English
English version: It is neither simply one nor different. For example, the Ajivikas (a type of ascetic) and others, in order to avoid falling into the four faults of 'one,' 'different,' 'both one and different,' and 'neither one nor different,' adopt a double negation, saying 'neither one nor different.' In general, the two aspects of seeing (subject and object) are actually produced from causes and conditions, belonging to the dependent nature (paratantra-svabhava). Based on these two aspects of seeing, beings falsely cling to the assertions of 'existence' or 'non-existence,' and 'one' or 'different.' These two opposing phenomena (subject and object) are what are called the imagined nature (parikalpita-svabhava). It is not that the two aspects of seeing, produced by causes and conditions, also belong to the imagined nature. 'Accomplishment' means achievement, not the meaning of arising and ceasing. The meaning of 'accomplishment' is explained by 'non-arising and non-ceasing.' The 'aspect is difficult to see,' now it should be widely explained. However, this Suchness (tathata) is called 'perfected nature' (parinispanna-svabhava) because it possesses three meanings, thereby distinguishing it from three kinds of dharmas. Therefore, the eighth volume of the *Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi* says: 'It reveals that this pervasive and constant essence is not false or erroneous.' This is to distinguish it from self-characteristics, common characteristics, emptiness, self, and so on. First is pervasiveness. This distinguishes self-characteristics. Dharmas such as form each maintain their own characteristics, which are not pervasive, so they are not perfect. Second is constancy. This distinguishes common characteristics. Suffering, impermanence, and so on, although they have the meaning of pervasiveness, cannot be constant, so they are not accomplishment. Third is non-falsehood. This distinguishes the falsely clung to emptiness, self, and so on, although they are said to be pervasive and constant, they are clung to by delusion, so they are not real. Among them, the arising and ceasing aspect of the second (emptiness, no-self, etc.) cannot accomplish the meaning of constancy. Since it is not arising and ceasing, it accomplishes the meaning of constancy. Therefore, 'non-arising and non-ceasing' is used to explain the meaning of 'constant.' Ultimately able to cut off the defilements of afflictions, accomplishing this ability. This refers to the non-outflow wisdoms (anāsrava-jñāna), which are ultimately able to cut off the defilements of afflictions, thereby accomplishing this function of dependent origination. Conditioned dharmas encompass all, etc. As the *Madhyantavibhaga* says: 'The perfected nature has two kinds in