成唯識寶生論卷第一(一名二十唯識順釋論)
Completion of the Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only, Volume 1(Also known as the Twenty Verses on Consciousness-Only with Commentary)
護法菩薩造
Treatise on the Dharma Protector Bodhisattva
大唐三藏法師義淨奉 制譯
Translation by Tripitaka Master Yijing of the Tang Dynasty, Under Imperial Commission
有情恒為眾苦逼， 熾燃猛火燒內心，
善士意樂起慈悲， 譬如自身皆自受。
敬禮善慧諸佛種， 於眾煩惱皆除滅，
與無依者作歸依， 能令極怖心安隱。
微笑降伏大魔軍， 明智覺了除眾欲，
於此大乘能善住， 深識愛源唯自心。
論曰：謂依大乘成立三界但唯是識。
釋曰：此復何意，輒名大乘？本契弘心，堅持禁戒，遍諸生品拔濟有情，普令出離，獲得難勝無罪之行極妙吉祥，是諸善逝去而隨去，無邊大路并所獲果，圓滿尊極，餘不能知。由此義故，名為大乘。如經所說：言大乘者，謂是菩提薩埵所行之路及佛勝果。為得此故修唯識觀，是無過失方便正路。為此類故顯彼方便，於諸經中種種行相而廣宣說，如地水火風并所持物，品類難悉方處無邊。由此審知自心相現，遂於諸處捨其外相，遠離欣慼。復觀有海諠靜無差，棄彼小途絕大乘望。及於諸有耽著之類，觀若險崖深生怖畏，正趣中道。若知但是自心所作，無邊資糧易為積集，不待多時，如少用功能成大事，善逝行處猶若掌中。由斯理故，所有願求當能圓滿隨意而轉。縱如所許有其外事，然由內心意樂慇重弘誓力故，能到無邊六度之岸。若異此者，所捨之物盡持行施，及所遺生何能總遍，令其歡喜愜順求心。此即便成無邊際境，所為施事無有竟期。又復所有廣為利益有情戒等，於諸無障有情之類，隨彼樂欲悉能稱意，赴彼希望正行施等，速便收集正覺資糧。由斯但自心，復何須外境。若許外事，復與正理義有相違，故知境無斯成勝妙。如仗自心妄生分別，作色等解、起身見等。無實，不待外諸有情而作所緣因生離染，然於施等各隨其事而能獲果，實不假藉識外境事。
Explanation: Why is this called the Great Vehicle? It is originally based on a vast compassionate aspiration, firmly upholding precepts, reaching all beings to rescue and guide them all, universally leading them to liberation, attaining the unsurpassable, impeccable conduct of supreme auspiciousness—this is the path that all the Blissfully Departed have walked and continue to walk. It is the boundless highway and the fruit obtained, perfect and supreme, unknown to others. For this reason, it is called the Great Vehicle. As the sutra says: The Great Vehicle refers to the path traveled by Bodhisattvas and the supreme fruit of Buddhahood. To attain this, one cultivates the contemplation of consciousness-only, which is a flawless and correct path. For the sake of such practitioners, this method is revealed, and it is explained extensively in various sutras through different modes, akin to earth, water, fire, wind, and the objects they support—countless in types and boundless in scope. Through this, one thoroughly understands that one's own mind manifests as appearances, thereby letting go of external forms in all situations, transcending attraction and aversion. Observing the ocean of existence as equal in its noise and silence, one abandons the lesser paths and does not lose hope in the Great Vehicle. For those attached to worldly existence, one views it as a dangerous cliff, deeply fearing it, and correctly pursues the Middle Way. If one recognizes that all are simply creations of one's own mind, then boundless resources are easily accumulated, requiring little time—like achieving great deeds with minimal effort, and the practice ground of the Blissfully Departed is as clear as the palm of one's hand. Through this principle, all aspirations can be fulfilled and turn according to one's wishes. Even if external events exist as ordinarily assumed, due to the earnest resolve and vast vow-power of the inner mind, one can reach the boundless shores of the six perfections. If it were otherwise, the objects given away in charity or the beings one aims to benefit could never be fully and joyfully satisfied according to their desires. This would create a boundless scope, and the act of giving would never cease. Moreover, all precepts and other practices aimed at benefiting beings could fully meet the wishes of those without obstacles, satisfying their hopes in proper deeds like generosity, and swiftly gather the provisions for enlightenment. Thus, it is solely the mind—why require external objects? If external events are posited, it contradicts true principle. Therefore, knowing that objects lack independent existence culminates in supreme excellence. Just as relying on one's own mind gives rise to false distinctions, constructing perceptions of form and color, and giving rise to views of self, nothing is real, and one does not depend on external beings as objects to cause detachment from defilement. Yet, in actions like generosity, fruits are obtained according to the deed, without relying on external objects beyond consciousness.
