---
title: "宗鏡錄 · 52"
description: "宗镜录是北宋高僧延寿大师编纂的一部重要佛教典籍，成书于10世纪。延寿大师为法眼宗第三代祖师，融会禅、教、净诸宗思想，主张禅教一致。全书共一百卷，以问答形式系统阐述佛教义理，内容涵盖心性论、修行法门、教相判释等核心议题，被誉为中国佛教的百科全书。该书在宋代即受皇室推崇，对后世禅宗发展影响深远，是研究中国佛教思想史的重要文献，在汉传佛教中具有承前启后的重要地位，至今仍为佛学研究者所重视。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cma8xstbm17t5l404wzelvv2a"
---

## 宗鏡錄卷第五十二

> The Record of the Mirror of the Source, Volume 52

慧日永明寺主智覺禪師延壽集

> Collection by the Great Master Yongming Yanshou, Abbot of Huiri Yongming Temple

夫第二能變識者。識論頌云。次第二能變。是識名末那。依彼轉緣彼。思量為性相。四煩惱常俱。謂我癡我見。并我慢我愛。及餘觸等俱。有覆無記攝。隨所生所繫。阿羅漢滅定。出世道無有。乃至應知。此意。但緣藏識見分。非餘。彼無始來。一類相續。似常似一故。恒與諸法為所依故。此唯執彼為自內我。我語勢故。說我所言。或此執彼是我之我。故於一見。義說二義。若作是說。善順教理。多處唯言有我見故。我我所執。不俱起故。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。為諸有情。緣解差別。示現種種佛影像故。釋云。此第七識。但緣見分。非餘相分種子心所等。唯緣見分者。謂無始時來。微細一類。似常似一。不斷故似常。簡境界。彼色等法。皆間斷故。種子亦然。或被損伏。或時永斷。由此遮計餘識為我。似一故。簡心所。心所多法故。何故不緣餘識。夫言我者。有作用相。見分受境。作用相顯。似於我故。不緣餘識。自證等。用細難知。

> Now, the second transforming consciousness. As the Verses on Consciousness explain: Next, the second transformation Is the consciousness called Manas. It arises based on and takes as its object The previous consciousness, with rumination as its nature and function. Four afflictions constantly accompany it: Self-ignorance, self-view, Self-conceit, and self-love, Along with other mental factors like contact. It is covered but morally neutral, Bound to whatever realm it is born in. For Arhats, in meditative cessation, And on the transcendent path, it ceases to exist. This should be understood: this Manas consciousness only takes as its object the seeing portion of the storehouse consciousness, not anything else. Why? Because since beginningless time, the storehouse consciousness has continued as a single uniform stream, appearing constant and singular. It also serves as the supporting basis for all phenomena. This consciousness grasps only that as its own inner self. Due to the force of the expression "self," it speaks of "what belongs to me." Or alternatively, it grasps that as "the self of my self." Therefore, from one single act of grasping, two aspects are described in terms of meaning. If explained this way, it accords well with both doctrine and reason. In many places, only self-view is mentioned, because the grasping of self and what belongs to self do not arise simultaneously. Before the transformation of the basis, it only takes the storehouse consciousness as its object. After the transformation of the basis, it also takes thusness and all other phenomena. This is because the wisdom of equality realizes ten kinds of equality, and in order to respond to sentient beings' different capacities and understandings, it manifests various images of Buddhas. Explanation: This seventh consciousness only takes the seeing portion, not the other portions—the perceived portion, the seeds, or mental factors. Why only the seeing portion? Because since beginningless time, it is subtle, uniform, appearing constant and singular. Its uninterrupted continuity makes it appear constant, distinguishing it from objects like forms and colors, which are intermittent. Seeds are likewise—they can be damaged or permanently cut off. This rules out the idea that other consciousnesses are the self. Its appearing singular distinguishes it from mental factors, which are multiple in nature. Why does it not take other consciousnesses? Because what we call "self" has an active function—the seeing portion receives objects and its function is evident, so it resembles a self. That is why it does not take other consciousnesses. The self-verifying portion and others have functions too subtle to be easily known.

