Chinese
大正藏第 31 册 No. 1589 大乘唯识论 No. 1589 [Nos. 1588, 1590; cf. No. 1591] 大乘唯识论序 唯识论者。乃是诸佛甚深境界。非是凡夫二乘所知。然此论始末明三种空。何者为三。一者人无我空。二者因缘法体空。三者真归佛性空。我空者。我本自无。但凡夫之人愚痴颠倒。于五阴中妄计为有。何以知无。凡夫依心识妄想分别。于五阴因缘法中见我为有。然此我相于五阴中实不可得。若尔般若观此五阴中一二离二。实体不可得犹如兔角。若有此我于一中住者。应于一中见。应于异中见。应于和合中见。云何一中无我者。以有常无常过故。若有我与五阴一者。五阴无常我亦应无常。复有我若与阴一者。我是常故阴亦应常。若我与阴二者。一边即同前无常。一边即同前常。若离二边者此亦不然。离于二边别相不可得。是故实无神我。如是知者名入人无我空。因缘法体空者。谓诸色等因缘法。以随俗因缘起。云何随俗因缘起。世人见牛起于牛想不起马想。见马起于马想不起牛想。色等法中亦复如是。见柱起柱想不起色想。见色起色想不起柱想。如薪火相待无实。以离于薪更无实火。以离于火更无实薪。于薪更无实火。以离于火更 现代汉语译本： 大正藏第 31 册 No. 1589 大乘唯识论 No. 1589 [Nos. 1588, 1590; cf. No. 1591] 大乘唯识论序 唯识论，乃是诸佛甚深境界，不是凡夫和二乘（声闻、缘觉）所能了解的。然而此论从始至终阐明三种空。哪三种空呢？一是人无我空，二是因缘法体空，三是真归佛性空。 我空，指的是‘我’本来就是不存在的，只是凡夫愚痴颠倒，在五阴（色、受、想、行、识）中错误地认为‘我’是存在的。凭什么知道‘我’不存在呢？因为凡夫依赖心识妄想分别，在五阴因缘法中见到‘我’的存在。然而这个‘我’相在五阴中实际上是无法得到的。如果这样，般若（智慧）观察这五阴，既不属于一，也不属于异，实体是无法得到的，就像兔角一样。如果‘我’存在，并且存在于‘一’之中，那么应该在‘一’之中见到‘我’；应该在‘异’之中见到‘我’；应该在和合之中见到‘我’。 为什么说‘一’之中没有‘我’呢？因为有常和无常的过失。如果‘我’与五阴是‘一’，五阴是无常的，那么‘我’也应该是无常的。反过来说，如果‘我’与五阴是‘一’，‘我’是常的，那么五阴也应该是常的。如果‘我’与五阴是‘异’，那么一边就如同前面所说的无常，一边就如同前面所说的常。如果离开这两边，也是不成立的，因为离开这两边，别的相状是无法得到的。所以实际上没有神我。像这样理解就叫做进入人无我空。 因缘法体空，指的是诸如色等因缘法，是随着世俗的因缘而生起的。什么是随着世俗的因缘而生起呢？世人见到牛就产生牛的念头，不会产生马的念头；见到马就产生马的念头，不会产生牛的念头。色等法中也是这样，见到柱子就产生柱子的念头，不会产生色的念头；见到色就产生色的念头，不会产生柱子的念头。就像柴和火互相依存一样，没有实体。离开柴就没有实在的火，离开火就没有实在的柴。离开火，柴中就没有实在的火。
English
English version: Taisho Tripitaka Volume 31, No. 1589, Mahayana Vijnaptimatrata Sastra (Treatise on the Consciousness-Only Doctrine) No. 1589 [Nos. 1588, 1590; cf. No. 1591] Preface to the Mahayana Vijnaptimatrata Sastra The Vijnaptimatrata Sastra (Consciousness-Only Doctrine) embodies the profound realm of all Buddhas, beyond the comprehension of ordinary beings and those of the Two Vehicles (Śrāvakayāna and Pratyekabuddhayāna). This treatise elucidates three types of emptiness from beginning to end. What are these three? First, the emptiness of self in persons (Pudgala-nairātmya). Second, the emptiness of the substance of conditioned dharmas (Dharma-nairātmya). Third, the emptiness of returning to the true Buddha-nature (Tathāgatagarbha). The emptiness of self (Pudgala-nairātmya) means that a 'self' is fundamentally non-existent. It is only due to the ignorance and delusion of ordinary beings that they falsely believe in its existence within the five skandhas (pañca-skandha: form, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness). How do we know it is non-existent? Because ordinary beings rely on the mind's consciousness, deluded thoughts, and discriminations, perceiving a 'self' within the conditioned dharmas of the five skandhas. However, this appearance of 'self' is actually unattainable within the five skandhas. If this is the case, prajna (wisdom) observes these five skandhas, finding them neither as one nor as different; their substance is