観心覚夢鈔三巻ページ8/24 - 翻刻

ページ: 8

翻刻

右頁】【枠外右上】 326 【枠外右横上】觀心覺夢鈔上【枠外右横下】一四【二段構成】【上段】爲＿一レ宗。雖＿レ云＿二心内法＿一。猶許＿二非心法＿一。豈是心外無別法敎。答。色聲等法質礙爲＿レ體。《割書：定果色等雖＿二無見無對＿一。｜對＿レ心猶是有質礙也》假令雖＿レ不＿レ爲＿二心所緣＿一。而猶可＿レ爲＿二色聲等法＿一故。無＿二境體轉爲＿レ心義＿一。諸心心所緣慮爲＿レ體。假令無＿下被＿二緣慮＿一物＿上者。緣＿二-慮何物＿一爲＿二緣慮法＿一。故心體轉必爲＿レ境也。是卽緣慮分別之法。法中勝故有＿二自在力＿一。能造＿二諸法＿一。非緣慮法體性鈍劣。豈堪＿三體轉起＿二緣慮法＿一。但不＿レ許＿二心外實境＿一者有＿二多道理＿一。唯識等破＿二外道小乘實我實法＿一種種文理卽皆是也。不＿レ遑＿二擧盡＿一。然今且擧＿二阿毘達磨經中所說四智成就菩薩所觀＿一。略示＿二其相＿一。言＿二四智＿一者。一相違識相智。謂於＿二一處＿一鬼人天等。隨＿二業因力＿一所見各別。鬼見爲＿レ火。人見爲＿レ水。天見＿二琉璃＿一。傍生見＿レ宅。如＿レ是等見種種不同。境若實有。豈可＿下如＿レ是隨＿二能見者業因差別＿一種種轉變＿上。二無所緣識智。謂緣＿二過去未來夢等非實境＿一時。境非＿二實有＿一。心現可得。心若必託＿二外境＿一起者。如＿レ是之時。其事云何。以＿レ此例知＿二一切境界＿一。三自應無倒智。謂若境體定實有者。一切凡夫皆應＿二是聖＿一。本來悟＿二-證心外境＿一故。若爾不＿レ假＿二功用＿一自然可＿レ得＿二解脫＿一。何不＿レ【下段】然耶。四隨三智轉智。謂三智者。一隨＿二自在者智＿一轉智。謂已證＿二-得心自在＿一人。隨＿二自所欲＿一轉＿二-變水等＿一事皆能成。境若實者。寧可＿二如＿レ是轉＿レ心轉變＿一。二隨＿二觀察者智＿一轉智。謂得＿二勝定＿一修＿二法觀＿一者。隨觀＿二一境＿一靑瘀等相種種顯現。境若實者。豈可＿二如＿レ是隨＿レ心顯現＿一。三隨＿二無分別智＿一轉智。謂起＿二證＿レ實無分別智＿一。一切境相皆不＿二現前＿一境若實者。云何如＿レ是證＿レ實智前皆不＿レ現乎。菩薩成＿二-就此四智＿一時。於＿二唯識理＿一決定悟入。是故不＿レ許＿二心外境＿一也。次自證分者。心還知＿レ自用。豈可＿三直緣＿二相分境＿一耶。是故心起＿二緣＿レ境作用#1是卽見分。若爾自證直緣＿レ境者不＿レ足＿レ言也。次凡能量所量法者。必有＿二量果＿一。若不＿レ爾者。於＿二此量知＿一無＿レ所＿二果成＿一。豈應＿二道理＿一。是故如＿レ是有＿二第三分＿一證＿二-知見分＿一。見分能量知＿二相分＿一也。譬如有＿レ人以＿二丈尺＿一量＿二絹等＿一之時。絹等所量。丈尺能量。人量果也。丈尺能量＿二絹等物＿一者。其所＿二量成＿一人證智也。若不＿レ引＿二其人證知＿一者。丈尺能量。絹等所量。有＿二何用＿一乎。丈尺能量＿二絹等＿一之時。人能證＿二-知丈尺分齊＿一。故能所量義能成立。若無＿二丈尺＿一。人豈得＿レ知＿二絹等分齊＿一。若無＿二絹等＿一。