Cheng Weishi Lun, Fascicle One
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.