unattainable, like a rabbit's horn. If a 'self' exists and resides within 'one,' then it should be seen within 'one'; it should be seen within 'different'; it should be seen within 'combination'. Why is there no 'self' within 'one'? Because there is the fault of permanence and impermanence. If the 'self' is 'one' with the five skandhas, and the five skandhas are impermanent, then the 'self' should also be impermanent. Conversely, if the 'self' is 'one' with the skandhas, and the 'self' is permanent, then the skandhas should also be permanent. If the 'self' is 'different' from the five skandhas, then one side is like the aforementioned impermanence, and the other side is like the aforementioned permanence. If one departs from these two extremes, it is also untenable, because apart from these two extremes, no other characteristic can be obtained. Therefore, there is actually no divine self (ātman). Understanding in this way is called entering the emptiness of self in persons (Pudgala-nairātmya). The emptiness of the substance of conditioned dharmas (Dharma-nairātmya) refers to conditioned dharmas such as form (rūpa), which arise according to conventional conditions. What does it mean to arise according to conventional conditions? When people see a cow, they generate the thought of a cow and not the thought of a horse; when they see a horse, they generate the thought of a horse and not the thought of a cow. It is the same with dharmas such as form: when one sees a pillar, one generates the thought of a pillar and not the thought of form; when one sees form, one generates the thought of form and not the thought of a pillar. It is like firewood and fire depending on each other, without substance. Apart from firewood, there is no real fire; apart from fire, there is no real firewood. Apart from fire, there is no real fire in the firewood. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
无实薪。于薪更无实火能作薪因。以离于火更无实薪能作火因。而见火说假名薪。见薪说假名火。以相待成故。如是能成所成。而不离能成因而有所成。不离所成因而有能成。如彼薪火能成所成亦实无。是名因缘法体空。真如法空者。所谓佛性清净之体古今一定。故经云佛性者名为第一义空。所言空者体无万相故。言其空无万相者。无有世间色等有为法故无万相。非是同于无性法。以其真如法体。是故经云。去八解脱者名不空空。是故不同无法空也。若如是观。是名解真如法空。唯识论言唯识者。明但有内心无色香等外诸境界。何以得知。如人目有肤翳妄见毛轮犍闼婆城等种种诸色实无前境界。但虚妄见有如是诸众生等外诸境界。故言唯识。若尔但应言破色。不应言破心。此亦有义。心有二种。一者相应心。二者不相应心。相应心者。谓无常妄识虚妄分别。与烦恼结使相应。名相应心。不相应心者。所谓常住第一义谛。古今一相自性清净心。今言破心者。唯破妄识烦恼相应心。不破佛性清净心。故得言破心也。 大乘唯识论一卷 天亲菩萨造 陈天竺三藏真谛译 修道不共他 能说无等义 顶礼大乘理 当说立及破 无量佛所修 除障及根本 唯识自性静 昧劣人不信 现代汉语译本 没有真实的柴薪。对于柴薪来说，也没有真实的火焰能够作为柴薪的原因。因为离开了火焰，就没有真实的柴薪能够作为火焰的原因。因此，看到火焰就说是假名的柴薪，看到柴薪就说是假名的火焰，这是因为相互依存而成立的缘故。像这样，能成立的和所成立的，不能离开能成立的因而有所成立，也不能离开所成立的因而有能成立。就像那柴薪和火焰，能成立的和所成立的，实际上都是没有的。这叫做因缘法体空。真如法空，指的是佛性（Buddha-nature，清净的本体）清净的本体，从古至今都是一定的。所以经书上说，佛性被称为第一义空。所说的空，是因为本体没有万象的缘故。说它空无万象，是因为没有世间的色等有为法，所以没有万象。但这不是等同于无性法。因为它是真如法体。所以经书上说，去除八解脱（Eight Liberations）的叫做不空空。因此，这不同于没有法的那种空。