流轉章
生滅流轉略作十門。一明違順。二斷常。三一異。四有無。五生滅。六前後。七時世。八因果。九真妄。十成觀。初中於一有為流轉法上義分為二。謂前念滅後念生。經云。如印印泥印壞文成。此即印壞為滅文成為生。又經云。由前五陰故。後陰相續生等。皆是此流轉義也。此中生滅違順有二門。初總後別。總中有四義。一相違義。以背滅為生生盡為滅。以相違故成生滅。二順義。以前念若不滅後念不生。要由滅前念後念方生。是故相順方成生滅。問若前念不滅後念不得生。以二念不並故者。既其滅已亦不得生。以生無所依故。如論云。滅法何能緣。故無次第緣。是故滅已無物誰能生後。答滅有二種。一斷滅。二剎那滅。今非斷滅故不同無物。問此剎那滅若不同無物。應非是滅。答是剎那滅必引後。故不同無物。若不引後非此滅故。問若剎那必引後生。是即不得入無心定等。以滅已無間要必生故。答剎那有二位。一約能依轉識麁故。皆從自種生。前念後念近遠俱為等無。聞緣。二約所依本識細故。前後流注滅已更生無間相續。問若爾。入寂二乘最後滅心。應亦還生。即無涅槃便成大過。答若約小乘初教。可如所難。以彼宗中許入寂二乘永滅斷故。若終教等即不如此。以二乘人。燒分段身生滅度想入於涅槃。而餘世界受變易身。受佛教化行菩薩道。乃至成佛。盡於未來無有斷絕。以無眾生作非眾生故。四記論中。滅者復生分別記者。此約小乘說。問此微細滅既自不住。何能有力而生後念。答以依真如如來藏故。令此生滅得生滅也。經云。依如來藏故有生滅心等。又經云。依無住本立一切法等。是故滅無真依無以起生。生不依真不從滅起。起信論云。不生不滅與生滅和合。名阿梨耶識。是即流轉是不流轉轉也。是故相順而成生滅。三此二亦違亦順方得生滅。由前二義不相離故。以若不滅生無以生。生若不依滅無以背滅。是故由極相違方極相順。思之可解。四非違非順方得生滅。由前二義相形奪故。以無二為一。離二相故。違順雙泯故。
The flow of arising and ceasing can be briefly explained in ten aspects: 1. Opposition and Conformity 2. Annihilation and Permanence 3. Sameness and Difference 4. Existence and Non-existence 5. Arising and Ceasing 6. Before and After 7. Time and World 8. Cause and Effect 9. True and False 10. Forming Insight
First, regarding conditioned phenomena in the flow of arising and ceasing, the meaning is divided into two: the ceasing of the previous thought-moment and the arising of the next thought-moment. As the sutra says: "Like a seal imprinting clay—when the seal is removed, the impression remains." Here, the removal of the seal represents ceasing, and the formation of the impression represents arising. Another sutra states: "Because of the previous five aggregates, the later aggregates arise in succession," and so on—all these illustrate the meaning of this flow.
Within this, the opposition and conformity of arising and ceasing have two approaches: first a general explanation, then a specific one.
In the general explanation, there are four meanings: 1. **The meaning of opposition**: Turning away from ceasing is arising; when arising is exhausted, it becomes ceasing. Because they oppose each other, arising and ceasing are established. 2. **The meaning of conformity**: If the previous thought-moment does not cease, the next thought-moment cannot arise. It is precisely because the previous thought-moment ceases that the next thought-moment can arise. Thus, through mutual conformity, arising and ceasing are established.
**Question**: If the previous thought-moment does not cease, the next thought-moment cannot arise because two thought-moments cannot coexist—then, once it has ceased, it also cannot arise, because arising would have nothing to depend on. As the treatise says: "How can a ceased dharma serve as a condition? Therefore, there is no sequential condition." Thus, after ceasing, there is nothing—what could give rise to what follows?
**Answer**: There are two kinds of ceasing: (1) annihilation, and (2) momentary ceasing. Here, it is not annihilation, so it is not the same as nothingness.
**Question**: If this momentary ceasing is not the same as nothingness, then it should not be considered ceasing.
**Answer**: This momentary ceasing necessarily leads to what follows, so it is different from nothingness. If it did not lead to what follows, it would not be this kind of ceasing.
