俱舍論疏 23.50

23.50

論「有士用力至故名最勝」，釋妨難也。《婆沙》第三云「此心、心所於餘世法為都勝故說名第一？為分勝故名第一耶？設爾何失？若都勝故名第一者，此豈能勝現觀邊世俗智？然現觀邊所修世俗智是見道眷屬，見道慧力殊勝，此法不爾。又此豈勝雜修靜慮？然彼等至及所感生不共異生，此法不爾。又此豈勝初盡智時所修善根？然修彼時離一切障所依清淨，此法不爾。又此豈勝空空、無願無願、無相無相三三摩地？然彼尚能厭惡聖道，況於有漏，此法不爾。若分勝故名第一者，煖、頂、忍等應亦名第一，各勝彼彼下位善根故。有作是說：此法都勝故名第一。然約能開聖道門說，非據一切。謂現觀邊世俗智等，雖有如前所說勝事，然皆無力開聖道門；此法獨能，是故都勝。或有說者，此法於餘一切事勝故名第一，謂現觀邊世俗智等所有勝事皆由此成。所以者何？彼諸勝事若無此法開聖道門體，尚不修，況有勝用。要由此法開聖道門，方修彼體乃有勝用。彼諸勝事既由此成，故此於餘一切事勝。有餘師說：此法分勝故名第一。問：若爾，煖等應亦名第一。答：彼於二分中俱非最勝故。謂世善法總有二分：一依異生、二依聖者。世第一法雖於聖者世俗智等不名最勝，而於異生所得善中皆最勝故，所以獨立第一法也。無評家也。」問：若爾，未來修者，不能為等無間緣引聖道生，應非第一。答：《婆沙》第二云「彼雖不作等無間緣，而能隨順已起得故。譬如苾芻與僧欲法，諸餘僧事亦得成立。問：世第一法隨轉色、心不相應行，彼既不作等無間緣，云何得名世第一法？」《婆沙》第二答云「彼雖不作等無間緣，而能隨順。由彼與此心、心所法，一起、一住、一滅、一果、一等流、一異熟，親近故。」

The Śāstra says: "Because they possess human effort... hence called the most supreme." This resolves an objection. Fascicle three of the Vibhāṣā says: "Is this mind and its mental factors said to be supreme because they surpass other mundane dharmas entirely, or are they called supreme because they surpass them partially? If so, what is the flaw? If they are called supreme because they surpass them entirely, how could this surpass the conventional knowledge at the edge of direct realization (abhisamayāntika)? Yet the conventional knowledge cultivated at the edge of direct realization is an accompaniment of the path of seeing, and the intellectual power of the path of seeing is preeminent, whereas this dharma is not like that. Furthermore, how could this surpass the mingled cultivation of dhyāna? Yet those meditative attainments and the births they induce are not shared with ordinary worldlings (pṛthagjana), whereas this dharma is not like that. Furthermore, how could this surpass the wholesome roots cultivated at the time of the initial knowledge of exhaustion (kṣayajñāna)? Yet when cultivating those, the basis is purified and free from all obstructions, whereas this dharma is not like that. Furthermore, how could this surpass the three samādhis: emptiness of emptiness, wishless of the wishless, and signless of the signless? Yet those are even capable of loathing the noble path, much more so the defiled, whereas this dharma is not like that. If they are called supreme because they surpass them partially, then warmth, peaks, acceptance, etc., should also be called supreme, since each surpasses the wholesome roots of its respective lower stage. Some say: This dharma is called supreme because it surpasses entirely. However, this is spoken in terms of being able to open the gate of the noble path, not based on everything. That is to say, although conventional knowledge at the edge of direct realization and so forth have the preeminent qualities stated above, none of them has the power to open the gate of the noble path; this dharma alone can, and therefore it surpasses entirely. Or some say: This dharma is called supreme because it surpasses in all other matters; namely, whatever preeminent qualities conventional knowledge at the edge of direct realization and so forth have are all accomplished by this. Why? If this dharma did not open the gate of the noble path, the very substance of those preeminent qualities would not even be cultivated, much less have preeminent functions. It is only because this dharma opens the gate of the noble path that one then cultivates their substance and subsequently has preeminent functions. Since those preeminent qualities are accomplished through this, this surpasses all other matters. Other masters say: This dharma is called supreme because it surpasses partially. Question: If so, then warmth, etc., should also be called supreme. Answer: Because they are not the most supreme in either of the two parts. That is to say, mundane wholesome dharmas have two parts in all: one based on ordinary worldlings, and the second based on noble beings. Although the supreme mundane dharmas are not called the most supreme compared to the conventional knowledge and so forth of noble beings, they are the most supreme among all the wholesome [dharmas] acquired by ordinary worldlings; therefore, it alone is established as the supreme dharma. There is no critical evaluation." Question: If so, what is cultivated in the future cannot act as an equal-and-immediate condition (samanantarapratyaya) to induce the arising of the noble path; should it not be supreme? Answer: Fascicle two of the Vibhāṣā says: "Although it does not act as an equal-and-immediate condition, it can conform to the acquisition of what has already arisen. Just as a bhikṣu giving his consent (chanda) to the Saṅgha allows all other Saṅgha business to be accomplished as well. Question: The concurrent form and mind-dissociated formations of the supreme mundane dharmas do not act as an equal-and-immediate condition; how can they be named supreme mundane dharmas?" Fascicle two of the Vibhāṣā answers, saying: "Although they do not act as an equal-and-immediate condition, they can conform. Because they share one arising, one abiding, one cessation, one fruit, one outflow, and one maturation with this mind and its mental factors, they are closely associated."