大般涅槃經義記 10.136

10.136

自下第三明道分齊，有四問答。迦葉初問，「有漏能作無漏法因，以何義故不名梵行」；下佛答之，「有漏顛倒，故非梵行」。第二迦葉問「世第一為漏無漏」，佛答「有漏」。第三迦葉就之設難，「彼性不倒，何故不名為淨梵行」。佛答「第一為無漏因，似於無漏，向無漏故不名顛倒」，一念不續，故非梵行。第四迦葉舉彼眾生五識作難，「五識非倒復非一念，以何義故不名梵行」。迦葉以彼五識之心取境不謬故言不倒，前後數起各非一念不言一一，多念相續名非一念。佛答「五識有漏顛倒，故非梵行」，先舉、次釋。「增漏名漏」，解為漏也。「著想倒」等，釋為倒也。問曰：著想是想非識，今以何故宣說五識以為著想？依如《成實》，想是通名，意識所收。若依《毘曇》，想是心法，非六識體；然是通數，與六識俱。此經所說多同《毘曇》，五識之心與倒想俱，從伴以彰名為倒想。「三十七品性非倒」下，舉是顯非，成前非梵。

From here below, the third [section] clarifies the demarcation of the path; it contains four sets of questions and answers. First, Kāśyapa asks: 'Tainted [dharmas] can serve as causes for untainted dharmas; for what reason are they not called brahma-conduct?' Below, the Buddha answers: 'Tainted [dharmas] are inversions, therefore they are not brahma-conduct.' Second, Kāśyapa asks: 'Are worldly supreme [dharmas] tainted or untainted?' The Buddha answers: 'Tainted.' Third, Kāśyapa raises an objection on that basis: 'Their nature is not inverted; why are they not called pure brahma-conduct?' The Buddha answers: 'The supreme [worldly dharmas] serve as the cause for the untainted, resemble the untainted, and are directed toward the untainted, and therefore they are not called inverted'; [yet because they last only for] a single thought-moment and do not continue, they are not brahma-conduct. Fourth, Kāśyapa brings up the five consciousnesses of sentient beings to raise an objection: 'The five consciousnesses are neither inverted nor are they a single thought-moment; for what reason are they not called brahma-conduct?' Kāśyapa, because the mind of those five consciousnesses apprehends sense objects without error, says they are not inverted; and because they arise repeatedly before and after and each is not a single thought-moment, without speaking of each one individually, their continuity over many thought-moments is termed 'not a single thought-moment.' The Buddha answers: 'The five consciousnesses are tainted and inverted, therefore they are not brahma-conduct.' He first raises [the statement] and then explains it. 'Increasing outflows is termed tainted' explains their being tainted. 'Adhering to ideations is inverted' and so forth explains their being inverted. Question: 'Adhering to ideations' is ideation (saṃjñā), not consciousness (vijñāna); why is it now proclaimed that the five consciousnesses are 'adhering to ideations'? According to the *Tattvasiddhi*, 'ideation' is a general term included within mental consciousness. If based on the *Abhidharma*, ideation is a mental factor (caitta), not the substance of the six consciousnesses; however, it is a universal mental factor (sarvatraga) that is concomitant with the six consciousnesses. What this sūtra states is mostly identical to the *Abhidharma*: the mind of the five consciousnesses is concomitant with inverted ideation, and it is designated 'inverted ideation' after its associate. From 'The nature of the thirty-seven factors is not inverted' below, he cites what is right to reveal what is wrong, establishing the previous [point that tainted states] are not brahma-[conduct].