[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大乘法苑義林章](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861) › 3.8 # 大乘法苑義林章 3.8 大乘法苑義林章 3.8 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3.8) 同異大、造相望辨造者，初以類異大、造相望，後以即離大、造相望。類異大、造相望辨造者，《瑜伽》第三、五十四說「類異有三：一異熟類，此有二種：一業生，最初起者；二相續，初是總異熟、後是別異熟，或初是初剎那、後是後時者。二長養類，此亦有二：一處寬遍，飲食睡眠，梵行等至之所長養；二相增盛，亦由食故，彼所依故，修勝作意故，長時淳熟故，云所長養。三等流類，此有四種：一異熟等流；二長養等流，即前二類皆等流故；三變異等流；四本性等流。異熟、長養二種不攝，皆後二故。五根唯有異熟、長養，離此二外無別等流。」此依三類體別而說，非根諸色具有三類。或此不說聲界，聲非異熟故。除法處色，彼唯長養及等流故，離根諸色亦無異熟。於前色中具三類者，具二異熟、二種長養、四種等流。無三類者，五內色根具二異熟及二長養，法處諸色有後長養、無處寬遍，有後三等流、無是異熟者。諸心、心所雖具三類，無初長養。色界諸蘊，除由段食睡眠，梵行之所長養。三界長養皆通等持。內外聚中，隨應或有三二一類大種造色，隨應說彼一切大種造一切色，相依而有是造義，故非辨體。故五十四說「依大種處有造色生，說名為造。又此聚中有彼大種所造可得，當知此中即有彼法。」故諸大種同聚所有一切造色相依有者，皆可名造。互得造義，非定屬義。理異小乘，不應別釋。此中或可大、造種子本性各異，後生現行各依自類。自類大種不生現行，此類造種終不生造，故自類造。此亦不然。相依而有說名為造，故同聚中所有大、造相依有者，隨應皆造。前說為善。即離大種相望辨造者，謂所造色與大種處不相離者，名即質造。若所造色與大種處體相離者，名離質造。五十四說「離輪光明、大種香等皆不可得。離質光、香及與聲等，即以發處四大所造。」無居處所依，故言不可得。諸律儀戒，《顯揚論》說依不現行法建立色性，皆以所防欲界惡，戒大種所造。不律儀戒，《顯揚論》說依現行法建立色性，即以所發惡身語色大種所造，名離質造。所餘皆名不相離造。其極略、極逈、隨本質大、可名即質及離質造。遍計所起亦爾。無色界無表及佛身無表、以何大造？應以過去自身所有能造惡戒大種所造，義名懸造，如〈無表章〉。 > Regarding distinguishing creation by comparing identical and different great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\]: first, the great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\] are compared by category difference, and next, the great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\] are compared by identity and separation. In comparing great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\] by category difference, the third and fifty-fourth fascicles of the Yogācārabhūmi state: "There are three category differences: (1) the maturation category, which has two kinds: \[a\] born of karma, which arises initially; \[b\] continuous, the former being general maturation and the latter being specific maturation, or the former being the initial moment and the latter being the later time; (2) the nourishing category, which also has two kinds: \[a\] spatial expansion, nourished by food, drink, sleep, and the attainments of the holy life; \[b\] increase in strength, which is also said to be nourished due to food, due to its basis, due to cultivating superior mental engagement, and due to long-term maturation; (3) the homogeneous-flow category, which has four kinds: \[a\] maturation homogeneous flow; \[b\] nourishing homogeneous flow, because the preceding two categories are both homogeneous flow; \[c\] transformative homogeneous flow; \[d\] original-nature homogeneous flow. The two kinds, maturation and nourishing, do not encompass \[all\], because the remainder are all the latter two. The five sense faculties have only maturation and nourishing; apart from these two, there is no other homogeneous flow." This is stated according to the difference in substance among the three categories; non-faculty material forms possess all three categories. Or this does not speak of the sound element, because sound is not maturation. Excluding dharmāyatana matter, because that is exclusively nourishing and homogeneous flow, matter apart from the faculties also lacks maturation. Among the aforementioned material forms, those possessing all three categories possess two maturations, two kinds of nourishment, and four kinds of homogeneous flow. Those lacking all three categories: the five internal material faculties possess two maturations and two nourishments; dharmāyatana material forms have the latter nourishment but lack spatial expansion, and have the latter three homogeneous flows but lack that which is maturation. Although minds and mental factors possess all three categories, they lack the initial nourishment. The aggregates of the form realm exclude nourishment by material food, sleep, and the holy life. Nourishment in the three realms all extends to samādhi. Within internal and external aggregations, as appropriate there may be three, two, or one category of great elements and derived matter; as appropriate, it is said that all those great elements create all material forms, because existing in mutual dependence is the meaning of creation, not producing the substance. Therefore, the fifty-fourth fascicle states: "Because derived matter arises depending on the place of the great elements, it is called creation. Moreover, in this aggregation, that which is created by those great elements is found; one should know that in this \[aggregation\] there is precisely that dharma." Therefore, all derived matter existing in mutual dependence within the same aggregation of the great elements can all be called created. Mutually obtaining the meaning of creation is not a matter of fixed assignment. Since the principle differs from the Hīnayāna, it should not be explained otherwise. Here, alternatively, the seeds of the great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\] might each differ in original nature, and in subsequently producing active \[dharmas\], each depends on its own kind. If great elements of its own kind do not produce active \[dharmas\], derived seeds of this kind will never produce derived \[matter\]; hence they are created by their own kind. This is also not correct. Existing in mutual dependence is called creation; therefore, all great \[elements\] and derived \[matter\] existing in mutual dependence within the same aggregation, as appropriate, all create. The former explanation is superior. Distinguishing creation by comparing contiguous and separated great elements: when derived matter is not separated from the place of the great elements, it is called creation contiguous with the substance. When derived matter is separated in substance and place from the great elements, it is called creation separated from the substance. The fifty-fourth fascicle states: "Light apart from the disk, and the great elements' fragrance and the like, are all unobtainable. Light, fragrance, sound, and the like separated from the substance are created precisely by the four great \[elements\] of the place of emission." Because there is no abiding support, it says they are unobtainable. Regarding moral restraints, the Xianyang lun says that material nature is established on the basis of non-active dharmas, and they are all created by the great elements of the unwholesome restraint of the desire realm that is prevented. Regarding non-restraint, the Xianyang lun says that material nature is established on the basis of active dharmas, and it is created precisely by the great elements of the unwholesome bodily and vocal matter that is emitted; this is called creation separated from the substance. The remainder are all called non-separated creation. The extremely reduced, the extremely distant, and what follows original material matter may be called contiguous and separated creation. What arises from conceptual construction is also like this. By what great \[elements\] are the non-manifestations of the formless realm and the non-manifestations of the Buddha's body created? They should be created by the great elements capable of creating unwholesome restraints possessed by one's own past body; this is called distant creation, as in the chapter on non-manifestation. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 3.7](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3.7) - [Next: 3.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3.9) - [Up: 3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861~en-mt.3.8) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1861.3.8) · Pramāṇa