Chinese
大正藏第 31 册 No. 1609 大乘成业论 No. 1609 [No. 1608] 大乘成业论一卷 世亲菩萨造 大唐三藏法师玄奘奉 诏译 如处处经中世尊说。三业谓身业语业意业。此中有说身所造业故名身业。语即是业故名语业。此二皆用表与无表为其自性。意相应业故名意业。此业但以思为自性。今于此中何法名表。且身表业形色为性。缘此为境心等所生。谁之形色谓身形色。若身形色。何故前言身所造业故名身业。谓总名身一分摄故名身形色。依身大种而发生故名身所造。以总身言于别亦转。如世间说居邑住林。何缘复说缘此为境心等所生。为欲简彼唇等形色。彼非缘彼心等所生。以缘言音心等生故。又为简彼宿愿心等所引形色。彼非缘彼心等所生。余异熟因心等生故。何故名表。此能表示自发业心令他知故。为显此义故。说颂言。 由外发身语 表内心所思 譬彼潜渊鱼 鼓波而自表 形色者何。谓长等性。何者长等。谓于彼生长等名想。此摄在何处。谓色处所摄。今应思择。长等为是极微差别犹如显色。为是极微差别积聚。为别一物遍色等聚。设尔何失。长等若是极微差别应如显色。诸色聚中一一细分。长等可取。若是极微差 现代汉语译本： 大正藏第 31 册 No. 1609 大乘成业论 No. 1609 [No. 1608] 大乘成业论一卷 世亲菩萨造 大唐三藏法师玄奘奉 诏译 如处处经中世尊说：‘三业谓身业、语业、意业。’此中有说，身所造的业，所以名为身业；语本身就是业，所以名为语业。这两种业都用表业和无表业作为它们的自性。与意相应的业，所以名为意业。此业只是以思作为它的自性。现在在这里，什么法名为‘表’呢？且身表业以形色为自性，缘于此形色为境界，心等所生。是谁的形色呢？是身的形色。如果是身的形色，为什么前面说‘身所造业故名身业’呢？这是因为总名为‘身’，其中一部分被摄入，所以名为‘身形色’。依靠身大种而发生，所以名为‘身所造’。以总体的‘身’来说，对于别体也适用，就像世间说居住在城邑、住在树林一样。为什么又说缘于此形色为境界，心等所生呢？为了简别那些唇等的形色，它们不是缘于彼形色而由心等所生。因为缘于言音，心等才生起。又为了简别那些宿愿心等所引发的形色，它们不是缘于彼形色而由心等所生，而是由其他异熟因的心等所生。为什么名为‘表’呢？因为此能表示自己发起的业心，使他人知晓。为了显明这个意义，所以说颂： ‘由外发身语， 表内心所思， 譬彼潜渊鱼， 鼓波而自表。’ 形色是什么呢？是指长等性质。什么是长等呢？是指对于彼生长等所产生的名想。此摄在何处呢？是指色处所摄。现在应该思择，长等是极微的差别，犹如显色，还是极微差别的积聚，还是别一物遍于色等聚？假设这样，会有什么过失呢？长等如果是极微的差别，应该像显色一样，在各种色聚中，每一细分都能取到长等。如果是极微的差别
English
English version: Tripitaka Volume 31 No. 1609 Mahayana Karma Accomplishment Treatise No. 1609 [No. 1608] Mahayana Karma Accomplishment Treatise, one volume Composed by Bodhisattva Vasubandhu (世亲菩萨) Translated under imperial decree by the Tang Dynasty Tripitaka Master Xuanzang (玄奘) As the World Honored One (世尊) said in various sutras: 'The three karmas are bodily karma, verbal karma, and mental karma.' Among these, it is said that actions created by the body are called bodily karma; speech itself is karma, hence called verbal karma. Both of these use manifestation (表) and non-manifestation (无表) as their nature. Karma corresponding to the mind is called mental karma. This karma takes only thought (思) as its nature. Now, within this context, what dharma is called 'manifestation'? Bodily manifestation-karma has form and color (形色) as its nature, taking this as its object (境), produced by mind (心) and so on. Whose form and color? The body's form and color. If it is the body's form and color, why was it previously said, 'Actions created by the body are called bodily karma'? This is because the general term 'body' includes a part of it, hence it is called 'body's form and color.' Because it arises relying on the body's great elements (大种), it is called 'created by the body.' Using the general term 'body' also applies to the specific, just as in the world one says residing in a city (邑), living in a forest (林). Why is it also said that it takes this form and color as its object, produced by mind and so on? It is to distinguish