問。何不但緣一受等為我。亦常一故。

> Question: Why not simply take one particular sensation, for instance, as the self? After all, it too is constant and singular.

答。夫言我者。是自在義。萬物主義。與一切法而為所依。心所不然。不可為我。唯心王是所依故。此第七識。恒執為內我。非色等故。不執為外我。若唯緣識。即唯起我。無有我所。我語勢故。論說我所言。非是離我。別起我所執。唯執第八是我之我。前五蘊假者。是第六所緣之我。後我第七所計。或前我前念。後我後念。二俱第七所計。或即一念計。此即是。此唯第七所計。或前是體。後是識用。於一我見之上。亦義說之為我及所二言。實但一我見。多處唯言有我見故者。瑜伽論云。由此末那。我見慢等。恒共相應。顯揚論云。由此意根。恒與我見我慢等相應。我我所執。不俱起故者。行相及境。二俱別故。不可並生。無此事故。若已轉依位善心等可。然。彼非執故亦不可。例。人法二執。境是一故。若未起對治斷其我執。名未轉依唯緣藏識。初地已去。既轉依已。入無漏心。亦緣真如。及餘一切法。二乘無學等。唯緣異熟識。證得十種平等性者。佛地經云。一諸相增上喜愛。二一切領受緣起。三遠離異相非相。四弘濟大慈。五。無待大悲。六隨諸有情所樂示現。七一切有情我愛所說。八世間寂靜皆同一味。九世間諸法苦樂一味。十修植無量功德究竟。即知十地有情緣解意樂差別。能起受用身之影像。論云。未轉依位。恒審思重所執我相。已轉依位。亦審思量無我相故者。第七末那。以思量為自性故。攝論云。思量是意。即自證分。前第八識了別是行相。今既言意。故知即是第七行相。即是見分。體性難知。以行相顯。其實思量。但是行相。其體即是識蘊攝故。初地已前。二乘有學。恒審思量我相。知有漏末那。已轉依位。亦審思量無我相故。亦名末那。

> Answer: The term "self" refers to the notion of autonomy—the idea that something is the master of all things and serves as the foundation for all phenomena. The mind itself, however, does not fit this description and cannot be considered a self, because only the mind-king (the fundamental consciousness) serves as that foundation. This seventh consciousness (manas) constantly grasps an inner self, not an outer one, since it does not focus on material forms. If it only perceives consciousness, it gives rise solely to the sense of "I" without a sense of "mine." The scriptures speak of "mine" as an extension of the "I" expression, not as a separate clinging distinct from the self. It only grasps the eighth consciousness as the self of the self. The earlier five aggregates are the apparent self, which is the object of the sixth consciousness's perception. The latter self is what the seventh consciousness clings to. Alternatively, the former self pertains to the previous moment, and the latter to the next, both being objects of the seventh consciousness's grasping. Or, within a single moment, it can grasp both, still solely the seventh consciousness's concern. Sometimes the former is the essence, and the latter is the function of consciousness—within a single view of self, it is described in terms of both "I" and "mine," but in reality, it is just one view of self. The scriptures often say "only the view of self" because, as the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* states, this manas is constantly accompanied by self-view, conceit, and so on. The \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\* says this mental faculty is always aligned with self-view and conceit. The grasping of "I" and "mine" does not arise simultaneously because their modes of operation and objects are entirely different, so they cannot occur together—there is no such situation. In the state of transformed reliance (post-enlightenment), virtuous states of mind may be possible, but those are not grasping, so they cannot serve as an example. The two clingings—to self and to phenomena—share the same object, but without the remedy of contemplation to cut off self-grasping, one is said to be in the un-transformed state, relying only on the store consciousness. From the first bodhisattva ground onward, having transformed reliance and entered the undefiled mind, one also perceives thusness and all other phenomena. The noble disciples who have completed their training (arhats) and non-returners rely only on the maturation consciousness. Regarding the attainment of the ten equalities, the \*Buddhabhūmi-sūtra\* enumerates them: 1) the heightened joy of all appearances, 2) the dependent origination of all experience, 3) freedom from difference and non-difference, 4) the vast great compassion, 5) the unconditional great pity, 6) manifesting according to the wishes of sentient beings, 7) what is spoken out of self-love for all beings, 8) the world's stillness as one taste, 9) the one taste of suffering and pleasure in worldly dharmas, and 10) the culmination of cultivating immeasurable virtues. Thus, one understands that the differing conditions, understanding, and inclinations of beings on the ten grounds give rise to the images of the enjoyment body. The treatise says: In the un-transformed state, it constantly and deeply deliberates the grasped self-image; in the transformed state, it also deeply deliberates the image of no-self. This seventh manas has deliberation as its nature. The \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\* says: Deliberation is the mind—this is the self-validating cognition. The eighth consciousness's discernment is its mode of operation. Now that we speak of "mind," we know it refers to the seventh consciousness's mode of operation, which is the seeing part. Its essence is hard to know directly, so it is revealed through its mode of operation. In truth, deliberation is just its mode of operation; its essence is included within the aggregate of consciousness. Before the first ground and for trainees in the two vehicles, it constantly and deeply deliberates the self-image, known as the defiled manas. In the transformed state, it also deeply deliberates the image of no-self, and so it is still called manas.

