俱舍論疏 26.190

26.190

論「此上未來至四諦他心」，明得修同。此上四例未來皆修八智，除盡、無生，是有學故。《正理論》云「四類不能斷欲界染，苦、集二法非上對治，何緣起彼治？此智未來修。若許兼彼非對治者，離有頂染等應兼修世俗。此難非理，唯同對治於未來修，非所許故。謂亦許有相屬故修，如見道中修世俗智，或由因力相資故修。如斷欲時兼修四類，斷上染位修苦、集法。若斷欲染不修類智，斷上不修苦、集二法。則漸次得不還果者，應無容起類智現前，阿羅漢應無起苦、集法智，先所得者皆已捨故。先未得者非所修故，由約種類，若先已得為同類因力，引等流智生，此智由先彼智引故，於彼智類彼能為因，故此智生因力資彼，雖非同治亦未來修。」准上論文，修見道邊俗智名相屬修，然名同觀亦不違理。斷九地染加行、勝進，皆修俗智未見辨處。且即詳此相望，雖非是同類因，亦有力用互相引故，由此與無漏智互相修也。

The passage of the śāstra from “Above this, future [cultivation]” up to “the four truths and [knowledge of] another's mind” explains that cultivation through acquisition is identical. In the four paradigms above, future [cultivation] in all cases cultivates eight knowledges, excluding exhaustion and non-arising, because one is a trainee (śaikṣa). The Nyāyānusāra states: “The four subsequent [knowledges] cannot abandon the defilements of the desire realm, and the two dharma [knowledges] of suffering and origin are not counteragents to the upper [realms]; for what reason, then, when arising their counteragents, are these knowledges cultivated in the future? If one permits that those which are not counteragents are also included, then when departing from the defilements of the peak of existence, etc., conventional [knowledge] should also be cultivated concurrently. This objection is unreasonable, because it is not conceded that only identical counteragents are cultivated in the future. That is, it is also conceded that cultivation occurs through relationship (xiangshu), as when conventional knowledge is cultivated during the path of seeing, or cultivation occurs because the power of causes mutually assists, as when the four subsequent [knowledges] are concurrently cultivated when abandoning desire, or when the dharma [knowledges] of suffering and origin are cultivated at the stage of abandoning upper defilements. If subsequent knowledge were not cultivated when abandoning the defilements of desire, and the two dharma [knowledges] of suffering and origin were not cultivated when abandoning the upper [defilements], then for one who gradually attains the fruit of a non-returner, there could be no possibility of subsequent knowledge manifesting, and for an arhat, there could be no arising of the dharma knowledges of suffering and origin, because what was previously attained has entirely been abandoned, and what was not previously attained was not cultivated. In terms of species, if what was previously attained acts as the power of a cause of the same class (sabhāga-hetu) to induce the arising of an outflowing knowledge (niṣyanda-jñāna), this knowledge, being induced by that previous knowledge, can act as a cause for that category of knowledge; therefore, the arising of this knowledge assists that by the power of causes, and though not an identical counteragent, it is still cultivated in the future.” Following the text above, the cultivation of conventional knowledge adjacent to the path of seeing is called cultivation through relationship; however, calling it identical contemplation also does not contradict the principle. In preparatory and distinguished paths abandoning the defilements of the nine stages, all cultivate conventional knowledge, but no explicit analysis is seen. For now, examining their mutual relationship: although they are not causes of the same class, they nevertheless possess the functional capacity to mutually induce one another, and therefore they and pure knowledge are mutually cultivated.