成唯識論演祕 6.398

6.398

有義兩釋。前七種識各各能熏彼七轉識，自相、見種在本識中。第八緣彼相、見分種為親所緣，即彼所緣由能熏引，故說能熏是彼所緣，雖現與種二相不同體，類同故。二云同《疏》，彼相、見種生八見、相是親所緣，能熏七識是疎所緣，是彼引故。如是二釋皆成所緣，然此後釋似義別言，實亦違理，引因與果不同世故。又依引種立命根故，此念熏已後念即能生，與彼相違故。設言隔身而能生故有緣義者，此亦不然，如此疎緣何成緣義？又第六於五、七，此義非無，何不說有？今准第六於五、七識亦有所緣，第六遍能熏五、七種，論不說者但略故也。諸人不說，乃說熏彼第八相、見，前後校行既許里數。

Another opinion provides two explanations: [First,] the previous seven kinds of consciousness each are capable of perfuming their own seven evolving consciousnesses' own nimitta- and darśana-seeds in the root consciousness. The eighth takes those seeds of the nimitta- and darśana-bhāga as its immediate cognitive object (pratyakṣālambana), and that cognitive object is induced by the perfuming [consciousnesses]; therefore, the perfuming [consciousnesses] are said to be its cognitive objects. Although the actual active state and the seed are two different forms, their essence and category are identical. Second, it says, in agreement with the Commentary: Those seeds of the nimitta- and darśana-bhāga produce the darśana and nimitta of the eighth [consciousness], which are its immediate cognitive objects, while the perfuming seven consciousnesses are the distant cognitive objects, because they induce them. Both of these two explanations establish [them as] cognitive objects. However, although this latter explanation seems to offer a distinct meaning, in reality it also contradicts principle, because the inducing cause and the fruit do not belong to the same lifetime. Furthermore, because the life faculty (jīvitendriya) is established based on the induced seeds, and once perfumed in this moment they are able to produce in the next moment, this contradicts that [view]. Even if one says that because they can produce across intervening lives there is the meaning of a condition, this too is incorrect; how could such a distant condition fulfill the definition of a condition? Furthermore, this meaning is not absent in the sixth with respect to the [first] five and the seventh; why is it not said to exist? Now, by deduction, the sixth consciousness also has an object-condition with respect to the five and seventh consciousnesses, for the sixth is universally capable of perfuming the seeds of the five and the seventh; that the Treatise does not mention it is merely an abbreviation. Other masters do not state this, but rather speak of perfuming those darśana and nimitta of the eighth, comparing actions before and after, thereby allowing for distance.