An Exhaustive Ledger of Every Faculty's Conditions
Fascicle 146 works through a census of causal correspondence, the four-category analysis of having or lacking an object, the noble-one/ordinary-being tetralemma across six glosses, and closes with an exhaustive ledger of which conditions each of the twenty-two faculties bears toward every other. This page carries Ru-Yi's complete translation.
Translation Method
The Chinese source is Xuánzàng's seventh-century translation of the Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā-śāstra (阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論), preserved in the Taishō canon (T1545, vol. 27) via the CBETA digital edition — public domain text, translated directly from the Chinese. The English wording throughout is Ru-Yi's own, and the reading notes are original, grounded in standard Sarvāstivāda scholarship rather than a specific named commentator's lecture transcript.
Fascicle 146 continues and concludes the Faculty Nyāsa (根納息第一之五). Terms established across fascicles 93–145 recur here and are not re-explained at each occurrence.
Classical text is set in the left-hand column below, our English in the right.
1. Fourteen Faculties, and How Many Ways to Count a Cause
Fascicle 146 opens with a fresh census: of the twenty-two faculties, how many are "associated by cause"? The treatise walks through no fewer than six different exegetical frameworks — one built around a single cause, one around two, one around three, one around four, one around five, and one around all six causes at once — each arriving at the same headline number, fourteen, while explaining that number on entirely different technical grounds.
此二十二根。幾因相應。乃至廣說。問何故作此論。答欲止說因緣法非實有者意。顯因緣法決定實有。亦為遮止愚於相應執相應法非實者意。令知相應是實有故。而作斯論。於此義中。有說。依一因作論。謂相應因。由此中說相應言故。依彼意趣釋此文者。此二十二根。幾因相應。答十四。謂意五受信等五三無漏根。此是相應因自體。根與相應因自體法相應故。名因相應。幾因不相應。答八。
"Of these twenty-two faculties, how many are 'associated by cause,' and so on, as stated at length?" Why raise this question at all? To block the view that causal dharmas are not truly real, and to show that causal dharmas are indeed real; and likewise to block the view of one confused about association, who holds that associated dharmas are not real, making it known that association is genuinely real. One position frames the question around a single cause alone, the associated cause, since this passage speaks specifically of "association." On that reading: of the twenty-two faculties, how many are associated by cause? Fourteen — the mind-faculty, the five feeling-faculties, faith and its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. These are themselves the very substance of the associated cause, and a faculty is called "associated by cause" precisely because it is associated with the dharma that is the substance of the associated cause. How many are not associated by cause? Eight.
謂七色命根。問此八既非相應因體。如何乃說因不相應。答此八雖非相應因體。而與相應因體不相應故。說為因不相應。斯有何失。
Namely the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty. If these eight are not themselves the substance of the associated cause, how can they be described as "not associated by cause" at all? Because, although they are not themselves the substance of the associated cause, they are simply not associated with whatever is the substance of the associated cause — hence they are called "not associated by cause." What fault could this possibly carry?
幾因相應因不相應。答即前十四少分因相應。少分因不相應。少分因相應者。謂自性於他性少分因不相應者。謂自性於自性。幾非因相應。非因不相應。答即前十四少分。非因相應。少分非因不相應少分非因相應者。謂自性於自性。少分非因不相應者。謂自性於他性。有說。此中依二因作論。謂相應因俱有因。由此二因恒與彼法不相離故。依彼意趣釋此文者。此二十二根。幾因相應。答十四。
How many are both associated by cause and not associated by cause? The same fourteen, in part associated by cause and in part not. "In part associated by cause" means one's own nature in relation to another's nature; "in part not associated by cause" means one's own nature in relation to itself. How many are neither associated by cause nor not associated by cause? The same fourteen, in part. "In part neither associated by cause" means one's own nature in relation to itself; "in part neither not associated by cause" means one's own nature in relation to another's nature. Another position frames the question around two causes at once, the associated cause and the co-existent cause, since these two causes are never separate from the dharmas they condition. On that reading: of the twenty-two faculties, how many are associated by cause? Fourteen.
此是二因自體。根與二因自體法相應故。名因相應。後三問答如前應知。有說此中依三因作論。謂相應因。俱有因。同類因。由此三因通三性故。有說。此中依四因作論。謂除同類遍行二因。由此四因通三世故。有說。此中依五因作論。謂除能作因。以通無為非親勝故。有說。此中依六因作論。由此所說因言總故。然相應法或作六因自體。或作五因自體。或作四因自體。如大種蘊廣說。依彼意趣釋此文者。此二十二根。幾因相應。答十四。謂六因自體。根與六因自體法相應。五因自體。根與五因自體法相應。四因自體。根與四因自體法相應故名因相應。後三問答如前應知。
These are the very substance of the two causes, and a faculty is called "associated by cause" because it is associated with the dharma that is their substance; the remaining three question-and-answer pairs should be understood exactly as before. Another position frames the question around three causes — the associated cause, the co-existent cause, and the homogeneous cause — since these three causes pervade all three moral qualities. Another position frames it around four causes, excluding only the homogeneous and the universal causes, since these four pervade all three time-periods. Another position frames it around five causes, excluding only the efficient cause, since it pervades even the unconditioned and lacks any close, decisive function. Another position frames it around six causes altogether, since the very term "cause" used in this passage is meant comprehensively; an associated dharma may thus stand as the substance of six causes, of five, or of four, exactly as explained at length in the Great Elements Aggregate. On that reading: of the twenty-two faculties, how many are associated by cause? Fourteen — those that are the substance of six causes are associated with dharmas that are the substance of six causes; those that are the substance of five causes are associated with dharmas that are the substance of five causes; those that are the substance of four causes are associated with dharmas that are the substance of four causes — and each is accordingly called "associated by cause." The remaining three question-and-answer pairs should again be understood as before.
Watching six different schools of interpretation converge on the identical number fourteen while disagreeing completely about which causes are actually doing the work is a small but telling demonstration of how much interpretive latitude this tradition tolerates beneath a stable surface answer: the destination is fixed, but the commentarial road built to reach it is explicitly left open to dispute.
2. A Sighted Person Sees a Blind One: Four Categories of Having an Object
A parallel census opens for a different property entirely — not what causes a faculty, but what kind of object a faculty itself takes. Four categories emerge: faculties whose object itself has an object, faculties whose object lacks any object of its own, faculties capable of both, and faculties that fall into neither, each illustrated with the treatise's own memorable image of a sighted person watching either another sighted person or someone born blind.
此二十二根。幾緣有緣。乃至廣說。問何故作此論。答欲止說所緣緣非實者意。顯所緣緣是實有故。而作斯論。此二十二根。幾緣有緣。答十三少分。謂意樂喜憂捨信等五三無漏根少分。有所緣法為此所緣。故說此為緣有緣句。如明眼者見明眼人。彼明眼人復有所見。緣有緣句應知亦爾。幾緣無緣。答一十三少分。一者謂苦根。
"Of these twenty-two faculties, how many take an object that itself has an object, and so on, as stated at length?" Why raise this question at all? To block the view that the object-condition is not real, and to show that the object-condition is indeed real. Of the twenty-two faculties, how many belong to the "has an object that has an object" category? Thirteen in part — the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, displeasure, and equanimity, and faith and its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties, each in part. A dharma that itself takes an object is what is meant by this object here, hence this is called the "has an object that has an object" phrase — just as a sighted person who sees another sighted person, and that second sighted person likewise has something they see; the "has an object that has an object" phrase should be understood in just the same way. How many belong to the "has an object without an object" category? Thirteen in part. One is the pain-faculty.
