瑜伽論記 17

English (machine translation) 17

Language: English

Above, the first two gates among the three explaining the defilement of afflictions have ended. From here below, the third explains the meaning of the nine gates; therein, first, the nine gates are explained individually; later, they are gathered in verse. In the former, first, the nine gates are explained; later, the gate of the remaining clauses is concluded, which is not manifest here.

17.4

In the former, first, the gate of initiating action is clarified. Jing says: If according to the Hīnayāna, afflictions of cultivation initiate action, they say that afflictions of external gates can initiate action, and so forth. If according to the *Yogācāra*, the *Abhidharmasamuccaya*, and so forth, it is invariably the unshared ignorance under suffering that initiates action; as the *Samuccaya* says: 'Deluded about the conventional, one creates unwholesome karma; based on delusion about the ultimate, one creates meritorious and unshakeable karma.'

17.5

This text precisely says that ignorance confused about suffering initiates action. Why is this? Unwholesome [action] brings about painful feeling, which is the suffering of suffering; speaking of this suffering of suffering is called the truth of suffering; if conventional [beings] comprehend it, it is called conventional suffering; deluded about this conventional suffering, they create unwholesome karma. Wholesome karma brings about retribution of pleasant and indifferent feelings among humans and devas, which is the essence of the suffering of conditioned existence; based on this suffering of conditioned existence, the truth of suffering is established; only the noble ones comprehend it, and it is called ultimate suffering; not comprehending that pleasure, indifference, and so forth are ultimate suffering, they create meritorious and unshakeable karma. The *Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra* says: 'Unshared ignorance can initiate all karma,' which encompasses all four truths: unshared ignorance can invariably initiate karma, because a trainee who has seen the footprints never produces the entwinement of longing for future existence to bring about future existence.

17.6

Question: Just as afflictions of cultivation initiate karma and that karma is severed by cultivation, does karma initiated by afflictions of seeing get severed by the path of seeing or not?

17.7

Answer: Just as retribution in wretched destinies is even said to be severed by seeing, what fault is there in karma generally being severed by seeing? Now this text says: 'All ten root afflictions initiate karma,' which may be based on the ten afflictions under suffering, or may also generally be based on the ten afflictions under the four truths, or may also generally be based on the ten root afflictions of seeing and cultivation. Because all [afflictions] of seeing and cultivation initiate [karma], it is said that all can initiate it. Although it says that both seeing and cultivation initiate it, it is not known what characteristics of afflictions initiate unwholesome karma capable of leading to wretched destinies. Therefore, it next says that intense ones can initiate karma, not those that are active through lapses of mindfulness; that is to say, fierce ones of superior grade initiate karma of the wretched destinies, while afflictions of inferior and middling grades through lapses of mindfulness initiate karma that does not lead to the wretched destinies, but only experiences suffering as separate retribution among humans and devas. Furthermore, those arisen through discrimination are mostly of the superior grade and initiate karma of the wretched destinies, while those initiated spontaneously are mostly of middling and inferior grades, experienced among humans and devas.

17.8

Tai says: The old *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* says: 'If there were no ignorance under suffering, the formations would not arise; if there were no ignorance of the path of cultivation, the formations would not ripen.' Now it says that all can initiate [karma]; how are these to be reconciled? The explanation is: If afflictions of seeing have not yet been severed, afflictions of cultivation also initiate karma; after afflictions of seeing are severed, cultivation cannot initiate [karma], because of the lack of an accompanying partner. Due to this meaning, the master of the *Saṃgraha* says: 'If there were no ignorance under suffering... because through afflictions of seeing, cultivation also initiates karma.' Hence the master of this treatise says: 'All initiate karma.' Another explanation: Afflictions of the path of seeing can initiate projecting and completing karma; the *Saṃgraha* relies on this meaning. Afflictions of cultivation can only initiate completing karma, as in Stream-enterers and so forth undergoing further rebirths; the master of this treatise relies on this meaning. If so, why does the *Buddhadhātu-śāstra* say: 'Due to reflection, all karmas are born; due to afflictions of seeing, all formations ripen'? This should be reflected upon further later.

