Cheng Weishi Lun, Fascicle One
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.