俱舍論記 26.37

26.37

「頌曰至為因生故」者，答。由七緣故立二為十。一自性故立世俗智。體是有漏，世俗法故。此世俗智非以無漏勝義智為自性故。若據前文，亦從境立名。故前文言：前有漏智總名世俗，多取瓶等世俗境故。二對治故立法、類智。法智全能對治欲界，類智全能對治上界。滅、道法智雖亦能治上界修惑，而非全故。三行相故立苦、集智。此二智境體無別故，但由能緣行相不同。由無常等四行相故立苦智，由因、集等四行相故立集智。又解：行相在境，此二智境體雖無別，約行不同分成苦、集。又解：行相通在能緣及所緣境。由彼境上有無常等八種行相，能緣之上似彼八行說名能緣。此二智境體雖無別，約行分二。四行相境故立滅、道智。此二行相有差別故，一作滅等四種行相、一作道等四種行相。行相三解，准前應知。此二境界有差別故，一緣無為、一緣有為。由行不同及境差別立滅、道智。

Regarding "The stanza says ... because of arising as cause": this is the answer. By reason of seven conditions, the two are established as ten. First, by intrinsic nature, conventional knowledge is established. Its essence is defiled, being a conventional dharma. This conventional knowledge does not have undefiled ultimate knowledge as its intrinsic nature. According to the preceding text, its name is also established from its objective domain. Therefore the preceding text says: the former defiled knowledge is collectively called conventional because it mostly grasps conventional objective domains such as jars. Second, by antidote, dharma knowledge and subsequent knowledge are established. Dharma knowledge can completely remedy the desire realm; subsequent knowledge can completely remedy the upper realms. Although the dharma knowledges of cessation and the path can also remedy defilements abandoned through cultivation in the upper realms, they do not do so completely. Third, by mode of activity, the knowledges of suffering and origination are established. Because the essences of the objective domains of these two knowledges do not differ, they are distinguished solely by the difference in the modes of activity that cognize them. By means of the four modes of activity, impermanence and so forth, the knowledge of suffering is established; by means of the four modes of activity, cause, origination, and so forth, the knowledge of origination is established. Another explanation: the modes of activity reside in the objective domain; although the essences of the objective domains of these two knowledges do not differ, based on the difference in modes of activity they are divided into suffering and origination. Another explanation: modes of activity pertain commonly to both the cognizing subject and the cognized domain. Because those eight kinds of modes of activity—impermanence and so forth—exist upon the objective domain, when the cognizing subject resembles those eight modes of activity, it is called the cognizing subject. Although the essences of the objective domains of these two knowledges do not differ, they are divided into two based on the modes of activity. Fourth, by mode of activity and objective domain, the knowledges of cessation and the path are established. Because the modes of activity of these two have a difference—one produces the four modes of activity of cessation and so forth, and the other produces the four modes of activity of the path and so forth. The three explanations of mode of activity should be understood by analogy with the preceding. Because the objective domains of these two have a difference—one takes the unconditioned as its objective domain, and one takes the conditioned as its objective domain. Due to the difference in modes of activity and the difference in objective domains, the knowledges of cessation and the path are established.