如果这样观察，就叫做理解了真如法空。《唯识论》（Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi shastra）说唯识，是说明只有内心，没有色香等外在的各种境界。凭什么知道呢？就像人的眼睛有翳病，错误地看到毛发轮、犍闼婆城（Gandharva city，海市蜃楼）等各种颜色，实际上没有前面的境界，只是虚妄地看到有这样的各种众生等外在的各种境界。所以说唯识。如果这样，就应该只说破除色，不应该说破除心。这里也有道理。心有两种，一是相应心，二是不相应心。相应心，指的是无常的妄识，虚妄的分别，与烦恼结使相应，叫做相应心。不相应心，指的是常住的第一义谛，从古至今都是一样的自性清净心。现在说破除心，只是破除妄识烦恼的相应心，不破除佛性的清净心。所以可以说破除心。 《大乘唯识论》（Mahayana Vijnaptimatrata Shastra）一卷 天亲菩萨（Vasubandhu）造 陈天竺三藏真谛（Paramartha）译 修道不与他人相同，能够说出无与伦比的意义 顶礼大乘的道理，应当说出建立和破除 无量佛所修习的，去除障碍和根本 唯识的自性是寂静的，愚昧浅薄的人不相信
English
English version There is no real firewood. With respect to firewood, there is also no real fire that can serve as the cause of firewood. Because apart from fire, there is no real firewood that can serve as the cause of fire. Therefore, seeing fire, one speaks of the nominal firewood; seeing firewood, one speaks of the nominal fire. This is because they are established through mutual dependence. Like this, the enabling and the enabled cannot be separated from the enabling cause in order to have the enabled, nor can they be separated from the enabled cause in order to have the enabling. Just like that firewood and fire, the enabling and the enabled, are actually non-existent. This is called the emptiness of the substance of conditioned arising (hetu-pratyaya). The emptiness of Suchness (Tathata) refers to the pure substance of Buddha-nature (Buddha-nature, the pure essence), which is constant from ancient times to the present. Therefore, the sutra says that Buddha-nature is called the ultimate emptiness. The emptiness that is spoken of is because the substance has no myriad forms. Saying that it is empty of myriad forms is because there are no conditioned phenomena (samskrta-dharma) such as the worldly form, and therefore there are no myriad forms. But this is not the same as the dharma of no-self-nature (nihsvabhava). Because it is the substance of Suchness. Therefore, the sutra says that removing the Eight Liberations (Eight Liberations) is called non-empty emptiness. Therefore, this is different from the emptiness of having no dharma. If one observes in this way, it is called understanding the emptiness of Suchness. The Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi shastra (Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi shastra) says that Vijnapti (consciousness-only) explains that there is only the inner mind and no external realms such as form, smell, etc. How is this known? Just as a person's eyes have cataracts and mistakenly see hair-like wheels, Gandharva cities (Gandharva city, mirage), and various colors, in reality there are no preceding realms, but only falsely sees that there are such various beings and other external realms. Therefore, it is said to be consciousness-only. If