唯識三十頌 偈十七 識轉變·唯識無境
能看的與被看的，都是同一個識變出來的。
前十六首講盡三能變，這一首正面立「唯識無境」。「是諸識轉變」——每個識生起，都自己變現出兩部分：能緣的「見分」（名「分別」）、被緣的「相分」（名「所分別」）。你以為『我在看一個外境』，其實能看被看兩頭都在識內。既然如此，素來認定的心外實我實法（「彼」）就「皆無」，「故一切唯識」。
「唯」字有分寸：《成唯識論》說「『唯』言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等」——心外所執的實境沒有（遮增益），識依他變現的見相二分卻不能說無（遮損減），兩邊不落，「遠離增、減二邊……契會中道」，正是慈尊二頌「非空非不空……是則契中道」（《辯中邊論》）所明。
到『見相二分有無體』處，古德起千年最深一岔：護法——二分亦依他起、非無，唯所執實我法為無（四分）；安惠——二分體無、即遍計所執，唯識體自證分一分實（一分），喻如手巾現幻兔耳、依巾而體無。此處只並陳兩位古德，不判一是一非；玄奘所傳《成唯識論》以護法四分為正義，是本書骨幹。無論一分四分，共許一句：心外實境本無，能看被看皆識自變——這就是唯識無境。
The grasper and the grasped are both transformed by one and the same consciousness.
The first sixteen verses set out the three transformers; this verse establishes "Consciousness-Only-without-object" head-on. "These consciousnesses transform" — each consciousness, as it arises, produces two parts of itself: a grasping "seeing-part" (named "discriminating") and a grasped "image-part" (named "the discriminated"). You suppose "I am seeing an external object," but both ends — grasper and grasped — are within consciousness. Since so, the real self and real dharmas long assumed outside the mind (彼) are "all absent," and "hence all is Consciousness-Only."
The word "only" has its measure: the CWL says "'only' is to exclude a real thing apart from consciousness, not the mental factors etc. not apart from consciousness" — the external object grasped is absent (excluding augmentation), yet the seeing-and-image parts consciousness dependently transforms-into are not to be called absent (excluding diminution); falling to neither side, "far from the two extremes … according with the Middle Way," just as Maitreya's two verses ("neither empty nor non-empty … this then accords with the Middle Way," the Madhyāntavibhāga) declare.
At "whether the two parts have substance," the masters open the deepest fork of a thousand years: Dharmapāla — the two parts are also dependently arisen, not absent, only the grasped real self-and-dharmas absent (four parts); Sthiramati — the two parts are without substance, precisely the wholly-imagined, only the single consciousness-substance (self-witnessing part) real (one part), like a towel folded to resemble a hare, the ears without substance arising on the towel. Here the two masters are only set side by side, with no verdict; the CWL Xuanzang transmitted takes Dharmapāla's four parts as correct, the backbone of this book. Whether one-part or four, both share one line: the external object is fundamentally absent; grasper and grasped are both consciousness's own transforming — this is Consciousness-Only-without-object.
原典＝玄奘譯《唯識三十論頌》世親菩薩造（T31n1586）。釋論揉頌見《成唯識論》（T31n1585）。
本頌（玄奘 T31n1586）〔T31n1586 0061a02–03〕
是諸識轉變，分別、所分別，
由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。
偈十七正立唯識無境：前所說諸識（三能變及彼心所）皆「轉變」——變似見、相二分；見分名「分別」（能取）、相分名「所分別」（所取）。由此（識轉變·分別）所執之實我、實法（彼）決定皆無，故一切唯識。 科判位：唯識相 · 廣辯 · 能變（偈一–十六）已竟，此偈正辯唯識無境——全論由「能變」轉入正立宗體之樞紐偈。四分（相·見·自證·證自證）·安慧一分／護法四分為唯識相宗最深之岐解。
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.
本頌
是諸識轉變，分別、所分別， 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。
白話
前面十六首把三種「能變」的識（阿賴耶·末那·六識）都講完了。到這一首，正式立「唯識無境」這個宗——也就是：心外其實沒有一個獨立的境。
一句一句看：
- 「是諸識轉變」：前面說的這些識（連同相應的心所），都在「轉變」。怎麼變？《成唯識論》說：每個識生起時，都會「變似」出兩個部分——一個「見分」、一個「相分」。
- 「分別、所分別」：那個能緣、能取的部分（見分），叫「分別」；那個被緣、被取的部分（相分），叫「所分別」。簡單說：識自己變出一個『能看的』和一個『被看的』，兩邊都是識變出來的。
- 「由此彼皆無」：「彼」指我們以為心外真有的「實我、實法」。正因為（由此）能看的、被看的都只是識自己變的，那麼離開識、獨立在外的實我實法，就決定沒有（皆無）。
- 「故一切唯識」：所以一切都不離識——這就是「唯識」。
要注意「唯」字的分寸。《成唯識論》特別說：「『唯』言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等」——「唯識」的「唯」，是要遮掉『離開識而獨立的實物』，並不是說連心所、依他變現的這些也沒有。所以唯識不是說『什麼都沒有』：
- 心外所執的實我、實法——沒有（這破「增益」，破多說了一個外境）；
- 識自己依他變現的見相二分、心心所——不能說無（這破「損減」，破少說了識的作用）。
兩邊都不偏，《成唯識論》說這叫「遠離增、減二邊……契會中道」。
（這一首是全論的樞紐：前面講『識怎麼變』，到這裡才點破『變出來的境本無實體』，正式立定唯識無境。下面幾首再回答各種疑難。）
The verse
是諸識轉變，分別、所分別， 由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。
these consciousnesses transform — the discriminating and the discriminated; by this, those are all absent, hence all is Consciousness-Only.
