俱舍論記 25.90

25.90

「此三十七至餘九同前」者，此即第二正出體性。名雖三十七，實體唯有十，毘婆沙師說有十一，身、語二業不相雜故。戒分為二，正命即是正語、業故，不別說也。餘九同前。《婆沙》九十五有三說，兩說同此論，復有一說；正語、業外有正命故。若說有三，即有十二。然無評家。雖復開合不同，並戒為體。總而言之，名雖三十七，實體唯十，謂慧、勤、定、信、念、喜、捨、輕安，及戒、尋為體。問：何故七十五法中立此十法為覺分，餘不立耶？解云：若順淨偏強立為覺分，餘非順淨故皆非立。如《婆沙》云「問：何故一切色等法中唯無表色有立覺分，非餘法耶？答：正語、業、命隨順聖道，勢用偏增故立覺分，餘皆不爾是故不立。」又解：戒能為轂，餘色不爾。又《正理》云「何故表業不立覺分？覺分唯是順定善法，心俱無表有勝順能，表業不然是故不立。」《婆沙》九十六云「問：何不立心為菩提分法？答：心無菩提分法相故。復次心於雜染、清淨品中勢用均等，菩提分法於清淨品勢用偏增，是故不立。復次菩提分法輔佐菩提，心王不應輔佐於覺，如王無有輔佐臣義。」廣如彼釋。問：於四十六心所法中，何故但立念、定、慧、受、信、勤、捨、輕安、尋，不立餘法？答：如《婆沙》云「問：大地法中何故但立念、定、慧、受為菩提分法？答：念、定、慧三順清淨品中勢用增上，菩提分法亦復如是，故攝此三。受於雜染、清淨品中勢用俱勝，故亦立為菩提分法。有餘師說：受於雜染勢用雖勝，而於淨品作饒益事，如旃荼羅姓雖鄙劣，而與豪族作饒益事，故亦立為菩提分法。想、思、觸欲，於雜染品勢用偏增，故不立為菩提分法。於假想觀勝解偏增，菩提分法順真實觀，是故勝解非彼所攝。有餘師說：菩提分法學位偏增，至無學位勝解方勝，故不立為菩提分法。作意於境令心發覺易脫不定，菩提分法令心住境，義不相應故亦不立。有餘師說：初取境時作意力勝，至境相續彼力漸微，菩提分法要取境已多時方有，義不相應故亦不立。問：何故三受皆通無漏，唯立喜為菩提分法？答：樂、捨二受無彼相故。復次菩提分法行相猛利，樂、捨遲鈍故俱不立。復次無漏樂受為輕安樂所覆損故、捨為行捨所覆損故，相不明了，故不立為菩提分法。問：大善地法中，何故但立信、精進、輕安、捨四種為菩提分法耶？答：由此四種順菩提勝，故偏立為菩提分法。謂趣菩提信為上首，將起眾行信為初基，故立信為菩提分法。精進遍策趣菩提行，令速趣向三乘菩提，故亦立為菩提分法。輕安調適對治惛沈，助觀品勝；行捨平等對治掉舉，助止品勝。菩提分中止、觀為主，故俱立為菩提分法。慚、愧等六，散善品中勢用雖勝，而於定善勢用微劣，故不立為菩提分法，以菩提分定善攝故。有餘師說：大善法中，若所治強、自性勝者立為覺分，餘則不爾。所治強者謂與一切染心相應，自性勝者謂眾行本。策發眾行助止、觀勝。信、精進、輕安、捨皆具二義。慚、愧等六無具二者，謂慚等五二義並無，不放逸一種唯闕自性勝，故不立為菩提分法。問：何故欣、厭亦體是善，而不立為菩提分法？答：欣、厭二法不能遍緣，一心品中無容俱起，助覺非勝，是故不立。問：何故尋、伺俱通無漏，唯立尋為菩提分法？答：伺無彼相，是故不立。復次菩提分法行相猛利，伺用微劣是故不立。復次伺為尋所覆損故，於策正見尋用偏增，故伺不立菩提分法（已上《婆沙》文。《正理》意亦同《婆沙》）。」餘大不善地法二、大煩惱地法六、少煩惱地法十，及不定地中貪、瞋、慢、疑，並順雜染，故皆不立。睡眠、惡作雖亦通善，唯是生得，菩提分法是加行善。又《正理》七十一云「何緣不立不相應行以為覺分？彼於助覺無別勝能，不相應故，非如無表雖不相應，而於道輪有為轂用，故於覺分不別建立。有餘師說：二無心定能滅心故與覺相違，四相及得於所相、成有遷、成用，此於染、淨起用平等，菩提分法順淨用增故不別立（解云：餘七是無記，理在絕言，故彼餘師不別釋也）。」問：三無為何故不立？解云：夫順菩提必須起用，無為無用是故不立。由斯廢立，故唯十種是菩提分法，餘皆不立。又《正理》云「何緣不立信為覺及道支？初發趣時信用增上，已入聖位立覺、道支，信於爾時勢用微劣，故不立在覺、道支中。何緣於覺支立喜、輕安、捨，非亦立彼在道支中？彼偏順覺，不順道故。云何順覺？且修道中地地各修九品勝覺，如如於諦數數覺悟，如是如是發生勝喜，由生勝喜復樂觀諦。如人掘地獲寶生喜，由生喜故復樂更掘，故喜於覺隨順力增。要由輕安息諸事務，及由捨力令心平等，方能於境審諦觀察，故立安、捨在覺支中。云何此三不順於道？速疾運轉是聖道義，此於速運少有相違，並能令心安隱住故。何緣於道立尋、戒支？於覺支中非亦立彼，彼偏順道，不順覺故。云何順道？且見道中尋策正見，令於上下八諦境中速疾觀察；戒能為轂成見道輪，令於諦中速疾迴轉，故尋及戒俱立道支。此復云何不順於覺？且尋於諦不寂靜轉，於聖諦理尋求相故。覺已見諦安靜而轉，故尋於覺少有相違。覺是相應，有所緣境、所依行相；戒此相違，故於覺支不建立彼。通運名道，不可為例。」

"These thirty-seven [...] the remaining nine are as before": this is the second [section], which properly sets forth their essential nature. Although there are thirty-seven names, their actual entities are only ten. The masters of the Vibhāṣā state that there are eleven, because bodily and vocal karma are not commingled with each other. Precept is divided into two, for right livelihood is precisely right speech and right action, and is therefore not stated separately. The remaining nine are as before. In fascicle 95 of the Vibhāṣā there are three explanations: two explanations agree with this treatise, and there is another explanation [which holds that] right livelihood exists distinct from right speech and action. If three are asserted, then there are twelve. However, there is no critical evaluation [by the compiler preferring one]. Although the divisions and combinations differ, they all have precept as their entity. To summarize: although there are thirty-seven names, their actual entities are only ten, namely wisdom, diligence, concentration, faith, mindfulness, joy, equanimity, pliancy, as well as precept and investigation as their entities. Question: Why among the seventy-five dharmas are only these ten established as wings of awakening, while the rest are not established? Solution: What is predominantly strong in according with purity is established as a wing of awakening; the rest do not accord with purity and are therefore not established. As the Vibhāṣā says: "Question: Why among all dharmas such as form is only non-informative form established as a wing of awakening, and not other dharmas? Answer: Right speech, action, and livelihood accord with the noble path, and their functional power is predominantly augmented; therefore they are established as wings of awakening. The others are not like this, and are