成唯識論 五識現起·五位無心
前五識——眼、耳、鼻、舌、身——不是一直開著的。論主用一個很實在的譬喻：它們像水面上的波。波不會自己起，要有水（根本識）、要有風（外境）、要有作意與根，緣湊齊了才起一朵；緣不齊，就沉回去。所以「或俱或不俱」——有時五個一起現，有時一個也沒有。
第六意識不一樣，它幾乎不停。但也有五個時候會停：生在無想天、入無想定、入滅盡定、極重的睡眠、悶絕過去。除此之外，它一直在。
這一章不談玄。它只是把『心什麼時候在』這件事，一條一條算清楚。而這個算清楚是有用的：修行所對治的，正是那個『一直在』的意識，與那些『說停就停』的表層識——知道哪個停得掉、哪個停不掉，路才走得準。
論主辨五位無心時，還細分了三類有情各得幾位：凡夫有其中四位——除滅盡定，那是聖者才入的；二乘無學除無想天與無想定，因為那是外道所欣求；如來則五位俱無，意識恒時現起無有間斷。
這個分配表值得看一眼：同樣是「無心」，凡夫的無心是被動的（睡著、悶絕），聖者的無心是修得的（滅盡定），而佛則根本不需要停。 一路讀下來會發現，論主講的從來不是『心停下來比較好』，而是：你要清楚哪一種停是障、哪一種停是道。
The first five consciousnesses — eye, ear, nose, tongue, body — are not switched on all the time. The treatise uses a very concrete simile: they are like waves on water. A wave does not rise of itself; it needs the water (the root consciousness), it needs wind (the outer object), it needs attention and a faculty. When the conditions gather, one rises; when they do not, it sinks back. Hence "together or not together" — sometimes all five appear at once, sometimes not one of them.
The sixth, the mind-consciousness, is different: it almost never stops. But there are five states in which it does — birth in the Heaven of No-Thought, the attainment of no-thought, the attainment of cessation, deep dreamless sleep, and fainting. Outside those five, it runs on.
This chapter is not speculative. It simply counts out, one by one, when the mind is present. And the counting has a use: what practice works on is precisely that mind-consciousness which "almost never stops," together with those surface consciousnesses that stop at the least provocation — knowing which can be stilled and which cannot is what keeps the path honest.
In sorting the five mindless states the treatise also counts how many fall to each class of being: ordinary beings have four of them — not the attainment of cessation, which only noble ones enter; the adepts of the two vehicles lack the Heaven of No-Thought and the attainment of no-thought, since those are what non-Buddhist practitioners aspire to; and a tathāgata has none of the five, the mind-consciousness arising constantly without a break.
The table repays a glance: the mindlessness of an ordinary being is passive (sleep, fainting); that of a noble one is cultivated (the attainment of cessation); and a buddha has no need to stop at all. Read through, one sees the treatise never argues that a stopped mind is better. It argues that you must know which stopping is obstruction and which is path.
〔頌曰 11 T31 0037a13〕
１５依止根本識，五識隨緣現，
或俱或不俱，如濤波依水。
１６意識常現起，除生無想天，
及無心二定、睡眠與悶絕。
論曰：「根本識」者，阿陀那識，染、淨諸識生根本故。「依止」者，謂前六轉識以根本識為共親依。
「五識」者，謂前五轉識，種類相似，故總說之。「隨緣現」言顯非常起，「緣」謂作意、根、境等緣，謂五識身內依本識，外隨作意、五根、境等眾緣和合方得現前，由此或俱或不俱起，外緣合者有頓、漸故。如水濤波隨緣多少，此等法喻廣說如經。
由五轉識行相麁動，所藉眾緣時多不具，故起時少，不起時多。第六意識雖亦麁動，而所藉緣無時不具，由違緣故，有時不起。第七、八識行相微細，所藉眾緣一切時有，故無緣礙令總不行。
又五識身不能思慮，唯外門轉起，藉多緣，故斷時多，現行時少；第六意識自能思慮，內、外門轉，不藉多緣。唯除五位，常能現起，故斷時少，現起時多，由斯不說此隨緣現。
〔T31 0037b03〕五位者何？
「生無想」等。
無想天者，謂修彼定，厭麁想力，生彼天中，違不恒行心及心所，想滅為首，名無想天。
故六轉識於彼皆斷。
有義：彼天常無六識，聖教說彼無轉識故；說彼唯有有色支故；又說彼為無心地故。
有義：彼天將命終位，要起轉識然後命終，彼必起下潤生愛故，《瑜伽論》說：「後想生已，是諸有情從彼沒」故。然說彼無轉識等者，依長時說，非謂全無。
有義：生時亦有轉識，彼中有必起潤生煩惱故，如餘本有，初必有轉識故。《瑜伽論》說：「若生於彼，唯入不起，其想若生，從彼沒」故，彼本有初，若無轉識，如何名入？先有後無，乃名入故。
〈決擇分〉言：「所有生得心、心所滅，名無想」故，此言意顯彼本有初，有異熟生轉識暫起宿因緣力，後不復生。由斯引起異熟無記分位差別，說名無想，如善引生二定名善。不爾，轉識一切不行，如何可言唯生得滅？故彼初位轉識暫起。
彼天唯在第四靜慮，下想麁動難可斷故，上無無想異熟處故。
即能引發無想定思，能感彼天異熟果故。
「及無心二定」者，謂無想、滅盡定，俱無六識，故名無心。
無想定者，謂有異生伏遍淨貪，未伏上染，由出離想，作意為先，令不恒行心、心所滅，想滅為首，立無想名，令身安和，故亦名定。
修習此定，品別有三：下品修者，現法必退，不能速疾還引現前，後生彼天，不甚光淨，形色廣大，定當中夭。中品修者，現不必退，設退速疾還引現前，後生彼天，雖甚光淨，形色廣大，而不最極，雖有中夭而不決定。上品修者，現必不退，後生彼天，最極光淨，形色廣大，必無中夭，窮滿壽量後方殞沒。
〔T31 0037c06〕此定唯屬第四靜慮。又唯是善，彼所引故。下上地無，由前說故。
四業通三，除順現受。
有義：此定唯欲界起，由諸外道說力起故，人中慧解極猛利故。
有義：欲界先修習已，後生色界能引現前，除無想天至究竟故。
此由厭想、欣彼果入，故唯有漏。非聖所起。
滅盡定者，謂有無學或有學聖，已伏或離無所有貪，上貪不定，由止息想，作意為先，令不恒行、恒行染污心、心所滅，立滅盡名，令身安和，故亦名定。由偏厭受、想，亦名滅彼定。
修習此定，品別有三：下品修者，現法必退，不能速疾還引現前；中品修者，現不必退，設退速疾還引現前；上品修者，畢竟不退。
此定初修必依有頂，遊觀無漏為加行入，次第定中最居後故，雖屬有頂而無漏攝。若修此定已得自在，餘地心後，亦得現前。
雖屬道諦而是非學非無學攝，似涅槃故。
此定初起唯在人中，佛及弟子說力起故，人中慧解極猛利故，後上二界亦得現前，《鄔陀夷經》是此誠證，無色亦名意成天故。於藏識教未信受者，若生無色不起此定，恐無色、心成斷滅故；已信生彼亦得現前，知有藏識不斷滅故。
要斷三界見所斷惑方起此定，異生不能伏滅有頂心、心所故，此定微妙，要證二空隨應後得所引發故。
〔T31 0038a02〕有義：下八地修所斷惑中，要全斷欲，餘伏或斷，然後方能初起此定，欲界惑種二性繁雜，障定強故，唯說不還、三乘無學及諸菩薩得此定故，彼隨所應生上八地皆得後起。
有義：要斷下之四地修所斷惑，餘伏或斷，然後方能初起此定，變異受俱煩惱種子障定強故，彼隨所應，生上五地，皆得後起。
若伏下惑能起此定，後不斷退生上地者，豈生上已却斷下惑？斷亦無失，如生上者，斷下末那俱生惑故。然不還者對治力強，正潤生位不起煩惱，但由惑種潤上地生，雖所伏惑有退、不退，而無伏下生上地義，故無生上却斷下失。
若諸菩薩先二乘位已得滅定，後迴心者，一切位中能起此定。若不爾者，或有乃至七地滿心，方能永伏一切煩惱，雖未永斷欲界修惑，而如已斷，能起此定，論說已入遠地，菩薩方能現起滅盡定故。有從初地即能永伏一切煩惱，如阿羅漢，彼十地中皆起此定，經說菩薩前六地中亦能現起滅盡定故。
無心「睡眠與悶絕」者，謂有極重睡眠、悶絕，令前六識皆不現行。
疲極等緣所引身位，違前六識，故名極重睡眠，此睡眠時，雖無彼體，而由彼似彼故，假說彼名。
風熱等緣所引身位，亦違六識，故名極重悶絕，或此俱是觸處少分。
除斯五位，意識恒起。
正死、生時亦無意識，何故但說五位不行？
有義：死、生「及」、「與」言顯。彼說非理，所以者何？但說六時名無心故，謂前五位及無餘依。應說死、生即悶絕攝，彼是最極悶絕位故，說「及」、「與」言顯五無雜。
〔T31 0038b03〕此顯六識斷已，後時依本識中自種還起，由此不說入無餘依。
此五位中異生有四，除在滅定，聖唯後三，於中如來、自在菩薩唯得有一，無睡、悶故。
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.
〔所釋之頌〕第十五頌至第十六頌
〔所釋頌〕
甲、五識現起分位（依止根本識·隨緣現·如濤波依水）
先解頌裡幾個詞。「根本識」就是阿陀那識（也就是第八識）——為什麼叫「根本」？因為不管是染污的識、還是清淨的識，全都是從它這裡長出來的，它是大家的老根。「依止」是說：前六個轉識（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意這六識）都拿這個根本識當『共同的親依』（也就是它們最貼身的靠山）。「五識」就是前五個轉識（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身），因為這五個性質相近，所以合起來一塊兒講。頌裡「隨緣現」這三個字，是要點出：五識並不是時時刻刻都在起的；這裡的「緣」指的是作意、根、境這幾樣條件。意思就是：五識這一夥，往裡靠的是第八識，往外則要等作意、五根、所緣的境這些條件湊齊了，才現得出來。正因為要等條件湊齊，五識起來的時候才會「或俱或不俱」——「俱」是幾個一起起，「不俱」是不一齊起；外緣湊齊的情形有的快、有的慢，所以才有時齊、有時不齊。就好比水面的波浪，風大就起得多、風小就起得少，隨著條件多少而定。這一類拿水波打的比方，經裡已經講得很詳細了。
這一段是比較八個識起、不起的多寡。前五個轉識，它們運作的樣子（行相）粗、又躁動，所要靠的那些條件常常湊不齊，所以它們現起的時候少、停著不起的時候多。第六意識雖然樣子也算粗、也躁動，可是它所要靠的條件沒有哪一刻不齊全，只因為碰上違逆它的條件（就是底下要講的『無心五位』），才偶爾不起。第七、第八這兩個識，運作的樣子很細微，要靠的條件任何時候都現成，所以沒有哪一種障礙能讓它們整個停掉不轉。
再換個角度講。前五識這一夥自己不會起思慮（不會審察、推度），只會向「外門」轉（也就是只朝外去緣色、聲等五種境），而且要靠的條件又多，所以它們斷掉的時候多、真正在運作的時候少。第六意識就不同了，它自己能起思慮，『內門、外門』兩邊都通（往裡能緣法境、往外能緣種種境），又不必靠那麼多條件。除了底下要講的「五位」以外，意識總是能現起，所以它斷掉的時候少、現起的時候多——正因為意識這麼能起、不太挑條件，頌裡才沒把「隨緣現」這句話安在意識頭上（「隨緣現」是專就五識說的）。
乙、五位無心（意識常現起，除五位）
頌裡說意識除了「五位」以外都恆常現起；那這「五位」是哪五個？就是「生無想天」等等這五種——無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕。在這五種情況下意識才會斷。
一、無想天（生無想）
先講第一種「無想天」。這是說：有人修「無想定」，憑著厭煩粗想（嫌這些念頭礙事）的那股力量，死後就生到這個天上去。在這個天裡，『不恆行』的那些心和心所（也就是前六識和它們的心所，這些是時起時斷、不是一直在的，所以叫『不恆行』）都被止住了，而其中最先滅、帶頭滅的是「想」這個心所，所以這個天就叫「無想天」。也因此，前六個轉識在這個天裡全都斷了、不再運作。
〔異說一·這個天裡始終沒有六識〕 第一派說：無想天裡始終都沒有六識在運作。他們的理由有三條：一是經教說這個天『沒有轉識』；二是經教說這個天『只有屬於色法的那一支』（也就是只有色身那一支，沒有心那一支）；三是經教把這個天叫作「無心地」（沒有心的境地）。
〔異說二·快死的時候會起識〕 第二派說：這個天的有情，到了『快要命終』的時候，一定先起轉識，然後才死。為什麼？因為他臨終一定會起一種貪——對下界投生的貪愛（叫「潤生愛」，就是那股把人黏回三界去受生的愛）；《瑜伽》也說『等到後來『想』又生起，這些有情就從這個天上沒落（死去）』，正可以拿來證明。至於前面說這個天『沒有轉識』那些話，那是『就大半時段』說的（多數時候確實沒有），並不是說從頭到尾一點都沒有。
〔異說三·剛生的時候也有〕 第三派說：這個天的有情，連『剛投生的時候』（初受生那一刻）也是有轉識的。理由有兩條：一是它在「中有」（也就是死後到再投生中間那段過渡的身）那段必定會起潤生的煩惱（不起這個煩惱就投不了生）；二是就像其餘各道的有情，在「本有」（正式受生、活著的那一期身）一開頭也一定有轉識。再引《瑜伽》說『如果生到這個天，那只是『入』、卻『不起』；等他的『想』又生起來，就從這個天沒落』——它既然用了「入」這個字，那這個天的「本有」一開頭要是沒有轉識，怎麼談得上「入」呢（連識都沒有，拿什麼去入）？必得先有（轉識）、然後才滅掉、沒了，這才叫『入了無想』啊。
第三派接著再引一段佐證。《瑜伽》的〈決擇分〉說『凡是『生得』的心、心所滅了，就叫無想』（「生得」指生來就帶著、自自然然就有的那種）。這句話的用意，正是要點出：這個天的「本有」一開頭，有一種「異熟生」的轉識，靠著前世種下的因緣力暫時起一下，過後就不再生了。就因為這轉識起一下、跟著就不再生，才使得後面那段異熟無記的狀態跟別處有所不同，於是把這段狀態叫作「無想」——這就好比是拿善法（出離想等）去引出「無想定、滅盡定」這兩種定，所以連帶把這兩種定也叫作「善」（名字是順著引它的東西取的）。要不是這樣（要是這個天的轉識從頭到尾一刻都不起），那《瑜伽》『只有『生得』的滅了』這句話又怎麼說得通呢（既然全都不起，何必還特地揀出『生得』來講）？所以可知：這個天一開頭，轉識還是暫時起了一下的。
無想天只設在第四靜慮（也就是第四禪）這一層，不在別處。為什麼？往下看（初禪、二禪、三禪那幾層），那裡的「想」還粗、還躁動，不容易斷掉；往上看（無色界），那裡又根本沒有「無想」這種果報所在的地方。就只有這第四靜慮裡，才有「無想定」那種思（修定的用心）能引發出來，也才招感得了這個天的果報。
二、無想定（無心二定之一）
頌裡「及無心二定」這句，指的是「無想定」和「滅盡定」這兩種定。這兩種定裡頭六識都不運作，所以叫「無心」（沒有心識在動）。
先講「無想定」。這是說：有凡夫（異生）已經把「遍淨天」（也就是第三禪那層）的貪壓伏住了，但它上面那層（第四禪）的染還沒壓伏；他憑著「出離想」（一心想擺脫念頭、嫌念頭礙事的那種用心）當先導，去用功，把『不恆行』的那些心和心所（前六識和它們的心所）都止滅掉，其中最先滅、帶頭滅的還是「想」這個心所，所以給這個定立名叫「無想」。它又能讓身子安穩調和，所以也叫它「定」。
修這個定，依用功的高低分三等：下品的人，在今生一定會退失，退了又不能很快把這定重新引現出來；將來生到無想天，光明不怎麼乾淨、形色雖然高大，而且一定會中途夭折。中品的人，今生不一定退，就算退了也能很快把這定重新引現出來；將來生到那個天，雖然也相當光淨、形色高大，可還沒到最頂；中途夭折雖有可能，但不是一定。上品的人，今生一定不退；將來生到那個天，最是光淨、形色高大，一定不會中途夭折，要把壽命整整享盡了才壽終。
這個無想定只屬第四靜慮這一層。它的性質又只能是「善」——因為它是由善法（出離想那些）引出來的。往下幾層（初二三禪）、往上（無色界）都沒有這個定，道理跟前面講無想天時一樣。再說它跟「四種業」的關係：四業裡頭它通「三業」——只除掉「順現受業」（也就是不招感今生就受的果），其餘三種（招感下一生受的、招感更往後幾生受的、受報時間不定的）它都通。
