大乘義章 8.33

8.33

次就三性分別五陰。言三性者，所謂善、惡、無記性也。依如《毘曇》，陰別有九，相從為三。所言九者，一生得善陰、二方便善陰、三無漏善陰、四不善五陰、五穢污五陰、六報生五陰、七威儀五陰、八工巧五陰。生得善者，一切眾生無始已來曾修善根，未起邪見斷滅已來，此善相續，生便得之，名生得善。生得善根，起身口業是其色陰，餘心法等為餘四陰。方便善者，於現在世，近友聞法、思惟修習，起諸善根，是方便善。於中所起身口二業是其色陰，餘心法等為餘四陰。問曰：方便與生得善同是現起，有何差別？釋言：此二分齊難知，但由宿習任性能起，是生得善；因他教化、聞法思惟，力勵起者，是方便善。無漏善者，遠離繫縛，合理相應，是無漏善，於中道共無漏律儀是其色陰，餘心法等為餘四陰。言不善者，一切無慚無愧俱者是不善陰，於中所起身口惡業是其色陰，餘四可知。問曰：善惡相對之法，善中得有生得方便，不善何故總說為一，不分二乎？釋言：齊類，理亦應然。但今為明惡法本來九品性成，非是方便進習始具，是故隱其方便之名。既隱方便，生得亦癈。又復善法難以頓成，須分上下令漸習故，說生得、方便之異；惡法易斷，總相厭離，是以不分生得、方便兩種之別。言穢污者，欲界地中身邊兩見，及上二界一切煩惱，能染污心，名為穢污。於中初禪穢污煩惱，能動身口，具五陰性。如彼梵王語諸梵眾：「汝但住此，我能令汝盡老死邊。」即是妄語；手牽黑齒，屏處求之，是身邪諂。此身與口是其色陰，餘心法等是餘四陰。欲界穢污是迷理惑，不能親發身口二業。二禪已上煩惱微細，不動身口；無色界中無身口業，一向不發，故無色陰，但有餘四。言報生者，過因所生眼等諸根，是其色陰，報心法等為餘四陰。言威儀者，身口進止是其色陰，起此心法為餘四陰。言工巧者，身營世務，口言分處，是其色陰，餘四可知。言變化者，依其通體，或化色身、或化口語，是其色陰。欲起化時，先作是念：「我今當作如是色像、如是語言。」以此起化心心數法，為餘四陰。問曰：化心與身通體為一異？釋言：是異。異相如何？變化心者是起化心，身通體者是起化力。又復化心是遠方便，身通體者親能起化。又復化心唯是無記，身通體者或時是善、或復無記。何故如是？通體有二：一是修慧、二是生慧。依定修得，是其修慧。天龍鬼等，不假習性能變現，是其生慧。是修慧者，體性唯善，與定相應，生慧無記。又復化心，或自地收、或他地攝。起自地化，即自地收；起他地化，則他地攝。論其通體，唯在自地。問曰：何不直依通體而起變化，別從化心而起化乎？雖有通體能起化事，若無化心終不起化，故須化心。問曰：若使要從化心而起化者，何須通體？若無通體，雖有化心，欲化前事終不能現，故復須之。問曰：化色為當正從化心而現？為當正從通體而發？釋言：化色正依通體、遠依化心。化心不能親動身口，是故必依通體化也。九陰如是。相從三者，初三是善、次一不善、後五無記，《毘曇》如是。成實法中，唯一行陰該通三性，餘皆無記。大乘所說，多同《毘曇》（此四門竟）。

