瑜伽師地論略纂 13.66

13.66

論云「得獲成就，謂若略說，生緣攝受增盛之因，說名為得」者，此約種子未伏未斷，有生果功能，名增盛之因，立得，非已伏斷種子名得。故下文云「若未為定伏及聖道伏，如善根種邪見所伏，名成就，名得」。故即彼伏斷已去，但名種子，不名為得。如《對法》三種成就之：若在欲界得色、無色定，欲界種子亦名成就，亦名不成就，未永害隨眠故，對治所攝故。然成就有二義：一、體成就，若已離欲，以有體故，亦名成就；二、功能成就，如已離欲，無生果功能，名不成就。此中偏約生果功能，故不成就；據其體有，亦名成就。此據種子增勝語，如現行亦名成就，下云三種中自有在，此文據勝。是生因中難，此難無漏種本無，彼就外宗，非大乘中本無種子。勝軍論師以此本無無漏種子文。

Where the treatise states, "Acquiring, obtaining, and possession: briefly stated, the cause for the gathering and flourishing of the conditions of arising is called acquisition," this refers to seeds that have not been suppressed or severed and have the capacity to produce fruit, which is called the flourishing cause, establishing acquisition; it is not that suppressed or severed seeds are called acquisition. Thus the text below says: "If not yet suppressed by concentration or suppressed by the noble path, as the seeds of wholesome roots are suppressed by wrong views, it is called possession, it is called acquisition." Therefore, once they are suppressed or severed, they are merely called seeds, not acquisition. As in the three kinds of possession in the Abhidharmasamuccaya: if one attains form or formless concentration in the desire realm, the seeds of the desire realm are called possession and also called non-possession, because the latent defilements are not permanently destroyed, yet they are subsumed under the antidote. However, possession has two meanings: first, essential possession: if one has already abandoned desire, because [the seeds] have substance, it is also called possession; second, functional possession: if one has already abandoned desire, having no capacity to produce fruit, it is called non-possession. Here, it is framed specifically in terms of the capacity to produce fruit, hence non-possession; based on their essential existence, it is also called possession. This is spoken with regard to the flourishing of seeds; as active manifestations are also called possession, among the three kinds below it has its own place, and this text is based on the flourishing [sense]. In the objection regarding the cause of arising, this objection assumes untainted seeds are fundamentally non-existent; that is based on external doctrines, for in the Mahāyāna seeds are not fundamentally non-existent. Master Jayasena based himself on this text showing fundamentally non-existent untainted seeds.