金剛般若疏 3.4.2

3.4.2

Regarding establishing two fruits through severing the delusions of the desire realm: the bhavanā-heya of the desire realm has nine grades; severing the first six grades is called the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, and completely severing the remaining three grades establishes the fruit of the anāgāmin. As for why severing the first six grades establishes the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin, the master Vasumitra says in the *Vibhāṣā*: "The afflictions of the first six grades can generate unmanifest karma and moisten rebirth in the three evil destinies; therefore, severing these six grades establishes one fruit. Moreover, having divided the delusions into nine grades, the delusions of the superior and middling two [sets of] three grades are heavy; hence severing them establishes one fruit, while the latter three grades are light, so severing them establishes the fruit of the anāgāmin." Master Zhuangyan says: "The afflictions of the nine grades of bhavanā-heya of the desire realm moisten karma differently: the first three grades moisten rebirth in the impoverished borderlands, and the next three grades moisten rebirth in the wealthy borderlands." Question: "From what text does the establishment of these four fruits come?" Answer: "The *Vibhāṣā* establishes them on account of five meanings: first, abandoning a path previously traveled; second, attaining a path not previously traveled; third, attaining liberation of a single flavor; fourth, fully cultivating the sixteen aspects; fifth, cultivating and attaining the eight knowledges. Now, the first fruit is established by fully possessing all five meanings; the lower three fruits may fully possess three meanings—namely, abandoning a path previously traveled, attaining a path not previously traveled, and liberation of a single flavor. Such meanings are extensively explained in the Sarvāstivāda treatises. One should merely know they are provisional designations and skillful means; it is not like the understanding of apprehension in the Sarvāstivāda treatises, for the Sarvāstivāda treatises only grasp the names and do not know the Buddha's intention." Regarding the text on the first fruit, there is first the question and next the answer. Within the answer there are three parts: first, the direct answer, clarifying that when awakening to the first fruit, one does not see attainment and non-attainment, or realization and non-realization, which accomplishes the aforementioned meaning of being ungraspable and ineffable. From "Why is this?" downward is the second sentence, explaining the meaning above. As for srotāpanna: here this means cultivating the uncontaminated, and it is also called "going against the flow of saṃsāra." There are two kinds of flows: first, the flow of saṃsāra, which is afflictions; second, the flow of the path, which is called correct contemplation. Here both flows are fully clarified: being called "entering the stream" means entering the flow of the path; not entering form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or dharmas means going against the flow of saṃsāra on account of entering the flow of the path. Because one goes against the flow of saṃsāra, one enters the flow of the path. Yet entering the flow of the path, there is in truth nothing entered; and going against the flow of saṃsāra, there is in truth nothing gone against. The third sentence, "This is called a srotāpanna," concludes with the name. Other sūtras say: "Attaining the srotāpanna is called severing the fetters in the trenches: first contemplating the suffering of the desire realm to sever the afflictions under the suffering of the desire realm; next contemplating the suffering of the higher realms to sever the afflictions under the suffering of the higher realms; turning back to contemplate the origination of the desire realm, and next contemplating the origination of the higher realms. Bending up and down like this resembles trenches; hence it is called severing the fetters in the trenches." The Tripiṭaka Master says: "Attaining the srotāpanna is translated here as reaching the flow: just as afflictions lead a person to the flow of saṃsāra, the Noble Eightfold Path leads a person to the flow of nirvāṇa." Question: "Why does it only say not entering the six sense objects?" Answer: "Since one does not enter the six sense objects, nor does one enter the six faculties or six consciousnesses, this clarifies the emptiness of dharmas. Because one does not see a srotāpanna, this is the emptiness of persons. Entering the flow of the path, there is nothing entered; hence nirvāṇa is unobtainable. Going against the flow of saṃsāra, there is nothing gone against; hence saṃsāra is unobtainable. Thus, no person, no dharma, no saṃsāra, and no nirvāṇa—this is called a srotāpanna of prajñā." The second fruit also has a question and answer; the coming of the text can be known. Sakṛdāgāmin is translated here as "attenuating lust, anger, and delusion," and is also called "once-returner." This person still experiences two births in the desire realm—one birth in heaven and one birth among humans, whereupon they become an arhat; hence they are called "once-returner," and also called "frequent returner." Because they frequently undergo two births, they are called a "frequent returner." Third, anāgāmin is translated here as "non-returner," and also called "not coming": having exhausted the fetters of the desire realm, they are not reborn in the desire realm; hence they are called "not coming." Regarding "yet in truth there is no coming": Question: "The anāgāmin is named 'not coming,' and it already says 'in truth does not come'; the sakṛdāgāmin is named 'once-returning,' so it should say 'in truth returns.' Above it said that the once-returner 'in truth has no returning'; so when the anāgāmin is named 'not coming,' it should say 'there is no not-coming.'" Answer: "In truth it should be so, but the alternating text expresses the meaning without doing so. The anāgāmin is named 'not coming,' yet it says 'in truth there is no coming' because the name of 'not coming' and the expression of 'no attainment' correspond in meaning; hence the phrase 'no coming' is used in turn to explain the name of 'non-birth.' The names of the two fruits above are different, which is why they are not of the same category. Furthermore, the meaning in truth should say 'and there is no not-coming'; now, lacking the character 'not' and merely saying 'no coming,' 'no' subsumes 'not,' thus sparing cumbersome words." Question: "Among the ten knowledges, how many knowledges do the four fruits fully possess?" Answer: "The first two fruits, among the ten knowledges, exclude the knowledge of exhaustion, the knowledge of non-arising, and the knowledge of others' minds." Question: "Ordinary beings and non-Buddhists still attain the knowledge of others' minds; why do the noble ones of the two fruits not attain it?" Answer: "It is not that the noble ones are incapable of attaining it; if they attain the knowledge of others' minds, they attain the four dhyānas and sever the desire realm, and are no longer of the first two fruits. A person of the third fruit possesses eight knowledges plus the knowledge of others' minds, and the fourth fruit fully possesses all ten knowledges." From the fourth fruit onward is the second part: adducing the fruit of the Hīnayāna to establish the meaning of the comparative assessment. The three above, although all called fruits, are all causes when viewed in relation to the arhat. Within this text there are again two parts: first, speaking generally of arhats; second, specifically clarifying Subhūti. The first also has a question and answer. Within the answer there are three parts: first, a direct answer; second, an answer explaining in accordance; third, an answer explaining by contrast. Question: "All four persons are called fruits; why do the first three say 'fruit' while the arhat is called the 'path'?" Answer: "The designations of fruit and path both apply to all four persons; however, because the arhat's virtue is ultimate, to distinguish them from the three above, it specifically says 'path.' Why is this? The *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* says: 'Bodhi is named the knowledge of exhaustion and the knowledge of non-arising.' Bodhi is called the 'path' here. Since the arhat has attained these two knowledges, they are given the name of the 'path'; the three fruits above have not attained these two knowledges, so they are not named with the 'path.'" Second, specifically relying on Subhūti's superior awakening and understanding as proof: Subhūti is indeed an arhat, but now he is the principal interlocutor, and he has also uniquely attained superior samādhi distinct from other people; moreover, he adduces himself as proof, wishing to make the meaning evident. In the text there are four parts: first, clarifying that the Buddha addressed his attainment of the superior fruit; second, clarifying that regarding his fruit he does not form the thought of attainment; third, clarifying that if he had the thought of attainment, he would not be endorsed by the Buddha; fourth, clarifying that because of non-attachment, he is praised by the Buddha.