In plain words
The previous sixteen verses set out all three "transformers" of consciousness (ālaya · manas · the six consciousnesses). At this verse, the thesis of "Consciousness-Only-without-object" is formally established — that is: outside the mind there is in fact no independent object.
Line by line:
- "These consciousnesses transform": the consciousnesses just discussed (together with their associated mental factors) all "transform." How? The CWL says: when each consciousness arises, it "transforms-into" two parts — a "seeing-part" and an "image-part."
- "The discriminating and the discriminated": the part that grasps, that takes (the seeing-part) is called "discriminating"; the part that is grasped, that is taken (the image-part) is called "the discriminated." Simply: the consciousness itself produces a "grasper" and a "grasped" — both sides are transformed by consciousness.
- "By this, those are all absent": "those" refers to the "real self and real dharmas" we take to truly exist outside the mind. Precisely because (by this) both the grasper and the grasped are only what consciousness itself transforms-into, the real self and real dharmas standing independent apart from consciousness are decidedly absent.
- "Hence all is Consciousness-Only": so everything is not apart from consciousness — this is "Consciousness-Only."
Note the measure of the word "only." The CWL especially says: "the word 'only' is to exclude a real thing apart from consciousness, not the mental factors etc. that are not apart from consciousness." The "only" of "Consciousness-Only" is to exclude "a real thing standing independent of consciousness," not to say that even the mental factors and other-dependent transformations are absent. So Consciousness-Only is not "nothing whatever exists":
- the real self and real dharmas grasped as outside the mind — absent (this breaks "augmentation," the over-positing of an external object);
- the seeing-and-image parts and mind-and-factors that consciousness dependently transforms-into — not to be called absent (this breaks "diminution," the erasing of consciousness's function).
Falling to neither side, the CWL says, is "far from the two extremes of augmentation-and-diminution … according with the Middle Way."
(This verse is the pivot of the whole treatise: the earlier verses said "how consciousness transforms"; here it breaks through to "what is transformed-into has no real substance," formally establishing Consciousness-Only-without-object. The verses that follow answer various difficulties.)
三能變都說完了，那「境」到底有沒有
前面十六首，把阿賴耶、末那、六識三種能變一一講盡。這裡《成唯識論》自己逼出一個總問：「一切唯有識耶？」（〔T31n1585 0038c15〕）——識是說清楚了，可我們明明對著一個花花世界，那個「境」、那個『心外的實我實法』，到底有沒有？這一首正面回答，立定「唯識無境」一宗。
識自己變出『能看的』和『被看的』
關鍵在「轉變」二字。《成唯識論》釋得極準：「『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」（〔T31n1585 0038c18–19〕）。每一個識生起，不是去攀一個現成的外境，而是自己變現出兩個部分：一個能緣的「見分」、一個被緣的「相分」。
於是本頌「分別、所分別」就好懂了：「所變見分說名分別，能取相故；所變相分名所分別，見所取故」（〔0038c19–21〕）。能看、能取的那一邊（見分）叫「分別」，被看、被取的那一邊（相分）叫「所分別」。請看清楚：能看的和被看的，是同一個識變出來的兩頭。 你以為『我（能看）在看一個外境（被看）』，其實兩頭都在識內。
「彼皆無」破的是什麼
既然能看被看都是識自變，那我們素來認定『心外真有的實我、實法』（彼）——《成唯識論》斷然說：「彼實我、法離識所變皆定非有，離能、所取無別物故」（〔T31n1585 0038c21–22〕）。離開識所變的見相二分，再沒有一個獨立的實物。所以「由此彼皆無」——破的不是識的變現，破的是『離識而獨立的實境』。
這裡《成唯識論》把「唯」字的分寸定得極嚴：「『唯』言為遮離識實物，非不離識心所法等」（〔0038c24–25〕）。「唯識」的「唯」，只遮『離識的實物』，不遮『不離識的心所、依他變現』。所以唯識不是頑空：
- 心外所執的實我實法——沒有（遮增益，破你多安了一個外境）；
- 識依他變現的見相二分、心心所——不能說無（遮損減，破你抹煞了識的作用）。
兩邊都不落，論主說這正是「遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道」（〔0039a04–05〕）。慈尊（彌勒）二頌所謂「虛妄分別有，於此二都無……非空非不空……是則契中道」（〔0039b04–07〕，即《辯中邊論》首二頌），說的就是這個中道。
一分還是四分：千年最深的一道岔
到「見相二分」這裡，古德起了一道最深的岔——這兩分到底有沒有體？窺基《述記》把一宗二釋並陳：
護法說：「諸識體即自證分，轉似相、見二分而生……此說識體是依他性，轉似相、見二分，非無，亦依他起。依此二分，執實二取，聖說為無，非依他中無此二分」（〔T43n1830 0241a02–06〕）。在護法，見相二分也是依他起、有體用，識體（自證分）變現它們是實實在在的功能；佛說「無」的，只是依著這二分再去執的「實我實法」。
