大乘法苑義林章 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.24 — 5 parts
3.29 — 3 parts

3.2

Chapter on Matter Derived from the Great Elements

Matter derived from the great elements is comprehensively analyzed through six sections: first, discerning its substance; second, explaining the names; third, clarifying the characteristics of derivation through the five causes such as production; fourth, discerning the derivation by the elements relying on causes and conditions; fifth, discerning derivation by contrasting the shared and distinct derivation by the elements; sixth, analysis through questions and answers.

3.4

Regarding the discernment of substance: The Lokāyata non-Buddhists do not separately establish primary causes of derivation and derived matter; both are the four great elements, yet their nature is eternal, and there is no other distinct entity. In Vaiśeṣika, the four great elements are substance categories (dravya-padārtha), possessing obstruction, and generally common to the eternal and the impermanent. The visual faculty is fire; the auditory faculty is space; the olfactory faculty is earth; the gustatory faculty is water; the tactile faculty is wind. Visible form, taste, odor, tangible, and sound are subsumed under the quality category (guṇa-padārtha), but are unobstructed. Sound and odor are solely impermanent; the remainder are common to the eternal and the impermanent. The four kinds such as visible form are qualities of the four great elements; the four great elements are not the primary causes of derivation, and visible form and so forth are not derived matter. Earth possesses visible form, taste, odor, and tangible; water possesses visible form, taste, odor, and tangible; fire possesses visible form and tangible; wind possesses only tangible. Sound is a quality of space, not a quality of the four great elements. The Sāṃkhya masters say: The five kinds such as visible form are called the five subtle elements (tanmātra); they are the primary causes that derive earth, water, and so forth. Only then do earth, water, and so forth derive the five faculties such as the visual faculty. Although the primary causes of derivation and the derived matter are both impermanent, they are not of the nature of arising and ceasing, but rather of transformation-impermanence, and all possess obstruction. However, there is distinct derivation, and there is also shared derivation. The Śabdika masters say: Sound alone is eternal; the remaining four great elements, the faculties such as the visual faculty, and visible form, taste, odor, and tangible are all impermanent. Sound is either eternal as manifested or eternal as produced. The Mahāsāṃghika school says: The four great elements are the primary causes of derivation, and the four sense data (viṣaya) are the derived matter. There are no separate five faculties, because they are identical with the four sense data. Both are common to sāsrava and anāsrava, since they are acknowledged to exist in the Buddha. The Tattvasiddhi-śāstra says: The four sense data are the primary causes of derivation, deriving the four great elements; the four great elements constitute the five faculties. The five faculties are solely derived matter; the four sense data are solely the primary causes of derivation. The four great elements are common to both. Sound is also solely derived matter. The Sarvāstivāda masters hold: The four great elements are the primary causes of derivation, solely sāsrava and possessing obstruction, subsumed under the tangible base (spraṣṭavyāyatana). The five faculties, the five sense data, and the unmanifest matter (avijñapti-rūpa) of the dharma base are the derived matter. The five faculties and five sense data all solely possess obstruction and are solely sāsrava. The unmanifest matter of the dharma base is said to be common to anāsrava and is subsumed under the unobstructed. All are substantially existent (dravyasat). The Sautrāntika masters say: Although both the primary causes of derivation and the derived matter possess obstruction, both are common to the nominal and the real. Atoms (paramāṇu) are real; coarse matter is nominal; all are sāsrava. Unmanifest matter is nominally established; in the dharma base there is no matter, and they do not accept that the aggregate of matter includes unmanifest matter. The Prajñaptivāda school says: The primary causes of derivation and the derived matter, whether coarse or subtle, are all substantial in substance within the context of the aggregates, because their meaning is an accumulation, while their substance is not an accumulation. Within the context of elements and bases, both are nominal, because both the support and the objective support are accumulations in substance. They are common to sāsrava and anāsrava. The Ekavyāvahārika school says: The primary causes of derivation and the derived matter have only a name and possess no real substance whatsoever. The Lokottaravāda school says: Among the primary causes of derivation and the derived matter, those that are sāsrava are entirely nominal, because they arise from perversion; those that are anāsrava are entirely real, because they are not produced from perversion. Now, relying on the Mahāyāna: The tangible base and the dharma base both contain great elements, owing to the difference between the distracted and concentrated [states]. Derived matter is common across eleven bases. The great elements and derived matter, as appropriate, are both subsumed under the two natures of paratantra and pariniṣpanna. Among the five dharmas, they are included within the two dharmas of sign (nimitta) and correct knowledge (samyag-jñāna). They are common to sāsrava and anāsrava, and to the wholesome and indeterminate natures. Sāsrava great elements and derived matter definitely belong to paratantra; anāsrava great elements and derived matter are also subsumed under both pariniṣpanna and paratantra. Sāsrava derived matter is solely of indeterminate nature; its nominal nature is common to the three [moral natures]. Therefore fascicle sixty-four of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "The manifest matter of color and sound is nominally common to the wholesome and unwholesome, but substantially it is solely indeterminate. Since unmanifest matter is nominal, it is admitted to be common to the wholesome and unwholesome. Anāsrava great elements and derived matter are all solely wholesome. The great elements are solely real, while derived matter is common to the nominal."

