俱舍論頌疏論本 6.28

6.28

唯等勝為果者，簡差別也。然唯得與等勝為因，非為劣因為無漏道。謂加行生故，豈設勤勞，劣法為果，故與等勝為同類因。且如已生苦法智忍，還與未來苦法智忍為同類因，是為等因。若苦法忍與苦法智乃至無生智為同類因，是名為勝，智勝忍故。廣說乃至諸無生智唯與等類為同類因，更無有法勝無生智故。又諸已生見道、修道及無學道，隨其次第，與三二一為同類因。解云：見道與三為因，見、修、無學也。修道與二為因，除見道也。無學道與一為因，除見、修道也。又於此中，諸鈍根道與鈍及利為同類因，諸利根道為利道為因。如隨信行及信勝解時，解脫道隨其次第與六四二為同類因。解云：見道二聖：一鈍、二利，鈍謂隨信行，利謂隨法行。修道有二聖：一鈍、二利，鈍謂信勝解，利謂見至。無學道有二聖：一鈍、二利，鈍謂時解脫，利謂不時解脫。此約三道，總有六聖。今隨信行與六為因。信勝解與四為因，除見道二聖也。時解脫道與二為因，除見修四聖也。若隨法行及見至、不時解脫道，隨其次第與三二一為同類因。解云：隨法行與三為因，謂隨法、見至、不時也。見至與二為因，除隨法也。不時與一為因，除隨法及見至也。論云：「諸上地道為下地因，云何名為或等或勝？」解云：此難九地道互為因，上地勝、下地劣，與下為因，是則與劣為因，非等勝也。論云：「由因增長，及由根故，謂見道等，下下品等，後後位中因轉增長。」解云：答前難也。不由地有上下，令道等有勝劣。雖依下地，望上地道有二種因，得名為勝，一由因增長、第二及由根故。由因增長者，謂見道等下，釋因增長也。等取修道及無學道。後後位中因轉增勝，謂修無學道在見道後，無學道在修道後，名為後後。又見道等各有下下品等九品道也。此九品等位，後後位中因亦轉勝，如上地起見道，與下地修道等為因，及上地下下品等道與下地上中品等道為因，以後後位因增長也。第二由根者，上地鈍根道與下地利根道為因。論文不釋根者，謂易解故。又論云：「雖一相續，無容可得隨信、隨法二道現起，而已生者為未來因。」解云：此文釋伏難。伏難意者，難前及由根故。如一身中已起鈍根隨信行道，不可更起利根隨法行道，如何可說上地鈍根道與下地利根道為因？故言雖一相續身，無容二道起。而上地已起隨信行道，與下地未來隨法行為因，理無妨矣。

