成唯識論演祕 4.727

4.727

准《瑜伽》釋家總有三義：一云五識唯一剎那，五復不俱；二云雖一剎那五得俱起；三云五得俱起復多剎那；三皆不許五三性俱。有義：疏中唯依初難，今別解云：此中但依第二所說五性不俱，所以者何？且此論中，上下無說，五不俱生。又《瑜伽》等云：若起五識則七俱轉，如是等文諸師共了，如何說有五識不俱？又即此文說眼等識成善、染者必由意引，許五性俱六亦應爾，明知即許五識俱生。又第二難率爾、等流眼等五識，或多或少言容俱起，初師若其不許俱者，何故第二如是立難？

According to the commentators on the Yogācāra, there are altogether three views: The first says that the five consciousnesses exist for only a single moment, and the five do not occur together. The second says that although they last only a single moment, the five can arise simultaneously. The third says that the five can arise simultaneously and moreover endure for many moments. All three do not permit the five consciousnesses to co-occur with the three natures. Some say: 'The Commentary relies solely on the first refutation; now I explain differently: Here it relies only on what the second says, that the five natures do not occur together. Why is this? In this treatise, from beginning to end, there is no statement that the five consciousnesses do not arise simultaneously. Moreover, the Yogācāra and other texts state: "If the five consciousnesses arise, then all seven turn simultaneously"; such passages are mutually understood by the various masters—how could it be said that the five consciousnesses do not co-occur? Furthermore, this very text says that the eye and other consciousnesses becoming wholesome or defiled must be induced by the mental consciousness; if one allows the five consciousnesses to co-occur with different natures, the six consciousnesses should do so as well, which clearly shows that it allows the five consciousnesses to arise simultaneously. Moreover, the second master poses the challenge that in the immediate and outflow phases, the five consciousnesses—eye and so forth—"are admitted to co-arise, whether more or fewer"; if the first master did not allow them to co-arise, why would the second master formulate the objection like this?'