大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 65.10

65.10

疏「若言四蘊」下，第二引異釋。先引《唯識》，即第三論，引經證有第八識，下文當具。引論文言「所依現行之識亦唯賴耶」者，以非色四蘊為名，則名色支之中已有識竟。故《唯識》云「眼等轉識攝在名中，此識若無，說誰為識？」釋曰：故以第八為識支也。恐有救云：名中識蘊是眼等五識支，即是第六識故。故次論云「亦不可說名中識蘊謂五識身，識謂第六，羯邏藍時無五識故。」釋曰：大小共許，初七日內無五識故。故我大乘以第七識為名中識。《俱舍》亦云「名謂非色，即是四蘊。」然其識蘊，意在第六。又《俱舍》說，唯約位說在於識後，不說與識同時互依。上云羯邏藍等者，此云雜穢，父母不淨為雜，深可厭患為穢。而言等者，此上初位等餘四位故。《俱舍》總云「最初羯邏藍」，此云薄酪。二云「次生頞部曇」，此云胞也。三「從此生閉尸」，此云軟肉。四「閉尸生健南」，此云堅肉。五「次鉢羅奢佉」，此云支節。此之五位皆名色支。此第五位亦六處攝。下有三句，皆六處支。偈云「後髮毛爪等，及色根諸相，漸次而轉增，皆第五位攝。」若取一生皆名色攝，即六處觸受皆屬名色，故復云等。

Regarding the Commentary's stating, "If one speaks of the four aggregates..." onward: second, citing an alternative interpretation. First, it cites the Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi], namely its third fascicle, which cites sūtras to prove the existence of the eighth consciousness, to be fully presented below. Citing the treatise's words, "The supporting actualized consciousness is also exclusively the ālaya[-vijñāna]," [it explains that] since the four non-form aggregates are taken as "name," the link of name-and-form already contains consciousness. Thus the Vijñaptimātratā[-siddhi] states: "The evolving consciousnesses, such as the eye-[consciousness], are subsumed under 'name'; if this [eighth] consciousness did not exist, what could be called 'consciousness'?" The explanation says: Therefore, the eighth is taken as the link of consciousness. Lest someone should offer the defense: "The aggregate of consciousness within 'name' refers to the five consciousnesses such as the eye-[consciousness], while the link of consciousness is the sixth consciousness," the treatise therefore continues: "Nor can it be said that the aggregate of consciousness within 'name' refers to the group of five consciousnesses and that consciousness refers to the sixth, because at the stage of the kalala the five consciousnesses do not exist." The explanation says: Both the Great and Small Vehicles agree that during the initial seven days the five consciousnesses do not exist. Therefore, our Mahāyāna considers the seventh consciousness to be the consciousness within "name." The Kośa also states: "Name refers to the non-form, namely the four aggregates." Yet its aggregate of consciousness is intended as the sixth. Furthermore, what the Kośa states is explained purely in terms of stages as being subsequent to consciousness; it does not speak of simultaneous mutual reliance with consciousness. Regarding the aforementioned "kalala and so forth": here translated as "turbid impurity"—the impurity of the parents constitutes the "turbid," and its deeply repellent nature constitutes the "impurity." And as for "and so forth": this initial stage implies the remaining four stages. The Kośa summarily states: "First is the kalala," translated here as "thin curds." Second: "Next arises the arbuda," translated here as "blister." Third: "From this arises the peśī," translated here as "soft flesh." Fourth: "The peśī gives rise to the ghana," translated here as "hard flesh." Fifth: "Next is the praśākhā," translated here as "limbs and joints." These five stages all belong to the link of name-and-form. This fifth stage is also subsumed under the six sense-spheres. Below there are three lines, all of which are the link of the six sense-spheres. The verse says: "Later, hair, nails, and the like, / as well as the various marks of the physical faculties, / gradually develop and expand; / all are subsumed under the fifth stage." If one takes the whole of a single life as subsumed under name-and-form, then the six sense-spheres, contact, and sensation all belong to name-and-form, which is why it again says "and so forth."