唯識二十論 偈三 地獄喻
偈二用夢、餓鬼、夢遺三個譬喻各打四難中的一處；偈三說，其實一座地獄就夠了。受苦的眾生，在同一地點、同一時刻，一群人同時看見獄卒、惡狗、烏鵲、鐵山撲來逼害——處定、時定、共見、有作用，四義一次顯齊，而地獄中並沒有真實的獄卒。共見怎麼來？世親原文作「同業異熟增上力故」（要注意：偈二講餓鬼只作「同業異熟」，偈三講地獄才加「增上力」三字，這三字是玄奘正文）。
世親立完喻不停手，順勢拆掉「獄卒是真有情」之說，連下三刀：獄卒不受地獄苦，算不上地獄眾生，若互相逼害則「地獄」之名不立；若體力相當則受苦者不至極懼、且獄卒自己也忍不住烈火，哪有餘力逼人；也不能說是別類有情被生來當差。對方退求「畜生鬼來當獄卒」，世親只回「此救不然」，留待下偈破。
挑地獄這個最像「外境實有」的硬場景來破，正是唯識的試金石：連逼害你的獄卒都不是離識實有，而是同業增上所共現——最像實有處都破得掉，唯識無境才立得穩。偈三是一道橋：一喻統四義、一刀破實獄卒，刀鋒指向後面「共見之境皆業所感、唯識所現」的總結。
Verse 2 used three illustrations — the dream, the hungry ghost, the nocturnal emission — each striking one of the four objections; Verse 3 says one hell is enough. The suffering beings, in one and the same place and at one and the same time, a whole crowd of them at once, see wardens of hell, vicious dogs, crows, and iron mountains rushing in to press upon and harm them — fixity of place, fixity of time, common seeing, real efficacy, all four senses made plain at one stroke, and yet within hell there are no real wardens. How does the common seeing come about? Vasubandhu's original text reads "by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma, reinforced by [its] dominant force" (同業異熟增上力故) — note: Verse 2, speaking of hungry ghosts, reads only "the karmic retribution of shared karma" (同業異熟); only Verse 3, speaking of hell, adds the three words "dominant force" (增上力), and these three words are Xuanzang's main text.
Having set up the illustration, Vasubandhu does not stay his hand; riding the momentum he dismantles the claim that "the wardens are real sentient beings," with three strokes in a row: the wardens do not undergo the suffering of hell, so they cannot count as beings of hell, and if they pressed in upon one another the very name "hell" could not stand; if they were equal in bodily strength, the sufferers would not be reduced to utter terror, and besides the wardens themselves could not endure the blazing fire, so what strength would be left to press in upon others; nor can one say they are beings of another kind born to serve there. When the opponent retreats to "let animals and ghosts come to be the wardens," Vasubandhu answers only "this rescue does not hold" (此救不然), leaving it for the next verse to break.
Picking hell — the hardest scene, the one that looks most like "real external objects" — to break is precisely the touchstone of consciousness-only: even the wardens who press in to harm you are not real apart from consciousness, but are seen together through the dominant force of shared karma — if even the place that looks most like real existence can be broken, only then does consciousness-without-object stand firm. Verse 3 is a bridge: one illustration establishing the four senses, one stroke breaking the real warden; and the blade points toward the later conclusion that "all objects seen in common are called forth by karma and are nothing but the manifestation of consciousness."
