A New Chapter: Sixteen Kinds of Contact, and the Divine Eye
Fascicle 149 opens the Contact Nyāsa, defending contact's own reality against the Dṛṣṭāntikas, defining and cross-tabulating its sixteen kinds, and closing with the divine eye's own nature, name, and the puzzle of observing a transformation-body sixteen thousand yojanas tall. 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 149 opens the Contact Nyāsa (觸納息第三之一), a new chapter within the Sixth Aggregate following the conclusion of the Existence Nyāsa in fascicle 148. Terms established across fascicles 93–148 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. A New Chapter Opens: Sixteen Kinds of Contact, and Is Contact Even Real?
Fascicle 149 opens an entirely new nyāsa within the Faculties Aggregate — the Contact Nyāsa — listing sixteen distinct kinds of contact before immediately confronting a rival school's most basic challenge: the Dṛṣṭāntikas hold that contact has no real substance of its own at all, citing the sūtra's own description of eye, form, and eye-consciousness simply "coming together" as contact, with nothing separate ever found beyond those three.
有十六觸謂有對觸。增語觸。明觸。無明觸。非明非無明觸。愛觸。恚觸。順樂受觸。順苦受觸。順不苦不樂受觸。眼觸。耳觸。
There are sixteen kinds of contact: resistance-contact, designation-contact, illumination-contact, non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, craving-contact, hatred-contact, pleasant-feeling-contact, painful-feeling-contact, neutral-feeling-contact, eye-contact, ear-contact,
鼻觸。舌觸。身觸。意觸。云何有對觸。乃至云何意觸。如是等章。及解章義既領會已。當廣分別。問何故作此論。答為止他宗顯己義故。謂譬喻者說。觸非實有。所以者何。契經說故。如契經說。眼及色為緣生眼識。三和合觸等。離眼色眼識外實觸體不可得。為遮彼意顯觸體是實有。若觸體非實有者。便違經說。如契經說。觸為緣受。若無觸者但應說六處緣受。或說無緣不應言觸緣受。又若觸體非實有者。應說緣起唯十一支。契經不應說有十二。
nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, and mind-contact. "What is resistance-contact?" And so on, up through "what is mind-contact?" — such are the chapter headings, and such is the explanation of their meaning. Having grasped this, a full analysis should now be given. Why raise this discussion at all? To block a rival school's own position and to make clear this treatise's own view. The Dṛṣṭāntikas hold that contact is not truly real, on the grounds that the sūtra itself states: "the eye and form serve as conditions for the arising of eye-consciousness; the coming together of these three is contact" — and, apart from the eye, form, and eye-consciousness, no separate, genuinely real substance called "contact" can ever be found. To block this view, the present discussion makes clear that contact's own substance is indeed real — for if contact's own substance were not real, this would contradict what the sūtra itself states: "contact serves as a condition for feeling." If there were truly no contact, the sūtra ought simply to have said that the six sense-bases serve as a condition for feeling, or, having no condition to name, ought not to have spoken of contact conditioning feeling at all. Moreover, if contact's own substance were not real, the sūtra ought to speak of dependent origination as having only eleven links, not twelve as it actually does.
That an entire nyāsa can open by defending the very existence of its own subject matter is a reminder of how contested even the most basic Abhidharma categories could be: before any classification of contact's sixteen kinds can proceed, the treatise first has to win the more fundamental argument that contact is a real thing at all, not just a convenient way of describing three other things meeting.
2. Two Vivid Similes Defend Contact's Reality
The defense of contact's reality continues with two memorable images: just as the moon, a moon-loving jewel, and a vessel coming together condition the arising of water — without this meaning water performs its watery function without ever truly existing — so too the coming together of a faculty, its object, and consciousness conditions the arising of contact, without this meaning contact performs its function of conditioning feeling without ever truly existing. Five further reasons are then offered for why the Faculties Aggregate specifically is the place to take up this defense.
又若觸體非實有者。但應說有九大地法。然說有十故觸實有。問若觸實有云何會釋彼所引經。答彼經意說三法和合為緣生觸非於無體得有生義。此若不生云何緣受。譬如月月愛珠。及器和合為緣生水。非無水生得有水用。又如日日愛珠。粖薪和合為緣生火。非無火生得有火用。如是根境及識和合為緣生觸非無觸生得有觸用。觸用謂能為緣生受。是故欲止他說顯觸實有而作斯論。問何緣根蘊分別觸耶。答彼作論者意欲爾故乃至廣說。復次此不應問。所以者何。前已說一一蘊中具一切義故。復次一切法觸所集起。根由觸生故分別觸。復次心心所以觸為命。觸所引觸所轉觸力故現在前此中有根故分別觸。復次先安立諸觸後辯根相應。根以觸為章故應先分別觸。
Moreover, if contact's own substance were not real, there ought to be only nine great-class mental factors found universally in every mind — yet the sūtra speaks of ten, and it is for this reason that contact must indeed be real. One might ask: if contact is indeed real, how, then, is the passage the Dṛṣṭāntikas themselves cite to be reconciled? Answer: that sūtra passage means that the coming together of three dharmas serves as a condition for the arising of contact — it does not mean that contact arises without any real substance of its own at all. And if contact did not itself arise, how could it possibly condition feeling? It is exactly like the coming together of the moon, the moon-loving jewel, and a vessel, which serves as a condition for the arising of water — this does not mean that water performs its watery function without ever itself truly arising. Or exactly like the coming together of the sun, the sun-loving jewel, and kindling, which serves as a condition for the arising of fire — this does not mean that fire performs its fiery function without ever itself truly arising. In just the same way, the coming together of a faculty, its object, and consciousness serves as a condition for the arising of contact — this does not mean that contact performs its own function, namely serving as a condition for feeling, without ever itself truly arising. It is precisely to block this rival view and to make clear that contact is indeed real that the present discussion is raised. One might then ask: why does the Faculties Aggregate take up the analysis of contact at all? Answer: the composer of this treatise simply intended it so, and so on, as explained at length before. Furthermore, this question ought not even to be raised, since it has already been explained that each and every aggregate already contains the full range of possible meanings within it. Furthermore, every dharma is gathered up and set going by contact, and since the faculties themselves arise through contact, contact is therefore analyzed here. Furthermore, mind and mental factors take contact as their very life; drawn forth by contact, turned by contact, and manifesting through contact's own power, they are thereby present before us — and since faculties are found within this very process, contact is analyzed here. Furthermore, the various kinds of contact are first established, and only afterward is the faculties' own association explained — and since the faculties take contact as their chapter heading, contact must accordingly be analyzed first.
The sun-jewel-and-kindling image for fire and the moon-jewel-and-vessel image for water are drawn from a genuinely ancient store of natural-philosophy lore about gem-conditioned combustion and condensation — and their deployment here shows this tradition reaching outside its own technical vocabulary for whatever illustrative resources, however folkloric, could make an abstract metaphysical point land more vividly.
3. Why Exactly Sixteen? Six Reasons for a Very Particular Number
Before analyzing each kind of contact individually, the treatise pauses to justify its own chosen number: contact could equally well be described as a single unified thing, as two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, or ten kinds, or as effectively limitless if broken down moment by moment — yet the treatise settles on exactly sixteen, justified by six independent principles of classification: what is taken as object, obstruction and its antidote, intrinsic nature, opposition and accord, association, and dependence.
