大乘起信論 心生滅門・阿梨耶識・覺與始覺四位
論主在這一段把「始覺」分成四個階位，每一位都說明覺到了什麼。
四位擺在一起看，像四個人站在四格上——而站在第一格的那個人，論主給了他一句最嚴的判詞。
第一格：止住下一個念頭的人
「如凡夫人覺知前念起惡故，能止後念令其不起」
覺察到前一念起了惡，於是止住後一念。這是很多人所理解的修行。
而論主的判是：「雖復名覺，即是不覺故。」
嚴，卻不是責備。因為所覺的只是念之「滅」——惡念已經起過了，才覺察到。整件事還在念裡打轉。
知道自己站在第一格，比誤以為已經到頂要好。
第二格：看見念在變的人
「覺於念異，念無異相，以捨麁分別執著相故，名相似覺」
覺到的是念之「異」——念在變。而一覺，就知道那個「異」本身沒有實相。
叫相似覺：像了，還不是。
第三格：看見念停駐的人
「覺於念住，念無住相，以離分別麁念相故，名隨分覺」
覺到的是念之「住」。隨其分量而覺，所以叫隨分覺。
第四格：覺到心之初起的人
「覺心初起心無初相，以遠離微細念故得見心性，心即常住，名究竟覺。」
覺到的是念之「生」——最初那一動。
滅、異、住、生——四位是倒著走的。先看得見粗的，才看得見細的。
而第四格那個人，並沒有看見什麼
論主緊接著補了一句，把一種很細的誤修擋住了：
「又心起者，無有初相可知，而言知初相者，即謂無念。」
不是修到某個地步就能看見念頭生起的那一剎那。所謂知初相，就是無念。
四個人所站的地，是同一塊
前面論主說過：「所言覺義者，謂心體離念。」——覺不是心裡多出一樣東西，是心體本來就離念。
而本覺與始覺是一個環：對始覺才說本覺；始覺依本覺而有不覺，依不覺才說始覺；而「始覺者即同本覺」。
修行不是造出一個原本沒有的覺，是那個本來的覺自己回頭。
眾生為什麼不在這四格裡
「一切眾生不名為覺，以從本來念念相續未曾離念故，說無始無明。」
不是缺了什麼零件。只是從來沒有離過念。
無明不是一樣東西，是一個沒有停過的習慣。
最後，四格全部收平
「以四相俱時而有皆無自立，本來平等同一覺故。」
四相是同時而有的，都沒有自立之體。
階位是對走路的人說的，平等是對到了的人說的。
走的時候需要那四格，否則不知道自己在哪裡；到了才知道，從來沒有離開過。
In this passage the author divides initial awakening into four stages. At each stage he says what has been awakened to.
Placed side by side, they are like four people standing in four squares. The person in the first receives the severest judgment of all.
First Square: The Person Who Stops the Next Thought
“An ordinary person awakens to the evil that arose in a preceding thought and is therefore able to stop the following thought from arising.”
Many people would already call this practice. The treatise calls it “awakening” only to add at once that it is still non-awakening.
The judgment is severe but not reproachful. What has been noticed is only the ceasing of thought: the unwholesome thought has already arisen before awareness arrives. The entire event is still turning within thought.
Knowing that one stands in the first square is better than mistaking it for the summit.
Second Square: The Person Who Sees Thought Changing
“One awakens to the changing of a thought, and the thought has no mark of changing; because the coarse mark of discriminating attachment has been abandoned, this is called semblance awakening.”
The change of thought is now visible, but its supposed mark cannot stand on its own.
It is called semblance awakening: near enough to resemble it, not yet at the source.
Third Square: The Person Who Sees Thought Abiding
“One awakens to the abiding of a thought, and the thought has no mark of abiding; because the mark of coarse discriminating thoughts has been left behind, this is called partial awakening.”
The apparent staying of thought is subtler than its change. Awakening appears according to the measure reached, hence partial awakening.
Fourth Square: The Person Who Awakens to Mind’s First Arising
“One awakens to the first arising of mind, and mind has no mark of first arising; because subtle thoughts have been left far behind, one sees the nature of mind; mind is then ever-abiding, and this is called ultimate awakening.”
Here the object is the arising of thought, its first movement.
Ceasing, changing, abiding, arising: the four stages travel backward. The coarse and final becomes visible first; only then does the subtle and initial come into view.
Yet the Person in the Fourth Square Has Seen No Thing
The author immediately adds a sentence that bars a very subtle error:
“When mind arises, there is no initial mark that can be known; to speak of knowing the initial mark means precisely no-thought.”
Practice does not culminate in watching a microscopic instant at which a thought is born. Knowing the initial mark means no-thought, not the discovery of a finer object.
All Four Stand on the Same Ground
The treatise has already said that “the substance of mind is free from thought.” Awakening is not something newly added to mind; being free from thought belongs to the substance itself.
Original and initial awakening form a circle: original awakening is spoken of in relation to initial awakening; in dependence upon original awakening there is non-awakening; in dependence upon non-awakening initial awakening is spoken of; and initial awakening is identical with original awakening.
Practice does not make an awakening that was never there. It is original awakening itself turning back.
Why Sentient Beings Stand Outside the Four Squares
“Sentient beings are not called awakened, because from the beginning thought has followed thought without interruption and they have never been free from thought; this is called beginningless ignorance.”
No part is missing. Thought has simply never ceased.
Ignorance is not a thing. It is a habit that has never paused.
At the End, the Four Squares Disappear
“The four marks are present simultaneously, none having independent standing; originally equal, they are the same one awakening.”
Stages are spoken for the person walking. Equality is spoken from arrival.
While walking, the four squares are needed; without them one cannot tell where one stands. At arrival, one sees that the same ground was under every step.
