成唯識論述記 6.456

6.456

述曰：此有三解。一云：此唯在佛，由意引故，五有輕安。又此五識成事智，俱有輕安故。初約他引立宗，後論自俱引證，總約佛位。此解破前佛無無漏五識身解，即順三界分別之中，欲無輕安。第二又解，定所引善有輕安者，此在因位有漏五識。身在欲界定所引善五識之中，非無調暢，即如通果天眼、天耳。善者有輕安，無記者即無，破前所說因位五無，在果許有。此據因位，若在佛果此為正義。或初地時，成所作智俱，必有輕安故。若作此解，違前所說欲無輕安中第二正義，鼻、舌二識欲界所繫，有輕安故。彼前但據一切異生及下意識說之為無，據理，聖者後得智引五有輕安，不相違也。前文但對彼初師說，非為盡理。

The Commentary states: There are three explanations here. The first says: This is only in the Buddha; because they are induced by the manas, the five consciousnesses have pliancy. Furthermore, these five consciousnesses are conjoined with the wisdom of accomplish-all-action (kṛtyānuṣṭhāna-jñāna), which possesses pliancy. The first establishes the thesis in terms of being induced by another [consciousness], and the latter cites textual authority for their own conjunction, both referring generally to the Buddha stage. This explanation refutes the previous view that the Buddha has no anāsrava five consciousness bodies, and accords with the distinction of the three realms wherein the desire realm lacks pliancy. The second explanation is: Wholesome [five consciousnesses] induced by samādhi have pliancy; this refers to the sāsrava five consciousnesses in the causal stage. Among the wholesome five consciousnesses induced by samādhi when the body is in the desire realm, there is not an absence of harmonization and fluency, as in the cases of the divine eye and divine ear which are fruitions of supernormal power (abhijñā-phala). Wholesome ones have pliancy, whereas indeterminate ones do not; this refutes the previous statement that the five lack it in the causal stage while granting it in the fruition stage. This is based on the causal stage; in the Buddha-fruition, this is the correct doctrine. Or, at the first bhūmi, when conjoined with the wisdom of accomplishing actions, they must have pliancy. If this explanation is adopted, it contradicts the second correct doctrine mentioned earlier regarding the desire realm lacking pliancy, because the nose- and tongue-consciousnesses are bound to the desire realm and would have pliancy. That earlier [statement] was merely based on all ordinary persons (pṛthagjana) and the lower mental consciousness, stating it is absent; according to the principle, when holy beings have the five [consciousnesses] induced by subsequent attainment wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdha-jñāna) with pliancy, there is no contradiction. The earlier text was merely spoken against that first master, not as an exhaustive account of the principle.