[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [成唯識論演祕](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833) › 6.259 # 成唯識論演祕 6.259 成唯識論演祕 6.259 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [6.259](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6.259) 詳曰：心帶境相據展轉言，非疏不許，故前疏云：緣生於誰？誰帶己相？謂心相應明心帶境。若云疏據親所緣者，在疏無文，又疏科云「初釋出體」，豈初段中疏主不許通疎親緣？以此故知，疏主許心帶境相也。今言影像是帶質者，帶謂狹帶親附之義。依此義言，云「相帶質」，見望本質隔相疎遠，故不言之。由斯前後望義不同，理無有失。今又解者，「帶」有二義：一、帶者，挾帶親附之義，能緣親附所緣之境而不相離，名為「挾帶」，而猶世言「身佩釰」矣；二、帶者，似也，能緣有似本質之相，相即相分，心質相離，名為「帶似」，亦若世言「面帶火」也。雖境望心近遠不同，然心對彼總得名帶，如次名為二所緣緣，心因親疎二境起故，故論總中言帶己相，心或相應不遮何相，別中方說能、所二緣不離、相離。由斯不假據展轉說方名為帶，智者思之。 > Evaluation: That the mind bears the aspect of the object is stated in terms of an indirect sense, which the Commentary does not disallow. Thus the earlier Commentary says: 'To what does the condition give rise? What bears its own aspect?' This refers to mind and mental factors, making clear that the mind bears the object. If one says that the Commentary speaks only based on the direct objective condition, there is no textual basis in the Commentary; moreover, the outline of the Commentary states 'First, explaining the substantial nature'—could it be that in the initial section the author of the Commentary did not allow it to apply commonly to both distant and direct conditions? From this we know that the author of the Commentary accepted that the mind bears the aspect of the object. Now, when it is said that the reflection bears the mūla-dharmin, 'bearing' has the meaning of carrying closely and adhering directly. According to this meaning, it is said that 'the nimitta bears the mūla-dharmin'; the darśana is separated from the mūla-dharmin by the nimitta and is distant, hence it is not spoken of in this way. Because of this, the perspectives before and after differ, and there is no error in principle. Now, to explain it in another way: 'bearing' (dài) has two meanings: First, bearing means carrying closely and adhering directly; the apprehending factor adheres directly to the apprehended object without separation, which is called 'carrying closely', just as the world speaks of 'the body carrying a sword'. Second, bearing means resembling; the apprehending factor possesses an aspect resembling the mūla-dharmin, the aspect being the nimitta-bhāga, and when mind and mūla-dharmin are separate, this is called 'bearing resemblance', just as the world speaks of 'the face bearing fire \[a flushed complexion\]'. Although the distance of the object relative to the mind differs, the mind in relation to them can generally be said to 'bear' them, and in corresponding order they are called the two objective conditions, because the mind arises depending on the two objects, direct and distant. Therefore, in the general statement of the treatise, it says 'bears its own aspect', and for the mind or its associates it does not exclude any aspect; only in the specific \[explanation\] does it state that the apprehending and apprehended conditions are unseparated or separated. Thus, one does not need to rely on speaking indirectly to call it 'bearing'; let the wise reflect on this. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 6.258](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6.258) - [Next: 6.260](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6.260) - [Up: 6](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833~en-mt.6.259) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6.259](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1833.6.259) · Pramāṇa