〔異說一·只在欲界起修〕 第一派說：這個無想定只在欲界（也就是人間）才修得起來。理由有兩條：一是要靠那些外道的言說力（也就是外道師父的教導）才引得起這個定（這定本是外道所修）；二是人這一道悟性、理解力最是猛利（在人間才修得來）。
〔異說二·色界也能起〕 第二派說：在欲界先修過了，將來生到色界也還能把這個定引現出來——只有已經生到無想天的人是例外（他已經拿到那個最後的果報了，不必再起）。要曉得，這個定是憑著『厭煩想』、『貪求那個天的果報』才入的，所以它純是「有漏」的（帶著煩惱、不出三界），不是聖者會去起的。
三、滅盡定（無心二定之二）
先講「滅盡定」。這是說：有「無學」（已修到頂、無可再學）的聖者，或「有學」（還在修途上）的聖者，已經把「無所有處」（無色界第三層）的貪壓伏或永遠斷了；至於它上面那層（非想非非想處）的貪，那就不一定了（有的壓伏了、有的還沒）。他憑著「止息想」（一心要把想止熄下來的那種用心）當先導，把『不恆行』（前六識）以及『恆行染污』（第七末那，這個是一直在、又帶染污的）這兩夥心和心所統統滅掉，所以給這個定立名叫「滅盡」（連染污末那都滅了，滅得徹底）。它又能讓身子安穩調和，所以也叫它「定」。又因為它特別針對「受、想」這兩個心所去厭離、止滅，所以也叫「滅受想定」。
修這個定，也依高低分三等：下品的人，今生一定會退，退了又不能很快把它重新引現出來；中品的人，今生不一定退，就算退了也能很快重新引現；上品的人，到底就不退了。
這個定第一次修，一定要依著「有頂」（也就是非想非非想處，三界最高的那層）來入——入的辦法是先拿「遊觀無漏」（在無漏智上來回觀照）當預備功夫，然後才入；之所以依有頂，是因為它在「九次第定」（一層接一層、由淺到深的九種定）裡頭排在最末一層。所依的地雖是有頂，可它的體性是歸在「無漏」裡的（依的是有漏地，體卻是無漏，這兩件事不衝突）。要是這個定修到已經得自在了，那就在其餘各地的心起過之後，也都能把它引現出來（不限定非從有頂入不可）。這個定雖然歸在「道諦」裡，可它又是歸在「非學非無學」裡的（既不繫在有學位、也不繫在無學位）——因為它樣子很像涅槃（那麼寂靜，所以不好歸到學、無學哪一邊去）。
這個定最初要起，只有在人這一道——理由有兩條：一是要靠佛和佛弟子的言說力（教導）才引得起來；二是人間悟性、理解力最猛利。但起過一回以後，將來在上二界（色界、無色界）也能把它引現出來，《鄔陀夷經》就是這件事的確切證據；況且無色界也叫「意成天」（那裡的有情雖無色身，仍有「意所成」的身），所以照樣起得了這個定。
對「藏識」（阿賴耶識）這套教法還信不過的人，要是生到了無色界，就不敢起這個滅盡定——他怕：無色界本來就沒有色身了，這下心識再一滅盡，豈不是整個人都斷滅、什麼都沒了？所以不敢起。可是已經信得過藏識教法的人，生到無色界照樣能把這定引現出來——因為他曉得：底下還有個藏識一直接續著、不會斷滅，所以不怕成斷滅。
必得把三界「見所斷」的惑（也就是一見道就斷得掉的那種迷惑）斷盡了——換句話說，必得入了見道、成了聖者——才起得了這個滅盡定。為什麼凡夫不行？因為凡夫（異生）壓不住、也滅不掉「有頂」（非想非非想處）那裡的心和心所。再說這個定很精微，得先證到『我空、法空』這兩種空，然後照所需，由「後得智」（證真之後再起的那種智）來引發，才起得了。
〔異說一·欲界惑全斷才起得了〕 第一派說：在下八地（也就是三界九地裡除掉最頂的有頂以外那八層）的「修所斷」惑（要在修道才一步步斷掉的迷惑）裡頭，必得把欲界的惑全斷掉，其餘各地的惑或壓伏、或斷掉，然後才頭一回起得了這個定。為什麼單挑欲界惑要全斷？因為欲界的惑種善、惡兩性混雜在一塊兒、特別繁亂，妨礙入定的力量最強。經教又只說「不還果」（三果聖人）、三乘的「無學」（四果阿羅漢、辟支佛、佛），以及諸菩薩才得這個定；他們照各自的情形、生到上八地以後，都能再起這個定。
〔異說二·斷盡下四地才起得了〕 第二派說：必得把下面四地（欲界，加上初禪、二禪、三禪）的修所斷惑都斷盡、其餘各地的惑或壓伏、或斷掉，然後才頭一回起得了這個定。這一派挑的是下四地，理由是：跟「變異受」（會起伏變動的苦受、樂受那些）綁在一起的煩惱種子，妨礙入定的力量最強（這種受只到三禪為止，四禪以上就沒了，所以要斷到第四地）。他們照各自的情形、生到上五地（第四禪，加上無色界四地）以後，都能再起這個定。
〔有人問難〕（針對第二派）：照你說只要把下地的惑『壓伏住』就起得了這個定，那他後來既沒把惑斷掉、又退了、卻生到上地去了——豈不是生到上地以後，反倒還得回過頭來斷下地的惑？這次序不就顛倒了嗎（哪有先生上、再斷下的）？〔回答〕：就算真是生上以後才斷下，也沒什麼過失——你看生到上地的人，照樣斷得了他下地末那的俱生惑（與生俱來的惑）嘛；可見『生在上、斷在下』本來就有先例，不算顛倒。
不過這裡要補一句：「不還」聖者對治的力量強，他在正要投生的當口並不起現行的煩惱，他是靠惑的「種子」把自己潤生到上地去的（用種子潤生，不必動現行）；他壓伏住的那些惑雖有退、有不退，可他根本沒有『下地惑只壓伏住、就帶著生到上地去』這回事（不還聖人一定先把下地的惑斷盡了才生上去），所以他這邊並不會出『生在上、卻回頭斷下』的顛倒毛病（前面說的那個顛倒，是針對只壓伏、不斷的情形講的，不還聖人不在此列）。
至於菩薩起這個定的情形，要分兩種人講。第一種：本來在二乘位（聲聞、緣覺）就已經得過滅盡定、後來才迴小向大（從小乘轉回大乘）的菩薩，那他在一切階位裡都能起這個定（他底子早打好了）。第二種：要不是這樣（不是從二乘轉過來的菩薩），那有的就得一直修到第七地的滿心，才能把一切煩惱永遠壓伏住——這時候雖然還沒把欲界的修惑徹底斷掉，可已經『跟斷掉一樣』（伏得死死的，等於斷），就能起這個定了；《論》裡說『要進到遠行地（第七地），菩薩才現起得了滅盡定』，正可以拿來證明。
不過也有菩薩從初地起就能把一切煩惱永遠壓伏住（伏得像阿羅漢那樣徹底），這種菩薩在十地裡頭每一地都起得了這個定——經裡說『菩薩在前六地裡也現起得了滅盡定』，正可以拿來證明（不必非等到第七地）。
四、睡眠（極重睡眠）· 五、悶絕（極重悶絕）
頌裡算作「無心」的這「睡眠與悶絕」，指的是『極重的睡眠』和『極重的悶絕』——重到能讓前六識統統停掉、不運作（這才算進無心五位裡）。要留意：並不是隨便哪一種睡眠、悶絕都算無心，只有重到六識全停的那種才算。
由累過了頭等等緣故所引起的那種身體狀態，會妨害前六識、讓它們停下來，所以叫「極重睡眠」。這裡有個細處要講：在這種睡眠裡，其實連「睡眠」這個心所的本身都沒有（因為這時六識已經滅了，那個叫「睡眠」的心所跟著也沒了）；可既然這狀態『很像睡眠』，就借「睡眠」這個名字來叫它（是借名來說，不是真有睡眠心所在）。
由風、熱等等緣故所引起的那種身體狀態，也會妨害六識，所以叫「極重悶絕」（也就是重到昏死過去）。或者也可以這麼歸：這睡眠、悶絕兩樣，都只是「觸處」（身根所對的那一塊境）的一小部分（都屬於身體狀態的變化）。
除了這（無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕）五種情況以外，意識總是現起、不斷。
六、五位之揀辨（正死生·六時·三類有情）
〔有人問難〕：正死的那一刻、正生的那一刻，意識其實也是沒有的（人斷氣那一剎那、投生那一剎那，意識都不運作）；那頌裡為什麼只說「五位」意識不起、卻不把「死、生」也算進去？
〔異說·死、生靠「及」「與」帶出來〕 第一派說：死位、生位其實已經藏在頌裡「及」「與」這兩個虛字裡頭一併帶出來了（暗暗攝在五位裡）。〔破斥〕：這個說法不合理。為什麼？因為經教只把『六種時候』叫作無心——就是前面那五位（無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕），再加上「無餘依」涅槃（這是第六種）；經教並沒有另外把死、生立成無心的時候。所以拿「及」「與」去硬塞死生，沒有教證。
〔正解〕應該這麼說：死位、生位其實就攝在「悶絕」裡頭，因為它們本來就是悶絕到極點的狀態（昏死過去）；而頌裡「及」「與」這兩個字，只是用來把五位一個個隔開、表示它們各是各的、不相混（不是用來藏死生的）。還有一層意思：這五位只是要說明——六識斷掉以後，還能靠著本識（第八）裡頭各自的種子重新起來（六識斷了還能再活過來）；正因為要強調這『斷了還能再起』，頌裡才不把「入無餘依涅槃」算進去（那個是六識永遠不再起了，跟這裡『還能再起』的意思不合，所以不收）。
這五位，分到不同人身上各佔幾種：凡夫（異生）佔其中四種——只少了「滅盡定」（滅盡定只有聖者才得）。聖者只佔後三種（滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕，沒有前兩種的無想天、無想定，因為那兩種是凡夫外道修的）。聖者裡頭，如來和「自在菩薩」（得了自在的高位菩薩）就只佔一種（也就是滅盡定）——因為他們已經沒有「睡眠、悶絕」這種事了。
〔Verses expounded〕
A. The modes of arising of the five consciousnesses (resting on the root consciousness · appearing as conditions allow · like waves resting on water)
First, the gloss on a few words in the verse. "The root consciousness" is the ādāna consciousness (that is, the eighth consciousness) — why is it called "root"? Because whether it be the defiled consciousnesses or the pure consciousnesses, every one of them grows up out of it; it is everyone's old root. "Resting on" means: the first six evolving consciousnesses (the six — eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind) all take this root consciousness as their "common intimate support" (the support closest to them of all). "The five consciousnesses" means the first five evolving consciousnesses (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body); because these five are close in nature, they are spoken of all together. The three words "appear as conditions allow" in the verse are meant to point this out: the five consciousnesses are not arising at every single moment; the "conditions" here mean attention, faculty, and object — these several requisites. The meaning is: this band of five consciousnesses leans inwardly on the eighth consciousness, while outwardly it must wait until attention, the five faculties, and the object supported upon — these conditions — are all assembled, and only then can it appear. Just because they must wait for the conditions to assemble, the five consciousnesses, when they arise, are "now together, now not together" — "together" being several arising at once, "not together" being not arising all at once; and since the gathering of outer conditions is in some cases quick and in some slow, that is why they are sometimes all together and sometimes not. It is just like the waves on the surface of water: a big wind raises many, a small wind raises few — they go by how much or little the conditions allow. As for this sort of comparison drawn with water and waves, the sūtras have already set it out in full.
This passage compares how often the eight consciousnesses arise or do not. The first five evolving consciousnesses — their way of working (their mode of activity) is coarse and restless, and the conditions they must lean on are often not all assembled, so they arise but little of the time and stay still, not arising, most of the time. The sixth, the mental consciousness, though its way of working is also reckoned coarse and restless, has conditions to lean on that are not lacking at any moment; only when it runs into a condition adverse to it (that is, the "five mindless states" to be discussed below) does it now and then fail to arise. The seventh and eighth consciousnesses — their way of working is very subtle, and the conditions they lean on are ready at any time, so there is no sort of obstruction that could make them stop turning altogether.
Now to put it from another angle. This band of five consciousnesses cannot of itself raise deliberation (it cannot examine and infer); it turns only toward the "outer door" (that is, it reaches only outward to take in form, sound, and the other five objects); and besides, the conditions it must lean on are many — so it breaks off most of the time and is truly working only a little of the time. The sixth, the mental consciousness, is different: it can of itself raise deliberation, it runs through both the "inner door and the outer door" (inwardly it can take in the dharma-object, outwardly it can take in all manner of objects), and it need not lean on so many conditions. Save for the "five states" to be discussed below, the mental consciousness is always able to arise, so it breaks off but little of the time and is arising most of the time — and just because the mental consciousness is so ready to arise and so little choosy about conditions, the verse did not fasten the phrase "appear as conditions allow" onto the mental consciousness ("appear as conditions allow" being said with reference to the five consciousnesses alone).
