Chinese
而且，不间断的刚过去的意识就是意，因为它作为后续意识的基础。阿罗汉的最后心识，由于因缘不具足，虽然实际上不作为后续的基础，但本质上仍然是基础，所以是意。其中，“六者”表明六种意识都具有意。“过去”区分了现在的意识，即现在的是意识，过去的是意。“刚过去”表明刚过去的才是意，过去很久的就不是意了。如果六种意识和意可以互相包含，那么说意就只有十二界，说意识就有十七界了吗？即使像后者那样，也没有过失，因为五种意识的基础是眼等。第六意识，即意的意识的基础，其他宗派认为是染污意和心脏的物质，但本宗不这样认为，也没有其他基础。没有基础就不会产生，而且六者刚过去的意可以作为基础，为了充分证明它的基础是存在的，所以意界也单独计数，即基础是根，所依赖的是意识，所缘是境，因此，界被认为是六、三、十八种。同样，一切事物虽然实际上不是基础和境，但因为是同类，所以也被认为是界。单独显示意的理由是因为它是第六者的基础，但也作为五种意识的基础。就像眼睛的境是色一样，意的境一定是法吗？不是的。经中说：“法是外处，未被十一处所包含。”有些住持比丘说一定是法。六种意识界由四种缘产生，为什么不说因和紧随因的界和处呢？因为分别说者认为因缘有五种，其中，等起因、遍行因、异熟因遍及同类心和烦恼异熟生，但不遍及其他，即使遍及，也不能确定这个一定是这个的因，所以不设立。意识的助伴虽然被特别对待，但助伴没有使意识特别，所以不设立俱生和相应的界和处。经
English
Moreover, the immediately past consciousness that is uninterrupted is the mind, because it serves as the basis for subsequent consciousness. The last mind of an Arhat, although not actually serving as the basis for subsequent consciousness due to incomplete conditions, remains as the basis in essence, so it is the mind. Among them, "the six" indicates that all six consciousnesses have mind. "Past" distinguishes the present consciousness, that is, the present is consciousness, and the past is mind. "Immediately past" indicates that only the immediately past is mind, and what has passed for a long time is not mind. If the six consciousnesses and mind can contain each other, then saying mind would only have twelve realms, and saying consciousness would have seventeen realms? Even if it is like the latter, there is no fault, because the basis of the five consciousnesses is the eye, etc. The basis of the sixth consciousness, the consciousness of mind, is considered by other schools to be the defiled mind and the substance of the heart, but this school does not think so, and there is no other basis. Without a basis, it cannot arise, and the immediately past mind of the six can serve as the basis, so in order to fully prove that its basis exists, the mind realm is also counted separately, that is, the basis is the root, what is relied upon is consciousness, and what is objectified is the object, therefore, the realms are considered to be six, three, and eighteen kinds. Similarly, although all things are not actually the basis and object, they are considered to be realms because they are of the same kind. The reason for showing the mind separately is because it is the basis of the sixth, but it also serves as the basis of the five consciousnesses. Just as the object of the eye is form, is the object of the mind necessarily dharma? No. The sutra says: "Dharma is the external source of arising, not included by the eleven sources of arising." Some abbot monks say it must be dharma. The six consciousness realms arise from four conditions, why not speak of the cause and the immediately following realm and source of arising? Because the Vaibhashikas consider that there are five kinds of causes, among them, the equal cause, the universal cause, and the ripening cause pervade the same kind of mind and the afflicted ripening birth, but do not pervade others, and even if they pervade, it cannot be determined that this must be the cause of this, so it is not established. Although the companions of consciousness are specially treated, the companions do not make the consciousness special, so the co-emergent and corresponding realms and sources of arising are not established. Sutra
Chinese
小乘有部宗认为，有包含根身在内的身心具有六种识的种子。这是因为仅仅宣说六识本身，并不能理解其转变的六种果，因此无法了解其能力或证悟。唯识宗则认为，种子存在于五因或阿赖耶识之上，与之前相同。紧随其后的俱有缘是先前的识，六者都可以作为六识的俱有缘，因为没有单独确定，所以不这样安立。这样，两种缘的差别，并没有将界和处分开，只是安立了实体。第二，归纳为三：这样，如果五蕴包含了一切有为法，并且界和处也包含了一切法，那么是否还有比这更简略的方式来包含一切法呢？答案是有的。色蕴、意处和法界这三者就包含了所有的法。第一者包含了十个色处和色界以及非能作；第二者包含了识蕴和七个意界；第三者包含了中间的三个蕴、非能作和法处。那么，这种包含是像无常一样，是自性上自己包含自己呢？还是像佛陀以四种摄事来摄受四众弟子一样，是他者包含他者的假立呢？答：能包含者以其自身本性的方式包含所包含者。因为所包含者是能包含者自身的本性，不具有与能包含者不同的事物或特征。第三，遣除界过多的过失。如果眼等三者各有两份，那么就会变成二十一个界。答：眼等虽然各有两份，但界只有一个。因为两者都是执持色等之识的所依，都是明澈的色，相似的觉知，具有相同的特征；所缘境都是相同的色；所依赖的执持色的识，生起相同的类别。那么，为什么会出现两份呢？如果只有一份，就显得非常不美观，为了使所依美观，所以出现了两份。哪里出现美观呢？
English
The Sautrāntika school asserts that the body and mind, including the sense faculties, possess the seeds of the six consciousnesses. This is because merely explaining the six consciousnesses themselves does not allow one to understand the six resultant transformations, thus one cannot comprehend their power or realization. The Mind-Only school, however, believes that the seeds exist upon the five causes or the ālaya-vijñāna, as before. The immediately preceding condition is the previous consciousness; all six can serve as the immediately preceding condition for the six consciousnesses, but because they are not individually determined, they are not established as such. Thus, the distinction between the two conditions does not separate the dhātus and āyatanas, but only establishes the substance. Second, condensing into three: Thus, if the five skandhas include all conditioned phenomena, and the dhātus and āyatanas also include all dharmas, is there an even more concise way to include all dharmas? The answer is yes. The rūpa-skandha, the mana-āyatana, and the dharma-dhātu—these three include all dharmas. The first includes the ten rūpa-āyatanas and rūpa-dhātus, as well as non-manifestation; the second includes the vijñāna-skandha and the seven mana-dhātus; the third includes the three intermediate skandhas, non-manifestation, and the dharma-āyatana. So, is this inclusion like impermanence, where it is self-inclusive by its own nature? Or is it like the Buddha gathering the fourfold assembly with the four means of gathering, where it is a designation of one including another? Answer: The includer includes the included in a way that the included are the very nature of the includer. Because the included are the nature of the includer itself, and do not possess things or characteristics different from the includer. Third, refuting the fault of too many dhātus. If each of the eyes, etc., has two, then there would be twenty-one dhātus. Answer: Although there are two of each of the eyes, etc., there is only one dhātu. Because both are the support of the consciousness that apprehends forms, etc., both are clear rūpa, similar awareness, and have the same characteristics; the objects of experience are the same rūpa; the consciousness that relies on and apprehends rūpa generates the same kind. So, why do two appear? If there were only one, it would be very unsightly; in order to make the support beautiful, two appear. Where does beauty appear?