成唯識論了義燈 4.54

4.54

問：解執受中，准《瑜伽論》等，皆有五因。何故但舉三因，不說非善、染及業所引？答：有二解。一云，先業所引是相續上義，非善、染者一類上義，所以不說；一云，亦簡佛果。雖有執受而非業引，雖是一類許是善故，故不言二。西明云：初二即一類攝；二云，欲顯執受非要五義，佛有執受故，此解為正，若如前解，但云：眼等無如是義，何須重說一類等三？

Question: In explaining "appropriated" (upātta), according to the Yogācārabhūmi and other texts, there are in all cases five causes. Why are only three causes cited here, without mentioning "neither wholesome nor defiled" and "projected by karma"? Answer: There are two explanations. One says: "projected by previous karma" pertains to the continuity [aspect], and "neither wholesome nor defiled" pertains to the uniform [aspect]; therefore they are not mentioned. Another says: it also serves to exclude the stage of the Buddha. Although [the Buddha's body] has appropriation, it is not projected by karma; and although it is uniform, it is admitted to be wholesome; hence neither of the two is mentioned. Ximing states: the first two are subsumed under "uniform"; the second [explanation] says that it intends to show that appropriation does not necessarily require all five characteristics, since a Buddha has appropriation. This [latter] explanation is the correct one. If it were like the former explanation, one would only need to say: "The eyes and so forth lack such characteristics"; why would there be a need to restate the three, such as "uniform"?