Cheng Weishi Lun, Fascicle One
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.