俱舍論疏 18.8

18.8

「論曰至行蘊所攝」，出破僧體。此釋破僧是不和合無覆無記，行蘊所攝。《婆沙》一百一十六「評曰：隨住六識、隨住五受皆能破僧。問：僧破以何為自性？答：以不和合無覆無記，不相應行為自性，是不相應行蘊所攝。即餘處說，復有所餘如是種類不相應行。」准此論文，不和合性即是非得，無別體也。所以得知？准《婆沙》六十「評曰：退自性者，是不成就無覆無記，即是非得，心不相應行蘊所攝，即在復有所餘如是類法心不相應中攝。退與順退法異，順退法以一切不善、有覆無記為自性。如僧破與破僧罪異，僧破以不和合為自性，無覆無記，心不相應行蘊所攝。」准此論說，退即在復有所餘如是類法心不相應中攝，與僧破同。退既更無別法，即是非得。故知僧破不和合性，即是同欲、同忍非得，無別體性。

[On the phrase of the] treatise, "[It is] unassociated with the mind, [being included in the] aggregate of formations (saṃskāra-skandha)": This reveals the essential nature (svabhāva) of schism in the Saṅgha. This explains that schism in the Saṅgha is non-concord (asāmagrī), non-obscured and neutral (anivṛtāvyākṛta), and subsumed within the aggregate of formations. Fascicle 116 of the Vibhāṣā says: "Evaluation: Relying on any of the six consciousnesses or relying on any of the five feelings, one is able to create a schism in the Saṅgha. Question: What is the self-nature of schism in the Saṅgha? Answer: Its self-nature is non-concord, non-obscured and neutral, an unassociated formation (citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra); it is subsumed under the unassociated formations of the aggregate of formations. That is what is elsewhere spoken of as: 'There are still other unassociated formations of such kind.'" According to this text, the nature of non-concord is simply non-acquisition (aprāpti); it has no separate substance. How is this known? Relying on fascicle 60 of the Vibhāṣā: "Evaluation: The self-nature of falling away (parihāṇi) is non-attainment, non-obscured and neutral; it is simply non-acquisition, subsumed under the aggregate of formations unassociated with the mind, being subsumed under 'there are still other dharmas of such kind unassociated with the mind.' Falling away is different from dharmas favorable to falling away; dharmas favorable to falling away have all unwholesome and obscured-neutral [dharmas] as their self-nature. Just as schism in the Saṅgha is different from the offense of breaking the Saṅgha: schism in the Saṅgha has non-concord as its self-nature, is non-obscured and neutral, and is subsumed under the aggregate of formations unassociated with the mind." Based on what this treatise states, falling away is subsumed under "there are still other dharmas of such kind unassociated with the mind," which is identical to schism in the Saṅgha. Since falling away is not a separate dharma, it is simply non-acquisition. Therefore we know that the non-concordant nature of schism in the Saṅgha is simply the non-acquisition of a shared aspiration and a shared acceptance; it has no separate substantial nature.