俱舍論記 26.102

26.102

「又為治常樂至行出行相」者，此即第四番釋。為治常見故修非常行相，為治樂見故修苦行相，為治我所見故修空行相，為治我見故修非我行相。為治外道無因見故修因行相，為治梵王、自在天等一因見故修集行相，多法聚集為因生果。為治數論轉變常因等見故修生行相。彼宗體常前後轉變能生諸法，如金轉變成環玔等。為治以知為先能生因見故修緣行相，遇緣即起，何須以知為先？言知先因者，如自在天將變境時，先起欲知彼境，起欲知已然後方變。大自在天以知為先，故名知先因也。或數論自性名知先因，欲變境時，要我先思欲知境界，起欲知已自性方變。此之自性以知為先方能變境，故名知先因也。為治解脫是無見修滅行相，謂諸外道起大邪見撥無解脫，為對治彼修滅行相，生緣滅故明知有滅。為治解脫是苦見故修靜行相，謂諸外道作如是執：我見世間無一眼者尚以為苦，況復涅槃諸根總滅而不苦哉。為治此見修靜行相，以涅槃中苦皆寂靜。為治外道執四靜慮及四無色等至樂是妙見故修妙行相。此有漏定非真妙法，唯有涅槃是真妙法。為治解脫是數退墮非永見故修離行相，謂諸外道執無想天等為真解脫，後時觀見數退墮落便作是執：解脫涅槃是數退墮，非永出離。為治彼見修離行相，以證涅槃必不退故。為治撥無聖道邪見故修道行相，以道行相緣實道故。為治外道執苦行等邪道見故修如行相，契正理故名之為如。為治計餘法為道是真見故修行行相，故《正理》云「為治世間離染是真道故修行行相。」為治退道數見故修出行相，故《正理》云「為治嘗遭不永離染道所誑惑，於真聖道亦不敬故修出行相。」

Regarding the passage from "Furthermore, in order to remedy [the views of] permanence, pleasure" up to "the aspect of escape": This is the fourth exposition. In order to remedy the view of permanence, one cultivates the aspect of impermanence; in order to remedy the view of pleasure, one cultivates the aspect of suffering; in order to remedy the view of what belongs to a self, one cultivates the aspect of emptiness; in order to remedy the view of a self, one cultivates the aspect of not-self. In order to remedy the non-Buddhist view of causelessness, one cultivates the aspect of cause; in order to remedy the view of a single cause such as Brahmā or Īśvara, one cultivates the aspect of origination, for multiple dharmas gather as a cause to produce a fruit. In order to remedy the Sāṃkhya view of a permanent cause that transforms and so forth, one cultivates the aspect of production; their school holds that an eternal substance transforms earlier and later to be able to produce all dharmas, just as gold transforms into rings, bracelets, and so forth. In order to remedy the view of a productive cause preceded by cognition, one cultivates the aspect of condition: when conditions are met, [effects] arise immediately; why must they be preceded by cognition? As for the cause preceded by cognition, it is like Maheśvara when about to transform an object: he first generates the desire to know that object, and having generated the desire to know, only then transforms it; since Maheśvara is preceded by cognition, he is called a cause preceded by cognition. Alternatively, the primordial nature (prakṛti) of the Sāṃkhyas is called the cause preceded by cognition: when about to transform an object, the self (puruṣa) must first deliberate and desire to know the object, and after that desire to know is generated, the primordial nature only then transforms; this primordial nature can transform objects only when preceded by cognition, hence it is called a cause preceded by cognition. In order to remedy the view that liberation is non-existent, one cultivates the aspect of cessation: namely, non-Buddhists give rise to the great wrong view of denying liberation; to remedy this, one cultivates the aspect of cessation, for because the conditions of arising cease, one clearly knows that there is cessation. In order to remedy the view that liberation is suffering, one cultivates the aspect of tranquility: namely, non-Buddhists hold such a conception: "I see that in the world, one lacking a single eye still considers it suffering; how much more so in nirvāṇa where all sense faculties are completely destroyed—how could it not be suffering!" To remedy this view, one cultivates the aspect of tranquility, because in nirvāṇa all suffering is tranquil. In order to remedy the view of non-Buddhists who grasp the bliss of the attainments (samāpatti) of the four dhyānas and the four formless absorptions as sublime, one cultivates the aspect of sublimity: these sāsrava absorptions are not the truly sublime dharma; only nirvāṇa is the truly sublime dharma. In order to remedy the view that liberation is subject to frequent falling back and is not eternal, one cultivates the aspect of escape: namely, non-Buddhists grasp the heaven of non-conception and so forth as true liberation, and later, seeing that they frequently fall back from it, they hold this conception: "Liberation and nirvāṇa are subject to frequent falling back and are not an eternal escape." To remedy that view, one cultivates the aspect of escape, because having realized nirvāṇa, one definitely does not regress. In order to remedy the wrong view of denying the noble path, one cultivates the aspect of the path, because the aspect of the path takes the real path as its object. In order to remedy the view of erroneous paths such as the non-Buddhist attachment to ascetic practices, one cultivates the aspect of rightness, which is called right because it accords with correct principle. In order to remedy the view that conceptualizing other dharmas as the path is true, one cultivates the aspect of practice; hence the *Nyāyānusāra* states: "In order to remedy [the view that] worldly detachment from defilement is the true path, one cultivates the aspect of practice." In order to remedy the view of frequent regression from the path, one cultivates the aspect of escape; hence the *Nyāyānusāra* states: "In order to remedy being deceived and confused by a path that does not eternally detach from defilement, which leads one not to revere even the true noble path, one cultivates the aspect of escape."