華嚴經探玄記 12.23

12.23

第三所離障者，依《十地論》離解法慢障，以第三地聞勝流教法生解起慢，四地翻此，故以為障。依梁本《攝論》名微細煩惱共生身見等無明。彼論以法執分別種子為體，如梁論第十具釋。又《成唯識論》第九名微細煩惱現行障，謂所知障中俱生一分，第六識俱身見等攝，最下品故、不作意緣故，遠隨現行故說名微細。下論釋世親《攝論》云「分別我見有三：一最初斷細故名為上品、二分別起故、三不能遠到故名為麁。」今此俱生最後所斷，故名下品。任運起故、遠到第四方可斷故，是故此障異彼麁故名微細也。上論彼障四地菩提分法，以入四地時便能永斷。彼昔多與第六識中任運而生執我見等同體起故，說煩惱名。今四地中既得無流菩提分法，彼便永滅，此我見等亦永不行。初二三地行施戒修，相同世間；四地修得菩提分法，方名出世故，能永害二身見等。下論釋云「以前三地同凡三行，由斯未斷迷理我見。四地出世方能永斷，燒薪之焰依此立名。」二我見言或二障同體我見，以正斷所知煩惱不起同名永斷，理實但除法執我見。或法執中我我所見為二身見，或分別俱生名二身見，盡處總說，故說四地斷二身見。此三釋中，初釋為勝。上論寧知此與第六識俱（此問也）？第七識俱執我見等，與無漏道性相違故，八地以去方永不行，七地以來猶得現起。下論釋有三因：非是第七，此即初地，上與餘煩惱為依持故。此麁彼細，伏有前後故，此但與第六相應。身見等言，亦攝無始所知障、攝定愛法愛。彼定法愛三地尚增，入四地時方能永斷，菩提分法特違彼故。由斯四地說斷二愚及彼麁重。一等至愛愚，即是此中定愛俱者；二法愛愚，即是此中法愛俱者，所知障攝。二愚斷故，煩惱二愛亦永不行。《金光明》云「味禪定樂生愛因無明，微妙淨法愛因無明。」《深密》、《瑜伽》並同上辨。

Third, the obstacles to be abandoned: according to the Daśabhūmika-śāstra, it abandons the obstacle of pride regarding understanding the Dharma, because on the third bhūmi, hearing the supreme teaching flowing from dharmatā gives rise to understanding and initiates pride; the fourth bhūmi overturns this, so it is taken as the obstacle. According to the Liang translation of the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, it is named the subtle affliction of co-arising view of self, etc., which is ignorance. That treatise takes the conceptual seeds of attachment to dharmas as its essence, as fully explained in fascicle ten of the Liang treatise. Furthermore, the Cheng Weishi Lun, fascicle nine, names it the obstacle of the active manifestation of subtle afflictions, meaning a portion of the co-arising within the cognitive obstacle, subsumed under the view of self, etc., associated with the sixth consciousness; because it is of the lowest grade, does not take objects through deliberate attention, and follows active manifestations from afar, it is called subtle. The lower treatise, commenting on Vasubandhu's Mahāyānasaṃgraha, says: "Conceptualized self-view has three [aspects]: first, being severed at the very beginning, the subtle is called superior grade; second, arising through conceptualization; third, being unable to extend far, it is called coarse." Now, this co-arising one is severed last, so it is called inferior grade. Because it arises spontaneously and can only be severed by extending far to the fourth [bhūmi], this obstacle, being distinct from that coarse one, is therefore called subtle. The upper treatise says that obstacle hinders the factors of bodhi of the fourth bhūmi; upon entering the fourth bhūmi, it can be permanently severed. Because in the past it mostly arose as of the same essence with the view of grasping a self, etc., spontaneously arisen in the sixth consciousness, it is called by the name affliction. Now, since on the fourth bhūmi they have attained the outflow-free factors of bodhi, that is permanently extinguished, and this self-view, etc., also permanently ceases to function. On the first, second, and third bhūmis, their practice of giving, morality, and cultivation resembled the mundane; only when cultivating and attaining the factors of bodhi on the fourth bhūmi is it termed supramundane; hence they can permanently destroy the two views of self, etc. The lower treatise's commentary says: "Because the preceding three bhūmis shared the three practices with ordinary persons, due to this they had not severed the self-view that deludes regarding principle. Only on the fourth bhūmi, being supramundane, can they permanently sever it; the flame that burns fuel is named based on this." As for the words "two views of self": they are either the views of self identical in essence with the two obstacles—since when the cognitive [obstacle] is correctly severed, afflictions do not arise, which are together called permanently severed, though in principle and reality it only eliminates the self-view of attachment to dharmas; or, within attachment to dharmas, the views of self and what belongs to self are taken as the two views of self; or, conceptualized and co-arising are called the two views of self, spoken of comprehensively at the point of their exhaustion; hence it is said that the fourth bhūmi severs the two views of self. Among these three explanations, the first explanation is superior. How does the upper treatise know that this is associated with the sixth consciousness (this is a question)? Grasping at self-view, etc., associated with the seventh consciousness is contrary to the nature of the outflow-free path; therefore, it is only from the eighth bhūmi onward that it permanently ceases to operate, while up through the seventh bhūmi it can still manifest actively. The lower treatise's commentary has three causes: it is not the seventh—this refers to the first bhūmi, for above it serves as the support for the remaining afflictions. This one is coarse and that one is subtle, and their suppression has a sequence of before and after; therefore, this is only associated with the sixth. The words "view of self, etc." also subsume the beginningless cognitive obstacle and subsume attachment to meditative absorption and attachment to Dharma. Those attachments to absorption and Dharma still increased on the third bhūmi; only upon entering the fourth bhūmi can they be permanently severed, because the factors of bodhi are especially contrary to them. Due to this, the fourth bhūmi is said to sever two ignorances and their heavy burdens: first, the ignorance of attachment to samāpatti, which is what is associated with attachment to absorption here; second, the ignorance of attachment to Dharma, which is what is associated with attachment to Dharma here, subsumed under the cognitive obstacle. Because the two ignorances are severed, the two afflictive attachments also permanently cease to operate. The Suvarṇaprabhāsa Sūtra says: "The ignorance that is the cause of giving rise to attachment by relishing the bliss of dhyāna absorption; the ignorance that is the cause of attachment to the subtle and pure Dharma." The Saṃdhinirmocana and Yogācārabhūmi are both identical to what was distinguished above.