the form and color of the lips (唇) and so on, which are not produced by mind and so on in relation to that. Because it is in relation to speech-sounds (言音) that mind and so on arise. Also, to distinguish the form and color brought about by past vows (宿愿心) and so on, which are not produced by mind and so on in relation to that, but are produced by mind and so on due to other ripening causes (异熟因). Why is it called 'manifestation'? Because it can manifest the karma-mind (业心) that one initiates, making it known to others. To clarify this meaning, a verse is spoken: 'Through external bodily and verbal actions, the thoughts of the inner mind are manifested, like a fish (鱼) hidden in a deep pool (渊), stirring the waves (波) to reveal itself.' What is form and color? It refers to qualities like length (长) and so on. What is length and so on? It refers to the name-concept (名想) produced in relation to that length and so on. Where is this included? It is included in the realm of color (色处). Now it should be considered, is length and so on a difference in subtle particles (极微), like visible color (显色), or is it an accumulation of differences in subtle particles, or is it a separate thing pervading the accumulation of color and so on? If so, what fault would there be? If length and so on were a difference in subtle particles, it should be like visible color, where length and so on could be perceived in each fine division within the various accumulations of color. If it is a difference in subtle particles --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
别积聚。此与显色极微积聚。有何差别。即诸显色积聚差别。应成长等。若别一物遍色等聚。一故遍故。一一分中应全可取。于一切分皆具有故。或应非一。于诸分中各别住故。又坏自宗十处皆是极微积集。又应朋助食米齐宗执实有分遍诸分故。即于和合诸聚色中。见一面多便起长觉。见一面少便起短觉。见四面等便起方觉。见诸面满便起圆觉。见中凸出便起高觉见中坳凹便起下觉。见面齐平起于正觉。见面参差起不正觉。如旋转轮观锦绣时。便生种种异形类觉。不应实有异类形色同在一处如诸显色。若许尔者。应于一一处起一切形觉。然无是事。是故形色无别有体。即诸显色于诸方面安布不同起长等觉。如树蚁等行列无过。若尔云何。于远闇处不了显色了形色耶。如何不了树等形色。而能了彼行列形耶。然离树等无别行列。或于远闇诸聚色中。若显若形俱不能了。虽复能取而不分明。疑是何物此何所见。由是应知但取显色。由远闇故见不分明。故表是形理不成立。 有说。身表行动为性。缘此为境心等所生。何缘复说。缘此为境心等所生。为欲简彼唇等摇动。彼非缘彼心等所生。以缘言音心等生故云何名行动。谓转至余方。此摄在何处。谓色处所摄。何缘知此转至余方。谓差别相不可知故。此理不然。如熟变 现代汉语译本 不要积聚。这与显色极微（组成可见颜色的最小单位）的积聚有什么差别呢？就像各种显色积聚的差别一样，应该有长、宽等不同。如果说有一个独立的物体，其颜色等遍布整个积聚体，那么因为它是独立的且遍布的，所以在每一个部分中都应该可以完全获取到它的颜色，因为它在所有部分都存在。或者说，它应该不是独立的，因为它在各个部分中分别存在。此外，这还会破坏你们宗派的观点，即十处（眼、耳、鼻、舌、身、意、色、声、香、味、触）都是极微的积聚。而且，这还应该像朋助食米派（佛教部派之一）一样，坚持认为实有部分遍布于各个部分。也就是说，在和合的各种积聚的颜色中，看到一面大就产生长的感觉，看到一面小就产生短的感觉，看到四面相等就产生方的感觉，看到各个面都完整就产生圆的感觉，看到中间凸出就产生高的感觉，看到中间凹陷就产生低的感觉，看到面齐平就产生正的感觉，看到面参差不齐就产生不正的感觉。就像旋转轮子观看锦绣时，就会产生各种不同形状的感觉。不应该真的有不同种类的形状颜色同时存在于一个地方，就像各种显色一样。如果允许这样，那么应该在每一个地方都产生所有形状的感觉，但实际上并没有发生这样的事情。因此，形状颜色没有独立的实体，而是各种显色在各个方面分布不同，从而产生长等感觉，就像树木、蚂蚁等行列一样，没有其他原因。如果这样，为什么在远处黑暗的地方不能分辨显色，却能分辨形状颜色呢？为什么不能分辨树木等的形状颜色，却能分辨它们的行列形状呢？实际上，离开树木等就没有独立的行列。或者说，在远处黑暗的各种积聚的颜色中，无论是显色还是形状都不能分辨清楚。即使能够获取到，也不清晰，怀疑是什么东西，看到了什么。由此应该知道，只是获取了显色，因为远处黑暗的缘故，看到的不清晰。所以，表是形状的理论不能成立。 有人说，身表（身体的动作）以行动为特性，心等（心、心所）以它为所缘境而生起。为什么又说，心等以它为所缘境而生起呢？这是为了区分嘴唇等的摇动，因为嘴唇等的摇动不是心等以它为所缘境而生起的，而是心等以言语声音为所缘境而生起的。什么叫做行动呢？就是转移到其他方向。这包含在哪里呢？包含在色处（色蕴）所摄。凭什么知道这是转移到其他方向呢？因为差别相无法得知。这个道理是不成立的，就像成熟的变化一样。