論問。如世尊言。出世末那。云何建立。

答。有二義。一名不必如義。彼無漏第七不名末那。名是假故。二能審思量無我相故。亦名末那。顯通無漏。即知此名。非唯有漏。論云。謂從無始。至未轉依。此意任運。恒緣藏識。與四根本煩惱相應。我癡者。謂無明。愚。於我相。迷無我理。故名我癡。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。乃至此四常起。擾濁內心。令外轉識。恒成雜染。有情由此生死輪迴。不能出離。故名煩惱。釋云。此第七意。除四惑外。不與餘心所相應者。一恒故。二內執故。三一類境生故。所以不作意而向外馳求。唯任運而一向內執。此第七識。於五受中。唯捨受相應。論云。此無始來。任運一類緣內執我。恒無轉易。與變異受不相應故。

又問。末那心所。何性所攝。

論答云。此意相應四煩惱等。是染法故。障礙聖道。隱蔽真心。說名有覆。非善不善。故名無記。若已轉依。唯是善性。密嚴經偈云。末那緣藏識。如磁石吸鐵。如蛇有二頭。各別為其業。染意亦如是。執取阿賴耶。能為我事業。增長於我所。復與意識俱。為因而轉謝。於身生煖觸。運動作諸業。飲食與衣裳。隨物而受用。騰躍或歌舞。種種自嬉遊。持諸有情身。皆由意功力。如火輪垂髮。乾闥婆之城。不了唯自心。妄起諸分別。身相器世間。如動鞦韆勢。無力不堅固。分別亦復然。分別無所依。但行於自境。譬如鏡中像。識種動而見。愚夫此迷惑。非諸明智者。仁主應當知。此三皆識現。於斯遠離處。是即圓成實。

問。此意有幾種差別。

答。略有三種。論云。一補特伽羅我見相應。二法我見相應。三平等性智相應。初通一切異生相續。二乘有學。七地已前一類菩薩。有漏心位。彼緣阿賴耶識。起補特伽羅我見。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。後通一切如來相續。菩薩見道。及順道中。法空智果現在前位。彼緣無垢異熟識等。起平等性智。

問。人法二執俱起。何故分位前後不同。

答。人法必依法執起。又法我通。人我局。論云。補特伽羅我見起位。彼法我見。亦必現前。我執必依法執而起。如要迷杌等。方謂人等故。釋云。今顯初位。必帶後位。以初短故。人我位。必有法我。人我必依法我起故。人我。是主宰作者等用故。法我。有自性勝用等故。即法我通。人我局。