人又何用＿二丈尺【左頁】【枠外左上】 327 【枠外左横上】觀心覺夢鈔上【枠外左横下】一五【二段構成】【上段】等＿一爲。若無＿二其人＿一。誰知＿三丈尺能量＿二絹等＿一。三分妙理亦復如＿レ是。相分所量。見分能量。見分能量＿二相分＿一之時。必内證＿二-知見分能量＿一。量知之義由＿レ此成立。若無＿二見分＿一心豈得＿レ知＿二色等境界＿一。若無＿二相分＿一心起＿二緣用＿一有＿二何所用＿一。若無＿二自證＿一誰知＿三見分能緣＿二相分＿一。是故定立＿二第三分＿一也。次内證用深細。故必現量。而其見分是外緣用。理通＿二三量＿一。《割書：五八識等｜見分現量。》《割書：然凡見分通＿二三量＿一｜法。故總論＿レ之。》　如何得＿レ知＿二己内體＿一耶。若約＿二見分現量時＿一者可＿レ爾見分比非量時誰知＿二自體＿一。明知。見分本是爲＿下緣＿二相分＿一用＿上故。雖＿二現量見＿一證＿二-知自體＿一義不＿レ可＿レ得。何況若無＿二第四分＿一者。第三能量應＿レ無＿二量果＿一。豈非＿二大過＿一乎。《割書：佛果｜三通》《割書：緣＿レ四等事｜至＿レ下可＿レ知。》是故必立＿二證自證分＿一。其自證分旣居＿二中間＿一内緣現量。故知＿二見分＿一。亦知＿二第四＿一。其義成立。何乃爲＿レ例。次此四分皆是心分皆應＿二證知＿一。若不＿レ爾者。一心中有＿二自所＿一レ不＿レ知。不＿レ應＿二道理＿一。故後三分雖＿二皆能緣#2。其中猶有＿二如＿レ是微細相緣之義＿一。皆成＿二所知＿一。豈非＿二深妙＿一。次心微細體相難＿レ知。只以＿二作用＿一顯＿二-示之＿一耳。所以四分皆是心用。然而於＿二此四分之中＿一强判＿二體用＿一。第三自證獨當＿二【下段】其體＿一。獨居＿二中間＿一普證＿二前後＿一。心根本義異＿レ餘故也。次唯識者。尋＿二諸法源＿一論＿二有爲起＿一。全非＿三唯祇一箇心法都無＿二餘法＿一。是故雖＿レ許＿二萬差諸法皆從＿レ心起＿一。無＿レ有＿三一法非＿二心内＿一也。雖＿レ在＿二心内＿一。色聲水火眼耳等法。種種差別宛然而存。雖＿レ存皆是從＿二自心＿一起如＿二夢境＿一故名＿二唯識＿一也。由＿レ此應＿レ言。心内諸法￣ハ諸法皆存。心外諸法￣ハ諸法皆無。經中心外無別法者卽此義也。不＿レ知＿二此理＿一人。迷＿二唯心敎文＿一。返發＿二因果撥無惡見＿一甚可＿レ悲矣。　問。今此四分相＿二-配八識＿一之方如何。答。八識一一皆有＿二四分＿一。相應心所一一亦爾。且於＿二眼識＿一明＿二四分＿一者。今此識體生起之時。以＿二第八識所變色塵＿一爲＿二疎所緣＿一。故自體轉現＿二色影像＿一。以＿二此影像＿一爲＿二親所緣＿一。故起＿二緣＿レ之能緣作用＿一。其色影像名爲＿二相分＿一。緣＿レ之作用名爲＿二見分＿一。今此二分心自體上之所現也。起＿二此二用＿一所依自體爲＿二自證分＿一。證＿二自體＿一用是卽名爲＿二證自證分＿一。如＿レ是耳等餘識四分准＿レ此可＿レ知。以＿二五塵境＿一如＿レ此相＿二-配眼等五識＿一。其相顯然。第六意識緣＿二十八界諸法＿一爲＿レ境。隨＿レ應變＿二-現諸法影像＿一。隨＿レ應起＿二此能緣作用＿一。是卽第六識自體