安惠（安慧）說：「變謂識體轉似二分，二分體無，遍計所執……諸識自體即自證分，由不證實，有法執故，似二分起，即計所執」（〔T43n1830 0241b07–11〕）。在安惠，只有識體這一分（自證分）是依他實有；見相二分由不證真實、起法執而妄似現出，體本是無，就是遍計所執。他打了個喻：八識自體變似二分，「如依手巾變似於兔，幻生二耳；二耳體無，依手巾起」（〔0241b13–15〕）——巾上的幻兔耳，依巾而現、其實無體。
這一道岔，是唯識相宗千年未息的『一分（安慧）／四分（護法）』之諍：一個徹底掃相、只留識體一分，一個存依他之用、立相見自證證自證四分。此處只是並陳兩位古德的讀法，不判一是一非。 玄奘所揉譯、所傳的《成唯識論》以護法為正義（四分），這是本書釋據的骨幹；安惠之說，則是漢傳古德所載、可資對看的另一路。無論一分四分，兩家共許的那一句是一樣的：你以為的心外實境，本無；能看被看，皆識自變。 這就是這一首立定的唯識無境。
The three transformers are all stated — so does the "object" exist or not?
The previous sixteen verses set out the three transformers — ālaya, manas, the six consciousnesses — to the full. Here the CWL itself forces a summary question: "Is everything Consciousness-Only alone?" (〔T31n1585 0038c15〕) — consciousness has been made clear; yet we plainly face a teeming world, so that "object," that "real self and real dharmas outside the mind," does it exist or not? This verse answers head-on, establishing the thesis of "Consciousness-Only-without-object."
Consciousness itself produces a "grasper" and a "grasped"
The crux is in "transform." The CWL glosses it precisely: "'these consciousnesses' means the three transformers just stated and their factors, which all transform-into the seeing-and-image parts, and 'transformation' is named" (〔T31n1585 0038c18–19〕). When each consciousness arises, it does not reach out to a ready-made external object but produces two parts of itself: a grasping "seeing-part" and a grasped "image-part."
So the verse's "the discriminating and the discriminated" becomes clear: "the transformed seeing-part is called 'discriminating,' for it grasps the image; the transformed image-part is called 'the discriminated,' for it is grasped by the seeing" (〔0038c19–21〕). The grasping, taking side (the seeing-part) is "discriminating"; the grasped, taken side (the image-part) is "the discriminated." See it clearly: the grasper and the grasped are two ends produced by one and the same consciousness. You suppose "I (the grasper) am seeing an external object (the grasped)," but both ends are within consciousness.
What "those are all absent" breaks
Since grasper and grasped are both consciousness's own transforming, then the "real self and real dharmas truly outside the mind" we have always assumed — the CWL says flatly: "the real self-and-dharmas, apart from what consciousness transforms-into, are decidedly not real, for apart from the grasping and the grasped there is no separate thing" (〔T31n1585 0038c21–22〕). Apart from the seeing-and-image parts that consciousness transforms-into, there is no further independent real thing. So "by this, those are all absent" — what is broken is not consciousness's transforming, but the "real object independent of consciousness."
Here the CWL fixes the measure of "only" with great strictness: "the word 'only' is to exclude a real thing apart from consciousness, not the mental factors etc. not apart from consciousness" (〔0038c24–25〕). The "only" of "Consciousness-Only" excludes only "the real thing apart from consciousness," not "the mental factors, the other-dependent transformations not apart from consciousness." So Consciousness-Only is not a blank nihil:
- the real self and real dharmas grasped as outside the mind — absent (excluding augmentation, breaking the extra external object you posited);
- the seeing-and-image parts and mind-and-factors that consciousness dependently transforms-into — not to be called absent (excluding diminution, breaking the erasure of consciousness's function).
Falling to neither side, the commentator says, is just "far from the two extremes of augmentation-and-diminution, the Consciousness-Only sense accomplished, according with the Middle Way" (〔0039a04–05〕). Maitreya's two verses — "false discrimination exists, in it the two are wholly absent … neither empty nor non-empty … this then accords with the Middle Way" (〔0039b04–07〕, the first two verses of the Madhyāntavibhāga) — speak of just this Middle Way.
