大乘義章 8.61

8.61

第二門中辨其體性。眼等五根，淨色為體。依如《毘曇》，四大所造淨色為體。若依《成實》，四大所成假色為體。問曰：四大既無增減，云何成根五種各別？釋言：四大所成法爾。如外四大雖無增減，而其所成粟麥豆等各各差別。又由業故，成根差別。有業能生一種四大集成眼根能見於色，乃至有業生一四大集成身根能覺於觸，如施燈明得其眼根，施鍾鈴等得其耳根，如是一切。問曰：若使由業能見乃至能覺，何用根乎？釋言：雖復有業為因，必藉根緣。如穀雖復由業而得，必藉種子，此亦如是。次辨意入。以心為體。依如《毘曇》，一切六識能生後義，悉是意根，齊名意入。自餘一切想受行等，以前生後，皆非意入，法入收故。問曰：若使一切六識能生後義悉是意根，所生六識通得名為意識以不？論自解釋「依有二種：一者共依，六識共依意根而生。二不共依，六識之心各別依根。望其共依，同名意識。望不共依，眼等五識各別受名，不名意識。」若依《成實》，義釋有三：一通相以論，一切四心以前生後，悉是意根，同名意入。從前生義，齊名意識，法入所收。二簡別五識，除生五識，自餘一切識想受行，以前生後，悉是意入。據此一門，五識已前次第滅心，是法入收，非是意入。三對別名意識以明意入，識想受行四心之中，局唯分取行末之心生意識者以為意入，餘者皆是法入所攝。大乘所說，與《毘曇》同。內入如是。次辨外入。色等五塵，以色為體。依如《毘曇》，四大所造色聲香等，以為五塵。成實法中，四大所因色香味觸，以為四塵，四大相擊便有聲發，是則四塵是四大因，聲是大果。五塵如是。次辨法入。法入寬通，除前十一，自餘一切有為無為悉是法入。體性如是。

In the second section, their essential nature is distinguished. The five faculties of the eye and so forth have subtle form (rūpaprasāda) as their essence. According to the Abhidharma, subtle form derived from the four great elements serves as their essence. According to the Tattvasiddhi, conventional form produced by the four great elements serves as their essence. Question: Since the four great elements have neither increase nor decrease, how do they form five distinct kinds of faculties? Explanation: It is the natural law (dharmatā) of what is formed by the four great elements. Just as the external four great elements have neither increase nor decrease, yet what they form—millet, wheat, beans, and so forth—are individually distinct. Furthermore, through karma, distinct faculties are formed: there is karma that can produce one kind of the four great elements that gather together to form the eye faculty able to see visible form, down to karma that produces one kind of the four great elements that gather together to form the body faculty able to feel tangibles. For instance, giving lamplight one obtains the eye faculty, and giving bells and chimes one obtains the ear faculty, and so on for all of them. Question: If seeing down to feeling are enabled by karma, what need is there for the faculties? Explanation: Although karma serves as the cause, it necessarily relies on the conditions of the faculties. Just as grain, although obtained through karma, necessarily relies on seed, this is also like that. Next is distinguishing the mind base. It takes consciousness (citta) as its essence. According to the Abhidharma, all six consciousnesses, in their capacity to give rise to subsequent states, are the mind faculty and are equally called the mind base. All other [factors such as] conception, sensation, formations, and so forth, in giving rise from earlier to later, are not the mind base, because they are subsumed under the mental phenomena base. Question: If all six consciousnesses in their capacity to give rise to subsequent states are the mind faculty, can the six consciousnesses that are produced all be called 'mental consciousness' (manovijñāna) or not? The treatise itself explains: 'There are two kinds of reliance: First, common reliance: the six consciousnesses commonly rely on the mind faculty to arise. Second, uncommon reliance: the minds of the six consciousnesses each rely on distinct faculties. With respect to their common reliance, they are all equally called mental consciousness. With respect to their uncommon reliance, the five consciousnesses of the eye and so forth each receive distinct names, and are not called mental consciousness.' According to the Tattvasiddhi, there are three interpretations: First, discussed in general terms: all four minds (consciousness, conception, sensation, and formations), in giving rise from earlier to later, are all the mind faculty and are equally called the mind base. In the sense of giving rise from what preceded, they are equally called mental consciousness, and are subsumed under the mental phenomena base. Second, distinguishing the five consciousnesses: apart from giving rise to the five consciousnesses, all other consciousness, conception, sensation, and formations, in giving rise from earlier to later, are all the mind base. According to this single approach, the minds that sequentially perish prior to the five consciousnesses are subsumed under the mental phenomena base, not the mind base. Third, explaining the mind base in contrast to the specific name 'mental consciousness': among the four minds of consciousness, conception, sensation, and formations, one specifically and restrictively takes the mind at the end of formations that gives rise to mental consciousness as the mind base; all the rest are subsumed under the mental phenomena base. What the Mahāyāna explains is the same as the Abhidharma. Such are the internal bases. Next is distinguishing the external bases. The five dusts of visible form and so forth take form as their essence. According to the Abhidharma, visible form, sound, odor, and so forth derived from the four great elements serve as the five dusts. In the system of the Tattvasiddhi, visible form, odor, taste, and tangibles, which serve as the causes of the four great elements, constitute four dusts; when the four great elements strike against each other, sound is then emitted; thus, the four dusts are the causes of the four great elements, and sound is an effect of the great elements. Such are the five dusts. Next is distinguishing the mental phenomena base. The mental phenomena base is broad and comprehensive: excluding the preceding eleven, all other conditioned and unconditioned [dharmas] are the mental phenomena base. Such is their essential nature.