問諸聖教中。或說一觸如心所中立觸心所。十大地法中立觸大地法。或說二觸謂有漏無漏縛解繫不繫。或說三觸。謂下中上善不善無記。或說四觸。謂三界繫及不繫。或說五觸。謂三界繫及學無學。或說六觸。謂眼觸乃至意觸。或說七觸。謂見苦所斷。乃至修所斷。并學無學或說八觸。謂見苦所斷乃至修所斷。及見道修道無學道。或說九觸謂下下乃至上上。或說十觸。謂欲界繫。乃至非想非非想處繫及不繫。若約相續剎那分別則有無量。何故此中於一等廣說十六。於無量略說十六耶。答由六因緣不略不廣說十六觸。謂所緣故。障治故自性故。違順故相應故所依故。由所緣故立有對觸增語觸。由障治故立明觸無明觸。由自性故立非明非無明觸。由違順故立愛觸恚觸。由相應故立順樂受觸。順苦受觸順不苦不樂受觸由所依故立眼觸乃至意觸。
One might ask: throughout the noble teachings, contact is sometimes spoken of as a single thing — as when "contact" is established as one of the mental factors, and as the single great-class mental factor found universally in every mind; sometimes as two — contaminated and uncontaminated, bound and liberated, bound to a realm and unbound; sometimes as three — inferior, middling, and superior, or wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral; sometimes as four — bound to each of the three realms, or unbound; sometimes as five — bound to each of the three realms, or belonging to the trainee or the one beyond training; sometimes as six — eye-contact through mind-contact; sometimes as seven — cut off by seeing suffering, and so on through cut off by cultivation, together with belonging to the trainee or the one beyond training; sometimes as eight — cut off by seeing suffering, and so on through cut off by cultivation, together with belonging to the path of seeing, the path of cultivation, or the path of the one beyond training; sometimes as nine — from the very lowest grade up through the very highest; sometimes as ten — bound to the desire realm, and so on through bound to the peak of existence, or unbound; and if one further analyzes it by way of successive moments within a single continuum, the count becomes altogether limitless. Why, then, does the present passage speak at length of exactly sixteen where a single, unified account would do, yet speak only briefly of sixteen where a limitless account might otherwise be given? Answer: sixteen kinds of contact are spoken of — neither abbreviated further nor expanded further — for six distinct reasons: on the basis of what is taken as object, on the basis of obstruction and its antidote, on the basis of intrinsic nature, on the basis of opposition and accord, on the basis of association, and on the basis of what it depends upon. On the basis of what is taken as object, resistance-contact and designation-contact are established; on the basis of obstruction and its antidote, illumination-contact and non-illumination-contact are established; on the basis of intrinsic nature, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact is established; on the basis of opposition and accord, craving-contact and hatred-contact are established; on the basis of association, pleasant-feeling-contact, painful-feeling-contact, and neutral-feeling-contact are established; and on the basis of what it depends upon, eye-contact through mind-contact are established.
That the very same subject matter, contact, can be truthfully described using anywhere from one category to limitless ones depending purely on which classificatory principle is applied is a clear statement of this tradition's own working assumption: a number is never simply given by the world itself, but is always relative to whatever specific analytical lens one chooses to look through it with.
4. Resistance-Contact and Designation-Contact: Two Contacts Sorted by Their Object
The individual definitions begin with the first classificatory pair — resistance-contact, associated with the five sense-consciousnesses and confined to resistant objects, and designation-contact, associated with mental consciousness alone, whose very name is explained through no fewer than three different etymologies, each locating its own special "amplification of language" in a different place: its intrinsic nature, its object, or simply the fact that it takes names themselves as object.
云何有對觸。答五識身相應觸。問何故此觸名有對答以有對法為所緣故。問增語觸亦以有對法為所緣。何故此觸獨名有對。答此觸以初故得名增語觸。更以餘緣建立。有說。此觸但以有對法為所緣。
"What is resistance-contact?" Answer: contact associated with the five sense-consciousness bodies. One might ask: why is this contact named "resistance"? Answer: because it takes resistant dharmas as its object. One might then ask: designation-contact likewise takes resistant dharmas as its object — why, then, is this particular contact alone named "resistance"? Answer: this contact receives the name first, since it comes first; the other is established through a different consideration entirely. Another position holds that this contact takes only resistant dharmas as its object, whereas
增語觸亦緣餘法。有說。此觸所依所緣皆是有對。增語觸所緣雖或有對所依不爾故別立名。云何增語觸。答意識身相應觸問何故此觸名增語。答由此觸自性語增故名增語。問云何此觸自性語增。答有對觸唯欲色界繫。此觸通三界繫及不繫。又有對觸唯欲界。初靜慮地可得。此觸一切地可得。又有對觸唯有漏。此觸通有漏無漏。由此等故自性語增。有說。此觸所緣語增故名增語。問云何此觸所緣語增。答有對觸唯以有色法為所緣。此觸通緣有色無色。又有對觸但以有對法為所緣。此觸通緣有對無對。又有對觸但以有漏法為所緣。此觸通緣有漏無漏。又有對觸但以有為法為所緣此觸通緣有為無為。由此等故所緣語增。有說。增語者。謂名此觸緣名故名增語。雖亦緣義而非不共故。隨不共立名依別立通名。如苦集智等。
designation-contact also takes non-resistant dharmas as its object. Another position holds that this contact's basis and object are both resistant, whereas designation-contact, though its object may sometimes be resistant, does not have a resistant basis — hence a separate name is established for it. "What is designation-contact?" Answer: contact associated with the mental-consciousness body. One might ask: why is this contact named "designation"? Answer: because, through this contact, language itself is amplified — hence it is called "designation." One might then ask: how, exactly, does language become amplified through this contact's own intrinsic nature? Answer: resistance-contact is bound only to the desire and form realms, whereas this contact pervades all three realms and the unbound alike; moreover, resistance-contact is obtainable only in the desire realm and the first dhyāna, whereas this contact is obtainable at every ground; moreover, resistance-contact is only contaminated, whereas this contact pervades both the contaminated and the uncontaminated — and it is for reasons such as these that its own intrinsic nature amplifies language. Another position holds that it is this contact's own object that amplifies language. One might then ask: how, exactly, does language become amplified through this contact's own object? Answer: resistance-contact takes only material dharmas as its object, whereas this contact takes both material and immaterial dharmas as its object; moreover, resistance-contact takes only resistant dharmas as its object, whereas this contact takes both resistant and non-resistant dharmas as its object; moreover, resistance-contact takes only contaminated dharmas as its object, whereas this contact takes both contaminated and uncontaminated dharmas as its object; moreover, resistance-contact takes only conditioned dharmas as its object, whereas this contact takes both conditioned and unconditioned dharmas as its object — and it is for reasons such as these that its own object amplifies language. Another position holds that "designation" means that this contact takes names themselves as its object, and is therefore called "designation" — for although it may also take meanings as its object, this is not what is distinctive about it; a name is given on the basis of what is distinctive, while the general term applies more broadly, exactly as with the knowledge of suffering, the knowledge of origin, and the like.
The final etymology offered for "designation-contact" — that it is named for taking names as its object, even though it may also take meanings as object, since a name is properly given on the basis of what is distinctive rather than what is merely also present — is a small but genuinely useful piece of naming theory: it explains why a term can be accurate without being exhaustive, capturing only whatever feature actually sets its referent apart from its neighbors.
5. Illumination, Non-Illumination, Craving, Hatred, and the Three Feeling-Contacts
The definitions continue through the pair sorted by obstruction and its antidote — illumination-contact, associated exclusively with the three uncontaminated faculties, and non-illumination-contact, associated with every affliction — followed by the single intrinsic-nature category left over once both illumination and defilement are excluded, and then the pairs sorted by opposition, accord, and association: craving-contact, hatred-contact, and the three feeling-contacts.
云何明觸。答無漏觸即三無漏根相應觸。云何無明觸。答染污觸即一切煩惱隨煩惱相應觸。云何非明非無明觸。答不染有漏觸。此中問答各有二遮。謂非明者遮明觸。非無明者遮無明觸。不染者遮染污觸。有漏者遮無漏觸。由此遮故此體唯攝一切有漏善無覆無記觸。云何愛觸。答貪相應觸。即三界五部所斷六識身俱貪相應觸。
"What is illumination-contact?" Answer: uncontaminated contact — namely, contact associated with the three uncontaminated faculties. "What is non-illumination-contact?" Answer: defiled contact — namely, contact associated with every affliction and secondary affliction. "What is neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact?" Answer: undefiled contaminated contact. In this passage, each question-and-answer pair carries two exclusions: "neither illumination" excludes illumination-contact; "nor non-illumination" excludes non-illumination-contact; "undefiled" excludes defiled contact; "contaminated" excludes uncontaminated contact. Through these exclusions, this category's own substance comes to comprise solely every contaminated, wholesome or unobscured-neutral form of contact. "What is craving-contact?" Answer: contact associated with craving — namely, contact co-arisen with craving found among the six consciousness-bodies, cut off across all three realms and all five categories of cutting-off.
