成唯識論述記 3.307

3.307

述曰：初隨因緣變，必有實體用，即五、八等所變之境；後隨分別變，但能為境，非必有體用，即七識等。今正明第八不緣心等義，兼五識等不緣心等，總談心等緣境道理。又解初唯第八，異熟主故，所熏處故，能持種故，變必有用；後餘七識，所變色觸等，皆無實用，似本質用，如鏡中火。既爾，五識應一向緣假，青等應非實。問：若隨因緣變必有用，第八識俱觸等五法境應有用？答：非報主故，非自在故，順第二解。由此復言隨因緣者，此是何義？隨任運義，隨種子義，順第一解第八五數。第六識等中，報心所緣，非必有用，以此見分雖任運生，不隨實體種子因緣變境相故，但是影像種子所生，如彼眼根等無見用故，不能發生眼等識故。問：觸等所變根無見用，故非因變；觸等所變色非因變，故無礙用，五識所變為例亦爾？答：理齊，亦無礙用。七識所變並無用故，此依第二解。此二義護法等菩薩解。若瑜伽釋家，亦有許觸等與識同實變，即不違此文，然違《成業》多種共生一芽之失，前解為勝，順下第三卷等文。又解因緣者，是諸法真實有用種子。若用此種子故生諸法，心緣變之，變必有用，以能生者實因緣故。其八俱五數所變之相，非實種生，但假種起，故但為境，分別變攝。分別變者，心心所之總名，隨心心所之勢力故變，不從真實有用因緣種子所生。彼但為境，無漏亦爾，非必有用。隨其所應五識相應心心所，及第八識體五俱意識，或定心所緣，有實種生者，皆因緣變，餘無實用但名似色、心等，名隨分別勢力故變，此解為正，無諸妨難。由能緣心任運有力，彼所變相從實種生，名因緣變。若能緣心不任運起，雖任運起而無勝力，所變之相非實種生，名分別變。初必有用，無無用者；後但為境，當情現故，非必有用。若論依他假因緣起，亦是有用，非是如色有礙等用，稱其自相名為有用。若第六報心五識俱者，亦隨因緣變，其境或有用。問：前所說若隨分別變但為境，定心及五識所變之境應全無用？答：隨彼實體，種子因生，故境有用，由此故言隨分別者。此是何義？隨加行義。分別變者，諸心心所強籌度義，定心及五識有雖加行生，不皆強籌度，故變必有用。然一念心得成二種，如定心緣十八界，返顯八俱，具有二變。性境不隨心，因緣變攝，獨影、帶質皆分別變。