馬鳴菩薩造·梁西印度三藏法師真諦譯《大乘起信論》〈心生滅門・阿梨耶識・覺與始覺四位〉· 大正藏 T32n1666〔起 T32 0576b07〕。段／行首〔T32 …〕＝大正藏頁・欄・行錨。
〔T32 0576b07〕心生滅者，依如來藏故有生滅心，所謂不生不滅與生滅和合，非一非異，名為阿梨耶識。此識有二種義，能攝一切法、生一切法。云何為二？一者、覺義，二者、不覺義。所言覺義者，謂心體離念。離念相者，等虛空界無所不遍，法界一相即是如來平等法身，依此法身說名本覺。何以故？本覺義者，對始覺義說，以始覺者即同本覺。始覺義者，依本覺故而有不覺，依不覺故說有始覺。又以覺心源故名究竟覺，不覺心源故非究竟覺。此義云何？如凡夫人覺知前念起惡故，能止後念令其不起，雖復名覺，即是不覺故。如二乘觀智、初發意菩薩等，覺於念異，念無異相，以捨麁分別執著相故，名相似覺；如法身菩薩等，覺於念住，念無住相，以離分別麁念相故，名隨分覺；如菩薩地盡，滿足方便一念相應，覺心初起心無初相，以遠離微細念故得見心性，心即常住，名究竟覺。是故修多羅說：「若有眾生能觀無念者，則為向佛智故。」又心起者，無有初相可知，而言知初相者，即謂無念。是故一切眾生不名為覺，以從本來念念相續未曾離念故，說無始無明。若得無念者，則知心相生住異滅。以無念等故，而實無有始覺之異，以四相俱時而有皆無自立，本來平等同一覺故。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
馬鳴菩薩造·梁西印度三藏法師真諦譯《大乘起信論》，自「心生滅者」至「本來平等同一覺故」。段首（…）＝大正藏頁·欄·行錨。
〔一·生滅心之所依〕（0576b07）所謂心生滅，是依著如來藏，所以有生滅心。
〔二·阿梨耶識〕（0576b08）就是那不生不滅的，與生滅和合，非一非異——名為阿梨耶識。
〔三·此識二義〕（0576b10）這個識有兩種義，能攝一切法、能生一切法。哪兩種？第一是覺義，第二是不覺義。
〔四·覺義＝心體離念〕（0576b11）所說的覺義，是說心體離念。（0576b12）離念之相，等同虛空界，無所不遍；法界一相，就是如來的平等法身——依著這個法身，說名為本覺。
〔五·本覺對始覺而說〕（0576b14）為什麼呢？本覺這一義，是對著始覺這一義而說的；而始覺，就等同本覺。
〔六·始覺依本覺而有〕（0576b15）始覺這一義，是依著本覺才有不覺，依著不覺才說有始覺。
〔七·究竟與非究竟〕（0576b16）又：因為覺到了心源，所以名為究竟覺；沒有覺到心源，就不是究竟覺。
〔八·始覺四位·凡夫〕（0576b18）這道理怎麼說？
（0576b18）像凡夫，覺知前一念起了惡，因而能止住後一念使它不起——雖然也叫作覺，其實還是不覺。
〔九·二乘與初發意菩薩〕（0576b20）像二乘的觀智、初發意的菩薩等，覺於「念異」，而念沒有異相——因為捨掉了粗的分別執著相，名為相似覺。
〔十·法身菩薩〕（0576b22）像法身菩薩等，覺於「念住」，而念沒有住相——因為離開了分別的粗念之相，名為隨分覺。
〔十一·菩薩地盡〕（0576b23）像菩薩地已窮盡，滿足方便、一念相應，覺到心的初起而心沒有初相——因為遠離了微細之念，得以見到心性，心即常住，名為究竟覺。
〔十二·經證〕（0576b26）所以經中說：「若有眾生能觀無念者，則為向佛智故。」
〔十三·所謂知初相，即是無念〕（0576b27）又：心起的時候，並沒有一個「初相」可以知道；而說知道初相，指的就是無念。
〔十四·眾生何以不名為覺〕（0576b28）所以一切眾生不名為覺——因為從本以來念念相續，不曾離念，這叫作無始無明。
〔十五·得無念則知四相〕（0576c01）若得到無念，就知道心相的生、住、異、滅。
〔十六·本來平等同一覺〕（0576c02）因為與無念平等的緣故，其實並沒有始覺與本覺之異——四相同時而有，都沒有自立，本來平等，同是一覺。
Composed by the Bodhisattva Aśvaghoṣa; translated by Paramārtha, Tripiṭaka Master of Western India, under the Liang. The Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle, from “Mind as arising and ceasing exists in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb” to “originally equal, they are the same one awakening.” The bracketed figures at the head of each segment give the Taishō page, register, and line.
〔1 · What the mind as arising and ceasing depends upon〕（0576b07）What is called mind as arising and ceasing exists in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb; therefore there is a mind of arising and ceasing.
〔2 · The ālaya consciousness〕（0576b08）It is the unarising-and-unceasing conjoined with the arising-and-ceasing, neither one nor different. This is called the ālaya consciousness.
〔3 · The two meanings of this consciousness〕（0576b10）This consciousness has two meanings, by which it is able to embrace all dharmas and bring forth all dharmas. Which two? First, the meaning of awakening; second, the meaning of non-awakening.
〔4 · Awakening: the substance of mind free from thought〕（0576b11）What is spoken of as the meaning of awakening is that the substance of mind is free from thought.（0576b12）The mark of being free from thought is equal to the realm of empty space and pervades everywhere. The dharma-realm has a single mark: it is the Tathāgata’s equal dharma-body. In dependence upon this dharma-body, it is called original awakening.
〔5 · Original awakening spoken in relation to initial awakening〕（0576b14）Why so? The meaning of original awakening is spoken in relation to the meaning of initial awakening; yet initial awakening is identical with original awakening.
〔6 · Initial awakening exists in dependence upon original awakening〕（0576b15）As for the meaning of initial awakening: in dependence upon original awakening there is non-awakening, and in dependence upon non-awakening initial awakening is spoken of.