十三少分者。如前說。無所緣法為此所緣。故說此為緣無緣句。如明眼者見生盲人。彼生盲人更無所見。緣無緣句當知亦爾。幾緣有緣緣無緣。答即前十三少分。有所緣無所緣法。為此所緣。故說此為緣有緣緣無緣句。如明眼者見明眼人及生盲人。彼明眼人復有所見。彼生盲人更無所見緣有緣緣無緣句。應知亦爾。有餘謂。此第三句義。即合初二更無異體。此說不然。與本論相違故。如十門說。緣有緣法是有為緣隨眠隨增。緣無緣法是一切隨眠隨增。緣有緣緣無緣法。是有為緣隨眠隨增。非緣有緣非緣無緣法。是有漏緣隨眠隨增。然有意識并相應法。一剎那頃總緣有緣及無緣法。是故如前所說為善。幾非緣有緣非緣無緣。答八。謂七色命根。由此不緣有所緣無所緣法。故說此為非緣有緣非緣無緣句。如生盲人。都無所見。此句亦爾。
The remaining thirteen in part are as already described — a dharma without an object is what is meant by this object here, hence this is called the "has an object without an object" phrase, just as a sighted person who sees a person born blind, and that blind person has nothing further that they see; the "has an object without an object" phrase should be understood in just the same way. How many belong to the "has an object that has an object, and has an object without an object" category? The same thirteen in part — a dharma that both has and lacks an object is what is meant by this object here, hence this is called the "has an object that has an object, and has an object without an object" phrase, just as a sighted person who sees both a sighted person and a person born blind, where the sighted person has something further that they see and the blind person has nothing further that they see; this phrase should be understood in just the same way. Some hold that this third category carries no meaning distinct from a mere combination of the first two, with no separate substance of its own — but this account does not hold, since it contradicts the root treatise, which speaks of these matters through ten separate gateways: a dharma that has an object that has an object is the object-condition of the conditioned, and underlying tendencies increase upon it; a dharma that has an object without an object is the object-condition of everything, and underlying tendencies increase upon it; a dharma that has both is the object-condition of the conditioned, and underlying tendencies increase upon it; a dharma that has neither is the object-condition of what is contaminated, and underlying tendencies increase upon it. Yet mental cognition, together with its associated dharmas, can in a single instant take both a has-object and a without-object dharma together as its object all at once, which is exactly why the account already given should be preferred. How many belong to "neither has an object that has an object nor has an object without an object"? Eight — the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty. Since these do not take as their object anything that either has or lacks an object, they are called "neither has an object that has an object nor has an object without an object," just as a person born blind who sees nothing at all; this phrase should be understood in just the same way.
The image of sight watching sight, and sight watching blindness, does real conceptual work here: it distinguishes a faculty's own bare capacity to observe from the separate question of whether whatever it is observing has any onward capacity to observe something else in turn — a distinction easy to blur without the concrete image holding it in place.
3. The Same Four Categories, Applied to Everything Else in the Abhidharma Universe
Having established the four categories for the faculties themselves, the treatise extends them across the entire Abhidharma inventory: the eighteen elements, twelve bases, five aggregates, six elements, and then every major doctrinal classification in turn — form and formlessness, contamination and its absence, the three time-periods, the three realms, the trainee and the one beyond training, what is cut off by seeing or cultivation, the four immeasurables, and more.
此中略示二十二根。緣有緣等四句差別十門所說。十八界等亦應以此四句分別。謂十八界中十色界為第四句。五識界為第二句。意界意識界為前三句。法界具為四句。十二處中十色處為第四句。意處為前三句。法處具為四句。五蘊中色蘊為第四句。受想識蘊為前三句。行蘊具為四句。如蘊取蘊亦爾。六界中五色界為第四句。識界為前三句。有色法。可見法。有對法。無為法。滅諦。為第四句。
This passage briefly indicates how these four categories concerning the twenty-two faculties' having or lacking an object divide across ten distinct gateways; the eighteen elements and so forth should likewise be analyzed through these same four categories. Among the eighteen elements, the ten form-elements belong to the fourth category; the five sense-consciousness elements belong to the second category; the mental element and the mental-consciousness element belong to the first three categories; and the dharma-element is fully distributed across all four categories. Among the twelve bases, the ten form-bases belong to the fourth category; the mental base belongs to the first three categories; and the dharma-base is fully distributed across all four categories. Among the five aggregates, the form aggregate belongs to the fourth category; the feeling, perception, and consciousness aggregates belong to the first three categories; and the formations aggregate is fully distributed across all four categories — and the same holds for the grasping aggregates. Among the six elements, the five form-elements belong to the fourth category; the consciousness-element belongs to the first three categories. Whatever is form, whatever is visible, whatever is resistant, whatever is unconditioned, and the truth of cessation — these all belong to the fourth category.
無色法。無見法。無對法。有漏法。無漏法。有為法。過去未來現在法。善不善無記法。欲色無色界繫法。學無學非學非無學法。見修所斷不斷法。苦集道諦。靜慮無色。皆具為四句。四無量中。若取自性。緣住同分心有情。則為第三句。若緣不住同分心有情。則為第二句。若并取相應隨轉。緣住同分心有情。則為第三第四句。
Whatever is formless, invisible, and non-resistant; whatever is contaminated or uncontaminated; whatever is conditioned; whatever belongs to past, future, or present; whatever is wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral; whatever is bound to the desire, form, or formless realm; whatever belongs to the trainee, the one beyond training, or neither; whatever is cut off by seeing, cut off by cultivation, or altogether uncuttable; the truths of suffering, origin, and the path; and the dhyānas and the formless attainments — every one of these is fully and without exception distributed across all four categories. Among the four immeasurables, if one takes only their own intrinsic nature, and they take as their object sentient beings who share one's own class of mental continuum, they belong to the third category; if instead they take as object beings not of one's own class, they belong to the second category; and if one further includes their associated and concomitant dharmas, while still taking as object beings of one's own class, they belong to the third and fourth categories together.
That a single fourfold distinction, first introduced to sort twenty-two faculties, turns out to apply cleanly across virtually every other classification this tradition maintains is a striking display of the Abhidharma's own systematic ambition: the same conceptual tool, once forged, is expected to fit the entire doctrinal machine, not just the part it was built for.
4. Noble Ones, Ordinary Beings, and Six Different Ways to Draw the Line Between Them
After finishing the object-relation gateways through the liberations, masteries, totalities, concentrations, knowledges, and afflictions, the treatise turns to a rich new tetralemma: which faculties belong to "this dharma" and which to "the ordinary being"? No fewer than six competing glosses are offered for what these two terms even mean — the noble one versus the ordinary being; the patient acceptance of suffering versus the mundane supreme dharma; moral restraint versus its absence; an unimpaired faculty versus an impaired one; and, opening a sixth, unsevered wholesome roots versus severed ones.
