---
title: "解深密經疏 · 一切法相品第四"
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/cmcweer0e0c2ljx04puj2g6k0"
---
## 解深密經疏卷第四經本第二
> Commentary on the Sutra of the Profound Secrets, Volume 4 Scripture Text, Volume 2
西明寺沙門 圓測 撰
> Commentary by the Monk Yuan Ce of Ximing Temple
### 解深密經一切法相品第四
> Chapter 4: Characteristics of All Phenomena
將釋此品，有其二種：一、解品名，二、釋文義。題云一切法相品者，自有兩釋：一云：三性非一，故言一切。皆持自性軌生物解，名之為法。相謂體相或相狀相，謂所執等是一切法體性相狀。總說三性名一切法，即持業釋。若一一性名一切法，是依主釋，以一一性非一切故。一云：一切法者，略有二釋，所謂有為及無為等。中即有五，謂心、心法等。廣有百法，謂八識等。然此三性是一切法體性相狀，故名一切法相。若依此釋，於三性中，前之二性名一切法相，即持業釋，二性皆具一切法故。後圓成實名一切法相，是依主釋，是一切法之體相故。雖有兩釋，後釋為勝下經文，不違理故。如下經說：所執、依他皆云一切，圓成實性是一切法平等真如。此品廣明一切法相三性道理，故名一切法相品深密題云聖者功德林菩薩問品者，梵本經文有此異故。
> To explain this chapter, there are two aspects: first, explaining the title of the chapter; second, clarifying the meaning of the text. The title "The Chapter on the Characteristics of All Phenomena" can be understood in two ways: First interpretation: The three natures are not one, hence the term "all." Each nature holds its own characteristics and gives rise to understanding, which is what we call "phenomena." "Characteristics" refers to their inherent essence or their distinct features—namely, the imagined, the dependent, and the perfected natures, which constitute the essential nature and features of all phenomena. Thus, summarizing the three natures as "all phenomena" is a direct appositional compound. If each nature individually is called "all phenomena," then it is a possessive compound, because each nature alone is not "all." Second interpretation: "All phenomena" has two general explanations—conditioned and unconditioned phenomena. In a medium scope, there are five categories, including mind and mental factors. In a broad scope, there are one hundred phenomena, such as the eight consciousnesses. However, these three natures are the essential nature and features of all phenomena, hence they are called "the characteristics of all phenomena." According to this interpretation, within the three natures, the first two—the imagined and the dependent—are called "the characteristics of all phenomena" in a direct appositional sense, since both natures encompass all phenomena. The perfected nature is called "the characteristics of all phenomena" in a possessive sense, as it is the underlying essence of all phenomena. Although there are two interpretations, the latter is superior, as it does not contradict reason and aligns with the subsequent scriptures. As the text later states, the imagined and dependent natures are both referred to as "all," while the perfected nature is the equality of all phenomena and true suchness. This chapter extensively clarifies the principle of the three natures as the characteristics of all phenomena, hence it is named "The Chapter on the Characteristics of All Phenomena"The deeper secret text titles it "The Chapter Asked by the Holy Being, the Bodhisattva Meritorious Grove," as the Sanskrit original differs..
爾時，德本菩薩摩訶薩白佛言：世尊！如世尊說，於諸法相善巧菩薩。
> At that time, the Bodhisattva Mahāsattva Deben said to the Buddha: "World-Honored One! As the World-Honored One has said, a bodhisattva who is skillful in the characteristics of all phenomena..."
釋曰：第二正釋文。就所觀境自有二種：一真俗諦境，二有無性境。上來已釋真俗二境，自下當辨有無性境。初明有性即是三性，後說無性即三無性。於二品中依有立無，有性是本所以先明，無性是末故在後說。由斯理故，世親菩薩三十頌云：即依此三性，立彼三無性。就此品中文別有二：初菩薩請問，後如來正答。就請問中復分為二：初舉所問教，後依教發問。此即初也，文有兩節：初約時分辨問答者，深密經云：功德林者，以德成人如樹成林，法喻雙舉名功德林。今德本者，從無量劫久殖德本。解云：此是從因立號，種殖福智二種德本，故言德本。於諸法相善巧菩薩者，舉所問教。諸法相者，辨所觀法。善巧菩薩者，能觀人也。
> Explanation: Now the main text is to be explained. Regarding the observed objects, there are two kinds: first, the realm of conventional and ultimate truth; second, the realm of existence and non-existence. The conventional and ultimate truths have already been explained above; now we turn to the realm of existence and non-existence. First, existence is explained through the three natures, and then non-existence through the three non-natures. In these two categories, non-existence is established based on existence. Existence is fundamental, so it is explained first; non-existence is derivative, so it is explained later. For this reason, the Venerable Vasubandhu states in his thirty verses: "Based on these three natures, the three non-natures are established." In this chapter, the text falls into two parts: first, the bodhisattva asks a question; second, the Tathāgata gives a proper answer. The question part is further divided into two: first, citing the teaching being asked about; second, asking the question based on that teaching. This is the first part. The text has two sections: first, distinguishing the questioner and answerer based on time. The \*Sutra of the Deep Mystery\* says: "Dharma Forest" means one who perfects people through virtue, just as a forest is formed by trees—both the teaching and the metaphor are used, hence the name "Dharma Forest." Here, "Virtue Root" refers to one who has cultivated roots of virtue over countless eons. Explanation: This is a name established based on cause—having planted both merit and wisdom as roots of virtue, hence the name "Virtue Root." "The bodhisattva skilled in the characteristics of all dharmas" refers to the teaching being asked about. "The characteristics of all dharmas" describes the observed objects. "The bodhisattva skilled" is the one who observes.
於諸法相善巧菩薩者，齊何名為於諸法相善巧菩薩？如來齊何施設彼為諸法相善巧菩薩？說是語已。
> "Who is a bodhisattva skilled in the characteristics of all phenomena? And how does the Tathagata define and establish such a bodhisattva as skilled in the characteristics of all phenomena?" After these words were spoken,
釋曰：此即第二依教發問，文有兩節：初牒所問教，後齊何等者正發問辭。問有二意：一問菩薩善巧齊何分位，二問施設善巧之名。或可前明所詮之義，後問能詮之教。
> The commentary explains: This is the second section, where questions are raised based on the teachings. The text has two parts: first, it brings up the teachings being questioned; second, it asks from what point the inquiry begins. The question itself has two meanings: first, it asks about the stage at which a bodhisattva's skillfulness is complete; second, it asks about the name given to this skillfulness. Alternatively, the earlier part clarifies the meaning being expressed, while the latter part questions the teaching that expresses it.
爾時，世尊告德本菩薩曰：
> At that time, the World-Honored One addressed the Bodhisattva Deben, saying:
釋曰：自下第二世尊正說。於中有二：初讚問許說，後諸法相下對問正說。前中有三：初標問答者，次讚問有益，後勸聽許說。此即初也。
> The commentary explains: From this point onward, the World-Honored One directly teaches. This section has two parts: first, praising the question and granting the teaching; second, starting from "the characteristics of all phenomena," answering the question with proper teaching. The first part has three subdivisions: first, introducing the questioner and answerer; second, praising the question as beneficial; third, urging the audience to listen and granting the teaching. This is the first subdivision.
善哉！德本！汝今乃能請問如來如是深義。汝今為欲利益安樂無量眾生，哀愍世間乃諸天、人、阿素洛等，為令獲得義利安樂，故發斯問。
> Excellent! O treasury of virtue, you now ask the Tathāgata about such profound meaning. You ask this out of a desire to benefit and bring happiness to countless beings, out of compassion for the world—including gods, humans, and asuras—and to help them attain what is beneficial and joyful.
釋曰：第二讚問有益。文有二節：初讚問深義，後讚問有益。准上應知。
> Explanation: The second section praises the benefit of asking questions. The text has two parts: first, it praises the profound meaning of the question; second, it praises the benefit of asking. This should be understood according to the above.
汝應諦聽，吾當為汝說諸法相。
> Listen closely, for I shall explain the nature of all things to you.
釋曰：第三勅聽許說。
> The commentary explains: Third, the decree grants permission to speak.
謂諸法相略有三種：
> As for the characteristics of all phenomena, there are roughly three kinds:
釋曰：自下第二對問正說，於中有二：初約所觀辨諸法相，後復次德本下約能觀人明善巧菩薩。前中有二：先法、後喻。法中有三：初標章舉數，次問答列名，後次第別釋。此即初也。然此略言自有兩釋：一者廣略，略謂一切法，廣雖百法略唯三性，今對百法故言略也。二者要略，略故攝大乘云：謂所知相略有三種。無性釋云：略有三種者，謂一切法要有所應知、所應斷、所應證差別故。
> The commentary explains: Next, in the second section, we address the formal explanation in response to questions. This section has two parts: first, examining the characteristics of all phenomena based on the object of observation; second, starting with "Furthermore, Virtuous One," clarifying the skillful bodhisattva based on the observing subject. The first part contains two elements: first, the teaching itself; second, the analogy. The teaching itself has three divisions: first, stating the principle and enumerating the categories; second, listing the names through questions and answers; third, explaining each in sequence. This is the first division. Here, "brief" has two interpretations: first, in terms of breadth versus brevity—"brief" means all phenomena, for although the full scope may extend to a hundred categories, the brief version reduces them to just the three natures. Since we are now comparing with the hundred categories, it is called "brief." Second, in terms of essential brevity—because of this brevity, the \*Compendium of the Mahayana\* states: "The characteristics of what is to be known are briefly of three kinds." The commentary by Asvabha further explains: "Briefly of three kinds" means that all phenomena necessarily have distinctions among what should be known, what should be abandoned, and what should be realized.
何等為三？
> What are the three?
釋曰：第二問答列名，先徵後列，此即徵也。
> The commentary explains: In the second set of questions and answers, the names are listed, first with an inquiry and then with the enumeration. This is the inquiry.
一者、遍計所執相，二者、依他起相，三者、圓成實相。
> First, the nature of delusive conceptualization; second, the nature of dependent arising; third, the nature of perfect realization.
