成唯識論述記 5.830

5.830

述曰：自下顯在果位唯善性攝。若五識轉依，隨前二師所解位次，唯善性攝，唯在佛也，唯善性故。不爾，初地已去，五識之中尚有不善；八地已去，或時亦有無記，五識故。唯佛色心是道諦故，唯善性攝。何以然者，諸戲論種已永無故，應細拾文推其義理。三乘無學、菩薩後得智中，何性六識俱起？然今不能煩文具解，雖知六識體通三性，五識之中通有覆者，如受中說。善中通生得、加行，加行有聞、思、修，論其五識，聞、思於義自性即無，為彼所引，亦通所成，如聽經觀字而思法義，意成聞、思，所引眼、耳豈非亦是聞、思所成，非生得故。香積佛土鼻、舌等識，類此應知。後得智中淨土聽法所生五識，豈非三惠之所成也，成所作智即是修故。所成之言，義寬遍也，此等皆由隨意引生故。不善之中有任運、分別，此五皆通，亦許五識通見斷故。此中各有煩惱、所知障，並許通由意引起故，下文自說。無記皆通有覆無記，亦意引故。《緣起經》說，欲界意識除潤生愛等，亦有有覆性故。四無記中，唯異熟生、威儀、工巧，無變化心，通果可爾。天眼、耳通彼俱惠故，然非變化相從四中變化所攝；五識緣威儀、工巧，不能發威儀、工巧故；如《大論》第一說，五識雖不作轉心發業，亦作隨轉心發業故，即通威儀、工巧、異熟生攝。無變化者，八十九雖言欲界有變化，不是五識，實是上界繫。據意識中相似者說，或所變化似欲界，故名為欲界。或是生得變化，但是異熟心攝。《瑜伽》自說，是生得變化故，論文自說欲界無變化，色界無工巧，無色又無威儀。即今大乘，亦通五識有威儀、工巧，四識緣威儀，五識緣工巧。若不爾者，異熟生攝。不同小乘是威儀類，名威儀心。異熟生心寬，威儀心狹，處處皆有文勢皆顯。

The Commentary states: From here downward, it clarifies that in the state of fruition, they are subsumed exclusively under the wholesome nature. If the five consciousnesses have transformed the basis, according to the stages explained by the previous two masters, they are subsumed exclusively under the wholesome nature, which belongs solely to the Buddha, because they are exclusively of wholesome nature. Were it not so, from the first bhūmi onward, among the five consciousnesses there would still be the unwholesome; from the eighth bhūmi onward, there would at times also be the indeterminate among the five consciousnesses. It is only because the matter and mind of a Buddha constitute the truth of the path (mārgasatya) that they are subsumed exclusively under the wholesome nature. Why is this so? Because all seeds of conceptual proliferation (prapañca) have been eliminated forever; one should carefully gather the texts and deduce the doctrinal principle. Among the aśaikṣas of the three vehicles and in the pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna of bodhisattvas, what nature do the six consciousnesses have when arising together? However, one cannot now give a tedious and exhaustive explanation. Although it is known that the substantial nature of the six consciousnesses pervades the three natures, that among the five consciousnesses they pervade the defiled indeterminate (nivṛtāvyākṛta) is as explained under feeling. Among the wholesome, they pervade the innate (upapattilābhika) and the applied (prayogika); the applied comprises hearing, reflection, and cultivation. In discussing the five consciousnesses, hearing and reflection do not exist in their own intrinsic nature, yet being induced by them, they also extend to what is so accomplished. For example, when listening to a sūtra and observing the written words while reflecting on the Dharma and its meaning, the mental consciousness accomplishes hearing and reflection; can the eye and ear induced by it not also be accomplished by hearing and reflection, since they are not innate? The nose-, tongue-, and other consciousnesses in the Fragrant-Accumulation Buddha-land should be understood as analogous to this. In the pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna, can the five consciousnesses generated while listening to the Dharma in a Pure Land not be accomplished by the three wisdoms? For the wisdom that achieves what must be done (kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna) is precisely cultivation. The word 'accomplished' is broad and pervasive in meaning; all these are due to being induced in accordance with the mental consciousness. Among the unwholesome, there are the spontaneous (sahaja) and the discriminated (vikalpita); the five consciousnesses pervade both, and the five consciousnesses are also permitted to pervade those abandoned by seeing (darśana-heya). Herein each possesses the afflictive and cognitive obscurations, both of which are permitted to be induced by the mental consciousness, as will be explained below. Indeterminate [states] all pervade the defiled indeterminate, also because they are induced by the mental consciousness. The Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra states that the mental consciousness of the desire realm, aside from the attachment that moistens rebirth and so forth, also possesses a defiled nature. Among the four indeterminates, they are only maturation-born (vipākaja), deportment (īryāpatha), and arts/crafts (śilpasthāna); they lack the mind of transformation (nirmāṇacitta), though what results from mastery (prābhāvika) can be so. The divine eye and ear are wisdoms concurrent with them; yet they are not transformation, being subsumed under transformation merely by association among the four. The five consciousnesses take deportment and arts/crafts as cognitive objects, but cannot initiate deportment and arts/crafts; as the first fascicle of the Great Treatise states, although the five consciousnesses do not generate karma as the initiating mind, they also generate karma as the concordant mind; thus they are subsumed under deportment, arts/crafts, and maturation-born. That there is no transformation: although fascicle eighty-nine says that the desire realm has transformation, this is not the five consciousnesses, but is actually bound to the higher realms. It is spoken of based on what is similar in the mental consciousness, or because what is transformed resembles the desire realm, hence it is called desire-realm; or it is innate transformation, but is subsumed simply under the maturation mind. The Yogācārabhūmi itself states that it is innate transformation; the text of the treatise itself states that the desire realm has no transformation, the form realm has no arts/crafts, and the formless realm furthermore has no deportment. Thus in the present Mahāyāna, it is also permitted that the five consciousnesses possess deportment and arts/crafts: four consciousnesses take deportment as cognitive object, and five consciousnesses take arts/crafts as cognitive object. If not so, they are subsumed under maturation-born. Unlike the Hīnayāna, where they are of the deportment category and called deportment minds, the maturation-born mind is broad, while the deportment mind is narrow; the textual force everywhere makes this evident.