俱舍論記 10.176

10.176

「又經說有至為第四句」者，又引經證起名中有。此經言斷，斷有二種：一得永對治斷，得擇滅不退名斷；二得永不行斷，得非擇滅不行名斷。故《正理》三十一云「我今於此審諦思求，見彼契經有如是意，謂依二斷說如是言。二斷者何？一得永對治斷、二得永不行斷（已上論文）。」於四句中，隨其所應說此二斷，潤中有惑名起結，潤生有惑名生結。又解：潤中有初念惑名起結，潤生有初念惑名生結。言四句者，第一句，已斷起結未斷生結。謂離欲、色二界貪諸無色上流者，離二界貪不受中有，故起結已斷。未斷無色貪更受無色生有，故生結未斷。此中言斷，約永對治斷說。以無起結但得不行，而於生結得有起義。謂欲、色界生結得行，必亦兼得行於起結。若無色界生結現行，必定已得永治起結，故知此斷約永治說。第二句，已斷生結未斷起結。謂中般涅槃不受生有，故生結已斷。受中有故，起結未斷。此中言斷據不現行，以無生結得永治，而於起結未斷之理。謂斷生結即離三界，而彼必無餘起結故，故知此但約永不行。第三句，已斷起結已斷生結。謂阿羅漢斷三界貪不受中有，故起結已斷。不受生有，故生結已斷。此中言斷據永治說。雖有於此身定成無學者，約不現行生、起二結亦名為斷。此中且據永對治說。第四句，不斷起結不斷生結。謂除前相。謂除前現、中般，諸餘未永離色界貪者，受中有故起結未斷，受生有故生結未斷。此言未斷亦應通二。

Regarding 'Furthermore, a sūtra speaks of [...] as the fourth alternative': This again cites a sūtra to prove that 'arising' designates intermediate existence. When this sūtra speaks of abandoning, there are two kinds of abandoning: first, abandoning by attaining perpetual counteraction, where attaining cessation through deliberation without retrogressing is called abandoning; second, abandoning by attaining perpetual non-arising, where attaining non-arising through cessation not through deliberation is called abandoning. Hence *Nyāyānusāra* 31 says: 'I now examine and scrutinise this, and see that the sūtra has such an intention, speaking in this way based on two kinds of abandoning. What are the two kinds of abandoning? First, abandoning by attaining perpetual counteraction; second, abandoning by attaining perpetual non-arising' (end of treatise citation). Among the four alternatives, these two kinds of abandoning are stated as appropriate: the defilement that moisturises intermediate existence is called the fetter of arising; the defilement that moisturises birth-existence is called the fetter of birth. Another explanation: the first moment of defilement that moisturises intermediate existence is called the fetter of arising; the first moment of defilement that moisturises birth-existence is called the fetter of birth. Regarding the four alternatives: The first alternative: one who has abandoned the fetter of arising but has not abandoned the fetter of birth. This refers to those who are higher-stream travelers in the formless realm who have abandoned craving for the desire and form realms; having abandoned craving for the two realms, they do not undergo intermediate existence, and thus the fetter of arising is already abandoned. Because they have not abandoned craving for the formless realm and will still undergo formless birth-existence, the fetter of birth is not yet abandoned. The mention of abandoning here is stated in terms of abandoning by perpetual counteraction. For there is no fetter of arising that merely attains non-arising while the fetter of birth still has the capacity to arise. That is, if the fetter of birth of the desire or form realm is capable of active occurrence, it must also be capable of active occurrence with the fetter of arising. If the fetter of birth of the formless realm actively occurs, one must have already attained perpetual counteraction of the fetter of arising; thus one knows that this abandoning is stated in terms of perpetual counteraction. The second alternative: one who has abandoned the fetter of birth but has not abandoned the fetter of arising. This refers to the intermediate nirvana who does not undergo birth-existence; hence the fetter of birth is already abandoned. Because they undergo intermediate existence, the fetter of arising is not yet abandoned. The mention of abandoning here is based on non-arising, because there is no principle that the fetter of birth could attain perpetual counteraction while the fetter of arising remains unabandoned. That is to say, abandoning the fetter of birth means leaving the three realms, and they definitely have no remaining fetter of arising; thus one knows this is stated solely in terms of perpetual non-arising. The third alternative: one who has abandoned the fetter of arising and has abandoned the fetter of birth. This refers to an arhat who has abandoned craving for the three realms and does not undergo intermediate existence; hence the fetter of arising is already abandoned. Because they do not undergo birth-existence, the fetter of birth is already abandoned. The mention of abandoning here is stated based on perpetual counteraction. Although there are those who are definitely destined to become aśaikṣas in this life, in terms of the non-arising of both fetters of birth and arising, they are also said to have abandoned them; here it is provisionally stated based on perpetual counteraction. The fourth alternative: one who has not abandoned the fetter of arising and has not abandoned the fetter of birth. This refers to the exclusion of the previous cases. That is, excluding those in the present life and the intermediate state who attain nirvāṇa, all others who have not perpetually abandoned craving for the form realm: because they undergo intermediate existence, the fetter of arising is not abandoned; because they undergo birth-existence, the fetter of birth is not abandoned. The term 'not abandoned' here should also apply to both meanings.