釋曰：此即列名。然三相名，有通有別。言三相者，是其通名。三謂標數。相即體性，或相狀相，即六釋中帶數釋也。具如別章。言別名者，一者遍計所執。攝大乘論第四卷云：云何成遍計所執？何因緣故，名遍計所執無量行相？意識遍計顛倒生相，故名遍計所執。自相實無，唯有遍計所執可得，是故說名遍計所執也。解云：此文雙答二問，或可次第答前兩問。世親釋云：無量行相者，所謂一切境界行相。意識遍計者，謂即意識，說名遍計。顛倒生相者，謂是能生虗妄顛倒所緣境相。自相實無者，實無彼體。唯有遍計所執可得者，唯有亂識所執可得。無性釋云：無量行相者，謂種種我法境界影像。一云依他因緣我法，一云所執我法。意識遍計者，謂即意識，說名遍計。顛倒生相者，謂亂識所取能取義相生因。一云遍計所執境義相生顛倒亂識之因，一云所執無量行相與依他起相見生因。故名遍計所執者，謂即遍計所執義相，名為遍計所執自性。自相實無，唯有遍計所執可得者，謂於實無我及法中，唯有遍計所執影像相貌可得，故名遍計所執。依成唯識第八卷云：周遍度故名遍計，即能計度虗妄分別。分別謂彼所執蘊界處等，若法若我自性差別，總名遍計所執自性。然能遍計自有兩說：一云：八識及諸心所有徧攝者，皆能遍計虗妄分別為自性故，皆似所取能取現故，說阿賴耶以遍計所執自性妄執種為所緣故。此是安慧論師義也。有義：第六第七心品執我法者，是能遍計，唯說意識能遍計故。廣說如彼。此即護法菩薩宗。深密經云：虗妄分別相、因緣相、第一義相。真諦三藏所翻諸論，分別性、依他性、真實性。楞伽經云：妄相自性、緣起自性、成自性者，譯家別故。今言遍計所執者，舉遍計意取所執。若遍計所執者，是依主釋。若以所執對性，即持業釋，所執即性故。二者依他起。攝大乘云：若依他自性實唯有識似義顯現之所依止，云何成依他起？何因緣故名依他起？從自薰習種子所生依他緣起故，名依他起。生剎那後無有功能自然住故，名依他起。世親釋云：從自因緣生，生已無能蹔時安住，名依他起。無性釋云：謂從遍計所執名言熏習種生，依自種子他所生故，名依他起。此說彼體依他而生。生剎那後無有功能自然住者，此說彼體依而住。由此二因名依他起。所言住者，依勝軍義，生剎那後別立住時，名依他住。依護法宗，即生剎那蹔有用故，義說為住。有為諸法依因託緣而得生起，名依他起。故三十唯識云：依他起自性，分別緣所生。護法釋云：依他眾緣而得生起，名依他起。三者圓成實性。攝大乘云：由無變異性故，又由清淨所緣性故，一切善法最勝性故，由最勝義名圓成實。世親釋云：由無變異性故者，謂無虗誑性，如不虗誑臣。由最勝義名圓成實者，謂由清淨所緣性故，最勝性故名圓成實，如圓成衣。無性釋云：圓滿成就真實為性，略不說喻，餘同世親。成唯識云：二空所顯圓滿成就諸法實性，名圓成實。顯此遍常體非虗謬，簡自共相虗空我等。解云：二空所顯者，略出體性具三義故，名圓成實。一者圓滿即顯遍滿義，簡色是質礙等自相。二者成就即顯常義，簡諸共相，苦無常等雖是共相，即無常故。三者諸法實性顯非虗誑，簡於虗空，外道我等雖說遍常，是虗謬故。又成唯識云：無漏有為離倒究竟勝用周遍，亦得此名。然此經中說初非後說得名者，皆持業釋遍計所執，乃至圓成即是性故。
> Commentary says: This is listing the names. However, the name "three characteristics" has both a general and a specific sense. When we say "three characteristics," that is the general name. "Three" indicates the number. "Characteristics" refers to the essential nature, or the marks or features—this is the "number-bearing compound" among the six types of compounds. Details are as explained in separate chapters. As for the specific names: First, the "Nature of Mere Imagination" (Parikalpita-svabhāva). The \*Compendium of the Mahāyāna\* (Mahāyānasaṃgraha), Volume Four, says: "How does it become the nature of mere imagination? For what reason is it called the nature of mere imagination with its countless forms? The consciousness (manas) imaginatively constructs and gives rise to distorted appearances, hence it is called the nature of mere imagination. Its own nature is ultimately nonexistent; only the imagined construction itself can be apprehended, so it is called the nature of mere imagination." Explanation: This passage answers both questions at once, or perhaps answers the first two questions in sequence. Vasubandhu's commentary says: "Countless forms" means the forms of all objects of experience. "The consciousness imaginatively constructs" means that the consciousness itself is what we call imagination. "Gives rise to distorted appearances" means it produces the distorted appearances that serve as objects of deluded perception. "Its own nature is ultimately nonexistent" means there is truly no such essence. "Only the imagined construction itself can be apprehended" means only what is grasped by the deluded consciousness can be apprehended. Asaṅga's commentary says: "Countless forms" means the countless images of self and dharmas. One interpretation: the self and dharmas arising from causes and conditions of the dependent nature; another: the imagined self and dharmas. "The consciousness imaginatively constructs" means that the consciousness itself is what we call imagination. "Gives rise to distorted appearances" means it is the cause that generates the distorted appearances of subject and object grasped by the deluded consciousness. One interpretation: it is the cause of deluded consciousness arising from the imagined object-forms; another: it is the cause of the imagined countless forms and the subjective and objective aspects of the dependent nature. "Hence it is called the nature of mere imagination" means that the imagined object-forms themselves are termed the nature of mere imagination. "Its own nature is ultimately nonexistent; only the imagined construction itself can be apprehended" means that in what is truly devoid of self and dharmas, only the imagined images and marks can be apprehended, hence the name. According to the \*Demonstration of Consciousness-Only\* (Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi), Volume Eight: "It is called 'imagination' because it deliberates universally, that is, it falsely discriminates. 'Discrimination' refers to the imagined aggregates, elements, and sense-fields—whether dharmas or self, with their intrinsic natures and distinctions—all collectively termed the nature of mere imagination." However, there are two views on what can engage in imagination: One view says: The eight consciousnesses and all mental factors that have universal apprehending capacity can all imagine, because their nature is false discrimination, and they all manifest as seeming subjects and objects. Thus, it is said that the ālaya-consciousness takes the imagined nature's falsely attached seeds as its object. This is Master Anhui's (sthirananda's) doctrine. Another view: Only the sixth and seventh consciousnesses, which grasp at self and dharmas, engage in imagination, since it is specifically said that the consciousness (manas) can imagine. Details are as explained there. This is the tradition of Master Dharmapāla. The \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\* speaks of the characteristics of false discrimination, the characteristics of causes and conditions, and the characteristics of ultimate truth. In Paramārtha's translation of various treatises: the nature of discrimination, the nature of dependence, and the nature of reality. The \*Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra\* says: the nature of false appearances, the nature of dependent arising, and the nature of ultimate reality—these are differences in translators' terminology. Here, when we say "the nature of mere imagination" (遍計所執), we take the act of imagination to point to what is imagined. If it is "what is imagined by imagination" (遍計所執), it is a governing compound (dependent word). If we take "what is imagined" in relation to "nature" (性), it is a possessive compound, because what is imagined is itself the nature. Second, the "Nature of Dependent Arising" (Paratantra-svabhāva). The \*Compendium\* says: "If the dependent nature truly is consciousness-only, serving as the basis for the manifestation of seeming objects—how does it become the dependent nature? For what reason is it called the dependent nature? Because it arises from seeds of its own habitual tendencies, dependent on other conditions, it is called the dependent nature. Because after arising in an instant it has no power to remain by itself, it is called the dependent nature." Vasubandhu's commentary says: "Arising from its own causes and conditions, and after arising, unable to remain even momentarily, it is called the dependent nature." Asaṅga's commentary says: "It arises from seeds of conceptualization and habituation belonging to the imagined nature. Because it arises depending on other factors from its own seeds, it is called the dependent nature. This says its essence arises depending on others. 'After arising in an instant it has no power to remain by itself' says its essence exists depending on others. These two reasons together make it the dependent nature." Regarding "remain," according to Master Senjuna (Jayasena), after arising there is a distinct phase of remaining, which is called "remaining dependently." According to Dharmapāla's tradition, since there is temporary function in the instant of arising, it is figuratively called 'remaining.' All conditioned dharmas arise in dependence on causes and conditions, hence the name "dependent arising." Therefore, the \*Thirty Verses on Consciousness-Only\* says: "The dependent nature arises from the conditions of discrimination." Dharmapāla explains: "Arising in dependence on various conditions is called the dependent nature." Third, the "Nature of Perfect Reality" (Pariniṣpanna-svabhāva). The \*Compendium\* says: "Because of its unchanging nature, because of its nature as the pure object of contemplation, because it is the supreme nature of all good dharmas, and because it is the ultimate meaning, it is called perfect reality." Vasubandhu's commentary says: "'Because of its unchanging nature' means it is without deception, like a loyal minister. 'Because it is the ultimate meaning, it is called perfect reality' means that because it is the nature of the pure object of contemplation, being supreme, it is called perfect reality, like perfectly finished clothing." Asaṅga's commentary says: "Perfect, complete, and real in nature—the metaphors are omitted for brevity; the rest is the same as Vasubandhu." The \*Demonstration of Consciousness-Only\* says: "That which is revealed by the emptiness of both self and dharmas—the perfect, complete, and real nature of all dharmas—is called perfect reality. This shows it is universal, permanent, and not false, distinguishing it from the specific and general characteristics, from empty space, and from the self of non-Buddhists." Explanation: "Revealed by the emptiness of both" briefly indicates its essence, which possesses three characteristics, hence the name "perfect reality": 1. "Perfect" indicates universality, distinguishing it from the self-characteristics of forms such as physical obstruction. 2. "Complete" indicates permanence, distinguishing it from general characteristics—suffering and impermanence, though universal, are impermanent. 3. "The real nature of all dharmas" indicates non-deception, distinguishing it from empty space and the self of non-Buddhists, who, though claiming universality and permanence, are mistaken. Furthermore, the \*Demonstration of Consciousness-Only\* says: "Uncontaminated conditioned phenomena, being free from distortion, ultimate in function, and universally pervasive, can also receive this name." However, in this sūtra, when the first name is mentioned and not the later ones, it is always through a possessive compound, because the imagined nature, the dependent nature, and the perfect nature each are themselves the nature.
云何諸法遍計所執相？
> What is the aspect of false conceptualization inherent in all phenomena?
釋曰：自下第三次第別釋。別釋三分為三，就初相中先問後答，此即問也。
> Commentary: Now, in the third stage, we will explain each part separately. This breakdown is divided into three sections. The first part consists of a question followed by an answer, and this is the question.
一切法名假安立自性差別，乃至為令隨起言說。
> All phenomena are merely names provisionally established, distinguished by their own inherent nature, even up to the point of giving rise to spoken expressions.
釋曰：此即答也。謂一切法無實自性，但隨妄情名言假立我諸自性。如說謂我，或說色等我法自性，或說假我，或說實我，或可見色不可見等我法差別。如是假立自性差別已，乃至為令世間有情隨起言說，依成唯識第八復云：謂所妄執蘊處界等若我若法自性差別。此所妄執自性差別，總名遍計所執自性。廣說自性及差別義，如世親無性攝大乘釋第四卷說，及瑜伽論七十三等。
> The commentary explains: This is the answer. It means that all phenomena lack any true self-nature. They are merely falsely established as self and attributes through deluded mental constructions and conventional labels. For example, one might speak of "self," or of "form" and other self-natures of dharmas, or of a conventional self, or of a real self, or of distinctions such as visible form and invisible form among self and dharmas. After thus falsely establishing self-natures and their distinctions, in order to allow worldly beings to engage in verbal expression, the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness Only), in its eighth chapter, further states: "What is falsely clung to as the aggregates, elements, and sense-fields—whether as self or as dharmas—its self-nature and distinctions." This falsely clung-to self-nature and its distinctions are collectively called the "nature of universal conceptualization" (parikalpita-svabhāva). For a detailed explanation of the meanings of self-nature and distinctions, see Vasubandhu's and Asaṅga's \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\* commentary, volume four, as well as the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*, volume seventy-three and onward.
云何諸法依他起相？
> What is the characteristic of dependent arising in all phenomena?
釋曰：此下第二辨依他起，先問後答。此即問也。
> Explanation: Next, the second part examines the Dependent Nature. First, there is a question, then an answer. This is the question.
謂一切法緣生自性，則此有故彼有，此生故彼生。謂無明緣行，乃至招集純大苦蘊。
> All phenomena arise from causes and conditions. When this exists, that exists; when this is born, that is born. Ignorance conditions volitional actions, and so on up to the accumulation of this entire mass of suffering.