17.9

Bei says: According to the principles of the Mahāyāna, for the most part, afflictions of seeing initiate karma and afflictions of cultivation moisten karma, agreeing with the explanation of [Guṇa]varman.

17.10

Ji says: This formulation encompasses both seeing and cultivation. Since the desire realm in the path of seeing is exclusively unwholesome, all can initiate karma.

17.11

In the path of cultivation, as the fourth fascicle of the *Samuccaya* says: 'Those able to initiate evil conduct spontaneously are unwholesome.' That is, among the view of self and so forth, there are those unable [to do so]; hence the path of seeing is called discriminative afflictions, as stated in the fourth fascicle of the *Samuccaya*. In accordance with this, initiating karma of the three wretched destinies is not of the path of cultivation. However, this is discussed based on fully projecting and completing fruits. In the path of cultivation, what is to prevent there also being those that initiate karma of separate retribution in the wretched destinies? Hence we know that here it is based on projecting fruits, not completing fruits.

17.12

Second, explaining the gate of characteristics. Therein, first, the characteristics are correctly distinguished; later, the intention of the previous explanation is concluded to introduce the subsequent gate.

17.13

In the former, first, the three characteristics are laid out through question and answer; later, they are explained in succession.

17.14

First, explaining specific characteristics: because each abides in its own nature.

17.15

Next, explaining common characteristics: that is, not being supremely tranquil is called the common characteristic of all afflictions; previously, in contrast to pure dharmas, non-tranquility was spoken of as the self-nature.

17.16

Third, explaining distinctions. First, asking about the two gates; later, explaining the two gates.

17.17

The characteristics of the distinctions of gates are pointed to as being like those in the Maulī Bhūmiḥ.

17.18

In the distinctions of activity, first, seven gates are laid out; later, the seven gates are explained, divided into four sections.

17.19

First, explaining the characteristics of the activity of dormant tendencies (anuśaya). First, distinguishing the characteristics of dormant tendencies; later, generating discourse based on discourse, taking the opportunity to distinguish their breadth and gravity.

17.20

In the former, the eighteen are grouped into eight pairs: 1. the pair of one's own and others' spheres; 2. the pair of impaired and unimpaired; 3. the pair of increasing and not increasing; 4. the pair of complete and incomplete; 5. the pair of damaging and not damaging; 6. the pair of superior, equal, and inferior; 7. the pair of conscious and unconscious; 8. the pair of producing much or little suffering.

17.21

'Following one's own sphere' means being bound by dormant tendencies of one's own stage when born in one's own stage. 'Following another's sphere' is, for instance, being followed by dormant tendencies of a lower stage when born in a higher stage, or being followed by dormant tendencies of a higher stage when born in a lower stage. 'Impaired' means, for instance, suppressing dormant tendencies of the desire realm by relying on the first dhyāna. 'Unimpaired' refers to dormant tendencies of the first dhyāna's own stage, whether one is detached or not detached from desire. 'Increasing' means that when born in one's own stage, dormant tendencies of one's own stage increase because of frequent perfuming. 'Not increasing' means that when born in one's own stage, dormant tendencies of another realm do not increase because of lack of frequent perfuming. 'Incomplete' means that according to the principles of the Mahāyāna, at the moment of the uninterrupted path there are no seed-tendencies of affliction, so no noble one has complete bondage, unlike in the Hinayāna treatises. 'Conscious dormant tendencies' refers to those whose fruits of entwinement operate together with the entwinements; entwinement is that which perfumes, and its fruit, operating together with the perfuming entwinement, is called conscious. 'Unconscious' refers to those capable of producing without being accompanied by manifest entwinements. 'Much suffering' and so forth means that the desire realm possesses all three sufferings, the form realm has two sufferings, and the formless realm has only one; those from the eighth stage and above are called sovereign bodhisattvas.