〔7 · Ultimate and not ultimate〕（0576b16）Again, because one awakens to the source of mind, it is called ultimate awakening; when one has not awakened to the source of mind, it is not ultimate awakening.
〔8 · The four stages of initial awakening: ordinary people〕（0576b18）How is this meaning to be understood?
（0576b18）Ordinary people, for example, awaken to the evil that arose in a preceding thought and are therefore able to stop the following thought from arising. Although this too is called awakening, it is in fact still non-awakening.
〔9 · The two vehicles and bodhisattvas at their first arousal of intention〕（0576b20）Those with the contemplative wisdom of the two vehicles, and bodhisattvas who have first aroused the intention, awaken to the changing of a thought and know that the thought has no mark of changing. Because they have abandoned the coarse mark of discriminating attachment, this is called semblance awakening.
〔10 · Dharma-body bodhisattvas〕（0576b22）Dharma-body bodhisattvas awaken to the abiding of a thought and know that the thought has no mark of abiding. Because they have left behind the mark of coarse discriminating thoughts, this is called partial awakening.
〔11 · At the exhaustion of the bodhisattva stages〕（0576b23）Those who have exhausted the bodhisattva stages, fulfilled the expedients, and correspond in a single thought awaken to the first arising of mind and know that mind has no mark of first arising. Because they have gone far beyond subtle thoughts, they are able to see the nature of mind; mind is then ever-abiding. This is called ultimate awakening.
〔12 · Scriptural witness〕（0576b26）Therefore a scripture says: “If sentient beings are able to contemplate no-thought, they are thereby directed toward buddha-wisdom.”
〔13 · To know the initial mark means no-thought〕（0576b27）Again, when mind arises, there is no initial mark that can be known. To speak of knowing the initial mark means precisely no-thought.
〔14 · Why sentient beings are not called awakened〕（0576b28）Therefore sentient beings are not called awakened: from the beginning, thought has followed thought without interruption, and they have never been free from thought. This is called beginningless ignorance.
〔15 · With no-thought, the four marks are known〕（0576c01）If one attains no-thought, one knows the arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing of the marks of mind.
〔16 · Originally equal, the same one awakening〕（0576c02）Because these are equal in no-thought, in truth there is no difference between initial awakening and original awakening. The four marks are present simultaneously, none having independent standing; originally equal, they are the same one awakening.
上一段說的是那道不動的門。從這裡起，論主轉身，去說那道會動的門。
而他一開口就把整部論最緊的一句話說了出來：
「心生滅者，依如來藏故有生滅心」
生滅心不是另有來源，是依著如來藏才有的。
這一句若讀過去了，後面的四百字都會變成名相；若停在這裡，後面的每一句都成了活的。
為什麼要立一個「非一非異」
「所謂不生不滅與生滅和合，非一非異，名為阿梨耶識。」
不生不滅的那個，與生滅的這個，和合在一起——不是一個，也不是兩個。這個和合之心，名為阿梨耶識。
有一種讀法把「非一非異」四字釋得很細：「即之義不一。辨之心不異。」——就其義說不是一，就其心說不是二。
為什麼非要立這個名？可以反過來想：
- 若不生不滅與生滅是一，那麼迷就是它的本性，無所謂悟。
- 若是二，那麼迷了以後就回不了頭——因為那兩樣東西之間沒有橋。
