瑜伽論記 1.596

1.596

又意識任運散亂下，明五心緣境之世，由緣不串習境非是作意力起名卒爾墮心，雖不作意任運起故。三藏解云：西有三說。初師云：意識率爾唯緣過去曾所緣境，若從五識無間所生意識尋決二心，唯應說緣前五識所緣種類現在境，若此尋求決定二心則緣彼境生。次最勝子難前師云：如佛菩薩神通等心，任運而起率爾之心，或緣現在或緣未來。而言率爾任運心，唯緣過去者，不緣，故意識任運率爾之心通緣三世及非世法。從唯緣過去下，乃明五識後，尋求、決定二意識緣過去五識所緣境生，此應長牽其文屬下，言唯緣過去境，五識無間所生意識或尋求決定也。由追緣五識所緣境故，唯緣過去境生，或時緣五識所緣境種類境者。唯應說緣現在境，第三師云：意識率爾唯緣過去境，以緣不明了故，次起五識與五識同時分別意識，或尋五境或定五識，既與五識同時意識，故唯應說緣現在境，若此五識同時尋求決定意識，則緣彼五識曾所緣境生，此言無間者，由與五識同時親依五識生故緣無間，此是同時無間非前後無間也。補闕加第四解而言：意識率爾及五識後尋、決二心；若緣賴耶本境義邊名緣過境；若緣自境相分義邊唯緣現境，故據唯識道理言之；若此心起則緣自變現在境生。又識能了別事之總相等者，成唯識云：心於所緣唯取總相，心所於彼亦取別相，故此說言即此所未了別等。此言表心所亦取境總相，此總境上所未了別境之別相所了境相。其能了別者，說名作意，此中但說心起必俱，故唯說遍行、心所、行相，由此兼題遍行、別境通三性，心、行相增強偏說體業，餘略不論。

Furthermore, under "the spontaneous and distracted mental consciousness," it explains the temporal periods of the objects cognized by the five minds. Because it cognizes an unaccustomed object and does not arise by the power of attention, it is called the mind falling spontaneously; although it lacks attention, it arises spontaneously. The Tripiṭaka Master explains that in the West there are three views. The first master says: the spontaneous mental consciousness cognizes solely objects of the past that were previously cognized; if it is the two minds of inquiry and determination produced immediately after the five consciousnesses, they should only be said to cognize present objects of the same category as those cognized by the preceding five consciousnesses; if these two minds of inquiry and determination arise, they cognize those objects. Next, Jinaputra refutes the former master, saying: as with the minds of supernatural powers and so forth of buddhas and bodhisattvas, which arise spontaneously as spontaneous minds, they cognize either the present or the future; and as for saying that the spontaneous mind arising naturally cognizes solely the past, this does not cognize [properly]; therefore the spontaneous mind of the mental consciousness arising naturally comprehensively cognizes the three times and phenomena not included in time. From "cognizes solely the past" onward, it then clarifies that after the five consciousnesses, the two mental consciousnesses of inquiry and determination arise cognizing the objects of the past five consciousnesses; this text should be carried downward to connect, stating that cognizing solely past objects, the mental consciousness produced immediately after the five consciousnesses is either inquiry or determination. Because it retroactively cognizes the objects of the five consciousnesses, it arises cognizing solely past objects; or when it cognizes objects of the same category as the objects of the five consciousnesses, it should only be said to cognize present objects. The third master says: the spontaneous mental consciousness cognizes solely past objects because its cognition is not clear; next, the five consciousnesses arise, and simultaneously with the five consciousnesses, the discriminating mental consciousness either inquires into the five objects or determines the five consciousnesses; since it is a mental consciousness simultaneous with the five consciousnesses, it should only be said to cognize present objects; if it is this mental consciousness of inquiry and determination simultaneous with the five consciousnesses, it arises cognizing the objects previously cognized by those five consciousnesses; as for saying "immediately," because it is simultaneous with the five consciousnesses and arises intimately relying on the five consciousnesses, its condition is without interval; this is simultaneous non-interval, not non-interval of before and after. Supplementing the gaps, a fourth interpretation is added, stating: regarding the spontaneous mental consciousness and the two minds of inquiry and determination after the five consciousnesses, in terms of cognizing the fundamental object of the ālayavijñāna, it is called cognizing past objects; in terms of cognizing the aspect of the object of its own image, it cognizes solely present objects; therefore, speaking according to the principles of consciousness-only, when this mind arises, it arises cognizing the present object manifested by itself. Furthermore, regarding "consciousness can cognize the general characteristics of things," the Cheng weishi lun says: the mind grasps solely general characteristics with respect to the cognized object; mental factors with respect to it also grasp particular characteristics; therefore this says "that which is not yet cognized by this," and so forth. This statement expresses that mental factors also grasp the general characteristics of an object; on this general object, that which is not yet cognized is the cognized objective aspect of the particular characteristics of the object. That which is capable of cognizing is called attention; here it only speaks of what necessarily accompanies the arising of mind, hence it speaks solely of the modes of activity of universal mental factors; thereby, mentioning both universal and particular as common to the three natures, because the modes of activity of mind are intensified, it particularly explains their essence and activity, omitting the rest.