The Commentary states: The first, transforming in accordance with causes and conditions, necessarily has substantial entity and functional efficacy, which are the objects transformed by the five [sense consciousnesses], the eighth, and so forth; the second, transforming in accordance with conceptual discrimination, can only serve as an objective condition and does not necessarily have substantial entity and functional efficacy, which are the seventh consciousness and so forth. Now, it correctly clarifies the principle that the eighth does not take mind, etc., as object, and concurrently that the five consciousnesses, etc., do not take mind, etc., as object, broadly discussing the principle of how minds and so forth take objects. Another explanation is: the first is only the eighth, because it is the master of retribution, because it is the locus of perfuming, and because it can sustain seeds, its transformation necessarily has functional efficacy; the second comprises the remaining seven consciousnesses, and the colors, tangible objects, etc., that they transform have no actual functional efficacy, merely resembling the functional efficacy of the original substance, like fire in a mirror. If so, the five consciousnesses would exclusively take unreal objects, and blue, etc., would not be real. Question: If transforming in accordance with causes and conditions necessarily has functional efficacy, should the objects of the five dharmas such as contact, etc., that are associated with the eighth consciousness also have functional efficacy? Answer: Because they are not the master of retribution, and because they are not sovereign, this accords with the second explanation. Therefore, when it is said again 'in accordance with causes and conditions,' what does this mean? It means in accordance with spontaneity; it means in accordance with seeds, which accords with the first explanation concerning the five mental factors of the eighth consciousness. In the sixth consciousness and so forth, that which is taken as object by the mind of retribution does not necessarily have functional efficacy, because although this darśanabhāga arises spontaneously, it does not transform the mark of the object in accordance with the causes and conditions of the seeds of substantial entities; it is merely produced from seeds of mental images, just as that eye faculty, etc., lacks the function of seeing, and thus cannot generate the visual and other consciousnesses. Question: The faculties transformed by contact and so forth lack the function of seeing, and therefore are not transformed by cause; the colors transformed by contact and so forth are not transformed by cause, and therefore lack obstructive function—is this analogy also the same for what is transformed by the five consciousnesses? Answer: The reasoning is equal; they also lack obstructive function. Because all that is transformed by the seven consciousnesses lacks functional efficacy, this is based on the second explanation. These two explanations were presented by Bodhisattva Dharmapāla and others. If according to the commentators on the Yogācāra[-bhūmi-śāstra], there are also those who accept that contact and so forth transform realities equally with consciousness, then it does not contradict this text; however, it incurs the fault of many seeds jointly producing a single sprout as stated in the Karmasiddhi-prakaraṇa. The former explanation is superior, as it accords with the text of the third fascicle below, and so on. Another explanation is: causes and conditions are the truly efficacious seeds of all dharmas. If, through using these seeds, all dharmas are produced, and the mind cognizes and transforms them, then the transformation necessarily has functional efficacy, because what can produce them are real causes and conditions. The marks transformed by the five mental factors associated with the eighth are not produced from real seeds, but arise merely from nominal seeds; hence they merely serve as objects, being subsumed under transformation by conceptual discrimination. 'Transformation by conceptual discrimination' is a general term for mind and mental factors: it transforms in accordance with the force of mind and mental factors, and is not produced from real, efficacious seeds of causes and conditions. They merely serve as objects; the anāsrava is also like this, not necessarily having functional efficacy. In accordance with what is appropriate, the mind and mental factors associated with the five consciousnesses, the entity of the eighth consciousness, the mental consciousness concurrent with the five [sense consciousnesses], or the objects grasped by the mind in samādhi—those that are produced from real seeds are all transformations by causes and conditions; the remainder, having no actual functional efficacy and merely termed 'simulated matter, mind, etc.,' are called transformations in accordance with the force of conceptual discrimination. This explanation is correct and free from all difficulties. Because the cognizing mind is spontaneous and forceful, the marks it transforms are produced from real seeds, which is called transformation by causes and conditions. If the cognizing mind does not arise spontaneously, or although arising spontaneously lacks superior force, the marks it transforms are not produced from real seeds, which is called transformation by conceptual discrimination. The first necessarily has functional efficacy, with none lacking functional efficacy; the second merely serves as an object, because it manifests to conscious thought, and does not necessarily have functional efficacy. If spoken of as dependently arisen nominal causes and conditions, it also has functional efficacy, which is not an obstructive function like matter, but is called having functional efficacy in conforming to its own-characteristic. If it is the sixth retributive mind concurrent with the five consciousnesses, it also transforms in accordance with causes and conditions, and its objects may have functional efficacy. Question: If, as said before, transforming in accordance with conceptual discrimination merely serves as an object, should the objects transformed by the mind in samādhi and the five consciousnesses entirely lack functional efficacy? Answer: Because they arise from seed-causes in accordance with their substantial entities, their objects have functional efficacy. Therefore, when it is said 'in accordance with conceptual discrimination,' what does this mean? It means in accordance with applied effort. 'Transformation by conceptual discrimination' refers to the intense deliberation of minds and mental factors; although the mind in samādhi and the five consciousnesses may arise through applied effort, they do not all intensely deliberate; hence their transformations necessarily have functional efficacy. However, a single thought of the mind can accomplish two kinds: for instance, when the mind in samādhi cognizes the eighteen dhātus, it inversely reveals that the eighth and its associated factors possess both transformations. The objective condition of actual nature (xingjing) does not follow the mind, being subsumed under transformation by causes and conditions; the solitary image (duying) and the image carrying substance (daizhi) are both transformations by conceptual discrimination.