[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [成唯識論述記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830) › 2.50 # 成唯識論述記 2.50 成唯識論述記 2.50 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.50) 此但有功能，非是心外別有大種所造之色。此功能言，即是發生五識作用。觀用知體，如觀生芽用，比知體是有，《觀所緣論》亦作是言：「識上色功能，名五根應理。」以用比知體性是有，由此說根唯是種子。《二十頌》云：「識從自種生，似境相而轉。」《觀所緣論》不言「現色」，言「功能」故。然今此義，諸說不同。大眾部等說，五種色根肉團為體，眼不見色，乃至身不覺觸，以經說言：根謂四大種所造各別堅性等，故是肉團，肉團不淨，故不見色，稍勝餘色，故名清淨。薩婆多師別有四大，生等五因為其因緣，造根、塵等；大唯身觸，根雖積集，離心之法，仍實有體。成實論師名師子胄，本於數論法中出家，因立彼義云：由色、香、味、觸四塵以造四大，是無常法，此中四大總得成根，為五根體。經部五色根、境，雖體並假，實極微成。說假部通假、實，蘊、處門中攝各別故。一說部說，唯有其名，都無體性；順世外道計，即四大。吠世史迦，四大俱是實句所攝；堅、濕、煖、動，德句所攝。眼唯得三，但除風大；身根得四，亦得堅等。然彼宗說：眼根即火，耳根即空，鼻根即地，味根即水，皮根即風。數論師自性生大，大生我執，我執生五唯——即色、聲、香、味、觸，此五是我所受用物，受用物時必有用。根謂十一根，不能自起，必待五大。待五大故，從五唯復生五大，五大生已，方成十一根，是能受用具故。有說色造火，火成眼，聲造空，空成耳，耳無礙，聲亦無礙，香造地，地成鼻，味造水，水成舌，觸造風，風成皮。心根有二說：一說是肉團；一說非色。非色者不說造；是色者說造，或說唯地造，或說五大皆能造餘根，亦有說五大通能造之。然今大乘一解，內自種子為其因緣，心內所變現行相分四大為增上緣，造根、境色，故此論說：非是心外實大所造。二解云：根即種子，名功能故，名種子故，引教如前。於中三說，至下當知。體既非色，非是外處四大所造。三解云：五根據實，皆通現、種，然論多據現色名根，此中造義諸門分別，如《對法疏》。 > These merely possess functionality; they are not form transformed by great elements existing separately outside the mind. This word "functionality" refers to the function that gives rise to the five consciousnesses. By observing the function one knows the entity, just as by observing the function of producing a sprout, one inferentially knows that its entity exists. The Ālambanaparīkṣā also states: "The functionality of form upon consciousness is logically termed the five sense faculties." Because by means of function one inferentially knows that the essential nature exists, on this basis it is said that the sense faculties are merely seeds. The Viṃśikā says: "Consciousness arises from its own seed, and evolves resembling the marks of an object-domain." This is because the Ālambanaparīkṣā does not say "manifest form", but says "functionality". However, regarding this meaning now, the various assertions differ. The Mahāsāṃghikas and others say that the five kinds of material faculties have the flesh-mass as their entity; the eye does not see form, up to the body does not feel touch, because the sūtras say that the sense faculties are defined as the respective hardness, etc., transformed by the four great elements, and hence they are the flesh-mass; the flesh-mass is impure, and therefore does not see form, but being slightly superior to other forms, it is called pure. The Sarvāstivādin masters maintain that there are separate four great elements, and the five causes, such as production, serve as their primary cause (hetupratyaya) to transform the faculties, object-domains, and so forth; the great elements are solely the tangible of the body, and although the sense faculties are aggregations, being dharmas apart from the mind, they still truly possess real entity. The Tattvasiddhi-śāstra master, named Harivarman, originally went forth into the religious life within the Sāṃkhya tradition; based on this, he established their tenet, saying: from the four object-domains of form, sound, smell, and taste, the four great elements are transformed, which are impermanent dharmas; here, the four great elements collectively come to form the faculties, serving as the entity of the five faculties. According to the Sautrāntikas, although the entities of both the five material faculties and their domains are nominal, they are composed of real subtle atoms. The Prajñaptivāda encompasses both the nominal and the real, because they are subsumed separately under the gates of aggregates (skandha) and bases (āyatana). The Ekavyāvahārika school says that there is only the name, without any substantial entity whatsoever. The Lokāyata non-Buddhists posit that they are simply the four great elements. According to the Vaiśeṣikas, the four great elements are all subsumed under the category of substance (dravya); hardness, moisture, warmth, and motion are subsumed under the category of quality (guṇa). The eye perceives only three, excluding only the air element; the body faculty perceives four, and also perceives hardness, and so on. However, their school says: the eye faculty is fire; the ear faculty is space; the nose faculty is earth; the tongue faculty is water; the skin faculty is air. The Sāṃkhya masters say that primordial nature produces the great (mahat), the great produces egoity (ahaṃkāra), and egoity produces the five subtle elements (tanmātra)—namely form, sound, smell, taste, and touch; these five are objects experienced by the self, and when objects are experienced, there must be functions. The faculties refer to the eleven faculties; they cannot arise of themselves, but must rely on the five great elements. Because they rely on the five great elements, from the five subtle elements the five great elements are again produced; only after the five great elements are produced are the eleven faculties completed, since they are instruments capable of experiencing. Some say form transforms fire, and fire forms the eye; sound transforms space, and space forms the ear; the ear is unobjectionable (unobstructed), and sound is also unobstructed; smell transforms earth, and earth forms the nose; taste transforms water, and water forms the tongue; touch transforms air, and air forms the skin. Regarding the mental faculty (manas), there are two theories: one says it is the flesh-mass; one says it is non-material. For the one that is non-material, transformation is not spoken of; for the one that is material, transformation is spoken of, or it is said to be transformed only by earth, or that the five great elements can all transform the other faculties, and there is also the theory that the five great elements can universally transform it. However, now within the Mahāyāna, one explanation is: internal seeds of its own serve as its primary cause, and the manifest four great elements of the nimittabhāga transformed within the mind serve as the conditioning cause (adhipatipratyaya) to transform the form of faculties and domains; therefore this treatise says: they are not transformed by real great elements outside the mind. The second explanation says: the sense faculties are just seeds, because they are called functionality, and because they are called seeds, citing the scriptures as before. Among them there are three theories, which should be known below. Since their entity is not material form, they are not transformed by the four great elements of the external bases. The third explanation says: strictly speaking, the five faculties both encompass the manifest and seeds; however, the treatises mostly designate manifest form as the faculty. Here, the meaning of transformation is analyzed through various gates, as in the Commentary on the Abhidharma-samuccaya. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.49](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.49) - [Next: 2.51](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.51) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830~en-mt.2.50) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.50](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.50) · Pramāṇa