total, namely, unconditioned and conditioned, because they are different.' Unconditioned dharmas encompass Suchness (tathata) and Nirvana (nirvana), because they have no change, so they are called perfected reality. Conditioned dharmas encompass all the noble paths, because they are not inverted with respect to the object of realization, they are also perfected reality. All the noble paths refer to the noble wisdoms of the three vehicles (sravaka-yana, pratyekabuddha-yana, bodhisattva-yana), all of which are not inverted with respect to the object of realization. Why does the *Yogacarabhumi-sastra* only use etc. The five dharmas mentioned are: characteristic (lakshana), name (nama), discrimination (vikalpa), correct knowledge (samyagjnana), Suchness (tathata). If according to the original text of the *Vijnapti-yoga*, they all say Suchness (tathata). If according to the *Lankavatara Sutra* and the *Suvarnaprabhasa Sutra*, they say Thusness (tathata). The explanations of these five dharmas differ in various teachings. Therefore, the *Vijnapti* often explains them with prajna. Now, let's temporarily explain according to the *Yogacarabhumi-sastra*, saying that the mind is like what it wants to express, and it is called. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
相。似能诠现施设为名。以能变心名为分别。无漏心等名为正智。心等实性名曰真如。前二缘生依他起摄。第五真性圆成实收。遍计所执不摄五事。既说正智而属依他。唯说真如圆成实摄。宁言无漏亦成实耶。 漏无漏门但是等者。所言漏者染污漏泄连注流散不绝之义。故旧经论译为有流。然释此漏有其二种。一者性漏。此有三种。一者欲漏。二者有漏。三无明漏。杂集第七释此义之。依外门流注故名欲漏。依内门流注故立有漏。依彼二所依门流注故立无明漏。谓诸现惑令心连注流散不绝是漏义故。若俱舍等诸论所说。有身见等诸烦恼中立漏名相。自体令他心心所等染漏泄故。故以一切现行烦恼为漏自性。二者有漏。此为五种。一五色根。二五尘境。三恶心品。四善心品。五无记心。此等皆与自身现惑俱时相资境故名有漏。故唯识论第五卷云。然诸有漏由与自身现行烦恼俱生俱灭互相增益方成有漏。自身烦恼即简他身。要自烦恼成自有漏。非由他惑成有漏故。现行烦恼即简惑种。有学圣者虽惑种随。而诸圣道不成漏故。俱生俱灭简色未惑。非前后惑能成现漏。已成未生不俱有故。互相增益简无漏种。虽与五法俱生俱灭。不相资益性相坏故。由此返显自身所有现行烦恼与前五法俱生俱灭。其性同故。互相资益方成 现代汉语译本 ‘相’（Lakshana）：类似于能够诠释和显现施设的名称。 ‘分别’（Vikalpa）：以能够转变心识的功用而得名。 ‘正智’（Jnana）：指无漏的心识等等。 ‘真如’（Tathata）：指心识等等的真实体性。 前两者（相和分别）属于缘起法，被摄于‘依他起’（Paratantra-svabhava）之中。 第五者（真如）的真实体性被归于‘圆成实’（Parinishpanna-svabhava）。 ‘遍计所执’（Parikalpita-svabhava）不包含在这五事之中。 既然已经说了‘正智’属于‘依他起’，那么仅仅说‘真如’被‘圆成实’所摄，难道能说无漏也属于‘圆成实’吗？ 关于‘漏’（Asrava）和‘无漏’（Anasrava）的区分，只是在于‘等’的方面。 所说的‘漏’，是指染污、漏泄、连续不断地流散的含义。所以旧的经论翻译为‘有流’。 然而，对于‘漏’的解释有两种。第一种是‘性漏’，这有三种：一是‘欲漏’（Kamasrava），二是‘有漏’（Bhavasrava），三是‘无明漏’（Avidyasrava）。《杂集论》第七卷解释了这个含义：依赖于外在的门径而流注，所以称为‘欲漏’；依赖于内在的门径而流注，所以立为‘有漏’；依赖于那两个所依赖的门径而流注，所以立为‘无明漏’。意思是说，各种现行的迷惑使心识连续不断地流散，这就是‘漏’的含义。如果按照《俱舍论》等论典所说，在有身见等各种烦恼中建立‘漏’的名称和相状，是因为其自体使其他的心和心所等染污漏泄。所以，以一切现行的烦恼作为‘漏’的自性。 第二种是‘有漏’，这有五种：一是五色根（Pancha-varna-indriya），二是五尘境（Pancha-rupa-vishaya），三是恶心品（Akusala-citta），四是善心品（Kusala-citta），五是无记心（Avyakrta-citta）。这些都与自身的现行迷惑同时相互资助，因此称为‘有漏’。所以《唯识论》第五卷说：‘然而，各种有漏法由于与自身的现行烦恼俱生俱灭，互相增益，才成为有漏。’自身的烦恼是用来简别他身的烦恼，必须是自身的烦恼才能构成自身的有漏，而不是由于他人的迷惑而成为有漏。现行烦恼是用来简别烦恼的种子，有学的圣者虽然有烦恼的种子随逐，但是各种圣道不会成为漏。俱生俱灭是用来简别色法和未生起的迷惑，不是前后的迷惑能够构成现行的漏，已经成就的和未生起的不能同时存在。互相增益是用来简别无漏的种子，虽然与五法俱生俱灭，但是不互相资助增益，因为其体性和相状是相违背的。由此反过来显示，自身所有的现行烦恼与前面的五法俱生俱灭，其体性相同，互相资助增益，才能构成有漏。
