Cheng Wei Shi Lun (成唯識論)

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Bodhisattva Dharmapala and others.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial command by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang.

稽首唯識性、滿、分清淨者，我今釋彼說，利樂諸有情。

I bow to the nature of consciousness-only, to those who are perfectly pure and to those who are partially pure; I now explain what they have taught, for the benefit and happiness of all sentient beings.

今造此論，為於二空有迷謬者生正解故。生解為斷二重障故，由我、法執二障具生，若證二空，彼障隨斷。斷障為得二勝果故，由斷續生煩惱障故，證真解脫；由斷礙解所知障故，得大菩提。

This treatise is composed in order to give rise to right understanding in those who are confused and mistaken about the two emptinesses (the absence of self in persons and the absence of self in dharmas). Understanding arises in order to cut off the two kinds of obstruction: because of attachment to self and attachment to dharmas, the afflictive obstruction and the cognitive obstruction arise together, and when the two emptinesses are realized, the two obstructions are cut off with them. Cutting off obstructions is in order to attain two excellent fruits: by cutting off the afflictive obstruction that can continue rebirth, one realizes true liberation; by cutting off the cognitive obstruction that blocks right understanding, one attains great Bodhi. The consciousness-only taught in this treatise is a set of interlocking terms: its basis is the eight consciousnesses (the vipaka alaya consciousness, the thinking manas consciousness, and the first six consciousnesses that discriminate objects), mental factors are associated with mind, the image-part and the seeing-part arise depending on self-witnessing, and the perfuming of seeds, the three natures and the two kinds of selflessness run through the whole treatise. The members below lock together, and at the first time each is argued I will point out its place in this set, not annotating word by word.

又為開示謬執我、法，迷唯識者，令達二空，於唯識理如實知故。

It is also to reveal to those who wrongly cling to self and dharmas and are deluded about consciousness-only, so that they may penetrate the two emptinesses and know the principle of consciousness-only as it truly is.

復有迷、謬唯識理者，或執外境如識非無；或執內識如境非有；或執諸識用別體同；或執離心無別心所。為遮此等種種異執，令於唯識深妙理中得如實解，故作斯論。

There are also those who are deluded and mistaken about the principle of consciousness-only: some cling to external objects as being not nonexistent, like consciousness; some cling to inner consciousness as being not existent, like objects; some cling to the functions of the consciousnesses as different while their substance is the same; some cling to there being no separate mental factors apart from the mind. In order to stop these various different attachments, and to let people attain a true understanding of the profound and wondrous principle of consciousness-only, this treatise is composed.

若唯有識，云何世間及諸聖教說有我、法？

If there is only consciousness, why does the world, as well as the holy teachings, say there are self and dharmas?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１由假說我、法，有種種相轉。

1. Because of the provisional designation of self and dharmas, there are various aspects that evolve.

彼依識所變，此能變唯三：

These depend on the transformation of consciousness, and the transformers here are only three:

２謂異熟、思量，及了別境識。

2. Namely the vipaka, the thinking, and the consciousness that discriminates objects.

論曰：世間、聖教說有我、法，但由假立，非實有性。我謂主宰，法謂軌持。

The treatise says: What the world and the holy teachings say of self and dharmas is established only provisionally and is not really existent by its own nature. Self means mastery, and dharma means to uphold a pattern.

彼二俱有種種相轉：「我種種相」謂有情、命者等，預流、一來等。「法種種相」謂實、德、業等；蘊、處、界等。「轉」謂隨緣施設有異。

Both have various aspects that evolve: the "various aspects of self" refers to sentient being, life-possessor and so on, to stream-enterer, once-returner and so on. The "various aspects of dharmas" refers to substance, quality, action and so on; to aggregates, sense-bases, elements and so on. "Evolve" means they are set up differently according to conditions.

如是諸相若由假說，依何得成？

If these aspects are provisionally spoken, on what are they established?

彼相皆依識所轉變而假施設。

These aspects all depend on the transformation of consciousness and are provisionally set up.

「識」謂了別，此中識言亦攝心所，定相應故。

"Consciousness" means discrimination; when consciousness is spoken of here, it also includes mental factors, because they are necessarily associated.

「變」謂識體轉似二分，相、見俱依自證起故，依斯二分施設我、法，彼二離此無所依故。

"Transformation" means that the substance of consciousness evolves to appear as two parts; the image-part and the seeing-part both arise depending on self-witnessing, and self and dharmas are set up based on these two parts, and those two have nothing to rely on apart from this.

或復內識轉似外境。

Or else, inner consciousness evolves to appear as external objects.

我、法分別燻習力故，諸識生時變似我、法，此我、法相雖在內識，而由分別似外境現，諸有情類無始時來緣此執為實我、實法，如患夢者，患夢力故，心似種種外境相現，緣此執為實有外境。

Because of the perfuming force of the discrimination of self and dharmas, when the consciousnesses arise they transform to appear as self and as dharmas; although these aspects of self and dharmas are within inner consciousness, because of discrimination they appear as external objects, and sentient beings since beginningless time, taking these as objects, cling to them as real self and real dharmas, like people who are sick or dreaming: because of the power of sickness or dream, the mind appears as various external objects, and, taking these as objects, they cling to them as really existing external objects.

愚夫所計實我、實法都無所有，但隨妄情而施設故，說之為假。內識所變似我、似法雖有，而非實我、法性，然似彼現，故說為假。

The real self and real dharmas conceived by fools do not exist at all and are only set up following false feelings, so they are said to be provisional. The apparent self and apparent dharmas transformed by inner consciousness, although existing, do not have the nature of a real self or real dharmas, yet they appear like them, so they are said to be provisional.

外境隨情而施設故，非有如識；內識必依因緣生故，非無如境，由此便遮增、減二執。

External objects are set up following feelings and do not exist as consciousness does; inner consciousness must arise from causes and conditions and is not nonexistent as objects are; from this the two attachments, of adding and of subtracting, are stopped.

境依內識而假立故，唯世俗有；識是假境所依事故，亦勝義有。

Objects are provisionally established depending on inner consciousness and exist only conventionally; consciousness is the basis on which the provisional objects rest, and also exists in the ultimate sense.

云何應知實無外境，唯有內識似外境生？

How does one know that there are in reality no external objects and only inner consciousness arising as if external objects?

實我、實法不可得故。

Because a real self and real dharmas cannot be found.

如何實我不可得耶？

How is it that a real self cannot be found?

諸所執我，略有三種：一者執我體常、周遍，量同虛空，隨處造業受苦、樂故；二者執我，其體雖常，而量不定，隨身大小有卷、舒故；三者執我體常、至細，如一極微，潛轉身中作事業故。

The selves that are clung to are, in brief, of three kinds: first, those who cling to a self whose substance is permanent and all-pervading, its extent equal to space, creating karma wherever it is and receiving suffering and pleasure; second, those who cling to a self whose substance, although permanent, has an indefinite extent, contracting and expanding according to the size of the body; third, those who cling to a self whose substance is permanent and extremely subtle, like one atom, which operates secretly within the body and performs actions.

初且非理，所以者何？執我常、遍，量同虛空，應不隨身受苦、樂等；又常、遍故，應無動轉，如何隨身能造諸業？又所執我，一切有情為同為異？若言同者，一作業時一切應作，一受果時一切應受，一得解脫時一切應解脫，便成大過；若言異者，諸有情我更相遍故，體應相雜，又一作業、一受果時，與一切我處無別故，應名一切所作、所受。若謂作、受各有所屬無斯過者，理亦不然，業、果及身，與諸我合，屬此非彼不應理故；一解脫時一切應解脫，所修、證法一切我合故。

The first is not reasonable. Why? If one clings to a self that is permanent and all-pervading, equal to space, it should not receive suffering and pleasure along with the body; and since it is permanent and all-pervading, it should have no movement, so how can it, following the body, create all karma? Moreover, regarding the self that is clung to: is the self of all sentient beings the same or different? If it is said to be the same, then when one acts all should act, when one receives the fruit all should receive it, and when one is liberated all should be liberated, which is a great fault; if it is said to be different, the selves of the various sentient beings all pervade one another, so their substances should be mixed, and when one performs karma or receives its fruit, with no distinction of location from all other selves, it should be called what is done and received by all. If it is said that acting and receiving each belong to someone and so there is no such fault, that too is not correct: karma and its fruit and the body are joined with all the selves, so that they belong to this one and not to that one is not reasonable; and when one is liberated all should be liberated, because the dharmas practiced and realized are joined with all selves.

中亦非理，所以者何？我體常住，不應隨身而有舒、卷，既有舒、卷如槖籥風，應非常住，又我隨身應可分析，如何可執我體一耶？故彼所言如童竪戲。

The middle one is also not reasonable. Why? The self's substance is permanent and abiding and should not expand or contract with the body; since it expands and contracts like the air in a bellows (tuoyue), it should be not permanent, and also the self should be divisible along with the body, so how can one cling to the self's substance as one? Therefore what they say is like children playing.

後亦非理，所以者何？我量至小如一極微，如何能令大身遍動？若謂雖小而速巡身，如旋火輪，似遍動者，則所執我非一、非常，諸有往來，非常、一故。

The last one is also not reasonable. Why? If the self's extent is extremely small like one atom, how can it make the great body move everywhere? If it is said that although small it quickly circles the body, like a whirling firebrand, appearing to move everywhere, then the self that is clung to is not one and not permanent; whatever comes and goes is not permanent and not one.

又所執我，復有三種：一者即蘊；二者離蘊；三者與蘊非即非離。

Moreover, the self that is clung to is of three further kinds: first, it is itself the aggregates; second, it is apart from the aggregates; third, it is neither identical with nor apart from the aggregates.

初即蘊我，理且不然，我應如蘊非常、一故；又內諸色定非實我，如外諸色有質礙故；心、心所法亦非實我，不恆相續，待眾緣故；餘行、餘色亦非實我，如虛空等，非覺性故。

The first, the self that is the aggregates, is not correct in principle; the self should then be like the aggregates, not permanent and not one; moreover, the inner forms are definitely not a real self, like outer forms they have resistance; mind and mental factors are also not a real self, as they do not continue constantly and depend on many conditions; other formations and other forms are also not a real self, like space and so on, not being of the nature of awareness.

中離蘊我，理亦不然，應如虛空，無作、受故。

The middle one, the self apart from the aggregates, is also not correct in principle; it should be like space, without action and without reception.

後俱非我，理亦不然，許依蘊立，非即、離蘊，應如瓶等，非實我故。又既不可說有為、無為，亦應不可說是我、非我。

The last, that is neither, is also not correct in principle: it is conceded to be established depending on the aggregates, and being neither identical with nor apart from the aggregates, it should be like a pot and so on, not a real self. Moreover, since it cannot be said to be conditioned or unconditioned, it also should not be said to be self or non-self.

故彼所執實我不成。

Therefore the real self that they cling to is not established.

又諸所執實有我體，為有思慮？為無思慮？若有思慮，應是無常，非一切時有思慮故；若無思慮，應如虛空，不能作業，亦不受果。故所執我，理俱不成。

Moreover, regarding the substance of a real self that is clung to: does it have thought or not? If it has thought, it should be impermanent, because it does not have thought at all times; if it has no thought, it should be like space, unable to perform karma and unable to receive its fruit. Therefore the self that is clung to is not established in principle on either side.

又諸所執實有我體，為有作用？為無作用？若有作用，如手足等，應是無常。若無作用，如兔角等，應非實我，故所執我，二俱不成。

Moreover, regarding the substance of a real self that is clung to: does it have function or not? If it has function, like hands and feet, it should be impermanent. If it has no function, like the horn of a rabbit, it should not be a real self; so the self that is clung to is not established on either side.

又諸所執實有我體，為是我見所緣境不？若非我見所緣境者，汝等云何知實有我？若是我見所緣境者，應有我見非顛倒攝，如實知故。若爾，如何執有我者所信至教皆毀我見，稱讚無我，言無我見能證涅槃；執著我見，沈淪生死。豈有邪見能證涅槃，正見翻令沈淪生死？

Moreover, regarding the substance of a real self that is clung to: is it an object of the view of self or not? If it is not an object of the view of self, how do you know there is a real self? If it is an object of the view of self, then the view of self should not be included in inversion, because it knows things as they are. If so, how is it that the scriptures believed by those who cling to a self all condemn the view of self and praise non-self, saying that the view of non-self can realize nirvana, while clinging to the view of self sinks one in birth and death? Could it be that a wrong view can realize nirvana, while a right view makes people sink in birth and death?

又諸我見不緣實我，有所緣故，如緣餘心；我見所緣定非實我，是所緣故，如所餘法。是故我見不緣實我，但緣內識變現諸蘊，隨自妄情，種種計度。

Moreover, the views of self do not take a real self as object, because they have an object, like taking other minds as objects; what the view of self takes as object is definitely not a real self, because it is an object, like other dharmas. Therefore the view of self does not take a real self as object, but only takes the aggregates transformed and manifested by inner consciousness, and according to their own false feelings, calculates in various ways.

然諸我執略有二種：

The attachments to self are, in brief, of two kinds:

一者俱生；二者分別。

First, innate; second, discriminative.

俱生我執無始時來虛妄燻習，內因力故，恆與身俱；不待邪教及邪分別，任運而轉，故名俱生。

The innate attachment to self arises from false perfuming since beginningless time; because of the power of internal cause, it is always together with the body; it does not wait for wrong teachings or wrong discrimination and operates spontaneously, so it is called innate.

此復二種：一、常相續，在第七識，緣第八識，起自心相，執為實我；二、有間斷，在第六識，緣識所變五取蘊相，或總、或別，起自心相，執為實我。

This again has two kinds: first, the constantly continuous one, in the seventh consciousness, which takes the eighth consciousness as object, produces an aspect of one's own mind, and clings to it as a real self; second, the intermittent one, in the sixth consciousness, which takes as object the aspect of the five clinging aggregates transformed by consciousness, whether in general or in particular, produces an aspect of one's own mind, and clings to it as a real self.

此二我執，細故難斷，後修道中，數數修習勝生空觀，方能除滅。

These two kinds of attachment to self are subtle and so hard to cut off; later, on the path of cultivation, only by repeatedly practicing the excellent contemplation of the emptiness of beings can they be removed.

分別我執亦由現在外緣力故，非與身俱，要待邪教及邪分別然後方起，故名分別，唯在第六意識中有。

The discriminative attachment to self also arises from the power of present external conditions and is not together with the body; it arises only after waiting for wrong teachings and wrong discrimination, so it is called discriminative, and exists only in the sixth, mental consciousness.

此亦二種：一、緣邪教所說蘊相，起自心相，分別、計度，執為實我；二、緣邪教所說我相，起自心相，分別、計度，執為實我。

This too has two kinds: first, taking as object the aspects of the aggregates spoken of in wrong teachings, producing an aspect of one's own mind, discriminating and calculating, and clinging to it as a real self; second, taking as object the aspect of self spoken of in wrong teachings, producing an aspect of one's own mind, discriminating and calculating, and clinging to it as a real self.

此二我執麁故易斷，初見道時，觀一切法生空真如，即能除滅。

These two kinds of attachment to self are coarse and so easily cut off; when one first sees the Way, contemplating the true suchness of the emptiness of beings in all dharmas, one can remove them.

如是所說一切我執，自心外蘊，或有、或無；自心內蘊，一切皆有。是故我執皆緣無常五取蘊相，妄執為我。

Of all the attachments to self spoken of thus, the aggregates outside one's own mind may or may not exist; the aggregates within one's own mind all exist. Therefore all attachments to self take as object the aspects of the impermanent five clinging aggregates and falsely cling to them as self.

然諸蘊相，從緣生故，是如幻有；妄所執我，橫計度故，決定非有。故契經說：苾芻當知，世間沙門、婆羅門等所有我見，一切皆緣五取蘊起。

But the aspects of the aggregates arise from conditions and are illusory existents; the self that is falsely clung to, because it is calculated arbitrarily, definitely does not exist. Therefore the sutras say: Bhiksus should know that all the views of self held by shramanas, brahmins and others in the world all arise based on the five clinging aggregates.

實我若無，云何得有憶、識、誦、習、恩、怨等事？所執實我既常無變，後應如前，是事非有；前應如後，是事非無。以後與前，體無別故。若謂我用，前後變易，非我體者，理亦不然。用不離體，應常有故；體不離用，應非常故。然諸有情，各有本識，一類相續，任持種子，與一切法更互為因，燻習力故，得有如是憶、識等事。故所設難，於汝有失，非於我宗。

If a real self does not exist, how can there be such things as memory, recognition, recitation, practice, kindness and resentment? The real self that is clung to, being permanent and unchanging, should have the later like the former, which is not the case; or the former should be like the later, which is not so. For the later and the former have no distinction in substance. If it is said that the function of the self changes before and after and is not the self's substance, that too is not correct: function is not apart from substance and should be constant; substance is not apart from function and should be nonconstant. But sentient beings each have a fundamental consciousness, which continues as one kind, upholds seeds, and is the cause of all dharmas reciprocally, and because of the power of perfuming there are such matters as memory and recognition. So the objection you raise is a fault on your side and does not lie in our school.

若無實我，誰能造業？誰受果耶？所執實我，既無變易，猶如虛空，如何可能造業、受果？若有變易，應是無常。然諸有情心、心所法因緣力故，相續無斷，造業、受果，於理無違。

If there is no real self, who performs karma? Who receives the fruit? The real self you cling to, having no change, is like space; how could it perform karma and receive fruit? If it has change, it should be impermanent. But the minds and mental factors of sentient beings, through the power of causes and conditions, continue without break, performing karma and receiving fruit, and in principle there is no contradiction.

我若實無，誰於生死輪迴諸趣？誰復厭苦求趣涅槃？所執實我，既無生滅，如何可說生死輪迴？常如虛空，非苦所惱，何為厭捨求趣涅槃？故彼所言常為自害。然有情類，身、心相續，煩惱、業力輪迴諸趣，厭患苦故，求趣涅槃。

If a self is really nonexistent, who transmigrates in birth and death through the destinies? And who, weary of suffering, seeks and heads toward nirvana? The real self you cling to, having no arising or ceasing, how can it be said to transmigrate in birth and death? Being permanent like space and not troubled by suffering, why would it loathe and give up and seek nirvana? So what they say always harms themselves. But for the class of sentient beings, body and mind continue, and by the power of afflictions and karma they transmigrate through the destinies, are weary of suffering and seek nirvana.

由此故知定無實我，但有諸識無始時來前滅後生，因果相續，由妄燻習，似我相現，愚者於中妄執為我。

From this we know that there is definitely no real self; there are only consciousnesses, which since beginningless time have ceased in front and arisen behind, continuing as cause and effect, and through false perfuming appear as the aspect of a self, and fools falsely cling to it as self.

如何識外實有諸法不可得耶？

How is it that real dharmas outside consciousness cannot be found?

外道、餘乘所執外法，理非有故。

Because the external dharmas clung to by non-Buddhists and other vehicles are not existent in principle.

外道所執云何非有？

Why are those clung to by non-Buddhists not existent?

且數論者執我是思，受用薩埵、剌闍、答摩所成大等二十三法，然大等法三事合成，是實非假，現量所得。

Take the Samkhya school (the Indian Samkhya school): it clings to the self as thinker, who experiences the twenty-three dharmas beginning with mahat, made of sattva, rajas and tamas (the three gunas of joy, sorrow and darkness); but the dharmas beginning with mahat are formed by the combination of three things, are real and not provisional, and are obtained by direct perception.

彼執非理，所以者何？

Their attachment is not reasonable. Why?

大等諸法，多事成故，如軍、林等，應假非實，如何可說現量得耶？又大等法，若是實有，應如本事，非三合成。

The dharmas beginning with mahat, being formed from many things like an army or a forest, should be provisional and not real; how can it be said they are obtained by direct perception? Moreover, if the dharmas beginning with mahat are real, they should be like the primal substance, not formed by a combination of three.

薩埵等三，即大等故，應如大等，亦三合成，轉變非常，為例亦爾。又三本事，各多功能，體亦應多，能、體一故。三體既遍，一處變時，餘亦應爾，體無別故。許此三事體、相各別，如何和合共成一相？不應合時變為一相，與未合時，體無別故。若謂三事體異相同，便違己宗體、相是一，體應如相，冥然是一，相應如體，顯然有三，故不應言三合成一。

The three, sattva and the others, are themselves mahat and so on; like mahat and so on, they too are formed by a combination of three, with transformations that are impermanent, and the example is likewise. Moreover, the three primal substances each have many functions, so their substance should also be many, because function and substance are one. If the three substances are all-pervading, when one changes in one place the others should also be so, because their substances have no distinction. If the three things are conceded to have different substances and characteristics, how can they combine to jointly form one characteristic? They should not, on combining, become one characteristic with no distinction in substance from before combining. If it is said that the three things differ in substance but are the same in characteristic, this contradicts their own doctrine that substance and characteristic are one; the substance should be like the characteristic, obscurely one, and the characteristic should be like the substance, plainly three, so one should not say that three combine to form one.

又三是別，大等是總，總、別一故，應非一、三。此三變時，若不和合成一相者，應如未變，如何現見是一色等？若三和合成一相者，應失本別相，體亦應隨失。不可說三各有二相：一、總；二、別。總即別故，總亦應三，如何見一？若謂三體各有三相，和雜難知，故見一者，既有三相，寧見為一？復如何知三事有異？若彼一一皆具三相，應一一事能成色等，何所𨵗少，待三和合，體亦應各三，以體即相故，又大等法皆三合成，展轉相望，應無差別，是則因、果、唯量、諸大、諸根差別皆不得成。若爾，一根應得一切境，或應一境一切根所得，世間現見情與非情、淨穢等物，現、比量等，皆應無異，便為大失。

Moreover, the three are particulars and mahat and so on are the universal; universal and particular are one, so it should be neither one nor three. When these three transform, if they do not combine to form one characteristic, they should be as if not yet transformed; how are single forms and so on seen directly? If the three combine to form one characteristic, they should lose their original distinct characteristics, and substance should be lost as well. One cannot say that each of the three has two characteristics: one, universal, and two, particular. The universal is itself the particular, so the universal too should be three, so how is one seen? If it is said that each of the three substances has three characteristics, and the blending is hard to know, so that one is seen, then given there are three characteristics, how is it seen as one? And how does one know the three things are different? If each of them fully has three characteristics, each thing should be able to form forms and so on; what is lacking that they should wait for the three to combine? And the substance should also each be three, because substance is itself characteristic. Moreover, since the dharmas beginning with mahat are all formed by combinations of three and, looking at one another in turn, should have no distinctions, the distinctions among cause and effect, subtle elements, great elements and sense faculties could not be established. If so, one faculty should obtain all objects, or one object should be obtained by all faculties; and in the world, the directly seen sentient and insentient, pure and impure things, direct perception and inference and so on, should all be without difference, which is a great fault. In the source, the character 𨵗 means lacking.

故彼所執實法不成，但是妄情計度為有。

Therefore the real dharmas they cling to are not established and are merely imagined as existing by false feelings and calculation.

勝論所執實等句義，多實有性，現量所得。

The categories of substance and so on clung to by the Vaisheshika school (the Indian Vaisheshika school) mostly have a nature of real existence and are obtained by direct perception.

彼執非理。

Their attachment is not reasonable.

所以者何？

Why?

諸句義中且常住者，若能生果，應是無常，有作用故，如所生果；若不生果，應非離識實有自性，如兔角等。諸無常者，若有質礙，便有方分，應可分析，如軍、林等，非實有性；若無質礙，如心、心所，應非離此有實自性。

Among the categories, take the permanent ones first: if they can produce effects, they should be impermanent, because they have function, like the effects they produce; if they do not produce effects, they should not have a real own-nature existing apart from consciousness, like the horn of a rabbit and so on. As for impermanent ones: if they have resistance, they have spatial parts and should be divisible, like an army or forest, and are not of real existence; if they have no resistance, like mind and mental factors, they should not have a real own-nature apart from this.

又彼所執地、水、火、風應非有礙，實句義攝，身根所觸故，如堅、濕、煖、動。即彼所執堅、濕、煖等，應非無礙，德句義攝，身根所觸故，如地、水、火、風，地、水、火三，對青色等，俱眼所見，准此應責。故知無實地、水、火、風與堅、濕等各別有性，亦非眼見實地、水、火。

Moreover, the earth, water, fire and wind they cling to should not be obstructive, but be included in the category of substance, because they are touched by the body faculty, like hardness, wetness, warmth and motion. Likewise the hardness, wetness, warmth and so on that they cling to should not be non-obstructive but be included in the category of quality, because they are touched by the body faculty, like earth, water, fire and wind; and earth, water and fire, regarding blue and other colors, are all seen by the eye; by analogy one should raise the same objection. So we know there is no real earth, water, fire or wind existing separately from hardness, wetness and so on with their own nature, and no real earth, water or fire seen by the eye.

又彼所執實句義中，有礙、常者，皆有礙故，如麁地等，應是無常。諸句義中，色根所取，無質礙法，應皆有礙，許色根取故，如地、水、火、風。又彼所執非實德等，應非離識有別自性，非實攝故，如石女兒，非有實等，應非離識有別自性，非有攝故，如空花等。

Moreover, among the real categories they cling to, those with resistance and permanence all have obstruction, like coarse earth and so on, which should be impermanent. Among the categories, dharmas that are taken by the faculty of form and have no resistance should all have obstruction, because they are conceded to be taken by the faculty of form, like earth, water, fire and wind. Moreover, the non-substance categories they cling to such as quality should not have a separate own-nature apart from consciousness, because they are not included in substance, like the child of a barren woman; and the nonexistent substance and so on should not have a separate own-nature apart from consciousness, because they are not included in existence, like flowers in the sky.

彼所執有，應離實等無別自性，許非無故，如實、德等。若離實等，應非有性，許異實等故，如畢竟無等。如有非無，無別有性，如何實等有別有性？若離有法，有別有性，應離無法，有別無性，彼既不然，此云何爾？故彼有性唯妄計度。

The existence they cling to should have no separate own-nature apart from substance and so on, because it is conceded not to be nonexistent, like substance and quality. If it is apart from substance and so on, it should not have the nature of existence, because it is conceded to be different from substance and so on, like the utterly nonexistent. Like existence, which is not nonexistence and has no separate existence-nature, how can substance and so on have a separate existence-nature? If, apart from existent dharmas, there is a separate existence-nature, then apart from nonexistent dharmas there should be a separate nonexistence-nature; since that is not so, how can this be so? Therefore their existence-nature is merely false imagination.

又彼所執實、德、業性，異實、德、業，理定不然，勿此亦非實、德、業性，異實等故，如德、業等。又應實等非實等攝，異實等性故，如德、業、實等。地等諸性對地等體，更相徵詰，准此應知。如實性等，無別實等性，實等亦應無別實性等。若離實等有實等性，應離非實等，有非實等性。彼既不爾，此云何然？故同異性唯假施設。

Moreover, the natures of substance, quality and action that they cling to, being different from substance, quality and action, are definitely not correct in principle; let it not be that these too are not natures of substance, quality and action, because they are different from substance and so on, like quality and action. Also, substance and so on should not be included in substance and so on, because they are different from the nature of substance and so on, like quality, action and substance. The natures of earth and so on, toward the substance of earth and so on, interrogate each other in turn; by analogy this should be understood. Like the nature of substance and so on, there is no other nature of substance and so on, and substance and so on should have no other nature of substance and so on. If apart from substance and so on there is a nature of substance and so on, then apart from non-substance and so on there should be a nature of non-substance and so on. Since that is not so, how can this be so? Therefore sameness-and-difference is merely a provisional designation.

又彼所執和合句義定非實有，非有、實等諸法攝故，如畢竟無。彼許實等現量所得，以理推徵尚非實有，況彼自許和合句義非現量得，而可實有？設執和合是現量境，由前理故，亦非實有。

Moreover, the category of inherence that they cling to is definitely not real, because it is not included in existence, substance and the other dharmas, like the utterly nonexistent. They concede that substance and so on are obtained by direct perception, but when examined by reason they are not real; how much more could inherence, which they themselves concede is not obtained by direct perception, be real? Even if one clings to inherence as an object of direct perception, by the above reasoning it is not real.

然彼實等，非緣離識實有自體現量所得，許所知故，如龜毛等。又緣實智，非緣離識實句自體現量智攝，假合生故，如德智等。廣說乃至緣和合智，非緣離識和合自體現量智攝，假合生故，如實智等。

Moreover, their substance and so on are not obtained by direct perception of a real self-substance apart from consciousness, because they are conceded to be objects of knowledge, like the hair of a tortoise. Also, the cognition that takes substance as object is not included in direct-perception cognition of a real categorical self-substance apart from consciousness, because it arises from provisional combination, like the cognition of quality. Extensively, up to the cognition that takes inherence as object, it is not included in direct-perception cognition of a self-substance of inherence apart from consciousness, because it arises from provisional combination, like the cognition of substance.

故勝論者實等句義，亦是隨情妄所施設。

Therefore the categories of substance and so on of the Vaisheshikas are also set up falsely following feelings.

有執有一大自在天，體實、遍、常，能生諸法。

Some cling to the existence of a great Isvara, whose substance is real, all-pervading and permanent, and who can produce all dharmas.

彼執非理，所以者何？

Their attachment is not reasonable. Why?

若法能生，必非常故；諸非常者，必不遍故；諸不遍者，非真實故。體既常、遍，具諸功能，應一切處、時，頓生一切法。待欲或緣方能生者，違一因論。或欲及緣亦應頓起，因常有故。

If a dharma can produce, it must be impermanent; whatever is impermanent must not be all-pervading; whatever is not all-pervading is not real. Since the substance is permanent and all-pervading and possesses all powers, it should produce all dharmas at once in all places and times. That which can produce only after waiting for desire or conditions contradicts the theory of a single cause. Or else desire and conditions should also arise at once, because the cause is always present.

餘執有一大梵、時、方、本際、自然、虛空、我等，常住、實有，具諸功能，生一切法，皆同此破。

Others cling to a great Brahma, time, space, original limit, nature, space, self and so on as permanent, real, possessing all powers and producing all dharmas; all are refuted in the same way.

有餘偏執，明論聲常，能為定量，表詮諸法；有執一切聲皆是常，待緣顯發，方有詮表。

Others hold one-sidedly that the sound of the Vedas (the Vedic treatises) is permanent and can serve as a fixed measure, expressing and explaining all dharmas; some cling to all sounds as permanent, waiting for conditions to manifest before there is expression.

彼俱非理，所以者何？

All of these are not reasonable. Why?

且明論聲，許能詮故，應非常住，如所餘聲。

Take the sound of the Vedas first: because it is conceded to be able to express, it should not be permanently abiding, like other sounds.

餘聲亦應非常聲體，如瓶、衣等，待眾緣故。

Other sounds also should not be permanent sound-substances, like pots and clothes, because they depend on many conditions.

有外道執地、水、火、風、極微實、常，能生麁色，所生麁色不越因量，雖是無常，而體實有。

Some non-Buddhists cling to the atoms of earth, water, fire and wind as real and permanent, able to produce coarse forms, and the coarse forms produced do not exceed the measure of their cause; although impermanent, their substance really exists.

彼亦非理，所以者何？

They too are not reasonable. Why?

所執極微，若有方分，如蟻行等，體應非實。若無方分，如心、心所應不共聚生麁果色，既能生果，如彼所生，如何可說極微常住？

If the atoms that are clung to have spatial parts, like ants walking and so on, their substance should not be real. If they have no spatial parts, like mind and mental factors, they should not jointly gather to produce coarse resultant forms; and since they can produce the result, like what they produce, how can it be said that atoms are permanent?

又所生果不越因量，應如極微，不名麁色，則此果色應非眼等色根所取，便違自執。若謂果色，量德合故，非麁似麁，色根能取。所執果色，既同因量，應如極微，無麁德合；或應極微亦麁德合；如麁果色，處無別故。若謂果色遍在自因，因非一故，可名麁者，則此果色體應非一，如所在因，處各別故。既爾，此果還不成麁，由此亦非色根所取。若果多分合故成麁，多因極微合應非細，足成根境，何用果為？既多分成，應非實有，則汝所執，前後相違。

Moreover, the resulting effect cannot exceed the measure of its cause; it should be like an ultimate particle and not be called gross form. Then this effect-form should not be grasped by the sense faculties such as the eye, which contradicts what they themselves maintain. If they say the effect-form has measure and its quality combines, and though not gross appears gross, so that the sense faculties can grasp it: since the effect-form maintained is the same in measure as its cause, it should be like an ultimate particle and have no combined gross quality; or else ultimate particles too should have combined gross quality; and like the apparently gross effect-form, there would be no distinction of place. If they say the effect-form pervades its own causes, and since the causes are not one it may be called gross, then this effect-form body should not be one, being like the causes where it resides, each in a different place. If so, this effect still does not become gross, and for this reason is also not grasped by the sense faculties. If the effect becomes gross by the combination of many parts, then since many causal ultimate particles combined should not be fine, and would suffice to form the sense faculty and its object, what is the use of the effect? Since it is formed from many parts, it should not be truly existent; then what you maintain contradicts itself from first to last.

又果與因俱有質礙，應不同處，如二極微。若謂果、因體相受入，如沙受水，藥入鎔銅。誰許沙、銅體受水、藥？或應離、變，非一、非常，又麁色果體若是一，得一分時應得一切，彼、此一故，彼應如此，不許違理，許便違事，故彼所執進、退不成，但是隨情虛妄計度。

Moreover, effect and cause both have material resistance, so they should not occupy the same place, like two ultimate particles. If they say the effect and cause bodies interpenetrate, like sand absorbing water or medicine entering molten copper, who grants that the body of sand or copper absorbs water or medicine? Otherwise they would separate and change, and would be neither one nor permanent. Moreover, if the body of the gross form-effect is one, then when one part is obtained all would be obtained, because that and this are one and that should be so. To deny it contradicts reason, to grant it contradicts fact; so what they maintain fails both in advancing and in retreating, and is merely false reckoning following feeling.

然諸外道品類雖多，所執有法不過四種：

Although the heretical schools are of many kinds, what they maintain regarding things possessing existence is no more than four.

一、執有法與有等性其體定一，如數論等。彼執非理，所以者何？勿一切法即有性故，皆如有性，體無差別，便違三德、我等體異，亦違世間諸法差別。又若色等即色等性，色等應無青、黃等異。

First, maintaining that the thing possessed (dharmin) and the nature of being (sattva and the like) are definitely one in substance, as in the Samkhya school and others. Their maintenance is unreasonable. Why? It would make all dharmas simply the nature of being, all alike the nature of being, with no difference of substance, which contradicts the difference in substance between the three qualities (gunas), the self and so on, and also contradicts the differences among worldly dharmas. Moreover, if form and so on are themselves the nature of form and so on, form and so on should have no differences such as blue and yellow.

二、執有法與有等性其體定異，如勝論等。彼執非理，所以者何？勿一切法非有性故，如已滅無，體不可得，便違實等自體非無，亦違世間現見有物。又若色等非色等性，應如聲等非眼等境。

Second, maintaining that the thing possessed and the nature of being are definitely different in substance, as in the Vaisheshika school and others. Their maintenance is unreasonable. Why? It would make all dharmas not the nature of being, like the non-existent that has ceased, whose substance cannot be obtained, which contradicts that the self-substance of substance and so on is not non-existent, and also contradicts the things visibly existing in the world. Moreover, if form and so on are not the nature of form and so on, they should be like sound and so on and not be objects of the eye and so on.

三、執有法與有等性亦一、亦異，如無慚等，彼執非理，所以者何？一、異同前一、異過故；二相相違，體應別故，一、異體同俱不成故。勿一切法皆同一體，或應一、異是假非實，而執為實理定不成。

Third, maintaining that the thing possessed and the nature of being are both one and different, as in the Nirgrantha and others (here referring to a class of heretics). Their maintenance is unreasonable. Why? The faults of one and different are the same as before; the two characteristics contradict each other, their substances should differ, and one and different having the same substance cannot be established on either side. Do not let all dharmas have the same substance; or if one and different are conventional and not real, yet maintained as real, it is definitely not established in principle.

四、執有法與有等性非一、非異，如邪命等。彼執非理，所以者何？非一、異執同異、一故。非一、異言為遮為表？若唯是表，應不雙非；若但是遮，應無所執；亦遮、亦表應互相違；非表、非遮應成戲論。又非一、異，違世共知有一、異物，亦違自宗色等有法決定實有。

Fourth, maintaining that the thing possessed and the nature of being are neither one nor different, as in the Ajivika (wrong-livelihood heretics) and others. Their maintenance is unreasonable. Why? The maintenance of neither one nor different is the same as that of different and one. Is the statement of neither one nor different a negation or an affirmation? If only an affirmation, it should not negate both; if only a negation, it should have nothing to maintain; if both negation and affirmation, they should contradict each other; if neither affirmation nor negation, it would become idle talk. Moreover, neither one nor different contradicts what everyone in the world knows, that there are things that are one and different, and also contradicts their own school, which holds that things possessing form and so on are definitely real.

是故彼言唯矯避過，諸有智者勿謬許之。

Therefore their words are merely twisting to avoid faults, and the wise should not wrongly accept them.

餘乘所執，離識實有色等諸法，如何非有？

As for what the other vehicles maintain, apart from consciousness there truly exist form and other dharmas; how is that not existence?

彼所執色、不相應行及諸無為，理非有故。

Because the form, non-associated conditioned factors, and unconditioned dharmas they maintain are not existent in principle.

且所執色總有二種：一者有對，極微所成；二者無對，非極微成。

Let us speak first of the form they maintain, which in general is of two kinds: first, that which has resistance, formed of ultimate particles; second, that which has no resistance and is not formed of ultimate particles.

彼有對色定非實有，能成極微非實有故。

That resistant form is definitely not real, because the ultimate particles that form it are not real.

謂諸極微，若有質礙，應如瓶等，是假非實。

As for the ultimate particles, if they have material resistance, they should be like a jar and so on, conventional and not real.

若無質礙，應如非色，如何可集成瓶、衣等？

If they have no material resistance, they should be like non-form; how could they gather to form jars, clothes and so on?

又諸極微，若有方分，必可分析，便非實有。

Moreover, if the ultimate particles have spatial parts, they can surely be analyzed, and so are not real.

若無方分，則如非色，云何和合承光、發影？日輪才舉照柱等時，東、西兩邊光影各現，承光、發影處既不同，所執極微定有方分。又，若見、觸壁等物時，唯得此邊不得彼分。既和合物即諸極微，故此極微必有方分。又諸極微隨所住處，必有上、下、四方差別，不爾便無共和、集義。或相涉入應不成麁，由此極微定有方分。執有對色即諸極微，若無方分，應無障隔。若爾，便非障礙有對。

If they have no spatial parts, they are like non-form; how could they combine to receive light and cast shadows? When the sun's disc has just risen and shines on a pillar and the like, light and shadow each appear on the east and west sides; since the places receiving light and casting shadow differ, the ultimate particles they maintain definitely have spatial parts. Moreover, when one sees or touches a wall and such things, one gets only this side and not the part of the other side. Since the combined thing is just the ultimate particles, these particles must have spatial parts. Moreover, each ultimate particle wherever it dwells must have differences of up, down and the four directions; otherwise there would be no meaning of combining or gathering. Or if they interpenetrate, they could not form the gross; so ultimate particles definitely have spatial parts. If resistant form is just the ultimate particles and they had no spatial parts, there should be no obstruction. If so, then it would not be resistance.

是故汝等所執極微必有方分，有方分故，便可分析，定非實有。

So the ultimate particles you maintain must have spatial parts, and because they have spatial parts they can be analyzed and are definitely not real.

故有對色實有不成。

Therefore the real existence of resistant form is not established.

五識豈無所依、緣色？

Do the five consciousnesses have no supports and no objects of form?

雖非無色，而是識變。謂識生時。內因緣力，變似眼等、色等相現，即以此相為所依、緣。

Though they do not lack form, it is a transformation of consciousness. That is, when consciousness arises, by the power of its internal causes and conditions it transforms and gives rise to appearances such as eye and form, and uses this appearance as its support and as its object.

然眼等根非現量得，以能發識，比知是有，此但功能，非外所造。外有對色理既不成，故應但是內識變現，發眼等識，名眼等根，此為所依，生眼等識。

The sense faculties such as the eye are not obtained by direct perception, but are known by inference as existent because they can produce consciousness; this is only a capacity and not made by something external. Since the principle of external resistant form is not established, it should be only the transformation and manifestation of internal consciousness, giving rise to eye consciousness and so on, called eye faculty and so on, and this is the support that gives rise to eye consciousness and so on.

此眼等識外所緣緣，理非有故，決定應許自識所變為所緣緣，謂能引生似自識者，汝執彼是此所緣緣。

For these consciousnesses such as eye consciousness, an external objective condition is not existent in principle, and one must definitely accept that what is transformed by one's own consciousness is the object condition, that is, what can induce the arising of an image like one's own consciousness; you maintain that to be the object condition here.

非但能生，勿因緣等亦名此識所緣緣故。

It is not merely what can produce; do not let causal conditions and the like also be called the object condition of this consciousness.

眼等五識了色等時，但緣和合，似彼相故，非和合相異諸極微有實自體。分析彼時，似彼相識定不生故，彼和合相既非實有，故不可說是五識緣，勿第二月等能生五識故。

When the five consciousnesses such as eye consciousness cognize form and so on, they take only the combination, because it appears like that image, and it is not that the combined appearance differs from the ultimate particles and has a real self-nature. When it is analyzed, the consciousness that appears like that image definitely does not arise; since that combined appearance is not real, it cannot be said to be a condition for the five consciousnesses, and do not let a second moon and so on be able to produce the five consciousnesses.

非諸極微共和合位可與五識各作所緣，此識上無極微相故，非諸極微有和合相，不和合時無此相故。非和合位與不合時，此諸極微體相有異，故和合位如不合時，色等極微非五識境。

It is not that the ultimate particles in their common combined state can each serve as an object for the five consciousnesses, because on this consciousness there is no appearance of ultimate particles; it is not that ultimate particles have a combined appearance and have no such appearance when not combined. It is not that the ultimate particles differ in substance and appearance between the combined state and the uncombined state, so the form and other ultimate particles in the combined state, like those in the uncombined state, are not the object of the five consciousnesses.

有執色等一一極微不和集時，非五識境，共和集位，展轉相資，有麁相生，為此識境，彼相實有，為此所緣。彼執不然，共和集位與未集時，體相一故。瓶、甌等物極微等者，緣彼相識應無別故；共和集位一一極微，各各應捨微、圓相故；非麁相識緣細相境，勿餘境識緣餘境故；一識應緣一切境故。

Some maintain that when each ultimate particle of form and so on is not combined it is not an object of the five consciousnesses, but when gathered together in common they support one another in turn and a gross appearance arises, which serves as this consciousness's object, and that appearance is real and is the object here. Their maintenance is incorrect: the state of common gathering and the uncombined state have the same substance and appearance. The consciousness that cognizes things such as jars and bowls and the consciousness that cognizes ultimate particles and so on should have no distinction; each ultimate particle in the gathered state should give up its minute, round appearance; it is not that a consciousness with a gross appearance cognizes a fine object; do not let a consciousness that cognizes other objects cognize other objects; one consciousness would cognize all objects.

許有極微，尚致此失，況無識外真實極微。

If one grants the existence of ultimate particles, one already incurs this fault; how much more so since there are no real ultimate particles outside consciousness.

由此定知，自識所變似色等相為所緣緣，見託彼生，帶彼相故。然識變時，隨量大、小，頓現一相，非別變作眾多極微合成一物。為執麁色有實體者，佛說極微，令其除析，非謂諸色實有極微。諸瑜伽師以假想慧，於麁色相漸次除析，至不可析，假說極微，雖此極微猶有方分，而不可析，若更析之便似空現，不名為色，故說極微是色邊際。

From this one definitely knows that the images of form and so on transformed by one's own consciousness are the object condition, and seeing arises depending on them, bearing that appearance. But when consciousness transforms, according to measure large or small, it displays one appearance at once, and does not separately transform into many ultimate particles combined into a single thing. For those who maintain that gross form has a real substance, the Buddha spoke of ultimate particles to make them analyze it away, and did not say that forms truly have ultimate particles. The yogis, using conceptual wisdom, gradually analyze gross form appearances, up to what cannot be analyzed, and provisionally speak of the ultimate particle; though this ultimate particle still has spatial parts, it cannot be analyzed, and if it were analyzed further it would appear like space and not be called form, so it is said that the ultimate particle is the limit of form.

由此應知，諸有對色，皆識變現，非極微成。

From this one should know that all resistant forms are the transformation and manifestation of consciousness and are not formed of ultimate particles.

餘無對色是此類故，亦非實有，或無對故，如心、心所，定非實色。諸有對色現有色相，以理推究，離識尚無，況無對色現無色相，而可說為真實色法？

The other, non-resistant forms are of this kind and are also not real; or because they are non-resistant, like mind and mental factors, they are definitely not real form. Resistant forms present the appearance of form, yet when examined by reason they do not exist apart from consciousness; how much less non-resistant forms, which present no appearance of form, can be called real form dharmas?

表、無表色豈非實有？

Are manifest form and non-manifest form not real?

此非實有，所以者何？

They are not real. Why?

且身表色若是實有，以何為性？

First, if bodily manifest form is real, what is its nature?

若言是形，便非實有，可分析故；長等極微不可得故。若言是動，亦非實有，才生即滅無動義故；有為法滅不待因故；滅若待因應非滅故。若言有色非顯、非形，心所引生，能動手等，名身表業，理亦不然。此若是動，義如前破；若是動因，應即風界，風無表示，不應名錶；又觸不應通善、惡性，非顯、香、味，類觸應知。

If it is said to be shape, it is not real, because it can be analyzed; ultimate particles of length and so on cannot be found. If it is said to be movement, it is also not real, because what perishes as soon as it is born has no meaning of movement; conditioned dharmas perish without waiting for a cause; if perishing waited for a cause it would not be perishing. If it is said that there is a form that is neither visible color nor shape, which is stirred up by mind and can move the hands and so on, called bodily manifest action, that is also unreasonable. If it is movement, the meaning is refuted as before; if it is the cause of movement, it should be just the wind element, and wind has no indication and should not be called manifest; moreover touch should not extend to good and evil natures, and it is not visible color, smell or taste; it should be known as of the kind of touch.

故身表業定非實有。

So bodily manifest action is definitely not real.

然心為因，令識所變手等色相，生滅相續，轉趣餘方，似有動作。表示心故，假名身表。

Rather, with mind as the cause, the appearances of hands and other forms transformed by consciousness arise and cease in succession and move toward other places, appearing like movement. Because it indicates the mind, it is provisionally called bodily manifest action.

語表亦非實有聲性，一剎那聲無詮表故，多念相續便非實故，外有對色，前已破故。

Verbal manifest action also is not a real nature of sound: a single moment of sound has no expression, and many moments in succession are not real; the external resistant form was refuted earlier.

然因心故，識變似聲，生滅相續，似有表示，假名語表，於理無違。

Rather, because of the mind, consciousness transforms and gives rise to an appearance like sound, arising and ceasing in succession, appearing like indication, provisionally called verbal manifest action, and there is no contradiction in principle.

表既實無，無表寧實？然依思願善惡分限，假立無表，理亦無違。謂此或依發勝身、語善惡思種增長位立；或依定中止身、語惡現行思立，故是假有。

Since manifest action is truly non-existent, how can non-manifest action be real? It is provisionally established based on the degrees of good and evil of volition and intention, and there is also no contradiction in principle. That is, it is established either based on the stage of growth of the seeds of good or evil volition that excel in producing bodily and verbal action; or based on the volition that stops bodily and verbal evil from arising in concentration, so it is conventional existence.

世尊經中說有三業，撥身、語業豈不違經？

The sutras of the World-Honored One speak of three kinds of action; does denying that bodily and verbal action exist not contradict the sutras?

不撥為無，但言非色。

It does not deny them as non-existent, it only says they are not form.

能動身思說名身業，能發語思說名語業。審、決二思，意相應故，作動意故，說名意業。

The volition that moves the body is called bodily action, the volition that produces speech is called verbal action. The two volitions of deliberation and decision, associated with mind, because they produce mental movement, are called mental action.

起身、語思，有所造作，說名為業，是審、決思所遊履故；通生苦、樂異熟果故，亦名為道。故前七業道，亦思為自性，或身、語表由思發故，假說為業，思所履故，說名業道。

The volition that gives rise to body and speech, which does creating, is itself called action, because it is what the volitions of deliberation and decision travel along; it also generates the ripening results of suffering and pleasure and is also called a path. So the first seven paths of action also have volition as their self-nature, or bodily and verbal manifest action arise from volition and are provisionally called action, and because they are traveled by volition they are called paths of action.

由此應知實無外色，唯有內識變似色生。

From this one should know that there is truly no external form, and only inner consciousness transforms and gives rise to the appearance of form.

不相應行亦非實有，所以者何？

Non-associated conditioned factors are also not real. Why?

得、非得等，非如色、心及諸心所體相可得；非異色、心及諸心所作用可得，由此故知定非實有，但依色等分位假立。

Attainment, non-attainment and the like are not obtainable in their substance and characteristics like form, mind and the various mental factors; and they are not obtainable as functions different from form, mind and mental factors; from this one knows they are definitely not real, and are provisionally established only on the stages of form and so on.

此定非異色、心、心所，有實體用，如色、心等，許蘊攝故。

This is definitely not different from form, mind and mental factors in having real substance and function, like form, mind and so on, because they are accepted as included in the aggregates.

或心、心所及色、無為所不攝故，如畢竟無，定非實有。或餘實法所不攝故，如餘假法，非實有體。

Or because they are not included in mind, mental factors, form or the unconditioned, like the absolutely non-existent, they are definitely not real. Or because they are not included in other real dharmas, like other conventional dharmas, they have no real substance.

且彼如何知得、非得，異色、心等，有實體用？

And how do they know that attainment and non-attainment differ from form, mind and so on and have real substance and function?

契經說故。如說：如是補特伽羅成就善、惡，聖者成就十無學法。又說：異生不成就聖法，諸阿羅漢不成就煩惱，成、不成言，顯得、非得。

Because the sutras say so. For example it is said: such a pudgala (one who repeatedly takes destinies, meaning a sentient being) accomplishes good and evil, and the holy ones accomplish the ten dharmas of the one beyond learning. It is also said: ordinary beings do not accomplish the holy dharmas, and arhats do not accomplish afflictions; the words accomplish and not accomplish show attainment and non-attainment.

經不說此異色、心等有實體用，為證不成。

The sutras do not say that this differs from form, mind and so on and has real substance and function, so the proof is not established.

亦說：輪王成就七寶。豈即成就他身、非情？

It is also said: the wheel-turning king accomplishes the seven treasures. Is it that he accomplishes his own body or inanimate things?

若謂於寶有自在力，假說成就，於善、惡法，何不許然，而執實得？

If it is said that he has the power of mastery over the treasures and so provisionally speaks of accomplishing them, why do you not grant the same for good and evil dharmas and instead maintain real attainment?

若謂七寶在現在，故可假說成，寧知所成善、惡等法離現在有？離現實法，理非有故。

If it is said that the seven treasures are present and so can be provisionally said to be accomplished, how do you know that the good and evil dharmas accomplished exist apart from the present? A real dharma apart from the present is not existent in principle.

現在必有善種等故。

Because in the present there must be seeds of good and so on.

又得於法有何勝用？

Moreover, what superior function does attainment have with respect to dharmas?

若言能起，應起無為，一切非情應永不起，未得、已失應永不生。

If it is said to be able to give rise, it should give rise to the unconditioned, all inanimate things should never arise, and the not yet attained and the already lost should never arise.

若俱生得為因起者，所執二生便為無用。又具善、惡、無記得者，善、惡、無記應頓現前，若待餘因，得便無用。

If innate attainment arises as a cause, the two kinds of arising they maintain would be useless. Moreover, one who possesses attainment of good, evil and neutral should have good, evil and neutral appear at once; if they wait for other causes, attainment would be useless.

若得於法是不失因，有情由此成就彼故，諸可成法不離有情，若離有情實不可得，故得於法俱為無用。

If attainment is a cause of non-loss with respect to dharmas, and sentient beings accomplish that by it, then the dharmas to be accomplished do not leave sentient beings; if they leave sentient beings they truly cannot be obtained, so attainment is of no use with respect to dharmas.

得實無故，非得亦無。

Attainment is truly non-existent, and non-attainment too.

然依有情可成諸法分位，假立三種成就：一、種子成就；二、自在成就；三、現行成就。翻此假立不成就名，此類雖多，而於三界見所斷種未永害位，假立非得，名異生性，於諸聖法未成就故。

Rather, based on the stages of sentient beings being able to accomplish dharmas, three kinds of accomplishment are provisionally established: first, accomplishment by seeds; second, accomplishment by mastery; third, accomplishment by manifest action. By reversal the name non-accomplishment is provisionally established; though such categories are many, in the three realms, at the stage where the seeds to be cut by seeing the path have not yet been eternally destroyed, non-attainment is provisionally established and called the nature of ordinary beings, because they have not yet accomplished the holy dharmas.

復如何知異色、心等有實同分？

And how do they know that there is a real commonality (nikaya-sabhaga) different from form, mind and so on?

契經說故。如契經說：此天同分、此人同分，乃至廣說。

Because the sutras say so. As the sutras say: this deva commonality, this human commonality, and so on at length.

此經不說異色、心等有實同分，為證不成。

These sutras do not say that there is a real commonality different from form, mind and so on, so the proof is not established.

若同智、言，因斯起故，知實有者，則草、木等應有同分。

If the same cognition and speech arise from this and one knows it is real, then grass, trees and so on should have commonality.

又，於同分起同智、言，同分復應有別同分，彼既不爾，此云何然？

Moreover, when the same cognition and speech arise with regard to commonality, the commonality should again have another commonality; since that is not so there, how could it be so here?

若謂為因起同事、欲，知實有者，理亦不然。宿習為因，起同事、欲，何要別執有實同分？

If it is said that it is known to be real because it causes the arising of shared undertakings and desires, that is also unreasonable. With past habit as the cause, shared undertakings and desires arise; why must one separately maintain a real commonality?

然依有情身、心相似，分位差別，假立同分。

Rather, commonality is provisionally established based on the similarity of the bodies and minds of sentient beings and the differences in their stages.

復如何知異色、心等，有實命根？

And how do they know that there is a real life-faculty different from form, mind and so on?

契經說故。如契經說：壽、煖、識三，應知命根說名為壽。

Because the sutras say so. As the sutras say: life, heat and consciousness, these three; one should know that the life-faculty is called life.

此經不說異色、心等有實壽體，為證不成。

These sutras do not say that there is a real substance of life different from form, mind and so on, so the proof is not established.

又，先已成色不離識，應此離識無別命根。

Moreover, since it was earlier established that form is not apart from consciousness, there should be no other life-faculty apart from this consciousness.

又，若命根異識實有，應如受等，非實命根。

Moreover, if the life-faculty were really different from consciousness, it should be like sensation and so on and not be a real life-faculty.

若爾，如何經說三法？義別說三，如四正斷。住無心位，壽、煖應無。豈不經說識不離身。既爾，如何名無心位？彼滅轉識，非阿賴耶。有此識因，後當廣說。此識足為界、趣、生體，是遍、恆、續。異熟果故，無勞別執有實命根。

If so, how do the sutras speak of three dharmas? The meaning of speaking of three separately is like the four right exertions. In the state without mind, life and heat should be absent. Do the sutras not say that consciousness is not apart from the body? Since so, how is it called a state without mind? What they extinguish is the active consciousnesses, not alaya (store consciousness, the earlier-mentioned ripening transformer). There is the cause of this consciousness, to be explained in full later. This consciousness is enough to be the substance of realm, destiny and birth, and is pervasive, constant and continuous. Because it is the ripening result, there is no need to separately maintain a real life-faculty.

然依親生此識種子，由業所引功能差別，住時決定，假立命根。

Rather, based on the seeds that directly produce this consciousness, the differences of capacity drawn by action, and the fixed duration of dwelling, the life-faculty is provisionally established.

復如何知二無心定、無想異熟，異色、心等有實自性？

And how do they know that the two mindless attainments and the ripening of non-perception are real natures different from form, mind and so on?

若無實性，應不能遮心、心所法，令不現起。

If they had no real nature, they should not be able to obstruct mind and mental factors so that they do not arise.

若無心位，有別實法，異色、心等，能遮於心，名無心定。

If, in the state without mind, there is another real dharma, different from form, mind and so on, that can obstruct mind, it is called the attainment of cessation of mind.

應無色時，有別實法，異色、心等，能礙於色，名無色定。彼既不爾，此云何然？

There should be, when there is no form, another real dharma, different from form, mind and so on, that can hinder form, called the formless attainment. Since that is not so there, how could it be so here?

又，遮礙心何須實法，如堤塘等，假亦能遮。

Moreover, obstructing the mind needs no real dharma; like dikes and ponds, a conventional thing can also obstruct.

謂修定時，於定加行，厭患麁動心、心所故，發勝期願，遮心、心所。令心、心所漸細漸微，微微心時，燻異熟識，成極增上厭心等種。由此損伏心等種故，麁動心等暫不現行，依此分位，假立二定。此種善故，定亦名善。

That is, when practicing concentration, in the preparatory practice of concentration, because one is weary of the coarse and moving mind and mental factors, one makes a superior vow and obstructs the mind and mental factors. One makes the mind and mental factors gradually finer and more subtle, and at the stage of the most subtle mind perfumes the ripening consciousness, producing seeds of extremely strong weariness of mind and so on. By this the seeds of mind and so on are damaged and subdued, the coarse and moving mind and so on temporarily do not manifest, and based on this stage the two attainments are provisionally established. Because of this wholesome seed, the attainment is also called wholesome.

無想定前，求無想果，故所燻成種，招彼異熟識。依定麁動想等不行，於此分位，假立無想。依異熟立，得異熟名，故此三法，亦非實有。

Before the attainment of non-perception, one seeks the result of non-perception, so what is perfumed becomes seeds and draws that ripening consciousness. Based on the concentration, coarse and moving perception and so on do not operate, and at this stage non-perception is provisionally established. It is established based on ripening and gains the name of ripening, so these three dharmas also are not real.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Bodhisattva Dharmapala and others.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang by imperial command.

復如何知，諸有為相異色、心等，有實自性？

And how do they know that the characteristics of conditioned things are real in self-nature and different from form, mind and so on?

契經說故。如契經說：有三有為之有為相，乃至廣說。

Because the sutras say so. As the sutra says: there are three characteristics of the conditioned, and so on at length.

此經不說異色、心等有實自性，為證不成。

These sutras do not say that they are real in self-nature and different from form, mind and so on, so the proof is not established.

非第六聲便表異體，色、心之體即色、心故。

It is not that the sixth case ending indicates a different substance; the substance of form and mind is just form and mind.

非能相體定異所相，勿堅相等異地等故。

It is not that the substance of the characterizing is definitely different from the characterized; do not let hardness and so on differ from earth and so on.

若有為相異所相體，無為相體應異所相。

If the characteristics of the conditioned were different from the substance of what is characterized, the substance of the characteristics of the unconditioned should also be different from what is characterized.

又生等相，若體俱有，應一切時齊興作用；若相違故，用不頓興，體亦相違，如何俱有？又住、異、滅用不應俱。

Moreover, if the characteristics of arising and so on all existed in substance, they should all exert function at all times at once; if they contradict each other and so their functions do not arise at once, their substances also contradict each other, so how can they coexist? Also the functions of abiding, change and cessation should not coexist.

能相、所相體俱本有，用亦應然，無別性故。若謂彼用更待因緣，所待因緣應非本有。又執生等便為無用。

If the substances of the characterizing and the characterized are both originally existent, then their functions should be so too, because there is no other nature. If it is said that function again waits for causes and conditions, the causes and conditions awaited should not be originally existent. Moreover, maintaining arising and so on would be useless.

所相恆有而生等合，應無為法亦有生等，彼此異因，不可得故。

If the characterized always exists and joins with arising and so on, then unconditioned dharmas too should have arising and so on; different causes for this and that cannot be found.

又去、來世，非現、非常，應似空花，非實有性。生名為有，寧在未來？滅名為無，應非現在。滅若非無，生應非有。又滅違住，寧執同時？住不違生，何容異世。故彼所執，進退非理。

Moreover, past and future times, being neither present nor permanent, should be like sky flowers and not have real nature. Arising is called existence; how can it be in the future? Cessation is called non-existence, so it should not be in the present. If cessation is not non-existence, arising should not be existence. Also cessation contradicts abiding; how can they maintain they are simultaneous? Abiding does not contradict arising; how can they allow them to be in different times? So what they maintain is unreasonable in advance and in retreat.

然有為法，因緣力故，本無今有，暫有還無，表異無為，假立四相。

Rather, conditioned dharmas, by the power of causes and conditions, are originally non-existent and now exist, exist briefly and then are non-existent again, which shows their difference from the unconditioned, and four characteristics are provisionally established.

本無今有，有位名生；生位暫停，即說為住；住別前後，復立異名；暫有還無，無時名滅。

Originally non-existent and now existent, the state of existing is called arising; when the state of arising pauses, it is said to be abiding; abiding differs before and after, and another name, change, is established; briefly existing and again non-existent, the time of non-existence is called cessation.

前三有故，同在現在，後一是無，故在過去。

The first three are existence, together in the present; the last is non-existence, so it is in the past.

如何無法與有為相？表此後無，為相何失？生表有法先非有，滅表有法後是無，異表此法非凝然，住表此法暫有用。故此四相，於有為法，雖俱名錶，而表有異。

How can a non-existent dharma serve as a characteristic of the conditioned? What fault is there in using this later non-existence as the characteristic? Arising shows that the dharma was not existent before; cessation shows that the dharma is non-existent afterward; change shows that this dharma is not unmoving; abiding shows that this dharma briefly has function. So with regard to conditioned dharmas, though all four are called indications, what they indicate differs.

此依剎那假立四相，一期分位亦得假立。初有名生；後無名滅；生已相似相續名住；即此相續轉變名異。

This provisionally establishes four characteristics on the basis of moments, and they can also be provisionally established on the stage of a lifetime. The first existence is called arising; the later non-existence is called cessation; the continuation of similar succession after arising is called abiding; and the transformation of this succession is called change.

是故四相皆是假立。

So the four characteristics are all provisionally established.

復如何知異色、心等，有實詮表名、句、文身？

And how do they know that names, sentences and letters (nama, pada, vyanjana-kaya) that really express are different from form, mind and so on?

契經說故。如契經說，佛得希有名、句、文身。

Because the sutras say so. As the sutra says, the Buddha attained rare names, sentences and letters.

此經不說異色、心等有實名等，為證不成。

These sutras do not say that real names and so on are different from form, mind and so on, so the proof is not established.

若名、句、文異聲實有，應如色等，非實能詮。

If names, sentences and letters were different from sound and real, they should be like form and so on and not be real expressers.

謂聲能生名、句、文者，此聲必有音韻屈曲，此足能詮，何用名等。

That is, sound can produce names, sentences and letters, and this sound must have tonal modulation, which suffices to express; what use are names and so on?

若謂聲上音韻屈曲即名、句、文，異聲實有，所見色上形量屈曲，應異色處別有實體。

If it is said that the tonal modulation on sound is itself names, sentences and letters, different from sound and real, then the shape, measure and curves seen on form should have a real substance elsewhere apart from the place of form.

若謂聲上音韻屈曲，如絃管聲非能詮者，此應如彼聲，不別生名等。又誰說彼定不能詮？聲若能詮，風鈴聲等應有詮用，此應如彼不別生實名、句、文身。若唯語聲能生名等，如何不許唯語能詮。

If it is said that the tonal modulation on sound, like the sounds of strings and pipes, cannot express, then this should be like that sound and not separately produce names and so on. Also who says that that definitely cannot express? If sound can express, the sound of wind bells and so on should have expressive function; this should be like that and not separately produce real names, sentences and letters. If only speech sounds can produce names and so on, why not grant that only speech can express?

何理定知能詮即語？寧知異語別有能詮？語不異能詮，人天共了，執能詮異語，天愛非餘。

By what principle do you definitely know that the expresser is just speech? How do you know that there is a separate expresser different from speech? That speech is not different from the expresser is understood by humans and devas alike; to maintain that the expresser differs from speech is only the "beloved of heaven" (a sarcastic term for the foolishly obstinate), and no one else.

然依語聲分位差別，而假建立名、句、文身。

Rather, names, sentences and letters are provisionally established on the differences in the stages of speech sound.

名詮自性；句詮差別；文即是字，為二所依。

A name expresses the self-nature; a sentence expresses the particular qualities; a letter is the syllable, the support of the two.

此三離聲雖無別體，而假、實異，亦不即聲。由此法、詞二無礙解，境有差別；聲與名等，蘊、處、界攝亦各有異。

These three, though apart from sound they have no separate substance, are different as conventional and real, and are not sound itself. For this reason the objects of the unobstructed understanding of dharma and of expression differ; and sound and names and so on, as included in aggregates, sense bases and elements, also each differ.

且依此土說名、句、文依聲假立，非謂一切；諸餘佛土亦依光明、妙香、味等假立三故。

Moreover, here in this land it is said that names, sentences and letters are provisionally established on sound, which is not said of all; in other buddha lands the three are provisionally established on light, wonderful fragrance, taste and so on.

有執隨眠異心、心所，是不相應行蘊所攝。

Some maintain that latent tendencies (anushaya) are different from mind and mental factors and are included in the aggregate of non-associated conditioned factors.

彼亦非理，名貪等故，如現貪等，非不相應。

This too is unreasonable, because they are called greed and so on, like manifest greed and so on, and are not non-associated.

執別有餘不相應行，準前理趣皆應遮止。

The maintenance of other non-associated factors should all be refuted according to the principles above.

諸無為法離色、心等決定實有，理不可得。且定有法，略有三種：一、現所知法，如色、心等。二、現受用法，如瓶、衣等，如是二法，世共知有，不待因成。三、有作用法，如眼、耳等，由彼彼用證知是有。無為非世共知定有，又無作用，如眼、耳等。設許有用，應是無常，故不可執無為定有。然諸無為所知性故，或色、心等所顯性故，如色、心等，不應執為離色、心等實無為性。

The unconditioned dharmas, apart from form, mind and so on, cannot be found to be definitely real in principle. There are in general three kinds of dharmas that definitely exist: first, dharmas presently known, like form and mind; second, dharmas presently used, like jars and clothes, and these two kinds of dharmas are commonly known by people to exist and do not wait for proof by reasons; third, dharmas that have function, like eye and ear, which are known to exist by their functions. The unconditioned is not commonly known by people to definitely exist, and has no function like the eye and ear. Even if function is granted, it would have to be impermanent, so one cannot maintain that the unconditioned definitely exists. Rather, the unconditioned, because they have the nature of being known, or the nature of being manifested by form, mind and so on, like form and mind, should not be maintained to be the nature of real unconditioned apart from form, mind and so on.

又虛空等為一、為多？

Moreover, are space and the like one or many?

若體是一，遍一切處，虛空容受色等法故，隨能合法，體應成多，一所合處餘不合故。不爾，諸法應互相遍。若謂虛空不與法合，應非容受，如餘無為。又色等中有虛空不？有應相雜，無應不遍。一部、一品結法斷時，應得餘部、餘品擇滅；一法緣闕得不生時，應於一切得非擇滅。執彼體一，理應爾故。

If the substance is one and pervades all places, space accommodates form and other dharmas, and it should become many according to the dharmas it joins with, because where one joins the others do not. Otherwise all dharmas would pervade each other. If it is said that space does not join with dharmas, it should not accommodate, like the other unconditioned. Also, is there space within form and so on? If there is, they should be mixed; if not, it should not be pervasive. When the bonds of one class and one category are cut, one should obtain cessation by discrimination of other classes and other categories; when the condition of one dharma is lacking so that it does not arise, one should obtain cessation without discrimination for all. If one maintains its substance is one, reason requires this.

若體是多，便有品類，應如色等，非實無為。虛空又應非遍容受。

If the substance is many, there would be categories, and it should be like form and so on, not a real unconditioned. Also space should not be pervasive in accommodating.

餘部所執離心、心所實有無為，準前應破。

What other schools maintain, that unconditioned dharmas are real apart from mind and mental factors, should be refuted according to the above.

又諸無為許無因果故，應如兔角，非異心等有。

Moreover, since the unconditioned are allowed to have no cause or effect, they should be like rabbit horns and not exist differently from mind and so on.

然契經說，有虛空等諸無為法，略有二種：

Rather, the sutras say there are space and other unconditioned dharmas, which in general are of two kinds:

一、依識變假施設有。謂曾聞說虛空等名，隨分別有虛空等相，數習力故，心等生時，似虛空等無為相現。此所現相，前後相似，無有變易，假說為常。

First, they exist by provisional designation depending on the transformation of consciousness. That is, having once heard the names of space and so on, one discriminates appearances of space and so on accordingly, and by the force of repeated habit, when mind and so on arise, appearances of the unconditioned such as space appear. These manifested appearances are similar before and after, without change, and are provisionally spoken of as permanent.

二、依法性，假施設有。

Second, they exist by provisional designation depending on the nature of dharmas.

謂空、無我所顯真如，有、無、俱非，心言路絕，與一切法非一、異等，是法真理，故名法性。

That is, suchness manifested by emptiness and selflessness, which is neither existent nor non-existent nor both nor neither, where the path of mind and words is cut off, and which is neither one nor different with respect to all dharmas and so on, is the true principle of dharmas, so it is called the nature of dharmas (dharmata).

離諸障礙，故名虛空；由簡擇力，滅諸雜染，究竟證會，故名擇滅；不由擇力，本性清淨，或緣闕所顯，故名非擇滅；苦、樂受滅，故名不動；想、受不行，名想受滅。

Being apart from all obstructions, it is called space; by the power of discrimination, extinguishing all defilements and finally realizing it, it is called cessation by discrimination; not by the power of discrimination, its nature being originally pure, or manifested by lack of conditions, it is called cessation without discrimination; the cessation of pleasant and painful sensations is called immovability; the non-operation of perception and sensation is called the cessation of perception and sensation.

此五皆依真如假立，真如亦是假施設名。

These five are all provisionally established depending on suchness, and suchness is also a conventionally designated name.

遮撥為無，故說為有；遮執為有，故說為空；勿謂虛、幻，故說為實；理非妄倒，故名真如。不同餘宗離色、心等有實常法名曰真如。

It is said to exist to refute denying it as non-existent; it is said to be empty to refute clinging to it as existent; it is said to be real so that it is not taken as unreal or illusory; it is called suchness because its principle is not false or inverted. It is unlike the other schools which, apart from form, mind and so on, say there is a real permanent dharma called suchness.

故諸無為非定實有。

So the unconditioned are not definitely real.

外道、餘乘所執諸法異心、心所非實有性，是所取故，如心、心所。

The dharmas maintained by non-Buddhists and the other vehicles, being different from mind and mental factors, have no real nature, because they are grasped objects, like mind and mental factors.

能取彼覺亦不緣彼，是能取故，如緣此覺。

The cognition that grasps that also does not cognize that, because it is a grasping cognition, like the cognition that cognizes this cognition.

諸心、心所依他起故，亦如幻事，非真實有。

All minds and mental factors, being dependently arisen, are also like magical illusions, and are not truly existent.

為遣妄執心、心所外實有境故，說唯有識。

To dispel the false clinging to real objects outside mind and mental factors, it is said that there is only consciousness.

若執唯識真實有者，如執外境，亦是法執。

If one clings to consciousness-only as truly existing, as one clings to external objects, that too is attachment to dharmas.

然諸法執略有二種：

Attachment to dharmas is in general of two kinds:

一者俱生；二者分別。

First, innate; second, discriminated.

俱生法執，無始時來虛妄燻習，內因力故，恆與身俱，不待邪教及邪分別，任運而轉，故名俱生。

Innate attachment to dharmas, owing to false habituation since beginningless time, by the power of internal causes, is always together with the body, does not wait for heterodox teachings or heterodox discrimination, and operates spontaneously, and so is called innate.

此復二種：一、常相續，在第七識，緣第八識，起自心相，執為實法；二、有間斷，在第六識，緣識所變蘊、處、界相，或總、或別，起自心相，執為實法。

It is also of two kinds: first, constantly continuous, in the seventh consciousness, which takes the eighth consciousness as object and gives rise to the image of its own mind, clinging to it as a real dharma; second, with interruption, in the sixth consciousness, which takes as object the appearances of aggregates, sense bases and elements transformed by consciousness, generally or separately, gives rise to the image of its own mind, and clings to it as a real dharma.

此二法執細故難斷，後十地中數數修習勝法空觀，方能除滅。

These two kinds of attachment to dharmas are subtle and so hard to cut off, and only later in the ten stages, by repeatedly practicing the excellent contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas, can they be extinguished.

分別法執，亦由現在外緣力故，非與身俱，要待邪教及邪分別然後方起，故名分別。

Discriminated attachment to dharmas also arises from present external conditions, is not together with the body, and arises only after waiting for heterodox teachings and heterodox discrimination, so it is called discriminated.

唯在第六意識中有。此亦二種：一、緣邪教所說蘊、處、界相，起自心相，分別、計度，執為實法。二、緣邪教所說自性等相，起自心相，分別、計度，執為實法。

It exists only in the sixth mental consciousness. It too is of two kinds: first, taking as object the appearances of aggregates, sense bases and elements spoken of in heterodox teachings, giving rise to the image of its own mind, discriminating and calculating, and clinging to it as a real dharma. Second, taking as object the appearances of primal nature and so on spoken of in heterodox teachings, giving rise to the image of its own mind, discriminating and calculating, and clinging to it as a real dharma.

此二法執麁故易斷，入初地時，觀一切法，法空真如，即能除滅。

These two kinds of attachment to dharmas are coarse and so easy to cut off, and upon entering the first stage, by contemplating all dharmas as suchness, the emptiness of dharmas, they can be extinguished.

如是所說一切法執，自心外法或有或無，自心內法一切皆有，是故法執皆緣自心所現似法，執為實有。然似法相從緣生故，是如幻有，所執實法妄計度故，決定非有。故世尊說：「慈氏當知，諸識所緣，唯識所現，依他起性，如幻事等。」

All the attachments to dharmas spoken of in this way, whether the dharmas outside one's mind exist or not, all dharmas inside one's mind exist, so all attachments to dharmas take as object the apparent dharmas manifested by one's own mind and cling to them as real. But the appearances of apparent dharmas arise from conditions and are illusory existence, while the real dharmas clung to are definitely non-existent because of false calculation. So the World-Honored One said: "Maitreya (Ci Shi) should know that what all consciousnesses take as object is only what consciousness manifests, of the dependent nature, like magical illusions and so on."

如是外道、餘乘所執離識我、法皆非實有。故心、心所決定不用外色等法為所緣緣，緣用必依實有體故。

Thus the self and dharmas maintained by non-Buddhists and the other vehicles apart from consciousness are not real. So mind and mental factors definitely do not use external form and other dharmas as object condition, because the function of an object must depend on a real substance.

現在彼聚心、心所法，非此聚識親所緣緣，如非所緣，他聚攝故。同聚心所亦非親所緣，自體異故，如餘非所取。

Now the mind and mental factors of that other aggregate are not the direct object condition of this aggregate of consciousness, like what is not an object, because they are included in another aggregate. The mental factors of the same aggregate are also not the direct object, because their self-substance differs, like others that are not grasped.

由此應知，實無外境，唯有內識，似外境生。是故契經伽他中說：「如愚所分別，外境實皆無，習氣擾濁心，故似彼而轉。」

From this one should know that there are truly no external objects, only inner consciousness, which arises like external objects. So the sutra verse says: "As fools discriminate, external objects are really all non-existent; habit-energy disturbs and clouds the mind, so it operates as if like them."

有作是難：若無離識實我、法者，假亦應無，謂假必依真事、似事、共法而立，如有真火、有似火人、有猛赤法，乃可假說此人為火，假說牛等應知亦然。我、法若無，依何假說，無假說故，似亦不成，如何說心似外境轉。

Someone raises this objection: if there is no real self or dharma apart from consciousness, the conventional should also not exist, for the conventional must be established based on a real thing, a similar thing, or a common quality, as there is real fire, a person like fire, and the quality of being fierce and red, and only then can this person be provisionally called fire; provisional speech about oxen and so on should be known to be the same. If self and dharma are non-existent, what is the provisional speech based on? Without provisional speech, "like" is also not established; how can it be said that the mind operates like external objects?

彼難非理，離識我、法，前已破故。

Their objection is unreasonable; the self and dharma apart from consciousness have been refuted earlier.

依類、依實假說火等，俱不成故。

Provisional speech about fire and so on based on kind or based on substance is not established.

依類假說理且不成，猛、赤等德非類有故。若無共德而假說彼，應亦於水等假說火等名。若謂猛等雖非類德，而不相離，故可假說。此亦不然，人類猛等現見亦有，互相離故。類既無德又互相離，然有於人假說火等，故知假說不依類成。

Provisional speech based on kind is not established in principle, because qualities such as fierceness and redness are not possessed by the kind. If one provisionally speaks of that without a common quality, one should also use the names fire and so on for water and so on. If it is said that though fierceness and so on are not qualities of the kind, they are not separate, so provisional speech can be made, that too is not right: fierceness and so on are visibly also found in the human kind, where they are separate from each other. Since the kind has no quality and they are mutually separate, yet there is provisional speech of fire and so on about a person, one knows that provisional speech is not established on the basis of kind.

依實假說，理亦不成。猛、赤等德非共有故，謂猛、赤等在火、在人其體各別，所依異故，無共假說，有過同前。若謂人、火，德相似故，可假說者，理亦不然。說火在人，非在德故。由此假說不依實成。

Provisional speech based on substance is also not established in principle. Fierceness, redness and other qualities are not held in common; that is, fierceness, redness and so on in fire and in the person are different in substance, because their supports differ and there is no commonness for provisional speech, and the fault is the same as before. If it is said that person and fire have similar qualities and so provisional speech can be made, that is also unreasonable. To say fire is in a person does not mean it is in the quality. So provisional speech is not established on the basis of substance.

又假必依真事立者，亦不應理。

Moreover, that the conventional must be established based on a real thing is also unreasonable.

真謂自相，假智及詮俱非境故。謂假智、詮不得自相，唯於諸法共相而轉，亦非離此有別方便施設自相為假所依。然假智、詮必依聲起，聲不及處，此便不轉，能詮、所詮俱非自相，故知假說不依真事。

Real means self-characteristic; conventional cognition and expression are not objects. That is, conventional cognition and expression cannot obtain the self-characteristic and operate only on the shared characteristics of dharmas, and they do not, apart from this, separately set up a self-characteristic as the support of the conventional. Conventional cognition and expression must arise depending on sound, and where sound does not reach this does not operate; the expresser and the expressed are both not the self-characteristic, so one knows that provisional speech does not rely on a real thing.

由此但依似事而轉，似謂增益，非實有相，聲依增益，似相而轉，故不可說假必依真。

Hence it operates only on the basis of a similar thing; "similar" means superimposition and is not the real existent appearance, and sound depends on superimposition and operates on an apparent appearance, so one cannot say the conventional must rest on the real.

是故彼難不應正理。然依識變，對遣妄執真實我、法，說假似言。由此契經伽他中說：

So their objection does not accord with correct reasoning. Rather, based on the transformation of consciousness, to dispel false clinging to a real self and dharmas, the words "conventional" and "apparent" are used. Therefore the sutra verse says:

「為對遣愚夫所執實我、法，

"In order to dispel the real self and dharmas

故於識所變，假說我、法名。」

clung to by fools, the names self and dharmas are provisionally spoken with respect to what consciousness transforms."

識所變相雖無量種，而能變識類別唯三：一謂異熟，即第八識，多異熟性故；二謂思量，即第七識，恆、審思量故；三謂了境，即前六識，了境相麁故。「及」言顯六合為一種。

Though the appearances transformed by consciousness are of immeasurable kinds, the kinds of transforming consciousness are only three: first is ripening, the eighth consciousness, because it is mostly of ripening nature; second is thinking, the seventh consciousness, because it constantly and carefully thinks; third is discerning objects, the first six consciousnesses, because their discernment of objects is coarse. The word "and" shows that the six combine into one kind.

此三皆名能變識者，能變有二種：

These three are all called transforming consciousnesses; there are two kinds of transformation:

一、因能變，謂第八識中「等流」、「異熟」二因習氣。等流習氣，由七識中善、惡、無記燻令生長；異熟習氣由六識中有漏善、惡燻令生長。

First, causal transformation, that is, the habit-energies of the two causes "outflowing" and "ripening" in the eighth consciousness. The outflowing habit-energy grows from the perfuming of good, evil and neutral in the seven consciousnesses; the ripening habit-energy grows from the perfuming of defiled good and evil in the six consciousnesses.

二、果能變，謂前二種習氣力故，有八識生現種種相。

Second, resultant transformation, that is, because of the power of the two earlier habit-energies, the eight consciousnesses manifest and arise as various appearances.

等流習氣為因緣故，八識體相差別而生，名等流果，果似因故。異熟習氣為增上緣，感第八識，酬引業力，恆相續故，立異熟名；感前六識，酬滿業者，從異熟起，名異熟生，不名異熟有間斷故。即前異熟及異熟生，名異熟果，果異因故。

The outflowing habit-energy serves as the causal condition, and the eight consciousnesses arise with different substances and characteristics, called the outflowing result, because the result resembles the cause. The ripening habit-energy serves as the dominant condition, drawing the eighth consciousness, which repays the power of the leading karma, and because it is constantly continuous the name ripening is established; drawing the first six consciousnesses, which repay completing karma, they arise from ripening and are called ripening-born, not called ripening, because they have interruptions. The earlier ripening and ripening-born are called the ripening result, because the result differs from the cause.

此中且說我愛執藏，持雜染種能變果識，名為異熟，非謂一切。

Here we speak first of the resultant consciousness that is the transformation which holds clinging to the self and love and stores defiled seeds, called ripening; this does not speak of all.

雖已略說能變三名，而未廣辯能變三相。且初能變其相云何？

Though the three names of transforming consciousness have been briefly spoken, the three characteristics of transformation have not yet been widely explained. Let us first say what the characteristics of the first transformation are.

頌曰：

The verse says:

初阿賴耶識，異熟一切種，

The first is alaya consciousness, ripening, all seeds,

３不可知執受，處了常與觸，

3 not discerned: appropriation, location and perceiving, constantly associated with contact,

作意、受、想、思，相應唯捨受。

attention, sensation, perception and volition, associated only with the neutral sensation.

４是無覆無記，觸等亦如是，

4 It is unobscured and neutral, as are contact and the rest,

恆轉如瀑流，阿羅漢位捨。

constantly flowing like a torrent; in the stage of the arhat it is abandoned.

論曰：初能變識，大小乘教名阿賴耶，此識具有能藏、所藏、執藏義故。謂與雜染互為緣故，有情執為自內我故，此即顯示初能變識所有自相，攝持因果為自相故。此識自相，分位雖多，藏識過重，是故偏說。

The treatise says: the first transforming consciousness is called alaya in the teachings of the Great and Small Vehicles, and this consciousness has the meanings of storing, being stored, and clinging-store. That is, it is mutually conditioned with the defiled, and sentient beings cling to it as their inner self, and this shows the self-characteristic of the first transforming consciousness, because it holds cause and effect as its self-characteristic. Though this consciousness has many stages in its self-characteristic, the store-consciousness is the heaviest, so it is singled out.

此是能引諸界、趣、生，善、不善業異熟果故，說名異熟。離此命根、眾同分等恆時相續勝異熟果不可得故。此即顯示初能變識所有果相。此識果相，雖多位、多種，異熟寬、不共，故偏說之。

It is the ripening result that can draw good and unwholesome actions into realms, destinies and births, so it is called ripening. Apart from this, superior ripening results that continue constantly, such as life-faculty and common group, cannot be found. This shows the result-characteristic of the first transforming consciousness. Though the result characteristic of this consciousness has many stages and kinds, ripening is broad and uncommon, so it is singled out.

此能執持諸法種子令不失故，名一切種。離此餘法能遍執持諸法種子不可得故，此即顯示初能變識所有因相。此識因相雖有多種，持種不共，是故偏說。

It can hold the seeds of all dharmas so that they are not lost, and is called all seeds. Apart from this, no other dharma that can universally hold the seeds of all dharmas can be found, and this shows the cause-characteristic of the first transforming consciousness. Though the cause characteristic of this consciousness has many kinds, its holding of seeds is uncommon, so it is singled out.

初能變識，體相雖多，略說唯有如是三相。

The first transforming consciousness, though its substance and characteristics are many, in brief has only these three characteristics.

一切種相應更分別。此中何法名為種子？

The associations of the all-seeds should be further distinguished. What dharma here is called a seed?

謂本識中親生自果，功能差別。

It is the specific capacity within the root consciousness that directly produces its own result.

此與本識及所生果不一、不異，體用、因果理應爾故。

This is neither one nor different from the root consciousness and from the result produced; the principle of substance and function and of cause and effect requires this.

雖非一、異，而是實有，假法如無，非因緣故。此與諸法既非一、異，應如瓶等是假非實。若爾，真如應是假有，許則便無真勝義諦。

Though neither one nor different, it is real existence; conventional dharmas are like non-existence because they are not causal conditions. Since this is neither one nor different from the dharmas, it should be like a jar and so on, conventional and not real. If so, suchness would be conventionally existent, and granting this there would be no true ultimate truth.

然諸種子唯依世俗說為實有，不同真如。

Rather, all seeds are spoken of as real only conventionally, unlike suchness.

種子雖依第八識體，而是此識相分；非餘，見分恆取此為境故。

Seeds, though they depend on the substance of the eighth consciousness, are the object-part of this consciousness; they are not otherwise, because the seeing-part constantly takes this as object.

諸有漏種與異熟識，體無別故，無記性攝；因果俱有善等性故，亦名善等。

All defiled seeds and the ripening consciousness are not different in substance and are included in the neutral nature; because cause and effect both have the nature of good and so on, they are also called good and so on.

諸無漏種，非異熟識性所攝故；因果俱是善性攝故，唯名為善。若爾，何故〈決擇分〉說二十二根一切皆有異熟種子，皆異熟生？雖名異熟而非無記，依異熟故名異熟種，異性相依如眼等識。或無漏種，由燻習力轉變成熟，立異熟名，非無記性所攝異熟。

All undefiled seeds are not included in the nature of ripening consciousness; because cause and effect are both included in the good nature, they are called only good. If so, why does the Discernment section say that all twenty-two faculties have seeds of ripening and are all ripening-born? Though called ripening they are not neutral, and they are called ripening seeds based on ripening, with a different nature and a dependence like eye consciousness and so on. Or the undefiled seeds, by the power of perfuming, transform and mature and are given the name ripening, which is not the ripening included in the neutral nature.

此中有義：一切種子皆本性有，不從燻生。

Here is one view: all seeds are originally present by nature and do not arise from perfuming.

由燻習力但可增長。

By the power of perfuming they can only increase.

如契經說：一切有情無始時來有種種界，如惡叉聚，法爾而有。界即種子差別名故。又契經說：「無始時來界，一切法等依」，界是因義。《瑜伽》亦說：諸種子體無始時來性雖本有，而由染淨新所燻發。諸有情類無始時來，若般涅槃法者，一切種子皆悉具足，不般涅槃法者，便闕三種菩提種子。如是等文，誠證非一。

As the sutra says: all sentient beings since beginningless time have various realms, like a cluster of akshas (a kind of fruit heaped in clusters), naturally present. Realm (dhatu) is another name for the differences of seeds. And the sutra says: "The realm since beginningless time is the common support of all dharmas," and realm has the meaning of cause. The Yogacarabhumi also says: though the substance of the seeds, since beginningless time, is originally existent by nature, it is newly perfumed and aroused by the defiled and pure. Sentient beings since beginningless time, if they are of the nirvana type, have all seeds completely, and if they are not of the nirvana type, they lack the seeds of the three kinds of bodhi. Such texts are truly proof in more than one place.

又諸有情既說本有五種性別，故應定有法爾種子，不由燻生。又《瑜伽》說：地獄成就三無漏根，是種非現。又從無始展轉傳來，法爾所得本性住性。由此等證，無漏種子法爾本有，不從燻生。

Moreover, since sentient beings are said to be originally of five distinct natures, there must be seeds naturally present, not arising from perfuming. Also the Yogacarabhumi says: in the hells, the three undefiled faculties are accomplished as seeds and not as manifestations. And from beginningless time transmitted onward, there is the natural original abiding nature. By such proofs, the undefiled seeds are naturally originally present and do not arise from perfuming.

有漏亦應法爾有種，由燻增長，不別燻生。

Defiled ones too should have seeds naturally present, increased by perfuming, not separately born of perfuming.

如是建立，因果不亂。

With this establishment, cause and effect are not confused.

有義：種子皆燻故生。

One view: all seeds arise because of perfuming.

所燻、能燻俱無始有，故諸種子無始成就。種子既是習氣異名，習氣必由燻習而有，如麻香氣，花燻故生。

The perfumed and the perfuming have both existed since beginningless time, so all seeds are accomplished since beginningless time. Since a seed is another name for habit-energy, habit-energy must exist through perfuming, like the fragrance of sesame, which arises from perfuming by flowers.

如契經說：諸有情心，染淨諸法所燻習故，無量種子之所積集。論說：內種定有燻習，外種燻習或有或無。又名言等三種燻習，總攝一切有漏法種。彼三既由燻習而有，故有漏種必藉燻生。

As the sutra says: the minds of all sentient beings, because they are perfumed by defiled and pure dharmas, are accumulations of immeasurable seeds. The treatise says: inner seeds definitely have perfuming, while for outer seeds perfuming may or may not exist. Also the three perfumings such as name-expression generally include the seeds of all defiled dharmas. Since those three exist through perfuming, defiled seeds must arise by perfuming.

無漏種生亦由燻習，說聞燻習、聞淨法界等流正法而燻起故，是出世心種子性故。

The arising of undefiled seeds is also by perfuming; it is said that they arise from the perfuming of hearing, from hearing the outflowing true teachings of the pure dharma realm, because they have the nature of seeds of the world-transcending mind.

有情本來種姓差別，不由無漏種子有無，但依有障、無障建立。如《瑜伽》說：於真如境，若有畢竟二障種者，立為不般涅槃法性；若有畢竟所知障種非煩惱者，一分立為聲聞種性，一分立為獨覺種性；若無畢竟二障種者，即立彼為如來種性。故知本來種性差別，依障建立，非無漏種。

The original differences in the lineages of sentient beings are not due to the presence or absence of undefiled seeds, but are established only by having or lacking obstructions. As the Yogacarabhumi says: with respect to the realm of suchness, those who have the seeds of the two obstructions definitively are established as of the non-nirvana nature; those who have definitively the seeds of the cognitive obstruction but not of the afflictions are partly established as of the shravaka lineage and partly of the pratyekabuddha lineage; those who have definitively no seeds of the two obstructions are established as of the Tathagata lineage. So one knows that the original differences of lineage are established by obstruction and not by undefiled seeds.

所說：「成就無漏種」言，依當可生，非已有體。

The statement "accomplishing undefiled seeds" is based on what can arise in the future, and does not mean they already exist in substance.

有義：種子各有二類。

One view: seeds each have two kinds.

一者本有，謂無始來異熟識中法爾而有，生蘊、處、界功能差別。世尊依此，說諸有情無始時來有種種界，如惡叉聚，法爾而有，餘所引證廣說如初。此即名為本性住種。

First, original: that is, since beginningless time they exist naturally in the ripening consciousness, with the specific capacity to produce aggregates, sense bases and elements. The World-Honored One, relying on this, said that sentient beings since beginningless time have various realms, like a cluster of akshas, naturally present, and the rest of the proofs cited are as at the beginning. This is called the seed abiding by original nature.

二者始起，謂無始來，數數現行燻習而有。世尊依此，說有情心染淨諸法所燻習故，無量種子之所積集。諸論亦說：染淨種子由染淨法燻習故生，此即名為習所成種。

Second, newly arisen: that is, since beginningless time, existing through repeated perfuming by manifest actions. The World-Honored One, relying on this, said that the minds of sentient beings are accumulations of immeasurable seeds because they are perfumed by defiled and pure dharmas. The treatises also say: defiled and pure seeds arise from the perfuming of defiled and pure dharmas. This is called the seed accomplished by habituation.

若唯本有，轉識不應與阿賴耶為因緣性。如契經說：

If there were only original seeds, the active consciousnesses should not be the causal condition of alaya. As the sutra says:

「諸法於識藏，識於法亦爾，

"Dharmas are in consciousness's store, and consciousness is likewise in dharmas,

更互為果性，亦常為因性。」

mutually having the nature of effect, and also always having the nature of cause."

