大乘義章 8.75

8.75

次就三性分別諸界。善、惡、無記，是其三性。依如《成實》，五根、五塵及與五識一向無記，意根、意識及與法界該通三性。毘曇法中，眼等五根、香味觸塵一向無記，餘通三性。故彼論言「無記謂八種，餘則善不善。」意根、意識及與法界，善惡可知，何者是其色聲五識善惡之義？依如彼宗，善心禮拜讚歎等事，是善色聲；惡心發動身口二業，是惡色聲。五識地中緣善境界而生五識，判之為善；若緣可貪可瞋等境而生五識，判為不善。問曰：何故毘曇法中宣說色聲該通三性，成實法中唯說無記？釋言：《毘曇》身口二業是色聲性，故通三性。成實法中一切善惡皆在假中，實中則無。然彼論中，五塵唯實，不通假名，故無善惡。問曰：何故善之與惡唯在假中，不通實法？釋言：彼宗相續之中方有損益，一念無故。又問：五識毘曇法中說通三性，何故《成實》說唯無記？釋言：《毘曇》不立假義，宣說善惡皆在實中，是故一念五識之中得有善惡。《成實》善惡假中方有，五識唯實，故無善惡。又復《毘曇》，心法同時，五識心邊有善惡數，以王從數，故說善惡。成實法中，心獨不並，五識心起直了五塵，更無餘義，故無善惡。問曰：若使成實法中五識無記無善惡者，五識之心應非妙行。釋言：彼宗五識心體實非妙行，五識心後行中無過方名妙行。大乘所說，凡夫二乘與《毘曇》同；諸佛菩薩實報境界，根識唯善，塵通三性（此四門竟）。

Next is distinguishing the elements in terms of the three natures. Good, bad, and indeterminate are the three natures. According to the Tattvasiddhi, the five faculties, the five dust-objects, and the five consciousnesses are entirely indeterminate; the mental faculty, mental consciousness, and the element of phenomena extend through the three natures. In the Abhidharma system, the five faculties of eye and so forth, as well as scent, taste, and tangibility dust-objects, are entirely indeterminate, while the remainder extend through the three natures. Hence that treatise states, 'Eight kinds are called indeterminate; the rest are good and unvirtuous.' For the mental faculty, mental consciousness, and the element of phenomena, their good and bad nature is evident; what is the meaning of good and bad for visible form, sound, and the five consciousnesses? According to that school, prostrations, praises, and other such acts performed with a good mind are good form and sound; bodily and verbal karmas initiated with an evil mind are bad form and sound. In the domain of the five consciousnesses, when the five consciousnesses are generated by taking good objects as conditions, they are judged to be good; if the five consciousnesses are generated by taking objects of greed, hatred, and so forth as conditions, they are judged to be unvirtuous. Question: Why is it that in the Abhidharma system visible form and sound are stated to extend through the three natures, whereas in the Tattvasiddhi system they are stated to be only indeterminate? Explanation: In the Abhidharma, the two karmas of body and speech are by nature visible form and sound, and therefore extend through the three natures. In the Tattvasiddhi system, all good and bad exist only within the provisional, not within the real. However, in that treatise, the five dust-objects are purely real and do not extend to the provisional; therefore they have no good or bad. Question: Why is it that good and bad exist only within the provisional and do not extend to real dharmas? Explanation: In that school, it is only within a continuity that harm and benefit exist, because they do not exist in a single thought-moment. Another question: Why is it that while the five consciousnesses are stated in the Abhidharma system to extend through the three natures, the Tattvasiddhi states that they are only indeterminate? Explanation: The Abhidharma does not establish the principle of the provisional, stating that good and bad all reside within the real; therefore, good and bad can exist within the five consciousnesses in a single thought-moment. In the Tattvasiddhi, good and bad only exist within the provisional, and since the five consciousnesses are purely real, they have no good or bad. Furthermore, in the Abhidharma, mental dharmas are simultaneous: alongside the mind of the five consciousnesses there are good and bad mental associates, and because the king follows its associates, they are said to be good or bad. In the Tattvasiddhi system, minds are solitary and do not run together; when the mind of the five consciousnesses arises, it directly cognizes the five dust-objects without any further function, and therefore there is no good or bad. Question: If in the Tattvasiddhi system the five consciousnesses are indeterminate and have neither good nor bad, then the mind of the five consciousnesses should not be wondrous practice. Explanation: In that school, the essence of the mind of the five consciousnesses is indeed not wondrous practice; only when there is no fault in the actions following the mind of the five consciousnesses is it called wondrous practice. As for what the Mahāyāna teaches: for ordinary persons and the two vehicles, it is the same as the Abhidharma; in the realm of the true retribution of the buddhas and bodhisattvas, faculties and consciousnesses are purely good, while dust-objects extend through the three natures. (This concludes the fourth section.)