非一非異，正是『可以迷、也可以回頭』的那個結構。 這部論之所以能講修行，全靠這四個字。
論主接著說此識「能攝一切法、生一切法」，並開出兩義：「一者、覺義，二者、不覺義。」不覺這一義此處只標名，要到下一段才展開——這一段是專講覺的。
覺不是心裡多出來的一樣東西
「所言覺義者，謂心體離念。」
七個字。而這七個字把「覺」的位置定死了：覺不是心裡新添了一樣叫做覺的東西，是心體本來就離念。
有一種讀法補了一句：這裡的離念是「離於妄念」，是要顯出它本來就沒有不覺。
然後論主形容這個離念之相：「離念相者，等虛空界無所不遍，法界一相即是如來平等法身，依此法身說名本覺。」
像虛空一樣無所不遍；法界一相，就是如來的平等法身。依著這個法身，才說「本覺」。
本覺不是一個階段，是那個從來沒有不在的東西。 它不需要被造出來，也不會因為你此刻在迷而少了一分。
三個名字，一個環
接下來一段極容易繞暈，其實只有一個意思。
「本覺義者，對始覺義說，以始覺者即同本覺。始覺義者，依本覺故而有不覺，依不覺故說有始覺。」
拆開來看：
- 說「本覺」，是為了對著「始覺」說的——沒有始覺，就不必說本覺。
- 而始覺一旦成就，「即同本覺」——不是另得一個覺。
- 始覺又從哪裡來？因為有本覺，才顯得出不覺；因為有不覺，才說得上始覺。
所以三者是一個環：本覺 → 顯出不覺 → 說有始覺 → 始覺同於本覺。
這個環有一個很實際的意涵：修行不是製造一個原本沒有的覺，是那個本來的覺自己回頭。 若始覺是新造的，那麼佛與眾生就是兩種材質；既然「始覺者即同本覺」，那麼所謂成就，只是回到本來。
而深淺怎麼判？論主給了一句話：「以覺心源故名究竟覺，不覺心源故非究竟覺。」——覺到心的源頭，才是究竟。
四個階位：從最後一格倒著走
論主接著把「始覺」分成四位，逐位說明覺到了什麼。這四位是本段最實用的一段，也是讀的人最能對號入座的一段。
第一位，凡夫。 「如凡夫人覺知前念起惡故，能止後念令其不起，雖復名覺，即是不覺故。」
覺察到前一念起了惡，於是止住後一念——這已經是覺了。但論主緊接著判：「雖復名覺，即是不覺故」。
為什麼這麼嚴？因為所覺的只是念之「滅」——惡念已經起過了，才覺察到，才去止住下一個。整個過程都還在念裡打轉。
這一判看似冷，其實是體貼。它沒有說『改過遷善不好』，只說那還不是這部論所說的覺。知道自己站在第一階，比誤以為已經到頂要好得多。
第二位，二乘觀智與初發意菩薩。 「覺於念異，念無異相，以捨麁分別執著相故，名相似覺」
覺到的是念之「異」——念頭在變、在轉。而一覺，就知道那個「異」本身沒有實相。捨掉了粗的分別執著，所以叫相似覺：像了，還不是。
第三位，法身菩薩。 「覺於念住，念無住相，以離分別麁念相故，名隨分覺」
覺到的是念之「住」——念頭的停駐。離了分別粗念之相，隨其分量而覺，所以叫隨分覺。
第四位，菩薩地盡。 「滿足方便一念相應，覺心初起心無初相，以遠離微細念故得見心性，心即常住，名究竟覺。」
覺到的是念之「生」——心的最初一起。而一覺，就知道那個「初」本身沒有相。遠離微細之念，見到心性，心即常住，這才是究竟覺。
四位是倒著走的：滅 → 異 → 住 → 生。從最後發生的那一格開始覺，一路往前，最後才覺到最初的那一動。
愈往前愈微細——這正是修行的實況：先看得見粗的，才看得見細的。 我們沒有人一開始就能覺到心之初起，也沒有人能跳過凡夫那一格。
一個經證，和一句翻案
論主在此引經為據：「若有眾生能觀無念者，則為向佛智故。」——能觀無念，就是趣向佛智。
這是全論唯一一處明標「修多羅說」的引文。 論主把它放在這裡，等於為前面四位作結：四位所覺的雖有粗細，所向的只有一個——無念。
然後他立刻做了一個關鍵的說明：「又心起者，無有初相可知，而言知初相者，即謂無念。」
上面說究竟覺是「覺心初起」，讀者難免以為真有一個「初相」可以抓住、可以等它出現的時候看見它。論主當下拆掉：心起的時候並沒有一個初相可知；所謂知初相，指的就是無念。
這一句擋住了一種很細的誤修：以為修到某個地步就能『看見念頭生起的那一剎那』。論主說：那不是看見了什麼，那是無念。
這一著也回應了前面那個環。若真有一個初相可被知，那麼始覺就是『知道了一件原本不知道的事』——是新得。而論主說所謂知初相就是無念，於是始覺仍舊不是新得：它不是多知道了什麼，是少了那個一直在的東西。
四位之判與這一句合看，還可以解掉一個常見的焦慮：人常想『我到底在第幾格』。而依論主之說，格與格之別在所覺之相的粗細，不在得到了多少——每一格都是同一個離念在不同深處顯出來。所以在第一格用功，用的並不是與第四格不同的力氣。
為什麼眾生不名為覺
「是故一切眾生不名為覺，以從本來念念相續未曾離念故，說無始無明。」
這句話說得很平。眾生不是缺了什麼零件——前面才說過本覺從來沒有不在——只是從來沒有離過念。念念相續，不曾間斷，這就叫無始無明。
無明不是一樣東西，是一個沒有停過的習慣。 它沒有實體，卻有慣性；不必去消滅一個東西，只要那個相續斷一下。
這一句與前面「依如來藏故有生滅心」是一件事的兩頭。生滅心既依如來藏而有，它就不是一個外來的敵人；無明既只是相續未斷，它也就不是一個要被殲滅的實體。修行於是不必是一場戰爭。 前一段講真如門時說「若離於念，名為得入」，這一段講生滅門時說眾生「未曾離念」——同一個「念」字，一邊是門，一邊是無明。門一直開著，只是沒有人停下來。
最後全部收平
本段收在一句把前面所有階位都收回去的話上：
「若得無念者，則知心相生住異滅。以無念等故，而實無有始覺之異，以四相俱時而有皆無自立，本來平等同一覺故。」
得了無念的人，才真正知道心相的生、住、異、滅——四相是回頭才看得清的。走在裡面的時候，你看不見自己在哪一格。
而既然與無念平等，其實也就沒有什麼始覺之「異」了：四相是同時而有的，都沒有自立之體，本來平等，同是一覺。
四個階位講得那麼分明，末了一句全部收平——這不是自相矛盾。階位是對走路的人說的，平等是對到了的人說的。 走的時候需要階位，否則不知道自己在哪裡、下一步往哪走；到了才知道，從來沒有離開過。
而對此刻正在讀的人，這一段留下的是最前面那一句：覺不是新生的。 你要做的不是造出它來，是別再擋著它。
承衍——注家如何讀這一段
上來是這一段自身的義。此下另以注家之眼旁照——注非論，只是同一樁事，換一個位置來看。
法藏《大乘起信論義記》於此段逐句牒釋。上文所說阿梨耶識之「即之義不一。辨之心不異」、覺義之「離於妄念。顯無不覺也」，皆出其手。
他在釋此識名時另記一事，於讀者頗有用：「阿梨耶及阿賴耶者。但梵言訛也。梁朝真諦三藏訓名翻為無沒識。今時奘法師就義翻為藏識。但藏是攝藏義。無沒是不失義。義一名異也。」——同一個識，真諦訓為「無沒」，取其不失；玄奘就義譯為「藏」，取其攝藏。名異而義一。 一位唐代注家肯把前代譯人與同時代譯人的兩種取義並列而不判高下，這一分寸本身也值得記下。
元曉《起信論疏》於本段不重錄論文，是隨科而釋；兩本此段亦無相違之判可並錄。
而論自己那句「以始覺者即同本覺」還立在那裡——它不需要注家，也不需要階位。
The preceding passage spoke of the aspect that does not move. Here the author turns to the aspect that does.
