俱舍論記 2.92

2.92

「意法意識至名為法界」者，此釋第六句。意、法、意識有一剎那，謂初無漏苦法忍品，非等流故名一剎那。此說究竟不從同類因生者名一剎那，餘有為法無非等流。苦忍俱心名意界、意識界，望後名意，望前名意識。餘俱起法，即相應等名為法界。初苦忍言，顯取現忍，故《正理》云「此說正現行亦非等流者。」問：何故但取現忍，非取未來？解云：現行苦忍非是等流，其義決定。未來苦忍，雖在凡位非是等流，若至聖位住不生者，即是現忍等流果故非是剎那，其義不決。問：如上忍現行，未來下忍住不生法，非等流攝，應是剎那。如何但取現忍？解云：苦忍名一剎那，由具二義：一者現行、二者非等流。如不生下忍，雖非等流而闕現行。如苦法智等，雖有現行闕非等流。如不生上忍，二義竝闕。餘隨所應，准此通釋。若依《正理》，五類有兩解：一解同此論。又一解云：復有餘師此中異說，謂一切法皆有實事，有實相故。除無為法，皆一剎那，速謝滅故。除初無漏心及助伴，餘有為法皆是等流。十色少分是所長養，十七少分是異熟生。由此眼等五內色根各有二種，謂所長養及異熟生。雖有餘三，而無別性，義雜亂故所以不說。餘皆准此。聲界有二，五識亦然。意、意識三。色等亦爾。法界有四，除所長養。

"Mind, dharmas, and mental consciousness... are called the dharma element": this explains the sixth line. Mind, dharmas, and mental consciousness have a single moment (kṣaṇa), namely the category of the initial undefiled receptivity to the dharma of suffering (duḥkha-dharma-jñāna-kṣānti); because it is not homogeneously-flowing, it is called a single moment. This speaks of that which ultimately does not arise from a homogeneous cause (sabhāga-hetu) as being a single moment; of the remaining conditioned dharmas, none are not homogeneously-flowing. The mind concurrent with the receptivity to suffering is called the mind element and the mental consciousness element: looking toward what follows it is called 'mind', looking toward what precedes it is called 'mental consciousness'. The other co-arising dharmas—namely those associated and so forth—are called the dharma element. The words 'initial receptivity to suffering' show that active receptivity is taken; hence the *Nyāyānusāra* says: "This speaks of that which is presently active and also not homogeneously-flowing." Question: Why is only active receptivity taken, and not future [receptivity]? The explanation is: active receptivity to suffering is not homogeneously-flowing; its meaning is definitive. As for future receptivity to suffering, although in the stage of an ordinary person it is not homogeneously-flowing, if upon reaching the noble stage it abides as a non-arising dharma, it is then the homogeneously-flowing fruit of the active receptivity and thus is not a single moment; its meaning is not definitive. Question: Just as when higher receptivity is active, the future lower receptivity abides as a non-arising dharma, not subsumed under the homogeneously-flowing, it should be a single moment. Why is only active receptivity taken? The explanation is: receptivity to suffering is called a single moment by virtue of possessing two criteria: first, being presently active; second, not being homogeneously-flowing. As with the non-arising lower receptivity, although it is not homogeneously-flowing, it lacks present activity. As with the knowledge of the dharma of suffering and so forth, although they have present activity, they lack non-homogeneously-flowing. As with the non-arising higher receptivity, both criteria are lacking. The rest are explained accordingly following this. According to the *Nyāyānusāra*, there are two explanations of the five categories: one explanation is identical to this treatise. Another explanation says: There are other masters who have a different view on this, saying that all dharmas possess real entities, because they possess real characteristics. Except for unconditioned dharmas, all are a single moment, because they swiftly perish. Except for the initial undefiled mind and its concomitants, the remaining conditioned dharmas are all homogeneously-flowing. A small portion of the ten physical forms is nutriment-increased, and a small portion of the seventeen is fruition-born. Due to this, the five internal physical faculties of the eye and so forth each have two kinds, namely nutriment-increased and fruition-born. Although they have the remaining three, they lack distinct nature and their meanings would be confused, which is why they are not mentioned. The rest are all analogized to this. The sound element has two, and the five consciousnesses are likewise. Mind and mental consciousness have three. Visible form and so forth are also like this. The dharma element has four, excluding nutriment-increased.