**Question**: If momentary ceasing must lead to subsequent arising, then one could not enter states like the mindless concentration, since after ceasing, there would inevitably be immediate arising.
**Answer**: Momentary ceasing has two aspects: (1) Regarding the coarse, dependent active consciousness: all arise from their own seeds. Whether previous and later thought-moments are near or far, they are equally without direct sensory conditions. (2) Regarding the subtle, foundational consciousness: it flows continuously, ceasing and then arising again without interruption.
**Question**: If so, then when practitioners of the Two Vehicles enter quiescence and their final thought-moment ceases, should it not also arise again? That would mean there is no nirvana—a serious error.
**Answer**: In the early teachings of the Lesser Vehicle, your objection would hold, because in that tradition, it is accepted that practitioners of the Two Vehicles who enter quiescence are permanently annihilated. But in the final teachings and beyond, it is not so. Those of the Two Vehicles burn up their coarse bodies, conceive the idea of entering nirvana, and yet in other worlds receive subtle bodies, receive the Buddha's teachings, practice the bodhisattva path, and ultimately attain buddhahood, continuing endlessly into the future—for there are no beings who become non-beings. In the Fourfold Analysis, the statement "one who has ceased arises again" is explained according to the Lesser Vehicle.
**Question**: Since this subtle ceasing does not abide on its own, how can it have the power to give rise to the next thought-moment?
**Answer**: It is because it relies on suchness, the Tathagatagarbha, that this arising and ceasing can occur. As the sutra says: "Because of the Tathagatagarbha, there is the mind of arising and ceasing," and also: "Based on the foundation of non-abiding, all dharmas are established." Thus, ceasing without true reliance cannot give rise to arising, and arising that does not rely on suchness does not come from ceasing. The *Awakening of Faith* says: "The non-arising, non-ceasing and the arising-ceasing harmonize, called the Alaya consciousness." This means the flow is the turning of the non-flow. Therefore, through mutual conformity, arising and ceasing are established.
3. **Both opposition and conformity** are required for arising and ceasing to occur. This is because the previous two meanings are inseparable: if there is no ceasing, arising has no basis to arise; if arising does not rely on ceasing, it cannot turn away from ceasing. Thus, through extreme opposition comes extreme conformity. Reflect on this to understand.
4. **Neither opposition nor conformity** is required for arising and ceasing to occur. This is because the previous two meanings negate each other. Without the two, there is oneness—free from dual characteristics, both opposition and conformity vanish.
第二別解者。此生及滅各開之為二。前念滅中二義。一滅壞義。二引後義。後念生中有二義。一依前義。二背前義。由滅壞與背前生滅極相違。由引後與依前生滅極相順。由滅壞不異引後故。由依前不異背前故。是故亦違亦順無有障礙。由滅壞融引後。背前融依前故。生滅非違非順也。更有句數思之可見。
Second, the separate explanation: "arising" and "ceasing" are each divided into two aspects. Within the ceasing of the previous moment, there are two meanings: first, the meaning of destruction, and second, the meaning of leading to what follows. Within the arising of the subsequent moment, there are two meanings: first, the meaning of depending on what precedes, and second, the meaning of turning away from what precedes. Because destruction and turning away from what precedes are in extreme opposition to arising and ceasing, while leading to what follows and depending on what precedes are in extreme harmony with arising and ceasing. Since destruction is not separate from leading to what follows, and since depending on what precedes is not separate from turning away from what precedes, therefore there is both opposition and harmony, without any obstruction. Because destruction merges with leading to what follows, and turning away from what precedes merges with depending on what precedes, therefore arising and ceasing are neither opposed nor harmonious. Further details can be understood through contemplation.
第二斷常者。亦先總後別。總中四句由前滅故不常。中後生故不斷。俱不俱准思之。別中亦四句。由滅壞及背前故。法不至法本不移而不常。由引後及依前故位不絕。位恒流而不斷。由上二義不相離故不斷即不常。恒流而不轉。不轉轉轉不轉無二故也。由滅壞違生後。由背前違依前。是故非常非非常。非斷非非斷。今此流轉法。亦非流轉非不流轉也。思之可見。
Second, on the cessation and continuity. This is also discussed first in general terms, then in specific detail.
