俱舍論記 3

English (machine translation) 3

Language: English

3.1

Composed by the Śramaṇa Śākyapragupta (Puguang).

Regarding the "Indriya-nirdeśa": because of their superior function and predominance, they are called faculties (indriya); because this chapter explains them in detail, it is called an exposition (nirdeśa). As for why faculties are explained next after dhātus: the "Dhātu-nirdeśa" explains the essences (svabhāva) of all dharmas, while the "Indriya-nirdeśa" explains the functions (kāritra) of all dharmas. Relying on essence, function arises; therefore faculties are explained next. Question: This chapter explains the functions of conditioned [dharmas] in detail; why is it titled with "faculties"? Answer: Although this chapter explains the functions of conditioned [dharmas], because faculties are analysed first and their function is predominant, it is titled with them. Question: The Miśrakābhidharmahṛdaya calls it the "Saṃskāra-nirdeśa", and the Nyāyānusāra calls it the "Viśeṣa-nirdeśa"; why does this treatise call it the "Indriya-nirdeśa"? Answer: In this chapter, the intention is to explain function: faculties definitely manifest function. Although "saṃskāra" means producing action, it can also manifest flux; hence its manifestation of function is not definitive. Although "viśeṣa" (distinction) also manifests different functions, it can manifest the distinction between existence and non-existence, or manifest the distinction between conditioned and unconditioned; hence its manifestation of function is also not definitive. Therefore our treatise master titled it with "faculties".

3.4

Regarding [the passage] "Having thus [explained the essences of conditioned and unconditioned dharmas] through the dhātus... what is the meaning of indriya?": within the overall explanation of defiled (sāsrava) and undefiled (anāsrava) dharmas, this chapter's text is second in explaining the functions of all dharmas. Therein, first, it explains the twenty-two faculties; second, it explains co-arising dharmas; third, it explains the six causes (hetu) and four conditions (pratyaya). Below, the first [part] explains the twenty-two faculties, which is to analyse function with respect to the faculties. Therein, first is explaining the meaning of "faculty"; second is the retention and elimination of faculties; third is explaining the essence of faculties; fourth is analysing various approaches; fifth is miscellaneous classifications. Now, in the first [part], explaining the meaning of "faculty": first is presenting its own school; second is recounting other schools. Below, it presents its own school, which is the Sarvāstivāda. It takes up the preceding text to introduce the question.

3.5

Regarding [the passage] "Supremacy, sovereignty... the meaning of predominance of a faculty": Answer: In the grammatical science (śabdavidyā) of the western regions, when forming a word there is the verbal root (dhātu) and the affix (pratyaya). "Supremacy" and "sovereignty" are the verbal root, and "illumination" is the affix. Through this verbal root and affix, together the meaning of predominance (adhipatitva) of a faculty is formed. Therefore Nyāyānusāra, fascicle nine, states: "This meaning of predominance is made evident through the meaning of the verbal root. The verbal root is said to be *idi* or said to be *indi*. Supremacy and sovereignty are the meaning of *idi*; shining and clear illumination are the meaning of *indi*. According to this, radiant illumination is called indriya." Explanation: Each of the twenty-two faculties has a predominant function in matters. What is the meaning of predominance? It is possessing great causal efficacy and extremely obvious characteristics; only then is it called predominant. This meaning of predominance is made evident through the meaning of the verbal root. "Root" (dhātu) has the meaning of essence. In the western regions, word elements have three hundred verses—namely *idi*, *indi*, and so forth—each having multiple meanings. In explaining that supremacy and sovereignty are the meaning of *idi*, the Sanskrit explanation says *idi parameśvarye*. Herein, *parama* means supreme, *īśvara* means sovereign, and *-e* is the seventh case-ending (locative), meaning "in"; that is, the word *idi* is established in the meaning of supremacy and sovereignty. Supremacy and sovereignty are the meaning proper to the verbal root *idi*, also called the root-meaning. In saying that shining and clear illumination are the meaning of *indi*, the Sanskrit explanation says *indi dīptau*. Herein, *dīp-* means illumination, and *-au* is also the seventh case-ending, meaning that the word *indi* is established in the meaning of illumination. Illumination is the meaning proper to *indi*, also called the root-meaning. Of these two kinds of root-meanings: the former is supremacy and sovereignty, which is possessing great causal efficacy; the latter is illumination, which is extremely obvious characteristics. "Radiant illumination": illumination in Sanskrit is *indanti*, which is an affix. Aiding the verbal root *idi*, it is called *indriyam*, translated as "faculty" (indriya), manifesting the meaning of predominance. Radiant in Sanskrit is *dīpti*, which is an affix. Aiding the aforementioned verbal root *indi*, it is called *indriyam*, translated as "faculty", manifesting the meaning of predominance. This *indriyam* fully contains possessing great causal efficacy and extremely obvious characteristics; it is translated as "faculty", both manifesting predominance. The Kośa explains relying on the former meaning; hence it says that supremacy, sovereignty, and illumination are called indriya. That is, the Nyāyānusāra takes the affix of illumination to aid *idi*, *idi* being supremacy and sovereignty. Due to the affix aiding the root, it forms *indriyam*, translated as "faculty". From these [meanings of] supremacy and so forth, together the meaning of predominance of a faculty is formed. Another explanation: because the essence of a faculty is superior, it is called supreme; because the function of a faculty is superior, it is called sovereign; because essence and function are both superior, it is called illuminating.

