Every "What Is It?" Answered, One Clause at a Time
This page carries Ru-Yi's translation of the complete Mahāyāna Five Aggregates Treatise (大乘五蘊論), composed by Vasubandhu and translated into Chinese by Xuánzàng. Where Part One named a hundred dharmas without defining one of them, this treatise takes up almost the same material — organized now under the older frame of the five aggregates — and asks, ninety-five times, 云何, "what is it?" Each question gets one answer: a single clause naming the defining nature (為性) of the thing in question. No argument, no example, no debate with a rival school — just definition after definition, until form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness have all been accounted for down to their last constituent.
Translation Method
The Chinese source is Xuánzàng's translation of Vasubandhu's Pañcaskandhaka, "the Five Aggregates [Treatise]." Every one of its ninety-five definitions follows the same grammar — 云何X？謂……為性, "what is X? It is the nature of…" — and we have kept that repetition in English rather than varying it, since the repetition is itself part of what the text is doing: building confidence, question by question, that nothing has been skipped. Classical text is set in the left-hand column below, our English in the right. See also this site's note on translation method.
1. The Aggregate of Form
如薄伽梵略說五蘊：一者、色蘊，二者、受蘊，三者、想蘊，四者、行蘊，五者、識蘊。
云何色蘊？謂四大種及四大種所造諸色。
云何四大種？謂地界、水界、火界、風界。云何地界？謂堅強性。
云何水界？謂流濕性。云何火界？謂溫燥性。云何風界？謂輕等動性。
云何四大種所造諸色？謂眼根、耳根、鼻根、舌根、身根，色、聲、香、味、所觸一分、無表色等。
云何眼根？謂色為境清淨色。云何耳根？謂聲為境清淨色。云何鼻根？謂香為境清淨色。云何舌根？謂味為境清淨色。云何身根？謂所觸為境清淨色。
云何為色？謂眼境界，顯色、形色及表色等。云何為聲？謂耳境界，執受大種因聲，非執受大種因聲，俱大種因聲。云何為香？謂鼻境界，好香、惡香、及所餘香。云何為味？謂舌境界，甘味、酢味、醎味、辛味、苦味、淡味。云何為所觸一分？謂身境界，除四大種餘所造觸，滑性、澁性、重性、輕性、冷、飢、渴等。云何名為無表色等？謂有表業及三摩地所生色等，無見無對。
As the Bhagavān taught in brief, there are five aggregates: first, the aggregate of form; second, the aggregate of feeling; third, the aggregate of perception; fourth, the aggregate of formations; and fifth, the aggregate of consciousness.
What is the aggregate of form? It is the four great elements, and all the forms made by the four great elements.
What are the four great elements? The element of earth, the element of water, the element of fire, and the element of wind. What is the element of earth? Solidity. What is the element of water? Fluid moistness. What is the element of fire? Warmth that dries. What is the element of wind? Lightness, and motion.
What are the forms made by the four great elements? The eye faculty, the ear faculty, the nose faculty, the tongue faculty, and the body faculty; form, sound, smell, taste, and part of the tangible; and non-informative form, and the rest.
What is the eye faculty? Translucent form that takes form as its object. What is the ear faculty? Translucent form that takes sound as its object. What is the nose faculty? Translucent form that takes smell as its object. What is the tongue faculty? Translucent form that takes taste as its object. What is the body faculty? Translucent form that takes the tangible as its object.
What is form? It is the object of the eye — color, shape, and expressive form, and the like. What is sound? It is the object of the ear — sound caused by appropriated great elements, sound caused by non-appropriated great elements, and sound caused by both together. What is smell? It is the object of the nose — good smell, bad smell, and every other smell. What is taste? It is the object of the tongue — sweet, sour, salty, pungent, bitter, and bland. What is part of the tangible? It is the object of the body — the further forms made, apart from the four great elements themselves: smoothness, roughness, heaviness, lightness, cold, hunger, and thirst, and the like. What is called non-informative form and the rest? It is the form produced by informative action and by concentration, which is invisible and offers no resistance.
The word "translucent" (淨色, literally "pure form") is doing real work in the five definitions of the sense faculties. Vasubandhu is not defining the eye as flesh; he is defining it as a special, subtle kind of matter, transparent to its own object, that ordinary flesh merely houses. Sthiramati's expansion of this same definition, in the Extended Five Aggregates Treatise to come, reaches for an image this shorter text only implies — that portion of translucent form within the eye is 如淨醍醐, like pure ghee — and adds an etymology this text skips entirely: 根 ("faculty") carries the sense of a ruling master, called that simply because the eye faculty 與眼識為主，生眼識故, is master over the eye consciousness because it produces it. This treatise states the doctrine; the extended version explains why the word for it means what it means.
非執受大種因聲 — "sound caused by non-appropriated great elements" — is a small phrase worth pausing on, since it quietly does a lot of classifying. "Appropriated" (執受) marks the great elements that belong to a living body; a hand clap is caused by appropriated elements meeting appropriated elements, wind in a tree by non-appropriated elements alone, and a drum struck by a mallet by both together. The three-way split covers every sound there is, from a human voice to a landslide, using only the single distinction between what is, and is not, taken up as part of a living being.