釋曰：此即答也。文有兩節，初總相出體，謂從緣生。一切煩惱業生雜染，從緣生故皆名依他。汎論依他自有二種：一者雜染、二者清淨。故成唯識第八云：有漏無漏皆依他起，依他眾緣而得起故。頌言分別緣所生者，應知亦說染分依他。此經亦爾，說染非淨。言則此有故等者，指事別釋。然前二句有差別者，薩婆多宗如俱舍論第九卷云：何故世尊說前二句？謂依此有故彼有、此生故彼生。為於緣起知決定故，依無明有諸行得有，非離無明可有諸行。又為顯示諸支傳生，謂依此支有彼支得有，由彼支生餘支得生。又為顯示三際傳生，謂依前際有中際得有，由中際有後際得生。又為顯示親傳二緣，謂有無明無明無間生行，或展轉力諸行方生一云：無明支後即起行支，名無間生行。起無明已，次起無記心，後起行支，名展轉力諸行方生。一云：無明望行名無間生，無明望識等名展轉生。有餘師釋：如是二句為破無因、常因二論。此有立破，具如彼論。軌範諸師釋：此二句為顯因果不斷及生，謂依無明不斷、諸行不斷，即由無明生故諸行得生。如是展轉皆應廣說。若廣分別，如順正理第二十五。依瑜伽論第十卷云：問：云何說言此有故彼有？答：由未斷緣餘得生義故。問：云何此生故彼生？答：由無常緣餘得生義故。依雜集第四云：相者，謂無作緣生故、無常緣生故、勢用緣生故，是緣生相。由此相故，薄伽梵說：此有故彼有，此生故彼生。謂無明緣行，乃至廣說。此有彼有者，顯無作緣生義，唯由有緣故果法得有，非緣有實作用能生果法。此生故彼生者，顯無常緣生義，非無生法為因故，少所生法而成得立。
> Commentary says: This is the answer. The passage has two sections. The first gives an overview of its nature, namely that it arises from conditions. All afflictions, karma, and contaminated existence arise from conditions, so they are all called "dependent." Generally speaking, "dependent" has two kinds: one is contaminated, the other is pure. Thus the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\* (Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness Only), Chapter 8, says: Both the contaminated and the uncontaminated arise dependently, because they arise depending on various conditions. In the verse, "arising from conditions as discriminated" should be understood as also referring to the contaminated aspect of dependent arising. This sutra is the same, speaking of the contaminated, not the pure. The phrase "when this exists, that exists" and so on refers to a specific explanation of the matter. However, the first two lines have differences \[in interpretation\]. According to the Sarvāstivāda school, as in the \*Abhidharmakośa\* (Treasury of Abhidharma), Chapter 9: Why did the World-Honored One speak the first two lines—"when this exists, that exists; when this arises, that arises"? It is to make known certainty regarding dependent origination. Because of ignorance, the formations exist; apart from ignorance, the formations cannot exist. It also displays the successive arising of the links—because this link exists, that link comes to be; because that link arises, the other link arises. It also displays the successive arising across the three times—because the past exists, the present comes to be; because the present exists, the future arises. It also displays both direct and indirect conditions—namely, having ignorance, the formations arise immediately after ignorance, or alternatively, the formations arise through the power of mutual dependence.\\(^1\\) Another teacher explains: These two lines are spoken to refute the two theories of no-cause and permanent-cause.\\(^2\\) The teachers of the tradition explain: These two lines are to show that causes and effects are uninterrupted and arise—namely, because ignorance is uninterrupted, the formations are uninterrupted; that is, because ignorance arises, the formations arise. This should be elaborated in the same way throughout. If fully differentiated, see \*Nyāyānusāra\* (Conformity to Correct Logic), Chapter 25. According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Stages of the Yogin), Chapter 10: Question: How is it said, "when this exists, that exists"? Answer: Because the remaining arises through the condition of what has not been cut off. Question: How is it said, "when this arises, that arises"? Answer: Because the remaining arises through the condition of impermanence. According to the \*Saṃgīti\* (Compendium), Chapter 4: The characteristic is: dependent origination without an agent, dependent origination through impermanence, dependent origination through efficacy—these are the characteristics of dependent origination. With these characteristics, the Blessed One said: "When this exists, that exists; when this arises, that arises"—namely, ignorance conditions the formations, and so on, up to the full elaboration. "When this exists, that exists" reveals the meaning of origination without an agent—only through the existence of a condition does a resultant exist; the condition does not have a real function that produces the resultant. "When this arises, that arises" reveals the meaning of origination through impermanence—it is not that an unarisen thing serves as a cause, such that a small arisen thing could be established. --- \\(^1\\) One explanation: After the ignorance link, the formation link arises immediately—called "arising without interval." Having arisen ignorance, next arises a neutral mind, then the formation link arises—called "formations arise through the power of mutual dependence." Another explanation: Ignorance with respect to the formations is called "arising without interval"; ignorance with respect to consciousness and so on is called "arising through mutual dependence." \\(^2\\) The establishment and refutation of these two views are fully explained in that treatise.
無明緣行等者，顯勢用緣生義。雖復諸法無作無常，然不隨一法為緣故一切果生。所以者何？以諸法功能差別。如說：無明力故諸行得生，乃至生力故得有老死。若廣分別，如彌勒菩薩所問論第五卷說。
> When ignorance conditions volitional formations, this illustrates how things arise dependent on causes and conditions. Although all phenomena are without a creator and are impermanent, it is not that one single cause brings about all effects. Why? Because each phenomenon has its own distinct function. As it is said: through the force of ignorance, volitional formations arise; through the force of birth, aging and death occur. For a detailed analysis, see the fifth volume of the \*Questions of Maitreya Bodhisattva\*.
招集純大苦薀者，依俱舍論，如是純言顯唯有行無我我所，大苦薀言顯苦積集無初無後，集言為顯諸苦薀生。依大毗婆沙第二十四云：復次此十二支緣起法，有根有莖、有枝有葉、有華有果，猶如大樹。此中根者謂無明行，莖者謂識名色，枝者謂六處，葉者謂觸受，華者謂愛取有，果者謂生老死。此十二支緣起法樹，或有華有果、或無華無果。有華有果者謂異生及有學，無華果者謂阿羅漢。依瑜伽第十云：問：於緣起中何等是苦牙？誰守養苦牙？何等為苦樹？答：無明行緣所引識乃至受是苦牙，受緣所引愛乃至有是守養苦牙，生與老死當知是苦樹。若依攝論，約十一識明依他起。故攝大乘云：論曰：此中何者依他起相？謂阿賴耶識為種子，虗妄分別所攝諸識。此復云何？謂身、身者、受者識、彼所受識、彼能受識、世識、數識、處識、言說識、自他差別識、善趣惡趣死生識。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，此由有支熏習種子。乃至云：如是名為依他起相。世親攝論第四釋云：身謂眼等五界，身者謂染汙意，無性云：眼等五識所依意界，名身者識也。能受者謂意界，無性云：第六識所依意界，名受者識。彼所受識者謂色等六外界，彼能受識者謂六識界，世識者謂生死相續不斷住。無性云：世識者，謂是三時影現。數識者，謂算計性。無性云：謂似一等筭數影現。處識者，謂器世間。無性云：謂似聚落蘭等影現。言說識者，謂見聞覺知四種言說。如是諸識，皆用所知依中所說名言熏習差別為因。自他差別識者，謂依此差別，此用前說我見熏習差別為因。無性云：謂身等識我我所執相續不斷，執我我所、他他所等有差別故。善趣惡趣生死識者，謂生死趣種種差別，此由前說有支熏習差別種子。無性云：謂似天人及捺落迦、傍生、餓鬼死生影現也。廣如無性、世親釋論第四。然此諸識有差別者，若依無性，眼等五識所依意界名身者識，第六意識所依意界名受者識。解云：無性論意：眼等五識所依意界即是賴耶名身者識，第六意識所依意界即是末那名受者識。若依世親與此相翻，第七末那名身者識，第八賴耶名受者識。故彼論云：身者謂染汙意，受者謂意界。又此諸識數有差別，若依梁論及成唯識，皆云十一。若依攝大乘，自有兩文，前文十一，後文十二，謂開善趣惡趣死生識以為二故：一善趣惡趣識，二死生識。故彼論云：業果異熟無數量故，所受死生無數量故。無性釋云：善趣惡趣及與死生。解云：說故及言，故知十二。世親不釋，故為十一，於理無違。
> Gathering the Complete Aggregation of Suffering: According to the \*Abhidharmakośa\*, the word "complete" indicates that this is only about the conditioned formations, with no self or anything belonging to a self. The phrase "aggregation of great suffering" indicates that suffering accumulates without beginning or end, and the word "aggregation" shows that the various sufferings arise together. According to the \*Mahāvibhāṣā\* (Volume 24): "Moreover, this twelve-link dependent origination is like a great tree with roots, a trunk, branches, leaves, flowers, and fruits. Here, the roots are ignorance and volitional formations; the trunk is consciousness and name-and-form; the branches are the six sense bases; the leaves are contact and feeling; the flowers are craving, clinging, and becoming; and the fruits are birth, aging, and death. This tree of dependent origination may have flowers and fruits, or may lack them. Those with flowers and fruits are ordinary beings and those in training; those without are arhats." According to the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Volume 10): "Question: In dependent origination, what is the sprout of suffering? What nurtures the sprout of suffering? What is the tree of suffering? Answer: Consciousness through feeling, brought about by ignorance and volitional formations, is the sprout of suffering. Craving through becoming, brought about by feeling, nurtures the sprout of suffering. Birth and aging-and-death should be understood as the tree of suffering." According to the \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\*, the dependent nature is explained through eleven types of consciousness. The text states: "What is the dependent nature? It is the various consciousnesses rooted in the alaya-consciousness as seed and included within false discrimination. What are these? They are: the consciousness of the body, the consciousness of the embodiment, the consciousness of the experiencer, the consciousness of what is experienced, the consciousness of the experiencer, the consciousness of time, the consciousness of number, the consciousness of place, the consciousness of speech, the consciousness of distinctions between self and other, and the consciousness of rebirth in good and bad destinations. Among these, the consciousness of the body, the embodiment, the experiencer, what is experienced, the one who experiences, time, number, place, and speech arise from the perfuming of verbal expressions. The consciousness of distinctions between self and other arises from the perfuming of the view of self. The consciousness of rebirth in good and bad destinations arises from the perfuming of the factors of existence. Thus is the dependent nature described." Vasubandhu's commentary (Volume 4) explains: "The body refers to the five sense faculties (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body). The embodiment refers to the defiled mind. As Asaṅga explains: the mental faculty that serves as the support for the five consciousnesses is called the consciousness of the embodiment. The experiencer refers to the mental faculty. Asaṅga explains: the mental faculty that serves as the support for the sixth consciousness is called the consciousness of the experiencer. The consciousness of what is experienced refers to the six external sense objects (forms, sounds, etc.). The consciousness of the one who experiences refers to the six consciousnesses. The consciousness of time refers to the continuous flow of birth and death without interruption. Asaṅga explains: the consciousness of time is the appearance of the three periods (past, present, future). The consciousness of number refers to the nature of counting. Asaṅga explains: it appears as numbers like one, etc. The consciousness of place refers to the physical world. Asaṅga explains: it appears as villages, forests, and so forth. The consciousness of speech refers to the four types of expression: seeing, hearing, sensing, and knowing. These consciousnesses all arise from the perfuming of verbal expressions described in the basis of perception. The consciousness of distinctions between self and other arises from the perfuming of the view of self, as previously explained. Asaṅga explains: the consciousnesses of the body, etc., continuously grasp at self and what belongs to self, with distinctions between self, other, and so forth. The consciousness of rebirth in good and bad destinations refers to the various rebirth destinies, arising from the perfuming of the factors of existence described earlier. Asaṅga explains: it appears as the birth and death of gods, humans, hell beings, animals, and hungry ghosts." This is elaborated extensively in the commentaries of Asaṅga and Vasubandhu (Volume 4). There are differences in how these consciousnesses are understood. According to Asaṅga, the mental faculty supporting the five sense consciousnesses (the alaya-consciousness) is called the consciousness of the embodiment, while the mental faculty supporting the sixth consciousness (the manas) is called the consciousness of the experiencer. According to Vasubandhu, this is reversed: the seventh consciousness (manas) is the embodiment, and the eighth consciousness (alaya) is the experiencer. Thus, his text states: "The embodiment is the defiled mind, and the experiencer is the mental faculty." There are also differences in the number of consciousnesses. According to the \*Liang Lun\* (Paramārtha's translation) and the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*, there are eleven. According to the \*Mahāyānasaṃgraha\* itself, there are two versions: the earlier passage lists eleven, while the later passage lists twelve, because it splits the consciousness of rebirth in good and bad destinations into two: one for good and bad destinations, and one for birth and death. Thus, that text states: "The results of actions are innumerable, and the births and deaths experienced are innumerable." Asaṅga's commentary explains: "Good and bad destinations, as well as birth and death." The word "as well as" indicates twelve. Vasubandhu does not split them, so he maintains eleven, which is also valid.
云何諸法圓成實相？
> What is the ultimate reality of all things?
釋曰：自下第三釋圓成實，於中先問後答，此即問也。
> Explanation: Next, the third part explains the Perfected Nature. Within this, there is first a question and then an answer. This is the question.
謂一切法平等真如。
> All dharmas are equal in their true nature, which is thusness.
釋曰：此即答也。於中有二：初正出體，後顯勝用。此即初也，謂前所說遍一切法一味真如以為體性。若中邊，圓成實性自有二種，故第二云：此圓成實總有二種，無為、有為有差別故。無為總攝真如涅槃無變異故，名圓成實；有為總攝一切聖道於境無倒故，亦名圓成實。若依攝大乘，圓成實性自有四種，故彼論云：云何應知圓成實性？應知宣說四清淨法：一者自性清淨，謂真如、空、實際、無相、勝義、法界。二離垢清淨，謂即此離一切障垢。三者得此道清淨，謂一切菩提分法波羅蜜多等。四者生此境清淨，謂諸大乘妙正法教。由此法教清淨緣故，非遍計所執自性；最淨法界等流性故，非依他自性。如是四法，總攝一切清淨法盡。此中有二頌：
> The commentary explains: This is the answer. Within it, there are two parts: first, directly presenting the essence; second, showing its excellent functions. This is the first part. That is, the aforementioned "one flavor of thusness pervading all dharmas" is taken as the essence. According to the \*Middle Way\* (Madhyānta-vibhāga), the perfect accomplished nature (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva) itself has two types, so the second \[section\] says: This perfect accomplished nature generally has two kinds, distinguished as the unconditioned and the conditioned. The unconditioned broadly includes thusness and nirvāṇa, which are immutable, hence called "perfect accomplished." The conditioned broadly includes all noble paths, which are free from error regarding objects, hence also called "perfect accomplished." According to the \*Compendium of the Great Vehicle\* (Mahāyāna-saṃgraha), the perfect accomplished nature itself has four types, so that treatise says: How should one understand the perfect accomplished nature? It should be understood as the four kinds of purity: First, intrinsic purity, namely thusness, emptiness, ultimate reality, signlessness, ultimate meaning, and the dharma realm. Second, purity from defilement, namely that same \[thusness\] freed from all hindrances and defilements. Third, purity of the path leading to this, namely all factors of enlightenment and perfections (pāramitās). Fourth, purity of the sphere giving rise to this, namely the sublime and correct Dharma teachings of the Great Vehicle. Because these Dharma teachings are pure in nature, they are not the imputed nature (parikalpita-svabhāva); being the outflow of the purest dharma realm, they are not the dependent nature (paratantra-svabhāva). These four dharmas collectively encompass all pure dharmas without exception. Here there are two verses:
幻等說於生， 說無計所執。 若說四清淨，是謂圓成實。 自性與離垢， 清淨道所緣，一切清淨法， 皆四相所攝。
> Illusions and such are said to arise, Yet what is spoken of is not the grasped self. When the four kinds of purity are taught, This is called the perfected reality. Inherent nature and freedom from defilement, The pure path and its objects of focus— All purified phenomena Are encompassed by these four aspects.
