while the dependent nature (Paratantra-lakshana) and the perfected nature (Parinishpanna-lakshana) have reason but no emotion, in order to make people abandon the attachments of addition and subtraction. Second, to reveal the differences between worldly matters, reasoning, attainment, and the ultimate Dharma, in order to enable people to cultivate the two truths (Satya-dvaya) with correct understanding. This is solely for the Dharma. Furthermore, there are two reasons: first, to open the gates of conforming and true reasoning, so that people know that the two collections (Śrāvakayāna and Bodhisattvayāna Pitakas) and the three collections (Sūtra Pitaka, Vinaya Pitaka, Abhidhamma Pitaka) are not contradictory. Second, to open the gates of reasoning on causality, Consciousness-only (Vijñānavāda), signlessness (Animitta), and Suchness (Tathata), so that people have distinctions in their cultivation of contemplation. Furthermore, there are two reasons: first, to show the differences in realms, so that people know the differences in the self-nature, characteristics, and positions of all dharmas. Second, to show the differences in cultivation, so that people know the differences in the expedient means, fundamental principles, and fruits of the three vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). Here, it is solely for the Dharma and not for people, but it can also apply to people, because they are capable of learning. The summary verse says: Dharma and emotion, opening, existence and emptiness, nature connecting both internally and externally, brief explanation, etc., three fours, two fours, realm, practice, and fruit.

Sixty-two kinds of sentient beings, the verse says: Five, four, three, three, four, three, two, and three, seven, nineteen, four, four, one, hence the name of sentient beings.

The five destinies are five (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, gods). The four castes are four (Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra). Male, female, and neither male nor female are three. Inferior, middling, and excellent are three. Householder, renunciant, ascetic practice, and non-ascetic practice are four. Disciplined, undisciplined, neither disciplined nor undisciplined are three. Detached from desire and not detached from desire are two. Those fixed in wrong views, those fixed in right views, and those whose destiny is undetermined are three. The five groups of renunciants (bhikshu, bhikshuni, śrāmaṇera, śrāmaṇerī, śikṣamāṇā), laymen, and laywomen are seven. Those who practice cessation, those who practice recitation, those who give purely, the elders, the middle-aged, the young, the preceptors, the teachers, the disciples who live together and nearby, the guests, those who manage the affairs of the Sangha, those who are greedy for gain and respect, those who are disgusted and renounce, those who are learned, those with great merit and wisdom, those who practice the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma, those who uphold the sutras, those who uphold the vinaya, those who uphold the shastras are nineteen. Ordinary beings, those who have seen the truth, those who are still learning, and those who have completed their learning are four. Śrāvaka

獨覺．菩薩．如來為四。輪王為一。合名六十二種有情。

論。今造此論等者。疏中二解。一依人。二依法。俱依能迷。若第二解依所迷釋。生．法我無執有名謬。不悟無我名為迷者。

為除情執令生正解。正除其謬。解斷其迷。執情斷故。所執便遣生正解。言遣所執也 生解為斷二重障等。明斷依他。清凈依他圓成攝故 斷障為得二勝果等。證圓成實也 大菩提．真解脫。凡夫．二乘．菩薩。各各自為大非菩提等句。復以凡夫對二乘對菩薩。以二乘對菩薩為句皆得。如是合有六對。自對為三。相望為三。菩提其例解脫。合為十二句 若悟．斷．得果解二重障。障唯二執。以根本故。即沉下義是重義。若遣所執。斷依他。證圓成。即四義解重。毀責名也 若約五位四段科。即分別猛利名之為重。以粗猛故。唯見道斷。此義可然 若言根本名為重者。安惠本義有漏心中皆有法執。何等名重。何者名輕。若六．七識中煩惱障名之為重。分別廣故。計執深故。五識之中煩惱名輕。由他別故。無眾生執故。若第六識中所知障名重。計深解廣。由與惠俱引生五故。為引業因生第八故。行相猛故。五．八識障名之為輕。執淺解略。由他引生。行相不猛。非必惠俱故。第七識中都無法執。由此重．輕二種別故。論遂說言

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 獨覺（Pratyekabuddha，獨自覺悟者）、菩薩（Bodhisattva，追求覺悟的修行者）、如來（Tathagata，佛的稱號）為四種。輪王（Cakravartin，統治世界的理想君主）為一種。合起來稱為六十二種有情（sentient beings，有感覺和意識的生命）。

論：現在造這部論等。疏中有兩種解釋。一是依據人，二是依據法。都依據能迷惑的方面。如果第二種解釋依據所迷惑的方面來解釋，認為生、法我（self of phenomena，構成存在的元素）沒有執著是錯誤的。不領悟無我是迷惑。

爲了去除情感上的執著，使產生正確的理解。正確地去除那些謬誤。理解斷除那些迷惑。執著的情感斷除了，所執著的東西也就被遣除了，產生正確的理解。說遣除所執著的東西。

產生理解是爲了斷除二重障礙等。說明斷除依賴他起性（dependent nature，事物相互依存的性質）。清凈是由於圓成實性（perfected nature，事物真實的性質）所攝持。斷除障礙是爲了獲得二種殊勝的果報等。證明圓成實性。

大菩提（Mahabodhi，偉大的覺悟）、真解脫（true liberation，真正的解脫）。凡夫（ordinary people，普通人）、二乘（two vehicles，聲聞和緣覺）、菩薩。各自認為自己是大而非菩提等語句。再以凡夫對二乘，對菩薩。以二乘對菩薩為語句都可以成立。這樣合起來有六對。自對為三，相望為三。菩提是這樣，解脫也是這樣。合起來為十二句。如果領悟、斷除、獲得果報，理解二重障礙。障礙只有兩種執著，因為是根本的。就是沉淪下義是重義。如果遣除所執著的東西，斷除依他起性，證明圓成實性。就是四義解釋重，是毀責的意思。

如果按照五位四段來分科，就是分別猛利稱為重。因為粗猛的緣故。只有見道才能斷除。這個意義是可以成立的。如果說根本稱為重，安惠的本義是有漏心中都有法執。什麼叫做重？什麼叫做輕？如果六、七識中的煩惱障稱為重。因為分別廣，計執深。五識之中的煩惱稱為輕。由於其他的原因，沒有眾生執。如果第六識中的所知障稱為重。計度深，理解廣。由於與智慧一起引生五種原因。爲了引業因生第八識的緣故。行相猛利。五、八識的障礙稱為輕。執著淺，理解略。由於其他原因引生。行相不猛利。不一定與智慧一起。第七識中都沒有法執。由於這種重、輕兩種區別，所以論中說。

【English Translation】 English version: Pratyekabuddhas (Solitary Buddhas, those who attain enlightenment on their own), Bodhisattvas (beings who seek enlightenment), and Tathagatas (Buddhas, 'Thus-gone Ones') are four types. Cakravartins (Wheel-turning Kings, ideal rulers of the world) are one type. Together, these are called sixty-two kinds of sentient beings (beings with consciousness).

Treatise: Now, composing this treatise, etc. There are two explanations in the commentary. One is based on persons, and the other is based on phenomena. Both rely on what can delude. If the second explanation interprets based on what is deluded, then it is a mistake to think that there is no attachment to origination and the self of phenomena (dharma-atma, the self of elements). Not realizing no-self is delusion.

In order to remove emotional attachments and generate correct understanding, to correctly remove those errors, and understanding cuts off those delusions. When emotional attachments are cut off, what is clung to is also eliminated, generating correct understanding. It is said to eliminate what is clung to.

Generating understanding is to cut off the two-fold obstacles, etc. It explains cutting off the dependent nature (paratantra-svabhava, the nature of dependence). Purity is because it is encompassed by the perfected nature (parinispanna-svabhava, the nature of perfection). Cutting off obstacles is to obtain the two kinds of excellent results, etc. It proves the perfected nature.

Mahabodhi (Great Enlightenment), true liberation. Ordinary people, the Two Vehicles (Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas), Bodhisattvas. Each considers themselves to be great and not Bodhi, etc. Furthermore, ordinary people are contrasted with the Two Vehicles and with Bodhisattvas. The Two Vehicles are contrasted with Bodhisattvas as statements that can all be established. Thus, there are six pairs in total. Self-contrast is three, mutual contrast is three. Bodhi is like this, and so is liberation. Together, there are twelve statements. If one realizes, cuts off, and obtains the result, understanding the two-fold obstacles. There are only two attachments as obstacles, because they are fundamental. That is, sinking downwards is the meaning of 'heavy'. If one eliminates what is clung to, cuts off the dependent nature, and proves the perfected nature, then the four meanings explain 'heavy', which is the meaning of criticism.

If classified according to the five positions and four sections, then distinguishing sharply is called 'heavy', because it is coarse and fierce. Only the path of seeing can cut it off. This meaning can be established. If it is said that the fundamental is called 'heavy', then according to Anhui's original meaning, all minds with outflows have attachment to phenomena. What is called 'heavy'? What is called 'light'? If the afflictive obscurations in the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are called 'heavy', because the distinctions are broad and the clinging is deep. The afflictions in the five consciousnesses are called 'light', because of other causes and because there is no attachment to beings. If the cognitive obscuration in the sixth consciousness is called 'heavy', because the calculation is deep and the understanding is broad, because it arises together with wisdom and gives rise to five causes, and because it causes the karma to give rise to the eighth consciousness, and because the activity is fierce. The obstacles in the fifth and eighth consciousnesses are called 'light', because the clinging is shallow and the understanding is brief, because they are caused by other causes and the activity is not fierce, and not necessarily together with wisdom. There is no attachment to phenomena at all in the seventh consciousness. Because of this distinction between 'heavy' and 'light', the treatise says.

由我法執二障具生。不爾如何名由及具。但是法執必帶人執。非此師義。不說五．八有眾生執。不說第七有法執故 若說現行名輕種．習名重由無種．習現行俱斷。障通攝三。重唯種．習。由我法執由有種．習。二障具生。余現行等方得生起。若斷種．習現行永滅 但不可說惠體名執名重。余相應者名輕名障。不說惠數是遍行故。說第八識等無惠俱故。由此故知前說為善 又約流轉．還滅因果以解之。還滅有因果位。因位有三轉依。謂心．道．粗重。二空是心。法性心故。正解是道。斷二重障名粗重轉。對法論第八卷。說阿賴耶為粗重轉。此說二障者。佛地論說。二障．所發業所得果亦名二障。性無堪任違細輕故。有漏皆是。此通彼局。故不相違。然由二執具生二障故。迷空言執。斷兼一切。至究竟位斷兼重障。心．道滿故名得二果。若依此解。彼障隨斷前。解因位後解果位 因中分二。初解三轉依。由我法執下。釋悟空生解斷障所由 又依六轉依以釋此文。依唯識文不依攝論 生正解者。損力益能轉。在地前故 斷二重障。是通達轉。見道位故 由我法執乃至彼障隨斷。是修習轉。在十地中修道位故 斷障為得二勝果故下。是果圓滿轉。在佛位故。總形下劣名廣大轉。即此文中通攝五轉 又為五忍 生正解位是伏忍

。見道前故 斷重障位是信忍。相同世間故 二障具生下是順忍。為順出世故。第四地中斷於我執。斷具生中有近遠。五地斷害伴名近。六地斷羸劣一分名遠 斷障為得二勝果下是無生忍。斷羸劣一分及微細隨眠。當於佛地得二果故 由斷續生下是寂滅忍。由第十地斷二障。至佛地別得二果。得二果時唯取佛地。名寂滅忍非取十地。別斷二障在第十地 又有七地 有迷謬者。種性地也。未入法時有迷謬故 生正解者。勝解行地。聞．思．修位名為正解斷重障者。謂增上意樂地 由我法執下乃至彼障隨斷。是行正行地．決定地．決定行地斷障為得二勝果者。到究竟地。十地斷障。佛地得果又依佛法莫過修．斷。雜染者斷之。清凈者修之。初斷後得。如文可知。凡．聖之中皆有修．斷 生正解前。是凡夫位伏斷修行 斷重障下。是聖人真斷得。真斷得中分見．修別。修中由我法執等有三難生 一難。安惠論師煩惱障中有非執者。二乘斷修惑九品斷前八品猶未斷我見。云何已斷余障。明知余障不從我執等生 二難。安惠論師除第七識說有二取皆是所執。證二空位。若由執滅障隨斷者。一切皆執。五地云何方除害伴。應輕執隨生我執四地斷故 三若一切障皆從執生。何故六．七地等所斷之障。不名害伴名羸劣等。皆是執起故

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『見道前故，斷重障位是信忍。』意思是說，在證悟真理之前，斷除深重障礙的階段是信忍（ksanti，忍辱）。 『相同世間故，二障具生下是順忍。』意思是說，與世間凡夫相似，兩種障礙（煩惱障和所知障）同時生起的狀態是順忍。 『為順出世故。第四地中斷於我執。』爲了順應出世間的智慧，在第四地（焰慧地）斷除我執（atma-graha，對自我的執著）。 『斷具生中有近遠。五地斷害伴名近。六地斷羸劣一分名遠。』斷除與生俱來的我執有近和遠的區別。第五地（極難勝地）斷除『害伴』，稱為近；第六地（現前地）斷除『羸劣』的一部分，稱為遠。 『斷障為得二勝果下是無生忍。斷羸劣一分及微細隨眠。當於佛地得二果故。』斷除障礙是爲了獲得兩種殊勝的果報，這屬於無生忍（anutpattika-dharma-ksanti，無生法忍）。斷除『羸劣』的一部分以及微細的隨眠（anusaya，煩惱的潛在傾向），是因為在佛地（Buddha-bhumi，佛的境界）能夠獲得兩種果報。 『由斷續生下是寂滅忍。由第十地斷二障。至佛地別得二果。得二果時唯取佛地。名寂滅忍非取十地。別斷二障在第十地。』通過斷除導致輪迴的因素，這屬於寂滅忍。通過在第十地（法雲地）斷除兩種障礙，到達佛地時分別獲得兩種果報。獲得兩種果報時，只取佛地，這稱為寂滅忍，而不是取第十地。分別斷除兩種障礙是在第十地。 『又有七地，有迷謬者。種性地也。未入法時有迷謬故。』還有七地，其中『有迷謬者』指的是種性地（gotra-bhumi，種性地），因為在未進入佛法時存在迷惑和謬誤。 『生正解者。勝解行地。聞．思．修位名為正解。』『生正解者』指的是勝解行地（adhimukti-carya-bhumi，勝解行地），通過聽聞（sruta）、思考（cinta）和修行（bhavana）而產生正確的理解。 『斷重障者。謂增上意樂地。』『斷重障者』指的是增上意樂地（adhisaya-citta-bhumi，增上意樂地）。 『由我法執下乃至彼障隨斷。是行正行地．決定地．決定行地。』從我執（atma-graha，對自我的執著）和法執（dharma-graha，對法的執著）開始，直到相應的障礙被斷除，這指的是行正行地、決定地和決定行地。 『斷障為得二勝果者。到究竟地。十地斷障。佛地得果。』『斷障為得二勝果者』指的是到達究竟地（parinispanna-bhumi，圓成實性）。在十地斷除障礙，在佛地獲得果報。 『又依佛法莫過修．斷。雜染者斷之。清凈者修之。初斷後得。如文可知。凡．聖之中皆有修．斷。』而且依據佛法，沒有什麼比修行和斷除更重要的了。對於雜染的要斷除，對於清凈的要修行。先斷除後獲得，正如經文所說，凡夫和聖人都有修行和斷除。 『生正解前。是凡夫位伏斷修行。』在產生正確的理解之前，是凡夫的階段，進行伏斷和修行。 『斷重障下。是聖人真斷得。真斷得中分見．修別。修中由我法執等有三難生。』在斷除深重障礙之後，是聖人真正斷除和獲得的階段。在真正的斷除和獲得中，分為見道和修道。在修道中，由於我執和法執等，會產生三種困難。 『一難。安惠論師煩惱障中有非執者。二乘斷修惑九品斷前八品猶未斷我見。云何已斷余障。明知余障不從我執等生。』第一個困難是，安慧論師認為煩惱障中存在並非由執著產生的。二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）斷除修惑（bhavana-heya，修道所斷的煩惱）的九品，斷除了前八品，但仍然沒有斷除我見（atma-drsti，我見）。那麼，如何能說已經斷除了其他的障礙呢？這表明其他的障礙並非從我執等產生。 『二難。安惠論師除第七識說有二取皆是所執。證二空位。若由執滅障隨斷者。一切皆執。五地云何方除害伴。應輕執隨生我執四地斷故。』第二個困難是，安慧論師認為，除了第七識（末那識）之外，還有兩種『取』都是所執。在證得二空（人空和法空）的階段，如果說由於執著的滅除，障礙也隨之斷除，那麼一切都是執著。第五地如何才能斷除『害伴』呢？應該說輕微的執著也會隨之產生我執，因為第四地已經斷除了我執。 『三若一切障皆從執生。何故六．七地等所斷之障。不名害伴名羸劣等。皆是執起故。』第三個困難是，如果說一切障礙都是從執著產生的，那麼為什麼第六地（現前地）和第七地（遠行地）等所斷除的障礙，不稱為『害伴』，而稱為『羸劣』等呢？因為這些都是由執著引起的。

【English Translation】 English version 'Before the Path of Seeing, the stage of cutting off heavy obstacles is the forbearance of faith.' This means that before realizing the truth, the stage of cutting off deep obstacles is ksanti (forbearance). 'Being similar to the world, the simultaneous arising of the two obstacles is compliant forbearance.' This means that being similar to ordinary beings in the world, the state of the two obstacles (afflictive obscurations and cognitive obscurations) arising simultaneously is compliant forbearance. 'To comply with transcendence, the fourth bhumi cuts off self-grasping.' In order to comply with transcendent wisdom, the fourth bhumi (Radiant Wisdom) cuts off atma-graha (grasping at a self). 'Cutting off what is co-emergent has near and far. The fifth bhumi cutting off the 'harmful companion' is called near. The sixth bhumi cutting off a portion of the 'feeble' is called far.' Cutting off what is co-emergent has near and far distinctions. The fifth bhumi (Most Difficult to Conquer) cutting off the 'harmful companion' is called near; the sixth bhumi (Manifest Wisdom) cutting off a portion of the 'feeble' is called far. 'Cutting off obstacles to obtain two superior results is the forbearance of non-origination. Cutting off a portion of the 'feeble' and subtle latent tendencies. Because in the Buddha-bhumi two results are obtained.' Cutting off obstacles in order to obtain two superior results belongs to anutpattika-dharma-ksanti (the forbearance of the non-arising of phenomena). Cutting off a portion of the 'feeble' and subtle anusaya (latent tendencies of afflictions) is because in the Buddha-bhumi (the realm of the Buddha) two results can be obtained. 'From cutting off the continuation of rebirth is the forbearance of quiescence. From the tenth bhumi cutting off the two obstacles. Reaching the Buddha-bhumi separately obtaining two results. When obtaining two results, only the Buddha-bhumi is taken. This is called the forbearance of quiescence, not taking the tenth bhumi. Separately cutting off the two obstacles is in the tenth bhumi.' By cutting off the factors that lead to rebirth, this belongs to the forbearance of quiescence. By cutting off the two obstacles in the tenth bhumi (Cloud of Dharma), reaching the Buddha-bhumi, two results are obtained separately. When obtaining the two results, only the Buddha-bhumi is taken; this is called the forbearance of quiescence, not taking the tenth bhumi. Cutting off the two obstacles separately is in the tenth bhumi. 'There are also seven bhumis. Those who are confused refer to the gotra-bhumi. Because there is confusion before entering the Dharma.' There are also seven bhumis, among which 'those who are confused' refers to the gotra-bhumi (lineage bhumi), because there is confusion and error before entering the Dharma. 'Those who generate correct understanding refer to the adhimukti-carya-bhumi. The stages of hearing, thinking, and meditating are called correct understanding.' 'Those who generate correct understanding' refers to the adhimukti-carya-bhumi (the bhumi of conduct based on conviction), through hearing (sruta), thinking (cinta), and meditating (bhavana), correct understanding is generated. 'Those who cut off heavy obstacles refer to the adhisaya-citta-bhumi.' 'Those who cut off heavy obstacles' refers to the adhisaya-citta-bhumi (the bhumi of heightened intention). 'From grasping at self and phenomena, until those obstacles are cut off, this refers to the bhumi of practicing correctly, the bhumi of determination, and the bhumi of determined practice.' Starting from atma-graha (grasping at a self) and dharma-graha (grasping at phenomena), until the corresponding obstacles are cut off, this refers to the bhumi of practicing correctly, the bhumi of determination, and the bhumi of determined practice. 'Cutting off obstacles to obtain two superior results refers to reaching the parinispanna-bhumi. The ten bhumis cut off obstacles, the Buddha-bhumi obtains results.' 'Cutting off obstacles to obtain two superior results' refers to reaching the parinispanna-bhumi (the perfectly accomplished nature). In the ten bhumis, obstacles are cut off; in the Buddha-bhumi, results are obtained. 'Moreover, according to the Buddha's teachings, nothing is more important than practice and cutting off. What is impure should be cut off; what is pure should be practiced. First cut off, then obtain, as the text says. Both ordinary beings and sages have practice and cutting off.' Moreover, according to the Buddha's teachings, nothing is more important than practice and cutting off. What is impure should be cut off; what is pure should be practiced. First cut off, then obtain, as the text says. Both ordinary beings and sages have practice and cutting off. 'Before generating correct understanding is the stage of ordinary beings, subduing and cutting off through practice.' Before generating correct understanding is the stage of ordinary beings, subduing and cutting off through practice. 'After cutting off heavy obstacles is the stage of true cutting off and obtaining by sages. In true cutting off and obtaining, there is a distinction between seeing and practice. In practice, three difficulties arise from grasping at self and phenomena, etc.' After cutting off heavy obstacles is the stage of true cutting off and obtaining by sages. In true cutting off and obtaining, there is a distinction between the path of seeing and the path of practice. In the path of practice, three difficulties arise from grasping at self and phenomena, etc. 'The first difficulty: Anhui's commentary states that among the afflictive obscurations, there are those not arising from grasping. The two vehicles cut off the nine grades of afflictions to be abandoned through cultivation, having cut off the first eight grades, yet still not having cut off self-view. How can it be said that other obstacles have already been cut off? It is clear that other obstacles do not arise from grasping at self, etc.' The first difficulty is that Anhui's commentary states that among the afflictive obscurations, there are those not arising from grasping. The two vehicles (Sravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana) cut off the nine grades of bhavana-heya (afflictions to be abandoned through cultivation), having cut off the first eight grades, yet still not having cut off atma-drsti (self-view). How can it be said that other obstacles have already been cut off? This shows that other obstacles do not arise from grasping at self, etc. 'The second difficulty: Anhui's commentary states that apart from the seventh consciousness, there are two kinds of 'grasping' that are all objects of grasping. In the stage of realizing the two emptinesses, if it is said that due to the cessation of grasping, obstacles are also cut off, then everything is grasping. How can the fifth bhumi cut off the 'harmful companion'? It should be said that slight grasping also gives rise to self-grasping, because the fourth bhumi has already cut off self-grasping.' The second difficulty is that Anhui's commentary states that apart from the seventh consciousness (Manas), there are two kinds of 'grasping' that are all objects of grasping. In the stage of realizing the two emptinesses (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena), if it is said that due to the cessation of grasping, obstacles are also cut off, then everything is grasping. How can the fifth bhumi cut off the 'harmful companion'? It should be said that slight grasping also gives rise to self-grasping, because the fourth bhumi has already cut off self-grasping. 'The third difficulty: If all obstacles arise from grasping, then why are the obstacles cut off in the sixth and seventh bhumis, etc., not called 'harmful companion' but called 'feeble', etc.? Because these all arise from grasping.' The third difficulty is that if all obstacles arise from grasping, then why are the obstacles cut off in the sixth bhumi (Manifest Wisdom) and seventh bhumi (Far-Going), etc., not called 'harmful companion' but called 'feeble', etc.? Because these all arise from grasping.

答有三解。一云此依究竟盡處為論。不說中間 二云但言障由執生執斷障滅。不言末障滅皆隨本執斷。二乘九品其義可知 三雖有漏心皆有法執。菩薩執生有三時斷。未執隨本。第六識執有三位斷。一俱時。二鄰近引生。三勢力疏遠。俱起者四地執俱斷。鄰近引生者名害伴。疏遠勢生者名羸劣等。故障與執斷有前後 果斷得中。斷障為得二勝果者。顯因能滿果。由斷續生下。顯果滿也。故果文中文分為二 今總結類上解文者。二段科有二。一因果三轉依。二凡聖斷得 三段科有二。一悟斷得。二遣斷證 四段科有二。一勝解行等四位。二六轉依中但成四位。四位攝六故 五段科亦二。一五忍。二七地。分五故。如是合成八義科段。

又為開示謬執我法等中。為外道開為內道示。為小乘開為大乘示。為邊主開為中主示。為初根開為熟根示。此上依人。

又開唯識示我法。此上總解開示二字。下有十釋 一除邪顯正。外道邪謬執我法迷正理唯識。令達二空除邪顯正 二斷謬明真。小乘謬執我法迷於真唯識。令達二空斷謬明真 三去虛妄留真實。謬執我法不了虛妄唯識。迷唯識者不了真實唯識。令達二空去妄留真 四識世俗知勝義。謬執我法不了世俗唯識。依依他起起二執故。迷唯識者不了勝義唯識。令達二空

識俗知勝。次上二解第九卷說二重唯識。已上四解皆取真如。在大牟尼名法身故 五見境觀心。謬執我法不了境唯識。迷唯識者不了心唯識。令達二空見境觀心 六除空說有。謬執我法增益空法。迷唯識者損減有法。令達二空除空說有 七滅愚起智。謬執我法愚癡增。迷唯識者少正智。令達二空滅愚起智。留惑潤生得種智故 八舍劣得勝。謬執我法生死劣法起。迷唯識故佛位二果無。令達二空捨生死劣法得勝佛位菩提．涅槃。斷煩惱障得大涅槃。斷所知障證無上覺。成立唯識意為如斯二轉依果 九遣斷證。謬執我法有所執轉。迷唯識故不悟依他。令達二空證圓成實 十粗道心。謬執我法粗重起。迷唯識故聖道無。令達二空證真心。于唯識理如實知故。以上諸釋隨其所應如理配釋。

第三為破邪執造論之中。又解各有小乘．大乘師執。第一清辨。依世俗諦心外有境。二俱非無。第二小乘中一說部。執一切法唯有假名都無心境。外道空見亦復如是。第三小乘。執心．意．識義一文異。攝大乘說心．意．識體一者是。第四上古大乘。亦有依莊嚴論執諸心所離心無體。如下心所問答中辨。故四各通大．小二執。由此總應九句分別 第一解云。第一．第二小乘．大乘。執境執心非空非有。第三．第四大乘．小乘。執心執所

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 識俗知勝：接下來上面的二解第九卷講述二重唯識。以上四解都取真如（Tathata，事物的真實本性）。因為在大牟尼（Mahamuni，偉大的聖人，通常指佛陀）處名為法身（Dharmakaya，佛的法性之身）。 五、見境觀心：錯誤地執著於我法，不瞭解境唯識（外部世界只是意識的顯現）。迷惑于唯識的人不瞭解心唯識（一切唯心造）。使人通達二空（人空和法空），從而正確地觀察境和心。 六、除空說有：錯誤地執著於我法，增益空法。迷惑于唯識的人損減有法。使人通達二空，從而在去除空的基礎上闡述有。 七、滅愚起智：錯誤地執著於我法，愚癡增長。迷惑于唯識的人缺少真正的智慧。使人通達二空，從而滅除愚癡，生起智慧。保留惑業以滋潤生命，從而獲得種智（一切種類的智慧）。 八、舍劣得勝：錯誤地執著於我法，導致生死等低劣之法產生。因為迷惑于唯識，所以無法證得佛位和二果（斯陀含和阿那含）。使人通達二空，從而捨棄生死等低劣之法，獲得殊勝的佛位、菩提（Bodhi，覺悟）和涅槃（Nirvana，寂滅）。斷除煩惱障，證得大涅槃。斷除所知障，證得無上覺。成立唯識的意義就在於這兩種轉依果（轉變所依而獲得的果報）。 九、遣斷證：錯誤地執著於我法，導致有所執著的轉變。因為迷惑于唯識，所以不領悟依他起性（一切現象皆由因緣和合而生起）。使人通達二空，從而證得圓成實性（真如實性）。 十、粗道心：錯誤地執著於我法，導致粗重之心產生。因為迷惑于唯識，所以無法證得聖道。使人通達二空，從而證得真心。因為對唯識的道理如實了知。 以上這些解釋，根據它們各自的情況，如理如實地進行配釋。 第三，爲了破除邪執而造論。其中又各有小乘（Hinayana，小乘佛教）和大乘（Mahayana，大乘佛教）的論師執著。第一種是清辨（Bhavaviveka，中觀派論師），他認為依世俗諦（Samvriti-satya，相對真理）來說，心外有境，二者都不是空無。 第二種是小乘中的一說部，他們認為一切法都只有假名，根本沒有心和境。外道的空見也是如此。 第三種是小乘，他們認為心、意、識的意義相同，只是用詞不同。《攝大乘論》中說心、意、識的體性相同。 第四種是上古的大乘，也有人依據《莊嚴論》認為諸心所（Caitasikas，心所法）離開心就沒有自體。如下面的心所問答中辨析。所以這四種情況各自貫通大乘和小乘的兩種執著。由此總共應該有九句分別。第一解說：第一、第二種小乘、大乘，執著于境和心，認為它們非空非有。第三、第四種大乘、小乘，執著於心和心所。

【English Translation】 English version Discriminating the Mundane and Knowing the Superior: Next, the second explanation in the ninth fascicle discusses the Twofold Consciousness-Only. The above four explanations all take Thusness (Tathata, the true nature of things). Because in the Great Sage (Mahamuni, the great sage, usually referring to the Buddha) it is called Dharmakaya (the Dharma body of the Buddha). 5. Seeing the Realm and Observing the Mind: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' not understanding that the realm is only a manifestation of consciousness. Those deluded by Consciousness-Only do not understand that everything is mind-made. Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses (emptiness of self and emptiness of phenomena), thereby correctly observing the realm and the mind. 6. Eliminating Emptiness and Speaking of Existence: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' increasing the emptiness of phenomena. Those deluded by Consciousness-Only diminish the existence of phenomena. Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses, thereby expounding existence based on the elimination of emptiness. 7. Eradicating Ignorance and Arousing Wisdom: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' ignorance increases. Those deluded by Consciousness-Only lack true wisdom. Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses, thereby eradicating ignorance and arousing wisdom. Retaining karmic forces to nourish life, thereby obtaining the wisdom of all kinds (Sarvakarajnana). 8. Abandoning the Inferior and Gaining the Superior: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' leading to the arising of inferior phenomena such as birth and death. Because of delusion in Consciousness-Only, one cannot attain Buddhahood and the Two Fruits (Sakrdagamin and Anagamin). Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses, thereby abandoning inferior phenomena such as birth and death, and gaining the superior Buddhahood, Bodhi (Enlightenment), and Nirvana (Cessation). Cutting off the afflictive obscurations, attaining Great Nirvana. Cutting off the cognitive obscurations, realizing Supreme Enlightenment. The meaning of establishing Consciousness-Only lies in these two transformation-bases (transformation of the basis to obtain the result). 9. Eliminating Severance and Realizing: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' leading to the transformation of clinging. Because of delusion in Consciousness-Only, one does not understand dependent origination. Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses, thereby realizing perfect reality (Parinispanna). 10. Coarse Mind of the Path: Erroneously clinging to 'I' and 'Dharma,' leading to the arising of a coarse mind. Because of delusion in Consciousness-Only, one cannot attain the Noble Path. Enabling people to understand the Two Emptinesses, thereby realizing the true mind. Because one truly knows the principles of Consciousness-Only. The above explanations, according to their respective situations, are explained and matched reasonably and truthfully. Third, in order to refute wrong views, treatises are created. Among them, there are Hinayana (Small Vehicle) and Mahayana (Great Vehicle) masters who hold onto different views. The first is Bhavaviveka (a Madhyamaka philosopher), who believes that according to conventional truth (Samvriti-satya, relative truth), there are realms outside the mind, and neither is empty. The second is a school in Hinayana, which believes that all dharmas are only provisional names, and there is no mind or realm at all. The empty views of the heretics are also like this. The third is Hinayana, which believes that the meanings of mind, intention, and consciousness are the same, only the words are different. The Mahayanasamgraha says that the nature of mind, intention, and consciousness is the same. The fourth is ancient Mahayana, and some people also believe, according to the Ornament of the Sutras, that the mental factors (Caitasikas, mental functions) have no self-nature apart from the mind. This is analyzed in the question and answer about mental factors below. Therefore, these four situations each connect the two attachments of Mahayana and Hinayana. Therefore, there should be a total of nine sentences to distinguish. The first explanation says: The first and second Hinayana and Mahayana cling to the realm and the mind, believing that they are neither empty nor existent. The third and fourth Mahayana and Hinayana cling to the mind and mental factors.

非多非異 第二解云。第一．第二大乘．小乘。第三．第四小乘．大乘 第三解云。第一．第二大乘．小乘。第三．第四大乘．小乘 第四解云。第一．第二小乘．大乘。第三．第四小乘．大乘 第五解云。第一．第二大乘大乘。第三．第四小乘小乘 第六解云。第一．第二小乘小乘。第三．第四大乘大乘 第七解云。四俱大乘 第八解云。四俱小乘 第九解云。四中一一皆有大乘．小乘。並各如次。應云執境執心非空非有。執心執所非多非異。

科成唯識本頌文者。依瑜伽論第三十八云。謂諸菩薩求正法時當於何求。當於一切五明處求。一內明處。二因明處。三聲明處。四醫方明處。五工業明處。諸佛語言名內明處。如是乃至一切世間工巧業處名工業明處。此各幾相轉。謂內明論略二相轉。一者顯示正因果相。二顯示已作不失．未作不得相。因明論亦二相。一顯摧伏他論勝利相。二顯免脫他論勝利相。聲明論亦二相。一顯安立界．及能成立相。二顯語工勝利相。醫方明論有四種相。一顯病體。二顯病因。三顯斷已病生。四顯斷已不生。工業明論顯各別工巧業處所作成辨種種異相。菩薩既先學內明處。內明處中以正因果而為其相 故應分二。一未發趣位。二已發趣位。故三十頌。初二十五頌明未發趣位正因果相

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『非多非異』第二種解釋說：第一、第二是[大乘]（Mahayana，佛教宗派之一，強調菩薩道）和[小乘]（Hinayana，佛教宗派之一，注重個人解脫）；第三、第四是[小乘]和[大乘]。 第三種解釋說：第一、第二是[大乘]和[小乘]；第三、第四是[大乘]和[小乘]。 第四種解釋說：第一、第二是[小乘]和[大乘]；第三、第四是[小乘]和[大乘]。 第五種解釋說：第一、第二是[大乘]和[大乘]；第三、第四是[小乘]和[小乘]。 第六種解釋說：第一、第二是[小乘]和[小乘]；第三、第四是[大乘]和[大乘]。 第七種解釋說：四者皆是[大乘]。 第八種解釋說：四者皆是[小乘]。 第九種解釋說：四者之中，每一個都包含[大乘]和[小乘]，並且各自按照順序。應該說執著于境和執著於心，既非空也非有；執著於心和執著于所，既非多也非異。

爲了完成《唯識本頌》的科判，依據《瑜伽師地論》第三十八卷所說：菩薩在尋求正法時，應當在哪裡尋求？應當在一切五明處尋求：一、[內明處]（Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna，關於自身心性的學問）；二、[因明處]（Hetu-vidyā-sthāna，邏輯學）；三、[聲明處]（Śabda-vidyā-sthāna，語言學）；四、[醫方明處]（Cikitsā-vidyā-sthāna，醫學）；五、[工業明處]（Śilpakarma-vidyā-sthāna，工藝學）。諸佛的語言稱為[內明處]，乃至一切世間的工巧行業稱為[工業明處]。 這些各自有幾種相的轉變？[內明論]略有二相的轉變：一是顯示正因果相，二是顯示已作不失、未作不得相。[因明論]也有二相：一是顯示摧伏他論的勝利相，二是顯示免脫他論的勝利相。[聲明論]也有二相：一是顯示安立界及能成立相，二是顯示語工勝利相。[醫方明論]有四種相：一是顯示病體，二是顯示病因，三是顯示斷已病生，四是顯示斷已不生。[工業明論]顯示各別工巧行業處所作成辨種種異相。 菩薩既然先學習[內明處]，[內明處]中以正因果作為它的相，所以應當分為二：一、未發趣位，二、已發趣位。所以《三十頌》中，前二十五頌說明未發趣位的正因果相。

【English Translation】 English version The second explanation of 'Neither Many nor Different' says: The first and second are [Mahayana] (a school of Buddhism emphasizing the Bodhisattva path) and [Hinayana] (a school of Buddhism focusing on individual liberation); the third and fourth are [Hinayana] and [Mahayana]. The third explanation says: The first and second are [Mahayana] and [Hinayana]; the third and fourth are [Mahayana] and [Hinayana]. The fourth explanation says: The first and second are [Hinayana] and [Mahayana]; the third and fourth are [Hinayana] and [Mahayana]. The fifth explanation says: The first and second are [Mahayana] and [Mahayana]; the third and fourth are [Hinayana] and [Hinayana]. The sixth explanation says: The first and second are [Hinayana] and [Hinayana]; the third and fourth are [Mahayana] and [Mahayana]. The seventh explanation says: All four are [Mahayana]. The eighth explanation says: All four are [Hinayana]. The ninth explanation says: Among the four, each contains both [Mahayana] and [Hinayana], and each in order. It should be said that attachment to objects and attachment to mind are neither empty nor existent; attachment to mind and attachment to what is attached to are neither many nor different.

To complete the classification of the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi verses, according to the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, volume 38: When Bodhisattvas seek the correct Dharma, where should they seek it? They should seek it in all five vidyasthanas (fields of knowledge): 1. Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna (Inner Knowledge, concerning the nature of self and mind); 2. Hetu-vidyā-sthāna (Logic); 3. Śabda-vidyā-sthāna (Grammar and Linguistics); 4. Cikitsā-vidyā-sthāna (Medicine); 5. Śilpakarma-vidyā-sthāna (Crafts and Technology). The language of the Buddhas is called Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna, and even all worldly skillful industries are called Śilpakarma-vidyā-sthāna. How many aspects of transformation do these each have? The Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna has two aspects of transformation: one is to show the correct cause-and-effect aspect, and the other is to show that what has been done is not lost, and what has not been done is not obtained. The Hetu-vidyā-sthāna also has two aspects: one is to show the victorious aspect of defeating other theories, and the other is to show the victorious aspect of escaping other theories. The Śabda-vidyā-sthāna also has two aspects: one is to show the establishment of boundaries and the ability to establish, and the other is to show the victorious aspect of linguistic skill. The Cikitsā-vidyā-sthāna has four aspects: one is to show the nature of the disease, the second is to show the cause of the disease, the third is to show the arising of the disease after it has been cut off, and the fourth is to show the non-arising of the disease after it has been cut off. The Śilpakarma-vidyā-sthāna shows the various different aspects of creation and discernment in each skillful industry. Since Bodhisattvas first study Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna, and Adhyātma-vidyā-sthāna takes correct cause and effect as its aspect, it should be divided into two: one, the stage of not yet embarking, and two, the stage of already embarking. Therefore, in the Thirty Verses, the first twenty-five verses explain the correct cause-and-effect aspect of the stage of not yet embarking.

。後之五頌明已發趣位正因果相。前未發趣正因果相中。復分為二。初十七頌明正因相。由識變故諸法得生。以識為因。次之八頌明正果相。由種識故生諸分別法體之果。及異熟等分位之果。其明三性等六頌之文。因釋妨難。屬果相攝。若諸果生唯識為因。唯有識者。何故世尊說三性等。故屬於果。後之五頌已發趣位正因果中。文復分二。初之四頌顯正因相。後之一頌顯正果相。此二位中義兼具明已作不失相．未作不得相。未趣．已趣義皆具故。理準可知。有諸外道多計為常。故明因相破此常執。有小乘師及七斷論等。多計為斷故。說果相破彼斷執。今為破此明非斷．常。故十七頌明因中分三。初一頌半標識變境無實我法。十四頌半釋能變．所變體非為我法。一頌釋變義 或前二十九頌宗明正因相顯非常故。後之一頌宗明正果相顯非斷故。以佛正法因果為宗破彼常斷故。今應說總為二段。因相有二。初二十五頌宗明因體。未趣入故。次之四頌宗明因位。已發趣故。因體之中。前二十四頌明世俗因。次有一頌明勝義因。性．相亦爾 或初一頌半略明因。後二十三頌半廣明因。標釋亦爾 或分為三。謂相．性．位。前二十四頌明唯識相。次之一頌明唯識性。後之五頌明唯識位。初中有二。一標。二釋。謂初一頌半略釋難以

【現代漢語翻譯】 後面的五頌闡明了已發起趣入位的正因果相。前面未發起趣入位的正因果相中，又分為兩部分。最初的十七頌闡明正因相，由於識的變現，諸法得以產生，以識為因。接下來的八頌闡明正果相，由於種子識的緣故，產生諸分別法體的果，以及異熟等分位的果。其中闡明三性等的六頌文字，是爲了解釋妨難，屬於果相所攝。如果諸果的產生唯有識作為原因，只有識存在，那麼為什麼世尊還要說三性等呢？所以歸屬於果。後面的五頌是已發起趣入位的正因果，文中又分為兩部分。最初的四頌顯示正因相，後面的一頌顯示正果相。這兩個位次中，義理兼具說明已作不失相、未作不得相。未趣入和已趣入的含義都具備，道理可以類推得知。有些外道大多計執為常，所以闡明因相來破斥這種常執。有些小乘師以及七斷論等，大多計執為斷，所以闡說果相來破斥他們的斷執。現在爲了破斥這種斷常之見，闡明既非斷也非常。所以十七頌闡明因中分為三部分。最初的一頌半標示變現的境界沒有真實的我法。十四頌半解釋能變和所變的體性並非是我法。一頌解釋變現的意義。或者前面的二十九頌總的闡明正因相，顯示非常的道理。後面的一頌總的闡明正果相，顯示非斷的道理。以佛的正法因果作為宗旨，破斥他們的常斷之見。現在應當總的說為兩段。因相有二，最初的二十五頌總的闡明因體，因為尚未趣入的緣故。接下來的四頌總的闡明因位，因為已經發起趣入的緣故。因體之中，前面的二十四頌闡明世俗因，接下來的一頌闡明勝義因。體性和相也是這樣。或者最初的一頌半簡略的闡明因，後面的二十三頌半廣泛的闡明因。標示和解釋也是這樣。或者分為三部分，即相、性、位。前面的二十四頌闡明唯識相，接下來的一頌闡明唯識性，後面的五頌闡明唯識位。最初的部分中有兩個方面，一是標示，二是解釋，即最初的一頌半簡略的解釋難以理解之處。

【English Translation】 English version: The following five verses clarify the correct cause-and-effect aspects of the position of having already initiated progress. In the preceding cause-and-effect aspects of the position of not yet initiating progress, it is further divided into two parts. The initial seventeen verses clarify the aspect of the correct cause; because of the transformation of consciousness (vijnana), all dharmas (phenomena) arise, with consciousness as the cause. The following eight verses clarify the aspect of the correct effect; because of the seed consciousness (bija-vijnana), the effect of the substance of various discriminating dharmas, as well as the effect of the divisions such as vipaka (result of actions), arises. The six verses that clarify the three natures (trisvabhava) and so on are to explain obstacles and difficulties, and are included within the aspect of the effect. If the arising of all effects has only consciousness as the cause, and only consciousness exists, then why did the World-Honored One (Bhagavan) speak of the three natures and so on? Therefore, it belongs to the effect. The following five verses are the correct cause and effect of the position of having already initiated progress, and the text is again divided into two parts. The initial four verses reveal the aspect of the correct cause, and the last verse reveals the aspect of the correct effect. In these two positions, the meaning comprehensively explains the aspect of 'actions done are not lost' and 'actions not done are not obtained'. The meanings of 'not yet progressed' and 'already progressed' are both included, and the principle can be inferred accordingly. Some heretics mostly adhere to the view of permanence (nitya), so clarifying the aspect of the cause refutes this adherence to permanence. Some Hinayana (Small Vehicle) teachers and the 'Seven Annihilation Theories' (ucchedavada) and so on, mostly adhere to the view of annihilation (uccheda), so explaining the aspect of the effect refutes their adherence to annihilation. Now, in order to refute this view of annihilation and permanence, it is clarified that it is neither annihilation nor permanence. Therefore, the seventeen verses clarifying the cause are divided into three parts. The initial one and a half verses indicate that the transformed realm has no real self (atman) or dharma. Fourteen and a half verses explain that the nature of the transformer and the transformed are not self or dharma. One verse explains the meaning of transformation. Or, the preceding twenty-nine verses generally clarify the aspect of the correct cause, revealing the principle of non-permanence. The last verse generally clarifies the aspect of the correct effect, revealing the principle of non-annihilation. Using the correct Dharma (righteous law) cause and effect of the Buddha as the principle, it refutes their views of permanence and annihilation. Now, it should be generally stated as two sections. The aspect of the cause has two parts: the initial twenty-five verses generally clarify the substance of the cause, because it has not yet been entered into. The following four verses generally clarify the position of the cause, because progress has already been initiated. Within the substance of the cause, the preceding twenty-four verses clarify the conventional cause, and the following verse clarifies the ultimate cause. The nature and characteristics are also like this. Or, the initial one and a half verses briefly clarify the cause, and the following twenty-three and a half verses extensively clarify the cause. The indication and explanation are also like this. Or, it is divided into three parts, namely, characteristics, nature, and position. The preceding twenty-four verses clarify the characteristics of Vijnaptimatrata (Consciousness-only), the following verse clarifies the nature of Vijnaptimatrata, and the following five verses clarify the position of Vijnaptimatrata. In the initial part, there are two aspects: one is indication, and the other is explanation, that is, the initial one and a half verses briefly explain the difficult points.

標宗。後二十二頌半隨所標而廣釋。廣中有三。一廣三能變體。二廣依識所變。三廣由假說言 或總為三。謂初．中．後。初一頌半名初。次二十三頌半名中。後五頌名後。初．中．及後一切善故。廣中分三。初十四頌半廣三能變體。次一頌廣依識變。後八頌廣假說等言 又總分三。謂境．行．果。初二十五頌明唯識境。次有四頌明依境起唯識行。後一頌依行得唯識果。辨境之中明真俗諦。二十四頌明俗諦。次之一頌明真諦。明俗諦中分二。初標。後釋。如相．性．位三科中解。次上三科如疏中解 又總分三。謂略．廣．中。初一頌半名略。次二十三頌半名廣。後五頌名中。為利迷我法。利迷於識。利迷行位利此三根。或迷所執．依他．圓成如次配之。或初破有執。後二破空執。故分為三不可增減 或總分四。初一頌半總標綱要分。第二十四頌半廣陳能變分。第三有九頌結釋外難分。後之五頌依修獲益分。先未有說故總標宗。不知識性如何故次陳能變。雖成所立外問須除故結釋難。既如是已聞思何利。故次明修獲益。由此成四不增不減 或總分五。一略標宗。二陳識性。三彰變義。四釋外徴。五修成果。宗義為主故最初陳。雖有識言未知識性。故次於前隨宗陳辨。雖知其體未明變義。故次識體而說變義。雖說義門妨難

【現代漢語翻譯】 標宗（Biao Zong，確立宗旨）。後面的二十二頌半根據所確立的宗旨進行廣泛解釋。廣泛解釋中包含三個方面：一是廣泛解釋三種能變識的體性；二是廣泛解釋依識所變現的境界；三是廣泛解釋由假說而產生的言論。或者總的來說分為三個部分，即初、中、後。最初的一頌半稱為初，接下來的二十三頌半稱為中，最後的五頌稱為後。初、中、後一切都是爲了善。廣泛解釋（中）又分為三個部分：最初的十四頌半廣泛解釋三種能變識的體性；接下來的一頌廣泛解釋依識所變現的境界；最後的八頌廣泛解釋假說等等的言論。又可以總的分為三個部分，即境、行、果。最初的二十五頌說明唯識的境界；接下來的四頌說明依境界而生起的唯識行；最後一頌說明依修行而獲得的唯識果。在辨別境界之中，闡明真諦和俗諦。二十四頌說明俗諦，接下來的一頌說明真諦。在說明俗諦中又分為兩個部分：首先是標示，然後是解釋，如同在相、性、位這三個科目中進行解釋。接下來的三個科目如同在疏中進行解釋。又可以總的分為三個部分，即略、廣、中。最初的一頌半稱為略，接下來的二十三頌半稱為廣，最後的五頌稱為中。爲了利益迷惑於我法的人，利益迷惑于識的人，利益迷惑於行位的人，利益這三種根器的人。或者迷惑于所執、依他、圓成，依次對應。或者最初破除有執，後面兩個破除空執，所以分為三個部分不可增減。或者總的分為四個部分：最初的一頌半總標綱要；第二十四頌半廣泛陳述能變；第三有九頌解釋外來的疑問；最後的五頌說明依修行而獲得的利益。先前沒有說明，所以總的標示宗旨。不瞭解識性如何，所以接下來陳述能變。雖然成立了所要建立的，但外來的疑問需要排除，所以總結解釋疑問。既然這樣，聞思有什麼利益？所以接下來說明修行獲得的利益。由此構成四個部分，不多不少。或者總的分為五個部分：一是簡略標示宗旨；二是陳述識性；三是彰顯變現的意義；四是解釋外來的質疑；五是修行成果。宗旨和意義是主要的，所以最先陳述。雖然有識的說法，但不瞭解識性，所以接下來在前面隨著宗旨進行辨別。雖然知道了它的體性，但不明白變現的意義，所以接下來隨著識的體性而說明變現的意義。雖然說了意義的門徑，但有妨礙和困難。

【English Translation】 Biao Zong (Establishing the Doctrine). The following twenty-two and a half verses extensively explain according to the established doctrine. The extensive explanation contains three aspects: first, extensively explaining the nature of the three consciousnesses that can transform; second, extensively explaining the realms transformed by consciousness; third, extensively explaining the statements arising from hypothetical constructs. Or, generally speaking, it is divided into three parts: beginning, middle, and end. The initial one and a half verses are called the beginning, the following twenty-three and a half verses are called the middle, and the final five verses are called the end. The beginning, middle, and end are all for the sake of goodness. The extensive explanation (middle) is further divided into three parts: the initial fourteen and a half verses extensively explain the nature of the three consciousnesses that can transform; the following verse extensively explains the realms transformed by consciousness; and the final eight verses extensively explain hypothetical constructs and so on. It can also be generally divided into three parts: realm, practice, and result. The initial twenty-five verses explain the realm of Vijnaptimatrata (Consciousness-only); the following four verses explain the Vijnaptimatrata practice arising from the realm; and the final verse explains the Vijnaptimatrata result obtained through practice. In distinguishing the realms, the true and conventional truths are elucidated. Twenty-four verses explain the conventional truth, and the following verse explains the true truth. In explaining the conventional truth, it is further divided into two parts: first, indication; then, explanation, as explained in the three categories of characteristics, nature, and position. The following three categories are explained as in the commentary. It can also be generally divided into three parts: brief, extensive, and middle. The initial one and a half verses are called brief, the following twenty-three and a half verses are called extensive, and the final five verses are called middle. It is for the benefit of those deluded by self and dharma (phenomena), for the benefit of those deluded by consciousness, for the benefit of those deluded by practice and position, and for the benefit of these three types of faculties. Or, delusion about what is grasped, dependent, and perfectly accomplished, corresponding in order. Or, initially refuting the attachment to existence, and the latter two refuting the attachment to emptiness, so it is divided into three parts that cannot be increased or decreased. Or, generally divided into four parts: the initial one and a half verses generally indicate the outline; the second twenty-four and a half verses extensively state the ability to transform; the third has nine verses explaining external questions; and the final five verses explain the benefits obtained through practice. Because it was not explained previously, the doctrine is generally indicated. Not understanding how consciousness functions, the ability to transform is explained next. Although what is to be established is established, external questions need to be eliminated, so the questions are summarized and explained. Since this is the case, what is the benefit of hearing and contemplating? Therefore, the benefits obtained through practice are explained next. This constitutes four parts, no more and no less. Or, generally divided into five parts: first, briefly indicating the doctrine; second, stating the nature of consciousness; third, manifesting the meaning of transformation; fourth, explaining external doubts; and fifth, the result of practice. The doctrine and its meaning are primary, so they are stated first. Although there is talk of consciousness, the nature of consciousness is not understood, so next, following the doctrine, discrimination is made. Although its nature is known, the meaning of transformation is not understood, so next, following the nature of consciousness, the meaning of transformation is explained. Although the path to meaning is explained, there are obstacles and difficulties.

未遣。故隨變義次釋外徴。達義周圓隨釋難已故須入位。故分成五。其第三彰變義。於前分為四科中。第三結釋外難中離出。義意可知也。

論。若唯有識云何世間及諸聖教說有我法。準瑜伽釋言。總問此論所明宗要。問者先聞諸經所說一切唯心。其義未了故為此問。或作論者先總受請。論之宗要盡在心中。欲為學徒分別解說。自假興問為起說因故為此問。若不爾者。先無略說無容欻問。又發問者略有五種。一不解故問。二疑惑故問。三試驗故問。四輕觸故問。五為欲利樂有情故問。今為第五。專為利樂諸有情故作此論也。已達故非初二。自問故非次二。故依第五以發問端。

由假說我法有種種相轉 安惠解云。佛身諸法不可說為若我．若法。證不可言故。執．習俱盡故。施說我法唯在於余。除佛已外諸異生等。于計所執總無之上別執為我法。世尊為除此妄實執。于總無上義施設。為聖教我法。如論所引厚嚴二頌 護法雲。世間依情起妄執無。聖教依因緣道理假施設為我法 難陀師云。依相分上起所執我法。隨計妄情說為世間我法。即依所變依他上施設為聖教我法 何故本頌最初答難即標論宗 般若燈論初釋八不。清辨二釋順世俗解。今以此頌攝一部中所有義盡。由是答標。下十四頌半廣此所標三種能變

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：

因為還沒有遣除（疑問），所以隨著轉變的意義依次解釋外在的徵象。爲了通達意義的周全圓滿，隨著解釋困難之後，必須進入位置（進行討論）。因此分成五部分。其中的第三部分彰顯轉變的意義，在前面分為四科中，從第三科總結解釋外在的困難中分離出來，意義和意圖是可以理解的。

論：如果只有識，為什麼世間以及諸聖教說有『我』（ātman，靈魂、自我）和『法』（dharma，事物、法則）呢？

根據《瑜伽師地論》的解釋說，這是總括地提問此論所闡明的宗旨要點。提問者先前聽聞諸經所說的一切唯心（citta-mātra，唯識）的道理，但對其意義還不瞭解，所以為此提問。或者可以認為是作者先前總括地接受了請求，論的宗旨要點都在心中，想要為學徒分別解說，自己假設提問，作為引發解說的原因，所以為此提問。如果不是這樣，先前沒有概括的說明，就沒有理由突然提問。而且，發起提問者略有五種情況：一是不理解所以提問；二是疑惑所以提問；三是試驗所以提問；四是輕慢冒犯所以提問；五是爲了利益安樂有情眾生所以提問。現在是爲了第五種情況，專門爲了利益安樂諸有情眾生而作此論。已經通達了，所以不是前兩種情況；自己提問，所以不是後兩種情況。所以依據第五種情況來發起提問。

由於假說『我』和『法』，有種種相狀轉變。

安慧（Sthiramati）解釋說，佛身（Buddha-kāya）和諸法（dharma）不可說為『我』或『法』，因為證悟的境界不可言說，執著（graha）和習氣（vāsanā）都已斷盡的緣故。施設說『我』和『法』只在于其餘眾生，除了佛以外的各種異生等，在計度所執的完全不存在的事物之上，特別執著為『我』和『法』。世尊爲了去除這種虛妄的實在執著，在完全不存在的事物之上施設，作為聖教的『我』和『法』。如論中所引用的《厚嚴經》的兩個偈頌。

護法（Dharmapāla）說，世間依據情識而生起虛妄的執著，本來沒有的事物；聖教依據因緣道理，假施設為『我』和『法』。

難陀（Nanda）師說，依據相分（nimitta-bhāga）之上生起所執著的『我』和『法』，隨著計度虛妄的情識，說為世間的『我』和『法』。即依據所變的依他起性（paratantra-svabhāva）之上施設，作為聖教的『我』和『法』。

為什麼本頌最初回答困難，就標明論的宗旨呢？

《般若燈論》最初解釋八不（不生不滅，不常不斷，不一不異，不來不去）。清辨（Bhāviveka）的兩種解釋順應世俗的理解。現在用這個偈頌概括一部論中所有的意義，因此是回答和標明。下面的十四個半偈頌廣泛地解釋這個所標明的三種能變（識的轉變）。

【English Translation】 English version:

Because it has not yet been dispelled, the external signs are explained in order according to the meaning of transformation. In order to achieve a complete and perfect understanding of the meaning, it is necessary to enter the position (for discussion) after explaining the difficulties. Therefore, it is divided into five parts. The third part highlights the meaning of transformation, which is separated from the third section of the previous four sections, which summarizes and explains external difficulties. The meaning and intention are understandable.

Treatise: If there is only consciousness (vijñāna), why do the world and the holy teachings speak of 'self' (ātman) and 'dharma' (things, laws)?

According to the explanation of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, this is a general question about the main points of the doctrine explained in this treatise. The questioner has previously heard the principle of citta-mātra (consciousness-only) as taught in the scriptures, but does not yet understand its meaning, so he asks this question. Or it can be considered that the author has previously accepted the request in general, and the main points of the treatise are in his heart, wanting to explain them separately to the students, and he himself assumes the question as a reason for initiating the explanation, so he asks this question. If this is not the case, there is no reason to ask suddenly without a prior summary explanation. Moreover, there are roughly five situations for those who initiate questions: first, they ask because they do not understand; second, they ask because they are doubtful; third, they ask to test; fourth, they ask to offend; fifth, they ask to benefit sentient beings. Now it is for the fifth situation, specifically to benefit all sentient beings that this treatise is made. Having already understood, it is not the first two situations; asking oneself, it is not the last two situations. Therefore, the question is initiated based on the fifth situation.

Because of the provisional designation of 'self' and 'dharma', there are various aspects of transformation.

Sthiramati explains that the Buddha-kāya (Buddha's body) and the dharmas cannot be said to be 'self' or 'dharma', because the state of enlightenment is indescribable, and because attachment (graha) and habitual tendencies (vāsanā) have been completely cut off. The designation of 'self' and 'dharma' only exists in other sentient beings. Apart from the Buddha, various ordinary beings especially cling to 'self' and 'dharma' on top of things that are completely non-existent in their conceptualized objects. The World-Honored One, in order to remove this false clinging to reality, provisionally designates on top of things that are completely non-existent, as the 'self' and 'dharma' of the holy teachings. As in the two verses of the Ghanavyūha Sūtra quoted in the treatise.

Dharmapāla says that the world arises from emotional consciousness and gives rise to false clinging to things that do not exist; the holy teachings provisionally designate 'self' and 'dharma' based on the principles of cause and condition.

Nanda says that based on the nimitta-bhāga (image-aspect), the clung-to 'self' and 'dharma' arise, and according to the conceptualized emotional consciousness, they are said to be the 'self' and 'dharma' of the world. That is, based on the paratantra-svabhāva (other-dependent nature) of what is transformed, it is provisionally designated as the 'self' and 'dharma' of the holy teachings.

Why does this verse initially answer the difficulty and then mark the doctrine of the treatise?

The Prajñāpradīpa initially explains the eight negations (neither arising nor ceasing, neither permanent nor impermanent, neither one nor different, neither coming nor going). Bhāviveka's two explanations conform to worldly understanding. Now this verse summarizes all the meanings in one treatise, so it is both an answer and a mark. The following fourteen and a half verses extensively explain the three kinds of transformation (transformations of consciousness) that are marked.

下三句頌。次是諸識轉變等一頌。廣此第五句頌彼依識所變。後有八頌廣此頌上二句由假說我法等。彼初二頌答文外違理難。後六頌答違經難。言雖似別。意皆依心所變現而說。後之五頌總廣修此一頌半所經行位。故先答難即標論宗。總攝一部之大意也。初一頌半分之為三。初二句隨先問答。次一句隨別徴釋。後三句隨陳自列。此以義科。非依釋段。

我謂主宰法謂軌持。主是俱生我。無分別故。宰是分別我。有割斷故。主是第七我。宰是第六我。主是世間我。能作．受故。宰是聖教我。依用辨故。並疏為五解。聖教法名軌。依用辨故。世間法名持。執實自體能自持故。並疏為五。此中皆依增上義說。四解通依世間．聖教。第五別配。

有情命者等。金剛般若說四。雖諸本名別。今菩提流支所翻云。我．眾生．命者．壽者。天親論釋。見五蘊差別一一陰是我。如是妄取是名我相。此意總計三世五蘊差別為我。見身相續不斷是名眾生。此計五蘊從前際來相續不斷故名眾生。一報命根不斷住故是名命者。此計現在現有命故。命根斷已後生六道是名壽者。此見未來生壽更起故。理準此名是養育者。養未來故。翻家錯失名為壽者。不爾生者命者。諸教之中應別說有壽者。由此彼經但說四種。以緣三世總別計故。瑜

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 接下來的三句是偈頌。然後是關於諸識轉變等的一句偈頌。廣泛解釋這第五句偈頌，即彼依識所變（由它所依的識所變現）。後面有八句偈頌廣泛解釋這句偈頌的前兩句，即由假說我法等（由虛假安立的我和法等）。其中最初的兩句偈頌回答了文外的違背常理的詰難。後面的六句偈頌回答了違背經文的詰難。言語雖然看起來不同，但意思都是依據心所變現而說的。最後的五句偈頌總括地闡述了修習這一頌半所經歷的位次。所以先回答詰難，就是標明論的宗旨，總攝整部論的大意。最初的一頌半分成三部分。最初的兩句隨順先前的問答。接下來的一句隨順分別的征問解釋。最後的三句隨順陳述自己的列舉。這是按照意義來劃分科判，不是依據解釋的段落。

『我』指的是主宰，『法』指的是軌持。『主』是俱生我（與生俱來的我），因為它沒有分別。『宰』是分別我，因為它有割斷（分別）的作用。『主』是第七識的我，『宰』是第六識的我。『主』是世間的我，因為它能作能受。『宰』是聖教的我，因為它依據作用來辨別。並列疏解為五種解釋。聖教的『法』名為『軌』，因為它依據作用來辨別。世間的『法』名為『持』，因為它執著真實的自體，能夠自己保持。並列疏解為五種。這裡都是依據增上義（增上緣）來說的。四種解釋都通用於世間和聖教。第五種解釋特別對應。

『有情』、『命者』等。《金剛般若經》中說了四種。雖然各種版本名稱不同，但今菩提流支所翻譯的經文中說：『我、眾生、命者、壽者』。天親的論釋中說，見到五蘊的差別，每一個蘊都是我，像這樣虛妄地取著，就叫做我相。這個意思是總計三世五蘊的差別作為我。見到身相續不斷，就叫做眾生。這是計度五蘊從前際以來相續不斷，所以叫做眾生。一期果報的命根不斷住留，就叫做命者。這是計度現在現有命根。命根斷絕之後，又在六道中產生，就叫做壽者。這是見到未來生壽再次生起。按照這個道理，這個名稱也應該是養育者，因為養育未來。翻譯家錯誤地將『養育者』翻譯成『壽者』。否則，『生者』、『命者』等，在各種教義之中應該另外說明有『壽者』。因此那部經只說了四種，因為緣於三世總別計度。

【English Translation】 English version: The following three lines are verses. Next is a verse about the transformation of consciousnesses, etc. This fifth line of the verse is extensively explained as 'that which is transformed by the dependent consciousness' (彼依識所變). Following this, there are eight verses that extensively explain the first two lines of this verse, namely, 'by the hypothetical establishment of self and dharma, etc.' (由假說我法等). Among these, the first two verses answer the difficulties that arise outside the text and contradict reason. The subsequent six verses answer the difficulties that contradict the scriptures. Although the wording may seem different, the meaning is based on what is manifested by the mind. The final five verses summarize and elaborate on the stages experienced in practicing this one and a half verses. Therefore, answering the difficulties first is to indicate the purpose of the treatise, encompassing the main idea of the entire treatise. The initial one and a half verses are divided into three parts. The first two lines follow the previous questions and answers. The next line follows the separate inquiries and explanations. The last three lines follow the presentation of one's own enumeration. This is a classification based on meaning, not based on the sections of explanation.

'Self' (我) refers to the master (主宰), 'dharma' (法) refers to the standard (軌持). 'Master' (主) is the co-emergent self (俱生我), because it has no discrimination. 'Ruler' (宰) is the discriminating self (分別我), because it has the function of cutting off (discrimination). 'Master' (主) is the self of the seventh consciousness, 'Ruler' (宰) is the self of the sixth consciousness. 'Master' (主) is the worldly self (世間的我), because it can act and receive. 'Ruler' (宰) is the self of the sacred teachings (聖教的我), because it is distinguished based on its function. These are explained in five ways. The 'dharma' (法) of the sacred teachings is called 'standard' (軌), because it is distinguished based on its function. The 'dharma' (法) of the world is called 'holder' (持), because it clings to the real self-nature and can maintain itself. These are explained in five ways. Here, everything is spoken of based on the meaning of the dominant condition (增上義). The four explanations are all applicable to both the worldly and the sacred teachings. The fifth explanation is specifically matched.

'Sentient being' (有情), 'life-force' (命者), etc. The Diamond Sutra speaks of four. Although the names vary in different versions, the sutra translated by Bodhiruci (菩提流支) says: 'self (我), sentient being (眾生), life-force (命者), lifespan (壽者)'. Vasubandhu's (天親) commentary says that seeing the differences in the five aggregates (五蘊), each aggregate is 'self' (我). Taking hold of it in this deluded way is called the 'appearance of self' (我相). This means that the differences in the five aggregates of the three times are all considered as 'self' (我). Seeing the continuous flow of the body is called 'sentient being' (眾生). This is because the five aggregates are considered to be continuously flowing from the past, hence the name 'sentient being' (眾生). The continuous dwelling of the life-force (命根) of one retribution is called 'life-force' (命者). This is because it is considered that there is a life-force (命根) in the present. After the life-force (命根) is cut off, it is born again in the six realms, which is called 'lifespan' (壽者). This is because it is seen that future life and lifespan arise again. According to this principle, this name should also be 'nurturer' (養育者), because it nurtures the future. The translator mistakenly translated 'nurturer' (養育者) as 'lifespan' (壽者). Otherwise, 'birth' (生者), 'life-force' (命者), etc., should have a separate explanation for 'lifespan' (壽者) in various teachings. Therefore, that sutra only speaks of four types, because it is based on the general and specific considerations of the three times.

伽八十三但解八名。一我。我我所見現前行故。舉有能緣以顯所緣我體是有。二有情。謂諸賢聖如實了知唯有此性更無餘法。又復于彼有愛著故。情者性也。初總談彼有情之義無體可顯。即五根等皆名有情。此即是我唯有此性無餘法故。後解以愛為情。能生我愛說名有情。于彼法性生愛著故。若無有情誰情所愛。三意生是意種類。有能思量勝作用故。顯是意類故名意生。四摩納縛迦。依止於意而高下故。若總釋義。此名儒童。儒美好義。童少年義。美好少年名曰儒童。論依別釋。摩納是高義。高慢他故。縛迦是下義。卑下他故。以依止意。或陵慢他。或卑下他。名摩納縛迦。五養育者。增後有業。作士夫用故。初養未來。後長養現在。六補特迦羅。以能數數取諸趣故。諸賢聖等亦名此者。從未得道舊身說故。七命者者。與壽命和合現存故名命者。壽命是別者。是總也。總者與別命和合現存故名命者。八生者者。謂具出現等故。瑜伽第十云。生云何。謂胎．卵二生初託生時。等生云何。謂即于彼身份圓滿仍未出時。趣云何謂從彼出生。起云何。謂出已增長。出現云何。謂濕．化二生身份頓起。蘊得云何。謂諸生位。五取蘊轉。界得云何。謂諸蘊因緣所攝性。處得云何。謂即諸蘊余緣所攝性。諸蘊生起云何。謂即諸蘊日日

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 伽（Gā）八十三但解釋了八個名稱：一、我（Atman）。因為『我』是『我所』見的現前行，所以舉出能緣來顯示所緣，『我』的本體是存在的。二、有情（Sattva）。指諸位賢聖如實了知只有這種自性，再沒有其他法。又因為對於它有愛著，『情』就是自性。最初總的談論有情的意義，沒有實體可以顯示，即五根等都名為有情。這就是『我』，只有這種自性，沒有其他法。後面解釋以愛為『情』，能生起『我』愛，所以名為有情。因為對於法性生起愛著。如果沒有有情，誰來愛，誰被愛？三、意生（Manomaya）。是意的種類，有能思量勝妙作用的緣故。顯示是意的種類，所以名為意生。四、摩納縛迦（Mānavaka）。依止於意而有高下之分。如果總的解釋這個詞的意義，此名是儒童。『儒』是美好之義，『童』是少年之義，美好少年名叫儒童。論中依據分別解釋，摩納是高義，因為高慢他人；縛迦是下義，因為卑下他人。因為依止意，或者凌慢他人，或者卑下他人，名為摩納縛迦。五、養育者（Poshaka）。增長後有的業，作為士夫的作用。最初養育未來，後來長養現在。六、補特伽羅（Pudgala）。因為能夠數數取諸趣。諸位賢聖等也名為補特伽羅，是從未得道前的舊身來說的。七、命者（Jiva）。與壽命和合現存，所以名為命者。壽命是別，命者是總。總與別命和合現存，所以名為命者。八、生者（Janman）。指具有出現等等。瑜伽第十說：『生』是什麼？指胎生、卵生二種最初託生的時候。『等生』是什麼？指即于彼身份圓滿仍然沒有出生的時候。『趣』是什麼？指從那裡出生。『起』是什麼？指出生後增長。『出現』是什麼？指濕生、化生二種身份頓然生起。『蘊得』是什麼？指諸生位，五取蘊的轉變。『界得』是什麼？指諸蘊因緣所攝的自性。『處得』是什麼？指即諸蘊余緣所攝的自性。諸蘊生起是什麼？指即諸蘊日日

【English Translation】 English version Gā eighty-three, but explains eight names: 1. Atman (我). Because 'I' is the present action seen by 'what is mine', it cites the able-causer to reveal the caused, the substance of 'I' exists. 2. Sattva (有情). Refers to all the wise and holy who truly know that there is only this nature, and no other dharma. Also, because there is attachment to it, 'emotion' is nature. Initially, the general discussion of the meaning of sentient beings has no substance to show, that is, the five roots, etc., are all called sentient beings. This is 'I', only this nature, no other dharma. Later, it explains that love is 'emotion', which can generate 'I' love, so it is called sentient beings. Because love arises for the nature of dharma. If there are no sentient beings, who loves and who is loved? 3. Manomaya (意生). It is a kind of mind, because it has the ability to think about wonderful functions. It shows that it is a kind of mind, so it is called Manomaya. 4. Mānavaka (摩納縛迦). It depends on the mind and has high and low distinctions. If the meaning of this word is generally explained, this name is 'young scholar'. 'Ru' means beautiful, and 'tong' means young. A beautiful young man is called a young scholar. According to the separate explanation in the treatise, Māna means high, because of arrogance towards others; Vaka means low, because of belittling others. Because of relying on the mind, either insulting others or belittling others, it is called Mānavaka. 5. Poshaka (養育者). Increases the karma of future existence, acting as the function of a man. Initially nurturing the future, and later nurturing the present. 6. Pudgala (補特伽羅). Because it can repeatedly take all destinies. All the wise and holy are also called Pudgala, which is said from the old body before attaining the Way. 7. Jiva (命者). Existing in harmony with lifespan, so it is called Jiva. Lifespan is separate, Jiva is general. The general and separate lives exist in harmony, so it is called Jiva. 8. Janman (生者). Refers to having appearance, etc. Yoga tenth says: 'Birth' is what? Refers to the initial conception of the two types of womb-born and egg-born. 'Equal birth' is what? Refers to the time when the body is complete but still not born. 'Destination' is what? Refers to being born from there. 'Arising' is what? Refers to growing after birth. 'Appearance' is what? Refers to the sudden arising of the two types of moisture-born and transformation-born bodies. 'Aggregate attainment' is what? Refers to the transformation of the five aggregates of grasping in all birth positions. 'Realm attainment' is what? Refers to the nature of the aggregates being taken by causes and conditions. 'Place attainment' is what? Refers to the nature of the aggregates being taken by other conditions. What is the arising of the aggregates? Refers to the aggregates day by day

飲食之所資長。命根出現云何。即諸蘊余壽力故得相續住。此中略義。謂生自性。若生處位。若所生。若因緣所攝。若住持所引。若俱生依持。前十中第一生。及第五齣現。是生自性。第二．三．四是生處位。第六蘊得是所生。第七界得．第八處得。是生因緣所攝。第九諸蘊生起。是任持所引。第十命根出現。是俱生依持。謂生者具有此十義。以總作用故但說八。合士夫用入養育者多分計故。若開為二增後有業名養育者。育現在身作士夫用名為士夫約世開之 能斷金剛般若經依杜行顗梵本。貞觀二十三年于玉華宮夜翻朝進。本既別矣。列名亦殊。初八後九。依大般若等諸本。及大師自本中能斷金剛分梵本亦四。所以天親等釋唯四非多。其能斷初八云。有情．命者．士夫．數取趣．意生．摩納婆．作者．受者。後文說九。此八加我。初文因說度一切有情。有情為首略無其我。此中士夫即育養者。于現在身作士夫用故。瑜伽生者即作者。攝此八之中。前六別行相。後二通行相。故前說八。後兼說我。六別行相．二通行相所以有九。大般若一處說十三。瑜伽八中加士夫．作者．受者．知者．見者。開瑜伽八中養育者分為二世。故說士夫。依此初九是別作用。後四通作用。依別作用．單行相說故。或說十五。加使作者．及使受

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 飲食是生命得以滋養和增長的來源。那麼，命根（jīnyuán）（生命力的根本）是如何出現的呢？這是因為諸蘊（zhū yùn）（構成個體的五種要素：色、受、想、行、識）的延續、壽命和力量，使得生命得以相續存在。這裡有一個簡略的解釋：所謂的『生』，具有其自性（zìxìng）（本質）。它存在於產生的位置，被產生出來，被因緣（yīnyuán）（條件和關係）所攝持，被住持（zhùchí）（保持）所引導，以及被俱生（jùshēng）（同時產生）的因素所依持。在前述的十個方面中，第一個『生』和第五個『出現』是『生』的自性。第二、第三和第四個方面是『生』產生的位置。第六個方面，即蘊的獲得，是被產生出來的東西。第七個方面，即界的獲得，和第八個方面，即處的獲得，是被『生』的因緣所攝持的。第九個方面，即諸蘊的生起，是被任持（rènchí）（承擔）所引導的。第十個方面，即命根的出現，是被俱生的因素所依持的。也就是說，一個生命體具有這十種意義。因為總體的作用，所以只說了八種。將『士夫』（shìfū）（丈夫，這裡指有能力的人）的作用納入到『養育者』（yǎngyù zhě）（滋養者）中，是因為大多數人這樣認為。如果將『養育者』分為兩個方面，那麼增加的『後有業』（hòuyǒu yè）（導致未來存在的業力）就是『養育者』。在現在這個身體中發揮作用的『士夫』，被稱為『士夫』。這是從世俗的角度來劃分的。《能斷金剛般若經》（Néng duàn jīngāng bōrě jīng）（The Diamond Sutra）是根據杜行顗（Dù Xíngyǐ）的梵文字翻譯的。在貞觀（Zhēnguān）二十三年，于玉華宮（Yùhuá Gōng）晚上翻譯，早上進呈。因為原本不同，所以列出的名稱也不同。最初是八個，後來是九個。依據《大般若經》（Dà bōrě jīng）（The Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra）等其他版本，以及大師自己的版本中，《能斷金剛》的梵文字也是四個部分。因此，天親（Tiānqīn）（Vasubandhu）等人的解釋只有四個，不多不少。『能斷』最初的八個是：有情（yǒuqíng）（sentient being）、命者（mìngzhě）（life-possessor）、士夫（shìfū）（person）、數取趣（shǔ qǔ qù）（one who repeatedly transmigrates）、意生（yìshēng）（mind-born）、摩納婆（mónàpó）（manava，人）、作者（zuòzhě）（doer）、受者（shòuzhě）（receiver）。後面的文章說了九個，這八個加上『我』（wǒ）（self）。最初的文章因為說了度一切有情，所以以有情為首，省略了『我』。這裡說的『士夫』就是『育養者』，在現在的身體中發揮『士夫』的作用。瑜伽（yújiā）（yoga）中說的『生者』就是『作者』。這八個之中，前六個是不同的行相（xíngxiàng）（aspect），後兩個是通用的行相。所以前面說了八個，後面兼說了『我』。六個不同的行相，兩個通用的行相，所以有九個。《大般若經》有一處說了十三個。瑜伽的八個中，加上了『士夫』、『作者』、『受者』、『知者』（zhīzhě）（knower）、『見者』（jiànzhě）（seer）。將瑜伽八個中的『養育者』分為兩個方面，所以說了『士夫』。依據最初的九個是不同的作用，後面的四個是通用的作用。依據不同的作用和單一的行相來說，所以或者說十五個，加上『使作者』（shǐ zuòzhě）（one who causes to do）和『使受者』（shǐ shòuzhě）（one who causes to receive）。

【English Translation】 English version Food is the resource for growth and sustenance. How does the jīnyuán (命根) (life-force root) arise? It is because of the continuation of the zhū yùn (諸蘊) (the five aggregates: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness), lifespan, and strength that life can continue to exist. Here is a brief explanation: the so-called 'birth' has its zìxìng (自性) (nature). It exists in the place of generation, is produced, is sustained by yīnyuán (因緣) (conditions and relationships), is guided by zhùchí (住持) (maintenance), and is supported by factors that arise simultaneously (jùshēng 俱生). Among the ten aspects mentioned earlier, the first 'birth' and the fifth 'appearance' are the zìxìng (自性) (nature) of 'birth'. The second, third, and fourth aspects are the places where 'birth' occurs. The sixth aspect, the attainment of the aggregates, is what is produced. The seventh aspect, the attainment of the realms, and the eighth aspect, the attainment of the bases, are sustained by the yīnyuán (因緣) (conditions) of 'birth'. The ninth aspect, the arising of the aggregates, is guided by rènchí (任持) (bearing). The tenth aspect, the appearance of the life-force root, is supported by factors that arise simultaneously (jùshēng 俱生). That is to say, a living being has these ten meanings. Because of the overall function, only eight are mentioned. Incorporating the function of the shìfū (士夫) (person, here referring to a capable individual) into the yǎngyù zhě (養育者) (nourisher) is because most people think this way. If the 'nourisher' is divided into two aspects, then the added 'hòuyǒu yè' (後有業) (karma leading to future existence) is the 'nourisher'. The 'shìfū' (士夫) (person) who functions in the present body is called 'shìfū' (士夫). This is divided from a worldly perspective. The Néng duàn jīngāng bōrě jīng (能斷金剛般若經) (The Diamond Sutra) was translated based on Dù Xíngyǐ's (杜行顗) Sanskrit text. In the twenty-third year of Zhēnguān (貞觀), it was translated at night in Yùhuá Gōng (玉華宮) and presented in the morning. Because the original text is different, the listed names are also different. Initially, there were eight, and later there were nine. According to other versions such as the Dà bōrě jīng (大般若經) (The Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra), and in the master's own version, the Sanskrit text of the Néng duàn jīngāng (能斷金剛) also has four parts. Therefore, the explanations of Tiānqīn (天親) (Vasubandhu) and others only have four, no more and no less. The initial eight of 'Néng duàn' are: yǒuqíng (有情) (sentient being), mìngzhě (命者) (life-possessor), shìfū (士夫) (person), shǔ qǔ qù (數取趣) (one who repeatedly transmigrates), yìshēng (意生) (mind-born), mónàpó (摩納婆) (manava, human), zuòzhě (作者) (doer), shòuzhě (受者) (receiver). The later text mentions nine, these eight plus 'wǒ' (我) (self). The initial text, because it mentioned liberating all sentient beings, starts with sentient beings and omits 'wǒ' (我). The 'shìfū' (士夫) (person) mentioned here is the 'yùyǎng zhě' (育養者) (nurturer), functioning as 'shìfū' (士夫) in the present body. The 'shēngzhě' (生者) (one who is born) mentioned in yoga is the 'zuòzhě' (作者) (doer). Among these eight, the first six are different xíngxiàng (行相) (aspects), and the last two are common aspects. Therefore, eight were mentioned earlier, and 'wǒ' (我) was also mentioned later. Six different aspects, two common aspects, hence there are nine. The Dà bōrě jīng (大般若經) mentions thirteen in one place. In the eight of yoga, 'shìfū' (士夫), 'zuòzhě' (作者), 'shòuzhě' (受者), 'zhīzhě' (知者) (knower), and 'jiànzhě' (見者) (seer) are added. Dividing the 'yǎngyù zhě' (養育者) (nourisher) in the eight of yoga into two aspects, hence 'shìfū' (士夫) is mentioned. According to the initial nine being different functions and the later four being common functions, it is said that there are fifteen, adding 'shǐ zuòzhě' (使作者) (one who causes to do) and 'shǐ shòuzhě' (使受者) (one who causes to receive).

者。依單．重．通．別行相具說故。初十三單說。後二重。初九別。後六通行相故。大般若第七說有十七。前十五中加起者．使者或說十九。前十七中加使知者．使見者。後二文亦依單．重．別．通行相一切具說。由此諸教說數不同。

預流等者。等二十七賢聖．十三住等菩薩。

二十七賢聖者。一信解。二見至。三身證。四惠解脫。五俱解脫。六預流向。七預流果。八一來向。九一來果。十不還向。十一不還果。十二阿羅漢向。十三阿羅漢果。十四極七返有。十五家家。十六一間。十七中般涅槃。十八生般涅槃。十九無行般涅槃。二十有行般涅槃。二十一上流般涅槃。二十二退法阿羅漢。二十三思法阿羅漢。二十四護法阿羅漢。二十五住法阿羅漢。二十六堪達法阿羅漢。二十七住不動法阿羅漢 十三住聖如疏第九卷。

成唯識論掌中樞要上(本終)

成唯識論掌中樞要捲上(末)

蘊處界三廢立離合 頌曰。

隨增說我事 為依此所行 生．持分略．廣 無別根．所緣

隨增說我事者。謂立五蘊廢立離合。對法論說。何因蘊唯有五。為顯五種我事故。謂身具我事．受用我事．言說我事．造作一切法非法我事．彼所依止我自體事。如其次第配釋五蘊。故不減增有離有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這些是根據單獨、重複、個別、共同的行相來全面解說的緣故。最初的十三種是單獨解說，接下來的兩種是重複解說，最初的九種是個別解說，最後的六種是共同行相的緣故。《大般若經》第七卷說有十七種，在前面的十五種中加上『起者』（karta，作者，行動者）、『使者』（hetu，原因，使者），或者說有十九種，在前面的十七種中加上『使知者』（jnata，知者）、『使見者』（drashta，見者）。後面的兩種經文也是依據單獨、重複、個別、共同的行相一切都具備地解說。因此，各種教義所說的數目不同。

『預流』（Srotapanna，須陀洹）等，包括二十七賢聖、十三住等菩薩。

二十七賢聖包括：一、信解（信勝解）。二、見至（見所至）。三、身證（身作證）。四、慧解脫（慧解脫阿羅漢）。五、俱解脫（俱解脫阿羅漢）。六、預流向（入流道）。七、預流果（入流果）。八、一來向（一來道）。九、一來果（一來果）。十、不還向（不還道）。十一、不還果（不還果）。十二、阿羅漢向（阿羅漢道）。十三、阿羅漢果（阿羅漢果）。十四、極七返有（七次往返欲界）。十五、家家（於二三家中受生）。十六、一間（一度往來）。十七、中般涅槃（于中陰身入滅）。十八、生般涅槃（生於色界入滅）。十九、無行般涅槃（無功用行入滅）。二十、有行般涅槃（有功用行入滅）。二十一、上流般涅槃（從色界頂上生入滅）。二十二、退法阿羅漢（退失神通的阿羅漢）。二十三、思法阿羅漢（由思惟而得的阿羅漢）。二十四、護法阿羅漢（能守護佛法的阿羅漢）。二十五、住法阿羅漢（安住於法的阿羅漢）。二十六、堪達法阿羅漢（能通達佛法的阿羅漢）。二十七、住不動法阿羅漢（安住于不退轉法的阿羅漢）。十三住聖如疏第九卷。

《成唯識論掌中樞要》上（本終）

《成唯識論掌中樞要》捲上（末）

蘊、處、界三者的廢立離合 頌曰：

隨增說我事 為依此所行 生．持分略．廣 無別根．所緣

『隨增說我事』，是指建立五蘊的廢立離合。對法論說：『因為什麼原因，蘊只有五種？』爲了顯示五種我事。即：身具我事、受用我事、言說我事、造作一切法非法我事、彼所依止我自體事。按照次序分別解釋五蘊，所以不能減少或增加，不能分離或存在。

【English Translation】 English version: These are explained comprehensively based on the aspects of being singular, repeated, individual, and common. The initial thirteen are explained singularly, the following two are explained repeatedly, the initial nine are explained individually, and the final six are due to common aspects. The seventh volume of the Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra says there are seventeen, adding 'karta' (the agent, doer) and 'hetu' (the cause, instigator) to the preceding fifteen, or it is said there are nineteen, adding 'jnata' (the knower) and 'drashta' (the seer) to the preceding seventeen. The latter two texts also explain everything completely based on the aspects of being singular, repeated, individual, and common. Therefore, the numbers mentioned in various teachings differ.

'Srotapanna' (Stream-enterer) etc., includes the twenty-seven virtuous saints, the thirteen abodes, and Bodhisattvas.

The twenty-seven virtuous saints include: 1. Faith-understanding (Adhimukti). 2. Vision-attainment (Drishti-prapta). 3. Body-witness (Kaya-sakshi). 4. Wisdom-liberation (Prajna-vimukta). 5. Both-liberation (Ubhayato-vimukta). 6. Stream-enterer path (Srotapatti-marga). 7. Stream-enterer fruit (Srotapatti-phala). 8. Once-returner path (Sakridagami-marga). 9. Once-returner fruit (Sakridagami-phala). 10. Non-returner path (Anagami-marga). 11. Non-returner fruit (Anagami-phala). 12. Arhat path (Arhat-marga). 13. Arhat fruit (Arhat-phala). 14. Extreme seven-times-more (Ekabijin). 15. Family-to-family (Kula-kula). 16. One-interval (Eka-vicika). 17. Intermediate Nirvana (Antara-parinirvayin). 18. Birth Nirvana (Upapaduka-parinirvayin). 19. Effortless Nirvana (Asamskara-parinirvayin). 20. Effortful Nirvana (Sasamskara-parinirvayin). 21. Upward-stream Nirvana (Urdhvamsrotas-parinirvayin). 22. Arhat who regresses (Parihanadharma). 23. Arhat who thinks (Cintayitarma). 24. Arhat who protects (Rakshadharma). 25. Arhat who abides (Sthiradharma). 26. Arhat who is capable (Prativedhanadharma). 27. Arhat who abides in non-regression (Akopyadharma). The thirteen abodes of saints are as in the ninth volume of the commentary.

Key Essentials of the Consciousness-Only Treatise, Volume 1 (End of the Volume)

Key Essentials of the Consciousness-Only Treatise, Volume 1 (End)

The Establishment, Abolishment, Separation, and Combination of the Three: Skandhas, Ayatanas, and Dhatus. Verse:

According to the increase, 'I' is spoken of. To rely on this, what is practiced. Birth, holding, division, brief, broad. No separate roots, objects.

'According to the increase, 'I' is spoken of' refers to the establishment, abolishment, separation, and combination of the five skandhas. The Abhidharma says: 'For what reason are there only five skandhas?' It is to reveal the five aspects of 'I'. Namely: the 'I' that possesses a body, the 'I' that experiences, the 'I' that speaks, the 'I' that creates all dharmas, both lawful and unlawful, and the 'I' that is the self-nature relied upon by them. The five skandhas are explained in order, so there can be no decrease or increase, no separation or existence.

合 為依此所行生持分略廣者。謂立處．界離合廢立。出生義是處義故略識。依及此所行為十二處。其六識體所出生故。不離為處 持自性義．能任持義是界義故廣識依及廣此識。並廣此所行。成十八界。六根．六境能持六識。六識自體能持識用。體能自持離識立界。體不自生。不離六識以立為處。故蘊．界．處不減不增有離有合 無別根所緣者。釋七．八識不別說為處．界所以。由離六識根．境之外。更無別根．境可立界．處故不立之。中邊第二釋蘊．處．界義。頌曰。非一及總略。分段義名蘊。能所取彼取。種子義名界。能受所了境。用門義名處。廣如彼說。十種三科如對法抄。此中總應三門分別。一釋名義。二廢立。三十種分別。

如是諸相。問起之中敘安惠等三師別問。

彼相皆依識所轉變而假施設。世間於此起執。聖教依斯義說。所執．依他隨應別說。此護法．難陀解 安惠解云。二種即依遍計所執 又與下同解。彼相唯依見．相二分名所轉變。與下別解者。此中自證亦所轉變。下據我法通依．今古同許．大小所成。唯依見．相。此據實依故並自證。種子變現行。現行亦變為種子故。真如非依故論不說。

相見同種別種生者。有二解。有說相．見同種生。謂無本質者。影像相與見分同種

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 總而言之，關於依據這些（蘊、處、界）而產生的行為，其生起、保持的區分有簡略和廣博之分。所謂的『立處』（ayatana，十二處）、『界離合廢立』（dhatu，十八界）是指對處和界的建立、區分、合併、廢除和設立。『出生義』是處（ayatana）的含義，所以簡略地認識（六識）。『依』（所依根）以及『此所行』（所緣境）構成十二處。因為六識的自體由此出生，所以不能脫離（六識）而成為處。 『持自性義』（保持自身性質的含義）、『能任持義』（能夠承擔和保持的含義）是界（dhatu）的含義，所以廣泛地認識『依』（所依根）以及廣泛地認識『此識』（六識），並且廣泛地認識『此所行』（所緣境），構成十八界。六根、六境能夠保持六識，六識自體能夠保持識的作用。自體能夠自我保持，脫離識而建立為界。自體不能自我產生，不能脫離六識而建立為處。所以，蘊（skandha，五蘊）、界（dhatu，十八界）、處（ayatana，十二處）不減少也不增加，有分離也有合併。沒有其他的根和所緣。 解釋第七識（末那識，manas-vijnana）、第八識（阿賴耶識，ālaya-vijñāna）不單獨設立為處和界的原因。因為脫離六識的根和境之外，沒有其他的根和境可以建立為界和處，所以不設立。 《中邊分別論》第二品解釋蘊、處、界的含義。頌文說：『非一及總略，分段義名蘊。能所取彼取，種子義名界。能受所了境，用門義名處。』詳細內容如《對法論》的抄本所說。這裡總共應該從三個方面來分別：一是解釋名稱和含義，二是廢立（建立和廢除），三是十種分別。 像這樣各種表相。在提問中敘述安慧（Sthiramati）等三位論師的分別提問。 這些表相都依賴於識所轉變而假立施設。世間對此產生執著，聖教依據這些意義而說。所執（遍計所執性，parikalpita-svabhava）、依他（依他起性，paratantra-svabhava）應該分別說明。這是護法（Dharmapala）、難陀（Nanda）的解釋。安慧（Sthiramati）的解釋說：兩種（相和見）就是依賴於遍計所執性。又與下面的解釋相同。這些表相僅僅依賴於見分和相分而名為所轉變。與下面的不同解釋是：這裡自證分也是所轉變。下面根據我法普遍依賴，現在和過去都認可，大乘和小乘都認可的，僅僅依賴於見分和相分。這裡根據實際所依賴的，所以包括自證分。種子變現行，現行也變為種子。真如（tathata）不是所依賴的，所以論中沒有說。 相分和見分是同一種子生起還是不同種子生起？有兩種解釋。有人說相分和見分是同一種子生起，指的是沒有外在本質的情況，影像和見分是同一種子。

【English Translation】 English version: In summary, regarding the arising and sustaining distinctions of actions generated based on these (skandhas, ayatanas, dhatus), there are concise and extensive aspects. The so-called 'establishment of ayatanas' (twelve ayatanas) and 'dhatu separation, combination, abolition, and establishment' (eighteen dhatus) refer to the establishment, differentiation, merging, abolishment, and setting up of ayatanas and dhatus. 'Meaning of arising' is the meaning of ayatana, so briefly recognize (the six consciousnesses). 'Basis' (supporting roots) and 'what is acted upon' (objects of perception) constitute the twelve ayatanas. Because the self-nature of the six consciousnesses arises from this, it cannot be separated (from the six consciousnesses) to become an ayatana. 'Meaning of holding self-nature' (the meaning of maintaining one's own nature) and 'meaning of being able to uphold' (the meaning of being able to bear and maintain) are the meanings of dhatu, so extensively recognize 'basis' (supporting roots) and extensively recognize 'this consciousness' (the six consciousnesses), and extensively recognize 'what is acted upon' (objects of perception), constituting the eighteen dhatus. The six roots and six objects are able to maintain the six consciousnesses, and the self-nature of the six consciousnesses is able to maintain the function of consciousness. Self-nature is able to maintain itself, and is established as a dhatu separate from consciousness. Self-nature cannot arise by itself, and cannot be separated from the six consciousnesses to be established as an ayatana. Therefore, skandhas (five skandhas), dhatus (eighteen dhatus), and ayatanas (twelve ayatanas) neither decrease nor increase, and there are both separation and combination. There are no other roots and objects of perception. Explaining the reason why the seventh consciousness (manas-vijnana) and the eighth consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna) are not separately established as ayatanas and dhatus. Because apart from the roots and objects of the six consciousnesses, there are no other roots and objects that can be established as dhatus and ayatanas, so they are not established. The second chapter of the Madhyāntavibhāga explains the meaning of skandhas, ayatanas, and dhatus. The verse says: 'Not one and general briefly, segmented meaning is called skandha. Able to take and what is taken, seed meaning is called dhatu. Able to receive and what is understood, function gate meaning is called ayatana.' Detailed content is as stated in the copy of the Abhidharma. Here, one should generally distinguish from three aspects: first, explain the name and meaning; second, abolition and establishment; third, ten kinds of distinctions. Like these various appearances. In the questions, narrate the separate questions of teachers such as Sthiramati. These appearances all depend on the transformations of consciousness and are falsely established. The world generates attachment to this, and the sacred teachings speak based on these meanings. What is grasped (parikalpita-svabhava) and dependent (paratantra-svabhava) should be explained separately as appropriate. This is the explanation of Dharmapala and Nanda. Sthiramati's explanation says: the two kinds (appearance and perception) rely on parikalpita-svabhava. Also the same as the explanation below. These appearances only rely on the appearance-aspect and perception-aspect and are called transformations. The different explanation from below is: here, the self-cognition aspect is also transformed. Below, it is based on the universal dependence of self and dharma, which is recognized by both the present and the past, and recognized by both Mahayana and Hinayana, and only relies on the appearance-aspect and perception-aspect. Here, it is based on what is actually relied upon, so it includes the self-cognition aspect. Seeds transform into manifestations, and manifestations also transform into seeds. Suchness (tathata) is not what is relied upon, so it is not mentioned in the treatise. Do the appearance-aspect and perception-aspect arise from the same seed or different seeds? There are two explanations. Some say that the appearance-aspect and perception-aspect arise from the same seed, referring to the situation where there is no external essence, and the image and perception-aspect are the same seed.

生。其有本質者。本質亦同種生。即一見分種生現行時。三法同一種故。謂見．影．質。有說相見別種生者。本質．見分定別種生。其影像相。與見分及本質。或異或同。種相分等現行為因緣故本有俱生。現行相分或和合生新舊種同生故 安惠二分亦說種生。見與體同。相分二說。或同或異。相分無體。種子是假 護法正義質．影二相與見分三。此三三性種子界系等未要皆同。隨所應故。即前所說相見別種是此正義 頌曰。

性境不隨心 獨影唯隨見 帶質通情．本 性．種等隨應

總攝諸境有其三類一者性境。諸真法體名為性境。色是真色。心是實心。此真實法不定隨心三性不定。如實五塵唯無記性。不隨能緣五識通三性故。亦不隨心同於一系。如第八識是一界系。所緣種子通三界系。身在地獄起二通時緣天眼耳。身在上地眼．耳二識見欲界境。二禪已上眼．耳．身識．緣自．地境。識初禪系。境自地系。如是等類亦不隨心一種所生。由見．相種各別體故 二者獨影之境唯從見分。性．系．種子皆定同故。如第六識緣龜毛．空花．石女。無為．他界緣等所有諸境。如是等類皆是隨心。無別體用。假境攝故。名為獨影 三者帶質之境。謂此影像有實本質。如因中第七所變相分。得從本質是無覆無記等

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 生起。對於有本質的事物，其本質也同樣由種子生起。即當見分（Vijnana-bhaga，能見的主觀部分）的種子生起現行時，見分、本質（Vastu，作為認知的對象）和影像（Pratibimba，反映本質的表象）這三種法是同一種子所生。也就是說，見分、影像和本質是同時產生的。有人說相分（Nimitta-bhaga，被見的對象部分）是由不同的種子生起的，本質和見分必定是由不同的種子生起。而影像相分，與見分及本質，或者不同，或者相同，因為種子、相分等現行是生起的因緣，並且是本有俱生的。現行相分或者和合生起，新舊種子一同生起。安慧（Sthiramati，唯識學派論師）的二分說也認為是由種子生起。見分與自體相同，相分有兩種說法，或者相同，或者不同。相分沒有自體，種子是虛假的。護法（Dharmapala，唯識學派論師）的正義是，本質和影像這兩種相分與見分這三者，這三者的自性、種子、界系等，未必都相同，而是隨其所應。即前面所說的相分和見分由不同種子生起，是此處的正義。 頌曰： 『性境不隨心，獨影唯隨見，帶質通情．本，性．種等隨應。』 總括來說，諸境有三種：一是性境（Svabhava-pratyaksa，真實的客觀境界）。諸真法體名為性境。色（Rupa，物質現象）是真色，心（Citta，精神現象）是實心。此真實法不一定隨心，三性（善、惡、無記）不定。如真實的五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸）唯是無記性。不隨能緣的五識（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身識），因為五識通於三性。也不隨心而同於一個界系（Dhatu，領域）。如第八識（Alaya-vijnana，阿賴耶識）是一個界系，所緣的種子通於三界系（欲界、色界、無色界）。身在地獄，生起二通（天眼通、天耳通）時，能緣天眼、天耳。身在上地，眼識、耳識能見欲界境。二禪（Dhyana，禪定）以上，眼、耳、身識緣自地境。識在初禪界系，境在自地界系。如此等等，也不隨心一種所生，因為見分和相分的種子各別。二是獨影境（Niralambana-pratyaksa，無所依託的境界），唯從見分生起，自性、界系、種子都一定相同。如第六識（意識）緣龜毛、空花、石女等，以及緣無為（Asamskrta，非造作的）、他界等所有諸境。這些都是隨心而生，沒有別的體用，屬於假境，所以名為獨影。三是帶質境（Sopadhana-pratyaksa，帶有本質的境界），指此影像有真實的本質。如因中第七識（末那識）所變的相分，得從本質，是無覆無記等。

【English Translation】 English version: Arising. For things that have essence (Vastu), their essence also arises from seeds (Bija). That is, when the seed of the seeing-part (Vijnana-bhaga) arises into manifestation, these three dharmas—the seeing-part, the essence, and the image (Pratibimba)—arise from the same seed. That is to say, the seeing-part, the image, and the essence arise simultaneously. Some say that the object-part (Nimitta-bhaga) arises from different seeds, and that the essence and the seeing-part definitely arise from different seeds. As for the image-object-part, it is either different from or the same as the seeing-part and the essence, because the manifestation of seeds, object-parts, etc., is the cause and condition for its arising, and it is originally co-born. The manifested object-part either arises in combination, or old and new seeds arise together. Sthiramati's two-part theory also holds that it arises from seeds. The seeing-part is the same as the self-nature (Atma), and there are two views on the object-part: either the same or different. The object-part has no self-nature, and the seeds are false. Dharmapala's correct view is that the two object-parts, essence and image, and the seeing-part, these three, their nature (Svabhava), seeds, realm (Dhatu), etc., do not necessarily have to be the same, but rather as appropriate. That is, the aforementioned view that the object-part and the seeing-part arise from different seeds is the correct view here. Verse: 'The nature-realm does not follow the mind, the single-image only follows the seeing, the essence-bearing pervades feelings and the original, nature, seeds, etc., follow accordingly.' In summary, there are three types of realms: first, the nature-realm (Svabhava-pratyaksa), which refers to the true essence of all dharmas. Form (Rupa) is true form, and mind (Citta) is real mind. This true dharma does not necessarily follow the mind, and its three natures (good, evil, neutral) are not fixed. For example, the real five sense objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch) are only of neutral nature. They do not follow the perceiving five consciousnesses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body consciousness), because the five consciousnesses are connected to the three natures. Nor do they follow the mind and belong to the same realm. For example, the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) is one realm, and the seeds it perceives are connected to the three realms (desire realm, form realm, formless realm). When the body is in the lower realm and generates the two supernormal powers (divine eye, divine ear), it can perceive the divine eye and divine ear. When the body is in the upper realm, the eye and ear consciousnesses can see the desire realm. Above the second Dhyana, the eye, ear, and body consciousnesses perceive their own realm. The consciousness is in the first Dhyana realm, and the object is in its own realm. And so on, they do not arise from the same seed as the mind, because the seeds of the seeing-part and the object-part are separate. Second, the single-image realm (Niralambana-pratyaksa), which arises only from the seeing-part, and its nature, realm, and seeds are all the same. For example, the sixth consciousness (mind consciousness) perceives things like turtle hair, sky flowers, barren women, as well as all realms such as the unconditioned (Asamskrta) and other realms. These all arise according to the mind, have no other essence or function, and belong to the false realm, so they are called single-image. Third, the essence-bearing realm (Sopadhana-pratyaksa), which refers to the image that has a real essence. For example, the object-part transformed by the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) in the causal stage, which derives from the essence, is neutral, etc.

。亦從見分是有覆所攝。亦得說言從本質種生。亦得說言從見分種生。義不定故 性種等隨應者。隨應是不定義。有二隨應。一者義顯三境。諸心聚生。有唯有一。有二二合。有三同聚 有一者。如前已說 有二合者。如第八識緣自地散境。心王所緣是初性境。心所所緣是獨影境。五識所緣自地五塵。是初性境。亦得說是帶質之境。如第六識緣過．未五蘊。得是獨影。亦得說是帶質之境。熏成種子生本質故。有三合者。如四第八緣定果色。心所所緣唯是獨影。心王所緣是實性境。亦得說為帶質之境。第六所變定果之色為本質故 二者又性種等隨應者。顯上三境隨其所應。或性雖同而系．種不同。如在下地緣上界天眼．耳。或系雖同性．種不同。如五識緣自界五塵。或種雖同而系不同。約聚論之即有。一法論之即無。如第八識聚心所所緣與見同種。心王所緣而系不同。二合三合思準可知。以此一頌定諸法體。於八識中若因若果。一一行相於五蘊法各別牒出。恐繁且止。

變謂識體轉似二分。釋所能變。依斯二分下釋能所依。我法俱依識所變故。若依總作二文科者。初文釋第三句中。或復內識轉似外境。釋能所變。我法分別熏習力故下。釋能所依。愚夫所計下。分為二文。能所變者。識所變。能所依者。彼依也。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：同樣，見分也屬於有覆無記所攝。也可以說從本質種子生起，也可以說從見分種子生起，因為意義不確定。『性種等隨應者』，『隨應』是不定義。有兩種『隨應』。一是義顯三境，諸心聚生起。有的是唯一一種，有的是兩種結合，有的是三種同聚。 『有一者』，如前面已經說過的情況。『有二合者』，比如第八識緣自地散境，心王所緣是初性境，心所所緣是獨影境。五識所緣自地五塵，是初性境，也可以說是帶質之境。比如第六識緣過去、未來五蘊，可以是獨影，也可以說是帶質之境，因為熏成種子生本質的緣故。『有三合者』，比如第四第八識緣定果色，心所所緣唯是獨影，心王所緣是實性境，也可以說是帶質之境，因為第六識所變的定果之色作為本質的緣故。 二是又『性種等隨應者』，顯示以上三種境界隨其所應。或者體性雖然相同而界系、種子不同，比如在下地緣上界的天眼、天耳。或者界系雖然相同，體性、種子不同，比如五識緣自界五塵。或者種子雖然相同而界系不同，從聚的角度來說就有，從一法的角度來說就沒有。比如第八識聚心所所緣與見分同種，心王所緣而界系不同。二合、三合的情況可以參照推知。用這一頌確定諸法體性，在八識中無論是因是果，一一的行相在五蘊法中各自區分出來。恐怕繁瑣，就此停止。 『變謂識體轉似二分』，解釋所能變。『依斯二分』下解釋能所依，因為我法都依識所變的緣故。如果按照總的分為兩段來科判，第一段解釋第三句中『或復內識轉似外境』，解釋能所變。『我法分別熏習力故』下，解釋能所依。『愚夫所計』下，分為兩段。能所變，是識所變。能所依，是彼所依。

【English Translation】 English version: Also, the 'seeing-division' (見分) is included in the 'covered unspecified' (有覆) category. It can also be said to arise from the 'essence-seed' (本質種), and it can also be said to arise from the 'seeing-division-seed' (見分種), because the meaning is not fixed. 'Nature-seed etc. according to appropriateness' (性種等隨應者), 'according to appropriateness' (隨應) is undefined. There are two kinds of 'according to appropriateness' (隨應). First, the meaning clearly shows the three realms, and all mental aggregates arise. Some are only one kind, some are a combination of two, and some are a gathering of three. 'Having one' (有一者), as previously stated. 'Having two combined' (有二合者), such as the eighth consciousness (第八識) cognizing scattered realms in its own ground. What the 'mind-king' (心王) cognizes is the 'initial nature-realm' (初性境), and what the 'mental-functions' (心所) cognize is the 'sole-image-realm' (獨影境). What the five consciousnesses (五識) cognize are the five objects of sense (五塵) in their own ground, which is the 'initial nature-realm' (初性境), and can also be said to be the 'dependent-quality-realm' (帶質之境). For example, the sixth consciousness (第六識) cognizing the past and future five aggregates (五蘊) can be a 'sole-image' (獨影), and can also be said to be a 'dependent-quality-realm' (帶質之境), because it is perfumed into seeds that give rise to the essence. 'Having three combined' (有三合者), such as the fourth and eighth consciousnesses (四第八識) cognizing the 'fixed-result-form' (定果色). What the 'mental-functions' (心所) cognize is only the 'sole-image' (獨影), and what the 'mind-king' (心王) cognizes is the 'real nature-realm' (實性境), and can also be said to be the 'dependent-quality-realm' (帶質之境), because the 'fixed-result-form' (定果色) transformed by the sixth consciousness (第六識) serves as the essence. Second, again, 'nature-seed etc. according to appropriateness' (性種等隨應者), showing that the above three realms are according to their appropriateness. Or, although the nature is the same, the realm and seed are different, such as cognizing the 'heavenly eye' (天眼) and 'heavenly ear' (天耳) of the upper realm in the lower ground. Or, although the realm is the same, the nature and seed are different, such as the five consciousnesses (五識) cognizing the five objects of sense (五塵) of their own realm. Or, although the seed is the same, the realm is different. From the perspective of the aggregate, it exists; from the perspective of a single dharma, it does not exist. For example, the object cognized by the mental functions of the eighth consciousness aggregate (第八識聚) is of the same seed as the 'seeing-division' (見分), while the object cognized by the 'mind-king' (心王) is of a different realm. The situations of two combined and three combined can be inferred accordingly. Use this verse to determine the nature of all dharmas, whether cause or effect, in the eight consciousnesses (八識), and distinguish each and every characteristic in the five aggregates (五蘊). Fearing complexity, I will stop here. 'Transformation means the substance of consciousness turns to resemble two divisions' (變謂識體轉似二分), explaining what is capable of transformation. 'Relying on these two divisions' (依斯二分) below explains what is capable of being relied upon and what is relied upon, because both 'self' (我) and 'dharma' (法) rely on what is transformed by consciousness. If we divide it into two sections in general, the first section explains the third sentence, 'Or the inner consciousness transforms to resemble the external realm' (或復內識轉似外境), explaining what is capable of transformation and what is transformed. 'Because of the force of the perfuming of the discrimination of self and dharma' (我法分別熏習力故) below explains what is capable of being relied upon and what is relied upon. 'What is conceived by foolish people' (愚夫所計) below is divided into two sections. What is capable of transformation and what is transformed is what is transformed by consciousness. What is capable of being relied upon and what is relied upon is what relies on that.