2. Feeling, Perception, and the List of Formations
云何受蘊？謂三領納：一、苦，二、樂，三、不苦不樂。樂謂滅時有和合欲；苦謂生時有乖離欲；不苦不樂謂無二欲。
云何想蘊？謂於境界，取種種相。
云何行蘊？謂除受想，諸餘心法及心不相應行。
云何名為諸餘心法？謂彼諸法與心相應。彼復云何？謂觸、作意、受、想、思；欲、勝解、念、三摩地、慧；信、慚、愧、無貪善根、無瞋善根、無癡善根、精進、輕安、不放逸、捨、不害；貪、瞋、慢、無明、見、疑；忿、恨、覆、惱、嫉、慳、誑、諂、憍、害，無慚、無愧，惛沈、掉舉、不信、懈怠、放逸、忘念、散亂、不正知；惡作、睡眠、尋、伺。
是諸心法：五是遍行，五是別境，十一是善，六是煩惱，餘是隨煩惱，四是不決定。
What is the aggregate of feeling? The threefold experiencing: painful, pleasant, and neither painful nor pleasant. The pleasant is such that, when it ceases, there is a wish to be joined with it again; the painful is such that, when it arises, there is a wish to be parted from it; the neither painful nor pleasant is such that there is neither wish.
What is the aggregate of perception? The grasping of the various marks of an object.
What is the aggregate of formations? All the remaining mental factors apart from feeling and perception, together with formations dissociated from mind.
What is called the remaining mental factors? Those dharmas that are associated with mind. What are they? Contact, attention, feeling, perception, and volition; aspiration, resolve, recollection, concentration, and wisdom; faith, sense of shame, sense of embarrassment, the wholesome root of non-greed, the wholesome root of non-hatred, the wholesome root of non-delusion, diligence, pliancy, heedfulness, equanimity, and non-harming; craving, hatred, conceit, delusion, wrong view, and doubt; wrath, resentment, concealment, vexation, envy, stinginess, deceit, flattery, arrogance, and harmfulness, lack of shame and lack of embarrassment, torpor, restlessness, lack of faith, laziness, heedlessness, forgetfulness, distraction, and incorrect knowledge; regret, sleep, coarse discursive thought, and subtle discursive thought.
Among these mental factors: five are universal, five are particular, eleven are wholesome, six are root afflictions, the rest are secondary afflictions, and four are indeterminate.
Feeling and perception are pulled out of the aggregate of formations and given aggregates of their own, and this treatise never explains why these two specifically — of the fifty-one mental factors about to be named — deserve the promotion. Sthiramati's expansion is again where the explanation of method actually surfaces: he explains why the first two categories of mental factor carry the names they do, a point this shorter text simply assumes. The universal five are so called because 此遍一切善、不善、無記心 — they pervade every wholesome, unwholesome, and indeterminate mind without exception. The particular five are so called for the opposite reason: unlike the universal five, 此五一一於差別境，展轉決定性不相離，是中有一必有一切 — each is tied to its own distinct object, yet among themselves they form a set, such that wherever one of the five arises with respect to that object, all five arise together. And he flags something this text's own count leaves ambiguous: the four indeterminate factors, though listed last after the secondary afflictions, 非正隨煩惱 — are not, strictly speaking, secondary afflictions at all, since regret, sleep, and the two kinds of discursive thought can each appear in a wholesome mind as readily as an unwholesome one.
Readers coming from Part One will notice this list's internal order does not quite match the hundred-dharmas list, and the differences are consistent rather than random. The eleven wholesome factors here run 信慚愧無貪無瞋無癡精進輕安不放逸捨不害 — faith, shame, embarrassment, then the three non-roots, then diligence — while the Hundred Dharmas Treatise moves diligence up to second place. The six root afflictions here run 貪瞋慢無明見疑, ending in doubt, where the other text ends in wrong view. And the four indeterminate factors here run 惡作睡眠尋伺, regret before sleep, where the other text reverses them. None of these are errors; they are simply two independent digests of the same fifty-one items, agreeing on membership and disagreeing on sequence — the kind of variation this collection's translation notes track in full.
3. Twenty-One Definitions: Universal, Particular, and Wholesome
云何為觸？謂三和合分別為性。
云何作意？謂能令心發悟為性。
云何為思？謂於功德過失及俱相違，令心造作，意業為性。
云何為欲？謂於可愛事，希望為性。
云何勝解？謂於決定事，即如所了印可為性。
云何為念？謂於串習事，令心不忘明記為性。
云何三摩地？謂於所觀事，令心一境不散為性。
云何為慧？謂即於彼擇法為性；或如理所引，或不如理所引，或俱非所引。
云何為信？謂於業果諸諦寶中，極正符順，心淨為性。
云何為慚？謂自增上，及法增上，於所作罪羞恥為性。
云何為愧？謂世增上，於所作罪羞恥為性。
云何無貪？謂貪對治，令深厭患無著為性。
云何無瞋？謂瞋對治，以慈為性。
云何無癡？謂癡對治，以其如實正行為性。
云何精進？謂懈怠對治，心於善品勇悍為性。
云何輕安？謂麁重對治，身心調暢堪能為性。
云何不放逸？謂放逸對治，即是無貪乃至精進。依止此故，捨不善法及即修彼對治善法。
云何為捨？謂即無貪乃至精進。依止此故，獲得所有心平等性，心正直性，心無發悟性。又由此故，於已除遣染污法中，無染安住。
云何不害？謂害對治，以悲為性。
What is contact? The nature of discernment born of the coming together of the three.
What is attention? The nature of what rouses the mind to awareness.
What is volition? The nature of mental karma, which impels the mind to act with respect to virtue, fault, and what is neither.
What is aspiration? The nature of longing for something desirable.
What is resolve? The nature of affirming, exactly as it has been understood, a matter that is settled.
What is recollection? The nature of keeping the mind from forgetting, clearly holding in mind a matter grown familiar through practice.
What is concentration? The nature of keeping the mind on a single object of contemplation, undistracted.