17.22

Next, unfitness (dauṣṭhulya) is clarified. First, a question and answer distinguishes that with respect to unfitness in the category of afflictions versus their active manifestations, the five aggregates must be said to be different, because in the case of that arhat, although unfitness has already been severed, active formations still arise. Ji says: Here, explaining in terms of the essential nature of unfitness, this unfitness is also called latent propensity (anuśaya); because it is the nature of affliction, its substance is called latent propensity, not named unfitness merely in terms of restlessness (unease).

17.23

Next, a question and answer distinguishes the eighteen kinds of unfitness. Regarding the first six kinds of unfitness, there are three explanations in the West [India]. First, Dharmapāla says: the first three are explained in terms of naturally existent seeds, and the latter three in terms of newly perfumed seeds. Second, Candramati says: the first three are explained in terms of seeds, and the latter three in terms of active manifestations. Third, Jayasena says: the first three have been perfumed and formed since beginningless time, while the latter three are present seeds.

17.24

Jing says: The first three enumerate the unfitness of all afflictions, karmas, and retributions. The next three solely enumerate the unfitness of the three obstacles. The 'omnipresent unfitness' is the unfitness belonging to the five omnipresent mental factors.

17.25

In the ninth fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā, twenty kinds of unfitness are explained, adding the unfitness of the obstacle to the knowable and the unfitness of the obstacle to meditative absorption. These eighteen kinds of unfitness are as previously [stated in] the Maulī Bhūmiḥ.

17.26

Next, the 'unfolding in four turns' points to the places where they are explained before and after; that is, it summarily takes up the second and third turns, and below, in the seventh and eighth sections, distinguishes them in order. Therefore, taking them up and pointing to the later explanation, it says: 'They will be extensively explained in their respective places.' The fourth, 'unfolding in differentiations of categories,' should be known to be as skillfully explained in the aggregates. The fifth, 'afflictions having strength or lacking strength,' is also as explained in the Maulī Bhūmiḥ.

17.27

Third, the 'unfolding of cause and fruit' is explained. Jing says: Afflictions, karma, and rebirth all taking afflictions as their cause means that generating active afflictions from the seeds of afflictions is the productive cause (janaka-hetu); generating active afflictions from active afflictions is the eliciting cause (pravartaka-hetu). When active afflictions generate active karma possessing a causal nature, this is also an eliciting cause. Producing retribution from the seeds of unwholesome afflictions is the pulling cause (ākarṣaka-hetu). There is also the generation of active manifestations from seeds of karma, which is a productive cause. Producing retribution from seeds of wholesome and unwholesome karma is a pulling cause. Generating causal afflictions from active unwholesome karma is also an eliciting cause.

17.28

Regarding the statement that 'fruit is also like this and should be understood accordingly': from the nominal seeds of the five factors, future fruit of birth, aging, and death is generated; that is, generating maturation from maturation is a productive cause. Generating afflictions and generating karma from maturation is an embracing cause (parigraha-hetu), because the phenomena produced by the three conditions are distant.

17.29

Ji says: The statement that a portion of unwholesome afflictions in the desire realm has maturation fruit and so forth refers to ordinary persons' unwholesome afflictions of seeing and cultivation. If one has entered noble status, or in the case of unwholesomeness within the body of a noble one, then it is unconditioned non-analytical cessation without maturation fruit. Furthermore, regarding indeterminate afflictions in the desire realm, they do not surpass the fruit.

