成唯識論之難究也。不獨糅百為十。詞約義豐而已是雖正釋三十論。而實攝攝論集論雜集論二十論廣百論辨中邊寶生顯識轉識五蘊掌珍手杖佛性佛地俱舍金七十勝宗十句諸論。無慮數百卷。雖瑜伽顯揚至多。然但可以證此論。而不可以攝此論。嗚呼淵矣博矣。蔑以加矣。況其中立正義摧邪見。每用三支比量。觸處而是。而今世講師。透徹因明者絕少。若又不熟究諸論融浹於心。遽解此論。其不郢書而燕說者幾希。如首卷破勝論實德業三句二比量。緣彼宗計瓶衣等物。身根所觸。眼根所見。是五識境。現量所得。即身觸眼見是因。現量所得是宗。色聲是喻。故以有質礙無質礙二宗共一因。出其不定之過。此計不出勝宗十句論。而出廣百論中。又如次卷破三有為相。後約三世破。為小乘執生在未來。而過去現在都無生用。故以來同去破之。此執不出於百論。而出俱舍及清凉鈔中。如此之類不可枚舉。目力一不到。率爾下筆。則有自誤誤人之咎。嗚呼可不慎哉。余既潛心此論。攷求諸典。有所標識。而闕疑尚多。後聞巢松緣督諸師。結侶焦山。徧檢大藏。將釋此論。遣使迎之。二師先後至。余謂。何不作補疏為後學指南。僉曰。非得一雨師來不可。余即遣使迎一雨師。會以他事覊不至。因循歲月。合併甚難。而余亦出山矣。追尋此約已將十年。緣督已作古人。而余亦老病。伏枕二秊。殊無起色。然研味此論未曾蹔捨。今年夏一雨師新解成。以前五卷刻本寄余。其書曰。近世解內典。各出已見者多。第性宗理圓。作聰明註釋。亦無大礙。相宗理方。一字出入。便謬以千里矣。不侫雖有臆見。目未曾經考證。口未曾經商確者。皆不敢入解。今入解者。不過摭古人言句以成文耳。不識能當明公之心否。嗚呼此正余之心也。余恒謂。陳那護法諸菩薩皆果位聖人。在賢劫千佛之數。其造諸論。皆現量心中流出。吾輩顧以分別心揣摩卜度。自以為比量。而不知皆非量也。不以至教量印之烏乎可。故余拙解取名證義。意正如此。師可謂得我心之所同然矣。及閱其書。則遇立量處。一一提明。雖不解因明者。讀之無不了然。其散見諸論。凡余心目之所及者。師皆先及之。且有余目之所未及者矣。然後知師用意之精如此。而巢松緣督之推許豈虗哉。余聞紫栢大師言。相宗絕傳久矣。魯庵泰法師。行脚避雨。止人家簷下。聞其內說法聲。聽之則相宗也。亟入見。乃一翁為一嫗說。師遂拜請教。因留月餘。盡傳其學而去。疑此翁嫗非凡人。盖聖賢應化而現者。雪浪恩法師即魯庵之孫也。緣督又雪浪之孫。而一雨巢松二師皆得法雪浪。稱高第弟子。其授受淵源有自矣。余承法師片言指點。受益良多。但其欲盡削繁文。獨存護法正義數語。未免憚煩樂簡之病。故其平生著述絕少。然有諸弟子。燈燈相續。著書滿天下。亦孰非法師之著述哉。病中久癈筆研。偶因贊喜而走筆序之。亦不知有當於師心否。

The profundity of the *Cheng Weishi Lun* (*Demonstration of Consciousness-Only*) is difficult to fathom. It is not merely a matter of condensing a hundred doctrines into ten, with terse words and rich meaning. Although it is a direct commentary on the *Thirty Verses*, it actually encompasses the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha*, *Abhidharmasamuccaya*, *Nyāyānusāra*, *Vimśatikā*, *Śataśāstra*, *Madhyāntavibhāga*, *Ratnagotravibhāga*, *Ālaya-vijñāna-vikṣepa*, *Pravṛtti-vijñāna-vikṣepa*, *Pañcaskandhaka*, *Karuṇā-puṇḍarīka*, *Tarkajvālā*, *Buddha-nature*, *Buddhabhūmi*, *Abhidharmakośa*, *Sāṃkhya-kārikā*, *Vaiśeṣika-daśapadārtha*, and other treatises—amounting to several hundred volumes. Although the *Yogācārabhūmi* and **Mahāyānasaṃgraha* are extensive, they can only serve as evidence for this treatise, not encapsulate it completely. Alas, how profound and vast it is, beyond compare! Moreover, wherever it establishes correct principles and refutes false views, it regularly employs the three-part syllogism (*tri-rūpa-hetu*), which appears throughout. Yet among today's lecturers, very few are thoroughly versed in logic (*hetu-vidyā*). If one has not carefully studied these various treatises and integrated them in the mind, then rashly attempting to explain this *śāstra* will almost certainly result in misreading the text and spreading absurdities.

