成唯識論演祕 5.392

5.392

答：宗計既殊，不煩和會。或外道執品類不一各敘一計，故《瑜伽》云：「或依天眼。」既置或言明計非一，且敘一也。《婆沙》等別，准此應知。不同，無失。《瑜伽》等論不言劫數，但略故爾。故〈第六〉云：如經廣說。故知略也。說餘見差，類此應悉。有義會云：《瑜伽論》等依《梵網經》，謂本計師說依定心，以伊師迦等本上古仙，由得五通，不如實知，而起計故。《毘婆沙論》依《阿含經》通本未計，說依散心，諸後學徒依先傳授，別起計故。二經影略，義無失故。

Answer: Since their doctrinal tenets differ, there is no need to harmonize them. Alternatively, the non-Buddhists' attachments are of diverse types, each describing one doctrine; hence the Yogācārabhūmi says: 'Or relying on the divine eye.' Having used the word 'or', it clarifies that the doctrines are not single, and merely describes one. Other differences in the Mahāvibhāṣā and elsewhere should be understood by analogy to this. Their being different is without error. That texts like the Yogācārabhūmi do not mention the number of kalpas is merely an abbreviation. Therefore, fascicle 6 says: 'As expounded at length in the sūtra.' Hence we know it is abbreviated. Other discrepancies in views should all be understood by analogy to this. There is also an interpretation harmonizing them: Treatises like the Yogācārabhūmi rely on the Brahmajāla-sūtra, referring to the original masters of these doctrines speaking on the basis of a concentrated mind; this is because ancient ṛṣis like Iṣika and others, having obtained the five superknowledges, gave rise to these doctrines through not knowing things as they truly are. The Mahāvibhāṣā relies on the Āgama-sūtra, covering both the root and branch doctrines, speaking on the basis of a distracted mind, because subsequent disciples gave rise to separate doctrines based on prior transmission. The two texts merely present complementary abridgments, so the meaning is without error.