English
English version: Question: Could external realms have such a feeling? Am I now directly experiencing such a realm? Answer: This verification is not valid. The verse says: 'Present feelings are like dreams, etc.; when present feelings have arisen, both the seer and the seen realm have disappeared. How can we allow for direct perception (pratyaksha)?' Treatise: Just as in dreams, etc., even without external realms, there can still be such present feelings. Present feelings at other times should also be understood in the same way. Therefore, using this as evidence is not valid. Moreover, if there were such present feelings at that time, and I am now directly experiencing such forms, etc., then the ability to see the realm would have already ceased, because it requires consciousness to discriminate. At that time, eye consciousness, etc., must have already passed away. Those who advocate momentariness believe that when this feeling arises, the present realms of forms, etc., have all perished. How can we allow for direct perception at this time? It is necessary to have personally experienced it before, so that consciousness can recall it. Therefore, it can be determined that there was a realm that was once experienced. Allowing the seeing of this realm is direct perception. Therefore, the meaning of the real existence of external realms is established. Like this, to prove the existence of external realms through first experiencing and then recalling is also not valid. Why? The verse says: 'Like the consciousness that appears similar to a realm, from this arises recollection.' Treatise: As mentioned earlier, even without external realms, eye consciousness, etc., appear similar to external realms. From this subsequent stage, corresponding to thought, discriminating consciousness appears similar to the previous realm. This is said to be the recollection of what was once experienced. Therefore, using subsequent recollection to prove that the previously seen external realm truly exists is not valid. If, like in a dream, even without a real realm, consciousness can arise, then it is the same when awake. Just as people know that the realms in dreams are not real, since it is like this when awake, why can't they know it themselves? Since they cannot know that the realms when awake are not real, how can they think, like consciousness in a dream, that real realms do not exist at all? This also cannot be used as evidence. The verse says: 'Without awakening, one cannot know that what is seen in a dream is not real.' Treatise: Just as when not awakened, one does not know that the realms in a dream are not real, but only knows it when awakened. Like this, the habitual practice of worldly false discriminations is so ripe that it is like being in a dream. All that is seen is not real. Without attaining true awakening, one cannot know it oneself. If one attains that transcendental antidote, non-discriminating wisdom (nirvikalpa-jnana), then it is called true awakening. When the worldly pure wisdom obtained after this is present, one truly knows that realm is not real. The meaning is the same. If various --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