His first words are among the most tightly drawn in the whole treatise:
“Mind as arising and ceasing exists in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb.”
The mind of arising and ceasing has no separate source. Its very existence depends upon the Tathāgata-womb.
Pass over that sentence and the next four hundred characters become a list of terms. Stop here, and every sentence that follows comes alive.
Why “Neither One nor Different” Must Be Established
“The unarising-and-unceasing conjoined with the arising-and-ceasing, neither one nor different, is called the ālaya consciousness.”
This conjoined mind cannot be collapsed into a single undifferentiated thing, yet neither can it be split into two minds. One traditional reading makes the distinction exact: “in the meaning identified with it, they are not one; distinguished in terms of mind, they are not different.”
Why insist upon this formula? Consider what either alternative would do:
- If the unarising-and-unceasing and the arising-and-ceasing were one, delusion would belong to the mind’s nature and awakening would have no place.
- If they were different, once delusion arose there would be no road back, for nothing would join the two.
Neither one nor different is precisely the structure within which delusion is possible and return is possible too. The entire account of practice depends upon these four words.
The treatise next says that this consciousness can “embrace all dharmas and bring forth all dharmas,” and opens two meanings within it: awakening and non-awakening. Non-awakening is only named here and unfolds in the next unit. This passage gives itself to awakening.
Awakening Is Not Something Added to Mind
“What is spoken of as the meaning of awakening is that the substance of mind is free from thought.”
Seven words fix the place of awakening once and for all: awakening is not a new possession introduced into mind; it names the mind’s own substance as free from thought.
An ancient reading specifies that “free from thought” means free from deluded thought, thereby disclosing that non-awakening is absent from the substance itself.
The treatise then gives this freedom a figure: “the mark of being free from thought is equal to the realm of empty space and pervades everywhere; the dharma-realm has a single mark, which is the Tathāgata’s equal dharma-body; in dependence upon this dharma-body, it is called original awakening.”
Empty space makes its pervasion visible; the equal dharma-body gives the name its ground. Original awakening is not one stage along a road. It is what has never once been absent from the road. It need not be produced, and it is not diminished because one is now deluded.
Three Names Forming One Circle
The next lines can seem circular. That is because a circle is exactly what they draw.
“The meaning of original awakening is spoken in relation to the meaning of initial awakening; initial awakening is identical with original awakening. In dependence upon original awakening there is non-awakening, and in dependence upon non-awakening initial awakening is spoken of.”
Taken one turn at a time:
- Original awakening is said only in relation to initial awakening; without initial awakening, there would be no need for that relational name.
- When initial awakening is fulfilled, it is “identical with original awakening,” not a second awakening newly obtained.
- Non-awakening can appear only because original awakening is its ground; only in relation to non-awakening can one speak of an awakening that begins.
The circle therefore runs: original awakening → non-awakening appears → initial awakening is spoken of → initial awakening is identical with original awakening.
Its practical force is plain. Practice does not manufacture an awakening that was missing. It is original awakening itself turning back. If initial awakening were newly made, buddhas and sentient beings would be of two different materials. Because it is identical with original awakening, accomplishment is return rather than acquisition.
Depth is measured in one sentence: “because one awakens to the source of mind, it is called ultimate awakening; when one has not awakened to the source of mind, it is not ultimate awakening.” Only awakening to the source is ultimate.
Four Stages, Traced Backward from the Last Square
The author now divides initial awakening into four stages and says, at each stage, what is awakened to. This is the most immediately recognizable part of the passage.
First: ordinary people. They “awaken to the evil that arose in a preceding thought and are therefore able to stop the following thought from arising; although this too is called awakening, it is in fact non-awakening.”
The judgment is severe because what has been noticed is only the ceasing of thought. The unwholesome thought has already arisen; only then is it noticed, and only the next one is stopped. The entire movement still takes place within thought.
Yet the severity is compassionate. It does not dismiss moral correction. It distinguishes that correction from the awakening meant here. Knowing that one stands in the first square is better than mistaking it for the summit.
Second: those with the contemplative wisdom of the two vehicles and bodhisattvas at their first arousal of intention. They “awaken to the changing of a thought, and the thought has no mark of changing; because they have abandoned the coarse mark of discriminating attachment, this is called semblance awakening.”
They see thought in the act of changing. In that awakening, the supposed mark of change cannot stand on its own. It resembles awakening, but has not yet reached the source.
Third: dharma-body bodhisattvas. They “awaken to the abiding of a thought, and the thought has no mark of abiding; because they have left the mark of coarse discriminating thoughts, this is called partial awakening.”
The object is subtler now: not the turn of thought but its apparent staying. Awakening appears in accordance with their measure, hence partial awakening.
Fourth: those who have exhausted the bodhisattva stages. Having “fulfilled the expedients and corresponded in a single thought,” they “awaken to the first arising of mind, and mind has no mark of first arising; because they have gone far beyond subtle thoughts, they see the nature of mind; mind is then ever-abiding, and this is called ultimate awakening.”
Here awakening reaches the arising of thought, the first movement itself, and finds no initial mark there.
The four stages proceed backward: ceasing → changing → abiding → arising. One first sees what is coarse and last, then traces it toward what is subtle and first. That is the lived order of practice: the coarse becomes visible before the subtle. No one begins by seeing the first arising of mind, and no one leaps over the square of the ordinary person.
A Scriptural Witness, Then a Reversal
The treatise cites scripture: “If sentient beings are able to contemplate no-thought, they are thereby directed toward buddha-wisdom.” This is the only citation in the whole treatise expressly introduced as a statement of scripture. Its place here gathers the four stages under a single direction: whatever their degree of subtlety, all tend toward no-thought.
Then comes a decisive clarification: “when mind arises, there is no initial mark that can be known; to speak of knowing the initial mark means precisely no-thought.”
