俱舍論記 15.139

15.139

「又本論說至俱時熟故」者，釋第七、第八句。又引《發智》等本論證下地中有捨異熟，以上界中無苦受故，不可說言順三受業一時受果。此中略舉《發智》初番，第二、第三番廣說中顯。如《婆沙》一百一十五云「頗有順樂受等三業非前非後受異熟果耶？答：有。此中非前者遮過去，非後者遮未來。受異熟果者，謂三業同於一剎那頃受異熟果。依此立問，是以答有，謂順樂受業色者。此業能感人天九處，除聲。惡趣四處，謂色、香、味、觸。順苦受業心、心所法者，此業能感苦受及彼相應異熟。順不苦不樂受業心不相應行者，此業能感人、天四類異熟，謂命根、眾同分、得、生住老無常。能感惡趣二類異熟，謂得、生住老無常。又順樂受業心不相應行者，此業能感人、天四類異熟，謂命根、眾同分、得、生住老無常。惡趣二類異熟，謂得、生住老無常。順苦受業色者，此業能感惡趣九處，除聲。人、天四處，謂色、香、味、觸。順不苦不樂受業心、心所法者，此業能感不苦不樂受及相應異熟。又順樂受業心、心所法者，此業能感樂受及彼相應異熟。順苦受業心不相應行者，此業能感惡趣四類異熟，謂命根、眾同分、得、生住老無常。人、天二類異熟，謂得、生住老無常。順不苦不樂受業色者，此業能感人、天九處，除聲。惡趣四處，謂色、香、味、觸（已上論文）。」此中引意：正取第二番中順不苦不樂受業心、心所法為證。既順不苦不樂受業感心、心所法，故知定感捨受異熟，必同時故。非離欲界中有此三業一剎那中俱時熟故，上界即無。由此證知，下地定有捨受異熟。雖有順捨受業色、不相應行，非定感捨受，故不以為證。《正理》三十破云「此亦非證。以本論中說三界業如三受故。然非三界所繫諸業可俱時受，此亦應然。而本論言有三界業俱時熟者，為欲試驗於對法宗解、不解故。或於增上果說受異熟聲，色、無色界資下異熟令其久住，故作是言。順三受業文亦容作此釋，故彼所引非定證因。」解云：《正理》意說，引順三受業俱時熟，非定能證異熟果業俱時熟。彼引三界業俱時受，例破順三受業，一為試驗為解、不解；二約增上果釋三界業。故《婆沙》一百一十八曰「頗有三界業非前、非後受異熟耶？答：有。」乃至廣說。此中道理應答言無，以異熟果界地斷故。而言有者，有何理耶？有說：此中以問非理，是故隨彼作非理答。何故須作非理問耶？欲試驗他故（廣引事云云）。復有說者，依增上果為此問、答，亦不違理，以三界業容有一時受此果故（廣引事云云）。又云：由此道理，今於此中依增上果作此問、答，亦不違理，以增上果一切界地無隔斷故。若作俱舍師救：說三受業，依理問答，非試驗他，故三受業約異熟俱時熟說。說三界業，非理問答，為試驗他。或約增上果，故三界業約增上果說，不約異熟，理必無有三界諸業於一剎那俱受異熟故。三受約異熟，三界約增上果，如何將彼三界增上例此三受異熟文耶？又《婆沙》第二十，解傍生、鬼趣異熟因中云「心、心所法者，樂、喜、捨受，及相應法。」又解欲界人、天異熟因中云「心、心所法者，樂、喜、捨受，及相應法。」准此故知，欲界定有捨受異熟為正。

