瑜伽論記 17.520

17.520

泰云：有人已得九無礙九解脫道離欲，從定起已，住勝進道定中，或於一時彼定與散心作意而轉，或於一時唯定相續不與散心相雜起，則於定中遇聲緣故從定起，此總舉大宗，不言則出定在定時與定相應，意識同時餘耳識生，獨一耳識緣於外聲，非則彼定相應意識能取此聲，以此文證意識不必與五識同取五塵。餘部小乘云：定中耳識不生，由聲導故，即便出定起耳識聞聲，今破云：若不在定耳識聞聲，若爾者，於音聲不領受故，不應為聲逼故出定。餘部又言：耳意二識不並故，耳識聞聲時意識已出定。故今破云：非取聲時則便出定，則於定中耳識領之。

Tai says: 'There is someone who has attained the nine paths of non-hindrance and nine paths of liberation, having separated from desire; having arisen from meditative absorption, they abide in the meditative absorption of the path of supreme progress. Or at one time that meditative absorption proceeds together with mental attention of the distracted mind, or at one time only the meditative absorption continues in succession without arising mixed with the distracted mind; then, in meditative absorption, encountering the condition of a sound, one arises from meditative absorption. This presents the main doctrine in general terms. It does not say that one immediately emerges from meditative absorption: while in meditative absorption, concurrent with the mental consciousness associated with meditative absorption, another ear-consciousness arises; the ear-consciousness alone takes the external sound as its object, but it is not that the mental consciousness associated with that meditative absorption can apprehend this sound. By this text it is proven that the mental consciousness does not necessarily apprehend the five sense-objects together with the five consciousnesses. Other Hīnayāna schools say: "In meditative absorption the ear-consciousness does not arise; guided by the sound, one immediately emerges from meditative absorption and gives rise to the ear-consciousness to hear the sound." This is now refuted: if the ear-consciousness did not hear the sound in meditative absorption, then "because of not receiving the sound, one would not emerge from meditative absorption under the duress of the sound." The other schools also say: "Because the ear and mental consciousnesses do not occur simultaneously, when the ear-consciousness hears the sound, the mental consciousness has already emerged from meditative absorption." Therefore this is now refuted: it is not that at the time of apprehending the sound one immediately emerges from meditative absorption, but rather within meditative absorption the ear-consciousness receives it.'