此頌意言：阿賴耶識與諸轉識，於一切時展轉相生，互為因果。《攝大乘》說：阿賴耶識與雜染法互為因緣，如炷與焰展轉生燒，又如束蘆互相依住，唯依此二建立因緣，所餘因緣不可得故。若諸種子不由燻生，如何轉識與阿賴耶有因緣義？非燻令長可名因緣，勿善、惡業與異熟果為因緣故。

The meaning of this verse is: alaya consciousness and the active consciousnesses at all times arise from each other in turn and are cause and effect to each other. The Mahayana-samgraha says: alaya consciousness and defiled dharmas are mutual causal conditions, like a lamp wick and its flame arising and burning each other in turn, and like a bundle of reeds supporting each other, and only on these two is causal condition established, while no other causal condition can be found. If seeds did not arise from perfuming, how would the active consciousnesses have the meaning of causal condition with alaya? It is not that perfuming to cause growth can be called a causal condition, so do not let good and evil actions be causal conditions for ripening results.

又諸聖教說有種子由燻習生，皆違彼義；故唯本有，理、教相違。

Moreover, the holy teachings say that seeds arise from perfuming, all of which contradict that view; so with only original seeds, principle and teaching conflict.

若唯始起，有為無漏無因緣故，應不得生，有漏不應為無漏種，勿無漏種生有漏故，許應諸佛有漏復生，善等應為不善等種。

If there were only newly arisen seeds, conditioned undefiled dharmas would have no causal condition and should not arise, defiled ones should not be the seeds of undefiled ones, do not let undefiled seeds give rise to defiled ones, and granting this, the Buddhas' defiled dharmas would arise again and good and so on would be seeds of unwholesome and so on.

分別論者雖作是說：心性本淨，客塵煩惱所染汙，故名為雜染，離煩惱時，轉成無漏，故無漏法非無因生。

The Vibhajyavadins, though they speak in this way: the nature of mind is originally pure, defiled by adventitious afflictions and so called defiled, and when freed from afflictions it turns into the undefiled, so undefiled dharmas are not born without cause.

而心性言，彼說何義？若說空理，空非心因，常法定非諸法種子，以體前後無轉變故。若即說心，應同數論，相雖轉變而體常一，惡、無記心又應是善，許則應與信等相應，不許便應非善心體，尚不名善，況是無漏？有漏善心既稱雜染，如惡心等，性非無漏，故不應與無漏為因，勿善、惡等互為因故。若有漏心性是無漏，應無漏心性是有漏，差別因緣不可得故。又異生心若是無漏，則異生位無漏現行應名聖者。若異生心性雖無漏，而相有染，不名無漏，無斯過者，則心種子亦非無漏，何故汝論說有異生唯得成就無漏種子，種子、現行性、相同故。

But what meaning do they give to "nature of mind"? If it means the principle of emptiness, emptiness is not a cause of mind, and a permanent dharma is definitely not a seed of dharmas, because its substance does not change before and after. If it is just mind, it would be the same as the Samkhya: though the characteristics change, the substance is constantly one; evil and neutral minds should also be good, and granting this they would be associated with faith and so on, and if not granted they should not be the substance of good mind, still not even called good, much less undefiled. Since defiled good mind is called defiled like evil mind and so on, its nature is not undefiled, so it should not be a cause of the undefiled; do not let good and evil and so on be causes of each other. If the nature of defiled mind were undefiled, the nature of undefiled mind should be defiled, and the distinguishing cause cannot be found. Also if the mind of ordinary beings were undefiled, then the manifest undefiled in the stage of ordinary beings should be called holy. If, though the nature of ordinary beings' mind is undefiled, its aspect is stained and it is not called undefiled, and this fault does not arise, then mind seeds are also not undefiled; why does your treatise say some ordinary beings only accomplish undefiled seeds, when seeds and manifest nature and characteristics are the same?

然契經說：心性淨者，說心空理所顯真如，真如是心真實性故。或說心體非煩惱故，名性本淨，非有漏心性是無漏，故名本淨。

But the sutra says: the nature of mind is pure, which speaks of suchness manifested by the emptiness of mind, because suchness is the true nature of mind. Or it says the substance of mind is not afflictions, called originally pure in nature, and not that the nature of defiled mind is undefiled and so called originally pure.

由此應信有諸有情無始時來有無漏種，不由燻習，法爾成就，後勝進位燻令增長，無漏法起，以此為因。無漏起時，復燻成種，有漏法種類此應知。

From this one should believe that sentient beings since beginningless time have undefiled seeds, naturally accomplished without perfuming, later increased by perfuming in the stage of superior advance, and undefiled dharmas arise taking this as cause. When undefiled dharmas arise, they again perfume and form seeds; the kinds of defiled dharma seeds should be known by analogy.

諸聖教中，雖說內種定有燻習，而不定說一切種子皆燻故生，寧全撥無本有種子？然本有種亦由燻習，令其增盛方能得果，故說內種定有燻習。

In the sacred teachings, although it is said that inner seeds certainly have perfuming, it is not definitely said that all seeds are produced because of perfuming; how can one then deny all innate seeds? Yet innate seeds too can bear fruit only when perfuming makes them grow stronger, and so it is said that inner seeds certainly have perfuming.

其聞燻習非唯有漏，聞正法時亦燻本有無漏種子，令漸增盛，展轉乃至生出世心，故亦說此名聞燻習。

That perfuming by hearing is not only with outflows; when one hears the correct Dharma, it also perfumes the innate seeds free of outflows and makes them gradually grow stronger, until, in turn, they give rise to the supramundane mind, and so this too is called perfuming by hearing.

聞燻習中，有漏性者是修所斷，感勝異熟，為出世法勝增上緣。無漏性者非所斷攝，與出世法正為因緣。此正因緣微隱難了，有寄麁顯勝增上緣，方便說為出世心種。

Among perfuming by hearing, that which has the nature of outflows is severed by cultivation, produces a superior maturation result, and serves as the superior dominant condition for supramundane dharmas. That which has the nature of being free of outflows is not included among what is severed, and is the true causal condition for supramundane dharmas. This true causal condition is subtle and hidden and hard to understand, and since it depends on the coarse and manifest superior dominant condition, it is expediently called the seed of the supramundane mind.

依障建立種姓別者，意顯無漏種子有無，謂：若全無無漏種者，彼二障種永不可害，即立彼為非涅槃法；若唯有二乘無漏種者，彼所知障種永不可害，一分立為聲聞種姓，一分立為獨覺種姓；若亦有佛無漏種者，彼二障種俱可永害，即立彼為如來種姓。故由無漏種子有無，障有可斷、不可斷義，然無漏種微隱難知，故約彼障顯性差別。不爾，彼障有何別因而有可害、不可害者？若謂法爾有此障別，無漏法種寧不許然？若本全無無漏法種，則諸聖道永不得生，誰當能害二障種子，而說依障立種姓別？既彼聖道必無生義，說當可生，亦定非理。

The establishment of differences in spiritual lineage according to obstructions means to show whether the seeds free of outflows exist or not; that is, a person who has no seeds free of outflows at all, in whom the seeds of the two obstructions can never be harmed, is established as one not of the nirvana Dharma; a person who has only the seeds free of outflows of the Two Vehicles, in whom the seeds of the obstruction to knowledge can never be harmed, is established partly as the Shravaka lineage and partly as the Pratyekabuddha lineage; a person who also has the Buddha's seeds free of outflows, in whom the seeds of both obstructions can be permanently harmed, is established as the Tathagata lineage. So, from whether seeds free of outflows exist or not, obstructions have the meaning of being severable or not severable; but since the seeds free of outflows are subtle and hidden and hard to know, the differences in nature are shown by reference to those obstructions. Otherwise, what other cause would those obstructions have to be harmable or not harmable? If one says that this difference in obstructions exists naturally, why is the same not allowed for the seeds of dharmas free of outflows? If originally there were no seeds of dharmas free of outflows at all, then the sacred paths could never arise, so who would be able to harm the seeds of the two obstructions, and yet it is said that spiritual lineage is established according to obstructions? Since that sacred path surely has no meaning of arising, to say that it will arise is also definitely unreasonable.

然諸聖教處處說有本有種子，皆違彼義，故唯始起，理、教相違。

But the sacred teachings everywhere speak of innate seeds, and to say that there are only newly arisen seeds contradicts that meaning, so that principle and teaching contradict each other.

由此應知，諸法種子各有本有、始起二類。

From this one should know that the seeds of all dharmas each have two classes, innate and newly arisen.

然種子義，略有六種。

The meaning of seed is, briefly, of six kinds.

一、剎那滅。謂體才生無間必滅，有勝功力，方成種子。此遮常法，常無轉變，不可說有能生用故。

First, momentary extinction. This means that its substance, as soon as it arises, must cease without interval, and having superior power it then becomes a seed. This excludes permanent dharmas, which are permanent and without change and cannot be said to have the function of producing.

二、果俱有。謂與所生現行果法俱現和合，方成種子。此遮前後及定相離，現、種異類互不相違，一身俱時有能生用，非如種子自類相生，前後相違，必不俱有。雖因與果有俱、不俱，而現在時可有因用，未生、已滅無自體故，依生現果立種子名，不依引生自類名種，故但應說與果俱有。

Second, co-existence with the fruit. This means that it exists together and in union with the manifest fruit-dharma it produces, and only then becomes a seed. This excludes before and after, and also being necessarily separate; the manifest and the seed are of different kinds and do not oppose each other, and within one body at the same time they have the function of producing; unlike the seed producing its own kind, where before and after contradict and cannot exist together. Although causes and effects may be simultaneous or not, the function of a cause can only exist in the present, and what has not arisen or has already ceased has no self-nature; seeds are named in terms of producing the manifest fruit, not named seeds in terms of leading to their own kind, so it should only be said that they co-exist with the fruit.

三、恆隨轉。謂要長時一類相續，至究竟位，方成種子。此遮轉識，轉易間斷，與種子法不相應故。此顯種子自類相生。

Third, constant continuation. This means that it must continue as one kind over a long time, up to the final stage, and only then becomes a seed. This excludes the active consciousnesses, which change, are interrupted, and do not correspond to the dharma of seeds. This shows that seeds produce their own kind.

四、性決定。謂隨因力生善、惡等，功能決定，方成種子。此遮餘部執異性因生異性果有因緣義。

Fourth, fixed nature. This means that, according to the power of the cause, it gives rise to good, evil and so on, with its capacity fixed, and only then becomes a seed. This excludes the claim of other schools that a cause of a different nature produces a result of a different nature and has the meaning of causal condition.

五、待眾緣。謂此要待自眾緣合，功能殊勝，方成種子。此遮外道執自然因不待眾緣恆頓生果；或遮餘部緣恆非無。顯所待緣非恆有性，故種於果非恆頓生。

Fifth, dependence on many conditions. This means that it must depend on the combination of its own many conditions, with its capacity becoming outstanding, and only then becomes a seed. This excludes the claim of outsiders that a natural cause constantly and suddenly produces its fruit without depending on many conditions; or it excludes the claim of other schools that conditions are always present. It shows that the conditions depended on are not of constant nature, and so the seed does not constantly and suddenly produce the fruit.

六、引自果。謂於別別色、心等果，各各引生方成種子。此遮外道執唯一因生一切果；或遮餘部執色、心等互為因緣。

Sixth, drawing forth its own fruit. This means that, for the separate fruits of form, mind and so on, each draws forth and produces its own, and only then is it a seed. This excludes the claim of outsiders that a single cause produces all fruits; or it excludes the claim of other schools that form, mind and so on serve as causal conditions for one another.

唯本識中功能差別具斯六義，成種非餘，外穀麥等，識所變故，假立種名，非實種子。

Only the differentiated capacities in the root consciousness have these six meanings and become seeds, and nothing else; external grain, wheat and the like are transformed by consciousness and called seeds provisionally, and are not real seeds.

此種勢力生近、正果，名曰生因；引遠、殘果，令不頓絕，即名引因。

The power of this seed that produces the near and main fruit is called the producing cause; that which draws forth the distant and residual fruit so that it is not suddenly cut off is called the leading cause.

內種必由燻習生長，親能生果，是因緣性。

Inner seeds must grow by perfuming, and directly produce fruit, having the nature of causal condition.

外種燻習或有、或無，為增上緣，辦所生果。

External seeds may or may not be perfumed, and serve as dominant conditions to accomplish the fruit they produce.

必以內種為彼因緣，是共相種所生果故。

One must take inner seeds as the causal condition for them, because the fruit is produced by seeds of common characteristics.

依何等義立燻習名？

By what meanings is the name "perfuming" established?

所燻、能燻各具四義，令種生長，故名燻習。

That which is perfumed and that which perfumes each have four meanings, which make seeds grow, and so it is called perfuming.

何等名為所燻四義？

What are the four meanings of that which is perfumed?

一、堅住性。若法始終一類相續能持習氣，乃是所燻。此遮轉識及聲、風等，性不堅住，故非所燻。

First, firm abiding. A dharma that continues as one kind from beginning to end and can hold habit-energies is what is perfumed. This excludes the active consciousnesses, as well as sound, wind and so on, whose nature does not abide firmly, so they are not what is perfumed.

二、無記性。若法平等，無所違逆，能容習氣，乃是所燻。此遮善染勢力強盛，無所容納，故非所燻。由此如來第八淨識，唯帶舊種，非新受燻。

Second, indeterminate nature. A dharma that is even, with nothing opposed, and can accommodate habit-energies is what is perfumed. This excludes good and defiled dharmas, whose power is strong and which cannot accommodate, so they are not what is perfumed. Hence the eighth pure consciousness of the Tathagata only carries old seeds and is not newly perfumed.

三、可燻性。若法自在，性非堅密，能受習氣，乃是所燻。此遮心所及無為法，依他、堅密，故非所燻。

Third, perfumable nature. A dharma that is independent, whose nature is not firm and dense, and can receive habit-energies is what is perfumed. This excludes mental factors and unconditioned dharmas, which depend on others or are firm and dense, so they are not what is perfumed.

四、與能燻共和合性。若與能燻同時、同處，不即、不離，乃是所燻。此遮他身、剎那前後，無和合義，故非所燻。

Fourth, union with what perfumes. If it is at the same time and place as what perfumes, neither identical nor separate, it is what is perfumed. This excludes another person's body, and before and after moments, which have no meaning of union, so they are not what is perfumed.

唯異熟識具此四義，可是所燻，非心所等。

Only the maturation consciousness has these four meanings and can be what is perfumed, and not mental factors and the like.

何等名為能燻四義？

What are the four meanings of that which perfumes?

一、有生滅。若法非常，能有作用，生長習氣，乃是能燻。此遮無為前後不變，無生長用，故非能燻。

First, having arising and ceasing. A dharma that is impermanent, able to have function and to grow habit-energies is what perfumes. This excludes unconditioned dharmas, which do not change before and after and have no function of growth, so they are not what perfumes.

二、有勝用。若有生滅，勢力增盛，能引習氣，乃是能燻。此遮異熟心、心所等，勢力羸劣，故非能燻。

Second, having superior function. If it has arising and ceasing, with its power growing strong and able to draw habit-energies, it is what perfumes. This excludes the maturation mind, mental factors and so on, whose power is weak and inferior, so they are not what perfumes.

三、有增減。若有勝用，可增可減，攝植習氣，乃是能燻。此遮佛果圓滿善法，無增無減，故非能燻。彼若能燻，便非圓滿，前後佛果應有勝劣。

Third, having increase and decrease. If it has superior function, can increase and decrease, and gathers and plants habit-energies, it is what perfumes. This excludes the perfectly complete good dharmas of the Buddha fruit, which neither increase nor decrease, so they are not what perfumes. If they could perfume, they would not be perfect, and the Buddha fruits before and after would have to differ in superiority.

四、與所燻和合而轉。若與所燻同時、同處，不即、不離，乃是能燻。此遮他身、剎那前後，無和合義，故非能燻。

Fourth, operating in union with what is perfumed. If it is at the same time and place as what is perfumed, neither identical nor separate, it is what perfumes. This excludes another person's body, and before and after moments, which have no meaning of union, so they are not what perfumes.

唯七轉識及彼心所有勝勢用，而增減者，具此四義，可是能燻。

Only the seven active consciousnesses and those mental factors that have superior power and can increase and decrease have these four meanings and can perfume.

如是能燻與所燻識，俱生俱滅，燻習義成。令所燻中種子生長，如燻苣蕂，故名燻習。

Thus the consciousnesses that perfume and are perfumed arise and cease together, and the meaning of perfuming is established. They cause the seeds in what is perfumed to grow, like perfuming sesame, and so it is called perfuming.

能燻識等，從種生時，即能為因，復燻成種，三法展轉因果同時，如炷生焰、焰生焦炷，亦如蘆束更互相依，因果俱時，理不傾動。

The perfuming consciousnesses and so on, when they arise from seeds, can serve as causes, and also perfume and form seeds, so the three dharmas are cause and effect at the same time in turn, like a lamp wick producing a flame and the flame scorching the wick, or like bundled reeds leaning on each other, with cause and effect simultaneous, and the principle is not shaken.

能燻生種，種起現行，如俱有因得士用果；種子前後自類相生，如同類因引等流果。此二於果是因緣性，除此餘法皆非因緣，設名因緣，應知假說。

The perfuming producing the seed, and the seed giving rise to the manifest, are like a co-existent cause obtaining the effect of human effort; the seeds of earlier and later moments producing their own kind are like a cause of the same kind drawing the effect of outflow. These two are of the nature of causal condition with respect to the fruit, and all other dharmas besides these are not causal conditions; even if called causal conditions, one should know it is a figure of speech.

是謂略說一切種相。

This is a brief account of the characteristics of all seeds.

此識行相、所緣云何？

What are the aspect and object of this consciousness?

謂不可知執受、處了。

They are the unknowable apprehending and sustaining, and place, and discernment.

「了」謂了別，即是行相。識以了別為行相故。

"Discernment" means distinguishing, which is the aspect, because consciousness takes discernment as its aspect.

「處」謂處所，即器世間，是諸有情所依處故。

"Place" means location, which is the world as vessel, because it is the support for all sentient beings.

「執受」有二：謂諸種子及有根身。諸種子者，謂諸相、名、分別習氣，有根身者，謂諸色根及根依處。此二皆是識所執受，攝為自體，同安危故。

"Apprehending and sustaining" are of two kinds: the seeds and the body with faculties. The seeds are the habit-energies of characteristics, names and discriminations; the body with faculties is the form faculties and the places on which the faculties rest. Both of these are apprehended and sustained by consciousness, included as its own substance, because they share safety and danger.

執受及處俱是所緣，阿賴耶識因緣力故，自體生時，內變為種及有根身，外變為器，即以所變為自所緣，行相仗之而得起故。

Apprehending and sustaining, and place, are all objects. The alaya consciousness, by the power of causal conditions, when its own substance arises, transforms inwardly into seeds and the body with faculties and outwardly into the vessel world, and takes what is transformed as its own object, with its aspect arising in reliance on it.

此中「了」者，謂異熟識於自所緣有了別用，此了別用，見分所攝。

Here "discernment" means that the maturation consciousness has the function of distinguishing its own object, and this function of distinguishing is included in the seeing division.

然有漏識自體生時，皆似所緣、能緣相現，彼相應法應知亦爾。似所緣相說名相分，似能緣相說名見分。若心、心所無所緣相，應不能緣自所緣境，或應一一能緣一切，自境如餘，餘如自故。

All consciousnesses with outflows, when their own substance arises, appear as the aspects of object and of subject, and one should know that the corresponding dharmas are likewise. What appears as the aspect of the object is called the image division; what appears as the aspect of the subject is called the seeing division. If mind and mental factors had no aspect of object, they would be unable to cognize their own objects, or else each would be able to cognize everything, so that its own object would resemble others and others resemble its own.

若心、心所無能緣相，應不能緣，如虛空等，或虛空等；亦是能緣。

If mind and mental factors had no aspect of subject, they should be unable to cognize, like empty space and the like, or else empty space and the like would also be able to cognize.

故心、心所必有二相。如契經說：

So mind and mental factors must have the two aspects. As the sutra says:

「一切唯有覺，所覺義皆無，

"All is only awareness, and the meaning of what is aware does not exist at all,

能覺所覺分，各自然而轉。」

the divisions of what is aware and what is cognized each operate naturally."

執有離識所緣境者，彼說外境是所緣，相分名行相，見分名事，是心、心所自體相故。心與心所同所依、緣，行相相似，事雖數等，而相各異，識、受、想等相各別故。

Those who hold that there is an object of cognition apart from consciousness say that the external object is the object, the image division is called the aspect, and the seeing division is called the event, because it is the self-substance aspect of mind and mental factors. Mind and mental factors have the same basis and object and similar aspects, and though the events are equal in number, the aspects differ, because the aspects of consciousness, feeling, perception and so on are distinct.

達無離識所緣境者，則說相分是所緣，見分名行相，相、見所依自體名事，即自證分。此若無者，應不自憶心、心所法，如不曾更境必不能憶故，心與心所同所依根，所緣相似，行相各別，了別、領納等作用各異故，事雖數等，而相各異，識、受等體有差別故。

Those who understand that there is no object apart from consciousness say that the image division is the object, the seeing division is called the aspect, and the self-substance on which image and seeing depend is called the event, which is the self-witnessing division. If this did not exist, one could not recall the dharmas of mind and mental factors on one's own, since what has not been experienced cannot be recalled. Mind and mental factors have the same supporting faculty, and their objects are similar and their aspects distinct, because their functions of discerning, receiving and so on differ; and although the events are equal in number, the aspects differ, because the substances of consciousness, feeling and so on differ.

然心、心所一一生時，以理推徵各有三分，所量、能量、量果別故，相、見必有所依體故。如《集量論》伽他中說：

Moreover, when each mind and mental factor arises, by reasoning each has three divisions, because the measured, the measurer and the result of measuring are distinct, and the image and seeing divisions must have a substance they rest on. As the verse in the Compendium of Valid Cognition says:

「似境相所量，能取相、自證，

"The image of an apparent object is the measured, the aspect of grasping and the self-witnessing,

即能量及果，此三體無別。」

are the measurer and the result; these three have no separate substance."

又心、心所若細分別應有四分，三分如前，復有第四證自證分。此若無者，誰證第三？心分既同應皆證故。又自證分應無有果，諸能量者必有果故。不應見分是第三果，見分或時非量攝故。由此見分不證第三，證自體者必現量故。

Furthermore, if mind and mental factors are analyzed finely, there should be four divisions; the three are as before, and there is also the fourth, the witnessing of self-witnessing division. If this did not exist, who would witness the third? Since the mind divisions are all alike, all should witness. Also the self-witnessing division would have no result, but all measurers must have a result. The seeing division should not be the result of the third, since the seeing division is sometimes not included in valid cognition. Hence the seeing division does not witness the third, and what witnesses its own substance must be direct perception.

此四分中前二是外，後二是內。初唯所緣，後三通二，謂第二分但緣第一，或量、非量，或現、或比。第三能緣第二，第四證自證分，唯緣第三，非第二者，以無用故，第三、第四皆現量攝，故心、心所四分合成，具所、能緣，無無窮過，非即、非離，唯識理成。

Among these four divisions, the first two are external and the last two are internal. The first is only an object; the latter three are both, in that the second division only cognizes the first, being valid or invalid cognition, direct perception or inference. The third can cognize the second, and the fourth, the witnessing of self-witnessing, only cognizes the third and not the second, because it would serve no purpose; the third and fourth are both included in direct perception. Thus the four divisions of mind and mental factors together form a whole with subject and object, with no fault of infinite regress, neither identical nor separate, and the principle of consciousness-only is established.

是故契經伽他中說：

So the verse in the sutra says:

「眾生心二性，內外一切分，

"The mind of beings has two natures, all divisions inner and outer,

所取能取纏，見種種差別。」

bound by the grasped and the grasper, seen in various differences."

此頌意說：眾生心性二分合成，若內、若外皆有所取、能取纏縛，見有種種，或量、非量，或現、或比，多分差別，此中見者是見分故。

The meaning of this verse is: the mind-nature of beings is formed of two divisions, and whether inner or outer, all are bound by the grasped and the grasper, seen in various ways, as valid or invalid cognition, as direct perception or inference, with many differing divisions; here "seeing" means the seeing division.

如是四分或攝為三，第四攝入自證分故。或攝為二，後三俱是能緣性故，皆見分攝，此言見者是能緣義。或攝為一，體無別故。如《入楞伽》伽他中說：

Thus the four divisions can be gathered into three, because the fourth is included in the self-witnessing division. Or they can be gathered into two, because the latter three are all of the nature of the cognizer and all included in the seeing division, and here "seeing" is said in the sense of cognizer. Or they can be gathered into one, because the substance has no distinction. As the verse in the Lankavatara says:

「由自心執著，心似外境轉，

"Through attachment to one's own mind, the mind appears as outer objects,

彼所見非有，是故說唯心。」

what others see does not exist, and so it is said to be mind-only."

如是處處說唯一心，此一心言亦攝心所。

Thus it is said everywhere that there is only one mind, and these words "one mind" also include the mental factors.

故識行相即是了別，了別即是識之見分。

So the aspect of consciousness is discernment, and discernment is the seeing division of consciousness.

所言「處」者，謂異熟識由共相種成熟力故，變似色等器世間相，即外大種及所造色。雖諸有情所變各別而相相似，處所無異，如眾燈明各遍似一。

As for what is called "place": the maturation consciousness, by the ripening power of seeds of common characteristics, transforms and raises up the aspect of the vessel world such as form, which is the external great elements and derived form. Although what each sentient being transforms is separate, the aspects are similar and the places are not different, like the light of many lamps each pervading and appearing as one.

誰異熟識變為此相？

Whose maturation consciousness transforms this aspect?

有義：一切。所以者何？如契經說：一切有情，業增上力共所起故。

One view says: everyone's. Why? As the sutra says: it is produced jointly by the dominant power of the karma of all sentient beings.

有義：若爾，諸佛菩薩應實變為此雜穢土，諸異生等應實變為他方、此界諸淨妙土。又諸聖者厭離有色，生無色界，必不下生，變為此土，復何所用？是故現居及當生者，彼異熟識變為此界。經依少分說「一切」言，諸業同者皆共變故。

Another view says: if so, then Buddhas and Bodhisattvas would really transform this mixed and impure land, and ordinary beings would really transform the pure and wonderful lands of other regions and of this realm. Moreover, sages who have grown weary of form and are born in the formless realm will not be reborn below, so what use would there be in their transforming this land? Therefore those now dwelling here and those who will be born here have maturation consciousnesses that transform this realm. The sutra speaks of "all" with reference to a small portion, because those with the same karma jointly transform it.

有義：若爾，器將壞時，既無現居及當生者，誰異熟識變為此界？又諸異生厭離有色，生無色界，現無色身，預變為土，此復何用？設有色身，與異地器，麁細懸隔，不相依持，此變為彼，亦何所益？然所變土本為色身依持、受用，故若於身可有持用便變為彼。由是設生他方自地，彼識亦得變為此土，故器世界將壞、初成，雖無有情而亦現有。此說一切共受用者，若別受用准此應知，鬼、人、天等所見異故。

Another view says: if so, when the vessel world is about to be destroyed, since there are no current dwellers or those to be born, whose maturation consciousness transforms this realm? Also, ordinary beings who have grown weary of form and are born in the formless realm, who have no form body, transforming a land in advance, what use is that? Even with a form body, the vessel in another ground is greatly separated in coarseness and fineness and does not support it; transforming one here and one there, what benefit would that be? But the land transformed is originally for the form body to rest on and enjoy, so if it can support and be used by the body, it is transformed. Hence even if born in another place or ground, that consciousness can also transform this land, so when the vessel world is about to be destroyed or is first formed, though there are no sentient beings, it still exists. This speaks of what is enjoyed in common by all; for separate enjoyment one should know it by analogy, because what ghosts, humans and gods see differs.

諸種子者，謂異熟識所持一切有漏法種，此識性攝，故是所緣。無漏法種雖依附此識，而非此性攝，故非所緣。雖非所緣而不相離，如真如性，不違唯識。

The seeds: these are the seeds of all dharmas with outflows held by the maturation consciousness, included in the nature of this consciousness, and so they are its objects. The seeds of dharmas without outflows, though they depend on this consciousness, are not included in its nature, so they are not its objects. Though not its objects, they are not separate from it, like the nature of suchness, and do not contradict consciousness-only.

有根身者，謂異熟識不共相種成熟力故，變似色根及根依處，即內大種及所造色，有共相種成熟力故，於他身處亦變似彼。不爾，應無受用他義。

The body with faculties: the maturation consciousness, by the ripening power of seeds of non-common characteristics, transforms and raises up the aspect of the form faculties and the places they rest on, which are the inner great elements and derived form, and by the ripening power of seeds of common characteristics, it also transforms the aspect of another's body and place. Otherwise, there would be no meaning of enjoying another's.

此中有義：亦變似根。《辯中邊》說：「似自、他身五根現」故。

Here one view is: it also transforms the aspect of the faculties. The Madhyantavibhaga says: "the five faculties of self and others appear as images."

有義：唯能變似依處，他根於己非所用故，「似自、他身五根現」者，說自、他識各自變義，故生他地或般涅槃，彼餘屍骸猶見相續。

Another view is: it can only transform the aspect of the places they rest on; the faculties of others are not used by oneself, and "the five faculties of self and others appear as images" means that the consciousnesses of self and others each transform their own, and so when someone is born in another ground or enters parinirvana, one still sees those other corpses continue.

前來且說業力所變外器、內身、界、地差別；若定等力所變器、身、界、地、自、他，則不決定。所變身、器，多恆相續；變聲、光等，多分暫時，隨現緣力擊發起故。

So far we have discussed the vessel, inner body, realms and grounds transformed by karmic power; the vessels, bodies, realms, grounds, self and others transformed by the power of concentration and the like are not fixed. The transformed bodies and vessels mostly continue constantly; the transformation of sound, light and so on is mostly partial and temporary, because it arises by being struck by the power of present conditions.

略說此識所變境者，謂有漏種、十有色處，及墮法處所現實色。

Briefly, the objects transformed by this consciousness are: the seeds with outflows, the ten sense-fields of form, and the real form manifest in the sphere of dharmas.

何故此識不能變似心、心所等為所緣耶？

Why can this consciousness not transform images of mind, mental factors and so on as objects?

有漏識變略有二種：一、隨因緣勢力故變；二、隨分別勢力故變。初必有用，後但為境。異熟識變但隨因緣，所變色等必有實用，若變心等便無實用，相分心等不能緣故，須彼實用別從此生。變無為等亦無實用，故異熟識不緣心等。至無漏位，勝慧相應，雖無分別，而澄淨故，設無實用，亦現彼影。不爾，諸佛應非遍知。故有漏位，此異熟識但緣器、身及有漏種。

The transformations of consciousness with outflows are of briefly two kinds: first, transformation according to the force of causal conditions; second, transformation according to the force of discrimination. The first must have function, and the latter is only an object. The maturation consciousness transforms only according to causal conditions, and the form and so on it transforms must have real function; if it transformed mind and so on, there would be no real function, because the image-division mind and so on cannot cognize, and that real function would have to arise separately from this. Transforming the unconditioned and so on also has no real function, so the maturation consciousness does not cognize mind and so on. In the stage free of outflows, corresponding to superior wisdom, though without discrimination it is clear and pure, and even without real function it also manifests those shadows. Otherwise, the Buddhas would not be omniscient. So in the stage with outflows, this maturation consciousness only cognizes the vessel, the body and the seeds with outflows.

在欲、色界具三所緣；無色界中緣有漏種，厭離色故，無業果色，有定果色，於理無違。彼識亦緣此色為境。

In the desire and form realms it has all three objects; in the formless realm it cognizes the seeds with outflows, because it has grown weary of form and has no karmic-fruit form, though there is concentration-fruit form, which has no contradiction in principle. That consciousness also takes this form as its object.

「不可知」者，謂此行相極微細故，難可了知；或此所緣內執受境亦微細故；外器世間量難測故，名不可知。

"Unknowable" means that this aspect is extremely subtle and hard to know; or that this object, the inner apprehended and sustained realm, is also subtle; and the external vessel world is hard to measure, and so it is called unknowable.

云何是識取所緣境，行相難知？如滅定中，不離身識，應信為有，然必應許滅定有識，有情攝故，如有心時。無想等位，當知亦爾。

How is it that this consciousness takes its objects and its aspect is hard to know? Like in the cessation attainment, where one is not separate from bodily consciousness, one should believe it exists, and one must allow that there is consciousness in cessation attainment, because it is included among sentient beings, as when there is mind. In the state of no-thought and the like, one should know it is likewise.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other Bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial order by the Tripitaka Master Xuanzang.

此識與幾心所相應？

With how many kinds of mental factors does this consciousness correspond?

常與觸、作意、受、想、思相應。

It always corresponds with contact, attention, feeling, perception and volition.

阿賴耶識無始時來乃至未轉，於一切位恆與此五心所相應，以是遍行心所攝故。

The alaya consciousness, from beginningless time until it is transformed, in all stages always corresponds with these five mental factors, because it is included among the omnipresent mental factors.

「觸」謂三和分別變異，令心、心所觸境為性，受、想、思等所依為業。

"Contact" means the transformation and distinction of the three in union, making mind and mental factors touch their objects; its nature is that, and its function is to be the basis of feeling, perception, volition and so on.

謂根、境、識更相隨順，故名三和。觸依彼生，令彼和合，故說為彼；三和合位皆有順生心所功能，說名變異；觸似彼起，故名分別。

That is, faculty, object and consciousness follow one another in turn, and so are called the union of the three. Contact arises depending on them, making them combine, and so it is said to be that; in the state of the union of the three, all have the capacity to give rise to mental factors in accord, called transformation; contact arises like that, and so it is called distinction.

根變異力，引觸起時，勝彼識、境，故《集論》等但說分別根之變異。

When the transformation power of the faculty draws forth the arising of contact, it surpasses that consciousness and object, and so the Compendium and others speak only of the distinguishing transformation of the faculty.

和合一切心及心所，令同觸境，是觸自性。

It unites all minds and mental factors and makes them touch the object together; this is the self-nature of contact.

既似順起心所功能，故以受等所依為業。

Since it is like the capacity to give rise to mental factors in accord, its function is to be the basis of feeling and so on.

《起盡經》說：受、想、行蘊一切皆以觸為緣故，由斯故說識、觸、受等因二、三、四和合而生。

The Sutra of Arising and Ending says: the aggregates of feeling, perception and formations all take contact as condition, and so it is said that consciousness, contact, feeling and so on arise from the union of two, three or four causes.

《瑜伽》但說與受、想、思為所依者，思於行蘊為主勝故，舉此攝餘。《集論》等說為受依者，以觸生受近而勝故，謂觸所取可意等相與受所取順益等相，極相隣近，引發勝故。

The Yogacara only says it is the basis of feeling, perception and volition, because volition is the principal and superior among the aggregate of formations, and by raising it the rest are included. The Compendium and others say it is the basis of feeling, because contact is near and superior in producing feeling, as the agreeable and other aspects grasped by contact and the beneficial and other aspects grasped by feeling are extremely close and draw forth a superior result.

然觸自性，是實非假，六六法中，心所性故，是食攝故，能為緣故，如受等性，非即三和。

But the self-nature of contact is real and not provisional; among the six sets of six dharmas, it is of the nature of a mental factor, is included among nourishments, and can serve as a condition, like feeling and so on; it is not simply the union of the three.

作意謂能警心為性，於所緣境，引心為業；謂此警覺，應起心種，引令趣境，故名作意。雖此亦能引起心所；心是主故，但說引心。

Attention means that its nature is to alert the mind, and with respect to the object, its function is to lead the mind; that is, this alertness gives rise to the seeds of the mind that should arise, and leads it toward the object, and so it is called attention. Although it also gives rise to mental factors, because mind is principal it only speaks of leading mind.

有說：令心迴趣異境，或於一境，持心令住，故名作意。彼俱非理，應非遍行，不異定故。

Some say: it makes the mind turn to a different object, or on one object holds the mind so that it stays, and so it is called attention. All of these are unreasonable, for it would then not be omnipresent and would not differ from concentration.

「受」謂領納順、違、俱非境相為性，起愛為業，能起合、離、非二欲故。

"Feeling" means that its nature is to receive aspects of objects that are agreeable, disagreeable or neither, and its function is to give rise to craving, because it can give rise to the desire for union, separation, or neither.

有作是說：受有二種：一、境界受，謂領所緣；二、自性受，謂領俱觸。唯自性受是受自相。以境界受共餘相故。

Some say as follows: feeling has two kinds: first, object feeling, which is to receive the object cognized; second, self-nature feeling, which is to receive the accompanying contact. Only self-nature feeling is feeling in its own characteristic; because object feeling shares aspects with the others.

彼說非理，受定不緣俱生觸故。

What they say is unreasonable; feeling definitely does not cognize the contact that arises with it.

若似觸生，名領觸者，似因之果，應皆受性。

If it is called receiving contact because it arises from contact, then like the fruit of a cause, everything should be of the nature of feeling.

又既受因，應名因受，何名自性？

Moreover, since it is the cause of feeling, it should be called causal feeling; why is it called self-nature?

若謂如王食諸國邑，受能領觸所生受體，名自性受。理亦不然，違自所執不自證故。

If one says it is like a king consuming the cities of various states, with feeling receiving the substance of feeling arisen from contact and called self-nature feeling, that is also not right, as it contradicts their own doctrine that one does not witness oneself.

若不捨自性，名自性受，應一切法皆是受自性。

If one calls it self-nature feeling because it does not abandon its self-nature, then all dharmas would be self-nature feeling.

故彼所說，但誘嬰兒。

So what they say is only coaxing infants.

然境界受，非共餘相，領順等相，定屬己者，名境界受，不共餘故。

But object feeling does not share aspects with others; the aspects such as agreeable that it receives definitely belong to itself, and so it is called object feeling, because it is not shared with others.

「想」謂於境取像為性，施設種種名言為業，謂要安立境分齊相，方能隨起種種名言。

"Perception" means that its nature is to take images of the object, and its function is to establish various names and words; that is, it must establish the demarcated aspects of the object, and only then can it give rise to various names and words.

「思」謂令心造作為性，於善品等役心為業，謂能取境正因等相，驅役自心令造善等。

"Volition" means that its nature is to make the mind act, and its function is to drive the mind toward good qualities and so on; that is, the aspects such as the proper cause for grasping an object drive its own mind to do good and so on.

此五既是遍行所攝，故與藏識決定相應，其遍行相後當廣釋。

Since these five are included among the omnipresent factors, they necessarily correspond with the store consciousness; the omnipresent characteristics will be explained at length later.

此觸等五與異熟識行相雖異，而時、依同，所緣、事等，故名相應。

Although the aspects of these five, contact and so on, differ from those of the maturation consciousness, their time and basis are the same, and their objects and events are the same, and so they are called corresponding.

此識行相極不明瞭，不能分別違、順境相，微細、一類、相續而轉，是故唯與捨受相應。

The aspects of this consciousness are extremely unclear and cannot distinguish disagreeable or agreeable object-aspects; subtle, of one kind, and continuing, so it corresponds only with neutral feeling.

又，此相應受唯是異熟，隨先引業轉；不待現緣，住善、惡業勢力轉故。唯是捨受；苦、樂二受是異熟生，非真異熟，待現緣故，非此相應。

Moreover, the feeling corresponding with it is only maturation, and turns in accord with the leading karma of earlier times; it does not wait on present conditions, because it abides in the power of good and bad karma. It is only neutral feeling; the two feelings of suffering and pleasure are born of maturation, not true maturation, since they depend on present conditions and do not correspond with this.

又，由此識常無轉變，有情恆執為自內我；若與苦、樂二受相應，便有轉變，寧執為我，故此但與捨受相應。

Moreover, because this consciousness is always without change, sentient beings constantly grasp it as their inner self; if it corresponded with suffering or pleasure, it would change, so how could it be grasped as self; therefore this corresponds only with neutral feeling.

若爾，如何此識亦是惡業異熟？既許善業能招捨受，此亦應然。捨受不違苦、樂品故，如無記法，善、惡俱招。

If so, how is this consciousness also the maturation of evil karma? Since it is allowed that good karma can bring neutral feeling, so should this. Neutral feeling does not contradict the classes of suffering and pleasure, and like indeterminate dharmas, it is brought by both good and evil.

如何此識非別境等心所相應？

Why does this consciousness not correspond with the object-determining mental factors and the like?

互相違故。

Because they contradict each other.

謂欲希望所樂事轉；此識任運，無所希望。勝解印持決定事轉；此識瞢昧，無所印持。念唯明記曾習事轉，此識昧劣，不能明記。定能令心專注一境；此識任運；剎那別緣。慧唯簡擇德等事轉；此識微昧，不能簡擇。故此不與別境相應。

Desire turns on hoped-for and delighted matters, but this consciousness is spontaneous and has nothing hoped for. Resolve turns on firmly held, decided matters, but this consciousness is dim and has nothing firmly held. Mindfulness turns only on clear remembering of what has been practiced, but this consciousness is dull and cannot remember clearly. Concentration can make the mind focus on one object, but this consciousness is spontaneous and changes its object every moment. Wisdom turns only on discriminating virtues and so on, but this consciousness is subtle and dim and cannot discriminate. So this does not correspond with the object-determining factors.

此識唯是異熟性故，善、染汙等亦不相應。

Because this consciousness is only of the nature of maturation, it also does not correspond with good, defiled and other factors.

惡作等四無記性者，有間斷故，定非異熟。

The four of remorse and the like that are neutral in nature are definitely not maturation because they are interrupted.

法有四種：謂善、不善、有覆無記、無覆無記，阿賴耶識何法攝耶？

There are four kinds of dharma: good, not good, obscured neutral and unobscured neutral. Which kind of dharma is the alaya consciousness included in?

此識唯是無覆無記，異熟性故。

This consciousness is only unobscured neutral, because it is of the nature of maturation.

異熟若是善、染汙者，流轉還滅應不得成，又此識是善、染依故，若善、染者，互相違故，應不與二俱作所依；又此識是所燻性故，若善、染者，如極香臭，應不受燻。

If maturation were good or defiled, going around in rebirth and turning back to cessation could not be accomplished; and this consciousness is the basis of good and defiled dharmas, and if it were good or defiled, because they contradict each other, it should not serve as basis for both; moreover this consciousness is of the nature of what is perfumed, and if it were good or defiled, like extremely fragrant or foul things, it would not receive perfuming.

無燻習故，染、淨因果俱不成立，故此唯是無覆無記。

Without perfuming, the causes and effects of the defiled and the pure could not be established, so this is only unobscured neutral.

「覆」謂染法障聖道故，又能蔽心，令不淨故；此識非染，故名「無覆」。「記」謂善、惡，有愛、非愛果，及殊勝自體可記別故；此非善、惡，故名「無記」。

"Obscured" means that defiled dharmas obstruct the sacred path and also cloud the mind, making it impure; this consciousness is not defiled, and so is called "unobscured." "Neutral" means that good and evil have loved or unloved fruits and a superior self-substance that can be distinguished; this is neither good nor evil, and so is called "neutral."

「觸等亦如是」者，謂如阿賴耶識，唯是無覆無記性攝，觸、作意、受、想、思亦爾，諸相應法，必同性故。

"Contact and the rest are also like this": that is, like the alaya consciousness, which is only of unobscured neutral nature, contact, attention, feeling, perception and volition are also so, because all corresponding dharmas must be of the same nature.

又，觸等五，如阿賴耶，亦是異熟，所緣、行相俱不可知，緣三種境，五法相應，無覆無記，故說「觸等亦如是」言。

Moreover, the five, contact and so on, like the alaya, are also maturation, with objects and aspects both unknowable, cognizing three kinds of objects, the five dharmas corresponding, unobscured neutral, and so it is said "contact and the rest are also like this."

有義：觸等如阿賴耶，亦是異熟及一切種，廣說乃至無覆無記，「亦如是」言，無簡別故。

One view is that contact and so on, like the alaya, are also maturation and all seeds, and so on up to unobscured neutral, with "also like this" being said because there is no qualification.

彼說非理。

What they say is unreasonable.

所以者何？

Why?

觸等依識，不自在故。如貪、信等不能受燻，如何同識，能持種子？

Contact and so on depend on consciousness and are not independent. Like greed, faith and so on, which cannot be perfumed, how could they, like consciousness, hold seeds?

又，若觸等亦能受燻，應一有情有六種體。

Moreover, if contact and so on could also be perfumed, then one sentient being would have six kinds of substance.

若爾，果起從何種生？理不應言從六種起，未見多種生一芽故。

If so, from which seed does the fruit arise? It is not reasonable to say it arises from six seeds, since one never sees many seeds produce one sprout.

若說果生唯從一種，則餘五種便為無用；亦不可說次第生果，燻習同時，勢力等故；又不可說六果頓生，勿一有情一剎那頃，六眼識等俱時生故。

If one says the fruit arises from only one seed, then the other five would be useless; nor can one say that fruits arise in sequence, since the perfuming is simultaneous and the power equal; nor can one say that six fruits arise at once, lest one sentient being in one moment have six eye consciousnesses and so on arising together.

誰言觸等亦能受燻持諸種子？不爾，如何觸等如識名一切種？

Who says that contact and so on can also be perfumed and hold seeds? If not, how can contact and so on, like consciousness, be called all-seeds?

謂觸等五，有似種相，名一切種，觸等與識所緣等故，無色觸等有所緣故，親所緣緣定應有故，此似種相不為因緣生現識等，如觸等上似眼根等非識所依，亦如似火無能燒用，彼救非理，觸等所緣似種等相，後執受處方應與識而相例故。

That is, the five, contact and so on, have aspects like seeds and are called all-seeds, because contact and so on and the objects of consciousness are the same, and contact and so on without form have objects, and the directly cognized object condition must exist; this seed-like aspect does not serve as causal condition to give rise to manifest consciousness and so on, like the aspect of eye faculty and so on on contact and so on, which is not the basis of consciousness, and also like fire without the function of burning; that defense is unreasonable, and the seed-like aspects on the objects of contact and so on should only be compared later with consciousness in apprehending and sustaining and place.

由此前說一切種言，定目受燻、能持種義；不爾，本頌有重言失。

Therefore the earlier statement of "all seeds" definitely refers to the meaning of being perfumed and holding seeds; otherwise, the root verse would have the fault of repetition.

又彼所說，「亦如是」言，無簡別故，鹹相例者，定不成證，勿觸等五，亦能了別，觸等亦與觸等相應。

Moreover, their saying "also like this," because there is no qualification, applies by analogy to all, and is definitely not established as proof, lest contact and so on, the five, also be able to discern, and contact and so on also correspond with contact and so on.

由此故知「亦如是」者，隨所應說，非謂一切。

From this one knows that "also like this" is said as appropriate and does not mean all.

阿賴耶識為斷？為常？

Is the alaya consciousness discontinuous or permanent?

非斷、非常，以「恆轉」故。「恆」謂此識無始時來，一類、相續，常無間斷，是界、趣、生施設本故，性堅、持種令不失故。「轉」謂此識無始時來，念念生滅前後變異，因滅果生，非常、一故，可為轉識燻成種故。

It is neither discontinuous nor permanent, because it is "constantly flowing." "Constant" means that this consciousness from beginningless time is of one kind and continuous, always uninterrupted, because it is the basis for establishing realms, destinies and births, firm in nature, and holds seeds so that they are not lost. "Flowing" means that this consciousness from beginningless time arises and ceases moment by moment, changing before and after, with the cause ceasing and the effect arising, because it is neither permanent nor one, and can be perfumed by the active consciousnesses to form seeds.

「恆」言遮斷，「轉」表非常，猶如瀑流，因果法爾。

"Constant" excludes discontinuity, and "flowing" indicates non-permanence, like a rushing stream, with cause and effect naturally so.

如瀑流水，非斷、非常，相續長時有所漂溺，此識亦爾，從無始來生滅相續，非常、非斷，漂溺有情令不出離。

Like a rushing stream of water, neither broken nor permanent, continuing for a long time and sweeping things away, this consciousness is also like this: from beginningless time it arises and ceases in continuity, neither permanent nor broken, sweeping sentient beings along so that they do not escape.

又如瀑流，雖風等擊，起諸波浪而流不斷，此識亦爾，雖遇眾緣，起眼識等而恆相續。

Also like a rushing stream, though struck by wind and so on, raising waves, the flow is not broken; this consciousness is also like this: though it meets many conditions and gives rise to eye consciousness and so on, it continues constantly.

又如瀑流，漂水下上魚、草等物，隨流不捨，此識亦爾，與內習氣外觸等法恆相隨轉。

Also like a rushing stream, which carries fish, grass and other things up and down, following the flow and not leaving them, this consciousness is also like this, constantly turning along with inner habit-energies and outer contact and other dharmas.

如是法喻，意顯此識無始因果非斷、常義。謂此識性無始時來，剎那剎那果生因滅。果生故非斷，因滅故非常，非斷、非常是緣起理，故說此識恆轉如流。

This simile and its application is meant to show that the beginningless cause and effect of this consciousness is neither discontinuous nor permanent. That is, the nature of this consciousness from beginningless time, moment after moment, has the effect arising and the cause ceasing. The effect's arising is why it is not discontinuous, and the cause's ceasing is why it is not permanent, and neither discontinuous nor permanent is the principle of dependent origination, and so it is said that this consciousness constantly flows like a stream.

過去、未來既非實有，非常可爾；非斷如何？斷豈得成緣起正理？

Since the past and future are not really existent, non-permanence is acceptable; but how can it be non-discontinuous? Can discontinuity be the right principle of dependent origination?

過去、未來若是實有，可許非斷；如何非常？常亦不成緣起正理。

If the past and future are really existent, non-discontinuity can be allowed; but how can it be non-permanent? Can permanence also be the right principle of dependent origination?

豈斥他過，己義便成？

Does refuting their faults establish one's own meaning?

若不摧邪難以顯正。前因滅位後果即生，如秤兩頭低、昂時等，如是因果相續如流，何假去、來，方成非斷？

If one does not crush the wrong, it is hard to reveal the right. When the cause ceases, the later effect arises at once, like the two ends of a scale, one low and one high at the same time; this continuation of cause and effect like a stream, what need is there to posit past and future in order to be non-discontinuous?

因現有位，後果未生，因是誰因？果現有時，前因已滅，果是誰果？既無因果，誰離斷、常？

When the cause is present, the later effect has not yet arisen, so whose cause is the cause? When the effect is present, the earlier cause has already ceased, so whose effect is the effect? Since there is no cause and effect, who is free of discontinuity and permanence?

若有因時，已有後果，果既本有，何待前因？因義既無，果義寧有？無因無果，豈離斷、常？

If at the time of the cause, the later effect already exists, then since the effect is originally existent, why wait for the earlier cause? Since the meaning of cause does not exist, how can the meaning of effect exist? With no cause and no effect, how is one free of discontinuity and permanence?

因果義成，依法作用，故所詰難，非預我宗。

Since the meaning of cause and effect is established, and it operates in dependence on dharmas, what they question does not concern my school.

體既本有，用亦應然，所待因緣，亦本有故。

Since the substance is originally existent, the function should also be so, and the conditions it depends on should also be originally existent.

由斯汝義因果定無，應信大乘緣起正理。謂此正理深妙離言，因果等言皆假施設。觀現在法有引後用，假立當果對說現因；觀現在法有酬前相，假立曾因對說現果。假謂現識似彼相現。

From this, in your doctrine cause and effect definitely do not exist, and you should believe in the right principle of dependent origination of the Mahayana. This right principle is profound and wondrous and beyond words, and words like cause and effect are all provisional. Observing that a present dharma has the function of leading to a later one, one provisionally establishes a future effect as correlative to the present cause; observing that a present dharma has the aspect of repaying an earlier one, one provisionally establishes a past cause as correlative to the present effect. "Provisional" means that the present consciousness appears as that aspect.

如是因果，理趣顯然，遠離二邊，契會中道，諸有智者應順修學。

Cause and effect in this way, with the principle clear, far from the two extremes and in accord with the Middle Way, should be followed and studied by all the wise.

有餘部說：雖無去、來而有因果恆相續義。

Other schools say: although there is no going or coming, there is still the meaning of cause and effect continuing constantly.

謂現在法極迅速者，猶有初、後，生、滅二時，生時酬因，滅時引果，時雖有二，而體是一，前因正滅，後果正生，體相雖殊，而俱是有。

That is, a present dharma that is extremely swift also has two moments, beginning and end, arising and ceasing; at the time of arising it repays the cause, and at the time of ceasing it leads to the effect; though there are two moments, the substance is one; the earlier cause is just ceasing and the later effect is just arising, and though the substance and characteristics differ, both exist.

如是因果非假施設，然離斷、常，又無前難，誰有智者捨此信餘？

Such cause and effect is not provisional, yet is free of discontinuity and permanence, and has none of the earlier difficulties; who among the wise would abandon this and believe others?

彼有虛言，都無實義，何容一念而有二時？生、滅相違，寧同現在？滅若現在，生應未來。有故名生，既是現在，無故名滅，寧非過去？滅若非無，生應非有；生既現有，滅應現無，又二相違，如何體一？非苦、樂等見有是事，生、滅若一，時應無二；生、滅若異，寧說體同？故生、滅時俱現在有，同依一體，理必不成。

They have empty words with no real meaning; how can they allow two moments in a single thought? Arising and ceasing contradict each other, so how can they be in the present together? If ceasing is present, arising should be future. Because there is existence it is called arising; if it is present, then because there is non-existence it is called ceasing, so how is it not past? If ceasing is not non-existence, arising should not be existence; since arising is presently existent, ceasing should be presently non-existent, and the two contradict each other, so how can their substance be one? It is not like suffering and pleasure and the like, where this is seen; if arising and ceasing are one, there should be no two moments; if arising and ceasing are different, how can one say their substance is the same? Therefore the claim that arising and ceasing are both present at the time and rely on one substance cannot be established in principle.

經部師等因果相續，理亦不成，彼不許有阿賴耶識能持種故。

The continuation of cause and effect according to the Sautrantikas and others also cannot be established in principle, because they do not allow an alaya consciousness that can hold seeds.

由此應信大乘所說因果相續緣起正理。

From this one should believe the right principle of dependent origination, the continuation of cause and effect, taught by the Mahayana.

此識無始恆轉如流，乃至何位當究竟捨？

This consciousness, from beginningless time, constantly flows like a stream; at what stage should it be finally abandoned?

阿羅漢位方究竟捨。

Only at the stage of the arhat is it finally abandoned.

謂諸聖者斷煩惱障究竟盡時，名阿羅漢。爾時，此識煩惱麁重永遠離故，說之為「捨」。

That is, when the sages finally exhaust the obstruction of afflictions, they are called arhats. At that time, the coarse heaviness of afflictions in this consciousness is permanently left behind, and this is said to be "abandoning."

此中所說阿羅漢者，通攝三乘無學果位，皆已永害煩惱賊故；應受世間妙供養故；永不復受分段生故。

The arhat spoken of here includes the fruits of no more learning of all Three Vehicles; they have permanently killed the thieves of afflictions, are worthy of the world's wondrous offerings, and will never again receive segmented birth and death.

云何知然？

How do we know this is so?

〈決擇分〉說：諸阿羅漢、獨覺、如來皆不成就阿賴耶故；《集論》復說：若諸菩薩得菩提時，頓斷煩惱及所知障，成阿羅漢及如來故。

The Section of Determination says: arhats, Pratyekabuddhas and Tathagatas all do not possess the alaya; and the Compendium again says: when Bodhisattvas attain Bodhi, they at once cut off the afflictions and the obstruction to knowledge, and become arhats and Tathagatas.

若爾，菩薩煩惱種子未永斷盡非阿羅漢，應皆成就阿賴耶識，何故即彼〈決擇分〉說不退菩薩亦不成就阿賴耶識？

If so, Bodhisattvas whose seeds of afflictions have not been permanently cut off are not arhats and should all possess the alaya consciousness; why does that same Section of Determination say that non-retrogressing Bodhisattvas also do not possess the alaya consciousness?

彼說二乘無學果位迴心趣向大菩提者，必不退起煩惱障故，趣菩提故，即復轉名不退菩薩，彼不成就阿賴耶識。

They say that those at the stage of no more learning in the Two Vehicles who turn their minds toward great Bodhi will surely not regress to give rise to the obstruction of afflictions, and as they head toward Bodhi they are again renamed non-retrogressing Bodhisattvas, and they do not possess the alaya consciousness.

即攝在此阿羅漢中，故彼論文不違此義。

They are included in this arhat category, so that treatise does not contradict this meaning.

又不動地已上菩薩，一切煩惱永不行故，法駛流中任運轉故；能諸行中起諸行故；剎那剎那轉增進故，此位方名不退菩薩。

Moreover, Bodhisattvas from the Immovable Ground upward never again act with any afflictions, turn spontaneously in the swift flow of the Dharma, can give rise to all practices within each practice, and advance further moment by moment; only this stage is called the non-retrogressing Bodhisattva.

然此菩薩雖未斷盡異熟識中煩惱種子，而緣此識我見、愛等，不復執藏為自內我，由斯永捨阿賴耶名，故說不成阿賴耶識，此亦說彼名阿羅漢。

But although these Bodhisattvas have not yet cut off the seeds of afflictions in the maturation consciousness, they no longer grasp the self-view, craving and so on that cognize this consciousness as an inner self, and from this they permanently abandon the name alaya, so it is said they do not possess the alaya consciousness, and this too speaks of them being called arhats.

有義：初地已上菩薩，已證二空所顯理故；已得二種殊勝智故；已斷分別二重障故；能一行中起諸行故；雖為利益起諸煩惱，而彼不作煩惱過失故，此亦名不退菩薩。

One view: Bodhisattvas from the first ground upward have already realized the principle shown by the two emptinesses, have attained the two kinds of superior wisdom, have already cut off the two heavy layers of discriminating obstructions, and can give rise to all practices in one practice; though they give rise to afflictions for the sake of benefiting others, they do not commit the faults of afflictions, and so this too is called a non-retrogressing Bodhisattva.

然此菩薩雖未斷盡俱生煩惱，而緣此識所有分別我見、愛等，不復執藏為自內我，由斯亦捨阿賴耶名，故說不成阿賴耶識，此亦說彼名阿羅漢。

But although these Bodhisattvas have not yet cut off the innate afflictions, they no longer grasp the discriminating self-view, craving and so on that cognize this consciousness as an inner self, and from this they also abandon the name alaya, so it is said they do not possess the alaya consciousness, and this too speaks of them being called arhats.

故《集論》中作如是說：十地菩薩雖未永斷一切煩惱，然此煩惱猶如呪、藥所伏諸毒，不起一切煩惱過失。一切地中，如阿羅漢已斷煩惱，故亦說彼名阿羅漢。

So the Compendium says as follows: Bodhisattvas of the ten grounds, though they have not yet permanently cut off all afflictions, have those afflictions subdued like poisons by spells and medicines, and do not give rise to any faults of afflictions. In all grounds, they are like arhats who have cut off afflictions, and so they too are called arhats.

彼說非理。七地已前猶有俱生我見、愛等，執藏此識為自內我，如何已捨阿賴耶名？

What they say is unreasonable. Before the seventh ground there are still innate self-view, craving and so on, which grasp this consciousness as an inner self; how could they have abandoned the name alaya?

若彼分別我見、愛等，不復執藏，說名為捨，則預流等諸有學位，亦應已捨阿賴耶名，許便違害諸論所說。

If they say that the discriminating self-view, craving and so on no longer grasp it, and call that abandoning, then those in the stages of learning such as stream-enterers should also have abandoned the name alaya, and allowing this would contradict what the treatises say.

地上菩薩所起煩惱皆由正知，不為過失，非預流等得有斯事，寧可以彼例此菩薩？

The afflictions that Bodhisattvas above the grounds give rise to are all with right knowledge and are not faults, and this is not something stream-enterers and the like can do; how can one compare these Bodhisattvas to them?

彼六識中所起煩惱，雖由正知不為過失，而第七識有漏心位，任運現行執藏此識，寧不與彼預流等同？由此故知彼說非理。

As for the afflictions they give rise to in the six consciousnesses, though with right knowledge they are not faults, in the seventh consciousness, in the mental state with outflows, they spontaneously and presently grasp this consciousness as a store; how are they not the same as those stream-enterers and others? From this one knows that what they say is unreasonable.

然阿羅漢斷此識中煩惱麁重究竟盡故，不復執藏阿賴耶識為自內我。由斯永失阿賴耶名，說之為捨，非捨一切第八識體。勿阿羅漢無識持種，爾時便入無餘涅槃。

But an arhat cuts off the coarse heaviness of afflictions in this consciousness completely, and no longer grasps the alaya consciousness as an inner self. From this he permanently loses the name alaya, which is said to be "abandoning"; it does not mean abandoning the entire substance of the eighth consciousness. Lest the arhat have no consciousness to hold seeds, he would at that time enter nirvana without remainder.

然第八識雖諸有情皆悉成就，而隨義別立種種名。

But although the eighth consciousness is possessed by all sentient beings, it is given various names according to different meanings.

謂或名心，由種種法燻習種子所積集故；或名阿陀那，執持種子及諸色根令不壞故；或名所知依，能與染、淨所知諸法為依止故；或名種子識，能遍任持世、出世間諸種子故。

That is, it is sometimes called mind, because it is accumulated by seeds perfumed by various dharmas; or called adana (the grasping consciousness), because it grasps seeds and the form faculties so that they do not decay; or called the basis of what is knowable, because it can serve as basis for all knowable dharmas, defiled and pure; or called the seed consciousness, because it can universally hold the seeds of the mundane and supramundane.

此等諸名通一切位。

These and other names apply in all stages.

或名阿賴耶，攝藏一切雜染品法令不失故，我見、愛等執藏以為自內我故。此名唯在異生、有學，非無學位、不退菩薩，有雜染法執藏義故。

Or it is called alaya, because it gathers and stores all defiled dharmas so that they are not lost, and self-view, craving and so on grasp it as an inner self. This name applies only to ordinary beings and those still learning, not to the stage of no more learning or non-retrogressing Bodhisattvas, because it has the meaning of storing and being grasped by defiled dharmas.

或名異熟識，能引生死善、不善業異熟果故。此名唯在異生、二乘諸菩薩位，非如來地猶有異熟無記法故。

Or it is called the maturation consciousness, because it can lead to the maturation fruit of good and not good karma of birth and death. This name applies only to ordinary beings, the Two Vehicles and the Bodhisattva stages, and not to the Tathagata ground, where there are no longer maturation neutral dharmas.

或名無垢識，最極清淨諸無漏法所依止故。此名唯在如來地有，菩薩、二乘及異生位，持有漏種可受燻習，未得善淨第八識故。如契經說：

Or it is called the immaculate consciousness, because it is the basis for the purest dharmas free of outflows. This name exists only on the Tathagata ground; in the stages of Bodhisattvas, the Two Vehicles and ordinary beings, it holds seeds with outflows and can be perfumed, and has not yet attained the good, pure eighth consciousness. As the sutra says:

如來無垢識，是淨無漏界，

The Tathagata's immaculate consciousness is the pure realm free of outflows,

解脫一切障，圓鏡智相應。

liberated from all obstructions, corresponding with the Great Mirror Wisdom.

阿賴耶名過失重故，最初捨故，此中偏說。異熟識體菩薩將得菩提時捨，聲聞、獨覺入無餘依涅槃時捨。無垢識體無有捨時，利樂有情無盡時故。心等通故，隨義應說。

The name alaya has the gravest faults and is abandoned first, so it is specially mentioned here. The substance of the maturation consciousness is abandoned when a Bodhisattva is about to attain Bodhi, and for Shravakas and Pratyekabuddhas when they enter nirvana without remainder. The substance of the immaculate consciousness is never abandoned, because there is no end to benefiting sentient beings. Mind and the rest are general, and should be said according to meaning.

然第八識總有二位：一、有漏位，無記性攝。

But the eighth consciousness in general has two stages: first, the stage with outflows, included in neutral nature.

唯與觸等五法相應，但緣前說執受、處境。

It corresponds only with the five dharmas of contact and so on, and only cognizes the apprehended and sustained and place objects spoken of earlier.

二、無漏位，唯善性攝。

Second, the stage free of outflows, included only in good nature.

與二十一心所相應，謂遍行、別境各五，善十一，與一切心恆相應故。常樂證智所觀境故；於所觀境恆印持故；於曾受境恆明記故；世尊無有不定心故；於一切法常決擇故。極淨信等常相應故，無染汙故。無散動故。

It corresponds with twenty-one mental factors, namely five omnipresent, five object-determining, and eleven good, because it always corresponds with all minds. It constantly delights in the objects observed by realized wisdom; with respect to the observed object it always holds firmly; with respect to the experienced object it always remembers clearly; the World-Honored One has no unsettled mind; and with respect to all dharmas it always decides. Utmost pure faith and so on always correspond, with no defilement and no distraction.

此亦唯與捨受相應，任運恆時平等轉故。

This too corresponds only with neutral feeling, because it operates spontaneously and constantly in equanimity.

以一切法為所緣境，鏡智遍緣一切法故。

It takes all dharmas as its object, because the Mirror Wisdom universally cognizes all dharmas.

云何應知此第八識離眼等識有別自體？

How should one know that this eighth consciousness has a separate substance apart from the eye consciousness and the others?

聖教、正理為定量故。

Because the sacred teachings and right reasoning are the standard.

謂有《大乘阿毘達磨》契經中說：

That is, the sutra of the Mahayana Abhidharma says:

「無始時來界，一切法等依，

"The realm from beginningless time, the common basis of all dharmas,

由此有諸趣，及涅槃證得。」

because of it there are all the destinies, and also the attainment of nirvana."

此第八識自性微細，故以作用而顯示之。

The self-nature of this eighth consciousness is subtle, so it is shown by its functions.

頌中初半，顯第八識為因緣用，後半顯與流轉還滅，作依持用。

In the verse, the first half shows the eighth consciousness serving as a causal condition, and the second half shows its serving as basis for going around and returning to cessation.

「界」是因義，即種子識，無始時來展轉相續，親生諸法，故名為因。

"Realm" has the meaning of cause, and is the seed consciousness, which from beginningless time continues in turn and directly produces all dharmas, and so is called cause.

「依」是緣義，即執持識無始時來，與一切法等為依止，故名為緣。

"Basis" has the meaning of condition, and is the grasping consciousness, which from beginningless time is the equal basis for all dharmas, and so is called condition.

謂能執持諸種子故，與現行法為所依故，即變為彼及為彼依。

That is, it can grasp and hold all seeds and serve as basis for manifest dharmas, that is, it transforms them and serves as their basis.

變為彼者，謂變為器及有根身；「為彼依」者，謂與轉識作所依止。以能執受五色根故，眼等五識依之而轉，又與末那為依止故，第六意識依之而轉。末那、意識轉識攝故。如眼等識依俱有根，第八理應是識性故，亦以第七為俱有依。

Transforming them means transforming the vessel and the body with faculties; "serving as their basis" means serving as the basis for the active consciousnesses. Because it can apprehend and sustain the five form faculties, the five consciousnesses such as the eye consciousness turn depending on it, and it is also the basis of manas, and the sixth, mental consciousness, turns depending on it. Manas and the mental consciousness are included among the active consciousnesses. Like the eye and other consciousnesses relying on simultaneous faculties, the eighth should in principle be of the nature of consciousness and also have the seventh as its simultaneous basis.

是謂此識為因、緣用。

This is this consciousness's function as cause and condition.

「由此有」者，由有此識；「有諸趣」者，有善、惡趣。

"Because of it there are": because this consciousness exists; "there are the destinies": there are good and evil destinies.

謂由有此第八識故，執持一切順流轉法，令諸有情流轉生死。

That is, because this eighth consciousness exists, it holds all dharmas that accord with going around, making sentient beings go around in birth and death.

雖惑、業、生皆是流轉，而趣是果，勝故偏說；或「諸趣」言通能、所趣，諸趣資具亦得趣名。

Although delusion, karma and birth are all going around, the destiny is the fruit and is superior, and so it is singled out; or "destinies" includes both the subject and object of going toward, and the equipment of the destinies also receives the name destiny.

諸惑、業、生皆依此識，是與流轉作依持用。

All delusion, karma and birth depend on this consciousness, and this is its function of serving as support for going around.

「及涅槃證得」者，由有此識故，有涅槃證得。

"And the attainment of nirvana": because this consciousness exists, there is attainment of nirvana.

謂由有此第八識故，執持一切順還滅法，令修行者證得涅槃。

That is, because this eighth consciousness exists, it holds all dharmas that accord with returning to cessation, so that practitioners can attain nirvana.

此中但說能證得道，涅槃不依此識有故。

Here only the path that can attain is spoken of, because nirvana does not depend on this consciousness for existence.

或此但說所證涅槃，是修行者正所求故。

Or here only the nirvana attained is spoken of, because it is what practitioners truly seek.

或此雙說涅槃與道俱是還滅品類攝故。謂「涅槃」言顯所證滅，後「證得」言顯能得道，由能斷道，斷所斷惑，究竟盡位，證得涅槃。

Or here both nirvana and the path are spoken of, as both are included in the class of returning to cessation. "Nirvana" shows the cessation attained, and "attainment" afterward shows the path that attains; by the path that can cut off, cutting off the delusions to be cut off, at the stage of final exhaustion, one attains nirvana.

能、所斷、證皆依此識，是與還滅作依持用。

The cutting off and the attaining, both subject and object, depend on this consciousness, and this is its function of serving as support for returning to cessation.

又此頌中初句，顯示此識自性無始恆有，後三顯與雜染、清淨二法，總、別為所依止。

Moreover, the first line of this verse shows that the self-nature of this consciousness has existed constantly from beginningless time, and the latter three show that it is, generally and specifically, the basis for both defiled and pure dharmas.

雜染法者，謂苦、集諦，即所能趣生及業、惑；清淨法者，謂滅、道諦，即所、能證涅槃及道；彼二皆依此識而有，依轉識等，理不成故。

Defiled dharmas are the truths of suffering and origin, that is, the places to be gone to and born into, together with karma and delusion; pure dharmas are the truths of cessation and path, that is, the nirvana and path that are attained and by which one attains; both depend on this consciousness for existence, and depending on the active consciousnesses and the rest cannot be established in principle.

或復初句顯此識體無始相續，後三顯與三種自性為所依止：

Or the first line shows that the substance of this consciousness continues from beginningless time, and the latter three show that it is the basis of the three self-natures:

謂依他起、遍計所執、圓成實性，如次應知。

namely the dependent nature, the imagined nature and the perfected nature, which one should know in that order.

今此頌中諸所說義，離第八識皆不得有。

All the meanings spoken of in this verse cannot exist apart from the eighth consciousness.

即彼經中復作是說：

That same sutra also says as follows:

「由攝藏諸法，一切種子識，

"Because it gathers and stores all dharmas, the consciousness of all seeds,

故名阿賴耶，勝者我開示。」

it is therefore called alaya; to the victorious ones I reveal it."

由此本識具諸種子，故能攝藏諸雜染法。

From this, the root consciousness holds all the seeds, and so can gather and store all defiled dharmas.

依斯建立阿賴耶名，非如勝性轉為大等，種子與果體非一故；能依、所依俱生滅故；與雜染法互相攝藏，亦為有情執藏為我，故說此識名「阿賴耶」。

The name alaya is established on this basis, and it is not like primal nature turning into the great and so on, because seeds and fruit are not one in substance; the subject and object of dependence both arise and cease; it mutually gathers and stores defiled dharmas and is also grasped by sentient beings as a self; so this consciousness is called "alaya."

已入見道諸菩薩眾得真現觀，名為「勝者」，彼能證解阿賴耶識，故我世尊正為開示；或諸菩薩皆名「勝者」，雖見道前未能證解阿賴耶識，而能信解，求彼轉依，故亦為說。

The Bodhisattva assembly who have entered the path of seeing and attained true direct observation are called "the victorious ones," and they can realize and understand the alaya consciousness, so I, the World-Honored One, reveal it to them; or all Bodhisattvas are called "the victorious ones," and though before the path of seeing they cannot yet realize and understand the alaya consciousness, they can believe and understand it and seek its transformation of the basis, so it is also spoken of for them.

非諸轉識有如是義。

The active consciousnesses do not have this meaning.

《解深密經》亦作是說：

The Samdhinirmocana Sutra also says as follows:

「阿陀那識甚深細，一切種子如瀑流，

"The adana consciousness is very deep and subtle, all its seeds flow like a rushing stream,

我於凡愚不開演，恐彼分別執為我。」

I do not reveal it to the ordinary and foolish, for fear they will discriminate and grasp it as a self."

以能執持諸法種子，及能執受色根依處，亦能執取結生相續，故說此識名「阿陀那」。無性有情不能窮底，故說「甚深」；趣寂種性不能通達，故名「甚細」。

Because it is able to hold and maintain the seeds of all dharmas, and is able to hold and sustain the material sense faculties and their supports, and is also able to grasp and take up rebirth and continuity, this consciousness is called "adana" (the grasping consciousness). Beings without the nature for enlightenment cannot fathom its depths, so it is called "extremely profound"; those whose nature inclines to quiescence cannot penetrate it, so it is called "extremely subtle".

是一切法真實種子，緣擊便生轉識波浪，恆無間斷，猶如瀑流。

It is the true seed of all dharmas; when struck by conditions it gives rise to the waves of the active consciousnesses, constantly without interruption, like a torrent.

「凡」即無性，「愚」即趣寂。恐彼於此起分別執，墮諸惡趣，障生聖道，故我世尊不為開演。

"Ordinary" means those without the nature for enlightenment, and "foolish" means those inclined to quiescence. For fear that they would form discriminating attachment to it, fall into evil destinies, and obstruct the arising of the noble path, our World-Honored One did not expound it for them.

唯第八識有如是相。

Only the eighth consciousness has such characteristics.

《入楞伽經》亦作是說：

The Lankavatara Sutra also says the same:

「如海遇風緣，起種種波浪，

"Like the ocean meeting the condition of wind, it stirs up various waves,

現前作用轉，無有間斷時。

and their manifest functions go on turning, without any time of interruption.

藏識海亦然，境等風所擊，

The ocean of the storehouse consciousness is also like this: struck by the wind of objects and so on,

恆起諸識浪，現前作用轉。」

it constantly stirs up the waves of the consciousnesses, and their manifest functions go on turning."

眼等諸識，無如大海恆相續轉起諸識浪，故知別有第八識性。

The eye consciousness and the other consciousnesses do not constantly and continuously arise as waves of consciousness like the great ocean, so one knows there is a separate eighth consciousness nature.

此等無量大乘經中，皆別說有此第八識。

In these and other immeasurable Mahayana sutras, this eighth consciousness is everywhere separately taught.

諸大乘經：皆順無我，違數取趣；棄背流轉，趣向還滅；讚佛、法、僧，毀諸外道；表蘊等法，遮勝性等；樂大乘者，許能顯示無顛倒理，契經攝故，如《增壹》等至教量攝。

All the Mahayana sutras accord with non-self and oppose the doctrine of the repeated taking of rebirth; they renounce the turning of rebirth and move toward return and cessation; they praise the Buddha, the Dharma and the Sangha and criticize the non-Buddhist paths; they expound the aggregates and other dharmas and refute the doctrine of the Supreme Nature and the like; those who delight in the Mahayana admit that they can reveal the principle without inversion, because they are included in the sutras, just like the Ekottara Agama and other scriptures counted as authoritative teaching.

又，聖慈氏以七種因，證大乘經真是佛說。

Moreover, the holy Maitreya uses seven reasons to prove that the Mahayana sutras were truly spoken by the Buddha.

一、先不記故。若大乘經佛滅度後，有餘為壞正法故說，何故世尊非如當起諸可怖事，先預記別？

First, no prior prediction. If the Mahayana sutras had been spoken after the Buddha's extinction by some other people in order to destroy the true Dharma, why did the World-Honored One not foretell it in advance, as he did with other fearful events that were to arise?

二、本俱行故。大小乘教本來俱行，寧知大乘獨非佛說？

Second, they were practiced together from the beginning. The Mahayana and Hinayana teachings have been practiced together from the start; how can one know that only the Mahayana was not spoken by the Buddha?

三、非餘境故。大乘所說廣大甚深，非外道等思量境界。彼經論中曾所未說，設為彼說，亦不信受，故大乘經非非佛說。

Third, it is not the domain of others. What the Mahayana teaches is vast and profound, and not a realm that non-Buddhists and others can reach by thought. It was never taught in their scriptures and treatises, and even if it were taught to them, they would not believe and accept it, so the Mahayana sutras are not something other than the Buddha's teaching.

四、應極成故。若謂大乘是餘佛說，非今佛語，則大乘教是佛所說，其理極成。

Fourth, it must be established. If one says that the Mahayana was spoken by some other buddha and not in the present Buddha's words, then the principle that the Mahayana teaching was spoken by a Buddha is fully established.

五、有、無有故。若有大乘，即應信此諸大乘教是佛所說，離此大乘不可得故。

Fifth, existence and non-existence. If there is the Mahayana, one should believe that these Mahayana teachings were spoken by the Buddha, because apart from this Mahayana there is no way to be obtained.

若無大乘，聲聞乘教亦應非有，以離大乘決定無有得成佛義，誰出於世說聲聞乘？故聲聞乘是佛所說，非大乘教不應正理。

If there is no Mahayana, the Shravaka Vehicle teachings should also not exist, because apart from the Mahayana there is definitely no meaning of attaining buddhahood, and who would have appeared in the world to teach the Shravaka Vehicle? So the Shravaka Vehicle was spoken by the Buddha, and to say it is not the Mahayana teaching is not in accord with right reason.

六、能對治故。依大乘經勤修行者，皆能引得無分別智，能正對治一切煩惱，故應信此是佛所說。

Sixth, the ability to counteract. Those who diligently cultivate and practice according to the Mahayana sutras can all attain nonconceptual wisdom, which can properly counteract all afflictions, so one should believe that this was spoken by the Buddha.

七、義異文故。大乘所說意趣甚深，不可隨文而取其義，便生誹謗謂非佛語。

Seventh, the meaning differs from the words. The intention of the Mahayana teachings is extremely profound, and one cannot take their meaning according to the letter and then give rise to slander, saying they are not the Buddha's words.

是故大乘真是佛說。

Therefore the Mahayana was truly spoken by the Buddha.

如《莊嚴論》頌此義言：

As the verse of the Ornament Treatise says about this meaning:

「先不記、俱行、非餘所行境、

"No prior prediction, practiced together, not the domain of others,

極成、有無有、對治、異文故。」

fully established, existence and non-existence, counteraction, the meaning differing from the words."

餘部經中亦密意說阿賴耶識有別自性。

In the scriptures of other schools too, the alaya consciousness is taught with a hidden intention as having a nature of its own.

謂大眾部阿笈摩中，密意說此名根本識，是眼識等所依止故。譬如樹根是莖等本，非眼等識有如是義。

For instance, in the Agama of the Mahasamghika school, with a hidden intention, it is called the root consciousness, because it is the support of the eye consciousness and the others. It is like the root of a tree being the base of the trunk and so on; it is not that the eye and other consciousnesses have this meaning.

上坐部經分別論者，俱密意說此名有分識，「有」謂三有；「分」是因義，唯此恆、遍，為三有因。

The Sthavira school and the Vibhajyavadins all teach with a hidden intention that it is called the bhavanga consciousness, where "bhava" refers to the three realms of existence and "anga" has the meaning of cause; only this consciousness is constant and pervasive, and is the cause of the three realms of existence.

化地部說此名窮生死蘊，離第八識無別蘊法，窮生死際無間斷時。謂無色界諸色間斷，無想天等餘心等滅，不相應行離色、心等無別自體，已極成故，唯此識名窮生死蘊。

The Mahishasaka school says it is called the aggregate lasting to the end of birth and death, and that apart from the eighth consciousness there is no other aggregate dharma lasting through the limit of birth and death without interruption. In the formless realm there is interruption of forms, in the heaven of non-perception other mental activities cease, and the conditioned dharmas not associated with mind have no separate substance apart from form, mind and so on, which is already fully established; only this consciousness is called the aggregate lasting to the end of birth and death.

說一切有部《增壹》經中，亦密意說此名阿賴耶，謂愛阿賴耶、樂阿賴耶、欣阿賴耶、憙阿賴耶。

In the Ekottara Agama of the Sarvastivada school, it is also taught with a hidden intention that this is called alaya, namely love of alaya, delight in alaya, pleasure in alaya, and joy in alaya.

謂阿賴耶識是貪總、別三世境故，立此四名。有情執為真自內我，乃至未斷恒生愛著，故阿賴耶識是真愛著處。

That is, the alaya consciousness is the general and specific craving for the objects of the three times, and these four names are established for it. Sentient beings cling to it as a true inner self and, until it is cut off, constantly give rise to attachment, so the alaya consciousness is the true place of attachment.

不應執餘五取蘊等，謂生一向苦受處者，於餘五取蘊不生愛著，彼恆厭逆餘五取蘊，念我何時當捨此命、此眾同分、此苦身心，令我自在受快樂故。

One should not cling to the other five aggregates of clinging, and so on. For those born in a realm of exclusively painful feeling do not give rise to attachment to the other five aggregates of clinging; they constantly loathe and resist them, thinking: when shall I abandon this life, this community of beings, this painful body and mind, so that I can freely enjoy pleasure?

五欲亦非真愛著處，謂離欲者於五妙欲，雖不貪著而愛我故。

The five desires are also not the true place of attachment. For those free from desire, toward the five wondrous desires, though they do not crave, they still love the self.

樂受亦非真愛著處，謂離第三靜慮染者，雖厭樂受而愛我故。

Pleasant feeling is also not the true place of attachment. For those free from the defilement of the third dhyana, though they are weary of pleasant feeling, they still love the self.

身見亦非真愛著處，謂非無學信無我者，雖於身見不生貪著，而於內我猶生愛故。

The view of self in the body is also not the true place of attachment. For those who are not arhats and believe in no-self, though they do not give rise to craving toward the view of self in the body, they still give rise to love toward the inner self.

轉識等亦非真愛著處，謂非無學求滅心者，雖厭轉識等而愛我故。

The active consciousnesses and the like are also not the true place of attachment. For those who are not arhats and seek the cessation of mind, though they are weary of the active consciousnesses and the like, they still love the self.

色身亦非真愛著處，離色染者，雖厭色身而愛我故。

The material body is also not the true place of attachment. Those free from the defilement of form, though weary of the material body, still love the self.

不相應行離色、心等無別自體，是故亦非真愛著處。

The conditioned dharmas not associated with mind have no separate substance apart from form, mind and so on, so they too are not the true place of attachment.

異生、有學起我愛時，雖於餘蘊有愛、非愛，而於此識，我愛定生，故唯此是真愛著處。

When ordinary beings and those still learning give rise to love of self, though they have love or non-love toward the other aggregates, toward this consciousness love of self arises without fail, so only this is the true place of attachment.

由是彼說阿賴耶名，定唯顯此阿賴耶識。

Therefore, the name alaya that they speak of definitely refers only to this alaya consciousness.

已引聖教，當顯正理。

Having cited the holy teachings, we should now reveal the right reasoning.

謂契經說：雜染、清淨諸法種子之所集起，故名為心，若無此識，彼持種心不應有故。

The sutra says: it is the gathering and arising of the seeds of all defiled and pure dharmas, and so it is called mind. If there were no such consciousness, that mind holding the seeds could not exist.

謂諸轉識在滅定等有間斷故，根、境、作意、善等類別易脫起故，如電光等不堅住故，非可燻習，不能持種，非染、淨種所集起心。

The active consciousnesses are interrupted in the absorption of cessation and other states; their faculty, object, attention and wholesome and other categories easily slip and arise differently, like lightning and the like not firmly abiding; they are not what can be perfumed, cannot hold seeds, and are not the mind where the seeds of defilement and purity gather and arise.

此識一類、恆無間斷，如苣蕂等堅住可燻，契當彼經所說心義。

This consciousness is of one kind and constantly without interruption, firmly abiding and perfumable like sesame and the like, and accords with the meaning of mind spoken of in that sutra.

若不許有能持種心，非但違經，亦違正理。

If one does not admit that there is a mind able to hold seeds, one not only contradicts the sutras but also contradicts right reasoning.

謂諸所起染、淨品法，無所燻故，不燻成種，則應所起唐捐其功。染、淨起時既無因種，應同外道執自然生。

That is, if the defiled and pure categories of dharmas that arise had nothing to perfume them and did not form seeds by perfuming, then their arising would be effort thrown away. When defilement and purity arise without causal seeds, they should be the same as the non-Buddhists' view that they arise spontaneously.

色、不相應，非心性故，如聲、光等，理非染、淨內法所燻，豈能持種？又彼離識無實自性，寧可執為內種依止？

Form and the dharmas not associated with mind are not of the nature of mind, like sound, light and the like, and in principle they are not perfumed by inner dharmas of defilement and purity, so how could they hold seeds? Moreover, they have no real own nature apart from consciousness, so how could they be taken as the support of inner seeds?

轉識相應諸心所法，如識間斷，易脫起故，不自在故，非心性故，不能持種，亦不受燻。

The mental factors associated with the active consciousnesses, like the consciousnesses themselves, are interrupted, easily slip and arise differently, and are not sovereign, not of the nature of mind, and cannot hold seeds or receive perfuming either.

故持種心，理應別有。

Therefore a seed-holding mind must, in principle, exist separately.

有說：六識無始時來，依根、境等前後分位，事雖轉變而類無別，是所燻習，能持種子。由斯染、淨因果皆成，何要執有第八識性？

Some say: the six consciousnesses, from beginningless time, depend on faculties, objects and so on in their earlier and later stages; though the events change, the kind does not differ, and this kind is what is perfumed and can hold seeds. In this way the cause and effect of defilement and purity are both established; why must one cling to the existence of an eighth consciousness?

彼言無義！

Their words are meaningless!

所以者何？

Why?

執類是實，則同外道；許類是假，便無勝用，應不能持內法實種。

If you hold the "kind" to be real, you are the same as the non-Buddhists; if you admit it to be nominal, it has no superior function and should not be able to hold the real seeds of inner dharmas.

又執識類何性所攝？若是善、惡，應不受燻，許有記故，猶如擇滅；若是無記，善、惡心時，無無記心，此類應斷，非事善、惡類可無記；別類必同別事性故。

Moreover, to which nature is this kind of consciousness assigned? If it is wholesome or unwholesome, it should not be perfumed, because it is admitted to be karmically marked, like cessation through analysis; if it is neutral, then at the time of wholesome and unwholesome minds there is no neutral mind, and this kind should be cut off, and it is not that the kind of a wholesome or unwholesome event can be neutral; a different kind must share the nature of a different event.

又無心位此類定無，既有間斷，性非堅住，如何可執持種、受燻？

Moreover, in the state without mind this kind definitely does not exist; since there is interruption, its nature does not firmly abide, so how can it be taken as holding seeds and receiving perfuming?

又阿羅漢或異生心，識類同故，應為諸染，無漏法燻，許便有失。又眼等根或所餘法，與眼等識根、法類同，應互相燻，然汝不許。

Moreover, the minds of an arhat or an ordinary being, being the same in kind of consciousness, should be perfumed by all defiled dharmas and by undefiled dharmas, and once admitted this would be a fault. Again, the eye and other faculties or other dharmas, being the same in kind as the eye and other consciousnesses, should perfume one another, but you do not admit this.

故不應執識類受燻。

Therefore one should not hold that the kind of consciousness receives perfuming.

又六識身，若事、若類，前後二念既不俱有；如隔念者，非互相燻。能燻、所燻必俱時故。

Moreover, the body of six consciousnesses, whether as events or as kinds, of two successive moments, do not coexist; like those separated by a moment, they do not perfume each other. The perfuming and the perfumed must be simultaneous.

執唯六識俱時轉者，由前理趣，既非所燻，故彼亦無能持種義。

Those who hold that only the six consciousnesses turn simultaneously, by the reasoning above, since they are not what is perfumed, likewise have no sense of holding seeds.

有執色、心自類無間，前為後種，因果義立，故先所說，為證不成。

Some hold that form and mind, each in its own kind without interruption, are earlier seeds for later ones, so the meaning of cause and effect is established, and so what was said earlier does not stand as proof.

彼執非理，無燻習故。謂彼自類既無燻習，如何可執前為後種？

Their view is unreasonable, because there is no perfuming. That is, since their own kinds have no perfuming, how can one hold that the former is the seed of the latter?

又間斷者，應不更生，二乘無學應無後蘊，死位色、心為後種故。

Moreover, what is interrupted should not arise again, and the two vehicles' arhats should have no later aggregates, because the form and mind at the position of death would be the seeds for the later ones.

亦不應執色、心展轉互為種生，轉識、色等非所燻習，前已說故。

Nor should one hold that form and mind take turns being seeds for each other; the active consciousnesses and form and so on are not what is perfumed, as already said.

有說：三世諸法皆有，因果感赴，無不皆成，何勞執有能持種識？然經說心為種子者，起染、淨法，勢用強故。

Some say: dharmas of the three times all exist, and cause and effect are brought about in response, so nothing fails to be established; why bother to hold that there is a consciousness able to hold seeds? But the sutra says that mind is the seed, giving rise to defiled and pure dharmas, with strong power and function.

彼說非理。過去、未來，非常、非現，如空花等，非實有故。

What they say is unreasonable. The past and future are neither permanent nor present, like flowers in the sky and the like, and are not really existent.

又無作用，不可執為因緣性故。若無能持染、淨種識，一切因果皆不得成。

Moreover, they have no function, and cannot be taken as having the nature of a causal condition. If there is no consciousness able to hold the seeds of defilement and purity, all cause and effect cannot be established.

有執大乘遣相空理為究竟者，依似比量，撥無此識及一切法，彼特違害前所引經。

Some hold that the Mahayana principle of the emptiness of negating characteristics is ultimate, and, relying on a false inference, they deny this consciousness and all dharmas; they specially contradict and harm the sutras cited earlier.

智、斷、證、修、染、淨因果皆執非實，成大邪見。

They hold that wisdom, cutting off, realization, cultivation, and the cause and effect of defilement and purity are all unreal, which becomes a great wrong view.

外道毀謗染、淨因果亦不謂全無，但執非實故。

Even the non-Buddhists who slander the cause and effect of defilement and purity do not say they are completely nonexistent, only that they are unreal.

若一切法皆非實有，菩薩不應為捨生死，精勤修集菩提資糧。誰有智者為除幻敵，求石女兒用為軍旅？

If all dharmas were unreal, bodhisattvas should not, in order to leave birth and death, diligently gather the provisions for enlightenment. What wise man, in order to get rid of a phantom enemy, would seek the son of a barren woman to use as his army?

故應信有能持種心，依之建立染、淨因果。

Therefore one should believe that there is a mind able to hold seeds, on which the cause and effect of defilement and purity are established.

彼心即是此第八識。

That mind is this eighth consciousness.

又契經說有異熟心，善、惡業感，若無此識，彼異熟心不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says there is a mind of karmic maturation, brought about by wholesome and unwholesome karma; if there were no such consciousness, that mind of karmic maturation could not exist.

謂眼等識有間斷故，非一切時是業果故，如電、光等，非異熟心。異熟不應斷已更續，彼命根等，無斯事故。

The eye and other consciousnesses are interrupted and are not at all times the fruit of karma, like lightning and light and the like, and are not the mind of karmic maturation. Karmic maturation should not be cut off and then continue again, and for those life faculties and the like there is no such thing.

眼等六識，業所感者，猶如聲等，非恆續故，是異熟生，非真異熟。

The six consciousnesses such as the eye consciousness, brought about by karma, like sound and the like, because they are not constantly continuing, are produced from karmic maturation, but are not true karmic maturation.

定應許有真異熟心，酬牽引業，遍而無斷，變為身、器作有情依，身、器離心，理非有故。不相應法無實體故，諸轉識等非恆有故，若無此心，誰變身、器？復依何法恆立有情？

One must definitely admit that there is a mind of true karmic maturation, which repays the leading karma, pervades without interruption, and transforms into the body and the world as the basis of sentient beings; body and world apart from mind cannot exist in principle. Dharmas not associated with mind have no substance, and the active consciousnesses and the like are not constant; if there were not this mind, who would transform into body and world? And by what dharma would sentient beings be constantly established?

又在定中，或不在定，有別思慮、無思慮時，理有眾多身受生起。此若無者，不應後時身有怡適，或復勞損，若不恆有真異熟心，彼位如何有此身受？

Moreover, in absorption or out of absorption, when there are separate thinking or no thinking, in principle many bodily sensations arise. If this did not exist, the body should not later feel comfort or fatigue; if there were not constantly a mind of true karmic maturation, how could that state have these bodily sensations?

非佛起餘善心等位，必應現起真異熟心，如許起彼時，非佛有情故。

It is not that when the Buddha arises in other wholesome minds and the like a mind of true karmic maturation must appear; if one admitted it arose at that time, he would not be a sentient being, not a buddha.