17.30

Fourth, the 'unfolding in deluded movements' is explained. As for those already listed as seven types in the Maulī Bhūmiḥ, as in the eighth fascicle, they are named without explanation. Jing says: The three—identity view, extreme view, and wrong view—conceive of a self, conceive of annihilation, and nihilistically deny with respect to the object; they possess distinct cognitive modes of understanding that do not accord with correct principle, hence they are called 'perverted understanding.' The single factor of ignorance is by nature dark delusion, lacking a distinct cognitive mode of understanding, hence it is called 'non-understanding movement.' When doubt gives rise to an understanding of existence or non-existence, it is called 'understanding'; when it gives rise to perverted understanding, it is called 'non-understanding.' The attachment to views grasps various views as supreme; the attachment to rules and vows grasps precepts that conform to various views; greed attaches to one's own view, and anger dislikes others' views; hence all of them are called 'holding perverted understanding.' Perverted understanding is just the various views. Suffering and origination are just the basis of clan, cause, and condition for all arising; now, delusion regarding these gives rise to all afflictions, hence it is said to be 'movement deluded regarding that basis of cause and condition.' Cessation and path are dharmas that run counter to delusion, or [objects] regarding which there is fear; delusion regarding these also gives rise [to afflictions], hence it is said to be 'movement deluded regarding the arising of that terror.'

17.31

Now it is explained: Regarding doubt, doubting the truths to exist is understanding; [doubting them] to not exist is non-understanding. Ji says: The three—identity view, extreme view, and wrong view—giving rise to perverted movements regarding the object belong solely to the afflictions [abandoned by] the path of seeing, not the path of cultivation, because identity view and extreme view do not arise from delusion regarding the truths. This treatise says: Because they unfold in movements deluded regarding the four noble truths, they arise solely conditioned on the four truths, and the remaining [afflictions such as] greed arise conditioned on these views.

17.32

The first four sections separately set forth afflictions without asking whether they are conditions or fetters for unconditioned or conditioned [phenomena] and so on. The fifth and sixth sections separately explain the six afflictions of the four truths: suffering and origination are the conditions of afflictions. Increasing in conjunction, they are called causes and conditions. Cessation and path sever afflictions, hence they are called terror. The single seventh section is abandoned solely by cultivation; this arises spontaneously without being generated from delusion regarding the truths, so it is known that the previous six sections are abandoned by seeing.

17.33

Below, concluding the intention of the preceding explanation introduces the subsequent section. Jing says: As previously explained, the distinctions of delusion regarding the four truths, delusion regarding what is abandoned by cultivation, obstacles, and antidotes are merely based on what is appropriate for conversion to make sentient beings easily understand; this concludes the preceding. The statement 'Now we shall comprehensively distinguish...' and so forth points below to the sixth, eight-question-and-answer section on the marks of severing afflictions, where they will be distinguished in detail.

17.34

Now it is explained: As explained above, the coarse marks are displayed. Now, the sections on having an objective referent, lacking an objective referent, and so forth are to be distinguished in minute detail, not merely pointing to the sixth section.

17.35

Third, the section on objective referents (vastu) is explained. There are three categories here. First, the five views and conceit are called lacking an objective referent: the self that is the intentional object of identity view lacks substance, hence it is called lacking an objective referent; the other four views and conceit arise depending on identity view, hence they are called lacking an objective referent. Second, greed and anger arise conditioned on a small degree of purity or impurity, hence they are called having an objective referent. Third, ignorance and doubt: if they are conjoined with views and so on, they are called lacking an objective referent; if conjoined with greed and so on, they are called having an objective referent. In principle, greed and so on also extend to lacking an objective referent. Thus the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'Identity view, conceit, and craving have objects lacking an objective referent.' Here, the three categories are stated in terms of the majority.

17.36

Jing says: Among the seven conceits, excluding conceit and inferiority conceit, the remaining five conceits have objects lacking an objective referent because they do not match reality. The other two conceits have objects possessing an objective referent. However, stating in terms of the majority, conceit lacks an objective referent.

17.37

Fang says: For now, it is explained in terms of the conceit of self having an object lacking an objective referent; in reality, it also extends to having an objective referent. The text says: 'Because there is truly no self, yet discrimination unfolds...'—this statement comprehensively explains the meaning stated above that views and conceit lack an objective referent. In truth, the conceit of self also takes an object having an objective referent. However, now specifically stating that conceit is called lacking an objective referent and greed is called having an objective referent is due to reciprocal ellipsis to illuminate each other; although the objects of the two attachments (clinging to views and clinging to precepts) have substantial existence, they nevertheless arise with identity view as their root.