English
English version Do not accumulate. What is the difference between this and the accumulation of subtle particles of manifest color (the smallest units that make up visible colors)? It's like the difference in the accumulation of various manifest colors, which should have differences such as length and width. If there is an independent object whose color, etc., pervades the entire accumulation, then because it is independent and pervasive, its color should be completely obtainable in every part, as it exists in all parts. Or, it should not be independent, as it exists separately in each part. Furthermore, this would undermine your sect's view that the ten sense bases (eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, form, sound, smell, taste, touch) are all accumulations of subtle particles. Moreover, this should be like the Pudgalavada (a Buddhist school), which insists that real parts pervade all parts. That is, in the combined colors of various accumulations, seeing a large side gives rise to the feeling of length, seeing a small side gives rise to the feeling of shortness, seeing four equal sides gives rise to the feeling of squareness, seeing all sides complete gives rise to the feeling of roundness, seeing the middle protruding gives rise to the feeling of height, seeing the middle recessed gives rise to the feeling of lowness, seeing the surface flat gives rise to the feeling of straightness, and seeing the surface uneven gives rise to the feeling of crookedness. Just like when watching embroidery on a rotating wheel, various different shapes are perceived. There should not really be different kinds of shapes and colors existing in the same place at the same time, like various manifest colors. If this were allowed, then all shapes should be perceived in every place, but this does not actually happen. Therefore, shape and color do not have independent entities, but rather various manifest colors are distributed differently in various aspects, thus giving rise to feelings of length, etc., just like rows of trees, ants, etc., without any other reason. If so, why can't manifest colors be distinguished in a distant, dark place, but shape colors can be distinguished? Why can't the shape colors of trees, etc., be distinguished, but their row shapes can be distinguished? In reality, there are no independent rows apart from trees, etc. Or, in the various accumulated colors