B. The five mindless states (the mental consciousness arises constantly, save the five states)
The verse says that the mental consciousness arises constantly save for the "five states"; so what five are these "five states"? They are "[one] born in the heaven of no-conception" and so on — these five: the heaven of no-conception, the concentration of no-conception, the concentration of cessation, sleep, and fainting. In these five situations the mental consciousness does break off.
1. The heaven of no-conception (born in [the heaven of] no-conception)
First, the first of them, "the heaven of no-conception." This says: someone cultivates the "concentration of no-conception," and by the force of "loathing coarse conception" (finding these thoughts a hindrance), is born after death up into this heaven. Within this heaven, the "non-ever-active" mind and mental factors (that is, the first six consciousnesses and their mental factors — these arise now and break off now, not being there all the time, and so are called "non-ever-active") are all stilled; and the one that ceases first, leading the rest, is the mental factor "conception," and so this heaven is called the "heaven of no-conception." For this reason, the first six evolving consciousnesses in this heaven are all severed and no longer work.
〔One view · in this heaven there are never the six consciousnesses〕 The first view says: in the heaven of no-conception there are at all times no six consciousnesses working. Their grounds are three: first, the holy teaching says this heaven "has no evolving consciousnesses"; second, the holy teaching says this heaven "has only the limb that belongs to form" (that is, only the limb of the form-body, with no limb of mind); third, the holy teaching calls this heaven the "mindless ground" (a ground without mind).
〔Another view · at the point of dying it does arise〕 The second view says: the beings of this heaven, when they reach the point of "about to die," must first arise the evolving consciousnesses, and only then die. Why? Because at the end they must arise a kind of craving — the craving for rebirth in the lower realm (called "moistening-life craving," that craving which sticks a person back into the three realms to take birth); and the Yogācārabhūmi too says "once conception arises again later, these beings sink down (die) from this [heaven]," which can be cited as proof. As for the earlier words that this heaven "has no evolving consciousnesses" and so on, those were said "with reference to the long stretch of time" (for most of the time there are indeed none); it is not that from beginning to end there are absolutely none.
〔A third view · at the very moment of birth too there are [consciousnesses]〕 The third view says: the beings of this heaven, even at "the very moment of being born" (the instant of first taking on this life), have evolving consciousnesses. The grounds are two: first, during its "intermediate existence" (the transitional body in the span between death and rebirth) it must arise the moistening-life affliction (without arising this affliction it cannot take birth at all); second, just as with beings of all the other destinies, at the very start of their "basic existence" (the life-span of formal birth, the body lived in over one lifetime) there must also be evolving consciousnesses. And it cites the Yogācārabhūmi again, saying "if one is born there, it is only 'entering,' not 'arising'; when its conception arises again, it sinks down from there" — since it used the word "entering," then if at the start of this heaven's "basic existence" there were no evolving consciousnesses, how could one speak of "entering" (with not even consciousness present, what would there be to enter with)? There must first be (evolving consciousnesses) and then they cease and are gone — only that is called "entering [the state of] no-conception."
The third view then cites a further support. The Yogācārabhūmi's Viniścaya-saṃgrahaṇī ("the Resolving division") says "whatever 'innate' mind and mental factors cease, that is called no-conception" ("innate" meaning the kind one is born already carrying, that one has of itself naturally). The intent of this sentence is precisely to point out: at the start of this heaven's "basic existence" there is a kind of "maturation-born" evolving consciousness, which, by the force of causes-and-conditions sown in a former life, arises briefly for a moment and afterward arises no more. It is just because this evolving consciousness arises once and then arises no more that the stretch of "maturation karmically-neutral [state]" that follows comes to differ from elsewhere, and so this stretch of state is called "no-conception" — this is like taking a wholesome dharma (the conception of leaving-behind, and so on) to draw out the "concentration of no-conception and the concentration of cessation," these two concentrations, so that those two concentrations get called "wholesome" too (the name is taken in keeping with what drew it out). Were it not so (were this heaven's evolving consciousness never to arise for even a moment from beginning to end), then how could the Yogācārabhūmi's sentence "only the 'innate' ones cease" make sense (if all of them never arose, why pick out the "innate" ones to speak of)? So one can know: at this heaven's start, the evolving consciousness did briefly arise for a moment.
The heaven of no-conception is set only within the fourth dhyāna (that is, the fourth meditative absorption), this one level, and nowhere else. Why? Looking downward (the levels of the first, second, and third dhyāna), the "conception" there is still coarse and restless and hard to sever; looking upward (the formless realm), there is no place at all for the "no-conception" maturation-fruit. Only here, within the fourth dhyāna, can the kind of "thought [governing] the concentration of no-conception" (the applied mind in cultivating the concentration) be drawn out, and only here can the fruit-recompense of this heaven be summoned.
2. The concentration of no-conception (one of the two mindless concentrations)
The phrase "and the two mindless concentrations" in the verse points to the "concentration of no-conception" and the "concentration of cessation," these two concentrations. In both of these concentrations the six consciousnesses do not work, and so they are called "mindless" (no mind-consciousness astir).
First, the "concentration of no-conception." This says: there is an ordinary worldling (a "common being") who has already pressed down the craving of "the heaven of universal purity" (that is, the level of the third dhyāna), but has not yet pressed down the defilement of the level above it (the fourth dhyāna); leaning on the "conception of leaving-behind" (that mode of mind that single-mindedly wishes to throw off thoughts, finding thoughts a hindrance) as forerunner, he sets to work, and stills the "non-ever-active" mind and mental factors (the first six consciousnesses and their mental factors) altogether; and again, the one that ceases first, leading the rest, is the mental factor "conception" — so this concentration is set up under the name "no-conception." And because it can make the body steady and harmonious, it is also called "concentration."
In cultivating this concentration, it falls into three grades by the high or low of one's effort. The lower grade: such a person in this present life must lose [the concentration], and having lost it cannot quickly draw it forth again into the present; and when later born up into the heaven of no-conception, his light is not very pure, his form-and-color is great and large, and he will surely die before his term. The middle grade: such a person in this present life need not lose it, and even if he loses it can quickly draw it forth again into the present; and when later born into that heaven, though his light is quite pure and his form-and-color great and large, it has not yet reached the very top; a death-before-term is possible, but not certain. The upper grade: such a person in this present life surely does not lose it; and when later born into that heaven, his light is the very purest, his form-and-color great and large, and there will surely be no death-before-term — only when his life-span is fully exhausted does he then pass away.
This concentration of no-conception belongs only to the fourth dhyāna, this one level. Its nature, again, can only be "wholesome" — because it is drawn out by a wholesome dharma (the conception of leaving-behind and the rest). In the levels below (the first, second, third dhyāna) and above (the formless realm) there is no such concentration, on the same reasoning as was given above when speaking of the heaven of no-conception. As for its relation to the "four kinds of karma": of the four, it runs through "three kinds of karma" — only excluding "karma to be experienced in this present life" (that is, it does not summon a fruit experienced in this very life); the remaining three (karma summoning a fruit experienced in the next life, karma summoning a fruit experienced some lives further on, and karma whose time of recompense is unfixed) it all runs through.
〔One view · it is cultivated only in the desire-realm〕 The first view says: this concentration of no-conception can be cultivated and roused only in the desire-realm (that is, among humans). The grounds are two: first, one must rely on the speaking-force of those heterodox masters (that is, the teaching of heterodox teachers) to draw this concentration forth (this concentration being originally what the heterodox cultivate); second, the human destiny has the sharpest, keenest understanding (only among humans can it be cultivated).
〔Another view · the form-realm can rouse it too〕 The second view says: having first cultivated it in the desire-realm, one can later, on being born into the form-realm, still draw this concentration forth into the present — only one who has already been born into the heaven of no-conception is the exception (he has already obtained that final fruit-recompense and need not rouse it again). One should know that this concentration is entered by "loathing conception" and "delighting in that heaven's fruit," and so it is purely "contaminated" (carrying affliction, not getting clear of the three realms); it is not what a noble one would rouse.
3. The concentration of cessation (the second of the two mindless concentrations)
First, the "concentration of cessation." This says: there is a noble one who is "beyond training" (who has cultivated to the summit, with nothing more to train), or a noble one "still in training" (still on the way), who has already pressed down or forever severed the craving of "the base of nothing-whatever" (the third level of the formless realm); as for the craving of the level above it (the base of neither-conception-nor-non-conception), that is unfixed (some have pressed it down, some not yet). Leaning on the "conception of stilling" (that mode of mind that single-mindedly would still conception down to extinction) as forerunner, he stills altogether both these bands of mind and mental factors — the "non-ever-active" (the first six consciousnesses) and the "ever-active defiled" (the seventh, the manas, which is there all the time and carries defilement) — and so this concentration is set up under the name "cessation" (even the defiled manas is stilled, the stilling being thorough). And because it can make the body steady and harmonious, it is also called "concentration." Again, because it especially loathes and stills these two mental factors, "feeling and conception," it is also called the "concentration of cessation-of-those [feeling and conception]."
In cultivating this concentration, it too falls into three grades by high and low. The lower grade: such a person in this present life must lose it, and having lost it cannot quickly draw it forth again into the present. The middle grade: such a person in this present life need not lose it, and even if he loses it can quickly draw it forth again. The upper grade: such a person in the end does not lose it at all.
This concentration, when cultivated for the first time, must be entered in dependence on "the summit of existence" (that is, the base of neither-conception-nor-non-conception, the highest level of the three realms) — and the way to enter is to take "ranging contemplation [in the] uncontaminated" (contemplating back and forth in the uncontaminated wisdom) as the preparatory effort, and only then to enter. The reason it is entered in dependence on the summit of existence is that, among the "nine successive concentrations" (the nine concentrations from shallow to deep, one ranked after the next), it stands at the very last level. Though the level it rests on is the summit of existence, its essential nature is reckoned among the "uncontaminated" (it rests on a contaminated level, but its substance is uncontaminated — these two facts do not clash). And if this concentration has been cultivated to the point of mastery, then it can also be drawn forth into the present after a mind on any of the other levels has arisen (one is not bound to enter it only from the summit of existence). Though this concentration is reckoned within the "truth of the path," it is again reckoned within the "neither-training-nor-beyond-training" (bound neither to the in-training stage nor to the beyond-training stage) — because its appearance is much like nirvāṇa (so still that it is hard to assign it to either the training or the beyond-training side).
This concentration, when first roused, is only among humans — the grounds being two: first, one must rely on the speaking-force of the Buddha and the Buddha's disciples (their teaching) to draw it forth; second, the human realm has the sharpest, keenest understanding. But once it has been roused a single time, then later, in the upper two realms (form and formless), it too can be drawn forth into the present, and the Udāyin Sūtra is the sure proof of this matter; what is more, the formless realm is also called the "heaven of mind-made [bodies]" (the beings there, though without form-bodies, still have a "mind-made" body), so this concentration can be roused there all the same.
For one who does not yet trust the teaching of the "store-consciousness" (the ālaya-vijñāna), if he is born into the formless realm, he dares not rouse this concentration of cessation — he fears: the formless realm has no form-body to begin with, and now if the mind-consciousness too be stilled to cessation, would not the whole person be cut off into extinction, with nothing left at all? So he dares not rouse it. But one who already trusts the store-consciousness teaching, born into the formless realm, can draw this concentration forth all the same — because he knows that down beneath there is a store-consciousness carrying on without break, and so he does not fear falling into extinction.
One must have severed entirely the "delusions severable by the path of seeing" of the three realms (that is, the kind of delusion that is severed the moment one sees the path) — in other words, one must have entered the path of seeing and become a noble one — before one can rouse this concentration of cessation. Why is the worldling unable? Because the worldling (the common being) cannot press down, nor cease, the mind and mental factors of "the summit of existence" (the base of neither-conception-nor-non-conception). Furthermore, this concentration is very subtle: one must first realize "the emptiness of self and the emptiness of dharmas," these two emptinesses, and then, as the case requires, have it drawn forth by the "subsequently-attained wisdom" (that wisdom which arises after one has realized the truth), before one can rouse it.
〔One view · only when the desire-realm delusions are entirely severed can it be roused〕 The first view says: among the "delusions severable by the path of cultivation" of the lower eight grounds (that is, the eight levels among the three realms' nine grounds, excepting the topmost, the summit of existence) — the delusions severed step by step on the path of cultivation — one must entirely sever those of the desire-realm, and either press down or sever those of the remaining grounds, and only then can one rouse this concentration for the first time. Why single out the desire-realm delusions for entire severance? Because the desire-realm's delusion-seeds, wholesome and unwholesome both, are mixed in together and especially tangled, and obstruct entry into concentration with the greatest force. The teaching, moreover, says only the "non-returner fruit" (the third-fruit noble one), the "beyond-training" of the three vehicles (the fourth-fruit arhat, the pratyekabuddha, the buddha), and the various bodhisattvas obtain this concentration; and these, each as his case requires, on being born into the upper eight grounds, can all rouse it again thereafter.
〔Another view · only when the lower four grounds are severed entirely can it be roused〕 The second view says: one must sever entirely the delusions-severable-by-the-path-of-cultivation of the lower four grounds (the desire-realm, plus the first, second, and third dhyānas), and either press down or sever those of the remaining grounds, and only then can one rouse this concentration for the first time. This view picks out the lower four grounds, the ground being this: the affliction-seeds bound up with "fluctuating feeling" (the feelings of pain and pleasure that rise and fall) obstruct entry into concentration with the greatest force (and this sort of feeling reaches only up to the third dhyāna, there being none above the fourth dhyāna, so one must sever down to the fourth ground). These, each as his case requires, on being born into the upper five grounds (the fourth dhyāna, plus the four grounds of the formless realm), can all rouse it again thereafter.
〔Q〕 (against the second view): On your account, that merely "pressing down" the lower grounds' delusions suffices to rouse this concentration, then someone who later neither severed the delusions nor [stayed un-]regressed, but regressed and yet was born into an upper ground — would he not then, after being born into the upper ground, have to turn back and sever the lower ground's delusions [only then]? Is this order not topsy-turvy (for whoever heard of being born upward first and severing the lower afterward)? 〔A〕: Even granting it truly is that one severs the lower only after being born upward, there is no fault in it — for look, one born into an upper ground can perfectly well sever the "innate delusions" (delusions born together with one) of his lower-ground manas; which shows that "born above, severing below" has precedent all along and is no inversion.
But here a word must be added: the "non-returner" noble one has strong counteracting power; in the very moment of taking birth he does not arise active afflictions; he is moistened up to the upper ground by the "seeds" of his delusions (using seeds to moisten his birth, with no need to stir up active afflictions). The delusions he has pressed down may regress or not regress, but he simply does not have the case of "the lower ground's delusions being merely pressed down, and carrying them into birth on an upper ground" (the non-returner noble one always severs the lower ground's delusions entirely before being born upward); and so, on his side, the inverted ill of "born above, yet turning back to sever below" does not arise (the inversion spoken of earlier was put with reference to the case of merely pressing down without severing, and the non-returner noble one is not in that case).