17.38

Furthermore, because they superimpose cognitive modes of understanding, they are called lacking an objective referent. Yet the explanations of having an objective referent and lacking an objective referent differ in various texts. For instance, the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: 'Views and conceit lack an objective referent; the rest have an objective referent.' In one place, the Samuccayavyākhyā says: 'Views, conceit, and craving lack an objective referent.' Another passage of the text says: 'Views and what is conjoined [with them] lack an objective referent;

17.39

This treatise says in fascicle fifty-eight: 'What is abandoned by seeing lacks an objective referent; the rest share both having an objective referent and lacking an objective referent.' Fascicle fifty-nine says: 'Views and conceit lack an objective referent; greed and hostility have an objective referent; doubt and ignorance apply to both.' How are these various texts to be harmonized and reconciled?

17.40

The Tripiṭaka Master says: They should be reconciled based on the text of the Nyāyānusāra. That treatise says: As the sūtra states, 'Afflictions abandoned by seeing take an intentional object lacking an objective referent; afflictions abandoned by cultivation take an intentional object possessing an objective referent.' Explaining this sūtra text, there are three interpretations. One says: Identity view is called lacking an objective referent because there is no real self; because the other afflictions abandoned by seeing take that identity view as their root, they are also said to lack an objective referent. Those abandoned by cultivation do not take identity view as their root, hence they are said to possess an objective referent. The second says: Four views superimpose onto non-existence, and one view deprecates within existence; but correct principle contains no phenomenon of superimposition or deprecation, hence the afflictions of seeing are called lacking an objective referent, whereas afflictions abandoned by cultivation are not grasps of superimposition or deprecation, hence they are said to have an objective referent. The third says: In the principle of the four truths there is no coarse, manifest phenomenon, hence the delusion that errs regarding them is called lacking an objective referent; afflictions abandoned by cultivation take coarse, manifest phenomena as intentional objects, hence they are said to have an objective referent.

17.41

Within the Mahāyāna tradition, when fascicle fifty-eight says that afflictions abandoned by seeing are called lacking an objective referent, it is stated according to their root. As for those abandoned by cultivation, because the Sarvāstivāda school holds no view-nature, it solely says there is a real entity; in our tradition, there is also view, hence we say they also lack an objective referent, which is why it says they apply to both. The remaining texts should be understood in their principle based on this.

17.42

Fourth, the section on conjunction with faculties is explained. Jing says: If arising spontaneously, they are all obtainable in the three feelings: spontaneous [afflictions] in the mental stage alone can be conjoined with the three faculties of grief, joy, and equanimity. 'Pervading all groups of consciousness and conjoined with all faculties' refers to greed, anger, and ignorance being conjoined with feelings. The phrase up to 'As for those that do not arise spontaneously, I shall now explain' summarily introduces the intended explanation of the meaning of the conjunction of faculties with conceptually arisen afflictions.

17.43

Below, conjunction is explained separately. Regarding the phrase 'Greed at one time is conjoined with pleasure and joy,' and so forth: Tai says: This text collectively considers the greed of the six consciousnesses, stating that it is wholly conjoined at one time with grief, joy, and so forth.

17.44

Question: Anger arising spontaneously is conjoined with equanimity; why is it not said to be conjoined with equanimity among those conceptually arisen?

17.45

Tai says: In principle, it is an abbreviation and not spoken of. 'Pleasure only [in] the aggregate of formations' refers to the aggregate of formations co-occurring with pleasure within human and heavenly retributions; 'the aggregate of formations co-occurring with suffering' refers to the three wretched destinies; equanimity pervades the five destinies. The view of annihilation is contrary to permanence: conceiving of a self as annihilated with respect to the aggregate of formations co-occurring with pleasure is conjoined with grief; conceiving of a self as annihilated with respect to the aggregate of formations co-occurring with suffering is conjoined with joy and pleasure. The two attachments grasp those views, hence 'they are conjoined accordingly as those are conjoined': attachment to views is conjoined with faculties as the grasped view is; attachment to rules and vows is also like this, conforming to whichever faculties the view is conjoined with. In principle, wrong view is also conjoined with the equanimity faculty, but it is omitted for brevity and not stated.