若其識外有別境者，遂便依彼起諸煩惱，既被執取隨轉而住。見此過已心捨離生，深懷厭棄不悕大覺。既捨有情界，如何欲弘益？由非攝取諸有生類，小心自度大行難成。然諸覺情依斯而轉，方能長養菩提資糧，謂於客塵有為之事厭背心故證無為法。由無為法體不生長故，希餘小寂偏證一邊，無上覺山遂便淪退。若無外境，愛厭俱亡，正覺之處斯成易得。豈非大悲常存於念，菩提薩埵極果方成，唯識之言便為違害？然而大悲要託他身為緣性故，既除外境但緣自識，此則便成怜自身故。利他為意大行方竪，唯顧己身寔乖弘度。雖陳雅責，因斯無過，藉外相續為增上緣，於自識中現有情相，緣此為境起大悲心，於有情處而作弘益。此無相違，決定如是，應起信心。假令於彼色聲等處一一推求彼無其我，設使和集我亦不成，然而本性不可捨故。既同所許無我為宗，當於何處欲興悲念？於世共許當情妄執，為所緣相以為有情。亦不應言情所執事即是外境。由此應知，假令不樂理必許然，但於自識現有情相，依仗斯事色相生焉，是故定知無其外境。若離於識必不可得，是顛倒故。何謂顛倒？本無外境見為實物。非妄執故，終能獲得無上之處，可為應理。唯識之見是真實故，為彼方便深成稱理。
If the mind perceives objects as existing externally, it becomes attached to them, giving rise to various afflictions. Once grasped, these objects seize the mind, compelling it to follow them. Witnessing this flaw, the mind turns away, giving rise to weariness and disgust, and no longer aspires to great enlightenment. Having abandoned beings, how can one work for their benefit? Rejecting all living creatures, this narrow, self-centered path makes it difficult to complete the great task. However, Bodhisattvas, relying on this very principle, are able to cultivate the essential provisions for enlightenment. That is, turning away from conditioned, defiled phenomena, they realize the unconditioned. But because the unconditioned nature does not generate growth, craving a petty individual peace, they lean toward one side and regress from the lofty mountain of supreme enlightenment.
If there are no external objects, then both attachment and aversion vanish, and the state of true enlightenment becomes easily attainable. Is it not the case that great compassion dwells constantly in awareness, and that the highest fruit of a Bodhisattva is fulfilled only thus? Does this not contradict the doctrine of Consciousness-Only? Yet great compassion depends on others as its condition. If external objects are removed and only one's own consciousness is perceived, then this becomes merely pity for one's own self. The great path, founded on benefiting others, collapses, while only selfish concern remains, truly betraying universal liberation.
Though these elegant objections may be raised, there is in fact no fault in this view. Depending on the continuity of others as a contributory condition, one's own consciousness manifests the appearance of sentient beings. Taking this as the object, great compassion arises, and one works for their welfare. This is not contradictory—such is the certainty—and thus faith should be aroused.