云何恚觸。答瞋相應觸。即五所斷六識身俱瞋相應觸。云何順樂受觸。答樂受相應觸。即樂喜根相應觸。云何順苦受觸。答苦受相應觸。即苦憂根相應觸。云何順不苦不樂受觸。答不苦不樂受相應觸。即捨根相應觸。云何眼觸。答眼識身相應觸。乃至云何意觸。
"What is hatred-contact?" Answer: contact associated with hatred — namely, contact co-arisen with hatred found among the six consciousness-bodies, cut off across the five categories of cutting-off. "What is pleasant-feeling-contact?" Answer: contact associated with pleasant feeling — namely, contact associated with the pleasure- and joy-faculties. "What is painful-feeling-contact?" Answer: contact associated with painful feeling — namely, contact associated with the pain- and displeasure-faculties. "What is neutral-feeling-contact?" Answer: contact associated with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling — namely, contact associated with the equanimity-faculty. "What is eye-contact?" Answer: contact associated with the eye-consciousness body. And so on, up through "what is mind-contact?"
The precise double-exclusion logic defining "neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact" — neither uncontaminated nor defiled, leaving only what is undefiled yet still contaminated — shows this tradition's fondness for defining a middle category not by any positive feature of its own, but purely by process of elimination from the two extremes flanking it on either side.
6. The Six Sense-Contacts, and a Sprawling Census of Which Contact Includes Which
The final classificatory pair — eye-contact through mind-contact, each simply named for the faculty it depends upon — completes the definitions, opening onto an extraordinarily thorough census of mutual inclusion: exactly how many of the sixteen kinds of contact each individual kind of contact fully contains, and how many it contains only partially, worked out one by one across all sixteen entries with its own precise numerical accounting.
答意識身相應觸謂依眼等根生故名眼等觸。顯自性已當辯相攝。然有一觸攝諸觸盡。謂心所中一觸自性。此中二觸攝諸觸盡。謂有對觸增語觸復有三觸攝諸觸盡。謂明無明。非明非無明觸。及順樂順苦順不苦不樂受觸。復有六觸攝諸觸盡。謂眼觸乃至意觸。問有對觸攝幾觸。乃至意觸攝幾觸耶。答有對觸攝六觸全七觸少分。六全者。謂有對觸眼耳鼻舌身觸。七少分者。謂無明非明非無明觸。愛恚觸。順樂順苦。順不苦不樂受觸。問云何此攝彼七少分。答彼七通與六識相應。此唯攝五識相應故言少分。增語觸攝三觸全。七觸少分。三全者。謂增語觸明觸意觸。七少分者如前說。問云何此攝彼七少分。答彼七通與六識相應。此唯攝意識相應故言少分。明觸攝明觸全。四觸少分。謂增語觸。順樂順不苦不樂受觸意觸。問云何此攝彼四少分。答彼四通有漏無漏。此唯攝無漏故言少分。無明觸攝三觸全。十一觸少分。三全者。謂無明觸愛恚觸。十一少分者。謂有對增語觸。順樂順苦順不苦不樂受觸。眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十一少分。答彼十一通染不染。此唯攝染故言少分。非明非無明觸。攝非明非無明觸全。十一觸少分。謂如前說。問云何此攝彼十一少分。答即前十一通染不染。不染有通有漏無漏。此唯攝不染有漏故言少分。愛觸攝愛觸全。十一觸少分。謂有對增語觸。無明觸。順樂順不苦不樂受觸。眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十一少分。答彼十一通與貪俱生不俱生。此唯攝俱生故言少分。恚觸攝恚觸全。十一觸少分。謂有對增語觸。無明觸。順苦順不苦不樂受觸。眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十一少分。答彼十一通與瞋俱生不俱生。此唯攝俱生故言少分。順樂受觸攝順樂受觸全。十二觸少分。謂有對增語觸。明無明。非明非無明觸愛觸。眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十二少分。答彼十二通與樂受俱生不俱生。此唯攝俱生故言少分。順苦受觸攝順苦受觸全。十一觸少分。謂有對增語觸。無明。非明非無明觸。恚觸眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十一少分。答彼十一通與苦受俱生不俱生。此唯攝俱生故言少分。順不苦不樂受觸。攝順不苦不樂受觸全。十三觸少分。謂有對增語觸明無明。非明非無明觸。愛恚觸。眼觸乃至意觸。問云何此攝彼十三少分。答彼十三通與捨受俱生不俱生。此唯攝俱生故言少分。眼觸攝眼觸全。八觸少分。謂有對觸。無明。非明非無明觸。愛恚觸。順樂順苦。順不苦不樂受觸。問云何此攝彼八少分。答彼八通與眼識相應不相應。此唯攝相應故言少分。如眼觸。耳鼻舌身觸亦爾。是中差別者。各攝自觸全。自識相應八少分。意觸攝三觸全。
Answer: contact associated with the mind-consciousness body — these are called eye-contact and so on because they arise in dependence on the eye and the other faculties respectively. Having shown their own intrinsic nature, the passage now goes on to discuss their mutual inclusion. There is a single kind of contact that includes every kind of contact without remainder — namely, contact's own single intrinsic nature as found among the mental factors. There are, alternatively, two kinds of contact that together include every kind of contact without remainder — namely, resistance-contact and designation-contact. There are, alternatively, three kinds that together include every kind without remainder — namely, illumination-contact, non-illumination-contact, and neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, together with pleasant-, painful-, and neutral-feeling-contact. There are, alternatively, six kinds that together include every kind without remainder — namely, eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how many kinds of contact does resistance-contact include, and so on, up through how many kinds does mind-contact include? Answer: resistance-contact includes six kinds of contact entirely and seven kinds of contact only in part. The six entirely included are resistance-contact itself, together with eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact; the seven included only in part are non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, craving-contact, hatred-contact, and pleasant-, painful-, and neutral-feeling-contact. One might ask: how does resistance-contact include only a part of these seven? Answer: these seven pervade all six consciousness-bodies, whereas resistance-contact is associated only with the five sense-consciousness-bodies — hence it is said to include only a part. Designation-contact includes three kinds of contact entirely and seven kinds only in part. The three entirely included are designation-contact itself, illumination-contact, and mind-contact; the seven included only in part are exactly as already described. One might ask: how does designation-contact include only a part of these seven? Answer: these seven pervade all six consciousness-bodies, whereas this contact is associated only with the mental-consciousness-body — hence it is said to include only a part. Illumination-contact includes illumination-contact entirely and four kinds only in part — namely, designation-contact, pleasant- and neutral-feeling-contact, and mind-contact. One might ask: how does illumination-contact include only a part of these four? Answer: these four pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, whereas this contact is exclusively uncontaminated — hence it is said to include only a part. Non-illumination-contact includes three kinds entirely and eleven kinds only in part. The three entirely included are non-illumination-contact itself, craving-contact, and hatred-contact; the eleven included only in part are resistance-contact, designation-contact, pleasant-, painful-, and neutral-feeling-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does non-illumination-contact include only a part of these eleven? Answer: these eleven pervade both the defiled and the undefiled, whereas this contact is exclusively defiled — hence it is said to include only a part. Neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact includes neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact entirely and eleven kinds only in part, exactly as already described. One might ask: how does it include only a part of these eleven? Answer: these same eleven pervade both the defiled and the undefiled, and the undefiled among them further pervades both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, whereas this contact is exclusively undefiled and contaminated — hence it is said to include only a part. Craving-contact includes craving-contact entirely and eleven kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, designation-contact, non-illumination-contact, pleasant- and neutral-feeling-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does craving-contact include only a part of these eleven? Answer: these eleven pervade both what co-arises with craving and what does not, whereas this contact is exclusively what co-arises with craving — hence it is said to include only a part. Hatred-contact includes hatred-contact entirely and eleven kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, designation-contact, non-illumination-contact, painful- and neutral-feeling-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does hatred-contact include only a part of these eleven? Answer: these eleven pervade both what co-arises with hatred and what does not, whereas this contact is exclusively what co-arises with hatred — hence it is said to include only a part. Pleasant-feeling-contact includes pleasant-feeling-contact entirely and twelve kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, designation-contact, illumination-contact, non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, craving-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does pleasant-feeling-contact include only a part of these twelve? Answer: these twelve pervade both what co-arises with pleasant feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is exclusively what co-arises with pleasant feeling — hence it is said to include only a part. Painful-feeling-contact includes painful-feeling-contact entirely and eleven kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, designation-contact, non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, hatred-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does painful-feeling-contact include only a part of these eleven? Answer: these eleven pervade both what co-arises with painful feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is exclusively what co-arises with painful feeling — hence it is said to include only a part. Neutral-feeling-contact includes neutral-feeling-contact entirely and thirteen kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, designation-contact, illumination-contact, non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, craving-contact, hatred-contact, and eye-contact through mind-contact. One might ask: how does neutral-feeling-contact include only a part of these thirteen? Answer: these thirteen pervade both what co-arises with neutral feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is exclusively what co-arises with neutral feeling — hence it is said to include only a part. Eye-contact includes eye-contact entirely and eight kinds only in part — namely, resistance-contact, non-illumination-contact, neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, craving-contact, hatred-contact, and pleasant-, painful-, and neutral-feeling-contact. One might ask: how does eye-contact include only a part of these eight? Answer: these eight pervade both what is associated with eye-consciousness and what is not, whereas this contact is exclusively what is associated with eye-consciousness — hence it is said to include only a part. Ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact are exactly the same as eye-contact — with the sole distinction that each includes its own kind of contact entirely, and includes only a part of the eight associated with its own respective consciousness. Mind-contact includes three kinds entirely,
The sheer combinatorial thoroughness of this inclusion census — patiently working out, for all sixteen kinds of contact in turn, exactly which others it fully contains and which it only partially overlaps with — is characteristic of this literature at its most exhaustive: no relationship between categories is ever left merely implied when it can instead be stated as an explicit, checkable number.
