---
title: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論 · 荅成唯識論十五問"
description: "靈峰蕅益大師宗論是明末高僧智旭的著作。明末佛教面臨內部僵化與外部挑戰，智旭大師立足天台宗，主張禪教律淨融合，回應時代弊病。該書匯集其書信、註疏與開示，系統闡述性相融通、淨土為歸的佛學思想，強調解行並進與實踐修行。作為中國佛教史上承先啟後的巨著，它深刻影響了後世漢傳佛教的發展，尤其對淨土宗的推廣貢獻卓著，被尊為淨土宗第九祖的智旭，其思想透過此論成為明清佛教的重要指南。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmgn46dbd0n5rk1042nvhitst"
---
### 荅成唯識論十五問原問附
問：末那與慧相應故，因中隨第六識轉，而為智藏識，不與慧俱，至果方圓，前五既有慧俱，又與善俱，復是轉識所攝，何故不隨第六因中轉，亦至果方圓邪？
> Question: The manas (seventh consciousness) is associated with wisdom, and in the causal stage, it follows the sixth consciousness (manovijnana) in transformation, eventually becoming the wisdom-store consciousness (alaya-vijnana). Yet it is not always accompanied by wisdom; only at the fruition stage does it become fully realized. Now, the first five consciousnesses are both accompanied by wisdom and associated with goodness, and they are also included among the transformed consciousnesses. So why do they not follow the sixth consciousness in transformation during the causal stage, and also only reach fulfillment at the fruition stage?
荅：末那之慧，即是我見。我見無自體，直以慧為體也。第六識入二觀，第七識二執不得現行，故得轉為平等性智。然第六出法空觀，第七仍起法執，第六出生空觀，第七仍起我執矣。但第七是第六不共親依，故六轉七不得不轉。若前五識雖有慧俱，既無我見相應，則慧甚劣。雖與善俱，由第六善，或境界善，暫得相應，無斷惑證理之能。以凡斷惑，須在定心，定心中多無前五識故，直至果位，第八識中有漏種盡，轉與大圓鏡智相應，名無垢識。從此淨識所變五根相分，純無漏故，依之發識，亦成無漏，名成所作智相應心品，僅屬果上化他之用，非能自利，不同第七識也。
> Answer: The wisdom associated with the \*manas\* consciousness is precisely what we call the view of self. The view of self has no independent essence; it directly takes wisdom as its essence. When the sixth consciousness enters the two forms of contemplation (contemplation of emptiness and contemplation of the lack of self), the two clingings of the seventh consciousness cannot manifest, and thus it transforms into the wisdom of equality. However, when the sixth consciousness emerges from the contemplation of the emptiness of phenomena, the seventh consciousness still arises with clinging to phenomena; when the sixth consciousness emerges from the contemplation of the emptiness of self, the seventh consciousness still arises with clinging to self. But because the seventh consciousness is the exclusive and intimate support of the sixth, when the sixth transforms, the seventh must also transform. As for the first five consciousnesses, although they may be accompanied by wisdom, since they are not associated with the view of self, their wisdom is very weak. Even when they are accompanied by virtuous states, it is only due to the virtue of the sixth consciousness or virtuous external conditions that they temporarily align—they lack the capacity to cut off afflictions or realize truth. This is because cutting off afflictions requires a concentrated mind, and in such a concentrated mind, the first five consciousnesses are mostly absent. Only at the final stage of enlightenment, when the seeds of affliction within the eighth consciousness are exhausted, does it transform to align with the great mirror wisdom, becoming the stainless consciousness. From this purified consciousness, the five sense faculties and their corresponding objects arise, now entirely free from defilement. Based on these, the consciousnesses that arise are also undefiled, giving rise to the wisdom of perfecting all actions. This wisdom is solely for the purpose of benefiting others at the stage of enlightenment, not for one’s own benefit—unlike the transformation of the seventh consciousness.