As for the bodhisattva's roer of this concentration, two kinds of person must be told apart. The first: a bodhisattva who in his earlier position in the two vehicles (the śrāvaka, the pratyekabuddha) had already obtained the concentration of cessation, and only afterward turned his mind from the lesser toward the greater (turning from the lesser vehicle back to the greater) — such a one can rouse this concentration in every position (his groundwork being laid long since). The second: a bodhisattva who is not like this (not one come over from the two vehicles) — then some such, only on cultivating all the way to the "perfected mind of the seventh ground," can press down all afflictions forever; at this point, though he has not yet thoroughly severed the desire-realm's cultivation-delusions, he is already "as if severed [of them]" (he presses them down so dead that it is as good as severing), and so can rouse this concentration; and the [Yogācāra] treatise's saying "only on entering the Far-going ground (the seventh ground) can a bodhisattva manifestly rouse the concentration of cessation" can be cited as proof.
But there are also bodhisattvas who from the first ground onward can press down all afflictions forever (pressing them down as thoroughly as an arhat); and such bodhisattvas can rouse this concentration in each and every one of the ten grounds — for the sūtra says "in the first six grounds too a bodhisattva can manifestly rouse the concentration of cessation," which can be cited as proof (one need not wait until the seventh ground at all).
4. Sleep (the deepest sleep) · 5. Fainting (the deepest fainting)
The "sleep and fainting" reckoned as "mindless" in the verse point to "the deepest sleep" and "the deepest fainting" — heavy enough to make the first six consciousnesses all stop and not work (only such count as falling within the five mindless states). One must mark this: it is not that just any sleep or fainting whatever counts as mindless; only the kind heavy enough to stop all six consciousnesses counts.
The sort of bodily state brought on by such conditions as utter exhaustion obstructs the first six consciousnesses and makes them stop, and so is called "the deepest sleep." Here there is a fine point to make: in this kind of sleep, even the very substance of the mental factor "sleep" is in fact absent (for at this time the six consciousnesses are already stilled, and the mental factor called "sleep" is gone along with them); yet since this state "much resembles sleep," the name "sleep" is borrowed to call it (it is named by borrowing, not that there is truly a mental factor of sleep astir).
The sort of bodily state brought on by such conditions as wind and heat also obstructs the six consciousnesses, and so is called "the deepest fainting" (that is, heavy enough to swoon away as if dead). Or else one may sort it this way: these two, sleep and fainting, are both only a small portion of "the tangible-base" (that patch of object that the body-faculty meets) — both belonging to changes in the bodily state.
Save for these (the heaven of no-conception, the concentration of no-conception, the concentration of cessation, sleep, fainting) five situations, the mental consciousness arises constantly, without break.
6. Sorting out the five states (the moments of dying and of birth · the six occasions · the three classes of beings)
〔Q〕: At the very moment of dying and the very moment of birth, the mental consciousness is in fact also absent (at the instant a person's breath is cut off, and at the instant of taking birth, the mental consciousness does not work); then why does the verse say only that the mental consciousness fails to arise in "the five states," and not reckon "death and birth" in as well?
〔A view · death and birth are drawn out by [the particles] "and" / "with"〕 The first view says: the state of death and the state of birth are in fact already tucked into the two particles "and" / "with" in the verse and drawn out together along with them (covertly subsumed within the five states). 〔Refutation〕: This account does not hold. Why? Because the holy teaching calls only "six occasions" mindless — namely, the earlier five states (the heaven of no-conception, the concentration of no-conception, the concentration of cessation, sleep, fainting), plus the "remainderless [nirvāṇa]" (this being the sixth); the holy teaching does not separately set up death and birth as mindless occasions. So forcing death and birth in by means of "and" / "with" has no scriptural warrant.
〔The correct sense〕: It should be put this way: the state of death and the state of birth are in fact subsumed within "fainting," for they are by nature states of fainting to the very extreme (swooning away as if dead); and the two words "and" / "with" in the verse merely serve to keep the five states one apart from another, marking that each is its own and unmingled (not to tuck in death and birth). And there is a further layer of meaning here: these five states are only meant to show that — once the six consciousnesses have broken off, they can later arise again in dependence on their own seeds within the root consciousness (the eighth) (the six consciousnesses, having broken off, can come back to life). It is just because [the verse] would stress this "broken off, yet able to arise again" that the verse does not reckon in "entering the remainderless nirvāṇa" (in that one the six consciousnesses arise no more forever, which does not fit the sense of "able to arise again" here, and so is not taken in).
Of these five states, how many fall to each kind of being: the worldling (the common being) has four of them — lacking only the "concentration of cessation" (the concentration of cessation being attained only by a noble one). The noble one has only the latter three (the concentration of cessation, sleep, fainting; lacking the first two, the heaven of no-conception and the concentration of no-conception, since those two are cultivated by worldlings and heterodox). Among the noble ones, the Tathāgata and the "self-mastered bodhisattva" (a bodhisattva of the higher ranks who has attained mastery) have only one (that is, the concentration of cessation) — because for them there is no such thing any longer as "sleep and fainting."
〔所釋之頌〕第十五頌至第十六頌
前面已經把三能變（第八異熟、第七思量、前六了境）的體用都辨明了。這一節順著頌文辨前六識的現起分位：先講前五識在什麼條件下才現起（甲）；再講第六意識唯一會『停掉』的那五種位（乙）。所釋的是兩首頌：前五識「依止根本識，五識隨緣現，或俱或不俱，如濤波依水」；意識「常現起，除生無想天，及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕」。至於八識俱轉之一異料簡、與『識轉變』之正解，別為次章。
本節『五識隨緣現、意識除五位』之義，經有所本。《楞伽經》以譬喻顯前五識的現起：『就像明鏡能現眾色之像；又像猛風吹動大海之水，外境界這陣風飄蕩著心海，識浪相續不斷……所以五識身得以轉起』——『明鏡現像、外境界風飄蕩心海、識浪不斷、五識身轉』，正是頌十五『五識隨緣現、如濤波依水』的經本，顯八識之浪依藏識而轉。下面順著頌文講開。
甲、前五識什麼時候現起——依著根本識、隨緣而現，像水上的波
頌說「依止根本識」。這「根本識」就是第八阿陀那識；之所以叫「根本」，是因為它是一切染法、淨法諸識所從生的根本。「依止」是說：前六個轉識，都以這第八識作它們『共同的親依』。窺基《述記》於此進一步剖明：這「依止根本識」一句通著前六識，因為它們都依止第八識、所以說是「共依」；而所謂依止有兩重——一是『依種子的第八識』，這是「因緣親依」；二是『依現行的第八識』，這是「增上緣依」。「五識」就是前五轉識——眼、耳、鼻、舌、身五個識，因為它們種類相似，所以合起來一起說。
頌說「隨緣現」，是要顯示五識並非時時刻刻都生起。這裡的「緣」，指作意、根、境這幾種條件。意思是：五識在內依託第八根本識，在外還得隨著作意、五根、所緣境這些眾多條件和合，才現得起來。正因為要等緣湊齊，五識的生起才「或俱或不俱」——有時幾個一齊起，有時不一齊起；外緣湊得齊的，現起就有的快、有的慢。就像水上的波，隨著風等緣的多少，起得有多有少。這一類用法作譬喻的話，經裡已經講得很詳細了。
為什麼五識停的時候多、起的時候少？因為前五識的行相粗顯而躁動，它所要藉的眾緣常常湊不齊，所以現起的時候少、不起的時候多。第六意識雖然也粗動，但它所藉的緣沒有一刻不具足，只在碰上『違逆的緣』（也就是下面要講的無心五位）時才偶爾不起。第七、第八這兩個識行相微細，所要藉的緣一切時都有，所以根本沒有什麼緣障能讓它們完全不現行。
換個角度再說一遍：前五識自己不能起思慮，只能朝「外門」轉、去緣外面的五境，而且要藉很多緣，所以間斷的時候多、現行的時候少。第六意識則能自己起思慮，通『內門、外門』兩頭轉——內可緣法境、外可緣諸境，不必藉那麼多緣；除了下面要說的那五種位以外，意識常能現起，所以它間斷得少、現起得多。正因為這樣，頌裡才不把「隨緣現」這句話安在意識上——「隨緣現」是專就五識說的。
乙、意識唯一會停掉的五種位
頌說意識除了「五位」以外恒常現起。哪五位？就是「生無想天」等五者：無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕。下面逐一細講。
一、生在無想天
「無想天」是說：修無想定的人，靠著厭患粗想的力量，生到那層天裡，違害了「不恒行」的心和心所——也就是前六識及其心所；這一違害以「想」的滅為首，所以叫「無想天」。因此前六轉識在那層天裡都斷了、不現行。
關於這天裡到底有沒有六識，論主攤開了好幾說。
一說：那天裡常常沒有六識。理據是聖教說那天「無轉識」、又說那天『只有有色的支（沒有心支）』、又說那天是「無心地」。
又一說：那天的眾生到『將要命終』的時候，必定先起轉識然後才命終——因為他臨終必起對下界的「潤生」之愛。《瑜伽》說『後想生起以後，這些有情就從那天沒落』，正可作證。至於前面說那天「無轉識」，那是約『長時段』（多分的時間）說的，不是說徹頭徹尾都沒有。
又一說：那天連「初受生」的時候也有轉識——因為他在「中有」位必定起潤生煩惱，又像其餘各趣的「本有」位最初也必有轉識。《瑜伽》說『若生到那天，只是『入』而『不起』，等想若再生，就從那天沒落』；既然說「入」，那他「本有」之初若沒有轉識，怎麼叫得上「入」呢？要先有轉識、後來才沒有，這才叫「入無想」啊。
再有一說補充得更細：聖教〈決擇分〉說『凡是『生得』的心、心所滅掉，才叫無想』。這句話的用意，是要顯示那天「本有」之初，有一種「異熟生」的轉識，靠宿世因緣力暫時起一下，此後就不再生。由這『暫起後不再生』，引起了異熟無記在分位上的差別，才說它叫「無想」——就像用善法引生無想、滅盡二定，所以那二定也叫做「善」一樣。如果不是這樣（那天的轉識一切時都不行），那論裡『只是『生得』的心心所滅』這句話就講不通了——既然全都不行，又何必特別揀出「生得」的來說？所以那天初位的轉識仍會暫時起一下。
無想天只在第四靜慮（第四禪）裡有。因為下地（初、二、三禪）的想太粗動、難以斷除；上地（無色界）又根本沒有「無想」這種異熟處。也就是在這第四靜慮裡，能引發「無想定」的那一念思，能感得那天的異熟果。
二、無想定（無心二定之一）
頌說「及無心二定」，指的是「無想定」和「滅盡定」這兩個——這兩定都沒有六識現行，所以叫「無心」。
「無想定」是說：有凡夫已經伏住了「遍淨天」（第三禪）的貪、卻還沒伏住其上（第四禪）的染，靠著「出離想」（厭患想的那念心）作先導的作意，讓「不恒行」的心、心所（也就是前六識及其心所）滅掉，這一滅以「想」滅為首，所以立「無想」之名；又因為它能讓身安和，所以也叫做「定」。
修這個定，依品有三等。下品修的人，這一生必定退失，不能很快重新引這定現前，往後生到那天，不甚光淨、形色廣大，而且必定中途夭折。中品修的人，這一生不一定退，就算退了也能很快重引現前，往後生到那天，雖然甚光淨、形色廣大，卻還沒到最極，雖有中夭的可能但不決定。上品修的人，這一生必不退，往後生到那天，最極光淨、形色廣大，必無中夭，要窮盡壽量之後才殞沒。
這無想定只屬第四靜慮。又只是「善」性，因為它是被善法（出離想等）所引起的。下地、上地都沒有這定，理由如前面說過的。它在「四業」當中通「三業」——除了「順現受業」（不感現世的受報）以外，其餘順次生受、順後次受、順不定受三者都通。
這定起的處所，論主也有兩說。一說：這定只在欲界（人中）起修——因為要靠諸外道言說的教授才引得起，又因為人趣裡慧解極為猛利。又一說：在欲界先修習過了，往後生到色界也能引這定現前——只除了已生無想天的人（他已得究竟果）。這定是由『厭患想、欣求那天果』而入的，所以只是「有漏」，不是聖者所起。
三、滅盡定（無心二定之二）
「滅盡定」是說：有「無學」聖者或「有學」聖者，已經伏除或永離了「無所有處」（無色界第三）的貪，其上「非想非非想處」的貪則不定（或伏或未伏），靠著「止息想」（息滅想的作意）作先導，讓「不恒行」的前六識、連同「恒行染污」的第七末那，這些心、心所都滅掉，所以立「滅盡」之名；又因為能讓身安和，也叫做「定」。由於它偏重厭患「受、想」二者，也叫「滅受想定」。
修這定也依品有三等。下品修的人這一生必退、不能很快重引現前；中品修的人這一生不一定退、就算退了也能很快重引現前；上品修的人畢竟不退。
這定初修時必定要依「有頂」（非想非非想處）——以「遊觀無漏」作加行而入，因為它在「九次第定」裡排在最後。雖然所依的是有頂地，它的體卻是「無漏」所攝。一旦修這定已得自在，那麼在其餘各地的心後也能讓它現前。這定雖屬「道諦」所攝，卻是「非學非無學」所攝（不繫在學位、無學位），因為它相似於涅槃。
這定最初生起只在人趣裡——因為要靠佛及弟子的言說力才引得起，又因為人中慧解極猛利；其後在上二界（色界、無色界）也能讓它現前，《鄔陀夷經》就是這事的確證，無色界也叫「意成天」（仍有意成之身可起這定）。
這裡牽出一個關鍵：對「藏識」（阿賴耶識）這教法還不能信受的人，若生到無色界就不敢起這滅盡定——因為他怕無色界裡既沒有色身、心又滅盡，那不就成了斷滅嗎？而已經信受藏識教法的人，生到無色界也能讓這定現前——因為他了知有藏識恒恒相續、不會斷滅。
還要曉得：必須斷盡三界「見所斷」的惑（也就是要先入見道、成了聖者），才能起這滅盡定——凡夫伏不了「有頂」的心、心所；而且這定微妙，要證得『我空、法空』二空、隨其所應由「後得智」引發才行。
至於『斷到什麼程度才初起這定』，論主又有兩說。一說：在下八地（除有頂以外）的「修所斷」惑裡，要把欲界惑全斷、其餘地的惑或伏或斷，然後才能初起這定——因為欲界惑的種子善惡二性繁雜、障定的力量強；所以只說「不還果」、三乘「無學」以及諸菩薩能得這定，他們隨其所應、生上八地都能在後面起這定。又一說：要斷盡下面四地（欲界及初、二、三禪）的修所斷惑、其餘地或伏或斷，然後才能初起這定——因為跟「變異受」（苦樂等）相俱的煩惱種子障定的力量強；他們隨其所應、生上五地（第四禪及無色四地）都能在後面起這定。
這裡有個問難：若只是「伏」住下地惑就能起這定，後來又不斷那惑就退、卻生到上地去了，那豈不是生上地後反而要回頭斷下地的惑（次序顛倒了）？回答：就算生上以後再斷下也沒有過失——因為生上地的人，本來就能斷他下地末那的俱生惑，這是有例可循的。話雖如此，「不還」聖者對治的力量強，在正潤生的時候並不起現行煩惱，只是由惑的「種子」潤生到上地；他所伏的惑雖有退、有不退，卻並沒有『伏著下地惑就生上地』這回事（不還必先斷盡下惑才生上），所以並不會犯『生上卻回頭斷下』的顛倒過失。
還有菩薩這一路的差別。若諸菩薩先在二乘位已得滅盡定、後來迴小向大的，那在一切位中都能起這定。若不是這種（不是從二乘迴心的）菩薩，那就有的要到第七地滿心，才能永伏一切煩惱——雖然還沒永斷欲界修惑，卻『如同已斷』一般，能起這定；論說『已入遠行地（第七地），菩薩才能現起滅盡定』可作證。也有菩薩從初地就能永伏一切煩惱（像阿羅漢那樣），他在十地中都能起這定——經說『菩薩在前六地中也能現起滅盡定』可作證。
四、極重睡眠 · 五、極重悶絕
頌說無心的「睡眠與悶絕」，指的是有『極重的睡眠』和『極重的悶絕』，能讓前六識都不現行（所以才收進無心五位；並不是說一切睡眠、悶絕都是無心）。
由疲極等緣所引起的那種身位，違害前六識、讓它們不行，所以叫「極重睡眠」。要注意：這種睡眠的時候，其實連「睡眠」這個心所的自體都沒有了（這時六識已滅，睡眠心所也談不上），只因為這身位『相似於睡眠』，才假借「睡眠」之名來說。由風、熱等緣所引起的那種身位，也違害六識，所以叫「極重悶絕」。或者說，這睡眠、悶絕兩者其實都是「觸處」（身根所對）的少分——屬於身位上的變異。
除了這五位（無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕）以外，意識恒時現起。
六、五位的揀辨——正死正生、六時、三類有情
有人問難：正當死的時候、正當生的時候，意識也是不行的，為什麼頌裡只說「五位」意識不行，不把死、生算進去？
一說：死位、生位其實已經被頌裡「及」「與」這兩個虛字一併顯出來了（隱含在五位之中）。論主破這說：不對。為什麼？因為聖教只說「六時」叫無心——也就是前五位（無想天、無想定、滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕）加上「無餘依」涅槃，並沒有另外把死、生立為無心之時。
那麼正義怎麼說呢？應當說：死位、生位就攝在「悶絕」裡頭，因為它本來就是最極的悶絕位；頌裡的「及」「與」兩字只是顯出五位彼此之間各不相雜（把五位分隔開）。還有一層意思：這五位只是顯『六識斷了以後，仍會依著第八識中各自的種子再起來』（六識還能復生）；正因為要顯『還能再起』，所以頌裡才不把「入無餘依涅槃」算進去——那是永遠不再起的，不是這裡所要說的。
末了把這五位配給三類有情：凡夫有其中四位——除了「滅盡定」（滅定只有聖者得）；聖者只有後三位（滅盡定、睡眠、悶絕，沒有前面無想天、無想定那兩位）；其中如來和「自在菩薩」只得其中一位（就是滅盡定），因為他們沒有「睡眠、悶絕」。
承衍
本節所辨的是前六識何時在、何時不在，後出諸論各有承用。《百法明門論》把本節所辨的前五識與第六意識列入心法八識，又把與五識相應的五遍行——觸、作意、受、想、思——列在心所法之下；其中『作意』一法所以要緊，正因它是本節『隨緣現』之眾緣裡最切近的一支。《唯識三十論頌》的頌十五（五識隨緣現）與頌十六（意識除五位），即本節所釋的本頌，逐頌相承。至於五位無心裡的無想定與滅盡定，《百法》列在心不相應行法，本論〈破法執〉一章已辨其非別有實體——彼處破其實有，此處明其能令識不現行，二說各有所當，並不相違。
We have already settled the substance and function of the three transformers — the eighth (the ripening consciousness), the seventh (the deliberating consciousness), and the first six (the consciousnesses that cognize their fields). Following the verses, this section does three things. First, it explains the conditions under which the first five consciousnesses arise at all (Part A). Then it treats the one consciousness that can in fact "switch off" — the mind-consciousness — in its five states, and from that draws out the questions of how the eight consciousnesses turn at the same time and whether the eight are one or many (Parts B and C). Finally it answers head-on what "the transformation of consciousness" means, and on that basis establishes the thesis of the whole treatise: that everything is consciousness-only (Part D). The three verses expounded here are these. Of the five: "Resting upon the root consciousness, the five consciousnesses manifest according to conditions — sometimes together, sometimes not — like waves resting upon water." Of the mind-consciousness: "It is always arising, except for those born in the heaven of no-perception, the two mindless absorptions, deep sleep, and fainting." And the summation: "These consciousnesses, in their transformation, are the discriminator and the discriminated; because of this, both [self and dharmas] are absent — therefore everything is consciousness-only."