7. What Does 'Inclusion' Even Mean? And a New Census of Faculty-Association Begins
Having completed the inclusion census, the treatise pauses to ask what "inclusion" itself actually means — offering several complementary answers, from a substance's own existence across past, present, and future to the vivid image of something bound and held fast, before turning to an entirely new census: exactly how many of the twenty-two faculties are associated with each of the sixteen kinds of contact.
七觸少分。如增語觸說。問何故名攝。攝是何義。答自體於自體。
and seven kinds only in part, exactly as already described for designation-contact. One might ask: why is this called "inclusion" at all — what, exactly, does "inclusion" mean here? Answer: a substance's own relation to itself,
已有當有現有可得故名為攝。有說。自體於自體不異不外不差別不相離。是有不空故名為攝。有說。自體於自體。非不曾有。非不今有。非不當有。故名為攝。諸法不捨自性義是攝義。非如以指捻衣。以手取食。彼可捨故。有說。拘礙義是攝義。諸法拘礙無如自體於自體者。有對觸幾根相應。乃至意觸幾根相應耶。答有對觸一根全。八根少分相應。一全者。謂苦根。八少分者。謂意樂捨信等五根。問云何此與彼八少分相應。答彼八根通六識俱生品。此唯與五識俱生品相應故言少分。增語觸五根全。八根少分相應。五全者。謂喜憂三無漏根。八少分者如前說。問云何此與彼八少分相應。答彼八根通六識俱生品。此唯與意識俱生品相應故言少分。明觸。三根全。九根少分相應。三全者。謂三無漏根。九少分者。謂意樂喜捨信等五根。問云何此與彼九少分相應。答彼九根通有漏無漏。此唯與無漏相應故言少分無明觸。六根少分相應。謂意五受根。問云何此與彼六少分相應。答彼六根通染不染。此唯與染相應故言少分。非明非無明觸。十一根少分相應。謂意五受信等五根。
as something already existing, presently existing, and yet to exist, that is genuinely obtainable — this is what "inclusion" means. Another position holds that a substance's own relation to itself, as undifferentiated, un-external, undivided, and inseparable, and as genuinely existent rather than empty — this is what "inclusion" means. Another position holds that a substance's own relation to itself, as never not having already existed, never not presently existing, and never not going to exist — this is what "inclusion" means; for every dharma's never abandoning its own intrinsic nature is the very meaning of "inclusion," quite unlike, say, pinching a garment with one's fingers or taking up food with one's hand, both of which can genuinely be let go of again. Another position holds that a sense of being bound and held fast is what "inclusion" means, since no dharma is ever more tightly bound and held fast than by its own relation to itself. "How many faculties are associated with resistance-contact, and so on, up through how many faculties are associated with mind-contact?" Answer: resistance-contact is associated with one faculty entirely, and eight faculties only in part. The one entirely associated is the pain-faculty; the eight associated only in part are the mind-faculty, pleasure, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these eight? Answer: these eight pervade all six consciousness-bodies in their co-arising, whereas this contact is associated only with the co-arising of the five sense-consciousness-bodies — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Designation-contact is associated with five faculties entirely, and eight faculties only in part. The five entirely associated are joy, displeasure, and the three uncontaminated faculties; the eight associated only in part are exactly as already described. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these eight? Answer: these eight pervade all six consciousness-bodies in their co-arising, whereas this contact is associated only with the co-arising of the mental-consciousness-body — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Illumination-contact is associated with three faculties entirely, and nine faculties only in part. The three entirely associated are the three uncontaminated faculties; the nine associated only in part are the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these nine? Answer: these nine pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, whereas this contact is associated only with the uncontaminated — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Non-illumination-contact is associated with six faculties only in part — namely, the mind-faculty and the five feeling-faculties. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these six? Answer: these six pervade both the defiled and the undefiled, whereas this contact is associated only with the defiled — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact is associated with eleven faculties only in part — namely, the mind-faculty, the five feeling-faculties, and faith with its four companions.
The observation that no dharma is ever more tightly bound and held fast than by its own relation to itself — offered as one gloss on "inclusion" — is a striking way of making a fairly technical logical point (a thing's identity with itself) sound almost existential, framing self-identity not as a trivial tautology but as the tightest possible form of binding conceivable.
8. The Faculty-Association Census Continues Through Craving, Hatred, and the Feelings
The census continues methodically through craving-contact, hatred-contact, and the three feeling-contacts, each precisely matched to its own corresponding faculties — pleasure and joy for pleasant-feeling-contact, pain and displeasure for painful-feeling-contact, equanimity for neutral-feeling-contact — with the three uncontaminated faculties recurring throughout as a partial match wherever contaminated and uncontaminated contact are not yet distinguished.
