[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736) › 40.3.4 # 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 40.3.4 大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔 40.3.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [40.3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3.4) 二執我無邊，死後有想，執非色為我，遍一切處故。 三執我亦有邊亦無邊，死後有想，執我隨身卷舒等。 四執我非有邊非無邊，死後有想，遮第三也，或依尋伺等至皆起。 第三四句者，一我有一想，二我有種種想，三我有小想，四我有無量想。 一一想者，在前三無色。 二種種想者，在欲界色界，除無想天。 三執少色或執少無色為我想、為我所，我與彼合名為小想。 在欲色界，除無想天。 四無量想者，執無量色為我想、為我所，我與彼合，名無量想。 第四四句者，一我純有樂，死後有想，在前三靜慮。 二我純有苦，死後有想，在地獄中。 三我有苦有樂，死後有想，在人欲天鬼畜生界。 四我無苦無樂，死後有想，在第四禪。 已上尋伺等至皆容得起。 無想俱非各八論者，無想八論者，有二四句。 初四句者，一我有色，死後無想，執色為我，得無想定，見他有人得定生彼，作如是計。 二我無色，死後無想，執命根為我，得無想定。 三執我亦有色亦無色，死後無想，雙執色命根為我，於此二中起一我想。 四執我非有色非無色，死後無想，遮第三句，等至尋伺皆容起故。 第二四句者，一執我有邊，死後無想，執色為我，其量狹小等，得無想定。 二執我無邊，死後無想，執色為我，遍一切處等。 三執我亦有邊亦無邊，死後無想，執色為我，隨身有卷舒故。 第四句者，遮第三句，更無別義，等至尋伺皆容得起。 後俱非八論者，有二四句。 一云執我有色，死後非有想非無想，執色為我，見諸有情入非想非非想定，想不明利，作如是執，唯尋伺執，非得定也。 二執我無色，死後如前，執無色蘊為我等，入非想非非想定，想不明了故，作如是執。 三執我亦有色亦無色，死後如前，執色無色為我，見有情等同前。 上皆依尋伺起，非由等至。 其第四句，遮第三句，更無別義。 第二四句云：一執我有邊，死後非有想非無想，乃至第四句，其文易知。 如是一切皆執四無色為我，以得非想非非想定，容有此執。 一由彼定時分位促故，別以一一蘊而為所緣，執我有邊。 二由彼定時分長故，總以四蘊為所緣故，執我無邊。 三由彼定，或一一蘊、或總為所緣故，成第三句。 第四句遮第三，更無別義。 七斷滅論者，一執我有麁色，四大種所造為性，死後斷滅畢竟無有，見身死後有而無故。 二我欲界天，死後斷滅。 三我色界天，死後斷滅。 四我空無邊處，乃至非想，皆云死後斷滅。 後之四執，執彼彼地為生死頂故。 前四十見為常，後七見為斷，此皆見斷，名分別起。 言有計前際二無因論等者，皆因邪見起，見不正故，名之為邪。 二無因者，一從無想天沒，來生此間，無宿住通，不能憶彼出心已前所有諸位，便執諸法本無而起，如我亦應本無而起，便起執言：我及世間無因而起。 二由尋伺不憶前身，作如是執，無因而起。 如是二見，由無想天及虛妄尋伺二事而起。 四有邊者，一由一向能憶上下，下至無間地獄，上至第四靜慮，執我於中悉皆充滿，便作是念：過此有我，我應能見，故知有邊。 二由一向能憶傍無有邊，執我遍滿，故執無邊。 三由能憶上下及傍故，雙執有邊無邊。 四由能憶壞劫分位，便生非有邊非無邊想，諸器世間無所得故。 四不死矯亂者，先總釋名。 準《婆沙》意，外道計天常住，名為不死，計不亂答，得生彼天。 今佛法訶云：汝言祕密等，即是矯亂，言四種者，一恐無知，念我不知善不善等，有餘問我不得定答。 我若定答，恐他鑒我無知因，即輕笑於我。 彼天祕密義，不應皆說等。 二行諂曲者，作是思惟：非我淨天一切隱密皆許記別，謂自所證及清淨道故。 三懷恐怖而無記別，恐我昧劣為他所知，由是因緣不得解脫，以此為室而自安處，懷恐怖故。 四有愚戇，專修止行而無所知，若有問我，我當反詰； 一切隨言，無減而印順之。 > Second, grasping that the self is boundless and possesses perception after death, one grasps that which is non-form as the self because it pervades all places. Third, grasping that the self is both bounded and boundless and possesses perception after death, one grasps that the self contracts and expands following the body, and so on. Fourth, grasping that the self is neither bounded nor boundless and possesses perception after death, negates the third \[alternative\]; or these \[views\] arise based on both discursive thought and meditative attainment. As for the third set of four positions: 1. The self has a single perception; 2. The self has manifold perceptions; 3. The self has small perception; 4. The self has immeasurable perception. 'A single perception' pertains to the first three formless \[realms\]. 'Manifold perceptions' pertains to the desire realm and the form realm, excluding the Heaven of Non-Perception. Third, grasping limited form or grasping limited non-form as the perception of the self, or as that which belongs to the self, where the self is united with it—this is termed 'small perception'. This is in the desire and form realms, excluding the Heaven of Non-Perception. Fourth, 'immeasurable perception' means grasping immeasurable form as the perception of the self, or as that which belongs to the self, where the self is united with it; this is termed 'immeasurable perception'. As for the fourth set of four positions: 1. The self experiences pure pleasure and possesses perception after death, which pertains to the first three dhyānas. 2. The self experiences pure pain and possesses perception after death, which pertains to hell. 3. The self experiences both pain and pleasure and possesses perception after death, which pertains to the realms of humans, desire-realm devas, hungry ghosts, and animals. 4. The self experiences neither pain nor pleasure and possesses perception after death, which pertains to the fourth dhyāna. All of the above can arise through either discursive thought or meditative attainment. Regarding the eight doctrines of non-perception and the eight doctrines of neither \[perception nor non-perception\]: the eight doctrines of non-perception have two sets of four positions. As for the first set of four positions: 1. The self has form and lacks perception after death; grasping form as the self, one attains the concentration of non-perception, or seeing others attain this concentration and be born there, one forms this calculation. 