俱舍論記 2.87

2.87

「有說聲屬至此乃生聲」者，此即第二師答。有說聲屬第五傳故，雖遠展轉由彼業生，疎非親感而非異熟，謂業為第一傳。從業所感造身根等異熟大種，為第二傳。從此異熟邊復有造身根等長養大種，為第三傳。從此長養色復起等流大種，為第四傳。從此等流方乃生聲，為第五傳。理亦應許有第四傳，而不說者，略而不說。或可影顯。或長養聲雖於一處而有間絕，若據一身諸支節中輪環不絕說非異熟，其理稍隱，故不說之。若等流聲有全間斷說非異熟，於理稍顯，偏約此明。此師意說：長養大種造長養聲，等流四大造等流聲，故許說有第四、第五傳聲非異熟，故非異熟大造，故不許有第三傳也。故《正理》述第二師解云「有餘師說：聲非異熟，如何異熟大種所造？故應許聲屬第四傳、第五傳，故非異熟。謂從業生異熟大種，從此傳生長養大種，此復傳生等流大種，長養大種發長養聲，等流大種發等流聲。」又解：此師別為一解。《婆沙》一百一十八，亦有第三、第五傳同此論。又《婆沙》一百二十七云「問：諸有情類所發聲，當言何處大種所造？有說：喉邊大種所造。有說：心邊大種所造。有說：臍邊大種所造。評曰：總說，此聲一切身支大種所造。若別說者，輕小語聲，應言喉邊大種所造；叱吒哮吼號叫等聲，應言遍身大種所造，現見此等舉身為掉動故。」

"Some say that sound belongs [to the fifth remove]... only then is sound produced": this is the second master's reply. Some say that sound belongs to the fifth remove, so although it is distantly generated through that karma in succession, being remote and not directly produced [by it], it is not a fruition. That is: karma is the first remove. The fruition great elements that produce the body faculty and so forth brought about by karma are the second remove. From the vicinity of these fruition [elements] there further are the nutriment-increased great elements that produce the body faculty and so forth, which are the third remove. From this nutriment-increased form there further arise homogeneously-flowing great elements, which are the fourth remove. Only from these homogeneously-flowing [elements] is sound then produced, which is the fifth remove. In principle, one should also accept a fourth remove, but the reason it is not mentioned is that it is omitted for brevity. Or perhaps it is implied. Alternatively, although nutriment-increased sound has interruption in a single place, if spoken of in terms of its continuous circulation throughout the limbs of the whole body, to say it is not a fruition would make the principle somewhat obscure, and therefore it is not mentioned. If homogeneously-flowing sound has complete interruption, to say it is not a fruition is somewhat clearer in principle, so this is specifically explained in terms of it. What this master means is: nutriment-increased great elements produce nutriment-increased sound, and homogeneously-flowing four great elements produce homogeneously-flowing sound; therefore, he accepts that sound of the fourth and fifth removes is not a fruition, and because it is not produced by fruition great elements, he does not accept the third remove. Thus the *Nyāyānusāra*, explaining the second master's interpretation, says: "Other masters say: Sound is not a fruition; how could it be produced by fruition great elements? Therefore one must accept that sound belongs to the fourth and fifth removes, and is thus not a fruition. That is: from karma arise fruition great elements; from these are produced in succession nutriment-increased great elements; these further produce in succession homogeneously-flowing great elements; the nutriment-increased great elements generate nutriment-increased sound, and the homogeneously-flowing great elements generate homogeneously-flowing sound." Another interpretation: this master provides a separate explanation. Fascicle 118 of the *Mahāvibhāṣā* also has the third and fifth removes identical to this treatise. Furthermore, fascicle 127 of the *Mahāvibhāṣā* says: "Question: By the great elements of what place should the sound produced by sentient beings be said to be produced? Some say: produced by the great elements near the throat. Some say: produced by the great elements near the heart. Some say: produced by the great elements near the navel. Judgment: In general terms, this sound is produced by the great elements of all limbs of the body. If speaking specifically, light and low vocal sounds should be said to be produced by the great elements near the throat; sounds such as shouting, roaring, and wailing should be said to be produced by the great elements throughout the entire body, since one observes that the entire body shakes and moves for these."