What is wisdom? The nature of discerning the dharma with respect to that very object — whether drawn out by correct reasoning, by incorrect reasoning, or by neither.
What is faith? The nature of a mind made pure, in complete and correct accord with karma and its fruit, the truths, and the Three Jewels.
What is a sense of shame? The nature of feeling shame for a wrong one has done, out of respect for oneself and for the dharma.
What is a sense of embarrassment? The nature of feeling shame for a wrong one has done, out of respect for the world.
What is non-greed? The antidote to craving — the nature of deep aversion and detachment.
What is non-hatred? The antidote to hatred — the nature of loving-kindness.
What is non-delusion? The antidote to delusion — the nature of correct conduct in accordance with how things really are.
What is diligence? The antidote to laziness — the nature of a mind bold and vigorous in wholesome things.
What is pliancy? The antidote to coarse heaviness — the nature of a body and mind made pliant and capable.
What is heedfulness? The antidote to heedlessness — it is simply non-greed on through diligence. In dependence on these, one abandons unwholesome things and cultivates the wholesome things that counteract them.
What is equanimity? It is simply non-greed on through diligence. In dependence on these, one obtains a mind that is even, upright, and free of the need to be roused. And by this, one abides without defilement among defiled things already dispelled.
What is non-harming? The antidote to harmfulness — the nature of compassion.
Heedfulness and equanimity are defined by the exact same clause — 即是無貪乃至精進 / 即無貪乃至精進, "simply non-greed on through diligence" — and the treatise does not pretend otherwise. Both factors are constructed entirely out of four others already defined (non-greed, non-hatred, non-delusion, diligence) rather than naming any further quality of their own. What distinguishes them is only what that same underlying stability is used for: heedfulness is that stability turned toward abandoning the unwholesome and cultivating its antidote, while equanimity is the settled, level, unforced mind that results once the work is already underway. Two names, one substance, two functions — a compact illustration of how the Abhidharma tradition is willing to multiply factors by function even where it will not multiply them by substance.
Sthiramati's expansion supplies what this text omits for every one of these eight factors: not just what each one is, but what it does. Diligence's function, on his account, is 圓滿成就善法, to bring wholesome dharmas to complete accomplishment — and his gloss adds a qualifier easy to miss, that true diligence requires 無喜足, freedom from being satisfied too soon. The danger it guards against is not only giving up, but stopping early because some real progress already feels sufficient. Read straight through his function clauses for this whole stretch, contact through wisdom stop looking like eight separate items and start looking like one continuous process: contact meets an object, attention holds it, volition acts on it, aspiration and resolve commit to it, recollection retains it, concentration steadies it, and wisdom finally settles what it is.
4. Six Definitions: The Root Afflictions
云何為貪？謂於五取蘊染愛耽著為性。
云何為瞋？謂於有情樂作損害為性。
云何為慢？所謂七慢：一、慢，二、過慢，三、慢過慢，四、我慢，五、增上慢，六、卑慢，七、邪慢。云何慢？謂於劣計己勝、或於等計己等，心高舉為性。云何過慢？謂於等計己勝、或於勝計己等，心高舉為性。云何慢過慢？謂於勝計己勝，心高舉為性。云何我慢？謂於五取蘊隨觀為我或為我所，心高舉為性。云何增上慢？謂於未得增上殊勝所證法中謂我已得，心高舉為性。云何卑慢？謂於多分殊勝計己少分，下劣心高舉為性。云何邪慢？謂實無德計己有德，心高舉為性。
云何無明？謂於業果及諦寶中無智為性。此復二種，所謂俱生、分別所起。又欲纏貪、瞋及欲纏無明，名三不善根，謂貪不善根、瞋不善根、癡不善根。
云何為見？所謂五見：一、薩迦耶見，二、邊執見，三、邪見，四、見取，五、戒禁取。云何薩迦耶見？謂於五取蘊隨觀為我或為我所，染污慧為性。云何邊執見？謂即由彼增上力故，隨觀為常或復為斷，染污慧為性。云何邪見？謂或謗因或復謗果、或謗作用或壞善事，染污慧為性。云何見取？謂即於三見及彼所依諸蘊，隨觀為最為上為勝為極，染污慧為性。云何戒禁取？謂於戒禁及彼所依諸蘊，隨觀為清淨為解脫為出離，染污慧為性。云何為疑？謂於諦等猶豫為性。諸煩惱中，後三見及疑唯分別起，餘通俱生及分別起。
What is craving? The nature of defiled attachment and addiction to the five appropriated aggregates.
What is hatred? The nature of delighting in doing harm to sentient beings.
What is conceit? The seven forms of conceit: conceit, excessive conceit, conceit exceeding excessive conceit, self-conceit, presumptuous conceit, self-deprecating conceit, and wrongful conceit. What is conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that considers itself superior to an inferior, or equal to an equal. What is excessive conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that considers itself superior to an equal, or equal to a superior. What is conceit exceeding excessive conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that considers itself superior to a superior. What is self-conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that regards the five appropriated aggregates as a self or as belonging to a self. What is presumptuous conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that considers itself to have already attained a distinguished, superior realization not yet actually attained. What is self-deprecating conceit? The nature of an exalted mind, though calling itself inferior, that measures itself against only a small part of what is greatly superior. What is wrongful conceit? The nature of an exalted mind that considers itself to have virtues it genuinely lacks.
What is delusion? The nature of ignorance concerning karma and its fruit, the truths, and the Three Jewels. It is again of two kinds: innate, and arisen through discrimination. Further, craving bound to the desire realm, hatred, and delusion bound to the desire realm are named the three unwholesome roots: the unwholesome root of craving, the unwholesome root of hatred, and the unwholesome root of delusion.