由是恆有真異熟心，彼心即是此第八識。

Therefore there is constantly a mind of true karmic maturation, and that mind is this eighth consciousness.

又契經說：有情流轉五趣、四生。若無此識，彼趣、生體不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: sentient beings revolve through the five destinies and the four modes of birth. If there were not this consciousness, the substance of those destinies and births could not exist.

謂要實有、恆、遍、無雜，彼法可立正實趣、生。

That is, only what is real, constant, pervasive and unmixed can be established as a true destiny or birth.

非異熟法趣、生雜亂，住此起餘趣、生法故。

It is not that the destinies and births of karmically matured dharmas are mixed up, because staying here arises dharmas of other destinies and births.

諸異熟色及五識中業所感者不遍趣、生，無色界中全無彼故。

The karmically matured forms, and what is brought about by karma in the five consciousnesses, do not pervade all destinies and births, and in the formless realm they are entirely absent.

諸生得善及意識中業所感者，雖遍趣、生，起無雜亂而不恆有。

The innate wholesome dharmas, and what is brought about by karma in the mental consciousness, though they pervade destinies and births and arise without mixture, are not constant.

不相應行無實自體，皆不可立正實趣、生。

The conditioned dharmas not associated with mind have no real substance and cannot be established as true destinies or births.

唯異熟心及彼心所，實恆、遍、無雜，是正實趣、生。

Only the mind of karmic maturation and its mental factors are truly constant, pervasive and unmixed, and are the true destiny and birth.

此心若無，生無色界起善等位應非趣、生。設許趣、生攝諸有漏，生無色界起無漏心應非趣、生，便違正理。勿有前過及有此失，故唯異熟法是正實趣、生。

If this mind did not exist, then at the time of wholesome and other thoughts arising in beings born in the formless realm, they would not be destinies or births. Even if one admitted that destinies and births comprise all contaminated things, then when an uncontaminated mind arises in one born in the formless realm it would not be a destiny or birth, which contradicts right reasoning. To avoid the earlier fault and this fault, only karmically matured dharmas are the true destiny and birth.

由是如來非趣、生攝，佛無異熟無記法故，亦非界攝，非有漏故，世尊已捨苦、集諦故，諸戲論種已永斷故。

Hence the Tathagata is not included in destinies and births, because the Buddha has no neutral dharma of karmic maturation, and is also not included in the realms, because he is uncontaminated; the World-Honored One has abandoned the truths of suffering and origin, and the seeds of all conceptual proliferation have been forever cut off.

正實趣、生既唯異熟心及心所，彼心、心所離第八識理不得成，故知別有此第八識。

Since the true destinies and births are only the mind of karmic maturation and its mental factors, and that mind and those mental factors cannot be established in principle apart from the eighth consciousness, one therefore knows there is this separate eighth consciousness.

又契經說：有色根身是有執受，若無此識，彼能執受，不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: a body with material faculties is one that is held and sustained; if there were not this consciousness, that holding and sustaining would not exist.

謂五色根及彼依處，唯現在世是有執受，彼定由有能執受心，唯異熟心，先業所引，非善、染等，一類、能遍、相續執受有色根身；眼等轉識無如是義。

That is, the five material faculties and their supports, in the present life alone, are held and sustained, and they are definitely due to a mind able to hold and sustain; only the mind of karmic maturation, led by earlier karma and not wholesome or defiled and so on, of one kind, pervasive and continuous, holds and sustains the body with material faculties; the eye and other active consciousnesses have no such meaning.

此言意顯眼等轉識，皆無一類、能遍、相續執受自內有色根身，非顯能執受唯異熟心，勿諸佛色身無執受故；然能執受有漏色身唯異熟心，故作是說。

The meaning of these words is to show that the eye and other active consciousnesses do not, as one kind, pervasively and continuously hold and sustain the body with inner material faculties; it is not to show that only the mind of karmic maturation can hold and sustain, lest the buddhas' material bodies be without holding and sustaining; but only the mind of karmic maturation can hold and sustain a contaminated material body, and so it is said thus.

謂諸轉識現緣起故，如聲、風等，彼善、染等，非業引故，如非擇滅。異熟生者，非異熟故、非遍依故、不相續故，如電、光等，不能執受有漏色身。

That is, the active consciousnesses arise manifestly from conditions, like sound, wind and so on, and those wholesome and defiled ones are not drawn by karma, like cessation not through analysis. What is born of karmic maturation is not karmic maturation itself, is not pervasive support and is not continuous, like lightning and light and the like, and cannot hold and sustain a contaminated material body.

諸心識言，亦攝心所，定相應故，如唯識言。

The phrase "the minds and consciousnesses" also includes the mental factors, because they are definitely associated, like the phrase "consciousness-only".

非諸色根、不相應行可能執受有色根身，無所緣故，如虛空等。

It is not that the material faculties or the dharmas not associated with mind can hold and sustain a body with material faculties, because they have no object, like empty space and the like.

故應別有能執受心，彼心即是此第八識。

Therefore there should be a separate mind able to hold and sustain, and that mind is this eighth consciousness.

又契經說：壽、煖、識三，更互依持，得相續住。若無此識能持壽、煖，令久住識不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: life, warmth and consciousness, these three, support one another and so continue to abide. If there were not this consciousness able to hold life and warmth, the consciousness that makes them abide long could not exist.

謂諸轉識有間、有轉，如聲、風等，無恆持用，不可立為持壽、煖識。

That is, the active consciousnesses are interrupted and changeable, like sound, wind and the like, and have no constant holding function, and cannot be established as the consciousness that holds life and warmth.

唯異熟識無間、無轉，猶如壽、煖，有恆持用，故可立為持壽、煖識。

Only the karmically matured consciousness is uninterrupted and unchanging, like life and warmth, with a constant holding function, and so it can be established as the consciousness that holds life and warmth.

經說三法更互依持，而壽與煖一類相續，唯識不然，豈符正理？

The sutra says the three dharmas mutually support one another, and that life and warmth continue as one kind, while only consciousness is not so; how could that accord with right reasoning?

雖說三法更互依持，而許唯煖不遍三界，何不許識獨有間、轉？

Though it says the three dharmas mutually support one another, you admit that only warmth does not pervade the three realms; why do you not admit that consciousness alone is interrupted and changing?

此於前理，非為過難。謂若是處具有三法無間轉者，可恆相持。不爾，便無恆相持用。前以此理，顯三法中所說識言，非詮轉識，舉煖不遍，豈壞前理？故前所說，其理極成。

This is not a real difficulty for the earlier reasoning. That is, where the three dharmas turn without interruption, they can constantly support one another. Otherwise, there is no function of constant mutual support. The earlier reasoning used this to show that the "consciousness" spoken of among the three dharmas does not refer to the active consciousnesses, and to cite that warmth is not pervasive does not damage the earlier reasoning. So what was said before is fully established.

又三法中，壽、煖二種既唯有漏，故知彼識如壽與煖，定非無漏；生無色界起無漏心，爾時，何識能持彼壽？

Moreover, among the three dharmas, life and warmth are only contaminated, so one knows that that consciousness, like life and warmth, is definitely not uncontaminated; when an uncontaminated mind arises in one born in the formless realm, at that time, what consciousness holds that life?

由此故知有異熟識，一類、恆、遍、能持壽、煖，彼識即是此第八識。

From this one knows that there is a karmically matured consciousness, of one kind, constant, pervasive, able to hold life and warmth, and that consciousness is this eighth consciousness.

又契經說：諸有情類，受生、命終，必住散心，非無心定。若無此識，生、死時心不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: all sentient beings, at rebirth and at the end of life, must dwell in a scattered mind and not in the absorption without mind. If there were not this consciousness, there could be no mind at the time of birth and death.

謂生死時，身心惽昧，如睡無夢、極悶絕時，明瞭轉識必不現起。

That is, at the time of birth and death, body and mind are dim and confused, as in sleep without dreams or in extreme fainting, and the clear active consciousnesses surely do not manifest.

又此位中，六種轉識行相、所緣不可知故，如無心位，必不現行。

Moreover, in this state the aspects and objects of the six active consciousnesses cannot be known, as in the state without mind, and they surely do not manifestly act.

六種轉識行相、所緣有必可知，如餘時故。

The aspects and objects of the six active consciousnesses, when they exist, must be knowable, as at other times.

真異熟識極微細故，行相、所緣俱不可了，是引業果，一期相續，恆無轉變；是散、有心，名生死心，不違正理。

The true karmically matured consciousness is extremely subtle, and its aspects and objects cannot be discerned; it is the fruit of the leading karma, continues for one lifetime, and constantly has no change; it is a scattered, mind-possessing state, called the mind of birth and death, which does not contradict right reasoning.

有說：五識此位定無，意識取境，或因五識、或因他教、或定為因，生位，諸因既不可得；故受生位，意識亦無。

Some say: in this state the five consciousnesses surely do not exist, and the mental consciousness takes its object either because of the five consciousnesses, or because of another's teaching, or because of absorption as the cause; at the moment of birth, since all these causes cannot be found, the mental consciousness too is absent at the moment of rebirth.

若爾，有情生無色界，後時意識應永不生，定心必由散意識引，五識、他教彼界必無，引定散心無由起故。

If so, when a being is born in the formless realm, the mental consciousness should never arise afterward, because absorption mind must be led by the scattered mental consciousness, and the five consciousnesses and another's teaching are surely absent in that realm, so there would be no cause for the scattered mind that leads to absorption to arise.

若謂彼定由串習力，後時率爾能現在前。

If one says that absorption, by the power of habituation, can suddenly appear later.

彼初生時，寧不現起？又欲、色界初受生時，串習意識亦應現起。

Why does it not arise when they are first born? Moreover, at the first moment of rebirth in the desire and form realms, the habituated mental consciousness should also appear.

若由惛昧，初未現前。

If it is because of dimness that it does not appear at first.

此即前因，何勞別說？

That is the earlier cause; why bother to speak of another?

有餘部執：生、死等位，別有一類微細意識，行相、所緣俱不可了。應知即是此第八識，極成意識不如是故。

Other schools hold that: at birth, death and similar states, there is a separate kind of subtle mental consciousness whose aspects and objects cannot be discerned. One should know that it is this eighth consciousness; the commonly accepted mental consciousness is not like this.

又將死時，由善、惡業，下、上身分，冷觸漸起，若無此識，彼事不成。轉識不能執受身故。

Moreover, when one is about to die, according to wholesome or unwholesome karma, cold touch gradually arises in the lower or upper parts of the body; if there were not this consciousness, that matter could not be established. The active consciousnesses cannot hold and sustain the body.

眼等五識，各別依故；或不行故。第六意識，不住身故，境不定故，遍寄身中恆相續故，不應冷觸由彼漸生。

The five consciousnesses such as the eye consciousness each depend on separate supports, or do not operate at all. The sixth, the mental consciousness, does not dwell in the body, its object is not fixed, and it is lodged throughout the body in constant continuity; cold touch should not gradually arise from it.

唯異熟心，由先業力，恆、遍、相續執受身分。捨執受處，冷觸便生，壽、煖識三不相離故。

Only the karmically matured mind, by the power of earlier karma, constantly, pervasively and continuously holds and sustains the parts of the body. When the place of holding and sustaining is abandoned, cold touch arises, because life, warmth and consciousness are inseparable.

冷觸起處即是非情，雖變、亦緣，而不執受。故知定有此第八識。

Where cold touch arises is inanimate; though it is transformed and also taken as object, it is not held and sustained. So one knows there definitely exists this eighth consciousness.

又契經說：識緣名色，名色緣識，如是二法展轉相依，譬如蘆束，俱時而轉，若無此識，彼識自體，不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: consciousness conditions name and form, and name and form condition consciousness; these two dharmas depend on each other in turn, like a bundle of reeds, turning at the same time; if there were not this consciousness, the substance of that consciousness could not exist.

謂彼經中自作是釋：名謂非色四蘊，色謂羯邏藍等。此二與識相依而住，如二蘆束，更互為緣，恆俱時轉，不相捨離。

That sutra itself explains thus: "name" refers to the four non-material aggregates, and "form" refers to kalala (the first congealed state of rebirth) and so on. These two and consciousness abide depending on each other, like two bundles of reeds, mutually conditioning one another and constantly turning at the same time, not abandoning one another.

眼等轉識，攝在名中，此識若無，說誰為識？

The eye and other active consciousnesses are included in "name"; if this consciousness did not exist, what would be called consciousness?

亦不可說名中識蘊謂五識身，識謂第六，羯邏藍時無五識故。

Nor can it be said that the consciousness aggregate within name refers to the body of five consciousnesses and that consciousness refers to the sixth, because at the kalala stage there are no five consciousnesses.

又諸轉識有間、轉故，無力恆時執持名色，寧說恆與名色為緣？

Moreover, the active consciousnesses are interrupted and changeable and have no power to constantly hold name and form; how could they be said to constantly condition name and form?

故彼識言，顯第八識。

Therefore the phrase "that consciousness" indicates the eighth consciousness.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial command by the Tripitaka Dharma Master Xuanzang.

又契經說：一切有情皆依食住，若無此識，彼識食體不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: all sentient beings abide depending on food; if there were not this consciousness, the substance of that consciousness-food could not exist.

謂契經說食有四種：

That is, the sutra says there are four kinds of food:

一者、段食，變壞為相。謂欲界繫香、味、觸三，於變壞時能為食事。由此色處非段食攝，以變壞時，色無用故。

First, morsel food, whose characteristic is to be transformed and broken down. That is, the three of smell, taste and touch belonging to the desire realm, at the time of being transformed and broken down, can perform the function of food. Hence the sense-field of form is not included in morsel food, because at the time of breakdown, form has no function.

二者、觸食，觸境為相，謂有漏觸才取境時，攝受喜等，能為食事。此觸雖與諸識相應，屬六識者食義偏勝，觸麁顯境，攝受喜、樂及順益捨，資養勝故。

Second, contact food, whose characteristic is contact with objects. That is, when contaminated contact has just taken an object, it receives joy and so on and can perform the function of food. Though this contact is associated with all the consciousnesses, the meaning of food is especially strong for the six consciousnesses; contact has coarse and obvious objects and receives joy, pleasure and also conforming equanimity, with strong nourishment.

三、意思食，希望為相。謂有漏思與欲俱轉，希可愛境，能為食事。此思雖與諸識相應，屬意識者食義偏勝，意識於境，希望勝故。

Third, volition food, whose characteristic is hope. That is, contaminated volition turning together with desire hopes for lovable objects and can perform the function of food. Though this volition is associated with all the consciousnesses, the meaning of food is especially strong for the mental consciousness, since the mental consciousness has the strongest hope toward objects.

四者、識食，執持為相。謂有漏識由段、觸、思勢力增長，能為食事。此識雖通諸識自體，而第八識食義偏勝，一類相續執持勝故。

Fourth, consciousness food, whose characteristic is holding. That is, contaminated consciousness, increased by the power of morsel, contact and volition, can perform the function of food. Though this consciousness is common to the substance of all the consciousnesses, the meaning of food is especially strong for the eighth consciousness, since its continuous holding as one kind is strongest.

由是《集論》說此四食，三蘊、五處、十一界攝。

Hence the Compendium of Abhidharma says that these four foods are included in three aggregates, five sense-fields and eleven realms.

此四能持有情身命，令不壞斷，故名為食。

These four are able to hold the body and life of sentient beings so that they do not break down or end, and so they are called food.

段食唯於欲界有用，觸、意思食雖遍三界而依識轉，隨識有無。

Morsel food is useful only in the desire realm, while contact and volition food, though pervading the three realms, depend on consciousness to turn, and exist or not according to consciousness.

眼等轉識有間、有轉，非遍、恆時能持身命，謂無心定、睡眠、悶絕、無想天中有間斷故，設有心位，隨所依、緣、性、界、地等有轉易故，於持身命，非遍、非恆。

The eye and other active consciousnesses are interrupted and changeable, and are not pervasively and constantly able to hold the body and life; for there is interruption in the absorption without mind, in sleep, in fainting, and in the heaven of non-perception, and even in states with mind, they change according to support, condition, nature, realm, level and so on, and with regard to holding the body and life they are neither pervasive nor constant.

諸有執無第八識者，依何等食？《經》作是言：「一切有情皆依食住。」

For those who hold that there is no eighth consciousness, on what do they rely as food? The sutra says thus: "All sentient beings abide depending on food."

非無心位過去、未來識等為食；彼非現、常；如空花等，無體用故。設有體用非現在攝，如虛空等，非食性故，亦不可說入定心等與無心位有情為食，住無心時彼已滅故，過去非食已極成故。

It is not that past or future consciousnesses and so on are food in the state without mind; they are neither present nor permanent; like flowers in the sky and the like, they have no substance or function. Even if they had substance and function, they are not included in the present, and like empty space and the like are not of the nature of food; nor can it be said that the mind in absorption and the like serve as food for beings in the state without mind, since while dwelling in the state without mind it has already ceased, and that the past is not food is already fully established.

又不可說無想定等不相應行即為彼食，段等四食所不攝故，不相應法非實有故。

Nor can it be said that the conditioned dharmas not associated with mind, such as the absorption of non-perception, are that food, because they are not included in the four foods such as morsel food, and dharmas not associated with mind are not really existent.

有執滅定等猶有第六識，於彼有情能為食事。彼執非理，後當廣破。

Some hold that even in the absorption of cessation there is still a sixth consciousness, which can perform the function of food for that being. Their view is unreasonable and will be refuted at length later.

又彼應說生上二界無漏心時，以何為食？無漏識等破壞有故，於彼身、命不可為食。亦不可執無漏識中有有漏種能為彼食，無漏識等猶如涅槃，不能執持有漏種故。

Moreover, they should say what serves as food when an uncontaminated mind arises in one born in the upper two realms. Uncontaminated consciousness and the like destroy existence and cannot serve as food for that body and life. Nor can one hold that there are contaminated seeds in uncontaminated consciousness that can serve as that food; uncontaminated consciousness and the like are like nirvana, and cannot hold contaminated seeds.

復不可說上界有情身、命相持即互為食，四食不攝彼身、命故，又無色無身，命無能持故，眾同分等無實體故。

Moreover, one cannot say that for beings of the upper realms, body and life support each other and thereby are food for each other, since the four foods do not include that body and life, and moreover the formless realm has no body, life has nothing that can hold it, and the community of beings and the like have no substance.

由此定知異諸轉識，有異熟識一類恆、遍執持身、命，令不壞斷。世尊依此，故作是言：一切有情皆依食住。

From this one definitely knows that, different from the active consciousnesses, there is a karmically matured consciousness, of one kind, constant and pervasive, holding body and life and preventing their breakdown or end. It was in reliance on this that the World-Honored One spoke thus: all sentient beings abide depending on food.

唯依「取蘊」建立有情，佛無有漏，非有情攝，說為有情依食住者，當知皆依示現而說。

Sentient beings are established only in reliance on the "aggregates of clinging"; the Buddha has no contaminated aggregates and is not included among sentient beings, and the saying that he abides depending on food as a sentient being should be understood as spoken in accordance with his manifestation.

既異熟識是勝食性，彼識即是此第八識。

Since the karmically matured consciousness is of the nature of supreme food, that consciousness is this eighth consciousness.

又契經說：住滅定者，身、語、心行無不皆滅，而壽不滅，亦不離煖，根無變壞，識不離身。若無此識住滅定者，不離身識不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: for one who abides in the absorption of cessation, the activities of body, speech and mind are all extinguished, yet life is not extinguished, nor is warmth gone, the faculties are not damaged, and consciousness does not leave the body. If there were not this consciousness, there could be no consciousness not leaving the body for one abiding in the absorption of cessation.

謂眼等識行相麁、動，於所緣境起必勞慮，厭患彼故，暫求止息，漸次伏除至都盡位，依此位立住滅定者，故此定中彼識皆滅，若不許有微細一類恆、遍執持壽等識在，依何而說識不離身？

That is, the aspects of the eye and other consciousnesses are coarse and agitated, and arising toward their objects they inevitably cause toil and thought; weary of this, one temporarily seeks rest, gradually subdues and removes them until they are entirely exhausted, and in reliance on this state one is established as one abiding in the absorption of cessation. So in this absorption all those consciousnesses cease, and if one did not admit a subtle consciousness of one kind, constant and pervasive, holding life and the like, then in reliance on what could one say that consciousness does not leave the body?

若謂後時彼識還起，如隔日瘧名不離身，是則不應說心行滅，識與想等起滅同故。壽、煖諸根應亦如識，便成大過，故應許識如壽、煖等實不離身。又此位中若全無識，應如瓦礫非有情數，豈得說為住滅定者？又異熟識此位若無，誰能執持諸根、壽、煖？無執持故皆應壞滅，猶如死屍便無壽等。既爾，後識必不還生，說不離身，彼何所屬？諸異熟識捨此身已，離識餘身無重生故。

If one says that those consciousnesses arise again later, and that being called not leaving the body is like a tertian fever, then one should not say that mental activity has ceased, because consciousness arises and ceases together with perception and so on. Life, warmth and the faculties would then also have to be like consciousness, which would be a great fault, so one must admit that consciousness, like life and warmth, really does not leave the body. Moreover, if in this state there were no consciousness at all, one would be like a tile or pebble, not counted among sentient beings; how could one be said to abide in the absorption of cessation? Moreover, if the karmically matured consciousness were absent in this state, who could hold the faculties, life and warmth? Without holding, they would all decay and cease, like a corpse that has no life and so on. Since it is so, later consciousness surely cannot be born again; if one says it does not leave the body, what does that refer to? After the karmically matured consciousnesses abandon this body, apart from consciousness there is no other body that is born again.

又若此位無持種識，後識無種，如何得生？過去、未來不相應法非實有體已極成故。諸色等法離識皆無受燻、持種亦已遮故。然滅定等無心位中，如有心位定實有識，具根、壽、煖，有情攝故。

Moreover, if in this state there were no seed-holding consciousness, how could later consciousness arise with no seeds? That the past and future conditioned dharmas not associated with mind are not really existent substances has already been established. And that form and other dharmas apart from consciousness all have no ability to be perfumed or to hold seeds has also been refuted. In the states without mind such as the absorption of cessation, just as in states with mind, there definitely really is consciousness, with faculties, life and warmth complete, because they are included among sentient beings.

由斯理趣，住滅定者，決定有識，實不離身。

By these reasonings, one abiding in the absorption of cessation definitely has consciousness, which truly does not leave the body.

若謂此位有第六識，名不離身，亦不應理，此定亦名無心定故。

If one says that in this state there is a sixth consciousness, called not leaving the body, that is also unreasonable, because this absorption is also called the absorption without mind.

若無五識名無心者，應一切定皆名無心，諸定皆無五識身故。意識攝在六轉識中，如五識身，滅定非有。或此位識行相、所緣不可知故，如壽、煖等，非第六識。若此位有行相、所緣可知識者，應如餘位，非此位攝。

If it is called "without mind" because the five consciousnesses are absent, then all absorptions should be called without mind, because all absorptions lack the body of five consciousnesses. The mental consciousness is included among the six active consciousnesses, like the body of five consciousnesses, and does not exist in the absorption of cessation. Or else, the aspects and objects of the consciousness in this state cannot be known, like life, warmth and so on, so it is not the sixth consciousness. If in this state there were a consciousness whose aspects and objects can be known, it should be like the other states and not be included in this state.

本為止息行相、所緣可了知識，入此定故。

One originally enters this absorption in order to bring to rest the consciousnesses whose aspects and objects can be discerned.

又若此位有第六識，彼心所法為有？為無？

Moreover, if in this state there is a sixth consciousness, do the mental factors exist or not?

若有心所，經不應言住此定者心行皆滅，又不應名滅受想定。

If mental factors exist, the sutra should not say that for one abiding in this absorption the activities of the mind are all extinguished, nor should it be called the absorption of the cessation of feeling and perception.

此定加行，但厭受、想，故此定中唯受、想滅；受、想二法資助心強，諸心所中獨名心行，說心行滅，何所相違？

The preparatory practice of this absorption only loathes feeling and perception, so in this absorption only feeling and perception cease; feeling and perception are the two dharmas that most strongly assist the mind, and among the mental factors alone are called mental activity, so to say mental activity ceases, what contradiction is there?

無想定中應唯想滅，但厭想故，然汝不許，既唯受、想資助心強，此二滅時，心亦應滅。

In the absorption of non-perception, then, only perception should cease, because only perception is loathed, but you do not admit this; since only feeling and perception strongly assist the mind, when these two cease, the mind too should cease.

如身行滅而身猶在，寧要責心令同行滅？

Just as bodily activity ceases while the body remains, why demand that the mind cease together with its activity?

若爾，語行尋、伺滅時，語應不滅，而非所許。然行於法有遍、非遍，遍行滅時，法定隨滅；非遍行滅，法或猶在。非遍行者謂入出息，見息滅時，身猶在故；尋、伺於語是遍行攝，彼若滅時，語定無故。受、想於心亦遍行攝，許如思等大地法故。受、想滅時，心定隨滅，如何可說彼滅心在？又許思等是大地法，滅受、想時，彼亦應滅。既爾，信等此位亦無，非遍行滅餘可在故，如何可言有餘心所？既許思等此位非無，受、想應然，大地法故。又此定中若有思等亦應有觸，餘心所法無不皆依觸力生故。若許有觸亦應有受，觸緣受故。既許有受，想亦應生，不相離故。

If so, then when the speech activities of investigation and analysis cease, speech should not cease, which is not what is admitted. But activities have pervasive and non-pervasive aspects with regard to dharmas: when a pervasive activity ceases, the dharma surely ceases with it; when a non-pervasive activity ceases, the dharma may remain. The non-pervasive activity refers to inhalation and exhalation, and when the breath is seen to cease, the body remains; investigation and analysis are included among the pervasive activities with regard to speech, and when they cease, speech surely is absent. Feeling and perception are also included among the pervasive activities with regard to mind, because they are admitted to be, like volition and so on, universal dharmas. When feeling and perception cease, the mind surely ceases with them; how can it be said that they cease and the mind remains? Moreover, if volition and so on are admitted to be universal dharmas, then when feeling and perception cease, they too should cease. Since it is so, faith and so on would also be absent in this state, since when a non-pervasive one ceases, the rest may remain; how can it be said that other mental factors exist? And if volition and so on are admitted not to be absent in this state, feeling and perception should be the same, since they are universal dharmas. Moreover, if volition and so on exist in this absorption, there should also be contact, since all other mental factors arise only by the power of contact. If contact is admitted to exist, there should also be feeling, because contact conditions feeling. Since feeling is admitted to exist, perception should arise too, because they are inseparable.

如受緣愛，非一切受皆能起愛，故觸緣受，非一切觸皆能生受，由斯所難，其理不成。

Just as feeling conditions craving, though not all feeling can give rise to craving, so contact conditions feeling, but not all contact can produce feeling; so the difficulty raised on this basis is not established.

彼救不然，有差別故。謂佛自簡唯無明觸所生諸受為緣生愛，曾無有處簡觸生受。故若有觸，必有受生，受與想俱，其理決定。或應如餘位，受、想亦不滅，執此位中有思等故，許便違害心行滅言，亦不得成滅受想定。

Their rescue is wrong, because there is a difference. That is, the Buddha himself specified that only feelings born of contact with ignorance serve as the condition for craving to arise, and nowhere has he specified that contact produces feeling only in some cases. So if there is contact, feeling must arise, and feeling and perception go together; this principle is definite. Otherwise one should say that, as in other states, feeling and perception do not cease either, since you hold that volition and so on exist in this state, and having admitted this you would contradict and harm the statement that mental activity ceases, and the absorption of the cessation of feeling and perception could not be established.

若無心所，識亦應無，不見餘心離心所故，餘遍行滅，法隨滅故，受等應非大地法故，此識應非相應法故。許則應無所依、緣等，如色等法亦非心故。又契經說：意、法為緣，生於意識，三和合觸，與觸俱起，有受、想、思。若此定中有意識者，三和合故，必應有觸，觸既定與受、想、思俱，如何有識而無心所？

If there are no mental factors, consciousness too should be absent; one never sees any other mind apart from mental factors; if other pervasive factors cease, the dharma ceases with them, so feeling and the like would not be universal dharmas, and this consciousness would not be an associated dharma. If admitted, it would have no support, object and so on, and would be like form and other dharmas, not mind. Moreover, the sutra says: dependent on mind and dharmas as conditions, mental consciousness arises, and the coming together of the three is contact, which arises together with contact, with feeling, perception and volition. If there is a mental consciousness in this absorption, then, since the three come together, there must be contact, and since contact is definitely accompanied by feeling, perception and volition, how can there be consciousness without mental factors?

若謂餘時，三和有力，成觸、生觸，能起受等。由此定前厭患心所，故在定位三事無能，不成生觸，亦無受等。

If one says that at other times the three coming together have power, and complete contact, produce contact, and can give rise to feeling and so on; but because before this absorption mental factors were loathed, in the state of absorption the three have no power, do not complete contact or produce contact, and there is also no feeling and so on.

若爾，應名滅心所定，如何但說滅受、想耶？

If so, it should be called the absorption of the cessation of mental factors; why does it speak only of the cessation of feeling and perception?

若謂厭時唯厭受、想，此二滅故，心所皆滅，依前所厭，以立定名。

If one says that when loathing, only feeling and perception were loathed, and when these two cease the mental factors all cease, and the name of the absorption is established according to what was loathed before.

既爾，此中心亦應滅，所厭俱故，如餘心所。不爾，如何名無心定？

If so, here the mind too should cease, because it goes together with what is loathed, like the other mental factors. Otherwise, how could it be called the absorption without mind?

又此定位意識是何？

Moreover, what is the mental consciousness in this state of absorption?

不應是染或無記性，諸善定中無此事故；餘染、無記心必有心所故，不應厭善起染等故。非求寂靜翻起散故。

It should not be defiled or neutral in nature; in all wholesome absorptions this does not occur; other defiled and neutral minds necessarily have mental factors, and one should not, while loathing the wholesome, give rise to defilement and the like. It is not that seeking quiescence turns around into scattering.

若謂是善，相應善故，應無貪等善根相應。此心不應是自性善或勝義善，違自宗故，非善根等及涅槃故。若謂此心是等起善，加行善根所引發故，理亦不然，違自宗故，如餘善心非等起故。善心無間起三性心，如何善心由前等起？故心是善，由相應力。既爾，必與善根相應，寧說此心獨無心所？故無心所，心亦應無。

If one says it is wholesome, because it is associated with wholesomeness, it should be without associated wholesome roots such as non-greed. This mind should not be intrinsically wholesome or ultimately wholesome, because that contradicts your own school's teaching, and it is not a wholesome root and so on or nirvana. If one says this mind is wholesome by arising from a cause, because it is evoked by the wholesome roots of preparatory practice, that principle is also wrong, since it contradicts your own school, and like other wholesome minds it is not wholesome by arising. A wholesome mind immediately gives rise to minds of the three natures, so how can a wholesome mind arise from what precedes it? So the mind is wholesome by the power of association. Since it is so, it must be associated with wholesome roots; how can it be said that this mind alone has no mental factors? So if there are no mental factors, the mind too should be absent.

如是推徵，眼等轉識於滅定位非不離身，故契經言不離身者，彼識即是此第八識，入滅定時不為止息，此極寂靜執持識故。

By such inference, the eye and other active consciousnesses in the absorption of cessation are not what does not leave the body; so the consciousness that the sutra says does not leave the body is this eighth consciousness, and in entering the absorption of cessation one is not entering it in order to bring it to rest, because this consciousness, holding in perfect quietude, is the one holding.

無想等位，類此應知。

The states of non-perception and the like should be understood similarly.

又契經說：心雜染故，有情雜染；心清淨故，有情清淨。若無此識，彼染、淨心不應有故。

Moreover, the sutra says: when the mind is defiled, beings are defiled; when the mind is pure, beings are pure. If there were not this consciousness, that defiled or pure mind could not exist.

謂染、淨法以心為本，因心而生，依心住故，心受彼燻，持彼種故。

That is, defiled and pure dharmas take mind as their root, arise from mind, abide in mind, and mind receives their perfuming and holds their seeds.

然雜染法略有三種：煩惱、業、果，種類別故。

Defiled dharmas are in brief of three kinds: affliction, karma and result, because their kinds are different.

若無此識持煩惱種，界、地往還，無染心後，諸煩惱起，皆應無因，餘法不能持彼種故，過去、未來非實有故。若諸煩惱無因而生，則無三乘學、無學果，諸已斷者皆應起故。

If there were not this consciousness holding the seeds of affliction, then after going back and forth among realms and levels, after a state without defiled mind, the arising of all afflictions would be without cause, since other dharmas cannot hold those seeds, and the past and future are not really existent. If afflictions arise without a cause, there would be no fruits of learning or beyond learning of the three vehicles, and all those already cut off would arise.

若無此識持業、果種，界、地往還，異類法後，諸業、果起，亦應無因，餘種、餘因前已遮故。若諸業、果無因而生，入無餘依涅槃界已，三界業果還復應生，煩惱亦應無因生故。

If there were not this consciousness holding the seeds of karma and results, then after going back and forth among realms and levels, after dharmas of different kind, the arising of all karma and results would also be without cause, since other seeds and other causes have been refuted before. If all karma and results arise without cause, then after entering the realm of nirvana without remainder, the karma and results of the three realms should arise again, because afflictions too would arise without cause.

又行緣識應不得成，轉識受燻，前已遮故。結生染識非行感故；應說名色，行為緣故，時分懸隔無緣義故。此不成故，後亦不成。

Moreover, the teaching that formations condition consciousness could not be established, since the active consciousnesses receiving perfuming has been refuted earlier. The defiled consciousness of conception and rebirth is not brought about by formations; if one must say name and form are conditioned by formations, there is no sense of condition because the time is too far apart. This is not established, and what follows is not established either.

諸清淨法亦有三種：世、出世道、斷果別故。

Pure dharmas also are of three kinds: the mundane and supramundane paths, and the result of cutting off, being different.

若無此識持世、出世清淨道種，異類心後，起彼淨法皆應無因，所執餘因前已破故。若二淨道無因而生，入無餘依涅槃界已，彼二淨道還復應生，所依亦應無因生故。

If there were not this consciousness holding the seeds of the mundane and supramundane pure paths, then after a mind of a different kind, the arising of those pure dharmas would be without cause, and the other causes they hold have been refuted before. If the two pure paths arise without cause, then after entering the realm of nirvana without remainder, those two pure paths should arise again, because their support too would arise without cause.

又出世道初不應生，無法持彼法爾種故；有漏類別非彼因故，無因而生非釋種故。初不生故，後亦不生，是則應無三乘道果。

Moreover, the supramundane path should not arise at first, because there is no dharma to hold its naturally existing seed; contaminated kinds are not its cause, and arising without cause is not the Buddha's teaching. If it does not arise at first, it will not arise later either, and so there would be no path and fruit of the three vehicles.

若無此識持煩惱種，轉依、斷果亦不得成，謂道起時，現行煩惱及彼種子俱非有故；染、淨二心不俱起故，道相應心不持彼種，自性相違，如涅槃故；去、來得等非實有故；餘法持種理不成故。既無所斷，能斷亦無，依誰由誰而立斷果？

If there were not this consciousness holding the seeds of affliction, then transformation of the basis and the result of cutting off could not be established either: that is, when the path arises, the manifest afflictions and their seeds are both absent; defiled and pure minds do not arise at the same time, and the mind associated with the path does not hold those seeds, being of opposite nature, like nirvana; the past, future, attainment and so on are not really existent; the principle of other dharmas holding seeds is not established. Since there is nothing to be cut off, there is no cutting off either; in dependence on what and by what would the result of cutting off be established?

若由道力，後惑不生，立斷果者，則初道起應成無學；後諸煩惱皆已無因，永不生故。

If, by the power of the path, later delusions do not arise, and this establishes the result of cutting off, then at the first arising of the path one would become one beyond learning; all later afflictions would be without cause and would never arise.

許有此識，一切皆成，唯此能持染、淨種故。

Admitting this consciousness, everything is established, because only this can hold the seeds of defilement and purity.

證此識有，理趣無邊，恐厭繁文，略述綱要。

The principles proving that this consciousness exists are boundless; for fear of wearying with a long text, I have only briefly stated the essentials.

別有此識，教理顯然，諸有智人，應深信受。

That there is this separate consciousness is manifest in both teaching and principle; all wise people should deeply believe and accept it.

如是已說初能變相；第二能變其相云何？

Having thus explained the characteristics of the first transforming consciousness, what are the characteristics of the second transforming consciousness?

頌曰：

The verse says:

５次第二能變，是識名末那，

5 Next is the second transformation, this consciousness is called manas,

依彼轉，緣彼，思量為性相。

it turns depending on that, takes that as object, with thinking and deliberating as its nature and characteristic.

６四煩惱常俱，謂：我痴、我見，

6 Four afflictions are always concurrent, namely: self-delusion, self-view,

並我慢、我愛，及餘觸等俱。

together with self-conceit and self-love, along with the other mental factors such as contact.

７有覆無記攝，隨所生所繫。

7 It is included in the obscured-neutral, and is bound according to where it is born.

阿羅漢、滅定、出世道無有。

It is absent in arhats, in the absorption of cessation, and on the supramundane path.

論曰：次初異熟能變識，後應辯思量能變識相。是識聖教別名末那，恆、審思量勝餘識故。

The treatise says: Next after the first consciousness, the karmically matured transformer, one should now explain the characteristics of the deliberating transformer. In the holy teaching this consciousness is separately named manas, because its constant and careful deliberation surpasses the other consciousnesses.

此名何異第六意識？此持業釋，如藏識名，識即意故；彼依主釋，如眼識等，識異意故。然諸聖教恐此濫彼，故於第七但立意名。又摽意名，為簡心、識，積集、了別劣餘識故，或欲顯此與彼意識為近所依，故但名意。

How does this name differ from the sixth, the mental consciousness? This one is a karmadharaya compound, like the name "storehouse consciousness", where consciousness is itself mind; that one is a tatpurusha compound, like the eye consciousness and so on, where consciousness is different from the organ. But the holy teachings, fearing this one would be confused with that one, establish only the name "mind" (manas) for the seventh. Moreover, the name "mind" is given in order to distinguish it from "thought" (citta) and "consciousness" (vijnana), because its accumulating and discerning are inferior to the other consciousnesses, or else to show that this one is the immediate support of that mental consciousness, and so it is called "mind" only.

「依彼轉」者，顯此所依。

"Turns depending on that" shows the support of this consciousness.

「彼」謂即前初能變識，聖說此識依藏識故。

"That" means the first transforming consciousness mentioned before, because the sages say this consciousness depends on the storehouse consciousness.

有義：此意以彼識種而為所依，非彼現識，此無間斷，不假現識為俱有依方得生故。

One interpretation: this mind takes the seeds of that consciousness as its support, and not that manifest consciousness; this one is without interruption and does not borrow the manifest consciousness as its simultaneous support in order to arise.

有義：此意以彼識種及彼現識俱為所依，雖無間斷，而有轉易，名轉識故，必假現識為俱有依，方得生故。

Another interpretation: this mind takes both the seeds of that consciousness and that manifest consciousness as its support; though it is without interruption, it has change, and because it is called an active consciousness, it must borrow the manifest consciousness as its simultaneous support in order to arise.

「轉」謂流轉，顯示此識恆依彼識取所緣故。

"Turns" means revolving, showing that this consciousness constantly depends on that consciousness to take its object.

諸心、心所皆有所依，然彼所依，總有三種：

All minds and mental factors have supports, but those supports are in general of three kinds:

一、因緣依，謂自種子，諸有為法皆託此依，離自因緣必不生故；二、增上緣依，謂內六處，諸心、心所皆託此依，離俱有根必不轉故；三、等無間緣依，謂前滅意，諸心、心所皆託此依，離開導根必不起故。

First, the support of causal condition, namely one's own seed; all conditioned dharmas rely on this support, and apart from their own causal condition they surely do not arise. Second, the support of dominant condition, namely the six inner sense bases; all minds and mental factors rely on this support, and apart from the simultaneous faculty they surely do not turn. Third, the support of immediately preceding condition, namely the mind that has just ceased; all minds and mental factors rely on this support, and apart from the opening faculty they surely do not arise.

唯心、心所具三所依，名有所依，非所餘法。

Only minds and mental factors have all three supports and are called having supports; other dharmas do not.

初種子依，有作是說：要種滅已，現果方生，無種已生，《集論》說故，種與芽等不俱有故。

As for the first, the support of seeds, some say thus: only after the seed has ceased can the manifest fruit arise, and a fruit without seed has already arisen; the Compendium of Abhidharma says that seed and sprout and the like do not coexist.

有義：彼說為證不成。彼依引生後種說故；種生芽等非勝義故；種滅芽生非極成故。焰、炷同時互為因故。

One interpretation: what they say is not established as proof. They are speaking in reliance on the seed that gives rise to the later seed; that the seed gives rise to the sprout is not ultimate truth; that the seed ceases and the sprout arises is not fully established. Flame and wick are causes of each other at the same time.

然種自類因果不俱，種、現相生決定俱有，故《瑜伽》說：無常法與他性為因，亦與後念自性為因，是因緣義。「自性」言顯種子自類前為後因，「他性」言顯種與現行互為因義。《攝大乘論》亦作是說：藏識染法互為因緣，猶如束蘆俱時而有。又說：種子與果必俱。故種子依，定非前後。

But the seed's own kind of cause and effect are not simultaneous, while seed and manifestation giving rise to each other are definitely simultaneous, so the Yogacara says: an impermanent dharma is a cause of another nature and also a cause of its own nature in the next moment, which is the meaning of causal condition. "Own nature" shows that the seed's own kind, earlier being the cause of the later; "another nature" shows that the seed and the manifest activity are causes of each other. The Compendium of the Mahayana also says: the storehouse consciousness and defiled dharmas are mutual causes and conditions, like a bundle of reeds existing at the same time. It also says: the seed and the fruit are necessarily simultaneous. So the support of seeds is definitely not earlier and later.

設有處說種果前後，應知皆是隨轉理門。

Even where it is said in some places that seed and fruit are earlier and later, one should know that this is all in accordance with the gate of provisional reasoning.

如是八識及諸心所，定各別有種子所依。

Thus the eight consciousnesses and all the mental factors definitely each have their own seed supports.

次俱有依，有作是說：眼等五識意識為依，此現起時，必有彼故。無別眼等為俱有依，眼等五根即種子故。

Next, the simultaneous support. Some say thus: the five consciousnesses such as the eye consciousness take the mental consciousness as their support, and when this arises manifestly, that one must be present. There is no separate eye and so on as a simultaneous support, because the five faculties such as the eye are themselves the seeds.

《二十唯識》伽他中言：

The verse in the Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only says:

「識從自種生，似境相而轉，

"Consciousness arises from its own seed and turns appearing as an object,

為成內、外處，佛說彼為十。」

in order to complete the inner and outer sense-fields, the Buddha spoke of those as ten."

彼頌意說：世尊為成十二處故，說五識種為眼等根，五識相分為色等境，故眼等根即五識種。《觀所緣論》亦作是說：

The meaning of that verse is: the World-Honored One, in order to complete the twelve sense-fields, said that the seeds of the five consciousnesses are the eye and other faculties, and the image-parts of the five consciousnesses are the objects of form and so on, so the eye and other faculties are themselves the seeds of the five consciousnesses. The Treatise on Observing the Object-Condition also says thus:

「識上色功能，名五根應理，

"The potentiality of form in consciousness is reasonably called the five faculties,

功能與境色，無始互為因。」

the potentiality and the object of form have been causes for each other since beginningless time."

彼頌意言：異熟識上能生眼等色識種子名色功能，說為五根，無別眼等，種與色識常互為因，能燻與種遞為因故。

The meaning of that verse is: the seeds on the karmically matured consciousness that can give rise to the eye and other consciousnesses of form are called the potentiality of form and are spoken of as the five faculties, and there is no separate eye and so on; the seed and the consciousness of form are constantly causes of each other, because the perfuming and the seed are causes of each other in turn.

第七、八識無別此依，恆相續轉，自力勝故。

The seventh and eighth consciousnesses have no such separate support, and turn in constant continuity, because their own power is superior.

第六意識別有此依，要託末那而得起故。

The sixth, the mental consciousness, has this separate support, and arises only depending on manas.

有義：彼說理、教相違。

One interpretation: they say that principle and teaching conflict.

若五色根即五識種，十八界種應成雜亂，然十八界各別有種，諸聖教中處處說故。

If the five material faculties are the seeds of the five consciousnesses, the seeds of the eighteen realms should become confused, yet each of the eighteen realms has its own seed, as is taught everywhere in the holy teachings.

又五識種各有能生相、見分異，為執何等名眼等根？若見分種，應識蘊攝；若相分種，應外處攝，便違聖教眼等五根，皆是色蘊內處所攝。

Moreover, the seeds of the five consciousnesses each have different aspects that can produce the image-part and the seeing-part; what do they take to be called the eye and other faculties? If it is the seeds of the seeing-part, they should be included in the consciousness aggregate; if the seeds of the image-part, they should be included in the external sense-fields, which contradicts the holy teaching that the five faculties such as the eye are all included in the form aggregate and the internal sense-fields.

又若五根即五識種，五根應是五識因緣，不應說為增上緣攝。

Moreover, if the five faculties are the seeds of the five consciousnesses, the five faculties should be the causal conditions of the five consciousnesses, and should not be said to be included in the dominant condition.

又鼻、舌根即二識種，則應鼻、舌唯欲界繫；或應二識通色界繫，許便俱與聖教相違。眼、耳、身根即三識種，二界、五地為難亦然。

Moreover, the nose and tongue faculties would be the seeds of two consciousnesses, so then the nose and tongue would belong only to the desire realm; or else the two consciousnesses would have to extend to the form realm, and either admission contradicts the holy teaching. The eye, ear and body faculties would be the seeds of three consciousnesses, and the objection regarding the two realms and five levels would be likewise.

又五識種既通善、惡，應五色根非唯無記。

Moreover, since the seeds of the five consciousnesses extend to wholesome and unwholesome, the five material faculties should not be only neutral.

又五識種無執受攝，五根亦應非有執受。

Moreover, the seeds of the five consciousnesses are not included in what is held and sustained, so the five faculties should also not be held and sustained.

又五色根若五識種，應意識種即是末那，彼以五根為同法故。

Moreover, if the five material faculties are the seeds of the five consciousnesses, the seed of the mental consciousness should be manas, because they take the five faculties as a parallel case.

又《瑜伽論》說眼等識皆具三依，若五色根即五識種，依但應二。

Moreover, the Yogacara Treatise says that the eye and other consciousnesses all have three supports; if the five material faculties were the seeds of the five consciousnesses, there should be only two supports.

又諸聖教說眼等根皆通現種，執唯是種，便與一切聖教相違。

Moreover, the holy teachings everywhere say that the eye and other faculties include both the manifest and the seed; to hold that they are only seeds contradicts all the holy teachings.

有避如前所說過難，朋附彼執復轉救言：異熟識中能感五識增上業種，名五色根；非作因緣生五識種，妙符二頌，善順《瑜伽》。

Some, to avoid the earlier objections, clinging to that view, turn around and say: in the karmically matured consciousness, the seed of the dominant karma that brings about the five consciousnesses is called the five material faculties; it is not the causal seed that produces the five consciousnesses, and this wonderfully accords with the two verses and well follows the Yogacara.

彼有虛言都無實義，應五色根非無記故；又彼應非唯有執受，唯色蘊攝，唯內處故；鼻、舌唯應欲界繫故；三根不應五地繫故；感意識業應末那故；眼等不應通現、種故；又應眼等非色根故。又若五識皆業所感，則應一向無記性攝；善等五識既非業感，應無眼等為俱有依，故彼所言非為善救。

Their empty words have no real meaning: the five material faculties should not be neutral; they should not only be held and sustained, included only in the form aggregate, only internal sense-fields; the nose and tongue should only belong to the desire realm; the three faculties should not belong to five levels; the karma that brings about the mental consciousness should be manas; the eye and other faculties should not extend to both manifest and seed; and the eye and other faculties should not be material faculties. Moreover, if the five consciousnesses were all brought about by karma, they would be exclusively included in the neutral nature; since the wholesome and other five consciousnesses are not brought about by karma, they should have no eye and other faculties as simultaneous support, so what they say is not a good rescue.

又諸聖教處處皆說阿賴耶識變似色根及根依處、器世間等，如何汝等撥無色根？許眼等識變似色等；不許眼等藏識所變，如斯迷謬，深違教、理。

Moreover, the holy teachings everywhere say that the alaya consciousness transforms and manifests images of material faculties and the supports of faculties, the world as vessel, and so on; how do you deny the material faculties? You admit that the eye and other consciousnesses transform and manifest images of form and so on, but do not admit that the eye and others are transformed by the storehouse consciousness; such confused error deeply contradicts teaching and reason.

然伽他說：種子功能名五根者，為破離識實有色根，於識所變似眼根等，以有發生五識用故，假名種子及色功能。非謂色根即識業種。

But the verse says that the potentiality of seeds is called the five faculties, in order to refute the really existing material faculties apart from consciousness, with regard to the image-eye faculty and so on transformed by consciousness, because they have the function of producing the five consciousnesses, which is nominally called seed and the potentiality of form. It does not say that the material faculties are the karmic seeds of consciousness.

又緣五境明瞭意識，應以五識為俱有依，以彼必與五識俱故，若彼不依眼等識者，彼應不與五識為依，彼此相依勢力等故。

Moreover, the clear mental consciousness that takes the five objects should take the five consciousnesses as its simultaneous support, because they must be simultaneous with the five consciousnesses; if they did not depend on the eye and other consciousnesses, they should not serve as support for the five consciousnesses, because mutual dependence has equal power.

又第七識雖無間斷，而見道等既有轉易，應如六識有俱有依，不爾，彼應非轉識攝，便違聖教轉識有七，故應許彼有俱有依，此即現行第八識攝。如《瑜伽》說有藏識故，得有末那；末那為依，意識得轉。彼論意言現行藏識為依止故，得有末那，非由彼種。不爾，應說有藏識故，意識得轉。

Moreover, though the seventh consciousness is without interruption, since it has change in the path of seeing and so on, it should, like the six consciousnesses, have a simultaneous support; otherwise it should not be included among the active consciousnesses, which would contradict the holy teaching that there are seven active consciousnesses; so one should admit it has a simultaneous support, which is included in the manifest eighth consciousness. As the Yogacara says: when there is the storehouse consciousness, there can be manas; manas is the support, and the mental consciousness can turn. The meaning of that treatise is that the manifest storehouse consciousness is the support, and manas can exist, and not by that seed. Otherwise it should say: when there is the storehouse consciousness, the mental consciousness can turn.

由此彼說理、教相違。

From this, what they say conflicts with both reasoning and teaching.

是故應言前五轉識，一一定有二俱有依，謂五色根、同時意識；第六轉識決定恆有一俱有依，謂第七識，若與五識俱時起者，亦以五識為俱有依；第七轉識決定唯有一俱有依，謂第八識；唯第八識恆無轉變，自能立故，無俱有依。

Therefore it should be said that each of the first five evolving consciousnesses definitely has two simultaneous supports, namely the five material sense organs and the simultaneous mental consciousness; the sixth evolving consciousness definitely always has one simultaneous support, namely the seventh consciousness, and if it arises together with the five consciousnesses, it also takes the five consciousnesses as simultaneous supports; the seventh evolving consciousness definitely has only one simultaneous support, namely the eighth consciousness; only the eighth consciousness never changes, because it can establish itself and has no simultaneous support.

有義：此說猶未盡理。第八類餘既同識性，如何不許有俱有依？第七、八識既恆俱轉，更互為依，斯有何失？

One view holds: this statement does not yet exhaust the principle. Since the remaining members of the eighth category share the nature of consciousness, why not allow them to have simultaneous supports? Since the seventh and eighth consciousnesses always operate together and support each other, what fault is there in this?

許現起識以種為依，識種亦應許依現識，能燻異熟，為生、長、住依，識種離彼不生、長、住故。

If one admits that manifest consciousness depends on seeds, one should also admit that the seeds of consciousness depend on manifest consciousness, which can perfume the vipaka (ripened result) and is the support for their arising, growth and abiding, since the seeds of consciousness do not arise, grow or abide apart from it.

又異熟識有色界中能執持身，依色根轉，如契經說：阿賴耶識業風所飄，遍依諸根，恆相續轉；《瑜伽》亦說：眼等六識各別依故，不能執受有色根身。若異熟識不遍依止有色諸根，應如六識非能執受，或所立因有不定失。

Moreover, the vipaka consciousness in the realm of form can hold and maintain the body and operates in dependence on the material sense organs, as a sutra says: the alaya consciousness is blown by the wind of karma, pervasively depends on all the faculties, and continuously operates; the Yogacara also says: the six consciousnesses such as eye consciousness depend separately and cannot hold and appropriate a body with material faculties. If the vipaka consciousness did not pervasively depend on the material faculties, it would be like the six consciousnesses, which cannot hold and appropriate, or else the reason given would have the fault of being indeterminate.

是故，藏識若現起者，定有一依，謂第七識，在有色界亦依色根；若識種子定有一依，謂異熟識，初燻習位亦依能燻。

Therefore, if the store consciousness is manifest, it definitely has one support, namely the seventh consciousness, and in the realm of form it also depends on the material faculties; if the seeds of consciousness definitely have one support, namely the vipaka consciousness, then at the stage of initial perfuming they also depend on the perfuming agent.

餘如前說。

The rest is as stated before.

有義：前說皆不應理，未了所依與依別故。

One view holds: all that was said earlier is not reasonable, because it has not understood the difference between support and dependence.

「依」謂一切有生滅法，仗因託緣而得生、住，諸所仗託皆說為依，如王與臣互相依等。

"Dependence" refers to all dharmas that arise and cease, which rely on causes and lean on conditions to arise and abide; all that they rely on and lean on is called dependence, as a king and his ministers depend on each other.

若法決定、有境、為主、令心心所取自所緣，乃是所依，即內六處，餘非有境、定、為主故，此但如王，非如臣等。故諸聖教唯心、心所名有所依，非色等法，無所緣故。但說心所，心為所依；不說心所，為心所依，彼非主故。

If a dharma is determinate, has an object, is the lord, and lets mind and mental factors take their own objects, only then is it a support; this is the inner six sense bases; the others, not having an object, being determinate or being lord, are like the king but not like the ministers. So the sacred teachings say only that mind and mental factors are said to have supports, and not that form and other dharmas do, because they have no object. Speaking only of mental factors, the mind is their support; not speaking of mental factors as supports of the mind, because they are not lords.

然有處說依為所依，或所依為依，皆隨宜假說。

Yet in some places dependence is said to be the support, or the support is said to be dependence, both as provisional expressions according to what is fitting.

由此五識俱有所依定有四種：謂五色根、六、七、八識，隨闕一種必不轉故。同境、分別、染淨、根本，所依別故。聖教唯說依五根者，以不共故，又必同境，近相順故。

Hence the simultaneous supports of the five consciousnesses are definitely of four kinds, namely the five material faculties and the sixth, seventh and eighth consciousnesses, and if any one is lacking they definitely do not operate. The supports differ as to same object, discrimination, defilement and purity, and root. The sacred teachings say only that they depend on the five faculties, because these are uncommon, and necessarily share the same object, and are close in aspect and in accord.

第六意識俱有所依唯有二種：謂七、八識，隨闕一種必不轉故。雖五識俱取境明瞭，而不定有，故非所依。聖教唯說依第七者，染淨依故，同轉識攝，近相順故。

The simultaneous supports of the sixth mental consciousness are of only two kinds, namely the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, and if either is lacking it definitely does not operate. Although the five consciousnesses together take objects clearly, they are not necessarily present, so they are not supports. The sacred teachings say only that it depends on the seventh, because it is the support of defilement and purity, included among the evolving consciousnesses, close in aspect and in accord.

第七意識俱有所依但有一種：謂第八識，藏識若無，定不轉故。如伽他說：

The simultaneous support of the seventh consciousness is only of one kind, namely the eighth consciousness; if the store consciousness is absent, it definitely does not operate. As a verse says:

阿賴耶為依，故有末那轉，

Depending on alaya, manas operates;

依止心及意，餘轉識得生。

depending on mind and on manas, the other evolving consciousnesses arise.

阿賴耶識俱有所依亦但一種：謂第七識，彼識若無，定不轉故。論說：藏識恆與末那俱時轉故；又說藏識恆依染汙，此即末那。而說三位無末那者，依有覆說，如言四位無阿賴耶，非無第八，此亦應爾。雖有色界亦依五根，而不定有，非所依攝；識種不能現取自境，可有依義而無所依。

The simultaneous support of the alaya consciousness is also of only one kind, namely the seventh consciousness; if that consciousness is absent, it definitely does not operate. The treatise says: the store consciousness always operates together with manas; and it also says that the store consciousness always depends on the defiled, which is manas. As for the statement that manas is absent in three states, it is said in relation to the obscured manas, just as it is said that alaya is absent in four states, which does not mean the eighth is absent, and this should be understood likewise. Although in the realm of form it also depends on the five faculties, they are not necessarily present and are not included among its supports; the seeds of consciousness cannot manifestly take their own objects, so they can have the sense of dependence but lack a support.

心所所依，隨識應說，復各加自相應之心。

The supports of mental factors should be said according to the consciousness, and further each adds its own corresponding mind.

若作是說，妙符理、教。

If it is stated this way, it wonderfully accords with principle and teaching.

後開導依，有義：五識自、他前後不相續故，必第六識所引生故，唯第六識為開導依。

As for the opening-and-guiding support (kaidao yi), one view holds: the five consciousnesses, whether of oneself or others, do not continue before and after, and are necessarily brought forth by the sixth consciousness, so only the sixth consciousness is the opening-and-guiding support.

第六意識自相續故，亦由五識所引生故，以前六識為開導依。

The sixth mental consciousness continues of itself, and is also brought forth by the five consciousnesses, so the preceding six consciousnesses are its opening-and-guiding support.

第七、八識自相續故，不假他識所引生故，但以自類為開導依。

The seventh and eighth consciousnesses continue of themselves and are not brought forth by other consciousnesses, and take only their own kind as opening-and-guiding support.

有義：前說未為究理。

One view holds: what has been said above has not yet exhausted the principle.

且前五識未自在位，遇非勝境，可如所說。

For the first five consciousnesses in a state not yet free, when encountering a non-superior object, it may be as said.

若自在位，如諸佛等，於境自在，諸根互用，任運決定，不假尋求，彼五識身寧不相續？

But in a state of freedom, like that of the Buddhas and others, who are free regarding objects, whose faculties can be used interchangeably, who are spontaneous and determinate and need no searching, why would those bodies of the five consciousnesses not continue?

等流五識，既為決定、染淨、作意勢力引生，專注所緣，未能捨頃，如何不許多念相續？

The five consciousnesses of equal outflow, since they are brought forth by the power of determination, defilement or purity, and attention, are focused on their object and cannot be dropped for an instant, so why would one not allow many moments to continue?

故《瑜伽》說：決定心後，方有染淨，此後乃有等流眼識善、不善轉，而彼不由自分別力，乃至此意不趣餘境，經爾所時，眼、意二識或善、或染，相續而轉，如眼識生，乃至身識，應知亦爾。

So the Yogacara says: only after the determining mind is there defilement or purity, and only after this do the five consciousnesses of equal outflow arise as good or bad, and these are not due to their own discriminating power, until that mind does not go to other objects; for as long as this lasts, the eye and mental consciousnesses are either good or defiled, and continue to operate; as with the arising of eye consciousness, so up to body consciousness, one should know it is likewise.

彼意定顯經爾所時，眼、意二識俱相續轉，既眼識時非無意識，故非二識互相續生。

That meaning decisively shows that during that time the eye and mental consciousnesses both operate continuously, and since at the time of eye consciousness it is not without mental consciousness, it is not that the two consciousnesses arise in alternation.

若增盛境相續現前，逼奪身心不能暫捨，時五識身，理必相續，如熱地獄、戲忘天等。

If an intensified object continually presents itself, pressing and seizing the body and mind so that they cannot rest for even a moment, then the bodies of the five consciousnesses by reason must continue, as in the hot hells and among the gods of forgetful play.

故《瑜伽》言：若此六識為彼六識等無間緣，即施設此名為意根。

So the Yogacara says: if this group of six consciousnesses is the immediately preceding condition for that group of six consciousnesses, then this is called the mind faculty (manas).

若五識前後定唯有意識，彼論應言：若此一識為彼六識等無間緣。或彼應言：若此六識為彼一識等無間緣。既不如是，故知五識有相續義。

If before and after the five consciousnesses there were definitely only mental consciousness, that treatise should say: if this one consciousness is the immediately preceding condition for those six consciousnesses; or they should say: if these six consciousnesses are the immediately preceding condition for that one consciousness. Since it does not say so, one knows that the five consciousnesses have the sense of continuity.

五識起時，必有意識能引後念意識令起，何假五識為開導依？

When the five consciousnesses arise, there is necessarily mental consciousness that can bring about the following moment of mental consciousness; what need is there to take the five consciousnesses as the opening-and-guiding support?

無心睡眠、悶絕等位，意識斷已，後復起時，藏識、末那既恆相續，亦應與彼為開導依。若彼用前自類開導，五識自類何不許然？此既不然，彼云何爾？

In states such as sleep without mind and fainting, when mental consciousness has been cut off and arises again later, since the store consciousness and manas always continue, they too should be its opening-and-guiding support. If they use their own previous kind to open and guide, why would the five consciousnesses not be allowed to do likewise with their own kind? Since here it is not so, how could it be so there?

平等性智相應末那初起必由第六意識，亦應用彼為開導依。

The manas corresponding to the wisdom of equality, when it first arises, must be through the sixth mental consciousness, and that too should be used as its opening-and-guiding support.

圓鏡智俱第八淨識，初必六、七方便引生。又異熟心依染汙意，或依悲願相應善心。既爾，必應許第八識亦以六、七為開導依。

The pure eighth consciousness together with the mirror wisdom, at its beginning must be brought forth by the expedient means of the sixth and seventh. Also the vipaka mind depends on the defiled mind, or on good minds corresponding to compassion and vows. Since this is so, one must allow that the eighth consciousness also takes the sixth and seventh as opening-and-guiding supports.

由此彼言都未究理。

Hence what they say has not exhausted the principle.

應說五識前六識內，隨用何識為開導依；第六意識用前自類或第七、八為開導依；第七末那用前自類或第六識為開導依；阿陀那識用前自類及第六、七為開導依。皆不違理，由前說故。

It should be said that among the six consciousnesses before the five, whichever consciousness is used is the opening-and-guiding support; the sixth mental consciousness uses its previous own kind or the seventh and eighth as the opening-and-guiding support; the seventh manas uses its previous own kind or the sixth consciousness as the opening-and-guiding support; and the adana consciousness uses its previous own kind and the sixth and seventh as the opening-and-guiding support. None violates principle, in accordance with what has been said earlier.

有義：此說亦不應理。

One view holds: this statement is also not reasonable.

開導依者，謂有緣法、為主，能作等無間緣。此於後生心、心所法，開避引導名開導依。此但屬心，非心所等。

The opening-and-guiding support is that which has an object, is the lord, and can serve as the immediately preceding condition (samanantara-pratyaya). For the later arising mind and mental dharmas, it makes way and guides, and is called the opening-and-guiding support. This belongs only to mind, not to mental factors and the like.

若此與彼無俱起義，說此於彼有開導力；一身八識既容俱起，如何異類為開導依？若許為依，應不俱起，便同異部心不並生。

If this and that do not have the sense of arising simultaneously, it is said that this has the power of opening and guiding that; but since the eight consciousnesses of one body may arise together, how could a different kind be the opening-and-guiding support? If one allows it to be a support, it should not arise simultaneously, which would be the same as minds of different schools not arising together.

又一身中諸識俱起，多少不定，若容互作等無間緣，色等應爾，便違聖說等無間緣唯心、心所。

Moreover, in one body the consciousnesses that arise together are indefinite in number; if one allowed them to act as each other's immediately preceding conditions, form and the like should be so too, which would contradict the sacred saying that the immediately preceding condition is only mind and mental factors.

然《攝大乘》說：色亦容有等無間緣者，是縱奪言，謂假縱小乘色、心前後有等無間緣，奪因緣故，不爾，「等」言應成無用。若謂「等」言非遮多少，但表同類，便違汝執異類識作等無間緣。

But the Mahayana-samgraha says that form can also have an immediately preceding condition; this is a statement of allowing and then withdrawing, namely provisionally allowing the Small Vehicle's claim that form and mind have an immediately preceding condition before and after, and withdrawing it as a causal condition; otherwise the word "samanantara" (equal and immediate) would be useless. If one says the word "equal" does not rule out many and few but only indicates the same kind, this would contradict your holding that a different kind of consciousness acts as the immediately preceding condition.

是故八識各唯自類為開導依，深契教理，自類必無俱起義故。心所此依，應隨識說。

So the eight consciousnesses each take only their own kind as opening-and-guiding support, which deeply accords with teaching and principle, because their own kind surely has no sense of arising simultaneously. The support of mental factors should be stated according to the consciousness.

雖心、心所異類並生，而互相應，和合似一，定俱生滅，事業必同，一開導時，餘亦開導，故展轉作等無間緣，諸識不然，不應為例。

Although mind and mental factors, being of different kinds, arise together, they correspond with one another, combine as if one, necessarily arise and cease together, and have necessarily the same functions; when one opens and guides, the others also open and guide, so they alternately act as immediately preceding conditions; the consciousnesses are not like this and should not be taken as an example.

然諸心所非開導依，於所引生無主義故。

But the mental factors are not opening-and-guiding supports, because they have no sense of being lord in what they bring forth.

若心、心所等無間緣各唯自類，第七、八識初轉依時，相應信等，此緣便闕，則違聖說諸心、心所皆四緣生。

If the immediately preceding conditions of mind and mental factors were each only of their own kind, then when the seventh and eighth consciousnesses first undergo the transformation of the support, the corresponding faith and the rest would lack this condition, which would contradict the sacred saying that all minds and mental factors arise from four conditions.

無心睡眠、悶絕等位意識雖斷，而後起時彼開導依即前自類，間斷五識應知亦然，無自類心於中為隔名無間故，彼先滅時，已於今識為開導故，何煩異類為開導依？

In states such as sleep without mind and fainting, although mental consciousness is cut off, when it arises later its opening-and-guiding support is just its previous own kind; for the interrupted five consciousnesses one should know it is likewise: there is no mind of the same kind intervening between them, which is called immediacy, and when they ceased earlier they had already opened and guided the present consciousness; what need is there for a different kind to be the opening-and-guiding support?

然聖教中說前六識互相引起，或第七、八依六、七生，皆依殊勝增上緣說，非等無間，故不相違。《瑜伽論》說：若此識無間，諸識決定生，說此為彼等無間緣。又此六識為彼六識等無間緣，即施設此名意根者，言總意別，亦不相違。

Yet in the sacred teachings it is said that the first six consciousnesses draw each other forth, or that the seventh and eighth arise depending on the sixth and seventh; these are all said in terms of the superior dominant condition (adhipati-pratyaya), not the immediately preceding condition, so they are not contradictory. The Yogacara treatise says: if this consciousness, immediately, makes the consciousnesses definitely arise, this is said to be the immediately preceding condition for them. Also that these six consciousnesses are the immediately preceding condition for those six consciousnesses, whereupon the name mind faculty is established; the words are general and the meaning specific, which is also not contradictory.

故自類依，深契教理。

So the support of its own kind deeply accords with teaching and principle.

傍論已了，應辯正論。此能變識雖具三所依，而「依彼轉」言但顯前二，為顯此識依、緣同故，又前二依有勝用故，或開導依易了知故。

The digression is concluded, and one should now discuss the main treatise. Although this evolving consciousness has the three supports, the words "it operates depending on that" show only the first two, in order to show that this consciousness has the same support and object, and because the first two supports have superior function, or because the opening-and-guiding support is easy to understand.

如是已說此識所依，所緣云何？

Thus the support of this consciousness has been stated; what about its object?

謂即「緣彼」。

It is just "taking that as object."

「彼」謂即前此所依識，聖說此識緣藏識故。

"That" refers to the consciousness that is the support mentioned above, because the sages say that this consciousness takes the store consciousness as object.

有義：此意緣彼識體，及相應法。

One view holds: this manas takes as object the substance of that consciousness and the corresponding dharmas.

論說：末那我、我所執恆相應故。

The treatise says: manas is always associated with the attachment to self and to what belongs to self.

謂緣彼體及相應法，如次執為我及我所。

That is, taking as object that substance and the corresponding dharmas, it grasps them respectively as self and as what belongs to self.

然諸心所不離識故，如「唯識」言，無違教失。

But the mental factors are not apart from consciousness, as in the saying "consciousness-only"; there is no fault of contradicting the teaching.

有義：彼說理不應然，曾無處言緣觸等故。

One view holds: their reasoning is not right, because nowhere is it said that manas takes contact and the like as object.

應言此意但緣彼識見及相分，如次執為我及我所，相、見俱以識為體故，不違聖說。

It should be said that this manas takes as object only the seeing part and the image part of that consciousness, grasping them respectively as self and as what belongs to self, since both the image part and the seeing part have consciousness as their substance, which does not contradict the sacred saying.

有義：此說亦不應理。五色根境非識蘊故，應同五識，亦緣外故；應如意識，緣共境故；應生無色者不執我所故，厭色生彼不變色故。

One view holds: this statement is also not reasonable. The five material faculties and objects are not the aggregate of consciousness; it should then, like the five consciousnesses, also take external objects; like mental consciousness, take common objects; and those born in the formless realm would not grasp what belongs to self, since they are weary of form and are born there with unchanged form.

應說此意但緣藏識及彼種子，如次執為我及我所。

It should be said that this manas takes as object only the store consciousness and its seeds, grasping them respectively as self and as what belongs to self.

以種即是彼識功能，非實有物，不違聖教。

Because the seeds are just the functions of that consciousness and are not real things, this does not contradict the sacred teaching.

有義：前說皆不應理。色等種子，非識蘊故，論說種子是實有故。假應如無，非因緣故。又此識俱薩迦耶見，任運一類，恆相續生，何容別執有我、我所？無一心中有斷、常等二境，別執俱轉義故，亦不應說二執前後，此無始來一味轉故。

One view holds: all that was said earlier is not reasonable. The seeds of form and the like are not the aggregate of consciousness, and the treatise says seeds are real existents. If provisional, they would be like non-existents and not a causal condition. Also this consciousness is accompanied by satkayadrishti (view of a real body), spontaneous and of one kind, continually arising, so how could it allow separately grasping a self and what belongs to self? There is not in one mind two objects such as permanence and annihilation, nor would it be reasonable to speak of the two graspings as separate and simultaneous, nor of two graspings before and after, because from beginningless time this has operated as of one flavor.

應知此意但緣藏識見分非餘，彼無始來一類相續似常、一故，恆與諸法為所依故。

One should know that this manas takes as object only the seeing part of the store consciousness and nothing else; that part, from beginningless time, continues as one kind, like something permanent and single, and is always the support of all dharmas.

此唯執彼為自內我，乘語勢故，說我所言。或此執彼是我、之我，故於一見義說二言。

This consciousness grasps only that as its own inner self, and by the momentum of language one speaks of "self and what belongs to self." Or this consciousness grasps that as self, as the self's, and so about one view it speaks in two expressions.

若作是說，善順教理。多處唯言有我見故，我、我所執，不俱起故。

If it is stated this way, it well accords with teaching and principle. In many places it speaks only of the view of self, and the graspings of self and what belongs to self do not arise together.

未轉依位，唯緣藏識。既轉依已，亦緣真如及餘諸法。平等性智，證得十種平等性故。知諸有情勝解差別，示現種種佛影像故。

Before the transformation of the support, it takes only the store consciousness as its object. After the transformation of the support, it also takes true suchness and all other dharmas. The wisdom of equality realizes the ten kinds of equality, knows the differences in the resolve of all sentient beings, and manifests the various images of Buddhas.

此中且說未轉依時，故但說此緣彼藏識。悟迷通局，理應爾故。無我、我境，遍、不遍故。

Here we speak only of the time before the transformation of the support, so it is said only that this takes that store consciousness. In awakening and delusion, whether pervasive or limited, the principle should be so. Egolessness and the object of self: pervasive or not pervasive.

如何此識緣自所依？如有後識，即緣前意。彼既極成，此亦何咎？

How does this consciousness take its own support as object? Like a later consciousness that takes the earlier mind as object. Since that is fully established, what fault is there here?

頌言：「思量為性相」者，雙顯此識自性、行相。

The verse says: "Its nature and characteristic is reflection": it shows both the self-nature and the mode of operation of this consciousness.

意以思量為自性故，即復用彼為行相故。由斯兼釋所立別名，能審思量名末那故。未轉依位，恆、審思量所執我相；已轉依位，亦審思量無我相故。

Manas takes reflection as its self-nature and further takes that as its mode of operation. From this, one also explains the name established for it: that which can examine and reflect is called manas. In the state before the transformation of the support, it constantly and carefully reflects on the aspect of self that it grasps; in the state after the transformation of the support, it also carefully reflects on the aspect of no-self.

此意相應有幾心所？

How many kinds of mental factors correspond with this manas?

且與四種煩惱常俱。

First, it is constantly accompanied by four kinds of afflictions.

此中「俱」言，顯相應義。

The word "accompanied" here shows the sense of correspondence.

謂從無始，至未轉依，此意任運恆緣藏識，與四根本煩惱相應。

That is, from beginningless time until the transformation of the support, this manas spontaneously and constantly takes the store consciousness as object, corresponding with the four root afflictions.

其四者何？

What are those four?

「謂我痴、我見並我慢、我愛」，是名四種。

"Namely self-delusion, self-view, self-conceit and self-love": these are called the four.

我痴者：謂無明，愚於我相，迷無我理，故名我痴。我見者：謂我執，於非我法，妄計為我，故名我見。我慢者：謂倨傲，恃所執我，令心高舉，故名我慢。我愛者：謂我貪，於所執我，深生耽著，故名我愛。「並」錶慢、愛、有見、慢俱，遮餘部執無相應義。

Self-delusion is ignorance, being foolish about the aspect of self and deluded about the principle of no-self, so it is called self-delusion. Self-view is clinging to self, wrongly reckoning as self what is not self, so it is called self-view. Self-conceit is arrogance, relying on the self it grasps and making the mind lofty, so it is called self-conceit. Self-love is craving for self, deeply attached to the self it grasps, so it is called self-love. "Together" indicates that conceit and love arise together with view, excluding the claim of other schools that there is no correspondence.

此四常起，擾濁內心，令外轉識恆成雜染。有情由此生死輪迴，不能出離，故名煩惱。

These four constantly arise, disturb and cloud the inner mind, and make the outwardly operating consciousnesses always defiled. By them sentient beings are born and die in the cycle and cannot escape, so they are called afflictions.

彼有十種，此何唯四？

They number ten; why are there only four here?

有我見故，餘見不生。無一心中，有二慧故。如何此識，要有我見？二取、邪見，但分別生，唯見所斷。此俱煩惱，唯是俱生，修所斷故。我所、邊見，依我見生。此相應見，不依彼起。恆內執有我，故要有我見。

Because there is the self-view, other views do not arise. In one mind there are not two kinds of wisdom. Why must this consciousness have self-view? The two kinds of grasping and wrong views arise only through discrimination and are only abandoned by seeing. The afflictions accompanying this are only innate, abandoned by cultivation. What belongs to self and extreme views arise relying on self-view. The view corresponding here does not arise relying on that. Constantly inwardly grasping that there is a self, it must have self-view.

由見審決，疑無容起。愛著我故，瞋不得生。故此識俱煩惱唯四。

With view examining and deciding, doubt has no room to arise. When one loves and clings to self, anger cannot arise. So the afflictions accompanying this consciousness are only four.

見、慢、愛三，如何俱起？行相無違，俱起何失？

How can view, conceit and love, these three, arise together? Their modes of operation do not conflict; what fault is there in arising together?

《瑜伽論》說：貪令心下，慢令心舉，寧不相違？分別、俱生；外境、內境；所陵、所恃，麁、細有殊，故彼此文，義無乖返。

The Yogacara treatise says: craving makes the mind lowly and conceit makes the mind lofty; how are they not contradictory? Discriminated and innate; external object and internal object; what one looks down on and what one relies on; coarse and subtle differ, so the passages differ but the meaning is not contradictory.

此意心所唯有四耶？

Are the mental factors of this manas only four?

不爾，「及餘觸等俱」故。

No: "and the remaining ones, contact and so on, accompany it."

有義：此意心所唯九，前四及餘觸等五法，即觸、作意、受、想與思，意與遍行，定相應故。前說觸等，異熟識俱，恐謂同前，亦是無覆，顯此異彼，故置「餘」言。

One view holds: the mental factors of this manas are only nine, the first four and the other five dharmas, contact and so on, namely contact, attention, feeling, perception and volition, which are definitely corresponding with manas as the universal factors. Earlier it was said that contact and so on accompany the vipaka consciousness, and fearing it might be said to be the same as before, it is also non-obscured; to show that this one differs from that, the word "remaining" is placed.

「及」是集義，前四後五合，與末那恆相應故。

"And" has the sense of collecting; the first four and the latter five together always correspond with manas.

此意何故無餘心所？

Why does this manas have no other mental factors?

謂「欲」，希望未遂合事，此識任運，緣遂合境，無所希望，故無有欲。「勝解」，印持曾未定境，此識無始，恆緣定事，無所印持，故無勝解。「念」唯記憶曾所習事，此識恆緣現所受境，無所記憶，故無有念。「定」唯繫心專注一境，此識任運，剎那別緣，既不專一，故無有定。「慧」即我見，故不別說。

"Desire" hopes for things not yet attained; this consciousness is spontaneous and takes objects already attained, with nothing to hope for, so it has no desire. "Resolve" affirms and holds objects not yet determined; this consciousness constantly, from beginningless time, takes determinate matters, with nothing to affirm, so it has no resolve. "Mindfulness" only remembers what has been practiced; this consciousness constantly takes the object just experienced, with nothing to remember, so it has no mindfulness. "Concentration" binds the mind to focus on one object; this consciousness is spontaneous and takes different objects every instant, not being single-pointed, so it has no concentration. "Wisdom" is just the self-view, so it is not separately mentioned.

善是淨故，非此識俱。

The good is pure; it does not accompany this consciousness.

隨煩惱生，必依煩惱前後分位差別建立。此識恆與四煩惱俱，前後一類，分位無別，故此識俱無隨煩惱。

The arising of secondary afflictions must be established depending on the differences in stages before and after the afflictions. This consciousness is constantly accompanied by four afflictions, of one kind before and after, with no difference in stage, so no secondary afflictions accompany this consciousness.

「惡作」追悔先所造業，此識任運，恆緣現境，非悔先業，故無惡作。「睡眠」必依身、心重昧，外眾緣力，有時暫起，此識無始一類內執，不假外緣，故彼非有。「尋」、「伺」俱依外門而轉，淺深推度，麁細發言，此識唯依內門而轉，一類執我，故非彼俱。

"Regret" is remorse for previously created karma; this consciousness is spontaneous and constantly takes the present object, and does not regret earlier karma, so it has no regret. "Drowsiness" necessarily depends on heaviness and dimness of body and mind and on the power of external conditions, and arises only briefly at times; this consciousness has from beginningless time one kind of inner grasping, not relying on external conditions, so it does not exist here. "Investigation" and "analysis" both operate through external doors, measuring shallowly or deeply and producing speech coarsely or finely; this consciousness operates only through the inner door, grasping self as one kind, so they do not accompany it.

有義：彼釋「餘」義非理。頌別說此有覆攝故。又闕意俱隨煩惱故。煩惱必與隨煩惱俱，故此「餘」言，顯隨煩惱。

One view holds: their explanation of the meaning of "remaining" is not reasonable. The verse separately says that this is included among the obscured. Also, the secondary afflictions accompanying mind are lacking. Afflictions necessarily accompany secondary afflictions, so this word "remaining" indicates the secondary afflictions.

此中有義：五隨煩惱，遍與一切染心相應。

Here there is one view: five secondary afflictions pervasively correspond with all defiled minds.

如《集論》說：惛沈、掉舉、不信、懈怠、放逸，於一切染汙品中，恆共相應。

As the Compendium says: torpor, restlessness, disbelief, laziness and negligence are always together in all defiled categories.

若離無堪任性等，染汙性成，無是處故。煩惱起時，心既染汙，故染心位，必有彼五。煩惱若起，必由無堪任、囂動、不信、懈怠、放逸故。

If apart from lack of fitness and the like, the defiled nature could not be accomplished; this is not reasonable. When afflictions arise, since the mind is defiled, in the stage of a defiled mind there must be those five. If afflictions arise, it must be through unfitness, agitation, disbelief, laziness and negligence.

掉舉雖遍一切染心，而貪位增，但說貪分。如眠與悔，雖遍三性心，而痴位增，但說為痴分。

Although restlessness pervades all defiled minds, in the stage where craving increases it is spoken of only as part of craving. Like drowsiness and regret, although they pervade the minds of the three natures, in the stage where delusion increases they are spoken of as part of delusion.

雖餘處說，有隨煩惱，或六、或十，遍諸染心，而彼俱依別義說遍，非彼實遍一切染心。謂依二十隨煩惱中，解通麁細，無記、不善，通障定、慧，相顯說六。依二十二隨煩惱中，解通麁細二性，說十。故此彼說：非互相違。

Although in other places it is said that there are secondary afflictions, six or ten, pervading all defiled minds, they are all said to pervade according to separate meanings, and it is not that they truly pervade all defiled minds. That is, relying on the twenty secondary afflictions, explaining coarse and subtle, neutral and bad, extending to hindering concentration and wisdom, they mutually show and are said to be six. Relying on the twenty-two secondary afflictions, explaining the two natures coarse and subtle, they are said to be ten. So this and that are said: they do not contradict each other.

然此意俱心所十五，謂前九法、五隨煩惱，並別境慧。我見雖是別境慧攝，而五十一心所法中，義有差別，故開為二。

Yet the mental factors accompanying this manas are fifteen, namely the first nine dharmas, the five secondary afflictions, and the particular-object factor of wisdom. Although self-view is included in the particular-object factor of wisdom, within the fifty-one mental factors the meanings differ, so it is opened out as two.

何緣此意無餘心所？謂忿等十行相麁動，此識審細，故非彼俱；無慚、無愧，唯是不善，此無記故，非彼相應；散亂，令心馳流外境，此恆內執一類境生，不外馳流，故彼非有；不正知者，謂起外門身、語、意行，違越軌則，此唯內執，故非彼俱。無餘心所，義如前說。

Why does this manas have no other mental factors? Anger and the other ten are coarse and agitated in mode of operation, whereas this consciousness is careful and subtle, so they do not accompany it; shamelessness and lack of embarrassment are only unwholesome, and this is neutral, so they do not correspond with it; distraction makes the mind run to external objects, whereas this always inwardly grasps one kind of object and does not run outward, so it does not exist here; wrong knowing means arising external bodily, verbal and mental actions that violate rules, whereas this only inwardly grasps, so it does not accompany it. Having no other mental factors is as explained before.

有義：應說六隨煩惱，遍與一切染心相應，《瑜伽論》說：不信、懈怠、放逸、忘念、散亂、惡慧，一切染心皆相應故。

One view holds: it should be said that six secondary afflictions pervasively correspond with all defiled minds, as the Yogacara treatise says: disbelief, laziness, negligence, forgetfulness, distraction and wrong wisdom correspond with all defiled minds.

忘念、散亂、惡慧若無，心必不能起諸煩惱。要緣曾受境界種類，發起忘念及邪簡擇，方起貪等諸煩惱故。煩惱起時，心必流蕩，皆由於境，起散亂故。

If forgetfulness, distraction and wrong wisdom are absent, the mind certainly cannot give rise to afflictions. One must take as object the kind of objects previously experienced and produce forgetfulness and wrong discrimination, and only then arise craving and other afflictions. When afflictions arise, the mind must be adrift, and because of the object, distraction arises.

惛沈、掉舉，行相互違，非諸染心皆能遍起。論說五法遍染心者，解通麁、細，違唯善法，純隨煩惱，通二性故。

Torpor and restlessness have contrary modes of operation, and not all defiled minds can arise pervasively. The treatise says that five dharmas pervade the defiled mind, explaining coarse and subtle; the contrary are only good dharmas, and the pure secondary afflictions extend to two natures.

說十遍言，義如前說。

The statement that ten pervade has the meaning explained before.

然此意俱心所十九。謂前九法、六隨煩惱，並念、定、慧，及加惛沈。此別說念，準前慧釋。並有定者，專注一類所執我境，曾不捨故。加惛沈者，謂此識俱無明尤重，心惛沈故。

Yet the mental factors accompanying this manas are nineteen. Namely the first nine dharmas, six secondary afflictions, and mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, plus torpor. Mindfulness is mentioned separately, explained by analogy with wisdom above. There is also concentration, focusing on the one kind of self-object it grasps, never giving it up. Torpor is added, meaning that the ignorance accompanying this consciousness is especially heavy and the mind is torpid.

無掉舉者，此相違故。無餘心所，如上應知。

There is no restlessness, because it is contrary to this. Having no other mental factors should be understood as above.

有義：復說十隨煩惱，遍與一切染心相應。

One view holds: further, it is said that ten secondary afflictions pervasively correspond with all defiled minds.

《瑜伽論》說：放逸、掉舉、惛沈、不信、懈怠、邪欲、邪勝解、邪念、散亂、不正知。此十一切染汙心起，通一切處，三界繫故。

The Yogacara treatise says: negligence, restlessness, torpor, disbelief, laziness, wrong desire, wrong resolve, wrong mindfulness, distraction and wrong knowing. These ten arise in all defiled minds, extending everywhere and bound to the three realms.

若無邪欲、邪勝解時，心必不能起諸煩惱。於所受境，要樂合、離，印持事相，方起貪等諸煩惱故。

If wrong desire and wrong resolve are absent, the mind certainly cannot give rise to afflictions. Toward the object experienced, one must delight in joining or separating it and affirm the aspect of the thing, and only then do craving and other afflictions arise.

諸疑理者，於色等事，必無猶豫；故疑相應，亦有勝解。於所緣事，亦猶豫者，非煩惱疑，如疑人杌。

Those who doubt principle certainly have no hesitation about form and other things; so doubt also has resolve corresponding with it. If one also hesitates about the object, it is not the affliction of doubt, as when doubting whether a figure is a person or a stump.

餘處不說此二遍者，緣非愛事，疑相應心，邪欲、勝解非麁顯故。

In other places these two are not said to pervade, because in the mind corresponding with doubt that takes an unloved object, wrong desire and resolve are not coarse or manifest.

餘互有無，義如前說。

The rest, their presence or absence, is as explained before.

此意心所有二十四：謂前九法、十隨煩惱，加別境五，準前理釋。

The mental factors of this manas are twenty-four: namely the first nine dharmas, the ten secondary afflictions, and the five particular-object factors, explained by analogy with the previous reasoning.

無餘心所如上應知。

The absence of other mental factors should be understood as above.

有義：前說皆未盡理。

One view holds: all that was said earlier has not exhausted the principle.

且疑他世為有、為無，於彼有何欲、勝解相？煩惱起位，若無惛沈，應不定有無堪任性；掉舉若無，應無囂動，便如善等，非染汙位。若染心中，無散亂者，應非流蕩，非染汙心。若無失念、不正知者，如何能起煩惱現前？

For example, in doubting whether another world exists or not, what desire or resolve is there regarding it? In the stage when afflictions arise, if there were no torpor, there would not necessarily be unfitness; if there were no restlessness, there would be no agitation, and it would be like the good and the like, not a defiled stage. If in a defiled mind there were no distraction, it should not be adrift and not be a defiled mind. If there were no forgetfulness or wrong knowing, how could afflictions arise and be present?

故染汙心決定皆與八隨煩惱相應而生，謂惛沈、掉舉、不信、懈怠、放逸、忘念、散亂、不正知。忘念、不正知，念、慧為性者，不遍染心，非諸染心，皆緣曾受，有簡擇故；若以無明為自性者，遍染心起，由前說故。

So defiled minds definitely all arise corresponding with eight secondary afflictions, namely torpor, restlessness, disbelief, laziness, negligence, forgetfulness, distraction and wrong knowing. Forgetfulness and wrong knowing, which take mindfulness and wisdom as their nature, do not pervade all defiled minds, and not all defiled minds take what was previously experienced as object or have discrimination; but those that take ignorance as their self-nature arise in all defiled minds, for the reasons stated above.

然此意俱心所十八：謂前九法、八隨煩惱，並別境慧。無餘心所及論三文，準前應釋。

Yet the mental factors accompanying this manas are eighteen: namely the first nine dharmas, the eight secondary afflictions, and the particular-object factor of wisdom. The absence of other mental factors and the three passages of the treatise should be explained by analogy with the above.

若作是說，不違理、教。

If it is stated this way, it does not contradict principle and teaching.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other Bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial decree by the Tripitaka Master Xuanzang.

此染汙意，何受相應？

With what feeling does this defiled manas correspond?

有義：此俱唯有喜受，恆內執我，生喜愛故。

One view holds: it is accompanied only by joyful feeling, because it constantly and inwardly grasps self, giving rise to joy and love.

有義：不然。應許喜受，乃至有頂，違聖言故。

One view holds: this is not right. One should allow joyful feeling up to the peak of existence, because otherwise it would contradict the sacred words.

應說：此意四受相應。謂生惡趣憂受相應，緣不善業所引果故。生人、欲天、初、二靜慮，喜受相應，緣有喜地善業果故。第三靜慮，樂受相應，緣有樂地善業果故。第四靜慮乃至有頂，捨受相應，緣唯捨地善業果故。

It should be said: this manas corresponds with four feelings. Those born in the evil destinies correspond with painful feeling, because they take as object the results brought by unwholesome karma. Those born among humans, in the desire-realm heavens, and in the first and second dhyanas correspond with joyful feeling, because they take as object the results of wholesome karma of the realms with joy. In the third dhyana, they correspond with pleasant feeling, because they take as object the results of wholesome karma of the realm with pleasure. In the fourth dhyana up to the peak of existence, they correspond with neutral feeling, because they take as object only the results of wholesome karma of the realm of equanimity.

有義：彼說亦不應理。此無始來，任運一類，緣內執我，恆無轉易，與變異受，不相應故。

One view holds: what they say is also not reasonable. This consciousness from beginningless time is spontaneous and of one kind, takes the inner grasped self as object, never changes, and does not correspond with changing feelings.

又此末那與前藏識義有異者，皆別說之。若四受俱，亦應別說。既不別說，定與彼同。故此相應，唯有捨受。

Also, where this manas differs in meaning from the store consciousness, they are all mentioned separately. If it were accompanied by four feelings, that too should be mentioned separately. Since it is not mentioned separately, it is definitely the same as that. So its correspondence here is only with neutral feeling.

未轉依位，與前所說心所相應；已轉依位，唯二十一心所俱起，謂遍行、別境各五，善十一。如第八識，已轉依位，唯捨受俱，任運轉故。恆於所緣平等轉故。

Before the transformation of the support, it corresponds with the mental factors mentioned earlier; after the transformation of the support, only twenty-one mental factors arise together with it, namely five universal factors, five particular-object factors, and eleven good factors. Like the eighth consciousness, after the transformation of the support it is accompanied only by neutral feeling, because it operates spontaneously. Always toward its object it operates equally.

末那心所，何性所攝？

The mental factors of manas, by what nature are they included?

有覆無記所攝，非餘。

They are included in the obscured-neutral, not the others.

此意相應四煩惱等，是染法故；障礙聖道，隱蔽自心，說名有覆；非善、不善，故名無記。

The four afflictions and others corresponding with this manas are defiled dharmas; they hinder the sacred path and conceal one's own mind, and so are called obscured; they are neither good nor bad, so are called neutral.

如上二界諸煩惱等，定力攝藏，是無記攝。此俱染法，所依細故，任運轉故，亦無記攝。

Just as the afflictions of the upper two realms are held and stored by the power of concentration and are included in the neutral, so the defiled dharmas accompanying this, whose support is subtle and which operate spontaneously, are also included in the neutral.

若已轉依，唯是善性。

If the transformation of the support has been accomplished, it is only of good nature.

末那心所，何地繫耶？

The mental factors of manas, to which realm are they bound?

隨彼所生，彼地所繫。

According to where one is born, they are bound to that realm.

謂生欲界，現行末那相應心所，即欲界繫。乃至有頂應知亦然；任運恆緣自地藏識，執為內我，非他地故。

That is, when one is born in the desire realm, the mental factors corresponding with the manifest manas are bound to the desire realm. One should understand it likewise up to the peak of existence; it spontaneously and constantly takes the store consciousness of its own realm as object and grasps it as inner self, not that of another realm.

