瑜伽師地論略纂 13.2

13.2

「攝決擇分中五識身相應地意地之一」者，此論一部總有五分：前五十卷已明十七地之體義，即初本地分也；下之四分，義重辨前，首皆稱攝。此分乃下四分中之初分也，攝決擇分故，名「決擇分」。或有以文攝文，前分有者，今重明之，以為一分。或有以文攝義，前分雖說法體，其義有未明者，今此明之，以為一分。如言眼界攝眼界等，自體攝自也。又以所詮決擇之智簡擇諸地不同，然簡擇義齊，更相收攝，即以義攝義。此一分教能詮決擇，以所詮為名，故名攝。亦可准《俱舍論》名對法藏，由彼《對法論》中勝義入此攝故，此得藏名；或此依彼，從彼引生，是彼所藏，故亦名藏。此既二義，此亦如是。由前〈本地分〉中勝義攝入此分，決擇明之；或此依彼，從〈本地〉引生，即彼所含之義，此分所攝，故名〈攝決擇分〉。亦是以文攝文，故名攝也。此明攝義。　言「決擇分」者，決謂決斷，謂決他疑。亦可決謂決了，能自了解。擇謂簡擇，可謂簡擇是非。今此明是破非，故言決擇。邪見撥無，真俗雖決，非簡擇是非；疑雖簡擇是非，而非決斷。言決以簡疑惑，談擇以別邪見。前〈本地分〉直述義相，今當重問答決疑擇要，故名決擇。舊云決定藏者，非也。彼言尼也摩，可言決定，既云毘尼生折邪，此言決擇，何得稱為決定藏論？　中者，簡持義。十七地中，簡餘十五地持，明此二地，是故言中也。　言分者，分齊也，分別、區分也。本地之後，攝釋之前，一分齊也。　言「五識身相應地意地」者，如〈本地分〉已釋。　問：何故不言意識者？以名濫故。此明心意識，故不置識。　問：相應義不唯局五，何以初標不云意有？答曰：據實皆有，略而不說。又舉初顯後，故意地不相應也。又據勝法以明五識無執持等，其境狹少，舉相應，不言根塵；意中兼明七、八二識，根塵等皆明，不可偏云相應，故略之也。　問：前〈本地分〉既開為二地，何乃此合明耶？述：有二意：一、六識各別依，謂六根；通依，謂本識。今此分先明第八是五、六識通依故，所以合明；前分約自性、業用等義，所以別開為二地。二、六識各別種子依。〈本地分〉中雖明賴耶，但明種子依，隨六識說，功能各異故，所以別開為二地。今此分中兼明現行，第八是六識通依，既是通依，不可別開二地明之，所以合說。從第八識，故合一明。又唯約作業，作業既別，須開別明。俱依根緣塵，行相狀同，所以合說。又如《顯揚》第六云「問：阿賴耶識何識所攝？答：六識攝。」前約種子分別，今約六識所攝，所以合明。　此地決擇，合有七卷，此為最初，故言第一。即首稱攝決擇分中五識身相應地意地之一。就此分中有三：一、結前生後，以發論端；二、釋分興之意；三、依地正辨。初、二如文。第三、正辨，五意合明，尋伺等三地合，即十四分也。就第三段中有二：初、簡擇別明一地；二、依地正辨。如文可悉。今明此地中總有七卷，前三卷半明五善巧，下三卷半明六善巧。初有多段，今論初且合為二：初、牒前已明，而興三問；第二、依問正答。就問中有三：初、牒前本識為所決擇；二、開三問端，為問由致；三、正設三問，令興決擇。

