大般涅槃經疏 28.14

28.14

「善男子復說有退」下，第四爭論。數人明無漏有退，如初果見諦一向無退，入思惟中二果用等智斷惑即有退義，羅漢無漏理應不退。前兩果退，牽羅漢退，舉沙井喻。上下有甎，中間有沙，中沙既頹，上去到下。論家云：無漏不退，但禪定退。修得欲界電光之定，此定難捉，有時退失，名之為退。無漏無退文中，先明退、次執無退。初退又三：法、譬、合。法又三：先通明比丘退、二別明羅漢、三通舉六人。初通明中二：先通明、次明退緣有五因緣。次「復有二種」下，是別明羅漢，又二：初直云羅漢有退、次別舉瞿坻即是死想羅漢。「我復或說」下，三通舉六人：一退、二不退、三慧、四俱、五時、六不時。時鈍好退，不時利不退。次「善男子」下，舉譬。三「煩惱亦爾」下，是合譬。因緣者，即外惡緣。「而羅漢」下，二正明不退。內無惡因、外不能亂，所以無退。

From “Good son, I also spoke of retrogression…” below, the fourth dispute. The abhidharmikas clarify that there is retrogression from the untainted state: for example, the first fruit sees the truths and definitively has no retrogression, but when entering cultivation, the second fruit uses worldly conventional knowledge to sever afflictions and thus has the possibility of retrogression; in principle an arhat's untainted state should not retrogress. Retrogression in the preceding two fruits pulls the arhat into retrogression, citing the analogy of a sand well. There are bricks above and below, with sand in the middle; once the middle sand collapses, the upper part falls to the bottom. Treatise masters say: the untainted state does not retrogress; only dhyāna-concentration retrogresses. Having cultivated and attained the lightning-like concentration of the desire realm, this concentration is difficult to grasp and is sometimes lost through retrogression; this is named retrogression. In the text on the untainted state having no retrogression, it first clarifies retrogression, and next the clinging to non-retrogression. The initial retrogression also has three parts: dharma, analogy, and application. The dharma also has three parts: first, clarifying generally the retrogression of monks; second, clarifying specifically arhats; third, generally citing the six kinds of persons. In the first general clarification, there are two parts: first, clarifying generally; next, clarifying that the conditions for retrogression have five causes and conditions. Next, from “There are also two kinds…” below, it clarifies arhats specifically, which also has two parts: first, directly saying that arhats retrogress; next, specifically citing Godhika, that is, the arhat with the perception of death. From “I have also sometimes spoken…” below, third, generally citing six persons: first, one who retrogresses; second, one who does not retrogress; third, one liberated by wisdom; fourth, one doubly liberated; fifth, one liberated at times; sixth, one liberated without time. Those liberated at times are dull and prone to retrogression; those liberated without time are sharp and do not retrogress. Next, from “Good son” below, it presents an analogy. Third, from “Afflictions are also like this” below, is the application of the analogy. Conditions refer to external evil conditions. From “Yet an arhat…” below, second, it directly clarifies non-retrogression. Internally there is no evil cause, and externally nothing can disturb him; therefore there is no retrogression.