---
title: "成唯識論測疏 · 第七"
description: "成唯識論測疏由唐代新羅高僧圓測撰寫是研究玄奘所傳唯識思想的重要注疏圓測為玄奘弟子其學說與窺基一系並立被視為西明系唯識學的代表該疏內容精深對世親《唯識三十頌》及護法等論師的釋論進行了詳細測解闡發唯識無境的妙義並在種姓論等問題上提出了與窺基系不同的見解在中國佛教唯識宗發展史上佔有獨特地位是研究唐代唯識學分歧與演變的關鍵文獻具有極高的學術價值"
url: "https://rushiwowen.co/en/r/cmgn15keh3jytl404bzzqxlnq"
---
## 成唯識論疏卷第七
> Commentary on the Treatise on the Establishment of Consciousness-Only, Volume Seven
唐西明寺沙門圓測撰
> Composed by the Monk Yuance of the Western Brightness Temple in the Tang Dynasty
悔眠尋伺，於善染等皆不定故。
> Regret, drowsiness, mental wandering, and subtle investigation—these are neither inherently wholesome nor unwholesome.
謂悔等四，於善於染及等三種，皆不定故，立不定名。善謂十一，染二十六，等言等取徧行別境。此中意說，善定唯善，染定是染，徧行於心，別境於地，皆悉決定。悔眠等四，非如善等，立不定名。鈔二十六
> The four mental factors such as regret are called "indeterminate" because they are not fixed in terms of being wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral. Wholesome refers to the eleven wholesome mental factors, unwholesome refers to the twenty-six unwholesome mental factors, and "neutral" includes the universally active and particular object mental factors. The meaning here is that wholesome mental factors are definitely wholesome, unwholesome mental factors are definitely unwholesome, the universally active mental factors are definitely present in all minds, and the particular object mental factors are definitely present in specific states. However, the four mental factors such as regret and drowsiness are not like the wholesome and other categories, hence they are given the name "indeterminate."Commentary 26
非如觸等定徧心故、非如欲等定徧地故，立不定名。
> It is called "indeterminate" because it is not like tactile consciousness, which is always present in the mind, nor like desire, which is always present in a particular realm.
逐難重釋。雖已略說於善染等顯不定義，而善及染定義已了，所說等言為顯何義？故今重釋，謂徧行五定徧八識，若別境五定徧九地；悔眠等四非如二位，故名不定。鈔二十六
> I will now explain the difficult points again in detail. Although I have already briefly explained the meaning of "indeterminate" in relation to wholesome and defiled mental states, the definitions of wholesome and defiled have already been clarified. What, then, does the word "etc." in the previous explanation refer to? Therefore, I will now explain it again: The five universal mental factors definitely pervade all eight consciousnesses, while the five particular mental factors definitely pervade all nine stages of meditative absorption. However, the four mental factors—regret, drowsiness, etc.—are not like these two categories, which is why they are called "indeterminate."
謂睡眠位，身不自在，心極闇劣，一門轉故；
> In the state of sleep, the body is not under our control, and the mind is extremely dull and weak, as it operates through a single channel.
謂睡眠位，心極闇劣，唯依意根一門轉故；非如覺時心心所法，依六根門故得明利。鈔二十六、燈十五、記九均略
> In the state of sleep, the mind is extremely dull and weak, as it operates solely through the mental faculty. Unlike during wakefulness, when mental activities rely on all six senses and remain sharp and clear.
問：眠中發耳識，由聞可生慧；眠是意地法，如何有聞慧？解：如前分別，夢中聞聲，自有兩釋：一云、聞聲如在定位，耳根發識；若依此釋，因聞生慧，義亦無失。一云、眠中不發耳識，由前散位聞起勢力引生故，亦聞慧攝。眠中思慧，準此應思。鈔二十六
> Question: When sleeping, the ear consciousness arises, and wisdom can be generated through hearing. But sleep is a function of the mind consciousness—how can there be wisdom from hearing? Answer: As previously explained, hearing sounds in dreams can be interpreted in two ways: First, it is said that hearing sounds in dreams is similar to hearing in a meditative state, where the ear faculty gives rise to consciousness. According to this interpretation, wisdom arising from hearing is not contradictory. Second, it is said that the ear consciousness does not actually arise during sleep. Instead, it is the momentum of hearing from the waking state that carries over and gives rise to such experience, and this too falls under wisdom from hearing. As for wisdom from reflection during sleep, it should be understood in a similar manner.
