---
title: "解深密經疏 · 心意識相品第三"
description: "解深密經疏由唐代高僧圆测撰寫，是對佛教經典《解深密經》的權威註釋。圓測為玄奘弟子，精通唯識學，該疏成書於7世紀，系統闡釋了唯識思想與三性理論，融合了印度瑜伽行派與中觀學說。內容涵蓋佛法深層義理，包括心識結構、修行次第及成佛之道，是研究唯識學的重要文獻。該疏在漢傳佛教中地位崇高，為後世學者提供了理解《解深密經》的關鍵依據，影響了中國佛教哲學的發展。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmcweeqw20bxdjx04m7yeulrc"
---
## 解深密經疏卷第三
> Commentary on the Sutra of the Profound and Secret Meaning, Volume 3
西明寺沙門 圓測 撰
> Commentary by the Monk Yuan Ce of Ximing Temple
勝義諦相品第二之餘。
> Here is the translation: \*\*The Characteristics of Ultimate Truth, Part 2 (Continued)\*\*
爾時，世尊告尊者善現曰：善現！
> At that time, the World-Honored One said to the Venerable Subhuti, "Subhuti!"
釋曰：自下第四釋遍一切一味相，於中有二：初長行廣釋，後舉頌略說或可頌文如來說中乃可分別。就長行中復分為三：一如來告問，次善現奉答，後世尊正說。此即第一世尊告問，於中有二：初約時標所問者，後正明告問。此即初也。言爾時者，佛說真如一味相時，或可善現發問之時真諦記云：言爾時者，有十一種：一佛在世時；二轉法輪時；三成就相續人聚集時；四聞思修時；五下種成就解脫時；六成立自正義時；七破邪執所立義時；八破壞生死牢獄義時；九由說正義為歡喜破除邪義所鄣眾生時；十正脩行人領受寶祠時，佛為大眾說能分張正法授與大眾，即是法寶祠大眾也；十一於脩行中正定智起抑下捨置之時。由如是等義，故言爾時也。言善現者，若具梵音，名脩浮吼底，此云善現。相傳說云：其人初生，宅室皆空，父母驚恠，以問相師。相師報云：現空唯善，無所加也。故名善現。或云空生，即由此義。無著論中名為善吉，笈多所翻直本般若名為善實。真諦金剛波若記云：東方世界青龍陀佛於此影嚮也。廣如彼記。又相傳云：自有經文，位登阿䟦致地然未見誠文。或相傳云：婆羅門子祈天而生，生始長大，〔請又〕延佛，為設大會，送佛祇園，返獲羅漢。或云是淨音嚮王太子。問：如何此會唯告善現比丘，不告餘三部眾及菩薩眾耶？真諦師云：不告餘部，有其三義：一、初轉法輪時，比丘先入道，為佛弟子，餘眾後入故。二、百臈比丘尼禮敬一臈比丘。所以者何？由比丘力成就戒故，又終身不離依止比丘。三、根性勝丈夫，根性堅利，女性闇。是故律明為女人說法，過五六語，波夜提。五語者，謂五陰；六語者，謂六入。為女說法，不得陰、入外義，根性闇，不能多受故。若廣分別，不告餘部及以菩薩，皆有五義，恐繁不述。又五分律第六卷云：五語者，色無常，受、想、行、識無常。六語者，眼無我，耳、鼻、舌、身、心無我。四分等律皆不釋也。今解命須菩提，如智度論第四十卷：須菩提有二因緣，大佛命說法，不命餘弟子：一者、好行無諍定；二、好深行空法。問：若爾，如何不告菩薩？答：如智度論第十一云：須菩提常行空三昧，復斷漏盡，眾生生信，命令說法。法華論中以五義故，佛命聲聞，不告菩薩。大智度論第四十一廣釋不告菩薩及餘弟子，佛亦不為說所由應知。准彼智度，唯告善現，今此經中應知亦爾。
> Commentary says: Next, this is the fourth section explaining the characteristic of the single flavor that pervades all things. It has two parts: first, a detailed explanation in prose; second, a brief summary in verse. In the prose section, there are three divisions: first, the Tathāgata's question; second, Subhūti's reply; third, the World-Honored One's proper teaching. This is the first—the Tathāgata's question, which itself has two parts: first, indicating the one being questioned at a specific time; second, presenting the actual question. This is the first part. "At that time" refers to the moment when the Buddha taught the characteristic of the single flavor of true suchness, or alternatively, the time when Subhūti posed his question. According to the Commentary on the \*Diamond Sūtra\* by Paramārtha, "at that time" has eleven meanings: (1) when the Buddha was in the world; (2) when he turned the wheel of Dharma; (3) when those who had accomplished their spiritual development gathered; (4) during hearing, reflection, and practice; (5) when planting the seed that leads to liberation; (6) when establishing one's own correct doctrine; (7) when refuting wrong views and their established tenets; (8) when destroying the prison of birth and death; (9) when, through teaching what is right, bringing joy to beings hindered by wrong views; (10) when genuine practitioners receive the Dharma-treasure, as the Buddha, teaching the assembly, distributes the true Dharma to them—this is like the Dharma-treasure offering to the great assembly; (11) when, in practice, one's focused wisdom arises and one sets aside and abandons lesser concerns. It is due to these many meanings that the text says "at that time." "Subhūti"—in full Sanskrit, his name is \*Subhūti\*, which means "Good Manifestation" or "Auspicious Presence." According to tradition, when he was born, his house became empty; his parents were astonished and consulted a fortune-teller. The fortune-teller said: "This emptiness signifies only good, nothing to fear." Hence the name Subhūti. Some call him "Born of Emptiness," for the same reason. In Asaṅga's treatise, he is called "Good Auspiciousness." In the translation by Dharmagupta, based directly on the \*Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra\*, his name is rendered as "Good Reality." In Paramārtha's commentary on the \*Diamond Sūtra\*, it is said that in the eastern world, under the Buddha \*Kṣitigarbha\* (or another) he appeared as an emanation—details as found in that commentary. It is also traditionally said that, according to certain scriptural passages, he reached the stage of \*avaivartika\* (non-retrogression), though I have not seen the original text. Some traditions say he was the son of a Brahmin, born in answer to his parents' prayers; as he grew up, he invited the Buddha and hosted a great gathering, then accompanied the Buddha to Jetavana, and ultimately attained arhatship. Others say he was the crown prince of King Pure Sound. Question: Why did the Buddha, in this assembly, address only Subhūti the monk, and not the other three groups of disciples or the bodhisattvas? Master Paramārtha says there are three reasons for not addressing the others: (1) At the first turning of the Dharma wheel, monks entered the path first and became the Buddha's disciples; the others joined later. (2) A nun of a hundred years' seniority must pay respect to a monk of one year's standing. Why? Because monks have accomplished moral discipline, and nuns throughout their lives rely on and are guided by monks. (3) Men have superior faculties—sharp and capable—whereas women have duller faculties. Thus, the monastic code says that when teaching women, one should not go beyond five or six categories of teaching. The "five" refers to the five aggregates; the "six" refers to the six sense bases. When teaching women, one should not go beyond the aggregates and sense bases, because their faculties are dull and they cannot receive much. If one were to elaborate further on all the reasons for not addressing the other groups and the bodhisattvas, there are fivefold reasons, but I will not go into detail to avoid excessive length. Moreover, the fifth volume of the \*Five Part Vinaya\* says: The "five teachings" are: form is impermanent; feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are impermanent. The "six teachings" are: the eye has no self; the ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind have no self. The \*Four Part Vinaya\* and others do not explain this. Now, concerning the passage in which the Buddha calls upon Subhūti—according to the \*Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom\*, volume 40, the Buddha had Subhūti expound the Dharma rather than other disciples for two reasons: (1) Subhūti excelled in the meditation of non-contention; (2) he excelled in deeply practicing the teaching of emptiness. Question: If so, why did the Buddha not address the bodhisattvas? Answer: According to the \*Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom\*, volume 11, Subhūti constantly practiced the absorption of emptiness and had also completely eliminated all defilements. Sentient beings had faith in him, so the Buddha asked him to teach the Dharma. (According to the \*Commentary on the Lotus Sūtra\*, there are five reasons why the Buddha addressed the śrāvakas and not the bodhisattvas. The \*Great Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom\*, volume 41, extensively explains why the Buddha did not address the bodhisattvas or other disciples, and why the Buddha himself did not teach—these should be understood accordingly.) Based on that treatise, the Buddha addressed only Subhūti. In this sūtra as well, it should be understood the same way.
汝於有情界中，知幾有情懷增上慢，為增上慢所執持故記別所解？汝於有情界中，知幾有情離增上慢故記別所解？
> In the realm of sentient beings, how many do you know who harbor arrogance, clinging to it as they declare their understanding? And how many do you know who, free from arrogance, declare their understanding?
釋曰：此即第三正明告問。此中所言增上慢者，如法華經：未得謂得，未證謂證，名增上慢。解節同此。深密經云：依我我慢者，譯家謬也。今於此中約慢有無以發兩問。真諦記云：前問有增上慢，後問無增上慢；前問凡夫，後問聖人；前問顯示不可治人，後問可治人；又前問空果行人，後問不空果行人；又前問顛倒脩人，後問不顛倒脩人；又前問邪定聚人，後問正定聚人。然釋此文依真諦記，有慢無慢各有四義。有慢四者：一、增上慢依止，謂有取五陰；二、慢因，謂慢隨眠；三、慢體，即是上心；四、慢事用，即是因上心慢能生諸業果報報等。言知幾有情者，顯慢依上。懷增上慢者，顯慢之因。增上慢所執持故者，顯慢體也。記別所解者，顯慢事用。無慢四者：一、無慢依上，謂無漏五陰相續；二、無慢因，即是未知欲根；三、無慢體，即是知根；四、無慢事用，即知已根。言知幾有情者，無慢依上。離增上慢者，謂無慢因及無慢體。
> The commentary explains: This is the third section, which directly clarifies the question. Here, "arrogance" refers to what the Lotus Sutra describes as claiming attainment without attaining, claiming realization without realizing—this is called arrogance. The explanation in the Jie Jie (Scripture of Unraveling) is the same. The phrase in the Shenmi Sutra that says "based on self-view and self-arrogance" is a translator's error. In this context, two questions are raised based on the presence or absence of arrogance. According to the True Meaning Record: The first question concerns those with arrogance; the second concerns those without arrogance. The first question asks about ordinary beings; the second asks about sages. The first question concerns those who are incurable; the second concerns those who can be cured. Furthermore, the first question concerns practitioners who pursue empty results; the second concerns practitioners who pursue non-empty results. Again, the first question concerns those who practice in a distorted way; the second concerns those who practice without distortion. Lastly, the first question concerns those in the realm of wrong views; the second concerns those in the realm of right views. In explaining this passage according to the True Meaning Record, both presence and absence of arrogance each have four aspects. The four aspects of arrogance are: 1) The basis of arrogance—the five aggregates that are clung to; 2) The cause of arrogance—the latent tendency of pride; 3) The essence of arrogance—the arising of the mind in that moment; 4) The function of arrogance—the karmic actions and their results born from that pride-driven mind. "Knowing how many beings" indicates the basis of arrogance. "Harboring arrogance" indicates the cause. "Being gripped by arrogance" indicates the essence. "Distinguishing and explaining what is understood" indicates the function. The four aspects of lacking arrogance are: 1) The basis of no-arrogance—the continuum of the undefiled five aggregates; 2) The cause of no-arrogance—the root of not yet knowing; 3) The essence of no-arrogance—the root of knowing; 4) The function of no-arrogance—the root of having known. "Knowing how many beings" indicates the basis of no-arrogance. "Free from arrogance" indicates both the cause and essence of no-arrogance.
解節經云：無增上慢，不由增上慢。深密經云：離我離慢。
> As stated in the \*Explanation of the Essential Sutra\*: Without heightened arrogance, not arising from heightened arrogance. As stated in the \*Profoundly Secret Sutra\*: Freed from self, freed from arrogance.
○此二經各具二文，今此本中唯有一句，含有二義，是故但云離增上慢也。
> These two scriptures each contain two passages, yet in the present text, only a single sentence appears, which encompasses both meanings. Hence, it is simply said to be free from overestimating one's own spiritual progress.
記別所解者，無慢事用。
> One who has received the prophecy of enlightenment does not rely on pride or attachments in action.
爾時，尊者善現白佛言：世尊！我知有情界中少分有情，離增上慢記別所解。
> At that time, the Venerable Subhuti said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, I know that among all sentient beings, only a few are free from arrogance and can be recognized for their understanding."
釋曰：自下第二善現奉答，於中有二：先釋、後問、後答前問。此即初也。謂唯初地已上菩薩如實了知遍一味相法空勝義，由此不起法增上慢，非諸二乘及異生等，故言少分有情離增上慢記別所解。問：如何二乘知其分齊為菩薩說？答：佛加被故，總相略知，而非究竟一一了知故。故大品經？舌相品云：須菩提為菩薩說法皆是佛力。問：此善現由加被力，若能解者應斷法執，若不解者如何能說？解云：由加力故能信知解亦能說空，不爾應斷法執過故。智度論云：二乘未證法空理故。問：此善現即是二乘，如何奉答在淨土耶？答：佛加被故得往淨土，或佛所化而非實身，或可穢土有此問答。
> Explanation: Next, the second section presents Subhuti's response, which is divided into two parts: first, an explanation, then a question, followed by an answer to the earlier question. This is the initial part. It means that only Bodhisattvas at the first stage and above truly understand the universal equality of the nature of all phenomena through the ultimate truth of emptiness, and thus do not develop pride regarding the Dharma. This is not the case for the two vehicles (i.e., Hearers and Solitary Realizers) or ordinary beings. Hence, it is said that only a small number of beings are free from such pride and are recognized for their understanding. Question: How can the two vehicles, knowing their limited scope, explain this to Bodhisattvas? Answer: Because of the Buddha's empowerment, they understand it in a general and brief manner, but not in its entirety or in every detail. Therefore, the \*Prajnaparamita Sutra\* states in the tongue chapter: "Subhuti's teachings to Bodhisattvas are all empowered by the Buddha's power." Question: If Subhuti, with the Buddha's empowerment, can understand and explain this, he should also be free from attachment to phenomena. If he cannot fully understand, how can he teach it? Explanation: With the Buddha's empowerment, he is able to believe, understand, and explain emptiness. Otherwise, he would still be subject to the fault of clinging to phenomena. The \*Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom\* says that the two vehicles have not yet realized the principle of emptiness of phenomena. Question: Since Subhuti belongs to the two vehicles, how can he give this response in the Pure Land? Answer: Through the Buddha's empowerment, he is able to go to the Pure Land, or he may be a manifestation of the Buddha rather than a real person, or it could be that such questions and answers occur in this impure land as well.
世尊！我知有情界中有無量無數不可說有情懷增上慢，為增上慢所執持故記別所解。
> World-Honored One! I know that in the realm of sentient beings, there are countless, immeasurable, and inexpressible beings who harbor arrogant conceit, and because they are gripped by this arrogance, they claim to have realized the truth.
釋曰：自下第二答第一問，於中有三：初略答，次世尊下述己所見，後世尊下申己所念。此則初也。謂我知有情界中無量有情壞增上慢，記別所解。記別之相，如後當說。然此所說懷增上慢，諸說不同。若依薩婆多宗，有四種人起增上慢，所謂異生及下三果。如大婆沙四十三云：起增上慢，三說不同。有說：異生起五，謂四善根及四果。預流起四，除第一。一來起三，除前二。不還起二，除前三。阿羅漢無增上慢。有說：異生起九，謂有漏善根、四向、四果。預流果起七，除前二。一來向起六，除前三。一來果起五，除前四。不還向起四，除前五。不還果起三，除前六。阿羅漢向起二，除前七。阿羅漢無增上慢，預流向無起增上慢義。評曰：聖者亦於勝有漏善起增上慢，故六聖者如前所起各復增一，廣說如彼。依經部宗，同薩婆多，於理無違，於彼部中有多計故。今依大乘，大同二宗，慢通異生、有學聖者。故成唯識第六卷云：云何為慢？恃己於他高舉為性，能障不慢生苦為業。此慢差別有七九種，謂於三品我德處生，一切皆通見脩所斷。聖位我慢既得現行，慢類由斯起亦無失。解云：言七慢者，五蘊論云：云何為慢？謂慢、過慢、慢過慢、我慢、增上慢、卑慢、邪慢。慢謂於劣計己勝，或於等計己等，心高舉為性。過慢謂於等計己勝，或於勝計己等慢。過慢謂於勝計己勝。我慢謂於五取蘊隨觀為我或我所，心高舉為性。增上慢謂於未得增上殊勝所證法中謂我已得。卑慢謂於多分殊勝計己少分下劣。邪慢謂實無德計己有德，心高舉為性。集論第四、雜集第六、瑜伽八十九皆同五蘊。若依智度論五十六云：增上人者是佛弟子，得禪定未得聖道，自謂已得。言九慢者，發智論第二十云：有九慢類，謂我勝、我等、我劣、有勝我、有等我、有劣我、無勝我、無等我、無劣我。顯揚第一但列三種慢類，故彼論云：如經說三種慢類：我勝慢類、我等慢類、我劣慢類。解云：義准說九，於理無違。此七九慢，依成唯識於五處生，故彼第六云：此慢差別有七九種，謂於三品我德處生。解云：且七慢中，慢、過慢、慢過慢、卑慢依三品起，我慢一種依我處生，邪慢增上依德處生。故雜集論第六卷云：於下中二品處生慢，依中上品處生過慢，依上品處生慢過慢，依上品處生劣慢。於五邪蘊執我我所，由此起我慢。於未得勝德計己得勝德，起增上慢。於實無德計己有德，即是邪慢。若辨九慢，自有兩說。若依發智論，如俱舍第十九說：如是九種，從前七慢三中離出，謂從前慢、過慢、卑慢。如是三種，若依見生，行次有殊，成三三類：初三如次，即過慢、慢、卑慢；中三如次，即卑慢、慢、過慢；後三如次，即慢、過慢、卑慢。廣如婆沙。若依品類足釋慢類者，且我勝、慢勝從三慢生，謂慢、過慢、慢過慢三，由觀劣等勝境別故。故婆沙第百九十九云：依品類足論，我勝慢中攝三種慢：若於劣謂己勝，即是慢；若於等謂己勝，即是過慢；若於勝謂己勝，即慢、過慢。餘八慢類，如理應說。解云：餘八慢類如理應說者，我等慢類依中上品攝二種慢：於等計等，此即是慢；於勝謂等，即是過慢。我劣慢類但依上品攝一種慢：謂於多勝計己少劣，即是卑慢；有勝無劣同我劣說，有等無勝同我等說，有劣無等同我勝說。如此九中，三依三品、三依中上、三依上品，如前可知。而今此中說有慢者，七九慢中但約增上，於中三說不同。真諦三藏但說異生以為有慢，依有所得觀以為真觀起上慢故。有說：此中通說異生、二乘、有學為有慢者，羅漢己斷煩惱障故。故法華經第一卷說：實得阿羅漢。若不信此法，無有是處。有說：亦通羅漢。所以者何？雖無煩惱慢，有所知慢故。問：若爾，如何會釋法華所說？答：彼約煩惱，此據所知，說有說無，互不相違。問：七地已來諸菩薩等，於增上慢亦得起不？答：有三釋：一云：初地己上不起上慢，己得勝義一味相故。一云：七地已還起亦無失，如經所說，故意起故。一云：前七地中不唯得起煩惱鄣慢、所知障慢，亦得現行，地地相望，有勝劣故。問：佛知一切眾生邊際不？如是問答，如大婆沙一百八十六，彼云：毗奈耶說：世尊於菩提樹下建立有情為三聚，謂齊爾許名邪定聚，齊爾許名正定聚，齊爾許名不定聚。問：為依有情分齊建立，為依法分齊耶？若依有情者，云何非是得有情海邊際耶？若依法者，聲聞亦能如是建立，佛與聲聞有何不共？有說：依有情建立。問：若爾，如何非是得有情海邊際耶？答：佛得有情海邊際亦無有過，然總相得而非別相，謂一切有情不出四生，如是而得。有說：依法建立。問：若爾，聲聞亦能建立，佛與聲聞有何不共？答：聲聞因從佛聞，佛無師，自能建立，是為不共。有說：若三千世界及千歲已來，依有情建立。若餘世界及餘時，依法建立。依智度論亦有問答。故第二十八云：問：一切眾生可得悉知不？若悉知，即眾生有邊。若不知，何以故說欲知一切眾生心所趣向？云何佛有一切智？答曰：眾生心心數法可得悉知。何以故？如經中說：一切實語中，佛最第一。若不能悉知一切眾生心得其邊際者，佛何以言悉知亦不名一切智人？而佛語皆實，必應定有一切智人。後次眾生雖無邊，一切種智亦無邊，譬如函大蓋亦大。若智慧有邊，眾生無邊者，應有是難。今智慧及眾生俱無邊故，汝難非也。後次若言有邊無邊，此二於佛法中是置。答：是十四事虗妄無實無益故，不應以為難。具如彼說。又三十云：問曰：菩薩若能滿一切眾生願者，則眾生有邊，即無有受諸飢寒苦。何以故？一切眾生皆滿所願，離苦得樂故。答云：滿一切者，名字一切，非實一切。如法句偈說：一切皆懼死，莫不畏杖痛。恕己可為譬，勿煞勿行杖。雖言一切畏杖痛，如無色眾生無身故即無杖痛，色界眾生雖可有身亦無杖痛，欲界眾生亦有不受杖痛。而言一切語應得杖者，說言一切，非實一切。
> Commentary says: Next, the second part answers the first question. It has three sections: first, a brief answer; second, the World-Honored One describes what he himself has seen; third, the World-Honored One presents what he himself is thinking. This is the first section. It says: I know that among sentient beings, countless beings harbor exaggerated pride, and I can discern their understanding. The characteristics of this discernment will be explained later. However, there are different interpretations of what "exaggerated pride" means here. According to the Sarvāstivāda school, there are four types of people who develop exaggerated pride: ordinary beings and those at the first three stages of attainment. As the Mahāvibhāṣā (volume 43) states, there are three different views on who develops exaggerated pride. One view says: ordinary beings develop five types, referring to the four wholesome roots and the four fruits. Stream-enterers develop four, excluding the first. Once-returners develop three, excluding the first two. Non-returners develop two, excluding the first three. Arhats have no exaggerated pride. Another view says: ordinary beings develop nine types, referring to contaminated wholesome roots, the four paths, and the four fruits. Stream-enterers develop seven, excluding the first two. Those on the path to once-returning develop six, excluding the first three. Once-returners develop five, excluding the first four. Those on the path to non-returning develop four, excluding the first five. Non-returners develop three, excluding the first six. Those on the path to arhatship develop two, excluding the first seven. Arhats have no exaggerated pride, and those on the path to stream-entry have no basis for developing it. The verdict: Noble ones can also develop exaggerated pride regarding superior contaminated wholesome qualities. Therefore, the six noble ones each add one more type as previously described, as explained in detail in that text. According to the Sautrāntika school, it agrees with the Sarvāstivāda view, and there is no contradiction, since that school has many interpretations. Now following the Mahāyāna, it largely agrees with both schools—pride applies to both ordinary beings and noble learners. Thus the Cheng Weishi Lun (volume 6) says: What is pride? It is the nature of relying on oneself to look down on others, with the function of hindering humility and producing suffering. This pride has seven or nine types, arising in relation to three levels and concepts of self and qualities. All of these are cut off by both insight and cultivation. Since self-pride can still operate at the noble stage, pride types arising from this are not contradictions either. Explanation: Regarding the seven prides, the Five Aggregates Treatise says: What is pride? It refers to pride, excessive pride, pride beyond excess, self-pride, exaggerated pride, inferiority pride, and distorted pride. Pride means considering oneself superior to those who are inferior, or equal to those who are equal—with the mind elevated as its nature. Excessive pride means considering oneself superior to those who are equal, or equal to those who are superior. Pride beyond excess means considering oneself superior even to those who are superior. Self-pride means contemplating the five aggregates as self or belonging to self, with the mind elevated as its nature. Exaggerated pride means claiming to have attained superior qualities that one has not actually attained. Inferiority pride means considering oneself slightly inferior compared to those who are greatly superior. Distorted pride means claiming to have virtues one does not actually possess, with the mind elevated as its nature. The Compendium of Abhidharma (volume 4), the Commentary on the Compendium (volume 6), and the Yogācārabhūmi (section 89) all agree with the Five Aggregates Treatise. According to the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom (volume 56): "Superior persons" refers to Buddha's disciples who have attained meditative absorption but not yet the noble path, yet claim they have already attained it. Regarding the nine types of pride, the Abhidharma-jñāna-prasthāna (volume 20) says: There are nine pride categories: "I am superior," "I am equal," "I am inferior," "there are those superior to me," "there are those equal to me," "there are those inferior to me," "there are none superior to me," "there are none equal to me," "there are none inferior to me." The Śikṣāsamuccaya (volume 1) only lists three pride categories: "I am superior" pride category, "I am equal" pride category, and "I am inferior" pride category. The explanation: by implication, nine are spoken of, and there is no contradiction. These seven and nine prides, according to the Cheng Weishi Lun, arise in five contexts. That text (volume 6) says: These prides have seven or nine types, arising in relation to three levels and concepts of self and qualities. Explanation: Among the seven prides, pride, excessive pride, pride beyond excess, and inferiority pride arise based on the three levels. Self-pride arises based on the concept of self. Distorted pride and exaggerated pride arise based on the concept of qualities. Thus the Commentary on the Compendium (volume 6) says: Pride arises based on inferior and middle levels; excessive pride arises based on middle and superior levels; pride beyond excess arises based on superior levels; inferiority pride arises based on superior levels. Regarding the five contaminated aggregates, one grasps them as self or belonging to self, giving rise to self-pride. Regarding superior qualities not yet attained, one claims to have attained them, giving rise to exaggerated pride. Regarding virtues one does not actually possess, one claims to possess them—this is distorted pride. For distinguishing the nine prides, there are two interpretations. According to the Abhidharma-jñāna-prasthāna, as stated in the Abhidharmakośa (volume 19): These nine types are derived from three of the seven prides—namely pride, excessive pride, and inferiority pride. When these three arise based on views, their modes of operation differ, forming three groups of three: The first three correspond respectively to excessive pride, pride, and inferiority pride. The middle three correspond respectively to inferiority pride, pride, and excessive pride. The last three correspond respectively to pride, excessive pride, and inferiority pride. This is explained in detail in the Vibhāṣā. According to the Dharmaskandha's explanation of pride categories: "I am superior" arises from three prides—pride, excessive pride, and pride beyond excess—depending on whether one observes inferior, equal, or superior objects. Thus the Vibhāṣā (volume 199) says: According to the Dharmaskandha, "I am superior" includes three types of pride: if one considers oneself superior to the inferior, that is pride; if one considers oneself superior to the equal, that is excessive pride; if one considers oneself superior to the superior, that is pride beyond excess. The other eight pride categories should be explained accordingly. Explanation: "The other eight pride categories should be explained accordingly" means: The "I am equal" category includes two prides based on middle and superior levels: considering oneself equal to the equal is pride; considering oneself equal to the superior is excessive pride. The "I am inferior" category includes only one pride based on the superior level: considering oneself slightly inferior compared to the greatly superior is inferiority pride. "There are those superior to me" and "there are those inferior to me" follow the same pattern as "I am inferior." "There are those equal to me" and "there are none superior to me" follow the same pattern as "I am equal." "There are those inferior to me" and "there are none inferior to me" follow the same pattern as "I am superior." Among these nine, three arise based on the three levels, three based on middle and superior levels, and three based on the superior level, as explained above. Now, the mention of pride here—among the seven and nine prides—specifically refers to exaggerated pride, with three different interpretations. The translator Paramārtha only says ordinary beings have this pride, because they regard their limited understanding as true insight and develop exaggerated pride. Some say: This passage refers to ordinary beings, the two vehicles, and noble learners as having pride, because Arhats have already severed the affliction hindrances. Thus the Lotus Sūtra (volume 1) says: One who has truly attained Arhatship—if such a person does not believe this Dharma, that is impossible. Some say: It also includes Arhats. Why? Although they have no affliction-based pride, they may have knowledge-based pride. Question: If so, how do we reconcile what the Lotus Sūtra says? Answer: That text refers to affliction-based pride; this text refers to knowledge-based pride. One says existence, the other says non-existence—they do not contradict each other. Question: Can Bodhisattvas from the seventh ground onward develop exaggerated pride? Answer: There are three interpretations: One says: From the first ground onward, they do not develop exaggerated pride, because they have attained the single flavor of ultimate truth. One says: Through the seventh ground and below, it is not wrong to have it, because as the sūtras say, it arises intentionally. One says: In the first seven grounds, they can not only develop affliction-based pride and knowledge-obstacle pride but also allow them to manifest, because each ground is superior or inferior compared to others. Question: Does the Buddha know the limits of all sentient beings? This question and answer appear in the Mahāvibhāṣā (volume 186), which states: The Vinaya says: The World-Honored One, under the Bodhi tree, established sentient beings into three groups: some are the "definitely wrong" group, some are the "definitely right" group, and some are the "uncertain" group. Question: Is this establishment based on sentient beings or on the Dharma? If based on sentient beings, then how can this not be reaching the limits of the ocean of sentient beings? If based on the Dharma, then śrāvakas can also make such distinctions—what distinguishes the Buddha from śrāvakas? Some say: It is based on sentient beings. Question: If so, how does this not constitute reaching the limits of the ocean of sentient beings? Answer: It is not wrong for the Buddha to reach the limits of the ocean of sentient beings, but this is a general rather than specific observation—namely, that all sentient beings fall within the four types of birth, and in this way they are known. Some say: It is based on the Dharma. Question: If so, śrāvakas can also do this—what distinguishes the Buddha from śrāvakas? Answer: Śrāvakas hear it from the Buddha, whereas the Buddha, with no teacher, can establish this himself. This is the difference. Some say: For the three thousand worlds and beings from one thousand years ago onward, establishment is based on sentient beings. For other worlds and other times, establishment is based on the Dharma. The Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom also has this question and answer. Thus (volume 28) says: Question: Can all sentient beings be fully known? If fully known, then sentient beings have a limit. If not, why is it said that one wishes to know the inclinations of all sentient beings' minds? How does the Buddha have all-knowledge? Answer: The mind and mental factors of sentient beings can be fully known. Why? As the sūtras say: Among all true statements, the Buddha's are foremost. If he could not fully know the limits of all sentient beings' minds, why would the Buddha say he fully knows, and why would he be called an all-knowing person? Since the Buddha's words are all true, there must indeed be an all-knowing person. Furthermore, although sentient beings are limitless, all-knowing wisdom is also limitless—like a large box having a large lid. If wisdom had a limit and sentient beings were limitless, then this objection would stand. But since both wisdom and sentient beings are limitless, your objection is invalid. Moreover, saying "limited" or "unlimited"—both of these are set aside in the Buddhist teaching. Answer: These fourteen questions are empty, without reality, and without benefit, so they should not be used as objections. This is explained in detail in that text. Also, volume 30 says: Question: If Bodhisattvas can fulfill the wishes of all sentient beings, then sentient beings have a limit, and no one would suffer from hunger, cold, or pain. Why? Because all sentient beings would have their wishes fulfilled, free from suffering and attaining happiness. Answer: "Fulfill all" is "all" in name only, not in reality. As the Dharmapada verse says: All fear death, none do not fear the pain of the stick. Using oneself as an example, do not kill or strike others. Although it says "all fear the pain of the stick," formless beings have no body and thus no stick pain. Beings in the form realm may have bodies but also no stick pain. Even in the desire realm, some beings do not experience stick pain. Yet when it says "all," it refers to those who could receive sticks—"all" is said in a general sense, not referring to every single being.