3.6

Regarding [the passage] "This predominance is in relation to what with respect to what?": this questions.

3.7

Regarding [the passage] "The verse says... each has its distinct predominance": this answers in verse.

3.8

Regarding [the passage] "The treatise says... because of fragrance, taste, and tangibles": this explains the first line [of verse]. If endowed with the five faculties, the body is adorned; whenever there is any lack, the body becomes ugly. For the body faculty, there is never a total lack; speaking of "lack" is based on the remaining four faculties. Or it is based on lacking a minor part, such as having no hands and so forth. Or the remaining four faculties may also lack a minor part; all such are called ugly. Regarding "guiding and nurturing": the eye sees dangers and avoids them, the ear hears dangers and avoids them; these guide and nurture the body. The body depends on material food to attain predominance; material food takes fragrance, taste, and tangibles as its essence. The nose smells, the tongue tastes, and the body feels; because these three faculties are capable of consuming material food, the body attains predominance; this is called nurturing the body. "Generating consciousness, etc.": "etc." includes associated mental factors. "Unshared objects": "objects" refers to visible forms and so forth; because the five faculties apprehend them separately, they are called unshared.

3.9

Regarding [the passage] "Female, male, life, and mind... differences in breasts, etc.": below, this explains the second line [of verse]. "Difference in sentient beings": at the beginning of the kalpa, the appearance and kind of sentient beings were all equal; through the arising of the two faculties, sentient beings are caused to be distinguished into female and male classes. "Difference in discrimination": through these two faculties, a male body's appearance is coarse and large, its voice is robust and resonant, and its breasts are small; a female body's appearance is delicate and weak, its voice is fine and quiet, and its breasts are large. "Etc." includes activities and so forth. These differences in appearance and so forth can give rise to discriminative understandings of difference; hence they are called "difference in discrimination". Another explanation: appearances and so forth are discriminated as distinctly different, which is called "difference in discrimination". The former "difference in sentient beings" is based on general characteristics; the latter "difference in discrimination" is based on specific characteristics. Furthermore, Nyāyānusāra, fascicle nine, states: "Some say that because of differences in courage and cowardice, it is called 'difference in sentient beings'; because of differences in clothing and adornments, it is called 'difference in discrimination'." This master explains it based on internal and external.

3.10

Regarding [the passage] "Some say that in these... all pure dharmas": this recounts an alternative view. In two kinds of predominance, whichever of these male and female faculties is attained has a predominant function with respect to defilement and with respect to purity; hence it says "in two". Predominant in defilement means attaining non-restraint (asaṃvara), creating immediate-retribution karma (ānantarya-karma), and being able to sever the roots of wholesomeness; predominant in purity means attaining restraint (saṃvara), attaining the fruits [of the path], and separating from defilement. The ṣaṇḍha and so forth have no such things. Predominant defilement and purity both rely on an excellent body; because this [type of] body is inferior, it is not a basis for them—just as a saline field does not grow foul weeds, so there is no non-restraint, no five immediate retributions, and no severing the roots of wholesomeness, which are defiled dharmas; just as in a saline field fine sprouts are not planted, so there is also no restraint, no attaining of fruits, and no separation from defilement, which are pure dharmas. Each is explained separately, as stated in the "Karma-nirdeśa". One should know that both ṣaṇḍha and paṇḍaka are called eunuchs (huángmén); therefore the "Karma-nirdeśa" states: "Two kinds of eunuchs and hermaphrodites; the ṣaṇḍha is exclusively without faculties." Those without faculties are of two kinds: first, innate ṣaṇḍhas; second, mutilated ṣaṇḍhas. The paṇḍaka is exclusively with faculties; those with faculties are of three kinds: first, jealous [paṇḍakas]; second, half-month [paṇḍakas]; third, irrigated [paṇḍakas]. Another explanation: the ṣaṇḍha is exclusively without faculties, while the paṇḍaka applies to both with faculties and without faculties; innate and mutilated also apply to the paṇḍaka. If interpreted this way, paṇḍaka is broad and ṣaṇḍha is narrow. If one is a ṣaṇḍha, one is a paṇḍaka; there are those who are paṇḍakas but not ṣaṇḍhas, namely the jealous, half-month, and irrigated. Therefore the Abhidharmasamuccaya, fascicle eight, states: "Furthermore, paṇḍakas are of five kinds: namely innate paṇḍakas, jealous paṇḍakas, half-month paṇḍakas, irrigated paṇḍakas, and excised paṇḍakas." Explanation: "innate" means by original nature; "jealous" means the male vigor arises only upon seeing another engaging in sexual intercourse; "half-month" means capable of male activities for half a month, but not for the other half; "irrigated" means the male vigor arises only upon bathing, washing, and irrigation; "excised" means being mutilated. Question: If the innate and mutilated among ṣaṇḍhas and paṇḍakas lack male faculties, why does the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle ninety, in explaining the four propositions on being free from desire being called a 'man', state: "There may be one who achieves the male faculty but is not called a man, such as ṣaṇḍhas, paṇḍakas, and so forth"? Explanation: Male faculties are of two kinds: first, the male faculty of a man; second, the male faculty of a non-man. Saying that the ṣaṇḍha and so forth do not achieve it is based on the male faculty of a man who possesses ambition and vitality; saying that the ṣaṇḍha and so forth achieve it is based on the male faculty of a non-man who lacks ambition and vitality. Another explanation: male faculties are of two kinds: first, complete attainment, meaning having the capacity to separate from desire and so forth; second, incomplete attainment, meaning lacking the capacity and being unable to separate from desire and so forth. Saying that it is not attained is based on the first explanation; saying that it is attained is based on the second explanation. Another explanation: speaking from the majority, although a ṣaṇḍha does not achieve the male faculty, the paṇḍaka and the hermaphrodite (ubhayavyañjanaka) do achieve the male faculty. Its mentioning the ṣaṇḍha is included because of the parallel phrasing. "And so forth" includes hermaphrodites.