3.5

Regarding the explanation of names, the third fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Because the nature of these great elements is great, and because they produce like seeds, they are called 'great elements' (mahābhūta). 'Great' has four meanings: First, because they serve as support, being the locus of support for all derived matter. Second, because their essential nature is expansive, their essential nature being broader and more extensive than that of derived matter. Third, because their physical forms are great, the shapes and manifestations of the great earth, great water, great fire, and great wind being great. Fourth, because they generate great functions, their functions in the formation and destruction of worlds being great. 'Element' (dhātu / bīja) means 'cause', or it means 'class'. This is because these four can serve as the five causes—generation and so forth—to give rise to diverse forms of matter, and because their categories and classes are distinct. Although empty space is great, it cannot serve as a cause. Although internal seeds and the like can serve as causes, their substance and characteristics are not great. All remaining phenomena are neither great nor seeds." Because earth and the others are thus both great and elements, they are called "great elements" (mahābhūta)—this is a karmadhāraya compound. If one speaks of the "four great elements", "four" is a numerical designation, which is a dvigu compound. Regarding the term "derived matter" (upādāya-rūpa), the fifth fascicle of the Xianyang shengjiao lun states: "It means that depending on the great elements, other derived matter is produced in the very locus of the great elements. Due to this cause, the four great elements are said to construct the constructed matter; the constructed is itself matter." The fifty-fourth fascicle states: "It means that holding and maintaining them in the same locus is named 'constructing'." The constructed being itself matter is named as a karmadhāraya compound. "Matter constructed by the great [elements]" is designated as a tatpuruṣa compound. Regarding specific names: the meaning of solidity is the meaning of earth; the meaning of flowing moisture is the meaning of water; the meaning of warmth and heat is the meaning of fire; the meaning of lightness and movement is the meaning of wind. Earth being itself great, up to wind being itself great, are all karmadhāraya compounds. The specific names of derived matter will be explained in their respective sections.