Regarding "Furthermore, the fundamental treatise says ... because of ripening simultaneously," this explains the seventh and eighth lines. It also cites the fundamental treatises such as the Jñānaprasthāna to prove that equanimity-ripening exists in the lower stages; because there is no painful feeling in the higher realms, it cannot be said that karma conducive to the three feelings experiences their results at one time. Here, the first round of the Jñānaprasthāna is briefly mentioned, and it is revealed in detail in the second and third rounds. As the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 115, says: "Is there a case where the three karmas conducive to pleasant feeling and so forth experience their fruitional results neither earlier nor later? Answer: Yes. Here, 'neither earlier' excludes the past, and 'nor later' excludes the future. 'Experiencing fruitional results' means that the three karmas experience fruitional results together in a single moment. The question is posed on this basis, and thus the answer is 'yes.' That is, the matter of karma conducive to pleasant feeling: this karma can bring about nine āyatanas among humans and devas, excluding sound; and four āyatanas in the bad destinies, namely form, odor, taste, and tangibles. The mind and mental factors of karma conducive to painful feeling: this karma can bring about painful feeling and the ripening associated with it. The formations not associated with the mind of karma conducive to neither-pain-nor-pleasure: this karma can bring about four categories of ripening among humans and devas, namely the life-faculty, similarity of kind, acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence; and can bring about two categories of ripening in the bad destinies, namely acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence. Furthermore, the formations not associated with the mind of karma conducive to pleasant feeling: this karma can bring about four categories of ripening among humans and devas, namely the life-faculty, similarity of kind, acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence; and two categories of ripening in the bad destinies, namely acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence. The matter of karma conducive to painful feeling: this karma can bring about nine āyatanas in the bad destinies, excluding sound; and four āyatanas among humans and devas, namely form, odor, taste, and tangibles. The mind and mental factors of karma conducive to neither-pain-nor-pleasure: this karma can bring about neither-pain-nor-pleasure and the ripening associated with it. Furthermore, the mind and mental factors of karma conducive to pleasant feeling: this karma can bring about pleasant feeling and the ripening associated with it. The formations not associated with the mind of karma conducive to painful feeling: this karma can bring about four categories of ripening in the bad destinies, namely the life-faculty, similarity of kind, acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence; and two categories of ripening among humans and devas, namely acquisition, and birth, abiding, aging, and impermanence. The matter of karma conducive to neither-pain-nor-pleasure: this karma can bring about nine āyatanas among humans and devas, excluding sound; and four āyatanas in the bad destinies, namely form, odor, taste, and tangibles (the above is the treatise text)." The intention in citing this here is specifically to take the mind and mental factors of karma conducive to neither-pain-nor-pleasure in the second round as proof. Since karma conducive to neither-pain-nor-pleasure brings about mind and mental factors, one thereby knows that it definitely brings about the ripening of equanimity feeling, as they must be simultaneous. It is not the case that outside the desire realm there are these three karmas ripening simultaneously in a single moment, for there is none in the higher realms. From this, it is proven and known that the lower stages definitely have the ripening of equanimity feeling. Although there are matter and unassociated formations of karma conducive to equanimity feeling, they do not definitely bring about equanimity feeling, so they are not taken as proof. The Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 30, refutes this, saying: "This is also not proof. For in the fundamental treatise, karma of the three realms is spoken of just as the three feelings are. However, it is not the case that karmas bound to the three realms can be experienced simultaneously, and this should be the case here as well. That the fundamental treatise says there are karmas of the three realms that ripen simultaneously was intended to test whether one understands or does not understand the Abhidharma tenets. Alternatively, the term 'experiencing ripening' is used in reference to the sovereign result (adhipatiphala), because the form and formless realms support the ripening of the lower [realms] so that it endures for a long time; thus it is spoken of in this way. The text on karma conducive to the three feelings also admits of this interpretation; therefore what they have cited is not a definitive reason for proof." As an explanation: the intent of the Nyāyānusāra says that citing the simultaneous ripening of karma conducive to the three feelings does not definitively prove the simultaneous ripening of karma with fruitional results. It cites the simultaneous experiencing of karmas of the three realms as a parallel to refute [the argument based on] karma conducive to the three feelings: first, as a test of whether one understands or does not understand; second, interpreting the karma of the three realms in terms of the sovereign result. Therefore, the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 118, says: "Is there a case where karma of the three realms experiences ripening neither earlier nor later? Answer: Yes," up to extensive explanations. In principle here, the answer should have been "no," because fruitional results are demarcated by realms and stages. But since it says "yes," what principle is there? Some say: here, because the question is illogical, a corresponding illogical answer was given following it. Why was it necessary to make an illogical question? Because of the desire to test the other (extensively citing incidents, and so forth). Others say: this question and answer are framed based on the sovereign result, which also does not contradict reason, because karmas of the three realms can admit of experiencing this result at one time (extensively citing incidents, and so forth). It also says: by this principle, framing this question and answer here now based on the sovereign result also does not contradict reason, because the sovereign result is unhindered across all realms and stages. If one constructs a defense for the Kośa master: speaking of karma of the three feelings is a question and answer based on reason, not to test another; therefore karma of the three feelings is spoken of in terms of ripening simultaneously as retribution. Speaking of karma of the three realms is an illogical question and answer to test another, or it is in terms of the sovereign result; therefore karma of the three realms is spoken of in terms of the sovereign result and not in terms of retribution, for in principle there can never be karmas of the three realms that both experience retribution in a single moment. The three feelings are in terms of retribution, whereas the three realms are in terms of the sovereign result; how can one take that sovereign [result] of the three realms as an analogy for this text on the retribution of the three feelings? Furthermore, the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 20, in explaining the cause of ripening for the destinies of animals and ghosts, says: "Mind and mental factors are pleasant, joyful, and equanimous feelings, and the dharmas associated with them." Furthermore, in explaining the cause of ripening for humans and devas of the desire realm, it says: "Mind and mental factors are pleasant, joyful, and equanimous feelings, and the dharmas associated with them." In accordance with this, one therefore knows that it is correct that the desire realm definitely has the ripening of equanimity feeling.