成唯識論了義燈 4.95

4.95

Regarding the Śāstra's statement: "However, the Mahāyānasaṃgraha says that form may also have the equal-immediate condition, which is 'a statement of concession and refutation'": Explaining fascicle three of that treatise, it says: The Sautrāntikas hold such an attachment, that form and mind arise immediately. They claim that the sequential succession of various forms and minds arises continuously, and that being the seeds of all phenomena, they are the productive causal nature of all conditioned phenomena; that is, they hold that from the form of the preceding kṣaṇa, the form of the subsequent kṣaṇa arises immediately; and from the mind of the preceding kṣaṇa, the mind and associated dharmas of the subsequent kṣaṇa arise immediately (the above is the text of the śāstra). After refuting this, it concludes below: It should only be granted that they have the equal-immediate condition and the sovereign condition, but they have no causal condition. Now, pointing to this text, it is a concession to the Sautrāntika master that there is an equal-immediate [condition], while refuting his position that the preceding and subsequent serve as a causal condition. If so, why does the first fascicle of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha say: "Furthermore, the Sautrāntikas do not say that form alone is called a mental dharma, an equal-immediate condition. Because this is absent, the mind and mental dharmas definitely have four conditions"? The explanation of the text is as given in the commentary.