成唯識論述記 5.377

5.377

述曰：次難初師，唯許五俱。若染心中無散亂者，應非流蕩，如善心等；既有流蕩，由散亂故。此有三體：一、別境定數染者名散亂；違善定故；如薩婆多比諸法師皆作此說。今無此文。二、無別體性，非彼定數。此復二說：一是愚癡分，無明為體；二云貪、瞋、癡分。《對法》等同。五十五云：忘念、散亂、惡惠是癡分等，故遍染心生。三、別有體性。第六卷說故，念、定二法別境為體，故亦無別體，或是癡分。若無失念、不正知者，如何能起煩惱現前？必失正念及不正知，此是非故而起煩惱。由有失念、不正知二法，非彼染心是正念等，故汝所言無此二，染心應是善性自無記心。許無此二故，如加行善等。此破初師，無此三故。

The Commentary states: Next, challenging the first master, who accepted only five conjoined [factors]. If in a defiled mind there were no distraction, it would not be wavering, like wholesome minds and the like; since it is wavering, it is due to distraction. This has three intrinsic entities: First, defiled states belonging to the samādhi factor among the specific-object factors are called distraction, because they oppose wholesome samādhi; as all the Sarvāstivādin masters maintain. Presently this textual reading is not followed. Second, it has no separate intrinsic entity and is not that samādhi factor. Here there are again two explanations: one is that it is a portion of delusion, having avidyā as its essence; the second says it is a portion of rāga, dveṣa, and moha. The Abhidharma[-samuccaya-vyākhyā] and other texts agree. The fifty-fifth fascicle [of the Yogācārabhūmi] states: "Forgetfulness, distraction, and bad wisdom are portions of delusion, and so forth"; therefore they arise universally pervading defiled minds. Third, it has a separate intrinsic entity. As stated in the sixth fascicle, smṛti and samādhi have specific-object factors as their entities, and thus it also lacks a separate entity, or is a portion of delusion. If there were no forgetfulness and incorrect comprehension, how could afflictions become manifest? One must lose correct mindfulness and have incorrect comprehension, taking this as that, before afflictions arise. Because forgetfulness and incorrect comprehension exist, that defiled mind is not correct mindfulness and so on; thus, by your statement that these two are absent, defiled minds would be wholesome in nature or self-nature neutral minds, since it is accepted that they lack these two, just like preparatory wholesome minds and so forth. This refutes the first master, because he lacked these three.