3.11

Regarding [the passage] "The two of the life faculty are... and being able to sustain": this explains the two kinds of predominance of the life faculty: first, by reason of the life faculty, it is able to continue what preceded with respect to the commonality of sentient beings (nikāya-sabhāga); second, by reason of life, it is able to sustain without interruption with respect to the commonality of sentient beings. Being able to continue is in relation to the preceding; being able to sustain is based on the present.

3.12

"The mind faculty is sovereign in two respects... [up to] sovereignly followed by all": this explains the mind faculty's sovereignty in two respects. First, its sovereignty in prolonging future existence: the terminal mind of the intermediate existence, accompanied by craving and so forth, is able to prolong birth-existence; hence it is called "able to prolong future existence." "Gandharva": gandha means "fragrance" and rva means "seeking," because it seeks fragrance as food; or it is called "eating," because it feeds on fragrance. It is another name for the intermediate existence. Second, its sovereignty in being sovereignly followed: quoting the sūtra by way of explanation, "the mind can lead the world" expresses sovereignty, meaning that because it can lead all the world it is called sovereign; "the mind can completely encompass [all]" expresses being followed, meaning that because the mind can completely encompass all phenomena it is called followed. Another explanation says: "the mind can lead the world" expresses being followed, and "the mind can completely encompass [all]" expresses sovereignty. Yet another explanation says: both lines apply to both sovereignty and being followed; because it has power it is called sovereign, and because it turns in accordance with objects it is called followed.

3.13

"The five feelings, beginning with pleasure... [up to] because they foster it": this explains the third and fourth lines. The five feelings have sovereign efficacy regarding defilement, because the anuśayas such as greed comply with and foster them. They comply with and foster them either through association or through intentional object. Although these five feelings are also found in wholesome states, their efficacy in defilement is predominant, so they are said to have sovereignty regarding defilement. That the five faculties beginning with faith and the three undefiled faculties have sovereignty regarding purification is self-evident.

3.14

"Other masters say... [up to] such is the tradition": this presents the view of other masters. The five feelings, beginning with pleasure, are not only sovereign regarding defilement, but are also sovereign regarding purification, as the sūtra states: "Because of ease, the mind attains samādhi; because of revulsion toward suffering, one brings about the bliss of nirvāṇa." Faith entails seeking renunciation with joy. "Six" refers to the six sense objects, because joy, grief, and equanimity take the six sense objects as their referents. "Renunciation" refers to nirvāṇa; wholesome joy, grief, and equanimity serve as bases for renunciation, hence they are called "bases of renunciation." Thus the treatise says below: "Bases of renunciation are the wholesome feelings." Up to this point, the faculties' sovereignty has been explained; such is the tradition of the masters of the Vibhāṣā.

3.15

"Other masters say... [up to] the eye and the rest are established as faculties": below this is the second part, presenting the other masters. Other masters who maintain that consciousness sees and the like speak as follows: "Guiding and nourishing the body is not the function of the eye and the rest, but is the sovereignty of consciousness, because it is consciousness that recognizes dangers so as to avoid them, and partakes of edible food. The function of seeing visible forms and the rest is likewise not distinct from consciousness; hence unshared functions are not the distinct sovereign efficacy of the eye and the other faculties." This refutes the earlier masters' claims of guiding and nourishing the body and of unshared functions. Why is beautifying the body not refuted here? In the first fascicle it was already refuted: "If it was originally like this, who would call it ugly?" Or, as the earlier text states: "If it were for beautifying the body and initiating speech, only the physical bases would be required; what would be the use of the two faculties?" For this reason it is not refuted here. As for giving rise to consciousness and the like, the masters of consciousness-seeing also accept it, and therefore do not separately refute it.

3.16

"If so, how [are they established]?": this is a query.

3.17

"The verse says... [up to] sovereignty over nirvāṇa and so forth": this answers in verse.

3.18

"The commentary says... [up to] each is established as a faculty": the five consciousnesses each taking their own object are called consciousnesses of distinct objects. The mental consciousness taking all objects generally is called consciousness of all objects, and is also called taking its own object. The six faculties are able to generate the six consciousnesses and possess sovereign efficacy; therefore, they are established as faculties.

