成唯識論述記 5.241

5.241

述曰：此論主答。一、分別、俱生二種別故，謂五十五說分別，五十八說俱生。分別者，唯見斷。又未必唯見斷，即修道中強分別生不相續者，亦是類故。分別起故，煩惱增猛，貪下，慢舉，故二相違。俱生起者，微細相續，故得相應。二、外境、內境二義別故。若緣外境多分見斷，亦通修斷。貪染生愛心必下之，此通見修。若於彼慢，即不卑下故，設卑慢亦不許與貪相應故。若緣內身為境，以自愛故心不卑下，緣之起慢以自高，故得二相應；五十五約外，五十八等約內。三、所陵、所恃二境別故。謂若陵彼起慢之時，必不起愛，故二相違。若自恃起愛，心必高舉，或陵他故，故得相應，並通見修斷。四、由麁、細二行相殊，麁猛利者說不相應，二麁行相相違返故。若細者可相應，此二行相不相違故。通見、修斷有四義別。五、更加之，或隨轉理門說不相應，真實理門說相應故，彼此二文不相違返。或復多分說不相應，據實說之亦得相應。然凡簡略先在遍行，煩惱便言先問根本，根本既訖更問所餘。

The Commentary states: The treatise master answers this. First, because the two types—conceptual and innate—are distinct: fascicle 55 discusses the conceptual, while fascicle 58 discusses the innate. What is conceptual is abandoned solely by vision; yet it is not necessarily abandoned solely by vision, for what arises through strong discrimination in the path of cultivation and is non-continuous is also of this type. Because they arise conceptually, the afflictions are intense: craving lowers, while conceit elevates, and thus the two conflict. What arise innately are subtle and continuous, and thus they can be associated. Second, because the two meanings of external objects and internal objects are distinct: if they cognize external objects, they are mostly abandoned by vision, but also extend to what is abandoned by cultivation. Greedily clinging to generate love, the mind must become lowly toward them; this extends to both vision and cultivation. If one has conceit toward them, one is not lowly; even with lowly conceit (mānātimāna), it is not accepted to be associated with craving. If one cognizes the internal body as object, because of self-love the mind is not lowly; cognizing it, one gives rise to conceit so as to elevate oneself; thus the two can be associated. Fascicle 55 refers to the external, while fascicle 58 and others refer to the internal. Third, because the two objects—what is disparaged and what is relied upon—are distinct: when disparaging someone and giving rise to conceit, one definitely does not give rise to love; hence the two conflict. If one relies upon oneself and gives rise to love, the mind must be elevated, or because one disparages others; hence they can be associated, and both extend to what is abandoned by vision and cultivation. Fourth, through the distinction between coarse and subtle active aspects: the coarse and fierce ones are said not to be associated, because two coarse active aspects contradict each other; if they are subtle, they can be associated, because these two active aspects do not conflict. Throughout what is abandoned by vision and cultivation, there are four distinctions. Fifth, to add further: either according to the pedagogical framework (abhiprāyika) they are said not to be associated, while according to the definitive framework of truth they are said to be associated; thus the two texts do not contradict each other. Or again, in most cases they are said not to be associated, but in accordance with reality they can also be associated. However, generally speaking, an abbreviation was first made regarding the omnipresent mental factors; then, concerning afflictions, one first asked about the fundamental ones; once the fundamental ones are finished, one asks about the remainder.