大般涅槃經集解 67.128

67.128

案僧亮曰：那含非初得也。爾時八智具十六行者，明超者是初得。僧宗曰：若依數經，須陀洹證六智為果，未得盡無生，未得根本禪心，不得他心智等，非證果之心，是則無八智，亦言少分盡無生也。今一解云：見智比智觀見在四諦為四，過去未來四諦為比，是則合諦分世為八智十六行。若合世分諦，言此人具得此，故證須陀洹也。寶亮曰：明無此超法。彼家所以作此義者，用等智斷結故。凡夫時以斷思惟煩惱，後斷見諦結盡，直超證那含。今明等智本是伏結，非永斷道。及見理生解，要先斷見諦，次斷思惟。此人直經果心而過，不出觀，非是超也。爾時具八智者，那含不復觀四諦比現八智作因，唯用一滅諦智為因得果，豈得以第三果名須陀洹耶？

Sengliang states: The anāgāmin is not a first attainment. ‘At that time possessing the eight cognitions and the sixteen aspects of practice’ explains that one who transcends attains it first. Sengzong states: If according to the Abhidharma texts, the srotāpanna realizes six cognitions as the fruit, has not yet attained the exhaustion-cognition and non-arising-cognition, has not yet attained the mind of the fundamental dhyānas, does not obtain the cognition of the minds of others and the like, which are not minds that realize the fruit—then he lacks the eight cognitions, though it is also said he has a minor portion of exhaustion and non-arising. Now, one explanation states: Cognition of seeing (dharmajñāna) and subsequent cognition (anvayajñāna)—contemplating the present four truths constitutes four [dharmajñānas], and contemplating the past and future four truths constitutes subsequent cognitions; thus, combining the truths and dividing the times yields eight cognitions and sixteen aspects of practice. If one combines the times and divides the truths, saying that this person fully attains these and therefore realizes srotāpanna. Baoliang states: This clarifies that this method of transcendence does not exist. The reason that school posits this doctrine is that they use conventional cognition to sever fetters: as an ordinary person, one has already severed the afflictions of cultivation, and later, when the fetters of seeing the truths are completely severed, one directly transcends to realize anāgāmin. Now it is clarified that conventional cognition is originally suppression of fetters, not the path of permanent severance. When one sees principle and generates understanding, one must first sever [the fetters of] seeing the truths, and next sever [the fetters of] cultivation. This person merely passes directly through the mind of the fruit without emerging from contemplation; it is not a transcendence. ‘At that time possessing the eight cognitions’: the anāgāmin no longer contemplates the four truths with subsequent and present eight cognitions as the cause; he uses only the cognition of the single truth of cessation as the cause to attain the fruit. How could one use the third fruit to be named a srotāpanna?