[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) › 2.782 # 成唯識論述記 2.782 成唯識論述記 2.782 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.782](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.782) 述曰：謂此種子唯世俗諦說為實有，不同真如，真如唯是勝義勝義，種子不然，非唯勝義，亦通世俗，道理世俗故。今顯異於勝義，故說唯依世俗，非不通勝義也。又依《瑜伽》等勝義，唯一非安立諦，故種言「唯」，真唯勝義，據實種子，亦通勝義。又於俗諦中可名實有，推入勝義虛妄假法，真如隨在二諦皆實，依詮勝義亦是實故。若非安立。唯有一種，此即諦唯，不通真故。若立四勝義，此是實唯，勝義諦中假故。此助《瑜伽》會於此等，《瑜伽》並有誠文同此。此則通說一切有漏、無漏種子，義皆同故。第五、有漏種子依本識何分，即是四分分別門也。 > The Commentary states: This means that these seeds are stated to be substantially existent only in conventional truth, not like tathatā. Tathatā is exclusively the ultimate of ultimates; seeds are not like this, for they are not exclusively ultimate, but also pervade conventional truth, because they are logical conventionality (yukti-saṃvṛti). Now, to show the difference from the ultimate, they are said to be based only on the conventional, not that they do not extend to the ultimate. Furthermore, according to the ultimate truth of the Yogācārabhūmi and other texts, there is only the single inexpressible truth (anabhilāpya-satya); therefore seeds are designated with 'only,' for tathatā is exclusively ultimate, whereas in fact seeds also extend to the ultimate. Furthermore, within conventional truth they may be called substantially existent, but when pushed into the ultimate, they are deceptive and nominal dharmas; tathatā, regardless of which of the two truths it is in, is always real, for it is real even in the conventional ultimate based on exposition. If it is the non-established \[ultimate\], there is only one kind; this is an exclusivity of truth, because it does not extend to the ultimate. If one establishes four kinds of ultimate, this is an exclusivity of reality, because it is nominal within the ultimate truth. This assists the Yogācārabhūmi in harmonizing these matters; the Yogācārabhūmi has clear passages agreeing with this. This applies generally to all seeds, both with outflows and without outflows, because the principle is identical for all. The fifth is: which part of the fundamental consciousness do seeds with outflows depend on? This is the gate of differentiation among the four parts. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.781](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.781) - [Next: 2.783](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.783) - [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.2.782) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.782](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.782) · Pramāṇa