2. The self is formless and lacks perception after death; grasping the life-faculty as the self, one attains the concentration of non-perception. 3. Grasping that the self is both with form and formless and lacks perception after death; one doubly grasps both form and the life-faculty as the self, giving rise to a single notion of self in both. 4. Grasping that the self is neither with form nor formless and lacks perception after death; this negates the third position, for both meditative attainment and discursive thought can give rise to it. As for the second set of four positions: 1. Grasping that the self is bounded and lacks perception after death; grasping form as the self, its measure being narrow and small, and so on, one attains the concentration of non-perception. 2. Grasping that the self is boundless and lacks perception after death; grasping form as the self, pervading all places, and so on. 3. Grasping that the self is both bounded and boundless and lacks perception after death; grasping form as the self because it expands and contracts following the body. The fourth position negates the third position and has no separate meaning; both meditative attainment and discursive thought can give rise to it. Next, the eight doctrines of neither \[perception nor non-perception\] have two sets of four positions. The first \[set\] states: 1. Grasping that the self has form and is neither percipient nor non-percipient after death; grasping form as the self, seeing sentient beings enter the concentration of neither-perception-nor-non-perception where perception is not clear and sharp, one forms this grasp; it is grasped solely through discursive thought, not through attaining the concentration. 2. Grasping that the self is formless and after death is as before; grasping the formless aggregates as the self, etc., because upon entering the concentration of neither-perception-nor-non-perception the perception is not distinct, one forms this grasp. 3. Grasping that the self is both with form and formless and after death is as before; grasping both form and the formless as the self, seeing sentient beings, etc., as before. The above all arise based on discursive thought, not from meditative attainment. The fourth position negates the third position, with no separate meaning. The second set of four positions states: 1. Grasping that the self is bounded and is neither percipient nor non-percipient after death, up through the fourth position; the text is easy to understand. All of these grasp the four formless \[aggregates\] as the self; because of attaining the concentration of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, this grasp can occur. 1. Because the duration of that concentration is brief, one takes each aggregate separately as an object of cognition and grasps that the self is bounded. 2. Because the duration of that concentration is long, one takes all four aggregates collectively as an object of cognition, and grasps that the self is boundless. 3. Because through that concentration, one takes either each separate aggregate or all collectively as an object of cognition, this forms the third position. The fourth position negates the third, with no separate meaning. As for the seven doctrines of annihilationism: 1. Grasping that the self has coarse form, having the nature of being composed of the four great elements, and after death is annihilated and ultimately non-existent; because one sees that the body exists and then ceases to exist after death. 2. The self is a desire-realm deva and after death is annihilated. 3. The self is a form-realm deva and after death is annihilated. 