Cheng Weishi Lun (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only), Volume 4

《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.