In the general discussion, there are four propositions. Due to the cessation of what came before, there is no permanence. Due to the arising of what is in the middle and what follows, there is no interruption. The cases of both and neither can be contemplated accordingly.
In the specific discussion, there are also four propositions. Due to the decay and departure from what preceded, phenomena do not reach other phenomena—their fundamental nature does not shift—and thus there is no permanence. Due to the drawing forth of what follows and the dependence on what preceded, states do not cease—states flow continuously—and thus there is no interruption.
Because these two meanings are inseparable, non-interruption is non-permanence: continuous flow without turning, turning without turning—there is no duality between them. Due to decay contradicting arising, due to departure contradicting dependence, it is thus neither permanent nor impermanent, neither interrupted nor uninterrupted. In this flowing, changing reality, it is neither flowing nor not flowing. This can be seen through contemplation.
第三一異者。亦二門。先總中亦四句。由前念中引後義。後念中背前義。是不一門。俱不俱等思之可知。二別中亦四。謂前後非一。各二非二為非異。俱不俱思之。又交絡相望亦四句可見。是故一異無礙流而不流也。
The third aspect, "Oneness and Difference," also has two perspectives. First, in the general view, there are four propositions. The preceding moment gives rise to the meaning of the following moment, while the following moment diverges from the meaning of the preceding moment—this is the aspect of non-oneness. The states of "both" and "neither" can be understood through contemplation. Second, in the specific view, there are also four propositions: the preceding and following moments are not one, yet each is not two—this is the aspect of non-difference. The states of "both" and "neither" can be contemplated. Moreover, when examined through interweaving and mutual perspective, four propositions become evident. Thus, oneness and difference are non-obstructive—flowing yet not flowing.
第四有無者亦四句。一後念中背前義是有義。二前念中滅壞義是無義。三後念中依前義是非有義。四前念中能引後義。是非無義。五由前二義無二。是俱存義。六由後二義無二。是俱泯義。七由存泯無礙。合前六句為一無障礙流轉。經云。一切法不生滅。我說剎那義。此之謂也。