現代語訳

【右頁】【枠外右上】 326 【枠外右横上】観心覚夢鈔上【枠外右横下】一四【二段構成】【上段】宗とすることができる。心内の法と云うといえども、なお非心の法を許す。どうして心外に別法無しという教えか。答える。色・声等の法は質礙を体とする。《割書：定果色等は見も対も無いといえども、心に対してなお質礙が有るのである》仮令心の所縁とならなくても、而もなお色・声等の法となることができるゆえに、境体が転じて心となる義は無い。諸心・心所は縁慮を体とする。仮令縁慮される物が無いとすれば、何物を縁慮して縁慮の法とするか。故に心体は必ず転じて境となるのである。これは即ち縁慮分別の法である。法中に勝れているゆえに自在力が有り、諸法を能く造る。縁慮でない法は体性が鈍劣である。どうして体が転じて縁慮の法を起こすことに堪えようか。ただし心外の実境を許さないという多くの道理が有る。唯識等が外道・小乗の実我・実法を破する種々の文理が即ち皆これである。挙げ尽くす暇が無い。しかし今はとりあえず阿毘達磨経中に説かれる四智成就の菩薩の所観を挙げて、略してその相を示す。四智と言うのは、一に相違識相智。謂わく一処において鬼・人・天等が、業因の力に随い所見が各別である。鬼は火と見、人は水と見、天は瑠璃と見、傍生は宅と見る。このような見は種々不同である。境がもし実有なら、どうしてこのように能見者の業因の差別に随って種々に転変することができようか。二に無所縁識智。謂わく過去・未来・夢等の実でない境を縁ずる時、境は実有でないのに、心は現に得ることができる。心がもし必ず外境に託して起こるなら、このような時、その事はいかん。これを以て一切境界を例知する。三に自応無倒智。謂わくもし境体が定んで実有なら、一切凡夫は皆聖であるべきである。本来心外の境を悟証しているからである。そうであるなら功用を仮らず自然に解脱を得ることができる。何故そう【下段】でないのか。四に随三智転智。謂わく三智とは、一に随自在者智転智。謂わく既に心の自在を証得した人は、自らの所欲に随って水等を転変する事を皆能く成す。境がもし実なら、どうしてこのように心を転じて転変することができようか。二に随観察者智転智。謂わく勝定を得て法観を修する者は、一境を観ずるに随い青瘀等の相が種々に顕現する。境がもし実なら、どうしてこのように心に随って顕現することができようか。三に随無分別智転智。謂わく実を証する無分別智を起こすと、一切境相が皆現前しない。境がもし実なら、どうしてこのように実を証する智の前に皆現れないのか。菩薩がこの四智を成就する時、唯識の理について決定して悟入する。故に心外の境を許さないのである。次に自証分とは、心が還って自を知る用である。どうして直ちに相分の境を縁ずることができようか。故に心が境を縁ずる作用を起こすのが、これが即ち見分である。そうであるなら自証が直ちに境を縁ずるというのは言うに足りない。次におよそ能量・所量の法には、必ず量果が有る。もしそうでなければ、この量知において果成が無い。どうして道理に応じようか。故にこのように第三分が有って見分を証知する。見分は能く相分を量知するのである。譬えば人が丈尺を以て絹等を量る時、絹等は所量、丈尺は能量、人は量果である。丈尺が能く絹等の物を量るというのは、その量成を人が証智することである。もしその人の証知を引かなければ、丈尺の能量、絹等の所量に何の用が有ろうか。丈尺が能く絹等を量る時、人が能く丈尺の分斉を証知する。故に能所量の義が能く成立する。もし丈尺が無ければ、人はどうして絹等の分斉を知ることを得ようか。