One part or four: the deepest fork of a thousand years
At "the seeing-and-image parts," the ancient masters open a deepest fork — do these two parts have substance or not? Kuiji's Commentary sets one lineage's two readings side by side:
Dharmapāla says: "the consciousness-substance is the self-witnessing part, transforming-into the seeing-and-image parts as it arises … this says the consciousness-substance is of other-dependent nature, transforming-into the seeing-and-image parts, which are not absent, also dependently arisen; the real two-graspings grasped upon these two parts the sages declare absent, but not that within the other-dependent these two parts are absent" (〔T43n1830 0241a02–06〕). For Dharmapāla, the seeing-and-image parts are also dependently arisen, with substance-and-function; the consciousness-substance (self-witnessing part) transforming-into them is altogether real as a function; what the Buddha declared "absent" is only the "real self and real dharmas" further grasped upon those two parts.
Sthiramati (安惠) says: "'transformation' means the consciousness-substance transforms-into the two parts, the two parts without substance, wholly-imagined … the consciousness's own substance is the self-witnessing part; by not-witnessing-the-real and the dharma-grasping, the seeming two parts arise, precisely the wholly-imagined" (〔T43n1830 0241b07–11〕). For Sthiramati, only the consciousness-substance, this single part (self-witnessing part), is dependently real; the seeing-and-image parts, by not-witnessing-the-real and raising the dharma-grasping, falsely seem to appear, and so are without substance — precisely the wholly-imagined. He gives a simile: the consciousness's own substance transforms-into the two parts "like a towel folded to resemble a hare, illusorily producing two ears; the two ears without substance, arising upon the towel" (〔0241b13–15〕) — the illusory hare's ears appear upon the towel yet are in fact without substance.
This fork is Faxiang's never-stilled millennium "one-part (Sthiramati)／four-part (Dharmapāla)" dispute: one sweeping away the image entirely, keeping only the single consciousness-substance; one preserving the other-dependent function, establishing the four parts of image, seeing, self-witnessing, and witnessing-the-self-witnessing. Here the two masters' readings are merely set side by side, with no verdict of right or wrong. The CWL that Xuanzang redacted and transmitted takes Dharmapāla as the correct sense (four parts), and this is the backbone of this book's grounding; Sthiramati's reading is the other path recorded by the ancient Chinese transmission, set out for comparison. Whether one-part or four, the one line both houses share is the same: the external object you suppose is fundamentally absent; grasper and grasped are both consciousness's own transforming. This is the Consciousness-Only-without-object that this verse establishes.
考據Apparatus
本偈正立唯識無境：諸識轉變（變似見、相二分），見分名分別、相分名所分別，所執實我法皆無，故一切唯識。其釋論《成唯識論》卷七釋之；四分結構見卷二，安慧／護法最深岐解見窺基《述記》。本偈目③④雙重（釋據濃·諸家異釋深）。
一、科判定位
| 科判系統 | 此偈之位 |
|---|---|
| 護法略標（玄奘 T1586 頌本卷首·主錨） | 唯識相 → 廣辯 → 能變（偈一–十六）竟 → 正立「唯識無境」（偈十七）。〔T31n1586 0060a21–24〕 |
| 成唯識論 釋文科段 | 「一切唯有識耶？」設問〔T31n1585 0038c15〕→ 識轉變·變似見相二分·分別所分別·彼皆無·唯識（卷七）→ 引四智·慈尊二頌證唯識無境 |