若起彼地異熟藏識現在前者，名生彼地；染汙末那，緣彼執我，即繫屬彼，名彼所繫。

If a vipaka store consciousness of that realm arises and is present, it is called birth in that realm; the defiled manas takes that as object and grasps self, and so belongs to that realm, and is called bound to that.

或為彼地諸煩惱等之所繫縛，名彼所繫。

Or it is bound by the afflictions of that realm and so is called bound to that.

若已轉依，即非所繫。

If the support has already been transformed, it is not bound.

此染汙意，無始相續，何位永斷？或暫斷耶？

This defiled manas, which continues from beginningless time: at which stage is it permanently cut off, or temporarily cut off?

「阿羅漢、滅定、出世道無有。」

"In the arhat, the concentration of cessation, and the supramundane path, it is absent."

阿羅漢者，總顯三乘無學果位。此位染意種及現行，俱永斷滅，故說無有。學位滅定、出世道中，俱暫伏滅，故說無有。

Arhat: this generally indicates the fruit stage of no more learning in all three vehicles. In this stage, the seeds and manifestations of the defiled mind are permanently cut off, so it is said to be absent. In the concentration of cessation of the learner and in the supramundane path, they are all temporarily subdued and extinguished, so it is said to be absent.

謂染汙意，無始時來，微細一類，任運而轉，諸有漏道，不能伏滅；三乘聖道，有伏滅義。真無我解，違我執故。後得無漏現在前時，是彼等流，亦違此意。真無我解，及後所得，俱無漏故，名出世道。

The defiled mind, from beginningless time, subtle and of one kind, operates spontaneously, and the various paths with outflows cannot subdue or extinguish it; the sacred paths of the three vehicles have the sense of subduing and extinguishing it. The true understanding of no-self contradicts self-grasping. When the pure wisdom attained afterward is present, it is a result flowing from that, and it also contradicts this mind. The true understanding of no-self and what is attained afterward are both without outflows and are called the supramundane path.

滅定既是聖道等流，極寂靜故，此亦非有。

Since the concentration of cessation is a result flowing from the sacred path and is utterly still, this too does not exist.

由未永斷此種子故，從滅盡定、聖道起已，此復現行，乃至未滅。

Because its seeds have not yet been permanently cut off, after arising from the concentration of cessation and from the sacred path, this manifests again, until it is extinguished.

然此染意相應煩惱，是俱生故，非見所斷。是染汙故，非非所斷。

Yet the afflictions accompanying this defiled mind are innate, not to be abandoned by seeing; they are defiled, not not-to-be-abandoned.

極微細故，所有種子，與有頂地，下下煩惱，一時頓斷，勢力等故；金剛喻定現在前時，頓斷此種，成阿羅漢，故無學位，永不復起。

Extremely subtle, all its seeds are cut off all at once together with the lowest of the lower afflictions of the peak of existence, because their strength is equal; when the vajra-like concentration is present, these are cut off at once, and one becomes an arhat, and so in the stage of no more learning it never arises again.

二乘無學，迴趣大乘，從初發心，至未成佛，雖實是菩薩，亦名阿羅漢。應義等故，不別說之。

Those of the two vehicles beyond learning who turn toward the Great Vehicle, from the first aspiration until Buddhahood, although in truth they are Bodhisattvas, are also called arhats. Because of such meanings as worthy of offerings, it is not separately mentioned.

此中有義：末那唯有煩惱障俱。聖教皆言：三位無故。又說：四惑恆相應故。又說：為識雜染依故。

Here there is one view: manas accompanies only the affliction-hindrance. The sacred teachings all say: it is absent in three states. They also say: the four delusions constantly correspond with it. They also say: it is the support of the defilement of consciousness.

有義：彼說教、理相違，出世末那，經說有故。

One view holds: their statement makes teaching and principle contradict each other, for the sutras say that supramundane manas exists.

無染意識，如有染時，定有俱生不共依故。

A non-defiled mental consciousness, as when there is defilement, definitely has an innate uncommon support.

論說：藏識決定恆與一識俱轉，所謂末那；意識起時，則二俱轉，所謂意識，及與末那；若五識中隨起一識，則三俱轉，乃至或時頓起五識，則七俱轉。若住滅定，無第七識，爾時，藏識應無識俱，便非恆定一識俱轉。住聖道時，若無第七。爾時，藏識應一識俱，如何可言，若起意識，爾時，藏識定二俱轉？

The treatise says: the store consciousness definitely always operates together with one consciousness, namely manas; when mental consciousness arises, two operate together, namely mental consciousness and manas; if one of the five consciousnesses arises, three operate together, and so on, until sometimes the five consciousnesses arise at once and seven operate together. If one abides in the concentration of cessation, there is no seventh consciousness, so at that time the store consciousness would have no consciousness together with it, and it would not be that it always operates together with one consciousness. When one abides in the sacred path, if there is no seventh, then the store consciousness would have just one consciousness together with it; how can it be said that if mental consciousness arises, then the store consciousness definitely operates together with two?

《顯揚論》說：末那恆與四煩惱相應，或翻彼相應，恃舉為行，或平等行。故知此意通染、不染。

The Xianyang treatise says: manas is constantly associated with four afflictions, or with their opposites, taking reliance and elevation as its mode, or with equal operation. So one knows this manas extends to the defiled and the non-defiled.

若由論說：阿羅漢位無染意故，便無第七。應由論說：阿羅漢位捨賴耶故，便無第八。彼既不爾，此云何然？

If, because the treatise says that in the state of arhat there is no defiled mind, one concludes there is no seventh, then, because the treatise says that in the arhat state alaya is abandoned, one should conclude there is no eighth. Since that is not so, how could this be so?

又諸論言：轉第七識，得平等智。彼如餘智，定有所依相應淨識。此識無者，彼智應無。非離所依有能依故。不可說彼依六轉識，許佛恆行，如鏡智故。

Also the treatises say: by transforming the seventh consciousness one attains the wisdom of equality. That, like other wisdoms, definitely has a support and a corresponding pure consciousness. If this consciousness does not exist, that wisdom should not exist. There is never a dependent without a support. One cannot say that it depends on the six evolving consciousnesses, admitting that the Buddha's constant practice is like the mirror wisdom.

又無學位，若無第七識，彼第八識，應無俱有依。然必有此依，如餘識性故。

Also, in the stage of no more learning, if there were no seventh consciousness, that eighth consciousness would have no simultaneous support. But it must have this support, because it is of the nature of other consciousnesses.

又如未證補特伽羅無我者，彼我執恆行；亦應未證法無我者，法我執恆行，此識若無，彼依何識？非依第八，彼無慧故。由此應信，二乘聖道、滅定、無學此識恆行，彼未證得法無我故。

Also, as for those who have not realized the no-self of persons, their self-grasping operates constantly; likewise, for those who have not realized the no-self of dharmas, the grasping of dharma-self operates constantly; if this consciousness did not exist, on what consciousness would they depend? Not on the eighth, because that has no wisdom. So one should believe that in the sacred path of the two vehicles, the concentration of cessation and the stage of no more learning, this consciousness operates constantly, because they have not yet realized the no-self of dharmas.

又諸論中，以五同法證有第七，為第六依。聖道起時，及無學位，若無第七為第六依，所立宗、因，便俱有失。或應五識亦有無依。五恆有依，六亦應爾。

Also, in the treatises, the five similar instances are used to prove the seventh, as the support of the sixth. When the sacred path arises, and in the stage of no more learning, if there were no seventh as support of the sixth, the thesis and reason established would both be faulty. Or else the five consciousnesses would also have no support at times. The five always have supports, and the sixth should likewise.

是故定有無染汙意，於上三位，恆起現前。言彼無者，依染意說；如說四位無阿賴耶，非無第八，此亦應爾。

So there definitely is a non-defiled manas, which arises and is present constantly in the above three states. The statement that it is absent in them is said in relation to the defiled manas; as it is said that alaya is absent in four states and this does not mean the eighth is absent, so this should also be understood.

此意差別，略有三種：

The distinctions of this manas are, in brief, of three kinds:

一、補特伽羅我見相應；二、法我見相應；三、平等性智相應。

first, corresponding with the self-view of the person (pudgala); second, corresponding with the self-view of dharmas; third, corresponding with the wisdom of equality.

初通一切異生相續、二乘有學、七地以前一類菩薩有漏心位，彼緣阿賴耶識，起補特伽羅我見。

The first extends to the continuum of all ordinary beings, the learners of the two vehicles, and the Bodhisattvas below the seventh ground in states of mind with outflows; they take the alaya consciousness as object and arise the self-view of the person.

次通一切異生、聲聞、獨覺相續、一切菩薩法空智果不現前位，彼緣異熟識，起法我見。

The second extends to the continuum of all ordinary beings, Sravakas and Pratyekabuddhas, and all Bodhisattvas in states where the fruit of the wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas is not present; they take the vipaka consciousness as object and arise the self-view of dharmas.

後通一切如來相續、菩薩見道及修道中法空智果現在前位，彼緣無垢異熟識等，起平等性智。

The third extends to the continuum of all Tathagatas and Bodhisattvas in the path of seeing and in the path of cultivation in states where the fruit of the wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas is present; they take the immaculate vipaka consciousness and so on as object and arise the wisdom of equality.

補特伽羅我見起位，彼法我見亦必現前。我執必依法執而起。如夜迷杌等，方謂人等故。

When the self-view of the person arises, the self-view of dharmas must also be present. Self-grasping necessarily arises depending on dharma-grasping. As in mistaking a stump for a person at night, only then is it called a person and so on.

我、法二見，用雖有別，而不相違，同依一慧。如眼識等，體雖是一，而有了別青等多用，不相違故，此亦應然。

The two views of self and dharmas, although different in function, do not contradict each other and depend on one wisdom. As eye consciousness and the others, though one in substance, have many functions such as discerning blue and so on without contradiction, this too should be so.

二乘有學聖道，滅定現在前時；頓悟菩薩，於修道位；有學漸悟，生空智果現在前時，皆唯起法執，我執已伏故。

When the sacred path of the learners of the two vehicles and the concentration of cessation are present; for Bodhisattvas of sudden awakening in the stage of cultivation; and for learners of gradual awakening when the fruit of the wisdom of the emptiness of persons is present, only dharma-grasping arises, because self-grasping has already been subdued.

二乘無學及此漸悟法空智果不現前時，亦唯起法執，我執已斷故。

For those of the two vehicles beyond learning, and for the gradual-awakening ones when the fruit of the wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas is not present, also only dharma-grasping arises, because self-grasping has already been cut off.

八地以上，一切菩薩所有我執皆永不行，或已永斷；或永伏故。法空智果不現前時，猶起法執，不相違故。

From the eighth ground upward, the self-grasping of all Bodhisattvas never operates, either permanently cut off or permanently subdued. When the fruit of the wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas is not present, dharma-grasping still arises, because they are not contradictory.

如契經說：八地以上，一切煩惱，不復現行；唯有所依所知障在。此所知障，是現非種。不爾，煩惱亦應在故。

As a sutra says: from the eighth ground upward, all afflictions no longer manifest; only the hindrance of knowledge, as support and what is known, remains. This hindrance of knowledge is manifest and not seed. Otherwise the afflictions would also remain.

法執俱意，於二乘等，雖名不染；於諸菩薩，亦名為染，障彼智故。由此亦名有覆無記。於二乘等，說名無覆，不障彼智故。是異熟生攝，從異熟識恆時生故，名異熟生，非異熟果，此名通故，如增上緣，餘不攝者，皆入此攝。

The manas accompanied by dharma-grasping, in relation to the two vehicles and others, though called non-defiled, is also called defiled in relation to Bodhisattvas, because it hinders their wisdom. Hence it is also called obscured-neutral. In relation to the two vehicles and others, it is called non-obscured, because it does not hinder their wisdom. It is included in what is born of vipaka, arising constantly from the vipaka consciousness; it is called vipaka-born, not a vipaka result, because this name is general, like the dominant condition, and whatever else is not included is included here.

云何應知此第七識，離眼等識，有別自體？

How should one know that this seventh consciousness has its own substance, apart from the eye consciousness and the others?

聖教正理，為定量故。

Because of the sacred teachings and correct reasoning, as definitive measures.

謂薄伽梵處處經中說：心、意、識三種別義。集起名心，思量名意，了別名識，是三別義。

The Bhagavan (World-Honored One) says in sutras in many places that mind, manas and consciousness have three different meanings. Gathering and arising is called mind, reflection is called manas, and discernment is called consciousness; these are the three different meanings.

如是三義，雖通八識，而隨勝顯。第八名心，集諸法種，起諸法故；第七名意，緣藏識等，恆、審思量，為我等故；餘六名識，於六別境，麁動間斷，了別轉故。

These three meanings, although extending to the eight consciousnesses, are shown according to what is most prominent. The eighth is called mind, gathering the seeds of dharmas and giving rise to dharmas; the seventh is called manas, taking the store consciousness and others as object, and constantly and carefully reflecting on it as self and so on; the other six are called consciousness, discerning the six distinct objects in a coarse, agitated and interrupted manner.

如《入楞伽》伽他中說：

As the verse in the Lankavatara says:

「藏識說名心，思量性名意，

"The store consciousness is called mind, the nature of reflection is called manas,

能了諸境相，是說名為識。」

and what discerns the aspects of all objects is called consciousness."

又大乘經處處別說有第七識，故此別有。諸大乘經是至教量，前已廣說，故不重成。

Also the Mahayana sutras in many places separately say there is a seventh consciousness, so this exists separately. The Mahayana sutras are authoritative teaching and have been discussed extensively above, so they are not established again.

《解脫經》中，亦別說有此第七識。如彼頌言：

In the Vimoksa Sutra it is also separately said that there is this seventh consciousness. As its verse says:

「染汙意恆時，諸惑俱生滅，

"The defiled mind constantly, with all the delusions, arises and ceases together;

若解脫諸惑，非曾非當有。」

if liberated from all delusions, it neither was nor will be."

彼經自釋此頌義言：有染汙意，從無始來，與四煩惱，恆俱生滅。謂我見、我愛，及我慢、我痴。對治道生，斷煩惱已，此意從彼便得解脫。爾時，此意相應煩惱，非唯現無，亦無過、未，過去、未來，無自性故。如是等教，諸部皆有，恐厭廣文，故不繁述。

That sutra itself explains the meaning of this verse, saying: there is a defiled mind which, from beginningless time, constantly arises and ceases together with four afflictions, namely self-view, self-love, self-conceit and self-delusion. When the antidote path arises and the afflictions are cut off, this mind is liberated from them. At that time the afflictions corresponding with this mind are not only absent in the present but also in the past and future; the past and future have no self-nature. Such teachings exist in all the schools; fearing to weary with lengthy text, they are not narrated at length.

已引聖教；當顯正理。

The sacred teachings have been cited; now correct reasoning should be shown.

謂契經說：不共無明，微細恆行，覆蔽真實。若無此識，彼應非有。

The sutras say: uncommon ignorance operates subtly and constantly, covering the truth. If there were no such consciousness, that would not exist.

謂諸異生，於一切分，恆起迷理不共無明，覆真實義，障聖慧眼。如伽他說：

That is, among ordinary beings in all states, there constantly arises uncommon ignorance deluded about principle, which covers the true meaning and obstructs the sacred eye of wisdom. As a verse says:

「真義心當生，常能為障礙，

"When the mind of true meaning is about to arise, it is always able to obstruct it,

俱行一切分，謂不共無明。」

operating together in all states; this is called uncommon ignorance."

是故契經說：異生類恆處長夜，無明所盲，惛醉纏心，曾無醒覺。

So a sutra says: ordinary beings always dwell in the long night, blinded by ignorance, with the mind entangled in dull intoxication, never awakening.

若異生位，有暫不起此無明時，便違經義。俱異生位，迷理無明，有行、不行，不應理故。此依六識，皆不得成。應此間斷，彼恆染故。許有末那，便無此失。

If in the stage of ordinary beings there were times when this ignorance does not arise, it would contradict the meaning of the sutra. The ignorance deluded about principle that accompanies ordinary beings is said to be sometimes operating and sometimes not, which is not reasonable. If it depended on the six consciousnesses, none could establish it. That would be interrupted, whereas this is constantly defiled. Allowing manas removes this fault.

染意恆與四惑相應，此俱無明，何名不共？

The defiled mind constantly corresponds with four delusions; how is the ignorance accompanying it called uncommon?

有義：此俱我見、慢、愛，非根本煩惱，名不共何失？

One view holds: the self-view, conceit and love accompanying this are not root afflictions; what fault is there in calling it uncommon?

有義：彼說理、教相違。純隨煩惱中，不說此三故，此三，六、十煩惱攝故。處處皆說染汙末那與四煩惱恆相應故。

One view holds: what they say conflicts with principle and teaching. Among the pure secondary afflictions these three are not mentioned; these three are included among the six or ten afflictions. In many places it is said that the defiled manas constantly corresponds with four afflictions.

應說四中，無明是主，雖三俱起，亦名不共。從無始際，恆內惽迷，曾不省察，痴增上故。

It should be said that among the four, ignorance is the lord, and although the three arise together, it is also called uncommon. From the beginningless limit it is constantly confused within and has never examined itself, because delusion is dominant.

此俱見等，應名相應，若為主時，應名不共？如無明故，許亦無失。

The view and others accompanying this should be called corresponding; when they are the lord, should they be called uncommon? Like ignorance, it is admitted that there is no fault.

有義：此痴名不共者，如不共佛法，唯此識有故。

One view holds: this delusion is called uncommon, like the uncommon dharmas of the Buddha, which exist only in this consciousness.

若爾，餘識相應煩惱，此識中無，應名不共。依殊勝義，立不共名，非互所無，皆名不共。謂第七識相應無明，無始恆行，障真義智，如是勝用，餘識所無，唯此識有，故名不共。既爾，此俱三亦應名不共。無明是主，獨得此名。或許餘三，亦名不共；對餘「痴」故，且說無明。

If so, the afflictions corresponding with other consciousnesses, which do not exist in this consciousness, should be called uncommon. The name uncommon is established on the basis of a superior meaning, and not everything that the others lack is called uncommon. That is, the ignorance corresponding with the seventh consciousness operates constantly from beginningless time and obstructs the wisdom of the true meaning; this superior function is lacking in other consciousnesses and exists only in this consciousness, so it is called uncommon. If so, the three accompanying this should also be called uncommon. Ignorance is the lord and alone gets this name. Or perhaps the other three are also called uncommon; with respect to the other kinds of 'delusion,' let us speak only of ignorance.

不共無明，總有二種：一、恆行不共，餘識所無；二、獨行不共，此識非有。

Uncommon ignorance is of two kinds in all: first, constantly operating uncommon, which other consciousnesses lack; second, solitarily operating uncommon, which does not exist in this consciousness.

故《瑜伽》說無明有二：若貪等俱者，名相應無明；非貪等俱者，名獨行無明。是主獨行，唯見所斷。如契經說：「諸聖有學，不共無明，已永斷故，不造新業。」非主獨行，亦修所斷。忿等皆通見、修所斷故。

So the Yogacara says there are two kinds of ignorance: that which accompanies craving and the like is called corresponding ignorance; that which does not accompany craving and the like is called solitary ignorance. The lordly solitary one is abandoned only by seeing. As a sutra says: "The sages who are learners have uncommon ignorance permanently cut off and create no new karma." The non-lordly solitary one is also abandoned by cultivation. Anger and the like all extend to what is abandoned by seeing and by cultivation.

恆行不共，餘部所無；獨行不共，此、彼俱有。

The constantly operating uncommon is absent in other schools; the solitarily operating uncommon exists in both this and that.

又契經說：眼、色為緣，生於眼識。廣說乃至意、法為緣，生於意識。若無此識，彼意非有。

Also a sutra says: eye and form are conditions that give rise to eye consciousness. Extensively it says up to: mind and dharmas are conditions that give rise to mental consciousness. If there were no such consciousness, that mind would not exist.

謂如五識，必有眼等增上不共俱有所依。意識既是六識中攝，理應許有如是所依。此識若無，彼依寧有？

Like the five consciousnesses, which must have the uncommon simultaneous supports such as the dominant eye faculty, the mental consciousness, being included among the six consciousnesses, by principle should be admitted to have such a support. If this consciousness were absent, how could that support exist?

不可說色為彼所依，意非色故。意識應無隨念、計度二分別故。

One cannot say form is its support, because mind is not form. Mental consciousness would then lack the two kinds of discrimination, recollective and calculative.

亦不可說五識無有俱有所依，彼與五根俱時而轉，如牙、影故。又識與根，既必同境，如心、心所，決定俱時。

One also cannot say that the five consciousnesses have no simultaneous supports, since they operate simultaneously with the five faculties, like a sprout and its shadow. Also, since consciousness and faculty necessarily share the same object, like mind and mental factors, they are definitely simultaneous.

由此理趣，極成意識如眼等識必有不共，顯自名、處。等無間不攝，增上生所依，極成六識隨一攝故。

By this principle, the universally accepted mental consciousness, like the eye and other consciousnesses, must have an uncommon support, which shows its own name and place. It is not included in the immediately preceding condition, and as the support of dominant arising, it is included in one of the universally accepted six consciousnesses.

又契經說：思量名意。若無此識，彼應非有。

Also a sutra says: reflection is called manas. If there were no such consciousness, that would not exist.

謂若意識現在前時，等無間意已滅非有。過去、未來，理非有故。彼思量用，定不得成。既爾，如何說名為意？若謂假說，理亦不然。無正思量，假依何立？若謂現在，曾有思量，爾時名識，寧說為意？

That is, when mental consciousness is present, the immediately preceding mind has already ceased and does not exist. The past and future, by principle, do not exist. That function of reflection definitely cannot be accomplished. Since this is so, how could it be called manas? If one says it is a provisional designation, that too is not right. Without actual reflection, on what would the provisional designation be established? If one says in the present, which once had reflection, that was called consciousness at the time; how could it be called manas?

故知別有第七末那，恆、審思量，正名為意，已滅依此，假立「意」名。

Hence one knows that there is a separate seventh manas, which constantly and carefully reflects and is properly called manas, and that the ceased one depends on this and is provisionally given the name "manas."

又契經說：無想、滅定染意若無，彼應無別。

Also a sutra says: if the defiled mind were absent, the unconscious attainment and the concentration of cessation would not differ.

謂彼二定，俱滅六識及彼心所，體數無異。若無染意，於二定中，一有一無，彼二何別？若謂加行、界、地、依等有差別者，理亦不然。彼差別因，由此有故。此若無者，彼因亦無。

That is, both those concentrations extinguish the six consciousnesses and their mental factors, with no difference in number of substances. If there were no defiled mind, with one present and one absent in the two concentrations, what difference would the two have? If one says they differ by preparatory practice, realm, ground, support and so on, that too is not right. The cause of that difference exists because of this. If this is absent, that cause is also absent.

是故定應別有此意。

Therefore one must definitely hold that there is a separate manas.

又契經說：無想有情，一期生中，心、心所滅。若無此識，彼應無染。

Also a sutra says: for sentient beings without perception, in one lifetime mind and mental factors cease. If there were no such consciousness, they would have no defilement.

謂彼長時，無六轉識；若無此意，我執便無。非於餘處有具縛者，一期生中，都無我執。彼無我執，應如涅槃，便非聖賢同所訶厭。

That is, they for a long time have no six evolving consciousnesses; if they lacked this manas, self-grasping would be absent. It is not that, among those in other states with complete bonds, none has self-grasping in the whole lifetime. If they had no self-grasping, they would be like nirvana, and would not be equally disliked by the sages and worthy.

初、後有故，無如是失。中間長時無故，有過。去、來有故，無如是失。彼非現、常，無故，有過。所得無故，能得亦無。

At the beginning and end of existence there is no such fault. In the long time between, absence is a fault. Presence in going and coming has no such fault. They are neither manifest nor constant, and absence is a fault. What is obtained is absent, and that which obtains is also absent.

不相應法，前已遮破。

Non-corresponding dharmas have been refuted before.

藏識無故，燻習亦無。餘法受燻，已辯非理。

If the store consciousness does not exist, perfuming too does not exist. That other dharmas receive perfuming has been shown to be unreasonable.

故應別有染汙末那，於無想天恆起我執，由斯賢聖同訶厭彼。

Therefore there must separately be a defiled manas, which constantly arises self-grasping in the heaven of non-perception, and for this reason the sages and worthy equally dislike them.

又契經說：異生善、染、無記心時，恆帶我執，若無此識，彼不應有。

Also a sutra says: ordinary beings, at the times of good, defiled and neutral minds, always carry self-grasping; if there were no such consciousness, that would not exist.

謂異生類，三性心時，雖外起諸業，而內恆執我。由執我故，令六識中所起施等，不能亡相。

That is, ordinary beings, at the times of minds of the three natures, although outwardly they produce various kinds of karma, inwardly always grasp self. Because of grasping self, the giving and the like arising among the six consciousnesses cannot lose their characteristics.

故《瑜伽》說：染汙末那，為識依止，彼未滅時，相了別縛，不得解脫。末那滅已，相縛解脫。

So the Yogacara says: the defiled manas is the support of consciousness; so long as it has not ceased, the bondage of discerning characteristics cannot be released. After manas ceases, the bondage of characteristics is released.

言相縛者，謂於境相不能了達，如幻事等。由斯見分相分所拘，不得自在，故名相縛。

The bondage of characteristics means that one cannot penetrate the aspects of objects, such as illusory things. Hence the seeing part is held by the image part and is not free, so it is called the bondage of characteristics.

依如是義，有伽他言：

Relying on this meaning, a verse says:

「如是染汙意，是識之所依，

"Such a defiled mind is the support of consciousness;

此意未滅時，識縛終不脫。」

so long as this mind has not ceased, the bondage of consciousness is never released."

又善、無覆無記心時，若無我執，應非有漏。自相續中，六識煩惱與彼善等不俱起故。去、來緣縛，理非有故。非由他惑，成有漏故；勿由他解，成無漏故。

Also, at the times of good and non-obscured neutral minds, if there were no self-grasping, they should not be with outflows. In one's own continuum, the afflictions of the six consciousnesses do not arise together with those good states and the like. Connections and bondage in going and coming are not reasonable. It is not that they become with outflows through another's delusion; nor should they become without outflows through another's understanding.

又不可說：別有隨眠，是不相應，現相續起，由斯善等成有漏法。彼非實有，已極成故。

Also one cannot say: there are separately latent tendencies, not corresponding, which arise in the present continuum, and thereby good states and the like become dharmas with outflows. They are not real existents, as has been established.

亦不可說：從有漏種，生彼善等，故成有漏。彼種先無因可成有漏故。

Also one cannot say: from seeds with outflows those good states and the like are born, so they become with outflows. Those seeds first have no cause by which to become with outflows.

非由漏種，彼成有漏；勿學無漏心，亦成有漏故。

It is not that, through seeds of outflows, they become with outflows; otherwise one would make even the pure minds of those still learning also become with outflows.

雖由煩惱，引施等業，而不俱起，故非有漏正因；以有漏言，表漏俱故；又無記業，非煩惱引，彼復如何得成有漏？

Although afflictions lead to giving and other karma, they do not arise together, so they are not the correct cause of outflows; because the word 'outflow' indicates being together with outflow; and neutral karma is not led by afflictions, so how could they become with outflows?

然諸有漏，由與自身現行煩惱俱生、俱滅，互相增益，方成有漏。由此燻成有漏法種，後時現起，有漏義成；異生既然，有學亦爾。無學有漏，雖非漏俱；而從先時有漏種起，故成有漏，於理無違。

But all that has outflows, because it arises and ceases together with the manifest afflictions of one's own body, mutually increasing, becomes with outflows. From this the seeds of dharmas with outflows are perfumed and later manifest, and the meaning of having outflows is established; if so for ordinary beings, so also for learners. For those beyond learning, although their dharmas with outflows are not together with outflows, they arise from the earlier seeds with outflows and so become with outflows, and there is no contradiction in principle.

由有末那恆起我執，令善等法有漏義成。此意若無，彼定非有，故知別有此第七識。

Because manas constantly gives rise to self-grasping, the meaning of wholesome and other dharmas being tainted (with outflows) is established. If this meaning did not hold, that would surely not exist; therefore we know there is a separate seventh consciousness.

證有此識，理趣甚多，隨《攝大乘》，略述六種，諸有智者，應隨信學。

The reasons proving the existence of this consciousness are many; following the Mahayana-samgraha, I briefly describe six kinds, and all the wise should follow them in faith and study.

然有經中說六識者，應知彼是隨轉理門，或隨所依六根說六，而識類別，實有八種。

Though some sutras speak of six consciousnesses, one should know that these speak following the gate of ordinary evolving principle, or speak of six according to the six sense organs on which they depend; yet in fact there are eight kinds of consciousness.

如是已說第二能變。第三能變，其相云何？

Thus the second transformation has been explained. As for the third transformation, what are its characteristics?

頌曰：

The verse says:

８次第三能變，差別有六種，

8. Next the third transformation, with differences of six kinds,

了境為性、相，善、不善、俱非。

Whose nature and characteristic is discerning objects; wholesome, unwholesome, and neither.

論曰：次中思量能變識後，應辯了境能變識相。

The treatise says: Following the middle transforming consciousness of thinking and measuring, one should explain the characteristics of the transforming consciousness that discerns objects.

此識差別總有六種，隨六根、境，種類異故。

The differences of this consciousness total six kinds, differing according to the six sense organs and objects.

謂名眼識乃至意識，隨根立名，具五義故。五謂依、發、屬、助、如根，雖六識身皆依意轉，然隨不共，立意識名，如五識身，無相濫過。或唯依意，故名意識，辯識得名，心、意非例。

These are called eye-consciousness through mind-consciousness, named according to their organs, because they have five meanings. The five are: dependence, arising, belonging, assisting, and being like the organ. Though the six bodies of consciousness all turn depending on the mind, the name of mind-consciousness is established according to what is not shared, as with the five bodies of consciousness, so there is no confusion. Or it depends solely on the mind, and so is called mind-consciousness; this explains how the consciousness receives its name, and "citta" and "manas" are not examples of this.

或名色識乃至法識，隨境立名，順識義故。謂於六境了別名識，色等五識，唯了色等，法識通能了一切法，或能了別法，獨得法識名，故六識名無相濫失。

Or they are called form-consciousness through dharma-consciousness, named according to their objects, because they conform to the meaning of consciousness. That is, discerning the six objects is called consciousness: the five consciousnesses of form and so on discern only form and so on, while dharma-consciousness is able to discern all dharmas, or alone can discern dharmas, and so alone obtains the name dharma-consciousness; therefore the names of the six consciousnesses have no fault of confusion.

此後隨境立六識名，依五色根未自在說；若得自在，諸根互用，一根發識，緣一切境；但可隨根，無相濫失。

This later establishing of six consciousness names according to objects is spoken of in terms of the five material sense organs not yet at ease; when one has attained ease, the organs are interchangeable in function, one organ gives rise to consciousness and takes all objects as condition; one may only follow the organ, and there is no fault of confusion.

《莊嚴論》說：如來五根，一一皆於五境轉者，且依麁顯、同類境說。

The Mahayanalankara says: each of the Tathagata's five organs operates on all five objects, and this is said in terms of coarse, evident objects of the same kind.

《佛地經》說：成所作智，決擇有情心行差別，起三業化、作四記等。若不遍緣，無此能故。

The Buddhabhumi Sutra says: the wisdom of accomplishing what is to be done discriminates the differences in the minds and conduct of sentient beings, and gives rise to the three karmas of transformation, makes the four kinds of prediction, and so on. If it did not take all as condition, it would lack this ability.

然六轉識所依、所緣，麁顯極成，故此不說。前隨義便，已說所依；此所緣境，義便當說。

Yet the supports and objects of the six evolving consciousnesses are coarse, evident, and fully established, so they are not spoken of here. Earlier, following the meaning's convenience, the supports were already explained; as for this object-condition, convenience of meaning requires that it be explained.

次言「了境為性相」者，雙顯六識自性、行相，識以了境為自性故；即復用彼為行相故。由斯兼釋所立別名，能了別境，名為識故。

Next, "its nature and characteristic is discerning objects": this shows both the self-nature and the aspect of the six consciousnesses, because consciousness takes discerning objects as its self-nature, and again uses that as its aspect. This also explains the established name in passing: because it can discern objects, it is called consciousness.

如契經說：眼識云何？謂依眼根，了別諸色；廣說乃至意識云何？謂依意根，了別諸法。

As the sutra says: What is eye-consciousness? It is depending on the eye organ and discerning forms; broadly speaking, up to what is mind-consciousness? It is depending on the mind organ and discerning dharmas.

彼經且說，不共所依，未轉依位，見分所了；餘所依、了，如前已說。

That sutra speaks only of the unshared support, and of what is discerned by the seeing-part in the state before the transformation of the basis; other supports and discernments are as previously explained.

此六轉識，何性攝耶？

By what kind of nature are these six evolving consciousnesses subsumed?

謂善、不善、俱非性攝。

They are subsumed by the natures of wholesome, unwholesome, and neither.

俱非者，謂無記，非善、不善，故名「俱非」；能為此世、他世順益，故名為善，人、天樂果，雖於此世能為順益，非於他世，故不名「善」；能為此世、他世違損，故名「不善」，惡趣苦果，雖於此世能為違損，非於他世，故非不善。於善、不善；益、損義中，不可記別，故名無記。

"Neither" means indeterminate: it is neither wholesome nor unwholesome, and so is called "neither." What can bring benefit in this life and other lives is called wholesome; the fruits of happiness among humans and gods, though they can bring benefit in this life, do not do so in other lives, so they are not called "wholesome." What can bring harm in this life and other lives is called "unwholesome"; the painful fruits of evil destinies, though they can bring harm in this life, do not do so in other lives, so they are not unwholesome. In the meaning of benefit and harm of the wholesome and unwholesome, they cannot be predicted and distinguished, and so are called indeterminate.

此六轉識若與信等十一相應，是善性攝；與無慚等十法相應，不善性攝；俱不相應，無記性攝。

If these six evolving consciousnesses are associated with the eleven of faith and so on, they are subsumed by the wholesome nature; if associated with the ten dharmas of shamelessness and so on, they are subsumed by the unwholesome nature; if associated with none, they are subsumed by the indeterminate nature.

有義：六識三性不俱。

One view holds: the six consciousnesses do not have three natures simultaneously.

同外門轉，互相違故；五識必由意識導引，俱生、同境成善、染故。若許五識三性俱行，意識爾時應通三性。便違正理，故定不俱。

They operate together in the outer gate and are contrary to each other; the five consciousnesses must be guided by mind-consciousness, and arising together with the same object they become wholesome or defiled. If one allowed that the five consciousnesses act with the three natures simultaneously, then mind-consciousness at that time should pervade the three natures. That contradicts correct principle, so it is definitely not simultaneous.

《瑜伽》等說：藏識一時與轉識相應，三性俱起者，彼依多念。如說一心，非一生滅，無相違過。

The Yogacara and others say: the storehouse consciousness is at one time associated with the evolving consciousnesses, and the three natures arise together; these rely on many moments of thought. As when one speaks of a single mind, it is not one arising and ceasing, so there is no fault of contradiction.

有義：六識三性容俱。

One view holds: the six consciousnesses may have three natures simultaneously.

率爾、等流眼等五識，或多或少，容俱起故。

With the initial and the equal-flow eye and other five consciousnesses, more or fewer may arise together.

五識與意，雖定俱生，而善性等，不必同故。前所設難，於此唐捐。

Though the five consciousnesses and mind-consciousness definitely arise together, their wholesome and other natures need not be the same. The earlier objection raised is here wasted.

故《瑜伽》說：若遇聲緣從定起者，與定相應意識俱轉，餘耳識生。非唯彼定相應意識，能取此聲。若不爾者，於此音聲，不領受故，不應出定。非取聲時，即便出定，領受聲已，若有希望，後時方出。

Therefore the Yogacara says: if a person rising from meditation meets the condition of sound, he turns together with the mind-consciousness associated with meditation, and other ear-consciousness arises. It is not that only that meditation-associated mind-consciousness can take this sound. If it were not so, one would not receive this sound and should not emerge from meditation. It is not that when taking the sound one immediately emerges from meditation; after receiving the sound, if there is hope, one emerges later.

在定，耳識率爾聞聲，理應非善。未轉依者，率爾墮心，定無記故。

In meditation, when ear-consciousness hears sound abruptly, by principle it should not be wholesome. For one who has not transformed the basis, the abruptly falling mind is definitely indeterminate.

由此誠證五俱意識，非定與五善等性同。

This truly proves that the mind-consciousness arising with the five is not the same in nature as the wholesome and so on of the five in meditation.

諸處但言五俱意識亦緣五境，不說同性。

In various places it is said only that the mind-consciousness arising with the five also takes the five objects, and it is not said to be of the same nature.

《雜集論》說：等引位中五識無者，依多分說。

The Abhidharma-samuccaya-vyakhya says: in the state of balanced meditation the five consciousnesses are absent, speaking in terms of the majority.

若五識中，三性俱轉，意隨偏注，與彼性同。無偏注者，便無記性。故六轉識，三性容俱。

If among the five consciousnesses the three natures operate together, the mind follows its focused attention and is the same in nature as that; where there is no focus, it is indeterminate. Therefore the six evolving consciousnesses may have the three natures simultaneously.

得自在位，唯善性攝。佛色心等，道諦攝故。已永滅除戲論種故。

In the state of ease, it is subsumed only by the wholesome nature. The Buddha's form, mind, and so on are subsumed by the truth of the path, as they have forever extinguished the seeds of conceptual proliferation.

六識與幾心所相應？

With how many kinds of mental factors are the six consciousnesses associated?

頌曰：

The verse says:

９此心所遍行、別境、善、煩惱、

9. These mental factors are the omnipresent, the object-specific, the wholesome, the afflictions,

隨煩惱、不定，皆三受相應。

The secondary afflictions, and the indeterminate; all are associated with the three feelings.

論曰：此六轉識，總與六位心所相應，謂遍行等。

The treatise says: These six evolving consciousnesses are altogether associated with six categories of mental factors, namely the omnipresent and so on.

恆依心起，與心相應，繫屬於心，故名心所，如屬我物，立我所名。

They always arise depending on the mind, are associated with the mind, and belong to the mind, so they are called mental factors (caitta), as things belonging to me are called "mine."

心於所緣，唯取總相；心所於彼，亦取別相，助成心事，得心所名。如畫師、資，作模、填彩。

The mind with regard to its object takes only the general characteristic; the mental factors with regard to it also take the particular characteristic, assisting in completing the mind's work, and so obtain the name mental factors. It is like a painter and an apprentice, one drawing the outline and the other filling in the color.

故《瑜伽》說：識能了別事之總相，作意了此所未了相。即諸心所所取別相，觸能了此可意等相，受能了此攝受等相，想能了此言說因相，思能了此正因等相。故作意等名心所法。此表心所亦緣總相。餘處復說：欲亦能了可樂事相，勝解亦了決定事相，念亦能了串習事相，定、慧亦了德失等相。

Therefore the Yogacara says: consciousness can discern the general characteristic of things, attention discerns the characteristics that it has not discerned. That is, the particular characteristics taken by the mental factors: contact can discern its agreeable and other characteristics, feeling can discern its receiving characteristics, perception can discern its characteristic as the cause of speech, volition can discern its characteristic as the right cause and so on. Therefore attention and the like are called mental factor dharmas. This shows that mental factors also take the general characteristic. In other places it is also said: desire can also discern the characteristic of a delightful thing, resolve also discerns the characteristic of a determined thing, mindfulness can also discern the characteristic of a habituated thing, concentration and wisdom also discern characteristics of merit and fault and so on.

由此於境，起善、染等。

Thereby with regard to objects, wholesome, defiled, and other states arise.

諸心所法，皆於所緣，兼取別相。

All mental factor dharmas, with regard to their objects, also take particular characteristics.

雖諸心所，名義無異，而有六位種類差別：

Though the mental factors do not differ in name and meaning, they have differences of six kinds of categories:

謂遍行有五，別境亦五，善有十一，煩惱有六，隨煩惱有二十，不定有四。

That is, the omnipresent are five, the object-specific are also five, the wholesome are eleven, the afflictions are six, the secondary afflictions are twenty, and the indeterminate are four.

如是六位，合五十一。

These six categories total fifty-one.

一切心中，定可得故。緣別別境，而得生故。唯善心中，可得生故。性是根本煩惱攝故。唯是煩惱等流性故。於善、染等，皆不定故。

In every mind they are definitely obtainable. They arise by taking separate objects as conditions. They are obtainable only in wholesome minds. Their nature is subsumed by the root afflictions. They are only of the outflow nature of afflictions. With regard to wholesome, defiled, and other states, all are indeterminate.

然《瑜伽論》合六為五，煩惱、隨煩惱，俱是染故。復以四一切，辯五差別：謂一切性及地、時、俱。五中遍行具四一切。別境唯有初、二一切。善唯有一，謂一切地。染四皆無。不定唯一，謂一切性。

But the Yogacara treatise combines the six into five, because afflictions and secondary afflictions are both defiled. It also uses the four universals to distinguish the five: namely universal of nature, and of ground, of time, and of simultaneity. Among the five, the omnipresent have all four universals. The object-specific have only the first and second universals. The wholesome have only one, namely the universal of ground. The defiled have none of the four. The indeterminate have only one, namely universal of nature.

由此五位，種類差別。

Thus the five categories differ in kind.

此六轉識，易脫不定，故皆容與三受相應。皆領順、違、非二相故。領順境相，適悅身心，說名樂受；領違境相，逼迫身心，說名苦受；領中容境相，於身於心，非逼非悅，名不苦樂受。

These six evolving consciousnesses are easily shifting and indeterminate, so all may be associated with the three feelings. All experience agreeable, disagreeable, and neither. Experiencing an agreeable object, which pleases body and mind, is called pleasant feeling; experiencing a disagreeable object, which afflicts body and mind, is called painful feeling; experiencing a neutral object, which neither afflicts nor pleases body or mind, is called neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling.

如是三受，或各分二：五識相應，說名身受，別依身故；意識相應，說名心受，唯依心故。又三皆通有漏、無漏，苦受亦由無漏起故。

These three feelings may each be divided into two: those associated with the five consciousnesses are called bodily feelings, because they depend on the body separately; those associated with mind-consciousness are called mental feelings, because they depend only on the mind. And all three pervade both outflow and non-outflow, because painful feeling also arises from the non-outflow.

或各分三：謂見所斷、修所斷、非所斷；又學、無學、非二，為三。

Or each is divided into three: namely abandoned by seeing, abandoned by cultivation, and not to be abandoned; also learner, non-learner, and neither, making three.

或總分四：謂善、不善、有覆、無覆二無記受。

Or altogether divided into four: namely wholesome, unwholesome, and the two kinds of indeterminate feeling, obscured and unobscured.

有義：三受容各分四，五識俱起任運貪、痴，純苦趣中任運煩惱，不發業者，是無記故。

One view holds: the three feelings may each be divided into four; the spontaneous greed and delusion arising with the five consciousnesses, and the spontaneous afflictions in purely painful destinies that do not initiate karma, are indeterminate.

彼皆容與苦根相應。

These may all be associated with the root of pain.

《瑜伽論》說：若任運生一切煩惱，皆於三受現行可得。若通一切識身者，遍與一切根相應；不通一切識身者，意地一切根相應。《雜集論》說：若欲界繫任運煩惱，發惡行者，亦是不善。所餘皆是有覆無記。

The Yogacara treatise says: if all afflictions arise spontaneously, all can be found actively present in the three feelings. If they pervade all bodies of consciousness, they are universally associated with all roots; if they do not pervade all bodies of consciousness, they are associated with all roots on the level of mind. The Abhidharma-samuccaya says: spontaneous afflictions belonging to the desire realm that initiate evil conduct are also unwholesome. All the rest are obscured and indeterminate.

故知三受各容有四。

Therefore we know that each of the three feelings may have four.

或總分五：謂苦、樂、憂、喜、捨。

Or altogether divided into five: namely pain, pleasure, sorrow, joy, and equanimity.

三中苦、樂各分二者，逼、悅身、心相各異故；由無分別、有分別故；尤重、輕微有差別故。不苦不樂不分二者，非逼、非悅相無異故；無分別故；平等轉故。

Of the three, pain and pleasure are each divided into two, because the aspects of affliction and pleasing in body and mind differ; because of being without discrimination or with discrimination; and because they differ in being intense or slight. Neither-pain-nor-pleasure is not divided into two, because the aspects of non-affliction and non-pleasing do not differ; because it is without discrimination; and because it operates evenly.

諸適悅受，五識相應，恆名為樂。

All pleasing feelings associated with the five consciousnesses are always called pleasure.

意識相應，若在欲界、初、二靜慮近分名喜，但悅心故。若在初、二靜慮根本，名樂、名喜，悅身、心故。若在第三靜慮近分、根本名樂，安靜尤重，無分別故。

Those associated with mind-consciousness, if in the desire realm and the access stage of the first and second dhyanas, are called joy, because they please only the mind. If in the basic stage of the first and second dhyanas, they are called pleasure and called joy, because they please body and mind. If in the access and basic stage of the third dhyana, they are called pleasure, a stillness especially intense, because there is no discrimination.

諸逼迫受，五識相應，恆名為苦。

All afflicting feelings associated with the five consciousnesses are always called pain.

意識俱者，有義：唯憂，逼迫心故。諸聖教說：意地慼受，名憂根故。

As for those arising with mind-consciousness, one view holds: only sorrow, because they afflict the mind. The holy teachings say: the feeling of distress on the level of mind is called the root of sorrow.

《瑜伽論》說：生地獄中諸有情類，異熟無間有異熟生，苦、憂相續。又說：地獄尋、伺憂俱，一分鬼趣，傍生亦爾。

The Yogacara says: among the sentient beings born in hell, for the interval of the maturing result there is born the maturing result, and pain and sorrow continue in succession. It also says: in hell, investigation and analysis are accompanied by sorrow; in part of the hungry ghost realm and among animals it is also like this.

故知意地尤重慼受，尚名為憂，況餘輕者？

So we know that the intense distress at the level of mind is still called sorrow; how much more the other lighter ones?

有義：通二，人、天中者，恆名為憂，非尤重故。傍生、鬼界名憂、名苦，雜受、純受有輕重故。㮈落迦中唯名為苦，純受尤重，無分別故。

One view holds: it pervades both; those among humans and gods are always called sorrow, because they are not intense. Among animals and the realm of hungry ghosts they are called sorrow and called pain, because mixed feeling and pure feeling have lighter and heavier forms. In Naraka (hell) it is only called pain, pure feeling being especially intense, because there is no discrimination.

《瑜伽論》說：若任運生一切煩惱，皆於三受現行可得，廣說如前。又說：俱生薩迦耶見，唯無記性。彼邊執見，應知亦爾。此俱苦受，非憂根攝，論說憂根非無記故。又《瑜伽》說：地獄諸根，餘三現行，定不成就。純苦鬼界，傍生亦爾。

The Yogacara says: if all afflictions arise spontaneously, all can be found actively present in the three feelings, as explained at length above. It also says: the innate view of a real self is only of indeterminate nature. The view of extremes should be known to be likewise. This pain-associated one is not subsumed by the root of sorrow, because the treatise says that the root of sorrow is not indeterminate. And the Yogacara says: of the faculties in hell, the other three active ones are definitely not accomplished. The purely painful ghost realm and animals are also like this.

「餘三」定是樂、喜、憂根，以彼必成現行捨故。

"The other three" are definitely the roots of pleasure, joy, and sorrow, because they would necessarily be accomplished as active equanimity.

豈不客捨彼定不成？

Could it be that guest equanimity is definitely not accomplished by them?

寧知彼文，唯說客受？應不說彼定成意根，彼六客識有時無故。不應彼論唯說客受，通說意根，無異因故。

How do we know that this passage speaks only of guest feeling? One should not say that they definitely accomplish the mind faculty, because those six guest consciousnesses are sometimes absent. That treatise should not speak only of guest feeling but speak of the mind faculty generally, because there is no different reason.

又若彼論依客受說，如何說彼定成八根？

Moreover, if that treatise speaks in terms of guest feeling, how does it say they definitely accomplish eight faculties?

若謂五識不相續故，定說憂根為第八者，死、生、悶絕寧有憂根？

If one says the five consciousnesses do not continue, one would definitely say the root of sorrow is the eighth; how could there be the root of sorrow in death, birth, and unconsciousness?

有執苦根為第八者，亦同此破。

If someone holds that the root of pain is the eighth, it is refuted in the same way.

設執一形為第八者，理亦不然，形不定故。彼惡業招，容無形故。彼由惡業，令五根門恆受苦故，定成眼等。必有一形，於彼何用？非於無間大地獄中，可有希求婬欲事故。

Even if one holds that one form is the eighth, it is not reasonable by principle, because form is not fixed. Their evil karma summons, and there may be no form. Because of their evil karma the gates of the five organs constantly suffer pain, and the eye and others are definitely accomplished. What use is a necessary form to them? It is not that in the great Avici hell there can be hope for sexual matters.

由斯第八定是捨根，第七、八識捨相應故。

Therefore the eighth is definitely the root of equanimity, because the seventh and eighth consciousnesses are associated with equanimity.

如極樂地，意悅名樂，無有喜根。故極苦處，意迫名苦，無有憂根。

As in the land of utmost bliss, mental pleasure is called pleasure, and there is no root of joy. Thus in the place of utmost pain, mental affliction is called pain, and there is no root of sorrow.

故「餘三」言，定憂、喜、樂。

Therefore the words "the other three" definitely refer to sorrow, joy, and pleasure.

餘處說彼有等流樂，應知彼依隨轉理說。或彼通說：餘雜受處，無異熟樂，名純苦故。

Elsewhere it is said they have pleasure of equal flow; one should know that these are spoken according to the principle of ordinary evolving. Or they speak in general: in other places of mixed feeling, where there is no maturing pleasure, it is called purely painful.

然諸聖教，意地慼受，名憂根者，依多分說，或隨轉門，無相違過。

As for the holy teachings in which distress on the level of mind is called the root of sorrow, they speak according to the majority, or according to the gate of ordinary evolving, with no fault of contradiction.

《瑜伽論》說：生地獄中諸有情類，異熟無間有異熟生，苦、憂相續。又說：地獄尋、伺憂俱。一分鬼趣，傍生亦爾者，亦依隨轉門。

The Yogacara says: among the sentient beings born in hell, for the interval of the maturing result there is born the maturing result, and pain and sorrow continue in succession. It also says: in hell, investigation and analysis are accompanied by sorrow. In part of the hungry ghost realm and among animals it is also like this, also according to the gate of ordinary evolving.

又彼苦根，意識俱者，是餘憂類，假說為憂。

Moreover, that root of pain which arises with mind-consciousness is of the type of the remaining sorrow, and is provisionally called sorrow.

或彼苦根，損身心故，雖苦根攝，而亦名憂。如近分喜，益身心故，雖是喜根，而亦名樂。《顯揚論》等，具顯此義。然未至地定無樂根，說彼唯有十一根故。

Or that root of pain, which harms body and mind, though subsumed by the root of pain, is also called sorrow. It is like the joy of the access stage, which benefits body and mind, and though it is the root of joy, is also called pleasure. The Xianyang treatise and others clearly show this meaning. But the meditation of the not-yet-arrived stage has no root of pleasure, because it is said they have only eleven faculties.

由此應知，意地慼受，純受苦處，亦苦根攝。

From this we should know that distress on the level of mind, and places of purely painful feeling, are also subsumed by the root of pain.

此等聖教，差別多門，恐文增廣，故不繁述。

These and other holy teachings, with their many gates of difference, I do not describe at length for fear of making the text too long.

有義：六識三受不俱，皆外門轉，互相違故。五俱意識，同五所緣，五三受俱，意亦應爾，便違正理，故必不俱。《瑜伽》等說：藏識一時與轉識相應，三受俱起者，彼依多念。如說一心，非一生滅，無相違過。

One view holds: the six consciousnesses do not have three feelings simultaneously, because they all operate in the outer gate and are contrary to each other. Mind-consciousness arising with the five has the same objects as the five, and with the five having three feelings together, mind should also be thus, which contradicts correct principle, so they must not be simultaneous. The Yogacara and others say: the storehouse consciousness is at one time associated with the evolving consciousnesses, and the three feelings arise together; these rely on many moments of thought. As when one speaks of a single mind, it is not one arising and ceasing, so there is no fault of contradiction.

有義：六識三受容俱。順、違、中境，容俱受故。意不定與五受同故。於偏注境，起一受故；無偏注者，便起捨故。由斯六識三受容俱。

One view holds: the six consciousnesses may have three feelings simultaneously. Agreeable, disagreeable, and neutral objects may be felt together. Mind is not fixed to be the same as the five feelings. It gives rise to one feeling with respect to the focused object; where there is no focus, it gives rise to equanimity. Therefore the six consciousnesses may have three feelings simultaneously.

得自在位，唯樂、喜、捨，諸佛已斷憂、苦事故。

In the state of ease there is only pleasure, joy, and equanimity, because the Buddhas have cut off the matters of sorrow and pain.

前所略摽六位心所，今應廣顯彼差別相。

The six categories of mental factors that were roughly indicated earlier should now be shown in full as to their different characteristics.

且初、二位，其相云何？

First, what are the characteristics of the first and second categories?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１０初遍行觸等；次別境謂欲、

10. First, the omnipresent: contact and so on; next the object-specific: namely desire,

勝解、念、定、慧，所緣事不同。

Resolve, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, whose objects differ.

論曰：六位中初遍行心所，即觸等五，如前廣說。

The treatise says: Among the six categories the first, the omnipresent mental factors, are the five of contact and so on, as explained at length before.

此遍行相，云何應知？

How should the characteristics of the omnipresent be known?

由教及理，為定量故。

Scripture and reasoning serve as the standard.

此中教者，如契經言：眼、色為緣，生於眼識，三和合觸，與觸俱生有受、想、思，乃至廣說。由斯觸等四是遍行。

As for scripture here: as the sutra says: with eye and form as conditions, eye-consciousness arises, and the three come together as contact, and arising together with contact there are feeling, perception, and volition, and so on at length. Therefore contact and the other four are omnipresent.

又契經說：若根不壞，境界現前，作意正起，方能生識。餘經復言：若於此作意，即於此了別。若於此了別，即於此作意。是故此二，恆共和合，乃至廣說，由此作意，亦是遍行。

The sutra also says: if the faculty is not impaired, the object appears before it, and attention properly arises, consciousness can then arise. Another sutra says: if one attends to this, one discerns this; if one discerns this, one attends to this. Therefore these two are always joined together, and so on at length; thus attention too is omnipresent.

此等聖教，誠證非一。

These and other holy teachings truly prove it, and are not found in only one place.

理謂識起必有三和。彼定生觸，必由觸有。若無觸者，心、心所法，應不和合觸一境故。

As for reasoning: it is that when consciousness arises there must be the harmony of three. That arises definitely with contact and must be due to contact. If there were no contact, mind and mental factor dharmas would not come together to make contact with a single object.

作意引心令趣自境。此若無者，心應無故。

Attention leads the mind to incline toward its own object. If this were absent, the mind would not exist.

受能領納順、違、中境，令心等起歡、慼、捨相。無心起時，無隨一故。

Feeling can receive agreeable, disagreeable, and neutral objects, causing the mind and the rest to give rise to the aspects of joy, distress, and equanimity. When the mind arises there is no case without one of them.

想能安立自境分齊。若心起時無此想者，應不能取境分齊相。

Perception can establish the boundaries of its object. If, when the mind arises, there were no such perception, it would not be able to take the characteristic of the object's boundaries.

思令心取正因等相，造作善等。無心起位，無此隨一，故必有思。

Volition causes the mind to take the characteristic of right cause and so on, and to produce wholesome and other karma. There is no state of the mind arising without one of these, so volition must exist.

由此證知，觸等五法，心起必有，故是遍行。餘非遍行，義至當說。

From this we prove that the five dharmas of contact and so on are necessarily present when the mind arises, and so are omnipresent. That the others are not omnipresent follows by implication of the meaning.

次別境者：謂欲至慧，所緣境事，多分不同，於六位中，次初說故。

Next the object-specific: namely from desire to wisdom, whose object-matters are mostly different; among the six categories, they are mentioned next after the first.

云何為欲？

What is desire?

於所樂境，希望為性，勤依為業。

With respect to a desired object, its nature is hope and its function is to be the support of diligence.

有義：所樂，謂可欣境。於可欣事，欲見、聞等，有希望故。

One view holds: "desired" means an object that can be delighted in. With respect to delightful things, there is hope to see, hear, and so on.

於可厭事，希彼不合，望彼別離，豈非有欲？

With respect to detestable things, one hopes not to meet them and wishes to be separated from them; is this not desire?

此但求彼不合離時，可欣自體，非可厭事。

This only seeks, when not meeting or separating, a delightful self-substance, and is not about the detestable thing.

故於可厭及中容境，一向無欲。緣可欣事，若不希望，亦無欲起。

So with regard to detestable and neutral objects, there is never desire. Taking a delightful thing as condition, if one does not hope for it, no desire arises either.

有義：所樂，謂所求境。於可欣、厭，求合、離等，有希望故。於中容境，一向無欲。緣欣、厭事，若不希求，亦無欲起。

One view holds: "desired" means an object sought. With respect to delightful and detestable things, there is hope to seek union, separation, and so on. With respect to neutral objects, there is never desire. Taking delightful and detestable matters as conditions, if one does not hope or seek, no desire arises either.

有義：所樂，謂欲觀境，於一切事，欲觀察者，有希望故。若不欲觀，隨因境勢，任運緣者，即全無欲。

One view holds: "desired" means an object one desires to observe; with respect to all things, there is hope in those one desires to examine. If one does not desire to observe, and takes things as condition spontaneously following the force of the causal object, then there is no desire at all.

由斯理趣，欲非遍行。

By these reasons, desire is not omnipresent.

有說：要由希望境力，諸心、心所方取所緣，故經說「欲為諸法本」。

Some say: only by the force of hoping for an object do the mind and mental factors take their objects, so the sutra says "desire is the root of all dharmas."

彼說不然。心等取境，由作意故。諸聖教說，作意現前能生識故。曾無處說由欲能生心、心所故。

Their saying is wrong. The mind and so on take objects through attention. The holy teachings say that with attention present consciousness can arise. Nowhere is it said that desire can give rise to mind and mental factors.

如說諸法，愛為根本，豈心、心所皆由愛生故？說欲為諸法本者，說欲所起一切事業。或說善欲，能發正勤。由彼助成一切善事，故論說此勤依為業。

Just as it is said that for all dharmas craving is the root, does that mean mind and mental factors all arise from craving? To say desire is the root of all dharmas means that all undertakings arise from desire. Or it speaks of wholesome desire, which can initiate right diligence. Since it assists in accomplishing all good deeds, the treatise says that this is the support of diligence in function.

云何勝解？於決定境，印持為性，不可引轉為業。

What is resolve? With respect to a determined object, its nature is to hold firmly, and its function is not to be drawn away.

謂邪、正等教、理、證力，於所取境，審決印持，由此異緣不能引轉。

That is, with respect to the object taken, by the force of right and wrong teachings, reasoning, and realization, one examines, decides, and holds firmly, and so other conditions cannot draw it away.

故猶豫境，勝解全無。非審決心，亦無勝解。由斯勝解，非遍行攝。

So with respect to doubtful objects, there is no resolve at all. Without a mind of careful judgment there is also no resolve. Thus resolve is not subsumed by the omnipresent.

有說：心等取自境時，無拘礙故，皆有勝解。

Some say: when the mind and so on take their own objects, without obstruction, they all have resolve.

彼說非理。所以者何？能不礙者，即諸法故。所不礙者，即心等故。勝發起者，根、作意故。若由此故，彼勝發起，此應復待餘，便有無窮失。

Their saying is unreasonable. Why? What can be unobstructing is all dharmas. What is not obstructed is the mind and the like. What gives rise to the superior are the faculties and attention. If because of this the other arises, then this would again depend on another, and so there is the fault of infinite regress.

云何為念？於曾習境，令心明記不忘為性，定依為業。

What is mindfulness? With respect to an object once experienced, its nature is to make the mind remember clearly without forgetting, and its function is to be the support of concentration.

謂數憶持曾所受境，令不忘失，能引定故；於曾未受體、類境中，全不起念。設曾所受，不能明記，念亦不生。故念必非遍行所攝。

That is, it repeatedly recollects and holds the objects previously experienced, so that they are not forgotten, and can lead to concentration; in objects of body and kind not previously experienced, mindfulness does not arise at all. Even for what was previously experienced, if it cannot be remembered clearly, mindfulness does not arise. So mindfulness is certainly not subsumed by the omnipresent.

有說：心起必有念俱，能為後時憶念因故。

Some say: when the mind arises, mindfulness is necessarily present with it, and can serve as the cause of later recollection.

彼說非理。勿於後時有痴、信等，前亦有故。前心、心所，或想勢力，足為後時憶念因故。

Their saying is unreasonable. Do not let later delusion, faith, and so on be present in the earlier too. The earlier mind and mental factors, or the force of perception, are sufficient to act as the cause of later recollection.

云何為定？於所觀境，令心專注不散為性，智依為業。

What is concentration? With respect to the object observed, its nature is to make the mind focused and undistracted, and its function is to be the support of wisdom.

謂觀德、失、俱非境中，由定令心專注不散，依斯便有決擇智生。

That is, in observing objects of merit, fault, or neither, by concentration the mind is made focused and undistracted, and depending on this there is the arising of discriminating wisdom.

「心專注」言，顯所欲住，即便能住，非唯一境。不爾，見道歷觀諸諦，前後境別，應無等持。

The words "the mind is focused" show that it wishes to dwell, and even though it can dwell, it is not a single object only. Otherwise, in the path of seeing, in successively observing the truths, the earlier and later objects differ, and there should be no samadhi.

若不繫心，專注境位，便無定起，故非遍行。

If the mind is not tied and in a state of focus on an object, there is no arising of concentration, so it is not omnipresent.

有說：爾時亦有定起，但相微隱。應說誠言。

Some say: at that time concentration also arises, only its aspect is slight and hidden. They should speak honestly.

若定能令心等和合，同趣一境，故是遍行，理亦不然，是觸用故。

If one says concentration makes the mind and so on come together and tend to one object, so it is omnipresent, it is also not reasonable, because that is the function of contact.

若謂此定，令剎那頃，心不易緣，故遍行攝，亦不應理；一剎那心，自於所緣，無易義故。

If one says that this concentration makes the mind not shift its object for a moment, so it is subsumed in the omnipresent, this too is unreasonable; in one moment of mind, there is no meaning of shifting in relation to its own object.

若言由定，心取所緣，故遍行攝，彼亦非理；作意令心取所緣故。

If one says that by concentration the mind takes its object, so it is subsumed in the omnipresent, this too is unreasonable; attention causes the mind to take its object.

有說：此定體即是心。經說為心學，心一境性故。彼非誠證，依定攝心，令心一境，說彼言故。

Some say: the substance of this concentration is just the mind. The sutra speaks of the training of the mind as one-pointedness of mind. That is not a true proof; it speaks those words about gathering the mind through concentration and making the mind one-pointed.

根、力、覺支、道支等攝。如念、慧等，非即心故。

It is subsumed by the faculties, powers, factors of awakening, and factors of the path. Like mindfulness and wisdom, it is not simply the mind.

云何為慧？於所觀境，簡擇為性，斷疑為業。

What is wisdom? With respect to the object observed, its nature is discrimination, and its function is to cut off doubt.

謂觀德、失、俱非境中，由慧推求，得決定故。於非觀境，愚昧心中，無簡擇故，非遍行攝。

That is, in observing objects of merit, fault, or neither, through wisdom one investigates and reaches decision. In objects not observed, in a deluded and dim mind, there is no discrimination, so it is not subsumed by the omnipresent.

有說：爾時，亦有慧起，但相微隱。天愛寧知？對法說為大地法故；諸部對法，展轉相違，汝等如何執為定量？

Some say: at that time wisdom also arises, only its aspect is slight and hidden. How does Tianai know? The Abhidharma speaks of the great-ground dharmas; the Abhidharma of the various schools contradict each other in turn, so how can you hold them as a decisive standard?

唯觸等五，經說遍行。說十非經，不應固執。然欲等五，非觸等故，定非遍行，如信、貪等。

Only the five of contact and so on are called omnipresent by the sutra. The statement of ten is not from a sutra, and one should not hold fast to it. But the five of desire and so on, not being contact and the rest, are definitely not omnipresent, like faith, greed, and so on.

有義：此五定互相資。隨一起時，必有餘四。

One view holds: these five definitely support one another. When any one arises, the other four are necessarily present.

有義：不定。《瑜伽》說此四一切中，無後二故。又說此五，緣四境生，所緣、能緣，非定俱故。

One view holds: not necessarily. The Yogacara says that of the four universals, these lack the last two. It also says these five arise taking four kinds of objects as conditions; the objects and the taking are not definitely simultaneous.

應說此五，或時起一：謂於所樂，唯起希望；或於決定，唯起印解；或於曾習，唯起憶念；或於所觀，唯起專注。謂愚昧類，為止散心，雖專注所緣，而不能簡擇。世共知彼有定無慧。

One should say that of these five, sometimes only one arises: that is, with respect to what is desired, only hope arises; or with respect to what is determined, only firm conviction arises; or with respect to what is habituated, only recollection arises; or with respect to what is observed, only focus arises. For example, the deluded kind, in order to stop a scattered mind, though they focus on the object, cannot discriminate. The world generally knows that they have concentration and no wisdom.

彼加行位，少有聞、思，故說等持，緣所觀境；或依多分，故說是言。如「戲忘天」，專注一境，起貪、瞋等，有定無慧，諸如是等，其類寔繁。

In their stage of preparatory practice, they have little hearing and reflection, so concentration is spoken of as taking the object observed; or it speaks according to the majority, and so says this. Like the "gods of forgetful play," focusing on a single object and giving rise to greed, anger, and so on, having concentration without wisdom; such cases are truly many.

或於所觀，唯起簡擇，謂不專注，馳散推求。

Or with respect to what is observed, only discrimination arises, namely not focusing, but racing and scattering in searching.

或時起二：謂於所樂、決定境中，起欲、勝解；或於所樂、曾習境中，起欲及念。如是乃至於所觀境，起定及慧，合有十二。

Or sometimes two arise: for example, with respect to what is desired and what is determined, desire and resolve arise; or with respect to what is desired and what is habituated, desire and mindfulness arise. And so on up to, with respect to the object observed, concentration and wisdom arise, making twelve in total.

或時起三：謂於所樂、決定、曾習，起欲、解、念；如是乃至於曾、所觀起念、定、慧，合有十三。

Or sometimes three arise: for example, with respect to what is desired, determined, and habituated, desire, resolve, and mindfulness arise; and so on up to, with respect to what is habituated and observed, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom arise, making thirteen in total.

或時起四：謂於所樂、決定、曾習、所觀境中，起前四種；如是乃至於定、曾習、所觀境中，起後四種，合有五四。

Or sometimes four arise: for example, with respect to what is desired, determined, habituated, and observed, the first four arise; and so on up to, with respect to concentration, the habituated, and the observed, the last four arise, making five fours in total.

或時起五：謂於所樂、決定、曾習、所觀境中，具起五種。

Or sometimes five arise: for example, with respect to what is desired, determined, habituated, and observed, all five arise together.

如是於四，起欲等五，總、別合有三十一句。

Thus with respect to four objects, the five of desire and so on arise, and in total and in particular there are thirty-one combinations.

或有心位，五皆不起，如非四境，率爾墮心，及藏識俱，此類非一。

Or there are mental states in which none of the five arises, such as in non-four-object cases, the abruptly falling mind, and the mind arising together with the storehouse consciousness, which are of more than one kind.

第七、八識，此別境五，隨位有無，如前已說。

In the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, these five object-specific factors are present or absent according to the stage, as previously explained.

第六意識諸位容俱，依轉、未轉，皆不遮故。

In the sixth, mind-consciousness, they may arise together in all stages, and whether it is transformed or not is not excluded.

有義：五識，此五皆無；緣已得境，無希望故；不能審決，無印持故；恆取新境，無追憶故；自性散動，無專注故；不能推度，無簡擇故。

One view holds: the five consciousnesses lack all these five; taking an already obtained object, they have no hope; they cannot examine and decide, so have no firm conviction; they always take new objects, so have no recollection; their nature is scattered and moving, so have no focus; they cannot reason, so have no discrimination.

有義：五識，容有此五：雖無於境增上希望，而有微劣樂境義故；於境雖無增上審決，而有微劣印境義故；雖無明記曾習境體，而有微劣念境類故。

One view holds: the five consciousnesses may have these five: although they have no intensified hope toward the object, they have the slight meaning of delighting in the object; although they have no intensified examination toward the object, they have the slight meaning of holding the object firmly; although they have no clear memory of the substance of the habituated object, they have the slight meaning of mindfulness of the kind of object.

雖不作意繫念一境，而有微劣專注義故。遮等引故，說性散動，非遮等持，故容有定。

Although they do not attend and fix thought on a single object, they have the slight meaning of focus. The denial of balanced meditation and the statement that their nature is scattered and moving does not deny samadhi, so concentration may exist.

雖於所緣不能推度，而有微劣簡擇義故。由此聖教說眼、耳通，是眼、耳識相應智性。餘三準此有慧無失。

Although they cannot reason about their object, they have the slight meaning of discrimination. Thus the holy teachings say that the eye and ear penetrate, which is the wisdom nature associated with eye- and ear-consciousness. The other three follow by analogy, and there is no fault in having wisdom.

未自在位，此五或無；得自在時，此五定有。

In the state not yet at ease, these five may be absent; when ease is attained, these five are definitely present.

樂觀諸境，欲無減故；印境勝解，常無減故；憶習曾受，念無減故；又佛五識，緣三世故；如來無有不定心故；五識皆有作事智故。

In delighting in objects, desire does not diminish; in holding objects firmly, resolve is always undiminished; in recalling what was previously experienced, mindfulness is undiminished; moreover the Buddha's five consciousnesses take the three times as objects; the Tathagata has no unsettled mind; and all five consciousnesses have the wisdom of accomplishing what is to be done.

此別境五，何受相應？

With what feelings are these five object-specific factors associated?

有義：欲三，除憂、苦受，以彼二境，非所樂故。餘四通四，唯除苦受，以審決等，五識無故。

One view holds: desire is associated with three, excluding sorrow and pain, because those two objects are not objects of delight. The other four pervade four, excluding only painful feeling, because the five consciousnesses lack examination and decision.

有義：一切，五受相應。論說憂根於無上法，思慕愁慼，求欲證故。純受苦處，希求解脫，意有苦根，前已說故。論說貪愛，憂、苦相應。此貪愛俱，必有欲故。苦根既有，意識相應，審決等四，苦俱何咎？又五識俱，亦有微細印境等四，義如前說。

One view holds: all are associated with the five feelings. The treatise says that the root of sorrow, toward the unsurpassed Dharma, yearns, grieves, and seeks to realize it with desire. In places of purely painful feeling, one seeks liberation; the mind has the root of pain, as explained earlier. The treatise says that craving is associated with sorrow and pain. With this craving there must be desire. Since the root of pain exists, the four of examination and decision and so on, associated with mind-consciousness, arising with pain, what fault is there? Moreover, those arising with the five consciousnesses also have the subtle four of holding objects firmly and so on, with the meaning as explained before.

由斯欲等，五受相應。

Therefore desire and the rest are associated with the five feelings.

此五復依性、界、學等諸門分別，如理應思。

These five may also be distinguished according to nature, realm, learning, and other gates; one should reflect on them according to principle.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other Bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial command by the Tripitaka Master Xuanzang.

已說遍行、別境二位。善位心所，其相云何？

The omnipresent and object-specific categories have been explained. What are the characteristics of the wholesome mental factors?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１１善謂信、慚、愧、無貪等三根，

11. The wholesome are faith, shame, embarrassment, the three roots such as non-greed,

勤、安、不放逸、行捨及不害。

Diligence, tranquility, non-negligence, equanimity of practice, and non-harming.

論曰：唯善心俱，名善心所。謂信、慚等，定有十一。

The treatise says: Only those that arise together with the wholesome mind are called wholesome mental factors. They are faith, shame, and so on, definitely eleven in number.

云何為信？於實、德、能，深忍、樂、欲，心淨為性；對治不信，樂善為業。

What is faith? With respect to reality, virtue, and ability, its nature is deep acceptance, delight, and aspiration, with a pure mind; its function is to counteract lack of faith and to delight in the good.

然信差別，略有三種：一、信實有，謂於諸法實事、理中，深信忍故；二、信有德，謂於三寶真淨德中，深信樂故；三、信有能，謂於一切世、出世善，深信有力，能得能成，起希望故。

The kinds of faith are roughly three: first, faith in reality, meaning deep faith and acceptance of the actual facts and principles of all dharmas; second, faith in virtue, meaning deep faith and delight in the true and pure virtue of the Three Jewels; third, faith in ability, meaning deep faith that one has the power regarding all worldly and supramundane good, able to attain and accomplish it, giving rise to hope.

由斯對治彼不信心，愛樂證修世、出世善。

Therefore it counteracts that mind of lack of faith, and loves and delights in realizing and cultivating worldly and supramundane good.

忍謂勝解，此即信因；樂欲謂欲即是信果。礭陳此信，自相是何？

"Acceptance" means resolve, which is the cause of faith; "delight and aspiration" means desire, which is the effect of faith. So what, exactly, is the self-characteristic of this faith?

豈不適言，心淨為性？

Was it not just said that its nature is a pure mind?

此猶未了，彼「心淨」言，若淨即心，應非心所；若令心淨，慚等何別？心俱淨法，為難亦然。

This is not yet understood. If the "pure mind" meant that purity itself is the mind, it would not be a mental factor; if it means making the mind pure, how does it differ from shame and the rest? The same objection is raised about the pure dharmas arising with the mind.

此性澄清，能淨心等。以心勝故，立心淨名。如水清珠，能清濁水。慚等雖善，非淨為相。此淨為相，無濫彼失。又諸染法，各別有相。唯有不信，自相渾濁，復能渾濁餘心、心所。如極穢物，自穢穢他。信正翻彼，故淨為相。

This nature is clear and can purify the mind and the rest. Because the mind is superior, the name "pure mind" is established. It is like a water-clearing pearl, which can clear turbid water. Though shame and the rest are wholesome, they do not take purity as their characteristic. Taking this purity as its characteristic, it has no fault of being confused with those. Moreover all defiled dharmas have their separate characteristics. Only lack of faith has a turbid self-characteristic, and can also make other minds and mental factors turbid. It is like an utterly filthy thing, which is itself filthy and makes others filthy. Faith is exactly the opposite of that, and so takes purity as its characteristic.

有說：信者愛樂為相。應通三性，體應即欲。又應苦、集非信所緣。

Some say: faith takes love and delight as its characteristic. This would pervade the three natures, and its substance should be just desire. Also, suffering and its origin should not be objects of faith.

有執信者隨順為相。應通三性，即勝解、欲。若印順者，即勝解故。若樂順者，即是欲故。離彼二體，無順相故。由此應知，心淨是信。

Some hold that faith takes conformity as its characteristic. This would pervade the three natures, and be just resolve and desire. If it is conformity in the sense of accepting, it is resolve; if conformity in the sense of delighting, it is desire. Apart from those two substances, there is no such thing as a characteristic of conformity. From this we should know that a pure mind is faith.

云何為慚？依自、法力，崇重賢、善為性；對治無慚，止息惡行為業。謂依自、法尊、貴增上，崇重賢、善，羞恥過惡，對治無慚，息諸惡行。

What is shame (hri)? Relying on the power of oneself and the Dharma, its nature is to esteem the worthy and good; it counteracts shamelessness and its function is to stop evil conduct. That is, relying on the dignity and value of oneself and the Dharma, one esteems the worthy and good, is ashamed of faults and evil, counteracts shamelessness, and stops all evil conduct.

云何為愧？依世間力，輕拒暴惡為性；對治無愧，止息惡行為業。謂依世間訶、厭增上，輕拒暴惡，羞恥過罪，對治無愧，息諸惡業。

What is embarrassment (apatrapya)? Relying on the power of the world, its nature is to hold violence and evil in contempt and to reject them; it counteracts lack of embarrassment and its function is to stop evil conduct. That is, relying on the world's rebuke and disgust, one holds violence and evil in contempt, is ashamed of faults and sins, counteracts lack of embarrassment, and stops all evil karma.

羞恥過惡是二通相；故諸聖教，假說為體。

Being ashamed of faults and evil is the common characteristic of the two; therefore the holy teachings provisionally speak of it as their substance.

若執羞恥，為二別相，應慚與愧，體無差別。則此二法定不相應，非受、想等有此義故。若待自、他，立二別者，應非實有，便違聖教。若許慚、愧實而別起，復違論說十遍善心。

If being ashamed were held to be the particular characteristic of the two, shame and embarrassment would not differ in substance. Then these two dharmas would definitely not be associated together, which is not the case for feeling, perception, and so on, which have this meaning. If one waits upon oneself and others to establish the distinction of the two, they would not be real existents, contradicting the holy teaching. If one allowed that shame and embarrassment are real and arise distinctly, it would again contradict the treatise's statement that the ten pervade wholesome minds.

崇重、輕拒若二別相，所緣有異，應不俱生。二失既同，何乃偏責？誰言二法所緣有異？不爾，如何？善心起時，隨緣何境，皆有崇重善，及輕拒惡義。故「慚」與「愧」，俱遍善心，所緣無別。豈不我說亦有此義？汝執「慚」、「愧」自相既同，何理能遮前所設難？

If esteeming and rejecting were the particular characteristics of the two, their objects would differ and they should not arise together. Since the two faults are the same, why blame only one side? Who says that the objects of these two dharmas differ? It is not so. How is it then? When a wholesome mind arises, whatever object it takes, it has the meaning of esteeming good and rejecting evil. Therefore "shame" and "embarrassment" both pervade wholesome minds, and their objects do not differ. Do I not also say that this meaning exists? Since you hold that the self-characteristics of "shame" and "embarrassment" are the same, what reasoning can refute the objection raised before?

然聖教說：「顧自、他者」，自法名自，世間名他。或即此中，崇拒善惡，於己益損，名自、他故。

But the holy teaching says: "regarding oneself and others"; oneself and the Dharma are called self, and the world is called other. Or it is precisely here that, in esteeming good and rejecting evil, the benefit and harm to oneself are called self and other.

「無貪等」者，等無瞋、痴。此三名根，生善勝故。三不善根，近對治故。

"Non-greed and so on": "and so on" takes in non-hatred and non-delusion. These three are called roots because they are superior in producing good. They are the near antidote to the three unwholesome roots.

云何無貪？於有、有具，無著為性；對治貪著，作善為業。

What is non-greed? With respect to existence and the means of existence, its nature is non-attachment; it counteracts greed and attachment, and its function is to do good.

云何無瞋？於苦、苦具，無恚為性；對治瞋恚，作善為業。

What is non-hatred? With respect to suffering and the means of suffering, its nature is absence of ill will; it counteracts hatred and ill will, and its function is to do good.

善心起時，隨緣何境，皆於有等，無著、無恚，觀有等立，非要緣彼。如前慚、愧，觀善、惡立，故此二種，俱遍善心。

When a wholesome mind arises, whatever object it takes, it has non-attachment and non-ill-will toward existence and so on; it is established in relation to existence and so on, and does not require taking those as objects. Like shame and embarrassment above, which are established in relation to good and evil, these two kinds both pervade wholesome minds.

云何無痴？於諸理事，明解為性；對治愚痴，作善為業。

What is non-delusion? With respect to all principles and matters, its nature is clear understanding; it counteracts foolish delusion and its function is to do good.

有義：無痴即慧為性。《集論》說：此報、教、證、智決擇為體，生得、聞、思、修所生慧。如次皆是決擇性故。

One view holds: non-delusion takes wisdom as its nature. The Abhidharma-samuccaya says: this takes discrimination through retribution, teaching, realization, and knowledge as its substance, and is the wisdom produced by birth, hearing, reflection, and cultivation. According to this order they are all of the nature of discrimination.

此雖即慧，為顯善品，有勝功能，如煩惱見，故復別說。

Though this is itself wisdom, to show that wholesome qualities have superior function, as with the afflicted view, it is again spoken of separately.

有義：無痴非即是慧，別有自性，正對無明。如無貪、瞋，善根攝故。

One view holds: non-delusion is not itself wisdom, but has a separate self-nature, directly opposed to ignorance. It is like non-greed and non-hatred, because it is subsumed by the wholesome roots.

論說：大悲無瞋、痴攝，非根攝故。若彼無痴，以慧為性，大悲如力等，應慧等根攝。又若無痴無別自性，如不害等，應非實物。便違論說：十一善中，三世俗有，餘皆是實。

The treatise says: great compassion is subsumed by non-hatred and non-delusion, and not by a root. If that non-delusion took wisdom as its nature, great compassion, like the powers and so on, would be subsumed by the root of wisdom and the rest. Moreover, if non-delusion had no separate self-nature, like non-harming and so on, it would not be a real thing. This would contradict the treatise's statement: among the eleven wholesome ones, three are conventionally existent and the rest are all real.

然《集論》說：慧為體者，舉彼因果，顯此自性。如以忍、樂，表「信」自體，理必應爾。

But the Abhidharma-samuccaya says it takes wisdom as its substance; this cites its cause and effect to show its self-nature. Like using acceptance and delight to point to the substance of "faith," by reasoning it must be so.

以貪、瞋、痴六識相應，正煩惱攝。起惡勝故，立不善根。斷彼必由通、別對治。通唯善慧，別即三根。由此無痴必應別有。

Because greed, hatred, and delusion are associated with the six consciousnesses and are subsumed by the principal afflictions, they are superior in giving rise to evil, so the unwholesome roots are established. Cutting them off must be done through common and particular antidotes. The common one is only wholesome wisdom, and the particular are the three roots. From this, non-delusion must exist separately.

勤謂精進，於善、惡品修、斷事中，勇、悍為性；對治懈怠，滿善為業。

Diligence means vigor: in the work of cultivating the wholesome and eliminating the evil, its nature is bravery and tenacity; it counteracts laziness and its function is to fulfill the wholesome.

「勇」表勝進，簡諸染法。「悍」表精純，簡淨無記。即顯精進，唯善性攝。

"Bravery" shows superior advance and excludes defiled dharmas. "Tenacity" shows purity and excludes pure indeterminate states. This shows that diligence is subsumed only by the wholesome nature.

此相差別略有五種。所謂：被甲、加行、無下、無退、無足。

The differences of its characteristic are roughly of five kinds: namely donning the armor, applying effort, not being inferior, not retreating, and not being satisfied.

即經所說：有勢、有勤、有勇、堅猛、不捨善軛，如次應知。

These correspond to what the sutra says: having strength, having diligence, having bravery, being firm and fierce, and not abandoning the yoke of the good; they should be understood in this order.

此五別者，謂初發心、自分、勝進，自分行中，三品別故；或初發心、長時、無間、慇重、無餘，修差別故；或資糧等，五道別故。二乘究竟道，欣大菩提故，諸佛究竟道，樂利樂他故；或二加行、無間、解脫、勝進別故。

The distinctions of the five are: first aspiration, one's own part, and superior advance, because within the conduct of one's own part there are three grades of distinction; or first aspiration, long duration, uninterruptedness, earnestness, and without remainder, being distinctions of cultivation; or because of the distinction of the five paths of accumulation and so on. The final path of the two vehicles is because they aspire to great bodhi; the final path of the Buddhas is because they delight in benefiting and pleasing others; or because of the distinctions of the two preparatory practices, the uninterrupted path, liberation, and superior advance.

「安」謂輕安，遠離麁重，調暢身心，堪任為性；對治惛沈，轉依為業。

"Tranquility" means light ease: it is far from heaviness and coarseness, harmonizes body and mind, and its nature is to be fit for use; it counteracts torpor and its function is to transform the basis.

謂此伏除能障定法，令所依止，轉安適故。

That is, this can subdue and remove the dharmas that obstruct meditation, and make the basis of support transform into comfort.

「不放逸」者：精進、三根，於所斷、修，防、修為性；對治放逸，成滿一切世、出世間善事為業。

"Non-negligence": diligence and the three roots, with respect to what is to be abandoned and cultivated, have as nature guarding and cultivating; it counteracts negligence, and its function is to complete and fulfill all worldly and supramundane good deeds.

謂即四法，於斷修事，皆能防、修，名不放逸。非別有體，無異相故。於防惡事、修善事中，離四功能，無別用故。雖信、慚等，亦有此能，而方彼四，勢用微劣；非根、遍策，故非此依。

That is, precisely these four dharmas, with regard to abandoning and cultivating, can guard and cultivate, and this is called non-negligence. It does not have a separate substance, since there is no different characteristic. In guarding against evil and cultivating good, apart from the functions of the four dharmas, there is no separate use. Though faith, shame, and so on also have this ability, compared with those four their force is slight and inferior; they are not roots and not universally urging, so they are not its basis.

豈不防、修是此相用？

Are guarding and cultivating not the characteristic and function of this?

防、修何異精進、三根？

How do guarding and cultivating differ from diligence and the three roots?

彼要待此，方有作用。

Those would have to wait for this in order to have function.

此應復待餘，便有無窮失。

This would again have to wait for another, and there would be the fault of infinite regress.

勤唯遍策，根但為依，如何說彼有防、修用？

Diligence is only universally urging, and the roots only act as supports; how can one say those have the function of guarding and cultivating?

汝防、修用，其相云何？

What is the aspect of the function of guarding and cultivating that you speak of?

若普依持，即無貪等。若遍策錄，不異精進。止惡、進善，即總四法。令不散亂，應是等持。令同取境，與觸何別？令不忘失，即應是念。

If it is universally supporting, it is just non-greed and so on. If it is universally urging and checking, it is no different from diligence. Stopping evil and advancing good is just the four dharmas together. If it makes the mind not scattered, it should be concentration. If it makes them take the same object, how does it differ from contact? If it makes them not forget, it should be mindfulness.

如是推尋不放逸用，離無貪等，竟不可得。故不放逸，定無別體。

Thus, searching for the function of non-negligence, apart from non-greed and the rest, one can never find it. Therefore non-negligence definitely has no separate substance.

云何「行捨」？精進、三根，令心平等、正直、無功用住為性；對治掉舉，靜住為業。

What is "equanimity of practice"? Diligence and the three roots make the mind equal, upright, and dwelling without effort as its nature; it counteracts agitation, and its function is to dwell in stillness.

謂即四法，令心遠離掉舉等障，靜住名捨。平等、正直、無功用住，初、中、後位，辯捨差別。由不放逸先除雜染；捨復令心寂靜而住。

That is, precisely these four dharmas make the mind free from obstacles such as agitation and dwell in stillness, and this is called equanimity. "Equal, upright, and dwelling without effort" distinguishes the differences of equanimity in the initial, middle, and final stages. Through non-negligence, defilements are first removed; and equanimity again makes the mind dwell in quiescence.

此無別體，如不放逸，離彼四法，無相、用故。能令寂靜，即四法故；所令寂靜，即心等故。

This has no separate substance, like non-negligence, because apart from those four dharmas it has no characteristic or function. That which can make quiescent is the four dharmas; that which is made quiescent is the mind and so on.

云何「不害」？於諸有情，不為損惱，無瞋為性；能對治害，悲愍為業。

What is "non-harming"? With respect to all sentient beings, not causing injury or vexation; its nature is non-hatred; it counteracts harming, and its function is compassion and pity.

謂即無瞋，於有情所，不為損惱，假名不害。

That is, it is just non-hatred; with respect to sentient beings, not causing injury or vexation is provisionally called non-harming.

無瞋，翻對斷物命瞋；不害，正違損惱物害。無瞋與樂；不害拔苦。是謂此二麁相差別。

Non-hatred is the opposite of hatred that takes the life of beings; non-harming directly opposes harm that injures beings. Non-hatred gives happiness; non-harming removes suffering. This speaks of the coarse difference between the two.

理實無瞋實有自體；不害依彼一分假立。為顯慈、悲，二相別故。利樂有情，彼二勝故。

By true principle, non-hatred has a real substance; non-harming is provisionally established on a part of that. To show the distinction of the two aspects of kindness and compassion, and because they benefit and delight sentient beings, those two are superior.

有說：不害非即無瞋，別有自體，謂賢善性。此相云何？謂不損惱。無瞋亦爾，寧別有性？謂於有情不為損惱，慈悲賢善，是無瞋故。

Some say: non-harming is not simply non-hatred but has a separate substance, namely a worthy and good nature. What is this characteristic? It is non-injury. Non-hatred is also like this, so how can there be a separate nature? That is, toward sentient beings not causing injury or vexation, kindness, compassion, and goodness are just non-hatred.

「及」顯十一，義別心所，謂欣、厭等善心所法。雖義有別，說種種名，而體無異，故不別立。

"And" shows that beyond the eleven, there are other mental factors in meaning, namely wholesome mental factor dharmas such as delight and disgust. Though they are distinct in meaning and called by various names, their substance is not different, so they are not established separately.

欣謂欲俱，無瞋一分，於所欣境，不憎恚故。

Delight means the part of non-hatred that arises with desire, because toward the object delighted in one has no hatred or ill will.

不忿、恨、惱、嫉等亦然；隨應正翻瞋一分故。

Non-anger, non-resentment, non-vexation, non-envy, and so on are likewise; because they correspond to a part that is directly opposite to hatred.

厭謂慧俱無貪一分，於所厭境，不染著故。

Disgust means the part of non-greed that arises with wisdom, because toward the object one is disgusted with, one has no defiled attachment.

不慳、憍等，當知亦然。隨應正翻，貪一分故。

Non-stinginess, non-arrogance, and so on should be known to be likewise, because they correspond to a part that is directly opposite to greed.

不覆、誑、諂無貪、痴一分；隨應正翻，貪、痴一分故。

Non-concealment, non-deceit, and non-flattery are parts of non-greed and non-delusion; because they correspond to a part directly opposite to greed and delusion.

有義：不覆唯無痴一分；無處說覆亦貪一分故。

One view holds: non-concealment is only a part of non-delusion; because nowhere is it said that concealment is also a part of greed.

有義：不慢信一分攝，謂若信彼，不慢彼故。有義：不慢捨一分攝，心平等者，不高慢故。有義：不慢慚一分攝，若崇重彼，不慢彼故。

One view holds: non-pride is subsumed in a part of faith, meaning if one has faith in that, one is not proud toward it. One view holds: non-pride is subsumed in a part of equanimity, because one whose mind is equal is not high and proud. One view holds: non-pride is subsumed in a part of shame, because if one esteems that, one is not proud toward it.

有義：不疑即信所攝，謂若信彼，無猶豫故。有義：不疑：即正勝解，以決定者，無猶豫故。有義：不疑即正慧攝，以正見者，無猶豫故。

One view holds: non-doubt is subsumed in faith, meaning if one has faith in that, one has no hesitation. One view holds: non-doubt is right resolve, because one who is decided has no hesitation. One view holds: non-doubt is subsumed in right wisdom, because one who has right view has no hesitation.

不散亂體，即正定攝。正見、正知，俱善慧攝。不忘念者，即是正念。

The substance of non-distraction is subsumed in right concentration. Right view and right knowing are both subsumed in wholesome wisdom. Non-forgetfulness is right mindfulness.

悔、眠、尋、伺，通染、不染，如觸、欲等，無別翻對。

Regret, drowsiness, investigation, and analysis may be defiled or not defiled, like contact, desire, and so on, and have no separate opposites.

何緣諸染所翻善中，有別建立，有不爾者？

Why, among the wholesome opposites of the various defilements, are some established separately and some not?

相、用別者，便別立之；餘善不然，故不應責。又諸染法遍六識者，勝故翻之，別立善法。慢等、忿等，唯意識俱。害雖亦然，而數現起損惱他故；障無上乘勝因悲故；為了知彼增上過失，翻立不害。失念、散亂及不正知，翻入別境，善中不說。

Those with distinct characteristics and functions are established separately; the other wholesome ones are not like this, so one should not raise the question. Moreover, defiled dharmas that pervade the six consciousnesses are opposed because of their superior nature, and wholesome dharmas are established separately. Pride, anger, and so on are associated only with mind-consciousness. Though harm is also like this, it is because it repeatedly arises and injures others; because it obstructs the compassion that is the superior cause of the unsurpassed vehicle; in order to know its great fault, non-harming is established as its opposite. Loss of mindfulness, distraction, and lack of right knowledge are opposites that enter the object-specific, and are not mentioned among the wholesome.

染、淨相翻，淨寧少染？

Defiled and pure are opposites; why are the pure fewer than the defiled?

