俱舍論疏 4.244

4.244

論「所以者何」，自此已下明異生性。《婆沙》四十五云「犢子部執，異生性是欲界見苦斷十隨眠。」《瑜伽》五十二云「復次云何異生性？謂三界見所斷法種子唯未永害量，名異生性。」今詳「唯未永害」言即是世第一法已前，非是無間道已後，即是害見所斷惑故。既言唯未永害量，即是不取一分害量，名異生性，唯言所遮故。今時人釋云：二障種子上建立異生性。聲聞之人斷煩惱障，名非異生；有所知障故，名為異生。若爾，二障通其見、修，唯佛能盡二障種子，即合唯佛一人名為聖人。自餘皆是亦凡亦聖，以障種有斷、不斷故。譬喻者說，其異生性無有實體。

[On the Śāstra's statement:] "Why is this?" From here below clarifies the nature of an ordinary being. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 45, states: "The Vātsīputrīyas hold that the nature of an ordinary being is the ten latencies severed by seeing [the truth of] suffering in the desire realm." The Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle 52, states: "Furthermore, what is the nature of an ordinary being? It is the mere measure of not yet permanently destroying the seeds of states abandoned by seeing in the three realms, termed the nature of an ordinary being." Now examining this, the words 'mere measure of not yet permanently destroying' refer to before the supreme mundane dharma, not after the uninterrupted path, which is precisely the destruction of afflictions abandoned by seeing. Since it says 'the mere measure of not yet permanently destroying', it does not take a portion of destruction as the nature of an ordinary being, because it is excluded by the word 'mere'. People of today explain: the nature of an ordinary being is established upon the seeds of the two obscurations. A śrāvaka has severed the affliction obscuration and is named a non-ordinary-being; because they have the cognizable obscuration, they are named an ordinary being. If so, the two obscurations span both seeing and cultivation, and only a Buddha can exhaust the seeds of the two obscurations, so it would follow that only the Buddha alone is named a noble one. All others would be both ordinary and noble, because the seeds of the obscurations would be partly severed and partly unsevered. The Dārṣṭāntikas say that this nature of an ordinary being has no real entity.