問。此第七識。云何離眼等識。別有自體。出何經文。

答。論云。聖教正理。為定量故。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。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。恒審思量為我等故。餘六名識。於六別境麁動間斷。了別轉故。如入楞伽頌說。藏識說名心。思量性名意。能了諸境相。是說名為識。釋云。雖通八識。皆名心意識。而隨勝顯。第八名心。為一切現行熏集諸法種。現行為依。種子識為因。能生一切法故。是起諸法。第七名意者。因中有漏。唯緣我境。無漏緣第八及真如。果上許緣一切法故。餘六識名識。於六別境。體是麁動。有間斷法。了別轉故。易了名麁。轉易名動。不續名間。各有此勝。各別得名。又論云。謂契經說。不共無明。微細恒行。覆蔽真實。若無此識。彼應非有。謂諸現生。於一切分。恒起迷理不共無明。覆真實義。障勝慧眼。如有頌說。真義心當生。常時為障礙。俱行一切分。謂不共無明。是故契經。說。異生類。恒處長夜。無明所盲。惛醉纏心。曾無醒覺。若異生位。有暫不起。此無明時。便違經義。謂異生位。迷理無明。有。行不行。不應理故。此依六識。皆不得成。應此間斷。彼恒緣故。許有末那。便無此失。釋云。如緣起經。有四無明。一現。二種。三相應。四不相應。或有為二。共。不共等。今說不共者。謂此微細常行。行相難知。覆無我理。蔽無漏智。名覆蔽真實。真實有二。一無我理。二無漏見。義有二義。一謂境義。見分境故。二謂義理。真如即理故。

問。染污末那。常與四惑相應。如何說不共無明。

答。論云。應說四中。無明是主。雖三俱起。亦名不共。從無始際。恒內惛迷。曾不省察。癡增上故。乃至謂第七相應無明。無始恒行。障真義智。如是勝用。餘識所無。唯此識有。故名不共。又不共無明。總有二種。一恒行不共。餘識所無。二獨行不共。此識非有。釋云。主是自在義。為因依義。與彼為依。故名不共。何故無明。名為不共。謂從無始際。顯長夜常起。恒內惛迷。明一切時不了空理。曾不省察。彰恒執我。無循反時。此意總顯癡主自在義。一恒行不共者。此識俱是。今此所論。餘識無也。二獨行不共者。則與忿等相應起故。名為獨行。或不與餘俱起無明。獨迷諦理。此識非有。又不共無明者。無明是主故。名不共者。以主是不共義。不共。即是獨一之義。謂無明是闇義。七俱無明。恒行不斷。是長闇義。由長闇故。名為長夜。唯此無明。為長夜體。餘法皆無長夜之義。唯此獨有。故名不共。除此已外。餘法有一類長相續義。而無闇義。或有一類。雖有闇義。而無長相續義。應作四句分別。一者有是長而非是夜。如七俱貪等三及妙平二智相應心品等。二者有是夜而非是長。如前六識相應無明。三是長亦是夜。七俱無明是。四者非長非夜。前六識除無明。取餘貪等。及因中善等。并果。中觀察成事。二智相應心品等。今此七俱無明。准此不但不與餘識共。兼亦不與自聚貪等三共。謂雖與同聚貪等俱起。而貪等無長夜闇義。貪等以染著等為義。此以長闇為義。與彼不同。故名不共。此以第七恒時迷闇名不共。六識中者。無恒時義。但有獨起之義。名為不共。