淨勝染劣，少敵多故。又解理通，說多同體，迷情事局，隨相分多。故於染、淨，不應齊責。

Because the pure is superior and the defiled inferior, the few can counter the many. Moreover, understanding principle is universal, so many are said to share one substance; delusion of feeling is localized to particular matters, and follows aspects so is many. So one should not make equal demands in the case of defiled and pure.

此十一法，三是假有，謂不放逸、捨及不害，義如前說。餘八實有，相、用別故。

Of these eleven dharmas, three are conventionally existent, namely non-negligence, equanimity, and non-harming, with the meaning as explained above. The other eight are real, because their characteristics and functions are distinct.

有義：十一四遍善心，精進、三根，遍善品故。餘七不定。

One view holds: among the eleven, four pervade wholesome minds: diligence and the three roots, because they pervade wholesome qualities. The other seven are not fixed.

推尋事理，未決定時，不生信故。慚、愧同類，依處各別，隨起一時，第二無故。要世間道斷煩惱時，有輕安故。不放逸、捨，無漏道時，方得起故。悲愍有情時，乃有不害故。

When investigating matters and principles and not yet decided, faith does not arise. Shame and embarrassment are of the same kind but depend on different bases, and when one arises at a time, the second is absent. Tranquility exists only when the worldly path cuts off afflictions. Non-negligence and equanimity arise only in the path without outflows. Non-harming exists only when one has compassion for sentient beings.

論說：十一六位中起。謂決定位，有信相應。止息染時，有慚、愧起，顧自、他故。於善品位，有精進、三根。世間道時，有輕安起，於出世道，有捨、不放逸。攝眾生時，有不害故。

The treatise says: the eleven arise in six states. In the stage of decision, faith is associated. When stopping defilements, shame and embarrassment arise, because of regard for oneself and others. In the wholesome stage there are diligence and the three roots. In the worldly path, tranquility arises; in the supramundane path there are equanimity and non-negligence. When gathering beings there is non-harming.

有義：彼說未為應理。推尋事理，未決定心，信若不生，應非是善。如染心等，無淨信故。

One view holds: these statements are not yet reasonable. When investigating matters and principles, in a mind not yet decided, if faith does not arise, it should not be wholesome. Like defiled minds and the like, there would be no pure faith.

慚、愧類異，依別境同，俱遍善心，前已說故。

Shame and embarrassment differ in kind and depend on different bases but have the same object, and both pervade wholesome minds, as explained above.

若出世道輕安不生，應此覺支非無漏故。

If tranquility did not arise in the supramundane path, this factor of awakening would not be free of outflows.

若世間道無捨、不放逸，應非寂靜防惡修善故；又應不伏掉、放逸故。有漏善心既具四法，如出世道應有二故。

If the worldly path had no equanimity and non-negligence, they would not be tranquil in guarding against evil and cultivating good; and they should not be able to subdue agitation and negligence. Since wholesome minds with outflows already have the four dharmas, like the supramundane path they should have these two.

善心起時，皆不損物，違能損法，有不害故。

When a wholesome mind arises, it does not harm beings and opposes harmful dharmas, so non-harming exists.

論說：「六位起十一」者，依彼彼增，作此此說。故彼所說，定非應理。

The treatise says: "in the six states, the eleven arise," speaking according to each one's superiority. Therefore what they say is definitely not reasonable.

應說信等十一法中，十遍善心，輕安不遍。要在定位，方有輕安，調暢身心，餘位無故。

One should say that among the eleven dharmas of faith and so on, ten pervade wholesome minds, and tranquility does not pervade. Only in the state of meditation is there tranquility, which harmonizes body and mind, and it is absent in the other states.

〈決擇分〉說：十善心所定、不定地皆遍善心，定地心中，增輕安故。

The Viniscaya section says: the ten wholesome mental factors pervade wholesome minds in both the stable and unstable grounds, and in the mind in the stable ground tranquility is added.

有義：定加行，亦得定地名。彼亦微有調暢義故。由斯欲界亦有輕安。不爾，便違〈本地分〉說：信等十一通一切地。

One view: even the preparatory practice of concentration is called the stage of concentration. That, too, has a slight sense of pliancy. Therefore the desire realm also has pliancy. If this were not so, it would contradict the statement in the Bhumi section: faith and the other ten are common to all stages.

有義：輕安唯在定有。由定滋養，有調暢故。論說：欲界諸心、心所，由闕輕安，名不定地。說一切地有十一者，通有尋伺等三地皆有故。

One view: pliancy exists only in concentration. It is nourished by concentration and has a sense of pliancy. The treatise says: because the minds and mental factors of the desire realm lack pliancy, it is called the unsettled stage. To say that the ten are common to all stages is because they are all present in the three stages that include initial thought and sustained thought.

此十一種，前已具說。第七、八識，隨位有無。第六識中，定位皆具。若非定位，唯闕輕安。

These eleven were fully explained earlier. In the seventh and eighth consciousnesses they are present or absent according to the stage. In the sixth consciousness, in the stage of concentration, all are present. If it is not a stage of concentration, only pliancy is lacking.

有義：五識唯有十種，自性散動，無輕安故。

One view: the five consciousnesses have only ten, because their own nature is scattered and moving and they have no pliancy.

有義：五識亦有輕安。定所引善者，亦有調暢故。成所作智俱，必有輕安故。

One view: the five consciousnesses also have pliancy, because the wholesome states induced by concentration also have pliancy, and because together with the wisdom of accomplishing what is to be done there must be pliancy.

此善十一，何受相應？十五相應。一除憂、苦，有逼迫受，無調暢故。

With which feelings do these eleven wholesome factors correspond? Ten correspond with the five feelings. One excludes sorrow and pain, because it has the feeling of oppression and has no pliancy.

此與別境皆得相應。信等欲等，不相違故。

These can all correspond with the object-specific mental factors, since faith and the others and desire and the others do not conflict.

十一唯善。

The eleven are only wholesome.

輕安非欲，餘通三界。

Pliancy is not in the desire realm; the rest extend through the three realms.

皆學等三。

All extend through the three categories of learner, non-learner, and neither learner nor non-learner.

非見所斷。《瑜伽論》說：信等六根，唯修所斷，非見所斷。

They are not what is eliminated by seeing. The Yogacarabhumi says: the six faculties of faith and the others are eliminated only by cultivation and not by seeing.

餘門分別，如理應思。

The other categories of analysis should be considered in accordance with principle.

如是已說善位心所，煩惱心所其相云何？

Having thus explained the wholesome mental factors, what are the characteristics of the affliction mental factors?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１２煩惱謂貪、瞋、痴、慢、疑、惡見。

12. The afflictions are said to be greed, anger, delusion, pride, doubt, and wrong views.

論曰：此貪等六性是根本煩惱攝故，得煩惱名。

The treatise says: these six, greed and the rest, are by nature included in the root afflictions, and so they are called afflictions.

云何為貪？於有、有具，染著為性；能障無貪，生苦為業。

What is greed? With regard to existence and the means of existence, its nature is attachment; it can obstruct non-greed, and its function is to produce suffering.

謂由愛力，取蘊生故。

That is to say, by the force of craving, one grasps the aggregates and is reborn.

云何為瞋？於苦、苦具，憎恚為性；能障無瞋，不安隱性，惡行所依為業。

What is anger? With regard to suffering and the means of suffering, its nature is hatred; it can obstruct non-anger, and its function is to be the basis of unwholesome conduct, being of an unpeaceful nature.

謂瞋必令身、心熱惱，起諸惡業，不善性故。

That is to say, anger must make body and mind hot and tormented and give rise to bad actions, since it is of an unwholesome nature.

云何為痴？於諸理、事，迷闇為性；能障無痴，一切雜染所依為業。

What is delusion? With regard to all principles and phenomena, its nature is confusion and darkness; it can obstruct non-delusion, and its function is to be the basis of all defilements.

謂由無明，起疑、邪見、貪等煩惱、隨煩惱業，能招後生雜染法故。

That is to say, through ignorance, doubt, wrong views, greed, and other afflictions and secondary afflictions and actions arise, which can summon future defiled phenomena.

云何為慢？恃己於他，高舉為性；能障不慢，生苦為業。

What is pride? Relying on oneself in relation to others, its nature is to be raised up; it can obstruct non-pride, and its function is to produce suffering.

謂若有慢，於德、有德，心不謙下，由此生死輪轉無窮，受諸苦故。

That is to say, if there is pride, toward virtue and the virtuous the mind is not humble, and because of this one revolves in birth and death without end and endures all sufferings.

此慢差別有七、九種，謂於三品、我、德處生。

The varieties of this pride are seven or nine, namely those that arise with regard to three grades, self, and virtue.

一切皆通見修所斷，聖位我慢既得現行，慢類由斯起亦無失。

All of them extend to what is eliminated by seeing and cultivation. Since pride of self can still manifest at the stage of the saints, it is not a fault that pride of this kind arises from this.

云何為疑？於諸諦理，猶豫為性；能障不疑善品為業。

What is doubt? With regard to the principles of the truths, its nature is hesitation; it can obstruct the wholesome factor of non-doubt as its function.

謂猶豫者，善不生故。

That is to say, for the hesitant, what is wholesome does not arise.

有義：此疑以慧為體，猶豫簡擇說為疑故。「毘」助「末底」，是疑義故，「末底」般若義無異故。

One view: this doubt has wisdom as its substance, since hesitation and discernment are said to be doubt. Because "vi" assisting "mati" (wisdom) means doubt, and because "mati" is no different in meaning from prajna.

有義：此疑別有自體，令慧不決，非即慧故。《瑜伽論》說：「六煩惱中，見世俗有，即慧分故。餘是實有，別有性故。」「毘」助「末底」，執慧為疑，「毘」助「若南」，智應為識。界由助力，義便轉變，是故此疑非慧為體。

One view: this doubt has a separate substance, making wisdom indecisive, and is not simply wisdom. The Yogacarabhumi says: "Among the six afflictions, seeing exists conventionally, being a part of wisdom; the others exist really and have separate natures." "Vi" assisting "mati" holds wisdom to be doubt; "vi" assisting "jnana" (knowledge), knowledge should be consciousness. Because the realm changes through assisting force, the meaning is transformed, so this doubt does not have wisdom as its substance.

云何惡見？於諸諦理，顛倒推度，染慧為性；能障善見，招苦為業。

What is wrong view? With regard to the principles of the truths, its nature is inverted speculation, a defiled wisdom; it can obstruct right view, and its function is to bring suffering.

謂惡見者，多受苦故。

That is to say, those with wrong views suffer much.

此見行相，差別有五：

The characteristics of this view are of five kinds:

一、薩迦耶見：謂於五取蘊，執我、我所，一切見趣所依為業。

First, satkayadrishti (view of a real self): that is, with regard to the five grasping aggregates, grasping self and what belongs to self, its function being the basis of all views.

此見差別，有二十句、六十五等，分別起攝。

The varieties of this view, such as the twenty phrases and sixty-five and so on, are included in the discriminated type.

二、邊執見：謂即於彼，隨執斷、常，障處中行、出離為業。

Second, the extreme view: that is, in relation to that, following the grasp of annihilation or permanence, its function being to obstruct the middle way and liberation.

此見差別，諸見趣中，有執前際四遍常論、一分常論；及計後際有想十六；無想、俱非各有八論；七斷滅論等，分別起攝。

The varieties of this view, among all views, include grasping the four kinds of totally eternal teachings and the partly eternal teaching about the past; and about the future the sixteen with perception, the eight each of the teachings of no perception and neither, the seven annihilationist teachings, and so on, all included in the discriminated type.

三、邪見：謂謗因果、作用、實事及非四見諸餘邪執，如增上緣，名義遍故。

Third, wrong view: that is, denying causes and effects, functions, and real things, and the various other wrong attachments that are not the four views, like a dominant condition, where the name and meaning are pervasive.

此見差別，諸見趣中，有執前際二無因論、四有邊等、不死矯亂；及計後際五現涅槃；或計自在、世主、釋、梵及餘物類，常恆不易；或計自在等是一切物因；或有橫計諸邪解脫；或有妄執非道為道，諸如是等皆邪見攝。

The varieties of this view, among all views, include grasping two causeless teachings about the past, the four with limit and so on, and eel-wriggling evasions; and about the future the five of nirvana in this very life; or holding that Ishvara, the lord of the world, Shakra, Brahma, and other kinds of beings are permanent and unchanging; or holding that Ishvara and others are the cause of all things; or arbitrarily clinging to various wrong liberations; or falsely holding what is not the path to be the path; all such are included in wrong view.

四、見取：謂於諸見及所依蘊，執為最勝，能得清淨，一切鬪諍所依為業。

Fourth, clinging to views: that is, with regard to the views and the aggregates they rely on, grasping them as supreme and able to yield purity, its function being the basis of all quarrels.

五、戒禁取：謂於隨順諸見戒禁及所依蘊，執為最勝，能得清淨，無利勤苦所依為業。

Fifth, clinging to precepts and vows: that is, with regard to precepts and vows that accord with the views and the aggregates they rely on, grasping them as supreme and able to yield purity, its function being the basis of fruitless toil.

然有處說：執為最勝，名為見取，執能得清淨，名戒取者，是影略說，或隨轉門。不爾，如何非滅計滅、非道計道，說為邪見，非二取攝。

Yet in some places it is said: grasping as supreme is called clinging to views, and grasping as able to yield purity is called clinging to precepts; this is a summary statement or a way of turning the discussion. If it were not so, how could taking the non-cessation as cessation and the non-path as path, which are called wrong view, not be included in the two kinds of clinging?

如是總別十煩惱中，六通俱生及分別起，任運、思察，俱得生故。疑後三見，唯分別起，要由惡友或邪教力，自審思察，方得生故。

Thus among the ten afflictions in general and in particular, six extend to the innate as well as the discriminated types, since they can arise spontaneously or through reflection. Doubt and the latter three views are only of the discriminated type, since they can arise only through the power of bad friends or wrong teachings and by one's own careful reflection.

邊執見中通俱生者，有義：唯斷。常見相麁，惡友等力方引生故。《瑜伽》等說：「何邊執見是俱生耶？謂斷見攝。」學現觀者，起如是怖：「今者我，我何所在耶？」故禽獸等若遇違緣，皆恐我斷，而起驚怖。

Among the extreme views that include the innate, one view: it is only annihilationism. The appearance of permanence is coarse and is drawn forth only by the power of bad friends and so on. The Yogacarabhumi and others say: "What extreme view is innate? That which is included in annihilationism." One who studies direct insight gives rise to such fear: "Now this I, where will I be?" So animals and others, if they meet adverse conditions, all fear the loss of self and give rise to fright.

有義：彼論依麁相說，理實俱生，亦通常見。謂禽獸等，執我常存，熾然聚集長時資具。故《顯揚》等諸論皆說：於五取蘊，執斷、計常，或是俱生或分別起。

One view: that treatise speaks according to the coarse aspect; in truth the innate also includes permanence. Animals and the like hold that the self remains permanent and blazingly gather resources for a long time. So the Xianyang and other treatises all say: with regard to the five grasping aggregates, grasping annihilation or computing permanence may be either innate or discriminated.

此十煩惱，誰幾相應？

Which of these ten afflictions correspond with which, and how many?

貪與瞋、疑，定不俱起，愛、憎二境，必不同故；於境不決，無染著故。

Greed is definitely not simultaneous with anger or doubt, because the objects of love and hatred must differ, and because toward an indecisive object there is no attachment.

貪與慢、見，或得相應，所愛、所陵境非一故，說不俱起。所染、所恃境可同故，說得相應。於五見境，皆可愛故，貪與五見相應無失。

Greed may correspond with pride and views; it is said they are not simultaneous because the objects that are loved and those that are looked down on are not the same. It is said they may correspond because the objects that are tainted and those relied on can be the same. As for the objects of the five views, all can be loved, so there is no fault in greed corresponding with the five views.

瞋與慢、疑或得俱起；所瞋、所恃境非一故，說不相應。所蔑、所憎境可同故，說得俱起；初猶豫時，未憎彼故，說不俱起。久思不決，便憤發故，說得相應；疑順、違事，隨應亦爾。

Anger may arise together with pride and doubt; it is said they do not correspond because the objects of anger and those relied on are not the same. It is said they may arise together because the objects despised and hated can be the same; at the first moment of hesitation, one has not yet hated that object, so it is said they are not simultaneous. When one thinks long and cannot decide, one becomes enraged, so it is said they may correspond; and doubt regarding agreeable and disagreeable matters is likewise, as appropriate.

瞋與二取，必不相應，執為勝、道，不憎彼故。

Anger certainly does not correspond with the two kinds of clinging, since one holds them as supreme and as the path and does not hate them.

此與三見，或得相應，於有樂蘊，起身、常見，不生憎故，說不相應。於有苦蘊，起身、常見，生憎恚故，說得俱起。斷見翻此，說瞋有、無。邪見誹撥惡事、好事，如次說瞋或無或有。

Anger may correspond with the other three views: when, regarding an aggregate that is pleasant, one gives rise to the view of self or permanence, hatred does not arise, so it is said they do not correspond. When, regarding an aggregate that is painful, one gives rise to the view of self or permanence, hatred arises, so it is said they may arise together. The view of annihilation reverses this, and anger may or may not be present. Wrong view that denies bad and good matters is said to have anger present or absent in this order.

慢於境定，疑則不然。故慢與疑，無相應義。

Pride is decisive about its object, but doubt is not so. So pride and doubt have no meaning of correspondence.

慢與五見，皆容俱起，行相展轉，不相違故。然與斷見，必不俱生，執我斷時，無陵、恃故。

Pride may arise together with all five views, since their characteristics are mutually non-conflicting. But with the view of annihilation it is certainly not simultaneous, since when one grasps the self as annihilated there is no looking down on others or relying on oneself.

與身、邪見一分亦爾。

It is the same with a portion of the view of a real self and of wrong view.

疑不審決，與見相違，故疑與見，定不俱起。

Doubt does not decide carefully and conflicts with views, so doubt and views are definitely not simultaneous.

五見展轉，必不相應，非一心中，有多慧故。

The five views definitely do not correspond with one another, since there cannot be many wisdoms in a single mind.

痴與九種，皆定相應，諸煩惱生，必由痴故。

Delusion definitely corresponds with the other nine, since all afflictions arise necessarily through delusion.

此十煩惱，何識相應？藏識全無；末那有四；意識具十；五識唯三：謂貪、瞋、痴。無分別故。由稱量等，起慢等故。

With which consciousnesses do these ten afflictions correspond? The storehouse consciousness has none; manas has four; mental consciousness has all ten; the five consciousnesses have only three: greed, anger, and delusion. Because they lack discrimination, pride and the others arise by measuring and so on.

此十煩惱，何受相應？

With which feelings do these ten afflictions correspond?

貪、瞋、痴三，俱生分別，一切容與五受相應。貪會違緣，憂、苦俱故；瞋遇順境，喜、樂俱故。

Greed, anger, and delusion, whether innate or discriminated, may all correspond with the five feelings. Greed may meet adverse conditions, accompanied by sorrow and pain; anger may meet favorable conditions, accompanied by joy and pleasure.

有義：俱生分別起慢，容與非苦四受相應，恃苦劣蘊，憂相應故。

One view: pride, whether innate or discriminated, may correspond with the four feelings other than pain, since relying on inferior aggregates of suffering corresponds with sorrow.

有義：俱生亦苦俱起，意有苦受，前已說故。

One view: the innate also arises together with pain, since mental pain exists, as was said before.

分別慢等，純苦趣無，彼無邪師、邪教等故。然彼不造引惡趣業，要分別起能發彼故。

Discriminated pride and the like are absent in purely painful destinies, since there are no wrong teachers or wrong teachings there. But they do not create karma that leads to evil destinies, which can only be produced by the discriminated type.

疑後三見，容四受俱。欲疑無苦等，亦喜受俱故；二取若緣憂俱見等，爾時得與憂相應故。

Doubt and the latter three views may be accompanied by four feelings. In the desire realm doubt has no pain and the like, and is also accompanied by joy; and when the two clingings take as object views accompanied by sorrow, they may then correspond with sorrow.

有義：俱生身邊二見，但與喜、樂、捨、受相應，非五識俱，唯無記故。分別二見，容四受俱，執苦俱蘊為我、我所。常、斷見翻此，與憂相應故。

One view: the two innate views of self and extremes correspond only with joy, pleasure, and equanimity, not being accompanied by the five consciousnesses, and being only indeterminate. The two discriminated views may be accompanied by four feelings, grasping aggregates accompanied by pain as self and what belongs to self. The views of permanence and annihilation reverse this, since they correspond with sorrow.

有義：二見若俱生者，亦苦受俱，純受苦處，緣極苦蘊，苦相應故。論說：俱生一切煩惱，皆於三受現行可得，廣說如前，餘如前說。

One view: if these two views are innate, they are also accompanied by pain, since in places of pure suffering they take as object the aggregates of extreme suffering and correspond with pain. The treatise says: all innate afflictions can be found manifest in three feelings, as extensively explained earlier, and the rest as explained earlier.

此依實義，隨麁相者，貪、慢、四見，樂、喜、捨俱。瞋唯苦、憂、捨受俱起。痴與五受皆得相應。邪見及疑四俱，除苦。

This is according to the true meaning; according to the coarse aspect, greed, pride, and the four views are accompanied by pleasure, joy, and equanimity. Anger arises together only with pain, sorrow, and equanimity. Delusion may correspond with all five feelings. Wrong view and doubt are accompanied by four, excluding pain.

貪、痴俱樂，通下四地，餘七俱樂，除欲通三，疑、獨行痴欲唯憂、捨，餘受俱起，如理應知。

Greed and delusion accompanied by pleasure extend through the lower four grounds; the other seven accompanied by pleasure exclude the desire realm and extend through three; doubt and solitary delusion in the desire realm have only sorrow and equanimity; the other feelings arise together, and should be understood according to principle.

此與別境幾互相應？

How many of the object-specific factors correspond with these?

貪、瞋、痴、慢容五俱起，專注一境，得有定故。疑及五見，各容四俱，疑除勝解，不決定故；見非慧俱，不異慧故。

Greed, anger, delusion, and pride may arise together with five, since fixing on a single object they obtain concentration. Doubt and the five views may each be accompanied by four; doubt excludes resolve because it is not decisive; views are not accompanied by wisdom because they are not different from wisdom.

此十煩惱何性所攝？

What moral nature do these ten afflictions have?

瞋唯不善，損自、他故，餘九通二。

Anger is only unwholesome, since it harms oneself and others; the other nine extend through two.

上二界者，唯無記攝，定所伏故。若欲界繫分別起者，唯不善攝，發惡行故。若是俱生，發惡行者，亦不善攝，損自、他故。餘無記攝，細不障善，非極損惱自、他處故。當知俱生身、邊二見，唯無記攝，不發惡業，雖數現起，不障善故。

Those of the two upper realms are included only in the indeterminate, being subdued by concentration. If those bound to the desire realm arise through discrimination, they are included only in the unwholesome, since they give rise to evil conduct. If they are innate and give rise to evil conduct, they are also included in the unwholesome, since they harm oneself and others. The others are included in the indeterminate, being subtle, not obstructing the wholesome, and not very harmful to oneself and others. One should know that the two innate views of self and extremes are included only in the indeterminate, not giving rise to evil karma, and though they manifest repeatedly, they do not obstruct the wholesome.

此十煩惱何界繫耶？瞋唯在欲，餘通三界。

To which realm are these ten afflictions bound? Anger is only in the desire realm; the others extend through the three realms.

生在下地，未離下染，上地煩惱，不現在前。要得彼地根本定者，彼地煩惱容現前故。

One born in a lower ground who has not yet left lower defilements does not have upper-ground afflictions manifest. Only one who has attained the fundamental concentration of that ground may have that ground's afflictions manifest.

謂有漏道，雖不能伏分別起惑及細俱生，而能伏除俱生麁惑，漸次證得上根本定。

That is to say, the path with outflows, though it cannot subdue discriminated delusions and subtle innate ones, can subdue and remove coarse innate delusions and gradually attain the fundamental concentration above.

彼但迷事，依外門轉，散亂、麁動，正障定故。

Those that only confuse phenomena, turn according to external doors, and are distracted and coarsely agitated, directly obstruct concentration.

得彼定已，彼地分別、俱生諸惑，皆容現前。

Having attained that concentration, the discriminated and innate delusions of that ground can all manifest.

生在上地，下地諸惑，分別、俱生皆容現起。

One born in an upper ground may have the delusions of the lower grounds, both discriminated and innate, all manifest.

生第四定中有中者，由謗解脫，生地獄故；身在上地，將生下時，起下潤生俱生愛故。

One who is born in the intermediate state within the fourth concentration is reborn in hell because of denying liberation; one whose body is in an upper ground, when about to be reborn below, gives rise to the innate craving that moistens lower rebirth.

而言生上，不起下者，依多分說，或隨轉門。

Yet to say that one born above does not give rise to lower ones is said in terms of the majority, or as a way of turning the discussion.

下地煩惱，亦緣上地。《瑜伽》等說：欲界繫貪，求上地生，味上定故。既說瞋恚憎嫉滅、道，亦應憎嫉離欲地故。總緣諸行，執我、我所斷常，慢者得緣上故。餘五緣上，其理極成。

The afflictions of lower grounds also take objects from upper grounds. The Yogacarabhumi and others say: greed bound to the desire realm seeks birth in upper grounds, relishing the upper concentrations. Since it is said that anger, hatred, and envy are directed at cessation and the path, they must also hate and envy the grounds free from desire. Taking all conditioned things as object, grasping self and what belongs to self, annihilation and permanence, pride can take objects above. The other five taking upper objects is logically established.

而有處言：貪、瞋、慢等不緣上者，依麁相說，或依別緣，不見世間執他地法為我等故；邊見必依身見起故。

In some places it is said that greed, anger, pride, and the like do not take upper objects; this is said in terms of coarse aspects, or in terms of particular objects, since one does not see the world grasping the dharmas of another ground as self and so on; and the extreme view must arise relying on the view of a real self.

上地煩惱亦緣下地，說生上者，於下有情，恃己勝德，而陵彼故。

The afflictions of upper grounds also take lower objects; it is said that one born above, relying on his own superior virtue, looks down on beings below.

總緣諸行，執我、我所、斷、常、愛者，得緣下故。疑後三見，如理應思。

Taking all conditioned things as object, grasping self and what belongs to self, annihilation, permanence, and craving can take lower objects. Doubt and the latter three views should be considered according to principle.

而說上或不緣下者，彼依多分或別緣說。

Where it is said that the upper do not take the lower, they speak in terms of the majority or of particular objects.

此十煩惱，學等何攝？非學無學，彼唯善故。

Among learner and so on, what do these ten afflictions fall under? They are neither learner nor non-learner, since those are only wholesome.

此十煩惱何所斷耶？

What eliminates these ten afflictions?

非非所斷，彼非染故。

It is not that they are not to be eliminated, since they are not undefiled.

分別起者，唯見所斷，麁易斷故；若俱生者，唯修所斷，細難斷故。

The discriminated are eliminated only by seeing, since they are coarse and easy to eliminate; the innate are eliminated only by cultivation, since they are subtle and hard to eliminate.

見所斷十，實俱頓斷，以真見道總緣諦故。

The ten eliminated by seeing are in fact eliminated all at once, because the true path of seeing takes the truths as object in general.

然迷諦相，有總、有別。總謂十種，皆迷四諦。苦、集是彼因依處故；滅、道是彼怖畏處故。

But in confusion about the aspects of the truths there are general and specific. The general says that all ten are confused about the four truths. Suffering and origin are the bases on which they depend, and cessation and the path are what they fear.

別謂別迷四諦相起，二唯迷苦，八通迷四，身、邊二見，唯果處起，別空、非我，屬苦諦故。

The specific says they arise through being confused about specific aspects of the four truths: two are confused only about suffering, eight are confused about all four; the two views of self and extremes arise only in the fruit, with the distinct aspects of emptiness and non-self belonging to the truth of suffering.

謂疑、三見，親迷苦理。二取執彼三見、戒禁及所依蘊為勝能淨，於自、他見及彼眷屬，如次隨應，起貪、恚、慢。相應無明，與九同迷；不共無明，親迷苦理。疑及邪見，親迷集等。二取、貪等，準苦應知。然瞋亦能親迷滅、道，由怖畏彼，生憎嫉故。

That is, doubt and the three views directly confuse the principle of suffering. The two clingings grasp those three views, precepts and vows, and the aggregates they rely on as supreme and able to purify, and toward one's own and others' views and their retinues, in this order as appropriate, give rise to greed, hatred, and pride. Associated ignorance is confused about the same nine; unassociated ignorance directly confuses the principle of suffering. Doubt and wrong view directly confuse origin and the others. The two clingings, greed, and so on, should be understood by analogy with suffering. But anger can also directly confuse cessation and the path, since by fearing them it gives rise to hatred and envy.

迷諦親疎，麁相如是。

The nearness and distance of confusion about the truths is thus in coarse terms.

委細說者，貪、瞋、慢、三見、疑俱生，隨應如彼。

In detailed terms, greed, anger, pride, the three views, and doubt that are innate are as appropriate like those.

俱生二見及彼相應愛、慢、無明，雖迷苦諦，細難斷故，修道方斷。

The two innate views and the associated craving, pride, and ignorance, though confused about the truth of suffering, are subtle and hard to eliminate, and so are eliminated only on the path of cultivation.

瞋餘愛等，迷別事生，不違諦觀，故修所斷。

Anger and the other cravings and the like arise from confusion about specific things and do not conflict with contemplation of the truths, so they are eliminated by cultivation.

雖諸煩惱，皆有相分，而所仗質，或有或無，名緣有事、無事煩惱。

Although all afflictions have an image aspect, the original object they rely on may exist or not, and so they are called afflictions that take existent things as object and afflictions that take non-existent things as object.

彼親所緣，雖皆有漏，而所仗質，亦通無漏，名緣有漏、無漏煩惱。

Their directly apprehended objects, though all with outflows, may have original objects that also include those without outflows, and so they are called afflictions that take things with outflows as object and afflictions that take things without outflows as object.

緣自地者，相分似質，名緣分別所起事境。緣滅、道諦及他地者，相分與質不相似故，名緣分別所起名境。

Those that take their own ground as object have an image aspect resembling the original object, and are called objects of things arising from discrimination. Those that take the truths of cessation and the path and those of other grounds have an image aspect not resembling the original object, and are called objects of names arising from discrimination.

餘門分別如理應思。

The other categories of analysis should be considered according to principle.

已說根本六煩惱相，諸隨煩惱其相云何？

Having explained the six root afflictions, what are the characteristics of the secondary afflictions?

頌曰：

The verse says:

隨煩惱謂：忿、恨、覆、惱、嫉、慳、

The secondary afflictions are said to be wrath, resentment, concealment, vexation, envy, miserliness,

１３誑、諂與害、憍、無慚與無愧、

13. deceit, flattery, harmfulness, arrogance, shamelessness and lack of embarrassment,

掉舉與惛沈、不信並懈怠、

restlessness and torpor, lack of faith and laziness,

１４放逸及失念、散亂不正知。

14. heedlessness, forgetfulness, distraction, and lack of clear awareness.

論曰：唯是煩惱分位差別、等流性，故名隨煩惱。

The treatise says: they are only distinctions of stages of the afflictions and their outflows, and so they are called secondary afflictions.

此二十種，類別有三：謂忿等十，各別起故，名小隨煩惱；無慚等二，遍不善故，名中隨煩惱；掉舉等八，遍染心故，名大隨煩惱。

These twenty are of three kinds: wrath and the other nine arise separately, and are called minor secondary afflictions; shamelessness and the other one are present in all unwholesome states, and are called middle secondary afflictions; restlessness and the other seven are present in all defiled minds, and are called major secondary afflictions.

云何為忿？依對現前不饒益境，憤發為性；能障不忿，執杖為業。謂懷忿者，多發暴惡身表業故。此即瞋恚一分為體，離瞋無別忿相用故。

What is wrath? Based on a present unfavorable object, its nature is anger and outburst; it can obstruct non-wrath, and its function is taking up a weapon. That is to say, one who harbors wrath mostly produces violent and evil bodily acts. This has a portion of hatred as its substance; apart from hatred there is no separate characteristic or function of wrath.

云何為恨？由忿為先，懷惡不捨，結怨為性；能障不恨，熱惱為業。謂結恨者，不能含忍，恆熱惱故。此亦瞋恚一分為體，離瞋無別恨相用故。

What is resentment? With wrath as the precondition, its nature is harboring ill will and not letting go, tying up grievance; it can obstruct non-resentment, and its function is burning torment. That is to say, one who ties up resentment cannot be forbearing and is always burning and tormented. This too has a portion of hatred as its substance; apart from hatred there is no separate characteristic or function of resentment.

云何為覆？於自作罪，恐失利、譽，隱藏為性；能障不覆，悔惱為業。謂覆罪者，後必悔惱，不安隱故。

What is concealment? With regard to sins one has committed, fearing loss of gain and reputation, its nature is hiding; it can obstruct non-concealment, and its function is regret and torment. That is to say, one who conceals sins will later surely regret and be tormented, being unpeaceful.

有義：此覆，痴一分攝。論唯說此痴一分故，不懼當苦，覆自罪故。

One view: this concealment is included in a portion of delusion. The treatise says only that it is a portion of delusion, since it does not fear future suffering and conceals one's own sins.

有義：此覆，貪、痴一分攝，亦恐失利譽，覆自罪故。論據麁顯，唯說痴分，如說掉舉是貪分故，然說掉舉遍諸染心，不可執為唯是貪分。

One view: this concealment is included in portions of greed and delusion, since it also fears the loss of gain and reputation and conceals one's own sins. The treatise speaks on the basis of the coarse and evident, saying only a portion of delusion, as it says restlessness is a portion of greed; but since it is said that restlessness is present in all defiled minds, one cannot hold it to be only a portion of greed.

云何為惱？忿、恨為先，追觸暴熱，佷戾為性；能障不惱，䖧螫為業。謂追往惡，觸現違緣，心便佷戾，多發囂暴、兇鄙麁言，䖧螫他故。此亦瞋恚一分為體，離瞋無別惱相用故。

What is vexation? With wrath and resentment as the precondition, pursuing and touching, violent heat, its nature is savageness; it can obstruct non-vexation, and its function is stinging like a gadfly. That is to say, pursuing past wrongs and touching on present adverse conditions, the mind becomes savage, often producing clamorous, violent, fierce, and vulgar speech, stinging others like a gadfly. This too has a portion of hatred as its substance; apart from hatred there is no separate characteristic or function of vexation.

云何為嫉？徇自名利，不耐他榮，妬忌為性；能障不嫉，憂慼為業。謂嫉妬者聞見他榮，深懷憂慼，不安隱故。此亦瞋恚一分為體，離瞋無別嫉相用故。

What is envy? Being attached to one's own name and gain, unable to bear another's glory, its nature is jealousy; it can obstruct non-envy, and its function is worry and grief. That is to say, the envious, hearing and seeing another's glory, deeply harbors worry and grief and is unpeaceful. This too has a portion of hatred as its substance; apart from hatred there is no separate characteristic or function of envy.

云何為慳？耽著財、法，不能慧捨，秘悋為性；能障不慳，鄙畜為業。謂慳悋者，心多鄙澁，畜積財法，不能捨故。此即貪愛一分為體，離貪無別慳相用故。

What is miserliness? Being attached to wealth and the Dharma and unable to give them up wisely, its nature is secretive stinginess; it can obstruct non-miserliness, and its function is petty hoarding. That is to say, the miserly mind is mostly petty and tight, hoarding wealth and the Dharma and unable to give them up. This has a portion of craving as its substance; apart from greed there is no separate characteristic or function of miserliness.

云何為誑？為獲利譽，矯現有德，詭詐為性；能障不誑，邪命為業。謂矯誑者，心懷異謀，多現不實邪命事故。此即貪、痴一分為體，離二無別誑相用故。

What is deceit? For the sake of obtaining gain and reputation, feigning virtue, its nature is trickery; it can obstruct non-deceit, and its function is wrong livelihood. That is to say, the deceitful harbor other schemes in the mind and often show unreal wrong-livelihood practices. This has portions of greed and delusion as its substance; apart from these two there is no separate characteristic or function of deceit.

云何為諂？為網他故，矯設異儀，險、曲為性；能障不諂教誨為業。謂諂曲者，為網帽他，曲順時宜，矯設方便，為取他意或藏己失。不任師、友正教誨故，此亦貪、痴一分為體，離二無別諂相用故。

What is flattery? For the sake of ensnaring others, falsely setting up different demeanors, its nature is dangerous crookedness; it can obstruct non-flattery and the teaching of instruction as its function. That is to say, the flatterer, in order to cover and deceive others (ensnaring and deceiving them), crookedly conforms to the times and feigns expedient means, in order to obtain others' favor or hide his own faults. He cannot rely on the correct instruction of teachers and friends. This too has portions of greed and delusion as its substance; apart from these two there is no separate characteristic or function of flattery.

云何為害？於諸有情，心無悲愍，損惱為性；能障不害，逼惱為業。謂有害者，逼惱他故。此亦瞋恚一分為體，離瞋無別害相用故。瞋、害別相，準善應說。

What is harmfulness? Toward all sentient beings, with a mind without compassion, its nature is injury and torment; it can obstruct non-harmfulness, and its function is oppression. That is to say, the harmful oppress others. This too has a portion of hatred as its substance; apart from hatred there is no separate characteristic or function of harmfulness. The distinction between hatred and harmfulness should be explained by analogy with the wholesome ones.

云何為憍？於自盛事，深生染著，醉傲為性；能障不憍，染依為業。謂憍醉者，生長一切雜染法故。此亦貪愛一分為體，離貪無別憍相用故。

What is arrogance? Toward one's own flourishing circumstances, deeply attached, its nature is drunken pride; it can obstruct non-arrogance, and its function is being the basis of defilement. That is to say, the arrogantly intoxicated grow all defiled phenomena. This too has a portion of craving as its substance; apart from greed there is no separate characteristic or function of arrogance.

云何無慚？不顧自、法，輕拒賢善為性；能障礙慚，生長惡行為業。謂於自、法無所顧者，輕拒賢善，不恥過惡，障慚生長，諸惡行故。

What is shamelessness? Not respecting oneself or the Dharma, its nature is lightly rejecting the worthy and good; it can obstruct shame, and its function is growing evil conduct. That is to say, those who have no regard for oneself or the Dharma lightly reject the worthy and good, are not ashamed of faults and evil, and obstruct shame and grow all evil conduct.

云何無愧？不顧世間，崇重暴惡為性；能障礙愧，生長惡行為業。謂於世間無所顧者，崇重暴惡，不恥過罪，障愧生長，諸惡行故。

What is lack of embarrassment? Not caring about the world and honoring violence and evil, its nature; it can obstruct embarrassment, and its function is growing evil conduct. That is to say, those who have no regard for the world honor violence and evil, are not ashamed of faults and sins, and obstruct embarrassment and grow all evil conduct.

不恥過惡，是二通相；故諸聖教，假說為體。

Not being ashamed of faults and evil is the common characteristic of these two; so the holy teachings provisionally speak of it as their substance.

若執不恥為二別相，則應此二體無差別。由斯二法應不俱生，非受、想等有此義故；若待自、他，立二別者，應非實有，便違聖教；若許此二實而別起，復違論說俱遍惡心。

If one grasps not being ashamed as the particular characteristic of these two, then the two would have no difference in substance. Then these two dharmas should not arise together, since feeling, perception, and so on do not have this meaning; if one waits on oneself and others to set up the distinction between these two, they should not be really existent, which would contradict the holy teachings; and if one allows that these two are real and arise distinctly, it would again contradict the treatise statement that both are present in all evil minds.

不善心時，隨緣何境，皆有輕拒善及崇重惡義故，此二法俱遍惡心，所緣不異，無別起失。

When the mind is unwholesome, whatever object it takes, it has the meaning of lightly rejecting the good and honoring evil, so these two dharmas are both present in all evil minds with no difference in object, and there is no fault of arising separately.

然諸聖教說不顧自、他者，自、法名自，世間名他。或即此中拒善、崇惡，於己益損，名自、他故。而論說為貪等分者，是彼等流，非即彼性。

But the holy teachings say one has no regard for oneself or others; "oneself" and the Dharma are called self, and the world is called other. Or it is just here, rejecting the good and honoring evil, with respect to the benefit or harm to oneself, that it is called self and others. As for the treatise's saying they are portions of greed and the like, they are outflows of those, not those natures themselves.

云何掉舉？令心於境不寂靜為性；能障行捨、奢摩他為業。

What is restlessness? Making the mind not tranquil with regard to its object is its nature; it can obstruct equanimity and shamatha (calming) as its function.

有義：掉舉貪一分攝，論唯說此是貪分故，此由憶昔樂事生故。

One view: restlessness is included in a portion of greed; the treatise says only that it is a portion of greed, since it arises from recalling past pleasures.

有義：掉舉非唯貪攝，論說掉舉遍染心故，又掉舉相謂不寂靜，說是煩惱共相攝故，掉舉離此無別相故。雖依一切煩惱假立，而貪位增，說為貪分。

One view: restlessness is not included only in greed; the treatise says restlessness is present in all defiled minds, and the characteristic of restlessness, namely not being tranquil, is said to be included in the common characteristic of the afflictions, so restlessness has no separate characteristic apart from this. Though it is provisionally established in reliance on all afflictions, in the stage where greed increases it is said to be a portion of greed.

有義：掉舉別有自性，遍諸染心，如不信等，非說他分，體便非實，勿不信等亦假有故。而論說為世俗有者，如睡眠等，隨他相說。掉舉別相，謂即囂動，令俱生法，不寂靜故。若離煩惱無別此相，不應別說障奢摩他，故不寂靜非此別相。

One view: restlessness has a separate nature of its own and is present in all defiled minds, like lack of faith and the others; if it is not said to be a portion of another, its substance is not unreal, lest lack of faith and the others also be provisionally existent. As for the treatise saying that it exists conventionally, like sleep and the like, this is said following another's characteristic. The distinct characteristic of restlessness is exactly noisy agitation, making coexisting dharmas not tranquil. If apart from the afflictions there is no separate characteristic of this kind, one should not separately say it obstructs shamatha, so not being tranquil is not its distinct characteristic.

云何惛沈？令心於境，無堪任為性；能障輕安、毘缽舍那為業。

What is torpor? Making the mind unable to function with regard to its object is its nature; it can obstruct pliancy and vipashyana (insight) as its function.

有義：惛沈痴一分攝，論唯說此是痴分故，惛昧沈重是痴相故。

One view: torpor is included in a portion of delusion; the treatise says only that it is a portion of delusion, since dullness and heaviness are the characteristics of delusion.

有義：惛沈非但痴攝，謂無堪任是惛沈相，一切煩惱皆無堪任，離此無別惛沈相故。雖依一切煩惱假立，而痴相增，但說痴分。

One view: torpor is not included only in delusion; being unable to function is the characteristic of torpor, and all afflictions are unable to function, so apart from this there is no separate characteristic of torpor. Though it is provisionally established in reliance on all afflictions, in the stage where the characteristic of delusion increases it is said only to be a portion of delusion.

有義：惛沈別有自性，雖名痴分而是等流，如不信等，非即痴攝。隨他相說名世俗有，如睡眠等，是實有性。惛沈別相，謂即瞢重，令俱生法，無堪任故。若離煩惱無別惛沈相，不應別說障毘缽舍那故。無堪任非此別相，此與痴相有差別者，謂痴於境，迷闇為相，正障無痴，而非瞢重，惛沈於境瞢重為相，正障輕安而非迷闇。

One view: torpor has a separate nature of its own; though called a portion of delusion, it is an outflow, like lack of faith and the others, and is not simply included in delusion. Being said following another's characteristic, it is called conventionally existent, like sleep and the like, and is of a real nature. The distinct characteristic of torpor is exactly dimness and heaviness, making coexisting dharmas unable to function. If apart from the afflictions there is no separate characteristic of torpor, one should not separately say it obstructs vipashyana. Being unable to function is not its distinct characteristic; and this differs from the characteristic of delusion: delusion toward its object has confusion and darkness as its characteristic and directly obstructs non-delusion, but is not dim heaviness; torpor toward its object has dim heaviness as its characteristic and directly obstructs pliancy but is not confusion and darkness.

云何不信？於實、德、能不忍樂欲，心穢為性；能障淨信，惰依為業。謂不信者多懈怠故。

What is lack of faith? Not accepting or delighting in the real, the virtuous, and the capable, its nature is a defiled mind; it can obstruct pure faith, and its function is being the basis of idleness. That is to say, the faithless are mostly lazy.

不信三相，翻信應知。然諸染法，各有別相，唯此不信，自相渾濁，復能渾濁餘心、心所，如極穢物，自穢、穢他，是故說此心穢為性。由不信故，於實、德、能不忍樂欲，非別有性，若於餘事，邪忍樂欲，是此因果，非此自性。

The three aspects of lack of faith should be understood as the reverse of faith. But all defiled dharmas each have separate characteristics, and only this lack of faith has a self-nature that is turbid and can also make the other minds and mental factors turbid, like an extremely foul thing, being itself foul and fouling others, so it is said that its nature is a defiled mind. Because of lack of faith, not accepting or delighting in the real, the virtuous, and the capable is not a separate nature; if toward other matters one wrongly accepts and delights, this is its cause and effect and not its own nature.

云何懈怠？於善、惡品修、斷事中，懶惰為性；能障精進，增染為業。謂懈怠者，滋長染故。於諸染事而策勤者，亦名懈怠，退善法故。於無記事而策勤者，於諸善品無進、退故，是欲、勝解，非別有性。如於無記，忍可樂欲，非淨、非染，無信不信。

What is laziness? In the practice and elimination of wholesome and unwholesome categories, its nature is indolence; it can obstruct diligence, and its function is increasing defilement. That is to say, the lazy grow defilement. Making effort at various defiled things is also called laziness, since it causes wholesome dharmas to decline. Making effort at indeterminate matters is neither advance nor decline with regard to the wholesome categories, and so it is desire and resolve and not a separate nature. Like toward the indeterminate, acceptance and delight is neither pure nor defiled, with neither faith nor lack of faith.

云何放逸？於染、淨品，不能防、修，縱蕩為性；障不放逸，增惡損善所依為業。謂由懈怠及貪、瞋、痴，不能防修染淨品法，總名放逸，非別有體。雖慢、疑等亦有此能，而方彼四，勢用微劣，障三善根、遍策法故。推究此相，如不放逸。

What is heedlessness? With regard to defiled and pure categories, unable to guard against or cultivate, its nature is dissipation; it obstructs heedfulness, and its function is being the basis of increasing evil and diminishing good. That is to say, being unable to guard against and cultivate defiled and pure dharmas due to laziness and greed, anger, and delusion is called heedlessness in general, and it is not a separate substance. Though pride, doubt, and the like also have this ability, their force and function are weak compared with those four, since they obstruct the three wholesome roots and are pervasive in urging dharmas. Inquiring into this characteristic, it is like heedfulness.

云何失念？於諸所緣，不能明記為性；能障正念、散亂所依為業。謂失念者，心散亂故。

What is forgetfulness? With regard to all objects, being unable to remember clearly is its nature; it can obstruct right mindfulness, and its function is being the basis of distraction. That is to say, the forgetful have scattered minds.

有義：失念念一分攝，說是煩惱相應念故。

One view: forgetfulness is included in a portion of mindfulness, since it is said to be mindfulness associated with afflictions.

有義：失念痴一分攝，《瑜伽》說此是痴分故，痴令念失，故名失念。

One view: forgetfulness is included in a portion of delusion; the Yogacarabhumi says it is a portion of delusion, since delusion makes mindfulness lost, and so it is called forgetfulness.

有義：失念俱一分攝，由前二文影略說故，論復說此遍染心故。

One view: forgetfulness is all included as a portion, being said briefly from the two earlier passages, and the treatise also says it is present in all defiled minds.

云何散亂？於諸所緣，令心流蕩為性；能障正定，惡慧所依為業。謂散亂者發惡慧故。

What is distraction? With regard to all objects, making the mind flow and wander is its nature; it can obstruct right concentration, and its function is being the basis of bad wisdom. That is to say, the distracted give rise to bad wisdom.

有義：散亂痴一分攝，《瑜伽》說此是痴分故。

One view: distraction is included in a portion of delusion; the Yogacarabhumi says it is a portion of delusion.

有義：散亂貪、瞋、痴攝，《集論》等說是三分故，說痴分者，遍染心故，謂貪、瞋、痴令心流蕩，勝餘法故，說為散亂。

One view: distraction is included in greed, anger, and delusion; the Compendium and others say it is three portions, and the saying about a portion of delusion is because it is present in all defiled minds, since greed, anger, and delusion make the mind flow and wander, surpassing other dharmas, and so it is called distraction.

有義：散亂別有自體，說三分者是彼等流，如無慚等，非即彼攝，隨他相說名世俗有。散亂別相，謂即躁擾，令俱生法皆流蕩故。若離彼三，無別自體，不應別說障三摩地。掉舉、散亂二用何別？彼令易解，此令易緣，雖一剎那，解、緣無易，而於相續有易義故。染汙心時，由掉亂力，常應念念易解、易緣，或由念等力所制伏，如繫猨猴有暫時住，故掉與亂，俱遍染心。

One view: distraction has a separate substance of its own; saying it is three portions refers to outflows of those, like shamelessness and the like, and is not simply included in them; said following another's characteristic, it is called conventionally existent. The distinct characteristic of distraction is restless agitation, making coexisting dharmas all flow and wander. If apart from the three there is no separate substance, one should not separately say it obstructs samadhi. What is the difference between the functions of restlessness and distraction? That makes understanding change; this makes the object change. Though in a single instant there is no change of understanding or object, there is a sense of change over the continuum. When the mind is defiled, because of the force of restlessness and distraction it should constantly change understanding and object moment after moment, or is restrained by the power of mindfulness and the like, like a tethered monkey having a brief rest, and so restlessness and distraction are both present in defiled minds.

云何不正知？於所觀境，謬解為性；能障正知、毀犯為業。謂不正知者，多所毀犯故。

What is lack of clear awareness? Toward the object contemplated, its nature is wrong understanding; it can obstruct clear awareness, and its function is violation. That is to say, those without clear awareness often commit violations.

有義：不正知慧一分攝，說是煩惱相應慧故。

One view: lack of clear awareness is included in a portion of wisdom, being said to be wisdom associated with afflictions.

有義：不正知痴一分攝，《瑜伽》說此是痴分故，令知不正，名不正知。

One view: lack of clear awareness is included in a portion of delusion; the Yogacarabhumi says it is a portion of delusion, since it makes knowing incorrect and so is called lack of clear awareness.

有義：不正知俱一分攝，由前二文，影略說故，論復說此遍染心故。

One view: lack of clear awareness is all included as a portion, being said briefly from the two earlier passages, and the treatise also says it is present in all defiled minds.

「與」、「並」、「及」言顯隨煩惱非唯二十，《雜事》等說貪等多種隨煩惱故。

The words "and," "together with," and "as well as" show that the secondary afflictions are not only twenty, since the Miscellaneous Matters and others speak of many secondary afflictions of greed and so on.

隨煩惱名，亦攝煩惱，是前煩惱等流性故；煩惱同類餘染汙法，但名隨煩惱，非煩惱攝故。

The name secondary afflictions also includes the afflictions, being outflows of the earlier afflictions; other defiled dharmas of the same kind as the afflictions are called only secondary afflictions and are not included in the afflictions.

唯說二十隨煩惱者，謂非煩惱，唯染、麁故；此餘染法，或此分位，或此等流，皆此所攝。隨其類別，如理應知。

Only twenty secondary afflictions are spoken of, meaning that they are not afflictions but only defiled and coarse; the other defiled dharmas are either stages of these or outflows of these, and are all included in them. According to their kinds, they should be understood according to principle.

如是二十隨煩惱中，小十、大三，定是假有；無慚、無愧、不信、懈怠定是實有；教、理成故。掉舉、惛沈、散亂三種，有義是假，有義是實。所引理、教，如前應知。

Among these twenty secondary afflictions, the ten minor and the three major are definitely provisionally existent; shamelessness, lack of embarrassment, lack of faith, and laziness are definitely really existent, being established by teaching and reason. Restlessness, torpor, and distraction, one view takes as provisional and another as real. The reasoning and teachings cited should be understood as before.

二十皆通俱生、分別，隨二煩惱勢力起故。

All twenty extend to both innate and discriminated types, arising by following the force of the two kinds of affliction.

此二十中，小十，展轉定不俱起。互相違故，行相麁猛，各為主故。

Among these twenty, the ten minor definitely do not arise together with one another, since they conflict with each other, their characteristics are coarse and fierce, and each is the principal.

中二，一切不善心俱，隨應皆得小、大俱起。論說：大八遍諸染心。展轉小、中，皆容俱起。

The two middle ones are accompanied by all unwholesome minds and can arise together with the minor and major as appropriate. The treatise says: the eight major are present in all defiled minds. Among them, minor and middle ones can all arise together.

有處說：六遍染心者，惛、掉增時，不俱起故。有處但說：五遍染者，以惛、掉等違唯善故。

In some places it is said that six are present in all defiled minds, since when torpor and restlessness increase, they do not arise together. In some places only five are said to be present in all defiled minds, because torpor, restlessness, and the like conflict only with the wholesome.

此唯染故，非第八俱。第七識中唯有大八，取捨差別，如上應知。第六識俱容有一切。小十麁猛，五識中無。中、大相通，五識容有。

These are only defiled, so they are not accompanied by the eighth consciousness. In the seventh consciousness there are only the eight major, with differences of taking and leaving as understood above. The sixth consciousness may be accompanied by all. The ten minor are coarse and fierce and are absent in the five consciousnesses. The middle and major are mutually shared, and may be present in the five consciousnesses.

由斯中、大五受相應。

Therefore the middle and major correspond with the five feelings.

有義：小十除三，忿等唯喜、憂、捨三受相應。諂、誑、憍三，四俱，除苦。

One view: of the ten minor, excluding three, wrath and the others correspond only with the three feelings of joy, sorrow, and equanimity. The three of flattery, deceit, and arrogance are accompanied by four, excluding pain.

有義：忿等四俱，除樂；諂、誑、憍三，五受俱起。意有苦受，前已說故。

One view: wrath and the other four are accompanied by four, excluding pleasure; the three of flattery, deceit, and arrogance arise together with five feelings, since mental pain exists, as said earlier.

此受俱相，如煩惱說。

The way these feelings accompany them is as explained for the afflictions.

實義如是，若隨麁相，忿、恨、惱、嫉、害憂、捨俱；覆、慳喜、捨；餘三增樂。中、大隨麁，亦如實義。

The true meaning is thus; if following the coarse aspect, wrath, resentment, vexation, envy, and harmfulness are accompanied by sorrow and equanimity; concealment and miserliness by joy and equanimity; the other three increase pleasure. The middle and major following the coarse aspect are also like the true meaning.

如是二十，與別境五，皆容俱起，不相違故。

Thus the twenty and the five object-specific factors may all arise together, since they do not conflict.

染念、染慧，雖非念、慧俱，而痴分者，亦得相應故。念亦緣現、曾習類境。忿亦得緣剎那過去，故忿與念，亦得相應。染定起時，心亦躁擾，故亂與定相應無失。

Defiled mindfulness and defiled wisdom, though not accompanied by mindfulness or wisdom, as portions of delusion also correspond. Mindfulness also takes present and previously practiced kinds of objects. Wrath can also take an object that has passed an instant ago, so wrath and mindfulness also correspond. When defiled concentration arises, the mind is also restless and agitated, so there is no fault in distraction corresponding with concentration.

中二、大八十煩惱俱。

The two middle and eight major are accompanied by the ten afflictions.

小十定非見、疑俱起。此相麁動，彼審細故。忿等五法，容慢、痴俱，非貪、恚並，是瞋分故。慳痴、慢俱，非貪、瞋並，是貪分故。憍唯痴俱，與慢解別，是貪分故。覆、誑與諂，貪、痴、慢俱。行相無違，貪、痴分故。

The ten minor definitely do not arise together with views and doubt. This one is coarse and moving, and those are careful and subtle. The five dharmas of wrath and so on may be accompanied by pride and delusion, but do not accompany greed and hatred, being portions of anger. Miserliness is accompanied by delusion and pride but does not accompany greed and anger, being a portion of greed. Arrogance is accompanied only by delusion, and differs from pride in understanding, being a portion of greed. Concealment, deceit, and flattery are accompanied by greed, delusion, and pride. Their characteristics do not conflict, being portions of greed and delusion.

小七、中二，唯不善攝。小三、大八，亦通無記。

The seven minor and two middle are included only in the unwholesome. The three minor and eight major also extend to the indeterminate.

小七、中二，唯欲界攝。誑、諂欲、色，餘通三界。

The seven minor and two middle are included only in the desire realm. Deceit and flattery are in the desire and form realms; the others extend through three realms.

生在下地，容起上十一。耽定於他，起憍、誑、諂故。

One born in a lower ground may give rise to the upper eleven, since one who is attached to concentration gives rise to arrogance, deceit, and flattery toward others.

若生上地，起下後十。邪見愛俱，容起彼故。小十，生上無由起下。非正潤生，及謗滅故。

If born in an upper ground, one gives rise to the lower last ten. Wrong view and craving accompany them, and may give rise to those. The ten minor: one born above has no way to give rise to the lower, since there is no moistening rebirth proper and no denying of extinction.

中二、大八，下亦緣上。上緣貪等，相應起故。

The two middle and eight major, the lower also take the upper as object. They arise in association with greed and the like taking the upper as object.

有義：小十，下不緣上。行相麁近，不遠取故。

One view: the ten minor, the lower do not take the upper as object. Their characteristics are coarse and near and do not reach far.

有義：嫉等亦得緣上。於勝地法，生嫉等故。

One view: envy and the like can also take the upper as object, since they give rise to envy and the like toward dharmas of superior grounds.

大八諂、誑，上亦緣下。下緣慢等，相應起故。梵於釋子，起諂、誑故。憍不緣下，非所恃故。

The eight major, flattery and deceit, the upper also take the lower as object. They arise in association with pride and the like taking the lower as object. Brahma gives rise to flattery and deceit toward the sons of Shakra. Arrogance does not take the lower as object, since it is not what is relied upon.

二十皆非學、無學攝。此但是染，彼唯淨故。

All twenty are not included in learner or non-learner. These are only defiled, and those are only pure.

後十，唯通見、修所斷，與二煩惱相應起故。見所斷者，隨迷諦相，或總、或別，煩惱俱生，故隨所應，皆通四諦。迷諦親疎等，皆如煩惱說。

The latter ten extend only to what is eliminated by seeing and by cultivation, since they arise in association with the two kinds of affliction. Those eliminated by seeing, following the aspect of the truths they confuse, whether general or specific, are innate with the afflictions, and so as appropriate all extend to the four truths. The nearness and distance of confusion about the truths and so on are all explained like the afflictions.

前十，有義：唯修所斷，緣麁事境，任運生故。有義：亦通見、修所斷。依二煩惱勢力起故。緣他見等，生忿等故。見所斷者，隨所應緣，總、別惑力，皆通四諦。此中有義：忿等但緣迷諦惑生，非親迷諦。行相麁淺，不深取故。有義：嫉等亦親迷諦，於滅、道等生嫉等故。

As for the first ten, one view: they are eliminated only by cultivation, taking coarse objects and arising spontaneously. One view: they also extend to what is eliminated by seeing and cultivation, since they arise relying on the force of the two afflictions, and wrath and the others arise from taking others' views and so on. Those eliminated by seeing, according to what they take as object, by the power of general and specific delusions, all extend to the four truths. Here one view: wrath and the others arise only from taking as object delusions that confuse the truths, and do not directly confuse the truths, since their characteristics are coarse and shallow and do not grasp deeply. One view: envy and the like also directly confuse the truths, since envy and the like arise toward cessation and the path and so on.

然忿等十，但緣有事，要託本質，方得生故。緣有漏等，準上應知。

But the ten, wrath and the others, take only existent things as object, and must rely on an original object to arise. Taking things with outflows and so on as object should be understood by analogy with the above.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Bodhisattva Dharmapala and others.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang by imperial command.

已說二十隨煩惱相。不定有四，其相云何？

The characteristics of the twenty secondary afflictions have been explained. What are the characteristics of the four unfixed ones?

頌曰：

The verse says:

「不定謂悔、眠、尋、伺，二各二。」

"The unfixed are said to be regret, sleep, initial thought, and sustained thought; each of the two is of two kinds."

論曰：悔、眠、尋、伺於善、染等皆不定故，非如觸等定遍心故，非如欲等定遍地故，立不定名。

The treatise says: regret, sleep, initial thought, and sustained thought are unfixed with respect to wholesome, defiled, and other kinds; they are not like contact and the others which definitely pervade the mind, nor like desire and the others which definitely pervade the grounds, so they are established as unfixed.

悔謂惡作，惡所作業，追悔為性，障止為業。此即於果假立因名，先惡所作業，後方追悔故；悔先不作，亦惡作攝，如追悔言：我先不作如是事業，是我惡作。

Regret is remorse: disliking the deed one has done, its nature is repentance, and its function is obstructing calm. This is provisionally named after the cause by way of the effect, since one first dislikes the deed done and only afterward repents; regret about not having done something earlier is also included in remorse, as in repenting and saying: it was my wrongdoing that I did not do such a deed earlier.

眠謂睡眠，令身不自在，昧、略為性，障觀為業。謂睡眠位，身不自在，心極闇劣，一門轉故。昧簡在定，略別寤時，令顯睡眠非無體用。有無心位假立此名，如餘蓋纏心相應故。

Sleep is slumber: making the body not at ease, its nature is obscurity and briefness, and its function is obstructing insight. That is to say, in the stage of sleep the body is not at ease, the mind is extremely dim and weak, and turns through a single door. "Obscurity" distinguishes it from concentration; "briefness" distinguishes it from waking, to show that sleep is not without substance and function. This name is provisionally established in the stage without mind, like the other hindrances and bonds that correspond with the mind.

有義：此二唯痴為體，說隨煩惱及痴分故。

One view: these two have only delusion as their substance, since they are said to be secondary afflictions and portions of delusion.

有義：不然，亦通善故。應說此二染痴為體；淨即無痴，論依染分說隨煩惱及痴分攝。

One view: not so, since they also extend to the wholesome. One should say that these two when defiled have delusion as their substance; when pure, it is non-delusion, and the treatise speaks in terms of the defiled portion, saying they are included in secondary afflictions and portions of delusion.

有義：此說亦不應理，無記非痴、無痴性故。應說惡作思、慧為體，明瞭思擇所作業故。睡眠合用思、想為體，思、想種種夢境相故。論俱說為世俗有故。彼染汙者是痴等流，如不信等，說為痴分。

One view: this saying is also not reasonable, since the indeterminate is not of the nature of delusion or non-delusion. One should say that remorse has intention and wisdom as its substance, since it clearly discriminates the deed done. Sleep combines intention and perception as its substance, since intention and perception form the various dream images. The treatise says both exist conventionally. The defiled ones are outflows of delusion, like lack of faith and the others, and are said to be portions of delusion.

有義：彼說理亦不然，非思、慧、想纏彼性故。應說此二各別有體，與餘心所行相別故。隨痴相說，名世俗有。

One view: their reasoning is also not so, since the nature is not that of intention, wisdom, perception, or binding. One should say that these two each have their own substance, differentiated by the characteristics of the other mental factors. Said following the characteristic of delusion, they are called conventionally existent.

尋謂尋求，令心怱遽於意言境，麁轉為性；伺謂伺察，令心怱遽於意言境，細轉為性。此二俱以安、不安住身心分位所依為業。並用思、慧一分為體，於意言境不深推度及深推度，義類別故，若離思、慧，尋、伺二種體類差別不可得故。

Initial thought is seeking: making the mind hasty, with regard to the object of mental speech, its nature is coarse turning; sustained thought is examining: making the mind hasty, with regard to the object of mental speech, its nature is subtle turning. Both have as their function being the basis of the stage in which body and mind are at ease or not at ease. Both use a portion of intention and wisdom as their substance, since toward the object of mental speech they are the discrimination of kinds, with respect to not deeply inferring and deeply inferring; apart from intention and wisdom, no difference in the substance and kind of the two, initial and sustained thought, can be found.

「二各二」者，有義：尋、伺各有染、淨二類差別。

"Each of the two is of two kinds": one view: initial thought and sustained thought each have two kinds, defiled and pure.

有義：此釋不應正理，悔、眠亦有染、淨二故。

One view: this explanation is not in accord with right reason, since regret and sleep also have two kinds, defiled and pure.

應說如前諸染心所，有是煩惱、隨煩惱性，此二各有不善、無記，或復各有纏及隨眠。

One should say that, as with the earlier defiled mental factors, some are of the nature of afflictions and secondary afflictions, and these two each have the unwholesome and the indeterminate, or else each have bonds and latent tendencies.

有義：彼釋亦不應理，不定四後有此言故。

One view: their explanation is also not reasonable, since these words come after the four unfixed.

應言「二」者顯二種二：一謂悔、眠；二謂尋、伺。此二二種，種類各別，故一「二」言，顯二二種。

One should say that "two" shows two kinds of two: one is regret and sleep; the other is initial and sustained thought. These two kinds of two differ in kind, so a single word "two" shows two kinds of two.

此各有二，謂染、不染。

Each of these has two, namely defiled and not defiled.

非如善、染各唯一故。或唯簡染，故說此言，有亦說為隨煩惱故。為顯不定義，說「二各二」言，故置此言深為有用。

This is unlike the wholesome and the defiled, each only one. Or it only distinguishes the defiled, so this statement is made, since those that exist are also said to be secondary afflictions. In order to show the meaning of being unfixed, the words "each of the two is of two kinds" are said, so setting up this statement is very useful.

四中尋、伺定是假有，思、慧合成，聖所說故。

Among the four, initial and sustained thought are definitely provisionally existent, being combined from intention and wisdom, as spoken by the saints.

悔、眠，有義：亦是假有，《瑜伽》說為世俗有故。

Regret and sleep, one view: also provisionally existent, since the Yogacarabhumi says they exist conventionally.

有義：此二是實物有，唯後二種說假有故。世俗有言隨他相說，非顯前二定是假有，又如內種體雖是實，而論亦說世俗有故。

One view: these two are really existent things, and only the latter two are said to be provisionally existent. The word "conventionally existent" is said following another's characteristic and does not show that the former two are definitely provisional, just as the substance of the inner seeds is real, yet the treatise also says conventionally existent.

四中尋、伺定不相應，體類是同，麁、細異故。依於尋、伺有染、離染立三地別，不依彼種現起有無，故無雜亂。

Among the four, initial and sustained thought definitely do not correspond with each other; their substance and kind are the same, differing only in coarseness and subtlety. Based on initial and sustained thought, the distinction of three grounds is established by being defiled or free from defilement, not relying on the presence or absence of their manifestation, so there is no confusion.

俱與前二容互相應，前二亦有互相應義。

All may correspond with the former two, and the former two also have the meaning of corresponding with each other.

四皆不與第七、八俱，義如前說；悔、眠唯與第六識俱，非五法故。

None of the four is accompanied by the seventh or eighth consciousness, with the meaning as explained earlier; regret and sleep are accompanied only by the sixth consciousness, not being the five dharmas.

有義：尋、伺亦五識俱，論說：五識有尋、伺故。

One view: initial and sustained thought are also accompanied by the five consciousnesses, since the treatise says the five consciousnesses have initial and sustained thought.

又說：尋、伺即七分別，謂有相等。《雜集》復言：任運分別謂五識故。

It also says: initial and sustained thought are the seven discriminations, namely that with characteristics and so on. The Compendium says further: spontaneous discrimination refers to the five consciousnesses.

有義：尋、伺唯意識俱。

One view: initial and sustained thought are accompanied only by mental consciousness.

論說：尋求、伺察等法皆是意識不共法故。又說：尋、伺憂、喜相應，曾不說與苦、樂俱故。捨受遍故，可不待說。何緣不說與苦、樂俱？雖初靜慮有意地樂，而不離喜，總說喜名；雖純苦處有意地苦，而似憂故，總說為憂。又說：尋、伺以名身等義為所緣，非五識身以名身等義為境故。

The treatise says: seeking, examining, and the like are all unshared dharmas of the mental consciousness. It also says: initial and sustained thought correspond with sorrow and joy, and it never says they are accompanied by pain or pleasure. Equanimity is pervasive, so it need not be said. Why is it not said they are accompanied by pain and pleasure? Though the first concentration has mental pleasure, it does not leave joy, and so is generally called joy; though in places of pure suffering there is mental pain, it resembles sorrow and so is generally called sorrow. It also says: initial and sustained thought take the meaning of name-body and so on as their object, which is not the case for the five consciousness bodies taking the meaning of name-body and so on as object.

然說五識有尋、伺者，顯多由彼起，非說彼相應。《雜集》所言：任運分別謂五識者，彼與《瑜伽》所說分別，義各有異：彼說任運即是五識，《瑜伽》說此是五識俱分別意識相應尋、伺。

But as for saying the five consciousnesses have initial and sustained thought, it shows that they mostly arise through those, not that they correspond with them. As for what the Compendium says, that spontaneous discrimination refers to the five consciousnesses, it differs in meaning from the discrimination spoken of in the Yogacarabhumi: the former says spontaneity is the five consciousnesses, while the Yogacarabhumi says this is the initial and sustained thought that correspond with the discriminating mental consciousness accompanied by the five consciousnesses.

故彼所引為證不成，由此五識定無尋、伺。

So what they cite as evidence is not established, and thus the five consciousnesses definitely have no initial or sustained thought.

有義：惡作憂、捨相應，唯慼行轉，通無記故。

One view: remorse corresponds with sorrow and equanimity, turns only in grief, and extends to the indeterminate.

睡眠喜、憂、捨受俱起，行通歡、慼、中庸轉故。

Sleep arises together with joy, sorrow, and equanimity, turning in joyful, sorrowful, and neutral modes.

尋、伺憂、喜、捨、樂相應，初靜慮中意樂俱故。

Initial and sustained thought correspond with sorrow, joy, equanimity, and pleasure, being accompanied by mental pleasure in the first concentration.

有義：此四亦苦受俱，純苦趣中，意苦俱故。

One view: these four are also accompanied by pain, since in purely painful destinies they are accompanied by mental pain.

四皆容與五別境俱，行相、所緣不相違故。

All four may be accompanied by the five object-specific factors, since their characteristics and objects do not conflict.

悔、眠但與十善容俱，此唯在欲，無輕安故。尋、伺容與十一善俱，初靜慮中輕安俱故。

Regret and sleep may be accompanied only by ten wholesome factors, since they exist only in the desire realm and lack pliancy. Initial and sustained thought may be accompanied by eleven wholesome factors, since in the first concentration they are accompanied by pliancy.

悔但容與無明相應，此行相麁，貪等細故。

Regret may correspond only with ignorance, since its characteristic is coarse and greed and the others are subtle.

睡眠、尋、伺十煩惱俱，此彼展轉不相違故。

Sleep, initial thought, and sustained thought are accompanied by the ten afflictions, since these and those do not mutually conflict.

悔與中、大隨惑容俱，非忿等十，各為主故。睡眠、尋、伺二十容俱，眠等位中皆起彼故。

Regret may be accompanied by the middle and major secondary delusions but not by wrath and the other ten, each being the principal. Sleep, initial thought, and sustained thought may be accompanied by the twenty, since in the stages of sleep and so on all those arise.

此四皆通善等三性，於無記業亦追悔故。

All four extend to the three natures of wholesome and so on, since one also repents of indeterminate karma.

有義：初二唯生得善，行相麁鄙及昧略故；後二亦通加行善攝，聞所成等有尋、伺故。

One view: the first two are only innately wholesome, since their characteristics are coarse and crude and obscure and brief; the latter two are also included in the wholesome of applied effort, since the wisdom from hearing and so on has initial and sustained thought.

有義：初二亦加行善，聞、思位中有悔、眠故。

One view: the first two are also wholesome through applied effort, since in the stages of hearing and reflection there are regret and sleep.

後三皆通染、淨無記，惡作非染，解麁猛故。四無記中，悔唯中二，行相麁猛，非定果故。眠除第四，非定引生，異熟生心亦得眠故。尋、伺除初，彼解微劣，不能尋察名等義故。

The last three are all of mixed defiled, pure and indeterminate types; but regret is not defiled, because it is explained as coarse and fierce. Among the four indeterminate ones, regret is included only in two, because its mode of appearance is coarse and fierce and it is not a result of meditative concentration. Sleep excludes the fourth, because it is not drawn forth by concentration, and a mind born of maturation can also have sleep. Initial thought and sustained thought exclude the first, because that is explained as subtle and weak and cannot investigate the meaning of names and the like.

惡作、睡眠唯欲界有，尋、伺在欲及初靜慮，餘界地法皆妙靜故。

Regret and sleep exist only in the desire realm; initial and sustained thought exist in the desire realm and the first dhyana, because the dharmas of the remaining realms and levels are all wondrously still.

悔、眠生上必不現起，尋、伺上下亦起下上。

Regret and sleep, once born in a higher realm, certainly do not manifest there; initial and sustained thought of higher and lower levels also arise in the lower and upper.

下上尋、伺能緣上下。

Initial and sustained thought of the lower and upper levels can take the upper and lower as objects.

有義：悔、眠不能緣上，行相麁近，極昧略故。

One view holds: regret and sleep cannot take the higher as object, because their modes of appearance are coarse and near, extremely dim and obscure.

有義：此二亦緣上境，有邪見者悔修定故，夢能普緣所更事故。

Another view holds: these two also take higher objects, because those with wrong views regret cultivating meditation, and because dreams can universally take as objects what has been experienced.

悔非無學，離欲捨故；睡眠、尋、伺皆通三種。求解脫者有為善法皆名學故；學究竟者有為善法皆無學故。

Regret is not of the stage beyond learning, because it has left desire behind; sleep, initial thought and sustained thought all extend to three kinds. For those seeking liberation, all conditioned good dharmas are called learning; for those whose learning is complete, all conditioned good dharmas are beyond learning.

悔、眠唯通見、修所斷，亦邪見等勢力起故，非無漏道親所引生故，亦非如憂，深求解脫故。若已斷故名非所斷，則無學眠非所斷、攝。

Regret and sleep extend only to what is cut off by the path of seeing and the path of cultivation, because they also arise by the force of wrong views and the like, and are not directly drawn forth by the flawless path, and unlike sorrow, they do not deeply seek liberation. If they are called not to be cut off because they have already been cut off, then the sleep of those beyond learning is included among what is not to be cut off.

尋、伺雖非真無漏道，而能引彼，從彼引生，故通見、修、非所斷攝。

Initial and sustained thought, though not the true flawless path, can draw forth those and are drawn forth from those, so they extend to what is cut off by seeing, by cultivation, and what is not to be cut off.

有義：尋、伺非所斷者，於五法中唯分別攝，《瑜伽》說彼是分別故。

One view holds: the initial and sustained thought that are not to be cut off are included, among the five dharmas, only in discrimination, because the Yogacara says that they are discrimination.

有義：此二亦正智攝，說：正思惟是無漏故，彼能令心尋求等故。又說：彼是言說因故，未究竟位於藥、病等未能遍知，後得智中為他說法必假尋、伺，非如佛地無功用說，故此二種亦通無漏。雖說尋、伺必是分別，而不定說唯屬第三，後得正智中亦有分別故。

Another view holds: these two are also included in right wisdom, because it says that right thought is flawless, because they can make the mind seek and so on. It also says that they are the cause of speech; in the stage not yet complete, one has not fully known medicines, illnesses and so on, and in the wisdom attained afterward, teaching others necessarily relies on initial and sustained thought, unlike the Buddha stage, where teaching is effortless; so these two also extend to the flawless. Although it says that initial and sustained thought are necessarily discriminative, it does not definitely say they belong only to the third, because in right wisdom attained afterward there is also discrimination.

餘門準上，如理應思。

The other aspects follow the above, and should be considered according to principle.

如是六位諸心所法，為離心體有別自性？為即是心分位差別？

These mental factors of the six categories: are they separate from the substance of mind and have their own nature, or are they just distinctions of state of the mind?

設爾何失？

Suppose it were so; what fault would there be?

二俱有過。

Both sides have faults.

若離心體有別自性，如何聖教說唯有識？又如何說心遠、獨行，染、淨由心，士夫六界？

If they are separate from the substance of mind and have their own nature, how do the holy teachings say there is only consciousness? And how do they say that the mind travels far and alone, that defilement and purity depend on the mind, and that a person is of six elements?

《莊嚴論》說復云何通？如彼頌言：

How would the Ornament Treatise's saying be reconciled? As the verse there says:

「許心似二現，如是似貪等，

"It is allowed that the mind appears in two aspects, like greed and the like,

或似於信等，無別染、善法。」

Or like faith and the like, and there is no separate defiled or good dharma."

若即是心分位差別，如何聖教說心相應？他性相應，非自性故。又如何說心與心所俱時而起，如日與光？《瑜伽論》說復云何通？彼說心所非即心故。如彼頌言：

If they are just distinctions of state of the mind, how do the holy teachings say they accord with the mind? Because they are of another nature, not its own nature. And how do they say that the mind and mental factors arise at the same time, like the sun and its light? How would the Yogacara treatise's saying be reconciled? It says there that the mental factors are not the mind itself. As the verse there says:

「五種性不成，分位差過失，

"The five kinds of nature are not established, distinctions of state have faults,

因緣無別故，與聖教相違。」

Because the causes and conditions are not distinguished, it contradicts the holy teachings."

應說離心有別自性，以心勝故，說唯識等，心所依心勢力生故，說似彼現，非彼即心。又識心言亦攝心所，恆相應故。唯識等言及現似彼，皆無有失，此依世俗。

It should be said that they are separate from the mind and have their own nature; but because the mind is supreme, one speaks of consciousness-only and the like, since the mental factors depend on the force of the mind to arise, and one says they appear like those, not that those are the mind itself. Moreover, the words consciousness and mind also include the mental factors, because they always accord with it. The words consciousness-only and the like, and appearing like those, have no fault; this follows the conventional truth.

若依勝義，心所與心非離非即，諸識相望應知亦然，是謂大乘真、俗妙理。

If following the ultimate truth, the mental factors and the mind are neither separate nor identical, and the consciousnesses in relation to one another should be known to be the same; this speaks of the wondrous principle of the true and the conventional in the Great Vehicle.

已說六識心所相應，云何應知現起分位？

Having spoken of the six consciousnesses and their corresponding mental factors, how is one to know the states of their arising?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１５依止根本識，五識隨緣現，

15 Relying on the root consciousness, the five consciousnesses arise according to conditions,

或俱或不俱，如濤波依水。

Sometimes together and sometimes not together, like waves relying on water.

１６意識常現起，除生無想天，

16 The mental consciousness always arises, except when born in the heaven of no thought,

及無心二定、睡眠與悶絕。

And in the two concentrations without mind, in sleep, and in fainting.

論曰：「根本識」者，阿陀那識，染、淨諸識生根本故。「依止」者，謂前六轉識以根本識為共親依。

The treatise says: "Root consciousness" is the adana consciousness (the holding consciousness), because it is the root from which all defiled and pure consciousnesses arise. "Relying on" means that the first six evolving consciousnesses take the root consciousness as their common and intimate support.

「五識」者，謂前五轉識，種類相似，故總說之。「隨緣現」言顯非常起，「緣」謂作意、根、境等緣，謂五識身內依本識，外隨作意、五根、境等眾緣和合方得現前，由此或俱或不俱起，外緣合者有頓、漸故。如水濤波隨緣多少，此等法喻廣說如經。

"Five consciousnesses" means the first five evolving consciousnesses, which are similar in kind, so they are spoken of together. The words "arise according to conditions" show that they do not always arise; "conditions" means attention, faculty, object and other conditions, that is, the five consciousness-bodies depend inwardly on the root consciousness and outwardly follow the combination of attention, the five faculties, the objects and other conditions before they can appear, and so they arise sometimes together and sometimes not together, because the combination of outer conditions may be sudden or gradual. Like waves on water following conditions of many or few, these dharmas and similes are widely explained as in the sutras.

由五轉識行相麁動，所藉眾緣時多不具，故起時少，不起時多。第六意識雖亦麁動，而所藉緣無時不具，由違緣故，有時不起。第七、八識行相微細，所藉眾緣一切時有，故無緣礙令總不行。

Because the five evolving consciousnesses have coarse and agitated modes of appearance, the conditions they rely on are often incomplete, so they arise seldom and do not arise often. The sixth, the mental consciousness, although also coarse and agitated, has the conditions it relies on complete at all times, and arises only occasionally not at all because of opposing conditions. The seventh and eighth consciousnesses have subtle modes of appearance, and the conditions they rely on exist at all times, so no obstruction of conditions makes them never operate.

又五識身不能思慮，唯外門轉起，藉多緣，故斷時多，現行時少；第六意識自能思慮，內、外門轉，不藉多緣。唯除五位，常能現起，故斷時少，現起時多，由斯不說此隨緣現。

Also, the five consciousness-bodies cannot think and ponder, and arise only through external doors, relying on many conditions, so they are often interrupted and seldom manifest; the sixth, the mental consciousness, can itself think and ponder, arising through inner and outer doors without relying on many conditions. Except for five states, it can always arise, so it is seldom interrupted and often manifest, and therefore it is not said to arise according to conditions.

五位者何？

What are the five states?

「生無想」等。

"Born in the heaven of no thought" and so on.

無想天者，謂修彼定，厭麁想力，生彼天中，違不恆行心及心所，想滅為首，名無想天。

The heaven of no thought: one who cultivates that concentration, tired of coarse thought, is born in that heaven, where the non-constant mind and mental factors, headed by the cessation of thought, are opposed; it is called the heaven of no thought.

故六轉識於彼皆斷。

So the six evolving consciousnesses are all cut off there.

有義：彼天常無六識，聖教說彼無轉識故；說彼唯有有色支故；又說彼為無心地故。

One view holds: that heaven is always without the six consciousnesses, because the holy teachings say there are no evolving consciousnesses there; they say there is only the form branch there; and they say it is a ground without mind.

有義：彼天將命終位，要起轉識然後命終，彼必起下潤生愛故，《瑜伽論》說：「後想生已，是諸有情從彼沒」故。然說彼無轉識等者，依長時說，非謂全無。

Another view holds: when the beings of that heaven are about to die, they must arouse evolving consciousness and only then die, because they must arouse the craving that moistens rebirth below; the Yogacara treatise says: "When thought arises afterward, those beings die from there." But saying there are no evolving consciousnesses there and so on speaks of the long period, not of their being entirely absent.

有義：生時亦有轉識，彼中有必起潤生煩惱故，如餘本有，初必有轉識故。《瑜伽論》說：「若生於彼，唯入不起，其想若生，從彼沒」故，彼本有初，若無轉識，如何名入？先有後無，乃名入故。

Another view holds: at birth too there is evolving consciousness, because in the intermediate state there the afflictions that moisten rebirth must arise, like the other original existences, whose beginning must have evolving consciousness. The Yogacara treatise says: "If one is born there, one only enters and does not arise; if thought arises, one dies from there." So if in the beginning of the original existence there were no evolving consciousness, how would it be called entering? Only if there was before and not after is it called entering.

〈決擇分〉言：「所有生得心、心所滅，名無想」故，此言意顯彼本有初，有異熟生轉識暫起宿因緣力，後不復生。由斯引起異熟無記分位差別，說名無想，如善引生二定名善。不爾，轉識一切不行，如何可言唯生得滅？故彼初位轉識暫起。

The Section on Determination says: "All mind and mental factors born of birth cease, which is called no thought." This shows that in the beginning of the original existence there, there is a temporary arising of evolving consciousness born of maturation, by the power of past causes and conditions, which later does not arise again. This draws forth a distinction of indeterminate maturation states, called no thought, as good that draws forth the two concentrations is called good. If it were not so, and the evolving consciousnesses did not operate at all, how could one say that only those born of birth cease? So in the initial state there, the evolving consciousness arises temporarily.

彼天唯在第四靜慮，下想麁動難可斷故，上無無想異熟處故。

That heaven exists only in the fourth dhyana, because coarse thought below is hard to cut off, and above there is no place of maturation of no thought.

即能引發無想定思，能感彼天異熟果故。

It is the volition that can bring about the concentration of no thought that causes the ripened result of that heaven.

「及無心二定」者，謂無想、滅盡定，俱無六識，故名無心。

"And the two concentrations without mind" means the concentration of no thought and the concentration of cessation, both of which have no six consciousnesses, so they are called without mind.

無想定者，謂有異生伏遍淨貪，未伏上染，由出離想，作意為先，令不恆行心、心所滅，想滅為首，立無想名，令身安和，故亦名定。

The concentration of no thought: it means that there are ordinary beings who have subdued the greed for the pure heavens but have not subdued upper defilements; by the thought of renunciation, with attention first, they cause the non-constant mind and mental factors to cease, headed by the cessation of thought, and set up the name no thought, which makes the body peaceful and harmonious, so it is also called concentration.

修習此定，品別有三：下品修者，現法必退，不能速疾還引現前，後生彼天，不甚光淨，形色廣大，定當中夭。中品修者，現不必退，設退速疾還引現前，後生彼天，雖甚光淨，形色廣大，而不最極，雖有中夭而不決定。上品修者，現必不退，後生彼天，最極光淨，形色廣大，必無中夭，窮滿壽量後方殞沒。

In cultivating this concentration there are three grades. One who cultivates the lower grade will certainly decline in this life and cannot quickly bring it forth again; when later born in that heaven, it is not very bright and pure, and its form is broad and large, but he will surely die young. One who cultivates the middle grade does not necessarily decline in this life, and if he declines, he quickly brings it forth again; when later born in that heaven, though very bright and pure with a broad and large form, it is not the utmost, and although there may be a premature death, it is not fixed. One who cultivates the highest grade surely does not decline in this life, and when later born in that heaven, it is the utmost bright and pure with a broad and large form, and there is no premature death, and only after the full span of life is exhausted does he pass away.

此定唯屬第四靜慮。又唯是善，彼所引故。下上地無，由前說故。

This concentration belongs only to the fourth dhyana. It is also only good, because it is drawn forth by those. It does not exist in lower and higher levels, because of what was said earlier.

四業通三，除順現受。

The four karmas extend to three, except what is received in the present.

有義：此定唯欲界起，由諸外道說力起故，人中慧解極猛利故。

One view holds: this concentration arises only in the desire realm, because it arises by the force of the teaching of non-Buddhists, and because the wisdom and understanding of humans is extremely sharp.

有義：欲界先修習已，後生色界能引現前，除無想天至究竟故。

Another view holds: having been cultivated first in the desire realm, it can later manifest when born in the form realm, until the end of the heaven of no thought, because of this.

此由厭想、欣彼果入，故唯有漏。非聖所起。

This is entered by weariness of thought and delight in its fruit, so it is only with outflows. It is not what the holy ones produce.

滅盡定者，謂有無學或有學聖，已伏或離無所有貪，上貪不定，由止息想，作意為先，令不恆行、恆行染汙心、心所滅，立滅盡名，令身安和，故亦名定。由偏厭受、想，亦名滅彼定。

The concentration of cessation: it means that holy ones, whether beyond learning or still learning, who have subdued or left the greed for nothing-whatever, and whose greed for the higher is not fixed, by the thought of stopping, with attention first, cause the non-constant and constant defiled mind and mental factors to cease, and set up the name cessation, which makes the body peaceful and harmonious, so it is also called concentration. Because it is especially wearied of feeling and thought, it is also called the concentration of cessation of those.

修習此定，品別有三：下品修者，現法必退，不能速疾還引現前；中品修者，現不必退，設退速疾還引現前；上品修者，畢竟不退。

In cultivating this concentration there are three grades. One who cultivates the lower grade will certainly decline in this life and cannot quickly bring it forth again; one who cultivates the middle grade does not necessarily decline in this life, and if he declines, he quickly brings it forth again; one who cultivates the highest grade ultimately does not decline.

此定初修必依有頂，遊觀無漏為加行入，次第定中最居後故，雖屬有頂而無漏攝。若修此定已得自在，餘地心後，亦得現前。

This concentration, when first cultivated, must rely on the Summit of Existence, entering through the preliminary practice of flawless roaming contemplation, since among the concentrations in sequence it is the last; although it belongs to the Summit of Existence, it is included in the flawless. If one has attained mastery of this concentration, it can also manifest after the minds of other levels.

雖屬道諦而是非學非無學攝，似涅槃故。

Although it belongs to the truth of the path, it is included in neither learning nor beyond learning, because it resembles nirvana.

此定初起唯在人中，佛及弟子說力起故，人中慧解極猛利故，後上二界亦得現前，《鄔陀夷經》是此誠證，無色亦名意成天故。於藏識教未信受者，若生無色不起此定，恐無色、心成斷滅故；已信生彼亦得現前，知有藏識不斷滅故。

This concentration first arises only among humans, because of the force of the teaching of the Buddha and his disciples, and because the wisdom and understanding of humans is extremely sharp, and later it can also manifest in the two upper realms; the Udayi Sutra is a true proof of this, since the formless realm is also called the heaven made of mind. For those who have not yet believed and accepted the teaching of the storehouse consciousness, if born in the formless realm they would not arouse this concentration, fearing that in the formless realm the mind would become annihilated; for those who already believe, they can also manifest it when born there, knowing that the storehouse consciousness exists and is not annihilated.

要斷三界見所斷惑方起此定，異生不能伏滅有頂心、心所故，此定微妙，要證二空隨應後得所引發故。

One must have cut off the afflictions to be cut off by seeing in the three realms before one can arouse this concentration, because ordinary beings cannot subdue and extinguish the mind and mental factors of the Summit of Existence; this concentration is subtle and wondrous, and must be brought forth by the wisdom attained afterward in accord with the realization of the two emptinesses.

有義：下八地修所斷惑中，要全斷欲，餘伏或斷，然後方能初起此定，欲界惑種二性繁雜，障定強故，唯說不還、三乘無學及諸菩薩得此定故，彼隨所應生上八地皆得後起。

One view holds: among the afflictions cut off by cultivation in the lower eight levels, one must entirely cut off desire, and subdue or cut off the others, and only then can this concentration first arise, because the seeds of afflictions in the desire realm are of two natures and mixed, and strongly obstruct concentration; it is said that the non-returners, the arhats of the three vehicles and the Bodhisattvas attain this concentration, and they can later arouse it in the upper eight levels as appropriate to their births.

有義：要斷下之四地修所斷惑，餘伏或斷，然後方能初起此定，變異受俱煩惱種子障定強故，彼隨所應，生上五地，皆得後起。

Another view holds: one must cut off the afflictions to be cut off by cultivation in the lower four levels, and subdue or cut off the others, and only then can this concentration first arise, because the seeds of afflictions accompanied by changing feeling strongly obstruct concentration; they, as appropriate, are born in the upper five levels and can all later arouse it.

若伏下惑能起此定，後不斷退生上地者，豈生上已卻斷下惑？斷亦無失，如生上者，斷下末那俱生惑故。然不還者對治力強，正潤生位不起煩惱，但由惑種潤上地生，雖所伏惑有退、不退，而無伏下生上地義，故無生上卻斷下失。

If one who has subdued the lower afflictions can arouse this concentration, and later, without cutting them off, regresses and is born in a higher level, then is it that after being born above he cuts off the lower afflictions? There is no fault in cutting them off, as with those born above who cut off the innate afflictions co-existing with manas. But the non-returner has strong antidotes, and at the stage of moistening rebirth does not arouse afflictions, and is born in the upper level only by the seeds of affliction moistening it; although the afflictions subdued may regress or not, there is no meaning of subduing the lower and being born in a higher level, so there is no fault of being born above and then cutting off the lower.

若諸菩薩先二乘位已得滅定，後迴心者，一切位中能起此定。若不爾者，或有乃至七地滿心，方能永伏一切煩惱，雖未永斷欲界修惑，而如已斷，能起此定，論說已入遠地，菩薩方能現起滅盡定故。有從初地即能永伏一切煩惱，如阿羅漢，彼十地中皆起此定，經說菩薩前六地中亦能現起滅盡定故。

If Bodhisattvas had already attained the concentration of cessation in the stage of the two vehicles and later turned their minds, they can arouse this concentration in all stages. If not so, some, up to the full mind of the seventh ground, can then forever subdue all afflictions; although they have not forever cut off the afflictions of cultivation in the desire realm, it is as if they had, and they can arouse this concentration, because the treatise says that Bodhisattvas who have entered the far-reaching ground can manifest the concentration of cessation. Some can forever subdue all afflictions from the first ground, like arhats, and they arouse this concentration throughout the ten grounds, because the sutra says that in the first six grounds Bodhisattvas can also manifest the concentration of cessation.

無心「睡眠與悶絕」者，謂有極重睡眠、悶絕，令前六識皆不現行。

Without mind, "sleep and fainting" means there are extremely heavy sleep and fainting that make the first six consciousnesses all fail to operate.