§頌
一切如地獄，同見獄卒等， 能為逼害事，故四義皆成。
§論（世親自註）
論曰：應知此中一地獄喻，顯處定等一切皆成。如地獄言，顯在地獄受逼害苦諸有情類。謂地獄中雖無真實有情數攝獄卒等事，而彼有情同業異熟增上力故，同處同時眾多相續，皆共見有獄卒、狗、烏、鐵山等物來至其所為逼害事。由此雖無離識實境，而處定等四義皆成。何緣不許獄卒等類是實有情？不應理故。且此不應那落迦攝，不受如彼所受苦故。互相逼害，應不可立彼那落迦。此獄卒等形量力既等，應不極相怖，應自不能忍受鐵地炎熱猛焰恒燒然苦，云何於彼能逼害他？非那落迦不應生彼，如何天上現有傍生，地獄亦然，有傍生鬼為獄卒等。此救不然。頌曰：
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
§頌 白話
那四件事，就拿「地獄」這一個譬喻來說，全都成立—— 受苦的眾生一起看見獄卒之類來到， 這些獄卒又真能逼迫、加害他們， 所以「處定、時定、共見、有作用」這四件事都成立。
§論 白話
世親解釋這首偈。
應該知道：這裡只用「地獄」一個譬喻，就把「地點定」等四件事全顯示成立了。所謂「地獄」，是指那些在地獄裡受逼迫、受苦害的眾生。地獄當中，其實並沒有真實的、算進「有情」裡的獄卒這類存在；可是那些受苦的眾生，因為同樣的業所感的果報、加上業的強大勢力（同業異熟增上力）的緣故，在同一個地方、同一個時候，許多人的心識相續同時都看見有獄卒、惡狗、烏鵲、鐵山等來到面前加以逼害。可見就算沒有離開心識的真實外境，「地點定、時間定、多人同見、能起作用」這四件事都成立。
接著有人問：為什麼不能說獄卒這類本來就是真實的有情？
世親說：這在道理上講不通。其一：獄卒不該算進地獄眾生裡，因為他們不受那些地獄眾生所受的苦；倘若獄卒也受苦、彼此互相逼害，那就立不起「地獄（那落迦）」這個分別了。其二：獄卒和受苦者若形體、力量都相當，受苦者就不該那麼極度害怕；而且獄卒自己也忍不住鐵地上那又熱又猛、長久燒著的火，又怎麼能去逼害別人？其三：也不能說獄卒是「本不屬地獄類」的有情卻被生到地獄去當差。
這時對方提出一個退讓的救法：就像天上也現有畜生雜處一樣，地獄裡也可以有畜生、餓鬼類的有情被生去當獄卒。
世親說：這個救法不成立。接著用下一首偈來破它。
§Verse — plain reading
Those four things — take just the one illustration of "hell," and all of them hold: the suffering beings see, together, the wardens of hell and the rest arrive, and these wardens can really press in upon and harm them — and so the four senses — "fixity of place, fixity of time, common seeing, real efficacy" — all hold.
§Auto-commentary — plain reading
Vasubandhu explains this verse.
You should know: here, using just the one illustration of "hell," he shows all four things — "fixity of place" and the rest — to hold. By "hell" is meant those beings who, in hell, are pressed in upon and suffer harm. Within hell there are in fact no wardens of hell or the like that count as real "sentient beings"; yet those suffering beings, by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma, reinforced by [its] dominant force (同業異熟增上力 — the ripened fruit of like karma, plus its dominant reinforcing power), in one and the same place and at one and the same time, the mind-streams of many of them at once all see wardens of hell, vicious dogs, crows, iron mountains and the like arrive before them to press in upon and harm them. So you can see that even with no real external object apart from consciousness, the four things — "fixity of place, fixity of time, many beings seeing together, the capacity for efficacy" — all hold.
Then someone asks: why can one not say that the wardens of hell and the like are real sentient beings to begin with?
Vasubandhu says: this does not hold up to reason. First: the wardens should not be counted among the beings of hell, because they do not undergo the suffering those beings of hell undergo; and if the wardens too were to suffer and press in upon one another, then one could not even set up the distinction "hell" (那落迦 naraka) at all. Second: if the wardens and the sufferers were equal in body and in strength, the sufferers would not be so utterly terrified; and besides, the wardens themselves could not endure the heat of the iron ground — that fierce fire burning on and on — so how could they go and press in upon others? Third: nor can one say that the wardens are beings "not belonging to the hell-kind" to begin with who have been born into hell to serve there.