The thesis of this section — "the correct reading of transformation, everything consciousness-only" — has its roots in scripture and treatise alike. The Saṃdhinirmocana Sūtra, in its chapter on the discernment of yoga, sets up just this meaning: the World-Honored One says that "the object cognized by the consciousness I speak of is only what consciousness manifests"; and again that "in this there is no slight dharma able to perceive a slight dharma, yet at the very moment this mind so arises there is just such a reflected image appearing" — "what consciousness cognizes is only what consciousness manifests, and at the mind's arising a reflected image appears" is precisely the scriptural root of verse seventeen of this chapter, "the discriminated and the discriminator, everything consciousness-only"; the treatise's citation, "a scripture says what is cognized is only what consciousness manifests," points to this very sūtra. The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra shows the arising of the first five consciousnesses by an image: "as a bright mirror manifests the images of the many colors; and as a fierce wind stirs the waters of the great ocean, the wind of outer fields buffets the ocean of mind, and the waves of consciousness continue unbroken... and so the body of the five consciousnesses is able to turn forth" — "the bright mirror manifesting images, the wind of outer fields buffeting the ocean of mind, the waves of consciousness unbroken, the five consciousnesses turning forth" is precisely the scriptural root of verse fifteen, "the five consciousnesses manifest according to conditions, like waves resting upon water," showing the waves of the eight consciousnesses turning in dependence on the store consciousness. The treatise-basis lies in the Yogācārabhūmi: its Section on Ascertainment records, in the same words as the Saṃdhinirmocana, "what consciousness cognizes is only what consciousness manifests, and at the mind's arising a reflected image appears," the treatise-basis for "what consciousness-only manifests"; and its Section on the Fundamental Grounds settles that "consciousness is the present discerning of the cognized field" and "consciousness discerns the general aspect of things" — and this sense, that "the discerning nature of consciousness is just its transforming-to-resemble and thereby grasping," is precisely the treatise-basis for verse seventeen, "the transformation of the consciousnesses, the perceiving-aspect named the discriminator, the grasper of aspects." Dharmapāla's blended commentary establishes the thesis of consciousness-only with its scriptural root in the Saṃdhinirmocana and the Laṅkāvatāra, and its treatise-basis in the Yogācārabhūmi — and with that we follow the verse and open the exposition.
A. When the First Five Consciousnesses Arise — Resting on the Root Consciousness, Manifesting According to Conditions, Like Waves Upon Water
The verse says "resting upon the root consciousness." This "root consciousness" is the eighth, the ādāna (appropriating) consciousness. It is called "root" because it is the root from which all the defiled and pure dharmas, and all the consciousnesses, arise. "Resting upon" means that the six evolving consciousnesses all take this eighth consciousness as their shared, intimate support. Kuiji's Notes (the Shuji) draws this out further: the phrase "resting upon the root consciousness" runs through all six evolving consciousnesses, for they all rest upon the eighth, and so it is called a "shared support"; and this resting is of two kinds — resting upon the eighth as seeds, which is the "intimate causal support," and resting upon the eighth as an active consciousness, which is the "dominant-condition support." The "five consciousnesses" are the first five evolving consciousnesses — eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body. Because they are alike in kind, they are spoken of together as a group.
The verse says "manifest according to conditions," and this is meant to show that the five consciousnesses do not arise at every moment. The "conditions" here are such factors as attention, the sense-faculties, and the sense-objects. The point is this: inwardly the five consciousnesses lean on the eighth root consciousness, but outwardly they still require the coming-together of many conditions — attention, the five sense-faculties, and the objects cognized — before they can manifest. Precisely because they must wait for the conditions to assemble, their arising is "sometimes together, sometimes not" — at times several arise at once, at times not all at once; where the outer conditions assemble fully, the manifestation comes, but with some quick and some slow. It is like waves upon water, which rise more or fewer according to how much wind and other conditions there are. This kind of usage, taken as a simile, the scriptures have already set out in detail.
Why are the first five consciousnesses more often at rest and seldom active? Because their mode of operation is coarse, evident, and restless, the many conditions they must borrow often fail to assemble; so the times of their manifestation are few and the times of their non-arising are many. The sixth, the mind-consciousness, though also coarse and active, never lacks the conditions it relies on for a single moment; it fails to arise only when it meets an "adverse condition" — that is, the five mindless states to be explained below. As for the seventh and the eighth, their mode of operation is subtle, and the conditions they require are present at all times; so there is essentially no obstacle of conditions that could make them entirely cease to operate.
To put it from another angle: the first five consciousnesses cannot themselves give rise to deliberation; they can only turn toward the "outer gate" and cognize the five outer fields, and they need many conditions, so their interruptions are many and their activity is slight. The sixth mind-consciousness, by contrast, can itself give rise to deliberation and turns at both the "inner gate" and the "outer gate" — inwardly it can cognize the field of mental objects, outwardly it can cognize all manner of fields — and it need not borrow so many conditions. Apart from the five states to be discussed below, the mind-consciousness is constantly able to manifest, so its interruptions are few and its activity is frequent. It is for just this reason that the verse does not attach the words "manifest according to conditions" to the mind-consciousness — "manifest according to conditions" is said of the five consciousnesses alone.
B. The Five States in Which the Mind-Consciousness Alone Comes to a Stop
The verse says the mind-consciousness is constantly arising "except for the five states." Which five? The five beginning with "born in the heaven of no-perception": the heaven of no-perception, the absorption of no-perception, the absorption of cessation, deep sleep, and fainting. Each is treated in turn below.
One. Born in the Heaven of No-Perception
The "heaven of no-perception" is so called because one who has cultivated the absorption of no-perception, by the force of his revulsion at coarse perception, is born into that heaven, where he suppresses the "non-constant" mind and mental factors — that is, the first six consciousnesses and their mental factors. Because this suppression is headed by the cessation of perception, it is called the "heaven of no-perception." Hence the first six evolving consciousnesses are cut off in that heaven and do not manifest.
As to whether there are any of the six consciousnesses in that heaven at all, the treatise lays out several positions.
One view: in that heaven there is constantly no operation of the six consciousnesses. The grounds are that the sacred teaching says that heaven has "no evolving consciousness," that it has "only the corporeal supports" (no mental support), and that it is a "mindless ground."
Another view: the beings of that heaven, when they are "about to die," must first give rise to evolving consciousness and only then pass away — because at death they necessarily give rise to the craving that "moistens" rebirth in a lower realm. The Yogācārabhūmi, which says "after a later perception arises, these beings then fall from that heaven," can be cited in proof. As for the earlier statement that the heaven has "no evolving consciousness," that is said with respect to the long stretch of time (the greater part), not that there is none from beginning to end.
Another view still: even at the very "first taking of birth" in that heaven there is evolving consciousness — because in the intermediate state one necessarily gives rise to the afflictions that moisten rebirth, and because, as in the "present life" phase of the other destinies, at the very start there must be evolving consciousness. The Yogācārabhūmi says, "if one is born into that heaven, one merely 'enters' and does not 'arise'; when perception is once again born, one falls from that heaven." Since it says "enters," then if there were no evolving consciousness at the start of his present life, how could it be called "entering"? There must first be evolving consciousness and only later its absence — this is what "entering no-perception" means.
And one further view fills this in more finely. The sacred teaching, in the Section on Ascertainment, says, "It is only when the mind and mental factors that are 'born of acquired ripening' cease that it is called no-perception." The intent of this sentence is to show that at the start of one's present life in that heaven there is a kind of evolving consciousness of the "ripening-born" sort, which arises briefly by the force of the causes and conditions of former lives and thereafter is born no more. By this "arising briefly and then being born no more," a phase-difference in the indeterminate ripening is brought about, and so it is called "no-perception" — just as one speaks of the absorption of no-perception and the absorption of cessation being induced by wholesome dharmas, and so those two absorptions are themselves called "wholesome." If it were otherwise (if the evolving consciousness of that heaven did not operate at all times), then the treatise's sentence, "only the mind and mental factors that are 'born of acquired ripening' cease," would make no sense — for if they all failed to operate, why single out the "born of acquired" ones to speak of? So the evolving consciousness at the initial phase in that heaven still arises briefly.
The heaven of no-perception exists only within the fourth meditative absorption (the fourth dhyāna). For in the lower grounds (the first, second, and third dhyānas) perception is too coarse and active to be cut off, and in the higher ground (the formless realm) there is simply no such ripening-place as "no-perception." It is precisely within this fourth absorption that the one thought of intention which can draw forth the "absorption of no-perception" is able to call forth the ripened fruit of that heaven.
Two. The Absorption of No-Perception (One of the Two Mindless Absorptions)
The verse says "and the two mindless absorptions," referring to the "absorption of no-perception" and the "absorption of cessation." In both of these the six consciousnesses do not operate, and so they are called "mindless."
The "absorption of no-perception" is so called because an ordinary person who has already subdued the craving of the "heaven of universal purity" (the third dhyāna) but has not yet subdued the defilement of what lies above it (the fourth dhyāna), led by the attention of the "perception of departure" (the thought that revolts at perception), brings the "non-constant" mind and mental factors — that is, the first six consciousnesses and their mental factors — to cease. Because this cessation is headed by the cessation of perception, the name "no-perception" is set up; and because it can render the body at ease and harmonious, it is also called an "absorption."
In cultivating this absorption there are three grades. One who cultivates the lower grade necessarily loses it in this very life and cannot quickly draw the absorption to manifest again; later, born into that heaven, he is not very luminous and pure, his form is broad and large, and he necessarily dies an untimely death partway through. One who cultivates the middling grade does not necessarily lose it in this life, and even if he does, he can quickly draw it to manifest again; later, born into that heaven, his form, though very luminous and pure and broad and large, has not reached the utmost, and though untimely death is possible it is not certain. One who cultivates the higher grade necessarily does not lose it in this life; later, born into that heaven, he is most luminous and pure, his form broad and large, with no untimely death whatsoever, perishing only after exhausting the full span of life.
This absorption of no-perception belongs only to the fourth meditative absorption. It is also only "wholesome" in nature, because it is induced by wholesome dharmas (the perception of departure and the like). Neither the lower grounds nor the higher ones possess this absorption, for the reasons stated before. Among the "four kinds of karma" it pertains to three — excepting "karma to be experienced in the present" (it does not call forth a ripening to be experienced in this very life), it pertains to the other three: karma to be experienced in the next life, karma to be experienced in a life thereafter, and karma of indeterminate time.