so, one should only say to break form, not to break mind. There is also reason here. There are two types of mind: one is the associated mind, and the other is the non-associated mind. The associated mind refers to the impermanent deluded consciousness, the false discrimination, which is associated with afflictions and bonds, and is called the associated mind. The non-associated mind refers to the permanent ultimate truth, the self-nature pure mind that is the same from ancient times to the present. Now, saying to break the mind only breaks the associated mind of deluded consciousness and afflictions, and does not break the pure mind of Buddha-nature. Therefore, it can be said to break the mind. Mahayana Vijnaptimatrata Shastra (Mahayana Vijnaptimatrata Shastra), one volume Composed by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu (Vasubandhu) Translated by Tripitaka Master Paramartha (Paramartha) of Chen Tianzhu Cultivating the path is not shared with others, able to speak of incomparable meaning Paying homage to the principle of Mahayana, one should speak of establishing and refuting What immeasurable Buddhas cultivate, removing obstacles and the root The self-nature of Vijnapti is tranquil, ignorant and shallow people do not believe --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
于大乘中立三界唯有识。如经言。佛子三界者唯有心。心意识等是总名。应知此心有相应法。唯言者为除色尘等。 实无有外尘 似尘识生故 犹如翳眼人 见毛二月等 大乘中立义。外尘实无所有。若尔云何见有外尘。为证此义故言。似尘识生故。由识似尘现故。众生于无尘中见尘。为显此识故立斯譬如眼有病及眼根乱。于无物中识似二月及鹿渴等而现。唯识义亦如是。是故三界实无外尘。识转似尘显。三性二谛同无性性。名非安立。 处时悉无定 无相续不定 作事悉不成 若唯识无尘 此偈欲显何义。若离六尘。色等识生不从尘生。何因此识有处得生。非一切处生。于此处中或生不生而不恒生。若众人同在一时一处。是识不定相续生非随一人。如人眼有翳见毛二月等。余人则不见。复有何因翳眼人所见发蝇等尘。不能作发蝇等事。余尘能作。又梦中所得饮食衣服毒药刀杖等。不能作饮食等事余物能作。又乾闼婆城实非有。不能作城事。余城能作。若同无尘。是四种义云何不同。是故离尘。定处定时不定相续及作事。是四义悉不成。非不成。定处等义成如梦。云何梦中离诸尘有处。或见国园男女等非一切处。或是处中有时见有时不见而不恒见。是故离尘。定处定时得成立。如饿 现代汉语译本： 在大乘佛教中，建立了三界唯有识的观点。正如经文所说：‘佛子，所谓三界，唯有心。’心、意识等等，只是总的名称。应当知道，这个‘心’有相应的法。这里用‘唯’字，是为了排除色尘等外在事物。 ‘实际上没有外在的尘埃，只是因为意识的显现才看起来像尘埃。’ ‘就像眼睛有翳病的人，会看到毛发、两个月亮等等。’ 大乘中确立的观点是，外在的尘埃实际上并不存在。如果这样，为什么会看到外在的尘埃呢？为了证明这个观点，所以说，‘因为意识的显现才看起来像尘埃’。由于意识显现得像尘埃，众生就在没有尘埃的地方看到了尘埃。为了彰显这个意识，所以设立了这个比喻，就像眼睛有疾病或者眼根错乱的人，在没有物体的地方，意识会显现出两个月亮或者鹿渴等幻象。唯识的道理也是这样。因此，三界实际上没有外在的尘埃，是意识的转变才显现得像尘埃。三性（遍计所执性、依他起性、圆成实性）和二谛（世俗谛、胜义谛）都与无自性性相同，这种‘名’是无法安立的。 ‘如果只有意识而没有尘埃，那么处所、时间都没有定准，相续也不确定，做事也都不能成功。’ 这首偈颂想要阐明什么道理呢？如果离开了六尘（色、声、香、味、触、法），色等意识的产生不是从尘埃产生，那么这个意识为什么会在某个处所产生，而不是在所有处所都产生呢？在这个处所中，有时产生，有时不产生，而不是恒常产生。如果众人同时在一个处所，这个意识的相续产生是不确定的，不是随着一个人而产生。就像人的眼睛有翳病，看到毛发、两个月亮等等，其他人则看不到。又是什么原因导致眼睛有翳病的人所看到的头发、苍蝇等尘埃，不能做头发、苍蝇等的事情，而其他的尘埃却能做呢？又比如梦中得到的饮食、衣服、毒药、刀杖等等，不能做饮食等的事情，而其他的物品却能做。又比如乾闼婆城（海市蜃楼）实际上并不存在，不能做城市的事情，而其他的城市却能做。如果同样是没有尘埃，这四种情况为什么不同呢？所以，离开了尘埃，确定的处所、确定的时间、不确定的相续以及做事，这四种情况都不能成立。并非不能成立，确定的处所等情况是可以成立的，就像梦一样。为什么梦中离开了诸尘埃，却有处所，或者看到国园、男女等等，而不是在所有处所都看到呢？或者是在这个处所中，有时看到，有时看不到，而不是恒常看到呢？所以，离开了尘埃，确定的处所、确定的时间是可以成立的，就像饥饿。