成唯識論述記 2.800

2.800

述曰：此無漏種由熏習力轉變成熟，與本種異立異熟名，即轉變已而方成熟，能生現行，非如善、惡而為因故。所招無記性所攝之異熟，非是因果性，別云「異」；果起酬因，說名為「熟」之異熟也，此通佛果諸無漏種。又設除佛，此中但言經熏習氣，非未熏時，自類變異而成熟位，所以者何？如前已解，如眼識等，即唯自類未熏時義，今此中解即熏已位。又復前解通熏、未熏，此解但據已熏之種，據顯偏說。又前解通熏已、未熏，今解據三家種子無諍義，法爾自類，有不許故。若言熏者，諸皆許故。前約本有等義，此約新熏等義，故文差別。故《瑜伽論》二十二根，皆名異熟，無處而言「皆通無記」，不可為難，如此文意諸論未詳，古昔文抄皆須毀棄。

The Commentary states: These uncontaminated seeds, through the power of perfuming, transform and ripen, and being different from the original seeds, receive the name 'ripened effect' (vipāka). That is, having transformed, they then ripen and are able to generate active manifestations; it is not that they are like wholesome or unwholesome deeds acting as causes to produce an indeterminate ripened effect. It is not that cause and fruit are of different moral natures that it is called 'different' (vi-); rather, it is because the fruit arises to repay the cause that it is called 'ripened' (-pāka)—this applies generally to all uncontaminated seeds of the Buddha fruit. Furthermore, even setting the Buddha aside, what is spoken of here refers only to seed-energies that have undergone perfuming, not to the state before perfuming when they transform and ripen within their own category. Why is this? As explained earlier, like the eye-consciousness and so forth, that was exclusively the meaning before perfuming within their own category; what is explained here is the state after having been perfumed. Moreover, the previous explanation applies to both perfumed and unperfumed seeds, whereas this explanation is based only on seeds that have already been perfumed, speaking exclusively in terms of the manifest. Again, the previous explanation covers both perfumed and unperfumed, while the present explanation is based on the doctrine undisputed among the three masters, because some do not accept that seeds are naturally present within their own category, whereas if one speaks of perfumed seeds, all accept them. The former was based on the doctrine of innate seeds and so forth, while this is based on the doctrine of newly perfumed seeds and so forth; hence the texts differ. Therefore, in the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra, the twenty-two faculties are all called 'ripened effects', yet nowhere does it say 'they are all indeterminate'; no objection can be raised against this. Such textual meaning has not been thoroughly examined in other treatises, and ancient commentaries must all be discarded.