疲極等緣所引身位，違前六識，故名極重睡眠，此睡眠時，雖無彼體，而由彼似彼故，假說彼名。

A state of the body drawn forth by conditions such as extreme fatigue opposes the first six consciousnesses, so it is called extremely heavy sleep; in this sleep, although it does not have the substance of that, it resembles it, so the name is provisionally given.

風熱等緣所引身位，亦違六識，故名極重悶絕，或此俱是觸處少分。

A state of the body drawn forth by conditions such as wind and heat also opposes the six consciousnesses, so it is called extremely heavy fainting, or perhaps these are a small part of the sphere of touch.

除斯五位，意識恆起。

Apart from these five states, the mental consciousness always arises.

正死、生時亦無意識，何故但說五位不行？

At the time of actual dying and being born there is also no mental consciousness; why are only five states said not to operate?

有義：死、生「及」、「與」言顯。彼說非理，所以者何？但說六時名無心故，謂前五位及無餘依。應說死、生即悶絕攝，彼是最極悶絕位故，說「及」、「與」言顯五無雜。

One view holds: dying and being born are shown by the words "and" and "with." That, they say, is unreasonable; why? Because only six times are called without mind, namely the first five states and the state without remainder. It should be said that dying and being born are included in fainting, since they are the most extreme state of fainting, and the words "and" and "with" show that the five are not mixed.

此顯六識斷已，後時依本識中自種還起，由此不說入無餘依。

This shows that after the six consciousnesses are cut off, later their own seeds in the root consciousness arise again, so it is not said to enter the state without remainder.

此五位中異生有四，除在滅定，聖唯後三，於中如來、自在菩薩唯得有一，無睡、悶故。

Among these five states, ordinary beings have four, except in the concentration of cessation; holy ones have only the last three, and among them the Tathagata and the Bodhisattvas of mastery have only one, since they have no sleep or fainting.

是故八識一切有情心與末那二，恆俱轉；若起第六，則三俱轉；餘隨緣合，起一至五，則四俱轉，乃至八俱，是謂略說識俱轉義。

So the eight consciousnesses of all beings and manas, two always operate together; if the sixth arises, three operate together; the rest, according to the combination of conditions, with one to five arising, four operate together, up to eight together; this speaks briefly of the meaning of the consciousnesses operating together.

若一有情多識俱轉，如何說彼是一有情？若立有情依識多少，汝無心位應非有情？又，他分心現在前位，如何可說自分有情？然立有情依命根數或異熟識俱不違理，彼俱恆時唯有一故。

If many consciousnesses operate together in one being, how is it said to be one being? If beings are established according to the number of consciousnesses, would you not have a stage without mind that is not a being? Moreover, in the stage where one's distinct mind is manifesting, how can one speak of one's own distinct being? But establishing a being according to the number of life-faculties or the maturation consciousness does not contradict principle, since those exist only as one at all times.

一身唯一等無間緣，如何俱時有多識轉？既許此一引多心所，寧不許此能引多心？又誰定言此緣唯一？說多識俱者，許此緣多故。又欲一時取多境者，多境現前寧不頓取？諸根、境等和合力齊，識前後生不應理故。又心所性雖無差別而類別者，許多俱生，寧不許心異類俱起？又如浪像依一起多，故依一心多識俱轉。又若不許意與五俱，取彼所緣應不明瞭，如散意識緣久滅故。

For one body there is only one immediately preceding condition, so how can many consciousnesses operate at the same time? Since you allow this one to bring forth many mental factors, why not allow this one to bring forth many minds? And who decides that this condition is only one? Those who say many consciousnesses are together allow that this condition is many. Also, for one who wants to take many objects at one time, when many objects are present, why does he not take them at once? Since the combined power of faculties and objects is equal, it is unreasonable for the consciousnesses to arise one after another. Also, though mental factors are not different in nature, they are different in kind, and many arise together; why not allow minds of different kinds to arise together? Also, like waves relying on one, many arise, so many consciousnesses operate together relying on one mind. Moreover, if one does not allow the mental consciousness to be together with the five, then taking those objects would be unclear, like a scattered mental consciousness taking things long past.

如何五俱唯一意識，於色等境取一或多？如眼等識各於自境取一或多，此亦何失？相、見俱有種種相故。

How, when the five arise together with only one mental consciousness, does it take one or many for objects such as form? As the eye and other consciousnesses each take one or many in their own objects, what fault is there in this? Because both the image and the seeing have many kinds of aspects.

何故諸識同類不俱？於自所緣若可了者，一已能了，餘無用故。若爾，五識已了自境，何用俱起意識了為？五俱意識助五令起，非專為了五識所緣。又於彼所緣能明瞭取，異於眼等識，故非無用。由此聖教說彼意識名有分別，五識不爾。

Why do consciousnesses of the same kind not arise together? Because, for their own objects that can be understood, one is already able to understand and the rest are useless. If so, since the five consciousnesses have already understood their own objects, what use is the accompanying mental consciousness arising? The mental consciousness accompanying the five assists the five to arise, and is not solely for the objects of the five consciousnesses. And it can clearly take those objects, which differs from the eye and other consciousnesses, so it is not useless. Because of this, the holy teachings say that mental consciousness is called discriminating, and the five consciousnesses are not so.

多識俱轉何不相應？非同境故，設同境者，彼此所依體、數異故，如五根識互不相應。

Why do many consciousnesses operating together not correspond? Because they do not share the same object, and even if they share the same object, their supports differ in substance and number, as the consciousnesses of the five faculties do not correspond with one another.

八識自性不可言定一，行相、所依、緣、相應異故；又一滅時餘不滅故，能、所燻等相各異故；亦非定異，經說八識如水波等，無差別故；定異應非因果性故。如幻事等，無定性故。

The nature of the eight consciousnesses cannot be said to be definitely one, because their modes of appearance, supports, objects and correspondences differ; also, when one ceases the others do not, and the aspects of what perfumes and what is perfumed differ; nor are they definitely different, because the sutra says the eight consciousnesses are like waves of water and the like, without distinction; and if definitely different, they would not be of cause and effect. They are like illusions and the like, with no fixed nature.

如前所說，識差別相依理世俗，非真勝義，真勝義中，心言絕故。

As stated above, the aspects of distinction among consciousnesses rest on principle in the conventional sense and are not the true ultimate; in the true ultimate, the mind and words are cut off.

如伽他說：

As a gatha says:

「心、意、識八種，俗故相有別；

"Mind, thought and consciousness, eight kinds, are conventionally different in aspect;

真故相無別，相、所相無故。」

Ultimately there is no difference in aspect, for aspect and what has aspect do not exist."

已廣分別三能變相為自所變二分所依。云何應知依識所變假說我、法非別實有，由斯一切唯有識耶？

Having widely distinguished the three transformers as the support of the two parts they themselves transform, how is one to know that the self and dharmas provisionally spoken of based on what the consciousnesses transform are not separately and truly existent, and thus that everything is consciousness only?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１７是諸識轉變，分別所分別，

17 These consciousnesses transform, as discriminator and discriminated,

由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。

Because of this those do not exist at all, so everything is consciousness only.

論曰：「是諸識」者，謂前所說三能變識及彼心所，皆能變似見、相二分，立「轉變」名。

The treatise says: "These consciousnesses" means the three transforming consciousnesses described above and their mental factors, all of which can transform into the two parts, the seeing part and the image part, and the name "transformation" is established.

所變見分說名「分別」，能取相故；所變相分名「所分別」，見所取故。

The transformed seeing part is called "the discriminator," because it can grasp the image; the transformed image part is called "the discriminated," because it is what the seeing part grasps.

由此正理，彼實我、法離識所變皆定非有，離能、所取無別物故，非有實物離二相故。

By this correct reasoning, those real self and real dharmas apart from what consciousness transforms are definitely nonexistent, because apart from the grasper and the grasped there is no other thing, and no real thing exists apart from the two aspects.

是故一切有為、無為，若實、若假，皆不離識。「唯」言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等。

So all conditioned and unconditioned things, whether real or provisional, are not apart from consciousness. The word "only" is to deny real things apart from consciousness, not the mental factors and other dharmas that are not apart from consciousness.

或轉變者，謂諸內識轉似我、法外境相現。

Or, transformation means that the various inner consciousnesses transform and appear as images of external objects, self and dharmas.

此能轉變即名分別，虛妄分別為自性故，謂即三界心及心所。此所執境名所分別，即所妄執實我、法性。

This capacity to transform is called discrimination, because its nature is false discrimination, that is, the mind and mental factors of the three realms. The objects grasped by it are called the discriminated, that is, the real self and real dharma natures falsely clung to.

由此分別變似外境假我、法相，彼所分別實我、法性，決定皆無，前引教理已廣破故。

By this discrimination, transformed into the appearance of provisional self and dharmas as external objects, those discriminated real self and real dharma natures are definitely nonexistent, since they have been widely refuted above by citing teaching and reasoning.

是故一切皆唯有識，虛妄分別有極成故。「唯」既不遮不離識法，故真空等亦是有性。

So everything is consciousness only, because false discrimination is well established. Since "only" does not deny dharmas not apart from consciousness, true emptiness and the like also have being.

由斯遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道。

By this one stays far from the two extremes of increase and decrease, the meaning of consciousness-only is established, and it accords with the Middle Way.

由何教理唯識義成？

By what teaching and reasoning is the meaning of consciousness-only established?

豈不已說？

Has it not already been said?

雖說未了，非破他義己義便成；應更礭陳，成此教理。

Though it has been said, it is not yet clear; refuting the other's meaning does not in itself establish one's own; one should state it more definitely and establish this teaching and reasoning.

如契經說：「三界唯心」；又說：「所緣唯識所現」；又說：「諸法皆不離心」；又說：「有情隨心垢、淨」。

As the sutras say: "The three realms are mind only"; and: "The objects are only manifested by consciousness"; and: "All dharmas are not apart from mind"; and: "Beings are defiled or pure according to the mind."

又說：「成就四智菩薩能隨悟入唯識無境」。

It also says: "Bodhisattvas who have accomplished four kinds of wisdom can follow and awaken to consciousness-only without objects."

一、相違識相智：謂於一處，鬼、人、天等隨業差別所見各異，境若實有，此云何成？二、無所緣識智：謂緣過、未、夢境像等非實有境，識現可得，彼境既無，餘亦應爾。三、自應無倒智：謂愚夫智若得實境，彼應自然成無顛倒，不由功用應得解脫。四、隨三智轉智：一、隨自在者智轉智：謂已證得心自在者，隨欲轉變地等皆成，境若實有，如何可變？二、隨觀察者智轉智：謂得勝定修法觀者，隨觀一境，眾相現前，境若是實，寧隨心轉？三、隨無分別智轉智：謂起證實無分別智，一切境相皆不現前，境若是實，何容不現？

First, the wisdom of contradictory aspects of consciousness: in one place, ghosts, humans, devas and the like see differently according to their karma; if the object were really existent, how could this be established? Second, the wisdom of consciousness without an object: that is, past, future, dreams and images are not really existent objects, yet consciousness appears and can be obtained; since that object does not exist, the others should be the same. Third, the wisdom of there being no inversion by themselves: if the wisdom of fools grasped real objects, they would naturally have no inversion and would attain liberation without effort. Fourth, the wisdom that turns with three kinds of wisdom: first, the wisdom that turns with those of mastery: those who have already realized mastery of mind can transform earth and the like as they wish, and if objects were really existent, how could they be transformed? Second, the wisdom that turns with those who contemplate: those who have attained supreme concentration and practice Dharma contemplation, as they contemplate one object, many aspects appear before them, and if the object were real, how could it turn with the mind? Third, the wisdom that turns with non-discriminating wisdom: those who give rise to the wisdom of non-discrimination realizing reality, in whom no object aspects appear, and if the objects were real, how could they fail to appear?

菩薩成就此四智者，於唯識理決定悟入。

Bodhisattvas who have accomplished these four wisdoms definitely awaken to the principle of consciousness-only.

又伽他說：

A gatha also says:

心、意、識所緣，皆非離自性，

The objects of mind, thought and consciousness are all not apart from their own nature,

故我說一切唯有識無餘。

So I say that everything is consciousness only with no remainder.

此等聖教誠證非一。

These are proofs from the holy teachings and are not just one.

極成眼等識，五隨一故，如餘，不親緣離自色等。餘識識故，如眼識等，亦不親緣離自諸法。此親所緣定非離此，二隨一故，如彼能緣。所緣法故，如相應法，決定不離心及心所。

The generally accepted eye and other consciousnesses, being the five and following the one, like the others, do not directly take as objects things such as form apart from themselves. The other consciousnesses, being consciousness, like the eye consciousness and so on, also do not directly take as objects dharmas apart from themselves. This directly taken object is definitely not apart from this, because the two follow the one, like that which takes it. Because it is a dharma that is taken as object, like corresponding dharmas, it is definitely not apart from the mind and mental factors.

此等正理，誠證非一，故於唯識，應深信受。

These correct reasonings and proofs are not just one, so one should deeply believe and accept consciousness-only.

我、法非有；空、識非無。離有、離無，故契中道。

Self and dharmas do not exist; emptiness and consciousness are not nonexistent. Apart from existence and apart from nonexistence, it accords with the Middle Way.

慈尊依此說二頌言：

The Compassionate One, relying on this, spoke two verses, saying:

「虛妄分別有，於此二都無，

"False discrimination exists, but in this the two are entirely nonexistent,

此中唯有空，於彼亦有此，

In this there is only emptiness, and in that there is also this,

故說一切法，非空非不空，

So it is said that all dharmas are neither empty nor not empty,

有無及有故，是則契中道。」

Because of existence, nonexistence and having, this is accord with the Middle Way."

此頌且依染依他說，理實亦有淨分依他。

This verse speaks provisionally in terms of the defiled dependent nature; in principle there is also a pure aspect of the dependent nature.

若唯內識似外境起，寧見世間情、非情物，處、時、身、用定、不定轉？

If only inner consciousness arises appearing as external objects, how do we see worldly sentient and insentient things, in place, time, body and function, operating in a fixed or unfixed way?

如夢境等，應釋此疑。

Like dream objects and the like, this doubt should be explained.

何緣世尊說十二處？

Why did the World-Honored One speak of the twelve sense-fields?

依識所變，非別實有。為入我空說六二法，如遮斷見說續有情。為入法空復說唯識，令知外法亦非有故。

They depend on what consciousness transforms, and are not separately real. To enter the emptiness of self he spoke of the six and two dharmas, like denying annihilation and speaking of continuing beings. To enter the emptiness of dharmas he again spoke of consciousness-only, so that one knows external dharmas are also nonexistent.

此唯識性豈不亦空？

Is this nature of consciousness-only not also empty?

不爾。

It is not so.

如何？

Why?

非所執故。

Because it is not what is clung to.

謂依識變，妄執實法，理不可得，說為法空；非無離言正智所證唯識性故，說為法空。

That is, what depends on consciousness's transformation, the real dharmas falsely clung to, cannot be found by reasoning, and is called emptiness of dharmas; it is not that the nature of consciousness-only realized by right wisdom beyond words is nonexistent, and is so called emptiness of dharmas.

此識若無，便無俗諦；俗諦無故，真諦亦無。真、俗相依而建立故。

If this consciousness were absent, there would be no conventional truth; because the conventional truth would be absent, the ultimate truth would also be absent, since the true and the conventional are established in dependence on each other.

撥無二諦是惡取空，諸佛說為不可治者。應知諸法有空、不空，由此慈尊說前二頌。

To deny both truths is wrongly grasping emptiness, which the Buddhas say is incurable. One should know that dharmas are both empty and not empty, and so the Compassionate One spoke the two verses above.

若諸色處亦識為體，何緣乃似色相顯現，一類堅住相續而轉？

If the sense-fields of form also have consciousness as their substance, why do they appear in the aspect of form, and operate continuously in a fixed and stable manner?

名言燻習勢力起故。

Because they arise by the force of the perfuming of verbal conventions.

與染、淨法為依處故。謂此若無，應無顛倒，便無雜染，亦無淨法，是故諸識亦似色現。如有頌言：

Because they are the support for defiled and pure dharmas. That is, if this did not exist, there would be no inversion, and so no defilement and no pure dharma, so the consciousnesses also appear as form. As a verse says:

亂相及亂體，應許為色識，

The aspect of confusion and the substance of confusion should be allowed to be the consciousness of form,

及與非色識，若無餘亦無。

And the consciousness that is not form; if the former did not exist, the others would not either.

色等外境分明現證，現量所得，寧撥為無？

External objects such as form are clearly and directly present, obtained by direct perception; how can one deny them as nonexistent?

現量證時，不執為外，後意分別，妄生外想。故現量境是自相分，識所變故，亦說為有；意識所執外實色等，妄計有故。說彼為無。

At the time of direct perception, one does not cling to them as external; only later does the mental discrimination falsely produce the idea of externality. So the object of direct perception is the part of its own image, since it is transformed by consciousness, and is also said to exist; the external real form and so on clung to by the mental consciousness are falsely imagined to exist, so those are said to be nonexistent.

又色等境，非色、似色，非外、似外，如夢所緣，不可執為是實外色。

Moreover, objects such as form are not form but resemble form, not external but resemble the external, like objects taken in a dream, and cannot be clung to as truly existing external form.

若覺時，色皆如夢境不離識者，如從夢覺知彼唯心，何故覺時於自色境不知唯識？

If, when awake, all form is like a dream object not apart from consciousness, then just as upon waking from a dream one knows those are mind only, why, when awake, does one not know that its own objects of form are consciousness only?

如夢未覺不能自知，要至覺時方能追覺，覺時境色應知亦爾，未真覺位不能自知，至真覺時亦能追覺。未得真覺恆處夢中，故佛說為生死長夜，由斯未了色境唯識。

Just as while one has not awakened from a dream one cannot know this oneself, and only when awake can one realize it afterward, so one should know that awake objects of form are the same: in the stage not yet truly awakened one cannot know it oneself, and only on truly awakening can one realize it afterward. Not yet having attained true awakening, one is always in a dream, and so the Buddha says it is the long night of birth and death, and thus one has not understood that objects of form are consciousness only.

外色實無，可非內識境；他心實有，寧非自所緣？

External form is truly nonexistent, which may not be an object of inner consciousness; but others' minds truly exist, so how are they not objects of one's own?

誰說他心非自識境？但不說彼是親所緣。

Who says others' minds are not objects of one's own consciousness? But we do not say they are directly taken objects.

謂識生時無實作用，非如手等親執外物，日等舒光親照外境；但如鏡等似外境現，名「了他心」，非「親能了」。親所了者，謂自所變。

That is, when consciousness arises it has no real function, unlike hands and so on that directly grasp external things or the sun and so on that spread light and directly illuminate external objects; it is only like a mirror that appears like an external object, and is called "understanding another's mind," not "directly able to understand." What it directly understands is, that is, what it itself transforms.

故契經言：無有少法能取餘法，但識生時，似彼相現，名取彼物。

So the sutra says: there is no dharma that can grasp another dharma, but when consciousness arises, it appears as that aspect, and is called grasping that thing.

如緣他心，色等亦爾。

As in taking another's mind, so form and the like are also the same.

既有異境，何名唯識？

Since there are different objects, how is it called consciousness-only?

奇哉！固執觸處生疑！豈唯識教但說一識？

Strange! Stubbornly doubting at every touch! Does the teaching of consciousness-only speak of only one consciousness?

不爾，如何？

It is not so; what then?

汝應諦聽：若唯一識，寧有十方凡聖、尊卑、因果等別？誰為誰說？何法何求？故「唯識」言有深意趣。「識」言總顯一切有情各有八識、六位心所，所變相、見、分位差別及彼空理所顯真如。識自相故，識相應故，二所變故，三分位故，四實性故，如是諸法皆不離識，總立識名。「唯」言，但遮愚夫所執定離諸識實有色等。

Listen carefully: if there were only one consciousness, how could there be distinctions of the ten directions, ordinary and holy, honored and lowly, cause and effect? Who would speak for whom? What dharma would be sought? So the words "consciousness-only" have a deep meaning. The word "consciousness" shows in general that all sentient beings each have eight consciousnesses and six categories of mental factors, the transformed image, seeing, distinctions of state, and the true suchness revealed by the principle of their emptiness. Because it is the self-nature of consciousness, because it corresponds with consciousness, because it is what the two transform, because it is the three distinctions of state, and because it is the real nature, in this way all dharmas are not apart from consciousness, and the name consciousness is established in general. The word "only" merely denies that real form and the like clung to by fools are definitely apart from the consciousnesses.

若如是知唯識教意，便能無倒善備資糧速入法空，證無上覺，救拔含識生死輪迴；非全撥無惡取空者，違背教理能成是事，故定應信一切唯識。

If one knows the meaning of the teaching of consciousness-only in this way, one can without inversion well prepare the provisions, quickly enter the emptiness of dharmas, realize unsurpassed awakening, and rescue sentient beings from the wheel of birth and death; those who wrongly grasp emptiness and deny everything cannot accomplish this by going against the teaching and reasoning, so one should definitely believe that everything is consciousness only.

若唯有識都無外緣，由何而生種種分別？

If there is only consciousness and no external conditions, by what do the various discriminations arise?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１８由一切種識，如是如是變，

18 By the all-seeds consciousness, transforming in such and such ways,

以展轉力故，彼彼分別生。

Because of the force of mutual interaction, this and that discrimination arise.

論曰：「一切種識」謂本識中能生自果功能差別，此生等流、異熟、士用、增上果故，名一切種，除離繫者，非種生故，彼雖可證，而非種果，要現起道，斷結得故，有展轉義，非此所說，此說能生分別種故。此識為體，故立識名，種離本識無別性故。「種識」二言，簡非種識；有識非種；種非識故。又「種識」言，顯識中種，非持種識，後當說故。

The treatise says: "All-seeds consciousness" means the differences of capacity in the root consciousness that can produce their own effects; it produces the fruits of equal outflow, maturation, human effort and dominance, so it is called all seeds, except for the effect of separation, which is not produced by seeds, since although it can be realized, it is not the fruit of a seed, and it must be manifested by the path and attained by cutting off the bonds, having a meaning of mutual interaction, which is not what is spoken of here, because here it speaks of seeds that can produce discrimination. This consciousness is the substance, so the name consciousness is established, as seeds have no separate nature apart from the root consciousness. The two words "seed-consciousness" distinguish what is not seed-consciousness; there is consciousness that is not seed; there is seed that is not consciousness. Also the words "seed-consciousness" show the seeds in consciousness, not the consciousness that holds the seeds, which will be discussed later.

此識中種餘緣助故，即便如是如是轉變，謂從生位轉至熟時。顯變種多，重言「如是」。謂一切種攝三燻習，共、不共等識種盡故。

The seeds in this consciousness are aided by other conditions, and so transform in such and such ways, that is, from the stage of production to the time of ripening. To show that there are many transformations of seeds, the word "such" is repeated. All seeds include the three kinds of perfuming, and the seeds of common and uncommon consciousnesses and so on are exhausted.

「展轉力」者，謂八現識及彼相應相、見分等，彼皆互有相助力故。

"The force of mutual interaction" means the eight manifest consciousnesses and their corresponding image part, seeing part and so on, since they have the power of mutually assisting each other.

即現識等，總名「分別」，虛妄分別為自性故，「分別」類多，故言「彼彼」。

The manifest consciousnesses and so on are in general called "discrimination," because false discrimination is their nature; since there are many kinds of discrimination, it is said "this and that."

此頌意說：雖無外緣，由本識中有一切種轉變差別，及以現行八種識等展轉力故，彼彼分別而亦得生，何假外緣方起分別？

The meaning of this verse is: although there are no external conditions, because in the root consciousness there are the transformations and differences of all the seeds, and because of the force of mutual interaction of the eight consciousnesses in actual operation and so on, this and that discrimination can arise; what need is there for external conditions to give rise to discrimination?

諸淨法起應知亦然，淨種現行為緣生故。

The arising of pure dharmas should be known to be the same, since they arise with pure seeds and their manifest operation as conditions.

所說種、現緣生分別，云何應知此緣生相？

Concerning the discriminations said to arise from seeds and manifest operation as conditions, how is one to know the aspect of this conditioned arising?

緣且有四。

There are four kinds of conditions.

一、因緣：謂有為法親辦自果。

First, the causal condition: conditioned dharmas that directly produce their own effects.

此體有二：一、種子；二、現行。種子者，謂本識中善、染、無記、諸界、地等功能差別，能引次後自類功能及起同時自類現果，此唯望彼是因緣性。現行者，謂七轉識及彼相應所變相、見、性、界、地等，除佛果善、極劣無記，餘燻本識生自類種，此唯望彼是因緣性。

This substance has two kinds: first, seeds; second, manifest operation. Seeds: the differences of capacity in the root consciousness, whether good, defiled or indeterminate, and in the various realms and levels, which can bring forth the next capacity of their own kind and give rise to a simultaneous effect of their own kind; this is the causal condition only in relation to those. Manifest operation: the seven evolving consciousnesses and their corresponding transformed image, seeing, nature, realm, level and so on, except for the good of the Buddha fruit and the extremely weak indeterminate, the rest perfume the root consciousness and produce seeds of their own kind; this is the causal condition only in relation to those.

第八心品無所燻故，非簡所依獨能燻故，極微、圓故，不燻成種。現行同類展轉相望皆非因緣，自種生故；一切異類展轉相望亦非因緣，不親生故。

The eighth mind-group has nothing perfumed by it, so it is not just that it picks out the support and alone can perfume, because it is extremely subtle and perfect, and does not perfume to make seeds. Manifest operations of the same kind in mutual relation are all not causal conditions, because they are produced by their own seeds; all mutual relations among different kinds are also not causal conditions, because they do not directly produce.

有說異類、同類現行展轉相望為因緣者，應知假說，或隨轉門。有唯說種是因緣性，彼依顯勝，非盡理說，聖說轉識與阿賴耶展轉相望為因緣故。

Some say that the mutual relations of manifest operations of the same or different kinds are causal conditions; one should know this is a provisional statement or follows a transformed mode. Some say only seeds are the causal condition; they rely on showing the most prominent, and do not say it fully, because the sage says that the evolving consciousnesses and alaya consciousness in mutual relation are causal conditions.

二、等無間緣，謂八現識及彼心所前聚於後自類無間，等而開導，令彼定生。

Second, the immediately preceding condition: the earlier group of the eight manifest consciousnesses and their mental factors, for those of its own kind afterward, without interval, equally leads and opens the way so that they definitely arise.

多同類種俱時轉故，如不相應非此緣攝，由斯八識非互為緣。心所與心雖恆俱轉，而相應故，和合似一，不可施設離別殊異，故得互作等無間緣。入無餘心最極微劣，無開導用，又無當起等無間法，故非此緣。云何知然？論有誠說：若此識等無間，彼識等決定生，即說此是彼等無間緣故。

Because many seeds of the same kind operate together, non-corresponding ones are not included in this condition, so the eight consciousnesses are not conditions for each other. The mental factors and the mind, though always operating together, correspond, and are united and seem like one, and cannot be set up as separate and distinct, so they can mutually be immediately preceding conditions. The mind entering the state without remainder is extremely subtle and weak and has no function of leading, and also has no immediately following dharma to arise next, so it is not this condition. How do we know this? The treatise has a true statement: if this consciousness is immediately preceding, that consciousness definitely arises, and this is said to be that one's immediately preceding condition.

即依此義，應作是說：阿陀那識三界九地皆容互作等無間緣，下、上，死、生相開導故，有漏無間有無漏生；無漏定無生有漏者，鏡智起已必無、斷故，善與無記相望亦然。

Based on this meaning, it should be said: the adana consciousness, in the nine levels of the three realms, may mutually serve as immediately preceding conditions, with the lower and upper, death and birth leading one another; with outflows immediately followed by flawless arising; but the flawless never gives rise to the outflowing, because after the mirror-like wisdom arises it is surely absent and cut off; good and indeterminate in relation are also like this.

此何界後引生無漏？

From which realm does this later lead to the flawless?

或從色界，或欲界後。

Either from the form realm, or from the desire realm.

謂諸異生求佛果者，定色界後引生無漏，彼必生在淨居天上大自在宮得菩提故。

That is, ordinary beings who seek the Buddha fruit definitely lead to the flawless after the form realm, because they are surely born in the Pure Abode heavens in the palace of Great Freedom and attain bodhi there.

二乘迴趣大菩提者，定欲界後引生無漏，迴趣留身唯欲界故，彼雖必往大自在宮方得成佛，而本願力所留生身是欲界故。

Those of the two vehicles who turn toward great bodhi definitely lead to the flawless after the desire realm, because in turning toward and remaining in body it is only in the desire realm; although they must go to the palace of Great Freedom to become Buddhas, the body of birth retained by the power of their original vow is in the desire realm.

有義：色界亦有聲聞迴趣大乘願留身者，既與教理俱不相違，是故聲聞第八無漏色界心後亦得現前。然五淨居無迴趣者，經不說彼發大心故。

One view holds: in the form realm too there are shravakas who vow to remain in body and turn toward the Great Vehicle, and since this does not contradict teaching or reasoning, the shravakas' eighth flawless mind of the form realm can also manifest afterward. But in the five Pure Abodes none turn toward it, because the sutras do not say that they give rise to the great mind.

第七轉識三界九地亦容互作等無間緣，隨第八識生處繫故。有漏、無漏容互相生，十地位中得相引故。善與無記相望亦然，於無記中，染與不染亦相開導，生空智果前、後位中得相引故。此欲、色界有漏得與無漏相生，非無色界，地上菩薩不生彼故。

The seventh evolving consciousness, in the nine levels of the three realms, may also mutually serve as immediately preceding conditions, since it is bound to where the eighth consciousness is born. With outflows and flawless may arise from each other, because in the ten grounds they can lead each other. Good and indeterminate are also like this; among indeterminate, defiled and non-defiled also lead each other, because in the stages before and after the fruit of the wisdom of emptiness of self they can lead each other. This is the desire and form realms, where outflowing can arise with flawless, and not the formless realm, because Bodhisattvas on the grounds are not born there.

第六轉識三界九地有漏無漏、善不善等，各容互作等無間緣，潤生位等更相引故，初起無漏唯色界後，決擇分善唯色界故。

The sixth evolving consciousness, in the nine levels of the three realms, with outflows and flawless, good and not good and so on, may each mutually serve as immediately preceding conditions, since they lead each other in the stage of moistening rebirth and so on; the first arising of the flawless is only after the form realm, since the good of the section of determination is only in the form realm.

眼、耳、身識二界二地，鼻、舌兩識一界一地，自類互作等無間緣，善等相望應知亦爾。

The eye, ear and body consciousnesses in two realms and two levels, and the nose and tongue consciousnesses in one realm and one level, of their own kinds mutually serve as immediately preceding conditions; good and so on in relation should be known to be the same.

有義：五識有漏、無漏自類互作等無間緣，未成佛時容互起故。

One view holds: the five consciousnesses with outflows and flawless of their own kind mutually serve as immediately preceding conditions, because before becoming a Buddha they may arise from each other.

有義：無漏有漏後起，非無漏後容起有漏。無漏五識非佛無故；彼五色根定有漏故；是異熟識相分攝故；有漏不共必俱同境根發無漏識，理不相應故；此二於境明、昧異故。

Another view holds: the flawless arises after the outflowing, but it is not that after the flawless the outflowing may arise. The five flawless consciousnesses do not exist except in a Buddha; those five material faculties are definitely with outflows; they are included in the image part of the maturation consciousness; the uncommon outflowing faculty that is necessarily together with the same object cannot give rise to flawless consciousness, since in principle they do not correspond; and these two differ in the clarity or dimness of the object.

三、所緣緣：謂若有法是帶己相心或相應所慮、所託。

Third, the object-condition: any dharma that is the mind or corresponding factors bearing its own aspect, contemplated and relied upon.

此體有二：一、親；二、疎。若與能緣體不相離，是見分等內所慮託，應知彼是親所緣緣；若與能緣體雖相離，為質能起內所慮託，應知彼是疎所緣緣。

This substance has two kinds: first, direct; second, remote. If it is not separate from the substance of the one who takes it as object, and is what the seeing part and the like inwardly contemplate and rely upon, one should know these are direct object-conditions; if, though separate from the substance of the one who takes it, it serves as a basis and can give rise to what is inwardly contemplated and relied upon, one should know these are remote object-conditions.

親所緣緣能緣皆有，離內所慮託必不生故。疎所緣緣能緣或有，離外所慮託亦得生故。

The direct object-condition always exists for what takes it, because apart from what is inwardly contemplated and relied upon it certainly does not arise. The remote object-condition may or may not exist for what takes it, because it can also arise without what is outwardly contemplated and relied upon.

第八心品：有義：唯有親所緣緣，隨業因力任運變故。

The eighth mind-group: one view holds that there is only the direct object-condition, because it transforms spontaneously by the power of its karmic cause.

有義：亦定有疎所緣緣，要仗他變質自方變故。

Another view holds: there is also definitely a remote object-condition, because it must rely on what others transform before it can itself transform.

有義：二說俱不應理。自、他身、土可互受用，他所變者為自質故。自種於他無受用理，他變為此不應理故，非諸有情種皆等故，應說此品疎所緣緣，一切位中有、無不定。

Another view holds: both views are unreasonable. Self and others' bodies and lands can be mutually enjoyed, and what others transform is the basis of one's own; but one's own seeds have no principle of being enjoyed by others, and it would be unreasonable for others to transform it as this one's; since not all beings' seeds are equal, it should be said that this group has the remote object-condition, which in all stages is indefinite as to presence or absence.

第七心品未轉依位是俱生故，必仗外質，故亦定有疎所緣緣；已轉依位此非定有，緣真如等無外質故。

The seventh mind-group, in the state before the change of support, is innate, and must rely on an external basis, so it also definitely has a remote object-condition; in the state after the change of support, this is not definite, because it takes suchness and so on as object, with no external basis.

第六心品行相猛利，於一切位能自在轉，所仗外質或有、或無，疎所緣緣有、無不定。

The sixth mind-group has a fierce and sharp mode of appearance and can operate freely in all stages; the external basis it relies on may or may not exist, and the remote object-condition is indefinite as to presence or absence.

前五心品未轉依位，麁、鈍、劣故，必仗外質，故亦定有疎所緣緣；已轉依位此非定有，緣過、未等，無外質故。

The first five mind-groups, in the state before the change of support, are coarse, dull and weak, so they must rely on an external basis and also definitely have a remote object-condition; in the state after the change of support, this is not definite, because they take the past, future and so on as objects, with no external basis.

四、增上緣：謂若有法有勝勢用，能於餘法或順、或違。雖前三緣亦是增上，而今第四除彼取餘，為顯諸緣差別相故。

Fourth, the dominant condition: any dharma that has supreme power and function, and can accord with or go against other dharmas. Although the first three conditions are also dominant, here the fourth excludes them and takes the others, in order to show the distinguishing aspects of the conditions.

此順、違用於四處轉：生、住、成、得四事別故。

These functions of according and opposing operate in four places: because the four matters of arising, abiding, accomplishing and attaining are distinguished.

然增上用隨事雖多，而勝顯者唯二十二，應知即是二十二根。

But although the dominant functions are many according to the matter, the supreme and prominent are only twenty-two, which should be known as the twenty-two faculties.

前五色根以本識等所變眼等淨色為性；男女二根，身根所攝故，即以彼少分為性；命根但依本識親種分位假立，非別有性；意根總以八識為性；五受根如應，各自受為性；信等五根即以信等及善念等而為自性。

The first five material faculties have as their nature the pure form of the eye and the like transformed by the root consciousness and so on; the two faculties of male and female are included in the body faculty, so they take a small part of it as their nature; the life faculty is only provisionally established based on the distinctions of state of the direct seed of the root consciousness and is not a separate nature; the mind faculty takes the eight consciousnesses together as its nature; the five faculties of feeling, as appropriate, each take feeling as their nature; the five faculties of faith and so on take faith and so on and good thoughts and so on as their own nature.

未知當知根，體位有三種：一、根本位，謂在見道，除後剎那，無所未知可當知故。二、加行位，謂煖、頂、忍、世第一法，近能引發根本位故。三、資糧位，謂從為得諦現觀故，發起決定勝善法欲，乃至未得順決擇分所有善根名資糧位，能遠資生根本位故。

The faculty of coming to know what is not yet known has three kinds of stages: first, the root stage, that is, in the path of seeing, except for the last moment, because there is nothing unknown left to be known. Second, the stage of preparatory practice, that is, warmth, peak, patience and the highest worldly dharma, because they come near and can bring forth the root stage. Third, the stage of provision, that is, from the desire to attain the truths by direct realization one gives rise to the resolve and desire for the supreme good dharmas, up to the good roots before attaining the factors favorable to penetration, which are called the stage of provision, because they provide from afar for the root stage.

於此三位，信等五根、意、喜、樂、捨為此根性，加行等位於後勝法求證愁慼亦有憂根，非正善根，故多不說。

In these three stages, the five faculties of faith and so on, the faculty of mind, joy, pleasure and equanimity are the nature of this faculty; in the preparatory stages and so on, there is also the faculty of sorrow in seeking and realizing later supreme dharmas with anxiety and grief, but it is not the right good faculty, so it is mostly not mentioned.

前三無色有此根者，有勝見道傍修得故，或二乘位迴趣大者，為證法空，地前亦起九地所攝生空無漏，彼皆菩薩，此根攝故。

The first three formless realms have this faculty, because they gain it by incidental cultivation of the supreme path of seeing, or those of the two vehicles who turn toward the Great Vehicle, in order to realize the emptiness of dharmas, also arouse before the grounds the flawless emptiness of self included in the nine levels; those are all Bodhisattvas, and are included in this faculty.

菩薩見道亦有此根，但說地前，以時促故。

The Bodhisattva path of seeing also has this faculty, but it is spoken of only before the grounds, because the time is short.

始從見道最後剎那乃至金剛喻定，所有信等無漏九根皆是已知根性。未離欲者，於上解脫求證愁慼，亦有憂根，非正善根，故多不說。

From the last moment of the path of seeing up to the vajra-like concentration, all the nine flawless faculties of faith and so on are the nature of the faculty of already knowing. Those who have not left desire, in seeking and realizing higher liberation with anxiety and grief, also have the faculty of sorrow, but it is not the right good faculty, so it is mostly not mentioned.

諸無學位，無漏九根一切皆是具知根性。有頂雖有遊觀無漏，而不明利，非後三根。

In the stages beyond learning, all nine flawless faculties are the nature of the faculty of fully knowing. Although the Summit of Existence has flawless roaming contemplation, it is not clear and sharp and is not one of the last three faculties.

二十二根自性如是，諸餘門義，如論應知。

The nature of the twenty-two faculties is thus; the other aspects of meaning should be known as in the treatise.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other Bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial command by the Tripitaka Dharma Master Xuanzang.

如是四緣，依十五處，義差別故，立為十因。云何此依十五處立？

These four conditions, depending on fifteen bases and the differences of meaning, are established as ten causes. How are these established depending on fifteen bases?

一、語依處：謂法名、想所起語性，即依此處立隨說因。謂依此語隨見、聞等，說諸義故。此即能說為所說因；有論說此是名、想、見，由如名字取相，執著隨起說故，若依彼說便顯此因是語依處。

First, the basis of speech: the nature of speech that arises from dharma names and conceptions; depending on this base, the cause of following speech is established. That is, depending on this speech, one speaks of all meanings following seeing, hearing and so on. This is the cause that enables speaking about what is spoken of; a treatise says it is name, conception and seeing, because following name one takes the aspect and clings to it and then speech arises, and according to what they say, this cause is shown to be the basis of speech.

二、領受依處：謂所觀待能、所受性，即依此處立觀待因。謂觀待此令彼諸事或生、或住、或成、或得，此是彼觀待因。

Second, the basis of reception: the nature of the one that is relied upon, the one that can receive, and the one that is received; depending on this base, the cause of dependence is established. That is, this makes those various things either arise, abide, accomplish or attain by dependence, and this is the cause of dependence for them.

三、習氣依處：謂內、外種，未成熟位。即依此處，立牽引因。謂能牽引遠自果故。

Third, the basis of habit energy: inner and outer seeds in the unripe state. Depending on this base, the cause of drawing forth is established. That is, because it can draw forth its own distant effect.

四、有潤種子依處：謂內、外種，已成熟位。即依此處，立生起因。謂能生起近自果故。

Fourth, the basis of moistened seeds: inner and outer seeds in the ripe state. Depending on this base, the cause of production is established. That is, because it can produce its own near effect.

五、無間滅依處：謂心、心所等無間緣。六、境界依處：謂心、心所所緣緣。七、根依處：謂心、心所所依六根。八、作用依處：謂於所作業、作具、作用，即除種子餘助現緣。九、士用依處：謂於所作業、作者、作用，即除種子餘作現緣。十、真實見依處：謂無漏見，除引自種於無漏法能助引證。總依此六，立攝受因。謂攝受五辦有漏法，具攝受六辦無漏故。

Fifth, the basis of the immediately preceding cessation: the immediately preceding condition of mind and mental factors. Sixth, the basis of objects: the object-condition of mind and mental factors. Seventh, the basis of faculties: the six faculties on which mind and mental factors rely. Eighth, the basis of function: with regard to the action performed, the instrument of action and the function, which are the other conditions aiding manifest operation besides seeds. Ninth, the basis of human effort: with regard to the action performed, the agent and the function, which are the other conditions making manifest operation besides seeds. Tenth, the basis of true seeing: flawless seeing, besides bringing forth its own seeds, can assist in leading to realization of flawless dharmas. Depending in general on these six, the cause of acceptance is established. That is, accepting five accomplishes dharmas with outflows, and accepting six accomplishes flawless dharmas.

十一、隨順依處：謂無記、染、善現種諸行，能隨順同類勝品諸法。即依此處，立引發因。謂能引起同類勝行，及能引得無為法故。

Eleventh, the basis of accordance: the indeterminate, defiled and good conditioned actions with manifest seeds can accord with higher grades of dharmas of the same kind. Depending on this base, the cause of bringing forth is established. That is, it can bring forth supreme conduct of the same kind, and can lead to attaining the unconditioned dharma.

十二、差別功能依處：謂有為法，各於自果，有能起證差別勢力。即依此處，立定、異因。謂各能生自界等果，及各能得自乘果故。

Twelfth, the basis of distinctive capacity: conditioned dharmas, each in relation to its own effect, have a distinctive power to cause realization. Depending on this base, the cause of fixity and difference is established. That is, each can produce effects of its own realm and so on, and each can attain the fruit of its own vehicle.

十三、和合依處：謂從領受，乃至差別功能依處，於所生、住、成、得果中，有和合力。即依此處，立同事因。謂從觀待乃至定、異，皆同生等，一事業故。

Thirteenth, the basis of union: from reception up to the basis of distinctive capacity, in the effects of arising, abiding, accomplishing and attaining, there is the power of union. Depending on this base, the cause of shared work is established. That is, from dependence up to fixity and difference, all share one work of arising and so on.

十四、障礙依處：謂於生、住、成、得事中，能障礙法。即依此處，立相違因。謂彼能違生等事故。

Fourteenth, the basis of obstruction: dharmas that can obstruct in the matters of arising, abiding, accomplishing and attaining. Depending on this base, the cause of opposition is established. That is, because those can oppose the matters of arising and so on.

十五、不障礙依處：謂於生、住、成、得事中，不障礙法。即依此處，立不相違因。謂彼不違生等事故。

Fifteenth, the basis of non-obstruction: dharmas that do not obstruct in the matters of arising, abiding, accomplishing and attaining. Depending on this base, the cause of non-opposition is established. That is, because those do not oppose the matters of arising and so on.

如是十因，二因所攝：一、能生；二、方便。〈菩薩地〉說：「牽引種子、生起種子，名能生因；所餘諸因，方便因攝。」

These ten causes are included in two causes: first, the producing cause; second, the expedient cause. The Bodhisattva Ground says: "The seeds that draw forth and the seeds that bring forth are called the producing cause; the remaining causes are included in the expedient cause."

此說牽引、生起、引發、定異、同事、不相違中，諸因緣種未成熟位，名牽引種；已成熟位名生起種。彼六因中，諸因緣種，皆攝在此二位中故。雖有現起是能生因，如四因中生自種者，而多間斷，此略不說。或親辦果亦立種名，如說現行穀、麥等種。

This speaks of the causal seeds in drawing forth, bringing forth, leading forth, fixity and difference, shared work and non-opposition: in the unripe state they are called seeds that draw forth; in the ripe state they are called seeds that bring forth. In those six causes, all the causal seeds are gathered in these two states. Although there is manifest arising that is a producing cause, as in the four causes that produce their own seeds, it is often interrupted, so it is briefly not mentioned here. Or what directly accomplishes the effect is also called a seed, as when one speaks of manifest grain, wheat and so on as seeds.

所餘因謂初、二、五、九，及六因中非因緣法，皆是生、熟因緣種餘，故總說為方便因攝。

The remaining causes, namely the first, second, fifth and ninth, and the non-causal dharmas in the six causes, are all remainders of the causal seeds of birth and ripening, so they are in general called included in the expedient cause.

非此二種，唯屬彼二因；餘四因中，有因緣種故。非唯彼八，名所餘因，彼二因亦有非因緣種故。

It is not that these two kinds belong only to those two causes, since among the other four causes there are causal seeds. It is not only those eight that are called the remaining causes, since those two causes also have non-causal seeds.

有尋等地，說生起因，是能生因，餘方便攝。

In the Ground of Initial Thought and so on, it says the cause of bringing forth is the producing cause, and the others are included in the expedient.

此文意說：六因中現種是因緣者皆名生起因；能親生起自類果故。此所餘因，皆方便攝。

The meaning of this text is: among the six causes, those with manifest seeds that are causal conditions are all called the cause of bringing forth, because they can directly bring forth effects of their own kind. These remaining causes are all included in the expedient.

非此生起，唯屬彼因，餘五因中，有因緣故。非唯彼九，名所餘因，彼生起因中，有非因緣故。

It is not that this bringing forth belongs only to that cause, since among the other five causes there are causal conditions. It is not only those nine that are called the remaining causes, since in that cause of bringing forth there are non-causal conditions.

或〈菩薩地〉所說「牽引、生起種子」，即彼二因；「所餘諸因」即彼餘八。

Or the "seeds that draw forth and bring forth" spoken of in the Bodhisattva Ground are those two causes; the "remaining causes" are those other eight.

雖二因內，有非能生因，而因緣種勝，顯故偏說；雖餘因內，有非方便因，而增上者多，顯故偏說。

Although within the two causes there are those that are not producing causes, it speaks only of them because the causal seeds are supreme and prominent; although within the other causes there are those that are not expedient causes, it speaks of them only because dominant ones are many and prominent.

有尋等地說：「生起因是能生因；餘方便」者，「生起」即是彼生起因；「餘因」應知即彼餘九。

In the Ground of Initial Thought and so on it says: "The cause of bringing forth is the producing cause, and the others are expedient"; "bringing forth" is that cause of bringing forth; the "other causes" should be known as those other nine.

雖生起中有非因緣種，而去果近，親顯故偏說；雖牽引中亦有因緣種，而去果遠，親隱故不說。餘方便攝，準上應知。

Although within bringing forth there are non-causal seeds, it speaks of it only because it is near the effect and directly prominent; although within drawing forth there are also causal seeds, it does not speak of it because it is far from the effect and directly hidden. The rest, included in the expedient, should be known as above.

所說四緣，依何處立？復如何攝十因、二因？

The four conditions spoken of, depending on what are they established? And how do they include the ten causes and two causes?

論說因緣，依種子立；依無間滅，立等無間；依境界，立所緣；依所餘，立增上。

The treatise says: the causal condition is established on the basis of seeds; the immediately preceding condition is established on the basis of immediate cessation; the object-condition is established on the basis of objects; and the dominant condition is established on the basis of all the rest.

此中種子，即是三、四、十一、十二、十三、十五，六依處中因緣種攝；雖現四處，亦有因緣，而多間斷，此略不說。或彼亦能親辦自果，如外麥等，亦立種名。或種子言，唯屬第四，親、疎、隱、顯，取捨如前。

The seeds here are those included among the causal-condition seeds in the third, fourth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth and fifteenth of the six bases; although the four bases that manifest also have causal conditions, they are mostly interrupted, so they are omitted here. Or those also can directly produce their own results, like outer wheat and so on, and they too are given the name of seed. Or the term seed belongs only to the fourth, and the direct, remote, hidden and manifest, and the acceptance and rejection, are as before.

言無間滅、境界處者，應知總顯二緣依處，非唯五、六，餘依處中，亦有中間二緣義故。或唯五、六，餘處雖有，而少、隱故，略不說之。

As for those who speak of immediate cessation and the object base, it should be known that these generally show the bases of the two conditions, and are not only the fifth and sixth; in the other bases there are also the meanings of the two middle conditions. Or it is only the fifth and sixth because, though the other bases have them, they are few and hidden, so they are omitted.

論說因緣，能生因攝；增上緣性，即方便因；中間二緣，攝受因攝。雖方便內具後三緣，而增上多，故此偏說；餘因亦有中間二緣，然攝受中，顯故偏說。初能生攝，進退如前。

The treatise says: the causal condition is included in the producing cause; the nature of the dominant condition is the expedient cause; and the two middle conditions are included in the receiving cause. Although the expedient cause contains the latter three conditions within it, the dominant aspect predominates, so it is singled out here; the other causes also have the two middle conditions, but they are manifest within the receiving cause, so it is singled out. The first, included in the producing cause, advances and retreats as before.

所說因、緣，必應有果。此果有幾？依何處得？

What are called causes and conditions must have results. How many results are there? On what basis are they obtained?

果有五種：一者異熟，謂有漏善及不善法所招自相續異熟生無記；二者等流，謂習善等所引同類，或似先業，後果隨轉；三者離繫，謂無漏道斷障所證善無為法；四者士用，謂諸作者，假諸作具，所辦事業；五者增上，謂除前四，餘所得果。

There are five kinds of results: first, the result of maturation, namely the neutral results that mature in one's own continuity as summoned by contaminated good and by unwholesome dharmas; second, the result of outflow, namely the same kind drawn out by practiced good and so on, or those similar to the former action, with later results following; third, the result of separation from bondage, namely the wholesome unconditioned dharma realized through the uncontaminated path by cutting off obstructions; fourth, the result of human effort, namely the work accomplished by agents who borrow various instruments; fifth, the dominant result, namely all the results obtained other than the previous four.

《瑜伽》等說：習氣依處，得異熟果；隨順依處，得等流果；真見依處，得離繫果；士用依處，得士用果；所餘依處，得增上果。

The Yogacara and others say: on the basis of the impression bases, the result of maturation is obtained; on the basis of the conforming bases, the result of outflow is obtained; on the basis of the true-seeing bases, the result of separation is obtained; on the basis of the human-effort bases, the result of human effort is obtained; on the basis of the remaining bases, the dominant result is obtained.

習氣處言，顯諸依處感異熟果一切功能；隨順處言，顯諸依處引等流果一切功能；真見處言，顯諸依處證離繫果一切功能；士用處言，顯諸依處招士用果一切功能；所餘處言，顯諸依處得增上果一切功能。不爾，便應太寬、太狹。

The statement about the impression bases shows all the powers by which the bases bring about the result of maturation; the statement about the conforming bases shows all the powers by which the bases draw out the result of outflow; the statement about the true-seeing bases shows all the powers by which the bases realize the result of separation; the statement about the human-effort bases shows all the powers by which the bases bring about the result of human effort; the statement about the remaining bases shows all the powers by which the bases obtain the dominant result. Otherwise it would be too broad or too narrow.

或習氣者，唯屬第三，雖異熟因餘處亦有，此處亦有非異熟因；而異熟因，去果相遠，習氣亦爾，故此偏說。隨順唯屬第十一處，雖等流果餘處亦得，此處亦得非等流果；而此因招勝行相顯，隨順亦爾，故偏說之。真見處言，唯詮第十，雖證離繫餘處亦能，此處亦能得非離繫；而此證離繫，相顯故偏說。士用處言，唯詮第九，雖士用果餘處亦招，此處亦能招增上等；而名相顯，是故偏說。所餘唯屬餘十一處，雖十一處亦得餘果，招增上果餘處亦能；而此十一多招增上，餘已顯餘，故此偏說。

Or the impression belongs only to the third, for although the cause of maturation also exists in other bases, there are also non-maturation causes in this base; and the cause of maturation is remote from its result, and so are impressions, so it is singled out here. The conforming belongs only to the eleventh base, for although the result of outflow can be obtained in other bases, in this base non-outflow results are also obtained; and this cause brings about superior conduct that is manifest, and so does conformity, so it is singled out. As for the true-seeing base, it expresses only the tenth, for although realizing separation can occur in other bases, in this base non-separation can also be obtained; and this realization of separation is manifest, so it is singled out. As for the human-effort base, it expresses only the ninth, for although the result of human effort is also brought about in other bases, this base can also bring about the dominant and others; but the name is manifest, so it is singled out. The remainder belongs only to the remaining eleven bases, for although the eleven bases also obtain other results, and bringing about the dominant result can also occur in other bases, these eleven mostly bring about the dominant, and the others already show the others, so it is singled out here.

如是即說此五果中：若異熟果，牽引、生起、定異、同事、不相違因，增上緣得；若等流果，牽引、生起、攝受、引發、定異、同事、不相違因，初、後緣得；若離繫果，攝受、引發、定異、同事、不相違因，增上緣得；若士用果，有義：觀待、攝受、同事、不相違因，增上緣得，有義：觀待、牽引、生起、攝受、引發、定異、同事、不相違因，除所緣緣，餘三緣得；若增上果，十因、四緣一切容得。

This is to say that among these five results: the result of maturation is obtained through the causes of drawing, producing, fixing difference, working together, and not contradicting, and through the dominant condition; the result of outflow is obtained through the causes of drawing, producing, receiving, eliciting, fixing difference, working together and not contradicting, and through the first and last conditions; the result of separation is obtained through the causes of receiving, eliciting, fixing difference, working together and not contradicting, and through the dominant condition; the result of human effort, in one view, is obtained through the causes of dependence, receiving, working together and not contradicting, and the dominant condition, and in another view is obtained through the causes of dependence, drawing, producing, receiving, eliciting, fixing difference, working together and not contradicting, and, excluding the object-condition, the other three conditions; the dominant result may be obtained through all ten causes and four conditions.

傍論已了，應辯正論。

The side discussion is finished, and we should now take up the main treatise.

本識中種，容作三緣，生現分別，除等無間。謂各親種，是彼因緣；為所緣緣，於能緣者；若種於彼，有能助力，或不障礙，是增上緣。

The seeds in the root consciousness may act as three conditions, producing manifest discriminations, excluding the immediately preceding condition. That is, each one's own direct seeds are the causal conditions of those; as the object-condition, they are for what can take them as an object; and if the seeds have the power to help those or do not obstruct them, they are the dominant condition.

生淨現行，應知亦爾。

In producing pure manifest activity, it should be known that this is the same.

現起分別，展轉相望，容作三緣，無因緣故。

Manifestly arising discriminations, looking at each other in turn, may act as three conditions, since there is no causal condition.

謂有情類自、他，展轉容作二緣，除等無間。

That is, in the class of sentient beings, self and other in turn may act as two conditions, excluding the immediately preceding condition.

自八識聚，展轉相望，定有增上緣，必無等無間。所緣緣義，或無或有：八於七有；七於八無。餘七非八所仗質故。第七於六五無一有，餘六於彼一切皆無。第六於五無，餘五於彼有。五識唯託第八相故。

The clusters of one's own eight consciousnesses, looking at each other in turn, surely have the dominant condition and surely lack the immediately preceding condition. As for the object-condition, sometimes it is absent and sometimes present: the eighth toward the seventh has it, the seventh toward the eighth lacks it, since the others are not the eighth's relied-on basis. The seventh toward the sixth and fifth has one and not the other, and the other six toward those all lack it. The sixth toward the fifth lacks it, and the other five toward those have it, since the five consciousnesses rely only on the eighth's image.

自類前後，第六容三，餘除所緣，取現境故。許五後見緣前相者，五、七前後亦有三緣。前七於八，所緣容有，能燻成彼相、見種故。

Of the same kind, before and after, the sixth may have three, the others excluding the object-condition, since they take present objects. Those who allow that the later five see the former image as a condition also hold that the five and seven have three conditions before and after. The first seven toward the eighth may have the object-condition, since they can impregnate the image-part and seeing-part seeds of those.

同聚異體，展轉相望，唯有增上。諸相應法，所仗質同，不相緣故。或依見分，說不相緣；依相分說，有相緣義。謂諸相分，互為質起，如識中種，為觸等相質。不爾，無色，彼應無境故；設許變色，亦定緣種，勿見分境不同質故。

In the same cluster but different substances, looking at each other in turn, there is only the dominant condition. All associated dharmas have the same basis on which they rely and do not take each other as objects. Or, relying on the seeing-part, it is said they do not take each other as objects; relying on the image-part, there is a sense of mutual objects. That is, all image-parts arise as each other's bases, like the seeds in consciousness being the basis of the images of contact and so on. If this were not so, with no form, those would have no objects; and even if one allows that they transform form, they surely take seeds, so that the seeing-part's objects not having the same basis is avoided.

同體相分，為見二緣；見分於彼，但有增上。

The image-part of the same substance is the two conditions for the seeing-part; the seeing-part toward those has only the dominant condition.

見與自證，相望亦爾。餘二展轉，俱作二緣。此中不依種相分說，但說現起互為緣故。

The seeing-part and the self-witnessing part, looking at each other, are the same. The other two in turn all act as two conditions. Here it does not speak on the basis of seed image-parts, but speaks only of mutual condition by manifest arising.

淨八識聚，自、他展轉，皆有所緣，能遍緣故，唯除見分，非相所緣，相分理無能緣用故。

The pure eight consciousness clusters, self and other in turn, all have object-conditions, because they can take everything as objects, except the seeing-part, which is not an object of the image, because the image-part logically has no function of taking objects.

既現分別緣種現生，種亦理應緣現種起，現種於種能作幾緣？種必不由中二緣起，待心、心所立彼二故。現於親種具作二緣，與非親種但為增上。種望親種亦具二緣，於非親種亦但增上。

Since manifest discrimination takes seeds and manifestations arise, it is reasonable that seeds also take manifestations and seeds arise; as for manifestation and seeds toward seeds, how many conditions can they act as? Seeds surely do not arise from the two middle conditions, because they await the mind and mental factors to establish those two. Manifestation toward its direct seed acts as both conditions, and toward non-direct seeds is only the dominant condition. Seeds toward direct seeds also have both conditions, and toward non-direct seeds only the dominant condition.

依斯內識互為緣起，分別因、果，理、教皆成。所執外緣，設有無用，況違理、教，何固執為？

On this basis, that inner consciousnesses are mutual conditions for arising, the distinctions of cause and effect are established in both principle and teaching. As for the external conditions that are clung to, even if they exist they are useless, and moreover they contradict principle and teaching, so why cling to them?

雖「分別」言，總顯三界心及心所，而隨勝者，諸聖教中多門顯示，或說為二、三、四、五等。如餘論中，具廣分別。

Although the word "discrimination" generally refers to the minds and mental factors of the three realms, following the predominant, the holy teachings show it in many ways, sometimes as two, three, four, five and so on. As in other treatises, there are full distinctions.

雖有內識，而無外緣，由何有情生死相續？

Although there are inner consciousnesses and no external conditions, by what do sentient beings continue in birth and death?

頌曰：

The verse says:

１９由諸業習氣，二取習氣俱；

19. By the impressions of the various actions, together with the impressions of the two graspings,

前異熟既盡，復生餘異熟。

When the former maturation is exhausted, another maturation arises again.

論曰：諸業謂福、非福、不動，即有漏善、不善思業。業之眷屬亦立業名，同招引、滿異熟果故。

The treatise says: the various actions are meritorious, non-meritorious and unmoving, that is, contaminated good and unwholesome volitional actions. The attendants of action are also named action, because they likewise bring about the drawing and completing results of maturation.

此雖才起，無間即滅，無義能招當異熟果，而燻本識，起自功能，即此功能，說為習氣，是業氣分，燻習所成，簡曾現業，故名習氣。

Although this has just arisen, it ceases without interval and has no way of bringing about the future result of maturation, but it perfumes the root consciousness and gives rise to its own potential; this potential is called an impression, which is a portion of the action's qi formed by perfuming, distinguished from past actions manifest, and so it is called an impression.

如是習氣，展轉相續，至成熟時，招異熟果，此顯當果勝增上緣。

Such impressions continue in succession, and when they ripen, they bring about the result of maturation, which shows that the future result is a superior dominant condition.

相見、名色、心及心所、本末，彼取皆二取攝。彼所燻發，親能生彼本識上功能，名二取習氣。此顯來世異熟果心，及彼相應諸因緣種。「俱」謂業種、二取種俱，是疎、親緣，互相助義。

The image and seeing parts, name and form, mind and mental factors, root and branch, all of these graspings are included in the two graspings. The potentials in the root consciousness that those perfume and arouse and directly produce are called the impressions of the two graspings. This shows the maturation-result mind of the future life and the various causal seeds associated with it. "Together" means that the seeds of action and the seeds of the two graspings, as remote and direct conditions, help one another.

業招生顯，故頌先說。

Action brings about birth, which is manifest, so the verse mentions it first.

「前異熟」者，謂前前生業異熟果；「餘異熟」者，謂後後生業異熟果。

"Former maturation" means the result of maturation of actions of earlier and earlier lives; "another maturation" means the result of maturation of actions of later and later lives.

雖二取種受果無窮，而業習氣受果有盡，由異熟果性別難招；等流、增上性同易感。

Although the seeds of the two graspings receive results without end, the impressions of action receive results that are exhausted, because the result of maturation is different in nature and hard to bring about, while outflow and dominant results are the same in nature and easy to induce.

由感餘生業等種熟，前異熟果受用盡時，復別能生餘異熟果。

When the seeds of the action that brings about another life are ripe, and the maturation result of the former life is exhausted in being enjoyed, another result of maturation can again be produced.

由斯生死輪轉無窮，何假外緣方得相續？此頌意說：由業、二取，生死輪迴皆不離識，心、心所法為彼性故。

So birth and death revolve without end; what need is there for external conditions for it to continue? The meaning of this verse is that by action and the two graspings, the wheel of birth and death never leaves consciousness, since minds and mental factors are the nature of those.

復次，生死相續，由諸習氣。

Moreover, the continuity of birth and death comes from the various impressions.

然諸習氣總有三種：一、名言習氣，謂有為法各別親種。名言有二：一表義名言，即能詮義，音聲差別；二顯境名言，即能了境心、心所法。隨二名言所燻成種，作有為法各別因緣。

The impressions are in general of three kinds: first, the impressions of name and word, namely the separate direct seeds of conditioned dharmas. Names and words are of two kinds: one is the name and word that expresses meaning, namely the differences of sound that can express meaning; the other is the name and word that shows objects, namely the minds and mental factors that can cognize objects. The seeds formed by perfuming according to the two kinds of name and word act as the separate causal conditions of conditioned dharmas.

二、我執習氣，謂虛妄執我、我所種。我執有二：一、俱生我執，即修所斷我、我所執；二、分別我執，即見所斷我、我所執。隨二我執所燻成種，令有情等自、他差別。

Second, the impressions of self-grasping, namely the seeds of falsely clinging to a self and what belongs to a self. Self-grasping is of two kinds: one is innate self-grasping, the clinging to self and what belongs to self that is cut off in cultivation; the other is discriminative self-grasping, the clinging to self and what belongs to self that is cut off by seeing. The seeds formed by perfuming according to the two kinds of self-grasping bring about the differences of self and other among sentient beings and the like.

三、有支習氣，謂招三界異熟業種。有支有二：一、有漏善，即是能招可愛果業；二、諸不善，即是能招非愛果業。隨二有支所燻成種，令異熟果善、惡趣別。應知我執、有支習氣，於差別果是增上緣。

Third, the impressions of the factors of existence, namely the seeds of actions that bring about the maturation of the three realms. The factors of existence are of two kinds: one is contaminated good, which is the action that brings about a lovable result; the other is the various unwholesome, which is the action that brings about an unlovable result. The seeds formed by perfuming according to the two kinds of factors of existence bring about the distinction between good and evil destinies in the maturation result. It should be known that the impressions of self-grasping and of the factors of existence are dominant conditions for the differentiated results.

此頌所言「業習氣」者，應知即是有支習氣；「二取習氣」，應知即是我執、名言二種習氣。取我、我所及取名言而燻成故，皆說名「取」。

The "impressions of action" spoken of in this verse should be known to be the impressions of the factors of existence; the "impressions of the two graspings" should be known to be the two kinds of impressions of self-grasping and of name and word. Because they grasp a self and what belongs to a self, and because they are formed by perfuming through grasping names and words, they are all called "grasping."

「俱」等餘文，義如前釋。

The remaining text such as "together" has the same meaning as explained above.

復次，生死相續，由惑、業、苦。

Moreover, the continuity of birth and death comes from delusion, action and suffering.

發業、潤生煩惱，名惑；能感後有諸業，名業；業所引生眾苦，名苦。惑、業、苦種，皆名習氣。前二習氣，與生死苦為增上緣，助生苦故。第三習氣，望生死苦能作因緣，親生苦故。頌三習氣，如應當知：惑、苦名取，能、所取故。取是著義，業不得名。

The afflictions that give rise to action and moisten rebirth are called delusion; the actions that can bring about later existence are called action; and the various sufferings produced by action are called suffering. The seeds of delusion, action and suffering are all called impressions. The first two kinds of impressions are dominant conditions for the suffering of birth and death, because they help produce suffering. The third kind of impression, in relation to the suffering of birth and death, can act as a causal condition, because it directly produces suffering. The three impressions in the verse should be understood accordingly: delusion and suffering are called grasping, because they are both grasper and grasped. Grasping means attachment, and action does not receive this name.

「俱」等餘文，義如前釋。

The remaining text such as "together" has the same meaning as explained above.

此惑、業、苦，應知總攝十二有支。謂從無明乃至老死，如論廣釋。

These delusion, action and suffering should be known to include all twelve factors of existence, namely from ignorance up to old age and death, as the treatise explains at length.

然十二支，略攝為四：

The twelve factors are summarized as four:

一、能引支：謂無明、行，能引識等五果種故。

First, the leading factors: namely ignorance and formations, because they lead to the seeds of the five results beginning with consciousness.

此中無明，唯取能發正感後世善、惡業者，即彼所發，乃名為行。由此一切順現受業，別助當業，皆非行支。

The ignorance here is taken only as what can give rise to good and evil actions that properly bring about the later world, and what is thus produced is called formations. Therefore all actions to be experienced in the present life and those that only help future action are not the factor of formations.

二、所引支：謂本識內親生當來異熟果，攝識等五種，是前二支所引發故。

Second, the led factors: namely the results of maturation of the future that are directly produced within the root consciousness, included in the five kinds beginning with consciousness, because they are what the first two factors lead out.

此中識種，謂本識因，除後三因，餘因皆是名色種攝。後之三因，如名次第，即後三種。或名色種，總攝五因，於中隨勝，立餘四種，六處與識，總別亦然。

The seeds of consciousness here are the cause of the root consciousness; excluding the latter three causes, the other causes are all included in the seeds of name and form. The latter three causes, in the order of the names, are the latter three kinds. Or the seeds of name and form generally include five causes, and among them, following the predominant, the other four kinds are established; for the six sense bases and consciousness, general and specific, it is also the same.

《集論》說識亦是能引，識中業種，名識支故；異熟識種，名色攝故。經說識支通能、所引，業種、識種，俱名識故；識是名色依，非名色攝故。識等五種由業燻發，雖實同時，而依主伴、總別、勝劣、因果相異，故諸聖教假說前後，或依當來、現起分位有次第故，說有前後。由斯識等，亦說現行；因時定無現行義故。復由此說生、引同時；潤、未潤時必不俱故。

The Compendium says that consciousness is also a leading factor, because the seeds of action within consciousness are called the factor of consciousness, while the seeds of maturation consciousness are included in name and form. The sutra says that the factor of consciousness covers both the leading and the led, because both the seeds of action and the seeds of consciousness are called consciousness; consciousness is the basis of name and form and is not included in name and form. Although the five seeds beginning with consciousness are perfumed and aroused by action and are in fact simultaneous, they differ in terms of principal and associate, general and specific, superior and inferior, cause and effect, so the holy teachings provisionally speak of before and after, or say there is before and after in terms of the future and the stages of manifestation having an order. Hence consciousness and the others are also said to be manifest; but at the time of causes there is surely no sense of manifestation. Also, from this it is said that producing and leading are simultaneous; since moistening and not yet moistening are surely not together.

三、能生支：謂愛、取、有，近生當來生、老死故。

Third, the producing factors: namely craving, grasping and becoming, since they directly produce the future birth, old age and death.

謂緣迷內異熟果愚，發正能招後有諸業為緣，引發親生當來生、老死位五果種已，復依迷外增上果愚，緣境界受，發起貪愛，緣愛復生欲等四取，愛、取合潤，能引業種及所引因，轉名為「有」，俱能近有後有果故。有處唯說業種名「有」，此能正感異熟果故。復有唯說五種名有，親生當來識等種故。

That is, conditioned by delusion about the inner result of maturation, actions that properly bring about later existence become the condition; after having aroused and directly produced the five kinds of seeds of the future stages of birth, old age and death, one then relies on delusion about the outer dominant result, experiences sensations toward objects, arouses craving, and with craving as the condition again produces the four kinds of grasping such as desire; craving and grasping together moisten, and the seeds of leading action and the causes that are led are renamed "becoming," since all can directly bring about the later existence's result. In some places only the seeds of action are called "becoming," because they properly bring about the result of maturation. In others only the five kinds are called becoming, because they directly produce the seeds of future consciousness and the rest.

四、所生支：謂生、老死，是愛、取、有近所生故。

Fourth, the produced factors: namely birth, old age and death, since these are directly produced by craving, grasping and becoming.

謂從「中有」至「本有」中，未衰變來，皆「生支」攝，諸衰變位，總名為老；身壞命終，乃名為「死」。

That is, from the "intermediate existence" to "original existence," the period before decline sets in is all included in the "factor of birth," and all the stages of decline are generally called old age; when the body perishes and life ends, it is called "death."

老非定有，附死立支。

Old age does not definitely exist, and so is established as a factor by attaching it to death.

病何非支？不遍、定故。老雖不定，遍故立支，諸界、趣、生除中夭者，將終皆有衰朽行故。

Why is sickness not a factor? Because it is neither universal nor definite. Old age, though not definite, is universal, so it is established as a factor, since in all realms, destinies and births, except those who die young, all show decay and decline as they approach death.

名色不遍，何故立支？

Name and form are not universal, so why are they established as a factor?

定故立支，胎、卵、濕生者，六處未滿，定有名色故。

They are established because they are definite: for beings born from wombs, eggs and moisture, the six sense bases are not yet complete, and name and form definitely exist.

又名色支，亦是遍有。有色化生，初受生位，雖具五根，而未有用，爾時未名六處支故。初生無色，雖定有意根而不明瞭，未名意處故；由斯論說，十二有支，一切一分，上二界有。

Moreover, the factor of name and form also universally exists. For those with form who are born by transformation, in the first stage of taking birth, although they have the five faculties, they are not yet in use, and at that time it is not yet called the factor of the six sense bases. For those first born in the formless realm, although the mind faculty definitely exists it is not yet clear, and it is not yet called the mind base; so the treatise says that of the twelve factors of existence, all or part exist in the upper two realms.

愛非遍有，寧別立支？生惡趣者，不愛彼故。

Craving is not universal, so why is it established as a separate factor? Those born in evil destinies do not love those (states).

定故別立，不求無有生善趣者，定有愛故。不還潤生，愛雖不起，然如彼取，定有種故。

It is established separately because it is definite: those who seek non-existence and are born in good destinies definitely have craving. For the non-returner who moistens rebirth, although craving does not arise, the seeds definitely exist like that grasping.

又愛亦遍，生惡趣者，於現我境，亦有愛故。依無希求，惡趣身愛，經說非有，非彼全無。

Craving is also universal, because those born in evil destinies also have craving toward the objects of the present self. According to the lack of hope, the sutra says that craving for a body in evil destinies does not exist, but it is not that those are wholly without it.

何緣所生立生、老死？所引別立識等五支？

Why are birth, old age and death established as the produced factors, while the five factors beginning with consciousness are separately established as the led?

「因位」難知差別相故，依當果位，別立五支。

Because the differentiated aspects at the causal stage are hard to know, on the basis of the stage of the future result five factors are separately established.

謂續生時，因識相顯，次根未滿，名色相增；次根滿時，六處明盛；依斯發觸，因觸起受；爾時乃名受果究竟。依此果位，立因為五。果位易了，差別相故，總立二支，以顯三苦。然所生果若在未來，為生厭故，說生、老死；若至現在，為令了知分位相生，說識等五。

That is, at the time of continued birth, the aspect of causal consciousness is manifest; next, when the faculties are not yet complete, name and form increase; next, when the faculties are complete, the six sense bases are bright and flourishing; relying on this, contact arises, and because of contact, sensation arises; at that time it is called the final stage of the experienced result. On the basis of this stage of result, five are established as causes. The stages of result are easy to understand and have differentiated aspects, so two factors are generally established to show the three sufferings. If the produced result is in the future, then, to give rise to aversion, birth, old age and death are spoken of; if it has reached the present, in order to make known the stages that arise, the five beginning with consciousness are spoken of.

何緣發業總立無明，潤業位中別立愛、取？

Why is ignorance generally established for arousing action, while craving and grasping are separately established at the stage of moistening action?

雖諸煩惱皆能發、潤，而發業位無明力增，以具十一殊勝事故。謂所緣等，廣如經說。

Although all afflictions can arouse and moisten, at the stage of arousing action the power of ignorance increases, because it has eleven special features. These are objects and so on, as explained at length in the sutra.

於潤業位，愛力偏增，說愛如水，能沃潤故。要數溉灌方生「有」芽。且依初、後，分愛、取二，無重發義，立一無明。雖取支中，攝諸煩惱，而愛潤勝，說是愛增。

At the stage of moistening action, the power of craving especially increases; craving is said to be like water that can moisten and irrigate. Only by repeated irrigation does the sprout of "becoming" grow. And taking the first and last, craving and grasping are distinguished as two, with no meaning of repeated arousing, so one ignorance is established. Although the factor of grasping includes all afflictions, the moistening of craving is superior, so it is said that craving increases.

諸緣起支皆依自地？有所發行依他無明，如下無明發上地行。不爾，初伏下地染者，所起上定，應非行支，彼地無明猶未起故。

Do all the dependent-arising factors depend on their own level? There are formations aroused that rely on ignorance of other levels, such as lower ignorance arousing higher-level formations. If not, the higher concentration aroused by first suppressing defilements of a lower level would not be a factor of formations, since the ignorance of that level has not yet arisen.

從上、下地生下、上者，彼緣何受而起愛支？彼愛亦緣當生地受，若現、若種，於理無違。

For those born from higher or lower levels into lower or higher ones, in what sensation do they take their craving factor and arouse it? That craving also takes the sensation of the level of future birth, either manifest or as seeds, with no contradiction in principle.

此十二支，十因、二果，定不同世。因中前七與愛、取、有，或異或同。若二、三、七各定同世。如是十二，一重因果，足顯輪轉，及離斷、常，施設兩重，實為無用，或應過此，便致無窮。

Of these twelve factors, ten are causes and two are results, and they surely do not belong to the same life. Among the causes, the first seven and craving, grasping and becoming may be either different or the same. The second, third and seventh each definitely belong to the same life. Thus the twelve make one round of cause and effect, enough to show the cycle, and to separate from cut-off and eternity; to set up two rounds is in fact useless, and if it were more than this, it would lead to infinite regress.

此十二支義門別者：九實、三假。已潤六支，合為有故；即識等五，三相位別，名生等故。

The twelve factors are distinguished through their aspects: nine are real and three are provisional. The six factors that have been moistened combine to be "becoming"; and the five beginning with consciousness, distinguished by three characteristic stages, are called birth and so on.

五是一事，謂無明、識、觸、受、愛五；餘非一事。

Five are of one substance, namely ignorance, consciousness, contact, sensation and craving; the others are not of one substance.

三唯是染，煩惱性故；七唯不染，異熟果故；七分位中容起染故，假說通二，餘通二種。

Three are only defiled, because they are of the nature of affliction; seven are only undefiled, because they are results of maturation; because in the stages of the seven, defilement may arise, they are provisionally said to cover both; the others cover both kinds.

無明、愛、取說名獨相，不與餘支相交雜故；餘是雜相。

Ignorance, craving and grasping are called solitary in character, because they do not mix with the other factors; the others are mixed in character.

六唯非色，謂無明、識、觸、受、愛、取；餘通二種。

Six are only non-material, namely ignorance, consciousness, contact, sensation, craving and grasping; the others cover both kinds.

皆是有漏，唯有為攝。

All are contaminated, and all are included only in the conditioned.

無漏無為，非有支故。

The uncontaminated and the unconditioned are not factors of existence.

「無明」、「愛」、「取」，唯通不善、有覆無記；「行」唯善、惡；「有」通善、惡、無覆無記；餘七唯是無覆無記。七分位中，亦起善、染。

"Ignorance," "craving" and "grasping" cover only the unwholesome and the obscured-neutral; "formations" are only good and evil; "becoming" covers good, evil and unobscured-neutral; the other seven are only unobscured-neutral. In the stages of the seven, good and defiled states may also arise.

雖皆通三界，而有分、有全。

Although all cover the three realms, there are partial and whole.

上地行支，能伏下地，即麁、苦等六種行相。有求上生，而起彼故。

The factor of formations of a higher level can suppress the lower level, namely the six aspects such as coarse and painful; because one seeks higher birth and arouses those.

一切皆唯非學、無學聖者所起有漏善業，明為緣故，違有支故，非有支攝。由此應知聖必不造感後有業，於後苦果不迷求故。雜修靜慮，資下故業，生淨居等，於理無違。

All are only neither in training nor beyond training, because the contaminated good actions arisen by saints have wisdom as condition and are opposed to the factors of existence, and so are not included in the factors of existence. From this it should be known that saints surely do not create actions that bring about later existence, because they are not deluded about or seeking the later result of suffering. For one who practices mixed meditation, assisting lower former action and being born in the Pure Abodes and so on, there is no contradiction in principle.

有義：無明唯見所斷，要迷諦理能發行故，聖必不造後有業故；愛、取二支唯修所斷，貪求當有而潤生故，九種命終心俱生愛俱故；餘九皆通見、修所斷。

In one view: ignorance is only what is cut off by seeing, because only through delusion about the truths can it arouse formations, and saints surely do not create actions that bring later existence; craving and grasping are only what is cut off by cultivation, because they covet future existence and moisten rebirth, and because the nine kinds are born together with the mind at death and with craving; the other nine all cover what is cut off by seeing and by cultivation.

有義：一切皆通二斷。

In another view: all cover both kinds of cutting off.

論說：預流果已斷一切一分有支，無全斷者故。若無明支唯見所斷，寧說預流無全斷者？若愛、取支唯修所斷，寧說彼已斷一切支一分？又說全界一切煩惱，皆能結生，往惡趣行，唯分別起煩惱能發，不言潤生唯修所斷，諸感後有行，皆見所斷發。

The treatise says: the stream-enterer has already cut off a part of all factors of existence, and has no factor that is wholly cut off. If the factor of ignorance were only cut off by seeing, how could one say the stream-enterer has none wholly cut off? If the factors of craving and grasping were only cut off by cultivation, how could one say they have already cut off a part of all factors? It also says that all afflictions of the whole realm can bind rebirth, and that going to evil destinies is aroused only by discriminative afflictions; it does not say that moistening birth is cut off only by cultivation, and the actions that bring about later existence are all aroused by what is cut off by seeing.

由此故知無明、愛、取三支，亦通見、修所斷。然無明支正發行者，唯見所斷，助者不定；愛、取二支正潤生者，唯修所斷，助者不定。

For this reason it is known that the three factors of ignorance, craving and grasping also cover what is cut off by seeing and by cultivation. But the ignorance factor that properly arouses formations is only what is cut off by seeing, while what merely helps is not definite; the two factors of craving and grasping that properly moisten birth are only what is cut off by cultivation, while what merely helps is not definite.

又染汙法自性應斷，對治起時彼永斷故。一切有漏不染汙法，非性應斷，不違道故。然有二義說之為斷：一、離縛故，謂斷緣彼、雜彼煩惱；二、不生故，謂斷彼依令永不起。依離縛斷，說有漏善、無覆無記，唯修所斷；依不生斷說諸惡趣、無想定等，唯見所斷。說十二支通二斷者，於前諸斷，如應當知。

Also, the own-nature of defiled dharmas should be cut off, because when the antidote arises they are forever cut off. All contaminated undefiled dharmas are not of a nature to be cut off, because they do not oppose the Path. But there are two meanings for saying they are cut off: first, because of separation from bondage, namely cutting off the afflictions that condition or mix with them; second, because of non-arising, namely cutting off their basis so that they never arise. By cutting off through separation from bondage, it is said that contaminated good and unobscured-neutral states are only cut off by cultivation; by cutting off through non-arising, it is said that evil destinies, the meditation without thought, and so on are only cut off by seeing. The statement that the twelve factors cover both kinds of cutting off should be understood with the above cuttings off as appropriate.

十樂、捨俱，受不與受共相應故；老死位中，多分無樂及容捨故。十一苦俱，非受俱故。

The tenth is associated with pleasure and equanimity, because sensation is not in common association with sensation; and in the stage of old age and death, for the most part there is no pleasure and equanimity is possible. The eleventh is associated with suffering, because it is not associated with sensation.

十一少分壞苦所攝，老死位中，多無樂受，依樂立壞，故不說之。十二少分苦苦所攝，一切支中，有苦受故；十二全分，行苦所攝，諸有漏法皆行苦故，依捨受說十一少分，除老死支，如壞苦說。實義如是，諸聖教中，隨彼相增，所說不定。

The eleventh is included in a small part of the suffering of change; in the stage of old age and death there is mostly no pleasant sensation, and the suffering of change is established in dependence on pleasure, so it is not spoken of. The twelfth is included in a small part of the suffering of suffering, because among all the factors there is painful sensation; the twelve factors as a whole are included in the suffering of conditioned existence, because all contaminated dharmas are suffering in that they are conditioned; on the basis of equanimity, eleven are said to be partial, except the factor of old age and death, as in the suffering of change. The true meaning is thus; in the holy teachings, following the one that predominates, what is said is not fixed.

皆苦諦攝，取蘊性故。五亦集諦攝，業煩惱性故。

All are included in the truth of suffering, because they are of the nature of the grasping aggregates. The five are also included in the truth of origination, because they are of the nature of action and affliction.

諸支相望，增上定有，餘之三緣，有無不定。契經依定，唯說有一。愛望於取，有望於生，有因緣義。若說識支是業種者，行望於識，亦作因緣。餘支相望，無因緣義。而《集論》說，無明望行，有因緣者，依無明時，業習氣說，無明俱故，假說無明，實是行種。《瑜伽論》說，諸支相望無因緣者，依現愛、取，唯業有說。無明望行，愛望於取，生望老死有餘二緣。有望於生，受望於愛，無等無間，有所緣緣。餘支相望，二俱非有。

Looking at one another, the factors surely have the dominant condition, while the other three conditions are not definitely present or absent. The sutra, relying on what is definite, speaks only of one. Craving toward grasping and becoming toward birth have the sense of causal condition. If the factor of consciousness is taken to be the seeds of action, formations toward consciousness also act as causal condition. The other factors looking at one another have no causal condition. But the Compendium says that ignorance toward formations has a causal condition, relying on the time of ignorance and speaking of the impression of action, because it arises together with ignorance, so it is provisionally called ignorance, while in reality it is the seed of formations. The Yogacara Treatise says that the factors looking at one another have no causal condition, relying on manifest craving and grasping, and speaking only of action. Ignorance toward formations, craving toward grasping, and birth toward old age and death have the other two conditions. Becoming toward birth and sensation toward craving lack the immediately preceding condition and have the object-condition. The other factors looking at one another have neither of the two.

此中且依隣近、順次、不相雜亂，實緣起說。異此相望，為緣不定。諸聰慧者，如理應思。

Here we speak only according to the real dependent arising, which is adjacent, sequential and not mixed up. In the case of looking at each other otherwise than this, whether they are conditions is not definite. The wise should reflect on this and choose according to principle.

惑、業、苦三攝十二者：無明、愛、取，是惑所攝；行、有一分，是業所攝；七、有一分，是苦所攝。

Delusion, action and suffering include the twelve: ignorance, craving and grasping are included in delusion; formations and a part of becoming are included in action; the seven and a part of becoming are included in suffering.

有處說業全攝有者，應知彼依「業有」說故。有處說識業所攝者，彼說業種為識支故。

In some places it is said that action is entirely included in becoming; it should be known that they speak on the basis of "becoming of action." In some places consciousness is said to be included in action; they say that the seeds of action are the factor of consciousness.

惑、業所招獨名苦者，唯苦諦攝，為生厭故。

What is brought about by delusion and action and uniquely called suffering is included only in the truth of suffering, in order to give rise to aversion.

由惑、業、苦即十二支故，此能令生死相續。

Because delusion, action and suffering are the twelve factors, they can cause the continuity of birth and death.

復次，生死相續，由內因緣，不待外緣，故唯有識。

Moreover, the continuity of birth and death comes from internal causes and conditions, without needing external conditions, so there is only consciousness.

因謂有漏、無漏二業正感生死，故說為因；緣謂煩惱、所知二障助感生死，故說為緣。

Cause means the two kinds of action, contaminated and uncontaminated, which properly bring about birth and death, so they are called cause; condition means the two obstructions, of affliction and of the knowable, which help bring about birth and death, so they are called condition.

所以者何？

Why is this so?

生死有二：

There are two kinds of birth and death:

一、分段生死，謂諸有漏善、不善業，由煩惱障緣助勢力，所感三界麁異熟果，身命短長，隨因緣力，有定齊限，故名分段。

First, birth and death in divided segments, namely the various contaminated good and unwholesome actions, which by the aid of the power of the conditions of the affliction obstruction bring about the coarse maturation results of the three realms; the length of body and life follows the power of causes and conditions and has a definite limit, so it is called divided segments.

二、不思議變易生死，謂諸無漏有分別業，由所知障緣助勢力，所感殊勝細異熟果。

Second, inconceivable transformational birth and death, namely the various uncontaminated discriminating actions, which by the aid of the power of the conditions of the obstruction of the knowable bring about subtle and superior maturation results.

由悲願力，改轉身命，無定齊限，故名變易；無漏定願正所資、感，妙用難測，名不思議。

By the power of compassionate vows, they change body and life without a definite limit, so it is called transformation; the uncontaminated concentrations and vows are what properly support and bring it about, and its wondrous function is hard to fathom, so it is called inconceivable.

或名「意成身」，隨意願成故。如契經說：如取為緣，有漏業因，續後有者，而生三有。如是無明習地為緣，無漏業因，有阿羅漢、獨覺、已得自在菩薩，生三種意成身。

It is also called the "mind-made body," because it is formed according to the will and vow. As the sutra says: as grasping is the condition and contaminated action is the cause, continuing into later existence, one is born in the three existences. In the same way, with the habit of ignorance as condition and uncontaminated action as cause, there are arhats, pratyekabuddhas, and Bodhisattvas who have attained mastery, who are born with three kinds of mind-made bodies.

亦名變化身，無漏定力，轉令異本，如變化故。如有論說：聲聞無學永盡後有，云何能證無上菩提？依變化身，證無上覺，非業報身，故不違理。

It is also called the transformation body, because by the power of uncontaminated concentration it changes and makes the body differ from its original, as in transformation. As a treatise says: shravakas beyond training have forever exhausted later existence; how can they realize unsurpassed bodhi? It is on the basis of the transformation body that they realize unsurpassed enlightenment, and since it is not a body of karmic retribution, there is no contradiction in principle.

若所知障助無漏業，能感生死，二乘定性，應不永入無餘涅槃。如諸異生拘煩惱故。

If the obstruction of the knowable helped uncontaminated action to bring about birth and death, then those of the two vehicles with fixed nature should not forever enter nirvana without remainder, just as ordinary beings are bound by afflictions.

如何道諦實能感苦？誰言實感？不爾，如何？無漏定、願，資有漏業，令所得果，相續長時，展轉增勝，假說名感。如是感時，由所知障為緣助力，非獨能感。然所知障，不障解脫，無能發業潤生用故。

How can the Path truth really bring about suffering? Who says it really brings it about? It is not so. How then? Uncontaminated concentrations and vows support contaminated action and make the results obtained continue for a long time and grow ever more excellent, which is provisionally called bringing about. When it thus brings about, the obstruction of the knowable is the condition that helps, and it cannot bring about alone. But the obstruction of the knowable does not obstruct liberation, since it has no power to arouse action and moisten birth.

何用資感生死苦為？自證菩提，利樂他故。謂不定性獨覺、聲聞，及得自在大願菩薩，已永斷伏煩惱障故，無容復受當分段身。恐廢長時修菩薩行，遂以無漏勝定願力，如延壽法資現身因，令彼長時與果不絕，數數如是定願資助，乃至證得無上菩提。

What is the use of supporting and bringing about the suffering of birth and death? It is to realize bodhi oneself and benefit and delight others. That is, indeterminate-nature pratyekabuddhas and shravakas, and Bodhisattvas with great vows who have attained mastery, have already forever cut off and subdued the affliction obstruction, so there is no way for them again to receive a body of divided segments. Fearing to abandon the long practice of the Bodhisattva path, they use the power of uncontaminated superior concentration and vows, like the method of extending life that supports the cause of the present body, to make those continue for a long time with results unbroken, supporting them repeatedly with such concentration and vows until they realize unsurpassed bodhi.

彼復何須所知障助？既未圓證無相大悲，不執菩提、有情實有，無由發起猛利悲願；又所知障，障大菩提，為永斷除，留身久住；又所知障為有漏依，此障若無，彼定非有，故於身住，有大助力。

Why do those also need the help of the obstruction of the knowable? Since they have not yet perfectly realized the great compassion without marks, and do not cling to bodhi and sentient beings as truly existing, they have no way of giving rise to fierce, strong compassionate vows; and the obstruction of the knowable obstructs great bodhi, so in order to cut it off forever they leave their bodies to stay long; and the obstruction of the knowable is the basis of the contaminated, and if this obstruction did not exist, those would certainly not exist, so it gives great help to staying in the body.

若所留身，有漏定願所資助者，分段身攝，二乘、異生所知境故。無漏定願所資助者，變易身攝，非彼境故。

If the body left is supported by contaminated concentration and vows, it is included in the body of divided segments, because it is the object of knowledge of the two vehicles and ordinary beings. If supported by uncontaminated concentration and vows, it is included in the transformation body, because it is not their object.

由此應知，變易生死，性是有漏，異熟果攝，於無漏業，是增上果。有聖教中說為無漏，出三界者，隨助因說。

From this it should be known that transformational birth and death is contaminated in nature and included in the result of maturation, and in relation to uncontaminated action it is a dominant result. In some holy teachings it is said to be uncontaminated and beyond the three realms, speaking according to its helping cause.

頌中所言諸業習氣，即前所說二業種子；二取習氣即前所說二障種子，俱執著故。「俱」等餘文，義如前釋。

The impressions of the various actions spoken of in the verse are the two kinds of seeds of action spoken of earlier; the impressions of the two graspings are the seeds of the two obstructions spoken of earlier, because they are clung to. The remaining text such as "together" has the same meaning as explained earlier.

變易生死，雖無分段前後異熟別盡別生，而數資助，前後改轉，亦有前盡餘復生義。雖亦由現生死相續，而種定有，頌偏說之。或為顯示真異熟，因果皆不離本識，故不說現。現異熟因，不即與果。轉識間斷，非異熟故。

Transformational birth and death, though it lacks the separate ending and separate arising of before and after maturation as in divided segments, is repeatedly supported and changes before and after, so there is also the sense of the former ending and another arising again. Although it also continues by present birth and death, the seeds definitely exist, so the verse singles them out. Or to show that true maturation, cause and effect, never leaves the root consciousness, it does not speak of the present. The cause of present maturation does not immediately give its result. Because the evolving consciousnesses are interrupted, they are not maturation.