廣如無性世親釋論第五卷說。此經上來別約三法釋三性義。若依中邊第二、成唯識第八，約四諦義通釋三性。若依雜集第五，約薀、界、處三科法門通說三性。若依大般若，約一切法通釋三性。故無性釋論第四卷云：如大般若波羅蜜多經中亦說，佛告慈氏：若於彼彼行相事中，遍計為色、為受、為想、為行、為識，乃至為一切佛法依止名想施設言說，遍計以為諸色自性乃至一切佛法自性，是名遍計所執色乃至遍計所執一切佛法。若復於彼行相事中，唯有分別法性安立，分別為緣起諸戲論，假立名想施設言說，謂之為色乃至謂為一切佛法，是名分別色乃至分別一切佛法。若諸如來出現於世、若不出世，法性安立、法界安立。由彼遍計所執色故，此分別色於常常時、於恒恒時，是真如性、無自性性、法無我性、實際之性，是名法性色。乃至由彼遍計所執一切佛法故，此分別一切佛法於常常時、於恒恒時，乃至是名法性一切佛法。廣說如經。
> As extensively explained in the fifth volume of the \*Commentary on the Treatise\* by Wuxing and Vasubandhu, this sutra has thus far discussed the three natures (\*trisvabhāva\*) through the lens of three aspects. If we follow the second chapter of the \*Middle Way\* and the eighth chapter of the \*Consciousness-Only Treatise\*, the three natures are interpreted comprehensively through the four noble truths. According to the fifth chapter of the \*Miscellaneous Collection\*, the three natures are explained generally through the three categories of the aggregates, realms, and sense bases. In line with the \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra\*, the three natures are expounded universally through all phenomena. Thus, the fourth volume of Wuxing's commentary states: As also taught in the \*Great Perfection of Wisdom Sutra\*, the Buddha told Maitreya: When, with regard to various aspects and events, one conceives them as form, feeling, perception, mental formations, or consciousness—even extending to all phenomena of Buddhahood as objects of reliance, names, constructs, and verbal expressions—and conceives them as the self-nature of form, and so on, up to the self-nature of all phenomena of Buddhahood, this is called the conceptualized form, and so on, up to the conceptualized all phenomena of Buddhahood. Furthermore, when, with regard to those aspects and events, there is only the establishment of the nature of discrimination, where discrimination serves as the condition for various conceptual proliferations, and one provisionally imposes names, constructs, and verbal expressions, calling them form, and so on, up to calling them all phenomena of Buddhahood—this is called discriminating form, and so on, up to discriminating all phenomena of Buddhahood. Whether the Tathāgatas appear in the world or do not appear, the nature of reality is established, and the realm of reality is established. Because of that conceptualized form, this discriminating form, at all times and eternally, is of the nature of suchness, the nature of absence of self-nature, the nature of selflessness of phenomena, and the nature of ultimate reality. This is called form as reality-nature. Likewise, because of that conceptualized all phenomena of Buddhahood, this discriminating all phenomena of Buddhahood, at all times and eternally, is likewise of the nature of suchness, and so on—this is called all phenomena of Buddhahood as reality-nature. This is explained in detail as in the sutra.
於此真如，諸菩薩眾勇猛精進為因緣故，如理作意無倒思惟為因緣故，乃能通達。於此通達漸漸修集，乃至無上正等菩提方證圓滿。
> With this true thusness as their foundation, Bodhisattvas rely on diligent effort and correct, undistorted contemplation as the causes and conditions. Through these, they come to understand it deeply. Gradually cultivating and accumulating along this path of understanding, they finally realize full and perfect Enlightenment—supreme, right, and universal awakening.
釋曰：此顯勝用。謂於真如諸菩薩眾資糧位中勇猛精進，於加行位無倒思惟。由此因緣，見道位中乃能通達，住修道位漸漸修集，至究竟位方證圓滿。若依瑜伽第七十三，有其三用：一、證得清淨用，二、解脫二縛二縛用，三、引發功德用。故彼論云：乃至能令證得清淨，能令解脫一切相縛及麤重縛，亦令引發一切功德。解云：如次即當見等三道。然此三相體性寬狹，諸說不同。且依真諦三藏說云：第八賴耶名依他起，眼等七識為分別性，依他無生、分別無相為真實性。又解：眼等八識為依他起，所變相分為分別性，依他無生、分別無相為真實性。又解：眼等八識見分、相分名依他起，妄所執境為分別性，依他無生、分別無相為真實性。如上兩解，理且不然。眼等八識及諸相分等從緣生，云何偏說第八賴耶名依他起，眼等七識為分別性？分別無相、依他無生不異二性，如何說彼名真實性？如此等過，不可具陳。已外諸說，恐繁不敘。今述諸教所說三性，總有二門：一、所執雜染不倒門。謂妄所執實我、實法都無所有，但隨妄情而施設故，說之為有，如是皆名遍計所執。一切雜染諸有漏法從緣生者名依他起，依因託緣而得生故。一切有為無漏道諦及諸無為名圓成實，二種皆是不顛倒故。二所執緣生不變門，謂妄所執實我法等隨情有故名所執性，有漏無漏一切有為皆依他起，一切諸法平等真如不變異故名圓成實。於上二門諸教不同，自有聖教說前非後，如楞伽經第四卷說：大慧正智如，如者不可壞，故名成自性。辨中邊論亦同此說。自有聖教說後非前，如瑜伽論七十四云：問：第二自性幾所攝？答：四所攝。問：第三自性幾所攝？答：一所攝。自有聖教二種俱有，如成唯識第八卷云：分別緣所生。應知且說染分依他，淨分依他亦圓成故。或諸染淨心心所法皆名分別，能緣慮故。是則一切染淨依他皆是此中依他起攝。攝論第四云：二者依他，雜染清淨性不成故。世親釋云：由即如是依他起性，若遍計時即成雜染，無分別時即成清淨。由二分故，一性不成。無性釋意亦同此說。今此一部說後非前，唯說真如圓成實故。或可說前非後，唯說染法為緣生故。或可通有二義，前二說故。若廣分別，如三性章。
> This passage explains the extraordinary functions of suchness. It describes how bodhisattvas, during the stage of accumulating merit, apply vigorous effort, and during the stage of intensive practice, engage in correct contemplation. Through these causes and conditions, they are able to penetrate reality at the stage of seeing the truth, gradually cultivate during the stage of cultivation, and only at the ultimate stage attain complete perfection. According to the sixtieth-seventh chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi, there are three functions: first, the function of attaining purity; second, the function of liberating from the two kinds of bondage—bondage to appearances and bondage to habitual tendencies; and third, the function of arousing virtuous qualities. That treatise states: "It can lead to the attainment of purity, can liberate from all bondage to appearances and bondage to habitual tendencies, and can also arouse all virtuous qualities." According to the explanation, these correspond respectively to the three stages of seeing, cultivating, and ultimate attainment. However, there are various interpretations regarding the precise scope of these three natures. According to Master Paramārtha's explanation, the eighth consciousness, the storehouse consciousness, is the nature that arises dependent on conditions; the seven consciousnesses from the eye onward constitute the nature of discrimination; and the absence of arising in the dependent nature and the absence of characteristics in the discriminating nature constitute the true nature. Another interpretation holds that the eight consciousnesses constitute the dependent nature; the discriminating aspects they project constitute the discriminating nature; and the absence of arising in the dependent nature and the absence of characteristics in the discriminating nature constitute the true nature. Yet another interpretation says that the seeing and perceived aspects of the eight consciousnesses constitute the dependent nature; the objects falsely clung to as real constitute the discriminating nature; and the absence of arising in the dependent nature and the absence of characteristics in the discriminating nature constitute the true nature. The above interpretations are not entirely reasonable. Since the eight consciousnesses and their various aspects arise from causes and conditions, why specifically designate only the eighth consciousness, the storehouse consciousness, as the dependent nature, and the seven consciousnesses from the eye onward as the discriminating nature? Moreover, the absence of characteristics in discrimination and the absence of arising in dependence are not different from the two natures themselves, so how can they be called the true nature? Such flaws cannot be enumerated exhaustively. As for other explanations, they are too numerous to mention. Now, presenting what the various teachings say about the three natures, there are generally two approaches. First, the gate of the imagined nature as defiled and the non-inverted: The imagined nature refers to falsely clinging to a real self and real dharmas, which have no existence whatsoever. They are only posited based on deluded mental states and are hence spoken of as existing—all such are called the imagined nature. All defiled dharmas that arise from causes and conditions are called the dependent nature, because they arise based on causes and conditions. All conditioned unconditioned paths and all unconditioned dharmas are called the perfect nature, because both are free from inversion. Second, the gate of the imagined nature, the dependent arising, and the immutable: The imagined nature refers to the real self and dharmas falsely clung to, which exist only according to deluded states. All conditioned dharmas, whether defiled or undefiled, are the dependent nature. The true suchness, which is equally present in all dharmas and never changes, constitutes the perfect nature. The scriptures differ on which of these two approaches they endorse. Some teachings affirm the first and not the second, as in the fourth chapter of the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra: "Mahāmati, true wisdom and suchness, being indestructible, are called the perfect nature." The Discrimination of the Middle and Extremes treatise also agrees with this. Other teachings affirm the second and not the first, as in the seventy-fourth chapter of the Yogācārabhūmi, where it is asked: which categories does the second nature include? Answer: it includes four. Which categories does the third nature include? Answer: it includes one. Still other teachings affirm both, as in the eighth chapter of the Consciousness-Only treatise, which states: "What arises from discrimination should be known as the defiled aspect of the dependent nature; the pure aspect of the dependent nature is also the perfect nature." Alternatively, all defiled and pure mental states and mental factors are called discriminations, because they engage in cognition. Thus, all defiled and pure dependent natures are included within the dependent nature in this context. The fourth chapter of the Mahāyāna Compendium states: "Second is the dependent nature, whose nature of being either defiled or pure is not established."Vasubandhu's commentary explains: because this very dependent nature, when discriminated, becomes defiled, and when free from discrimination, becomes pure. Due to these two aspects, its nature as a single entity is not established. The commentary by Asaṅga conveys the same meaning. This entire discourse follows the second approach and not the first, because it only regards true suchness as the perfect nature. Alternatively, it may be said to follow the first approach and not the second, because it only regards defiled dharmas as arising from conditions. Or it may be said to encompass both meanings, based on the two interpretations above. For a detailed analysis, see the chapter on the three natures.
善男子！如眩翳人，眼中所有眩翳過患，遍計所執相，當知亦爾。
> Good man, just as a person with blurred vision sees faults and distortions in their eyes, you should know that the characteristics we project onto the world are likewise mere illusions.