唯識相之「廣辯」前明三能變（初·二·三，偈二–十六），此偈轉入正面立宗——識自轉變而似境，所執境無，故一切唯識。下偈十八–十九釋諸難（種識變·二取習氣），偈二十起明三性。
二、古漢義理平行
《轉識論》T1587 僅作古漢義理平行，不作世親造、同本異譯或逐頌校本。
| 文本 | 逐字 | 出處 |
|---|---|---|
| 玄奘 T1586（本頌） | 是諸識轉變，分別、所分別，由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。 | T31n1586 0061a02–03 |
| 成唯識論 T1585（揉頌） | 「是諸識轉變，分別所分別，由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。」 | T31n1585 0038c16–17 |
| 真諦《轉識論》T1587 | 何者立唯識義？意本為遣境遣心，今境界既無，唯識又泯，即是說唯識義成也。 | T31n1587 0062b22–24 |
義理平行所見：玄奘本頌與成唯識論揉頌唯標點小異（本頌「分別、所分別」一頓，揉頌「分別所分別」無頓），文同。真諦《轉識論》（書名即「轉識」＝識轉變）立唯識義為「遣境遣心」——境（所分別）既遣，能緣之識（唯識之相）亦泯，方成唯識義；與本偈「由此彼皆無，故一切唯識」同明唯識無境，而真諦更標「唯識又泯」之遣詮一路。
三、唯識義之釋據（眼）
（一） 識體變似見相二分·立轉變名——〔T31n1585 0038c18–21〕：
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。〔T31n1585 0038c18–21〕
（二） 我法離識非有·唯識無境——〔T31n1585 0038c21–25〕：
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。〔T31n1585 0038c21–25〕
（三） 或轉變者·虛妄分別為自性——〔T31n1585 0038c25–0039a03〕：
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。此所執境名所分別，即所妄執實我、法性。由此分別變似外境假我、法相，彼所分別實我、法性，決定皆無……是故一切皆唯有識，虛妄分別有極成故。〔T31n1585 0038c25–0039a02〕
（四） 離增減二邊·契會中道——〔T31n1585 0039a04–05〕：
由斯遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道。〔T31n1585 0039a03–04〕
→ 識轉變者，識體變似見、相二分：見分（能分別）·相分（所分別）。所執實我、實法（彼）離識所變決定皆無——非無依他之識變，唯無離識所執之實境，故曰「唯識無境」。「唯」遮離識實物（遮增益），非遮不離識之心所等（遮損減），由斯契中道。 → 承衍：本論 v.18–19（諸難釋·一切種變·二取習氣）· v.20–22（三性·依他遍計）· 二十論（破外境）· 辯中邊論（虛妄分別·三性）。
四、諸家異釋（古德·標宗·最深岐解）
（一） 四分結構（護法正義·成唯識論卷二）——識體一一生時，以理推徵具四分：
似所緣相說名相分，似能緣相說名見分。〔T31n1585 0010a23–24〕
然心、心所一一生時，以理推徵各有三分，所量、能量、量果別故〔自證分〕。〔T31n1585 0010b11–13〕
又心、心所若細分別應有四分，三分如前，復有第四證自證分。此若無者，誰證第三？〔T31n1585 0010b17–18〕
此四分中前二是外，後二是內……故心、心所四分合成，具所、能緣，無無窮過，非即、非離，唯識理成。〔T31n1585 0010b22–28〕
（二） 安慧／護法 最深岐解（窺基《成唯識論述記》·釋「識轉變」）——一宗二釋：
護法：諸識體即自證分，轉似相、見二分而生。此說識體是依他性，轉似相、見二分，非無，亦依他起。依此二分，執實二取，聖說為無，非依他中無此二分。〔T43n1830 0241a03–06〕
安惠：變謂識體轉似二分，二分體無，遍計所執……諸識自體即自證分，由不證實，有法執故，似二分起，即計所執。似依他有，二分體無，如自證分。〔T43n1830 0241b08–11〕
→ 二師判「見相二分」之有無分途：護法——識體（自證分）轉似相見二分，二分亦依他起·非無（有體用），唯依二分所執之實二取（我法）為無；安惠（安慧）——識體唯自證分一分是依他，見相二分由不證實·有法執而似起，二分體無·即遍計所執。此即唯識相宗『一分（安慧）／四分（護法）』千年最深之岐解。〔僅徵引·古德異釋並陳，不判一是一非。〕
（三） 慈尊（彌勒）二頌證唯識中道——《成唯識論》引：
「虛妄分別有，於此二都無，此中唯有空，於彼亦有此，故說一切法，非空非不空，有無及有故，是則契中道。」〔T31n1585 0039b04–07〕
→ 此即《辯中邊論》辯相品首二頌；唯識無境之中道（非空非不空）所本，繫本論 v.22（辯中邊·非異非不異）。
（四） 四智悟入唯識無境——《成唯識論》：成就四智菩薩能隨悟入唯識無境：相違識相智·無所緣識智·自應無倒智·隨三智轉智。〔T31n1585 0039a09–22〕
五、術語
| 漢 | 古德傳梵（羅馬字·發音輔助） | 唯識精確義 |
|---|---|---|
| 識轉變 | vijñāna-pariṇāma | 識體變似見、相二分；「諸識」謂三能變及彼心所〔0038c18〕 |
| 分別 | vikalpa | 所變見分，能取相故〔0038c19〕 |
| 所分別 | vikalpya | 所變相分，見所取故〔0038c20〕 |
| 相分 | — | 似所緣相；識體所變之境分〔0010a23〕 |
| 見分 | — | 似能緣相；識體所變之能緣分〔0010a23〕 |
| 自證分 | — | 相、見所依自體；量果（《集量論》「此三體無別」）〔0010b13〕 |
| 證自證分 | — | 證第三（自證分）之第四分；現量攝〔0010b17〕 |
六、譬喻·修辭
巾兔喻（安惠釋「二分體無」）——窺基《述記》載安惠義：
八識自體皆似二分，如依手巾變似於兔，幻生二耳。二耳體無，依手巾起。〔T43n1830 0241b12–14〕
- 喻體：手巾摺現似兔，幻生二耳。
- 喻依：手巾＝識自體（自證分·依他實有）；幻兔二耳＝見相二分（依識體而似起·體無）。
- 所顯：安惠以巾兔喻明見相二分如幻兔之耳，依識體（巾）而現、體實無，即遍計所執——唯識體一分實。此為『一分（安慧）』之喻；護法則許二分亦依他有體（非無），唯所執我法無。一喻而見二師分途之要。
七、互讀
- 三十頌 v.1：由假說我法·有種種相轉——本偈正明『所執實我法皆無』，與 v.1 遍計假我法相呼應（彼皆無）。
- 三十頌 v.18–19：一切種識如是變·二取習氣——本偈唯識無境之諸難釋（識變何以生種種分別）。
- 三十頌 v.20–22：三性（遍計·依他·圓成）——本偈『識轉變·所執皆無』即依他起變似、遍計所執無之張本；v.22 圓成依他「非異非不異」承此。
- 辯中邊論：虛妄分別有·三性·中道——本偈所引慈尊二頌之本論（繫 v.22）。
- 唯識二十論：唯識無境·破外境難——與本偈唯識無境互為表裏（頌立·二十論破）。
- 百法明門論：心法·心所有法——本偈四分即心心所之行相結構。
八、校本定位
- 玄奘 T1586（底本）：偈十七〔T31n1586 0061a02–03〕。