therefore not established." Another explanation: Precept can serve as the hub, whereas other forms cannot. Also, the Nyāyānusāra says: "Why is informative karma not established as a wing of awakening? The wings of awakening are solely wholesome dharmas that accord with concentration. Non-informative form arisen together with the mind possesses superior accordant capacity, whereas informative karma does not; therefore it is not established." Fascicle 96 of the Vibhāṣā says: "Question: Why is mind not established as a factor of awakening? Answer: Because mind lacks the characteristics of a factor of awakening. Furthermore, the functional power of the mind is equal across defiled and pure categories, whereas factors of awakening have predominantly augmented functional power in the pure category; therefore it is not established. Furthermore, factors of awakening assist awakening; the kingly mind ought not to assist awakening, just as a king does not serve to assist a minister." It is explained extensively as in that text. Question: Among the forty-six mental factors, why are only mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, feeling, faith, diligence, equanimity, pliancy, and investigation established, while the other dharmas are not established? Answer: As the Vibhāṣā says: "Question: Among the universal mental factors, why are only mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, and feeling established as factors of awakening? Answer: Mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom are augmentedly predominant in according with the pure category, and the factors of awakening are likewise; therefore these three are subsumed. Feeling has superior functional power in both defiled and pure categories, and therefore it is also established as a factor of awakening. Other masters say: Although feeling has superior functional power in the defiled, it performs a beneficial function in the pure category, just as the caṇḍāla caste, though base and inferior, performs beneficial functions for noble clans; therefore it is also established as a factor of awakening. Conception, volition, contact, and desire are predominantly augmented in the defiled category; therefore they are not established as factors of awakening. Resolution is predominantly augmented in conceptual contemplation, whereas factors of awakening accord with real contemplation; therefore resolution is not subsumed by them. Other masters say: Factors of awakening are predominantly augmented in the stage of training; resolution becomes superior only upon reaching the stage of no-more-learning; therefore it is not established as a factor of awakening. Attention makes the mind aware of the object, easily shifting and unstable, whereas factors of awakening cause the mind to abide on the object; the senses are incompatible, so it is also not established. Other masters say: When first grasping an object, the power of attention is superior; when the object continues, its power gradually weakens. Factors of awakening exist only after having grasped the object for a long time; the senses are incompatible, so it is also not established. Question: Why is it that, although all three feelings are equally anāsrava, only joy is established as a factor of awakening? Answer: Because pleasant and neutral feelings lack that characteristic. Furthermore, the modes of activity of factors of awakening are sharp and fierce, whereas pleasant and neutral feelings are sluggish; hence neither is established. Furthermore, anāsrava pleasant feeling is obscured and diminished by the pleasure of pliancy, and neutral feeling is obscured and diminished by conditioned equanimity, so their characteristics are not distinct; therefore they are not established as factors of awakening. Question: Among the universal wholesome factors, why are only the four