3.6

Regarding distinguishing construction by means of the five causes of generation and so forth, the first fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "'Derived' means having the four great elements as the causes of generation, dependence, maintenance, holding, and nourishment." That is, based on the five causes it is said to be "constructed". As for the cause of generation (janana-hetu), it is the cause of arising; that is, because matter does not arise apart from the great elements. Although all derived matter arises from its own seeds, if apart from the great elements it certainly cannot arise. Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi raises a question: "If all phenomena arise from their own seeds, why say that the great elements can generate the various forms of matter, and so forth up to nourishing them?" It answers itself: "Because the seeds of all internal and external great elements and derived matter all adhere to the internal continuous mind. Before the seeds of the great elements generate the great elements, the seeds of derived matter can never generate [derived matter]. It requires the seeds of the great elements to first generate the great elements, and only then do the seeds of derived matter generate derived matter. Because they serve as the vanguard, they are said to be able to generate, and are thus called the cause of generation." Fascicle sixty-six states the same. Now one should ask: If so, since the prātimokṣa discipline and the vows concomitant with concentration and the path are separate from the great elements, they should not be able to arise. [Answer:] These are called matter in accordance with the bodily activities undertaken and the evils prevented, and they are also metaphorically said to be constructed by the great elements in accordance with these two. Non-separation has two senses: first, necessarily being in the same locus; second, necessarily depending upon [them]. Prātimokṣa vows and the like necessarily depend upon the great elements to arise, and though not necessarily in the same locus, this is also called non-separation. Sound and light separated from their source material are also like this. Fascicle fifty-four of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Matter resulting from superior concentration depends only on superior concentration; it does not depend on the great elements." How does one resolve this? It explains itself: "Yet because it is produced from samādhi taking those types of images as objects, it is said to be constructed by the great elements; it is not called constructed because it arises depending upon them." The "Section on Matter of the Dharmāyatana" will present this in detail. Or furthermore, the five causes do not pervade all cases, just as light separated from a orb of light lacks the cause of dependence. As for the cause of dependence (niśraya-hetu), the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "It is the cause of transformation; that is, if abandoning the great elements, derived matter has no capability to occupy a different place. All derived matter can only arise by relying on the great elements; therefore, if abandoning the great elements, it has no other place to abide." Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Because after derived matter has arisen, it operates without departing from the locus of the great elements, it is called the cause of dependence." If so, why does fascicle fifty-four say that in light separated from its orb, the great elements, odor, and the like are all unobtainable? Now, the cause of dependence is distinguished based on matter coincident with the source material; light and the like separated from the source material have no meaning of the cause of dependence, so there is no contradiction. Or some say: That light also has the construction by the great elements, because wherever there is light, there is construction by the great elements. This explanation is not correct. When sound and odor are separated from their source material, by what great elements are they constructed? Therefore, the previous explanation is good. As for the cause of maintenance (pratiṣṭhā-hetu), it is the cause of following transformation. Because when the great elements undergo change, the derived matter relying upon them undergoes change accordingly. The constructor and the constructed must share security and peril; therefore, when the great elements change, derived matter changes accordingly. Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Because of the harm and benefit to the great elements, they share the same security and peril." After prātimokṣa vows continuously arise, if manifest action undergoes change, how can they continue? Some say: At later times, that which they depend on still exists, hence they do not change. As for the true meaning, this is construction by the great elements in accordance with the bodily activities undertaken and the evils prevented. If not, the concentration and path-concomitant vows in the formless realm, having no locus of support, would lack this cause. If so, what is prevented has long since been eliminated, and since there is no constructor, there should be no cause of maintenance; one cannot say it is called matter because it prevents others, taking another's four great elements to construct one's own non-manifest [action]. This is only a remote antidote to them, and is nominally called "constructed" because it belongs to a past category; non-manifest actions from the second dhyāna and above are all like this. A treatise says that it prevents others, and is constructed by another's four great elements. This meaning is incorrect. Because it is not in the past, and what is prevented cannot be obtained, it would not be an antidote. It is nominally called matter and metaphorically called constructed because it is a remote antidote, so there is no fault. Remotely preventing one's own past evil vows means that the present matter is constructed from past great elements; or non-manifest vows and the like lack the meaning of the cause of maintenance, because only real matter coincident with the source possesses the cause of maintenance. If one takes the great elements of the supported body as the constructor, a noble one in the formless realm would have no non-manifest action, which would not be Mahāyāna, and would also contradict the Xianyang shengjiao lun where all morality matter is established as physical nature on the basis of non-manifest phenomena; therefore, it is construction by the great elements in accordance with what is prevented. As for the cause of holding (upastambha-hetu), it is the cause of abiding. That is, because of the great elements, derived matter arises in a similar continuity, held so as not to be interrupted. The continuous arising of derived matter is due to the holding power of the great elements; if not, derived matter would be interrupted. Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Because it does not deteriorate in equal measure with the great elements, it is called the cause of holding." Furthermore, sound and light vary in size; why only speak of not deteriorating in equal measure? The Abhidharmasamuccaya speaks of the cause of holding generally in terms of the whole, while the Yogācārabhūmi speaks this way in terms of a small portion, because it is spoken in terms of derived matter coincident with the source. Or what the Yogācārabhūmi calls "not deteriorating in equal measure" does not mean that the two quantities—the great elements and the constructed—are equal; "equal" means similar before and after. The former explanation is good. As for the cause of nourishment (upabṛṃhaṇa-hetu), it is the cause of growth. That is, because the great elements nourish that derived matter, causing it to increase and grow. Due to the direct nourishment by the great elements, derived matter increases and grows. Either growth is itself the cause, or it is the cause of growth, hence it is called the cause of growth. Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi states: "Due to the causes of food and drink, sleep, and the practice of brahmacarya, samādhi, and so forth, derived matter relying upon them becomes doubly augmented and expanded; therefore, the great elements are said to be their cause of nourishment." That which can nourish derived matter has causes and conditions: the great elements are the nourishing cause, and those are the nourishing conditions; each relies on one explanation, so they do not contradict each other. Furthermore, due to those conditions, the great elements are nourished first, causing derived matter to increase, so there is no fault. Or those are causes that generally nourish all phenomena, including the great elements, derived matter, mind, and mental factors. These are specific causes that nourish only derived matter; because the nature of derived matter is dull and not like mind and the like, it relies on two kinds of nourishment, whereas mind and the like do not. Fascicle fifty-four asks: "All conditioned phenomena arise from their own seeds; how can it be said that the great elements construct what is constructed? Because when they undergo change, [the constructed] undergoes change; and because they are established and sustained by them." The fifth fascicle of the Xianyang shengjiao lun states: "It means that depending on the great elements, other derived matter is gathered in one place, which is called constructed by the great elements." This meaning shows that existing in mutual dependence is the meaning of construction, not distinguishing the substantial entity. When viewed as existing phenomena interacting, it is due to the sovereign condition (adhipati-pratyaya).

