識顯現的概念在《辯中邊論》之前的《解深密經》和《瑜伽師地論》等唯 識經論很少使用，而到了《辯中邊論》成為主要概念，說明有情身心世界的存 有和認識。識顯現為唯識思想，成立現實世界的基礎理論，此思想與唯識三性 有極大關連。而轉依是唯識行者重要的目的，本論文以三性的中心──依他起 性，作為轉依的中心點，來談識顯現與轉依。識顯現的作用，能將無現而為 有，所現的事物，稱為四塵境。這四塵境包含能取的亂識，和所取的我、法。 這能取、所取的二取本性是無，因虛妄分別故，被分別成有實體性的二取。依 聖人智慧，則能於虛妄分別中遠離二取相，見到虛妄分別之法性，也就是空 性，聖人了解虛妄與空二者是「即一性」的中道。其實踐階段稱入無相方便， 首先由於知「識有可得性」，故知「境的不實」，就能去除對境界的分別為實 有；次再因「境不可得」，能分別境的識，因失去對象，亦成為無，境無識 無，就證得平等無所得性，這樣就達成了轉依。 轉依的語詞梵文雖有āśraya-parāvṛtti 和āśraya-parivṛtti 二字，但二字基本 上皆是「所依變貌」的意思，都是有情所依止處改變，唯識學派以阿賴耶識為 有情所依之處，這是依他起性，為有情身心的全體。若轉捨雜染識成清淨的無 分別智，有情身心的因緣也就由雜染相續，變成清淨相續，就是轉依。轉依有 六種之多，本文只針對修無相方便，初入見道位的轉依作研究。 本論文以《辯中邊論．相品》為研究材料，依目前所見相關論文來看，皆 將識顯現與轉依分開研究。實際上，從凡夫的雜染到聖人的清淨，識顯現與轉依有相當大關聯性，本文即扣緊二者相關性做研究，去探討二者轉換的方式是 什麼？筆者發現可以從二種角度作說明：一是認識方面，一是三性。首先從認 識方面解說的話，因為識與無分別智，都是對識顯現之事物的認識，前者用 識，後者用智。另一方面從三性來說的話，於識顯現四塵境這依他起法上，增 益為有，就是遍計所執；如於識顯現四塵的依他起性，遠離二取，就顯出虛妄 分別的清淨依他起，就是空性。這空性是緣起法的真實性，並不能損減為無， 故是圓滿成就的真實性，也就是轉依。又三性本身含有存有論和認識論，《辯 中邊論》以虛妄分別來談三性思想，是偏向認識論。事物本身皆是虛妄分別， 為因緣所生，是依他起性；用識去認識事物，會有增益成二取的現象，這樣是 產生遍計所執；能以無分別智行於一切境界，則能認知事物的法性、空性，這 樣就是認識事物的本來面貌，圓滿成就的真實性，也就是圓成實性。

The concept of the representation of consciousness is not often used in the Saṃdhinirmocana-sūtra and Yogacarabhūmi. It becomes, however, a crucial idea in the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāṣya. The represtation of consciousness talks about the existences and knowings of the body and mind of sentient beings. The representation of consciousness is closely related to the theory of three natures of consciousness-only. Transformation of the basis (āśraya-parāvṛtti) is very important for the Yogacara practitioners. The present paper is focusing on one of the three natures, nature of dependent arising, as the central point of the transformation of the basis, to explain the representation and the transformation of basis of consciousness. The function of the representation of consciousness is to turn non-existent objects into existent objects. It is called the Fourfold Object (artha). The Fourfold Objects consists of grasper and grasped that is incorrectly viewed in terms of subject-object duality. Referential objects and sentient beings are the grasped, consciousness of self and representation are the grasper. The original nature of subject-object duality is emptiness. The dependent nature that is consciousness's representation is the ontological basis of the other two natures. So I should take the dependent nature as the center of the point of transformation, when the dependent nature is constructed in terms of language and conceptualization, this false vision of reality is referred as the imagined nature. But when one shifts from the imagined mode to perfect mode, when one leaves subject-object duality behind, then one will see things as they really are: reality will be viewed without the superimposed matrix of language and conceptualization. When knowing the way things really are, that is transformation of the basis. There are two Sanskrit terms of transformation of the basis. These are “āśrayaparāvṛtt” and “āśraya-parivṛtti.” Both of them share the similar meaning of the changing of the basis. The basis means the body and mind of sentient beings who depends upon them. From the school of consciousness-only points of view, the basis of sentient beings is the ālaya-vijñāna. When the ālaya-vijñāna representate, it become consciousness's representation that is the dependent nature. If one could transform from the afflicted consciousness to the purified one, that means the causes and conditions of the body and mind of the sentient being are transformed from afflicted contiunity to purified contiunity. This is the transformation of the basis. Although there are six kinds of transformation of the basis, the practice of the non-characteristic, and the transformation of the basis in the path of seeing are discussed here only. There are two aspects of the explanation of the relation between representation of consciousness and transformation of the basis. One is epistemological, and the other is in terms of the three natures. First, for the epistemology, the consciousness and nonconceptual awareness both are used on the knowing of objects, the front is by means of consciousness, whereas the latter is by means of knowledge. On the other hand, the imagined nature of three natures constructs conceptual discrimination (vikalpa) and conceptual proliferation (prapañca) on the dependent nature. In terms of dependent nature, when the Fourfold Objects are appeared in the consciousness, and the consciousness could away from the conception of the grasping and the grasped, the pure perfect nature of knowing conceptual discrimination and conceptual proliferation will be manifested. This is the emptiness. The emptiness is the reality of dependent origination. This cannot be decreased to non-exist. Therefore, the perfect nature is the transformation of the basis. The three natures consist of epistemology and the theory of existence. There are discussions of the three natures in terms of the unreal imagination in the Madhyāntavibhāgabhāṣya. That is in terms of epistemological.