瑜伽論記 23.131

23.131

第五明隨煩惱，景師云：此就通門，若本、若隨，總名隨惑，以展轉相隨逐起故。對法二說：一說除根本使，餘名隨煩惱；復次一切煩惱，皆名隨煩惱，以展轉相隨逐起，因此處文也。於他下劣，謂己為勝，或復於等，謂己為等，名慢。於等、謂勝、於勝、謂等，名為過慢者，此文具也。婆沙俱舍但云：於等為勝不言於勝謂等，何故又爾耶？又多解云：於等謂勝、於勝、謂等，望境亦是過慢，然心作等解不順過義，所以不論，此文具足，故收過慢。泰師云：心法唯有五十一，故憤發等攝入數也。達師云：小論不說於勝、謂等，名為過慢，故論師作妨，何故不說彼處師等解。於等、謂勝者，心境俱過，故說過慢。於勝、謂等者，心過境不過，是故不說，剋實亦有也。於所比境中，計不過故，言境不過也。

Fifth, it explains the secondary afflictions (upakleśa). Master Jing says: this is from a general perspective; whether root or secondary, they are collectively called secondary afflictions, because they arise following upon one another successively. The Abhidharma has two explanations: one says that excluding the root proclivities, the remainder are called secondary afflictions; furthermore, all afflictions are called secondary afflictions because they arise following upon one another successively, relying on this text. Regarding "Toward one who is inferior, considering oneself superior, or toward an equal, considering oneself equal, is called pride. Toward an equal, considering oneself superior, or toward one who is superior, considering oneself equal, is called arrogance (atimāna)": this text is complete. The Vibhāṣā and Kośa only say "toward an equal, considering oneself superior," and do not say "toward one who is superior, considering oneself equal"; why is this so? Many further explain: toward an equal, considering oneself superior, and toward one who is superior, considering oneself equal, in view of the object, are both arrogance; however, when the mind conceives [oneself as] equal, it does not accord with the sense of "exceeding" (ati-), which is why it is not discussed; this text is complete, and thus includes it under arrogance. Master Tai says: mental factors are only fifty-one, and therefore wrath and the like are subsumed within this number. Master Da says: the Hīnayāna treatises do not say that toward one who is superior, considering oneself equal is called arrogance, so the treatise master raises an objection: why did the masters there not explain it? Toward an equal, considering oneself superior: both mind and object exceed, hence it is called arrogance. Toward one who is superior, considering oneself equal: the mind exceeds but the object does not exceed, which is why it is not stated; strictly speaking, it also exists. Within the object of comparison, because one does not conceptualize exceeding it, it is said that the object does not exceed.