- 成唯識論 T1585（釋論骨幹·卷七）：論曰「是諸識」變似見相二分〔0038c18–21〕· 我法離識非有〔0038c21–25〕· 或轉變者·虛妄分別〔0038c25–0039a03〕· 契中道〔0039a04–05〕· 四智〔0039a09–22〕· 慈尊二頌〔0039b04–07〕。四分結構（卷二）：相見分〔0010a23–24〕· 自證分〔0010b12–14〕· 證自證分〔0010b16–18〕· 四分合成〔0010b22–c01〕。
- 窺基《成唯識論述記》T1830（法相宗標準疏·最深岐解）：護法釋「識轉變」〔T43n1830 0241a02–06〕· 安惠釋〔0241b07–11〕· 巾兔喻〔0241b13–14〕。
- 真諦《轉識論》T1587（古漢義理平行）：唯識義·遣境遣心〔0062b22–24〕。
This verse establishes Consciousness-Only-without-object: the consciousnesses transform (transforming-into the seeing-and-image parts), the seeing-part named "discriminating," the image-part "the discriminated"; the grasped real self-and-dharmas are all absent, hence all is Consciousness-Only. The CWL fascicle 7 expounds it; the four-part structure is in fascicle 2, and the deepest Sthiramati／Dharmapāla fork in Kuiji's Commentary. This verse is double-weighted in registers 3 and 4 (dense grounding · deep variant readings).
1 · Sectioning (科判定位)
| Scheme | Placement of this verse |
|---|---|
| 護法 brief statement (head of T1586 verse-text · primary anchor) | Characteristic of Consciousness-Only → detailed exposition → the transformers (verses 1–16) done → establishing "Consciousness-Only-without-object" (verse 17). 〔T31n1586 0060a21–24〕 |
| CWL exegetical段 | "一切唯有識耶？" the question 〔T31n1585 0038c15〕 → consciousness-transformation · transforming-into seeing-and-image parts · discriminating-and-discriminated · these all absent · Consciousness-Only (fasc. 7) → cited the four cognitions · Maitreya's two verses to prove Consciousness-Only-without-object |
The "detailed exposition" of the characteristic of Consciousness-Only first stated the three transformers (verses 2–16); this verse turns to establishing the thesis head-on — consciousness itself transforms so as to resemble an object, the grasped object is absent, hence all is Consciousness-Only. Verses 18–19 then answer the difficulties (seed-consciousness transformation · the latent energies of the two graspings); verse 20 onward states the three natures.
2 · Ancient-Chinese thematic parallels (古漢義理平行)
T1587 is used only as an ancient-Chinese thematic parallel, not as evidence of Vasubandhu authorship, a common source text, or a verse-by-verse variant recension.
| Text | Verbatim | Loc |
|---|---|---|
| Xuanzang T1586 (root verse) | 是諸識轉變，分別、所分別，由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。 | T31n1586 0061a02–03 |
| 成唯識論 T1585 (redacted verse) | 「是諸識轉變，分別所分別，由此彼皆無，故一切唯識。」 | T31n1585 0038c16–17 |
| Paramārtha 《轉識論》 T1587 | 何者立唯識義？意本為遣境遣心，今境界既無，唯識又泯，即是說唯識義成也。 | T31n1587 0062b22–24 |
What the thematic parallel shows: Xuanzang's root verse and the CWL redaction differ only in punctuation (root "分別、所分別" one enumeration-mark, redaction "分別所分別" none), the wording identical. Paramārtha's 《轉識論》 (the title itself ＝ "evolving consciousness" / consciousness-transformation) establishes the Consciousness-Only sense as "removing object, removing mind" — the object (the discriminated) removed, the grasping consciousness (the mark of Consciousness-Only) too is dissolved, and only then is the Consciousness-Only sense accomplished; the same Consciousness-Only-without-object as this verse's "由此彼皆無，故一切唯識," while Paramārtha further marks the apophatic line "Consciousness-Only too is dissolved."