昧𥳑在定，略別寤時，令顯睡眠非無體用；有無心位，假立此名，如餘蓋纏，心相應故。
> In deep meditation, the mind is subtle and still, distinct from the waking state. This demonstrates that sleep and drowsiness are not without their own functions. In states where the mind is absent or present, we provisionally use these terms, just as with other hindrances and defilements, because they are associated with the mind.
二量：一云、睡眠非無體用，是蓋纏故，如餘葢纏。又量云：實睡眠是心相應，因、喻可知。燈十五
> There are two logical arguments: The first says, "Sleep is not without its own substance and function, because it is one of the coverings and hindrances, just like the other coverings and hindrances." Another argument says, "True sleep is associated with the mind; the reason and example can be understood."
染悔眠體，非思慧想，以纏性故，如無慚等；不染悔眠，非思慧想，悔眠性故，如染悔眠。記九同基
> Impure remorse and drowsiness are not associated with thought or wisdom, because they are bound by their nature, just like shamelessness and others. Pure remorse and drowsiness are not associated with thought or wisdom, because they are the nature of remorse and drowsiness, just like impure remorse and drowsiness.Note: The ninth entry is the same as the base text.
尋謂尋求，令心悤遽，於意言境，麤轉為性；伺謂伺察，令心悤遽，於意言境，細轉為性。此二俱以安、不安住身心分位所依為業。
> Investigation is the seeking, causing the mind to rush, coarsely moving towards objects of mental discourse as its nature; Examination is the scrutinizing, causing the mind to rush, finely moving towards objects of mental discourse as its nature. Both of these take the state of the body and mind—whether settled or unsettled—as the basis for their function.
思名為安，徐而細故、思量性故。慧名不安，急而麤故、簡擇性故。同基更有二解；一云、如理名安，不如理不安。一云、定俱名安，不俱不安。記九
> "Thought" is called calm because it is slow and subtle, and its nature is to ponder. "Wisdom" is called unsettled because it is quick and coarse, and its nature is to discern. Same basis. There are two further explanations: One says, "What accords with principle is called calm; what does not accord with principle is called unsettled." Another says, "What is accompanied by concentration is called calm; what is not accompanied is called unsettled." Record, vol. 9.
並用思慧一分為體。
> It also employs a portion of analytical wisdom as its essence.
尋伺並用思慧為體，自有二釋：一云、尋思不推度時，唯思為性，以無慧故；深推度時，以慧為性，雖定有思而慧勝故。故《顯揚》云「或時由思，於法造作；或時由慧，於法推求。」又《瑜伽論》第五卷云「尋伺體性者，謂不深推度所緣，思為體性；若深推度所緣，慧為體性。」二云、尋思必用二法假合為性。謂一剎那二用各別。不深推度，是其思用；若深推度，即是慧能。故《瑜伽》五十五云「尋伺二種，略及慧分故。」又《五蘊》云「謂能尋求，意言各別思慧差別。」略此論下云「思慧合成，聖所說故；而《顯揚》等隨增相說，言或時等。」鈔二十六、燈十五略
> The functions of investigation and examination both utilize thought and wisdom as their essence. There are two interpretations: First, it is said that when investigation and examination do not engage in deep analysis, they are solely of the nature of thought, as wisdom is not present. When they engage in deep analysis, they take wisdom as their nature, for although thought is certainly present, wisdom predominates. Therefore, the \*Xianyang Lun\* states, "At times, through thought, one engages with phenomena; at times, through wisdom, one inquires into phenomena." Moreover, the fifth volume of the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* says, "The essence of investigation and examination is thought when not deeply analyzing the object, and wisdom when deeply analyzing the object." Second, it is said that investigation and examination necessarily combine two factors as their composite nature. That is, in a single moment, the two functions are distinct. When not deeply analyzing, it is the function of thought; when deeply analyzing, it is the capacity of wisdom. Therefore, the fifty-fifth volume of the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* states, "The two types of investigation and examination are briefly aspects of thought and wisdom." Additionally, the \*Five Aggregates\* says, "That which investigates, with verbal thought distinguishing the differences between thought and wisdom." Briefly, this treatise below states, "They are synthesized from thought and wisdom, as taught by the sages; while the \*Xianyang Lun\* and others speak according to the predominant aspect, saying 'at times,' etc." Commentary 26, Lamp 15, summarized
於意言境，不深推度及深推度，義類別故。若離思慧、尋伺二種體類差別不可得故。
> When it comes to the meaning expressed in words, one does not deeply ponder it or analyze it in depth, because the nature of its meaning is distinct. If one departs from the wisdom of reflection, the two aspects of investigation and examination—their distinct natures—cannot be grasped.