3.7

Regarding distinguishing creation on the basis of causes and conditions: first is distinguished creation by cause, and next is distinguished creation by condition. Creation by cause has two [aspects]: first, the ten causes; second, the six causes. Regarding creation by the ten causes: with respect to the great [elements] viewed in relation to derived matter, there are in total seven causes: (1) the leading cause; (2) the producing cause, because among indeterminate causes, with respect to unmoistened and moistened, external grain, barley, and the like are [causes] for sprouts and the like; (3) the receiving cause, because they are received by the support of purposive action; (4) the inducing cause; (5) the determinate-differentiation cause, because they induce the arising of their own kind and their own nature; (6) the co-operating cause; and (7) the non-contradictory cause, because these two encompass the preceding causes. As for the contradictory cause, because they mutually injure each other and act as causes, there is no contradictory cause. The great [elements] are not speech, so there is no conventional cause. The dependent cause is remote, so there is no dependent cause. Another opinion holds that there are eight, excluding only the conventional and contradictory causes, since these two are also established throughout dependence. Another opinion holds that there may be nine, adding the contradictory cause. Derived matter viewed in relation to the great [elements] can serve as eight causes: (1) the conventional cause, because vocal speech interprets and explains the great [elements]; (2) the dependent cause, because they are remotely interdependent; (3) the leading cause and (4) the producing cause, because among defiled and pure causes, moral restraint, non-restraint, and meditation-concomitant restraint, whether unmoistened or moistened, serve as these two; (5) the receiving cause, because they are received by the support of activity; (6) the determinate-differentiation cause, because they determinately and distinctively can karmically induce their own maturation; (7) the co-operating cause and (8) the non-contradictory cause, excluding the inducing [cause] because it induces homogeneous and superior states of its own kind, serving as cause for them; excluding the contradictory [cause] because they do not conform. Or it is said that there are nine, adding the inducing cause; this meaning is also valid, because they mutually induce. Or there are ten causes, because there is contradiction. Regarding creation by the six causes: the active six causes are all said in the eighteenth fascicle of the Xianyang to be sovereign conditions. The fourth fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: "One should know that all causes are subsumed under the active cause. In order to show distinctive meanings, the remaining five causes are additionally established." If six causes are distinguished on the basis of direct cause and condition (hetupratyaya), the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, the Cheng weishi lun, and the like state: "Seeds viewed in relation to the active serve as active, co-existent, associated, and all-pervading [causes]. Seeds viewed in relation to seeds also serve as homogeneous [causes], but there is no maturation [cause], because it is not a direct cause and condition. The great [elements] viewed in relation to derived matter are none of the six causes. Derived [matter] viewed in relation to the great elements is the maturation cause, because it karmically induces that result." Now, distinguishing creation by the six causes on the basis of the sovereign condition: the great [elements] viewed in relation to derived matter have only three causes: (1) the active cause, because they can give power to them without obstruction; (2) the homogeneous cause, because they cause them to increase—in the text of the Abhidharmasamuccaya, it is said in relation to the former perfuming seeds and inducing later results to arise, and is also said in relation to active dharmas viewed mutually, not seeds viewed in relation to seeds; (3) the co-existent cause—the fourth fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: "Because the great elements and derived matter must arise together, they are co-existent causes. It is not with the meaning of obtaining a single result together." Because they are not mind or mental factors, there is no associated cause. Because they are not wholesome or unwholesome karma, there is no maturation cause. Because they are not of the nature of kleśa, there is no all-pervading cause. Derived matter viewed in relation to the great [elements] also serves as three causes: (1) the active cause, because this cause is broad; (2) the co-existent cause, because they are not separated; (3) the maturation cause, because moral restraint, non-restraint, and meditation-concomitant restraint can karmically induce the great [elements]. Or there are four causes, adding the homogeneous cause, as in inducing; that there are no others can be known. This speaks of the same period of time, not creation in a different period, because it exists depending on a support, not in a different period of time. Only restraint matter is established as the nature of matter on the basis of non-active dharmas, and is also created across different periods of time, because past great elements create present matter. Sāsrava matter and sound are exclusively indeterminate in nature. In the anāsrava state, both the great [elements] and derived [matter] are wholesome; therefore, it should only be as spoken of here. It should be stated thus: past is cause for present, not cause for past or future; present is cause for present and cause for future; future is not cause for future, because past and future do not exist. Here it is not said that past is cause for future, because cause and result both do not exist. Nor does aparānta serve as cause for pūrvānta, because that would reverse cause and result. Creation by cause having been distinguished, how is creation by condition? The great [elements] and derived [matter] viewed in relation to each other serve as a single sovereign [condition]. Active dharmas viewed in relation to each other, because they do not produce the substance, are not direct causes and conditions. Because the five causes such as production are sovereign conditions, and because they are not mind and the like, there are no other two conditions. This creation by causes and conditions is stated according to general characteristics. Viewed mutually across sāsrava and anāsrava, the twelve sense bases, the three natures, and the three realms, viewing the great in relation to the great, or derived in relation to derived, whether causes and conditions are many or few should all be reasoned according to principle.