世尊！我於一時住阿練若大樹林中。
> World-Honored One! At one time, I dwelt in the deep forest among great trees, in a place of solitude.
釋曰：自下第二申己所見，於中有二：初明自他住處，後我見下敘他記別。此明自所住處眾樹聚集，故深密經云：名為？林。如我憶念過去世時，住於一處阿練若園。阿練若者，即是梵音，此云空閑靜處。真諦釋云：阿練若者，自有三義：一者離聲處，謂國邑音聲所不至故；二者離斫伐處，謂採薪所不至故；三者離鬪諍處，謂一切煩惱總能動亂善法，名為鬪諍。若住此處，能伏煩惱，故名離鬪諍也。從一拘盧舍外，外去乃至百千由旬，皆名阿練若處。若薩婆多部解，一拘盧舍五百弓；依正量部解，一拘盧舍凡一千弓也。一弓八尺，凡八百丈地。若准此間，應成四里少許。毗曇論云：四肘為一弓，五百弓名一拘盧舍，一拘盧舍半名阿練若處。大毗婆沙一百三十六云：四肘為一弓，五百弓名阿練若處。從此已去名邊遠處，即五百弓成摩揭陀國，一俱盧舍成北方半俱盧舍。所以者何？摩揭陀國其地平正，去村雖近而不聞聲，北方高下遠猶聲及，是故北方俱盧舍大。俱舍第十二廣辨其量，彼云：頌云：極微微金水，㝹羊牛隙塵，蠛蝨麥指節， 後後增七倍， 二十四指肘， 四肘為弓量， 五百拘盧舍， 此八踰繕那。 論曰：極微為初，指節為後，應知後後皆七倍增。謂七極微為一微量，積微至七為一金塵，積七金塵為水塵量，水塵積至七為一莬毛塵，積七莬毛塵為一羊毛塵量，積羊毛塵七為一牛毛塵，積七牛毛塵為隟遊塵量，隟塵七為蠛，七蠛為一蝨，七蝨為麥，七麥為指節，三節為一指，二十四指橫布為肘，豎積四肘為弓，謂尋豎積五百弓為一俱盧舍。一俱盧舍許是從村至阿練若中間道量，說八俱盧舍為一踰繕那。若廣分別，如婆沙論一百三十六說。無性攝論云：遠離聚落拘盧舍，名阿練若。十住論云：離眾憒丙，名阿練若。瑜伽復云：謂住空閑山林坰野，受用邊際所有臥具，遠離一切村邑聚落，名阿練若。頭陀經云：阿練若法，令身遠離憒閙，住於空閑。遠離者，離眾惱亂。若放牧處最近三里，能遠益善。身遠離已，亦當令心遠離五欲五葢，名阿練若。智論亦同。
> Commentary states: Next, the second section presents the author's own view, which has two parts: first, it clarifies the dwellings of oneself and others; second, beginning with "my view," it recounts others' predictions. This clarifies that one's dwelling place is a gathering of many trees, hence the \*Sūtra of the Deep Mystery\* says: It is called the "Forest Grove." As I recall, in a past life, I dwelt in a place called an \*aranya\* garden. \*Aranya\* is a Sanskrit word, which here means a quiet and secluded place. Master \*Zhendi\* explains: \*Aranya\* has three meanings: first, a place free from sounds—because the noises of cities and towns do not reach it; second, a place free from cutting—because woodcutters do not reach it; third, a place free from conflict—because all afflictions can disturb wholesome dharmas, and this is called conflict. Dwelling there can subdue afflictions, hence it is called "free from conflict." From one \*krośa\* outward, up to hundreds of thousands of \*yojanas\*, all are called \*aranya\* places. According to the Sarvāstivāda school, one \*krośa\* equals five hundred bows; according to the Saṃmitīya school, one \*krośa\* equals one thousand bows. One bow is eight feet, totaling eight hundred \*zhang\* of land. If measured by this standard, it should be slightly over four \*li\*. The \*Vibhāṣā Treatise\* says: Four cubits make one bow; five hundred bows make one \*krośa\*; one and a half \*krośas\* make an \*aranya\* place. The \*Great Vibhāṣā\*, in its 136th fascicle, says: Four cubits make one bow; five hundred bows make an \*aranya\* place. Beyond this is called the "remote area." Thus, five hundred bows make up Magadha country, and one \*krośa\* forms half a \*krośa\* in the north. Why? Because Magadha's terrain is flat and level—though near a village, sounds are not heard; but the north has high and low ground, and sounds still reach from afar, so the northern \*krośa\* is larger. The \*Abhidharma-kośa\*, in its twelfth fascicle, extensively clarifies these measurements. It states: A verse says: Extremely subtle, fine gold, water, rabbit hair, cow hair, gap dust, mites, lice, barley, finger joints—each subsequent unit increases sevenfold; twenty-four fingers make a cubit; four cubits make a bow; five hundred bows make a \*krośa\*; eight of these make a \*yojana\*. The commentary explains: Beginning with the extremely subtle and ending with the finger joint, each subsequent unit should be known to increase sevenfold. That is, seven extremely subtle particles make one subtle unit; accumulating seven subtle units makes one gold dust; seven gold dusts make one water dust; accumulating seven water dusts makes one rabbit-hair dust; seven rabbit-hair dusts make one sheep-wool dust; seven sheep-wool dusts make one cow-hair dust; seven cow-hair dusts make one gap dust; seven gap dusts make a mite; seven mites make a louse; seven lice make a barley grain; seven barley grains make a finger joint; three joints make a finger; twenty-four fingers laid across make a cubit; four cubits stacked vertically make a bow, which is a fathom; five hundred bows stacked vertically make one \*krośa\*. One \*krośa\* is the distance between a village and an \*aranya\* place. It is said that eight \*krośas\* make one \*yojana\*. For a detailed explanation, see the \*Vibhāṣā Treatise\*, fascicle 136. The \*Asaṅga's Commentary on the Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra\* says: One \*krośa\* away from a settlement is called an \*aranya\*. The \*Daśabhūmika-vibhāṣā\* says: Being apart from the bustling crowd is called an \*aranya\*. The \*Yogācārabhūmi\* further states: Dwelling in a quiet place—in mountains, forests, or open fields—using only the simplest bedding, far from all villages and settlements, is called an \*aranya\*. The \*Dhuta Sūtra\* says: The \*aranya\* practice causes the body to distance itself from noise and dwell in solitude. "Distancing" means separating from all disturbances. If grazing land is at least three \*li\* away, and one can distance oneself further, it is even better. After distancing the body, one should also cause the mind to distance itself from the five desires and the five hindrances—this is called an \*aranya\*. The \*Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra\* says the same.
時，有眾多苾蒭亦於林依近我住。
> At that time, many monks also lived in the forest near me.
釋曰：此明眾所住處。言苾蒭者，唐言乞士，舊云比丘。金剛仙云：此是梵音。此方義釋，或云乞士，或云破惡，或云怖魔，無正名相翻，故存梵語。依智度論，有其五義：一名乞士，清淨活命故。彼第三卷云：離四口食，故名清淨。四口食者，一下口食。有出家人合藥、種、殖樹等不淨活命者，是名下口食。有出家人觀視星宿、日月、風雨、雷電、礔礰不淨活命者，是名仰口食。有出家人曲媚豪勢，通使四方，巧言多求不淨活命者，名方口食。有出家人學種種呪術，笇吉凶小術不正，如是等不淨活命者，是名四維口食也。二破煩惱名比丘，比此云破，丘名煩惱。三出家人號，四名清淨持戒，五名怖魔。比名怖，丘名魔。依瑜伽論，有五苾蒭，故第二十九云：苾蒭有五種：一乞白苾蒭，二自稱苾蒭，三名想苾蒭，四破壞煩惱苾蒭，五白四羯魔受具足戒苾蒭。真諦記云：在因名怖魔乞士，破惡至果，轉怖魔為煞賊，改乞士為應供，說破惡為不生。
> Explanation: This clarifies the place where the assembly resides. The term "Bhikshu" is rendered in Chinese as "one who begs for food," while the older translation is "Bhikkhu." Vajra Immortal states that this is a Sanskrit word. When its meaning is interpreted in this land, it may be called "beggar," "destroyer of evil," or "one who frightens Mara." Since there is no exact Chinese equivalent, the Sanskrit term is retained. According to the Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom, there are five meanings: First, "beggar," because one lives a pure life by relying on alms. The third volume of that treatise says: One who abstains from the four types of wrong livelihood is called pure. The four types of wrong livelihood are: 1. "Downward-looking" livelihood: monastics who mix medicines, plant trees, or engage in other impure means of living. 2. "Upward-looking" livelihood: monastics who observe stars, sun, moon, wind, rain, thunder, and lightning for impure means of living. 3. "Square-looking" livelihood: monastics who flatter the powerful, run errands in all directions, and use clever words to seek many things for impure living. 4. "Four-cornered" livelihood: monastics who study various spells and divination arts for unorthodox purposes. These are the impure livelihoods. Second, "destroying afflictions" is why he is called Bhikshu. "Bhi" means to destroy, "kshu" means affliction. Third, it is the title for one who has left the household life. Fourth, it means "one who upholds pure precepts." Fifth, it means "one who frightens Mara." "Bhi" means to frighten, "kshu" means Mara. According to the Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra, there are five types of Bhikshus, as stated in its twenty-ninth chapter: The five types are: 1. The Bhikshu who begs by name, 2. The Bhikshu who claims the title, 3. The Bhikshu who has the name only, 4. The Bhikshu who destroys afflictions, 5. The Bhikshu who receives full ordination through the formal act of a motion and three announcements. The commentary by Paramārtha says: In the causal stage, he is called "one who frightens Mara" and "beggar." When destroying evil reaches the fruition stage, "frightening Mara" becomes "slayer of thieves," "beggar" becomes "worthy of offerings," and "destroying evil" is explained as "no further birth."
我見彼諸苾蒭，於日後分，展轉聚集，依有所得現觀，各說種種相法，記別所解。
> I saw those monks, in the latter part of the day, gathering in groups, each relying on their own limited understanding, discussing and explaining various conceptual views, and sharing their interpretations based on what they had realized.
釋曰：自下第三記別所解，於中有二：初總敘諸計、後別敘諸計。此即第一總敘諸計。如後所說，依五蘊等作種種解以為勝義，不說一味法空道理為勝義諦，如是乃至八聖道中自性差別及對治等計為勝義，成增上慢，故今敘之。現觀者，依瑜伽論五十三云：決定義是現觀義。依俱舍論第二十二云：於諸諦境現見分明，名見現觀。然此現觀諸教不同。依俱舍論有三種現觀，謂見、緣、事有差別故。或說六種，如瑜伽五十五等。或說十種，如集論第七、雜集十三。或說十八，如顯揚十七。然今所說有所得現觀者，謂諸苾蒭依初法輪所說十三法門，如言執義，不了無所得一味法句勝義，起增上慢，便諸證得空竟勝義。問：諸苾蒭依何現觀記別所解？答：通說見、脩、無學及前方故。下經云：由得念住乃至得八支聖道故。
> Commentary says: Next, the third section records and distinguishes the various interpretations. This has two parts: first, a general summary of the various views; second, a detailed account of them. This is the first part, the general summary. As described later, some make various interpretations based on the five aggregates and consider them the ultimate truth, without recognizing the single flavor of emptiness—the principle of no-self—as the ultimate truth. Likewise, they regard even the noble eightfold path, with its intrinsic nature, distinctions, and antidotes, as ultimate truth. This is a form of spiritual pride, so it is mentioned here. "Direct realization" — according to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 53), certainty of meaning is what constitutes direct realization. According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\* (Chapter 22), seeing the objects of truth clearly and distinctly is called "insight realization." However, teachings on direct realization vary. According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\*, there are three types of direct realization—seeing, engaging, and actualizing—because of their differences. Some say six types, as in the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 55). Some say ten types, as in the \*Saṃgīti Sūtra\* (Chapter 7) and the \*Abhidharma-samuccaya\* (Chapter 13). Some say eighteen, as in the \*Saṃyuktābhidharma\* (Chapter 17). Here, "realization with attainment" refers to monks who, based on the thirteen sets of teachings from the first turning of the wheel, grasp the words literally without understanding the single flavor of no-attainment—the ultimate truth of emptiness—and thus develop spiritual pride, claiming to have attained the ultimate truth. Question: On what realization do these monks base their interpretations? Answer: It is said to cover insight, cultivation, and the stage of no further learning, as well as the earlier stages of practice. The following sutra passage states: "Because they attain mindfulness and penetrate the noble eightfold path."
於中一類，由得蘊故，得蘊相故，得蘊起故，得蘊滅故，得蘊滅作證故，記別所解。
> Among them, some are recognized for their understanding based on attaining the aggregates, perceiving their characteristics, arising, cessation, and personally realizing their cessation.
釋曰：自下第二別敘諸計，於中有二：初約六種善巧所觀境界記別取解；後復有類得念住下，約道品中七種觀門記別所解。此即第一六種善巧所觀境界記別所解。六善巧者，謂蘊、處、緣生、四食、四諦并十八界。理實處界攝法周盡，而諸有情意樂差別，故約蘊等開為六門。若真現觀，要證一味勝義諦理方名現觀，而諸苾蒭懷增上慢得蘊等相，謂真現觀。故今此中敘六種計，雖有六門，攝為五段：一明五蘊、二類處緣生、三明四食、四明四諦、五明十八界。此即第一釋蘊六句。問：此六句為一類計、為六計耶？解云：解節相續皆作此說：有諸比丘證見陰相說為證法，有諸比丘證見陰生以為證法。故知六句皆有別計。今此本經一一門中俱說一類，故知同彼分為六計。或可一門合為一計，於理無違。然此六句釋有二義：一句數多少、二辨差別相。言多少者，依深密經唯有五句，少第一句一者陰相、二陰生相、三陰滅相、四陰滅法、五陰滅現證法也。依解節經具有六句，意同此經一陰、二陰相、三陰生、四陰變異、五陰滅、六證陰滅道。今依此經，三處不同。第一卷中有其六句，如經可知。第二卷初唯有五句一諸蘊所有自相、二者生相、三者滅相、四者永斷、五者遍知。第二卷末有七種相，故彼云：假名安立以為色蘊，或自性相，或差別相。假名安立為色蘊生，為色蘊滅，及為色蘊永斷遍知，或自性相，或差別相。問：如何此經句數多少有此異耶？解云：據實前後總有九句，謂初卷六句外更加永斷遍知及開相為二，謂自性、差別。然此第一及第二末總別具說，故置總句。第二卷初總不離別，不別說總。又初卷中自性差別合為蘊相，至於第二相中分為自性差別。又初卷中唯說滅道不論苦集，第二卷末永斷遍知不說滅道者，影略互顯，故不相違。言差別相者，真諦師云：問：此五蘊等八萬法門得一味義，其相云何？若依上坐部則有八萬四千法門，今依正量部但有八萬。答：約六種法相顯一味義。或有比丘由見陰者記自所得，此則第一執有五陰不能了別。大師所說但唯音聲，無有別法名為五陰。由不了知此一味故，起如是執，謂實有五陰。由此執故起於顛倒，由此倒故起增上慢。或有比丘證見陰相者，此即第二顯五陰相，或假名相、或實法相、功德相、過惡相、因緣相、三世相、生住滅相、苦等四諦相、三界相、無漏界相、一向答相、分別答相及問答相、置答相、四食相，乃至有漏色心非色心等相。陰有如是種種道理，名為陰相。由不了別道理一味故，起此實實道理執。因此執故起於顛倒，由顛倒故起增上慢。或有比丘證見陰生者，此即第三顯生相。由不了別因果一味故，執五陰真實有生。由此執故起於顛倒，由顛倒故起增上慢。或有比丘證陰變異者，此即第四顯陰變異相。由不了別無滅一味故，起此實變異執。由此執故起於顛倒，由顛倒故起增上慢。或有比丘證見陰滅者，此即第五顯陰滅相。不了別清淨一味故，起此實清淨執。由此執故起顛倒，由顛倒故起增上慢。或有比丘證陰滅道者，此即第六顯陰滅道。由不了別境智一味故，起實滅道執。由此執故起於顛倒，由顛倒起增上慢。就五陰法門既有此六義，為六種一味。如是十二入等一切法門中例皆如此。又有別解：第一句顯言說品類，即是五陰但有言說無有別故。第二句顯義及理品類，義有假名、實法、三世相等種種不同，如前所列道理一無我。第三句顯應滅品類，即是集諦，煩惱業故。第四句顯應知品類，即是苦諦。第五句顯所證得品類，即是滅諦。第六句顯應脩品類，即是道諦。於入等中例有此六也。今解不爾。言得蘊者，總顯所證五蘊法門，即是總句。言得蘊相者，得蘊自性、差別相，此二句是總，通下諸句。故第二云：假名安立以為色蘊，或自性相、或差別相，乃至色蘊永斷遍知，或自性相、或差別相。言自性相者，自法自體名為自性，如色受蘊等。於自性上辨差別義，名差別相，如說常無常、漏無漏等。言得蘊起故、得蘊盡故者，此二句顯生滅無常見，故下經云：諸蘊生相、滅相。又諸經云：諸行無常，起盡法故。又瑜伽八十五云：云何諸行無常？決定起盡相應故。言得蘊滅故、得蘊滅作證故者，此二句如次顯示滅道二諦，斷苦集諦、得滅諦故，由道斷蘊作證滅故。十二處等皆准此釋。廣辨五蘊，義如別章。
> The commentary explains: From here onward, the text presents various viewpoints in two main sections. First, it discusses the six kinds of skillful contemplation and the objects they observe, distinguishing and interpreting them. Second, later on from "again, there are those who attain mindfulness" onward, it discusses the seven types of contemplation within the path factors, distinguishing and interpreting them. This first section deals with the six kinds of skillful contemplation and their respective objects of observation. The six skillful contemplations are: the aggregates, the sense bases, dependent arising, the four kinds of nutriment, the four noble truths, and the eighteen elements. In reality, the sense bases and elements encompass all phenomena completely, but because beings have different mental dispositions, the teachings are presented through these six categories. True direct realization only occurs when one directly perceives the single flavor of ultimate truth. However, some monks, due to inflated pride, mistake their superficial understanding of the aggregates and so forth for true realization. Therefore, this text presents six viewpoints, which, although organized into six categories, are grouped into five sections: first, the five aggregates; second, the sense bases and dependent arising; third, the four kinds of nutriment; fourth, the four noble truths; and fifth, the eighteen elements. This is the first section, explaining the six statements about the aggregates. Question: Do these six statements represent one single view or six separate views? Answer: The explanation from the \*Saṃdhinirmocana\* tradition states: Some monks claim to have directly realized the mark of the aggregates and call that realization of truth. Others claim to have directly realized the arising of the aggregates and call that realization of truth. Therefore, we know each of the six statements represents a distinct view. In this present sutra, each category presents one type of view, so we know they should be divided into six separate views according to that tradition. Alternatively, one could combine each category into a single view, which would not contradict the meaning either. Now, regarding the explanation of these six statements, there are two aspects: first, the number of statements; second, distinguishing their distinctive features. Regarding the number: According to the \*Saṃdhimirmocana Sūtra\*, there are only five statements, omitting the first one (Note: the five are: 1) the mark of the aggregates, 2) the arising mark of the aggregates, 3) the cessation mark of the aggregates, 4) the cessation of the aggregates as a truth, and 5) direct realization of the cessation of the aggregates). According to the \*Jiejie Jing\* (Explanation of the Knots Sūtra), there are six statements, matching the present sutra in meaning (Note: 1) the aggregates, 2) the mark of the aggregates, 3) the arising of the aggregates, 4) the transformation of the aggregates, 5) the cessation of the aggregates, and 6) the path realizing the cessation of the aggregates). Now, according to this sutra, there are three different versions. In the first volume, there are six statements, as can be seen in the sutra text. At the beginning of the second volume, there are only five statements (Note: 1) the own-character of all aggregates, 2) their arising mark, 3) their cessation mark, 4) their complete abandonment, and 5) their complete understanding). At the end of the second volume, there are seven marks, as stated: "The conventional designation of form as the aggregate of form, either in terms of its own-character mark or its distinguishing mark. The conventional designation of the arising of the aggregate of form, the cessation of the aggregate of form, and the complete abandonment and complete understanding of the aggregate of form, either in terms of its own-character mark or its distinguishing mark." Question: How is it that the number of statements differs in different places in this sutra? Answer: In reality, there are altogether nine statements across the whole text. Besides the six statements in the first volume, there are the additional "complete abandonment" and "complete understanding," which are further expanded into two aspects: own-character and distinguishing marks. Since the first volume and the end of the second volume present both the general and the specific, general statements are included. The beginning of the second volume presents only the specific without departing from the general, so it does not separately state the general. Moreover, in the first volume, the own-character and distinguishing marks are combined into the "mark of the aggregates," whereas later, in the second volume, they are divided into own-character and distinguishing marks. Also, in the first volume, only the cessation and path are mentioned without discussing suffering and the origin, while at the end of the second volume, complete abandonment and complete understanding are mentioned without discussing cessation and path. These are mutually complementary by implication, so there is no contradiction. Concerning the distinctive features, the master of truth (Paramārtha) says: Question: These five aggregates and the eighty-four thousand teachings all share the meaning of single flavor. What does this look like? According to the Sthavira school, there are eighty-four thousand teachings. According to the Saṃmitīya school, there are only eighty thousand. Answer: The single flavor is explained through six types of phenomena. Some monks, through seeing the aggregates, record what they have attained. This is the first view—they grasp at the existence of five aggregates but fail to understand that what the great teacher has spoken consists only of sound—there is no separate reality called the five aggregates. Because they do not understand this single flavor, they develop such a view, believing the five aggregates truly exist. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Some monks claim to have directly realized the mark of the aggregates. This is the second view, revealing the characteristics of the aggregates: conventional characteristics, substantial characteristics, virtuous characteristics, faulty characteristics, causal characteristics, characteristics of the three times, characteristics of arising-abiding-ceasing, characteristics of the four truths of suffering and so forth, characteristics of the three realms, characteristics of the uncontaminated realm, characteristics of definitive answers, characteristics of analytical answers, characteristics of counter-questions, characteristics of withheld answers, and characteristics of the four kinds of nutriment—even characteristics of contaminated form, mind, non-form, and non-mind. The aggregates have such various principles, called the marks of the aggregates. Because they do not understand the single flavor of these principles, they develop the view that these principles truly exist. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Some monks claim to have directly realized the arising of the aggregates. This is the third view, revealing the mark of arising. Because they do not understand the single flavor of cause and effect, they grasp that the five aggregates truly arise. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Some monks claim to have directly realized the transformation of the aggregates. This is the fourth view, revealing the mark of transformation of the aggregates. Because they do not understand the single flavor of impermanence, they develop the view that transformation truly exists. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Some monks claim to have directly realized the cessation of the aggregates. This is the fifth view, revealing the mark of cessation of the aggregates. Because they do not understand the single flavor of purity, they develop the view that this purity truly exists. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Some monks claim to have directly realized the path to the cessation of the aggregates. This is the sixth view, revealing the path to the cessation of the aggregates. Because they do not understand the single flavor of object and wisdom, they develop the view that cessation and path truly exist. From this view arise distorted perceptions, and from distorted perceptions arises inflated pride. Just as the teaching of the five aggregates has these six aspects, corresponding to six kinds of single flavor, the same pattern applies to the twelve sense bases and all other categories of teachings. There is another interpretation: The first statement reveals the category of verbal expression—the five aggregates exist merely as conventional labels with no separate reality. The second statement reveals the categories of meaning and principle: meaning includes conventional labels, substantial realities, the three times, and so forth in various distinctions, as listed above—all principles are but one selflessness. The third statement reveals the category of what should be abandoned—that is, the truth of the origin, namely afflictions and karma. The fourth statement reveals the category of what should be understood—that is, the truth of suffering. The fifth statement reveals the category of what is to be realized—that is, the truth of cessation. The sixth statement reveals the category of what should be cultivated—that is, the truth of the path. The same sixfold pattern applies to the sense bases and so forth. My explanation here differs. "Attaining the aggregates" generally reveals the teaching on the five aggregates as the object of realization—this is the general statement. "Attaining the mark of the aggregates" refers to attaining the own-character and distinguishing marks of the aggregates. These two statements are general and apply to all the subsequent statements. Therefore, the second volume states: "The conventional designation of form as the aggregate of form, either in terms of its own-character mark or its distinguishing mark, down to the complete abandonment and complete understanding of the aggregate of form, either in terms of its own-character mark or its distinguishing mark." By "own-character mark," it means the self-nature of each phenomenon itself, such as the form aggregate and the feeling aggregate. By "distinguishing mark," it refers to the distinctions made upon that self-nature, such as permanent/impermanent, defiled/undefiled, and so forth. "Attaining the arising of the aggregates" and "attaining the cessation of the aggregates"—these two statements reveal the view of impermanence in arising and ceasing, as the sutra later says: "the arising mark and cessation mark of the aggregates." Other sutras also say: "All conditioned things are impermanent because they are phenomena of arising and ceasing." The \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (section 85) also says: "Why are all conditioned things impermanent? Because they are necessarily associated with arising and ceasing." "Attaining the cessation of the aggregates" and "attaining realization through the cessation of the aggregates"—these two statements respectively reveal the truths of cessation and the path: one abandons the truths of suffering and origin and attains the truth of cessation; through the path one cuts off the aggregates and realizes cessation. The same interpretation applies to the twelve sense bases and so forth. A detailed explanation of the five aggregates is given in the separate chapter.
如此一類由得蘊故，復有一類由得處故，復有一類得緣起故，當知亦爾。
> So too, some beings gain freedom through the aggregates, others through the sense bases, and still others through dependent origination. Know this as well.
釋曰：此即第二類處緣生，皆有六句類蘊應知。處及緣生，義如別章。
> Explanation: This is the second type of dependent origination, where all six categories of aggregates should be understood. The meanings of "sense bases" and "dependent origination" are as explained in other chapters.
復有一類，由得食故、得食相故、得食起故、得食盡故、得食滅故、得食滅作證故，記別所解。
> Then there are others who share their understanding based on food: its nature, its arising, its ending, its cessation, and the direct realization of that cessation.
釋曰：此即第三約四食門記別所解。配釋六句，准上應知。辨四食相，義如別章。
> Explanation: This is the third section, which concerns the teaching on the four kinds of nutriment. The six statements are matched and explained as above. The characteristics of the four kinds of nutriment are detailed in a separate chapter.
復有一類，由得諦故、得諦相故、得諦遍知故、得諦永斷故、得諦作證故、得諦脩習故，記別所解。
> There is another type who, by attaining the truth, by attaining its characteristics, by fully comprehending the truth, by completely eradicating it, by directly realizing it, and by cultivating it, proclaims their understanding.
釋曰：此即第四約四諦門記別所解。於六句中，初二是總，如上應知。後四如次苦應遍知、集應永斷、滅應作證、道應脩習。若依瑜伽第五十五云：問：何緣故說遍知苦諦、永斷集諦、觸證滅諦、脩習道諦？答：由彼苦諦是四顛倒所依處故。為除顛倒，苦既遍知，苦即遍知，故遍知集。由彼集諦苦諦攝故，雖遍知苦，仍為集之所隨逐故，故須更說永斷集諦。言觸證者，是現見義。由於滅諦現前見故，不生怖畏，受樂攝受，是故次說觸證滅諦。若勤脩道，乃能成辦所觀三義，是故後說脩習道諦。問：餘三諦亦應遍知，如何唯說苦應遍知？答：此如婆沙七十九說，彼云：問：契經但說苦諦應遍知，如何阿毗達磨說一切法皆應遍知？脇尊者言：世尊唯說應遍知苦，或謂唯苦是應遍知，故對法中說一切法是所遍知。世尊唯說集應永斷，或謂唯集是應永斷，故對法中說有漏法皆應永斷。世尊唯說滅應作證，或謂唯滅是應作證，故對法中說有漏法皆應永斷。世尊唯說滅應作證，或謂唯滅是應作證，故對法中依得作證說諸善法皆應作證。世尊唯說道應脩習，或謂唯道是應脩習，故對法中總說一切善有為法皆應脩習。此則顯示經義不了。阿毗達磨是了義說，廣如彼論多復次說。廣辨四諦，義如別章。
> Explanation: This is the fourth section, which uses the framework of the Four Noble Truths to explain the predictions. Among the six lines, the first two are general summaries, as explained above. The latter four correspond respectively to: Suffering should be fully understood, the origin should be completely eradicated, cessation should be realized, and the path should be cultivated. According to the Yogācārabhūmi, volume 55: Question: Why is it said that the truth of suffering should be fully understood, the truth of origin should be completely eradicated, the truth of cessation should be directly realized, and the truth of the path should be cultivated? Answer: Because the truth of suffering is the foundation for the four distortions. To eliminate these distortions, once suffering is fully understood, the origin is also understood—hence, the origin is fully understood through suffering. Since the truth of origin is subsumed under the truth of suffering, even though suffering is fully understood, it is still pursued by the origin. Therefore, it is further stated that the truth of origin should be completely eradicated. "Directly realized" means seeing clearly in the present moment. Because the truth of cessation is seen directly in the present, one no longer fears it and willingly embraces it with joy. Hence, it is next stated that the truth of cessation should be directly realized. If one diligently cultivates the path, one can accomplish the three objectives of contemplation. Therefore, it is finally stated that the truth of the path should be cultivated. Question: The other three truths should also be fully understood—why is it said only that suffering should be fully understood? Answer: This is explained in the Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣā, volume 79, which says: Question: The scriptures only mention that the truth of suffering should be fully understood. How is it that the Abhidharma states that all phenomena should be fully understood? TheVenerable Pārśva said: The World-Honored One only spoke of suffering as something to be fully understood, perhaps thinking that only suffering needs such understanding. Therefore, in the Abhidharma, it is taught that all phenomena are objects of full understanding. The World-Honored One only spoke of the origin as something to be completely eradicated, perhaps thinking that only the origin needs such eradication. Therefore, in the Abhidharma, it is taught that all defiled phenomena should be completely eradicated. The World-Honored One only spoke of cessation as something to be directly realized, perhaps thinking that only cessation needs such realization. Therefore, in the Abhidharma, it is taught that, based on attainment, all wholesome phenomena should be directly realized. The World-Honored One only spoke of the path as something to be cultivated, perhaps thinking that only the path needs such cultivation. Therefore, in the Abhidharma, it is generally taught that all wholesome conditioned phenomena should be cultivated. This demonstrates that the scriptures are not explicit in their meaning, while the Abhidharma provides definitive teachings. For a more detailed exposition, refer to that treatise, which contains multiple explanations. A detailed analysis of the Four Noble Truths is provided in a separate chapter.