3.19

"Do not visible form and the rest... [up to] also ought to be established as faculties?": an objection, drawing a parallel from the objects to the faculties.

3.20

"Objects in relation to consciousness... [up to] the same applies to dharmas": this explains it. Sovereign efficacy means preeminent and self-determined power. The eye is preeminent and self-determined regarding the consciousness that discerns visible form which it engenders. First, because it serves as a common cause for discerning manifold visible forms; that is, a single eye faculty can serve as a common cause for consciousnesses discerning manifold forms. Second, because consciousness varies in clarity and dullness following the eye faculty; that is, when the faculty is strong the consciousness is clear, and when the faculty is weak the consciousness is dull; hence it is called sovereign. Because it serves as a common cause it is called preeminent, and because it determines clarity and dullness it is called self-determined; or, because it determines clarity and dullness it is called preeminent, and because it serves as a common cause it is called self-determined; or both being a common cause and determining clarity and dullness are called preeminent and self-determined. Visible form is not so, because of two contrary facts. First, it is not a common cause: blue form can only generate a consciousness of blue and cannot generate a consciousness of yellow and so forth. Second, consciousness does not vary in clarity and dullness following the object: that is, consciousness does not have clarity or dullness following the strength or weakness of the object; sometimes when the object is weak consciousness is strong, as when viewing blue form; sometimes when the object is strong consciousness is weak, as when looking at the sun and the like. Because of these two contrary facts, it is not established as a faculty; and so on, up to the mind faculty regarding dharmas, which is likewise.

3.21

"From the body are further established... [up to] sovereignty over the two sexes": this explains the third and fourth lines. The female body is physically frail and weak, its voice is thin and quiet, its occupations are sewing clothes and the like, and its inclinations are cosmetics and the like. The male body is physically robust and large, its voice is vigorous and bright, its occupations are writing and the like, and its inclinations are bows, horses, and the like. The difference between the two sexes is due to the female and male faculties; therefore, the female and male faculties have sovereignty over the two sexes. The rest of the text is clear.

3.22

"Over the commonality of sentient beings... [up to] each can function as a faculty": this explains the second verse. Because the life faculty exists, the commonality is able to endure; therefore, over the commonality of sentient beings, life has sovereign efficacy. Because of the five feelings, the defilements arise; therefore, in defilement the five feelings have sovereign efficacy. The cited proofs are clear. The sūtra speaks in terms of three feelings without mentioning grief and joy, because grief is subsumed under suffering, and joy is subsumed under pleasure. The five faculties beginning with faith have sovereign efficacy in purification: through the power of these wholesome faculties of faith and the rest, defilements are subdued and the noble path is induced to arise. The rest of the text is clear.

3.23

"The three undefiled faculties... [up to] because they can achieve parinirvāṇa": this explains the third verse, elucidating the three undefiled faculties. The first induces the second; therefore, it has sovereign efficacy regarding [the state of] having known. The second induces the third; therefore, it has sovereign efficacy regarding [the state of] full knowledge. The third can realize nirvāṇa; therefore, it has sovereign efficacy regarding nirvāṇa. Only when the mind is free of defilements does one attain nirvāṇa; for it is not when the mind is not yet liberated from defilements that one can achieve parinirvāṇa. As for "successive [paths]," the second faculty is the path subsequent to the first faculty, and the third faculty is the path subsequent to the second faculty; hence they are called successive paths. The third faculty has sovereignty over nirvāṇa.

3.24

"The word 'and so forth' is to show that there is also another perspective": this separately explains the word "and so forth" (ādi).

3.25

"What is that other perspective?": a query.

3.26

"Namely, what is abandoned by vision... [up to] joy and bliss of liberation": this is the answer. In the cessation of the defilements abandoned by vision, the faculty of having not yet known has sovereign efficacy. In the cessation of the defilements abandoned by cultivation, the faculty of having known has sovereign efficacy. In abiding in the present life experiencing the joy of Dharma, the faculty of full knowledge has sovereign efficacy, because through this full knowledge one is able to experience the various joys and blisses in the body of liberation.

3.27

"If by sovereignty... [up to] because they have sovereign efficacy": from here down is the second section, clarifying the establishment and rejection of faculties. Within this, first is the presentation of their own school, and second is the presentation of other views. Below is the presentation of their own school, introducing the question to be explained. Within the question, first it asks from the standpoint of their own school, and second it asks from the standpoint of the Sāṃkhya. This is the question from their own school: in the twelve links of dependent origination, causes such as ignorance each distinctly possess sovereign efficacy toward effects such as saṃskāras; therefore, they should be established as faculties.

