俱舍論疏 17.57

17.57

論「有斷善根至謂除前相」，已下四句分別。布剌拏，此云滿，舊云富樓那，訛也。此人斷善而不造逆，故非邪定。是第一句。未生怨，即是阿闍世王。造逆故，是邪定（依大乘非邪定）；信三寶故，不斷善根。是第二句。天授，舊云提婆提多。此人破僧、出佛身血、殺阿羅漢，故是邪定，亦斷善根，故是俱句。俱非可知。《正理論》云「斷善邪見、破僧妄語，當知定招無間異熟。餘無間業或招無間，或招所餘地獄異熟。」依《婆沙》三十五更有問答。《施設論》說「若害蟻卵，無少悔心，應說是人斷三界善。問：若現法中續善根者，彼命終已生地獄耶？答：彼不決定生於地獄，唯有轉身續善根者定生地獄。問：若現法中續善根者，彼現身能入正性離生不？評曰：應作是說，彼能引起順決擇分，亦後能入正性離生，乃至能得阿羅漢果。問：殺斷善人與害蟻卵，何者罪重？評曰：應作是說，若依罰罪，殺斷善人得罪為重，得邊罪故。若依業道，害蟻卵重，以彼成就諸善法故。問：於何處受斷善根果？答：於無間地獄受彼異熟果（與《正理》亦同）。問：斷善邪見，於眾同分為但能滿，亦能引耶？答：亦能牽引，亦能圓滿。有作是說：但能圓滿不能牽引。所以者何？業能牽引眾同分故。評曰：如前說好。邪見相應有思業故，邪見與彼同一果故。」

The treatise says, "There are those who have severed the good roots [...] means excluding the previous characteristics": below is the fourfold permutation. "Pūraṇa" means "Full"; the old translation was "Fulouna", which is corrupt. This person severed the good without committing unpardonable transgressions, so he is not in the wrongly determinate group. This is the first permutation. "Ajātaśatru" is King Ajātaśatru. Because he committed an unpardonable transgression, he is in the wrongly determinate group (according to the Mahāyāna, he is not wrongly determinate); because he had faith in the Three Jewels, he did not sever the good roots. This is the second permutation. "Devadatta", previously translated as Tipodaduo: this person caused a schism in the Saṃgha, shed the Buddha's blood, and killed an arhat, so he is wrongly determinate and also severed the good roots; thus this is the permutation of both. The permutation of neither can be understood. The Nyāyānusāra states: "The wrong view of severing the good and the false speech of causing a schism in the Saṃgha should be known to definitively incur the vipāka of the Avīci [Hell]. The remaining unpardonable karmas either incur the Avīci or incur the vipāka of other hells." According to fascicle 35 of the Vibhāṣā, there are further questions and answers. The Prajñaptiśāstra says: "If someone destroys an ant's egg without the slightest remorse, it should be said that this person severs the good of the three realms. Question: If one reconnects the good roots in the present life, does that person take birth in hell after life ends? Answer: It is not determinate that they take birth in hell; only those who reconnect the good roots across lives definitely take birth in hell. Question: If one reconnects the good roots in the present life, can that person enter the correct determination of abandonment of birth in the present life or not? The critique says: it should be stated that they can induce the aids to penetration, and later can also enter the correct determination of abandonment of birth, up to being able to attain the fruit of an arhat. Question: Between killing a person who has severed the good and destroying an ant's egg, which offense is heavier? The critique says: it should be stated that, according to punitive transgression, killing a person who has severed the good incurs a heavier offense, because one incurs an extreme transgression. According to karmapatha, destroying an ant's egg is heavier, because that [creature] is endowed with good dharmas. Question: Where does one experience the fruit of severing the good roots? Answer: One experiences that vipāka fruit in the Avīci Hell (this is also identical to the Nyāyānusāra). Question: Regarding the wrong view that severs the good, in terms of nikāya-sabhāga, can it only complete it, or can it also project it? Answer: It can both project and complete. Some say: it can only complete, but cannot project. Why is this? Because karma projects the nikāya-sabhāga. The critique says: the former explanation is better. Because there is karma of intention associated with wrong view, wrong view and that [karma] share the same single fruit."