瑜伽論記 15.383

15.383

三、約四句分別，景云：有眼、非界，謂羅漢最後眼者，此據臨入無餘最後念眼不能生後非種子義不名為界，亦應言學人從下二界命終生無色界時最後捨眼不為界。又略不論同本識中，為種子生彼最後眼根，以不若有種子則最後眼是眼亦有眼界，云何特言是眼非眼界。又云何言阿羅漢最後蘊名無種已生。若最後眼同時無有能生種子，云何攝論種子六義中，此時種子有即此時果生名為俱有。解云：一釋，最後眼實從同時種子生而言非眼界者，據此種子更無生後念眼根功能故名非界，非謂後眼無同時種名非界，後蘊名無種已生亦爾，即依此義解十地最後金剛心生時，生現賴耶與能生種已住滅相，以因果法理必同時俱謝滅故。爾時即有圓鏡智相續生，故智論云：無礙道中，行名為菩薩；解脫道中。行名為佛。又釋，羅漢後眼，從前念種生，同時無種故言無種已生，又最後不生後，不名眼界。

Third, discriminating in terms of four alternatives. Jing said: “There is what is an eye and not an element: namely, the final eye of an arhat.” This is based on the eye of the final moment when approaching entry into [nirvāṇa] without remainder: being unable to produce subsequent [eyes], it does not have the meaning of a seed and is not called an element; one should also say that when a person in training dies from the lower two realms and is born into the immaterial realm, the final eye relinquished is not an element. Moreover, it is briefly not discussed whether in the same fundamental consciousness there are seeds that produce that final eye faculty: if there are seeds, then the final eye is an eye and also has an eye-element; why does it specifically say it is an eye and not an eye-element? Furthermore, why is it said that the final aggregates of an arhat are called “already arisen without seeds”? If the final eye does not simultaneously have a seed capable of producing it, how can it accord with the six meanings of seeds in the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, where “the seed existing at this moment while the fruit arises at this moment” is called “coexistent”? The explanation says: One explanation is that the final eye actually arises from a simultaneous seed, but when it is said to not be an eye-element, this is based on this seed having no further capacity to produce an eye faculty in a subsequent moment, so it is called not an element; it does not mean that the final eye has no simultaneous seed and is thus not an element; the final aggregate being called “already arisen without seeds” is also like this. Relying on this meaning, it explains that when the final vajra-mind of the tenth bhūmi arises, the generated manifest ālaya and the seed capable of producing it have already reached the characteristic of cessation, because causal and fruitional dharmas must, in principle, pass away together at the same time. At that time, the mirror-like wisdom arises in continuity. Therefore the Treatise on the Great [Prajñāpāramitā] says: “On the path of non-obstruction, the practitioner is called a bodhisattva; on the path of liberation, the practitioner is called a Buddha.” Another explanation is that the arhat's final eye arises from the seed of the preceding moment and has no seed at the same moment; therefore it is said to be “already arisen without seeds”; and because the final does not produce subsequent, it is not called an eye-element.