Chinese
的意和意随行是，向内观察的缘故，不能发起善或非善的业，如何成为行的因缘呢？发心有两种，即因时的发心和彼时的发心。第一种是间接的因缘，第二种是直接的因缘。以无明的缘故而有行，这里是指因时的发心，不是指彼时的发心。否则，福德和不动业也会变成只是烦恼，因为无明具有彼时的发心，如同非福德业一样。因此，三种行都是因时的发心由无明所发起，同样，一切也都会变成是能投生轮回的业，而彼时的发心是从善与非善的根本各自产生，因此，成熟带来所欲与不欲的业，会变成善恶各自不同。其中，非福德业的彼时的发心是三种不善根中的任何一种，而另外两种的彼时的发心是无贪等三种善根。烦恼性的意的随行的无明，如何也能成为因时的发心呢？以无明的力量，会产生我执和我爱，凡是对我执著的人，为了自己今生的安乐，会从事杀生等非福德业，为了自己来世的安乐，则会从事福德和不动业。这样看来，这些行所产生的根本就是无明本身，因此，无明是这些行的因时的发心是合理的。那么，无明是修断的，因为有些证悟真谛者也还有无明，圣者们也会造作能投生轮回的业等吗？这种过失是不存在的，因为在没有现见真谛之前，凡是凡夫们只是对无我生起信解
English
With regard to the mind and its accompanying mental events: Since one looks inward, is it not the case that one cannot initiate virtuous or non-virtuous actions? How then does it become a condition for formation? There are two kinds of motivation: the motivation at the time of the cause and the motivation at that time. The first is an indirect condition, and the second is a direct condition. In this case of 'formation through the condition of ignorance,' it refers to the motivation at the time of the cause, not the motivation at that time. Otherwise, meritorious and unwavering actions would also become solely afflictive, since ignorance possesses the motivation at that time, just like non-meritorious actions. Therefore, all three types of formation are equally initiated by ignorance as the motivation at the time of the cause, and thus all become actions that propel rebirth. However, the motivation at that time arises from the respective roots of virtue and non-virtue, and thus the actions that produce desired and undesired results become distinct as virtue and vice. Among these, the motivation at that time for non-meritorious actions is any one of the three non-virtuous roots, while the motivation at that time for the other two is all three virtuous roots, such as non-attachment. How can ignorance, which accompanies the afflictive mind, also be the motivation at the time of the cause? Through the power of ignorance, the view of self and attachment to self arise. Whoever is attached to self engages in non-meritorious actions such as killing for the sake of their own happiness in this life, and engages in meritorious and unwavering actions because they desire happiness for themselves in the next life. Thus, since the basis from which these formations arise is ignorance itself, it is reasonable that ignorance is the motivation at the time of the cause for these formations. If ignorance is to be abandoned through cultivation, and since some who have seen the truth also have it, will the noble ones also create actions that propel rebirth, and so on? This fault does not exist, because as long as one has not directly seen the truth, ordinary people only have faith in selflessness
Chinese
然而，这是因为它的力量非常微弱，而且执着于我的观念从无始以来就已根深蒂固。因此，它会引发转世的业等。当一个人亲眼见到真理时，由于证悟无我的智慧具有强大的力量，就像后得位中，画家将自己画的画像误认为是夜叉一样，即使我执稍微生起，也会立即消失，因为它力量微弱，所以没有引发转世的能力。此外，这里的无明有两种：对业果的愚昧和对真如实相的愚昧。第一种会引发非福德业等。第二种则被解释为引发福德和不动业等。如果有人问：这是为什么呢？第一种是根据当时的动机而说的，第二种是根据因时的动机而说的，所以没有过失。如果有人问：在瑜伽行者的地界中，进入圣流者是否已经断除了支分？答：只是断除了所有支分中的一部分，而不是完全断除。经中说，断除了恶趣所摄的众生，而没有断除善趣所摄的众生，这只是指这个意思，而不是说无明有两种需要断除。此外，见道所断的无明是由于听闻邪法等突发因素而产生的遍计所执，因此，对于那些没有被鸟兽和宗派改变心智的孩童来说，这种无明不会显现，因此，他们也不会引发转世的业等，所以，在这里，作为缘起支分的无明不是见道所断，而是修道所断，而且它是不混杂的无明，与染污意相应，这样说是合理的。行是思和思维自性的业，包括福德等三种，以及善业和不善业的十种道路。识是执持这些行之业习气的阿赖耶识，也就是因时的识和果时的识。
English
However, this is because its power is very weak, and the clinging to the notion of self has been deeply ingrained since beginningless time. Therefore, it triggers the karma of rebirth, etc. When one directly sees the truth, because the wisdom of realizing non-self has great power, just as in the post-attainment state, a painter mistakes the image he painted for a yaksha, even if the ego arises slightly, it will immediately disappear, because it is weak, so it has no ability to trigger rebirth. Furthermore, ignorance here is of two kinds: ignorance of the law of karma and ignorance of the true reality. The first kind triggers non-meritorious karma, etc. The second is explained as triggering meritorious and unwavering karma, etc. If someone asks: Why is this? The first is said according to the motivation at that time, and the second is said