大乘法苑義林章 5.28

5.28

三大種所造者，五十四說「勝定果色，若依此繫定，即由此繫大種所造。」又說「此色勝定力故先起大種，然後造色變異而生。」又說「此色不依大種，然從緣彼種類影像三摩地發故，亦說彼大種所造。非依彼生，故名為造。」六十六云「問：世尊說有無見無對色。當言何等大種所造？答：若彼定心思惟欲界有色諸法，影像生起，當言欲界大種所造。思惟色界大造亦爾。」《顯揚論》十八說法處色有十二相，第五色相非實大生。雖此五文作諸異說，今詳造義莫過三種，由彼所緣親疎大種唯二類故。一者觸處，業等所生，本四大種。此通身根、身識、俱意、第八識境。二者法處定果大種，此唯定意第八識境，通或五識境。前通異熟長養等流，後非異熟。前唯欲色二界所繫，或通不繫；後通色界無色界繫及與不繫。五中初文依後大造，隨能緣定處所繫故。此言繫者，是攝屬義，非繫縛義。不爾，無漏應非大造，隨所攝屬何等，至中大種造故。前第二文義亦同此。謂由勝定，先變大種，後造色生，即隨能緣定地大造。隨定前因，及義說彼大種先起，實俱時故。此大通造三識之境。亦許定力先起定果本識等境大，後造生故。或此文說依初大造，定先擊起觸處大種，後造生故。前第三文依初大造，雖定亦變大種親生，初變色境要託觸處，法處方起，故說本質大種所造。定大種劣，不說依起。然非本大親實能生，親能生者定大種故。前第四文義亦同此，隨所思惟本大造故。《顯揚》意說：非實觸處大種親生，說非大造。非定中者，若初大種通三識境，大種皆能造後定果色，相依而有成造義故，是疎遠造，非親近造故。若後大造，通三識境，俱能為依起造色故，是親近造，非疏遠造。若依初造，或以下大種能造上色、或以有漏能造無漏、或以自處能造他處。若依後造，唯自類造，非他能造，唯以有漏能造有漏、唯以無漏能造無漏、唯以自處還造自處，皆唯自類，一切非他。設有諸處互造不同，據理尋文未踰此二，有義大造總應立三。亦有不依本質，定果得成造。故前初文說隨所繫定大種造者，此依依處大種所造。如依此處入彼定時，不杖本質，先定期心不變大種。彼所造色豈無大造？即隨所依床座等物，或所依身大種所造故，應別立第三依處。雖無加行，然以理攝即觸處大。二大種中初大種攝。神通勢力，如《瑜伽》六十二說「修之方便初起何身，異界相緣。」如是等義，如唯識疏別章等說。