問：有我見故，餘見不生，無一心中有二慧故。云何既有我見，又得與慧相應？
荅：心所有假實，如別境中慧，則有自體。十煩惱中，五見無體，惟以染慧為體。今第七相應之慧，未轉，舉體為我見法見，已轉，舉體為平等性智，故云約義別也。豈一心中有二慧邪？
> Answer: Mental factors exist as either real or provisional—for instance, the factor of wisdom in the specific mental states has its own substance. Among the ten afflictions, the five views have no separate substance; they merely take defiled wisdom as their substance. In the seventh consciousness, the corresponding wisdom, before transformation, wholly operates as the view of self and the view of phenomena; after transformation, it wholly operates as the wisdom of equality. Therefore, it is said that they are distinguished based on meaning. Could there possibly be two forms of wisdom within a single mind?
問：末那俱之我見，以慧為體，由義別故，仍以慧俱忘念，以念為體，何不亦由義別故，與念相應邪？
> Question: The self-view associated with manas has wisdom as its essence. Because its meaning is distinct, it is still linked to wisdom and is forgetful of mindfulness, which has mindfulness as its essence. Why is it that, given its distinct meaning, it does not correspond with mindfulness?
荅：末那有慧，故有我見，與我見俱，即與慧俱也。忘念以念為體者，不遍染心；以癡為體者，乃遍染心。秖於第七識我癡上，明其無正念，故斥為忘念；無正知，故斥為不正知。皆無自體，約過失邊義，立此二耳。
> Answer: The \*manas\* consciousness possesses discernment, hence it gives rise to the view of self. Where the view of self exists, discernment is also present. "Forgetful mindfulness," if defined as having mindfulness as its essence, does not pervade all defiled mental states. However, if defined as having ignorance as its essence, it pervades all such states. It is only within the self-delusion of the seventh consciousness that we can speak of the absence of correct mindfulness—this absence is what is condemned as "forgetful mindfulness." Likewise, the absence of correct knowing is condemned as "incorrect knowing." Both are without independent substance; they are merely established based on the aspect of faults, designating these two terms.
問：謂此識緣自所依者，如有後識，即緣前意。儻難云：前五識所依五根，亦增上緣，何獨不許作所緣邪？識相緣之義，乞垂細剖。
> Question: The text says this consciousness arises based on its own support—like when a later moment of consciousness arises, it conditions the previous moment of mind. But what about the five sense organs? They are also a supporting condition for the five sense-consciousnesses. Why are they not considered objects of perception? Please explain the principle of how consciousness relates to its objects in detail.
荅：第七識唯內門轉故，得所依為所緣。前五識唯外轉，不得所依為所緣，不應為例。
> \*\*Answer:\*\* The seventh consciousness only turns inward, so its support also serves as its object. The first five consciousnesses only turn outward and do not have their support as their object, so they cannot be considered the same case.
問：意識依意，具三分別，設依色者，便同五識。第八亦依意，不依色根，何但有自性分別，無隨念計度？
> Question: Consciousness relies on the mind and has three kinds of discrimination. If it were based on physical sense organs, it would be the same as the five sense-consciousnesses. The eighth consciousness also relies on the mind, not on physical sense organs. Why does it only have natural discrimination, without memory-based or analytical discrimination?
荅：前六皆轉識攝，而一依心法、五依色法，故有差別。第八非轉識攝，但是所熏，唯無記性一類恆轉。儻亦具三分別，則有轉易，而受熏持種，皆不得成矣。
> Answer: The first six consciousnesses are all included in the category of evolving consciousness. However, one of them (mind consciousness) relies on the mental faculty, while the other five rely on physical sense organs—this accounts for their difference. The eighth consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna) does not belong to the evolving consciousnesses; it is merely what is perfumed (the passive recipient of karmic impressions). Its nature is exclusively neutrally karmic (avyākṛta), and it operates continuously as a single, constant stream. If it were also to possess the three discriminations (self-discrimination, object-discrimination, and conceptualization), it would undergo change and transformation. In that case, its functions of being perfumed (receiving karmic seeds) and holding the seeds would both be impossible to achieve.
問：《唯識》五觀，與《占察》二觀，是同是別？
> Question: Are the Five Contemplations in Consciousness-Only teachings and the Two Contemplations in the Divination Sutra the same or different?