4. The self is in the stage of infinite space, up to neither-perception-\[nor-non-perception\], and in all cases one says that after death it is annihilated. The latter four grasps consider their respective planes to be the summit of cyclic existence. The preceding forty views are eternalism; the latter seven views are annihilationism. These are all abandoned by seeing and are termed 'conceptually generated'. Regarding the statement that there are the two doctrines of non-causality calculating the prior edge, and so on: these all arise due to wrong views; because the view is improper, it is called 'wrong'. As for the two \[doctrines of\] non-causality: 1. Dying from the Heaven of Non-Perception and coming to be born here, lacking the supernormal knowledge of past lives, one cannot recollect all the states prior to the emergence of mind, and thus grasps that all dharmas arise from having previously been non-existent, just as my self must also have arisen from having previously been non-existent; one then gives rise to the grasp, saying: 'I and the world have arisen without a cause.' 2. Due to discursive thought failing to recollect previous lives, one forms this grasp that they arise without a cause. These two views arise due to the two factors of the Heaven of Non-Perception and false discursive thought. As for the four \[doctrines of\] having an end: 1. Because one can solely recollect the upper and lower \[realms\]—down to the Avīci Hell and up to the fourth dhyāna—one grasps that the self fully pervades therein, and then forms this thought: 'Beyond this, if there were a self, I should be able to see it; therefore I know it has an end.' 2. Because one can solely recollect that the horizontal directions have no end, one grasps that the self pervades them, and therefore grasps that it is endless. 3. Because one can recollect both upper and lower as well as the horizontal, one doubly grasps both having an end and endless. 4. Because one can recollect the phases of the kalpa of destruction, one gives rise to the thought that it neither has an end nor is endless, because no container world can be found. As for the four kinds of immortality-evasive equivocation, first is an overall explanation of the name. Following the intent of the Vibhāṣā, non-Buddhists calculate devas as permanent, calling them 'immortals', and calculate that answering without disorder allows one to be born in those heavens. Now the Buddhadharma rebukes them, saying: 'Your statements of secret \[meanings\] and so forth are simply evasive equivocations.' As for the four kinds: 1. Fearing their own ignorance, thinking: 'I do not know what is wholesome and unwholesome, etc.; if others ask me, I must not answer definitely. If I answer definitely, I fear others will discern the cause of my ignorance and will laugh at and ridicule me. The secret meanings of those heavens ought not to be fully spoken, and so on.' 2. Those who practice flattery and deviousness contemplate: 'It is not the case that our pure heavens permit all concealed secrets to be predicted'—referring to one's own realizations and the path of purity. 3. Harbouring fear and making no prediction: fearing that their dullness and inferiority will become known to others, and that due to this cause and condition they will not attain liberation, they use this as a chamber in which to comfortably abide, because they harbour fear. 4. Those with foolish stupidity who single-mindedly cultivate quietude without knowing anything: 'If someone asks me, I will cross-examine them; whatever they say, I will confirm and agree with without diminution.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 40.3.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3.3) - [Next: 40.3.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3.5) - [Up: 40.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736~en-mt.40.3.4) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [成唯識論述記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1830.6.531) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.40.3.4) · Pramāṇa