前、中、後際，生死輪迴，不待外緣，既由內識，淨法相續，應知亦然。謂無始來，依附本識，有、無漏種，由轉識等，數數燻發，漸漸增勝，乃至究竟，得成佛時，轉捨本來雜染識種，轉得始起清淨種識，任持一切功德種子。由本願力，盡未來際，起諸妙用，相續無窮。

The cycle of birth and death through the former, middle and later limits does not depend on external conditions, since it comes from inner consciousness; and the continuity of the pure dharmas should be known to be the same. That is, since beginningless time the contaminated and uncontaminated seeds that rely on the root consciousness are repeatedly perfumed and aroused by the evolving consciousnesses and others and gradually increase in excellence until, when Buddhahood is finally attained, one transforms and abandons the original defiled consciousness seeds and transformationally obtains the newly arisen pure seeds and consciousness, which uphold all seeds of merit. By the power of original vows, to the end of the future, they give rise to wondrous functions continuing without end.

由此應知，唯有內識。

From this it should be known that there is only inner consciousness.

若唯有識，何故世尊處處經中說有三性？

If there is only consciousness, why does the World-Honored One in sutras everywhere speak of the three natures?

應知三性亦不離識。

It should be known that the three natures also do not leave consciousness.

所以者何？

Why?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２０由彼彼遍計，遍計種種物，

20. By this and that conceptual construction, various things are constructed,

此遍計所執，自性無所有。

This constructed and clung-to own-nature has no existence at all.

２１依他起自性，分別緣所生。

21. The dependent own-nature is produced by conditions of discrimination.

圓成實於彼，常遠離前性。

The perfected nature, in that, is forever free from the former nature.

２２故此與依他，非異非不異，

22. Therefore this is neither different from nor not different from the dependent,

如無常等性，非不見此彼。

Like impermanence and the like, it is not that one does not see this and that.

論曰：周遍計度，故名遍計；品類眾多，說為「彼彼」。謂能遍計虛妄分別。即由彼彼虛妄分別，遍計種種所遍計物：謂所妄執蘊、處、界等，若法、若我自性差別。此所妄執自性差別，總名遍計所執自性。如是自性，都無所有，理、教推徵，不可得故。

The treatise says: since it is a universal conceptualizing, it is called pervasive construction; since the kinds are many, it is said to be "this and that." That is, the false discrimination that can construct. It is by this and that false discrimination that various constructed things are conceptualized: that is, the falsely clung-to aggregates, sense fields, elements and so on, the own-nature and distinctions of dharma or self. This falsely clung-to own-nature and distinction is generally called the constructed own-nature that is clung to. Such own-nature all has no existence, because it cannot be found when examined by principle and teaching.

或初句顯能遍計識，第二句示所遍計境，後半方申遍計所執若我、若法自性非有，已廣顯彼不可得故。

Or the first line shows the consciousness that can conceptualize, the second line shows the objects conceptualized, and only the second half states that the constructed own-nature of self or dharma is nonexistent, since it has been fully shown that those cannot be found.

初能遍計，自性云何？

First, what is the own-nature of the one that conceptualizes?

有義：八識及諸心所，有漏攝者，皆能遍計，虛妄分別為自性故；皆似所取、能取現故；說阿賴耶以遍計所執自性，妄執種為所緣故。

In one view: the eight consciousnesses and all mental factors, those included in the contaminated, can all conceptualize, because false discrimination is their own-nature; and because they all appear as the grasped and the grasper; and it is said that the alaya takes the constructed clung-to own-nature, because it falsely clings to seeds as its object.

有義：第六、第七心品執我、法者，是能遍計。

In another view: the sixth and seventh mind-groups, which cling to self and dharma, are the ones that can conceptualize.

唯說意識能遍計故，意及意識名意識故；計度分別能遍計故；執我、法者必是慧故；二執必與無明俱故；不說無明有善性故；痴、無痴等不相應故；不見有執導空智故；執有、達無不俱起故；曾無有執非能燻故。

Because it is said only that mind-consciousness can conceptualize; because manas and mind-consciousness are called mind-consciousness; because conceiving and discriminating can conceptualize; because clinging to self and dharma must be wisdom; because the two clingings must be accompanied by ignorance; because it is not said that ignorance has a good nature; because it does not associate with non-ignorance and the like; because there is no clinging that leads to the wisdom of emptiness; because clinging to existence and understanding nonexistence do not arise together; and because what has never clung is not able to perfume.

有漏心等不證實故，一切皆名虛妄分別。雖似所取、能取相現，而非一切能遍計攝，勿無漏心亦有執故，如來後得應有執故。經說佛智現身、土等種種影像，如鏡等故，若無緣用應非智等。雖說藏識緣遍計種，而不說唯，故非誠證。由斯理趣，唯於第六、第七心品，有能遍計。

Contaminated minds and the like do not realize reality, so all are called false discrimination. Though they appear as the aspects of the grasped and the grasper, it is not that all are included in those that can conceptualize, lest uncontaminated minds also have clinging, for the Tathagata's subsequently attained wisdom would then have clinging. The sutra says that the Buddha's wisdom manifests various images such as body and land, like a mirror, and so on; if there were no function of taking objects, it should not be wisdom and the like. Although it is said that the store consciousness takes constructed seeds, it does not say "only," so it is not a sound proof. By this reasoning, only in the sixth and seventh mind-groups is there what can conceptualize.

識品雖二，而有二、三、四、五、六、七、八、九、十等遍計不同，故言「彼彼」。

Although the consciousness groups are two, the conceptualizations differ in being two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten and so on, so it is said "this and that."

次所遍計自性云何？《攝大乘》說是依他起，遍計心等所緣緣故。圓成實性寧非彼境？真非妄執所緣境故，依展轉說亦所遍計。遍計所執雖是彼境，而非所緣緣，故非所遍計。

Next, what is the own-nature of the conceptualized? The Compendium of the Mahayana says it is the dependent, because it is the object-condition of the conceptualizing minds and the like. How is the perfected nature not their object? Because the true is not an object clung to; but by way of successive reasoning it is also what is conceptualized. The constructed nature that is clung to, though it is the object of those, is not an object-condition, so it is not what is conceptualized.

遍計所執，其相云何？與依他起，復有何別？

What is the aspect of the constructed that is clung to? And what is the difference from the dependent?

有義：三界心及心所，由無始來虛妄燻習，雖各體一，而似二生：謂見、相分，即能、所取。如是二分，情有理無，此相說為遍計所執。二所依體，實託緣生，此性非無，名依他起，虛妄分別緣所生故。

In one view: the minds and mental factors of the three realms, by false perfuming since beginningless time, though each is one in substance, appear as if born in two: namely the seeing-part and the image-part, that is, the grasper and the grasped. These two parts exist in feeling and do not exist in principle, and this aspect is said to be the constructed that is clung to. The substance on which the two rely truly depends on conditions to arise, and this nature is not nonexistent, and is called the dependent, because it is produced by the conditions of false discrimination.

云何知然？諸聖教說：虛妄分別是依他起，二取名為遍計所執。

How is this known? The holy teachings say that false discrimination is the dependent, and the two graspings are called the constructed that is clung to.

有義：一切心及心所，由燻習力所變二分，從緣生故，亦依他起。遍計依斯妄執定實有無、一異、俱不俱等，此二方名遍計所執。

In another view: all minds and mental factors, the two parts transformed by the power of perfuming, are also the dependent because they arise from conditions. It is on this basis that clinging falsely determines existence or nonexistence, oneness or difference, both or neither, and only these are called the constructed that is clung to.

諸聖教說：唯量、唯二、唯種種，皆名依他起故。又相等四法、十一識等，論皆說為依他起攝故。

The holy teachings say that mere measure, mere two, and mere variety are all called dependent. Also the four dharmas of the aspects and so on, and the eleven consciousnesses and so on, are said in treatises to be included in the dependent.

不爾，無漏後得智品二分，應名遍計所執。許應聖智不緣彼生，緣彼智品應非道諦；不許應知有漏亦爾。又若二分是遍計所執，應如兔角等非所緣緣，遍計所執體非有故。又應二分不燻成種，後識等生，應無二分。又諸習氣是相分攝，豈非有法能作因緣？若緣所生內相、見分，非依他起，二所依體，例亦應然，無異因故。

It is not so, since the two parts of uncontaminated subsequently attained wisdom would then be called the constructed that is clung to. If one allowed that the holy wisdom does not take those as objects of arising, and the wisdom that takes those would not be the truth of the path; if not allowed, it should be known that the contaminated is also the same. Also, if the two parts were the constructed that is clung to, they should be like rabbit horns and the like and not be object-conditions, because the constructed that is clung to has no substance. Also, the two parts would not perfume into seeds, and later consciousnesses and so on that arise would lack the two parts. Also, the impressions are included in the image-part; could a nonexistent dharma act as a causal condition? If the inner image-part and seeing-part produced by conditions are not dependent, then the substance on which the two rely should by analogy be the same, since there would be no different cause.

由斯理趣，眾緣所生心、心所體及相、見分，有漏、無漏皆依他起。

By this reasoning, the substances of minds and mental factors produced by many conditions, and their image-parts and seeing-parts, both contaminated and uncontaminated, are all the dependent.

依他眾緣而得起故。頌言：「分別緣所生」者，應知且說染分依他，淨分依他亦圓成故。或諸染淨心、心所法，皆名分別，能緣慮故。是則一切染、淨依他，皆是此中依他起攝。

Because they arise depending on many conditions. The verse says, "produced by conditions of discrimination"; it should be known that this speaks of the defiled portion of the dependent, while the pure portion of the dependent is also the perfected. Or all defiled and pure minds and mental factors are called discriminations, because they can take objects and think. Then all defiled and pure dependent states are included in this dependent.

二空所顯圓滿成就，諸法實性，名圓成實。顯此遍、常，體非虛謬，簡自、共相、虛空、我等。無漏有為，離倒、究竟、勝用周遍，亦得此名。然今頌中，說初非後。

What is shown by the two emptinesses, perfectly accomplished, the true nature of all dharmas, is called the perfected nature. It shows that this is pervasive and constant, its substance not false, distinguishing it from self-marks, common marks, empty space, self and so on. The uncontaminated conditioned, free of inversion, ultimate, and with superior function everywhere, also gets this name. But in the present verse, the first is meant, not the latter.

此即於彼依他起上，常遠離前遍計所執，二空所顯真如為性。

This is, on that dependent, forever free from the constructed that was clung to before, with suchness shown by the two emptinesses as its nature.

說「於彼」言：顯圓成實與依他起，不即不離；「常遠離」言：顯妄所執能、所取性，理恆非有。「前」言義顯不空依他；「性」顯二空非圓成實，真如離有離無性故。

The words "in that" show that the perfected and the dependent are neither identical nor separate; the words "forever free" show that the nature of the falsely clung-to grasper and grasped is always nonexistent in principle. The word "former" means that the dependent is not empty; "nature" shows that the two emptinesses are not the perfected, since suchness is free from the nature of existence and nonexistence.

由前理故，此圓成實與彼依他起，非異非不異。異應真如非彼實性；不異此性應是無常。彼此俱應淨、非淨境，則本後智，用應無別。

By the reasoning above, this perfected and that dependent are neither different nor non-different. If different, suchness would not be the true nature of those; if not different, this nature would be impermanent. Both would be pure or impure objects, and then the fundamental and subsequent wisdoms should have functions without discrimination.

云何二性，非異非一？如彼無常、無我等性。無常等性與行等法異，應彼法非無常等；不異此應非彼共相。

How can the two natures be neither different nor one? Like impermanence, no-self and other such natures. The nature of impermanence and the like is different from conditioned things; if not different, those dharmas would not be impermanent and so on; and if not different from this, this would not be the common marks of those.

由斯喻顯，此圓成實與彼依他，非一非異，法與法性，理必應然，勝義、世俗，相待有故。

From this analogy it is shown that this perfected and that dependent are neither one nor different; dharmas and dharma-nature must be like this in principle, since the ultimate and the conventional exist in mutual dependence.

非不證見此圓成實，而能見彼依他起性。

It is not that one can see that dependent nature without realizing and seeing this perfected.

未達遍計所執性空，不如實知依他有故。無分別智證真如已，後得智中，方能了達依他起性如幻事等。

Before one has understood the emptiness of the constructed that is clung to, one does not truly know that the dependent exists. Once the wisdom without discrimination has realized suchness, then in subsequently attained wisdom one can comprehend the dependent nature as being like illusions and the like.

雖無始來心、心所法，已能緣自相、見分等，而我、法執恆俱行故，不如實知。眾緣所引自心、心所，虛妄變現，猶如幻事、陽焰、夢境、鏡像、光影、谷響、水月、變化所成，非有似有。依如是義，故有頌言：

Although minds and mental factors have, since beginningless time, been able to take their own aspects, seeing-parts and so on as objects, clinging to self and dharma is always operating with them, so they do not truly know. The minds and mental factors drawn out by many conditions, falsely transformed and manifested, are like illusions, mirages, dreams, mirror images, light and shadows, echoes, the moon in water, and creations of transformation, not truly existing but appearing to exist. Based on such meaning, a verse says:

「非不見真如，而能了諸行，

"It is not that one does not see suchness and yet can comprehend all conditioned things,

皆如幻事等，雖有而非真。」

As all are like illusions and the like, though they exist, they are not real."

此中意說：三種自性，皆不遠離心、心所法。

The meaning here is that the three own-natures do not leave minds and mental factors.

謂心、心所及所變現，眾緣生故，如幻事等，非有、似有，誑惑愚夫，一切皆名依他起性。愚夫於此橫執我法、有無、一異、俱不俱等，如空花等，性、相都無，一切皆名遍計所執。依他起上，彼所妄執我、法俱空，此空所顯識等真性，名圓成實。

That is, minds and mental factors and what they transform and manifest, because they arise from many conditions, are like illusions and the like, nonexistent yet appearing to exist, deceiving fools; all are called dependent nature. Fools, in these, arbitrarily cling to self and dharma, existence and nonexistence, oneness and difference, both and neither, like flowers in the sky, whose nature and marks are wholly nonexistent; all are called the constructed that is clung to. On the dependent, the self and dharma that are falsely clung to are all empty, and the true nature of consciousness and so on shown by this emptiness is called the perfected.

是故此三，不離心等。

So these three do not leave minds and the like.

虛空、擇滅、非擇滅等，何性攝耶？

Space, cessation through analysis and cessation without analysis and so on, what natures are they included in?

三皆容攝。

All three can include them.

心等變似虛空等相，隨心生故，依他起攝；愚夫於中，妄執實有，此即遍計所執性攝；若於真如，假施設有虛空等義，圓成實攝。有漏心等，定屬依他；無漏心等，容二性攝。眾緣生故，攝屬依他；無顛倒故，圓成實攝。

Minds and the like transform and appear as the aspects of space and the like, arising according to mind, so they are included in the dependent; fools, within them, falsely cling to real existence, and this is included in the constructed nature that is clung to; if, in suchness, one provisionally establishes the meaning of space and the like, they are included in the perfected. Contaminated minds and the like definitely belong to the dependent; uncontaminated minds and the like may be included in two natures. Because they arise from many conditions, they are included in the dependent; because they are without inversion, they are included in the perfected.

如是三性與七真如，云何相攝？

How are the three natures and the seven suchnesses included in each other?

七真如者：一、流轉真如，謂有為法，流轉實性；二、實相真如，謂二無我，所顯實性；三、唯識真如，謂染淨法，唯識實性；四、安立真如，謂苦實性；五、邪行真如，謂集實性；六、清淨真如，謂滅實性；七、正行真如，謂道實性。

The seven suchnesses are: first, the suchness of flowing, namely the true nature of the flow of conditioned dharmas; second, the suchness of true characteristic, namely the true nature shown by the two selflessnesses; third, the suchness of consciousness-only, namely the true nature of consciousness-only of defiled and pure dharmas; fourth, the suchness of establishment, namely the true nature of suffering; fifth, the suchness of wrong practice, namely the true nature of origination; sixth, the suchness of purity, namely the true nature of cessation; seventh, the suchness of right practice, namely the true nature of the path.

此七實性，圓成實攝，根本、後得二智境故；隨相攝者，流轉、苦、集三，前二性攝，妄執雜染故；餘四皆是圓成實攝。

These seven true natures are included in the perfected, because they are objects of the two wisdoms, fundamental and subsequently attained; as for those included according to characteristics, the three of flowing, suffering and origination are included in the first two natures, because of false clinging and defilement; the other four are all included in the perfected.

三性六法，相攝云何？彼六法中，皆具三性。色、受、想、行、識及無為，皆有妄執緣生理故。

How are the three natures and the six dharmas included in each other? In those six dharmas, all have the three natures. Form, sensation, perception, formations, consciousness and the unconditioned all have the principles of false clinging and of arising from conditions.

三性五事，相攝云何？

How are the three natures and the five matters included in each other?

諸聖教說，相攝不定：

The holy teachings say that the inclusion is not fixed:

謂或有處說：依他起攝彼相、名、分別、正智；圓成實性攝彼真如；遍計所執不攝五事。彼說有漏心、心所法，變似所詮，說名為相；似能詮現，施設為名；能變心等，立為分別；無漏心等，離戲論故，但總名正智，不說能、所詮。四從緣生，皆依他攝。

That is, in some places it is said: the dependent includes the aspects, names, discriminations and correct wisdom; the perfected nature includes suchness; the constructed that is clung to does not include the five matters. They say that contaminated minds and mental factors, transformed to appear as the signified, are said to be called aspects; appearing as the signifier, they are established as names; the evolving minds and so on are established as discrimination; uncontaminated minds and the like, being free from conceptual proliferation, are only generally called correct wisdom, without speaking of signifier or signified. The four arise from conditions and are all included in the dependent.

或復有處說：依他起攝相、分別；遍計所執，唯攝彼名；正智、真如，圓成實攝。彼說有漏心及心所相分名相，餘名分別；遍計所執，都無體故，為顯非有，假說為名；二無倒故，圓成實攝。

In other places it is said: the dependent includes aspects and discriminations; the constructed that is clung to includes only the names; correct wisdom and suchness are included in the perfected. They say that the image-parts of contaminated minds and mental factors are called aspects, and the rest are called discriminations; the constructed that is clung to has no substance at all, so in order to show nonexistence it is provisionally called name; the two are without inversion, so they are included in the perfected.

或有處說：依他起性唯攝分別；遍計所執，攝彼相、名；正智、真如，圓成實攝。彼說有漏心及心所相、見分等，總名分別，虛妄分別為自性故，遍計所執，能詮、所詮，隨情立為名、相二事。

In some places it is said: the dependent nature includes only discrimination; the constructed that is clung to includes the aspects and names; correct wisdom and suchness are included in the perfected. They say that the image-parts, seeing-parts and so on of contaminated minds and mental factors are generally called discrimination, because false discrimination is their own-nature; the constructed that is clung to, the signifier and the signified, are established according to feeling as the two matters of name and aspect.

復有處說：名屬依他起性，義屬遍計所執。彼說有漏心、心所法相、見分等，由名勢力成所遍計，故說為名；遍計所執，隨名橫計，體實非有，假立義名。

In other places it is said: names belong to the dependent nature and meanings belong to the constructed that is clung to. They say that the image-parts and seeing-parts of contaminated minds and mental factors, by the power of names, become what is conceptualized, so they are called names; the constructed that is clung to, following names, arbitrarily conceives, its substance truly nonexistent, and the name of meaning is provisionally established.

諸聖教中所說五事，文雖有異，而義無違。然初所說不相雜亂，如《瑜伽論》廣說應知。

In the five matters spoken of in the holy teachings, though the texts differ, the meanings do not contradict. But the first explanation is not mixed up, as should be known from the extensive discussion in the Yogacara Treatise.

又聖教中說有五相，此與三性相攝云何？

Moreover, in the holy teachings the five aspects are spoken of; how is this included with the three natures?

所詮、能詮各具三性：謂妄所計，屬初性攝；相、名、分別，隨其所應，所詮、能詮，屬依他起；真如、正智，隨其所應，所詮、能詮，屬圓成實，後得變似能詮相故。

The signified and the signifier each have the three natures: that is, the falsely conceived belongs to the first nature; aspects, names and discriminations, as appropriate, as signified or signifier, belong to the dependent; suchness and correct wisdom, as appropriate, as signified or signifier, belong to the perfected, because the subsequently attained wisdom transforms to appear as the aspect of a signifier.

二相屬相，唯初性攝，妄執義、名，定相屬故。

The two aspects belonging to the aspect are included only in the first nature, because they are definitely aspects that belong to the falsely clung-to meanings and names.

彼執著相，唯依他起，虛妄分別為自性故。

That clinging aspect is only dependent, because false discrimination is its own-nature.

不執著相，唯圓成實，無漏智等為自性故。

The non-clinging aspect is only perfected, because uncontaminated wisdom and the like are its own-nature.

又聖教中說四真實，與此三性相攝云何？

Moreover, in the holy teachings four realities are spoken of; how are they included with these three natures?

世間、道理所成真實，依他起攝；三事攝故；二障淨智所行真實，圓成實攝；二事攝故。

The reality established by the world and by reasoning is included in the dependent, because it is included in the three matters; the reality practiced by the wisdom that purifies the two obstructions is included in the perfected, because it is included in the two matters.

《辯中邊論》說：初真實唯初性攝，共所執故；第二真實通屬三性，理通執無執，雜染、清淨故；後二真實唯屬第三。

The Discrimination of the Middle and the Extremes says that the first reality is included only in the first nature, because it is held in common as clung to; the second reality belongs to all three natures, because in principle it covers clinging and non-clinging, defiled and pure; the latter two realities belong only to the third.

三性四諦，相攝云何？

How are the three natures and the four truths included in each other?

四中一一皆具三性。

Each of the four has all three natures.

且苦諦中無常等四各有三性。無常三者：一、無性無常，性常無故；二、起盡無常，有生滅故；三、垢淨無常，位轉變故。

Taking first the truth of suffering, impermanence and the other three aspects each have three natures. Impermanence has three: first, impermanence of nonexistence, since a permanent nature does not exist; second, impermanence of arising and ceasing, because there is arising and perishing; third, impermanence of defilement and purity, because stages change.

苦有三者：一、所取苦，我、法二執所依取故；二、事相苦，三苦相故；三、和合苦，苦相合故。

Suffering has three: first, the suffering of what is grasped, because it is the basis grasped by the two clingings to self and dharma; second, the suffering of the aspect of affairs, because it is the aspect of the three sufferings; third, the suffering of combination, because the aspects of suffering are combined.

空有三者：一、無性空，性非有故；二、異性空，與妄所執自性異故；三、自性空，二空所顯為自性故。

Emptiness has three: first, the emptiness of nonexistence, because the nature does not exist; second, the emptiness of difference, because it differs from the own-nature falsely clung to; third, the emptiness of own-nature, because what is shown by the two emptinesses is its own-nature.

無我三者：一、無相無我，我相無故；二、異相無我，與妄所執我相異故；三、自相無我，無我所顯為自相故。

No-self has three: first, no-self of no mark, because the mark of self does not exist; second, no-self of different mark, because it differs from the mark of self falsely clung to; third, no-self of own mark, because what is shown by no-self is its own mark.

集諦三者：一、習氣集，謂遍計所執自性執習氣，執彼習氣假立彼名；二、等起集，謂業、煩惱；三、未離繫集，謂未離障真如。

The truth of origination has three: first, the origination of impressions, namely the impression of clinging to the own-nature of the constructed that is clung to, clinging to that impression and provisionally establishing that name; second, the origination of simultaneous arising, namely action and affliction; third, the origination not yet separated from bondage, namely suchness not yet free from obstructions.

滅諦三者：一、自性滅，自性不生故；二、二取滅，謂擇滅二取不生故；三、本性滅，謂真如故。

The truth of cessation is threefold: first, cessation of own-nature, because own-nature does not arise; second, cessation of the two graspings, namely cessation by discernment, because the two graspings do not arise; third, cessation of original nature, namely true suchness.

道諦三者：一、遍知道，能知遍計所執故；二、永斷道，能斷依他起故；三、作證道，能證圓成實故。然遍知道，亦通後二。

The truth of the path is threefold: first, the path of complete knowledge, because it can know the imputed; second, the path of permanent severance, because it can sever the dependent; third, the path of realization, because it can realize the perfected. But the path of complete knowledge also extends to the latter two.

七三三性，如次配釋。今於此中，所配三性，或假或實，如理應知。

The seven and the three natures are explained in correspondence according to this order. Here, as for the three natures that are matched, whether provisional or real, one should know as is reasonable.

三解脫門所行境界，與此三性相攝云何？理實皆通，隨相各一。空、無願、相，如次應知。緣此復生三無生忍：一、本性無生忍；二、自然無生忍；三、惑苦無生忍。如次此三，是彼境故。

How are the objects practiced in the three gates of liberation included among these three natures? In principle and in fact they all interpenetrate, but according to characteristic each corresponds to one: emptiness, wishlessness and signlessness should be known in this order. Taking these as objects, three kinds of patience of non-arising further arise: first, the patience of non-arising of original nature; second, the patience of natural non-arising; third, the patience of non-arising of delusion and suffering. In this order these three are because of those objects.

此三云何攝彼二諦？應知世俗具此三種；勝義唯是圓成實性。世俗有三：一、假世俗；二、行世俗；三、顯了世俗。如次應知即此三性。勝義有三：一、義勝義，謂真如，勝之義故；二、得勝義，謂涅槃，勝即義故；三、行勝義，謂聖道，勝為義故。無變、無倒，隨其所應，故皆攝在圓成實性。

How do these three include the two truths? One should know that the conventional has all three; the ultimate is only the perfected nature. The conventional has three: first, the provisional conventional; second, the conventional of practice; third, the manifest conventional. In this order one should know they are these three natures. The ultimate has three: first, the ultimate in meaning, namely true suchness, because it is the meaning of the excellent; second, the attained ultimate, namely nirvana, because the excellent is itself the meaning; third, the ultimate of practice, namely the holy path, because the excellent is the meaning. Because they are unchanging and not inverted, as is appropriate to each, all are included in the perfected nature.

如是三性，何智所行？遍計所執，都非智所行，以無自體，非所緣緣故。愚夫執有，聖者達無，亦得說為凡、聖智境。依他起性，二智所行。圓成實性，唯聖智境。

By which wisdom are these three natures practiced? The imputed is entirely not what wisdom practices, because it has no self-substance and is not an object-condition. Fools cling to its existence and sages understand its nonexistence, so it can also be said to be the domain of the wisdom of ordinary beings and of sages. The dependent nature is practiced by both wisdoms. The perfected nature is only the domain of holy wisdom.

此三性中，幾假？幾實？遍計所執，妄安立故，可說為假；無體相故，非假非實。依他起性，有實有假：聚集、相續、分位性故，說為假有；心、心所、色，從緣生故，說為實有。若無實法，假法亦無，假依實因而施設故。圓成實性，唯是實有，不依他緣而施設故。

Among these three natures, how many are provisional and how many real? The imputed, because it is falsely established, can be said to be provisional; because it has no substance or characteristic, it is neither provisional nor real. The dependent nature has both real and provisional: because of its nature of aggregation, continuity and phases it is said to be provisionally existent; because mind, mental factors and form arise from conditions it is said to be really existent. If there were no real dharmas, there would be no provisional dharmas, because the provisional is set up depending on a real cause. The perfected nature is only really existent, because it is not set up depending on other conditions.

此三為異？為不異耶？應說俱非，無別體故；妄執、緣起、真義別故。

Are these three different or not different? One should say neither, because there is no separate substance; because they are distinguished as false clinging, dependent arising and true meaning.

如是三性，義類無邊，恐厭繁文，略示綱要。

The meanings and categories of these three natures are boundless; fearing tedious text, I show only a brief outline.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Bodhisattva Dharmapala and others.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by imperial command by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang.

若有三性，如何世尊說一切法皆無自性？

If there are three natures, why did the World-Honored One say that all dharmas have no own-nature?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２３即依此三性，立彼三無性，

23. Based on just these three natures, the three non-natures are established,

故佛密意說，一切法無性。

and so the Buddha, with hidden intent, said that all dharmas have no nature.

２４初即相無性，次無自然性，

24. The first is non-nature of characteristic, the next is non-nature of natural arising,

後由遠離前，所執我法性，

and the last is because it is far removed from the previously clung-to nature of self and dharmas.

２５此諸法勝義，亦即是真如，

25. This is the ultimate of all dharmas, which is also true suchness,

常如其性故，即唯識實性。

because it is always so by its own nature, and it is the real nature of consciousness-only.

論曰：即依此前所說三性，立彼後說三種無性，謂即相、生、勝義無性，故佛密意說一切法皆無自性，非性全無。

The treatise says: Based on just the three natures spoken of earlier, the three non-natures spoken of later are established, namely non-nature of characteristic, of arising and of the ultimate; therefore the Buddha, with hidden intent, said that all dharmas have no own-nature, not that they entirely lack nature.

說「密意」言顯非了義，謂後二性雖體非無，而有愚夫於彼增益，妄執實有我、法自性，此即名為遍計所執。為除此執，故佛世尊於有及無，總說無性。

The phrase "hidden intent" shows that it is not of definitive meaning: although the latter two natures are not nonexistent in substance, there are fools who add to them, falsely clinging to a real own-nature of self and dharmas, and this is called the imputed. In order to remove this attachment, the Buddha, the World-Honored One, spoke in general of non-nature regarding both existence and nonexistence.

云何依此而立彼三？

How are those three established based on these?

謂依此初遍計所執立相無性，由此體相畢竟非有，如空華故。依次依他立生無性，此如幻事託眾緣生，無如妄執自然性故，假說無性，非性全無。依後圓成實立勝義無性，謂即勝義由遠離前遍計所執我、法性，故假說無性，非性全無。如太虛空雖遍眾色，而是眾色無性所顯。

Based on the first, the imputed, the non-nature of characteristic is established; therefore its substance and characteristic are utterly nonexistent, like flowers in the sky. Based on the next, the dependent, the non-nature of arising is established; this is like an illusion, arising from many conditions and not as the false clinging to natural arising; it is provisionally called non-nature, not that it entirely lacks nature. Based on the last, the perfected, the ultimate non-nature is established; namely, the ultimate is far removed from the previously imputed nature of self and dharmas, so it is provisionally called non-nature, not that it entirely lacks nature. Like the great empty space, which, though it pervades all forms, is what is revealed by the non-nature of all forms.

雖依他起非勝義故，亦得說為勝義無性，而濫第二，故此不說。

Although the dependent is not the ultimate and could also be called ultimate non-nature, that would overlap with the second, so it is not mentioned here.

此性即是諸法勝義，是一切法勝義諦故。然勝義諦略有四種：一、世間勝義，謂蘊、處、界等；二、道理勝義，謂苦等四諦；三、證得勝義，謂二空真如；四、勝義勝義，謂一真法界。此中勝義依最後說，是最勝道所行義故，為簡前三，故作是說。此諸法勝義亦即是真如，真謂真實，顯非虛妄，如謂如常，表無變易，謂此真實於一切位常如其性，故曰真如，即是湛然不虛妄義。「亦」言顯此復有多名，謂名法界及實際等，如餘論中隨義廣釋。

This nature is the ultimate of all dharmas, because it is the ultimate truth of all dharmas. But the ultimate truth is, in brief, of four kinds: first, the worldly ultimate, namely aggregates, sense-bases, elements and so on; second, the ultimate of principle, namely the four truths of suffering and so on; third, the ultimate of realization, namely the true suchness of the two emptinesses; fourth, the ultimate of the ultimate, namely the one true dharma realm. The ultimate here is spoken of according to the last, because it is the meaning practiced by the supreme path; to distinguish it from the first three, it is said in this way. This ultimate of all dharmas is also true suchness: true means real, showing it is not false; such means constant, indicating it is unchanging; that is, this reality is always so by its own nature in all states, so it is called true suchness, meaning calm and not false. The word "also" shows that it again has many names, namely called the dharma realm, actual limit and so on, as extensively explained according to meaning in other treatises.

此性即是唯識實性，謂唯識性略有二種：一者虛妄，謂遍計所執；二者真實，謂圓成實性，為簡虛妄說「實性」言。復有二性：一者世俗，謂依他起；二者勝義，謂圓成實，為簡世俗故說「實性」。

This nature is the real nature of consciousness-only; the nature of consciousness-only is, in brief, of two kinds: first, false, namely the imputed; second, true, namely the perfected nature; the word "real nature" is said to exclude the false. There are also two natures: first, conventional, namely the dependent; second, ultimate, namely the perfected; "real nature" is said to exclude the conventional.

三頌總顯諸契經中說無性言非極了義，諸有智者不應依之總撥諸法都無自性。

The three verses together show that the words of the various sutras that speak of non-nature are not of the utmost definitive meaning, and the wise should not rely on them to deny in general that all dharmas have an own-nature.

如是所成唯識相、性，誰於幾位？如何悟入？

Regarding the characteristics and nature of consciousness-only thus established, who, in how many stages, and how do they awaken to and enter it?

謂具大乘二種姓者，略於五位漸次悟入。

Those who possess the two Mahayana lineages gradually awaken to and enter it in five stages, in brief.

何謂大乘二種種姓？一、本性住種姓，謂無始來依附本識，法爾所得無漏法因。二、習所成種姓，謂聞法界等流法已，聞所成等燻習所成。要具大乘此二種姓，方能漸次悟入唯識。

What are the two Mahayana lineages? First, the lineage abiding by original nature, namely the cause of outflow-free dharmas that since beginningless time has been attached to the fundamental consciousness and is naturally attained. Second, the lineage formed by habituation, namely what is formed by the perfuming of hearing and so on after hearing the outflow of the dharma realm. One must possess these two Mahayana lineages to gradually awaken to and enter consciousness-only.

何謂悟入唯識五位？一、資糧位，謂修大乘順解脫分；二、加行位，謂修大乘順決擇分；三、通達位，謂諸菩薩所住見道；四、修習位，謂諸菩薩所住修道；五、究竟位，謂住無上正等菩提。

What are the five stages of awakening to and entering consciousness-only? First, the stage of provisions, namely cultivating the Mahayana factors conducive to liberation; second, the stage of preparatory practice, namely cultivating the Mahayana factors conducive to penetration; third, the stage of penetration, namely the path of seeing on which bodhisattvas dwell; fourth, the stage of cultivation, namely the path of cultivation on which bodhisattvas dwell; fifth, the ultimate stage, namely abiding in unsurpassed right and perfect awakening.

云何漸次悟入唯識？謂諸菩薩於識相、性，資糧位中能深信解；在加行位能漸伏除所取、能取，引發真見；在通達位如實通達；修習位中如所見理，數數修習伏斷餘障；至究竟位出障圓明，能盡未來化有情類，復令悟入唯識相、性。

How do they gradually awaken to and enter consciousness-only? Bodhisattvas, regarding the characteristics and nature of consciousness, can deeply believe and understand in the stage of provisions; in the stage of preparatory practice they can gradually subdue and remove the grasped and the grasper, giving rise to true vision; in the stage of penetration they penetrate it as it truly is; in the stage of cultivation, according to the principle they have seen, they repeatedly cultivate to subdue and cut off remaining obstructions; arriving at the ultimate stage, they emerge from obstruction with perfect clarity, and can transform the class of sentient beings to the end of the future, and also cause them to awaken to and enter the characteristics and nature of consciousness-only.

初資糧位，其相云何？

What are the characteristics of the first stage, the stage of provisions?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２６乃至未起識，求住唯識性，

26. As long as consciousness has not arisen, seeking to abide in the nature of consciousness-only,

於二取隨眠，猶未能伏滅。

regarding the latent tendencies of the two graspings, one is still unable to subdue and extinguish them.

論曰：從發深固大菩提心，乃至未起順決擇識，求住唯識真勝義性，齊此皆是資糧位攝，為趣無上正等菩提，修集種種勝資糧故。為有情故，勤求解脫，由此亦名順解脫分。

The treatise says: From arousing the deep and firm great Bodhi mind up to the time when consciousness conducive to penetration has not yet arisen, seeking to abide in the true ultimate nature of consciousness-only, all this is included in the stage of provisions, because one cultivates and accumulates various excellent provisions in order to head toward unsurpassed right and perfect awakening. Because of sentient beings, one diligently seeks liberation, and so this is also called the part conducive to liberation.

此位菩薩依因、善友、作意、資糧四勝力故，於唯識義雖深信解，而未能了能、所取空，多住外門修菩薩行，故於二取所引隨眠，猶未有能伏滅功力，令彼不起二取現行。

This bodhisattva, because of the four excellent powers of cause, good friends, attention and provisions, although he deeply believes and understands the meaning of consciousness-only, is not yet able to comprehend the emptiness of grasper and grasped, mostly dwells in outward gates cultivating bodhisattva practice, and so regarding the latent tendencies led by the two graspings, he does not yet have the power to subdue and extinguish them, to keep the two graspings from manifesting.

此「二取」言顯二取取，執取「能取」、「所取」性故。二取習氣名彼隨眠，隨逐有情，眠伏藏識，或隨增過，故名隨眠。即是所知、煩惱障種。

The word "two graspings" shows the grasping of the two graspings, since it grasps the nature of the "grasper" and the "grasped." The habitual energies of the two graspings are called their latent tendencies; they follow sentient beings, sleep and hide in the storehouse consciousness, or follow and increase faults, so they are called latent tendencies (anusaya, literally "lying down"). They are the seeds of the cognitive and afflictive obstructions.

煩惱障者，謂執遍計所執實我，薩迦耶見而為上首，百二十八根本煩惱，及彼等流諸隨煩惱。

The afflictive obstruction: namely clinging to the imputed real self, with the view of a real self (satkayadrsti) as the chief, the one hundred and twenty-eight root afflictions, and the secondary afflictions that flow from them.

此皆擾惱有情身、心，能障涅槃，名煩惱障。

All these disturb and trouble the body and mind of sentient beings and can obstruct nirvana, so they are called the afflictive obstruction.

所知障者，謂執遍計所執實法，薩迦耶見而為上首，見、疑、無明、愛、恚、慢等。

The cognitive obstruction: namely clinging to the imputed real dharmas, with the view of a real self as the chief, along with views, doubt, ignorance, craving, hatred, pride and so on.

覆所知境無顛倒性，能障菩提，名所知障。

It covers the undistorted nature of the objects of knowledge and can obstruct Bodhi, so it is called the cognitive obstruction.

此所知障，決定不與異熟識俱，彼微劣故，不與無明、慧相應故，法空智品與俱起故。七轉識內，隨其所應或少或多，如煩惱說。眼等五識無分別故，法見、疑等定不相應，餘由意力皆容引起。

This cognitive obstruction is definitely not together with the vipaka consciousness, because those are subtle and inferior, because they are not associated with ignorance and wisdom, and because the class of wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas arises together with them. Among the seven evolving consciousnesses, according to what is appropriate, it is fewer or more, as spoken of for the afflictions. The five consciousnesses of eye and so on have no discrimination, so they are definitely not associated with views of dharmas, doubt and so on, though the others, through the force of mind, can be induced.

此障但與不善、無記二心相應，論說無明唯通不善、無記性故，痴、無痴等不相應故。煩惱障中此障必有，彼定用此為所依故，體雖無異而用有別。故二隨眠，隨聖道用有勝、有劣，斷惑前後。此於無覆無記性中，是異熟生，非餘三種。彼威儀等勢用薄弱，非覆所知，障菩提故。此名無覆，望二乘說，若望菩薩亦是有覆。

This obstruction is associated only with the unwholesome and neutral minds, since the treatise says ignorance extends only to the unwholesome and neutral natures, and delusion, non-delusion and so on are not associated. Among the afflictive obstructions this obstruction is necessarily present, because those are definitely based on it, and although the substance is not different, the function differs. So of the two latent tendencies, according to the function of the holy path some are superior and some inferior, and the severing of delusions comes earlier or later. This, within the unobstructed neutral nature, is born of vipaka and not of the other three. Their power of postures and so on is weak and does not cover knowledge, but it obstructs Bodhi. This is called unobstructed, said in relation to the two vehicles; in relation to bodhisattvas it is also obstructed.

若所知障有見、疑等，如何此種，契經說為無明住地？無明增故，總名無明，非無見等。如煩惱種立見一處、欲、色、有愛四住地名，豈彼更無慢、無明等。

If the cognitive obstruction has views, doubt and so on, why is this kind said in the sutras to be the ground of abiding ignorance? Because ignorance is predominant, it is generally called ignorance, not that views and so on are absent. Just as in the afflictive seeds the four grounds named view-one-place, desire, form and existence craving are established, could it be that those have no pride, ignorance and so on?

如是二障分別起者，見所斷攝；任運起者，修所斷攝。

Of these two obstructions, those that arise by discrimination are included in what is severed by seeing; those that arise spontaneously are included in what is severed by cultivation.

二乘但能斷煩惱障，菩薩俱斷。

The two vehicles can sever only the afflictive obstruction; bodhisattvas sever both.

永斷二種，唯聖道能；伏二現行，通有漏道。

Only the holy path can permanently sever the two; subduing the manifestation of the two extends to the path with outflows.

菩薩住此資糧位中，二麁現行雖有伏者，而於細者及二隨眠，止、觀力微，未能伏滅。

Bodhisattvas dwelling in this stage of provisions, although they have subdued the coarse manifestations of the two, still, for the subtle ones and the two latent tendencies, the power of calm abiding and insight is weak and they cannot yet subdue and extinguish them.

此位未證唯識真如，依勝解力修諸勝行，應知亦是解行地攝。

This stage has not yet realized the true suchness of consciousness-only and, relying on the power of resolute understanding, cultivates excellent practices; one should know it is also included in the ground of understanding and practice.

所修勝行，其相云何？

What are the characteristics of the excellent practices cultivated?

略有二種：謂福及智，諸勝行中慧為性者皆名為智，餘名為福。且依六種波羅蜜多，通相皆二，別相前五說為福德，第六智慧；或復前三唯福德攝，後一唯智；餘通二種。

There are two kinds, in brief: namely merit and wisdom; among the excellent practices, those whose nature is insight are all called wisdom, and the rest are called merit. Taking the six paramitas (gone to the other shore) first, in general characteristic there are two; in particular characteristic the first five are said to be merit and the sixth wisdom; or else the first three are included only in merit and the last only in wisdom, and the rest pertain to both.

復有二種：謂利自、他所修勝行，隨意樂力一切皆通自他利行，依別相說，六到彼岸、菩提分等，自利行攝；四種攝事、四無量等，一切皆是利他行攝。如是等行差別無邊，皆是此中所修勝行。

There are also two kinds: namely excellent practices cultivated for oneself and for others; by the power of one's inclination, all of them extend to practices benefiting both self and others; spoken of according to particular characteristic, the six paramitas, the factors of awakening and so on are included in practices benefiting oneself; the four means of attraction, the four immeasurables and so on are all included in practices benefiting others. The differences among such practices are boundless, and all are the excellent practices cultivated here.

此位二障雖未伏除，修勝行時有三退屈，而能三事練磨其心，於所證、修勇猛不退：一、聞無上正等菩提廣大深遠，心便退屈，引他已證大菩提者，練磨自心勇猛不退。二、聞施等波羅蜜多甚難可修，心便退屈，省己意樂能修施等，練磨自心勇猛不退。三、聞諸佛圓滿轉依極難可證，心便退屈，引他麁善況己妙因，練磨自心勇猛不退。由斯三事練磨其心，堅固熾然，修諸勝行。

At this stage, although the two obstructions are not yet subdued or removed, there are three occasions of discouragement while cultivating the excellent practices, but one can train one's mind through three things so that one advances bravely without retreating in what is to be realized and cultivated: first, hearing that unsurpassed right and perfect awakening is vast and profound, the mind becomes discouraged; one cites others who have already realized great Bodhi to train one's own mind and advance bravely without retreating. Second, hearing that the paramitas of giving and so on are extremely hard to cultivate, the mind becomes discouraged; one reflects that one's own inclination can cultivate giving and so on, trains one's mind and advances bravely without retreating. Third, hearing that the Buddhas' perfect transformation of the basis is extremely hard to realize, the mind becomes discouraged; one cites others' coarse good deeds, and, moreover, one's own wondrous causes, to train one's mind and advance bravely without retreating. By training the mind through these three things, one becomes firm and blazing, and cultivates the excellent practices.

次加行位，其相云何？

Next, what are the characteristics of the stage of preparatory practice?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２７現前立少物，謂是唯識性，

27. Setting up a little something before one, saying it is the nature of consciousness-only,

以有所得故，非實住唯識。

because there is still something grasped, one does not really abide in consciousness-only.

論曰：菩薩先於初無數劫，善備福德、智慧資糧。順解脫分既圓滿已，為入見道住唯識性，復修加行，伏除二取，謂煖、頂、忍、世第一法。

The treatise says: The bodhisattva, in the first incalculable kalpa, has well prepared the provisions of merit and wisdom. Once the part conducive to liberation is complete, in order to enter the path of seeing and abide in the nature of consciousness-only, he again cultivates preparatory practice to subdue and remove the two graspings, namely warmth, peak, patience and the highest worldly dharma.

此四總名順決擇分，順趣真實決擇分故。近見道故立加行名，非前資糧無加行義。

These four are generally called the part conducive to penetration, because they conform to and lead toward the true penetration. Since they are near the path of seeing, they are named preparatory practice, not that the earlier provisions had no preparatory practice.

煖等四法，依四尋思、四如實智初後位立。四尋思者，尋思名、義、自性、差別，假有實無。如實遍知此四離識及識非有，名如實智，名、義相異，故別尋求，二二相同，故合思察。

The four dharmas of warmth and so on are established based on the early and later stages of the four investigations and the four knowledges of things as they are. The four investigations: investigating name, meaning, own-nature and difference, as provisionally existent and really nonexistent. Fully knowing as they truly are that these four are apart from consciousness and that consciousness too is nonexistent is called knowledge of things as they are; since name and meaning differ, they are investigated separately, and since the two pairs are similar, they are contemplated together.

依明得定，發下尋思，觀無所取，立為煖位。謂此位中，創觀所取名等四法皆自心變，假施設有，實不可得。初獲慧日前行相故，立明得名，即此所獲道火前相，故亦名煖。

Relying on the samadhi of attaining brightness, one gives rise to the lower investigation, contemplating that there is nothing grasped, and this is established as the stage of warmth. That is, in this stage one first contemplates that the four dharmas of name and so on that are grasped are all transformed by one's own mind, provisionally set up, and cannot really be found. This is the preliminary aspect of first obtaining the sun of wisdom, so it is named attaining brightness; this is the preceding sign of the fire of the path to be obtained, so it is also called warmth.

依明增定，發上尋思，觀無所取，立為頂位。謂此位中，重觀所取名等四法皆自心變，假施設有，實不可得。明相轉盛，故名明增，尋思位極，故復名頂。

Relying on the samadhi of increasing brightness, one gives rise to the upper investigation, contemplating that there is nothing grasped, and this is established as the stage of peak. That is, in this stage one again contemplates that the four dharmas of name and so on that are grasped are all transformed by one's own mind, provisionally set up, and cannot really be found. The aspect of brightness grows more intense, so it is named increasing brightness; the stage of investigation reaches its limit, so it is also called peak.

依印順定，發下如實智，於無所取決定印持，無能取中亦順樂忍。既無實境離能取識，寧有實識離所取境？所取、能取相待立故。印順忍時總立為忍，印前順後立印順名，忍境、識空故亦名忍。

Relying on the samadhi of approving, one gives rise to the lower knowledge of things as they are, firmly sealing and holding that there is nothing grasped, and also accepting with delight that there is nothing that grasps. Since there are no real objects apart from the grasping consciousness, how can there be a real consciousness apart from the grasped object? Because grasped and grasper are established in mutual dependence. When the patience of approval arises, it is called patience in general; since it seals the preceding and conforms to the following, it is named approving; and because the object of patience and consciousness are empty, it is also called patience.

依無間定，發上如實智，印二取空，立世第一法。謂前上忍唯印能取空，今世第一法二空雙印，從此無間必入見道故，立無間名，異生法中此最勝故，名世第一法。

Relying on the uninterrupted samadhi, one gives rise to the upper knowledge of things as they are, sealing the emptiness of the two graspings, and this is established as the highest worldly dharma. That is, the earlier superior patience seals only the emptiness of the grasper, while now the highest worldly dharma seals the emptiness of both at once; because from here, without interval, one will surely enter the path of seeing, it is named uninterrupted, and since it is the most excellent among ordinary beings' dharmas, it is called the highest worldly dharma.

如是煖、頂依能取識觀所取空，下忍起時印境空相；中忍轉位，於能取識如境是空，順樂忍可；上忍起位印能取空；世第一法雙印空相，皆帶相故未能證實。故說菩薩此四位中。猶於現前安立少物，謂是唯識真勝義性，以彼空、有二相未除，帶相觀心有所得故，非實安住真唯識理。彼相滅已方實安住。依如是義，故有頌言：

Thus warmth and peak contemplate the emptiness of the grasped through the grasping consciousness; when the lower patience arises, it seals the aspect of the emptiness of the object; at the stage of the middle patience, it takes the grasping consciousness as empty like the object and accepts it with delight; when the upper patience arises, it seals the emptiness of the grasper; the highest worldly dharma seals the aspects of emptiness of both together; all of them carry an aspect, so they cannot yet realize it in reality. Therefore it is said that in these four stages bodhisattvas still set up a little something before them, namely saying that it is the true ultimate nature of consciousness-only, because the two aspects of emptiness and existence have not yet been removed, and the mind that contemplates with an aspect still has something obtained, so they do not truly abide in the principle of true consciousness-only. Only when those aspects are extinguished do they truly abide. In accordance with this meaning, there is a verse that says:

「菩薩於定位，觀影唯是心，

"A bodhisattva in the stage of concentration contemplates that the image is only mind,

義相既滅除，審觀唯自想。

and when the aspect of meaning is extinguished, examining closely it is only one's own thought.

如是住內心，知所取非有，

Abiding thus in the inner mind, he knows that what is grasped does not exist;

次能取亦無，後觸無所得。」

next the grasper too is absent, and afterward he touches nothing obtained."

此加行位未遣相縛，於麁重縛亦未能斷，唯能伏除分別二取，違見道故。於俱生者及二隨眠，有漏觀心有所得故，有分別故，未全伏除，全未能滅。

This stage of preparatory practice has not yet cast off the bondage of aspects and has not yet been able to cut off the bondage of coarse heaviness; it can only subdue and remove the discriminative two graspings, since they contradict the path of seeing. As for the innate ones and the two latent tendencies, because the contemplating mind with outflows still has something obtained and still discriminates, it has not fully subdued them and has not at all been able to extinguish them.

此位菩薩於安立諦、非安立諦俱學觀察，為引當來二種見故，及伏分別二種障故，非安立諦是正所觀，非如二乘唯觀安立。

This bodhisattva studies observing both the established truths and the non-established truths, in order to lead to the two kinds of seeing in the future and to subdue the two kinds of discriminative obstruction; the non-established truth is what is properly contemplated, unlike the two vehicles, who contemplate only the established.

菩薩起此煖等善根，雖方便時通諸靜慮，而依第四方得成滿，託最勝依入見道故。

When the bodhisattva gives rise to these good roots of warmth and so on, although in the expedient period they are common to all dhyanas, they can be completed only relying on the fourth, because he relies on the most excellent basis to enter the path of seeing.

唯依欲界善趣身起，餘慧、厭心非殊勝故。

They arise only relying on a body in a good destiny of the desire realm, because the other kinds of wisdom and aversion are not as excellent.

此位亦是解行地攝，未證唯識真勝義故。

This stage is also included in the ground of understanding and practice, because it has not yet realized the true ultimate of consciousness-only.

次通達位，其相云何？

Next, what are the characteristics of the stage of penetration?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２８若時於所緣，智都無所得，

28. When toward the object, the wisdom has nothing obtained at all,

爾時住唯識，離二取相故。

then one abides in consciousness-only, because it is apart from the aspects of the two graspings.

論曰：若時菩薩於所緣境，無分別智都無所得，不取種種戲論相故，爾時乃名實住唯識真勝義性，即證真如智與真如平等平等，俱離能取、所取相故，能、所取相，俱是分別，有所得心，戲論現故。

The treatise says: When a bodhisattva, toward the objects, has nothing obtained at all by the non-discriminating wisdom, not grasping the various aspects of conceptual proliferation, only then is he said to truly abide in the true ultimate nature of consciousness-only; that is, the wisdom that realizes true suchness is equal and equal with true suchness, and is entirely apart from the aspects of grasper and grasped; for the aspects of grasper and grasped are all discrimination, a mind with something obtained, and the manifestation of conceptual proliferation.

有義：此智二分俱無，說無所取、能取相故。

One view: this wisdom has neither of the two parts, because it is said to have no aspect of the grasped or the grasper.

有義：此智相、見俱有，帶彼相起名緣彼故，若無彼相名緣彼者，應色智等，名聲等智，若無見分應不能緣，寧可說為緣真如智？勿真如性亦名能緣，故應許此定有見分。

One view: this wisdom has both the image and the seeing; it arises carrying that image and so is named taking that as object; if it had no such image, what takes that as object would be form-wisdom and so on, called sound-wisdom and the like; if it had no seeing-part, it could not take an object, so how can it be called wisdom taking true suchness as object? Let it not be that the nature of true suchness is also called the apprehender; so one should concede that this definitely has a seeing-part.

有義：此智見有相無，說無相取，不取相故，雖有見分而無分別，說非能取，非取全無。雖無相分，而可說此帶如相起，不離如故。如自證分緣見分時不變而緣，此亦應爾；變而緣者便非親證，如後得智應有分別，故應許此有見無相。

One view: this wisdom has seeing but no image; it is said to have no taking of an image because it does not grasp an image; although it has a seeing-part it has no discrimination, so it is said to be not a grasper, not that grasping is entirely absent. Although it has no image-part, it can be said to arise carrying the aspect of suchness, since it is not apart from suchness. Just as when the self-witnessing part takes the seeing-part as object, it takes it without transformation, this should also be so; what takes by transforming is not direct realization, like the subsequently attained wisdom, which should have discrimination; so one should concede that this has seeing and no image.

加行無間此智生時，體會真如，名通達位；初照理故，亦名見道。

When this wisdom arises immediately after preparatory practice, it realizes true suchness and is called the stage of penetration; because it first illuminates the principle, it is also called the path of seeing.

然此見道，略說有二。

This path of seeing is, in brief, of two kinds.

一、真見道，謂即所說無分別智，實證二空所顯真理，實斷二障分別隨眠，雖多剎那事方究竟，而相等故，總說一心。有義：此中二空、二障漸證、漸斷，以有淺深、麁細異故。有義：此中二空、二障頓證、頓斷，由意樂力有堪能故。

First, the true path of seeing, namely the non-discriminating wisdom spoken of, which truly realizes the true principle revealed by the two emptinesses and truly severs the discriminative latent tendencies of the two obstructions; although it takes many moments to complete, because they are similar, it is spoken of as one mind. One view: the two emptinesses and the two obstructions are realized and severed gradually, because there are differences of depth and coarseness. One view: the two emptinesses and two obstructions are realized and severed suddenly, because the power of intention has capacity.

二、相見道，此復有二。

Second, the path of seeing of aspects, which again has two.

一、觀非安立諦有三品心：一、內遣有情假緣智，能除軟品分別隨眠；二、內遣諸法假緣智，能除中品分別隨眠；三、遍遣一切有情、諸法假緣智，能除一切分別隨眠。

First, contemplating the non-established truth, there are three grades of mind: first, the wisdom of inwardly dismissing the provisional objects of sentient beings, which can remove the weak grade of discriminative latent tendencies; second, the wisdom of inwardly dismissing the provisional objects of dharmas, which can remove the middle grade of discriminative latent tendencies; third, the wisdom of universally dismissing the provisional objects of all sentient beings and dharmas, which can remove all discriminative latent tendencies.

前二名法智，各別緣故。第三名類智，總合緣故。

The first two are called wisdom of dharma, because they take objects separately. The third is called subsequent wisdom, because it takes objects together.

法真見道二空見分自所斷障無間、解脫，別總建立，名相見道。

The paths of immediate and liberation, in which the seeing-parts of the two emptinesses in the true path of seeing of dharmas sever their respective obstructions, established as particular and general, are called the path of seeing of aspects.

有義：此三是真見道，以相見道緣四諦故。有義：此三是相見道，以真見道不別緣故。

One view: these three are the true path of seeing, because the path of seeing of aspects takes the four truths as objects. One view: these three are the path of seeing of aspects, because the true path of seeing does not take objects separately.

二、緣安立諦有十六心，此復有二。

Second, taking the established truths as objects, there are sixteen moments of mind, which again have two kinds.

一者依觀所取、能取，別立法、類十六種心。

The first, relying on contemplating the grasped and the grasper, separately establishes sixteen moments of mind, of dharma and of subsequent.

謂於苦諦有四種心：一、苦法智忍，謂觀三界苦諦真如，正斷三界見苦所斷二十八種分別隨眠。二、苦法智，謂忍無間觀前真如，證前所斷煩惱解脫。三、苦類智忍，謂智無間無漏慧生，於法忍、智各別內證，言後聖法皆是此類。四、苦類智，謂此無間無漏智生，審定、印可苦類智忍。如於苦諦有四種心，集、滅、道諦應知亦爾。此十六心，八觀真如，八觀正智。法真見道無間、解脫見、自證分差別建立，名相見道。

Regarding the truth of suffering there are four moments of mind: first, patience of the dharma-wisdom of suffering, namely contemplating the true suchness of the truth of suffering in the three realms and properly severing the twenty-eight kinds of discriminative latent tendencies to be severed by seeing suffering in the three realms. Second, the dharma-wisdom of suffering, namely contemplating the previous true suchness uninterruptedly after the patience and realizing liberation from the previously severed afflictions. Third, patience of the subsequent wisdom of suffering, namely when outflow-free insight arises uninterruptedly after wisdom, in dharma patience and wisdom each separately inwardly realized, saying that the later holy dharmas are all of this kind. Fourth, the subsequent wisdom of suffering, namely when the outflow-free wisdom arises uninterruptedly after this, firmly determining and approving the patience of subsequent wisdom of suffering. As there are four moments of mind for the truth of suffering, one should know it is the same for the truths of origin, cessation and path. Of these sixteen moments of mind, eight contemplate true suchness and eight contemplate correct wisdom. The seeing and self-witnessing parts of the uninterrupted and liberation paths of the true path of seeing of dharmas, established with distinctions, are called the path of seeing of aspects.

二者依觀下、上諦境，別立法、類十六種心。

The second, relying on contemplating the objects of the lower and upper truths, separately establishes sixteen moments of mind of dharma and subsequent.

謂觀現前、不現前界，苦等四諦各有二心，一、現觀忍；二、現觀智，如其所應法真見道，無間、解脫見分觀諦，斷見所斷百一十二分別隨眠，名相見道。

That is, in contemplating the present and non-present realms, each of the four truths of suffering and so on has two minds: first, patience of direct observation; second, wisdom of direct observation. As is appropriate to the true path of seeing of dharmas, the uninterrupted and liberation seeing-parts contemplate the truths and sever the one hundred and twelve discriminative latent tendencies to be severed by seeing, and this is called the path of seeing of aspects.

若依廣布聖教道理，說相見道有九種心。

If one speaks according to the principle of the extensively spread holy teachings, the path of seeing of aspects has nine moments of mind.

此即依前緣安立諦二十六種，止、觀別立，謂法類品忍、智合說各有四觀，即為八心，八相應止，總說為一，雖見道中止觀雙運，而於見義觀順非止，故此觀、止開合不同，由此九心名相見道。

This is based on the earlier twenty-six kinds of established truths, with calm abiding and insight set up separately, namely the patience and wisdom of dharma and subsequent classes, spoken of together, each with four contemplations, which is eight minds; the eight associated calm abidings, spoken of in general as one. Although in the path of seeing calm abiding and insight operate together, in regard to seeing the meaning, contemplation predominates and calm abiding does not, so the opening and combining of this contemplation and calm abiding differ, and for this reason the nine minds are called the path of seeing of aspects.

諸相見道依真假說，世第一法無間而生及斷隨眠，非實如是，真見道後方得生故，非安立後起安立故。分別隨眠真已斷故。前真見道證唯識性，後相見道證唯識相，二中初勝，故頌偏說，前真見道根本智攝，後相見道後得智攝。

The various paths of seeing of aspects are spoken of according to the true and the provisional: it is not really that the highest worldly dharma arises without interval and severs the latent tendencies, because they arise only after the true path of seeing, because the established arises after the non-established; and because the discriminative latent tendencies have already been truly severed. The earlier true path of seeing realizes the nature of consciousness-only, and the later path of seeing of aspects realizes the characteristics of consciousness-only; of the two the first is superior, so the verse speaks only of it. The earlier true path of seeing is included in fundamental wisdom, and the later path of seeing of aspects is included in subsequently attained wisdom.

諸後得智有二分耶？

Do all the subsequently attained wisdoms have two parts?

有義：俱無，離二取故。

One view: they have none, because they are apart from the two graspings.

有義：此智見有相無，說此智品有分別故，聖智皆能親照境故，不執著故，說離二取。

One view: this wisdom has seeing but not image; saying that this class of wisdom has discrimination is because holy wisdom can directly illuminate objects and is non-attached, and so is said to be apart from the two graspings.

有義：此智二分俱有。

One view: this wisdom has both parts.

說此思惟似真如相，不見真實真如性故。又說此智分別諸法自、共相等，觀諸有情根性差別而為說故。又說此智現身、土等，為諸有情說正法故，若不變現似色、聲等，寧有現身說法等事？

Because it is said that this contemplates what resembles the aspect of true suchness without seeing the real nature of true suchness. It is also said that this wisdom discriminates the self-characteristics and common characteristics of dharmas, and observes the differences in faculties and natures of sentient beings in order to preach for them. It is also said that this wisdom manifests bodies, lands and so on in order to preach the true Dharma for sentient beings; if it did not transform to display forms, sounds and so on, how could there be such matters as manifesting bodies and preaching the Dharma?

轉色蘊依不現色者，轉四蘊依應無受等。又若此智不變似境，離自體法應非所緣，緣色等時應緣聲等，又緣無法等應無所緣緣，彼體非實無緣用故。

When the form aggregate is transformed, if the basis does not manifest form, then when four aggregates are transformed the basis should lack feeling and so on. Moreover, if this wisdom did not transform to appear as objects, dharmas apart from its own substance should not be objects, and when it takes form as object it should take sound and so on as object; and taking nonexistent dharmas as object and so on would lack the object-condition, because their substance is not real and has no function of being taken as object.

由斯後智二分俱有。

Therefore the subsequent wisdom has both parts.

此二見道與六現觀相攝云何？

How are these two paths of seeing included in the six direct realizations?

六現觀者：一、思現觀，謂最上品喜受相應，思所成慧，此能觀察諸法共相，引生煖等，加行道中觀察諸法此用最猛，偏立現觀，煖等不能廣分別法，又未證理故非現觀。

The six direct realizations: first, direct realization of thought, namely the wisdom formed by thought associated with the highest grade of joyful feeling, which can observe the common characteristics of dharmas and lead to the arising of warmth and so on; in the path of preparatory practice, this function in observing dharmas is the strongest, so it alone is established as direct realization, while warmth and so on cannot widely discriminate dharmas and have not yet realized the principle, so they are not direct realizations.

二、信現觀，謂緣三寶世、出世間決定淨信，此助現觀令不退轉，立現觀名。

Second, direct realization of faith, namely definite pure faith in the Three Jewels, worldly and supramundane, which helps direct realization so that one does not turn back, and so is named direct realization.

三、戒現觀，謂無漏戒除破戒垢令觀增明，亦名現觀。

Third, direct realization of precepts, namely outflow-free precepts that remove the stain of broken precepts and make observation brighter, also called direct realization.

四、現觀智諦現觀，謂一切種緣非安立根本、後得無分別智。

Fourth, direct realization of the truths through direct realization of wisdom, namely the fundamental and subsequently attained non-discriminating wisdom that takes the non-established as object in every way.

五、現觀邊智諦現觀，謂現觀智諦現觀後，諸緣安立世、出世智。

Fifth, direct realization of the truths through the wisdom bordering direct realization, namely the worldly and supramundane wisdom that takes the established as object after the direct realization of the truths through direct realization of wisdom.

六、究竟現觀，謂盡智等究竟位智。

Sixth, ultimate direct realization, namely the wisdom of the ultimate stage such as the wisdom of exhaustion.

此真見道攝彼第四現觀少分，此相見道攝彼第四、第五少分，彼第二、三雖此俱起而非自性，故不相攝。

This true path of seeing includes a small part of the fourth direct realization, and this path of seeing of aspects includes a small part of the fourth and fifth; as for the second and third, although they arise together with it, they are not its own nature, so they are not included.

菩薩得此二見道時，生如來家，住極喜地，善達法界，得諸平等，常生諸佛大集會中，於多百門已得自在，自知不久證大菩提，能盡未來利樂一切。

When a bodhisattva attains these two paths of seeing, he is born into the Tathagata's family, abides in the ground of Great Joy, understands the dharma realm well, attains all equalities, is always born in the great assemblies of the Buddhas, has already attained mastery in many hundreds of gates, knows himself that before long he will realize great Bodhi, and can benefit and bring joy to all beings to the end of the future.

次修習位，其相云何？

Next, what are the characteristics of the stage of cultivation?

頌曰：

The verse says:

２９無得不思議，是出世間智，

29. Without attainment, inconceivable, it is supramundane wisdom,

捨二麁重故，便證得轉依。

because it abandons the two kinds of coarse heaviness, one then realizes the transformation of the basis.

論曰：菩薩從前見道起已，為斷餘障，證得轉依，復數修習無分別智。

The treatise says: After the bodhisattva arises from the path of seeing, in order to cut off the remaining obstructions and realize the transformation of the basis, he again repeatedly cultivates the non-discriminating wisdom.

此智遠離所取、能取，故說「無得」及「不思議」；或離戲論說為「無得」，妙用難測名「不思議」。

This wisdom is far removed from the grasped and the grasper, so it is called "without attainment" and "inconceivable"; or being apart from conceptual proliferation it is called "without attainment," and its wondrous function being hard to fathom it is called "inconceivable."

是出世間無分別智，斷世間故，名「出世間」。二取隨眠是世間本，唯此能斷獨得「出」名。或「出世」名依二義立，謂體無漏及證真如，此智具斯二種義故，獨名「出世」，餘智不然，即十地中無分別智。

It is supramundane non-discriminating wisdom, because it severs what is worldly, and so is called "supramundane." The latent tendencies of the two graspings are the root of the world, and only this wisdom can sever them and alone deserves the name "supramundane." Or the term "supramundane" is established on two meanings, namely that its substance is outflow-free and that it realizes true suchness; this wisdom has both meanings, so it alone is called "supramundane," while other wisdoms are not so; that is, the non-discriminating wisdom in the ten grounds.

數修此故，「捨二麁重」。二障種子立「麁重」名，性無堪任，違細、輕故，令彼永滅，故說為「捨」。

Because of repeatedly cultivating this, one "abandons the two coarse heavinesses." The seeds of the two obstructions are named "coarse heaviness," because their nature has no capacity and is contrary to subtlety and lightness; to make them permanently extinct is called "abandoning."

此能捨彼二麁重故，便能證得廣大「轉依」。

Because it can abandon these two coarse heavinesses, one can then realize the vast "transformation of the basis."

「依」謂所依，即依他起，與染、淨法為所依故；染謂虛妄遍計所執；淨謂真實圓成實性。轉謂二分，轉捨、轉得。由數修習無分別智，斷本識中二障麁重，故能轉捨依他起上遍計所執，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，意為有情證得如斯二轉依果。

"Basis" means what is relied upon, namely the dependent nature, because it is the basis of defiled and pure dharmas; defiled means the false imputed, and pure means the true perfected nature. "Transformation" has two parts: transforming away and transforming into. Through repeatedly cultivating non-discriminating wisdom, one cuts off the coarse heaviness of the two obstructions in the fundamental consciousness, and so one can transform away the imputed on the dependent nature and can transform into the perfected nature within the dependent. By transforming afflictions one attains great nirvana; by transforming the cognitive obstruction one realizes unsurpassed awakening. Establishing consciousness-only means that sentient beings realize such two fruits of transformation of the basis.

或「依」即是唯識真如，生死、涅槃之所依故。

Or "basis" is the true suchness of consciousness-only, because it is the basis of birth and death and nirvana.

愚夫顛倒，迷此真如，故無始來受生死苦，聖者離倒，悟此真如，便得涅槃畢竟安樂。由數修習無分別智，斷本識中二障麁重，故能轉滅依如生死，及能轉證依如涅槃，此即真如離雜染性。如雖性淨而相雜染，故離染時假說新淨，即此新淨說為轉依，修習位中斷障證得。

Fools, in their inversion, are deluded about this true suchness, and so since beginningless time they have suffered birth and death; the holy, free from inversion, awaken to this true suchness and attain the ultimate peace and joy of nirvana. By repeatedly cultivating non-discriminating wisdom and cutting off the coarse heaviness of the two obstructions in the fundamental consciousness, one can transform and extinguish the birth and death that rely on suchness and can transform and realize the nirvana that relies on suchness; this is the nature of true suchness being free from defilement. Although suchness is pure in nature but defiled in appearance, so when it is free from defilement it is provisionally said to be newly pure; this newly pure is what is called transformation of the basis, realized in the stage of cultivation by cutting off obstructions.

雖於此位亦得菩提，而非此中頌意所顯，頌意但顯轉唯識性，二乘滿位名解脫身，在大牟尼名法身故。

Although Bodhi is also attained in this stage, it is not what is shown by the meaning of this verse; the verse only shows the transformation of the nature of consciousness-only, which for the two vehicles at their full stage is called the body of liberation and in the great sage (the Buddha) is called the Dharma body.

云何證得二種轉依？

How are the two kinds of transformation of the basis realized?

謂十地中修十勝行、斷十重障、證十真如，二種轉依由斯證得。

Namely, in the ten grounds one cultivates ten excellent practices, severs ten kinds of obstruction and realizes ten true suchnesses, and the two kinds of transformation of the basis are realized through this.

言十地者，一、極喜地，初獲聖性，具證二空，能益自、他，生大喜故。

Speaking of the ten grounds: first, the ground of Great Joy, because one first attains the holy nature, fully realizes the two emptinesses, can benefit self and others, and gives rise to great joy.

二、離垢地，具淨屍羅，遠離能起微細毀犯煩惱垢故。

Second, the ground of Freedom from Defilement, because one is complete in pure sila (precepts) and is far removed from the stains of afflictions that give rise to subtle violations.

三、發光地，成就勝定，大法總持，能發無邊妙慧光故。

Third, the ground of Light-Emitting, because one accomplishes superior concentration and the total retention of the great Dharma, and can emit boundless wondrous wisdom light.

四、焰慧地，安住最勝菩提分法，燒煩惱薪，慧焰增故。

Fourth, the ground of Blazing Wisdom, because one dwells securely in the most excellent factors of awakening, burns the firewood of afflictions, and the blaze of wisdom increases.

五、極難勝地，真、俗兩智行相互違，合令相應極難勝故。

Fifth, the ground of Extremely Difficult to Conquer, because the practices of the two wisdoms, true and conventional, contradict each other, and making them accord is extremely difficult to master.

六、現前地，住緣起智，引無分別最勝般若令現前故。

Sixth, the ground of Manifestation, because one abides in the wisdom of dependent arising and brings the most excellent prajna without discrimination into manifestation.

七、遠行地，至無相住功用後邊，出過世間二乘道故。

Seventh, the ground of Far-Reaching Practice, because one reaches the far end of the effort of abiding in the signless and goes beyond the path of the two worldly vehicles.

八、不動地，無分別智任運相續，相、用煩惱不能動故。

Eighth, the ground of Immovability, because non-discriminating wisdom continues spontaneously and afflictions of characteristic and function cannot move it.

九、善慧地，成就微妙四無閡解，能遍十方善說法故。

Ninth, the ground of Good Wisdom, because one accomplishes the subtle and wondrous four unobstructed understandings (the four unobstructed knowledges) and can preach the Dharma well throughout the ten directions.

十、法雲地，大法智雲含眾德水，蔽如空麁重，充滿法身故。

Tenth, the ground of Dharma Cloud, because the great Dharma-wisdom cloud contains the water of many virtues, covers coarse heaviness like space, and fills the Dharma body.

如是十地，總攝有為、無為功德以為自性。

These ten grounds comprehensively include conditioned and unconditioned merits as their nature.

與所修行為勝依持，令得生長，故名為地。

They serve as excellent supports for the practices cultivated, enabling them to grow, and so are called grounds.

十勝行者，即是十種波羅蜜多。

The ten excellent practices are the ten paramitas.

施有三種：謂財施、無畏施、法施。戒有三種：謂律儀戒、攝善法戒、饒益有情戒。忍有三種：謂耐怨害忍、安受苦忍、諦察法忍。精進有三種：謂被甲精進、攝善精進、利樂精進。靜慮有三種：謂安住靜慮、引發靜慮、辦事靜慮。般若有三種：謂生空無分別慧、法空無分別慧、俱空無分別慧。方便善巧有二種：謂迴向方便善巧、拔濟方便善巧。願有二種：謂求菩提願、利樂他願。力有二種：謂思擇力、修習力。智有二種：謂受用法樂智、成熟有情智。

Giving has three kinds: giving of wealth, giving of fearlessness and giving of the Dharma. Precepts have three kinds: the precepts of restraint, the precepts of gathering good dharmas and the precepts of benefiting sentient beings. Patience has three kinds: patience in enduring harm from enemies, patience in accepting suffering and patience in examining the Dharma. Diligence has three kinds: armor-donning diligence, diligence in gathering good and diligence in benefiting and delighting. Meditation has three kinds: abiding meditation, inducing meditation and work-accomplishing meditation. Prajna has three kinds: non-discriminating insight into the emptiness of beings, non-discriminating insight into the emptiness of dharmas and non-discriminating insight into both emptinesses. Skillful means has two kinds: skillful means of dedication and skillful means of deliverance. Vow has two kinds: the vow to seek Bodhi and the vow to benefit and delight others. Power has two kinds: the power of discernment and the power of cultivation. Wisdom has two kinds: wisdom of enjoying the joy of the Dharma and wisdom of maturing sentient beings.

此十性者，施以無貪及彼所起三業為性；戒以受學菩薩戒時三業為性；忍以無瞋、精進、審慧及彼所起三業為性；精進以勤及彼所起三業為性；靜慮但以等持為性；後五皆以擇法為性，說是根本、後得智故。有義：第八以欲、勝解及信為性，願以此三為自性故。

As for the nature of these ten: giving takes non-greed and the three kinds of karma it arouses as its nature; precepts take the three kinds of karma at the time of receiving and training in the bodhisattva precepts as their nature; patience takes non-anger, diligence, discerning insight and the three kinds of karma they arouse as its nature; diligence takes effort and the three kinds of karma it arouses as its nature; meditation takes only equipoise as its nature; the latter five all take discernment of dharmas as their nature, said to be fundamental and subsequently attained wisdom. One view: the eighth takes desire, resolute understanding and faith as its nature, because vow takes these three as its own nature.

此說自性，若並眷屬，一一皆以一切俱行功德為性。

This speaks of own-nature; if one includes the retinue, each one takes all concurrent merits as its nature.

此十相者，要七最勝之所攝受，方可建立波羅蜜多。

These ten characteristics: only when supported by seven kinds of supremacy can paramitas be established.

一、安住最勝，謂要安住菩薩種性；二、依止最勝，謂要依止大菩提心；三、意樂最勝，謂要悲愍一切有情；四、事業最勝，謂要具行一切事業；五、巧便最勝，謂要無相智所攝受；六、迴向最勝，謂要迴向無上菩提；七、清淨最勝，謂要不為二障間雜。

First, supremacy of abiding, namely one must abide in the bodhisattva lineage; second, supremacy of reliance, namely one must rely on the great Bodhi mind; third, supremacy of intention, namely one must have compassion for all sentient beings; fourth, supremacy of activity, namely one must fully carry out all activities; fifth, supremacy of skillful means, namely one must be supported by signless wisdom; sixth, supremacy of dedication, namely one must dedicate to unsurpassed Bodhi; seventh, supremacy of purity, namely one must not be mixed with the two obstructions.

若非此七所攝受者，所行施等非到彼岸。

If giving and so on are not supported by these seven, what is practiced is not reaching the other shore.

由斯施等十對波羅蜜多，一一皆應四句分別。

Therefore the ten paramitas of giving and so on should each be analyzed in four alternatives.

此但有十不增減者，謂十地中對治十障、證十真如，無增減故。

There are only ten, with no increase or decrease: because in the ten grounds one counteracts ten obstructions and realizes ten true suchnesses, with no increase or decrease.

復次，前六不增減者，為除六種相違障故，漸次修行諸佛法故，漸次成熟諸有情故，此如餘論廣說應知。又施等三增上生道，感大財體及眷屬故；精進等三決定勝道，能伏煩惱、成熟有情及佛法故，諸菩薩道唯有此二。又前三種饒益有情，施彼資財、不損惱彼、堪忍彼惱而饒益故。精進等三對治煩惱，雖未伏滅，而能精勤修對治彼諸善加行，永伏永滅諸煩惱故。又由施等不住涅槃，及由後三不住生死，為無住處涅槃資糧，由此前六不增不減。

Furthermore, the first six have no increase or decrease: because they remove six kinds of contradictory obstruction, because they progressively cultivate the Buddha-dharmas, and because they progressively mature sentient beings; one should know this as extensively explained in other treatises. Moreover, the three of giving and so on are the path of superior birth, because they bring a great body of wealth and retinue; the three of diligence and so on are the path of definite superiority, because they can subdue afflictions, mature sentient beings and Buddha-dharmas; the bodhisattva paths are only these two. Moreover, the first three benefit sentient beings by giving them wealth, not harming or troubling them and enduring their troubles. The three of diligence and so on counteract afflictions: although not yet subdued or extinguished, one can diligently cultivate the good preparatory practices that counteract them, permanently subduing and extinguishing afflictions. Moreover, by giving and so on one does not abide in nirvana, and by the latter three one does not abide in birth and death; these are the provisions for the nirvana of no abiding, and so the first six neither increase nor decrease.

後唯四者，為助前六令修滿足不增減故，方便善巧助施等三，願助精進，力助靜慮，智助般若，令修滿故，如《解深密》廣說應知。

The latter are only four: because they help the first six to complete their cultivation without increase or decrease; skillful means helps the three of giving and so on, vow helps diligence, power helps meditation, and wisdom helps prajna, enabling their cultivation to be complete; one should know this as extensively explained in the Samdhinirmocana.

十次第者，謂由前前引發後後，及由後後持淨前前。又前前麁，後後細故，易難修習次第如是。

The ten in order: because each earlier one induces the later one, and because each later one upholds and purifies the earlier one. Also, the earlier ones are coarse and the later ones subtle, so the order of ease and difficulty in cultivation is thus.

釋總別名如餘處說。

The explanation of general and particular names is as spoken of elsewhere.

此十修者有五種修：一、依止任持修；二、依止作意修；三、依止意樂修；四、依止方便修；五、依止自在修。依此五修，修習十種波羅蜜多皆得圓滿，如《集論》等廣說其相。

These ten have five kinds of cultivation: first, cultivation relying on upholding; second, cultivation relying on attention; third, cultivation relying on intention; fourth, cultivation relying on skillful means; fifth, cultivation relying on mastery. Relying on these five cultivations, one cultivates the ten paramitas and all attain perfection, as their characteristics are extensively explained in the Abhidharmasamuccaya and elsewhere.

此十攝者，謂十一一皆攝一切波羅蜜多，互相順故，依修前行而引後者，前攝於後，必待前故，後不攝前，不待後故。依修後行，持淨前者，後攝於前，持淨前故，前不攝後，非持淨故。若依純雜而修習者，展轉相望應作四句。

As for the ten including one another: each of the ten includes all the paramitas, because they accord with one another; when one cultivates the earlier practice and induces the later, the earlier includes the later, because the later necessarily depends on the earlier, and the later does not include the earlier, because the earlier does not depend on the later. When one cultivates the later practice to uphold and purify the earlier, the later includes the earlier, because it upholds and purifies the earlier, and the earlier does not include the later, because it does not uphold and purify. If one cultivates according to pure or mixed, looking at one another in turn one should make four alternatives.

此實有十而說六者，應知後四第六所攝，開為十者，第六唯攝無分別智，後四皆是後得智攝，緣世俗故。

These really are ten but are said to be six: one should know that the last four are included in the sixth; when opened into ten, the sixth includes only non-discriminating wisdom, and the last four are all included in subsequently attained wisdom, because they take the conventional as object.

此十果者，有漏有四，除離繫果；無漏有四，除異熟果。而有處說具五果者，或互相資或二合說。

The ten fruits: with outflows there are four, excluding the fruit of separation; without outflows there are four, excluding the fruit of vipaka. But some places say they have five fruits, either because they support one another or because two are spoken of together.

十與三學互相攝者，戒學有三：一、律儀戒，謂正遠離所應離法；二、攝善法戒，謂正修證應修證法；三、饒益有情戒，謂正利樂一切有情。此與二乘有共、不共，甚深廣大，如餘處說。

The ten and the three trainings include one another: the training in precepts has three: first, the precepts of restraint, namely properly staying away from what should be avoided; second, the precepts of gathering good dharmas, namely properly cultivating and realizing what should be cultivated and realized; third, the precepts of benefiting sentient beings, namely properly benefiting and delighting all sentient beings. These have both common and uncommon aspects with the two vehicles, are profound and vast, and are as spoken of elsewhere.

定學有四：一、大乘光明定，謂此能發照了大乘理、教、行、果，智光明故；二、集福王定，謂此自在集無邊福，如王勢力無等雙故；三、賢守定，謂此能守世、出世間賢善法故；四、健行定，謂佛菩薩大健有情之所行故。此四所緣、對治、堪能、引發、作業，如餘處說。

The training in concentration has four: first, the Mahayana light samadhi, because it can bring forth the light of wisdom that illuminates the principle, teaching, practice and fruit of the Mahayana; second, the samadhi of the king of gathering merit, because it freely gathers boundless merit, with the power of a king without equal; third, the samadhi of the worthy guardian, because it can guard worldly and supramundane worthy and good dharmas; fourth, the samadhi of heroic going, because it is what Buddhas and bodhisattvas, great heroic beings, practice. The objects, antidotes, capacities, inductions and functions of these four are as spoken of elsewhere.

慧學有三：一、加行無分別慧；二、根本無分別慧；三、後得無分別慧。此三自性、所依、因緣、所緣、行等，如餘處說。

The training in wisdom has three: first, non-discriminating wisdom of preparatory practice; second, fundamental non-discriminating wisdom; third, subsequently attained non-discriminating wisdom. The own-nature, basis, causes and conditions, objects and activities of these three are as spoken of elsewhere.

如是三慧，初二位中種具有三，現唯加行，於通達位現二種三，見道位中無加行故，於修習位七地已前，若種若現俱通三種。八地以去現二種三，無功用道違加行故，所有進趣皆用後得，無漏觀中任運起故，究竟位中現、種俱二，加行現、種俱已捨故。

Of these three wisdoms, in the first two stages the seeds have all three while the manifest is only preparatory practice; in the stage of penetration the manifest is two of the three, because there is no preparatory practice in the path of seeing; in the stage of cultivation before the seventh ground, whether seed or manifest, all three apply. From the eighth ground on the manifest is two of the three, because the effortless path contradicts preparatory practice, and all progress uses subsequently attained wisdom, arising spontaneously in outflow-free contemplation; in the ultimate stage both manifest and seed are two, because preparatory practice, both manifest and seed, has already been abandoned.

若自性攝，戒唯攝戒，定攝靜慮，慧攝後五。若並助伴，皆具相攝。若隨用攝，戒攝前三，資糧、自體、眷屬性故，定攝靜慮，慧攝後五，精進三攝，遍策三故。若隨顯攝，戒攝前四，前三如前，及守護故，定攝靜慮，慧攝後五。

If included by own-nature, precepts include only precepts, concentration includes meditation, and wisdom includes the last five. If one includes the accompanying companions, all include one another completely. If included by function, precepts include the first three, because they are the provisions, own-body and retinue, concentration includes meditation, and wisdom includes the last five; diligence is included in all three, because it urges all three. If included by manifestation, precepts include the first four, the first three as before and also because of guarding, concentration includes meditation, and wisdom includes the last five.

此十位者，五位皆具，修習位中其相最顯，然初二位，頓悟菩薩種通二種，現唯有漏，漸悟菩薩若種、若現俱通二種，已得生空無漏觀故。通達位中，種通二種，現唯無漏。於修習位七地已前，種、現俱通有漏無漏，八地以去種通二種，現唯無漏。究竟位中，若現、若種俱唯無漏。

In these ten grounds: five stages all have them, and in the stage of cultivation their characteristics are most evident; but in the first two stages, for the sudden-awakening bodhisattva, the seeds extend to both kinds and the manifest is only with outflows, while for the gradual-awakening bodhisattva, whether seed or manifest, both kinds apply, because he has already attained outflow-free contemplation of the emptiness of beings. In the stage of penetration, the seeds extend to both kinds and the manifest is only outflow-free. In the stage of cultivation before the seventh ground, seeds and manifest both extend to with-outflows and without-outflows; from the eighth ground on, seeds extend to both kinds and the manifest is only outflow-free. In the ultimate stage, whether manifest or seed, all are only outflow-free.

此十因位有三種名：一名遠波羅蜜多，謂初無數劫，爾時施等勢力尚微，被煩惱伏，未能伏彼，由斯煩惱不覺現行。二名近波羅蜜多，謂第二無數劫，爾時施等勢力漸增，非煩惱伏，而能伏彼，由斯煩惱故意方行。三名大波羅蜜多，謂第三無數劫，爾時施等勢力轉增，能畢竟伏一切煩惱，由斯煩惱永不現行，猶有所知微細現種及煩惱種，故未究竟。

These causal stages of the ten have three names: the first is called the distant paramita, namely in the first incalculable kalpa, when the power of giving and so on is still slight, subdued by afflictions and not yet able to subdue them, so that afflictions manifest unnoticed. The second is called the near paramita, namely in the second incalculable kalpa, when the power of giving and so on gradually increases, not subdued by afflictions but able to subdue them, so that afflictions act only deliberately. The third is called the great paramita, namely in the third incalculable kalpa, when the power of giving and so on increases further and can ultimately subdue all afflictions, so that afflictions never manifest, though subtle manifestations and seeds of the cognitive obstruction and seeds of afflictions remain, so it is not yet ultimate.

此十義類差別無邊，恐厭繁文，略示綱要。

The meanings and categories of these ten are boundless; fearing tedious text, I show only a brief outline.

十於十地雖實皆修，而隨相增，地地修一。

Although the ten are all really cultivated in the ten grounds, according to which aspect increases, one is cultivated in each ground.

雖十地行有無量門，而皆攝在十到彼岸。

Although the practices of the ten grounds have immeasurable gates, they are all included in the ten paramitas.

十重障者：

The ten kinds of obstruction:

一、異生性障，謂二障中分別起者，依彼種立異生性故。

First, the obstruction of the nature of ordinary beings, namely those of the two obstructions that arise by discrimination, because the nature of ordinary beings is established depending on those seeds.

二乘見道現在前時，唯斷一種，名得聖性；菩薩見道現在前時，具斷二種，名得聖性。

When the two vehicles' path of seeing arises, they sever only one kind and are said to attain the holy nature; when the bodhisattva's path of seeing arises, he fully severs both kinds and is said to attain the holy nature.

二真見道現在前時，彼二障種必不成就，猶明與闇定不俱生，如秤兩頭低昂時等，諸相違法理必應然，是故二性無俱成失。

Second, when the true path of seeing arises, the seeds of those two obstructions are certainly not accomplished, just as light and darkness definitely do not arise together, and as both ends of a scale rise and fall at the same time; in all contradictory dharmas the principle must be thus, so there is no fault of the two natures being accomplished together.

無間道時已無惑種，何用復起解脫道為？

At the time of the uninterrupted path there are already no seeds of delusion; why must the path of liberation arise again?

斷惑證滅，期心別故。

Because cutting off delusions and realizing cessation is discriminated by expectation.

為捨彼品麁重性故，無間道時雖無惑種，而未捨彼無堪任性，為捨此故，起解脫道，及證此品擇滅無為。

Because one is to abandon the coarse heaviness of that grade; at the time of the uninterrupted path, although there are no seeds of delusion, one has not yet abandoned that lack of capacity, and in order to abandon it, one gives rise to the path of liberation and to the realization of the unconditioned cessation by discernment of that grade.

雖見道生亦斷惡趣諸業果等，而今且說能起煩惱是根本故，由斯初地說斷二愚及彼麁重。

Although the arising of the path of seeing also severs the karmic fruits of the evil destinies and so on, here only what can give rise to afflictions is spoken of, because it is the root; for this reason, in the first ground, the severing of two kinds of ignorance and their coarse heavinesses is spoken of.

一、執著我法愚，即是此中異生性障；二、惡趣雜染愚，即是惡趣諸業果等。應知愚品總說為愚，後准此釋。或彼唯說利、鈍障品俱起二愚。

First, ignorance of clinging to self and dharmas, which is the obstruction of the nature of ordinary beings here; second, ignorance of defilement in the evil destinies, which is the karmic fruits of the evil destinies and so on. One should know that ignorance in general is spoken of as ignorance, and the later ones are explained likewise. Or else those are spoken of only as the two ignorances arising together in the sharp and dull grades of obstruction.

彼麁重言，顯彼二種，或二所起無堪任性，如入二定說斷苦根，所斷苦根雖非現、種而名麁重，此亦應然，後麁重言，例此應釋。

The word "coarse heaviness" shows those two kinds, or the nature of lacking capacity that arises from the two; as in entering the two samadhis it is said that the root of suffering is cut off, and although the severed root of suffering is neither manifest nor seed it is called coarse heaviness, this should be likewise, and the word coarse heaviness later should be explained by this example.

雖初地所斷實通二障，而異生性障意取所知，說十無明非染汙故；無明即是十障品愚。

Although what is severed in the first ground in truth extends to both obstructions, the obstruction of the nature of ordinary beings is meant to take the cognitive obstruction, and the ten ignorances are said to be not defiled; ignorance is the ignorance of the ten grades of obstruction.

二乘亦能斷煩惱障，彼是共故，非此所說。又十無明不染汙者，唯依十地修所斷說。

The two vehicles can also sever the afflictive obstruction, which is shared, so it is not what is spoken of here. Moreover, the ten undefiled ignorances are said only according to what is severed by cultivation in the ten grounds.

雖此位中亦伏煩惱、斷彼麁重，而非正意，不斷隨眠，故此不說。

Although in this stage afflictions are also subdued and those coarse heavinesses are severed, it is not the main intent, and the latent tendencies are not severed, so they are not mentioned here.

理實初地修道位中，亦斷俱生、所知一分，然今且說最初斷者，後九地斷，准此應知。

In principle and in truth, in the stage of cultivation in the first ground one also severs a part of the innate and the cognitive, but here only what is severed first is spoken of, and the later nine grounds should be understood by analogy.

住、滿地中時既淹久，理應進斷所應斷障，不爾三時道應無別，故說菩薩得現觀已，復於十地修道位中，唯修永滅所知障道，留煩惱障助願受生，非如二乘速趣圓寂，故修道位不斷煩惱，將成佛時方頓斷故。

While dwelling in and completing a ground, since the time is long, in principle one should proceed to sever the obstructions to be severed; it is not that the three times of the path should be without discrimination, so it is said that after bodhisattvas attain direct realization, in the stage of cultivation in the ten grounds they cultivate only the path that permanently extinguishes the cognitive obstruction, retaining the afflictive obstruction to help their vows to take rebirth, unlike the two vehicles who hasten to perfect quiescence; so in the stage of cultivation they do not sever afflictions, but will sever them all at once when about to become Buddhas.

二、邪行障，謂所知障中俱生一分及彼所起悞犯三業。

Second, the obstruction of wrong conduct, namely the part of the innate among the cognitive obstruction and the mistaken violation of the three kinds of karma it arouses.

彼障二地極淨屍羅，入二地時便能永斷，由斯二地說斷二愚及彼麁重：一、微細悞犯愚，即是此中俱生一分；二、種種業趣愚，即彼所起悞犯三業，或唯起業、不了業愚。

These obstruct the extremely pure sila of the second ground, and on entering the second ground they can be permanently severed, so in the second ground it is said that two ignorances and their coarse heavinesses are severed: first, ignorance of subtle mistaken violations, which is the part of the innate here; second, ignorance of the various paths of karma, which is the mistaken violation of the three kinds of karma that they arouse, or ignorance of only arousing karma without understanding karma.

三、闇鈍障，謂所知障中俱生一分，令所聞、思、修法忘失。

Third, the obstruction of dullness, namely the part of the innate among the cognitive obstruction that causes what has been heard, thought and cultivated to be forgotten.

彼障三地勝定、總持及彼所發殊勝三慧，入三地時便能永斷。

These obstruct the superior concentration and total retention of the third ground and the excellent three wisdoms they arouse, and on entering the third ground they can be permanently severed.

