俱舍論疏 21.7

21.7

論「此中愛結至當辨其相」，出愛結也。所以九種總名結者，《正理論》云「於境於生有繫縛能，故名為結。或有此故，令諸有情合眾多苦，故名為結，是眾苦惱安足處故。此中愛結，謂三界貪，此就所依及所緣說。依三界身、緣三界境，未離三界染之貪，名三界貪。所言貪者，謂有心所樂可意相所攝受行，即於諸有及諸有具所起樂著，說名為貪。何緣此貪說名為愛？此染心所隨樂境故。」「餘隨所應當辨其相」者，謂恚結等。如餘處釋，當辨其相。《正理》釋云「恚謂於違想及別離欲所攝受行中，令心憎背。慢謂七慢，如前已釋。言無明結者，謂三界無知，此約所依，非所緣故，以諸無漏法不墮界故，無明亦用彼為所緣故。此廣分別，如〈緣起〉中。見結、取結，俱邪推度相，別顯彼相，廣如五見中。於前分別邊執見處說，計為我有漏行中，計斷計常名邊執見。於中斷見名何所目？謂執死後行不續生。豈不此即是撥後有邪見？雖有此責，現見世間有行相同而體差別，如慈與愛體異行同。如何行同而體差別？如起加行欲饒益他，若屬染心從愛所起，若從慈起屬不染心，是謂行同而體差別。如是於行見不續生，從邪方便生，此屬斷見。離方便而起生，此屬邪見，亦是行同而體差別。此斷、常生方便，如六十二見中說。」

The Śāstra says: "Herein, the fetter of craving, up to 'their characteristics should be distinguished'"—this brings out the fetter of craving. As for why these nine kinds are collectively named fetters, the Nyāyānusāra states: "Because they have the power to bind to objects and to rebirths, they are called fetters. Alternatively, because they exist, they join sentient beings to manifold suffering; hence they are called fetters, as they are the footing for manifold suffering and afflictions. Herein, the fetter of craving refers to attachment in the three realms; this is spoken of with respect to the basis and the objective support. Relying on a body of the three realms and taking objects of the three realms as objective support, attachment that is not yet free from the defilement of the three realms is called attachment in the three realms. What is called attachment refers to mental activity characterized by taking pleasure in agreeable signs—that is, delight and attachment arising with respect to realms of existence and the requisites for existence, which is called attachment. For what reason is this attachment called craving? Because this defiled mental factor follows pleasing objects." Regarding "the rest, as appropriate, their characteristics should be distinguished," this refers to the fetter of hostility and so forth. As explained elsewhere, their characteristics should be distinguished. The Nyāyānusāra explains: "Hostility refers to causing the mind to detest and turn away from activities grasped under repulsive notions and the desire for separation. Conceit refers to the seven conceits, as already explained before. The fetter of ignorance refers to non-knowledge in the three realms; this is said in terms of the basis, not the objective support, because unconditioned and untainted dharmas do not fall into the realms, and ignorance also takes them as objective support. This is differentiated in detail as in the 'Conditioned Arising' section. The fetter of view and the fetter of grasping both have the characteristic of false inference; their distinct characteristics are shown extensively as in the five views. In the previous analysis of the view of extreme grasping, it was said: among conditioned outflows grasped as 'mine', grasping at annihilation or permanence is called the view of extreme grasping. Therein, what does the annihilation view signify? It refers to grasping that after death, conditioned factors do not arise in succession. Is this not simply the wrong view that repudiates future existence? Although there is this objection, it is observed in the world that there are things whose modes of activity are the same while their essential natures are distinct, just as benevolence and attachment have distinct essential natures but identical modes of activity. How are their modes of activity identical while their essential natures are distinct? For instance, when initiating an exertion wishing to benefit another, if it belongs to a defiled mind, it arises from attachment; if it arises from benevolence, it belongs to an undefiled mind: this is termed identical modes of activity with distinct essential natures. Likewise, regarding conditioned factors, viewing them as not continuing to arise, if born from wrong means, belongs to the annihilation view; if arising independently of means, this belongs to wrong view. This also constitutes identical modes of activity with distinct essential natures. The means giving rise to these views of annihilation and permanence are as spoken of in the sixty-two views."