有情。由自相续转变差别。似境识起。不由外境为所缘生。彼诸有情。近善恶友闻正邪法。二识决定。既无友教此云何成。非不得成。颂曰。 展转增上力 二识成决定 论曰。以诸有情自他相续诸识展转为增上缘。随其所应二识决定。谓余相续识差别故。令余相续差别识生各成决定不由外境。若如梦中境虽无实而识得起。觉识亦然。何缘梦觉造善恶行。爱非爱果当受不同。颂曰。 心由睡眠坏 梦觉果不同 论曰。在梦位。心由睡眠坏势力羸劣。觉心不尔。故所造行当受异熟。胜劣不同非由外境。若唯有识无身语等。羊等云何为他所杀。若羊等死不由他害。屠者云何得杀生罪。颂曰。 由他识转变 有杀害事业 如鬼等意力 令他失念等 论曰。如由鬼等意念势力。令他有情失念得梦。或着魅等变异事成。具神通者意念势力。令他梦中见种种事。如大迦多衍那意愿势力。令娑剌拏王等梦见异事。又如阿练若仙人意愤势力。令吠摩质呾利王梦见异事。如是由他识转变故。令他违害命根事起。应知死者谓众同分。由识变异相续断灭。复次颂曰。 弹咤迦等空 云何由仙忿 意罚为大罪 此复云何成 论曰。若不许由他识转变增上力故他有情死。云何世尊 现代汉语译本： 有情（yǒuqíng）：由于自身相续的转变差别，生起类似于外境的识，但不是由外境作为所缘而生。这些有情，亲近善友或恶友，听闻正法或邪法，两种识就此决定。如果既没有善友的教导也没有恶友的引诱，这又如何成立呢？并非不能成立。颂文说： ‘展转增上力，二识成决定。’ 论述：以诸有情自身和他人的相续诸识，辗转作为增上缘，随着各自的情况，两种识就此决定。意思是由于其他相续的识的差别，使得其他相续的差别识生起，各自成为决定，不是由外境所决定。如果像梦中一样，境虽然没有实体，而识却能够生起，那么觉醒时的识也是如此。那么为什么梦中和觉醒时造作善恶行为，所受的可爱和不可爱果报会有所不同呢？颂文说： ‘心由睡眠坏，梦觉果不同。’ 论述：在梦中的时候，心由于睡眠而损坏，势力衰弱。觉醒时的心则不是这样。因此，梦中和觉醒时所造作的行为，所受的异熟果报，胜劣不同，不是由于外境造成的。如果只有识而没有身语等，那么羊等动物为什么会被他人所杀害呢？如果羊等的死亡不是由于他人杀害，那么屠夫又怎么会得到杀生的罪过呢？颂文说： ‘由他识转变，有杀害事业，如鬼等意力，令他失念等。’ 论述：就像由于鬼等的意念势力，使其他有情失去正念而做梦，或者被迷惑等变异事情发生。具有神通的人的意念势力，使他人梦中见到种种事情。例如大迦多衍那（Mahākātyāyana）的意愿势力，使娑剌拏王（Saraṇa）等梦见奇异的事情。又如阿练若（āraṇyaka）仙人的愤怒势力，使吠摩质呾利王（Vemacitrin）梦见奇异的事情。像这样，由于其他识的转变，使他人违害命根的事情发生。应当知道，死者是指众同分（nikāya-sabhāga），由于识的变异，相续断灭。再次，颂文说： ‘弹咤迦（Daṇḍaka）等空，云何由仙忿？意罚为大罪，此复云何成？’ 论述：如果不承认由于其他识转变的增上力，导致其他有情死亡，那么世尊（Śākyamuni Buddha）
English
English version: Sentient beings (yǒuqíng): Due to the transformation and differentiation of their own mental continuum, consciousness arises that resembles external objects, but it is not produced by external objects as its object-condition. These sentient beings, associating with good or bad friends, hearing the correct or incorrect Dharma, the two types of consciousness are thus determined. If there is neither the teaching of good friends nor the enticement of bad friends, how can this be established? It is not that it cannot be established. The verse says: 'Through the power of mutual influence, the two consciousnesses become determined.' Treatise: With the consciousnesses of sentient beings' own and others' mental continuums mutually acting as contributing conditions, according to their respective situations, the two types of consciousness become determined. This means that due to the difference in the consciousness of other mental continuums, the differentiated consciousness of other mental continuums arises, each becoming determined, not determined by external objects. If, like in a dream, the object has no substance, yet consciousness can arise, then the consciousness in the waking state is also like that. Then why is it that performing good and bad deeds in dreams and in the waking state results in different agreeable and disagreeable consequences? The verse says: 'The mind is damaged by sleep; the results of dreams and waking differ.' Treatise: In the dream state, the mind is damaged by sleep, and its power is weak. The mind in the