kinds—faith, diligence, pliancy, and equanimity—established as factors of awakening? Answer: Because these four are superior in according with awakening, they are specifically established as factors of awakening. That is to say, faith is the foremost guide in proceeding toward awakening; when about to undertake all practices, faith is the initial foundation; therefore faith is established as a factor of awakening. Diligence universally urges forward practices directed toward awakening, causing one to swiftly proceed toward the awakening of the three vehicles; therefore it is also established as a factor of awakening. Pliancy is well-adjusted and counteracts torpor, being superior in assisting the category of contemplation; conditioned equanimity is impartial and counteracts restlessness, being superior in assisting the category of calming. In the factors of awakening, calming and contemplation are primary; therefore both are established as factors of awakening. Although the six beginning with shame and embarrassment have superior functional power among dispersed wholesome categories, their functional power is weak and inferior in concentrated wholesome states; therefore they are not established as factors of awakening, because factors of awakening are subsumed under concentrated wholesome states. Other masters say: Among universal wholesome factors, if their antidote is strong and their own-nature is superior, they are established as wings of awakening; the others are not. 'Antidote is strong' means being associated with all defiled minds; 'own-nature is superior' means being the basis of all practices. They stimulate all practices and are superior in assisting calming and contemplation. Faith, diligence, pliancy, and equanimity all possess both meanings. None of the six beginning with shame and embarrassment possess both: the five beginning with shame lack both meanings, and non-heedfulness alone merely lacks a superior own-nature; therefore they are not established as factors of awakening. Question: Why are rejoicing and revulsion, although wholesome in entity, not established as factors of awakening? Answer: Rejoicing and revulsion cannot universally take objects as their cognitive domain; they cannot arise together in a single state of mind; and they are not superior in assisting awakening; therefore they are not established. Question: Why is it that, although both gross investigation and subtle investigation are anāsrava, only gross investigation is established as a factor of awakening? Answer: Subtle investigation lacks that characteristic; therefore it is not established. Furthermore, the modes of activity of factors of awakening are sharp and fierce, whereas the function of subtle investigation is weak and inferior; therefore it is not established. Furthermore, subtle investigation is obscured and diminished by gross investigation, and gross investigation is predominantly augmented in stimulating right view; therefore subtle investigation is not established as a factor of awakening (the above is the text of the Vibhāṣā; the intent of the Nyāyānusāra is also identical to the Vibhāṣā)." The remaining two universal unwholesome factors, the six universal defilements, the ten minor defilements, and attachment, aversion, conceit, and doubt among the indeterminate factors all accord with defilement, and are therefore none of them established. Although sleep and regret also include the wholesome, they are solely innate, whereas factors of awakening are wholesome through application. Also, the Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 71, says: "For what reason are conditioning factors not associated with mind not established as wings of awakening? They have no distinct, superior capacity to assist awakening; because they are unassociated, unlike non-informative form which, though unassociated, functions