"The First of the Bhūmis Associated with the Fivefold Sensory Consciousness and the Mental Bhūmi in the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī": This single treatise as a whole has five divisions. The preceding fifty fascicles have already explained the substance and meaning of the seventeen bhūmis, which is the first Maulī Bhūmi; the four divisions below re-examine what precedes in meaning, and each begins with the word "saṃgraha" (compilation/gathering). This division is the first among the four lower divisions; because it gathers and resolves, it is called the "Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī." In some cases, text gathers text: what was present in the preceding division is now re-explained, making up one division. In other cases, text gathers meaning: although the preceding division spoke of the substance of dharmas, where their meaning was not fully clarified, it is now clarified here, making up one division. This is like saying the eye-element gathers the eye-element, where its own nature gathers itself. Furthermore, it differentiates the differences among the various bhūmis by means of the wisdom of decisive selection which is what is expressed; yet the meaning of decisive selection is equal, mutually gathering each other, which is gathering meaning by meaning. This one division of teaching is capable of expressing decisive selection, taking its name from what is expressed, and is therefore called "Saṃgraha." It can also be understood by analogy to the Abhidharmakośa being called the treasury of Abhidharma: because the ultimate meaning in the Abhidharmāvatāra/Abhidharma treatises is gathered into this, it obtains the name "treasury"; or because this relies on that, being produced from that, and is what is contained in that, it is therefore also called "treasury." Since that has two meanings, this is also like that: because the ultimate meaning in the preceding Maulī Bhūmi is gathered into this division and explained with decisive selection; or because this relies on that, being derived from the Maulī, and is the meaning contained in that gathered by this division, it is therefore called the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī. This also means text gathering text, hence it is called "gathering." This clarifies the meaning of "saṃgraha." Regarding "Viniścaya-bhāga": "viniścaya" means decisive determination, namely deciding others' doubts. It can also mean decisive comprehension, being able to comprehend on one's own. "Śaya" means selection, which can be called selecting the right from the wrong. Now, this clarifies what is right and refutes what is wrong, hence it is called decisive selection. Wrong views deny existence; although ultimate and conventional are determined, they do not select right from wrong. Doubt, though it selects right from wrong, is not decisive determination. Stating "decisive" sets aside hesitation and doubt; speaking of "selection" distinguishes from wrong views. The preceding Maulī Bhūmi directly set forth the characteristics of meaning; now it re-examines questions and answers to resolve doubts and select essentials, hence it is called decisive selection. The old rendering as "Treatise on the Treasury of Determination" is incorrect. Their word "niyama" might be translated as "determination," but since the Sanskrit says "viniścaya," which means decisive selection, how could it be called the "Treatise on the Treasury of Determination"? "Among" has the meaning of selection and retention: among the seventeen bhūmis, it sets aside the remaining fifteen bhūmis and retains and explains these two bhūmis; therefore it says "among." "Division" means scope, discrimination, or classification: after the Maulī Bhūmi and before the Saṃgrahaṇī-vyākhyā, it constitutes one scope. Regarding "the Bhūmis Associated with the Fivefold Sensory Consciousness and the Mental Bhūmi": this has been explained in the Maulī Bhūmi. Question: Why does it not say mental consciousness? Because the name would be ambiguous. This explains citta, manas, and vijñāna, and therefore does not insert vijñāna. Question: The meaning of association is not limited only to the five; why does the opening heading not say that the mental bhūmi has it? Answer: In reality both have it, but it is omitted for brevity. Furthermore, citing the first displays the latter, so the mental bhūmi does not mention association. Moreover, based on the superior dharma to explain that the five consciousnesses have no appropriation and so on, their objects being narrow and few, it cites association without mentioning faculties and dusts; the mental bhūmi additionally clarifies the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, and faculties, dusts, and so on are all clarified, so one cannot exclusively say association, hence it is omitted. Question: Since the preceding Maulī Bhūmi opened them into two bhūmis, why are they explained together here? Exposition: There are two intentions. First, the six consciousnesses have distinct bases, namely the six faculties; and a common basis, namely the mūlavijñāna. Now, this division first clarifies that the eighth consciousness is the common basis of the five and sixth consciousnesses, which is why they are explained together; the previous division was based on intrinsic nature, karmic function, and so forth, which is why they were opened separately as two bhūmis. Second, the distinct seed-bases of the six consciousnesses: although the Maulī Bhūmi explained the ālaya, it only explained the seed-basis, spoken according to the six consciousnesses, their functions being distinct; therefore they were opened separately as two bhūmis. Now, this division additionally explains the active functioning, and the eighth is the common basis of the six consciousnesses; since it is a common basis, they cannot be opened as two separate bhūmis to explain, and are therefore stated together. Following the eighth consciousness, they are thus united and explained as one. Furthermore, based solely on performing action, since the actions performed are distinct, they must be opened and explained separately. However, both rely on faculties and cognize dusts, their modes of activity being similar, which is why they are explained together. Furthermore, as the sixth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā says: "Question: By which consciousness is the ālayavijñāna gathered? Answer: It is gathered by the six consciousnesses." The preceding was a distinction according to seeds; now it is according to being gathered by the six consciousnesses, which is why they are explained together. The decisive selection of this bhūmi comprises seven fascicles in total; this is the very first, hence it says "the first." That is to say, the heading states: "The First of the Bhūmis Associated with the Fivefold Sensory Consciousness and the Mental Bhūmi in the Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī." Within this division there are three parts: first, concluding the preceding and introducing what follows to initiate the treatise; second, explaining the reason for the division's arising; third, the main explanation based on the bhūmis. The first and second are as in the text. Third, the main explanation: the five consciousnesses and mental bhūmi are explained together, and the three bhūmis of vitarka and vicāra are combined, which yields fourteen divisions. Within this third section there are two parts: first, selecting and distinctly explaining one bhūmi; second, the main explanation based on the bhūmis. This can be understood from the text. Now, in explaining this bhūmi, there are seven fascicles in total: the first three and a half fascicles explain the five skills (kauśalya), and the lower three and a half fascicles explain the six skills. The first has multiple sections; now, at the beginning of the treatise, it is provisionally combined into two: first, restating what was previously explained and raising three questions; second, the main answer according to the questions. Within the questions there are three parts: first, restating the preceding mūlavijñāna as that to be decisively selected; second, opening the three question topics as the rationale for the questions; third, directly posing the three questions to give rise to decisive selection.