成唯識論述記 3.15

3.15

述曰：種子望種，體性相似名為「同類」；以相違故，不得俱時一身和合，即第五卷《瑜伽論》云：「與他性為因」，即種望現；「亦與後念自性為因，非即此剎那」，此即是種前後相生。種相生時，何故不許有同時義？難曰：「見分緣於見，自體同時緣，種子生於種，自體同時」。有解云：種望於種為因果，若許同時非因緣。見分望見雖同時因果，即非因緣攝。若爾，種望現起，類亦應然，故應更解：種望於種，許同時生，體便無窮，自類許有同時生故，即一剎那有多種生，都無因緣，不許後種更生果故。現行望種名為異類，雖亦熏種，後種未生果，故非無窮，於一剎那無二現行自體並故，所生之種由此不可更生現行，種望於種，類亦應爾。

The Commentary states: A seed with respect to a seed is called 'same class' because their substances and natures are similar; because they conflict, they cannot be conjoined simultaneously in one body. Thus fascicle 5 of the Yogācārabhūmi states: 'It is a cause for a different nature,' meaning seed with respect to active manifestation; and 'It is also a cause for its own nature in a subsequent moment, not in this very kṣaṇa,' meaning seeds producing each other consecutively. When seeds produce each other, why is simultaneity not allowed? The objection says: 'The darśanabhāga takes the darśana[bhāga] as object, and its own essence is cognized simultaneously; when a seed produces a seed, its own essence is simultaneous.' An explanation says: When seed is cause and result with respect to seed, if simultaneity were allowed, it would not be a direct cause (hetupratyaya). Although the darśanabhāga is cause and result simultaneously with respect to darśana, it is not included in hetupratyaya. If so, seed with respect to active manifestation should also be like this, so one should explain further: if seed with respect to seed were allowed to arise simultaneously, the substances would become infinite, because one's own class would be allowed to arise simultaneously; that is, in a single kṣaṇa many seeds would arise, completely lacking a hetupratyaya, because a subsequent seed is not allowed to produce further results. Active manifestations with respect to seeds are called different classes; although they also perfume seeds, subsequent seeds have not yet produced results, so there is no infinite regress; within a single kṣaṇa, two active manifestations of the same essence do not occur alongside each other, and the produced seed cannot thereby produce further active manifestations; seed with respect to seed should be considered analogous.