我法分別熏習力故等文中有二難。一云諸識生似我法時。為皆由我法分別熏習之力。為亦不由。若皆由者。八識．五識無二分別。後生果時應不似二。若不由者。此中何故但說我法熏習為因 答二解俱得。其皆由解者。一切有漏與第七中二分別俱故。或第六識二分別引故。後生果時皆似我法。其不必由解者。此說第六根本遍緣一切。為因緣發諸識令熏習故。後生果時似我法相起。或非外似外。六七計為似外起故。若安惠師八識有執。不須此問。

如夢者者。婆剌拏者此云流轉。即先婆羅那訛也。此流轉王是眉[示*希]羅國王。容貌端正。自謂無雙。求覓勝形欲自方比顯己殊類。時有人言。王舍城內有大迦旃延。形容甚好。世中無比。王遣迎之。迦旃延至。王出宮迎。王不及彼。人視迦旃延無看王者。王問所以。眾白。迦延容貌勝王。王問大德今果宿因。迦延答曰。我昔出家。王作乞兒。我掃寺地。王來乞食。我掃地竟令王除糞。除糞既訖方與王食。以此業因生人天中得報端正。王聞此已尋請出家為迦延弟子。後共迦延往阿般地國。山中修道別處坐禪。阿般地王名缽樹多。將諸宮人入山遊戲。宮人見王形貌端正圍繞看之。缽樹多王見婆剌拏王疑有欲意。問婆剌拏曰。汝是阿羅漢耶不。王答言非。次第一一

問餘三果皆答言非。又問汝離欲不。又答言非。缽樹多嗔曰。若爾汝何故八我淫女之中。遂鞭身破悶絕而死。至夜方醒至迦延所。迦延見已心生悲愍。其諸同學問為療治。婆剌拏王語迦延曰。我從師乞暫還本國集軍。破彼阿般地國。殺缽樹多王。事竟當還從師修道。迦延從請。語王欲去且停一宿。迦延安置．好處。令眠欲令感夢。夢見集軍征阿般地。自軍破敗身被他獲。堅縛手足赤花插頭嚴鼓欲殺。王于夢中恐怖大叫喚失聲云。我今無歸。愿師濟拔作歸依處得壽命長。迦延以神力手指出火喚之令寤。問言何故。其心未醒尚言災事。迦延以火照而問之。此是何處。汝可自看。其心方寤。迦延語言。汝若征彼必當破敗如夢所見。王言愿師為除毒意。迦延為說一切諸法。譬如國土假名無實。離舍屋等無別國土。乃至廣說種種因緣。至一極微亦非實事。無此無彼無怨無親。王聞此法得預流果。後漸獲得阿羅漢果。

境唯世俗有者。疏有二解。今又加云。遍計所執凡夫境故唯世俗有。依他起性凡．聖智境識亦勝義。顯示兼之。

破我之中。數論．勝論立我宗云。我我性是常。許無初後故。如虛空等 又我體周遍。許常住故。如虛空等。前所立宗即為此因。我體常遍。許隨身造業受苦．樂等故。如大虛空 難初量云。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 他問餘三果（Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami，須陀洹果、斯陀含果、阿那含果）是否證得，他都回答說沒有。又問他是否已經離欲，他也回答說沒有。缽樹多（Boshuduo）嗔怒地說：『如果這樣，你為何在我八我**之中？』於是鞭打他的身體，導致他昏厥而死。直到夜晚才醒來，去迦延（Jiayan）那裡。迦延（Jiayan）見到後，心中生起悲憫。他的同學們問該如何治療。婆剌拏（Poluo）王對迦延（Jiayan）說：『我向老師請求暫時回到本國集結軍隊，攻破阿般地（Abandi）國，殺死缽樹多（Boshuduo）王。事情結束後，我將回來跟隨老師修道。』迦延（Jiayan）答應了他的請求，告訴國王如果要走，先停留一晚。迦延（Jiayan）妥善安排，讓他入睡，想讓他做個夢。國王夢見集結軍隊征討阿般地（Abandi），自己的軍隊被打敗，自己被敵人俘獲，手腳被緊緊捆綁，頭上插著紅花，敲著戰鼓要殺他。國王在夢中驚恐大叫，失聲喊道：『我現在無處可歸。愿老師救拔我，作為我的歸依之處，讓我得以長壽。』迦延（Jiayan）用神力，用手指發出火焰喚醒了他，問他發生了什麼事。他的心還未清醒，仍然說著災難之事。迦延（Jiayan）用火光照著他問：『這是什麼地方？你可以自己看看。』他的心才清醒過來。迦延（Jiayan）說：『你如果征討那個國家，必定會像夢中所見一樣被打敗。』國王說：『愿老師為我消除毒害之意。』迦延（Jiayan）為他說了一切諸法，譬如國土只是假名，沒有實體。離開房屋等，就沒有別的國土。乃至廣泛地講述種種因緣，直到一個極微之物也不是真實存在的，沒有此也沒有彼，沒有怨也沒有親。國王聽聞此法，證得了預流果（Sotapanna，須陀洹果）。後來逐漸獲得了阿羅漢果（Arahan）。

『境唯世俗有者』，疏中有兩種解釋。現在又補充說：遍計所執是凡夫的境界，所以只有世俗諦才有。依他起性是凡夫和聖人的智慧所觀照的境界，也屬於勝義諦，這是爲了顯示兼具二者。

『破我之中』。數論派和勝論派立『我』的宗義說：『我』的自性是常住的，允許沒有開始和結束，就像虛空一樣。又，『我』的本體是周遍的，允許常住不變，就像虛空一樣。前面所立的宗義就是為此原因。『我』的本體是常住且周遍的，允許隨著身體造業而承受苦樂等，就像廣大的虛空一樣。駁斥第一個量云：

【English Translation】 English version He was asked if he had attained the three fruits (Sotapanna, Sakadagami, Anagami), and he answered no to all. He was then asked if he was free from desire, and he answered no again. Boshuduo (缽樹多) angrily said, 'If that's the case, why are you among my eight me**?' Thereupon, he whipped his body, causing him to faint and die. He only awoke at night and went to Jiayan's (迦延) place. Upon seeing him, Jiayan (迦延) felt compassion. His fellow students asked how to treat him. King Poluo (婆剌拏) said to Jiayan (迦延), 'I ask the teacher for permission to return to my kingdom temporarily to gather troops, conquer the country of Abandi (阿般地), and kill King Boshuduo (缽樹多). After this is done, I will return to follow the teacher to cultivate the Way.' Jiayan (迦延) granted his request, telling the king that if he wanted to leave, he should stay for one more night. Jiayan (迦延) made arrangements for him and let him sleep, wanting him to have a dream. The king dreamed of gathering troops to attack Abandi (阿般地). His own army was defeated, and he was captured by the enemy, his hands and feet tightly bound, a red flower stuck in his head, and drums beating to kill him. In the dream, the king cried out in terror, shouting, 'I have nowhere to turn now. May the teacher save me, be my refuge, and grant me long life.' Jiayan (迦延), using his divine power, emitted fire from his finger and woke him up, asking him what had happened. His mind was still not clear, and he was still talking about the disaster. Jiayan (迦延) shone a light on him and asked, 'Where is this? You can see for yourself.' Only then did his mind clear. Jiayan (迦延) said, 'If you attack that country, you will surely be defeated as you saw in the dream.' The king said, 'May the teacher remove the poisonous intent from me.' Jiayan (迦延) spoke to him about all dharmas, explaining that a country is just a false name, without substance. Apart from houses, there is no other country. He extensively explained various causes and conditions, even to the point that a single atom is not real, there is neither this nor that, neither enemy nor friend. Upon hearing this dharma, the king attained the fruit of Stream-enterer (Sotapanna). Later, he gradually attained the fruit of Arhat (Arahan).

'The realm exists only conventionally.' The commentary has two explanations. Now, it is further added that the realm of conceptual construction is only for ordinary beings, so it only exists in conventional truth. The dependent arising nature is the realm contemplated by the wisdom of both ordinary beings and sages, and it also belongs to ultimate truth. This is to show that it encompasses both.

'Among the refutation of self.' The Samkhya and Vaisheshika schools establish the tenet of 'self' by saying: 'The nature of 'self' is permanent, allowing no beginning or end, like space.' Also, 'The substance of 'self' is pervasive, allowing it to be permanent, like space.' The previously established tenet is the reason for this. 'The substance of 'self' is permanent and pervasive, allowing it to experience suffering and happiness according to the karma created by the body, like vast space.' Refuting the first measure:

有有法差別相違過。我有法上意所許義。隨身造業受苦．樂我。不隨身造業受苦．樂我。是有法我之差別。今造相違云。汝我應非隨身受苦．樂我。許無初後故。如大虛空 難第二量。作法差別相違過。體常遍法自相上意所許義。隨身造業受苦．樂體常遍。非隨身造業受苦．樂。體常遍是差別。今作相違云。汝我應不隨身造業受苦．樂。許常住故。如大虛空 難第三量云。隨身之因既隨一不成。于同喻空上無。即不共不定。常遍之宗空為同喻。瓶為異喻。隨身造業等因二亦俱非有 論文或別比量相違難云汝我應不隨身造業受果。許常遍故。如太虛空。此別以比量徴。不要述其本量。

離系立量云。所說之我隨身不定。身所有故。猶如影等。下難中應云。我應可折。執隨身故。猶如影等。不須以卷舒解隨身義。

瑜伽第六及六十四顯揚第十說。執我有四。一即蘊。二異蘊住蘊中。三異蘊住離蘊法中。四異蘊非住蘊中。亦非住異蘊法中。而無有蘊。一切蘊法都不相應。後三俱是異蘊計攝。合是二三類計中初二攝盡。彼唯破外道不破小乘。故無與蘊不即不離 破非即離中。又有量云。汝所執我。不應說是我我非他我。許不可說故。如有為．無為。此義雖可爾不順文意。乃破一我非一切故。又此論但破一師計我。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 存在有法差別相違的過失。我所主張的『有法』是指意念所允許的意義，即隨身造業並承受苦樂的『我』，以及不隨身造業也不承受苦樂的『我』。這是『有法』的差別。現在構成相違，說：『你的「我」不應是隨身承受苦樂的「我」，因為你承認它是無始無終的，就像廣闊的虛空一樣。』這是第二個量式的難題。 存在作法差別相違的過失。我所主張的『體常遍法』是指意念所允許的意義，即隨身造業並承受苦樂的『體常遍』，以及不隨身造業也不承受苦樂的『體常遍』。這是差別。現在構成相違，說：『你的「我」不應是隨身造業並承受苦樂的，因為你承認它是常住的，就像廣闊的虛空一樣。』這是第三個量式的難題，說：『隨身的原因既然沒有一個是成立的，在同喻的虛空上就沒有，這就是不共不定。』常遍的宗義以虛空為同喻，瓶子為異喻。隨身造業等原因兩者都不存在。 論文或者用別的比量相違來為難，說：『你的「我」不應隨身造業並承受果報，因為你承認它是常遍的，就像太虛空一樣。』這是用別的比量來徵詢，不需要陳述它的本量。 離系派立量說：『所說的「我」隨身是不定的，因為它是身所擁有的，就像影子一樣。』在下面的難題中應該說：『「我」應該是可以被駁倒的，因為它執著于隨身，就像影子一樣。』不需要用卷舒來解釋隨身的意義。 《瑜伽師地論》第六卷和第六十四卷，《顯揚聖教論》第十卷說，執著于『我』有四種：一是『我』即是五蘊（skandha，構成個體經驗的五種要素：色、受、想、行、識）；二是『我』異於五蘊，住在五蘊中；三是『我』異於五蘊，住在離開五蘊的法中；四是『我』異於五蘊，既不住在五蘊中，也不住在異於五蘊的法中，而是沒有五蘊，一切五蘊法都不相應。後三種都屬於異蘊的範疇，合起來就是二三類計中的前兩種都包括在內。他們只是破斥外道，不破斥小乘，所以沒有與五蘊不即不離的說法。在破斥非即離的觀點中，又有量式說：『你所執著的「我」，不應該說是「我」，也不是「他我」，因為你承認它是不可說的，就像有為法（conditioned phenomena）和無為法（unconditioned phenomena）一樣。』這個意義雖然可以這樣說，但不順應文意，只是破斥一個『我』不是一切『我』。而且這篇論文只是破斥一個師的計『我』。

【English Translation】 English version There is the fault of contradiction due to the difference in the subject (dharmin). The 'dharmin' that I assert is the meaning accepted by intention, which is the 'self' that creates karma and experiences suffering and pleasure along with the body, and the 'self' that does not create karma and does not experience suffering and pleasure along with the body. This is the difference in the 'dharmin'. Now, a contradiction is constructed, saying: 'Your 'self' should not be the 'self' that experiences suffering and pleasure along with the body, because you admit that it is without beginning or end, like the vast space.' This is the second difficulty in the inference. There is the fault of contradiction due to the difference in the attribute (dharma). The 'eternal and pervasive dharma' that I assert is the meaning accepted by intention, which is the 'eternal and pervasive' that creates karma and experiences suffering and pleasure along with the body, and the 'eternal and pervasive' that does not create karma and does not experience suffering and pleasure along with the body. This is the difference. Now, a contradiction is constructed, saying: 'Your 'self' should not create karma and experience suffering and pleasure along with the body, because you admit that it is permanent, like the vast space.' This is the third difficulty in the inference, saying: 'Since none of the reasons related to the body are established, it does not exist in the example of space, which is the uncommon uncertain reason.' The tenet of eternality and pervasiveness uses space as the similar example and a pot as the dissimilar example. The reasons such as creating karma along with the body are both non-existent. The treatise, or another inference, poses a contradictory difficulty, saying: 'Your 'self' should not create karma and experience the results along with the body, because you admit that it is eternal and pervasive, like the great void.' This is questioning with another inference, and it is not necessary to state its original inference. The Nirgrantha (離系) school establishes an inference, saying: 'The 'self' that is spoken of is not fixed to the body, because it is possessed by the body, like a shadow.' In the following difficulty, it should be said: 'The 'self' should be refutable, because it clings to being with the body, like a shadow.' It is not necessary to explain the meaning of being with the body by expanding and contracting. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論) sixth and sixty-fourth, and the Abhidharmasamuccaya (顯揚聖教論) tenth, say that there are four kinds of clinging to the 'self': first, the 'self' is the five skandhas (蘊, aggregates); second, the 'self' is different from the five skandhas, residing in the five skandhas; third, the 'self' is different from the five skandhas, residing in a dharma apart from the five skandhas; fourth, the 'self' is different from the five skandhas, neither residing in the five skandhas nor residing in a dharma apart from the five skandhas, but is without the five skandhas, and all the dharmas of the five skandhas are not associated. The latter three all belong to the category of being different from the skandhas, and together they include the first two of the two or three categories. They only refute the heretics and do not refute the Hinayana, so there is no saying of being neither identical nor different from the skandhas. In refuting the view of non-identity and non-difference, there is another inference saying: 'The 'self' that you cling to should not be said to be 'self' or 'not-self', because you admit that it is inexpressible, like conditioned phenomena (有為) and unconditioned phenomena (無為).' Although this meaning can be said in this way, it does not accord with the meaning of the text, and it only refutes one 'self' not being all 'selves'. Moreover, this treatise only refutes one teacher's clinging to 'self'.

非一切故。此解乃通破一切故。又但舉一法足為同喻。何假有．無為。又論總令於我．非我聚亦應不可說。如有為．無為。何得乃言如有．無為我非他我。故應如疏。

破作用中略有四類。一生死有用。涅槃無用。二僧佉等無動轉作用。余有此用。三綺更無作受用等。四正難有用。設難無用 欲貪名取者。雖對法文。同亦十地解取支云愛增上名取。此隨義增非真實理。據實而言。瑜伽等云一切煩惱名取支。取蘊亦爾。蘊能生取。如花果樹。蘊從取生如草糠火。

七識所緣第八。與見要同一系。任運緣故。六任運緣。何故即總或別．或同地不同地系。應思之也。隨所緣現行系不隨種。潤生見緣當生。八十八文緣三界法。

二乘先伏修入見道。有說修．見二惑一時頓斷。加行欣求先折勢故。有說別起無間道斷。今取頓斷不取別斷。

起自心相之言有二解。一云即影像相。二云即所執相。雖無實體當情現故。諸說心相皆準應知。

此二我執細故難斷等中。疏有三解。一以修道之見行相。微細于見道見故。或修道中自望前八為細故。二以見道易斷名細。上道難除名粗。如三心中自分粗細。三見道約能治道弱。所斷相從初品名細。修道約自品行相名細 難斷疏解亦三。一世道不伏。二漸次初道不

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 並非一切都是如此。這種解釋是爲了徹底破除一切。而且，僅僅舉出一個法就足以作為相同的比喻，何必需要有為和無為呢？如果總的來說，將我與非我聚集在一起也應該是不可說的，就像有為和無為一樣。怎麼能說有為和無為是我而非他人呢？所以應該按照疏文所說。

破除作用中略有四類：一是生死有用，涅槃（Nirvana，佛教術語，指解脫後的境界）無用；二是僧佉（Samkhya，古印度哲學流派）等沒有動轉作用，其他有這種作用；三是綺更沒有作和受用等；四是正難有用，設難無用。說『欲貪』名為『取』，雖然符合《阿毗達摩》（Abhidharma，佛教論藏）的文義，但也與十地（Bhumi，菩薩修行的十個階段）的解釋相符，即愛增長名為取。這只是隨順意義的增補，並非真實的道理。根據實際情況來說，《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra，瑜伽行派的根本論書）等說一切煩惱名為取支，取蘊也是如此。蘊能生取，就像花、果和樹；蘊從取生，就像草、糠和火。

第七識所緣的第八識，與見道（Darshana-marga，佛教修行道路上的一個階段）要同一體系，因為是任運緣故。六個任運緣，為什麼是總、別，或是同地、不同地系，應該思考。隨所緣現行系不隨種子。潤生見緣當生。八十八文緣三界法。

二乘（Sravakayana & Pratyekabuddhayana，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）先降伏煩惱，然後修入見道。有人說修道和見道的兩種迷惑一時頓斷，因為加行（Prayoga-marga，佛教修行道路上的一個階段）欣求先折損了勢力。有人說另外生起無間道（Anantarya-marga，佛教修行道路上的一個階段）來斷除。現在採取頓斷的說法，不採取別斷的說法。

說『起自心相』這句話有兩種解釋：一種說法是即影像相，另一種說法是即所執相。雖然沒有實體，但當下顯現。各種關於心相的說法都應該依此理解。

『此二我執細故難斷』等內容中，疏文有三種解釋：一是以修道的見行相，比見道的見更加微細；或者修道中自己與前八地相比為細。二是以見道容易斷除名為細，上道難以去除名為粗，就像三心中自分粗細。三是見道約能治之道弱，所斷之相從初品名為細，修道約自品行相名為細。『難斷』的疏文解釋也有三種：一是世道不伏，二是漸次初道不。

【English Translation】 English version: It is not the case that everything is so. This explanation is to thoroughly break down everything. Moreover, just citing one dharma (phenomenon, teaching) is sufficient as a common analogy; why is it necessary to have 'being' and 'non-being'? Furthermore, if, in general, the aggregation of 'self' and 'non-self' should also be unspeakable, just like 'conditioned' and 'unconditioned'. How can it be said that 'conditioned' and 'unconditioned' are 'self' and not 'other'? Therefore, it should be as the commentary (疏) says.

Breaking down function (作用) roughly has four categories: first, birth and death are useful, Nirvana (涅槃, the state of liberation) is useless; second, Samkhya (僧佉, an ancient Indian philosophical school) and others do not have the function of movement, while others have this function; third, Qi Geng (綺更) does not have the functions of creating and receiving, etc.; fourth, correct challenges are useful, while setting up challenges is useless. Saying 'desire and greed' is called 'grasping' (取), although it accords with the meaning of the Abhidharma (阿毗達摩, Buddhist philosophical texts), it also aligns with the explanation of the ten Bhumis (十地, ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), that is, the increase of love is called grasping. This is merely a supplement according to meaning, not the true principle. According to the actual situation, the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論, the fundamental text of the Yogacara school) and others say that all afflictions are called grasping-limb (取支), and the grasping aggregates (取蘊) are also like this. Aggregates can generate grasping, like flowers, fruits, and trees; aggregates arise from grasping, like grass, chaff, and fire.

The eighth consciousness, which is the object of the seventh consciousness, must be in the same system as the Path of Seeing (見道, Darshana-marga), because it is a spontaneous condition. The six spontaneous conditions, why are they general, specific, or in the same or different Bhumis, should be considered. The existing system follows the object of consciousness and does not follow the seed. The condition of rebirth is the cause of future birth. The eighty-eight texts are related to the three realms.

The two vehicles (二乘, Sravakayana & Pratyekabuddhayana) first subdue afflictions and then cultivate entry into the Path of Seeing. Some say that the two kinds of delusion of the Path of Cultivation and the Path of Seeing are cut off suddenly at the same time, because the striving (加行, Prayoga-marga) to seek has first diminished the power. Some say that another Anantarya-marga (無間道) arises to cut off. Now we adopt the sudden cutting off, not the separate cutting off.

There are two explanations for the saying 'arising from the appearance of one's own mind': one explanation is that it is the image-appearance, and the other explanation is that it is the grasped-appearance. Although there is no substance, it appears in the present moment. All statements about the appearance of the mind should be understood accordingly.

Regarding 'these two ego-graspings are subtle and difficult to cut off', etc., the commentary has three explanations: one is that the appearance of the practice of the Path of Cultivation is more subtle than the seeing of the Path of Seeing; or that in the Path of Cultivation, one considers oneself to be subtle compared to the previous eight Bhumis. The second is that the Path of Seeing is easily cut off and is called subtle, while the upper path is difficult to remove and is called coarse, just like the coarse and subtle distinctions within the three minds. The third is that the Path of Seeing is weak in relation to the path that can cure it, and the appearance of what is to be cut off is called subtle from the initial stage, while the Path of Cultivation is called subtle in relation to the appearance of its own stage. The commentary explanation of 'difficult to cut off' also has three aspects: first, the worldly path is not subdued; second, the initial path is not gradual.

斷。非見斷故。三缺道不除。要九品滿道方能斷故。今第四若超越第三果人第六識執。于中五釋。一見道不能斷。超得果後而亦不斷。要至金剛心與第七識執一時斷。二云超得果位別起道斷。彼既不障果。何名彼地惑。如第七識執此亦何違。三超得果時。相見道後更不出觀別起勝道．加行等道。斷修道惑得第三果。諸處但說第十六心已知根攝而建立果。何故此中後起修道斷惑得果。彼說初果非超越故。四超得果時。從相見道即入修道。無間．解脫斷修惑得果。不起加行無容別起加行道故。五超得果時。即一剎那真見道無間見．修惑雙斷。雖先世道不伏我執。由意樂勝入見道位。伏與不伏一念俱斷。依第一解。道數數修。斷不數數。依次二．三解。道．斷俱數數。依第四解。先離無所有處已下欲。超得第三後成無學。唯二品斷。總而言之。隨前所應而成數數．不數數義。超越第四果頓取二果者。雖缺有頂。缺前八品。三界我執而不能斷。漸次得果。非想地中有二義說。若為九品斷。前八道亦不除之。自地第九品故。若為一品斷。但缺有頂即能斷盡。前義為正。後無文說。三十四念等要九品故。第七要缺有頂第九方能斷盡。由此難斷故數數斷。其超越第四果人。第六識執道數數修。斷非數數。一品斷故。次第得果。一地而

解。前八道數數修。身見第九品除。斷非數數。若總九地而論。道．斷俱數數。若迴心已唯習數斷非種。

分別二執既不說總別。即蘊之我二十句等。論唯說別無總之文。此有二解。一依文義實無總。然未見文。但與前俱生不同。所以不說。二解實有總別。與前同故略而不論。如即蘊計我豈簡總耶。此解為勝。離蘊之我不說總別。

此二我執初見道時斷者。如疏可知 三心見道分別二執。三心見道何者初斷。何者後斷。二種俱通皆有邪友邪思力起故 一云邪教力起故後斷。邪思力者先斷。粗易斷故。第二解返此。是邪教力起者先斷。如先續善根勢薄弱故。邪思力起後斷。如續善根地獄死時續。勢堅牢故。第三解即蘊計等後斷。細故蘊我相似故。離蘊計先斷。粗猛故。第四解不定。九地地地皆有粗細。粗者先除。細者後斷。由於一時行有粗細。斷有前後。其諸煩惱與此等流。隨其品類說前後斷。

論熏習力故得有憶識等者。問前心善不善。熏故後可憶。前心若異熟。不熏後不憶 答前心是能熏。有種後能憶。前心若異熟。不熏後不憶 問前心是能熏。有因果能憶。後心若異熟。無因憶非果 答前心是能熏。有因後能憶。未必要同性。異熟何妨憶。如前嗔心後善心憶。異性為因異效能憶。佛憶無始一切

事故。有漏宿命豈不能憶異熟心耶。但由後時熏習勝故能憶前事。非要此因生此果故。

既有三相寧見為一。此難三德。各應見一。與疏不同。

一根應得一切境。以根無別故。一境諸根得。以境無異故。

破勝論常諸句中。第一有用非常難。第二無用即識難。

破無常中。第一有礙非實難。第二無用即識難。

破實德中。第一大非實句難。第二堅等非德等難。第三地等非見難。第四色非德句難。

破實句中。第一有礙無常難。第二無礙成有難。許色根取故令成有礙。

破有句中有四。第一法自相相違過。彼云。有性。離實句外有別自性。許非無故。如德業。此有不定。以實句是異法喻。因於彼有故。今云。離實句外無別自性。許非無故。猶如實句。彼外道師。若以德業如因異．和合為不定過。非不定過。他不定故。非自共故。論既以德．業為同喻。但比量相違 第二有法自相相違過。彼云。有性。離實有別自性。許異實故。如德業。以有性為有法。今言有性應非有性。故成有法自相相違。今舉無法為喻。亦成決定相違。第三．第四俱皆比量相違。

難同異性中。第一有法自相相違過。彼云。同異性。定異實別有。許異實故。如德．業 今令同異亦非同異。故成有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 事故。如果具有遺漏的宿命能力，難道不能回憶起異熟心（Vipāka-citta，果報心）嗎？只是由於後來的熏習更為強大，所以能夠回憶起以前的事情。並非一定要這個原因產生這個結果。

既然有三相（tri-lakṣaṇa，諸行無常、諸法無我、涅槃寂靜），怎麼能看作是一個呢？這是對三德（tri-guṇa， सत्त्व sattva, रजस् rajas, तमस् tamas）的質疑。每一種德都應該被看作是一個。這與疏鈔的觀點不同。

一個根（indriya，感覺器官）應該能夠獲得一切境（viṣaya，感覺對像），因為根沒有區別的緣故。一個境應該被所有根獲得，因為境沒有差異的緣故。

在破斥勝論派（Vaiśeṣika）的『常』（nitya，永恒）的論述中，第一點是用處非常（anitya，無常）難以成立。第二點是無用就等同於識（vijñāna，意識）難以成立。

在破斥『無常』（anitya，無常）的論述中，第一點是有障礙就不是真實難以成立。第二點是無用就等同於識難以成立。

在破斥『實德』（guṇa，屬性）的論述中，第一點是『大』（mahat，廣大的）不是真實屬性難以成立。第二點是『堅』（kaṭhina，堅硬的）等不是屬性等難以成立。第三點是地（pṛthivī，地）等不是可見的難以成立。第四點是色（rūpa，顏色）不是屬性難以成立。

在破斥『實句』（dravya，實體）的論述中，第一點是有障礙就是無常難以成立。第二點是無障礙就成為『有』（bhāva，存在）難以成立。因為允許色根（rūpendriya，色根）取境，所以導致成為有障礙。

在破斥『有句』（bhāva，存在）的論述中有四點。第一點是法自相（svalakṣaṇa，自性）相違的過失。他們說：『有性』（bhāvatva，存在的性質），在實句（dravya，實體）之外有別的自性。允許不是沒有的緣故，如德（guṇa，屬性）、業（karma，行為）。這有不定，因為實句是異法喻。因為在它那裡有（有性）的緣故。現在說：在實句之外沒有別的自性。允許不是沒有的緣故，猶如實句。如果外道師以德、業作為因異、和合為不定過失，則不是不定過失。因為他是非決定的緣故，不是自共的緣故。論典既然以德、業作為同喻，只是比量相違。第二點是有法自相相違的過失。他們說：『有性』，離開實有別的自性。允許不同於實（dravya，實體）的緣故，如德、業。以有性作為有法。現在說有性應該不是有性。所以成為有法自相相違。現在舉無法作為比喻，也成為決定相違。第三、第四點都是比量相違。

在質疑『同異性』（sāmānyaviśeṣa，共相和殊相）中，第一點是有法自相相違的過失。他們說：『同異性』，決定與實（dravya，實體）不同，有別的存在。允許不同於實的緣故，如德、業。現在令同異也不是同異。所以成為有法自相相違。

【English Translation】 English version: Accident. If one has the leaky power of remembering past lives, can one not recall the Vipāka-citta (resultant consciousness)? It is only because the subsequent conditioning is stronger that one can recall past events. It is not necessarily the case that this cause produces this effect.

Since there are three characteristics (tri-lakṣaṇa, impermanence, non-self, and nirvana), how can they be seen as one? This is a challenge to the three qualities (tri-guṇa, सत्त्व sattva, रजस् rajas, तमस् tamas). Each quality should be seen as one. This is different from the commentary.

One sense faculty (indriya) should be able to perceive all objects (viṣaya), because there is no difference between the faculties. One object should be perceived by all faculties, because there is no difference between the objects.

In refuting the Vaiśeṣika's (勝論派) argument for 'permanence' (nitya), the first point is that 'usefulness is impermanent' (anitya) is difficult to establish. The second point is that 'uselessness is equivalent to consciousness' (vijñāna) is difficult to establish.

In refuting 'impermanence' (anitya), the first point is that 'having obstruction is not real' is difficult to establish. The second point is that 'uselessness is equivalent to consciousness' is difficult to establish.

In refuting 'real qualities' (guṇa), the first point is that 'greatness' (mahat) is not a real quality is difficult to establish. The second point is that 'hardness' (kaṭhina) etc. are not qualities etc. is difficult to establish. The third point is that earth (pṛthivī) etc. are not visible is difficult to establish. The fourth point is that color (rūpa) is not a quality is difficult to establish.

In refuting 'real substance' (dravya), the first point is that 'having obstruction is impermanent' is difficult to establish. The second point is that 'having no obstruction becomes existence' (bhāva) is difficult to establish. Because it is allowed that the color faculty (rūpendriya) takes objects, it leads to having obstruction.

In refuting 'existence' (bhāva), there are four points. The first point is the fault of self-contradiction of the nature of phenomena (svalakṣaṇa). They say: 'The nature of existence' (bhāvatva), apart from real substance (dravya), has a separate nature. It is allowed that it is not non-existent, like qualities (guṇa) and actions (karma). This has uncertainty, because real substance is a dissimilar example. Because there is (the nature of existence) in it. Now it is said: apart from real substance, there is no separate nature. It is allowed that it is not non-existent, like real substance. If the non-Buddhist teacher uses qualities and actions as the cause of difference and combination as a fault of uncertainty, then it is not a fault of uncertainty. Because he is uncertain, not self-common. Since the treatise uses qualities and actions as similar examples, it is only a contradiction in inference. The second point is the fault of self-contradiction of the subject. They say: 'The nature of existence', apart from reality, has a separate nature. It is allowed that it is different from reality (dravya), like qualities and actions. Taking the nature of existence as the subject. Now it is said that the nature of existence should not be the nature of existence. Therefore, it becomes a self-contradiction of the subject. Now, using non-existence as an example, it also becomes a definite contradiction. The third and fourth points are both contradictions in inference.

In questioning 'sameness and difference' (sāmānyaviśeṣa), the first point is the fault of self-contradiction of the subject. They say: 'Sameness and difference' is definitely different from reality (dravya), having a separate existence. It is allowed that it is different from reality, like qualities and actions. Now, let sameness and difference not be sameness and difference. Therefore, it becomes a self-contradiction of the subject.

法自相相違。云何亦名謂許異實等。因不但顯有異於實．德．業。亦顯實等性非實性等。如能成遮實。如是亦能成遮同異性。俱決定故。故成有法自相相違又不但有比量及決定相違。及有有法自相相違。故論言亦。不爾亦言便為無用 比量相違過者。實．德．業三。更無別性。六．十句中隨一攝故。如大有等 又或實性。定異實無。許顯實故。如實 余德．業性亦爾。亦成決定相違。難實非實。亦同此破。因言便破非正難也。第三準上返覆兩難。總別有殊義理無別 第四比量相違。彼云。實性。無別性性。許非初三故。如大有等 不但闕無同喻成不共不定。亦成比量相違。第五亦比量相違。

破離識實有自體現量智中。德句心．心所應有所簡。

破大自在天中。論文四因。如次以下難於上宗。然更互為因。一因難三宗亦得。如理應知。

聲論中。瑜伽第十五云。處所根裁施設建立者。如樹根裁樹之根本故。聲根本名曰根裁。即是字也。辨出聲處所名為處所。本聲明也。謂劫初起。梵王創造一百萬頌聲明。後命惠減。帝釋後略為十萬頌。次有迦多沒羅仙。略為一萬二千頌。次有波膩尼仙。略為八千頌此上四論總名處所。今現行者唯有後二。前之二論並已滅沒。字型根裁聲明論有三百頌。波膩尼仙所造

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：法（Dharma）的自相（svalakṣaṇa）是相互違背的。為什麼又稱為『許異實等』呢？因為因（hetu）不僅顯示有異於實（dravya）、德（guṇa）、業（karma），也顯示實等的自性並非實性等。例如，能成立遮遣實，也能成立遮遣同異性，因為兩者都是決定的。所以，成立有法（dharmin）自相相違。而且，不僅有比量（anumāna）及決定相違，也有有法自相相違，所以論中說『亦』。不然，『亦』字就變得沒有用了。比量相違的過失在於，實、德、業這三者，更沒有其他的自性，因為它們被包含在六句（ṣaṭpadārtha）或十句（daśapadārtha）中的一個里，例如大有（mahāsattā）等。又或者，實性（dravyatva）必定異於實無（adravyatva），因為它被認為是顯現實（dravya）的，例如實（dravya）本身。其餘的德性（guṇatva）、業性（karmatva）也是如此。這也成立了決定相違。如果反駁說實（dravya）並非實（dravya），也可以用同樣的道理來破斥。因（hetu）的說法就破斥了非正難（anaiকান্তika）的責難。第三種情況，準照上面的正反兩種責難，總體和個別雖然有差別，但義理上沒有區別。第四種比量相違，他們說：實性（dravyatva）沒有別性（viseṣa），因為它被認為不是最初的三者（實、德、業），例如大有（mahāsattā）等。這不僅缺少同喻（sapakṣa）而成立不共不定（asādhāraṇa-anaikāntika），也成立了比量相違。第五種也是比量相違。 在破斥離識實有自體現量智（pramāṇa-jñāna）中，德句（guṇa-padārtha）的心（citta）、心所（caitta）應該有所簡別。 在破斥大自在天（Maheśvara）中，論文中的四個因（hetu），依次用下面的來責難上面的宗（pakṣa）。然而，它們可以互相作為因（hetu）。一個因（hetu）也可以用來責難三個宗（pakṣa），應該如理了解。 在聲明論（Śabda-śāstra）中，《瑜伽論》（Yoga-śāstra）第十五卷說：『處所（sthāna）、根裁（mūla-prakṛti）、施設（vyavasthāna）、建立（pratiṣṭhā）』。例如，樹根裁（mūla-prakṛti）是樹的根本，所以聲明（śabda）的根本被稱為根裁（mūla-prakṛti），也就是字（akṣara）。辨別發出聲音的處所（sthāna）稱為處所（sthāna），也就是本聲明（mūla-śabda）。據說在劫初的時候，梵王（Brahmā）創造了一百萬頌的聲明（śabda），後來命令減少。帝釋天（Indra）後來縮略為十萬頌。接著有迦多沒羅仙（Kātantra），縮略為一萬二千頌。然後有波膩尼仙（Pāṇini），縮略為八千頌。以上四種論總稱為處所（sthāna）。現在流行使用的只有後兩種，前兩種已經滅沒了。字型根裁（akṣara-mūla-prakṛti）的聲明論（śabda-śāstra）有三百頌，是波膩尼仙（Pāṇini）所造。

【English Translation】 English version: The self-characteristics (svalakṣaṇa) of Dharmas (Dharma) contradict each other. Why is it also called 'affirming difference from substance, etc.'? Because the reason (hetu) not only shows difference from substance (dravya), quality (guṇa), and action (karma), but also shows that the nature of substance, etc., is not the nature of substance, etc. For example, it can establish the negation of substance, and it can also establish the negation of identity and difference, because both are definite. Therefore, it establishes that the subject of the property (dharmin) contradicts itself. Moreover, not only are there contradictions in inference (anumāna) and determination, but there are also contradictions in the subject of the property itself. Therefore, the word 'also' is used in the treatise. Otherwise, the word 'also' would be useless. The fault of contradiction in inference lies in the fact that substance, quality, and action have no other distinct nature, because they are included in one of the six categories (ṣaṭpadārtha) or ten categories (daśapadārtha), such as great existence (mahāsattā), etc. Or, the nature of substance (dravyatva) is necessarily different from the non-existence of substance (adravyatva), because it is considered to manifest substance (dravya), such as substance (dravya) itself. The same applies to the nature of quality (guṇatva) and the nature of action (karmatva). This also establishes a definite contradiction. If it is argued that substance (dravya) is not substance (dravya), the same reasoning can be used to refute it. The statement of the reason (hetu) refutes the accusation of inconclusive (anaiকান্তika). In the third case, according to the above two kinds of accusations, although there are differences in the general and the specific, there is no difference in the meaning. The fourth contradiction in inference, they say: The nature of substance (dravyatva) has no distinct nature (viseṣa), because it is considered not to be the first three (substance, quality, and action), such as great existence (mahāsattā), etc. This not only lacks a similar example (sapakṣa) and establishes the uncommon inconclusive (asādhāraṇa-anaikāntika), but also establishes a contradiction in inference. The fifth is also a contradiction in inference. In refuting the truly existing self-manifesting valid cognition (pramāṇa-jñāna) apart from consciousness, the mind (citta) and mental factors (caitta) of the quality category (guṇa-padārtha) should be distinguished. In refuting Maheśvara (Maheśvara), the four reasons (hetu) in the treatise are used in sequence to challenge the above-mentioned thesis (pakṣa). However, they can be used as reasons (hetu) for each other. One reason (hetu) can also be used to challenge three theses (pakṣa), which should be understood accordingly. In the treatise on sound (Śabda-śāstra), the fifteenth volume of the Yoga-śāstra (Yoga-śāstra) says: 'Place (sthāna), root nature (mūla-prakṛti), arrangement (vyavasthāna), establishment (pratiṣṭhā)'. For example, the root nature (mūla-prakṛti) of a tree is the root of the tree, so the root of sound (śabda) is called root nature (mūla-prakṛti), which is the letter (akṣara). Distinguishing the place (sthāna) where the sound is produced is called place (sthāna), which is the original sound (mūla-śabda). It is said that at the beginning of the kalpa, Brahmā (Brahmā) created one million verses of sound (śabda), and later ordered a reduction. Indra (Indra) later abbreviated it to one hundred thousand verses. Then there was Kātantra (Kātantra), who abbreviated it to twelve thousand verses. Then there was Pāṇini (Pāṇini), who abbreviated it to eight thousand verses. The above four treatises are collectively called place (sthāna). Only the latter two are currently in use, and the former two have been destroyed. The treatise on sound (śabda-śāstra) of the letter root nature (akṣara-mūla-prakṛti) has three hundred verses, which were created by Pāṇini (Pāṇini).

略成聲明頌有一千頌。名為聲明略本頌。後有八界論。有八百頌。名為因緣。又有聞釋迦論。一千五百頌。又有溫那地論。二千五百頌。此五聲明併名根裁。能與根本處所聲明為生智解所依本故。然護法菩薩。造二萬五千頌。名雜寶聲明論。西方以為聲明究竟之極論。盛行於世。然聲明論有五品。瑜伽云。相續．名號．總略．彼益．宣說。一相續。是合聲合字法為一品是第一分。二名號。明劫初梵王於一一法皆立千名。帝釋後減為百名。後又減為十名。後又減為三名。總為一品。是第二名號品名號分。三總略。是聲明中根本略要。四彼益。是次中略之。令物生解名為彼益。五宣說。是廣宣說。謂略．中．廣。是後三品即後分。三聲論中有執。一切聲皆是常。有二釋。一云一切一切。即內外皆計常。二云小分一切。唯內一切聲常。雖有二解前解為勝。外物雖復不詮。顯生聲之緣。亦有一切物共。亦有各別。隨應有之。

破薩婆多中有三。一敘宗總非。二別破。三結妄。別破有三。初同觀所緣論。第二比量可知。第三比量云。和合極微。非離本極微外有別體相。即不和合時極微故。如不合時。

五境。略以五門分別。一假實。二有無漏。三三性。四異熟等分別。五識緣分別。

極微。五門分別。一辨眼

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：略成聲明頌有一千頌，名為聲明略本頌（關於聲明的簡略頌）。後有八界論，有八百頌，名為因緣（關於因緣的論述）。又有聞釋迦論，一千五百頌（關於聽聞釋迦牟尼佛的論述）。又有溫那地論，二千五百頌（關於溫那地的論述）。此五聲明併名根裁（根本），能與根本處所聲明為生智解所依本故（因為它們是產生智慧和理解根本聲明的基礎）。然護法菩薩，造二萬五千頌，名雜寶聲明論（護法菩薩創作了名為《雜寶聲明論》的二萬五千頌）。西方以為聲明究竟之極論（西方認為這是聲明的終極論著），盛行於世。然聲明論有五品（聲明論有五類）：瑜伽云（瑜伽經中說），相續（連續）、名號（名稱）、總略（總括簡要）、彼益（其利益）、宣說（宣講）。一相續，是合聲合字法為一品是第一分（相續是將聲音和文字組合的規則作為一類，是第一部分）。二名號，明劫初梵王於一一法皆立千名（名號是說在劫初，梵天為每一種法都設立了一千個名字），帝釋後減為百名（帝釋天後來減少到一百個名字），後又減為十名（後來又減少到十個名字），後又減為三名（最後減少到三個名字），總為一品（總共作為一類）。是第二名號品名號分（是第二類名號品，名號部分）。三總略，是聲明中根本略要（總略是聲明中最根本的簡要內容）。四彼益，是次中略之（彼益是其次要的簡要內容），令物生解名為彼益（使事物產生理解就叫做彼益）。五宣說，是廣宣說（宣說是廣泛的宣講），謂略（簡要）、中（中等）、廣（廣博）。是後三品即後分（是後面的三類，也就是後面的部分）。三聲論中有執（在關於聲音的論述中有人認為），一切聲皆是常（所有的聲音都是永恒不變的）。有二釋（有兩種解釋）：一云一切一切（一種說法是所有的一切），即內外皆計常（即內部和外部都認為是永恒的）。二云小分一切（另一種說法是小部分的一切），唯內一切聲常（只有內部的一切聲音是永恒的）。雖有二解前解為勝（雖然有兩種解釋，但前一種解釋更好）。外物雖復不詮（外部事物雖然不能直接表達），顯生聲之緣（但能顯示產生聲音的因緣），亦有一切物共（也有所有事物共有的），亦有各別（也有各自不同的），隨應有之（根據情況而有）。 破薩婆多中有三（駁斥一切有部有三個方面）：一敘宗總非（首先總的否定其宗義），二別破（然後分別駁斥），三結妄（最後總結其虛妄）。別破有三（分別駁斥有三個方面）：初同觀所緣論（首先是共同觀察所緣的論述），第二比量可知（第二是通過比量可以得知），第三比量云（第三個比量說）：和合極微（組合在一起的極微），非離本極微外有別體相（不是在原本的極微之外還有其他的實體），即不和合時極微故（就像不組合在一起時的極微一樣）。如不合時（就像不組合在一起的時候一樣）。 五境（五種境界），略以五門分別（簡要地用五個方面來區分）：一假實（虛假和真實），二有無漏（有漏和無漏），三三性（三種性質），四異熟等分別（異熟等等的區分），五識緣分別（意識所緣的區分）。 極微（最小的微粒），五門分別（用五個方面來區分）：一辨眼（辨別眼睛）

【English Translation】 English version: The 'Slightly Abridged Treatise on Sound' consists of one thousand verses, and is named 'Shengming Lueben Song' (Verses on the Abridged Treatise on Sound). Following this is the 'Treatise on the Eighteen Realms,' comprising eight hundred verses, named 'Yinyuan' (Conditions). Then there is the 'Treatise on Hearing Shakyamuni,' with one thousand five hundred verses. And the 'Treatise on Unnati,' with two thousand five hundred verses. These five treatises on sound are collectively named 'Gencai' (Roots), because they serve as the foundation for generating wisdom and understanding of the fundamental principles of sound. However, the Bodhisattva Dharmapala composed twenty-five thousand verses, named 'Zabao Shengming Lun' (Treatise on Varied Treasures of Sound). The West regards this as the ultimate treatise on sound, and it is widely circulated in the world. The treatise on sound has five categories: Yoga says: 'Continuity, Names, Summary, Benefit, and Explanation.' 1. Continuity is the method of combining sounds and characters, forming one category, which is the first part. 2. Names explains that at the beginning of the kalpa, Brahma established a thousand names for each dharma. Indra later reduced it to a hundred names, then to ten names, and finally to three names, forming one category in total. This is the second category, the Names section. 3. Summary is the fundamental essence of the treatise on sound. 4. Benefit is the subsequent summary, enabling understanding, and is called Benefit. 5. Explanation is the extensive explanation, including brief, intermediate, and extensive explanations. These are the last three categories, which constitute the latter part. In the treatises on sound, some hold that all sounds are eternal. There are two interpretations: one says 'all all,' meaning that both internal and external sounds are considered eternal; the other says 'a small part of all,' meaning that only internal sounds are eternal. Although there are two interpretations, the former is considered superior. Although external objects do not directly express, they reveal the conditions for the generation of sound. There are also things common to all objects, and things that are distinct, depending on the circumstances. There are three aspects to refuting the Sarvastivadins: 1. Stating the general negation of their doctrine; 2. Refuting separately; 3. Concluding their delusion. There are three aspects to the separate refutations: first, the discussion of the common object of perception; second, it can be known through inference; third, the inference says: the combined atoms are not separate entities from the original atoms, just like the atoms when they are not combined. Like when they are not combined. The five realms are briefly distinguished by five aspects: 1. False and real; 2. Defiled and undefiled; 3. Three natures; 4. Distinctions such as Vipaka (resultant); 5. Distinctions of the object of consciousness. The ultimate particle is distinguished by five aspects: 1. Distinguishing the eye.

緣。二釋違難。三說勝利。四何心所觀。要方便非生得。五能緣之心何諦所攝。有漏通二諦。無漏道諦收。然非唯苦。通善．不善。執為實有。正觀觀察故。非唯苦諦。

然依思愿善惡分限者。此是佛身無表之別句。是余表無表之總句。由佛無表雖是曾得非唸唸新生。以昔發願制於業思。眾生界盡我期乃爾。以心無萎歇故。或常有。除佛已外或皆未曾得。由愿制思不萎歇故。未遇破緣或常相續。若遇犯舍之緣。愿既萎歇更不新起。名為舍或故也。然定道無表唯依善思分限。別解脫無表全依善思愿分限。不律儀無表唯依惡思愿分限。處中無表通依善惡思愿分限。故今合說。

增長位立者。是除佛外。佛身修舊不增長故。

發身語思。疏中但言是業非表．無表。名身表業者。動身表之業。依主釋也。但言身業。亦動身之業。若言身表者。依身之表。其語即表發語之業。亦語表之業隨應皆得 三思之中後之二思二義名道。前思游履。其審慮思唯生當果一義名道 問若許思所發身．語立無表名。意亦由思作。應當立表稱。問身．語思所作。則許立業名。意識思所造。亦應立業稱 答不然。身．語外彰他表名錶。意唯內解自表非他。造作名為業。身．語體造作。意體雖他引。非作不名業。其觸．作意等皆由思

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 緣。二釋違難。三說勝利。四何心所觀。要方便非生得。五能緣之心何諦所攝。有漏通二諦。無漏道諦收。然非唯苦。通善．不善。執為實有。正觀觀察故。非唯苦諦。

然依思愿善惡分限者。此是佛身無表之別句。是余表無表之總句。由佛無表雖是曾得非唸唸新生。以昔發願制於業思。眾生界盡我期乃爾。以心無萎歇故。或常有。除佛已外或皆未曾得。由愿制思不萎歇故。未遇破緣或常相續。若遇犯舍之緣。愿既萎歇更不新起。名為舍或故也。然定道無表唯依善思分限。別解脫無表全依善思愿分限。不律儀無表唯依惡思愿分限。處中無表通依善惡思愿分限。故今合說。

增長位立者。是除佛外。佛身修舊不增長故。

發身語思。疏中但言是業非表．無表。名身表業者。動身表之業。依主釋也。但言身業。亦動身之業。若言身表者。依身之表。其語即表發語之業。亦語表之業隨應皆得 三思之中後之二思二義名道。前思游履。其審慮思唯生當果一義名道 問若許思所發身．語立無表名。意亦由思作。應當立表稱。問身．語思所作。則許立業名。意識思所造。亦應立業稱 答不然。身．語外彰他表名錶。意唯內解自表非他。造作名為業。身．語體造作。意體雖他引。非作不名業。其觸．作意等皆由思 現代漢語譯本 第一，解釋『緣』（hetu，因緣）的含義。第二，解釋其中的困難。第三，說明其殊勝之處。第四，用什麼心來觀察？需要方便而非生來就有的。第五，能緣之心屬於哪個諦（satya，真諦）所包含？有漏（sāsrava，有煩惱）之心通於二諦（duḥkha-satya，苦諦和samudaya-satya，集諦）。無漏（anāsrava，無煩惱）之心被道諦（mārga-satya，道諦）所包含。然而並非只有苦諦，也通於善與不善。執著于認為是真實存在的，通過正確的觀察來觀察，所以並非只有苦諦。

然而，依據思（cetanā，思）和愿（praṇidhāna，愿）的善惡來劃分界限。這是佛身無表（arūpī，無表色）的特殊情況，是其餘表（rūpī，表色）和無表的總體情況。由於佛的無表雖然是曾經獲得的，但並非唸唸新生。因為過去發願約束著業思（karma-cetanā，業思），『眾生界盡，我的期限才到』。因為心沒有衰竭的緣故，或許常有。除了佛以外，或許都未曾獲得。因為愿約束著思，不衰竭的緣故，未遇到破壞的因緣，或許常常相續。如果遇到違犯或捨棄的因緣，愿既然衰竭，就不再重新生起，這叫做捨棄或者故意的。然而，禪定之道（dhyāna-mārga，禪定之道）的無表，僅僅依據善思來劃分界限。別解脫（prātimokṣa，別解脫戒）的無表，完全依據善思和愿來劃分界限。不律儀（apratisaṃvara，不律儀）的無表，僅僅依據惡思和愿來劃分界限。處中無表（neither wholesome nor unwholesome，非善非惡的無表），通於依據善惡思和愿來劃分界限。所以現在合在一起說。

建立增長位，是除了佛以外。佛身修舊，不會增長的緣故。

發起身語思（kāya-vacī-cetanā，身語思）。疏中只說是業，不是表或無表。稱為身表業（kāya-vijñapti-karma，身表業），是動身所表現的業，是依主釋。只說身業，也是動身的業。如果說身表，是依身而表現的。其語即是表，發起語的業，也是語表之業，隨應都可以。三種思之中，後面的兩種思，具有兩種意義，稱為道。前面的思是游履。其中審慮思（samlocanā-cetanā，審慮思）只有產生當來果報的一種意義，稱為道。問：如果允許思所發的身語，建立無表之名，意也是由思所作，應當建立表之稱。問：身語思所作，就允許建立業之名。意識思所造，也應當建立業之稱。答：不是這樣。身語向外彰顯，向他人表達，稱為表。意僅僅向內理解，向自己表達，不是向他人表達。造作稱為業。身語的體是造作，意的體雖然被他引導，但不是造作，所以不稱為業。其觸（sparśa，觸）、作意（manaskāra，作意）等，都是由思所引起。 English version First, explain the meaning of 'hetu' (cause, condition). Second, explain the difficulties therein. Third, explain its advantages. Fourth, with what mind should one observe? It requires skillful means, not something innate. Fifth, to which satya (truth) does the mind that cognizes belong? The contaminated (sāsrava) mind is common to the two truths (duḥkha-satya, the truth of suffering and samudaya-satya, the truth of the origin of suffering). The uncontaminated (anāsrava) mind is included in the mārga-satya (the truth of the path). However, it is not only the truth of suffering; it also includes wholesome and unwholesome. Clinging to it as truly existing, observing through correct contemplation, therefore it is not only the truth of suffering.

However, based on the limits of good and evil of cetanā (volition, intention) and praṇidhāna (vow, aspiration). This is a specific statement about the arūpī (non-manifestation) of the Buddha's body; it is a general statement about the remaining rūpī (manifestation) and non-manifestation. Although the Buddha's non-manifestation is something previously attained, it is not newly arising in each moment. Because the past vow restricts the karma-cetanā (karma-intention): 'When the realm of sentient beings is exhausted, then my term will be over.' Because the mind does not wither, it may be constant. Except for the Buddha, perhaps all have never attained it. Because the vow restricts the intention and does not wither, if it does not encounter destructive conditions, it may continue constantly. If it encounters conditions of violation or abandonment, since the vow withers, it will not arise anew; this is called abandonment or intentional. However, the non-manifestation of the dhyāna-mārga (path of meditation) relies solely on the limits of wholesome intention. The non-manifestation of prātimokṣa (individual liberation vows) relies entirely on the limits of wholesome intention and vow. The non-manifestation of apratisaṃvara (non-restraint) relies solely on the limits of evil intention and vow. The neutral non-manifestation (neither wholesome nor unwholesome) is common to relying on the limits of good and evil intention and vow. Therefore, they are now spoken of together.

The establishment of the stage of growth is apart from the Buddha. Because the Buddha's body is repaired and does not grow.

Initiating kāya-vacī-cetanā (body, speech, and mind intention). The commentary only says that it is karma, not manifestation or non-manifestation. What is called kāya-vijñapti-karma (body manifestation karma) is the karma that manifests through the movement of the body; it is a possessive compound. Simply saying body karma is also the karma of moving the body. If it is said to be body manifestation, it is the manifestation that depends on the body. Its speech is the manifestation, the karma of initiating speech, and it is also the karma of speech manifestation, as appropriate. Among the three intentions, the latter two intentions have two meanings and are called the path. The former intention is wandering. Among them, samlocanā-cetanā (deliberative intention) has only one meaning of producing the future result and is called the path. Question: If it is allowed that the body and speech issued by intention establish the name of non-manifestation, and the mind is also made by intention, it should establish the name of manifestation. Question: What is done by body, speech, and intention is allowed to establish the name of karma. What is created by consciousness intention should also establish the name of karma. Answer: It is not so. The body and speech manifest outwardly, expressing to others, and are called manifestation. The mind only understands inwardly, expressing to oneself, not to others. Creation is called karma. The substance of body and speech is creation. Although the substance of mind is guided by others, it is not creation, so it is not called karma. Its sparśa (contact), manaskāra (attention), etc., are all caused by intention.

【English Translation】 English version First, explain the meaning of 'hetu' (cause, condition). Second, explain the difficulties therein. Third, explain its advantages. Fourth, with what mind should one observe? It requires skillful means, not something innate. Fifth, to which satya (truth) does the mind that cognizes belong? The contaminated (sāsrava) mind is common to the two truths (duḥkha-satya, the truth of suffering and samudaya-satya, the truth of the origin of suffering). The uncontaminated (anāsrava) mind is included in the mārga-satya (the truth of the path). However, it is not only the truth of suffering; it also includes wholesome and unwholesome. Clinging to it as truly existing, observing through correct contemplation, therefore it is not only the truth of suffering.

However, based on the limits of good and evil of cetanā (volition, intention) and praṇidhāna (vow, aspiration). This is a specific statement about the arūpī (non-manifestation) of the Buddha's body; it is a general statement about the remaining rūpī (manifestation) and non-manifestation. Although the Buddha's non-manifestation is something previously attained, it is not newly arising in each moment. Because the past vow restricts the karma-cetanā (karma-intention): 'When the realm of sentient beings is exhausted, then my term will be over.' Because the mind does not wither, it may be constant. Except for the Buddha, perhaps all have never attained it. Because the vow restricts the intention and does not wither, if it does not encounter destructive conditions, it may continue constantly. If it encounters conditions of violation or abandonment, since the vow withers, it will not arise anew; this is called abandonment or intentional. However, the non-manifestation of the dhyāna-mārga (path of meditation) relies solely on the limits of wholesome intention. The non-manifestation of prātimokṣa (individual liberation vows) relies entirely on the limits of wholesome intention and vow. The non-manifestation of apratisaṃvara (non-restraint) relies solely on the limits of evil intention and vow. The neutral non-manifestation (neither wholesome nor unwholesome) is common to relying on the limits of good and evil intention and vow. Therefore, they are now spoken of together.

The establishment of the stage of growth is apart from the Buddha. Because the Buddha's body is repaired and does not grow.

Initiating kāya-vacī-cetanā (body, speech, and mind intention). The commentary only says that it is karma, not manifestation or non-manifestation. What is called kāya-vijñapti-karma (body manifestation karma) is the karma that manifests through the movement of the body; it is a possessive compound. Simply saying body karma is also the karma of moving the body. If it is said to be body manifestation, it is the manifestation that depends on the body. Its speech is the manifestation, the karma of initiating speech, and it is also the karma of speech manifestation, as appropriate. Among the three intentions, the latter two intentions have two meanings and are called the path. The former intention is wandering. Among them, samlocanā-cetanā (deliberative intention) has only one meaning of producing the future result and is called the path. Question: If it is allowed that the body and speech issued by intention establish the name of non-manifestation, and the mind is also made by intention, it should establish the name of manifestation. Question: What is done by body, speech, and intention is allowed to establish the name of karma. What is created by consciousness intention should also establish the name of karma. Answer: It is not so. The body and speech manifest outwardly, expressing to others, and are called manifestation. The mind only understands inwardly, expressing to oneself, not to others. Creation is called karma. The substance of body and speech is creation. Although the substance of mind is guided by others, it is not creation, so it is not called karma. Its sparśa (contact), manaskāra (attention), etc., are all caused by intention.

作以成三性。體非造作。亦不名業。亦不名自表。非王非勝故。

五十九云。身．語名業道。發思名業。貪嗔．邪見名道者。隨順薩婆多與此不違。

表無表中略為 頌曰。

惡或生彼家 發心起忍樂 是不律儀者 業道猶樂成 小多作彼事 便成不善業 如是余有人 發心等亦爾 此由舍五緣 誓舍．及受戒 命終．得上定 戒沒二形生 苾芻非自受 從他簡擇故 近事．及近住 自受亦從他 表業定從他 無表通二受 自受唯意表 非表示他故 出家舍五緣 舍學．犯重罪 形沒二形生 斷善．棄同分 近事由三緣 舍學．善根斷 及棄眾同分 並前非法滅 近住亦由三 日出．舍學處 並棄眾同分 非斷善．法滅 定戒通無色 初近分名斷 余持遠分性 是名定律儀 道戒唯九定 六色．三無色 (以見道許依五地。修道亦唯通三無色。瑜伽第一百云。九地能盡漏。即色界六地並能盡漏。即唯修道。見道不依中間。三依五依生故) 是斷依見．修 頓．漸無間道 (預流超越取第四果。于欲界有斷對治故。對法第十三說。預流依未至定得超第四。不說依餘地者。今為二解。如下第十卷解。頓漸斷惑中疏

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『作以成三性』，其本體並非人為造作，因此不稱為『業』，也不稱為『自表』，因為它既非自主，也非殊勝的緣故。

第五十九卷中說：『身』和『語』被稱為『業道』，『發思』被稱為『業』，『貪』、『嗔』、『邪見』被稱為『道』。這與薩婆多部（Sarvastivada，一切有部）的觀點沒有衝突。

對於『表業』和『無表業』，簡略地用偈頌概括如下：

惡行可能發生在某人家中，（即使）發起忍耐和喜樂之心，如果是不持律儀者，『業道』仍然會樂於成就。 如果少量多次地做那些事情，就會形成不善業，其他人發起（同樣）的心也是如此。 以下情況會喪失五種緣：捨棄誓言、以及受戒、命終、獲得上定、戒體消失、以及變成雙性人。 比丘（Bhikkhu，出家男眾）不是自己受戒，而是從他人處經過簡擇後受戒；近事（Upasaka，在家男眾）和近住（Upavasatha，八關齋戒）既可以自己受戒，也可以從他人處受戒。 『表業』必定是從他人處受得，『無表業』則可以通過兩種方式獲得：自己受和從他處受。 自己受戒只能產生意表業，因為它不是爲了向他人表示。 出家會喪失五種緣：捨棄所學、犯下重罪、形體消失、變成雙性人、斷絕善根、以及捨棄共同的身份。 近事（Upasaka，在家男眾）會因為三種緣故而喪失（戒體）：捨棄所學、善根斷絕、以及捨棄大眾共同的身份，加上之前的非法行為而滅失。 近住（Upavasatha，八關齋戒）也會因為三種緣故而喪失（戒體）：日出、捨棄所學的戒條、以及捨棄大眾共同的身份，但不會斷絕善根，也不會導致法滅。 禪定之戒可以通於無色界，最初的近分定被稱為『斷』，其餘的具有保持遠分（遠離惡行）的性質，這被稱為『定律儀』。 道戒只存在於九種禪定中，即六種色界禪定和三種無色界禪定。 （因為見道允許依靠五地，修道也只通於三種無色界禪定。《瑜伽師地論》第一百卷說：九地能夠斷盡煩惱，即第六地也能斷盡煩惱，即唯有修道。見道不依靠中間禪，因為三禪依靠五禪而生。） 這種斷絕依賴於見道和修道，是頓斷、漸斷和無間道。 （預流果（Sotapanna，須陀洹）可以超越而取得第四果（Arhat，阿羅漢），因為在欲界有斷除對治的緣故。《對法論》第十三卷說：預流果依靠未至定可以超越到第四果，沒有說依靠其他地，現在有兩種解釋，如下第十卷的解釋，在頓漸斷惑中疏解。）

【English Translation】 English version 『Made to constitute the three natures,』 its substance is not artificially created, therefore it is not called 『karma,』 nor is it called 『self-expression,』 because it is neither autonomous nor supremely excellent.

The fifty-ninth volume says: 『Body』 and 『speech』 are called 『paths of karma,』 『thought』 is called 『karma,』 『greed,』 『hatred,』 and 『wrong views』 are called 『paths.』 This does not conflict with the Sarvastivada (一切有部) school's view.

Regarding 『manifest karma』 and 『non-manifest karma,』 a brief summary is given in verse:

Evil deeds may occur in someone's home, (even if) a mind of patience and joy arises, if one does not uphold the precepts, the 『path of karma』 will still be happy to be accomplished. If those things are done in small amounts and frequently, they will form unwholesome karma; it is the same if others generate (the same) mind. The following situations will cause the loss of the five conditions: abandoning vows, taking precepts, death, attaining higher samadhi, the disappearance of the precept body, and becoming hermaphroditic. A Bhikkhu (比丘, ordained male monastic) does not take precepts by himself, but takes them from others after careful selection; an Upasaka (近事, lay male follower) and Upavasatha (近住, eight precepts) can both take precepts by themselves or from others. 『Manifest karma』 must be received from others, while 『non-manifest karma』 can be obtained in two ways: by oneself and from others. Taking precepts by oneself can only produce mental expression karma, because it is not for expressing to others. Leaving home will cause the loss of the five conditions: abandoning learning, committing serious offenses, the disappearance of the form, becoming hermaphroditic, severing good roots, and abandoning the common identity. An Upasaka (近事, lay male follower) will lose (the precept body) for three reasons: abandoning learning, severing good roots, and abandoning the common identity of the Sangha, plus the previous illegal actions will cause it to perish. Upavasatha (近住, eight precepts) will also lose (the precept body) for three reasons: sunrise, abandoning the precepts learned, and abandoning the common identity of the Sangha, but it will not sever good roots, nor will it cause the Dharma to perish. The precepts of samadhi can extend to the formless realm; the initial proximity samadhi is called 『severance,』 and the rest have the nature of maintaining distance (from evil deeds), which is called 『law-abiding conduct.』 The precepts of the path only exist in nine samadhis, namely six form realm samadhis and three formless realm samadhis. (Because the path of seeing allows reliance on the five grounds, the path of cultivation also only extends to the three formless realm samadhis. The one-hundredth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: the nine grounds can exhaust afflictions, that is, the sixth ground can also exhaust afflictions, that is, only the path of cultivation. The path of seeing does not rely on the intermediate dhyana, because the three dhyanas rely on the five dhyanas for their arising.) This severance relies on the path of seeing and the path of cultivation, and is sudden severance, gradual severance, and the path of no interval. (A Sotapanna (預流果, stream-enterer) can transcend and attain the fourth fruit (Arhat, 阿羅漢), because there is severance of the antidote in the desire realm. The thirteenth volume of the Abhidharmakosa says: a Sotapanna can transcend to the fourth fruit by relying on the unreached dhyana, without mentioning reliance on other grounds; now there are two explanations, as explained in the tenth volume below, in the commentary on sudden and gradual severance of afflictions.)

文自解) 此依于遠分 隨應及有頂 (許有遊觀心故) 若起異分心(定散二緣。有漏無漏緣。不爾便非) 便舍隨心戒

論。然依思愿善惡分限等者。此是一切無表之通句。亦是佛身無表之別句。佛身定戒與因不殊。唯別脫異。不增長故。下增長言唯據因位。故佛別脫無表。唯依思愿分限。愿盡未來方可舍故不同於因。故此初是佛戒別句。諸無表總句 問若許思所發身．語立表名。意亦由思作。應當立表稱 答身．語性是業。可依立表名。意非體是業。如何得表稱 問身．語思所作。即許立業名。意識思所造。亦應立業稱 答不然。造作名為業。身．語體造作。意體雖他引。非作不名業。其觸．作意等。皆由思作以成三性。體非造作。亦不名業。此義應思 五十九云身．語名業．道。發思名業。貪．嗔．邪見名道者。隨順薩婆多。與此不違。

難不相應中。顯揚第十八云。諸不相應皆有二失故是假有。一因過失。二體過失 因過失。若生生故名之為生。是則無別果生可得。若生所生名之為生。是則不應名能生等。廣如彼說。今應難云。

破得中第三正破有二。初破得。後非得。得中又二。一依教理齊徴。即七難是。二縱有別義徴。又得於法等是。初中又四。初引教齊難。二破救自在

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 文自解： 此（戒體）依賴於遠分（指色界和無色界），隨其所應（指不同根性的眾生）及有頂天（色界最高的禪定境界）。（因為這些地方允許有遊觀的心念存在） 若生起異分心（指與戒體相違的心念，包括定心和散心兩種因緣，以及有漏和無漏兩種因緣。否則便不算是異分心），便捨棄隨心戒。 論：然而，依據思愿、善惡分限等，這是一切無表（指無表色，即無法用外在行為表現的戒體）的通用語句，也是佛身無表的特殊語句。佛身的定戒與因地（指凡夫地）的戒體沒有差別，唯有別解脫戒不同，因為它不會增長。下文所說的增長，僅僅是指因地的戒體。所以佛的別解脫無表，僅僅依據思愿分限。因為要到未來際願力窮盡時才可以捨棄，所以不同於因地的戒體。因此，這最初是佛戒的特殊語句，是諸無表的總括語句。 問：如果允許由思所發的身、語立為表色之名，那麼意也由思所作，應當也立為表色之稱。 答：身、語的性質是業，可以依據它來立表色之名。而意不是自體是業，如何能得到表色之稱？ 問：身、語由思所作，就允許立為業名。意識由思所造，也應該立為業稱。 答：不是這樣的。造作名為業，身、語的自體是造作。意的自體雖然由他引導，但不是造作，所以不名為業。至於觸、作意等，都由思所作而成就三性（善、惡、無記），但自體不是造作，也不名為業。這個道理應該仔細思考。 《五十九》中說，身、語名為業、道，發起思名為業，貪、嗔、邪見名為道，這是隨順薩婆多部（一切有部）的觀點，與此（指本文的觀點）並不違背。 難：在不相應行法中，《顯揚》第十八說，諸不相應行法都有兩種過失，所以是假有。一是因的過失，二是體的過失。 因的過失：如果說生是由於生而名為生，那麼就沒有別的果生可以得到。如果說生是由所生而名為生，那麼就不應該名為能生等。詳細的論述如彼處所說。現在應該提出疑問： 破得中，第三（品）正式破斥有二：首先破斥得，然後破斥非得。得中又有二：一是依據教理一起征難，即七難是；二是縱然有別的意義也進行征難，又如得於法等。初中又有四：首先引用教證一起進行詰難，其次破斥救護的自在。

【English Translation】 English version: Text Self-Explanation: This (the substance of precepts) relies on the distant realms (referring to the Form Realm and Formless Realm), according to what is appropriate (referring to sentient beings of different capacities) and the Peak of Existence (the highest meditative state in the Form Realm). (Because these places allow for the existence of wandering thoughts). If a different mind arises (referring to a mind contrary to the substance of precepts, including both meditative and scattered states, as well as defiled and undefiled states. Otherwise, it would not be considered a different mind), then the precepts taken at will are abandoned. Treatise: However, according to thoughts, wishes, the limits of good and evil, etc., this is a general statement for all non-manifestations (referring to non-manifest form, i.e., the substance of precepts that cannot be expressed through external actions), and also a specific statement for the non-manifestation of the Buddha's body. The meditative precepts of the Buddha's body are no different from the precepts in the causal stage (referring to the stage of ordinary beings), except for the Pratimoksha precepts, because they do not increase. The increase mentioned below only refers to the causal stage. Therefore, the Buddha's Pratimoksha non-manifestation only relies on thoughts and wishes. Because it can only be abandoned when the power of vows is exhausted in the future, it is different from the precepts in the causal stage. Therefore, this is initially a specific statement for the Buddha's precepts, and a general statement for all non-manifestations. Question: If it is allowed that bodily and verbal actions produced by thought are established as names of manifest form, then the mind is also produced by thought, and it should also be established as a name of manifest form. Answer: The nature of bodily and verbal actions is karma, and names of manifest form can be established based on them. However, the mind is not inherently karma, so how can it obtain the name of manifest form? Question: Bodily and verbal actions are produced by thought, so it is allowed to establish them as names of karma. Consciousness is created by thought, so it should also be established as a name of karma. Answer: It is not like that. Creation is called karma. The substance of bodily and verbal actions is creation. Although the substance of the mind is guided by others, it is not creation, so it is not called karma. As for contact, attention, etc., they are all produced by thought and accomplish the three natures (good, evil, and neutral), but the substance itself is not creation, so it is not called karma. This principle should be carefully considered. 《Fifty-Nine》 says that bodily and verbal actions are called karma and path, the arising of thought is called karma, and greed, hatred, and wrong views are called path. This is in accordance with the Sarvastivada school's view, and it does not contradict this (referring to the view in this text). Objection: In non-associated formations, the eighteenth chapter of 《Xianyang》 says that all non-associated formations have two faults, so they are provisionally existent. One is the fault of the cause, and the other is the fault of the substance. The fault of the cause: If it is said that arising is called arising because of arising, then no other fruit of arising can be obtained. If it is said that arising is called arising because of what is arisen, then it should not be called the producer, etc. Detailed discussions are as described there. Now, the question should be raised: In the chapter on 'Breaking Acquisition,' the third (section) formally refutes in two ways: first refuting acquisition, and then refuting non-acquisition. Within acquisition, there are again two: one is to challenge based on both doctrine and reason, which is the seven difficulties; the other is to challenge even if there is a different meaning, such as acquiring the Dharma, etc. Within the first, there are again four: first, quoting scriptural evidence to challenge together; second, refuting the freedom of protection.

名成。三由現在可假說有。四破彼救。若無得者未起之法應永不生者。現在必有善種等故縱有別義徴中有二。初定問。後別破。破中有二。如文可知。初破能起中有三。如文。

成不成中。種子成熟。謂有二乘及世道成不成不說菩薩。菩薩見道前二障亦有成不成。應說二乘煩惱種有成不成。所知一向成。菩薩雙說。資糧位俱產生不成。分別成不成。加行位一向不成。俱生通成不成。入見道已。修道成不成。見道一向不成。修道第七一向成。第六有成不成。煩惱障不斷一向成。所知障種有成不成。皆思準。

異生性唯染二障種上立者。問智障不障於二乘。即說名無覆。無性之人二障俱不障三乘。所知障體何性攝。皆應非染 答可斷種輕望不障以名無覆。無性二種俱重。通障三乘聖道併名為覆。若唯取分別種名異生。即一界成三界。應名三界異生。若取生現行種。即已離欲應名諸界異生 取與第八異生同地之性。其體即得之。

同分。略以十門分別。一釋名(如疏。抉擇五十二云。由彼彼分互相似性名眾同分。此意則顯眾者彼彼多非一義。分者類義。同者相似義。即眾多分類相似名眾同分)。二現種所依(難俱通。命根依之而立故此皆通。如對法)。三等流．異熟等(一切皆通。五十二示音聲等位。故

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：名成。三、由現在可以假設有。四、破斥對方的辯解。如果無所得者，那麼未生起的法應該永遠不會產生嗎？因為現在必定有善的種子等，所以即使有別的意義，征問中也有兩種。首先是確定性的提問，然後是分別破斥。破斥中有兩種，如文中所述。首先是破斥能生起，其中有三種，如文中所述。

成與不成中，種子成熟。指的是二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）以及世俗道（人天道）的成與不成，這裡不說菩薩。菩薩在見道之前，二障（煩惱障和所知障）也有成與不成。應該說二乘的煩惱種子有成與不成，所知障則一向是成。菩薩則兩者都說。資糧位（修行的最初階段）是俱產生與不成，分別成與不成。加行位（修行進入更高階段）則一向不成，俱生通達成與不成。進入見道（初果）之後，修道（進一步修行）成與不成。見道一向不成，修道第七識一向成，第六識有成與不成。煩惱障不斷則一向成，所知障種子有成與不成，都可以參照思考。

異生性（凡夫性）只在染污的二障種子上建立。問：智障（所知障）不障礙二乘，所以說它是無覆無記（不障礙解脫）。沒有佛性的人，二障都不障礙三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）。所知障的體性屬於什麼性質？都應該不是染污的。答：可以斷除的種子，因為輕微，所以說不障礙，稱為無覆。沒有佛性的兩種（指煩惱障和所知障）都沉重，普遍障礙三乘的聖道，所以稱為覆。如果只取分別種子名為異生，那麼一個界（欲界、色界、無色界）就成了三個界，應該稱為三界異生。如果取生起現行種子，那麼已經離欲的人應該稱為諸界異生。取與第八識（阿賴耶識）異生同地的性質，其體性就是所得的。

同分（眾生相似性）。略以十個方面來分別。一、解釋名稱（如疏中所說。《抉擇分》第五十二卷說：『由於彼彼部分互相相似的性質，名為眾同分。』這個意思就顯示了『眾』是指彼彼眾多，不是單一的意思；『分』是類別的意思；『同』是相似的意思。即眾多分類相似，名為眾同分）。二、現行和種子的所依（現行和種子都普遍。命根依它而建立，所以這些都普遍，如《對法論》中所說）。三、等流、異熟等（一切都普遍。《瑜伽師地論》第五十二卷顯示音聲等位，所以……）

【English Translation】 English version: Name accomplishment. Three, it can be hypothetically assumed from the present. Four, refuting the opponent's defense. If there is no attainment, then should the unarisen dharma never arise? Because there must be good seeds etc. in the present, even if there is another meaning, there are two in the questioning. First, a definitive question, then separate refutations. There are two in the refutation, as stated in the text. First, refuting the ability to arise, there are three, as stated in the text.

In accomplishment and non-accomplishment, the seed matures. This refers to the accomplishment and non-accomplishment of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) and the worldly path (paths of humans and devas), not speaking of Bodhisattvas here. Before a Bodhisattva sees the path, the two obscurations (kleśāvaraṇa and jñeyāvaraṇa) also have accomplishment and non-accomplishment. It should be said that the seeds of afflictions of the Two Vehicles have accomplishment and non-accomplishment, while the jñeyāvaraṇa is always accomplished. For Bodhisattvas, both are spoken of. In the stage of accumulation (the initial stage of practice), both innate and acquired are accomplished and not accomplished, and discrimination is accomplished and not accomplished. In the stage of application (entering a higher stage of practice), it is always not accomplished, and the innate universally accomplishes and does not accomplish. After entering the path of seeing (first fruit), the path of cultivation (further practice) accomplishes and does not accomplish. The path of seeing is always not accomplished, the seventh consciousness in the path of cultivation is always accomplished, and the sixth consciousness has accomplishment and non-accomplishment. If the kleśāvaraṇa is not severed, it is always accomplished, and the seeds of jñeyāvaraṇa have accomplishment and non-accomplishment, which can all be considered accordingly.

The nature of a different being (prthag-janatva) is only established on the seeds of the defiled two obscurations. Question: The intellectual obscuration (jñeyāvaraṇa) does not obstruct the Two Vehicles, so it is called avyākrta (unobstructed and neutral). For those without Buddha-nature, both obscurations do not obstruct the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, Bodhisattvayāna). What nature does the substance of jñeyāvaraṇa belong to? It should all be non-defiled. Answer: Seeds that can be severed, because they are light, are said not to obstruct and are called avyākrta. The two types without Buddha-nature (referring to kleśāvaraṇa and jñeyāvaraṇa) are both heavy and universally obstruct the holy path of the Three Vehicles, so they are called āvrta (obstructed). If only the seeds of discrimination are taken as different beings, then one realm (desire realm, form realm, formless realm) becomes three realms, and it should be called different beings of the three realms. If the seeds of arising manifest actions are taken, then those who have already left desire should be called different beings of all realms. Taking the nature of the same ground as the different being of the eighth consciousness (Ālayavijñāna), its substance is what is attained.

Sabhāgatā (similarity of beings). Briefly distinguished by ten aspects. 1. Explanation of the name (as stated in the commentary. The fifty-second fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says: 'Due to the mutually similar nature of those parts, it is called sabhāgatā.' This meaning shows that 'multitude' refers to those many, not a single meaning; 'part' is the meaning of category; 'same' is the meaning of similarity. That is, many categories are similar, called sabhāgatā). 2. The support of manifestation and seeds (manifestation and seeds are both universal. The life force relies on it for establishment, so these are all universal, as stated in the Abhidharma). 3. Equal flow, maturation, etc. (everything is universal. The fifty-second fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra shows the position of sound, etc., so...)

通三)。四三性所依(並通。五十二云邪見等類。諸佛亦等故)。五內外所依(諸論唯內。此中難他。故俱通外)。六系非系依(皆通)。七總別所依(有無漏位皆通別總)。八見所斷等所依。九學等所依。十總別得舍。既通人．法隨應捨得準小乘說 今以理立。有唯一得不捨。謂佛報身。有唯一捨不得。謂入無餘心位。有永定得．舍。謂無性有情死此生彼。有定不得．舍。謂無為等 問有為相以假立同分。擇滅相似許假立耶 答不然。有為體用相似有同分。擇滅無體復無用故不立同分。真如是一。無相似故。不說同分。

四正斷者。一律儀斷。謂已生惡法為令斷故生欲策勵。二斷斷。未生惡法令不生故。三修習斷。未生善法為令生故。四防護斷。已生善法為欲令住生欲策勵。皆即精進策發故。惠自能漸伏惑。從果為名名為正斷。

命根。以五門分別。一體。二名。三異熟．非異熟等。四有．無漏等。五問答分別。有難命根若唯種子者。何故地獄八根現．種俱定成熟 答又七根有現．種。命根唯種。通論八法故言現．種。非命根有現行。又此八根定必成熟。設有種．現皆定成之。非說命根亦有現也。又以所持六處為現斯有何失。此由業引功能差別名命根。佛由願力令種生現。連色．心等之分限名命根。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 通三)。四三性所依(包括所有。五十二說邪見等。諸佛也一樣)。五內外所依(各論只說內。這裡反駁其他觀點。所以內外都包括)。六系非系依(都包括)。七總別所依(有無漏位都包括總和別)。八見所斷等所依。**等所依。十總別得舍。既然包括人和法，就應該按照小乘的說法來舍和得。現在用道理來建立。有唯一得不捨的，就是佛的報身。有唯一捨不得的，就是進入無餘涅槃的心位。有永遠確定得和舍的，就是無性有情死後生到別處。有確定不得和舍的，就是無為法等。問：有為法的相貌可以用假立的同分來表示，那麼擇滅的相似性也可以用假立來表示嗎？答：不能。有為法的體和用相似，所以有同分。擇滅沒有體也沒有用，所以不能建立同分。真如只有一個，沒有相似性，所以不說同分。

四正斷：一、律儀斷。爲了斷除已經產生的惡法而生起慾望和努力。二、斷斷。爲了使未產生的惡法不產生。三、修習斷。爲了使未產生的善法產生。四、防護斷。爲了使已經產生的善法保持住，生起慾望和努力。這些都是精進的策發。智慧能夠逐漸地降伏煩惱，從結果來命名，所以叫做正斷。

命根。從五個方面來分別：一體性。二名稱。三異熟和非異熟等。四有漏和無漏等。五問答分別。有人問：如果命根只是種子，為什麼地獄中的八根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意、末那、阿賴耶）的現行和種子都必定成熟？答：其他七根有現行和種子，而命根只有種子。從總的方面來說，八法都說現行和種子，但命根沒有現行。而且這八根必定成熟，即使有種子和現行都必定成熟，但不是說命根也有現行。又以所持的六處（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）為現行，這有什麼過失呢？這是由業力引導的功能差別，叫做命根。佛由願力使種子生出現行，連線色和心等的分限，叫做命根。

【English Translation】 English version Generally covers three aspects). 4. The support of the three natures (encompassing all. Fifty-two mentions wrong views, etc. All Buddhas are the same). 5. Internal and external supports (various treatises only discuss internal supports. Here, it refutes other views, thus encompassing both internal and external). 6. Conditioned and unconditioned supports (both are included). 7. General and specific supports (both general and specific are included in the positions of with and without outflows). 8. The support of what is severed by view, etc. **etc. support. 10. General and specific acquisition and abandonment. Since it includes people and dharmas, it should be abandoned and acquired according to the Hinayana teachings. Now, it is established with reason. There is only acquisition without abandonment, which is the Reward Body (Sambhogakaya) of the Buddha. There is only abandonment without acquisition, which is the state of mind entering Nirvana without remainder. There is permanent acquisition and abandonment, which is when a being without nature dies here and is born elsewhere. There is definite non-acquisition and non-abandonment, which is unconditioned dharmas, etc. Question: The characteristics of conditioned dharmas can be represented by hypothetical commonality. Can the similarity of cessation by discrimination (Nirvana) also be represented by hypothesis? Answer: No. The substance and function of conditioned dharmas are similar, so there is commonality. Cessation by discrimination has no substance and no function, so commonality cannot be established. Suchness (Tathata) is one and has no similarity, so commonality is not discussed.

The Four Right Exertions: 1. Restraint exertion: generating desire and effort to abandon evil dharmas that have already arisen. 2. Abandonment exertion: to prevent evil dharmas that have not yet arisen from arising. 3. Cultivation exertion: to generate good dharmas that have not yet arisen. 4. Protection exertion: to maintain good dharmas that have already arisen, generating desire and effort. These are all incited by diligence. Wisdom can gradually subdue afflictions, and it is named 'Right Exertion' from the result.

Life faculty. Distinguished from five aspects: 1. Essence. 2. Name. 3. Vipaka (result of actions) and non-Vipaka, etc. 4. With outflows and without outflows, etc. 5. Questions and answers. Someone asks: If the life faculty is only a seed, why are the manifest and seed of the eight faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, Manas, Alaya) in hell definitely matured? Answer: The other seven faculties have manifest and seed, while the life faculty only has seed. Generally speaking, all eight dharmas are said to have manifest and seed, but the life faculty has no manifest activity. Moreover, these eight faculties must mature, even if there are seed and manifest, they must mature, but it is not said that the life faculty also has manifest. Also, what is the fault of taking the six places (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) that are held as manifest? This is the functional difference guided by karma, called the life faculty. The Buddha uses the power of vows to make the seed generate manifest, connecting the limits of form and mind, which is called the life faculty.

問厭心入無心有細心。厭色入無色有細色。厭身入無身有細身 答若厭粗身亦有細身。如佛身故。粗細總厭不得有身。與心異故 問厭心入無心。二定名無心。厭初入第二。二禪名無心 答厭心總厭六。二定名無心。厭下非上心。上定非無心 問厭色八無色。雖有細色名無色。厭下入上定。上定名無心 答業色上地無。雖有細色名無色。報心上地有。不得名無心 問心種防於心。定體非心色。色種防於色。戒體非色．心 答所防性是色。能防亦色收 問所厭既是心。能厭應心攝 答所防．所發俱是色。能防於色亦名色。所厭雖心無所發。能防於心非心．色 問散色可然。定．道共戒無所發。云何可名色。於此難中可勵思擇 答厭心厭一切。能厭非色．心。防色唯防惡。能防故稱色 問厭心厭一切。能厭唯心種。防色唯防惡。能防應現行 答曰通有。

第二卷

上坐部立二相。化地部立三相。一剎那滅蘊。一切色．心。二一期蘊。謂壽命。此二辨相。三窮生死蘊。雖別有法而非在相 正量部立四相。色法一期多時生滅。心．心所法．燈焰．鈴聲剎那剎那生滅。動等時長。大地經劫住 經部師若順薩婆多。故俱舍第四說。彼意生用未來。三相用現在。然是假立。非是本計。其經部師本所執相。與大乘世

同 古一切有師。生在未來。現在一剎那三相時別。初位名住。此能取果。有殊勝方故。異．滅不能。其力弱故。住位以後令法衰微名為異位。異位已後令法後用無名之為滅 若正理師。生在未來。住．異．滅三同一時用。生令法將有用。住能令法取當果起。即住之時。異能令法後不及已前弱於前故。有為法爾勢力羸劣不及前故。而或有時法增長者。由余緣至令生。如是非本法性。本法性劣必衰異故。其增長時其異仍體在性。令法劣故。滅即于住時起用令用至後念無 若經但說有二相者。一切有師云。舉初．後相以略中間。生轉令法有用。有用之時在現在。未來生時法未有用故。滅能令法將無用。後剎那中正無用故。住雖有法不及於生。異雖衰法不及於滅。是故略住．異。但說于生．滅 正理師云。此顯二時起用。未來起生功能。令法入現在。現在有滅時。令法入過去。住．異之用與滅同時。時不異故所以不說。生．滅乃是有用．無用之始際。不說生及住．異為二用等。

第三破四相中有二。初總非。後別破。別破中有七。一六轉無差難。二能所不異難。此二皆有宗比量相違因不定過。謂初彼量云。三有為相。異所相法定別有體。說屬主言故。如提婆達多之衣。後比量云。三身為相。異所相法定別有體。是能相

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 同樣，一切有部（Sarvāstivāda，佛教部派之一）的論師認為，生存在未來，現在和一剎那（kṣaṇa，極短的時間單位）的三種狀態在時間上是不同的。最初的狀態叫做『住』（sthiti，持續），它能夠取得果報，因為它具有殊勝的力量。『異』（anyathātva，變異）和『滅』（nirodha，消滅）則不能，因為它們的力量較弱。在『住』的狀態之後，使法（dharma，佛法）衰微的狀態叫做『異』。在『異』的狀態之後，使法失去作用的狀態叫做『滅』。 如果正理師（Nyāya，古印度正理學派）認為，『生』、『住』、『異』、『滅』三種狀態同時起作用。『生』使法將要產生作用，『住』能使法取得應有的果報。在『住』的時候，『異』能使法不如以前，比以前弱。有為法（saṃskṛta-dharma，由因緣和合而成的法）的本性就是勢力衰弱，不如以前。然而，有時法會增長，這是由於其他因緣的到來所致，這不是法本來的性質。法本來的性質是衰弱的，必然會變異。在法增長的時候，『異』仍然存在於其本性中，使法衰弱。『滅』就是在『住』的時候起作用，使法在下一個剎那消失。 如果經文中只說有『生』和『滅』兩種狀態，一切有部的論師認為，這是舉出最初和最後的狀態，省略了中間的狀態。『生』使法產生作用，產生作用的時候是在現在。在未來產生的時候，法還沒有產生作用。『滅』能使法將要失去作用，在下一個剎那中完全失去作用。『住』雖然有法，但不如『生』。『異』雖然使法衰弱，但不如『滅』。因此，省略了『住』和『異』，只說了『生』和『滅』。 正理師認為，這顯示了兩個時間段起作用。未來起『生』的作用，使法進入現在。現在有『滅』的時候，使法進入過去。『住』和『異』的作用與『滅』同時發生，因為時間沒有不同，所以沒有說。『生』和『滅』是有用和無用的開始和結束。沒有說『生』以及『住』和『異』是兩種作用等等。 第三，破斥四相（生、住、異、滅）分為兩個部分。首先是總體的破斥，然後是分別的破斥。在分別的破斥中有七個方面。第一是六轉無差別難，第二是能所不異難。這兩種破斥都有宗、比量、相違、因不定等過失。所謂第一個比量是：『三種有為相（saṃskṛta-lakṣaṇa，有為法的相），與所相（lakṣya，被相所標識的事物）在定義上必然有不同的本體，因為它們有屬主關係。』例如提婆達多（Devadatta，古印度人名）的衣服。後一個比量是：『三種自身是相（lakṣaṇa，相），與所相在定義上必然有不同的本體，因為它們是能相（lakṣaṇa，能標識事物的性質）。』

【English Translation】 English version: Similarly, the Sarvāstivāda (a school of Buddhism) masters hold that the three states of arising (utpāda), existence in the present, and a kṣaṇa (an extremely short unit of time) are different in time. The initial state is called 'sthiti' (duration), which is capable of yielding results because it possesses superior power. 'Anyathātva' (change) and 'nirodha' (cessation) cannot, because their power is weaker. After the state of 'sthiti', the state that causes the dharma (Buddhist teachings) to decline is called 'anyathātva'. After the state of 'anyathātva', the state that causes the dharma to lose its function is called 'nirodha'. If the Nyāya (an ancient Indian school of logic) masters believe that the three states of 'arising', 'duration', 'change', and 'cessation' function simultaneously. 'Arising' causes the dharma to be about to function, and 'duration' enables the dharma to obtain the due results. At the time of 'duration', 'change' can make the dharma not as good as before, weaker than before. The nature of conditioned dharmas (saṃskṛta-dharmas, dharmas that arise from causes and conditions) is that their power is weak and not as good as before. However, sometimes the dharma will increase, which is due to the arrival of other causes and conditions, and this is not the original nature of the dharma. The original nature of the dharma is weak and will inevitably change. When the dharma increases, 'change' still exists in its nature, causing the dharma to weaken. 'Cessation' functions at the time of 'duration', causing the function to disappear in the next moment. If the scriptures only mention the two states of 'arising' and 'cessation', the Sarvāstivāda masters believe that this is to mention the initial and final states, omitting the intermediate states. 'Arising' causes the dharma to function, and the time of functioning is in the present. When it arises in the future, the dharma has not yet functioned. 'Cessation' can cause the dharma to be about to lose its function, and it completely loses its function in the next moment. Although 'duration' has dharma, it is not as good as 'arising'. Although 'change' weakens the dharma, it is not as good as 'cessation'. Therefore, 'duration' and 'change' are omitted, and only 'arising' and 'cessation' are mentioned. The Nyāya masters believe that this shows that two time periods are functioning. The future gives rise to the function of 'arising', causing the dharma to enter the present. When there is 'cessation' in the present, it causes the dharma to enter the past. The functions of 'duration' and 'change' occur simultaneously with 'cessation', because the time is not different, so it is not mentioned. 'Arising' and 'cessation' are the beginning and end of usefulness and uselessness. It is not said that 'arising' and 'duration' and 'change' are two functions, and so on. Third, refuting the four characteristics (arising, duration, change, cessation) is divided into two parts. The first is the overall refutation, and the second is the separate refutation. There are seven aspects in the separate refutation. The first is the difficulty of no difference in the six transformations, and the second is the difficulty of no difference between the agent and the object. Both of these refutations have the faults of thesis, inference, contradiction, and uncertain cause. The so-called first inference is: 'The three conditioned characteristics (saṃskṛta-lakṣaṇas, characteristics of conditioned dharmas) must have a different entity in definition from the characterized (lakṣya, the thing identified by the characteristic), because they have a possessive relationship.' For example, the clothes of Devadatta (an ancient Indian name). The latter inference is: 'The three selves are characteristics (lakṣaṇas, characteristics), and they must have a different entity in definition from the characterized, because they are the identifying characteristics (lakṣaṇas, the qualities that identify things).'

故。如煙等相。故皆有二過。

第一難比量相違。汝名．句．文。非實能詮。許異聲故。如色．香等 第二結歸聲詮 第三外救云。聲上非即異聲之名等。量云。聲上屈曲。定異所依實有。色蘊上屈曲故。如長．短等。此有三過。一闕無同喻。不分別彼此長等故。二若以大乘長等為喻。同喻中無所立過。大乘長等非異所依實有體故。三若以自長等為喻。因中有彼法差別相違過。異所依實有中。異所依別處實有。異所依同處實有等。為法差別。量云。聲上屈曲。定不異所依別處實有色蘊上屈曲故。如長．短等。或文字等。處攝不別故。故知名等實為無用 第四外難云。內聲屈曲。不能詮表。聲屈曲故。如絃管聲。論主為作有法差別相違。內聲屈曲。能生名不能生名。是有法差別故。量云。汝內聲屈曲。不能生名。聲屈曲故。如絃管聲。此就他宗難。

又誰說彼等。申自宗義。恐違比量。量云。絃管屈曲等聲。能詮表。有因受大聲之屈曲故。如自許內聲 彼量云。大乘風鈴聲等。應有詮用。聲性故。如內語聲等。或內聲等。不能詮。聲攝故。如風鈴等 次云直以理遂。如彼風鈴不生名等。我風等聲亦不能詮量云。汝風鈴等聲。應生名。聲攝故。如內語聲 第五諍語與聲即異。

言天愛者。梵云沒劫。此

【現代漢語翻譯】 因此，就像煙等現象一樣，都存在兩種過失。

第一種過失是比量相違。你所說的『名』（nāma，名稱）、『句』（pada，句子）、『文』（vyañjana，文字），並非真實能詮釋意義的，因為它們與聲音不同。就像色（rūpa，顏色）、香（gandha，氣味）等一樣。第二是總結歸於聲音的詮釋。第三，對方辯解說，聲音上的屈曲並非與聲音不同的『名』等。他們提出量式：聲音上的屈曲，必定是依賴於實在存在的不同之處，因為色蘊（rūpaskandha，色蘊）上有屈曲，就像長、短等。這有三種過失：一是缺乏共同的同喻（sādṛśya-dṛṣṭānta，相似的例子），因為沒有區分彼此的長短等。二是如果以大乘的長短等作為比喻，那麼同喻中就存在無所立的過失，因為大乘的長短等並非依賴於實在存在的不同之處。三是如果以自身的長短等作為比喻，那麼因中就存在彼法差別相違的過失。在依賴於實在存在的不同之處中，存在依賴於不同之處的別處實在存在，依賴於不同之處的同處實在存在等，作為法的差別。他們提出量式：聲音上的屈曲，必定不依賴於不同之處的別處實在存在，因為色蘊上有屈曲，就像長、短等，或者文字等，因為處所的攝取沒有區別。因此，『名』等實際上是無用的。第四，對方提出難題：內在的聲音屈曲，不能詮表意義，因為是聲音屈曲，就像絃管的聲音。論主為此作了有法差別相違的辯駁：內在的聲音屈曲，能生『名』，不能生『名』，這是有法的差別。他們提出量式：你的內在聲音屈曲，不能生『名』，因為是聲音屈曲，就像絃管的聲音。這是就對方的宗派進行辯難。

此外，誰說那些（聲音）能詮表意義？（對方）陳述自己的宗義，恐怕違背比量。他們提出量式：絃管屈曲等聲音，能詮表意義，因為有因接受大的聲音的屈曲，就像自己所承認的內在聲音。對方提出量式：大乘的風**等，應該有詮釋作用，因為是聲音的性質，就像內在的語言聲音等。或者內在的聲音等，不能詮釋意義，因為被聲音所攝，就像風鈴等。接著說，直接以理推論，就像那些風鈴不產生『名』等，我的風等聲音也不能詮釋意義。他們提出量式：你的風鈴等聲音，應該產生『名』，因為被聲音所攝，就像內在的語言聲音。第五，爭論語言與聲音是相同還是不同。

『天愛』（devānāṃpriya，意為『天所喜愛的人』）一詞，梵文是沒劫（murkha，愚笨）。

【English Translation】 Therefore, like phenomena such as smoke, they all have two faults.

The first fault is contradiction in inference. Your 'nāma' (name), 'pada' (sentence), and 'vyañjana' (letter) are not truly capable of expressing meaning, because they are different from sound. Like rūpa (form), gandha (smell), etc. The second is a conclusion returning to the expression of sound. Third, the opponent argues that the inflections on sound are not 'nāma' etc., which are different from sound. They propose the following inference: Inflections on sound must rely on something real and different, because the rūpaskandha (aggregate of form) has inflections, like long, short, etc. This has three faults: First, it lacks a common example (sādṛśya-dṛṣṭānta), because it does not distinguish between the length of one thing and another. Second, if the long and short of Mahayana are used as an example, then there is the fault of 'unestablished in the example' (asiddha-dṛṣṭānta) in the example, because the long and short of Mahayana do not rely on something real and different. Third, if one's own long and short etc. are used as an example, then there is the fault of 'contradiction of the difference of that property in the reason' (hetu-vaidharmya) in the reason. Among things that rely on something real and different, there is the difference of properties such as 'relying on something real in a different place' and 'relying on something real in the same place'. They propose the following inference: Inflections on sound must not rely on something real in a different place, because the rūpaskandha has inflections, like long, short, etc., or letters, because the inclusion of location is not different. Therefore, 'nāma' etc. are actually useless. Fourth, the opponent raises a difficulty: Inner sound inflections cannot express meaning, because they are sound inflections, like the sound of stringed instruments. The proponent makes a counter-argument of 'contradiction of the difference of the subject' (pakṣa-vaidharmya): Inner sound inflections can produce 'nāma' and cannot produce 'nāma', this is the difference of the subject. They propose the following inference: Your inner sound inflections cannot produce 'nāma', because they are sound inflections, like the sound of stringed instruments. This is a refutation based on the opponent's doctrine.

Furthermore, who says that those (sounds) can express meaning? (The opponent) states their own doctrine, fearing contradiction of inference. They propose the following inference: The sound of stringed instruments etc. can express meaning, because there is a cause that receives the inflections of a large sound, like the inner sound that one admits. The opponent proposes the following inference: The wind of Mahayana etc. should have expressive function, because it is the nature of sound, like inner speech sounds etc. Or inner sounds etc. cannot express meaning, because they are included in sound, like wind chimes etc. Next, they say, directly reasoning, just as those wind chimes do not produce 'nāma' etc., my wind sounds etc. also cannot express meaning. They propose the following inference: Your wind chime sounds etc. should produce 'nāma', because they are included in sound, like inner speech sounds. Fifth, the argument is whether language and sound are the same or different.

The term 'devānāṃpriya' (beloved of the gods) in Sanskrit is murkha (fool).

名為愚。愚有三名。一提婆此雲天。二匿縛(平聲呼之)此云光明。三缽剌阇缽底此云生主。缽剌阇生也。缽底主也。舊云世主也。摩訶波阇波提名大生主是也。此即梵王 世間之勝莫過於天。世間之劣莫過愚者。喚愚為天調之故也。喚奴為郎君等 光明者。照了義。愚人癡闇調喚為光明。如名貧人為富財物。亦如喚鈍人為聰明物。梵王世間皆計為父。猶彼所生但知端坐。雖能生一切都無動作。癡人喻彼。雖被驅使百種皆作。都無所知。無小別識。劣從勝號名曰生主。此癡夫可憐故曰天愛也。余義同常。

問字是名．句依而不詮表。大乘離聲無體。何者為字 此方但有一字名。其字難解。彼方多分無一字名。如言殺字有三字合。謂沙．吒．多三合方成一殺。𠍜字如雲音鄔。字無詮表故。故雖假立亦有字轉名．句．文身。文身異名身。文者彰義。彰彼二故。又名顯。此為所依顯彼義故。又名字無異轉。如𧙃．噎．等。如疏中釋別名等。名身者名謂呼召。名因稱名。句者梵云缽陀。如疏中解應云跡。一名謂名身等皆依士釋。身是二總。名是一別。別名之身名為名身。二名積集名為身。故多名之身亦。復如是。以一名非身故。非持業釋。然此三種。不單言名。復不言多名身。唯就名身等者。言中攝略．廣故。單言名身

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 名為愚（Murkha，意為愚者）。愚有三個別名：一是提婆（Deva，意為天），二是匿縛（Nirbha，意為光明），三是缽剌阇缽底（Prajapati，意為生主）。缽剌阇（Praja）是『生』的意思，缽底（Pati）是『主』的意思，舊譯為『世主』。摩訶波阇波提（Mahaprajapati）意為大生主。這裡指的是梵王（Brahma）。 世間沒有比天更殊勝的，也沒有比愚者更低劣的。稱愚者為『天』，是因為調侃的緣故，就像稱奴僕為郎君一樣。 『光明』的意思是照亮。愚人癡暗，卻被調侃地稱為『光明』，就像稱貧窮的人為富人一樣，也像稱遲鈍的人為聰明人一樣。梵王被世間認為是父親，但他只是端坐著，雖然能生一切，卻沒有動作，癡人就像他一樣。雖然被驅使做各種事情，卻一無所知，沒有絲毫辨別能力。低劣的卻用殊勝的名稱，叫做『生主』。這個癡夫可憐，所以被稱為『天愛』。其餘的意義和通常一樣。 問：字是名，句依附於字而不詮釋意義。大乘佛教認為語言文字沒有實體，那麼什麼是字呢？ 答：此地（指印度）只有一個字的名，這個字很難理解。彼地（指中土）大多沒有一個字的名。比如『殺』字，是由三個字組合而成，即沙（Sa）、吒（Ta）、多（Da）三個字組合成一個『殺』字。𠍜字，發音如『鄔』（U）。字沒有詮釋意義的功能，所以即使是假立的，也有字轉變而成的名、句、文身。文身是異於名身的身。文，是彰顯意義，彰顯名和句的意義。又名『顯』，因為文是所依，用來顯現意義。又，字和名沒有不同的轉變，如𧙃（Hrih）、噎（Ehi）等。如同疏中解釋別名等。 名身，『名』是指呼召，因名而稱名。句，梵語是缽陀（Pada），如同疏中解釋應為『跡』。『一名』是指名身等都依附於士釋（Tatpurusa compound）。身是名和句的總稱，名是一個別稱。別稱的身稱為名身。兩個名積集稱為身，所以多個名的身也是這樣。因為一個名不是身，所以不是持業釋（Karmadharaya compound）。然而這三種，不單獨說『名』，也不說『多名身』，只就名身等來說，是因為言語中攝略和廣略的緣故。單獨說名身。

【English Translation】 English version: He is called Murkha (meaning fool). Murkha has three other names: first, Deva (meaning god); second, Nirbha (meaning light); third, Prajapati (meaning lord of beings). Praja means 'birth,' and Pati means 'lord.' It was formerly translated as 'Lord of the World.' Mahaprajapati means Great Lord of Beings. This refers to Brahma. There is nothing more superior in the world than a Deva, and nothing more inferior than a fool. Calling a fool 'Deva' is for the sake of mockery, just like calling a servant 'young master.' 'Light' means illumination. A fool is ignorant and dark, yet is mockingly called 'light,' just like calling a poor person rich, or calling a dull person intelligent. Brahma is considered the father by the world, but he merely sits still. Although he can create everything, he takes no action. A fool is like him. Although driven to do all sorts of things, he knows nothing and has no discernment. The inferior is given a superior name, called 'Lord of Beings.' This foolish man is pitiable, so he is called 'Deva-beloved.' The remaining meanings are the same as usual. Question: A letter is a name, and a phrase relies on letters but does not express meaning. In Mahayana Buddhism, language has no substance. So what is a letter? Answer: In this land (India), there is only one name for a letter, and that letter is difficult to understand. In that land (China), there are mostly no single-letter names. For example, the word 'kill' (殺) is composed of three letters: Sa, Ta, and Da, combined to form one 'kill.' The letter 𠍜 is pronounced like 'U.' A letter has no function of expressing meaning, so even if it is provisionally established, there are names, phrases, and body of words transformed from letters. The body of words is different from the body of names. A word is to manifest meaning, to manifest the meaning of names and phrases. It is also called 'manifestation,' because the word is what is relied upon to manifest meaning. Also, letters and names have no different transformations, such as Hrih, Ehi, etc. As explained in the commentary on different names, etc. The body of names: 'Name' refers to calling, named because of the name. A phrase, in Sanskrit, is Pada, which, as explained in the commentary, should be 'trace.' 'One name' refers to the body of names, etc., all relying on Tatpurusa compound. The body is the totality of names and phrases, and a name is a separate term. The body of a separate term is called the body of names. Two names accumulated are called a body, so the body of multiple names is also like this. Because one name is not a body, it is not a Karmadharaya compound. However, these three, do not simply say 'name,' nor do they say 'body of multiple names,' but only refer to the body of names, etc., because of the abbreviation and elaboration in speech. Simply saying the body of names.

且以略言。多即廣故 二辨其差別。論云名詮自相等。五十二云。為名．句所依應字。於一切所知．所詮事。極略相是字。若中是名。若廣是句。若唯依文了達音韻。不能了達所有事義。若依止名。復能了達彼法自性。亦了音韻。不能了達所簡擇法深廣差別。若依通句一切能了。對法亦同。顯揚十二云。有字非名。謂一字。有名非句。謂一字名。句必有名。名必有字。故成差別 若能顯名顯。何故名．句不名顯 以非本故。謂辨句自體詮由文身顯。如飲食有味由鹽方顯之 三界分別。名有二種。一言說。此中者是。以聲為體。唯二地系。以即語聲故。發語之行唯二地故。此隨聲系。二識上地無。無漏即言有。語言初定有。何妨二定有。又論云。顯多由彼起。非說彼相應。五識既爾。語言應然。無漏上地言有。語言有漏者。依上地意發亦無過。如引五識尋言說。定自在所生聲無色。三界起言亦有何過。有漏語言必粗。云何上地起而無尋．伺 四有漏．無漏。即明三性。唯二性。取境名通三界 五釋妨難。何故四蘊亦名為名。能取境故如名相似。體相非顯。以名顯故。名在此聚故。依名行境故。五十六言順趣種種所緣境義。同第一解。依言說名分別種種所緣境義故。同第四解。名為一名 問何故二名已上方名為身。一名非

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 簡而言之，『多』即是『廣』的緣故。二、辨別它們的差別。《論》中說，『名』詮釋自性等等。第五十二卷說：『名為句所依的應是字。』對於一切所知、所詮釋的事物，極其簡略的相就是字；如果適中就是名；如果廣大就是句。如果僅僅依靠文字來了解音韻，不能瞭解所有事物的意義；如果依靠名，又能瞭解那個法的自性，也瞭解音韻，但不能瞭解所簡擇的法深廣的差別；如果依靠通達的句，一切都能瞭解。對法也是一樣。《顯揚》第十二卷說：『有字不是名，指一個字；有名不是句，指一個字的名；句必定有名，名必定有字。』因此形成差別。如果能顯示名，為什麼名和句不稱為『顯』呢？因為它們不是根本。意思是說，辨別句的自體，詮釋依靠文身來顯示，就像飲食有味道依靠鹽來顯示一樣。三、界分別。名有兩種：一是言說，這裡所說的是這種，以聲音為體，只有欲界和色界繫有，因為它就是語聲的緣故，發起語聲的行為只有欲界和色界才有。這隨著聲音而繫縛。二是識上地沒有。無漏即是言語有。語言最初確定有。為什麼妨礙二禪定也有呢？又《論》中說：『顯示多由它而起，不是說與它相應。』五識既然如此，語言也應該這樣。無漏上地有言語，有漏的語言，依靠上地的意思發起也沒有過失。如引用五識來尋找言說。禪定自在所生的聲音在無色界。三界發起言語又有什麼過失呢？有漏的語言必定粗糙，為什麼上地發起而沒有尋、伺呢？四、有漏、無漏，即是說明三性。只有二性。取境的名通於三界。五、解釋妨難。為什麼四蘊也稱為名？因為能取境，像名一樣。體相不是顯，因為名能顯。名在此聚集的緣故。依靠名來行境的緣故。第五十六卷說，順著趣向種種所緣境的意義。與第一種解釋相同。依靠言說名來分別種種所緣境的意義，與第四種解釋相同。名為一名。問：為什麼二名以上才稱為身，一名不是？

【English Translation】 English version: In brief, 'many' is because it is 'broad'. Second, distinguish their differences. The Shastra says, 'Name' explains self-nature, etc. Volume 52 says: 'What name relies on for a sentence should be a character.' Regarding all knowable and explainable things, the most concise aspect is a character; if it is moderate, it is a name; if it is broad, it is a sentence. If one only relies on the text to understand the phonetics, one cannot understand the meaning of all things; if one relies on the name, one can understand the self-nature of that dharma, and also understand the phonetics, but one cannot understand the deep and broad differences of the dharma being selected; if one relies on a comprehensive sentence, one can understand everything. The Abhidharma is the same. The twelfth volume of the Xianyang says: 'There are characters that are not names, referring to a single character; there are names that are not sentences, referring to a single word name; a sentence must have a name, and a name must have a character.' Therefore, differences are formed. If one can reveal a name, why are name and sentence not called 'revealing'? Because they are not fundamental. It means that distinguishing the self-nature of a sentence, explanation relies on the body of the text to reveal, just as the taste of food relies on salt to reveal it. Third, the division of realms. There are two types of names: one is speech, which is what is being referred to here, with sound as its substance, only existing in the Desire Realm and the Form Realm, because it is the voice itself, and the act of initiating speech only exists in the Desire Realm and the Form Realm. This is bound by sound. The second is not present in the realms above consciousness. Non-outflow is language. Language is initially determined to exist. Why does it hinder the existence of the second dhyana? Also, the Shastra says: 'Revealing much arises from it, not saying it corresponds to it.' Since the five consciousnesses are like this, language should be the same. The upper realms of non-outflow have language, and the outflow language, initiated based on the intention of the upper realms, is also without fault. For example, using the five consciousnesses to seek speech. The sound produced by samadhi freely exists in the Formless Realm. What fault is there in initiating speech in the three realms? Outflow language must be coarse; why is there no seeking or investigation when initiated in the upper realms? Fourth, outflow and non-outflow, which explain the three natures. Only two natures. The name of grasping objects pervades the three realms. Fifth, explaining difficulties. Why are the four skandhas also called names? Because they can grasp objects, like names. The substance and appearance are not revealing, because names can reveal. Names are gathered here. Because one relies on names to act in the realm. Volume 56 says that it follows the meaning of tending towards various objects of perception. It is the same as the first explanation. Relying on speech names to distinguish the meaning of various objects of perception is the same as the fourth explanation. Name is one name. Question: Why is it called a body only when there are two or more names, and not one name?

身。此中三種總名為身等也 名．及名身．多名身不出名身。又三中從二名為身故 問如多名身名身。論云但有二種。何故名多 解云身雖有二名有其多。多名之身名多名身。非多身之名 或隔越名多。身亦有多故。何故不立頌等。如疏中解。

總十四不相應。此雖說非得。諸論多說異生性。今依共有且說十四種。以十門分別。一有之所由。二廢立。三聚依處。四現種依。五有無漏。六三性。七見斷等。八五位。九界系非。十九地。然依對法有二十三。除不和合。雖有等言不別解釋。瑜伽第三．五十六．顯揚第一．百法等立二十四。五蘊及此論立十四。顯揚云。復有所餘。如是種類差別應知。各依一義以立。實可說多。一說有所以。由起屬主言論等故。如顯揚論十八說 二廢立。即前次文是 三辨聚法依處。依處有三。一心。二心所。三色。以有別依有總依。有一唯依心種。謂命根。此攝正。三唯依色立。謂名．句．文身。且依此土非余佛土。四依心．心所二法立。謂二無心定．及果異生性。六依三法。謂得．眾同分．四相。通依三種立。六十五云。依名分位立無想．滅盡定等故。唯依心．心所 四辨現．種依。五唯依種。謂命根．二無心定．及果異生性。三唯依現。謂名．句．文。六通種．現。謂得等 五有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：身。這裡說的三種總的名稱是身等。名、及名身、多名身，都離不開名身。又這三種中，從兩個名稱來說是身，所以問：如果有多名身和名身，論中說只有兩種，為什麼叫多？解釋說：身雖然有兩個，但名稱有很多。多個名稱的身叫做多名身，而不是多個身的名。或者因為間隔而名稱多，身也有很多，所以為什麼不建立頌等，就像疏中解釋的那樣。

總共有十四種不相應行法。這裡雖然說的是非得，但很多論典都說是異生性（Pṛthag-janatva，凡夫的性質）。現在依據共有的，暫且說十四種，用十個方面來分別。一、存在的理由；二、廢立；三、聚合的依據處；四、現行和種子的依據；五、有漏和無漏；六、三性；七、見斷等；八、五位；九、界系和非界系；十、九地。然而依據《阿毗達摩》（Abhidharma，佛教論藏），有二十三種，除去不和合。雖然有『等』字，但不另外解釋。《瑜伽師地論》（Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra）第三、五十六，《顯揚聖教論》（Abhisamayālaṃkāra）第一、《百法明門論》等建立了二十四種。五蘊和這部論建立了十四種。《顯揚聖教論》說：『還有其他的，像這樣的種類差別應該知道。』各自依據一個意義來建立，實際上可以說很多。一、說明存在的理由，因為由起始、歸屬、主宰、言論等，就像《顯揚聖教論》十八所說。二、廢立，就是前面緊接著的文。三、辨別聚合法的依據處。依據處有三種：一、心；二、心所；三、色。因為有分別的依據，有總的依據。有一種只依據心種子，就是命根（Jīvitendriya，生命力）。這裡攝取正。三種只依據色法建立，就是名身（Nāmakāya，名稱的集合）、句身（Padakāya，語句的集合）、文身（Vyañjanakāya，文字的集合）。暫且依據這個國土，不是其他的佛土。四種依據心、心所兩種法建立，就是二無心定（asaṃjñā-samāpatti，無想定和nirodha-samāpatti，滅盡定）、以及果異生性。六種依據三種法，就是得（Prāpti，獲得）、眾同分（Nikāyasabhāga，同類性）、四相（caturlakṣaṇa，生、住、異、滅），普遍依據三種建立。《六十五》說：『依據名稱的分位建立無想、滅盡定等。』只依據心、心所。四、辨別現行和種子的依據。五種只依據種子，就是命根、二無心定、以及果異生性。三種只依據現行，就是名、句、文。六種通於種子和現行，就是得等。五、有漏

【English Translation】 English version: Body. Here, the three general terms are 'body, etc.' Name, and name-body, multi-name-body, cannot exist without name-body. Also, among these three, from the perspective of two names, it is called 'body.' Therefore, the question arises: if there are multi-name-body and name-body, and the treatise says there are only two types, why is it called 'multi'? The explanation is: although the body has two aspects, it has many names. A body with multiple names is called multi-name-body, not the name of multiple bodies. Or, because of separation, the name is multiple, and the body is also multiple. Therefore, why are sūtras, etc., not established, as explained in the commentary?

