俱舍論記 7.107

7.107

「次說無色至謂自界四」者，此明無色界四心相生。問：身在下地能起上界生得善心不？解云：准前所引《正理論》文，定不能起。自古諸德皆云能起，如無學人身在欲界退起無色界惑，從何心起？既無煩惱，非染心生。彼無威儀、工巧、通果三無記心，異熟生心無起異地，以此故知非無記心生。亦不可說善心能生，唯退分定能生煩惱，得無學時不成就故。餘住等三不能生惑，不起上界生得善退，更起何心？以此故知，身在下地能起上地生得善心，退起煩惱。又云：身在欲界起天眼通，從天眼通却入定時，若無生得善心，便不能生加行善心。以諸論說除變化心，不許餘無覆無記心生加行善心。若不許起上地生得善者，天眼體是無覆無記，云何能生加行善心？以此准知，身在下界起上界生得善心。今解不然。身在下地不能起上生得善心。如無學退，雖無退分定，《婆沙》、《正理》兩論意說：許住分定亦能生煩惱。古德不悟住分能生，所以種種穿鑿。又從天眼通後亦能生加行善心，以天眼通即是通果心故。若言變化心狹，若言通果心即寬。唯翻作變化心不言通果者，譯家謬耳。古德不悟二通是通果心攝，所以致斯謬解。

Regarding "Next, explaining the formless realm ... meaning the four of its own realm": this explains the mutual arising of the four minds of the formless realm. Question: When one's body is in a lower stage, can one produce an innate good mind of a higher realm? Explanation: Following the text of the Nyāyānusāra cited previously, one definitely cannot produce it. Past masters have all said that one can produce it: for example, when a non-trainee whose body is in the desire realm falls back and produces afflictions of the formless realm, from what mind do they arise? Since they are without defilements, they do not arise from a defiled mind. That person lacks the three unspecified minds of deportment, the arts and crafts, and the fruition of supernatural faculties, and the mind born of maturation never arises in a different stage; therefore we know they do not arise from an unspecified mind. Nor can it be said that a good mind can produce them, for only the absorption connected with falling back can produce afflictions, and when attaining the state of a non-trainee, one does not possess it; the remaining three, such as the absorption connected with maintenance, cannot produce afflictions. If one does not produce an innate good mind of a higher realm and fall back, what other mind could arise? Therefore we know that when one's body is in a lower stage, one can produce an innate good mind of a higher stage and fall back to produce afflictions. Furthermore, it is said: When one's body is in the desire realm and initiates the divine eye faculty, when entering absorption again after the divine eye faculty, if there were no innate good mind, one could not produce an acquired good mind. For the treatises say that except for the transformation mind, other non-defiled unspecified minds are not allowed to produce an acquired good mind. If one does not allow the arising of an innate good mind of a higher stage, then since the divine eye is in essence a non-defiled unspecified [state], how could it produce an acquired good mind? From this it can be inferred that when one's body is in a lower realm, one produces an innate good mind of a higher realm. Now the explanation is not so. When one's body is in a lower stage, one cannot produce an innate good mind of a higher stage. As for the falling back of a non-trainee, although they lack the absorption connected with falling back, the intended meaning of both the Vibhāṣā and the Nyāyānusāra is that they allow that the absorption connected with maintenance can also produce afflictions. The past masters did not realize that the maintenance division can produce them, and therefore made various strained interpretations. Furthermore, after the divine eye faculty, an acquired good mind can also be produced, because the divine eye faculty is precisely a mind of the fruition of supernatural faculties. If one says "transformation mind", it is narrow; if one says "mind of the fruition of supernatural faculties", it is broad. Translating it only as "transformation mind" without mentioning the "fruition of supernatural faculties" was merely an error by the translator. The past masters did not realize that the two supernatural faculties are subsumed under the mind of the fruition of supernatural faculties, which is why they arrived at this mistaken interpretation.