大乘百法明門論開宗義記 1.20.5

1.20.5

故許互作等無間緣。 故大乘宗唯取自類。 自類必無俱起義故。 雖心心所異類並生。 而互相應和合似一。 定俱生滅事業必同。 一開導時餘亦開導。 雖能開導而不名依。 於所引生無主義故。 此與四緣義有別者。 一者因緣。 為有為法親辨自果。 此體有二。 一者種子。 二者現行。 種子者。 謂本識中善染無記諸界地等功能差別。 能引次後自類功能。 及起同時自類現果。 此唯望彼是因緣性。 即三依中初所依義。 彼望現識為種子依。 此兼後種為因緣性。 現行者。 謂七轉識及彼相應。 所變相見性界地等。 除佛果善極劣無記。 餘熏本識生自類種。 此唯望彼是因緣性。 三所依中都無此義。 現行同類展轉相望皆非因緣。 自種生故。 二等無間緣。 謂八現識及彼心所。 前聚於後自類無間等而開導令彼定生多同類種俱時轉故。 知不相應非此緣攝。 除入無餘最後一念極微劣故。 又無當起等無間法。 故非此緣。 餘八識聚三界九地上下死生有漏無漏。 隨其所應互相開導。 故皆得作等無間緣。 即三依中開導依義。 三所緣緣。 謂若有法是帶己相。 心或相應所慮所託。 此體有二。 一親二疎。 若與能緣體不相離。 是見分等內所慮託。 應知彼是親所緣緣。 若與能緣體雖相離。 為質能起內所慮託。 應知彼是疎所緣緣。 親所緣緣能緣皆有。 離內所慮託必不生故。 疎所緣緣能緣或有。 離外所慮託亦得生故。 由是八識及諸心所。 各各定有親所緣緣。 疎所緣緣有無不定。 若前五識麁鈍劣故。 及第七識是俱生故。 未轉依位必杖外質故。 皆定有疎所緣緣。 若第六識行相猛利。 於一切位能自在轉。 若第八識所變身土。 可互受用更互為質。 所變根種於他有情無受用理。 不互為質。 及五七識已轉依位。 所杖外質或有或無。 疎所緣緣有無不定。 此就諸識當體而說。 若依相望有無不定。 恐文增廣略而不述。 三所依中都無此義。 四增上緣。 謂若有法有勝勢用。 能於餘法或順或違。 雖前三緣亦是增上。 而今第四除彼取餘。 為顯諸緣有差別故。 此順違相於四處轉。 生住成得四事別故。 然增上用隨事雖多。 而勝顯者唯二十二。 應知即是二十二根。 此即攝彼三所依中俱有依義。 此義寬故。 是故八識更互為緣。 有力無力義皆通故。 初因緣中種子義者。 種子即是習氣異名。 習氣必由熏習而有。 依何義故立熏習名。 能熏所熏各具四義。 令種子生長故名熏習。 何等名為能熏四義。 一有生滅。 若法非常能有作用生長習氣。 乃是能熏。 此遮無為。 前後不變無生長用故非能熏。 二有勝用。 若有生滅勢力增盛能引習氣。 乃是能熏。 此遮異熟心心所等。 勢力羸劣故非能熏。 三有增減。 若有勝用可增可減攝垣習氣。 乃是能熏。 此遮佛果。 圓滿善法無增無減故非能熏。 彼若能熏便非圓滿。 前後佛果應有勝劣。 四與所熏和合而轉。 若與所熏同時同處不即不離。 乃是能熏。 此遮他身。 剎那前後無和合義故非能熏。 唯七轉識及彼心所有勝勢用而增減者。 具此四義可是能熏。 何等名為所熏四義。 一堅住性。 若法始終一類相續能受習氣。 乃是所熏。 此遮轉識及聲風等。 性不堅住故非所熏。 二無記性。 若法平等無所違逆能容習氣。 乃是所熏。 此遮善染。 勢力強盛無所容納故非所熏。 由此如來第八淨識唯帶舊種非新受熏。 三可熏性。 若法自在性非堅密能受習氣。 乃是所熏。 此遮心所及無為法。 依他堅密故非所熏。 四與能熏共和合性。 若與能熏同時同處不即不離。 乃是所熏。 此遮他身。 剎那前後無和合義故非所熏。 唯異熟識具此四義可是所熏。 非心所等。 若爾第八種是誰熏。 第八唯是所熏識故。 答。 即前七識而與熏生。

Therefore, they are allowed to mutually serve as the equal-and-immediate condition. Hence, the Mahāyāna school accepts only those of the same category, because those of the same category definitely cannot arise together. Although the mind and mental factors arise together as different categories, they correspond to each other and harmonize as if they were one; they definitely arise and cease together, and their activities are necessarily identical. When one opens the way and guides, the others also open the way and guide. Although they can open the way and guide, they are not called bases, because they have no master-like function with respect to what is induced and produced. Where this differs from the four conditions is as follows: First is the cause condition (hetupratyaya). It directly produces its own fruit for conditioned dharmas. Its substance is of two kinds: first, seeds; second, actual states. As for seeds: they refer to the differentiated capacities of wholesome, defiled, and indeterminate natures across the various realms, stages, and so forth within the fundamental consciousness; they are able to induce subsequent capacities of their own category and give rise to simultaneous actual fruits of their own category. These are of the nature of the cause condition solely in relation to those [fruits]. This corresponds to the meaning of the first base among the three bases: in relation to the actual consciousness, it is the seed-basis; here it additionally includes subsequent seeds as being of the nature of the cause condition. As for actual states: they refer to the seven evolving consciousnesses and their associated [mental factors], their transformed objective and subjective aspects, natures, realms, stages, and so forth, excluding the wholesome [states] of the fruit of buddhahood and the extremely weak indeterminate [states]; the rest perfume the fundamental consciousness, producing seeds of their own category. These are of the nature of the cause condition solely in relation to those [seeds]. Among the three bases, this meaning is completely absent. Actual states of the same category, mutually viewed in succession, are none of them cause conditions, because each is produced from its own seed. Second is the equal-and-immediate condition (samanantarapratyaya). It refers to the eight actual consciousnesses and their mental factors: the prior aggregation opens the way equally and immediately for its own subsequent category, causing it to definitely