in a distant, dark place, neither manifest colors nor shapes can be clearly distinguished. Even if they can be obtained, they are not clear, and there is doubt about what it is, what is being seen. From this, it should be known that only manifest colors are obtained, and because of the distance and darkness, what is seen is not clear. Therefore, the theory that expression is shape cannot be established. Some say that bodily expression (bodily action) has action as its characteristic, and the mind, etc. (mind, mental factors), arise with it as their object. Why is it said again that the mind, etc., arise with it as their object? This is to distinguish the movement of the lips, etc., because the movement of the lips, etc., does not arise with the mind, etc., taking it as their object, but rather with the mind, etc., taking speech sounds as their object. What is called action? It is the transfer to another direction. Where is this included? It is included in what is encompassed by the form aggregate (rupa-skandha). How is it known that this is a transfer to another direction? Because the distinguishing characteristics cannot be known. This reasoning is not valid, just like the change of ripening. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chinese
物虽才触火。光雪。酢等诸熟变缘即有差别。而不可知彼差别相。然彼前后非无有异。此亦应然。如长薪草众分相似。各别生焰虽有差别。而不可知彼差别相。然彼众分非无有异。此亦应然。若熟变物才触缘时。诸熟变相不即生者。彼于后时亦应不生。缘无异故。若长薪草众分相似。非分分中别生焰者。彼焰应无由彼别故。形量照明焰热差别。是故不应以差别相不可知故。便谓即此转至余方。应审了知彼差别相。若谓灭因不可得故知即此法转至余方。此亦非理。如心心所声灯焰等。有何灭因而念念灭。余亦应尔。灭不待因若言心等亦有灭因。谓唯各别自无常相。若尔何故余不许然。余既不然。此云何尔。故知心等灭不待因。心等既然余亦应尔。若余法灭不待因者。薪等未与火等合前。彼色等性应不可取。如合后位后亦应如前位。可取如何。风手未触未执灯铃已前。灯焰铃声分明可取。非于后位然焰声灭不待风手。薪等亦然不应为难。又若薪等由火等灭。彼色等性不可取者。才触无间应不可取。彼才触时有差别故。又彼外缘无差别故。诸熟变物下中上品。诸熟变相差别生时。由彼为因。后后生起前前灭坏。谁复为因。不应此法由彼故生。即此复由彼法故灭。二相违法非共一因。世极成立故有为法不待灭因。任运自灭如前 现代汉语译本 物体即使刚刚接触到火、光、醋等导致成熟变化的因缘，其成熟变化的现象也会有差别，但我们无法知道这些差别的具体表现。然而，这些前后状态并非没有不同。这里也应该这样理解。就像长长的木柴和草，它们的各个部分看起来相似，但各自燃烧产生的火焰却有差别。虽然我们无法知道这些差别的具体表现，但这些部分并非没有不同。这里也应该这样理解。 如果成熟变化的物体在刚刚接触到因缘时，成熟变化的现象没有立即产生，那么在之后的时间里也应该不会产生，因为因缘没有改变。 如果长长的木柴和草，它们的各个部分看起来相似，但不是每个部分都分别产生火焰，那么火焰的产生就没有依据，因为它们是不同的部分。火焰的形状、大小、照明度和热度都有差别。因此，不应该因为无法知道这些差别的具体表现，就认为这个物体转移到了其他地方。应该仔细了解这些差别的具体表现。 如果认为因为找不到灭亡的原因，所以知道这个法转移到了其他地方，这也是不合理的。比如心、心所、声音、灯焰等，有什么灭亡的原因导致它们念念生灭？其他的也应该如此。灭亡不需要原因。如果说心等也有灭亡的原因，那就是各自的无常相。如果是这样，为什么其他的就不允许这样呢？既然其他的不是这样，那么这个怎么会是这样呢？所以知道心等的灭亡不需要原因。心等既然如此，其他的也应该如此。 如果其他的法灭亡不需要原因，那么木柴等在没有与火等结合之前，它们的颜色等性质应该无法被感知。就像结合后的状态一样，之后的状态也应该像之前的状态一样可以被感知。为什么呢？在风和手没有接触或拿着灯铃之前，灯焰明明可以被感知。并非在之后的状态，火焰和声音的熄灭不需要风和手。木柴等也是如此，不应该以此为难。 再者，如果木柴等因为火等而熄灭，它们的颜色等性质无法被感知，那么刚刚接触的时候就应该无法被感知。因为它们刚刚接触的时候有差别。而且，它们的外在因缘没有差别。成熟变化的物体，下品、中品、上品，各种成熟变化的现象产生差别的时候，因为这些差别作为原因，后后的现象生起，前前的现象灭坏，那么谁又是原因呢？不应该是这个法因为那个法而生起，然后又因为那个法而灭亡。两种状态相互矛盾，不能共用一个原因。世间的真理就是这样成立的，所以有为法不需要灭亡的原因，而是自然而然地灭亡，就像之前所说的那样。