此有二義：一云、不深推度及深推度，如次即是尋伺行相。一云、如次思慧行相。同基後說為勝。此同《瑜伽》第五卷說故。鈔二十六、記九略
> There are two interpretations here. First, it is said that shallow examination and deep examination correspond respectively to the mental activities of investigation and analysis. Second, it is said that they correspond respectively to the functions of thought and wisdom. The latter view, as recorded in the same source, is considered superior. This aligns with the explanation given in the fifth volume of the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\*.
應言二者，顯二種二。
> We should say both, to reveal the two kinds of duality.
是護法義。記九
> This is the meaning of protecting the Dharma.
依於尋伺有染離染，立三地別；不依彼種，現起有無，故無雜亂。
> Based on the presence or absence of defiled mental investigation, three distinct realms are established. This distinction does not depend on whether the seeds of such investigation are present or manifesting, thus avoiding any confusion.
依經部師，體類是同，說名俱起。略依薩婆多，或有心中具起尋伺，可立三地有差別義。大乘尋伺定不相應，如何得有三地差別？解云：然釋三地，諸宗不同。薩婆多宗依界地立，略故《俱舍論》第二卷云。略《瑜伽》釋論自有三解：一云、此三就二前後相應建立，謂欲界地及初靜慮，麤心心所前後相續，可有尋伺，其相應故，名有尋有伺地。略二云、此三就二離欲，略三如實義者，此三但就界地建立。略今此論意，依離欲說。略若依種有，始從欲界乃至非想，應名尋伺地，有二種故。若依種無，唯無餘依名第二地。雖如來地無現尋伺，而有無漏尋伺種故。略問：若依釋論二師義，離欲立三是不正說。第三師難，如何會釋？故彼難云：已離欲者，下地諸法名無尋等；未離欲者，上地應名有尋伺等，由此應成雜亂過失。鈔二十六
> According to the Sautrāntika school, the nature and categories are the same, thus they are said to arise together. Briefly following the Sarvāstivāda, in some states of mind, both vitarka and vicāra may arise, allowing for the establishment of the three realms with distinct meanings. In Mahāyāna, vitarka and vicāra are definitely not concomitant; how then can there be three realms with distinctions? The explanation is: However, the interpretation of the three realms differs among various schools. The Sarvāstivāda school establishes them based on the realms and stages. Briefly, as stated in the second volume of the \*Abhidharmakośa\*. The \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* itself offers three explanations: First, these three are established based on the sequence and concomitance of the two, meaning that in the desire realm and the first dhyāna, coarse mental factors arise sequentially and can be concomitant with vitarka and vicāra, thus it is called the realm with vitarka and vicāra. Second, these three are based on the two stages of liberation from desire. Third, according to the true meaning, these three are established solely based on the realms and stages. The intention of this treatise is based on liberation from desire. If based on the presence of seeds, from the desire realm up to the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, it should be called the realm of vitarka and vicāra, as both seeds are present. If based on the absence of seeds, only the realm without remainder is called the second realm. Although in the Buddha’s realm there is no manifest vitarka or vicāra, the seeds of unconditioned vitarka and vicāra still exist. Question: If following the two masters’ interpretations in the commentary, establishing the three realms based on liberation from desire is not the correct explanation. How then can the third master’s objection be reconciled? Thus, the objection states: For those who have already liberated from desire, the phenomena of the lower realms are said to be without vitarka, etc.; for those who have not yet liberated from desire, the phenomena of the higher realms should be said to have vitarka and vicāra, etc., leading to the fault of confusion.
又今助難：若依離欲立三地者，中間根本同縛同離應成一地，有雜亂過。解云：論意自有兩釋。一云、護法用第二說以為正義，而無兩失。下劣從上勝離染，名無伺等；上勝皆離下劣，未離非伺等，故無前失。又說離欲有其二時，謂前加行及正離時。今依加行說離欲言，故先離尋、後離伺欲，故無後失。記九引此說文略二云、此論說離欲言，與釋論異。所以者何？欲有二種：一、煩惱欲，謂貪瞋等；二、自性欲，謂九地法。隨其自地，性不相厭，義說為欲；隨應上地，所有諸法，性厭下地，義說離欲。五十六云「由彼有情，於諸尋伺，以性離欲，而離欲故。」彼地雖名無尋無伺，此後現行，亦無過失。《瑜伽》釋第二師依離煩惱欲，有前二過。此論正義，依離自性欲說，故無兩失。鈔二十六、倫五同、記九略
> Furthermore, regarding the current objection: If we base the three stages on the elimination of desire, then the fundamental states in between, being bound and liberated together, should constitute a single stage, leading to the fault of confusion. The explanation is as follows: The treatise’s intent allows for two interpretations. First, it is said that Dharmapāla adopts the second explanation as the correct view, thereby avoiding both faults. When inferior states follow superior ones in abandoning defilements, they are called “without investigation,” and so on. Superior states have all abandoned inferior ones, but if they have not yet abandoned them, they are not called “without investigation,” and so on. Thus, the first fault is avoided. Moreover, it is said that the elimination of desire occurs in two phases: the preliminary practice and the actual moment of abandonment. Here, the term “elimination of desire” is based on the preliminary practice, so first the desire for coarse examination is abandoned, and later the desire for subtle investigation is abandoned. Thus, the second fault is avoided. Second, it is said that this treatise’s use of the term “elimination of desire” differs from that of the commentary. Why is this? Desire is of two kinds: first, defiled desire, such as greed and anger; second, inherent desire, referring to the dharmas of the nine stages. According to their respective stages, their nature does not inherently reject one another, but they are conventionally called “desire.” Correspondingly, the dharmas of higher stages inherently reject lower stages, and this is conventionally called “elimination of desire.” As stated in the \*Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra\* (Chapter 56): “Because those beings, with regard to coarse examination and subtle investigation, eliminate desire by nature, they are said to have eliminated desire.” Thus, even though that stage is called “without coarse examination and subtle investigation,” there is no fault in their subsequent manifestation. The \*Yogācārabhūmi\* commentary explains that the second teacher, based on the elimination of defiled desire, falls into the two aforementioned faults. The correct view of this treatise, however, is based on the elimination of inherent desire, thus avoiding both faults.
然說五識有尋伺者，顯多由彼起，非說彼相應。
> Although it is said that the five sense consciousnesses involve investigation and analysis, this indicates that they often arise from these factors, not that they are inherently associated with them.
多由彼言，略有二義：一、依定散，住定心少，在散心多。設在定心起五亦少，故約散心說多由起。二、約率爾等流心說，率爾心少，等流心多。設率爾心尋伺等引少，等流心必有尋求等引，故約等流說，多由彼起。又總相解云：雖有少分五識，不由尋伺所引。而彼多分尋伺相應意識所引，故言顯多由彼起，非說彼相應也。鈔二十七、記九略
> This is generally explained in two ways: First, based on whether the mind is settled or scattered: the mind is rarely in a settled state, and is mostly scattered. Even when settled, the arising of the five sense-consciousnesses is infrequent. Therefore, it is said that they mostly arise from a scattered mind. Second, based on the initial and subsequent moments of mind: the initial moment of perception is brief, while the subsequent flow of thoughts is prolonged. Even if the initial moment involves minimal reflection, the subsequent flow of thought inevitably includes seeking and reflection. Therefore, it is said that they mostly arise from this subsequent flow. In summary, although a small portion of the five sense-consciousnesses may arise without being guided by reflection, the majority are guided by the mind-consciousness, which is associated with reflection. Thus, it is said that they mostly arise from it, not that they are necessarily associated with it.
有義惡作，憂捨相應，唯慽行轉，通無記故。
> There is a type of remorse that is associated with distress and neutrality, arising only from troubled mental activity, and it can be of an indeterminate nature.
就相顯故無記說捨，非謂捨俱定唯無記，實善惡悔亦捨俱故。記九
> Because it is revealed through its appearance, it is said to be neutral and equanimous—not that equanimity is exclusively neutral, for in reality, wholesome and unwholesome states, as well as regret, are also accompanied by equanimity.
睡眠喜憂，捨受俱起，行通歡慽，中庸轉故。
> Sleep brings both joy and sorrow, for it arises with a neutral feeling. It moves through both happiness and distress, as it turns in a balanced way.
實慼行睡亦與捨俱；既悔相應，唯慼行故。記九
> Even when sleeping, one who practices with diligence maintains a state of equanimity; for regret arises only in connection with diligent practice.
悔但容與無明相應，此行相麤，貪等細故；睡眠、尋伺，十煩惱俱，此彼展轉，不相違故。
> Regret, however, can coexist with ignorance because its nature is coarse, while greed and the others are subtle. Sleep, mental wandering, and investigation can accompany all ten afflictions, as they can interact with one another without conflict.
有部、經部，皆同大乘。記九
> The Sarvāstivāda and Sautrāntika schools both align with the Mahayana.
然大乘中二說：一云、麤同小乘，悔實八俱；悔施貪俱，違情瞋俱；陵猶豫時，慢疑相應；悔我所作，故我見俱。計斷常時，悔施損物，又如下說，悔修定故與邪見俱，非二取俱，執為勝道不生悔故。二云、必不得俱，與悔間起，非相應故。不應難云：悔如忿等，獨頭起故，應如忿等、慢等相應。忿等瞋等分，如本得相應，惡作別有體，非與貪俱故。記九同基
> In Mahayana Buddhism, there are two interpretations regarding regret: The first view holds that regret is fundamentally similar to the understanding in the Theravada tradition. It arises together with the eight fundamental defilements. Specifically, regret associated with stinginess is linked to greed; regret arising from aversion is linked to anger; regret connected to arrogance and hesitation is linked to pride and doubt; and regret about one's own actions is linked to self-view. When one clings to views of annihilation or permanence, regret about stinginess and harming others may arise, as explained further below. Regret about meditative practices can also be associated with wrong views, but not with the two extremes of attachment, because one does not regret what is considered a superior path. The second view argues that regret cannot arise simultaneously with these defilements but occurs intermittently, as they are not directly compatible. It should not be questioned that regret, like anger, can arise independently and thus should be associated with pride and other defilements. Anger and similar states are aspects of aversion and naturally align with their root causes, whereas regret has its own distinct nature and is not inherently linked to greed.
有邪見者，悔修定故；
> Those with wrong views will regret having cultivated concentration.
是本有位，謗滅中有，不起悔故。記九同基
> This is the fundamental state; slandering its extinction in the intermediate state does not give rise to regret.
悔非無學，離欲捨故；
> Regret is not absent in learning; it is relinquished through detachment from desire.
律說無學無記犯，或生悔厭，假名悔；於無記悔，是慧勝解。《法華》鶖子聞所未聞，斷諸疑悔。記九
> The monastic code states that for an unlearned person, an unrecorded offense may arise from regret or aversion, which is provisionally called "regret." Regarding unrecorded regret, it is wisdom that prevails. In the Lotus Sutra, Shariputra, upon hearing what he had never heard before, severed all doubts and regrets.Record nine
有義：此二亦正智攝，說正思惟是無漏故。
> This is meaningful: both of these are also included within correct knowledge, as it is said that correct thought is free from defilements.
尋既無漏，例伺亦然；非正思惟，體亦是伺。如《婆沙》九十六云：何故尋伺俱通無漏，唯立尋為菩提分法？菩提分法行相猛利；伺用微劣，是故不立。今說大乘，伺亦道分，依中間定能盡漏者，亦有正思惟支故。記九
> Since the initial mental investigation can be free from defilements, the same applies to sustained examination. However, what is not considered right thought is also a form of sustained examination. As stated in the \*Abhidharma Mahāvibhāṣa Śāstra\*, Volume 96: "Why is it that both initial investigation and sustained examination can be free from defilements, yet only initial investigation is established as a factor of enlightenment? The factors of enlightenment are characterized by intense and sharp activity, whereas sustained examination is subtle and less forceful, and therefore is not established as such." In the Mahāyāna teachings, sustained examination is also considered a factor of the path, as it is based on the intermediate meditative absorption that can exhaust defilements, and there is also the factor of right thought.
又說彼是言說因故，
> Furthermore, it is said that this arises from the nature of language itself.
正引十地三請之中，第一請文。長行釋云：唯歎淨覺，淨覺是說因故。覺名覺觀，即口言行。三藏解云：應言尋伺；言覺觀者，釋家謬也。燈十五
> In the first request within the three requests of the Ten Grounds, the prose commentary states: "It praises only pure enlightenment, for pure enlightenment is the cause of the teaching." The term "enlightenment" here refers to the practice of speech and action. The Tripitaka Master explains: "It should be called 'investigation and examination.' The phrase 'enlightenment and contemplation' is an error made by commentators."
覺觀，即口言行，明知尋伺通無漏智。記九
> Awareness and contemplation are the speech and actions of the mouth, clearly knowing that reflection and investigation extend to the wisdom free from defilements.
是謂大乘真俗妙理。
> This is the profound principle of the Mahayana, embracing both the absolute and the conventional.
四重諦中，皆依第二道理俗真，因果法爾非即非離，第二真故。記九
> Within the Four Noble Truths, all are established based on the second principle—the conventional and ultimate truths. Causes and effects are naturally so—neither identical nor separate—because the second truth is the ultimate truth.
無想天者，謂修彼定，厭麤想力，至違不恆行，心及心所。
> The Heaven of No-Thought is where, through cultivating that concentration, one becomes weary of coarse thoughts, and thus ceases the activities of the mind and mental factors that are not constantly active.
由先定力，百劫中違六識體徧行別境十心所，故不相應；贊補心處，為無想體。記九
> Due to the power of prior concentration, during one hundred kalpas, it is incompatible with the six consciousnesses and the ten mental factors of universal and specific objects, because they are not in accord. It supports the mind-ground, forming the substance of the thoughtless state.
如餘本有初，必有轉識故。
> Just as with other originally existing things, there must be a transforming consciousness.
比量也。此言初者，一期之初，非初一念。生分悶絕，容無心故。記九
> Inference. The term "initial" here refers to the beginning of a stage, not the very first moment. At the moment of birth, in a state of unconsciousness, it is possible for the mind to be absent.