釋曰：自下第二舉喻重釋，於中有二：初明翳淨眼境三相喻，後善男子下頗胝迦寶四事喻。前中三喻即分為三：初眩翳過患喻，次眩翳眾相喻，後淨眼本境喻。例有二節：初正明喻說，後舉法同喻。此即第一眩翳過患喻。此喻意云：由眼有翳，便發眼識及眼識同時分別意識，由此二識引生第二念中分別意識作毛輪等解。然毛輪自有二種：一者分別意識所計實毛輪等，即說此為眼翳過患，以此過患喻所執性。二者即彼分別意識所依所託似毛輪相，即說此為眩翳眾相，喻依他起，如後當說。此用過患喻所執性，故言遍計所執當知亦爾。或可眩翳過患者，即說眩翳名為過患。此意說言：由所執故生依他起，似由眩翳現毛輪等。故瑜伽論七十三云：如眼若有翳等過患，便有髮毛輪等翳相現前可得。若無彼患，便不可得，但有自性，無顛倒取。問：如何依他喻所執性？答：無淨色喻圓成故，故無有失。問：翳眼、眼識見毛輪不？解云：西方諸師自有兩釋：一、安慧宗，眼等五眼亦緣毛輪第二月等。故雜集云：迦末羅病，損壞眼根，見青為黃。護法菩薩說眼等識緣實境起，是現量故。瞿婆論師十二唯識梵本記中自有二說：一云：五識唯緣實境，是故阿毗達磨經云：無有眼等識，不緣實境起。意識有三種：緣實、不實境。故知五識唯緣實境。一云：五識亦緣不實，是故經云：由亂眼根及眼識引亂意識生，由不亂眼及眼識引不亂意識。故知五識見第二月及空華等。此中所說過患等文，依前三說，准即可知。
> Commentary says: Next, the second section uses a metaphor to further explain. It has two parts: first, it clarifies the three aspects of the metaphor of the diseased eye and the pure vision; second, from "Good son" onward, it explains the four aspects of the metaphor of the vaidurya gem. The first part contains three metaphors, which are divided into three: first, the metaphor of the affliction of blurred vision; second, the metaphor of the various appearances of blurred vision; third, the metaphor of the original scope of pure vision. Each of these has two sections: first, the direct explanation through metaphor; second, the alignment of the metaphor with the teaching. This is the first metaphor, that of the affliction of blurred vision. The meaning of this metaphor is: because the eye has a cataract, it gives rise to eye consciousness and the mental awareness that simultaneously discriminates with the eye consciousness. These two consciousnesses lead to a subsequent moment of discriminating awareness that perceives things like hair or a wheel. However, the hair and wheel appear in two ways: first, what the discriminating awareness grasps as real hair or a wheel—this is described as the affliction of the eye cataract, and this affliction is used to illustrate the nature of clinging to what is imputed. Second, there is the appearance of hair or a wheel that arises based on that discriminating awareness, serving as its support and object—this is called the various manifestations of blurred vision, illustrating dependent origination, as will be explained later. The affliction is used to illustrate the nature of clinging to what is imputed, hence it is said that "what is imputed and clung to should also be understood in this way." Alternatively, "the affliction of blurred vision" may simply refer to blurred vision itself as the affliction. The point here is: because of clinging, dependent origination arises, just as blurred vision brings forth appearances of hair or a wheel. Therefore, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Volume 73) says: "Just as when the eye has afflictions like a cataract, appearances of hair, a wheel, and so on come into view. If that affliction were absent, these would not be perceived—only the inherent nature remains, without distorted grasping." Question: How does dependent origination illustrate the nature of clinging to what is imputed? Answer: The untainted eye is used to illustrate the perfect nature, so there is no flaw in this analogy. Question: Does the cataract-affected eye consciousness actually see a hair or a wheel? Explanation: Western masters have two interpretations. First, according to the school of Anhui (Viśeṣamitra or an older tradition), the five sense consciousnesses also perceive such things as a hair or the second moon. Thus, the \*Saṃyuktābhidharma\* says: "When the eye faculty is impaired by a disease like timira (blurred vision), it sees yellow in what is blue." The Master Dharmapāla states that the five sense consciousnesses arise based on real objects, as they operate by direct perception. In the Sanskrit commentary on the \*Twelve Consciousnesses\* by Master Gunabhadra, there are two explanations: one says the five sense consciousnesses only perceive real objects, as the \*Abhidharma Sūtra\* states: "There is no consciousness of the eye or others that arises without a real object." The mental consciousness operates in three modes: with real objects, with unreal objects, and with both. Therefore, it is known that the five sense consciousnesses only perceive real objects. Another explanation says: the five sense consciousnesses also perceive unreal objects, as the sūtra states: "Due to a disordered eye faculty and eye consciousness, a disordered mental consciousness arises; due to an orderly eye and eye consciousness, an orderly mental consciousness arises." Therefore, it is known that the five sense consciousnesses see the second moon and empty flowers (illusory phenomena). The phrase "affliction" and related passages here can be understood according to the three explanations above.
如眩翳人，眩翳眾相，或髮、毛、輪、蜂、蠅、巨勝，或復青、黃、赤、白等相差別現前，依他起相當知亦爾。
> Just as a person with an eye disorder sees various illusions—such as hairs, threads, bees, flies, or swirling patterns, or colors like blue, yellow, red, and white appearing before them—so too should the dependently arising nature of things be understood.
釋曰：第二眩翳眾喻，喻依他相當知亦爾。謂眩翳人似毛輪相，非實似實故。喻依他起，非有似有當知亦爾。
> Explanation: The second simile—the appearance of floating hairs seen by someone with blurred vision—should be understood as an analogy for the nature of dependent reality. Just as a person with an eye condition perceives patterns resembling hair that are not truly real yet appear real, so too should we understand that dependent reality, though not truly existent, appears as if it exists.
如淨眼人遠離眼中眩翳過患，即此淨眼本性所行無亂境界圓成實相，當知亦爾。
> Just as a person with clear vision, free from any eye disease or obstruction, sees things as they truly are—so too should you understand the nature of ultimate reality, which is the pure, undistorted state of things as they are.
釋曰：第三淨眼本境喻，謂彼淨眼本所行境，青黃等色自性清淨，無毛輪等眩翳過患。圓成實性當知亦爾，自性清淨，於依他起無所執性。
> Explanation: The third simile is the "pure eye and its original objects." Just as the pure eye naturally sees its objects—colors like blue and yellow—as they truly are, free from any distortion such as floating hairs or blurred spots, so too should we understand the nature of ultimate reality. It is inherently pure, and within the dependent nature, it is free from any grasping or attachment.
善男子！譬如清淨頗胝迦寶，若與青染色合，則似帝青、大青、末尼寶像。由耶執耶帝青、大青、末尼寶故，惑亂有情。
> Good man, consider a pure crystal. If it is mixed with a blue dye, it appears like a sapphire or a great blue gem. Because people mistake it for a real sapphire or great blue gem, it confuses and misleads sentient beings.
釋曰：此下第二頗胝迦寶四色喻，於中有二：初廣辨四喻，後如是德本下舉法同喻。前中四喻即分為四，此即第一青色相應喻。文有五節、義含四種、意喻三性。文五節者，一清淨頗胝迦者，依他起；二若與青染色合者，喻言說習氣，此明依他起與言說習氣合；三即似帝青大青等者，喻依他起由我法分別名言種子力故，雖在內識而似外現；四由耶執取帝青等者，此喻由邪執故執為實有；五惑亂有情者，此喻邪師將己所執惑亂有情令生實解。義含四者，准下合文，喻中有四：一頗胝迦者，喻依他起；二與青染色合者，喻名言熏習與依他合；三由耶執耶等，喻彼能執；四即彼所執情有理無，喻圓成實。言意三者，謂青染色合，乃至惑亂有情喻所執性，頗胝迦寶喻依他起，無實帝青喻圓成實。下三色喻皆具諸義，准此應知。譬如清淨頗胝迦寶者，此出寶體，此處無名故不翻之。應師經音云：此云水玉，或云白珠。深密經云：清淨瑠璃者，譯家別故。若依俱舍妙高山王四寶所成，謂金、銀、吠瑠璃、頗胝迦，此頗胝迦即當赤色。又即彼云：日輪下面頗胝迦寶，火珠所成；月輪下面頗胝迦寶，水珠所成。准此等文，其頗胝迦亦具眾色。今於此經且舉白色以對四色，由此下文不說白色。若與青染色者，明色轉變，謂頗胝迦與青色合，即似帝青、大青、末尼寶像。帝青等者，謂天帝釋青及大青。末尼寶者，此云如意珠，即說頗胝迦名為如意，或可所似帝青等即是末尼。由耶執等者，顯諸世間執似為實，為他宣說迷亂有情。此意說云：阿賴耶識由我法執習氣力故，變似我法諸有情類執為實我，惑亂有情。據實頗胝迦上無實青等，於賴耶上無所執性，應知亦爾，後當分別。
> Explanation: Next, the second section presents the simile of the four colors of the vaidurya gem. This has two parts: first, a detailed explanation of the four similes; second, starting from "such virtuous roots," a correlation of the teachings with the similes. In the first part, the four similes are divided into four sections, and this is the first, the simile of the blue color. The passage has five clauses, contains four meanings, and is intended to illustrate the three natures. The five clauses are: first, the pure vaidurya gem represents the dependent nature; second, its combination with the blue dye represents the habitual tendencies of verbal expression, clarifying that the dependent nature combines with these tendencies; third, its appearance as sapphire or lapis lazuli represents how the dependent nature, due to the power of discriminative and verbal seeds regarding self and phenomena, appears externally despite being within consciousness; fourth, the mistaken grasping of it as sapphire or lapis lazuli represents how delusion grasps it as ultimately real; fifth, the confusion of sentient beings represents how false teachers confuse beings with their own attachments, leading them to believe in true existence. The four meanings, according to the correlation passage, are: first, the vaidurya gem represents the dependent nature; second, its combination with the blue dye represents the combination of verbal imprinting with the dependent nature; third, mistaken grasping represents the grasping nature; fourth, the object grasped, though seeming to exist in the mind, lacks real existence, representing the perfect nature. The three intended levels are: the combination with the blue dye, up to the confusion of beings, represents the imagined nature; the vaidurya gem represents the dependent nature; and the absence of real sapphire represents the perfect nature. The following three color similes all contain these meanings, and one should understand them accordingly. "For example, a pure vaidurya gem" identifies the essence of the gem. Since there is no name for it here, it is not translated. Master Ying's phonetic gloss says: this is called crystal or white pearl. The \*Sutra of the Deep Secret\* says "pure beryl," which is due to differing translations. According to the \*Abhidharmakosha\*, Mount Sumeru is composed of four treasures: gold, silver, vaidurya, and sapphire. Here, vaidurya corresponds to the color red. Also, it states: below the sun disk is a vaidurya gem made of fire pearls; below the moon disk is a vaidurya gem made of water pearls. Based on these passages, vaidurya also possesses various colors. In this sutra, the white color is mentioned specifically to contrast with the four colors, which is why the white color is not mentioned later. "If it combines with a blue dye" indicates a transformation of color, meaning that when vaidurya combines with blue, it appears as an image of sapphire, lapis lazuli, or a wish-fulfilling jewel. Sapphire and lapis lazuli refer to the deep blue of Indra and the deeper blue. "Wish-fulfilling jewel" here means the mani jewel, and thus vaidurya is also called a wish-fulfilling jewel. Alternatively, what it resembles, such as sapphire, is itself a mani jewel. "Mistaken grasping" shows how ordinary beings grasp the apparent as real and, by explaining it to others, confuse beings. This means: the alaya consciousness, due to the power of habitual tendencies of grasping self and phenomena, produces appearances of self and phenomena, which beings grasp as real selves, thereby confusing them. In truth, there is no real blue color on the vaidurya gem, and similarly, there is no real nature to be grasped on the alaya consciousness. One should understand this likewise, as will be explained later.
若與赤染色合，則以虎魄末尼寶像，由耶執耶虎魄末尼寶故，惑亂有情。
> If combined with a red dye, it takes the form of a ruby gemstone. Because of the power of that ruby-like gemstone, it deludes and confuses living beings.
釋曰：第二赤色相應喻。深密經云：置赤色中即出赤波頭摩尼，摩尼寶光明現前。
> The commentary explains: The second simile involves the crimson hue. As stated in the Deep Secret Sutra, when placed in a red substance, the jewel appears red, and its radiant light shines forth.
若與綠染色合，則似末羅羯多末尼寶像，由耶執取末羅羯多末尼寶故，惑亂有情。
> When dyed green, it resembles the appearance of the Marakata gemstone. Because beings grasp at it as a Marakata gem, they are deluded and confused.
釋曰：第三綠色相應喻。末羅羯多此處無名，故不翻之。有說：此云煞色寶，由此寶故，煞一切色盡壞故。依深密經，但言綠色。
> Explanation: The third is the metaphor of the green-colored correspondence. "Mārakata" has no name in this context, so it is not translated. Some say it means a gem that destroys color, because this gem causes all colors to be completely destroyed. According to the \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\*, it is simply referred to as "green."
若與黃染色合，則似金像，由耶執取真金像故，惑亂有情。
> When combined with yellow dye, it resembles a golden statue, and because fools cling to it as a real golden statue, it confuses and misleads sentient beings.