若緣不住同分心有情。則為第二第四句。初三解脫八勝處前八遍處。若取自性為第二句。若并取相應隨轉。則為第二第四句。滅受想解脫為第四句。餘四解脫具為四句。後二遍處為第三第四句。滅智無相等持為第二句。他心智為初句。餘六智二等持為前三句。諸門煩惱中。五識相應者為第二句。意識相應者為前三句。是中差別應思。廣說諸根此法彼根異生耶。設根異生彼根此法耶。答諸根此法彼根非異生。諸根異生彼根非此法。問何謂此法。何謂異生。答此法謂聖者。異生即異生。諸根此法彼根非異生者。謂諸無漏根唯聖者成就。非諸異生。諸根異生彼根非此法者。謂見所斷根。唯異生成就非諸聖者。有說。此法者。謂住苦法智忍。異生者。謂住世第一法。諸根此法彼根非異生者。謂苦法智忍俱生諸根。唯住苦法智忍者現起。非住世第一法者。諸根異生彼根非此法者。謂世第一法俱生諸根。唯住世第一法者現起。非住苦法智忍者。有說。此法者。謂住律儀。異生者。謂住不律儀。諸根住律儀者所起。彼根非住不律儀者所起。諸根住不律儀者所起。彼根非住律儀者所起。有說。此法者。謂不缺根。異生者。謂缺根。如扇[打-丁+虎]半擇迦無形二形等。諸根不缺根者所起。彼根非缺根者所起。諸根缺根者所起。彼根非不缺根者所起。有說此法者。謂不斷善根。異生者。
And if instead they take as object beings not of one's own class, they belong to the second and fourth categories together. Among the first three liberations, the eight masteries, and the first eight totalities, if one takes only their intrinsic nature, they belong to the second category; if one includes their associated and concomitant dharmas, they belong to the second and fourth categories together. The liberation of the cessation of feeling and perception belongs to the fourth category; the remaining four liberations are fully distributed across all four categories; the last two totalities belong to the third and fourth categories together. The concentration of cessation-knowledge and of the signless belong to the second category; the knowledge of others' minds belongs to the first category; the remaining six kinds of knowledge and the two remaining concentrations belong to the first three categories. Among the afflictions associated with the various sense-fields, whatever is associated with the five sense-consciousnesses belongs to the second category; whatever is associated with mental cognition belongs to the first three categories; the distinctions within each should be considered accordingly. As is stated at length: "is it the case that whatever faculty possesses this dharma belongs to that faculty's category and is never an ordinary being, and conversely, whatever faculty is an ordinary being's faculty never possesses this dharma?" Answer: whatever possesses this dharma is never an ordinary being; whatever is an ordinary being never possesses this dharma. What, then, is meant by "this dharma," and what is meant by "ordinary being"? Answer: "this dharma" refers to the noble one; "ordinary being" refers precisely to the ordinary being. "Whatever possesses this dharma is never an ordinary being" means that the uncontaminated faculties are possessed only by noble ones, never by any ordinary being; "whatever is an ordinary being never possesses this dharma" means that the faculties cut off by seeing are possessed only by ordinary beings, never by noble ones. Another position holds that "this dharma" means abiding in the patient acceptance of the dharma-knowledge of suffering, and "ordinary being" means abiding in the mundane supreme dharma. "Whatever possesses this dharma is never an ordinary being" means that the faculties co-arisen with the patient acceptance of the dharma-knowledge of suffering arise only for one abiding in that patient acceptance, never for one abiding in the mundane supreme dharma; "whatever is an ordinary being never possesses this dharma" means that the faculties co-arisen with the mundane supreme dharma arise only for one abiding in the mundane supreme dharma, never for one abiding in the patient acceptance of the dharma-knowledge of suffering. Another position holds that "this dharma" means abiding in moral restraint, and "ordinary being" means abiding in the absence of restraint — the faculties arisen for one abiding in restraint never arise for one abiding without restraint, and the faculties arisen for one abiding without restraint never arise for one abiding in restraint. Another position holds that "this dharma" means an unimpaired faculty, and "ordinary being" means an impaired faculty — such as an emasculated man, a paṇḍaka, one without genital form, or one of dual form, and so on — the faculties arisen for one with unimpaired faculties never arise for one with impaired faculties, and the faculties arisen for one with impaired faculties never arise for one with unimpaired faculties. Another position holds that "this dharma" means one whose wholesome roots remain unsevered, and "ordinary being" means—
That the treatise needs six entirely separate glosses before it can even state what "this dharma" and "ordinary being" mean is itself instructive: rather than treating the noble-one/ordinary-being boundary as a single fixed line, this tradition treats it as a family of related but genuinely distinct boundaries — moral, meditative, physiological, and soteriological all at once — each cutting the same underlying territory a little differently.
5. Pure Abodes, Severed Roots, and What Each Aggregate Actually Contains
The tetralemma concludes with its final two glosses — the group fixed for correct or wrong attainment, and the five Pure Abodes set against the five stations of ordinary beings — before the fascicle pivots to a wholly new census: how many faculties does each of the five aggregates actually include? The form aggregate claims seven; the feeling aggregate claims five outright plus a fractional three; perception, tellingly, claims none at all.
謂斷善根。諸信等根不斷善者所起。彼根非斷善者所起。諸邪見俱生根。斷善者所起。非不斷善者所起。有說。此法者。謂住正定聚。異生者。謂住邪定聚。諸住正定聚者所起根。彼根非住邪定聚所起。諸住邪定聚者所起根。彼根非住正定聚者所起。有說。此法者。謂住五淨居。異生者。謂住五異生處。諸住五淨居者所起根。
one whose wholesome roots have been severed. The faculties of faith and its four companions arise only for one whose wholesome roots remain unsevered, never for one whose wholesome roots have been severed; the faculties co-arisen with wrong view arise only for one whose wholesome roots have been severed, never for one whose wholesome roots remain unsevered. Another position holds that "this dharma" means abiding in the group fixed for correct attainment, and "ordinary being" means abiding in the group fixed for wrong attainment — the faculties arisen for one abiding in the group fixed for correct attainment never arise for one abiding in the group fixed for wrong attainment, and the faculties arisen for one abiding in the group fixed for wrong attainment never arise for one abiding in the group fixed for correct attainment. Another position holds that "this dharma" means abiding in the five Pure Abodes, and "ordinary being" means abiding in the five stations of ordinary beings — the faculties arisen for one abiding in the five Pure Abodes—
彼根非住五異生處者所起。諸住五異生處者所起根。彼根非住五淨居者所起。色蘊攝幾根。答七。謂眼等七色根。受蘊攝幾根。答五三少分。五者。謂五受根。三少分者。謂三無漏根少分。以三無漏根九法為體。此唯攝三。故言少分。想蘊攝幾根。答。無。想非根故。行蘊攝幾根。答六三少分。六者。謂命信等五根。三少分者。
never arise for one abiding in the five stations of ordinary beings, and, conversely, the faculties arisen for one abiding in the five stations of ordinary beings never arise for one abiding in the five Pure Abodes. How many faculties does the form aggregate include? Seven — the eye and the other six form-faculties. How many does the feeling aggregate include? Five, plus three in part — the five are the five feeling-faculties; the three in part are the three uncontaminated faculties, since each uncontaminated faculty's own substance comprises nine dharmas, of which only three belong to feeling — hence "in part." How many does the perception aggregate include? None, since perception is not itself a faculty. How many does the formations aggregate include? Six, plus three in part — the six are the life-faculty and faith with its four companions; the three in part are
That perception, one of the five great aggregates around which the entire analysis of a person is organized, contains not a single faculty is a useful reminder that the aggregates and the faculties are two independent classification systems layered over the same reality, not one subordinate to the other — a full aggregate can simply have no faculty-representative within it at all.
