俱舍論頌疏論本 15.64

15.64

又許此三業，非前後熟故者，引證。意明下地有捨異熟，此是《發智本論》說也。彼云：「頗有三業非前非後受異熟耶（解云：同一時受，言非前非後也）？」彼論答曰：「有，謂順樂受業色，順苦受業心、心所法，順不苦不樂受業心不相應行，乃至廣說（解云：順樂色者，於人天中眼等五根、色、香、昧、觸。順苦心、心所者，謂感人天苦受及相應法。順不苦不樂受業心不相應者，於人天中命根、眾同分、得四相。）」（此是第一節文，於廣說中更有一節文，《俱舍》略引，但言乃至廣說。第二節文，順樂受業心不相應行，能感人天命根等四。順苦受業色者，謂感人天中色、香、味、觸。順不苦不樂受業心、心所法，此業能感不苦不樂受及相應異熟也）。今引彼文意，取第二節文為證，以說不苦不樂受業，感不苦不樂受異熟，明知欲界有捨異熟，以本論說三業俱時受異熟果。由此證知，下地亦有順、非二業，非離欲界有此三業俱時熟故，上界無苦故，三業之言唯說欲界。問：「豈不業是善惡，受果無記，此業與樂體性既殊，如何說為順樂受等？」答：「業能為因，利益樂受，故約利益說名順受。或復此業是樂所受，謂樂是業，異熟果故，果領於因，此即所受順能受也。或復彼樂是業所受，由此能受樂異熟故，因受於果，此即能受順所受也。」

"Furthermore, these three karmas are admitted / Because they do not mature earlier or later" cites proof. The intention is to clarify that the lower stages have the maturation of equanimity; this is taught in the *Jñānaprasthāna*. That text says: "Can there be three karmas that experience maturation neither earlier nor later? (The commentary explains: Experiencing it at the same time is meant by 'neither earlier nor later'.)" That treatise answers: "There are: namely, matter (rūpa) of karma conducive to pleasant feeling, mind and mental factors of karma conducive to painful feeling, and formations non-associated with mind of karma conducive to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, and so forth in detail. (The commentary explains: The matter of conducive to pleasant refers to the five sense faculties such as the eye, as well as visible form, fragrance, taste, and tangibles among humans and devas. Mind and mental factors of conducive to painful refers to incurring painful feeling and its associated dharmas among humans and devas. Formations non-associated with mind of karma conducive to neither-painful-nor-pleasant refers to the life-faculty, commonality of sentient beings (nikāya-sabhāgatā), and the four characteristics of acquisition among humans and devas.)" (This is the first passage. In the detailed exposition there is yet another passage; the *Abhidharmakośa* cites it in abridged form, merely stating 'and so forth in detail'. In the second passage: formations non-associated with mind of karma conducive to pleasant feeling can incur the four [dharmas] such as the life-faculty among humans and devas; matter of karma conducive to painful feeling refers to incurring visible form, fragrance, taste, and tangibles among humans and devas; mind and mental factors of karma conducive to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling can incur neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling and its associated maturation.) Now, citing that text's intention, the second passage is taken as proof: since it says that karma conducive to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling incurs the maturation of neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, it is clearly known that the Desire Realm has the maturation of equanimity, because the root treatise says that the three karmas experience the fruit of maturation simultaneously. From this it is proven and known that the lower stages also have karma conducive to neither, for these three karmas cannot mature simultaneously outside of the Desire Realm; since the higher realms lack suffering, the words 'three karmas' speak solely of the Desire Realm. Question: "Is it not that karma is wholesome or unwholesome, while the fruit of feeling is neutral? Since this karma and pleasant [feeling] are completely distinct in nature, how can it be called conducive to pleasant feeling and so forth?" Answer: "Karma can act as a cause to benefit pleasant feeling; therefore, with respect to benefit, it is called conducive to feeling. Or alternatively, this karma is experienced by pleasure: that is, pleasure is the fruit of maturation of the karma; the fruit apprehends the cause, which is the experienced being conducive to the experiencer. Or alternatively, that pleasure is experienced by karma: because by this [karma] one is able to experience the maturation of pleasure, the cause experiences the fruit, which is the experiencer being conducive to the experienced."