問。恒行不共無明相應。有幾種義。

答。有四義。古德云。一是主者。謂前六識無明是客。有間斷故。第七無明是主。無間斷故。二恒行者。有漏位中。常起現行。不間斷。故名恒行。三不共者。不同第六識獨頭。名不共。第六不共。但不與餘九煩惱同起。名為不共。若第七名不共者。障無漏法勝故。又恒行不間斷故。四前六識通三性心時。此識無明。皆起現行。謂前六識善性心時。於施等不能亡相者。皆是第七恒行不共無明內執我。令六識等行施時。不能達三輪體空。又以有不共無明。常能為障。而令彼當生無漏智不生。此無明與第七識俱有故。至今不捨。故名俱行。又經云。眼色為緣。生於眼識。乃至意法為緣。生於意識。若無此識。彼意非有。眼根色境為二緣。能發引得眼識。乃至意識法境為二緣。能發得意識。若無第七識者。即應第六識唯有一法境為緣。應無所依根緣也。既有俱有根者。明知即是第七識與第六識為俱有根。小乘云。我宗取肉團。與第六識為依。何要別執有第七識耶。論主破云。亦不可說第六依於色故。第六必依意有。說意非是色故。又說第六有三分別。隨念計度自性分別故。若許第六依色而住者。即同前五識。無隨念計度二種分別。救云。我宗五識。根先識後故。即前念五根。發後念五識。論主破云。但有根者。如葉依種起。芽種俱時。影藉身生。身影同有。識依根發。理必同時。無前念根。發後念識故。既若五識有俱有根。將證第六亦須有俱有根。即第七識是也。引理證者。教中說有思量者。即是第七識。小乘云。但是第六等無間。名思量意。何要別說第七為思量意耶。論主破云。且如第六意識現在前時。念等無間意。已滅無體。如何有思量用名意耶。且如第六識。若居現在時。雖有思量。恒名為識。不名意故。要待過去。方名意故。須信有第七識。具恒審思量。方得名意。意者。依止義。若等無間意。依此第七假得意名。俱有依止思量用故。又第七識與四惑俱。名為染污。恒審思量。名之為意。常有恒行不共無明。故名染污。正是有覆性。即覆真緣義。蔽淨妙智。恒審思量者。此揀第八前六識。恒者。不間斷。審者。決定執我法故。

問。第八亦無間斷。第六決定。有思量。何不名意。

答。有四句。一恒而非審。第八恒無間斷。不審思量我法故。二審而非恒。即第六。雖審思量。而非恒故。不名意也。前五俱非。非恒非審。第七俱攝。而恒審故。獨名意也。

問。第七思量何法。

答。執第八見分。思量有我法故。二乘無學無我執。以思量法我執故名意。佛果我法二執俱無。恒審思量無我理。佛果第七亦名意。

問。為第七自體有思量。為第七相應遍行中思。名思量意不。

答。取心所思量者。即八識皆有。思何獨第七。

問。若唯取自體有思量者。即何用心所中思耶。

答。具二義。一有相應思量。二亦自體思量。今取自體有思量名意。

問。心所與心王。一種是常審思量。執第八為我。如何不說心所為意。

答。言意者。依止義。心所雖恒審思量。非主。是劣法。非所依止故。不名意也。二者自體識有思量。與餘七識為所依止。唯取心王。即名意也。

問。若言自體有思量名意者。即第七有四分。何分名思量意。

答。有二解。第一見分名思量。內二分不名思量。但名意。見分不名意。有思量。以是用故。思量我無我。內二分不能思量我無我。但名意。以是體故。第二見分是思量相。相者。體相。相狀。內二分是思量性。即內外皆名意。三分皆思量。但除相分。相分是所量境也。

問。何以得知。內外三分總是思量。

答。識論云。思量為性相。內二分是體。名思量性。外見分是思量相。是用。一種是思量。三分皆名意。即不取相分名思量。以無能緣用故。

問。見分緣執我法。即思量我故。得名思量。自證分不緣於我相分。如何自證分亦名思量。

答。自證分證。彼見分思量我執故。亦名思量也。

問。見分思量我。是非量攝。自證分證。彼見分思量我。自證分。亦是非量耶。

答。見分思量我。見分妄執。故名非量。自證是內證見分妄執故。自證體是現量。即體用皆是思量。即內二分亦名意。亦名識。見分亦名意。亦名識。是意之用故。思量是用。意是體。思量即意。持業釋也。