もし絹等が無ければ、人はまた何のために丈尺【左頁】【枠外左上】 327 【枠外左横上】観心覚夢鈔上【枠外左横下】一五【二段構成】【上段】等を用いるのか。もしその人が無ければ、誰が丈尺が能く絹等を量ることを知ろうか。三分の妙理もまたこのようである。相分は所量、見分は能量、見分が能く相分を量る時、必ず内にて見分の能量を証知する。量知の義はこれにより成立する。もし見分が無ければ心はどうして色等の境界を知ることを得ようか。もし相分が無ければ心が縁用を起こしても何の所用が有ろうか。もし自証が無ければ誰が見分が能く相分を縁ずることを知ろうか。故に定んで第三分を立てるのである。次に内証の用は深細である。故に必ず現量である。而してその見分は外縁の用である。理として三量に通ずる。《割書：五八識等の見分は現量。》《割書：然るに凡そ見分は三量に通ずる法。故に総じてこれを論ずる。》どのように己の内体を知ることを得るか。もし見分の現量の時について言うなら、そうかもしれないが、見分が比量・非量の時、誰が自体を知るのか。明らかに知る、見分は本来相分を縁ずる用のためであるゆえに、現量見といえども自体を証知する義は得ることができない。何況んや、もし第四分が無ければ、第三の能量は量果が無いはずである。大過に非ざるか。《割書：仏果の三通、四を縁ずる等の事は下に至って知ることができる。》故に必ず証自証分を立てる。その自証分は既に中間に居て内縁現量である。故に見分を知り、また第四をも知る。その義は成立する。何で例とするのか。次にこの四分は皆心の分で皆証知されるべきである。もしそうでなければ、一心中に自らの知らない所が有る。道理に応じない。故に後の三分は皆能縁といえども、その中になおこのような微細相縁の義が有る。皆所知と成る。深妙に非ざるか。次に心は微細で体相を知り難い。只作用を以てこれを顕示するのみである。所以に四分は皆心用である。然れどもこの四分の中において強いて体用を判ずるなら、第三の自証が独りその【下段】体に当たる。独り中間に居て普く前後を証す。心の根本義が余と異なるからである。次に唯識とは、諸法の源を尋ね有為の起を論じている。全く唯だ一箇の心法のみで都て余法が無いのではない。故に万差の諸法が皆心から起こることを許すといえども、一法として心内でないものは無い。心内に在るといえども、色・声・水・火・眼・耳等の法は、種々差別として宛然として存する。存するといえども皆自心から起こり夢境の如くであるゆえに唯識と名づける。これにより応に言うべきである。心内の諸法は諸法が皆存し、心外の諸法は諸法が皆無い。経中の心外に別法無しとは即ちこの義である。この理を知らない人は、唯心教文に迷い、返って因果撥無の悪見を発する。甚だ悲しむべきである。問う。今この四分を八識に相配する方法はいかん。答える。八識は一一皆四分が有る。相応の心所も一一また然りである。眼識において四分を明かすならば、今この識体が生起する時、第八識の所変の色塵を疎所縁として、故に自体が転じて色の影像を現す。この影像を以て親所縁として、故に之を縁ずる能縁の作用を起こす。その色影像を相分と名づけ、之を縁ずる作用を見分と名づける。今この二分は心の自体上に現ずる所である。この二用を起こす所依の自体を自証分とし、自体を証する用をこれ即ち証自証分と名づける。このように耳等の余識の四分もこれに准じて知ることができる。五塵の境を以てこのように眼等の五識に相配すること、その相は顕然である。第六意識は十八界の諸法を縁じて境とする。応に随って諸法の影像を変現し、応に随ってこの能縁の作用を起こす。これが即ち第六識の自体