6. Sorting Every Wholesome, Unwholesome, and Neutral Root Into Its Elements and Bases
The census continues into the formations and consciousness aggregates' own fractional faculty counts, before turning to an exhaustive element-base-aggregate breakdown of the wholesome, unwholesome, obscured-neutral, and unobscured-neutral roots — each precisely mapped to a fixed number of elements, bases, and aggregates, with a parallel census of what belongs to that root and nothing else.
謂三無漏根少分。以三無漏根九法為體。此唯攝五故言少分。識蘊攝幾根。答一三少分。一者。謂意根。三少分者。謂三無漏根少分。以三無漏根九法為體。此唯攝一故言少分。善根幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答八界二處三蘊。八界者。謂七心界法界。二處者。謂意處法處。三蘊者。謂受蘊行蘊識蘊。唯攝善根有幾界幾處幾蘊。答無。
the three uncontaminated faculties, since each uncontaminated faculty's own substance comprises nine dharmas, of which only five belong to formations — hence "in part." How many does the consciousness aggregate include? One, plus three in part — the one is the mind-faculty; the three in part are the three uncontaminated faculties, since each uncontaminated faculty's own substance comprises nine dharmas, of which only one belongs to consciousness — hence "in part." How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the wholesome root belong to? Eight elements, two bases, three aggregates. The eight elements are the seven mental elements and the dharma-element; the two bases are the mental base and the dharma-base; the three aggregates are feeling, formations, and consciousness. How many elements, bases, and aggregates belong solely to the wholesome root? None.
不善根幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答八界二處二蘊。八界者。謂七心界法界。二處者。謂意處法處。二蘊者。謂受蘊識蘊。唯攝不善根有幾界幾處幾蘊。答無。有覆無記根。幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答六界二處二蘊。六界者。謂眼識界耳識界身識界意界意識界法界。二處者。謂意處法處。二蘊者。謂受蘊識蘊。唯攝有覆無記根。有幾界幾處幾蘊。答無。無覆無記根。幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答十三界七處四蘊。十三界者。謂內十二界。及法界。七處者。謂內六處。及法處。四蘊者。謂除想蘊。唯攝無覆無記根。有幾界幾處幾蘊。答五界五處。
How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the unwholesome root belong to? Eight elements, two bases, two aggregates. The eight elements are the seven mental elements and the dharma-element; the two bases are the mental base and the dharma-base; the two aggregates are feeling and consciousness. How many belong solely to the unwholesome root? None. How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the obscured-neutral root belong to? Six elements, two bases, two aggregates. The six elements are the eye-, ear-, and body-consciousness elements, the mental element, the mental-consciousness element, and the dharma-element; the two bases are the mental base and the dharma-base; the two aggregates are feeling and consciousness. How many belong solely to the obscured-neutral root? None. How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the unobscured-neutral root belong to? Thirteen elements, seven bases, four aggregates. The thirteen elements are the twelve internal elements plus the dharma-element; the seven bases are the six internal bases plus the dharma-base; the four aggregates are all but the perception aggregate. How many belong solely to the unobscured-neutral root? Five elements, five bases,
The obscured-neutral root's own narrow home — just six elements, confined specifically to the eye-, ear-, and body-consciousness elements alongside the mental and dharma elements — is a small but concrete illustration of how precisely this tradition insists on locating even its most ethically ambiguous category: obscured-neutral dharmas are neither wholesome nor simply unwholesome, and their exact elemental address reflects that ambiguity structurally rather than leaving it vague.
7. A Faculty, a Non-Faculty, and Three Different Ways to Frame a Single Question
The unobscured-neutral root's own census concludes, followed by a parallel census of the faculty-dharma, the non-faculty-dharma, and their combination, each again mapped onto precise elements, bases, and aggregates. The fascicle then turns to its longest-running investigation: can a faculty condition the arising of another faculty? Before answering, the treatise pauses to catalogue three entirely different ways later exegetes have structured this very question — as one heading with one elaboration, as three headings each fully elaborated, or as three headings paired with brief answers alone.
非蘊。五界者。謂眼等五色根界。五處者。謂眼等五色根處。非蘊者。謂無蘊。唯無覆無記故根法幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答十三界七處四蘊。十三界者。謂內十二界。及法界。七處者。謂內六處。及法處。四蘊者。謂除想蘊。唯攝根法。有幾界幾處幾蘊。答十二界六處二蘊。十二界者。謂內十二界。六處者。謂內六處。二蘊者。謂受蘊識蘊。非根法幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答六界六處三蘊。六界者。謂外六界。六處者。謂外六處。三蘊者。謂色蘊想蘊行蘊。唯攝非根法。有幾界幾處幾蘊。答五界五處一蘊。五界者。謂外五色界。五處者。謂外五色處。一蘊者。謂想蘊。根非根法。幾界幾處幾蘊攝。答十八界十二處五蘊。唯攝根非根法。有幾界幾處幾蘊。答一界一處二蘊。一界者。謂法界。一處者。謂法處。二蘊者。謂色蘊行蘊。頗根為緣生根耶。乃至廣說。有說。此中有一標一釋一廣釋。如說。頗根為緣生根耶等。是標。頗眼根為緣生眼根耶等。是釋。眼根與眼根為幾緣等。是廣釋。有說。此中有三標三釋三廣釋。如說。頗根為緣生根耶是標。答生。是釋。生非根耶等。是廣釋。頗眼根為緣生眼根耶。是標。答生。是釋。生耳根乃至生具知根耶等。是廣釋。眼根與眼根為幾緣。是標。答因增上。是釋。乃至與具知根為所緣增上等。是廣釋。有說。此中有三標三釋。如說。頗根為緣生根耶等。是標。答生等。是釋頗眼根為緣生眼根耶等。是標。答生等。是釋。眼根與眼根為幾緣等。是標。答因增上等。是釋。
no aggregate. The five elements are the five form-faculty elements — eye and the rest; the five bases are the five form-faculty bases; "no aggregate" means there is none, since unobscured-neutral matters alone never constitute a complete aggregate. How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the faculty-dharma belong to? Thirteen elements, seven bases, four aggregates. The thirteen elements are the twelve internal elements plus the dharma-element; the seven bases are the six internal bases plus the dharma-base; the four aggregates are all but the perception aggregate. How many belong solely to the faculty-dharma? Twelve elements, six bases, two aggregates. The twelve elements are the twelve internal elements; the six bases are the six internal bases; the two aggregates are feeling and consciousness. How many elements, bases, and aggregates does the non-faculty-dharma belong to? Six elements, six bases, three aggregates. The six elements are the six external elements; the six bases are the six external bases; the three aggregates are form, perception, and formations. How many belong solely to the non-faculty-dharma? Five elements, five bases, one aggregate. The five elements are the five external form-elements; the five bases are the five external form-bases; the one aggregate is perception. How many elements, bases, and aggregates does what is both faculty and non-faculty dharma belong to? Eighteen elements, twelve bases, five aggregates. How many belong solely to what is both faculty and non-faculty dharma? One element, one base, two aggregates. The one element is the dharma-element; the one base is the dharma-base; the two aggregates are form and formations. "Can a faculty condition the arising of another faculty, and so on, as stated at length?" One position holds that this passage contains one heading, one brief answer, and one extended elaboration — "can a faculty condition the arising of a faculty" and so on is the heading; "can the eye-faculty condition the arising of the eye-faculty" and so on is the brief answer; "what conditions does the eye-faculty bear toward the eye-faculty" and so on is the extended elaboration. Another position holds that this passage contains three headings, three brief answers, and three extended elaborations — "can a faculty condition the arising of a faculty" is the heading; "it can" is the brief answer; "can it condition the arising of a non-faculty" and so on is the extended elaboration. "Can the eye-faculty condition the arising of the eye-faculty" is the heading; "it can" is the brief answer; "can it condition the arising of the ear-faculty, up through the faculty of complete knowledge" and so on is the extended elaboration. "What conditions does the eye-faculty bear toward the eye-faculty" is the heading; "cause and dominance" is the brief answer; "and so on, up through what conditions it bears as object and dominance toward the faculty of complete knowledge" is the extended elaboration. Another position holds that this passage contains three headings and three brief answers — "can a faculty condition the arising of a faculty" and so on is the heading, and "it can" and so on is the brief answer; "can the eye-faculty condition the arising of the eye-faculty" and so on is the heading, and "it can" and so on is the brief answer; "what conditions does the eye-faculty bear toward the eye-faculty" and so on is the heading, and "cause and dominance" and so on is the brief answer.