according to the motivation at the time of the cause, so there is no fault. If someone asks: In the realm of yogis, has the stream-enterer abandoned the limbs? The answer is: Only a part of all the limbs has been abandoned, not completely abandoned. The sutra says that those beings included in the evil realms have been abandoned, while those included in the good realms have not been abandoned, which only refers to this meaning, and does not mean that there are two kinds of ignorance to be abandoned. Furthermore, the ignorance to be abandoned by seeing is the conceptual imputation that arises due to sudden factors such as listening to wrong teachings, etc. Therefore, for those children whose minds have not been changed by birds, beasts, and sects, this ignorance will not manifest, therefore, they will not trigger the karma of rebirth, etc. Therefore, here, the ignorance as a limb of dependent origination is not to be abandoned by seeing, but to be abandoned by cultivation, and it is unmixed ignorance, corresponding to the afflicted mind, which is reasonable to say. Action is the karma of the nature of thought and thinking, including the three kinds of merit, etc., and the ten paths of good and non-virtuous karma. Consciousness is the alaya consciousness that holds the karmic imprints of these actions, that is, the consciousness at the time of the cause and the consciousness at the time of the result.
Chinese
两种业的识中，第一种是：执持福德等诸行习气的识，即由行缘所生的识，名为识。第二种是：凭借其力量，使名色在母胎中生长的识，即由识缘所生的名色之识。名色是指与软滑等相伴随的名基蕴，以及具有诸根的身体。六处是指它生长，成为眼识等生门之眼的诸根。触和受已述。爱是指对苦乐等感受产生取舍的贪著。即欲爱、有爱和无有爱。第一种是指对欲界所行之事的贪著，因为特别执着于欲望的功德。第二种是指对上二界的贪著，因为它们执着于有，即执着于相续受蕴。第三种是指想要断绝三界之蕴的相续。或者想要获得快乐是欲爱，想要舍弃痛苦是无有爱。理自在认为，对蕴等有漏事物普遍贪著是有爱。取是：想要在未来获得，以及想要不与现在分离的自性之意愿和贪著。它们因对象的不同而转变为见取等四种。如果问：爱和取有什么区别？二者虽然在贪著的体性上相同，但爱是小部分的贪著，而取是大部分的贪著。而且，爱是对现在的处境、蕴等产生贪著，而取是在死亡的处境中，对蕴单独产生特别贪著的贪著。第一种是见取等取与爱之间的差别。第二种是缘起的支分。
English
Of the two consciousnesses of karma, the first is: the consciousness that holds the imprints of virtuous actions and so forth, that is, the consciousness that arises from the condition of action, called consciousness. The second is: the consciousness that, by its power, causes name and form to grow in the mother's womb, that is, the consciousness of name and form arising from the condition of consciousness. Name and form refer to the aggregate of the base of name accompanied by softness and so forth, and the body with its faculties. The six sense sources refer to the faculties such as the eye, which grow and become the gate of birth for eye consciousness and so forth. Contact and feeling have already been explained. Craving refers to the attachment of wanting to accept or reject pleasant and unpleasant feelings. That is, desire craving, existence craving, and non-existence craving. The first refers to the attachment to the things done in the desire realm, because of particularly clinging to the qualities of desire. The second refers to the attachment to the two upper realms, because they cling to existence, that is, clinging to the continuous aggregate of reception. The third is the desire to cut off the continuity of the aggregates of the three realms. Or, wanting to obtain happiness is desire craving, and wanting to abandon suffering is non-existence craving. The Lord of Reasoning believes that universally clinging to contaminated things such as aggregates is existence craving. Grasping is: the desire to obtain in the future, and the intention and attachment of wanting not to be separated from the present. These transform into four types such as view grasping, depending on the difference in the object. If asked, what is the difference between craving and grasping? Although both are the same in the nature of attachment, craving is a small part of attachment, while grasping is a large part of attachment. Moreover, craving is attachment to the present situation, aggregates, and so forth, while grasping is the attachment of particularly clinging to the aggregates alone in the situation of death. The first is the difference between grasping alone, such as view grasping, and craving. The second is a limb of dependent origination.
