俱舍論記 3.49

3.49

「若在修道至名為已知」者，約修道立已知。若在修道，於上、下八諦無未曾知當知，以知八諦皆周遍故。但為斷除餘隨眠故，即於彼諦復數數了知，是故說彼行者名為已知。修道初念道類智時，於上界道爾時正知，雖如七智而名已知者，已後無量無邊諸智皆與前別，以少從多總名已知。故《婆沙》一百四十三云「問：第十六心應如七智，何故獨說為已知根？非已知而知故。答：此亦從多分說。謂初剎那雖與七智相似，後諸剎那皆與彼異，從多分說悉名已知根，一類性故。有說：此後更無未已知道所凌所覆，不以下著上令不得自在，必當爾故。於知言已知，如去時名已去，彼亦如是（已上論文）。」問：道類智至第二念為所緣境，爾時正知，何故名已知耶？解云：約諦作法，不約剎那，以少從多名為已知。如大海一渧、妙高一塵，不可說言塵等未度。又解：道類忍，智眷屬故，亦名為知。問：道類忍後，道類智創緣，如何名已知？解云：約諦作法，不約剎那，以少從多總名已知。如大海一渧、妙高一塵，據此義邊七智亦名已知。知諦未盡，中間起故，不名已知。

Regarding "If on the path of cultivation […] is called one who has known": this establishes 'one who has known' in terms of the path of cultivation. If on the path of cultivation, regarding the eight truths of the higher and lower [realms], there is no 'will know what was not yet known', because knowledge of the eight truths is fully comprehensive. It is only in order to abandon the remaining latent afflictions that one repeatedly and fully knows those very truths; therefore, that practitioner is called 'one who has known'. At the initial moment of the path of cultivation, at the time of the subsequent knowledge of the path, one correctly knows the path of the higher realms; although this is like the seven knowledges, the reason it is called 'one who has known' is that the immeasurable and boundless knowledges that follow are all different from the preceding ones, and following the majority, it is collectively called 'one who has known'. Therefore, the *Mahāvibhāṣā*, fascicle 143, states: 'Question: The sixteenth mind-moment should be like the seven knowledges; why is it spoken of uniquely as the faculty of one who has known? For it is not knowing after having already known. Answer: This also is spoken of according to the majority. That is to say, although the initial moment is similar to the seven knowledges, all subsequent moments are different from them; speaking according to the majority, they are all called the faculty of one who has known, because they are of a uniform nature. Some say: After this, there is no longer any path of not having known that oppresses or covers it; it is not obstructed by the lower clinging to the higher so that it cannot attain mastery; it is bound to be so. With regard to knowing, it is called "already known", just as at the time of going it is called "already gone"; that is also like this' (end of treatise passage). Question: When the subsequent knowledge of the path reaches the second moment as a cognitive object, at that time one correctly knows it; why is it called 'already known'? The explanation says: The principle is applied in terms of the truths, not in terms of moments; following the majority, it is called 'already known'. Just as with a single drop in the great ocean or a single dust mote on Mount Meru, one cannot say that the dust mote and so forth are not yet crossed over. Another explanation says: Because the subsequent patience of the path is an attendant of knowledge, it is also called 'knowing'. Question: After the subsequent patience of the path, when the subsequent knowledge of the path first cognizes its object, how can it be called 'already known'? The explanation says: The principle is applied in terms of the truths, not in terms of moments; following the majority, it is collectively called 'already known'. Just as with a single drop in the great ocean or a single dust mote on Mount Meru, according to this sense, the seven knowledges are also called 'already known'. But because the knowing of the truths is not yet complete and they arise in the intermediate stages, they are not called 'already known'.