成唯識論演祕 6.76

6.76

詳曰：若八地去許第六識起有漏者，即第七識我執乃行，如何《瑜伽》言「八地等唯成轉識，不成賴耶」？若據多分，二乘無學應亦同之，同一句故。又《大般若》云「不退位得漏盡通」，以彼諸漏永不起故。若許更起，豈不違經？若據多分，即第七地應名漏盡及捨賴耶，多不起故。若云第七方八不及，亦應第八不如後地，應第九等方名捨執得漏盡通。若云第八是不退，故七不例者，既齊容有我執等行，亦應同七，不名不退。若依勝劣還第九等合名不退，由此定知不起有漏。《疏》會為善，今助一釋，《大般若》言「起欲界心」，通實及似；彼經但言菩薩能超諸等至等，不言唯是不退位故，故通諸地皆能超定，隨應真、似。《瑜伽》且據唯無漏者自在人說，亦不相違欲界心。

Examination: If from the eighth ground onward one allows the sixth consciousness to give rise to the defiled, then the seventh consciousness's self-grasping (ātmagrāha) would be active; how then could the Yogācārabhūmi state that 'the eighth ground and above are only constituted of the transforming consciousnesses (pravṛtti-vijñāna), and do not constitute the ālaya'? If this were based on the majority, the aśaikṣas of the two vehicles should also be the same, because it is the same phrase. Furthermore, the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra says 'at the non-retrogressing stage, one attains the abhijñā of the destruction of defilements (āsravakṣayābhijñā)', because those defilements never arise again. If one allows them to arise again, would that not contradict the sūtra? If based on the majority, then the seventh ground should be called 'destruction of defilements' and 'abandoning the ālaya', because for the most part they do not arise. If one says that the seventh ground is inferior when compared to the eighth, then the eighth should also be inferior to the subsequent grounds, and only the ninth and above should be called abandoning grasping and attaining the abhijñā of the destruction of defilements. If one says that the eighth is non-retrogressing so the seventh cannot serve as an analogy, since both equally admit the activity of self-grasping and so forth, [the eighth] should also be like the seventh and not be called non-retrogressing. If based on superiority and inferiority, again only the ninth and above ought to be called non-retrogressing. From this it is definitively known that defilements do not arise. The Commentary's harmonization is excellent. Now I offer an additional explanation: the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra's statement 'giving rise to a desire-realm mind' applies to both the real and the simulated. That sūtra only states that bodhisattvas are able to transcend all attainments and so on, and does not state that it is exclusively the non-retrogressing stage; therefore, across all grounds they are able to transcend concentrations, according to whether it is real or simulated. The Yogācārabhūmi is merely spoken from the standpoint of the person with mastery who is purely undefiled, so there is also no contradiction regarding the desire-realm mind.