3.8

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.

3.9

Regarding distinguishing through questions and answers: Question: In the matter aggregates of the desire realm, how many substances are obtainable? Fascicle 3 of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "In some aggregates there is only one primary element, such as [in] stone, mani gems, rivers, ponds, flames, lamplight, and dust-free wind; or only two primary elements, such as hot mani gems, snowy and wet trees, and so forth; or only three primary elements, such as wet, hot trees, or trees that are shaking and wet; or all four primary elements together. Or there is only visible matter, such as light separated from the solar disc; or only sound, such as sound separated from its source; or only odor, such as solitary wafting fragrance; if there are taste and touch, there must also be odor and visible matter. Or there are only the four of the external vessel world, excluding sound; or only five, when the external vessel world has sound. Or there is the body faculty together with the four, visible matter and the rest; or only six, depending on whether there is the eye faculty or another, together with the five, the body and the rest. With sound, there are seven. As for the matter derived from the body above, adding earth makes six; adding the eye and so forth makes seven; adding water, fire, and wind makes eight, nine, or ten; adding sound makes eleven. Light separated from the disc and so forth, according to what is appropriate, increase the four primary elements to become more or fewer." Fascicle 64 and others say: "If in this aggregate primary elements and derived matter are obtainable, one should know that in this aggregate there are these primary elements and derived matter. If their own-marks are entirely absent, one should know that in this place those dharmas do not exist. It is not like other schools where, absent the manifest thing, its subtle atoms exist." The various extensive questions and answers are all as stated there. The presence or absence of marks spoken of here—if subsumed according to the realms—all exist as appropriate, as extensively explained in fascicle 3 of that treatise. Fascicle 66 says: "The desire realm has earth, and also visible matter, odor, and taste. The form realm has only visible matter, and things bound to the form realm exclude odor and taste. And matter in the formless realm is spoken of as obtainable according to how it may exist." Fearing tedious verbosity, we should briefly cease. Question: When primary elements of the form realm arise in a body of the desire realm, do those primary elements occupy the same place as or a different place from the matter of the lower realm? Answer: Like water in sand, they do not abide in different places. Because within the fundamental consciousness there are two types of seeds—purely generated and mixedly generated—which induce those primary elements to arise. The pure cease and the mixed arise, so they do not abide in different places. There is an interpretation: this is an accommodating approach. In the Mahāyāna, occupying the same place is like heterogeneous primary elements; these two kinds of matter originally do not obstruct each other, so why would they need to abide interstitially? Hence this is an accommodating approach. Question: Since primary elements and derived matter are resistant and yet co-located without obstruction, why are they not called non-resistant? Answer: Because they mutually assist each other's arising and do not obstruct each other. Furthermore, they are produced by the sovereign power of karma of this kind, and the faculties pervade them to be shared in enjoyment. Just as the intermediate existence and so forth are resistant yet do not obstruct each other, this too should be understood in the same way. Question: How do primary elements and derived matter abide? Do they have an above and below? Are they internal and external places? Or are they chaotically mixed? Fascicle 65 says: "They exist simultaneously and are not separate from each other, because they are accomplished by causes of that kind. Like a ball of a single taste, they mutually interpenetrate and pervade all places; it is not like an agglomeration of roasted flour, rice, mani gems, and so forth." Furthermore, there are three types: first, co-location; second, mingling; third, intermingled non-separation. Again, fascicle 3 of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Matter-bases have two kinds of non-separation: first, co-located non-separation; second, mingled non-separation. As for co-located non-separation: like the aṇu matter of a single eye faculty, the aṇus of the four primary elements and the aṇus of derived matter, according to what is present, all mutually interpenetrate to form a single location, without distinct places." Thus within a single aṇu of matter there are eight aṇus; adding sound makes nine; adding the body makes ten; depending on other faculties, it makes eleven. Or the seven aṇus of eye, body, earth, visible matter, odor, taste, and touch—one cause and one effect—abide together in one location and mutually interpenetrate. It is not like the Sarvāstivāda school where subtle atoms are each distinct and each form an aṇu, nor is it like the Sautrāntika combining them to form an aṇu. Now, in the Mahāyāna, there are originally no subtle atoms; when subtle things like visible matter reach the aṇu level, depending on how many there appropriately are, they are co-located in a single place. The faculties are capable of completely enjoying them, because the mind knows the object, and because the mind arises due to the object. Thus it is co-located non-separation. As for mingled non-separation: the aforementioned co-located, non-separated aṇu matter of producer and produced that mutually interpenetrate, though abiding together in one location, do not merge into a single entity, because when the faculties grasp them, they are each distinct. Yet it cannot be said to be like a heap of sesame seeds, beans, and so forth, because it can be analyzed and obtained. This is called mingled non-separation. Another explanation: primary elements and derived matter of the same category, viewed with respect to each other, abide in the same single location; this is called co-located non-separation. Primary elements and derived matter of different categories, viewed with respect to each other, also abide together in this single location; this is called mingled non-separation. It is not like other schools where subtle atoms of the same or different categories are each distinct and not in the same location. Question: Maturation sometimes increases and expands; why then is maturation not itself nurture? Answer: Because that nurture is capable of gathering and maintaining, the continuum of maturation manifests increase and so forth, just as an outer rampart defends and protects an inner citadel; hence it is not identical to it. Question: Does a single set of four primary elements produce a single derived matter? Or does it produce many? Do multiple sets of four primary elements produce multiple derived matters? Or do they produce one? Answer: Existing in mutual dependence is designated by the name "producing"; whether producing one or producing many, there is logically no impediment. The Viniscayasamgrahaṇī says: "Primary elements must arise first occupying a location, and afterwards derived matter arises. Because it is not separated from that location, it is called 'producing'." Light from the solar disc and the like is a case of the small producing the many; sound produced simultaneously by a cause and the like is a case of the many producing the few. Categories such as these should all be understood accordingly. Since there are no subtle atoms, both are entirely admissible.

3.10

Chapter on the Five Faculties

3.11

The five faculties are analyzed collectively through five sections: first, differences among the various schools; second, identifying their essential nature; third, explaining their names; fourth, establishing their general and distinct characteristics; fifth, distinctions among their categories.