復有一類，內得界故、得界相故、得界種種性故、得界非一性故、得界滅故、得界滅作證故，記別所解。
> There is another kind who, because they have realized the element of liberation within, perceived its nature, recognized its many aspects, understood its singularity, witnessed its cessation, and directly experienced that cessation—such a person is declared to have attained realization.
釋曰：第五約十八界記別所解。於六句中，初二後二准前應知，中間二句釋有差別。種類眾多名為種種，數過一故名為非一。故雜阿含經第十六云：佛告比丘：云何種種界？謂十八界：眼界、色界、眼識界，乃至意界、法界、意識界，是名種種界。若瑜伽二十七約五蘊明種種非一二義差別，彼云：云何名蘊種種差別性？謂色蘊異乃至識蘊異。云何名蘊非一眾多性？謂色蘊非一眾多，品類大種所造差別故、古來今等品類差別故。若瑜伽五十六云：云何種種界？謂即十八界展轉異相性。云何非一界？謂即彼諸界無量有情種種差別所依住。云何無量界？謂總彼二名無量界。又瑜伽八十三云：若能了知十八界者，名非一界智。了知彼界種種品類，名種種界智。通達了知彼界趣地補特伽羅品類差別故。十八界義如別章說。
> Explanation: The fifth section explains the classification based on the eighteen elements. Among the six phrases, the first two and the last two are understood as before, while the middle two phrases have differing explanations. "Various" refers to the many types and categories, and "more than one" indicates a number exceeding one. Thus, the Sixteenth Chapter of the Miscellaneous Agama Sutra states: The Buddha told the monks, "What are the various elements?
復有一類，由得念住故，得念住相故，得念住能治所治故，得念住脩故，得念住未生令生故，得念住生已堅住不忘倍脩增上廣大故，記別所解。
> There is another type who, by attaining mindfulness, by attaining the nature of mindfulness, by attaining the ability to counteract what mindfulness treats, by cultivating mindfulness, by giving rise to mindfulness where it has not yet arisen, and by firmly establishing mindfulness once it has arisen—unforgetting, further cultivated, enhanced, and expanded—proclaims their understanding.
釋曰：自下第二約道品三十七法記別所解。此有兩釋：一云：前蘊等法約所證境記別所解，後念住等依能證行記別所解。一云：彼諸苾蒭非但緣於蘊等中六相以為勝義現觀境界，亦緣念住、正斷等法六種別相計為真實現觀境界，故不能了真勝義中一味相也。故解節云：或有比丘證見念處及念處相等，記自所得。又深密云：如是諸比丘取念處相說為證法。具說如彼。於中有三：初約念住記別所解；次如有一類下，類釋正斷、神足、根、力、覺支記別所解；後約八聖道記別所解。此即第一約四念住記別所解。言念住者，謂四念住，即身、受、心、法。依正理論七十一云：何緣於慧立念住名？慧由念力持令住故。俱舍二十五云：毗婆沙師作如是說：慧由念力持令住故。理實由慧令念住境如實見者，能明記故。依毗婆沙第九十六云：由念勢力析除自體，故名念住。自體即是有漏五蘊，要由念住折除彼故。依智度論第十九云：隨順智慧緣中止住，是時名念處。依瑜伽二十八云：問：念住何義？答：若於此念住，若由此住念，皆名念住。於此念住者，謂所緣念住。由此住念者，謂若慧若念攝持於定，是自性念住。所餘相應諸心心所，是相雜念住。辨體性者，依薩婆多以慧為體，若大乘以念慧為體。故雜集論十云：念住自體者，謂慧及念。由佛經中有於身等隨觀言故，及有念住言故，如其次第。依瑜伽云：若慧若念攝持於定，是名自性念住。又此復三種：一聞所成、二思所成、三脩所成。聞思所成唯是有漏，脩所成者通有漏無漏。就釋文中，文有六句深密經有七句，於第六句開為二句，謂念處生已住及不失脩行相。解節經文，依真諦記開為十句。真諦記云：問曰：經意或有比丘證見念處等十句，欲何所顯？答曰：為顯十義，說此十句。初句證見念處者，即是境界念處。第二念處相者，即是自性念處。第三念處對治者，顯念處道所治四倒。第四念處對治道者，顯能治道即是雜念處，治四倒故。第五念處脩習者，即是脩念處方便道。第六未生念處證見念生者，即是無礙道，謂八忍。第七已生念處證見念住者，即解脫道，謂八知。第八不忘失，即是脩道乃至金剛心。第九增長者，即無學道，謂金剛後心。第十圓滿者，即神通道，三輪利物也，謂神通、記心、正教。如四念處有此十句，四正勤乃至八聖道例亦如此，具說如彼。今解不爾，一一法門例有六句，初二句准蘊應知，下有四句不同蘊等。言得念住能治所治者，顯四念住能治四倒，謂身念住觀身不淨能治淨倒，受念住觀受無樂能治樂倒，心念住觀心無常能治常倒，法念住觀法無我能治我倒，廣如瑜伽二十八等。言得念住脩故等者，此三句文約四種脩釋四念住。然此四脩，薩婆多宗念住現前名為行脩，亦名得脩，起得能得未來種類名准得脩。故俱舍論二十六云：脩有四種：一得脩、二習脩、三對治脩、四除遣脩。如是四種依法立頌曰：
> Commentary: Next, under the second section, we explain the realization as it relates to the thirty-seven factors of enlightenment. There are two interpretations: one says that the earlier aggregates and other dharmas are distinguished as objects to be realized, while the later foundations of mindfulness and so forth are distinguished as the path that accomplishes this realization. Another says that those monks not only regard the six aspects within the aggregates as the ultimate sphere of insight, but also take the six distinct marks of the foundations of mindfulness, right exertion, and other factors as true objects of insight. Thus they fail to understand the single flavor of ultimate truth. Hence, the \*Explanation of the Sūtra\* says: “Some monks, having seen the foundations of mindfulness and their marks, record what they have realized.” The \*Profound Secret Sūtra\* similarly states: “These monks take the mark of the foundations of mindfulness and call it the realized dharma.” This is explained in detail there. Among these, there are three parts: first, realization as recorded in terms of the foundations of mindfulness; second, under “there is a certain type,” realization is analogously explained for right exertion, psychic powers, faculties, powers, and factors of awakening; third, realization is recorded in terms of the eightfold noble path. This is the first part, concerning the four foundations of mindfulness. What are the foundations of mindfulness? They are the four: body, feeling, mind, and dharmas. According to the \*Abhidharma-nyāyānusāra\*, chapter seventy-one: “Why is wisdom given the name ‘foundation of mindfulness’? Because wisdom is upheld and made stable by the power of mindfulness.” The \*Abhidharmakośa\*, chapter twenty-five, says: “The Vibhāṣā masters explain it thus: wisdom is upheld and made stable by the power of mindfulness. In truth, it is wisdom that causes mindfulness to remain on its object, for one who sees things as they are can remember them clearly.” According to the \*Vibhāṣā\*, chapter ninety-six: “Through the power of mindfulness, the self-body is analyzed and removed; hence it is called ‘foundation of mindfulness.’ The self-body refers to the five aggregates contaminated by defilements, which are dismantled by means of mindfulness.” According to the \*Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom\*, chapter nineteen: “When one rests, following wisdom, upon an object, this is called the foundation of mindfulness.” According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, chapter twenty-eight: “Question: What is the meaning of ‘foundation of mindfulness’? Answer: Whether one abides in this mindfulness or abides by means of this mindfulness, both are called ‘foundation of mindfulness.’ Abiding in this mindfulness refers to the object of mindfulness. Abiding by means of this mindfulness refers to wisdom and mindfulness holding the mind in concentration—this is the intrinsic nature of mindfulness. The remaining associated mental factors are the accompanying constituents of mindfulness.” As for its essential nature: according to the Sarvāstivāda school, wisdom is its essence; according to the Mahāyāna, both wisdom and mindfulness are its essence. Thus, the \*Saṃgraha-śāstra\*, chapter ten, says: “The self-nature of the foundations of mindfulness is wisdom and mindfulness.” This is because the Buddha’s scriptures speak of “contemplating the body and so forth,” and also of “foundations of mindfulness,” respectively. According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*: “Wisdom and mindfulness holding the mind in concentration constitute the intrinsic nature of the foundations of mindfulness.” Moreover, these are of three kinds: (1) born from hearing, (2) born from reflection, and (3) born from cultivation. The first two are only defiled, while the third includes both defiled and undefiled. In the text being explained, there are six statements The \*Profound Secret Sūtra\* has seven statements, where the sixth is divided into two: “the foundation of mindfulness arisen and abiding” and “not losing the practice.” The \*Explanation of the Sūtra\* text, according to Paramārtha’s record, is divided into ten statements.. Paramārtha’s record says: “Question: The sūtra says that a monk realizes ten statements such as ‘seeing the foundation of mindfulness.’ What is this intended to show? Answer: These ten statements are spoken to show ten meanings. The first statement, ‘seeing the foundation of mindfulness,’ refers to the foundation of mindfulness as object. The second, ‘the mark of the foundation of mindfulness,’ refers to the intrinsic nature. The third, ‘the remedy of the foundation of mindfulness,’ shows the four inversions that the path of mindfulness remedies. The fourth, ‘the path that remedies the foundation of mindfulness,’ shows the remedial path, which is the accompanying foundation of mindfulness that cures the four inversions. The fifth, ‘cultivating the foundation of mindfulness,’ is the preparatory path. The sixth, ‘seeing the arising of the unarisen foundation of mindfulness,’ is the unobstructed path, namely the eight forbearances. The seventh, ‘seeing the abiding of the arisen foundation of mindfulness,’ is the path of liberation, namely the eight knowledges. The eighth, ‘not losing,’ is the path of cultivation up to the vajra-like concentration. The ninth, ‘growth,’ is the path of no further learning, namely the mind after the vajra-like concentration. The tenth, ‘perfection,’ is the path of psychic powers, benefiting beings through three means: psychic powers, reading minds, and true teaching. Just as the four foundations of mindfulness have these ten statements, so too do right exertion and the rest up to the eightfold noble path, as explained in detail there.” Our interpretation differs. Each dharmamethod naturally has six statements. The first two correspond to those of the aggregates, while the following four differ. “Attaining the foundation of mindfulness that remedies and is remedied” shows that the four foundations of mindfulness counteract the four inversions: contemplation of the body as impure counters the inversion of purity; contemplation of feeling as suffering counters the inversion of pleasure; contemplation of mind as impermanent counters the inversion of permanence; contemplation of dharmas as non-self counters the inversion of self. This is extensively explained in the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, chapter twenty-eight, and elsewhere. The statements beginning with “attaining the foundation of mindfulness through cultivation” explain the four foundations of mindfulness through four kinds of cultivation. In the Sarvāstivāda system, the manifestation of mindfulness is called “cultivation by practice” and also “cultivation by acquisition,” since obtaining the potential obtains future kinds—this is called “cultivation by anticipation.” Thus, the \*Abhidharmakośa\*, chapter twenty-six, says: “Cultivation is of four kinds: (1) cultivation by acquisition, (2) cultivation by practice, (3) cultivation as remedy, and (4) cultivation as removal.” These four are established according to the dharma, and a verse states:
立得習二脩， 依善有為法， 依諸有漏法，立治脩遣脩。
> "One establishes the cultivation of practice and the cultivation of abandonment, relying on wholesome conditioned phenomena and relying on all defiled phenomena."
論曰：得習二脩依有為善，未來唯得現其二脩。治遣二脩依有漏法，故有漏善具足四脩。無漏有為餘有漏法，如次各具前後二脩。若廣分別，如順正理七十四、婆沙一百五說。今依大乘，諸教不同。若依集論第五、雜集第九，亦依四脩脩念住等。彼約四正斷明四種脩，故彼論云：更辨諸道脩之差別，略說有四種，謂得脩、習脩、除去脩、對治脩。得脩者，謂未生善法脩習令生。習脩者，謂已生善法脩令堅住不忘陪復增廣。除去脩者，謂已生惡不善法脩令永斷。對治脩者，謂未生惡不善法脩令不生。如是四種脩差別相，隨其所應依四正斷說。瑜伽六十六亦同集論。若依此經，唯初二脩明脩念住。言得念住脩故者，總標二脩。言未生令生者，別顯得脩。言生已堅住等者，別顯習脩。問：如何不說後二種脩？答：此中俱說脩諸善法，不說餘惡不善法故。或可具四，前能治中攝二脩故。言得念住未生令生故者，准顯揚第二云：未生善法，為令生故。未生者，謂所未得。善法者，謂聞、思、脩所生三慧，由無過義，故名為善。為令生故者，謂令脩得故。言得念住生已堅住不忘倍脩增廣故者，此習脩文，諸教不同。若准顯揚，有其七種：一、已生善法，二、令住，三、不忘，四、令脩滿，五、令倍脩，六、令增長，七、令廣大。故彼論云：已生者，謂已得故。令住者，謂聞慧。令不忘者，謂思慧。令脩滿者，謂脩慧。此上三句，顯唯守護已所得善。令倍脩、令增長、令廣大者，如其次第，不唯於彼生知足故。若依瑜伽二十八，具足列名，而不解釋二十九文，但有前四，闕後三句。
> The treatise states: The two forms of cultivation—attainment and practice—are based on flourishing goodness. In the future, only attainment and practice are obtained. The two forms of removal and remedy are based on conditioned phenomena. Therefore, flourishing conditioned goodness fully possesses all four forms of cultivation. Unconditioned flourishing and other conditioned phenomena, in order, each possess the preceding and following two forms of cultivation. For a detailed explanation, refer to the \*Abhidharma Nyāyānusāra\* Chapter 74 and the \*Vibhāṣā\* Chapter 105. Now, following the Mahāyāna tradition, various teachings differ. According to the \*Abhidharma-samuccaya\* Chapter 5 and the \*Abhidharma-samuccaya-vyākhyā\* Chapter 9, the four forms of cultivation are also applied to the establishments of mindfulness. That text explains the four kinds of cultivation through the four right efforts. It states: Further explaining the differences in the cultivation of the path, there are briefly four kinds: attainment cultivation, practice cultivation, removal cultivation, and remedy cultivation. Attainment cultivation means cultivating so that unarisen flourishing dharmas arise. Practice cultivation means cultivating so that already arisen flourishing dharmas remain firm, are not forgotten, and are further increased and expanded. Removal cultivation means cultivating so that already arisen evil and unwholesome dharmas are permanently eradicated. Remedy cultivation means cultivating so that unarisen evil and unwholesome dharmas do not arise. These four kinds of cultivation, with their respective characteristics, are explained according to the four right efforts. The \*Yogācārabhūmi\* Chapter 66 agrees with the \*Abhidharma-samuccaya\*. According to this sutra, only the first two forms of cultivation are used to explain the cultivation of the establishments of mindfulness. Saying "the attainment of the establishments of mindfulness cultivation" summarizes the two forms. Saying "unarisen ones are made to arise" specifically reveals attainment cultivation. Saying "arisen ones remain firm, etc." specifically reveals practice cultivation. Question: Why are the latter two forms of cultivation not mentioned? Answer: Here, the cultivation of various flourishing dharmas is discussed, not the removal of evil and unwholesome dharmas. Alternatively, all four are included, as the two forms of remedy are contained within the preceding. Thus, saying "the attainment of establishments of mindfulness, unarisen ones are made to arise" follows the \*Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya\* Chapter 2: For unarisen flourishing dharmas, to cause them to arise. "Unarisen" means not yet obtained. "Flourishing dharmas" refers to the three kinds of wisdom born from hearing, reflection, and cultivation. Because they are free from fault, they are called flourishing. "To cause them to arise" means to cultivate so that they are obtained. Saying "the attainment of establishments of mindfulness, arisen ones remain firm, are not forgotten, are further practiced and expanded" concerns the passage on practice cultivation, which differs among various teachings. According to the \*Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya\*, there are seven aspects: (1) already arisen flourishing dharmas, (2) making them remain, (3) not forgetting them, (4) making them fully cultivated, (5) making them further cultivated, (6) making them increase, and (7) making them vast. That text states: "Already arisen" means already obtained. "Making them remain" refers to the wisdom of hearing. "Not forgetting" refers to the wisdom of reflection. "Making them fully cultivated" refers to the wisdom of cultivation. These three phrases indicate merely guarding already obtained goodness. "Making them further cultivated," "making them increase," and "making them vast," in order, indicate not being satisfied with just that. According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* Chapter 28, the names are fully listed, but not explained. Chapter 29 only has the first four phrases, lacking the latter three.
如有一類得念住故，復有一類得正斷故、得神足故、得諸根故、得諸力故、得覺支故，當知亦爾。
> Some gain mindfulness, others gain right effort, still others gain the bases of spiritual power, the faculties, the powers, or the factors of awakening—know this as well.
釋曰：此即第二類釋五門。謂如念住有其六句，正斷、神足、根、力、覺支皆有六句，准上應知。言五門者，一者正斷，謂四正斷，即已生惡不善法為令斷故、於諸未生惡不善法為令不生故、於其未生一切善法為令生故、於其已生一切善法為欲令住令不忘失等。依俱舍論云：何故說勤名為正斷？於正脩習斷脩位中，此勤力能斷懈怠故。或名正勝，於正持筞身語意中此最勝故。順正理毗婆沙亦同。依智度論第十九云：破邪法正道中行，故名正勤。又云：四種精進心勇發動，故名正勤。辨體性者，大小諸教皆以精進為體。言神足者，謂四神足，即欲、勤、心、觀三摩地。依俱舍云：何緣於定立神足名？諸靈妙德所依止故。有餘師說：神即是定，足謂欲等。彼應覺分事有十三，增欲心故毗婆沙師覺分十一，加欲心故成十三事。又違經說，如契經言：吾今為汝說神足等。神謂受用種種神境，分一為多，乃至廣說。足謂欲等四三摩地。此中佛說定果名神，欲等所生等持名足，正理大同。毗婆沙云：能為神妙功德所依，故名神足。若廣分別，如大婆沙百四十一說。依智度論云：攝心安隱於緣中，故名如意足。又云：行四正勤時，心等散故，以定攝心，故名如意足。又云：智、定、力等所願皆得，故名如意足。具說如彼。依瑜伽云：問：何因緣說名神足？答：如有足者，能往能還，騰躍勇健，能得能證世間所有殊勝之法。世殊勝法說名為神，彼能到此，故名神足。廣說乃至能得能證出世間法，由出世法最勝自在是最勝神，彼能證此，故名神足。廣說如彼。辨體性者，大小諸教皆用三摩地為體。言諸根諸力者，謂五根五力，即信、精進、念、定、慧。依俱舍論，何緣信等先說為根，後名為力？由此五法依下上品分先後故，又依可屈伏、不可屈伏故。依順正理，云何緣信等立根、力名？以增上故，難屈伏故。何緣此五先說為根，後名為力？由此五法依下上品分先後故，又依可屈伏、不可屈伏故。下品信等勢力劣故，猶為所治同類屈伏；上品翻此，故得力名。毗婆沙云：勢用增上，故名為根；難可摧制，故名為力。依智度云：耎智心得，故名根；利智心得，故名力。又云：於知眾生根中得自在方便力，故名為根。五力增長能破煩惱，度眾生得無生法忍，是名為力。復次天魔外道不能爼壞，故名為力。具說如彼。依瑜伽論，增上義故說名根，難伏義故名力。具如彼說。顯揚、雜集等意同瑜伽。辨體性者，大小諸教皆用信等五法為體。言覺支者，謂七覺支，即念、擇法、精進、喜、安、定、捨覺支。依婆沙云：助如實覺故名覺支。問：覺支者是何義耶？為能覺悟故名覺支？為覺之支故名覺支？有作是說：是能覺悟故名覺支。問：若爾，即應一是六非。答：六是覺支，能隨順覺從勝而說，亦名覺支。復有說者：是覺之支故名覺支。問：若爾，即應六是一非。答：擇法是覺支亦是覺，餘六是覺支而非是覺。如正見是道亦正道支。具說如彼。順正理論意同婆沙。依智度論云：無學實覺此七事能到，故名分。又云：脩道用故名覺，見道用故名道。中邊論云：此支助覺故名覺支，由此覺支位在見道。依瑜伽論云：諸已證入正性離生補特伽羅如實覺慧，用此為支，故名覺支。辨體性者，大小諸教用慧、精進、念、定、喜、受、輕安、行、捨為體。
> Explanation: This is the second category, explaining the five sets of factors. Just as Mindfulness has six lines, so do Right Effort, Bases of Psychic Power, Roots, Powers, and Awakening Factors each have six lines—understand them in the same way. When we speak of the "five sets," the first is Right Effort, namely the Four Right Efforts: for unwholesome states that have already arisen, to abandon them; for unwholesome states not yet arisen, to prevent them from arising; for wholesome states not yet arisen, to bring them about; and for wholesome states already arisen, to maintain them, not forget them, and so on. According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\*, why is effort called "Right Effort"? Because in the proper cultivation of abandonment and cultivation, this effort has the power to overcome laziness. It is also called "Right Excellence," because in properly directing body, speech, and mind, it is supreme. The \*Nyāyānusāra\* and \*Vibhāṣā\* agree. The \*Great Prajñāpāramitā Śāstra\* (chapter 19) says: "Because it practices the right path while breaking wrong dharmas, it is called Right Effort." It also says: "Because the four kinds of diligence stir the mind with vigor and energy, it is called Right Effort." Regarding its essential nature, whether in great or small vehicles, all teachings take diligence as its essence. As for "Bases of Psychic Power," these are the Four Bases of Psychic Power: concentration through desire, concentration through effort, concentration through mind, and concentration through investigation. According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\*: "Why is concentration called 'Bases of Psychic Power'? Because it is the foundation for all miraculous and excellent qualities." Other masters say: "Psychic power is concentration itself, while 'bases' refers to desire and so forth." If so, the factors of awakening would be thirteen in number, with the addition of desire and mindAccording to the Vibhāṣā masters, there are eleven awakening factors; adding desire and mind makes thirteen.. This also contradicts the scriptures—for instance, the sūtras say: "I will now teach you about psychic powers and their bases." Psychic power means experiencing various miraculous states—dividing one into many, and so on. "Bases" means the four concentrations born from desire and so forth. Here, the Buddha speaks of the fruit of concentration as psychic power, and the states of meditative absorption produced by desire etc. as the bases. The \*Nyāyānusāra\* is essentially the same. The \*Vibhāṣā\* says: "Because they serve as the foundation for miraculous and excellent qualities, they are called Bases of Psychic Power." For a detailed explanation, see the \*Mahāvibhāṣā\*, section 141. According to the \*Great Prajñāpāramitā Śāstra\*: "Because it settles the mind peacefully on its object, it is called the Base of Fulfillment." It also says: "When practicing the Four Right Efforts, the mind tends to scatter, so concentration is used to stabilize it—hence 'Base of Fulfillment.'" It further says: "Through wisdom, concentration, and strength, all that is wished for is attained—hence 'Base of Fulfillment.'" Details are given there. According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*: "Why are they called Bases of Psychic Power? Just as a person with feet can go and return, leap and stride forth, and can obtain and realize all the excellent worldly dharmas—these excellent worldly dharmas are called 'psychic powers,' and because one can reach them through these bases, they are so named." Further: "They enable one to attain and realize supramundane dharmas as well. Since the supramundane path is supremely sovereign and is the supreme psychic power, and one realizes it through these, they are called Bases of Psychic Power." Details are as given there. Regarding their essential nature, all great and small vehicle teachings take concentration (\*samādhi\*) as their essence. As for "Roots" and "Powers," these refer to the Five Roots and Five Powers: faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\*: "Why are faith etc. first called 'roots' and then 'powers'? Because these five dharmas are distinguished by lower and higher levels, and by whether they can be bent or not." According to the \*Nyāyānusāra\*: "Why are faith etc. named 'roots' and 'powers'? Because they confer dominance and are difficult to overcome. Why are these five first called 'roots' and then 'powers'? Because of the distinction between lower and higher levels. Lower-grade faith etc. have weak force and can still be subdued by their corresponding opposing factors; higher-grade ones are the opposite, hence the name 'powers.'" The \*Vibhāṣā\* says: "Because their function is dominant, they are called roots; because they are hard to destroy, they are called powers." The \*Great Prajñāpāramitā Śāstra\* says: "With soft wisdom, they are gained and so called roots; with sharp wisdom, they are gained and so called powers." It also says: "Because one gains skilled and powerful means in knowing the capacities of sentient beings, they are called roots. When the Five Powers grow, they can break afflictions, ferry sentient beings across, and achieve tolerance of the non-arising of dharmas—these are called powers." Furthermore: "Because neither Māra nor heretics can destroy them, they are called powers." Details are given there. According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, "the meaning of dominance is called root; the meaning of being hard to overcome is called power." This is elaborated there. The \*Saṃdhinirmocana\*, \*Abhidharmasamuccaya\*, and others agree with the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*. Regarding their essential nature, all great and small vehicle teachings take faith and the other four dharmas as their essence. As for "Awakening Factors," these are the Seven Factors of Awakening: mindfulness, investigation of dharmas, effort, joy, tranquility, concentration, and equanimity. According to the \*Vibhāṣā\*: "Because they aid genuine awakening, they are called Awakening Factors." Question: "What does 'Awakening Factor' mean? Is it because they themselves awaken, or because they are factors of awakening?" Some say: "They themselves awaken." Question: "If so, one would be an awakening and six would not." Answer: "The six are factors of awakening; because they lead to awakening, they are also called by the name of awakening from the more prominent aspect." Others say: "They are factors of awakening." Question: "If so, six would be factors and one would be the awakening itself." Answer: "Investigation of dharmas is both a factor of awakening and awakening itself; the other six are factors but not awakening itself—just as right view is both the path and a factor of the path." Details are given there. The \*Nyāyānusāra\* agrees with the \*Vibhāṣā\*. The \*Great Prajñāpāramitā Śastra\* says: "The unlearned true awakening is reached through these seven—hence they are called 'factors.'" It also says: "Their use in cultivation is called awakening; their use in seeing the path is called path." The \*Madhyāntavibhāga\* says: "These factors assist awakening, hence called Awakening Factors; because these factors are situated in the path of seeing." According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*: "For persons who have already entered rightness and severed birth, true awakening and wisdom use these as factors, hence called Awakening Factors." Regarding their essential nature, all great and small vehicle teachings take wisdom, effort, mindfulness, concentration, joy, feeling, tranquility, mental formation, and equanimity as their essence.
復有一類，得八支正道相故、得八支聖道能治所治故、得八支聖道脩故、得八支聖道未生令生故、得八支聖道生已堅住不忘倍脩增廣故，記別所解。
> There is another type who, having attained the characteristics of the Eightfold Noble Path, having attained the Eightfold Noble Path that counteracts what needs to be countered, having cultivated the Eightfold Noble Path, having caused the unarisen Eightfold Noble Path to arise, and having caused the arisen Eightfold Noble Path to remain firmly, not be forgotten, and to be further cultivated and expanded—such a person is declared to have attained understanding.
釋曰：此即第三約八道支記別所解。能治是八聖道，所治是八邪。餘同前釋。言八支聖道者，謂正見、正思惟、正語、正業、正命、正精進、正念、正定。毗婆沙云：問：言道支者，是何義耶？為能求趣，故名道支？為道之支，故名道支？有作是說：此能求趣，故名道支。問：若爾，則應一是七非？答：七是道分，能隨順道，從勝而說，亦名道支。復有說者：是道之支，故名道支。問：若爾，即應七是一非？答：正見是道亦道支，餘是道支而非道。如擇法是覺亦是覺支，餘六是覺支而非覺。智度論云：得是諸安隱具足已，欲入涅槃無為城故，行是諸法，是時名為道。瑜伽論云：問：何因緣故，名八支聖道？答：諸聖是覺已見迹者，由八支攝行迹正道，能無餘斷一切煩惱，能於解脫究竟作證，是故名為八支聖道。辨體性者，諸說不同。若依俱舍，六法為體，正語、業、命同或故。毗婆沙師，七法為體，身、語二業不相雜故。正理亦同。毗婆沙論有三釋：或說為六；或說為七，意同俱舍；或說為八，正命非正語、業故。依雜集論云：道支自體者，謂正見、正思惟、正語、正業、正命、正精進、正念、正定，如是八法名道支自體。問：七覺、八道依何位說？答：依婆沙，自有兩說：一云：見位八正道，脩位七覺支。一云：見道名覺支，脩道名八道。許家正義，前說為正。依俱舍論，亦有兩釋：一說同婆沙；一說七覺在見道，八道通見、脩。今依大乘智度論，自有兩說，同大婆沙。雜集中邊，七覺為見，八道為脩。顯揚論說：七覺在見，八聖道中正見通於見、修，餘七唯脩。瑜伽：七覺為見，八聖道中正語、業、命唯立脩道，餘不別說。廣辨道品，義如別章。
> Explanation: This is the third section, which explains the teachings in terms of the Eightfold Path. What is treated is the Eightfold Noble Path; what is abandoned is the eight wrong paths. The rest is as explained earlier. The Eightfold Noble Path consists of Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. The Vibhasha states: "Question: What does 'path factor' mean? Does it mean that it can seek and reach, hence called a path factor? Or is it a factor of the path, hence called a path factor?" One explanation says: "It can seek and reach, hence called a path factor." Question: "If so, then only one should be the path and seven should not be?" Answer: "The other seven are parts of the path; they assist the path. Speaking from the superior standpoint, they are also called path factors." Another explanation says: "They are factors of the path, hence called path factors." Question: "If so, then seven should be factors and one should not be?" Answer: "Right View is both the path and a path factor; the others are path factors but not the path itself. Just as the factor of discernment is both an awakening factor and a factor of awakening, while the other six are awakening factors but not awakening itself." The Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom says: "Having attained all these forms of security and completeness, in order to enter the unconditioned city of Nirvana, one practices these teachings; at that time, it is called the path." The Yogachara Bhumi asks: "Question: For what reason is it called the Eightfold Noble Path?" Answer: "The noble ones are those who have awakened and seen the traces. Through the eight factors, they traverse the noble path, which can completely cut off all afflictions without remainder and can ultimately realize liberation. Therefore, it is called the Eightfold Noble Path." Regarding the nature of its essence, there are various explanations. According to the Abhidharmakosha, it has a nature of six factors, because Right Speech, Right Action, and Right Livelihood are of the same kind. The Vibhasha masters say it has a nature of seven factors, because the bodily and verbal actions are not mixed. The Nyaya also agrees. The Vibhasha itself offers three explanations: sometimes it is said to be six; sometimes seven, agreeing with the Kosha; sometimes eight, because Right Livelihood is not the same as Right Speech or Right Action. According to the Compendium of Abhidharma: "The essence of the path factors is Right View, Right Thought, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration—these eight teachings constitute the essence of the path factors." Question: "At which stages are the Seven Awakening Factors and the Eightfold Path taught?" Answer: According to the Vibhasha, there are two explanations: one says that the Eightfold Path is in the stage of seeing, and the Seven Awakening Factors in the stage of cultivation; another says that the stage of seeing is called the awakening factors, and the stage of cultivation is called the Eightfold Path. The accepted correct view is the first explanation. According to the Abhidharmakosha, there are also two explanations: one agrees with the Vibhasha; the other says the Seven Awakening Factors are in the stage of seeing, while the Eightfold Path applies to both seeing and cultivation. Now, following the Great Vehicle's Treatise on the Perfection of Wisdom, there are two explanations, which agree with the great Vibhasha. The Compendium and the Middle Way say the Seven Awakening Factors are for seeing and the Eightfold Path for cultivation. The Discourse on Manifestation says: the Seven Awakening Factors are in seeing; among the Eightfold Noble Path, Right View applies to both seeing and cultivation, while the other seven are only in cultivation. The Yogachara Bhumi says: the Seven Awakening Factors are for seeing; among the Eightfold Noble Path, Right Speech, Right Action, and Right Livelihood are only established in the cultivation stage; the others are not separately explained. A detailed discussion of the path factors is given in other chapters.