問云何此與彼十一少分相應。答彼十一根中前六通染不染。後五通有漏無漏。此唯與不染有漏相應故言少分。愛觸。四根少分相應。
One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these eleven? Answer: of these eleven faculties, the first six pervade both the defiled and the undefiled, and the latter five pervade both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, whereas this contact is associated only with the undefiled and contaminated — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Craving-contact is associated with four faculties only in part,
謂意樂喜捨根。問云何此與彼四少分相應。答彼四根通貪俱生不俱生。此唯與俱生者相應故言少分恚觸。四根少分相應。謂意苦憂捨根。問云何此與彼四少分相應。答彼四根通瞋俱生不俱生。此唯與俱生者相應故言少分。順樂受觸。二根全。九根少分相應。二全者。謂樂喜根。九少分者。謂意信等五三無漏根。問云何此與彼九少分相應。答彼九根中前六通樂受俱生不俱生。此唯與俱生者相應。後三通以九根為性。此唯與六根相應故言少分。順苦受觸。二根全六根少分相應。二全者。謂苦憂根。六少分者。謂意信等五根。問云何。此與彼六少分相應。答彼六根通苦受俱生不俱生。此唯與俱生者相應故言少分。順不苦不樂受觸。一根全。九根少分相應。一全者。謂捨根。九少分者。謂意信等五三無漏根。問云何此與彼九少分相應。答彼九根中前六。通不苦不樂受俱生不俱生。此唯與俱生者相應。後三通以九根為性。此唯與六根相應故言少分。
namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, joy, and equanimity. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these four? Answer: these four pervade both what co-arises with craving and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with craving — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Hatred-contact is associated with four faculties only in part — namely, the mind-faculty, pain, displeasure, and equanimity. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these four? Answer: these four pervade both what co-arises with hatred and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with hatred — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Pleasant-feeling-contact is associated with two faculties entirely, and nine faculties only in part. The two entirely associated are pleasure and joy; the nine associated only in part are the mind-faculty, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these nine? Answer: of these nine faculties, the first six pervade both what co-arises with pleasant feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with pleasant feeling; the latter three, since their very substance comprises nine dharmas each, are associated only with the six faculties among those nine — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Painful-feeling-contact is associated with two faculties entirely, and six faculties only in part. The two entirely associated are pain and displeasure; the six associated only in part are the mind-faculty and faith with its four companions. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these six? Answer: these six pervade both what co-arises with painful feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with painful feeling — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Neutral-feeling-contact is associated with one faculty entirely, and nine faculties only in part. The one entirely associated is equanimity; the nine associated only in part are the mind-faculty, faith with its four companions, and the three uncontaminated faculties. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these nine? Answer: of these nine faculties, the first six pervade both what co-arises with neutral feeling and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with neutral feeling; the latter three are associated only with the six faculties among those nine — hence it is said to be associated only in part.
The recurring appearance of the three uncontaminated faculties as only a partial match throughout this entire census — since each one's own ninefold substance touches feeling in only a fraction of its full extent — is a quiet reminder that even the tradition's most exalted faculties remain subject to the very same fractional bookkeeping applied to every ordinary faculty alongside them.
9. The Census Concludes With the Six Sense-Contacts
The faculty-association census concludes with the six sense-contacts, each associated with a partial share of nine faculties corresponding to whichever consciousness it depends upon, before the fascicle turns to yet another parallel investigation: the precise causal relationship between each faculty and each kind of contact, worked out through the familiar apparatus of the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes.
眼觸九根少分相應。謂意樂苦捨信等五根。問云何此與彼九少分相應。答彼九根通眼識俱生品不俱生品。此唯與俱生品相應故言少分。如眼觸。耳鼻舌身觸亦爾。是中差別者。各與自識俱生品根相應。意觸。五根全八根少分相應。如增語觸說。相應義廣說如上。
Eye-contact is associated with nine faculties only in part — namely, the mind-faculty, pleasure, pain, equanimity, and faith with its four companions. One might ask: how is this contact associated with only a part of these nine? Answer: these nine pervade both what co-arises with eye-consciousness and what does not, whereas this contact is associated only with what co-arises with eye-consciousness — hence it is said to be associated only in part. Ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact are exactly the same as eye-contact — with the sole distinction that each is associated with the faculties co-arising with its own respective consciousness. Mind-contact is associated with five faculties entirely, and eight faculties only in part, exactly as already described for designation-contact — the sense of "association" throughout being exactly as explained at length above.
That eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact are each described as "exactly the same," differing only in which consciousness-body they depend upon, is an efficient piece of textual economy: rather than spelling out five nearly identical entries in full, the treatise trusts the reader to substitute the appropriate term and move on, confident the underlying logical shape never actually changes.
10. Causal Correspondence Begins: What Conditions Resistance- and Designation-Contact?
A new and precise causal census opens, asking for each kind of contact exactly which faculties condition it and through how many of the six causes, beginning with resistance-contact and designation-contact — each faculty bearing a different number of causes depending on whether it is genuinely associated with that contact or merely a ripening-produced faculty that, taking no object at all, can only ever condition it through the single ripening cause.
諸根因有對觸。此根有對觸相應耶。設根有對觸相應。此根因有對觸耶。答諸根有對觸相應。此根因有對觸。謂此根以有對觸為四因。即相應俱有同類異熟因。有根因有對觸。此根非有對觸相應。
"Whatever faculty conditions resistance-contact — is that faculty associated with resistance-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with resistance-contact — does that faculty condition resistance-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with resistance-contact conditions resistance-contact — namely, this faculty bears four causes toward resistance-contact, the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, and ripening causes. There is a faculty that conditions resistance-contact yet is not associated with resistance-contact —
謂根因有對觸餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。謂增語觸相應。此根。以有對觸為二因。即同類異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。此根以有對觸為一因。即異熟因。諸根因增語觸。此根增語觸相應耶。設根增語觸相應。此根因增語觸耶。答諸根增語觸相應此根因增語。觸謂此根以增語觸為五因。即相應俱有同類遍行異熟因。有根因增語觸。此根非增語觸相應。謂根因增語觸餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。謂有對觸相應。此根以增語觸為三因。即同類遍行異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。此根以增語觸為一因。即異熟因。諸根因明觸此根明觸相應耶。答如是。設根明觸相應此根因明觸耶。答如是。此中因者。謂三因即相應俱有同類因。諸根因無明觸。此根無明觸相應耶。設根無明觸相應。此根因無明觸耶。答諸根無明觸相應。此根因無明觸。謂此根以無明觸為四因。即相應俱有同類遍行因。有根因無明觸此根非無明觸相應。謂根因無明觸餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。
namely, a faculty that conditions resistance-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with designation-contact; this faculty bears two causes toward resistance-contact, the homogeneous and ripening causes. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward resistance-contact, the ripening cause. "Whatever faculty conditions designation-contact — is that faculty associated with designation-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with designation-contact — does that faculty condition designation-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with designation-contact conditions designation-contact — namely, this faculty bears five causes toward designation-contact, the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. There is a faculty that conditions designation-contact yet is not associated with designation-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions designation-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with resistance-contact; this faculty bears three causes toward designation-contact, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward designation-contact, the ripening cause. "Whatever faculty conditions illumination-contact — is that faculty associated with illumination-contact?" Answer: yes. "And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with illumination-contact — does that faculty condition illumination-contact?" Answer: yes. Here, "conditions" means this faculty bears three causes toward illumination-contact, the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. "Whatever faculty conditions non-illumination-contact — is that faculty associated with non-illumination-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with non-illumination-contact — does that faculty condition non-illumination-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with non-illumination-contact conditions non-illumination-contact — namely, this faculty bears four causes toward non-illumination-contact, the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, and universal causes. There is a faculty that conditions non-illumination-contact yet is not associated with non-illumination-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions non-illumination-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all.
The recurring category of "the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" — the life-faculty and its seven companions, condemned throughout this census to a single, thin ripening-cause relationship with every kind of contact — is a structural constant running beneath this entire investigation: whatever else changes from one kind of contact to the next, these eight faculties' own limited causal reach never does.
11. The Census Continues Through Illumination, Non-Illumination, and the Undefiled-Contaminated
The causal census proceeds through illumination-contact, whose associated faculties are simply and cleanly the three uncontaminated faculties bearing three causes, and then through non-illumination-contact and its undefiled-contaminated counterpart, each requiring the fuller apparatus of four causes and the careful separation of what is genuinely associated from what is merely co-arisen with a neighboring kind of contact instead.