At this the opponent puts forward a fallback rescue: just as, even in the heavens, there are animals living mixed in, so too in hell there can be beings of the animal or hungry-ghost kind born to be the wardens of hell.
Vasubandhu says: this rescue does not hold. And he goes on to break it with the verse that follows.
從三個譬喻收成一個
偈二用了三個譬喻（夢、餓鬼、夢遺），各打四難中的一處。世親接著說：其實不必這麼費事——「應知此中一地獄喻，顯處定等一切皆成」。一座地獄，就把四義一次顯齊。 你想想地獄的畫面：受苦的眾生，在同一個地方、同一個時候，一群人同時看見獄卒、惡狗、烏鵲、鐵山撲過來逼害他們。處定、時定、共見、有作用——四義全在這一幕裡，齊了。而這一切，地獄中並沒有真實的獄卒存在。
共見的機制：這裡多了「增上力」三個字
共見怎麼來的？世親 §論寫得清楚：受苦有情「同業異熟增上力故」，多身共見獄卒。這裡要特別留意一個字眼上的分寸——偈二講餓鬼共見膿河，原文只作「同業異熟」；到偈三講地獄，原文加了「增上力」三字，成「同業異熟增上力故」。這三字是玄奘 §論的正文，不是後人添的。同類的業招同類的果，再加上業的「增上勢力」推動，於是一群眾生不約而同、纖毫不差地共見同一座地獄景象。共見從此落地，根本不需要心外真有獄卒。
順手一刀：獄卒根本不是真的有情
世親立完喻，沒有就此打住，反而趁勢追問：那為什麼不能說獄卒本來就是真實的「有情」呢？他連下三刀破這個執——
一、身分上講不通。 獄卒若也算「地獄眾生」，就該跟受苦者一樣受地獄苦；可獄卒並不受那苦。而若說獄卒也受苦、彼此互相逼害，那「誰是受刑者、誰是行刑者」就分不開，「地獄」這個名目本身就立不住了。
二、體力上講不通。 若獄卒和受苦者形體、力量都差不多，受苦者就不至於那麼極度恐懼；何況獄卒自己也受不了那鐵地烈焰恆燒之苦——連自己都站不住，哪還有餘力去逼害別人？
三、來歷上講不通。 也不能說獄卒是「本不屬地獄類」的有情被生到地獄去當差。
三刀下去，「獄卒實有」之說站不住。對方退一步求救：「那就像天上也有畜生雜處一樣，地獄裡也可以有畜生、餓鬼類被生去當獄卒嘛。」世親只回四個字——「此救不然」——便把話頭交給下一偈去破。
為什麼這一刀要在這裡下
也許有人問：答四難就答四難，何必扯進「獄卒是不是真的」？因為這正是唯識立場的試金石。地獄喻最像「外境實有」的反例——獄卒明明在逼害你，怎能說無外境？世親偏挑這個最硬的場景，證明：連逼害你的獄卒都不是離識實有，而是同業增上所共現。最像實有的地方都破得掉，唯識無境才立得穩。 這不是節外生枝，是把答難推到它該到的深度。
承衍
偈三立喻又破執，但破得還沒完——「傍生鬼為獄卒」這個救說，留到偈四正面破除；獄卒辯的最終落點，要到偈五「業力大種」才收進業感的正面安立。也就是說，偈三的地獄喻是一道橋：前接偈二的別喻，後啟偈四–五對「業」的正面交代。讀偈三，記住它兩件事都做了——一喻統四義，一刀破實獄卒；而那把刀指向的，正是後面「一切共見之境，皆業所感、唯識所現」的總結。
Gathering three illustrations into one
Verse 2 used three illustrations (the dream, the hungry ghost, the nocturnal emission), each striking one of the four objections. Vasubandhu then says: there is in fact no need to go to all that trouble — "you should know that here, the one hell illustration shows that 'fixity of place' and all the rest hold" (應知此中一地獄喻，顯處定等一切皆成). A single hell makes all four senses plain at one stroke. Picture the scene of hell: the suffering beings, in one and the same place and at one and the same time, a whole crowd of them at once, see the wardens of hell, vicious dogs, crows, and iron mountains rushing in to press upon and harm them. Fixity of place, fixity of time, common seeing, real efficacy — all four senses are present in this one scene, complete. And in all of this, there is within hell no real warden of hell existing at all.