世尊！我見彼已，便作是念：此諸長老依有所得，現觀各說種種相法，記別所解。
> World-Honored One! Having seen this, I thought to myself: These elders, relying on their attachments and attainments, each proclaim various conceptual teachings based on their own insights and interpretations.
釋曰：自下第三述已所念。於中有三：初略述己念、次重述己念、後讚世尊德。此即第一略述己念。
> The commentary says: From here onward, the third section describes what the speaker himself recollects. This part has three divisions: first, a brief account of his own recollection; second, a detailed account of it; and third, praise of the World-Honored One's virtues. This is the first—the brief account of his own recollection.
當知彼諸長老一切皆懷增上慢，為增上慢所執持故，於勝義諦遍一切一味相不能解了。
> Know that all those elders are caught up in arrogance—driven by their own inflated sense of superiority, they fail to perceive the ultimate truth that is uniformly present in all things.
釋曰：此即第二重述所念。
> The commentary explains: This is the second level of recounting the object of mindfulness.
是故，世尊！甚奇，乃至世尊善說。
> Therefore, World-Honored One, how remarkable! The World-Honored One has spoken so well.
釋曰：自下第三讚世尊德。於中有三：初略讚善說，次舉所讚教，後顯非餘境。此即初也。
> Commentary: From here onward, the third section praises the virtues of the World-Honored One. It consists of three parts: first, a brief praise of his excellent teachings; second, an enumeration of the praised doctrines; and third, showing that these are beyond the scope of others. This is the first part.
謂世尊言：勝義諦相微細最微細、甚深最甚深、難通達最難通達，遍一切一味相。
> The World-Honored One said: “The characteristic of ultimate truth is subtle beyond subtlety, profound beyond profundity, and difficult to penetrate beyond all difficulty. It pervades everything as one single flavor.”
釋曰：此即第二舉所讚教微細等文，已如上釋。
> Explanation: This refers to the second section, which cites the praised teaching in its subtle and detailed form, as already explained above.
世尊！此聖教中脩行苾蒭，於勝義諦遍一切一味相尚難通達，況諸外道！
> World-Honored One! Even monks who practice in this sacred teaching find it difficult to fully comprehend the ultimate truth's all-pervading, single-taste nature—how much less so for those outside the path!
釋曰：此即第三顯非餘境。謂諸二乘及諸外道，不能通達遍一味相，皆是此中起增上慢。
> Commentary: This is the third point, revealing what lies beyond their scope. That is, the followers of the Lesser Vehicle and the various non-Buddhist traditions cannot comprehend the universal, single-flavored nature—and it is precisely here that they develop exaggerated pride.
爾時，世尊告尊者善現曰：如是！如是！善現！我於微細最微細、甚深最甚深、難通達最難通達，遍一切一味相勝義諦，現正等現，覺等覺已，為他宣說、顯示、開解、施設、照了。
> At that time, the World-Honored One said to the Venerable Subhuti: "So it is, so it is, Subhuti. I have fully awakened to the ultimate truth—the most subtle of the subtle, the most profound of the profound, the most difficult to comprehend—which pervades all things as one single taste. Having realized this enlightenment, I proclaim it, reveal it, explain it, establish it, and illuminate it for others."
釋曰：此即第二即所讚德。如汝所讚，於微細等一味勝義自覺悟他。又解：初是總讚能自覺他，後是別讚能自覺他。讚自他覺，重言如是。
> Commentary: This is the second part, praising the qualities being extolled. Just as you have praised, in the ultimate truth that is undifferentiated in all things, however subtle, one awakens oneself and others. Another interpretation: the first part is a general praise of the ability to awaken oneself and others, while the latter is a specific praise of that same ability. In praising the awakening of self and others, the phrase "thus" is repeated.
何以故？
> Why is this so?
釋曰：第二依徵廣釋。先徵後釋，此即徵也。
> Explanation: The second section expands on the meaning based on the inquiry. First comes the inquiry, then the explanation—this is the inquiry itself.
善現！我已顯示於一切蘊中清淨所緣是勝義諦。
> Subhuti! I have revealed that in all aggregates, the pure object of observation is the ultimate truth.
釋曰：此即廣釋，於中有三：初法、次喻、後合。法中有三：初約清淨所緣顯一味相，次善現脩觀行下約三遍義以辨一味，後善現如彼下即以離三過釋一味相。就初段中先釋、後結。釋中復二：初約清淨所緣顯勝義諦，後此清淨下以清淨所緣顯一味相。前中有二：初約蘊上清淨所緣顯勝義諦，後類處等清淨所緣是勝義諦。此則初也。一切蘊者，五蘊非一故言一切，或可漏無漏等非一故言一切。此意說云：於蘊等上有勝義諦，亦名清淨所緣，由緣此境得心清淨故。是故顯揚十六卷云：復次頌曰：
> The commentary explains: This is a detailed exposition, which is divided into three parts: first, the analogy; second, the teaching; third, the application. Within the teaching, there are again three sections: first, presenting the single flavor through the pure object of focus; second, from "Subhuti, cultivate the practice" onward, explaining the single flavor through three aspects of universality; and third, from "Subhuti, just as" onward, explaining the single flavor by means of freedom from three flaws. In the first section, there is first an explanation and then a summary. Within the explanation, there are two parts: first, presenting ultimate truth through the pure object of focus; and second, from "this purity" onward, presenting the single flavor through the pure object of focus. Within the former, there are two parts: first, presenting ultimate truth through the pure object of focus on the aggregates; and second, similarly applying it to the sense bases and other factors, showing that the pure object of focus is ultimate truth. Here, we are at the first of these. "All aggregates" means the five aggregates—plural, so "all" is used. Alternatively, since there are both defiled and undefiled ones, "all" is used. The meaning is this: ultimate truth exists on the aggregates and so forth, which is also called the pure object of focus, because focusing on this object leads to mental purification. Thus, the Summary of Manifestation states in its sixteenth chapter: "Again, a verse says:"
清淨之所緣， 常無有變異。 善性及樂性，一切皆成就。
> The object of pure focus, Is ever unchanging. Goodness and joy, All are perfected.
論曰：由勝諦離一異性故，當知即是清淨所緣。何以故？由緣此境得心清淨故。具說如彼。或可勝義即體離繫，故名清淨。問：上經中未說此言，如何說言我已顯示？解云：諸部般若及無量義中皆說真如也。
> The Treatise states: Because the Supreme Truth is free from both oneness and difference, it should be understood as the pure object of focus. Why? Because by focusing on this state, the mind becomes purified. This is explained in detail elsewhere. Alternatively, the Supreme Truth itself is inherently free from attachment, hence it is called "pure." Question: The previous scriptures did not state this explicitly. How can it be said that it has already been revealed? Explanation: In the various Prajñāpāramitā texts and the countless meanings within them, the True Thusness (Suchness) is indeed taught.
我已顯示於一切處緣起食諦界，念住、正斷、神足、根、力、覺支、道支中清淨所緣，是勝義諦。
> I have revealed that, in all places, the objects of purity within dependent origination, the Four Noble Truths, the Six Elements, the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, the Four Right Efforts, the Four Bases of Psychic Power, the Five Faculties, the Five Powers, the Seven Factors of Awakening, and the Eightfold Path—these constitute the ultimate truth.
釋曰：此即第二釋類處等清淨所緣是勝義諦。所以者何？勝義諦理遍諸法故。
> The commentary explains: This is the second kind—the pure object of observation, which pertains to the ultimate truth. Why is that? Because the principle of ultimate truth pervades all phenomena.
此清淨所緣，於一切蘊中是一味相，無別異相。
> This pure object of focus, within all aggregates, is of a single uniform nature, without any distinctions.
釋曰：自下第二約清淨所緣顯一味相，於中有二：初約諸蘊釋一味相，後類處等釋一味相。此即第一約蘊上清淨所緣顯一味相，於諸蘊上清淨所緣無別異相，無別異義即一味故。
> The commentary explains: Next, the second section clarifies the unified nature through the pure object of focus. This section has two parts: first, it explains the unified nature in terms of the aggregates; second, it extends this to the sense bases and so forth. Here, the first part shows the unified nature through the pure object of focus on the aggregates—there is no distinction or difference in the pure object of focus across the aggregates, and because there is no distinction, it is called "unified."
如於蘊中，如是於一切處中乃至一切道支中，是一味相、無別異相。
> Just as within the aggregates, so too in all places including all the factors of the path, there is but a single flavor and no distinction.
釋曰：此即第二類處等諸法一味。
> Explanation: This refers to the second category—the single flavor of all dharmas, such as places and so forth.
是故，善現！由是道理，當知勝義諦是遍一切味相。
> Therefore, Subhuti! Through this principle, you should understand that the ultimate truth is present in all experiences.
釋曰：此即第二結勝義諦是一味相。謂由前所明蘊等法中清淨所緣勝義諦相無別道理，故知勝義諦相即是遍一切。
> Explanation: This is the second point, concluding that the ultimate truth is of a single, unified nature. Since the purified object of meditation—the ultimate truth—within phenomena such as the aggregates has no distinction in its fundamental nature, it follows that the ultimate truth pervades everything alike.
善現！脩觀行苾蒭通達一蘊真如、勝義、法無我性已，更不尋求各別餘蘊諸處、緣起、食、諦、界、念住、正斷、神足、根、力、覺支、道支真如、勝義、法無我性。
> Subhuti! A monk who cultivates insight practice, having understood the true nature, ultimate meaning, and selflessness of phenomena within one aggregate, no longer seeks to find these qualities separately in the other aggregates, sense bases, dependent origination, nutriments, truths, elements, mindfulness establishments, right efforts, spiritual powers, faculties, powers, awakening factors, or path factors.
釋曰：自下第二約三遍義以釋一味。言三遍者，謂真如、勝義及法無我。此三皆遍蘊等法中，故說此三名為一味。於中有二：先釋、後結。釋中有二：先反解、後順釋。此即初也。謂勝義諦有眾多義，依大般若有十二名，謂真如、法界、法性、不虗妄性、不變異性、平等性、離生性、法定、法住、實際、虗空界、不思議界，如是乃至餘教所說不可具述。今於此中且約三義以釋一味。言真如者，如成唯識第九卷云：真謂真實，顯非虗妄。如謂如常，表無變異。謂此真實於一切位常如其性，故曰真如，即是湛然不虗妄義。問：豈不前說真勝義諦離諸名言，如何於此說名真如？解釋此難，如成唯識第二卷說：真如亦是假施設名，遮撥為無故說為有，遮執為有故說為空。勿謂虗幻故說為實，理非妄倒故名真如。言勝義者，勝謂勝智，義即境義。謂此真如二種勝智所緣境義，故名勝義。是故顯揚第十六云：論曰：此勝義諦當知即是圓成實性。問：何因緣故七種真如名勝義諦？答：由是二最勝智所行故，謂出世智及後所得世間智。由此勝義無戲論故，非餘智境。自餘別義如二諦章。言法無我者，如集論第三說：何等無我相？謂如我論者所立我相，蘊界處非此相。由蘊界處我相無故，故名無我相。雜集第八亦同此說。問：空與無我二種何別？答：諸教不同。依俱舍論四說不同，故第二十六云：違我所見故空，違我見故非我。又云：內離士夫故空，不自在故非我。又云：於此無我故空，自非我故非我。又云：為治我所見故脩空行相，為治我見故脩非我行相。大毗婆沙第七十九亦有兩說，同俱舍初二釋。順正理論第七十四云：無主宰故空，違我相故非我。又云：為治我所見故脩空行相，為治我見故脩非我行相。此同俱舍論第四釋。依智度論第三十二云：不見實是名空，不見我是名無我。依集論第三云：何等空相？謂若於是處此非有，由此理正觀為空。若於是處餘是有，由此理如實如有。是名善入空性。於何處誰非有？於蘊界處常恒凝住不變壞法，我我所等非有，由此理彼皆是空。於何處誰餘有？即此處無我性。此無我性、無我有性是謂空。成實論第二十五云：如法印經中說：行者觀色無常空虗。無常者，謂色體性無常。空虗者，如瓶中無水名曰空瓶。如是如是，五蘊中無神我故名為空。又聖行品云：有二行：空行、無我行。於五陰中不見眾生是名空行，見五陰亦無是無我行也。
> Explanation: This passage, in the context of the "threefold universality," explains the concept of "single flavor." The "threefold universality" refers to Suchness, Ultimate Truth, and the Absence of Self in Phenomena. These three pervade the aggregates and all elements, hence they are said to be of a single flavor. The text first explains, then concludes. Within the explanation, it first addresses misconceptions, then provides a direct interpretation. This is the initial part. The Ultimate Truth has many aspects. According to the Great Prajnaparamita, it has twelve names: Suchness, the Element of Reality, the Nature of Reality, Non-Falsity, Immutability, Equality, the Nature of Freedom from Arising, the Fixed Principle, the Abiding Principle, Ultimate Reality, the Element of Space, and the Inconceivable Realm. These and other names are described in various scriptures, which cannot be fully enumerated here. Here, we focus on three aspects to explain the single flavor. "Suchness": As stated in \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*, chapter nine: "True" means real, indicating it is not false. "Thus" means constant, expressing no change. This reality remains constant in all states, hence it is called Suchness—the serene, non-falsified nature. \*\*Question\*\*: Was it not previously said that the Ultimate Truth transcends all verbal designations? How can it be called Suchness here? \*\*Answer\*\*: As explained in \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*, chapter two: Suchness is also a provisional designation. It is said to exist to counter the denial of it, and said to be empty to counter attachment to its existence. It is described as real to prevent seeing it as illusory, and its principle, being free from error and distortion, is called Suchness. "Ultimate Truth": "Ultimate" refers to supreme wisdom, and "truth" signifies the object of that wisdom. Suchness is the object of two types of supreme wisdom—the transcendental wisdom and the subsequent mundane wisdom—hence it is called Ultimate Truth. This is why \*Xianyang\* states: "This Ultimate Truth should be understood as the Perfect Reality." \*\*Question\*\*: Why are the seven kinds of Suchness called Ultimate Truth? \*\*Answer\*\*: Because they are the domain of the two supreme wisdoms—the wisdom that transcends the world and the subsequent wisdom of the world. Since this Ultimate Truth is free from conceptual elaboration, it is not the object of other wisdoms. Other details are covered in the chapter on the two truths. "Absence of Self in Phenomena": As stated in \*Ji Lun\*, chapter three: What is the mark of no-self? The self posited by proponents of self is not found in the aggregates, elements, or sense bases. Because the self is absent in these, this is called the mark of no-self. \*Za Ji\* also states the same. \*\*Question\*\*: What is the difference between emptiness and no-self? \*\*Answer\*\*: Various scriptures present different views. According to \*Abhidharmakosha\*, four distinctions are given (chapter twenty-six): 1. Emptiness contradicts the view of "mine"; no-self contradicts the view of "I." 2. Emptiness means no inner agent; no-self means lack of independence. 3. Emptiness means there is no self here; no-self means the self itself is not self. 4. To counteract the view of "mine," one cultivates the meditation on emptiness; to counteract the view of "I," one cultivates the meditation on no-self. \*Mahavibhasha\*, chapter seventy-nine, also offers two explanations, aligning with the first two from the \*Kosha\*. \*Nyayanusara\*, chapter seventy-four, states: Emptiness means absence of a sovereign agent; no-self means it contradicts the mark of self. It also mentions, "To counteract the view of 'mine,' one cultivates the meditation on emptiness; to counteract the view of 'I,' one cultivates the meditation on no-self." This aligns with the fourth explanation in the \*Kosha\*. According to \*Dazhidu Lun\*, chapter thirty-two: Not seeing a real entity is called emptiness; not seeing a self is called no-self. According to \*Ji Lun\*, chapter three: What is the mark of emptiness? If something is absent in a given place, one rightly contemplates it as empty. If something else is present, one perceives it as it truly is. This is called skillful entry into emptiness. Where and what is absent? In the aggregates, elements, and sense bases, there is no permanent, fixed, unchanging entity—no self or what belongs to self. Thus, these are empty. What is present? Here, there is the absence of self-nature. This absence of self and self-nature is called emptiness. \*Chengshi Lun\*, chapter twenty-five, says: As in the \*Dharma Seal Sutra\*, a practitioner observes form as impermanent, empty, and void. Impermanence means the nature of form is transient. Empty means like a bottle without water, called an empty bottle. Likewise, within the five aggregates, there is no self or soul, hence called empty. Also, the \*Holy Conduct Chapter\* speaks of two contemplations: emptiness and no-self. Not seeing a being within the five aggregates is the contemplation of emptiness; seeing that the aggregates themselves lack a self is the contemplation of no-self.
唯即隨此真如勝義無二智為依止故，於遍一切一味相勝義諦審察趣證。
> Relying solely on this supreme, non-dual wisdom that accords with the ultimate reality of Suchness, one carefully investigates and directly realizes the ultimate truth of the one-taste nature that pervades all phenomena.
釋曰：此即第二順釋一味，釋此文諸說不同。一云：唯此皆是一蘊，遮表異故說。二言唯是遮遣遮餘蘊等，此者表示此一蘊也。此意說云：唯此一蘊，真如、勝義及有無、無二法、無我境三種無分別智為依止故，後所得智於彼一切一味相審察趣證，故知真如是一味相。一云：無二智者，人、法二無我智，餘如前說。一云：行者以三種無分別智為依止故，即用此智於遍一切一味相中審察趣證，餘如初說。或可餘如前說，上來總有三說。一云：唯此皆是一味真如，亦有三釋，准上應知。一云：唯謂一蘊，此即真如，亦有三釋，准上應知。如是上來總有九釋。或可唯是真如，此即一蘊，亦有三釋，准上應知。雖有此釋，文辭不便。總釋意云：前文遮求餘法勝義，故名反解；此文成立唯求一蘊，故名順釋。真諦三藏釋兩段經云：前文釋通達三境，後文釋審察趣證。此三別者，若依小乘，三無漏根有差別故，此即見、脩、無學位差別故。今依大乘，地地皆有入、住、出分，如其次第配屬應知。
> Explanation: This is the second part, which explains the meaning of "one flavor" in a direct manner. There are various interpretations of this passage. One interpretation says: "This alone is entirely one aggregate, and it is spoken of as such to distinguish it from what is other than this." A second says: "This only negates and excludes other aggregates; 'this' indicates this one aggregate." The meaning of this is: "Only this one aggregate—true suchness, ultimate meaning, and the states of existence and non-existence, the non-dual dharma, and the sphere of no-self—serves as the basis for the three kinds of non-conceptual wisdom. Therefore, the subsequently attained wisdom carefully examines and realizes the one-flavor characteristic in all those phenomena. Thus, true suchness is known to have a one-flavor characteristic." Another interpretation says: "The wisdom of non-duality refers to the wisdom of no-self in persons and no-self in dharmas; the rest is as previously explained." Another says: "The practitioner, relying on the three kinds of non-conceptual wisdom, uses this wisdom to carefully examine and realize the one-flavor characteristic pervading everything; the rest is as in the first explanation." Alternatively, "the rest is as previously explained," and in total there are three interpretations above. One interpretation says: "This alone is entirely the one-flavor true suchness," and there are also three explanations for this, which should be understood according to the above. Another says: "This alone is one aggregate, which is true suchness," and there are also three explanations, to be understood according to the above. Thus, in total there are nine interpretations above. Alternatively, "this alone is true suchness, which is one aggregate," and there are also three explanations, to be understood as above. Although these interpretations exist, the wording is not very convenient. The overall meaning is: The earlier passage negates seeking other dharmas as the ultimate meaning, so it is called a reverse explanation; this passage establishes seeking only one aggregate, so it is called a direct explanation. The true meaning of the three treatises from the master (Paramārtha) explains these two passages as follows: The earlier passage explains the penetrating understanding of the three spheres, and the latter passage explains the careful examination and realization. As for these three distinctions: If according to the Lesser Vehicle, the three kinds of undefiled faculties are distinct, this corresponds to the distinctions of the stages of seeing, cultivation, and no-more-learning. Now, according to the Greater Vehicle, each ground has entering, abiding, and emerging phases, which should be understood as corresponding in order to these three.
是故，善現！由此道理，當知勝義諦是遍一切一味相。
> Therefore, Subhuti! Based on this principle, you should understand that the Ultimate Truth is a single flavor pervading all things.
釋曰：此即第二結文，可知。
> Explanation: This concludes the second summary passage, as can be understood.
善現！如彼諸蘊展轉異相，如彼法處、緣起、食、諦、界、念住、正斷、神足、根、力、覺支、道支展轉異相。
> Subhuti! Just as those aggregates differ one from another in their characteristics, so too do the spheres of reality, dependent origination, nutriment, truths, elements, foundations of mindfulness, right efforts, psychic powers, faculties, strengths, factors of enlightenment, and the noble eightfold path—all differ in their characteristics, each distinct from the other.
釋曰：此下第三以離三過釋一味相，即真如等離有因等三種過失，故成一味。於中有二：先釋、後結。釋中有二：初明蘊等展轉異相，後辨真如無別異相。此即初也，文有二節：初明諸蘊展轉異相，後如彼下類處等展轉相異。由此蘊等相別異故，有三過失：一者有因，因所生故；二者有為，相所遷故；三非勝義，應更尋求，非究竟故。
> The commentary explains: This next section clarifies the single flavor through three eliminations, meaning that Suchness is free from three faults—being caused, being conditioned, and being non-ultimate. Therefore, it constitutes one flavor. This section has two parts: first, the explanation; second, the conclusion. Within the explanation, there are two divisions: first, it clarifies the transformations and distinctions among the aggregates; second, it distinguishes the undifferentiated nature of Suchness. This is the first part, which has two sections: first, it clarifies the transformations and distinctions among the aggregates; second, from "like that" onward, it applies this to other categories like elements and sense bases, showing their transformations and distinctions. Because these aggregates differ from one another, three faults arise: first, being caused, as they arise from causes; second, being conditioned, as they are subject to change; third, being non-ultimate, since further inquiry is required, as they are not final.
若一切法真如、勝義、法無我性亦異相者，是即真如、勝義、法無我性，亦應有因從因所生，若從因生應是有為，若是有為應非勝義，若非勝義應更尋求餘勝義諦。
> If the true nature of all things, ultimate reality, and the absence of a separate self in phenomena were distinct from one another, then they too would have a cause and arise from conditions. If they arise from conditions, they would be conditioned phenomena. If they are conditioned, they would not be ultimate reality. If they are not ultimate reality, one would have to seek yet another ultimate truth beyond them.
釋曰：此下第二顯勝義諦無別異相，於中有二：初返顯勝義有三過失，後善現下順釋勝義離三過失。此即初也，文有二節：初牒異相，後顯三失。言三失者，如前已說。或可五失：一應有因、二從因生、三應有為、四非勝義、五應求勝。即准此文，圓鏡智等從因生故，是有為攝，非勝義諦。故親光等釋受用身即是無常，生者必滅，一向記故，有說是常勘文。如是等義，第五卷中當廣分別。
> Explanation: The following section reveals that the ultimate truth has no distinct characteristics. This part is divided into two: first, it negatively demonstrates that if the ultimate truth had distinct characteristics, there would be three faults; second, starting from "Good Son," it positively explains that the ultimate truth is free from these three faults. The first part is what we are currently discussing. The text has two sections: first, it raises the idea of distinct characteristics, and second, it reveals the three faults. The three faults are as previously explained. Alternatively, there could be five faults: first, it should have a cause; second, it should arise from a cause; third, it should be conditioned; fourth, it would not be the ultimate truth; and fifth, one should seek something higher. Based on this passage, the mirror-like wisdom and other aspects arise from causes, thus they are conditioned and not the ultimate truth. Therefore, teachers like Venerable Chin Guang explain that the enjoyment body is impermanent, for what is born must cease, and this is a definite teaching. Some say it is permanent, but such views, as noted in the annotation, will be discussed in detail in the fifth volume.
善現！由此真如、勝義、法無我性不名有因，非因所生亦非有為是勝義諦，得此勝義更不尋求餘勝義諦。
> Subhuti! This Suchness, ultimate truth, and the nature of non-self in phenomena are not called 'having a cause,' nor are they produced by causes, nor are they conditioned — this is the ultimate truth. Having attained this ultimate truth, one does not seek any other ultimate truth.
釋曰：自下第二順釋勝義離三過失，於中有二：初正釋勝義離三過，後唯有下以理重成。此即初也。謂若別異有三失故，故知勝義唯是一味，離三種失。
> Explanation: Next, the second section explains in detail how ultimate truth transcends three flaws. This section has two parts: first, it directly explains how ultimate truth is free from the three flaws; second, beginning with "only this," it reconfirms this through reasoning. This is the first part. That is, if there were distinctions, there would be three flaws. Therefore, it is understood that ultimate truth is only of a single flavor, free from the three flaws.
唯有常常時、恒恒時，如來出世、若不出世，諸法法性安立、法界安住。
> At all times, whether the Tathagata appears in the world or not, the nature of phenomena remains established, and the realm of reality abides.
釋曰：此即第二以理重成。謂彼勝義一味真如唯常恒時，如來出世、若不出世，一切諸法法性安立、法界安住，更無變異種種異相。依解節經，但說恒常乃至法性、法界、法住真諦。解曰：於道前位中先來本有，故名為恒，非佛出世方始有故。道中後位此理無滅，故稱為常，佛出世後理無盡故。法性者即自性住，佛性約道前位，能為菩提以作根本，眾生由此得發心故。法界者即引出，佛性約道中位，界名為諸行根本，引出萬行故。法住者即至得果，佛性約道後位，至涅槃法體常住故。今依此本云常常時、恒恒時者，解云：一味真如從本已來，前時非一名常常時，後時非一名恒恒時，於如是時諸法法性安立、法界安住。然此法性安立、法界安住自有二義，准餘二本分為三種：一諸法法性、二安立法界、三安立安住。若准無性攝論第四分為二種：一諸法法性安立、二法界安住。安住即是安立異名。若依瑜伽分為三種，謂法性、法界、法住。安住即是法性，故第十卷云：是諸緣起無始時來理成就性，是名法性。如成就性，以無顛倒文句安立，是名法住。由此法住以彼法性為因，是故說彼名為法界。解云：瑜伽舉彼緣起顯彼理性，或可彼論即說緣起有此三句，非顯彼性。然釋三句，其理無別。
> Commentary: This is the second point, further establishing the principle through reasoning. It means that the ultimate Truth, the single flavor of Suchness, is perpetually constant. Whether a Tathāgata appears in the world or not, the fundamental nature of all phenomena remains established. The realm of reality abides without any change or differentiation. According to the \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\*, it speaks only of constancy, and further mentions such aspects as the nature of phenomena, the realm of reality, and the abiding of reality as ultimate truths. Explanation: In the stage before the path, this principle is already inherently present, so it is called "perpetual"—it does not come into being only when a Buddha appears. During and after the path, this principle never ceases, so it is called "constant"—it is not exhausted after a Buddha appears. The "nature of phenomena" refers to the intrinsically abiding Buddha-nature, pertaining to the stage before the path. It serves as the foundation for enlightenment, as sentient beings develop the aspiration for awakening based on it. The "realm of reality" refers to the emerging Buddha-nature, pertaining to the stage of the path. "Realm" signifies the foundation of all practices, as it gives rise to the myriad practices leading to liberation. The "abiding of reality" refers to the accomplished fruition, the Buddha-nature pertaining to the stage after the path, reaching the state where the Dharma-body of nirvāṇa abides eternally. Now, based on this text’s phrase "perpetually constant and eternally abiding," the explanation is: the single flavor of Suchness has, from the very beginning, been undifferentiated across all times—this is called "perpetual constancy." In later times, it remains undifferentiated—this is called "eternal abiding." Within such times, the nature of all phenomena is established, and the realm of reality abides. However, this establishment of the nature of phenomena and the abiding of the realm of reality carries two aspects. According to the other two versions, it is divided into three: first, the nature of all phenomena; second, the establishment of the realm of reality; third, the establishment and abiding. Following the \*Asaṅga's Commentary on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha\*, the fourth chapter divides it into two: first, the nature of all phenomena is established; second, the realm of reality abides. "Abiding" is synonymous with "establishment." According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, it is divided into three: the nature of phenomena, the realm of reality, and the abiding of reality. "Abiding" corresponds to the nature of phenomena. Thus, the tenth chapter states: "That conditioned arising, from beginningless time, has an essence that is naturally accomplished—this is called the nature of phenomena. As this accomplished nature is expressed in non-distorted words and phrases, it is called the abiding of reality. Because this abiding of reality has that nature of phenomena as its cause, it is therefore called the realm of reality." Explanation: The \*Yogācārabhūmi\* cites conditioned arising to reveal its underlying principle. Alternatively, that treatise may simply describe conditioned arising through these three phrases, rather than revealing its nature. Yet, in explaining these three phrases, the underlying principle is the same.
是故，善現！由此道理，當知勝義諦是遍一切一味相。
> Therefore, Subhuti! Based on this principle, you should understand that the Ultimate Truth is a single flavor pervading all things.
釋曰：是第二結文應知。
> The commentary explains: This is the concluding passage of the second section, which should be understood as such.
善現！譬如種種非一品類異相色中，虗空無相、無別、無變異，遍一切一味相。
> Subhuti! It is like this: in various forms of different kinds and appearances, space has no form, no distinctions, and no changes—it pervades all as one single taste.
