[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) › [成唯識論了義燈](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832) › 2.132 # 成唯識論了義燈 2.132 成唯識論了義燈 2.132 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [2.132](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.132) 二出體者，初敘異說，後敘大乘。敘異說者：犢子部說：欲界見道所斷十煩惱，以為體性；一切有部別，有體性唯是無記，通三界繫，不相應；經部不立有別體性，但於曾未生聖法，相續分位差別，假立名異生性。大乘雖亦在不相應，非異色、心，有別體性，但於是斷二障種，上未永斷位，假立異生性，不是唯約能障自乘所有聖法不生現位，立異生性。無種姓人，無別障故。但約未斷見惑種立，由不成就於聖法故，若用若體，俱得云不成。有種姓人，不成功用；無種姓者，亦不成體。故《瑜伽》五十二說：三界見所斷種子，唯未永害量，名異生性。即通二障種上假立，此論亦云：而於三界見所斷種，未永害位，假立非得，名異生性。亦不言各障自聖種現，但云於諸聖法，未成就故。 > Second, presenting the substantial entity: first, relating divergent explanations, and next, relating the Mahāyāna. In relating divergent explanations: the Vātsīputrīyas say that the ten afflictions abandoned by the path of vision in the desire realm constitute the essential nature; the Sarvāstivādins say that there is a distinct essential nature that is exclusively neutral, pertains to the bonds of all three realms, and is non-concomitant; the Sautrāntikas do not establish a distinct essential nature, but merely conventionally establish the designation 'nature of an ordinary person' upon the particular state in the continuum where noble dharmas have never arisen. Although the Mahāyāna also places it among the non-concomitants, it does not exist as a distinct essential nature apart from form and mind, but is merely conventionally established as the nature of an ordinary person upon the state where the seeds of the two obstructions to be severed have not yet been perpetually severed; it is not established as the nature of an ordinary person merely with respect to the state where the active manifestations of all noble dharmas belonging to one's own vehicle are obstructed from arising. For people without spiritual lineage, there is no distinct obstruction; it is established solely with respect to the unsevered seeds of the delusions of vision. Because they do not possess noble dharmas, both function and entity can be said to be unaccomplished: those with spiritual lineage do not accomplish the function, while those without spiritual lineage also do not accomplish the entity. Therefore, \*Yogācāra\* fascicle fifty-two states: the measure of seeds abandoned by vision in the three realms that have merely not yet been perpetually destroyed is called 'the nature of an ordinary person'. That is, it is conventionally established across the seeds of both obstructions. This treatise also says: 'And conventionally establishing non-possession at the stage where the seeds abandoned by vision in the three realms have not yet been perpetually destroyed is called the nature of an ordinary person.' It also does not say that each obstructs the seeds and manifestations of its own noble \[state\], but merely says: 'because they have not yet accomplished any noble dharmas'. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 2.131](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.131) - [Next: 2.133](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.133) - [Up: 2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832~en-mt.2.132) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [成唯識論](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.darsana.yogacara.trimsika!vijnaptimatratasiddhi*zh-xuanzang.1.143) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.132](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.2.132) · Pramāṇa