俱舍論疏 25.132

25.132

「論曰至餘九同前」，明十法為體。此出體也。《婆沙》九十五有三說：一說同此論；一說開戒為二，以十一法為體；一師開為三，謂正語、正業、正命。此論合說，以十法體。開合雖異，於理無違。問：何故唯十為體？《婆沙》廢立。問：何故一切色中唯無表色有立覺分非餘色耶？答：正語、業、命隨順聖道勢用偏增故立覺分，餘色不爾。又戒能為穀，餘色不爾。又《正理》云「何緣表業不立覺分？覺分唯是順定善法，心俱無表有勝順能。表業不然，是故不立。問：何故不立心為菩提分法？復次心於雜染、清淨品中勢用均等。菩提分法於清淨品勢用偏增，是故不立。復次菩提分法輔佐菩提，心王不應輔佐於覺，如王無有輔佐臣義。問：大地法中何故但立念、定、慧、受為菩提分法？答：念、定、慧三順清淨品勢用增上，菩提分法亦復如是，故攝此三。受於雜染、清淨品中勢用俱勝，故亦立為菩提分法。有餘師說：受於雜染勢用雖勝，而於淨品作饒益事。如旃荼羅性雖鄙劣，而與豪族作饒益事，故亦立為菩提分法。想、思、觸、欲於雜染品勢用偏增，故不立為菩提分法。於假想觀勝解偏增，菩提分順真實觀，是故勝解非彼所攝。有餘師說：菩提分法學位偏增，至無學位勝解方勝，故不立為菩提分法。作意於境義不相應，故亦不立。有餘師說：初取境時作意力勝，至境相續彼力漸微。菩提分法要取境已多時方有，義不相應故亦不立。問：何故三受皆通無漏，唯立喜為菩提分法？答：樂、捨二受無彼相故。復次菩提分法行相猛利，樂、捨遲鈍故俱不立。復次無漏樂受為輕安樂所覆損故，捨為行捨所覆損故，相不明了，故不立為菩提分法。問：大善地法中何但立信、精進、輕安、行捨四種為菩提分法耶？答：由此四種順菩提勝，故偏立為菩提分法。謂趣菩提信為上首，將起眾行信為初基，故立信為菩提分法。精進遍策趣菩提行，令速趣向三乘菩提，故亦為菩提分法。輕安調適對治惽沈，助觀品勝。行捨平等對治掉舉，助止品勝。菩提分法止、觀為主，故俱立為菩提分法。慚、愧等六，散善品中勢用雖勝，而於定善勢力微劣，故不立為菩提分法，以菩提分定善攝故。餘大不善地法二、大煩惱地六、小煩惱地法十，及不定地中貪、瞋、慢、疑，並順雜染故皆不立。睡眠、惡作雖亦通善，唯是生得，菩提分法是加行善。」又《正理論》云「何緣不立不相應行以為覺分？彼於助覺無別勝能、不相應故，非如無表雖不相應，而於道輪有為轂用，故於覺分不別建立。問：三無為法何故不立？解云：順菩提分必須起用，無為無用，是故不立。由斯廢立，故唯十種是菩提分，餘皆不立。」又《正理論》云「何緣不立信為覺及道支。初發趣時信用增上，已入聖位在覺、道支，信於爾時勢用漸劣，故不立在覺、道支中。何緣於覺支立喜、輕安、捨，非亦立在彼道支中？彼偏順覺，不順道故。云何順覺。且修道中地地各修九品勝覺，如如於諦數數覺悟，如是如是發生勝喜，由聖勝喜後樂觀諦，如人掘地獲寶生喜故，後樂更掘。故喜於覺順力增，要由輕安息諸事務，及由捨力令心平等，方能於境審諦覺察，故立安、捨在覺支中。云何此三不順於道？速疾運轉是聖道義，此於速運少有相違，並能令心安隱住故。何緣於道立尋及戒，於覺支中非亦立彼？彼偏順道，不順覺故。云何順道？且見道中尋策正見，令於上、下八諦境中速疾觀察。戒為轂，成見道輪，令於諦速疾迴轉，故尋及戒俱立道支。此復云何不順於覺？且尋於諦不寂靜轉，故尋於覺少有相違。覺是相應，有所緣境、所依行相。戒此相違，故覺支不建立彼。通運為道，不可為例。」何緣聖種不立覺支？《正理論》云「覺支通道、俗，聖種唯道，故不立也。」

[On the passage in the] treatise: "The text says: [...] the remaining nine are as before": this clarifies that ten factors constitute their essential natures. This is setting forth their essential natures. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 95, presents three explanations: one explanation agrees with this treatise; one explanation divides morality into two, taking eleven factors as their essential nature; one master divides it into three, namely right speech, right action, and right livelihood. This treatise combines them, taking ten factors as their essential nature. Although division and combination differ, neither conflicts with reason. Question: Why are only ten taken as their essential nature? The Vibhāṣā provides the rationale for what is included and excluded. Question: Why is it that among all material forms, only unmanifest form is established as an auxiliary of awakening, and no other form? Answer: Right speech, action, and livelihood accord with the noble path and have especially prominent power; hence they are established as auxiliaries of awakening, whereas other forms are not like this. Furthermore, morality can serve as a hub, whereas other forms are not like this. Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra states: "For what reason is manifest karma not established as an auxiliary of awakening? The auxiliaries of awakening are solely wholesome factors that accord with concentration; unmanifest form co-arising with the mind has a superior accordant capability. Manifest karma is not like this; therefore it is not established. Question: Why is mind (citta) not established as an auxiliary of awakening? Furthermore, mind has equal power within both defiled and pure categories. The auxiliaries of awakening have especially prominent power within the pure category; therefore it is not established. Furthermore, the auxiliaries of awakening assist awakening; the king of the mind ought not to assist awakening, just as a king cannot act as an assistant minister to his own ministers. Question: Why, among the universally associated mental factors (mahābhūmika), are only mindfulness, concentration, prajñā, and feeling established as auxiliaries of awakening? Answer: Mindfulness, concentration, and prajñā have predominant power in according with the pure category, and the auxiliaries of awakening are likewise; hence