成唯識論述記 2.792

2.792

The Commentary states: Because these seeds without outflows are not subsumed under the nature of the retribution consciousness, they are not indeterminate; their essential nature does not accord with the substance of the fundamental consciousness. Since their substances are not identical, they cannot be mutually identical. Furthermore, their nature and category are distinct: the antidotal (pratipakṣa) and what is to be abandoned (vipakṣa), with outflows and without outflows, are different, and they cannot be mutually identical. Therefore, the single word 'nature' in meaning combines both substance and category. Since they do not take the name 'indeterminate nature' from consciousness, what nature are they? Because both cause and effect are subsumed under the wholesome nature, they are named exclusively wholesome. If they are natural seeds, the homogeneous cause (sabhāga-hetu) of the prior moment is wholesome in its original nature, and the outflow fruit (niṣyanda-phala) of the subsequent moment is also wholesome, and so forth up to the fruit of active phenomena produced later. Since by natural power they are not subsumed under the nature of the eighth consciousness, there is no error in their cause being of wholesome nature. This represents the state of seeds before being perfumed, where there is such a meaning when viewed within their own class. If subsequently perfumed, through the perfuming of hearing, contemplation, and so forth prior to the path of seeing, causing them to increase, although they are causes with outflows, they cause the fruit to increase within the sovereign condition (adhipati-pratyaya), yet they are also named wholesome; from the path of seeing onward, the principle is obvious and clearly knowable, so they are exclusively of wholesome nature, not unwholesome or indeterminate. By nature, all dharmas without outflows accord with principle, oppose birth [in cyclic existence], and are without unwholesomeness or indeterminacy. Question: Seeds without outflows differ in nature and category from consciousness and cannot be named indeterminate following consciousness; seeds without outflows differ in substance from consciousness, so they should not be named retribution following consciousness. Because there is this implication, the treatise asks next: