俱舍論疏 17.95

17.95

論「然聖隨依至皆得成就」，明聖人在無色界成就過、未不同，過去唯成曾起，未來五地皆得成就。《正理論》云「然聖隨依何靜慮地，曾起、曾滅無漏尸羅，生無色時成彼過去，若未來世六地皆成。二處皆無現起義者，無色唯有四蘊性故，無想有情無定心故。若無色無學，定不成就過去七支，得無學果捨向道故，無學身中必不起故。」無色有學，兩說不同。《婆沙》一百二十二云「問：若諸學者以世俗道得不還果，曾不現起無漏律儀便生無色，彼云何成就過去身無表業？若不成就，何故此文作如是說：若諸學者生無色界，成就過去身無表耶？有作是說：亦有學者生無色界，不成就過去身無表業。然此文中但依成就者說，是以無過。有餘師說：得聖果已必起勝果，聖道現前故。諸學者生無色界，必定成就過去身無表業。」一百三十二、一百三十四皆同兩說。今詳二說，後說為正。一百三十四第二師後結文云「是故本論說言：若諸學者生無色界，成就過去、未來所造業色。若於彼得阿羅漢果，成就未來所造色，非過去所造色。若謂不爾，本論應說學者生無色界有不成過去所造色。」前師通此文云：此文俱依成就者說，是以無過。然前師不釋本論，何故不盡理說，但據一邊而說？無所以也。但據一邊既無切理，應順本論。故此論及《正理》皆同本論說，不言無色有學有不成過去七支。

The passage of the śāstra from "However, the noble one, according to whatever [stage] they rely upon" up to "all are possessed" explains that when a noble one is in the formless realm, their possession of past and future differs: as for the past, they possess only what was previously arisen; as for the future, [vows of] all five stages are possessed. The Nyāyānusāra says: "However, according to whichever stage of dhyāna a noble one relied on when they previously arose and previously extinguished uncontaminated morality (śīla), when born into the formless realm they possess that past [morality]; as for the future, all six stages are possessed. That both places have no meaning of current arising is because the formless realm has only the nature of four skandhas, and beings without conception have no concentrated mind. If one is a non-learner in the formless realm, they definitely do not possess the past seven branches, because upon attaining the fruit of the non-learner they abandon the path of the candidate, and it definitely does not arise in the body of a non-learner." Regarding learners in the formless realm, there are two differing explanations. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 122, says: "Question: If learners attain the fruit of non-returner via the worldly path, never having currently arisen an uncontaminated saṃvara, and then take birth in the formless realm, how do they possess past non-informative physical karma? If they do not possess it, why does this text state: 'If learners take birth in the formless realm, they possess past non-informative physical karma'? There is an explanation saying: There are also learners born in the formless realm who do not possess past non-informative physical karma. However, this text merely speaks relying on those who do possess it, so there is no fault. Other masters say: Having attained the noble fruit, they must arouse the superior fruit, because the noble path is brought to presence. Thus, learners born in the formless realm definitely possess past non-informative physical karma." Fascicles 132 and 134 both share these two explanations. Now, examining the two explanations, the latter explanation is correct. The concluding text of the second master in fascicle 134 says: "Therefore, the root treatise states: 'If learners are born in the formless realm, they possess past and future conditioned physical karma. If they attain the fruit of arhatship there, they possess future conditioned physical karma, but not past conditioned physical karma.' If one claims this is not so, the root treatise should have stated that learners born in the formless realm include those who do not possess past conditioned physical karma." The former master resolved this text by saying: this text solely speaks relying on those who possess it, so there is no fault. However, the former master did not explain why the root treatise would not speak exhaustively according to the truth, but merely speak based on one side; there is no justification. Since merely relying on one side lacks cogent reason, one should follow the root treatise. Therefore, both this śāstra and the Nyāyānusāra agree with the root treatise's statement, and do not say that learners in the formless realm include those who do not possess the past seven branches.