What is wrong view? The five views: the view of a substantial body, the extremist view, wrong view proper, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and rituals. What is the view of a substantial body? The nature of defiled wisdom that regards the five appropriated aggregates as a self or as belonging to a self. What is the extremist view? The nature of defiled wisdom that, by the force of that same view, regards them as permanent or as annihilated. What is wrong view proper? The nature of defiled wisdom that denies cause, or denies effect, or denies function, or destroys what is good. What is clinging to views? The nature of defiled wisdom that regards the three views above, and the aggregates they depend on, as the foremost, the highest, the supreme, and the ultimate. What is clinging to rules and rituals? The nature of defiled wisdom that regards rules and rituals, and the aggregates they depend on, as purifying, as liberating, and as leading out. What is doubt? The nature of wavering with respect to the truths and the rest. Among the afflictions, these last three views and doubt arise only through discrimination; the rest occur both innately and through discrimination.
Conceit and wrong view are each, on inspection, not one affliction but a small taxonomy in its own right — seven forms of the first, five of the second — folded inside what the summary list of fifty-one names as a single item apiece. The treatise's method is the same in both cases: name the general term, announce the count, then run through the members using a nearly identical template each time (心高舉為性 for every one of the seven conceits; 染污慧為性 for every one of the five views), varying only the specific object the mind exalts itself over, or the specific way the wisdom is corrupted. This is worth noticing because it means "fifty-one mental factors" already understates the treatise's own granularity — the real count of named mental states, once conceit and wrong view are unfolded, runs closer to sixty.
Sthiramati's expansion supplies the one piece of philology this shorter text's bare list cannot: why the first of the five views is called 薩迦耶見 at all. He glosses the compound in two halves — 薩 carries the sense of what perishes and decays, 迦耶 the sense of what is joined and heaped together — and explains that the name is built to attack both errors the view makes at once, mistaking something impermanent for permanent and mistaking something composite for a unity. The name of the affliction is already, on this reading, a compressed refutation of it.
The closing sentence — that the last three views, together with doubt, arise only through discrimination, while the rest occur both innately and through discrimination — draws a line this treatise will not explain further but that matters for practice. "Arising through discrimination" (分別起) means an affliction that depends on having been taught a wrong theory: a view of self elaborated by a particular philosophical school, or a specific doctrine one has come to doubt. "Innate" (俱生) afflictions need no doctrine at all — an animal has self-view and craving without ever having heard a philosophy. The four singled out here as discrimination-only are, not coincidentally, the four most tied to holding a position: extremism, wrong view proper, clinging to views, and doubt. A view of self can be innate; a view about that self dressed up as a philosophy cannot.
5. Twenty-Four Definitions: The Secondary and Indeterminate Factors
云何為忿？謂遇現前不饒益事心損惱為性。
云何為恨？謂結怨不捨為性。
云何為覆？謂於自罪覆藏為性。
云何為惱？謂發暴惡言尤䖧為性。
云何為嫉？謂於他盛事心妬為性。
云何為慳？謂施相違心悋為性。
云何為誑？謂為誑他詐現不實事為性。
云何為諂？謂覆藏自過方便所攝心曲為性。
云何為憍？謂於自盛事染著倨傲心恃為性。
云何為害？謂於諸有情損惱為性。
云何無慚？謂於所作罪不自羞恥為性。
云何無愧？謂於所作罪不羞恥他為性。
云何惛沈？謂心不調暢無所堪能蒙昧為性。
云何掉舉？謂心不寂靜為性。
云何不信？謂信所對治，於業果等不正信順，心不清淨為性。
云何懈怠？謂精進所治，於諸善品心不勇猛為性。
云何放逸？謂即由貪瞋癡懈怠故，於諸煩惱心不防護，於諸善品不能修習為性。
云何失念？謂染污念，於諸善法不能明記為性。
云何散亂？謂貪瞋癡分心流蕩為性。
云何不正知？謂於身語意現前行中不正依住為性。
云何惡作？謂心變悔為性。
云何睡眠？謂不自在轉心極昧略為性。
云何為尋？謂能尋求意言分別思慧差別令心麁為性。云何為伺？謂能伺察意言分別思慧差別令心細為性。
What is wrath? The nature of a mind injured and vexed upon meeting some present harm.
What is resentment? The nature of harboring a grudge without letting go.
What is concealment? The nature of hiding one's own wrongdoing.
What is vexation? The nature of bursting out with harsh, cruel words that wound.
What is envy? The nature of a mind jealous of another's flourishing.
What is stinginess? The nature of a mind that begrudges giving, the opposite of generosity.
What is deceit? The nature of falsely presenting what is untrue, in order to deceive others.
What is flattery? The nature of a crooked mind, given to devices that conceal one's own faults.
What is arrogance? The nature of a mind conceited and presumptuous, attached to its own flourishing.
What is harmfulness? The nature of injuring and vexing sentient beings.
What is lack of shame? The nature of feeling no shame in oneself for a wrong one has done.
What is lack of embarrassment? The nature of feeling no shame before others for a wrong one has done.
What is torpor? The nature of a mind unpliant, incapable, and clouded.
What is restlessness? The nature of a mind that is not still.
What is lack of faith? The antidote to which is faith — the nature of a mind not made pure, not rightly trusting and according with karma and its fruit and the rest.
What is laziness? The antidote to which is diligence — the nature of a mind not bold in wholesome things.
