[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) › 7.651 # 成唯識論述記 7.651 成唯識論述記 7.651 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [7.651](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7.651) 述曰：此中有三：初出體；次簡略；後釋相。此即初也。「八現識及心所」者，出緣體，唯見、自證是此緣體，總名「現識」，簡色、不相應、種子、無為非此緣性，以多同類色、不相應、種子俱時轉故。三十八說：等無間緣唯望一切心、心所說，以前生開導所攝受故。「開」者，避義與後處義；「導」者，招引義，即前法避其處，招引後令生，必有緣法方具此二。既知菩薩地有開導之言，明命根、同分，體雖一一而無並生，一者是假；二無緣用，若是緣慮開導之法，又非假者方有此緣，然非唯假義便簡命根等，以不放逸等是假亦有此緣故，命根有等無間義，無有緣義、開導義故。「前聚於後」者，簡俱時及後為前緣義，非開導故。「自類」者，顯非他識為緣。「無間」者，顯雖前無間為後緣，非中有間隔，要無間者，雖經百年等斷，亦是此緣故。《對法》第五卷言：「不爾者，入無心定心望出定心，應非此緣」，故知准望自類識為緣義。若不爾者，出定之心有七、八識引，寧非此緣？「等而開導」者，顯前滅一心，為後心、心所緣，前一切心、心所為後一心緣，意即齊等而開導，故名等開導。此乃等屬前後通因果也，即簡相似法沙門義，彼一一心所，自望為緣，非望餘故。又，「等」者，顯此心、心所聚中，唯一心、一所，後亦爾故，一法非多故成等，非一聚中如色、不相應有多類起，彼非等故。且一身八識雖名多類，然體用各別，名但是等，其色等法，體用無別。多類並生，故非是等，如草火等喻，准此應知，開導者顯緣義。「令彼定生」者，即顯後果，雖經久遠，如經八萬劫，前眼識望後亦為緣，以後後果當定生故。即簡入無餘依最後心，無果定生，故非此緣，雖有開義，無導引力故。色法非等世所極成，不相應假是我宗義，無為無前後相他、自共許，今應解種子非此緣相也。 > The Commentary states: Within this there are three parts: first, identifying the real entity; second, exclusions; third, explaining its characteristics. This is the first part. 'The eight active consciousnesses and mental factors' identifies the real entity of this condition: only the darśanabhāga and svasaṃvittibhāga are the entity of this condition, and they are collectively termed 'active consciousnesses', excluding rūpa, non-associated \[factors\], seeds, and the unconditioned from having the nature of this condition, because multiple factors of the same kind among rūpa, non-associated \[factors\], and seeds operate simultaneously. Chapter thirty-eight \[of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\] states: The equal and immediately contiguous condition is stated only with reference to all cittas and caitasikas, because they are received and sustained through the opening and guiding of what arose previously. 'Opening' means the sense of vacating, giving place to what comes after; 'guiding' means the sense of beckoning and leading, namely that the prior factor vacates its place, beckoning and leading the subsequent to be produced. Only a factor that possesses conditions can fully possess these two. Knowing that the Bodhisattvabhūmi contains the statement about opening and guiding, it is clear that although the vital faculty and generic similarity are singular entities and do not arise in parallel, first, they are nominal, and second, they lack cognitive function. Only if a factor is of cognitive reflection, opening and guiding, and is also not nominal, does it possess this condition. However, it is not solely on the grounds of being nominal that the vital faculty and so forth are excluded, since non-negligence and the like, though nominal, also possess this condition; it is because the vital faculty has the sense of equal and immediately contiguous, but lacks the sense of cognitive reflection and the sense of opening and guiding. 'The prior aggregation with respect to the subsequent' excludes the sense of simultaneous and subsequent \[factors\] acting as conditions for the prior, because they are not opening and guiding. 'Of its own class' shows that another consciousness does not serve as this condition. 'Immediately contiguous' shows that although the prior without interval serves as condition for the subsequent, it is not that there is no intermediary interval \[in time\] that matters; even if separated across a hundred years and so forth, it is still this condition. Fascicle five of the Abhidharma-samuccaya-bhāṣya states: 'Were it not so, the mind entering the mindless absorption, with respect to the mind emerging from the absorption, would not be this condition'; hence we know that it is established as the condition with respect to consciousness of its own class. Were it not so, the mind emerging from absorption being guided by the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, how could it not be this condition? 'Equally opening and guiding' shows that one prior ceasing mind serves as condition for subsequent mind and mental factors, and all prior mind and mental factors serve as condition for one subsequent mind; the meaning is that they equally open and guide, hence it is named 'equally opening and guiding'. Here 'equal' pertains to both prior and subsequent, spanning cause and effect; it specifically excludes the doctrine of the Sāṃkhya-like śramaṇas, where each individual mental factor serves as condition only for itself, not for others. Furthermore, 'equal' shows that within this aggregation of mind and mental factors, there is only one mind and \[one of each\] factor, and the subsequent is also like this; because it is one factor and not many, it constitutes 'equal', not like rūpa and non-associated \[factors\] within one aggregation which arise in multiple classes, for those are not 'equal'. Furthermore, although the eight consciousnesses in one person are called multiple classes, their entities and functions are distinct, so they are only termed 'equal'; whereas with rūpa and such factors, their entities and functions are not distinct, and multiple classes arise together, hence they are not 'equal', as in the analogy of grass and fire, etc. In accordance with this, one should know that 'opening and guiding' shows the meaning of condition. 'Causing it definitively to arise' shows the subsequent fruit: even across a long interval, such as eighty thousand kalpas, the prior eye-consciousness with respect to the subsequent also serves as condition, because subsequent fruits will definitively arise. This excludes the final mind entering the \[nirvāṇa\] without remainder, which has no fruit definitively arising, and therefore is not this condition; for although it has the sense of opening, it lacks the power of guiding. That physical forms are not equal is universally established in the world; that non-associated factors are nominal is the doctrine of our school; that the unconditioned lacks prior and subsequent characteristics is mutually accepted by other \[schools\] and ourselves. Now we should explain why seeds lack the characteristics of this condition. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 7.650](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7.650) - [Next: 7.652](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7.652) - [Up: 7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830~en-mt.7.651) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [宗鏡錄](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2016.70.15) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7.651](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.7.651) · Pramāṇa