Regarding "only equal or superior as fruit": this sets apart distinctions. However, it can only serve as a cause for what is equal or superior, not as an inferior cause, because it is an undefiled path. That is, because it is produced by effort (prayogaja)—how could one make strenuous exertion and have an inferior phenomenon as the fruit? Therefore, it is a similar cause only for what is equal or superior. As an illustration, the patience with the knowledge of the phenomenon of suffering (duḥkhe dharmajñānakṣānti) that has already arisen is, for its part, a similar cause for the future patience with the knowledge of the phenomenon of suffering; this is an equal cause. If the patience with the phenomenon of suffering is a similar cause for the knowledge of the phenomenon of suffering (duḥkhe dharmajñāna), up to the knowledge of non-arising (anutpādajñāna), this is called superior, because knowledge is superior to patience. Expanding this up to: all knowledges of non-arising are similar causes only for their equal kind, because there is no phenomenon superior to the knowledge of non-arising. Furthermore, the path of seeing (darśanamārga), the path of cultivation (bhāvanāmārga), and the path beyond training (aśaikṣamārga) that have already arisen are, according to their order, similar causes for three, two, and one. The explanation says: The path of seeing is a cause for three: seeing, cultivation, and beyond training. The path of cultivation is a cause for two, excluding the path of seeing. The path beyond training is a cause for one, excluding the paths of seeing and cultivation. Furthermore, within this, paths of dull faculties are similar causes for both dull and sharp [faculties]; paths of sharp faculties are causes only for sharp paths. As in the case of those who follow through faith (śraddhānusārin), those resolved through faith (śraddhādhimukta), and the time-released (samayavimukta), their paths of liberation are, according to their order, similar causes for six, four, and two. The explanation says: The path of seeing has two noble persons: first, dull; second, sharp. The dull is called the one who follows through faith; the sharp is called the one who follows through phenomena (dharmānusārin). The path of cultivation has two noble persons: first, dull; second, sharp. The dull is called the one resolved through faith; the sharp is called the one who has attained vision (dṛṣṭiprāpta). The path beyond training has two noble persons: first, dull; second, sharp. The dull is called the time-released; the sharp is called the not-time-released (asamayavimukta). In reference to these three paths, there are altogether six noble persons. Now, the one who follows through faith is a cause for six. The one resolved through faith is a cause for four, excluding the two noble persons of the path of seeing. The path of the time-released is a cause for two, excluding the four noble persons of seeing and cultivation. If it is the path of the one who follows through phenomena, of the one who has attained vision, and of the not-time-released, they are, according to their order, similar causes for three, two, and one. The explanation says: The one who follows through phenomena is a cause for three, namely, following through phenomena, attaining vision, and the not-time-released. Attaining vision is a cause for two, excluding following through phenomena. The not-time-released is a cause for one, excluding following through phenomena and attaining vision. The treatise says: "The paths of superior stages are causes for inferior stages; how can they be called either equal or superior?" The explanation says: This questions the paths of the nine stages being causes for one another—the superior stage is superior and the inferior stage is inferior; if it is a cause for the inferior, then it would be a cause for what is inferior, not equal or superior. The treatise says: "Because of the growth of the cause, and because of faculties; that is, in the path of seeing and so forth, in the lowest of the low grades and so forth, in subsequent stages the cause progressively grows." The explanation says: This answers the preceding objection. It is not that stages being higher or lower makes the path and so forth superior or inferior. Even if based on an inferior stage, when viewed in relation to the path of a superior stage, there are two kinds of causes by which it can be termed superior: first, because of the growth of the cause; second, also because of faculties. Regarding "because of the growth of the cause": the passage from "that is, in the path of seeing and so forth" explains the growth of the cause. "And so forth" includes the path of cultivation and the path beyond training. In subsequent stages the cause progressively becomes more superior: that is, cultivation and beyond training are after the path of seeing, and the path beyond training is after the path of cultivation, which is called "subsequent." Furthermore, the path of seeing and so forth each have nine grades of paths, such as the lowest of the low grade and so forth. Among these nine grades and so forth, in subsequent stages the cause also becomes more superior. For instance, the path of seeing arising in a superior stage is a cause for the path of cultivation and so forth of an inferior stage; and the path of the lowest of the low grade and so forth of a superior stage is a cause for the path of the medium of the low grade and so forth of an inferior stage, because the cause grows in subsequent stages. The second, "because of faculties": the path of dull faculties of a superior stage is a cause for the path of sharp faculties of an inferior stage. The text of the treatise does not explain "faculties" because it is easily understood. Furthermore, the treatise says: "Although within a single mental continuum there is no possibility of the two paths of following through faith and following through phenomena arising together, that which has already arisen is a cause for the future." The explanation says: This text resolves an implicit objection. The intention of the implicit objection is to challenge the preceding "also because of faculties." For example, if within one bodily continuum the dull-faculty path of following through faith has already arisen, it is impossible to further arise the sharp-faculty path of following through phenomena; how could one say that the dull-faculty path of a superior stage is a cause for the sharp-faculty path of an inferior stage? Therefore it says: although within a single continuous body there is no possibility for the two paths to arise [together], that which has already arisen in a superior stage being a cause for the future following through phenomena in an inferior stage is logically without obstruction.