waking state is not like this. Therefore, the actions performed in dreams and in the waking state result in different ripening consequences, with varying degrees of superiority or inferiority, not caused by external objects. If there is only consciousness and no body, speech, etc., then why are sheep and other animals killed by others? If the death of sheep and others is not due to others killing them, then how can butchers incur the sin of killing? The verse says: 'Due to the transformation of others' consciousness, there is the act of killing; like the mental power of ghosts, causing others to lose mindfulness, etc.' Treatise: Just as due to the mental power of ghosts, other sentient beings lose mindfulness and dream, or are deluded and other aberrant things happen. The mental power of those with supernatural abilities causes others to see various things in dreams. For example, the power of Mahākātyāyana's intention caused King Saraṇa and others to dream of strange things. Also, the power of the anger of the hermit āraṇyaka caused King Vemacitrin to dream of strange things. Like this, due to the transformation of others' consciousness, events that harm the life force of others occur. It should be known that the deceased refers to the commonality of beings (nikāya-sabhāga), and due to the transformation of consciousness, the mental continuum is severed. Again, the verse says: 'Daṇḍaka and other empty places, how are they due to the anger of a sage? Mental punishment is a great crime; how is this established?' Treatise: If it is not admitted that the contributing power of the transformation of others' consciousness leads to the death of other sentient beings, then how did the World Honored One (Śākyamuni Buddha) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
为成意罚是大罪故。返问长者邬波离言。汝颇曾闻何因缘故。弹咤迦林。末蹬伽林。羯陵伽林。皆空闲寂。长者白佛言。乔答摩。我闻由仙意愤恚故。若执神鬼敬重仙人。知嫌为杀彼有情类。不但由仙意愤恚者。云何引彼。成立意罚为大罪性过于身语。由此应知。但由仙忿彼有情死理善成立。若唯有识。诸他心智知他心不。设尔何失。若不能知何谓他心智。若能知者。唯识应不成。虽知他心然不如实。颂曰。 他心智云何 知境不如实 如知自心智 不知如佛境 论曰。诸他心智云何于境不如实知。如自心智。此自心智云何于境不如实知。由无知故。二智于境各由无知所覆蔽故。不知如佛净智所行不可言境。此二于境不如实知。由似外境虚妄显现故。所取能取分别未断故。唯识理趣无边决择品类差别难度甚深。非佛谁能具广决择。颂曰。 我已随自能 略成唯识义 此中一切种 难思佛所行 论曰。唯识理趣品类无边。我随自能已略成立。余一切种非所思议。超诸寻思所行境故。如是理趣唯佛所行。诸佛世尊于一切境及一切种智无碍故。 唯识二十论一卷 现代汉语译本：因为成立意罚是很大的罪过。所以反过来问长者邬波离（Upali，佛陀的弟子）说：‘你可曾听说过什么因缘，导致弹咤迦林（Dandaka forest）、末蹬伽林（Matanga forest）、羯陵伽林（Kalinga forest）都空闲寂静？’长者回答佛陀说：‘乔答摩（Gautama，佛陀的姓），我听说是因为仙人意念愤恨的缘故。如果执掌神鬼敬重仙人，知道（有人）冒犯（仙人）就杀害那些有情众生。’如果不仅仅是因为仙人意念愤恨，又怎么能以此来成立意罚是大罪的性质，超过身语（所造的罪业）呢？由此应该知道，仅仅因为仙人的忿恨，那些有情众生死去的道理才能成立。如果只有识，那么其他的心智能否知道其他的心呢？如果这样假设，会有什么缺失？如果不能知道，那还叫什么他心智？如果能知道，那么唯识的道理就应该不能成立。即使能知道其他的心，但却不能如实地了解。 偈颂说： ‘他心智怎么能知道境界，却不能如实地了解？就像知道自己的心智，却不能了解像佛陀境界那样。’ 论述说：各种他心智怎么能对境界不如实地了解呢？就像自己的心智一样。这自己的心智又怎么能对境界不如实地了解呢？因为没有智慧的缘故。两种智慧对于境界，各自因为被无知所覆盖遮蔽的缘故，不能像佛陀清净的智慧所行持的不可言说的境界那样了解。这两种智慧对于境界不能如实地了解，因为相似于外在境界的虚妄显现的缘故，所取和能取的分别还没有断除的缘故。唯识的理趣，无边的决择，品类的差别，难度非常深奥，不是佛陀谁能完全广泛地决择呢？ 偈颂说： ‘我已经随着自己的能力，略微地成就了唯识的意义。这其中一切的种类，都是难以思议的佛陀所行持的。’ 论述说：唯识的理趣，品类无边。我随着自己的能力已经略微地成立了。其余一切的种类都不是所能思议的，超越了各种寻思所行持的境界的缘故。像这样的理趣只有佛陀才能行持。诸佛世尊对于一切境界和一切种类的智慧都没有障碍的缘故。 《唯识二十论》一卷