釋曰：第二舉喻重說。言種種非一品類者，凡論色蘊，有其三種：一者四大及所造相，二者有見有對、無見有對、無見無對三句差別之相，三者變壞。謂前二種皆有變壞，名變壞相。具此三種，故言種種非一品類，或云異相也。然虗空中無能所造相，故名無相。無有有見有對色等種種差別，故名無分別。分別即是差別異名。解節經云：無差別故，亦無變壞，名無變異。具此三義，名一味相。
> Explanation: The second section uses a simile to elaborate. The phrase "various and not of a single kind" refers to the three aspects of the form aggregate: first, the elements and what they constitute; second, the distinctions among visible and obstructive, invisible but obstructive, and invisible and unobstructive forms; third, the characteristic of change and decay. Both of the first two aspects undergo change and decay, hence the term "characteristic of change and decay." With these three aspects, it is described as "various and not of a single kind," or alternatively as "different characteristics." However, in empty space, there is no element or constituted form, hence it is called "formless." There is no visible and obstructive form, nor other such distinctions, hence it is called "without differentiation." Differentiation is another term for distinction. The \*Commentary on the Scripture of Understanding\* states: "Because there is no differentiation, there is also no change or decay, hence it is called 'without change or decay.'" With these three meanings, it is termed "the characteristic of a single flavor."
如是異性異相一切法中，勝義諦遍一切一味相，當知亦爾。
> Just as in all phenomena, each with its own distinct characteristics, the ultimate truth pervades all as a single, unified flavor—so too should it be understood.
釋曰：第三、舉法同喻。言異性相者，即自相差別。故深密云：自相差別。此意說云：一切諸法皆有二相：一者、自性，二者、差別。而勝義中無一切法自相差別，故名一味。故佛地經云：譬如虗空，雖遍諸色種種相中，而不可說有種種相，體唯一味。如是如來清淨法界，雖復遍至種種相類所知境界，而不可說有種種相，體唯一味。佛地論第五：依他起性同皈真如，圓成實性，故名一味。又遍計所執、所顯真如無差別故，名為一味。
> Explanation: Third, \[this\] cites a simile to illustrate the same principle. "Nature of difference" refers to the distinctions within intrinsic characteristics. Thus, the \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\* says: "intrinsic characteristics and distinctions." The meaning here is that all phenomena possess two aspects: first, their intrinsic nature; second, their distinctions. However, in ultimate reality, there are no such intrinsic characteristics or distinctions among all phenomena, which is why it is called "one flavor." Therefore, the \*Buddhabhūmi Sūtra\* states: "For example, space, though pervading all kinds of forms with their various characteristics, cannot be said to have various characteristics; its essence is solely one flavor." Likewise, the pure realm of the Tathāgata, though it extends to all kinds of categories of knowable objects, cannot be said to have various characteristics; its essence is solely one flavor. According to the fifth chapter of the \*Buddhabhūmi Treatise\*, dependent nature returns to suchness, and perfected nature \[also returns to suchness\]; hence it is called "one flavor." Moreover, because the suchness revealed by imputed nature is undifferentiated, it is also called "one flavor."
爾時，世尊欲重宣此義而說頌曰：
> At that time, the World-Honored One, wishing to reiterate this meaning, spoke these verses:
釋曰：自下第二舉頌略說。於中有二：初發起頌文，後舉頌略說。此即初也。
> Commentary: Next, the second part presents a summary through verses. It consists of two sections: first, the introductory verse; second, the detailed explanation through verses. Here begins the first section.
此遍一切一味相，勝義諸佛說無異，若有於中異分別，彼定愚癡依上慢。
> This all-pervading, single-flavored nature, The Buddhas in their ultimate truth declare as one. If within it one discriminates distinctions, That one is surely foolish, clinging to pride.
釋曰：自下第二以頌略說。於中有二：初有半頌舉佛同說讚一味相，後二句辨愚異執顯理甚深。前中上句頌一味相遍諸蘊等，下句明其勝義諸佛同說。或可勝義諸佛說無異者，無異即是一味義也。下半頌中前句辨異計，後句計所依。然此頌中依解節經，更有一頌及奉持長行，應非正本。所以爾者，唐本、深密皆無後頌。又後奉持真諦自云：後去流通非此品內，乃是攝最後流通文。安此未了，前序亦然，抄經前序安第一品也。今判此釋亦不順經，經末奉持曼殊室利以為後故深密頌云：如來應說法，見別是憍慢。 解節經有其二頌： 法通相一味，一切一味相， 不離第一義， 是人增上慢。 逆生死流通， 微細深難見， 諸佛說平等， 若於中執異， 欲染癡覆故， 凡夫不能得。
> The commentary says: Next, the second section briefly explains this through verses. It is divided into two parts: first, half a verse praising the uniform taste of the Buddha's teachings; second, two lines distinguishing the foolish attachments of ordinary beings to reveal the profound nature of truth. In the first part, the upper line praises the uniform taste that pervades all aggregates and so on, while the lower line clarifies that the ultimate truth is equally spoken by all Buddhas. Alternatively, the ultimate truth spoken by all Buddhas is without distinction—this "without distinction" is precisely the meaning of "uniform taste." In the latter half-verse, the first line addresses the differing views, and the second line addresses the basis of those views. However, in this verse, according to the \*Scripture of Explaining the Nodes\*, there is an additional verse and a concluding section, which should not be considered part of the main text. The reason is that neither the Tang version nor the \*Samdhinirmocana Sūtra\* includes this additional verse. Moreover, the later concluding passage was personally noted by Paramārtha: "The concluding section that follows is not within this chapter; rather, it is drawn from the final transmission section at the end." Placing it here is incomplete, as is the introduction—in copied scriptures, the introduction is placed before the first chapter. Now I judge that this interpretation also does not align with the sūtra, because the sūtra ends with the transmission to Mañjuśrī as the final sectionThe \*Samdhinirmocana\* verse says: "The Tathāgata's teaching is spoken; seeing distinctions is arrogance." The \*Scripture of Explaining the Nodes\* has two verses: "The dharma universally shares one taste, all are of one taste, not distinct from ultimate truth—such a person has inflated pride. Reversing the flow of birth and death, subtle, profound, and hard to see, all Buddhas speak of equality—if one clings to distinctions within it, covered by desire, defilement, and ignorance, ordinary beings cannot attain it.".
### 解深密經心意識相品第三
> Chapter 3: The Marks of Mind, Thought, and Consciousness
將釋此品略有二義：一釋品名，二正釋文。言心意識相品者，心意識名有通有別，如成唯識第五卷云：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，緣第八識恒審思量為我等故；餘六名識，於六別境麤動間斷了別轉故。相謂體相，或是相狀。品義如前。雖有二門，此品宗明通名三義，於中就勝故說第八。或可此中別名三義，雖有兩釋，前說為勝，是故題云心意識相品。
> Now I will explain this chapter, which has two main parts: first, explaining the chapter's title; second, explaining the text itself. Regarding the chapter "The Characteristics of Mind, Intention, and Consciousness": the terms "mind," "intention," and "consciousness" have both general and specific meanings. As stated in the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Treatise on the Perfection of Consciousness Only), volume five: "The Blessed One, in various discourses, taught the three distinct meanings of mind, intention, and consciousness: accumulation is called mind, deliberation is called intention, and discernment is called consciousness. These are the three distinct meanings." Although these three meanings apply to all eight consciousnesses, they are emphasized according to each consciousness's predominant function: - The eighth consciousness is called "mind" because it accumulates the seeds of all phenomena and gives rise to all phenomena. - The seventh consciousness is called "intention" because it continuously and deeply deliberates upon the eighth consciousness, grasping it as a self. - The remaining six consciousnesses are called "consciousness" because they discern their respective objects in a coarse, intermittent, and active manner. "Characteristics" refers to their inherent nature or their manifest features. The meaning of "chapter" is as previously explained. Though there are two approaches—the general and the specific—this chapter primarily clarifies the general meaning of the three terms, with emphasis on the eighth consciousness due to its preeminence. Alternatively, this chapter could address the specific meanings of the three terms. Although there are two interpretations, the former is preferred. Therefore, the title is given as "The Characteristics of Mind, Intention, and Consciousness" (心意識相品).
爾時，廣慧菩薩摩訶薩白佛言：世尊，如世尊說，於心意識秘密善巧菩薩
> At that time, the great bodhisattva Guanghui said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One, as you have spoken about the profound skill of bodhisattvas in understanding the mind, consciousness, and awareness..."
釋曰：就所觀境，自有二種：一者、勝義；二者、世俗。上來已釋勝義諦訖。自下第二、辨世俗諦，於中有二：初、長行廣釋；後、以頌略說。前中有二：先問、後答。問中有二：初、舉所問教；後、依教發問。此即初也。言廣慧菩薩者，從慧立名。真諦記云：廣慧對佛說法之人，一切菩薩無不具此廣慧之德。但此中從廣慧法門立名。佛地論云：深廣圓滿，善通達故，名為廣慧。智度論云：道俗種種經書論議無不悉知，名為廣慧。瑜伽論云：謂即此慧無量無邊所行境故，名為廣慧。謂世尊說於心、意、識秘密義中如實了知，名善巧菩薩。
> Explanation: Regarding the object of observation, there are two kinds: first, the ultimate truth; second, the conventional truth. The ultimate truth has already been explained above. Now, in the second part, we will discuss the conventional truth, which has two sections: first, a detailed explanation in prose; second, a brief summary in verse form. The first section has two parts: a question followed by an answer. The question has two parts: first, citing the scripture being questioned; second, raising the question based on that scripture. This is the first part. As for the name "Bodhisattva Guanghui (Broad Wisdom)," it is established based on wisdom. According to the \*Commentary on the Ultimate Truth\*, Guanghui refers to one who teaches the Dharma to the Buddha. All bodhisattvas possess this virtue of broad wisdom. However, here it is named after the Dharma door of broad wisdom. The \*Commentary on the Buddha Land\* states: "Because it is deep, broad, and perfect, and one is skilled in penetrating it, it is called Broad Wisdom." The \*Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom\* says: "One who knows all kinds of scriptures, treatises, and discussions, both worldly and transcendent, is called Broad Wisdom." The \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\* says: "Because this wisdom has immeasurable and boundless objects of engagement, it is called Broad Wisdom." It is said that the World-Honored One's teaching on truly understanding the secret meaning of mind, intention, and consciousness is what qualifies one as a skillful bodhisattva.
於心意識秘密善巧菩薩者，齊何名為於心意識秘密善巧菩薩？如來齊何施設彼為於心意識秘密善巧菩薩？說是語已。
> "Regarding the Bodhisattva who is skillful in the secret of mind, thought, and consciousness—what defines him as such? How does the Tathāgata designate him as a Bodhisattva skilled in the secret of mind, thought, and consciousness?" After these words were spoken.
釋曰：此即第二、依教發問。文有二節：初、牒所問教；後、齊何下，正設問辭。問有二意：初、齊何名為於心、意、識秘密善巧菩薩者，問菩薩位即是教所說義；後、如來齊何施設彼為於心、意、識秘密善巧菩薩者，問如來依何菩薩施設彼教，施設彼教，施設即是宣說之義。
> Explanation: This is the second part, raising questions based on the teachings. The text has two sections: first, it references the teachings being questioned; second, starting with "At what point," it formally presents the questions. There are two aspects to the questioning: first, "At what point is one called a bodhisattva skilled in the secrets of mind, intention, and consciousness" asks about the bodhisattva's stage, which is what the teachings explain; second, "How does the Tathagata designate such a person as a bodhisattva skilled in the secrets of mind, intention, and consciousness" asks on what basis the Tathagata designates that bodhisattva in the teachings—"designate" meaning to proclaim or explain.
爾時，世尊告廣慧菩薩摩訶薩曰：善哉，善哉！
> At that time, the World-Honored One said to the Great Bodhisattva Guanghui, "Excellent, excellent!"
釋曰：此下第二依問正答。於中有二：初讚問許說，後廣慧當知下對問正答。前中有二：初讚其所問，後勅聽許說。前中有二：先總、後別。此即初也。所問深義能益復廣，是故重讚善哉善哉。十地論第一云：善哉者，所說法中善具足故。瑜伽八十三云：善哉者，是諸賢聖所稱讚故。九十八亦同。大智度論四十一云：善哉善哉者，讚德之美也。又智度論六十六云：言必可信，能問於佛，斷大眾疑，能大利益，故言善哉。無上依經第一卷云：若有煩惱不能染著，是名善哉。
> The commentary explains: This next section responds to the question based on proper sequence. It is divided into two parts: first, praising the question and granting the teaching; second, beginning with "Guanghui, you should know," directly answering the question. The first part has two sections: first, praising the question; second, instructing the listener to hear the teaching. The first of these has two parts: first, a general praise; second, a specific one. This is the general praise. The question's profound meaning and vast benefits are why it is praised twice with "Excellent, excellent." The \*Ten Stages Sutra\* commentary, first roll, says: "Excellent" means that the teaching spoken is fully complete in goodness. The \*Yoga\* treatise, eighty-third roll, says: "Excellent" means it is praised by all sages and saints. The ninety-eighth roll says the same. The \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise\*, forty-first roll, says: "Excellent, excellent" praises the beauty of virtue. Also, the \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Treatise\*, sixty-sixth roll, says: Speech that is trustworthy, able to question the Buddha, dispel the doubts of the assembly, and bring great benefit is called "excellent." The \*Unsurpassed Sutra\*, first roll, says: If one is not tainted by afflictions, that is called "excellent."
廣慧！汝今乃能請問如來如是深義。
> Guanghui! You are now able to ask the Tathagata about such profound meanings.
釋曰：自下別讚，於中有二：初讚問勝義，後讚問有益。此即初也。
> Commentary: From here onward, verses are individually praised, in two parts: first, praising the profound meaning of the question; second, praising the benefit of asking. This is the first part.
汝今為欲利益安樂無量眾生，哀愍世間及諸天、人、阿素落等，為令獲得義利安樂，故發斯問。
> Now, because you wish to benefit and bring peace to countless beings, out of compassion for the world—including gods, humans, and asuras—and to help them attain true well-being, you have asked this question.
釋曰：自下第二讚問有益，文有兩節：初明總益，後哀愍下明別利益。言利益安樂者，如佛地論第一卷云：現益名樂、當益名利、世間名樂、出世名利、離惡名樂、攝善名利、福德名樂、智慧名利。無性攝論第七亦有七對，大同佛地第一。若依佛地第七有其五對，故彼論云：謂淨法界及妙智皆能安立一切眾生利益安樂，令脩善因名為利益，令得樂果名為安樂。又令離惡名為利益，令其攝善名為安樂。又拔其苦名為利益，施與其樂名為安樂。此世他世、世出世等應知亦爾。解云：利益安樂與第一卷相違應知。言哀愍等者，明其利益自有二種。言世間者，五蘊世間成人之法。人天等者，蘊所成人謂五蘊假者，依智度論有三世間：一器世間、二五蘊世間、三眾生世間。今於此中辨教所益，是故但說五蘊眾生。或可所益諸眾名為世間，領解眾首名天人等。問：豈不頌言我於凡愚不開演，如何此云哀愍世間及天人等？答：說教所為有其多義：若為令離惡脩善，通為有性無性故說；若為趣無上正等菩提，但為菩薩種姓不定者說。
> Explanation: Next, the second section praises the benefits of asking. The text has two parts: first, it clarifies the general benefit; then, from “with compassion” onward, it clarifies specific benefits. The phrase “benefit and comfort” is explained in the first volume of the \*Treatise on the Grounds of Buddhahood\*: present benefit is called “comfort,” future benefit is called “benefit”; worldly benefit is called “comfort,” transcendent benefit is called “benefit”; abandoning evil is called “comfort,” cultivating goodness is called “benefit”; merit is called “comfort,” wisdom is called “benefit.” The seventh volume of Asaṅga’s \*Compendium\* also presents seven paired contrasts, largely matching those in the first volume of the \*Treatise on the Grounds of Buddhahood\*. According to the seventh volume of the \*Treatise on the Grounds of Buddhahood\*, however, there are five paired contrasts. That treatise states: “The pure realm of reality and sublime wisdom can both establish the benefit and comfort of all sentient beings. Causing them to cultivate wholesome causes is called ‘benefit’; causing them to attain pleasant results is called ‘comfort.’ Also, causing them to abandon evil is called ‘benefit’; causing them to embrace goodness is called ‘comfort.’ Furthermore, removing their suffering is called ‘benefit’; giving them happiness is called ‘comfort.’ The same should be understood for this life and the next life, for worldly and transcendent matters, and so forth.” Explanation: It should be noted that the meaning of “benefit and comfort” here differs from that in the first volume. “With compassion” and similar phrases clarify that benefit itself has two kinds. “Worldly” refers to the five aggregates—the factors that constitute a person. “Human and celestial beings” refers to the beings formed by the aggregates, namely the conventional selves of the five aggregates. According to the \*Treatise on the Great Perfection of Wisdom\*, there are three worlds: the physical world, the world of the five aggregates, and the world of sentient beings. Here, since we are discussing what the teaching benefits, only the five aggregates and sentient beings are mentioned. Alternatively, the various beings who benefit are called “the world,” and the leaders who understand are called “humans and celestial beings.” Question: Does the verse not say, “I do not teach this to the ignorant or the unwise”? How then can this text say “with compassion for the world and for humans and celestial beings”? Answer: The purpose of teaching has many aspects. If the aim is to lead beings to abandon evil and cultivate goodness, the teaching is given universally to both those with the potential and those without. If the aim is to attain unsurpassed, perfect enlightenment, the teaching is given specifically to those of indeterminate Bodhisattva lineage.
汝應諦聽，吾當為汝說心意識秘密之義。
> Listen closely, for I shall reveal to you the secret meaning of the mind, consciousness, and awareness.
釋曰：此即第二勅聽許說。言諦聽者，依功德施。波若論云：諦聽者，心專一境。瑜伽八十三云：言諦聽者，謂如是相法勸令審聽。
> Explanation: This is the second invitation to listen and receive the teaching. "Listen carefully" means, according to the Merit Giving Bodhisattva, as stated in the Prajñā Treatise: "Listening carefully means focusing the mind on a single object." The Yogācārabhūmi, in its eighty-third section, says: "Listening carefully means urging oneself to listen attentively to such teachings with proper attention."
廣慧當知，於六趣生死彼彼有情眾中，或在卵生、或在胎生、或在濕生、或在化生身分生起。
> Guanghui, you should know that among all living beings in the six realms of rebirth, some are born from eggs, some from a womb, some from moisture, and some through transformation.
釋曰：自下第二對問正答。此心意識即是八識，故今先辨八識差別，後方正釋心意識義。八識差別略辨六義：一種數多少、二釋名字、三出體性、四所依根、五所緣境、六心所相應。
> The commentary explains: Now we move to the second section, where the question is answered directly. The mind, thought, and consciousness refer to the eight consciousnesses. Therefore, we first distinguish the differences among the eight consciousnesses, and then we properly explain the meaning of mind, thought, and consciousness. The differences among the eight consciousnesses can be briefly outlined in six aspects: first, the number of types; second, the explanation of their names; third, their essential nature; fourth, the roots they rely on; fifth, the objects they perceive; and sixth, the mental factors they correspond with.
言種數者，諸聲聞藏但說六識，而無七、八，具如諸教。今依大乘，自有兩釋：一、龍猛等，但說六識，是故清辨菩薩所造中觀心論？入真甘露品云：離六識外，無別阿賴耶識，眼等六識所不攝故，猶如空華。故知彼宗唯立六識。二、彌勒宗，依金光明等，具立八識。然依此宗，西方諸師有其三說：一、菩提留支，唯識論云：立二種心：一、法性心，真如為體。此即真如心之性故，名之為心，而非能緣。二、相應心，與信、貪等心所相應。解云：唯釋意之性故。識之性故，亦名意識，於理無違。二、真諦三藏，依決定藏論，立九識義，如九識品說。言九識者，眼等六識，大同識論。第七阿陀那，此云執持。執持第八為我、我所，唯煩惱障，而無法執，定不成佛。第八阿梨耶識，自有三種：一、解性梨耶，有成佛義；二、果報梨耶，緣十八界。故中邊分別偈云：根塵我及識，本識生似彼。依彼論等，說第八識緣十八界。三、染汙阿梨耶，緣真如境，起四種謗，即是法執，而非人執。依安慧宗，作如是說。第九阿摩羅識，此云無垢識，真如為體。於一真如有其二義：一、所緣境，名為真如及實際等；二、能緣義，名無垢識，亦名本覺。具如九識章引決定藏論九識品中說。三、大唐三藏依楞伽等及護法宗，唯立八識，不說第九。破清辨云：所立量中便有自教相違之失，楞伽等經皆說第八阿賴耶故。問：若爾，如何大品經等唯說六識？護法會釋如成唯識第五卷說。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。問：豈不龍猛唯立六耶？解云：據實龍猛等信有七八，位在極喜大菩薩故。而彼論中說六識者，述大品經等意，故不相違。真諦師說：九種識中，後之三識皆有多失。且如第七有二種失：一、阿陀那者，第八異名而非第七，故此經等說第八識名阿陀那。二義相違，所謂唯煩惱障，便違此經八地已上有染末那；或不成佛，違莊嚴論等轉八識成四智義也。第八賴耶能起法執，或云緣十八界，皆不應理。心所法中無明無明數，如何得與法執俱起？又新翻辨中邊論云：頌曰：
> Now, regarding the explanation of consciousness, the texts of the Shravaka (listener) tradition only discuss six consciousnesses, without the seventh and eighth. This is elaborated in detail in various scriptures. According to the Mahayana (Great Vehicle), there are two interpretations: First, the tradition of Nagarjuna and others, which only establishes six consciousnesses. Accordingly, in the \*Madhyamaka Hridaya Shastra\* (Middle Way Mind Treatise) by the great master Bhavaviveka, in the "Chapter on Entering the True Nectar," it is stated: "Apart from the six consciousnesses, there is no separate Alaya (Storehouse) consciousness, because it is not included among the six consciousnesses of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind; it is like a flower in the sky (an illusion)." Therefore, it is understood that this tradition only establishes six consciousnesses. Second, the tradition of Maitreya, based on scriptures such as the \*Golden Light Sutra\*, fully establishes eight consciousnesses. Within this tradition, Western (Indian) masters have three interpretations: 1. Bodhiruci, in his \*Treatise on Consciousness-Only\*, posits two kinds of mind: - The \*\*Dharma-nature mind\*\* (dharmata-citta), whose essence is Suchness (thusness, ultimate reality). This is called "mind" because it is the nature of the true mind, but it is not an active cognitive function. - The \*\*corresponding mind\*\* (samprayukta-citta), which is associated with mental factors such as faith, greed, and so on. Explanation: This interpretation merely explains the nature of the mental consciousness. Since it is the nature of consciousness, it can also be called "mental consciousness" (mano-vijnana), and this does not contradict reason. 2. The great master Paramartha (Zhendi), based on the \*Decisive Treatise on the Storehouse\* (Niyata-bhumi-shastra), establishes the doctrine of nine consciousnesses, as explained in the chapter on the nine consciousnesses. The nine are: - The six consciousnesses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind) are largely the same as in the consciousness-only treatise. - The seventh, \*\*Adana\*\* (Sanskrit for "grasping" or "holding"), which holds the eighth consciousness as "self" and "what belongs to self." It involves only the afflictive hindrance (klesha-avarana) and not the hindrance of cognitive obstacles (jnana-avarana). It definitely does not lead to Buddhahood. - The eighth, \*\*Alaya\*\* (Storehouse consciousness), has three aspects: a. The \*\*Alaya of the nature of liberation\*\* (or understanding nature), which has the potential for Buddhahood. b. The \*\*Alaya of retribution\*\*, which perceives the eighteen elements (the six sense organs, their objects, and the six consciousnesses). Thus, the verse in the \*Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes\* (\*Madhyanta-vibhaga\*) says: "Sense organs, sense objects, the self, and consciousness—these arise from the root consciousness and appear as such." According to that treatise, the eighth consciousness perceives the eighteen elements. c. The \*\*defiled Alaya\*\*, which perceives Suchness as its object and gives rise to four types of erroneous views (or four distortions). This is the cognitive hindrance (dharma-avarana), not the personal hindrance (pudgala-avarana). This is according to the tradition of Sthiramati (Anhui). - The ninth, \*\*Amala\*\* (Sanskrit for "immaculate" or "undefiled"), called the "immaculate consciousness," has Suchness as its essence. Within the one Suchness, there are two aspects: a. As the object of cognition, it is called Suchness, ultimate reality, and so on. b. As the cognitive function, it is called the immaculate consciousness, also known as \*\*original awakening\*\* (ben jue). This is fully explained in the chapter on the nine consciousnesses, citing the \*Decisive Treatise on the Storehouse\*. 3. The great master Xuanzang (from the Tang Dynasty), based on the \*Lankavatara Sutra\* and the tradition of Dharmapala (Hufa), only establishes eight consciousnesses and does not posit a ninth. He refutes Bhavaviveka by saying: "In your logical argument (proving the absence of the eighth), there is the flaw of contradicting one's own scriptures, because the \*Lankavatara Sutra\* and other sutras clearly teach the eighth consciousness, Alaya." Question: If so, how do texts like the \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra\* (\*Mahaprajnaparamita Sutra\*) only speak of six consciousnesses? Dharmapala resolves this, as explained in the fifth volume of the \*Compilation of Consciousness-Only\* (\*Cheng Weishi Lun\*). He says: "When some sutras speak of six consciousnesses, it should be understood that they are taught in a way that conforms to the disciples' capacities (according to the expedient truth), or they speak of six based on the six sense organs as the supporting conditions. But in reality, the eight consciousnesses are distinct in nature." Question: But doesn't Nagarjuna only establish six? Explanation: In truth, Nagarjuna and others believed in the existence of the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, as they were great Bodhisattvas at the highest level (the ground of great joy). In their treatises, they spoke of six consciousnesses in order to convey the meaning of the \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra\* and similar texts. Therefore, there is no contradiction. Critique of Paramartha's doctrine of nine consciousnesses: Among the nine, the last three (the seventh, eighth, and ninth) each have numerous flaws. - Regarding the seventh: It has two faults. First, \*\*Adana\*\* is actually another name for the eighth consciousness, not the seventh. Thus, sutras and treatises say the eighth consciousness is called Adana. This contradicts his claim. Second, saying that it only involves the afflictive hindrance (klesha-avarana) contradicts the sutras that say the defiled mental consciousness (manas) persists even after the eighth ground (bhummi) of a Bodhisattva. Or, saying it never leads to Buddhahood contradicts the \*Ornament of Mahayana Sutra\* (\*Mahayana-sutralamkara\*), which speaks of transforming the eight consciousnesses into four wisdoms. - Regarding the eighth consciousness: Saying it can give rise to cognitive hindrances (dharma-avarana) or that it perceives the eighteen elements is both unreasonable. Among the mental factors, ignorance (avidya) and its associated states—how can these coexist with the cognitive hindrance? - Moreover, in the newly translated \*Distinguishing the Middle from the Extremes\*, the verse says:
識生變似義， 有情我及了， 此境實非有。境無故識無。
> Consciousness arises and transforms, appearing as objects, As living beings, as self, and as awareness— Yet these objects are not ultimately real. When the object is absent, consciousness itself is no more.
長行釋云：論云：變似義者，謂似色等諸境性現。變似有情者，謂似自他身五根性現。變似我者，謂染末那與我癡等恒相應故。變似了者，謂餘六識了相麤故。具說如彼，故知第八不緣心等。若廣分別，如成唯識也。又真諦云：阿摩羅識反照自體，無教可憑，復違如來功德莊嚴經。彼云：如來無垢識，是淨無漏界，解脫一切障，圓鏡智相應。准經可知。無垢識者，即是淨分第八識也。又決定藏論即是瑜伽，彼論本無九識品也。
> The prose commentary explains: The treatise says, "What appears as objects refers to the manifestation of forms and other sensory qualities. What appears as sentient beings refers to the manifestation of the five sense faculties of oneself and others. What appears as a self refers to the defiled manas, which is constantly associated with self-delusion and similar mental factors. What appears as understanding refers to the other six consciousnesses, which perceive their objects in a coarse manner." As fully detailed in that text, it is understood that the eighth consciousness does not take the mind or mental factors as its object. For a more detailed analysis, see the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Demonstration of Consciousness Only). Furthermore, Paramārtha speaks of an \*amala consciousness\* that reflects upon itself. However, there is no scriptural support for this view, and it contradicts the \*Sūtra of the Adornments of the Buddha's Merits\*. That sūtra states: "The Tathāgata's immaculate consciousness is the pure, undefiled realm, free from all obstructions, in accord with the perfect mirror wisdom." Based on this scripture, it is clear that the "immaculate consciousness" refers simply to the pure aspect of the eighth consciousness. Moreover, the \*Definitive Treasury Treatise\* is in fact the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, and that treatise contains no chapter on nine consciousnesses.