釋曰：第四黃色相應喻，與深密經有差別者，此云金像，彼云金色摩尼之寶。後三種喻，准初可知。
> Explanation: The fourth metaphor, the "yellow color correspondence," differs from the \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\* in that this text refers to a golden statue, while that one speaks of a precious jewel of golden hue. The remaining three metaphors can be understood by analogy with the first one.
如是，德本！如彼清淨頗胝迦上所有染色相應，依他起相上遍計所執相，言說習氣當知亦爾。
> Thus, O virtuous one! Just as the colors that appear on a clear crystal are conditioned by the dye applied to it, in the same way, the imagined nature that arises from the dependent nature should be understood as being influenced by the habitual tendencies of verbal expression.
釋曰：自下第二舉法同喻合上四義，即分為四：一合種子、二合相執、三合依他、四合成實。此之四義於前喻中文雖有五，義合有四，故以四義合上喻文。此即初也。然此四義自有兩說：一云：初一執緣，次三如次喻其三性。一云：初二喻所執性，白種現執成所執故。此即初也。謂於頗胝迦上所有染色相應義故，頗胝迦上似青色像現。如是由依他上妄執種子為因緣故，於賴耶上似色聲等依他相現。
> Explanation: Following this, the second point uses a simile to align with the four aspects above, which are divided into four parts: first, matching the seed; second, matching the attachment to appearances; third, matching the dependent nature; fourth, matching the perfected nature. Although these four aspects appear as five in the earlier simile, their meaning aligns with four, so the four aspects are used to match the earlier simile. This is the first part. However, there are two interpretations of these four aspects: one says the first deals with attachment based on conditions, while the last three correspond respectively to the three natures. Another says the first two illustrate the imagined nature, as the white seed and apparent grasping constitute the imagined nature. This is the first interpretation. That is, on a crystal, due to the presence of dye-related characteristics, a blue image appears on the crystal. Similarly, due to the deluded attachment to seeds as causal conditions on the dependent nature, appearances of sounds and forms, which are of the dependent nature, manifest on the base consciousness.
如彼清淨頗胝迦上所有帝青、大青、虎魄、末羅、羯多、金等耶執，依他起相上遍計所執相執，當知亦爾。
> Just as the pure crystal surface reflects the colors of indigo, sapphire, amber, and gold, so too do imagined appearances arise upon the dependent nature—know this to be the same.
釋曰：此下第二合現行執。謂由前說執種子故，能生依他似色等相，由現執故執彼為實。由此義故，此上二段意顯三中遍計所執。
> Commentary: The following passage now addresses the second aspect—attachment that arises in direct experience. Because latent tendencies toward attachment were established earlier, they give rise to the dependent nature, which appears as forms and other phenomena. Through immediate grasping, these appearances are mistaken for reality. Thus, these two sections together reveal that, among the three natures, this is the imagined nature (parikalpita-svabhāva).
如彼清淨頗胝迦寶，依他起相當知亦爾。
釋曰：第三合依他起，謂頗胝迦即似青等。如是依他由種子故，似色聲等種種相現。
> Explanation: Third, the dependent nature—this is like a crystal that appears as blue and other colors. In the same way, the dependent nature, because of its seeds, appears as various forms such as sights and sounds.
如彼清淨頗胝迦上，所有帝青、大青、虎魄、末羅羯多、真金等相，於常常時、於恒恒時，無有真實、無自性性。
> Just as on the surface of a pure crystal, the appearances of precious blue sapphire, azure, amber, coral, and gold—though they seem to appear—never truly exist at any time, nor do they possess any inherent nature of their own.
釋曰：第四合圓成實，於中有二：初重舉前喻，後釋法同喻。此即初也。於頗胝迦上無實青等，名無有真實，亦名無自性性。或可無真實者遮青等實，無自性性者雖無青等實而有頗胝迦性。
> Explanation: The fourth section combines the "perfect reality" (pariniṣpanna-svabhāva). This is divided into two parts: first, it reiterates the previous simile; second, it explains how the principle is the same as the simile. This is the first part. On a crystal, there is no real blue or other colors—this is called "having no true reality," also called "having no self-nature." Alternatively, "no true reality" negates the actual existence of blue and so on, while "no self-nature" indicates that even though there is no actual blue, the crystal's own nature still exists.
即依他起相上，由遍計所執相，於常常時，於恒恒時，無有真實，無自性性，圓成實相，當知亦爾。
> Based on the nature of dependent arising, the false distinctions we project onto it—these are, at all times and in every moment, devoid of true reality and inherent existence. The nature of perfect realization should be understood in the same way.
釋曰：此即第二釋法同喻。於依他上無有所執實我等性，即此名為無自性性。或可於依他上無有所執實，而有無自性性。於常常時及恒恒時者，自有兩釋。一云：依前前無故說常常言，於後後無故說恒恒言。一云：顯無有真實故說常常，有無自性性故言恒恒時。問：此三性與七真如如何相攝？解云：如成唯識第八卷說，彼云：如是三性與七真如云何相攝？七真如者，一流轉真如，謂有為法流轉實性有為有二種：一四相所為故名有為、二煩惱所為故名有為，此即煩惱所為。二實相真如，謂二無我所顯實性。三唯識真如，謂染淨法唯識實性今此所取能觀染淨唯識觀智即是真如也。四安立真如，謂苦實性。五邪行真如，謂集實性。六清淨真如，謂滅實性。七正行真如，謂道實性。此七實性圓成實攝，根本後得二智境故。隨相攝者，流轉苦集三前二性攝，妄執雜染故，餘四皆是圓成實攝。辨中邊論第二卷云：差別真實略有七種，謂流轉、實相、唯識、安立、邪行、清淨、正行。云何應知此七真實依三根本真實立耶？頌曰：流轉與安立，邪行依初二，實相、唯識、清正行依後一。顯揚論第三、瑜伽七十七應准此攝，於理無違。次後又問：三性五事相攝云何？諸聖教說相攝不定。一、瑜伽七十四說：依他性攝彼相，名分別正智。成圓實性攝彼真如，遍計所執不攝五事。彼說有漏心、心所法變似所詮說名為相，似能詮現施設為名，能變心等立為分別，無漏心等離戲論故。但總名正智，不說能、所詮。四、從緣生，皆依他攝。二、依辨中邊第二卷說：依他起性攝相分別，遍計所執唯攝彼名，正智真如圓成實攝。彼說有漏心及心所相分名、相，餘名分別，遍計所執都無體故。為顯非有，假說為名。二、無倒故，圓成實攝。三、依楞伽經第七卷說：依他起唯攝分別，遍計所執攝彼相、名，正智真如圓成實攝。彼說有漏心及心所相、見分等總名分別，虗妄分別為自性故。遍計所執能詮、所詮，隨情立為名、相二事。四、依世親攝大乘論第四卷說：名屬依他起性，義屬遍計所執。彼有漏心、心所法相、見分等，由名勢力成所遍計，故說為名。遍計所執隨名橫計，體實非有，假立義、名。如前四教所說五事，三性、相攝，文雖有異而義無違。護法菩薩取初為勝，不雜亂故。復有問言：諸聖教中說有五相，此與三性、相攝。云何所詮、能詮各具三性？謂妄所計屬初性攝，相、名、分別隨其所應；所詮、能詮屬依他起，真如、正智隨其所應；所詮、能詮屬圓成實，後得變似能詮相故。二、相屬相唯初性攝，妄執義、名定相屬故。彼執著相唯依他起，虗妄分別為自性故；不執著相唯圓成實，無漏智等為自性故。瑜伽八十一，二性是所詮，遍計所執性是能詮。第七十四、顯揚十六，能詮、所詮皆通三性。委細分別，具如唯識第八卷疏。
> The commentary explains that this is the second instance, using a simile from the Dharma. On the dependent nature, there is no truly existing self or dharmas—this is what is called the nature of absence of intrinsic existence. Alternatively, on the dependent nature, there is no truly existing self, yet there is the nature of absence of intrinsic existence. As for "constantly" and "always," there are two interpretations. One says: because what comes before is absent, it is called "constantly"; because what comes after is absent, it is called "always." Another says: it indicates that there is no true reality, hence "constantly"; and because there is the nature of absence of intrinsic existence, it is called "always." Question: How do the three natures relate to the seven types of suchness? Explanation: As stated in the eighth chapter of the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*, it says: How do the three natures and the seven types of suchness correspond? The seven types of suchness are: 1. The suchness of samsara, which is the true nature of conditioned phenomena in fluxConditioned phenomena are of two kinds: one is conditioned by the four characteristics, the other is conditioned by afflictions; this refers to afflictions.. 2. The suchness of reality, which is the true nature revealed by the two types of selflessness. 3. The suchness of consciousness-only, which is the true nature of defiled and pure phenomena as consciousness-onlyHere, the perceived and the perceiving, the defiled and pure, along with the wisdom of consciousness-only, are precisely suchness.. 4. The suchness of establishment, which is the true nature of suffering. 5. The suchness of wrong conduct, which is the true nature of accumulation. 6. The suchness of purity, which is the true nature of cessation. 7. The suchness of right practice, which is the true nature of the path. These seven true natures are included in the perfectly accomplished nature, as they are the objects of both fundamental and subsequent wisdom. According to their characteristics, the suchness of samsara, suffering, and accumulation are included in the first two natures, due to mistaken attachment and defilement; the remaining four are all included in the perfectly accomplished nature. The second chapter of the \*Bianzhongbian Lun\* says: The distinctions of reality are briefly of seven kinds: samsara, reality, consciousness-only, establishment, wrong conduct, purity, and right practice. How should we know that these seven realities are established based on the three fundamental realities? A verse says: Samsara and establishment, wrong conduct depend on the first two; reality, consciousness-only, purity, and right practice depend on the last one. The third chapter of the \*Xianyang Lun\* and the seventy-seventh chapter of the \*Yoga\* should be understood accordingly, with no contradiction. Next, a further question: How do the three natures and the five categories correspond? The holy teachings say the correspondence is not fixed. 1. The seventy-fourth chapter of the \*Yoga\* says: The dependent nature includes the characteristics, names, and correct wisdom. The perfectly accomplished nature includes suchness. The imagined nature is not included among the five categories. It says that defiled minds and mental factors, which appear as objects of designation, are called "characteristics"; those that appear as designations are established as "names"; the transforming minds are established as "discrimination"; undefiled minds, being free from conceptual proliferation, are generally called "correct wisdom," without distinguishing subject and object. These are all born from conditions and are included in the dependent nature. 2. According to the second chapter of the \*Bianzhongbian Lun\*: The dependent nature includes characteristics and discrimination; the imagined nature only includes the name; correct wisdom and suchness are included in the perfectly accomplished nature. It says that defiled minds and mental factors' objective aspects are called "characteristics," the rest are called "discrimination." The imagined nature has no substance; to show it is non-existent, it is falsely spoken of as "name." Being without distortion, it is included in the perfectly accomplished nature. 3. According to the seventh chapter of the \*Lengqie Jing\*: The dependent nature only includes discrimination; the imagined nature includes characteristics and names; correct wisdom and suchness are included in the perfectly accomplished nature. It says that defiled minds and mental factors' objective and subjective aspects are all called "discrimination," as false discrimination is their nature. The imagined nature's designation and meaning are established as name and characteristic according to circumstances. 4. According to the fourth chapter of Vasubandhu's \*She Dacheng Lun\*: Names belong to the dependent nature; meanings belong to the imagined nature. The defiled minds and mental factors' objective and subjective aspects, through the power of names, become objects of imagination, hence they are called "names." The imagined nature, based on names, falsely conceives, but their essence is truly non-existent; meaning and name are provisionally established. As the four teachings above state the five categories, the correspondence with the three natures, though the wording differs, does not contradict the meaning. Master Dharmapala takes the first as superior, as it is not mixed. Another question arises: In the holy teachings, five characteristics are mentioned. How do these correspond with the three natures? How do the designated meaning and designation each possess the three natures? The falsely imagined belongs to the first nature; characteristics, names, and discrimination, accordingly, the designated meaning and designation belong to the dependent nature; suchness and correct wisdom, accordingly, the designated meaning and designation belong to the perfectly accomplished nature, as subsequent wisdom appears as designations. 2. The mutual relation of characteristics is only included in the first nature, as falsely attached meanings and names are necessarily related. The attached characteristics are only in the dependent nature, as false discrimination is their nature; the unattached characteristics are only in the perfectly accomplished nature, as undefiled wisdom is their nature. The eighty-first chapter of the \*Yoga\* states that the two natures are the meaning to be designated, while the imagined nature is the designation. The seventy-fourth chapter and the sixteenth chapter of the \*Xianyang\* state that both designation and meaning pervade all three natures. For detailed analysis, see the commentary on the eighth chapter of the \*Cheng Weishi Lun\*.
