俱舍論疏 27.94

27.94

論「法無礙解至無名等故」，明法無礙所依地也。《婆沙》一百八十云「地者，法無礙解，有說在二地，謂欲界、初靜慮。有說在五地，謂欲界、四靜慮。有說在七地，謂欲界、未至、靜慮中間及四靜慮。」然無評家。有人云：初說據名隨語繫故，說法無礙解且依二地。後二說據名隨身繫，說法無礙解通依上地。以緣法難，要自地智緣自地法。此論、《正理》、《顯宗》竝同《婆沙》第二說，以五地為正。今詳此解不得論意。若以《婆沙》三說後二說是名隨身繫家，既未至禪無別有身，如何第三釋通七地也。又准此中明法無礙所依地有三釋，明名所依地有兩重二說、兩重詳文，准彼名屬聲為正。《正理論》云「法無礙解通依五地，謂依欲界、四本靜慮。上地中無名身等故，彼不別緣下名等故。」准此論文，無色不別緣下名也。「上地無名身等故」者，上地謂無色界，無色界無名身等，復不能別緣下名等故，無法無礙解。第二靜慮已上無名等身，有能別緣下名等故，有法無礙解。

On the Śāstra's statement: "The unimpeded comprehension of phenomena ... because names and so forth do not exist [there]": this clarifies the level supported by the comprehension of phenomena. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 180, says: "Regarding the level: as for the unimpeded comprehension of phenomena, some say it is in two levels, namely the desire realm and the first dhyāna. Some say it is in five levels, namely the desire realm and the four dhyānas. Some say it is in seven levels, namely the desire realm, the threshold [concentration], the intermediate dhyāna, and the four dhyānas." However, there is no critical evaluation [by the compiler]. Someone said: the first statement is based on the idea that names are tied to speech, and thus states that the unimpeded comprehension of phenomena relies only on two levels. The latter two statements are based on the idea that names are tied to the body, and thus state that the unimpeded comprehension of phenomena generally relies on the higher levels; because taking phenomena as object is difficult, knowledge of one's own level must take phenomena of one's own level as object. This treatise, the Nyāyānusāra, and the Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya all agree with the second statement of the Vibhāṣā, taking the five levels as correct. Now, examining this explanation, it misses the treatise's intent. If the latter two of the three statements in the Vibhāṣā belonged to the master who holds that names are tied to the body, then since there is no distinct body in the threshold absorption, how could the third explanation apply to seven levels? Furthermore, according to this, there are three explanations clarifying the level supported by the comprehension of phenomena, and two sets of two statements and two detailed texts clarifying the level supported by names; based on those, it is correct that names pertain to sound. The Nyāyānusāra says: "The unimpeded comprehension of phenomena relies generally on five levels, namely relying on the desire realm and the four fundamental dhyānas. Because sets of names and so forth do not exist in the higher levels, and because they do not separately take lower names and so forth as objects." According to this text, the formless realm does not separately take lower names as object. "Because sets of names and so forth do not exist in the higher levels": 'higher levels' refers to the formless realm; since sets of names and so forth do not exist in the formless realm and it cannot separately take lower names and so forth as objects, it lacks the unimpeded comprehension of phenomena. From the second dhyāna upward, sets of names and so forth do not exist [there], but because they can separately take lower names and so forth as objects, they have the unimpeded comprehension of phenomena.