餘觸相應者。謂非明非無明觸相應。此根以無明觸為一因即異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。此根以無明觸為一因即異熟因。諸根因非明非無明觸。此根非明非無明觸相應耶。設根非明非無明觸相應。此根因非明非無明觸耶。答諸根非明非無明觸相應。
"Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact; this faculty bears one cause toward non-illumination-contact, the ripening cause. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward non-illumination-contact, the ripening cause. "Whatever faculty conditions neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact — is that faculty associated with neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact — does that faculty condition it?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with it conditions it —
此根因非明非無明觸。謂此根以非明非無明觸為四因。即相應俱有同類異熟因。有根因非明非無明觸。此根非明非無明觸相應。謂根因非明非無明觸。異熟生無所緣。謂命等八根。以非明非無明觸為一因。即異熟因。諸根因愛觸此根愛觸相應耶。設根愛觸相應。此根因愛觸耶。答諸根愛觸相應此根因愛觸。謂此根以愛觸為三因。
namely, this faculty bears four causes toward it, the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, and ripening causes. There is a faculty that conditions it yet is not associated with it — namely, a faculty that conditions it yet is associated with a different contact — namely, the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties, which bear one cause toward it, the ripening cause. "Whatever faculty conditions craving-contact — is that faculty associated with craving-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with craving-contact — does that faculty condition craving-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with craving-contact conditions craving-contact — namely, this faculty bears three causes toward craving-contact,
Illumination-contact's own comparatively simple causal profile — just three causes, with no ripening-produced exception to complicate the picture — stands out against the more elaborate four- and five-cause entries surrounding it: the uncontaminated, it seems, generates a tidier causal ledger than the contaminated ever manages to.
12. Craving, Hatred, and the Three Feeling-Contacts Complete Their Own Causal Entries
The census works through craving-contact and hatred-contact, each bearing three causes when genuinely associated, before completing the three feeling-contacts, each bearing the full complement of five causes — the associated cause joining the co-existent, homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes whenever a faculty is truly and inseparably bound up with a given feeling.
即相應俱有同類因。有根因愛觸。此根非愛觸相應。謂根因愛觸。
the associated, co-existent, and homogeneous causes. There is a faculty that conditions craving-contact yet is not associated with craving-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions craving-contact yet
餘觸相應及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。謂餘無明觸。非明非無明觸相應。此根以愛觸為二因。即同類異熟因。謂餘無明觸相應。根以愛觸為同類因。非明非無明觸相應。根以愛觸為異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根以愛觸為一因即異熟因。如說愛觸恚觸亦爾。差別者。說自名諸根因順樂受觸。此根順樂受觸相應耶。設根順樂受觸相應。此根因順樂受觸耶。答諸根順樂受觸相應。此根因順樂受觸。謂此根以順樂受觸為五因。即相應等五。有根因順樂受觸。此根非順樂受觸相應。謂根因順樂受觸。餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。謂順苦受觸。順不苦不樂受觸相應。此根以順樂受觸為三因。即同類遍行異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。以順樂受觸為一因即異熟因。如說順樂受觸。順苦受觸。順不苦不樂受觸亦爾。差別者。說自名諸根。因眼觸此根眼觸相應耶。設根眼觸相應。此根因眼觸耶。答諸根眼觸相應。此根因眼觸。謂此根以眼觸為四因。即相應俱有同類異熟因。有根因眼觸。
is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with non-illumination-contact or neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact; this faculty bears two causes toward craving-contact, the homogeneous and ripening causes — being associated with non-illumination-contact, this faculty bears the homogeneous cause toward craving-contact, and being associated with neither-illumination-nor-non-illumination-contact, this faculty bears the ripening cause toward it. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward craving-contact, the ripening cause. Exactly as with craving-contact, so too, mutatis mutandis, with hatred-contact — with the sole distinction of substituting its own name throughout. "Whatever faculty conditions pleasant-feeling-contact — is that faculty associated with pleasant-feeling-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with pleasant-feeling-contact — does that faculty condition pleasant-feeling-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with pleasant-feeling-contact conditions pleasant-feeling-contact — namely, this faculty bears five causes toward pleasant-feeling-contact, the associated and the other four. There is a faculty that conditions pleasant-feeling-contact yet is not associated with pleasant-feeling-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions pleasant-feeling-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with painful- or neutral-feeling-contact; this faculty bears three causes toward pleasant-feeling-contact, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward pleasant-feeling-contact, the ripening cause. Exactly as with pleasant-feeling-contact, so too, mutatis mutandis, with painful-feeling-contact and neutral-feeling-contact — with the sole distinction of substituting each one's own name throughout. "Whatever faculty conditions eye-contact — is that faculty associated with eye-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with eye-contact — does that faculty condition eye-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with eye-contact conditions eye-contact — namely, this faculty bears four causes toward eye-contact, the associated, co-existent, homogeneous, and ripening causes. There is a faculty that conditions eye-contact yet
The five-cause maximum reserved specifically for the feeling-contacts and mind-contact, exceeding every other entry in this census, quietly signals something about where this tradition locates the deepest causal entanglement: feeling and mentation, more than any of contact's other dimensions, draw on the widest possible range of causal relationships a faculty can ever bear toward anything.
13. The Causal Census Closes With the Six Sense-Contacts
The fascicle's long causal investigation concludes with eye-contact through mind-contact, each faculty again sorted by whether it is genuinely associated, merely co-arisen with a neighboring sense-contact, or among the ripening-produced faculties confined to the single ripening cause — mind-contact alone reaching the full five-cause maximum, since it alone is bound up with the mind-faculty's own uniquely rich causal profile.
此根非眼觸相應。謂根因眼觸餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。謂耳鼻舌身意觸相應。此根以眼觸為二因。即同類異熟因。
is not associated with eye-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions eye-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to being associated with ear-, nose-, tongue-, body-, or mind-contact; this faculty bears two causes toward eye-contact, the homogeneous and ripening causes.
及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。此根以眼觸為一因即異熟因。如說眼觸。耳鼻舌身觸亦爾。差別者。說自名諸根。因意觸此根意觸相應耶。設根意觸相應。此根因意觸耶。答諸根意觸相應。此根因意觸。謂此根以意觸為五因。即相應等五。有根因意觸。此根非意觸相應。謂根因意觸。餘觸相應。及異熟生無所緣。餘觸相應者。
"The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward eye-contact, the ripening cause. Exactly as with eye-contact, so too, mutatis mutandis, with ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact — with the sole distinction of substituting each one's own name throughout. "Whatever faculty conditions mind-contact — is that faculty associated with mind-contact? And, conversely, whatever faculty is associated with mind-contact — does that faculty condition mind-contact?" Answer: whatever faculty is associated with mind-contact conditions mind-contact — namely, this faculty bears five causes toward mind-contact, the associated and the other four. There is a faculty that conditions mind-contact yet is not associated with mind-contact — namely, a faculty that conditions mind-contact yet is associated with a different contact instead, and the ripening-produced faculty that takes no object at all. "Associated with a different contact" refers to —
謂眼耳鼻舌身觸相應。此根以意觸為三因。即同類遍行異熟因。及異熟生無所緣者。謂命等八根。此根以意觸為一因即異熟因。
being associated with eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue-, or body-contact; this faculty bears three causes toward mind-contact, the homogeneous, universal, and ripening causes. "The ripening-produced faculty that takes no object" refers to the life-faculty and the other seven such faculties; this faculty bears one cause toward mind-contact, the ripening cause.
That mind-contact alone among the six sense-contacts reaches the full five-cause count, while eye-, ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-contact each max out at four, is a small numerical echo of a pattern this entire treatise keeps confirming: whatever apparatus of causal richness this tradition has to offer, the mind-faculty and its own associated contact consistently draw on more of it than any of the five physical senses ever do.
14. A New Question: Does Possessing an Eye of One Realm Mean Possessing a Body to Match?
The fascicle turns to a genuinely intricate question: if a being possesses the eye-faculty of a given realm, must that being also possess the body-faculty of that same realm? A fourfold analysis follows — a desire-realm being can cultivate a form-realm eye without ever obtaining a form-realm body, since no being ever possesses a body belonging to a realm other than its own, while the nose- and tongue-faculties, unlike the eye and ear, can never manifest across realms at all.
