English
English version: For example, blue and yellow, etc. The answer is that perhaps some say so. Therefore, it should be understood that the truth is not entirely expressible in words, nor is it entirely inexpressible. Because of this principle, the truth is both expressible and inexpressible. Such statements are not inappropriate, and therefore nothing is appropriate. Precisely because nothing is appropriate, nothing is inappropriate. In the True Thusness (Tathata) gate, the meaning of severance and non-severance is explained in this way, and the same applies to the birth-and-death gate. ‘Speaking of birth and death’ below, is the second part explaining the birth-and-death gate. It is divided into two parts. The first is a formal and extensive explanation, and then ‘Furthermore, there are four kinds of perfuming’ below, which is re-emphasized because of language. The initial part is divided into three parts. The first is to broadly establish the meaning and distinguish between the arising and ceasing of the mind; the second is ‘Furthermore, the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing’ below, which broadly explains the causes and conditions of arising and ceasing; the third is ‘Furthermore, the characteristics of arising and ceasing’ below, which broadly explains the characteristics of arising and ceasing. The initial part is divided into two parts. The first is a general explanation of the substance, and the second is a separate explanation based on meaning. The initial part is: ‘Speaking of the mind of arising and ceasing existing because of the Tathagatagarbha (Tathagatagarbha, the storehouse of the Tathagata's Dharma body)’, refers to the mind that neither arises nor ceases, which produces arising and ceasing due to the disturbance of the wind of ignorance (avidya, a fundamental affliction in Buddhism). Therefore, it is said that the mind of arising and ceasing depends on the mind that neither arises nor ceases. However, the mind that neither arises nor ceases and the mind of arising and ceasing are not two in essence. It is only by taking two meanings and regarding the mind as two that it is said to be dependent. Just as still water is blown by the wind and produces moving water, although movement and stillness are different, the essence of water is one. Therefore, it can be said that moving water exists because of still water. It should be understood that the principle here is also the same. As the following discussion says: ‘The self-nature pure mind is disturbed by the wind of ignorance.’ Also, the four-volume scripture says: ‘The Tathagatagarbha is perfumed by beginningless evil habits and is called the storehouse of consciousness (alayavijnana, the eighth consciousness in Buddhist Yogacara).’ It also says, ‘An instant is called the storehouse of consciousness.’ It should be understood that the mind of arising and ceasing mentioned here refers precisely to the storehouse of consciousness. Now, the dependent Tathagatagarbha and the dependent mind of arising and ceasing are combined as the gate of the mind of arising and ceasing. Therefore, the gate of the mind of arising and ceasing means that the mind of arising and ceasing exists because of the Tathagatagarbha, and it is not merely raising the Tathagatagarbha and taking the mind of arising and ceasing as the gate of arising and ceasing. As the following text says, ‘This consciousness has two meanings,’ therefore, it is known that both meanings are in the gate of arising and ceasing. ‘That which is neither arising nor ceasing and the combination of arising and ceasing, which is neither one nor different, is called Alaya-vijnana (Alaya-vijnana, the storehouse consciousness)’, the neither arising nor ceasing here is the above-mentioned Tathagatagarbha. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