問。第七識但緣第八見分為我。云何不取相分。及內二分等。

答。相分間斷。又是外緣。內二分作用沈隱難知。不執也。種子無作用故。不執為我。以見分作用顯現故。

問。第七識三量假實。如何分別。

答。古釋三量分別者。第七見分是非量。境不稱心故。其第八見分。本非是我。今第七妄執為我。即不稱本質。又親緣第八見分不著。變相分緣。相分。本非是我。第七又執為我。又不稱相分。即兩重不稱境。故知非量。假實分別者。第七緣他本質。第八見分不著。但緣得中間假我相分故。境假非實。

問。中間相分。為定是假。為亦通實。

答。第七中間相分是假。無實種生。但從兩頭起。此相分。仍通二性。若一半從本質上起者。是無覆性。即屬本質。若一半從自能緣第七見分上起者。同見分。是有覆性。但兩頭心法爍起。成一相分。今言境假者。但約隨妄心我相分以說。

問。若言第七當情相分但是假。從兩頭起。通二性者。應可第七所緣我相分中。一半有覆。一半無覆。一半是我。一半非我。

答。其第八見分上所起無覆性相分。與能緣第七妄心遍計相分。密合一處。若是第七但自執妄起遍計有覆性假相分。為自內我。雖密合一處。亦不犯所執我中通二性過。如水中鹽味。但執是水。不執於鹽。水與鹽元不相離。

問。第七自有相分。如何不自緣相分。緣他第八見分為我耶。

答。古德云。今言緣見分者。即是疎緣。若言親者。唯識義何在。

又問。設許疎緣第八者。且第七自識於何法上起執。

答。於自識相分起執。

又問。相見何別。

答。若論外境。相見全殊。若就心論。相見無異。相即是見。故經云。心如相顯現。見如心所依。

問。若無末那。有何等過。

答。若無第七。則無凡可厭。無聖可欣。凡聖不成。染淨俱失。論云。是故定應別有此意。又契經說。無想有情。一期生中。心心所滅。若無此識。彼應無染。謂彼長時無六轉識。若無此意。我執便無。乃至故應別有染污末那。於無想天。恒起我執。由斯賢聖。同訶厭彼。又契經說。異生善染無記心時。恒帶我執。若無此識。彼不應有。謂異生類。三性心時。雖外起諸業。而內恒執我。內執我故。令六識中所起施等。不能亡相。故瑜伽說。染污末那。為識依止。彼未滅時。相了別縛。不得解脫。末那滅已。相縛解脫。言相縛者。調於境相。不能了達如幻事等。由斯見分相分所拘。不得自在。故名相縛。依如是義。有伽陀言。如是染污意。是識之所依。此意未滅時。識縛終不脫。釋云。於無想天。恒起我執。由斯賢聖。同訶厭彼者。有第七於彼起我執。是異生故。出定已後。復沈生死。起諸煩惱。聖賢訶彼。若無第七。不應訶彼。無過失果。由執我故。令六識中所起施等不能亡相者。此我外緣。行相麁動。非第七起。由第七故。第六起此。全由七生。增明為論。第六識中。我執體有間斷。通三性心。間雜生故。第七不緣外境生故。已上略錄第七末那。諸教同詮。群賢共釋。創入道者。此意須明。是起凡聖之因。宜窮體性。乃立解惑之本。可究根原。迷之則為人法。執之愚。悟之則成平等性之智。於諸識內。獨得意名。向有漏中。作無明主。不間不斷。無想定治而不消。常審常恒。四空天避而還起。雖有覆而無記。不外執而內緣。常起現行。能蔽真而障道。唯稱不共。但成染而潤生。是以欲透塵勞。須知要徑。將施妙藥。先候病原。若細意推尋。冥心體察。則何塵而不出。何病而不消。斷惑之門。斯為要矣。