3 · The doctrinal grounding in the commentary (釋據 · the eye)
(i) The consciousness-substance transforms-into the seeing-and-image parts · "transformation" named — 〔T31n1585 0038c18–21〕:
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。〔T31n1585 0038c18–21〕
(ii) Self-and-dharmas apart from consciousness are not real · Consciousness-Only-without-object — 〔T31n1585 0038c21–25〕:
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。〔T31n1585 0038c21–25〕
(iii) "Or, transformation" · false discrimination as its nature — 〔T31n1585 0038c25–0039a03〕:
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。此所執境名所分別，即所妄執實我、法性。由此分別變似外境假我、法相，彼所分別實我、法性，決定皆無……是故一切皆唯有識，虛妄分別有極成故。〔T31n1585 0038c25–0039a02〕
(iv) Far from the two extremes of augmentation-and-diminution · according with the Middle Way — 〔T31n1585 0039a04–05〕:
由斯遠離增、減二邊，唯識義成，契會中道。〔T31n1585 0039a03–04〕
→ Consciousness-transformation: the consciousness-substance transforms-into the seeing-and-image parts — the seeing-part (the discriminator) · the image-part (the discriminated). The grasped real self-and-dharmas (彼), apart from what consciousness transforms-into, are decidedly absent — not that the other-dependent consciousness-transformation is absent, but only that the real object grasped apart from consciousness is absent, hence "Consciousness-Only-without-object." The "唯" excludes a real thing apart from consciousness (excluding augmentation), not the mental factors etc. not apart from consciousness (excluding diminution); thereby according with the Middle Way. → Further connections: this treatise vv.18–19 (the difficulties · all-seed transformation · the two-grasping energies) · vv.20–22 (the three natures · other-dependent and wholly-imagined) · the Twenty Verses (refuting external objects) · the Madhyāntavibhāga (false discrimination · three natures).
4 · Variant readings of the masters (諸家異釋 · standard-setting · the deepest fork)
(i) The four-part structure (Dharmapāla's correct sense · CWL fascicle 2) — the consciousness-substance, in each arising, is found by reason to have four parts:
似所緣相說名相分，似能緣相說名見分。〔T31n1585 0010a23–24〕
然心、心所一一生時，以理推徵各有三分，所量、能量、量果別故〔the self-witnessing part〕。〔T31n1585 0010b11–13〕
又心、心所若細分別應有四分，三分如前，復有第四證自證分。此若無者，誰證第三？〔T31n1585 0010b17–18〕
此四分中前二是外，後二是內……故心、心所四分合成，具所、能緣，無無窮過，非即、非離，唯識理成。〔T31n1585 0010b22–28〕
(ii) The deepest Sthiramati／Dharmapāla fork (Kuiji's Commentary · glossing "consciousness-transformation") — one lineage, two readings:
Dharmapāla: 諸識體即自證分，轉似相、見二分而生。此說識體是依他性，轉似相、見二分，非無，亦依他起。依此二分，執實二取，聖說為無，非依他中無此二分。〔T43n1830 0241a03–06〕
Sthiramati (安惠): 變謂識體轉似二分，二分體無，遍計所執……諸識自體即自證分，由不證實，有法執故，似二分起，即計所執。似依他有，二分體無，如自證分。〔T43n1830 0241b08–11〕
→ The two masters part ways over whether the "seeing-and-image parts" exist: Dharmapāla — the consciousness-substance (self-witnessing part) transforms-into the seeing-and-image parts, and the two parts are also dependently-arisen · not absent (having substance-and-function); only the real two-graspings (self-and-dharmas) grasped upon those two parts are absent; Sthiramati — only the consciousness-substance, the single self-witnessing part, is other-dependent; the seeing-and-image parts, by not-witnessing-the-real and the dharma-grasping, falsely seem to arise, and so are without substance · precisely the wholly-imagined. This is Faxiang's millennium-deep "one-part (Sthiramati)／four-part (Dharmapāla)" fork. 〔Citation only · the masters' variant readings set side by side, with no verdict of right or wrong.〕
(iii) Maitreya's two verses proving the Consciousness-Only Middle Way — the CWL cites:
「虛妄分別有，於此二都無，此中唯有空，於彼亦有此，故說一切法，非空非不空，有無及有故，是則契中道。」〔T31n1585 0039b04–07〕
→ These are the first two verses of the Madhyāntavibhāga's "Marks" chapter; the basis of the Consciousness-Only Middle Way (neither empty nor non-empty), anchored to this treatise's v.22 (Madhyāntavibhāga · "neither different nor non-different").