3.28

"Moreover, the organ of speech and the rest... [up to] because they have sovereignty": this asks from the standpoint of the Sāṃkhya. The Sāṃkhya school establishes twenty-five principles (tattvas). Regarding the twenty-five principles: First is the self (puruṣa); they postulate an eternal self whose essence is consciousness (cetanā), which in nature is only an experiencer (bhoktṛ) and not an agent (kartṛ); the other twenty-four principles are 'mine' (belongings of the self), being what the self experiences. Second is primordial nature (prakṛti), which has sattva, rajas, and tamas as its essence, also called pleasure, pain, and delusion, or grief, joy, and darkness; these three are like the ministers of the self. When the self desires to experience objects, they transform for the self; when they have not yet transformed, each abides in its own nature, hence the name primordial nature. Third, from primordial nature arises the intellect (mahat): when the self reflects and wishes to experience objects, at the moment when the three phenomena perceive and stir, because its nature is great, it is named mahat. Fourth, from mahat arises ego-sense (ahaṃkāra): because it conceives of that self, it is called ego-sense. Fifth, from ego-sense arise the five subtle elements (tanmātras), namely visible form, sound, odor, taste, and tangibility; adding the previous, these make nine. Sixth, from the five subtle elements arise the five gross elements (mahābhūtas), namely earth, water, fire, wind, and space; adding the previous, these make fourteen. That is, visible form can generate fire, because fire is red in color; sound can generate space, because sound exists in space; odor can generate earth, because there is much odor in earth; taste can generate water, because there is much taste in water; tangibility can generate wind, because wind can touch the body. Seventh, from the five gross elements arise the eleven faculties (indriyas), namely eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, hands, feet, the organ of excretion, the organ of generation, and the organ of speech. The organ of speech is the fleshy tongue; adding the previous, these make twenty-five. That is, fire can generate the eye, which in turn can see visible forms; space can generate the ear, which in turn can hear sounds; earth can generate the nose, which in turn can smell odors; water can generate the tongue, which in turn can taste flavors; wind can generate the body, which in turn can perceive tangibles. The five gross elements together can generate mind, hands, feet, the organ of excretion, the organ of generation, and the organ of speech. They postulate the physical heart as the mind. In that school's doctrine, all phenomena are eternal, like transforming gold into rings and bracelets: the gold color does not change, while the shapes of rings and the like differ. When the self desires to experience objects, from primordial nature arises mahat, from mahat arises ahaṃkāra, from ahaṃkāra arise the five subtle elements, from the five subtle elements arise the five gross elements, and from the five gross elements arise the eleven faculties. When the self does not experience objects, from the eleven faculties it returns back into the five gross elements, from the five gross elements back into the five subtle elements, from the five subtle elements back into ahaṃkāra, from ahaṃkāra back into mahat, and from mahat back into primordial nature. Here, the challenge is raised based on the five organs of action (karmendriyas) among the eleven faculties of their school. The organ of speech refers to the fleshy tongue, which has sovereignty over speaking; hands have sovereignty over grasping; feet have sovereignty over walking; the organ of excretion has sovereignty over eliminating waste; the organ of generation has sovereignty over the pleasures of sexual desire. Since these all possess sovereignty, they should be established as faculties.

3.29

"Things such as these... [up to] because of sovereign efficacy": this is the reply stating their own school's position, namely the Sarvāstivāda. These six internal sense bases together constitute a sentient being; they are the root of a sentient being and the basis of mind, all possessing the meaning of a faculty. That these six faculties have distinct characteristics is due to the female and male faculties. Furthermore, due to the life faculty, these six faculties endure for a single lifespan. That these six faculties become defiled is due to the five faculties of feeling. That these six faculties are able to serve as provisions for undefiled purification is due to the five faculties beginning with faith. That these six faculties become undefiled and purified is due to the last three faculties. Regarding differences: distinct abiding in both cases encompasses the six faculties, whereas defilement, provisions, and purification pertain only to the mind. Another explanation: the five categories from 'distinct characteristics' downward all pertain to this mind or to this sentient being; through these six categories, the establishment of the faculties is completely exhaustive. Those factors such as ignorance or the organ of speech do not possess the sovereign efficacy discussed here, and therefore should not be established as faculties.

3.30

"There are other masters who... [up to] establish twenty-two faculties": below this is the second part, presenting the other masters' views, which is the way the masters of consciousness-seeing and others establish faculties. Regarding "transmigration and cessation (pravṛtti and nivṛtti)," the Nyāyānusāra states: "The succession of birth and death is the meaning of transmigration; the cessation of birth and death is the meaning of cessation." That is the ultimate extinction of the six faculties. Also, the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 100, states: "Transmigration means taking rebirth again; cessation means heading toward nirvāṇa."

3.31

Regarding "The basis of transmigration... are the first fourteen faculties": in the state of transmigration, the first fourteen faculties are established in terms of four meanings. Transmigration within the three realms takes consciousness as primary, and the arising of consciousness necessarily relies on the six faculties. The generation of these six faculties is due to the female and male faculties. The duration of these six faculties is, furthermore, due to the life-faculty. The six faculties' enjoyment of objects of experience is, furthermore, due to the five sensations; because of those five sensations, the six faculties experience those objects. To enjoy objects of experience is called experiencing (lingna), which is distinct from sensation [as a mental factor itself].

3.32

Regarding "In the state of reversal... the sūtra establishes the sequence": in the state of reversal, the last eight faculties are established precisely in terms of four meanings. The purport of the Nyāyānusāra explains them in terms of the attainment of nirvāṇa; hence Nyāyānusāra fascicle 9 says: "The cessation of birth-and-death is the meaning of reversal, which is the ultimate annihilation of the six bases. The basis of this attainment refers to the five beginning with faith, because they are the most supreme causes for the growth of all wholesome roots. The initial uncontaminated faculty can produce this attainment, because it arises first within the assembly of the determined-in-the-right. The intermediate uncontaminated faculty causes this attainment to endure, because it arises continuously for a long period. The final uncontaminated faculty causes one to attain the enjoyment of dwelling happily in the present phenomena, because it is made manifest by it" (end of text of the treatise). That is, the basis of the attainment of reversal refers to the five faculties beginning with faith. Due to the initial uncontaminated [faculty], the attainment of nirvāṇa arises; due to the intermediate uncontaminated [faculty], the attainment of nirvāṇa endures; due to the final uncontaminated [faculty], the attainment of nirvāṇa is enjoyed as dwelling happily in the present phenomena. The quantity of the faculties is established according to these four meanings, without deficiency and without excess. It is precisely due to the causes and conditions of these four meanings of transmigration and reversal that the sūtras establish the order of the twenty-two faculties from first to last.

3.33

Regarding "The vocal organ should not be... because speech is only then accomplished": below, this is a separate refutation. This refutes the vocal organ. It is not appropriate that the vocal organ should be a faculty for speech, because this speech only succeeds by depending upon the habituation and learning of distinct words and so forth; thus we know that relative to speech, the vocal organ has no sovereign function. If the vocal organ could serve as a sovereign function for speech, a newborn possessing a tongue ought immediately to be able to speak.

3.34

Regarding "Hands and feet should not be... established as faculties": this refutes the hands and feet. Hands are for grasping, and feet are for walking; this grasping and walking have no nature distinct from the hands and feet themselves. That is to say, the hands and feet going from here to there is called distinct positions; raising, lowering, bending, and extending are called distinct characteristics. When these distinctions arise, they are called grasping and walking; apart from the hands and feet, there is no distinct grasping or walking. Furthermore, even apart from hands and feet, there are grasping and walking: like snakes and other belly-crawling creatures, who can walk though they have no feet, and can grasp and bind though they have no hands. Therefore, hands and feet cannot be established as faculties for that grasping and walking. If one obstinately clings [to this position], then since [walking] also depends on the belly, one ought to establish a belly-faculty.

3.35

Regarding "The excretory organ... because it is drawn and caused to emerge": this refutes the excretory organ. For the purpose of discharging excrement and defilement, the excretory organ should not be established as a faculty, because heavy objects in space by nature do not stay still, falling down universally whether internal or external, and not due to that place. If one obstinately clings [to this position], then because it also falls due to space, one ought to establish a space-faculty. Furthermore, the impurities within the body are drawn and made to emerge by the force of wind, which has nothing to do with that place. If one obstinately clings [to this position], then because it is drawn out by wind, one ought to establish a wind-faculty.

3.36

Regarding "The urinary organ... because of giving rise to this pleasure": this refutes the urinary organ. For the matter of generating sexual pleasure, the urinary organ should not be established as a faculty, because it is precisely the female and male faculties that can give rise to this pleasure; why is it necessary to posit the organ and separately establish it as a faculty?

3.37

Regarding "Furthermore, throats, teeth... should not be established as faculties": he adduces examples to refute by counterargument. If the throat for swallowing, teeth for chewing, eyelids for opening and closing, and joints for bending and stretching each have their own efficacy and should all be established as faculties; or, if all causes, each having efficacy toward their own produced effects, should all be established as faculties—and yet those throats, teeth, and so forth, although possessing efficacy, are not established as faculties because they lack a sovereign function; then this vocal organ and the rest, also lacking a sovereign function, should not be established as faculties. By this, the objection regarding ignorance and the rest is also resolved, or because the word "and so forth" also includes ignorance and the like.

Question: As for the twenty-two faculties, if their real entities are extracted according to the seventy-five dharmas, there are only thirteen. The male and female faculties are just the physical body-faculty; the five sensations are entirely subsumed under sensation; and the three uncontaminated faculties are just nine faculties. The thirteen referred to are: eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, mind, mindfulness, concentration, discernment, sensation, faith, vigor, and life. Why is it that among the seventy-five dharmas, only thirteen are established as faculties, while the remainder are not?

Explanation: Briefly following the Mahāvibhāṣā and so forth, their rejection or inclusion is as follows.
First, among the eleven rūpadharmas, the five [sense] faculties are exclusively internal and exclusively bases [of consciousness]; therefore, they are established as faculties. Matter (rūpa) and the rest are not like this, so they are not established as faculties. Male and female are established as faculties because they are the body-faculty itself.
Second, mind is internal and is also a basis [of consciousness], running through minds of the three natures and uniformly possessing sovereign function; therefore, it is established as a faculty.
Third, among the mental concomitants, only mindfulness, concentration, discernment, sensation, faith, and vigor are established as faculties. As for why the others are not established: if they accord with purification and are pre-eminent, they are established as faculties. Among the universal mental factors (mahābhūmika), mindfulness, concentration, discernment, and sensation are established as faculties. As for why the others are not: the three of mindfulness, concentration, and discernment accord with purification and are pre-eminent, so they are established as faculties. Attention (manaskāra), though leaning toward purification, is strong at first and weak later, so it is not established as a faculty. Resolve (adhimokṣa), though leaning toward purification, is strong in the state of no-more-learning where it establishes the aggregate of liberation, but is weak in the state of training; therefore, it is not established as a faculty.