The mechanism of common seeing: here three more words are added — "dominant force"
How does the common seeing come about? Vasubandhu's §Auto-commentary writes it plainly: the suffering beings, "by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma, reinforced by [its] dominant force" (同業異熟增上力故), see the wardens of hell with many bodies together. Here one must take careful note of a fine point of wording: Verse 2, in speaking of the hungry ghosts seeing the river of pus together, the original text reads only "the karmic retribution of shared karma" (同業異熟); but by Verse 3, in speaking of hell, the original text adds the three words "dominant force" (增上力), making it "by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma, reinforced by [its] dominant force" (同業異熟增上力故). These three words are part of the main text of Xuanzang's §Auto-commentary, not something added by later hands. Like karma calls forth like fruit, and then, pushed on by karma's "dominant reinforcing power," a whole crowd of beings, with one accord and not a hair's breadth of difference, see together one and the same scene of hell. From this, common seeing comes down to earth, with no need at all for real wardens to exist outside the mind.
A stroke in passing: the wardens are not real sentient beings at all
Having set up the illustration, Vasubandhu does not stop there; rather, riding the momentum, he presses the question further: then why can one not say that the wardens of hell are real "sentient beings" to begin with? He brings down three strokes in a row to break this clinging —
One, it does not hold up as a matter of status. If the wardens too counted as "beings of hell," they ought, like the sufferers, to undergo the suffering of hell; but the wardens do not undergo that suffering. And if one says the wardens too suffer and press in upon one another, then "who is the one punished and who is the one inflicting punishment" can no longer be told apart, and the very designation "hell" cannot stand.
Two, it does not hold up as a matter of bodily strength. If the wardens and the sufferers were about equal in body and in strength, the sufferers would not be reduced to such utter terror; what is more, the wardens themselves could not bear the suffering of that iron ground's fierce flames burning on without end — when they cannot even keep their own footing, what strength would be left over to go and press in upon others?
Three, it does not hold up as a matter of origin. Nor can one say that the wardens are beings "not belonging to the hell-kind" to begin with who have been born into hell to serve there.
With these three strokes brought down, the claim that "the wardens really exist" cannot stand. The opponent steps back and reaches for a rescue: "Then, just as there are animals living mixed in even in the heavens, so too in hell there can be beings of the animal or hungry-ghost kind born to serve as the wardens." Vasubandhu answers with just four words — "this rescue does not hold" (此救不然) — and hands the thread over to the next verse to break.
Why this stroke must come here
Perhaps someone asks: to answer the four objections, just answer the four objections — why drag in "whether the wardens are real"? Because this is precisely the touchstone of the consciousness-only position. The hell illustration is the closest of all to a counter-example for "real external objects" — the wardens are plainly pressing in to harm you, so how can one say there is no external object? Vasubandhu deliberately picks this hardest of scenes and proves: even the wardens who press in to harm you are not real apart from consciousness, but are seen together through the dominant force of shared karma. If even the place that looks most like real existence can be broken, only then does consciousness-without-object stand firm. This is no idle branching-off; it is pushing the answering of the objections to the depth it ought to reach.