As to the place where this absorption is first cultivated, the treatise gives two positions. One view: this absorption is cultivated only in the desire realm (among humans) — because it must be drawn forth by relying on the instruction set out in the teachings of the various non-Buddhists, and because among humans the keenness of understanding is extremely sharp. Another view: having first practiced it in the desire realm, one can also, later born into the form realm, draw this absorption to manifest — excepting only one already born in the heaven of no-perception (who has already attained the final fruit). This absorption is entered through "revulsion at perception and longing for the fruit of that heaven," and so it is merely "contaminated," not something a noble one gives rise to.
Three. The Absorption of Cessation (The Second of the Two Mindless Absorptions)
The "absorption of cessation" is so called because a noble one of the "beyond-training" stage, or one of the "still-training" stage, who has already subdued or permanently left behind the craving of the "sphere of nothingness" (the third sphere of the formless realm) — the craving of the sphere above it, "neither-perception-nor-non-perception," being indeterminate (either subdued or not) — led by the "perception of quieting" (the attention that stills perception), brings to cease the "non-constant" first six consciousnesses, together with the "constantly operating defiled" seventh, the manas — bringing all these mind and mental factors to cease. Hence the name "cessation" is set up; and because it can render the body at ease and harmonious, it too is called an "absorption." Since it lays special weight on the revulsion at the two — feeling and perception — it is also called the "absorption of the cessation of feeling and perception."
In cultivating this absorption there are likewise three grades. One who cultivates the lower grade necessarily loses it in this life and cannot quickly draw it to manifest again; one who cultivates the middling grade does not necessarily lose it in this life, and even if he does, he can quickly draw it to manifest again; one who cultivates the higher grade does not, in the end, lose it.
This absorption, when first cultivated, must rely on the "summit of existence" (the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception) — one enters it taking "roaming contemplation in the uncontaminated" as the preparatory practice, because in the "nine successive absorptions" it stands last. Though the ground it relies on is the summit of existence, its own substance pertains to the "uncontaminated." Once one has gained mastery in cultivating this absorption, one can also bring it to manifest after the mind on any of the other grounds. Though this absorption pertains to the "truth of the path," it is held to be "neither of training nor beyond training" (not tied to the stage of training or the stage beyond training), because it resembles nirvāṇa.
This absorption, when it first arises, occurs only among humans — because it must be drawn forth by the power of the words of the Buddha and his disciples, and because among humans the keenness of understanding is extremely sharp; thereafter, in the upper two realms (the form realm and the formless realm), one can also bring it to manifest. The Udāyin Sūtra is the firm proof of this, and the formless realm is also called the "heaven of mind-made bodies" (where there is still a mind-made body that can give rise to this absorption).
Here a key point is drawn out. One who cannot yet accept the teaching of the "store consciousness" (the ālaya-vijñāna), if born into the formless realm, will not dare to give rise to this absorption of cessation — because he fears that in the formless realm, where there is no physical body and the mind too is brought to cessation, would not this amount to annihilation? But one who has already accepted the teaching of the store consciousness can, even when born into the formless realm, bring this absorption to manifest — because he understands that there is a store consciousness which continues moment after moment and is never cut off.
One must also understand this: one must have exhausted the afflictions "to be cut off by the path of seeing" of all three realms (that is, one must first have entered the path of seeing and become a noble one) before one can give rise to this absorption of cessation — an ordinary person cannot subdue the mind and mental factors of the "summit of existence." Moreover, this absorption is subtle and wondrous; one must realize the twofold emptiness — the emptiness of self and the emptiness of dharmas — and draw it forth, as the case may be, by means of the "subsequently attained wisdom."
As to "what degree of cutting-off is required before this absorption first arises," the treatise again gives two positions. One view: among the afflictions "to be cut off by the path of cultivation" on the lower eight grounds (excepting the summit of existence), one must cut off the afflictions of the desire realm entirely and subdue or cut off the afflictions of the other grounds, before one can first give rise to this absorption — because the seeds of the desire-realm afflictions are wholesome and unwholesome, mixed and tangled, and their power to obstruct absorption is strong. Hence it is said that only those of the "non-returner" fruit, the "beyond-training" of the three vehicles, and the bodhisattvas can attain this absorption, and they, as the case may be, can give rise to it afterward when born on any of the upper eight grounds. Another view: one must exhaust the afflictions "to be cut off by the path of cultivation" of the lower four grounds (the desire realm and the first, second, and third dhyānas), and subdue or cut off those of the other grounds, before one can first give rise to this absorption — because the seeds of the afflictions that accompany "variable feeling" (pain, pleasure, and the like) have a strong power to obstruct absorption. They, as the case may be, can give rise to it afterward when born on any of the upper five grounds (the fourth dhyāna and the four formless grounds).
Here there is a challenge. If merely "subduing" the afflictions of a lower ground suffices to give rise to this absorption, and one then, without cutting off those afflictions, loses the absorption and yet is born into an upper ground — would this not mean that, after being born in the upper ground, one must turn back to cut off the afflictions of the lower ground (the order reversed)? The reply: even if, after being born in the upper ground, one then cuts off the lower, there is no fault — because one born on an upper ground is, by nature, able to cut off the innate afflictions of the manas of his lower ground, and there is precedent for this. That said, the "non-returner" noble one has strong power of countering, and at the time of properly moistening rebirth he does not give rise to active afflictions at all; it is only by the "seeds" of the afflictions that rebirth is moistened into the upper ground. Of the afflictions he has subdued, some are lost and some are not, yet there is no such case as "being born into an upper ground while merely having subdued the afflictions of the lower" (the non-returner necessarily cuts off the lower afflictions entirely before being born above), and so he does not commit the reversed fault of "being born above and then turning back to cut off the lower."
There is, further, the distinction proper to the bodhisattva's path. If a bodhisattva first attained the absorption of cessation while in the stage of the two vehicles and later turned from the lesser toward the great, then he can give rise to this absorption in all stages. If he is not such a bodhisattva (not one who has turned his mind from the two vehicles), then some must reach the consummate mind of the seventh ground before they can permanently subdue all afflictions — and though they have not yet permanently cut off the desire-realm afflictions of cultivation, it is "as if already cut off," and they can give rise to this absorption; the treatise's saying, "Having entered the Far-Reaching Ground (the seventh ground), the bodhisattva can then bring forth the absorption of cessation," can be cited in proof. There are also bodhisattvas who, from the first ground, can permanently subdue all afflictions (as an arhat does), and these can give rise to this absorption throughout the ten grounds — the scripture's saying, "In the first six grounds the bodhisattva can also bring forth the absorption of cessation," can be cited in proof.
Four. Extremely Heavy Sleep · Five. Extremely Heavy Fainting
The verse speaks of the mindless states of "deep sleep and fainting," referring to "extremely heavy sleep" and "extremely heavy fainting," which can cause the first six consciousnesses all to not operate (which is why they are gathered into the five mindless states; it is not that all sleep and all fainting are mindless).
That bodily condition brought on by such conditions as utter exhaustion harms the first six consciousnesses and renders them inoperative, and so it is called "extremely heavy sleep." Note this carefully: at the time of such sleep, even the very substance of the mental factor "sleep" is gone (since the six consciousnesses have here ceased, there is no "sleep" mental factor to speak of); it is only because this bodily condition "resembles sleep" that the name "sleep" is borrowed to speak of it. That bodily condition brought on by such conditions as wind and heat likewise harms the six consciousnesses, and so it is called "extremely heavy fainting." Or one may say that these two — sleep and fainting — are both a small portion of the "field of touch" (what the body-faculty meets), pertaining to alterations in the bodily condition.
Apart from these five states (the heaven of no-perception, the absorption of no-perception, the absorption of cessation, sleep, and fainting), the mind-consciousness arises at all times.
Six. Sorting Out the Five States — The Moment of Dying and the Moment of Being Born, the Six Times, the Three Classes of Beings
Someone raises a challenge: at the very moment of dying and the very moment of being born, the mind-consciousness too is inoperative — why does the verse speak only of "five states" in which the mind-consciousness is inoperative, and not count dying and being born among them?
One view: the states of dying and being born have, in fact, already been shown in the verse by the two particles "and" and "with" (they are implicit within the five states). The treatise refutes this view: that is wrong. Why? Because the sacred teaching speaks of only "six times" as mindless — namely, the first five states (the heaven of no-perception, the absorption of no-perception, the absorption of cessation, sleep, and fainting) plus the nirvāṇa "without remainder" — and does not separately set up dying and being born as times that are mindless.
Then how does the settled (correct) reading put it? One should say: the states of dying and being born are subsumed under "fainting," because each is itself the utmost state of fainting; the verse's two particles "and" and "with" merely show that the five states do not mingle with one another (they set the five states apart). And there is a further sense: these five states only show that "after the six consciousnesses are cut off, they will still arise again according to their respective seeds within the eighth consciousness" (the six consciousnesses can revive). It is precisely in order to show "they can arise again" that the verse does not count "entering nirvāṇa without remainder" among them — for that is a never-again-arising, which is not what is meant to be spoken of here.
Finally, the five states are allotted to the three classes of beings. The ordinary person has four of them — excepting the "absorption of cessation" (cessation is attained only by noble ones). The noble one has only the latter three (the absorption of cessation, sleep, and fainting, lacking the earlier two of the heaven of no-perception and the absorption of no-perception). Among these, the Tathāgata and the "sovereign bodhisattvas" have only one of them (namely the absorption of cessation), because they have neither "sleep" nor "fainting."
考據Apparatus
〔所釋之頌〕第十五頌至第十六頌
一、科判定位
| 科判 | 此章之位 |
|---|---|
| 三能變 | 初能變（阿賴耶）· 第二能變（末那）· 第三能變（了境）皆已廣辯 |
| 此章內 | 五識現起分位（頌十五）· 意識五位無心（頌十六） |
| 所釋頌 | 《唯識三十論頌》頌十五全 · 頌十六全 |
三能變相既已廣分別，本章上承「為自所變二分所依」一語，先辯前六識之現起分位：五識隨緣而現，意識常起而有五位暫無。八識俱轉之料簡與正解識變，別為次章。
二、源頌 · 義理脈絡
依止根本識，五識隨緣現，或俱或不俱，如濤波依水。 〔T1586 0060c05–0060c06〕 意識常現起，除生無想天，及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕。 〔T1586 0060c07–0060c08〕
頌十五明前五識之現起分位——依止根本識、隨緣而現、或俱或不俱、如濤波依水；頌十六明第六意識常現起而除五位——生無想天、無想定、滅盡定、極重睡眠、悶絕。二頌合明前六識何時在、何時不在。
三、經論宗依（經證 → 論本）
經證
由彼影像唯是識故。善男子！我說識所緣，唯識所現故。 〔解深密經·分別瑜伽品 T676 0698b01–0698b02〕
此中無有少法能見少法；然即此心如是生時，即有如是影像顯現。 〔解深密經 T676 0698b04–0698b05〕
譬如明鏡，現眾色像。大慧！猶如猛風，吹大海水。外境界風，飄蕩心海，識浪不斷……故五識身轉。 〔楞伽阿跋多羅寶經 T670 0484a16–0484a19〕
《解深密》以「識所緣唯識所現」「無有少法能見少法然即此心如是生時即有如是影像顯現」直立唯識——本章頌十七『分別所分別、一切唯識』之經本，本論引『契經說所緣唯識所現』即此；《楞伽》以『明鏡現像、外境界風飄蕩心海、識浪不斷』顯八識浪依藏識而轉、五識身轉，為頌十五『五識隨緣現、如濤波依水』之經本。
論本（瑜伽師地論 T1579）
我說識所緣、唯識所現故……此中無有少法能見少法；然即此心如是生時、即有如是影像顯現。 〔T1579·攝決擇分 0724a06–0724a09〕
識，謂現前了別所緣境界。 〔T1579·本地分 0280b09〕
又識能了別事之總相。 〔T1579·本地分 0291b21〕
《瑜伽師地論》〈攝決擇分〉錄『識所緣唯識所現、心生影像顯現』（與《解深密》同文，法相本地之唯識所現論本）；〈本地分〉定『識＝現前了別所緣境界』『識了別事之總相』（頌十七『諸識轉變、見分名分別、能取相』之論本——識之了別性即能變似而能取）。護法糅釋成立唯識所宗，其經在解深密、楞伽，其論在瑜伽師地論。
四、本論釋要（護法糅釋 · T1585）