復次，德本！相名相應，以為緣故，遍計所執相而可了知。
> Furthermore, O Virtuous Root! When names and forms correspond with one another, this gives rise to the deluded perception that things exist as they appear to be.
釋曰：自下第二依能觀門明善巧菩薩，於中有二：初長行廣釋，後以頌略說。前中有二：初略辨三相勸物令知，後依前三相正顯觀門。又釋即分為二：初正辨觀門，後如是德本下重牒前觀以答前問。前中有三：初明菩薩了知三性，次善男子下知三性故了知三相，後善男子下知三相故斷染證淨。雖有兩科，且依後釋。此即第一了知三性，三性別故即分為三。此即初也，謂所詮相與能詮名互相繫屬以為緣故，妄所執相遍計所執而可了知。故瑜伽七十三云：遍計所執自性緣何應知？答：緣於相名，相屬應知。若廣分別，如三無性論。彼第一云：分別性者無有體相，名等五法所不攝故。外曰：無體云何分別？答：但有無義故。何以故？如世間於義中立名，凡夫執名分別義性，謂名即義性。此為顛倒，但有名分別，無實體故。何以故？此名及義互為客故。云何知然？由三義故，此理可知：一名前覺不生、二多體相違失、三雜體相違過。具如彼論。攝大乘論同三無性。
> 解释如下：以下第二部分依据能观之门，阐明善巧菩萨的修行方法。这部分分为两个层次：第一是长行（详细经文）的广泛解释，第二是用偈颂简要说明。前一层次又分为两部分：第一是简略辨别三种相状，劝勉众生令其知晓；第二是依据前述三种相状，正式展示观想的法门。 进一步解释，这部分又分为两段：第一是直接阐明观想法门；第二是从“如是德本”开始，重新引用前面的观想内容来回答前面提出的问题。前一段又分为三部分：第一是阐明菩萨了知三性（遍计所执性、依他起性、圆成实性）；第二是从“善男子”开始，说明由于了知三性而了知三种相状；第三是从“善男子”开始，说明由于了知三种相状而断除染污、证得清净。虽然有这两种分科方式，但此处依据后一种解释。 这就是第一部分“了知三性”。由于三性各有不同，所以又分为三部分。这一段讲的是第一性，即：所表述的相状与能表述的名称相互关联，以此作为因缘，虚妄执着所显现的相状（遍计所执性）就可以被了知。因此《瑜伽师地论》卷七十三中说：“遍计所执的自性，应依什么来认知呢？答案是：应依相状与名称的相互关联来认知。”如果详细展开论述，可以参考《三无性论》。该论第一部分说：“分别性（遍计所执性）没有实体和相状，因为名称等五种法都不包含它。” 有人问：“既然没有实体，又怎么能分别呢？” 回答：“只是因为存在一种虚妄的意义概念。为什么呢？因为世间人先于意义（事物本体）安立名称，凡夫执着于名称去分别意义的本质，认为名称就是意义的本质。这是颠倒的认知，实际上只有名称在分别，并没有真实的实体。为什么呢？因为名称和意义彼此互为客体，并不等同。” 怎么知道是这样的呢？根据三种理由可以明白这一道理：第一，名称产生之前，认知不会先行存在；第二，如果名称等同于意义，会有多种体性互相矛盾的过失；第三，如果意义等同于名称，会有混杂体性互相冲突的过失。详细内容参见《三无性论》。《摄大乘论》的说法与《三无性论》一致。
依他起上遍計所執相執，以為以緣依他起相而可了知。
> Within the dependent nature, the clinging to the characteristics of the imagined nature arises, which can be understood based on the dependent nature as its condition.
釋曰：此釋依他，謂執遍計所執相分別以為緣故，依他起性而得生起。故顯揚第十六云：於依他起自性執著初自性故，起於熏智則成雜染。又云：於所執相所起執故，應可了知是依他起。若能執者，從緣生故。故佛性論第二卷云：問曰：依他起性緣何因故得成耶？答曰：緣執分別性故得顯現。問：依他起通染及淨，如何但言所執相執以為緣故，依他起性而可了知？會釋此難，如瑜伽論第七十四說。故彼云：問：若依他起自性亦正智所攝，何故前說依他起自性緣遍計所執自性執應可了知？答：彼意唯說依他起自性雜染分，非清淨分。若清淨分，當知緣彼無執應可了知。
> Explanation: This passage explains the "dependent nature" (paratantra-svabhāva). It arises because one clings to the characteristics imagined by the "thoroughly imagined nature" (parikalpita-svabhāva). Thus, the \*Compendium of True Doctrine\* (Chapter 16) states: "Because of attachment to the first nature within the dependent nature, habitual tendencies arise, leading to defilement." It further says: "The attachment to imagined characteristics should be understood as the dependent nature. For what clings arises from causes and conditions." Similarly, the \*Treatise on Buddha-Nature\* (Volume 2) asks: "What causes the dependent nature to come into being?" The answer: "It manifests due to attachment to the imagined nature." A question then arises: Does the dependent nature encompass both defiled and pure states? If so, why say it is understood only through attachment to imagined characteristics? This is resolved as taught in the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* (Chapter 74). There it says: "Question: If the dependent nature also includes the true wisdom, why was it earlier said that the dependent nature is understood through attachment to the thoroughly imagined nature? Answer: That statement refers only to the defiled aspect of the dependent nature, not its pure aspect. The pure aspect, it should be known, is understood through the absence of attachment."
依他起相上，遍計所執相，無執以為緣，故圓成實相而可了知。
> Upon the dependently originated nature, the falsely imagined nature, when no attachment arises as the condition, the perfectly accomplished nature becomes known.
釋曰：此釋圓成實，謂於依他起上無所執相以顯真實，故言無執。故瑜伽七十三云：緣遍計所執自性，於依他起自性中畢竟不實。應知或可無執即是聖道，不執著故名為無執。此意說云：不執著道以為因故，證得清淨圓成實性。故瑜伽云：世尊於餘經中說：緣不執著遍計所執自性。應知此性者，依得清淨說，不依相說。解云：餘經者，即此經也。依得清淨者，依內證得真如聖道顯所證理。或可由聖道力斷染證得清淨真如，依能證道顯所證理。不依相說者，此文不依遣所執相顯圓成實。若依前說，言餘經者，指所餘經。有云：無執者，無能執依他及所執分別，故言無執。故佛性論云：問曰：真實性緣何因得成？答曰：由分別依他極無所有，故得顯現。解云：譯家謬也。遣依他起，違自所宗瑜伽等故。
> Explanation: This explains the "Perfect Nature" (parinishpanna-svabhava). It means that, upon the "Dependent Nature" (paratantra-svabhava), there is no attachment to any conceptualized form, thereby revealing the ultimate truth. Therefore, it is said to be "non-attachment." Thus, the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\* (Chapter 73) states: "Based on the imagined nature (parikalpita-svabhava), within the dependent nature, it is ultimately unreal." One should know that "non-attachment" can also refer to the noble path—because it does not cling, it is called "non-attachment." The meaning here is: The non-attaching path serves as the cause, whereby one realizes the pure Perfect Nature. Hence, the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\* says: "The Blessed One, in other scriptures, stated: Based on the non-attachment to the imagined nature, one should understand this nature—this is explained in terms of attaining purity, not in terms of characteristics." Explanation of the commentary: "Other scriptures" refers to this very sutra. "Attaining purity" means internally realizing the noble path of Suchness, which reveals the principle to be realized. Alternatively, through the power of the noble path, one cuts off defilements and realizes the pure Suchness—this is explained in terms of the realizing path revealing the realized principle. "Not in terms of characteristics" means that this passage does not rely on eliminating the attachment to characteristics to reveal the Perfect Nature. If we follow the earlier explanation, "other scriptures" indicates scriptures other than this one. Some say: "Non-attachment" means there is no attaching subject (the dependent nature) and no attached object (the imagined distinction), hence it is called "non-attachment." Therefore, the \*Ratnagotravibhāga Śāstra\* (Buddha-nature Treatise) says: "Question: Through what cause is the True Nature accomplished? Answer: Through the utter absence of discrimination and the dependent nature, it becomes manifest." Explanation of the commentary: This is a translator's error. To eliminate the dependent nature contradicts the fundamental tenets of one's own school, such as the \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\*.
善男子！若諸菩薩能於諸法依他起相上，如實了知遍計所執相，即能如實了知一切無相之法。
> Good man! If bodhisattvas can truly understand the nature of clinging to what is merely imagined, based on the dependent nature of all phenomena, then they can truly understand all phenomena as being without inherent characteristics.
釋曰：此下第二知三性故了知三相。三相不同即分為三，此即第一知所執故了知無相。謂如前說相名相應以為緣故，知實了知遍計所執名相假立無實自性，由此即能如實了知一切所執無相之法。
> Explanation: This next section is the second point, which involves understanding the three natures in order to grasp the three characteristics. Since these three characteristics differ from one another, they are divided into three parts. This is the first: by understanding what is imputed, one realizes the characteristic of no-form. As mentioned earlier, because signs and names are connected as the basis, one truly understands that the imputed nature—where names and forms are falsely established—has no real essence. Through this, one can accurately understand that all imputed phenomena are ultimately formless.
若諸菩薩如實了知依他起相，即能如實了知一切雜染相法。
> If bodhisattvas truly understand the nature of dependent origination, they will also truly understand all phenomena that arise from defilement.
釋曰：此即第二了依他故知雜染相。謂能了知從相執起皆是依他，即能了知雜染是依他起。前是總觀，後是別觀，前後二相准此應知。又云：初約自性辨依他觀，後約差別辨依他觀。又云：前依盡所有性，後是如所有性。
> Explanation: This is the second aspect—understanding the dependent nature in order to recognize the characteristics of defilement. It means that by understanding that everything arising from conceptual grasping is dependent, one can understand that defilement itself is dependent arising. The former is a general observation, while the latter is a specific observation. The distinction between these two aspects should be understood accordingly. Furthermore, it is said: the first aspect examines the dependent nature in terms of its intrinsic nature, while the second examines it in terms of its distinctions. It is also said: the first aspect pertains to exhausting all that exists, while the second pertains to understanding things as they truly are.
若諸菩薩如實了知圓成實相，即能如實了知一切清淨相法。
> If bodhisattvas truly understand the nature of perfect reality, they will likewise truly understand all aspects of pure phenomena.
釋曰：此即第三了圓成實知清淨相。謂遍計所執無執以為緣故，即能了知諸清淨法皆圓成實。
> Explanation: This is the third aspect—the pure understanding of the ultimate reality. It means that by seeing through false attachments, one can recognize that all pure phenomena are inherently perfect and complete.
善男子！若諸菩薩能於依他起相上，如實了知無相之法，即能斷滅雜染相法。
> Good man! If bodhisattvas can truly understand the nature of non-conceptuality based on the dependent nature of phenomena, they will be able to eliminate all defiled and impure perceptions.