> Answer: If there were no seventh consciousness (manas), then there would be no ordinary beings to turn away from, nor sages to aspire toward. Neither ordinary beings nor sages would exist, and both defilement and purity would be lost. The Treatise says: "Therefore, there must certainly be this distinct consciousness." Furthermore, the scriptures state that beings in the Realm of No-Thought, throughout their entire lifetime, have their mind and mental factors extinguished. If this consciousness did not exist, they would lack defilement. That is, during that long period, the six transforming consciousnesses are absent. If this manas did not exist, self-grasping would be absent. Hence, there must be a defiled manas that, in the Heaven of No-Thought, continuously generates self-grasping. Because of this, sages and saints alike condemn and reject that state. Moreover, the scriptures say that when ordinary beings have defiled, virtuous, or neutral minds, they always carry self-grasping. If this consciousness did not exist, this would not be the case. That is, when ordinary beings experience the three types of mind, although external actions arise, internally they constantly grasp at a self. Because of this internal self-grasping, the giving and other virtuous deeds arising in the six consciousnesses cannot transcend attachment to characteristics. Therefore, the Yogācāra texts say: "The defiled manas is the support of the consciousnesses. Until it is extinguished, the bondage of characteristic-discrimination cannot be liberated. Once manas is extinguished, the bondage of characteristics is released." What is meant by "bondage of characteristics"? It means being unable to understand that perceived objects are like illusions. Because of this, the seeing and perceived aspects are constrained, and one cannot attain freedom. Hence, it is called "bondage of characteristics." Based on this meaning, there is a verse: "This defiled mind is the support of consciousness. As long as this mind is not extinguished, the bondage of consciousness will never be released." Commentary: In the Heaven of No-Thought, self-grasping continuously arises. Because of this, sages and saints condemn that state. There, the seventh consciousness generates self-grasping because one is still an ordinary being. After emerging from that state of concentration, one again sinks into birth-and-death and generates all kinds of afflictions. Sages condemn this. If there were no seventh consciousness, there would be no basis for condemning it, and there would be no faulty result. "Because of self-grasping, the giving and other deeds in the six consciousnesses cannot transcend attachment to characteristics": This self-grasping that arises in the sixth consciousness, with its coarse and active mode of operation, is not produced by the seventh itself. Rather, because of the seventh, the sixth generates this. It arises entirely from the seventh, and this is explained from the perspective of its strengthening influence. In the sixth consciousness, self-grasping is intermittent and mixed with all three types of mind. The seventh, however, does not arise from external objects. The above is a brief summary of the seventh consciousness, manas. All the teachings declare it, and all the wise have explained it. For those who first enter the path, this consciousness must be understood. It is the cause of becoming ordinary beings or sages, so one should investigate its nature. It is the foundation for resolving confusion and attaining awakening, so one should explore its origin. Those who are confused by it become attached to the notions of self and phenomena. Those who awaken to it accomplish the wisdom of equality. Among all the consciousnesses, it alone is called "manas." In the realm of the defiled, it serves as the lord of ignorance. Uninterrupted and unceasing, the concentration of No-Thought cannot eliminate it. Constantly deliberate and persistent, the Four Formless Heavens avoid it, yet it still arises. Though it is covered and neutral, it does not grasp externally but turns inward. It constantly manifests, obscuring truth and obstructing the path. It is said to be "unshared," yet it only creates defilement and nourishes rebirth. Therefore, to transcend the dust of worldly passions, one must know the essential path. To administer the wondrous medicine, one must first examine the source of the illness. If one carefully investigates and silently observes, then what dust cannot be removed, and what illness cannot be cured? The gate to severing delusion—this is the key.

## 宗鏡錄卷第五十二

> The Record of the Mirror of the Source, Volume 52

戊申歲分司大藏都監開板

> In the year of Wushen, the Bureau for the Correction of the Buddhist Canon, under the Directorate of the Great Treasury of Scriptures, commenced the printing of the blocks.