In total, there are fourteen non-associated formations (Citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra). Although 'non-attainment' is mentioned here, many treatises refer to it as 'the nature of a common being' (Pṛthag-janatva). Now, based on what is common, we will temporarily discuss fourteen types, distinguishing them in ten aspects: 1. The reason for existence; 2. Establishment and abolition; 3. The basis of aggregation; 4. The basis of manifestation and seeds; 5. Defiled and undefiled; 6. The three natures; 7. Severance by seeing, etc.; 8. The five positions; 9. Within and outside the realms; 10. The nine grounds. However, according to the Abhidharma, there are twenty-three types, excluding non-harmony. Although there is the word 'etc.,' it is not explained separately. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, chapters 3 and 56, the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, chapter 1, the Hundred Dharmas, etc., establish twenty-four types. The five aggregates and this treatise establish fourteen types. The Abhisamayālaṃkāra says: 'There are other such kinds of differences that should be known.' Each is established based on one meaning, and in reality, many can be said. 1. Explaining the reason for existence, because it arises from origination, belonging, mastery, speech, etc., as stated in the Abhisamayālaṃkāra, chapter 18. 2. Establishment and abolition, which is the preceding text. 3. Distinguishing the basis of aggregation of dharmas. There are three bases: 1. Mind; 2. Mental factors; 3. Form. Because there are separate bases and general bases. One relies only on the mind-seed, which is the life faculty (Jīvitendriya). This includes what is correct. Three rely only on form to establish, which are name-body (Nāmakāya), sentence-body (Padakāya), and word-body (Vyañjanakāya). Temporarily based on this land, not other Buddha-lands. Four rely on the two dharmas of mind and mental factors to establish, which are the two mindless samādhis (asaṃjñā-samāpatti and nirodha-samāpatti), and the nature of a common being as a result. Six rely on the three dharmas, which are attainment (Prāpti), commonality of kind (Nikāyasabhāga), and the four characteristics (caturlakṣaṇa: arising, abiding, changing, ceasing), universally based on the three to establish. The Sixty-fifth says: 'Based on the divisions of names, establish mindless and cessation samādhis, etc.' Relying only on mind and mental factors. 4. Distinguishing the basis of manifestation and seeds. Five rely only on seeds, which are the life faculty, the two mindless samādhis, and the nature of a common being as a result. Three rely only on manifestation, which are name, sentence, and word. Six are common to both seeds and manifestation, which are attainment, etc. 5. Defiled

漏．無漏。一唯無漏。謂滅定。三唯有漏。謂無想定．及果異生性。十通二種。謂得．同分．命根．名．句．文．四相。佛等皆有故 六辨三性。今四唯一性。二唯善。謂無想．滅定。二唯無記。謂異生性．無想異熟唯無覆。四通二性。謂名．句．文．命根。四因唯無覆無記。果唯是善。六通三性。謂得．同分．四相 七辨見斷等三。一唯見斷。謂異生性。一唯不斷。謂滅定。二通見．修斷。謂無想定．及果。五十三說唯見所斷不生故。五十七說善法修所斷。斷緣縛故。餘十種通見．修．及不斷 八五位。謂見．修等。二唯資糧。謂無想定．及果。十住第六心方不退。即優婆塞戒經舍利弗六萬劫修道尚退。故已前尚得起。瑜伽論言非聖所入。又十住第七名不退心。以後更不可起。一唯二位。謂異生性在初二。一唯二位起。謂滅定非初三。若迴心可爾。三唯四位。除見道。謂名．句．文。七通五位。謂得．同分．命根．四相 九界系。二唯一界。謂無想定．及果。三通二界．及非界。謂得名．句文。一通三界。謂異生性。一非三界。謂滅定。七通三界．及非系。謂得．同分．命根．及四相。命根五十七說不通無漏。不說佛故 十九地。三唯一地。謂二無心定．及果。三通二地。謂名等三。或五地。八通九地。謂異生性．

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『有漏』(sāsrava，指與煩惱相關的)和『無漏』(anāsrava，指與煩惱無關的)。一種唯有『無漏』，指的是『滅盡定』(nirodha-samāpatti，一種高級禪定狀態)。三種唯有『有漏』，指的是『無想定』(asañjñā-samāpatti，一種無意識的禪定狀態)以及『果異生性』(phala-pṛthag-janatva，指凡夫獲得果位時的狀態)。十種通於兩種，指的是『獲得』(prāpti，指獲得某種法) 、『同分』(sabhāga，指同類事物)、『命根』(jīvitendriya，指生命力)、『名』(nāma，指名稱)、『句』(pada，指句子)、『文』(vyañjana，指文字)、『四相』(catvāri lakṣaṇāni，指生、住、異、滅四種現象)。因為佛等都具有這些。

六、辨別三種自性。現在四種唯有一種自性。兩種唯是善，指的是『無想定』和『滅盡定』。兩種唯是『無記』(avyākṛta，指非善非惡)，指的是『異生性』和『無想異熟』(asañjñika-vipāka，指無想定的果報，唯是無覆無記)。四種通於兩種自性，指的是『名』、『句』、『文』、『命根』。四因唯是『無覆無記』(anivṛtāvyākṛta，指不障礙解脫的無記性)。果唯是善。六種通於三種自性，指的是『獲得』、『同分』、『四相』。

七、辨別『見斷』(darśana-heya，指見道所斷的煩惱)等三種。一種唯是『見斷』，指的是『異生性』。一種唯是『不斷』，指的是『滅盡定』。兩種通於『見斷』和『修斷』(bhāvanā-heya，指修道所斷的煩惱)，指的是『無想定』及其果。第五十三卷說唯有見所斷，不會再生。第五十七卷說善法是修所斷，因為斷除緣縛的緣故。其餘十種通於『見斷』、『修斷』以及『不斷』。

八、五位，指的是『見道』(darśana-mārga，指證悟真理的階段)、『修道』(bhāvanā-mārga，指修行的階段)等。兩種唯在『資糧位』(saṃbhāra-mārga，指積累資糧的階段)，指的是『無想定』及其果。十住位的第六心才不會退轉。正如《優婆塞戒經》所說，舍利弗六萬劫修道尚且會退轉，因此在此之前尚且可能生起（煩惱）。《瑜伽師地論》說，這不是聖者所能進入的。又，十住位的第七位名為『不退心』，此後更不可能生起（煩惱）。一種唯在二位，指的是『異生性』在最初二位。一種唯在二位生起，指的是『滅盡定』不在最初三位。如果迴心則可以。三種唯在四位，除了見道，指的是『名』、『句』、『文』。七種通於五位，指的是『獲得』、『同分』、『命根』、『四相』。

九、界系。兩種唯一界，指的是兩種無心定及其果。三種通於二界以及非界，指的是『得』、『名』、『句』、『文』。一種通於三界，指的是『異生性』。一種不屬於三界，指的是『滅盡定』。七種通於三界以及非系，指的是『得』、『同分』、『命根』以及『四相』。第五十七卷說『命根』不通於無漏，因為沒有說佛的緣故。

十、九地。三種唯一地，指的是兩種無心定及其果。三種通於二地或者五地，指的是『名』等三種。八種通於九地，指的是『異生性』。

【English Translation】 English version 'Sāsrava' (with outflows, referring to being associated with afflictions) and 'Anāsrava' (without outflows, referring to being free from afflictions). One is only 'Anāsrava', referring to 'Nirodha-samāpatti' (cessation attainment, a high state of meditation). Three are only 'Sāsrava', referring to 'Asañjñā-samāpatti' (non-perception attainment, a state of unconscious meditation) and 'Phala-pṛthag-janatva' (the state of an ordinary person attaining a fruit). Ten are common to both, referring to 'Prāpti' (attainment, referring to obtaining a certain dharma), 'Sabhāga' (similarity, referring to similar things), 'Jīvitendriya' (life faculty, referring to life force), 'Nāma' (name), 'Pada' (sentence), 'Vyañjana' (letter), 'Catvāri lakṣaṇāni' (four characteristics, referring to the four phenomena of birth, duration, change, and extinction). Because Buddhas and others all possess these.

Six, distinguishing the three natures. Now, four only have one nature. Two are only wholesome, referring to 'Asañjñā-samāpatti' and 'Nirodha-samāpatti'. Two are only 'Avyākṛta' (unspecified, referring to neither wholesome nor unwholesome), referring to 'Pṛthag-janatva' and 'Asañjñika-vipāka' (the result of non-perception, only unconditioned and unspecified). Four are common to two natures, referring to 'Nāma', 'Pada', 'Vyañjana', and 'Jīvitendriya'. The four causes are only 'Anivṛtāvyākṛta' (uncovered and unspecified, referring to unspecified nature that does not hinder liberation). The result is only wholesome. Six are common to three natures, referring to 'Prāpti', 'Sabhāga', and 'Catvāri lakṣaṇāni'.

Seven, distinguishing the three types of 'Darśana-heya' (abandoned by seeing, referring to afflictions abandoned by the path of seeing) and others. One is only 'Darśana-heya', referring to 'Pṛthag-janatva'. One is only 'not abandoned', referring to 'Nirodha-samāpatti'. Two are common to 'Darśana-heya' and 'Bhāvanā-heya' (abandoned by cultivation, referring to afflictions abandoned by the path of cultivation), referring to 'Asañjñā-samāpatti' and its result. Volume 53 says that only what is abandoned by seeing does not arise again. Volume 57 says that wholesome dharmas are abandoned by cultivation, because of abandoning the bonds of conditions. The remaining ten are common to 'Darśana-heya', 'Bhāvanā-heya', and 'not abandoned'.

Eight, the five stages, referring to 'Darśana-mārga' (path of seeing, the stage of realizing the truth), 'Bhāvanā-mārga' (path of cultivation, the stage of practice), etc. Two are only in the 'Saṃbhāra-mārga' (path of accumulation, the stage of accumulating merit), referring to 'Asañjñā-samāpatti' and its result. Only the sixth mind in the ten abodes does not regress. As the 'Upāsaka Precepts Sutra' says, even Śāriputra regressed after cultivating the path for sixty thousand kalpas, so before this, it is still possible for (afflictions) to arise. The 'Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra' says that this is not entered by the noble ones. Also, the seventh of the ten abodes is called the 'non-regressing mind', and after this, it is no longer possible for (afflictions) to arise. One is only in two stages, referring to 'Pṛthag-janatva' in the first two stages. One only arises in two stages, referring to 'Nirodha-samāpatti' not being in the first three stages. If there is a change of heart, it is possible. Three are only in four stages, except for the path of seeing, referring to 'Nāma', 'Pada', and 'Vyañjana'. Seven are common to five stages, referring to 'Prāpti', 'Sabhāga', 'Jīvitendriya', and 'Catvāri lakṣaṇāni'.

Nine, the realms. Two are only in one realm, referring to the two mindless attainments and their result. Three are common to two realms and non-realms, referring to 'Prāpti', 'Nāma', 'Pada', and 'Vyañjana'. One is common to the three realms, referring to 'Pṛthag-janatva'. One does not belong to the three realms, referring to 'Nirodha-samāpatti'. Seven are common to the three realms and non-attachments, referring to 'Prāpti', 'Sabhāga', 'Jīvitendriya', and 'Catvāri lakṣaṇāni'. Volume 57 says that 'Jīvitendriya' is not common to the outflow-free, because it does not mention the Buddha.

Ten, the nine grounds. Three are only in one ground, referring to the two mindless attainments and their result. Three are common to two grounds or five grounds, referring to the three of 'Nāma' etc. Eight are common to nine grounds, referring to 'Pṛthag-janatva'.

及餘七。

別以量破三無為中有二。初審定問。後隨二難。難中有二。初難一。後多。難一中有三。初總牒一體遍一切處。次別難之。後出彼因執彼體一。理應爾故 別難之中分三。三無為故。虛空中有四。一體應成多。二應互相遍。三應非容受。四有應相雜。有同處不相離色為不定過。為如色處處無別故。虛空即色處。為如香等處無別故空非色處。

許無因果故者。大乘之中無為是離系果。十因中觀待．攝受．引發．定異．同事．不相違因。得是觀待．攝受．同事．相違．不相違因。能得增上果。今就他宗。又是同品亦無過失。定有性故。

敘自宗無為中有二。初總標經說舉數明之。後隨烈顯。後中有二解。二別故。初中有二。初顯依識變。後顯說為常解 依法性中有五。一標依法性。二顯法性體。三顯依義。四結依假。五釋眾名 廢立門。應立一。謂真如。余非實故。又可立二。順世間立二。謂空．非擇。真如立一或應立三。真為一。隨障斷為一。順世間為一。今順世間立二。隨障斷立三。真立一。隨其所應開合別說。

無為。以五門分別。一諸教增減。或說三．四．六．八等。二出體。三三性分別。一善等三性。若本唯善即真如故。若相通三性。許三性識變故。二所執等三性。第八卷

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 以及其餘七種。

以衡量來破斥三種無為法，其中有二種情況。首先是審定提問，然後是跟隨兩種詰難。詰難中又有兩種情況，首先是單一的詰難，然後是多重的詰難。單一的詰難中包含三種情況：首先是總括一體遍佈一切處，其次是分別詰難它，最後提出對方的理由，堅持對方的本體是一，理由應當是這樣。

分別詰難之中分為三種情況。因為是三種無為法，對於虛空有四種詰難：一，一體應當成為多體；二，應當互相遍佈；三，應當不是容受；四，有應當互相混雜。有與同處不相離的色法作為不確定的過失。因為如同色法處處沒有差別，所以虛空就是色法之處。因為如同香等處處沒有差別，所以虛空不是色法之處。

『允許沒有因果』的原因是，在大乘之中，無為是離系的果。十因中，觀待因、攝受因、引發因、定異因、同事因、不相違因，得到的是觀待因、攝受因、同事因、相違因、不相違因，能夠得到增上果。現在就對方的宗派來說，又是同品，也沒有過失，因為確定有自性。

敘述自宗的無為法，其中有兩種情況：首先是總標經文所說，舉出數量來明確它；然後是跟隨詳細地顯示。後面又有兩種解釋，因為有兩種差別。首先一種解釋中又有兩種情況：首先顯示依靠識的變現，然後顯示說它是常的解釋。

依法性中有五種情況：一，標明依靠法性；二，顯示法性的本體；三，顯示依靠的意義；四，總結依靠假立；五，解釋各種名稱。廢立門，應當建立一，即真如（tathata，事物的真實本性）。其餘的不是真實的緣故。又可以建立二，順應世間而建立二，即空（sunyata，空性）和非擇滅（pratisankhya-nirodha，通過智慧抉擇而滅除煩惱）。真如建立一。或者應當建立三，真如為一，隨順障礙斷滅為一，順應世間為一。現在順應世間建立二，隨順障礙斷滅建立三，真如建立一。隨其所應當開合分別解說。

無為法，用五種門來分別：一，諸教的增減，或者說三種、四種、六種、八種等；二，指出本體；三，用三性來分別，一，善等三性，如果本來唯有善，那就是真如的緣故。如果相通於三種性質，允許是三種性質的識的變現的緣故。二，所執等三種性質，在第八卷。

【English Translation】 English version And the remaining seven.

To refute the three unconditioned dharmas by measurement, there are two cases. First, there is the examination and questioning, and then the following two refutations. There are two cases in the refutations, first a single refutation, then multiple refutations. The single refutation contains three cases: first, it summarizes that one entity pervades all places; second, it separately refutes it; and finally, it presents the opponent's reason, insisting that the opponent's substance is one, and the reason should be so.

Among the separate refutations, there are three cases. Because there are three unconditioned dharmas, there are four refutations for space: one, one entity should become multiple entities; two, they should pervade each other; three, they should not be receptive; four, existence should be mixed with each other. Existence and inseparable form in the same place are an uncertain fault. Because, like form, there is no difference everywhere, space is the place of form. Because, like smell, there is no difference everywhere, space is not the place of form.

The reason for 'allowing no cause and effect' is that in Mahayana, the unconditioned is the result of detachment. Among the ten causes, the dependent cause (觀待因), receptive cause (攝受因), initiating cause (引發因), definite difference cause (定異因), co-operative cause (同事因), and non-contradictory cause (不相違因) are obtained as the dependent cause, receptive cause, co-operative cause, contradictory cause, and non-contradictory cause, which can obtain the increasing result. Now, according to the other's school, it is also of the same kind and there is no fault, because it is certain to have self-nature.

Narrating the unconditioned dharmas of one's own school, there are two cases: first, the general statement of what the sutras say, citing the number to clarify it; then, following with detailed display. There are two explanations later, because there are two differences. In the first explanation, there are two cases: first, it shows reliance on the transformation of consciousness; then, it shows the explanation that it is constant.

There are five cases in relying on the nature of dharma: one, marking reliance on the nature of dharma; two, showing the substance of the nature of dharma; three, showing the meaning of reliance; four, concluding reliance on the provisional; five, explaining various names. In the gate of abolishment and establishment, one should be established, namely, tathata (真如, the true nature of things). The rest are not real. Also, two can be established, establishing two in accordance with the world, namely, sunyata (空, emptiness) and pratisankhya-nirodha (非擇滅, cessation through discernment). Tathata is established as one. Or three should be established, tathata as one, following the cessation of obstacles as one, and following the world as one. Now, following the world, two are established, and following the cessation of obstacles, three are established, and tathata is established as one. According to what is appropriate, opening and closing are explained separately.

Unconditioned dharma is distinguished by five gates: one, the increase or decrease of various teachings, or saying three, four, six, eight, etc.; two, pointing out the substance; three, distinguishing by the three natures, one, the three natures such as good, if originally only good, then it is the reason for tathata. If it is common to the three natures, it is allowed to be the transformation of consciousness of the three natures. Two, the three natures such as what is grasped, are in the eighth volume.

說通三。此第二說唯二性。四諦攝。一安立．非安立諦。二二諦真俗攝。三二三諦。四四諦。五釋難。于中有五門 一一多。隨心言多。約體但一 二何因攝。十因．六因應思。六因中唯能作因。余皆有為。十因通五。一觀待因。二攝受因。境界依處故。三同事因。同爲生等一事業故。四不相違因。令聖道生故。五相違因。與礙法生法染污相違。故說為滅。性離障等也。五果攝攝何。擇者謂離系。虛空．非擇攝增上果 三凡聖得。虛空．非擇通聖．凡得。想受滅．擇滅真如。定唯聖者得。不動二說 四伏斷障得。想受滅通伏．斷如常。何故擇滅不伏得。已不害隨眠故 其不動兩解。一內道得唯斷得。外道伏得。計為涅槃滅心．心所故。內道不然 又解。內道亦伏得。如想受伏得。此伏三禪已下。不得伏欲界。已二性煩惱增強故。如不伏得第三禪已下障得想受滅。已變異受強故。以理而論。既有伏三禪下惑得不動。即此人伏四禪上得想受斯有何失。二受強故論不許之。若爾更應伏欲界障得不動滅。既許二性障令不得伏得不動。三定下障伏。不能得想受何失 五問答。何故擇滅三界唯立一。定障別開二 以變異．不變異相顯于煩惱故 問何故伏惑得非擇。亦伏煩惱滅。亦得伏定障。何故不分二唯分害隨眠耶 答定障通於事

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 關於通達三法（說一切有部宗義）。這第二種說法只承認兩種自性（二性）。四聖諦可以涵蓋這些自性。分為五點進行解釋： 一、安立諦（satya of establishment）與非安立諦（non-establishment satya）。 二、二諦（two truths）：勝義諦（paramārtha-satya）與世俗諦（saṃvṛti-satya）。 三、二諦與三諦。 四、四聖諦。 五、釋難（解決疑問）。 其中有五個方面： 一、一與多。隨順心意而說則為多，就其本體而言則只有一個。 二、被何種因所攝？應思考十因（ten causes）和六因（six causes）。在六因中，只有能作因（kāraṇa-hetu）可以包含擇滅（pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha）。其餘都是有為法（saṃskṛta）。十因則普遍包含五種： 一、觀待因（apekṣā-hetu）。 二、攝受因（parigraha-hetu）：因為是境界（viṣaya）的所依處。 三、同事因（sahakāri-hetu）：因為共同產生等同一事業。 四、不相違因（avirodha-hetu）：使聖道（ārya-mārga）得以產生。 五、相違因（virodha-hetu）：與障礙生法（dharma）和染污（kleśa）的產生相違背，因此說為滅（nirodha）。自性遠離障礙等等。 五果（five results）包含哪些？有部宗認為包含離系果（visaṃyoga-phala）。虛空（ākāśa）和非擇滅（apratisaṃkhyā-nirodha）包含增上果（adhipati-phala）。 三、凡夫和聖者（ārya）的證得。虛空和非擇滅，凡夫和聖者都可以證得。想受滅（saṃjñā-vedayita-nirodha）和擇滅真如（tathatā），只有聖者才能證得。關於不動（āniñjya）有兩種說法。 四、伏（suppression）斷（severance）障（obstacle）得（attainment）。想受滅，包含伏和斷，如常理。為什麼擇滅不能通過伏而證得？因為它已經不再損害隨眠（anuśaya）了。 關於不動，有兩種解釋。第一種解釋是，內道（佛教）的證得只是斷得，外道（非佛教）則是伏得，他們認為涅槃（nirvāṇa）是滅心（citta）和心所（caitta）。內道不這樣認為。 另一種解釋是，內道也有伏得，就像想受滅的伏得一樣。這種伏得可以伏住三禪（dhyāna）以下的煩惱，但不能伏住欲界（kāma-dhātu）的煩惱，因為二性的煩惱會增強。就像不伏得第三禪以下的障礙，而證得想受滅一樣，因為變異受（vikṛta-vedanā）很強。從道理上來說，既然有伏住三禪以下的惑而證得不動，那麼這個人伏住四禪（caturtha dhyāna）以上而證得想受滅，又有什麼過失呢？ 因為受很強，所以論典不允許這樣做。如果這樣，更應該伏住欲界的障礙而證得不動滅。既然允許二性的障礙使人不能通過伏而證得不動，那麼三禪以下的障礙被伏住，不能證得想受滅，又有什麼過失呢？ 五、問答。為什麼擇滅在三界（trayo dhātava）中只建立一個，而定障（samāpatti-āvaraṇa）卻分別開設兩個？ 因為變異相（vikāra-lakṣaṇa）和不變異相（avikāra-lakṣaṇa）在煩惱中顯現。 問：為什麼伏惑（suppressed delusion）可以證得非擇滅，也可以伏住煩惱而證得伏定障，為什麼不分成兩種，而只分為損害隨眠呢？ 答：定障普遍存在於事物之中。

【English Translation】 English version Concerning the Thorough Understanding of the Three Dharmas (Sarvāstivāda School Doctrine). This second explanation only acknowledges two natures (two self-natures). The Four Noble Truths can encompass these self-natures. It is explained in five points:

1. The Satya of Establishment (an established truth) and the Non-Establishment Satya (a non-established truth).
2. The Two Truths: Ultimate Truth (paramārtha-satya) and Conventional Truth (saṃvṛti-satya).
3. The Two Truths and the Three Truths.
4. The Four Noble Truths.
5. Explanation of Difficulties (resolving doubts). Among these, there are five aspects:
6. One and Many. According to the mind's intention, it is said to be many, but in terms of its essence, it is only one.
7. By what cause is it encompassed? One should consider the Ten Causes (ten hetus) and the Six Causes (six hetus). Among the Six Causes, only the Efficient Cause (kāraṇa-hetu) can include Cessation Through Discrimination (pratisaṃkhyā-nirodha). The rest are conditioned phenomena (saṃskṛta). The Ten Causes universally include five types:
8. The Dependent Cause (apekṣā-hetu).
9. The Supporting Cause (parigraha-hetu): because it is the basis of the object (viṣaya).
10. The Co-operative Cause (sahakāri-hetu): because it jointly produces the same activity.
11. The Non-Conflicting Cause (avirodha-hetu): enabling the arising of the Noble Path (ārya-mārga).
12. The Conflicting Cause (virodha-hetu): being contrary to the arising of phenomena (dharma) that obstruct and defile (kleśa), hence it is said to be cessation (nirodha). The self-nature is apart from obstacles, etc. What are included in the Five Results (five phalas)? The Sarvāstivāda school believes it includes the Result of Separation (visaṃyoga-phala). Space (ākāśa) and Cessation Not Through Discrimination (apratisaṃkhyā-nirodha) include the Dominating Result (adhipati-phala).
13. The Attainment of Ordinary Beings and Noble Ones (āryas). Space and Cessation Not Through Discrimination can be attained by both ordinary beings and noble ones. Cessation of Perception and Feeling (saṃjñā-vedayita-nirodha) and Suchness of Cessation Through Discrimination (tathatā) can only be attained by noble ones. There are two views regarding Immovability (āniñjya).
14. Suppression (suppression), Severance (severance), Obstacle (obstacle), and Attainment (attainment). Cessation of Perception and Feeling includes both suppression and severance, as is commonly understood. Why can't Cessation Through Discrimination be attained through suppression? Because it no longer harms the latent tendencies (anuśaya). Regarding Immovability, there are two explanations. The first explanation is that the attainment of the Inner Path (Buddhism) is only through severance, while the Outer Path (non-Buddhism) is through suppression, as they consider Nirvāṇa (nirvāṇa) to be the cessation of mind (citta) and mental factors (caitta). The Inner Path does not hold this view. Another explanation is that the Inner Path also has suppression, just like the suppression attainment of Cessation of Perception and Feeling. This suppression can suppress afflictions below the Third Dhyāna (dhyāna), but cannot suppress afflictions of the Desire Realm (kāma-dhātu), because the afflictions of the two natures will increase. Just like not suppressing the obstacles below the Third Dhyāna and attaining Cessation of Perception and Feeling, because the altered feeling (vikṛta-vedanā) is strong. Logically speaking, since there is the attainment of Immovability by suppressing the delusions below the Third Dhyāna, what fault is there if this person suppresses above the Fourth Dhyāna (caturtha dhyāna) and attains Cessation of Perception and Feeling? Because the feeling is strong, the treatises do not allow this. If so, one should further suppress the obstacles of the Desire Realm and attain the cessation of Immovability. Since it is allowed that the obstacles of the two natures prevent one from attaining Immovability through suppression, what fault is there if the obstacles below the Third Dhyāna are suppressed and one cannot attain Cessation of Perception and Feeling?
15. Questions and Answers. Why is only one Cessation Through Discrimination established in the Three Realms (trayo dhātava), while two are separately established for the Obstacles to Samāpatti (samāpatti-āvaraṇa)? Because the characteristics of alteration (vikāra-lakṣaṇa) and non-alteration (avikāra-lakṣaṇa) are manifested in the afflictions. Question: Why can suppressed delusion (suppressed delusion) attain Cessation Not Through Discrimination, and also suppress afflictions to attain the suppressed Obstacles to Samāpatti, why not divide it into two types, but only divide it into harming latent tendencies? Answer: Obstacles to Samāpatti are universally present in things.

觀斷。亦有伏得者。煩惱要唯理觀除故無伏得者。設有異生得定伏煩惱。亦名定障。本求定故。而未求理。聖得者隱而難知。故分別說令易趣入。凡得者是可斷。又凡得易而相顯。更何須開 法執中。問第七影像攝相歸見可名有覆。攝影歸質可名無覆。亦應攝相歸見名為分別。攝影歸質得名異熟 答不離見故性類可同。非是能緣不名分別。托質方起可從無覆。非業果故不從異熟 問非是能緣不從分別。有覆應爾。非是業果不從異熟。無覆應然 答性通多法。二性可從見。果義局不從分別及名異熟。

此二法執粗故易斷。入初地時乃至除滅。初有四種。一地位。初在初地斷非餘地。二聖道。初彼中唯見非修故。三真相。初在真見道非相見道故。四四道。初在無間道非解脫道故。此依一心見道。非斷粗重釋。在此四初斷分別法執。若解脫道斷粗重。三心見道等。隨義應說。迷淺必深人執必法。解淺非深人空非法。悟深必淺法空有人。迷深亦淺法．人俱起。然人必常一。有法不帶人。人用必帶體。人執定有法。

緣用必依實有體故者。此據正理。外道．小乘所執。體無不得成緣。有所緣義。前卷設許薩婆多等有極微故。縱成緣義而無所緣。就他比量非自所許。今述正義故不相違 同聚心所自許相緣。下第八云勿

見分境不同質故。遮見分境不同質過。非令知能緣必同是見分故。佛第八見分等。與相應法自證分等同一所緣。自之見分故不相違 問心．心所法既自相應。諸自證分既不同一所緣。所緣亦不相似。如何說為相應。證自證分為問亦爾 自證是識體。何得不相應。具時等．依等．事等．處等。此闕處等。各緣自見非他故。此義應思。

我法若無依何假說者。所似既無說誰為能似。能似假說無故。共法之似亦不成。不得別解義依于體等假。世間．聖教二似俱不成故。

破小乘真事中有三。初總非。次別顯。後結依。別顯中有三。初顯不依真唯依共相轉。次顯詮智有勝功能。亦非離此等是。後總申假說不依真事。然假智詮必依聲起等是 由此但依下。結假智所依。

依佛地論第六云。若共相境二量所知。云何二相依二量立。有義二量在散心位依二相立。不說定位。若在定心緣一切相。皆現量攝。有義定心唯緣自相。然由共相方便所引緣諸共相所顯理者。就方便說。不如是者名知自相。由此道理。或說真如名空無我諸法共相。或說真如二空所顯非是共相。如實義者。因明二相與此小異。彼說法上所有實義皆名自相。以諸法上自相．共相。各附己體不共他故。若分別心立一種類。能詮．所詮通在諸法。如縷貫

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為見分（jian fen，能見之部分）和境（jing，所見之對象）的體性不同。這是爲了避免見分和境體性相同的過失。並非爲了使能知和能緣一定與見分相同。佛的第八見分等，與相應的法（fa，佛法）的自證分（zi zheng fen，自我認知的部分）等，是同一個所緣（suo yuan，所緣的對象）。因為是自己見分，所以不相違背。問：心（xin，意識）.心所法（xin suo fa，心的附屬物）既然各自相應，諸自證分既然不是同一個所緣，所緣也不相似，如何說是相應呢？證自證分也是同樣的問題。自證是識體（shi ti，意識的本體），怎麼能說不相應呢？具備時間等、所依等、事情等、處所等。這裡缺少處所等，因為各自緣自己的見分，而不是其他的。這個道理應該思考。 如果我和法沒有所依，又何必假設說者呢？所相似的如果不存在，又說誰能相似呢？能相似的假設不存在，共同法的相似也不能成立。不能另外理解義理依賴於體等假設。世間和聖教兩種相似都不能成立。 破斥小乘的真實事有三種。首先是總的否定，其次是分別顯示，最後是總結所依。分別顯示中有三種。首先是顯示不依賴真實，只依賴共相而轉。其次是顯示詮釋的智慧有殊勝的功能，也不是離開這些等法而存在的。最後是總的申明假設的說法不依賴真實的事物，然而假設的智慧詮釋必定依賴聲音生起等。由此以下，總結假設的智慧所依賴的。 依據《佛地論》第六卷說，如果共相境（gong xiang jing，共相的境界）是二量（er liang，兩種衡量標準）所知，那麼這兩種相如何依賴兩種量而成立呢？有種說法是兩種量在散心位（san xin wei，散亂的心境）依賴兩種相而成立，沒有說在定位（ding wei，禪定狀態）。如果在定心中緣一切相，都屬於現量（xian liang，直接的認知）。有種說法是定心只緣自相（zi xiang，自身的相）。然而由於共相方便所引導，緣各種共相所顯示的道理，就方便來說。不如是的情況就叫做認知自相。根據這個道理，或者說真如（zhen ru，事物的真實本性）名叫空無我（kong wu wo，沒有自我）諸法共相，或者說真如是二空（er kong，兩種空性）所顯示的，不是共相。如實的意義是，因明（yin ming，因明學）的兩種相與此略有不同。因明認為法上所有真實的意義都叫做自相，因為諸法上的自相和共相，各自附著于自己的本體，不與其他的相混淆。如果分別心建立一種種類，能詮（neng quan，能表達的）和所詮（suo quan，所表達的）貫通於各種法，就像用線穿珠子一樣。

【English Translation】 English version: Because the 'jian fen' (見分, perceiving aspect) and 'jing' (境, object of perception) have different natures. This is to avoid the fault of the 'jian fen' and 'jing' having the same nature. It is not to make the knower and the object of perception necessarily the same as the 'jian fen'. The Buddha's eighth 'jian fen', etc., and the corresponding 'fa' (法, Dharma) 'zi zheng fen' (自證分, self-awareness aspect), etc., are the same 'suo yuan' (所緣, object of cognition). Because it is one's own 'jian fen', it is not contradictory. Question: Since the mind ('xin', 心) and mental functions ('xin suo fa', 心所法) correspond to each other, and the various 'zi zheng fen' are not the same 'suo yuan', and the 'suo yuan' are also not similar, how can they be said to correspond? The question of proving the 'zi zheng fen' is the same. The 'zi zheng' is the essence of consciousness ('shi ti', 識體), how can it be said that it does not correspond? It possesses time, support, event, and place, etc. Here, place is lacking, because each perceives its own 'jian fen', not others. This meaning should be contemplated. If I and the Dharma have nothing to rely on, why would there be a speaker? If what is similar does not exist, who can be said to be similar? If the assumed similarity does not exist, the similarity of common Dharma cannot be established either. One cannot separately understand that the meaning relies on the assumption of essence, etc. Both worldly and sacred teachings' similarities cannot be established. There are three ways to refute the Sarvastivada's (小乘) belief in the real existence of things. First, a general negation; second, a separate explanation; and third, a concluding reliance. The separate explanation has three parts. First, it shows that it does not rely on the real, but only on the common characteristics. Second, it shows that the wisdom of explanation has superior functions, and it does not exist apart from these dharmas. Finally, it generally states that the assumed explanation does not rely on real things, but the assumed wisdom of explanation must rely on the arising of sound, etc. From here on, it concludes what the assumed wisdom relies on. According to the sixth volume of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (佛地論), if the 'gong xiang jing' (共相境, realm of common characteristics) is known by two 'liang' (量, valid cognitions), how can these two characteristics rely on the two 'liang' to be established? One view is that the two 'liang' rely on the two characteristics to be established in the distracted mind state ('san xin wei', 散心位), not in the samadhi state ('ding wei', 定位). If one perceives all characteristics in the samadhi mind, they are all included in direct perception ('xian liang', 現量). One view is that the samadhi mind only perceives the self-characteristic ('zi xiang', 自相). However, because it is guided by the means of common characteristics, perceiving the principles revealed by various common characteristics is a matter of convenience. The situation that is not like this is called perceiving the self-characteristic. According to this principle, either 'zhen ru' (真如, suchness) is called the common characteristic of emptiness and no-self ('kong wu wo', 空無我) of all dharmas, or 'zhen ru' is revealed by the two emptinesses ('er kong', 二空), and is not a common characteristic. The real meaning is that the two characteristics of 'hetuvidya' (因明, logic) are slightly different from this. 'Hetuvidya' considers all real meanings on dharmas to be called self-characteristics, because the self-characteristics and common characteristics on dharmas each adhere to their own essence and do not mix with other characteristics. If the discriminating mind establishes a kind, the expresser ('neng quan', 能詮) and the expressed ('suo quan', 所詮) are connected in all dharmas, just like threading beads with a string.

華名為共相。此要散心分別假立。是比量境。一切定心離此分別皆名現量。雖緣諸法苦．無常等。亦一一法各別有故名為自相。真如雖是共相所顯。以是諸法自實性故。自有性故亦非共相。不可以其與一切法不一不異即名共相。自相亦與一切共相不一不異故。是故彼論說諸法上所有實義皆名自相。經義不爾故不相違。

亦非離此有別方便。有二解。一云即以假智詮施設自相為假所依。由假智．詮顯於法故。如手指月等。不爾如何說為自相能證得也。二云假智．詮境不得自相。亦非離此二外更有別方便施設自相可為假所依。顯此二既不得自相。離此亦無方便可得自相。意顯自相除證智外莫能得者。

四十九立七地。一種性地。二勝解行地。三凈勝意息地。四行正行地。五決定地。六決定行地。七到究竟地 四十七種姓．勝解行．極喜．增上戒．增上心．三惠諦覺分．緣起．無相有功用．無相無功用．及以無礙解．最上菩薩住．最極如來住。種姓地即種姓位。勝解行地勝解行地位也。凈勝意樂地即極喜住行正行地即增上惑。增上心。三種增上惠。有加行功用無相住。決定地即無加行無功用無相住 有三決定。一種性定。二發心定。三不虛行定。此地菩薩墮在第三決定中故。決定行地即無礙解住。到究竟地即最

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『華名』（Vācanāmarūpa，言語名相）被稱為共相（sāmānyalakṣaṇa，共相）。這是由於散亂心分別假立而產生的，屬於比量境（anumāna-gocara，推論的境界）。一切定心遠離這種分別，都稱為現量（pratyakṣa，現量）。雖然緣于諸法的苦、無常等，但因為每一個法各自有其差別，所以稱為自相（svalakṣaṇa，自相）。真如（tathatā，真如）雖然是共相所顯現的，但因為是諸法自身真實的性質，具有自身本性，所以也不是共相。不能因為它與一切法不一不異就稱之為共相，自相也與一切共相不一不異。因此，彼論說諸法上所有真實的意義都稱為自相。經文的意義不是這樣，所以不相違背。

也沒有離開這些而存在其他施設自相的方便。對此有兩種解釋。一種解釋是，就是用假智（parikalpita-jñāna，遍計所執智）詮釋施設自相，作為假立所依賴的基礎，因為通過假智和詮釋來顯現法，就像用手指指月亮一樣。如果不是這樣，怎麼能說自相能夠被證得呢？另一種解釋是，假智和詮釋的境界無法得到自相，也不是離開這二者之外，還有其他施設自相的方便可以作為假立所依賴的基礎。這表明這二者既不能得到自相，離開這二者也沒有方便可以得到自相。意思是說，除了證智（pramāṇa-jñāna，正確的智慧）之外，沒有其他方法可以獲得自相。

四十九立七地：一種性地（gotra-bhūmi，種性地），二勝解行地（adhimukti-caryā-bhūmi，勝解行地），三凈勝意息地（viśuddha-ādhyāśaya-bhūmi，清凈增上意樂地），四行正行地（caryā-pratipatti-bhūmi，行正行地），五決定地（viniścaya-bhūmi，決定地），六決定行地（viniścaya-pratipatti-bhūmi，決定行地），七到究竟地（niṣṭhā-gamana-bhūmi，到究竟地）。四十七種：姓、勝解行、極喜（pramudita，極喜）、增上戒（adhiśīla，增上戒）、增上心（adhicitta，增上心）、三惠諦覺分（tisraḥ prajñāḥ satyānusmṛti-pakṣa，三種慧諦覺分）、緣起（pratītyasamutpāda，緣起）、無相有功用（anābhoga-nirnimitta，無相有功用）、無相無功用（anābhoga-nirnimitta，無相無功用）、以及無礙解（pratibhāna，無礙解）、最上菩薩住（paramā bodhisattva-vihāra，最上菩薩住）、最極如來住（atyanta tathāgata-vihāra，最極如來住）。種姓地即種姓位。勝解行地即勝解行地位。凈勝意樂地即極喜住。行正行地即增上惑。增上心。三種增上惠。有加行功用無相住。決定地即無加行無功用無相住。有三種決定：一種性定（gotra-niyata，種性決定），二發心定（citta-utpāda-niyata，發心決定），三不虛行定（amogha-caryā-niyata，不虛行決定）。此地菩薩墮在第三決定中故。決定行地即無礙解住。到究竟地即最極如來住。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Vācanāmarūpa' (verbal designation) is called sāmānyalakṣaṇa (universal characteristic). This is due to the distracted mind's conceptual fabrication, and it belongs to the anumāna-gocara (realm of inference). All concentrated minds, free from this conceptualization, are called pratyakṣa (direct perception). Although they are related to the suffering, impermanence, etc., of all dharmas, because each dharma has its own distinctiveness, it is called svalakṣaṇa (own-characteristic). Although tathatā (suchness) is manifested by sāmānyalakṣaṇa, because it is the self-real nature of all dharmas and has its own nature, it is not sāmānyalakṣaṇa. It cannot be called sāmānyalakṣaṇa simply because it is neither identical nor different from all dharmas; svalakṣaṇa is also neither identical nor different from all sāmānyalakṣaṇa. Therefore, that treatise says that all real meanings on dharmas are called svalakṣaṇa. The meaning of the sutra is not like this, so there is no contradiction.

Nor is there any other means of establishing svalakṣaṇa apart from these. There are two interpretations of this. One interpretation is that it is precisely using parikalpita-jñāna (imaginative wisdom) to explain and establish svalakṣaṇa as the basis upon which the imagined is based, because dharmas are manifested through imaginative wisdom and explanation, just like pointing at the moon with a finger. If it were not so, how could it be said that svalakṣaṇa can be attained? The second interpretation is that the realm of imaginative wisdom and explanation cannot attain svalakṣaṇa, nor is there any other means of establishing svalakṣaṇa apart from these two that can be used as the basis upon which the imagined is based. This shows that these two cannot attain svalakṣaṇa, and there is no means of attaining svalakṣaṇa apart from these two. The meaning is that apart from the wisdom of realization (pramāṇa-jñāna), there is no other way to obtain svalakṣaṇa.

Forty-nine establish seven bhūmi (grounds): 1. gotra-bhūmi (lineage ground), 2. adhimukti-caryā-bhūmi (ground of aspirational conduct), 3. viśuddha-ādhyāśaya-bhūmi (ground of pure superior intention), 4. caryā-pratipatti-bhūmi (ground of conduct and practice), 5. viniścaya-bhūmi (ground of determination), 6. viniścaya-pratipatti-bhūmi (ground of determined practice), 7. niṣṭhā-gamana-bhūmi (ground of reaching the ultimate). Forty-seven kinds: lineage, aspirational conduct, pramudita (joyful), adhiśīla (higher morality), adicitta (higher mind), tisraḥ prajñāḥ satyānusmṛti-pakṣa (three wisdoms, aspects of mindfulness of truth), pratītyasamutpāda (dependent origination), anābhoga-nirnimitta (effortless and signless), anābhoga-nirnimitta (effortless and signless), and pratibhāna (unobstructed eloquence), paramā bodhisattva-vihāra (supreme bodhisattva abode), atyanta tathāgata-vihāra (ultimate tathāgata abode). gotra-bhūmi is the position of lineage. adhimukti-caryā-bhūmi is the position of aspirational conduct. viśuddha-ādhyāśaya-bhūmi is the abode of great joy. caryā-pratipatti-bhūmi is the increased delusion. adicitta. Three increased wisdoms. The abode of signlessness with effort. viniścaya-bhūmi is the abode of signlessness without effort. There are three determinations: 1. gotra-niyata (determination of lineage), 2. citta-utpāda-niyata (determination of mind generation), 3. amogha-caryā-niyata (determination of unfailing conduct). Because the bodhisattva of this ground falls into the third determination. viniścaya-pratipatti-bhūmi is the abode of unobstructed eloquence. niṣṭhā-gamana-bhūmi is the ultimate tathāgata abode.

上成滿菩薩。及如來住。合立。

其阿賴耶名在前四地。毗播迦名通六地半。第七地中攝第十地菩薩故。阿陀那名貫通七地。然依雜染位。多分異熟。通阿賴耶故 又十三住。初名通九。第三名通十三。異熟名談十二。故名為多。依生死摽故唯取此。此二解依不共所緣以三性境為所緣者。不說二乘。二乘回趣亦此所攝。疏之二解通三乘解。以上簡自名。必其簡不名心。所以與阿陀那名等故。意名不及第七。故不取之 又簡他識。多者相續義。一切時行名之為多。多時行故。異熟者業果。五果中異熟果。六識雖有異熟而非多。第七雖多非異熟故。唯此名。又多者廣義。即是總義。異熟之義雖通六識。非總報主不立多名。第七非多非異熟。故名異熟余識不名。

又思量者。簡他識如疏。又簡自 何故此名意 有二義。一者依止名意。二者思量名意 何故名思量不名依止 依止之名是共他故。今不共故。又依止名兼他顯自。以能依止顯所依故。思量之名自行相義。以行顯體。以緣多故相續恒起。行相緣遠名之為審。故以思量行相而顯自性不名依止。又現正思量名之為意。對法第二無間覺義是意。即次第滅根。今此思量是現正思量。簡無間故言恒故。顯此思量恒現在故 又簡自名。何故不名心識而獨名意。百法等

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 上成滿菩薩（指修行圓滿的菩薩）以及如來所住的境界，合在一起建立。

阿賴耶（ālǎiyé，梵文ālaya的音譯，意為『藏』，指第八識，含藏一切種子）這個名稱在前四地（指菩薩修行的最初四個階段）適用。毗播迦（pípōjiā，梵文vipāka的音譯，意為『異熟』，指業果成熟）這個名稱貫通六地半。在第七地中，因為它包含第十地菩薩的緣故。阿陀那（ātuóná，梵文ādāna的音譯，意為『執取』，指第七識，執取第八識為自我）這個名稱貫通七地。然而，依據雜染位（指充滿煩惱的狀態），它主要表現爲異熟。因為它與阿賴耶識相通的緣故。又有十三住（指菩薩修行的十三個階段），最初的名稱貫通九個階段，第三個名稱貫通全部十三個階段。異熟這個名稱談論的是十二個階段。所以說它是『多』。依據生死流轉的標誌，所以只取這個名稱。這兩種解釋都依據不共所緣（指第七識獨特的所緣境），以三性境（指善、惡、無記三種性質的境界）作為所緣境。這裡沒有說二乘（指聲聞乘和緣覺乘）。二乘的回小向大也包含在這裡。疏鈔的兩種解釋貫通三乘（指聲聞乘、緣覺乘和菩薩乘）的解釋。以上是爲了簡別自名（指第七識的其他名稱）。必定要簡別不名為『心』，因為它與阿陀那這個名稱相同。『意』這個名稱不及第七地，所以不取用它。又簡別他識（指第七識以外的其他識）。『多』是相續不斷的意思。一切時中都在執行，所以稱為『多』。因為在很多時間裡都在執行的緣故。『異熟』指的是業的果報。在五果（指異熟果、等流果、士用果、增上果、離系果）中，指的是異熟果。第六識雖然也有異熟，但不是『多』。第七識雖然是『多』，但不是異熟。所以只有第八識才被稱為『異熟』。『多』又是廣大的意思，也就是總體的意思。異熟的含義雖然貫通六識，但它不是總報的主體，所以不建立『多』這個名稱。第七識既不是『多』，也不是異熟，所以稱為『異熟』，其餘的識不稱為『異熟』。

『思量』是爲了簡別他識，如同疏鈔所說。又爲了簡別自身。為什麼這個識被稱為『意』？有兩個含義：一是依據依止而稱為『意』，二是依據思量而稱為『意』。為什麼稱為『思量』而不稱為『依止』？因為依止這個名稱是與其他的識共有的。現在是不共有的緣故。而且依止這個名稱兼顧了他者來顯示自身，因為能依止的可以顯示所依止的。思量這個名稱是自行相的含義，用執行來顯示本體。因為它緣慮很多，所以相續不斷地生起。執行的相狀緣慮深遠，所以稱為『審』。所以用思量的執行相狀來顯示自性，而不稱為『依止』。又，現在正在思量，所以稱為『意』。《對法論》第二中，無間覺的含義就是『意』，也就是次第滅去的根。現在這個思量是現在正在思量。爲了簡別無間，所以說『恒』。顯示這個思量恒常存在。又，爲了簡別自名。為什麼不稱為『心』、『識』，而單獨稱為『意』？《百法明門論》等經典中……

【English Translation】 English version: The attainment of perfect enlightenment by Bodhisattvas (those who have completed their practice) and the abode of the Tathagata (the Buddha), are established together.

The name Ālaya (ālǎiyé, Sanskrit for 'storehouse', referring to the eighth consciousness, which contains all seeds) applies to the first four Bhumis (stages of a Bodhisattva's path). The name Vipāka (pípōjiā, Sanskrit for 'result of karma', referring to the maturation of karmic actions) applies throughout six and a half Bhumis. In the seventh Bhumi, it includes Bodhisattvas of the tenth Bhumi. The name Ādāna (ātuóná, Sanskrit for 'grasping', referring to the seventh consciousness, which grasps the eighth consciousness as self) applies throughout seven Bhumis. However, according to the impure and defiled state, it mainly manifests as Vipāka. This is because it is connected to the Ālaya consciousness. Furthermore, there are thirteen Abodes (stages of a Bodhisattva's practice), the initial name applies to nine stages, and the third name applies to all thirteen stages. The name Vipāka refers to twelve stages. Therefore, it is called 'manifold'. Based on the characteristic of the cycle of birth and death, only this name is taken. Both of these explanations are based on the uncommon object of cognition (the unique object of the seventh consciousness), using the three natures of objects (good, evil, and neutral) as the object of cognition. The Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) are not mentioned here. The turning of the Two Vehicles towards the Great Vehicle is also included here. The two explanations in the commentary apply to the explanations of the Three Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna). The above is to distinguish the self-name (other names of the seventh consciousness). It is necessary to distinguish that it is not called 'mind' because it is the same as the name Ādāna. The name 'Manas' (mind) does not reach the seventh Bhumi, so it is not used. Also, it distinguishes other consciousnesses (other than the seventh consciousness). 'Manifold' means continuous. It operates at all times, so it is called 'manifold'. Because it operates for a long time. 'Vipāka' refers to the result of karma. Among the five results (Vipāka result, flowing result, volitional result, augmenting result, separation result), it refers to the Vipāka result. Although the six consciousnesses also have Vipāka, they are not 'manifold'. Although the seventh consciousness is 'manifold', it is not Vipāka. Therefore, only the eighth consciousness is called 'Vipāka'. 'Manifold' also means vast, which is the meaning of totality. Although the meaning of Vipāka applies to the six consciousnesses, it is not the main controller of the overall retribution, so the name 'manifold' is not established. The seventh consciousness is neither 'manifold' nor Vipāka, so it is called 'Vipāka', and the other consciousnesses are not called 'Vipāka'.

'Thinking' is to distinguish other consciousnesses, as the commentary says. It is also to distinguish oneself. Why is this consciousness called 'Manas' (mind)? There are two meanings: one is based on reliance and is called 'Manas', and the other is based on thinking and is called 'Manas'. Why is it called 'thinking' and not 'reliance'? Because the name 'reliance' is common to other consciousnesses. Now it is uncommon. Moreover, the name 'reliance' considers others to reveal oneself, because the one who relies can reveal the one who is relied upon. The name 'thinking' is the meaning of self-functioning, using operation to reveal the essence. Because it contemplates many things, it arises continuously. The aspect of operation contemplates deeply and far, so it is called 'deliberation'. Therefore, the nature is revealed by the aspect of thinking, and it is not called 'reliance'. Also, it is currently thinking, so it is called 'Manas'. In the second chapter of the Abhidharma, the meaning of immediate awareness is 'Manas', which is the root that disappears in sequence. Now this thinking is currently thinking. To distinguish the immediate, it is said 'constant'. It shows that this thinking is constantly present. Also, to distinguish the self-name. Why is it not called 'mind' or 'consciousness', but only called 'Manas'? In the Shastra of Hundred Dharmas, etc...

說識有八種。有心地說八併名心故 以恒審思量之義勝餘名故。若恒集起名心。不及第八。若了境名識。不及餘六。故以意各而標自稱不說心．識。由此簡他識有二義。此余識非恒。及非審故。如疏解。第二此中心．識不及八．六。恒自識思量之用勝心．識故 簡自名中亦有二。一不唯依止解意。非諸論中依止之義行之其名。二顯常現在非無間覺。

又了境者。一唯見分行相。而現自體。二簡他識。有四義。一易共知故。嬰垓之屬皆知有故。二共許有故。三乘通許。三行相粗故。四所緣粗故。唯六名了境余不得名 又自可名為心．意。何故但名識不名心．意等 以了境之行相粗故易知顯其自性。心．意不爾。眼識等名心義難知故。有心地說。八併名心。對法等說無間覺意。故簡自名。又簡不名異熟名等顯。異熟等名相難知故。多非分故。自余別義如對法抄．及別章說。

體相沉隱名之為因。故唯在種。體用顯現立為果。名為見故不在種。不爾應通因果。

能變中有二四句。初應總因果為句。次等流．異熟各別因果為句。次以二相對為句。後轉變．變現為句。合五四句思之。有唯轉變名變非變現名變。謂一切種子。有唯變現名變非轉變名變。謂因第八及六識中業果現行。並佛功德一切諸心．心所。有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於『識』（vijñāna，了別作用）有八種說法。因為有『心』（citta，積集）的緣故，所以說八個識都可稱為『心』，這與『心』的恒常審察思量的特性勝過其他名稱有關。如果說恒常積集稱為『心』，則不如第八識（阿賴耶識，ālaya-vijñāna）。如果說了別境界稱為『識』，則不如其餘六識（眼識，耳識，鼻識，舌識，身識，意識）。因此，爲了各自的意義而標立各自的名稱，不說『心』或『識』。由此可以簡化其他識的兩種含義：這些其餘的識不是恒常的，也不是審察的，如疏解所說。第二，在此處，『心』和『識』不如第八識和第六識（意識，manovijñāna），因為恒常地認識和思量的作用勝過『心』和『識』。簡化自身名稱也有兩種含義：一是不唯獨依賴於解釋『意』（manas，思量），並非所有論典中都依止於解釋『意』來使用這個名稱；二是顯示其常時存在，並非無間斷的覺知。

此外，關於『了境』（viṣaya-vijñāna，對境的了別）：一是隻有見分（darśana-bhāga，認識的主體）的行相（ākāra，相狀）顯現自體（sva-lakṣaṇa，自性）；二是簡化其他識，有四種含義：一是容易共同認知，因為嬰兒都知曉其存在；二是共同認可其存在；三是乘教普遍認可；三是行相粗顯；四是所緣（ālambana，認識的對象）粗顯。只有六識可以稱為『了境』，其餘的不能稱為『了境』。此外，自身可以稱為『心』或『意』，為什麼只稱為『識』而不稱為『心』或『意』等？因爲了境的行相粗顯，容易知曉其自性，而『心』和『意』則不然。眼識等稱為『心』的意義難以理解。因為有『有心地說』，所以說八個識都可稱為『心』。《對法》（Abhidharma）等論典說無間斷的覺知為『意』，因此簡化自身名稱。又簡化不稱為『異熟名』等，因為『異熟名』等名稱難以理解，而且大多不是一部分。其餘的特殊含義如《對法抄》及其他章節所述。

體相沉隱的稱為『因』（hetu，原因），因此只存在於種子（bīja，潛能）中。體用顯現的立為『果』（phala，結果），稱為『見』（darśana，顯現），因此不存在於種子中。否則，應該因果相通。

能變（pariṇāma，轉變）中有二個四句。首先，應該將總的因果作為一句。其次，等流（nisyanda-phala，等流果）和異熟（vipāka-phala，異熟果）各自的因果作為一句。其次，以二者相對作為一句。最後，以轉變（pariṇāma，轉變）和變現（vivarta，顯現）作為一句。總共五個四句來思考。有唯有轉變之名，而無變現之名，稱為『變』，指的是一切種子。有唯有變現之名，而無轉變之名，稱為『變』，指的是第八識和六識中的業果現行，以及佛的功德和一切心、心所（citta-caitta，心和心理活動）。

【English Translation】 English version: There are eight kinds of 『consciousness』 (vijñāna). Because of the presence of 『mind』 (citta), all eight consciousnesses can be called 『mind,』 which is related to the fact that the characteristic of constant examination and deliberation of 『mind』 surpasses other names. If constant accumulation is called 『mind,』 it is not as good as the eighth consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna). If distinguishing objects is called 『consciousness,』 it is not as good as the other six consciousnesses (eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and mind consciousness). Therefore, names are established for their respective meanings, without saying 『mind』 or 『consciousness.』 From this, two meanings of other consciousnesses can be simplified: these other consciousnesses are neither constant nor examining, as explained in the commentary. Secondly, here, 『mind』 and 『consciousness』 are not as good as the eighth and sixth consciousnesses (manovijñāna), because the function of constant cognition and deliberation surpasses 『mind』 and 『consciousness.』 There are also two meanings in simplifying one's own name: one is not solely dependent on explaining 『intellect』 (manas), and not all treatises rely on explaining 『intellect』 to use this name; the second is to show that it is constantly present, not an uninterrupted awareness.

Furthermore, regarding 『object-cognizing』 (viṣaya-vijñāna): one is that only the appearance (ākāra) of the seeing-aspect (darśana-bhāga) manifests its own nature (sva-lakṣaṇa); the second is to simplify other consciousnesses, which has four meanings: one is that it is easy to be commonly known, because even infants know of its existence; the second is that its existence is commonly acknowledged; the third is that it is universally acknowledged by the teachings; the third is that the appearance is coarse; the fourth is that the object (ālambana) is coarse. Only the six consciousnesses can be called 『object-cognizing,』 and the rest cannot be called 『object-cognizing.』 Furthermore, oneself can be called 『mind』 or 『intellect,』 why is it only called 『consciousness』 and not 『mind』 or 『intellect,』 etc.? Because the appearance of object-cognizing is coarse and easy to know its own nature, while 『mind』 and 『intellect』 are not. The meaning of eye consciousness, etc., being called 『mind』 is difficult to understand. Because there is the 『teaching of having mind,』 it is said that all eight consciousnesses can be called 『mind.』 Treatises such as the Abhidharma say that uninterrupted awareness is 『intellect,』 therefore simplifying one's own name. Also, simplifying not being called 『resultant name,』 etc., because names such as 『resultant name』 are difficult to understand, and most are not a part. Other special meanings are as described in the Abhidharma notes and other chapters.

The substance and appearance that are hidden are called 『cause』 (hetu), so they only exist in the seeds (bīja). The substance and function that are manifest are established as 『result』 (phala), called 『seeing』 (darśana), so they do not exist in the seeds. Otherwise, cause and effect should be interconnected.

In transformation (pariṇāma), there are two sets of four phrases. First, the general cause and effect should be taken as one phrase. Second, the respective cause and effect of outflow (nisyanda-phala) and maturation (vipāka-phala) should be taken as one phrase. Third, the two should be taken as one phrase in relation to each other. Finally, transformation (pariṇāma) and manifestation (vivarta) should be taken as one phrase. Consider all five sets of four phrases. There is only the name of transformation, but not manifestation, called 『transformation,』 referring to all seeds. There is only the name of manifestation, but not transformation, called 『transformation,』 referring to the present actions of karma results in the eighth and sixth consciousnesses, as well as the merits of the Buddha and all minds and mental activities (citta-caitta).

俱句者。謂因七識。俱非者。謂異熟相分。但是所變故。一切因位有力相分為能熏故。亦轉變名變。非變現名變。第一句攝。其因中六識業果相分。及一切第八。佛果諸心．心所相分。併爲第四句 又有因變非果變。謂成佛已去一切有為無漏種。佛更無現熏生故。有果變非因變。謂第八．六識中業果。並佛一切現心．心所。俱句者謂因七識能熏現行。及能生種。俱非者。謂佛果上一切相分 唯以等流為因果能變作四句。惑唯等流因非果變。大悲菩薩之果。無漏法爾種。有唯等流果非因變。謂佛果現八識。有俱句。即因第七及六識無漏。並威儀．工巧變化因種。有俱非句。即佛果相分 以異熟為因果能變作四句中。唯有三句。無第三句故。有漏善．惡種子為初句。第八及六識業果現．種為第二句。無第三句。俱非者如理思。

諸科文頌皆應別敘。

第七及六識非善惡並業果心等。是於八識各為五句。後別應思。真異熟。具三義。一業果。二不斷。三遍三界。第七具後二義非初。第六報心具初．後義非中。非報心具後一義非初二。五識報心具初非後二。非報心三義俱無。故唯第八獨得其名。

十因中第八現行望諸法能為幾因。一觀待。二攝受。作用．依處相攝受故。三同事。四不相違。非言說故。非潤

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『俱句者』，指的是作為七識的因。『俱非者』，指的是異熟識的相分，因為它只是所變現的，一切因位的有力相分是能熏習的，所以也稱為『轉變』的『變』，而不是『變現』的『變』。第一句涵蓋了因位中六識的業果相分，以及一切第八識，佛果的諸心、心所的相分，這些都屬於第四句。 又有『因變非果變』，指的是成佛之後所捨棄的一切有為無漏種子，因為佛不再有現行熏生。有『果變非因變』，指的是第八識和六識中的業果，以及佛的一切現行心、心所。『俱句者』指的是因位的七識能熏現行，以及能生種子。『俱非者』指的是佛果上的一切相分。 僅以等流作為因果能變，可以作出四句。惑唯是等流因，而非果變。大悲菩薩的果位，是無漏法爾種子。有唯是等流果，而非因變，指的是佛果的現行八識。有『俱句』，即因位的第七識和六識的無漏，以及威儀、工巧變化的因種。有『俱非句』，即佛果的相分。 以異熟作為因果能變，可以作出四句，但實際上只有三句，因為沒有第三句。有漏的善、惡種子是第一句。第八識和六識的業果現行和種子是第二句。沒有第三句。『俱非者』可以如理思維。 各種科文頌都應該分別敘述。 第七識和六識的非善惡以及業果心等，是對於八識各自作出五句。之後應該分別思考。真正的異熟，具備三種含義：一是業果，二是不間斷，三是遍及三界。第七識具備後兩種含義，但不具備第一種。第六識的報心具備第一種和第三種含義，但不具備第二種。非報心具備第三種含義，但不具備第一種和第二種。五識的報心具備第一種含義，但不具備後兩種。非報心三種含義都不具備。因此只有第八識才獨得其名。 在十因中，第八識的現行對於諸法能作為幾種因？一是觀待因，二是攝受因，因為作用、依處相互攝受。三是同事因，四是不相違因，因為不是言說。

【English Translation】 English version 『Both』 refers to the cause of the seven consciousnesses. 『Neither』 refers to the image-component (相分) of the Alaya consciousness (異熟識), because it is only what is transformed. The powerful image-components in all causal stages are capable of perfuming (能熏), so it is also called 『transformation』 (轉變) of 『change』 (變), not 『manifestation』 (變現) of 『change』. The first statement covers the karma-result image-components of the six consciousnesses in the causal stage, as well as all the image-components of the minds and mental factors of the eighth consciousness and the Buddha-fruit (佛果), which all belong to the fourth statement. There is also 『cause-transformation but not result-transformation』, which refers to all conditioned, non-outflow seeds (有為無漏種子) that are abandoned after becoming a Buddha, because the Buddha no longer has manifest perfuming and arising. There is 『result-transformation but not cause-transformation』, which refers to the karma-results in the eighth and sixth consciousnesses, as well as all the Buddha's manifest minds and mental factors. 『Both』 refers to the seven consciousnesses in the causal stage that are capable of perfuming manifest activities, as well as the seeds that can produce. 『Neither』 refers to all the image-components on the Buddha-fruit. Only using equal-flow (等流) as the cause-result transformation, four statements can be made. Delusion (惑) is only the equal-flow cause, but not the result-transformation. The result of the Great Compassion Bodhisattva (大悲菩薩) is the non-outflow, naturally-so seed (無漏法爾種子). There is only the equal-flow result, but not the cause-transformation, which refers to the manifest eight consciousnesses of the Buddha-fruit. There is 『both』, which is the non-outflow of the seventh and sixth consciousnesses in the causal stage, as well as the seeds of dignified behavior, skillful craftsmanship, and transformation. There is 『neither』, which is the image-component of the Buddha-fruit. Using maturation (異熟) as the cause-result transformation, four statements can be made, but in reality, there are only three statements because there is no third statement. The outflowing good and evil seeds are the first statement. The karma-result manifest activities and seeds of the eighth and sixth consciousnesses are the second statement. There is no third statement. 『Neither』 can be thought about according to reason. Various categories and verses should be described separately. The non-good and non-evil of the seventh and sixth consciousnesses, as well as the karma-result minds, etc., are making five statements for each of the eight consciousnesses. Afterwards, one should think about them separately. True maturation has three meanings: first, karma-result; second, uninterrupted; third, pervading the three realms. The seventh consciousness has the latter two meanings, but not the first. The retribution-mind (報心) of the sixth consciousness has the first and third meanings, but not the second. The non-retribution-mind has the third meaning, but not the first and second. The retribution-mind of the five consciousnesses has the first meaning, but not the latter two. The non-retribution-mind has none of the three meanings. Therefore, only the eighth consciousness uniquely obtains its name. Among the ten causes, how many causes can the manifest activity of the eighth consciousness be for all dharmas? First, the condition-cause (觀待因); second, the receptive-cause (攝受因), because function and basis mutually receive each other. Third, the co-operative cause (同事因); fourth, the non-contradictory cause (不相違因), because it is not verbal expression.

．未潤生後果故。非引發．定異。不親引他生。非定分別生。故不相違。思可知。種識望諸法能為幾因。可為觀待．牽引．生起．攝受．引發．定異．同事．不相違合八因。唯無隨說．相違二種。

準此中雲。三相俱唯現行。現可見故。執持勝故。從勝為相 第八三相。攝論第二卷。以種為因相。諸法因緣故。現行為果相。二種所生故。現．種俱為自相。現．種俱為自體故 又說唯現行。所藏處名所藏故。論本之文字意如此 又說自相．因相通釋第八現行及一切種子能藏．所藏故。自相體通。一切種相應更分別故。因相亦通。其果相唯第八現．種。除餘種子。非異熟故 第四說。三相俱取現行及一切種。與轉識互為因果故。攝論云。言熏習所生諸法。此從彼異熟與轉識更互為緣因故。果相亦通也。又諸法于識藏。識於法亦爾等 在因具三相。佛果唯自相．因相。無果相。非熏非異熟故。若準攝論頌。不唯異熟名果相。但從他生名果相。佛果現行可名果相。自種生故。前解為勝。望他為因果故。

問三藏闕一不名阿賴耶。三持闕一不名執持 答本以執藏解藏。闕此便失其名。本各以執持名持。闕一猶名執持。又三境有差別。闕一境尚名能持。藏者所藏之用。闕一不名賴耶 問第七闕三中一之義。應不名末那

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：未潤生的後果，因此不是引發。定異，不直接引發其他生。不是定分別生，因此不相違背。思擇可知。種子識對於諸法能作為幾種因？可以作為觀待、牽引、生起、攝受、引發、定異、同事、不相違合這八種因。唯獨沒有隨說、相違這兩種。

依照《攝大乘論》中的說法，三種相唯有現行，因為現行是可見的，執持是殊勝的，所以從殊勝的角度立為相。第八識的三種相。《攝大乘論》第二卷中說，以種子為因相，因為是諸法的因緣；以現行為果相，因為是兩種（種子和現行）所生的；現行和種子都為自相，因為現行和種子都是自體。又說只有現行，所藏之處名為所藏，論本的文字意思是這樣。又說自相、因相通用於解釋第八識的現行和一切種子，能藏和所藏。自相的體性是共通的，因為一切種子相應而需要進一步分別。因相也是共通的，而果相只有第八識的現行和種子，排除其餘的種子，因為不是異熟果。第四種說法是，三種相都包括現行和一切種子，因為與轉識互相為因果。《攝大乘論》說：『言熏習所生諸法』，這是因為從彼異熟與轉識更互相為緣因，所以果相也是共通的。又諸法對於識藏，識對於法也是如此等等。在因位具足三種相，佛果只有自相、因相，沒有果相，因為不是熏習所生，也不是異熟果。如果依照《攝大乘論》的偈頌，不只是異熟才名為果相，只要是從他所生就名為果相，佛果的現行可以名為果相，因為是從自己的種子所生。前面的解釋更為殊勝，因為是相對於他者而言的因果關係。

問：三種藏缺少一種就不能稱為阿賴耶（Ālaya，藏識）。三種執持缺少一種就不能稱為執持嗎？答：原本是用執藏來解釋藏，缺少這個就失去了它的名稱。原本各自用執持來命名持，缺少一種仍然可以稱為執持。而且三種境有差別，缺少一種境仍然可以稱為能持。藏是所藏的作用，缺少一種就不能稱為阿賴耶。問：第七識缺少三種中的一種含義，應該不能稱為末那（Manas，末那識）吧？

【English Translation】 English version: The consequence of not being moistened and grown, therefore it is not 'inducing'. 'Defining difference', it does not directly induce other births. It is not 'defining and distinguishing birth', therefore it is not contradictory. This can be understood through contemplation. Regarding all dharmas, how many causes can the seed consciousness act as? It can act as eight causes: 'attending to', 'drawing in', 'arising', 'receiving', 'inducing', 'defining difference', 'being together', and 'not contradicting'. Only 'following speech' and 'contradicting' are absent.

According to the Shē Dà Chéng Lùn (Mahāyānasaṃgraha, Compendium of the Mahayana) it says, the three aspects are only in the present activity, because the present activity is visible, and holding is supreme, so from the perspective of supremacy, it is established as an aspect. The three aspects of the eighth consciousness. In the second volume of the Shē Dà Chéng Lùn (Mahāyānasaṃgraha, Compendium of the Mahayana), it says that the seed is the causal aspect because it is the cause and condition of all dharmas; the present activity is the resultant aspect because it is born from two (seed and present activity); both the present activity and the seed are the self-aspect because both the present activity and the seed are the self-nature. It also says that only the present activity, the place where it is stored is called the stored place, and this is the meaning of the original text of the treatise. It also says that the self-aspect and the causal aspect are commonly used to explain the present activity of the eighth consciousness and all seeds, the able to store and the stored. The nature of the self-aspect is common, because all seeds correspond and need to be further distinguished. The causal aspect is also common, while the resultant aspect is only the present activity and seed of the eighth consciousness, excluding the remaining seeds, because it is not a Vipāka (異熟, differentiated maturation) result. The fourth statement is that the three aspects include both the present activity and all seeds, because they are mutually causal with the transforming consciousness. The Shē Dà Chéng Lùn (Mahāyānasaṃgraha, Compendium of the Mahayana) says: 'The dharmas born from the spoken of perfuming', this is because from that Vipāka (異熟, differentiated maturation) and the transforming consciousness are mutually causal, so the resultant aspect is also common. Also, all dharmas are to the storehouse consciousness, and the consciousness is also to the dharmas, and so on. In the causal position, the three aspects are complete, and the Buddha fruit only has the self-aspect and the causal aspect, and does not have the resultant aspect, because it is not born from perfuming, nor is it a Vipāka (異熟, differentiated maturation) result. If according to the verses of the Shē Dà Chéng Lùn (Mahāyānasaṃgraha, Compendium of the Mahayana), not only Vipāka (異熟, differentiated maturation) is called the resultant aspect, but as long as it is born from others, it is called the resultant aspect, and the present activity of the Buddha fruit can be called the resultant aspect, because it is born from its own seed. The previous explanation is more superior, because it is the causal relationship relative to others.

Question: If one of the three stores is missing, it cannot be called Ālaya (阿賴耶, storehouse consciousness). If one of the three holdings is missing, can it not be called holding? Answer: Originally, holding and storing were used to explain storing, and if this is missing, it loses its name. Originally, each used holding to name holding, and if one is missing, it can still be called holding. Moreover, the three realms are different, and if one realm is missing, it can still be called able to hold. Storing is the function of what is stored, and if one is missing, it cannot be called Ālaya (阿賴耶, storehouse consciousness). Question: If the seventh consciousness lacks one of the three meanings, should it not be called Manas (末那, mind consciousness)?

答言末那然通有染義。差別義無尚名末那。有思量故。

謂本識中親生自果。今簡數論。數論大等藏最勝中。

若由本識種子性故。相從無記亦應相從一界所繫 系據縛義見．相別系。無記是性。性類復同。不可難以同一性故相應非色。

瑜伽五十七。二十二根中雲。問幾有異熟。答一謂憂。十少分。謂信等五．四受．意。通無漏故。問幾無異熟。答十一。謂七色．命．三然漏。十少分。謂四受．意。通無記故。信等五通無漏故。問幾有異熟助伴。答最後三。能助有可愛異熟法。令轉明盛能感決定人天異熟。問幾是異熟。答一命根。九少分七色．意．舍。問幾有種子異熟。答一切皆有。問幾非異熟。答十二。謂信等五．三無漏．四受。九少分。謂前九。通長養善性等故。問幾是異熟生。答亦一切種子所攝異熟所生故。此中雖有七問。總三門分別。初三為一門。次二為一門。後二為一門。第二門中第二問。第三門中第二問。當唯識種子中無記性難。或為二門。初三為一門。後四為一門。

非熏令長可名因緣勿善惡業與異熟果為因緣故者。若現行業望自業種令增名因。即業種亦令果種增故應名因緣。此義可然然非正好。初熏習位已令果種增。非已後故。非業種令果種增。但應如疏解 此中護法

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：回答說，末那（manas，意根）然通於有染污的含義。差別義上沒有更合適的名稱可以稱為末那。因為它有思量的作用。 指的是本識（alaya-vijñana，阿賴耶識）中親生的自果。現在簡要說明數論。數論中的大等藏是最殊勝的。 如果由於本識種子的性質，相互隨順於無記性，也應該相互隨順於同一界所繫縛——繫縛指的是束縛的含義，見和相的差別在於繫縛。無記是其自性。自性種類相同。不能因為自性相同就認為相應行不是色法。 《瑜伽師地論》第五十七卷中，在二十二根中說：『問：有幾種是有異熟果的？』答：一種，即憂根。十種是少分的，即信等五根、四受、意根。因為它們通於無漏法。『問：有幾種是沒有異熟果的？』答：十一種，即七色根、命根、三種無漏根。十種是少分的，即四受、意根。因為它們通於無記性。信等五根通於無漏法。『問：有幾種是有異熟助伴的？』答：最後三種。能夠幫助有可愛異熟果的法，使其更加明顯興盛，能夠感得決定的人天異熟果。『問：有幾種是異熟果？』答：一種，即命根。九種是少分的，即七色根、意根、舍受。『問：有幾種是有種子異熟的？』答：一切都有。『問：有幾種不是異熟果？』答：十二種，即信等五根、三種無漏根、四受。九種是少分的，即前面的九種。因為它們通於長養善性等。『問：有幾種是異熟所生的？』答：也是一切種子所攝的異熟所生。』這裡雖然有七個問題，總共分為三個方面來分別。前三個問題為一方面，中間兩個問題為一方面，後兩個問題為一方面。第二方面中的第二個問題，第三方面中的第二個問題，針對的是唯識種子中無記性的難題。或者分為兩個方面，前三個問題為一方面，後四個問題為一方面。 如果不是通過熏習使其增長，就可以稱為因緣，難道善惡業與異熟果不是因緣嗎？如果現行之業對於其自身的業種使其增長，可以稱為因，那麼業種也使其果種增長，因此應該稱為因緣。這個說法可以成立，但並非完全正確。在最初熏習的階段，就已經使果種增長了，而不是在之後。不是業種使果種增長，而應該像疏文中解釋的那樣——這裡是護法的觀點。

【English Translation】 English version: The answer states that manas (意根, mind-consciousness), by its nature, is associated with defilement. In terms of its distinctive function, there is no better name than manas. This is because it possesses the function of thinking. It refers to the self-result directly produced from the alaya-vijñana (阿賴耶識, storehouse consciousness). Now, let's briefly explain Samkhya (數論). Among the great collections of Samkhya, the most supreme is... If, due to the nature of the seeds in the alaya-vijñana, they are mutually compliant with the nature of neutral (non-specified) karma, they should also be mutually compliant with being bound by the same realm—'bound' refers to the meaning of restriction, the difference between view and appearance lies in binding. Neutrality is its nature. The types of nature are the same. It cannot be argued that because the nature is the same, the corresponding activities are not form. In the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論), volume 57, regarding the twenty-two faculties, it says: 'Question: How many have maturation (vipaka, 異熟)?' Answer: One, namely the faculty of sorrow (憂). Ten are partial, namely the five faculties of faith, etc. (信等五), the four feelings (四受), and the mind (意). Because they are common to the unconditioned (無漏). 'Question: How many do not have maturation?' Answer: Eleven, namely the seven sense faculties (七色), the life faculty (命), and the three unconditioned faculties (三無漏). Ten are partial, namely the four feelings (四受) and the mind (意). Because they are common to the neutral. The five faculties of faith, etc., are common to the unconditioned. 'Question: How many have maturation associates?' Answer: The last three. They can help the dharma with lovely maturation results, making them more obvious and flourishing, and can cause the definite maturation results of humans and gods. 'Question: How many are maturation?' Answer: One, the life faculty. Nine are partial, the seven sense faculties, the mind, and indifference. 'Question: How many have seed maturation?' Answer: All have it. 'Question: How many are not maturation?' Answer: Twelve, the five faculties of faith, etc., the three unconditioned, and the four feelings. Nine are partial, the previous nine. Because they are common to nourishing good nature, etc. 'Question: How many are born from maturation?' Answer: Also, all are born from maturation contained in the seeds.' Although there are seven questions here, they are divided into three aspects in total. The first three questions are one aspect, the middle two questions are one aspect, and the last two questions are one aspect. The second question in the second aspect, and the second question in the third aspect, address the difficulty of the neutral nature in the seeds of Consciousness-only. Or, it can be divided into two aspects, the first three questions as one aspect, and the last four questions as one aspect. If it is not increased through conditioning, it can be called a cause and condition (hetu-pratyaya, 因緣). Are good and evil karma not the cause and condition for maturation results? If the present action increases its own karma seed, it can be called a cause. Then the karma seed also increases the result seed, so it should be called a cause and condition. This statement is valid, but not entirely correct. In the initial stage of conditioning, the result seed has already been increased, not after. It is not the karma seed that increases the result seed, but it should be explained as in the commentary—this is the view of Dharmapala (護法).

現行望本有種無因緣義。但增長故。如何可說種子．現行互為因緣 護法既存新．舊。望新熏者正是因緣。望本有種為增上緣。不辨體故。

論若爾真如應是假有者。此有多過。宗有比量相違。亦有決定相違。亦有自不定。比量相違云。種子應非定假。與法不一異。亦如說真如。為如瓶等與法不一異故種子是假。為如真如與法不一異故種實有耶。故為不定。

種子以諸門分別如別抄 下是唯新熏中第二釋難。釋前初四通證文。第四解違中解後三別證文。

破新熏中大文有五。如疏。第一破本宗義中有三。一初道無因難。二相違互起難。三凡聖轉易難。

破分別論者中有三。初敘宗。次別破。後自釋。別破中有二。初空理非因難。後起心非凈難。起心非凈難中有八。一相轉體常難。二二性應同難。三惡與善俱難。四不俱非善難。五例惡非因難。六治障性同難。七凡夫起聖難。八現種應同難。大眾部等無種子 破分別論者而言成種者。別破大乘異師。又經部別有種子。薩婆多因義種子義。未來有無漏因故。大眾類此亦然。凡夫身中有可當生無漏之因義名為種子。不同經部等。又不相應隨眠亦名種子等。

第四會違中有四。一諸聖教中雖說內種下。會前內種定有熏習及三熏習等文。二其聞熏

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 現在流行的版本認為，現行（Xiànxíng，指當下生起的行為或現象）沒有因緣（Yīnyuán，指產生結果的直接原因和輔助條件）的意義，只是增長而已。那麼，如何能說種子（Zhǒngzi，指潛在的可能性或力量）和現行互為因緣呢？護法（Hùfǎ，佛教護法神或論師，此處指護法菩薩）既然已經存在新熏（Xīnxūn，指新熏習的力量）和本有（Běnyǒu，指原本就存在的）兩種說法，那麼，就新熏來說，種子正是因緣；就本有種來說，是增上緣（Zēngshàngyuán，指促進結果產生的輔助條件）。因為沒有區分它們的體性。

論中說，如果這樣，那麼真如（Zhēnrú，指事物的真實本性）就應該是假有（Jiǎyǒu，指虛假的存在）了。這種說法有很多過失。宗有比量相違（Zōng yǒu bǐliàng xiāngwéi，指宗義與比量推理相矛盾），也有決定相違（Juédìng xiāngwéi，指確定性的矛盾），也有自不定（Zì bùdìng，指自身不確定）。比量相違是說，種子不應該是確定的假有，因為它與法（Fǎ，指事物或規律）不是完全相同也不是完全不同，就像真如一樣。就像說瓶子等事物與法不是完全相同也不是完全不同，所以種子是假有；還是像說真如與法不是完全相同也不是完全不同，所以種子是實有呢？因此，這是不確定的。

關於種子的各種分類，可以參考其他抄本。下面是唯識宗在新熏上的第二種解釋，解釋前面四個普遍證明的文句，第四個解釋矛盾的部分，解釋後面三個特別證明的文句。

破斥新熏的論述主要有五點，如疏（Shū，指註釋）中所說。第一點是破斥本宗的義理，其中有三點：一是最初的道（Dào，指修行之路）沒有原因的難題；二是相互矛盾而產生的難題；三是凡夫（Fánfū，指未開悟的普通人）和聖人（Shèngrén，指已開悟的聖者）轉變的難題。

破斥分別論者（Fēnbié lùn zhě，指持分別論的論師）的論述有三點：一是先敘述他們的宗義；二是分別破斥；三是自己解釋。分別破斥中有兩點：一是空理（Kōnglǐ，指空性的道理）不是原因的難題；二是起心（Qǐxīn，指生起念頭）不是清凈的難題。起心不是清凈的難題中有八點：一是相（Xiàng，指現象）轉變而體（Tǐ，指本質）恒常的難題；二是兩種性質應該相同（指善與惡）的難題；三是惡與善同時存在的難題；四是不同時存在就不是善的難題；五是類比惡不是原因的難題；六是治療障礙的性質相同的難題；七是凡夫生起聖人（的功德）的難題；八是現行和種子應該相同的難題。大眾部（Dàzhòng bù，佛教部派之一）等不承認有種子。

破斥分別論者說種子形成，這是分別破斥大乘（Dàchéng，佛教宗派之一）中不同的論師。另外，經部（Jīng bù，佛教部派之一）特別有種子，薩婆多部（Sā pó duō bù，佛教部派之一）有因義種子義，因為未來有無漏（Wúlòu，指沒有煩惱）的因。大眾部也類似這樣認為，凡夫身中有可以產生無漏的因，這種意義稱為種子，不同於經部等。另外，不相應的隨眠（Suímián，指潛在的煩惱）也稱為種子等。

第四部分是調和矛盾，其中有四點：一是諸聖教（Shèngjiào，指聖人的教誨）中雖然說了內在的種子，這是爲了調和前面關於內在的種子一定有熏習以及三種熏習等的文句；二是其聞熏（Wénxūn，指聽聞佛法後的熏習）。

【English Translation】 English version: The current popular version holds that 'present action' (Xiānxíng, referring to actions or phenomena arising in the present moment) has no meaning of 'cause and condition' (Yīnyuán, referring to the direct cause and auxiliary conditions for producing a result), but only increases. Then, how can it be said that 'seed' (Zhǒngzi, referring to potentiality or power) and 'present action' are mutually cause and condition? Since Dharmapāla (Hùfǎ, a Buddhist protector deity or commentator, here referring to Bodhisattva Dharmapāla) already has both 'new perfuming' (Xīnxūn, referring to the power of new perfuming) and 'original existence' (Běnyǒu, referring to what originally exists), then, in terms of new perfuming, the seed is precisely the cause and condition; in terms of the originally existing seed, it is the 'augmenting condition' (Zēngshàngyuán, referring to the auxiliary condition that promotes the production of a result). Because their natures are not distinguished.

The treatise says, if so, then 'Suchness' (Zhēnrú, referring to the true nature of things) should be 'false existence' (Jiǎyǒu, referring to illusory existence). There are many faults in this statement. The tenet contradicts inference (Zōng yǒu bǐliàng xiāngwéi, referring to the contradiction between the tenet and inferential reasoning), there is also definite contradiction (Juédìng xiāngwéi, referring to a definitive contradiction), and there is also self-indetermination (Zì bùdìng, referring to self-uncertainty). The contradiction of inference is that the seed should not be a definite false existence, because it is neither completely the same nor completely different from the 'dharma' (Fǎ, referring to things or laws), just like Suchness. Just like saying that things like bottles are neither completely the same nor completely different from the dharma, so the seed is false existence; or like saying that Suchness is neither completely the same nor completely different from the dharma, so the seed is real existence? Therefore, this is uncertain.

Regarding the various classifications of seeds, refer to other transcripts. The following is the second explanation of the Consciousness-Only school on new perfuming, explaining the previous four universally proven sentences, and the fourth part explaining contradictions, explaining the latter three specially proven sentences.

There are five main points in refuting new perfuming, as stated in the commentary (Shū, referring to annotations). The first point is to refute the meaning of one's own school, which has three points: first, the difficulty that the initial path (Dào, referring to the path of practice) has no cause; second, the difficulty of arising from mutual contradiction; and third, the difficulty of transformation between ordinary people (Fánfū, referring to unenlightened ordinary people) and sages (Shèngrén, referring to enlightened saints).

There are three points in refuting the 'discrimination theorists' (Fēnbié lùn zhě, referring to commentators holding discrimination theories): first, to narrate their tenets; second, to refute them separately; and third, to explain oneself. There are two points in separate refutation: first, the difficulty that 'emptiness principle' (Kōnglǐ, referring to the principle of emptiness) is not a cause; and second, the difficulty that 'arising mind' (Qǐxīn, referring to the arising of thoughts) is not pure. There are eight points in the difficulty that arising mind is not pure: first, the difficulty of the 'appearance' (Xiàng, referring to phenomena) changing while the 'essence' (Tǐ, referring to the nature) is constant; second, the difficulty that the two natures (referring to good and evil) should be the same; third, the difficulty that evil and good exist simultaneously; fourth, the difficulty that if they do not exist simultaneously, then it is not good; fifth, the difficulty of analogy that evil is not a cause; sixth, the difficulty that the nature of treating obstacles is the same; seventh, the difficulty that ordinary people give rise to the (merits of) sages; and eighth, the difficulty that present action and seed should be the same. The Mahāsāṃghika school (Dàzhòng bù, one of the Buddhist schools) and others do not acknowledge the existence of seeds.

Refuting the discrimination theorists' saying that seeds are formed, this is separately refuting different commentators in Mahāyāna (Dàchéng, one of the Buddhist schools). In addition, the Sautrāntika school (Jīng bù, one of the Buddhist schools) especially has seeds, and the Sarvāstivāda school (Sā pó duō bù, one of the Buddhist schools) has the meaning of cause and the meaning of seed, because there will be 'unleaked' (Wúlòu, referring to without afflictions) causes in the future. The Mahāsāṃghika school also similarly believes that there is a cause in the body of ordinary people that can produce the unleaked, and this meaning is called seed, which is different from the Sautrāntika school and others. In addition, non-corresponding 'latent defilements' (Suímián, referring to potential afflictions) are also called seeds, etc.

The fourth part is reconciling contradictions, which has four points: first, although the 'holy teachings' (Shèngjiào, referring to the teachings of the saints) say about the inner seed, this is to reconcile the previous sentences about the inner seed definitely having perfuming and the three perfumings, etc.; second, its 'hearing perfuming' (Wénxūn, referring to the perfuming after hearing the Dharma).

習下。會前攝論說聞熏習聞凈法界等流文。三聞熏習中有漏性者等。會前攝論是世出世心種子性文。四依障建立種性別者下。會前瑜伽有情本來種性差別等文 或分為五。若作四段。總會前新熏家所引之文。今為五科。亦兼傍會前對法之文。聞熏習中有漏性者下。會對法雲抉擇善根能得建立為無漏性。修道所斷等文。此正因緣微隱難了下。方會攝論是出世心種子性處。義兼傍會。于理為勝 前新熏中多界經者。即此家義新熏之證。故不須會 會瑜伽中有二。初會。後難。會中有三。初標。次釋。後經。難中亦三。初立理。次破救。後申二難。

瑜伽第五建立因有七相。第一無常法是因。無有常法能為法因。謂為生因．得因．成立因．成辨因．作用因。即當六義中第一剎那滅。第二又雖無常法為無常法因。然與他性為因。亦與後念自性為因。非即此剎那。即當六義中第二果俱有．第三恒隨轉。其與他性為因者。即種望于現行名為他性。緣．不緣礙．不礙隱．顯等種種異故名為他性。即果俱有。其與後自性為因非即此剎那。種子相生名為自性。前後生也。即恒隨轉。故唯識云。此顯種子自類相生。攝論．唯識以果世別開之為二。瑜伽據一念因能生二果因無別故合之為一。亦不相違。若諸種子生果應取所熏中說。同身

非相離者。即為亡人七齊追福。何有他他而得自身受勝果等。又異趣身如何受果。有解前趣有善惡相。令受罪者能發善心。又經云。地獄等上有白黑幡表善．惡相。令彼罪人發善心故。若爾鬼畜人天無白黑幡。應不受果。有解但是化後俗語。何必得果。我殺還我上走避亦難故。又解由作愿者勝愿資故。令受罪者七分得一。又由亡者曾有處分作善惡事。現在為作果遂本心故。有果報同趣可受。異趣成難 又無受盡相。依名言種生自同類。有受盡相。謂善惡業得名言種感異性故。次萎歇時。非善惡種生自善惡而有萎歇 第三又雖與他性及後自性為因。然已生未滅方能為因。非未生已滅。即當六義中果俱有．及恒隨轉二。唯識云。雖因與果有俱不俱。而現在時可有因用。未生已滅無自體故。正顯為因之世。非正種子之義。現行之因得諸果等皆亦爾。故攝論．唯識。以通諸法不唯種子故。果俱中因言敘出。瑜伽前既合二為一。故別門說為因之世。故不相違。現在去來非種子也 第四又雖已生未滅方能為因。然得余因非不得。即六義中第五待眾緣。第五又雖得余緣。然成變異方能為因。非未變異。即六義之中無別相門。即待眾緣攝。夫待緣有二。一顯一因體不能生果故待眾緣。二顯待緣已方始變異。瑜伽據體即有別。開一為二。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『非相離者』（指並非與亡者毫無關聯的人），才能為亡人做『七齊追福』（指在亡者去世後的七個七日內做法事以追福）。如果毫無關聯，又怎麼能讓亡者自身獲得殊勝的果報呢？而且，不同趣道的眾生，又如何能承受果報呢？ 有一種解釋是，前一趣道（指亡者生前所處的趣道）有善惡之分，讓受罪者能夠生起善心。還有經文說，地獄等處有白幡和黑幡，分別代表善和惡的象徵，讓那裡的罪人因此生起善心。如果這樣說，那麼鬼道、畜生道、人道和天道沒有白幡和黑幡，難道就不受果報了嗎？ 有一種解釋說，這只不過是火化後的俗語，未必真能得到果報。就像俗話說『我殺還我』，即使想逃避也很難。 還有一種解釋是，由於作愿者殊勝的願力加持，讓受罪者能得到七分之一的功德。還有一種解釋是，由於亡者生前曾有安排，做了善事或惡事，現在為他做法事，是爲了成全他原本的心願，所以能得到果報。同趣道的眾生可以接受果報，不同趣道的眾生就很難了。 而且，沒有受盡業報的說法。根據名言種子，會生出同類的果報。而有受盡業報的說法，是因為善惡業會得到名言種子，從而感生出不同的性質。 其次，當（名言種子）枯萎衰竭時，並非善惡種子會生出善惡果報，然後又枯萎衰竭。 第三，即使（果報）與他性（指與自身不同的性質）以及後來的自性（指自身後來的性質）作為因，但只有已經產生而尚未滅亡的（因）才能作為因，而不是尚未產生或已經滅亡的。（這）就相當於六義中的『果俱有』和『恒隨轉』兩種。 《唯識論》說，雖然因與果有同時存在和不同時存在的情況，但只有現在時才能有因的作用，未生或已滅的（因）沒有自體，所以不能作為因。這正是爲了彰顯作為因的『世』（時間），而不是正種子（根本種子）的含義。現行之因得到諸果等也是如此。所以《攝論》和《唯識論》認為（因）可以通於諸法，不只是種子。 『果俱中』的『因』字是爲了敘述說明。瑜伽（《瑜伽師地論》）前面已經將二者合為一體，所以特別開闢一個門來說明作為因的『世』，因此並不矛盾。現在、過去、未來都不是種子。 第四，即使已經產生而尚未滅亡的（因）才能作為因，但得到其他因緣才能成為因，否則就不能成為因。這就相當於六義中的第五個『待眾緣』。 第五，即使得到其他因緣，但只有發生變異才能作為因，而不是沒有發生變異。這就相當於六義中的『無別相門』，也就是包含在『待眾緣』之中。 所謂『待緣』，有兩種含義：一是說明一個因的本體不能獨自產生果報，所以需要等待眾多的因緣；二是說明只有等待因緣之後，才能開始發生變異。瑜伽（《瑜伽師地論》）根據本體（的差異）而有區別，將一個（『待眾緣』）分為兩個（方面）。

【English Translation】 English version Those who are 『not separate』 (meaning those who are not completely unrelated to the deceased) can perform 『seven-day merit-making』 (referring to performing rituals in the seven seven-day periods after the deceased's death to accumulate merit). If there is no connection, how can the deceased themselves receive superior karmic results? Moreover, how can beings in different realms of existence receive karmic results? One explanation is that the previous realm (referring to the realm where the deceased lived) has good and evil aspects, allowing the suffering to generate good intentions. Furthermore, some scriptures say that there are white and black banners in places like hell, representing symbols of good and evil, respectively, so that the sinners there can generate good intentions. If this is the case, then the realms of ghosts, animals, humans, and gods do not have white and black banners, so would they not receive karmic results? One explanation is that this is just a common saying after cremation, and it may not necessarily lead to actual karmic results. It's like the saying 『I kill, I repay,』 even if you want to escape, it's difficult. Another explanation is that due to the superior power of the vows made by the person making the offering, the suffering person can receive one-seventh of the merit. Another explanation is that because the deceased had arrangements during their lifetime, doing good or bad deeds, performing rituals for them now is to fulfill their original wishes, so they can receive karmic results. Beings in the same realm can receive karmic results, but it is difficult for beings in different realms. Moreover, there is no saying that karmic retribution is completely exhausted. According to the seed of verbal expression, similar karmic results will arise. And there is a saying that karmic retribution is exhausted because good and evil karma will obtain the seed of verbal expression, thereby causing different natures to arise. Secondly, when (the seed of verbal expression) withers and decays, it is not that good and evil seeds will produce good and evil karmic results, and then wither and decay. Thirdly, even if (karmic retribution) takes other natures (referring to natures different from oneself) and later self-nature (referring to one's later nature) as causes, only (causes) that have already arisen and have not yet perished can serve as causes, not those that have not yet arisen or have already perished. (This) is equivalent to the two types of 『co-existent with result』 and 『constantly following』 in the six meanings. The Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi says that although causes and results can exist simultaneously or not simultaneously, only the present time can have the function of a cause, and (causes) that have not arisen or have already perished do not have self-nature, so they cannot serve as causes. This is precisely to highlight the 『time』 as a cause, not the meaning of the fundamental seed. The causes of present actions obtaining various results are also the same. Therefore, the Mahayana-samgraha and the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi consider (causes) to be applicable to all dharmas, not just seeds. The word 『cause』 in 『co-existent with result』 is for narration and explanation. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra has already combined the two into one earlier, so it specially opens a door to explain the 『time』 as a cause, so there is no contradiction. The present, past, and future are not seeds. Fourthly, even if (causes) that have already arisen and have not yet perished can serve as causes, they can only become causes by obtaining other conditions, otherwise they cannot become causes. This is equivalent to the fifth 『dependent on conditions』 in the six meanings. Fifthly, even if other conditions are obtained, they can only serve as causes if they undergo changes, not if they do not undergo changes. This is equivalent to the 『no separate characteristic door』 in the six meanings, which is included in 『dependent on conditions.』 The so-called 『dependent on conditions』 has two meanings: one is to explain that the substance of a single cause cannot produce karmic results on its own, so it needs to wait for many conditions; the other is to explain that only after waiting for conditions can changes begin to occur. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra differentiates based on the substance (of the differences), dividing one (『dependent on conditions』) into two (aspects).

攝論．唯識以待緣義等。合二為一。亦不相違。變異是轉易義故。

第六又雖成變異。必與功能相應方能為因。非失功能。即當六義中第四性決定。第七又雖與功能相應。然必相稱相順方能為因。非不相稱相順。即當六義中引自果。總而言之。合六義中第二果俱．第三恒隨轉。瑜伽第二．第三義門對說。開六義中第五待眾緣。為瑜伽第四．第五。自餘一切六．七無差別。勘瑜伽第五抄。

生引因中。瑜伽等云。未潤種子名牽引因。已潤種子名生起因。三性．十因悉皆如是。果雖合為一不論遠．近正．殘生．引。其能生種通業．及因緣。未潤去果遠名引因。已潤去果近名生因。正合能引所引說為引因。能生為生因義。三性．十因即為三義生引二因。並無性二合有五解。既有正．殘為生．引。亦有內．外。果為生．引。

三法展轉因果同時中。難云。舊種生新現為因果種生。新種現熏成為因果現起。若更新種無生力。唯從現所生。亦應新現力猶微。如何起新種 答新現緣皆具。新種故從生。新種未逢緣。故不能生現 問現行新所起即言緣已具。新種亦新生。何不緣稱具答新現能熏四義具故。說現逢緣。新種未逢加行引故不緣稱具。要由前加行勢力牽引故。種子方生現 問能熏四義具。即說現生種。種子

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 《攝大乘論》中，唯識的『待緣義』等，如果將二者合二為一，也不會互相違背。因為『變異』是指『轉變』的意思。 第六，即使形成了變異，也必須與功能相應才能作為因，而不是失去功能。這對應於六義中的第四『性決定』。 第七，即使與功能相應，也必須相稱相順才能作為因，而不是不相稱不相順。這對應於六義中的『引自果』。總而言之，將六義中的第二『果俱』、第三『恒隨轉』合併。《瑜伽師地論》第二、第三義門相對而說，將六義中的第五『待眾緣』分為《瑜伽師地論》的第四、第五。其餘一切六義、七義沒有差別。可參考《瑜伽師地論》第五的抄本。 在『生引因』中，《瑜伽師地論》等經論說，未滋潤的種子名為『牽引因』，已滋潤的種子名為『生起因』。三性（sva-bhāva，自性）、十因（hetu，因）都是如此。果雖然合為一個，不論遠近、正殘、生引。其能生種子的，通於業（karma，行為）及因緣（hetu-pratyaya，因和條件）。未滋潤，離果遠，名為『引因』；已滋潤，離果近，名為『生因』。正合能引和所引，說為『引因』；能生為『生因』的意義。三性、十因即為三義的生引二因。並無性二合有五種解釋。既然有正、殘為生、引，也有內、外果為生、引。 在『三法展轉因果同時』中，有人提問：舊種子生起新的現行，作為因果的種子生；新的現行熏習成為因果的現起。如果更新的種子沒有生起的力量，僅僅從現行所生，那麼新的現行的力量也應該很微弱，如何生起新的種子？回答：新的現行緣都具備，所以新的種子能夠生起。新的種子未遇到緣，所以不能生起現行。提問：現行新產生的，就說是緣已具備，新的種子也是新生的，為什麼不說是緣已具備？回答：新的現行能熏的四義具備，所以說現行遇到緣。新的種子未遇到加行（prayoga，努力）的牽引，所以不說是緣已具備。需要由之前的加行勢力牽引，種子才能生起現行。提問：能熏的四義具備，就說現行生種子，種子

【English Translation】 English version: In the Śata-sāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra, the 'depending-on-conditions meaning' (待緣義) of Consciousness-only (唯識) and others, if combined into one, would not contradict each other. This is because 'transformation' (變異) refers to the meaning of 'change' (轉變). Sixth, even if a transformation is formed, it must be in accordance with its function to be a cause, not losing its function. This corresponds to the fourth of the six meanings, 'nature determination' (性決定). Seventh, even if it is in accordance with its function, it must be compatible and harmonious to be a cause, not incompatible or disharmonious. This corresponds to the 'deriving from its own effect' (引自果) of the six meanings. In summary, combine the second 'effects together' (果俱) and the third 'constant following transformation' (恒隨轉) of the six meanings. The second and third meanings of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra are discussed in contrast, dividing the fifth 'depending on numerous conditions' (待眾緣) of the six meanings into the fourth and fifth of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra. All other six or seven meanings are no different. Refer to the fifth copy of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra. In the 'producing and leading causes' (生引因), the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra and other treatises state that an unmoistened seed is called a 'leading cause' (牽引因), and a moistened seed is called a 'producing cause' (生起因). The three natures (sva-bhāva, 自性) and ten causes (hetu, 因) are all like this. Although the effect is combined into one, regardless of near or far, direct or residual, producing or leading. That which can produce the seed is common to karma (行為) and conditions (hetu-pratyaya, 因和條件). Unmoistened, far from the effect, is called a 'leading cause'; moistened, near to the effect, is called a 'producing cause'. The correct combination of what can lead and what is led is called a 'leading cause'; the meaning of what can produce is the 'producing cause'. The three natures and ten causes are the two causes of producing and leading in three meanings. There are five interpretations of the combination of non-nature. Since there are direct and residual as producing and leading, there are also inner and outer effects as producing and leading. In the 'three dharmas transforming into cause and effect simultaneously', someone asks: The old seed produces a new manifestation, as the seed that is the cause and effect produces; the new manifestation perfumes and becomes the manifestation that is the cause and effect arises. If the renewed seed has no power to produce, but only arises from the manifestation, then the power of the new manifestation should also be weak, how can it produce a new seed? Answer: The conditions for the new manifestation are all complete, so the new seed can arise. The new seed has not encountered the conditions, so it cannot produce a manifestation. Question: The newly produced manifestation is said to have complete conditions, and the new seed is also newly produced, why not say that the conditions are complete? Answer: The four meanings of the new manifestation being able to perfume are complete, so it is said that the manifestation encounters the conditions. The new seed has not encountered the attraction of effort (prayoga, 努力), so it is not said that the conditions are complete. It requires the attraction of the power of the previous effort for the seed to produce a manifestation. Question: The four meanings of being able to perfume are complete, so it is said that the manifestation produces the seed, the seed

六義成。應說能生現 答逢不逢緣二有別故。如前已解。

六十六說。五相名執受。初三。一唯色名有執受。此遮心．心所等。非執受故。二於色中所有肉根根所依屬說名執受。此遮外不屬根色。非執受故。三心．心所任持不捨說名執受。當知此遮過未及現在世依屬根發．爪等。及遮死後所有內身。非執受故 執受有三義。一生覺受義。即對法文。二能生覺聚類。即五十六文是。三親領為境安危同義。即此文及五十一等文是。

第二三變俱解體行。唯初能變釋行非體。此有二解。一云具論者質故。不具論者影故。二云初變有三相。後二皆無。自相即自體故。初變但解行。不可重彰其自體故。後二不然。行．體雙釋。此解稍能。

達無離識所緣境中。稱行相相似。雖第三卷有二和會。然無分別智緣真如。所緣不相似。應言同一。此唯識文不盡理。若就瑜伽言同一。即無本質心唯相似故不可同一。應會二文以為正理。偏取可皆非。非正中釋。應如理思 或二文說。瑜伽約相似同一。此論約境一名相似。同一境轉故。亦不相違 釋所緣相似與瑜伽同一所緣有五釋。一就彼文。二就此文。三彼約本質。此依影像。四彼此約皆同。五彼依無為有本質緣。此依有為無本質緣。

心分既同應皆證故。此量不

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：『六義成。應說能生現』，回答：因為『逢』與『不逢』的因緣有區別，所以如前面已經解釋過的那樣。

『六十六說。五相名執受』，最初的三種：第一，只有色法才稱為『有執受』。這排除了心和心所等，因為它們不是『執受』。第二，在色法中，所有屬於肉根和根所依之處，都稱為『執受』。這排除了外在不屬於根的色法，因為它們不是『執受』。第三，心和心所任持而不捨棄的，稱為『執受』。應當知道，這排除了過去、未來以及現在世中依屬於根的頭髮、指甲等，以及死後所有的內身，因為它們不是『執受』。『執受』有三種含義：一是生起覺受的含義，即《對法》中的文義。二是能生起覺聚的類別，即第五十六條文義。三是親身領納作為境界，安危與共的含義，即本文以及第五十一條等文義。

第二和第三能變都解釋了『體』和『行』，只有最初的能變解釋了『行』而沒有解釋『體』。對此有兩種解釋：一是說，詳細論述的人是因為有『質』（本質），不詳細論述的人是因為只有『影』（影像）。二是說，初能變有三種相，後兩種能變都沒有。自相就是自體，所以初能變只解釋了『行』，不可重複彰顯它的自體。後兩種能變則不然，『行』和『體』都解釋了。這種解釋稍微合理一些。

達到無離識所緣境中，稱作『行相相似』。雖然在第三卷中有兩種和會，但是無分別智所緣的真如，所緣並不相似，應該說是『同一』。這唯識宗的說法並不完全合理。如果就《瑜伽師地論》(Yogacarabhumi-sastra)來說是『同一』，那就是因為沒有本質，心只是相似的緣故，不可說是『同一』。應該會通這兩種說法，作為正確的道理。偏頗地取捨都是不對的，不是正中的解釋，應該如理思維。或者這兩種說法，《瑜伽師地論》(Yogacarabhumi-sastra)是約相似而說『同一』，此論是約境界而說名稱相似，因為是同一境界的轉變。這也不相違背。解釋所緣相似與《瑜伽師地論》(Yogacarabhumi-sastra)的同一所緣有五種解釋：一是就彼文而言，二是就此文而言，三是彼文約本質而言，此文依影像而言，四是彼此都約相同而言，五是彼文依無為法有本質的緣，此文依有為法沒有本質的緣。

心識的體分既然相同，應該都能證得，所以這個量不成立。

【English Translation】 English version: 『The six meanings are accomplished. It should be said that it can produce manifestation.』 The answer is: Because the conditions of 『meeting』 and 『not meeting』 are different, as explained earlier.

『Sixty-sixth discourse. The five aspects are called grasping.』 The first three: First, only form (rupa) is called 『having grasping.』 This excludes mind (citta) and mental factors (cetasika), because they are not 『grasping.』 Second, among forms, all that belongs to the physical sense organs (rupa-ayatana) and their bases are called 『grasping.』 This excludes external forms that do not belong to the sense organs, because they are not 『grasping.』 Third, that which is upheld and not abandoned by mind and mental factors is called 『grasping.』 It should be known that this excludes hair, nails, etc., that belong to the sense organs in the past, future, and present, as well as the internal body after death, because they are not 『grasping.』 『Grasping』 has three meanings: First, the meaning of generating sensation, which is the meaning in the Abhidharma texts. Second, the category of being able to generate aggregates of sensation, which is the meaning in the fifty-sixth text. Third, personally experiencing it as an object, sharing the same safety and danger, which is the meaning in this text and the fifty-first text, etc.

The second and third transformations both explain 『essence』 (體, ti) and 『function』 (行, xing), only the first transformation explains 『function』 without explaining 『essence.』 There are two explanations for this: One is that those who discuss in detail do so because there is 『substance』 (質, zhi), while those who do not discuss in detail do so because there is only 『image』 (影, ying). The other is that the first transformation has three characteristics, while the latter two transformations do not. The self-characteristic is the self-essence, so the first transformation only explains 『function』 and cannot repeatedly manifest its self-essence. The latter two transformations are not like this; both 『function』 and 『essence』 are explained. This explanation is slightly more reasonable.

Reaching the state where there is no object of perception apart from consciousness, it is called 『similarity in functional aspect.』 Although there are two reconciliations in the third volume, the object of perception of non-discriminating wisdom (nirvikalpa-jnana) is true suchness (tathata), and the objects of perception are not similar; it should be said that they are 『identical.』 This statement of the Vijnanavada school is not entirely reasonable. If, according to the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論), it is 『identical,』 that is because there is no substance, and the mind is only similar, so it cannot be said to be 『identical.』 These two statements should be reconciled as the correct principle. Partial acceptance or rejection is incorrect and not a central explanation; one should contemplate it rationally. Or, these two statements, the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) speaks of 『identical』 in terms of similarity, while this treatise speaks of similarity in name in terms of the object, because it is the transformation of the same object. This is also not contradictory. There are five explanations for explaining the similarity of the object of perception and the identity of the object of perception in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論): One is in terms of that text, two is in terms of this text, three is that text speaks of substance, this text speaks of image, four is that both speak of the same, five is that text relies on unconditioned (asamskrta) dharma having a substantial condition, this text relies on conditioned (samskrta) dharma having no substantial condition.

Since the divisions of mind are the same, they should all be able to attain enlightenment, so this argument is not valid.