釋曰：此下第三知三相故，斷染證淨。於中有二：初了知無相，斷雜染法；後斷雜染故，證得清淨。此即初也。然無相法自有三釋：一云：即所執性，隨情說有，據理即無。相常無故，故名無相。故中邊云：遍計所執，此相本無，故名無相。若依此釋，謂能了知無相法故，依他起性雜染相法即不得生，故說能斷雜染相法。若無所執，雜染相法不得生故。故瑜伽論七十四云：問：遍計所執自性能為幾業？答五：一、能生依他起自性，二、即於彼性能起言說，三、能生補特伽羅執，四、能生法執，五、能攝受彼二種執習氣麤重。一云：依他起上無所執性所顯真如離諸相故，名為無相。故攝論云：真如永離一切色等相故，故名無相。又廣百論云：真如空理，離有無等一切法相，故名無相。若依此釋，謂能了知無相法故，即能斷滅依他起性雜染相法。一云：所執、圓成皆名無相，前二義故。若依此釋，謂能了知遍計所執無相法故，即能悟入圓成實性無相之法。由能悟入圓成實故，即能斷滅依他起性雜染相法。故瑜伽七十四云：問：若觀行者如實悟入遍計所執自性時，當言隨入何等自性？答：圓成自性。問：若觀行者隨入圓成自性時，當言除遣何等自性？答：依他起自性。
> Commentary: This is the third section, where understanding the three natures leads to severing defilements and realizing purity. This section has two parts: first, understanding signlessness to sever defiled phenomena; second, having severed defilements, realizing purity. This is the first part. Now, the "signless" nature has three interpretations: First, it refers to the imagined nature. It is said to exist based on ordinary perception, but in ultimate reality it does not. Since its signs are constantly absent, it is called signless. Thus, the \*Distinguishing the Middle and Extremes\* says: "The imagined nature—this sign is originally nonexistent, hence called signless." According to this interpretation, understanding the signless nature means that the defiled, sign-laden phenomena of the dependent nature cannot arise, so it is said to sever defiled phenomena. If there is no imagined object, defiled phenomena cannot arise. Hence, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 74) states: "Question: How many functions does the imagined nature's own essence perform? Answer: Five—one, it generates the dependent nature; two, it gives rise to verbal expression based on it; three, it produces the grasping of a self; four, it produces the grasping of phenomena; five, it harbors the latent tendencies and coarseness of both graspings." Second, it refers to the perfect nature. The thusness revealed on the dependent nature, free from all signs because it is devoid of imagined characteristics, is called signless. Thus, the \*Compendium of the Mahāyāna\* says: "Thusness is permanently free from all signs such as form, hence called signless." Similarly, the \*Great Hundred Treatise\* states: "The empty principle of thusness, free from all phenomenal signs such as existence and nonexistence, is called signless." According to this interpretation, understanding the signless nature means that one can extinguish the defiled, sign-laden phenomena of the dependent nature. Third, both the imagined and the perfect natures are called signless, based on the two preceding meanings. According to this interpretation, understanding the imagined nature as signless allows one to penetrate the perfect nature, which is also signless. By penetrating the perfect nature, one can extinguish the defiled phenomena of the dependent nature. Hence, the \*Yogācārabhūmi\* (Chapter 74) states: "Question: When a meditator truly penetrates the imagined nature, what nature should he be said to enter? Answer: The perfect nature. Question: When a meditator enters the perfect nature, what nature should he be said to eliminate? Answer: The dependent nature."
若能斷滅雜染相法，即能證得清淨相法。
> If one can cut off all defiled appearances, one can realize the pure appearance of reality.
釋曰：此即第二斷雜染故證得涅槃。謂由斷滅雜染法故，即能證得清淨涅槃。問：此三相觀依何位說？若在地前，如何能斷雜染相法？要無漏道方能斷故。若在地上，入初地時證二空理，如何先起二性觀耶？解云：此三相觀分成兩位，初二性觀依加行位作四尋思、四如實智，第三圓成在十地位。是故無著攝大乘論立三性觀，釋此經意。彼第六卷論云：如是菩薩悟入意言似義相故，悟入遍計所執性，悟入唯識故，悟入依他起性。云何悟入圓成實性？若已滅除意言聞法熏習種類唯識之想，爾時菩薩已遣義想，一切似義無容得生，故似唯識亦不得起。由是因緣，住一切義無分別名無分別名者，能詮真諦平等法名，以所詮真如是一切義無分別理。今能詮名從所詮立名，名無分別名。此所詮真如從能詮立目，故云無分別名，於法界中便得現見相應而住。爾時菩薩平等平等，所緣能緣無分別智已得生起，由此菩薩名已悟入圓成實性。即准此文，圓成實觀唯在地上。故成唯識第九頌云：若時於所緣，智都無所得，爾時住唯識，離二取相故。
> Commentary: This is the second aspect—by eliminating defilements, one attains Nirvana. That is, through the cessation of impure phenomena, one can realize pure Nirvana. Question: On which stage are these three characteristics meditated? If before the ground of enlightenment, how can one eliminate defiled phenomena? Only the supramundane path can eliminate them. If on the ground of enlightenment, upon first entering the first ground, one realizes the principle of two-fold emptiness—how then can one first cultivate the meditation on two natures? Explanation: These three characteristics are divided into two stages. The first two nature meditations are based on the preparatory stage, employing the fourfold investigation and four types of correct understanding. The third, perfect realization, belongs to the ten grounds. Thus, Asanga's \*Compendium of the Mahayana\* establishes the meditation on three natures to explain this scripture's meaning. In its sixth chapter, it says: "Thus, the bodhisattva, by awakening to the appearance of meaning in mental speech, awakens to the nature of conceptual construction. By awakening to consciousness-only, they awaken to the dependent nature. How do they awaken to the perfectly realized nature? If they have already eliminated the concept of consciousness-only arising from the mental speech and dharma-listening cultivation, then at that time, the bodhisattva has abandoned the concept of meaning, and no appearance of meaning can arise. Hence, the appearance of consciousness-only also ceases. Through this reason, dwelling in the non-discriminative name of all meanings The non-discriminative name refers to the name that signifies the equal principle of ultimate truth. The signified thusness is the principle of non-discrimination in all meanings. The signifying name here takes its designation from the signified, thus it is called the non-discriminative name. The signified thusness takes its name from the signifier, hence the term "non-discriminative name.", one directly sees and abides in the dharma realm. At that time, the bodhisattva, in perfect equality, with the non-discriminative wisdom of object and subject, has arisen. Thus, the bodhisattva is said to have awakened to the perfectly realized nature." Based on this passage, the meditation on perfect realization occurs only on the ground of enlightenment. Therefore, in the ninth verse of \*Demonstration of Consciousness-Only\*, it says: "When, toward the object, wisdom obtains nothing, then one abides in consciousness-only, free from the duality of subject and object."
如是，德本！由諸菩薩如實了知遍計所執相、依他起相、圓成實相故，如實了知諸無相法、雜染相法、清淨相法。
> Thus, O virtuous one! Because bodhisattvas truly understand the nature of imagined constructs, the nature of dependent arising, and the nature of perfect reality, they truly understand all phenomena as signless, as defiled, and as pure.
釋曰：自下第二重牒觀門以答二問。於中有二：初重牒觀門，後齊此已下正答二問。前中有二：初牒知三性故了知三相，後牒知三相故即斷染證淨。此即第一牒上知三性故了知三相，准上可知。
> Commentary: Next, the second restatement of the contemplative framework addresses two questions. This section has two parts: first, it restates the contemplative framework; second, starting from "with this," it directly answers the two questions. The first part itself has two sections: first, it restates that understanding the three natures leads to understanding the three characteristics; second, it restates that understanding the three characteristics leads to cutting off defilements and realizing purity. This is the first section, which restates that understanding the three natures leads to understanding the three characteristics, as can be understood from the preceding discussion.
如實了知無相法故，斷滅一切雜染相法；斷滅一切染相法故，證得一切清淨相法；
釋曰：自下第二牒上知三相故斷染證淨。謂由了知遍計所執無相義故，展轉漸證圓成實性，由斯證得清淨涅槃。又解了知遍計所執無相真如故，能斷雜染證涅槃果也。
> Commentary: Next, the second section elaborates on the previous point—by understanding the three natures, one cuts off defilements and realizes purity. Specifically, by realizing that the imagined nature (parikalpita) has no inherent characteristics, one progressively attains the perfect nature (parinispanna), thereby achieving pure nirvana. Alternatively, understanding that the imagined nature is empty in its true suchness enables one to abandon defilements and realize the fruit of nirvana.
齊此名為於諸法相善巧菩薩，如來齊此施設彼為於諸法相善巧菩薩。
> Thus is one called a bodhisattva skilled in the characteristics of all phenomena. The Tathāgata likewise designates such a person as a bodhisattva skilled in the characteristics of all phenomena.
釋曰：此即第二依上觀門以答二問。謂佛依上了知三性諸菩薩眾，即說名為善巧菩薩。如來依此善巧菩薩施設聖教，名為善巧菩薩。然此菩薩善巧分限，諸說不同。一云：十信已上皆名善巧。一云：十迴向中第十迴向名加行道，即依彼位起四尋思如實智故。一云：初已上證清淨如及俗相故。
> The commentary states: This is the second part, where the teachings are explained through the above-discussed contemplative framework to address two questions. The Buddha, by understanding the three natures of all bodhisattvas, refers to them as "skillful bodhisattvas." The Thus-Gone One, based on these skillful bodhisattvas, establishes the sacred teachings and calls them "skillful bodhisattvas." However, there are differing interpretations regarding the scope of these bodhisattvas' skillfulness. One view holds that all those from the stage of ten faiths and above are called skillful. Another view says that within the ten dedications, the tenth dedication is the path of adding effort, and it is at this stage that the fourfold investigation and the wisdom of reality arise. A third view maintains that it applies from the first stage onward, where one realizes the purity of suchness and the characteristics of the conventional world.
爾時，世尊欲重宣此義而說頌曰：
釋曰：自下第二以頌略說。於中有二：初發起頌文，後舉頌略說。此即初也。
若不了知無相法，雜染相法不能解，不斷雜染相法故，壞證微妙淨相法。不觀諸行眾過失，放逸過失害眾生，懈怠住法動法中，無有失壞可憐愍。
> If one fails to understand the truth of formlessness, They cannot penetrate the defiled nature of forms. Without cutting through these defiled forms, They ruin their chance to realize the pure, subtle truth. Not seeing the flaws in all conditioned things, Negligence brings harm to all beings. Dwelling in laziness amid the shifting dharmas, They face ruin—and deserve our compassion.
釋曰：此即第二以頌略說。上來長行順釋了知三性德，此頌反顯不了無相失。如何說此反順釋者？理實長行及頌皆有反順，為存略故，各據一邊影略互顯。依深密經，頌及長行皆順釋者，譯家別故。有其二頌，即分為二：初有一頌正頌不了無相失，後之一頌重釋不觀眾行失。前中有二：初之二句舉不了知顯不斷雜染失，後有二句約不斷染顯不證圓成失。壞謂失壞，謂不斷染故，失壞證得微妙真如淨相法也。失壞者，是不能證義。就釋後頌，文別有二：初之二句明放逸失，後有二句明懈怠失。言不觀諸行眾過失等者，謂由愚痴不能觀察諸行過失，遂起放逸傷害眾生。言懈怠住法動法中等者，此明第二懈怠過失。謂懈怠者，過失之因、功德之障。言住法者，即是涅槃，常住不滅，故名為住。言動法者，是生死法，前生後滅，流轉三有，故名動法。又解：住法者是定，動法者是散亂。言無有失壞可憐愍者，謂由懈怠故，於住法無、於動法有，由是無有故成失壞，由失壞故甚可憐愍。廣釋失壞，如瑜伽論第三十六及七十三深密經云：如實知諸法，即捨染法相，捨染法相已，證於清淨法。不觀有為過，懈怠放逸害，諸法常不動，離相名菩薩也。
> The commentary explains: This is the second section, where the verses provide a brief summary. Above, the prose portion explained in detail the merits of understanding the three natures. Now these verses illustrate, by contrast, the loss that comes from failing to understand the mark of signlessness. How is this a reverse explanation? In truth, both the prose and the verses contain elements of direct and reverse explanation. For the sake of brevity, each is presented from one angle, complementing each other by implication. According to the \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\*, both the verses and the prose are direct explanations, differing due to the translators' choices. There are two verses, divided into two parts: the first verse directly addresses the loss from not understanding signlessness, while the second verse further explains the loss from not contemplating the faults of conditioned phenomena. The first part has two sections: the first two lines point out that failing to understand leads to the fault of unbroken defilement, and the last two lines show that because defilement is not severed, one fails to realize perfect attainment. "Loss" (huai) means to lose or spoil—by not severing defilement, one loses the attainment of the subtle true nature’s pure mark. "Failure to attain" means the inability to realize it. Explaining the second verse, there are two parts: the first two lines clarify the fault of negligence, and the last two lines clarify the fault of laziness. "Not contemplating the faults of all conditioned things" means that through ignorance, one cannot observe the faults of conditioned phenomena, giving rise to negligence and harming beings. "Remaining in the still principle, moving within phenomena" refers to the second fault of laziness. Laziness is the cause of faults and the obstacle to merits. "The still principle" refers to nirvana, which is permanent and unchanging, hence called "still." "The moving principle" refers to saṃsāra, where things arise and cease, flowing through the three realms, hence called "moving." Another interpretation: the still principle is meditative concentration, and the moving principle is distraction. "No loss, lamentable" means that through laziness, one lacks the still principle and possesses the moving one. Lacking the still, one becomes lost and spoiled, and being spoiled, one is deeply pitiable. For a detailed explanation of this loss, see \*Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra\*, chapters 36 and 73. The \*Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra\* says: "Truly knowing all phenomena, one abandons the mark of defilement. Having abandoned the mark of defilement, one realizes the pure Dharma. Not contemplating the faults of conditioned things, through laziness and negligence one is harmed. All phenomena are ever still and unmoving; free from marks, this is called a bodhisattva."