Pausing an entire investigation just to catalogue the different ways commentators have chosen to organize the investigation itself is a distinctly self-aware move: before answering whether a faculty can condition a faculty, the treatise first answers the quieter, curatorial question of how such questions ought to be laid out at all — treating exegetical method as worth documenting in its own right, not just the doctrine that method eventually delivers.
8. Can a Faculty Give Rise to a Faculty? The First Two Expository Passes
The investigation proper now unfolds through its first two expository versions: whether a faculty conditions the arising of a faculty, a non-faculty, or both together, and whether a non-faculty conditions the arising of a non-faculty, a faculty, or both — each answer worked out concretely through the eye taking a basis-role or an object-role, generating everything from the mind-faculty itself down to perception, volition, contact, and attention.
頗根為緣生根耶。答生云何生。答如眼為所依。生意三受信等五根。或眼為所緣。生意四受信等五三無漏根。頗根為緣生非根耶。
"Can a faculty condition the arising of a faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, gives rise to the mind-faculty, the three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions; or the eye, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, four feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. "Can a faculty condition the arising of a non-faculty?"
答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。生想思觸作意等。或眼為所緣。生想思觸作意。及惡作睡眠等。頗根為緣生根非根耶。答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。生意三受信等五根想思觸作意等。或眼為所緣。生意四受信等五三無漏根想思觸作意等。及惡作睡眠等。頗非根為緣生非根耶。答生。云何生。答如色為所緣。生想思觸作意等。及惡作睡眠等。頗非根為緣生根耶。答生。云何生。答如色為所緣。生意五受信等五三無漏根。頗非根為緣。生根非根耶。答生。云何生。答如色為所緣。生意五受信等五三無漏根想思觸作意等。及惡作睡眠等。頗根非根為緣。生根非根耶。答生。云何生。
Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, gives rise to perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth; or the eye, serving as object, gives rise to perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth, including regret, drowsiness, and so on. "Can a faculty condition the arising of both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, gives rise to the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth; or the eye, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, four feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, the three uncontaminated faculties, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth, including regret, drowsiness, and so on. "Can a non-faculty condition the arising of a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: form, serving as object, gives rise to perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth, including regret, drowsiness, and so on. "Can a non-faculty condition the arising of a faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: form, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, five feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. "Can a non-faculty condition the arising of both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so?
答如眼為所依。色為所緣。生意三受信等五根想思觸作意等。頗根非根為緣生根耶。答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。色為所緣。生意三受信等五根。頗根非根為緣。生非根耶。答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。色為所緣。生想思觸作意等有餘於此作第二文。頗根為緣唯生根耶。答不生。由此根亦生非根故。頗根為緣唯生非根耶。
Answer: the eye, serving as basis, and form, serving as object, together give rise to the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty condition the arising of a faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, and form, serving as object, together give rise to the mind-faculty and the three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty condition the arising of a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, and form, serving as object, together give rise to perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth. Another exegete offers a second version of this passage: "Can a faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a faculty?" Answer: no, since a faculty also gives rise to non-faculties. "Can a faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a non-faculty?"
答不生。由此根亦生根故。頗根為緣唯生根非根耶。答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。生意三受信等五根想思觸作意等。頗非根為緣。唯生非根耶。答不生。由此非根亦生根故。頗非根為緣。唯生根耶。答不生。由此非根亦生非根故。頗非根為緣。唯生根非根耶。答生。云何生。答如色為所緣。生意五受信等五三無漏根想思觸作意等。及惡作睡眠等。頗根非根為緣。唯生根非根耶。答生。
Answer: no, since a faculty also gives rise to faculties. "Can a faculty condition arising while giving rise only to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, gives rise to the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth. "Can a non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since a non-faculty also gives rise to faculties. "Can a non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a faculty?" Answer: no, since a non-faculty also gives rise to non-faculties. "Can a non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can. How so? Answer: form, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, five feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, the three uncontaminated faculties, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth, including regret, drowsiness, and so on. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can.
The sheer combinatorial patience on display here — faculty-from-faculty, faculty-from-non-faculty, non-faculty-from-faculty, non-faculty-from-non-faculty, and every combined pairing besides — reflects a governing assumption of this whole literature: that causal claims are only trustworthy once every logically available combination has actually been checked, not merely the intuitively obvious ones.
9. A Third Pass, Testing Whether Anything Ever Gives Rise to Only One Kind of Thing
A third exegetical version sharpens the question further, asking not simply whether a faculty or non-faculty can condition arising, but whether it can condition arising while giving rise exclusively to one category alone. Almost every such exclusive claim is firmly rejected — a faculty conditioning arising always also gives rise to non-faculties, and vice versa — until the investigation isolates the one combination, the mixed faculty-and-non-faculty condition, capable of exclusively producing a specific combined result.
云何生。答如眼為所依。色為所緣。生意三受信等五根想思觸作意等。頗根非根為緣。唯生根耶。答不生。由此根非根亦生非根故。
How so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, and form, serving as object, together give rise to the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and perception, volition, contact, attention, and so forth. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a faculty?" Answer: no, since a combined faculty-and-non-faculty also gives rise to non-faculties.
頗根非根為緣。唯生非根耶。答不生。由此根非根亦生根故。
"Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty condition arising while giving rise only to a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since a combined faculty-and-non-faculty also gives rise to faculties.
