成唯識論述記 2.349

2.349

述曰：下明定果，即是微微心等諸明了心，求無想果，將此果以為涅槃，所熏成種，此是增上微微心是，招彼異熟，即招阿賴耶識。依此本識，餘麁動六轉識想等不行，於此無心分位假立無想異熟。此言雖總，而意欲說明了心時，種子招總異熟，無心以去厭心種子，招別無想異熟。論種子體，是一種子通招總、別。若據其位，前後有殊，有心、無心二果別故。又解微微心以前，明了故招總果，微微心細所熏成種感別果，二種種子各招一果，亦不相違，微微心種轉為無想定等故。前解為勝。今解即是彼地六識中，善染等心不行位建立此體，如許無心唯依本識，即依本識上立此無心，無心實非異熟，親依異熟立，得異熟名，故論云：不恒行心、心所滅，不簡何性心。然《瑜伽》五十三云：唯約生得心、心所滅立此異熟者，即善等恒行心，生便即得，故名生得，非謂異熟生得無記心。或種依本識，是生得無記性，與本識同性，故名生得。此相傳解違下第七，然不順理。又解第六異熟捨受生得無記，心滅種子上立，即是依本識，而生得麁動想等滅故，建立此異熟。此師為正，諸論皆說生有初心定無覆故，如下第七。第六識何時滅？此有二義，如下第七卷中廣說，自有三師。

The Commentary states: Below explains the fruit of the absorption. Namely, the extremely subtle mental states (sūkṣma-mano-vijñāna) and other lucid minds seek the fruit of non-conception, taking this fruit to be nirvāṇa, and what is perfumed becomes seeds; it is this predominant, extremely subtle mind that summons that maturation, which is to say it summons the ālayavijñāna. Relying on this fundamental consciousness, the other coarse and active six transforming consciousnesses, their ideation, and so forth do not operate; on this state of mindlessness, non-conceptual maturation is nominally established. Although this statement is general, its intention is to explain that at the time of the lucid mind, the seeds summon the general maturation, and from the point of mindlessness onward, the seeds of the mind of revulsion summon the specific non-conceptual maturation. Regarding the substance of the seeds: it is a single seed that generally summons both the general and the specific. If considered according to its stages, the earlier and later differ, because the two fruits—with mind and without mind—are distinct. Another interpretation: prior to the extremely subtle mind, being lucid, it summons the general fruit; the seeds perfumed by the subtle, extremely subtle mind induce the specific fruit; the two kinds of seeds each summoning one fruit also does not conflict, because the seeds of the extremely subtle mind transform into the absorption of non-conception, etc. The former interpretation is superior. The present interpretation is that it is established at the stage where wholesome, defiled, and other minds among the six consciousnesses of that plane do not operate. Just as mindlessness is admitted to rely solely on the fundamental consciousness, it is on the fundamental consciousness that this mindlessness is established; mindlessness in reality is not maturation, but being directly established upon maturation, it receives the name of maturation. Therefore the treatise says: 'the cessation of non-constant minds and mental factors,' without distinguishing what nature of mind. However, Yogācārabhūmi fascicle 53 says: 'This maturation is established solely in reference to the cessation of minds and mental factors that are acquired at birth (upapattilābhika).' This refers to the wholesome and other constantly operating minds which are obtained as soon as one is born, hence called 'acquired at birth,' not referring to maturation-born indeterminate minds. Or, the seeds rely on the fundamental consciousness and are of an acquired-at-birth indeterminate nature, possessing the same nature as the fundamental consciousness, hence called 'acquired at birth.' This traditionally transmitted interpretation contradicts fascicle 7 below and does not accord with reason. Yet another interpretation: it is established upon the seeds of the cessation of the sixth consciousness's maturation-equanimous feeling acquired-at-birth indeterminate mind; that is, relying on the fundamental consciousness, because the acquired-at-birth coarse and active ideation and so forth have ceased, this maturation is established. This master is correct; all treatises say that the initial mind of rebirth-existence is definitely non-obscured [indeterminate], as in fascicle 7 below. At what time does the sixth consciousness cease? Here there are two explanations, as explained in detail in fascicle 7 below, where there are three masters.