Chinese
是说把握和贪爱的差别。有，就是以前的行为习气所熏染的阿赖耶识，在临死的时候，以具有执着未来蕴特征的近取而滋养，又以趋向于再次出生的状态的业习气所具有的能力和威力，成为出生的因缘的有，而那个识就是成为名色因缘的识。然而，那些是不可说为既是它，又是其他的。生，就是那样的识进入母胎，眼等诸根逐渐显现的状态，也就是前面已经说过的。老和死，就是年龄变化和生命变化的状态，那些也已经说过了。老死合为一个支分，是因为有未老而寿命已尽就死亡的情况。这些支分中，哪些存在于哪个界呢？欲界中全部都有，色界和无色界中有各个支分的一部分，因为在那些界中也有具有衰老特征的老。为什么无明被列为第一个支分呢？因为从无明产生烦恼，从烦恼也产生业，从业产生生，因此无明是存在中一切出生的根本，所以被列为第一个支分。如果无明有产生它的其他原因，那么它就不会是第一个支分了，如果它没有原因，那么轮回就是无始的，并且承认了无因论的观点，那就不是说缘起的人了。如果说是什么力量使无明完全成为烦恼性的，无明有其他的原因，或者说是无因产生的，那么就像前面所说的过失一样，虽然是真实的，但在这里不是那样产生的，无明是从无始以来相续不断的无明习气所产生的，所以这不是无因产生的，也不是从其他的原因产生的。如果是那样，那么行等等
English
It is said that it is the difference between grasping and craving. Existence is that the Alaya consciousness, which is especially perfumed by the habits of previous actions, is nourished by the near-taking, which has the characteristic of clinging to the future aggregates that occur at the time of death. Moreover, the power and might of the karmic habits in the state of being manifestly directed towards rebirth in existence become the cause of birth, and that consciousness is the consciousness that becomes the cause of name and form. However, those cannot be said to be the same as it, and others. Birth is the state in which such consciousness enters the womb and the sense organs such as the eyes gradually appear, which is what has already been said before. Aging and death are the states of changing age and changing life, and those have also been said before. Aging and death are made into one limb because there are cases where one dies without aging after the end of one's life. Among these limbs, which ones exist in which realm? All exist in the desire realm, and the form and formless realms have a part of each of them, because there is also aging with the characteristic of decaying actions in those realms. Why is ignorance shown as the first limb? Because afflictions arise from ignorance, and actions also arise from afflictions, and birth arises from actions, therefore ignorance is the root of all births in existence, so it is shown as the first limb. If ignorance has another cause that produces it, then it will not be the first limb, and if it has no cause, then samsara is without beginning, and by admitting the view of causelessness, one will not be a speaker of dependent origination. If one says that it is by the power of what that ignorance becomes completely afflicted, that ignorance has other causes, or that it arises without cause, then it is true that it will only become the fault as mentioned before, but here it does not arise in that way, ignorance arises from the power of the habits of ignorance that have been continuous from beginningless time, so this is not arising without cause, nor is it arising from other causes. If that is the case, then actions and so on