諸成就此類眼根。彼成就此類身根耶。乃至廣說。類有四種。一修類。二律儀類。三界類。四相似類。此四廣說如前業蘊。此中依界類而作論。諸成就此類眼根。彼成就此類身根耶。設成就此類身根。彼成就此類眼根耶。答應作四句。有成就此類眼根非此類身根。謂生欲界不得眼根。設得已失。得色界眼不得眼根者。謂未至鉢羅奢佉位等。設得已失者。謂已得眼根。或自然壞。或遇緣壞故失。得色界眼者。謂由善習靜慮力故。色界眼根依欲界身得。而不得彼界身根。無成就他界身故。有成就此類身根。非此類眼根。謂生欲界不得眼根。設得已失。不得色界眼彼但成就欲界身根。二界眼根並不成就。有成就此類眼根亦此類身根。謂生欲界眼根已得不失。若生色界已得者。謂已至鉢羅奢佉位等。不失者。謂所得眼根非自然壞。及遇緣壞故不失。生色界者色界無有根不具故。有非成就此類眼根。亦非此類身根。謂生無色界。彼地定無諸色根故。如眼根。耳根亦爾。此二俱有異界現前故。諸成就此類鼻根。彼成就此類身根耶。設成就此類身根。彼成就此類鼻根耶。答若成就此類鼻根。彼成就此類身根。有成就此類身根。彼不成就此類鼻根。謂生欲界不得鼻根。設得已失。不得鼻根者。謂未至鉢羅奢佉位等。
"Whatever being possesses this class of eye-faculty — does that being possess this same class of body-faculty, and so on, as stated at length?" "Class" is of four kinds: the class of cultivation, the class of moral discipline, the class of realm, and the class of resemblance — all four explained at length already in the Karma Aggregate. The present discussion is framed specifically in terms of the class of realm. "Whatever being possesses this class of eye-faculty — does that being possess this same class of body-faculty? And, conversely, whatever being possesses this class of body-faculty — does that being possess this same class of eye-faculty?" Answer: this calls for a tetralemma. There is a being who possesses this class of eye-faculty yet not this class of body-faculty — namely, one born in the desire realm who has never obtained the eye-faculty of the form realm, or who obtained it but has since lost it, and who has obtained the eye-faculty of the form realm through the power of skillfully cultivated dhyāna. "Never obtained the eye-faculty of the form realm" refers to one who has not yet reached the praśākhā stage or beyond; "obtained it but has since lost it" refers to one who has already obtained the eye-faculty but has lost it, either through some natural decay or through some external condition destroying it. "Obtained the eye-faculty of the form realm" refers to obtaining, through the power of skillfully cultivated dhyāna, a form-realm eye-faculty that relies upon a desire-realm body — for one does not thereby obtain the body-faculty of that other realm, since no being ever possesses the body of a realm other than its own. There is a being who possesses this class of body-faculty yet not this class of eye-faculty — namely, one born in the desire realm who has never obtained the eye-faculty, or who obtained it but has since lost it, and who has not obtained the eye-faculty of the form realm — such a being possesses only the body-faculty of the desire realm, possessing the eye-faculty of neither realm at all. There is a being who possesses this class of eye-faculty and also this class of body-faculty — namely, one born in the desire realm who has already obtained the eye-faculty and has not lost it, or one born in the form realm who has already obtained it. "Already obtained it," for one born in the form realm, refers to one who has already reached the praśākhā stage or beyond; "has not lost it" refers to one whose obtained eye-faculty has not decayed naturally nor been destroyed by some external condition; "born in the form realm" is mentioned because, in that realm, no faculty is ever incomplete. There is a being who possesses neither this class of eye-faculty nor this class of body-faculty — namely, one born in the formless realm, since that ground fixedly possesses no form-faculty of any kind at all. Exactly as with the eye-faculty, so too with the ear-faculty — both of these can manifest across different realms at once. "Whatever being possesses this class of nose-faculty — does that being possess this same class of body-faculty? And, conversely, whatever being possesses this class of body-faculty — does that being possess this same class of nose-faculty?" Answer: whatever being possesses this class of nose-faculty possesses this same class of body-faculty. There is a being who possesses this class of body-faculty yet does not possess this class of nose-faculty — namely, one born in the desire realm who has never obtained the nose-faculty, or who obtained it but has since lost it. "Never obtained the nose-faculty" refers to one who has not yet reached the praśākhā stage or beyond;
設得已失者。謂已得鼻根。或自然壞。或遇緣壞故。失如鼻根。舌根亦爾。此二俱無異界現前故。問何故生欲界得起色界眼耳根現在前。非鼻舌身根耶。答由眼耳二根。有加行得。離染得。修所成。
"obtained it but has since lost it" refers to one who has already obtained the nose-faculty but has lost it, either through some natural decay or through some external condition destroying it — exactly as with the nose-faculty, so too with the tongue-faculty, since neither of these two can ever manifest across different realms at all. One might ask: why is it that a being born in the desire realm can bring about the manifestation of a form-realm eye- or ear-faculty, but never a nose-, tongue-, or body-faculty? Answer: only the eye and ear faculties possess a preparatory attainment, a liberation-attainment, and a cultivated result,
That a desire-realm practitioner can, through skilled meditative cultivation, come to see with a form-realm eye while still standing in a desire-realm body is a genuinely striking piece of cross-realm hybridity: the tetralemma here shows this tradition comfortable with a being's own faculties spanning two different cosmological realms at once, so long as the body itself, the one thing that can never be borrowed from elsewhere, remains anchored in its own native ground.
15. Why Only the Eye and Ear Can Ever Reach Into a Higher Realm
Two explanations are offered for why only the eye and ear, among all the sense-faculties, can manifest across realms at all: one holds that only these two possess the necessary preparatory attainment, liberation-attainment, and cultivated result needed to support such cross-realm reach; the other holds simply that practitioners only ever aspire to see the form realm's sights and hear its sounds, since that realm offers no fragrance, flavor, or distinct tactile sensation there to be desired in the first place.
通所依性四支五支靜慮果故。得異界起現在前。鼻舌身根無如是事。故唯自界起現在前。有餘師言。生欲界者求起上界天眼耳根。
pervading the four- or five-factor dhyānas' own dependent nature, and it is for this reason that they alone can manifest across different realms at all — the nose-, tongue-, and body-faculties have no such capacity, and therefore only ever manifest within their own native realm. Another master holds that a being born in the desire realm seeks specifically to bring forth the higher realm's divine eye and divine ear,
不求餘三故不得起。謂觀行者作是希求。云何令我見色界色。聞色界聲。由此便修根本靜慮起天眼耳。彼無香味可欲嗅甞故。不求起色界鼻舌。無生異地覺異地觸。設於彼求無理可起。唯取至境故。
and seeks nothing corresponding for the remaining three faculties, and it is for this reason that these three are never brought forth. For a practitioner of contemplation makes precisely this aspiration: "how might I come to see the form realm's own forms, and hear the form realm's own sounds?" — and it is on account of this aspiration that the fundamental dhyānas are cultivated, bringing forth the divine eye and divine ear. But since that realm has no fragrance or flavor there to be desired, smelled, or tasted, no such aspiration is ever made to bring forth a form-realm nose or tongue; and since no being ever experiences a different ground's own sensations of touch, even where such an aspiration might be made there would be no rational way for it to succeed, since only what is actually reached can ever be grasped.
The second explanation's own quiet honesty — that the nose, tongue, and body never reach across realms simply because no one ever wants them to, there being nothing up there worth smelling, tasting, or touching in a way that differs from what is already at hand — replaces a purely structural explanation with a frankly motivational one: sometimes a capacity goes undeveloped not because it is impossible, but because nobody ever had reason to aspire to it.
16. What Is the Divine Eye, and Why Is It Called 'Divine' at All?
The fascicle's closing investigation turns to the divine eye itself: not composed of ordinary sinew, bone, blood, or flesh, but the pure, subtle matter produced by the form realm's own great elements, capable of unobstructed seeing while itself remaining invisible — and named "divine" for the same reason the world calls any exceptional thing "divine," from robes to ornaments to food, using the term simply to mark out something outstanding rather than to claim any literal celestial origin.
