成唯識論述記 3.15

3.15

The Commentary states: A seed with respect to a seed is called 'same class' because their substances and natures are similar; because they conflict, they cannot be conjoined simultaneously in one body. Thus fascicle 5 of the Yogācārabhūmi states: 'It is a cause for a different nature,' meaning seed with respect to active manifestation; and 'It is also a cause for its own nature in a subsequent moment, not in this very kṣaṇa,' meaning seeds producing each other consecutively. When seeds produce each other, why is simultaneity not allowed? The objection says: 'The darśanabhāga takes the darśana[bhāga] as object, and its own essence is cognized simultaneously; when a seed produces a seed, its own essence is simultaneous.' An explanation says: When seed is cause and result with respect to seed, if simultaneity were allowed, it would not be a direct cause (hetupratyaya). Although the darśanabhāga is cause and result simultaneously with respect to darśana, it is not included in hetupratyaya. If so, seed with respect to active manifestation should also be like this, so one should explain further: if seed with respect to seed were allowed to arise simultaneously, the substances would become infinite, because one's own class would be allowed to arise simultaneously; that is, in a single kṣaṇa many seeds would arise, completely lacking a hetupratyaya, because a subsequent seed is not allowed to produce further results. Active manifestations with respect to seeds are called different classes; although they also perfume seeds, subsequent seeds have not yet produced results, so there is no infinite regress; within a single kṣaṇa, two active manifestations of the same essence do not occur alongside each other, and the produced seed cannot thereby produce further active manifestations; seed with respect to seed should be considered analogous.