藏。言生灭者。是上不生灭心之生灭。言与和合者。不生灭心动作生灭。名之曰与。此生灭之心。心之生灭。不相舍离。名为和合。如下论云。如大海水因风波动。水相风相不相舍离。此中水之动是风相。动之湿是水相。虽有二相。而无二体故。不相离。心亦如是。心之生灭。依无明成。生灭之心。从本觉成。而无二体。不相舍离。故为和合。正是不生灭与生灭和合。非是生灭与不生灭和合也。言非一非异者。此心与生灭非一故。恒不失不生灭性。又心与生灭非异故。亦举体作生灭相。若是一者。作生灭时。失不生灭。如其异者。此不生灭不作生灭。故言非一非异。虽有二义。心体无二。此合二义。不二之心名为梨耶识也。如四卷经云。譬如泥团微尘。非异非不异。金庄严具。亦如是。若泥团微尘异者。非彼所成。而实彼成。是故非异。若不异者。泥团微尘。应无差别。如是转识。藏识真相。若异者。藏识非异。若不异者。转识灭藏识亦应灭。而自真相实不灭。是故非真识灭。但业相灭。今此论者。正释此经文。故言非一非异。此言转识者。梨耶识内生灭见相。名为转识。于中体名为藏识。如十卷经云。如来藏阿梨耶识。共七种识生。名转相。故知。转相亦在阿梨耶识。言自真相者。十卷经中。真名自相。本觉之心。 现代汉语译本： 关于‘生灭’的说法，指的是不生不灭的真心所产生的生灭现象。关于‘和合’的说法，指的是不生不灭的真心驱动生灭现象，这被称为‘与’。这种生灭之心，以及心的生灭，彼此不相分离，这被称为‘和合’。正如《楞伽经》所说：‘譬如大海水因风波动，水相和风相不相分离。’这里，水的动是风的现象，动的湿性是水的现象。虽然有这两种现象，但本体没有两个，所以不相分离。心也是如此，心的生灭依赖于无明而产生，生灭之心从本觉而来，但本体没有两个，不相分离，所以是‘和合’。准确地说，是不生不灭与生灭和合，而不是生灭与不生不灭和合。 关于‘非一非异’的说法，这个心与生灭不是一体的，所以始终不会失去不生不灭的本性。而且，心与生灭也不是不同的，所以整体都呈现出生灭的相状。如果是一体的，那么在呈现生灭相时，就会失去不生不灭的本性。如果不同，那么这个不生不灭就不会呈现生灭相，所以说是‘非一非异’。虽然有这两种含义，但心的本体没有两个。这两种含义合在一起，不二的心被称为阿赖耶识。正如四卷本的《楞伽经》所说：‘譬如泥团和微尘，非异也非不异。金的庄严器具也是如此。’如果泥团和微尘是不同的，那么就不是由它们所构成，但实际上是由它们构成，所以说‘非异’。如果不异，那么泥团和微尘应该没有差别。同样，转识和藏识的真相也是如此。如果不同，那么藏识就不是异。如果不异，那么转识灭时，藏识也应该灭，但其自性真相实际上并没有灭，所以说不是真识灭，只是业相灭。现在的这部论著，正是解释这部经文，所以说‘非一非异’。这里所说的转识，指的是阿赖耶识内生灭的见相，被称为转识。其中，本体被称为藏识。正如十卷本的《楞伽经》所说：‘如来藏阿梨耶识，与七种识共同产生，名为转相。’由此可知，转相也在阿赖耶识中。关于‘自真相’的说法，在十卷本的《楞伽经》中，‘真’指的是自相，也就是本觉之心。
English
English version: The statement about 'arising and ceasing' refers to the arising and ceasing phenomena produced by the non-arising and non-ceasing true mind. The statement about 'union' refers to the non-arising and non-ceasing true mind driving the arising and ceasing phenomena, which is called 'giving rise to'. This mind of arising and ceasing, and the arising and ceasing of the mind, are not separate from each other, which is called 'union'. As the *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* says: 'For example, when the ocean water is disturbed by the wind, the water aspect and the wind aspect are not separate from each other.' Here, the movement of the water is the phenomenon of the wind, and the wetness of the movement is the phenomenon of the water. Although there are these two phenomena, there are not two entities, so they are not separate. The mind is also like this. The arising and ceasing of the mind depends on ignorance to arise, and the mind of arising and ceasing comes from original enlightenment (buddhajñāna), but there are not two entities, and they are not separate, so it is 'union'. To be precise, it is the union of the non-arising and non-ceasing with the arising and ceasing, not the union of the arising and ceasing with the non-arising and non-ceasing. The statement about 'neither one nor different' means that this mind and arising and ceasing are not one, so it will never lose its non-arising and non-ceasing nature. Moreover, the mind and arising and ceasing are not different, so the whole presents the appearance of arising and ceasing. If they were one, then when presenting the appearance of arising and ceasing, it would lose its non-arising and non-ceasing nature. If they were different, then this non-arising and non-ceasing would not present the appearance of arising and ceasing, so it is said to be 'neither one nor different'. Although there are these two meanings, the essence of the mind is not two. These two meanings together, the non-dual mind is called the Ālaya-vijñāna (storehouse consciousness). As the four-fascicle *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* says: 'For example, a lump of clay and fine dust are neither different nor not different. The golden ornaments are also like this.' If the lump of clay and fine dust are different, then they would not be made of them, but in reality they are made of them, so it is said to be 'not different'. If they are not different, then the lump of clay and fine dust should have no difference. Similarly, the truth of the transformed consciousness (pravṛtti-vijñāna) and the storehouse consciousness (ālaya-vijñāna) is also like this. If they are different, then the storehouse consciousness is not different. If they are not different, then when the transformed consciousness ceases, the storehouse consciousness should also cease, but its self-nature truth actually does not cease, so it is said that it is not the true consciousness that ceases, but only the karma aspect that ceases. The current treatise is precisely explaining this sutra text, so it says 'neither one nor different'. The transformed consciousness mentioned here refers to the arising and ceasing perception aspect within the Ālaya-vijñāna, which is called the transformed consciousness. Among them, the essence is called the storehouse consciousness. As the ten-fascicle *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra* says: 'The Tathāgatagarbha (womb of the Tathāgata) Ālaya-vijñāna, together with the seven kinds of consciousness, arises, and is called the transformation aspect.' From this, it is known that the transformation aspect is also in the Ālaya-vijñāna. Regarding the statement about 'self-nature truth', in the ten-fascicle *Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra*, 'truth' refers to the self-aspect, which is the mind of original enlightenment (buddhajñāna). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
不藉妄缘。性自神解。名为自真相。是约不一义门说也。然随无明风。作生灭时。神解之性。与本不异。故亦得名为自真相。是依不异义门说也。当知自真名。不偏在不生灭。问如瑜伽论等说阿梨耶识。是异熟识一向生灭。何故此论乃说此识具含二义。答各有所述。不相违背。何者。此微细心。略有二义。若其为业烦恼所感义边。辨无令有。一向生灭。若论根本无明所动义边。熏静令动。动静一体。彼所论等。依深密经。为除是一是常之见。约业烦恼所感义门。故说此识一向生灭心。心数法差别而转。今此论者。依楞伽经。为治真俗别体执。就其无明所动义门故。说不生灭与生灭和合不异。然此无明所动之相。亦即为彼业惑所感故。二意虽异。识体无二也。问为当。心体常住。心相生灭体相不离。合为一识。为当。心体常住。亦即心体生灭耶。答若得意者。二义俱许。何者。若论其常住不随他成曰体。论其无常随他生灭曰相。得言体常相是无常。然言生灭者。非生之生。非灭之灭。故名生灭。是心之生。心之灭故。乃名生灭。故得言心体生灭。如似水之动名为波终不可说是动非水之动。当知。此中道理亦尔。设使心体不动。但无明相动者。则无转凡成圣之理。以无明相一向灭故。心体本来不作凡故。难曰。若使心体生 现代汉语译本：不依赖虚妄的因缘，自性自然就能神妙地理解一切，这叫做‘自真相’（Zizhenxiang，自性的真实面貌）。这是从‘不一’的角度来说的。然而，随着无明之风的作用，产生生灭变化时，这种神妙理解的自性，与原本的自性并没有不同。所以，也可以称之为‘自真相’。这是从‘不异’的角度来说的。应当明白，‘自真相’这个名称，并不偏指不生不灭的状态。 问：像《瑜伽师地论》等论典中说，阿梨耶识（Alaya-识，储存一切种子识）是异熟识（Vipaka-识，果报识），总是处于生灭变化之中。为什么这部论典却说这个识包含着两种含义呢？ 答：因为各自所阐述的重点不同，所以并不互相矛盾。为什么这么说呢？这种微细的心识，大致有两种含义。如果从它被业和烦恼所影响的角度来说，辨别没有的使之产生，它就是总是处于生灭变化之中。如果从根本无明（Moha，对事物真相的迷惑）所驱动的角度来说，熏习寂静使之产生动摇，动摇和寂静成为一体。他们所论述的，依据《深密经》（Samdhinirmocana Sutra），是为了消除‘它是一个’或‘它是常’的见解，是从业和烦恼所影响的角度来说的，所以说这个识总是处于生灭变化之中，心和心所法（Citta-caitta，心和与心相关的心理活动）的差别而运转。现在这部论典，依据《楞伽经》（Lankavatara Sutra），为了对治认为真谛和俗谛是不同实体的执着，就从无明所驱动的角度来说，所以说不生不灭和生灭和合在一起并没有不同。然而，这种无明所驱动的相状，也就是被那些业和烦恼所影响的缘故。所以，两种意思虽然不同，识的本体并没有两个。 问：到底是心体（Citta-dhatu，心的本体）常住不变，而心相（Citta-lakshana，心的现象）生灭变化，体和相不分离，合为一个识呢？还是心体常住不变，也就是心体生灭变化呢？ 答：如果能领会其中的意思，这两种说法都可以接受。为什么这么说呢？如果从它常住不变，不依赖其他条件而成就的角度来说，就叫做‘体’。从它无常变化，依赖其他条件而生灭的角度来说，就叫做‘相’。可以说体是常住的，相是无常的。然而，说到生灭，不是指‘生’的产生，也不是指‘灭’的消灭，所以叫做‘生灭’。是心的产生，心的消灭的缘故，才叫做生灭。所以可以说心体生灭。就像水的流动叫做波浪，最终不能说成是流动不是水的流动。应当明白，这里面的道理也是这样。假设心体不动，只是无明的相状动摇，那么就没有转凡成圣的道理了。因为无明的相状总是会消灭的，心体本来就没有作为凡夫的缘故。 难：如果心体生灭变化，