[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [俱舍論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822) › 27.85 # 俱舍論疏 27.85 俱舍論疏 27.85 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [27.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27.85) 論「諸有欲起至皆如實知」，明願智加行。准此論文，亦是實知，非比知也。《正理論》云「此願智力能知過去，與宿住智差別云何？願智通知自相、共相，諸宿住智知共非餘。知共相中亦有差別，願智明了，宿住不然。於現所緣對他心智辨差別相，如理應思（述曰：他心知別，不知共相。觀知別中，他心明了未及願智）。」《婆沙》一百七十九「問：云何願智知無色界？有說：由觀等流及行差別，如觀行路之人知所從至。有說：若爾，願智應是比量智，非現量智。應作是說：此願智不觀因知果、不觀果知因，故此智是現量智，非比量智。」又《婆沙》云「問：宿住隨念智與緣過去願智何別？復次宿住隨念智知有漏五蘊，此願智知有漏、無漏諸蘊。復次宿住隨念智知欲、色界五蘊，此願智知三界及不繫諸蘊。復次宿住隨念智知諸蘊共相，此願智知諸蘊自相及共相。」又云「他心智與緣現在願智何別？復次他心智緣一物為境，此願智緣一物或多物為境。復次他心智緣自相境，願智緣自相、共相境。復次他心智緣他相續，此願智緣自、他相續。」准前文釋，復次雖多，然義不足。若與願智同一緣者，力用何別？准《正理論》，雖有同緣，願智勝也。 > On the Śāstra's statement: "Whoever wishes to give rise to ... all is known as it truly is": this clarifies the preparatory practice of knowledge resulting from resolve. According to this text, it is also true knowledge, not inferential knowledge. The Nyāyānusāra says: "This power of knowledge resulting from resolve can know the past; how does it differ from the knowledge of past lives? Knowledge resulting from resolve knows both specific characteristics and common characteristics, whereas all knowledges of past lives know only the common characteristics, not the rest. Even within knowing common characteristics there is a difference: knowledge resulting from resolve is clear and distinct, whereas the knowledge of past lives is not. Its difference from the knowledge of the minds of others with respect to present objects should be considered in accordance with reason (The commentary says: the knowledge of the minds of others knows the specific, not the common characteristics. In terms of observing and knowing the specific, although the knowledge of the minds of others is clear, it does not equal knowledge resulting from resolve)." The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 179, says: "Question: How does knowledge resulting from resolve know the formless realm? Some say: by observing the flowing outflows and differences in practice, just as watching a traveler one knows whence he comes and whither he goes. Some say: if so, knowledge resulting from resolve would be inferential knowledge, not direct perceptual knowledge. It should be stated thus: this knowledge resulting from resolve does not observe the cause to know the fruit, nor does it observe the fruit to know the cause; therefore, this knowledge is direct perceptual knowledge, not inferential knowledge." Furthermore, the Vibhāṣā says: "Question: What is the difference between the knowledge that recollects past lives and the knowledge resulting from resolve that takes the past as its object? Furthermore, the knowledge that recollects past lives knows the five contaminated aggregates, whereas this knowledge resulting from resolve knows both contaminated and uncontaminated aggregates. Furthermore, the knowledge that recollects past lives knows the five aggregates of the desire and form realms, whereas this knowledge resulting from resolve knows the aggregates of the three realms and those unattached \[to any realm\]. Furthermore, the knowledge that recollects past lives knows the common characteristics of the aggregates, whereas this knowledge resulting from resolve knows both the specific characteristics and the common characteristics of the aggregates." It also says: "What is the difference between the knowledge of the minds of others and the knowledge resulting from resolve that takes the present as its object? Furthermore, the knowledge of the minds of others takes a single entity as its object, whereas this knowledge resulting from resolve takes a single entity or multiple entities as its object. Furthermore, the knowledge of the minds of others takes an object of specific characteristics, whereas knowledge resulting from resolve takes objects of specific characteristics and common characteristics. Furthermore, the knowledge of the minds of others takes the mental continuum of another \[as its object\], whereas this knowledge resulting from resolve takes the mental continuum of oneself and others \[as its object\]." Based on the preceding text's explanations, although there are many such alternate points, their meaning is insufficient. If they share the same object as knowledge resulting from resolve, what is the difference in their power and function? According to the Nyāyānusāra, although they share the same object, knowledge resulting from resolve is superior. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 27.84](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27.84) - [Next: 27.86](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27.86) - [Up: 27](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822~en-mt.27.85) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [俱舍論記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1821.27.64) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27.85](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1822.27.85) · Pramāṇa