[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [成唯識論述記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830) › 6.986 # 成唯識論述記 6.986 成唯識論述記 6.986 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.986](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.986) 述曰：第二師說通見、修斷。此無別體，依二煩惱俱生、分別勢力起故，故通二種。非但緣麁事生，亦緣他身見生忿等故。此後師正，故前俱生、分別中唯取正義。然五十八說迷諦中，於滅諦起損害心、恚惱心，即害、惱二親迷理生，亦通見斷。出佛身血害，緣無漏生，《對法》云憎嫉出離，嫉緣理生，故亦見斷。九十卷云或嫉妬性，乃至於有情起邪見行，發惡業種種事，故知能發惡趣業也。唯分別起更有八十六已去忿等發惡趣業文，忘不知處。又何緣假立，唯修非見。又於諦言嫉等，即非是嫉等，但名為瞋者。於事言嫉等，何故是嫉等？ > The Commentary states: The second master says that they are abandoned by both seeing and cultivation. These have no separate substantial entity, for they arise on the strength of the co-arising and conceptually differentiated forms of the two \[root\] afflictions, and thus they belong to both kinds. It is not only that they arise by taking coarse worldly events as intentional objects, but also that wrath and so forth arise by taking another's personality view as an intentional object. This latter master is correct; hence, in the preceding discussion of 'co-arising' and 'conceptually differentiated', only this correct view was adopted. However, where \[Fascicle\] 58 speaks of being confused about the truths, the arousal of an intention to harm or an intention of resentment regarding the truth of cessation means that harm and malice directly arise from confusion regarding the principle \[of the truth\], and thus are also abandoned by seeing. Harm such as shedding the blood of a Buddha arises in connection with the uncontaminated; the Abhidharma\[-samuccaya\] states that one is jealous of liberation, and jealousy arises in connection with the principle, so it is also abandoned by seeing. Fascicle 90 states that, owing to a jealous disposition and so forth, one engages in wrong views regarding sentient beings and generates various evil karmic actions; hence we know that it can generate karma leading to the bad destinies. Arising solely from conceptual differentiation, there are further passages from Fascicle 86 onward where wrath and so forth generate karma leading to the bad destinies, but the exact place has been forgotten. Furthermore, on what grounds would they be designated as purely abandoned by cultivation and not by seeing? Moreover, if speaking of jealousy and so forth regarding the truths means they are not actually jealousy and so forth but are merely named anger, then when one speaks of jealousy and so forth regarding worldly affairs, why would they be jealousy and so forth? > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.985](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.985) - [Next: 6.987](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.987) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830~en-mt.6.986) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.986](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.986) · Pramāṇa