彼本有初，有異熟生，轉識暫起；宿因緣力，後不復生；由斯引起異熟、無記、分位差別，說名無想。
一解：生得意識心及心所，滅種上立。記九同基
即能引發無想定思，能感彼天異熟果故，
然解此文，自有三釋：一云、微心相應思，引總異熟果，以明利故；若微微心相應思，感彼異熟果不明利故。二云、微心及微微心相應之思，引總異熟，以有心故。即彼二思，至無心位為定之時，招別異熟，以無心故。三云、正取微微之心相應之思，正引總果，兼招無相別異熟生，以微微究竟勝故。要引定思，由定勢力，感彼二果。鈔二十八、燈十五集引一三釋同基均略
令身安和，故亦名定。
雖非心所，專注一境令身安和，故亦名定。燈十五
又唯是善，彼所引故；
彼所引故，通二義。燈十五
四業通三，除順現受。
經部也。記九
滅盡定者，謂有無學，或有學聖。
此通三乘有學無學，明得滅定人，要斷三界惑。下明初起後起，於中初說二乘，後明菩薩；若不爾者，得滅定人，不說如來，理有不盡。燈十五
能得人中，菩薩二種：漸悟如聲聞數，四萬、二萬、十千劫中，亦入滅定；從信位乃至等覺，有五十一賢聖。燈十五
已伏或離無所有貪，上貪不定，
伏謂暫伏，離即永斷。此中意說：無所有貪，要須已伏，斷即不定。斷與不斷，皆能得入，故說或離無所有貪。上非想貪即不決定，未伏未離、不伏已離，故言不定。無已伏非想九品六行，伏道不通非想故。鈔二十九
心心所滅。
依非想地微微心時，種上假立二十二不相應，謂滅徧行。別境善識，通於新舊無漏立。記九
若修此定已得自在，餘地心後亦得現前。
餘地心後入滅定者，彼所入言屬彼地攝。三藏兩釋：一云、隨依何地入定，而所入定必屬非想。所以者何？由餘地心擊發非想，遊觀無漏新舊種子，令有遮用，但至定故。《瑜伽》十二「依非想故」。二云、隨依何地心，即屬彼地；即彼地心，能厭心故；彼能厭心，是無漏故；所入滅定，即屬彼地。鈔二十九
此定初起，唯在人中，佛及弟子，說力起故、人中慧解極猛利故。
此以二因釋成。初起唯在人中，以非色界，佛及弟子，說力起故。非六欲，人中慧解極利故。或可上界及六欲天皆由二因，故非初起。是故《集論》第五卷云「要於人趣，方能引發；或於人趣或於色界，能現在前；生無色界，多不現起。」《雜集》第九釋彼論云「引發者，是初起義；先已生起，後重現前故。或於人趣者，謂即於是生。或於色界，謂後生彼。」鈔二十九、燈十五略
無色亦名意成天故。
然大乘宗分成兩說：難陀等說上界八地起滅盡定，故名意成天。覺師子釋第四靜慮以上五地，方起滅定，名意成天。護法同第二釋。燈十五
於藏識教，未信受者，
經不為說，不求一切智故；今者為說，令入滅定故。燈十五
《大品》、《涅槃》等，及諸小乘，名未建立。記九
有義：下八地修所斷惑中，至彼隨所應，生上八地，皆得後起。
初義難陀，後義安慧、護法等。記九
後義為勝，順《對法》四句故。謂第二句，聖得第四靜慮，厭無色生，不斷第四；捨斷結道，依勝進道，入無色定。爾時捨斷，而依伏道，入上定故。記九
然不還者，對治力强；正潤生位，不起煩惱；但由惑種，潤上地生。
不還唯種潤，約中有說。中有沒心常染汙者，約潤生有。記九、燈十五略
或此俱是觸處少分，
觸謂欲色，若無色悶，異熟四蘊。記九
自在菩薩，唯得存一，無睡悶故；
八地以上，不同有部。菩薩有睡悶而無滅定；如來有三，睡而無夢。記九同基
餘識識故；
言餘識者，第六意識，及大眾部等細意識；自宗所許第七八識，皆是有法。五識之餘，故言餘識。此下三是並有極成，準上應知。問：七八識如何極成？前以理教已成立故，亦成有法。鈔三十、燈十六、記九均略
所緣法故；如相應法，決定不離心及心所。
記九云：「本疏解法，故因通取有體無體。」
若唯內識，似外境起；寧見世間情非情物，處時身用，定不定轉。
又彼論云「同一處時，有多相續；略有此識生。」解云：此釋身定不成難。略此難意云：如一堂內，同處同時有多人住，皆見一柱，若唯識變而無實境，何不決定唯屬一人？如眩翳眼者所見髮等，唯屬一人；而所見柱，不決定屬一人相續，故知實有云云。鈔三十
非無離言，正智所證，唯識性故，說為法空。
此釋非遣離正智所證依他起性及圓成實二種性故，說為法空。所云正智者，無分別智及後得智。以無分別智，自證分中，緣依他起性，見分緣真。後得智通緣真俗，義顯可知。或可此中依他起性唯識性，名唯識性。以離名言後得正智所證性故，非此性無說為法空。後解為勝，順文相故。鈔三十
外色實無，可非內識境；他心實有，寧非自所緣？
釋他心智名，唯識中安慧三釋，護法二釋。燈十六
能引次後自類功能，及起同時自類現果，此唯望彼是因緣性。