Carried forward (承衍)
Verse 3 sets up the illustration and also breaks the clinging — but the breaking is not yet finished: the rescue-claim "let animal- and ghost-beings be the wardens" is left for Verse 4 to break head-on; and the final resting-place of the warden-debate must wait until Verse 5, "the force of karma and the great elements" (業力大種), where it is gathered into the positive establishing of karmic causation. That is to say, the hell illustration of Verse 3 is a bridge: it connects backward to the separate illustrations of Verse 2, and opens forward to the positive account of "karma" in Verses 4–5. In reading Verse 3, remember that it does two things at once — one illustration establishing the four senses, one stroke breaking the real warden; and the point that stroke aims at is precisely the later conclusion that "all objects seen in common are called forth by karma and are nothing but the manifestation of consciousness."
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
| 系統 | 此偈之位 |
|---|---|
| 全論五段 | §壹 立宗·答四難（偈一–七）之統攝偈。偈二以別別三喻分答四義 → 偈三以地獄一喻統顯四義，並啟「獄卒是否實有情」之辯 → 偈四 破傍生鬼救 → 偈五–七 業力·密意收束 |
| 偈二→偈三 | 偈二「別別譬喻」（夢·鬼·夢損精血各打一義）→ 偈三「一地獄喻顯處定等一切皆成」（一喻統四義），且不止立喻，更進破實有獄卒之執 |
| 玄奘段位 | §頌〔p0075a01–02〕· §論自註〔p0075a03–16〕 |
二、源頌 · 義理脈絡
§頌四句：「一切如地獄」（立喻）·「同見獄卒等」（共見）·「能為逼害事」（作用）·「故四義皆成」（統收）。一喻而四義（處定·時定·共見·作用）俱顯。
§論二節：(一)立喻——地獄中無真實有情數攝之獄卒，然受苦有情同業異熟增上力故，同處同時眾多相續共見獄卒、狗、烏、鐵山來為逼害；無離識實境而四義皆成。(二)破執——設「獄卒是實有情」之三難：① 不應那落迦攝（不受彼苦）；若互相逼害則那落迦不立；② 形量力既等，應不極相怖，且獄卒自不能忍鐵地炎焰，何能逼他；③ 非那落迦類生彼為獄卒。末出對方「傍生鬼為獄卒」之救，斷以「此救不然」，啟偈四。
三、經論宗依（經證 → 論本）
- 經證：地獄受苦、獄卒逼害之相，本佛教共傳之趣相說；世親取地獄為統攝四義之喻。
- 論本：世親自註（T1590）立一喻統四義，復以三難破「實有獄卒」之執——機制明文作「同業異熟增上力故」（同類業之異熟，更以增上力故多身共見）；論之答難不離佛說業感趣相之理。
四、本論釋要（世親自註 T1590）
世親於本偈跨出兩步：先以地獄一喻收束偈二之四義（一喻足顯處定等一切），再進破「獄卒實有」之執，預為偈四–五張本。機制語據實作「同業異熟增上力故」——此處增上力為玄奘 §論 正文所有，與偈二之「同業異熟」（無增上力）不同，係本偈共見機制之完整語。三難之破，全在「若獄卒實受苦則那落迦不立／若不受苦則無力逼他」之兩難，純就趣相之理立說。
五、諸家異釋（古德 · 標宗）
- 護法《成唯識寶生論》T31n1591（唐·義淨譯·漢有傳本）——卷一中後段釋本偈，展開地獄共見及破實有獄卒之論。〔標宗：護法於獄卒非實有情處有詳釋；古德讀法之一，此處只記其宗，不判。〕
- Vinītadeva Prakaraṇaviṃśakaṭīkā——藏譯存·漢無傳本，依例僅志其名，內容不入義據。
六、譯名 · 古譯對讀（三漢譯）
| 漢譯 | 譯本 | 對讀 |
|---|---|---|
| ★ 唐·玄奘 T31n1590 | 「一切如地獄，同見獄卒等，能為逼害事，故四義皆成」 | 五言四句，一喻統四義，並直啟獄卒實有之辯；以此為底本 |
| 陳·真諦 T31n1589《大乘唯識論》 | 散文連展地獄喻，獄卒實有之辯以較廣散文出之，未顯化為單句主張（古代漢證·參校） | |
| 後魏·般若流支 T31n1588《唯識論》 | 「獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」——與偈二夢喻合為一聯（「如夢中無女，動身失不淨，獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」），「種種主」對應玄奘「獄卒等」；合二偈而模糊分擊／統攝之別（古代漢證·參校） |
