宗鏡錄 71.15

71.15

答疏云。是帶已相。須是能緣之心緣所緣時。帶起所緣已相。此有體法。即是。所緣緣。餘不帶起已相者。雖是有法。不為所緣緣。如眼識緣境時。所帶起色。已相。此有體法。即是眼識家所緣緣。餘不帶起已相者。雖是有法。不是眼識所緣緣。眼識既爾。餘識亦然。帶與已相。各有二義。且帶二義者。一者挾帶。即能緣心親附境體而緣。二者變帶。即能緣心變起相分而緣。言已相亦有二義。一體相相。二相狀相。若無分別智緣真如。是挾帶體相而緣。是所緣緣。及內二分相緣。并自證緣見分。是挾帶。若有漏心心所見分。及無漏後得智。起見分緣境時。即是變帶相狀而緣。是所緣緣。謂若有法。是緣。是帶已相。是所緣。具此二義。名所緣緣義。又簡法辯果者。先引慈恩徵云。緣生於誰。誰帶已相。疏答云。心或相應。此辯所緣緣果也。以所緣為緣。是因。生得心心所。是果。言心者。即八識心王。言或相應者。即五十一心所。有起有不起不定故。而言或也。即簡不立色。及不相應無為等。為所緣緣。彼非心法。無緣慮故。

Answer: The commentary states: 'It is bearing its own image.' It must be that when the cognizing citta cognizes an object, it bears the object's own image; this phenomenon possessing substance is then an object-condition. As for the rest that do not bear its own image, although they are existent phenomena, they do not serve as object-conditions. Just as when the eye-consciousness cognizes an object, the own-image of form that it bears—this phenomenon possessing substance is the object-condition belonging to the eye-consciousness. The rest that do not bear its own image, although they are existent phenomena, are not object-conditions of the eye-consciousness. As it is with the eye-consciousness, so it is with the other consciousnesses. 'Bearing' and 'own-image' each have two meanings. First, the two meanings of 'bearing': one is grasping-and-bearing (saṃsṛṣṭa-bhāva), in which the cognizing citta immediately cleaves to the substance of the object and cognizes it; second is transforming-and-bearing (pariṇāma-bhāva), in which the cognizing citta transforms and raises up a nimittabhāga and cognizes it. 'Own-image' also has two meanings: first, the image as substantive nature (dravyasvarūpa); second, the image as perceptual form (ākāra). When non-conceptual wisdom (nirvikalpajñāna) cognizes tathatā, it cognizes by grasping and bearing the substantive nature, and this is an object-condition; also, the two internal divisions cognizing each other and the self-witnessing [cognizing] the darśanabhāga are grasping-and-bearing. When the darśanabhāga of defiled cittas and caittas, or of pure subsequent wisdom (pṛṣṭhalabdhajñāna), gives rise to a darśanabhāga to cognize an object, it cognizes by transforming and bearing the perceptual form, and this is an object-condition. That is, if a phenomenon is a condition, and bears its own image, it is an object; possessing both of these meanings is called the meaning of an object-condition. Furthermore, to differentiate phenomena and discern the fruit: first citing Ci'en's interrogation, 'In what does the condition cause arising? What bears its own image?' The commentary answers, 'Citta or associated [factors].' This discerns the fruit of the object-condition. Taking the object as a condition is the cause; the attained cittas and caittas that arise are the fruit. 'Citta' refers to the eight consciousness-kings. 'Or associated [factors]' refers to the fifty-one caittas; because they are undetermined—some arising and some not arising—it says 'or'. Thus it excludes and does not establish matter (rūpa), the unassociated (viprayukta-saṃskāra), the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta), and so forth, as object-conditions, for they are not mental phenomena and have no cognitive deliberation.