俱舍論疏 1.36

1.36

六、對辨差別。《正理》二十八有三釋。第一釋云：今詳二種無知相別，謂由此故立愚智殊，如是名為染無知相。若由此故，或有境中智不及愚，是第二相。述曰：愚謂異生，智謂聖者。斷名聖者，不斷名凡。此由染污無知立愚智別。或有境中、羅漢不識赤鹽、異生善通三藏，是名於境智不及愚。准此異相，而不可說不染無知通所依身。第二釋云：又若斷已，佛與二乘皆無差別，是第一相。若有斷已，佛與二乘有行、不行，是第二相。述曰：染污無知，三乘同斷。斷已不行，自性斷故，皆無差別。不染無知，三乘同斷，緣縛斷故，二乘容行，唯佛不行，故有差別。第三釋云：若於事中自、共相愚，是名第一染無知相。若於諸法味、勢、熟、德、數、量、處、時、同、異等相不能如實覺，是不染無知。述曰。染污無知迷自、共相，不染無知謂於諸法味（諸法滋味或苦等味）、勢（諸法損益等勢力）、熟（諸法至成熟位）、德（德用也）、數（一二等數也）、量（大少等量）、處（近遠等處）、時（近遠等時）、同（相似）、異（差別也）。准第三釋，不染無知亦非所依身也。

6. Comparative discernment of their distinction. Fascicle twenty-eight of the *Nyāyānusāra* has three explanations. The first explanation says: "Now, examining the difference in characteristics between the two kinds of ignorance in detail: that on account of which the distinction between the foolish and the wise is established is named the characteristic of defiled ignorance. If on account of something, in some cognitive domain, the wise may not equal the foolish, this is the second characteristic." To explain: "Foolish" refers to worldlings (pṛthagjana); "wise" refers to noble ones (ārya). Those who have abandoned it are called noble ones, and those who have not abandoned it are called ordinary worldlings. Thus the distinction between foolish and wise is established through defiled ignorance. In some cognitive domain, an arhat does not recognize red salt, while an ordinary worldling is well-versed in the Tripiṭaka: this is called wisdom not equaling the foolish in that domain. Relying on this different characteristic, one cannot say that un-defiled ignorance extends to the physical basis (āśraya). The second explanation says: "Furthermore, if once it is abandoned, there is no difference between the Buddha and the two vehicles, this is the first characteristic. If once it is abandoned, there is still operation and non-operation between the Buddha and the two vehicles, this is the second characteristic." To explain: Defiled ignorance is equally abandoned by the three vehicles. Once abandoned, it does not operate; because it is abandoned in its intrinsic nature (svabhāva-prahāṇa), there is no difference between them. Un-defiled ignorance is equally abandoned by the three vehicles; because it is abandoned through the binding of objects (ālambana-saṃyoga-prahāṇa), it may still operate in the two vehicles, whereas it never operates only in the Buddha; thus there is a difference. The third explanation says: "If there is delusion regarding the self-nature and common characteristics of things, this is called the first characteristic, that of defiled ignorance. If one cannot understand in accordance with reality with regard to the taste, potency, maturity, virtue, number, measure, place, time, similarity, difference, and other characteristics of phenomena, this is un-defiled ignorance." To explain: Defiled ignorance is deluded regarding self-nature and common characteristics. Un-defiled ignorance refers to phenomena's taste (the flavor of phenomena or the taste of suffering and so forth), potency (the capacity of phenomena to harm, benefit, and so forth), maturity (phenomena reaching the stage of full ripening), virtue (their virtues and functions), number (numbers such as one and two), measure (measures such as large and small), place (places such as near and far), time (times such as near and far), similarity (resemblance), and difference (differentiation). Relying on this third explanation, un-defiled ignorance is also not the physical basis.