Suppose one were to analyze external objects such as form and sound, searching for a self within them. Even if they are assembled, no self is found. Yet their intrinsic nature cannot be abandoned. Since it is commonly accepted that non-self is the principle, where then should one direct compassion? It is upon what the world conventionally accepts, upon the deluded attachments of ordinary mind, that one takes as the object of perception and calls a sentient being. One should not argue that the object of such mental fabrication is an external entity.
Therefore, even if one dislikes it, reason must accept that only one's own consciousness manifests the appearance of sentient beings. Relying on this, form arises. Thus, it is established that there are no external objects. Apart from consciousness, they cannot be obtained, because they are deluded. What is this delusion? It is seeing that which is originally non-existent as actual reality. Yet, because it is not a product of deluded grasping, one can ultimately attain the supreme state—this is as it should be. The view of Consciousness-Only is true. As a means to that end, it is profoundly fitting and reasonable.
如何得知斯為實見？三界唯心是詮說故。凡有諍事欲求決定，須藉二門：一順阿笈摩、二符正理。謂欲為彼信證聖人無倒宣說所有傳教引阿笈摩，若為此餘不信之者，應申正理。或可為彼二人俱陳兩事，如所信事令安住故陳其正理。又為顯其所論正理有依仗處說阿笈摩。由其正理不依傳教，未見真者所有言說無非謬故，名強思構。是故應知阿笈摩者便成正理所託之處。或於自部有力用故，為此先陳阿笈摩教。爾來據義依大乘說，即第七聲目其所為。謂欲證得彼大乘理說唯識觀是真實故，此不虛性，以阿笈摩善成立故。又若唯據言說大乘，猶如於義假名乘者，依第七聲所說聲也。謂即依託大乘言教聚集之處真實句義而成立之。但唯是識，為欲明其所立宗義，於大乘教而引一隅顯所立宗，不於自教有相違背。
How can one know that this is a true understanding? It is said because the three realms are merely mind. Whenever there is a dispute that seeks resolution, two methods must be relied upon: first, accordance with the Āgamas; second, conformity with correct reasoning. To provide faith-based evidence for the wise who see truth without distortion, one may cite the Āgamas. For those who are not yet faithful, one should present correct reasoning. Or, to address both types of people, one may present both: by citing the Āgamas to establish what is believed, and by presenting reasoning to reinforce that faith. Furthermore, to show that the correct reasoning has a foundation, the Āgamas are cited. Without claiming that reasoning depends solely on transmitted teachings, one must avoid the error of assuming that words from those who have not seen the truth are mistaken, which would be mere forced speculation. Therefore, it should be understood that the Āgamas serve as the foundation of correct reasoning. Alternatively, because they hold authority within their own tradition, the Āgamas are presented first. Accordingly, based on the meaning, we follow the Mahāyāna teaching, using the seventh case to indicate its purpose. That is, to realize the truth of the Mahāyāna, the perception of mere consciousness is affirmed as true. This non-illusionness is well established through the Āgamas. Moreover, if one relies solely on the spoken Mahāyāna, as merely a conventional label for the truth, it is expressed by the seventh case. That is, by relying on the spoken Mahāyāna as a gathering of words, one establishes true statements and meanings. Everything is merely consciousness. To clarify the established tenet, a single example is drawn from the Mahāyāna teaching to illustrate the established doctrine, ensuring that it does not contradict one’s own tradition.