英語訳

【Right Page】【Top right margin】 326 【Upper right margin horizontal】 Kanshin Kakumu-shō, Volume 1 【Lower right margin horizontal】 Fourteen 【Two-column format】【Upper section】 sufficient as doctrine. Though speaking of dharmas within mind, one still permits non-mind dharmas. How could this be the teaching that there are no separate dharmas outside mind? Answer: Dharmas like form and sound have material obstruction as their substance. *[Margin note: Although form produced by meditative concentration has no visibility or resistance, in relation to mind it still has material obstruction]* Even if they do not serve as objects of mind, they can still be dharmas like form and sound, etc. Therefore, there is no principle of object-substance transforming to become mind. All minds and mental factors have cognition as their substance. If there were no things to be cognized, what would be cognized as the dharma of cognition? Therefore, mind-substance must transform to become objects. This is precisely the dharma of cognitive discrimination. Being superior among dharmas, it has autonomous power and can create all dharmas. Non-cognitive dharmas have dull and inferior substance-nature. How could they endure having their substance transform to give rise to cognitive dharmas? However, there are many principles for not permitting real external objects. The various textual principles by which Consciousness-Only, etc., refute the real self and real dharmas of heterodox schools and the two vehicles are all precisely these. There is no time to enumerate them all. However, now I will briefly raise what is explained in the Abhidharma Sutra regarding the four wisdoms accomplished by bodhisattvas in their contemplation, and briefly indicate their characteristics. The four wisdoms are: First, the wisdom of conflicting consciousness-characteristics. This means that at one place, ghosts, humans, gods, etc., following the power of karmic causes, have different perceptions. Ghosts see fire, humans see water, gods see lapis lazuli, animals see dwelling places. Such perceptions are variously different. If objects were really existent, how could they undergo such various transformations following the karmic causal differences of the perceivers? Second, the wisdom of objectless consciousness. This means when cognizing objects like past, future, dreams, etc., that are not real, though the objects are not really existent, mind can manifestly be obtained. If mind necessarily arose by relying on external objects, how would such situations be possible? By this example, one understands all object-realms. Third, the wisdom of naturally being without error. This means if object-substances were definitely really existent, all ordinary beings should be sages, because they would originally realize and witness objects external to mind. If so, without relying on effort, one could naturally attain liberation. Why is this not 【Lower section】 the case? Fourth, the wisdom that follows the transformations of the three wisdoms. The three wisdoms are: First, the wisdom that follows the transformations of the wisdom of autonomous ones. This means those who have already realized and attained mental autonomy can, following their own desires, accomplish transforming water, etc.—all such matters they can achieve. If objects were real, how could they be transformed by such mental transformations? Second, the wisdom that follows the transformations of the wisdom of contemplators. This means those who have attained superior concentration and cultivate dharma-contemplation, as they contemplate one object, various characteristics like blue-black decay appear. If objects were real, how could they appear following mind in this way? Third, the wisdom that follows the transformations of non-discriminating wisdom. This means when one arises the non-discriminating wisdom that witnesses reality, all object-characteristics do not appear before one. If objects were real, how is it that they all do not appear before the wisdom that witnesses reality? When bodhisattvas accomplish these four wisdoms, they definitively realize and enter the consciousness-only principle. Therefore, they do not permit objects external to mind. Next, the self-witnessing aspect is the function of mind returning to know itself. How could it directly cognize object-aspect objects? Therefore, when mind gives rise to the function of cognizing objects, this is precisely the perceiving-aspect. If so, saying that self-witnessing directly cognizes objects is insufficient. Next, whenever there are dharmas of measurer and measured, there must be a measurement-result. If not, there would be no successful fruition in this measurement-knowing. How would this accord with principle? Therefore, there is a third aspect that witnesses and knows the perceiving-aspect. The perceiving-aspect can measure and know the object-aspect. For example, when a person uses a ruler to measure silk, etc., the silk, etc., is what is measured, the ruler is what measures, and the person is the measurement-result. That the ruler can measure silk and other things means that the person witnesses and knows the accomplishment of that measurement. If one did not invoke that person's witnessing knowledge, what use would there be for the ruler's measuring and the silk's being measured? When the ruler can measure silk, etc., the person can witness and know the ruler's extent. Therefore, the meaning of measurer and measured can be established. If there were no ruler, how could the person come to know the extent of silk, etc.? If there were no silk, etc., what would the person use the ruler 【Left Page】【Top left margin】 327 【Upper left margin horizontal】 Kanshin Kakumu-shō, Volume 1 【Lower