The preceding stage spoke of awakening to mind’s first arising. A reader might therefore wait for some tiny first mark to appear and imagine that practice consists in catching it. The treatise removes the object at once. Nothing has been caught. The expression ‘knowing the initial mark’ points to no-thought.
This blocks a subtle mispractice: the expectation that sufficient refinement will allow one to watch the exact instant a thought is born. What is disclosed is not a finer spectacle but the absence of the thought that would seize one.
The same clarification closes the circle above. If an initial mark were truly knowable, initial awakening would be newly acquiring a fact once unknown. But when knowing the initial mark means no-thought, awakening remains no acquisition. It is not that something more has become known; what continuously stood in the way is no longer there.
The four stages also answer the anxious question, Which square am I in? Their difference lies in the coarseness or subtlety of the mark awakened to, not in the amount of awakening acquired. At every stage it is the same being free from thought appearing at a different depth. The work of the first square therefore does not employ a force different in kind from the fourth.
The Habit That Has Never Paused
“Therefore sentient beings are not called awakened, because from the beginning thought has followed thought without interruption and they have never been free from thought; this is called beginningless ignorance.”
Nothing is missing from sentient beings — original awakening has just been said never to be absent. What persists is an unbroken continuity of thought.
Ignorance is not a separate object. It is a habit that has never paused. It has no substance of its own, but it has momentum. There is no enemy-thing to destroy; the continuity need only cease.
This is the other end of the opening statement. Because the mind of arising and ceasing depends upon the Tathāgata-womb, it is not an invader from outside. Because ignorance is the uninterrupted succession of thought, it is not an entity to be annihilated. Practice need not become a war. The preceding unit said that to be free from thought is to enter the aspect of suchness; this unit says sentient beings have never been free from thought. The same word thought names both the opening and what has obscured it. The opening has never closed; the succession has never stopped.
All Distinctions Finally Return to Equality
The passage closes by gathering every stage into one statement:
“If one attains no-thought, one knows the arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing of the marks of mind. Because these are equal in no-thought, in truth there is no difference between initial awakening and original awakening: the four marks are present simultaneously, none having independent standing; originally equal, they are the same one awakening.”
Only from no-thought are the four marks truly known. They become clear in retrospect; while carried within their movement, one cannot see which square one occupies.
And because all are equal in no-thought, even the supposed difference between initial and original awakening falls away. The four marks arise together and possess no independent substance. Their elaborately distinguished stages end in the same one awakening.
This does not undo the stages. Stages are spoken for the person walking; equality is spoken from arrival. While walking, distinctions show one where one stands and where the path leads. At arrival, one sees that the ground was never left.
For the person reading now, the passage leaves its opening judgment intact: awakening is not newly born. The work is not to make it, but to cease obscuring it.
Carrying Forward — How the Commentators Read This Passage
The foregoing is the sense of the passage itself. What follows lets the commentators’ eyes shine on it from the side — a commentary is not the treatise, only the same matter seen from another position.
Fazang’s Record of the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle takes up this passage phrase by phrase. The account above of the ālaya consciousness — “in the meaning identified with it, they are not one; distinguished in terms of mind, they are not different” — and the explanation of awakening as “free from deluded thought, disclosing the absence of non-awakening” are both from his hand.
In explaining the name of this consciousness, he records another matter useful to the reader. The Sanskrit sounds represented by the two Chinese forms, he says, differ through corruption; Paramārtha rendered the name as the unperishing consciousness, taking the sense of not being lost, while Xuanzang rendered it as the consciousness that stores and preserves, taking the sense of containing and holding. The names differ, while the meaning is one. A Tang commentator could place the renderings of an earlier translator and a translator of his own age side by side without ranking them. That measure deserves to be preserved too.
Wonhyo’s Commentary on the Awakening of Faith follows the doctrinal outline here and does not repeat the passage word for word; the two works offer no opposed judgment at this point to set in parallel.