Next, the five aggregates are differentiated according to the three natures. As for the three natures, they are the wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate natures. According to the Abhidharma, the aggregates are categorized into nine, grouped into three. What are the nine? First, the innate wholesome aggregates; second, the wholesome aggregates produced through expedient means; third, the untainted wholesome aggregates; fourth, the five unwholesome aggregates; fifth, the defiled five aggregates; sixth, the five aggregates born of retribution; seventh, the five aggregates of deportment; eighth, the five aggregates of craftsmanship; [ninth, the five aggregates of magical transformations]. As for innate wholesome [aggregates]: from beginningless time all sentient beings have cultivated wholesome roots; until they give rise to wrong views that cut them off, these wholesome [roots] continue in succession, obtained simply upon being born; hence they are named 'innate wholesome'. The innate wholesome roots give rise to bodily and vocal actions, which are their form aggregate; the remaining mental dharmas and so forth are the remaining four aggregates. As for the wholesome produced through expedient means: in the present life, one associates with good friends, listens to the Dharma, contemplates and cultivates it, and gives rise to various wholesome roots—these are the wholesome produced through expedient means. The bodily and vocal karma arisen within this is their form aggregate; the remaining mental dharmas and so forth are the remaining four aggregates. Question: The wholesome through expedient means and the innate wholesome are both active manifestations in the present; what is the difference? Explanation: The boundary between these two is difficult to know. However, that which is naturally capable of arising from past habituation is the innate wholesome; that which arises through exertion due to others' instruction, hearing the Dharma, and contemplation, is the wholesome produced through expedient means. As for the untainted wholesome: far removed from bonds, concordant with principle—this is the untainted wholesome. Within it, the untainted restraint that accompanies the Path is its form aggregate; the remaining mental dharmas and so forth are the remaining four aggregates. As for the unwholesome: all those that are associated with lack of shame and lack of remorse are unwholesome aggregates; the bodily and vocal unwholesome actions arisen within them are their form aggregate, and the remaining four can be known. Question: Wholesome and unwholesome are correlative dharmas; in the wholesome there are innate and expedient, so why is the unwholesome spoken of as a single whole, without being divided into two? Explanation: In terms of parallel categories, according to principle it should indeed be so. But now, in order to make clear that unwholesome dharmas are fundamentally composed of the nine grades by nature and are not newly perfected through gradual training by expedient means, the designation 'expedient means' is concealed. Since expedient means is concealed, the innate is also discarded. Furthermore, wholesome dharmas are difficult to accomplish all at once, and must be divided into superior and inferior to allow gradual cultivation; hence the difference between innate and expedient is spoken of. Unwholesome dharmas are easy to sever, and one is repelled by them universally; therefore the two distinctions of innate and expedient are not divided. As for the defiled: in the realm of desire, the view of the transitory collection (satkāyadṛṣṭi) and extreme views (antagrāhadṛṣṭi), as well as all afflictions of the two upper realms, are capable of polluting the mind; hence they are called 'defiled'. Among them, the defiled afflictions of the first dhyāna can motivate body and speech, possessing the nature of all five aggregates. For instance, when that Brahmā King told the multitude of Brahmās: 'Just stay here, and I can bring you to the end of aging and death,' that was false speech; taking the black-toothed woman by the hand to seek a secluded place was bodily deceit. This body and speech are its form aggregate, and the remaining mental dharmas and so forth are the remaining four aggregates. The defilements of the desire realm are delusions obscuring principle, and cannot directly initiate bodily and vocal actions. From the second dhyāna upwards, the afflictions are subtle and do not move body and speech; in the formless realm there is no bodily or vocal karma, which consistently does not arise, and therefore there is no form aggregate, but only the remaining four. As for the retribution-born: the various faculties of the eyes and so forth produced by past causes are their form aggregate; the retribution mental dharmas and so forth are the remaining four aggregates. As for deportment: the movements and stops of body and speech are their form aggregate; the mental dharmas giving rise to this are the remaining four aggregates. As for craftsmanship: the body engaging in worldly affairs and the mouth speaking assignments are their form aggregate; the remaining four can be known. As for magical transformation: relying on the substance of supernormal powers, either magically transforming a physical body or magically transforming speech is its form aggregate. When one wishes to initiate a transformation, one first conceives the thought: 'I shall now create such a physical image and such speech.' Taking this mind and the mental factors that initiate transformation as the remaining four aggregates. Question: Are the mind of transformation and the substance of the bodily supernormal power one or different? Explanation: They are different. What are their different characteristics? The transformation mind is the mind that initiates the transformation; the substance of the bodily supernormal power is the power that initiates the transformation. Furthermore, the transformation mind is a distant expedient, while the substance of the bodily supernormal power is capable of directly initiating the transformation. Furthermore, the transformation mind is exclusively indeterminate, while the substance of the bodily supernormal power is sometimes wholesome and sometimes indeterminate. Why is it like this? The substance of the supernormal power has two types: first, wisdom through cultivation; second, innate wisdom. Attained through cultivation relying on samādhi is wisdom through cultivation. Devas, nāgas, ghosts, and the like, who are capable of transforming and manifesting without needing to rely on habitual practice, are innate wisdom. That which is wisdom through cultivation is exclusively wholesome in its nature, being associated with samādhi; innate wisdom is indeterminate. Furthermore, the transformation mind is either subsumed under its own stage or belongs to another stage. When initiating a transformation of one's own stage, it is subsumed under one's own stage; when initiating a transformation of another stage, it is subsumed under that other stage. Regarding the substance of the supernormal power, it resides only in its own stage. Question: Why not directly rely on the substance of the supernormal power to initiate transformation, but separately initiate transformation from the transformation mind? Although there is the substance of the supernormal power capable of initiating transformative matters, without the transformation mind one will ultimately not initiate transformation; hence the transformation mind is required. Question: If one must rely on the transformation mind to initiate transformation, why is the substance of the supernormal power needed? If there were no substance of the supernormal power, even if there were a transformation mind, when one wishes to transform the object before oneself, it could ultimately never manifest; hence it is also required. Question: Does the transformed form manifest directly from the transformation mind, or does it issue directly from the substance of the supernormal power? Explanation: The transformed form relies directly on the substance of the supernormal power, and distantly on the transformation mind. The transformation mind cannot directly move body and speech; therefore it must rely on the substance of the supernormal power to transform. Such are the nine aggregates. When grouped into three: the first three are wholesome, the next one is unwholesome, and the latter five are indeterminate; thus it is in the Abhidharma. In the Tattvasiddhi teaching, only the single formations aggregate pervades all three natures, and the rest are all indeterminate. What the Mahāyāna explains mostly accords with the Abhidharma. (This finishes the fourth section).