俱舍論記 27.101

27.101

「非天眼通至死生智名」者，答。非天眼通能知語、意。以天眼通但知色處，有別勝智是通眷屬，依聖身起能如是知。此眷屬智是天眼通力所引故，所以與通合立死生智名。問：何故死生智是天眼通所引眷屬？解云：謂天眼通於現在世見有情類死此生彼，其死生智復知有情死此生彼，流類相似故由彼引是彼眷屬，名天眼通。如變化心是神境智證通攝，彼通能作運身等用。彼變化心、能變化事流類相似，故在彼攝。若說天眼通名死生智，從果為名。若說死生智名天眼通，就因為名。問：若說死生智名天眼通，何故《婆沙》七十六云「死生智觀未來事。」解云：彼據眷屬，對宿住說言觀未來。又問：若死生智能緣未來，何故《婆沙》三十云「死生智力，過去緣過去、現在緣現在、未來生法緣未來，若不生法緣三世。」解云：彼據根本，不言緣未來。或據眷屬，眷屬有二：一緣未來、二緣現在，此據緣現。又問：若死生智通緣三業，何故《婆沙》三十云「死生智力緣色處。」解云：彼據根本言緣色處，若據眷屬通緣三業。或據眷屬，眷屬有二：一緣色處、二緣三業，彼據緣色處說。又問：若死生智是天眼通，應是無記。何故《婆沙》三十云「十力唯善。」解云：彼據眷屬說，死生智力唯是善性。若據根本，天眼通說唯是無記。若據現起緣境寬狹，應知天眼通狹，唯緣現在色處；死生智寬，通緣五蘊，或緣現在、或緣未來。

As for "It is not that the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye … is called the knowledge of death and birth": This is the answer. It is not that the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye can know speech and mind. Because the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye knows only the āyatana of visible form, there is a distinct superior knowledge that is the retinue of the supernormal knowledge, arising based on the body of an ārya, which can know in this way. Because this retinue knowledge is induced by the power of the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye, it is jointly given the name 'knowledge of death and birth' together with the supernormal knowledge. Question: Why is the knowledge of death and birth a retinue induced by the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye? Explanation: The supernormal knowledge of the divine eye sees sentient beings dying here and being born there in the present period, and the knowledge of death and birth further knows sentient beings dying here and being born there; their types of flow are similar, so being induced by the former, it is its retinue and is called the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye. Just as the mind of transformation is subsumed under the supernormal knowledge of realizing psychic power, and that supernormal knowledge can perform functions such as transporting the body; that mind of transformation and the transformed objects it produces are similar in their types of flow, and so it is subsumed under it. If one says that the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye is called the knowledge of death and birth, the name is given in terms of the fruit. If one says that the knowledge of death and birth is called the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye, the name is given in terms of the cause. Question: If the knowledge of death and birth is called the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye, why does the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 76, say: "The knowledge of death and birth observes future events"? Explanation: That is based on the retinue; speaking in contrast to knowledge of past abodes, it is said to observe the future. Another question: If the knowledge of death and birth can take the future as an object, why does the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 30, say: "For the power of the knowledge of death and birth, past [knowledge] takes the past as object, present [knowledge] takes the present as object, and future dharmas that arise take the future as object, whereas dharmas that do not arise take the three times as object"? Explanation: That is based on the fundamental [supernormal knowledge], not stating that it takes the future as object. Alternatively, it is based on the retinue: the retinue is twofold—one taking the future as object and the other taking the present as object; this is based on taking the present as object. Another question: If the knowledge of death and birth universally takes the three karmas as objects, why does the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 30, say: "The power of the knowledge of death and birth takes the āyatana of visible form as object"? Explanation: That is based on the fundamental, saying it takes the āyatana of visible form as object; if based on the retinue, it universally takes the three karmas as objects. Alternatively, it is based on the retinue: the retinue is twofold—one taking the āyatana of visible form as object, and the other taking the three karmas as objects; that is stated based on taking the āyatana of visible form as object. Another question: If the knowledge of death and birth is the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye, it should be indeterminate. Why does the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 30, say: "The ten powers are exclusively wholesome"? Explanation: That is stated based on the retinue: the power of the knowledge of death and birth is exclusively wholesome in nature. If based on the fundamental, the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye is exclusively indeterminate. If viewed in terms of the breadth or narrowness of the objects taken by their actual arisings, one should know that the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye is narrow, taking only the present āyatana of visible form as object, whereas the knowledge of death and birth is broad, universally taking the five skandhas as object, taking either the present or the future as object.