俱舍論疏 23.51

23.51

論「如是煖等至重現前故」，此出體也。取俱有法，然除彼得。《婆沙》第三云「問：何故沙門果得是沙門果，而世第一法得非世第一法耶？答：沙門果成就所顯故，沙門果得是沙門果。世第一法等無間緣所顯故，彼得既非等無間緣，亦不隨順如彼生等故，彼得非世第一法。煖、頂、忍得亦非煖等，勿得聖已重現前故。有說：得亦是世第一法。有餘師說：彼俱起得是世第一法。評曰：若彼俱起、若後起得，一切皆非世第一法種類同故，煖等亦爾。是故初說為善。問：何故世第一法生等是世第一法，而得非耶？答：生等與彼同一果，相隨行不相離，常和合無前後。相與所相未嘗相離，由此亦是世第一法。得與彼法不同一果，不相隨行，性相離不和合，或前或後。得與所得有時相離，譬如樹皮或時離樹，是故得非世第一法。煖、頂、忍得亦復如是。」《正理論》云「然以見諦不許煖等重現在前，已見諦者加行現前成無用故。」今為一釋：前果非是後向道攝，向後起得不違理故。煖等是彼聖道加行，道後起煖等是違理故。又得聖不捨煖，果後起煖過。得果捨前向，果後無向得。

The Śāstra says: "In this way, warmth, etc., ... because it does not reappear." This identifies the essential nature. It includes the co-existent dharmas, yet excludes their acquisition (prāpti). Fascicle three of the Vibhāṣā says: "Question: Why is the acquisition of a fruition of recluseship (śrāmaṇyaphala) itself a fruition of recluseship, whereas the acquisition of the supreme mundane dharmas is not a supreme mundane dharma? Answer: Because the fruition of recluseship is manifested through possession, the acquisition of a fruition of recluseship is a fruition of recluseship. The supreme mundane dharmas are manifested through an equal-and-immediate condition; since their acquisition is neither an equal-and-immediate condition nor conforms like their arising, etc., their acquisition is not a supreme mundane dharma. The acquisitions of warmth, peaks, and acceptance are also not warmth, etc., so that after obtaining the noble state they do not reappear. Some say: The acquisition is also a supreme mundane dharma. Other masters say: The acquisition arising together with it is a supreme mundane dharma. Evaluation: Whether arising together with it or arising subsequently, all acquisitions are not supreme mundane dharmas because they are of the same category; the same is true of warmth, etc. Therefore, the first explanation is good. Question: Why are the arising and other [characteristics] of the supreme mundane dharmas the supreme mundane dharmas, whereas their acquisition is not? Answer: Arising and others have the same fruit as it, accompany it and are not separated from it, and are always conjoined without before and after. The characteristic and what is characterized are never separated from one another; hence they are also the supreme mundane dharmas. The acquisition does not have the same fruit as that dharma, does not accompany it, is separated by nature and not conjoined, and may be prior or posterior. The acquisition and what is acquired are sometimes separated, just as bark is sometimes separated from a tree; therefore, the acquisition is not a supreme mundane dharma. The acquisitions of warmth, peaks, and acceptance are also like this." The Nyāyānusāra says: "However, because one has seen the truths, warmth, etc., are not permitted to reappear; for one who has already seen the truths, the manifestation of the preliminary practices (prayoga) would be useless." Now I propose an explanation: The prior fruit is not subsumed under the subsequent path of the candidate, so the acquisition arising after the candidate does not contradict reason. Warmth, etc., are the preliminary practices for that noble path; warmth, etc., arising after the path would contradict reason. Furthermore, attaining the noble state does not abandon warmth, which leads to the fault of warmth arising after the fruit. Attaining the fruit abandons the prior candidate, so after the fruit there is no acquisition of the candidate.