五識 · 所依
論曰：「根本識」者，阿陀那識，染、淨諸識生根本故。「依止」者，謂前六轉識以根本識為共親依。 〔T1585 0037a17–a19〕
五識 · 隨緣現
「五識」者，謂前五轉識，種類相似，故總說之。「隨緣現」言顯非常起，「緣」謂作意、根、境等緣……由此或俱或不俱起，外緣合者有頓、漸故。 〔T1585 0037a19–a23〕
五位 · 列名
五位者何？「生無想」等。 〔T1585 0037b03–b04〕
八識 · 俱轉
是故八識一切有情心與末那二，恒俱轉；若起第六，則三俱轉；餘隨緣合，起一至五，則四俱轉，乃至八俱，是謂略說識俱轉義。 〔T1585 0038b06–b09〕
八識 · 一異
八識自性不可言定一，行相、所依、緣、相應異故……亦非定異，經說八識如水波等，無差別故；定異應非因果性故。 〔T1585 0038c04–c07〕
識變 · 立轉變名
論曰：「是諸識」者，謂前所說三能變識及彼心所，皆能變似見、相二分，立「轉變」名。所變見分說名「分別」，能取相故；所變相分名「所分別」，見所取故。 〔T1585 0038c18–c21〕
識變 · 由此彼皆無
由此正理，彼實我、法離識所變皆定非有，離能、所取無別物故，非有實物離二相故。是故一切有為、無為，若實、若假，皆不離識。「唯」言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等。 〔T1585 0038c21–c25〕
識變 · 第二解（虛妄分別）
或轉變者，謂諸內識轉似我、法外境相現。此能轉變即名分別，虛妄分別為自性故，謂即三界心及心所。 〔T1585 0038c25–c27〕
唯識義成 · 契中道
「唯」既不遮不離識法，故真空等亦是有性。由斯遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道。 〔T1585 0039a02–a04〕
成立唯識 · 唯識言深意
「識」言總顯一切有情各有八識、六位心所，所變相、見、分位差別及彼空理所顯真如……如是諸法皆不離識，總立識名。「唯」言，但遮愚夫所執定離諸識實有色等。 〔T1585 0039c20–c25〕
要義：本論於五識以『依本識、隨緣現』明其現起分位（行相麁動、所藉緣不具，故起少斷多）；意識內外門轉、不藉多緣，唯五位（無想天·無想定·滅盡定·睡眠·悶絕）無心時不起。八識料簡，俱轉者『心與末那恒二，加六成三，加五至八』；一異者『不可定一（行相所依等異）、不可定異（如水波無差別、定異失因果）』，依世俗立差別、真勝義中心言絕。正解識變，本論二復次：初解『諸識變似見相二分名轉變，見分名分別（能取）、相分名所分別（見所取），離二取無實我法』；後解『內識轉似我法外境相現、能轉變即名分別、以虛妄分別為自性』。「唯」字遮離識實物、不遮不離識之心所真如，故遠離增減契中道。結成『識言總顯八識六位心所相見分位真如、皆不離識』，定應信一切唯識。
五、諸家異釋（窺基《述記》T1830）
「依止根本識」者，此句通下第六識，二俱依止第八識故，顯其共依。然依止有二：一、依種子第八識，即是因緣親依……二、依現行第八，即是增上緣依。 〔T1830 0475b13–b17〕
安惠解云：何名轉變？謂是三識自體皆轉變似見、相二分，識自體分名為轉變。轉變者，變現義……或轉變者，是變異義……護法菩薩解云：又轉變者，是改轉義，謂一識體改轉為二相起，異於自體……今取自體能轉變也。 〔T1830 0487a06–a16〕
下難陀等第二解……言轉變者，即前三能變內見分識，能轉依他相分，似外境相現，唯有見、相之內識，都無所變之外境……此依《攝論》等說唯二義，不說自證分師義，前師別也。 〔T1830 0487b26–c03〕
窺基於「依止根本識」剖二依（依種子第八為因緣親依、依現行第八為增上緣依）、判此句通前六識共依。於「轉變」一語列古德二系：安惠以『變現／變異』釋轉變（自體現似二相、實非二相，即遍計所執似依他有，理實無）；護法以「改轉」釋轉變（一識體改轉為見相二相、見有能取用、相有質礙用，取自體能轉變），此本論初解所宗。後難陀等「第二解」則以『見分識轉依他相分似外境現、唯見相二分、依《攝論》立唯二義』，與護法四分義別。安惠唯一分、難陀二分、護法四分諸師立分之異，《述記》逐處詳之。
六、譯名 · 古譯對讀（玄奘 ↔ 真諦《轉識論》）
| 義 | 玄奘《成唯識論》 | 真諦《轉識論》 |
|---|---|---|
| 識變·能所 | 是諸識轉變·分別·所分別 | 此識轉不離兩義（「此識轉不離兩義，一能分別、二所分別」〔0062b20〕） |
| 唯識成立 | 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識 | 唯識義得成（「所分別既無，能分別亦無……以是義故唯識義得成」〔0062b20–b22〕） |
| 五位無心 | 除生無想天，及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕 | 離六處（「離無想定及無想天、熟眠不夢、醉悶、絕心、暫死」〔0062b18–b19〕） |
| 識俱轉·喻 | 如濤波依水 | 如眾浪同集一水（「如眾像影俱現鏡中，亦如眾浪同集一水」〔0062b16–b17〕） |
玄奘頌作「分別、所分別」，真諦《轉識論》作「能分別、所分別」，二者皆以能取所取雙泯成立唯識；「五位無心」真諦列為「六處」（兼攝暫死），「識俱轉」之喻玄奘作「濤波依水」、真諦作『眾浪同集一水／眾像現鏡』——古譯於分位開合一分詳略。
七、術語
識轉變（vijñāna-pariṇāma）— 諸識自體變似見、相二分；本論立此為「一切唯識」之正釋。 分別 · 所分別（vikalpa · vikalpita）— 能取之見分（能取相）· 所取之相分（見所取）。 根本識（mūla-vijñāna）— 阿陀那識（第八），染淨諸識生起之根本、前六轉識之共親依。 五位無心 — 無想天 · 無想定 · 滅盡定 · 睡眠 · 悶絕；意識於此五位不現行。 虛妄分別（abhūta-parikalpa）— 三界心及心所，能轉似我法外境相現者，識轉變之自性。 唯識 — 「識」總顯八識·六位心所·相見二分·分位·真如皆不離識；「唯」但遮離識實有之外境。 〔梵文為古德所傳發音輔助。〕
八、互讀（唯識系次第：百法 → 三十頌 → 二十論 → 辯中邊論 → 攝大乘論）
- 百法：心法·八識（前五·第六·第七·第八，本章八識俱轉一異之所列）；心所·五遍行（五識相應）·六位心所（『識言總顯六位心所』）。
- 三十頌：頌十五（五識隨緣現）· 頌十六（意識除五位）· 頌十七（識轉變·一切唯識）——逐頌姊妹。
- 二十論：正相關·成立唯識之專論。「安立大乘三界唯識……內識生時似外境現」〔T1590 0074b27–b29〕為『諸識轉變似外境相現』之張本；「處時定如夢，身不定如鬼，同見膿河等，如夢損有用」〔0074c15–c16〕正對本章『處時身用定不定如夢境』釋疑及四智『相違識相智（鬼人天所見各異）』。
- 辯中邊論：辯相品·虛妄分別（「虛妄分別有，於此二都無，此中唯有空，於彼亦有此」即本論成立唯識所引慈尊二頌之本，染依他·中道）。
- 攝大乘論：所知相分·唯識（依他起·唯識性·三性；本論識變第二解「依《攝論》說唯二義」即本於此）。
章內：阿賴耶識章（初能變·根本識·五識所依）· 末那章（第二能變·恒俱轉之一）· 了境章（第三能變·前六識·五識現起·五位無心皆於此章後段）。
九、校本定位
頌 T1586〔0060c05·0060c06·0060c07·0060c08·0061a02·0061a03〕· 本論 T1585 正解識變諸段〔五識 0037a17–a23·五位 0037b03–b04·俱轉 0038b06–b09·一異 0038c04–c07·識變 0038c18–c27·中道 0039a02–a04·唯識言 0039c20–c25〕· 述記 T1830〔五識依止 0475b13–b17·轉變二義 0487a06–a16·難陀第二解 0487b26–0487c03〕· 《轉識論》T1587〔0062b16–b22〕。 〔經證〕解深密 T676〔0698b01–0698b05〕· 楞伽 T670〔0484a16–0484a19〕。〔互讀〕二十論 T1590〔0074b27–b29·0074c15–c16〕。〔論本〕瑜伽師地論 T1579〔本地分 0280b09·0291b21·攝決擇分 0724a06–0724a09〕。
1. Position in Kuiji's Structural Outline
| Outline | This chapter's place |
|---|---|
| The three transformers | the first transformer (the ālaya) · the second transformer (the manas) · the third transformer (object-discerning) have all been treated at length → the general sorting-out of the consciousnesses (turning together · same-or-different) → correctly resolving consciousness-transformation · establishing consciousness-only |
| Within this chapter | the modes of the five consciousnesses' arising (verse 15) · the mental consciousness's five mindless states (verse 16) · the eight consciousnesses turning together · same-or-different · correctly resolving consciousness-transformation (verse 17) · resolving the several objections so as to clear the sense of consciousness-only |
| Verses expounded | Triṃśikā verse 15 in full · verse 16 in full · verse 17 in full |
The marks of the three transformers having been treated and distinguished at length, this chapter takes up from the phrase "the support of the two parts each [consciousness] transforms into" and goes on, with verse 17's "these consciousnesses transform — discrimination and the discriminated," to set up squarely the thesis "all is consciousness-only" — the pivot of the whole treatise's thirty verses is made firm in this one verse.
2. Source verses · doctrinal context
依止根本識，五識隨緣現，或俱或不俱，如濤波依水。 〔T1586 0060c05–0060c06〕
tr. "Resting on the root consciousness, the five consciousnesses appear as conditions allow — now together, now not together — like waves resting on water."
意識常現起，除生無想天，及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕。 〔T1586 0060c07–0060c08〕
tr. "The mental consciousness arises constantly, save for [one] born in the heaven of no-conception, and the two mindless concentrations, [deep] sleep, and fainting."
是諸識轉變，分別、所分別，由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。 〔T1586 0061a02–0061a03〕
tr. "These consciousnesses transform [into] discrimination and the discriminated; because of this, those [self and dharmas] are alike non-existent, and so all is consciousness-only."
Verses 15 and 16 show the modes of arising of the first six consciousnesses (the five consciousnesses [arising] as conditions allow, the mental consciousness [arising always] save in the five [mindless] states), while verse 17 then correctly explains "consciousness-transformation" and so establishes consciousness-only: the several consciousnesses, in their own substance, transform into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and seen; the grasping seeing-part is named "discrimination," the grasped image-part is named "the discriminated"; apart from these two parts a real self and real dharmas are decidedly both non-existent, and so "all is consciousness-only." The sorting-out of modes in the first two verses lays the ground for "establishing consciousness-only" (there is no object outside consciousness; only the inner consciousness transforms and appears as conditions allow), while the third verse correctly answers the question "how, in dependence on what consciousness transforms, are self and dharmas conventionally posited, and how is there only consciousness."
| Verse-phrase | Doctrinal gate | What it settles |
|---|---|---|
| 依止根本識 resting on the root consciousness | the support of the five consciousnesses | the first six evolving consciousnesses take the eighth root consciousness (ādāna) as their common intimate support |
| 五識隨緣現 · 或俱或不俱 the five consciousnesses appear as conditions allow · now together, now not | the arising of the five consciousnesses | inwardly they rest on the root consciousness; outwardly they appear only when attention, faculty, object, and the manifold conditions come together — hence they arise but seldom; like waves resting on water |
| 意識常現起，除…… the mental consciousness arises constantly, save… | the modes of the mental consciousness | the mental consciousness turns by both inner and outer doors, not borrowing many conditions; only in the five mindless states does it not arise |
| 是諸識轉變 these consciousnesses transform | consciousness-transformation | the three transforming consciousnesses and their mental factors transform into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and image; this is given the name "transformation" |
| 分別、所分別 discrimination and the discriminated | grasper and grasped | the seeing-part transformed-into is named "discrimination" (the grasper of the mark) · the image-part transformed-into is named "the discriminated" (what the seeing grasps) |
| 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識 because of this they are alike non-existent, so all is consciousness-only | the establishing of consciousness-only | apart from grasper and grasped there is no separate thing, and real self and dharmas are decidedly non-existent; all is consciousness-only, and departing from the two extremes of addition and subtraction it accords with the middle way |
For the term "transformation," the root treatise sets out two successive expositions (first Dharmapāla's explanation, then Nanda et al.'s); Sthiramati has a separate explanation of "manifesting / altering" (seen in full in heading 5). The various sortings-out — the five mindless states, the eight consciousnesses turning together, same-or-different — the root treatise lays out place by place as several "one view holds…," taking Dharmapāla as correct, the whole given in the Exposition.
3. Scriptural and treatise grounding (scripture → root śāstra)
Scriptural witnesses
由彼影像唯是識故。善男子！我說識所緣，唯識所現故。 〔Saṃdhinirmocana · Yoga-discernment chapter, T676 0698b01–0698b02〕
tr. "Because that image is consciousness alone. Good son! I teach that the object-support of consciousness is only what consciousness manifests."
此中無有少法能見少法；然即此心如是生時，即有如是影像顯現。 〔Saṃdhinirmocana T676 0698b04–0698b05〕
tr. "Herein there is no slightest dharma able to see [any] slightest dharma; yet just as this mind arises thus, there is just such an image manifesting forth."
譬如明鏡，現眾色像。大慧！猶如猛風，吹大海水。外境界風，飄蕩心海，識浪不斷……故五識身轉。 〔Laṅkāvatāra T670 0484a16–0484a19〕
tr. "As a bright mirror manifests the manifold form-images. Mahāmati! As a fierce wind blows upon the great sea-water — the wind of outer objects sets the mind-sea tossing, and the waves of consciousness do not cease… and so the body of the five consciousnesses turns."
The Saṃdhinirmocana, with "the object-support of consciousness is only what consciousness manifests" and "there is no slightest dharma able to see [any] slightest dharma; when the mind arises, the image manifests," sets up consciousness-only directly — the scriptural root of this chapter's verse 17, "discrimination and the discriminated · all is consciousness-only," which the root treatise cites as "the sūtra says the object-support is only what consciousness manifests"; the Laṅkāvatāra, with "the bright mirror manifesting images · the wind of outer objects setting the mind-sea tossing · the waves of consciousness not ceasing," discloses that the waves of the eight consciousnesses turn in dependence on the store-consciousness and that the body of the five consciousnesses turns — the scriptural root of verse 15's "the five consciousnesses appear as conditions allow · like waves resting on water."
Root śāstra (Yogācārabhūmi T1579)
我說識所緣、唯識所現故……此中無有少法能見少法；然即此心如是生時、即有如是影像顯現。 〔T1579 · Viniścaya-saṃgrahaṇī 0724a06–0724a09〕
tr. "I teach that the object-support of consciousness is only what consciousness manifests… Herein there is no slightest dharma able to see [any] slightest dharma; yet just as this mind arises thus, there is just such an image manifesting forth."
識，謂現前了別所緣境界。 〔T1579 · Maulī-bhūmi 0280b09〕
tr. "Consciousness: that is, the presently-cognizing discernment of the object-realm it supports upon."
又識能了別事之總相。 〔T1579 · Maulī-bhūmi 0291b21〕
tr. "Again, consciousness can discern the general mark of a thing."
The Yogācārabhūmi's Viniścaya-saṃgrahaṇī records "the object-support of consciousness is only what consciousness manifests · the mind arising and the image manifesting" (same text as the Saṃdhinirmocana, the śāstra-root for "what consciousness manifests" in the dharma-lakṣaṇa basic stage); its Maulī-bhūmi settles "consciousness = the presently-cognizing discernment of the object-realm it supports upon" and "consciousness discerns the general mark of a thing" (the śāstra-root for verse 17's "these consciousnesses transform · the seeing-part named discrimination · the grasper of the mark" — consciousness's discerning nature is precisely its ability to transform into a semblance and so to grasp). What Dharmapāla's redaction takes as authority for establishing consciousness-only has its scripture in the Saṃdhinirmocana and the Laṅkāvatāra, and its śāstra in the Yogācārabhūmi.
4. Essentials of the root treatise (Dharmapāla's redaction · T1585)
The five consciousnesses · their support
論曰：「根本識」者，阿陀那識，染、淨諸識生根本故。「依止」者，謂前六轉識以根本識為共親依。 〔T1585 0037a17–a19〕
tr. "The treatise says: 'the root consciousness' is the ādāna consciousness, because it is the root from which the defiled and pure consciousnesses arise. 'Resting on' means: the first six evolving consciousnesses take the root consciousness as their common intimate support."
The five consciousnesses · appearing as conditions allow
「五識」者，謂前五轉識，種類相似，故總說之。「隨緣現」言顯非常起，「緣」謂作意、根、境等緣……由此或俱或不俱起，外緣合者有頓、漸故。 〔T1585 0037a19–a23〕
tr. "'The five consciousnesses' means the first five evolving consciousnesses; being similar in kind, they are spoken of together. The phrase 'appear as conditions allow' shows that they do not arise constantly; 'conditions' means attention, faculty, object, and such conditions… By this they arise now together, now not together, since the gathering of outer conditions is now sudden, now gradual."
The five states · listing the names
五位者何？「生無想」等。 〔T1585 0037b03–b04〕
tr. "What are the five states? '[One] born in [the heaven of] no-conception' and the rest."