有餘於此作第三文。頗唯根為緣生根耶。答不生。由此根亦緣非根生故。頗唯根為緣生非根耶。答不生。由此非根亦緣非根生故。頗唯根為緣生根非根耶。答不生。由此根非根亦緣非根生故。頗唯非根為緣生非根耶。答不生。由此非根亦緣根生故。頗唯非根為緣生根耶。答不生。由此根亦緣根生故。頗唯非根為緣生根非根耶。答不生。由此根非根亦緣根生故。頗唯根非根為緣。生根非根耶。答生。廣說如上。頗唯根非根為緣生根耶。答生。廣說如上。頗唯根非根為緣生非根耶。答生。廣說如上。
Another exegete offers a third version of this passage: "Can a faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a faculty?" Answer: no, since it also gives rise, in dependence on a non-faculty, to a non-faculty. "Can a faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since it also gives rise, in dependence on a non-faculty, to a faculty. "Can a faculty alone, as condition, give rise to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since a faculty-and-non-faculty combined also gives rise, in dependence on a non-faculty, to this same pairing. "Can a non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since it also gives rise, in dependence on a faculty, to a faculty. "Can a non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a faculty?" Answer: no, since it also gives rise, in dependence on a faculty, to a faculty. "Can a non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: no, since a faculty-and-non-faculty combined also gives rise, in dependence on a faculty, to this same pairing. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to both a faculty and a non-faculty?" Answer: it can, exactly as explained above. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a faculty?" Answer: it can, exactly as explained above. "Can a combined faculty-and-non-faculty alone, as condition, give rise to a non-faculty?" Answer: it can, exactly as explained above.
The near-universal rejection of exclusivity here — almost nothing, on this analysis, ever gives rise to only faculties or only non-faculties — captures something the Abhidharma keeps rediscovering across very different topics: causal relationships in this system are characteristically promiscuous rather than tidy, generating mixed results far more often than clean, single-category ones.
10. The Eye Generates the Mind; the Mind Generates Everything, Including Its Own Retribution
The investigation now turns concrete, tracing exactly how the eye-faculty conditions the arising of the ear-faculty and, eventually, every other faculty up through the faculty of complete knowledge — whether by serving as basis, by serving as object, or through the karmic mechanism of slandering or having faith in the eye-faculty itself, which respectively yield rebirth in the evil or the good destinies. The mind-faculty's own causal reach is then traced in exactly the same detail.
頗眼根為緣生眼根耶。答生。云何生。答謂不礙生。及唯無障。頗眼根為緣生耳根乃至具知根耶。答生。云何生。答如眼為所依。生意三受信等五根。或眼為所緣。生意四受信等五三無漏根。或謗眼根墮諸惡趣。受諸色根命根意根苦根異熟。或信眼根生諸善趣。受諸色根命根意根樂根喜根捨根異熟。是名眼根為緣生耳根乃至具知根。如眼根。耳鼻舌身女男命根亦爾。然有差別。謂女男根。非苦根信等五根所依。命根非一切根所依。頗意根為緣生意根耶。生眼根。乃至具知根耶。答生。云何生。答如意根為所依。生意五受信等五三無漏根。或意根為所緣。生意四受信等五三無漏根。或謗意根墮諸惡趣。受諸色根命根意根苦根異熟。或信意根。生諸善趣。
"Can the eye-faculty condition the arising of the eye-faculty?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: through mere non-obstruction of arising, and through simple absence of hindrance. "Can the eye-faculty condition the arising of the ear-faculty, up through the faculty of complete knowledge?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the eye, serving as basis, gives rise to the mind-faculty and three feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions; or the eye, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, four feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties; or, by slandering the eye-faculty, one falls into the evil destinies, receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, and pain-faculties; or, by having faith in the eye-faculty, one takes rebirth in the good destinies, receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, pleasure-, joy-, and equanimity-faculties. This is what is meant by the eye-faculty conditioning the arising of the ear-faculty up through the faculty of complete knowledge. The ear, nose, tongue, body, female, male, and life faculties are exactly the same as the eye, though with certain distinctions — namely that the female and male faculties do not serve as basis for the pain-faculty or for faith and its four companions, and the life-faculty does not serve as basis for every faculty. "Can the mind-faculty condition the arising of the mind-faculty, up through the eye-faculty and on to the faculty of complete knowledge?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the mind-faculty, serving as basis, gives rise to the mind-faculty, five feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties; or the mind-faculty, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, four feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties; or, by slandering the mind-faculty, one falls into the evil destinies, receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, and pain-faculties; or, by having faith in the mind-faculty, one takes rebirth in the good destinies,
受諸色根命根意根樂根喜根捨根異熟。又意根有善不善。善者於善趣受諸色根命根意根樂根喜根捨根異熟。不善者。於惡趣受諸色根命根意根苦根異熟。如意根。五受根信等五根亦爾。然有差別。謂一切非所依。苦根於自非所緣。信等五根非不善。頗未知當知根為緣。生未知當知根耶。生眼根乃至具知根耶。答生。云何生。答如未知當知根為所依。生未知當知已知意三受信等五根。或未知當知根為所緣。生意四受信等五三無漏根。或謗未知當知根。墮諸惡趣。受諸色根命根意根苦根異熟。或信未知當知根。生諸善趣。受諸色根命根意根樂根喜根捨根異熟。如未知當知根。已知根具知根亦爾。然有差別。謂已知根為所依。生已知根具知根意根三受信等五根。具知根為所依。生具知根意根三受信等五根。問眼根與眼根為幾緣。與耳根乃至具知根為幾緣。乃至具知根與具知根為幾緣。
receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, pleasure-, joy-, and equanimity-faculties. Moreover, the mind-faculty may itself be wholesome or unwholesome — when wholesome, in the good destinies it gives the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, pleasure-, joy-, and equanimity-faculties; when unwholesome, in the evil destinies it gives the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, and pain-faculties. The five feeling-faculties and faith with its four companions are exactly like the mind-faculty, though with certain distinctions — namely that all of them never serve as basis, the pain-faculty is never its own object, and faith with its four companions is never unwholesome. "Can the faculty of the yet-unknown condition the arising of the faculty of the yet-unknown, up through the eye-faculty and on to the faculty of complete knowledge?" Answer: it can. How does it do so? Answer: the faculty of the yet-unknown, serving as basis, gives rise to the faculty of the yet-unknown, the already-known faculty, the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions; or the faculty of the yet-unknown, serving as object, gives rise to the mind-faculty, four feeling-faculties, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties; or, by slandering the faculty of the yet-unknown, one falls into the evil destinies, receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, and pain-faculties; or, by having faith in the faculty of the yet-unknown, one takes rebirth in the good destinies, receiving the retribution of the form-, life-, mind-, pleasure-, joy-, and equanimity-faculties. The already-known faculty and the faculty of complete knowledge are exactly like the faculty of the yet-unknown, though with certain distinctions — namely that the already-known faculty, serving as basis, gives rise to the already-known faculty, the faculty of complete knowledge, the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions, while the faculty of complete knowledge, serving as basis, gives rise to the faculty of complete knowledge, the mind-faculty, three feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions. "What conditions does the eye-faculty bear toward the eye-faculty, toward the remaining faculties from the ear-faculty up through the faculty of complete knowledge, and, indeed, what conditions does the faculty of complete knowledge bear toward the eye-faculty up through the already-known faculty?"
That slandering or having faith in a mere sense-faculty — the eye, say, rather than any grand doctrinal object — can itself ripen into an entire rebirth's worth of retributive faculties is a vivid reminder of how seriously this tradition takes even small, specific acts of denigration or reverence: karmic weight, on this account, attaches to remarkably granular objects of attitude, not only to grand moral choices.
