成唯識論述記 4.678

4.678

The Commentary states: Below this is the second part, refuting karma and its fruit. In this there are two parts: first, objecting that the arising upon transitioning between realms and stages, etc., would lack a cause; second, objecting that 'conditioning of consciousness by karmic formations' and so forth would not be established. This is the first of these. If this consciousness did not exist to hold the seeds of karma and fruit, transitioning between realms and stages would also lack a cause. Concerning this karma, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha offers no explanation. Its third chapter says: if someone, having died from this non-concentrated stage, is being born, relying on the mental state at the intermediate existence (antarābhava), defiled mental consciousness arises to link life in continuity; up to, there are two mental consciousnesses operating simultaneously within the mother's womb, etc.—this only explains its fruit. Furthermore, if having died from this, one is taking birth directly into a concentrated stage, by means of a non-concentrated defiled mental consciousness, one links life in continuity. This non-concentrated, defiled mind is subsumed by that stage; apart from the retribution consciousness, another seed-substance is definitely unfindable, etc. Being born into the formless realm and so on is called 'transitioning.' Regarding 'after dharmas of a different kind,' the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says: furthermore, if in that realm a supramundane mind is directly present, all other worldly minds must be entirely extinguished. At that time, one would have to be extinguished and detached from that destiny; if, when born in the stage of neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization or the stage of nothingness, a supramundane mind becomes present, then one would have to be detached from both destinies, etc. Both Vasubandhu and Asvabhāva have this explanation. After these, the arising of karma and fruit would all lack a cause, because seeds are absent.