成唯識論述記 3.373

3.373

述曰：由前理教契經復說，識、觸、受等因二、三、四和合而生。如經所說眼、色為緣，能生眼識，說識依根、境二法和合生。經雖復言，作意力故識乃得生，此辨所依，故今不說。彼能警心依心而有，非心依故，此不說之。問：觸依三和生，名分別變異。識依二合生，名分別根境？答：准於觸，理亦可然。又是主故，不同於觸，二解並得。契經復說三和故觸，說觸依根、境、識三和合生，《起盡經》說受等皆以觸為緣故，即是受等依根、境、識、觸四法和合生。問：若無自證，可說心是二和合生。既有自證，心亦依心，心體亦是三和合生？答：今依見分別體者說，同體為依，非此所說。若亦說者，如次復以三、四、五和合生，心心所法各自依故。此說親、現依，不說疎、種子。若說疎依及種子者，法則有多。問：若諸心所皆依觸生，何故《瑜伽》第三及五十五說以受、想、思所依為業，不說所餘心所法也。

The Commentary states: Because of the aforementioned reasoning and scriptural teaching, the sūtras further state that consciousness, contact, feeling, and so forth arise dependent on the coming together of two, three, or four factors. Just as the sūtras state, 'Conditioned by the eye and visible forms, eye-consciousness arises,' this states that consciousness arises dependent on the coming together of two factors: the faculty and the object. Although the sūtras also state, 'By the power of attention (manaskāra), consciousness is enabled to arise,' this passage analyzes that upon which [consciousness] depends, so it is not stated here. Because [attention] can alert the mind and exists dependent on the mind, but is not that upon which the mind depends, it is not mentioned here. Question: Contact arises depending on the union of three, and is called 'discriminating modification.' Does consciousness arise depending on the union of two, and is it called 'discriminating the faculty and the object'? Answer: In accord with the case of contact, in principle it may also be so. Furthermore, because it is the master, it is not the same as contact; both explanations are acceptable. The sūtras further state, 'Because of the coming together of the three, there is contact,' stating that contact arises dependent on the harmonious coming together of the three: faculty, object, and consciousness. And the Qijin jing states that feeling and so forth all have contact as their condition; that is, feeling and so forth arise dependent on the harmonious coming together of the four factors: faculty, object, consciousness, and contact. Question: If there were no self-awareness (svasaṃvedana), one could say mind arises from the coming together of two. Since there is self-awareness, mind also depends on mind, so is the substance of mind also arisen from the coming together of three? Answer: We speak now based on the substance that discriminates via the seeing-aspect (darśanabhāga); that having the same substance serves as a basis is not what is being discussed here. If that were also discussed, it would arise sequentially from the coming together of three, four, and five, because mind and mental factors each depend on themselves. This discussion refers to immediate and manifest dependencies, not remote ones or seeds (bīja). If remote dependencies and seeds were included, the factors would be many. Question: If all mental factors arise dependent on contact, why do chapters 3 and 55 of the Yogācārabhūmi state that its activity is serving as the basis for feeling, conceptualization (saṃjñā), and volition (cetanā), without mentioning the remaining mental factors?