---
title: "太虛大師全書．第六編　法相唯識學 · 己八　攝受真實"
description: "太虚大师是民国时期佛教改革领袖，本书为《太虚大师全书》第六编，系统阐述法相唯识学。成书于二十世纪上半叶，正值佛教复兴与中西思想碰撞之际。主要内容包括对唯识经典的系统解读、八识理论、种子与现行关系、转识成智的修行次第，以及唯识观在现实生活中的应用。该书是太虚大师佛学思想的核心部分，以现代学术方法整理传统唯识教义，强调理性分析与实证修持并重，对现代唯识学研究具有重要奠基作用，被视为中国近代唯识宗复兴的权威代表作之一。"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmpjjbyu700xzt10n3oq8nwhl"
---

### 己八　攝受真實

> Section 8: Embracing Reality

名、遍計所執，相、分別、依他，真如及正智，圓成實所攝。

> Names and conceptual fabrications, forms and discriminative thoughts, dependent nature, ultimate reality, and true wisdom—these are all encompassed within the perfect realization.

此四句頌，即說以五法攝一切諸法。五法者：就是相，名，分別，真如，正智；有的說正智，如如。此五法皆三自性所攝：名即遍計所執，相與分別即依他。相是立名的所依法，如立色受等名，就是依於色受等事實而建立，此種種名，就是遍計所執；相，分別，是色及心心所的依他起法。真如、正智，即圓成所攝。蓋正智者，就是無倒的正行，依此可了知真非真實而證真如。此中五法三自性相攝，和瑜伽及成唯識論不同，雖此義成唯識論亦說，不過顯示其不同的一種，而成為確定義的，還是另一種說法。如成唯識言三自性和五法相攝，名，相，分別，正智的四種，都是依他起法；真如是圓成實法。所以遍計不攝者，以五法是有，遍計是無，故不收攝；這是瑜伽唯識所決擇如是。其所說的依他，包括染淨依他，故正智雖是清淨亦包括在依他之中，這和辨中邊論是不同的。然以此論的出發點與他論有異，如卷首云：虛妄分別有；以依虛妄故唯說染的依他，其淨依他的無倒行則攝入圓成；故此論與唯識等不同。由此，此論的圓成義廣，包括真如及淨依他。依他義狹，唯攝染汙。成唯識論則依他寬，包括染淨，圓成義狹，唯攝真如空性，此是兩不同處。

> These four verses explain that all phenomena are encompassed by five categories: characteristics (signs), names, discrimination, thusness (suchness), and right understanding. Some versions include right understanding and thusness together. These five categories are all covered by the three natures (threefold intrinsic nature): - Names correspond to the nature of imputed illusion (pervasive grasping). - Characteristics and discrimination fall under the dependent nature. - Characteristics are the basis on which names are established—for example, we give names like "form" or "feeling" based on the actual realities of form and feeling. These various names are the imputed nature. - Characteristics and discrimination pertain to form and the mind and mental factors, which are phenomena arising dependently. - Thusness and right understanding belong to the consummate nature. - Right understanding is the correct, undistorted practice through which one can discern what is real from what is not, and thereby realize thusness. The way these five categories relate to the three natures here differs from the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* and the \*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra\* (Treatise on Consciousness-Only). Although the latter also discusses this relationship, it presents a different, definitive interpretation. In the \*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra\*, the relationship is explained as follows: among the five categories, names, characteristics, discrimination, and right understanding all fall under the dependent nature, while thusness alone belongs to the consummate nature. The imputed nature is not included at all, because the five categories represent what truly exists, whereas the imputed nature is empty and unreal. This is the conclusion reached in the Yogācāra and Consciousness-Only traditions. Their notion of the dependent nature includes both defiled and purified aspects, so right understanding—though pure—is still classified under the dependent nature. This is another point of divergence from the \*Discourse on Distinguishing the Middle and the Extremes\* (\*Madhyānta-vibhāga\*). However, the starting point of this treatise differs from those other texts. As stated at its opening: "There exists the discrimination of the unreal." Because it focuses on the unreal as its basis, it only discusses the defiled aspect of the dependent nature. The undefiled, correct practice is subsumed under the consummate nature. This is why this treatise differs from the Consciousness-Only school's perspective. As a result, this treatise defines the consummate nature broadly, encompassing both thusness and the pure dependent nature. The dependent nature, in contrast, is defined narrowly, covering only what is defiled. In the \*Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra\*, the opposite is true: the dependent nature is broad, covering both defiled and purified phenomena, while the consummate nature is narrow, referring only to thusness and emptiness. These are the key differences between the two frameworks.