玄奘以偈三獨立顯「一喻統四義＋啟辯」，般若流支併入偈二聯、真諦散文連展——玄奘最便逐項對讀。
七、術語（古德所傳梵 · 發音輔助）
| 漢 | 梵（發音輔助） | 義 |
|---|---|---|
| 那落迦 | naraka | 地獄；受逼害苦之趣 |
| 同業異熟增上力 | samāna-karma-vipāka·adhipati-bala | 同類業之異熟，更以增上力故多身共見（本偈 §論 正文有此語） |
| 傍生 | tiryañc | 畜生趣；對方「傍生鬼為獄卒」救之所引 |
梵羅馬字僅作發音輔助；無古德音寫可徵者從闕，不據現代校本補。
八、互讀（唯識系次第）
| 百法明門論 | 唯識三十論 | 二十論內部 |
|---|---|---|
| #8 阿賴耶識 ālaya——同業增上之共感基底；地獄共見之所依 ⭐ | 偈四 恒轉——ālaya 恒轉為同業異熟增上之所依 | 偈二 夢鬼喻——別別三喻；偈三以一喻統之 |
| #6 意識 mano-vijñāna——共見獄卒之分別主體 | 偈一 假說我法——本偈一喻即「依識所變」之具體 | 偈四 破傍生鬼救——承本偈末「此救不然」，破「傍生鬼為獄卒」 |
| #1 眼識 cakṣur-vijñāna——同見獄卒、鐵山之似境顯現面 | 偈十七「故一切唯識」——三十論證成收結 | 偈五 業力大種——獄卒辯收於業力 |
九、校本定位
- 漢文正文（§頌）：T31n1590〔p0075a01–02〕（玄奘譯）
- 漢文自註（§論）：T31n1590〔p0075a03–16〕（玄奘譯）
- 參校漢譯：T31n1589（真諦《大乘唯識論》）· T31n1588（般若流支《唯識論》「獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」·與偈二合聯）
- 古德釋：T31n1591（護法《成唯識寶生論》卷一中後段·漢有傳本）
1. Doctrinal-outline placement
| System | This verse's place |
|---|---|
| The treatise's five parts | The subsuming-verse of §I Establishing the Thesis · Answering the Four Objections (vv.1–7). v.2 answers the four senses separately with three separate illustrations → v.3 shows the four senses as a whole with the one hell illustration, and opens the debate on "whether the wardens of hell are real sentient beings" → v.4 refutes the animal-and-ghost rescue → vv.5–7 round off with the force of karma · hidden intent (業力·密意). |
| v.2 → v.3 | v.2 uses "separate illustrations" (the dream · the ghost · the nocturnal loss of seed, each striking one sense) → v.3 uses "the one hell illustration showing 'fixity of place' and all the rest to hold" (一地獄喻顯處定等一切皆成 — one illustration subsuming the four senses), and does not stop at setting up the illustration but goes on to break the clinging to really-existent wardens. |
| Xuanzang's textual loci | §Verse 〔p0075a01–02〕· §Auto-commentary 〔p0075a03–16〕 |
2. The source-verse · the doctrinal thread
The §Verse's four lines: 「一切如地獄」 ("all is like hell" — setting up the illustration) · 「同見獄卒等」 ("seeing together the wardens of hell and the rest" — common seeing) · 「能為逼害事」 ("capable of pressing in upon and harming" — efficacy) · 「故四義皆成」 ("therefore the four senses all hold" — the subsuming gathering). One illustration, and the four senses (fixity of place · fixity of time · common seeing · efficacy) are all made plain.