言釋名者，先通後別。言八識者，是其通名。八謂標數，識即了別。通性及相，簡唯六識，故言八識，即六釋中帶數釋也。言名別者，眼等六識皆依主釋，謂依眼之識名為眼識，乃至依意之識名為意識。第七末那，此云意，如成唯識，恒審思勝餘識故。若依此釋，意即識故，名為意識，是持業釋。八阿賴耶，此云藏識，具有能藏、所藏、執藏義故。此即如次果於因中藏、因於果中藏、境於執中藏，具如成唯識論及攝大乘。此亦持業，藏即識故。
言體性者，且依三義：一約三性，二約三科，三依法數。若依三性分別，八識一一此通三性，攝妄皈真皆真如故，託因緣起皆名依他，隨執情有是所執性。故唯識第九卷云：謂唯識性略有二種：一者虗妄，謂遍計所執；二者真實，謂圓成實。復有二性：一者世俗，謂依他起；二者勝義，謂圓成實。三科出體，五蘊門中八識皆用識蘊為體，十二處中皆意處攝，皆有無間滅依義故。十八界中前五種識，一一皆用自識界及意界一分為體；第六、七、八三識，一一皆用意識及意界少分以為自性。
辨所依者，八識所依各有三種：一、因緣依，謂能親生八識種子。故成唯識第四卷云：一、因緣依，謂自種子，諸有為法皆託此依，離自因緣必不生故。二、開導依，謂前念滅，自類八識各望後念為開導依。故唯識云：三、等無間緣依，謂前滅意，諸心、心所皆託此依，離開導根必不轉故。三、俱有依，然俱有依諸識不同。眼等五識各有四依：一、同境根，謂眼等五根各望自識；二、分別根，謂五識俱同緣意識；三、染淨根，謂第七末那；四、根本依，謂第八識。故唯識云：由此五識俱有所依定有四種，謂五色根、六、七、八識，隨𨷂一種必不轉故，同境、分別、染淨、根本所依別故。第六意識俱有所依唯有二種，故唯識云：第六意識俱有所依唯有二種，謂七、八識，隨𨷂一種必不轉故。第七末那俱有所依唯有一種，故唯識云：第七意識俱有所依但有一種，謂第八識，藏識若無必不轉故。第八賴耶俱有所依亦唯一種，故唯識云：阿賴耶識俱有所依亦但一種，謂第七識，彼識若無定不轉故。論說：藏識恒與末那俱時轉故。解云：八識所依，有漏、無漏無有差別。
顯所緣者，有其四種：一、五識所緣，二、意識所緣，三、末那所緣，四、阿賴耶境。一一門中，先辨有漏，後顯無漏。有漏五識，於五境中各唯緣一，謂眼識緣色，乃至身識緣觸唯是現量。若無漏位，依成唯識論第十卷，有兩師義，故彼云：成所作智相應心品，有義但緣五種現境，莊嚴論說：如來五根，一一皆於五境故轉。有義亦能通緣三世諸法，佛地論說：成所作智起三業諸變化事，決擇有情心行差別，領受去、來、現在等義亦唯現量，不通真智。有漏意識遍緣十八界，諸論皆同通量、非量，或現、或比。若已轉依，亦遍緣諸法，故唯識云：妙觀察智相應心品，緣一切法自相、共相皆無障礙唯是現量，通真、俗智。有漏第七，唯緣第八賴耶見分執為我法，諸論悉同唯是非量。無漏末那，依唯識論，三釋不同，故彼云：平等性智相應心品，有義但緣第八淨識，如染末那緣藏識故。有義但緣真如為境，緣一切法平等性故。有義遍緣真、俗為境，佛地經說：平等性智證得十種平等性故。莊嚴論說：緣諸有情自他平等，隨他勝解示現無邊佛影像故唯是現量，通真俗智。有漏賴耶所緣境，諸論不同。若依瑜伽五十一，唯說二種，故彼云：謂若略說阿賴耶識，由於二種所緣境轉：一、由了別內執受故，二、由了別外無分別器相故。若依成唯識第二卷，前文緣三種境，謂外器世間有漏種子及有根身。若依唯識第二，後文緣四種境，前三之外更加法處實色，故彼云：略說此識所變境者，謂有漏種十有色處及隨法處所現實色唯是現量。問：何故此識不緣心等？解云：如唯識第二卷云：異熟識變必有實用，若變心等便無實用，相分心等不能緣故。變無為等亦無實用，故異熟識不緣心等。無漏第八，依唯識論第十，有兩師義，故彼云：大圓鏡智相應心品，有義但緣真如為境，是無分別，非後得智，行相所緣不可知故。有義此品緣一切法，莊嚴論說：大圓鏡智於一切境不愚迷故。佛地經說：如來智鏡，諸處境識眾像現故。又此決定緣無漏種及身土等諸影像故亦唯現量，通真俗智。八識緣假實實境、有為無為、三世等別，廣如唯識論等說。
言心所相應者，依唯識論，護法正義於五十一心所法中，有漏五識各與三十四心所相應，謂遍行五、別境五，善有十一；根本惑三，謂貪、瞋、痴；隨惑有十，謂中二、大八。然善十一中有兩師義，故唯識第六云：有義，五識唯有十種，自性散亂無輕安故。有義，五識亦有輕安，定所引善者亦有調暢故，成所作智俱必有輕安故。無餘心所，如論廣說。有漏意識與五十一心所相應，諸論共同，亦無異義。有漏末那，護法正義唯與十八心所相應，故成唯識第四云：然此意俱心所十八，謂九法、八隨煩惱并別境中。慧解云：前九法者，謂遍行五及四煩惱。四煩惱者，謂我知、我見、我慢、我愛。無別心法，義如論說。有漏賴耶唯與五種遍行相應，故論頌云：觸、作意、受、想、思相應。無餘心所，具如論說。無漏八識皆二十一心所相應，謂遍行五、別境五，善有十一。於中別者，妙觀察智因位亦得尋、伺相應，於藥、病等未自在故。若至佛果，尋、伺即無，無思成事故。若廣分別，具如諸論。心、意、識義，具如別章。
就釋文中，文別有二：初明心、意、識秘密之義；後廣慧！如是下，辨秘密善巧，答前兩問。前中有二：初明第八眾名差別；後廣慧！阿陀那識下，明諸識俱轉差別。前中有四：一、釋種子識；二、辨阿陀那；三、明阿賴耶；四、顯心名。此即第一、釋一切種子識。一切種子即三習氣。此中意說由第八識攝持三種習氣結生相續，故成唯識第八卷云：復次，生死相續由諸習氣。然諸習氣總有三種：一、名言習氣；二、我執習氣；三、有支習氣。其種子識自有二種：一、識所持種，名種子識；二、能持種識，名為種識。雖有二種，今此正明能持種識身分生時執持所依及種子故。彼所持種即三習氣，故今略辨三種習氣。然三習氣略以四門分別：一、釋名字；二、出體性；三、生果差別；四、四緣分別。
第一釋名，有通有別。三習氣者，是其通名。三是標數。言習氣者，說名言等，名之為習。第八中種習之氣分，故名習氣，即六釋中帶數釋也。言別名者，如成唯識。然諸習氣總有三種：一名言習氣，謂有為法各別親種。名言有二：一表義名言，即能詮義音聲差別；二顯境名言，即能了境心心所法如其次第，舊云言說名、思惟名也。二我執習氣，謂虗妄執我我所種。我執有二：一俱生我執，即脩所斷我我所執；二分別我執，即見所斷我我所執。隨二我執所熏成種，令有情等自他差別。三有支習氣，謂招三界異熟業種。有支有二種：一有漏善，即是能招可愛果種；二諸不善，即是能招非愛果報。解云：三習氣相，如論應知。三種習氣皆依主釋，謂名言習之氣種子故，乃至有支習之氣種子故。
言出體者，如前所說，隨二名言所熏種子為名言習氣，二種我見所熏成種為我見習氣，乃至由善惡業所熏種子為有支習氣。種現分別，唯種非現。三果出體名言習氣，五蘊門中一分種子五蘊以為自性，除無漏種，種隨所生同蘊攝故。處界門中一分十二處種、十八界種以為自性，除無漏種，准蘊應知。我見習氣，五蘊門中行蘊一分所攝，處界門中法處法界少分為體。有支習氣，五蘊門中色行二蘊以身語業是色蘊故，意思業種行蘊攝故。處界門中色處聲處法處、色界聲界法界一分為體。法數出體名言習氣，百法門中通用百法種子為體，影像百法皆熏種故。我見習氣，用別境中慧及十煩惱中薩迦耶見以為自性。有支習氣，十一色中色聲二法及心所中思為自性，意思業故。
言出果者，有其二義：一、依成唯識，通約諸法以明生果；二、依攝論，就十一識以辨生果。言通約諸法以明生果者，名言習氣通生百法而差別者，九十四法本質及影皆名言生，六種無為本影不同。本質六種不從種生，圓成無為無生義故；影像六種從名言起，依他無為據實有為託因生故。故唯識論云：名言習氣謂有為法各別親種。問：有為法中實法有體，可言種生；不相應等既無實體，如何因起？解云：據實，假法不從種生。故成唯識論第二卷云：假法如無，非因緣故。解云：假法既非因緣，義唯假法亦非所生。然以假從實，說為假種從因緣生。故唯識論第二卷云：名、相、分別三種習氣，我見習氣能生自他身中百法差別，有支習氣能生百法善惡趣別。無為假法，准前應思。言就十一識辨生果者，如攝大乘論第四卷云：此中若身、身者、受者識、彼所受識、彼能受識、世識、數識、處識、言說識，此由名言熏習種子；若自他差別識，此由我見熏習種子；若善趣、惡趣、死生識，此由有分熏習種子。廣如彼釋。
言四緣分別者，名言習氣是正因緣，餘二習氣增上緣故。成唯識第八卷云：隨二名言所熏成種，作有為法各別因緣。又彼復云：應知我執有支習氣於差別果是增上緣。若廣分別，成唯識論第八：疏：就種識中，文別有二：初約趣生，略明身分生起；後於中下，依種子識，廣辨受生差別。此即初也。
言六趣者，如下經說：那落迦、傍生、餓鬼、天、阿素洛、人。然此六趣，諸宗不同。依薩婆多宗，唯立五趣。故大婆娑第一百七十二云：如契經說五趣，謂那落迦、傍生、餓鬼、人、天。又云：謂有餘部立阿素洛為第六趣。彼不應作是說，契經唯說有五趣故。廣說如彼。問：若爾，阿素洛何趣所攝？答：婆沙有二說：一云天趣，評家正義鬼趣所攝。正理二十一、俱舍第八大同婆沙。依經部宗，唯立五趣。故成實論第十四云：業有六種，謂五趣業及不定業。今依大乘，有處唯五，如佛地經及維摩等。問：若爾，阿素洛何趣所攝？答：依佛地經第六卷云：諸阿素落種類不定，或天、或鬼、或復傍生。故不別說。有處說六，如即此經及法華經等。或有處說或五、或六。若依瑜伽，立五為正。故第四云：又諸非天，當知天趣所攝。然由意思多、懷詐約、諂誑多故，不如諸天為淨法器。由此因緣，有諸經中說為別趣，實是天趣。又第二云：如是安立世界成已，於中五趣可得，謂那落伽、傍生、餓鬼、人、天。依智度論，立六為正。故第三十云：又摩訶衍中法華經說：有六趣眾生。觀諸義意，應有六道。復次分別善惡，故有六道。善有上中下，故有三善道：天、人、阿脩羅。惡有上中下，故有地獄、畜生、餓鬼道。廣說如彼。又第十云：佛不分明說有五道。說五道者，是一切有部僧所說。婆嗟弗姡路部僧說有六道。復次應有六道。何以故？三惡道一向是罪處。若福多罪少，是名阿脩羅。生處應別，以是故應言六趣。問：琰摩王何趣所攝？答：依大婆沙，鬼趣所攝。故彼一百七十二云：施設論說：如今時鬼世界，王名琰摩。又云：贍部洲下五百踰繕那有琰摩王界，是一切鬼本所住處，從彼流轉亦在餘處。若依瑜伽，地獄趣攝。故第二云：隨一有情由感雜染增上業生，在那落迦中作靜息王。言卵、胎、濕、化生者，即是四生。瑜伽第二云：云何卵生？謂諸有情破㲉而出。彼復云何？如鵝、鴈、孔、鸚鵡、舍利鳥等。云何胎生？謂諸有情胎所纏裹，部胎而出。彼復云何？如象、馬、牛、驢等。云何濕生？謂諸有情隨因一種濕氣而生。彼復云何？如虫、蝎、飛蛾等。云何化生？謂諸有情業增上故，具足六處而生，或復不具。彼復云何？如天、那落迦全及人、鬼、傍生一分。若廣分別，如毗曇第八、顯宗十二、俱舍第八、順正理二十二、婆沙一百二十。問：前說六趣，何故復說四種生耶？答：俱舍第八云：施設足論作如是說：四生攝五趣，非五攝四生。不攝者何？所謂中有。由是道理，天等六趣攝生不盡，故復重說卵等四生。問：若爾，何故更說六趣？答：欲顯善惡受生差別，故說六趣。問：若爾，何故不說界耶？答：界通非情，故此不說。真諦三藏亦同此意。六趣、四生，義如別章。然釋此文有其兩解：一云：於六趣生死彼彼有情者，明所捨身；墮彼彼有情眾中者，辨所受身。所受身中自有二類：一、六趣身，二、四生身。若依此釋，身分生起通前二類。一云：所受身者皆是四生，墮彼彼有情眾中是其總因。或有卵生等者，別顯四生。故金剛仙論云：卵生等者，受生差別；有色等者，麤細差別。若依此說，身分生起依四生說。
於中最初一切種子心識成熟，展轉和合增長廣大。
釋曰：自下第二約種子識廣辨受生差別。於中有二：初明受生分位差別，復明種依二執受。此即初也。文有三節：初明種識成熟，次展轉和合，三增長廣大。
言於中最初一切種子心識成熟者，此明種識成熟。謂於此趣生受生位中，最初結生一切種子心識成熟。初結生時，種識成熟，成羯羅監，名為結生。故瑜伽論第一卷云：爾時父母貪愛俱極，最後決定各出一滴濃厚精血，二滴和合住母胎中，合為一段。猶如熟乳凝結之時，當於此處一切種子異熟所攝執受所依阿賴耶識和合依託。謂此出濃厚精血成合一段，與顛倒緣中有俱滅同時。即由一切種子識功能力故，有餘微細根及大種和合而生，及餘有根同分精血和合轉生。於此時中說識已住結生續，即此名為羯羅藍位。此羯羅藍中有諸根大種，唯與身根及根所依處大種俱生。即由此身根俱生諸根大種力故，眼等諸根次第當生。又由此身根俱生根所依處大種力故，諸根依處次第當生。由彼諸根及所依處具足生故，名得圓滿依止成熟。乃至彼云：羯羅藍識最初託處，即名肉心。如是識此處最初託，即從此處最後捨依。俱舍論第九云：有言精血即成根依，謂前無根中有俱滅，後有根者無間續生。又云：有餘師云：別生大種，如依葉糞別有虫生。瑜伽所說同初師釋。若依順正理二十四取，後說為正，廣如彼說。
言展轉和合者，此有兩釋。一云：初受生之時，以識為緣，根、大種等展轉和合。故瑜伽第一卷云：即由一切種子識功能力故，有餘微細根及大種和合而生等。一云：識與羯羅藍展轉和合。故攝大乘論云：於母胎中，識、羯羅藍更相和合。無性釋論第三云：異熟與其赤白同一安危。世親釋論，意同無性。梁朝攝論第三云：論云：是識託柯羅邏，於母胎中變合受生。釋曰：是識即是意識，於一時中與柯羅邏相應，故言託柯羅邏。此果報識異前染汙識，故言變。由宿業功能起風，和合赤白，令與識同，言合。即名此為受生。
言增長廣大者，亦有兩釋：一云：由前展轉和合力故，羯羅藍等漸增長位，根大種等增長廣大。一云：由和合故，名色漸漸增長廣大。故瑜伽第二云：又羯羅藍漸增長時，名之與色平等增長俱漸廣大，如是增長乃至依止圓滿。應知此中由地界故，依止造色漸漸增廣；由水界攝持故；由火界成熟故，令其堅梗；由無閏故；由風界故，分別支節各安其所。若分位者，有二種位：一者胎藏八位，二者通相八位。胎藏八位，謂羯羅藍等。故雜集第六云：自此已後根漸生長，如緣起說。故列頌云：
最初羯羅藍， 次生遏部曇， 從此生閉尸，閉尸生鍵南， 次鉢羅賖佉， 後髮毛爪等，及色根形相， 漸漸而生長。
> First comes the embryo's initial form, Then the fetal membrane begins to form, From that, the flesh-like mass appears, Then the solid lump takes shape, Next the limbs start to develop, After that, hair, nails, and the like, Along with the senses and bodily features, Gradually all grow and mature.
又瑜伽第二云：復次此胎藏八位差別。何等為八？謂羯羅藍位、遏部曇位、閉尸位、鍵南位、鉢羅賖佉位、髮毛爪位、根位、形位。若已結凝箭內稀，名羯羅藍。若表裏如酪未至肉位，名遏部曇。若已成肉仍極柔煗，名閉尸。若已堅厚稍勘摩觸，名為鍵南。即此肉團增長支分相現，名鉢羅賖佉。從此以後髮毛爪現，即名此位。從此以後眼等生，名為根位。從此以後彼所依處分別顯現，名為形位。大唐三藏云：羯羅藍，此云和合。頞部曇，此云胞。閏尸，此云凝血。鍵南，此云堅厚。鉢羅奢佉，此云支分。鉢羅，此云分。奢佉，此云支。真諦三藏云：本識與父母遺體和合，名為受生。於胎藏中略有五位：一者柯羅邏，翻為凝滑，識與父母精血和合如薄酪，即執為根，爾時名為初受生。二者第二七日名頞呼陀，翻為胎結，始有一胎結在凝滑中，如凝蘇在白酪乳中。三者第三七日名閉尸，翻為肉團，男則上闊下狹、女則下闊上狹，肉猶少軟。四者第四七日名伽訶那，翻為堅實，爾時肉團始堅強。五者第五七日名彼羅捨佉，翻為枝枝，爾時始有頭足手脚等相貌，方有業風吹破開九孔生大苦受，次後以去則有觔肉骨髮爪等。梁攝論疏第五卷說。
> Also, the Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra states in its second chapter: Furthermore, this embryo develops through eight distinct stages. What are these eight? They are: the coagulation stage, the vesicle stage, the flesh stage, the firm stage, the limb stage, the hair-and-nail stage, the sense-organ stage, and the bodily-form stage. When the fluid has congealed but remains somewhat viscous internally, it is called the coagulation stage. When it becomes uniform like curds, yet is not fully flesh, it is called the vesicle stage. When flesh has formed but is still extremely soft and warm, it is called the flesh stage. When it has become firm and thick, slightly able to withstand touching, it is called the firm stage. When this same fleshy mass has grown and its limbs begin to appear, it is called the limb stage. From this point onward, hair, body hair, and nails appear, which characterizes this stage. Next, the eyes and other sense organs develop, known as the sense-organ stage. Following this, the bodily features supported by these organs become clearly distinguished, termed the bodily-form stage. The great Tang monk Xuanzang comments: "Kelaluan (kalala) means 'union.' Ebutan (arbuda) means 'vesicle.' Runshi (pesi) means 'coagulated blood.' Jiannan (ghana) means 'firm and thick.' Boluosheqiu (prasakha) means 'limbs.' Boluo (prasha) means 'division,' and sheqiu (sakha) means 'limb.'" The great master Zhendi explains: "The fundamental consciousness unites with the parents' physical remains, which is termed conception. Within the womb, there are generally five stages: First, the kalala stage, translated as 'coagulated fluid,' where consciousness unites with the parents' essence and blood, like thin curds, and this is grasped as the root \[of the body\]; at this time, it is called initial conception. Second, by the second week, it is called the arbuda stage, translated as 'embryonic knot,' where an embryo begins to form within the coagulated fluid, like cream within clotted milk. Third, by the third week, it is called the pesi stage, translated as 'flesh ball'; for males, it is wider at the top and narrower at the bottom, while for females, it is wider at the bottom and narrower at the top, and the flesh is still thin and soft. Fourth, by the fourth week, it is called the ghana stage, translated as 'solidified mass'; at this time, the flesh ball begins to harden. Fifth, by the fifth week, it is called the prasakha stage, translated as 'branches and limbs'; at this point, the head, feet, hands, and other features begin to take shape, and it is then that karmic winds blow, breaking open the nine orifices, giving rise to great suffering. From this point onward, sinews, flesh, bones, hair, and nails develop." This is according to the Commentary on the Yogācārabhūmi by Liang (Volume 5).
問：羯羅藍等八位，經幾許時方得圓滿？答：如瑜伽論第二卷說。彼云：又於胎中經三十八七日，此之胎藏一切支分皆悉具足。從此以後復經四日方乃出生。如薄伽梵於入胎經廣說。此說極滿足者，或經九月，或復過此。若經八月，此名圓滿，非極圓滿。若經七月六月，不名圓滿，或復缺減。五王經云：何謂生苦？人死之時，不知精神趣向何道，未得生處，普受中陰之形。至其三七日中，父母和合，便來受胎。一七日如薄酪，二七日如稠酪，三七日如凝蘇，四七日如肉團。五皰成熟，巧風入腹，吹其身體，六情開張。在胎中生藏之下，熟藏之上。母噉一杯熱食，灌其身體，如入鑊湯。母飲一杯冷水，亦如寒氷切身。母飽之時，迫迄身體，痛不可言。母饑之時，腹中了𠄏，亦如倒懸，受苦無量。至月滿欲生之時，頭向產門，劇如兩石挾山。欲生之時，母危父怖，生墮草上，身體細軟，草觸其身，如履刀劒。忽然失聲大呼，此是大苦。又大集經二十五云：云何名為觀於生苦？從業因緣，父母和合，初受意識歌羅羅時，其身猶如亭歷子許，是時未有入出氣息。乃至云：歌羅羅時住六七日，六七日轉名頞浮陀，是時形色猶如小〔來〕。住七七日轉名伽那，是時形色如胡桃㲉。住八七日轉名閉尸，形色猶頻婆羅菓，是時身邊有五胞出，謂頭手脚。十三七日始有腹相。二十七日男女根別。二十一七日始生骨節。乃至三十六七日其身具足血肉毛根。三十八七日具足身枝。四日夜住在胎中臰穢之處。爾時還憶本生之事，憶己愁苦，作是念言：若我出胎，當脩善法，願後更莫生如是處。脩不放逸，遠離受生。始出母胎，爾時舉身受迫迮苦。外風觸手，身亦復受苦。身初至地，以水摩洗，復受大苦，猶如地獄。爾時還失憶宿命事。生已復有老病死，隨逐不捨。具說如彼。若廣分別，如解脫道論第七卷及入胎經說。
> Question: How long does it take for the eight stages, such as the first stage of conception, to be fully completed? Answer: As stated in the second volume of the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\*, it says: Within the womb, after thirty-eight weeks, all the parts of the embryo are fully developed. Following that, after another four days, birth occurs. This is explained in detail in the \*Garbhāvakrānti Sūtra\* spoken by the Bhagavān. This refers to the most complete term, which may be nine months or slightly longer. If it is eight months, it is called complete but not utterly complete. If it is seven or six months, it is not called complete, and may even be deficient. According to the \*Five Kings Sūtra\*: What is the suffering of birth? When a person dies, the consciousness does not know which path it will take. Before finding a place of rebirth, it takes on the form of the intermediate state. By the twenty-first day, when the parents unite, it comes to take rebirth. In the first seven days, it is like thin curds; in the second seven days, like thick curds; in the third seven days, like condensed butter; in the fourth seven days, like a flesh ball. When the five protrusions mature, the wind of karma enters the womb, blowing on the body, opening the six sense faculties. In the womb, it lies below the stomach and above the intestines. When the mother drinks a cup of hot food, it pours over its body like entering boiling water. When the mother drinks a cup of cold water, it is like ice touching the body. When the mother is full, the body is squeezed, causing unbearable pain. When the mother is hungry, the belly feels hollow, like being hung upside down, suffering immeasurably. When the month is full and birth is about to occur, the head faces the birth canal, as painful as two stones crushing a mountain. At the moment of birth, the mother is in danger and the father is terrified. When born and dropped on grass, the body is soft and delicate, and the grass touching it feels like treading on swords and blades. Suddenly it cries out loudly—this is great suffering. Also, the \*Mahāsaṃnipāta Sūtra\*, chapter twenty-five, says: What is meant by contemplating the suffering of birth? Through the causes of karma and the union of parents, when the consciousness first enters the embryo, the body is like a mustard seed, at which time there is no inhalation or exhalation. Furthermore: In the first stage, it remains for six or seven days; after six or seven days, it transforms into the second stage, at which time its shape and color are like a small fruit. Remaining for seven seven-day periods, it transforms into the third stage, at which time its shape is like a walnut shell. Remaining for eight seven-day periods, it transforms into the fourth stage, at which time its shape is like a wood-apple fruit. At this time, five protrusions appear on the body—the head, hands, and feet. By the thirteenth seven-day period, the abdomen takes shape. By the twenty-seventh seven-day period, male and female organs differentiate. By the twenty-first seven-day period, bones and joints begin to form. Until the thirty-sixth seven-day period, the body is complete with flesh, blood, hair, and roots. At the thirty-eighth seven-day period, the limbs are complete. For four days and nights, it remains in the foul, impure place of the womb. At that time, it recalls its past lives, and remembering them, feels sorrow, thinking: If I am born, I will cultivate good practices, wishing not to be born in such a place again. I will practice diligence and avoid rebirth. As it first emerges from the mother's womb, at that moment the whole body experiences the suffering of being squeezed. When external wind touches the hands, the body also suffers. When the body first touches the ground and is washed with water, it suffers greatly, like in hell. At that time, it forgets its past lives. After birth, aging, sickness, and death follow without cease. This is explained in detail there. For a more detailed explanation, see the seventh volume of the \*Vimuttimagga\* and the \*Garbhāvakrānti Sūtra\*.
通相八位者，如瑜伽第二云：云何八位？謂處胎位、出生位、嬰孩位、童子位、少年位、中年位、老年位、耄熟位。處胎位者，謂羯羅藍等。出生位者，謂從此後乃至耄熟。嬰孩位者，謂乃至未能遊行嬉戲。童子位者，謂能為彼事。少年位者，謂能受用欲塵乃至三十。中年位者，謂從此位乃至五十。老年位者，謂從此位乃至七十。從此已上名耄熟位。
> Regarding the eight universal stages of life, as stated in the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\*, Chapter Two: What are the eight stages? They are the embryonic stage, the newborn stage, the infancy stage, the childhood stage, the youth stage, the middle age stage, the old age stage, and the advanced old age stage. The embryonic stage refers to the period from conception, such as the initial cell formation, onward. The newborn stage begins after birth and continues through the subsequent stages up to advanced old age. The infancy stage spans the period until the child can walk and play. The childhood stage is when one is capable of performing tasks. The youth stage is the time of enjoying sensual pleasures, lasting up to around age thirty. The middle age stage extends from that point to around fifty. The old age stage extends from then to around seventy. Beyond this is known as the advanced old age stage.
依二執受。
> Relying on the two kinds of grasping and holding.
釋曰：第二種識依二執受，於中有三：初標章舉數，次依數列名，後約界分別。此即初也。上來已辨根等依識生起增長，此下明識依色根等。
> Explanation: The second type of consciousness relies on two kinds of support, within which there are three parts: first, outlining the topic and its numbers; second, listing the names according to the numbers; and third, distinguishing them by realms. This is the first part. Above, we have already explained how the sense bases and so forth arise and grow based on consciousness. The following clarifies how consciousness depends on the physical sense bases and so on.
一者、有色諸根及所依執受二相，名分別言說戲論習氣執受。
釋曰：此即第二依數列名。謂受生位有異熟識，執受二種為所緣境：一者執受五根及彼所依，色香味觸為所依止；二者執相名分別三法習氣為所緣境，除無漏種，非所緣故。此所攝受皆是所緣。是故瑜伽五十一云：謂若略說阿賴耶識，由於二種所緣境轉：一由了別內執受故、二由了外無分別器相故。了別內執受者，謂能了別遍計所執自性妄執習氣，及諸色根根所依處。此於有色界，若在無色，唯習氣執受了別。了別外無分別器相者，謂能了別依止緣內執受阿賴耶識故，於一切時無有間斷器世間相。譬如燈焰生時，內執膏炷外發光明。如是阿賴耶識緣內執受、緣外器相，生起道理應知亦爾。又成唯識第二卷云：賴耶所緣有其三種：一器世間、二有漏種、三有根身。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，行相杖之而得起故。廣說如彼。此中所說執受義者，是能執受執受五根及彼所依，令不損壞為自所依，攝受種子為自所有，亦名所依。然此執受，諸教不同。俱舍第二云：十八界中，九不受餘二。彼約一義釋執受故，彼云有執受。此言何義？心心所法共所執持攝為依處，名為執受，損益展轉更相隨故，乃至廣說。正理第四有三師釋：一同俱舍。正理釋云：若爾，色等即應一向名無執受，心心所法不依彼故，非根性故。不爾，色等若不離根，雖非所依，而是心等之所親附，故無有失。二毗婆沙師說：若諸色法逼迫斷壞，便能生苦。與此相違，即能生樂，是己身攝，名有執受。三有餘師說：若諸有情執為自體，一切處時方便防護，乃至廣說。若爾，應違契經所說。故契經云：若於此處識所執藏，識所隨攝，名有執受。雖有是說，而不相違。有執受法略有二種：一者有愛，乃有身見執為己有，名有執受，若淨智生即便斷滅。二者為因，能生苦樂，至般涅槃隨轉不捨。是為經論各據一義。解云：經約有愛、身見執為己有，名有執受。論有三釋：初師意說執為依處，次師意說能生苦樂，後師意說執為自體，並符本論己身所攝名有執受，即當為因生苦樂義。然第二師唯生苦樂，初後兩師兼取餘義。經論合說，總有四釋，具說如彼。若依毗婆沙第一百四十八，執受納息，六教不同，恐繁不述。今依大乘，三說不同。或有唯約生苦樂故，名為執受。故集論云：五色界全，四界一分，名有執受。即既不說聲，故知唯約生苦樂故，名執受也。或有唯約攝為自體，名有執受。如瑜伽五十一等云：若無第八，依止執受不可得故。又五十六復云：五執非執受，所餘一向非執受。准此等文，唯約攝為自體明執受也。或有通約二義以明執受。如五十三云：識執不執者，若識依執，名執受色。此復云何？謂識所託安危事同，和合生長。又此為依，能生諸受。與此相違，非執受攝。又瑜伽論第一百云：執受法者，謂色法為心心所執持。由託彼故，心心所轉安危事同。同安危者，由心心所住持力故，其色不斷不壞不爛。即由如是所執受色，或棄損，或時攝益，其心心所亦隨損益。與此相違，名非執受。今此經中說執受者，且依二義：一者賴耶執根依處為自所依，二者執持種子為自所攝。具如諸論。
> The commentary explains: This is the second section, listing the objects of consciousness by category. During the process of rebirth, the ripening consciousness takes two kinds of objects as its focus: First, it grasps and maintains the five sense faculties and their supporting bases—forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile sensations—which serve as the foundation for those faculties. Second, it takes as its object the habitual imprints of the three dharmas—signs, names, and conceptual discrimination—except for the seed of liberation, which is not included as an object. Everything that is thus held and received becomes an object of consciousness. This is why the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 51) states: "In brief, the ālayavijñāna operates through two kinds of objects: one is the discernment of inner grasping and sustaining; the other is the discernment of the external, undifferentiated appearance of the material world. The discernment of inner grasping refers to discerning the habitual imprints of attachment to falsely imagined intrinsic nature, as well as the material sense faculties and their bases. This applies in the realm of form; in the formless realm, only the habitual imprints are discerned and grasped. The discernment of the external, undifferentiated world appearance refers to discerning, without interruption at all times, the appearance of the material world, based on the inner grasping and sustaining of the ālayavijñāna. Just as a lamp flame, when it arises, grasps the wick and oil within while emitting light outward, so too should the ālayavijñāna be understood: it grasps inner objects and perceives external appearances in its arising." Furthermore, the \*Compilation of Consciousness Only\* (Volume 2) says: "The ālayavijñāna has three kinds of objects: first, the material world; second, contaminated seeds; third, the physical body with its faculties. Due to the power of causes and conditions, when the ālayavijñāna’s own essence arises, internally it transforms into seeds and the physical body with faculties, and externally it transforms into the material world. What it transforms becomes its own object, and its mode of operation relies on this as a support." A detailed explanation follows in that text. Now, regarding the meaning of "grasping and sustaining" (upādāna): It refers to the consciousness that grasps and sustains the five sense faculties and their supporting bases, keeping them from being damaged, and that holds the seeds as its own possession. This is also called the "basis." However, different texts explain this concept differently. The \*Abhidharmakośa\* (Chapter 2) says: "Among the eighteen elements, nine are subject to grasping, and the rest are not." That text defines grasping according to one principle. It says: "What is meant by 'grasped'? It is that which the mind and mental factors jointly hold and support as their basis. It is called 'grasped' because harm and benefit mutually follow from it." Further details are given. The \*Nyāyānusāra\* (Chapter 4) offers three interpretations: 1. The first follows the \*Abhidharmakośa\*. Its explanation says: "If so, then forms and so forth would always be called 'ungrasped,' because the mind and mental factors do not depend on them, and they are not of the nature of faculties." But this is not so: forms and so forth, if not separate from the faculties, though they are not the direct support, are still intimately associated with the mind, so there is no fault. 2. The second, from the Vibhāṣā masters, says: "When material dharmas are pressured and broken, they produce suffering. What is opposite to this—producing pleasure—and is included in one’s own body, is called 'grasped.'" 3. The third, from other masters, says: "When sentient beings grasp something as their own body and protect it with effort in all places and times, it is called 'grasped.'" Further details follow. But if this were so, it would contradict the sūtras. For the sūtra says: "Wherever consciousness stores and follows, there it is called 'grasped.'" Although this is said, it is not contradictory. "Grasped" dharmas are of two kinds: First, those with craving, where the view of self grasps them as one’s own—called "grasped"—which ceases upon the arising of pure wisdom. Second, that which, as a cause, produces pleasure and suffering and continues without abandonment until nirvāṇa. Thus, the sūtras and treatises each rely on a different meaning. Explanation: The sūtra speaks of "grasped" in terms of craving and the view of self. The treatises offer three interpretations: the first refers to being a basis; the second to producing pleasure and suffering; the third to grasping as one’s own body. All align with the original treatise’s idea that what is included in one’s own body is "grasped," which corresponds to the meaning of producing pleasure and suffering as a cause. However, the second interpretation only addresses pleasure and suffering, while the first and third also incorporate other meanings. Combining the sūtra and treatises, there are four interpretations in total, as detailed therein. According to the \*Vibhāṣā\* (Chapter 148), there are six different teachings on grasping, which we omit here for brevity. Now, in the Mahāyāna, there are three differing views: 1. Some define "grasping" solely as the production of pleasure and suffering. Thus, the \*Collection of Abhidharma\* says: "The five material realms in full, and one portion of the four realms, are called 'grasped.'" Since sound is not mentioned, it is understood that "grasping" is defined only in terms of producing pleasure and suffering. 2. Others define "grasping" solely as taking something as one’s own body. As the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 51) says: "Without the eighth consciousness, the basis and grasping would be impossible." And (Chapter 56) says: "The five grasped \[faculties\] are not themselves 'grasped'; the rest are always 'ungrasped.'" According to these passages, "grasping" is understood solely as taking something as one’s own body. 3. Still others define "grasping" through both meanings. As (Chapter 53) says: "Whether consciousness grasps or not: if consciousness relies on and grasps, it is called 'grasped form.' What does this mean? It is what consciousness relies on, sharing the same fate of safety and danger, growing together in harmony. Moreover, based on this, various feelings arise. What is opposite to this is not included in 'grasping.'" Also, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 100) says: "'Grasped' dharmas are material dharmas held by the mind and mental factors. Because the mind and mental factors rely on them, they share the same fate of safety and danger. 'Sharing safety and danger' means that, due to the sustaining power of the mind and mental factors, those material forms remain continuous, undamaged, and undecomposed. And when such grasped forms are either abandoned or nourished, the mind and mental factors likewise gain or lose accordingly. What is opposite to this is called 'ungrasped.'" In this sūtra, the term "grasping" is used according to two meanings: first, the ālayavijñāna grasps the faculties and their bases as its own support; second, it holds the seeds as its own possession. This is detailed in the various treatises.