What is heedlessness? The nature of a mind that, through craving, hatred, delusion, and laziness, fails to guard against the afflictions and is unable to cultivate wholesome things.
What is forgetfulness? Defiled memory — the nature of being unable to hold wholesome things clearly in mind.
What is distraction? The nature of a mind, apportioned by craving, hatred, and delusion, that drifts and scatters.
What is incorrect knowledge? The nature of resting incorrectly on present conduct of body, speech, and mind.
What is regret? The nature of a mind that turns back on itself in remorse.
What is sleep? The nature of a mind turning without mastery of itself, utterly dim and contracted.
What is coarse discursive thought? The nature of a distinct working of volition and wisdom that searches through mental speech, making the mind coarse. What is subtle discursive thought? The nature of a distinct working of volition and wisdom that examines through mental speech, making the mind fine.
Twenty secondary afflictions in a row, each given exactly one clause, produce an effect the treatise's terseness makes almost accidental: read straight through, the list becomes a compact catalog of ordinary bad behavior stripped of any narrative excuse. Wrath is just injury met with injury; flattery is just a crooked mind managing its own image; arrogance is just attachment to one's own good fortune. Nothing here is exotic. The fifty-one mental factors were never a list of rare meditative attainments and their opposites; most of them, especially in this stretch, are the texture of an unremarkable bad day.
Sthiramati's expansion adds one more layer this text's flat list obscures entirely: nearly every one of the twenty is classified there as 是貪之分、是瞋之分, or 是癡之分 — a facet of craving, of hatred, or of delusion — rather than standing as an independent fault. Stinginess, deceit, and arrogance are named as craving's facets; harmfulness, hatred's; concealment and torpor, delusion's. Twenty names shrink back to three underlying diseases once this classification is seen, which may be exactly why this shorter text never bothers to state it: the point only matters once a reader is ready to ask not just what each affliction is, but which root it actually serves.
The final pair, coarse and subtle discursive thought, are defined by the same underlying process — 意言分別思慧差別, "a distinct working of volition and wisdom through mental speech" — differing only in grain: one searches (尋), the other examines (伺) the same mental speech more finely. Even here at the very edge of the mental-factors list, the treatise's method holds to the last: name the shared substance first, then locate the one variable that actually distinguishes the two things being defined.
6. Formations Dissociated from Mind, and the Aggregate of Consciousness
云何心不相應行？謂依色、心、心法分位，但假建立，不可施設決定異性及不異性。彼復云何？謂得、無想等至、滅盡等至、無想所有、命根、眾同分、生、老、住、無常、名身、句身、文身、異生性如是等類。
云何為得？謂若獲若成就。此復三種，謂若種子、若自在、若現前，如其所應。
云何無想等至？謂已離遍淨貪、未離上貪，由出離想作意為先，不恒現行心心法滅為性。
云何滅盡等至？謂已離無所有處貪，從第一有更求勝進，由止息想作意為先，不恒現行及恒行一分心心法滅為性。
云何無想所有？謂無想等至果。無想有情天中生已，不恒現行心心法滅為性。
云何命根？謂於眾同分中，先業所引，住時決定為性。
云何眾同分？謂諸有情自類相似為性。
云何為生？謂於眾同分中，諸行本無今有為性。
云何為老？謂即如是諸行相續變異為性。
云何為住？謂即如是諸行相續隨轉為性。
云何無常？謂即如是諸行相續謝滅為性。
云何名身？謂諸法自性增語為性。
云何句身？謂諸法差別增語為性。
云何文身？謂諸字為性，以能表彰前二種故；亦名為顯，由與名句為所依止顯了義故；亦名為字，非差別門所變易故。云何異生性？謂於諸聖法不得為性。如是等類已說行蘊。
云何識蘊？謂於所緣境了別為性。亦名心意，由採集故、意所攝故。最勝心者，謂阿賴耶識。何以故？由此識中諸行種子皆採集故。又此行緣不可分別，前後一類相續隨轉。又由此故，從滅盡等至、無想等至、無想所有起者，了別境名轉識還生，待所緣緣差別轉故、數數間斷還復轉故、又令生死流轉旋還故。阿賴耶識者，謂能攝藏一切種子故，又能攝藏我慢相故，又復緣身為境界故。即此亦名阿陀那識，能執持身故。最勝意者，謂緣阿賴耶識為境，恒與我癡、我見、我慢及我愛等相應之識，前後一類相續隨轉，除阿羅漢果及與聖道滅盡等至現在前位。
What are formations dissociated from mind? Provisional constructs established on the basis of positions taken by form, mind, and mental factors — which cannot be posited as definitely other than these, nor as not other than these. What are they? Possession, the attainment of no-thought, the attainment of cessation, the fruit of no-thought, the life faculty, class-commonality, birth, aging, abiding, impermanence, word-groups, phrase-groups, syllable-groups, the state of an ordinary being, and the like.
What is possession? Acquisition, or attainment. It is again of three kinds — as seed, as mastery, or as presently manifest — as is appropriate in each case.
What is the attainment of no-thought? One who has become free of desire for the sphere of universal purity but not yet free of desire for what lies above — preceded by an attention set on the notion of release, it is the nature of the cessation of the mind and mental factors that are not constantly present.
What is the attainment of cessation? One who has become free of desire for the sphere of nothingness and, going beyond even the summit of existence, seeks further advancement — preceded by an attention set on the notion of stilling, it is the nature of the cessation of the mind and mental factors that are not constantly present, together with a portion of those that are constantly present.
What is the fruit of no-thought? The fruit of the attainment of no-thought. Once born among the sentient beings of the heaven of no-thought, it is the nature of the cessation of the mind and mental factors that are not constantly present.
