俱舍論記 19.99

19.99

「若爾何故至不違彼經」者，難毘婆沙師。慶喜，梵云阿難陀。辨自在，是初果人。若想、心倒唯見所斷不通修斷，何故慶喜告辨自在：「由有想亂倒，故汝心焦熱。後得無學果，遠離彼想已，貪息心便淨。」學位猶起想、心二倒，故知想、心亦通修斷。有餘經部師復作是說：八想、心倒，學未全斷。彼宗意說：見唯迷理，故唯見斷。想、心通迷理、事起，故通見、修斷。復通前經。前經所說於四聖諦如實見知，想、心見倒皆永斷者，此經非唯說見斷，亦通修斷。如是八種於修位中，終由如實見知聖諦方得永斷。離此諦觀，無餘永斷八種方便故。此經部所說八種亦通修斷，不違前經。論主意朋經部，所以此中絕救。十二顛倒，若依毘婆沙師，唯見苦斷，麁果起故。於學位中諸染想、心，及學、無學位無記想、心，有迷亂者容可說倒，而非四倒。具三義就勝名倒，如先。若依餘部，八唯見斷，四通見、修，如前應知。若依餘經部師，四唯見斷，八通見、修，亦如前說。

"If so, why [...] does it not contradict that sūtra?"—this poses a challenge to the Vaibhāṣikas. "Qingxi" (Joyful) is in Sanskrit Ānanda. "Bianzhizai" (Master of Eloquence) is a person who has attained the first fruit [of stream-entry]. If the perversions of ideation and mind were abandoned only by seeing [the truths] and did not extend to being abandoned by cultivation, why did Ānanda tell Bianzhizai: "Because there are disordered and perverted ideations, your mind is scorched with fever. Later, having attained the fruit of an aśaikṣa and left those ideations far behind, craving will cease and your mind will become pure"? Since a practitioner in the stage of learning (śaikṣa) still produces the two perversions of ideation and mind, one therefore knows that ideation and mind also extend to being abandoned by cultivation. Other Sautrāntika masters also state: the eight perversions of ideation and mind are not yet entirely abandoned by a śaikṣa. The meaning of their school is that views err only regarding principles, and hence are abandoned only by seeing; ideation and mind, by contrast, arise through erring with regard to both principles and empirical facts, and hence extend to being abandoned by both seeing and cultivation. Furthermore, they resolve [the contradiction with] the previous sūtra: what the previous sūtra stated—that when the four noble truths are seen and known as they really are, the perversions of ideation, mind, and views are all eternally abandoned—does not speak only of abandonment by seeing, but also extends to abandonment by cultivation. These eight kinds, during the stage of cultivation, are ultimately abandoned eternally only by seeing and knowing the noble truths as they really are. Apart from this contemplation of the truths, there is no other expedient means for eternally abandoning these eight kinds. Thus, what these Sautrāntikas state—that the eight kinds also extend to being abandoned by cultivation—does not contradict the previous sūtra. The author of the treatise sides with the Sautrāntikas, which is why no defense is offered [for the Vaibhāṣikas] here. As for the twelve perversions, if one follows the Vaibhāṣikas, they are abandoned only by seeing the truth of suffering, because they arise in reference to coarse results. When defiled ideations and minds arise in the stage of learning, or when morally indeterminate ideations and minds arise in the stages of learning or non-learning with disorientation, they may casually be called "perversions," but they are not the four perversions. Endowed with the three meanings, they are called perversions only in the primary sense, as explained previously. If one follows the other school, eight are abandoned only by seeing and four extend to both seeing and cultivation, as should be understood from the above. If one follows the other Sautrāntika masters, four are abandoned only by seeing and eight extend to both seeing and cultivation, also as stated above.