瑜伽論記 23.148

23.148

第三對明邪正二論，各由五相成不成染，五相成雜染者，達師云：一、無因論，二、惡因論，三、身惡業，四、語惡業，五、意惡業，是為五種。今謂之不然，即二論、三過名為五也。言現法中乃至是即有一依於不善諸樂法受，而有樂不善受生等者，又言樂受酬於善業，此現在中不善樂受是不善故，不得言酬宿善業生，若酬不善業生，應是無記異熟之法，云何得是不善性耶？何以故下，釋非彼宿世不善業，於現法中能感樂果；若言此受、用現法中惡業為因，復違汝立宿作等宗，是名初過；又說言諸不善法，皆用宿世惡業為因，是即決定所有善法，亦用宿世善法為當類自生修諸對治，皆成無用，名第二過。

The third pair clarifies how the false and correct doctrines each constitute or do not constitute defilement through five aspects. Regarding the five aspects constituting defilement, Master Da says: 1. the doctrine of causelessness; 2. the doctrine of evil causes; 3. bodily evil karma; 4. vocal evil karma; 5. mental evil karma—these are the five kinds. Now we say this is not so: it is the two doctrines and three faults that are called the five. The words from “In the present life… up to… that is, there is pleasant and unwholesome feeling arising based on unwholesome pleasant dharmic feeling”: it is also said that pleasant feeling requites wholesome karma; this unwholesome pleasant feeling in the present is unwholesome, so it cannot be said to arise in requital of past wholesome karma. If it arose in requital of unwholesome karma, it ought to be an indeterminate (avyākṛta) vipāka dharma; how could it be of an unwholesome nature? The words below “Why is this?” explain that that past-life unwholesome karma cannot produce a pleasant fruit in the present life. If one says that this feeling takes evil karma in the present life as its cause, this again contradicts your established thesis of past actions and the like; this is called the first fault. Furthermore, saying that all unwholesome dharmas take evil karma of past lives as their cause would mean that definitively all wholesome dharmas also take wholesome dharmas of past lives as their cause, such that they naturally arise of their own kind, and cultivating various antidotes would all become useless; this is called the second fault.