此復何故名阿笈摩，輒自引證說斯言耶？謂從能說如理教者，假彼相續為增上緣此教方生，於其聽者識之差別，體有功能現前而住。或是親聞或復傳說，於所詮事當情相狀次第而生猶如筆畫，章句形段昞然明現，從他來故名阿笈摩。若復有時自生憶念隨順本相識方生者，從彼生故得阿笈摩名。猶如自說名為佛語。德者義相，為智因故名智資糧。豈非一切但唯有識。此違所許故，及自語相違，理固不然。非由於色有別異故，依識差別而為建立。如無色界所有差別，如無色界實無其色，但依於識分為四種立空處等，餘界亦然。設復說三，於識何妨？猶若有情雖無差異，然而安立欲色界殊，據其所繫色差別故。色雖無異，別立無過。
Then why is it called the “Āgama,” when one cites it as personal testimony? It is so called because it arises from the ability of a teacher who speaks in accordance with reason, using the continuity of their being as a supporting condition, bringing the teaching into being in the listener’s mind as a distinct cognitive function. Whether heard directly or passed down through tradition, the meaning manifests in the mind sequentially like the strokes of a brush, with clear patterns of words and phrases. Because it comes from another, it is called the Āgama. If, at other times, one’s own memory arises in accordance with the original pattern, that too is called Āgama by virtue of arising from that source—just as what one personally says can be called the Buddha’s words. “Quality” refers to the characteristics of meaning, which serve as the cause for wisdom, hence the term “wisdom resource.”
Do all things truly consist only of consciousness? This contradicts what is accepted, and it also contradicts the statement itself. The reason is not so. Because forms are not distinct in themselves, distinctions are established based on differences in consciousness. Just as in the Formless Realm, where there is no actual form but distinctions are made based on consciousness, dividing it into four levels such as the “Sphere of Infinite Space,” so too it is for other realms. Even if we posit