English
English version 'Lakshana' (相): Similar to being able to explain and manifest established names. 'Vikalpa' (分别): Named for its ability to transform the mind. 'Jnana' (正智): Refers to undefiled (anāsrava) mind, etc. 'Tathata' (真如): Refers to the true nature of mind, etc. The former two (Lakshana and Vikalpa) belong to dependent origination and are included in 'Paratantra-svabhava' (依他起). The true nature of the fifth (Tathata) is included in 'Parinishpanna-svabhava' (圆成实). 'Parikalpita-svabhava' (遍计所执) is not included in these five things. Since it has been said that 'Jnana' belongs to 'Paratantra-svabhava', and it is only said that 'Tathata' is included in 'Parinishpanna-svabhava', can it be said that undefiled (anāsrava) is also 'Parinishpanna-svabhava'? The distinction between 'Asrava' (漏) and 'Anasrava' (无漏) lies only in the aspect of 'equality'. The so-called 'Asrava' refers to the meaning of defilement, leakage, continuous flow, and uninterrupted scattering. Therefore, the old sutras and treatises translated it as 'Ogha' (有流). However, there are two explanations for 'Asrava'. The first is 'Svabhava-asrava' (性漏), which has three types: first, 'Kamasrava' (欲漏), second, 'Bhavasrava' (有漏), and third, 'Avidyasrava' (无明漏). The seventh volume of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* explains this meaning: relying on external gateways to flow, hence it is called 'Kamasrava'; relying on internal gateways to flow, hence 'Bhavasrava' is established; relying on the gateways on which those two depend to flow, hence 'Avidyasrava' is established. It means that various manifest delusions cause the mind to continuously flow and scatter without interruption, which is the meaning of 'Asrava'. According to the *Abhidharmakosa* and other treatises, the names and characteristics of 'Asrava' are established among various afflictions such as the view of self (satkayadristi), because their own nature causes other minds and mental factors to be defiled and leaked. Therefore, all manifest afflictions are taken as the nature of 'Asrava'. The second is 'Bhavasrava' (有漏), which has five types: first, the five sense organs (Pancha-varna-indriya), second, the five sense objects (Pancha-rupa-vishaya), third, unwholesome mind (Akusala-citta), fourth, wholesome mind (Kusala-citta), and fifth, neutral mind (Avyakrta-citta). These all mutually support each other simultaneously with one's own manifest delusions, hence they are called 'Bhavasrava'. Therefore, the fifth volume of the *Vijnaptimatrata-siddhi* says: 'However, various defiled dharmas become defiled because they arise and cease simultaneously with one's own manifest afflictions and mutually