有色界中具二執受，無色界中不具二種。
> In the realm of form, two kinds of grasping and clinging exist; in the formless realm, these two are absent.
釋曰：此即第三約界分別。即准此文，依大乘宗，無色界中無眼耳等十種色界，非如摩訶僧祇部說具十色及五識身。而本業經無色諸天來入會中，法華經中間有頂香，如此等文皆依法處所攝色說。
> Here, the text explains the third distinction, which is made in terms of the realms. According to the Mahayana tradition, in the Formless Realm, there are none of the ten types of physical forms, such as the eyes and ears. This is unlike what the Mahāsāṃghika school teaches, which holds that the Formless Realm possesses all ten physical elements and the five types of sensory consciousness. However, when the \*Sutra of the Original Acts\* mentions that gods from the Formless Realm come to the assembly, or when the \*Lotus Sutra\* speaks of fragrance reaching the peak of existence, such passages should be understood as referring to the subtle physical forms that belong to the domain of mental objects.
廣慧！此識亦名阿陀那識。何以故？由此識於身隨逐執持故。
> Great Wisdom! This consciousness is also called the Storehouse Consciousness. Why? Because this consciousness follows and holds onto the body continuously.
釋曰：此即第二釋阿陀那識。梵云阿陀那，此翻名執持。謂由此識隨逐於身，執受色根令不失壞，故說此識名為執持。依攝大乘，有其二義釋阿陀那：一、執受色根令不壞故，二、執受自體取彼生故。如彼第一具廣分別。依成唯識，具有三義，故第三云：以能執持諸法種子，及能執受色根依處，亦能執取結生相續，故說此識名阿陀那。此當二論所說執受。
> Explanation: This is the second explanation of the Ādāna consciousness. In Sanskrit, it is called Ādāna, which is translated as "holding" or "grasping." This consciousness follows the body and holds onto the physical sense faculties, preventing them from decaying or being lost. Therefore, this consciousness is called "holding." According to the \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\*, there are two meanings for the term Ādāna: first, it holds the physical sense faculties so they do not deteriorate; second, it holds the self-body, taking on rebirth. The first meaning is elaborated in detail in that text. According to the \*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi\*, there are three meanings: it can hold the seeds of all dharmas, it can hold the physical sense faculties and their bases, and it can grasp the continuity of rebirth. Thus, this consciousness is called Ādāna. This corresponds to the meaning of "holding" as discussed in both texts.
亦名阿賴耶識。何以故？由此識於身攝受藏隱，同安危義故。
> It is also known as the Alaya Consciousness. Why? Because this consciousness, within the body, holds and conceals everything, sharing the same meaning of safety and danger.
釋曰：此即第三解阿賴耶。梵云阿賴耶，此翻名藏。藏有三義：一者、能藏；二者、所藏；三者、執藏。故成唯識第二卷云：此識具有能藏、所藏、執藏義故，為與雜染互為緣故，有情執為自內我故。攝論第一亦辨三義，故彼論云：復何緣故，此識亦名阿賴耶？一切有生雜染品法於此攝藏為果性故，又即此識於彼攝藏為自性故，或諸有情攝藏此識為自我故，說名阿賴耶識。解云：藏義三種別者：第一、能藏，此即果法於因中藏，謂識中種生現七識，染果不離能生因故；第二、所藏，此即因種於果中藏，謂所熏種藏在能熏七現識中成因性故；第三、我愛所執藏義，此即境於能執中藏。今依此經，不同諸論，謂由此識於有根身能攝受彼為所依止，於彼藏隱與所依身同安危故。此即現識藏所依中，故名為藏，於所藏中一分之義。故深密云：於彼身中住者故，一體相應故。住者，即此攝受藏隱，一體相應，同安危義。
> Explanation: This is the third explanation of "Alaya." In Sanskrit, "Alaya" is translated as "storehouse" or "treasury." The term "storehouse" has three meanings: first, that which stores; second, that which is stored; and third, that which is grasped as self. Thus, the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only), Volume Two, states: "This consciousness has the meanings of storing, being stored, and being grasped as self. Because it mutually conditions with defiled phenomena, sentient beings grasp it as their inner self." The \*She Lun\* (Compendium of the Great Vehicle), Volume One, also discusses three meanings. That treatise asks: "For what reason is this consciousness also called Alaya?" It answers: "All defiled dharmas of conditioned arising are stored within it as their fruition-nature, and further, this consciousness is stored within them as its own nature. Alternatively, sentient beings grasp this consciousness as their self, so it is called Alaya-consciousness." Explanation of the three meanings of "storehouse": First, "that which stores" refers to the fruition-dharma being stored within the cause. That is, the seeds within the consciousness give rise to the seven manifest consciousnesses, and the defiled fruition does not depart from the generating cause. Second, "that which is stored" refers to the causal seeds being stored within the fruition. That is, the perfumed seeds are stored within the perfuming seven manifest consciousnesses, forming their causal nature. Third, "grasped as self by self-love" means that the object is stored within the grasping subject. Now, according to this sutra, unlike other treatises, it states that this consciousness, with respect to the physical body, can receive and hold it as its support, and within that support, it is hidden, sharing the same safety and danger with the supported body. This means that the manifest consciousness is stored within its support, hence it is called "storehouse." This is one aspect of the meaning of "that which is stored." Thus, the \*Shenmi\* (Sutra of the Deep Mystery) says: "It dwells within that body, and they are one in substance and function." "Dwelling" means this receiving, holding, and hiding. "One in substance and function" means sharing the same safety and danger.
亦名為心。何以故？由此識色、聲、香、味、觸等積集滋長故。
> It is also called the mind. Why? Because through this consciousness, forms, sounds, smells, tastes, and touches are accumulated and nourished.
釋曰：此即第四釋其心義。梵音質多，此翻為心。有其多義：一名集起，集諸法種起諸法故，如成唯識第五卷說。二名積集，有其二義：一諸法種子所積集故，如攝論第一由種種法熏習種子所積集故。二外六境界積集滋長故。三名採集，採集種種所緣境故，如深密經及五蘊論。今依此經，依第二義故名為心。此有二義：一者積集；二者滋長，由色等境之所積集及滋長故。若依成唯識論第三卷有七種名，此經四名外更加三名。三名者何？如彼論云：或名所知依，能與染淨所知諸法為依止故。釋如攝論十殊勝中第一殊勝名所知依。世親釋云：所應可知故名所知，所謂雜染清淨諸法，即三自性，依是因義。無性釋云：所應可知故名所知，依謂所依。此所依聲簡取能依雜染清淨諸有為法，不取無為，由彼無所依義故。所依即是阿賴耶識，是彼因故，能列彼故，如其所應。解云：世親菩薩許第八識通與三性為所依止，無性菩薩唯與依他起性為依，不與遍計、圓成為依。是彼因故者，與染分依他為依；能列彼故者，與淨分依他為依。問：如何兩論有此相違？解云：世親約通依，故通三性；無性唯約親依，故依他。各據一義，亦不相違。或名異熟識，能引生死善、不善業異熟果故。解云：異熟有三：一、轉變而熟，故名異熟；二、異時而熟，故名異熟；三、異類而熟，因是善、惡，果唯無記，故云異熟。三中唯取第三異類，以前二名通餘果故。或名無垢識，最極清淨諸無漏法所依止故。解云：梵音阿末羅識，此云無垢識，即妙覺位大圓鏡智相應心體，名無垢識，最極清淨諸智、定等無漏道法為依止故。故如來功德莊嚴經云：如來無垢識是淨無漏界解脫一切鄣圓鏡智相應。廣如唯識疏第三卷說。
> The commentary explains: This is the fourth section, explaining the meaning of "mind." In Sanskrit, it is called "citta," which is translated as "mind." It has multiple meanings: First, it means "arising and gathering" — gathering the seeds of all phenomena and giving rise to all phenomena, as stated in the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Volume 5). Second, it means "accumulation" — this has two aspects: (1) It is where the seeds of all phenomena are accumulated, as stated in the \*She Dacheng Lun\* (Volume 1), because it is where the perfumed seeds of various phenomena accumulate. (2) It is where the six external sense objects accumulate and grow. Third, it means "collecting" — collecting the various objects of perception, as stated in the \*Shenmi Jing\* and the \*Five Aggregates Treatise\*. Now, according to this sutra, we follow the second meaning and therefore call it "mind." This has two aspects: (1) accumulation; (2) growth — because it is where form and other sense objects accumulate and grow. According to the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Volume 3), there are seven names for it. This sutra lists four names, and adds three more. What are these three additional names? As that treatise says: One is called the "basis of what is to be known" (ālaya), because it serves as the support for all phenomena, both defiled and pure, that are to be known. This is explained in the \*She Dacheng Lun\*'s ten special qualities, specifically the first special quality called "basis of what is to be known." Vasubandhu explains: "What is to be known" means what should be understood — namely, the defiled and pure phenomena, which are the three intrinsic natures. "Basis" means the foundation. This foundation is the ālaya consciousness, which serves as their cause and supports their manifestation, as appropriate. Asamakṣa explains: "What is to be known" means what should be understood. "Basis" means the support. The term "support" here specifically refers to the dependent nature of conditioned phenomena, both defiled and pure, and does not include the unconditioned, because they have no supporting function. The foundation is the ālaya consciousness, which is their cause and enables their manifestation. The commentary clarifies: Vasubandhu accepts that the eighth consciousness serves as the support for all three natures (the imagined, the dependent, and the perfected). Asamakṣa holds that it serves only as the support for the dependent nature, not for the imagined or perfected natures. "Is their cause" means it supports the defiled aspect of the dependent nature; "enables their manifestation" means it supports the pure aspect of the dependent nature. Question: How do these two treatises differ? The commentary explains: Vasubandhu speaks of a general support, so it applies to all three natures. Asamakṣa speaks only of a direct support, so it applies to the dependent nature. Each is based on a different perspective, and they do not contradict each other. Another name is the "retribution consciousness" (vipāka-vijñāna), because it brings the karmic results of good and bad actions that lead to rebirth in samsara. The commentary explains: Retribution has three types: (1) transformation and ripening — hence called retribution; (2) ripening at a different time — hence called retribution; (3) ripening as a different type — because the cause is good or bad, but the result is neutral, hence called retribution. Of these three, only the third type is taken, because the first two apply to other results as well. Another name is the "immaculate consciousness" (amala-vijñāna), because it is the support for all supremely pure uncontaminated phenomena. The commentary explains: In Sanskrit, it is called "amala-vijñāna," translated as "immaculate consciousness." This refers to the mind essence corresponding to the great mirror wisdom at the stage of perfect enlightenment. It is called the immaculate consciousness because it serves as the support for all supremely pure uncontaminated practices, such as wisdoms and meditative concentrations. Thus, the \*Tathāgata's Merit and Virtue Sutra\* says: "The Tathāgata's immaculate consciousness is the pure uncontaminated realm, free from all obstacles, and corresponds to the mirror wisdom." For a detailed explanation, see the \*Weishi Shu\* (Volume 3).
廣慧！阿陀那識為依止、為建立故，六識身轉，謂眼識、耳、鼻、舌、身、意識。
> Guanghui! The Alaya-consciousness serves as the foundation and support, upon which the six consciousnesses operate—namely, the eye consciousness, ear consciousness, nose consciousness, tongue consciousness, body consciousness, and mind consciousness.
釋曰：自下第二明諸識俱轉差別，於中有三：初法、次喻、後合。前中有二：初阿陀那與六識俱轉，後廣慧若於下明意識對五俱轉多少。初舉本末以辨俱轉，後以意對五明其俱轉。然瑜伽等且約初義以辨俱轉，此中應說末那俱轉而不說者，舉初舉後准可知故，略而不說，故瑜伽等通約末那以辨俱轉。前中有二：初總標俱轉，後逐難重釋。此即初也，以阿陀那為依止故。六識身轉，謂眼識等。
> Explanation: From here onward, the second section explains the distinctions in the simultaneous functioning of the various consciousnesses. This section is divided into three parts: first, the principle; second, the analogy; and third, the synthesis. The first part contains two subsections: first, the simultaneous functioning of the base consciousness (\*ādāna-vijñāna\*) with the six consciousnesses; second, from "Guanghui, if..." onward, it clarifies how the mental consciousness functions alongside the five sense consciousnesses to varying degrees. The first subsection first mentions the root and branches to explain their simultaneous functioning, while the second uses the mental consciousness to clarify its simultaneous functioning with the five sense consciousnesses. However, texts like the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* primarily address the first interpretation to explain simultaneous functioning. Here, the functioning of the manas should also be mentioned, but it is not, because what is first mentioned and what follows allow us to infer the rest, so it is omitted for brevity. Thus, texts like the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* broadly include the manas to explain simultaneous functioning. Within the first subsection, there are two parts: first, a general statement of simultaneous functioning; second, a detailed explanation to address any difficulties. This is the first part: because the base consciousness (\*ādāna-vijñāna\*) serves as the foundation, the six consciousnesses arise, namely the eye consciousness and so forth.
此中有識，眼及色為緣生眼識，與眼識俱轉、隨行、同時、同境，有分別意識轉。
> Here, there is consciousness. With the eye and visual forms as conditions, eye-consciousness arises. Along with this eye-consciousness—accompanying it, operating together, occurring simultaneously, with the same object—there also arises discriminating mind-consciousness.
釋曰：自下第二逐難重釋。於中有二：初明眼識必意識俱，後明四識與意識俱。此即初也。
> Explanation: Next, the second section addresses difficult points with a deeper explanation. This is divided into two parts: first, it clarifies that eye consciousness always operates together with mind consciousness; second, it explains that the other four consciousnesses also arise with mind consciousness. This is the first part.
言此中者，依理門說有其二義：一起論端義、二簡持義。上來總言諸識俱轉，而未分別五必依意、意不依五，為欲發起如是義端，故言此中。又於俱轉含有多義，不可頓說簡餘諸義，持取此義故言此中。言有識眼者，謂眼二種：一有識眼名同分眼、二無識眼名彼同分。簡彼同分名有識眼，然此同分及彼同分諸教不同。一薩婆多依十八界以釋同分、彼同分義，謂十八界有業用者名為同分，若無業用名彼同分。故俱舍論第二卷云：十八界中幾是同分？幾彼同分？頌曰：
> Here, the phrase "in this context" has two meanings according to the principle of reasoning: first, it initiates the topic of discussion; second, it selects and preserves meaning. Above, we have generally spoken of all consciousnesses arising together, but we have not yet distinguished that the five sense consciousnesses must rely on the mind, while the mind does not rely on the five. To bring forth this point of discussion, we say "in this context." Furthermore, the concept of "arising together" contains multiple meanings that cannot be explained all at once. To set aside other meanings and focus on this one, we say "in this context." The phrase "consciousness-bearing eye" refers to two kinds of eyes: first, the eye with consciousness, called the "shared portion eye"; second, the eye without consciousness, called the "non-shared portion eye." We distinguish the non-shared portion eye by calling it the "consciousness-bearing eye." However, the interpretations of "shared portion" and "non-shared portion" vary among different schools. First, the Sarvāstivāda school explains the meanings of "shared portion" and "non-shared portion" based on the eighteen elements. According to them, among the eighteen elements, those with functioning activity are called "shared portion," while those without functioning activity are called "non-shared portion." Therefore, the \*Abhidharma-kośa\* states in its second chapter: "Among the eighteen elements, how many are shared portion? How many are non-shared portion?" The verse says:
法同分餘二， 作不作自業。
> The law applies equally to the other two, Whether one acts or not, the deed is one's own.
論曰：謂一法界唯是同分，謂諸聖者二念已去無我觀智，緣一切法無不同遍，是故法界恒名同分。雜心釋云：一切法界，意識境故。大婆沙云：以無有法非三世攝意識境故。具說如彼。問：十七界意識所緣應皆同分，無彼同分。答：十七界不依意識立為同分及彼同分，但依各別根境相對色、色對眼，乃至身對觸、觸對身。問：若爾，意界及意識界唯應對法界立同分、彼同分，是則緣餘十七界者應非同分。答：理應如是。然以意界及意識界能遍了一切法故，依自作用立為同分。如眼等根有見等用，必不立為彼同分故。有餘師說：法界總攝一切法盡，以十七界亦名法故。彼不應作是說，法名雖通而法界別故。由此前說於理為善解云：准此，薩婆多宗通一切法，非法界攝。謂餘十七界皆有同分及彼同分。何名同分、彼同分耶？謂依自業、不作自業。若作自業名為同分，不作自業名彼同分。此中眼界已、正、當見，名同分眼。如是廣說，乃至意界皆各於自界應說自用。迦濕彌羅國毗婆沙師說：彼同分眼但有四種，謂不見色已、正、當滅及不生法。西方諸師說有五種，謂不生法復開為二：一有識屬、二無識屬。乃至身界應知亦然。意彼同分唯不生法解云：准此，羅漢最後蘊同分意界，約能緣義說為同分。不爾，如何說為同分？色界為眼已正當見，名同分色。彼同分色亦有四種，乃至觸界亦爾。各對自根應說自用，應知同分及彼同分。眼若於一是同分，於餘一切亦同分。彼同分眼如是廣說，乃至意界亦爾，雜心亦爾。若依婆沙有其三釋，初師說同俱舍等。有作是說：諸見色眼，於自有情名同分眼，於餘有情名彼同分眼。諸不見色眼，於自有情名彼同分眼，於餘有情亦名彼同分眼。復有說者，諸見色眼，於自有情名同分眼，於餘有情非同分亦非彼同分。諸不見色眼，於自有情名彼同分眼，於餘有情非同分眼亦非彼同分。彼不應作是說：云何有眼而非同分亦非彼同分？應作是說：於三說中初說應理，具說如彼。又俱舍云：眼不共故，依一相續建立同分及彼同分。色是共故，依多相續建立同分及彼同分。如說色界，聲香味觸應知亦爾。聲可如色，香味觸三至根方取。是不共故，一取非餘。理應如眼等，不應如色說。雖有是理，而容有共。所以者何？香等三界於一及餘，皆有可生鼻等識義。眼等不爾，故如色說。若依雜心，謂眼見色是有分，不見色是餘有分。謂色眼可見是有分，所不見是餘有分。差別者，若眼是一有分，餘一切亦有分。若一餘有分，餘一切亦餘有分。色若見者，是有分非餘。耳鼻舌身聲香味觸亦如是。第一義如眼說，俗數如色說解云：雜心意不分明。毗婆沙云：如色界，聲香味觸界亦爾，同分彼同分品類差別皆相似故。然於此義，或有欲令唯齅甞覺各自身中諸香味觸，彼作是說：香味觸界依世俗理如色界說，謂諸世間作如是語：汝所齅香我等亦齅，汝所甞味我等亦甞，汝所覺觸我等亦覺。依勝義理，香味觸界如眼界說，謂一有情所齅香界餘不能齅，若一有情所甞味界餘不能甞，若一有情所覺觸界餘不能覺。問：若一觸界，二有情身各在一邊共所逼觸，豈非勝義如色界說？答：如是觸界有多極微和集一處，二身逼觸各得一邊，無共得者，故勝義理如眼界說。香味二界准此應知。復有欲令亦齅甞覺他及非情諸香味觸，若已受用及受用時，依世俗理如色界說，謂諸世間說共得故。依勝義諦如眼界說，一所受用餘不得故。若未受用，香味觸界依勝義理亦得如色界說，謂在未來當至現在有多人等共得義故。若依前義，應作是說：香味觸界依世俗理如色界說，依勝義理如眼界說。若依後義，應作是說：香味觸界若已受用及受用時，依世俗理如色界說，依勝義理如眼界說。若未受用，依勝義理亦可得言如色界說。是故諸論皆作是說：如色界，聲香味觸界亦爾，以香味觸可共得故。眼等六識同分彼同分生不生法故，如意界說。
> The treatise states: The single realm of phenomena is entirely "shared in kind," because once sages have passed the second moment of thought, their wisdom of no-self perceives all phenomena without exception, universally and equally. Therefore, the realm of phenomena is always called "shared in kind." The \*Miscellaneous Abhidharma\* explains: "All realms of phenomena are objects of the mental consciousness." The \*Great Vibhāṣā\* states: "There is no phenomenon that is not included in the three times and thereby an object of the mental consciousness." The details are as given there. \*\*Question\*\*: If so, the objects of the mental consciousness among the seventeen realms should all be "shared in kind," with no "other-shared" portions. \*\*Answer\*\*: The seventeen realms are not designated as "shared in kind" or "other-shared" based on the mental consciousness. Rather, they are established based on the mutual correspondence of each sense organ and its object: visible forms correlate with the eye, and so forth, up to tangible objects correlating with the body, and the body correlating with tangible objects. \*\*Question\*\*: If so, the mind element and the mental consciousness element should only be established as "shared in kind" or "other-shared" in relation to the realm of phenomena. In that case, those who perceive the other seventeen realms should not be "shared in kind." \*\*Answer\*\*: Logically, this should be so. However, because the mind element and the mental consciousness element can universally perceive all phenomena, they are established as "shared in kind" based on their own function. For example, the eye faculty, having the function of seeing, is certainly not established as "other-shared." Some other masters say: The realm of phenomena encompasses all phenomena completely, because the seventeen realms are also called "phenomena" (dharmas). They should not make this claim, for although the term "dharma" is general, the realm of phenomena is distinct. Therefore, the earlier explanation is more reasonable. Explanation: According to this, the Sarvāstivāda school extends \[the distinction\] to all phenomena, not just the realm of phenomena. The remaining seventeen realms all have both "shared in kind" and "other-shared" portions. What do "shared in kind" and "other-shared" mean? They are based on whether one performs one's own function or does not perform one's own function. If one performs one's own function, it is called "shared in kind"; if one does not perform one's own function, it is called "other-shared." Here, regarding the eye realm: having seen, presently seeing, or about to see forms—this is called the "shared in kind" eye. This is explained in detail, up to the mind element, each within its own realm should be described according to its own function. The Kashmiri Vaibhāṣika masters say: The "other-shared" eye has only four kinds: the eye that has ceased without seeing forms, the eye presently ceasing without seeing, the eye about to cease without seeing, and the yet-to-arise eye. The Western masters say there are five kinds, dividing the yet-to-arise into two: one with consciousness attached, and one without consciousness attached. The same should be understood up to the body realm. The mind element as "other-shared" exists only in the yet-to-arise state. Explanation: According to this, the last aggregate of an Arhat is the "shared in kind" mind element, established based on its capacity to cognize. Otherwise, how could it be called "shared in kind"? For the form realm: forms that have been seen, are being seen, or will be seen by the eye are called "shared in kind" forms. The "other-shared" forms also have four kinds, and so forth up to tangible objects. Each should be described according to its own function in relation to its corresponding sense organ. One should understand "shared in kind" and "other-shared" in this way. Regarding the eye: if it is "shared in kind" with respect to one \[sentient being\], it is "shared in kind" with respect to all others as well. The same applies to the "other-shared" eye, and this is explained in detail up to the mind element. The \*Miscellaneous Abhidharma\* says the same. According to the \*Vibhāṣā\*, there are three explanations. The first school's explanation agrees with the \*Kośa\* and others. Some say: The eye that sees forms—for the sentient being to whom it belongs, it is called the "shared in kind" eye; for other sentient beings, it is called the "other-shared" eye. The eye that does not see forms—for the sentient being to whom it belongs, it is called the "other-shared" eye; for other sentient beings, it is also called the "other-shared" eye. Others say: The eye that sees forms—for the sentient being to whom it belongs, it is the "shared in kind" eye; for other sentient beings, it is neither "shared in kind" nor "other-shared." The eye that does not see forms—for the sentient being to whom it belongs, it is the "other-shared" eye; for other sentient beings, it is neither "shared in kind" nor "other-shared." They should not make this claim: How could there be an eye that is neither "shared in kind" nor "other-shared"? It should be said that among the three explanations, the first is the most reasonable, as detailed therein. The \*Kośa\* further states: Because the eye is not shared \[among beings\], "shared in kind" and "other-shared" are established based on a single mental continuum. Because forms are shared, they are established based on multiple continuums. As said for the form realm, so too should sound, smell, taste, and touch be understood. Sound may be treated like form. Smell, taste, and touch, however, are apprehended only upon reaching the sense organ. They are not shared, because one apprehends them and others do not. Logically, they should be like the eye, not like form. Although this reasoning holds, they may still admit of sharing. Why? Because smell, taste, and touch, with respect to both one and others, each have the potential to give rise to nose, tongue, and body consciousness. The eye and so forth are not like this, and therefore they are explained like form. According to the \*Miscellaneous Abhidharma\*: The eye seeing forms is "having a portion"; not seeing forms is "having another portion." Forms visible to the eye are "having a portion"; forms not seen are "having another portion." The distinction is: if the eye is one "having a portion," all \[eyes\] are also "having a portion." If one is "having another portion," all others are also "having another portion." For forms, if seen, they are "having a portion," not otherwise. The ear, nose, tongue, body, sound, smell, taste, and touch follow the same pattern. In the ultimate sense, \[they should be understood\] like the eye; in conventional terms, like form. Explanation: The \*Miscellaneous Abhidharma\*'s meaning is not entirely clear. The \*Vibhāṣā\* says: Like the form realm, so too are the sound, smell, taste, and touch realms—their classifications of "shared in kind" and "other-shared" are all similar. However, on this point, some wish to hold that only one's own body's smells, tastes, and touches are apprehended \[by oneself\]. They say: The smell, taste, and touch realms, in conventional terms, are explained like the form realm—because people in the world speak thus: "The smell you smell, we also smell; the taste you taste, we also taste; the touch you feel, we also feel." In ultimate terms, the smell, taste, and touch realms are explained like the eye realm—because the smell realm apprehended by one sentient being cannot be apprehended by another; the taste realm apprehended by one cannot be apprehended by another; the touch realm felt by one cannot be felt by another. \*\*Question\*\*: If one tangible object is pressed upon by two bodies from two sides simultaneously, wouldn't that be, in ultimate terms, like the form realm? \*\*Answer\*\*: Such a tangible object consists of many atoms gathered together. The two bodies, pressing from each side, each obtain a portion; no one obtains \[the whole\] in common. Therefore, in ultimate terms, it is explained like the eye realm. The smell and taste realms should be understood analogously. Others wish to hold that one also smells, tastes, and feels the smells, tastes, and touches of others and of inanimate objects. If already experienced or currently being experienced, in conventional terms they are explained like the form realm—because worldly speech speaks of common acquisition. In ultimate terms, they are explained like the eye realm—because what is experienced by one is not obtained by another. If not yet experienced, the smell, taste, and touch realms, in ultimate terms, may also be explained like the form realm—because in the future, when they come to the present, multiple people will obtain them in common. If following the former view, one should say: The smell, taste, and touch realms, in conventional terms, are explained like the form realm; in ultimate terms, like the eye realm. If following the latter view, one should say: The smell, taste, and touch realms, when already experienced or currently being experienced, are explained in conventional terms like the form realm and in ultimate terms like the eye realm. If not yet experienced, in ultimate terms they may also be said to be explained like the form realm. Therefore, all the treatises state: Like the form realm, so too are the sound, smell, taste, and touch realms, because smell, taste, and touch admit of common acquisition. The six consciousnesses—eye consciousness and so forth—are "shared in kind" or "other-shared" based on whether their conditions have arisen or not yet arisen, just as explained for the mind element.
