俱舍論記 21.154

21.154

「得亦然者至謂退不還」者，釋第二句。得亦然者，例同於捨。謂有得一、得二、得六，唯除得五，理亦應除。得三、得四對捨說故，捨中既無三、四，所以得中亦不說也。成通初、後。成中可成一、二、三、四、五、六。得唯據初，但有一、二、六也。言得一者，謂得未得，於九遍知一一漸得，皆名得一。及從無學起色纏退，得一五順下分。言得二者，謂從無學起無色界諸纏退時，得色愛盡及五下分。言得六者，謂退不還起欲纏時，得見斷六。問：為或至現在名退？為或至生相名退？解云：或至生相。彼品善得不至生相將現在前名退，如得捨門據將說故。又解：不可皆例齊。文中既言起纏，明知或至現在名退。或至生相現在猶成彼品善法，何得名退？後解為勝。又《正理》云「豈不勝進得聖果時，於諸無為更起勝得，乍可名得，寧捨遍知？約斷實然，恒成就故。但今且據九遍知中，若得異名本名便失，說名為捨，亦無有過（已上論文）。」

Regarding "'acquisition is likewise' up to 'it refers to falling back from a non-returner'": this explains the second line. 'Acquisition is likewise' is parallel to abandonment. That is, there are acquisition of one, acquisition of two, and acquisition of six, excluding only the acquisition of five, which by principle should also be excluded. Acquisition of three and acquisition of four are explained in contrast to abandonment; since in abandonment there are no three or four, they are also not stated in acquisition. Possession applies to both initial and subsequent [moments]. Within possession, one can possess one, two, three, four, five, or six. Acquisition is stated solely with reference to the initial [moment], so there are only one, two, and six. 'Acquiring one' refers to obtaining what was not yet obtained: gradually obtaining the nine complete comprehensions one by one is in each case called 'acquiring one'; and when falling back from the stage of no-learner by giving rise to the entanglements of the form realm, one acquires the one [complete comprehension] of the five belonging to the lower realm. 'Acquiring two' refers to when falling back from the stage of no-learner by giving rise to the entanglements of the formless realm, one acquires [the complete comprehension of] the exhaustion of desire for form and that of the five belonging to the lower realm. 'Acquiring six' refers to when falling back from a non-returner by giving rise to the entanglements of the desire realm, one acquires the six [complete comprehensions] of what is abandoned by seeing. Question: Does 'falling back' mean that the defilement has reached the present, or does 'falling back' mean that the defilement has reached the phase of arising? Explanation: It means reaching the phase of arising. When the attainment of wholesome dharmas of that category does not reach the phase of arising, but is about to manifest in the present, it is called falling back, just as the category of acquisition and abandonment is stated in terms of what is impending. Another explanation: they cannot all be made identical. Since the text says 'giving rise to entanglements', we clearly know that it is called falling back when the defilement reaches the present. If the defilement were merely in the phase of arising, while in the present one still possessed wholesome dharmas of that category, how could it be called falling back? The latter explanation is superior. Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra says: "'When advancing to higher states and obtaining noble fruits, does one not produce superior attainments regarding the unconditioned, so that it might rather be called an acquisition, why [call it] abandoning complete comprehension?' In terms of actual abandonment, this is indeed true, because one continuously possesses it. However, now, taking the nine complete comprehensions as our frame of reference, if one obtains a different name, the original name is lost, so it is designated as 'abandonment', and there is no fault in this (the above is the śāstra text)."