成唯識論掌中樞要 2.139

2.139

一切有事、無事煩惱不過三種：一、諸見所緣，本是無事，餘是有事，因此見行相本無決定，餘不定故。當《對法》第七。二、行相深迷無我，名緣無事，餘名有事。所謂行相深境必迷無我故，餘必不定。〈五十九〉云：見、慢名無事；貪、恚名有事；無明、疑通二種。《對法》第五同。三、見道所緣名緣無事，修名有事。見道諸惑分別猛利，多橫執故；修道少故。《瑜伽》云：見所斷，名緣無事，餘名有事，除緣現在無為有體法。緣過、未鏡像等，名緣無事，所餘名緣有事，本境有故。《對法》云：非有所緣，謂顛倒心、心所及緣過未等，餘名有事。本質或無，名緣無事，餘必有，名緣有事。〈五十九〉云：無事緣謂無事煩惱，有事緣謂有事煩惱，與唯識同。今觀此義，初二門：一、本體有，名有事；二、無質影像中無體、用，名無事。影像中有決定執，名無事，但五見不定，名有事。癡、愛、慢雖亦有執，不決定故。二執者名無事，二不執名緣有事。故見、慢、愛等，此名無事，餘名有事。三朋屬見道，名無事；修道名有事。隨前諸文，據實有、無事二門即盡：一、本質影像；二、影像之內有體、無體，如緣過、未等，名無事；現在有體法及無為，名緣有事。然於中義別更分三種：一、決定、不定；二、執、不執；三、明屬見、修道法，即五重中前三重是，如《大論》第十一「五蓋」中說惛沈、睡眠二別相，太好！

All defilements with an object-basis (savastu) and without an object-basis (avastu) do not exceed three kinds. First: what is cognized by the views is originally without an object-basis, while the rest are with an object-basis, because the cognitive mode (ākāra) of views is originally not determinate, whereas the others are indeterminate; this corresponds to fascicle seven of the Abhidharma. Second: when the cognitive mode is deeply confused about selflessness, it is called cognizing without an object-basis, and the rest are called with an object-basis; that is to say, because when the cognitive mode is deeply immersed in its sphere it is inevitably confused about selflessness, whereas the others are necessarily not determinate. Fascicle fifty-nine states: "Views and arrogance are called without an object-basis; greed and anger are called with an object-basis; ignorance and doubt pertain to both." Fascicle five of the Abhidharma agrees. Third: what is cognized in the path of seeing is called cognizing without an object-basis, while [that in] the path of cultivation is called with an object-basis; this is because the various defilements of the path of seeing are conceptually sharp and violent, mostly holding perverse attachments, whereas those of the path of cultivation are less so. The Yogācārabhūmi says: "What is abandoned by seeing is called cognizing without an object-basis, and the rest are called with an object-basis, excluding those that cognize present unconditioned real-entity dharmas." Cognizing past and future entities, mirror-images, and the like is called cognizing without an object-basis, and the remainder are called cognizing with an object-basis, because their original sphere exists. The Abhidharma says: "Non-existent object-basis refers to inverted minds, mental factors, and the cognition of the past, future, and so forth; the rest are called having an object-basis." Where the archetype (bimba) may be absent, it is called cognizing without an object-basis; where the rest must exist, it is called cognizing with an object-basis. Fascicle fifty-nine states: "Cognizing without an object-basis refers to defilements without an object-basis, and cognizing with an object-basis refers to defilements with an object-basis," which is the same as the Cheng weishi lun. Now, observing these meanings: as for the first two approaches: 1. Having an original substance is called having an object-basis; 2. Having no substance or function within an imageless reflection (pratibimba) is called without an object-basis. When there is determinate attachment within the reflection, it is called without an object-basis; but when the five views are not determinate, it is called with an object-basis. Although ignorance, attachment, and arrogance also have attachment, they are not determinate. Where the two attachments are present, it is called without an object-basis; where the two attachments are absent, it is called cognizing with an object-basis. Therefore, views, arrogance, attachment, and the like are here called without an object-basis, and the rest are called with an object-basis. Third, those belonging to the path of seeing are called without an object-basis; those of the path of cultivation are called with an object-basis. In accordance with the preceding texts, in reality the two gates of with and without an object-basis exhaust it: 1. The archetype and the reflection; 2. Having a substance or lacking a substance within the reflection, such as cognizing the past, future, and so on, which is called without an object-basis; present real-entity dharmas and the unconditioned are called cognizing with an object-basis. However, within these, their meanings are distinguished further into three kinds: 1. Determinate and indeterminate; 2. Attached and unattached; 3. Clearly belonging to the dharmas of the paths of seeing and cultivation; that is, the first three tiers among the five tiers. As explained in fascicle eleven of the Great Treatise in the discussion of the "Five Hindrances" regarding the two distinct marks of torpor and sleepiness—how excellent!