次釋同分彼同分名。依俱舍論，有其三義，故彼問言：云何同分彼同分義？根、境、識三更相交雜，故名為分。或復分者，是已作用；或復分者，是所生觸。同有此分，故云同分。與此相違，名彼同分。由非同分與彼同分，與彼同分種類分同，名彼同分。正理同俱舍。雜心論云：有分餘有分有何義？答：有分時說名有分。問：眼界二種，有業及無業分。彼有業分，為無業分可分亦說有分？彼無業分，亦為有業分可分亦說有分？二分俱得有分相。依經部宗，未見正文。准同大乘，於理無違。今依大乘，諸論不同。若依世親、安慧五蘊論，唯約五內處釋同分義，故彼論皆云：幾同分？謂五內有色界，與彼自識等境界故。幾彼同分？謂彼自識空時，與自類等故。解云：同分等境義，故名同分。集論第三、雜集第五意同五蘊，故集論云：云何同分彼同分？幾同分彼同分？為何義故觀同分彼同分耶？謂不離識，彼相似根於境相續生故；離識，自類相似相續生，是同分彼同分。初是同分，諸根與識俱識相似，於諸境相續生故。由根與識相似轉義，說名同分。第二是彼同分，諸根離識自類相似相續生故。由根不與識合，唯自體相似相續生，根相似義說同分。色蘊一分、眼等五有色界處一分，是同分彼同分。又瑜伽五十六亦依五內處說，彼云：問：十八界中幾是同分？幾彼同分？答：有識眼界名為同分，所餘眼界名彼同分。如眼界，乃至身界亦爾。唯根所攝內諸界中思量同分及彼同分，非於色等外諸界中。當知法界諸有所緣如心界說，無所緣如色等說。若深密經闕無此文。梁攝論所列解節經云：依有識眼根緣外色塵，眼識得生。真諦解云：若死人眼名無識眼，故言有識以簡無識。此釋不然，若捨命後不成眼故也。下有識耳等，准此應知。與眼識俱隨行等者，此明眼識起時必有分別意識同時隨行、同緣一境。
> Now let me explain the names "same division" (sabhāga) and "other division" (tad-anyabhāga). According to the \*Abhidharma-kośa\*, there are three meanings, which is why it asks: What is the meaning of "same division" and "other division"? The mutual intermingling of the sense organ, the object, and the consciousness is called "division." Alternatively, "division" refers to that which has already functioned, or it refers to the contact produced. To share this division is called "same division"; the opposite is called "other division." Because it is not the same division but shares the same type as the other division, it is called "other division." The \*Nyāyānusāra\* agrees with the \*Kośa\*. The \*Saṃyuktābhidharma-śāstra\* asks: What is the meaning of "having a division" and "having remaining divisions"? Answer: When there is a division, it is called "having a division." It asks: The eye realm has two kinds—functional and non-functional divisions. Does the functional division, being separable from the non-functional division, still count as "having a division"? Does the non-functional division, being separable from the functional division, also count as "having a division"? Both divisions can possess the characteristic of "having a division." According to the Sautrāntika school, no original text confirms this. Following the Mahāyāna, there is no contradiction. Now, according to the Mahāyāna, various treatises differ. If we follow Vasubandhu's and Asaṅga's \*Pañca-skandhaka\*, the meaning of "same division" is explained only in terms of the five internal sense bases. Thus, both treatises say: How many are "same division"? The five internal form realms, because they share the same objects as their respective consciousnesses. How many are "other division"? When their respective consciousnesses are absent, because they share the same type with their own kind. The explanation: Sharing the same object is called "same division." The \*Abhidharma-samuccaya\* (ch. 3) and the \*Abhidharma-samuccaya-bhāṣya\* (ch. 5) agree with the \*Pañca-skandhaka\*. Thus, the \*Samuccaya\* asks: What are "same division" and "other division"? How many are they? For what purpose do we observe them? It answers: Not being separate from consciousness, the similar sense organs arise continuously toward objects; being separate from consciousness, they arise continuously as similar to their own type—this is "same division" and "other division." The first is "same division": the sense organs, together with consciousness, are similar to consciousness, arising continuously toward various objects. Because the sense organs and consciousness operate similarly, they are called "same division." The second is "other division": the sense organs, apart from consciousness, arise continuously as similar to their own type. Because the sense organs do not unite with consciousness but merely arise as similar to their own type, the similarity of the sense organs is called "same division" (in this context). A portion of the form aggregate, namely a portion of the five internal form sense bases, constitutes "same division" and "other division." Furthermore, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (ch. 56) also explains according to the five internal sense bases. It asks: Among the eighteen realms, how many are "same division" and how many are "other division"? Answer: An eye realm with consciousness is called "same division"; the remaining eye realm is called "other division." This applies likewise to the ear realm and so on up to the body realm. Only among the internal realms included in the sense organs should we consider "same division" and "other division," not among external realms such as form and so on. Know that in the element of mental objects, all that have objects are explained like the mind realm, and those without objects are explained like form and so on.The \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\* lacks this passage. The \*Liang Translation of the Mahāyāna-saṃgraha\* cites the \*Saṃdhinirmocana\* as saying: Relying on an eye root with consciousness, in contact with external form objects, eye consciousness arises. Paramārtha's explanation says: An eye of a dead person is called an eye without consciousness, hence "with consciousness" excludes that. This explanation is not correct, because after death, it no longer constitutes an eye.For "with consciousness," apply the same to the ear and so on. "Accompanied by and co-occurring with eye consciousness" clarifies that when eye consciousness arises, there is always an accompanying discriminating mental consciousness operating simultaneously, perceiving the same object.
有識，耳、鼻、舌、身及聲、香、味、觸為緣，生耳、鼻、舌、身識，與耳、鼻、舌、身識俱隨行、同時、同境，有分別意識轉。
> With the ear, nose, tongue, and body, and with sounds, smells, tastes, and touches as conditions, ear, nose, tongue, and body consciousness arise. Along with these consciousnesses, which occur simultaneously, directed at the same objects, a discerning mind-consciousness also operates.
釋曰：此即第二釋。餘四識與意識俱，准上應知。
> Explanation: This is the second explanation. The remaining four consciousnesses, along with the mind consciousness, should be understood according to the above.
廣慧！若於爾時一眼識轉，即於此時唯有一分別意識與眼識同行轉。
> Guanghui! At that moment, if one eye-consciousness arises, then at that very same time, there is only a single discriminating mind-consciousness that operates together with the eye-consciousness.
釋曰：自下第二別釋俱轉多少。於中有二：初明意識與眼識俱轉，後明意識與眼等二三四五識俱轉。此即第一明意識與眼識俱轉，一緣合故。
> Explanation: Next, the second part explains in detail how many consciousnesses can arise together. This section has two parts: first, it clarifies how the mind-consciousness arises together with the eye-consciousness; second, it clarifies how the mind-consciousness arises together with two, three, four, or five of the eye and other consciousnesses. The first part explains how the mind-consciousness and the eye-consciousness arise together, because they share a single condition.
若於爾時二、三、四、五諸識身轉，即於此時唯有一分別意識與五色身同所行轉。
> If, at that moment, two, three, four, or five consciousnesses arise and function, then at that very moment, there is only a single discriminating mind-consciousness that operates together with the five material sense faculties.
釋曰：此即第二明隨所緣境等緣合多少。是一意識與眼等五識俱轉多少，其數不定。深密經云無分別意識，依解節經等皆云分別意識，與此本同，故知分別為正。
> Explanation: This is the second point, clarifying the number of conditions (or factors) that come together depending on the object or situation being perceived. The single consciousness, together with the five sense consciousnesses (sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch), operates in varying numbers—there is no fixed count. According to the \*Deep Mystery Sutra\*, this is referred to as "non-discriminating consciousness," while the \*Scripture of Unlocking Meanings\* and others call it "discriminating consciousness." Both are consistent with the source text, so it is clear that "discriminating" (or "differentiating") is the correct interpretation.
廣慧！如大暴水流，若有一浪生緣現前，唯一浪轉。
> Guanghui! Just as in a great rushing flood, when a single wave arises due to conditions, only that one wave turns.
釋曰：此即第二舉喻重釋，於中有二：初水浪多少喻、二鏡影多少喻。前後二喻有差別者，諸說不同。一云二喻意趣各別，如真諦記：水生浪譬六識與本識同生滅義，鏡生影譬諸識雖起，非本識體轉作六識。一云二喻意趣無異，同顯諸識俱轉義故，如瑜伽論第五十一、顯揚十七。今解二喻諸教不同，有處欲顯所依、能依二種差別，故說二喻。如瑜伽六十三云：云何名為勝義道理建立差別？謂略有二識：一阿賴耶、二者轉識。阿賴耶識是所依，轉識是能依。此復七種，所謂眼識乃至意識。譬如水浪依止暴流，或如影像依止明觀，如是名依勝義道理建立所依、能依差別。有處為顯第八與七俱轉，如瑜伽五十一、顯揚十七。有處為顯第八與七不異義故，如成唯識第七云：八識自性不可言定，一行相所依緣相應異故，又一滅時餘不滅故，能熏等相各異故。亦非定異，經說八識如水波等無差別故，定異應非因果性故，如幻等無定性故。如前所說識差別相，依理世俗非真勝義，真勝義中心言絕故。如伽他說：心意識八種，俗故相有別，真故相無別，相所相無別故。今此經意含有如上所說諸義。或可此經二喻意異，前喻俱起及因果相續不斷義，如成唯識第三卷云：恒言遮斷轉非常，猶如暴流因果法爾。具說如彼。後喻俱起及八不轉，成七及受用無盡義。前中有三：初一緣一浪喻，次多緣多浪喻，後然此下自類無斷喻。此即第一一緣一浪喻。
> Explanation: This is the second comparison, using analogies to explain further. It has two parts: first, the analogy of water waves and their number; second, the analogy of reflections in a mirror and their number. There are differences in how these two analogies are understood, with various interpretations offered. One view holds that the two analogies have distinct meanings, as noted in the \*Commentary by Paramārtha\*: the water wave analogy illustrates that the six consciousnesses and the fundamental consciousness arise and cease together, while the mirror reflection analogy shows that although the various consciousnesses arise, the fundamental consciousness itself does not transform into the six consciousnesses. Another view maintains that the two analogies share the same intent, both demonstrating that the consciousnesses arise simultaneously, as found in \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, Chapter 51, and \*Compendium of Ascertainments\*, Chapter 17. Now, my interpretation is that these two analogies differ across various teachings. In some places, they are used to highlight the distinction between the supporting basis and what depends on it, as in \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, Chapter 63, which says: "What is the distinction established through ultimate reasoning? Briefly, there are two types of consciousness: foundational consciousness (\*ālaya-vijñāna\*) and evolving consciousnesses (\*pravṛtti-vijñāna\*). The foundational consciousness is the supporting basis, while the evolving consciousnesses are what depend on it. The latter have seven forms, namely, the eye consciousness up to the mind consciousness. For example, waves depend on a flowing current, or reflections depend on a clear mirror. Thus, through ultimate reasoning, the distinction between the supporting basis and what depends on it is established." In other contexts, the analogies are used to show that the eighth consciousness and the seven consciousnesses arise together, as in \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, Chapter 51, and \*Compendium of Ascertainments\*, Chapter 17. In yet other contexts, they illustrate that the eighth and seventh consciousnesses are not fundamentally different, as in \*Discourse on the Theory of Consciousness Only\*, Chapter 7, which states: "The intrinsic natures of the eight consciousnesses cannot be said to be definitely identical, because their modes, supporting bases, conditions, and associated factors differ. Also, when one ceases, the others do not necessarily cease; their functions of perfuming and so on are each distinct. Nor can they be said to be definitely different, because the scriptures say that the eight consciousnesses are like water and waves, without distinction. If they were definitely different, they would not have cause-and-effect relationships, and they would have fixed natures, unlike illusions. As mentioned earlier, the distinctions among the consciousnesses are based on conventional truth, not ultimate truth. In ultimate truth, all conceptualization and speech cease. As the verse says: 'The eight kinds of mind and consciousness differ in characteristics in conventional terms, but in ultimate terms, their characteristics are not different, and there is no difference between what is characterized and the characteristic itself.'" The intent of this sutra encompasses all the above meanings, or perhaps the two analogies in this sutra have different purposes. The first analogy (water waves) illustrates simultaneous arising and the unbroken continuity of cause and effect, as in \*Discourse on the Theory of Consciousness Only\*, Chapter 3: "The term 'constant' prevents cessation and indicates continuity, not permanence, like a rushing current, with cause and effect naturally existing." The second analogy (mirror reflections) illustrates simultaneous arising and that the eighth consciousness does not transform into the seven, and that the experiencing of results is inexhaustible. The first analogy has three aspects: first, the analogy of one condition and one wave; second, the analogy of many conditions and many waves; and third, after that, the analogy of continuous arising within the same category without interruption. This is the first aspect: the analogy of one condition and one wave.
若二、若多浪生，緣現前有多浪轉。
> When there are two or more waves, many waves arise due to the conditions present.
釋曰：此即第二多緣多浪喻。
> This illustrates the second simile: many causes, many waves.
然此暴水，自類恒流，無斷無盡，
> Yet this torrent of rushing water flows on unceasingly, without break or end.
釋曰：第三自類不斷喻，入楞伽經亦同此意。故彼頌云：
> Explanation: The third metaphor, that of one's own kind continuing without interruption, is also expressed with the same meaning in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra. Thus, its verse says:
如海遇風緣， 起種種波浪， 現前作用轉，無有間斷時。 藏識海亦然， 境等風所擊，恒起諸識浪， 現前化用轉。
> Like the ocean meeting wind, Waves of many kinds arise, Before us they act and turn, Without a moment's pause. The storehouse consciousness, the sea, Struck by winds of sense and world, Forever stirs its waves of thought, Appearing, acting, turning on.
譬如善淨鏡面，若有一影生緣現前，唯一影起。
> For example, a clear and pure mirror, when an object appears before it, reflects that single image.
釋曰：自下第二鏡影多少喻。於中有三：初一緣一影喻、二多緣多影喻、後非此下受用無盡喻。此即第一一緣一影喻。
> Explanation: Next, the second metaphor involving the number of reflections in a mirror. This section consists of three parts: first, a metaphor illustrating one object producing one reflection; second, a metaphor illustrating many objects producing many reflections; and finally, a metaphor beyond these, illustrating the endless enjoyment of what is received. This is the first metaphor, showing one object producing one reflection.
若二、若多影生，緣現前有多影起。
> If two or many images arise, they appear because multiple conditions are present before them.
釋曰：此即第二多緣多影喻。
> The commentary explains: This is the second metaphor, comparing multiple conditions to multiple reflections.
非此鏡面轉變為影，亦無受用滅盡可得。
> Neither does the mirror itself turn into the reflection, nor can the experience of it ever be entirely extinguished.
釋曰：此即第三受用無盡喻。言非此鏡面轉變為影等者，真諦記云：鏡影生藉緣，鏡不轉作影。六識藉緣塵生者，並用前六識種子生後六識，非為本識體轉作六識。今解轉變自有二義：一者因變，種子賴耶變成七識；二者果變，現行第八變自相分，而不能變眼等七識。今此經中約果變義，故非此鏡面轉變為影。又此鏡面現影無滅，意顯第八生果無盡。問：如何合中唯舉水波？解云：義准可知，略而不說。若爾，如何深密解節具合二喻？解云：梵本有此差別。
> Here is the explanation: This is the third simile, illustrating the inexhaustible reward. Saying, "It is not that the mirror's surface itself transforms into the image," the \*Zhendi\* commentary explains: The image in the mirror arises dependent on conditions; the mirror does not itself turn into the image. In the same way, the six consciousnesses arise dependent on sense objects and conditions, each subsequent state of the six consciousnesses being born from the seeds of the previous ones. It is not that the underlying consciousness's essence itself transforms into the six consciousnesses. Now, as I interpret it, "transformation" has two meanings: First, transformation by cause—the seeds in the underlying consciousness (ālaya) evolve into the seven consciousnesses. Second, transformation by result—the active eighth consciousness produces its own perceptual appearances, but it does not transform into the eye consciousness and the other six. This sutra is speaking in terms of transformation by result, so it says the mirror's surface does not itself become the image. Moreover, the fact that the image in the mirror appears without any loss or diminution is meant to show that the eighth consciousness produces its effects inexhaustibly. A question arises: In the analogy, why does it only mention water and waves? The answer: The meaning can be understood by extension; it is omitted for brevity. But then, why does the \*Sūtra on Unraveling the Profound\* include both water and waves in its analogy? The answer: This difference exists in the Sanskrit original.
如是，廣慧！由似暴流阿陀那識為依止、為建立故，若於爾時有一眼識生緣現前，即於此時一眼識轉。
> Thus, O Vast Wisdom! When the deep-flowing consciousness—like a rushing stream—serves as the foundation and support, then at the very moment a condition arises for the arising of an eye-consciousness, at that very moment the eye-consciousness turns and functions.
釋曰：自下第三舉法同喻。於中有二：初明一緣一識轉、後明多緣多識轉。此即第一明一緣一識。
> Explanation: Next, the third section presents a simile to illustrate the same principle. This section is divided into two parts: the first explains how a single condition gives rise to a single consciousness, and the second explains how multiple conditions give rise to multiple consciousnesses. Here, we address the first part, clarifying the case of a single condition and a single consciousness.
若於爾時，乃至有五識身生緣現前，即於此時五識身轉。
> If, at that time, the conditions for the five sense consciousnesses to arise are present, then at that very moment, the five sense consciousnesses become active.
釋曰：此即第二明多緣多識轉，准上應知。
> Explanation: This is the second part, clarifying how multiple conditions give rise to multiple consciousnesses. Following the above, this should be understood accordingly.
廣慧！如是菩薩雖由法住智為依止為建立故，於心意識秘密善巧，然諸如來不齊於此，施設彼為於心意識一切秘密善巧菩薩。
> Guanghui! Even though a bodhisattva, relying on and established in the wisdom of the true nature of phenomena, is skilled in the secrets of mind, consciousness, and awareness, the Tathagatas do not, based on this alone, declare such a person to be a bodhisattva who is skilled in all the secrets of mind, consciousness, and awareness.
釋曰：此下第二辨秘密善巧，答前兩問。於中有二：初依問正釋；後廣慧齊此下，結答前問。前中有二：初明地前非佛所說，後明地上是佛所說。此即初也。法住智者，依薩婆多宗，知果法所住內故，名法住智。故大婆沙一百一十云：問：何故名法住智？答：法者是果，住者是因。知果法所住因故，名法住智。謂知三界下、中、上果所住之因，名法住智。廣說如彼。依經部宗，知法常住故，名法住智。故成實論二十六云：知諸法生起，名法住智。如生緣老死，乃至無明緣行，以有佛無佛，此性常住，故曰法住智。今依大乘，依顯揚論第十五云：法住智者，謂依素怛等安立法門智。依瑜伽論，同顯揚論，故第十云：云何法住智？謂如佛施設開示，無倒而知。又九十四云：云何法住智？謂如有一人間，隨順緣生、緣起無倒教已，於緣生行因果分位住異生地，便能如實以聞、思、脩所成作意如理思惟，能以妙慧悟入信解苦真是苦、集真是集、滅真是滅、道真是道，諸如是等，如其因果安立法中所有妙智，名法住智。今此所說，意同顯揚、瑜伽第十。此意說云：地前菩薩雖由法住智力了知心、意、識中世俗差別，而未證解於心、意、識秘密勝義，是故世尊不齊於此，施設彼為善巧菩薩。
> The commentary explains: This next section clarifies the profound skillful means and answers the two previous questions. It is divided into two parts: first, it answers based on the original questions; second, from "Guanghui, at this point" onward, it summarizes and concludes the answers. Within the first part, there are two sub-sections: first, it clarifies that before the stage of spiritual development, this is not taught by the Buddha; second, it clarifies that on the stages of spiritual development, this is taught by the Buddha. This passage is the first sub-section. Regarding the wisdom of abiding in phenomena (dharma-sthitijñāna): According to the Sarvāstivāda tradition, it refers to the wisdom that knows the inner abiding of the causal result, hence it is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena. Thus, the \*Mahāvibhāṣā\* (Volume 110) says: "Question: Why is it called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena? Answer: 'Phenomena' refers to the result; 'abiding' refers to the cause. Knowing the cause in which the result of phenomena abides is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena. This means knowing the causes in which the lower, middle, and higher results of the three realms abide—this is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena." Details are given there. According to the Sautrāntika tradition, it refers to the wisdom that knows the constant abiding of phenomena. Thus, the \*Satyasiddhiśāstra\* (Volume 26) says: "Knowing the arising of all phenomena is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena. For example, birth is the condition for aging and death, and ignorance is the condition for volitional formations. Whether a Buddha appears or not, this nature is constant—hence it is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena." Now, according to the Mahāyāna, the \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\* (Volume 15) says: "The wisdom of abiding in phenomena refers to the wisdom that establishes the gateway of the teachings based on the sūtras, such as the discourses." According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\*, it agrees with the \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\*, so in its Volume 10 it says: "What is the wisdom of abiding in phenomena? It is the wisdom that, as taught and revealed by the Buddha, understands correctly without distortion." Furthermore, in Volume 94: "What is the wisdom of abiding in phenomena? It is when a person, having heard the correct teachings that accord with dependent origination and the arising of conditions, and being in the ordinary state while still at the stage of learning, is able to reflect correctly with the attention developed through hearing, reflection, and meditation. With excellent wisdom, they awaken to and confidently accept that suffering is truly suffering, that its origin is truly its origin, that its cessation is truly cessation, and that the path is truly the path. All such excellent wisdom, established in accordance with cause and effect within the teachings, is called the wisdom of abiding in phenomena." The meaning here aligns with the \*Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra\* and the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Volume 10). This indicates that bodhisattvas before the stage of spiritual development, even though they use the power of the wisdom of abiding in phenomena to understand the conventional distinctions within mind, thought, and consciousness, have not yet realized the profound ultimate truth of these aspects. Therefore, the World-Honored One does not at this point designate them as skilled bodhisattvas.
廣慧！若諸菩薩於內各別如實不見阿陀那、不見阿陀那識，不見阿賴耶、不見阿賴耶識，不見積集、不見心。
> Wise One! If bodhisattvas, individually and truly, do not perceive the underlying consciousness, nor its activities; do not perceive the storehouse consciousness, nor its functions; do not perceive accumulation, nor the mind—
釋曰：自下第二正明地上是佛所記，於中有二：初總答兩問，後是名下別答兩問。謂前答中含有二義：一者教所詮義以答初問，二者依義設教即答後問。於中有二：初約第八三名辨如實知，後約十八界明如實知。此即初也。然釋此文，諸說不同。真諦記云：菩薩若如此前來見識色等，此依俗解，佛不記說此人解心意識秘密義。由如實不見前來所明識義，佛方記說此人解心意識秘密義。此明識虗妄無所有即真，由達本秘密，於虗妄之末方始明了也。又解云：於內各別者，內謂真如諸法自體，故名為內。各別者，隨詮顯真，名為各別。此意說地上菩薩依勝義諦，由根本智於內各別。由證真如境上，如實不見阿陀那用，如實不見阿陀那體。賴耶及心體用差別，准此應知。又解云：於內各別者，阿陀那等諸法體上皆有自共相道理，於中自相現量境故名之為內，諸法自相各附自體名為各別。是故雜集第一云：自內所受是知義。此即現量知自相義。又瑜伽第二復作此言：依知言說者，謂各別於內所受所證所觸所得，由此因緣為他宣說。若依此釋，正體後得皆是現量。如實了知陀那自相，離諸分別故名不見，非無分別乃名不見。
> Commentary: Next, we explain the second section, which clarifies that the bodhisattva's ground-level realization is what the Buddha has predicted. This section has two parts: first, a general answer to both questions, and second, a detailed answer to each question under the respective headings. The general answer contains two meanings: first, it answers the first question by explaining what the teachings point to, and second, it answers the second question by showing how the teachings are established based on that meaning. Within this, there are again two parts: first, it explains true understanding through the three aspects of the eighth consciousness, and second, it explains true understanding through the eighteen elements. Here, we address the first part. However, interpretations of this passage vary. The commentary by Paramārtha says: When a bodhisattva, as previously described, sees consciousness, forms, and so on, this is based on conventional understanding, and the Buddha does not predict that such a person understands the secret meaning of mind, consciousness, and the storehouse consciousness. Only when one truly does not see the aspects of consciousness described earlier does the Buddha predict that this person understands the secret meaning of mind, consciousness, and the storehouse consciousness. This clarifies that consciousness is illusory and ultimately empty, which is itself the truth. By penetrating the fundamental secret, one becomes clear about the illusory surface manifestations. Another interpretation says: "Internally, each distinct" means that the inner refers to suchness, the self-nature of all phenomena, and is therefore called "internal." "Each distinct" means that as one illumines the truth according to the teachings, it is called "each distinct." This means that bodhisattvas on the ground, based on ultimate truth, through fundamental wisdom, experience each distinctly within. By directly realizing the suchness realm, they truly do not see the function of the ādāna consciousness, nor do they see its essence. The distinctions of body and function in the storehouse consciousness and mind should be understood in the same way. Another interpretation says: "Internally, each distinct" means that within the entities of ādāna and other phenomena, there are principles of both self-characteristics and common characteristics. Among these, the self-characteristics, being objects directly perceived, are called "internal." The self-characteristics of each phenomenon, being inherent to their own entities, are called "each distinct." Therefore, the \*Compendium of Abhidharma\* (first chapter) states: "What is directly experienced internally is the object of knowledge." This is the knowledge of self-characteristics through direct perception. Also, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (second chapter) states: "Knowledge based on verbal expression refers to what is individually experienced, realized, contacted, and attained internally. Based on this, one teaches others." According to this interpretation, both fundamental and post-attainment wisdom involve direct perception. Truly understanding the self-characteristics of ādāna, apart from all conceptual discrimination, is called "not seeing." It is not that the absence of discrimination itself is what is meant by "not seeing."
不見眼色及眼識，不見耳聲及耳識，不見鼻香及鼻識，不見舌味及舌識，不見身觸及身識，不見意法及意識。
> Not seeing forms and eye consciousness, not seeing sounds and ear consciousness, not seeing smells and nose consciousness, not seeing tastes and tongue consciousness, not seeing touches and body consciousness, not seeing mental objects and mind consciousness.
釋曰：此釋不見十八界故名善巧菩薩。
> This explains that one who does not perceive the eighteen elements is called a skilled bodhisattva.
是名勝義善巧菩薩，如來施設彼為勝義善巧菩薩。
> This is what is called a noble bodhisattva skilled in ultimate truth. The Tathagata designates them as a bodhisattva skilled in ultimate truth.
釋曰：此即第二別答前兩問。文有兩節：初是名勝義善巧菩薩者，牒上所證之義以答前問；後如來施設彼為勝義善巧菩薩者，牒上能詮之教以答後問或可是名兩字該通兩段。
> Explanation: This is the second part, responding separately to the two earlier questions. The text has two sections: the first, "a bodhisattva skilled in ultimate truth," refers back to the meaning just established to answer the earlier question; the second, "the Tathāgata designates them as a bodhisattva skilled in ultimate truth," refers back to the teaching that expresses this to answer the later questionIt may be that the phrase "is called" covers both sections..
廣慧！齊此名為於心意識一切秘密善巧菩薩，如來齊此施設彼為於心意識一切秘密善巧菩薩。
> Guanghui! This is what is called a bodhisattva who is skilled in all the hidden aspects of mind, thought, and consciousness. The Tathagata hereby designates such a person as a bodhisattva skilled in all the hidden aspects of mind, thought, and consciousness.
釋曰：此即第二結答前問，如文可知。
> Explanation: This is the second part that summarizes the previous question, as the text clearly shows.
爾時，世尊欲重宣此義而說頌曰：
> At that time, the World-Honored One, wishing to reiterate this meaning, spoke these verses:
釋曰：自下第二舉頌略說。於中有二：初發起頌文、後舉頌略說。此即第一發起頌文。
> Here is the translation: Explanation: From this point onward, the second part presents a brief explanation through verses. This section contains two parts: first, the introductory verses; second, the verses that provide a concise explanation. The text at hand is the first of these, the introductory verses.
阿陀那識甚深細，一切種子如暴流，我於凡愚不開演，恐彼分別執為我。深密頌云：諸種阿陀那。 解節經曰：執持識深細， 能生於諸法， 我說水鏡喻， 不為愚人說。 諸種子恒流， 於凡我不說， 彼勿執為我。
> The Alaya-consciousness is profound and subtle, All seeds flow like a rushing torrent. I do not teach this to the ordinary or the unwise, Fearing they might mistake it for a self. The Deep Secret Verse says: The seeds of all things lie in the Alaya-consciousness. The Explanation of the Sections Sutra says: The holding consciousness is deep and subtle, It gives rise to all phenomena. I speak of it through the simile of water and a mirror, But do not explain it to the unwise. The seeds flow ceaselessly, yet I do not speak of this to ordinary beings, Lest they cling to it as a self.
釋曰：此即第二舉頌說。然釋此頌諸論不同，依攝大乘無性。釋曰：言甚者，世聰叡者所有覺慧難窮底故。言甚細者，諸聲聞等難了知故。是故不為諸聲聞等開示此識，以不求微細一切智智故。一切種子如暴流者，剎那展轉相續不斷，如水暴流。我於凡愚不開演者，懷我見者不為開示，恐彼分別計執為我，何容彼類分別計我？窮生死際，行相一類無改易故。世親釋云：阿陀那識者，所釋異名。甚深細者，難了知故。一切種子如暴流者，次第轉故。一切種子剎那展轉，如暴水流相續轉故。恐彼分別執為我者，一行相轉故，分別執可得。成唯識論護法釋云：以能執持諸法種子，及能執受色根依處，亦能執取結生相續，故說此識名阿陀那。無性有情不能窮底，故說甚深。趣寂種性不能通達，故名甚細。是一切法真實種子，緣擊便生轉識波浪，恒無間斷猶如暴流。凡即無性，愚即趣寂。恐彼於此起分別執，墮諸惡趣障生聖道，故我世尊不為開示。
> Commentary: This is the second section, presenting the verses. Various treatises explain these verses differently. According to the \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\* (as interpreted by Asvabhāva): The word "profound" means that even the intelligence of the world's wise ones finds it difficult to reach its depths. The word "subtle" means that the Śrāvakas and others find it hard to comprehend. Therefore, this consciousness is not revealed to the Śrāvakas and others, because they do not seek the subtle, all-knowing wisdom. "All seeds like a torrent" refers to the continuous, unbroken succession of moments, just like a rushing stream of water. "I do not teach it to the ordinary and the ignorant" means that those who harbor the view of self are not instructed, for fear that they might discriminate and grasp it as a self. How could such beings discriminate and grasp a self? Because it persists throughout the limits of existence, with a uniform mode of operation without change. Vasubandhu's commentary states: "Ādāna-vijñāna" is the alternative name being explained. "Profound and subtle" means it is difficult to comprehend. "All seeds like a torrent" means it unfolds in succession. All seeds, moment by moment, continue like a rushing torrent. "For fear they might discriminate and grasp it as a self" means that because its mode of operation is uniform, such discrimination and grasping could occur. In the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*, Dharmapāla explains: Because it holds all seeds of phenomena, sustains the physical sense faculties and their bases, and also seizes the continuity of rebirth, this consciousness is called Ādāna-vijñāna. Those without the seed of liberation cannot reach its depths, hence it is called "profound." Those tending toward cessation cannot penetrate it, hence it is called "subtle." It is the true seed of all phenomena; when conditions stir it, the evolving consciousnesses arise like waves, continuously flowing without interruption, like a torrent. "Ordinary" refers to those without the seed of liberation; "ignorant" refers to those tending toward cessation. For fear that they might develop discriminating attachments, fall into evil destinies, and obstruct the holy path, our Bhagavān did not teach it to them.
## 解深密經疏卷第三
> Commentary on the Sutra of the Profound and Secret Meaning, Volume 3