three realms, what harm does that do to consciousness? Just as sentient beings, though without inherent difference, are classified into the Desire Realm and the Form Realm based on the distinctions of the aggregates to which they are bound, so too, although form itself is not distinct, such distinctions can be made without error.
豈不詮教言唯有心，今此立宗言唯有識，說違本教諒在憑虛。義有所歸，誠無斯過，由其先許心意識了是名差別，由同體事名不俱陳，故以異名而宣其義。即此唯了之言非眾共許，欲令解義取共知聲更陳餘號。復更顯與經不相違，重說意識二聲況彼二義，知體不別即是其果。若欲要明不違經者，心了二聲同其一義，明不違教。釋妨已周，何須更說意與識耶？若說了聲心異名者，心望心所是別有體，猶如於境同生之類，念昔睡等便成是無，此則前後理相違背。實無此過，有所由故。此中心言許有相應，即是了言兼攝於彼。若如是者，識外之境心意詮故，於其心處更置唯聲，意有取遮以為其果，境若無者遂成無用。唯聲不遮，可如來責；現遮所緣境，如何言無用？若如斯解，由同生法及所緣境俱是離心別有其體，一便遮止、一乃見留。豈得事無由緒而空談自愛，若無別意，誠如所詰。然由於境心聚共緣決斷等事，同類性故，於心所處假說心聲。復為遮其非所許事，故於心處更置唯聲。縱有所談此還非理，便成亦是不取心言，非一處顯真假二事俱能彰顯有力用故。如牛等聲於心所處，置此心言說心聲時真事便捨，如於邊鄙假說為牛，垂胡等事理定應棄。有言本意二事俱說，亦應更作一種異聲用表斯義，或可攝聲，撮略而顯依俗論法，猶如欲聲而為辯釋。非唯自意能為巧釋，元其緒系生決定耶。亦復不由有染等言，蘇呾囉中有染等說，於其遮遣無有力用，於彼亦有有境言故。境亦不遮，所說唯聲便成無用。若言外境非理須遮，無阿笈摩摩呾囉聲二處同故，隨遮一事無決定因，是故須依異宗之見。心心所法體不相離但位有別，即此唯聲能遮外事，同生之法無不遮故。凡總相聲所有詮名，於其自事必不差別，非為決定而並現前。由其不遮，理便總攝，為欲述曉如斯道理，故說心言許有相應。若離心所獨心非有，故不應難，亦遣同遮。作是釋時，唯遮外境實有功能，述已義成故說唯言。以理准餘但遮境事，豈非所引有此中言，明知於餘有除心所。復是容有如六識身名為識聚。若言此中說識蘊時兼攝心所，理定不然，想受及思諸心所法餘蘊無故。若言猶如於色蘊者，由如取其仳喏那分立為色蘊，想等同然非相似故。若言許取，由色差別便以識聲說其識蘊，非色等法是心位差猶如於想。若以位差簡有差時，隨其色類為簡別已，以色等聲於識而立。此亦非理，斯乃便成撥其識聚。由彼被斯色受等聲割其分故，非位差外別可得故。離仳喏那位差之外別有色位，猶如樂等所現相狀憂愁苦惱，於斯相處安置識聲隨牛𬌏理。若如是者，識六識身為其識蘊，義乃相違眼等諸識，色等相現故。由其並是色聚所收，復更有餘雜亂之過。若其青等相現之時，或違或順，色行二蘊便成雜亂，如是復成於樂等位。受等相雜准斯道理，亦是破其總別之義。有說識能遍故是總相聲，猶如初相。此之別相，謂是色等，彼乃是其現相位差之因性故。此亦如前受等，便有雜亂之過。是故除其心所性言，猶如成立所有色聚。唯心之聲表唯識耳，此亦不能於其心所及以所緣令疑斷絕。言唯字者，有何所遮？雖言心所不離於心，此成虛言，由其相狀體各別故。所言識者，唯觀現境雜染等性，但是愛著，體非照察。如何能見？此即於彼體成殊別，及以更互。上來所述道理既多，然於本宗未為的要，且息傍論應辯正宗。心及心所設令體別，以其心字亦得相收，應知此義共成已久。若於其處諸心所法，不以自名而顯說者，應知此中即是總目。