increase each other.' One's own afflictions are used to distinguish the afflictions of others; it must be one's own afflictions that constitute one's own defilement, and not become defiled due to the delusions of others. Manifest afflictions are used to distinguish the seeds of afflictions; although the seeds of afflictions follow the learners (saiksha), the various noble paths do not become defiled. Arising and ceasing simultaneously are used to distinguish form and unarisen delusions; the delusions before and after cannot constitute manifest defilement, because what has been accomplished and what has not arisen cannot exist simultaneously. Mutually increasing each other is used to distinguish undefiled seeds; although they arise and cease simultaneously with the five dharmas, they do not mutually support and increase each other, because their nature and characteristics are contradictory. From this, it is shown in reverse that all of one's own manifest afflictions arise and cease simultaneously with the preceding five dharmas, and their nature is the same, and they mutually support and increase each other, so that they can constitute defilement. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
有漏。此则五法非本性漏。有彼漏故名为有漏。此能熏成有漏法种。种复能生有漏现行。故无始来有漏成立。若尔世间信等善品应非有漏。无现惑故。答。虽意识中现惑不起。而末那识诸识常生。此与诸识既非定异。能污信等亦成有漏。若尔末那初地转时。则五八识亦成无漏。答。虽第七识无现行漏。而有漏种。亦令五八耶识成漏。若尔亦由随眠成漏。如何前说简种子耶。答。前正简者但当识种。今末那种故不应例。此唯识中约克体说。但取末那为有漏依。若依瑜伽及杂集论。通约诸义辨有漏因。故彼文云。谓由事故。随眠故。相应故。所缘故。生起故。所言事者。即前五体皆漏随眠所随逐故。若三性心漏相应故。若五尘境漏所缘故。若五色根漏所生故。故五体事皆成有漏。言无漏者与前相违。谓由永断漏自性故。内证真理发生圣智及智所起皆名无漏。此无漏体亦有五种。即五般若。无漏体故。无漏性故。无漏起故。无漏伴故。无漏境故。虽有五种总摄为二。五种不离有无为故。故俱舍论本颂说云。无漏谓道体及三种无为等。 清净增上力等者。清净力者。谓善根力以能降伏所除障故。增上力者。谓大愿力常作善友增进道故。坚固心者。由善根力大菩提心坚固不退。心升进者。由大愿力修善之心运运增长。此依 现代汉语译本 ‘有漏’（Sāsrava，指烦恼），是指这五法（五蕴）本身并非本性就是‘漏’（烦恼）。因为有这些‘漏’的存在，所以称为‘有漏’。这些‘漏’能够熏习并形成‘有漏法’的种子，而这些种子又能够产生‘有漏’的现行（实际表现）。因此，从无始以来，‘有漏’的性质就成立了。如果这样说，那么世间的信心等善品，应该不是‘有漏’，因为没有现行的烦恼。回答：虽然意识中现行的烦恼不起作用，但是末那识（Manas，第七识，意根）和其它识（眼识、耳识、鼻识、舌识、身识、意识）经常生起。这些识与其它识既不是完全相同，也不是完全不同，所以能够污染信心等善品，使之成为‘有漏’。如果这样说，那么末那识在初地（菩萨修行的一个阶段）转依（转变）的时候，那么五、八识（眼识、耳识、鼻识、舌识、阿赖耶识）也应该成为‘无漏’（Anāsrava，指没有烦恼）。回答：虽然第七识没有现行的‘漏’，但是有‘有漏’的种子，也能够使五、八识成为‘漏’。如果这样，也应该由随眠（Anusaya，烦恼的潜在形式）成为‘漏’，为什么前面说要简别种子呢？回答：前面所简别的是指当识的种子，现在是指末那识的种子，所以不应该类比。这在唯识学中是就其本体而言的，只取末那识作为‘有漏’的所依。如果依据《瑜伽师地论》和《杂集论》，则会通各种意义来辨别‘有漏’的原因。所以那些经论中说：‘由事故，随眠故，相应故，所缘故，生起故。’所说的事，就是指前面的五体（五蕴），都是‘漏’和随眠所随逐的缘故。如果三性心（善、恶、无记）与‘漏’相应故。如果五尘境（色、声、香、味、触）是‘漏’的所缘故。如果五色根（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身）是‘漏’所生起故。所以五体的事都成为‘有漏’。所说‘无漏’，与前面相反。是指由于永远断除了‘漏’的自性，内在证悟真理，发生圣智以及圣智所生起的一切都称为‘无漏’。这‘无漏’的体性也有五种，即五般若（Prajna，智慧）。因为是‘无漏’的体性故，‘无漏’的自性故，‘无漏’的生起故，‘无漏’的伴侣故，‘无漏’的境界故。虽然有五种，总摄起来为二种，因为五种不离有为和无为的缘故。所以《俱舍论》的颂文说：‘无漏谓道体及三种无为等。’ ‘清净增上力等’，‘清净力’是指善根的力量，因为它能够降伏所要去除的障碍。‘增上力’是指大愿的力量，经常作为善友，增进道业。‘坚固心’是指由善根的力量，使大菩提心（Bodhicitta，觉悟之心）坚固不退。‘心升进’是指由大愿的力量，使修善之心不断增长。这是依据...