left margin horizontal】 Fifteen 【Two-column format】【Upper section】 for? If there were no person, who would know that the ruler can measure silk, etc.? The subtle principle of the three aspects is also like this. The object-aspect is what is measured, the perceiving-aspect is what measures. When the perceiving-aspect can measure the object-aspect, it necessarily witnesses and knows the perceiving-aspect's measuring internally. The meaning of measurement-knowing is established by this. If there were no perceiving-aspect, how could mind come to know object-realms like form, etc.? If there were no object-aspect, even if mind gave rise to cognizing function, what purpose would there be? If there were no self-witnessing, who would know that the perceiving-aspect can cognize the object-aspect? Therefore, a third aspect is definitely established. Next, the function of inner witnessing is profound and subtle. Therefore, it is necessarily direct perception. But that perceiving-aspect is the function of external cognition. In principle, it is connected to the three [types of] valid cognition. *[Margin note: The perceiving-aspects of the fifth and eighth consciousnesses, etc., are direct perception.]* *[Margin note: However, generally speaking, perceiving-aspects are dharmas connected to the three [types of] valid cognition. Therefore, we discuss this comprehensively.]* How does one come to know one's inner substance? If we speak about the time when perceiving-aspects are direct perception, this might be so, but when perceiving-aspects are inference or invalid cognition, who knows the self-substance? Clearly knowing: because perceiving-aspects are originally functions for cognizing object-aspects, even with direct perceptual seeing, the meaning of witnessing and knowing self-substance cannot be obtained. How much more so—if there were no fourth aspect, the third measurer should have no measurement-result. Would this not be a great fault? *[Margin note: The three supernatural powers of Buddha-result, matters like cognizing the four, etc., can be known when we reach below.]* Therefore, the witnessing-self-witnessing aspect is necessarily established. Since that self-witnessing aspect already dwells in the middle and is inner cognizing direct perception, it knows the perceiving-aspect and also knows the fourth. Its meaning is established. Why make this an analogy? Next, these four aspects are all aspects of mind and should all be witnessed and known. If not, there would be something within one mind that one does not know oneself. This would not accord with principle. Therefore, though the latter three aspects are all cognizing, within them there is still such meaning of subtle mutual cognition. They all become knowable. Is this not profound and subtle? Next, mind is subtle and its substantial characteristics are difficult to know. We only use functions to reveal and indicate it. Therefore, the four aspects are all mind-functions. However, if we forcefully distinguish substance and function within these four aspects, the third self-witnessing alone corresponds to that 【Lower section】 substance. It alone dwells in the middle and universally witnesses before and after. The fundamental meaning of mind differs from the rest. Next, consciousness-only seeks the source of all dharmas and discusses the arising of the conditioned. It is not at all that there is only one individual mind-dharma with absolutely no other dharmas. Therefore, though it permits that all the myriad different dharmas arise from mind, there is not one dharma that is not within mind. Though dwelling within mind, dharmas like form, sound, water, fire, eye, ear, etc., exist distinctly with various differences. Though they exist, they all arise from one's own mind and are like dream-objects, therefore they are called consciousness-only. Based on this, one should say: dharmas within mind—all dharmas exist; dharmas outside mind—all dharmas are nonexistent. What the sutras mean by "no separate dharmas outside mind" is precisely this meaning. People who do not understand this principle become confused by consciousness-only teaching texts and instead generate the evil view of rejecting cause and effect—this is extremely lamentable. Question: How should these four aspects be correlated with the eight consciousnesses? Answer: Each of the eight consciousnesses has four aspects. Each of the corresponding mental factors is also thus. Clarifying the four aspects in the eye-consciousness: when this consciousness-substance arises, it takes the form-dust transformed by the eighth consciousness as the remote object, therefore its own substance transforms and manifests a form-image. Taking this image as the immediate object, it therefore gives rise to the cognizing function that cognizes it. That form-image is called the object-aspect, and the function that cognizes it is called the perceiving-aspect. These two aspects are what appear on mind's own substance. The self-substance that depends on giving rise to these two functions is the self-witnessing aspect, and the function that witnesses the self-substance is precisely called the witnessing-self-witnessing aspect. Thus, the four aspects of the remaining consciousnesses like ear, etc., can be known by analogy with this. Correlating the five sense-object realms with the five consciousnesses of eye, etc., in this way, their characteristics are evident. The sixth, mind-consciousness, cognizes the dharmas of the eighteen realms as objects. It correspondingly transforms and manifests images of various dharmas. It correspondingly gives rise to these cognizing functions. This is precisely the self-substance of the sixth consciousness.

日本の仏典を翻刻

観心覚夢鈔三巻 - 翻刻

翻刻

現代語訳

英語訳