俱舍論記 4.260

4.260

「無無窮過至後後轉增」者，釋。法之得故名為法得，即是大得。大得之得名為得得，即小得也。大得力強成就二種，得得力劣唯成一種。故初剎那於三法中，大得得二、小得得一。此三落謝第二剎那，隨前三法起三法得、起三得得，六法俱起。此六落謝，足前成九。第三剎那，於前九法起九法得、起九得得，十八俱起。如是諸得，後後剎那展轉增多，如理應釋。問：如第一剎那三法俱起，各有大、小四相。此之四相為更起得得？為三法中得得？若更起得，得復有相、相復有得，便有無窮。若不起得，此誰得耶？解云：即三法中得得。如初三法各有大、小四相，三九總成二十七法。於此法中，若大得得十八法，謂得本法并本法上大、小四相，又得小得并小得上大、小四相。若小得得九法，謂得大得并大得上大、小四相。由此故無無窮過。理實初念有二十七法，但言三者，且據法體不論能相。故《婆沙》一百五十八云「如是說者，法與生等同一得得，相與所相極親近故。由此善通色蘊、行蘊一得得等。」又云「如前無窮過失，具作問答。」廣如彼說。問：第二剎那有三大得、有三小得，復各得幾法？解云：若大得各得十八法，謂得過去本法及本法上大、小四相，又得同時小得并小得上大、小四相。若小得各得九法，謂各得大得并大得上大、小四相。又解：大得各得十法，謂得過去二十七法中隨得一法，又得同時小得并小得上大、小四相。若小得得九法，如前釋。雖有兩解，前解為勝。若據無為，大得得十法，謂得無為，及得小得并小得上大、小四相。小得得九法，謂得大得并大得上大、小四相。故《婆沙》云「有為、無為一得得。」問：如得既然，非得復非得幾法？解云：非得必無法俱非得，但有法前、法後非得。應知非得非得九法，謂非得法體并法體上大、小四相。法體現前必無非得，故不得望法俱以說也。故望大得，小九法也。言得非相翻立者，隨其所應非要數等。又解：非得唯非得一法。雖有兩解，前解為勝。

"There is no fault of infinite regress... progressively increase later and later": this explains. The possession of a dharma is called the 'possession of the dharma' (dharma-prāpti), which is the major possession (mahāprāpti). The possession of the major possession is called the 'possession of possession' (prāpti-prāpti), which is the minor possession (anuprāpti). The major possession has strong power and achieves two kinds; the possession of possession has weak power and achieves only one kind. Therefore, in the first moment, among the three dharmas, the major possession possesses two, and the minor possession possesses one. When these three elapse into the past, in the second moment, following the former three dharmas, three possessions of the dharmas arise, and three possessions of possession arise, so that six dharmas arise together. When these six elapse into the past, added to the former they make nine. In the third moment, with respect to the former nine dharmas, nine possessions of the dharmas arise, and nine possessions of possession arise, so that eighteen arise together. In this way, all the possessions progressively increase in subsequent moments, which should be explained in accordance with reason. Question: In the first moment, when three dharmas arise together, each has the four major and minor characteristics. Do these four characteristics further generate possession of possession, or are they possessed by the possessions among the three dharmas? If they generate further possessions, then the possessions will further have characteristics and the characteristics will further have possessions, resulting in an infinite regress. If they do not generate possessions, then by what are these possessed? Answer: They are possessed by the possessions among the three dharmas. Just as the initial three dharmas each have the four major and minor characteristics, three times nine makes twenty-seven dharmas in total. Among these dharmas, the major possession possesses eighteen dharmas, namely possessing the root dharma together with the four major and minor characteristics on the root dharma, and also possessing the minor possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the minor possession. The minor possession possesses nine dharmas, namely possessing the major possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the major possession. Because of this, there is no fault of infinite regress. In principle, there are actually twenty-seven dharmas in the first moment; mentioning only three is just based on the substances of the dharmas without discussing the characterizing factors. Therefore Mahāvibhāṣā 158 says: 'The correct position is that a dharma and its arising and so forth are possessed by a single possession, because the characteristic and the characterized are extremely close. Thereby, it is well explained that the form aggregate, formation aggregate, and so forth are possessed by a single possession.' It also says: 'The questions and answers regarding the fault of infinite regress mentioned before are presented in detail.' It is broadly as explained there. Question: In the second moment there are three major possessions and three minor possessions; how many dharmas does each possess? Answer: Each major possession possesses eighteen dharmas, namely possessing the past root dharma and the four major and minor characteristics on the root dharma, and also possessing the simultaneous minor possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the minor possession. Each minor possession possesses nine dharmas, namely each possessing the major possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the major possession. Another explanation: Each major possession possesses ten dharmas, namely possessing any one dharma among the past twenty-seven dharmas, and also possessing the simultaneous minor possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the minor possession. The minor possession possesses nine dharmas, as explained before. Although there are two explanations, the former explanation is superior. If based on the unconditioned, the major possession possesses ten dharmas, namely possessing the unconditioned, and possessing the minor possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the minor possession. The minor possession possesses nine dharmas, namely possessing the major possession together with the four major and minor characteristics on the major possession. Therefore the Mahāvibhāṣā states: 'Conditioned and unconditioned are possessed by a single possession.' Question: If possession is like this, then how many dharmas does non-possession non-possess? Answer: Non-possession definitely cannot have non-possession simultaneous with the dharma; there is only non-possession prior to the dharma and posterior to the dharma. One should know that non-possession non-possesses nine dharmas, namely the substance of the dharma and the four major and minor characteristics on the substance of the dharma. When the substance of the dharma is present, there definitely cannot be non-possession; therefore it cannot be spoken of with respect to being simultaneous with the dharma. Hence, relative to the major possession, it is nine dharmas less. The statement that possession and non-possession are established by inversion means that they follow what is appropriate, and their numbers do not necessarily have to be equal. Another explanation: Non-possession non-possesses only one dharma. Although there are two explanations, the former explanation is superior.