What is the life faculty? The nature of a fixed span of abiding, drawn forth by prior karma, within one's class-commonality.
What is class-commonality? The nature of resemblance among sentient beings of the same kind.
What is birth? The nature by which, within a class-commonality, formations that were formerly absent now come to be. What is aging? The nature of the continuous alteration of these same formations. What is abiding? The nature of the continuous carrying-on of these same formations. What is impermanence? The nature of the continuous passing away of these same formations.
What are word-groups? The nature of the terms that designate the own-nature of things. What are phrase-groups? The nature of the terms that designate the differentiation of things. What are syllable-groups? The nature of the letters themselves, since they are what make the previous two manifest. They are also called "the manifesting," since they serve as the basis on which words and phrases become clear in meaning; and they are also called "letters," since they are not altered by the distinctions made through them. What is the state of an ordinary being? The nature of not having attained the noble dharmas. Such is the aggregate of formations, now explained.
What is the aggregate of consciousness? The nature of discerning the object taken as condition. It is also called mind and intent, since it gathers, and since it is included within intent. The supreme mind is the ālayavijñāna. Why? Because it is within this consciousness that the seeds of all formations are gathered. Further, its object and conditions cannot be discriminated; it is a single kind, continuing on before and after without break. And because of this, when one arises from the attainment of cessation, the attainment of no-thought, or the fruit of no-thought, the consciousness that discerns objects — called the evolving consciousness — arises again, since it turns according to differences in the objective condition, since it turns again after repeated interruption, and since it makes the flow of birth and death revolve. The ālayavijñāna is so called because it is able to store and gather all seeds, because it is able to store and gather the mark of self-conceit, and because it further takes the body as its object. This same consciousness is also called the ādāna-consciousness, since it is able to hold the body together. The supreme intent is the consciousness that constantly takes the ālayavijñāna as its object and is constantly associated with self-delusion, self-view, self-conceit, and self-love, continuing on before and after as a single kind — except at the stage of the fruit of arhatship, or of the noble path, or when the attainment of cessation is presently manifest.
The opening definition of formations dissociated from mind is the most abstract sentence in the treatise, and worth unpacking, because everything that follows depends on it. These fourteen items are explicitly not a fourth kind of stuff alongside form and mind — they are 假建立, provisional constructs, laid across 分位, the positions or states that form, mind, and mental factors happen to occupy. "Birth" is not an ingredient added to a formation; it is simply what we call a formation's position at the moment it starts existing. This is why the treatise insists such items are neither definitely the same as form-and-mind, nor definitely different — they have no independent reality of their own to be same or different as.
The three names for the fruit of the no-thought state across this collection — 無想報 in the Hundred Dharmas Treatise, 無想所有 here, 無想天 in Sthiramati's Extended version — are one more small proof that these digests were composed independently rather than copied from one another, even while agreeing closely on substance. All three definitions converge on the same fact: a meditator who mistakes the temporary absence of mind for liberation is reborn, as the karmic fruit of that mistake, in a heaven where mind stays absent for a very long time but eventually, unavoidably, resumes.
The ālayavijñāna passage compresses, into a single paragraph, an argument this site's longer Yogācāra treatises spend entire fascicles making: that ordinary experience requires a consciousness deeper than the six we notice, one that never actually stops even when the other six do. The proof offered here is economical. The two meditative attainments just defined are, by definition, states in which the six active consciousnesses — sight, hearing, and the rest, through to ordinary mental awareness — have all ceased. Yet a person who has entered such a state can still be said to be alive, and does eventually come back out of it with memory, personality, and karmic continuity intact. Something had to be running the whole time to make that continuity possible, and 轉識還生 — the evolving consciousness arises again — describes exactly that return. The ālayavijñāna is offered as the only candidate that fits: never interrupted, storing every seed, and constituting the very sense of "self" that manas (the "supreme intent") mistakes it for.
The four afflictions bound permanently to manas — self-delusion, self-view, self-conceit, self-love — are the same four this site's other Yogācāra pages name for the seventh consciousness, and the three exceptions given here (an arhat's final fruit, the noble path directly manifest, the attainment of cessation) are the same three moments in which that grasping falls silent elsewhere on this site as well. Sthiramati's own expansion closes this same passage with an explicit tally this shorter text leaves the reader to work out alone — 如是六轉識及染污意、阿賴耶識，此八名識蘊, "these eight are named the aggregate of consciousness" — making unmistakable that the fifth aggregate, taught to beginners on the very first page of this collection as simply "consciousness," was always eight consciousnesses, six of them interruptible and two of them never actually absent.
7. Why "Aggregate"? The Twelve Sense Fields, and the Unconditioned
問：「以何義故說名為蘊？」答：「以積聚義說名為蘊。謂世相續品類趣處差別色等總略攝故。」
復有十二處，謂眼處色處、耳處聲處、鼻處香處、舌處味處、身處觸處、意處法處。眼等五處及色聲香味處，如前已釋。言觸處者，謂四大種及前所說所觸一分。言意處者，即是識蘊。言法處者，謂受想行蘊無表色等及與無為。
云何無為？謂虛空無為、非擇滅無為、擇滅無為及真如等。云何虛空？謂若容受諸色。云何非擇滅？謂若滅非離繫。此復云何？謂離煩惱對治而諸蘊畢竟不生。云何擇滅？謂若滅是離繫。此復云何？謂由煩惱對治故諸蘊畢竟不生。云何真如？謂諸法法性、法無我性。
Question: "For what reason are they called aggregates?" Answer: "They are called aggregates in the sense of a heaping together — since form and the rest, across the continuity of time, kinds, destinies, and places, are all gathered up together in brief under this one term."