3.12

Regarding the differences among the various schools: The Lokāyata non-Buddhists say that all dharmas take the four primary elements—earth, water, fire, and wind—as their nature; hence the five faculties are in their essence simply the four primary elements. The Vaiśeṣikas say: the eye faculty is fire; the ear faculty is space; the nose faculty is earth; the taste faculty is water; the skin faculty is wind. The five primary elements are all subsumed under the category of substance (dravya); solidity, moisture, heat, and motion are all inherently non-obstructive and are subsumed under the category of quality (guṇa). The eye obtains only three, excluding only the wind element. The body faculty obtains four, and also obtains solidity and the rest. The Sāṃkhyas say: the primal nature forms the great (mahat); the great forms the 'I'-maker (ahaṃkāra); the 'I'-maker forms the five subtle elements (tanmātra); the five subtle elements form the five primary elements (mahābhūta); the five primary elements form the eleven faculties (indriya). Some say: fire forms the eye faculty, space forms the ear faculty, earth produces the nose faculty, water forms the tongue faculty, and wind produces the skin faculty. Regarding the mind faculty there are two explanations: one says it is a fleshly mass produced solely by the earth element, or produced collectively by the five primary elements; another says it is non-material. Among those six faculties, only the ear is unobstructed; for those who say the mind faculty is non-material, it too is unobstructed; the remainder are all obstructed, and all are eternal by nature. The Mahāsāṃghikas and others hold that their essence is simply the four dusts, with the fleshly mass as their nature; there is no distinct clear matter, and they cannot grasp objects. Being slightly superior to other matter, they are called clear. The Sarvāstivādins hold that there are distinct four primary elements which, through the five causes of production and so forth acting as cause and condition, produce the five faculties, the eye and the rest. The primary elements are solely tangible objects of the body. Although the faculties are aggregations, they are all real entities. The author of the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra was named Harivarman; he originally went forth in the Sāṃkhya tradition, and based on this established his doctrine, saying: the four dusts form the four primary elements, and the four primary elements form the five faculties. The Sautrāntikas say: although the faculties are derived, they nonetheless apply to both the provisional and the real; subtle atoms are real, whereas the coarse is provisional. The Prajñaptivādins say: they also apply to both the provisional and the real; within the aggregate gate they are real, while in the realm and base gates they are provisional. The Ekavyāvahārikas say: the faculties are merely nominal, completely lacking any material entity. The Lokottaravādins say: defiled faculties are provisional, while undefiled faculties are real. Now, according to the Mahāyāna, there are briefly four explanations, which will be fully demonstrated in the section on identifying their essential nature.

3.13

Regarding identifying their essential nature: Fascicle 4 of the Cheng weishi lun briefly offers two explanations. First, Master Nanda and others say: they are solely seeds; there are no distinct manifest, clear-matter five faculties. This has four meanings: first, solely the seeds of the seeing portion of the five consciousnesses; second, solely the seeds of the image portion of the five dusts; third, taking the seeds of both the seeing and image portions, these three all being Master Nanda's interpretations; fourth, Bodhisattva Dharmapāla provisionally offers a rescue, saying: taking the sovereign karma seeds that induce the five consciousnesses is what is named the five faculties. Fascicle 4 of the Cheng weishi lun says: "The five consciousnesses, the eye and the rest, do not have distinct eyes and so forth as their co-arising supports, because the five faculties, the eye and the rest, are simply seeds." The verse in the Viṃśikā says: "Consciousness arises from its own seed / and evolves appearing as the semblance of an object; / to establish the internal and external bases, / the Buddha spoke of them as ten." It goes on to extensively cite a verse from the Ālambanaparīkṣā, saying: "The meaning of that verse is: the capacity for matter, which is the seed on the maturation consciousness that can generate the matter-consciousnesses such as the eye, is called the five faculties; there are no distinct eyes and so forth. The seed and the matter-consciousness are perpetually causes for each other, because the perfume and the seed alternately act as cause." Furthermore, it says: "There are those who, seeking to avoid the errors previously stated, align with that view and offer another rescue, saying: the sovereign karma seeds in the maturation consciousness that can induce the five consciousnesses are named the five material faculties; they are not the seeds acting as cause and condition that generate the five consciousnesses." Second, the orthodox view of Dharmapāla and others is that there is distinctly manifest clear matter serving as their five faculties. Hence the Cheng weishi lun says: "The co-arising supports of the five consciousnesses are definitely of four kinds, namely the five material faculties, and the sixth, seventh, and eighth consciousnesses; for if any one of them is lacking, [the consciousness] will certainly not function." The Abhidharmasamuccaya and others say: "What is the eye faculty? It is clear matter derived from the four primary elements, which serves as the support of the eye consciousness, as its essence; and so on up to the body faculty, which takes clear matter serving as the support of the body consciousness as its essence." The Cheng weishi lun says: "Here we speak provisionally of the uncommon support." The Abhidharmasamuccaya also says: "The eye element refers to the eye that has previously or presently seen visible matter, and its seeds accumulated in the maturation ālaya consciousness; that is, taking both the manifest and the seeds together is called the eye element. The other four elements are also like this." Question: What is the difference in meaning between the eye element and the eye faculty? Why does the faculty take only the manifest and not speak of seeds? Answer: Maintaining and causing are called 'element', so seeds are also named 'element'. Sovereign power is named 'faculty', so seeds are not subsumed under 'faculty'. Question: If the manifest faculty increases the manifest consciousness, and manifest matter obtains the name 'faculty', then since the seed of the faculty increases the seed of the consciousness, it should likewise be subsumed under the manifest faculty. The Abhidharmasamuccaya says: "Because from the seed of the faculty the manifest faculty is generated, only then does the seed of the consciousness generate the manifest consciousness." Answer: Being derived from the primary elements, its functional capacity is sovereign; thus the manifest obtains the name 'faculty'. Seeds are not derived from the primary elements, and their function is not sovereign; therefore, they are not subsumed under 'faculty'. Question: The manifest eye arises based on the primary elements, and being an eye it is also called a faculty. The primary elements are also the support for the seed of the faculty; why is the eye seed not subsumed under faculty? Answer: This is said according to the evident characteristics, where seeds are not faculties. Based on principle and relying on the texts, seeds are also subsumed under faculties. Hence the Viniścaya says: "The five faculties, the eye and the rest, apply to both the manifest and seeds."