(iv) The four cognitions entering Consciousness-Only-without-object — the CWL: the bodhisattva accomplishing the four cognitions can enter Consciousness-Only-without-object: the cognition-of-conflicting-consciousness-marks · the cognition-of-objectless-consciousness · the cognition-that-one-should-of-oneself-be-undeluded · the cognition-turning-with-the-three-cognitions. 〔T31n1585 0039a09–22〕
5 · Terminology (術語)
| 漢 | Masters'-transmitted Skt. (pronunciation aid) | Yogācāra precise sense |
|---|---|---|
| 識轉變 | vijñāna-pariṇāma | the consciousness-substance transforms-into the seeing-and-image parts; "the consciousnesses" = the three transformers and their factors 〔0038c18〕 |
| 分別 | vikalpa | the transformed seeing-part, for it grasps the image 〔0038c19〕 |
| 所分別 | vikalpya | the transformed image-part, for it is grasped by the seeing 〔0038c20〕 |
| 相分 | — | resembling the object-condition; the object-part the consciousness-substance transforms-into 〔0010a23〕 |
| 見分 | — | resembling the grasping-condition; the grasping-part the consciousness-substance transforms-into 〔0010a23〕 |
| 自證分 | — | the self-substance on which seeing-and-image rest; the measuring-result (Pramāṇasamuccaya: "these three are not separate in substance") 〔0010b13〕 |
| 證自證分 | — | the fourth part witnessing the third (self-witnessing part); direct-perception 〔0010b17〕 |
6 · Simile and rhetoric (譬喻·修辭)
The towel-hare simile (Sthiramati glossing "the two parts are without substance") — Kuiji's Commentary records Sthiramati's sense:
八識自體皆似二分，如依手巾變似於兔，幻生二耳。二耳體無，依手巾起。〔T43n1830 0241b12–14〕
- Vehicle: a towel folded to resemble a hare, illusorily producing two ears.
- Tenor: the towel ＝ the consciousness's own substance (the self-witnessing part · dependently real); the illusory hare's two ears ＝ the seeing-and-image parts (seeming to arise upon the consciousness-substance · without substance).
- What it shows: Sthiramati uses the towel-hare to show that the seeing-and-image parts are like the illusory hare's ears, appearing upon the consciousness-substance (the towel) yet without real substance — precisely the wholly-imagined; only the single consciousness-substance is real. This is the simile of the "one-part (Sthiramati)" reading; Dharmapāla, by contrast, grants the two parts too a other-dependent substance (not absent), only the grasped self-and-dharmas being absent. One simile reveals the crux of the two masters' parting.
7 · Cross-readings (互讀)
- 三十頌 v.1: by provisional designation of self-and-dharmas · the variety of marks turn — this verse states "the grasped real self-and-dharmas are all absent," answering to v.1's wholly-imagined provisional self-and-dharmas (彼皆無).
- 三十頌 v.18–19: the all-seed consciousness so transforms · the two-grasping energies — this verse's Consciousness-Only-without-object's difficulties (how the consciousness-transformation gives rise to the variety of discriminations).
- 三十頌 v.20–22: the three natures (wholly-imagined · other-dependent · perfectly-accomplished) — this verse's "consciousness-transformation · the grasped all absent" is the ground for the other-dependent's transforming-into and the wholly-imagined's being absent; v.22's perfectly-accomplished and other-dependent "neither different nor non-different" follows from here.
- 辯中邊論 (Madhyāntavibhāga): false discrimination · three natures · the Middle Way — the root text of Maitreya's two verses cited here (anchored to v.22).
- 唯識二十論 (Twenty Verses): Consciousness-Only-without-object · refuting the difficulty of external objects — the inner and outer face of this verse's Consciousness-Only-without-object (the verse establishes · the Twenty Verses refutes).
- 百法明門論: mind-dharmas · mental factors — this verse's four parts are the operational structure of mind and mental factors.
8 · Manuscript loci (校本定位)
- Xuanzang T1586 (base): verse 17 〔T31n1586 0061a02–03〕.
- 成唯識論 T1585 (commentary backbone · fasc. 7): 論曰「是諸識」transforms-into seeing-and-image 〔0038c18–21〕 · self-and-dharmas apart from consciousness not real 〔0038c21–25〕 · "or, transformation" · false discrimination 〔0038c25–0039a03〕 · according with the Middle Way 〔0039a04–05〕 · the four cognitions 〔0039a09–22〕 · Maitreya's two verses 〔0039b04–07〕. Four-part structure (fasc. 2): seeing-and-image parts 〔0010a23–24〕 · self-witnessing part 〔0010b12–14〕 · witnessing-the-self-witnessing part 〔0010b16–18〕 · the four parts combined 〔0010b22–c01〕.
- 窺基《成唯識論述記》 T1830 (Faxiang standard commentary · the deepest fork): Dharmapāla glossing "consciousness-transformation" 〔T43n1830 0241a02–06〕 · Sthiramati's gloss 〔0241b07–11〕 · the towel-hare simile 〔0241b13–14〕.
- 真諦《轉識論》 T1587 (ancient-Chinese thematic parallel): the Consciousness-Only sense · removing object, removing mind 〔0062b22–24〕.