定。中第四心分應有能證。第三即是。何故無也。立四份量云。心．心所法。一剎那中定能自顯。能顯他故。如燈日等。此因有法差別相違。喻有所立不成。以燈無緣慮。心有緣慮故。

論如眾燈明各遍似一相各各別。對法第二眼識於二根。如二燈共發一光。此如何通 此以隨說小乘法為喻。彼據大乘體義為喻。亦不相違。如因俱聲共別造故 若爾如多燈共處。其影便殊。云何共造 今正釋者。如一盞中有多燈炷。及因俱聲。大種鄰近共造一色。兩盞別炷不共造色。故影有別。

第二師變外處中有三。一破他。二申自。三釋妨。破他中有三。一聖應變穢難。二凡應變凈難。三無因變下難。

第三師中亦三。一破他。二申自義。三釋妨。此說一切共受用等是。破中有三。一器壞無因難。二已厭無用難。三有身無益難。

其上天眼．耳見聞下色．聲不託本質。如第七卷解。第八得自相。見．相異界攝。五識得自相。應許別界收。不許別界者。云何名得自相。

第七卷解不許。今解云許異界無失。先解得處自相義。今解得事自相。

勝定果色大種造不。如對法第一末疏。雖有五文說造不同。說先變為大種後造色生。並同系等文者。有義此說依欲．色二界地定果色。以有所依身故。無色

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 問：如果『定』（Samadhi，禪定）中的第四『心分』（citta-bhāga，心識的組成部分）應該有能證（證明自身存在）的能力，那麼第三『心分』也是心識的一部分，為什麼它沒有這種能力呢？ 答：可以建立一個四份量（tetralemma，四句推理）來論證：心和心所法（citta-caitta dharmas，心識及其伴隨的精神現象），在一剎那（kṣaṇa，極短的時間單位）中必定能夠自我顯現，因為它們能夠顯現其他事物，就像燈和太陽一樣。但是，這個論證的『因』（hetu，理由）存在『有法差別相違』（dharma-viśeṣa-viruddha，因的屬性與所立的宗相違），譬喻（upamā，比喻）也因為有所立不成（sādhya-vikala，缺乏所要證明的性質）而無效。因為燈沒有緣慮（對像和思慮），而心有緣慮。 論：就像許多燈的光明各自普遍照耀，看起來像一個整體，但實際上各自獨立。在《阿毗達磨》（Abhidharma，論藏）第二卷中提到，眼識（cakṣu-vijñāna，視覺意識）對於兩個根（dve indriya，眼根和意根），就像兩盞燈共同發出一個光芒。這如何解釋？ 答：這可以用隨說小乘法（anuvāda-Hīnayāna-dharma，根據小乘教義的說法）來比喻。小乘是根據字面意義來比喻，而大乘（Mahāyāna）是根據本體的意義來比喻，兩者並不矛盾。就像『因俱聲共別造』（hetu-sahakāri-śabda-sādhāraṇa-vikalpa，原因、輔助聲音共同且分別產生作用）一樣。 問：如果像多盞燈放在一起，它們的影子就會不同，怎麼能說是共同創造呢？ 答：現在正確解釋是，就像一個燈盞里有多個燈芯，以及『因俱聲』，大種（mahābhūta，四大元素）鄰近共同創造一種顏色。兩個不同的燈盞里的燈芯不會共同創造顏色，所以影子會有區別。 第二位論師改變外處（bāhya-āyatana，外部境界）中有三個方面：一、駁斥他人觀點；二、闡述自己的觀點；三、解釋疑問。駁斥他人觀點中有三個方面：一、聖者（ārya，證悟者）應該變化出污穢之物有困難；二、凡夫（pṛthagjana，普通人）應該變化出清凈之物有困難；三、沒有原因就變化出低劣之物有困難。 第三位論師也有三個方面：一、駁斥他人觀點；二、闡述自己的觀點；三、解釋疑問。這裡說的是一切共同受用等。駁斥他人觀點中有三個方面：一、器界（bhājana-loka，物質世界）壞滅沒有原因有困難；二、已經厭惡了沒有用處有困難；三、有身體沒有益處有困難。 關於上界天眼（divya-cakṣu，天眼）和天耳（divya-śrotra，天耳）見聞地獄色（rūpa，顏色、形狀）和聲（śabda，聲音）不依賴本質的問題，就像第七卷的解釋。第八識（ālayavijñāna，阿賴耶識）得到自相（svalakṣaṇa，自身獨特的性質），見（darśana，見）和相（nimitta，相）屬於不同的界（dhātu，界）。五識（pañca-vijñāna，前五識）得到自相，應該允許被歸入不同的界。如果不允許被歸入不同的界，那怎麼能叫做得到自相呢？ 第七卷的解釋是不允許。現在的解釋是允許屬於不同的界也沒有過失。先前的解釋是得到『處』（āyatana，處）的自相的意義，現在的解釋是得到『事』（vastu，事物）的自相。 勝定（adhimokṣa-samādhi，勝解禪定）的果色（phala-rūpa，由禪定產生的色法）是大種所造嗎？就像《對法》（Abhidharma，論藏）第一卷末尾的疏文。雖然有五種說法說明創造的不同，說先變化為大種，然後創造色法產生，並且與『同系』（sajāti，同類）等文相同。有一種觀點認為，這裡說的是依據欲界（kāma-dhātu，慾望界）和色界（rūpa-dhātu，色界）二界地的定果色，因為有可以依靠的身體。無色界（arūpa-dhātu，無色界）則不然。

【English Translation】 English version: Question: If the fourth citta-bhāga (part of the mind) in Samadhi (concentration) should have the ability to prove itself, then the third citta-bhāga is also a part of the mind, why doesn't it have this ability? Answer: A tetralemma (fourfold negation) can be established to argue: Citta (mind) and caitta dharmas (mental phenomena) must be able to manifest themselves in a kṣaṇa (instant), because they can manifest other things, like a lamp and the sun. However, the hetu (reason) of this argument has dharma-viśeṣa-viruddha (contradiction in the specific property of the reason), and the upamā (analogy) is also invalid because of sādhya-vikala (lack of the property to be proven). Because a lamp has no object and thought, while the mind has object and thought. Treatise: Just like the light of many lamps shines universally, appearing as one, but in reality, they are independent. In the second volume of the Abhidharma (doctrines), it is mentioned that the cakṣu-vijñāna (eye consciousness) is related to dve indriya (two roots), like two lamps emitting one light together. How can this be explained? Answer: This can be illustrated using the anuvāda-Hīnayāna-dharma (statement according to the Hinayana teachings). Hinayana uses literal meaning for analogy, while Mahāyāna (Great Vehicle) uses the meaning of the essence for analogy, and the two are not contradictory. It's like 'hetu-sahakāri-śabda-sādhāraṇa-vikalpa' (cause, auxiliary sound jointly and separately produce effects). Question: If many lamps are placed together, their shadows will be different, how can it be said that they are created together? Answer: The correct explanation now is that, just like there are multiple wicks in one lamp, and 'hetu-sahakāri-śabda', mahābhūta (the four great elements) are adjacent and jointly create one color. The wicks in two different lamps will not jointly create color, so the shadows will be different. The second teacher changes the bāhya-āyatana (external realms) in three aspects: 1. Refuting others' views; 2. Explaining one's own views; 3. Explaining doubts. There are three aspects to refuting others' views: 1. It is difficult for an ārya (noble being) to transform into impure things; 2. It is difficult for a pṛthagjana (ordinary person) to transform into pure things; 3. It is difficult to transform into inferior things without a reason. The third teacher also has three aspects: 1. Refuting others' views; 2. Explaining one's own views; 3. Explaining doubts. This refers to everything being jointly enjoyed, etc. There are three aspects to refuting others' views: 1. It is difficult for the bhājana-loka (container world) to be destroyed without a reason; 2. It is difficult to be useless after being disgusted; 3. It is difficult to have a body without benefit. Regarding the question of divya-cakṣu (divine eye) and divya-śrotra (divine ear) seeing and hearing rūpa (form) and śabda (sound) in the lower realms without relying on essence, it is like the explanation in the seventh volume. The eighth consciousness, ālayavijñāna (store consciousness), obtains svalakṣaṇa (self-characteristic), darśana (seeing) and nimitta (sign) belong to different dhātu (realms). The five consciousnesses, pañca-vijñāna (five sense consciousnesses), obtain svalakṣaṇa, and should be allowed to be classified into different realms. If they are not allowed to be classified into different realms, then how can it be called obtaining svalakṣaṇa? The explanation in the seventh volume does not allow it. The current explanation is that there is no fault in allowing it to belong to different realms. The previous explanation was the meaning of obtaining the svalakṣaṇa of 'āyatana' (sense base), and the current explanation is obtaining the svalakṣaṇa of 'vastu' (thing). Is the phala-rūpa (resultant form) of adhimokṣa-samādhi (liberation concentration) created by mahābhūta (the great elements)? It's like the commentary at the end of the first volume of the Abhidharma. Although there are five statements explaining the difference in creation, saying that it first transforms into mahābhūta, and then creates the production of rūpa, and is the same as the text of 'sajāti' (homogeneous), etc. One view is that this refers to the samādhi-phala-rūpa based on the kāma-dhātu (desire realm) and rūpa-dhātu (form realm), because there is a body to rely on. This is not the case in the arūpa-dhātu (formless realm).

界定果色。從本質大種造。定中無大種。無所依身故。

定等有界地自他不定者。此有五。一定力。二通力。三善法力。四借識力。五大願力。由行大愿引他地色現在前。然第八識唯有初二。後亦通余。因便顯之。亦無過失。如第八識無漏意引定果色。令欲界第八變。不妨欲界有定果色種。無能引變 如第八緣境中。色．聲．觸中假色緣不。緣者法處假色何故不緣。任運心及八俱心所有此妨 見隨本定種子生名因緣變。此為正義。

勝定果色。略以七門分別。一凡聖起。如對法抄。色界通果可通凡聖。如三十三文。若無色界毗缽舍那菩薩。緣三界及無漏。亦有定色淚下如雨。及宮殿香故。必要是聲聞能變。非是地前故。皆通凡聖皆能起之。有用無用即成差別。如三十三說 第二依地者。此有二門。一能變依。二所變依。能變之中通唯四定。如唯識疏。定力通無色。色界六地．無色四地可然。餘七方便作用狹劣。欣厭上下無勝力能故不能變。或方便初未至亦無相故。有義非想行相微細闇昧故不能。初近分地亦無廣通故亦不能。此上隨依通有漏．無漏 所變依者。變色．無色界及與無漏決定皆得。隨能變故。于欲界中。如身在地獄意引定果色。與上界色類相似及無漏者。欲界五識未必能觀。名無見無對。地獄

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 界定果色。從本質大種（組成物質的基本元素）所造。定中沒有大種，因為沒有所依賴的身體。

定等有界地自他不定者。這有五種情況：一定力，二通力，三善法力，四借識力，五大願力。由於行大愿，能引導其他地方的色法顯現在眼前。然而，第八識（阿賴耶識）只有前兩種能力，後面幾種也通於其他情況。因為原因顯現，也沒有過失。例如第八識的無漏意（無煩惱的意念）能引導定果色，使欲界的第八識發生變化，不妨礙欲界有定果色的種子，只是沒有能引導其變化的力量。例如第八識緣取境界時，色、聲、觸中的假色是否緣取？如果緣取，那麼法處的假色為什麼不緣取？任運心以及與第八識同時生起的心所有法（心所）會對此產生妨礙。見解隨著本定種子生起，名為因緣變。這是正確的解釋。

殊勝的定果色，略以七個方面來分別：一、凡聖起。如《對法》抄本所說，通果可以通於凡夫和聖人。如《三十三》文所說，如果沒有毗缽舍那（觀）菩薩，緣取三界以及無漏法，也會有定色淚如雨下，以及宮殿香氣等現象。不必一定是聲聞（阿羅漢）才能變化，也不是地前菩薩（初地前的菩薩）才能變化，凡夫和聖人都能發起。有用和無用就形成了差別，如《三十三》所說。二、依地者。這有兩方面：一、能變依，二、所變依。能變之中，通於唯四禪定，如《唯識疏》所說。定力通於無色界六地、無色界四地，這是可以理解的。其餘七方便（七加行位）作用狹窄低劣，欣求厭離上下沒有殊勝的力量，所以不能變化。或者方便道的初未至定也沒有相應的相狀。有義認為，非想非非想處的行相微細闇昧，所以不能變化。初禪近分地也沒有廣大的神通，所以也不能變化。以上隨所依據的禪定，通於有漏和無漏。所變依者，變化色法、無表色以及無漏法，決定都可以，隨著能變的力量而定。在欲界中，如果身體在地獄，意念引導定果色，與上界色類的色法相似以及無漏法，欲界的五識未必能觀察到，名為無見無對。地獄

【English Translation】 English version Defining the color of resultant karma. It is created from the essential great elements (fundamental elements composing matter). In meditative absorption (定, dhyana), there are no great elements because there is no body to rely on.

Those with limited realms and uncertain self and other in meditative absorption, etc. There are five such cases: 1. The power of meditative absorption (定力, dhyana-bala). 2. The power of supernormal abilities (通力, abhijñā-bala). 3. The power of wholesome dharmas (善法力, kuśala-dharma-bala). 4. The power of borrowed consciousness (借識力, paravijñāna-bala). 5. The power of great vows (大願力, mahāpraṇidhāna-bala). Due to the practice of great vows, one can guide the appearance of form (色, rūpa) from other realms. However, the eighth consciousness (第八識, ālayavijñāna) only possesses the first two abilities; the latter ones also apply to other situations. Because the cause manifests, there is no fault. For example, the undefiled intention (無漏意, anāsrava-manas) of the eighth consciousness can guide the color of resultant karma from meditative absorption, causing the eighth consciousness in the desire realm to change, without hindering the existence of seeds of the color of resultant karma from meditative absorption in the desire realm, only lacking the power to guide its change. For example, when the eighth consciousness cognizes objects, does it cognize the imputed form (假色, prajñapti-rūpa) among form, sound, and touch? If it does, then why doesn't it cognize the imputed form in the realm of dharmas (法處, dharmāyatana)? The spontaneous mind (任運心, anabhoga-citta) and the mental factors (心所, caitta) that arise simultaneously with the eighth consciousness would hinder this. The view that arises following the seeds of the original meditative absorption is called causal-conditional transformation (因緣變, hetupratyaya-pariṇāma). This is the correct explanation.

The excellent color of resultant karma from meditative absorption is briefly distinguished in seven aspects: 1. Arising from ordinary beings and sages. As stated in the commentary on the Abhidharmakośa, the general result can apply to both ordinary beings and sages. As stated in the Thirty-Three text, if there is no Vipaśyanā (毗缽舍那, insight meditation) Bodhisattva, cognizing the three realms and undefiled dharmas, there will also be tears of the color of meditative absorption falling like rain, as well as the fragrance of palaces, etc. It is not necessarily that only Śrāvakas (聲聞, Hearers) can transform, nor is it that only Bodhisattvas before the first ground (初地, prathamā bhūmi) can transform; both ordinary beings and sages can initiate it. Usefulness and uselessness form the difference, as stated in the Thirty-Three. 2. Relying on the ground. This has two aspects: 1. The reliance of the transformer; 2. The reliance of the transformed. Among the transformers, it applies to only the four dhyānas, as stated in the Commentary on the Consciousness-Only Treatise. The power of meditative absorption applies to the six grounds of the form realm and the four grounds of the formless realm; this is understandable. The remaining seven expedients (七方便, sapta upāyas) have narrow and inferior functions, and lack the superior power to seek or reject the higher or lower realms, so they cannot transform. Or, the initial unarrived concentration (未至定, anāgamya-samādhi) of the path of expedient means also lacks the corresponding characteristics. Some argue that the characteristics of the realm of neither perception nor non-perception are subtle and obscure, so they cannot transform. The proximate concentration (近分定, upacāra-samādhi) of the first dhyāna also lacks extensive supernormal abilities, so it cannot transform. The above, depending on the meditative absorption relied upon, applies to both defiled and undefiled. As for the reliance of the transformed, the transformation of form, non-revealing form (無表色, avijñapti-rūpa), and undefiled dharmas is definitely possible, depending on the power of the transformer. In the desire realm, if the body is in the lower realm and the mind guides the color of resultant karma from meditative absorption, which is similar to the form of the upper realm and undefiled dharmas, the five consciousnesses of the desire realm may not be able to observe it, and it is called invisible and without opposition. The lower realm

第八所緣可爾。如眼．耳通扶根塵等。此類甚多。若有四禪小作欲界化。能引粗色似欲界者。為令欲界眾生受用。即令五識第八所緣。皆欲界系。隨意樂力起色果故。亦復無遮。三十三云。聖神通變能令受用成辨所作故 三有漏無漏。凡夫所變唯有漏不能令用。唯令他見。如三十三說。聖者所變通有漏．無漏。因五．第八見。皆唯有漏。相勢同故。唯無記性。在果唯無漏善。自他俱然。第六意變自他俱通有漏．無漏。通善．無記。利戲別故。然無色界及中間。唯是善性無通果。唯定境。無記定不能故。四靜慮果即通無記。此在七地以前．二乘．異生。非八地等 四具境多少。不變根等在中如對法抄等 五大種造性。如對法抄 六定通別。如唯識疏 七界處所攝者。因中意識第八所變之色。五識不得定屬法處。以境對根。及果對因。皆定爾故。能緣之根。俱是意處．意界．意識界故。以果屬因。定法處所攝故。不以影從質五塵等攝。五不見故。亦得從質為名。名色．聲．香．味．觸等故。然有不依質而變故。不以影從質攝。若令五識得受用者。即通五外處及法處攝。法處攝如前說。五境攝者。以境對根。離因從果故。若五識外境。以果從因。名勝定果。亦法處攝。意．八俱境相從亦爾。在佛果上五識．意識．第七．八所

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 第八所緣是什麼呢？比如眼識、耳識能夠扶助根和塵等。這類情況非常多。如果有人通過四禪定的小部分力量，在欲界變化出能夠引導粗色、類似於欲界的東西，爲了讓欲界眾生能夠受用，就使得五識和第八識所緣的，都是欲界所繫的。因為隨其意樂的力量而生起色果的緣故，也是沒有遮止的。《三十三》中說，聖者的神通變化能夠使受用成就，辨別所作的緣故。三有漏和無漏方面，凡夫所變化的只有有漏，不能使人受用，只能讓人看見，如《三十三》中所說。聖者所變化的東西，既有有漏也有無漏。因為五識和第八識所見，都只有有漏，相和勢相同，所以只有無記性。在果位上只有無漏善，自己和他人都是這樣。第六意識的變化，自己和他人都能通達有漏和無漏，通達善和無記，因為有利和戲的區別。然而無想和中間定，只有善性，沒有通果，只有定境，無記定不能做到。四靜慮的果，就通達無記。這在七地以前、二乘、異生中是這樣，不是八地等。四具境的多少，不變根等，在其中就像《對法抄》等所說。五大種造性，如《對法抄》所說。六定通別，如《唯識疏》所說。七界處所攝方面，因中意識和第八識所變的色，五識不能得到，一定屬於法處。因為境對根，以及果對因，都是一定的緣故。能緣的根，都是意處、意界、意識界。因為果屬於因，一定屬於法處所攝的緣故。不因為影子跟隨質，就屬於五塵等所攝，因為五識不能看見。也可以從質來命名，名為色、聲、香、味、觸等。然而有不依靠質而變化的緣故，不因為影子跟隨質就屬於五塵等所攝。如果讓五識能夠受用，就通達五外處和法處所攝。法處所攝如前面所說。五境所攝，因為境對根，離開因跟隨果的緣故。如果五識的外境，以果跟隨因，名為勝定果，也屬於法處所攝。意、八識的境相跟隨也是這樣。在佛果上，五識、意識、第七識、第八識所……

【English Translation】 English version: What is the eighth object of cognition? For example, eye-consciousness and ear-consciousness can support the roots and objects, etc. There are many such cases. If someone uses a small portion of the power of the four Dhyanas (meditative absorptions) to transform something in the desire realm that can guide coarse matter and is similar to the desire realm, in order to allow sentient beings in the desire realm to enjoy it, then the objects of cognition of the five consciousnesses and the eighth consciousness are all related to the desire realm. Because the color-result arises according to the power of their wishes, there is no prohibition either. The Thirty-Three says that the supernatural transformations of the sages can enable enjoyment to be accomplished and distinguish what is done. Regarding the three, contaminated and uncontaminated, what ordinary people transform is only contaminated and cannot be enjoyed by others, but can only be seen by others, as stated in the Thirty-Three. What the sages transform can be both contaminated and uncontaminated. Because what the five consciousnesses and the eighth consciousness see is only contaminated, and their appearance and power are the same, it is only of neutral nature. In the result, there is only uncontaminated good, both for oneself and others. The transformation of the sixth consciousness can be understood by both oneself and others as both contaminated and uncontaminated, and can be both good and neutral, because of the distinction between benefit and playfulness. However, the No-Thought realm and the intermediate Dhyana are only of good nature, without the result of supernatural powers, only the state of Samadhi (meditative concentration), because neutral Samadhi cannot achieve it. The result of the four Dhyanas is connected to neutral. This is the case before the seventh Bhumi (stage), for the two vehicles (Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas), and for ordinary beings, but not for the eighth Bhumi, etc. Regarding the amount of the four possessing-objects, the unchanging roots, etc., are in it, as stated in the Abhidharma notes, etc. The five great elements and created nature are as stated in the Abhidharma notes. The six distinctions between fixed and general are as stated in the Vijnaptimatrata commentary. Regarding what is included in the seven realms and places, the color transformed by the consciousness and the eighth consciousness in the cause cannot be obtained by the five consciousnesses, and it must belong to the Dharma-sphere. Because the object is opposite to the root, and the result is opposite to the cause, it is certain. The roots that can cognize are all the mind-sphere, the mind-realm, and the consciousness-realm. Because the result belongs to the cause, it must belong to what is included in the Dharma-sphere. It is not included in the five dusts, etc., because the shadow follows the substance, because the five consciousnesses cannot see it. It can also be named after the substance, such as color, sound, smell, taste, touch, etc. However, because there are transformations that do not rely on substance, it is not included in the five dusts, etc., because the shadow follows the substance. If the five consciousnesses can enjoy it, then it is connected to what is included in the five external spheres and the Dharma-sphere. What is included in the Dharma-sphere is as stated before. What is included in the five objects is because the object is opposite to the root, and it leaves the cause and follows the result. If the external object of the five consciousnesses follows the cause with the result, it is called the superior Samadhi result, and it also belongs to what is included in the Dharma-sphere. The object-appearance of the mind and the eighth consciousness follows the same pattern. On the Buddha-result, what the five consciousnesses, the consciousness, the seventh consciousness, and the eighth consciousness...

變實色者。從五識故皆名五塵。不爾佛果十八界云何名無漏。佛地．唯識廣成立故。如散心五．八意所變五塵。皆五塵故。佛果意識中第七．八所變假色。如八勝處等可唯法處。若五識等亦五外境收。今唯於法處說勝定果者。由在因中根本色故。多五不緣。自體微細名無見對。若神通等所發許五見者。顯揚第一。勝定果法處色。所依成就者。亦令他見。即非無見無對。非如散色名無見對。從本為名。非實無也。三十三云凡夫神通定猶令他見故。即依此義。有說佛果無十五界。若不爾者。勝定果色應不唯法處。護法等解。約因位中安立諦。但說有處界故。唯法處說勝定果。不爾云何經言十八界種通有無漏獲常色等。故前解善。

因緣故變等中。疏有四釋。一因緣者任運義。分別者強思義。難陀師觸等五法。亦能受熏持諸種子變皆有用。即違成業多種生芽。下第三卷自當廣釋非也 第二因緣者。諸法實因緣。分別者餘七識。非實種子故。唯取第八所變是因緣變者。此言因緣是何義。若論異熟應通五數。何故不爾。若五識所變不是實法。云何名得自相。若言得處自相非事自相。即青黃等及定四大等非五識得。甚大靈異。火燒身時應不覺痛等。又本識得實非五識者。即應五塵法處所攝非五境攝。許五識得自相者。以總從

別五塵所收。既不許緣自相。如何以假從實五塵所攝。如勝定果色。本唯意變。設雖五識得。以末從本。名勝定果。法處所收。離本說末。以境對根。可五塵攝。青．黃等色五本不得。唯意所緣。應法處收。何因以實從假五塵所收 第三解云。因緣者異熟心。因謂名言種子。緣謂善．惡業緣。若隨此生變必有用。本識觸等為例應爾。若不自在故非者。五識非一切時是業果故。俱意亦然。如何變必有用。又獨頭之意是業果心。因緣變故亦應有用。由此故知第四說善。因緣者法體實從真種子生。從真種子生者。所變有用。餘名分別。

性境不隨心。獨影唯從見。帶質通情本。性種等隨應 性境全及帶質一分。是因緣變。獨影及帶質一分。是分別變。然帶質境可通因緣．分別二門。從種及見二門攝故 若所緣心無心用者。見分為境自證分緣。云何有用 答自體義分非相分故。

變無為等便無實用等者。等取不相應法。無為無實。所等不相應無用。合而為文。非無為無用也 有解真如未證實。假無為無用。二俱不緣。合而為文故言無實用 又解真如雖無實作用。今言用者力用。即是真如離系之力。今言本識變為真如不如本體。無實離系之力名無實用。非無作用名為無用也。此解為正。又設影像心中亦無實用。所以

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『別五塵所收。既不許緣自相。如何以假從實五塵所攝。』意思是說，如果意識所緣的不是五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸）的自相，那麼如何能說它是從真實的五塵所攝取的呢？比如，勝定果色（通過殊勝禪定產生的色），其本質是意識的變現。即使五識能夠感知到它，也是以末隨本，稱之為勝定果。法處（Dharmadhatu，法界）所收的法，如果離開根本而只說末端，以境界對應根，可以說被五塵所攝。但是，青、黃等顏色，五根本識無法直接感知，只能由意識所緣，應該歸於法處所收。為何要以真實之物從屬於虛假的五塵所收呢？ 第三種解釋是：因緣指的是異熟心（Vipaka-citta，果報心）。因是指名言種子（種子，Bija），緣是指善業和惡業的緣。如果隨著這些因緣而生起的變現一定有用處，可以以本識的觸等為例。如果說因為不自在所以沒有用處，那麼五識並非任何時候都是業的果報，意識也是如此。如果變現一定有用處，那麼獨頭意識（Manovijnana，獨立意識）是業的果報心，因緣變現也應該有用處。因此，第四種說法是正確的：因緣指的是法的體性，實際上是從真實的種子生起的。從真實的種子生起的變現才是有用處的，其餘的都是名言分別。 『性境不隨心。獨影唯從見。帶質通情本。性種等隨應。』意思是說，性境（Svalaksana-visaya，自相境）不隨心而改變，獨影境（Nirbhasa-visaya，獨影境）僅僅從見分（Darsana-bhaga，見分）產生，帶質境（Sadharana-visaya，帶質境）則貫通情和本。性、種子等則隨其相應而生。 性境全部以及帶質境的一部分是因緣變現，獨影境以及帶質境的一部分是分別變現。然而，帶質境可以貫通因緣和分別二門，因為它既可以從種子生起，也可以從見分產生。 如果所緣的心沒有心用，那麼見分作為境界，自證分（Svasamvedana-bhaga，自證分）作為緣，如何能說有用處呢？回答是：自體義分（Svartha-bhaga，自體義分）不是相分（Nimitta-bhaga，相分），所以有用處。 『變無為等便無實用等者。』意思是說，『等』字包括了不相應法（Visamyoga-dharma，不相應法）。無為法（Asamskrta-dharma，無為法）沒有實體，所包括的不相應法也沒有用處。合起來說，並非無為法沒有用處。 有一種解釋是，真如（Tathata，真如）沒有被證實，虛假的無為法沒有用處，二者都不緣起。合起來說，所以說沒有實際用處。 還有一種解釋是，真如雖然沒有實際的作用，但現在所說的『用』指的是力量，也就是真如的離系之力（Vimoksa-bala，解脫力）。現在說本識變現的真如不如本體，沒有實際的離系之力，所以說沒有實際用處，並非沒有作用。這種解釋是正確的。即使是影像心中也沒有實際用處，這是為什麼呢？

【English Translation】 English version: 'Being collected by the separate five dusts, and not allowing to cognize its own characteristics, how can it be said that it is collected by the five dusts by taking the false as real?' This means, if what the consciousness cognizes is not the self-characteristics of the five dusts (rupa, sabda, gandha, rasa, sparsa), how can it be said that it is collected from the real five dusts? For example, the color resulting from superior samadhi (meditative concentration), its essence is the manifestation of consciousness. Even if the five senses can perceive it, it follows the root from the branch, and is called the result of superior samadhi. If the dharmas collected by the Dharmadhatu (realm of dharmas) are discussed only from the branch without the root, and the realm corresponds to the root, it can be said to be collected by the five dusts. However, colors such as blue and yellow cannot be directly perceived by the five root consciousnesses, but can only be cognized by the mind, and should be collected by the Dharmadhatu. Why should the real be subordinate to the false and be collected by the five dusts? The third explanation is: 'Cause and condition' refers to the Vipaka-citta (resultant consciousness). 'Cause' refers to the Bija (seed) of name and language, and 'condition' refers to the conditions of good and evil karma. If the manifestations that arise with these causes and conditions must be useful, we can take the touch of the root consciousness as an example. If it is said that it is useless because it is not independent, then the five senses are not always the result of karma, and so is the mind. If manifestation must be useful, then the Manovijnana (independent consciousness) is the mind of the result of karma, and the manifestation of cause and condition should also be useful. Therefore, the fourth statement is correct: 'Cause and condition' refers to the nature of the dharma, which actually arises from the real seed. The manifestation arising from the real seed is useful, and the rest are verbal distinctions. 'The nature realm does not follow the mind. The single shadow only comes from seeing. The quality-bearing connects emotion and root. Nature, seeds, etc., follow accordingly.' This means that the Svalaksana-visaya (self-characteristic realm) does not change with the mind, the Nirbhasa-visaya (single shadow realm) only arises from the Darsana-bhaga (seeing aspect), and the Sadharana-visaya (quality-bearing realm) connects emotion and root. Nature, seeds, etc., arise accordingly. The entire nature realm and part of the quality-bearing realm are manifestations of cause and condition, and the single shadow realm and part of the quality-bearing realm are manifestations of distinction. However, the quality-bearing realm can connect the two doors of cause and condition and distinction, because it can arise from both seeds and the seeing aspect. If the mind that is cognized has no mental function, then the seeing aspect is the realm, and the Svasamvedana-bhaga (self-awareness aspect) is the condition, how can it be said to be useful? The answer is: the Svartha-bhaga (self-benefit aspect) is not the Nimitta-bhaga (image aspect), so it is useful. 'Transforming the unconditioned, etc., then there is no practical use, etc.' means that 'etc.' includes the Visamyoga-dharma (non-corresponding dharmas). The Asamskrta-dharma (unconditioned dharma) has no substance, and the included non-corresponding dharmas are also useless. Taken together, it is not that the unconditioned dharma is useless. One explanation is that Tathata (suchness) has not been proven, and the false unconditioned dharma is useless, and neither arises. Taken together, it is said that there is no practical use. Another explanation is that although Tathata has no practical function, the 'use' now refers to power, which is the Vimoksa-bala (power of liberation) of Tathata. Now it is said that the Tathata manifested by the root consciousness is not as good as the original body, and there is no actual power of liberation, so it is said that there is no practical use, not that there is no function. This explanation is correct. Even the image mind has no practical use, why is that?

不變。

說第八識緣三種境。不言法處境者。依非定通力法爾所緣故。設變法處不異內身及外器二故。即二攝盡。

成唯識論掌中樞要捲上(末終) 大正藏第 43 冊 No. 1831 成唯識論掌中樞要

成唯識論掌中樞要卷下(本上)

大慈恩寺翻經沙門基撰

第三卷

五十一云乃至未斷。斷則終無餘斷。非離縛斷。

解觸中有三。一略標。二廣辨。三破斥 廣辨中有二。初廣前。瑜伽論說。與受．想．思等者。下會違 廣前中有二。初廣體。後廣業。既似順起心下是 廣體中有二。初廣三和分別變異。後廣令心心所觸境為性。和合一切以下是 初中又二。初散釋三和．分別．變異。後會集論。根變異力等是 初中復三。一釋三和。二釋變異。三釋分別。由三和．變異俱非己能。故前別說。後方釋分別 此中由想起言說。何因不說為語言因者。故果例現想疏故 思令心者。取正因等 何因說信等。則自性善 此中三和合。皆有生心所功能說名變異。無為無變異。如何有生心所功能。今解。此據有為緣三變異。若無為緣心二變異。無為無變異功能故 又解依無為有隱有顯分位變異。不同有為體有變異故。無為有位異故說名功能。體無功能也 如第七識以第八為

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 關於第八識所緣的三種境，論中沒有提及法處境（dharmadhatu）（指一切法的生起處），是因為法處境是依靠非定通力（aniyata-abhijna）（指不確定的神通力）自然而然所緣的。假設轉變法處境，它與內在的身體和外在的器世界（bhajana-loka）（指眾生所居住的物質世界）沒有區別，因此可以被這二者所涵蓋。

《成唯識論掌中樞要》捲上（結束） 大正藏第43冊 No. 1831 《成唯識論掌中樞要》

《成唯識論掌中樞要》卷下（上半部分）

大慈恩寺翻經沙門基 撰

第三卷

五十一云：乃至未斷（avadhi）。斷則終無餘斷。非離縛斷（bandhana）。（指煩惱未斷盡時，斷了就永遠斷了，不是離開束縛的斷。）

解釋觸（sparsha）中有三部分：一、簡略標示；二、廣泛辨析；三、破除駁斥。廣泛辨析中有兩部分：首先，廣泛解釋前面的內容。《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra）中說：『與受（vedana）、想（samjna）、思（cetana）等』。下面會解釋其中的不一致之處。廣泛解釋前面內容有兩部分：首先，廣泛解釋體性；然後，廣泛解釋作用。『既似順起心下是』。 廣泛解釋體性中有兩部分：首先，廣泛解釋三和（trisamgati）、分別（vikalpa）、變異（parinama）；然後，廣泛解釋使心和心所（caitasika）觸境為自性。『和合一切以下是』。首先的部分又分為兩部分：首先，分散解釋三和、分別、變異；然後，會集論述。『根變異力等是』。首先的部分又分為三部分：一、解釋三和；二、解釋變異；三、解釋分別。由於三和、變異都不是自身的能力，所以前面分別說明，後面才解釋分別。這裡因為想起而有言說，為什麼不說它是語言的因呢？因為結果類似於現在的想法的疏遠。 『思令心者』，取正因等。為什麼說信（sraddha）等，就是自性善呢？這裡三和合，都有產生心所的功能，所以叫做變異。無為（asamskrta-dharma）沒有變異，怎麼會有產生心所的功能呢？現在解釋，這是根據有為（samskrta-dharma）緣三變異。如果無為緣心二變異，無為沒有變異的功能。又解釋依靠無為有隱有顯的分位變異，不同於有為體有變異。無為有位置的差異，所以叫做功能，體沒有功能。如第七識（manas）以第八識（alaya-vijnana）為……

【English Translation】 English version: Regarding the three kinds of objects cognized by the eighth consciousness (alaya-vijnana), the text does not mention the dharmadhatu (the realm of all phenomena), because the dharmadhatu is naturally cognized based on the non-deterministic supernormal power (aniyata-abhijna). Supposing the dharmadhatu is transformed, it is no different from the internal body and the external world (bhajana-loka), thus it can be encompassed by these two.

The End of Chapter 1 of Key Essentials of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only Taisho Tripitaka Volume 43, No. 1831, Key Essentials of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only

Chapter 2 of Key Essentials of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-only (First Half)

Composed by the Sramana Ji of the Great Compassion Temple, Translator of Sutras

Volume 3

Fifty-one says: 'Until not severed (avadhi). Once severed, there will be no further severing. Not severance from bondage (bandhana).' (Referring to when afflictions are not completely severed, once severed, they are severed forever, not severance from bondage.)

There are three parts to explaining contact (sparsha): 1. Brief indication; 2. Extensive analysis; 3. Refutation. There are two parts to the extensive analysis: First, extensively explain the preceding content. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: 'With feeling (vedana), conception (samjna), volition (cetana), etc.' The inconsistencies will be explained below. There are two parts to extensively explaining the preceding content: First, extensively explain the nature; then, extensively explain the function. 'That which seems to arise in accordance with the mind below is'. There are two parts to extensively explaining the nature: First, extensively explain the three conjunctions (trisamgati), discrimination (vikalpa), and transformation (parinama); then, extensively explain making the mind and mental factors (caitasika) contact the object as its nature. 'The union of all below is'. The first part is further divided into two parts: First, separately explain the three conjunctions, discrimination, and transformation; then, gather the arguments. 'The power of root transformation, etc. is'. The first part is further divided into three parts: 1. Explain the three conjunctions; 2. Explain transformation; 3. Explain discrimination. Because the three conjunctions and transformation are not one's own abilities, they are explained separately first, and then discrimination is explained later. Here, because of recollection, there is speech, why not say it is the cause of language? Because the result is similar to the alienation of present thoughts. 'That which causes the mind to think' takes the correct cause, etc. Why is it said that faith (sraddha), etc., are good in nature? Here, the three conjunctions all have the function of generating mental factors, so it is called transformation. The unconditioned (asamskrta-dharma) has no transformation, how can it have the function of generating mental factors? Now explain, this is based on the conditioned (samskrta-dharma) condition of the three transformations. If the unconditioned conditions the mind with two transformations, the unconditioned has no function of transformation. Also explain that relying on the unconditioned has hidden and manifest positional transformations, which are different from the conditioned having transformations in its substance. The unconditioned has differences in position, so it is called function, but the substance has no function. For example, the seventh consciousness (manas) takes the eighth consciousness (alaya-vijnana) as...

根復為境依。說觸為二和。

釋業中。初釋總文。起盡經說下。引經證成。會違中有二。初會瑜伽。後會集論。

解相應中。而時．依同。所緣．事等。若約本質。或無本質法一切名等。同緣一境故。與事等不同。若影像相相似名等。何事一種。無分別智緣如無影不可相似。不同一。故知有本質者。影像名相似。本質名同一。若無本質者。有為緣相似名同一。無為緣境一名同一。此據實緣故不相違。

蔽心者有二。一法性心。二依他心。

心所例中。第一師不例異熟等者應思。一一不例所以。以義不同故 何故觸．作意．思三皆言於心等受．想不爾 勝義不善。謂生死流轉 何故與無漏為依。而言善．染違應不與二俱作依。

心所例中。第三師云。以六義例。今觀第四師難意。不例了別及與受俱。則例六門。雖有難言觸與觸俱。許五法俱為例同故。三釋皆以後阿羅漢所不捨藏。唯心王舍藏。為非心所舍藏名。非心所舍藏名所以。前例如是。不爾何故中路例也。此則依初二解為正。並第四釋 難中有十。一總非。二卻詰。三難令不受熏。四縱難受熏。五他救。六復詰。七彼釋。八正難。九轉問。十申宗 第四縱難受熏中有五。一一成六體過。二多因一果過。三五種無用過。四勢等非次過

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：根是境的所依之處。說觸是二者和合而成。

在解釋業的部分，首先解釋總的文義。《起盡經》說以下的內容，是引用經文來證明和成立。會通不同觀點有兩方面，首先是會通《瑜伽師地論》，然後是會通《集論》。

在解釋相應的部分，時間和所依相同，所緣和事相等。如果從本質上來說，或者對於沒有本質的法，一切名相等同緣一個境。因此，與事相等不同。如果影像相似，名稱也相似，那麼什麼事是一種呢？無分別智所緣的境如同沒有影子一樣，不可能相似，因此不同一。所以要知道，有本質的，影像和名稱相似，本質是同一的。如果沒有本質，有為法所緣的相似，名稱是同一的。無為法所緣的境，名稱是同一的。這是根據真實的緣故，所以不相違背。

蔽心有兩種，一是法性心，二是依他心。

在心所的類比中，第一位論師不類比異熟等，應該思考，一一不類比的原因，是因為意義不同。為什麼觸、作意、思三者都說『於心』等，而受、想不是這樣呢？勝義的不善，指的是生死流轉。為什麼以無漏為所依，卻說善和染相違背，不應該與二者都作為所依。

在心所的類比中，第三位論師說，用六種意義來類比。現在觀察第四位論師的為難之處，不類比了別以及與受俱起，那麼類比六門。雖然有難以反駁的，說觸與觸俱起，允許五法俱起，因此類比相同。三種解釋都以後阿羅漢所不捨的藏識，唯有心王舍藏識，作為非心所舍藏識的名稱。非心所舍藏識的名稱的原因，前面的類比是這樣。不然，為什麼中路類比呢？這則是依據最初的兩種解釋為正確，並且加上第四種解釋。困難中有十種，一是總的否定，二是反過來詰問，三是使之不能接受熏習，四是縱容其接受熏習，五是其他的救助，六是再次詰問，七是他們的解釋，八是正式的為難，九是轉換問題，十是申明宗旨。第四種縱容其接受熏習中有五種，一是成就六體過失，二是多因一果的過失，三是五種無用的過失，四是勢均力敵而非依次的過失。

【English Translation】 English version: The root is the basis of the object. It is said that contact ('Sparsha') is the combination of the two.

In the explanation of karma ('Karma'), first explain the general meaning of the text. The 'Qijing Sutra' says the following, citing scriptures to prove and establish it. There are two aspects to reconciling different views: first, reconciling the 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra', and then reconciling the 'Abhidharmasamuccaya'.

In the explanation of correspondence, time and dependence are the same, and the object ('Alambana') and event are equal. If speaking from the perspective of essence ('Svarupa'), or for dharmas without essence, all names are the same because they share one object. Therefore, it is different from being equal to the event. If the images are similar and the names are also similar, then what event is of one kind? The object of non-discriminating wisdom is like having no shadow, so it cannot be similar, and therefore it is not the same. Therefore, it should be known that for those with essence, the image and name are similar, and the essence is the same. If there is no essence, the object of conditioned dharmas is similar, and the name is the same. The object of unconditioned dharmas, the name of the object is the same. This is based on the true cause, so it does not contradict.

There are two kinds of obscured minds: one is the mind of dharma-nature ('Dharmata-citta'), and the other is the dependent mind ('Paratantra-citta').

In the analogy of mental factors ('Caitasika'), the first teacher does not analogize the Vipaka etc., one should consider the reason for not analogizing each one, because the meanings are different. Why do contact ('Sparsha'), attention ('Manaskara'), and thought ('Cetanā') all say 'in the mind' etc., while feeling ('Vedana') and perception ('Samjna') are not like this? The ultimate unwholesome refers to the cycle of birth and death ('Samsara'). Why is it based on the unconditioned ('Asamskrita'), but it is said that good and defilement are contradictory, and should not both be used as a basis.

In the analogy of mental factors, the third teacher says to use six meanings to analogize. Now observe the difficulty of the fourth teacher, not analogizing discernment and being together with feeling, then analogizing the six doors. Although there is a difficult rebuttal, saying that contact arises together with contact, allowing five dharmas to arise together, therefore the analogy is the same. The three explanations all take the store consciousness ('Alaya-vijnana') that is not abandoned by the later Arhats, only the mind-king abandons the store consciousness, as the name of the store consciousness that is not abandoned by non-mental factors. The reason for the name of the store consciousness that is not abandoned by non-mental factors is that the previous analogy is like this. Otherwise, why is the middle road analogy used? This is based on the first two explanations as correct, and adding the fourth explanation. There are ten difficulties, one is a general negation, two is a counter-question, three is to make it unable to accept熏習(『Xunxi』 influence of habit), four is to indulge it to accept熏習(『Xunxi』 influence of habit), five is other assistance, six is a repeated question, seven is their explanation, eight is a formal difficulty, nine is a shift of the question, and ten is a statement of the principle. The fourth indulgence to accept熏習(『Xunxi』 influence of habit) has five aspects: one is achieving the fault of six entities, two is the fault of multiple causes and one effect, three is the fault of five kinds of uselessness, and four is the fault of equal power but not in order.

。五頓生六果過。又彼所說。轉問也。由此等。申宗也。

三喻恒轉中。一沉浮兩趣間喻。二逢緣波浪起喻。三飄流內外物喻。非佛何能止。

有四薩婆多。此中有四種。類．相．位．待異。第三依作用。立世最為善。如俱舍第二十卷。

破上座師等因果等義中有二。一敘宗。二正破 敘宗中有三。一總標。二別顯。三總結。如是因果等下是 別顯中有三。一舉極速以明時。二舉一體而成二。三舉二體而彰俱有 正破中有七。初總非而起徴。二顯相違而破世。三定有無而興問。四縱滅有而返詰。五序相違而體一。六逐一異而理乖。七總結申難意。

般若毀菩薩不令入滅定。瑜伽說四人不成賴耶不退亦入。豈不相違。順此三說中。八地不入。第一師以此為證。故不許取直往八地。佛所訶故。故迂會者名不退也。

第二明直往者名不退。即有二義。一云瑜伽為正。佛訶耽玩。無勝利故。非彼不入 又解經正。瑜伽依不退者成熟而說。初已曾入後訶故不入。由自在故亦說不退入定。其實不入。

勘菩薩地少大廣行等名。解深密第三當瑜伽第七十八云。觀自在菩薩白佛言。世尊是諸菩薩于諸地中所生煩惱。當知何相何失何德。善男子無染污相。何以故。是諸菩薩于初地中。實於一切諸法

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：五頓生六果過。又彼所說，轉問也。由此等，申宗也。

三喻恒轉中。一沉浮兩趣間喻。二逢緣波浪起喻。三飄流內外物喻。非佛何能止。

有四薩婆多（Sarvastivadins，一切有部）。此中有四種：類、相、位、待異。第三依作用，立世最為善。如俱舍第二十卷。

破上座師等因果等義中有二：一敘宗，二正破。敘宗中有三：一總標，二別顯，三總結。如是因果等下是別顯中有三：一舉極速以明時，二舉一體而成二，三舉二體而彰俱有。正破中有七：初總非而起徴，二顯相違而破世，三定有無而興問，四縱滅有而返詰，五序相違而體一，六逐一異而理乖，七總結申難意。

般若毀菩薩不令入滅定。瑜伽說四人不成賴耶（Alaya，阿賴耶識）不退亦入。豈不相違。順此三說中，八地不入。第一師以此為證。故不許取直往八地。佛所訶故。故迂迴者名不退也。

第二明直往者名不退，即有二義。一云瑜伽為正，佛訶耽玩，無勝利故，非彼不入。又解經正，瑜伽依不退者成熟而說。初已曾入後訶故不入。由自在故亦說不退入定，其實不入。

勘菩薩地少大廣行等名。《解深密經》第三當《瑜伽師地論》第七十八云：觀自在菩薩（Avalokiteśvara，觀世音菩薩）白佛言：『世尊，是諸菩薩于諸地中所生煩惱，當知何相何失何德？』善男子，無染污相。何以故？是諸菩薩于初地中，實於一切諸法

【English Translation】 English version: Five causes produce six results. Furthermore, what was said before is a counter-question. From these, the doctrine is expounded.

Three metaphors for constant transformation: first, a metaphor for sinking and floating between two realms; second, a metaphor for encountering conditions and waves arising; third, a metaphor for drifting internal and external objects. Who but the Buddha can stop this?

There are four Sarvastivadins (一切有部). Within this, there are four kinds: difference in category, characteristic, position, and dependence. The third, based on function, establishes the world as most excellent. As in the Abhidharmakośa, volume 20.

In refuting the views of the Sthavira school (上座師) and others regarding causality, there are two parts: first, stating the doctrine; second, directly refuting. Stating the doctrine has three aspects: first, a general statement; second, a specific exposition; third, a conclusion. 'Such causality and so on' below is the specific exposition, which has three aspects: first, citing extreme speed to clarify time; second, citing one entity becoming two; third, citing two entities manifesting co-existence. Direct refutation has seven aspects: first, a general negation followed by a challenge; second, revealing contradiction to refute the world; third, determining existence or non-existence to raise a question; fourth, conceding extinction and then questioning back; fifth, presenting contradiction while unifying the essence; sixth, pursuing difference and sameness while the principle deviates; seventh, concluding and reiterating the difficult point.

The Prajñā (般若) texts criticize Bodhisattvas for not entering cessation samādhi (滅定). The Yogācāra (瑜伽) texts say that the four types of people who have not perfected the Ālaya-vijñāna (阿賴耶識) also enter it without regression. Isn't this contradictory? According to these three teachings, the eighth ground does not enter. The first teacher uses this as evidence, therefore not allowing direct progress to the eighth ground, because the Buddha criticized it. Therefore, those who go circuitously are called non-regressors.

The second explanation is that those who go directly are called non-regressors, which has two meanings. First, it says that the Yogācāra is correct, and the Buddha criticized indulgence because there is no benefit, not that they do not enter. Also, the explanation of the sutra is correct; the Yogācāra relies on those who do not regress to speak of maturation. Initially, they had entered, but later they were criticized, so they do not enter. Because of their freedom, it is also said that non-regressors enter samādhi, but in reality, they do not enter.

Examining the names of the Bodhisattva grounds, such as small, large, and vast practices, etc. The third chapter of the Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra (解深密經), corresponding to the seventy-eighth chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論), says: Avalokiteśvara Bodhisattva (觀自在菩薩) said to the Buddha: 'World-Honored One, what are the characteristics, losses, and merits of the afflictions that these Bodhisattvas generate in the various grounds?' The Buddha replied: 'Good man, there is no characteristic of defilement. Why? Because these Bodhisattvas in the first ground, in reality, regarding all dharmas

法界已善通達。由此因緣菩薩要知方起煩惱。非為不知。是故說名無染污相。于自身中不能生苦故無過失。菩薩生起如是煩惱。于有情界能斷苦因。是故彼有無量功德甚奇。世尊無上菩提。乃有如是大功德利。令諸菩薩生起煩惱。尚勝一切有情聲聞．獨覺善根。何況其餘無量功德 何故心通諸位。則言隨義應說。異熟亦通諸位不言隨義 已別說舍。何須更說。

依無相論同性經。無垢識是自性識心。則真如理。故知無垢通二種也。

然本識有十八名 頌曰。

無沒．本．宅．藏 種．無垢．持．緣 顯．現．轉．心．依 異．識．本．生．有

無始時來界。一切法等依。由此有諸趣．及涅槃證得 無性攝論云無始時來者。顯此識性初際無故。界者因也。則種子識。是誰因種。謂一切法。等所依者。能任持故。非因性故。能任持義是所依義。非因性義。所依．能依性各異故。若不爾者。界聲已了。何假余言。此二句意。無始時來者。顯此識性無初際通句也。一切法之界。謂與有漏法為因緣。與無漏法等為所依。由一切法界故有諸趣。由等為所依故。有涅槃證得。與唯識第二複次少分相似。然稍差別。如文可知。

由攝藏諸法一切種子識中有三解。一云此中但舉能藏名阿賴耶。非是藏

義具。以對勝性明能藏故 二云此中三藏一切皆具。舉能攝藏顯所藏性。雜染種子互為緣故。由此持能內執為我則執藏義故具三藏。此上二解論長行中有此文說 第三義云。據實賴耶但以執藏。今據能藏。有大自在似常一故。別似於我。顯為我愛之所執藏義意正以所執藏故名阿賴耶。若以能藏解阿賴耶。佛果應名。若以能藏．所藏義解。二乘無學．八地以去應得此名。故唯執藏名阿賴耶。闕則非也。今舉能藏彰雜染藏。佛唯一能藏。二乘無學．八地以去有二能．所藏。以外有三藏。故以執藏名阿賴耶。

論勝者我開示中。論文唯據究竟證果而說故立正名。正名亦通地前等故。不定性者理在其中。地上地前隨應攝故。決定二乘生無色界信有第八得入滅定。明亦為說。然非正故。究竟不能得大果故。此中簡之。

我于凡愚不開演者。無性解云。懷我見者不為開示。恐彼分別計執為我 何容彼類分別計執。窮生死際行相一類無改轉故。為顯二乘定性凡夫。俱生之見未除不得為說。恐增分別見故。非得聖者不為說也 今難若以凡夫有俱生見不為說。二乘已斷者亦應為說。若為不愚法者說。凡夫定性亦有不愚。何故不說。故知不為凡夫正說。無性雖言懷我見者不為開示。非盡理言。又此論言障生聖道。凡決定性可爾

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 義具：因為阿賴耶識具有能藏勝性（殊勝的性質）和明能藏（顯明能藏）的功用。 第二種說法是，阿賴耶識中具足三藏（三種儲藏：能藏、所藏、執藏）。這裡舉出能攝藏的特性，是爲了彰顯所藏的性質。雜染的種子互相作為因緣，因此阿賴耶識具有能執持、能向內執取為『我』的特性，所以具有執藏的含義，因此具足三藏。以上兩種解釋在論的行文中都有提及。 第三種解釋是，從真實的意義上來說，賴耶識只是執藏。現在從能藏的角度來說，阿賴耶識具有大自在，類似常一不變的特性，特別像『我』，顯現為『我愛』所執藏的對象，因此從所執藏的角度稱為阿賴耶。如果從能藏的角度解釋阿賴耶，那麼佛果也應該被稱為阿賴耶。如果從能藏和所藏的角度解釋，那麼二乘無學（已經證得阿羅漢果位的聲聞和緣覺）以及八地菩薩以上也應該得到這個名稱。所以只有執藏才能稱為阿賴耶，缺少了就不行。現在舉出能藏是爲了彰顯雜染藏。佛只有能藏，二乘無學和八地以上有能藏和所藏兩種，此外還有三藏。所以用執藏來命名阿賴耶。

論中關於勝者（指菩薩）我開示的部分，論文只是根據究竟證果（最終證得佛果）而說的，所以立了正名。正名也適用於地前（菩薩十地之前）等階段，所以不定性的人也包含在其中，地上（菩薩十地）和地前的人都可以隨其根器而攝受。對於決定性的二乘人，即使他們沒有**信（對大乘佛法的信心），如果他們有第八識（阿賴耶識）也能進入滅盡定（一種禪定狀態），這也是為他們而說的，但這不是正說，因為他們最終不能獲得大果，所以在這裡簡略地說明。

『我于凡愚不開演』的意思是，無性（菩薩名）解釋說，對於懷有我見的人，不為他們開示，恐怕他們分別計執為『我』。 怎麼能容許那些人分別計執呢？因為他們窮盡生死輪迴，其行相始終如一，沒有改變。這是爲了說明二乘定性（註定證得阿羅漢果位）的凡夫，由於俱生我見（與生俱來的我見）沒有斷除，所以不能為他們宣說，恐怕增加他們的分別見。並不是說對於已經證得聖果的人也不為他們宣說。現在提出疑問，如果因為凡夫有俱生我見而不為他們宣說，那麼對於已經斷除我見的二乘人也應該為他們宣說。如果為不愚法的人宣說，那麼凡夫中也有不愚法的人，為什麼不為他們宣說呢？所以知道不為凡夫正說。無性雖然說懷有我見的人不為開示，但這不是完全正確的說法。而且此論說會障礙生起聖道，對於凡夫決定性的人來說是這樣的。

【English Translation】 English version: 『義具』 (Yi Ju, Meaning of Possession): Because the Ālaya-vijñāna (阿賴耶識, storehouse consciousness) possesses the superior nature of 『能藏勝性』 (Neng Cang Sheng Xing, the ability to store superior qualities) and the function of 『明能藏』 (Ming Neng Cang, illuminating the ability to store). The second explanation is that the Ālaya-vijñāna fully possesses the three stores (三藏, San Zang): the ability to store (能藏, Neng Cang), what is stored (所藏, Suo Cang), and the clinging to storage (執藏, Zhi Cang). Here, highlighting the characteristic of being able to store is to reveal the nature of what is stored. Because the seeds of defilement mutually act as causes and conditions, the Ālaya-vijñāna has the characteristic of being able to hold and inwardly cling to as 『I,』 so it has the meaning of clinging to storage, thus fully possessing the three stores. The above two explanations are mentioned in the text of the treatise. The third explanation is that, from a true perspective, the Laya-vijñāna (賴耶識, another name for Ālaya-vijñāna) is only clinging to storage. Now, from the perspective of the ability to store, the Ālaya-vijñāna has great autonomy, similar to a constant and unchanging nature, especially like 『I,』 appearing as the object clung to by 『love of self.』 Therefore, from the perspective of what is clung to, it is called Ālaya. If the Ālaya is explained from the perspective of the ability to store, then the fruit of Buddhahood should also be called Ālaya. If it is explained from the perspective of the ability to store and what is stored, then the Arhats (無學, Wu Xue, those who have completed learning) of the Two Vehicles (二乘, Er Cheng, Śrāvakas and Pratyekabuddhas) and the eighth-ground Bodhisattvas (八地, Ba Di, Acalā) and above should also obtain this name. Therefore, only clinging to storage can be called Ālaya; lacking it is not sufficient. Now, highlighting the ability to store is to reveal the store of defilement. The Buddha only has the ability to store. The Arhats of the Two Vehicles and the eighth-ground Bodhisattvas and above have two: the ability to store and what is stored. In addition, there are three stores. Therefore, the Ālaya is named by clinging to storage.

In the section of the treatise on the 『Enlightenment of Self for the Superior Ones』 (論勝者我開示, Lun Sheng Zhe Wo Kai Shi), the text only speaks based on the ultimate attainment of the fruit (究竟證果, Jiu Jing Zheng Guo), so it establishes the correct name (正名, Zheng Ming). The correct name also applies to stages before the grounds (地前, Di Qian, before the ten Bhūmis), so those of uncertain nature are also included. Those on the grounds (地上, Di Shang, the ten Bhūmis) and before the grounds can be included according to their capacity. For those of determined Two Vehicle nature, even if they do not have **faith (信心, Xin Xin, faith in Mahāyāna Buddhism), if they have the eighth consciousness (第八識, Di Ba Shi, Ālaya-vijñāna), they can enter cessation meditation (滅盡定, Mie Jin Ding, Nirodha-samāpatti). This is also spoken for them, but it is not the primary teaching because they ultimately cannot obtain the great fruit. Therefore, it is briefly explained here.

The meaning of 『I do not expound it to ordinary fools』 (我于凡愚不開演, Wo Yu Fan Yu Bu Kai Yan) is that Asaṅga (無性, Wu Xing) explains that for those who harbor views of self (我見, Wo Jian), it is not expounded to them, lest they discriminate and cling to it as 『self.』 How can those people be allowed to discriminate and cling? Because they exhaust the cycle of birth and death, their conduct is always the same, without change. This is to explain that ordinary people of determined Two Vehicle nature, because their innate view of self (俱生我見, Ju Sheng Wo Jian) has not been eliminated, cannot be taught, lest it increase their discriminating views. It is not that it is not expounded to those who have already attained the holy fruit. Now, a question is raised: if it is not expounded to ordinary people because they have an innate view of self, then it should be expounded to those of the Two Vehicles who have already eliminated the view of self. If it is expounded to those who are not foolish about the Dharma, then there are also ordinary people who are not foolish. Why is it not expounded to them? Therefore, it is known that it is not primarily expounded to ordinary people. Although Asaṅga said that it is not expounded to those who harbor views of self, this is not entirely correct. Moreover, this treatise says that it will obstruct the arising of the holy path, which is the case for ordinary people of determined nature.

。與無性同。非聖者身更障聖道故。又雖二乘聖者不為說。多分不愚法故。非同異生。此意不為正說。非不兼說。

成大乘是佛語中。論有十量。前四對中。更加樂大乘許字。簡隨一不成。以至教攝為宗故成四因。七因證中。先不記中又有三量。一云若大乘是住自法內為廣壞正法說。佛應先記。無功用智佛恒有故。如滅法事。又恒正勤守正法故。又知未來智無著礙故。又有一量云。有法如前。法雲佛應先分別記別。後時壞正法者所等起故。如正法滅事。並驢披師子皮教。有七比量。顯揚第二十。以十因說大乘言教是佛所說。一先不起。即此初因。二今不可知。則此第二。三多有所作。四極重障故。此中所無。五非尋伺境故。則此第三因。六證大覺故。則第五因中若有大乘因也。七無第三乘過失故。八此若無有應無一切智故。即此第五中無有大乘因也。九有對治故。即此第六因。十不應如言取意故。即此第七因也。此七因中。一一更應思作比量。

上座部師立九心輪。一有分．二能引發．三見．四等尋求．五等貫徹．六安立．七勢用．八返緣．九有分。然實但有八心。以周匝而言總說有九。故成九心輪 且如初受生時未能分別。心但任運緣于境轉名有分心。

若有境至心欲緣時便生警覺。名能引發

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：與無自性相同。因為非聖者之身會進一步障礙通往聖道的道路。此外，即使是二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的聖者，通常也不會為他們宣說，因為他們大多不會愚昧於佛法。這與凡夫俗子不同，因為此意並非主要針對他們宣說，但並非完全不兼顧到他們。

大乘是佛語的組成部分。論中有十種衡量標準。在前四個對比中，加上了『樂大乘』的允許字樣，以排除隨一不成的情況。因為以至教攝為宗，所以構成了四種原因。在七種原因的證明中，首先在『不記』中又有三種衡量標準。一是如果大乘是安住于自身法內，爲了廣泛破壞正法而宣說，那麼佛應該事先記錄下來，因為佛恒常具有無功用智（無需努力就能獲得的智慧），就像滅法之事一樣。而且，佛恒常精進守護正法，並且具有知曉未來而無所障礙的智慧。還有一種衡量標準是，如果存在某種法，如前所述，佛應該事先分別記錄下來，因為後來破壞正法者會因此而興起，就像正法滅亡之事，以及驢披著獅子皮的教導。有七種比量。《顯揚》第二十品中，用十種原因說明大乘的言教是佛所說。一是先不起，即此初因。二是今不可知，則是此第二因。三是多有所作。四是極重障故，此中所無。五是非尋伺境故，則是此第三因。六是證大覺故，則是第五因中若有大乘因也。七是無第三乘過失故。八是此若無有應無一切智故，即此第五中無有大乘因也。九是有對治故，即此第六因。十是不應如言取意故，即此第七因也。在這七種原因中，每一個都應該進一步思考並作為比量。

上座部（Theravada）的老師建立了九心輪：一、有分（bhavanga，潛意識流）；二、能引發（āvajjana，注意）；三、見（dassana，見）；四、等尋求（sampaticchana，領受）；五、等貫徹（santirana，推度）；六、安立（votthapana，確定）；七、勢用（javana，速行）；八、返緣（tadārammana，彼所緣）；九、有分。然而，實際上只有八個心，因為從周遍的角度來說，總共說了九個。因此構成了九心輪。例如，在最初受生時，未能分別，心只是任運地緣于境轉，這被稱為有分心。

如果有境來到，心想要緣取時，便會產生警覺，這被稱為能引發。

【English Translation】 English version: It is the same as without inherent existence (無性). Because the body of a non-saint further obstructs the path to sainthood. Furthermore, even for the saints of the Two Vehicles (聲聞乘 and 緣覺乘), it is usually not expounded to them, because they are mostly not ignorant of the Dharma. This is different from ordinary beings, because this intention is not primarily expounded for them, but it is not that they are not considered at all.

The Mahayana (大乘) is part of the Buddha's words. There are ten measures in the treatise. In the first four comparisons, the word 'allowing delight in Mahayana' is added to exclude the case of incompleteness in one aspect. Because it takes the authoritative teachings as its principle, it constitutes four causes. In the proof of the seven causes, there are first three measures in 'non-recording'. One is that if the Mahayana resides within its own Dharma and is spoken to widely destroy the correct Dharma, then the Buddha should have recorded it beforehand, because the Buddha constantly possesses effortless wisdom (無功用智, wisdom attained without effort), just like the matter of destroying the Dharma. Moreover, the Buddha is constantly diligent in guarding the correct Dharma, and possesses the wisdom to know the future without obstruction. There is also a measure that if there is a certain Dharma, as mentioned before, the Buddha should have recorded it separately beforehand, because those who later destroy the correct Dharma will arise because of it, just like the matter of the destruction of the correct Dharma, and the teaching of the donkey wearing the lion's skin. There are seven analogies. In the twentieth chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (顯揚), the words and teachings of the Mahayana are said to be spoken by the Buddha for ten reasons. One is that it does not arise first, which is the first cause. Two is that it is now unknowable, which is the second cause. Three is that it has much to do. Four is because of extremely heavy obstacles, which is absent here. Five is that it is not the object of investigation and analysis, which is the third cause. Six is that it proves great enlightenment, which is the cause of the Mahayana in the fifth cause. Seven is that there is no fault of the Third Vehicle. Eight is that if this does not exist, there should be no omniscience, which is the cause of the Mahayana in the fifth cause. Nine is that there is an antidote, which is the sixth cause. Ten is that the meaning should not be taken literally, which is the seventh cause. In these seven causes, each one should be further considered and used as an analogy.

The Theravada (上座部) teachers established the nine mental moments: 1. Bhavanga (有分, subconscious stream); 2. Āvajjana (能引發, attention); 3. Dassana (見, seeing); 4. Sampaticchana (等尋求, receiving); 5. Santirana (等貫徹, investigating); 6. Votthapana (安立, determining); 7. Javana (勢用, apperception); 8. Tadārammana (返緣, registering); 9. Bhavanga. However, in reality, there are only eight minds, because from a comprehensive perspective, nine are mentioned in total. Therefore, the nine mental moments are formed. For example, at the time of initial birth, one is unable to distinguish, and the mind simply turns towards the object according to its own momentum, which is called the Bhavanga mind.

If an object comes and the mind wants to grasp it, an alert arises, which is called Āvajjana.

其心既於此境上轉見照矚彼 既見彼已便等尋求察其善．惡 既察彼已遂等貫徹識其善惡。而安立心起語分別說其善惡 隨其善惡便有動作勢用心生 動作既興將欲休廢遂復返緣前所作事 既返緣已遂歸有分任運緣境。名為九心。方成輪義 其中見心通於六識余唯意識 有分心通死．生。返緣心唯得死。若離欲者死唯有分心。既無我愛無所返緣不生顧戀。未離欲者以返緣心而死。有變愛故。若有境至則心可生。若無異境恒作有分任運相續。然見與尋求前後不定。無性攝論第二捲雲。五識於法無所了知。先說見心也。復言見唯照矚卻結前心。

五欲非著處者。生上二界亦起我識。

第一證中集起心者。又解所集種。處起生法。因故名為心。

破色不相應及心所中。亦應有非染凈種所集起心。略無之也。

許類是假不能持內法實種 前第一卷。如堤塘等假遮實水。此何不爾 暫息滅遮假定可爾。畢竟永持于理未可 若爾佛身別解脫戒等亦畢竟遮。何義不同 遮是息義。可假遮實。持是任義。故假不持。

破清辨似比量。宗有一分所別不成。如論中道勝義。亦有一分違宗之失。不成如疏中解。同喻如幻者。依俗諦如幻有二徴。如幻實事。非緣生故能立不成。如幻似事。此宗非空所立不成。依

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：當內心在此境界上轉而顯現照見時，既然已經見到，便開始尋求並觀察其善與惡。既然已經觀察，就徹底貫穿並認識其善惡，然後安立於心，通過語言分別述說其善惡。隨著善惡，便有動作的趨勢和用心的產生。動作興起後，將要停止廢棄時，又返回緣于先前所做的事情。既然返回緣于先前所做的事情，就歸於有分心（Bhavanga-citta，潛意識）任運緣境。這被稱為九心，才形成輪轉的意義。其中，見心（seeing-consciousness）通於六識（six consciousnesses），其餘的只屬於意識（manovijnana）。有分心通於死亡和出生。返緣心（recollection-consciousness）只在死亡時出現。如果已經離欲的人死亡，只有有分心，因為沒有我愛，所以沒有可以返回緣唸的事物，不產生顧戀。未離欲的人以返緣心而死，因為有變異的愛。如果有境界到來，心就可以產生。如果沒有不同的境界，就恒常作為有分心任運相續。然而，見與尋求的前後順序不一定。無性《攝大乘論》（Asanga's Compendium of Mahayana）第二卷說，五識對於法沒有了知，先說見心也是如此。又說見只是照見，卻連線著前一個心。

五欲（five desires）不是執著之處，生於上二界（the two higher realms of form and formless realms）也會生起我識（ego-consciousness）。

第一證中集起心（accumulating consciousness）是指，又解釋所集起的種子，處所生起法，因為是因，所以名為心。

在破斥色不相應以及心所（mental factors）中，也應該有非染凈種子所集起的心，只是省略了沒有說。

允許類別是虛假的，不能持有內在法的真實種子。如前第一卷所說，如同堤壩等虛假地遮擋真實的水。為什麼這裡不可以這樣呢？暫時停止滅除遮擋或許可以，但畢竟永遠持有，在道理上是不可行的。如果這樣，佛身（Buddha's body）、別解脫戒（Pratimoksha vows）等也畢竟是遮擋，有什麼不同呢？遮擋是止息的意思，可以虛假地遮擋真實。持有是任持的意思，所以虛假不能持有。

破斥清辨（Bhavaviveka）的相似比量。宗（thesis）有一部分所區別，不能成立。如論中道勝義（ultimate truth of the Middle Way），也有一部分違背宗的過失，不能成立，如疏中解釋。同喻如幻者，依據俗諦（conventional truth），如幻有二種征：如幻的真實事物，不是緣生的緣故，能立不能成立。如幻的相似事物，此宗不是空所立，不能成立。依據。

【English Translation】 English version: When the mind turns and manifests seeing on this object, having seen it, it then seeks and observes its good and evil. Having observed it, it thoroughly penetrates and recognizes its good and evil, and then establishes it in the mind, verbally distinguishing and speaking of its good and evil. Following the good and evil, there arises the tendency of action and the arising of mental effort. Once action arises, when it is about to cease and be abandoned, it returns to the previous action. Having returned to the previous action, it reverts to the Bhavanga-citta (subconscious mind) spontaneously cognizing the object. This is called the nine minds, which then form the meaning of cyclic existence. Among them, the seeing-consciousness (seeing-consciousness) is common to the six consciousnesses (six consciousnesses), while the rest belong only to the manovijnana (mind consciousness). The Bhavanga-citta is common to death and birth. The recollection-consciousness (recollection-consciousness) only appears at death. If a person who has already abandoned desire dies, there is only the Bhavanga-citta, because there is no ego-love, so there is nothing to return to and no attachment arises. A person who has not abandoned desire dies with the recollection-consciousness, because there is changing love. If an object arrives, the mind can arise. If there is no different object, it constantly acts as the Bhavanga-citta spontaneously continuing. However, the order of seeing and seeking is not fixed. Asanga's Compendium of Mahayana, Volume 2, says that the five consciousnesses have no knowledge of the Dharma, and the seeing-consciousness is mentioned first. It also says that seeing only illuminates, but connects to the previous mind.

The five desires (five desires) are not the place of attachment; ego-consciousness (ego-consciousness) also arises in the two higher realms (the two higher realms of form and formless realms).

The accumulating consciousness (accumulating consciousness) in the first proof refers to, and also explains, the seeds that are accumulated, the place where the Dharma arises, and because it is the cause, it is called mind.

In refuting the non-correspondence of form and mental factors (mental factors), there should also be a mind accumulated by non-defiled and non-pure seeds, but it is omitted and not mentioned.

It is allowed that categories are false and cannot hold the real seeds of the inner Dharma. As mentioned in the first volume, like dikes and dams that falsely block real water. Why can't it be like this here? Temporarily stopping and eliminating the blocking may be possible, but ultimately holding it forever is not feasible in principle. If so, the Buddha's body (Buddha's body), the Pratimoksha vows (Pratimoksha vows), etc., are also ultimately blocking, what is the difference? Blocking means cessation, and it is possible to falsely block the real. Holding means maintaining, so the false cannot hold.

Refuting Bhavaviveka's (Bhavaviveka) similar analogy. The thesis (thesis) is distinguished by a part, and cannot be established. For example, the ultimate truth of the Middle Way (ultimate truth of the Middle Way) in the treatise also has the fault of violating the thesis in a part, and cannot be established, as explained in the commentary. The same analogy is like illusion, based on conventional truth (conventional truth), like illusion has two characteristics: the real things like illusion, because they are not produced by conditions, the establisher cannot be established. The similar things like illusion, this thesis is not established by emptiness, and cannot be established. Based on.

勝義諦。彼此二宗一切法皆不可言。非空非不空。非緣生非不緣生。何得以空華等為喻。同喻亦有俱不成失。名似比量。

第二證中身器離心非有。則八證中第五業果證。

趣生中言五趣者。佛地論說。以阿素洛多諂詐故說為非天。有諸經中開為六趣。實則天趣。故五趣也。余經亦說通鬼趣攝。隨順理故。或佛地論約多分義。實通二趣。如法華第一抄。

起無雜者。界地可爾。如欲界五趣四生。何者。煩惱．業．果定屬此趣生。而言起雜。如轉重令輕。亦有惡趣果人六天中受。人天亦起分別煩惱等。亦有惡趣受別報善業果。如天人中龍象馬等．福德鬼等。皆無定屬。今言起余可名雜亂 今解不然。彼無定屬。唯第八識趣生一定不可轉受。轉受唯是別報等故。故餘名雜。不知何趣何生類故。故若起之便名為雜。第八不爾故名無雜。

生得善及意識業果起無雜者。如生得善。雖此欲界亦有定屬。趣生名無雜不爾。唯意業果無雜。此相從名。非實無雜。此解為正。通五趣得果故。意異熟者。此師不許諸趣轉受。唯本處歟。或多分故。亦有實異熟依異熟轉受故。意中業果是護法文。生得善者余師義。合之一處。然非準的。

實準異熟及彼心所名正趣生者。問趣生之體為一為多。若是一者。依六

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：勝義諦（Paramārtha-satya，最終真理）認為，彼此二宗（指不同的佛教宗派）所說的一切法都無法用語言表達。它既非空也非不空，既非緣起也非非緣起。為什麼用空華（空中虛幻的花朵）等來作比喻呢？如果用相同的比喻，也會有雙方都無法成立的過失，這只是名似比量（聽起來像比量，但實際上不是）。

第二，在證明中，身（身體）和器（器世界）都離開了心就不能存在。那麼，在八個證明中，就包括第五個業果證（因果關係的證明）。

在趣生（輪迴的去處）中，說到五趣（五種輪迴的去處），《佛地論》（Buddhabhūmi-śāstra）中說，因為阿素洛（Asura，非天）大多諂媚虛偽，所以被稱為非天。有些經典中將其分為六趣。實際上，它屬於天趣。所以說是五趣。其他經典也說它包含在鬼趣中，這是順應道理的說法。或者，《佛地論》是從大部分情況來說的，實際上它貫通二趣。如《法華第一抄》（Dharma-Lotus Sutra First Commentary）所說。

『起無雜』（產生沒有混雜）的意思是，界地（不同的界和地）或許可以這樣說。比如欲界（Kāma-dhātu）的五趣（五種輪迴的去處）四生（四種出生方式）。為什麼說煩惱、業、果一定屬於這個趣生，卻說『起雜』（產生混雜）呢？比如將重的轉為輕的，也有惡趣（壞的輪迴去處）的果報之人在六慾天（六慾天）中受報。人天（人和天）也會產生分別煩惱等。也有惡趣承受其他善業的果報，比如天人中的龍、象、馬等，以及有福德的鬼等，都沒有一定的歸屬。現在說『起余』（產生其他的）可以稱為雜亂。現在的解釋不是這樣。它們沒有一定的歸屬，只有第八識（第八識，阿賴耶識，Ālaya-vijñāna）的趣生是一定的，不能轉受。轉受只是別報等。所以說『余』（其他的）是雜的，因為不知道是哪個趣哪個生類。所以如果產生了，就稱為雜。第八識不是這樣，所以稱為『無雜』。

『生得善及意識業果起無雜』（與生俱來的善和意識的業果產生沒有混雜）的意思是，比如與生俱來的善，雖然這個欲界也有一定的歸屬，但趣生不能稱為『無雜』。只有意業果（意念產生的業的果報）沒有混雜。這是從名稱上來說的，並非實際上沒有混雜。這種解釋是正確的，因為它貫通五趣而得到果報。意異熟（意念產生的異熟果報），這位論師不認可諸趣轉受，只在本處嗎？或者是因為大部分情況是這樣。也有真實的異熟依異熟而轉受。意中的業果是護法（Dharmapāla）的文句。『生得善』是其他論師的觀點，將它們合在一起，但並非準確的依據。

真正準確的是，異熟（Vipāka，異熟果）以及與它相應的心所（Caitasika，心所法）稱為『正趣生』（正確的趣生）。問：趣生的本體是一個還是多個？如果是一個，那麼依據六

【English Translation】 English version: According to the Paramārtha-satya (ultimate truth), all dharmas (phenomena, teachings) spoken of by both schools (referring to different Buddhist schools) are inexpressible. It is neither empty nor not empty, neither arising from conditions nor not arising from conditions. Why use analogies such as empty flowers (illusory flowers in the sky)? If the same analogy is used, there will also be the fault of both sides being unable to establish their points, which is merely a semblance of valid reasoning (hetvābhāsa).

Secondly, in the proof, the body (physical body) and the vessel (the world) cannot exist apart from the mind. Then, among the eight proofs, there is the fifth proof of karma and its result (karmaphala-siddhi).

Regarding the 'destinations of rebirth' (gati), the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra (Treatise on the Stages of Buddhahood) states that because Asuras (demigods) are mostly flattering and deceitful, they are called non-gods. Some sutras divide it into six destinies. In reality, it belongs to the realm of gods. Therefore, it is said to be five destinies. Other sutras also say that it is included in the realm of ghosts, which is in accordance with reason. Or, the Buddhabhūmi-śāstra speaks from the perspective of the majority of cases, and in reality, it encompasses both destinies, as stated in the Dharma-Lotus Sutra First Commentary.

The meaning of 'arising without mixture' (utpāda avimishratā) is that perhaps this can be said of realms and grounds (different realms and levels of existence). For example, in the Kāma-dhātu (desire realm), there are five destinies (five realms of rebirth) and four forms of birth (four ways of being born). Why is it said that afflictions, karma, and results certainly belong to this destiny of rebirth, yet it is said that 'arising is mixed'? For example, turning the heavy into the light, there are also beings with the results of evil destinies (bad realms of rebirth) who receive rewards in the six heavens (six heavens of the desire realm). Humans and gods (humans and devas) also generate discriminating afflictions, etc. There are also evil destinies that receive the results of other good karma, such as dragons, elephants, horses, etc., among gods and humans, as well as ghosts with merit, etc., which do not have a fixed belonging. Now, saying 'arising of others' (utpāda anyatva) can be called mixed up. The current explanation is not like this. They do not have a fixed belonging; only the destiny of rebirth of the eighth consciousness (Ālaya-vijñāna, storehouse consciousness) is fixed and cannot be transferred. Transferring is only for separate rewards, etc. Therefore, 'others' (anyatva) are said to be mixed because it is not known which destiny or which type of being it is. Therefore, if it arises, it is called mixed. The eighth consciousness is not like this, so it is called 'unmixed'.

The meaning of 'innate goodness and the karma results of consciousness arising without mixture' (sahaja-kuśala-cittotpāda-karmaphala-avimishratā) is that, for example, innate goodness, although this desire realm also has a fixed belonging, the destiny of rebirth cannot be called 'unmixed'. Only the karma results of mental actions (manas-karma) are unmixed. This is spoken of in terms of name, not that it is actually unmixed. This explanation is correct because it pervades the five destinies and obtains results. The Vipāka (result of maturation) of mental actions, does this teacher not acknowledge the transfer of destinies, only in the original place? Or is it because this is the majority of cases? There are also true Vipākas that are transferred based on other Vipākas. The karma results in mental actions are the sentences of Dharmapāla. 'Innate goodness' is the view of other teachers, putting them together, but it is not an accurate basis.

What is truly accurate is that the Vipāka (result of maturation) and the associated mental factors (Caitasikas) are called 'correct destiny of rebirth' (samyak-gati). Question: Is the essence of the destiny of rebirth one or many? If it is one, then based on the six

別實心及心所以立總一。如瓶．盆等趣生應假。若許假者違上文故。若實一者。云何依多實法而立體一實耶。若是多者。應如一人六個人趣六生所攝。故為大過 此義應思。趣生是假。經部師難。依六根立命根。命根應是趣生。總一假故 要依實法方可建立故。不違上。所依實故。後解為正 或唯心王是趣生體。心所相從實非趣生。故唯是一 或同在一聚俱言無失。是實非假。應勘瑜伽假實 正實趣生者。正者本識義。趣生本故。余別報五蘊依此相從名趣生。不爾應雜亂。一趣起他趣故。此中唯取正感後業所招識等。為趣生體。

必住散心非無心及定者。大小共同。摩訶摩耶經。佛入滅定方入涅槃。與八十瑜伽同。此中文或分六。一破經部。如睡無夢。轉識無故。餘部不爾。次破薩婆多等。三顯真異熟。餘三文自顯。

受生命終中。六種轉識行相所緣有必可知者。薩婆多等說有意識行相可知。故今難之云。如可知者。應如餘位分明可知。既不分別。明非意識。

名色互為緣。如心經贊。

頞部曇。此云皰。漸稠如皰 閉尸。云凝結。彼呼熟血亦言閉尸 健南。此云厚。漸凝厚也。同五王經 缽羅奢佉。云具根。即五七日也。

第四卷

四食證末。云說為有情依食住者。皆依示現

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 如果說『別實心』（獨立的實體）以及『心所以立』（心識所依賴的事物）總是一體的，就像瓶子、盆子等，那麼『趣生』（生命的流轉）就應該是假立的。如果承認是假立的，就違背了前面的經文。如果說是一個真實的實體，那麼怎麼能依據多個真實的法而建立一個真實的實體呢？如果是多個實體，就應該像一個人有六個根，導致六種不同的生命流轉，這樣就犯了很大的錯誤。這個道理應該仔細思考。『趣生』是假立的，經部師提出了疑問：如果依據六根建立命根，那麼命根就應該是『趣生』，因為總的來說是假立的。必須要依據真實的法才能建立，所以不違背前面的經文，因為所依據的是真實的。後面的解釋是正確的。或者只有心王（根本識）是『趣生』的本體，心所（心識的附屬）是隨之而來的，實際上不是『趣生』。所以唯一的心王才是。或者它們共同存在於一個集合中，一起說也沒有錯，是真實的而不是假立的。應該參考《瑜伽師地論》來辨別真假。真正的『實趣生』，『正』指的是本識的意義，是『趣生』的根本。其餘的別報五蘊（不同果報的五蘊）依據這個根本而隨之產生，被稱為『趣生』。否則就會雜亂，一個『趣』會引發其他的『趣』。這裡只取正感後業所招感的識等，作為『趣生』的本體。 必定安住于散亂心，而不是無心或禪定中的狀態，這是大乘和小乘共同的觀點。《摩訶摩耶經》中說，佛陀進入滅盡定後才進入涅槃，這與八十部《瑜伽師地論》的觀點相同。這裡的內容或者可以分為六個部分：一是破斥經部宗，就像睡著無夢一樣，因為轉識不存在。其他部派不這樣認為。二是破斥薩婆多部等。三是顯現真實的異熟果報。其餘三部分的內容自然會顯現。 在受生和生命終結的過程中，六種轉識的行相和所緣是否必定可知？薩婆多部等認為有意識的行相是可以知道的，所以現在反駁他們說：如果可以知道，就應該像其他時候一樣可以清楚地知道。既然不能分別，就明顯不是意識。 名色互相為緣，就像《心經》所讚歎的那樣。 『頞部曇』（Arbuda），這裡翻譯為『皰』（水泡），逐漸變得稠密，像水泡一樣。『閉尸』（Pesi），翻譯為『凝結』，他們也稱之為熟血，也說是『閉尸』。『健南』（Ghana），這裡翻譯為『厚』，逐漸凝結變厚。與《五王經》相同。『缽羅奢佉』（Prasakha），翻譯為『具根』，也就是第五個七天。 第四卷 四食證明末法時期，說『有情依食住』，都是依據示現。

【English Translation】 English version: If 'distinct real entities' and 'that upon which the mind is established' are always one and the same, like bottles and pots, then 'Gati-janma' (the flow of life) should be hypothetically established. If it is admitted to be hypothetical, it contradicts the previous text. If it is a single real entity, how can a single real entity be established based on multiple real dharmas? If they are multiple entities, it should be like one person having six roots, leading to six different flows of life, which would be a great mistake. This principle should be carefully considered. 'Gati-janma' is hypothetical. The Sautrantika school raises the question: if the life-root is established based on the six roots, then the life-root should be 'Gati-janma' because it is generally hypothetical. It must be established based on real dharmas, so it does not contradict the previous text because what it relies on is real. The later explanation is correct. Or only the Citta-raja (the fundamental consciousness) is the substance of 'Gati-janma'. The Citta-caitta (mental attributes) follow it and are not actually 'Gati-janma'. Therefore, only the single Citta-raja is. Or they exist together in a cluster, and it is not wrong to say so together; it is real and not hypothetical. One should refer to the 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra' to distinguish between the real and the hypothetical. The true 'real Gati-janma', 'true' refers to the meaning of the Alaya-vijnana (store consciousness), which is the root of 'Gati-janma'. The remaining Vipaka-skandha (the five aggregates of different retributions) arise following this root and are called 'Gati-janma'. Otherwise, it would be chaotic, and one 'Gati' would trigger other 'Gatis'. Here, only the consciousness etc. that is directly felt and caused by later karma is taken as the substance of 'Gati-janma'. Definitely abiding in a distracted mind, not in a state of no-mind or Samadhi (meditative absorption), is a common view of both Mahayana and Hinayana. The 'Mahamaya Sutra' says that the Buddha entered Nirvana only after entering Nirodha-samapatti (cessation attainment), which is the same as the eighty 'Yogacarabhumi-sastras'. The content here can be divided into six parts: first, refuting the Sautrantika school, like sleeping without dreams, because the Vijnana (consciousness) does not exist. Other schools do not think so. Second, refuting the Sarvastivada school etc. Third, revealing the true Vipaka (result of actions). The content of the remaining three parts will naturally appear. In the process of birth and the end of life, are the characteristics and objects of the six Vijnanas necessarily knowable? The Sarvastivada school etc. believes that the characteristics of consciousness are knowable, so now refute them by saying: if it is knowable, it should be clearly knowable as at other times. Since it cannot be distinguished, it is obviously not consciousness. Nama-rupa (name and form) are mutually dependent, just as praised in the 'Heart Sutra'. 'Arbuda', here translated as 'bubble', gradually becomes dense, like a bubble. 'Pesi', translated as 'coagulation', they also call it cooked blood, also called 'Pesi'. 'Ghana', here translated as 'thick', gradually coagulates and becomes thick. Same as the 'Five Kings Sutra'. 'Prasakha', translated as 'having roots', which is the fifth seven days. Volume Four The four kinds of food prove the end of Dharma, saying 'sentient beings rely on food to live', all are based on manifestation.

。中觀論破如來品云。如來者亦名眾生。又智度論第三十卷云。於二足四足等眾生等最為尊勝等。說為有情皆是示現。又言于眾生中尊。佛身何必則是眾生。入城乞食等皆名依食住。亦示現也。對法第五云。一不凈依止住食。謂欲界異生。由具縛故。二凈不凈依止住食。謂有學．及色．無色界異生。有餘縛故。三清凈依止住食。謂阿羅漢等。解脫一切縛故。四示現依止住食。謂諸佛．及已證得大威德菩薩。由唯示現食力住故。攝論第十亦同。唯示現食但說唯佛。世尊實不受食亦不假食。彼約四食作論故不說菩薩。異熟識食彼非示現。故對法據三食作論。恒無漏俱。實無三食。故稱示現。實不相違。又此論據八地以去菩薩實是有情非是示現。雖現三食亦不說之。佛示有情。故不為例。或偏依段食。八地已往實不待資 問何故四食一入長養餘三非。四種長養三非食耶。瑜伽自釋後難。前難如何。

滅定中。成業論云。心有二種。一集起心。無量種子集起處故。二種種心。所緣．行相差別轉故。滅定等位闕第二心。故名無心。如一足馬闕一足故亦名無足。

謂眼等識行相粗動起必勞慮等者。從三乘通義。據實八地已往菩薩無有漏心。何必勞慮。

破薩婆多滅定識不離身中有二。初敘計後正破。破中有五。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：中觀論《破如來品》中說：『如來』也可以稱為眾生。又《智度論》第三十卷中說：『在二足、四足等眾生中，最為尊勝』等等，這說明說如來是有情眾生，都是一種示現。又說在眾生中最為尊貴，佛身又何必一定是眾生呢？（佛）入城乞食等，都可稱為依食而住，這也是一種示現。《對法論》第五中說：『一、不凈依止住食，指的是欲界異生，因為他們具有束縛。二、凈不凈依止住食，指的是有學之人以及色界、無色界異生，因為他們還有剩餘的束縛。三、清凈依止住食，指的是阿羅漢等，因為他們解脫了一切束縛。四、示現依止住食，指的是諸佛以及已經證得大威德的菩薩，因為他們僅僅是示現食力的住持。』《攝大乘論》第十也相同。僅僅示現食，只是說佛。世尊實際上不接受食物，也不需要食物。那是根據四食來作論述，所以沒有說菩薩。異熟識食，那不是示現。所以《對法論》根據三食來作論述，恒常與無漏相伴隨。實際上沒有三食，所以稱之為示現，實際上並不矛盾。又此論根據八地以上的菩薩，實際上是有情，不是示現。雖然示現三食，也不說這個。佛示現有情，所以不作為例子。或者偏重於段食。八地以上的菩薩實際上不需要資助。問：為什麼四食中只有一段食能增長養分，其餘三種不是食呢？四種長養，三種不是食嗎？《瑜伽師地論》自己解釋了後面的難題。前面的難題是什麼呢？ 滅盡定中。《成業論》中說：『心有兩種，一種是集起心，因為是無量種子的集起之處；另一種是種種心，因為所緣、行相有差別而轉變。』滅盡定等狀態缺少第二種心，所以稱為無心。就像一足的馬缺少一隻腳，所以也稱為無足。 所謂眼等識的行相粗糙、動搖，生起必定勞累思慮等等，這是從三乘共通的意義來說的。根據實際情況，八地以上的菩薩沒有有漏心，何必勞累思慮呢？ 破斥薩婆多部認為滅盡定中的識不離開身中，有兩點。首先敘述他們的觀點，然後正式破斥。破斥中有五點。

【English Translation】 English version: The Madhyamaka-karika (Treatise on the Middle Way) in the chapter 『Examination of the Tathagata』 says: 『The Tathagata (Thus-gone One, Buddha) can also be called a sentient being.』 Also, the thirtieth chapter of the Mahaprajnaparamita-sastra (Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom) says: 『Among sentient beings with two feet, four feet, etc., the most venerable』 etc., which indicates that saying the Tathagata is a sentient being is a manifestation. Furthermore, it says that among sentient beings, he is the most venerable, so why must the Buddha's body necessarily be a sentient being? (The Buddha) entering the city to beg for food, etc., can all be called dwelling by relying on food, and this is also a manifestation. The fifth chapter of the Abhidharmasamuccaya (Compendium of Abhidharma) says: 『First, impure reliance and dwelling on food refers to ordinary beings in the desire realm, because they possess bonds. Second, pure and impure reliance and dwelling on food refers to those who are still learning, as well as ordinary beings in the form and formless realms, because they still have remaining bonds. Third, pure reliance and dwelling on food refers to Arhats (worthy ones) and others, because they have liberated themselves from all bonds. Fourth, manifestation of reliance and dwelling on food refers to all Buddhas and Bodhisattvas (enlightenment beings) who have attained great power, because they dwell only by manifesting the power of food.』 The tenth chapter of the Mahayana-samgraha (Summary of the Great Vehicle) is the same. Merely manifesting food only refers to the Buddha. The Bhagavan (World Honored One) does not actually receive food, nor does he need food. That is based on the discussion of the four foods, so it does not mention Bodhisattvas. The Vipaka-vijnana (resultant consciousness) food is not a manifestation. Therefore, the Abhidharma discusses based on the three foods, which are constantly accompanied by the unconditioned. In reality, there are no three foods, so it is called a manifestation, which is not actually contradictory. Furthermore, this treatise is based on Bodhisattvas from the eighth bhumi (ground) onwards, who are actually sentient beings, not manifestations. Although they manifest the three foods, it does not mention this. The Buddha manifests sentient beings, so it is not taken as an example. Or it focuses on coarse food. Bodhisattvas from the eighth bhumi onwards do not actually need assistance. Question: Why is it that among the four foods, only coarse food can increase nourishment, and the other three are not food? Among the four types of nourishment, are three not food? The Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) itself explains the later difficult question. What is the earlier difficult question? In the Nirodha-samapatti (cessation attainment). The Karma-siddha-sastra (Treatise on the Establishment of Karma) says: 『There are two types of mind: one is the accumulating mind, because it is the place where countless seeds accumulate; the other is the various minds, because the objects and characteristics are different and change.』 The Nirodha-samapatti and other states lack the second type of mind, so it is called no-mind. Just like a one-legged horse lacks one leg, so it is also called legless. The so-called characteristics of the consciousness of the eyes, etc., are rough, moving, and arising, and they must be laborious and thoughtful, etc. This is from the common meaning of the three vehicles. According to the actual situation, Bodhisattvas from the eighth bhumi onwards do not have defiled minds, so why must they be laborious and thoughtful? Refuting the Sarvastivada (those who assert all exists) school's view that the consciousness in Nirodha-samapatti does not leave the body, there are two points. First, narrate their view, and then formally refute it. There are five points in the refutation.

一如想起滅難。二壽不離身難。三應非有情難。四根．壽無持難。五經言無屬難。薩婆多言。受．想前偏厭。心行說言無。識體非心行。滅定故言有。若爾難言。識體非心行。滅定實無而言有。壽等非心行。定內實無而言有。故論云。壽．暖諸根應亦如識。便成大過。

破經部本計中有二。初由四難。後總結之。四難者。一無因果不生。二無體非因義。三餘非受熏等。四以量成有識 第二由斯理趣下結也。

七段破有心所中。第四段破救中有八。一以語同心行。二審定遍非遍行法以起後難。此中有三。一總標。二顯隨有無。三結正。三難思如受．想亦應同滅。四難信等亦無。五受．想例思應有。六例觸應有。七受例應然。八想例同此。

第七段破中有五。一總非救。二引經破例。三結成義。四例有受．想。五違教失。

難無心所中有五問答。初難中有七。一心同所無難。二法隨遍行滅難。三受非大地難。四識非相應難。五應無依緣難。六如經有觸難。七受等必俱難。

難滅定染無記心。云余染無記心必有心所故。此中心必有心所。宗也。加之滅定位心文言方足。不爾則有相符極成。染無記心故。因也。如余染無記心。喻也。因脫故字。喻少如字。余皆文足。應義讀取。

第十證

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 一、如想起滅（Ru Xiangqi Mie，指如想起滅盡定）是困難的。二、壽命不離身是困難的。三、應與非有情相應是困難的。四、根（gen，指根身）、壽命沒有支援是困難的。五、經文所說是無所依屬是困難的。薩婆多（Sarvastivadins，一切有部）說：受（shou，感受）、想（xiang，表象）在前偏於厭離，心行（xinxing，心理活動）說為沒有，識體（shiti，認識的主體）不是心行。滅定（Mie Ding，滅盡定）的緣故說為有。如果這樣，就難以說識體不是心行，滅定實際上沒有卻說為有。壽命等不是心行，在定中實際上沒有卻說為有。所以論中說：壽命、暖（nuan，體溫）、諸根（zhugen，各種感覺器官）應該也像識一樣，便會成為很大的過失。

破斥經部（Jingbu，經量部）的根本主張中有兩種方式。首先由四個難題入手，然後總結。四個難題是：一、沒有因果就不會產生。二、沒有自體就不是因的意義。三、其餘的不是受熏等。四、以量（liang，衡量）成立有識。第二，由這些道理趣味來總結。

在七段破斥有心所（xin suo，與心相應的心理活動）中，第四段破斥救護中有八個方面。一、以語言等同於心行。二、審定普遍與非普遍的心行法，以引起後面的難題。這其中有三個方面：一、總的標示。二、顯示隨之有無。三、總結歸正。三、難題是思（si，思維）如受、想也應該一同滅盡。四、難題是信（xin，信仰）等也沒有。五、受、想類比思也應該有。六、類比觸（chu，接觸）也應該有。七、受類比也應該如此。八、想類比也相同。

第七段破斥中有五個方面。一、總的否定救護。二、引用經文破斥類比。三、總結成立意義。四、類比有受、想。五、違背教義的過失。

難題是無心所（wu xin suo，沒有心所）中有五個問答。最初的難題中有七個方面：一、心與心所都沒有是難題。二、法隨著普遍的心行滅盡是難題。三、受不是大地法是難題。四、識不是相應法是難題。五、應該沒有所依緣是難題。六、如經文所說有觸是難題。七、受等必定同時具備是難題。

難題是滅定（mie ding，滅盡定）中的染污無記心（ranwu wuji xin，不清凈的無記狀態的心）。說其餘的染污無記心必定有心所的緣故，這個滅定中的心必定有心所，這是宗（zong，論題）。加上『在滅定位的心』這樣的文句才足夠完整，不然就會有自相矛盾的過失。因為是染污無記心，這是因（yin，理由）。如其餘的染污無記心，這是喻（yu，比喻）。因缺少『故』字，喻缺少『如』字，其餘的文字都完整，應該按照意義來理解。

第十個證據

【English Translation】 English version Firstly, it is difficult to remember the cessation of suffering. Secondly, it is difficult for lifespan not to leave the body. Thirdly, it is difficult to correspond with non-sentient beings. Fourthly, it is difficult for the roots (gen, sensory organs) and lifespan to have no support. Fifthly, it is difficult for the scriptures to say that there is no dependence. The Sarvastivadins (Sarvastivadins, the 'all exists' school) say: Feeling (shou, sensation) and perception (xiang, perception) are biased towards aversion in the past, mental activities (xinxing, mental activities) are said to be non-existent, and the nature of consciousness (shiti, the subject of cognition) is not a mental activity. Because of cessation meditation (Mie Ding, Nirodha-samāpatti), it is said to exist. If so, it is difficult to say that the nature of consciousness is not a mental activity, and that cessation meditation actually does not exist but is said to exist. Lifespan, etc., are not mental activities, and in meditation they actually do not exist but are said to exist. Therefore, the treatise says: Lifespan, warmth (nuan, warmth), and the various roots (zhugen, various sensory organs) should also be like consciousness, which would be a great fault.

There are two ways to refute the fundamental assertion of the Sautrāntikas (Jingbu, Sautrāntika school). First, start with four difficulties, and then summarize. The four difficulties are: 1. Without cause and effect, there will be no production. 2. Without self-nature, it is not the meaning of cause. 3. The rest are not receiving impressions, etc. 4. Establishing the existence of consciousness by means of measurement (liang, measurement). Second, conclude with these reasons and interests.

In the seven sections refuting the existence of mental factors (xin suo, mental activities corresponding to the mind), the fourth section refutes the defense in eight aspects. 1. Equating language with mental activity. 2. Determining the universal and non-universal mental dharmas to raise later difficulties. There are three aspects to this: 1. General indication. 2. Showing presence or absence accordingly. 3. Concluding and correcting. 3. The difficulty is that thought (si, thinking), like feeling and perception, should also cease together. 4. The difficulty is that faith (xin, faith), etc., also do not exist. 5. Feeling and perception are analogous to thought and should exist. 6. Analogy to contact (chu, contact) should also exist. 7. Feeling analogy should also be so. 8. Perception analogy is the same.

There are five aspects to the seventh section of refutation. 1. General denial of defense. 2. Quoting scriptures to refute analogy. 3. Concluding and establishing meaning. 4. Analogy to the existence of feeling and perception. 5. The fault of violating the teachings.

The difficulty is that there are five questions and answers in the absence of mental factors (wu xin suo, absence of mental factors). There are seven aspects to the initial difficulty: 1. It is difficult for both the mind and mental factors to be absent. 2. It is difficult for the dharma to cease with the universal mental activity. 3. It is difficult for feeling not to be a great earth dharma. 4. It is difficult for consciousness not to be a corresponding dharma. 5. It should be difficult to have no dependent conditions. 6. It is difficult to have contact as stated in the scriptures. 7. It is difficult for feeling, etc., to necessarily be present at the same time.

The difficulty is the defiled and indeterminate mind (ranwu wuji xin, impure and indeterminate state of mind) in cessation meditation (mie ding, Nirodha-samāpatti). It is said that the rest of the defiled and indeterminate mind must have mental factors, so the mind in this cessation meditation must have mental factors, which is the thesis (zong, topic). Adding the phrase 'the mind in cessation meditation' is complete enough, otherwise there will be a self-contradictory fault. Because it is a defiled and indeterminate mind, this is the reason (yin, reason). Like the rest of the defiled and indeterminate mind, this is the metaphor (yu, metaphor). The reason lacks the word 'therefore', and the metaphor lacks the word 'like', and the rest of the words are complete and should be understood according to the meaning.

Tenth proof

中以心為本。諸部總句。有無為染凈法皆心為本。薩婆多等無為由心顯。有為由心故起。由心起染凈法勢用最強勝。故說為本也。由此經說若心染凈有情染凈。經部師意雖亦如是。然心受熏勝於根等。以遍界故說心為本。雖有為之總句。並無為之別句。因心而生。謂色．不相應由心為同類．俱有．異熟因等方始生故。諸心所法理雖亦然。鄰近於心依心方住。此上二句別對薩婆多。下二句對經部。如文可悉。疏中但敘大乘四釋。此中總釋。然觀下文之意雙破彼部。故說此釋。

業果界地往還後起應無因。攝論第三云。若有於此非等引地沒已生時。依中有位意。起染污意識結生相續。此染污意識于中有中滅。于母胎中識羯羅藍更相和合。若則意識與彼和合既和合已依止此識。于母胎中有意識轉。若爾即應有二意識于母胎中同時而轉。乃至廣說。

時分懸隔無緣義者。對薩婆多。識位中色是異熟故。名行緣識。一則劫數時懸遠。二則乖隔。本無果識可名識支。云何名感識位中色。經部師未來世無而言感者。時分懸遠。時久隔絕。如何名感。又若言感名色位識名緣。則隔識支。應說與名色為緣。非與識為緣也。

十證攝八證者。此第二異熟。是彼第六。此第四執受。是彼第一執受。此第六生死心。是彼第八

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 以心為根本。這是對所有部派的總括性論斷。無論是有為法還是無為法，無論是染污還是清凈，都以心為根本。薩婆多部（Sarvastivadins，一切有部）認為無為法由心顯現，有為法由心而生。由於心生起染污和清凈法的力量最為強大，所以說心是根本。因此經中說，如果心染污，有情（sentient beings）就染污。經部師（Sautrantikas，經量部）的觀點也大致如此，但他們認為心接受熏習的能力勝過根等，因為它遍及一切界，所以說心是根本。雖然這是對有為法的總括性論斷，以及對無為法的個別論斷，但都是因心而生。也就是說，色法（rupa，物質）和不相應行法（citta-viprayukta-samskaras，心不相應行）的產生，是因為心作為同類因、俱有因、異熟因等才得以產生。雖然心所法（caitasikas，心所有法）的道理也是如此，但它們鄰近於心，依心而住。以上兩句是分別針對薩婆多部，以下兩句針對經部。具體含義可以參考原文。疏中只敘述了大乘的四種解釋，這裡是總括性的解釋。然而，從下文的含義來看，是同時破斥了這兩個部派，所以這樣解釋。 業果的界地往還，以及後起的果報，如果這樣，就應該沒有原因。《攝大乘論》（Mahayana-samgraha）第三卷說：『如果有人從非等引地（asamapatti-bhumi，非等至地）死亡，在生時，依靠中有（antarabhava，中陰）的意，生起染污的意識，結生相續。』這個染污的意識在中陰中滅亡，在母胎中，識（vijnana，識）與羯羅藍（kalala，凝酪）相互結合。如果這樣，意識與羯羅藍結合後，就應該依靠這個識，在母胎中產生意識的轉變。如果這樣，就應該有兩個意識在母胎中同時存在，乃至更多。 時間間隔遙遠，沒有緣的意義。這是針對薩婆多部。識位中的色法是異熟果，所以稱為行緣識。一是劫數時間遙遠，二是乖隔，本來沒有果識可以稱為識支，怎麼能說能感識位中的色法呢？經部師認為未來世不存在，怎麼能說能感呢？時間間隔遙遠，時間久遠隔絕，怎麼能說能感呢？又如果說感名色位的識名為緣，那麼就隔開了識支，應該說與名色為緣，而不是與識為緣。 十證包含八證。這第二個異熟，是彼部的第六個。這第四個執受，是彼部的第一個執受。這第六個生死心，是彼部的第八個。

【English Translation】 English version: The mind is the root. This is a general statement encompassing all schools. Whether it is conditioned (samskrta) or unconditioned (asamskrta), defiled or pure, all have the mind as their root. The Sarvastivadins (一切有部) believe that the unconditioned is manifested by the mind, and the conditioned arises from the mind. Because the power of the mind to generate defilement and purity is the strongest, it is said to be the root. Therefore, the sutra says that if the mind is defiled, sentient beings (有情) are defiled. The Sautrantikas' (經量部) view is similar, but they believe that the mind's capacity to receive impressions (熏習) surpasses that of the sense faculties (根等), because it pervades all realms, so it is said to be the root. Although this is a general statement about the conditioned and a separate statement about the unconditioned, both arise from the mind. That is, form (rupa, 色) and non-associated formations (citta-viprayukta-samskaras, 不相應行) arise because the mind serves as the homogenous cause (同類因), co-existent cause (俱有因), and resultant cause (異熟因), etc. Although the same principle applies to mental factors (caitasikas, 心所法), they are close to the mind and depend on the mind to exist. The above two sentences are directed at the Sarvastivadins, and the following two sentences are directed at the Sautrantikas. The specific meaning can be understood from the text. The commentary only narrates the four explanations of the Mahayana, while this is a general explanation. However, judging from the meaning of the following text, it simultaneously refutes both schools, so this explanation is given. The realms and grounds of karmic results, the coming and going, and the subsequent arising of consequences, should be without cause if that were the case. The third volume of the Mahayana-samgraha (攝大乘論) says: 'If someone dies from a non-attainment ground (asamapatti-bhumi, 非等至地) and arises, relying on the intermediate existence (antarabhava, 中陰), a defiled consciousness arises, connecting the continuity of life.' This defiled consciousness ceases in the intermediate existence, and in the mother's womb, consciousness (vijnana, 識) combines with kalala (凝酪). If so, after the consciousness combines with kalala, it should rely on this consciousness, and a transformation of consciousness should arise in the mother's womb. If so, there should be two consciousnesses existing simultaneously in the mother's womb, and so on. The meaning of being separated by a long time and having no connection. This is directed at the Sarvastivadins. The form in the consciousness stage is a result of maturation (vipaka, 異熟), so it is called 'action conditioning consciousness'. First, the time of kalpas is far away, and second, there is separation. Originally, there was no resultant consciousness that could be called a limb of consciousness (識支), so how can it be said that it can sense the form in the consciousness stage? The Sautrantikas believe that the future does not exist, so how can it be said that it can sense? The time is far away, and the time is long and separated, so how can it be said that it can sense? Also, if it is said that the consciousness in the stage of name and form is called a condition, then the limb of consciousness is separated, and it should be said that it is conditioned by name and form, not by consciousness. Ten proofs include eight proofs. This second result of maturation is the sixth of that school. This fourth grasping is the first grasping of that school. This sixth mind of birth and death is the eighth of that school.

命終。此第九滅定。是彼第七滅定。此第十持種。是彼第四種子。

第一能變中。何故第八心所例同心王言亦如是。第二．三能變不然。但舉相應不言倒同。

恐此濫彼故於第七但立意名等者。何故第六不但名意。第七亦識也 第七持業。二義以彰識體。第六依主。將他以明自。若第六標一意不言識者。不能顯自。第七加識恐濫依主。故第七但標意名。恐此濫彼故。第六加識顯依他故得名故。

何故四緣三名所依。所緣緣體不名所依。勝者名依。勢相親近。所緣緣疏。是故不立。因則可是。依義則非。

俱有依中。第二是安惠師義。彼見．相分雖是所執體性都無。亦有似色之相。如夢所見。今時山．河一切皆爾。故有藏識所變根．境為所依緣亦無失也。

依所依別中。所依具四義者。身根望四識。闕於何義而非所依。且義解云。無決定義。以依下身起上眼等故 此亦不然。下五識俱起上意識。應非五依。亦不定故 又有解云。闕有境義。夫立有境者。必同分根起有境用故。彼同分根非是所依。但是依攝。由此身根必無與四同分有境。設自身識未必俱起為四識依。以說依用名為有境非依體故。此亦不然。論下文說。雖有色界亦依色根。而不定有。非所依攝。若許依用以名有境。五根於八

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：命終。此第九滅定（第九種禪定），是彼第七滅定（第七種禪定）。此第十持種（第十種持種子），是彼第四種子（第四種種子）。

在第一能變中，為什麼第八心所（第八識的心所）可以像心王（第八識）一樣被提及？第二、第三能變則不然，只提到相應而不說倒同。

恐怕因此混淆，所以在第七識只設立『意』這個名稱等。為什麼第六識不只叫『意』，第七識也叫『識』呢？第七識持業，用兩種含義來彰顯識的本體。第六識依主，用其他來表明自己。如果第六識只標明一個『意』而不說『識』，就不能彰顯自己。第七識加上『識』恐怕混淆依主，所以第七識只標明『意』這個名稱，恐怕因此混淆。第六識加上『識』是爲了彰顯依他起性，所以得名。

為什麼四緣（四種緣）中的三種緣是所依（所依賴的對象），而所緣緣（認識的對象）的本體不被稱為所依？殊勝者被稱為依，因為勢相親近。所緣緣疏遠，所以不設立為所依。因緣可以說是所依，但依義則不是。

在俱有依中，第二種是安慧論師的觀點。他認為，見分（能見的部分）和相分（所見的部分）雖然是所執著的，但體性完全沒有，也有類似色的相，就像夢中所見。現在山河大地一切都是這樣。所以有藏識（阿賴耶識）所變的根和境作為所依緣也沒有缺失。

在依和所依的區別中，所依具備四種含義。身根（身體的感官）相對於前四識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識），缺少了什麼含義而不能成為所依？且義解說，缺少決定義，因為依賴下身可以生起上眼等。這種說法不對，因為前五識同時生起上意識，也不應該是前五識的所依，也是不定的。又有解釋說，缺少有境義。建立有境，必須是同分根（同類的感官）生起有境的作用。這個同分根不是所依，只是依攝。因此，身根一定沒有與前四識同分有境。即使自身識未必同時生起作為前四識的所依，因為說依用名為有境，不是依體。這種說法也不對。論的下文說，即使有**也依賴色根，但不一定有，不屬於所依。如果允許依用以名有境，五根對於八

【English Translation】 English version: Life ends. This ninth cessation attainment (Ninth Samadhi) is that seventh cessation attainment (Seventh Samadhi). This tenth seed-holding (Tenth seed-holding) is that fourth seed (Fourth seed).

In the first transformation, why can the eighth mental function (mental function of the eighth consciousness) be mentioned like the mind-king (eighth consciousness)? The second and third transformations are not like that; they only mention correspondence and do not speak of inverted identity.

Fearing confusion, the name 'mind' is established for the seventh consciousness. Why isn't the sixth consciousness only called 'mind,' and why is the seventh also called 'consciousness'? The seventh consciousness holds to its own nature, using two meanings to manifest the substance of consciousness. The sixth consciousness relies on a master, using others to illuminate itself. If the sixth consciousness only marks 'mind' without mentioning 'consciousness,' it cannot manifest itself. Adding 'consciousness' to the seventh consciousness might cause confusion with reliance on a master, so the seventh consciousness only marks the name 'mind,' fearing confusion. Adding 'consciousness' to the sixth consciousness is to manifest dependent origination, hence the name.

Why are three of the four conditions (four conditions) the support (object of reliance), while the substance of the object condition (object of cognition) is not called the support? The superior one is called support because of close proximity in power and appearance. The object condition is distant, so it is not established as the support. The causal condition can be considered the support, but the meaning of reliance is not.

Among the co-existent supports, the second is the view of Acharya Anhui. He believes that although the seeing-aspect (the seeing part) and the seen-aspect (the seen part) are what are clung to, their substance is completely non-existent, and they also have appearances similar to form, like what is seen in a dream. Now, all mountains, rivers, and lands are like this. Therefore, there is no loss in having the roots and objects transformed by the storehouse consciousness (Alaya consciousness) as the supporting conditions.