3.14

Regarding the explanation of names, the various treatises unanimously state that "faculty" (indriya) has the meaning of predominance (adhipati), the meaning of giving rise to, this being the meaning of a faculty. Because they are sovereignly predominant with respect to the visual and other consciousnesses, and serve as causes to give rise to them, they are called "faculties." "Five" is a numerical designation, so this is a compound containing a numeral (digu-samāsa). "Eye" (cakṣus) has the meaning of illuminating, understanding, and guiding, hence it is called "eye." Fascicle three of the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because it repeatedly observes various forms, observing and then abandoning them, it is called the eye." In Sanskrit it is called cakṣus: cak- has the meaning of "going," and -ṣus has the meaning of "exhaustive." That is to say, it can go exhaustively toward its objects in its activity of seeing, exhaustively seeing all forms; hence it is called "going exhaustively." Translating it as "eye" (yan) matches substance and function, and it is translated according to the language of the Tang. "Ear" (śrotra) has the meaning of being capable of hearing. In Sanskrit it is called śrotra, which means here "capable of hearing." "Thus have I heard" also uses śrotra. Therefore the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because it repeatedly is capable of hearing when sound reaches it, it is called the ear." Translating it as "ear" (er) matches substance and function, and it is translated according to the language of the Tang. "Nose" (ghrāṇa) has the meaning of being capable of smelling. In Sanskrit it is called ghrāṇa, which means here "capable of smelling." Therefore the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because one repeatedly smells fragrances by means of this, it is called the nose." Translating it as "nose" (bi) matches substance and meaning, and it is translated according to the language of the Tang. "Tongue" (jihvā) has the meaning of being capable of tasting, sucking, and removing hunger and thirst. In Sanskrit it is called jihvā, which means here "capable of tasting" and "removing hunger and thirst." Therefore the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because it can eliminate hunger and emaciation, and repeatedly utters speech to indicate and summon, it is called the tongue." However, uttering speech according to worldly convention is the physical basis of the tongue; hence in the Yogācārabhūmi, both the ultimate and conventional senses together are called "tongue." Translating it as "tongue" (she) corresponds in meaning, and it is translated according to the language of the Tang. "Body" (kāya) has the meaning of accumulation and the meaning of a locus of support. Although all faculties and physical elements are accumulations, the body faculty serves as the support for those many phenomena, and being an accumulation among them, it alone receives the designation of "body." In Sanskrit it is called kāya, which means here "accumulation." Therefore the Yogācārabhūmi says: "Because it is an accumulation pervaded and accompanied by the faculties, it is called the body." Although kāya has the meaning of a support that is accumulated, translating it as "body" (shen) matches substance and meaning, and it is translated according to the language of the Tang. Here, the substance of the eye is itself its faculty, and so on through the body faculty; these are all karmadhāraya compounds. They all possess the word "giving rise to," because they have the meaning of predominance.

First 14 of 44 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

大乘法苑義林章 — Classical Chinese