成唯識論了義燈 5.26

5.26

《論》：若得自在諸根互用。《樞要》二說，於第一師自有二解：一云五識各各能緣一切諸境，皆得自相，無壞根、境過。言離合者，據因位說，不障果位，得自在故。又如第八識，雖緣諸境，皆得自相，不有壞過，以於果位，體有多能。非體轉變為餘法體，故不得。難云：見色名為眼，亦許聞聲等。能造名為大，色等亦能造。彼體轉異，此是功能。若以色能見，可例色能造見色眼功能，非是體轉變。然法師意存第二解，若第二師各還自根，緣於自相，不名互用。《要集》云：舊相傳有三師：一、云一識通依六根，各取根所得自境；二、云：一識通緣六境，各依自根，境是共故，劣得通餘。一、云一識通依六根通緣六境，未詳決云：根、識不共，境即是共，不欲壞自根、識所行。若一識通依諸根，即壞根、識，故用他境，不用他根。今存未詳。今謂有餘。何者境是共取，本自共成？若不欲壞自根、識所行，通依諸根即壞根、識，故用他境不用他根者。今依自根取於餘境，不分離合得假實境，豈不猶有壞根、境失？以餘識根取餘境故，既不釋通，應依《樞要》。

The treatise: 'When one attains sovereignty, the sense faculties are used interchangeably.' The Pivotal Essentials (Zongyao) presents two explanations. Within the first master's view, there are themselves two interpretations: One says that each of the five consciousnesses is able to cognize all object-fields, all apprehending their own particular characteristics, without the fault of destroying faculties or objects. The reference to 'contact and separation' is stated in terms of the causal stage and does not obstruct the fruition stage, because sovereignty has been attained. Furthermore, just as the eighth consciousness, although cognizing all object-fields, apprehends their own particular characteristics without the fault of destruction, because at the fruition stage its substance possesses multiple functions. It is not that its substance transforms into the substance of other dharmas, so one cannot raise the objection: 'Seeing form is called the eye; should one also allow it to hear sounds and the like? That which produces is called a primary element; should form and the like also be able to produce?' The substance of the latter transforms into something different, whereas here it is a matter of function. If form could see, one might analogize that form could produce; the function of the eye that sees form is not a transformation of its substance. However, the Master of the Law's intention favored the second interpretation: according to the second master, each returns to its own faculty and cognizes its own particular characteristic, which is not called 'interchangeable use'. The Yaoji states: Traditionally, three masters are transmitted: One says that a single consciousness universally relies on the six faculties, each apprehending the own-object obtained by that faculty. The second says: a single consciousness universally cognizes the six objects, each relying on its own faculty; because the objects are shared, the inferior [faculty] can extend to the others. The third says that a single consciousness universally relies on the six faculties and universally cognizes the six objects. It has not been decided, saying: 'The faculties and consciousnesses are unshared, while the objects are shared; one does not wish to destroy the scope of action of one's own faculty and consciousness. If a single consciousness universally relied on all faculties, it would destroy faculty and consciousness; therefore, it utilizes other objects but does not utilize other faculties.' Now, this undecided view is maintained. Now I maintain that there is a remainder [of error]. Why? The objects are grasped in common and are fundamentally shared in their accomplishment. If, not wishing to destroy the scope of action of one's own faculty and consciousness, universally relying on all faculties would destroy faculty and consciousness, and thus one utilizes other objects without utilizing other faculties: now relying on one's own faculty to apprehend other objects, without distinguishing contact and separation, apprehending conventional and real objects, how could this not still have the fault of destroying faculties and objects? Because another consciousness's faculty apprehends another object. Since this has not been fully resolved, one should rely on the Pivotal Essentials (Zongyao).