成唯識論述記 7.651

7.651

The Commentary states: Within this there are three parts: first, identifying the real entity; second, exclusions; third, explaining its characteristics. This is the first part. 'The eight active consciousnesses and mental factors' identifies the real entity of this condition: only the darśanabhāga and svasaṃvittibhāga are the entity of this condition, and they are collectively termed 'active consciousnesses', excluding rūpa, non-associated [factors], seeds, and the unconditioned from having the nature of this condition, because multiple factors of the same kind among rūpa, non-associated [factors], and seeds operate simultaneously. Chapter thirty-eight [of the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra] states: The equal and immediately contiguous condition is stated only with reference to all cittas and caitasikas, because they are received and sustained through the opening and guiding of what arose previously. 'Opening' means the sense of vacating, giving place to what comes after; 'guiding' means the sense of beckoning and leading, namely that the prior factor vacates its place, beckoning and leading the subsequent to be produced. Only a factor that possesses conditions can fully possess these two. Knowing that the Bodhisattvabhūmi contains the statement about opening and guiding, it is clear that although the vital faculty and generic similarity are singular entities and do not arise in parallel, first, they are nominal, and second, they lack cognitive function. Only if a factor is of cognitive reflection, opening and guiding, and is also not nominal, does it possess this condition. However, it is not solely on the grounds of being nominal that the vital faculty and so forth are excluded, since non-negligence and the like, though nominal, also possess this condition; it is because the vital faculty has the sense of equal and immediately contiguous, but lacks the sense of cognitive reflection and the sense of opening and guiding. 'The prior aggregation with respect to the subsequent' excludes the sense of simultaneous and subsequent [factors] acting as conditions for the prior, because they are not opening and guiding. 'Of its own class' shows that another consciousness does not serve as this condition. 'Immediately contiguous' shows that although the prior without interval serves as condition for the subsequent, it is not that there is no intermediary interval [in time] that matters; even if separated across a hundred years and so forth, it is still this condition. Fascicle five of the Abhidharma-samuccaya-bhāṣya states: 'Were it not so, the mind entering the mindless absorption, with respect to the mind emerging from the absorption, would not be this condition'; hence we know that it is established as the condition with respect to consciousness of its own class. Were it not so, the mind emerging from absorption being guided by the seventh and eighth consciousnesses, how could it not be this condition? 'Equally opening and guiding' shows that one prior ceasing mind serves as condition for subsequent mind and mental factors, and all prior mind and mental factors serve as condition for one subsequent mind; the meaning is that they equally open and guide, hence it is named 'equally opening and guiding'. Here 'equal' pertains to both prior and subsequent, spanning cause and effect; it specifically excludes the doctrine of the Sāṃkhya-like śramaṇas, where each individual mental factor serves as condition only for itself, not for others. Furthermore, 'equal' shows that within this aggregation of mind and mental factors, there is only one mind and [one of each] factor, and the subsequent is also like this; because it is one factor and not many, it constitutes 'equal', not like rūpa and non-associated [factors] within one aggregation which arise in multiple classes, for those are not 'equal'. Furthermore, although the eight consciousnesses in one person are called multiple classes, their entities and functions are distinct, so they are only termed 'equal'; whereas with rūpa and such factors, their entities and functions are not distinct, and multiple classes arise together, hence they are not 'equal', as in the analogy of grass and fire, etc. In accordance with this, one should know that 'opening and guiding' shows the meaning of condition. 'Causing it definitively to arise' shows the subsequent fruit: even across a long interval, such as eighty thousand kalpas, the prior eye-consciousness with respect to the subsequent also serves as condition, because subsequent fruits will definitively arise. This excludes the final mind entering the [nirvāṇa] without remainder, which has no fruit definitively arising, and therefore is not this condition; for although it has the sense of opening, it lacks the power of guiding. That physical forms are not equal is universally established in the world; that non-associated factors are nominal is the doctrine of our school; that the unconditioned lacks prior and subsequent characteristics is mutually accepted by other [schools] and ourselves. Now we should explain why seeds lack the characteristics of this condition.