俱舍論記 1.271

1.271

「頌曰至皆行蘊攝」者，西方數法，多以十、百為因乘成多數，百、千以上以百因之，未滿百、千以十乘之、故目八萬為八十千也。此中教體，兩說不同。自古諸德出教體，或有以聲為體，或有以名、句、文為體，或具含二種。若約逗機說法，以聲為體。若據詮法，以名、句、文為體。所以諸論出教體中，皆有兩說不同。今依新譯《婆沙》，以此論初說為正。故《婆沙》一百二十六云「問：如是佛教以何為體？為是語業？為是名等？答：應作是說，語業為體。問：若爾，次後所說當云何通？如說佛教名何法？答謂名身、句身、文身，乃至次第連合。答：後文為顯佛教作用，不欲顯示佛教自體。謂次第行列、安布、連合，名、句、文身，是佛教用。問：伽陀所說復云何通？答：有於名轉，有於義轉。此中且說於名轉者，有說佛教名等為體。問：若爾，所說當云何通？如說佛教云何？謂佛語言乃至語表是謂佛教。答：依展轉因故作是說，如世子孫展轉生法。謂語起名，名能顯義。如是說者，語業為體，佛意所說他所聞故。」又云「問：何故佛教唯是語表，非無表耶？答：生他正解故名佛教。他正解生但由表業，非無表故（廣如彼釋）。」又云「佛教當言善耶？無記耶？答：或善、或無記。云何善？謂佛善心所發語言乃至語表。云何無記？謂佛無記心所發語言乃至語表。」問：教體若通善者，何故《金剛般若論》云「我法是善，汝法是無記。」解云：十八部中有立無記，非汝、我部。

Regarding "The verse says: [...] are all subsumed under the saṃskāra-skandha": In Western methods of counting, tens and hundreds are often multiplied as factors to form larger numbers. For hundreds and thousands and above, they are multiplied by hundreds; for those not reaching hundreds or thousands, they are multiplied by tens. Therefore, eighty thousand is designated as "eighty thousands" [aśīti-sahasra]. In this context, regarding the substantial entity (svabhāva) of the teaching, two explanations differ. From ancient times, various masters presenting the substantial entity of the teaching have either taken sound as the substantial entity, or taken names, phrases, and phonemes as the substantial entity, or held that it includes both kinds. If considered in terms of adapting to mental capacities to preach the Dharma, sound is taken as the substantial entity. If based on that which expresses the Dharma, names, phrases, and phonemes are taken as the substantial entity. Therefore, whenever the various treatises set forth the substantial entity of the teaching, they all contain these two differing explanations. Now, relying on the new translation of the *Mahāvibhāṣā*, this treatise takes the first explanation as correct. Hence, fascicle 126 of the *Mahāvibhāṣā* states: "Question: What is the substantial entity of such teaching of the Buddha? Is it vocal action (vāg-karman)? Or is it name and so forth? Answer: One should state that vocal action is its substantial entity. Question: If so, how is what is stated immediately afterward to be reconciled? As it says: 'What dharma is called the Buddha's teaching?' Answer: 'It refers to nāmakāya, padakāya, and vyañjanakāya, up to their sequential combination.' Answer: The later passage is intended to reveal the function of the Buddha's teaching; it does not intend to reveal the substantial entity itself of the Buddha's teaching. That is to say, the sequential arrangement, setting forth, and combination of nāmakāya, padakāya, and vyañjanakāya constitute the function of the Buddha's teaching. Question: How is what is said in the gāthās to be reconciled further? Answer: Some operate with regard to names; some operate with regard to meanings. Here, it provisionally speaks of operating with regard to names. Some say that the Buddha's teaching has name and so forth as its substantial entity. Question: If so, how is what is said to be reconciled? As it says: 'What is the Buddha's teaching? It refers to the Buddha's speech, up to vocal informatory action (vāg-vijñapti); this is called the Buddha's teaching.' Answer: This is stated based on indirect causation, like the way children and grandchildren in the world are born in succession. That is, speech gives rise to names, and names can reveal meanings. The orthodox explanation holds that vocal action is its substantial entity, because what is intended by the Buddha is heard by others." It also states: "Question: Why is the Buddha's teaching exclusively vocal informatory action (vāg-vijñapti) and not uninformative action (avijñapti)? Answer: Because it generates right understanding in others, it is called the Buddha's teaching. Others' right understanding arises only through informatory action, not through uninformative action (explained in detail as in that text)." It also states: "Should the Buddha's teaching be said to be wholesome? Or indeterminate (avyākṛta)? Answer: It is either wholesome or indeterminate. How is it wholesome? It refers to the speech, up to vocal informatory action, produced from the Buddha's wholesome mind. How is it indeterminate? It refers to the speech, up to vocal informatory action, produced from the Buddha's indeterminate mind." Question: If the substantial entity of the teaching admits of being wholesome, why does the *Vajracchedikā-śāstra* say: "My Dharma is wholesome; your dharma is indeterminate"? The explanation is: among the eighteen nikāyas, there are those that posit it as indeterminate; this is not the position of your school or my school.