俱舍論疏 27.99

27.99

論「《施設足論》至四種次第」，引論證兼顯次第。無退轉智是無礙解體，四種皆以無退轉智為體。《正理論》云「又經列此先義後法，諸對法中先法後義，此為顯示二智生時，或義因名、或名因義，故經與論作差別說。謂聽法者先分別名，既正知名次尋其義，正知義已欲為他說，次必應求無滯說智，依此次第故名在先。然此四中義智最勝，餘是助伴，故義在先。謂於義中若正了達，次應方便尋究其名，既已知名欲為他說，次應於說求巧便智，是故此四次第如是。辨無礙解若緣說時，何異第三詞無礙解？第三了達訓釋言詞，如有變礙故名色等，此達應理無滯礙說（已上論文）。」

The Śāstra states: "From the Prajñaptipāda up to the sequence of the four," citing a treatise as proof while also revealing the sequence. Non-regressive cognition is the intrinsic nature of the unobstructed understandings; all four have non-regressive cognition as their intrinsic nature. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Furthermore, the sūtras list these with meaning first and then phenomena, while in the Abhidharma texts phenomena come first and then meaning. This is to demonstrate that when the two cognitions arise, either meaning is based on names, or names are based on meaning; therefore the sūtras and the śāstras explain them differently. That is to say, a listener to the Dharma first discerns names; having correctly known the names, they next investigate their meanings; having correctly known the meanings, wishing to explain them to others, they next must certainly seek cognition of unimpeded speech. Relying on this sequence, names come first. However, among these four, cognition of meaning is supreme, and the rest are its assistants; therefore meaning comes first. That is to say, if one correctly comprehends meaning, one should next expediently investigate its names; having already known the names, wishing to explain them to others, one should next seek skilful cognition regarding speech. Therefore, the sequence of these four is thus. When the unobstructed understanding of eloquence takes speech as its object, how does it differ from the third, the unobstructed understanding of etymology? The third comprehends the explanatory terms, such as being named 'form' because of mutability and obstruction, and so forth; this [fourth] one comprehends speech that accords with principle and is free from obstruction." (End of śāstra citation.)