[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [俱舍論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822) › 19.54 # 俱舍論疏 19.54 俱舍論疏 19.54 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [19.54](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.54) 論「若執煩惱至不可得故」，此合兩喻同隨眠也。俱因薰習並是種子，一有體性是不相應，一無體性但是功能差別，差別因緣不可得也。《正理論》云「又所立喻如念種子，是證智生，能生當念功能差別。亦不相似，以我宗言念種子者，即於證智後初重緣，實念從先證智俱起念生，能生後時憶智俱念。此顯即念前後相引，為能赴感差別功能。彼自體俱生，無別實煩惱從前纏起能生後纏，可名隨眠煩惱種子。故喻於法，相去極遙（已上論文）。」二說法別，詳《順正理論》，此文二喻亦對有部。詳論主釋，前證智位總聚熏成，名別種子功能差別。種子功能差別，能生智念後聚法也。由前位智能決斷故，同時念記令後位念記憶分明，前位總立智名，後位總立念稱。親證境心名之為智，後記不忘名之為念。 > On the passage where the Śāstra says, 'If it is held that the defilements \[...\] because it is impossible to find': This combines both similes to apply equally to the anusayas. Both arise by perfuming (vāsanā) and both are seeds; yet one has real substance and is a non-associated \[formation\], while the other has no real substance and is merely a specific distinction in capacity (sāmarthya-viśeṣa) — the distinct cause and condition for this cannot be found. The Nyāyānusāra states: 'Furthermore, the simile adduced—such as the seed of mindfulness, which is generated from direct realizing knowledge and is a specific capacity able to produce future mindfulness—is likewise not analogous. For in our school's doctrine, what is called the seed of mindfulness is the initial reflective objectification following upon direct realizing knowledge; actual mindfulness arises from the mindfulness that was associated with the prior realizing knowledge, and is able to generate subsequent mindfulness associated with remembering knowledge. This demonstrates that it is simply mindfulness inducing itself prior and posterior, serving as a distinct capacity capable of corresponding to its effect. Yet within its own nature \[for anusayas\] they are co-arisen; there is no distinct real defilement arising from a prior entanglement (paryavasthāna) that can produce a subsequent entanglement such that it could be named an anusaya or defilement-seed. Therefore the simile is extremely far removed from the principle' (end of quote from the Śāstra). The explanations of the two doctrines differ, as detailed in the Nyāyānusāra; these two similes in the present text are also aimed at the Sarvāstivādins. Examining the Śāstra master's explanation: in the state of prior direct realizing knowledge, the entire assemblage perfumed together is designated as a distinct capacity of the seed. The distinct capacity of the seed is able to produce the subsequent assemblage of dharmas of knowledge and mindfulness. Because the knowledge in the prior state is capable of decisive judgment, simultaneous mindfulness memorizes it so that mindfulness in the subsequent state remembers it clearly; the prior state is generally given the name 'knowledge', while the subsequent state is generally given the designation 'mindfulness'. The mind that directly realizes the object is called 'knowledge'; that which subsequently remembers without forgetting is called 'mindfulness'. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 19.53](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.53) - [Next: 19.55](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.55) - [Up: 19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822~en-mt.19.54) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.54](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.19.54) · Pramāṇa