In the distinction between support and supported, the support possesses four meanings. What meaning does the body-sense (sense of the body) lack in relation to the first four consciousnesses (eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness) that prevents it from being a support? Furthermore, the explanation says that it lacks a definitive meaning because relying on the lower body can give rise to the upper eyes, etc. This statement is incorrect because the first five consciousnesses arise simultaneously with the upper mind-consciousness, and it should not be the support of the first five consciousnesses, as it is also indefinite. Another explanation says that it lacks the meaning of having an object. To establish having an object, it must be that the same-category root (sense of the same category) gives rise to the function of having an object. This same-category root is not the support, but only included in reliance. Therefore, the body-sense certainly does not have the same-category object as the first four consciousnesses. Even if one's own consciousness does not necessarily arise simultaneously as the support of the first four consciousnesses, because saying that the function of reliance is called having an object, not the substance of reliance. This statement is also incorrect. The text below says that even if there is **, it also relies on the color-root, but it is not necessarily present and does not belong to the support. If it is permissible to name the function of reliance as having an object, the five roots for the eight

起識不起皆名有境。以依體說。不除有境。唯無決定。若依用說亦應說言無有境義。非一切時恒起識故。或第七．八非五．六識定同分故。由此今釋。有其別義。夫所杖托皆說為依。具四義者。依中最勝立為所依。劣者不立。

具決定中何名決定。非定俱有名為決定。決定有四。一順取所緣決定。下名同境。二明瞭所緣決定。下名分別。三分位差別決定。下名染凈。四能起為依決定。下名根本。其有境為主亦各有四。此四決定．有境．為主。亦隨有一種。即是決定．有境．為主。五根於五識。有順取所緣決定．有境．為主。意識於五識。有明瞭所緣決定．有境．為主。第七於五識。有分位差別決定．有境．為主。第八於五識。有能起為依決定．有境．為主。故此五識具四所依。五根能順五識取所緣故。意識能助五明瞭所緣故。分別之言明了境義。不爾定心應非五依。七識能令五分位別。第七究竟成無漏時。五定無漏。不爾有漏因七雖轉。非究竟故。第八於五種子能起現行為依。總說第八為能起依。準此等證。故知隨具則得彼名。若決定．有境．為主。唯但一種不通四者。則應五識無四種根。由此義言。第七於六及第八識。唯有分位差別決定．有境．為主。第八於六七。唯有能起為依決定．有境．為主。後四依義

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 生起意識或不生起意識，都可以稱為『有境』（yǒu jìng，having an object）。這是從本體上來說的，不排除『有境』，只是沒有決定的性質。如果從作用上來說，也應該說沒有『有境』的意義，因為不是所有時候都恒常生起意識。或者第七識（第七識，the seventh consciousness, 末那識，Manas-vijnana）和第八識（第八識，the eighth consciousness, 阿賴耶識，Alaya-vijnana）不一定與前五識（前五識，the first five consciousnesses, 眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識）和第六識（第六識，the sixth consciousness, 意識，Manovijnana）有相同的同分。因此，現在的解釋，有其特別的意義。凡是所憑藉和依託的，都可以稱為『依』（yī，support）。具備四種意義的，在『依』中最為殊勝，可以立為『所依』（suǒ yī，supported），差的則不立。

在『具決定』（jù juédìng，having determination）中，什麼叫做『決定』（juédìng，determination）？不是固定的俱有，叫做『決定』。『決定』有四種：一是順取所緣決定（shùn qǔ suǒ yuán juédìng，determination of conforming to the object），下面稱為『同境』（tóng jìng，same object）。二是明瞭所緣決定（míngliǎo suǒ yuán juédìng，determination of clarifying the object），下面稱為『分別』（fēnbié，discrimination）。三是分位差別決定（fēn wèi chābié juédìng，determination of the difference in stages），下面稱為『染凈』（rǎn jìng，defiled and pure）。四是能起為依決定（néng qǐ wéi yī juédìng，determination of being able to arise as support），下面稱為『根本』（gēnběn，root）。其『有境』為主，也各有四種。這四種『決定』、『有境』、『為主』，也隨有一種，就是『決定』、『有境』、『為主』。五根（五根，the five sense organs, 眼根、耳根、鼻根、舌根、身根）對於五識，有順取所緣決定、有境、為主。意識對於五識，有明瞭所緣決定、有境、為主。第七識對於五識，有分位差別決定、有境、為主。第八識對於五識，有能起為依決定、有境、為主。所以這五識具備四種所依。五根能夠順著五識取所緣的緣故。意識能夠幫助五識明瞭所緣的緣故。『分別』這個詞是明瞭境的意思。不然的話，定心（dìng xīn，concentrated mind）就不應該是五識的所依。第七識能夠使五識的分位有差別。第七識究竟成就無漏（wú lòu，without outflows）的時候，五識一定也是無漏的。不然的話，有漏（yǒu lòu，with outflows）的因，即使第七識轉變，也不是究竟的緣故。第八識對於五識的種子（zhǒngzi，seed）能夠生起現行作為所依。總的說來，第八識是能起依。依照這些證據，就知道隨具一種，就得到那個名稱。如果『決定』、『有境』、『為主』，只有一種而不通四種，那麼五識就不應該有四種根。根據這個意義來說，第七識對於第六識和第八識，只有分位差別決定、有境、為主。第八識對於第六識和第七識，只有能起為依決定、有境、為主。後面四種『依』的意義。

【English Translation】 English version: The arising or non-arising of consciousness is both termed 『having an object』 (you jing). This is spoken of in terms of essence. 『Having an object』 is not excluded, only the nature of determination is absent. If spoken of in terms of function, it should also be said that there is no meaning of 『having an object』, because consciousness does not constantly arise at all times. Or, the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) and the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) are not necessarily the same in their shared divisions as the first five consciousnesses and the sixth consciousness (Manovijnana). Therefore, the current explanation has its special meaning. Whatever is relied upon and entrusted is called 『support』 (yi). That which possesses four meanings is the most excellent among supports and is established as 『supported』 (suo yi), while the inferior is not established.

Among 『having determination』 (ju juédìng), what is called 『determination』 (juédìng)? That which is not fixedly co-present is called 『determination』. There are four types of 『determination』: first, determination of conforming to the object (shun qu suo yuan juédìng), which is referred to below as 『same object』 (tong jing); second, determination of clarifying the object (mingliao suo yuan juédìng), which is referred to below as 『discrimination』 (fenbie); third, determination of the difference in stages (fen wei chabie juédìng), which is referred to below as 『defiled and pure』 (ran jing); and fourth, determination of being able to arise as support (neng qi wei yi juédìng), which is referred to below as 『root』 (genben). The 『having an object』 as the main aspect also has four types each. These four types of 『determination』, 『having an object』, and 『as the main aspect』 each follow one type, which is 『determination』, 『having an object』, and 『as the main aspect』. The five sense organs (eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body) in relation to the first five consciousnesses have determination of conforming to the object, having an object, and as the main aspect. The sixth consciousness in relation to the first five consciousnesses has determination of clarifying the object, having an object, and as the main aspect. The seventh consciousness in relation to the first five consciousnesses has determination of the difference in stages, having an object, and as the main aspect. The eighth consciousness in relation to the first five consciousnesses has determination of being able to arise as support, having an object, and as the main aspect. Therefore, these first five consciousnesses possess four types of supported. The five sense organs are able to conform to the first five consciousnesses in taking the object. The sixth consciousness is able to assist the first five consciousnesses in clarifying the object. The term 『discrimination』 means clarifying the object. Otherwise, a concentrated mind (ding xin) should not be the support of the first five consciousnesses. The seventh consciousness is able to make the stages of the first five consciousnesses different. When the seventh consciousness ultimately achieves non-outflow (wu lou), the first five consciousnesses must also be non-outflow. Otherwise, the cause of outflow (you lou), even if the seventh consciousness transforms, is not ultimate. The eighth consciousness is able to cause the seeds (zhongzi) of the first five consciousnesses to arise as manifest activity as support. Generally speaking, the eighth consciousness is the able-to-arise support. According to these proofs, it is known that by possessing one type, one obtains that name. If 『determination』, 『having an object』, and 『as the main aspect』 have only one type and do not encompass four types, then the first five consciousnesses should not have four types of roots. According to this meaning, the seventh consciousness in relation to the sixth and eighth consciousnesses has only determination of the difference in stages, having an object, and as the main aspect. The eighth consciousness in relation to the sixth and seventh consciousnesses has only determination of being able to arise as support, having an object, and as the main aspect. The meaning of the latter four types of 『support』.

皆通前三。論之本意隨應疏出。所依之體既具三義。令所生果取自所緣。為第四義。隨何前三俱具。即能令取自所緣故。此四義勝皆隨三中能可具者。即名所依。餘者不立。于所生果非殊勝故。且色蘊中五根。望餘五識．及六．七．八。五塵．法處色望一切識。不相應行及無為望一切識。非識種子望一切識。皆不具三。無前隨應三中義故。子細研究都無有故。一切心所隨望何識。唯有決定．有境四種隨應可具。唯無為主。其諸種子望其自識。可有分位差別決定．為主二義。唯無有境。其前五識自互相望及望六．七．八。並六望七．八一切皆無。無隨所應三中四義故。余心．心所一切現行。色．不相應望諸種子一切皆無。諸心所法望自種子闕無為主。以有分位差別決定．有境。染．凈同故。體是王臣故無為主。亦無令果取自所緣。其八現識望自種子。唯無令果取自所緣。可有分位差別決定．有境．為主義故。其中具闕隨義應知。已略疏牒。後讀應審 然下文中五根望第八。唯除定有不除餘者。舉初所無。例無後故。但舉無一則不成所依。何假具述。

識種不能現取自境可有依義者。疏中有二義。一云前師識種許依本識。本識具三義。可與種為所依。種果不能現取自境。果無自所緣故。異熟識與彼為依。非所依也。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 以上這些都通於前三種含義。論的本意是隨著所應而疏解出來的。所依賴的自體既然具備三種含義，使得所產生的果取自所緣，這是第四種含義。無論哪種前三種含義都具備，就能使得果取自所緣。這四種殊勝的含義都隨順於三種含義中能夠具備的，就稱為所依，其餘的則不成立，因為對於所產生的果來說並非殊勝。比如色蘊中的五根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身五種感覺器官），相對於其餘的五識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識）以及第六識（意識）、第七識（末那識）、第八識（阿賴耶識），五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸五種感覺對像）、法處色（意識所緣的法），相對於一切識，不相應行（既非色法也非心法的存在）以及無為（不生不滅的真如），相對於一切識，非識種子（不是識的種子）相對於一切識，都不具備這三種含義，因為沒有前面隨應的三種含義。仔細研究，都沒有這些含義。一切心所（心的附屬作用）隨順於哪種識，只有決定、有境四種隨應可以具備，唯獨沒有為主。那些種子相對於其自身的識，可以有分位差別決定、為主這兩種含義，唯獨沒有有境。前面的五識互相觀望以及觀望第六識、第七識、第八識，以及第六識觀望第七識、第八識，一切都沒有，因為沒有隨所應的三種或四種含義。其餘的心、心所的一切現行，色、不相應行觀望各種種子，一切都沒有。各種心所法觀望自身的種子，缺少為主，因為有分位差別決定、有境，染污和清凈相同，體是王臣，所以沒有為主，也沒有使得果取自所緣。第八現識觀望自身的種子，唯獨沒有使得果取自所緣，可以有分位差別決定、有境、為主的含義。其中的具備和缺少，應該隨著含義來理解。已經簡略地疏解完畢，後面閱讀應該仔細審察。然而下文中，五根觀望第八識，唯獨除去決定有，不除去其餘的，這是舉出最初所沒有的，來例證後面也沒有。只是舉出一個沒有，就不能成立為所依，何必全部陳述。 識種不能現取自境，可以有所依的含義，疏中有兩種解釋。一種說法是，前代的論師認為識種可以依賴本識（阿賴耶識），本識具備三種含義，可以作為種子的所依。種子產生的果不能直接取自境界，果沒有自身的所緣，異熟識（阿賴耶識）可以作為它的所依，但並非是種子的所依。

【English Translation】 English version All the above are in accordance with the first three meanings. The main intention of the treatise is to elucidate according to what is appropriate. Since the entity relied upon possesses three meanings, it causes the resulting effect to take from its own object, which is the fourth meaning. Whichever of the first three meanings are fully possessed, it can cause the effect to take from its own object. These four superior meanings all follow the three meanings that can be possessed, which are called the 'supported'. The rest are not established because they are not superior for the resulting effect. For example, among the skandha of form, the five roots (the five sense organs of eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body), in relation to the remaining five consciousnesses (eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, and body-consciousness) and the sixth (mind-consciousness), seventh (manas-consciousness), and eighth (ālaya-consciousness) consciousnesses, the five dusts (the five sense objects of form, sound, smell, taste, and touch), the form of the dharma-sphere (objects of mind-consciousness), in relation to all consciousnesses, the non-associated formations (neither form nor mind), and the unconditioned (non-arising and non-ceasing suchness), in relation to all consciousnesses, the non-consciousness seeds (not seeds of consciousness) in relation to all consciousnesses, do not possess these three meanings because they do not have the preceding three meanings that are in accordance. Upon careful examination, they do not have these meanings. All mental functions (mental concomitants) in relation to which consciousness only have the four kinds of determination, object-possessing, and appropriate, but not being the 'chief'. Those seeds in relation to their own consciousness can have the two meanings of differentiated determination and being the 'chief', but not object-possessing. The preceding five consciousnesses viewing each other and viewing the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses, and the sixth consciousness viewing the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, all do not have the three or four meanings that are in accordance because they do not have the three or four meanings that are appropriate. All the remaining manifest activities of mind and mental functions, form, and non-associated formations viewing the various seeds, all do not have them. The various mental functions viewing their own seeds lack being the 'chief' because they have differentiated determination and object-possessing, and are the same in defilement and purity. The entity is like a king and his ministers, so it does not have being the 'chief', nor does it cause the effect to take from its own object. The eighth manifest consciousness viewing its own seeds only lacks causing the effect to take from its own object, but can have differentiated determination, object-possessing, and being the 'chief'. The possession and lack of these should be understood according to the meaning. It has been briefly elucidated, and should be carefully examined in later readings. However, in the following text, the five roots viewing the eighth consciousness only remove determination, but do not remove the rest. This is to cite what is initially absent to exemplify what is also absent later. Merely citing one absence is not enough to establish the 'supported', so why state everything? The seeds of consciousness cannot directly take from their own object, but can have the meaning of being supported. The commentary has two explanations. One explanation is that previous teachers believed that the seeds of consciousness can rely on the fundamental consciousness (ālaya-consciousness), which possesses three meanings and can serve as the 'supported' for the seeds. The effect produced by the seeds cannot directly take from the object, and the effect does not have its own object. The resultant consciousness (ālaya-consciousness) can serve as its support, but it is not the 'supported' of the seeds.

故說種有依。不說有所依。

又解此解識種不能與現行為所依。可有分位差別決定．為主。無有境故。可有識依義。而非識所依。上來分位差別即染凈依。別與為名名分位差別。身根望四識四義皆無。故無過失。

第三等無間緣依中。又異熟心依染污意。

天親解是第七者。論文但言煩惱俱行意。無性亦云。或有說言。與四煩惱相應心名染污意識。故知天親說為第七 又言此緣未來為境。非必第七。與無性同 若如疏解說為第七者。何故世親說為第七。無性說為第六。天親以第六相顯略而不論。第七相隱。亦能助潤。故明依之。無性據緣當有為境非第七力。故隱不說。唯說第六。各據一義亦不相違 又無性第三。亦同天親說為第七。如前俱有依中已引之訖。

疏中二解。法華論中五種法師六千功德。凡夫未得無漏。五根中亦言得互用。有二解。一諸根互用。

謂假縱小乘色心前後有等無間者。則攝論第三卷。上坐中經部。執色．心展轉前為後種。今難則阿羅漢後心不成。無性云。是故色．心前後相生。但應容有等無間緣。無因緣故。

何故第七緣彼即有四說。正義緣見分。依彼唯有現．種二師。以依現為正。仍不別說四分依何 今解依自體有勝力故。見分有作受之用。所以緣之

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此說種子有所依。不說有為所依。

又解釋說，這種解識的種子不能作為現行（現象）的所依。可以有分位差別決定，作為主導。因為沒有境界的緣故。可以有識依的意義，而不是識所依。上面所說的分位差別就是染凈依（染污和清凈的所依）。特別給予命名為分位差別。身根（身體的感官）和根望四識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識）四義都不具備。所以沒有過失。

第三，在等無間緣依中。又是異熟心（果報心）依染污意（被染污的意）。

天親（Vasubandhu）解釋說是第七識（末那識，Manas）。論文中只說煩惱俱行意（與煩惱一同生起的意）。無性（Asanga）也說：『或者有人說，與四種煩惱相應的意識名為染污意識。』因此可知天親說是第七識。又說此緣以未來為境界。並非一定是第七識。與無性相同。如果按照疏解所說，認為是第七識，那麼為什麼世親（Vasubandhu）說是第七識，而無性說是第六識（意識，Vijnana）呢？天親認為第六識的相貌顯而易見，所以略而不論。第七識的相貌隱晦，也能幫助滋潤（種子），所以闡明了它的所依。無性根據緣當下的境界，認為不是第七識的力量，所以隱而不說，只說了第六識。各自根據一個角度來說，並不互相違背。而且無性在第三點中，也和天親一樣說是第七識。如前面俱有依中已經引用完畢。

疏中兩種解釋。《法華論》中五種法師有六千功德。凡夫沒有得到無漏智（沒有煩惱的智慧）時，五根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身）中也說可以互用。有兩種解釋。一是諸根互用。

假設小乘（Hinayana）的色法和心法前後有等無間緣，那麼《攝大乘論》第三卷中，上座部（Sthavira）和經部（Sautrantika）認為色法和心法輾轉相生，前一法是後一法的種子。現在如果這樣認為，那麼阿羅漢（Arhat）的後心就無法成立。無性說：『因此，色法和心法前後相生，只應容許有等無間緣，沒有因緣的緣故。』

為什麼第七識緣彼（見分）即有四種說法。正義是緣見分（認識的主體）。依彼只有現、種二師。以依現為正。仍然沒有分別說明四分（見分、相分、自證分、證自證分）依何而立。現在解釋說，因為依靠自體有殊勝的力量。見分有作用和領受的作用。所以緣之。

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is said that seeds have a basis of dependence. It is not said that there is a basis of dependence for what is conditioned.

Furthermore, it is explained that these seeds of discriminating consciousness cannot serve as the basis of dependence for manifest phenomena. There can be determined distinctions in phases, serving as the primary factor. Because there is no object. There can be a meaning of consciousness depending, but not what consciousness depends on. The aforementioned distinctions in phases are the basis of dependence for defilement and purity. Specifically naming them as distinctions in phases. The body's sense organs and the four types of consciousness (eye, ear, nose, tongue) lack all four meanings. Therefore, there is no fault.

Thirdly, within the condition of immediate contiguity, there is also the resultant mind depending on the defiled mind (Klista-manas).

Vasubandhu explains that this is the seventh consciousness (Manas). The text only mentions the mind associated with afflictions. Asanga also says, 'Or some say that the consciousness associated with the four afflictions is called defiled consciousness.' Therefore, it is known that Vasubandhu speaks of the seventh consciousness. It is also said that this condition takes the future as its object. It is not necessarily the seventh consciousness. This is the same as Asanga. If, as the commentary explains, it is considered the seventh consciousness, then why does Vasubandhu say it is the seventh consciousness, while Asanga says it is the sixth consciousness (Vijnana)? Vasubandhu considers the characteristics of the sixth consciousness to be obvious, so he omits discussing it. The characteristics of the seventh consciousness are hidden, and it can also help nourish (the seeds), so he clarifies its basis of dependence. Asanga, based on the condition of the present object, believes it is not the power of the seventh consciousness, so he conceals it and only speaks of the sixth consciousness. Each is based on one aspect, and they do not contradict each other. Moreover, Asanga, in the third point, also agrees with Vasubandhu in saying it is the seventh consciousness, as already quoted in the section on the co-existent basis of dependence.

There are two explanations in the commentary. In the Lotus Sutra Treatise, the five types of Dharma teachers have six thousand merits. When ordinary beings have not attained non-outflow wisdom (wisdom without afflictions), it is also said that the five sense organs (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body) can be used interchangeably. There are two explanations. One is that the sense organs are used interchangeably.

If the Hinayana (Small Vehicle) posits that form and mind arise successively with immediate contiguity, then in the third volume of the Compendium of Mahayana, the Sthavira (Elders) and Sautrantika (Sutra School) schools hold that form and mind arise in succession, with the preceding one being the seed for the subsequent one. If this is the case, then the final mind of an Arhat (liberated being) cannot be established. Asanga says, 'Therefore, the successive arising of form and mind should only be allowed to have the condition of immediate contiguity, not the causal condition.'

Why does the seventh consciousness condition that (the seeing-aspect)? There are four views. The correct view is that it conditions the seeing-aspect (the subject of perception). According to this, there are only the present and seed schools. The present is considered the correct one. It is still not separately explained what the four aspects (seeing-aspect, object-aspect, self-awareness aspect, and awareness-of-self-awareness aspect) depend on. The current explanation is that it depends on its own essence because it has superior power. The seeing-aspect has the function of acting and receiving. Therefore, it conditions it.

。不離體故總名緣彼 又解依三分。總有力故。唯緣見分。唯作．受故 或所緣見者。是能緣義。即依．緣同。三分併名見。所以論云。恒與諸法為所依故。

說六隨遍中。云無掉舉者此相違故者。問掉．惛相違不許俱決。定．亂相返應不併生 答彼不違故俱起。此相返遂別生 問二二行相各各相違。如何不等。答流蕩是散亂。一行得定俱。高．下名惛．掉。故二行相返。由行相別其體亦無。是此師意。

第三師中。薩婆多貪．恚．慢唯鈍。五見．疑唯利。癡通利．鈍。今大乘見．疑唯利。四通利．鈍。隨應許與見．疑俱故。不得以見與貪等俱。亦名為鈍。無獨鈍故。彼有獨鈍故。由此貪等通迷理．事。疑唯迷理。仁王經云。見五地斷疑。事中猶預。阿羅漢疑蝙蝮亦爾。皆異熟生。故法執類。堅著即執。

第五卷

此與初變有同不同頌說不說。疏指如樞要者。如十卷中解。

平等性智唯舍受俱者。觀智是初定。平等智初定攝。觀智喜樂俱。平等智隨喜樂。有二解。一解得。然今說者。取至佛位唯舍一定。未自在隨觀智。自在不然故 若爾七識因舍俱。凈由他喜．樂。因中無尋．伺。果由他引生 答尋．伺行相粗。非由他引轉。亦應喜．樂非一類。他引不隨生。故第二義一切是舍 何故

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為不離本體，所以總稱為緣彼。又解釋為依靠三分，總有力量的緣故，唯獨緣見分，唯獨作為和接受的緣故。或者所緣見，是能緣的意義，即依靠和緣相同，三分都名為見。所以論中說，恒常與諸法作為所依靠的緣故。

在說六隨遍中，說沒有掉舉是因為此與掉舉的相違。問：掉舉和昏沉相違，不應允許同時存在。決定和散亂相反，應該不能同時產生。答：它們不相違，所以可以一起生起。掉舉和昏沉相返，於是分別產生。問：二二行相各自相違，為什麼不一樣？答：流蕩是散亂，一行可以和定同時存在。高和下名為昏沉和掉舉，所以二者行相相反。由於行相不同，它們的體性也不同。這是此師的觀點。

第三師中，薩婆多（Sarvastivada，一切有部）認為貪、嗔、慢唯獨是鈍性的，五見（五種錯誤的見解）和疑唯獨是利性的，癡通於利性和鈍性。現在大乘認為見和疑唯獨是利性的，四種煩惱通於利性和鈍性。應該允許它們與見和疑同時存在，所以不能因為見與貪等同時存在，就也稱為鈍性的，因為沒有單獨的鈍性。他們有單獨的鈍性，因此貪等通於迷惑理和事，疑唯獨迷惑理。《仁王經》說，見在五地斷除，疑在事中猶豫。阿羅漢（Arhat，已證得涅槃的聖者）懷疑蝙蝠，也是如此，都是異熟生，所以是法執的類別。堅固執著就是執。

第五卷

此與初變有相同和不同，頌說和不說。疏指如樞要，如十卷中解釋。

平等性智（Samatajnana，平等性智）唯獨與舍受（Upeksha，不苦不樂的感受）同時存在。觀智（Vipassana-jnana，觀智）是初禪定，平等智初禪定所攝。觀智與喜樂同時存在，平等智隨喜樂。有兩種解釋，一種是得到。然而現在所說的是，取至佛位唯獨是舍受一定，未自在隨觀智，自在不是這樣。如果這樣，七識因舍受俱，清凈由其他喜樂。因中沒有尋伺，果由其他引生。答：尋伺行相粗，不是由其他引轉。也應該喜樂不是一類，其他引生不隨生。所以第二義一切是舍受。為什麼？

【English Translation】 English version: Because it does not depart from the substance, it is generally called 'conditioned by that'. It is also explained as relying on the three aspects, because it has overall power, it solely conditions the 'seeing aspect', solely acting and receiving. Or the 'seen aspect' is the meaning of the 'able to condition', that is, the 'reliance' and 'condition' are the same, and all three aspects are called 'seeing'. Therefore, the treatise says, 'Constantly taking all dharmas as the basis of reliance'.

In discussing the six pervasive mental factors, it is said that the absence of agitation is because it contradicts agitation. Question: Agitation and torpor contradict each other, so they should not be allowed to exist simultaneously. Determination and distraction are opposite, so they should not arise together. Answer: They do not contradict each other, so they can arise together. Agitation and torpor are opposite, so they arise separately. Question: The characteristics of each pair are contradictory, so why are they not the same? Answer: Wandering is distraction, one aspect can coexist with concentration. High and low are called torpor and agitation, so the two aspects are opposite. Because the characteristics are different, their nature is also different. This is the view of this teacher.

In the third teacher's view, the Sarvastivadins hold that greed, hatred, and pride are exclusively dull, while the five views and doubt are exclusively sharp, and ignorance is both sharp and dull. Now, Mahayana holds that views and doubt are exclusively sharp, while the four afflictions are both sharp and dull. They should be allowed to coexist with views and doubt, so they cannot be called dull simply because views coexist with greed, etc., because there is no exclusively dull. They have exclusively dull, therefore greed, etc., generally delude both principle and phenomena, while doubt only deludes principle. The Renwang Sutra says that views are cut off at the fifth ground, and doubt hesitates in phenomena. Arhats also doubt bats, and so on, all of which are born from different maturation, so they are categories of attachment to dharma. Firm attachment is clinging.

Volume Five

This has similarities and differences with the initial transformation, spoken and unspoken. The commentary points to the essentials, as explained in the ten volumes.

Equanimity wisdom (Samatajnana) exists only with neutral feeling (Upeksha). Contemplative wisdom (Vipassana-jnana) is the first dhyana, and equanimity wisdom is included in the first dhyana. Contemplative wisdom exists with joy and happiness, and equanimity wisdom follows joy and happiness. There are two explanations, one is attainment. However, what is being said now is that, taking up to the Buddha position, only neutral feeling is certain, not freely following contemplative wisdom, freedom is not like this. If so, the seventh consciousness is always with neutral feeling, and purity is due to other's joy and happiness. There is no initial thought and sustained thought in the cause, and the result is caused by other's leading. Answer: Initial thought and sustained thought are coarse in characteristics, not transformed by other's leading. Also, joy and happiness should not be of one kind, and other's leading does not follow. Therefore, in the second meaning, everything is neutral feeling. Why?

地同。共受即別 喜．樂易脫故恒唯舍受。定不相違故。從能引。若有漏位能依通九地。所依一地攝。隨所生故。若至佛位。能依通九地。所依唯第四定。與凈第八相依相續無動搖故。十地無漏能依．所依俱定同地。隨他引故。未無動故。此說法觀品。非生觀品。猶有漏故。

末那系中難云。所緣一地系。能緣系隨境。所緣九地系。能緣系通九。如總緣我見等 答現行為境顯。能緣隨彼系。種等境沉隱。能緣系不隨 問現行相顯可緣起見。種子相沈應不生見 答境通隱顯種．現俱境。隨系義顯不隨種系 又難。能緣緣彼地。能所一地系。境為能緣緣。能所俱無覆 答性據類殊。能．所別性。系據縛義。不可別系 問第七緣彼現。能所一界攝。八緣三界種。應隨三界系 七．八互相增。能．所一界系。八境不平增。見．境各別系。又八為彼業招。不隨境界系。七非業所感。隨境一地系。

問煩惱縛三乘。所執名為藏。法執縛菩薩。所執立藏名 答縛有二。一縛處生死。二縛不得種智。由此得藏名。非是菩薩。

恒起法執。量云。法執未證法空位。應恒行。二執隨一攝故。如生執。

所立宗因便俱有失。如疏。各有二過。又因有自法自相相違。以無學．聖道意為同法故。同品定有可成害於宗法。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 地界相同。共同感受，即是分離的喜悅和快樂，容易解脫，所以總是隻有舍受（upeksa, 不苦不樂感受）。禪定不會互相違背，因為是從能引發禪定的因素而來。如果是有漏的階段，能依附於九地（指欲界、色界、無色界），所依附的被一個地界所攝。這是隨著所生之處而定的。如果到了佛的果位，能依附於九地，所依附的只有第四禪定。因為與清凈的第八識（阿賴耶識）相互依存，相續不斷，沒有動搖的緣故。十地（菩薩修行的十個階段）的無漏狀態，能依附的和所依附的禪定都在同一個地界。這是隨著其他因素的引導而定的，因為還沒有達到不動地的緣故。這裡說的是說法觀品，不是生觀品，因為仍然是有漏的。

末那識（manas, 第七識）的體系中有人提問：所緣的境是一個地界所繫縛，能緣的心識隨著所緣的境而繫縛。如果所緣的境是九個地界所繫縛，那麼能緣的心識也通於九個地界嗎？比如總的緣於我見等等。回答：現行的法作為所緣的境而顯現，能緣的心識隨著它而繫縛。而種子等等作為所緣的境是沉沒隱晦的，能緣的心識不隨著它而繫縛。提問：現行的相顯現，可以作為所緣的境而生起見解。種子的相沉沒，應該不能生起見解吧？回答：所緣的境通於隱沒和顯現，種子和現行都是所緣的境。隨著繫縛的意義而顯現，不隨著種子的繫縛。又有人提問：能緣的心識緣于那個地界，能緣和所緣是一個地界所繫縛。境作為能緣所緣的境，能緣和所緣都是無覆無記的。回答：自性是根據類別而不同的，能緣和所緣的自性是不同的。繫縛是根據束縛的意義，不能分別繫縛。提問：第七識緣于那個現行，能緣和所緣是一個界所攝。第八識緣於三界的種子，應該隨著三界而繫縛吧？第七識和第八識互相增上，能緣和所緣是一個界所繫縛。第八識的境不平等增上，見解和境是各自不同的繫縛。而且第八識是為那個業所招感的，不隨著境界而繫縛。第七識不是業所感，隨著境在一個地界繫縛。

提問：煩惱束縛三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘），所執著的稱為藏。法執束縛菩薩，所執著的建立藏的名字。回答：束縛有兩種，一是束縛在生死之中，二是束縛而不能得到種智（一切種智，佛的智慧）。因此得到藏的名字，而不是菩薩。

恒常生起法執。可以這樣衡量：法執在沒有證得法空的階段，應該是恒常生起的。因為兩種執著（我執和法執）被其中一個所攝，就像生執（與生俱來的執著）一樣。

所建立的宗和因，就都同時有缺失。就像疏文中說的，各有兩種過失。而且因有自法自相的相違背。因為以無學（阿羅漢）和聖道意作為相同的法。相同的品類必定有可以成就的，會損害宗法。

【English Translation】 English version The realms are the same. To share the same feeling is to be separated from joy and happiness, easy to be liberated, therefore there is always only upeksa (equanimity, neither pleasant nor unpleasant feeling). Samadhi (concentration) does not contradict each other, because it comes from the factors that can induce samadhi. If it is a stage with outflows (asrava), it can rely on the nine realms (referring to the desire realm, form realm, formless realm), and what it relies on is included in one realm. This is determined by where it is born. If one reaches the state of Buddhahood, one can rely on the nine realms, and what one relies on is only the fourth dhyana (meditative state). Because it relies on the pure eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) and continues without shaking. The outflow-free state of the ten bhumis (ten stages of bodhisattva practice), both the relying and the relied-upon samadhi are in the same realm. This is determined by the guidance of other factors, because it has not yet reached the immovable ground. This speaks of the Dharma teaching contemplation chapter, not the birth contemplation chapter, because it still has outflows.

In the system of Manas (seventh consciousness), someone asks: The object of cognition is bound by one realm, and the cognizing consciousness is bound by the object of cognition. If the object of cognition is bound by nine realms, then does the cognizing consciousness also penetrate the nine realms? For example, generally clinging to the view of self, etc. Answer: The manifest dharma is revealed as the object of cognition, and the cognizing consciousness is bound by it. However, seeds, etc., as objects of cognition, are submerged and obscure, and the cognizing consciousness is not bound by them. Question: The manifest appearance can be taken as the object of cognition to generate views. The submerged appearance of seeds should not generate views, right? Answer: The object of cognition penetrates both hidden and manifest, and both seeds and manifest dharmas are objects of cognition. It manifests according to the meaning of bondage, not according to the bondage of seeds. Someone also asks: The cognizing consciousness cognizes that realm, and the cognizing and cognized are bound by one realm. The object is the object of the cognizing and cognized, and both the cognizing and cognized are unwholesome and neutral. Answer: Nature is different according to categories, and the natures of the cognizing and cognized are different. Bondage is according to the meaning of binding, and cannot be separately bound. Question: The seventh consciousness cognizes that manifest dharma, and the cognizing and cognized are included in one realm. The eighth consciousness cognizes the seeds of the three realms, so should it be bound by the three realms? The seventh and eighth consciousnesses mutually increase, and the cognizing and cognized are bound by one realm. The objects of the eighth consciousness do not increase equally, and the views and objects are bound separately. Moreover, the eighth consciousness is summoned by that karma, and is not bound by the realm. The seventh consciousness is not sensed by karma, and is bound by the realm in one realm.

Question: Afflictions bind the three vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle), and what is clung to is called a store. Dharma clinging binds bodhisattvas, and establishing the name of a store for what is clung to. Answer: There are two kinds of bondage, one is bondage in samsara (cycle of birth and death), and the other is bondage that prevents one from obtaining sarvajna (all-knowing wisdom, the wisdom of the Buddha). Therefore, the name of a store is obtained, not that of a bodhisattva.

Dharma clinging constantly arises. It can be measured like this: Dharma clinging should constantly arise in the stage where dharma emptiness has not been realized. Because the two clingings (self-clinging and dharma-clinging) are included in one of them, just like innate clinging.

The established thesis and reason both have flaws at the same time. Just like what is said in the commentary, each has two faults. Moreover, the reason has contradictions in its own dharma and own characteristics. Because the intention of the non-learner (Arhat) and the holy path are taken as the same dharma. The same category must have what can be accomplished, which will harm the thesis.

故成法自相相違。

阿羅漢永斷染末那中。唯說畢竟斷染名舍。不說畢竟伏名舍。故不說直往不退菩薩。亦舍第八四人相違。以心從境實亦應舍。種非永無故略不說。其實亦舍。則是聖道舍門攝。故更不論說。又八地已去法執在故。末那不得舍名。賴耶據煩惱得名。八地等名舍。不相違也。

護法立末那通法執諍中有十。一違經失．二違量失．三違瑜伽失．四違顯揚失．五七八相例失．六四智不齊失．七第八無依失．八二執不均失．九五六不同失．十總結會 或總分三。一立理引證。二總結。三會違。初中有九。即前九是。是故定有下結。言彼無者下會違。

差別三中。以心對境。境有三位。謂我愛執藏位等。心亦應三。一補特伽羅執位。名染末那。二法執位。名不染末那。三思量位。但名末那。與前三境相應不寬不狹。今第三說平智不說思量位者。今顯第七有二位別。一有漏。二無漏。無漏無別。有漏位中有染．不染復分為三。又前三位心境雖相應。而境中無垢不別明顯。今對彼境雖寬狹不同。無漏義等故說平智不說末那。計準本識名亦應有四。此加思量。對彼執持故。彼若但說異熟．無垢二名。此但名無覆．平等智。彼但名執持。此亦但名末那。俱染．凈故。今此說別故有三名。

見道

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，已成立的法則自身相互矛盾。

阿羅漢（Arhat，已證得涅槃的聖者）永遠斷除了染污的末那（Manas，意根）中的煩惱。僅僅說徹底斷除染污才稱為『舍』（放棄），不說徹底降伏稱為『舍』。因此，不說直往不退轉的菩薩（Bodhisattva，發願成佛的修行者）也捨棄了第八識，這與四種人（指不同修行階段的聖者）的說法相矛盾。因為心識隨著外境，實際上也應該捨棄。種子並非永遠消失，所以略而不說，其實也是捨棄了。這屬於聖道捨棄之門所攝，所以不再單獨論述。而且，八地（菩薩修行的一個階段）以上的菩薩因為還有法執存在，所以末那不得名為『舍』。阿賴耶識（Ālaya-vijñāna，藏識）根據煩惱而得名，八地等可以名為『舍』，這並不矛盾。

護法（Dharmapāla，佛教論師）認為末那通於法執的諍論中有十點：一、違背經文的過失；二、違背量論的過失；三、違背瑜伽行（Yoga，一種修行方式）的過失；四、違背《顯揚聖教論》的過失；五、第七識和第八識相互類比的過失；六、四智（指四種智慧）不齊等的過失；七、第八識沒有所依的過失；八、二執（人執和法執）不均等的過失；九、第五識和第六識不同的過失；十、總結歸納。或者總分為三：一、立論引證；二、總結；三、解釋矛盾。最初的部分中有九點，就是前面說的九種過失。所以，『是故定有』是下面的結論，『言彼無者』是解釋矛盾。

差別有三種。以心識對外境來說，外境有三種狀態，即我愛執藏位等。心識也應該有三種狀態：一、補特伽羅（Pudgala，個體）執著位，名為染污末那；二、法執位，名為不染污末那；三、思量位，只名為末那。與前面的三種外境相應，既不寬泛也不狹隘。現在第三種說法只說平等性智（Samatajnana），不說思量位，是因為現在顯示第七識有兩種狀態的差別：一是有漏（有煩惱），二是無漏（無煩惱）。無漏沒有差別，有漏位中，有染污和不染污又分為三種。而且，前面三種狀態心識和外境雖然相應，但是外境中無垢的狀態沒有特別明顯。現在針對外境雖然寬泛和狹隘不同，但無漏的意義相同，所以說平等性智，不說末那。如果按照本識（根本識）來計算，名稱也應該有四種，這裡加上思量，針對執持的緣故。如果本識只說異熟識（Vipāka-vijñāna，果報識）和無垢識（Amala-vijñāna）兩種名稱，那麼這裡只說無覆無記性（不善不惡）和平等性智。本識只名為執持，這裡也只名為末那，都是因為染污和清凈的緣故。現在這裡說差別，所以有三種名稱。

見道（Darśana-mārga，見道位）

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, the established doctrines contradict each other.

An Arhat (one who has attained Nirvana) eternally severs the afflictions within the defiled Manas (mind-consciousness). Only the complete severing of defilements is called 'abandonment' (舍, she); the complete subduing is not called 'abandonment.' Therefore, it is not said that a Bodhisattva (a being who aspires to Buddhahood) who directly advances without regression also abandons the eighth consciousness, which contradicts the statement about the four types of individuals (referring to different stages of spiritual attainment). Because the mind follows external objects, it should actually be abandoned as well. Since the seeds are not eternally non-existent, they are briefly not mentioned, but in reality, they are also abandoned. This is included within the gate of abandonment in the Noble Path, so it is not discussed separately. Moreover, since the Dharma-attachment (attachment to phenomena) still exists for Bodhisattvas beyond the eighth ground (a stage of Bodhisattva practice), the Manas cannot be named 'abandonment.' The Ālaya-vijñāna (storehouse consciousness) is named based on afflictions; the eighth ground and beyond can be named 'abandonment,' which is not contradictory.

Dharmapāla (a Buddhist commentator) argues that there are ten points in the debate about the Manas being common to Dharma-attachment: 1. The fault of contradicting the sutras; 2. The fault of contradicting logic; 3. The fault of contradicting Yoga practice; 4. The fault of contradicting the Exposition of the Holy Teachings (顯揚聖教論); 5. The fault of analogy between the seventh and eighth consciousnesses; 6. The fault of the four wisdoms (四智) not being equal; 7. The fault of the eighth consciousness having no basis; 8. The fault of the two attachments (attachment to self and attachment to phenomena) being unequal; 9. The fault of the fifth and sixth consciousnesses being different; 10. Summary and conclusion. Or, it can be broadly divided into three: 1. Establishing the argument with evidence; 2. Summary; 3. Explaining contradictions. The initial part has nine points, which are the nine faults mentioned earlier. Therefore, 'Therefore, it definitely exists' is the conclusion below, and 'Those who say it does not exist' explains the contradictions.

There are three kinds of distinctions. In relation to the mind's interaction with external objects, external objects have three states, namely, the position of attachment to self, love, and storage, etc. The mind should also have three states: 1. The position of attachment to Pudgala (individual), called defiled Manas; 2. The position of Dharma-attachment, called undefiled Manas; 3. The position of thinking, only called Manas. Corresponding to the previous three external objects, it is neither too broad nor too narrow. The third statement now only speaks of Equality Wisdom (Samatajnana) and does not speak of the thinking position because it now reveals the difference between the two states of the seventh consciousness: one is with outflows (with afflictions), and the other is without outflows (without afflictions). There is no difference in the state without outflows. In the state with outflows, there are defiled and undefiled, which are further divided into three. Moreover, although the mind and external objects correspond in the previous three states, the state of stainlessness in the external objects is not particularly clear. Now, although the breadth and narrowness are different in relation to external objects, the meaning of without outflows is the same, so it speaks of Equality Wisdom and does not speak of Manas. If calculated according to the fundamental consciousness, there should also be four names, adding thinking here, because it is directed towards holding. If the fundamental consciousness only speaks of the two names of Vipāka-vijñāna (resultant consciousness) and Amala-vijñāna (immaculate consciousness), then here it only speaks of non-obscured and indeterminate nature and Equality Wisdom. The fundamental consciousness is only named holding, and here it is only named Manas, both because of defilement and purity. Now, this speaks of distinctions, so there are three names.

The Path of Seeing (Darśana-mārga)

全生平等智者。疏中但有一心見道解。設三心見道。後二心有此智。初一心無。多分有故。所論總說。非於其中唯起平等智。又長讀論文。見道法空智起。方有平等智。不但修道 問頗有菩薩無分別智入法觀。意樂即入後得生觀耶。頗有無分別智入生觀。意樂即入後智法觀耶。答曰不得。菩薩後得必由無分別智為前導故。佛地論云等流之觀與根本觀同故 問若爾何故言遠等流即得．近即不得 答近勢難入。遠即易入故 又解總無後得入別觀。必各更起無分別智引之生故 問初起未自在。後得由前引。久起自在生。何妨自力轉 答曰即依此義。遂有意樂後得。不同無分別智。二觀別也。佛地論及此論中。據其多分及未自在故。

平等性智無分別。妙觀智引即緣真如。若妙觀智相見道引平等智。即緣似真如相。妙觀入生空。自不成平等。唯緣第八。此相可知。若第六識入法觀位。聽聞正法等。入別遊觀心。平等性智緣何境界。不可緣如及緣第八。六非此行故。若緣外緣聽聞正法等。及緣三惡趣等者。因中已有此行相耶。若其不緣。何故緣似真如等。即許他引。此不許隨他引耶。

所知障中。縱不善不覆二乘名無覆。障菩薩名有覆 又解不善心中亦唯無記。與煩惱障不相違也。問智障不障於二乘即名無覆。惑障

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 全生平等智者（具有完全平等智慧的人）。疏文中只說一心見道（通過一心證悟真理）。假設以三種心見道，後兩種心具有這種智慧，第一種心沒有。因為大多數情況是這樣，所以總的來說是這樣說的，並非在其中只產生平等智。而且，仔細閱讀論文，見道時法空智（證悟諸法空性的智慧）生起，才會有平等智，不僅僅是修道時才有。 問：有沒有菩薩以無分別智（不帶任何分別唸的智慧）進入法觀（對法的觀照），然後立即進入後得生觀（從根本智生起的觀照）呢？有沒有以無分別智進入生觀，然後立即進入後智法觀呢？ 答：不可能。菩薩的後得智（根本智之後的智慧）必定由無分別智引導。如《佛地論》所說，等流觀（與根本智相似的觀照）與根本觀相同。 問：如果這樣，為什麼說遠離等流觀就能證得，接近就不能證得呢？ 答：因為接近時難以進入，遠離時容易進入。 又解釋說，總的來說，沒有後得智進入其他觀照，必須各自重新生起無分別智來引導。 問：最初生起時還不自在，後得智由先前的智慧引導。長時間生起後變得自在，為什麼不能自己運轉呢？ 答：就是依據這個道理，才有意樂後得（隨順意樂的後得智），不同於無分別智。這兩種觀照是不同的。《佛地論》和此論中，都是根據大多數情況和未自在的情況來說的。 平等性智（證悟諸法平等的智慧）沒有分別，妙觀智（微妙的觀照智慧）引導時就緣于真如（不生不滅的真理）。如果妙觀智與見道時的智慧引導平等智，就緣于相似真如的相。妙觀智進入生空（諸法皆空的境界），自身不能成就平等智，只能緣于第八識（阿賴耶識）。這個相狀是可以理解的。如果第六識（意識）進入法觀的位次，聽聞正法等，進入其他遊觀心（不定的觀照），平等性智緣于什麼境界呢？不能緣于真如以及緣于第八識，因為第六識不是這樣運作的。如果緣于外緣，聽聞正法等，以及緣於三惡趣等，那麼在因地中就已經有這種行相了嗎？如果不是這樣緣，為什麼能緣于相似真如等，就允許被其他智慧引導，而這裡不允許隨順其他智慧引導呢？ 在所知障（對真理的認知障礙）中，即使是不善和不覆（不覆蓋），二乘（聲聞和緣覺）稱為無覆，障礙菩薩稱為有覆。 又解釋說，不善心中也只有無記（非善非惡），與煩惱障（由煩惱產生的障礙）不相違背。問：智障（智慧上的障礙）不障礙二乘就稱為無覆，惑障（迷惑上的障礙）……

【English Translation】 English version: The All-Living Equality Wisdom Knower. The commentary only mentions 'one mind seeing the Dao' (realizing the truth through one mind). Suppose there are three minds seeing the Dao, the latter two minds possess this wisdom, while the first mind does not. Because this is the case in most situations, it is spoken of in general terms, not that only equality wisdom arises within it. Moreover, reading the treatise carefully, when the wisdom of emptiness of phenomena (wisdom realizing the emptiness of all dharmas) arises at the moment of seeing the Dao, then equality wisdom arises, not only during the path of cultivation. Question: Is there a Bodhisattva who enters the contemplation of Dharma (Dharma-view) with non-discriminating wisdom (wisdom without any discrimination), and then immediately enters the subsequent acquired contemplation of existence (contemplation arising from fundamental wisdom)? Is there one who enters the contemplation of existence with non-discriminating wisdom, and then immediately enters the subsequent wisdom contemplation of Dharma? Answer: It is not possible. The subsequent acquired wisdom (wisdom after fundamental wisdom) of a Bodhisattva must be guided by non-discriminating wisdom. As stated in the Buddhabhumi Sutra, the contemplation of equal flow (contemplation similar to fundamental wisdom) is the same as fundamental contemplation. Question: If so, why is it said that one can attain it when far from the contemplation of equal flow, but not when near? Answer: Because it is difficult to enter when near, and easy to enter when far. Another explanation is that, in general, there is no subsequent acquired wisdom entering other contemplations; each must re-arise non-discriminating wisdom to guide it. Question: When first arising, it is not yet free; subsequent acquired wisdom is guided by previous wisdom. After arising for a long time, it becomes free; why can't it turn on its own? Answer: It is based on this principle that there is subsequent acquired wisdom according to intention, which is different from non-discriminating wisdom. These two contemplations are different. The Buddhabhumi Sutra and this treatise speak according to the majority of cases and the state of not being free. Equality Wisdom (wisdom of realizing the equality of all dharmas) is without discrimination. When Wonderful Contemplation Wisdom (subtle wisdom of contemplation) guides, it is based on Suchness (unchanging truth). If Wonderful Contemplation Wisdom and the wisdom at the moment of seeing the Dao guide Equality Wisdom, it is based on the appearance of similar Suchness. Wonderful Contemplation enters the emptiness of existence (the state of all dharmas being empty), and cannot itself achieve Equality Wisdom, but can only be based on the eighth consciousness (Alaya Consciousness). This appearance can be understood. If the sixth consciousness (consciousness) enters the position of Dharma-view, listening to the correct Dharma, etc., and enters other wandering contemplation minds (unstable contemplation), what realm does Equality Wisdom rely on? It cannot rely on Suchness or the eighth consciousness, because the sixth consciousness does not operate in this way. If it relies on external conditions, listening to the correct Dharma, etc., and relies on the three evil realms, etc., then is there already this behavior in the causal stage? If it does not rely in this way, why can it rely on similar Suchness, etc., allowing it to be guided by other wisdom, but here it is not allowed to follow the guidance of other wisdom? In the Obstruction of Knowledge (obstacles to the knowledge of truth), even if it is unwholesome and uncovered (not covering), the Two Vehicles (Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas) are called uncovered, while obstructing Bodhisattvas is called covered. Another explanation is that there is only neutral (neither good nor evil) in the unwholesome mind, which is not contrary to the Obstruction of Afflictions (obstacles arising from afflictions). Question: If the Obstruction of Wisdom (obstacles to wisdom) does not obstruct the Two Vehicles, it is called uncovered, while the Obstruction of Delusion (obstacles of delusion)...

不障菩薩應名無覆 答聲聞唯求一果。智障故名無覆。菩薩雙求二果。惑障故非無覆 問智障障菩薩。即唯名有覆。惑障障三乘。應非是不善 答智障唯障真見但名有覆。惑障令處生死故通不善。又自損損他故。

瑜伽第十六引經云。染污意恒時諸惑俱生滅。若解脫諸惑。非先亦非後。彼自釋云。非先者與諸煩惱恒俱生故。非後者即與彼惑俱時滅故。

不共無明有二。一與根本俱恒行一切分。余識所無名不共。二不與根本俱名不共。然復有二。一與小．中．大隨煩惱俱。不與根本惑俱名不共。二不與小隨惑及根本俱。與中大隨俱名不共。隨其所應後二亦通上界。然與相應多小上地獄別 然為三句。一唯見斷。謂獨行四諦下者。二唯修斷。謂第七識者。三通見修。謂忿等相應。

第三難中。已滅依此假立意名。何故不依現名心識。但似意耶。意有二義。一依止。二思量。七二義具。余唯依止。過去依止似七故。思量亦似第七名意。不似心識名心識 問已滅為依等思量亦名似。六．八現為依。似七有思量。應皆得名意 據實余識皆得意名。已滅似七識現故。但說之為意。

末那為識縛之本。今觀此意。若緣縛體唯據煩惱障 若相縛體據法執說。故此滅已相縛解脫。此若有時所起施等不能亡相。若

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『不障菩薩』應名為『無覆』（沒有覆蓋），因為聲聞乘只求證得一個果位。因為智慧上的障礙，所以稱為『無覆』。菩薩乘同時追求智慧和慈悲兩種果位。因為有煩惱的障礙，所以不是『無覆』。 問：智慧上的障礙如果障礙了菩薩，那麼就只能稱為『有覆』（有覆蓋）。煩惱的障礙如果障礙了三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘），那麼應該不是不善的嗎？ 答：智慧上的障礙僅僅障礙了對真理的見解，所以只稱為『有覆』。煩惱的障礙使眾生處於生死輪迴之中，所以通於不善。而且，既損害自己也損害他人。 《瑜伽師地論》第十六卷引用經文說：『染污的意（末那識，Manas）恒常與各種煩惱同時生滅。如果解脫了各種煩惱，不是先於煩惱，也不是後於煩惱。』 它自己解釋說：『不是先於煩惱，因為與各種煩惱恒常同時生起。不是後於煩惱，就是與那些煩惱同時滅亡。』 不共無明有兩種：第一種是與根本煩惱同時恒常執行於一切部分。其他識所沒有的，稱為『不共』。第二種是不與根本煩惱同時，稱為『不共』。然而又有兩種：一種是與小、中、大隨煩惱同時，不與根本煩惱同時，稱為『不共』。另一種是不與小隨煩惱及根本煩惱同時，與中、大隨煩惱同時，稱為『不共』。根據情況，後兩種也通於上界（色界和無色界）。然而與煩惱相應的多少有上地獄的區別。 然後分為三句：第一句是唯有見道才能斷除的。指的是獨行於四諦之下的煩惱。第二句是唯有修道才能斷除的。指的是第七識（末那識，Manas）。第三句是見道和修道都能斷除的。指的是與忿等煩惱相應的。 在第三個難題中，已經滅去的（過去）依靠它假立意（末那識，Manas）的名字。為什麼不依靠現在的（現在）而命名為心識（Citta-Vijnana），而只是類似意（末那識，Manas）呢？意（末那識，Manas）有兩種含義：一是依止，二是思量。第七識（末那識，Manas）具備兩種含義，其他的識只有依止的含義。過去的依止類似第七識（末那識，Manas），所以思量也類似第七識（末那識，Manas），稱為意（末那識，Manas）。不像心識（Citta-Vijnana），所以稱為心識（Citta-Vijnana）。 問：已經滅去的作為所依等，思量也名為類似。第六識（意識，Manovijnana）和第八識（阿賴耶識，Alaya-vijnana）現在作為所依，類似第七識（末那識，Manas）有思量，應該都可以命名為意（末那識，Manas）。 根據實際情況，其他的識都可以得到意（末那識，Manas）的名字。已經滅去的類似第七識（末那識，Manas）的顯現，所以只說它是意（末那識，Manas）。 末那（末那識，Manas）是識（Vijnana）被束縛的根本。現在觀察這個意（末那識，Manas），如果緣于束縛的本體，僅僅根據煩惱障來說。 如果相縛的本體，根據法執來說。所以這個（末那識，Manas）滅去之後，相縛就解脫了。這個（末那識，Manas）如果存在的時候，所做的佈施等行為不能消除對相的執著。

【English Translation】 English version 'Non-obstructing Bodhisattvas' should be named 'Uncovered' because Sravakas (hearers) only seek to attain one fruit. Due to the obstruction of wisdom, they are called 'Uncovered'. Bodhisattvas seek both wisdom and compassion. Due to the obstruction of afflictions, they are not 'Uncovered'. Question: If the obstruction of wisdom obstructs Bodhisattvas, then it can only be called 'Covered'. If the obstruction of afflictions obstructs the Three Vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, Bodhisattva Vehicle), then shouldn't it be non-unwholesome? Answer: The obstruction of wisdom only obstructs the view of truth, so it is only called 'Covered'. The obstruction of afflictions causes sentient beings to be in the cycle of birth and death, so it is generally unwholesome. Moreover, it harms both oneself and others. The sixteenth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra quotes a sutra saying: 'The defiled Manas (mind) constantly arises and ceases simultaneously with various afflictions. If one is liberated from various afflictions, it is neither before nor after the afflictions.' It explains itself by saying: 'Not before the afflictions, because it constantly arises simultaneously with various afflictions. Not after the afflictions, because it ceases simultaneously with those afflictions.' Non-common ignorance has two types: The first type constantly operates in all parts simultaneously with the root afflictions. What other consciousnesses do not have is called 'non-common'. The second type is not simultaneous with the root afflictions and is called 'non-common'. However, there are again two types: One is simultaneous with minor, medium, and major secondary afflictions, but not simultaneous with the root afflictions, and is called 'non-common'. The other is not simultaneous with minor secondary afflictions and root afflictions, but is simultaneous with medium and major secondary afflictions, and is called 'non-common'. Depending on the situation, the latter two also apply to the upper realms (the Form Realm and the Formless Realm). However, the amount of afflictions that are associated with them differs depending on the upper and lower realms. Then it is divided into three sentences: The first sentence is what can only be cut off by the path of seeing. It refers to the afflictions that operate alone below the Four Noble Truths. The second sentence is what can only be cut off by the path of cultivation. It refers to the seventh consciousness (Manas). The third sentence is what can be cut off by both the path of seeing and the path of cultivation. It refers to what is associated with afflictions such as anger. In the third difficulty, the name of Manas (mind) is provisionally established based on what has already ceased (the past). Why not rely on what is present (the present) and name it Citta-Vijnana (mind-consciousness), but only similar to Manas? Manas has two meanings: one is reliance, and the other is thinking. The seventh consciousness (Manas) has both meanings, while other consciousnesses only have the meaning of reliance. The past reliance is similar to the seventh consciousness (Manas), so thinking is also similar to the seventh consciousness (Manas), and it is called Manas. It is not like Citta-Vijnana, so it is called Citta-Vijnana. Question: Since what has already ceased serves as the basis, thinking is also called similar. The sixth consciousness (Manovijnana) and the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) now serve as the basis, and are similar to the seventh consciousness (Manas) in having thinking, so they should all be named Manas. According to the actual situation, other consciousnesses can all obtain the name of Manas. What has already ceased is similar to the manifestation of the seventh consciousness (Manas), so it is only said to be Manas. Manas is the root of the bondage of Vijnana (consciousness). Now observing this Manas, if it is based on the entity of bondage, it is only based on the affliction obstruction. If it is based on the entity of the object-bondage, it is based on the attachment to phenomena. Therefore, after this (Manas) ceases, the object-bondage is liberated. If this (Manas) exists, the acts of giving, etc., that are performed cannot eliminate the attachment to phenomena.

依煩惱說有相縛。阿羅漢身應無有相。以依緣縛說名藏時。無時名舍藏。不名舍相縛。無法執時名舍相縛 若爾生空智與法執俱。應稱相縛。由是總顯相應所緣之縛。通三乘斷。相縛者唯菩薩斷。若由法執。即二乘生空觀。亦應有相縛 又論但云染污末那為識依止。彼未滅時相了別縛不得解脫。故但由生執成了別縛。是故但應如疏中解。由有末那施等不亡相。即非七義中無相智所攝受。云何見道前及地上有漏施等成施等耶。今顯異無漏其相不亡。其無相智所攝受。謂無第六識中執名無相智。非第七識執也。不爾便無波羅密義。又相縛見名相縛。見縛相名見縛。見不明證。不自在故由相縛。相無能證自在力。如何說見縛于相。不爾。如何所取．能取纏 下文雖由煩惱引施等業。而不俱起。非有漏正因。即顯緣縛等非有漏正體。六十五說。現量所行有所緣縛。其清凈色．不相應善．及一分無記心心所。非有所緣縛。但由隨眠名有漏。與煩惱種俱者。此依別義。亦不相違等廣說太精。應取彼會。即顯五境有所緣縛。余根心等即無是義。但顯與此表有漏俱言相順。然與五十九斷二縛義相違。由此所緣縛有二。一親。唯現量所行。二疏。即凈色等。展轉心．境互相增故。言凈色．善心．一分無記等非有所緣縛者。據親相分非。故

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 如果說因為煩惱而有『相縛』（Sanga-bandha，與現象的束縛），那麼阿羅漢（Arhat，已證得涅槃的聖人）的身體應該沒有『相』。當說依『緣縛』（Pratyaya-bandha，因緣的束縛）而名為『藏』（Samgraha，積聚）時，沒有『時』（Kala，時間）就名為『舍藏』（Samgraha-tyaga，捨棄積聚），但不名為捨棄『相縛』。當沒有『法執』（Dharma-graha，對法的執著）時，才名為捨棄『相縛』。 如果這樣，那麼『生空智』（Sunyata-jnana，對一切事物皆空的智慧）與『法執』同時存在，應該稱為『相縛』。因此，總的來說，『相應所緣之縛』（Samprayukta-alambana-bandha，與心識相應的所緣的束縛）是三乘（Triyana，聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）所斷除的，而『相縛』只有菩薩（Bodhisattva，發願成佛的修行者）才能斷除。如果由於『法執』，那麼二乘（Sravakayana和Pratyekabuddhayana，聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的『生空觀』（Sunyata-darsana，對一切事物皆空的觀察）也應該有『相縛』。 此外，論中只說染污的『末那識』（Manas-vijnana，末那識，第七識）是『識』（Vijnana，意識）的依止。當它沒有滅除時，『相了別縛』（Sanga-vikalpa-bandha，對現象進行分別的束縛）就不能解脫。因此，只是由於有『生執』（Atma-graha，對自我的執著）才形成了『了別縛』。所以，應該像疏中解釋的那樣，由於有『末那識』，佈施等行為的『相』（Lakshana，現象）不會消失，這不屬於七義中的『無相智』（Nirakara-jnana，無相的智慧）所攝受。為什麼在見道（Darsana-marga，見道位）之前和地上（Bhumi，菩薩的階位）的有漏佈施等行為能成為佈施等行為呢？現在顯示它與無漏（Anasrava，無漏）不同，它的『相』不會消失，被『無相智』所攝受。所謂的『無相智』是指第六識（意識）中沒有執著，而不是第七識（末那識）的執著。否則，就沒有『波羅蜜』（Paramita，到達彼岸）的意義。此外，『相縛見』（Sanga-bandha-darsana，對現象的束縛的見解）名為『相縛』，『見縛相』（Darsana-bandha-sanga，見解對現象的束縛）名為『見縛』（Darsana-bandha，見解的束縛）。因為見解不明證，不自在，所以有『相縛』。『相』沒有能證明的自在力量，如何說見解束縛了『相』？否則，如何解釋所取和能取的纏縛？ 下文雖然說由煩惱引發佈施等業，但它們不是同時生起的，不是有漏的正因。這表明『緣縛』等不是有漏的正體。六十五說，現量（Pratyaksha，現量）所行的有所緣縛（Alambana-bandha，所緣的束縛），其清凈色（Subha-varna，清凈的色）、不相應善（Visamyukta-kusala，不相應的善）、以及一部分無記（Avyakrta，非善非惡）的心心所（Caitasika，心所法），沒有『有所緣縛』，只是由於隨眠（Anusaya，煩惱的潛在形式）才名為有漏。與煩惱的種子同時存在。這是依據不同的意義，並不互相矛盾。應該理解彼處的會通。這表明五境（Panca-vishaya，色、聲、香、味、觸）有『有所緣縛』，其餘的根（Indriya，感官）和心等就沒有這個意義。只是表明與此表述有漏同時存在是相順的。然而，與五十九斷二縛的意義相違背。由此，『所緣縛』有兩種：一是親近的，唯有現量所行；二是疏遠的，即清凈色等。展轉心和境互相增益。說清凈色、善心、一部分無記等沒有『有所緣縛』，是就親近的相分而言的，所以如此。

【English Translation】 English version: If it is said that there is 『Sanga-bandha』 (bondage to phenomena) due to afflictions, then the body of an Arhat (a liberated being) should be without 『Sanga』 (phenomena). When it is said that 『Samgraha』 (accumulation) is named based on 『Pratyaya-bandha』 (bondage of conditions), the absence of 『Kala』 (time) is called 『Samgraha-tyaga』 (abandonment of accumulation), but it is not called abandonment of 『Sanga-bandha』. When there is no 『Dharma-graha』 (attachment to Dharma), it is called abandonment of 『Sanga-bandha』. If that is the case, then 『Sunyata-jnana』 (wisdom of emptiness) and 『Dharma-graha』 exist simultaneously, and it should be called 『Sanga-bandha』. Therefore, in general, 『Samprayukta-alambana-bandha』 (bondage of objects associated with consciousness) is severed by the Three Vehicles (Sravakayana, Pratyekabuddhayana, and Bodhisattvayana), while 『Sanga-bandha』 is only severed by Bodhisattvas (beings striving for enlightenment). If it is due to 『Dharma-graha』, then the 『Sunyata-darsana』 (vision of emptiness) of the Two Vehicles (Sravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana) should also have 『Sanga-bandha』. Furthermore, the treatise only states that the defiled 『Manas-vijnana』 (Manas consciousness, the seventh consciousness) is the basis of 『Vijnana』 (consciousness). When it is not extinguished, 『Sanga-vikalpa-bandha』 (bondage of distinguishing phenomena) cannot be liberated. Therefore, it is only due to the existence of 『Atma-graha』 (attachment to self) that 『Vikalpa-bandha』 (bondage of discrimination) is formed. Therefore, it should be explained as in the commentary, that because there is 『Manas-vijnana』, the 『Lakshana』 (characteristics) of giving and other actions do not disappear, and this is not included in the 『Nirakara-jnana』 (wisdom without characteristics) among the seven meanings. Why can the contaminated giving and other actions before the Path of Seeing (Darsana-marga) and on the Bhumis (Bodhisattva stages) become giving and other actions? Now it is shown that it is different from the uncontaminated (Anasrava), its 『Lakshana』 does not disappear, and it is included in 『Nirakara-jnana』. The so-called 『Nirakara-jnana』 refers to the absence of attachment in the sixth consciousness (consciousness), not the attachment of the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana). Otherwise, there would be no meaning of 『Paramita』 (perfection). Furthermore, 『Sanga-bandha-darsana』 (view of bondage to phenomena) is called 『Sanga-bandha』, and 『Darsana-bandha-sanga』 (bondage of view to phenomena) is called 『Darsana-bandha』 (bondage of view). Because the view is not clear and not independent, there is 『Sanga-bandha』. 『Sanga』 does not have the power to prove independence, so how can it be said that the view binds 『Sanga』? Otherwise, how to explain the entanglement of the object and the subject? Although the following text says that giving and other actions are caused by afflictions, they do not arise simultaneously and are not the direct cause of contamination. This shows that 『Pratyaya-bandha』 and others are not the main body of contamination. Sixty-five says that the 『Alambana-bandha』 (bondage of objects) of what is practiced by direct perception (Pratyaksha), its pure form (Subha-varna), non-associated virtue (Visamyukta-kusala), and a portion of neutral (Avyakrta) mental factors (Caitasika), do not have 『Alambana-bandha』, but are called contaminated only because of latent afflictions (Anusaya). It exists simultaneously with the seeds of afflictions. This is based on different meanings and is not contradictory. The reconciliation there should be understood. This shows that the five objects (Panca-vishaya: form, sound, smell, taste, touch) have 『Alambana-bandha』, while the remaining senses (Indriya) and mind do not have this meaning. It only shows that it is consistent with the statement that contamination exists simultaneously. However, it contradicts the meaning of severing the two bondages in fifty-nine. Therefore, there are two types of 『Alambana-bandha』: one is close, which is only practiced by direct perception; the other is distant, which is pure form and so on. The mind and object mutually increase each other. Saying that pure form, virtuous mind, and a portion of neutral things do not have 『Alambana-bandha』 is in terms of the close aspect, so it is so.

此論下第八等。說二縛斷等者。依疏義說。不爾便與二論相違。更勘和會。既言雖由煩惱引施等業而非正因。我能行施。明但相縛。非有漏因。如斷緣縛。雖斷見道及修前八。以未全盡。不名為斷。有漏應然。如緣一色。五識及意二所緣縛。並以第七識與漏俱。言要至金剛方可斷盡。此如修道初品所斷。雖亦為後八品惑縛。然得名斷。以自力強故。有漏亦爾。緣縛．相應二力。增上故說。未斷第七亦名為斷 若爾何故前二既勝。何故不為有漏正因而取漏俱。或復縛據二縛。有漏據漏俱。斷依二縛。故可說斷。不約漏俱說斷。亦不相違 無始法爾種子。不曾現起與第七俱。云何得成有漏。不要現行與第七惑俱方名有漏。若種．若現無始皆與第七惑俱。互相增益。相隨順故。併成有漏。非無漏種亦能相順。又言法爾不要七俱。非法爾者。必俱增益。然六十五等有漏．無漏義等。如下第八卷釋。

隨境立名依五色根未自在等者。問一境多識取。果位但隨根。一根取多境。不可隨根稱 答一識境成多。不可隨境稱。所依根但一。隨根立識名。此義應思。太難。

諸根互用者。有二異說。第一師云。實能緣諸境。于中有二義。一義云。一一識體轉用成多。非轉法體。故非受等亦成想等。取像之用一切無遮。不可難以

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 此論下文第八部分，關於『二縛斷』（兩種束縛的斷除）等內容的解釋，是依據《瑜伽師地論》的疏釋來闡述的。否則，就會與《攝大乘論》和《顯揚聖教論》的觀點相違背，需要進一步考證和會通。既然說雖然是由煩惱引發佈施等行為，但煩惱並非根本原因，而『我』能夠行佈施，這表明只是相互束縛的關係，並非有漏之因。如同斷除緣縛（對所緣境的束縛）一樣，雖然斷除了見道和修道前八地（指菩薩修行階位），但因為沒有完全斷盡，所以不能稱為斷除有漏。有漏的情況也應如此，如同緣取一種顏色，五識和意識兩種所緣境的束縛，都與第七識（末那識）和有漏同時存在。因此說要到金剛喻定（一種堅固的禪定）才能完全斷盡。這就像修道最初階段所斷除的煩惱，雖然也會成為後八地煩惱的束縛，但仍然可以稱為斷除，因為依靠自身強大的力量。有漏也是如此，緣縛和相應縛兩種力量增強，所以說即使沒有斷除第七識，也可以稱為斷除。如果這樣，為什麼前兩種束縛既然更強，卻不作為有漏的正因，反而取與有漏同時存在的第七識呢？或者說，緣縛和相應縛是根據兩種束縛來定義的，而有漏是根據與有漏同時存在的第七識來定義的。斷除是依據兩種束縛來說的，所以可以說斷除，不根據與有漏同時存在的第七識來說斷除，這樣就不矛盾了。 無始以來的法爾種子（自然而然存在的種子），不曾顯現起作用並與第七識同時存在，怎麼能成為有漏呢？不需要現行（已經發生的行為）與第七識的煩惱同時存在才稱為有漏。無論是種子還是現行，無始以來都與第七識的煩惱同時存在，互相增益，相互隨順，因此都成為有漏。並非無漏的種子也能相互隨順。又說，法爾如此，不需要與第七識同時存在；非法爾的情況，必定要與第七識同時存在才能增益。關於六十五法等有漏和無漏的含義，將在第八卷中解釋。 隨境立名（根據所緣境來確定名稱）是依據五色根（眼耳鼻舌身五根）未得自在等情況而說的。問題是：一個所緣境被多個識所取，在果位（佛果）上只是隨根（五根）而定；一個根取多個所緣境，不能隨根來稱呼。回答是：一個識的所緣境可以成為多個，不能隨所緣境來稱呼；所依的根只有一個，所以隨根來確定識的名稱。這個道理應該仔細思考，太難了。 諸根互用（各個根互相作用）有兩種不同的說法。第一位論師說，實際上各個根都能緣取各種所緣境，其中有兩種含義。一種含義是，每一個識的體性可以轉變而成為多個，但不是轉變法的體性，所以不是受等也能成為想等，取像的作用一切都沒有遮礙，不能用困難來詰難。

【English Translation】 English version: This is the eighth section of the treatise, explaining the 'severance of the two bonds' (二縛斷, èr fù duàn, the severance of two kinds of fetters) and other related topics, based on the commentary of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論, Yújiāshī dìlùn, Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice). Otherwise, it would contradict the views of the Mahayanasamgraha (攝大乘論, Shè dàchéng lùn, Compendium of the Mahayana) and the Asanga's Compendium of Determinations (顯揚聖教論, Xiǎnyáng shèngjiào lùn, Exposition of the Holy Teaching), requiring further investigation and reconciliation. Since it is said that although afflictions cause actions such as giving, afflictions are not the fundamental cause, and 'I' am able to perform giving, this indicates only a relationship of mutual bondage, not a cause of conditioned existence (有漏, yǒu lòu, contaminated existence). Just as severing the object-bond (緣縛, yuán fù, the bondage of objects), although the path of seeing (見道, jiàn dào, the path of insight) and the first eight bhumis (地, dì, stages) of the path of cultivation (修道, xiū dào, the path of cultivation) are severed, they cannot be called severance of conditioned existence because they are not completely severed. The situation of conditioned existence should also be like this, just as perceiving a color, the object-bonds of the five consciousnesses and the mind consciousness both exist simultaneously with the seventh consciousness (末那識, Mònàshí, Manas-vijnana) and conditioned existence. Therefore, it is said that it is only when reaching the Vajra-like Samadhi (金剛喻定, Jīngāng yù dìng, Diamond-like concentration) that it can be completely severed. This is like the afflictions severed in the initial stage of the path of cultivation, although they will also become the bondage of the afflictions of the later eight bhumis, they can still be called severance because they rely on their own strong power. Conditioned existence is also like this, the power of the object-bond and the co-arising bond (相應縛, xiāngyìng fù, the bondage of co-arising) are enhanced, so it is said that even if the seventh consciousness is not severed, it can still be called severance. If so, why are the first two bonds stronger, but not taken as the direct cause of conditioned existence, but instead take the seventh consciousness that exists simultaneously with conditioned existence? Or rather, the object-bond and the co-arising bond are defined according to the two bonds, while conditioned existence is defined according to the seventh consciousness that exists simultaneously with conditioned existence. Severance is based on the two bonds, so it can be said to be severance, not based on the seventh consciousness that exists simultaneously with conditioned existence, so there is no contradiction. The dharma seeds (種子, zhǒngzi, seeds) from beginningless time, which have never manifested and existed simultaneously with the seventh consciousness, how can they become conditioned existence? It is not necessary for the manifested actions (現行, xiànxíng, manifest actions) to exist simultaneously with the afflictions of the seventh consciousness to be called conditioned existence. Whether it is seeds or manifested actions, from beginningless time they have existed simultaneously with the afflictions of the seventh consciousness, mutually increasing and following each other, so they all become conditioned existence. It is not that unconditioned seeds can also follow each other. Furthermore, it is said that it is naturally so, it is not necessary to exist simultaneously with the seventh consciousness; in non-natural situations, it must exist simultaneously with the seventh consciousness to increase. Regarding the meaning of conditioned and unconditioned existence of the sixty-five dharmas, etc., it will be explained in the eighth volume. Establishing names according to objects (隨境立名, suí jìng lì míng, establishing names according to objects) is based on the situation where the five sense organs (五色根, wǔ sè gēn, five sense organs: eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body) have not attained freedom, etc. The question is: one object is taken by multiple consciousnesses, in the fruition stage (果位, guǒ wèi, the stage of Buddhahood) it is only determined by the root (五根, wǔ gēn, five roots); one root takes multiple objects, it cannot be called according to the root. The answer is: the object of one consciousness can become multiple, it cannot be called according to the object; the root on which it relies is only one, so the name of the consciousness is determined according to the root. This principle should be carefully considered, it is too difficult. The mutual use of the senses (諸根互用, zhū gēn hù yòng, the mutual use of the senses) has two different explanations. The first teacher says that in reality, each sense can perceive various objects, and there are two meanings in it. One meaning is that the nature of each consciousness can transform and become multiple, but it is not transforming the nature of the dharma, so it is not that feeling, etc., can also become thought, etc. The function of taking images is not obstructed in any way, and cannot be challenged with difficulties.

大種為造。彼轉體故。如第八緣五塵。亦得自在不可難言壞根不壞境等 二義云。恐壞法相。但取自境皆是實境。所取他境皆是假境。以識用廣非得余自相。恐眼．耳根得三塵時。若至能取壞根不壞境。若不至能取。壞境不壞根。餘三根取色．聲亦爾。皆有此過故 第二師解云。一一根處遍有諸根各自起用。非以一根得一切境。以諸根用各遍一切故名互用。不爾便成壞法相故。心王亦應有心所用而取別相等。

所依頌曰。五四六有二。七．八一俱依。及開導．因緣。一一皆增二 五四者五識各有四依。一順取依。二明瞭依。三分位依。四依起依 六有二者。第六意識有二所依。一分位。二依起 七八一者。七．八二識各有一依。七有一。謂依起。八有一。謂分位。俱依者。顯上所明俱有依攝。開導者。即等無間依。因緣者即種子依。及者顯此諸識更加二依。一一皆增二。謂五有六。第六有四。七．八各三。如前第四卷說。

所緣頌曰。因見各隨應。五三六有二。六一一不定。自在等分別 因者。簡自在位 見者。于因中取見分除自證分等 各者。顯別別界 隨應者。顯能緣識非決定故。隨其所應諸識緣故 五三者。色等五界三識所緣。一五識。二第六。三第八。第八者意界攝 六有二者。謂眼等五界。六

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 『大種』（Mahabhuta，四大元素）是『造色』（Rupa，物質現象）的成因，因為它們會轉變形態。就像第八識（Alaya-vijnana，阿賴耶識）緣取五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸）一樣。也可以說是自在的，不能說它會破壞根（Indriya，感覺器官）而不破壞境（Visaya，感覺對像）等等。第二種解釋是，恐怕破壞了法的體相，所以只取各自的境都是真實的境，所取其他的境都是虛假的境。因為識的作用廣泛，不能得到其他的自相。恐怕眼根、耳根得到三塵時，如果到了能取，就破壞根而不破壞境；如果不能到能取，就破壞境而不破壞根。其餘的三根取色、聲也是這樣，都有這種過失。第二位論師解釋說，每一個根處都遍佈著諸根，各自起作用，不是用一個根就能得到一切境。因為諸根的作用各自遍佈一切，所以叫做互用。不然就會變成破壞法的體相。心王（Citta，心）也應該有心所（Caitasika，心所法）的作用，而取不同的相。

『所依頌』說：『五四六有二，七八一俱依，及開導因緣，一一皆增二。』『五四』是指前五識各有四種所依：一、順取依；二、明瞭依；三、分位依；四、依起依。『六有二』是指第六意識（Mano-vijnana，意識）有兩種所依：一、分位依；二、依起依。『七八一』是指第七識（Manas-vijnana，末那識）和第八識各有一種所依。第七識有一種，叫做依起依；第八識有一種，叫做分位依。『俱依』是顯示上面所說的俱有依包含在內。『開導』就是等無間依。『因緣』就是種子依。『及』是顯示這些識都增加兩種所依。『一一皆增二』是指前五識有六種所依，第六識有四種所依，第七識和第八識各有三種所依。如前面第四卷所說。

『所緣頌』說：『因見各隨應，五三六有二，六一一不定，自在等分別。』『因』是簡別自在位。『見』是在因中取見分，除去自證分等等。『各』是顯示各個界。『隨應』是顯示能緣的識不是決定的，所以隨著所應的諸識緣取。『五三』是指色等五界是三種識所緣：一、前五識；二、第六識；三、第八識。第八識屬於意界。『六有二』是指眼等五界，第六識所緣。

【English Translation】 English version 『Mahabhuta』 (the great elements) are the cause of 『Rupa』 (material phenomena) because they transform. Just like the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana, storehouse consciousness) cognizes the five dusts (form, sound, smell, taste, touch). It can also be said to be independent, and it cannot be argued that it destroys the root (Indriya, sense organ) without destroying the object (Visaya, sense object), and so on. The second explanation is that, for fear of destroying the characteristics of the Dharma, only taking their own objects are real objects, and taking other objects are false objects. Because the function of consciousness is broad, it cannot obtain other self-characteristics. Fearing that when the eye and ear roots obtain the three dusts, if they reach the ability to grasp, they will destroy the root without destroying the object; if they cannot reach the ability to grasp, they will destroy the object without destroying the root. The remaining three roots taking form and sound are also like this, all have this fault. The second teacher explains that each root place is filled with various roots, each functioning independently, not using one root to obtain all objects. Because the functions of the roots each pervade everything, it is called mutual use. Otherwise, it would become destroying the characteristics of the Dharma. The mind-king (Citta, mind) should also have the function of mental factors (Caitasika, mental events), and take different characteristics.

The 『Verse on Support』 says: 『Five four six have two, seven eight one both rely, and opening guidance cause condition, each all increase two.』 『Five four』 refers to the first five consciousnesses each having four supports: 1. Sequential taking support; 2. Clear support; 3. Divisional support; 4. Arising support. 『Six have two』 refers to the sixth consciousness (Mano-vijnana, mind consciousness) having two supports: 1. Divisional support; 2. Arising support. 『Seven eight one』 refers to the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana, mind consciousness) and the eighth consciousness each having one support. The seventh consciousness has one, called arising support; the eighth consciousness has one, called divisional support. 『Both rely』 shows that the above-mentioned co-existing support is included. 『Opening guidance』 is immediate contiguity support. 『Cause condition』 is seed support. 『And』 shows that these consciousnesses all increase by two supports. 『Each all increase two』 refers to the first five consciousnesses having six supports, the sixth consciousness having four supports, and the seventh and eighth consciousnesses each having three supports. As mentioned in the previous fourth volume.

The 『Verse on Object』 says: 『Cause seeing each accordingly, five three six have two, six one one uncertain, independence etc. distinguish.』 『Cause』 is to distinguish the independent position. 『Seeing』 is to take the seeing portion in the cause, excluding the self-awareness portion, and so on. 『Each』 shows each realm. 『Accordingly』 shows that the cognizing consciousness is not fixed, so according to the appropriate consciousnesses cognizing. 『Five three』 refers to the five realms of form etc. being cognized by three consciousnesses: 1. The first five consciousnesses; 2. The sixth consciousness; 3. The eighth consciousness. The eighth consciousness belongs to the mind realm. 『Six have two』 refers to the five realms of eye etc., cognized by the sixth consciousness.

．八二識所取。意界通為六．七所取。瑜伽等說第七．八識意界攝故 六一者。謂眼等六識界。唯一意識緣。第七．八識不名意識界故 一不定者。即法界。若非為他定．通等力所引。唯意識緣。若為他引。五．八．六識俱能引之。于中復有異生．二乘．菩薩所引。各有差別。

自在分別者。謂或初地．或八地．如來位各有差別。一一為他八識緣也 等分別者。謂若因中法界心所。並自證分．證自證分。於七心界中處處加自。及果上十八界。為七心界及法界所了。如理應知。

三業化者。身化有三。一現神通化。謂現種種工巧等處。摧伏諸伎慠慢眾生。即是悲．惠平等運道。如現神通度迦葉等。二現受生化。謂往彼處示同類生。而居尊位攝伏一切異類眾生。三現業果化。謂示領受本事本生難修諸行。如毗濕飯怛羅等一切本生事名本生事。依此本生先所修行種種苦行名難修行。或於今世依變化身。先修苦行後舍彼行。修處中行方得菩提。名難修行。如說如來迦葉佛世作是罵言。何處沙門剃鬚發者有大菩提。無上菩提極難得故。由此惡業今受苦果。此為止行惡行現化所作。語化亦三。一慶慰語化。謂所宣暢種種隨樂文義巧妙。小智眾生初聞當信。二方便語化。謂立學處毀諸放逸贊不放逸。又復建立隨信解人．

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 八二識所取：第八阿賴耶識（Alaya-vijnana，儲存一切種子識）和第二末那識（Manas-vijnana，意根識）所緣取的對象。意界通為六、七所取：意識界普遍被第六意識（Mano-vijnana，分別識）和第七末那識所緣取。《瑜伽師地論》等論典說，第七末那識和第八阿賴耶識都包含在意識界中。 六一者：指眼識等六識界，唯一被意識緣取。因為第七末那識和第八阿賴耶識不稱為意識界。 一不定者：指法界（Dharmadhatu，一切法的總稱）。如果不是被其他禪定、神通等力量所引導，就只有意識緣取。如果被其他力量引導，那麼五識、第八阿賴耶識、第六意識都能引導它。其中又有異生（凡夫）、二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）、菩薩所引導的不同，各有差別。 自在分別者：指或者初地菩薩（Prathama-bhumi，歡喜地）、或者八地菩薩（Acalā-bhūmi，不動地）、或者如來（Tathagata，佛）的果位，各有差別。一一法界都為其他八識所緣取。 等分別者：指如果在因地時，法界中的心所法，以及自證分（Sva-samvedana-bhaga，能認識自己的認識）、證自證分（Samvedana-samvedana-bhaga，認識到自己認識的認識），在七心界（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識、意識、末那識）中處處加上『自』字，以及果位上的十八界（六根、六塵、六識），被七心界和法界所了知。應當如理如實地瞭解。 三業化者：身化有三種：一是現神通化，指顯現種種工巧等處，摧伏那些對自己的技藝感到傲慢的眾生，這就是悲心和智慧平等運作的途徑。比如顯現神通來度化迦葉（Kasyapa）等。二是現受生化，指往生到其他地方，示現和當地眾生一樣的出生方式，但卻居於尊貴的位置，以此來攝伏一切不同種類的眾生。三是現業果化，指示現領受自己過去世或本生故事中難以修行的種種行為。比如毗濕飯怛羅（Visvantara）等一切本生故事，都稱為本生事。依據這些本生故事，先前所修行的種種苦行，稱為難修行。或者在今世，依靠變化之身，先修行苦行，然後捨棄苦行，修行中道，才能獲得菩提（Bodhi，覺悟），這稱為難修行。比如佛經上說，如來在迦葉佛（Kasyapa Buddha）時代，曾經說過這樣的話：『哪裡有剃除鬚髮的沙門（Sramana）能獲得大菩提？無上菩提極其難以獲得。』因為這個惡業，今生才受到這樣的苦果。這是為止息惡行而顯現的化現所作。 語化也有三種：一是慶慰語化，指所宣說的種種隨順眾生喜好的文辭和巧妙的義理，小智慧的眾生最初聽聞時就會相信。二是方便語化，指建立學處（Siksa-pada，戒條）來毀壞各種放逸的行為，讚歎不放逸的行為。又建立隨順眾生信解的人。

【English Translation】 English version Eight and two consciousnesses are what are taken: The eighth Alaya-vijnana (storehouse consciousness) and the second Manas-vijnana (mind consciousness) are the objects that are cognized. The mind element is universally cognized by the sixth and seventh consciousnesses: The mind element is generally cognized by the sixth Mano-vijnana (discriminating consciousness) and the seventh Manas-vijnana. The Yogacarabhumi-sastra and other treatises say that the seventh Manas-vijnana and the eighth Alaya-vijnana are both included within the mind element. The 'six-one' refers to the six consciousness elements such as eye consciousness, which are only cognized by the mind consciousness. This is because the seventh Manas-vijnana and the eighth Alaya-vijnana are not called mind consciousness elements. The 'one undetermined' refers to the Dharmadhatu (the totality of all dharmas). If it is not guided by the power of other samadhis (meditative absorptions), supernormal powers, etc., then only the mind consciousness cognizes it. If it is guided by others, then the five consciousnesses, the eighth Alaya-vijnana, and the sixth consciousness can all guide it. Among these, there are differences in what is guided by ordinary beings, the two vehicles (Sravakayana and Pratyekabuddhayana), and Bodhisattvas. The 'self-mastery discrimination' refers to the differences between the first-ground Bodhisattva (Prathama-bhumi, Joyful Ground), the eighth-ground Bodhisattva (Acalā-bhūmi, Immovable Ground), and the state of the Tathagata (Buddha). Each and every Dharmadhatu is cognized by the other eight consciousnesses. The 'equal discrimination' refers to the mental factors within the Dharmadhatu in the causal stage, as well as the self-cognizing aspect (Sva-samvedana-bhaga, the aspect that cognizes itself) and the cognizing-of-self-cognition aspect (Samvedana-samvedana-bhaga, the aspect that cognizes the self-cognition). In the seven mind elements (eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, mind consciousness, Manas consciousness), the word 'self' is added everywhere, and the eighteen elements (six sense organs, six sense objects, six consciousnesses) in the fruition stage are cognized by the seven mind elements and the Dharmadhatu. One should understand this as it truly is. The 'three karmic transformations': There are three types of bodily transformations: First, the transformation of manifesting supernormal powers, which refers to manifesting various skillful arts, etc., to subdue beings who are arrogant about their skills. This is the path of equal operation of compassion and wisdom. For example, manifesting supernormal powers to liberate Kasyapa (Kasyapa) and others. Second, the transformation of manifesting rebirth, which refers to being reborn in other places, showing the same birth as the local beings, but occupying a noble position, thereby subduing all different kinds of beings. Third, the transformation of manifesting karmic results, which refers to showing the reception of various difficult practices from one's past lives or Jataka tales. For example, all the Jataka tales such as Visvantara (Visvantara) are called Jataka stories. Based on these Jataka stories, the various ascetic practices previously practiced are called difficult practices. Or, in this life, relying on a transformation body, one first practices ascetic practices, then abandons them, and practices the Middle Way, and then attains Bodhi (Enlightenment), which is called difficult practice. For example, it is said in the sutras that in the time of Kasyapa Buddha (Kasyapa Buddha), the Tathagata once said, 'Where can a Sramana (Sramana) who shaves his head and beard attain great Bodhi? Supreme Bodhi is extremely difficult to attain.' Because of this evil karma, one receives such suffering results in this life. This is what is done by the transformation of stopping evil deeds. There are also three types of verbal transformations: First, the transformation of congratulatory words, which refers to the various skillful words and meanings that are spoken in accordance with the preferences of beings, which beings of small wisdom will believe when they first hear them. Second, the transformation of expedient words, which refers to establishing the precepts (Siksa-pada, precepts) to destroy various lax behaviors, and praising non-lax behaviors. And also establishing people who follow the understanding of beings.

隨法行等。三辨揚語化。謂斷眾生無量疑惑 意化有四。一抉擇意化。謂抉擇彼八萬四千心行差別。如疏中解。賢劫經第二卷中。喜王菩薩宴坐思惟等。二造作意化。謂觀眾生所行之行。行與不行。若得若失。為令取捨造作對治。三發起意化。謂為欲說彼對治故。顯彼所樂名．句．字身。四領受意化。則依四記等。四記有二。一人四記。二法四記。如別卷抄。

從定起者。瑜伽抄解。一起耳識名起者。二起定心與耳識緣聲名起者。三出定者名起者。初續前位故。此等廣如佛地第六。

菩薩後智中起五識。亦等引位起。雜集言據二乘少．異生全故。

恒依心起等。解心所者要具三義名為心所。無所簡別。余如疏說。

心心所總別相。應說無為緣別．有為緣別。有為緣中有本質緣別。無本質境亦別。相者義也。非體非相。

從根名意。及其名受。乃名心受。今解。名據近依故名意識。受對於色故標心名。若不對時可名意受。然無此文。其七．八二識以對身故可名心受。又受從相應心名心。第六俱從所依七故名意。心通六．七．八故。

五識任運貪癡是無記。勘緣起經。

五受分二。謂身及心。論文但以別．唯義解。如對法第一抄 何故第六名識。三受之中。何故但說苦．樂為

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：隨法行等。三種辨揚語化，即斷除眾生無量的疑惑。意化有四種：一是抉擇意化，即抉擇那八萬四千種心行差別，如疏中解釋。《賢劫經》第二卷中，喜王菩薩宴坐思惟等。二是造作意化，即觀察眾生所行的行為，是行還是不行，是得還是失，爲了讓他們取捨而造作對治。三是發起意化，即爲了宣說那對治之法，顯現他們所喜愛的名、句、字身。四是領受意化，則是依據四記等。四記有兩種：一人四記，二法四記，如別卷抄。 從定起者。《瑜伽師地論》抄解：一起耳識名起者。二起定心與耳識緣聲名起者。三出定者名起者。最初是延續之前的狀態。這些內容詳細記載在《佛地經論》第六卷。 菩薩從後得智中生起五識，也是在等引位生起。《雜集論》說這是根據二乘的少數情況和異生的全部情況而說的。 恒依心起等。解釋心所，需要具備三種意義才能稱為心所，沒有其他簡別。其餘內容如疏中所說。 心心所的總別相，應該說無為緣的差別，有為緣的差別。有為緣中又有本質緣的差別，無本質境也有差別。相，是義理的意思，不是體也不是相。 從根名為意，及其名為受，才名為心受。現在解釋，名是根據近依而名為意識，受是對於色而標明心名。如果不對色時，可以名為意受。然而沒有這樣的說法。第七、八二識因為是對身而說，可以名為心受。又，受從相應的心而得名心。第六識同時從所依的第七識而得名意。心通於六、七、八識。 五識任運的貪癡是無記。參考《緣起經》。 五受分為兩種，即身和心。論文只是用別義和唯義來解釋。如《對法論》第一抄。為什麼第六識名為識？三受之中，為什麼只說苦、樂為...

【English Translation】 English version: 'Following the Dharma' and so on. The three are the verbalization of exposition, which means to cut off the immeasurable doubts of sentient beings. There are four types of mental activity: First, decisive mental activity, which is to decide the differences in the eighty-four thousand mental activities, as explained in the commentary. In the second volume of the 'Bhadrakalpika Sutra' (Xian Jie Jing), Bodhisattva Joyful King (Xi Wang Pusa) sits in meditation and contemplates, etc. Second, creative mental activity, which is to observe the actions of sentient beings, whether they are practiced or not, whether they are gained or lost, in order to create antidotes for them to adopt or abandon. Third, initiating mental activity, which is to reveal the names, sentences, and body of words that they like in order to explain those antidotes. Fourth, receptive mental activity, which is based on the four records, etc. There are two types of four records: the four records of a person and the four records of the Dharma, as in the separate volume. Those arising from Samadhi (Ding). The commentary on the 'Yogacarabhumi-sastra' (Yuqie Shidi Lun) explains: First, the arising of ear consciousness is called 'arising'. Second, the arising of the mind of Samadhi in relation to sound through ear consciousness is called 'arising'. Third, emerging from Samadhi is called 'arising'. Initially, it continues the previous state. These are detailed in the sixth volume of the 'Buddhabhumi Sutra' (Fodi Jing Lun). Bodhisattvas arise the five consciousnesses from the wisdom gained after attaining enlightenment (Hou De Zhi), also arising from the state of equanimity (Deng Yin Wei). The 'Abhidharmasamuccaya' (Zaji Lun) says that this is based on the few cases of the two vehicles (two types of arhats) and all cases of ordinary beings (Yi Sheng). 'Constantly arising from the mind', etc. To explain mental factors (Xin Suo), it is necessary to have three meanings to be called a mental factor, without any other distinctions. The rest is as explained in the commentary. The general and specific characteristics of mind and mental factors should be distinguished by the conditions of the unconditioned (Wu Wei Yuan) and the conditions of the conditioned (You Wei Yuan). Among the conditions of the conditioned, there are differences in the essential nature (Ben Zhi Yuan), and there are also differences in the non-essential realm. 'Characteristics' means the meaning, not the substance or the appearance. From the root it is called 'mind' (Yi), and its name is 'feeling' (Shou), and then it is called 'mental feeling' (Xin Shou). Now explaining, the name is based on the near dependence, so it is called 'consciousness' (Yi Shi). Feeling is in relation to form (Se), so the name of the mind is marked. If it is not in relation to form, it can be called 'mental feeling'. However, there is no such statement. The seventh and eighth consciousnesses can be called 'mental feeling' because they are in relation to the body. Also, feeling is named 'mind' from the corresponding mind. The sixth consciousness is named 'mind' from the seventh consciousness on which it depends. The mind is common to the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses. The unintentional greed and delusion of the five consciousnesses are indeterminate (Wu Ji). Refer to the 'Pratītyasamutpāda Sutra' (Yuanqi Jing). The five feelings are divided into two, namely body and mind. The text only explains it with separate and unique meanings. As in the first copy of the 'Abhidharma-samuccaya' (Duifa Lun). Why is the sixth consciousness called 'consciousness'? Among the three feelings, why only speak of suffering and pleasure as...

名。不標憂．喜 以苦對樂俱通三性。以憂對喜理則不然。以寬攝狹但名苦樂 又苦與樂行相猛利。以明攝暗。憂．喜不等 又苦與樂皆是異熟。並有異熟。憂之與喜不能具足 又具果．因攝不具故 又有異釋。以苦對樂俱通六識。以憂對喜唯在意中 又說苦．樂厭．欣行增。憂．喜不然。故標苦．樂 又苦對樂俱通無學。以憂對喜離欲便除。故說苦．樂 又以苦對樂俱上地舍。以憂對喜皆先下地除故說苦．樂。

三受分二。謂身及心。論文但以別．唯釋之 依五根受隨根各別。何因總以身受為名 答由此五根體皆色故 若爾眼等應併名身 答自體生識。相狀異故 若由相異不併名身。隨別受生。應非身受 答由眼等四不離於身。皆從所依總名身受 意根亦爾。若不離身。並應名身不名心受 答二界眼等並不離身。無色意根離色而轉。如何建立身受非心。體相既殊。故分二種。

論中不通一切識身者意地一切根相應者。既說根言。如何可證意有苦根 答前說俱生一切煩惱。皆於三受現行可得。故知根者即是苦根。憂根定非無記性故 又設憂根雖通與並。唯身見不然。故地獄中意有苦根。而與俱故約五根故。憂雖無誠證。今以理釋說憂通無記。竟有何辜。悔必憂俱。彼既無記。何妨定然。瑜伽論言非無記者

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 不標明憂和喜，而用苦來對應樂，是因為苦和樂都遍通三性（善、惡、無記）。用憂來對應喜，在道理上則不然。用寬泛的苦和樂可以涵蓋狹義的憂和喜，所以只標明苦和樂。 另外，苦和樂的行相猛烈，用光明來涵蓋黑暗。憂和喜則不然。 再者，苦和樂都是異熟果，並且具有異熟因。憂和喜則不能完全具備。 還有，苦和樂具備果和因，而憂和喜不具備，所以只標明苦和樂。 還有另一種解釋，用苦來對應樂，是因為苦和樂都遍通六識。用憂來對應喜，則只存在於意中。 又說苦和樂能增長厭離和欣樂的行相，憂和喜則不然。所以標明苦和樂。 又用苦來對應樂，是因為苦和樂都遍通無學（阿羅漢）。用憂來對應喜，則在離欲之後便被去除。所以說苦和樂。 又用苦來對應樂，是因為苦和樂在上地（色界和無色界）都被捨棄。用憂來對應喜，則都在下地（欲界）先被去除，所以說苦和樂。

三受（苦受、樂受、不苦不樂受）分為兩種，即身受和心受。論文中只是用『別』和『唯』來解釋。 依據五根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身）所產生的受，隨各根而各別。為什麼總的用身受來命名呢？ 回答：因為這五根的體都是色法。 如果這樣，眼等根也應該都叫做身。 回答：因為自體產生識，相狀不同。 如果因為相狀不同而不都叫做身，那麼隨各別根產生的受，就不應該是身受了。 回答：因為眼等四根不離於身，都從所依處總的稱為身受。 意根也是這樣。如果不離身，也應該叫做身受而不叫心受。 回答：欲界的眼等根並不離身，而無色界的意根則離開色法而運轉。如何建立身受而不是心受呢？因為體相既然不同，所以分為兩種。

論中說不遍通一切識身，是指意地的一切根相應者。既然說了根，如何證明意有苦根呢？ 回答：前面說過俱生的一切煩惱，都能在三受現行中得到。所以知道這裡說的根就是苦根。憂根必定不是無記性的。 又假設憂根雖然通於並與，但唯有身見不是這樣。所以在地獄中意有苦根，並且與苦根俱生。因為是約五根來說的。憂雖然沒有確鑿的證據，現在用道理來解釋說憂通於無記，究竟有什麼過失呢？悔一定與憂俱生，它既然是無記，又有什麼妨礙呢？《瑜伽師地論》說不是無記的。

【English Translation】 English version: Not marking sorrow and joy, but using suffering to correspond to pleasure, is because both suffering and pleasure pervade the three natures (wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral). Using sorrow to correspond to joy is not so in principle. Using the broad terms of suffering and pleasure can encompass the narrow meanings of sorrow and joy, so only suffering and pleasure are marked. Furthermore, the characteristics of suffering and pleasure are intense, using light to encompass darkness. Sorrow and joy are not so. Moreover, suffering and pleasure are both resultant effects (vipaka), and possess resultant causes. Sorrow and joy do not fully possess these. Also, suffering and pleasure possess both cause and effect, while sorrow and joy do not, so only suffering and pleasure are marked. There is another explanation: using suffering to correspond to pleasure is because both suffering and pleasure pervade the six consciousnesses. Using sorrow to correspond to joy only exists in the mind (manas). It is also said that suffering and pleasure increase the characteristics of aversion and delight, while sorrow and joy do not. Therefore, suffering and pleasure are marked. Using suffering to correspond to pleasure is because both suffering and pleasure pervade the non-learners (Arhats). Using sorrow to correspond to joy is removed after detachment. Therefore, suffering and pleasure are spoken of. Using suffering to correspond to pleasure is because both suffering and pleasure are abandoned in the higher realms (rupa and arupa datus). Using sorrow to correspond to joy are both removed first in the lower realm (kama dhatu), so suffering and pleasure are spoken of.

The three feelings (suffering, pleasure, neither-suffering-nor-pleasure) are divided into two types: bodily and mental. The treatise only explains this with 'separate' and 'only'. Based on the feelings arising from the five roots (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body), each root is distinct. Why is it generally named bodily feeling? Answer: Because the substance of these five roots is all form (rupa). If so, the eye and other roots should all be called body. Answer: Because the self produces consciousness, and the characteristics are different. If, because the characteristics are different, they are not all called body, then the feelings arising from each separate root should not be bodily feelings. Answer: Because the eye and the other four roots are inseparable from the body, they are all generally called bodily feelings based on their support. The mind root (manas) is also like this. If it is inseparable from the body, it should also be called bodily feeling and not mental feeling. Answer: The eye and other roots in the desire realm (kama dhatu) are not inseparable from the body, while the mind root in the formless realm (arupa dhatu) operates separately from form. How can bodily feeling be established instead of mental feeling? Because the substance and characteristics are different, they are divided into two types.

The treatise says that it does not pervade all consciousness bodies, referring to those corresponding to all the roots in the mind ground. Since roots are mentioned, how can it be proven that the mind has a suffering root? Answer: It was previously said that all co-arisen afflictions can be obtained in the present activity of the three feelings. Therefore, it is known that the root mentioned here is the suffering root. The sorrow root is definitely not of a neutral nature. Furthermore, even if the sorrow root pervades conjunction, only the view of self (satkayadristi) is not like this. Therefore, in hell, the mind has a suffering root, and it is co-arisen with the suffering root. This is because it is spoken of in relation to the five roots. Although there is no solid evidence for sorrow, now using reason to explain that sorrow pervades the neutral, what fault is there? Regret is definitely co-arisen with sorrow, and since it is neutral, what obstacle is there? The Yogacarabhumi-sastra says it is not neutral.

。隨轉理故。由此二釋互有長短。任情取捨 三性三受俱不俱義。勘五十一抄。

地獄八根。現行．種子定俱成就。命根既種。如何現成 答一總說八言成。何必命有現 亦識中種可為命體者名種。現能為根者名現 又體是種。用為根者名現 又能持名種。所持名現。

問何故第三定近分．根本。同爲樂根。初二定中有喜有樂。方便唯喜而無有樂。不同第三二俱相似 答三定俱尤重無分別故。本．因俱是樂。初二方便不怡根。唯同根本說有喜 問三定方便引根本。即言二地俱怡勝同樂。下地方便引根本。亦應俱稱怡五根 答方便根本怡差別。三定無分別故。方便．根本俱稱樂。下地方便．根本有差別。俱有差別並稱喜。根本下二定中。不以無分別故名樂。但以悅根名樂 問亦應第三定不以無分別。亦應悅心名喜 答下有分別怡根名樂。上無分別悅心名樂。此義應思。

問如苦極故意有苦根。地獄之根人中回受。如賢愚經第十二卷說。鴦掘摩羅人中得阿羅漢果已被火燒殺。彼極苦根人中有不 有解地獄人中唯受四處或五處。不受六識果。唯識十證中雲。意中業果。雖起無雜。而有間斷。即說不于余趣受故。準此一文。唯回受四處或五處果。五根．六識並不得 又解論據非懺悔及入聖者。趣生無雜。從

【現代漢語翻譯】 隨其所轉之理而變化，因此這兩種解釋各有長處和短處，可根據情況自行取捨。關於三性（遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性）和三受（苦受、樂受、舍受）是否同時存在的問題，可以參考《五十一抄》。

關於地獄的八根（眼根、耳根、鼻根、舌根、身根、意根、命根、男根/女根）：現行和種子是否都同時成就？既然命根是種子，如何成為現行？回答：總的來說，八根都可以說是成就的，不一定命根必須是現行。也可以說，在識（vijñāna）中可以作為命根的體性者，稱為種子；現在能夠作為根起作用者，稱為現行。或者說，體是種子，作用為根者，稱為現行。又或者說，能夠執持者名為種子，所執持者名為現行。

問：為什麼第三禪定（dhyāna）的近分定（upacāra-samādhi）和根本定（mūla-samādhi）都同樣是樂根（sukha-indriya），而初禪和二禪定中有喜（prīti）有樂，方便道（upāya）只有喜而沒有樂，與第三禪定不同，第三禪定二者相似？答：第三禪定中，喜和樂都特別強烈，沒有分別，所以根本定和因位都是樂。初禪和二禪的方便道不能使根感到愉悅，只是和根本定一樣，所以說有喜。問：如果說第三禪定的方便道能引出根本定，那麼就說二地（指方便道和根本道）都感到愉悅，而且殊勝相同，都是樂。那麼下方的方便道引出根本道，也應該都稱為愉悅五根（pañca-indriya）嗎？答：方便道和根本道的愉悅程度有差別，第三禪定沒有分別，所以方便道和根本道都稱為樂。下方的方便道和根本道有差別，都有差別，所以都稱為喜。根本定在下方的二禪定中，不因為沒有分別而稱為樂，只是因為使根感到愉悅而稱為樂。問：也應該第三禪定不因為沒有分別，也應該使心感到愉悅而稱為喜嗎？答：下方有分別，使根感到愉悅，稱為樂；上方沒有分別，使心感到愉悅，稱為樂。這個道理應該仔細思考。

問：如果因為極度痛苦而故意產生苦根（duḥkha-indriya），那麼地獄的根在人中會感受嗎？如《賢愚經》第十二卷所說，鴦掘摩羅（Aṅgulimāla，指殺人魔王）在人中得到阿羅漢果（arhat）後，仍然被火燒殺。那麼他極度的苦根在人中存在嗎？有一種解釋是，地獄的根在人中只感受四處或五處，不感受六識（ṣaḍ-vijñāna）的果報。《唯識十證》中說，意中的業果，雖然生起沒有混雜，但是有間斷，就是說不在其他趣（gati）中感受。根據這一說法，只感受四處或五處的果報，五根和六識都不能感受。另一種解釋是，論據不包括懺悔和進入聖位的人，趣生沒有混雜，從

【English Translation】 They change according to the principle of their transformation. Therefore, these two explanations each have their strengths and weaknesses, and one can choose according to their preference. Regarding the question of whether the three natures (parikalpita-svabhāva, paratantra-svabhāva, and pariniṣpanna-svabhāva) and the three feelings (painful feeling, pleasant feeling, and neutral feeling) exist simultaneously, refer to the Fifty-one Excerpts.

Regarding the eight roots (eye-faculty, ear-faculty, nose-faculty, tongue-faculty, body-faculty, mind-faculty, life-faculty, and male/female faculty) of hell: Are both their manifest form and seeds simultaneously accomplished? Since the life-faculty is a seed, how can it be manifest? Answer: Generally speaking, all eight roots can be said to be accomplished. It is not necessary for the life-faculty to be manifest. Alternatively, what can serve as the essence of the life-faculty within consciousness (vijñāna) is called a seed; what can currently function as a root is called manifest. Or, the essence is the seed, and what functions as a root is called manifest. Furthermore, what can hold is called a seed, and what is held is called manifest.

Question: Why are both the proximate concentration (upacāra-samādhi) and fundamental concentration (mūla-samādhi) of the third dhyāna the root of pleasure (sukha-indriya), while the first and second dhyānas have both joy (prīti) and pleasure, and the expedient path (upāya) only has joy and no pleasure, unlike the third dhyāna where the two are similar? Answer: In the third dhyāna, both joy and pleasure are particularly strong and undifferentiated. Therefore, both the fundamental concentration and the causal stage are pleasure. The expedient path of the first and second dhyānas cannot delight the faculties, but it is the same as the fundamental concentration, so it is said to have joy. Question: If the expedient path of the third dhyāna can lead to the fundamental concentration, then it is said that both stages (referring to the expedient path and the fundamental path) feel delighted, and their superiority is the same, both being pleasure. Then, if the expedient path below leads to the fundamental path, should they also both be called delighting the five faculties (pañca-indriya)? Answer: The degree of delight in the expedient path and the fundamental path is different. The third dhyāna has no differentiation, so both the expedient path and the fundamental path are called pleasure. The expedient path and the fundamental path below have differences, and both have differences, so they are both called joy. In the fundamental concentration of the lower two dhyānas, it is not called pleasure because there is no differentiation, but it is called pleasure because it delights the faculties. Question: Shouldn't the third dhyāna also be called joy because it delights the mind without differentiation? Answer: Below, there is differentiation, and delighting the faculties is called pleasure; above, there is no differentiation, and delighting the mind is called pleasure. This principle should be carefully considered.

Question: If a root of suffering (duḥkha-indriya) is intentionally produced due to extreme suffering, will the root of hell be experienced in the human realm? As stated in the twelfth chapter of the Damamūka Nidāna Sūtra, Aṅgulimāla (指殺人魔王) attained the arhat (阿羅漢果) fruit in the human realm but was still burned to death. Does his extreme root of suffering exist in the human realm? One explanation is that the root of hell is only experienced in four or five places in the human realm, and the result of the six consciousnesses (ṣaḍ-vijñāna) is not experienced. The Ten Proofs of Consciousness-Only states that the karmic result in the mind, although arising without mixture, has interruptions, meaning it is not experienced in other realms (gati). According to this statement, only the result of four or five places is experienced, and the five faculties and six consciousnesses cannot be experienced. Another explanation is that the argument does not include those who have repented and entered the holy path. The realm of rebirth is not mixed, starting from

多分故。非回受者。故六識並可通回受。六識之中皆受苦故 問此護法論師憂．苦種子為同爲異 設爾何失 問若言同者。何故地獄苦根不亦名憂。若別者何故初二定名喜亦樂。地獄憂．苦不許二名。若一苦根亦名憂者。三根不成復為自害。第三即是憂根不成故 今憂．苦二根種子定別。俱行逼迫。由無分別有分別故。苦．樂二根或同或異。如無分別智及後所得四地已前各別種生。五地已上或同或異。二種生一現。一種生二能。亦無過失。現行之中無二惠故。行不相違。一念俱說。喜．樂亦爾。故不同憂．苦 問安惠師憂．苦種子亦爾。何故地獄憂根不亦名苦如下二定喜。何故苦極不名為苦如第三定樂 答憂．苦行增。二不俱說。喜．樂不違故一念生 問何故等順異於違。苦極非意。違乖于順。樂極在心。由有分別．無分別故。此師地獄許起分別煩惱故。前師不然。此義應思。極難解也。

善等三性六識為遠因等起．剎那等起分別。

四無記等幾有三業。異熟心等能發業不。

非業果心定得發業及隨轉。業果者雖未見文理實難。判餘者得 其初起苦樂受。如善．不善共難故。必由染．凈心引方隨等流。離欲苦根既無憂引。如何初起 善惡性隔難。初生隨意性。苦．樂非性別。舍引即隨生。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 因為不是回受者，所以六識都可以通達回受。六識之中都感受痛苦的緣故。 問：護法論師所說的憂（煩惱，sorrow）和苦（痛苦，suffering）的種子是相同還是不同？ 如果這樣說，會有什麼過失？ 問：如果說是相同的，為什麼地獄的苦根不也叫做憂？如果說是不同的，為什麼初禪和二禪的喜（喜悅，joy）也叫做樂（快樂，pleasure）？地獄的憂和苦不允許有兩個名稱。如果一個苦根也叫做憂，那麼三根（苦根、樂根、舍根）就不能成立，這又會自相矛盾，因為第三根（憂根）就不能成立了。 現在，憂和苦兩種根的種子一定是不同的。它們同時發生，因為一個沒有分別，一個有分別。苦和樂兩種根或者相同或者不同。例如，在無分別智以及後來獲得的四地之前，各自的種子產生。五地以上或者相同或者不同，兩種種子產生一種顯現，一種種子產生兩種功能，也沒有過失。因為在現行之中沒有兩種智慧，行為不相違背，一念之間同時說出喜和樂也是這樣，所以不同於憂和苦。 問：安慧論師也認為憂和苦的種子是不同的。為什麼地獄的憂根不也叫做苦，如下面二禪的喜？為什麼極度的苦不叫做樂，如第三禪的樂？ 答：憂和苦的作用增強，兩者不能同時說。喜和樂不相違背，所以可以在一念之間產生。 問：為什麼等同於順從，不同於違背？極度的苦不是意願，違背順從。極度的樂在心中，因為有分別和沒有分別的緣故。這位論師認為地獄可以產生分別煩惱，而前一位論師不這樣認為。這個道理應該思考，非常難以理解。 善（善良，wholesome）、不善（不善良，unwholesome）和無記（中性，neutral）三種性質的六識，是遠因等起、剎那等起分別。 四種無記等有多少有三業（身語意，body, speech, and mind）？異熟心等能夠引發業嗎？ 非業果心一定能引發業以及隨轉。業果心雖然沒有見到經文，但道理上確實很難判斷其餘的可以。最初生起的苦樂感受，如同善和不善共同的責難，必定由染污和清凈的心引導才能隨順等流。離欲的苦根既然沒有憂的引導，如何最初生起？ 善惡性質隔絕難以相容，最初生起隨意的性質。苦和樂不是性質的差別，舍受引導就會隨之產生。

【English Translation】 English version Because it is not a recipient, all six consciousnesses can communicate with the recipient. This is because all six consciousnesses experience suffering. Question: Are the seeds of sorrow (U, affliction) and suffering (Ku, pain) mentioned by the Dharmapala master the same or different? If you say so, what would be the fault? Question: If they are said to be the same, why isn't the root of suffering in hell also called sorrow? If they are said to be different, why are the joy (Xi, joy) of the first and second Dhyanas also called pleasure (Le, pleasure)? Sorrow and suffering in hell are not allowed to have two names. If one root of suffering is also called sorrow, then the three roots (suffering, pleasure, and neutral) cannot be established, which would be self-contradictory, because the third root (sorrow) cannot be established. Now, the seeds of the two roots of sorrow and suffering must be different. They occur simultaneously, because one is without discrimination and the other is with discrimination. The two roots of suffering and pleasure are either the same or different. For example, before the non-discriminating wisdom and the four lands obtained later, each seed arises separately. Above the fifth land, they are either the same or different, two seeds produce one manifestation, and one seed produces two functions, and there is no fault. Because there are no two wisdoms in the present action, the actions do not contradict each other, and joy and pleasure are spoken of simultaneously in one thought, so they are different from sorrow and suffering. Question: Master Anhui also believes that the seeds of sorrow and suffering are different. Why isn't the root of sorrow in hell also called suffering, like the joy of the second Dhyana below? Why isn't extreme suffering called pleasure, like the pleasure of the third Dhyana? Answer: The functions of sorrow and suffering increase, and the two cannot be said at the same time. Joy and pleasure do not contradict each other, so they can arise in one thought. Question: Why is being equal to being compliant, and different from being contrary? Extreme suffering is not intentional, contrary to compliance. Extreme pleasure is in the heart, because of discrimination and non-discrimination. This master believes that hell can produce discriminating afflictions, while the previous master does not think so. This principle should be considered, it is very difficult to understand. The six consciousnesses of the three natures of wholesome (Shan, virtuous), unwholesome (Bu Shan, non-virtuous), and neutral (Wu Ji, neutral) are the respective causes of distant cause arising and momentary cause arising. How many of the four neutral etc. have the three karmas (body, speech, and mind)? Can the Vipaka-citta (Yi Shu Xin, resultant consciousness) etc. initiate karma? Non-karma result mind can definitely initiate karma and follow the transformation. Although the karma result mind has not seen the scriptures, it is indeed difficult to judge in principle that the rest can. The initial arising of suffering and pleasure is like the common difficulty of good and unwholesome, and it must be guided by defiled and pure minds to follow the equal flow. Since the suffering root of detachment has no sorrow to guide it, how does it arise initially? The nature of good and evil is difficult to separate, and the initial arising is of arbitrary nature. Suffering and pleasure are not differences in nature, and if equanimity guides, it will follow.

