成唯識論述記 8.483

8.483

述曰：八、三性分別門，無明、愛、取三，唯通不善、有覆無記，無明欲界唯是不善，《對法》云：「若欲界繫分別起者，唯不善攝」，愛、取欲界亦通不善、無記二性，潤生有覆，經論誠文。欲界四取說是不善，誠證非一，上界此三皆唯無記。問：若爾，取中既通四取，如何乃言修道惑正潤，見惑助潤？豈有取支名助閏也？答：彼是助潤合名取支。問：何妨亦應助發惑者合名無明？答：齊解亦得，今此但據正發之惑，論說亦得文影故也，以前准後故。又不齊解，發業無重但一發，唯可舉一正發惑，潤生通明數數潤是故，通取助潤生。行支唯通善惡，不通無記，無記不感果故。有通三性，行等六支合為有故。餘識等五，生、老死七，唯無記性，異熟性故。分位之中，亦起善染。《大論》第十云：「四唯雜染，餘通染淨」，謂無明、愛、取、老死四唯染，老死起憂悲，假說為染，此中剋性，彼唯異熟，故不相違。餘通染淨者，此中會云，七分位中，起善、染故，非體性也。五果支約當生處，說分位故；老死由二義：一分位中起染，二多起憂悲故也。

The Commentary states: Eighth, the category distinguishing the three natures. The three of ignorance, craving, and grasping encompass only the unwholesome and the veiled indeterminate. Ignorance in the desire realm is exclusively unwholesome; the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: 'If bound to the desire realm and arisen through discrimination, it is comprised exclusively by the unwholesome.' Craving and grasping in the desire realm also encompass both natures, the unwholesome and the indeterminate; that the moistening of birth is veiled [indeterminate] is an explicit statement of the sūtras and śāstras. That the four graspings in the desire realm are stated to be unwholesome has more than one definitive proof. In the higher realms, these three are all exclusively indeterminate. Question: If so, since grasping encompasses the four graspings, how can it be said that defilements of the path of cultivation are the primary moisteners, while defilements of the path of seeing are auxiliary moisteners? Could there be an auxiliary moistener named the grasping link? Answer: They are auxiliary moisteners collectively named the grasping link. Question: What prevents those defilements that auxiliarily generate [karma] from also being collectively named ignorance? Answer: An equal explanation is also admissible: now this relies merely on the defilement that primarily generates it, and that the treatise states this is also because the texts reflect each other, taking the former as a standard for the latter. Alternatively, it is not an equal explanation: generating karma is not repeated, but occurs only once, so one can only cite the single defilement that primarily generates it; moistening birth encompasses repeated moistening, and for this reason it comprehensively takes what auxiliarily moistens birth. The formations link encompasses exclusively the wholesome and unwholesome, and does not encompass the indeterminate, because the indeterminate does not incur fruit. Existence encompasses the three natures, because the six links of formations, etc., are combined to form existence. The remaining five of consciousness, etc., and birth and aging-and-death—seven in all—are exclusively of indeterminate nature, because their nature is true ripening. Within their stages, wholesome and defiled also arise. The Great Treatise, fascicle 10, says: 'Four are exclusively defiled, and the rest encompass defiled and pure'—meaning that the four of ignorance, craving, grasping, and aging-and-death are exclusively defiled; aging-and-death gives rise to sorrow and grief, so it is metaphorically called defiled. Here, taking its precise nature, it is exclusively true ripening, so there is no contradiction. As for 'the rest encompass defiled and pure,' it is harmonized here by saying that within the stages of the seven, wholesome and defiled arise, not that their intrinsic substance is so. Because the five fruit links are stated as stages in relation to the place of future rebirth; aging-and-death is due to two meanings: first, defilement arises within its stages; second, it mostly gives rise to sorrow and grief.