[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) › 2.792 # 成唯識論述記 2.792 成唯識論述記 2.792 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.792](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.792) 述曰：此無漏種，非異熟識性所攝故，故非無記，體性不順本識體故。體既不同，不可相即。又性類別，能治、所治，漏、無漏殊，不可相即。故一性言，義乃合通體、類二種，既不從識名無記性，此為何性？因果俱是善性攝故，唯名為善。若法爾種，前念同類因本性是善，後念等流果是善亦然，乃至後生現行果亦爾。既法爾力，非第八性之所攝故，因是善性，亦無有過。此即種子未熏習位，自類相望有如是義。若後熏習，由見道前聞、思等熏，令其增長，雖有漏因，增上緣中為果增長，然亦名善，見道已去理顯可知，故唯善性，非惡、無記。法爾一切無漏之法順理、違生、無惡、無記。問曰：無漏與識性類別，不得隨識名無記，無漏與識體不同，應非隨識名異熟，為有此義，故次論問。 > The Commentary states: Because these seeds without outflows are not subsumed under the nature of the retribution consciousness, they are not indeterminate; their essential nature does not accord with the substance of the fundamental consciousness. Since their substances are not identical, they cannot be mutually identical. Furthermore, their nature and category are distinct: the antidotal (pratipakṣa) and what is to be abandoned (vipakṣa), with outflows and without outflows, are different, and they cannot be mutually identical. Therefore, the single word 'nature' in meaning combines both substance and category. Since they do not take the name 'indeterminate nature' from consciousness, what nature are they? Because both cause and effect are subsumed under the wholesome nature, they are named exclusively wholesome. If they are natural seeds, the homogeneous cause (sabhāga-hetu) of the prior moment is wholesome in its original nature, and the outflow fruit (niṣyanda-phala) of the subsequent moment is also wholesome, and so forth up to the fruit of active phenomena produced later. Since by natural power they are not subsumed under the nature of the eighth consciousness, there is no error in their cause being of wholesome nature. This represents the state of seeds before being perfumed, where there is such a meaning when viewed within their own class. If subsequently perfumed, through the perfuming of hearing, contemplation, and so forth prior to the path of seeing, causing them to increase, although they are causes with outflows, they cause the fruit to increase within the sovereign condition (adhipati-pratyaya), yet they are also named wholesome; from the path of seeing onward, the principle is obvious and clearly knowable, so they are exclusively of wholesome nature, not unwholesome or indeterminate. By nature, all dharmas without outflows accord with principle, oppose birth \[in cyclic existence\], and are without unwholesomeness or indeterminacy. Question: Seeds without outflows differ in nature and category from consciousness and cannot be named indeterminate following consciousness; seeds without outflows differ in substance from consciousness, so they should not be named retribution following consciousness. Because there is this implication, the treatise asks next: > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.791](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.791) - [Next: 2.793](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.793) - [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.2.792) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.792](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.2.792) · Pramāṇa