arise, because many seeds of the same category operate at the same time. One knows that non-associated [dharmas] are not included in this condition. The very last thought-moment upon entering [the nirvāṇa] without remainder is excluded because it is extremely faint and weak, and also because there is no equal-and-immediate dharma that is to arise; hence, it is not this condition. As for the rest of the eight consciousness aggregations across the three realms and nine stages, higher and lower, dying and being reborn, sāsrava and anāsrava—they mutually open the way and guide according to what is appropriate; hence, all can serve as the equal-and-immediate condition. This corresponds to the meaning of the opening-and-guiding basis among the three bases. Third is the object-condition (ālambanapratyaya). That is, if a dharma bears its own image, and is that which is cogitated and relied upon by the mind or its associated [factors]. Its substance is of two kinds: first, direct; second, indirect. If it is not separated from the substance of that which cognizes, being that which is inwardly cogitated and relied upon by the subjective aspect and so forth, one should know that it is the direct object-condition. If, although separated in substance from that which cognizes, it serves as the archetype able to give rise to that which is inwardly cogitated and relied upon, one should know that it is the indirect object-condition. The direct object-condition is present in all that cognize, because separated from that which is inwardly cogitated and relied upon, [cognition] definitely does not arise. The indirect object-condition may or may not be present in that which cognizes, because even separated from that which is outwardly cogitated and relied upon, [cognition] can still arise. Thus, the eight consciousnesses and all mental factors each definitely possess a direct object-condition, whereas whether they have an indirect object-condition is not fixed. The first five consciousnesses, being coarse, dull, and weak, and the seventh consciousness, being innate, definitely rely upon external archetypes prior to the state of having overturned the basis; hence, they definitely possess an indirect object-condition. The sixth consciousness, having sharp and vigorous operational modes, operates freely in all states. As for the physical body and lands transformed by the eighth consciousness, they can be mutually experienced and mutually serve as archetypes; but the sense faculties and seeds it transforms cannot reasonably be experienced by other sentient beings, so they do not mutually serve as archetypes. In the states where the five [sensory] and seventh consciousnesses have overturned the basis, the external archetypes upon which they rely may or may not be present, so whether they possess an indirect object-condition is not fixed. This is spoken with respect to the intrinsic substance of the consciousnesses; as for whether it exists when considering their mutual relations, it is not fixed, and fearing excessive proliferation of text, I omit it and do not explain. Among the three bases, this meaning is completely absent. Fourth is the sovereign condition (adhipatipratyaya). That is, if a dharma has superior power and function, able to be either concordant with or contrary to other dharmas. Although the prior three conditions are also sovereign, the fourth here excludes them and takes the remainder, in order to show that the conditions have distinctions. This concordant and contrary aspect operates in four places, because the four matters of arising, abiding, completing, and obtaining are distinct. Although sovereign functions are many according to circumstances, those that are superior and manifest are only twenty-two; one should know that these are precisely the twenty-two faculties (indriyas). This subsumes the meaning of the coexistent basis among the three bases, because this meaning is broader. Therefore, the eight consciousnesses mutually serve as conditions for one