瑜伽師地論略纂 13.74

13.74

Regarding the treatise's statement, "Furthermore, what are seeds? They are not distinct real substances separate from the conditioned phenomena (saṃskāra), nor are they located elsewhere": Masters Bei and Jing state that this clarifies that seeds and conditioned phenomena or fruits are neither identical nor different. "Not distinct real substances separate" means not different, referring to functional capacity—and functional capacity is not active manifestation (samudācāra); if one breaks down conditioned phenomena into seeds, the substance of seeds would be conditioned phenomena themselves. "Nor located elsewhere" means not identical, referring to functional capacity of conditioned phenomena, which does not exist as an independent real substance separate from conditioned phenomena. Regarding "Yet, conditioned phenomena having such lineages and being born in such a manner": Master Bei states that this clarifies that the sixth and seventh consciousnesses are neither identical nor different from seeds. Regarding "Being arranged in such a manner, they are called seeds, and also called fruits": Master Bei states that this clarifies that the fundamental consciousness (mūlavijñāna) and seeds are neither identical nor different. Master Jing states that from "Yet, conditioned phenomena having such lineages" downwards, this explains and completes the above meaning. The Great Master states: the above generally explains that seeds stored within the fundamental consciousness have no separate substance from the fundamental consciousness, and when viewed in relation to each other, are neither identical nor different. The statement that conditioned phenomena are neither identical nor different is a provisional exposition (saṃvṛti-nītārtha). Below, it explains a clear passage to establish a distinct meaning. Now, my explanation differs slightly: these are all discussed in relation to active manifestations and seeds. From "nor are they located elsewhere" upwards explains that seeds are not different from conditioned phenomena; from "Yet, conditioned phenomena" downwards clarifies that seeds are not identical to conditioned phenomena. From "Why?" downwards explains and completes the above meaning. From "Just as grains, wheat, and other things" downwards, the Dharma Master states: the meaning here is that just as a sprout of wheat, in relation to subsequent leaves, is called a seed, and being born from a prior seed is called a fruit, the stalk serves as the seed for the stalk and also serves as the fruit of the prior seed. Now the explanation: from "Just as..." down to "nor are they located elsewhere," it clarifies that for grains, wheat, etc., which arise taking sprouts and stalks as seeds, the stalks, etc., as fruits, are neither identical nor different. From "Yet, the great elements having such lineages and being born in such a manner" downwards, it clarifies that when these grains and wheat, through the conditioning power of water and earth, later produce stalk fruits, they are neither identical nor different. This analogy mostly parallels the preceding dharma: namely, the seeds of the preceding fruits such as stalks, with wheat serving as condition for their birth, and subsequent sprouts, etc., are designated as seeds. One should know that the characteristics of dharmas are also like this. This is because the preceding non-associated conditioned phenomena are nominal and do not require seeds to be produced. An external objection arises: "The preceding discussion of causes and conditions stated that the eighth consciousness serves as the cause and condition; how are these seeds so?" Hence this text is present. If not so, this would combine distinct meanings. In answering again how such non-associated phenomena are, only after explaining the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti), etc., does it conclude this preceding text. Among the four phrases on impairing and subduing wholesome seeds: the first phrase refers to defilements that are energetic but not sharp; the second phrase refers to those that are sharp but not energetic; the third phrase refers to those who sever wholesome roots; the fourth phrase, at the end of the preceding fascicle, refers to impairment without accompaniment, which is wholesome seeds when an aśaikṣa enters remainderless [nirvāṇa]. This fourth seed lacks substance and is called an impaired wholesome seed; the first two cause wholesome seeds to lose power and are called impaired, but they do not fail to arise entirely; in the third phrase, active manifestation fails to arise entirely and seeds lose efficacy, which is called impaired and attainment is not possessed, but it is not that all substance of attainment is absent, as differentiated in the preceding section on possession. In the second phrase, "adhering to wrong views through views" is the clinging to views (dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa); "frequently practicing wrong views" is wrong view (mithyādṛṣṭi).