成唯識論述記 4.303

4.303

述曰：第四立異熟。量云：非佛起餘善心等位，必應現起真異熟心（宗也）；非佛有情故（因也）；如許起彼時（喻也）。非佛者，謂菩薩、二乘、及異生等。此簡佛者，佛起善心位無異熟心故。起餘者，餘有二種：即是共許六識中異熟心餘，即善無漏心位等；或是餘無心位等，此簡起異熟心。更立異熟心，便犯相符，無同喻故。在彼位中必應現起真異熟心，此下二句是法，前二句是有法。非佛有情故者，不言非佛但言有情，有不定過。或違自宗，佛亦示現為有情故；善、無心等時無異熟心故。如許起彼時，如汝自許，或我許汝宗起彼六識中業所感心是真異熟，故得為喻。不爾便有所立不成，不許六識真異熟故，又不舉此即無同喻。若以此宗第八為喻，彼說無故，無俱不成，起六識中異熟心是非佛有情。何故善心起時無異熟心，亦非佛有情故？

The Commentary states: The fourth [section] establishes ripening. The inference runs: In states where a non-Buddha gives rise to other wholesome minds and so forth, a true ripening mind must definitely be manifest (thesis); because of being a non-Buddha sentient being (reason); just as when it is accepted that one gives rise to that [ripening mind] (example). 'A non-Buddha' refers to bodhisattvas, the two vehicles, ordinary beings (pṛthagjana), and so forth. This excludes the Buddha, because when the Buddha gives rise to a wholesome mind there is no ripening mind. 'Gives rise to other': 'other' has two meanings: either other than the ripening mind in the six consciousnesses commonly accepted [by both schools], namely states of wholesome and uncontaminated minds, etc.; or other, mindless states, etc. This qualifies 'gives rise to a ripening mind'. If one were to establish another ripening mind [when one is already present], it would commit the fallacy of proving what is already accepted (siddhasādhana) and would lack an agreeing example. In those states, a true ripening mind must definitely be manifest: the following two clauses are the predicate (sādhya-dharma), and the preceding two clauses are the subject (dharmin). 'Because of being a non-Buddha sentient being': if one did not say 'non-Buddha' but merely said 'sentient being', there would be the fault of inconclusiveness (anaikāntika). Or it would contradict one's own tenet, because the Buddha also manifests as a sentient being; and because during wholesome, mindless, and other states [for a Buddha] there is no ripening mind. 'Just as when it is accepted that one gives rise to that': just as you yourselves accept, or as I accept in your school, that when giving rise to that karmically induced mind among the six consciousnesses it is true ripening; hence it can serve as an example. Otherwise, the predicate would not be established, because [we] do not accept the six consciousnesses as true ripening; furthermore, without adducing this there would be no agreeing example. If one took the eighth [consciousness] of our own school as the example, because they say it does not exist, both [thesis and reason] would be unestablished. Giving rise to a ripening mind in the six consciousnesses is [the state of] a non-Buddha sentient being. Why would there be no ripening mind when a wholesome mind arises, since that is also a non-Buddha sentient being?