Question: Concentration is also strong in meditative absorption and weak in distraction; why is it established as a faculty?
Answer: Concentration, even in a state of distraction, has strong one-pointedness. Conception, volition, contact, and desire lean toward defilement, so they are not established as faculties. Sensation, although broadly according with both defilement and purification and being strong in both, is established as a faculty by selecting the dharma provisionally from the side of what is wholesome. How do we know that it broadly accords with defilement and purification? As the Mahāvibhāṣā says: "There is an explanation that sensation, although it accords with the category of defilement, also interacts with wholesome dharmas, just as the warden of a prison, although his status is low, interacts with the noble and exalted." Therefore, among the universal mental factors, four are established as faculties and the remaining six are not.

Among the wholesome universal mental factors, faith and effort are established as faculties while the others are not, because faith is the root of all wholesome things, and no wholesome factor can be accomplished apart from faith; vigor can universally stimulate the manifold wholesome [dharmas], and no wholesome factor can be accomplished apart from vigor. These two accord with purification and are pre-eminent, so they are established as faculties. Shame and remorse, although capable of counteracting the unwholesome mind and the utterly dark category of intrinsic unwholesomeness, and obtaining the names "white" and "intrinsic goodness," yet lack a distinct superior capability in generating wholesome dharmas; hence they lack the meaning of a faculty. Non-greed and non-hatred: because what they counteract accompanies the six consciousnesses, pervades the five abandonables, is of the nature of anusaya, can initiate coarse and heavy unwholesome bodily and vocal actions, and serves as supreme application for severing the roots of wholesomeness—possessing these five meanings, they are established as unwholesome roots. Non-greed and the other [wholesome roots], being three, can counteract them and initiate manifold distracted wholesome actions, thereby gaining the name "wholesome roots." However, the establishment of faith and the rest as faculties is broadly with a view to generating all wholesome dharmas; non-greed and the rest are not faculties here, because the meaning of a faculty is different. Lightness, equanimity, heedfulness, and non-harming: because the four secondary afflictions that they counteract—three exclusively pervading defiled mind, and one accompanying bad investigation—disturb bodhisattvas and obstruct the attainment of bodhi. Although their antidotes are established among wholesome dharmas, they lack supreme function in generating pure dharmas, so they are not established as faculties. Joyful approval and disgust are strong in distraction and weak in absorption, not being supreme in both states nor arising simultaneously; hence they are not established as faculties.

The six great defilement mental factors, the two unwholesome universal factors, the ten minor defilement factors, as well as greed, hatred, pride, and doubt outside these categories, do not accord with purification, and their nature is base and lacking the characteristic of a faculty; therefore they are not established as faculties.

Question: If so, defiled sensation should not be established as a faculty.
Answer: Sensation has sovereign power and efficacy in the category of defilement, so it is established as a faculty. The afflictions are not like this, because afflictions arise based upon sensations.

Question: If so, conception ought to be established as a faculty, because it also can generate afflictions.
Answer: Although conception can generate afflictions, it is not as pre-eminent as sensation; for this reason, it is also not stated as a link of dependent origination. There is an explanation: sensation, although according with the category of defilement, also interacts with wholesome dharmas. Afflictions accord only with the category of defilement and do not accord with the wholesome, so they are not established as faculties. It is like the warden of a prison whose status is low, yet interacts with the noble and exalted. It is not like the gatekeeper of a prison who, though fierce and harsh to people, is extremely vile and contemptible, so the noble and exalted shun him.

As for remorse, sleep, examination, investigation, and fear not being established as faculties: fear is defiled and neutral, not extending to the wholesome. Remorse and sleep, although also extending to the wholesome nature, exist only in distraction and not in absorption. Examination and investigation, although extending to both absorption and distraction, do not extend through all stages, and both are not pre-eminent in according with the wholesome; therefore, they are not established as faculties.

Question: If so, pain, pleasure, grief, and joy do not extend through all stages, so they should not be established as faculties.
Answer: Generally speaking, sensation pervades all stages, because the sensation of equanimity extends through all stages; they are all established as faculties based on their kind. Furthermore, sensations all possess sovereignty in growth, whereas fear and the rest are not like this.

Question: In the path-factors, examination is established, and in the dhyāna-factors, examination and investigation are established; do they not possess superior growth?
Answer: These have the power to spur and maintain concentration and wisdom, so they are established as factors. They do not have a sovereign function in growth; therefore, they are not faculties.

Fourth, among the conditioned factors not associated with mind, only life is established as a faculty, and the others are not, because life possesses three meanings and is therefore established as a faculty: first, it belongs solely to sentient beings; second, it is solely retribution; third, it sustains universally. The four characteristics lack all three meanings. The retribution of the non-conceptual possesses the first two, but lacks universal sustainment. Homogeneity of sentient beings possesses the first and the last, but is not solely retribution, extending to outflowing (nisyanda) as well. The two non-conscious absorptions, the sets of words, phrases, and syllables, possession, and non-possession, although having the first meaning, lack the latter two meanings; therefore, none are faculties.