these three are included. Feeling is superior in power within both the defiled and pure categories; hence it too is established as an auxiliary of awakening. Other masters state: Although feeling has superior power in the defiled, it performs beneficent service in the pure category. Just as a caṇḍāla, though base in nature, performs beneficent service for a noble clan, so too is it established as an auxiliary of awakening. Ideation, volition, contact, and desire have especially prominent power in the defiled category; therefore they are not established as auxiliaries of awakening. In visualisations of provisional mental constructs, resolve (adhimukti) is especially prominent, whereas the auxiliaries of awakening accord with real observation; therefore resolve is not subsumed under them. Other masters state: The auxiliaries of awakening are especially prominent in the stage of a trainee (śaikṣa), while resolve becomes superior only upon reaching the stage of non-training (aśaikṣa); therefore it is not established as an auxiliary of awakening. Attention (manaskāra) does not correspond to the object in this sense; hence it too is not established. Other masters state: When initially grasping an object, the power of attention is superior, but when continuity of the object is reached, its power gradually weakens. The auxiliaries of awakening require that an object has already been grasped for a long time before they occur; the sense does not correspond, so it too is not established. Question: Why, when the three feelings all extend to the undefiled, is only joy established as an auxiliary of awakening? Answer: Because pleasant feeling and neutral feeling lack that characteristic. Furthermore, the aspects of the auxiliaries of awakening are fierce and sharp, whereas pleasant and neutral feelings are sluggish and dull; hence neither is established. Furthermore, undefiled pleasant feeling is covered and diminished by the pleasure of pliancy, and neutral feeling is covered and diminished by mental equanimity; their characteristics are not distinct, and therefore they are not established as auxiliaries of awakening. Question: Among the universal wholesome factors (kuśalamahābhūmika), why are only the four kinds—faith, energy, pliancy, and equanimity—established as auxiliaries of awakening? Answer: Because these four kinds are superior in according with bodhi, they are specifically established as auxiliaries of awakening. That is, faith is the foremost leader in proceeding toward bodhi, and when about to initiate the myriad practices, faith is the initial foundation; therefore faith is established as an auxiliary of awakening. Energy universally spurs on practices that proceed toward bodhi, causing one to proceed swiftly toward the bodhi of the three vehicles; hence it too is an auxiliary of awakening. Pliancy is well-attuned and remedies torpor, excelling in assisting the category of insight (vipaśyanā). Equanimity is impartial and remedies restlessness, excelling in assisting the category of calming (śamatha). The auxiliaries of awakening take calming and insight as primary; hence both are established as auxiliaries of awakening. The six factors such as shame and embarrassment, though superior in power among the uncoordinated wholesome categories, are weak in power with respect to meditative wholesome states; therefore they are not established as auxiliaries of awakening, because the auxiliaries of awakening are subsumed under meditative wholesomeness. The remaining two universal unwholesome factors, the six universal defilement factors, the ten minor defilement factors, and greed, anger, pride, and doubt among the indeterminate factors all accord with defilement, and thus none are established. Although sleep and regret also extend to the wholesome, they are solely innate, whereas the auxiliaries of awakening are wholesome states attained through application (prayoga)." Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra states: "For what reason are the non-concurrent formations (cittaviprayuktasamskāra) not established as auxiliaries of awakening? Because they lack any distinct, superior capacity to assist awakening and are non-concurrent; they are not like unmanifest form, which, though non-concurrent, serves as a hub for the wheel of the path. Therefore, they are not separately established among the auxiliaries of awakening. Question: Why are the three unconditioned phenomena not established? Explanation: What accords with the auxiliaries of bodhi must generate activity, but unconditioned phenomena have no activity; therefore they are not established. Through such inclusion and exclusion, only ten kinds are auxiliaries of bodhi, and the rest are not established." Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra states: "For what reason is faith not established as a limb of awakening (bodhyaṅga) or a limb of the path (mārgāṅga)? When first setting out, the function of faith is predominant; but once one has entered the noble stage, being among the limbs of awakening and of the path, the power of faith gradually weakens at that time, and therefore it is not established among the limbs of awakening and of the path. For what reason are joy, pliancy, and equanimity established as limbs of awakening, yet not also established among the limbs of the path? Because they specifically accord with awakening, not with the path. How do they accord with awakening? In the path of cultivation, in stage after stage, nine grades of superior awakening are cultivated; as one repeatedly awakens to the truths, in just that way superior joy arises. From this noble superior joy, one subsequently delights in observing the truths, just as a person who digs the earth and finds a jewel feels joy, and therefore subsequently delights in digging further. Thus joy increases in its accordant power toward awakening. It is only when one puts an end to all concerns through pliancy and renders the mind impartial through the power of equanimity that one is able to investigate and awaken to the object accurately; therefore pliancy and equanimity are established among the limbs of awakening. How do these three not accord with the path? Swift transit is the meaning of the noble path; these slightly conflict with swift transit, as they all cause the mind to abide peacefully. For what reason are applied thought (vitarka) and morality established as limbs of the path, yet not also established among the limbs of awakening? Because they specifically accord with the path, not with awakening. How do they accord with the path? In the path of seeing, applied thought spurs on right view, causing it to observe swiftly within the realms of the eight truths above and below. Morality serves as the hub, forming the wheel of the path of seeing, causing it to revolve swiftly with respect to the truths; hence both applied thought and morality are established as limbs of the path. How does this furthermore not accord with awakening? Applied thought operates non-tranquilly with respect to the truths; hence applied thought slightly conflicts with awakening. Awakening is concurrent, possesses an objective referent, and possesses a basis and an aspect. Morality is the opposite of this; therefore it is not established among the limbs of awakening. Universal transit constitutes the path; this cannot serve as a parallel." For what reason are the noble lineages not established as limbs of awakening? The Nyāyānusāra states: "The limbs of awakening extend to both the path and the mundane, whereas the noble lineages pertain solely to the path; therefore they are not established."