[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) › 3.19 # 成唯識論了義燈 3.19 成唯識論了義燈 3.19 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.19) 二說意者，先辨小乘。《婆沙》三十九云：問何故作此論？答為欲分別契經義故。復次，為止他宗，顯正義故。復次，標別有為，名有為相。雖釋經中，說三所以，亦說相意。相實有四，經中說三。釋此經意，有多復次，亦說相意，如疏略辨。次顯大乘者，准《顯揚》十八，為起屬主相應言論故，說相等。故彼論云：屬主言論者，謂諸言論配屬於主，方解其相，非不屬主。如說生相，此誰之生？觀所屬主起此言論，所謂色之生，受、想、行、識之生，非說色時。此誰之色？觀所屬主起此言論，如生如是，住異、無常等心不相應行，類如其所，應盡當知，是名屬主相應言論。《瑜伽》四十六有多復次，一、令觀無常；二、觀行是苦；三、知法無我；四、令證涅槃。廣如彼釋。《雜集》說觀生、老、住，意亦同此。若此論文表異無為，假立四相者，意亦同彼，觀無常、證涅槃等，相狀如文。 > Second, concerning the intention in explaining them: First, analyzing the Hīnayāna. The Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle thirty-nine, states: 'Question: Why was this treatise composed? Answer: In order to analyze the meaning of the sūtras. Furthermore, in order to refute other schools and reveal the correct doctrine. Furthermore, in order to mark and distinguish conditioned phenomena, they are called conditioned characteristics.' Although this explains the reason for teaching three in the sūtras, it also explains the intention behind the characteristics. In reality there are four characteristics, but the sūtras mention three. To explain the meaning of this sūtra there are many alternatives, which also explain the intention behind the characteristics, as briefly analyzed in the Commentary. Next, revealing the Mahāyāna: According to the Prakaraṇāryavācā, fascicle eighteen, characteristics and so forth are taught in order to give rise to discourse subordinated to a principal referent. Thus that treatise states: 'Discourse subordinated to a principal referent means that discourse must be subordinated to a principal referent before its characteristic can be understood, and cannot be without subordination to a principal referent. As when speaking of the characteristic of arising: whose arising is this? Looking to the subordinate principal, one gives rise to this discourse, namely, the arising of matter, the arising of sensation, perception, formations, and consciousness; this is not like when speaking of matter: whose matter is this? Looking to the subordinate principal, one gives rise to this discourse. As it is with arising, so it is with duration, alteration, impermanence, and other formations not associated with mind; their categories should all be understood according to their proper application; this is called discourse subordinated to a principal referent.' In the Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle forty-six, there are many alternatives: 1. to cause the contemplation of impermanence; 2. to contemplate conditioned phenomena as suffering; 3. to know the selflessness of dharmas; 4. to cause the realization of nirvāṇa. These are explained extensively there. The Abhidharmasamuccaya speaks of contemplating arising, aging, and duration, and its intention is also the same as this. If this treatise metaphorically establishes the four characteristics to distinguish them from the unconditioned, its intention is also the same as that: contemplating impermanence, realizing nirvāṇa, and so on; the features are as in the text. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.18](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.18) - [Next: 3.20](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.20) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832~en-mt.3.19) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.19](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1832.3.19) · Pramāṇa