俱舍論疏 5.26

5.26

論「生死位中至還起於想」，答也。謂初生彼天多時有想、將欲命終位亦多時有想，於其中間長時無想，以此義故名為無想，非是彼天全無想也。《婆沙》一百五十四「評家云：如是說者，此事不定。或前多後少、或前少後多，隨彼意樂有差別故。」又《婆沙》「評家云：出無想心，通生得善有覆無記、無覆無記，通五部所斷。幾隨眠隨增者，色界有漏緣，謂第四定有漏緣隨眠。問：何故無漏緣隨眠於彼無想不隨增耶？答：彼計無想為涅槃，無想定為真道。乃至生彼及從彼沒，唯如是執還復隨轉，於真滅道不謗為無，故無漏緣爾時不起。問：彼無想位三食亦滅，云何說有食？答：食有二種，一先時能引、二現在任持。彼位雖無現任持食，而有先時能引食，故名為有食。問：入無想心為通幾性？幾部所斷？有人釋云：雖未見文，准彼出心，入心亦爾。」今詳入心多分唯是異熟生心，以順滅故、趣異熟故。前心雖非等無間緣，然《正理論》云「彼以宿業等無間緣為任持食，謂由宿業引眾同分及命根等，由續生心及無間入無想果心牽引資助故，彼亦有過去觸等為任持食。無心位中唯有過去觸等為食，現在都無，有心位中二種俱有。」已上論文同《婆沙》意。

On the text of the Treatise, "In the states of birth and death... conception arises again": This is the answer. It means that when first born in that heaven, there is conception for a long time, and when approaching the point of death, there is also conception for a long time; during the interval between these, there is no conception for a prolonged period. For this reason, it is called non-conception; it is not that that heaven is entirely devoid of conception. Fascicle 154 of the Vibhāṣā states: "The verdict says: 'It should be stated thus: this matter is indefinite. Either the former is long and the latter short, or the former is short and the latter long, because there are differences depending on their aspirations.'" Furthermore, the Vibhāṣā states: "The verdict says: 'The mind emerging from non-conception includes innate good, defiled-neutral (nivṛtāvyākṛta), and undefiled-neutral (anivṛtāvyākṛta), and is abandoned by all five sections. As for which anuśayas increase: those that take the rūpāvacara contaminations as objects—namely, the anuśayas of the fourth dhyāna that take contaminations as objects.' Question: Why do anuśayas that take uncontaminated objects not increase in that state of non-conception? Answer: They hold non-conception to be nirvāṇa and the non-conception attainment to be the true path. Up to the time they are born there and die from there, only such grasping continues to function; they do not slander the true cessation and path as non-existent, so [anuśayas] with uncontaminated objects do not arise at that time. Question: In that state of non-conception, the three nutriments are also ceased; how can they be said to have nutriment? Answer: Nutriment is of two kinds: first, that which induces previously; second, that which sustains in the present. Although in that state there is no present sustaining nutriment, there is nutriment that previously induced it; hence they are said to have nutriment. Question: As for the mind entering non-conception, how many moral natures does it encompass? By how many sections is it abandoned? Someone explained: 'Although no text has been seen, judging from the emerging mind, the entering mind is likewise.'" Now, examining the entering mind, it is mostly only a mind born of maturation, because it conforms to cessation and tends toward maturation. Although the preceding mind is not an immediately contiguous condition (samanantara-pratyaya), yet the Nyāyānusāra says: "They take past karma and the immediately contiguous condition as sustaining nutriment; that is, because past karma induces generic similarity, the life faculty, and so forth, and because the mind reconnecting existence and the mind immediately entering the fruit of non-conception lead and assist them, they also have past contact and so forth as sustaining nutriment. In the mindless state, there are only past contact and so forth as nutriment, with none in the present; in the state with mind, both kinds are present." The above treatise text agrees with the intention of the Vibhāṣā.