as a hub for the wheel of the path, they are not separately established as wings of awakening. Other masters say: The two mindless absorptions can eradicate mind and are therefore contrary to awakening; the four characteristics and possession have the functions of transforming and perfecting what is characterized and perfected, and these functions arise equally in defilement and purity; factors of awakening have augmented function in according with purity; therefore they are not separately established (Explanation: the remaining seven are neutral, which in principle goes without saying; therefore those other masters do not explain them separately)." Question: Why are the three unconditioned dharmas not established? Explanation: Anything that accords with awakening must produce activity; the unconditioned has no activity; therefore they are not established. Due to this inclusion and exclusion, only these ten kinds are factors of awakening, and none of the others are established. Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra says: "For what reason is faith not established as a branch of awakening or of the path? When first setting out, the function of faith is augmentedly predominant; but the branches of awakening and of the path are established once one has entered the noble stage, at which time the functional power of faith is weak and inferior; therefore it is not established among the branches of awakening or of the path. For what reason are joy, pliancy, and equanimity established among the branches of awakening, but not also among the branches of the path? Because they specifically accord with awakening and do not accord with the path. How do they accord with awakening? In the path of cultivation, in stage after stage, one cultivates nine grades of superior awakening; to the extent that one repeatedly awakens to the truths, to that extent superior joy arises; because superior joy arises, one further takes pleasure in contemplating the truths. Just as when a person digs the earth and obtains a jewel, joy arises, and because joy arises he takes pleasure in digging further; therefore joy's accordant power with awakening is augmented. One must rely on pliancy to rest all activities and rely on the power of equanimity to make the mind impartial before one can closely and accurately contemplate the object; therefore pliancy and equanimity are established among the branches of awakening. How do these three not accord with the path? Swift movement is the meaning of the noble path; these slightly run contrary to swift movement, since they all cause the mind to abide peacefully. For what reason are gross investigation and precept branches established in the path, but not also in the branches of awakening? Because they specifically accord with the path and do not accord with awakening. How do they accord with the path? In the path of seeing, gross investigation stimulates right view, causing it to swiftly contemplate the upper and lower realms within the objects of the eight truths; precept can serve as the hub to complete the wheel of the path of seeing, causing it to turn swiftly within the truths; therefore gross investigation and precept are both established as branches of the path. Again, how do these not accord with awakening? Gross investigation proceeds without tranquility toward the truths, for its characteristic is seeking with respect to the principles of the noble truths; having awakened, one sees the truths and proceeds peacefully and quietly; therefore gross investigation slightly runs contrary to awakening. Awakening is associated [with mind], possessing an intentional object and a mental mode based upon it; precept is contrary to this; therefore it is not established among the branches of awakening. Moving through and through is called the path; this cannot serve as a parallel."