The §Auto-commentary has two parts: (i) setting up the illustration — within hell there are no wardens of hell that count as real sentient beings, yet the suffering beings, by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma reinforced by [its] dominant force (同業異熟增上力故), in one place and at one time, the mind-streams of many at once, see together wardens of hell, dogs, crows, iron mountains come to press in upon and harm them; with no real external object apart from consciousness, the four senses all hold. (ii) breaking the clinging — three objections are raised against "the wardens are real sentient beings": ① they should not be counted among the naraka (不應那落迦攝 — they do not undergo that suffering); and if they were to press in upon one another, the naraka could not be established; ② if equal in bodily measure and strength, [the sufferers] should not be so utterly terrified, and besides the wardens themselves could not endure the iron ground's blazing flames, so how could they press in upon others; ③ beings not of the naraka-kind are not born there to be wardens. At the end the opponent's rescue, "let animal- and ghost-beings be the wardens" (傍生鬼為獄卒), is cut off with 「此救不然」 ("this rescue does not hold"), opening v.4.
3. Scripture and treatise: the grounding (scriptural proof → treatise-root)
- Scriptural proof. The aspect of suffering in hell and being pressed in upon and harmed by wardens is the account of the destinies (趣相) commonly transmitted within Buddhism; Vasubandhu takes hell as the illustration that subsumes the four senses.
- Treatise-root. Vasubandhu's auto-commentary (T1590) sets up the one illustration subsuming the four senses, and then breaks the clinging to "really-existent wardens" with three objections — the mechanism stated in so many words as 「同業異熟增上力故」 ("by the force of the karmic retribution of shared karma, reinforced by [its] dominant force" — the ripened fruit of like karma, further, by dominant force, seen by many bodies together); the treatise's answering of the objections does not depart from the Buddha-taught principle of karmic causation and the destinies.
4. The treatise-root in essence (Vasubandhu's auto-commentary, T1590)
Vasubandhu takes two steps in this verse: first he gathers up the four senses of v.2 with the one hell illustration (one illustration suffices to show "fixity of place" and all the rest), then he goes on to break the clinging to "really-existent wardens," laying the groundwork for vv.4–5. The wording for the mechanism is stated in fact as 「同業異熟增上力故」 — and here the dominant force (增上力) belongs to the main text of Xuanzang's §Auto-commentary, differing from v.2's 「同業異熟」 ("the karmic retribution of shared karma," without the dominant force); it is the complete wording of this verse's mechanism of common seeing. The breaking by three objections rests entirely on the dilemma "if the wardens really undergo suffering, the naraka cannot be established / if they do not undergo suffering, they have no power to press in upon others," argued purely on the principle of the destinies.
5. The ancient masters' readings (古德 · stating their position)
- Dharmapāla, Cheng weishi baosheng lun 《成唯識寶生論》T31n1591 (Tang; tr. Yijing 義淨; a transmitted Chinese witness) — the middle-to-later portion of fascicle one comments on this verse, unfolding the argument for the common seeing of hell and the refutation of really-existent wardens. 〔Position stated: Dharmapāla has a detailed exposition at the point of the wardens not being real sentient beings; this is one of the ancient masters' readings, recorded here only as to its position, not adjudicated.〕
- Vinītadeva, Prakaraṇaviṃśakaṭīkā — extant in Tibetan translation · no transmitted Chinese witness; per convention its name only is recorded, its content not entering as doctrinal ground.