由斯三地說斷二愚及彼麁重：一、欲貪愚，即是此中能障勝定及修慧者，彼昔多與欲貪俱故，名欲貪愚，今得勝定及修所成，彼既永斷，欲貪隨伏，此無始來依彼轉故。二、圓滿聞持陀羅尼愚，即是此中能障總持、聞、思慧者。

For this reason, in the third ground it is said that two ignorances and their coarse heavinesses are severed: first, ignorance of desire and greed, which here obstructs superior concentration and cultivated wisdom; since in the past they were mostly together with desire and greed, they are called ignorance of desire and greed, and now that superior concentration and what is formed by cultivation have been attained, once those are permanently severed, desire and greed are subdued along, since from beginningless time they have evolved depending on them. Second, ignorance of perfecting the dharani of hearing and retention, which here obstructs total retention and the wisdom of hearing and thinking.

四、微細煩惱現行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，第六識俱身見等攝，最下品故，不作意緣故，遠隨現行故，說名微細。

Fourth, the obstruction of the manifestation of subtle afflictions, namely the part of the innate among the cognitive obstruction, included in the view of self and so on associated with the sixth consciousness, of the lowest grade; because it does not take attention as its condition and follows manifestations from afar, it is called subtle.

彼障四地菩提分法，入四地時便能永斷。

These obstruct the factors of awakening of the fourth ground, and on entering the fourth ground they can be permanently severed.

彼昔多與第六識中任運而生，執我見等同體起故，說煩惱名，今四地中既得無漏菩提分法，彼便永滅，此我見等亦永不行。

In the past these mostly arose spontaneously within the sixth consciousness and, because they arose together in substance with the view of self and so on, were called afflictions; now in the fourth ground, once outflow-free factors of awakening are attained, they are permanently extinguished, and this view of self and so on also never operates.

初、二、三地行施、戒、修，相同世間，四地修得菩提分法方名出世，故能永害二身見等。

In the first, second and third grounds, the practice of giving, precepts and cultivation is the same as in the world; in the fourth ground, the factors of awakening are attained through cultivation and only then are called supramundane, and so the two views of self and so on can be permanently destroyed.

寧知此與第六識俱？

How does one know this is together with the sixth consciousness?

第七識俱執我見等，與無漏道性相違故，八地以去方永不行，七地已來猶得現起，與餘煩惱為依持故，此麁彼細，伏有前後，故此但與第六相應。

The view of self and so on associated with the seventh consciousness is contrary in nature to the outflow-free path, so only from the eighth ground onward does it never operate, and until the seventh ground it can still manifest, serving as the basis and support for other afflictions; this is coarse and that subtle, and the subduing comes earlier or later, so this is associated only with the sixth.

「身見等」言亦攝無始所知障攝定愛、法愛。彼定、法愛三地尚增；入四地時方能永斷，菩提分法特違彼故。

The phrase "view of the body and so on" also includes the attachment to concentration and attachment to Dharma that fall within the beginningless cognitive obstruction. These attachments to concentration and Dharma still increase in the three grounds; only on entering the fourth ground can they be permanently severed, because the factors of enlightenment specifically oppose them.

由斯四地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一、等至愛愚，即是此中定愛俱者；二、法愛愚，即是此中法愛俱者。所知障攝二愚斷故，煩惱二愛亦永不行。

On this basis, the fourth ground is said to sever two kinds of ignorance together with their coarse heaviness. First, ignorance of the attachment to meditative attainment, which is just what accompanies attachment to concentration here; second, ignorance of attachment to Dharma, which is just what accompanies attachment to Dharma here. Because these two ignorances fall within the cognitive obstruction, the two attachments of the afflictions also never act again.

五、於下乘般涅槃障，謂所知障中俱生一分，令厭生死樂趣涅槃，同下二乘厭苦欣滅。彼障五地無差別道，入五地時便能永斷。由斯五地說斷二愚及彼麁重：一、純作意背生死愚，即是此中厭生死者；二、純作意向涅槃愚，即是此中樂涅槃者。

Fifth, the obstruction to the lesser vehicle's parinirvana: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that makes one weary of birth and death and delight in nirvana, like the two lower vehicles that are weary of suffering and delight in extinction. This obstruction blocks the path of non-discrimination of the fifth ground, and on entering the fifth ground it can be permanently severed. On this basis, the fifth ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness: first, the ignorance of purely intending to turn away from birth and death, which is just what is weary of birth and death here; second, the ignorance of purely intending to turn toward nirvana, which is just what delights in nirvana here.

六、麁相現行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，執有染、淨麁相現行，彼障六地無染、淨道，入六地時便能永斷。

Sixth, the obstruction of coarse appearances arising in action: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that clings to the coarse appearances of defilement and purity arising in action. This obstruction blocks the path of no defilement and purity of the sixth ground, and on entering the sixth ground it can be permanently severed.

由斯六地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一、現觀察行流轉愚，即是此中執有染者，諸行流轉染分攝故；二、相多現行愚，即是此中執有淨者。

On this basis, the sixth ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness. First, the ignorance of the actual contemplation of the flow of conditioned existence, which is just what clings to defilement here, because the flow of the formations falls within the defiled part; second, the ignorance of the frequent arising of appearances, which is just what clings to purity here.

取淨相故，相觀多行，未能多時住無相觀。

Because one grasps the appearance of purity, contemplation of appearances is practiced often, and one cannot dwell for long in the contemplation of signlessness.

七、細相現行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，執有生滅細相現行，彼障七地妙無相道，入七地時便能永斷。

Seventh, the obstruction of subtle appearances arising in action: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that clings to the subtle appearances of arising and ceasing, and this obstruction blocks the wondrous signless path of the seventh ground, and on entering the seventh ground it can be permanently severed.

由斯七地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一、細相現行愚，即是此中執有生者，猶取流轉細生相故；二、純作意求無相愚，即是此中執有滅者，尚取還滅細滅相故。

On this basis, the seventh ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness. First, the ignorance of subtle appearances arising in action, which is just what clings to arising here, because one still grasps the subtle appearance of arising in the flow of conditioned existence; second, the ignorance of purely intending to seek the signless, which is just what clings to ceasing here, because one still grasps the subtle appearance of cessation in the return to extinction.

純於無相作意勤求，未能空中起有勝行。

One purely and diligently seeks with the intention toward the signless, and so cannot give rise to superior practice amid emptiness.

八、無相中作加行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，令無相觀不任運起。

Eighth, the obstruction of applying effort within the signless: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that keeps the contemplation of the signless from arising spontaneously.

前之五地，有相觀多，無相觀少；於第六地，有相觀少，無相觀多；第七地中純無相觀，雖恆相續而有加行，由無相中有加行故，未能任運現相及土，如是加行障八地中無功用道；故若得入第八地時便能永斷。彼永斷故，得二自在。

In the earlier five grounds, contemplation of signs is frequent and contemplation of the signless is slight; in the sixth ground, contemplation of signs is slight and contemplation of the signless is frequent; in the seventh ground contemplation is purely of the signless, and although it continues constantly, it still involves effort. Because there is effort within the signless, one cannot spontaneously manifest the signs and the lands, and this effort-obstruction blocks the effortless path of the eighth ground; so on entering the eighth ground it can be permanently severed. Because it is permanently severed, one obtains two kinds of sovereignty.

由斯八地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一、於無相作功用愚；二、於相自在愚，令於相中不自在故，此亦攝土、相一分故。

On this basis, the eighth ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness. First, ignorance of applying effort in the signless; second, ignorance of sovereignty over signs, which makes one lack sovereignty over signs, and this also includes a portion of the sovereignty over lands and signs.

八地以上純無漏道任運起故，三界煩惱永不現行，第七識中細所知障猶可現起，生空智果不違彼故。

Because from the eighth ground upward the pure undefiled path arises spontaneously, the afflictions of the three realms never act again; the subtle cognitive obstruction in the seventh consciousness can still arise, since the fruit of wisdom of the emptiness of the self does not oppose it.

九、利他中不欲行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，令於利樂有情事中，不欲勤行，樂修己利。

Ninth, the obstruction of not wishing to act in benefiting others: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that makes one, in matters of benefiting and bringing joy to sentient beings, not wish to act diligently and delight in cultivating one's own benefit.

彼障九地四無閡解，入九地時便能永斷。

This obstruction blocks the four unimpeded understandings of the ninth ground, and on entering the ninth ground it can be permanently severed.

由斯九地說斷二愚及彼麁重。

On this basis, the ninth ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness.

一、於無量所說法、無量名句字、後後慧辯陀羅尼自在愚。

First, ignorance of sovereignty in immeasurable teachings, immeasurable names, phrases and letters, and the dharani of successive wisdom and eloquence.

於無量所說法陀羅尼自在者，謂義無閡解，即於所詮總持自在，於一義中現一切義故；於無量名句字陀羅尼自在者，謂法無閡解，即於能詮總持自在，於一名句字中現一切名句字故；於後後慧辯陀羅尼自在者，謂詞無閡解，即於言音展轉訓釋總持自在，於一音聲中現一切音聲故。

Sovereignty in the dharani of immeasurable teachings spoken means the unimpeded understanding of meaning, which is sovereignty over what is expressed by total retention, in which one manifests all meanings within one meaning; sovereignty in the dharani of immeasurable names, phrases and letters means the unimpeded understanding of Dharma, which is sovereignty over the means of expression by total retention, in which one manifests all names, phrases and letters within a single name, phrase or letter; sovereignty in the dharani of successive wisdom and eloquence means the unimpeded understanding of expression, which is sovereignty over total retention of explanation and interpretation in speech, in which one manifests all sounds within a single sound.

二、辯才自在愚，辯才自在者，謂辯無閡解，善達機宜巧為說故。

Second, ignorance of sovereignty in eloquence; sovereignty in eloquence means the unimpeded understanding of eloquence, skillfully understanding the capacity of beings and teaching them cleverly.

愚能障此四種自在，皆是此中第九障攝。

The ignorance that obstructs these four kinds of sovereignty all falls within the ninth obstruction here.

十、於諸法中未得自在障，謂所知障中俱生一分，令於諸法不得自在。

Tenth, the obstruction of not yet having attained sovereignty over all dharmas: this refers to a portion of the innate cognitive obstruction that keeps one from attaining sovereignty over dharmas.

彼障十地大法智雲及所含藏、所起事業。

This obstruction blocks the great Dharma cloud of wisdom of the tenth ground, together with what it contains and the works it produces.

入十地時便能永斷。由斯十地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一、大神通愚，即是此中障所起事業者；二、悟入微細秘密愚，即是此中障大法智雲及所含藏者。

On entering the tenth ground it can be permanently severed. On this basis, the tenth ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness. First, ignorance of great spiritual powers, which is just what obstructs the works produced here; second, ignorance of entering the subtle and secret, which is just what obstructs the great Dharma cloud of wisdom and what it contains.

此地於法雖得自在，而有餘障，未名最極。

In this ground, though one attains sovereignty over dharmas, there are remaining obstructions, and it is not yet called the ultimate.

謂有俱生微所知障，及有任運煩惱障種，金剛喻定現在前時，彼皆頓斷，入如來地。

That is, there is still an innate subtle cognitive obstruction, and there are still the seeds of the spontaneous afflictive obstruction; when the vajra-like concentration appears, they are all severed at once and one enters the ground of the Tathagata.

由斯佛地說斷二愚及彼麁重：一、於一切所知境極微細著愚，即是此中微所知障；二、極微細礙愚，即是此中一切任運煩惱障種。

On this basis, the Buddha ground is said to sever two ignorances together with their coarse heaviness: first, ignorance of extremely subtle attachment to all objects of knowledge, which is just the subtle cognitive obstruction here; second, ignorance of extremely subtle hindrance, which is just all the seeds of the spontaneous afflictive obstruction here.

故《集論》說：得菩提時頓斷煩惱及所知障，成阿羅漢及成如來，證大涅槃、大菩提故。

Therefore the Compendium of Abhidharma says: when one attains bodhi, one severs the afflictions and the cognitive obstruction at once, becoming an arhat and becoming a Tathagata, realizing great nirvana and great bodhi.

護法等菩薩造

Composed by Dharmapala and other Bodhisattvas.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by the Tripitaka Master Xuanzang under imperial order.

此十一障，二障所攝。

These eleven obstructions are included in two obstructions.

煩惱障中見所斷種，於極喜地見道初斷。彼障現起，地前已伏。

Among the afflictive obstructions, the seeds severed by seeing are first cut off at the path of seeing in the ground of Great Joy. The arising of that obstruction has already been subdued before the ground.

修所斷種，金剛喻定現在前時，一切頓斷。彼障現起，地前漸伏，初地以上，能頓伏盡，令永不行，如阿羅漢。由故意力，前七地中雖暫現起，而不為失。八地以上，畢竟不行。

The seeds severed by cultivation are all cut off at once when the vajra-like concentration appears. The arising of that obstruction is gradually subdued before the ground, and from the first ground onward it can be completely subdued at once, never to act again, like an arhat. By the power of deliberate intention, even if it arises briefly in the first seven grounds, this is not a fault. From the eighth ground upward, it never acts at all.

所知障中見所斷種，於極喜地見道初斷。彼障現起，地前已伏。

Among the cognitive obstructions, the seeds severed by seeing are first cut off at the path of seeing in the ground of Great Joy. The arising of that obstruction has already been subdued before the ground.

修所斷種，於十地中，漸次斷滅；金剛喻定現在前時，方永斷盡。彼障現起，地前漸伏；乃至十地，方永伏盡。

The seeds severed by cultivation are gradually severed in the ten grounds; only when the vajra-like concentration appears are they completely severed. The arising of that obstruction is gradually subdued before the ground, and only up to the tenth ground is it completely subdued.

八地以上，六識俱者，不復現行，無漏觀心，及果相續，能違彼故；第七俱者，猶可現行，法空智果起位方伏。

From the eighth ground upward, what accompanies the six consciousnesses no longer acts, because the contemplating mind of the undefiled and the continuing fruit can oppose it; what accompanies the seventh can still act, and is subdued only when the fruit of wisdom of the emptiness of dharmas arises.

前五轉識，設未轉依，無漏伏故，障不現起。

The first five consciousnesses, even if their basis has not yet been transformed, since they are subdued by the undefiled, the obstruction does not arise.

雖於修道十地位中，皆不斷滅煩惱障種，而彼麁重，亦漸斷滅，由斯故說二障麁重，一一皆有三位斷義。

Although in the ten grounds of the path of cultivation the seeds of the afflictive obstruction are not all severed, the coarse heaviness of them is also gradually severed, and for this reason it is said that the coarse heaviness of the two obstructions each has the meaning of being severed in three stages.

雖諸位中，皆斷麁重，而三位顯，是故偏說。

Although in all stages the coarse heaviness is severed, the three stages are the prominent ones, so they are singled out.

斷二障種，漸、頓云何？

How are the seeds of the two obstructions severed, gradually or suddenly?

第七識俱煩惱障種，三乘將得，無學果時，一剎那中，三界頓斷。所知障種，將成佛時，一剎那中，一切頓斷，任運內起，無麁細故。

The seeds of the afflictive obstruction accompanying the seventh consciousness are severed in the three realms all at once in a single instant, by the three vehicles when they are about to attain the fruit of no more learning. The seeds of the cognitive obstruction are all severed at once in a single instant when one is about to become a Buddha, arising spontaneously within, without coarse or subtle distinction.

餘六識俱煩惱障種，見所斷者，三乘見位真見道中，一切頓斷；修所斷者，隨其所應：一類二乘，三界九地，一一漸次，九品別斷；一類二乘，三界九地，合為一聚，九品別斷；菩薩要起金剛喻定，一剎那中，三界頓斷。

The seeds of the afflictive obstruction accompanying the other six consciousnesses, those severed by seeing, are all severed at once in the true path of seeing in the stage of seeing of the three vehicles; those severed by cultivation vary as is fitting: one kind of two-vehicle practitioner severs gradually, one by one, through the nine grounds of the three realms, severing the nine grades separately; another kind of two-vehicle practitioner combines the nine grounds of the three realms into a single mass and severs the nine grades separately; Bodhisattvas must arouse the vajra-like concentration, and in a single instant sever the three realms all at once.

所知障種，初地初心，頓斷一切見所斷者。修所斷者，後於十地修道位中，漸次而斷，乃至正起金剛喻定，一剎那中方皆斷盡。通緣內外麁細境生，品類差別有眾多故。

As to the seeds of the cognitive obstruction, at the initial mind of the first ground, all that are severed by seeing are severed at once. Those severed by cultivation are severed gradually afterward in the path of cultivation in the ten grounds, until at the right arising of the vajra-like concentration, in a single instant they are all severed completely. This is because they arise by taking inner and outer, coarse and subtle objects, and their kinds and grades are many and different.

二乘根鈍，漸斷障時，必各別起無間、解脫；加行、勝進，或別或總。

For the two vehicles, whose faculties are dull, when they gradually sever obstructions, they must separately arouse the uninterrupted path and the path of liberation, and the path of application and the path of further progress, either separately or together.

菩薩利根，漸斷障位，非要別起無間、解脫，剎那剎那能斷證故。加行等四，剎那剎那前後相望，皆容具有。

Bodhisattvas, being sharp in faculties, in the stages of gradually severing obstructions do not need to separately arouse the uninterrupted path and the path of liberation, since moment after moment they can sever and realize. The four, application and the others, in successive moments, all may be present in relation to one another.

十真如者：

The ten suchnesses:

一、遍行真如：謂此真如二空所顯，無有一法而不在故。

First, the all-pervading suchness: this suchness, manifested by the two kinds of emptiness, is such that there is no dharma in which it is not present.

二、最勝真如：謂此真如具無邊德，於一切法最為勝故。

Second, the supreme suchness: this suchness is endowed with boundless virtues and is most supreme among all dharmas.

三、勝流真如：謂此真如所流教法，於餘教法極為勝故。

Third, the suchness of supreme outflow: the teachings that flow from this suchness are supreme beyond all other teachings.

四、無攝受真如：謂此真如無所繫屬，非我執等所依取故。

Fourth, the suchness of non-appropriation: this suchness is not bound to anything and is not what attachment to self and so on depend on and grasp.

五、類無別真如：謂此真如類無差別，非如眼等類有異故。

Fifth, the suchness of non-difference of kind: this suchness has no difference of kind, unlike the eyes and so on, which differ by kind.

六、無染淨真如：謂此真如本性無染，亦不可說後方淨故。

Sixth, the suchness of non-defilement and non-purity: this suchness is by nature without defilement and also cannot be said to become pure later.

七、法無別真如：謂此真如雖多教法，種種安立而無異故。

Seventh, the suchness of non-difference of dharmas: although this suchness has many teachings, set up in various ways, there is no difference in it.

八、不增減真如：謂此真如離增減執，不隨淨染有增減故。即此亦名相土自在所依真如，謂若證得此真如已，現相、現土俱自在故。

Eighth, the suchness of no increase or decrease: this suchness is free of the clinging to increase and decrease and does not increase or decrease according to purity or defilement. This is also called the suchness on which sovereignty over signs and lands depends, meaning that once one realizes this suchness, one has sovereignty over manifested signs and manifested lands.

九、智自在所依真如：謂若證得此真如已，於無礙解得自在故。

Ninth, the suchness on which sovereignty of wisdom depends: once one realizes this suchness, one attains sovereignty in unimpeded understanding.

十、業自在等所依真如：謂若證得此真如已，普於一切神通作業、總持定門皆自在故。

Tenth, the suchness on which sovereignty of action and so on depend: once one realizes this suchness, one has sovereignty over all spiritual powers, actions and dharani-and-concentration gates universally.

雖真如性實無差別，而隨勝德假立十種。

Although the nature of suchness in reality has no differences, ten are nominally established according to supreme virtues.

雖初地中已達一切，而能證行，猶未圓滿，為令圓滿，後後建立。

Although in the first ground one has already penetrated everything, the realizing practice is still not perfect, and for the sake of perfecting it, later ones are established in succession.

如是菩薩於十地中，勇猛修行十種勝行，斷十重障，證十真如，於二轉依便能證得。

Thus the Bodhisattva, in the ten grounds, courageously cultivates ten supreme practices, severs ten layers of obstruction, realizes ten suchnesses, and thereby can realize the two transformations of the basis.

轉依位別，略有六種。

The stages of the transformation of the basis are, in brief, of six kinds.

一、損力益能轉：謂初、二位，由習勝解及慚、愧故，損本識中染種勢力，益本識內淨種功能，雖未斷障種，實證轉依，而漸伏現行，亦名為轉。

First, the transformation by decreasing power and increasing capacity: this refers to the first and second stages, in which, through the habit of superior understanding and through shame and conscience, the power of the defiled seeds in the root consciousness is reduced, and the capacity of the pure seeds within the root consciousness is increased; although the seeds of the obstruction have not yet been severed and the transformation of the basis is not truly realized, the manifest action is gradually subdued, and this is also called transformation.

二、通達轉：謂通達位，由見道力，通達真如，斷分別生二障麁重，證得一分真實轉依。

Second, the transformation by penetration: this refers to the stage of penetration, in which, through the power of the path of seeing, one penetrates suchness, severs the coarse heaviness of the two obstructions produced by discrimination, and realizes a portion of the true transformation of the basis.

三、修習轉：謂修習位，由數修習十地行故，漸斷俱生二障麁重，漸次證得真實轉依。《攝大乘》中說通達轉在前六地。有無相觀，通達真、俗間雜現前，令真、非真現、不現故。說修習轉在後四地。純無相觀長時現前，勇猛修習，斷餘麁重，多令非真不顯現故。

Third, the transformation by cultivation: this refers to the stage of cultivation, in which, through repeated cultivation of the practices of the ten grounds, one gradually severs the coarse heaviness of the two innate obstructions, and gradually realizes the true transformation of the basis. The Compendium of the Mahayana says that the transformation by penetration is in the first six grounds, where with contemplation of signs one penetrates truth and convention mingled before one, making truth and non-truth present or not present. It says that the transformation by cultivation is in the last four grounds, where pure contemplation of the signless is present for a long time, and with courageous cultivation, one severs the remaining coarse heaviness, making non-truth mostly not appear.

四、果圓滿轉：謂究竟位，由三大劫阿僧企耶，修集無邊難行勝行，金剛喻定現在前時，永斷本來一切麁重，頓證佛果圓滿轉依，窮未來際利樂無盡。

Fourth, the transformation of perfect fruit: this refers to the ultimate stage, in which, through three great asamkhyeya kalpas (countless time), one cultivates and gathers boundless, hard-to-practice supreme practices, and when the vajra-like concentration appears, one permanently severs all the coarse heaviness from the beginning and at once realizes the perfect transformation of the basis of the Buddha fruit, benefiting and gladdening beings without end to the end of the future.

五、下劣轉：謂二乘位，專求自利，厭苦、欣寂，唯能通達生空真如，斷煩惱種，證真擇滅，無勝堪能，名下劣轉。

Fifth, the inferior transformation: this refers to the stage of the two vehicles, which seek only their own benefit, are weary of suffering and delight in stillness, and can only penetrate the suchness of the emptiness of self, sever the seeds of affliction, and realize true cessation through discernment, without superior capacity; this is called the inferior transformation.

六、廣大轉：謂大乘位，為利他故，趣大菩提。生死涅槃俱無欣、厭，具能通達二空真如，雙斷所知、煩惱障種，頓證無上菩提、涅槃。有勝堪能，名廣大轉。

Sixth, the vast transformation: this refers to the stage of the Mahayana, which for the sake of benefiting others heads for great bodhi. It has neither delight nor weariness toward birth and death or nirvana, can fully penetrate the suchness of the two emptinesses, severs both the cognitive and afflictive obstruction seeds, and at once realizes unsurpassed bodhi and nirvana. Having superior capacity, it is called the vast transformation.

此中意說廣大轉依，捨二麁重而證得故。

What is intended here is the vast transformation of the basis, realized through abandoning the two kinds of coarse heaviness.

轉依義別，略有四種：

The meanings of the transformation of the basis are, in brief, of four kinds:

一、能轉道，此復有二：一、能伏道，謂伏二障隨眠勢力，令不引起二障現行，此通有漏、無漏二道，加行、根本、後得三智，隨其所應，漸頓伏彼。

First, the path that transforms; this again has two: first, the path that subdues, which subdues the power of the latent tendencies of the two obstructions so that the manifest action of the two obstructions is not aroused. This is common to both defiled and undefiled paths and to the three wisdoms of application, root and subsequent attainment, which as is fitting subdue these gradually or suddenly.

二、能斷道，謂能永斷二障隨眠。此道定非有漏加行，有漏曾習、相執所引，未泯相故；加行趣求所證、所引，未成辦故。

Second, the path that severs, which can permanently sever the latent tendencies of the two obstructions. This path is certainly not the defiled path of application, since the defiled is led by past habit and clinging to signs and has not yet eliminated signs; and since application strives toward what is to be realized and led, it has not yet been accomplished.

有義：根本無分別智，親證二空所顯真理，無境相故，能斷隨眠；後得不然，故非斷道。

One view holds that the root non-discriminating wisdom, directly realizing the truth manifested by the two emptinesses, has no objective appearance, and so can sever the latent tendencies; the subsequently attained wisdom is not like this, and so is not a path of severing.

有義：後得無分別智，雖不親證二空真理，無力能斷迷理隨眠，而於安立、非安立相，明瞭現前，無倒證故，亦能永斷迷事隨眠。

Another view holds that the non-discriminating wisdom of subsequent attainment, although it does not directly realize the truth of the two emptinesses and has no power to sever the latent tendencies that are deluded about principle, is nonetheless clear and present with regard to established and non-established appearances, realizing without inversion, and so can also permanently sever the latent tendencies that are deluded about phenomena.

故《瑜伽》說：修道位中，有出世斷道；世、出世斷道。無純世間道，能永害隨眠。是曾習故，相執引故。

So the Yogacarabhumi says: in the stage of the path of cultivation there is a supramundane path of severing; there is a mundane and supramundane path of severing. There is no purely mundane path that can permanently destroy latent tendencies, because it is based on past habit and led by clinging to signs.

由斯理趣，諸見所斷，及修所斷，迷理隨眠，唯有根本無分別智，親證理故，能正斷彼；餘修所斷迷事隨眠，根本、後得俱能正斷。

By this reasoning, the latent tendencies deluded about principle, whether severed by seeing or by cultivation, are rightly severed only by root non-discriminating wisdom, since it directly realizes principle; the other latent tendencies severed by cultivation, deluded about phenomena, can be rightly severed by both root and subsequent attainment.

二、所轉依，此復有二：一、持種依，謂本識。由此能持染、淨法種，與染、淨法俱為所依，聖道轉令捨染得淨；餘依他起性，雖亦是依，而不能持種，故此不說。

Second, what is transformed as basis; this again has two: first, the basis that holds seeds, namely the root consciousness. Because it can hold the seeds of defiled and pure dharmas, it serves as basis for both defiled and pure dharmas, and the holy path transforms it so that it abandons the defiled and attains the pure. The other dependent nature also serves as basis but cannot hold seeds, so it is not mentioned here.

二、迷悟依，謂真如。由此能作迷、悟根本，諸染、淨法依之得生，聖道轉令捨染得淨。餘雖亦作迷悟法依，而非根本，故此不說。

Second, the basis of delusion and awakening, namely suchness. Because it can serve as the root of delusion and awakening, all defiled and pure dharmas arise depending on it, and the holy path transforms it so that it abandons the defiled and attains the pure. Others also serve as basis of dharmas of delusion and awakening but are not the root, so they are not mentioned here.

三、所轉捨，此復有二：一、所斷捨，謂二障種。真無間道現在前時，障、治相違，彼便斷滅，永不成就，說之為捨。彼種斷故，不復現行妄執我、法。

Third, what is transformed by abandoning; this again has two: first, abandonment by severing, namely the seeds of the two obstructions. When the true uninterrupted path appears, the obstruction and its remedy are mutually opposed, and the former are severed and extinguished, never again accomplished, and this is called abandoning. Because of that severing, one no longer falsely clings to self and dharmas.

所執我、法，不對妄情，亦說為捨。由此名捨遍計所執。

The self and dharmas that were clung to, no longer facing false feeling, are also said to be abandoned. For this reason it is called abandoning the completely imagined nature.

二、所棄捨，謂餘有漏、劣無漏種。金剛喻定現在前時，引極圓、明純淨本識，非彼依故，皆永棄捨。

Second, abandonment by discarding, namely the remaining defiled seeds and inferior undefiled seeds. When the vajra-like concentration appears, it leads to the perfectly bright and utterly pure root consciousness, which is not the basis of these, and so they are all permanently discarded.

彼種捨已，現有漏法及劣無漏，畢竟不生；既永不生，亦說為捨。由此名捨生死劣法。

After discarding them, defiled dharmas and inferior undefiled ones are ultimately not produced; since they are permanently not produced, this too is called abandoning. For this reason it is called abandoning the inferior dharmas of birth and death.

有義：所餘有漏法種及劣無漏，金剛喻定現在前時，皆已棄捨，與二障種俱時捨故。

One view holds that the remaining seeds of defiled dharmas and the inferior undefiled ones are all already discarded when the vajra-like concentration appears, being abandoned at the same time as the seeds of the two obstructions.

有義：爾時猶未捨彼，與無間道不相違故。菩薩應無生死法故；此位應無所燻識故，住無間道應名佛故；後解脫道應無用故。

Another view holds that at that time they are not yet abandoned, because they do not oppose the uninterrupted path. The Bodhisattva should be free of dharmas of birth and death; this stage should be without a perfumed consciousness; dwelling in the uninterrupted path should be called a Buddha; and the later path of liberation should be without use.

由此應知，餘有漏等，解脫道起，方棄捨之。第八淨識，非彼依故。

From this one should know that the remaining defiled dharmas and so on are discarded only when the path of liberation arises. The pure eighth consciousness is not the basis of these.

四、所轉得，此復有二：

Fourth, what is transformed and attained; this again has two:

一、所顯得，謂大涅槃。此雖本來自性清淨，而由客障覆令不顯。真聖道生，斷彼障故，令其相顯名得涅槃。此依真如離障施設，故體即是清淨法界。

First, what is manifested and attained, namely great nirvana. Although it is originally pure by nature, it is covered by adventitious obstructions so that it does not appear. When the true holy path arises, because it severs those obstructions, it makes its aspect appear, which is called attaining nirvana. This is established in dependence on suchness being free of obstruction, so its substance is just the pure dharma realm.

涅槃義別，略有四種：

The meanings of nirvana are, in brief, of four kinds:

一、本來自性清淨涅槃，謂一切法相真如理，雖有客染而本性淨，具無數量微妙功德，無生無滅，湛若虛空，一切有情平等共有，與一切法不一不異。離一切相、一切分別，尋思路絕，名言道斷，唯真聖者自內所證，其性本寂，故名涅槃。

First, the nirvana that is originally pure in nature: this is the suchness-principle of all dharmas' characteristics, which, although having adventitious defilements, is pure in its original nature, endowed with countless subtle and wondrous merits, without arising or ceasing, serene like space, shared equally by all sentient beings, neither one with nor different from all dharmas. It is free of all marks and all discriminations, the path of thought and reflection is cut off, the path of names and words is severed, and it is realized within only by the truly holy; because its nature is originally still, it is called nirvana.

二、有餘依涅槃，謂即真如出煩惱障，雖有微苦所依未滅，而障永寂，故名涅槃。

Second, nirvana with remainder: this is just suchness emerging from the afflictive obstruction; although there is still a slight basis of suffering that has not been extinguished, the obstruction is permanently stilled, and so it is called nirvana.

三、無餘依涅槃，謂即真如出生死苦，煩惱既盡，餘依亦滅，眾苦永寂，故名涅槃。

Third, nirvana without remainder: this is just suchness emerging from the suffering of birth and death; the afflictions are exhausted and the remaining basis is also extinguished, and since all suffering is permanently stilled, it is called nirvana.

四、無住處涅槃，謂即真如出所知障，大悲般若常所輔翼。由斯不住生死涅槃，利樂有情，窮未來際，用而常寂，故名涅槃。

Fourth, nirvana without fixed abode: this is just suchness emerging from the cognitive obstruction, always assisted by great compassion and prajna. Because of this it does not abide in birth and death or in nirvana, benefits and gladdens sentient beings to the end of the future, is constantly still in its function, and so is called nirvana.

一切有情，皆有初一，二乘無學，容有前三，唯我世尊可言具四。

All sentient beings have the first; the two vehicles of no more learning may have the first three; only our World-Honored One can be said to have all four.

如何善逝有有餘依？雖無實依，而現似有；或苦依盡，說無餘依，非苦依在，說有餘依。是故世尊可言具四。

How can the Well-Gone One have nirvana with remainder? Although there is no real basis, there appears to be one; or the basis of suffering is exhausted and it is called without remainder, but it is not that the basis of suffering is present and it is called with remainder. So the World-Honored One can be said to have all four.

若聲聞等有無餘依，如何有處說彼非有？

If Shravakas and others have nirvana without remainder, why do some places say they do not?

有處說彼都無涅槃，豈有餘依彼亦非有？

In some places it is said they all have no nirvana; is it then that nirvana with remainder is not for them either?

然聲聞等身、智在時，有所知障，苦依未盡，圓寂義隱，說無涅槃；非彼實無煩惱障盡所顯真理有餘涅槃，爾時未證無餘圓寂，故亦說彼無無餘依；非彼後時滅身、智已，無苦依盡無餘涅槃。或說二乘無涅槃者，依無住處，不依前三。

It is that when the body and wisdom of Shravakas and others are still present, they have the cognitive obstruction, the basis of suffering is not exhausted, the meaning of perfect stillness is hidden, and so it is said they have no nirvana; it is not that they truly lack the nirvana with remainder manifested by the truth that arises when the afflictive obstruction is exhausted, and at that time they have not yet realized nirvana without remainder, so it is also said they have no nirvana without remainder; it is not that afterward, when their body and wisdom are extinguished, they have no nirvana without remainder through exhaustion of the basis of suffering. Or when it is said that the two vehicles have no nirvana, it relies on the nirvana without fixed abode and does not rely on the first three.

又說彼無無餘依者，依不定性二乘而說，彼才證得有餘涅槃，決定迴心求無上覺，由定願力留身久住，非如一類入無餘依。謂有二乘深樂圓寂，得生空觀親證真如，永滅感生煩惱障盡，顯依真理有餘涅槃，彼能感生煩惱盡故，後有異熟無由更生，現苦所依任運滅位。餘有為法既無所依，與彼苦依同時頓捨，顯依真理無餘涅槃，爾時雖無二乘身智，而由彼證可說彼有。此位唯有清淨真如，離相湛然寂滅安樂，依斯說彼與佛無差，但無菩提利樂他業，故復說彼與佛有異。

As for saying that they have no nirvana without remainder, this is said in reference to the two vehicles of indeterminate nature: having just realized nirvana with remainder, they surely turn their minds toward unsurpassed awakening and by the power of firm vows remain in the body for a long time, unlike one kind who enter nirvana without remainder. That is, there are two-vehicle practitioners who deeply delight in perfect stillness, attain the contemplation of the emptiness of self and directly realize suchness, permanently extinguish the afflictive obstruction that can induce birth, and manifest nirvana with remainder based on the truth; because the afflictions that can induce birth are exhausted, the later ripening of results has no way to be born again, and at the moment the basis of present suffering naturally ends, the other conditioned dharmas, having no basis, are discarded at once together with that basis of suffering, manifesting nirvana without remainder based on the truth; though at that time they have no body or wisdom of the two vehicles, by what they realized, they can be said to have it. At this stage there is only pure suchness, free of marks, serenely still and blissful, and in reliance on this it is said that they are no different from the Buddha; only they lack the work of benefiting others through bodhi, so it is also said they differ from the Buddha.

諸所知障，既不感生，如何斷彼，得無住處？彼能隱覆法空真如，令不發生大悲般若，窮未來際，利樂有情。故斷彼時顯法空理，此理即是無住涅槃，令於二邊，俱不住故。

Since all cognitive obstructions do not induce birth, how does severing them attain nirvana without fixed abode? They can conceal the suchness of the emptiness of dharmas and prevent great compassion and prajna from arising, to the end of the future benefiting and gladdening beings. So when they are severed, the principle of the emptiness of dharmas is manifested, and this principle is nirvana without fixed abode, since it makes one abide in neither extreme.

若所知障，亦障涅槃，如何斷彼，不得擇滅？

If the cognitive obstruction also obstructs nirvana, why does severing it not attain cessation through discernment?

擇滅離縛，彼非縛故。

Cessation through discernment is freedom from bondage, and these are not bondage.

既爾，斷彼寧得涅槃？

If so, how does severing them attain nirvana?

非諸涅槃皆擇滅攝。不爾，性淨應非涅槃。能縛有情住生死者，斷此說得擇滅無為。諸所知障不感生死，非如煩惱能縛有情，故斷彼時不得擇滅；然斷彼故，法空理顯，此理相寂，說為涅槃，非此涅槃擇滅為性。故四圓寂諸無為中，初、後即真如，中二擇滅攝。

It is not that all nirvanas fall within cessation through discernment. If it were so, nature-purity would not be nirvana. What can bind sentient beings in birth and death, when severed, is called attaining cessation through discernment, the unconditioned. The cognitive obstructions do not induce birth and death and do not bind sentient beings as the afflictions do, so when they are severed one does not attain cessation through discernment; yet because they are severed, the principle of the emptiness of dharmas is manifested, this principle is still in aspect, and it is called nirvana, but this nirvana does not have cessation through discernment as its nature. So among the four perfect stillnesses and unconditioned dharmas, the first and last are just suchness, and the middle two fall within cessation through discernment.

若唯斷縛得擇滅者，不動等二，四中誰攝？

If only severing bondage attains cessation through discernment, among the four, which includes the unmoving and the other one?

非擇滅攝，說暫離故；擇滅無為，唯究竟滅。有非擇滅，非永滅故。

They are not included in cessation through discernment, since they are said to be a temporary separation; cessation through discernment as unconditioned is only ultimate cessation. There is cessation not through discernment, since it is not permanent extinction.

或無住處亦擇滅攝，由真擇力，滅障得故。擇滅有二：一、滅縛得，謂斷感生煩惱得者；二、滅障得，謂斷餘障而證得者。故四圓寂諸無為中，初一即真如，後三皆擇滅，不動等二，暫伏滅者，非擇滅攝；究竟滅者，擇滅所攝。

Or nirvana without fixed abode also falls within cessation through discernment, since through the power of true discernment one attains extinction of obstruction. Cessation through discernment is of two kinds: first, attained by extinguishing bondage, meaning attained by severing the afflictions that induce birth; second, attained by extinguishing obstruction, meaning realized by severing the other obstructions. So among the four perfect stillnesses and unconditioned dharmas, the first is just suchness and the last three are all cessation through discernment; the unmoving and the other one, extinguished only temporarily by subduing, are not included in cessation through discernment, and the ultimately extinguished are included in cessation through discernment.

既所知障亦障涅槃，如何但說是菩提障？說煩惱障但障涅槃，豈彼不能為菩提障？應知聖教依勝用說，理實俱能通障二果。

Since the cognitive obstruction also obstructs nirvana, why is it said only to be an obstruction to bodhi? And since the afflictive obstruction is said only to obstruct nirvana, is it not also able to be an obstruction to bodhi? One should know that the holy teaching speaks according to the main function, but in principle both can obstruct both fruits.

如是所說四涅槃中，唯後三種，名所顯得。

Among the four nirvanas thus described, only the last three are called what is manifested and attained.

二、所生得，謂大菩提。此雖本來有能生種，而所知障礙故不生；由聖道力，斷彼障故，令從種起，名得菩提。起已相續，窮未來際。此即四智相應心品。

Second, what is produced and attained, namely great bodhi. Although it originally has seeds that can produce it, because the cognitive obstruction blocks it, it does not arise; through the power of the holy path, since the obstruction is severed, it arises from its seeds, and this is called attaining bodhi. Once arisen, it continues to the end of the future. This is the mental category associated with the four wisdoms.

云何四智相應心品？

What is the mental category associated with the four wisdoms?

一、大圓鏡智相應心品：謂此心品，離諸分別，所緣、行相，微細難知，不忘不愚，一切境相，性相清淨，離諸雜染，純淨圓德，現種依持，能現、能生身、土智影，無間無斷，窮未來際，如大圓鏡，現眾色像。

First, the mental category associated with the Great Mirror Wisdom: this mind is free of all discriminations, its objects and modes are subtle and hard to know, it does not forget and is not ignorant, its nature and aspect with respect to all objects are pure, free of all defilements, a pure and perfect virtue; it is what manifested seeds depend on and uphold, can manifest and produce the shadows of body, land and wisdom, is uninterrupted and without cessation to the end of the future, like a great round mirror that reflects many images.

二、平等性智相應心品：謂此心品，觀一切法，自、他有情，悉皆平等。大慈悲等，恆共相應，隨諸有情所樂，示現受用身、土，影像差別。妙觀察智不共所依，無住涅槃之所建立，一味相續，窮未來際。

Second, the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Equality: this mind observes all dharmas, self and other sentient beings, as all equal. It is constantly associated with great compassion and the like, and in accordance with what sentient beings enjoy, it manifests the differences of the enjoyment body and land and the shadow images. It is the uncommon basis of the Wisdom of Wondrous Observation, established by nirvana without fixed abode, continuing in a single flavor to the end of the future.

三、妙觀察智相應心品：謂此心品，善觀諸法自相、共相，無礙而轉。攝觀無量總持定門，及所發生功德珍寶。於大眾會，能現無邊作用差別，皆得自在，雨大法雨，斷一切疑，令諸有情皆獲利樂。

Third, the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Wondrous Observation: this mind skillfully observes the particular and general characteristics of all dharmas, operating without obstruction. It includes the contemplation of immeasurable gates of dharani and concentration and the precious merits produced by them. In great assemblies it can manifest boundless differences of activity, all with sovereignty, pouring down the great Dharma rain, severing all doubts and causing all sentient beings to gain benefit and joy.

四、成所作智相應心品：謂此心品，為欲利樂諸有情故，普於十方，示現種種變化三業，成本願力所應作事。

Fourth, the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Accomplishing What Is to Be Done: this mind, for the sake of benefiting and gladdening sentient beings, universally in the ten directions manifests various transformations of the three karmas, accomplishing what should be done by the power of the original vow.

如是四智相應心品，雖各定有二十二法，能變、所變種現俱生，而智用增，以智名顯。

Although each of these four categories associated with wisdom surely has twenty-two dharmas, with the seeds and manifestations of the transforming and the transformed arising together, the function of wisdom is predominant, and so it is named after wisdom.

故此四品，總攝佛地一切有為功德皆盡。

So these four categories altogether include all conditioned merits of the Buddha ground without remainder.

此轉有漏八、七、六、五識相應品，如次而得。智雖非識，而依識轉，識為主故，說轉識得。又有漏位智劣識強，無漏位中，智強識劣。為勸有情依智捨識，故說轉八識而得此四智。

These are obtained, in this order, by transforming the defiled eighth, seventh, sixth and fifth consciousnesses and their associated categories. Though wisdom is not consciousness, it is transformed in dependence on consciousness, with consciousness as the main factor, so it is said to be obtained by transforming consciousness. Moreover, in the defiled stage wisdom is weak and consciousness strong, while in the undefiled stage wisdom is strong and consciousness weak. To encourage sentient beings to rely on wisdom and abandon consciousness, it is said that by transforming the eight consciousnesses one obtains these four wisdoms.

大圓鏡智相應心品，有義：菩薩金剛喻定現在前時，即初現起，異熟識種與極微細所知障種，俱時捨故；若圓鏡智爾時未起，便無能持淨種識故。

For the mental category associated with the Great Mirror Wisdom, one view holds that when the vajra-like concentration of the Bodhisattva appears, it first arises, because the seeds of the ripening consciousness and the seeds of the extremely subtle cognitive obstruction are abandoned at the same time; if the Mirror Wisdom did not arise at that time, there would be no consciousness able to hold the pure seeds.

有義：此品解脫道時，初成佛故，乃得初起；異熟識種，金剛喻定現在前時，猶未頓捨，與無間道不相違故。

Another view holds that this category arises first only at the moment of the path of liberation, when one first becomes a Buddha; the seeds of the ripening consciousness, when the vajra-like concentration appears, are not yet abandoned all at once, since they do not oppose the uninterrupted path.

非障有漏、劣無漏法，但與佛果定相違故；金剛喻定無所燻識，無漏不增，應成佛故。由斯此品，從初成佛，盡未來際，相續不斷，持無漏種令不失故。

It is not that it obstructs defiled and inferior undefiled dharmas, but that it is certainly opposed to the Buddha fruit alone; the vajra-like concentration has no perfumed consciousness, and since the undefiled does not increase, one should become a Buddha. For this reason this category, from the first becoming a Buddha to the end of the future, continues without interruption, holding the undefiled seeds so that they are not lost.

平等性智相應心品，菩薩見道初現前位，違二執故，方得初起。後十地中，執未斷故，有漏等位，或有間斷；法雲地後，與淨第八，相依相續，盡未來際。

The mental category associated with the Wisdom of Equality first arises at the stage when the Bodhisattva first attains the path of seeing, because it opposes the two attachments. In the later ten grounds, since attachment is not yet severed, in the defiled and other stages it may be interrupted; after the Dharma Cloud ground, it continues, depending on the pure eighth consciousness, to the end of the future.

妙觀察智相應心品，生空觀品，二乘見位，亦得初起。此後展轉至無學位，或至菩薩解行地終，或至上位，若非有漏，或無心時，皆容現起。

For the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Wondrous Observation, the category of contemplation of the emptiness of self first arises also in the stage of seeing of the two vehicles. After that it continues in turn to the stage of no more learning, or to the end of the Bodhisattva's grounds of understanding and practice, or to higher stages, and unless it is defiled or there is no mind, it may all arise.

法空觀品，菩薩見位，方得初起，此後展轉乃至上位，若非有漏，生空智果，或無心時，皆容現起。

The category of contemplation of the emptiness of dharmas first arises in the Bodhisattva's stage of seeing, and after that continues in turn up to higher stages, and unless it is defiled, or the fruit of wisdom of the emptiness of self, or there is no mind, it may all arise.

成所作智相應心品，有義：菩薩修道位中，後得引故，亦得初起。

For the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Accomplishing What Is to Be Done, one view holds that in the Bodhisattva's stage of the path of cultivation, since it is led by subsequent attainment, it also first arises.

有義：成佛方得初起。以十地中，依異熟識所變眼等非無漏故，有漏不共，必俱同境，根發無漏識，理不相應故。此二於境，明昧異故。由斯此品，要得成佛，依無漏根，方容現起，而數間斷，作意起故。

Another view holds that it first arises only on becoming a Buddha. This is because in the ten grounds the eyes and so on, which are transformed from the ripening consciousness, are not undefiled; the defiled and uncommon must share the same objects, and it does not accord with principle that the faculty produce undefiled consciousness. The two differ in clarity and dimness toward objects. For this reason this category arises only when one becomes a Buddha, relying on undefiled faculties, and is often interrupted, since it arises through intention.

此四種性雖皆本有，而要燻發方得現行，因位漸增，佛果圓滿，不增不減，盡未來際，但從種生；不燻成種，勿前佛德勝後佛故。

Although these four kinds of nature are all originally present, they must be perfumed to arise in action, increasing gradually in the causal stage, and when the Buddha fruit is perfect they neither increase nor decrease, arising only from seeds to the end of the future; if they were not perfumed into seeds, the Buddha's virtues would not be superior to those of later Buddhas.

大圓鏡智相應心品，有義：但緣真如為境，是無分別，非後得智，行相、所緣不可知故。

For the mental category associated with the Great Mirror Wisdom, one view holds that it takes only suchness as its object, being non-discriminating and not the wisdom of subsequent attainment, since its modes and objects cannot be known.

有義：此品緣一切法，《莊嚴論》說：大圓鏡智，於一切境，不愚迷故。《佛地經》說：如來智鏡，諸處、境、識，眾像現故。又此決定緣無漏種，及身、土等諸影像故，行、緣微細，說不可知，如阿賴耶，亦緣俗故。

Another view holds that this category takes all dharmas; the Ornament of the Mahayana says that the Great Mirror Wisdom is not ignorant or deluded toward all objects. The Buddhabhumi Sutra says that the Tathagata's wisdom mirror shows many images in all places, objects and consciousnesses. And this must take the undefiled seeds and the images of body, land and so on, with subtle modes and objects, said to be unknowable, like the alaya consciousness, which also takes the conventional.

緣真如故，是無分別；緣餘境故，後得智攝。其體是一，隨用分二。了俗由證真，故說為後得。餘一分二，准此應知。

Because it takes suchness, it is non-discriminating; because it takes the other objects, it is included in the wisdom of subsequent attainment. Its substance is one, and by function it is divided into two. Understanding the conventional by realizing the true, it is called subsequent attainment. The same should be understood for the division of the other single ones into two.

平等性智相應心品，有義：但緣第八淨識，如染第七緣藏識故。有義：但緣真如為境，緣一切法平等性故。有義：遍緣真、俗為境，《佛地經》說：平等性智，證得十種平等性故。《莊嚴論》說：緣諸有情自他平等，隨他勝解，示現無邊佛影像故。由斯此品，通緣真、俗，二智所攝，於理無違。

For the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Equality, one view holds that it takes only the pure eighth consciousness, as the defiled seventh takes the store consciousness. Another view holds that it takes only suchness as its object, taking the equal nature of all dharmas. Another view holds that it takes both true and conventional as its objects, since the Buddhabhumi Sutra says that the Wisdom of Equality realizes ten kinds of equality. The Ornament of the Mahayana says that it takes the equality of self and others of all sentient beings, and following others' understanding manifests boundless images of Buddhas. For this reason this category takes both true and conventional and is included in both wisdoms, which is not contrary to principle.

妙觀察智相應心品，緣一切法自相、共相，皆無障礙，二智所攝。

The mental category associated with the Wisdom of Wondrous Observation takes the particular and general characteristics of all dharmas without any obstruction and is included in both wisdoms.

成所作智相應心品，有義：但緣五種現境，《莊嚴論》說：如來五根，一一皆於五境轉故。有義：此品亦能遍緣三世諸法，不違正理，《佛地經》說：成所作智，起作三業諸變化事，決擇有情心行差別，領受去來現在等義。若不遍緣，無此能故。然此心品，隨意樂力，或緣一法、或二、或多。且說五根於五境轉，不言唯爾，故不相違。隨作意生，緣事相境，起化業故，後得智攝。

For the mental category associated with the Wisdom of Accomplishing What Is to Be Done, one view holds that it takes only the five present objects, since the Ornament of the Mahayana says that each of the Tathagata's five faculties operates on all five objects. Another view holds that this category can also take dharmas of the three times universally, which is not contrary to correct principle, since the Buddhabhumi Sutra says that the Wisdom of Accomplishing What Is to Be Done arises, performs transformations of the three karmas, discerns the differences in sentient beings' minds and conduct, and comprehends meanings of past, future and present. If it did not take them universally, it would not have this capacity. Yet this mental category, by the power of intention and delight, takes one dharma, or two, or many. And in saying the five faculties operate on five objects, it does not say only that, so they do not contradict one another. It arises according to intention and takes objects of appearances, arising in the work of transformation, so it is included in the wisdom of subsequent attainment.

此四心品，雖皆遍能緣一切法，而用有異：謂鏡智品，現自受用身、淨土相，持無漏種；平等智品，現他受用身、淨土相；成事智品，能現變化身及土相；觀察智品，觀察自、他功能過失，雨大法雨，破諸疑網，利樂有情。

Although these four mental categories can all take all dharmas universally, their functions differ: the Mirror Wisdom category manifests the aspect of the self-enjoyment body and pure land and holds the undefiled seeds; the Wisdom of Equality category manifests the aspect of the other-enjoyment body and pure land; the Wisdom of Accomplishing category can manifest transformation bodies and the aspect of lands; the Wisdom of Observation category observes the merits and faults of self and others, pours down the great Dharma rain, breaks the net of doubts, and benefits and gladdens sentient beings.

如是等門，差別多種。

There are many such differences among such gates.

此四心品，名所生得。

These four mental categories are called what is produced and attained.

此所生得，總名菩提；及前涅槃，名所轉得。

What is produced and attained is called bodhi as a whole; and the nirvana described earlier is called what is transformed and attained.

雖轉依義總有四種，而今但取二所轉得。頌說「證得轉依」言故。

Although the transformation of the basis has four meanings in all, here only the two kinds of transformed attainment are taken, since the verse says "realizing the transformation of the basis."

此修習位說能證得，非已證得，因位攝故。

This stage of cultivation is said to be able to realize it, not to have already realized it, since it is included in the causal stage.

後究竟位，其相云何？

In the later ultimate stage, what are its characteristics?

頌曰：

The verse says:

３０此即無漏界，不思議善常，

30. This is the undefiled realm, inconceivable, good, constant,

安樂解脫身，大牟尼名法。

the body of peace, joy and liberation, the Great Muni, called the Dharma.

論曰：前修習位所得轉依，應知即是究竟位相。

The treatise says: the transformation of the basis attained in the earlier stage of cultivation should be known as just the characteristics of the ultimate stage.

「此」謂此前二轉依果，即是究竟無漏界攝。

"This" means the two fruits of the transformation of the basis before, which are just included in the ultimate undefiled realm.

諸漏永盡，非漏隨增，性淨圓明，故名無漏。

All outflows are permanently exhausted, not that outflows increase, and its nature is pure and perfectly bright, so it is called undefiled.

「界」是藏義，此中含容無邊希有大功德故；或是因義，能生五乘世、出世間利樂事故。

"Realm" (dhatu) means storehouse, because it contains boundless rare and great merits; or it means cause, since it can produce the beneficial and joyful affairs of the worlds and the beyond-worldly in the five vehicles.

清淨法界，可唯無漏攝，四智心品，如何唯無漏？

The pure dharma realm may be included only in the undefiled, but how are the mental categories of the four wisdoms only undefiled?

道諦攝故，唯無漏攝，謂佛功德及身、土等皆是無漏種性所生，有漏法種已永捨故。

Because they are included in the truth of the path, they are included only in the undefiled; that is, the Buddha's merits and the body, land and so on are all produced from undefiled seed-nature, since the seeds of defiled dharmas have been permanently discarded.

雖有示現作生死身、業煩惱等，似苦、集諦，而實無漏，道諦所攝。

Although there are manifested births in bodies of birth and death, and karma, afflictions and so on, seemingly the truths of suffering and origin, in reality they are undefiled and included in the truth of the path.

《集論》等說：十五界等，唯是有漏，如來豈無五根、五識、五外界等？

The Compendium of Abhidharma and others say that the fifteen realms and so on are only defiled; does the Tathagata not have the five faculties, five consciousnesses, five external realms and so on?

有義：如來功德、身、土，甚深微妙，非有非無，離諸分別，絕諸戲論，非界、處等法門所攝，故與彼說理不相違。

One view holds that the Tathagata's merits, body and land are profound and subtle, neither existent nor non-existent, free of all discriminations and cutting off all conceptual proliferation, and are not included in dharma gates such as realms and sense-bases, so they do not contradict that teaching.

有義：如來五根、五境妙定生故，法界色攝，非佛五識，雖依此變，然麁、細異，非五境攝。如來五識，非五識界，經說佛心恆在定故，論說五識性散亂故。

Another view holds that the Tathagata's five faculties and five objects are produced by wondrous concentration and so are included in the form of the dharma realm; the Buddha's five consciousnesses, although they transform in dependence on this, differ in being coarse or subtle and are not included in the five objects. The Tathagata's five consciousnesses are not the realms of five consciousnesses, since the sutras say that the Buddha's mind is always in concentration, and the treatise says that the nature of the five consciousnesses is scattered.

成所作智何識相應？

With which consciousness is the Wisdom of Accomplishing What Is to Be Done associated?

第六相應，起化用故。與觀察智性有何別？彼觀諸法自、共相等，此唯起化，故有差別。此二智品應不並生，一類二識不俱起故。許不並起，於理無違；同體用分，俱亦非失。

It is associated with the sixth, since it arises the function of transformation. What distinguishes it from the Wisdom of Observation? That one observes the particular and general characteristics of dharmas, while this only arises transformation, so there is a difference. These two kinds of wisdom categories should not arise together, since two consciousnesses of one kind do not arise together. Allowing them not to arise together is not contrary to principle; and if of one substance with different functions, their being together is also not a fault.

或與第七淨識相應，依眼等根，緣色等境，是平等智作用差別，謂淨第七起他受用身土相者，平等品攝，起變化者，成事品攝。

Or it is associated with the pure seventh consciousness, relying on the eyes and other faculties and taking form and other objects, as a difference in the function of the Wisdom of Equality: the pure seventh that arises the other-enjoyment body and land aspects is included in the Equality category, and that which arises transformations is included in the Accomplishing category.

豈不此品，轉五識得？

Is this category not obtained by transforming the five consciousnesses?

非轉彼得，體即是彼。如轉生死言得涅槃，不可涅槃同生死攝，是故於此，不應為難。

It is not obtained by transforming them; its substance is just them. It is like saying nirvana is obtained by transforming birth and death, though one cannot say nirvana is included in birth and death, so one should not raise difficulty about this.

有義：如來功德、身、土，如應攝在蘊、處、界中，彼三皆通有漏、無漏。

One view holds that the Tathagata's merits, body and land are, as appropriate, included in the aggregates, sense-bases and realms, and those three all include both defiled and undefiled.

《集論》等說：十五界等唯有漏者，彼依二乘麁淺境說，非說一切。謂餘成就十八界中，唯有後三，通無漏攝，佛成就者，雖皆無漏，而非二乘所知境攝。

The Compendium of Abhidharma and others say that the fifteen realms and so on are only defiled; this is said in relation to the coarse and shallow objects of the two vehicles and not about everything. That is, among the other eighteen realms that are accomplished, only the last three include the undefiled, and what the Buddha accomplishes, though all undefiled, is not included in the objects known by the two vehicles.

然餘處說，佛功德等非界等者，不同二乘劣智所知界等相故，理必應爾。

Yet in other places it is said that the Buddha's merits and so on are not realms and so on, differing from the characteristics of realms and so on known by the lesser wisdom of the two vehicles; the principle must be so.

所以者何？說有為法皆蘊攝故；說一切法界、處攝故；十九界等，聖所遮故；若絕戲論，便非界等。亦不應說，即無漏界、善、常、安樂、解脫身等。又處處說：轉無常蘊，獲得常蘊，界、處亦然；寧說如來非蘊、處、界？故言非者，是密意說。

Why? Because it is said that conditioned dharmas are all included in the aggregates; that all dharmas are included in realms and sense-bases; that the nineteen realms and so on are excluded by the holy ones; and that if conceptual proliferation is cut off, then it is not realms and so on. It also should not be said that it is just the undefiled realm, good, constant, the body of peace, joy and liberation, and so on. And in many places it is said: transforming the impermanent aggregates, one obtains the permanent aggregates, and likewise for sense-bases and realms; how can one say that the Tathagata is not aggregates, sense-bases and realms? So the "not" is said with hidden intent.

又說五識性散亂者，說餘成者，非佛所成。

It is also said that the nature of the five consciousnesses is scattered, which refers to other accomplished ones and not to what is accomplished by the Buddha.

故佛身中，十八界等，皆悉具足，而純無漏。

So in the Buddha's body, the eighteen realms and so on are all complete, but purely undefiled.

此轉依果，又不思議，超過尋思言議道故；微妙甚深自內證故；非諸世間喻所喻故。

This fruit of the transformation of the basis is also inconceivable, since it surpasses the paths of reflection, speech and discussion; it is profound and subtle, realized within oneself; and it cannot be illustrated by any worldly analogy.

此又是善，白法性故；清淨法界，遠離生滅，極安隱故；四智心品，妙用無方，極巧便故；二種皆有順益相故；違不善故俱說為善。

It is also good, because of the nature of white dharmas; the pure dharma realm is far from arising and ceasing and extremely peaceful; the mental categories of the four wisdoms have wondrous functions without limit and extreme skill; both kinds have the aspect of accordance and benefit; and because they oppose the unwholesome, both are called good.

論說處等，八唯無記，如來豈無五根、三境？此中三釋，廣說如前。一切如來身、土等法皆滅道攝，故唯是善，聖說滅道唯善性故，說佛土等，非苦、集故；佛識所變有漏、不善、無記相等，皆從無漏善種所生，無漏善攝。

The treatise says that among the sense-bases and so on, eight are only neutral; does the Tathagata not have the five faculties and three objects? There are three explanations here, set out broadly as before. All the Tathagatas' bodies, lands and other dharmas are included in the path of cessation, and so are only good, since the holy teaching says the path of cessation is only of good nature, and it says the Buddha lands and so on are not suffering or origin; the defiled, unwholesome, neutral aspects and so on that are transformed by the Buddha's consciousness are all produced from undefiled good seeds, and are included in the undefiled good.

此又是常，無盡期故。清淨法界，無生無滅，性無變易，故說為常；四智心品所依常故，無斷盡故，亦說為常。非自性常，從因生故，生者歸滅，一向記故。不見色心，非無常故。然四智品，由本願力，所化有情，無盡期故，窮未來際無斷、無盡。

It is also constant, because it has no end. The pure dharma realm is without arising or ceasing and its nature does not change, so it is called constant; the mental categories of the four wisdoms are also called constant because their basis is constant and they have no end or exhaustion. It is not constant in nature, since it arises from causes, and what arises returns to cessation, always recorded as such. It is not impermanent in that form and mind are not seen. Yet because of the power of the original vow, the sentient beings to be transformed by the four wisdoms are without end, and so it is without interruption and exhaustion to the end of the future.

此又安樂，無逼惱故。清淨法界，眾相寂靜，故名安樂。四智心品永離惱害，故名安樂。此二自性，皆無逼惱，及能安樂一切有情，故二轉依，俱名安樂。

It is also peaceful and joyful, because it has no oppression. The pure dharma realm, with all aspects still, is called peace and joy; the mental categories of the four wisdoms, permanently free of affliction and harm, are called peace and joy. Both of these natures are free of oppression and can bring peace and joy to all sentient beings, so both transformations of the basis are called peace and joy.

二乘所得二轉依果，唯永遠離煩惱障縛，無殊勝法故，但名解脫身。

The two fruits of the transformation of the basis attained by the two vehicles are only the permanent separation from bondage by the afflictive obstruction, without superior dharmas, so they are called only the body of liberation.

大覺世尊，成就無上寂默法，故名大牟尼。此牟尼尊所得二果，永離二障，亦名法身。無量無邊力無畏等，大功德法所莊嚴故。

The Greatly Awakened World-Honored One has accomplished the unsurpassed dharma of stillness and silence, and so is called the Great Muni. The two fruits attained by this Muni honor are permanently free of the two obstructions and are also called the Dharma body, because they are adorned by dharmas of great merit such as immeasurable boundless powers and fearlessnesses.

體、依、聚義，總說名身。故此法身，五法為性，非淨法界獨名法身，二轉依果，皆此攝故。

Substance, basis and collection are together called body. So this Dharma body has the five dharmas as its nature; it is not only the pure dharma realm that is called the Dharma body, as both fruits of the transformation of the basis are included in it.

如是法身，有三相別：一、自性身，謂諸如來真淨法界，受用、變化平等所依，離相寂然，絕諸戲論，具無邊際真常功德，是一切法平等實性，即此自性，亦名法身，大功德法所依止故。

This Dharma body is distinguished by three aspects. First, the self-nature body: the true pure dharma realm of the Tathagatas, the common basis of the enjoyment and transformation bodies, serene and free of marks, cutting off all conceptual proliferation, endowed with boundless true and constant merits, and the equal true nature of all dharmas. This self-nature is also called the Dharma body, because it is the basis of the dharmas of great merit.

二、受用身，此有二種：一、自受用，謂諸如來三無數劫，修集無量福慧資糧，所起無邊真實功德，及極圓、淨、常、遍色身，相續湛然，盡未來際，恆自受用廣大法樂。

Second, the enjoyment body, which is of two kinds. First, the self-enjoyment body: the boundless true merits arisen from the Tathagatas' cultivation and gathering of immeasurable stores of merit and wisdom over three countless kalpas, together with the extremely perfect, pure, constant and pervasive form body, which continues serenely to the end of the future and constantly enjoys the vast joy of Dharma by itself.

二、他受用，謂諸如來由平等智，示現微妙淨功德身，居純淨土，為住十地諸菩薩眾，現大神通，轉正法輪，決眾疑網，令彼受用大乘法樂。合此二種，名受用身。

Second, the other-enjoyment body: the Tathagatas, by the Wisdom of Equality, manifest wondrous pure bodies of merit, dwell in pure lands, and for the Bodhisattvas dwelling in the ten grounds, manifest great spiritual powers, turn the wheel of the true Dharma, and resolve the net of doubts, so that these beings enjoy the joy of the Mahayana Dharma. These two together are called the enjoyment body.

三、變化身：謂諸如來由成事智，變現無量隨類化身，居淨、穢土，為未登地諸菩薩眾、二乘、異生，稱彼機宜，現通說法，令各獲得諸利樂事。

Third, the transformation body: the Tathagatas, by the Wisdom of Accomplishing, manifest immeasurable bodies of transformation according to kind, dwelling in pure and impure lands, and for Bodhisattvas who have not yet reached the grounds, for the two vehicles and for ordinary beings, in accordance with their capacities, manifest powers and teach the Dharma, so that each obtains benefits and joys.

以五法性攝三身者，有義：初、二攝自性身，經說真如是法身故。論說轉去阿賴耶識，得自性身；圓鏡智品，轉去藏識，而證得故。中二智品，攝受用身，說平等智，於純淨土，為諸菩薩現佛身故；說觀察智，大集會中，說法斷疑現自在故；說轉諸轉識得受用身故。後一智品，攝變化身，說成事智，於十方土，現無量種難思化故。又智殊勝，具攝三身，故知三身，皆有實智。

In assigning the three bodies to the five-dharma natures, one view holds that the first and second include the self-nature body, since the sutras say that suchness is the Dharma body. The treatise says that by transforming away the alaya consciousness one attains the self-nature body, and the Mirror Wisdom category is realized by transforming away the store consciousness. The middle two wisdom categories include the enjoyment body, since it is said that the Wisdom of Equality, in pure lands, manifests the Buddha body for the Bodhisattvas, that the Wisdom of Observation, in great assemblies, teaches the Dharma, resolves doubts and manifests sovereignty, and that the enjoyment body is attained by transforming the various consciousnesses. The last wisdom category includes the transformation body, since it is said that the Wisdom of Accomplishing manifests immeasurable kinds of inconceivable transformations in the lands of the ten directions. Also, wisdom is supreme and fully includes the three bodies, so one knows that all three bodies have real wisdom.

有義：初一攝自性身。

Another view holds that the first one includes the self-nature body.

說自性身本性常故；說佛法身無生滅故；說證因得非生因故；又說法身諸佛共有，遍一切法，猶若虛空，無相無為，非色心故。

It is said that the self-nature body is constant in original nature; that the Buddha's Dharma body is without arising or ceasing; that what is realized through a cause of realization is not produced through a cause of production; and that the Dharma body is shared by all Buddhas, pervades all dharmas like space, is signless and unconditioned, and is not form or mind.

然說轉去藏識得者，謂由轉滅第八識中二障麁重，顯法身故。智殊勝中說法身者，是彼依止彼實性故。

Yet the statement that it is attained by transforming away the store consciousness means that by transforming and extinguishing the coarse heaviness of the two obstructions in the eighth consciousness, the Dharma body is manifested. In the supreme wisdom the Dharma body is spoken of because it is the real nature on which they depend.

自性法身，雖有真實無邊功德，而無為故，不可說為色、心等物。

The self-nature Dharma body, although it has true boundless merits, is unconditioned and so cannot be called form or mind and so on.

四智品中真實功德，鏡智所起，常、遍色身，攝自受用；平等智品，所現佛身，攝他受用；成事智品，所現隨類種種身相，攝變化身。

Among the four wisdom categories, the true merits are as follows: the constant and pervasive form body produced by the Mirror Wisdom is included in the self-enjoyment body; the Buddha bodies manifested by the Equality Wisdom category are included in the other-enjoyment body; the various bodily aspects manifested according to kind by the Accomplishing Wisdom category are included in the transformation body.

說圓鏡智是受用，佛轉諸轉識得受用故。

It is said that the Great Mirror Wisdom is enjoyment, since the Buddha attains the enjoyment body by transforming the various consciousnesses.

雖轉藏識亦得受用，然說轉彼顯法身故。於得受用，略不說之。又說法身無生無滅，唯證因得，非色、心等，圓鏡智品，與此相違。若非受用，屬何身攝。

Although transforming the store consciousness also attains enjoyment, it is said that transforming those manifests the Dharma body, and as to attaining enjoyment, it is not mentioned here. It is also said that the Dharma body is without arising or ceasing and is realized only through a cause of realization, and not form or mind and so on; the Mirror Wisdom category contradicts this. If it were not the enjoyment body, which body would it belong to?

又受用身，攝佛不共有為實德。故四智品，實有色、心，皆受用攝。

Also, the enjoyment body includes the Buddha's uncommon conditioned real virtues. So in the four wisdom categories, real form and mind are all included in the enjoyment body.

又他受用及變化身，皆為化他方便示現，故不可說實智為體。

Also, the other-enjoyment and transformation bodies are both skillful means of manifestation for transforming others, so real wisdom cannot be said to be their substance.

雖說化身智殊勝攝，而似智現或智所起，假說智名，體實非智。但說平等、成所作智，能現受用、三業化身，不說二身即是二智，故此二智自受用攝。

Although it is said that the transformation body is included in the supreme wisdom, what is meant is the appearance of wisdom or what arises from wisdom, and wisdom is spoken of nominally, while in substance it is not wisdom. It is said only that the Wisdom of Equality and the Wisdom of Accomplishing can manifest the enjoyment body and the transformation body of the three karmas, and it is not said that the two bodies are the two wisdoms, so these two wisdoms are included in the self-enjoyment body.

然變化身及他受用，雖無真實心及心所，而有化現心、心所法。無上覺者，神力難思，故能化現無形質法。

Yet although the transformation body and the other-enjoyment body have no real mind or mental factors, they have transformed minds and mental factors. The spiritual power of the unsurpassed Awakened One is inconceivable, and so he can transform and manifest dharmas without form or substance.

若不爾者，云何如來現貪、瞋等？久已斷故。云何聲聞及傍生等，知如來心？如來實心，等覺菩薩尚不知故。

If it were not so, how could the Tathagata manifest greed, anger and so on, which were severed long ago? How could Shravakas and animals and others know the Tathagata's mind? The Tathagata's real mind is not even known by Bodhisattvas of equal enlightenment.

由此經說，化無量類皆令有心；又說如來成所作智化作三業；又說變化有依他心，依他實心，相分現故。

For this reason the sutra says that in transforming immeasurable kinds, all are made to have minds; it also says that the Tathagata, by the Wisdom of Accomplishing, transforms the three karmas; and it says that transformations have minds that depend on others, which manifest as image-aspects dependent on the other's real mind.

雖說變化無根心等，而依餘說，不依如來。又化色根心、心所法，無根等用，故不說有。

Although it is said that transformations have no root-mind and so on, this is said in relation to others and not in relation to the Tathagata. Also, in transformed faculties, minds and mental factors, the functions of faculties and so on are absent, so it is not said that they exist.

如是三身，雖皆具足無邊功德，而各有異。謂自性身，唯有真實常、樂、我、淨，離諸雜染，眾善所依，無為功德，無色、心等差別相用。自受用身，具無量種妙色、心等真實功德；若他受用及變化身，唯具無邊似色、心等，利樂他用化相功德。

These three bodies, though all complete with boundless merits, each differ. The self-nature body has only true constant, joyful, self and pure, free of all defilements, the basis of all good, unconditioned merit, without differences in form, mind and so on. The self-enjoyment body is endowed with immeasurable kinds of wondrous real merits of form, mind and so on; the other-enjoyment body and the transformation body are endowed only with boundless apparent form, mind and so on, with merits of transformed aspects that benefit others.

又自性身，正自利攝，寂靜安樂無動作故；亦兼利他，為增上緣，令諸有情得利樂故；又與受用及變化身為所依止，故俱利攝。自受用身唯屬自利。若他受用及變化身，唯屬利他，為他現故。

Also, the self-nature body is mainly included in benefit to self, since it is still, peaceful and joyful, without action; it also includes benefit to others as a dominant condition, since it causes sentient beings to gain benefit and joy; and it is the basis of the enjoyment and transformation bodies, so it is included in both benefits. The self-enjoyment body belongs only to benefit for self. The other-enjoyment body and the transformation body belong only to benefit for others, since they are manifested for others.

又自性身，依法性土。雖此身、土體無差別，而屬佛、法，相、性異故。此佛身、土俱非色攝。雖不可說形量小、大；然隨事相其量無邊，譬如虛空，遍一切處。

Also, the self-nature body depends on the land of dharma-nature. Although the substance of this body and land is without difference, they differ in aspect and nature as Buddha and Dharma. This Buddha body and land are not included in form. Though one cannot speak of their shape, measure, smallness or greatness, their measure is boundless in accordance with phenomena and aspects, like space, pervading all places.

自受用身，還依自土：謂圓鏡智相應淨識，由昔所修自利無漏純淨佛土因緣成熟，從初成佛，盡未來際，相續變為純淨佛土，周圓無際，眾寶莊嚴，自受用身常依而住。如淨土量，身量亦爾，諸根相好，一一無邊，無限善根所引生故。功德智慧既非色法，雖不可說形量大小，而依所證及所依身，亦可說言遍一切處。他受用身，亦依自土：謂平等智大慈悲力，由昔所修利他無漏純淨佛土，因緣成熟，隨住十地菩薩所宜變為淨土，或小或大，或劣或勝，前後改轉，他受用身依之而住。能依身量，亦無定限。若變化身，依變化土。謂成事智大慈悲力，由昔所修利他無漏淨穢佛土，因緣成熟，隨未登地有情所宜化為佛土，或淨或穢，或小或大，前後改轉，佛變化身依之而住。能依身量，亦無定限。

The self-enjoyment body also rests on its own land. That is, the pure consciousness associated with the Mirror-like Wisdom, when the causes and conditions of the self-benefiting, undefiled, purely pure Buddha-land cultivated in the past mature, from the first attainment of Buddhahood to the end of the future, continuously transforms into a purely pure Buddha-land, perfect and boundless, adorned with many treasures, in which the self-enjoyment body constantly dwells. As the measure of the pure land, so is the measure of the body; its faculties, marks and characteristics are each limitless, drawn forth by limitless good roots. Since merit and wisdom are not form dharmas, though one cannot speak of their size, in terms of what is realized and the body relied upon, they can also be said to pervade all places. The other-enjoyment body also rests on its own land: that is, by the power of Wisdom of Equality and great compassion, from the benefiting-others, undefiled, purely pure Buddha-land cultivated in the past, when the causes and conditions mature, it transforms into a pure land according to what suits the Bodhisattvas dwelling in the ten stages, small or large, inferior or superior, changing before and after, and the other-enjoyment body rests on it. The measure of the body that rests on it is also not fixed. As for the transformation body, it rests on a transformed land. That is, by the power of Wisdom of Accomplishing Works and great compassion, from the benefiting-others, undefiled, pure and impure Buddha-land cultivated in the past, when the causes and conditions mature, it transforms into a Buddha-land according to what suits sentient beings who have not yet ascended the stages, pure or impure, small or large, changing before and after, and the Buddha's transformation body rests on it. The measure of the body that rests on it is also not fixed.

自性身土，一切如來同所證故，體無差別；自受用身及所依土，雖一切佛各變不同，而皆無邊不相障礙。餘二身土，隨諸如來所化有情，有共、不共。所化共者，同處同時，諸佛各變為身、為土，形狀相似，不相障礙，展轉相雜為增上緣，令所化生，自識變現。謂於一土有一佛身，為現神通說法饒益。於不共者，唯一佛變。諸有情類無始時來，種性法爾更相繫屬，或多屬一，或一屬多，故所化生有共、不共。不爾，多佛久住世間，各事劬勞，實為無益，一佛能益一切生故。

The body and land of the Self-nature, being what all Tathagatas realize in common, have no difference in substance; the self-enjoyment body and the land it relies on, though each Buddha transforms differently, are all boundless and do not obstruct one another. The other two bodies and lands, according to the sentient beings each Tathagata converts, are shared or not shared. For those converted in common, in the same place and at the same time, the Buddhas each transform bodies and lands, similar in form and not obstructing one another, mutually mingling as dominant conditions, so that the converted beings' own consciousnesses transform and manifest them. That is, in one land there is one Buddha body, who manifests supernatural powers and teaches the Dharma for benefit. For those not shared, only one Buddha transforms. Sentient beings, since beginningless times, by natural affinity of lineage are connected to one another, some many to one and some one to many, so the converted beings are shared or not shared. If it were not so, many Buddhas dwelling long in the world, each toiling in his own work, would truly be of no benefit, since one Buddha can benefit all beings.

此諸身、土若淨、若穢，無漏識上所變現者，同能變識，俱善無漏，純善無漏因緣所生。是道諦攝，非苦、集故。蘊等識相不必皆同，三法因緣雜引生故。

These bodies and lands, whether pure or impure, are manifested on undefiled consciousness; like the transforming consciousness, they are all wholesome and undefiled, born of purely wholesome undefiled causes and conditions. They are included in the truth of the path, not in suffering or origin. The characteristics of aggregates and so on in consciousness need not all be the same, because they are drawn forth by the mixed causes and conditions of three dharmas.

有漏識上所變現者，同能變識，皆是有漏。純從有漏因緣所生，是苦、集攝，非滅、道故。善等識相，不必皆同，三性因緣雜引生故。蘊等同異，類此應知，不爾，應無五、十二等。

Those manifested on defiled consciousness, like the transforming consciousness, are all defiled. Born purely of defiled causes and conditions, they are included in suffering and origin, not in cessation and path. The characteristics of good and so on in consciousness need not all be the same, because they are drawn forth by the causes and conditions of the three natures. The sameness and difference of aggregates and so on should be understood by analogy; if not, there should be no five, twelve and so on.

然相分等依識變現；非如識性依他中實。不爾，唯識理應不成許識內境俱實有故。

Rather, the object-part and so on are manifested depending on consciousness; unlike the nature of consciousness, which is real within the dependent. If it were not so, the principle of consciousness-only would not be established, because it would be granting that objects within consciousness are all real.

或識相、見等從緣生，俱依他起，虛實如識，唯言遣外，不遮內境。不爾，真如亦應非實。內境與識，既並非虛，如何但言唯識非境？識唯內有，境亦通外，恐濫外故，但言唯識。或諸愚夫，迷執於境，起煩惱業，生死沈淪，不解觀心，勤求出離，哀愍彼故，說唯識言，令自觀心，解脫生死，非謂內境如外都無。

Or the image-part, seeing-part and so on arise from conditions, all of the dependent nature, empty or real like consciousness, and the word "only" excludes the external and does not deny inner objects. If it were not so, suchness too should be unreal. Since objects within and consciousness are both not empty, why speak only of consciousness-only and not of objects? Consciousness exists only within, while objects also extend outside, and to avoid confusing the external, only consciousness-only is spoken of. Or because all fools are deluded and cling to objects, giving rise to afflictions and karma and sinking in birth and death, not understanding how to contemplate the mind and diligently seek escape, out of compassion for them the words consciousness-only are spoken, so that they contemplate their own minds and are liberated from birth and death, and it is not saying that inner objects like the external are all non-existent.

或相分等，皆識為性，由燻習力，似多分生。真如亦是識之實性。故除識性，無別有法。此中識言，亦說心所，心與心所，定相應故。

Or the object-part and so on all take consciousness as their nature, and by the power of perfuming appear as arising in many parts. Suchness is also the true nature of consciousness. So apart from the nature of consciousness there is no other dharma. The word consciousness here also speaks of mental factors, because mind and mental factors are necessarily associated.

此論三分成立唯識，是故說為《成唯識論》。

This treatise establishes consciousness-only in three parts, so it is called the Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only.

亦說此論名淨唯識，顯唯識理極明淨故。

It is also said that this treatise is named Pure Consciousness-Only, because it shows the principle of consciousness-only to be utterly clear and pure.

此本論名唯識三十，由三十頌，顯唯識理，乃得圓滿，非增減故。

This basic treatise is named Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only, because the principle of consciousness-only is shown to be complete by thirty verses, with nothing added or subtracted.

已依聖教及正理，分別唯識性相義，

Having relied on the holy teachings and correct reasoning, we have distinguished the nature and characteristics of consciousness-only,

所獲功德施群生，願共速登無上覺。

and the merit obtained is given to all beings; may we together quickly ascend to unsurpassed awakening.

原夫覺海澂玄，涵萬流而濬宗極；神幾闡妙，被眾象而凝至真。朗慧日而鏡六幽，洩慈雲而清八㝢，演一音而懸解，逸三乘以遐騖。體陳如之半器，津有有於鹿園；照善現之滿機，繹空空於鷲嶺。雖絕塵於常斷，詎遺筌於有空？顯無上之靈宗，凝中道於茲教。逮金河滅景，派淳源而不追；玉牒霏華，緒澆風而競扇。於是二十八見迷桑鴈於五天，一十六師亂雲牛於四主。半千將聖，茲惟世親寔賢劫之應真，晦生知以提化，飛光毓彩誕暎資靈。曜常明於八蘊、藻初情於六足，秀談芝於俱舍、摽說有之餘宗，攝玄波於大乘，賁研空之至理，化方昇而照極，湛沖一於斯頌。唯識三十偈者，世親歸根之遺製也。理韜淵海，泛浮境於榮河；義欝煙飈，麗虹章於玄圃。言含萬象、字苞千訓，妙旨天逸、邃彩星華，幽緒未宣冥神絕境，孤明斂暎秘思潛津。後有護法、安慧等十大菩薩，韞玄珠於八藏、聳層搆於四圍，宅照二因、捿清三觀，升暉十地，澄智水以潤賢林；隣幾七覺，皎行月而開重夜。優柔芳烈、景躅前修，箭湧泉言、風飛寶思，鹹觀本頌各裁斯釋，名曰「成唯識論」，或名「淨唯識論」。空心外之二取，息滯有之迷塗；有識內之一心，遣歸空之妄執。晦斯心境，苦海所以長淪；悟彼有空，覺岸於焉高蹈。九十外道，亂風轍而靡星旗；十八小乘，軔羬軒而扶龍轂。窮神體妙、詣賾探機，精貫十支、洞該九分，顧十翼而搏仙羽、頫九流以濬瓊波，盡邃理之希微、闡法王之奧典，稱謂雙絕、筌象兼忘，曜靈景於西申、閟虹光於震旦，濟物弘道、眇歸宗德。

The sea of awakening is originally clear and profound, containing a myriad streams while opening the ultimate source; the divine mechanism reveals wonderful meaning, covering the multitude of forms while condensing the highest truth. The sun of wisdom shines brightly and illuminates the six dark places, the clouds of compassion are released to clear the eight directions (the whole world); with a single sound it makes people understand at once, and it lets the three vehicles spread far. Perceiving the capacity of Ajnata-Kaundinya, who was half-vessel, it saved "existence-and-existence" in the Deer Park; shining upon the full capacity of Subhuti (Shanxian), it expounded "emptiness-of-emptiness" on Vulture Peak. Though already beyond the dust of the two extremes of permanence and annihilation, how could one then discard the fish-trap and rabbit-snare of existence and emptiness? Revealing the numinous source of the unsurpassed, it condensed the Middle Way into this teaching. When the golden river extinguished its shadow (the Buddha's entry into nirvana), the pure source branched off and none could bring it back; when the jade tablets scattered flowers, the thinning wind blew up in rivalry. So the twenty-eight views confused the mulberry and the geese in the five regions of India, and the sixteen masters stirred up the clouds and oxen among the four rulers. The saint expected after five hundred years is this Vasubandhu (Shiqin), truly a worthy of the Auspicious Kalpa, who hid his innate knowledge in order to lead and teach, flew with radiance and nurtured colors, and his birth shone upon and aided the spirits. Upon the eight aggregates he shone constantly bright, upon the six feet he adorned the early feelings, in the Abhidharma-kosa he stood out in discussing the fungus of immortality, raising the remaining schools that speak of existence, gathering the profound waves into the Mahayana, adorning the supreme principle of studying emptiness; teaching just rose and shone to the utmost, and placed the still clarity of supreme unity within these verses. The Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only are the final testament of Vasubandhu returning to the root. The principle is concealed like a deep sea, floating the superficial realm on the flowering river; the meaning is dense like smoke and storm, adorning the rainbow patterns in the mystic garden. The words contain myriad images, the characters embrace a thousand glosses, the wonderful purport is free as the heavens, the deep colors are star-flowers, the subtle threads are not yet unfolded, the spirit is hidden beyond all bounds, a solitary light is gathered and reflected, and secret thought is concealed at the ford. Later the ten great Bodhisattvas Dharmapala, Sthiramati and others, who stored the mystic pearl in the eight stores and raised tiers on all four sides, made their dwelling in the illumination of the two causes and lodged in the clarity of the three contemplations, rose in radiance through the ten stages and clarified the waters of wisdom to moisten the grove of the worthy; near to the incipience of the seven factors of awakening, they brightened the traveling moon and opened the long night. Gentle and fragrant in manner, they revered the earlier cultivators, their words like springs gushing forth like arrows, their thoughts like wind flying with treasures, and all took the root verses and each shaped this commentary, named "Cheng Weishi Lun", or also called "Pure Treatise on Consciousness-Only." It empties out the two graspings outside the mind and stops the deluded path of clinging to existence; it affirms the one mind within consciousness and dispels the false clinging that returns to emptiness. When mind and objects are obscured, the sea of suffering sinks long; awakening to existence and emptiness, one strides to the shore of awakening. The ninety heretics disorder the wind and the wheel tracks and the banner of stars is lost; the eighteen schools of the Small Vehicle set the wheel against the shaft to support the dragon hub. Exhausting the spirit and embodying the wonderful, reaching the profound and probing the mechanism, they thoroughly penetrated the ten branches and fully comprehended the nine parts, looked back on the ten wings and grasped the immortal's feather, looked down on the nine currents and dredged the jeweled waves, exhausting the subtle obscurity of the deep principle and expounding the esoteric canon of the Dharma King, with both name and attribute cut off and both trap and image forgotten, shining the spiritual light in the west and hiding the rainbow in the east, saving beings and broadening the Way, vast and distant, returning to the source of virtue.

粵若大和上三藏法師玄奘，體睿舍真、履仁翔慧，九門禪宴證靜於融山、八萬玄津騰流於委海，疊金牆而月曜、峻玉宇而霞騫，軼芳粹於澄蘭、孕風華於龍翼。悼微言之匿彩、嗟大義之淪暉，用啟誓言、肆茲遙踐，泳祥河之輟水、攀寶樹之低枝、循鏤槓以神遊、𨈆霙峰而安步，昇紫階而證道、瞰玄影以嚴因。採奧觀奇，徙蒼龍於二紀；緘檀篆貝，旋白馬於三秦。我

As for the great monk Tripitaka Master Xuanzang, he embodied wisdom and relinquished the false, walked in benevolence and his wisdom flew, the nine gates of meditation realized stillness on the melting mountains and the eighty thousand profound fords surged into the sea, layers of golden walls shone like the moon and lofty jade halls rose like clouds at dawn, his fragrant purity surpassed orchids and his refinement incubated the dragon's wing. Grieving that subtle words had hidden their color and lamenting that the great meaning had sunk its radiance, he made a vow and set out to travel far, swimming in the waters of the auspicious river that had stopped, climbing the drooping branches of the jeweled trees, following the carved poles with spirit roaming, and walking calmly on snowy peaks, ascending purple steps to realize the Way and gazing at the dark shadows to adorn causes. Gathering the profound and viewing the marvelous, he moved the blue dragon over two cycles of years; sealing sandalwood and shell-leaf scriptures, he turned the white horse back to the three Qin. Our

大唐慶表金輪、禎資樞電，奄大千而光宅、御六辯以天飛，神化潛通、九仙賮寶，玄猷旁闡、百靈聳職，凝旒邃拱，杳通夢於宵暉；掞組摛華，煥騰文以幽贊。爰降綸旨，溥令翻譯，勅尚書左僕射燕國公於志寧、中書令高陽公許敬宗等潤色，沙門釋神泰等證義，沙門釋靖邁等質文。肇自貞觀十九年，終於顯慶之末，部將六十，卷出一千。韜軼蓬萊、池湟環㴾，載隆法寶、大啟群迷，頌德序經並紆宸藻，玄風之盛未之前聞。粵以顯慶四年龍捿葉洽，玄英應序，厥閏惟陽，糅茲十釋四千五百頌，彙聚群分各遵其本，合為一部勒成十卷。月窮於紀，銓綜雲畢，精括詁訓、研詳夷夏，調驚韶律、藻掞天𨓍，白鳳甄奇、紫微呈瑞，遂使文同義異若一師之製焉，斯則古聖今賢其揆一也。

(Shen Xuanming continues:) The great Tang, blessed with the sign of the golden wheel and endowed with auspicious omens of the pivot lightning, held the great thousand realm and shone through it, driving the six eloquences to soar in the sky, its divine transformation secretly penetrating, the nine immortals offering treasures, its mystic scheme spreading far, the hundred spirits standing to duty; with the beaded cap solemnly folded, it communicated in dreams with the night light; with ribbons and flowing flowers it supported the refined writings and aided them in the dark. So an imperial decree was issued ordering universal translation, and the Left Vice-Director of the Department of State Affairs Yu Zhining, Duke of Yan, the Director of the Secretariat Xu Jingzong, Duke of Gaoyang, and others were ordered to polish the text, the shramanas Shentai and others to verify the meaning, and the shramanas Jingmai and others to check the style. From the nineteenth year of Zhenguan to the end of Xianqing, the works numbered nearly sixty and fascicles reached one thousand. Hidden away in Penglai and encircled by moats of ponds, they greatly honored the Dharma treasure and widely opened the confusion of the multitude, the praises of virtue and prefaces to sutras all passing through the imperial brush, and the flourishing of the profound wind had never been heard of before. In the fourth year of Xianqing, the year yezhi, in the season of winter when the leap was in the yang month, this treatise mixed the ten commentaries and four thousand five hundred verses, gathering the various divisions, each following its root, and combined them into one work divided into ten fascicles. At the end of the month the collation was complete; it carefully summarized the glosses, examined the Chinese and foreign details, its harmony startled the Shao music, its ornamentation shone like heaven's light, the white phoenix selected the marvelous and the purple palace displayed auspiciousness, so that the text was the same and the meaning different as if made by one teacher, which is the same standard of ancient sages and present worthies.

三藏弟子基，鼎族高門、玉田華胄，壯年味道、綺日參玄，業峻林遠、識清雲鏡，閑儀玉瑩，陵道邃而澄明；逸韻蘭芳，掩法汰而飛辯。緒僊音於八梵，舞霄鶴以翔禎；摛麗範於九章，影桐鸞而絢藻。昇光譯侶，俯潛叡而融暉；登彩義徒，顧猷暢而高視。秀初昕之琁景，晉燭玄儒；矯彌天之絕翰，騰邁真俗。親承四辯、言獎三明，䟽發戶牖、液導津涉，繢功資素、通理寄神，綜其綱領、甄其品第，兼撰義䟽傳之後學。庶教蟠黃陸，跨合璧於龜疇；祥浮紫宮，掩連珠於麟籀。式罄庸謏，敘其宗致雲。

The Tripitaka Master's disciple Ji (Kuiji), from a high gate of a tripod family and a descendant of the jade fields, tasted the Way in his prime and consulted the profound in his bright days, his work lofty like a distant forest and his knowledge clear like a cloud mirror, his composed bearing gleaming like jade, rising above the depths of the Way with clarity; his elegant tone fragrant as orchids, covering Fatai with his flying eloquence. He spread the immortal voice in the eight Brahma sounds, danced like the cranes of the sky to soar with auspiciousness; he composed a beautiful model in the nine chapters, with the shadow of the paulownia simurgh dazzling in brilliance. Ascending in light among the translators, he looked down on Qian and Rui and blended their radiance; climbing in color among the disciples of meaning, he looked back at Youchang and viewed from on high. Outstanding as the jade light at early dawn, he advanced the candles of the profound Confucians; raising a peerless brush that covered the heavens, he soared over the true and the common. He personally received the four eloquences and the words encouraged the three insights, opening doors and windows, guiding through fords and crossings, painting merit on plain silk and entrusting principle to spirit, gathering its main outline and sorting its grades, and also composing commentary to pass on to later students. May the teaching coil from the Yellow Road and join the paired jade over the tortoise fields; may auspiciousness float over the purple palace and cover the linked pearls in the unicorn script. I have briefly exhausted my meager ability and narrated its main purport in this way.