大乘法苑義林章 4.16

4.16

第五諸門者，於中有五：一三界、二五趣、三三性攝、四因果別、五問答。第一三界者，《顯揚》第一、《瑜伽》第五、《唯識》等皆言「由觸、思、識三種食故，一切三界有情安住。」段食一種，唯令欲界有情安住，欲界有眠及婬欲故，必資段食。餘界不爾。此依散境，定境通三界，至下當知。第二五趣者，《瑜伽》第六十六云「若麁段食，於欲界五趣中皆現可得，此於一分各別那落迦，非大那落迦。餘食通三界中皆現可得。」《瑜伽》第五云「於那落迦受生有情，有微細段食，謂腑藏間風。由此因緣，彼得久住。鬼、傍生、人、天有麁段食，謂作分段而食噉之，說之為麁。地獄風不爾，故名為細。復有微細食，謂住羯邏藍等位有情，及欲界諸天，由彼食已，所有段食流入一切身分支節，尋即消化無有便穢。」然五十七云「那落迦中無有段食，定地諸天亦復如是。」諸那落迦雖有廣大諸根大種損害因緣，而不能死者，彼卷次文自會之云「然彼亦有諸微細風，隨入身分以之為食。」難可了知，是故不說，故不相違。即顯四食遍五趣也。第三三性攝者，段食唯無記，散位三境其性定故，能造所造本性定故。法處三境若為食者，自識所變第八識境亦無記故。若依意境遠資長故，色無色繫是有漏者，是善性攝。若無漏者，親非資有，究竟為損，破裂有故，近可為食。義稍難知，此應思審。其觸、思、識通三性有，若取勝識食，唯無記性，即第八故。然通定散，定位思、觸、識皆能攝益故。第四因果別者，《對法》第五云：有四差別。一不淨依止住食、謂欲界異生由具縛故。《攝論》世親第十但言具縛，《對法》為勝，依有現種名具縛故。二淨不淨依止住食，謂有學及色無色異生有餘縛故。《攝論》言有學，雖同《對法》，異生中云「若生色無色界」，此義便狹，唯明三食非說段故，在下離欲攝不盡故。三清淨依止住食，謂阿羅漢解脫一切縛故。《攝論》文同。四示現依止住食，謂諸佛及已證大威德菩薩，由唯示現食力住故。《攝論》云「謂佛世尊示現受用段等四食。如來食時實不受食，亦不假食因食而生，然順世間示現受食，示現假食其身安住。」《對法》不約第四識食以明示現，故取菩薩。《攝論》具依四皆示現，故說唯佛。《唯識》亦因《攝論》所說，各望不同，不相違也。

Fifth, the various analytical categories: within this there are five: first, the three realms; second, the five destinies; third, subsumption under the three natures; fourth, the distinction between cause and fruit; fifth, questions and answers. First, regarding the three realms: fascicle 1 of the *Xianyang*, fascicle 5 of the *Yogācārabhūmi*, the *Cheng weishi lun*, and so forth all state: 'Through the three kinds of food—contact, volition, and consciousness—all sentient beings in the three realms abide.' Morsel food alone causes sentient beings of the desire realm to abide; because the desire realm has sleep and sexual desire, it must be sustained by morsel food. The other realms are not like this. This is based on sensory objects in distraction; meditative objects pervade the three realms, as will be known below. Second, regarding the five destinies: fascicle 66 of the *Yogācārabhūmi* says: 'Coarse morsel food is presently accessible in all five destinies of the desire realm; this is in a portion of the isolated hells, not in the great hells. The remaining foods are presently accessible throughout the three realms.' Fascicle 5 of the *Yogācārabhūmi* says: 'For sentient beings reborn in the hells, there is subtle morsel food, namely the wind between the internal organs. Due to this cause and condition, they can endure for a long time. Ghosts, animals, humans, and devas have coarse morsel food: that is, it is divided into portions and eaten, which is termed coarse. The wind of the hells is not like this, hence it is called subtle. There is also subtle food, namely for sentient beings abiding in stages such as the *kalala*, and the devas of the desire realm: once eaten by them, all morsel food flows into all parts and joints of the body and is immediately digested without excrement.' However, fascicle 57 says: 'In the hells there is no morsel food, and this is also the case for devas of the meditative stages.' Although beings in the hells encounter extensive causes and conditions that harm their faculties and primary elements, they cannot die; the subsequent text of that fascicle reconciles this itself, saying: 'However, they also have subtle winds that enter their bodily parts in succession and serve as their food.' Because this is difficult to perceive, it was not mentioned; hence they are not in contradiction. This shows that the four foods pervade the five destinies. Third, regarding subsumption under the three natures: morsel food is exclusively indeterminate; because the three objects in a distracted state have a fixed nature, and the primary elements that produce and are produced are intrinsically determinate in nature. If the three objects of the mental-object base serve as food, as objects of the eighth consciousness transformed by one's own consciousness, they are also indeterminate. If based on the mental object providing distant sustenance and nourishment, those bound to the form and formless realms that are contaminated are subsumed under the wholesome nature. If they are uncontaminated, they do not directly sustain existence, and ultimately act as damage because they shatter existence, but in the immediate term they can serve as food. The meaning is somewhat difficult to understand and should be carefully considered. Contact, volition, and consciousness exist throughout the three natures; if one takes the primary consciousness-food, it is exclusively of indeterminate nature, namely the eighth [consciousness]. Yet they pervade both concentration and distraction, because volition, contact, and consciousness in the state of concentration are all capable of providing sustenance. Fourth, regarding the distinction between cause and fruit: fascicle 5 of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* says that there are four distinctions: First, food of abiding based on an impure support, referring to ordinary worldlings in the desire realm because they possess all bondages. Fascicle 10 of Vasubandhu's *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* merely says 'possessing all bondages'; the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* is superior, because having both manifest activity and seeds is called possessing all bondages. Second, food of abiding based on a pure and impure support, referring to learners and ordinary worldlings of the form and formless realms because they have remaining bondages. The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* mentions learners, which is the same as the *Abhidharmasamuccaya*, but among ordinary worldlings it says 'if born in the form or formless realms'; this meaning is narrower, as it only clarifies the three foods and does not speak of morsel food, failing to fully subsume those below who have separated from desire. Third, food of abiding based on a pure support, referring to arhats because they are liberated from all bondages. The text of the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* is identical. Fourth, food of abiding based on a manifested support, referring to the Buddhas and bodhisattvas who have already realized great majestic power, because they abide solely through the power of manifested food. The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* says: 'The Buddha, the World-Honoured One, manifests the consumption of the four foods such as morsel food. When the Tathāgata eats, he does not actually receive food, nor does he rely on food or arise due to food; however, in conformity with the world, he manifests receiving food, manifesting that his body abides relying on food.' The *Abhidharmasamuccaya* does not explain manifestation with reference to the fourth consciousness-food, and therefore includes bodhisattvas. The *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* relies on all four being manifested, and thus says it is solely the Buddha. The *Cheng weishi lun* also follows what was taught in the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha*; their perspectives differ, so they are not in contradiction.