And the treatise’s own line, “initial awakening is identical with original awakening,” remains where it stood all along. It needs neither a commentator nor a stage.
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
本單元為全論十六單元之第五，範圍〔T32 0576b07–0576c04〕，四百零七字。所說為心生滅門之立（依如來藏故有生滅心・阿梨耶識・二義）與覺義之全部（心體離念・本覺・本覺與始覺・始覺四位・經證・無始無明・四相同一覺）。
碑界之特殊：本單元之起處〔0576b07「心生滅者」〕與前單元之訖處落在底本同一段之內——大正藏此處自「復次，真如者」至「本來平等同一覺故」為一整段，真如門之末與生滅門之首同段。依義切之而不動一字。
法藏《大乘起信論義記》於此段逐句牒釋，其牒句包括「名為阿梨耶識」〔T44n1846 0255c01〕與「所言覺義者謂心體離念離念相者等虛空」〔T44n1846 0256b17〕。
二、異譯對勘
| 事 | 本段（真諦本） | 實叉難陀本 |
|---|---|---|
| 識名 | 「阿梨耶識」〔0576b09〕 | 「阿賴耶」（其本四見） |
識名之三形：本段作「梨」；本論他本作「黎」（見目九）；實叉難陀本作「賴」。三形並存，不取一為正，亦不正字化。二本此段之逐段對勘未備，誌之。
三、經論宗依
論自引修多羅一處：「若有眾生能觀無念者，則為向佛智故。」〔0576b26〕——本論唯此一處明標「修多羅說」。其所出之經，論文未標，古來注家亦未一致指實；誌不判，不代為繫某經。
四、本段釋要
阿梨耶識之得名——《義記》：「然此生滅不生滅。即之義不一。辨之心不異。目此二義不二之心。名阿梨耶識。」〔T44n1846 0255c01〕
識名之三譯——《義記》同處：「又阿梨耶及阿賴耶者。但梵言訛也。梁朝真諦三藏訓名翻為無沒識。今時奘法師就義翻為藏識。但藏是攝藏義。無沒是不失義。義一名異也。」〔T44n1846 0255c03〕
覺義之「離念」是離妄念——《義記》牒「所言覺義者謂心體離念離念相者等虛空」而釋：「初中言離念者。離於妄念。顯無不覺也。」〔T44n1846 0256b19〕
五、諸家異釋（分欄並錄）
| 鏡 | 逐字 | 錨 |
|---|---|---|
| 法藏《義記》（唐·釋阿梨耶識） | 「即之義不一。辨之心不異。」 | 〔T44n1846 0255c01〕 |
| 法藏《義記》（唐·釋覺義） | 「初中言離念者。離於妄念。顯無不覺也。」 | 〔T44n1846 0256b19〕 |
元曉《疏》為科釋體，本段不重錄論文；本段無二家相違之判可並錄——已查 T44n1846、T44n1844 兩本。
六、術語
- 阿梨耶識〔0576b09〕：本論此名二見。譯名三系（《義記》逐字）：真諦訓「無沒識」，玄奘就義譯「藏識」，「義一名異」。讀者面依底本作「阿梨耶識」，不正字化為「阿賴耶」。
- 覺義・不覺義〔0576b11〕：阿梨耶識之二義。不覺義此段只出其名，其釋在次單元。
- 本覺〔0576b14〕：依如來平等法身而說之名。
- 始覺〔0576b14〕：對本覺而立，而「始覺者即同本覺」。
- 究竟覺・相似覺・隨分覺〔0576b18–b26〕：始覺四位之名（凡夫位論文未別立名）。『始覺四位』一詞論文無，為後人綜稱；讀者面用之不得加「」。
- 無始無明〔0576c01〕：本論首見。
- 生住異滅〔0576c01〕：本段所出之四相。
七、譬喻·修辭
- 等虛空界〔0576b12〕：「離念相者，等虛空界無所不遍」——以虛空喻離念之相的無所不遍。本段唯此一譬。
不為本段另造譬喻。
八、徵引承衍
- 論內之前後相繫：本段「不覺義」只出其名，其三相六相在次單元展開；末句「四相俱時而有皆無自立」為後文「分別生滅相」一節之伏筆；「依如來藏故有生滅心」承前之如來藏而立生滅之所依——論自標其所將說。
- 本叢書之內：如來藏與藏識之會通見於《楞伽》帙（三譯對讀）；本論此處以「依如來藏故有生滅心」立阿梨耶識，是同一組名相之另一種安置法。二處各繫其書，不相混計。
九、校本定位
本單元域〔0576b07–0576c04〕之異讀四處，並錄不判：
| 錨 | 大正作 | 他本作 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔0576b09〕 | 梨 | 黎 |
| 〔0576b17〕 | 源 | 原 |
| 〔0576b23〕 | 以 | 心 |
| 〔0576b25〕 | 心 | 心性 |
〔0576b09〕一處與目二、目六相關：「阿梨耶」之「梨」，他本作「黎」——同一識名在本論之傳本內部已有二形，與唐譯之「賴」合為三。並錄不判。
本單元域內：缺字標記 0、私用區字 0、夾註 0。
I. Doctrinal-Outline Placement
This unit is the fifth of the sixteen units of the whole treatise, its range 〔T32 0576b07–0576c04〕, four hundred and seven characters. It sets up the aspect of mind as arising and ceasing — the mind of arising and ceasing in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb, the ālaya consciousness, and its two meanings — and gives the complete account of the meaning of awakening: the substance of mind free from thought, original awakening, original and initial awakening, the four stages of initial awakening, the scriptural witness, beginningless ignorance, and the four marks as the same one awakening.
The unusual boundary: the beginning of this unit, 〔0576b07「心生滅者」〕, and the end of the preceding unit fall within the same paragraph of the base text. In the Taishō, everything from “Further, suchness” through “originally equal, they are the same one awakening” forms a single paragraph, with the close of the aspect of suchness and the opening of the aspect of arising and ceasing joined within it. The cut follows the meaning without changing a character.
Fazang’s Record of the Meaning of the Awakening of Faith in the Great Vehicle takes up this passage phrase by phrase. Its lemmas include 「名為阿梨耶識」—“this is called the ālaya consciousness” 〔T44n1846 0255c01〕 and 「所言覺義者謂心體離念離念相者等虛空」—“what is spoken of as the meaning of awakening is that the substance of mind is free from thought; the mark of being free from thought is equal to empty space” 〔T44n1846 0256b17〕.
II. Cross-Recension Collation
| Matter | Present passage (Paramārtha’s recension) | Śikṣānanda’s recension |
|---|---|---|
| Name of the consciousness | 「阿梨耶識」—“the ālaya consciousness” 〔0576b09〕 | 「阿賴耶」—“ālaya” (four occurrences in that recension) |
Three graphic forms of the name: the present passage has 「梨」; another witness to this treatise has 「黎」 (see IX); Śikṣānanda’s recension has 「賴」. All three forms are preserved side by side: none is selected as correct, and none is regularized into another. A passage-by-passage collation of the two recensions has not been prepared for this unit; this is recorded.
III. Scriptural and Treatise Basis
The treatise itself cites a scripture once: 「若有眾生能觀無念者，則為向佛智故。」—“If sentient beings are able to contemplate no-thought, they are thereby directed toward buddha-wisdom” 〔0576b26〕. This is the only place in the entire treatise expressly introduced as a statement of scripture. The treatise does not identify its source, and the ancient commentators do not agree on a definite attribution. It is recorded without adjudication and is not assigned to a particular scripture here.
IV. Exegesis of the Passage (the word-by-word mirror, phrase by phrase)
How the ālaya consciousness receives its name — the Record of the Meaning: 「然此生滅不生滅。即之義不一。辨之心不異。目此二義不二之心。名阿梨耶識。」—“As for this arising-and-ceasing and unarising-and-unceasing: in the meaning identified with it, they are not one; distinguished in terms of mind, they are not different. This mind, in which the two meanings are not two, is designated the ālaya consciousness” 〔T44n1846 0255c01〕.