11. The Great Ledger Begins: Eye, Body, Life, Mind, and Pleasure Bear Their Precise Conditions
The fascicle's final and longest structure now opens — an exhaustive, faculty-by-faculty ledger cataloguing exactly which of the four conditions (cause, immediacy, object, and dominance) each faculty bears toward every other faculty, and precisely how many of the six causes are involved in each case. The eye-faculty's own entry sets the pattern before the ledger works methodically through the body, female, male, life, mind, and pleasure faculties in turn.
與眼根乃至已知根為幾緣。答眼根與眼根。為因增上。因者一因。
And what conditions does it bear toward the eye-faculty, up through the already-known faculty? The eye-faculty bears cause and dominance toward the eye-faculty; the cause is a single cause,
謂同類因。增上者。謂不礙生及唯無障。後增上義皆同此說。與餘色根命根苦根為一增上。與餘根為所緣增上。餘根者。謂意四受信等五三無漏根。如眼根。耳鼻舌根亦爾。身根與身根女根男根。為因增上。因者一因。謂同類因。與餘色根命根苦根。為一增上。與餘根為所緣增上。餘根者。如前說。女根與女根身根。為因增上。
the homogeneous cause; "dominance" means through mere non-obstruction of arising and simple absence of hindrance — and dominance is to be understood in this same sense throughout what follows. It bears dominance alone toward the remaining form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely the mind-faculty, the four feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties. The ear and nose faculties are exactly like the eye. The body-faculty bears cause and dominance toward the body-faculty, the female faculty, and the male faculty; the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause. It bears dominance alone toward the remaining form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the remaining faculties, as already described. The female faculty bears cause and dominance toward the female faculty and the body-faculty;
因者一因。謂同類因。與餘色根命根苦根。為一增上。與餘根為所緣增上。餘根者。如前說。如女根。男根亦爾。命根與命根為因增上。因者一因。謂同類因。與七色根苦根。為一增上。與餘根為所緣增上。餘根者。如前說。意根與意根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。謂同類遍行異熟因。等無間者。謂意根等無間。意根現在前。所緣者。謂意根與意根為所緣。諸等無間。及所緣義。皆准此說。與七色根命根。為因增上。因者一因。謂異熟因。與苦根為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者五因。謂相應俱有同類遍行異熟因。等無間者。謂意根等無間苦根現在前。非所緣者。苦根緣色。意根非色故。與餘根為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。謂樂喜捨憂信等五三無漏根。此依具緣等故總說。然因有異。謂與樂喜捨根為五因。即相應等五。與憂根為四因。除異熟因。與信等五根三無漏根為三因。即相應俱有同類因。如意根。樂根喜根捨根信等五根亦爾。當知此依緣數等故總相而說。然以因緣有差別故。恐文隔遠。今具分別。謂樂根與樂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與七色命根。為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。與意根為因等無間所緣增上。因者五因。即相應等五。與苦根為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者二因。即同類異熟因。非所緣者。苦根緣色。樂根非色故。與喜根為因等無間所緣增上。因者二因。即同類異熟因。與憂根為因等無間所緣增上因者一因。即同類因。與捨根為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與信等五根三無漏根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。喜根與喜根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與七色根命根。為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。與意根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者五因。即相應等五。與樂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與苦根。為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與憂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者二因。即同類遍行因。與捨根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與信等五根三無漏根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。捨根與捨根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與七色根命根。為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。與意根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者五因。即相應等五。與樂根喜根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。
the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause; it bears dominance alone toward the remaining form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the remaining faculties, as already described. The male faculty is exactly like the female faculty. The life-faculty bears cause and dominance toward the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause; it bears dominance alone toward the seven form-faculties and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the remaining faculties, as already described. The mind-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the mind-faculty; the cause comprises three causes — the homogeneous, the universal, and the ripening causes; "immediacy" means that the mind-faculty arises immediately after the mind-faculty; "object" means that the mind-faculty takes the mind-faculty as its object — and immediacy and object are to be understood in this same sense throughout what follows. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause, immediacy, and dominance, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises five causes — the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes; "immediacy" means that the pain-faculty arises immediately after the mind-faculty; "not object" means that the pain-faculty takes form as its object, while the mind-faculty is not form. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely pleasure, joy, equanimity, displeasure, and faith with its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties. This is stated comprehensively on the basis of the conditions being complete, yet the causes actually differ: toward pleasure, joy, and equanimity there are five causes, the associated and the other four; toward displeasure there are four causes, excluding the ripening cause; toward faith and its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties there are three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. Pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions are exactly like the mind-faculty in this same respect — one should understand that this too is stated comprehensively on the basis of the number of conditions being equal, yet since the causal conditions genuinely differ, and out of concern the text might otherwise seem too distant and disconnected, a full distinction is now given. The pleasure-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the pleasure-faculty; the cause comprises three causes — the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the mind-faculty; the cause comprises five causes, the associated and the other four. It bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and ripening causes; "not object" means the pain-faculty takes form as its object, while the pleasure-faculty is not form. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the joy-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and ripening causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the equanimity-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward faith and its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. The joy-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the joy-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the mind-faculty; the cause comprises five causes, the associated and the other four. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the pleasure-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and universal causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the equanimity-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward faith and its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. The equanimity-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the equanimity-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the mind-faculty; the cause comprises five causes, the associated and the other four. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward pleasure and joy; the cause comprises three causes,
The mind-faculty's own aside — that this comprehensive style of reporting, while accurate in aggregate, actually obscures real differences in the causal count from case to case, prompting the compiler to "fear the text might seem too distant and disconnected" and offer a fuller breakdown — is a rare moment of authorial self-consciousness: the tradition catches its own summarizing convention creating exactly the kind of confusion a careful reader would eventually stumble over, and corrects course in real time.
12. Joy, Equanimity, Faith, Pain, and Displeasure Complete Their Own Entries
The ledger continues methodically through the joy-, equanimity-, and faith-faculties — the last extending automatically to its four companions, diligence, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom — before turning to the pain- and displeasure-faculties, each entry once again specifying the exact cause-count toward every other faculty in the system, down to the precise reason the pain-faculty can never take itself as its own object.
即同類遍行異熟因。與苦根。為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與憂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者二因。即同類遍行因。與信等五根三無漏根。為因等無間所緣增上。
the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and universal causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward faith and its four companions and the three uncontaminated faculties; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes.
因者三因。即相應俱有同類因信根與信根。為因等無間所緣增上。
The cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. The faith-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the faith-faculty;
因者一因。即同類因。與七色根命根。為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。與意根樂根喜根捨根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者四因。除遍行因。與苦根為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。與憂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。與精進等四根三無漏根為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。如信根。精進等四根亦爾。苦根與苦根。為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者二因。即同類異熟因。非所緣者。苦根緣色苦根非色故。與七色根命根。為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。
the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, and equanimity; the cause comprises four causes, excluding the universal cause. It bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward diligence and the remaining three companions and the three uncontaminated faculties; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. Diligence and the remaining three companions are exactly like the faith-faculty. The pain-faculty bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and ripening causes; "not object" means the pain-faculty takes form as its object, while the pain-faculty is not form. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause.