所有心聚如調心等但道其心，此謂共成，故知唯聲但遮其境。若無境者，如何於青及甜味等而了別之？由理不能撥現見故。誰言撥其現見之境？但於自識境相生焉。由自識相領受之時，遂即計執所有青等如外而住，但為是其邪妄之解，猶如眩目見髮蠅等。斯乃但是識之相別現其蠅相，即便妄執為有蠅耶，然而在外曾無蠅等自性可得，如何作境令識別生？此若無境，如何得之識似於彼相狀生耶？要有本相似彼相生，可於此時得言似彼。如斯之事世皆共許，如於陽炎謂言似水，非無其境，亦能見故。如於薩埵有覺相生，而非離於色等體外有別薩埵實事可得，亦非色等或總或別有其自性變壞等性而簡別故，於心實事亦復不能捨其本性，或可薩埵是覆俗有。如斯道理，我亦同然。於色等處謂從於識生差別性是覆俗故，如依色處執為車等。然而但由情所計執，於其色等覆障實性，於眾緣處作自相狀而安置之如在於外，即於是處見車等故。未審覆俗是何義耶？是覆障義，順俗情故。由彼於其車乘等處計執自性，是覆俗有覆其實體生餘執故。故彼妄情施設其相，先於斯事而執取之，雖無實相妄生境想。又如常等情所現相，何有本相而隨順之？是故雖無識外實境，識所現相其理善成。或可此中言似相者，乃是隨順顛倒事義，如陽炎處翻作水解便作水想。識亦於其色等相處生起倒情，故言現相，此不相違。有說其顛倒境亦依實事方始生心，此亦同前悉皆徵責。
復有外律作斯異執：離色等外別有我體。此復依何而生於倒？經云依內，此亦無違，謂於俱生所起身見密而說故，故云於我正可用心，當見現見。如其親近惡友等人，即云於我故作是說。然彼凡小妄生其識，遂起顛倒為外境相。或可隨順他共成事而為言說，即如世間所共許事將為境者，即於其事唯識生起。是故由斯似境相故，緣色等識不取外境，如眩瞖人見髮蠅等。此外境空但唯有識是其宗義，即由此義而為難曰：此喻不成。於光明分妄生髮想，斯由其眼根虧力故。有說有別大種生而可見，遂令情執為其髮等。若如是立似境相現但唯識者，處時等定便成非理。如其所有色等諸境離識別有，即於色等定其方所所現形量分局之處，其識於彼形量決斷方隅決定似彼相生，斯成應理。若如所許不由外境，但唯內識起妄所執色相生者，於餘無處如何不隨形量決定處時現識相耶？隨於方處見其處定。如隨處有非一切處，境既無定，即於餘處亦應可見或不可見。然彼所立定不取其外境生識，於非有境所生之覺曾無決定處時可得有其實事。說境空故，決定時處所現之相便成非有。然不如是，此既無定，見色等心與彼乃是不相離性，是故不應執境空無。既無重執有有分者，此顯立宗有相違過。若言其喻有成理者，身不定屬，理有相違。相應時處和會共觀不偏屬一，由覿斯境此不應理，許境無故。此既境無，或復異類。言異類者，見異相時此是根壞為其緣故，如眩瞖人，亦不應有諸能觀者咸皆患瞖。然於時處現相應者，於諸身處不定而生，并於色等能見識生，准此應知外境無故。於所量事在不定身不見生故，此則同前難斥宗過。又諸事用亦不應理，諸實髮等現見能為磨鏡等用，何不用此識之髮相？雖無真實事而作用轉生，此亦非理，無功能故。若其識分有功能者，眩目所覿何無髮用？此之同有似髮相故。斯亦同前所量之境，作用功能不可見故，出其宗過。三喻為依，三事不同。於不實境而作三喻，由依根境功能差別。應知根有二種：一是色根、二非色根。即此初根由闇損故妄見其事，故為初喻。次第二根，於彼夢中見有差別，述第二喻。由其彼境有功力故能生倒見，引第三喻。此則是其一家異釋。有餘復言：處時決定故，緣色等心心是依託，非內現事而為其境，猶如緣彼章句之心。然於心內據最初起，隨現有事而執取故。又且諸覺容有定時，然而於心如何定處？非無方處物有方處定及不定故。此據境上所有之法於其心處而假說之。斯亦無過，此處能作現相事故說為定處。凡由彼事心得生者即名為境，此謂成立別有外境，取共許者將以為喻。於其相應時處住者，咸共生其無異相故。緣色等心以外一事而為其因，如同學類依教者心、依增上識此得生起，隨其自相作用生故，故知離識別有色等。此不應有，更應成立無髮等用，彼相之覺猶如夢覺是覺性故。上來所述眾多成立相違道理，意欲障他不定之過。