解欲中。第一師云可厭事即無慾。其無漏心有無慾時。無漏第七緣因第八亦應無慾故。此理非違。第二師若有求希資具．什物慾禾稼等。豈無慾耶。故並非正。

第六卷

信中忍．樂．欲別。於三境中隨增義說。後二唯善亦唯樂欲為名。初通染．凈故標忍號其實于滅．道亦樂欲故。於後二亦忍可故 有能中。謂於一切世出世善。深信有力能得能成。對法但云謂我有力能得能成。若準此解。其信二善即得無為能成覺者。即信實有。信有用故。或信德攝。法中攝故 今又解云。信此二善能得涅槃。能成大覺等。是信有能。有功能故。

被甲加行等。論既自釋 有勢等句無文解釋。勢謂威勢 勤謂策勵 勇謂勇銳 堅猛謂固進 不捨善軛。謂永不屈及不止 善法立少染法立多者。染法曾熏時長。法廣故多說之。善法起少時促。法略故少說之。若在佛位由因廣故。果善無邊。欲令聞者歡喜希求。所以多說。

善法修斷及不斷中。應敘六十五緣縛之義。及五十九二斷之義。至下第八當廣分別。威儀．工巧．變化既通善性。善中具幾。各應思之。

薩迦耶見二十句六十五中。準前計我。略有三種。一者即蘊。二者離蘊。三者與蘊不即不離。此句但是初即蘊計。無後二計。離蘊總說而為一我。蘊別有

三。如是我所有十五句。既說與蘊不即不離。不可定說蘊為我所。故無諸句 然準瑜伽第六及六十四。離蘊有三。一者異蘊住在蘊中。二者異蘊住離蘊法中。三者異蘊非住蘊中非異蘊中。一切蘊法都不相應。如是三種皆有十五我所。合成四十五句我所。並我總有四十八句。說所行相各有起．處．緣。謂緣歷．依起．所緣三義皆得。若緣處者不分別處。又有四十八。若分別者一處有三十三我所．一我。合三十四。十二個三十四。合四百八。十二個我見。三百九十六我所見。十八界等隨應當知。

瑜伽第八說有七倒。謂想倒．見倒．心倒．及凈．樂．我．常。彼四妄想分別是想倒。于彼妄想所分別中。忍可．欲樂．建立．執著是見倒。于所執著貪等煩惱名心倒。煩惱有三。一倒根本。謂無明。二倒自性。謂薩迦邪見．邊執見一分．見．或取．及貪．三倒等流。謂邪見．及邊執見一分．恚．慢．及疑。薩迦邪見是無我我倒。邊見一分是無常常倒。見取是不凈凈倒。或取是于苦樂倒。貪通二種。通凈．樂二倒故 一會如疏。又解此隨順門故二取收。不說見．戒有所依緣及二義不具非二取攝。若單緣見及俱緣同時五蘊並前後伴類為勝．能凈是見取。若單緣俱時及前後五蘊並一切法為勝．能凈。或勝非凈。或能凈非勝。並緣

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 三、像我這樣，有十五句。既然說了與蘊不即不離，就不可斷定說蘊為我所擁有。所以沒有這些句子。然而根據《瑜伽師地論》第六卷和第六十四卷，離開蘊有三種情況：一是異蘊住在蘊中，二是異蘊住在離蘊法中，三是異蘊非住在蘊中也非異蘊中，一切蘊法都不相應。像這三種情況都有十五種我所，合起來共有四十五句我所。加上我，總共有四十八句。說明所行之相各有起、處、緣。所謂緣，包括歷、依起、所緣三種含義都可以成立。如果緣處，就不分別處。又有四十八句。如果分別處，一個處有三十三個我所、一個我，合起來三十四個。十二個三十四個，合四百零八。十二個我見，三百九十六個我所見。十八界等，應當根據情況瞭解。

《瑜伽師地論》第八卷說有七種顛倒（dian dao）：即想倒（xiang dao）、見倒（jian dao）、心倒（xin dao），以及凈（jing）、樂（le）、我（wo）、常（chang）。其中四種妄想分別是想倒。對於那些妄想所分別的事物中，忍可、欲樂、建立、執著是見倒。對於所執著的貪等煩惱，稱為心倒。煩惱有三種：一是倒的根本，即無明（wu ming）；二是倒的自性，即薩迦邪見（薩迦邪見，認為五蘊和合的身體為我）、邊執見（bian zhi jian，執著于斷常等極端觀點）的一部分、見（jian，錯誤的見解）、或取（qu，執取不正見為正見）、以及貪（tan）；三是倒的等流，即邪見（xie jian）、以及邊執見的一部分、恚（hui，嗔恨）、慢（man，傲慢）、以及疑（yi，懷疑）。薩迦邪見是無我我倒。邊見一部分是無常常倒。見取（jian qu，執取不正見為正見）是不凈凈倒。或取是于苦樂倒。貪通兩種，通凈、樂二倒。一會如疏。又解釋此隨順門故二取收。不說見、戒有所依緣及二義不具非二取攝。若單緣見及俱緣同時五蘊並前後伴類為勝、能凈是見取。若單緣俱時及前後五蘊並一切法為勝、能凈。或勝非凈。或能凈非勝。並緣

【English Translation】 English version 3. Like myself, there are fifteen phrases. Since it has been said that the skandhas (蘊, yun, aggregates) are neither identical to nor separate from 'I', it cannot be definitively said that the skandhas are what 'I' possess. Therefore, these phrases do not exist. However, according to the sixth and sixty-fourth volumes of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論), there are three situations apart from the skandhas: first, a different skandha resides within the skandhas; second, a different skandha resides within a dharma (法, fa, law, principle) that is separate from the skandhas; third, a different skandha neither resides within the skandhas nor within a different skandha, and all skandha dharmas are not in accordance. In these three situations, there are fifteen 'mine' (我所, wo suo) phrases each, totaling forty-five 'mine' phrases. Adding 'I', there are a total of forty-eight phrases. It explains that the characteristics of what is acted upon each have arising, place, and condition. The so-called condition includes the meanings of traversing, relying on arising, and what is conditioned, all of which can be established. If it is the condition of place, then the place is not distinguished. There are also forty-eight phrases. If the place is distinguished, one place has thirty-three 'mine', one 'I', totaling thirty-four. Twelve thirty-fours total four hundred and eight. Twelve 'I'-views, three hundred and ninety-six 'mine'-views. The eighteen realms (十八界, shi ba jie) and so on should be understood accordingly.

The eighth volume of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says there are seven inversions (倒, dao): namely, the inversion of thought (想倒, xiang dao), the inversion of view (見倒, jian dao), the inversion of mind (心倒, xin dao), and purity (凈, jing), pleasure (樂, le), self (我, wo), and permanence (常, chang). Among them, the four kinds of false conceptions are respectively the inversion of thought. Among the things distinguished by those false conceptions, acceptance, desire, establishment, and attachment are the inversion of view. For the afflictions such as greed that are attached to, they are called the inversion of mind. There are three kinds of afflictions: first, the root of inversion, namely ignorance (無明, wu ming); second, the nature of inversion, namely satkāya-dṛṣṭi (薩迦邪見, sat jia xie jian, the false view of a real self in the five aggregates), a portion of antagrahadṛṣṭi (邊執見, bian zhi jian, the view of clinging to extremes), view (見, jian, wrong views), or grasping (取, qu, grasping wrong views as right views), and greed (貪, tan); third, the outflow of inversion, namely wrong views (邪見, xie jian), and a portion of antagrahadṛṣṭi, hatred (恚, hui, anger), pride (慢, man, arrogance), and doubt (疑, yi, suspicion). Satkāya-dṛṣṭi is the inversion of self in no-self. A portion of antagrahadṛṣṭi is the inversion of permanence in impermanence. Dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa (見取, jian qu, holding onto wrong views) is the inversion of purity in impurity. Śīla-vrata-parāmarśa (戒禁取, jie jin qu, holding onto wrong precepts) is the inversion of pleasure in suffering. Greed is common to two types, common to the two inversions of purity and pleasure. A meeting is like a commentary. Also explain that this follows the door, so the two grasps are collected. It does not say that views and precepts have a basis and the two meanings are not complete, so they are not collected by the two grasps. If it is only conditioned by views and simultaneously conditioned by the five aggregates and the preceding and following companions as superior and able to purify, it is dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa. If it is only conditioned by the simultaneous and preceding and following five aggregates and all dharmas as superior and able to purify, or superior but not pure, or able to purify but not superior, and conditioned by

見及俱緣同時五蘊。為勝非能凈。為能凈非勝。皆非見取。戒取亦爾。若緣見增隨順戒劣亦名見取。戒增隨順見劣亦名戒取。若緣二俱增。行相亦俱增者。必非二取。二取不相應故。但是法執染惠。非二見攝。二見攝者必推求深。行相獨勝故。不作如前等解。便違此及瑜伽等文。二義不具。設二義具非見．戒者非名所目。故非二取。

三惡趣極苦處。不造往惡趣業。無分別惑故。可造人．天業耶 答不障。但言無分別煩惱。不說無人．天業故。若自不起不共無明。如何造人．天業。故亦不造。此論總報。別報可造。善．惡俱得。

生在下地起無色界幾煩惱。唯起於六或七。謂見取．慢．疑．愛．癡．及我見。若定若生不過爾故。又可起彼戒取。執彼定為勝因故。無起彼邪見及邊見文。不同色界有六十二見等故。生欲起色界定五。散中謂身．邊．慢．愛．疑．二取。不見起耶見之相。二無因論亦是定後起彼耶見。九皆容起。並起戒取執彼定為勝因故。然無此文生無色界除下潤生我．貪．慢二見．癡。余更不得起。彼無中有可說起謗等故。生無色界唯起下俱生。無起分別相。無中有起謗故。

六十二初文。說五種愛緣上者。謂或證得等至出已。計為清凈．可欣．可樂．可愛．可意隨念愛味 或未證得。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 觀察並同時與五蘊（skandha，構成個體經驗的五種要素：色、受、想、行、識）相關聯的見解，如果是殊勝的，就不能被凈化；如果是能夠凈化的，就不是殊勝的。因此，它們都不是見取（dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa，執著于錯誤的見解）。戒取（śīla-parāmarśa，執著于錯誤的戒律）也是如此。如果因緣于見解而增長，並隨順於低劣的戒律，也稱為見取。如果因緣于戒律而增長，並隨順於低劣的見解，也稱為戒取。如果因緣于見解和戒律都增長，並且其行相（ākāra，表現形式）也同時增長，那麼一定不是二取（兩種執取）。因為二取不相應。這只是法執（dharma-graha，對法的執著）所染污的智慧，不屬於二見（兩種錯誤的見解）所攝。屬於二見所攝的，必定是推求深刻，行相獨特殊勝的。不作如前等的解釋，就違背了此論以及《瑜伽師地論》等的經文。二義不具備。假設二義具備，但不是見或戒，就不是名稱所指代的，所以不是二取。

處於三惡趣（trayo apāyāḥ，地獄、餓鬼、畜生）的極度痛苦之處，不造作前往惡趣的業，因為沒有分別惑（vikalpa-moha，分別性的迷惑）。可以造作人（manuṣya，人類）、天（deva，天神）的業嗎？回答：不障礙。只是說沒有分別煩惱，沒有說沒有人、天的業。如果自己不生起不共無明（asaṃskṛta-avidyā，與生俱來的無明），如何造作人、天的業？所以也不造作。此論說的是總報（samudāyaphala，總體果報），別報（prithak-phala，個別果報）可以造作，善業和惡業都可以得到。

生在下地（adhastādbhūmi，較低的界），會生起多少煩惱？只生起六種或七種。即見取、慢（māna，傲慢）、疑（vicikitsā，懷疑）、愛（rāga，貪愛）、癡（moha，愚癡）以及我見（satkāya-dṛṣṭi，認為有「我」的見解）。如果入定或出生，不會超過這些。又可以生起戒取，執著于那個禪定是殊勝的原因。沒有生起邪見（mithyā-dṛṣṭi，錯誤的見解）和邊見（antagrāha-dṛṣṭi，極端的見解）的經文。不同於外道有六十二見等。生在欲界（kāmadhātu，慾望界）入定，會生起五種。散亂中會生起身見（satkāya-dṛṣṭi，認為有「我」的見解）、邊見、慢、愛、疑、二取。不見生起耶見（不知道耶見是什麼）的相。二無因論（ahetuvāda，認為沒有原因的理論）也是入定後生起那個耶見。九種都可能生起。並且生起戒取，執著于那個禪定是殊勝的原因。然而沒有此經文說生在無色界（arūpadhātu，沒有物質的界）除了下品潤生的我見、貪、慢二見、癡，其餘都不能生起。因為那裡沒有中有（antarābhava，中陰身），可以說生起誹謗等。生在無色界只生起下品俱生（sahaja，與生俱來的），沒有生起分別相（vikalpa-lakṣaṇa，分別的相）。沒有中有生起誹謗等。

六十二見（bāṣṭi-dṛṣṭi，六十二種錯誤的見解）的最初經文，說五種愛緣于上界（ūrdhva-bhūmi，較高的界）的人，即或者證得了等至（samāpatti，禪定）出來後，認為它是清凈的、可喜的、可樂的、可愛的、可意的，隨念愛味；或者沒有證得。

【English Translation】 English version: Views that observe and simultaneously relate to the five skandhas (aggregates of existence: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness), if they are superior, cannot be purified; if they can be purified, they are not superior. Therefore, they are not dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa (clinging to views). Śīla-parāmarśa (clinging to precepts) is also the same. If it increases due to conditions related to views and follows inferior precepts, it is also called dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa. If it increases due to conditions related to precepts and follows inferior views, it is called śīla-parāmarśa. If it increases due to conditions related to both views and precepts, and its ākāra (form, appearance) also increases simultaneously, then it is certainly not both types of clinging. Because the two types of clinging are not compatible. This is merely wisdom defiled by dharma-graha (attachment to dharmas), and is not included in the two views. Those included in the two views must be deeply investigated, and their form is uniquely superior. If it is not explained as before, it would contradict this treatise and texts such as the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra. The two meanings are not complete. Assuming the two meanings are complete, but it is not a view or a precept, then it is not what the name refers to, so it is not both types of clinging.

Being in the extremely painful places of the trayo apāyāḥ (three evil realms: hell, hungry ghosts, and animals), one does not create karma to go to the evil realms because there is no vikalpa-moha (discriminating delusion). Can one create karma for manuṣya (humans) and deva (gods)? Answer: It does not obstruct. It only says there are no discriminating afflictions, not that there is no karma for humans and gods. If one does not generate asaṃskṛta-avidyā (innate ignorance) oneself, how can one create karma for humans and gods? Therefore, one does not create it either. This treatise speaks of the samudāyaphala (collective retribution); prithak-phala (individual retribution) can be created, and both good and bad karma can be obtained.

How many afflictions arise when one is born in the adhastādbhūmi (lower realms)? Only six or seven arise. Namely, dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa, māna (pride), vicikitsā (doubt), rāga (desire), moha (ignorance), and satkāya-dṛṣṭi (view of self). If one enters samādhi or is born, it will not exceed these. One can also generate śīla-parāmarśa, clinging to that dhyana as a superior cause. There is no text about generating mithyā-dṛṣṭi (wrong view) and antagrāha-dṛṣṭi (extreme view). It is different from the heretics who have sixty-two views, etc. Being born in the kāmadhātu (desire realm) and entering samādhi, five arise. In distraction, satkāya-dṛṣṭi, antagrāha-dṛṣṭi, māna, rāga, vicikitsā, and the two types of clinging arise. The appearance of generating 'ya jian' (unclear what this refers to) is not seen. The ahetuvāda (theory of no cause) also generates that 'ya jian' after entering samādhi. All nine can arise. And śīla-parāmarśa arises, clinging to that dhyana as a superior cause. However, there is no such text saying that being born in the arūpadhātu (formless realm), except for the lower-grade life-sustaining view of self, desire, the two views of pride, and ignorance, nothing else can arise. Because there is no antarābhava (intermediate existence) there, one can say that slander, etc., arise. Being born in the arūpadhātu, only the lower-grade sahaja (innate) arises, and no vikalpa-lakṣaṇa (discriminating characteristics) arise. There is no intermediate existence to generate slander, etc.

The initial text of the bāṣṭi-dṛṣṭi (sixty-two views) says that the five types of desire are related to those in the ūrdhva-bhūmi (higher realms), that is, either after attaining samāpatti (meditative absorption) and emerging from it, they consider it to be pure, pleasing, delightful, lovely, and desirable, and they recall and savor it with desire; or they have not attained it.

或已證得。未來愛味增上力故。進求欣樂而生愛味 或已證得計為清凈．可欣。乃至廣說現行愛味。若從定出可生愛味。若正在定無有愛味。愛味者謂於是中遍生貪著。後文說二種。謂未得定者有染污。謂希上生深生愛著。不染污愛緣上定者。謂方求離欲生。廣如六十二說。

我見別緣不緣他地者。修道我見有二行相。一總緣得他地。二別緣不得。見斷我見亦有二類。一見為他我則得。二計為自內我即不得。今說不得隨義應知。或無分別我見緣他地者。梵王常等即定我見故 下上相緣中。下地緣上二界皆同。無文遮故。上緣下中。無色界中無別緣慢。總緣亦有慢。余如前皆有。見．戒二取理定不得。除總緣行相。無別體故。

貪瞋癡俱生與三受俱者。瑜伽五十五說俱生通一切識身者。與一切根相應故。其分別者。瑜伽論貪貪違緣憂．苦俱。瞋遇順境喜．樂俱。今此文通一切。不遮俱生．分別二。引皆同應廣如彼。

慢有二種。一高舉。二卑下。高舉有三。一稱量。二解了。三利養。以卑下慢與憂相應。高舉不爾。故前所說不與身．耶一分俱。此與憂俱。據卑下說亦不相違。

正義若地獄無分別煩惱。應無因力斷善者死時續等。解云。勢力不生。非因邪見。

五十九云。于利養等他引猶

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：或者已經證得了（禪定）。因為未來對愛味的增長力，進而尋求欣樂而生起愛味。或者已經證得了（禪定），認為它是清凈、可欣的，乃至廣泛地說，愛味在（禪定中）現行。如果從禪定中出來，可能會生起愛味；如果正在禪定中，則沒有愛味。愛味指的是在其中普遍產生貪著。後文會說兩種情況：未得禪定者有染污，即希望向上生起而深生愛著；不染污的愛緣于上定者，即正在尋求脫離慾望而生起（上定）。詳細內容如《六十二見經》所說。

我見（認為有『我』的錯誤見解）分別緣于或不緣于其他地（指欲界、色界、無色界）的情況：修道中的我見有兩種行相：一是總緣，可以得到其他地；二是分別緣，不能得到其他地。見斷（通過見道斷除）的我見也有兩類：一是認為『他』是我，則可以得到（其他地）；二是計為『自內』是我，則不能得到（其他地）。現在說的是不能得到的情況，應根據意義理解。或者沒有分別的我見緣于其他地的情況，如梵王常等，即是禪定中的我見。下地與上地相互緣的情況中，下地緣于上二界（色界、無色界）是相同的，因為沒有經文遮止。上地緣于下地的情況中，沒有**，中（間）沒有分別緣的慢（驕慢）。總緣也有慢。其餘情況如前所述，都有。見取（執取錯誤的見解）、戒取（執取錯誤的戒律）在理上必定不能得到（其他地），除了總緣的行相，因為沒有別的自體。

貪、瞋、癡（三種根本煩惱）俱生與三種感受（苦受、樂受、舍受）俱起的情況：瑜伽五十五說俱生通於一切識身，因為它與一切根相應。其分別在於：瑜伽論說貪與貪的違緣——憂、苦俱起；瞋與順境——喜、樂俱起。現在這裡的說法是通於一切情況，不遮止俱生和分別兩種情況。引用的內容都相同，應廣泛地參考瑜伽論。

慢有兩種：一是高舉，二是卑下。高舉有三種：一、稱量（與他人比較）；二、解了（自以為理解）；三、利養（因獲得利益而驕傲）。因為卑下慢與憂相應，而高舉不這樣，所以前面所說的不與身、耶（不確定是什麼，原文如此）一分俱起。這裡說與憂俱起，是根據卑下慢來說的，並不矛盾。

正義：如果地獄沒有分別煩惱，那麼應該沒有因力斷善者死時續等（指地獄眾生因惡業力盡而死亡，並繼續輪迴）。解釋說：勢力不生，並非因為邪見。

五十九云：于利養等他引猶（未完）

【English Translation】 English version: Or already attained (dhyana/meditative state). Because of the increasing power of future craving for savor (愛味, àiwèi), further seeking pleasure and generating craving. Or already attained (dhyana), considering it pure and delightful, and so on, broadly speaking, savor manifests in (dhyana). If emerging from dhyana, savor may arise; if currently in dhyana, there is no savor. Savor refers to the pervasive attachment arising within it. The following text will discuss two situations: those who have not attained dhyana have defilement, namely, hoping to be reborn upwards and deeply craving; non-defiled craving is related to those who are seeking to be free from desire and generate (higher dhyana). Detailed content as described in the 'Sixty-two Views Sutra'.

The situation of 'self-view' (我見, wǒjiàn, the erroneous view of 'self') being related to or not related to other realms (referring to the desire realm, form realm, formless realm): There are two aspects of self-view in cultivation: first, general relation, which can attain other realms; second, separate relation, which cannot attain other realms. There are also two categories of self-view that are severed by the path of seeing (見道, jiàndào): first, considering 'others' as 'self', then one can attain (other realms); second, considering 'self-within' as 'self', then one cannot attain (other realms). Now we are talking about the situation where one cannot attain, which should be understood according to the meaning. Or the non-discriminating self-view is related to other realms, such as Brahma kings, etc., which is the self-view in dhyana. In the case of lower realms being related to upper realms, the lower realm being related to the upper two realms (form realm, formless realm) is the same, because there is no sutra text prohibiting it. In the case of upper realms being related to lower realms, there is no **, in the middle there is no separate relation of pride (慢, màn). General relation also has pride. The remaining situations are as mentioned before, all have. View-attachment (見取, jiànqǔ, grasping wrong views) and precept-attachment (戒取, jièqǔ, grasping wrong precepts) cannot be attained in principle, except for the aspect of general relation, because there is no other self-nature.

The situation of greed, hatred, and delusion (the three root afflictions) arising simultaneously with the three feelings (suffering, pleasure, and neutral): Yoga Chapter 55 says that simultaneous arising is common to all aggregates of consciousness, because it corresponds to all roots. The distinction lies in: Yoga-shastra says that greed arises with its opposing conditions - sorrow and suffering; hatred arises with favorable conditions - joy and pleasure. Now the statement here is common to all situations, not prohibiting the two situations of simultaneous arising and separate arising. The cited content is the same, and should be widely referred to in the Yoga-shastra.

There are two types of pride: first, arrogance; second, inferiority. There are three types of arrogance: first, comparison (with others); second, self-understanding (thinking one understands); third, profit and offerings (being proud of gaining benefits). Because inferiority is associated with sorrow, while arrogance is not, the previous statement does not arise together with a portion of body and 'ye' (unclear what it refers to, as in the original text). Here it says it arises together with sorrow, which is based on inferiority, and is not contradictory.

Righteous meaning: If hells have no discriminating afflictions, then there should be no cause for those who cut off good deeds to die and continue (referring to hell beings dying due to the exhaustion of evil karma and continuing to reincarnate). The explanation says: the power does not arise, not because of wrong views.

Chapter 59 says: Regarding profit and offerings, others lead still (incomplete)

預疑與憂相應。于惡趣等他引猶預喜根相應。邪見先作妙行憂根相應。先作惡行喜根相應。二取隨境故四受俱。五十九中但依欲界疑．邪見等說。此通一切地。故與樂相應。

要得根本定煩惱方起。有依未至斷欲九品已。不得根本命終。此人以何現行潤生 有解無此。必得方命終故。如第七生預流無命終不得應果者。心得根本定方命終。有解亦有。唯以隨眠潤生。如見諦以隨眠。亦有現行潤故 此亦應爾。伏修不伏見。見惑既不善。何不感惡趣而生上界耶。若以勢力不行。何不名伏。今以義解。由勢不行不能發業。設使有者輕而不重。非決定業不感欲界生。若正六行所厭名為伏故。不爾便退。煩惱強故。定力勢劣弱故。以無修伴。弱故不能。

一切有事無事煩惱不過三種。一諸見所緣本是無事。余是有事。因此見行相本無決定余不定故。當對法第七。二行相深迷無我。名緣無事。餘名有事。所謂行相深境。必迷無我故。余必不定。五十九云。見．慢名無事。貪．恚名有事。無明．疑通二種。對法第五同。三見道所緣名緣無事。脩名有事。見道諸惑分別猛利多橫執故。修道少故。瑜伽云。見所斷名緣無事。餘名有事。除緣現在．無為有體法。緣過未．映象等名緣無事。所餘名緣有事。本境有故。對法雲。非

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『預』（猶豫）與『憂』（憂愁）相應。對於惡趣等，由其他因素引起的猶豫與『喜根』（喜悅的感受）相應。『邪見』（錯誤的見解）先於妙行產生，與『憂根』（憂愁的感受）相應。先於惡行產生，與『喜根』（喜悅的感受）相應。二取（能取和所取）隨順於境界，所以四受（苦、樂、舍、不苦不樂）都可能。在五十九種煩惱中，只是依據欲界的疑、邪見等來說明，這裡是通用於一切地的，所以與樂相應。

必須要得到根本定（根本禪定），煩惱才會生起。有人依靠未至定（未到地定）斷除了欲界的九品煩惱之後，沒有得到根本定就命終了。這個人以什麼現行（現行的業力）來潤生（延續生命）呢？有一種解釋認為沒有這種情況，因為必須要得到根本定才會命終。如同第七生（指證得預流果之前的第七次轉生）的預流（預流果位，須陀洹），沒有命終就不能證得應果（阿羅漢果）。心得根本定才會命終。也有解釋認為有這種情況，只是以隨眠（潛在的煩惱）來潤生，如同見諦（見道）以隨眠。也有現行潤生的緣故，這種情況也應該如此。伏修（通過修行來降伏煩惱）不能伏見（不能降伏見惑）。見惑既然是不善的，為什麼不會感生惡趣而生到上界呢？如果因為勢力不行（力量不足以產生作用），為什麼不稱為伏呢？現在用義理來解釋，由於勢力不行，不能引發業力。即使有，也是輕微而不重的，不是決定業，所以不會感生欲界。如果正六行（正確的六種修行方法）所厭惡的才稱為伏。否則就會退失，因為煩惱強大，定力勢力弱小，因為沒有修行的伴侶，所以弱小而不能。

一切有事（有實體的事物）無事（無實體的事物）的煩惱，不超過三種。第一種，諸見（各種錯誤的見解）所緣的，本來是無事，其餘是有事。因為見的行相（運作方式）本來沒有決定，其餘是不定的緣故。應當參考《對法》第七。第二種，行相深刻地迷惑于無我（沒有永恒不變的自我），稱為緣無事，其餘稱為有事。所謂行相深刻的境界，必定迷惑于無我，其餘必定不定。《五十九》中說，見、慢（驕慢）稱為無事，貪（貪婪）、恚（嗔恨）稱為有事，無明（無知）、疑（懷疑）通於兩種。《對法》第五相同。第三種，見道（見道的修行階段）所緣的，稱為緣無事，修道（修道的修行階段）稱為有事。見道的各種迷惑，分別猛利，多橫生執著的緣故，修道少。瑜伽（《瑜伽師地論》）中說，見所斷（見道所斷的煩惱）稱為緣無事，其餘稱為有事。除了緣現在、無為（無為法）的有體法，緣過去、未來、映象等，稱為緣無事，其餘稱為緣有事，因為本境是存在的緣故。《對法》中說，不是...

【English Translation】 English version: 'Pre'(Hesitation) corresponds to 'Sorrow'(Grief). Regarding evil destinies etc., hesitation induced by other factors corresponds to the 'Root of Joy'(Feeling of joy). 'False View'(Wrong view) arises before virtuous conduct, corresponding to the 'Root of Sorrow'(Feeling of grief). Arising before evil conduct, corresponding to the 'Root of Joy'(Feeling of joy). The two graspings (grasper and grasped) follow the object, so all four feelings (suffering, pleasure, equanimity, neither suffering nor pleasure) are possible. Among the fifty-nine afflictions, it is only explained based on doubt, false views, etc., in the desire realm. This is applicable to all realms, so it corresponds to pleasure.

Afflictions only arise when one has attained fundamental concentration (fundamental samadhi). Someone, relying on the preliminary concentration (preliminary stage of samadhi), has already severed the nine grades of afflictions in the desire realm. If they die without attaining fundamental concentration, what present karma (presently active karma) will moisten their rebirth (continue their life)? One explanation is that this doesn't happen, because one must attain fundamental concentration before dying. Like a Stream-enterer (Srotapanna, one who has entered the stream to enlightenment) in their seventh life (referring to the seventh rebirth before attaining the fruit of Stream-entry), they cannot attain the corresponding fruit (Arhatship, the state of liberation) without dying. One dies when the mind has attained fundamental concentration. Another explanation is that this is possible, only with latent afflictions (dormant afflictions) moistening rebirth, like seeing the truth (seeing the path) with latent afflictions. There is also present karma moistening rebirth, so this should also be the case. Subduing through cultivation (subduing afflictions through practice) cannot subdue views (cannot subdue afflictions of view). Since afflictions of view are unwholesome, why wouldn't they cause one to be reborn in evil destinies but instead in higher realms? If it's because the power is insufficient to act, why isn't it called subduing? Now, explaining it through reasoning, because the power is insufficient to act, it cannot initiate karma. Even if there is, it is light and not heavy, not decisive karma, so it won't cause rebirth in the desire realm. Only what is disliked by the six correct practices (six correct methods of practice) is called subduing. Otherwise, one will regress, because the afflictions are strong, and the power of concentration is weak, because there is no companion in practice, so it is weak and unable.

All afflictions, whether related to things with substance (things with entity) or things without substance (things without entity), do not exceed three types. The first type, what is cognized by views (various wrong views), is originally without substance, the rest are with substance. Because the mode of operation (way of functioning) of views is originally not fixed, the rest are uncertain. One should refer to Abhidharma (Treatise on Abhidharma) VII. The second type, the mode of operation deeply deluded about no-self (no permanent self), is called cognizing without substance, the rest are called with substance. The so-called realm of deep mode of operation, must be deluded about no-self, the rest must be uncertain. The Fifty-Nine (Fifty-Nine Categories) says that views and pride (arrogance) are called without substance, greed (greed) and hatred (hatred) are called with substance, ignorance (ignorance) and doubt (doubt) are common to both. Abhidharma V is the same. The third type, what is cognized by the path of seeing (stage of seeing the path), is called cognizing without substance, the path of cultivation (stage of cultivation) is called with substance. The various delusions of the path of seeing are sharply discriminating, with many arising attachments, the path of cultivation is less. Yoga (Yogacarabhumi-sastra) says that what is severed by seeing (afflictions severed by the path of seeing) is called cognizing without substance, the rest are called with substance. Except for cognizing present, unconditioned (unconditioned dharmas) existing dharmas, cognizing past, future, reflections, etc., is called cognizing without substance, the rest are called cognizing with substance, because the original object exists. Abhidharma says, not...

有所緣。謂顛倒心．心所。及緣過未等。餘名有事。本質或無名緣無事。余必有名緣有事。五十九云。無事緣謂無事煩惱。有事緣謂有事煩惱。與唯識同 今觀此義。初二門。一本體有名有事。二無質影像中無體用名無事。影像中有決定執名無事。但五見。不定名有事。癡．愛．慢雖亦有執。不決定故。二執者名無事。二不執名緣有事。故見．慢．愛等此名無事。餘名有事。三朋屬見道名無事。修道名有事 隨前諸文據實有無事二門即盡。一本質。影像。二影像之內有體．無體。如緣過．未等名無事。現在有體法及無為名緣有事。然于中義別更分三種。一決定不定。二執．不執。三明屬見．修道法。即五重中前三重是。

如大論第十一五蓋中。說惛沈．睡眠二別相。太好。

隨煩惱中諂誑覆等。癡分者亦非瞋俱者。依多粗相說。據實亦俱。如瞋故誑他引諂覆自罪者。理亦應然。相細隱故論略不說。余解如疏。

隨煩惱中。忿等隨所依．緣總．別惑力。皆通四部。有依少諦緣多諦。有依多諦緣少諦。有依多緣多。有依少緣少。後二行相可知。初二是何諦惑。為從所依判諦。為從所緣。俱不定故。由此應言。所緣即所依。緣謂緣藉故。非所緣境。境不定故 有義所依即所緣境也。以所緣境為所依杖。依

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：有所緣，指的是顛倒的心和心所（心理活動），以及緣於過去、未來等。其餘的稱為『有事』。本質上或者無名，緣于『無事』。其餘的必定有名，緣于『有事』。《五十九論》中說：『無事緣』指的是無事的煩惱，『有事緣』指的是有事的煩惱，這與唯識宗的觀點相同。現在觀察這個意義，最初的兩個方面：一是本體有名有事；二是在無質的影像中，沒有本體作用，稱為『無事』；影像中有決定的執著，稱為『無事』，但僅限於五見（身見、邊見、邪見、見取見、戒禁取見）。不決定的稱為『有事』。癡（愚昧）、愛（貪愛）、慢（傲慢）雖然也有執著，但不決定。二，執著稱為『無事』，不執著稱為緣于『有事』。所以見、慢、愛等，這稱為『無事』，其餘的稱為『有事』。三，屬於見道的稱為『無事』，屬於修道的稱為『有事』。根據前面的各種說法，據實有『無事』、『有事』兩個方面就全部包括了。一是本質、影像；二是影像之內有本體、無本體。如緣於過去、未來等，稱為『無事』。現在有本體的法以及無為法，稱為緣于『有事』。然而，在其中意義上，又可分為三種：一是決定、不定；二是執著、不執著；三是屬於見道、修道法。也就是五重中的前三重。 如《大論》第十一，在五蓋（貪慾蓋、瞋恚蓋、睡眠蓋、掉舉惡作蓋、疑蓋）中，說惛沈（精神昏沉）、睡眠兩種不同的相狀，非常好。 隨煩惱中，諂（諂媚）、誑（欺騙）、覆（隱藏）等，屬於癡的部分，也不是與瞋（嗔恨）同時生起的。這是依據多數粗顯的相狀來說的，實際上也是同時生起的。例如因為嗔恨而欺騙他人，爲了引誘而諂媚，爲了掩蓋自己的罪過等，道理也應該是這樣。因為相狀細微隱蔽，所以論中略而不說。其餘的解釋如疏文中。 隨煩惱中，忿（忿怒）等，隨著所依、緣的總惑、別惑的力量，都通於四諦（苦諦、集諦、滅諦、道諦）。有依于少諦而緣于多諦的，有依于多諦而緣于少諦的，有依于多諦而緣于多的，有依于少諦而緣于少的。後兩種行相可以知道。最初的兩種是什麼諦的惑？是從所依來判斷諦，還是從所緣來判斷？因為都不確定。因此應該說，所緣就是所依，緣指的是緣借，不是所緣境。境不確定。有一種觀點認為，所依就是所緣境，以所緣境為所依的拄杖。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Something that is objectified' refers to the inverted mind and mental factors (psychological activities), as well as that which is conditioned by the past, future, and so on. The rest are called 'something that exists'. Essentially, it is either nameless, conditioned by 'something that does not exist'. The rest must have a name, conditioned by 'something that exists'. The Fifty-Nine Treatise says: 'Conditioned by something that does not exist' refers to afflictions that do not exist, 'conditioned by something that exists' refers to afflictions that exist, which is the same as the view of the Consciousness-Only school. Now observing this meaning, the first two aspects: one is that the substance has a name and exists; two is that in a formless image, there is no substantial function, called 'something that does not exist'; in an image, there is a definite attachment, called 'something that does not exist', but only limited to the five views (self-view, extreme view, wrong view, view of holding wrong views as supreme, view of holding wrong precepts as supreme). That which is indefinite is called 'something that exists'. Ignorance (delusion), attachment (greed), pride (arrogance), although there is also attachment, it is not definite. Two, attachment is called 'something that does not exist', non-attachment is called conditioned by 'something that exists'. Therefore, views, pride, attachment, etc., these are called 'something that does not exist', the rest are called 'something that exists'. Three, belonging to the path of seeing is called 'something that does not exist', belonging to the path of cultivation is called 'something that exists'. According to the previous various statements, in reality, the two aspects of 'something that does not exist' and 'something that exists' are all-inclusive. One is substance, image; two is that within the image there is substance, no substance. For example, being conditioned by the past, future, etc., is called 'something that does not exist'. The present existing dharma with substance and the unconditioned dharma are called conditioned by 'something that exists'. However, in the meaning within it, it can be further divided into three types: one is definite, indefinite; two is attachment, non-attachment; three is belonging to the path of seeing, the path of cultivation dharma. That is, the first three of the five levels. As in the Great Treatise, eleventh section, in the five coverings (desire-coverings, hatred-coverings, sleep-coverings, restlessness-and-remorse-coverings, doubt-coverings), it says that dullness (mental dullness) and sleep are two different characteristics, which is very good. Among the secondary afflictions, flattery (insincerity), deceit (cheating), concealment (hiding), etc., belonging to the part of ignorance, are also not arising simultaneously with anger (hatred). This is based on the majority of coarse and obvious characteristics, but in reality, they also arise simultaneously. For example, because of anger, one deceives others, flatters to entice, conceals one's own faults, the principle should also be like this. Because the characteristics are subtle and hidden, the treatise omits them. The rest of the explanation is as in the commentary. Among the secondary afflictions, anger (resentment), etc., according to the power of the general and specific delusions of the support and object, all penetrate the Four Noble Truths (Truth of Suffering, Truth of the Origin of Suffering, Truth of the Cessation of Suffering, Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering). There are those who rely on few truths and are conditioned by many truths, there are those who rely on many truths and are conditioned by few truths, there are those who rely on many truths and are conditioned by many, there are those who rely on few truths and are conditioned by few. The latter two types of characteristics can be known. What truths are the delusions of the first two types? Is the truth judged from the support, or from the object? Because neither is certain. Therefore, it should be said that the object is the support, the condition refers to borrowing, not the objectified realm. The realm is uncertain. One view is that the support is the objectified realm, using the objectified realm as the supporting staff.

從所緣判諦。依不定故 有義依與緣別。如疏中解。若依初二解。初二句無妨。若依第三解。初二句云何 有解。必無此者 有解。隨增屬諦。依增緣弱。憐近引故屬依。緣增依弱屬緣。疏遠引故。

諸本隨惑幾異熟生。通威儀．工巧。

覆自罪為覆。覆他為覆。非也。如比丘尼覆他粗罪亦名覆。菩薩說他罪為罪為福。憂惱俱生勢伏可除。善者及分別煩惱。世間離欲。汝何心故噁心皆覆。此中且說自覆。無噁心皆善(云性不行勢分力故)。

成唯識論掌中樞要卷下(本終)

成唯識論掌中樞要卷下(末)

基撰

第七卷

依于尋伺有染離染立三地別。不依彼種現起有無等者。瑜伽釋略有三解。有義。三地就二前後相應建立。謂欲界地．及初靜慮粗心．心所。前後相續可有尋伺共相應故。名有尋有伺地。靜慮中間粗心．心所。前後相續定無有尋。唯可有伺共相應故。名無尋唯伺地。第二靜慮以上諸地諸心．心所。前後相續決定不與尋．伺相應。名無尋無伺地。若欲界地及初靜慮．靜慮中間細心．心所不與尋．伺共相應者。及一切色．不相應行．諸無為法。不與尋．伺共相應故。亦皆說名無尋無伺地。故後論言。有尋有伺地．無尋唯伺地一向是有心地。無心睡眠．無心悶絕．

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 從所緣來判斷真諦（Satya，佛教術語，指真實不虛的道理）。因為所依賴的並不固定，所以有一種觀點認為所依和所緣是不同的，就像疏文中解釋的那樣。如果按照前兩種解釋，那麼前兩句沒有問題。如果按照第三種解釋，那麼前兩句該如何理解呢？有一種解釋是，一定沒有這種情況發生。還有一種解釋是，隨增屬於真諦。依賴增加，緣則減弱。因為憐憫靠近的，所以歸屬於依賴；緣增加，依賴則減弱，因為疏遠的引導。 各種版本中，隨煩惱（Upaklesha，佛教術語，指隨順根本煩惱而生的枝末煩惱）中有多少是異熟生（Vipāka-ja，佛教術語，指由業力成熟而產生的果報）？包括威儀和工巧。 掩蓋自己的罪過叫做『覆』，掩蓋他人的罪過也叫做『覆』嗎？不是這樣的。例如，比丘尼（Bhikshuni，佛教術語，指受過具足戒的女性出家人）掩蓋他人粗重的罪過也叫做『覆』。菩薩（Bodhisattva，佛教術語，指發菩提心，以利益眾生為己任者）說他人的罪過是爲了使人知罪而得福。憂愁和煩惱同時產生，可以通過勢力壓制而消除。善良的人以及分別煩惱的人，世間已經遠離慾望。你為什麼用噁心來掩蓋一切呢？這裡只說掩蓋自己的罪過，沒有噁心的人都是善良的（因為本性不行使勢力）。 《成唯識論掌中樞要》卷下（本終） 《成唯識論掌中樞要》卷下（末） 基 撰 第七卷 依據尋（Vitarka，佛教術語，指粗略的推求、尋求）和伺（Vicara，佛教術語，指細緻的觀察、伺察）的有染和離染，設立三地的區別。不依據尋伺的種子現起與否等等。《瑜伽師地論》的解釋略有三種。有一種觀點認為，三地是就二者前後相應而建立的。即欲界地（Kāmadhātu，佛教術語，指眾生有情慾的生存世界）以及初禪（Prathama Dhyana，佛教術語，指色界的第一禪定）的粗心和心所（Caitasika，佛教術語，指與心相應的心理活動），前後相續可以有尋伺共同相應，所以叫做有尋有伺地。靜慮中間（Dhyānāntara，佛教術語，指位於初禪和二禪之間的禪定）的粗心和心所，前後相續一定沒有尋，只可能有伺共同相應，所以叫做無尋唯伺地。第二禪（Dvitīya Dhyana，佛教術語，指色界的第二禪定）以上各地的諸心和心所，前後相續決定不與尋伺相應，叫做無尋無伺地。如果欲界地以及初禪、靜慮中間的細心和心所不與尋伺共同相應，以及一切色法（Rūpa，佛教術語，指物質現象）、不相應行法（Citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra，佛教術語，指既非心法，又非色法的存在）、諸無為法（Asaṃskṛta dharma，佛教術語，指不生不滅、無造作的法），因為不與尋伺共同相應，所以也都叫做無尋無伺地。所以後來的論典說，有尋有伺地、無尋唯伺地一向是有心地。無心睡眠、無心悶絕。

【English Translation】 English version Judging the truth (Satya) from the object of cognition. Because what is relied upon is not fixed, some argue that what is relied upon and the object of cognition are different, as explained in the commentary. If according to the first two explanations, the first two sentences are not problematic. If according to the third explanation, how should the first two sentences be understood? One explanation is that this never happens. Another explanation is that the augmentation belongs to the truth. If reliance increases, the object of cognition weakens. Because of compassion for what is near, it belongs to reliance; if the object of cognition increases, reliance weakens, because of guiding what is distant. Among the secondary afflictions (Upaklesha) in various versions, how many are maturation-born (Vipāka-ja)? Including deportment and craftsmanship. Is covering one's own faults called 'covering,' and covering others' faults also called 'covering'? It is not like that. For example, a Bhikshuni covering another's gross faults is also called 'covering.' A Bodhisattva speaking of others' faults is to make them aware of their faults and gain merit. Sorrow and affliction arise simultaneously, and can be suppressed and eliminated by force. Good people and those who discriminate afflictions, the world has already abandoned desire. Why do you use evil intentions to cover everything? Here, we only talk about covering one's own faults; those without evil intentions are all good (because their nature does not exert force). Essentials of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-Only, Scroll 2 (End of the Volume) Essentials of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-Only, Scroll 2 (End) Composed by Kui Ji Volume 7 Based on the presence or absence of defilement in initial (Vitarka) and sustained (Vicara) application of thought, three grounds are established. Not based on whether the seeds of initial and sustained application of thought arise or not, etc. The Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra has roughly three explanations. One view is that the three grounds are established based on the sequential correspondence of the two. That is, the desire realm (Kāmadhātu) and the coarse mind and mental factors (Caitasika) of the first dhyana (Prathama Dhyana), which can have initial and sustained application of thought corresponding sequentially, are called the ground with initial and sustained application of thought. The coarse mind and mental factors of the intermediate dhyana (Dhyānāntara), which definitely do not have initial application of thought sequentially, but only sustained application of thought corresponding, are called the ground without initial application of thought but only sustained application of thought. The minds and mental factors of all grounds above the second dhyana (Dvitīya Dhyana), which definitely do not correspond with initial and sustained application of thought sequentially, are called the ground without initial and sustained application of thought. If the subtle mind and mental factors of the desire realm and the first dhyana and intermediate dhyana do not correspond with initial and sustained application of thought, and all form (Rūpa), non-associated formations (Citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra), and unconditioned dharmas (Asaṃskṛta dharma), because they do not correspond with initial and sustained application of thought, are also called the ground without initial and sustained application of thought. Therefore, later treatises say that the ground with initial and sustained application of thought and the ground without initial application of thought but only sustained application of thought are always grounds with mind. Sleeplessness without mind and fainting without mind.

無想定．無想生．滅盡定．及無餘依涅槃界。併名無心地 有義此三就二離欲分依建立。謂欲界地．及初靜慮諸法．假者。于尋及伺並未離欲。名有尋有伺地。靜慮中間諸法假者。尋已離欲。伺未離欲。名無尋唯伺地。第二靜慮已上諸地諸法．假者。于尋及伺並已離欲。名無尋無伺地。若在下地並已離欲。亦得說名無尋無伺地。故後瑜伽第四言。此中由離尋．伺欲故。說名無尋無伺地。不由不現行故。所以者何。未離欲界欲者。由教導作意差別故。於一時間亦有無尋無伺意現行。已離尋．伺欲者。亦有尋．伺現行。如出彼定及生彼地 如實義者。此三但就界地建立。謂欲界地．及初靜慮有漏無漏諸法。于中尋．伺俱可得故名第一地。靜慮中間有漏無漏諸法。于中無尋唯有伺故名第二地。第二靜慮已上諸地有漏無漏諸法。于中尋．伺俱無有故名第三地。故瑜伽第四言。此中欲界．及初靜慮若定若生。名有尋有伺地。靜慮中間若定若生。名無尋唯伺地。第二靜慮已上色界．無色界全。名無尋無伺地。無漏有為初靜慮定。亦名有尋有伺地。依尋．伺處法緣真如為境入此定故。不由分別現行故。余如前說 若就相應及就離欲建立三地。攝法不盡。亦大雜亂。雖言有尋有伺等地。唯是有心。此就一門粗相辨地。於此門中。唯說第

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 無想定（Asamjnasamapatti，無想的禪定）、無想生（Asamjnaka，無想有情天）、滅盡定（Nirodhasamapatti，斷滅一切感受和想法的禪定），以及無餘依涅槃界（Anupadhisesa-nirvana，證入涅槃的境界，不再有任何煩惱的殘餘），這些都稱為無心地（Cittabhavabhumi，沒有心識活動的狀態）。 有一種觀點認為，這三種狀態是根據兩種離欲（Vitaraga，對慾望的舍離）的層次來建立的。也就是說，欲界地（Kamadhatu，充滿慾望的境界）和初禪（Prathama-dhyana，色界的第一禪定）的諸法（Dharma，事物、現象），假設那些對於尋（Vitarka，粗略的思考）和伺（Vicara，細微的觀察）尚未離欲的人，稱為有尋有伺地（Savitarka-savicara-bhumi，有尋有伺的狀態）。靜慮中間（Dhyanantara，初禪和二禪之間的狀態）的諸法，假設那些尋已離欲，而伺尚未離欲的人，稱為無尋唯伺地（Avitarka-vicara-matra-bhumi，沒有尋但有伺的狀態）。第二禪（Dvitiya-dhyana，色界的第二禪定）以上的諸地（Bhumi，境界、層次）的諸法，假設那些對於尋和伺都已經離欲的人，稱為無尋無伺地（Avitarka-avicara-bhumi，沒有尋也沒有伺的狀態）。如果在較低的境界已經離欲，也可以說成是無尋無伺地。所以後來的《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra）第四卷說：『這裡由於舍離尋和伺的慾望，所以稱為無尋無伺地，不是因為尋和伺不現行的緣故。』為什麼這樣說呢？因為沒有舍離欲界慾望的人，由於教導和作意的差別，在某一時間也會有無尋無伺的意念現行。已經舍離尋和伺慾望的人，也會有尋和伺現行，比如從那些禪定中出來，或者生到那些境界。 如實義（Yatharthika，真實的意義）是，這三種狀態只是根據界地（Dhatu-bhumi，境界和層次）來建立的。也就是說，欲界地和初禪的有漏（Sasrava，有煩惱的）和無漏（Anasrava，沒有煩惱的）諸法，在其中尋和伺都可以得到，所以稱為第一地。靜慮中間的有漏和無漏諸法，在其中沒有尋只有伺，所以稱為第二地。第二禪以上的諸地的有漏和無漏諸法，在其中尋和伺都沒有，所以稱為第三地。所以《瑜伽師地論》第四卷說：『這裡欲界和初禪，無論是禪定還是生，都稱為有尋有伺地。靜慮中間，無論是禪定還是生，都稱為無尋唯伺地。第二禪以上，無全，都稱為無尋無伺地。』無漏有為（Anasrava-sasamskrta，沒有煩惱但有造作的）的初禪定，也稱為有尋有伺地，因為是依靠尋和伺所緣的法緣真如（Dharmadhatu-tathata，法界真如）作為對像而進入這種禪定的，不是因為分別不現行的緣故。其餘的就像前面所說的那樣。 如果根據相應（Samprayukta，相應、共同運作）以及根據離欲來建立三地，那麼所包含的法就不全面，也會非常雜亂。雖然說有尋有伺等等地，都只是有心（Sacitta，有心識）的狀態，這只是就一個方面粗略地辨別境界。在這個方面中，只說了第

【English Translation】 English version Asamjnasamapatti (the attainment of non-perception), Asamjnaka (the realm of non-perception), Nirodhasamapatti (the attainment of cessation), and Anupadhisesa-nirvana (nirvana without remainder), are all called Cittabhavabhumi (the state of no-mind). Some argue that these three states are established based on two levels of Vitaraga (separation from desire). That is, the Dharmas (phenomena, things) of Kamadhatu (the realm of desire) and Prathama-dhyana (the first dhyana of the form realm), assuming those who have not separated from desire for Vitarka (gross thought) and Vicara (subtle observation), are called Savitarka-savicara-bhumi (the state with Vitarka and Vicara). The Dharmas of Dhyanantara (the intermediate state between the first and second dhyanas), assuming those who have separated from desire for Vitarka but not for Vicara, are called Avitarka-vicara-matra-bhumi (the state without Vitarka but only with Vicara). The Dharmas of the Bhumis (levels, realms) above the Dvitiya-dhyana (the second dhyana of the form realm), assuming those who have separated from desire for both Vitarka and Vicara, are called Avitarka-avicara-bhumi (the state without Vitarka and Vicara). If one has already separated from desire in a lower realm, it can also be said to be Avitarka-avicara-bhumi. Therefore, the fourth volume of the later Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) says: 'Here, it is called Avitarka-avicara-bhumi because of the separation from the desire for Vitarka and Vicara, not because Vitarka and Vicara do not manifest.' Why is this said? Because those who have not separated from the desire of the desire realm will also have Avitarka-avicara thoughts manifest at a certain time due to the differences in teaching and attention. Those who have already separated from the desire for Vitarka and Vicara will also have Vitarka and Vicara manifest, such as when coming out of those samadhis or being born into those realms. The Yatharthika (true meaning) is that these three states are only established based on Dhatu-bhumi (realms and levels). That is, the Sasrava (with afflictions) and Anasrava (without afflictions) Dharmas of the Kamadhatu and the first dhyana, in which both Vitarka and Vicara can be obtained, are called the first Bhumi. The Sasrava and Anasrava Dharmas of Dhyanantara, in which there is no Vitarka but only Vicara, are called the second Bhumi. The Sasrava and Anasrava Dharmas of the Bhumis above the second dhyana, in which there is neither Vitarka nor Vicara, are called the third Bhumi. Therefore, the fourth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: 'Here, the desire realm and the first dhyana, whether it is samadhi or birth, are called Savitarka-savicara-bhumi. Dhyanantara, whether it is samadhi or birth, is called Avitarka-vicara-matra-bhumi. Above the second dhyana, no complete, are called Avitarka-avicara-bhumi.' The Anasrava-sasamskrta (unafflicted but conditioned) first dhyana samadhi is also called Savitarka-savicara-bhumi, because it relies on the Dharmadhatu-tathata (the suchness of the realm of phenomena) that Vitarka and Vicara are related to as the object to enter this samadhi, not because discrimination does not manifest. The rest is as mentioned before. If the three Bhumis are established according to Samprayukta (association, co-operation) and according to separation from desire, then the Dharmas included will not be comprehensive, and it will also be very chaotic. Although it is said that the Bhumis such as Savitarka-savicara, etc., are only Sacitta (with mind) states, this is only a rough distinction of the realms from one aspect. In this aspect, only the

二靜慮已上無尋無伺地中。無想定．無想生．滅盡定名無心地。餘一切位名有心地。後有四門同異建立。如後當說 雖言此中由離尋．伺欲故。說名無尋無伺地。然唯說彼第二靜慮已上諸地。必定已離尋．伺欲故。不言已離尋．伺欲者下地諸法。亦得說名無尋無伺。若如是者。未離下地尋．伺欲者上地諸法。亦應說名有尋伺等。如是建立成大雜亂。是故此三唯就界地上下建立 今觀此意。依染．離染非釋有尋有伺無尋唯伺地。但釋無尋無伺地。即此論文便非盡理。云何可言依有染無染立三地別。身在地獄成三地染應名三地。已隨所離應非彼地故 今應問此第三師解。界地何由得成差別 由有地法粗細異故 彼粗細異如何得成 必依有染系法別故。無漏離染依此地法亦殊。已斷是此有染種類。故彼地攝。言有染者。有現行染。故身在下雖成三界種子有染不名三地。言離染者。據生上義。即非前地。不言已離此染即非此地故。唯識文正。不同瑜伽。瑜伽但依第二禪以上為論。如前第三師會 又解。此中言有染者。有彼現行染。離染者。即無漏等。隨所離染地。即前有染之地今離故名離染。隨此有．染離染二種有殊。地界法異。皆應所應二種皆是彼地所攝。不說有染是彼地。離染即非。故文無妨。不同瑜伽。瑜伽但說第三地

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 在二禪及以上的無尋無伺地中，無想定（沒有念想的禪定）、無想生（無想有情的境界）、滅盡定（滅盡一切心識活動的禪定）被稱為無心地。其餘一切狀態被稱為有心地。之後有四種門類，關於它們的同異之處將在後面說明。 雖然說這裡因為離開了尋（粗略的思考）和伺（精細的思考）的慾望，所以稱為無尋無伺地。但只是說二禪及以上的各個地界，必定已經離開了尋和伺的慾望。不說已經離開了尋和伺的慾望的下地諸法，也可以稱為無尋無伺。如果這樣的話，未離開下地尋和伺的慾望的上地諸法，也應該稱為有尋伺等。這樣建立就會造成很大的混亂。所以這三種地界只能就界地上下進行建立。 現在觀察這個意思，依據染污和離染來解釋有尋有伺地和無尋唯伺地是不合理的，只能解釋無尋無伺地。這樣看來，這段論文並非完全合理。怎麼能說依據有染和無染來建立三種地界的區別呢？身在地獄，成就了三地的染污，應該稱為三地。已經隨著所離的染污，應該不屬於那個地界了。所以現在應該問這個第三位論師的解釋，界地是如何形成差別的呢？ 因為各個地界的法有粗細的差異。這種粗細的差異是如何形成的呢？必定是依據有染的繫縛法不同。無漏的離染法也依此地法而不同。已經斷除了的是此有染的種類，所以被那個地界所攝。說有染，是指有現行的染污。所以身在地獄，雖然成就了三界的種子，有染污，但不能稱為三地。說離染，是根據生到上界的意義。就不屬於之前的地界了。不說已經離開了這種染污，就不是這個地界。所以《唯識論》的說法是正確的，不同於《瑜伽師地論》。《瑜伽師地論》只是依據二禪以上來討論，如前面第三位論師的解釋。 又一種解釋，這裡說有染，是指有那個現行的染污。離染，就是指無漏等。隨著所離的染污地，就是之前有染的地界，現在離開了，所以稱為離染。隨著這種有染和離染兩種情況的不同，地界法也不同。都應該是所應和二種都是那個地界所攝。不說有染就是那個地界，離染就不是。所以文句沒有妨礙。不同於《瑜伽師地論》，《瑜伽師地論》只是說第三地。

【English Translation】 English version: In the No-Rough-Thought-No-Subtle-Thought realms from the Second Dhyana (second level of meditative absorption) upwards, the Non-Perception Samadhi (meditative absorption without perception), the state of Non-Perception Existence, and the Cessation Samadhi (meditative absorption of cessation) are called No-Mind realms. All other states are called Mind-Having realms. Afterwards, there are four categories established regarding their similarities and differences, which will be discussed later. Although it is said that here, because of being apart from the desire for rough and subtle thought, it is called the No-Rough-Thought-No-Subtle-Thought realm. But it only refers to the realms from the Second Dhyana upwards, which have certainly already departed from the desire for rough and subtle thought. It does not mean that the lower realm dharmas that have not departed from the desire for rough and subtle thought can also be called No-Rough-Thought-No-Subtle-Thought. If that were the case, then the higher realm dharmas that have not departed from the desire for rough and subtle thought in the lower realms should also be called realms of Rough Thought and Subtle Thought, etc. Such an establishment would create great confusion. Therefore, these three realms can only be established based on the upper and lower levels of the realm. Now, observing this meaning, it is unreasonable to explain the realms of Rough Thought and Subtle Thought and the realm of No-Rough-Thought-Only-Subtle-Thought based on defilement and non-defilement; it can only explain the realm of No-Rough-Thought-No-Subtle-Thought. In this view, this thesis is not entirely reasonable. How can it be said that the distinction between the three realms is established based on defilement and non-defilement? If one's body is in the lower realm, achieving the defilement of the three realms, should it be called the three realms? Having already followed the defilement that has been departed from, it should not belong to that realm. Therefore, we should now ask for the explanation of this third teacher: how are the differences between the realms formed? It is because the dharmas of each realm have differences in coarseness and subtlety. How are these differences in coarseness and subtlety formed? It must be based on the differences in the defiled and bound dharmas. The undefiled and non-defiled dharmas also differ according to the dharmas of this realm. What has been severed is the category of this defilement, so it is included in that realm. Saying 'defiled' means having present defilement. Therefore, even though one's body is in the lower realm, achieving the seeds of the three realms, having defilement, it cannot be called the three realms. Saying 'non-defiled' is based on the meaning of being born in the upper realm. It does not belong to the previous realm. It does not mean that not having departed from this defilement means it is not this realm. Therefore, the statement in the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only) is correct, unlike the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice). The Yogacarabhumi-sastra only discusses based on the Second Dhyana and above, as explained by the third teacher earlier. Another explanation: here, saying 'defiled' means having that present defilement. 'Non-defiled' refers to the undefiled, etc. Following the defiled realm that has been departed from, that is, the previously defiled realm, is now departed from, so it is called non-defiled. Following the differences between these two kinds of defilement and non-defilement, the realm dharmas are also different. Both what should be and the two kinds should be included in that realm. It does not mean that being defiled is that realm, and being non-defiled is not. Therefore, the text has no obstacles. It is different from the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, which only discusses the third realm.

故。由此真智亦屬三地。依尋．伺處法緣真如為境。入此定故。不由分別現行。以諸無漏性離染法依彼他法。尚即彼地。況已離染。三地有漏法而非三地。故文正義。不爾便為不正義也。

五十六云。問生第二定或生上地。若有尋有伺眼等識現在前云何此地無尋無伺。若不現前云何于彼有色諸根而能領受彼地境界。答由有尋有伺諸識種子。隨逐無尋無伺三摩地故。從彼起已此得現前。乃至廣說。

三．七分別。今以十門分別。一出體。二行相。三釋名。四廢立。五八識所攝。六有無漏。七三世所緣。八與十散動十分別相攝。九斷位。十問答分別 尋．伺本末頌。

體．境．行．等起 差別．及抉擇 行．觸．引．相應 求業名流轉

瑜伽第五。尋．伺以七門分別。一體性。二所緣。三行相。四等起。五差別。六抉擇。七流轉。一體性者。不深推度思為體性。若深推度惠為體性。二所緣者。以名．句．文身義為所緣。三行相者。尋求行是尋。伺察行是伺。四等起者。謂發語言。五差別者。謂七分別。六抉擇者。若尋．伺即分別耶等。若尋．伺皆分別。有分別非尋．伺。謂望出世道所餘一切三界心．心所法。七流轉者。五趣之處皆為六問。如那落迦尋．伺。何等行。何所觸。何所引。何相應

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 因此，這種真正的智慧也屬於第三禪定。它依賴於有尋、有伺的處所，以法緣真如（dharma-dhatu-tathata，宇宙萬法的真實本性）為境界。進入這種禪定狀態，就不會有分別唸的現行。因為各種無漏、性離染的法，依賴於其他的法，尚且屬於那個禪定之境，更何況是已經遠離染污的法呢？第三禪定中的有漏法，並非屬於第三禪定。所以經文的真正含義是這樣的，否則就是不正確的理解。

《瑜伽師地論》第五十六卷說：『如果有人問，如果生於第二禪定，或者生於更高的禪定，如果帶有尋、伺的眼識等在眼前顯現，為什麼這個禪定之地沒有尋、沒有伺呢？如果這些眼識等不顯現，那麼如何通過這些有色的根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身）來領受那個禪定之地的境界呢？』回答是：『由於帶有尋、伺的各種識的種子，跟隨無尋、無伺的三摩地（samadhi，禪定），從那個禪定中出來之後，這些帶有尋、伺的識才能顯現。』乃至廣說。

《瑜伽師地論》第三卷和第七卷分別對此進行了闡述。現在用十個方面來分別說明：一、指出體性；二、說明行相；三、解釋名稱；四、說明廢立；五、說明八識所攝；六、說明有漏無漏；七、說明三世所緣；八、說明與十種散動和十分別相的包含關係；九、說明斷除的位次；十、用問答的方式進行分別。下面是關於尋、伺的根本和末端的偈頌：

體性、境界、行相、等起，差別、以及抉擇；行、觸、引、相應，求、業、名、流轉。

《瑜伽師地論》第五卷，用七個方面來分別說明尋、伺：一、體性；二、所緣；三、行相；四、等起；五、差別；六、抉擇；七、流轉。一、體性：不深入推測的思考是尋的體性，深入推測的智慧是伺的體性。二、所緣：以名身（nama-kaya，名稱的集合）、句身（pada-kaya，語句的集合）、文身（vyanjana-kaya，文字的集合）和義（artha，意義）為所緣。三、行相：尋求是尋的行相，伺察是伺的行相。四、等起：指發起語言。五、差別：指七種分別。六、抉擇：如果問尋、伺就是分別嗎？如果尋、伺都是分別，那麼就有分別不是尋、伺的情況，比如對於超出世間道的其餘一切三界（欲界、色界、無色界）的心和心所法來說。七、流轉：五趣（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、人、天）之處都有六個問題，比如在那落迦（naraka，地獄）中，尋、伺是什麼樣的行相？觸及什麼？引導什麼？相應于什麼？

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, this true wisdom also belongs to the third dhyana (meditative absorption). It relies on the places of vitarka (initial application of thought) and vicara (sustained application of thought), taking dharma-dhatu-tathata (the suchness of the element of dharma) as its object. Entering this samadhi (concentration), there will be no manifestation of discrimination. Because various undefiled, inherently pure dharmas (elements of existence), relying on other dharmas, still belong to that state of dhyana, let alone those that have already been freed from defilement? The defiled dharmas in the third dhyana do not belong to the third dhyana. Therefore, the true meaning of the scripture is like this; otherwise, it would be an incorrect understanding.

The fifty-sixth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra says: 'If someone asks, if one is born in the second dhyana or born in a higher dhyana, if the eye-consciousness, etc., with vitarka and vicara appear before one, why is there no vitarka and vicara in this place of dhyana? If these eye-consciousnesses, etc., do not appear, then how can one perceive the realm of that dhyana through these colored roots (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body)?' The answer is: 'Because the seeds of various consciousnesses with vitarka and vicara follow the samadhi without vitarka and vicara, after arising from that dhyana, these consciousnesses with vitarka and vicara can manifest.' And so on, extensively explained.

The third and seventh volumes of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra explain this separately. Now, I will explain it separately in ten aspects: 1. Pointing out the essence; 2. Explaining the characteristics; 3. Explaining the name; 4. Explaining the establishment and abolition; 5. Explaining what is included in the eight consciousnesses; 6. Explaining defiled and undefiled; 7. Explaining what is conditioned by the three times; 8. Explaining the relationship of inclusion with the ten kinds of distraction and the ten kinds of differentiation; 9. Explaining the stages of cutting off; 10. Differentiating by means of questions and answers. Below is a verse about the root and end of vitarka and vicara:

Essence, object, characteristic, arising, difference, and ascertainment; action, contact, leading, correspondence, seeking, karma, name, transmigration.

The fifth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra explains vitarka and vicara in seven aspects: 1. Essence; 2. Object; 3. Characteristic; 4. Arising; 5. Difference; 6. Ascertainment; 7. Transmigration. 1. Essence: Thinking without deep speculation is the essence of vitarka; wisdom with deep speculation is the essence of vicara. 2. Object: Taking nama-kaya (collection of names), pada-kaya (collection of phrases), vyanjana-kaya (collection of letters), and artha (meaning) as the object. 3. Characteristic: Seeking is the characteristic of vitarka; investigation is the characteristic of vicara. 4. Arising: Refers to initiating language. 5. Difference: Refers to the seven kinds of differentiation. 6. Ascertainment: If one asks, are vitarka and vicara discrimination? If vitarka and vicara are both discrimination, then there are discriminations that are not vitarka and vicara, such as for all the minds and mental factors of the three realms (desire realm, form realm, formless realm) that are beyond the path of transcending the world. 7. Transmigration: In the places of the five destinies (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, gods), there are six questions, such as in naraka (hell), what are the characteristics of vitarka and vicara? What does it touch? What does it lead to? What does it correspond to?

。何所求。何業轉。乃至初靜慮尋．伺為問亦爾。且地獄中戚行轉。觸非愛境。引發于苦。與憂相應。常求解脫。嬈心業轉。一向苦受。餓鬼亦爾。傍生．人趣．大力餓鬼。多分戚行。少分欣行。多觸非愛。少觸愛境。多分引苦。少分引樂。多憂相應。少喜相應。多分求脫苦。少分求遇樂。嬈心業轉。欲界天尋．伺多分欣行。少分戚行。多觸可愛。少觸非愛。多引樂。少引苦。多喜相應。少憂相應。多分求遇樂。少分求脫苦。嬈心業轉。初靜慮地一向欣行。一向髑可愛境。一向引樂。一向喜俱。唯求不離樂。不嬈心業轉。

十五不共業。頌曰。

分別．審所緣 醉．狂．夢．覺．悶 醒．發業．離欲 退．斷．續．生．死

瑜伽第一說意識十五種不共業。一分別所緣。即七分別。二審慮所緣。謂如理．不如理．及俱非所引。三醉。四狂。五夢。六覺。七悶。八醒。九能發身．語業。十離欲。十一離欲退。十二斷善。十三續善。十四生。十五死。

法華第二。舍利弗云。而今從佛聞所未聞未曾有法斷諸疑悔。彼偈又云我已得漏盡。聞亦除憂惱 疑悔即惡作。厭也。惠俱無貪。疑即事疑。疑不作佛。憂即是悔。悔先惡故。悔即是疑。

此中正思惟。若體是尋通無漏者。何故五十七二十

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：他們尋求什麼？什麼業在流轉？乃至初禪的尋和伺也是如此問。且在地獄中，戚行（憂愁的行為）在流轉，接觸的都是不喜歡的境界，引發痛苦，與憂愁相應，總是尋求解脫。這是惱亂心的業在流轉，完全是苦受。餓鬼道也是如此。傍生道（畜生道）、人道、大力餓鬼，大部分是戚行，少部分是欣行（欣喜的行為），大部分接觸不喜歡的境界，少部分接觸喜歡的境界，大部分引發痛苦，少部分引發快樂，大部分與憂愁相應，少部分與喜悅相應，大部分尋求脫離痛苦，少部分尋求遇到快樂。這是惱亂心的業在流轉。欲界天的尋和伺，大部分是欣行，少部分是戚行，大部分接觸喜歡的境界，少部分接觸不喜歡的境界，大部分引發快樂，少部分引發痛苦，大部分與喜悅相應，少部分與憂愁相應，大部分尋求遇到快樂，少部分尋求脫離痛苦。這是惱亂心的業在流轉。初禪地完全是欣行，完全是喜歡的境界，完全引發快樂，完全與喜悅相應，只是尋求不離開快樂，不是惱亂心的業在流轉。

十五種不共業。頌曰：

分別、審所緣，醉、狂、夢、覺、悶， 醒、發業、離欲，退、斷、續、生、死。

《瑜伽師地論》第一說，意識有十五種不共業。一是分別所緣，即七種分別。二是審慮所緣，即如理、不如理以及非如理非不如理所引發的。三是醉。四是狂。五是夢。六是覺。七是悶。八是醒。九是能引發身語業。十是離欲。十一是離欲退。十二是斷善。十三是續善。十四是生。十五是死。

《法華經》第二，舍利弗（Śāriputra，佛陀十大弟子之一，以智慧著稱）說：『而今從佛聞所未聞未曾有法，斷諸疑悔。』那偈頌又說：『我已得漏盡，聞亦除憂惱。』疑悔即惡作（kukkritya，對已做錯的事後悔），厭也。惠俱無貪。疑即事疑，疑不作佛。憂即是悔，悔先惡故。悔即是疑。

此中正思惟，若體是尋通無漏者，何故五十七二十

【English Translation】 English version: What do they seek? What karma revolves? Even the initial dhyana's (jhāna, meditative state) vitarka (initial application of thought) and vicara (sustained application of thought) are asked in the same way. Moreover, in hell, the sorrowful conduct (戚行) revolves, contacting unpleasant realms, causing suffering, corresponding with sorrow, and always seeking liberation. This is the karma of disturbing the mind revolving, entirely suffering. The preta (hungry ghost) realm is also like this. The tiryagyoni (animal realm), the human realm, and the powerful pretas mostly have sorrowful conduct, a small part have joyful conduct (欣行), mostly contacting unpleasant realms, a small part contacting pleasant realms, mostly causing suffering, a small part causing happiness, mostly corresponding with sorrow, a small part corresponding with joy, mostly seeking to escape suffering, a small part seeking to encounter happiness. This is the karma of disturbing the mind revolving. The vitarka and vicara of the desire realm devas (gods), mostly have joyful conduct, a small part have sorrowful conduct, mostly contacting pleasant realms, a small part contacting unpleasant realms, mostly causing happiness, a small part causing suffering, mostly corresponding with joy, a small part corresponding with sorrow, mostly seeking to encounter happiness, a small part seeking to escape suffering. This is the karma of disturbing the mind revolving. The first dhyana ground entirely has joyful conduct, entirely pleasant realms, entirely causing happiness, entirely corresponding with joy, only seeking not to be separated from happiness, not the karma of disturbing the mind revolving.

Fifteen Uncommon Karmas. Verse:

Discrimination, deliberation on the object, drunkenness, madness, dream, wakefulness, dullness, Awakening, generating karma, detachment from desire, regression from detachment, severing, continuing, birth, death.

The first [section] of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論, Treatise on the Stages of Yoga Practice) says that consciousness has fifteen kinds of uncommon karmas. First is discrimination of the object, which is the seven discriminations. Second is deliberation on the object, which is caused by rational, irrational, and neither rational nor irrational [thoughts]. Third is drunkenness. Fourth is madness. Fifth is dream. Sixth is wakefulness. Seventh is dullness. Eighth is awakening. Ninth is the ability to generate bodily and verbal karma. Tenth is detachment from desire (離欲). Eleventh is regression from detachment from desire. Twelfth is severing wholesome [roots]. Thirteenth is continuing wholesome [roots]. Fourteenth is birth. Fifteenth is death.

In the second [chapter] of the Lotus Sutra (法華經, Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra), Śāriputra (舍利弗, one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha, known for his wisdom) said, 'Now I hear from the Buddha the unprecedented Dharma, cutting off all doubts and regrets.' That verse also says, 'I have attained the exhaustion of outflows, and hearing also removes sorrow and vexation.' Doubt and regret are kukkritya (惡作, remorse over wrongdoings), aversion. Wisdom is without greed. Doubt is doubt about things, doubting not becoming a Buddha. Sorrow is regret, regretting past evils. Regret is doubt.

Here, with correct contemplation, if the substance is vitarka, universally un-outflowed, why fifty-seven twenty

二根中五根。不攝三十七中六法。謂語．業．命．喜．安．舍。故正思惟別即惠根。此師以因果通論故體即惠。前師此可為正。故尋非無漏。以尋名說之。如三界適悅名樂。瑜伽第四云。若無漏界有為定所攝初靜慮。亦名有尋有伺。依尋．伺處法緣真如為境入此定故。不由分別現行故。故知尋．伺引無漏。無漏引中兩解皆得 若言尋．伺必是分別。而不定說唯屬第三故通無漏。何不對分別四句分別。以互有寬狹故 悔離欲舍者。法華經第二。舍利子云。我從昔來終日竟夜每自克責。而今從佛聞所未聞未曾有法斷諸疑悔。悔者是法疑悔。非煩惱也。

五十六說。身行有三。謂出．入息．及身業。語行亦三。謂尋．伺．及語業 正思惟與語為目故。尋通無漏 五十七。五根不攝三十七品中六語．業．命．喜．安．舍。不說不攝正思惟即是惠故。此云何通 瑜伽五十六說。身行有三。謂入．出息．及身業。語行亦三。謂尋．伺．及語業。意行亦三。謂受．楊．及意業。故佛無尋．伺何妨語轉。業不無故 第四禪中二息等既無其身得住。二定處應無尋．伺。及語業故語應亦轉 遍．非遍行故。如前已說。身業唯染不可為例。又論且舉身業染者。論實亦有無漏善法。不爾佛身語如何得轉耶。故以業思為轉。常入第四定故。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 二根中五根（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）不包含三十七道品中的六法，即語（語言）、業（行為）、命（生命）、喜（喜悅）、安（安穩）、舍（捨棄）。因此，正思惟（Samma-sankappa）特別指慧根（Panna-indriya）。此師認為因果是普遍適用的，所以正思惟的體性就是智慧。前一位老師的觀點可以認為是正確的。因此，尋（Vitakka）並非一定都是有漏的，因為尋的名稱是這樣說的。例如，三界（欲界、色界、無色界）中的適悅都可以稱為樂。瑜伽師地論第四卷說，如果無漏界（Anasrava-dhatu）的有為定（Saklesika-samadhi）所包含的初禪（Prathama-dhyana），也稱為有尋有伺（Savitakka-savicara）。這是因為依靠尋、伺所緣的法緣真如（Tathata）為境界而入此定，不是通過分別現行而入定的。因此，可知尋、伺可以引導無漏，無漏的引導中兩種解釋都成立。如果說尋、伺一定是分別，但又不能確定說只屬於第三禪（Tritiya-dhyana），所以尋、伺也通於無漏。為什麼不對分別作四句分別呢？因為它們之間互有寬窄。悔離欲舍，法華經第二品中，舍利子（Sariputta）說：『我從過去以來，終日竟夜，常常自我克責，而今從佛（Buddha）那裡聽聞到前所未聞、未曾有之法，斷除了各種疑悔。』這裡的悔是指對法的疑悔，不是指煩惱。

五十六說，身行有三種，即出息（assasa）、入息（passasa）和身業（kaya-kamma）。語行也有三種，即尋、伺和語業（vaci-kamma）。正思惟與語相關，所以尋通於無漏。五十七說，五根不包含三十七道品中的六種：語、業、命、喜、安、舍。不說不包含正思惟，是因為正思惟就是慧。這如何解釋呢？瑜伽師地論第五十六卷說，身行有三種，即入息、出息和身業；語行也有三種，即尋、伺和語業；意行也有三種，即受（vedana）、想（sanna）和意業（mano-kamma）。所以佛沒有尋、伺，不妨礙語言的運轉，因為業不是沒有的。第四禪（Caturtha-dhyana）中，二息等既然沒有了，身體還能存在。二定處（Dvi-samapatti-sthana）應該沒有尋、伺和語業，所以語言也應該停止運轉。這是因為遍行和非遍行，如前所述。身業只有染污的，不能作為例子。而且論中只是舉了身業中染污的例子，實際上也有無漏善法。否則，佛的身語如何運轉呢？所以用業思（karma-cetana）來運轉。因為佛常常入于第四禪。

【English Translation】 English version Among the two roots, the five roots (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom) do not encompass the six dharmas within the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment, namely speech (vaca), action (karma), life (jivitendriya), joy (piti), tranquility (passaddhi), and equanimity (upekkha). Therefore, right thought (Samma-sankappa) specifically refers to the wisdom root (Panna-indriya). This teacher believes that cause and effect are universally applicable, so the nature of right thought is wisdom. The previous teacher's view can be considered correct. Therefore, initial application of thought (Vitakka) is not necessarily defiled, because that is how the name 'Vitakka' is used. For example, pleasant experiences in the three realms (desire realm, form realm, formless realm) can be called pleasure. The fourth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra states that if the first dhyana (Prathama-dhyana) included in the conditioned samadhi (Saklesika-samadhi) of the undefiled realm (Anasrava-dhatu) is also called 'with initial and sustained application of thought' (Savitakka-savicara). This is because one enters this samadhi by relying on the suchness (Tathata) that is the object of initial and sustained application of thought, and not by the active functioning of discrimination. Therefore, it can be known that initial and sustained application of thought can lead to the undefiled, and both interpretations are valid for the guidance of the undefiled. If it is said that initial and sustained application of thought must be discrimination, but it cannot be determined that it only belongs to the third dhyana (Tritiya-dhyana), then initial and sustained application of thought also applies to the undefiled. Why not analyze discrimination with a fourfold analysis? Because they have different scopes. Repentance, detachment from desire, and abandonment: In the second chapter of the Lotus Sutra, Sariputta (Sariputta) said: 'From the past, day and night, I have always reproached myself, but now I have heard from the Buddha (Buddha) the unprecedented Dharma, and I have cut off all doubts and regrets.' Here, regret refers to doubt about the Dharma, not afflictions.

Section 56 says that there are three bodily activities: inhalation (assasa), exhalation (passasa), and bodily action (kaya-kamma). There are also three verbal activities: initial application of thought, sustained application of thought, and verbal action (vaci-kamma). Right thought is related to speech, so initial application of thought applies to the undefiled. Section 57 says that the five roots do not include the six factors in the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment: speech, action, life, joy, tranquility, and equanimity. It is not said that right thought is not included, because right thought is wisdom. How can this be explained? The fifty-sixth volume of the Yogacarabhumi-sastra says that there are three bodily activities: inhalation, exhalation, and bodily action; there are also three verbal activities: initial application of thought, sustained application of thought, and verbal action; there are also three mental activities: feeling (vedana), perception (sanna), and mental action (mano-kamma). Therefore, the Buddha does not have initial and sustained application of thought, but it does not hinder the functioning of language, because action is not absent. In the fourth dhyana (Caturtha-dhyana), since the two breaths and so on are absent, the body can still exist. The two meditative attainments (Dvi-samapatti-sthana) should not have initial and sustained application of thought and verbal action, so language should also cease to function. This is because of pervasive and non-pervasive activities, as mentioned earlier. Bodily action is only defiled and cannot be used as an example. Moreover, the treatise only gives the example of defiled bodily action, but there are also undefiled virtuous dharmas. Otherwise, how would the Buddha's body and speech function? Therefore, volitional thought (karma-cetana) is used to function. Because the Buddha often enters the fourth dhyana.

心所俱生頌曰。

五法五俱起 九法必六俱 九法必十四 二十一十五 三法起十六 八法十七俱 是心所相應 惠者應當思

瑜伽五十七二十二根中。問世尊依何根處說如是言。遠行及獨行。無身寐于窟。答依意根處。由於前際無始時故。遍緣一切所知境故。名為遠行。諸心相續一一轉故。無主宰故。名為獨行。無色無見亦無對故。名為無身。依止色故名寐于窟 攝論第四云。遊歷一切所識境故。名為遠行。為證此義。復說獨行。無第二故。言無身者。無形質故。寐于窟故。居在內故 言調此者。于如是心作自在故。難調心者。性𢤱悷故。

上座部勘有中有。無何得說言中有必起潤生煩惱耶 本計無中有。末計有故。已下文理唯識中看。

無想異熟威儀除行。無在因中行入定故。果難起故。

和上所立唯識比量云。真故極成色。不離於眼識。自許初三攝眼所不攝故。猶如眼識 順憬師決定相違云。真故極成色。定離於眼識。自許初三攝眼識不攝故。猶如眼根 此如憬師抄解。裕師邊取。

他心智中。應敘安惠師解二十唯識文。

瑜伽八十九受有八種。初二內外。後六即六六法所建立。所以後勘。前第三論抄注之。

然不還者對治力強正潤生

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 心所俱生頌說： 五法與五法同時生起，九法必定與六法同時生起。 九法必定與十四法同時生起，二十一法與十五法同時生起。 三法生起時與十六法同時生起，八法與十七法同時生起。 這些是心所相應的情況，有智慧的人應當思考。

《瑜伽師地論》第五十七卷和第二十二根品中提到。問：世尊依據哪個根處說出這樣的話：『遠行及獨行，無身寐于窟』？答：依據意根處。因為意根在前際是無始的，所以能普遍緣取一切所知的境界，因此稱為『遠行』。諸心相續一個接一個地轉變，沒有主宰，因此稱為『獨行』。沒有顏色，不能被看見，也沒有對立之物，因此稱為『無身』。依止於色法，所以說『寐于窟』。《攝大乘論》第四卷說：『遊歷一切所識境故，名為遠行。』爲了證實這個意義，又說『獨行』，因為沒有第二個。說『無身』，是因為沒有形質。說『寐于窟』，是因為居住在內。

說『調此者』，是指對於這樣的心能夠自在掌控。說『難調心者』，是因為心性粗暴難以馴服。

上座部考證說沒有中有（bardo，中陰身）。如果沒有中有，怎麼能說中有必定會生起潤生煩惱呢？原本認為沒有中有，後來又認為有。以下的內容和道理可以在《唯識論》中檢視。

無想定的異熟果、威儀和除行，是因為在因地中沒有行入定，所以果難以生起。

和上（Upadhyaya，親教師）所立的唯識比量是：真實的、被普遍認可的色法，不離於眼識。因為自許最初的三種色法不被眼識所攝取，就像眼識一樣。順憬師的決定相違是：真實的、被普遍認可的色法，必定離於眼識。因為自許最初的三種色法不被眼識所攝取，就像眼根一樣。這如同憬師的抄解，裕師的取用。

在他心智中，應該敘述安惠師對《二十唯識論》的解釋。

《瑜伽師地論》第八十九卷說，受有八種。最初兩種是內外受，後六種是六六法所建立的。所以要向後勘查。前面的第三論有抄注。

然而，不還果（Anagamin，阿那含）的聖者，因為對治的力量強大，所以能夠阻止潤生。

【English Translation】 English version: The verse on simultaneous arising of mental factors says: Five dharmas arise simultaneously with five; nine dharmas certainly arise simultaneously with six. Nine dharmas certainly arise simultaneously with fourteen; twenty-one dharmas with fifteen. When three dharmas arise, they arise simultaneously with sixteen; eight dharmas arise simultaneously with seventeen. These are the corresponding mental factors; the wise should contemplate them.

In the Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) Volume 57 and the Twenty-Two Roots section. Question: Upon which root did the World-Honored One rely when saying, 'Far-going and solitary-going, without a body, sleeps in a cave'? Answer: Upon the mind-root (意根). Because the mind-root is without beginning in the past, it can universally cognize all knowable objects, hence it is called 'far-going'. Because the continuum of minds transforms one after another, without a master, hence it is called 'solitary-going'. Because it has no color, cannot be seen, and has no opposite, hence it is called 'without a body'. Because it relies on form, it is said to 'sleep in a cave'. The fourth volume of the Mahayanasamgraha (攝大乘論) says: 'Because it travels through all cognized objects, it is called 'far-going'.' To confirm this meaning, it is further said 'solitary-going', because there is no second. Saying 'without a body' is because it has no form. Saying 'sleeps in a cave' is because it dwells within.

Saying 'to tame this' refers to being able to freely control such a mind. Saying 'difficult to tame mind' is because the mind's nature is coarse and difficult to subdue.

The Theravada (上座部) school examines and says there is no intermediate existence (bardo, 中有). If there is no intermediate existence, how can it be said that the intermediate existence will certainly give rise to the afflictions that propel rebirth? Originally it was thought that there was no intermediate existence, but later it was thought that there was. The following content and reasoning can be found in the Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi (唯識論).

The fruition, deportment, and cessation of activity of the non-perception samadhi (無想定) are because there was no practice of entering the samadhi in the causal stage, so the fruition is difficult to arise.

The Upadhyaya's (和上) established Vijnapti (唯識) syllogism is: Truly existent and universally accepted form is not separate from eye-consciousness. Because it is admitted that the first three forms are not encompassed by eye-consciousness, just like eye-consciousness. Shun Jing's determination is contradictory: Truly existent and universally accepted form is certainly separate from eye-consciousness. Because it is admitted that the first three forms are not encompassed by eye-consciousness, just like the eye-organ. This is like Jing's commentary and Yu's adoption.

In the knowledge of others' minds, one should narrate Anhui's explanation of the Twenty Verses on Vijnaptimatrata (二十唯識論).

Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) Volume 89 says that there are eight kinds of feeling (受). The first two are internal and external feelings, and the latter six are established by the six-six dharmas. Therefore, one should examine it later. The preceding third treatise has annotations.

However, the Anagamin (不還果) saint, because the power of counteracting is strong, can prevent rebirth.

位不起煩惱等者。于中有五難。取下第五問應為第一。第二應為第二。第一為第三。余如次 一問。如五十九云見諦唯以隨眠潤。初聖亦以現行潤。既說異生現．種潤。異生應有唯種潤 答聖多階降潤有現行。異生類等故無唯種 亦應聖生他地唯種潤生。若生自地以現行潤故。異生亦應爾。若生自地未有治道故可用現。生他地應唯種潤 今解不然。無漏道圓。勢勝煩惱。無漏道缺。或現便強。不同異生故不為例。

二難。初二果聖生自地潤通現行。不還生自處義應現潤 答此可爾。準初二果故。如處處不還等。論略不說。又理不然。初二果未有圓道故。可用現潤。第三果已有圓道故。設生自地亦唯種潤。論五說以現行潤故。唯初二果說用現故 三難。何故異生潤現．種俱潤。聖人但種。種強彼耶 答聖業決定。業強可唯藉種。異生業不爾故通現行 問若爾者初二果業亦已決定。應唯種潤 答凡生苦逼善業微。必藉現行方可潤。聖生苦少善業勝。由此唯用種子潤。無漏亦可資有漏故。不同凡夫。又凡夫不覺生多小。可藉煩惱現．種皆助潤。聖人知業多小定。由此唯用種子潤 四難。六行所伏不伏潤生貪等。唯伏散境貪等。何故凡夫得定而不下生潤。業皆在乃生他地 答藉助伴貪愛等故可潤生。彼伴已亡力弱不能獨

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 對於那些不再受煩惱困擾的人來說，存在五種困難。將第五個問題移到第一個，第二個問題保持為第二個，第一個問題變為第三個，其餘問題依次排列。

一問：正如第五十九卷所說，見諦（dṛṣṭi-satya，見真諦）唯以隨眠（anuśaya，潛在的煩惱）滋潤，初聖（第一個聖者）也以現行（paryavasthāna，顯現的煩惱）滋潤。既然說異生（pṛthag-jana，凡夫）以現行和種子（bīja，煩惱的潛在形式）滋潤，那麼異生應該有隻以種子滋潤的情況嗎？

答：聖者（ārya，證悟者）在多個階位上可能退轉，因此滋潤可能需要現行。異生與此類情況不同，所以沒有隻以種子滋潤的情況。也應該考慮聖者生於他地（其他境界）時，可能只以種子滋潤而生。如果生於自地（自身境界），則以現行滋潤，那麼異生也應該如此。如果生於自地，因為還沒有對治之道，所以可以使用現行。生於他地應該只以種子滋潤。

現在的解釋並非如此。無漏道（anāsrava-mārga，沒有煩惱的道路）圓滿，其力量勝過煩惱。無漏道缺失，或者現行變得強大。這與異生不同，所以不能作為例子。

二難：初果（srota-āpanna，入流者）和二果（sakṛdāgāmin，一來者）的聖者生於自地時，滋潤可以通過現行。不還者（anāgāmin，不歸者）生於自處，按照道理應該以現行滋潤。

答：這可能是對的。參照初果和二果的情況。就像在各處，不還者等情況，論中簡略地沒有說。但道理上並非如此。初果和二果還沒有圓滿的道，所以可以使用現行滋潤。第三果（anāgāmin，不還者）已經有了圓滿的道，所以即使生於自地，也只以種子滋潤。論第五卷說以現行滋潤，所以只有初果和二果才說使用現行。

三難：為什麼異生滋潤時，現行和種子都滋潤，而聖人只用種子？是種子比他們更強嗎？

答：聖者的業（karma，行為）是決定的。業的力量強大，可以只憑借種子。異生的業不是這樣，所以現行和種子都滋潤。問：如果這樣，初果和二果的業也已經決定了，應該只用種子滋潤。答：凡夫（pṛthag-jana，未證悟者）生於苦難之中，善業微弱，必須藉助現行才能滋潤。聖者生的苦難少，善業殊勝，因此只用種子滋潤。無漏也可以資助有漏，所以與凡夫不同。而且凡夫不覺知生的大小多少，可以藉助煩惱的現行和種子來幫助滋潤。聖人知道業的大小多少是確定的，因此只用種子滋潤。

四難：六行（ṣaḍ-ākāra，六種思維方式）所伏和不伏的滋潤生貪等，只是伏散境（vikṣipta-gocara，散亂的境界）的貪等。為什麼凡夫得到禪定（dhyāna，冥想狀態）而不下生滋潤？業都在才能生於他地。

答：藉助助伴，如貪愛等，可以滋潤生。那些助伴已經消失，力量弱小，不能獨自滋潤。

【English Translation】 English version For those who are free from afflictions, there are five difficulties. The fifth question should be taken as the first, the second remains as the second, the first becomes the third, and the rest follow in order.

Question 1: As stated in volume 59, seeing the truth (dṛṣṭi-satya) is only nourished by latent afflictions (anuśaya), and the first noble one (ārya) is also nourished by manifest afflictions (paryavasthāna). Since it is said that ordinary beings (pṛthag-jana) are nourished by both manifest and seed (bīja) afflictions, should ordinary beings also have cases where they are only nourished by seed afflictions?

Answer: Noble ones (ārya) may regress in multiple stages, so nourishment may require manifest afflictions. Ordinary beings are different from such cases, so there is no case where they are only nourished by seed afflictions. It should also be considered that when noble ones are born in other realms, they may only be born nourished by seed afflictions. If they are born in their own realm, they are nourished by manifest afflictions, so ordinary beings should also be like this. If they are born in their own realm, because there is no antidote yet, manifest afflictions can be used. Being born in other realms should only be nourished by seed afflictions.

The current explanation is not like this. The path without outflows (anāsrava-mārga) is complete, and its power surpasses afflictions. The path without outflows is lacking, or manifest afflictions become strong. This is different from ordinary beings, so it cannot be taken as an example.

Difficulty 2: When noble ones of the first fruit (srota-āpanna) and second fruit (sakṛdāgāmin) are born in their own realm, nourishment can pass through manifest afflictions. Non-returners (anāgāmin) being born in their own place, according to reason, should be nourished by manifest afflictions.

Answer: This may be correct. Refer to the cases of the first and second fruits. Just like in various places, the cases of non-returners, etc., are briefly not mentioned in the treatise. But the reasoning is not like this. The first and second fruits do not yet have a complete path, so manifest afflictions can be used for nourishment. The third fruit (anāgāmin) already has a complete path, so even if they are born in their own realm, they are only nourished by seed afflictions. Volume 5 of the treatise says that they are nourished by manifest afflictions, so only the first and second fruits are said to use manifest afflictions.

Difficulty 3: Why is it that when ordinary beings are nourished, both manifest and seed afflictions nourish, while noble ones only use seeds? Are the seeds stronger than them?

Answer: The karma (action) of noble ones is determined. The power of karma is strong, so it can rely solely on seeds. The karma of ordinary beings is not like this, so both manifest and seed afflictions nourish. Question: If this is the case, the karma of the first and second fruits is also already determined, so they should only be nourished by seeds. Answer: Ordinary beings (pṛthag-jana) are born into suffering, and their good karma is weak, so they must rely on manifest afflictions to nourish. Noble ones are born with less suffering, and their good karma is superior, so they only use seeds for nourishment. The outflow-free can also assist the outflow-having, so it is different from ordinary beings. Moreover, ordinary beings are not aware of the size and amount of births, so they can rely on the manifest and seed afflictions to help nourish. Noble ones know that the size and amount of karma is certain, so they only use seeds for nourishment.

Difficulty 4: The taming and untaming of the six aspects (ṣaḍ-ākāra) nourish the arising of greed, etc., only taming the greed, etc., of scattered states (vikṣipta-gocara). Why is it that ordinary beings attain dhyana (meditative state) but do not nourish lower rebirths? Only when the karma is all there can they be born in other realms.

Answer: By relying on companions, such as greed and love, they can nourish rebirth. Those companions have already disappeared, and their power is weak, so they cannot nourish alone.

潤。由此不生下地。又凡造新業勝而上生。聖由故業而生。有種即生彼地如凡夫在欲界具五趣之業。隨一業勝而先生。故雖下業不無。上業勝初先往。若上業劣。排之為後報。退失上定而生自界。亦無有失 五難。何故不許六識中俱生我見等。雖得世道而不能伏。雖得第三果下不能斷。至上方斷如第七識耶 答彼障果及障出自地故。不同第七微細不障果及出自地故。

瑜伽第十二云滅定中雲。先於其心善修治故。不分別諸行相狀。能入此定能出於定。由極多修習故。任運能入出。出滅定時觸二種觸。一不動。二無所有。三無相。出定之時多由三境而出於定。一由有境。二由境境。三由滅境。如其次第觸三種觸。緣于有境而出定時。無有我慢擾動其心謂此為我。乃至計未來我當有等。故觸不動觸。緣于境境而出定時。無貪無瞋無癡所有。故定觸無所有觸。緣于滅境而出定時。於一切相無思惟故。緣無相界故。言觸無相觸 此意言。出定已緣三境。有境者有為五蘊。即以依非想相而入定心今出。滅境者即以依滅盡相而入于定今出。於二之上無三煩惱之所有。故觸無所有觸名緣境境。引後不定。隨彼出心不與入同。行相別故 或緣六塵而出於定總名境境。此唯是境之境。此說任運自在出定。若未自在而出定時緣于境界

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因此，不會因為（惡業）而墮落下地。而且，凡是造作新的善業，（此業力）殊勝的就會上升到更高的境界。聖者是由於過去的業力而轉生。有（什麼）種子，就會生於（相應的）地方，比如凡夫在欲界，具有五趣（地獄、餓鬼、畜生、人、天）的業力，隨其中一種業力最強盛的就會首先感果。所以，即使有低下的業力，也不是沒有，而是因為上等的業力殊勝，所以最初先去往上界。如果上等的業力較弱，就會被排在後面受報。退失了上界的禪定而轉生到自己所屬的界，也沒有什麼損失五難（五種障礙）。為什麼不允許第六識中生起俱生我見（與生俱來的我見）等？即使獲得了世間的道，也不能夠降伏（我見），即使獲得了第三果（阿那含果），也不能夠斷除（我見），要到上方界（色界、無色界）才能斷除，如同第七識（末那識）一樣呢？ 回答：因為第六識的（我見等）障礙證果以及障礙超出自身所處的地位。這與第七識不同，第七識微細，不障礙證果以及超出自身所處的地位。

《瑜伽師地論》第十二卷說，滅盡定（Nirodha-samāpatti）中說：『先前已經對自己的心善加修治的緣故，不分別諸行的相狀，能夠進入此定，能夠出離此定。由於極多地修習的緣故，能夠任運地進入和出離。』出滅盡定的時候，會觸及兩種觸：一是不動觸，二是無所有觸，三是無相觸。出定的時候，大多由三種境界而出離禪定：一是由有境，二是由境境，三是由滅境。按照次第觸及三種觸。緣于有境而出定的時候，沒有我慢擾動他的心，認為『這是我』，乃至計較未來『我將會有』等等。所以觸及不動觸。緣于境境而出定的時候，沒有貪、沒有嗔、沒有癡所有，所以（此）定觸是無所有觸。緣于滅境而出定的時候，對於一切相都沒有思惟的緣故，緣于無相界（而出定），所以說觸及無相觸。 這裡的意思是說，出定以後緣於三種境界。有境指的是有為的五蘊，就是以依于非想非非想處（Saññā-Nāsaññāyatana）的相而入定的心，現在出定。滅境指的是以依于滅盡的相而入于定，現在出定。在這兩種（境界）之上，沒有三種煩惱的所有，所以（此）觸是無所有觸，名為緣境境。引後不定，隨彼出心不與入同，行相別故。或者緣於六塵而出離禪定，總名為境境。這只是境的境。這裡說的是任運自在地出定。如果不是任運自在地出定，那麼出定的時候就會緣于境界。

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, one will not be reborn in a lower realm due to (evil karma). Moreover, those who create new virtuous karma, if that (karmic force) is superior, will ascend to higher realms. Saints are born due to past karma. Whatever seed (there is), one will be born in (the corresponding) place, such as ordinary beings in the desire realm, who possess the karma of the five destinies (hell, hungry ghosts, animals, humans, and gods), whichever karma is the strongest will ripen first. Therefore, even if there is inferior karma, it is not non-existent, but because the superior karma is dominant, one initially goes to the higher realm first. If the superior karma is weak, it will be scheduled for later retribution. Losing the samādhi (state of meditative absorption) of the higher realm and being reborn in one's own realm is not a loss of the five difficulties (five obstacles). Why is it not permitted for the co-arisen ego-view (innate ego-view) and others to arise in the sixth consciousness? Even if one attains the worldly path, one cannot subdue (the ego-view), even if one attains the third fruit (Anāgāmin), one cannot sever (the ego-view), and it is only severed in the upper realms (form realm, formless realm), like the seventh consciousness (Manas-consciousness)? Answer: Because the (ego-view, etc.) of the sixth consciousness obstructs the attainment of fruition and obstructs transcending one's own position. This is different from the seventh consciousness, which is subtle and does not obstruct the attainment of fruition or transcending one's own position.

The twelfth chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra says, regarding the cessation attainment (Nirodha-samāpatti): 'Because one has previously well-cultivated one's mind, one does not discriminate the characteristics of phenomena, and one is able to enter this samādhi and able to emerge from this samādhi. Because of extremely frequent practice, one is able to enter and emerge effortlessly.' When emerging from cessation attainment, one touches two kinds of contact: one is the immovable contact, the second is the contact of no-thing-ness, and the third is the signless contact. When emerging from samādhi, one mostly emerges from samādhi through three kinds of objects: one is through the object of existence, the second is through the object of objects, and the third is through the object of cessation. In sequence, one touches three kinds of contact. When emerging from samādhi by focusing on the object of existence, there is no arrogance disturbing his mind, thinking 'this is me,' and even calculating in the future 'I will have' and so on. Therefore, one touches the immovable contact. When emerging from samādhi by focusing on the object of objects, there is no greed, no hatred, no delusion, so (this) samādhi contact is the contact of no-thing-ness. When emerging from samādhi by focusing on the object of cessation, because there is no thinking about all signs, (one emerges from samādhi) by focusing on the signless realm, so it is said that one touches the signless contact. The meaning here is that after emerging from samādhi, one focuses on three kinds of objects. The object of existence refers to the conditioned five aggregates, which is the mind that entered samādhi relying on the aspect of the Realm of Neither Perception Nor Non-Perception (Saññā-Nāsaññāyatana), and now emerges from samādhi. The object of cessation refers to entering samādhi relying on the aspect of cessation, and now emerging from samādhi. Above these two (objects), there is none of the three afflictions, so (this) contact is the contact of no-thing-ness, called focusing on the object of objects. Citing the latter as uncertain, the emerging mind does not match the entering, because the modes of operation are different. Or, emerging from samādhi by focusing on the six sense objects is generally called the object of objects. This is only the object of the object. This speaks of effortlessly emerging from samādhi. If one does not effortlessly emerge from samādhi, then when emerging from samādhi, one will focus on the object.

。雖無文說不過此三。

問何故悶．睡俱引無心。問即有觸塵之體。睡不爾耶。睡有睡心所。悶即無耶。有心悶時此悶何也 由悶觸增引生悶位。不同睡數引別位生故。無悶心所也 睡何故非觸塵 能引心所即是睡數。能引悶觸即是心悶故。所以無也。悶或惛沈。無堪任故。或悶即依五蘊上假立。如生無色生死悶數。即本識相應六數也。

五無心。三唯一界。謂睡唯欲。無想定．生唯色。一通三界。謂悶。一非界。謂滅定。二唯一界起。謂睡．無想天。一通二界起。謂無想定。一通三界起。謂悶。一通三界．非界起。謂滅定。亦在凈土起故。二唯善。謂二定。三唯無記。謂餘三。

行相有二。一影像相名行相。何故即似本境。二見分名行相。何故不似耶 答影像名行相。見分之行解相狀。見分之行但境相貌。見分名行相。行於境體中故。如無分別智無狀相。故似不似。又未必影像相一向似境。無為緣等即不似故。

答等無間緣有六。一且隨他義答。二舉自正義答。三識起無初答。四例所同心答。五指喻顯法答。六別以理微答。

三界唯心。依有漏法以明唯識。又說所緣唯識所現。依心生境以明唯識。又說諸法皆不離心。此依不離以顯唯識。唯此一門具攝諸法。又說有情隨心垢．凈。依

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：雖然沒有文字說明，但不會超出這三種情況。

問：為什麼昏悶和睡眠都會引發無心狀態？答：昏悶是因為接觸了塵境的本體，而睡眠不是這樣嗎？睡眠有睡眠的心所。昏悶就沒有心所嗎？有心昏悶的時候，這種昏悶又是什麼呢？答：由昏悶的觸覺增強而引發產生昏悶的狀態。這不同於睡眠，睡眠是引發產生別的狀態。所以沒有昏悶的心所。問：為什麼睡眠不是接觸塵境呢？答：能夠引發心所的就是睡眠的數。能夠引發昏悶的觸覺就是心的昏悶。所以沒有（接觸塵境）。昏悶或者令人昏沉，因為沒有堪能性。或者昏悶是依五蘊之上假立的，比如生於無色界的眾生的昏悶的數，就是本識相應的六個心所數。

五種無心狀態，三種只在一個界中存在。睡眠只在欲界。無想定和無想天只在色界。一種通行於三界，即昏悶。一種不屬於任何界，即滅盡定。兩種只在一個界中生起，即睡眠和無想天。一種通行於兩個界生起，即無想定。一種通行於三界生起，即昏悶。一種通行於三界和非界生起，即滅盡定，因為它也可以在凈土中生起。兩種只有善性，即兩種禪定（無想定和滅盡定）。三種只有無記性，即其餘三種（睡眠、無想天、昏悶）。

行相有兩種。一是影像相，名為行相。為什麼它類似於本境？二是見分，名為行相。為什麼它不像本境呢？答：影像名為行相，見分的作用是理解事物的相狀。見分的作用只是境的相貌。見分名為行相，因為它作用於境的本體之中。比如無分別智沒有狀相，所以有時像，有時不像。而且未必影像相一定像境，因為無為緣等就不像境。

答：等無間緣有六種解釋方式。一是暫且隨順他人的觀點回答。二是提出自己的正確觀點回答。三是從識的生起沒有初始來回答。四是用相同的心來類比回答。五是指示比喻來顯明佛法。六是特別用精微的道理來回答。

三界唯心，是依據有漏法來說明唯識。又說所緣的境是唯識所現，是依據心生境來說明唯識。又說諸法都不離心，這是依據不離心來顯示唯識。只有這一門能夠完全攝取諸法。又說有情隨著心的垢染或清凈而變化，是依據...

【English Translation】 English version: Although there is no textual explanation, it does not go beyond these three.

Question: Why do both dullness and sleep induce a state of no-mind? Answer: Dullness is due to contact with the essence of the object of perception, but is sleep like that? Sleep has its own mental factors (citta-caitta). Does dullness not have mental factors? When there is mental dullness, what is this dullness? Answer: It is caused by the increase of the sensation of dullness, which leads to the arising of the state of dullness. This is different from sleep, which induces the arising of a different state. Therefore, there is no mental factor of dullness. Question: Why is sleep not considered contact with the object of perception? Answer: That which can induce mental factors is the 'number' of sleep. That which can induce the sensation of dullness is the dullness of the mind. Therefore, there is no (contact with the object of perception). Dullness may cause faintness because of the lack of ability. Or dullness is provisionally established on the five skandhas (five aggregates), such as the 'number' of dullness of beings born in the Formless Realm (Arupadhatu), which is the six mental factors associated with the Alaya-consciousness (storehouse consciousness).

Of the five states of no-mind, three exist only in one realm. Sleep exists only in the Desire Realm (Kamadhatu). The Non-Perception Samadhi (Asamjnasamadhi) and the Heaven of Non-Perception (Asamjnasattva) exist only in the Form Realm (Rupadhatu). One pervades the three realms, namely dullness. One does not belong to any realm, namely the Cessation Attainment (Nirodhasamapatti). Two arise only in one realm, namely sleep and the Heaven of Non-Perception. One pervades and arises in two realms, namely the Non-Perception Samadhi. One pervades and arises in the three realms, namely dullness. One pervades and arises in the three realms and non-realm, namely the Cessation Attainment, because it can also arise in the Pure Land. Two are only virtuous (kusala), namely the two samadhis (Non-Perception Samadhi and Cessation Attainment). Three are only neutral (avyakrta), namely the remaining three (sleep, Heaven of Non-Perception, dullness).

There are two kinds of characteristics (akara). One is the image-aspect (pratibimba-akara), called the characteristic. Why is it similar to the original object? The second is the seeing-division (darsana-bhaga), called the characteristic. Why is it not like the original object? Answer: The image is called the characteristic, and the function of the seeing-division is to understand the appearance of things. The function of the seeing-division is only the appearance of the object. The seeing-division is called the characteristic because it functions within the essence of the object. For example, non-discriminating wisdom (nirvikalpa-jnana) has no appearance, so sometimes it is similar, and sometimes it is not. Moreover, the image-aspect is not necessarily always like the object, because the unconditioned causes (asamskrta-pratyaya) are not like the object.

Answer: There are six ways to explain the Immediate and Homogeneous Cause (samanantara-pratyaya). First, temporarily answer according to the views of others. Second, present one's own correct view to answer. Third, answer from the perspective that the arising of consciousness has no beginning. Fourth, answer by analogy using the same mind. Fifth, point to metaphors to reveal the Dharma. Sixth, answer specifically with subtle reasoning.

The Three Realms are only mind (citta-matra), which is explained based on defiled (with outflows) dharmas to clarify the Mind-Only (Vijnanavada) doctrine. It is also said that the object of perception (alambana) is only a manifestation of consciousness, which is explained based on the mind generating the environment to clarify the Mind-Only doctrine. It is also said that all dharmas are inseparable from the mind, which is based on inseparability from the mind to reveal the Mind-Only doctrine. Only this approach can completely encompass all dharmas. It is also said that sentient beings change according to the defilement or purity of their minds, which is based on...

