瑜伽論記 8.468

8.468

基云：此舉前第二第三事乃汎明第一第四不取意也。測云：此五相中無罪自利利他三業十善為體，攝受以無染污所攝無記異熟等樂及善喜樂捨三受為體，何以得知捨受無罪名樂者，下文云：有漏受樂通三界繫，故知捨受亦名為樂，或眾具所攝五塵及諸定喜樂捨受是也。言此世他世樂者，四法四法文中此世苦後世樂中一分，全取二世樂，二句為二業體，何故不取此世樂後世苦者，此世樂中取後世苦因即是不善，是故不取，或可汎明此世樂者其中亦有善無記樂，是故亦取小分，寂滅樂者，以涅槃及能得涅槃資糧等五種道。

Ji says: "This cites the earlier second and third matters to generally clarify why the first and fourth are not taken. Ce says: Among these five characteristics, the faultless self-benefit and other-benefit takes the three karmas and the ten virtuous actions as its entity. Sustenance takes the unsoiled undefiled-indeterminate karmic maturation bliss and the three feelings of wholesome joy, pleasure, and equanimity as its entity. How is it known that the feeling of equanimity is faultless and called bliss? The text below says: Tainted pleasant feeling is bound to the three realms; therefore, we know that the feeling of equanimity is also called bliss. Or it is the five sense objects included under requisites of life, and the feelings of joy, pleasure, and equanimity in the various concentrations. As for 'bliss in this world and the next world,' in the passage on the four modes of taking on Dharma, it takes one part of 'suffering in this world and bliss in the next,' and completely takes 'bliss in both worlds'; these two clauses serve as the entity of the two karmas. Why does it not take 'bliss in this world and suffering in the next world'? Because in bliss in this world, taking the cause of suffering in the next world is precisely unwholesome, and therefore it is not taken. Or it may generally clarify bliss in this world, within which there is also wholesome and indeterminate bliss, and therefore it also takes a small portion. The bliss of peaceful cessation takes nirvāṇa and the five kinds of paths, such as the path of equipment, that are able to attain nirvāṇa."