英譯（韋達）

§ IV. CAUSALITY OF BIJAS AND ACTUAL DHARMAS

The Bijas of the root consciousness (Mulavijnana), in the generation of actual 'forms of distinction' (Vikalpas),¹ i.e., all the impure Cittas-Caittas consist of three Pratyayas, to the exclusion of Samanantarapratyaya (antecedent).

1.        In reality, every parent-Bija is the Hetupratyaya (cause) of that which proceeds from it. [All dharmas, nimittabhaga, darsanabhaga, etc., proceed from Heptupratyaya which is their parent-Bija.]

2.        The Bijas are the Alambanapratyaya (object) of the Citta-Caittas which perceive them as their object. [They are always the object of the darsanabhaga of the eighth consciousness, sometimes of the darsanabhaga of the sixth; never of the nimittabhaga nor of the svasamvittibhaga of the eighth.]

3.        They are the Adhipatipratyaya (contributory factor) of those dharmas in respect of which they are effective, contributory influences or which they do not impede. [The organ-bijas (indriyabijas) are effective helping factors in respect of the development of the consciousness-bijas (vijnanabijas); the 'attention-bijas' (manasikarabijas) are effective helping influences in respect of consciousnesses; the Bija of a certain consciousness does not represent an obstacle to a different consciousness, etc.]

Such is the causality of Bijas in relation to defiled actual Vikalpas (forms of distinction). Their causality in the generation of pure actual Vikalpas is similar.

The actual Vikalpas can, in relation to one another, be three kinds of Pratyaya, because they are never Hetupratyaya.

(1)      With reference to various different sentient beings, their Vikalpas may, between themselves, be Alambana and Adhipatipratyaya, but not Samanantarapratyaya.

(2)      With reference to a single person, the eight groups of consciousness are, between themselves, neither Hetupratyaya nor Samanantarapratyaya. They are Adhipatipratyaya to one another; they are or are not Alambanapratyaya.

The eighth is the Alambana of the seven others.

The seven are not the Alambana of the eighth, because they are not the archetype on which the eighth is based.

The seventh is not the Alambana of the Five; it is the Alambana of the sixth. The first six are not the Alambana of the seventh.

The sixth is not the Alambana of the Five; because the Five are based solely on the nimitta of the eighth. [They do not take as their object the Rupa developed from the sixth.] The Five are the Alambana of the sixth.

(3)   With reference to the successive moments of the same species, i.e., the successive moments of the same kind of consciousness, the earlier sixth consciousness, in relation to the later sixth, is Samanantara, Alambana, and Adhipatipratyaya; but the seven other earlier consciousnesses are not Alambana of the later seven, because the seven take only one present object, [Nevertheless Dinaga, in Alambanapariksa: 'or else the nimitta of the preceding consciousness is the Pratyaya of the subsequent consciousness…’.] There are therefore masters for whom the later darsanabhaga of the Five perceive the earlier nimittabhaga. For these masters, the earlier moments of the Five and the seventh are therefore three kinds of Pratyaya of the later moments, as is the case with the sixth. Further, according to the same Dignagian principle, the earlier moments of the Seven are Alambana of the eighth, because the Seven create (by perfuming) the Bijas of nimittabhaga and darsanabhaga of the eighth.

(4)   In regard to dharmas of the same group but of different nature, for example, the eye-consciousness and its related mental activities (Caittas), there are two opinions:

a. They are, between themselves, exclusively Adhipatipratyaya, [There is no question of their being Hetupratyaya or Samanantarapratyaya; but are they not Alambanapratyaya? No,] because the associated dharmas do not take each other as their object and, if it is said that they have the same Alambana, it is because the same archetype serves as the supporting basis for their nimittabhaga.

b. [According to Dignaga, who is mistaken,] it is darsanabhaga regarding which it is stated ： ‘Citta and its Caittas do not take each other as their object [among the non-Buddhas]'. But Citta and Caittas do take, mutually, their mmittabhagas as their objects. The nimittabhagas of Citta and Caittas are born by taking each other as archetypes, just as the Bijas of the eighth consciousness are the archetype of the nimittabhaga of its five mental associates, mental contact, etc. In fact, if the dharma-Bijas of Mulavijnana were not the archetype for the mmittabhagas of the five mental associates, the five would find themselves without an object in the course of an Arupya existence.

Even if it is admitted, with the second masters, that the eighth consciousness of the Arupyadhatu develops into the Rupa of an inferior Dhatu, it is still necessary for the Caittas of this consciousness to have a bearing on the Bijas, because, as noted by the first masters, if it were otherwise the immediate object of the darsanabhagas of Citta and the Caittas would not depend on the same archetype.

(5)   In regard to an individual consciousness

a.     The nimittabhaga is Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga.

b.     The darsanabhaga is exclusively Adhipatipratyaya of the nimittabhaga.

c.     The same is true of the relations between the darsanabhaga and the svasamvittibhaga: the darsanbhaga is Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya of the svasamvittibhaga, while the svasamvittibhaga is exclusively the Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga. [The darsanabhaga is only the Adhipratipratyaya of the svasamvitti-samvittibhaga; it is also its distant Alambanapratyaya.]

d. The last two Bhagas (the svasamvittibhaga and the svasamvittisamvittibhaga) are, between themselves, Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya.

When we say that the nimittabhaga is only Alambanapratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya of the darsanabhaga, we do not forget that Bijas may form part of the nimittabhaga and that they are Hetupratyaya. But we are here concerned solely with the causal relations of the actual dharmas.

(6) The pure eight consciousnesses are Alambanapratyaya of one another, because they are all-perceiving. The same is true of the Bhagas of each of them. We must, however, exclude the darsanabhaga, which is not the Alambanapratyaya of the nimittabhaga, the latter being deprived of the function of taking an object.

Since the actual Vikalpas are born by reason of the Bijas and the actual Vikalpas, the Bijas should also be born by reason of the actual Vikalpas and the Bijas. What are the causal relations between the actual Vikalpas and the Bijas on the one hand and among the Bijas on the other?

Bijas are not born by reason of the two intermediate Pratyayas, Samanantarapratyaya (antecedent) and Alambanapratyaya (object), because these two Pratyayas are established in dependence upon Cittas and Caittas, which are actual dharmas.

Among non-Buddhas, the actual Vikalpa, in relation to the parent-Bija (or immediate Bija) [that is to say, in relation to the Bija which it creates and perfumes], discharges the function of Hetupratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya; and in relation to the non-immediate Bija, the function of Adhipatipratyaya only.

The Bija which is the anterior moment, in relation to the immediate Bija (i.e.,  the Bija which it engenders) discharges the function of Hetupratyaya and Adhipatipratyaya; and in relation to the non-imiriediate Bija, the function of Adhipatipratyaya only.

It is therefore established by both Scripture and Pure Reason that the causal succession of Cittas-Caittas is the result of the functioning of the reciprocal causality of internal dharmas, i.e., consciousnesses, either actual or in a Bija-state. If we suppose that the so-called external Pratyayas of the Lesser Vehicle really exist, then they will serve no purpose. Besides, they are at variance with Pure Reason and the texts. Why, then, do you affirm their existence in such an opinionated manner?

The term Vikalpa (form of distinction), broadly speaking, designates the Cittas-Caittas of the three Dhatus (that is to say, all the impure mental activities). Yet, on account of the importance of certain Vikalpas, the sacred teaching has established various lists: 2, 3, 4, 5 Vikalpas and more. These lists are explained in other treatises.

1 See definition at the end of this Section.