俱舍論疏 13.217

13.217

論一「切無漏至任運轉故」，釋無漏、異熟無記非二轉也，無漏唯在定故，異熟生心任運轉故。《正理》破云「然說無漏，異熟非者，此有大減及太過失。有漏定心亦俱非故（此大減失），諸異熟識但可非轉，能為隨轉。何理能遮（大過失也）？然經主言：不由加行任運轉故，諸異熟識非轉、隨轉。有餘復言：此唯先業勢力所引，餘心息位方可現前，故非二種。設此能起身、語表業，是何性類？為異熟生？為威儀路？為工巧處？且非異熟生，現加行起故。亦非餘二種，異熟心起故。如是理趣，但可能遮異熟生心為因等起，餘心為轉所發表業。異熟生心外門轉故，能為隨轉，何理相違？且若無心，表業不轉。許表業轉，用異熟識為隨轉因，斯有何過？又但應說異熟生心勢微劣故非因等起，不應說言不由加行任運轉故。勿生得善亦不為因發有表業，亦非加行任運轉故。由此經主有增減失，因復非因。智者應了。」俱舍師云：有漏定心理同無漏非轉、隨轉，唯在定言，以遮顯故，故不別說。異熟生心雖外門轉，善、惡業感不由加行任運而生，性羸劣故，非轉、隨轉。生得善心豈同於彼？一即非從業感、二即其性是強。故亦非難，此即違理，又教相違。《婆沙》一百一十七云「問：異熟生心何故不能作二等起發身、語業耶？答：強盛心發身、語業。異熟生心其性羸劣，故不能發。」廣如彼說。

The treatise says: "All uncontaminated [minds] ... up to ... because they operate spontaneously." This explains why uncontaminated minds and maturation-born indeterminate minds are neither of the two initiators: because the uncontaminated exists only in meditative absorption, and the maturation-born mind operates spontaneously. The *Nyāyānusāra* refutes this, saying: "However, stating that uncontaminated and maturation minds are neither of the two involves great under-inclusion and excessive fault. Tainted minds in absorption are also neither of the two (this is the fault of great under-inclusion). Various maturation consciousnesses simply cannot be initiators, but they can be concomitants. What principle could preclude this (this is the excessive fault)? Yet the author of the treatise says: 'Because they operate spontaneously without preparation, maturation consciousnesses are neither initiators nor concomitants.' Others also say: 'These are induced solely by the force of prior karma and can only manifest when other minds have ceased; therefore, they are neither of the two.' Suppose these were capable of initiating bodily and vocal manifest actions: what nature and category would they belong to? Would they be maturation-born, or deportment-related, or skill-related? First, they are not maturation-born, because [manifestations] arise through present preparation. Nor are they the other two kinds, because they would arise from a maturation mind. Such a line of reasoning can only preclude a maturation-born mind from serving as a causal motivating factor and launching manifest actions initiated by another mind. Since a maturation-born mind operates via external gates, it can be a concomitant; what principle contradicts this? Moreover, if there were no mind, manifest action would not occur. If it is admitted that manifest action occurs, taking the maturation consciousness as its concomitant cause, what fault is there in this? Furthermore, one should merely say that because the power of the maturation-born mind is feeble, it is not a causal motivating factor; one should not say that it is because it operates spontaneously without preparation. Otherwise, innate wholesome states would also fail to act as causes launching manifest action, as they also do not involve preparation and operate spontaneously. Hence the author of the treatise incurs the fault of excessive addition and omission, taking non-causes as causes. The wise should understand this." The master of the *Kośa* says: In principle, the tainted mind in absorption is the same as the uncontaminated in being neither an initiator nor a concomitant. The phrase 'solely in absorption' implies this exclusion, so it is not stated separately. Although the maturation-born mind operates via external gates, it is produced spontaneously by wholesome and unwholesome karmic retribution without preparation, and because its nature is feeble, it is neither an initiator nor a concomitant. How could the innate wholesome mind be equated with that? First, it does not result from karmic retribution; second, its nature is strong. Hence this is not a valid objection either; [the opponent's claim] contradicts reasoning, and it also contradicts scripture. Fascicle 117 of the *Vibhāṣā* states: "Question: Why cannot a maturation-born mind act as the two motivating factors to launch bodily and vocal actions? Answer: A strong and vigorous mind launches bodily and vocal actions. The nature of a maturation-born mind is feeble, so it cannot launch them." It is explained at length there.