Fifth, unconditioned dharmas are not faculties: the state where faculties are completely extinguished is called the unconditioned, and furthermore it lacks the function of producing; therefore, it is not established as a faculty.
In accordance with preference, the above is a brief explanation; for details, see the Mahāvibhāṣā.

3.38

Regarding "Here, the eyes and the rest... therefore we should now explain": below, this is the third section, which clarifies the essential nature of the faculties and introduces the verses. Here, the six faculties of the eyes and the rest are as explained previously in the "Dhātu-nirdeśa" under aggregates, dhātus, and āyatanas. The female and male faculties are as explained at the beginning of this chapter. The life-faculty will be distinguished later among the non-associated [factors]. The five faculties of faith and the rest will be distinguished among the mental factors. Since these fourteen faculties are explained before and after, they are not clarified here. The remaining faculties have not yet been clarified, and therefore should now be explained.

3.39

Regarding "The verse says: ... Three faculties are established based on nine": this is a brief explanation of the verse.

3.40

Regarding "The treatise says: ... is named the faculty of grief": this explains the first five lines. "Body" has two meanings. If one speaks of the six bodies of sensation, "body" is the real entity. If one speaks of bodily sensation and mental sensation, "body" is the aggregation of form (rūpa). An aggregation of form is named "body." Here, "body" means the aggregation of form; that is, because the material faculties arise based on the body, it is called bodily sensation, taking its name from its basis. The rest of the text is easy to understand.

Question: The third dhyāna is extremely delightful to the mind and associates with pleasure; likewise, hell is extremely unpleasant to the mind and should associate with pain.
Explanation: Extreme delight is without conceptual discrimination, so it can associate with pleasure. Extreme harm has conceptual discrimination, so it does not associate with pain. If based on the Mahāyāna, the mental consciousness in hell also associates with pain.

3.41

Regarding "The intermediate is called non-delight... is named the faculty of equanimity": this explains the intermediate equanimity in the sixth line.

3.42

Regarding "Is such a faculty of equanimity... or is it mental sensation?": this is a question.

3.43

Regarding "It should be said to extend to both": this is the answer, explaining both.

3.44

Regarding "For what reason are these two collectively established as one faculty?": this is a question. For what reason are these two, bodily and mental, collectively established as one faculty of equanimity?

3.45

Regarding "This feeling in the body and mind […] therefore it is established as a single faculty": this is the answer, explaining why there is no distinction. This feeling of equanimity is alike non-conceptual whether in body or mind; therefore it is not established separately. Suffering and pleasure differ, and for that reason they are established separately. Suffering and pleasure in the mind mostly arise through conceptual discrimination, being called grief and joy. Although the mental pleasure of the third dhyāna is without conceptual discrimination, it is named according to the majority of conceptual discriminations; hence it is said to 'mostly arise through conceptual discrimination'. Suffering and pleasure in the body arise without conceptual discrimination, arising in accordance with the force of the object, being called suffering and pleasure. When an arhat or those of the preceding three fruits experience those five feelings as appropriate, they also arise in this manner. This adduces the noble ones to show that they are the same as ordinary persons. Therefore, in establishing these sufferings and pleasures as faculties, body and mind are distinct. Equanimity is non-conceptual and arises spontaneously; for that reason, in establishing it as a faculty, body and mind are combined into one. Furthermore, suffering differs in how it harms the body versus the mind, and pleasure differs in how it benefits the body versus the mind; therefore separate faculties are established. Equanimity has no distinct characteristics; therefore it is established collectively as one.

3.46

Regarding "Mind, pleasure, joy, equanimity […] are established as the faculty of one who has fully known": this explains the last two lines [of the verse]. The three untainted faculties take nine faculties as their substance. Their establishment across the three paths can be understood from the text.

3.47

Regarding "Because of what are these three names established?": this asks for the reason why the names are established.

3.48

Regarding "Namely, on the path of seeing […] will know what is not yet known": this is the answer. Within this, first, it is explained in terms of the three paths; second, the faculties are explained individually. Here, it is established in terms of the path of seeing as 'one who will know what is not yet known'. 'Knowing' means knowledge, referring to the fifteen moments on the path of seeing. The eight patiences and the seven knowledges, with regard to the eight truths of the higher and lower [realms], all operate in the activity of 'will know what was not yet known'; therefore, that practitioner is called 'one who will know what is not yet known'. Question: The eight patiences are not knowledges, so they may well be called 'will know what is not yet known'. But the seven knowledges correctly know the principle of the truths; why are they also called 'will know what is not yet known'? The explanation says: In terms of taking their own truths as cognitive objects, the seven knowledges are indeed called correct knowledge; but now, proceeding according to the eight truths, because the knowledge of the eight truths is not yet comprehensive and the knowing of the truths is not yet complete, and because they arise in the intermediate stages, they are also called 'will know what is not yet known'.

First 48 of 155 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

俱舍論記 — Classical Chinese