瑜伽論記 20.472

20.472

又解：變異是苦相，無變異是苦，無實性也。有為異相者，色心等異故，同相者苦無常等同故。或知一切是一切已有一切相者，知一切法既是一切即有一切相也，彼既多住如是行故，善修治心，於七真如有七各別自內所證通達智生名為見道者，由於七如各別自證為方便，故後入想觀，觀諸如通達智生名為見道，即入初地也，由得此故名入菩薩正性離生，是入位過，生如來家者，此明家過，又能受用此地勝德，是餘六過，彼於先無時由得止觀故已得二種所緣謂有分別影像所緣及無分別影像所緣者，此文自判二種影像是彼地前止觀所緣，彼於今時得見道故更證得事邊際所緣者，此相明見修證第三所緣，今時且說見道所緣，即說真如名事邊，以彼真如遍諸諦法名諦邊際，此文即說證智緣如不變影像，若變似彼真如影像，即是無分別影像所收，云何判二影像所緣是地前耶？又見道所緣云何但名事邊際耶？復於後後一切地中進修修道即於如是三種所緣作意思惟者，此明修道智緣事邊際，後智緣變二種影像，故言修道於三所緣作意思惟，自下喻說，以其細楔出於麁楔，以勝道捨於劣道，漸漸除遣相及麁重，乃至證得阿耨菩提，此名證得無上等正覺，又得所作成滿所緣者，即判此境在於佛地，佛地所作皆悉成滿智境故，名所作成滿所緣，所緣何法，不離前三，如來證理所有止觀緣諦邊際境，如來緣諦所有止觀是二影像，此三為佛止觀所緣，總名所作成滿所緣。

Another explanation: changing is the mark of suffering; unchanging is that suffering has no real nature. As for 'different marks of the conditioned', it is because forms, mind, and so forth are different; 'common marks' is because suffering, impermanence, and so forth are common. Or 'knowing all to be all, they already have all marks': knowing that since all dharmas are all, they then have all marks. 'Since they mostly abide in such practice, well cultivating and purifying the mind, there arises regarding the seven kinds of tathatā the penetrating wisdom of seven distinct internal realizations, which is called the path of seeing': because using the distinct self-realization of the seven kinds of tathatā as an expedient means, they subsequently enter conceptual contemplation, and the penetrating wisdom observing the various tathatās arises, which is called the path of seeing, that is, entering the first ground. 'Because of attaining this, it is called entering the bodhisattva's correct nature of certainty (samyaktvaniyāma)', which is the faultlessness of entering the rank; 'being born into the Tathāgata's family', this explains the faultlessness of the family; 'further being able to enjoy the superior virtues of this ground' refers to the remaining six faultlessnesses. 'In the prior time when it was not yet present, because of attaining calm abiding and special insight, they have already attained two kinds of cognitive objects, namely, the cognitive object that is an image with conceptualization and the cognitive object that is an image without conceptualization': this text itself judges that the two kinds of images are the cognitive objects of calm abiding and special insight prior to the grounds. 'Because they now attain the path of seeing, they further realize the cognitive object of the limits of things': this characteristic explains that seeing and cultivation realize the third cognitive object; here it provisionally speaks of the cognitive object of the path of seeing, that is, calling tathatā the limit of things, because that tathatā pervades the dharmas of all truths, it is called the limit of the truths. This text then states that the wisdom of realization takes tathatā as its object without manifesting an image; if it manifests an image resembling that tathatā, it is subsumed under the image without conceptualization. Why are the two image cognitive objects judged to belong prior to the grounds? And why is the cognitive object of the path of seeing called only the limit of things? 'Further, in all subsequent grounds, advancing in cultivating the path of cultivation, they reflect with attention upon these three kinds of cognitive objects': this explains that the wisdom of the path of cultivation takes the limit of things as its object, and the subsequent wisdom takes the two manifested images as its objects; therefore it says that the path of cultivation reflects with attention upon the three cognitive objects. Below, an analogy is stated: just as a fine wedge drives out a coarse wedge, one abandons an inferior path with a superior path, gradually removing marks and coarse heavy states, up to realizing anuttara-bodhi; this is called realizing unexcelled complete and perfect awakening. 'Further attaining the cognitive object of the fulfillment of what is to be done': this realm is judged to be on the Buddha ground, because it is the cognitive realm of the wisdom wherein all deeds on the Buddha ground are fulfilled; hence it is called the cognitive object of the fulfillment of what is to be done. What dharmas does it take as object? It is not apart from the previous three: all calm abiding and special insight of the Tathāgata's realization of the principle takes the realm of the limits of the truths as its object; all calm abiding and special insight of the Tathāgata regarding the truths constitutes the two images; these three are the cognitive objects of the Buddha's calm abiding and special insight, collectively named the cognitive object of the fulfillment of what is to be done.