內異熟以明唯識。又說成就四智菩薩。依修因以明唯識。又伽他說心意識所緣等。亦以所緣名為唯識。

四智中初唯觀境。次唯觀智。三雙觀境．心。又初唯破薩婆多。次唯破經部。後雙破。

現量乖宗難中。應敘薩婆多．正量部．大眾部。及取他又乘心為難。解中應亦疏牒。

燈光舒光至彼。違對法第二。破云如燈光頓發聲亦爾。勘抄。舒光者隨順理門。頓發大乘義。

謂諸異生求佛果者。定色界後引生無漏。彼必生在凈居天上大自在宮得菩提故。此中問言。瑜伽第四說。四靜慮中凡聖同處天。各由耎．中．上三品熏修故生。無想天即廣果攝更無別處。復有諸聖住止不共五凈居地。謂無煩．無熱．善現．善見．及色究竟。由耎．中．上．上勝．上極品雜熏修第四靜慮故。復有超過凈居天大自在住處。第十地菩薩由極熏修故得生其中。今觀義意。熏修定等而招生者乃有四句。一唯有漏熏。如第八說舍福命行等。分段生死及四禪中各三處生。論但言熏修不言雜修。故第十二言余取雜修生五凈居。不言生下故 有唯無漏修。如一切變易生死。有有漏．無漏雜修。謂生五凈居者。第十二瑜伽云。謂如有一已得有漏及與無漏四靜慮。長時相續入諸靜慮。有漏．無漏更相間雜。乃至有漏無間無漏現前。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 內異熟（內部不同成熟）以闡明唯識（唯有識）。又說成就四智（四種智慧）的菩薩，依據修習之因以闡明唯識。又有伽他（偈頌）說心意識所緣等，也以所緣（所觀對像）之名，名為唯識。 四智中，最初唯觀境（境界），其次唯觀智（智慧），第三雙觀境、心。又最初唯破薩婆多（一切有部），其次唯破經部（經量部），最後雙破。 現量（現量）乖宗難中，應敘述薩婆多（一切有部）、正量部（正量部）、大眾部（大眾部），以及取他又乘心為難。解釋中也應略作說明。 燈光舒光至彼，違反《對法》（阿毗達磨）第二。破斥說，如燈光頓發，聲音也一樣。勘抄。舒光者，隨順理門（道理之門），頓發是大乘義。 謂諸異生（凡夫）求佛果者，必定在死後引生無漏（無煩惱）之果。他們必定生在凈居天（色界天）上的大自在宮（最高處）得到菩提（覺悟）的緣故。這裡問到，瑜伽第四說，四靜慮（四禪定）中，凡夫和聖人同處的天，各自由於下、中、上三品熏修而生。無想天（無想天）即廣果天（廣果天）所攝，更無別處。復有諸聖住止不共五凈居地（五凈居天），謂無煩天（無煩天）、無熱天（無熱天）、善現天（善現天）、善見天（善見天）、及色究竟天（色究竟天）。由下、中、上、上勝、上極品雜熏修第四靜慮的緣故。復有超過凈居天的大自在住處，第十地菩薩由極熏修故得生其中。現在觀察其義，熏修禪定等而招生者乃有四句。一唯有漏熏（有煩惱的熏習），如第八說舍福命行等，分段生死及四禪中各三處生。論中只說熏修，不說雜修。所以第十二說其餘取雜修生五凈居，不說生下。有唯無漏修（無煩惱的修習），如一切變易生死。有有漏、無漏雜修，謂生五凈居者。第十二瑜伽說，謂如有一已得有漏及與無漏四靜慮，長時相續入諸靜慮，有漏、無漏更相間雜，乃至有漏無間無漏現前。

【English Translation】 English version: Internal Vipaka (different maturation) is used to clarify Vijnaptimatrata (Consciousness-only). It also speaks of Bodhisattvas who have achieved the Four Wisdoms, relying on the causes of cultivation to clarify Vijnaptimatrata. Furthermore, the Gatha (verse) speaks of the objects of mind, consciousness, and intellect, and also uses the name 'Vijnaptimatrata' for the object of perception. Among the Four Wisdoms, the first solely observes the object (vishaya), the second solely observes wisdom (jnana), and the third observes both object and mind. Furthermore, the first solely refutes the Sarvastivadins (those who believe everything exists), the second solely refutes the Sautrantikas (those who rely on the sutras), and the last refutes both. In the difficulty of direct perception (pratyaksha) contradicting the doctrine, one should narrate the Sarvastivadins, the Sammitiya school, the Mahasanghika school, and take the mind of another vehicle as a difficulty. In the explanation, one should also briefly annotate. The light of the lamp extends to that place, contradicting the second part of the Abhidharma. The refutation says, 'Just as the light of a lamp arises suddenly, so does sound.' Check the copy. 'Extending the light' accords with the gate of reason, and 'sudden arising' is the meaning of Mahayana. It is said that those ordinary beings (prthagjana) who seek Buddhahood will certainly give rise to the unconditioned (anasrava) fruit after death. They will certainly be born in the Pure Abodes (Suddhavasa heavens) in the Great Free Palace (highest place) to attain Bodhi (enlightenment). Here it is asked, 'The fourth chapter of the Yoga says that in the Four Dhyanas (four meditations), the heavens where ordinary beings and sages dwell together are born from the cultivation of the inferior, intermediate, and superior qualities. The Asanjnasattva heaven (heaven of non-perception) is included in the Brhatphala heaven (heaven of great fruit), and there is no other place. Furthermore, there are sages who dwell in the uncommon Five Pure Abodes, namely Avrha (no trouble), Atapa (no heat), Sudrsa (good appearance), Sudarsana (easy to see), and Akanistha (ultimate in form). They are born from the mixed cultivation of the inferior, intermediate, superior, superior-superior, and superior-ultimate qualities of the fourth Dhyana. Furthermore, there is a dwelling place of the Great Free Being that surpasses the Pure Abodes, where Bodhisattvas of the tenth Bhumi are born from extreme cultivation. Now, observing the meaning, there are four possibilities for cultivating meditation and other practices to attract rebirth. First, only conditioned (sasrava) cultivation, as the eighth chapter says, abandoning merit, life, and actions, etc., leading to segmented birth and death and birth in three places in each of the four Dhyanas. The treatise only speaks of cultivation, not mixed cultivation. Therefore, the twelfth chapter says that others take mixed cultivation to be born in the Five Pure Abodes, not saying they are born below. There is only unconditioned cultivation, such as all transformational birth and death. There is mixed conditioned and unconditioned cultivation, which refers to those born in the Five Pure Abodes. The twelfth chapter of the Yoga says, 'For example, someone has already attained the conditioned and unconditioned Four Dhyanas, and continuously enters these Dhyanas for a long time, with the conditioned and unconditioned intermingling, until the unconditioned appears immediately after the conditioned.'

無漏無間還入有漏。當知齊此熏修成就。此為于定得自在故。即得等至自在果故。即現法樂住轉更明凈。又由此故得不退道。又凈修治解脫勝處等勝品功德能引之道。若有餘取而命終者。由此因緣便入凈居。不說生下諸靜慮故。即依此修資先所造下三天業。令其轉勝生五凈居。非今新業能感異熟。聖不造業故。

第四既言極熏修第十地故第十地生彼。八地已去既受變易生。如何十地更熏修生彼 即是八地已生第四定下三天處。今極純無漏勝前三地業資感今業而得生彼。據實非更新生。以同地業于彼受果處往名生。同地名生。往地別故名之為往。不相違也 第四句非二所資而生。即一切欲界異生等。以色界等業定心住境名為不動。非不異處受故名不動 既言第十地菩薩四禪之主故。于自在宮起十種果相。現大寶蓮華座故要得生彼。非第八地已得生彼。唯說第十地極熏修故。又八地菩薩非彼主故。亦非變易有生死故。設許死生何者新生業。

第七識不說初起何界後生。以不定故。若說色界無迴心。初起唯欲界。若說色界有迴心。初起通色界。以定不在。初起法空故。若平等初起在色界身。

無漏種子在識。及無漏五塵在內即質變化。第八皆不緣 謂因有無漏五根為五識依。第八不緣。此有何失 解云。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：無漏的（智慧）沒有間隔地進入有漏的（世間），應當知道這是通過熏修成就的。這是因為在禪定中獲得了自在，因此獲得了等至（samāpatti，入定）的自在果報，從而使得現世的安樂更加明凈。又因為這個緣故，獲得了不退轉的道。又清凈地修治解脫勝處等殊勝的功德，能夠引導（修行者）到達（更高的境界）。如果還有剩餘的執取而命終的人，因為這個因緣便會進入凈居天（Śuddhāvāsa）。這裡沒有說生到較低的靜慮天，而是說依靠這個修行來資助先前所造的下三天（欲界天）的業，使其轉為殊勝，從而生到五凈居天。這不是現在新造的業能夠感得異熟果報，因為聖者不造業。 第四（問）：既然說了極熏修第十地，所以第十地（的菩薩）才能生到那裡。第八地（的菩薩）已經接受了變易生死，如何第十地（的菩薩）還要熏修才能生到那裡？（答：）這是說第八地（的菩薩）已經生到第四禪下三天之處，現在以極其純粹的無漏（智慧）勝過前三地的業，資助感得現在的業，才能生到那裡。實際上不是重新產生新的（業），因為同地的業在那個受果報的地方往生，稱為生。同地稱為生，前往的地點不同，所以稱為往，這並不矛盾。（問：）第四句不是二者資助而生。（答：）即一切欲界異生等，以等業，定心住境，名為不動，並非不在異處受果，所以名為不動。（問：）既然說了第十地菩薩是四禪之主，所以在自在宮（Akaniṣṭha）顯現十種果相，顯現大寶蓮花座，所以一定要生到那裡，不是第八地（的菩薩）已經能夠生到那裡。只是說第十地（的菩薩）極熏修的緣故。而且第八地菩薩不是彼處的主，也不是變易生死。假設允許有死生，那麼什麼才是新生業？ 第七識沒有說最初生起于哪個界，之後又生於哪個界，因為不確定。如果說沒有迴心，最初生起只在欲界。如果說有迴心，最初生起通於。因為禪定不在，最初生起法空。如果平等，最初生起在**身。 無漏種子在識中，以及無漏五塵在內，即是物質變化。第八識都不緣。（問：）說因為有無漏五根作為五識的所依，第八識不緣，這有什麼過失？（答：）解釋說：

【English Translation】 English version: The unconditioned (wisdom) enters the conditioned (world) without interruption. It should be known that this is achieved through cultivation. This is because one has attained mastery in meditation, and thus attains the fruit of mastery in samāpatti (entering into meditation), thereby making the happiness of the present life even more clear and pure. Moreover, because of this reason, one attains the irreversible path. Furthermore, the pure cultivation of the superior qualities of liberation, such as the abodes of victory, can guide (the practitioner) to (higher realms). If there is still remaining attachment at the time of death, due to this cause, one will enter the Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa). It does not speak of being born in the lower meditative realms, but rather says that relying on this cultivation to support the previously created karma of the lower three heavens (of the desire realm), one transforms it into something superior, thereby being born in the five Pure Abodes. This is not that newly created karma can cause a different maturation, because a saint does not create karma. Fourth (question): Since it is said that one intensely cultivates the tenth ground, therefore (Bodhisattvas) of the tenth ground are born there. The eighth ground (Bodhisattvas) have already accepted the change and transformation of life and death, how can (Bodhisattvas) of the tenth ground still need to cultivate to be born there? (Answer:) This means that (Bodhisattvas) of the eighth ground have already been born in the lower three heavens of the fourth dhyana (meditative absorption), and now, with extremely pure unconditioned (wisdom), surpassing the karma of the previous three grounds, one supports and causes the present karma to be born there. In reality, it is not newly produced (karma), because karma of the same ground is reborn in that place where the fruit is received, and this is called birth. The same ground is called birth, but the place one goes to is different, so it is called going, and this is not contradictory. (Question:) The fourth sentence is not that the two support each other to be born. (Answer:) That is, all ordinary beings of the desire realm, etc., with karma such as **, the mind dwells in a state of concentration, and this is called immovability, not that one does not receive the fruit in a different place, so it is called immovability. (Question:) Since it is said that the Bodhisattva of the tenth ground is the lord of the four dhyanas, therefore, in the Akaniṣṭha (the highest of the Pure Abodes), ten kinds of fruit appearances manifest, and a great treasure lotus seat appears, so one must be born there, not that (Bodhisattvas) of the eighth ground are already able to be born there. It only says that (Bodhisattvas) of the tenth ground intensely cultivate. Moreover, Bodhisattvas of the eighth ground are not the lords of that place, nor do they have the change and transformation of life and death. If we allow for death and birth, then what is the newly created karma? The seventh consciousness does not say which realm it initially arises in, and which realm it is born into later, because it is uncertain. If it is said that ** does not have a change of heart, then it initially arises only in the desire realm. If it is said that ** has a change of heart, then it initially arises in **. Because meditation is not present, it initially arises in the emptiness of phenomena. If it is equal, it initially arises in the ** body. The unconditioned seeds are in the consciousness, and the unconditioned five objects of sense are within, which is material transformation. The eighth consciousness does not cognize them. (Question:) It is said that because there are unconditioned five roots as the basis for the five consciousnesses, the eighth consciousness does not cognize them, what is the fault in this? (Answer:) The explanation says:

五根實者第八必緣。假者不要第八緣色。種子．色等不要八緣方成實用。故於因中無有無漏五根 問色等可爾。云何種子第八不緣而成實種子 如相應法．及第六識緣皆非實種 何故不要第八緣有實種用。

此義應思。

所緣緣必緣有者。與五十二相違。彼云緣無生心故 應會彼云。

五識必有疏所緣者。此依觀彼業力界地若定通力所變五塵。非必有本質 如生上界緣地獄地色。或身在下起天眼．耳緣上地色等 又解異熟之心緣境浮淺。非要藉本質。第八識是雖緣似他身。仍不名本質。前五識等有分別故必杖本質。緣異地時。雖無自本識本質。有他變者為本質故 若爾即前六識。無時無本質故。恒分別故。前解為勝 五識粗者行相易知。鈍者行相淺不相續。劣者他引方生。無自力起故。

本識等者。第六識所變。以帶質通情本。今隨本說故。

二十二根中。幾欲界系 答四男女憂苦．十五少分。除三無漏．及前四 幾色界系 答十五少分 幾無色界系 答八少分。意捨命．信等五 幾不繫 答三無漏．九少分 幾欲界系欲界為義 答四。二欲．色二界系。欲界係爲義。三欲．色二界系。以二界為義。二欲．色界系及不繫。一切系不繫為義。七三界系及不繫。一切系不繫為義。一色界系

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 五根（五種感覺器官）如果是真實的，必然需要第八識（阿賴耶識）作為所緣。如果是假立的，則不需要第八識緣色。種子、色等不需要第八識作為緣才能成就實際作用。因此，在因地中沒有無漏的五根。問：色等可以這樣說，為什麼種子不需要第八識緣就能成為真實的種子？答：如相應法以及第六識（意識）所緣的都不是真實的種子。為什麼不需要第八識緣就能有真實的種子作用？ 這個道理應該仔細思考。 如果說所緣緣必然緣于存在的事物，這與五十二種心所法相違背，因為它們說緣于無生之心。應該這樣理解它們所說的。 五識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識）必然有疏所緣，這是依據觀察彼等業力、界地，或者禪定、神通力所變的五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸）。不一定有本質。例如，生於上界的人緣于地獄的地色，或者身在地獄的人通過天眼、天耳緣于上界的地色等。又可以解釋為，異熟（果報）之心緣境浮淺，不需要憑藉本質。第八識雖然緣于相似的他身，仍然不稱為本質。前五識等因為有分別，所以必須依賴本質。緣于異地時，雖然沒有自己的本識本質，但有他所變的作為本質。如果這樣說，那麼前六識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識、意識）就沒有沒有本質的時候，因為它們恒常分別。所以之前的解釋更為殊勝。五識粗顯，行相容易瞭解；遲鈍的五識，行相淺薄不相續；低劣的五識，需要他力引導才能產生，沒有自主生起的力量。 本識等，是第六識所變現的，因為它帶有本質，並且普遍存在於有情眾生之中。現在是隨順於根本的本質來說的。 二十二根中，有多少屬於欲界繫縛？答：四種，即男女根、憂根、苦根，以及十五種少分。除去三種無漏根以及前面的四種。有多少屬於色界繫縛？答：十五種少分。有多少屬於無色界繫縛？答：八種少分，即意根、舍根、命根、信等五根。有多少不屬於任何界繫縛？答：三種無漏根以及九種少分。有多少以欲界繫縛為含義？答：四種，即兩種欲根、色根、以及二界繫縛。有多少以欲界繫縛為含義？答：三種欲根、色根、以及二界繫縛。有多少以二界為含義？答：兩種欲根、色根、以及無色界繫縛以及不繫縛。有多少以一切繫縛和不繫縛為含義？答：七種三界繫縛以及不繫縛。有多少以一切繫縛和不繫縛為含義？答：一種色界繫縛。

【English Translation】 English version: The five faculties (five sense organs), if real, necessarily require the eighth consciousness (Ālaya-vijñāna) as their object. If they are nominally established, then the eighth consciousness is not needed to cognize form. Seeds, form, etc., do not need the eighth consciousness as a condition to achieve practical function. Therefore, in the causal stage, there are no unconditioned five faculties. Question: Form, etc., can be said to be so, but why can seeds become real seeds without the eighth consciousness as a condition? Answer: Such as corresponding dharmas and what the sixth consciousness (mind consciousness) cognizes are not real seeds. Why is it not necessary for the eighth consciousness to be a condition for real seeds to have function? This meaning should be carefully considered. If it is said that the object-condition (所緣緣, alambana-pratyaya) necessarily conditions existing things, this contradicts the fifty-two mental factors, because they say it conditions the unarisen mind. This is how their statement should be understood. The five consciousnesses (eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness) necessarily have indirect objects. This is based on observing their karmic force, realms, or the five sense objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch) transformed by meditative concentration or supernatural powers. They do not necessarily have an essence. For example, beings born in the upper realms cognize the earth-form of the lower realms, or beings in the lower realms use their divine eye or ear to cognize the form, etc., of the upper realms. It can also be explained that the consciousness of resultant effects (異熟, vipāka) superficially cognizes objects and does not need to rely on an essence. Although the eighth consciousness cognizes something similar to another's body, it is still not called an essence. The first five consciousnesses, etc., because they have discrimination, must rely on an essence. When cognizing different realms, although there is no essence of one's own consciousness, there is the transformation of others as the essence. If this is the case, then the first six consciousnesses (eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, mind consciousness) never lack an essence, because they constantly discriminate. Therefore, the previous explanation is more superior. The five consciousnesses are coarse, and their characteristics are easy to understand; the dull five consciousnesses have shallow and discontinuous characteristics; the inferior five consciousnesses need to be guided by others to arise and have no power to arise on their own. The fundamental consciousness, etc., is transformed by the sixth consciousness, because it carries the essence and is universally present in sentient beings. Now, it is spoken of in accordance with the fundamental essence. Among the twenty-two faculties, how many are bound by the desire realm (欲界, kāmadhātu)? Answer: Four, namely the male and female faculties, sorrow, suffering, and fifteen minor parts, excluding the three unconditioned faculties and the previous four. How many are bound by the form realm (色界, rūpadhātu)? Answer: Fifteen minor parts. How many are bound by the formless realm (無色界, arūpadhātu)? Answer: Eight minor parts, namely the mind faculty, equanimity, life faculty, faith, etc., the five faculties. How many are unbound? Answer: Three unconditioned faculties and nine minor parts. How many have the meaning of being bound by the desire realm? Answer: Four, namely the two desire faculties, the form faculty, and the two realm bindings. How many have the meaning of being bound by the desire realm? Answer: Three desire faculties, the form faculty, and the two realm bindings. How many have the meaning of the two realms? Answer: Two desire faculties, the form faculty, and the formless realm binding and the unbound. How many have the meaning of all bindings and the unbound? Answer: Seven, the three realm bindings and the unbound. How many have the meaning of all bindings and the unbound? Answer: One, the form realm binding.

及不繫。一切為義。二不繫一切為義 問五色根何義 答色等五各別境 第六根何義 答一切法界 男女根何義 因欲相應即觸所攝 五受根何義。隨順苦．樂．憂．喜．舍受即六根義 信等根何義。應得應舍所有境界 精進根即于得．舍俱無所彈 念根于聞．思．修憶持不忘 定根何義。答奢摩他．毗缽舍那 惠根何義。所知真實 未知當知根何義。修現觀者從善法欲已去於一切方便道中。即彼五根義。即是此根義 已知根從預流果。乃至金剛喻定五根義。是此根義 具知根從初無學道。乃至入無餘涅槃五根義。是此根義 依六十九．及對法第九．第十．及第十三並明修。應廣分別。地已前得．行二修有漏。唯得修無漏。若在見道。得．行二修無漏。得修有漏。七地已前二修。通有漏．無漏。八地已後二修俱無漏。得修有漏。受為十王位故。若出世間智世出世間智。已辨修並上下修。串習．未串習等。何位起．不起。一切皆如理應思 三無色中無四善根故。無漏見道所言有者。故知修有漏曾得故 對法已知根。或十或九根。憂根在中即通有漏。有漏信等修道位中亦是已知根。此中雖除憂根。何故不取有漏信等耶。若言以無憂有漏皆除即未知根既除憂根。亦應不取余有漏。有漏彼既皆取。此亦應爾 初根欣樂心深憂根

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 以及不被任何事物束縛。一切都是爲了正義。二是不被一切事物束縛，一切都是爲了正義。 問：五色根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身五種感覺器官）是什麼意思？ 答：色等五根各自有不同的境界。 第六根（意根）是什麼意思？ 答：它是一切法界。 男女根（性器官）是什麼意思？ 答：與慾望相應，屬於觸覺的範疇。 五受根（苦、樂、憂、喜、舍五種感受）是什麼意思？ 答：隨順苦、樂、憂、喜、舍的感受，也就是六根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）的意義。 信等根（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）是什麼意思？ 答：應該獲得和應該捨棄的所有境界。 精進根（努力）是指對於獲得和捨棄都沒有任何執著。 念根（正念）是指對於聽聞、思考、修習的憶持不忘。 定根（禪定）是什麼意思？ 答：奢摩他（止）和毗缽舍那（觀）。 慧根（智慧）是什麼意思？ 答：所知真實。 未知當知根（預流果位前的智慧）是什麼意思？ 答：修習現觀的人，從對善法的慾望開始，在一切方便道中，就是那五根（信、精進、念、定、慧）的意義，也就是這個根的意義。 已知根（預流果到金剛喻定之間的智慧）是從預流果開始，乃至金剛喻定（一種非常堅固的禪定）的五根（信、精進、念、定、慧）的意義，就是這個根的意義。 具知根（無學道及涅槃的智慧）是從初無學道（不再需要學習的階段）開始，乃至進入無餘涅槃（完全寂滅）的五根（信、精進、念、定、慧）的意義，就是這個根的意義。 依據《六十九》以及《對法》第九、第十、第十三，並結合修習，應該廣泛地分別說明。在初地之前，得和行二種修習是有漏的（有煩惱的），只有得修是無漏的（沒有煩惱的）。如果在見道位（證悟真理的階段），得和行二種修習是無漏的，得修是有漏的。七地之前，兩種修習都通於有漏和無漏。八地之後，兩種修習都是無漏的，得修是有漏的。這是因為要接受十王位的緣故。如果是出世間智（超越世俗的智慧）和世出世間智（既有世俗智慧又有出世間智慧），已經辨明了修習以及上下修習、串習（熟悉）和未串習（不熟悉）等，在什麼位次生起或不生起，一切都應該如理如實地思考。 在三無色界中，沒有四善根（暖、頂、忍、世第一法）的緣故，無漏見道所說有的，因此可知修習有漏是曾經得到的。 《對法》中，已知根或者有十根或者有九根，憂根在其中，是通於有漏的。有漏的信等根在修道位中也是已知根。這裡雖然排除了憂根，為什麼不取有漏的信等根呢？如果說因為沒有憂根，有漏的都被排除，那麼既然未知根已經排除了憂根，也應該不取其餘的有漏。有漏的他們既然都取了，這裡也應該一樣。 初根是欣樂心，深憂根。

【English Translation】 English version: And not bound. Everything is for righteousness. Two are not bound, everything is for righteousness. Question: What is the meaning of the five sense faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body)? Answer: The five faculties such as form each have separate realms. What is the meaning of the sixth faculty (mind)? Answer: It is the entire realm of phenomena (Dharmadhatu). What is the meaning of the male and female faculties (sexual organs)? Answer: Corresponding to desire, they are included in touch. What is the meaning of the five feeling faculties (suffering, pleasure, sorrow, joy, equanimity)? Answer: Following the feelings of suffering, pleasure, sorrow, joy, and equanimity, which is the meaning of the six faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind). What is the meaning of the faculties of faith, etc. (faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom)? Answer: All realms that should be attained and should be abandoned. The faculty of effort (diligence) means having no attachment to either attainment or abandonment. The faculty of mindfulness (right mindfulness) means remembering and not forgetting what is heard, thought about, and practiced. What is the meaning of the faculty of concentration (samadhi)? Answer: Samatha (tranquility) and Vipassana (insight). What is the meaning of the faculty of wisdom (prajna)? Answer: Knowing the truth. What is the meaning of the faculty of 'unknown, about to be known' (wisdom before the Stream-enterer stage)? Answer: For those who cultivate direct perception, starting from the desire for good Dharma, in all expedient paths, it is the meaning of those five faculties (faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom), which is the meaning of this faculty. The faculty of 'knowing' (wisdom from Stream-enterer to Vajrasamadhi) is from the Stream-enterer fruit onwards, up to the meaning of the five faculties (faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom) in Vajrasamadhi (a very firm state of samadhi), which is the meaning of this faculty. The faculty of 'fully knowing' (wisdom of the Arhat and Nirvana) is from the initial stage of no-more-learning (a stage where no further learning is needed) onwards, up to the meaning of the five faculties (faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom) in entering Nirvana without remainder (complete extinction), which is the meaning of this faculty. Based on 'Sixty-Nine' and 'Abhidharma' ninth, tenth, and thirteenth, combined with practice, it should be widely explained separately. Before the first Bhumi (stage), the two cultivations of attainment and practice are defiled (with afflictions), only attainment cultivation is undefiled (without afflictions). If in the Path of Seeing (stage of realizing the truth), the two cultivations of attainment and practice are undefiled, attainment cultivation is defiled. Before the seventh Bhumi, both cultivations are common to defiled and undefiled. After the eighth Bhumi, both cultivations are undefiled, attainment cultivation is defiled. This is because of accepting the position of the Ten Kings. If it is transcendental wisdom (wisdom beyond the world) and worldly-transcendental wisdom (wisdom that includes both worldly and transcendental aspects), the cultivation and the upper and lower cultivations, familiarity and unfamiliarity, etc., have already been distinguished, in what stage they arise or do not arise, everything should be considered reasonably and truthfully. In the three formless realms, because there are no four good roots (warmth, peak, forbearance, the highest worldly Dharma), what is said to exist in the undefiled Path of Seeing indicates that the cultivation of the defiled was once attained. In 'Abhidharma', the faculty of 'knowing' has either ten or nine faculties, the faculty of sorrow is among them, and it is common to the defiled. The defiled faculties of faith, etc., in the stage of cultivation are also faculties of 'knowing'. Although the faculty of sorrow is excluded here, why are the defiled faculties of faith, etc., not taken? If it is said that because there is no faculty of sorrow, all the defiled are excluded, then since the faculty of 'unknown' has already excluded the faculty of sorrow, the remaining defiled should also not be taken. Since they have taken all the defiled, it should be the same here. The initial faculty is the mind of joy, the faculty of deep sorrow.

亦是。此根有漏劣於無漏。無漏之者是根。據實而言。有漏亦是。除劣取勝。但說無漏為已知根。其具知根若成無學即通有漏。為根增上不取有漏。有漏者名為信等。不名具知根。其已知根亦應準此文。言無漏故。故有漏者亦所除中 一增上義是根義。云何增上義立根。為顯于彼彼事。彼彼法最勝義故。非一根法於一切法有增上義故。意顯于別別法中有最勝義。故立為根 二廢立。五十七。八複次釋廢立。取境。(六)續家族。(二)活命。(一)受業果。(五)世間。(五)出世凈。(三)依此量立根。能受顯．隱境。(八)受用時邊際。(一)受境發雜染。(五)立清凈後根。心所依．此別．此住．此雜染．此資糧．此凈由此量立根 三假實者。十六實。六非實。謂男．女．命．三無漏。男女身根小分。命根即意種子故是假有。三無漏九根分。故六假 四心心所色不相應無為分別者。七色。是色眼等五．及男女。一心。謂意。三小分。三無漏小分。十全心所。謂五受．信等五及三無漏根小分。一不相應。謂命根。一切有為。無為非根 五幾善。八唯善。謂信等五．三無漏。八唯無記。謂七色．及命根。一根通善．不善。謂憂根。五根通三性。謂．四受．及意 六幾欲界系。四唯欲。謂男．女．憂．苦。十五小分。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 是的。這些有漏根不如無漏根。無漏的那些才是真正的根。但實際上，有漏根也是根。因為要去除劣的，選取殊勝的，所以只說無漏根是已知根（Ajñendriya）。如果具知根（Ajñātāvindriya）成就了無學果位，它也通於有漏。因為根的增上力，所以不取有漏。有漏的根被稱為信等根，不稱為具知根。已知根也應該按照這個原則，因為經文中說的是無漏。所以有漏根也被排除在外。 一、增上義是根的含義。如何通過增上義來確立根？爲了顯示在各種事物、各種法中最殊勝的意義。因為沒有一個根法對一切法都有增上義，所以表明在不同的法中具有最殊勝的意義，因此被確立為根。 二、廢立。五十七。八、再次解釋廢立。取境（六），延續家族（二），活命（一），承受業果（五），世間（五），出世清凈（三）。根據這些標準來確立根：能夠接受顯現和隱藏的境界（八），受用時的邊際（一），接受境界時產生雜染（五），確立清凈之後的根。心所依處、此差別、此住處、此雜染、此資糧、此清凈，根據這些標準來確立根。 三、假實。十六個是真實的，六個是非真實的。即：男根（Purusendriya）、女根（Striindriya）、命根（Jīvitendriya）、三個無漏根。男女根是身體的小部分，命根是意的種子，所以是假有。三個無漏根是九根的一部分，所以六個是假有。 四、心、心所、色、不相應行、無為的分別。七個是色法：即眼等五根，以及男女根。一個是心法：即意根（Manendriya）。三個是小部分：三個無漏根的小部分。十個是全心所：即五種受（五受：樂受、苦受、喜受、憂受、舍受）、信等五根（信根、精進根、念根、定根、慧根）以及三個無漏根的小部分。一個是不相應行法：即命根。一切有為法都是根，無為法不是根。 五、幾善？八個唯是善：即信等五根、三個無漏根。八個唯是無記：即七個色根、以及命根。一個根通於善、不善：即憂根（Daurmanasyendriya）。五個根通於三種性質：即四種受（樂受、苦受、喜受、舍受）以及意根。 六、幾個屬於欲界系？四個唯屬於欲界：即男根、女根、憂根、苦根（Duhkhendriya）。十五個是小部分。

【English Translation】 English version Yes. These contaminated roots (Sāsrava-indriya) are inferior to uncontaminated roots (Anāsrava-indriya). Those that are uncontaminated are the true roots. But in reality, the contaminated are also roots. Because one removes the inferior and chooses the superior, it is only said that the uncontaminated is the 'known root' (Ajñendriya). If the 'root of complete knowledge' (Ajñātāvindriya) achieves the state of no-more-learning (Aśaikṣa), it also extends to the contaminated. Because of the dominant power of the root, the contaminated is not taken. The contaminated are called the roots of faith, etc. (Śraddhendriya, etc.), and are not called the 'root of complete knowledge'. The 'known root' should also follow this principle, because the text speaks of the uncontaminated. Therefore, the contaminated are also among those excluded.

1. The meaning of 'dominance' (Adhipati) is the meaning of 'root'. How is a root established through the meaning of dominance? It is to show the most excellent meaning in various things and various dharmas. Because no single root-dharma has dominance over all dharmas, it shows that there is a most excellent meaning in different dharmas, and therefore it is established as a root.
2. Abandonment and establishment (Prahāṇa-sthāpana). Fifty-seven. 8. Again, explaining abandonment and establishment: Taking objects (6), continuing the lineage (2), maintaining life (1), receiving the results of karma (5), mundane (5), supramundane purity (3). Based on these criteria, roots are established: able to receive manifest and hidden realms (8), the boundary of the time of enjoyment (1), generating defilements when receiving realms (5), establishing roots after purification. The support of mental factors, this difference, this dwelling, this defilement, this resource, this purity, based on these criteria, roots are established.
3. Factual and non-factual (Satya-asatya). Sixteen are factual, six are non-factual. Namely: male organ (Purusendriya), female organ (Striindriya), life faculty (Jīvitendriya), the three uncontaminated roots. The male and female organs are small parts of the body, the life faculty is the seed of the mind, so it is nominally existent. The three uncontaminated roots are part of the nine roots, so six are nominally existent.
4. Differentiation of mind, mental factors, form, non-associated formations, and unconditioned. Seven are form: namely, the five sense organs such as the eye, and the male and female organs. One is mind: namely, the mind faculty (Manendriya). Three are small parts: the small parts of the three uncontaminated roots. Ten are complete mental factors: namely, the five feelings (five sensations: pleasant, painful, joyful, sorrowful, neutral), the five roots of faith, etc. (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom), and the small parts of the three uncontaminated roots. One is non-associated formation: namely, the life faculty. All conditioned phenomena are roots, unconditioned phenomena are not roots.
5. How many are wholesome? Eight are only wholesome: namely, the five roots of faith, etc., and the three uncontaminated roots. Eight are only neutral: namely, the seven form roots and the life faculty. One root is common to wholesome and unwholesome: namely, the root of sorrow (Daurmanasyendriya). Five roots are common to the three natures: namely, the four sensations (pleasant, painful, joyful, neutral) and the mind faculty.
6. How many belong to the desire realm? Four belong only to the desire realm: namely, the male organ, the female organ, the root of sorrow, and the root of pain (Duhkhendriya). Fifteen are small parts.

謂五色根．意．命．三受．信等五。除三無漏根。即前十五小分色界系。八小分無色界系。謂信等五．意．命．舍三無漏根．九根小分之不繫 七未至幾可得。答十一。意．喜．舍．信等五．三無漏。初靜慮十八根可得。除憂．苦．男．女。第二定亦爾。第三定十七。除喜根。第四定十六．除樂。前三無色十一。謂命．意．舍．信等五．三無漏。非想八。除三無漏根。

第八卷(見聞覺知如對法第一抄)

雖二目內有非能生果種勝顯者。此二名牽引．生起。潤．未潤別得果顯故。相續無斷故。

十因之義。如別章說。六十六明有因法雲。又先所作諸業．煩惱。於三界中異熟果勝。此異熟果由業．煩惱因發因故名有因法者 此非十因中第六引發因。引發因論不說得異熟果故。此是望定別因等。隨其所應異熟因者對滿別果假立引發因名。疏相引發故。對滿果滿因說故。

六種相違。三十八說。一語言相違。二道理相違。三生起相違。四同處相違。五怨敵相違。六障治相違。

五果如別章說。

三十八既說無記攝士用即田．水等。故知別法亦名士用。不爾無記應無此因。六種依處俱說無記故。既知作用．士用依處即田．水等。明知士用果不唯假者得。

無間滅及境界。疏中或三

【現代漢語翻譯】 所謂五色根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身五種感覺器官）。意（意識）。命（生命）。三受（苦受、樂受、舍受）。信等五（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）。除去三種無漏根（未知當知根、已知根、具知根）。即前十五小分有繫縛。八小分無繫縛。所謂信等五（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）。意（意識）。命（生命）。舍（舍受）。三種無漏根（未知當知根、已知根、具知根）。九根的小分沒有繫縛。 七未至定中，有幾種根可以獲得？答：十一種。意（意識）。喜（喜受）。舍（舍受）。信等五（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）。三種無漏根（未知當知根、已知根、具知根）。初禪定中十八根可以獲得。除去憂（憂受）。苦（苦受）。男（男根）。女（女根）。第二禪定也是這樣。第三禪定十七種，除去喜根（喜受）。第四禪定十六種，除去樂（樂受）。前三個無色界定有十一種。所謂命（生命）。意（意識）。舍（舍受）。信等五（信、精進、念、定、慧五根）。三種無漏根（未知當知根、已知根、具知根）。非想非非想處有八種。除去三種無漏根（未知當知根、已知根、具知根）。

第八卷(見聞覺知如對法第一抄)

雖然兩眼內有非能生果的種子，但勝妙顯現。這兩個（種子）名為牽引、生起。潤澤與未潤澤的差別，使得果顯現。因為相續沒有斷絕。

十因的意義，如其他章節所說。六十六明有因法說，又先前所作的諸業、煩惱，在三界中異熟果殊勝。此異熟果由業、煩惱為因，作為引發因，所以名為有因法。這並非十因中的第六引發因。引發因的論述沒有說得到異熟果。這是望定別因等。隨其所應，異熟因是對滿別果假立引發因的名稱。因為疏遠地相互引發。因為對滿果滿因而說。

六種相違。三十八說。一、語言相違。二、道理相違。三、生起相違。四、同處相違。五、怨敵相違。六、障治相違。

五果如其他章節所說。

三十八既說無記攝的士用，即田地、水等。所以知道其他法也名為士用。不然無記應沒有此因。六種依處都說無記的緣故。既然知道作用、士用的依處即田地、水等。明顯知道士用果不只是假法才能得到。

無間滅及境界。疏中或者有三種說法。

【English Translation】 These are the five sense faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body). Mind (consciousness). Life. Three feelings (suffering, pleasure, neutral). Five faculties beginning with faith (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom). Excluding the three undefiled roots (the root of 'I shall know', the root of knowledge, the root of complete knowledge). That is, the preceding fifteen minor divisions are bound. Eight minor divisions are unbound. Namely, the five beginning with faith (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom). Mind (consciousness). Life. Neutral feeling. The nine roots' minor divisions are unbound. In the seventh, the Unreached Concentration, how many roots can be obtained? Answer: Eleven. Mind (consciousness). Joy. Neutral feeling. Five beginning with faith (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom). Three undefiled roots (the root of 'I shall know', the root of knowledge, the root of complete knowledge). In the first Dhyana (meditative absorption), eighteen roots can be obtained. Excluding sorrow, suffering, male, female. The second Dhyana is also the same. The third Dhyana has seventeen, excluding the root of joy. The fourth Dhyana has sixteen, excluding pleasure. The first three formless realms have eleven. Namely, life, mind, neutral feeling, five beginning with faith (faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom). Three undefiled roots (the root of 'I shall know', the root of knowledge, the root of complete knowledge). The Realm of Neither Perception Nor Non-Perception has eight. Excluding the three undefiled roots (the root of 'I shall know', the root of knowledge, the root of complete knowledge).

Volume 8 (Seeing, Hearing, Perceiving, and Knowing as in the First Copy of Abhidharma)

Although within the two eyes there are seeds that cannot directly produce results, they are supremely manifest. These two (seeds) are called attraction and arising. The difference between being moistened and not moistened causes the result to manifest. Because the continuity is not broken.

The meaning of the ten causes, as explained in other chapters. The sixty-sixth 'Clear Explanation of Conditioned Dharmas' says that the previously created karmas and afflictions are superior in their maturation results in the three realms. These maturation results are called conditioned dharmas because karma and afflictions are the causes and the initiating causes. This is not the sixth initiating cause among the ten causes. The discussion of the initiating cause does not mention obtaining maturation results. This refers to specific causes related to concentration, etc. As appropriate, the maturation cause is a provisional name for the initiating cause in relation to the complete and distinct result. Because they distantly initiate each other. Because it is spoken in relation to the complete result and the complete cause.

The six contradictions. Thirty-eight says: 1. Contradiction in language. 2. Contradiction in reason. 3. Contradiction in arising. 4. Contradiction in the same location. 5. Contradiction as enemies. 6. Contradiction as obstacles and cures.

The five results are as explained in other chapters.

Thirty-eight already says that the 'effort' included in the neutral is like fields, water, etc. Therefore, it is known that other dharmas are also called 'effort'. Otherwise, the neutral should not have this cause. Because all six bases are said to be neutral. Since it is known that the bases of function and 'effort' are like fields, water, etc., it is clear that the result of 'effort' is not only obtained by provisional dharmas.

Cessation without interval and the realm. In the commentary, there are perhaps three views.

或四依處。何故真見．隨順二中無無間滅 答具攝受六辨無漏法 若爾有二等無間。真見取前無漏引後生故 不取等無間滅。隨順下引中故。

若異熟果牽引生起定異同事不相違因得者。此說雜染十因得異熟果。若無記法十因。準三十八不得此果。彼亦無記為隨說因．觀待因．同事．不相違因。及以無記為相違因故。其清凈十因中。二因得異熟果。謂攝受因．及相違因。清凈攝受因者。謂親近善士聽聞正法。如理作意法隨法行。及先所作諸根成就名攝受因。即顯此與出世法為攝受因。故得異熟果。相違因者。若清凈品諸相違因。即是雜染法因故得異熟果由此同事．不相違亦得異熟。即攝受因故。論中據雜染因故無有失。或此皆非。清凈法因以清凈法為果故。無異熟果。

等流果三種十因皆得。

士用果不說生起因等得者。前第二捲雲。能熏生種。種起現行。如俱有因得士用果。第七末云。此生士用果名一切種。云何下說因緣得士用果 有二解。一云如小乘。非大乘義許。二云如彼文亦得。此中據別體士用果。非雜體故不相違。

離系果唯清凈因得非餘二。雜染法相違因何故不得離系果。三十八云。謂出世間種姓具足。值佛出世演說正法。親近善士聽聞正法。如理作意法隨法行。及與一切菩提

【現代漢語翻譯】 或四依處（四種可以作為依據的處所）。為什麼『真見』（真實的見解）和『隨順』（隨順真理）兩種因中沒有『無間滅』（立即滅盡）？答：因為它們具足攝受六種辨別無漏之法（沒有煩惱的法）的能力。如果這樣，那麼有『等無間』（相等的、無間斷的滅盡）。因為『真見』取前面的無漏法，引導後面的無漏法產生。不取『等無間滅』，因為『隨順』是下面的法引導中間的法。

如果『異熟果』（不同性質的果報）是由牽引生起的，並且決定了不同和相同的事物不互相違背的因所得到的，那麼這是說雜染的十因（導致煩惱的十種因）得到『異熟果』。如果無記法（非善非惡的法）的十因，按照第三十八章所說，不能得到這種果報。因為它們也是無記法，作為隨說因、觀待因、同事因、不相違因，以及以無記法作為相違因。在清凈的十因中，有兩種因可以得到『異熟果』，即攝受因和相違因。清凈的攝受因，是指親近善知識，聽聞正法，如理作意，法隨法行，以及先前所作的諸根成就，稱為攝受因。這表明它與出世間法（超越世俗的法）是攝受因，所以得到『異熟果』。相違因，是指清凈品中的各種相違因，也就是雜染法的因，所以得到『異熟果』。由此，同事因和不相違因也能得到『異熟果』，即攝受因。論中根據雜染因，所以沒有過失。或者這些都不是，因為清凈法的因以清凈法為果，所以沒有『異熟果』。

『等流果』（性質相同的果報）三種十因都能得到。

『士用果』（由人的努力而產生的果報）沒有說由生起因等得到。前面第二卷說，能夠熏習產生種子，種子生起現行，如同俱有因得到『士用果』。第七卷末尾說，這種生起的『士用果』名為一切種。為什麼下面又說因緣得到『士用果』？有兩種解釋。一種說法如同小乘，不承認大乘的意義。另一種說法如同那段經文也能得到。這裡根據別體的『士用果』，不是雜體的，所以不相違背。

『離系果』（脫離束縛的果報）只有清凈因才能得到，不是其餘兩種。雜染法的相違因為什麼不能得到『離系果』？第三十八章說，具有出世間的種姓，遇到佛出世演說正法，親近善知識，聽聞正法，如理作意，法隨法行，以及一切菩提（覺悟）。

【English Translation】 Or the four reliances (four places to rely on). Why is there no 'immediate cessation' in the two causes of 'true view' (correct understanding) and 'compliance' (compliance with the truth)? Answer: Because they fully encompass the ability to receive and discern the six unconditioned dharmas (laws without defilements). If so, then there is 'equal and immediate cessation'. Because 'true view' takes the preceding unconditioned dharma and guides the subsequent unconditioned dharma to arise. It does not take 'equal and immediate cessation' because 'compliance' is the lower dharma guiding the middle dharma.

If the 'result of maturation' (vipāka-phala, a result of a different nature) is produced by attraction and determines that different and similar things do not contradict each other, then this says that the ten causes of defilement (ten causes leading to afflictions) obtain the 'result of maturation'. If the ten causes of neutral dharmas (neither good nor evil dharmas), according to what is said in chapter thirty-eight, cannot obtain this result. Because they are also neutral dharmas, serving as the cause of subsequent speech, the cause of dependence, the cause of similarity, the cause of non-contradiction, and also taking neutral dharmas as the cause of contradiction. Among the ten causes of purity, two causes can obtain the 'result of maturation', namely the cause of reception and the cause of contradiction. The pure cause of reception refers to approaching good teachers, listening to the correct Dharma, reflecting properly, practicing the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma, and the previous accomplishments of the faculties, which are called the cause of reception. This shows that it is the cause of reception for the transcendental Dharma (dharma beyond the mundane), so it obtains the 'result of maturation'. The cause of contradiction refers to the various causes of contradiction in the pure category, which are the causes of defiled dharmas, so it obtains the 'result of maturation'. Therefore, the cause of similarity and the cause of non-contradiction can also obtain the 'result of maturation', which is the cause of reception. The treatise is based on the cause of defilement, so there is no fault. Or none of these are, because the cause of pure dharma takes pure dharma as the result, so there is no 'result of maturation'.

The 'result of outflow' (niḥsyanda-phala, a result of the same nature) can be obtained by all three types of ten causes.

The 'result of effort' (puruṣakāra-phala, a result produced by human effort) is not said to be obtained by the cause of arising, etc. The second chapter earlier said that it can perfume and produce seeds, and the seeds give rise to present actions, just as the co-existent cause obtains the 'result of effort'. The end of the seventh chapter says that this arising 'result of effort' is called all seeds. Why does it say below that causes and conditions obtain the 'result of effort'? There are two explanations. One says that it is like the Hinayana, not acknowledging the meaning of the Mahayana. The other says that it can also be obtained like that passage. Here, it is based on the 'result of effort' of a separate entity, not a mixed entity, so there is no contradiction.

The 'result of separation' (visaṃyoga-phala, a result of liberation) can only be obtained by pure causes, not the other two. Why can't the contradictory cause of defiled dharmas obtain the 'result of separation'? Chapter thirty-eight says that it possesses the lineage of transcendence, encounters the Buddha appearing in the world and expounding the correct Dharma, approaches good teachers, listens to the correct Dharma, reflects properly, practices the Dharma in accordance with the Dharma, and all bodhi (enlightenment).

分法。是雜染法相違因故。由此不說得離系果。然彼解清凈法因云。若雜染品諸相違因。當知即是清凈法因。故知雜染相違因亦得離系果。此中但說清凈順因。故略不說 又與雜染為相違因。雜染法非離系果故不得。

攝論第四云。此復云何。謂身．身者．受者識．彼所受識．彼能受識．世識．數識．處識．言說識。此由名言熏習種子。若自他差別識。此由我見熏習種子。若善趣惡趣死生識。此由有支熏習種子。由此諸識一切界趣雜染所攝。依他起相虛妄分別皆得顯現。

三熏習中以八門辨。一出體。二釋名。三廢立。應思之。四三界。無色界定果色．聲有亦無失。五三性。六八識。七有無漏。八位次。何故第二卷說能變。唯有等流．異熟不說我執此中說耶。

十二支廢立。如中邊第一。覆障．及安立。獎導．攝．圓滿。三分別．受用。引起．並連縛。現前．苦．果故。唯此惱世間。三．二．七雜染。由虛妄分別。

論說識支既是所引。即顯業種能引業收。如識即業為能引。識種名色收。

與三種二種緣生相攝。

問何緣發業要現無明。潤業位中亦通唯種 答二理皆齊。前不放逸內異生福．不動唯種發故。經說言非無明發。若種亦不發。何得稱為非明為緣非違有支。與見諦何別

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 分法，是因為與雜染法（Klesha Dharma，煩惱法）的相違之處。因此，不能說得到離系果（Vairagya-phala，解脫之果）。然而，關於清凈法（Visuddhi Dharma，純凈之法）的因，經中說：『如果雜染品的各種相違之因，應當知道那就是清凈法的因。』因此可知，與雜染相違的因也能得到離系果。這裡只說了清凈的順因，所以省略未說。又因為與雜染是相違之因，雜染法不是離系果，所以不能得到。 《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）第四卷說：『這又是什麼呢？』指的是身（Kāya，身體）、身者（Kāyaka，身體的擁有者）、受者識（Vedaka-vijñāna，感受者之識）、彼所受識（Tad-vedita-vijñāna，所感受之識）、彼能受識（Tad-vedayitṛ-vijñāna，能感受之識）、世識（Loka-vijñāna，世間之識）、數識（Saṃkhyā-vijñāna，計數之識）、處識（Āyatana-vijñāna，處所之識）、言說識（Saṃjñā-vijñāna，言說之識）。這些由名言（Nāma-rūpa，名色）熏習的種子產生。如果是自他差別識，這是由我見（Ātma-dṛṣṭi，我執）熏習的種子產生。如果是善趣惡趣死生識，這是由有支（Bhavaṅga，有支）熏習的種子產生。由此，這些識都屬於一切界趣雜染所攝。依他起相（Paratantra-svabhāva，依他起性）的虛妄分別（Kalpana，虛妄分別）都能顯現。 三種熏習（Tri-vāsanā，三種熏習）用八個方面來辨析：一體性（Ekātmatā，本體），二釋名（Nirukta，解釋名稱），三廢立（Utsāda-sthāpana，廢除與建立），應思考。四三界（Tri-dhātu，欲界、色界、無色界），無決定果色（Aniyata-phala-rūpa，沒有決定果報的色）、聲有也沒有過失。五三性（Tri-svabhāva，三種自性），六八識（Aṣṭa-vijñāna，八種識），七有無漏（Sāsrava-anāsrava，有漏與無漏），八位次（Avasthā-krama，位階次第）。為什麼第二卷說能變（Pariṇāma，轉變）只有等流（Nisyanda，等流果）、異熟（Vipāka，異熟果），沒有說我執（Ātmagraha，我執），而這裡卻說了呢？ 十二支（Dvādaśāṅga，十二因緣）的廢立，如《中邊分別論》（Madhyānta-vibhāga）第一卷所說：覆障（Āvaraṇa，覆蓋）、及安立（Pratiṣṭhāpana，建立）、獎導（Praṇayana，引導）、攝（Saṃgraha，攝取）、圓滿（Paripūraṇa，圓滿），三分別（Tri-vikalpa，三種分別）、受用（Upabhoga，受用）、引起（Pratyaya，引起）、並連縛（Sambandha，連結）、現前（Abhimukha，現前）、苦（Duḥkha，苦）、果（Phala，果），所以只有這些惱亂世間。三、二、七雜染，由虛妄分別所致。 論中說識支（Vijñāna-aṅga，識支）既是所引，就顯示了業種（Karma-bīja，業的種子）能引業（Karma，業）。如識即是業作為能引，識種被名色（Nāma-rūpa，名色）所攝。 與三種二種緣生（Hetu-pratyaya，因緣生）相攝。 問：為什麼發業（Karma-utpāda，發起業）一定要現行無明（Avidyā，無明）？潤業（Karma-upabṛṃhaṇa，滋潤業）的階段也可以只有種子？答：兩種道理都一樣。之前的不放逸（Apramāda，不放逸）內異生（Pṛthagjana，異生）的福、不動（Āniñjya，不動業）只有種子才能發起。經中說，如果不是無明發起，即使有種子也不會發起。怎麼能稱為非明為緣，不違背有支呢？與見諦（Satya-darśana，見諦）有什麼區別？

【English Translation】 English version: Division is because of the contradictory nature of defiled dharmas (Klesha Dharma). Therefore, it cannot be said that one obtains the fruit of detachment (Vairagya-phala). However, regarding the cause of pure dharmas (Visuddhi Dharma), it is said in the scriptures: 'If the various contradictory causes of defiled qualities are known, they are the causes of pure dharmas.' Therefore, it can be known that causes contradictory to defilement can also obtain the fruit of detachment. Here, only the favorable causes of purity are mentioned, so it is omitted. Furthermore, because it is a contradictory cause to defilement, defiled dharmas are not the fruit of detachment, so they cannot be obtained. The Mahāyānasaṃgraha (Compendium of the Mahayana) says in the fourth chapter: 'What is this again?' It refers to the body (Kāya), the possessor of the body (Kāyaka), the consciousness of the feeler (Vedaka-vijñāna), the consciousness of what is felt by it (Tad-vedita-vijñāna), the consciousness that can feel it (Tad-vedayitṛ-vijñāna), world consciousness (Loka-vijñāna), number consciousness (Saṃkhyā-vijñāna), place consciousness (Āyatana-vijñāna), and speech consciousness (Saṃjñā-vijñāna). These arise from the seeds of habitual verbalization (Nāma-rūpa). If it is the consciousness of self and other differences, it arises from the seeds of habitual views of self (Ātma-dṛṣṭi). If it is the consciousness of good and bad destinies, death, and birth, it arises from the seeds of habitual existence (Bhavaṅga). Therefore, these consciousnesses are all included in the defilement of all realms and destinies. The dependent nature (Paratantra-svabhāva) and false discriminations (Kalpana) can all appear. The three habitual tendencies (Tri-vāsanā) are distinguished by eight aspects: 1. Essence (Ekātmatā), 2. Explanation of names (Nirukta), 3. Abolition and establishment (Utsāda-sthāpana), which should be contemplated. 4. The three realms (Tri-dhātu): there is no fault in the indeterminate result of form (Aniyata-phala-rūpa) and sound also existing. 5. The three natures (Tri-svabhāva), 6. The eight consciousnesses (Aṣṭa-vijñāna), 7. Defiled and undefiled (Sāsrava-anāsrava), 8. Sequence of stages (Avasthā-krama). Why does the second chapter say that transformation (Pariṇāma) only has outflow (Nisyanda) and maturation (Vipāka), and does not mention self-grasping (Ātmagraha), but it is mentioned here? The abolition and establishment of the twelve links (Dvādaśāṅga), as stated in the first chapter of the Madhyānta-vibhāga (Discrimination of the Middle and the Extremes): covering (Āvaraṇa), and establishment (Pratiṣṭhāpana), guidance (Praṇayana), gathering (Saṃgraha), completion (Paripūraṇa), three discriminations (Tri-vikalpa), enjoyment (Upabhoga), arising (Pratyaya), and connection (Sambandha), manifestation (Abhimukha), suffering (Duḥkha), fruit (Phala), so only these trouble the world. The three, two, and seven defilements are caused by false discriminations. The treatise says that since the link of consciousness (Vijñāna-aṅga) is what is led, it shows that the seed of karma (Karma-bīja) can lead to karma (Karma). For example, consciousness is karma as what can lead, and the seed of consciousness is included in name and form (Nāma-rūpa). It is included with the three and two kinds of conditioned arising (Hetu-pratyaya). Question: Why must ignorance (Avidyā) be manifest when initiating karma (Karma-utpāda)? In the stage of nourishing karma (Karma-upabṛṃhaṇa), can there only be seeds? Answer: Both reasons are the same. The merit of non-negligence (Apramāda) of ordinary beings (Pṛthagjana) and the imperturbable (Āniñjya) can only be initiated by seeds. The sutras say that if it is not initiated by ignorance, even if there are seeds, they will not be initiated. How can it be called non-ignorance as a condition, not contradicting the links of existence? What is the difference from seeing the truth (Satya-darśana)?

。由此故知。唯種亦發 問若爾何故生上初行支不唯種發 有現無明為勝因起。遠真實義愚現見有故。不同不放逸異生。

八十九云。能取所取所為取名取支者。

欲界生惡趣極重者。見惡相已不生希求欲界業輕引。及上二界死生惡趣者。不見惡相。見往同類相。遂于當生希求愛。緣起不依前義故說不求。總愛見所有支義。不爾上界不生惡趣應無愛．取。現在．未來俱不愛故。

此中假支攬他為自名假。不攬他為自名非假。不說自支中無體用名假。行中有假名思等色故。

識唯一事。違第九瑜伽。彼取六識。故九十三云。彼依一切相續為論。非實支體。此說實故。

應斷之法者。五十九說。從彼相應．及所緣故煩惱可斷。所以者何。對治道生煩惱不起得無生法。是故說名斷彼相應。相應斷已不復緣境。故從所緣亦說名斷 然六十五說。由五相故建立有漏。一由事故。二隨眠故。三相應故。四所緣故。五生起故。云何有漏法事。謂清凈內色。及彼相依．不相依外色。若諸染污心心所若善若無記心心所等。此有漏法隨其所應由余四相說名有漏。謂隨眠故等 若於清凈諸色。及於如前所說一切心．心所中。煩惱種子未害未斷說名隨眠。亦名粗重。若彼乃至未無餘斷。當知一切由隨眠故說名有

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：由此可知，只有種子才能引發（果報）。 問：如果這樣，為什麼在上界最初的行支中，不是隻有種子才能引發呢？ 答：因為有現行的無明作為殊勝的因，由於遠離真實的意義，愚昧地顯現並見到（錯誤的事物）。這與不放逸的異生不同。

《瑜伽師地論》第八十九卷說：『能取、所取、所為取，名為取支。』

欲界眾生如果造作極重的惡業，見到惡相之後不會生起希求（之心）。欲界業力輕微的眾生，以及上二界（色界和無色界）的眾生，死後如果會墮入惡趣，是因為他們沒有見到惡相，而是見到與自己同類的景象，於是對當來之生生起希求和愛。緣起不依賴於前面的意義，所以說不求。總的來說，愛和見包含了所有支的意義。否則，上界眾生如果不會墮入惡趣，那麼就不應該有愛和取。因為現在和未來都不會有愛。

這裡，假支是指把其他的（支）攬為自己，稱為假。不把其他的（支）攬為自己，稱為非假。不是說在自支中沒有體和用，才稱為假。在行支中，有假名思等色。

識只是唯一一件事。這與《瑜伽師地論》第九卷相違背。該論取六識。所以第九十三卷說：『那是依據一切相續來討論的，不是真實的支體。』這裡說的是真實的。

應斷之法，第五十九卷說：『從與彼（煩惱）相應以及所緣的緣故，煩惱可以斷除。』為什麼這樣說呢？因為對治道生起，煩惱不起，獲得無生法。所以說名為斷彼相應。相應斷除之後，不再緣境，所以從所緣也說名為斷。 然而第六十五卷說：『由於五種相的緣故，建立有漏。一、由事故；二、隨眠故；三、相應故；四、所緣故；五、生起故。』什麼是有漏法的事呢？是指清凈的內在色，以及與它相依或不相依的外在色。如果是染污的心和心所，無論是善的還是無記的心和心所等。這些有漏法，隨其所應，由其餘四種相說名為有漏。即隨眠故等。如果在清凈的諸色，以及如前所說的一切心、心所中，煩惱的種子沒有被損害，沒有被斷除，就說名為隨眠，也名為粗重。如果這些（煩惱種子）乃至沒有完全斷除，應當知道一切都由隨眠的緣故說名有漏。

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is known that only the seed can initiate (the retribution). Question: If that is the case, why in the initial stage of 'action' (行) in the higher realms, is it not only the seed that initiates? Answer: Because there is the present ignorance (無明) as the superior cause. Due to being far from the true meaning, foolishly appearing and seeing (wrong things). This is different from the non-negligent ordinary beings.

The eighty-ninth volume of Yogacarabhumi-sastra (瑜伽師地論) says: 'That which is able to grasp (能取), that which is grasped (所取), and that which is done for grasping (所為取), are called the limb of grasping (取支).'

If beings in the desire realm (欲界) create extremely heavy evil karma, they will not generate desire (希求) after seeing evil signs. Beings with light karma in the desire realm, and beings in the upper two realms (色界 and 無色界) who may fall into evil destinies after death, do not see evil signs. Instead, they see scenes similar to their own kind, and thus generate desire and love for the coming life. Dependent origination (緣起) does not rely on the previous meaning, so it is said that they do not seek. In general, love and view encompass the meaning of all limbs. Otherwise, if beings in the upper realms would not fall into evil destinies, then there should be no love and grasping. Because there is no love in the present and future.

Here, a false limb (假支) refers to taking other (limbs) as one's own, which is called false. Not taking other (limbs) as one's own is called non-false. It is not that there is no substance and function in one's own limb, and therefore it is called false. In the limb of action (行), there are false names such as thought (思) and form (色).

Consciousness (識) is only one thing. This contradicts the ninth volume of Yogacarabhumi-sastra. That treatise takes the six consciousnesses. Therefore, the ninety-third volume says: 'That is discussed based on all continuities, not the real limb body.' This speaks of the real.

The dharma that should be severed, the fifty-ninth volume says: 'From the cause of being associated with it (煩惱) and the object of its perception (所緣), afflictions can be severed.' Why is this so? Because the antidote path arises, afflictions do not arise, and one attains the unarisen dharma. Therefore, it is said to be severing that association. After the association is severed, it no longer clings to the object, so it is also said to be severed from the object of perception. However, the sixty-fifth volume says: 'Due to five aspects, conditioned existence (有漏) is established. First, due to the event (事故); second, due to latent tendencies (隨眠); third, due to association (相應); fourth, due to the object of perception (所緣); fifth, due to arising (生起).' What is the event of conditioned existence? It refers to pure internal form (清凈內色), and external forms that are dependent or independent of it. If they are defiled minds and mental factors, whether they are wholesome or neutral minds and mental factors, etc. These conditioned existences, as appropriate, are said to be conditioned due to the remaining four aspects. That is, due to latent tendencies, etc. If, in the pure forms and in all the minds and mental factors mentioned earlier, the seeds of affliction have not been harmed or severed, they are said to be latent tendencies, and also called coarse and heavy. If these (seeds of affliction) have not been completely severed, it should be known that everything is said to be conditioned due to latent tendencies.

漏 此中意說。于清凈色．若染善無記心心所等。由諸煩惱所有種子未害未斷。即此種子說名隨眠。亦名粗重。故由隨眠說名有漏。 於此心所。若染污心．心所。由相應故說名有漏 與彼俱故 若諸有事。若現量所行。若有漏所生增上所起。如是一切有漏所緣故說名有漏 此中現在名為有事。過去．未來名非有事 即現在中 若依清凈色識所行名現量所行 此意即五識及俱意所緣五塵。名現量所行 若余所行名非現量所行 若內諸處增上生起一切外處。名有漏所生增上所起 即第八識等所變外處 或雖現量所行。非所緣故成有漏。謂一切定心境界等。故復第三重言有漏所生增上所起。唯在五．六．八識所緣五塵 唯彼所緣當知有漏。所以者何。若緣去．來起諸煩惱。過去．未來非有事故。不由所緣說名有漏。若現在事非現量所行。如清凈色．及一切染污．善．無記心心所。彼亦非煩惱所緣故說名有漏。但由自分別所起相起諸煩惱。非彼諸法為此分明所行境故 準此唯有五境現在本．影二塵。名所緣有漏。餘一切非 由生起故成有漏者。謂諸隨眠未永斷故。順煩惱境現在前故。于彼現起不如理作意故。由此因緣諸所有法。正生．已生．或復當生。如是一切由生起故說名有漏。又從一切不善煩惱。諸異熟果．及異熟果增

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：

『漏』，在此中的意思是說，對於清凈的色法，如果染上了善、無記的心和心所等，由於各種煩惱的種子沒有被斷除，這些種子就被稱為隨眠（煩惱的潛在狀態），也稱為粗重（沉重、不自在的狀態）。因此，由於隨眠的存在，就被稱為有漏（不清凈，有煩惱）。

對於這些心所，如果是染污的心和心所，由於相應的緣故，被稱為有漏，因為它們與煩惱在一起。

如果是有實體的事物，如果是現量（直接感知）所行，或者是有漏所生、增上所起（由有漏法增強而產生），那麼這一切都是有漏所緣，因此被稱為有漏。這裡，現在的事物被稱為有事，過去和未來的事物被稱為非有事。

在現在的事物中，如果依賴清凈的色法和識所行，就稱為現量所行。這裡的意思是，五識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識）以及與它們相應的意識所緣的五塵（色、聲、香、味、觸），被稱為現量所行。其餘所行的則被稱為非現量所行。

如果內在的諸處（六根：眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意）增強而生起一切外在的處（六塵：色、聲、香、味、觸、法），就稱為有漏所生、增上所起。這裡指的是第八識（阿賴耶識）等所變現的外在的處。或者，即使是現量所行，如果不是所緣的境，也成為有漏，比如一切定心的境界等。因此，再次強調有漏所生、增上所起，只存在於五、六、八識所緣的五塵。只有這些所緣才應當知道是有漏的。為什麼呢？如果緣於過去、未來而生起各種煩惱，過去和未來不是真實存在的事物，因此不能因為所緣而被稱為有漏。如果現在的事物不是現量所行，比如清凈的色法，以及一切染污、善、無記的心和心所，它們也不是煩惱所緣，因此被稱為有漏。只是由於自己的分別所產生的相而生起各種煩惱，而不是這些法作為清晰的所行境。因此，只有五境（色、聲、香、味、觸）的現在、本、影二塵，才被稱為所緣有漏，其餘一切都不是。

由於生起而成為有漏，指的是各種隨眠沒有被永遠斷除，順應煩惱的境現在眼前，因此對它們產生不如理作意（錯誤的思考和判斷）。由於這些因緣，所有正生、已生、或將要生的法，這一切由於生起而被稱為有漏。此外，從一切不善的煩惱，各種異熟果（由惡業產生的果報），以及異熟果的增長……

【English Translation】 English version:

『Leakage』 (Asrava), the meaning here is that, regarding pure form, if it is tainted by wholesome or neutral mind and mental factors, etc., because the seeds of various afflictions have not been harmed or severed, these seeds are called latent tendencies (anusaya), also known as heaviness (gaurava). Therefore, due to the presence of latent tendencies, it is called 『with leakage』 (sasrava).

Regarding these mental factors, if they are defiled mind and mental factors, they are called 『with leakage』 due to their association, because they are together with afflictions.

If there are substantial things, if they are directly perceived (pratyaksa-gamana), or produced and increased by leakage (sasrava-utpatti-adhipati), then all of these are objects of leakage, and therefore called 『with leakage』. Here, present things are called substantial things, while past and future things are called non-substantial things.

Among present things, if they rely on pure form and are perceived by consciousness, they are called directly perceived. The meaning here is that the five consciousnesses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body) and the corresponding mind consciousness perceiving the five objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch) are called directly perceived. The rest are called not directly perceived.

If the internal sense bases (six roots: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) increase and give rise to all external sense objects (six objects: form, sound, smell, taste, touch, dharma), it is called produced and increased by leakage. This refers to the external objects transformed by the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana), etc. Or, even if it is directly perceived, if it is not the object of perception, it becomes with leakage, such as the states of all meditative minds. Therefore, it is emphasized again that produced and increased by leakage only exists in the five objects perceived by the five, sixth, and eighth consciousnesses. Only these objects should be known as with leakage. Why? If afflictions arise from perceiving the past and future, the past and future are not real things, so they cannot be called with leakage because of the object of perception. If present things are not directly perceived, such as pure form, and all defiled, wholesome, and neutral mind and mental factors, they are also not objects of affliction, and therefore called with leakage. It is only due to the appearances produced by one's own discrimination that various afflictions arise, rather than these dharmas being the clear objects of perception. Therefore, only the present, original, and shadow aspects of the five objects (form, sound, smell, taste, touch) are called objects of leakage, and all the rest are not.

Becoming with leakage due to arising refers to the fact that various latent tendencies have not been permanently severed, the objects that accord with afflictions appear before one's eyes, and therefore one engages in inappropriate attention (ayoniso manasikara). Due to these causes, all dharmas that are arising, have arisen, or will arise, all of these are called with leakage due to arising. Furthermore, from all unwholesome afflictions, various resultant fruits (vipaka-phala, the consequences of bad karma), and the increase of resultant fruits...

上所引外事生起。如是一切亦生起故。說名有漏。乃至廣說生起有漏之相。正生者漏俱。當生者引起。已生者間生。並相應．所緣合有五例。此說有漏。雖五相殊。論其斷門正對治斷莫過二種。親疏二種皆所緣縛。故論說斷莫過二種。今說義別親疏有異。故有現量所行等異。若不爾者。第七緣第八。應不名藏能緣斷故說所緣斷。由此但應如此中說 又解彼二斷者隨轉理門。今據實義故說有漏有其五相 然諸有漏略為五例。第一人天外五塵。唯由一所緣縛名有漏。不在內故非漏俱。第二善趣五根．內塵。由二成有漏。謂所緣．漏俱。以在內故。其不善業外塵亦二。一所緣。二漏引。第三除惡趣果。余無覆無記心．心所由三緣。一所緣如第七緣八等類。二漏俱。三間生。惡趣內五根．四塵亦由三緣。謂所緣．漏俱．漏引。第四善心．心所由四緣。謂所緣．漏俱．間生．漏引。其惡趣果無覆無記心．心所亦四。由不善有漏之所引故。第五一切染污心．心所由五緣。謂所緣．漏俱．間生．漏引．相應 大乘相應．所緣二縛與小乘異。漏體謂煩惱及隨。八識．遍行．別境．不定四。性是無記。與善十一相應名善。其心．心所與煩惱及隨煩惱俱名染心．心所。其煩惱及隨自性斷法。其俱識等相應名斷。即染一切心．心所皆相應斷。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 上面所引用的外事生起，像這樣的一切也都會生起，所以被稱為『有漏』。乃至廣泛地說明生起有漏的各種相狀。『正生』是指與煩惱同時生起，『當生』是指煩惱引起未來的生，『已生』是指煩惱使已生的法產生間隔。再加上『相應』和『所緣』，合起來共有五種情況。這裡所說的有漏，雖然有五種不同的相狀，但從斷除的角度來說，最直接的對治方法莫過於兩種：親近的對治和疏遠的對治，都是被所緣境所束縛。所以經論上說，斷除有漏的方法莫過於這兩種。現在所說的意義有所區別，親近和疏遠有所不同，所以有現量所行等差別。如果不是這樣，第七識緣第八識，就不應該被稱為『藏』，因為能緣的煩惱已經被斷除了，所以說是『所緣斷』。因此，應該像這裡所說的那樣理解。 另一種解釋是，這兩種斷除方法是隨著道理而轉變的。現在根據實際意義來說，有漏具有五種相狀。然而，各種有漏可以概括為五種情況：第一，人天道的外五塵，僅僅由於『所緣縛』而被稱為有漏，因為不在內，所以不是與煩惱同時生起。第二，善趣的五根和內塵，由兩種原因成為有漏，即『所緣』和『漏俱』，因為在內。不善業的外塵也是兩種原因，一是『所緣』，二是『漏引』。第三，除了惡趣果報之外，其餘的無覆無記的心和心所由三種因緣產生，一是『所緣』，比如第七識緣第八識等等，二是『漏俱』，三是『間生』。惡趣的內五根和四塵也由三種因緣產生，即『所緣』、『漏俱』、『漏引』。第四，善心和心所由四種因緣產生，即『所緣』、『漏俱』、『間生』、『漏引』。惡趣果報的無覆無記心和心所也是四種因緣，因為是被不善的有漏所引發的。第五，一切染污的心和心所由五種因緣產生，即『所緣』、『漏俱』、『間生』、『漏引』、『相應』。 大乘佛法中，『相應』和『所緣』這兩種束縛與小乘佛法不同。『漏體』指的是煩惱和隨煩惱。第八識（Alaya-vijnana），以及遍行、別境、不定這四種心所，其性質是無記的。與善十一心所相應時，被稱為善。而心和心所與煩惱及隨煩惱同時生起時，被稱為染心和心所。煩惱和隨煩惱的自性是斷法。與它們同時生起的識等，相應時被稱為斷。也就是說，染污的一切心和心所都是相應斷。

【English Translation】 English version: The external affairs mentioned above arise, and like that, everything also arises, therefore it is called 'Asrava' (outflow, leakage). And even extensively explain the various aspects of the arising of Asrava. 'Right arising' means arising simultaneously with afflictions, 'about to arise' means afflictions cause future arising, 'already arisen' means afflictions cause already arisen dharmas to produce intervals. Adding 'correspondence' (Samprayukta) and 'object' (Alambana), there are a total of five situations. The Asrava mentioned here, although there are five different aspects, from the perspective of cutting off, the most direct countermeasure is nothing more than two types: close countermeasure and distant countermeasure, both are bound by the object of perception. Therefore, the sutras say that there are no more than these two methods to cut off Asrava. The meaning now spoken of is different, closeness and distance are different, so there are differences such as direct perception. If it is not like this, the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) clinging to the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana), should not be called 'storehouse' (Alaya), because the afflictions that can cling have been cut off, so it is said to be 'object cut off'. Therefore, it should be understood as said here. Another explanation is that these two methods of cutting off change according to the principle. Now, according to the actual meaning, Asrava has five aspects. However, various Asravas can be summarized into five situations: First, the external five sense objects of humans and gods are called Asrava only because of 'object binding' (Alambana-bandha), because they are not internal, so they do not arise simultaneously with afflictions. Second, the five roots and internal objects of good destinies become Asrava for two reasons, namely 'object' and 'simultaneous with leakage' (Asrava-saha), because they are internal. The external objects of unwholesome karma are also two reasons, one is 'object', and the other is 'leakage-induced' (Asrava-pratyaya). Third, except for the results of evil destinies, the remaining uncovered and unspecified (Avyakrta) minds and mental factors arise from three causes, one is 'object', such as the seventh consciousness clinging to the eighth consciousness, etc., the second is 'simultaneous with leakage', and the third is 'interval arising'. The internal five roots and four objects of evil destinies also arise from three causes, namely 'object', 'simultaneous with leakage', and 'leakage-induced'. Fourth, wholesome minds and mental factors arise from four causes, namely 'object', 'simultaneous with leakage', 'interval arising', and 'leakage-induced'. The uncovered and unspecified minds and mental factors of the results of evil destinies are also four causes, because they are induced by unwholesome Asrava. Fifth, all defiled minds and mental factors arise from five causes, namely 'object', 'simultaneous with leakage', 'interval arising', 'leakage-induced', and 'correspondence'. In Mahayana Buddhism, the two bindings of 'correspondence' and 'object' are different from Hinayana Buddhism. 'Leakage body' refers to afflictions and secondary afflictions. The eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana), as well as the four mental factors of pervasive (Sarvatraga), object-specifying (Visesa), and variable (Aniyata), are unspecified in nature. When corresponding to the eleven wholesome mental factors, they are called wholesome. When the mind and mental factors arise simultaneously with afflictions and secondary afflictions, they are called defiled minds and mental factors. The nature of afflictions and secondary afflictions is the Dharma of cutting off. When the consciousness etc. that arise simultaneously with them are corresponding, they are called cut off. That is to say, all defiled minds and mental factors are corresponding cut off.

余不染法是所緣斷。疏所緣通一切有故。論文中自性斷者。即染心．心所。離緣彼煩惱者。即親．疏二所緣。雜彼煩惱者。謂俱生雜．引生雜．間生雜三種雜也 由此應分別。第八識能緣善趣二義。一所緣。二漏俱。惡趣有三。加漏引。第八現行相分。隨善．惡趣亦爾。然諸種子相分。隨諸現行分別具義。外塵不爾。

第七識見分五緣。一相應。二所緣。三引起四間生。五漏俱。是染污故。相分通情．本二性故。唯有所緣．漏俱。亦得漏引。像在心故。染見引故 第六識見分通三性。如前三性心．心所說。無記中威儀．工巧二心由三。謂間生．俱生．所緣。此中所緣由緣種子。現行亦不名所緣。去．來無體。現在必無染心所緣之。余皆準此。其異熟心由四。此三中加漏引。其通果無記心．心所由二緣。一所緣。二漏俱。善心．心所由四。謂漏俱．間生．所引．所緣。染污由五。其相分中一切異界緣．無漏緣．無本質緣皆名獨影。準能緣說但除相應。其善趣有本質獨緣五根．及內五塵等由二緣。謂所緣．漏俱。其惡趣外果亦二。謂所緣．漏引。惡趣內根．塵由二等。謂所緣．漏引。皆同前根門 五識見分亦通三性。皆同第六。相分善趣外唯所緣。內通漏俱。惡趣加漏引。雖有如是有漏不同。但以相應．所緣二縛增

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『余不染法』是指所緣斷（Alambana-prahana，通過斷除所緣境來斷除煩惱）。疏鈔解釋說，所緣境通於一切有為法。論文中提到的『自性斷』，指的是染污的心和心所（Citta-caitta，心理活動）。『離緣彼煩惱者』，指的是親所緣和疏所緣。『雜彼煩惱者』，指的是俱生雜（Sahaja-samsarga，與生俱來的雜染）、引生雜（Anubandha-samsarga，由先前行為引發的雜染）和間生雜（Antarabhava-samsarga，中陰身階段的雜染）這三種雜染。 由此應該分別討論第八識（Alaya-vijnana，阿賴耶識）能夠緣取善趣的兩種含義：一是作為所緣境，二是與有漏法（Sasrava-dharma，產生煩惱的法）俱生。對於惡趣，則有三種含義，加上了有漏法所引發的。第八識現行時的相分（Nimitta-bhaga，影像部分），也隨善趣或惡趣而不同。然而，各種種子（Bija，潛在力量）的相分，則隨各種現行而分別具備這些含義。外塵（Bahya-rupa，外部色法）則不是這樣。 第七識（Manas-vijnana，末那識）的見分（Darsana-bhaga，能見部分）有五種緣：一是相應（Samprayoga，與心所相應），二是所緣（Alambana，所緣境），三是引起（Hetu，因），四是間生（Antarabhava，中陰），五是與有漏法俱生。因為它是有染污的。相分通於情性（Adhyasaya，情執）和本性（Svabhava，自性）兩種性質，所以只有所緣和與有漏法俱生。也可能被有漏法所引發，因為影像存在於心中，並且被染污的見解所引導。 第六識（Mano-vijnana，意識）的見分通於三種性質，如前面所說的三種性質的心和心所。在無記（Avyakrta，非善非惡）中，威儀心（Iryapatha-citta，行為舉止的心）和工巧心（Silpasthana-citta，工藝技巧的心）由三種緣構成，即間生、俱生和所緣。這裡所說的所緣，是由緣取種子而產生的。現行也不稱為所緣。過去和未來沒有實體，現在必定沒有染污心所緣取。其餘的都可以依此類推。其異熟心（Vipaka-citta，果報心）由四種緣構成，即這三種緣加上有漏法所引發的。其通果無記心和心所由兩種緣構成，一是所緣，二是與有漏法俱生。善心和心所由四種緣構成，即與有漏法俱生、間生、所引發和所緣。染污心由五種緣構成。其相分中，一切異界緣（Visambhaga-alambana，不同界別的所緣）、無漏緣（Anasrava-alambana，無漏的所緣）和無本質緣（Nirvastuka-alambana，沒有實體的所緣）都稱為獨影（Niralambana-pratibhasa，無所緣的顯現）。參照能緣（Grahaka，能取）來說，但要除去相應。其善趣（Sugati，善道）有本質的獨緣五根（Panca-indriya，眼耳鼻舌身）以及內在的五塵（Panca-visaya，色聲香味觸）等由兩種緣構成，即所緣和與有漏法俱生。其惡趣（Durgati，惡道）的外果（Bahya-phala，外部果報）也是兩種，即所緣和有漏法所引發的。惡趣的內根（Adhyatmika-indriya，內在的根）和塵（Visaya，所對境）由兩種等構成，即所緣和有漏法所引發的，都與前面的根門相同。 五識（Panca-vijnana，前五識）的見分也通於三種性質，都與第六識相同。相分在善趣外只有所緣，內在則通於與有漏法俱生。惡趣則加上有漏法所引發的。雖然有如此這般的有漏不同，但只是以相應和所緣這兩種束縛來增加。

【English Translation】 English version: 'The remaining non-tainted dharmas' refers to Alambana-prahana (severance through the object of perception). The commentary explains that the object of perception encompasses all conditioned dharmas. The 'self-nature severance' mentioned in the treatise refers to the tainted mind and mental factors (Citta-caitta). 'Those who are separated from the afflictions due to conditions' refers to both direct and indirect objects of perception. 'Those who are mixed with those afflictions' refers to the three types of mixture: Sahaja-samsarga (innate mixture), Anubandha-samsarga (mixture arising from previous actions), and Antarabhava-samsarga (mixture during the intermediate state). Therefore, one should separately discuss the two meanings of the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) being able to perceive the good realms: first, as an object of perception; second, being co-existent with tainted dharmas (Sasrava-dharma). For the evil realms, there are three meanings, adding what is induced by tainted dharmas. The image-aspect (Nimitta-bhaga) of the eighth consciousness in its present manifestation also varies according to the good or evil realms. However, the image-aspect of the various seeds (Bija) possesses these meanings separately according to the various present manifestations. External objects (Bahya-rupa) are not like this. The perception-aspect (Darsana-bhaga) of the seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) has five conditions: first, association (Samprayoga); second, object of perception (Alambana); third, arising (Hetu); fourth, intermediate existence (Antarabhava); and fifth, co-existence with tainted dharmas. This is because it is tainted. The image-aspect encompasses both emotional nature (Adhyasaya) and intrinsic nature (Svabhava), so it only has object of perception and co-existence with tainted dharmas. It can also be induced by tainted dharmas because the image exists in the mind and is guided by tainted views. The perception-aspect of the sixth consciousness (Mano-vijnana) encompasses three natures, as mentioned earlier regarding the mind and mental factors of the three natures. Among the non-specified (Avyakrta), the minds of deportment (Iryapatha-citta) and skillful activities (Silpasthana-citta) are constituted by three conditions: intermediate arising, co-existence, and object of perception. The object of perception here arises from perceiving seeds. Present manifestation is also not called object of perception. The past and future have no substance, and in the present, there is certainly no object of perception for tainted mental factors. The rest can be inferred accordingly. Its resultant consciousness (Vipaka-citta) is constituted by four conditions: these three conditions plus what is induced by tainted dharmas. Its general-result non-specified mind and mental factors are constituted by two conditions: first, object of perception; second, co-existence with tainted dharmas. Wholesome minds and mental factors are constituted by four conditions: co-existence with tainted dharmas, intermediate arising, what is induced, and object of perception. Tainted minds are constituted by five conditions. Among its image-aspects, all objects of perception from different realms (Visambhaga-alambana), untainted objects of perception (Anasrava-alambana), and objects of perception without substance (Nirvastuka-alambana) are called unique shadows (Niralambana-pratibhasa). Referring to the taker (Grahaka), but excluding association. The good realms (Sugati) have substantial unique objects of perception, the five roots (Panca-indriya: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body) and the inner five objects (Panca-visaya: form, sound, smell, taste, touch), etc., are constituted by two conditions: object of perception and co-existence with tainted dharmas. The external results (Bahya-phala) of the evil realms (Durgati) are also two: object of perception and what is induced by tainted dharmas. The inner roots (Adhyatmika-indriya) and objects (Visaya) of the evil realms are constituted by two equals: object of perception and what is induced by tainted dharmas, all the same as the previous root-doors. The perception-aspect of the five consciousnesses (Panca-vijnana) also encompasses three natures, all the same as the sixth consciousness. The image-aspect in the good realms outside only has object of perception, while inside it encompasses co-existence with tainted dharmas. The evil realms add what is induced by tainted dharmas. Although there are such differences in taintedness, it is only increased by the two bonds of association and object of perception.

上斷隨二種。不依斷漏俱等名斷。如前第七識第六證中分別。

三苦中若依生苦相。初二唯欲。後一通三。若據其性苦苦唯欲。有迫緣故。壞苦通色界。有樂受故。如經中說入變壞心。後一通三界。

三受俱中識等六支既是種子。云何相應。釋有二義。一依當生位說。二依隨順俱有義。亦無違也。故種名俱。俱是相應之異名故 若爾依有支無當生。云何相應 識等五種當有現行種說相應。有支威力曾於行支等中有相應故。種亦說相應 或從識等當生位說。

抉擇分說苦等四諦體。如疏。

攝事分中說十二分逆觀中。生支及識等五。皆是老死集。即苦．集體同者。集有二種。一招感異熟名集。即抉擇說。唯業．煩惱。二能生苦果名集。攝事品中生支等是。二論雖別不相違也。

二種生死。以八門分別。一出體。二釋名。三辨招生死差別相。四解位次。五解得處。六四種生死相攝。七會三種生死不同。八問答分別 體．名．問答三門如論 其得處如前第七卷解第八識生無漏中說。然應料簡諸果不同。其位次預流等得初地即得。如瑜伽抉擇．聲聞地．及佛地論。其三種生死不同。如疏中引楞伽。然且勝鬘．及此論三種身依三乘決定。楞伽唯依大乘頓悟怖煩惱者說。或通說不定性差別勝位。地

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 上斷隨二種：對於上界煩惱的斷除，有兩種情況。不依斷漏俱等名斷：如果不是通過斷除煩惱的手段，而是通過其他方式（例如修習無漏智慧）來達到與斷除煩惱相同的效果，也稱為『斷』。如前第七識第六證中分別：就像前面在第七識的第六個證明中分別說明的那樣。 三苦中若依生苦相：如果從生苦的角度來看，初二唯欲：苦苦和壞苦只在欲界存在。後一通三：行苦則遍通三界。若據其性苦苦唯欲：如果根據其性質來區分，苦苦只在欲界存在，有迫緣故：因為它有逼迫的因緣。壞苦通**：壞苦遍通**，有樂受故：因為它有樂受的緣故。如經中說入變壞心：就像經中所說的那樣，進入變壞的心。後一通三界：行苦遍通三界。 三受俱中識等六支既是種子：在感受、觸等六支都存在的情況下，識等六支已經是種子，云何相應：它們如何相互關聯呢？釋有二義：對此有兩種解釋。一依當生位說：一是根據未來將要產生的狀態來說。二依隨順俱有義：二是根據隨順俱有的意義來說，亦無違也：這兩種解釋並不矛盾。故種名俱：所以說種子是俱有的。俱是相應之異名故：俱有是相應的另一種說法。若爾依有支無當生：如果這樣，根據有支，沒有未來將要產生的狀態，云何相應：如何相互關聯呢？識等五種當有現行種說相應：識等五種應當有現行的種子，才能說它們相互關聯。有支威力曾於行支等中有相應故：因為有支的力量曾經在行支等中有相互關聯，種亦說相應：所以種子也可以說是相互關聯的。或從識等當生位說：或者從識等未來將要產生的狀態來說。 抉擇分說苦等四諦體：抉擇分中說明了苦等四聖諦的體性，如疏：就像疏文中解釋的那樣。 攝事分中說十二分逆觀中：攝事分中說明了在十二因緣逆觀中，生支及識等五：生支以及識等五支，皆是老死集：都是導致老死的因。即苦．集體同者：也就是說，苦諦和集諦是相同的。集有二種：集諦有兩種。一招感異熟名集：一是招感異熟果報的，稱為集，即抉擇說：也就是抉擇分中所說的，唯業．煩惱：只有業和煩惱。二能生苦果名集：二是能夠產生苦果的，稱為集，攝事品中生支等是：攝事品中所說的生支等就是。二論雖別不相違也：兩種論述雖然不同，但並不矛盾。 二種生死：兩種生死，以八門分別：用八個方面來分別。一出體：一是說明其體性。二釋名：二是解釋其名稱。三辨招生死差別相：三是辨別招感生死的差別相。四解位次：四是解釋其位次。五解得處：五是解釋其獲得之處。六四種生死相攝：六是四種生死相互包含的關係。七會三種生死不同：七是會合三種生死的不同之處。八問答分別：八是用問答的方式來分別。體．名．問答三門如論：體性、名稱、問答這三個方面就像論中所說的那樣。其得處如前第七卷解第八識生無漏中說：其獲得之處就像前面第七卷解釋第八識生起無漏智慧時所說的那樣。然應料簡諸果不同：然而應當簡別各種果報的不同。其位次預流等得初地即得：其位次，例如預流果等，獲得初地就立即獲得。如瑜伽抉擇．聲聞地．及佛地論：就像《瑜伽師地論·抉擇分》、《聲聞地》以及《佛地論》中所說的那樣。其三種生死不同：其三種生死不同。如疏中引楞伽：就像疏文中引用的《楞伽經》所說的那樣。然且勝鬘．及此論三種身依三乘決定：然而《勝鬘經》以及此論中，三種身是依據三乘來決定的。楞伽唯依大乘頓悟怖煩惱者說：而《楞伽經》只是依據大乘頓悟、對煩惱感到恐懼的人來說的。或通說不定性差別勝位：或者通泛地說明不定性的差別和殊勝的地位。地：地位。

【English Translation】 English version 上斷隨二種 (shàng duàn suí èr zhǒng): The cessation of afflictions in the higher realms follows two paths. 不依斷漏俱等名斷 (bù yī duàn lòu jù děng míng duàn): If it's not through the cessation of outflows (漏, lòu) but achieves the same result, it's also called 'cessation'. 如前第七識第六證中分別 (rú qián dì qī shì dì liù zhèng zhōng fēn bié): As explained in the sixth proof of the seventh consciousness earlier. 三苦中若依生苦相 (sān kǔ zhōng ruò yī shēng kǔ xiāng): Regarding the three kinds of suffering, if based on the aspect of birth suffering, 初二唯欲 (chū èr wéi yù): the first two (苦苦, kǔ kǔ, suffering of suffering and 壞苦, huài kǔ, suffering of change) exist only in the desire realm (欲界, yù jiè). 後一通三 (hòu yī tōng sān): The last one (行苦, xíng kǔ, suffering of conditioned existence) pervades the three realms. 若據其性苦苦唯欲 (ruò jù qí xìng kǔ kǔ wéi yù): If based on its nature, the suffering of suffering exists only in the desire realm, 有迫緣故 (yǒu pò yuán gù): because it has the condition of oppression. 壞苦通** (huài kǔ tōng**): The suffering of change pervades **, 有樂受故 (yǒu lè shòu gù): because it has the experience of pleasure. 如經中說入變壞心 (rú jīng zhōng shuō rù biàn huài xīn): As the sutra says, entering the mind of change and decay. 後一通三界 (hòu yī tōng sān jiè): The last one pervades the three realms. 三受俱中識等六支既是種子 (sān shòu jù zhōng shì děng liù zhī jì shì zhǒng zi): When the six factors of feeling, contact, etc., are present, the six factors of consciousness, etc., are already seeds. 云何相應 (yún hé xiāng yìng): How do they correlate? 釋有二義 (shì yǒu èr yì): There are two explanations. 一依當生位說 (yī yī dāng shēng wèi shuō): One is based on the state that will arise in the future. 二依隨順俱有義 (èr yī suí shùn jù yǒu yì): The second is based on the meaning of concurrent existence. 亦無違也 (yì wú wéi yě): These two explanations are not contradictory. 故種名俱 (gù zhǒng míng jù): Therefore, the seed is called concurrent. 俱是相應之異名故 (jù shì xiāng yìng zhī yì míng gù): Concurrent is another name for correlation. 若爾依有支無當生 (ruò ěr yī yǒu zhī wú dāng shēng): If so, based on the existence factor, without a future state arising, 云何相應 (yún hé xiāng yìng): how do they correlate? 識等五種當有現行種說相應 (shì děng wǔ zhǒng dāng yǒu xiàn xíng zhǒng shuō xiāng yìng): The five kinds of consciousness, etc., should have manifest seeds to be said to correlate. 有支威力曾於行支等中有相應故 (yǒu zhī wēi lì céng yú xíng zhī děng zhōng yǒu xiāng yìng gù): Because the power of the existence factor has correlated with the action factor, etc., 種亦說相應 (zhǒng yì shuō xiāng yìng): the seed is also said to correlate. 或從識等當生位說 (huò cóng shì děng dāng shēng wèi shuō): Or it is based on the future state of consciousness, etc. 抉擇分說苦等四諦體 (jué zé fēn shuō kǔ děng sì dì tǐ): The Vyavasthāna-vibhāga (抉擇分, jué zé fēn) explains the nature of the Four Noble Truths, such as suffering, etc. 如疏 (rú shū): As explained in the commentary. 攝事分中說十二分逆觀中 (shè shì fēn zhōng shuō shí èr fēn nì guān zhōng): The Sangraha-vastu (攝事分, shè shì fēn) explains in the reverse contemplation of the twelve links, 生支及識等五 (shēng zhī jí shì děng wǔ): the birth factor and the five factors of consciousness, etc., 皆是老死集 (jiē shì lǎo sǐ jí): are all the accumulation of old age and death. 即苦．集體同者 (jí kǔ jí tǐ tóng zhě): That is, suffering and accumulation are the same. 集有二種 (jí yǒu èr zhǒng): There are two kinds of accumulation. 一招感異熟名集 (yī zhāo gǎn yì shú míng jí): One is called accumulation that invites different ripening, 即抉擇說 (jí jué zé shuō): as explained in the Vyavasthāna-vibhāga, 唯業．煩惱 (wéi yè fán nǎo): only karma and afflictions. 二能生苦果名集 (èr néng shēng kǔ guǒ míng jí): The second is called accumulation that can produce suffering results, 攝事品中生支等是 (shè shì pǐn zhōng shēng zhī děng shì): such as the birth factor in the Sangraha-vastu. 二論雖別不相違也 (èr lùn suī bié bù xiāng wéi yě): Although the two treatises are different, they are not contradictory. 二種生死 (èr zhǒng shēng sǐ): The two kinds of birth and death are distinguished by eight aspects. 以八門分別 (yǐ bā mén fēn bié): They are distinguished by eight aspects. 一出體 (yī chū tǐ): First, explaining the nature. 二釋名 (èr shì míng): Second, explaining the name. 三辨招生死差別相 (sān biàn zhāo shēng sǐ chā bié xiāng): Third, distinguishing the different aspects of inviting birth and death. 四解位次 (sì jiě wèi cì): Fourth, explaining the stages. 五解得處 (wǔ jiě dé chù): Fifth, explaining the place of attainment. 六四種生死相攝 (liù sì zhǒng shēng sǐ xiāng shè): Sixth, the mutual inclusion of the four kinds of birth and death. 七會三種生死不同 (qī huì sān zhǒng shēng sǐ bù tóng): Seventh, the convergence of the differences between the three kinds of birth and death. 八問答分別 (bā wèn dá fēn bié): Eighth, distinguishing through questions and answers. 體．名．問答三門如論 (tǐ míng wèn dá sān mén rú lùn): The aspects of nature, name, and questions and answers are as explained in the treatise. 其得處如前第七卷解第八識生無漏中說 (qí dé chù rú qián dì qī juǎn jiě dì bā shì shēng wú lòu zhōng shuō): The place of attainment is as explained in the seventh volume regarding the arising of non-outflow wisdom in the eighth consciousness. 然應料簡諸果不同 (rán yīng liào jiǎn zhū guǒ bù tóng): However, the differences between the various fruits should be distinguished. 其位次預流等得初地即得 (qí wèi cì yù liú děng dé chū dì jí dé): The stages, such as Srotapanna (預流, yù liú), are attained immediately upon attaining the first bhumi (地, dì). 如瑜伽抉擇．聲聞地．及佛地論 (rú yú qié jué zé shēng wén dì jí fó dì lùn): As explained in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra (瑜伽師地論, yú qié shī dì lùn) Vyavasthāna-vibhāga, Śrāvakabhūmi (聲聞地, shēng wén dì), and Buddhabhūmi-sūtra (佛地論, fó dì lùn). 其三種生死不同 (qí sān zhǒng shēng sǐ bù tóng): The three kinds of birth and death are different. 如疏中引楞伽 (rú shū zhōng yǐn léng qié): As explained in the commentary citing the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra (楞伽經, léng qié jīng). 然且勝鬘．及此論三種身依三乘決定 (rán qiě shèng mán jí cǐ lùn sān zhǒng shēn yī sān shèng jué dìng): However, the three bodies in the Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra (勝鬘經, shèng mán jīng) and this treatise are determined based on the Three Vehicles. 楞伽唯依大乘頓悟怖煩惱者說 (léng qié wéi yī dà chéng dùn wù bù fán nǎo zhě shuō): The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra only speaks to those who have sudden enlightenment in the Mahayana and fear afflictions. 或通說不定性差別勝位 (huò tōng shuō bù dìng xìng chā bié shèng wèi): Or it generally speaks of the differences and superior positions of indeterminate nature. 地 (dì): Bhumi.

前一劫與本無別。所以不說 辨招生死差別相者。分段有二。一散。二定。散中有二。一如十二因緣生。唯欲界全。上界小分。依生得善得報別。二依勝聞．思生得善心。轉延福壽雜資所起唯在欲界。心猛利故 定中有三。一有漏定愿轉福壽行。唯欲界有。二生四靜慮廣果天下．乃四無色。唯有漏業熏三品禪生。三生五凈居有．無漏雜 變易唯二。一有漏發願等並無漏。合資故業。謂七地已前．一切二乘。皆已現行無明等為緣資。二八地已上。唯無漏定資。現行智障等並已無故 攝四生死者。無上經云。阿難．一切阿羅漢．辟支佛．十地菩薩。為四種障不得如來法身四德波羅蜜。何者為四。一者生緣。二者生因。三者有有。四者無有 何者生緣惑。即是無明住地能生一切行。如無明生業。何者生因惑。是無明住地所生諸行。譬如無明所生諸業。何者有有。緣無明住地。因無明住地所起無漏行。三種意生身生。譬如四取為緣。三有漏業為因。起三種有。何者無有。緣三種意生身。不可覺知微細墮滅。譬如緣三有中生唸唸老死 下文又云。阿難於三界中有四種難。一者煩惱。二業難。三者生報難。四者過失難。無明住地所起方便生死。如三界內煩惱難。無明住地所起因緣生死。如三界內業難。無明住地所起有有生死。如三

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 前一劫與現在並無差別。所以不再贅述。辨別分段生死差別相，分為兩種：一是散，二是定。散中有兩種：一是如十二因緣所生，僅欲界全部，上界小部分，依據生得善和所得果報而不同。二是依據殊勝的聞、思所生得的善心，以及由此而產生的延年益壽的各種資財，僅在欲界。因為心力猛利。定中有三種：一是有漏定愿所轉變的福壽之行，僅欲界有。二是生於四靜慮（色界四禪天）和廣果天（色界第四禪天），乃至四無色界（無色界四天），僅由有漏業熏習三種禪定而生。三是生於五凈居天（色界第五禪天），有有漏和無漏的雜染。變易生死僅有兩種：一是有漏發願等以及無漏，共同資助而成的業。指七地（菩薩修行第七階段）以前的一切二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘），都已現行無明等作為緣和資助。二是八地（菩薩修行第八階段）以上，僅無漏定資助。因為現行的智障等已經沒有了。攝取四種生死，無上經中說：『阿難（Ananda，佛陀十大弟子之一），一切阿羅漢（Arhat，斷盡煩惱的聖者）、辟支佛（Pratyekabuddha，又稱獨覺或緣覺）、十地菩薩（Tenth Bhumi Bodhisattva，菩薩修行的第十個階段），被四種障礙所阻礙，無法獲得如來法身四德波羅蜜（Tathāgata Dharmakāya Four Virtues Pāramitā，如來法身的四種功德：常、樂、我、凈）。哪四種呢？一是生緣，二是生因，三是有有，四是無有。』 什麼是生緣惑？就是無明住地（Avidyā-sthiti，根本無明）能生一切行。如無明生業。什麼是生因惑？是無明住地所生的諸行。譬如無明所生的諸業。什麼是有有？緣無明住地，因無明住地所起的無漏行。三種意生身（Manomayakāya，由意念所生的身）生。譬如四取（Four Attachments，四種執取：欲取、見取、戒禁取、我語取）為緣，三有漏業為因，生起三種有。什麼是無有？緣三種意生身，不可覺知微細的墮落和滅亡。譬如緣三有中生唸唸的老死。 下文又說：『阿難，在三界（Trailokya，欲界、色界、無色界）中有四種難：一是煩惱難，二是業難，三是生報難，四是過失難。無明住地所起的方便生死，如三界內的煩惱難。無明住地所起的因緣生死，如三界內的業難。無明住地所起的有有生死，如三

【English Translation】 English version The previous kalpa (aeon) is no different from the present. Therefore, it is not discussed further. Differentiating the characteristics of the difference between segmented and transformational births and deaths, there are two types: one is scattered, and the other is fixed. Among the scattered, there are two types: one is like the arising of the twelve links of dependent origination (Dvādaśāṅga-pratītyasamutpāda), which is entirely in the desire realm (Kāmadhātu), and a small part in the upper realms, depending on the acquired goodness and the resulting retribution. The second is based on the excellent hearing and contemplation that gives rise to good thoughts, and the various resources that arise from prolonging life and increasing blessings, which are only in the desire realm, because the mind is vigorous. Among the fixed, there are three types: one is the practice of blessings and longevity transformed by defiled meditative vows, which is only in the desire realm. The second is birth in the four dhyānas (meditative states) of the form realm (Rūpadhātu) and the Heaven of Great Fruition (Bṛhatphala), and even the four formless realms (Arūpadhātu), which are only born from the defiled karma that has been imbued with the three types of dhyāna. The third is birth in the five Pure Abodes (Śuddhāvāsa) of the form realm, which is a mixture of defiled and undefiled. Transformational birth and death are only of two types: one is the defiled vows, etc., and the undefiled, which are jointly supported by karma. This refers to all the two vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) before the seventh bhūmi (stage of bodhisattva practice), who have already manifested ignorance, etc., as conditions and support. The second is above the eighth bhūmi, which is only supported by undefiled samādhi (meditative concentration), because the currently active obstacles of wisdom, etc., are no longer present. To encompass the four types of birth and death, the Supreme Sutra says: 'Ānanda (one of the ten great disciples of the Buddha), all Arhats (those who have eradicated afflictions), Pratyekabuddhas (solitary Buddhas), and tenth bhūmi Bodhisattvas (the tenth stage of bodhisattva practice) are obstructed by four types of hindrances, unable to attain the Tathāgata Dharmakāya Four Virtues Pāramitā (the four virtues of the Tathāgata's Dharma body: eternity, bliss, self, and purity). What are the four? One is the condition for birth, the second is the cause for birth, the third is existence, and the fourth is non-existence.' What is the affliction of the condition for birth? It is the ground of ignorance (Avidyā-sthiti, fundamental ignorance) that can give rise to all actions. For example, ignorance gives rise to karma. What is the affliction of the cause for birth? It is the various actions that arise from the ground of ignorance. For example, the various karmas that arise from ignorance. What is existence? It is the undefiled practice that arises from the ground of ignorance, due to the ground of ignorance. The three types of mind-made bodies (Manomayakāya, bodies created by the mind) are born. For example, the four attachments (Four Attachments, four types of clinging: desire attachment, view attachment, precept and ritual attachment, and self-assertion attachment) are the conditions, and the three defiled karmas are the cause, giving rise to the three types of existence. What is non-existence? It is the subtle falling and perishing of the three types of mind-made bodies, which cannot be perceived. For example, it is like the aging and death that occur in every moment of birth within the three realms of existence. The following text also says: 'Ānanda, in the three realms (Trailokya, the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm) there are four difficulties: one is the difficulty of afflictions, the second is the difficulty of karma, the third is the difficulty of the retribution of birth, and the fourth is the difficulty of faults. The expedient birth and death that arise from the ground of ignorance are like the difficulty of afflictions within the three realms. The birth and death of conditions that arise from the ground of ignorance are like the difficulty of karma within the three realms. The existence that arises from the ground of ignorance is like the three

界內生根難。無明住地所起無有生死。如三界內過失難。有有者有三界有異熟體。無有者無有苦苦等。唯有行苦相。以無漏資生死亦說為難 問答分別。既得變易經三大劫。亦有變易得百劫麟角耶 答不得。不以所知障為緣故若所留身有漏定愿所資助者。分段身攝 設許無漏定愿所資助感其分段。有何過失而不許耶 以極勝故非分段收。非變易者不能無漏資身久住。勢力弱故。

對法十四說十分別。謂無性分別．有性分別．增益分別．損滅分別．一性分別．異性分別．自性分別．差別分別．隨名義分別．隨義名分別。廣如彼配釋般若經文。

證三性之前後中。與諸處三文不同。如唯識章中會 何故二空理有淺深。悟生不必悟法。二性淺深不悟深時必不悟淺。要達理方達事也 答二理別障。斷生執不悟法空。二性無別障。不悟本時不能悟末事。未有先悟事而後悟生空故。悟真理方了俗事思之可知。

三解脫門與諸論攝行不同。應如別抄。

無性無常。對法等苦諦無常行皆有此行。初除所執。次觀依他故。亦可性．諦俱實。

所遍計法唯言依他。為唯護法。亦安惠耶。此二師文。護法親取相分。安惠本質皆得。三解俱得。勘之。

攝大乘雲。如是菩薩悟入意言似義相故悟入遍計所執

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 界內生根難。在無明住地（Avidya-bhumi，無明的所在地）所產生的，沒有生死。如同在三界（Trailokya，欲界、色界、無色界）內的過失難以避免。『有有者』（bhava-bhava，存在者）有三界（Trailokya）的異熟果報之身。『無有者』（abhava，不存在者）沒有苦苦等，只有行苦之相。即使以無漏（anasrava，沒有煩惱）的資糧來延續生死，也被認為是困難的。問答分別：既然證得變易生死（parinama-marana，聖者所經歷的微細生死）需要三大阿僧祇劫（asamkhya-kalpa，無數大劫），那麼證得百劫麟角喻（khadga-visana-kalpa，比喻菩薩的稀有）也需要變易生死嗎？答：不需要。因為不是以所知障（jneyavarana，對所知事物的障礙）為緣故。如果所留下的身體是有漏（sasrava，有煩惱）的，由禪定和願力所資助，那麼屬於分段生死（bhavanga-marana，凡夫的粗大生死）所攝。假設允許無漏的禪定和願力所資助，感得分段生死，有什麼過失而不允許呢？因為極其殊勝，所以不屬於分段生死所攝。不是變易生死者，不能以無漏的資糧使身體長久住世，因為勢力弱小。 《對法論》（Abhidharma）第十四說，有十分別，即無性分別（asvabhava-vikalpa，無自性分別）、有性分別（svabhava-vikalpa，有自性分別）、增益分別（samaropa-vikalpa，增益分別）、損滅分別（apavada-vikalpa，損減分別）、一性分別（ekatva-vikalpa，一性分別）、異性分別（nanatva-vikalpa，異性分別）、自性分別（svabhava-vikalpa，自性分別）、差別分別（visesa-vikalpa，差別分別）、隨名義分別（namartha-vikalpa，隨名取義分別）、隨義名分別（arthanama-vikalpa，隨義立名分別）。詳細內容如彼經文所配釋的《般若經》（Prajnaparamita-sutra）。 在證三性（trisvabhava，遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性）的前後中，與諸處的三文不同，如《唯識章》（Vijnaptimatrata-sastra）中會通。為什麼二空（dvisunyata，人空、法空）之理有淺深？悟入有情空不一定悟入法空。二性（dvisvabhava，兩種自性）的淺深，不悟入深時必定不悟入淺。要通達真理才能通達事相。答：二理的障礙不同。斷除有情執不悟入法空。二性沒有別的障礙。不悟入根本時不能悟入末端之事。沒有先悟入事相而後悟入有情空的。悟入真理才能瞭解世俗之事，思考可知。 三解脫門（trimoksa-dvara，空解脫門、無相解脫門、無愿解脫門）與諸論所攝的行門不同，應該如別抄所說。 無性無常。對法等苦諦（duhkha-satya，苦諦）的無常行（anitya-lakshana，無常相）都有此行。首先去除所執著的，其次觀察依他起性（paratantra-svabhava，依他而起的自性），因此也可以說自性和諦都是真實的。 所遍計法（parikalpita-dharma，遍計所執的法）只說是依他起性（paratantra-svabhava），是隻有護法（Dharmapala）這樣認為，還是安慧（Sthiramati）也這樣認為？這兩位論師的觀點是，護法親取相分（nimitta-bhaga，影像部分），安慧的本質都可以得到。三解（trisamadhi，三種三昧）都可以得到，可以勘驗。 《攝大乘論》（Mahayana-samgraha）說：如此菩薩悟入意言，相似於義相，因此悟入遍計所執性（parikalpita-svabhava，遍計所執的自性）。

【English Translation】 English version It is difficult to take root within the realms of existence. That which arises from the ground of ignorance (Avidya-bhumi) is without birth and death. Just as faults within the three realms (Trailokya: Desire Realm, Form Realm, Formless Realm) are difficult to avoid. Those who 'have existence' (bhava-bhava) possess the body of ripened karma from the three realms (Trailokya). Those who 'do not have existence' (abhava) do not have suffering of suffering, etc., but only the aspect of suffering of change. Even using undefiled (anasrava) resources to continue in samsara is said to be difficult. Question and Answer Differentiation: Since attaining transformation birth and death (parinama-marana) requires three great asamkhya kalpas, does attaining the metaphor of a hundred kalpa rhinoceros horn (khadga-visana-kalpa) also require transformation birth and death? Answer: It does not. Because it is not caused by the obscuration of knowledge (jneyavarana). If the body that remains is defiled (sasrava), supported by samadhi and vows, then it is included within sectional birth and death (bhavanga-marana). If it is allowed that undefiled samadhi and vows support and cause sectional birth and death, what fault is there in not allowing it? Because it is extremely superior, it is not included within sectional birth and death. One who is not in transformation birth and death cannot use undefiled resources to sustain the body for a long time, because the power is weak. The fourteenth section of the Abhidharma states that there are ten distinctions, namely: non-nature discrimination (asvabhava-vikalpa), nature discrimination (svabhava-vikalpa), additive discrimination (samaropa-vikalpa), subtractive discrimination (apavada-vikalpa), one-nature discrimination (ekatva-vikalpa), different-nature discrimination (nanatva-vikalpa), self-nature discrimination (svabhava-vikalpa), difference discrimination (visesa-vikalpa), discrimination following name and meaning (namartha-vikalpa), and discrimination following meaning and name (arthanama-vikalpa). The details are as explained in the Prajnaparamita-sutra. The sequence of before, after, and middle in realizing the three natures (trisvabhava: the nature of complete dependence, the nature of other-power, and the nature of perfect reality) is different from the three texts in various places, as reconciled in the Vijnaptimatrata-sastra. Why are the principles of the two emptinesses (dvisunyata: emptiness of self, emptiness of phenomena) shallow and deep? Realizing the emptiness of beings does not necessarily mean realizing the emptiness of phenomena. Regarding the shallowness and depth of the two natures (dvisvabhava), if one does not realize the deep, one will certainly not realize the shallow. One must understand the principle in order to understand the phenomena. Answer: The obstacles to the two principles are different. Cutting off the attachment to beings does not mean realizing the emptiness of phenomena. There is no other obstacle to the two natures. If one does not realize the root, one cannot realize the end. There is no case of first realizing phenomena and then realizing the emptiness of beings. Understanding the true principle allows one to understand worldly matters; think about it and you will understand. The three doors of liberation (trimoksa-dvara: emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness) are different from the practices included in various treatises; it should be as stated in the separate notes. Non-nature is impermanent. The impermanence aspect (anitya-lakshana) of the truth of suffering (duhkha-satya) in the Abhidharma, etc., all have this aspect. First, remove what is clung to, then observe the dependent arising nature (paratantra-svabhava), so it can also be said that both nature and truth are real. The completely conceptualized dharma (parikalpita-dharma) is only said to be dependent arising nature (paratantra-svabhava). Is this only the view of Dharmapala, or is it also the view of Sthiramati? According to these two masters, Dharmapala directly takes the image-part (nimitta-bhaga), while Sthiramati can obtain the essence. All three samadhis (trisamadhi) can be obtained; examine it. The Mahayana-samgraha says: Thus, the Bodhisattva realizes that the meaning of words is similar to the aspect of meaning, and therefore realizes the completely conceptualized nature (parikalpita-svabhava).