與三無漏根。為所緣增上。所緣者。謂與苦忍苦智集忍集智品為所緣。與餘根為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。謂意樂喜捨憂信等五根。此亦具緣等故總說。然因有異。謂與意根為四因。除遍行因。
It bears object-dominance toward the three uncontaminated faculties; "object" means it serves as the object for the patient-acceptance-of-suffering and knowledge-of-suffering and the patient-acceptance-of-origin and knowledge-of-origin classes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, displeasure, and faith with its four companions. This too is stated comprehensively on the basis of the conditions being complete, yet the causes differ: toward the mind-faculty there are four causes, excluding the universal cause.
與樂根喜根捨根為二因。即同類異熟因。與憂根為一因。即同類因。與信等五根為三因。即相應俱有同類因。憂根與憂根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者二因。即同類遍行因。與七色根命根為因增上。因者一因。即異熟因。與苦根為因等無間增上。非所緣。因者三因。即同類遍行異熟因。與三無漏根。為所緣增上。所緣者。謂與苦忍苦智集忍集智品為所緣。與餘根為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。謂意樂喜捨信等五根。此亦具緣等故總說。然因有異。謂與意根為五因。即相應等五。與樂喜捨根為三因。即同類遍行異熟因。
Toward pleasure, joy, and equanimity there are two causes, the homogeneous and ripening causes; toward displeasure there is one cause, the homogeneous cause; toward faith and its four companions there are three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. The displeasure-faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; the cause comprises two causes, the homogeneous and universal causes. It bears cause and dominance toward the seven form-faculties and the life-faculty; the cause is a single cause, the ripening cause. It bears cause and immediacy, but not object, toward the pain-faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. It bears object-dominance toward the three uncontaminated faculties; "object" means it serves as the object for the patient-acceptance-of-suffering and knowledge-of-suffering and the patient-acceptance-of-origin and knowledge-of-origin classes. It bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. This too is stated comprehensively on the basis of the conditions being complete, yet the causes differ: toward the mind-faculty there are five causes, the associated and the other four; toward pleasure, joy, and equanimity there are three causes, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes;
The recurring explanatory aside — "the pain-faculty takes form as its object, while the pain-faculty is not form" — repeated with only the faculty-name changed each time it applies, shows the ledger holding itself to a standard of total explicitness: even a conclusion implied by definitions already given several faculties earlier is respelled out fresh every time it becomes relevant again, leaving nothing for the reader to infer alone.
13. The Three Uncontaminated Faculties Close the Ledger
The great ledger reaches its conclusion with the three uncontaminated faculties — the yet-unknown, the already-known, and the faculty of complete knowledge — each bearing its own precise pattern of cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the others and toward the ordinary faculties surrounding them, including the specific technical reason the faculty of complete knowledge bears object-dominance but not immediacy toward the faculty of the yet-unknown from which it has already, definitionally, moved on.
與信等五根為三因。即相應俱有同類因。未知當知根與未知當知根為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。所緣者。謂與道忍道智品為所緣。與具知根為因所緣增上。非等無間。因者一因。即同類因。所緣者。謂與道忍道智品為所緣。非等無間者。未知當知根等無間。具知根不現前故。與七色根命根苦根。為一增上。與憂根為所緣增上。與餘根。為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。
toward faith and its four companions there are three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. The faculty of the yet-unknown bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the faculty of the yet-unknown; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes; "object" means it serves as the object for the patient-acceptance-of-the-path and knowledge-of-the-path classes. It bears cause and object-dominance, but not immediacy, toward the faculty of complete knowledge; the cause is a single cause, the homogeneous cause; "object" means it serves as the object for the patient-acceptance-of-the-path and knowledge-of-the-path classes; "not immediacy" means that the faculty of complete knowledge does not arise immediately after the faculty of the yet-unknown. It bears dominance alone toward the seven form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the displeasure-faculty; it bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely,
謂意樂喜捨信等五已知根。此亦具緣等故總說。然因有異。謂與意等九根為三因。即相應俱有同類因。與已知根為一因。即同類因。
the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions and the already-known faculty. This too is stated comprehensively on the basis of the conditions being complete, yet the causes differ: toward the mind-faculty and the other eight faculties there are three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes; toward the already-known faculty there is one cause, the homogeneous cause.
已知根與已知根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。與七色根命根苦根。為一增上。與憂根未知當知根為所緣增上。與餘根。為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。謂意樂喜捨信等五具知根。此亦具緣等故總說。然因有異謂與意等九根。為三因。即相應俱有同類因。與具知根為一因。即同類因。具知根與具知根。為因等無間所緣增上。因者三因。即相應俱有同類。與七色根命根苦根。為一增上。與憂根未知當知根已知根。為所緣增上。與餘根為因等無間所緣增上。餘根者。謂意樂喜捨信等五根。因者三因。即相應俱有同類因。等無間者。謂具知根等無間。意等九根現在前。
The already-known faculty bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the already-known faculty; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. It bears dominance alone toward the seven form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the displeasure-faculty and the faculty of the yet-unknown; it bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions and the faculty of complete knowledge. This too is stated comprehensively on the basis of the conditions being complete, yet the causes differ: toward the mind-faculty and the other eight faculties there are three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes; toward the faculty of complete knowledge there is one cause, the homogeneous cause. The faculty of complete knowledge bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the faculty of complete knowledge; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. It bears dominance alone toward the seven form-faculties, the life-faculty, and the pain-faculty; it bears object-dominance toward the displeasure-faculty, the faculty of the yet-unknown, and the already-known faculty; it bears cause, immediacy, object, and dominance toward the remaining faculties — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions; the cause comprises three causes, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes; "immediacy" means that the mind-faculty and the other eight faculties arise immediately after the faculty of complete knowledge.
所緣者。謂具知根與意等九根為所緣。增上者。謂不礙生及唯無障。
"Object" means that the faculty of complete knowledge takes the mind-faculty and the other eight faculties as its object; "dominance" means through mere non-obstruction of arising and simple absence of hindrance.
That even the three most exalted faculties in this entire system — the very markers of a path moving irreversibly toward liberation — still submit to exactly the same mechanical four-condition ledger applied to the eye or the pain-faculty is a fitting closing note: nothing in this cosmology, however soteriologically advanced, is exempt from the same exhaustive causal bookkeeping demanded of everything else.
Fascicle 146 Complete
This closes fascicle 146 of Ru-Yi's translation, drawn from the treatise's true CBETA boundary. Fascicle 146 continues and concludes the Faculty Nyāsa (根納息第一之五): a fresh census of causal correspondence across six exegetical frameworks; the four-category analysis of having or lacking an object, extended across the entire Abhidharma inventory; an extended tetralemma distinguishing the noble one from the ordinary being through six separate glosses; a full element-base-aggregate census of the wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral roots and of the faculty-dharma itself; three expository passes on whether a faculty can condition the arising of a faculty; and, closing both the fascicle and the entire Faculty Nyāsa, an exhaustive faculty-by-faculty ledger of cause, immediacy, object, and dominance running from the eye-faculty through the three uncontaminated faculties. Fascicle 147 opens an entirely new nyāsa within this same Sixth Aggregate: the Existence Nyāsa (根蘊第六中有納息第二之一), turning from the faculties themselves to the karmic origins of a being's continuity across rebirth.