俱舍論記 24.13

24.13

「應知總有至或二或三」者，別釋家家。應知總有二種家家：一天家家，謂欲天趣生三、二家而證圓寂，或於一天處受三、二生，或於二天處受三、二生，或於三天處而受三生。二人家家，謂於人趣生三、二家而證圓寂，或於一洲處受三、二生，或於二洲處受三、二生，或於三洲處而受三生。今案此論，許一天處或一洲處受三、二生。又准《婆沙》五十三，亦許一天家、一人家，受三、二生。故彼論云「或一天家、或二天家、或三天家，受二、三生。」又云「或一人家、或二人家、或三人家，受二、三生。」問：三生、二生家家，人、天各受三、二生不？解云：若天三生家家，天三、人二。若天二生家家，天二、人一。若人家家，翻此應知。故《正理》六十四云「若天家家受三生者，人間受二、天上受三。受二生者，人一、天二。如應例釋人中家家。」問：何故住果人、天往返各有具受七，家家不受一小生耶？解云：住果容預，各具受七。向中忩迫，二、三數滿即般涅槃，故不受後一小生也。又解：家家具緣。若天家家，天三、人二；若人家家，人三、天二。三生、二生緣滿即休，故不受後一小生也。應知天家家者人中得道，人家家者天中得道。又解：天家家天中得道，還於天中入般涅槃。謂於天中初得道已，從彼處沒還生天中，以樂生天，故初受生還生天處。初得道身非是家家二、三生攝，故生天趣不名重生，後方人、天往還間生。人家家例此應釋。雖有兩解，前解為勝。問：《俱舍》、《婆沙》同《正理》不？解云：《俱舍》、《婆沙》既無明文與《正理》同，或《正理》據極少家家說，此論、《婆沙》據極多家家說。或論意各別。若作此解，《俱舍》、《婆沙》人、天各受二生、三生。又《正理》云「若有七生不必滿七，非家家位中間涅槃。何類所攝攝屬七生？七中極聲顯極多故。由此已顯生未滿前得般涅槃，亦是彼攝。根最鈍者具經七生，非諸利根生定滿七。」問：未滿七生得般涅槃即七生攝，未滿二、三生得般涅槃家家攝不？解云：七生不具緣，雖不滿七是彼攝。家家約具緣，要須生滿方彼攝。問：不滿二、三便般涅槃，既非家家，是何攝耶？解云：一來向攝，以向寬故。家家義狹，故非彼攝。

Regarding "It should be known that in total there are … or two or three": this specifically explains the kulaṃkula. It should be known that in total there are two kinds of kulaṃkula: First, the deva-kulaṃkula, which refers to being reborn into three or two families in the destiny of the desire devas and then realizing complete extinction; either undergoing three or two rebirths in one deva station, or undergoing three or two rebirths across two deva stations, or undergoing three rebirths across three deva stations. Second, the manuṣya-kulaṃkula, which refers to being reborn into three or two families in the human destiny and then realizing complete extinction; either undergoing three or two rebirths in one continent, or undergoing three or two rebirths across two continents, or undergoing three rebirths across three continents. Now, examining this treatise, it accepts undergoing three or two rebirths in one deva station or one continent. Moreover, according to *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 53, it also accepts undergoing three or two rebirths in one deva family or one human family. Thus that treatise states: "either in one deva family, or two deva families, or three deva families, undergoing two or three rebirths." It also states: "either in one human family, or two human families, or three human families, undergoing two or three rebirths." Question: In three-birth and two-birth kulaṃkulas, do they each undergo three or two rebirths among humans and devas? Explanation: If it is a three-birth deva-kulaṃkula, there are three among devas and two among humans. If it is a two-birth deva-kulaṃkula, there are two among devas and one among humans. For the manuṣya-kulaṃkula, it should be understood as the reverse of this. Therefore, *Nyāyānusāra*, fascicle 64 states: "If a deva-kulaṃkula undergoes three rebirths, two are undergone in the human realm and three in heaven. If one undergoes two rebirths, one is in the human realm and two in heaven. One should explain the human kulaṃkula by analogy in the corresponding way." Question: Why is it that those abiding in the fruit traverse back and forth between humans and devas, each undergoing fully seven [rebirths], whereas a kulaṃkula does not undergo one final small rebirth? Explanation: Those abiding in the fruit are leisurely, each undergoing the full seven. Those in the path of pursuit are urgent; as soon as the count of two or three is complete, they enter parinirvāṇa; therefore, they do not undergo a final small rebirth. Another explanation: The kulaṃkula relies on having the full conditions. If it is a deva-kulaṃkula, three in heaven and two among humans; if it is a manuṣya-kulaṃkula, three among humans and two in heaven. When the conditions for three or two rebirths are complete, it ceases; therefore, they do not undergo a final small rebirth. It should be known that the deva-kulaṃkula attains the path among humans, while the manuṣya-kulaṃkula attains the path among devas. Another explanation: The deva-kulaṃkula attains the path among devas and returns to enter parinirvāṇa in heaven. That is to say, having initially attained the path in heaven, upon dying from that place they are reborn again in heaven; because they delight in rebirth in heaven, their first rebirth is again in a heavenly station. The body in which the path was first attained is not included in the two or three rebirths of the kulaṃkula; hence, being born in the deva destiny is not called a repeated rebirth; only later do they alternate between humans and devas. The manuṣya-kulaṃkula should be explained by analogy with this. Although there are two explanations, the former explanation is superior. Question: Do the *Kośa* and *Vibhāṣā* agree with the *Nyāyānusāra*? Explanation: Since the *Kośa* and *Vibhāṣā* have no explicit text agreeing with the *Nyāyānusāra*, either the *Nyāyānusāra* speaks according to the minimal kulaṃkula while this treatise and the *Vibhāṣā* speak according to the maximal kulaṃkula; or the intentions of the treatises are distinct. If one adopts this explanation, in the *Kośa* and *Vibhāṣā*, each undergoes two or three rebirths among humans and devas. Furthermore, the *Nyāyānusāra* states: "If one has seven rebirths, they do not necessarily fulfill seven; it is not the case that in the state of a kulaṃkula they enter nirvāṇa in the interim. Under what category are they included? They are included under 'seven rebirths', because the term 'at most' among the seven indicates the maximum. By this, it is already demonstrated that attaining parinirvāṇa before fulfilling the rebirths is also subsumed by that. The dullest in faculties fully undergo seven rebirths; it is not the case that sharp faculties definitely fulfill seven rebirths." Question: If attaining parinirvāṇa before fulfilling seven rebirths is subsumed under seven rebirths, is attaining parinirvāṇa before fulfilling two or three rebirths subsumed under kulaṃkula? Explanation: Seven rebirths is not defined by full conditions; although they do not fulfill seven, it is subsumed by that. Kulaṃkula is defined in terms of full conditions: only when the rebirths are fulfilled is it subsumed by that. Question: If one enters parinirvāṇa before completing two or three [rebirths], since it is not a kulaṃkula, under what is it subsumed? Explanation: It is subsumed under the candidate for Once-Returner, because the candidate is broader. The definition of kulaṃkula is narrower, hence it is not subsumed by it.