此對所生出種子體，謂生次念及生同時自類現行，方成因緣。前法滅時，後法即生，如稱兩頭低昂時等。有因緣為非隔念者，與現行法不相違故，與果同時；若隔念者，皆非因緣。鈔三十一
問：若爾，如何牽引種子，說為因緣？解云：據實為論，非正因緣。而菩薩地說牽引種子為因緣者，因緣類故，假說因緣。鈔三十一、燈十六略
極微圓故，不熏成種；
三釋。第三云、前文通釋因果第八，即無所熏故；後文別釋因果第八，因微果圓。燈十六集引、記九云：「上明因已，此釋果位。」
多同類種，俱時轉故。
且一眼識，有多種子，共生自識，一時轉故。記九、鈔三十一
謂諸異生求佛果者，定色界後引生無漏，後必生在淨居天上、大自在宮，得菩提故。
異生求佛，是頓悟人；未斷煩惱，隨眠力故。色界心後，引生無漏。燈十六
然大自在，薩婆多宗，五淨居中第五淨居，名大自在，以上更無有色天故。今依大乘《十地經》等，五淨居外，立大自在。然天處，三藏兩釋：一云、正在五淨居上，亦色界有別處所，如《大品》等。一云、即是菩薩淨土，住處不定。或在色界淨居天上，或東西等，如說西方極樂世界等。此即二種受用土中他受用土，自受用土徧法界故。鈔三十一
有義：色界亦有聲聞，迴趣大乘願留身者，既與教理俱不相違，是故聲聞第八無漏色界心後，亦得現前。
後護法宗。記九
然五淨居，無迴趣者，經不說彼發大心故。
此即第二別簡色界有不發者。謂前總言色界留身，然五淨居無迴心者。所以者何？《大般若》等不說淨居發大心故。故《大般若》第一會中百二十九云略，此當《大品》十五卷等。解云：彼經不說淨居有發大心，故知彼天無迴心者；以彼淨居由熏力，唯聖無凡；極樂處故，心生樂著，故不發心。鈔三十二、記九略
問：後二果不別受生，其義可知；已斷欲界諸煩惱故、不許上果受變易故。初之二果，發心之後，更受生不？此有兩釋：一云、不受，由發心力依邊際定，助感身業，轉受變易，經三僧祇。一云、不定，謂或發心即受變易、或經七生方受變易，如親光說。故《佛地論》第二卷略如祕引。問：護法宗初之二果發心以後，經多生乃至欲界發心，生上界不？解云：有許不許，不許為勝。鈔三十二
問：既許初二果，經生方變易，不還下發心，應有上生界。二解：一云、同前。必無上生，厭麤身故，即受變易。一云、既無文遮，許生上地，或受一生、或受多生，諸地隨應受變易故。記九同基，但本疏存初解。
有漏不共，必俱同境根；發無漏識，理不相應故。
有難：有漏七八識等，得與無漏意識為根，如何不許五根亦然？故論解云：有漏簡佛五根不共簡第八識必俱簡開導根同境根簡第七識，發無漏識，理不相應故。記九
是見分等，內所慮託。
等言等取自證緣見及證自證；證自證分，能緣自證。記九同基
有義：二說俱不應理。自他身土可互受用，他所變者為自質故；自種於他無受用理，他變為此，不應理故。
自下二因，破第二師，此即初失。本所變者，為欲受用；他種無用，何須變耶？鈔三十三
非諸有情，種皆等故。
謂諸有情，由種子力、凡聖等異、五姓等別。若諸有情緣他種者，一切有情展轉相緣，所有種子等應無別。既爾，應無凡聖等異，便成大失。問：設許種等，此有何失？如圓鏡智，緣一切種而無失故。解云：護法將自宗理難他所立，謂染第八因緣變故，所變境必有實用；若緣他種應有實用。若爾，凡聖等應無差別，離欲聖者緣他下地煩惱種子故。問：前第二云，護法正宗不變他根，如何此說自他身土可有受用？解云：此云身者，但說依處，以自他根非互用故。鈔三十三、燈十六略
第三師難第二師言：應無凡聖等異。此難非理，因八不緣無漏種故。又復前師但云：自第八影必須仗質，非自無種必須變化。若以他有即例為質，應眼等起所有色等恆具彼影，必仗質故。既眼等起，或唯緣青等，故約自相必須仗他，非他所有皆須為質。故今此難，約自所變有多種子，所對有情非必相似。燈十六
前五心品未轉依位，麤鈍劣故必仗外質，故亦定有疏所緣緣。
意識所變，亦為五質。記九同基
四增上緣，謂若有法；
二說：一云、此寬通假。如《對法》云「任持增上者，謂命根力，眾同分住。」一云、此亦非假，如因緣等緣所攝故，就所依種說命能持。記九
有勝勢用，能於餘法或順或違；
以順違法為增上緣。記九
雖前三緣，亦是增上，而今第四，除彼取餘，為顯諸緣差別相故。此順違用於四處轉，生住成得四事別故。
雖無一法非所緣緣，所緣緣外更無增上；然彼緣時是所緣緣，不緣之時是增上故。生等四事，如《大論》第五「順者能生，違不令生，餘三亦爾。」且十因中，初九順因，相違違也。記九同基
三句：一、有為望無為；二、有為望有為；三、無為望有為。無第四句，為增上緣以常對常無勝用故。記九
前五色根，以本識等所變眼等淨色為性。
等取意識。八俱五數，所變影像雖不發識，似故名根。記九
## 成唯識論疏卷第七