第五生滅者。於中亦二重。初中四句。依前後起是無生義。以不由自能起故引後。是不滅義以有功能故。俱不俱准思之。又前念滅故不生。後念起故不滅。俱不俱思之。第六前後中亦二重。初總中四句。由依前及引後故。二念不前後。由滅壞及背前故。二念不同時。由上二門不相離故。俱不俱等准思之。是故非初非中後。前中後取故而說流轉。流轉即無轉。別中通論有四重無礙。一不礙前後而說同時。二不礙同時而說前後。三不礙非三時而說三時。四不礙三時而說是非三時。經中劫入非劫非劫入劫等准之。第七約時世者。於中有三。初約趣向。二約相成。三約時法。初中有四。一從前向後門。謂依前念滅令後念生。是故依過去轉為現在。現在滅引起當來。由依此門則新新生。而無窮盡。二依後向前門。謂依本無今有已有還無。即當來作現在。現在現滅為過去。由依此門即念念滅而無停積。三由前二義不相離故。亦向前亦向後。依此門故。即生無盡而無不滅。滅無積而無不生。無障無礙思之。四由前二義形奪盡故。非向前非向後。依此門故。即滅無積而無滅。生無盡而無生。是謂無礙法門也。
第二相成者有五句。一此現在法由當來有。及由過去滅生。是故現在為二世所成。令現無體入於過未。二此現在法落謝為過去。引後作當來。是故二世為現所成。令過未無體。二入於現在。三由前二門不相離故。此約相成有力義故。三世俱立。四由前二義形奪盡故。此約相依無力義故。三世俱泯。五合前四義同一法故。存亡無礙理事雙融。思之可見。
第三時法者。於中亦有五門。一時不流而法轉。謂依前滅引後生。此生滅還引後。此是法轉也。然過去時不至現在。現在不至未來。此時不流也。此即約時念念間斷。約法相續恒流。二法不轉而時遷。謂由過去謝滅方有現在。現在落謝能引當來。三世念念無有斷絕。此是時遷流也。過去法不來至現在。現在法不去到於當來。各住自位不相到故。此法不轉也。此即約法本不相到。約時念念無間也。三俱遷者。離法無別時故。是故以時流法轉無二故。無始已來未曾暫停也。四非遷者。以不流之時不轉之法無二故。無始已來未曾遷動也。五合前四句不相離故。從無始來不動而流。遷而不易。無障無礙是此法體。思之可見。
第八因。果門中亦四位。一無二有。三俱四泯。初中謂此一念法。前因已滅對誰稱果。後果未生對誰說因。當念不住非因非果。二假有因果者。如論云。觀現在法有引後用。假立當果。對說現因。觀現在法有酬前相。假立曾因。對說現果。因果不無。三俱者。由有引後義故有因。由有酬前義故有果。由滅壞義故非因。由背前義故非果。由引後不異滅壞故。亦因亦非因。由酬前不異背前故。亦果亦非果。由四義合成一流轉。故具存亡二義也。四俱泯者。由滅壞不異引後故。非因非非因。背前不異酬前故。非果非非果。此二門復不異故。非因果非非因果。又若因果先存可得對之說。非既因果。先自不成今亦無。非因果之可立。思之。
第九真妄中亦四。一無人。二無法。三相盡。四理現。初中此中但是前滅後生。無間流轉畢竟無人。從此至彼以生滅法中竟無人。故論云。一切世間法法因果無人。此之謂也。二無法者。此生滅法。由後依前起後無自性無體。又不可從前念而來。由後背前後非前。及此亦不從前念而來。由前滅壞故。無法可至。後念由能引後故。體非後位攝。此亦不能至後位。是故前念無法可去至後念。後念無法可從前念來。但緣起力故似有相續。實無有一法從此至彼。故論云。但從於空法還生於空法。此之謂也。三相盡者。思惟此法過去已滅。未來未至故無體。現在不能自住故無體也。又復思惟前念已謝故無有來。不至後念故無有去當念速故不能住。是故此法相無不盡。又細思惟現法不離過未。以離首尾無別體故。是故諸相未曾不盡。問若爾者。豈令現在如彼過未耶。亦無體空耶。答即以如過未之空無為。現假有故。是故此現有無不是真空。以不礙假有者方是性空故。以是法理空非是斷空故。是故只說此生死流轉法。即是真空非滅。此法方為性空。經云。諸法畢竟空無有毫末相。又經云。色即是空非色滅空。此之謂也。思之可知。四理現者。即由如是相自盡故。平等理性未嘗不現。論中一種真如內名為流轉真如。以尋思此流轉。相盡真理現露故以為名。又經云。生死即涅槃等。皆此義也。是故諸佛菩薩。看於生死常見涅槃。常見涅槃恒遊生死。如履波者未甞不踐水。踐水者無不履波。依是道理。諸佛不起涅槃界常在生死中。教化眾生等悲智無礙。斯之謂矣。
第十成觀者有二。先令識妄念。後攝念成觀。前中識妄念者。既思惟此流轉之法。細剋其實。唯是一念至於無念。彼能緣之念。亦如所念無不相。及彼此當處相即空故。性本現故。既知法實如此。而昔所見自他人法是非差別。悉是亂識妄想計度。實無所有。應傷己顛倒息諸妄念。又復思惟。即此妄念逐自妄境。此二則今恒無所有。經云。從心相生與心作相和合。而有共生共滅。同無有住。此之謂也。二成觀中二。先解後行。初解中二。一始謂解知。如前所說諸義。令心決定。二終謂知此解是解非行。亦解知正行。不如所解。是故方堪為行方便。二行中亦二。一始謂思惟彼法至無念處。諸見皆絕絕亦絕。言說不及念慮不到。若於乃至作無念等解。並是妄念非是實行。何況餘念。二終謂以念智照無相境。亦非照非境亦無觀無不觀。故云法離一切觀行。久作純熟心不失念。四威儀中常作一切而無所作。雙行無礙難思議也。問若爾則此一門無念便足。何須如上廣分別耶。答若不如前尋思彼義者。即見不伏生。若不解知解行別者。即妄以解為行情謂不破也。設總無知但強伏心而作諸觀。並是謂中作非是真行。究竟增惡見入於魔網。不能成益故。經頌云。百千瘂羊僧。無慧修靜慮。設於百千劫。無一得涅槃。聰敏智慧人。能聽法說法。斂念須臾頃。能速至涅槃其觀中魔事及餘行相觀利益等。並如別說。
華嚴經明法品內立三寶章卷上