瑜伽論記 9.234

9.234

第二釋得名所以，有通有別，通名分別者，梵本音云毘羯腸波，此云分別意識，具三思惟者，本音云僧羯腸波，此云思性，不當三分別名，本音云三藐僧羯腸波，此云正思惟，是八正道中名也。舊論云八妄想不當梵音，故存分別，八是數名，即從數就義為名。言別名者，名雖有八得名有三：一、自性差別愛非愛俱相違，此五分別從境得名，分別色等自性故名自性分別，分別自性境上差別故名差別分別。又所緣境有其三種，順境稱心故名可愛，違境乖心名為非愛，中境違二名俱相違；二、總執分別從境及執為名，總是總多法，執是能執過名；三、我我所分別從行解得名，境體非我我所而作我我所解。

Second, explaining the reason for obtaining the names: there are general and specific ones. The general name of 'discrimination' (vikalpa): in the Sanskrit text, the pronunciation is vikalpa, which here means discrimination of mental consciousness. As for having three reflections, the original pronunciation is saṃkalpa, which here means the nature of intention (cetanā), not corresponding to the name of the three discriminations; the original pronunciation is samyaksaṃkalpa, which here means right reflection, a term in the eightfold noble path. The old commentary rendering it as 'eight false notions' did not match the Sanskrit sound, so 'discrimination' is retained. 'Eight' is a numerical term; thus the name is given based on number and meaning. As for the specific names: although there are eight names, their naming has three aspects: first, intrinsic nature, difference, agreeable, disagreeable, and contrary to both—these five discriminations get their names from the cognitive object: discriminating the intrinsic nature of form and so forth is therefore called discrimination of intrinsic nature; discriminating the differences upon the object of intrinsic nature is therefore called discrimination of difference. Furthermore, the cognitive objects are of three kinds: an agreeable object pleases the mind, hence called agreeable; an adverse object opposes the mind, called disagreeable; a neutral object opposes both, called contrary to both. Second, discrimination of total clinging takes its name from both the object and the clinging: 'total' means totality of many phenomena; 'clinging' is the fault of grasping. Third, discrimination of self and what belongs to self gets its name from mental disposition and comprehension: the object's entity is not self or what belongs to self, yet one forms the comprehension of self and what belongs to self.