There are further the twelve sense fields: the eye field and the form field, the ear field and the sound field, the nose field and the smell field, the tongue field and the taste field, the body field and the tangible field, the mental field and the dharma field. The five fields of eye and the rest, together with the fields of form, sound, smell, and taste, have already been explained above. The tangible field is the four great elements, together with the aforementioned part of the tangible. The mental field is simply the aggregate of consciousness. The dharma field is the aggregates of feeling, perception, and formations, non-informative form and the like, and the unconditioned.
What is the unconditioned? Space, cessation not through discrimination, cessation through discrimination, and suchness. What is space? Whatever accommodates form. What is cessation not through discrimination? A cessation that is not freedom from bondage. What does this mean? It means that, apart from the antidote to the afflictions, the aggregates finally do not arise. What is cessation through discrimination? A cessation that is freedom from bondage. What does this mean? It means that, through the antidote to the afflictions, the aggregates finally do not arise. What is suchness? The nature of dharmas as they are, the selflessness of things.
Four kinds of the unconditioned here, not six as in the Hundred Dharmas Treatise and not eight as in Illuminating the Sacred Teaching — this text simply omits the immovable and the cessation of perception and feeling, which belong to a meditative-attainment register this treatise, having already covered those same states under formations dissociated from mind, does not revisit under a second heading. Sthiramati's Extended version, expanding almost everything else in this treatise, expands this passage the least of all and keeps the same count of four — a sign that this particular divergence from the Hundred Dharmas Treatise was settled doctrine within this text's own tradition, not an open question later commentary needed to resolve.
Notice how much of the dharma field's definition is negative space: "the dharma field is the aggregates of feeling, perception, and formations, non-informative form and the like, and the unconditioned" — in other words, everything real that is not form, not consciousness, and not one of the other ten sense fields' own proper objects. The mental field, by contrast, gets the shortest definition in the whole passage: 即是識蘊, "simply the aggregate of consciousness." The twelve sense fields are not a new inventory; they are the same five aggregates, re-sorted by which of twelve doorways of experience each item opens through.
8. Why "Sense Field"? The Eighteen Elements, and Why Any of This Is Taught
問：「以何義故名為處耶？」答：「諸識生長門義，是處義。」
復有十八界，謂眼界、色界、眼識界，耳界、聲界、耳識界，鼻界、香界、鼻識界，舌界、味界、舌識界，身界、觸界、身識界，意界、法界、意識界。
眼等諸界及色等諸界，如處中說。六識界者，謂依眼等根、緣色等境，了別為性。言意界者，謂即彼無間滅等，為欲顯示第六意識，及廣建立十八界故。如是色蘊，即十處十界及法處法界，一分識蘊即意處及七心界，餘三蘊及色蘊一分并諸無為即法處法界。
問以何義故說名為界。答以能任持無作用性自相義故。說名為界。
問：「以何義故宣說蘊等？」答：「為欲對治三種我執。如其次第三種我執者，謂一性我執、受者我執、作者我執。」
Question: "For what reason are they called sense fields?" Answer: "The sense of being the gateway through which the consciousnesses are generated and grow — that is the sense of 'field.'"
There are further the eighteen elements: the eye element, the form element, the eye-consciousness element; the ear element, the sound element, the ear-consciousness element; the nose element, the smell element, the nose-consciousness element; the tongue element, the taste element, the tongue-consciousness element; the body element, the tangible element, the body-consciousness element; the mental element, the dharma element, the mental-consciousness element.
The elements of eye and the rest, and the elements of form and the rest, are as stated among the sense fields. The six consciousness-elements are the nature of discerning, in dependence on the faculties of eye and the rest, the objects of form and the rest. The mental element is that very same consciousness immediately upon its ceasing — spoken of in order to display the sixth, mental consciousness, and in order to fully establish the eighteen elements. Thus the aggregate of form is the ten fields and ten elements, together with a part of the dharma field and dharma element; the aggregate of consciousness is the mental field and the seven mental elements; and the remaining three aggregates, together with a part of the aggregate of form, and all of the unconditioned, are the dharma field and dharma element.
Question: "For what reason are they called elements?" Answer: "In the sense of bearing and holding a particular character that is without activity of its own — that is the sense of 'element.'"
Question: "For what reason is the teaching of the aggregates and the rest given?" Answer: "In order to counteract three kinds of grasping at a self. In their order, the three kinds of grasping at a self are: grasping at a self as a single unity, grasping at a self as an experiencer, and grasping at a self as an agent."
The three self-graspings answer a question a careful reader has likely been asking since Part One: why does this material need to be taught three separate ways — once as five aggregates, once as twelve sense fields, once as eighteen elements — when all three carve up the identical territory? This closing exchange gives the traditional answer directly. The aggregates counteract the grasping at a self as a single unity, because sorting experience into five heaps that never fuse into one thing makes a single, unified self hard to locate. The sense fields counteract the grasping at a self as an experiencer, because framing everything as gateways of arising makes plain that there is no one behind the gates doing the receiving. The elements counteract the grasping at a self as an agent, because 無作用性自相 — a particular character that is without activity of its own — denies each element any power to act under its own steam, and a self that cannot even act is not much of an agent. Same facts, three different self-delusions dismantled, three different frames required.
