俱舍論記 26.93

26.93

「論曰至名四實一」者，此下釋第一句。此敘異說是不正義。有餘師說：十六行相名雖十六實事唯七。謂緣苦諦四種行相，治四倒故，名、實俱四。緣餘三諦四種行相，非治倒故，名雖有四，實事唯一。故《婆沙》七十九云「問：何故緣苦有四行相，名有四種，實體亦四。緣餘三諦而不爾耶？答：緣苦諦行相是四顛倒近對治故。如四顛倒名、體各四，緣餘三諦所起行相非四顛倒近對治故，名雖有四，實體唯一。

[On the text from] "The treatise says" down to "[the remaining three truths each] are four in name but one in reality": below this explains the first line. This presents a dissenting view, which is not the orthodox position. Other masters say: Although the sixteen aspects are sixteen in name, in real entity there are only seven. Namely, the four aspects that take the truth of suffering as object, because they remedy the four distortions, are four in both name and reality; the four aspects that take the remaining three truths as object, because they do not remedy distortions, although four in name, are only one in real entity. Thus the *Mahāvibhāṣā*, fascicle seventy-nine, states: "Question: Why is it that the aspects taking suffering as object have four names and also four real entities, whereas those taking the other three truths are not like this? Answer: Because the aspects taking the truth of suffering as object are direct remedies for the four distortions. Just as the four distortions are four in both name and entity, the aspects arisen taking the other three truths as object are not direct remedies for the four distortions; hence, although they have four names, their real entity is only one."