[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [成唯識論掌中樞要](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831) › 2.42 # 成唯識論掌中樞要 2.42 成唯識論掌中樞要 2.42 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2.42) 實准異熟及彼心所名「正趣生」者：問：趣生之體為一為多？若是一者，依六別實心及心所以立總一；如瓶、盆等趣生應假；若許假者，違上文故。若實一者，云何依多實法而立體一實耶？若是多者，應如一人六箇人趣，六生所攝，故為大過。此義應思。趣生是假，經部師難：依六根立命根，命根應是趣生，總一假故，要依實法方可建立故。不違上，所依實故。後解為正。或唯心王是趣生體；心所相從，實非趣生。故唯是一。或同在一聚，俱言無失，是實非假，應勘《瑜伽》假實。「正實趣生」者，「正」者本識義，「趣生」本故，餘別報五蘊依此相從名「趣生」，不爾應雜亂，一趣起他趣故，此中唯取正感後業所招識等為趣生體。 > Regarding real true vipāka and its mental factors being called the 'primary destiny and birth': Question: Is the substance of destiny and birth one or many? If it is one, it is established as a collective unity based on the six distinct real minds and mental factors; like a vase or bowl, destiny and birth would be nominal; if granted to be nominal, it contradicts the text above. If it is really one, how can a single real entity be established based on multiple real dharmas? If it is many, it would be like a single person having six human destinies and being subsumed under six births, which is a great error. This point should be contemplated. If destiny and birth are nominal, the Sautrāntika master objects: the jīvitendriya is established based on the six sense-faculties, so the jīvitendriya should be destiny and birth; since it is a collective nominal entity, it can only be established based on real dharmas. This does not contradict the above, because what it is based on is real. The latter explanation is correct. Alternatively, only citta is the substance of destiny and birth; the mental factors follow along with it and are not truly destiny and birth. Thus it is only one. Or, being together in the same aggregate, both being stated is without error; it is real and not nominal. One should consult the Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra regarding real and nominal. In 'primary real destiny and birth', 'primary' means the mūla-vijñāna, because it is the root of 'destiny and birth'; the other distinct fruition five aggregates are nominally called 'destiny and birth' by association with it. Otherwise, there would be confusion, with one destiny giving rise to another. Here, only the consciousness and so forth attracted directly by the karma that produces the subsequent \[existence\] are taken as the substance of destiny and birth. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2.41) - [Next: 2.43](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2.43) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831~en-mt.2.42) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1831.2.42) · Pramāṇa