俱舍論頌疏論本 15.5

15.5

從根本恒時，得靜慮無漏者，一、從根本得靜慮無漏戒；二、從恒時得靜慮無漏戒。從根本者，謂從根本業道處得定、道律儀，此二律儀於定位中唯有根本，定前定後無此戒故，故無加行後起位也。由定、道戒唯根本故，故得戒時，唯於根本起惡處得別解脫戒，加行、後起皆容有故，故於三處皆發得戒。論云：「若得靜慮、無漏律儀，應知但從根本業道，尚不從彼加行後起，況從遮罪（已上論文）？」第二、從恒時得者（恒謂三世也），謂從三世發定、道戒，由定、道戒與心俱轉，謂戒俱心能緣三世，故心俱戒亦防三世。由上差別應作四句。論云：「第一句者，謂從現世加行後起及諸遮罪（以現世故，得別解脫戒。加行等故，不得定道戒也）；第二句者，謂從去來根本業道（由根本故，得定道戒。由去來故，不得別解脫戒也）；第三句者，謂從現世根本業道（以現世故，得別解脫戒。是根本故，得定、道戒也）；第四句者，謂從去來加行後起（由去來故，無別解脫戒。加行等故，無定、道戒也）。」又論云：「非於正得善律儀時，可定有現世惡業道等，是故應言從現處得，理實應言防護未來，定不應言防護過現（解云：此文是論主彈前第三，第一句，謂正得善戒，豈有現世惡業道等？等取第一句中加行後起及遮罪也。彈已正言：是故應言從現處得。此意者，第一第三句應加處字，義即無妨，謂現在雖無業道等體，而有發業等處，故於業道等處發戒，義無妨也。若論發戒，有通三世。論其防罪，理應未來，遮不起故。過去已滅，現在已生，不可防也）。」

"From the fundamental and all time, one acquires [the discipline of] dhyāna and the undefiled": first, acquiring the precepts of dhyāna and the undefiled from the fundamental; second, acquiring the precepts of dhyāna and the undefiled from all time. "From the fundamental" means acquiring the disciplines of absorption and the path from the loci of the fundamental karmapathas. In these two disciplines, at the stage of absorption, there are only the fundamental ones; because these precepts do not exist before absorption or after absorption, there are no stages of preliminary preparation or subsequent action. Because the precepts of absorption and the path are only fundamental, when the precepts are acquired, one acquires the prātimokṣa precepts only at the loci where fundamental evil arises; but because preliminary preparations and subsequent acts are both possible [in prātimokṣa], the acquisition of the precepts arises in relation to all three loci. The treatise says: "If one acquires the disciplines of dhyāna and the undefiled, it should be known that it is only from the fundamental karmapathas, not even from their preliminary preparations or subsequent acts, let alone from prohibited offences." (The above is the text of the treatise.) Second, "acquiring from all time" (all time means the three times) means generating the precepts of absorption and the path from the three times. Because the precepts of absorption and the path operate co-arising with the mind—that is, the mind accompanied by the precepts can take the three times as its object—the precepts accompanying the mind likewise guard against the three times. Based on the above distinctions, a fourfold proposition (catuṣkoṭi) should be constructed. The treatise says: "The first proposition: from the preliminary preparations, subsequent acts, and prohibited offences of the present time (because it is the present time, one acquires the prātimokṣa precepts; because it is the preliminary preparations, etc., one does not acquire the precepts of absorption or the path). The second proposition: from the fundamental karmapathas of the past and future (because it is the fundamental, one acquires the precepts of absorption and the path; because it is the past and future, one does not acquire the prātimokṣa precepts). The third proposition: from the fundamental karmapathas of the present time (because it is the present time, one acquires the prātimokṣa precepts; because it is the fundamental, one acquires the precepts of absorption and the path). The fourth proposition: from the preliminary preparations and subsequent acts of the past and future (because it is the past and future, there are no prātimokṣa precepts; because it is the preliminary preparations, etc., there are no precepts of absorption or the path)." Furthermore, the treatise says: "At the very time when the wholesome discipline is acquired, it cannot be definitively established that there are present unwholesome karmapathas and the like. Therefore, one should say that it is acquired from the present locus; in truth and reason, one should say that it guards against the future, and one should certainly not say that it guards against the past and present." (The explanation states: This passage is the treatise master’s critique of the previous third and first propositions. That is, at the very time of acquiring the wholesome precepts, how could there be present unwholesome karmapathas and the like? "And the like" includes the preliminary preparations, subsequent acts, and prohibited offences of the first proposition. Having critiqued this, he states correctly: "Therefore, one should say that it is acquired from the present locus." The meaning is that if the word "locus" is added to the first and third propositions, there is no conceptual obstacle. That is, although the intrinsic nature of the karmapathas and the like does not exist in the present, there are loci that give rise to the karma and so forth; thus, generating precepts in relation to the loci of the karmapathas and the like presents no contradiction. If one speaks of generating precepts, this applies to the three times. But as to guarding against offences, it reason dictates it must be the future, because one prevents them from arising; the past has already ceased and the present has already arisen, so they cannot be guarded against.)