成唯識論了義燈 6.73

6.73

《論》：「由斯識等，亦說現行。」西明初云：相從假說，十二有支皆通種、現，云有支通現行者，却談業行，假說有支，由彼熏成有種子故。今謂不然，識等俱有支現，不約過說，據當生說。故知有支，約當起說，以五果種潤為有支，同行支故，何不據當却談過去？若云望生、老死，但識等五不通行故者，却談業行亦唯行支，無五果現。又此論云：故望當生現起，假說於理為勝。故《十地經》論云：十二支皆有子時、果時。子謂種位，果即現行。《緣起經》及此論，皆悉同故。

The Treatise states: 'Through this, consciousness and the others are also spoken of as active.' Ximing initially said: 'This is a nominal designation by association; the twelve branches of existence all apply to both seeds and active [states]. Saying that the branch of existence applies to active states is looking back to karmic formations and nominally designating them as the branch of existence, because seeds of existence are perfumed by them.' I now say this is not so: consciousness and the rest exist simultaneously with the active branch of existence, which is not stated in terms of the past, but in terms of future birth. Therefore we know that the branch of existence is stated in terms of future arising; since the seeds of the five results are moistened into the branch of existence, acting in the same way as the branch of formations, why not look back to the past based on the future? If it were said that in relation to birth and aging-and-death, only the five [branches] of consciousness and so forth do not apply to formations, then looking back to karmic formations would also only be the branch of formations, without the active states of the five results. Furthermore, this treatise states: 'Therefore, metaphorically speaking in relation to active arising in future birth is superior in principle.' Thus the Daśabhūmika-śāstra states: 'The twelve branches all have a seed time and a fruit time; seed refers to the stage of seeds, fruit is the active state.' The Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra and this treatise are both completely in agreement.