3. Regarding that which is produced by the great elements: Fascicle 54 states, “Forms that are the fruition of superior concentration, if they depend on concentration bound to a given realm, are produced by the great elements bound to that realm.” It also states, “Due to the force of superior concentration, these forms first give rise to the great elements, after which the derived forms arise through transformation.” It further states, “These forms do not rely upon the [tangible] great elements; rather, because they arise from a samādhi that cognizes the image of their kind, they are also said to be produced by those great elements. It is not because they arise dependent on them that they are called ‘produced.’” Fascicle 66 says, “Question: The World-Honoured One spoke of form that is invisible and non-obstructive. By what great elements should it be said to be produced? Answer: If that concentrated mind reflects on material phenomena of the desire realm, and their image arises, it should be said to be produced by the great elements of the desire realm. The production by great elements when reflecting on the form realm is also like this.” Fascicle 18 of the *Xianyang lun* states that the form belonging to the dharmāyatana has twelve aspects, and the fifth form-aspect is not produced by real great elements. Although these five texts present various differing accounts, when examining the meaning of production now, it does not go beyond three kinds, because the immediate and distant great elements that serve as their objective support are of only two classes. First are the fundamental four great elements born of karma and the like within the tangible-sense-sphere (spraṣṭavyāyatana). These are common to the cognitive domains of the body faculty, body consciousness, the concurrent mental consciousness, and the eighth consciousness. Second are the great elements that are the fruition of concentration within the dharmāyatana. These are exclusively within the cognitive domain of the concentrated mental consciousness and the eighth consciousness, and may also be common to the domain of the five [sensory] consciousnesses. The former range over maturation (vipāka), nourishment (aupacayika), and outflow (niṣyanda); the latter is not maturation. The former are bound only to the desire and form realms, or may also extend to what is unbound; the latter extend to being bound to the form and formless realms, as well as being unbound. The first of the five passages is based on production by the latter great elements, following the realm to which the cognizing concentration is bound. Here, 'bound' means inclusion and attribution, not bondage [by defilement]. Otherwise, what is anāsrava would not be produced by great elements, for it is produced by great elements belonging to whatever stage it is subsumed under. The meaning of the second passage cited above is also the same as this: that is, by the power of superior concentration, the great elements are first transformed, and the derived forms arise subsequently—that is, produced by the great elements of the stage of concentration that cognizes them. According to the preceding causal conditions of concentration, and by way of conceptual explanation, those great elements are said to arise first, while in reality they are simultaneous. These great elements generally produce the objects of the three consciousnesses. It is also accepted that by the force of concentration, the great elements that are objects of the root consciousness and others as fruits of concentration arise first, after which the derived forms arise. Alternatively, this passage refers to production by the initial great elements, because concentration first stimulates the great elements of the tangible-sense-sphere, and derived forms arise subsequently. The third passage cited above refers to production by the initial great elements: although concentration also transforms great elements directly produced, when first transforming material objects, one must rely on the tangible sphere before the dharmāyatana can arise; therefore they are said to be produced by the primary great elements (the archetype). The great elements of concentration are weaker, so they are not said to arise dependent on them. However, it is not that the fundamental great elements can directly and genuinely produce them; what directly produces them are the great elements of concentration. The fourth passage cited above also shares this meaning: they are produced by the fundamental great elements according to what is contemplated. The intent of the *Xianyang [lun]* is to say that, because they are not directly produced by the real great elements of the tangible sphere, they are not produced by the great elements; it does not refer to those within concentration. If the initial great elements extend to the domains of the three consciousnesses, all these great elements can produce subsequent forms that are fruits of concentration, because the meaning of 'production' is established by their mutual dependence; this is mediate production, not immediate production. If it is production by the latter great elements, extending to the domains of the three consciousnesses, they can simultaneously serve as support to give rise to derived forms; this is immediate production, not mediate production. If based on the initial production, lower great elements can produce higher forms, sāsrava can produce anāsrava, or one's own sphere can produce another sphere. If based on the latter production, only their own kind produces them, not other kinds: only sāsrava can produce sāsrava, only anāsrava can produce anāsrava, and only one's own sphere produces its own sphere; they are all solely of their own category and never another. Even if there are different mutual productions in various places, investigating the texts according to reason does not exceed these two. There is an opinion that production by great elements should generally be established as threefold. There are also cases where fruition of concentration can be established as produced without relying on an archetype. Therefore, what the first passage above says—that they are produced by the great elements of the concentration to which they are bound—refers to being produced by the great elements of the physical base. For example, when entering that concentration while relying on this base, without relying on an archetype, the mind initially set on concentration does not transform great elements. Could the forms it produces lack production by great elements? They are produced by the great elements of the supporting seat, couch, or the physical body itself; therefore, a third category of physical base should be separately established. Although it lacks preliminary cultivation, reasonably speaking it is subsumed under the great elements of the tangible sphere. Among the two kinds of great elements, it is subsumed under the first. The dynamic power of supernormal faculties is as stated in Fascicle 62 of the *Yogācāra*: “As for the preliminary application of its cultivation, in which body does it first arise, and how do they mutually cognize across different realms?” Meanings such as these are as explained in the commentaries on the *Vijñaptimātratā* and separate chapters.