。悟入唯識故悟入依他起性。若已滅除意言聞法熏習種類唯識之相。乃至爾時菩薩平等平等無分別智已得生起。悟入圓成實性。又云。名．事互為客。其性應尋思。於二亦當推唯量及唯假。實智觀無義。唯有分別三。彼無故此無。是即入三性。初半頌悟入遍計所執。次半頌悟入依他起性。後一頌悟入圓成實性。成唯識云。非不見真如而能了諸行皆如幻事等。雖有而非真。如是上下三處不同。攝論初文暖．頂二位悟入所執。忍．第一法悟入依他。初地初心入圓成實。攝論第二文暖．頂尋思悟入初二性。四如實智悟入圓成。成唯識文要入初地方悟三性。雖有三文義理唯二。一者二證。二者相似。成唯識中據實親證。由無漏二智真．俗前後方可證得後二性故。證二性時不見二取。即名證彼計所執無。無法體無。智何所證。心所變無依他起攝。真如理無圓成實攝。故計所執不說別證。但於二性不見二取。可名悟入遍計所執。然正體智達無證理。多說此智證計所執。雖見道前亦已不見。未親得二不名證無故於初地方名證得。攝論初文悟圓成者據實證得。與唯識同。悟前二性據相似悟。長時多分意解思惟前二性故。短時小分雖亦相似悟入圓成。非長時多分亦非親證。故據實說。攝論次文悟入三性。總據相似意趣而說。創觀名．事不

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：領悟唯識的道理，就能領悟依他起性（事物相互依存的性質）。如果已經滅除了意識層面的語言概念，以及通過聽聞佛法所熏習的唯識種子，乃至菩薩的平等無分別智慧已經生起，就能領悟圓成實性（事物真實圓滿的性質）。 經文中又說：『名』（概念）和『事』（現象）互為客體，它們的性質應該深入尋思。對於這兩者，也應當推究它們只是唯量的存在，以及唯假的存在。真實的智慧觀察到它們沒有自性意義，只有分別。因為前者不存在，所以後者也不存在。這就是進入三性的境界。』 這首偈頌的前半部分領悟的是遍計所執性（虛妄分別的性質），中間部分領悟的是依他起性，後半部分領悟的是圓成實性。 《成唯識論》中說：『如果不能見到真如（事物的真實本性），就不能瞭解諸行（一切現象）都如幻象一般，雖然存在，但並非真實。』像這樣，以上下三處經文的說法有所不同。 《攝大乘論》的第一段經文說，在暖位和頂位時領悟遍計所執性，在忍位和第一法位時領悟依他起性，在初地（菩薩修行的一個階段）的最初階段領悟圓成實性。《攝大乘論》的第二段經文說，在暖位和頂位時通過尋思領悟前兩種性質，通過四種如實智領悟圓成實性。《成唯識論》的經文說，要進入初地才能領悟三性。 雖然有這三種不同的說法，但義理上只有兩種：一是實證，二是相似。在《成唯識論》中，是根據真實親證的角度來說的，因為只有通過無漏的二智（真智和俗智）才能先後證得後兩種性質。在證得後兩種性質時，不見能取和所取，就叫做證得遍計所執性無。因為遍計所執性沒有自體，沒有法體，智慧又證什麼呢？心所變現的沒有依他起性所攝，真如的理沒有圓成實性所攝，所以遍計所執性不說單獨證得，只是在證得二性時，不見能取和所取，就可以叫做領悟遍計所執性。 然而，正體智通達無證的道理，大多說這種智慧證得遍計所執性。雖然在見道之前也已經不見，但未親身獲得二智，不能叫做證得無，所以在初地才叫做證得。《攝大乘論》的第一段經文說領悟圓成實性是根據實證的角度來說的，與《成唯識論》相同。領悟前兩種性質是根據相似領悟的角度來說的，因為長時間、大部分時間用意解思惟前兩種性質。短時間、小部分時間雖然也相似領悟圓成實性，但不是長時間、大部分時間，也不是親證，所以根據實證來說。 《攝大乘論》的第二段經文說領悟三性，總體上是根據相似意趣而說的。最初觀察名和事不

【English Translation】 English version: Understanding the Vijnaptimatrata (Consciousness-only) doctrine leads to the understanding of Paratantra-svabhava (the nature of dependent origination). If the verbal expressions of the mind and the seeds of Vijnaptimatrata, which have been cultivated through hearing the Dharma, have been extinguished, and even the Bodhisattva's equanimous non-discriminating wisdom has arisen, then one can understand the Parinispanna-svabhava (the nature of perfect reality). Furthermore, it is said: 'Name' (concept) and 'thing' (phenomenon) are mutually objective; their nature should be deeply contemplated. Regarding these two, one should also investigate that they are merely quantitative existences and merely provisional existences. Real wisdom observes that they have no intrinsic meaning, only discrimination. Because the former does not exist, the latter also does not exist. This is entering the realm of the three natures.' The first half of this verse is about understanding the Parikalpita-svabhava (the nature of imaginary construction), the middle part is about understanding the Paratantra-svabhava, and the last part is about understanding the Parinispanna-svabhava. The Vijnaptimatratasiddhi-sastra (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-only) says: 'If one cannot see the Tathata (the true nature of things), one cannot understand that all phenomena are like illusions, existing but not real.' Thus, the statements in the three passages above are different. The first passage of the Mahayanasamgraha (Compendium of the Mahayana) states that in the stages of Warmth and Peak, one understands the Parikalpita-svabhava; in the stages of Forbearance and Supreme Mundane Dharma, one understands the Paratantra-svabhava; and at the initial stage of the first Bhumi (a stage of Bodhisattva's practice), one understands the Parinispanna-svabhava. The second passage of the Mahayanasamgraha states that in the stages of Warmth and Peak, one understands the first two natures through contemplation; and through the four Right Knowledges, one understands the Parinispanna-svabhava. The Vijnaptimatratasiddhi-sastra states that one must enter the first Bhumi to understand the three natures. Although there are these three different statements, there are only two meanings in terms of doctrine: one is actual realization, and the other is similar understanding. In the Vijnaptimatratasiddhi-sastra, it is based on the perspective of actual personal realization, because only through the two undefiled Wisdoms (True Wisdom and Conventional Wisdom) can one successively realize the latter two natures. When realizing the latter two natures, one does not see the grasper and the grasped, which is called realizing the non-existence of the Parikalpita-svabhava. Because the Parikalpita-svabhava has no self-nature, no Dharma-nature, what does wisdom realize? The transformations of the mind are not included in the Paratantra-svabhava, and the principle of Suchness is not included in the Parinispanna-svabhava. Therefore, the Parikalpita-svabhava is not said to be realized separately; only when realizing the two natures and not seeing the grasper and the grasped can it be called understanding the Parikalpita-svabhava. However, the True Wisdom understands the principle of non-realization, and it is mostly said that this wisdom realizes the Parikalpita-svabhava. Although one has already not seen it before the Path of Seeing, one cannot be called realizing non-existence without personally obtaining the two Wisdoms. Therefore, it is called realization at the first Bhumi. The first passage of the Mahayanasamgraha states that understanding the Parinispanna-svabhava is based on the perspective of actual realization, which is the same as the Vijnaptimatratasiddhi-sastra. Understanding the first two natures is based on the perspective of similar understanding, because one intentionally understands and contemplates the first two natures for a long time and for the most part. Although one also similarly understands the Parinispanna-svabhava for a short time and a small part, it is not for a long time and for the most part, nor is it a personal realization. Therefore, it is based on actual realization. The second passage of the Mahayanasamgraha states that understanding the three natures is generally based on the perspective of similar intention. Initially observing name and thing not

相屬故名悟所執。次觀唯有識量及假名等諸法。雖未證實。名悟依他如實智位雖實有相而未證真。二取俱亡與真真觀相似趣入。意解亦謂即是真如。故實智位名入圓成。實未悟入。攝論據相似意解三性別明悟入。唯識據真實別證二性。通證所執雖文有異而不相違。余所有文皆準此釋。

攝論第五說八喻喻依他。云何無義遍計度時。分明顯現似所行境。為除此疑說幻事喻。如實無象而有幻象。所緣境界依他起性亦復如是。雖無色等所緣六處。遍計度時似有所緣六處顯現 無性下自解云此于內事生疑 諸師解云。此于內身色．聲．香等而生疑惑故說幻事喻 天親菩薩有二複次釋 第二解云。此中幻喻為除眼等六種內處。譬如幻象雖實非有而現可得。以此準無性色等所緣六處。非是色．聲．香等六處。即是眼等六內處法。眼等是色故說色等。言色等六處理亦無妨。不爾與第二所除有何差別 古解云。初是塵體。第二是器界。故二差別 又如陽焰于飄動時實無有水而有水覺。外器世間亦復如是 又如夢中睡眠所起心．心所聚極成昧略。雖無女等種種境義。而有愛．非愛境界受用。覺時亦爾 又如影像于鏡等中還見本質。而謂我今別見影像。而此影像實無所有。非等引地善．惡思業本質為緣。影像果生亦復如是。唯識云鏡

【現代漢語翻譯】 相屬的緣故稱作悟入所執（Parikalpita，遍計所執性）。接下來觀察唯有識量以及假名等諸法，雖然尚未證實，稱作悟入依他（Paratantra，依他起性）如實智位，雖然真實有相而未證得真如。二取（能取、所取）都滅亡，與真真觀相似而趣入。意解也認為這就是真如，所以實智位稱作入圓成（Parinispanna，圓成實性），實際上並未悟入。《攝大乘論》根據相似的意解，以三種自性說明悟入。唯識宗根據真實分別證得二種自性，普遍證得所執，雖然文句有所不同，但並不互相違背。其餘所有的文句都參照這個解釋。

《攝大乘論》第五說八個比喻來比喻依他。『為什麼在無意義的遍計度時，分明顯現好像所行之境？』爲了消除這個疑惑，說了幻事的比喻。就像真實沒有象，卻有幻象。所緣境界的依他起性也是這樣，雖然沒有色等所緣的六處，但在遍計度時，好像有所緣的六處顯現。無性論師在下面自己解釋說：『這是對於內事產生疑惑。』諸位論師解釋說：『這是對於內身色、聲、香等產生疑惑，所以說了幻事的比喻。』天親菩薩有兩種『複次』的解釋。第二種解釋說：『這裡用幻喻來消除眼等六種內處。』譬如幻象雖然實際上沒有，但現在可以得到。用這個來比照無性的色等所緣六處，不是色、聲、香等六處，就是眼等六內處法。眼等是色，所以說色等。說色等六處也沒有妨礙。不然的話，與第二種所要消除的有什麼差別？』古老的解釋說：『第一個是塵體，第二個是器界，所以有這兩種差別。』又如陽焰在飄動時，實際上沒有水，卻有水的錯覺。外在的器世間也是這樣。又如夢中睡眠所引起的心、心所聚非常昏昧。雖然沒有女等種種境義，卻有愛、非愛的境界受用。醒來時也是這樣。又如影像在鏡子等中，還見到本質，卻認為我現在另外見到影像。而這個影像實際上什麼也沒有。非等引地（非禪定狀態）的善、惡思業以本質為緣，影像果生也是這樣。』唯識宗說鏡子。

【English Translation】 Because of their relationship, it is called 'understanding what is grasped' (Parikalpita, the completely imputed nature). Next, observe that there are only consciousness-only measurements and nominal dharmas, etc. Although not yet truly realized, it is called 'understanding the dependent' (Paratantra, the dependent nature), the position of true wisdom. Although there are real characteristics, true suchness is not yet realized. When both the dual graspings (of grasper and grasped) cease, it is similar to true and genuine contemplation and one approaches it. The intentional understanding also considers it to be true suchness. Therefore, the position of real wisdom is called 'entering the perfected' (Parinispanna, the thoroughly established nature), but in reality, it is not yet truly understood. The Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle explains understanding based on similar intentional understanding of the three natures. Consciousness-only establishes understanding based on the real and distinct realization of two natures, universally realizing what is grasped. Although the wording may differ, they do not contradict each other. All other passages should be interpreted accordingly.

The fifth chapter of the Treatise on the Summary of the Great Vehicle speaks of eight metaphors to illustrate the dependent. 'Why, during meaningless complete imputation, does it clearly appear as if it were the object of action?' To dispel this doubt, the metaphor of illusory events is given. Just as there is no real elephant, yet there is an illusory elephant. The dependent nature of the object of perception is also like this. Although there are no six sense bases of objects of perception such as form, etc., during complete imputation, it appears as if there are six sense bases of objects of perception. The Treatise on the Absence of Nature explains itself below, saying: 'This arises doubt about internal matters.' The teachers explain, saying: 'This arises doubt about internal body, color, sound, smell, etc., therefore the metaphor of illusory events is given.' Bodhisattva Vasubandhu has two 'further' explanations. The second explanation says: 'Here, the metaphor of illusion is used to eliminate the six internal bases such as the eye, etc.' For example, although an illusory elephant is not actually present, it can now be obtained. Use this to compare with the six sense bases of objects of perception such as form, etc., in the Treatise on the Absence of Nature. They are not the six sense bases such as color, sound, smell, etc., but are the six internal bases of dharmas such as the eye, etc. The eye, etc., are form, therefore it is said that form, etc. It is also not a problem to say the six bases of form, etc. Otherwise, what is the difference from the second thing to be eliminated?' The ancient explanation says: 'The first is the element of dust, the second is the realm of vessels, therefore there are these two differences.' Furthermore, like a heat haze, when it is fluttering, there is actually no water, but there is the illusion of water. The external world of vessels is also like this. Furthermore, like the aggregates of mind and mental factors arising from sleep in a dream, they are extremely dim. Although there are no various meanings of objects such as women, etc., there is the enjoyment of loving and unloving realms. It is also like this when awake. Furthermore, like an image in a mirror, etc., one still sees the essence, but thinks that I am now seeing a different image. But this image is actually nothing. The good and evil volitional actions in the non-equipoised state (non-meditative state) take the essence as the condition, and the resulting image arises in this way.' Consciousness-only says mirror.

像 又如光影由弄影者膜弊其光起種種影。定等地中種種諸識。于無實義差別而轉 又如谷響實無有聲。而令聽者似聞多種言說境界。種種言說語業亦爾 又如水月由水潤滑澄清性故。雖無有月而月可取。緣實義境之所熏脩潤清為性。諸三摩地相應之意。亦復如是。雖無所緣實義境界而似有轉。此與第四影像有何差別。定．不定地而有差別 又如變化依此變化說名變化。雖無有實。而能化者無有顛倒。于所化事勤作功用。菩薩亦爾。雖無遍計所執有情。于依他起諸有情類。由哀愍故。而往彼彼諸所生處攝受自體 無性解云。應知此中喻有爾所虛妄執事。所謂內．外受用差別。身業．語業．三種意業非等引地．若等引地．若無顛倒。於此八事。諸佛世尊說八種喻。諸有智者。聞是所說。于定不定二地義中。能正解了 此中內者。第一幻事喻所顯。外是第二陽焰喻所顯。受用差別。是第三夢境喻所顯。身業。是第五光影喻所顯。語業。第六穀響喻所顯。三種意業中初非等引地。是第四影像喻所顯。若等引地。是第七水月喻所顯。若無顛倒。是第八變化喻所顯 天親菩薩二複次釋。第二複次云。說幻事喻。為除眼等內六處。說陽焰喻。為除器世間。說所夢喻。為除色等所受用境。顯如所夢色等定無。而能為因起愛．非愛受用

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 又如光影，由弄影者遮蔽光源，從而產生種種影像。定地（Samadhi-bhumi，禪定之地）等中的種種識，對於無實義的差別而流轉。 又如山谷迴響，實際上沒有聲音，卻讓聽者好像聽到了多種言說的境界。種種言說語業也是如此。 又如水中之月，由於水的潤滑澄清的性質，雖然沒有真實的月亮，卻可以顯現出月亮的影像。以實義境（vastu-artha-visaya，真實意義的境界）的熏修，潤澤清凈為自性，諸三摩地（samadhi，禪定）相應的意（manas，意根）也是如此。雖然沒有所緣的實義境界，卻好像有流轉。這與第四種影像有什麼差別？在於定地和不定地的差別。 又如變化，依靠這種變化而說名為變化，雖然沒有真實，但是能變化者沒有顛倒，對於所變化的事物勤奮地作出功用。菩薩也是如此，雖然沒有遍計所執（parikalpita，遍計所執性）的有情，對於依他起（paratantra，依他起性）的諸有情類，由於哀愍的緣故，而前往彼彼諸所生之處攝受自體。 無性（Asanga，無著）解釋說：『應當知道，這裡面用這些比喻來說明虛妄執事，即所謂內外受用的差別、身業、語業、三種意業，以及非等引地（asamahita-bhumi，非等持地）、等引地（samahita-bhumi，等持地）、無顛倒。對於這八件事，諸佛世尊說了八種比喻。有智慧的人，聽了這些所說，對於定地和不定地二地的意義，能夠正確理解。』 這裡面，內，由第一幻事喻所顯示。外，由第二陽焰喻所顯示。受用差別，由第三夢境喻所顯示。身業，由第五光影喻所顯示。語業，由第六穀響喻所顯示。三種意業中，最初的非等引地，由第四影像喻所顯示。等引地，由第七水月喻所顯示。無顛倒，由第八變化喻所顯示。 天親（Vasubandhu，世親）菩薩的第二次解釋說：『第二次解釋說，說幻事喻，是爲了去除眼等內六處。說陽焰喻，是爲了去除器世間（bhajana-loka，器世界）。說所夢喻，是爲了去除色等所受用境，顯示如所夢的色等決定沒有，而能作為原因生起愛和非愛的受用。』

【English Translation】 English version It is like light and shadow, where the one manipulating the shadows obscures the light, causing various shadows to arise. The various consciousnesses in meditative states (Samadhi-bhumi) and the like, revolve around distinctions that have no real meaning. It is like an echo in a valley, which has no actual sound, yet causes the listener to seem to hear various realms of speech. Various verbal actions are also like this. It is like the moon in water, where due to the lubricating and clarifying nature of the water, although there is no actual moon, the moon can be perceived. The mind (manas) corresponding to the various meditative states (samadhi), which has been cultivated and purified by the influence of the realm of real meaning (vastu-artha-visaya), is also like this. Although there is no objective realm of real meaning, it seems to revolve. What is the difference between this and the fourth image? The difference lies in meditative and non-meditative states. It is like transformation, which is called transformation based on this transformation. Although it is not real, the one who transforms is not deluded, and diligently performs actions on the transformed things. Bodhisattvas are also like this. Although there are no sentient beings as conceived by pervasive conceptualization (parikalpita), they go to various places of birth to embrace themselves out of compassion for sentient beings who arise dependently (paratantra). Asanga explains: 'It should be known that these metaphors are used here to illustrate false conceptions, namely the differences between internal and external experiences, physical actions, verbal actions, the three types of mental actions, as well as non-meditative states (asamahita-bhumi), meditative states (samahita-bhumi), and non-delusion. Regarding these eight things, the Buddhas have spoken of eight metaphors. Wise people, upon hearing these words, can correctly understand the meaning of the two states of meditative and non-meditative states.' Here, the internal is shown by the first metaphor of illusion. The external is shown by the second metaphor of mirage. The difference in experience is shown by the third metaphor of dream. Physical action is shown by the fifth metaphor of light and shadow. Verbal action is shown by the sixth metaphor of echo. Among the three types of mental actions, the initial non-meditative state is shown by the fourth metaphor of image. The meditative state is shown by the seventh metaphor of the moon in water. Non-delusion is shown by the eighth metaphor of transformation. Vasubandhu's second explanation says: 'The second explanation says that the metaphor of illusion is used to remove the six internal sense bases such as the eye. The metaphor of mirage is used to remove the container world (bhajana-loka). The metaphor of dream is used to remove the objects of experience such as form, showing that the form etc. in the dream are definitely not real, but can be the cause of arising pleasant and unpleasant experiences.'

差別。說影像喻為除身業果。顯善．不善業為緣。而有餘色影像生起。說谷響喻。為除語業果。顯語業因感語業果猶如谷響。說光影喻。為除非等引地諸意業果。顯此意業所得諸果。猶如光影。說水月喻。為除等引地諸意業果。顯等引地諸意業果猶如水月。說變化喻。為除聞種類意業。聞種類者即是聞．思之所熏習。此即顯示聞種類意差別而轉。猶如變化。此意為除內外受用差別．身語業果．三種意業。故說八喻。與無性不同 金剛般若云。一切有為法。如星．翳．燈．幻．露．泡．夢．電．云。應作如是觀。此中九喻。天親菩薩釋云。別喻九事。謂見．相．識．器．身．受．過．現．未世故說九喻。各依別義。不可會同。釋頌異故 中邊論說八喻。通依他．所執二性。似喻依他。實喻所執。亦不相違。

三性凡聖境中。前後四文及應實說合五。如理應思。

應總立三假。謂應立一實．一假。真如實勝義故。如第一百卷說。余世俗假。或不待此余實如色受等。待此余假如瓶等。或不待名言實。謂一切法。待名言假。謂一切法。如雜集第三疏釋。

瑜伽六十解業．業道等。與唯識第一相違。勘之。

第九卷

問愚夫于彼增益妄執者。亦有邪見撥無。何故唯言增益 答以多分故。執我法門

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 差別。說影像比喻為去除身業的果報，顯示善與不善業為因緣，從而有剩餘的色法影像生起。說谷響比喻，是爲了去除語業的果報，顯示語業的因感得語業的果報，猶如山谷的迴響。說光影比喻，是爲了去除除非等引地（Samāhita-bhūmi，指禪定狀態）的各種意業果報，顯示這些意業所得到的各種果報，猶如光和影。說水月比喻，是爲了去除等引地的意業果報，顯示等引地的意業果報猶如水中的月亮。說變化比喻，是爲了去除聞種類（Śruta-prakāra，通過聽聞而產生的）的意業，聞種類指的是聽聞和思惟所熏習的。這顯示了聞種類意的差別而轉變，猶如變化。此意是爲了去除內外受用的差別、身語業的果報、三種意業。所以說八個比喻，與無性（Asvabhāva，指空性）不同。《金剛般若經》說：『一切有為法，如星、翳、燈、幻、露、泡、夢、電、云，應作如是觀。』這裡有九個比喻，天親（Vasubandhu）菩薩解釋說：『分別比喻九件事，即見、相、識、器、身、受、過、現、未世，所以說九個比喻，各自依據不同的意義，不可混同。』因為解釋的偈頌不同。中邊論（Madhyānta-vibhāga，唯識宗重要論典）說八個比喻，通用於依他起性（Paratantra，緣起性）和遍計所執性（Parikalpita，虛妄分別性）兩種自性。相似的比喻是依他起性，真實的比喻是遍計所執性，也不相違背。 三性（Trisvabhāva，指遍計所執性、依他起性、圓成實性）在凡夫和聖人的境界中，前後四段文字以及應實說的合起來共五處，應該如理思維。 應該總共建立三種假說，即應該建立一個真實和一個假說。因為真如（Tathātā，事物的真實本性）是真實勝義（Paramārtha-satya，最高真理）的緣故，如第一百卷所說。其餘的是世俗假說。或者不依賴於此的其餘實法，如色、受等。依賴於此的其餘假法，如瓶子等。或者不依賴於名言（Nāma-vacana，語言概念）的實法，指的是一切法。依賴於名言的假法，指的是一切法，如《雜集》（Abhidharma-samuccaya）第三疏的解釋。 《瑜伽師地論》（Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra）第六十卷解釋業、業道等，與唯識（Vijñānavāda，唯識宗）第一卷相違背，可以勘校。 第九卷 問：愚夫對於那些增益妄執的事物，也有邪見否定，為什麼只說增益？答：因為增益是多數情況，執著我法（Ātman，自我；Dharma，法）的法門。

【English Translation】 English version: Differences. The analogy of an image is used to eliminate the result of bodily karma, showing that good and bad karma are the causes and conditions for the arising of residual color images. The analogy of an echo is used to eliminate the result of verbal karma, showing that the cause of verbal karma produces the result of verbal karma, just like an echo in a valley. The analogy of light and shadow is used to eliminate the results of various mental karmas in non-Samāhita-bhūmi (states of meditative concentration), showing that the various results obtained from these mental karmas are like light and shadow. The analogy of the moon in water is used to eliminate the results of mental karmas in Samāhita-bhūmi, showing that the results of mental karmas in Samāhita-bhūmi are like the moon reflected in water. The analogy of transformation is used to eliminate mental karma of the Śruta-prakāra (type of hearing), which refers to what is cultivated through hearing and thinking. This shows the differences and transformations of the mind of the Śruta-prakāra, just like transformations. This intention is to eliminate the differences in internal and external enjoyment, the results of bodily and verbal karma, and the three types of mental karma. Therefore, eight analogies are given, which are different from Asvabhāva (non-self-nature, emptiness). The Diamond Sutra says: 'All conditioned dharmas are like stars, darkness, lamps, illusions, dew, bubbles, dreams, lightning, and clouds; one should contemplate them in this way.' Here, there are nine analogies. Vasubandhu Bodhisattva explains: 'These analogies separately illustrate nine things, namely, seeing, appearance, consciousness, vessel, body, feeling, fault, present, and future worlds. Therefore, nine analogies are given, each based on different meanings, and they cannot be mixed together,' because the explanatory verses are different. The Madhyānta-vibhāga (a key text of the Yogācāra school) says that the eight analogies apply to both Paratantra (dependent nature) and Parikalpita (imagined nature). Similar analogies are Paratantra, and real analogies are Parikalpita, which are not contradictory. Regarding the Trisvabhāva (three natures: Parikalpita, Paratantra, and Pariniṣpanna) in the realms of ordinary beings and sages, the four passages before and after, together with what should be truly stated, make a total of five places, which should be contemplated reasonably. One should establish three kinds of provisional designations in total, that is, one should establish one real and one provisional. Because Tathātā (suchness, the true nature of things) is Paramārtha-satya (ultimate truth), as stated in the hundredth volume. The rest are conventional provisional designations. Or, the remaining real dharmas that do not depend on this, such as form, feeling, etc. The remaining provisional dharmas that depend on this, such as a pot, etc. Or, the real dharmas that do not depend on Nāma-vacana (linguistic concepts) refer to all dharmas. The provisional dharmas that depend on Nāma-vacana refer to all dharmas, as explained in the third commentary of the Abhidharma-samuccaya. The sixtieth volume of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra explains karma, the path of karma, etc., which contradicts the first volume of Vijñānavāda (Yogācāra), and can be compared and verified. Ninth Volume Question: Why do you only mention 'increase' when foolish people also have wrong views of denial regarding those things they increase and falsely grasp? Answer: Because 'increase' is the majority of cases, clinging to the Dharma (teachings) of Ātman (self) and Dharma (phenomena).

必增益故。說有三性遮損減門。說三無性遮增益門。

依他起無自然生者。自然有二。一無因自然生。舉此攝一切無因。二以自然為因生。舉此攝一切冥性等不平等因生。無此無因自然。及無不平等因自然生。故名自然無生 依他起中亦有無因．惡因非一橫執。何故唯遮自然生耶 答且舉自然。余不平等因皆是此收。此說三無性破非余增益。余損減門三性所違。故非破無因。

依他起性名勝義無性。論文但有無之言非勝義之性名勝義無性。亦有體是勝義無計所執名勝義無性。是後得智所行義故。如說是彼四勝義攝。論略無之。理亦有也。

唯識之中但有二對。何故不說前二以為虛妄。無漏有為非虛妄故。何故不說前二以為世俗對勝義。如說二勝義中。初亦名俗故 今據有體名世俗。彼無體故。理實亦有。準二諦故。此中實性唯取真如。但有常．無常門。不說漏無漏門者。無漏有為非實性故。

攝論說四位修唯識。如唯識章說。

理實威儀．工巧與所知障法執亦俱。今約孤行故。言非威儀等。亦不相違。據實執時非彼等心。是彼等心而不起執。

三十七品以九法為體。遍行一謂喜受。別境三謂念．定．惠。善有四謂信．進．舍．輕安。色法一謂道共無表。喜為一謂喜覺支。念為四

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：因為要防止增益，所以說有三性來遮止損減之門。說三無性來遮止增益之門。

依他起性不是自然產生的。自然有兩種：一是無因而自然產生，舉出這種就包括了一切無因的情況；二是以自然為因而產生，舉出這種就包括了一切冥性等不平等因的產生。沒有這種無因的自然，以及沒有不平等因的自然產生，所以叫做自然無生。

在依他起性中也有無因、惡因等不正確的執著，為什麼只遮止自然產生呢？回答：這裡只是先舉出自然，其餘不平等的因都包含在其中。這裡說三無性是爲了破除對非實在的增益，其餘損減之門與三性相違背，所以不是爲了破除無因。

依他起性被稱為勝義無性。論文中只有『無』這個詞，而不是勝義的『性』，被稱為勝義無性。也有本體是勝義，沒有計所執性，被稱為勝義無性，因為這是後得智所行之義。如經中所說，這是四勝義所包含的。論中省略了『無』字，但道理上也是有的。

在唯識中只有兩種對立，為什麼不說前兩種是虛妄的呢？因為無漏有為不是虛妄的。為什麼不說前兩種是世俗對勝義呢？如經中所說，在二勝義中，最初的也叫做世俗。現在根據有本體的來說是世俗，因為它們沒有本體。道理上實際上也是有的，根據二諦的說法。這裡所說的實性只取真如（tathata，事物的真實如是之性）。只有常、無常之門，不說有漏、無漏之門，是因為無漏有為不是實性。

《攝大乘論》（Mahāyānasaṃgraha）中說了四位修唯識，如唯識章所說。

實際上，威儀、工巧與所知障（jñeyāvaraṇa，對所知事物的障礙）的法執也是同時存在的。現在只是就單獨存在的執著來說，所以說不是威儀等，這並不矛盾。根據實際執著的時候，不是彼等的心；是彼等的心，但不起執著。

三十七道品以九法為體。遍行有一個，是喜受（sukha vedanā，快樂的感受）。別境有三個，是念（smṛti，正念）、定（samādhi，禪定）、慧（prajñā，智慧）。善有四個，是信（śraddhā，信心）、進（vīrya，精進）、舍（upekṣā，捨棄）、輕安（praśrabdhi，身心輕快安適）。色法有一個，是道共無表色（prāpti-hetu，獲得之因）。喜為一個，是喜覺支（prīti-saṃbodhyaṅga，喜的覺悟支）。念為四個。

【English Translation】 English version: Because it is necessary to prevent augmentation, it is said that the three natures are used to prevent the gate of diminution. It is said that the three non-natures are used to prevent the gate of augmentation.

The dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva) is not naturally produced. There are two kinds of 'natural': one is naturally produced without a cause, which includes all causeless phenomena; the other is produced with 'natural' as the cause, which includes all unequal causes such as primordial matter (prakṛti). There is no such causeless 'natural' production, nor is there 'natural' production from unequal causes. Therefore, it is called 'no natural production'.

In the dependent nature, there are also incorrect attachments to causelessness, evil causes, etc. Why only prevent natural production? Answer: 'Natural' is mentioned as an example, and the remaining unequal causes are included in it. The three non-natures are mentioned here to refute the augmentation of the unreal. The remaining gates of diminution contradict the three natures, so it is not to refute causelessness.

The dependent nature is called ultimate non-nature (paramārtha-niḥsvabhāvatā). The treatise only has the word 'non-' and not the 'nature' of the ultimate, called ultimate non-nature. There is also the entity that is ultimate, without the conceptual nature (parikalpita-svabhāva), called ultimate non-nature, because this is the meaning practiced by the wisdom attained after enlightenment (pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna). As the sutra says, this is included in the four ultimates. The treatise omits the word 'non-', but it is logically present.

In Consciousness-Only (Vijñānavāda), there are only two oppositions. Why not say that the first two are false? Because undefiled conditioned phenomena (anāsrava-saṃskṛta-dharmas) are not false. Why not say that the first two are conventional (saṃvṛti) opposed to ultimate (paramārtha)? As the sutra says, in the two ultimates, the first is also called conventional. Now, according to the entity that has substance, it is called conventional, because they have no substance. Logically, it is actually present, according to the two truths (dve satye). The real nature (bhūta-tathatā) here only takes Suchness (tathatā). There are only the gates of permanence (nitya) and impermanence (anitya), and not the gates of defiled (sāsrava) and undefiled, because undefiled conditioned phenomena are not real nature.

The Mahāyānasaṃgraha says about the four stages of cultivating Consciousness-Only, as said in the chapter on Consciousness-Only.

In reality, deportment, craftsmanship, and the attachment to phenomena (dharma-graha) that is the obscuration of the knowable (jñeyāvaraṇa) also exist simultaneously. Now, it is only in terms of the solitary existence of attachment that it is said not to be deportment, etc., which is not contradictory. According to the time of actual attachment, it is not the mind of those; it is the mind of those, but no attachment arises.

The thirty-seven factors of enlightenment (bodhipākṣika-dharmas) take nine dharmas as their substance. The pervasive one is the feeling of joy (prīti). The specific objects are three: mindfulness (smṛti), concentration (samādhi), and wisdom (prajñā). The wholesome ones are four: faith (śraddhā), effort (vīrya), relinquishment (upekṣā), and pliancy (praśrabdhi). The form is one: the unmanifested form (avijñapti-rūpa) common to the path (mārga). Joy is one: the enlightenment factor of joy (prīti-saṃbodhyaṅga). Mindfulness is four.

根．力．覺．道各一。定為八四神足．根力覺道各為一。惠為九四念住根力覺支各為一。道支為二謂正見．正思惟。思惟自中是依惠尋。佛果唯惠。瑜伽五十七云。三十七品與五根云何相攝。道品攝根非根攝道。謂語．業．命．喜．安．舍。故正思惟其體即惠。信為二謂根．力。精進為八謂四正斷．根力覺道中各為一。舍為一謂舍覺支。輕安為一謂安覺支。無表為三謂正語．業．命。故九開成三十七 四攝事施以無貪．及三業為體。愛語以語業為體。利行．同事三業為性。謂無貪．及思。假實和合說故 四無量以三法為體謂無瞋．不害．及舍。喜以不嫉為體。體即無瞋。故唯三法。六度合以八九法或十一法為體。遍行一謂思。別境四欲．勝解．定．惠。善有四。信．精進．無貪．無瞋。並身．語業表無表色。如應當知。下自廣說同下六度中。

四善根既唯色界五地。卻照無色無無漏見道。故是有漏修也。如前說。

入見道唯依欲界善趣身起。余惠厭心非殊勝故者。此依所知障俱有煩惱障對治。或唯斷煩惱障入見道義。非依唯斷所知障對治義。以欲界見道煩惱。有不善．及五趣．四生。厭心可深能入見道。上界不爾。若唯斷所知障。不藉深厭心。但求菩提不折解脫。上界亦得故。有聲聞色界迴心入見道等。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 根、力、覺、道各一。定為八十四神足（iddhi-pāda，成就神通的基礎）。根、力、覺、道各為一。慧為九十四念住（smṛti-upasthāna，四種專注的修行），根、力、覺支各為一。道支為二，謂正見（samyag-dṛṣṭi，正確的見解）、正思惟（samyak-saṃkalpa，正確的思考）。思惟自中是依慧尋。佛果唯慧。瑜伽五十七云：『三十七品與五根云何相攝？』道品攝根，非根攝道。謂語、業、命、喜、安、舍。故正思惟其體即慧。信為二，謂根、力。精進為八，謂四正斷（catvāri samyak-prahāṇāni，四種正確的努力）、根力覺道中各為一。舍為一，謂舍覺支（upekṣā-saṃbodhyaṅga，舍的覺悟因素）。輕安為一，謂安覺支（praśrabdhi-saṃbodhyaṅga，輕安的覺悟因素）。無表為三，謂正語（samyag-vāc，正確的言語）、業（karmānta，正確的行為）、命（ājīva，正確的生計）。故九開成三十七。四攝事（catasraḥ saṃgrahavastūni，四種攝取眾生的方法）施以無貪（alobha，不貪婪）及三業為體。愛語以語業為體。利行、同事三業為性。謂無貪及思。假實和合說故。四無量（catasro apramāṇāḥ，四種無限的慈悲心）以三法為體，謂無瞋（adveṣa，不嗔恨）、不害（avihiṃsā，不傷害）及舍。喜以不嫉為體。體即無瞋。故唯三法。六度（ṣaṭ pāramitāḥ，六種波羅蜜多）合以八九法或十一法為體。遍行一，謂思。別境四，欲（chanda，願望）、勝解（adhimokṣa，理解）、定（samādhi，專注）、慧。善有四。信、精進、無貪、無瞋。並身、語業表無表色。如應當知。下自廣說同下六度中。 四善根既唯五地。卻照無色無無漏見道。故是有漏修也。如前說。 入見道唯依欲界善趣身起。余惠厭心非殊勝故者。此依所知障（jñeyāvaraṇa，對知識的障礙）俱有煩惱障（kleśāvaraṇa，對煩惱的障礙）對治。或唯斷煩惱障入見道義。非依唯斷所知障對治義。以欲界見道煩惱，有不善及五趣（pañca-gatayaḥ，五種輪迴的境界）、四生（catasro yonayaḥ，四種生命形式）。厭心可深能入見道。上界不爾。若唯斷所知障，不藉深厭心。但求菩提不折解脫。上界亦得故。有聲聞（śrāvaka，聲聞乘的修行者）迴心入見道等。

【English Translation】 English version One each of roots, powers, enlightenment factors, and path factors. These are determined as eighty-four divine abodes (iddhi-pāda). One each of roots, powers, enlightenment factors, and path factors. Wisdom is nine, with one each for the four foundations of mindfulness (smṛti-upasthāna), roots, powers, and enlightenment factors. Path factors are two, namely right view (samyag-dṛṣṭi) and right thought (samyak-saṃkalpa). Thought itself relies on wisdom and investigation. The fruit of Buddhahood is solely wisdom. Yoga Chapter 57 states: 'How are the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment related to the five roots?' The path factors encompass the roots, but the roots do not encompass the path factors. These include speech, action, livelihood, joy, tranquility, and equanimity. Therefore, the essence of right thought is wisdom. Faith is two, namely root and power. Diligence is eight, namely one each in the four right efforts (catvāri samyak-prahāṇāni), roots, powers, enlightenment factors, and path factors. Equanimity is one, namely the equanimity enlightenment factor (upekṣā-saṃbodhyaṅga). Tranquility is one, namely the tranquility enlightenment factor (praśrabdhi-saṃbodhyaṅga). Non-manifestation is three, namely right speech (samyag-vāc), action (karmānta), and livelihood (ājīva). Therefore, nine are expanded into thirty-seven. The four means of conversion (catasraḥ saṃgrahavastūni) are based on non-greed (alobha) and the three actions. Kind speech is based on speech action. Beneficial conduct and cooperation are characterized by the three actions, namely non-greed and thought. This is spoken of as a combination of the provisional and the real. The four immeasurables (catasro apramāṇāḥ) are based on three factors, namely non-hatred (adveṣa), non-harming (avihiṃsā), and equanimity. Joy is based on non-jealousy. Its essence is non-hatred. Therefore, there are only three factors. The six perfections (ṣaṭ pāramitāḥ) are based on eight, nine, or eleven factors combined. Pervasive is one, namely thought. Distinctive are four: desire (chanda), conviction (adhimokṣa), concentration (samādhi), and wisdom. Goodness is four: faith, diligence, non-greed, and non-hatred, along with the manifest and non-manifest colors of body and speech actions. As it should be known. The following will be explained in detail, similar to the following six perfections. The four good roots are only in the five realms. Yet, they illuminate the formless realms and the non-defiled path of seeing. Therefore, it is a defiled practice. As previously stated. Entering the path of seeing arises only from a body in the good realms of the desire realm. The remaining wisdom and aversion are not particularly superior. This relies on the antidote to both the obscuration of knowledge (jñeyāvaraṇa) and the obscuration of afflictions (kleśāvaraṇa). Or, it refers to the meaning of entering the path of seeing by only severing the obscuration of afflictions, not relying on the meaning of only severing the obscuration of knowledge. Because the afflictions of the path of seeing in the desire realm include unwholesome, the five destinies (pañca-gatayaḥ), and the four forms of birth (catasro yonayaḥ). Aversion can be deep and capable of entering the path of seeing. The higher realms are not like this. If only severing the obscuration of knowledge, it does not rely on deep aversion. But seeking enlightenment without abandoning liberation. The higher realms can also achieve this. Therefore, there are Hearers (śrāvaka) who turn their minds and enter the path of seeing, etc.

此說直往。彼說迂會。亦不相違 七十三解無相取有數十番解。應勘敘之 問若許無分別智有見無相。如自證分。何不即緣自證。若以內外取故不得者。既爾應成相分所攝。即自體故不成相分者。即自體故應緣自證。若以相．性別故不得緣者。相．性別故應相分緣 彼無相故不可為例 又應無分別故說非能取實有見分。亦應無差別故名為無相實有相分 相謂相狀。狀貌。無此狀貌體相之法。非無境體。以無分別差別相故名無相分。見分之言通非分別。故彼智有。

見道二師說 勝進道緣何為境。即緣解脫道境。更無別行相。思之 有義漸者。依疏以三心為漸。五十九說三心為頓。準此文釋。頓通一心．三心。諸釋漸如別抄多小別引。

三心分粗細。如第一抄顯解。

二乘見道為唯安立。亦有一心非安立。有二說。或有。或無 其三心見道二乘者。唯斷人執。唯依二心非安立亦何妨 二種十六心。上下諦境在前作。初十六心在後作。初粗觀事。後細觀理故。又諸教唯說道類智名已知根。建立預流果故。今以相粗顯故。所以先說觀智。後說現前．不現前言。依欲界身入現觀論師于非色界入現觀亦爾。彼言下．上界別故 此十六心獨覺一坐聖者如何不說 亦作不出觀。期心未滿。雖至第十六心不名第三果

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 這種說法是直接了當的，那種說法是迂迴曲折的，但兩者並不互相違背。關於七十三解中『無相取有』的數十種解釋，應該加以考察敘述。 問：如果允許無分別智具有能見無相的能力，就像自證分一樣，為什麼不直接緣自證分呢？如果因為有內外之分而不能緣，那麼這樣一來，就應該成為相分所攝。如果因為是自體就不能成為相分，那麼因為是自體就應該能緣自證分。如果因為相和性別的緣故不能緣，那麼因為相和性別的緣故，就應該是相分所緣。 答：因為彼（無分別智）沒有相，所以不能作為例子。又因為是無分別的緣故，說它不是能取實有的見分。也應該因為沒有差別，所以稱為無相實有相分。相，指的是相狀、狀貌。沒有這種狀貌體相的法，並非沒有境體。因為沒有分別差別的相，所以稱為無相分。見分這個詞語可以通用於非分別，所以彼智是存在的。

見道二師的說法：勝進道緣何為境？即緣解脫道境。更沒有其他的行相，仔細思考。 有一種觀點認為漸悟者，依據疏文，以三心為漸悟。第五十九卷說三心為頓悟。按照這個文義來解釋，頓悟可以通於一心和三心。各種解釋漸悟的說法，如其他抄本所引，多少有些不同。

三心有粗細之分，如第一抄本所顯現的解釋。

二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）見道是唯安立的，也有一種一心不是安立的。有兩種說法，或者有，或者沒有。對於三心見道的二乘來說，只是斷除了人執（人我執），只是依靠二心，不是安立的又有什麼妨礙呢？兩種十六心，上下諦境在前作，初十六心在後作，因為最初是粗略地觀察事相，後來是仔細地觀察理。而且各種教義都只說道類智名為已知根，建立預流果的緣故。現在因為相粗顯的緣故，所以先說觀智，後說現前、不現前。依據欲界身入現觀的論師，對於非**入現觀也是這樣。他們說地獄和上界有區別。這十六心，獨覺一坐聖者為什麼不說呢？也可以作不出觀想，如果期心沒有滿足，即使到了第十六心，也不能稱為第三果（阿那含果）。

【English Translation】 English version: This statement is straightforward, while that statement is circuitous, but they do not contradict each other. The dozens of explanations of 'taking existence without characteristics' in the seventy-three explanations should be examined and narrated. Question: If it is allowed that non-discriminating wisdom has the ability to see without characteristics, like the self-cognizance division (sva-saṃvedana-bhāga), why not directly cognize the self-cognizance division? If it is because of the distinction between internal and external that it cannot cognize, then in that case, it should be included in the object division (viṣaya-bhāga). If it cannot become an object division because it is the self-nature, then because it is the self-nature, it should be able to cognize the self-cognizance division. If it cannot cognize because of characteristics and gender, then because of characteristics and gender, it should be cognized by the object division. Answer: Because that (non-discriminating wisdom) has no characteristics, it cannot be taken as an example. Moreover, because it is non-discriminating, it is said that it is not the perceiving division (darśana-bhāga) that truly exists. It should also be called the non-characteristic truly existing object division because it has no difference. 'Characteristic' refers to the appearance and form. The dharma (phenomenon) that does not have this appearance and form is not without an objective entity. Because it does not have the characteristics of discrimination and difference, it is called the non-characteristic division. The term 'perceiving division' can be applied to non-discrimination, so that wisdom exists.

The two teachers of the path of seeing (darśana-mārga) say: What does the path of superior progress (viśeṣa-mārga) take as its object? It takes the object of the path of liberation (vimukti-mārga). There are no other aspects. Think about it carefully. One view holds that for gradual enlightenment, according to the commentary, three minds are considered gradual. Volume 59 says that three minds are sudden enlightenment. According to this text, sudden enlightenment can apply to one mind and three minds. Various explanations of gradual enlightenment, as quoted in other copies, differ slightly.

The three minds have coarse and subtle distinctions, as explained in the first copy.

The path of seeing for the two vehicles (śrāvaka-yāna and pratyekabuddha-yāna) is only established, and there is also one mind that is not established. There are two views, either it exists or it does not exist. For the two vehicles with three minds on the path of seeing, they only sever the attachment to self (ātma-graha), and only rely on two minds. What harm is there if it is not established? The two types of sixteen minds, the higher and lower truths (satya) are made in front, and the first sixteen minds are made behind, because initially, the phenomena are observed roughly, and later the principles are observed carefully. Moreover, various teachings only say that the knowledge of the categories of dharma (dharma-jñāna) is called the known root, because the stream-enterer fruit (srotaāpanna-phala) is established. Now, because the characteristics are coarse and obvious, the wisdom of observation (vipaśyanā-jñāna) is mentioned first, and then the words 'present' and 'not present' are mentioned later. According to the commentators who enter the present contemplation (abhisamaya) with a body in the desire realm (kāma-dhātu), it is the same for entering the present contemplation without **. They say that there is a difference between the lower and upper realms. Why are these sixteen minds not mentioned for the solitary Buddha (pratyekabuddha) who is a sage in one sitting? It can also be done without emerging from contemplation. If the intended mind is not fulfilled, even if it reaches the sixteenth mind, it cannot be called the third fruit (anāgāmin-phala).

。若非想斷九品障。無間．解脫剎那思之可知。若不作此相見道者有何意也。思之。

三種現觀勘抄敘。

聖性。有解。通取一切能生現行無漏種子。不同異生性。彼能發業招生品類故。唯見道故 八地已上菩薩不生欲界。何故不名不還耶。又有不定性慾還生欲界故。頓悟菩薩還於欲界利生故。

對法十三說十現觀。一法現觀。最勝順解脫分善根所攝清凈勝解。若準瑜伽六現觀。唯取喜受相應思所成惠。若準顯揚十八現觀。通聞．思．修最勝三惠。然對法解義現觀。由即于如上所說法中。如理作意增上緣力。故知法觀亦即思惠。如理作意故。今依唯識唯取思。二義現觀。即最勝順抉擇分二坐暖為下品。頂．忍為中品。世第一法為上品。三真現觀。謂見道。四後現觀。謂修道。此二共唯識別。唯識約安立．非安立別。對法約道位別。亦不相違。五寶現觀。即信現觀。得四不壞信。唯別取無漏。瑜伽等寬。通有漏故。或能越惡。對法但說寶名。唯識通取一切信。六不行現觀。謂戒能遮犯戒非不行。七究竟現觀。同唯識。八聲聞。九獨覺。十菩薩。此三約能證乘別故。唯識但約所證行明廣名現觀。所以除抉擇分。不約人為論。所以無三乘。對法不約廣略。但明明瞭親得名現觀。約人．法為論。所以有十亦

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果不是想要斷除九品煩惱障，那麼無間道（Anantarya-marga，直接證入解脫的道）和解脫道（Vimukti-marga，從煩惱中解脫的道）的剎那思量就可以知道了。如果不這樣理解見道（Darshana-marga，證悟空性的道），又有什麼意義呢？仔細思考吧。

三種現觀的勘抄敘述。

聖性（Aryata，聖者的本性）。有一種解釋是，普遍攝取一切能夠產生現行無漏種子（Anasrava-bija，沒有煩惱的種子）的。這與異生性（Prthag-janata，凡夫的本性）不同，因為異生效能夠引發業力，招感輪迴的品類。唯有見道才能達到這種程度。八地以上的菩薩不會再投生到欲界（Kama-dhatu，眾生有情慾的世界）。為什麼不稱為不還果（Anagamin，不再返回欲界）呢？還有一些不定的情況，仍然會返回欲界。頓悟的菩薩還會爲了利益眾生而回到欲界。

《對法論》（Abhidharma）第十三卷中說了十種現觀。一、法現觀（Dharma-abhisamaya，對法的現觀），是最殊勝的順解脫分善根（Anulomika-nirvedha-bhagiya-kusala-mula，順應解脫的善根）所包含的清凈殊勝的理解。如果按照《瑜伽師地論》（Yogacarabhumi-sastra）的六種現觀，只取與喜受（Sukha-vedana，快樂的感受）相應的思所成慧（Cintamaya-prajna，通過思考獲得的智慧）。如果按照《顯揚聖教論》（Asanga's Abhidharma-samuccaya）的十八種現觀，則包括聽聞、思考、修習所產生的最殊勝的三種智慧。然而，《對法論》解釋的義現觀（Artha-abhisamaya，對意義的現觀），是由於對如上所說的法，如理作意（Yoniso-manasikara，如理思維）的增上緣（Adhipati-pratyaya，強有力的條件）的力量。因此可知，法現觀也就是思慧，因為是如理作意。現在依據唯識宗（Vijnanavada），只取思慧。二、義現觀，是最殊勝的順抉擇分（Anulomika-nirvedha-bhagiya，順應抉擇的善根），包括二坐暖位（Usma-gata，暖位）作為下品，頂位（Murdhan，頂位）和忍位（Ksanti，忍位）作為中品，世第一法（Laukikagradharma，世間第一法）作為上品。三、真現觀（Satya-abhisamaya，對真諦的現觀），指的是見道。四、後現觀（Pascat-abhisamaya，見道之後的現觀），指的是修道（Bhavana-marga，修習的道）。這兩種現觀共同屬於唯識宗的分別，唯識宗是從安立（Sthapana，建立）和非安立（Asthapana，非建立）的角度來區分的。《對法論》是從道位的角度來區分的，兩者並不矛盾。五、寶現觀（Ratna-abhisamaya，對珍寶的現觀），也就是信現觀（Sraddha-abhisamaya，對信仰的現觀），獲得四不壞信（Catvari-avaisraddhyani，四種不退轉的信心）。唯識宗特別選取無漏的信心，而《瑜伽師地論》等則範圍更寬，包括有漏的信心。或者能夠超越惡趣。 《對法論》只說了寶這個名稱，唯識宗則普遍攝取一切信心。六、不行現觀（Acaritra-abhisamaya，對不行的現觀），指的是戒律能夠遮止違犯戒律的行為，所以稱為不行。七、究竟現觀（Nistha-abhisamaya，對究竟的現觀），與唯識宗相同。八、聲聞（Sravaka，聽聞佛法而證悟者），九、獨覺（Pratyekabuddha，獨自證悟者），十、菩薩（Bodhisattva，追求菩提的眾生）。這三種現觀是從能夠證悟的乘（Yana，交通工具，比喻運載眾生到達解脫的法門）的角度來區分的。唯識宗只是從所證悟的行（Caritra，行為）來闡明廣義的現觀。因此，排除了抉擇分（Nirvedha-bhagiya，抉擇分），不從人的角度來討論。所以沒有三乘的區分。《對法論》不從廣略的角度，只是闡明了明瞭親證才稱為現觀，從人和法的角度來討論，所以有十種現觀。

【English Translation】 English version: If one did not intend to sever the nine grades of affliction-obstructions, then the instantaneous contemplation of the Anantarya-marga (path of immediate entry into liberation) and the Vimukti-marga (path of liberation from afflictions) would be sufficient to understand. If one does not understand the Darshana-marga (path of seeing reality) in this way, what is the point? Reflect on this.

A summary of the examination and transcription of the three kinds of Abhisamaya (direct realization).

Aryata (the nature of a noble being). One explanation is that it universally encompasses all seeds of non-outflow (Anasrava-bija, seeds without defilements) that can generate manifest non-outflow. This is different from Prthag-janata (the nature of an ordinary being), because the latter can initiate karma and attract categories of rebirth. Only the Darshana-marga can achieve this level. Bodhisattvas above the eighth Bhumi (stage) are no longer born in the Kama-dhatu (desire realm). Why are they not called Anagamin (non-returner)? There are also uncertain cases where they still return to the Kama-dhatu. Bodhisattvas who attain sudden enlightenment also return to the Kama-dhatu to benefit sentient beings.

The thirteenth volume of the Abhidharma discusses ten kinds of Abhisamaya. 1. Dharma-abhisamaya (direct realization of the Dharma), which is the pure and excellent understanding encompassed by the most supreme Anulomika-nirvedha-bhagiya-kusala-mula (roots of good that accord with liberation). According to the six Abhisamayas in the Yogacarabhumi-sastra, it only takes the Cintamaya-prajna (wisdom born of thought) that corresponds to Sukha-vedana (pleasant feeling). According to the eighteen Abhisamayas in Asanga's Abhidharma-samuccaya, it includes the three most supreme wisdoms arising from hearing, thinking, and cultivation. However, the Artha-abhisamaya (direct realization of meaning) explained in the Abhidharma is due to the power of the Adhipati-pratyaya (dominant condition) of Yoniso-manasikara (reasoned attention) to the Dharma as described above. Therefore, it can be known that Dharma-abhisamaya is also Cintamaya-prajna, because it involves reasoned attention. Now, according to Vijnanavada (Yogacara school), only Cintamaya-prajna is taken. 2. Artha-abhisamaya, which is the most supreme Anulomika-nirvedha-bhagiya, including the Usma-gata (heat stage) of the two seats as the lower grade, the Murdhan (peak stage) and Ksanti (patience stage) as the middle grade, and the Laukikagradharma (supreme mundane Dharma) as the upper grade. 3. Satya-abhisamaya (direct realization of truth), which refers to the Darshana-marga. 4. Pascat-abhisamaya (subsequent direct realization), which refers to the Bhavana-marga (path of cultivation). These two Abhisamayas are jointly distinguished by the Vijnanavada school, which distinguishes them from the perspective of Sthapana (establishment) and Asthapana (non-establishment). The Abhidharma distinguishes them from the perspective of the stages of the path, and the two are not contradictory. 5. Ratna-abhisamaya (direct realization of the jewel), which is Sraddha-abhisamaya (direct realization of faith), obtaining the Catvari-avaisraddhyani (four indestructible faiths). The Vijnanavada school specifically selects non-outflow faith, while the Yogacarabhumi-sastra and others have a broader scope, including outflow faith. Or it can transcend evil destinies. The Abhidharma only mentions the name 'jewel', while the Vijnanavada school universally encompasses all faith. 6. Acaritra-abhisamaya (direct realization of non-conduct), which refers to the precepts being able to prevent actions that violate the precepts, so it is called 'non-conduct'. 7. Nistha-abhisamaya (direct realization of ultimate), which is the same as in the Vijnanavada school. 8. Sravaka (hearer, one who attains enlightenment by hearing the Buddha's teachings), 9. Pratyekabuddha (solitary Buddha, one who attains enlightenment independently), 10. Bodhisattva (a being who seeks Bodhi). These three Abhisamayas are distinguished from the perspective of the Yana (vehicle, metaphor for the Dharma that transports beings to liberation) that can be attained. The Vijnanavada school only clarifies the broad meaning of Abhisamaya from the perspective of the Caritra (conduct) that is attained. Therefore, it excludes Nirvedha-bhagiya (decisive part) and does not discuss it from the perspective of people. Therefore, there is no distinction between the three Yanas. The Abhidharma does not discuss it from the perspective of breadth or brevity, but only clarifies that clear and direct realization is called Abhisamaya, and discusses it from the perspective of people and Dharma, so there are ten kinds of Abhisamaya.

不相違 顯揚十七說六及十八。六同此論。論十八者。一聞。二思。三修。四抉擇分智。五見道。六修道。七究竟道。八不善清凈世俗智。九善清凈世俗智。十勝義智。十一不善清凈行有分別智。十二善清凈行有分別智。十三善清凈行無分別智。十四成所作加行智。十五成所作智。十六成所作後智。十七聲聞等智。十八菩薩等智現觀 此十八中分五位。初七約五道以明現觀。次三依真俗智以明現觀。次三依有無漏有分別無分別以明現觀。次三依加行．根本．後得三智以明現觀。後二依上乘．下乘以明現觀。然此唯明惠觀。觀察諸法故不取信．戒。然解脫分智定．散有殊。三惠類異故分三種。真俗智中有漏唯世俗。無漏通二種。故合分三種。有分別無分別中。亦有有漏無漏別。無漏通二。有漏唯有分別。依三業行以顯智殊。此中成所作非四智中成所作智。乃是本期所作智。加行．正體．後得。如諸無漏智上乘．下乘因果通論。故但二種。故與唯識六現觀。對法十現觀。亦不相違。攝論第六現觀十一種差別。即對法第十三。聲聞．菩薩現觀差別有十一。更無別類。

建立六度中。度度三相。應互相攝。六度以八法為體。無貪．身業色．語業聲．意業思．無瞋．精進．惠．定。或十一。加欲．勝解．信。遍行一思。別

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 不相違，顯揚十七說六及十八。六同此論。論十八者：一、聞（聽聞佛法）；二、思（思考佛法）；三、修（修行佛法）；四、抉擇分智（能辨別選擇的智慧）；五、見道（證入聖道的智慧）；六、修道（在修道位上的智慧）；七、究竟道（達到究竟涅槃的智慧）；八、不善清凈世俗智（去除不善染污的世俗智慧）；九、善清凈世俗智（清凈良善的世俗智慧）；十、勝義智（證悟空性的智慧）；十一、不善清凈行有分別智（去除不善染污，帶有分別的智慧）；十二、善清凈行有分別智（清凈良善，帶有分別的智慧）；十三、善清凈行無分別智（清凈良善，不帶分別的智慧）；十四、成所作加行智（為成就所應作的事業而做的加行之智慧）；十五、成所作智（成就所應作的事業之智慧）；十六、成所作後智（成就所應作的事業後的智慧）；十七、聲聞等智（聲聞等小乘聖者的智慧）；十八、菩薩等智（菩薩等大乘聖者的智慧）。現觀，此十八中分五位：初七約五道以明現觀；次三依真俗智以明現觀；次三依有無漏有分別無分別以明現觀；次三依加行、根本、後得三智以明現觀；後二依上乘、下乘以明現觀。然此唯明惠觀，觀察諸法故不取信、戒。然解脫分智定、散有殊，三惠類異故分三種。真俗智中有漏唯世俗，無漏通二種，故合分三種。有分別無分別中，亦有有漏無漏別，無漏通二，有漏唯有分別。依三業行以顯智殊。此中成所作非四智中成所作智，乃是本期所作智。加行、正體、後得，如諸無漏智上乘、下乘因果通論，故但二種。故與唯識六現觀，對法十現觀，亦不相違。攝論第六現觀十一種差別，即對法第十三。聲聞、菩薩現觀差別有十一，更無別類。 建立六度中，度度三相，應互相攝。六度以八法為體：無貪、身業色、語業聲、意業思、無瞋、精進、惠、定。或十一，加欲、勝解、信。遍行一思，別

【English Translation】 English version They are not contradictory. The 'Exposition of the Seventeen' speaks of six and eighteen. The six are the same as in this treatise. The eighteen are: 1. Hearing (śruta); 2. Thinking (cintā); 3. Cultivation (bhāvanā); 4. Discriminating Wisdom (pratiniyatasamjñā); 5. Path of Seeing (darśanamārga); 6. Path of Cultivation (bhāvanāmārga); 7. Ultimate Path (niṣṭhāgamamārga); 8. Impure and Pure Conventional Wisdom (akuśala-viśuddha-saṃvṛti-jñāna); 9. Pure and Virtuous Conventional Wisdom (kuśala-viśuddha-saṃvṛti-jñāna); 10. Ultimate Wisdom (paramārtha-jñāna); 11. Impure and Pure Wisdom with Discrimination in Action (akuśala-viśuddha-saṃvṛti-karma-vikalpa-jñāna); 12. Pure and Virtuous Wisdom with Discrimination in Action (kuśala-viśuddha-saṃvṛti-karma-vikalpa-jñāna); 13. Pure and Virtuous Wisdom without Discrimination in Action (kuśala-viśuddha-saṃvṛti-karma-nirvikalpa-jñāna); 14. Wisdom of Preparatory Action for Accomplishment (kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-prayoga-jñāna); 15. Wisdom of Accomplishment (kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna); 16. Wisdom Subsequent to Accomplishment (kṛtyānuṣṭhānottara-jñāna); 17. Wisdom of Śrāvakas (śrāvaka-jñāna), etc.; 18. Wisdom of Bodhisattvas (bodhisattva-jñāna), etc. Manifest Realization (abhisamaya). These eighteen are divided into five stages: the first seven explain manifest realization in terms of the five paths; the next three explain manifest realization based on true and conventional wisdom; the next three explain manifest realization based on defiled/undefiled, with/without discrimination; the next three explain manifest realization based on the three wisdoms of preparatory action, fundamental, and subsequent attainment; the last two explain manifest realization based on the Higher Vehicle and the Lower Vehicle. However, this only clarifies wisdom-observation (prajñā-abhisamaya), because it observes all dharmas and does not include faith (śraddhā) and morality (śīla). However, the wisdom of the stage of liberation (mokṣabhāgīya-jñāna) differs in concentration and dispersion, and the three types of wisdom are different, so they are divided into three types. Among true and conventional wisdom, defiled wisdom is only conventional, while undefiled wisdom encompasses both, so they are combined into three types. Among wisdom with and without discrimination, there is also a distinction between defiled and undefiled; undefiled encompasses both, while defiled is only with discrimination. The differences in wisdom are shown based on the actions of the three karmas (body, speech, and mind). The 'Wisdom of Accomplishment' here is not the 'Wisdom of Accomplishment' among the four wisdoms, but rather the wisdom of the originally intended action. Preparatory action, the main body, and subsequent attainment are discussed in general terms as cause and effect in the undefiled wisdoms of the Higher and Lower Vehicles, so there are only two types. Therefore, it is not contradictory to the six manifest realizations of Yogācāra and the ten manifest realizations of Abhidharma. The eleven differences in the sixth manifest realization of the Saṃgrahaṇī are the same as the thirteenth in the Abhidharma. There are eleven differences between the manifest realizations of Śrāvakas and Bodhisattvas, and there are no other categories. In establishing the six perfections (pāramitā), each perfection has three aspects, which should mutually encompass each other. The six perfections are embodied by eight dharmas: non-greed (alobha), bodily action (kāya-karma-varṇa), verbal action (vāk-karma-śabda), mental action (citta-karma-cetanā), non-hatred (adveṣa), diligence (vīrya), wisdom (prajñā), and concentration (samādhi). Or eleven, adding desire (chanda), conviction (adhimokṣa), and faith (śraddhā). Pervasive mental factor (sarvatraga) is one thought (manaskāra), separate.

境四欲．解．定．惠。善四信．勤．無貪．嗔。色法二身．語業。

三界九地行相。地前地上一一行相純四句。一一自為六度。相望為四句名雜。依種類福有四句。不依有無句。

六度五果。應諸不同。

異生性障即分別障種。三界具有名何異生。若取能生。有離下染上下分別染法皆起。名何異生。若取依此地第八有故得此地名。應第八識自名異生。何須障種。不爾菩薩十地。此地第八識未斷故應成異生。由此應知。取依此地第八分別二障種立。性唯染污。有覆性收。二障體定故。望二障亦爾應思之。

其惡趣果非染污法。云何見道說為斷也。如無餘滅。

二地名離垢。無誤犯三業。初地誤犯。猶須思擇。此地不然。如行之時蟲自分路任運不傷。故無誤犯。初地不爾。猶有誤犯。何故十障但說邪行。二愚兼說誤犯三業。是根本故。彼亦邪行收。第二釋云或唯起業不了業愚。即邪行攝。更無所小。

第三地闇能障。于所聞思修法忘失者。何故初地名已得不退。此猶忘耶。又菩薩地云勝解行位於久所作所思所說法。有時忘失。入地不爾。如何今說有忘失耶。定位所得多分忘失。地前猶有。地上咸無名證不退。其聞．思．修所得。猶小有退忘非多。又無漏所得無忘。有漏所得三惠境猶

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 境四欲（對四種慾望的境界），解（解脫），定（禪定），惠（智慧）。善四信（四種善的信心），勤（精進），無貪（沒有貪婪），嗔（嗔恨）。色法二身（色法所包含的兩種身），語業（語言行為）。

三界九地行相（三界九地的修行狀態）。地前地上一一行相純四句（每一地之前和每一地之上，其修行狀態都是純粹的四句）。一一自為六度（每一句都各自包含六度）。相望為四句名雜（相互觀望則為四句，名為雜）。依種類福有四句（依據種類福報有四句）。不依有無句（不依據有和無的句式）。

六度五果（六度對應五種果報）。應諸不同（應該適應各種不同的情況）。

異生性障即分別障種（異生性障礙就是分別障礙的種子）。三界具有名何異生（三界都具有，稱為什麼是異生）。若取能生（如果取其能產生的作用）。有離下染上下分別染法皆起（有遠離地獄的染污，上地獄的分別染法都生起）。名何異生（稱為什麼是異生）。若取依此地第八有故得此地名（如果取其依據此地第八識的存在而得到此地的名稱）。應第八識自名異生（那麼第八識應該自己被稱為異生）。何須障種（何必需要障礙的種子）。不爾菩薩十地（如果不是這樣，菩薩的十地）。此地第八識未斷故應成異生（此地的第八識沒有斷除，應該成為異生）。由此應知（由此應該知道）。取依此地第八分別二障種立（取其依據此地第八識的分別二障種子而建立）。性唯染污（性質只是染污）。有覆性收（被有覆無記性所攝）。二障體定故（二障的本體是確定的緣故）。望二障亦爾應思之（對於二障也是這樣，應該思考）。

其惡趣果非染污法（惡趣的果報不是染污法）。云何見道說為斷也（為什麼在見道時說要斷除它呢）。如無餘滅（就像無餘涅槃一樣）。

二地名離垢（第二地名為離垢地）。無誤犯三業（沒有錯誤地觸犯身口意三業）。初地誤犯（初地會有誤犯）。猶須思擇（還需要思考選擇）。此地不然（此地不是這樣）。如行之時蟲自分路任運不傷（就像行走的時候蟲子自己分開道路，順其自然地不傷害它們）。故無誤犯（所以沒有誤犯）。初地不爾（初地不是這樣）。猶有誤犯（還有誤犯）。何故十障但說邪行（為什麼十種障礙只說邪行）。二愚兼說誤犯三業（兩種愚癡兼說誤犯身口意三業）。是根本故（因為這是根本）。彼亦邪行收（它們也被邪行所包含）。第二釋云或唯起業不了業愚（第二種解釋說，或者只是生起行為，不瞭解行為的愚癡）。即邪行攝（就是被邪行所攝）。更無所小（沒有更小的）。

第三地闇能障（第三地的昏暗能夠障礙）。于所聞思修法忘失者（對於所聽聞、思考、修習的佛法而忘失的人）。何故初地名已得不退（為什麼初地名為已經得到不退轉）。此猶忘耶（這裡仍然會忘失嗎）。又菩薩地云勝解行位於久所作所思所說法（又《菩薩地》中說，勝解行位的菩薩對於很久以前所做、所思、所說的佛法）。有時忘失（有時會忘失）。入地不爾（進入初地就不會這樣）。如何今說有忘失耶（為什麼現在說會有忘失呢）。定位所得多分忘失（在禪定中得到的，大部分會忘失）。地前猶有（地前仍然會有）。地上咸無名證不退（地上完全沒有，名為證得不退轉）。其聞．思．修所得（其聽聞、思考、修習所得到的）。猶小有退忘非多（仍然會有小小的退失和忘失，但不是很多）。又無漏所得無忘（又無漏智慧所得到的不會忘失）。有漏所得三惠境猶（有漏智慧所得到的三種智慧境界仍然會……） English version: Realm four desires (the realm of four kinds of desires), liberation, concentration, wisdom. Good four faiths (four kinds of good faith), diligence, non-greed, aversion. Form two bodies (the two bodies contained in form), verbal karma (language behavior).

The characteristics of the Three Realms and Nine Grounds. The characteristics of each ground before and after are purely four sentences. Each sentence contains the six perfections. Looking at each other, the four sentences are called mixed. According to the type of blessings, there are four sentences. Not based on sentences of existence and non-existence.

The six perfections and five fruits. Should adapt to different situations.

Other-being nature obstacle is the seed of discrimination obstacle. The Three Realms all have it, what is called other-being? If taking the ability to produce. There is arising of discrimination and defilement of the upper and lower realms from leaving the lower defilement. What is called other-being? If taking the name of this ground because of the existence of the eighth consciousness on this ground. The eighth consciousness should be called other-being itself. Why need the seed of obstacle? If not, the ten grounds of Bodhisattvas. The eighth consciousness of this ground has not been cut off, so it should become other-being. From this, it should be known. Taking the seed of the two obstacles of discrimination based on the eighth consciousness of this ground to establish. The nature is only defiled. Collected by covered nature. Because the substance of the two obstacles is fixed. It should also be considered in relation to the two obstacles.

The fruits of the evil realms are not defiled dharmas. Why is it said to be cut off in the path of seeing? Like the extinction without remainder.

The second ground is called stainless. No mistaken violation of the three karmas. The first ground has mistaken violations. Still need to think and choose. This ground is not like that. Like when walking, insects separate their own paths and naturally do not harm them. So there is no mistaken violation. The first ground is not like that. There are still mistaken violations. Why do the ten obstacles only talk about wrong conduct? The two ignorances also talk about mistaken violations of the three karmas. Because it is fundamental. They are also included in wrong conduct. The second explanation says that it is only the ignorance of arising karma without understanding karma. That is included in wrong conduct. There is nothing smaller.

The darkness of the third ground can obstruct. Those who forget the dharmas they have heard, thought about, and cultivated. Why is the first ground called already attained non-retrogression? Is there still forgetting here? Also, the Bodhisattva Ground says that Bodhisattvas in the stage of understanding and practice sometimes forget the dharmas they have done, thought about, and spoken about for a long time. Entering the ground is not like that. How can it be said now that there is forgetting? What is obtained in concentration is mostly forgotten. There is still before the ground. There is completely none on the ground, called attaining non-retrogression. What is obtained from hearing, thinking, and cultivating. There is still a small amount of regression and forgetting, but not much. Also, what is obtained from non-outflow is not forgotten. What is obtained from outflow wisdom, the realm of the three wisdoms still...

【English Translation】 Realm four desires. 解. 定. 惠. Good four faith. 勤. No greed. Aversion. Form two bodies. Verbal karma. Three realms nine grounds behavior. Before ground on ground one by one behavior pure four sentences. One by one self as six perfections. Looking at each other as four sentences name mixed. According to kind of blessing have four sentences. Not according to existence or non-existence sentence. Six perfections five fruits. Should all different. Other-being nature obstacle is discrimination obstacle seed. Three realms have name what other-being. If take can produce. Have leave lower defilement up and down discrimination defilement dharma all arise. Name what other-being. If take rely on this ground eighth have so get this ground name. Should eighth consciousness self name other-being. Why need obstacle seed. Not so Bodhisattva ten grounds. This ground eighth consciousness not cut off so should become other-being. Therefore should know. Take rely on this ground eighth discrimination two obstacles seed establish. Nature only defilement. Covered nature collect. Two obstacles body fixed so. Looking at two obstacles also so should think of it. Its evil realm fruit not defilement dharma. How see path say as cut off also. Like no remainder extinction. Two ground name leave dirt. No mistake commit three karma. First ground mistake commit. Still need think choose. This ground not so. Like walk time insect self separate road let nature not hurt. So no mistake commit. First ground not so. Still have mistake commit. Why ten obstacles but say evil conduct. Two ignorance also say mistake commit three karma. Is fundamental so. They also evil conduct collect. Second explain say or only arise karma not understand karma ignorance. Is evil conduct collect. More no small. Third ground dark can obstacle. At what hear think cultivate dharma forget person. Why first ground name already get not retreat. This still forget yeah. Also Bodhisattva ground say victory understand conduct position at long time do think say dharma. Sometimes forget. Enter ground not so. How now say have forget yeah. Position fix get mostly forget. Before ground still have. On ground all no name prove not retreat. Its hear think cultivate get. Still small have retreat forget not much. Also no outflow get no forget. Have outflow get three wisdom realm still

忘。亦不相違。三定成無也。又應不是退也 何故諸地十障皆舉小分。唯第二第三地第五第六第七第八第九第十第十一障攝二愚皆盡。攝法盡故。唯有初四地有通有別。初地異生性本故。惡趣愚末故。此依前釋。若依後釋。即總攝盡更不須說。第四地障身見等不入二愚中。二愚不說為十障有何意也 答二愚據因。前地所起說與後為障。身見等據久遠所行名十障。又十障據因說。身見等能起諸煩惱故。後二為果正能障故說為二愚。不相違也。

何故九地障。三無礙解為一障。餘一無礙解為一障。有何意也。要速前三方辦說故。前後輕重等故。開合不同。

第十地障神通為一。智云及所含藏為一者。內德．外業有差別故。

何故餘地障皆有二愚。唯第四地障不即二愚。

異生既不斷粗重。云何二靜慮斷苦根粗重。二乘亦如是 今解。凡夫小伏現行粗重。二乘亦能分滅定障小分種子．苦根粗重。亦得何妨。如理應思。

第十卷

應說三乘斷見．修別。第七識頓斷中任運簡見道一切。內起簡修道外緣事獨頭貪．瞋．癡等。以此二義故無粗細。無粗細言。簡修道內外緣迷理身．邊二見．及此相應。九地斷有粗細故。如是總簡一切惑盡。

菩薩以煩惱助愿受生中。唯以現行勢力遠資。

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本 遺忘，也不互相違背。三定（三種禪定）成就無所有（涅槃）。又，這不應該是退步（的狀態）。 為什麼諸地（各個菩薩的修行階段）的十種障礙都只舉出小部分，唯有第二地、第三地、第五地、第六地、第七地、第八地、第九地、第十地、第十一地攝盡二愚（道理愚和事愚）？因為攝盡了法。只有最初四地有共通和個別之處。初地是異生性（凡夫的本性）的根本，惡趣愚是末端。這是依照之前的解釋。如果依照之後的解釋，就是總攝一切，不再需要說明。第四地的障礙，如身見等，不屬於二愚之中。二愚沒有被說成是十種障礙，有什麼用意呢？ 回答：二愚是就原因來說的，前地所產生的，說是後地的障礙。身見等是就久遠以來所行的來說，稱為十種障礙。又，十種障礙是就原因來說的，身見等能夠引起各種煩惱。後二（二愚）是就結果來說的，真正能夠障礙，所以說成是二愚，不互相違背。 為什麼九地（第九個菩薩修行階段）的障礙，三種無礙解（法無礙解、義無礙解、詞無礙解）算作一種障礙，其餘一種無礙解（樂說無礙解）算作一種障礙，有什麼用意呢？因為要快速地辦成前三種，所以這樣說。前後輕重等等的緣故，開合不同。 第十地（第十個菩薩修行階段）的障礙，神通算作一種，智云（智慧之云）及所含藏算作一種，是因為內在的功德和外在的事業有差別。 為什麼其餘各地的障礙都有二愚，唯有第四地的障礙不包括二愚？ 異生（凡夫）既然沒有斷除粗重的煩惱，為什麼二靜慮（第二禪和第三禪）能夠斷除苦根的粗重煩惱？二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）也是這樣嗎？現在解釋：凡夫只是稍微地伏住現行的粗重煩惱。二乘也能部分地滅除定障的小部分種子和苦根的粗重煩惱，又有什麼妨礙呢？應該如理地思考。 第十卷 應該說明三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘、菩薩乘）斷除見惑和修惑的區別。第七識（末那識）在頓斷中，任運地簡擇見道的一切。內在生起簡擇修道的外緣事物，如獨頭貪、瞋、癡等。因為這兩種意義，所以沒有粗細之分。沒有粗細之說，是簡擇修道的內外緣，迷惑于理的身見、邊見，以及與此相應的煩惱。九地斷除有粗細的煩惱。這樣總括地簡擇一切煩惱斷盡。 菩薩以煩惱幫助願力而受生，只是以現行的勢力來遙遠地資助。

【English Translation】 English version Forgetting, and not contradicting each other. The three samādhis (three types of meditative concentration) achieve non-existence (Nirvana). Moreover, this should not be a state of regression. Why do the ten obstacles of all the Bhumis (stages of a Bodhisattva's practice) only mention small portions, while only the second, third, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh Bhumis completely encompass the two ignorances (ignorance of principle and ignorance of practice)? Because they encompass all the Dharmas. Only the first four Bhumis have common and individual aspects. The first Bhumi is the root of the nature of a non-saint (the nature of an ordinary person), and the ignorance of evil destinies is the end. This is according to the previous explanation. If according to the later explanation, it is a complete encompassing, and there is no need to explain it further. The obstacles of the fourth Bhumi, such as self-view, etc., are not included in the two ignorances. What is the intention of not saying that the two ignorances are the ten obstacles? Answer: The two ignorances are spoken of in terms of cause; what arises in the previous Bhumi is said to be an obstacle to the later Bhumi. Self-view, etc., are spoken of in terms of what has been practiced for a long time, and are called the ten obstacles. Moreover, the ten obstacles are spoken of in terms of cause; self-view, etc., can give rise to various afflictions. The latter two (the two ignorances) are spoken of in terms of result, and are truly able to obstruct, so they are called the two ignorances, and they do not contradict each other. Why is it that in the obstacles of the ninth Bhumi (the ninth stage of a Bodhisattva's practice), the three unimpeded understandings (unimpeded understanding of the Dharma, unimpeded understanding of meaning, unimpeded understanding of language) are counted as one obstacle, and the remaining one unimpeded understanding (unimpeded understanding of eloquence) is counted as one obstacle? Because the first three need to be accomplished quickly, that's why it is said this way. Because of the relative importance of what comes before and after, the opening and closing are different. In the obstacles of the tenth Bhumi (the tenth stage of a Bodhisattva's practice), supernatural powers are counted as one, and the cloud of wisdom (cloud of wisdom) and what it contains are counted as one, because there is a difference between inner virtues and outer actions. Why do the obstacles of all the other Bhumis have the two ignorances, while only the obstacles of the fourth Bhumi do not include the two ignorances? Since non-saints (ordinary people) have not eliminated coarse afflictions, how can the two dhyanas (the second and third dhyanas) eliminate the coarse afflictions of the root of suffering? Are the two vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna) also like this? Now explaining: Ordinary people only slightly subdue the coarse afflictions of present activity. The two vehicles can also partially extinguish the small portion of the seeds of the obstacles of concentration and the coarse afflictions of the root of suffering, so what harm is there? One should think about it reasonably. Volume Ten One should explain the difference between the three vehicles (Śrāvakayāna, Pratyekabuddhayāna, and Bodhisattvayāna) in eliminating the afflictions of view and the afflictions of cultivation. The seventh consciousness (Manas-vijnana) in sudden elimination, spontaneously selects everything of the path of seeing. Internally arising, it selects the external objects of the path of cultivation, such as solitary greed, anger, and delusion, etc. Because of these two meanings, there is no distinction between coarse and subtle. The saying 'no coarse and subtle' refers to selecting the internal and external conditions of the path of cultivation, being deluded about the self-view and extreme views that are confused about principle, and the afflictions corresponding to them. The elimination of afflictions in the nine Bhumis has coarse and subtle aspects. In this way, all afflictions are completely eliminated. Bodhisattvas use afflictions to help their vows and take rebirth, only using the power of present activity to remotely assist.

非如潤生愛等。如行殺生貪．瞋等惑方能利樂。未得無漏勝道利生。故以貪．瞋引無漏道。方始能利名為助愿。非如貪等潤生用之。由此應為四句分別。有唯現潤非種。謂七地前菩薩。有唯種潤非現。謂第三果。有俱潤。謂一切異生。有俱非潤。謂變易．及化身等。

俱生地前漸伏地上伏盡。此依六識為論 何故見所斷煩惱隨所知伏與不伏。俱生煩惱獨入地伏。不隨所知。所知後伏。煩惱先伏。見所斷不爾 見障利故同時。修障鈍故漸次。又見道猛。修道不爾。

故留煩惱本擬潤生。八地以去無分段死。不藉煩惱助潤。何故不斷耶 答如初地怖煩惱。即伏而受變易。亦如二乘有學回心即受變易。雖無分段不斷煩惱 所以者何 煩惱雖非親助潤變易如分段生。遠勢亦有。又惑種在變易時長。不假數資。若無惑種變易時促。如二乘無學愿數數資 然有四句。唯定勝無惑助。亦不長時受變易。如二乘無學回心。雖有惑種助。無勝定資。亦不長時。如二乘有學回心。有惑助及勝定資。即變易長時受。如十地菩薩。故愿留之。不同二乘斷之不得非故留也。又二乘但種助。不由愿資而不名留。菩薩正由愿資。傍由種助。故說留之。若即斷之於生無力。惑因亡果隨盡故。又由菩薩意樂菩提十地練根。不假斷煩惱。煩惱在

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 不像潤生（run sheng，指使生命延續）的愛等情感。如果行殺生、貪婪、嗔恨等迷惑行為，才能帶來利益和快樂。在未獲得無漏（wu lou，指沒有煩惱和業力的）殊勝之道以利益眾生之前，通過貪婪和嗔恨來引導進入無漏之道，才能開始利益眾生，這被稱為助愿（zhu yuan，輔助發願）。這不像貪婪等情感直接用於潤生。因此，應該用四句話來區分：有些只有現行潤生而沒有種子潤生，比如七地（qi di，菩薩修行的第七個階段）之前的菩薩；有些只有種子潤生而沒有現行潤生，比如第三果（di san guo，指阿羅漢果位）；有些既有現行潤生也有種子潤生，比如一切異生（yi sheng，指凡夫）；有些既沒有現行潤生也沒有種子潤生，比如變易身（bian yi shen，指菩薩或阿羅漢的化身）和化身等。

俱生（ju sheng，指與生俱來的）煩惱在地前逐漸被降伏，在地上完全被降伏。這是以六識（liu shi，指眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識、意識）為基礎來討論的。為什麼見所斷（jian suo duan，通過見道斷除的）煩惱隨著所知障（suo zhi zhang，對真理的認知障礙）的降伏而降伏或不降伏，而俱生煩惱卻只能通過進入地（di，指菩薩修行的階段）來降伏，不隨著所知障而降伏呢？所知障是後降伏的，煩惱是先降伏的，見所斷的煩惱不是這樣。見所斷的煩惱因為見道（jian dao，證悟真理的道路）的銳利而同時斷除，修所斷（xiu suo duan，通過修道斷除的）煩惱因為修道的遲鈍而逐漸斷除。而且見道猛烈，修道則不然。

所以保留煩惱的根本目的是爲了潤生。八地（ba di，菩薩修行的第八個階段）以後沒有分段生死（fen duan sheng si，指凡夫的生死），不需要藉助煩惱來輔助潤生。為什麼不斷除煩惱呢？回答說，就像初地（chu di，菩薩修行的第一個階段）的菩薩害怕煩惱，所以降伏煩惱而接受變易生死（bian yi sheng si，指菩薩或阿羅漢的生死）。也像二乘（er cheng，指聲聞乘和緣覺乘）的有學（you xue，指還在學習的修行者）迴心（hui xin，指從二乘轉向大乘），就接受變易生死。雖然沒有分段生死，但不斷除煩惱。為什麼呢？煩惱雖然不是直接輔助潤變易生死，但遠距離的影響還是有的。而且惑種（huo zhong，煩惱的種子）在變易生死時，不需要頻繁地滋養。如果沒有惑種，變易生死的時間就會縮短，就像二乘的無學（wu xue，指已經完成學習的修行者）需要通過願力來頻繁地滋養。然而有四種情況：只有定力殊勝而沒有煩惱輔助，也不會長時間地承受變易生死，比如二乘的無學回心；雖然有惑種輔助，但沒有殊勝的定力滋養，也不會長時間，比如二乘的有學回心；既有惑種輔助，又有殊勝的定力滋養，就會長時間地承受變易生死，比如十地（shi di，菩薩修行的第十個階段）菩薩。所以菩薩發願保留煩惱，這不同於二乘斷除煩惱是因為不得不斷除，而不是故意保留。而且二乘只是通過種子來輔助，不是通過願力來滋養，所以不稱為保留。菩薩主要是通過願力來滋養，順便通過種子來輔助，所以說保留煩惱。如果立即斷除煩惱，對於生命就沒有力量了，因為煩惱的因消失了，果也會隨之消失。而且由於菩薩意樂菩提（yi le pu ti，渴望覺悟），在十地中鍛鍊根基，不需要斷除煩惱，煩惱存在。

【English Translation】 English version: Unlike affections such as love that nourish life. Only by engaging in actions such as killing, greed, and hatred can one bring benefit and joy. Before attaining the unsurpassed path of non-outflow (wu lou, meaning without afflictions and karma) to benefit beings, guiding oneself into the path of non-outflow through greed and hatred is the only way to begin benefiting beings, which is called assisting vows (zhu yuan, assisting vows). This is not like greed and other emotions that are directly used to nourish life. Therefore, it should be distinguished with four sentences: Some only have manifest nourishment but no seed nourishment, such as Bodhisattvas before the Seventh Ground (qi di, the seventh stage of a Bodhisattva's practice); some only have seed nourishment but no manifest nourishment, such as the Third Fruit (di san guo, referring to the state of an Arhat); some have both manifest and seed nourishment, such as all ordinary beings (yi sheng, referring to ordinary people); some have neither manifest nor seed nourishment, such as the Transformation Body (bian yi shen, referring to the transformation body of a Bodhisattva or Arhat) and emanations.

Co-arisen (ju sheng, meaning innate) afflictions are gradually subdued before reaching the Grounds, and completely subdued on the Grounds. This is discussed based on the six consciousnesses (liu shi, referring to eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and mind consciousness). Why are afflictions severed by seeing (jian suo duan, severed through the path of seeing) subdued or not subdued according to the subduing of the obstacle of the knowable (suo zhi zhang, the obstacle to the knowledge of truth), while co-arisen afflictions can only be subdued by entering the Grounds (di, referring to the stages of a Bodhisattva's practice) and are not subdued according to the obstacle of the knowable? The obstacle of the knowable is subdued later, and afflictions are subdued earlier; afflictions severed by seeing are not like this. Afflictions severed by seeing are severed simultaneously because of the sharpness of the path of seeing (jian dao, the path of realizing truth), while afflictions severed by cultivation (xiu suo duan, severed through the path of cultivation) are gradually severed because of the slowness of the path of cultivation. Moreover, the path of seeing is fierce, while the path of cultivation is not.

Therefore, the fundamental purpose of retaining afflictions is to nourish life. After the Eighth Ground (ba di, the eighth stage of a Bodhisattva's practice), there is no segmented death (fen duan sheng si, referring to the death of ordinary beings), and there is no need to rely on afflictions to assist in nourishing life. Why are afflictions not severed? The answer is that just as Bodhisattvas on the First Ground (chu di, the first stage of a Bodhisattva's practice) fear afflictions, they subdue afflictions and accept transformational death (bian yi sheng si, referring to the death of a Bodhisattva or Arhat). Similarly, those of the Two Vehicles (er cheng, referring to the Hearer Vehicle and the Solitary Realizer Vehicle) who are still learning (you xue, referring to practitioners who are still learning) and turn their minds (hui xin, referring to turning from the Two Vehicles to the Great Vehicle) accept transformational death. Although there is no segmented death, afflictions are not severed. Why? Although afflictions do not directly assist in nourishing transformational death, they still have a distant influence. Moreover, the seeds of delusion (huo zhong, the seeds of affliction) do not need to be frequently nourished during transformational death. If there are no seeds of delusion, the time of transformational death will be shortened, just as those of the Two Vehicles who have completed their learning (wu xue, referring to practitioners who have completed their learning) need to frequently nourish through vows. However, there are four situations: Only the power of samadhi is superior and there is no assistance from afflictions, and one will not endure transformational death for a long time, such as those of the Two Vehicles who have completed their learning and turn their minds; although there is assistance from the seeds of delusion, there is no nourishment from superior samadhi, and it will not be for a long time, such as those of the Two Vehicles who are still learning and turn their minds; if there is both assistance from the seeds of delusion and nourishment from superior samadhi, one will endure transformational death for a long time, such as Bodhisattvas on the Tenth Ground (shi di, the tenth stage of a Bodhisattva's practice). Therefore, Bodhisattvas vow to retain afflictions, which is different from the Two Vehicles severing afflictions because they have to sever them, not because they intentionally retain them. Moreover, the Two Vehicles only assist through seeds, not through the nourishment of vows, so it is not called retaining. Bodhisattvas mainly nourish through vows and incidentally assist through seeds, so it is said that they retain afflictions. If afflictions are severed immediately, there will be no power for life, because the cause of affliction is gone, and the result will also disappear. Moreover, because Bodhisattvas desire enlightenment (yi le pu ti, desiring enlightenment) and train their roots in the Ten Grounds, they do not need to sever afflictions; afflictions exist.

不障得地故名留。

見道頓斷。五十九三心亦名頓。然所知．煩惱二障各分為二 云何為二。若以九品粗品先斷。即十地修道應先斷粗。若以隨所障道以辨粗細。九地不定。即煩惱品云何隨所知以明粗細。此義應思 今解云。如十地修道地地所斷。初為粗後為細。煩惱隨彼以說粗細。此亦應爾。見道中自分別力粗先斷。他引力細後斷。有先伏煩惱超得第二三果。無先伏所知而超入二地。然入地已如聞半頌以捨身亦有超者。然無超大劫。以極難斷故等。此義應思。

一類二乘三界九地品品別斷中有二義。一云闕無超人。二云此中兼盡。先世道亦九品。後不伏者亦九品故 菩薩利根見道既許分三。二乘根鈍見道應有三品。何故彼唯一此有三 菩薩二障為三。二乘一障為二。分粗細故。

六十九有前勝進即後加行。後所有道即前勝進文。與對法同。四道以諸門分別。作用二釋。

損力益能轉中。有懺悔罪滅。應敘。六十卷業有四。謂異熟決定．時決定．二俱不定．二俱定。及阿羅漢受殘苦等。處阿阇世王五逆業滅。瑜伽云。依未解脫者建立定業。為二解和會應知。

四智如佛地各有十喻。應勘敘之。

有漏曾習相執所引等者。今觀此意。有漏觀心由俱第七惑前相執勢所引故。乃順於障

不斷隨眠。無漏不爾。

初有義根本無分別智親證二空能斷隨眠者。故六十四云。若安立諦已立為諦。何須復說非安立耶。答由安立諦取于有相。以有相故相縛未脫。相縛未脫故於粗重縛亦未能斷。由此準知。唯無分別智斷諸隨眠 第二有義後得無分別智。斷迷事隨眠者。解前文云。先據斷迷理隨眠非斷迷事。又前約斷究竟一切粗重。非因位中斷二障種語。又前約有漏安立及無漏安立諦語。非後得緣非安立語。亦無分別相故。即彼論云。若不要緣非安立者。有于凈定心順抉擇分者轉緣諸諦時。應斷隨眠等。彼既不爾。故但簡有漏等。非為盡理。不果。披彼文應尋之。

疏中但有二乘用之非菩薩。今更解。菩薩亦用此智。十地中非唸唸唯斷法執故。亦別時斷法執所知障故。前師釋修道中世出世斷道者。此依菩薩修道有獨用無分別智。名世出世道。有真俗合用智斷。如舉勝者。下下地者斷障雖不由俗然必俱時。若不爾者。豈後勝地要唯無分別智。不與後得俱方斷惑耶。初唯出世斷通三乘。後兼菩薩故作是說。二理教齊。任情取捨。

大涅槃體有二義。一理三事即于真如有摩訶般若．解脫．法身三義故。二體三事。三體各別故。合名大涅槃。

十地不起無漏五識。比量云。十地有漏五根。必不能發

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本： 『不斷隨眠』（Anusaya，煩惱的潛在傾向）是指煩惱持續存在，而『無漏』（Anasrava，沒有煩惱的智慧）則不是這樣。

第一種觀點認為，最初的根本無分別智（Mula-nirvikalpa-jnana，直接證悟空性的智慧）能夠親自體證二空（人無我和法無我），從而斷除隨眠。因此，《六十四》中說：『如果安立諦（Samvriti-satya，世俗諦）已經被確立為諦，為什麼還需要說非安立諦（Paramartha-satya，勝義諦）呢？』回答是：因為安立諦執取有相（Sakara，有表象），由於有相的緣故，相縛（Nimitta-bandha，對錶象的執著）沒有解脫。由於相縛沒有解脫，所以對於粗重縛（Sthula-prakriti-bandha，粗重的煩惱束縛）也不能斷除。由此可以推知，只有無分別智才能斷除各種隨眠。第二種觀點認為，後得無分別智（Prsthalabdha-nirvikalpa-jnana，證悟後獲得的智慧）能夠斷除迷事隨眠（Vastu-anusaya，對事物的迷惑）。解釋前面的文句說：先前是依據斷除迷理隨眠（Tattva-anusaya，對真理的迷惑），而不是斷除迷事。而且，先前是就斷除究竟一切粗重而言，而不是在因位中斷除二障（煩惱障和所知障）的種子。此外，先前是就『有漏安立諦』（Sasrava-samvriti-satya，有煩惱的世俗諦）和『無漏安立諦』（Anasrava-samvriti-satya，無煩惱的世俗諦）而言，而不是就後得智所緣的『非安立』而言，因為它也沒有分別相。正如那部論典所說：『如果不需要緣非安立，那麼在凈定心中，對於順抉擇分（Anukulya-nirvedha-bhagiya，順應抉擇分的善根）的人，在轉緣諸諦時，應該斷除隨眠等等。』既然不是這樣，所以只是簡別有漏等等，而不是窮盡真理，沒有結果。應該查閱《披彼文》來尋找答案。

疏文中只說二乘（聲聞乘和緣覺乘）使用這種智慧，而不是菩薩。現在進一步解釋，菩薩也使用這種智慧。在十地（菩薩修行的十個階段）中，不是念念都只斷除法執（Dharma-graha，對法的執著），而是分別在不同的時候斷除法執所知障（Jnana-avarana，知識上的障礙）。前一位論師解釋修道中的世出世斷道時說，這是依據菩薩修道有獨用無分別智，稱為世出世道（Lokottara-lokika-marga，既超越世間又存在於世間的道），有真俗合用智斷（Satyadvaya-yukta-jnana，結合真諦和俗諦的智慧）斷除煩惱，例如舉勝者（殊勝的例子）。下下地（較低的菩薩階段）的人斷除障礙雖然不是由俗諦引起的，但必定是同時發生的。如果不是這樣，難道後來的殊勝階段只需要無分別智，不與後得智同時發生才能斷除迷惑嗎？最初只有出世智斷除煩惱，這適用於三乘（聲聞乘、緣覺乘和菩薩乘）。後來兼顧菩薩，所以才這樣說。兩種道理和教義是一致的，可以根據自己的理解來取捨。

大涅槃（Maha-nirvana，偉大的涅槃）的體性有兩種含義：一是理三事，即在真如（Tathata，事物的真實本性）中具有摩訶般若（Maha-prajna，大智慧）、解脫（Vimoksha，解脫）和法身（Dharma-kaya，法性身）三種含義；二是體三事，即三種體性各不相同。合起來稱為大涅槃。

十地（菩薩修行的十個階段）不生起無漏五識（Anasrava-panca-vijnana，沒有煩惱的五種感官意識）。可以進行比量（Anumana，推理）：十地有漏五根（Sasrava-panca-indriya，有煩惱的五種感官），必定不能引發無漏五識。

【English Translation】 English version: 'Continuous Anusaya' (Anusaya, latent tendencies of afflictions) refers to the continuous existence of afflictions, while 'Anasrava' (wisdom without afflictions) is not so.

The first view holds that the initial Mula-nirvikalpa-jnana (fundamental non-conceptual wisdom, the wisdom that directly realizes emptiness) can personally realize the two emptinesses (the emptiness of self and the emptiness of phenomena), thereby cutting off Anusaya. Therefore, the Sixty-Four states: 'If Samvriti-satya (conventional truth) has already been established as truth, why is it necessary to speak of Paramartha-satya (ultimate truth)?' The answer is: Because Samvriti-satya grasps at Sakara (with appearances), and because of Sakara, Nimitta-bandha (attachment to appearances) is not liberated. Because Nimitta-bandha is not liberated, Sthula-prakriti-bandha (coarse bondage of nature) cannot be cut off either. From this, it can be inferred that only Nirvikalpa-jnana (non-conceptual wisdom) can cut off all Anusaya. The second view holds that Prsthalabdha-nirvikalpa-jnana (post-attainment non-conceptual wisdom, wisdom attained after realization) can cut off Vastu-anusaya (delusion about objects). Explaining the previous sentence, it says: Previously, it was based on cutting off Tattva-anusaya (delusion about truth), not cutting off delusion about objects. Moreover, previously, it was in terms of cutting off all coarse burdens ultimately, not cutting off the seeds of the two obscurations (afflictive obscurations and cognitive obscurations) in the causal stage. Furthermore, previously, it was in terms of 'Sasrava-samvriti-satya' (conventional truth with afflictions) and 'Anasrava-samvriti-satya' (conventional truth without afflictions), not in terms of 'non-establishment' that is the object of post-attainment wisdom, because it also has no distinguishing characteristics. Just as that treatise says: 'If it is not necessary to rely on non-establishment, then for those in pure concentration who are in accordance with Anukulya-nirvedha-bhagiya (roots of virtue in accordance with the decisive part), when turning to the truths, they should cut off Anusaya, etc.' Since it is not so, it only distinguishes between those with afflictions, etc., and does not exhaust the truth, and there is no result. One should consult 'Pi Bi Wen' to find the answer.

The commentary only says that the Sravakas (listeners) and Pratyekabuddhas (solitary realizers) use this wisdom, not Bodhisattvas. Now, to further explain, Bodhisattvas also use this wisdom. In the Ten Bhumis (ten stages of Bodhisattva practice), it is not that every moment only cuts off Dharma-graha (attachment to phenomena), but rather separately cuts off Jnana-avarana (cognitive obscurations) at different times. The previous teacher explained that the Lokottara-lokika-marga (path that is both transcendent and mundane) in the path of cultivation is based on the Bodhisattva's cultivation having uniquely used Nirvikalpa-jnana, called Lokottara-lokika-marga, and having Satyadvaya-yukta-jnana (wisdom combined with the two truths) to cut off afflictions, such as citing superior examples. Although the cutting off of obstacles by those in the lower Bhumis (lower Bodhisattva stages) is not caused by conventional truth, it must occur simultaneously. If it is not so, then do the later superior stages only need Nirvikalpa-jnana, and not simultaneously with post-attainment wisdom, to cut off delusion? Initially, only transcendent wisdom cuts off afflictions, which applies to the Three Vehicles (Sravaka Vehicle, Pratyekabuddha Vehicle, and Bodhisattva Vehicle). Later, it includes Bodhisattvas, so it is said in this way. The two principles and teachings are consistent, and one can adopt or reject according to one's own understanding.

The nature of Maha-nirvana (great Nirvana) has two meanings: one is the three aspects of principle, that is, Tathata (the true nature of things) has the three meanings of Maha-prajna (great wisdom), Vimoksha (liberation), and Dharma-kaya (Dharma body); the other is the three aspects of nature, that is, the three natures are different from each other. Together, they are called Maha-nirvana.

The Ten Bhumis (ten stages of Bodhisattva practice) do not give rise to Anasrava-panca-vijnana (five sense consciousnesses without afflictions). Anumana (inference) can be made: The Sasrava-panca-indriya (five sense faculties with afflictions) of the Ten Bhumis must not be able to give rise to Anasrava-panca-vijnana.

無漏五識。有漏不共必俱同境根所攝故。如地前位。

說常樂我凈等。以除二乘四顛倒心故。二乘正證此法性者。非作常．無常等解。由加行心作此無常等解故入。後出觀時復觀前觀。不審所緣。便見加行。謂是真智所緣亦是無常等。便謂真實諸法無常等。諸加行心及有漏後得。雖非是執性皆是善。然由六．七法執未亡故。引有漏善心而作此解。於法執所引之果有漏觀心上。說能引法執障為顛倒。若無法執時此觀不生。故由前凡位起四顛倒．或十二倒。謂想．心．見等執身等為凈。佛為除彼說無常等行為非常等令其趣證。論其真理非常．無常。然二乘者由隨佛方便言及執引故。作無常等解。今為除彼令證極果。說此真如為常．我等。令起此行方便趣入證其法也。正證彼時非常．無常。諸佛或說我。或時說無我。諸法實相中。無我無非我。余皆類然。此依護法唯六．七有染心有執為論。其八地以前。起下乘般涅槃障．細生滅等障。皆準此釋故。八地以去皆不論現行。觀心為障。

其安惠因中無漏一切有漏皆有法執故。說二乘無漏心等為四顛倒。八地以前說功用加行為障。不爾加行道應非二愚攝。由此一切有漏善心等及因無漏皆有法執。今論真理非常．無常等。為斷法執無常等故。說為常樂等也。眾善所依。

顯性無貪．瞋．癡等種種煩惱。因之為善。能順諸善與善為依故具功德。

法身正自利言。顯不同利他展轉說故。其自受用身修因。本為利他故修。又為利他所依止故不說。對他受用等自利義微。所以不說。理亦不遮。

他受用變化。何故不說自利。諸佛利他即自利故。理亦應然。意為利他變現生故。從意樂說為利他故。前資糧位。云一切功德皆屬二利。隨意樂力。今此隨增上。故三身別。

自受用身如凈土量遍法界者。應作二解。一實爾。二依用說。智是佛故。以所證無邊故。如世間言所見處高言眼孔大。所學廣故說智惠大。

四智緣境門中。自受用土唯凈無漏。余不見故。唯佛所知。他受用土本唯無漏．凈。見者唯凈。一切不善諸異熟果皆已無故。然通有．無漏。第八．五識所觀有漏故。見者居穢土。利樂有情亦為現穢。見亦通穢。通諸識境。化土本唯無漏。然有凈．穢。見者亦爾。通有．無漏然有凈．穢。十地菩薩亦得見故。上知下故。然由本為十地菩薩現凈土故。論說化土有其凈言。化土本為地前等見。不別言凈。總說見身．土各據增勝。本為而說。亦不相違。下不知上故。地前．二乘必不見無漏凈土。

此中諸土皆四智境。由隨增勝本擊發因。說智別現。不爾便有非遍智過

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：顯現出沒有貪婪（無貪，Alobha），嗔恨（無瞋，Adosa），愚癡（無癡，Amoha）等等各種煩惱的狀態。因為這種狀態是善良的（善，Kusala），能夠順應各種善良的事物，並且以善良為依靠，所以具備功德（功德，Guna）。

法身（Dharmakaya）主要是爲了自身利益而說的，這表明它不同於爲了利益他人而輾轉講述的情況。而報身（Sambhogakaya）的修習是基於利益他人的目的而進行的。此外，由於報身是利益他人的所依止，所以沒有特別說明其自利性。化身（Nirmanakaya）等在自利方面的意義較小，因此沒有提及，但理論上並不排除其自利的可能性。

為什麼報身和化身沒有提到自利呢？因為諸佛（Buddha）的利他行為本身就是自利。從道理上講也應該是這樣。意思是說，爲了利益他人而變現化身，從意樂（Adhimutti）的角度來說是爲了利益他人。之前的資糧位（Sambhara-bhumi）說一切功德都屬於二利（自利和他利），是隨順意樂的力量。現在這裡是隨順增上緣（Adhipati），所以三身（Trikaya）有所區別。

如果報身像凈土（Sukhavati）一樣遍佈法界（Dharmadhatu），應該有兩種解釋。一是實際上就是這樣，二是依據其作用來說。智慧（Jnana）就是佛，因為所證悟的境界是無邊的。就像世俗所說，『所見之處高』就說『眼孔大』，所學廣泛就說智慧大。

在四智（Catur-jnana）緣境的方面，報身土（Sambhogakaya-ksetra）只有清凈無漏（Anasrava），因為其他（不清凈的）無法被看見，只有佛才能知曉。化身土（Nirmanakaya-ksetra）原本只有無漏清凈，見者只能看到清凈的部分，因為一切不善的異熟果（Vipaka-phala）都已經沒有了。然而，它也通於有漏和無漏，因為第八識（Alaya-vijnana）和第五識（Manovijnana）所觀照的境界是有漏的，見者居住在不清凈的國土中，爲了利益有情（Sattva）也會示現不清凈的景象，所以見到的也通於不清凈，通於各種識的境界。化土（Nirmanakaya-ksetra）原本只有無漏，但有清凈和不清凈之分，見者也是如此，通於有漏和無漏，也有清凈和不清凈之分，因為十地菩薩（Dasabhumi-bodhisattva）也能見到。這是因為上位者知道下位者的情況。然而，由於化土原本是爲了十地菩薩示現清凈的國土，所以論中說化土有清凈的說法。化土原本是爲了十地之前的眾生所見，沒有特別說清凈，總的來說，見身和見土各自依據其增勝的方面來說，原本是爲了這個目的而說的，並不矛盾。因為下位者不知道上位者的情況，所以十地之前的菩薩和二乘（Sravaka, Pratyekabuddha）必定見不到無漏清凈的國土。

這裡所有的國土都是四智的境界，由於隨順增勝的根本和擊發的原因，才說智慧的顯現有所不同。否則就會有智慧不遍一切處的過失。

【English Translation】 English version: Manifesting the absence of greed (Alobha), hatred (Adosa), delusion (Amoha), and various other afflictions. Because this state is virtuous (Kusala), able to accord with all virtuous things, and relies on virtue, it possesses merit (Guna).

The Dharmakaya (法身) is primarily spoken of in terms of self-benefit, indicating that it differs from situations where benefit to others is conveyed indirectly. The Sambhogakaya (報身)'s practice is based on the purpose of benefiting others. Furthermore, because the Sambhogakaya is the support for benefiting others, its self-benefit is not specifically mentioned. The Nirmanakaya (化身), etc., have less significance in terms of self-benefit, so they are not mentioned, but the principle does not exclude the possibility of self-benefit.

Why are self-benefits not mentioned in relation to the Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya? Because the Buddhas' (佛) benefiting of others is itself self-benefit. Logically, it should be so. The intention is that the transformation and manifestation of the Nirmanakaya are for the benefit of others, and from the perspective of intention (Adhimutti), it is for the benefit of others. The previous stage of accumulation (Sambhara-bhumi) stated that all merits belong to the two benefits (self and others), according to the power of intention. Here, it follows the dominant condition (Adhipati), so the three bodies (Trikaya) are differentiated.

If the Sambhogakaya, like Sukhavati (凈土), pervades the Dharmadhatu (法界), there should be two interpretations. One is that it is actually so, and the other is that it is spoken of in terms of its function. Wisdom (Jnana) is the Buddha, because the realm of enlightenment is boundless. Just as it is said in the world, 'Where one sees high' is said 'the eye socket is large,' and extensive learning is said to be great wisdom.

In the context of the four wisdoms (Catur-jnana) relating to objects, the Sambhogakaya-ksetra (報身土) is only pure and without outflows (Anasrava), because other (impure) things cannot be seen, and only the Buddha knows. The Nirmanakaya-ksetra (化身土) was originally only without outflows and pure, and the seer can only see the pure part, because all unwholesome results of maturation (Vipaka-phala) are gone. However, it also connects to with outflows and without outflows, because the realms observed by the eighth consciousness (Alaya-vijnana) and the fifth consciousness (Manovijnana) are with outflows, and the seer resides in an impure land, and impure appearances are also manifested to benefit sentient beings (Sattva), so what is seen also connects to impurity, connecting to the realms of various consciousnesses. The Nirmanakaya-ksetra (化土) was originally only without outflows, but there are pure and impure aspects, and the seer is also the same, connecting to with outflows and without outflows, and there are also pure and impure aspects, because the Ten-Ground Bodhisattvas (Dasabhumi-bodhisattva) can also see it. This is because those in higher positions know the situations of those in lower positions. However, because the Nirmanakaya-ksetra was originally manifested as a pure land for the Ten-Ground Bodhisattvas, the treatise says that the Nirmanakaya-ksetra has purity. The Nirmanakaya-ksetra was originally seen by beings before the Ten Grounds, and purity is not specifically mentioned. Generally speaking, seeing the body and seeing the land are each based on their dominant aspects, and it was originally spoken of for this purpose, which is not contradictory. Because those in lower positions do not know the situations of those in higher positions, Bodhisattvas before the Ten Grounds and the Two Vehicles (Sravaka, Pratyekabuddha) will certainly not see the pure land without outflows.

All the lands here are the realms of the four wisdoms, and it is only because of the fundamental and triggering causes that follow the dominant aspects that it is said that the manifestations of wisdom are different. Otherwise, there would be the fault of wisdom not pervading all places.

。若佛五蘊計是蘊等收。何故不許佛是有情攝。有情依異熟。佛非有情。攝持性名為法。佛可法所收。

純雜義解由增劣不同。但依親相分說若依影．質復說不同。影中自地變純。通力引雜。非通力中八緣現純。緣種雜。第七識中得名影純雜。影從見．質說性故。五識善惡心雜。無記心純。第六五俱等通。法應思準。假實中約識分別復別。有無對．有為無為對．有漏無漏對．自界他界緣對。思準純雜。

成唯識論掌中樞要卷下(末終)

【現代漢語翻譯】 現代漢語譯本：如果佛陀的五蘊（skandha，構成個體的五種要素：色、受、想、行、識）被認為是包含在蘊等之中，那麼為什麼不允許佛陀被歸類為有情（sentient being）所攝呢？因為有情是依賴於異熟（vipāka，業力的果報）而存在的，而佛陀並非有情。攝持的性質被稱為法（dharma，佛法、規律），佛陀可以被法所包含。 純粹和混雜的意義，可以通過增上和減損的不同來解釋。僅僅依靠親近的相狀來區分說明。如果依靠影像和實體，那麼說法又有所不同。在影像中，自地的變現是純粹的，通過神通力所引發的是混雜的。並非神通力中八種因緣顯現的是純粹的，因緣的種子是混雜的。在第七識（末那識，manas-vijñāna，意識的根本）中，可以得到名為影像的純粹和混雜。影像從見分和質分來說明其性質。因此，五識（眼識、耳識、鼻識、舌識、身識）的善惡之心是混雜的，無記之心是純粹的。第六識（意識，mano-vijñāna）與五識同時生起等同，法應該按照這個思路來推斷。在假和實之中，根據對識的分別，情況又有所不同。有和無的對立，有為和無為的對立，有漏和無漏的對立，自界和他界緣的對立。按照這個思路來推斷純粹和混雜。 《成唯識論掌中樞要》卷下（末終）

【English Translation】 English version: If the Buddha's five skandhas (pañca-skandha, the five aggregates constituting an individual: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness) are considered to be included within the skandhas, etc., then why is it not permitted to categorize the Buddha as being included within sentient beings (sattva)? Because sentient beings rely on vipāka (karmic retribution), while the Buddha is not a sentient being. The nature of upholding is called dharma (the teachings, the law), and the Buddha can be included by the dharma. The meanings of pure and mixed can be explained through the differences of increase and decrease. Distinction and explanation are made solely based on the aspect of closeness. If relying on image and substance, then the explanation is different again. In the image, the manifestation of one's own ground is pure, while that induced by supernormal power is mixed. It is not that the eight conditions manifested in supernormal power are pure; the seeds of conditions are mixed. In the seventh consciousness (manas-vijñāna, the root of consciousness), one can obtain the pure and mixed called image. The image explains its nature from the seeing-aspect and the substance-aspect. Therefore, the good and evil minds of the five consciousnesses (eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness) are mixed, while the neutral mind is pure. The sixth consciousness (mano-vijñāna, mind consciousness) arises simultaneously with the five consciousnesses, etc., and the dharma should be inferred according to this line of thought. Among the false and the real, the situation differs again according to the distinctions of consciousness. The opposition of existence and non-existence, the opposition of conditioned and unconditioned, the opposition of defiled and undefiled, the opposition of self-realm and other-realm conditions. Infer pure and mixed according to this line of thought. Essential Points in the Palm of the Hand of the Treatise on Establishing Consciousness-Only, Volume Lower (End)