俱舍論記 2.113

2.113

Regarding 'The treatise states... are all not to be abandoned': this explains the first two lines. Abandonment means severing the bonds and realizing detachment from bondage. The fourth fascicle of the Samayapradīpikā states: 'First is abandonment by intrinsic nature (svabhāva-prahāṇa); second is abandonment through the cognitive object (ālambana-prahāṇa). If a dharma is a defilement (saṃyojana) or a single fruit, etc., when the antidote arises, abandonment is attained with respect to it; this is called abandonment by intrinsic nature. Because that is abandoned, detachment from bondage is attained with respect to the objective entity, without necessarily attaining non-possession (aprāpti) within it; this is called abandonment through the cognitive object.' Explanation: Both intrinsic nature and cognitive object refer to detachment from bondage as abandonment. 'Etc.' includes possession (prāpti). In accord with that treatise text, on the side where the four characteristics and possession of defilements, etc., become non-possessed, it is also called abandonment by intrinsic nature. If it is abandonment of the objective bond, it is based on the defilements cognizing it being thoroughly exhausted before it is termed abandonment, not necessarily non-possession. It is detailed in the Nyāyānusāra. Regarding 'fifteen elements are abandoned only through cultivation': the five faculties, odour, taste, and tangible are non-defiled, and are material dharmas, so they are abandoned through objective bonds. Visible form and sound are directly generated by minds abandoned through cultivation, and are material dharmas, so they are abandoned through objective bonds. If the five consciousness elements are wholesome or indeterminate, they are non-defiled and abandoned through objective bonds. Those that are defiled arise through confusion regarding phenomena; all are abandoned only through cultivation. Lacking the characteristic of being abandoned through seeing, they do not extend to abandonment through seeing; being entirely not unconditioned/untainted (anāsrava), they do not extend to non-abandonment. The last three extend to all three: anuśayas abandoned through seeing and their associated dharmas arise through confusion regarding principle. The four characteristics and possession are directly generated by those defilements of seeing; all are abandoned through seeing. Lacking the characteristic of being abandoned through cultivation, they do not extend to cultivation; because they are not unpolluted, they do not extend to non-abandonment. Another explanation says: the eighty-eight defilements, arising through confusion regarding principle, are abandoned through seeing. Dharmas associated with defilement are intimate with respect to the defilement, being bound by association (saṃprayuktaka-bandhana) and acting as saṃprayuktaka-hetu; therefore they are abandoned along with the defilement. Although the four characteristics are not associated with defilement, they belong to the same category of bondage and are sahabhū-hetu; therefore they are also abandoned along with the defilement. Although possession is neither associated with nor coexistent with that defilement, because it belongs to the same category of bondage, when defilement exists it exists, and when defilement is absent it is absent. Although it is an objective bond, it is also intimate with respect to defilement; hence it is abandoned along with the defilement. Because they are not confused regarding phenomena, etc., they do not extend to abandonment through cultivation. Because they are dharmas to be abandoned, they do not extend to non-abandonment. All remaining tainted [dharmas]: if they are wholesome immaterial dharmas or anivṛtāvyākṛta, being non-defiled, they are abandoned through objective bonds. If they are defilements and their associated dharmas, they arise through confusion regarding phenomena. The four characteristics and possession are directly generated by those defilements of cultivation. If they are wholesome or defiled avijñapti, they are directly generated by minds abandoned through cultivation, and being material dharmas are abandoned through objective bonds; all are abandoned through cultivation. Lacking the characteristic of being abandoned through seeing, they do not extend to abandonment through seeing; because they are not unpolluted, they do not extend to non-abandonment; all unpolluted dharmas, not being bound by bondage, are entirely not to be abandoned.