成唯識論述記 8.335

8.335

次辨別名。名義得名者，言無明者非六釋攝，以無別體義可為六釋故，初離無與明別解，後合之總釋，故名離合。舊云六釋者是，謂此六釋依二法簡別，離合方可為解，非如眼等雖有二字名曰「斫芻」，而體一法，無可簡別，用此六釋。六釋不遍諸法釋故，如別抄解。行者當體彰名，造作是行義，亦功能得稱。了別名識；觸境名觸；領納名受；耽染名愛；追欲名取；有果名有；蘊起名生義。《勝鬘經及緣起經》等、《瑜伽》等亦有別釋，皆同於行，不能別引。言名色者是相違釋，名之與色，體各別故，如云能立與能破言。五十六云：「何故四無色蘊名『名』？答：順趣種種所緣境義，或依言說名分別種種所緣境義故說為名。」何故色蘊名色？答：於彼彼方所種殖增長義，及變礙義，故說為色。變礙有二乃至廣說。既各彰別體，故是相違釋，非名體即色，非是依名之色，名所有色故。

Next, distinguishing the specific names. As for the derivation of their names and meanings: 'ignorance' (avidyā) is not subsumed under the six compound analyses (ṣaṭ-samāsa), because it has no distinct entity or meaning that can serve as the six compound analyses. First, 'without' and 'clarity' are explained separately, and then combined into a general explanation; hence it is called 'separate-and-combined' (lihe). The older assertion that it is among the six compound analyses is [mistaken]; these six compound analyses distinguish between two things, and can only be explained through separation and combination; it is not like the eye and so on, which, although having two characters named 'cakṣus', constitute a single entity with nothing to distinguish, so that these six compound analyses cannot be used. Because the six compound analyses do not apply universally to the explanation of all phenomena, as explained in the separate notes. 'Formations' (saṃskāra) displays its name from its very entity: 'making/constructing' is the meaning of formation; it also receives its designation from its functional capacity. Discerning is called 'consciousness' (vijñāna); contacting an object is called 'contact' (sparśa); experiencing/receiving is called 'sensation' (vedanā); indulging in attachment is called 'craving' (tṛṣṇā); pursuing desires is called 'grasping' (upādāna); having results is called 'existence' (bhava); the arising of aggregates is the meaning of 'birth' (jāti). The Śrīmālādevī-sūtra, the Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra, the Yogācāra, and other texts also have distinct explanations, all similar to 'formations', which cannot be cited individually. 'Name-and-form' (nāmarūpa) is a dvandva compound (virodha-samāsa), because name and form are mutually distinct in entity, just as one speaks of 'proof and refutation'. The fifty-sixth fascicle states: 'Why are the four immaterial aggregates called "name"? Answer: Because they mean inclining toward various cognitive objects, or because they mean distinguishing various cognitive objects relying on verbal expression; therefore they are called "name". Why is the form aggregate called "form"? Answer: Because it means being planted and growing in respective locations, and because it means mutability and obstructiveness; therefore it is called "form".' Mutability and obstructiveness are of two kinds, and so forth, as explained at length. Since each displays a distinct entity, it is a dvandva compound; it is not that the entity of name is itself form, nor is it form dependent on name, or form possessed by name.