For example, in the first volume, it refutes the Vaiśeṣika school's three categories of substance, quality, and action with two syllogisms. According to that school, objects like pots and clothes are tangible by the body and visible by the eye—they are objects of the five senses, perceived directly (*pratyakṣa*). Thus, bodily touch and visual sight are the reason (*hetu*), direct perception is the proposition (*sādhya*), and forms and sounds are the example (*dṛṣṭānta*). The refutation uses the two properties of "having obstruction" and "having no obstruction" as a common reason for two different propositions, revealing the fault of uncertainty (*anaikāntika*). This reasoning does not come from the *Vaiśeṣika-daśapadārtha* but from the *Śataśāstra*.

Another example appears in the second volume, where it refutes the three conditioned characteristics (*lakṣaṇa*), then refutes them in terms of the three times. Because the Lesser Vehicle holds that arising occurs in the future, while in the past and present it has no function, the treatise refutes this by arguing that future arising is the same as past arising. This argument does not come from the *Śataśāstra* but from the *Abhidharmakośa* and the *Avataṃsaka* commentary. Instances like this are too numerous to list. If one's attention slips for a moment, hastily writing down an explanation can lead to errors that mislead both oneself and others. Alas, how can one not be cautious?

Having devoted myself to this treatise and consulted various texts, I have made some annotations, but many doubts remain. Later, I heard that Masters Chaosong and Yuandu had formed a study group at Jiaoshan and were examining the entire canon in order to explain this treatise. I sent a messenger to invite them. Both masters arrived one after another. I suggested, "Why not compose a supplementary commentary to guide later students?" They replied in unison, "That would require Master Yiyu to join us." I then sent for Master Yiyu, but he was detained by other matters and could not come. Time passed, and it became very difficult to bring everyone together. Eventually, I left the mountain. Now, nearly ten years have passed since that plan was made. Yuandu has already passed away, and I am old and ill, having been bedridden for two years with little sign of recovery. Yet I have never ceased studying and savoring this treatise.

This summer, Master Yiyu completed a new commentary and sent me the printed text of the first five fascicles. In his letter, he said: "In recent times, many people who explain Buddhist scriptures follow their own opinions. For the school of nature (*xingzong*), whose principles are all-encompassing, clever annotations may not cause great harm. But for the school of characteristics (*xiangzong*), whose principles are precise, even a single character's deviation leads to errors by a thousand miles. Though I have my own views, I have not included any explanation that I have not personally verified through textual evidence or discussed with others. What I have included is merely assembling ancient sayings into a coherent text. I wonder if this will meet with your approval."

Alas, this is exactly my own approach! I have always said that all beings like Bodhisattvas Dignāga and Dharmapāla are perfected saints destined among the thousand Buddhas of the Fortunate Eon. Their compositions flow directly from an enlightened mind. We, however, speculate with our discriminating minds, mistaking our conjectures for correct reasoning (*anumāna*), not realizing they are not true knowledge at all. How can we proceed without confirming them with the authority of scripture (*āgama-pramāṇa*)? This is why I named my own humble commentary *Evidence of the Meaning*, intending just this. Master Yiyu has truly understood what I hold in my heart.

When I read his work, I found that wherever there is a syllogism (*prayoga*), he clearly explains it. Even those unfamiliar with logic can read and fully understand it. The various treatises scattered throughout—everything my mind and eyes could reach, the master has already covered. Moreover, he has included things beyond my reach. I then realized how meticulously he crafted his work, and I understood that the praise from Chaosong and Yuandu was not unfounded.

I recall Master Zibai saying that the transmission of the school of characteristics had been lost for a long time. Master Lu'an Tai, while traveling, took shelter from rain under someone's eaves. Inside, he heard a voice expounding the Dharma—and it was the school of characteristics! He immediately entered and saw an old man teaching an old woman. The master bowed and asked for instruction. He stayed for over a month, fully mastering the teaching before leaving. I suspect that old couple was no ordinary pair but enlightened beings manifesting in human form. Master Xuelang En was the disciple of Lu'an's lineage. Yuandu, in turn, was a disciple in the same lineage. Masters Yiyu and Chaosong both received the Dharma from Xuelang and were regarded as his eminent disciples. Their transmission has a deep and authentic source.

I have benefited greatly even from a few words of guidance from Master Yiyu. However, his inclination to completely eliminate lengthy explanations and retain only the essential points of Dharmapāla's correct teaching perhaps reveals a tendency to avoid complexity and prefer simplicity. As a result, he authored very few works in his lifetime. But with his disciples, the lamp of Dharma has been passed continuously, and their writings fill the world—how can these not be considered his own works?

Prolonged illness has kept me away from brush and ink for a long time. But recently, inspired by this occasion, I hurriedly wrote this preface. I do not know if it truly reflects the master's mind.

Cheng Weishi Lun Collected Explanations (成唯識論集解)

Cheng Weishi Lun Collected Explanations (成唯識論集解)