問天眼以何為自性。答非諸筋骨血肉所成。色界大種所造淨色。能無礙視體不可見。眼界眼處眼根所攝是謂天眼。顯自性已當釋其名。問此何因緣說為天眼。答此眼殊勝故名為天。世於勝法有天言故。如說天衣天莊嚴具天飲食等。此中皆以殊勝名天。彼亦如是。
One might ask: what is the divine eye's own intrinsic nature? Answer: it is not composed of sinew, bone, blood, or flesh at all, but is the pure, subtle matter produced by the form realm's own great elements — capable of unobstructed seeing, yet its own substance remains invisible; included among the eye-element, the eye-base, and the eye-faculty — this is what is called the divine eye. Having shown its own intrinsic nature, the passage now goes on to explain its name. One might ask: for what reason is it called the "divine" eye? Answer: because this eye is exceptionally excellent, it is called "divine" — the world, in speaking of anything superlative, tends to use the term "divine," exactly as one speaks of "divine" robes, "divine" ornaments, or "divine" food and drink, in every case using "divine" simply to name something exceptional; the same holds true here as well.
The observation that "divine" here functions the same way it does in everyday speech about "divine" robes or "divine" food — as an intensifier marking excellence, not a literal claim about celestial manufacture — is a useful piece of demystification: the divine eye's own name turns out to be far less mysterious, and far more linguistically ordinary, than its exotic reputation might suggest.
17. Where the Divine Eye Manifests, and the Puzzle of Seeing With a Body Too Small to See
The fascicle closes with a rich, almost comic thought-experiment: the divine eye always manifests symmetrically in both eye-sockets at once, never favoring one side over the other, and never appearing blind, missing, or dazzled — but if a desire-realm being conjures a transformation-body sixteen thousand yojanas tall, so vast that an ordinary human body could not even span the width of one of its toes, from what location does the divine eye actually observe forms at that colossal scale? Four different, genuinely creative solutions are offered in turn.
界者色界繫。地者在四靜慮地。非近分無色。所以者何。若地有通所依勝定。此地有天眼。非近分無色有通所依勝定。故彼地無天眼。問何故近分無色無通所依勝定耶。答奢摩他毘鉢舍那不平等故。非五支四支所成故。非樂道所攝故。問若生欲界修得天眼。現在前時於何處起。答即於生得眼根處起。問若生得眼壞彼何處起。
As for its own realm, it is bound to the form realm; as for its own ground, it is found within the four dhyānas proper, never within their proximate-access levels nor within the formless attainments. Why is this so? Because wherever a ground possesses the mastery-concentration on which supernormal penetration depends, that ground can support the divine eye; the proximate-access levels and the formless attainments possess no such mastery-concentration, and it is for this reason that no ground among them possesses the divine eye. One might ask: why do the proximate-access levels and the formless attainments possess no such mastery-concentration on which supernormal penetration depends? Answer: because their calming and their insight are not evenly balanced there; because they are not accomplished through either the four-factor or the five-factor structure; and because they are not classed among the grounds leading toward joy. One might ask: if a being born in the desire realm cultivates and obtains the divine eye, at what location does it manifest when it becomes present? Answer: it manifests precisely at the location of the naturally born eye-faculty. One might then ask: if the naturally born eye-faculty has already been destroyed, at what location does the divine eye then manifest?
答即於曾有眼根處起。問若彼處所合為一段。不可知者復何處起。
Answer: it manifests precisely at the location where the eye-faculty once existed. One might then ask: if that very location can no longer be identified as any single, fixed spot, at what location does it then manifest?
答即於應有眼根處起。問諸起天眼現在前者。為有左起右不起耶。
Answer: it manifests precisely at the location where the eye-faculty ought to exist. One might then ask: among those for whom the divine eye becomes manifest and present, is there ever a case where it becomes manifest on the left side but not the right,
右起左不起耶。左劣右中耶。左中右上耶。右劣左中耶。右中左上耶。答不如是起謂起天眼者必二處眼俱起。等劣等中等上。一切天眼無瞎無闕。亦無眩亂及彼同分。問若生欲界化作色究竟萬六千踰繕那身。天眼現前觀彼色時。人身長三肘半。或四肘尚不遍彼足指。為住何處觀彼色耶。為上為下。有說。以神境通住上而見。如營舍人處上觀下。如是居上觀下眾色。有說。住下而見如行像者處下觀上。如是居下觀上眾色。有說。彼時以神境智證通。延廣此身令遍所化萬六千踰繕那身量而觀眾色。有說。欲界亦有萬六千踰繕那身。應與所化色究竟身俱生。若時化作色究竟身。爾時欲界三肘半或四肘身便滅。彼萬六千踰繕那身續起。即依常眼處所而觀眾色。如是說者。如彼生處異熟身量化身亦爾。如從色界來欲界時。
or manifest on the right but not the left, or inferior on the left and middling on the right, or middling on the left and superior on the right, or inferior on the right and middling on the left, or middling on the right and superior on the left? Answer: no such thing occurs — whenever the divine eye manifests, it invariably manifests in both locations at once, equally inferior, equally middling, or equally superior in both; every divine eye is entirely free of blindness, of any missing part, of dazzled confusion, and of anything belonging to that same unfortunate class. One might ask: if a being born in the desire realm conjures up, through transformation, a body reaching the very Akaniṣṭha heaven's own height of sixteen thousand yojanas, and the divine eye then manifests to observe forms at that scale, given that a human body stands only three and a half or four cubits tall and could not even span the width of a single toe on such a transformed body, from what location does it observe those forms — from above, or from below? One position holds that one abides above by means of one's own supernormal locomotive power and observes downward from there, exactly as someone standing above a building looks down upon what lies below, observing the many forms below in just this way while abiding above. Another position holds that one abides below and observes from there, exactly as someone walking beside a great statue looks upward from below, observing the many forms above in just this way while abiding below. Another position holds that, at that very moment, by means of the realization attained through supernormal locomotive power, one's own body is stretched and expanded until it fully matches the scale of the transformed body reaching sixteen thousand yojanas, and it is from within that vastly expanded body that the many forms are then observed. Another position holds that the desire realm, too, already possesses a sixteen-thousand-yojana-scale body, which must co-arise together with whatever Akaniṣṭha-scale form is being conjured through transformation — so that, at the very moment the transformed Akaniṣṭha body is conjured, the desire realm's own three-and-a-half or four-cubit body simply ceases, and that sixteen-thousand-yojana body arises to continue in its place, observing the many forms from precisely the ordinary location of the eye-base as it always has. On this last account, exactly as the ripening-produced body's own scale differs according to wherever a being happens to be born, so too does the transformed body's own scale — exactly as, when coming from the form realm down into the desire realm,
化作化身還如欲界異熟身量。此作彼身當知亦爾。隨彼所住觀見眾色。
one's own conjured transformation-body still matches the scale of one's own desire-realm ripening-produced body; the same holds, mutatis mutandis, for this transformation working in the opposite direction as well — one should understand this to work in just the same way, observing the many forms according to whatever scale of body one happens, in each case, to be abiding within.
The four competing solutions to the giant-body puzzle — perching above and looking down, standing below and looking up, stretching one's own body to match the transformation's scale, or positing a hidden sixteen-thousand-yojana body already latent within the desire realm itself, ready to replace the ordinary one the instant it is needed — are a wonderfully concrete illustration of this tradition's willingness to let genuine cosmological imagination run alongside its driest technical censuses, treating even a seemingly whimsical scale-mismatch as a problem worth four serious, structurally different answers rather than a single tidy one.
Fascicle 149 Complete
This closes fascicle 149 of Ru-Yi's translation, drawn from the treatise's true CBETA boundary. Fascicle 149 opens the Contact Nyāsa (根蘊第六中觸納息第三之一): sixteen kinds of contact defined and defended against the Dṛṣṭāntikas' claim that contact is not truly real; an exhaustive census of which contact includes which, and which faculties associate with and causally condition each; a fourfold analysis of whether possessing one realm's eye-faculty requires possessing that realm's body-faculty; and a closing investigation into the divine eye's own nature, name, and the puzzle of how it observes a transformation-body sixteen thousand yojanas tall. Fascicle 150 continues within this same nyāsa (觸納息第三之二).