The eight consciousnesses · turning together
是故八識一切有情心與末那二，恒俱轉；若起第六，則三俱轉；餘隨緣合，起一至五，則四俱轉，乃至八俱，是謂略說識俱轉義。 〔T1585 0038b06–b09〕
tr. "Therefore, in every sentient being the eight consciousnesses [run thus]: the [store-]mind and the manas, the two, ever turn together; if the sixth arises, then three turn together; the rest, as conditions gather, arise from one up to five, and then four turn together, on up to eight together — this is the gist of the sense in which the consciousnesses turn together, stated in brief."
The eight consciousnesses · same-or-different
八識自性不可言定一，行相、所依、緣、相應異故……亦非定異，經說八識如水波等，無差別故；定異應非因果性故。 〔T1585 0038c04–c07〕
tr. "The eight consciousnesses' own nature cannot be called definitely one, for their mode of activity, support, object, and concomitants differ… nor are they definitely different, for the sūtra says the eight consciousnesses are like water and waves, without difference; [and] were they definitely different, they ought not to have the nature of cause and effect."
Consciousness-transformation · setting up the name "transformation"
論曰：「是諸識」者，謂前所說三能變識及彼心所，皆能變似見、相二分，立「轉變」名。所變見分說名「分別」，能取相故；所變相分名「所分別」，見所取故。 〔T1585 0038c18–c21〕
tr. "The treatise says: 'these consciousnesses' means the previously-stated three transforming consciousnesses together with their mental factors, which all transform into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and image; this is given the name 'transformation.' The seeing-part transformed-into is called 'discrimination,' because it grasps the mark; the image-part transformed-into is named 'the discriminated,' because it is what the seeing grasps."
Consciousness-transformation · because of this they are alike non-existent
由此正理，彼實我、法離識所變皆定非有，離能、所取無別物故，非有實物離二相故。是故一切有為、無為，若實、若假，皆不離識。「唯」言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等。 〔T1585 0038c21–c25〕
tr. "By this right principle, that real self and dharmas, apart from what consciousness transforms, are all decidedly non-existent — for apart from grasper and grasped there is no separate thing, and there is no real thing apart from the two parts. Therefore all conditioned and unconditioned [dharmas], whether real or conventional, are none of them apart from consciousness. The word 'only' is to ward off a real thing apart from consciousness, not [to ward off] the mental factors and the like that are not apart from consciousness."
Consciousness-transformation · the second explanation (unreal imagining)
或轉變者，謂諸內識轉似我、法外境相現。此能轉變即名分別，虛妄分別為自性故，謂即三界心及心所。 〔T1585 0038c25–c27〕
tr. "Or 'transformation' means: the several inner consciousnesses turn so as to manifest the marks of self, dharmas, and outer objects. This transforming [side] is just what is named 'discrimination,' because its own nature is unreal imagining — that is, the mind and mental factors of the three realms."
The sense of consciousness-only made good · according with the middle way
「唯」既不遮不離識法，故真空等亦是有性。由斯遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道。 〔T1585 0039a02–a04〕
tr. "Since the word 'only' does not ward off the dharmas not apart from consciousness, true emptiness and the like are also of the nature of being. By this, departing from the two extremes of addition and subtraction, the sense of consciousness-only is made good and accords with the middle way."
Establishing consciousness-only · the deep import of the word "consciousness-only"
「識」言總顯一切有情各有八識、六位心所，所變相、見、分位差別及彼空理所顯真如……如是諸法皆不離識，總立識名。「唯」言，但遮愚夫所執定離諸識實有色等。 〔T1585 0039c20–c25〕
tr. "The word 'consciousness' altogether displays that every sentient being has its own eight consciousnesses, the six classes of mental factors, the image and seeing transformed-into, the differences of state, and the suchness disclosed by the emptiness-principle of these… all such dharmas being not apart from consciousness, they are all set up under the name 'consciousness.' The word 'only' merely wards off the real form and the rest that the fool grasps as definitely apart from the consciousnesses."
Essentials: the treatise, for the five consciousnesses, shows their modes of arising by "resting on the root consciousness · appearing as conditions allow" (their mode of activity coarse and stirring, the conditions they borrow not complete, hence they arise but little and break off much); the mental consciousness turns by both inner and outer doors, not borrowing many conditions, and only in the five states (the heaven of no-conception · the concentration of no-conception · the concentration of cessation · sleep · fainting) does it not arise when mindless. In sorting out the eight consciousnesses, as to turning-together "the [store-]mind and the manas ever the two, plus the sixth makes three, plus the five up to eight"; as to same-or-different, "they cannot be called definitely one (their mode of activity, support, and the rest differing), nor definitely different (like water and waves, without difference; were they definitely different, cause and effect would fail)" — difference being set up by the conventional, while in the truly-ultimate the [reach of] mind and speech is cut off. In correctly resolving consciousness-transformation, the treatise gives two successive expositions: the first explains "the several consciousnesses transform into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and image, named transformation; the seeing-part named discrimination (the grasper), the image-part named the discriminated (what the seeing grasps); apart from the two graspings there is no real self or dharmas"; the latter explains "the inner consciousnesses turn so as to manifest the marks of self, dharmas, and outer objects; the transforming [side] is just what is named discrimination, with unreal imagining for its own nature." The word "only" wards off a real thing apart from consciousness, not the mental factors and suchness that are not apart from consciousness, and so, departing from addition and subtraction, it accords with the middle way. It concludes by making good that "the word 'consciousness' altogether displays the eight consciousnesses, the six classes of mental factors, the image-and-seeing parts, the states, and suchness, all not apart from consciousness," and so one should be settled in faith that all is consciousness-only.
5. Divergent readings across the masters (Kuiji, Shuji T1830)
「依止根本識」者，此句通下第六識，二俱依止第八識故，顯其共依。然依止有二：一、依種子第八識，即是因緣親依……二、依現行第八，即是增上緣依。 〔T1830 0475b13–b17〕
tr. "'Resting on the root consciousness': this phrase runs down to [cover] the sixth consciousness too, since both [the five and the sixth] rest on the eighth consciousness, showing their common support. Now 'resting on' is twofold: first, resting on the seed-eighth-consciousness, which is the intimate support that is the causal condition… second, resting on the active-eighth, which is the support that is the dominant condition."
安惠解云：何名轉變？謂是三識自體皆轉變似見、相二分，識自體分名為轉變。轉變者，變現義……或轉變者，是變異義……護法菩薩解云：又轉變者，是改轉義，謂一識體改轉為二相起，異於自體……今取自體能轉變也。 〔T1830 0487a06–a16〕
tr. "Sthiramati explains: what is named 'transformation'? It means that the own-substance of the three consciousnesses all transforms into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and image; the consciousness's own-substance-part is named transformation. 'Transformation' has the sense of manifesting-forth… or 'transformation' has the sense of altering… The bodhisattva Dharmapāla explains: again, 'transformation' has the sense of changing-over, meaning that one consciousness-substance changes over and arises as two marks, [these] being other than [its] own substance… here we take it that the own-substance is what transforms."
下難陀等第二解……言轉變者，即前三能變內見分識，能轉依他相分，似外境相現，唯有見、相之內識，都無所變之外境……此依《攝論》等說唯二義，不說自證分師義，前師別也。 〔T1830 0487b26–c03〕
tr. "Below, Nanda et al.'s second explanation… by 'transformation' is meant the seeing-part consciousness within the foregoing three transformers, which can turn the other-dependent image-part so that it manifests as the mark of an outer object; there being only the inner consciousness of seeing and image, with no outer object transformed-into at all… this rests on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha and the like, which state only the two-part sense, not the master's [view] of the self-witnessing part — it differs from the former master[s]."
Kuiji, on "resting on the root consciousness," divides out the two supports (resting on the seed-eighth as the intimate support that is the causal condition · resting on the active-eighth as the support that is the dominant condition) and judges this phrase to run to the common support of the first six consciousnesses. On the term "transformation" he sets out the ancient masters' two lines: Sthiramati explains transformation as "manifesting / altering" (the own-substance manifests the semblance of the two marks, while in truth there are not two marks — that is, the wholly-imagined seeming to be the other-dependent, in principle non-existent); Dharmapāla explains transformation as "changing-over" (one consciousness-substance changes over into the two marks of seeing and image, the seeing having the function of grasping, the image having the function of resistance, taking the own-substance as what transforms) — this is what the root treatise's first explanation takes as authority. Then Nanda et al.'s "second explanation" takes "the seeing-part consciousness turning the other-dependent image-part to manifest as an outer object · only the two parts seeing and image · resting on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha to set up the two-part sense," differing from Dharmapāla's four-part doctrine. The masters' differences over the setting-up of parts — Sthiramati's single part, Nanda's two parts, Dharmapāla's four parts — the Shuji details place by place.
6. Rendering of terms · old-translation comparison (Xuanzang ↔ Paramārtha, Zhuanshi lun)
| Sense | Xuanzang, Cheng Weishi Lun | Paramārtha, Zhuanshi lun |
|---|---|---|
| consciousness-transformation · grasper and grasped | 是諸識轉變·分別·所分別 these consciousnesses transform · discrimination · the discriminated | 此識轉不離兩義 this consciousness-turning is not apart from two senses (「此識轉不離兩義，一能分別、二所分別」〔0062b20〕) |
| the establishing of consciousness-only | 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識 because of this they are alike non-existent, so all is consciousness-only | 唯識義得成 the sense of consciousness-only comes to be established (「所分別既無，能分別亦無……以是義故唯識義得成」〔0062b20–b22〕) |
| the five mindless states | 除生無想天，及無心二定，睡眠與悶絕 save [one] born in the heaven of no-conception, and the two mindless concentrations, sleep, and fainting | 離六處 apart from six occasions (「離無想定及無想天、熟眠不夢、醉悶、絕心、暫死」〔0062b18–b19〕) |
| the consciousnesses turning together · simile | 如濤波依水 like waves resting on water | 如眾浪同集一水 like the many waves gathering together in one water (「如眾像影俱現鏡中，亦如眾浪同集一水」〔0062b16–b17〕) |
Xuanzang's verse has "discrimination, the discriminated," Paramārtha's Zhuanshi lun has "the discriminating, the discriminated," both establishing consciousness-only through the twin effacement of grasper and grasped; the "five mindless states" Paramārtha lists as "six occasions" (taking in also "momentary death"), and for the simile of "the consciousnesses turning together" Xuanzang has "waves resting on water," Paramārtha has "the many waves gathering together in one water / the many images manifesting in a mirror" — the old translation parting from [the new] in the opening-and-folding of detail in [its handling of] the states.
7. Key terms
- consciousness-transformation (識轉變, vijñāna-pariṇāma) — the several consciousnesses, in their own substance, transform into the semblance of the two parts, seeing and image; the root treatise sets this up as the correct explanation of "all is consciousness-only."
- discrimination · the discriminated (分別 · 所分別, vikalpa · vikalpita) — the grasping seeing-part (the grasper of the mark) · the grasped image-part (what the seeing grasps).
- the root consciousness (根本識, mūla-vijñāna) — the ādāna consciousness (the eighth), the root from which the defiled and pure consciousnesses arise, the common intimate support of the first six evolving consciousnesses.
- the five mindless states — the heaven of no-conception · the concentration of no-conception · the concentration of cessation · sleep · fainting; in these five states the mental consciousness does not become active.
- unreal imagining (虛妄分別, abhūta-parikalpa) — the mind and mental factors of the three realms, which can transform so as to manifest the marks of self, dharmas, and outer objects; the own-nature of consciousness-transformation.
- consciousness-only (唯識) — "consciousness" altogether displays that the eight consciousnesses · the six classes of mental factors · the two parts, image and seeing · the states · and suchness are all not apart from consciousness; "only" merely wards off an outer object really existing apart from consciousness.
〔Sanskrit forms are a pronunciation aid transmitted by the ancient masters.〕
8. Cross-reading (the Yogācāra sequence: Baifa → Triṃśikā → Viṃśatikā → Madhyāntavibhāga → Mahāyānasaṃgraha)
- Baifa (Hundred Dharmas): the mind-dharmas · the eight consciousnesses (the first five · the sixth · the seventh · the eighth, the ones laid out in this chapter's eight-consciousnesses turning-together and same-or-different); the mental factors · the five omnipresent (concomitant with the five consciousnesses) · the six classes of mental factors ("the word consciousness altogether displays the six classes of mental factors").
- Triṃśikā: verse 15 (the five consciousnesses appear as conditions allow) · verse 16 (the mental consciousness save the five states) · verse 17 (consciousness-transformation · all is consciousness-only) — the verse-by-verse sister.
- Viṃśatikā: directly relevant · the dedicated treatise on establishing consciousness-only. "Establishing that in the Mahāyāna the triple world is consciousness-only… when inner consciousness arises it appears to resemble an outer object" 〔T1590 0074b27–b29〕 is the prototype for "the several consciousnesses transform so as to manifest the mark of an outer object"; "place and time are fixed, as in a dream; the body is not fixed, as with [the hungry ghosts and] the pus[-river]; all alike see the pus-river and so on; as in a dream there is loss-and-function" 〔0074c15–c16〕 squarely answers this chapter's resolution of the doubt over "place, time, body, and function being fixed-or-unfixed, as in a dream-realm" and the four-wisdoms' "wisdom of mutually-contradicting consciousness-marks (what hungry ghosts, humans, and gods see differing each from each)."
- Madhyāntavibhāga: the Characteristics chapter · unreal imagining ("unreal imagining exists; in it the two are both non-existent; herein there is only emptiness; in that too there is this" — the source of the two verses of the venerable Maitreya that the root treatise cites in establishing consciousness-only; defiled other-dependent · the middle way).
- Mahāyānasaṃgraha: the Knowable-Characteristic division · consciousness-only (the other-dependent · the consciousness-only nature · the three natures; this chapter's second explanation of consciousness-transformation, "resting on the Mahāyānasaṃgraha to set up the two-part sense," is grounded here).
Within the treatise: the chapter on the ālaya-consciousness (the first transformer · the root consciousness · the support of the five consciousnesses) · the chapter on the manas (the second transformer · one of the two ever turning together) · the chapter on object-discerning (the third transformer · the first six consciousnesses · the arising of the five consciousnesses · the five mindless states, all in the latter part of this chapter).
9. Collation position
Verses T1586 〔0060c05·0060c06·0060c07·0060c08·0061a02·0061a03〕 · root T1585 the several segments correctly resolving consciousness-transformation 〔the five consciousnesses 0037a17–a23 · the five states 0037b03–b04 · turning together 0038b06–b09 · same-or-different 0038c04–c07 · consciousness-transformation 0038c18–c27 · the middle way 0039a02–a04 · the word consciousness-only 0039c20–c25〕 · Shuji T1830 〔the five consciousnesses' support 0475b13–b17 · the two senses of transformation 0487a06–a16 · Nanda's second explanation 0487b26–0487c03〕 · Zhuanshi lun T1587 〔0062b16–b22〕. 〔Scripture〕 Saṃdhinirmocana T676 〔0698b01–0698b05〕 · Laṅkāvatāra T670 〔0484a16–0484a19〕. 〔Cross-reading〕 Viṃśatikā T1590 〔0074b27–b29·0074c15–c16〕. 〔Root śāstra〕 Yogācārabhūmi T1579 〔Maulī-bhūmi 0280b09·0291b21 · Viniścaya-saṃgrahaṇī 0724a06–0724a09〕.