Three renderings of the name of the consciousness — at the same place the Record of the Meaning says: 「又阿梨耶及阿賴耶者。但梵言訛也。梁朝真諦三藏訓名翻為無沒識。今時奘法師就義翻為藏識。但藏是攝藏義。無沒是不失義。義一名異也。」—“Further, as for ālaya in the forms aliye and alaye, these are merely corruptions in the Sanskrit sounds. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha of the Liang rendered the name by gloss as ‘the unperishing consciousness.’ In the present day, Master Xuanzang has rendered it according to meaning as ‘store consciousness.’ ‘Store’ means containing and preserving; ‘unperishing’ means not being lost. The meaning is one, while the names differ” 〔T44n1846 0255c03〕.
Being free from thought in the meaning of awakening means freedom from deluded thought — the Record of the Meaning takes up 「所言覺義者謂心體離念離念相者等虛空」—“what is spoken of as the meaning of awakening is that the substance of mind is free from thought; the mark of being free from thought is equal to empty space” and explains: 「初中言離念者。離於妄念。顯無不覺也。」—“In the first, ‘free from thought’ means free from deluded thought, disclosing the absence of non-awakening” 〔T44n1846 0256b19〕.
V. Divergent Readings of the Commentators (recorded side by side, without adjudication)
| Mirror | Word for word | Anchor |
|---|---|---|
| Fazang, Record of the Meaning (Tang; on the ālaya consciousness) | 「即之義不一。辨之心不異。」—“In the meaning identified with it, they are not one; distinguished in terms of mind, they are not different.” | 〔T44n1846 0255c01〕 |
| Fazang, Record of the Meaning (Tang; on the meaning of awakening) | 「初中言離念者。離於妄念。顯無不覺也。」—“In the first, ‘free from thought’ means free from deluded thought, disclosing the absence of non-awakening.” | 〔T44n1846 0256b19〕 |
Wonhyo’s Commentary follows a doctrinal-outline form and does not repeat the text of the treatise in this passage. No opposed judgments by the two commentators are present here for parallel recording — T44n1846 and T44n1844 were both checked.
VI. Terms (first occurrences in this passage)
- 阿梨耶識 — the ālaya consciousness 〔0576b09〕: this name occurs twice in the treatise. Three lines of rendering are given word for word in the Record of the Meaning: Paramārtha glosses it as 「無沒識」—“the unperishing consciousness”; Xuanzang renders it by sense as 「藏識」—“store consciousness”; their “meaning is one, while the names differ.” The reader-facing layers follow the base text’s form 「阿梨耶識」 and do not regularize it to 「阿賴耶」.
- 覺義・不覺義 — the meaning of awakening · the meaning of non-awakening 〔0576b11〕: the two meanings of the ālaya consciousness. The meaning of non-awakening is only named in this passage; its explanation comes in the next unit.
- 本覺 — original awakening 〔0576b14〕: the name spoken in dependence upon the Tathāgata’s equal dharma-body.
- 始覺 — initial awakening 〔0576b14〕: established in relation to original awakening, while “initial awakening is identical with original awakening.”
- 究竟覺・相似覺・隨分覺 — ultimate awakening · semblance awakening · partial awakening 〔0576b18–b26〕: names among the four stages of initial awakening (the treatise gives no separate name to the stage of ordinary people). The collective expression 『始覺四位』—the four stages of initial awakening does not occur in the treatise; where it is used in the reader-facing layers, it is not placed in quotation marks.
- 無始無明 — beginningless ignorance 〔0576c01〕: its first occurrence in the treatise.
- 生住異滅 — arising, abiding, changing, and ceasing 〔0576c01〕: the four marks set out in this passage.
VII. Simile and Rhetoric
- 等虛空界 — equal to the realm of empty space 〔0576b12〕: 「離念相者，等虛空界無所不遍」—“the mark of being free from thought is equal to the realm of empty space and pervades everywhere.” Empty space figures the universal pervasion of the mark of being free from thought. This is the sole simile in the passage.
No further simile is manufactured for the passage.
VIII. Citation and Carrying Forward
- Connections before and after within the treatise: the “meaning of non-awakening” is only named here; its three subtle and six coarse marks unfold in the next unit. The final statement, 「四相俱時而有皆無自立」—“the four marks are present simultaneously, none having independent standing,” prepares for the later passage “distinguishing the marks of arising and ceasing.” And 「依如來藏故有生滅心」—“in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb there is a mind of arising and ceasing” carries forward the preceding Tathāgata-womb and establishes what arising and ceasing depend upon. The treatise marks out what it is about to say.
- Within this series: the conjunction of Tathāgata-womb and store consciousness is treated in the Laṅkāvatāra edition through a reading across three recensions. Here the treatise establishes the ālaya consciousness with 「依如來藏故有生滅心」—“in dependence upon the Tathāgata-womb there is a mind of arising and ceasing.” These are two arrangements of the same group of terms; each remains attached to its own book, and their counts are not pooled.
IX. Text-critical Placement
Four variant readings fall within this unit’s range 〔0576b07–0576c04〕. They are recorded side by side without adjudication:
| Anchor | Taishō text | Other witness |
|---|---|---|
| 〔0576b09〕 | 梨 | 黎 |
| 〔0576b17〕 | 源 | 原 |
| 〔0576b23〕 | 以 | 心 |
| 〔0576b25〕 | 心 | 心性 |
The reading at 〔0576b09〕 bears on II and VI: for the 「梨」 in 「阿梨耶」, another witness has 「黎」. The name of this consciousness therefore already has two forms within the transmitted witnesses to this treatise; with the 「賴」 of the Tang recension, there are three. They are recorded without adjudication.
Within the range of this unit: lacuna markers 0, private-use-area characters 0, interlinear notes 0.