6. Rendering and old-translation comparison (the three Chinese translations)
| Chinese translation | Edition | Comparison |
|---|---|---|
| ★ Tang · Xuanzang T31n1590 | 「一切如地獄，同見獄卒等，能為逼害事，故四義皆成」 | A five-character quatrain, one illustration subsuming the four senses, directly opening the debate on the reality of the wardens; this is the base text. |
| Chen · Paramārtha T31n1589 《大乘唯識論》 | The hell illustration is unfolded in continuous prose; the debate on the reality of the wardens comes out in broader prose, not made explicit as a single-line claim (an ancient Chinese witness · collated for comparison). | |
| Later Wei · Prajñāruci T31n1588 《唯識論》 | 「獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」 "The various lords within hell — by them [the sufferers] are pressed and tormented" — joined with v.2's dream illustration into one couplet (「如夢中無女，動身失不淨，獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」 "as in a dream there is no woman, [yet] the body stirs and loses the impure; the various lords within hell, by them [the sufferers] are pressed and tormented"), with 「種種主」 ("the various lords") corresponding to Xuanzang's 「獄卒等」 ("the wardens of hell and the rest"); the two verses are joined, blurring the distinction of separate-striking versus subsuming (an ancient Chinese witness · collated for comparison). |
Xuanzang alone, with v.3 standing on its own, makes plain "one illustration subsuming the four senses + opening the debate"; Prajñāruci folds it into the v.2 couplet, and Paramārtha unfolds it in continuous prose — Xuanzang is the most convenient for item-by-item comparison. Verbatim comparison follows the CBETA original text.
7. Terms (Sanskrit per the ancient transmission · pronunciation aid)
| Chinese | Sanskrit (pronunciation aid) | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| 那落迦 | naraka | hell; the destiny of suffering, of being pressed in upon and harmed |
| 同業異熟增上力 | samāna-karma-vipāka · adhipati-bala | the ripened fruit of like karma, further, by dominant force, seen by many bodies together (this wording is present in the main text of this verse's §Auto-commentary) |
| 傍生 | tiryañc | the animal destiny; cited in the opponent's rescue "let animal- and ghost-beings be the wardens" |
The Sanskrit roman script is a pronunciation aid only; where no ancient-master transliteration is attested, it is left blank, not supplied from modern critical editions.
8. Cross-reading (the Yogācāra sequence)
| Baifa (Hundred Dharmas) | Triṃśikā | Within the Viṃśatikā |
|---|---|---|
| #8 storehouse consciousness ālaya — the basis of the shared sensing of shared-karma-with-dominant-force; that on which the common seeing of hell rests ⭐ | v.4 「恒轉」 ("ever-turning") — ālaya ever-turning is that on which the dominant force of the karmic retribution of shared karma rests | v.2 dream-and-ghost illustration — three separate illustrations; v.3 subsumes them with one illustration |
| #6 mind-consciousness mano-vijñāna — the discriminating subject that sees the wardens in common | Triṃśikā v.1, the provisional positing of self and dharmas — this verse's one illustration is the concrete case of "what consciousness transforms into" (依識所變) | v.4 refuting the animal-and-ghost rescue — taking up this verse's closing 「此救不然」 ("this rescue does not hold"), it refutes "let animal- and ghost-beings be the wardens" |
| #1 eye-consciousness cakṣur-vijñāna — the aspect that manifests the seeming-object of seeing in common the wardens and the iron mountains | Triṃśikā v.17 「故一切唯識」 "therefore all is consciousness-only" — the Triṃśikā's concluding establishment | v.5 the force of karma and the great elements — the warden-debate is gathered into the force of karma |
9. Witness placement
- Chinese verse-text (§Verse): T31n1590 〔p0075a01–02〕 (Xuanzang)
- Chinese auto-commentary (§Auto-commentary): T31n1590 〔p0075a03–16〕 (Xuanzang)
- Chinese translations collated for comparison: T31n1589 (Paramārtha, 《大乘唯識論》) · T31n1588 (Prajñāruci, 《唯識論》「獄中種種主，為彼所逼惱」 · joined into the couplet with v.2)
- Ancient master's commentary: T31n1591 (Dharmapāla, 《成唯識寶生論》, the middle-to-later portion of fascicle one · a transmitted Chinese witness)