another, because the meanings of having power and lacking power both apply universally. As for the meaning of seeds within the first cause condition: 'seed' is simply another name for 'habit-energy' (vāsanā). Habit-energy definitely exists by virtue of perfuming. Based on what meaning is the term 'perfuming' established? That which perfumes and that which is perfumed each possess four characteristics; because they cause seeds to be produced and grow, it is called 'perfuming'. What are called the four characteristics of that which perfumes? First, having arising and ceasing: if a dharma is impermanent and capable of having activity that generates and nurtures habit-energy, then it is that which perfumes. This excludes unconditioned dharmas: because they are unchanging before and after, having no activity of generating and nurturing, they are not that which perfumes. Second, having superior function: if it has arising and ceasing and its power is flourishing, able to induce habit-energy, then it is that which perfumes. This excludes ripely maturated mind, mental factors, and so forth, because their power is feeble and weak, so they are not that which perfumes. Third, having increase and decrease: if it has superior function and can be increased or decreased, cultivating and retaining habit-energy, then it is that which perfumes. This excludes the fruit of buddhahood: its fully perfected wholesome dharmas neither increase nor decrease, so they are not that which perfumes; if they were that which perfumes, they would not be fully perfected, and there would be superiority and inferiority between earlier and later fruits of buddhahood. Fourth, operating in harmony with that which is perfumed: if it is simultaneous and co-local with that which is perfumed, neither identical nor separate, then it is that which perfumes. This excludes other persons: between moments before and after there is no meaning of harmonious combination, so they are not that which perfumes. Only the seven evolving consciousnesses and their mental factors that possess superior power and undergo increase and decrease, possessing these four characteristics, can be that which perfumes. What are called the four characteristics of that which is perfumed? First, having a stable nature: if a dharma continues as one uniform type from beginning to end, able to receive habit-energy, then it is that which is perfumed. This excludes the evolving consciousnesses, sound, wind, and so forth: because their nature is not stable, they are not that which is perfumed. Second, having an indeterminate nature: if a dharma is impartial and unopposed, able to accommodate habit-energy, then it is that which is perfumed. This excludes wholesome and defiled [dharmas]: because their power is strong and forceful, having nothing they can accommodate, they are not that which is perfumed. On this account, the Tathāgata's eighth pure consciousness only carries old seeds and does not newly receive perfuming. Third, having a perfumable nature: if a dharma is autonomous and its nature is not solid and dense, able to receive habit-energy, then it is that which is perfumed. This excludes mental factors and unconditioned dharmas: because they are dependent on others or solid and dense, they are not that which is perfumed. Fourth, having a nature that is in harmonious combination with that which perfumes: if it is simultaneous and co-local with that which perfumes, neither identical nor separate, then it is that which is perfumed. This excludes other persons: between moments before and after there is no meaning of harmonious combination, so they are not that which is perfumed. Only the ripely maturated consciousness possesses these four characteristics and can be that which is perfumed, not the mental factors and so forth. If so, by what are the seeds of the eighth consciousness perfumed, since the eighth is solely the consciousness that is perfumed? Answer: They are perfumed and produced by the preceding seven consciousnesses.