俱舍論疏 5.105

5.105

論「此非善說違我宗故」，可解。《正理論》云「又執滅定體唯是假，未知何法為假所依？非離假依可有假法。」述曰：如瓶等假，所依即是色等四境。若四境無，亦無瓶等。「又唯不轉。其體是無，如何可言是有為攝？此前後位及現皆無有性，恒時不可得故。而言是有，是有為攝，但有虛言都無有義。若言假定亦有所依，謂所依身由定心引令如是起，假立為定。是則此定應無記攝，非無記法可說為善。」述曰：若身為所依，即是無記。已下自立宗也。「是故唯應依心、心起，非前定心力能遮礙餘心。由此故知，離前心外定有別法能遮礙心。由此法故，於無心位雖有心因而心不起，即此別法名滅盡定，體是有為，實而非假。修觀行者，由定前心要期願力所引發故，令滅盡定勢力漸微，至都盡位無遮礙用，意、法為緣還生意識。由此准釋前無想定及與無想。」述曰：亦同實有。

Regarding the treatise's statement, "This is not a sound explanation, because it contradicts our school": This is easily understood. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Furthermore, holding that the essence of the cessation attainment is purely nominal, we do not know what factor serves as the support for the nominal designation? A nominal factor cannot exist apart from a nominal support." Commentary: Just as a pot or the like is a nominal entity, its support is the four sensory objects such as visible form. If the four objects are absent, there is also no pot or the like. [Nyāyānusāra:] "Furthermore, it is merely non-functioning. Its essence being non-existent, how can it be said to be subsumed under the conditioned? It lacks real existence in the periods before and after, as well as in the present, because it is at all times unattainable. To say that it exists and is subsumed under the conditioned is merely empty talk completely devoid of meaning. If one says that the nominal attainment also has a support, namely that the body relied upon is induced by the mind of the attainment to arise in such a way, and is nominally designated as attainment, then this attainment would be subsumed under the indeterminate, and an indeterminate factor cannot be said to be wholesome." Commentary: If the body serves as the support, it is indeterminate. From here downward, it establishes its own tenet. [Nyāyānusāra:] "Therefore, it can only arise dependent on the mind, and it is not that the power of the preceding mind of the attainment can obstruct other minds. From this we know that apart from the preceding mind, there is definitely a distinct factor able to obstruct the mind. Due to this factor, in the state of mindlessness, although the causes of mind are present, the mind does not arise; this distinct factor is named the cessation attainment, its nature is conditioned, and it is real, not nominal. For a contemplative practitioner, because it is induced by the power of the aspiration and resolve in the mind prior to the attainment, the force of the cessation attainment gradually weakens until it reaches a point of total exhaustion where it has no obstructive function, and with the manas and dharmas as conditions, the mental consciousness arises once again. By this, the preceding non-ideational attainment and non-ideation are explained analogously." Commentary: They are likewise substantially real.