荅：遣虛存實，捨濫留純，攝末歸本，隱劣顯勝，皆從唯心識觀開出。若遣相證性，義仍兩屬。如云俗有真空，仍是唯心識觀。若遣相執，達相即性，乃真如實觀。
> Answer: Setting aside the illusory and holding to the real, discarding the vague and keeping the pure, gathering the branches back to the root, hiding the lesser and revealing the greater—all these arise from the Mind-Only Consciousness Contemplation. If one sets aside appearances to realize their essential nature, the principle still belongs to both. For example, saying "the conventional is existent, the ultimate is empty" remains within the Mind-Only Consciousness Contemplation. But if one sets aside attachment to appearances, realizing that appearances themselves are the essential nature, this is the True Suchness Contemplation.
問：思能令心造作第八識相應之思，令造何等？
> Question: When mental formations influence the mind to create patterns corresponding to the eighth consciousness, what exactly is created?
荅：爪生髮長，筋轉脈搖，髮白面皺，氣消容悴，及日月稽天，江河競注，滄桑易，春夏更，皆第八所造。
> Answer: The growth of nails and hair, the flexing of sinews, the pulsing of vessels, the graying of hair, the wrinkling of skin, the waning of vitality, the fading of appearance, as well as the sun and moon hanging in the sky, rivers rushing endlessly, oceans shifting into mulberry fields, and the changing of seasons—all these are creations of the Eighth Consciousness.
問：瞋唯不善，則初二果任運所起瞋心，名不善否？與無慚無愧相應否？能發業潤生否？
> Question: Anger is exclusively unwholesome. So, does the anger that arises spontaneously in a Stream-enterer or Once-returner count as unwholesome? Is it associated with the mental factors of shamelessness and no moral dread? Can it cause karmic actions and lead to rebirth?
荅：學人失念起瞋，亦名不善，此念亦名無慚無愧。然已斷見惑，故不發業，善心易起，惡心易滅，不潤生也。
> Answer: When a practitioner loses mindfulness and gives rise to anger, this is also called unwholesome—this mindfulness itself is also known as lacking a sense of shame and guilt. However, since one has already cut off mistaken views, such tendencies do not generate new karma. Wholesome thoughts arise easily, unwholesome thoughts fade easily, and they no longer nourish further rebirth.
問：自在位，唯樂喜捨，以諸佛斷憂苦事故。彼金鎗馬麥等報，得名苦否？憂念眾生，得名憂否？又如頭臨白刃，如斬春風，得名無憂苦否？
> Question: In the state of complete freedom, there is only bliss, joy, and equanimity, because all Buddhas have eliminated the cause of sorrow and suffering. Do those acts of retribution, such as the "golden spear" and "horse fodder," count as suffering? Does concern for sentient beings count as sorrow? Also, when facing a blade at the throat, like a knife cutting through the spring breeze, can it be considered without sorrow or suffering?
荅：唯識名義，憂喜苦樂等，各有分劑，唯佛方能實無憂苦。金鎗馬麥，大權示現，原非實事，故非苦。憂念眾生，亦不同凡夫迫戚，故非憂也。臨刃斬風，雖無憂苦，仍與佛果未同，以佛果不受害故，至稱性極談，菩薩分證憂苦，諸佛究竟憂苦，是在忘名字相者，方能信之。
> Answer: The concepts of Consciousness-Only — joy, sorrow, suffering, and pleasure — each have their own boundaries. Only a Buddha can truly be free from sorrow and suffering. The Golden Spear and Horse-fodder incidents are manifestations of the Great Power's skillful means; they are not real events, and therefore do not constitute suffering. The Buddha's compassionate concern for sentient beings is also different from the anxiety and distress of ordinary people, so it is not sorrow. Facing a blade or cutting through the wind may involve neither sorrow nor suffering, but this state is still not the same as the Buddha's ultimate fruit, because the Buddha's fruit is invulnerable to harm. Ultimately, when speaking on the ultimate level, Bodhisattvas experience sorrow and suffering partially, while all Buddhas experience it completely. Only those who have forgotten the attachment to names and forms can truly believe in this.