成唯識論了義燈 1.53

1.53

《要集》云：有說得新境故，名為率爾。有釋不作意緣，名為率爾。以何為正？解云：《論》唯任運。若言新境，不見其文，然准道理，合有二義。今謂不爾，《瑜伽》第三云：「又意識任運散亂，緣不串習境時，無欲等生。」名率爾。既云緣不串習，即是新境。若唯任運散亂緣境，不與欲俱，即名率爾。除第六外，餘一切時，但名率爾，應無餘心。未轉依位，皆唯任運散亂緣故，更有同異，繁不具述。言聚集顯現者，如說諸行無常。

The Yaoji states: Some say that because it apprehends a new cognitive object, it is called sudden (ābhoga/prathamamanaskāra/impulsive mind). Others explain that cognizing without intentionality is called sudden. Which is correct? The explanation says: The treatise speaks only of spontaneous operation. If one speaks of a new cognitive object, its text is not seen; however, following reason, both meanings should be combined. Now I say this is not so. The third fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Moreover, when the manovijñāna spontaneously and distractedly cognizes an unaccustomed object, without desire and so forth arising," it is called sudden. Since it says cognizing an unaccustomed object, this is precisely a new object. If merely spontaneously and distractedly cognizing an object without accompanying desire were called sudden, then except for the sixth [consciousness], at all other times it would merely be called sudden, and there should be no other minds. In the state prior to the transformation of the basis, all cognize solely spontaneously and distractedly. There are further agreements and differences, but they are too numerous to recount in full. As for "aggregation and manifestation", it is like saying "all conditioned phenomena are impermanent".