The definition of "element" is the driest and most consequential line in this section: 任持無作用性自相 — bearing and holding a particular character that is without activity of its own. Every one of the eighteen elements, on this account, does nothing; each merely holds its own distinguishing mark, present as a condition for what arises in dependence on it, contributing nothing more. This is the seed of the entire Yogācāra critique of causation-as-agency this site's longer treatises unfold at length: if not even a sense faculty truly acts, the case for a self that acts was never strong to begin with.
Sthiramati's Extended version carries this entire exchange over almost word for word, adding nothing further — unlike nearly everything else in this treatise, which he expands with an etymology, a citation, or a worked example. Apparently the three self-graspings needed no further gloss to be considered complete, even from a commentator who otherwise elaborates everything in sight.
9. The Eighteen Elements, Classified Nineteen Ways
復次此十八界幾有色？謂十界、一少分，即色蘊自性。幾無色？謂所餘界。幾有見？謂一色界。幾無見？謂所餘界。幾有對？謂十有色界。若彼於是處有所障礙，是有對義。幾無對？謂所餘界。幾有漏？謂十五界及後三少分，由於是處煩惱起故、現所行處故。幾無漏？謂後三少分。幾欲界繫？謂一切。幾色界繫？謂十四，除香、味，鼻、舌識。幾無色界繫？謂後三。幾不繫？謂即彼無漏界。幾蘊所攝？謂除無為。幾取蘊所攝？謂有漏。幾善？幾不善？幾無記？謂十，通三種七心界及色聲法界，八無記。幾是內？謂十二，除色、聲、香、味、觸及法界。幾是外？謂六即所除。幾有緣？謂七心界及法界少分心所有法。幾無緣？謂餘十及法界少分。幾有分別？謂意界、意識界、法界少分。幾執受？謂五內界及四界少分，謂色、香、味、觸。幾非執受？謂餘九四少分。幾同分？謂五內有色界，由與自識等境界故。幾彼同分？謂即彼自識空時與自類等故。
Next, of these eighteen elements, how many have form? Ten elements, and a part of one more — this is the own-nature of the aggregate of form. How many are formless? The remaining elements. How many are visible? One, the form element. How many are invisible? The remaining elements. How many are resistant? The ten elements that have form — resistance means that something is obstructed where they are. How many are non-resistant? The remaining elements.
How many are contaminated? Fifteen elements, and part of the last three — since it is in these that the afflictions arise, and these are their present sphere of operation. How many are uncontaminated? Part of the last three. How many are bound to the desire realm? All of them. How many are bound to the form realm? Fourteen — excepting smell, taste, and the nose- and tongue-consciousnesses. How many are bound to the formless realm? The last three. How many are unbound? Simply the uncontaminated part of those same elements.
How many are included among the aggregates? All except the unconditioned. How many are included among the appropriated aggregates? Those that are contaminated. How many are wholesome, how many unwholesome, how many indeterminate? Ten — the seven mental elements, and the elements of form, sound, and dharma — pass through all three; the remaining eight are indeterminate. How many are internal? Twelve — excepting form, sound, smell, taste, the tangible, and the dharma element. How many are external? The six thus excepted.
How many take an object? The seven mental elements, and the mental factors that are part of the dharma element. How many take no object? The remaining ten, and the rest of the dharma element. How many involve discrimination? The mental element, the mental-consciousness element, and part of the dharma element. How many are appropriated? The five internal elements, and part of four elements — form, smell, taste, and the tangible. How many are not appropriated? The remaining nine, and the rest of those four. How many are of similar class? The five internal elements that have form, since they are on a par with their own consciousness's sphere. How many are of that same class? Those same elements, at a time when their own consciousness is absent, since they remain on a par with their own kind.
Nineteen questions in a row, and the treatise never once explains why these nineteen and not some other set — the list simply runs through the standard Abhidharma battery of cross-cutting classifications applied to the eighteen elements, one after another, letting the sheer number of cuts demonstrate the same point the sense-field and aggregate discussions made by other means: there is no remainder. Every element is fully accounted for on every axis — material or not, visible or not, bound to a realm or free of all three — and the exhaustiveness is the argument. A self would have to show up in at least one of these nineteen sorts; it never does.
The closing pair, 同分 and 彼同分 — "of similar class" and "of that same class" — names one of Abhidharma's more technical distinctions, and is worth spelling out since the treatise's own gloss is compressed to the point of opacity. A sense faculty currently generating its own consciousness — an eye actually seeing — is 同分, on a par with its consciousness. A faculty that belongs to the same class but is not, at a given moment, generating consciousness — an eye closed in sleep, or one that has gone blind — is 彼同分, still "of that class" by category even though nothing is currently arising from it. The distinction exists because Abhidharma physiology needs a way to say that a sleeping or blind eye is still, in the relevant sense, an eye, without having to say it is presently doing an eye's job.
Sthiramati's expansion reproduces this entire classification almost clause for clause, the least-changed stretch in his whole commentary. Everywhere else he adds an etymology or a worked example; here, the material is already at maximum compression and there is nothing left to add — a commentator's freedom shows up precisely where a text has room for it, and vanishes exactly where it does not.
Part Two Complete
This closes Part Two: the whole of Vasubandhu's Five Aggregates Treatise, from the four great elements through all fifty-one mental factors, the fourteen formations dissociated from mind, the aggregate of consciousness and the ālayavijñāna, and the twelve sense fields and eighteen elements that re-sort the same material twice more, each time to counteract a different way of grasping at a self. Part Three turns to Sthiramati's Extended Five Aggregates Treatise (廣五蘊論), which takes up this same text almost clause by clause and expands nearly every definition with the reasoning, the objections, and the illustrations this shorter treatise leaves out.
Continue to Part 3 — The Extended Five Aggregates Treatise →