有餘復言：謂即於斯時處二種有其實義，即於此處時處決定應成非有。仁既不許有其境事，依彼差別亦不許故，何勞為他作便成過。此若非有便即相符，如賊被捉唱瘡痛言。強作前宗誠為麁淺，不應理故。若言於識所現相狀為所許者，不應道理，雖呈雅思不異前釋。或復隨於時處差別所有之事，即於此處見其時處許為決定。縱於所許有實外境，然而色等永為定者。此亦非理，異時異處有時見故。設令於此常時見有，然他不許，如何於他不共許境，此之能別決定道理可遣許耶？故但於識而現其相。復有別作相違因難而為詰責，猶如成立境是空無，我還成立時處決定令非有故。若其時處是共許者，便成共許而遮遣之。由其無違方可得作相違之言，若言不是眾所共許，斯乃全無我所不愛，由斯理故成無力難。
復有自許但用遮遣，於無境處緣空之識無定時處故，彼之決定於色等處共見有故，成立外境是其實有。此亦應知離彼隨成，但有遮遣不應理故，但用此一不能令他生其正解，斯非真實。且如前宗所立之義，由底蜜攞之所損故，於眼睛上有其疎膜，如羅網目外觀白色，於彼隙中明相斯顯，便生妄解將為髮等。即此之喻，於其所立隨成理闕。今應問彼：若光明相髮等形狀，此不應理。此光明相有見為黃、或見為赤，然於髮等見為純黑、或見眾彩如鑠羯羅弓等。然其明目總能見者，於彼光邊不觀異相，如事見之能作斯語，在隙光處倒為髮解，此即便成見髮等心境空無性，光明支分非髮相性故，及此似髮等相現故。非但為因能為生者，遂令作其所緣性故。勿令緣其色等諸識，便成緣彼眼等諸根，因義同故。或可更有如斯別意：託實事因方生顛倒，餘則不爾。斯言是實，此亦便依在內安布種子成就，不待外境。凡論境者，要須自相安布在心，然後方得成所緣性。其光明分起不關心，如何得作所緣之性？此亦未堪發生歡悅。次有計云：其患目人大種失度，睛生瞖眩損其眼分，由彼損力便生異相，令於外境別大種生，依損根識便能見彼。是故定知羝蜜梨迦所有覺慧緣實外境。如斯計者有大過失。凡邪倒事所起覺心皆來設難：於樂等倒託誰為緣而生是相作其境耶？雖無外境然有妄見，此則顛倒便成非有。若言世俗不共許事，我即將此以為邪倒，還有大過。苦空等見緣薩帝時是彼類故，此則不勞功力能見非倒，諸具縛者咸是悟真，如來出世宣揚正法此即便成空無果利。何處得有如是定判，偏令瞖目獨受邪迷？又復於彼情有相狀，見其有情飛行往還，令諸覺者觀其搖颺。此諸薩埵許大種生，何不計命？設復百千群瞖同聚，遂於一處各觀別形，此時如何有對礙物而不更相共為排擯？若言此亦由其瞖力，則底蜜攞多用其功，於所學門善修幻術，能令諸法自性遷移。或應見許彼非質礙。非質礙故，如無貪等便非色性，斯乃何殊唯識論者？
又復何勞非處呈力，彼許大種於其一一非青等性，但由種合因緣力故，眼等諸識緣彼相生？此本宗義，凡是聚合非實物有，即此之識緣非實物，不勞深搆，無違諍故。詎煩辛苦而為成立？
成唯識寶生論卷第一
大唐景龍四年歲次庚戌四月壬午朔十五日景申，三藏法師大德沙門義淨宣釋梵本并綴文正字。
翻經沙門吐火羅大德達秣磨證梵義。
翻經沙門中天竺國大德拔努證梵義。
翻經沙門罽賓國大德達摩難陀證梵文。
翻經沙門淄州大雲寺大德惠沼證義。
翻經沙門洛州崇光寺大德律師道𭻜證義。
翻經沙門福壽寺寺主大德利明證義。
翻經沙門洛州太平寺大德律師道恪證義。
翻經沙門大薦福寺大德大勝莊證義。
翻經沙門相州禪河寺大德玄傘證義筆受。
翻經沙門大薦福寺大德律師智積證義正字。
翻經沙門德州大雲寺寺主惠傘證義。
翻經沙門西涼州伯塔寺大德惠積讀梵本。
翻經婆羅門右驍衛翊府中郎將員外置宿衛臣李釋迦讀梵本。
翻經婆羅門東天竺國左衛翊府中郎將員外置同正員臣瞿金剛證譯。
翻經婆羅門東天竺國大首領臣伊舍羅證梵本。
翻經婆羅門左領軍衛中郎將迦濕彌羅國王子臣阿順證譯。
翻經婆羅門東天竺國左執戟直中書省臣度頗具讀梵本。
翻經婆羅門龍播國大達官准五品臣李輸羅證譯。
金紫光祿大夫守尚書左僕射同中書門下三品上柱國史館國公臣匡臣源等及修文館學士三十三人同監。
判官朝散大夫行著作佐郎臣劉令植。
使金紫光祿大夫行祕書監檢校殿中監兼知內外閑廐隴右三使上柱國嗣號王臣邑。