俱舍論疏 3.88

3.88

論「如本論說至壽異熟果」，此有二意：一引本論證有留壽行、二引本論答前問也。言「留壽行誰之異熟」者，引本論證，即是先感富等業之異熟。「云何苾芻留多壽行」者，問留法。「謂阿羅漢」，簡有學。「成就神通」，簡慧解脫。「得心自在」，簡時解脫。「若於僧眾若於別人」，簡餘田。「以諸命緣至隨分布施」，簡餘物。「施已發願」，簡無願。「即入第四定」等，簡餘定。「從定起已至則皆轉招壽異熟果」者，由施、定力，能轉招也。由施、定轉先不定富異熟業，令招今時壽異熟果。或由此施、定，願令延不定業也。問：何以得知非是由今布施現招壽果？答：有多文證。《婆沙》一百二十六云「問：理無富異熟果可成壽異熟果，何故乃說富異熟業則轉能招壽異熟果？答：無轉果體，有轉業力。謂由布施、邊際定力，轉富異熟業，招壽異熟果。雖俱可轉，而彼今時不顧富果，祈壽果故。」准此文，施為能轉，不言正感。「有餘師說：有業先感壽異熟果，然有災障。由今布施，邊際定力，彼災障滅，壽異熟起。雖俱可轉，而彼今時不顧富果，祈壽果故。」准此論文，施為能感。「有作是說：有業先招壽異熟果，然不決定。由今布施、邊際定力，令招壽業決定與果。」准此論文，施為能決定也。「復有欲令由施、定故，引取宿世殘壽異熟。謂阿羅漢有餘生中殘壽異熟，由今布施、邊際定力引令現前。定力不思議，令久斷還續。」准此論文，亦由施、定引也。准上四解，第一解云：由布施、邊際定力轉富異熟業，招壽異熟果。准此論文，於僧眾等施，為轉業因，非自招命。然此初解即與本論相扶，言轉富業招壽果故。第二師云：有業先招壽異熟果，然有障故等。此亦容是不定業也。第三師云：有業先招壽異熟果，然不決定。第四師云：由施、定故引取宿世殘壽異熟。上三師釋，皆與本論相違。本論云「時彼能感富異熟業，則皆轉招壽異熟果。」此後三師皆不言轉富業，但言壽業有障、不定、殘果，故知非與本論相扶。

On the Śāstra's statement: "As the fundamental treatise says […] the vipāka-fruit of life": This has two points: first, citing the fundamental treatise to prove that prolonging life-formations exists; second, citing the fundamental treatise to answer the previous question. The statement "Of what is the prolonged life-formation the vipāka?" cites the fundamental treatise to prove that it is the vipāka of karma previously ripening in wealth and so forth. "How does a bhikṣu prolong many life-formations?" asks about the method of prolongation. "An arhat" excludes those in training (śaikṣa). "Possessing supernatural faculties" excludes those liberated by wisdom (prajñāvimukta). "Attained mastery of mind" excludes those liberated periodically (samayavimukta). "Whether toward the Saṅgha or toward a specific person" excludes other fields [of merit]. "With requisites of life […] giving according to one's means" excludes other articles. "Having given, making a vow" excludes having no vow. "Immediately enters the fourth dhyāna" and so forth excludes other dhyānas. "Having arisen from dhyāna […] all are transformed to bring about the vipāka-fruit of life": through the power of giving and dhyāna, one is able to transform [the karmic fruition] to bring it about. Through giving and dhyāna, karma previously indefinite for the vipāka of wealth is transformed, causing it to bring about the vipāka-fruit of life in the present. Or through this giving and dhyāna, the vow causes the indefinite karma to be prolonged. Question: How is it known that it is not that the present giving directly brings about the fruit of life in the present? Answer: Many passages prove this. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 126, states: "Question: In principle, no vipāka-fruit of wealth can become a vipāka-fruit of life; why then is it said that karma for the vipāka of wealth is transformed and can bring about the vipāka-fruit of life? Answer: There is no transformation of the substantial entity of the fruit; there is transformation of the power of karma. That is, by the power of giving and the summit-dhyāna (prāntakoṭika-dhyāna), the karma for the vipāka of wealth is transformed to bring about the vipāka-fruit of life. Although both could be transformed, at that time he has no regard for the fruit of wealth, because he prays for the fruit of life." According to this passage, giving is that which can transform; it does not say it directly produces it. "Other masters say: There is karma that previously brings about the vipāka-fruit of life, but there were disasters and obstacles. By the power of the present giving and the summit-dhyāna, those disasters and obstacles are extinguished, and the vipāka of life arises. Although both could be transformed, at that time he has no regard for the fruit of wealth, because he prays for the fruit of life." According to this passage of the treatise, giving is that which can produce [the fruit]. "Some say: There is karma that previously brings about the vipāka-fruit of life, but it is not determined. By the power of the present giving and the summit-dhyāna, the karma that brings about life is made determined to yield its fruit." According to this passage of the treatise, giving is that which makes it determined. "Furthermore, there are those who maintain that through giving and dhyāna, one draws forth the remaining vipāka of life from past lives. That is, an arhat has remaining vipāka of life in other lives; through the power of the present giving and the summit-dhyāna, he draws it forth to make it present. The power of dhyāna is inconceivable, causing what was long interrupted to be joined again." According to this passage of the treatise, it is also drawn forth by giving and dhyāna. According to the above four explanations: The first explanation states: Through the power of giving and summit-dhyāna, karma for the vipāka of wealth is transformed to bring about the vipāka-fruit of life. According to this passage of the treatise, giving to the Saṅgha and so forth is the cause that transforms karma; it does not itself bring about life. However, this first explanation accords with the fundamental treatise, because it speaks of transforming the karma of wealth to bring about the fruit of life. The second master says: There is karma that previously brings about the vipāka-fruit of life, but because there are obstacles, and so forth. This also allows for indefinite karma. The third master says: There is karma that previously brings about the vipāka-fruit of life, but it is not determined. The fourth master says: Through giving and dhyāna, one draws forth the remaining vipāka of life from past lives. The explanations of the above three masters all contradict the fundamental treatise. The fundamental treatise says: "At that time, his karma that could bring about the vipāka of wealth is then all transformed to bring about the vipāka-fruit of life." These latter three masters do not speak of transforming the karma of wealth; they only speak of life karma having obstacles, being indefinite, or being a remaining fruit, so it is known that they do not accord with the fundamental treatise.