17.46

Regarding conceit, in principle inferiority conceit also has three kinds. It is omitted for brevity because it is easy to understand. With regard to a definite matter such as material gain, when another person says to him, 'This does not exist,' doubt arises, producing grief; regarding material gain or even the wretched destinies, when another person says they do not exist, through lack of doubt there is joy.

17.47

Question: Are the above instances of greed and so forth co-occurring with grief and suffering joyful or sorrowful? We have not seen explicit text on this.

17.48

There are three interpretations of the meaning. One says: subverting the faculty to follow the affliction, grief and suffering follow greed, hence they are subsumed under joyful nature. The second says: subverting the affliction to follow the faculty, greed relies on grief and suffering, hence it is subsumed under sorrowful nature. The third says: according to the distinct essential substance, there are multiple functions in a single moment; therefore, grief and suffering arise conditioned on adverse objects and are subsumed under sorrowful nature, while greed is conditioned on favorable objects, hence it is called joyful nature. Regarding the remaining conjunctions, the text pointing to and castigating instances does not appear again, which means the conjunction of the remaining secondary afflictions with the five faculties is not stated further in the text; alternatively, the conjunction of these afflictive dharmas with consciousnesses, conjunction with object-determining factors, and so forth do not appear again in the text.

17.49

Regarding 'first distinguishing the coarse marks, now in terms of minute detail,' and so on: It is asked, according to the previous treatise text, the four views and conceit of the desire realm are conjoined with joy and equanimity, greed is conjoined with pleasure, joy, and equanimity, anger is wholly conjoined with suffering, grief, and equanimity, wrong view is conjoined with joy, grief, and equanimity, doubt is conjoined with grief and equanimity, and ignorance is conjoined with all five faculties—is this not different from this text? Therefore, to reconcile and resolve it: first distinguishing the meaning of conjunction with faculties was based on coarse principles to guide beginners; now distinguishing in detail is to guide long-term practitioners.

17.50

Fifth, the section on unwholesomeness and so forth is explained. Therein, it is first explained, and later summarized with verses.

17.51

In the former part, first the two natures, having maturation, and so forth are distinguished comprehensively in terms of the three realms; furthermore, question and answer distinguishes greater and lesser quantities.

17.52

First, within this, ten pairs are briefly enumerated. First, the pair of multiple natures and few natures: because the afflictions of the desire realm encompass both unwholesome and veiled-indeterminate, and moreover possess stinginess, jealousy, and so forth, they are called multiple natures; the higher realms are solely indeterminate and lack stinginess, jealousy, and so forth, hence they are called few natures. Furthermore, the afflictions of the desire realm take the six sensory objects as intentional objects, hence they are called multiple natures; the afflictions of the higher realms take four sensory objects and take one sensory object as intentional objects, hence they are called few natures. The remaining sections are explained on the model of multiple natures and few natures, and their meaning can be understood.

17.53

Regarding the statement that "they do not arise with a single mode and are not determinate in nature, etc.": because in the desire realm there are manifold modes such as joy and sorrow, their activity directed toward objects is determinate in grasping that of the higher realms. Another explanation says: afflictions of the desire realm are not subdued by concentration, hence they are not determinate in mode; afflictions of the higher realms are subdued by concentration, and therefore are determinate in a single mode.

17.54

Below, in summarizing with verses, the general presentation is set aside to take up the specifics, versifying only the ten pairs.

17.55

Sixth, explaining the section on the abandonment of afflictions. First, eight questions are posed: First, it asks what roots of virtue are accumulated and into which stages one is admitted in order to be able to abandon afflictions; second, it asks up to what stage or position one is said to have already abandoned afflictions; third, it asks whether abandonment is stated with respect to bondage by conjunction or bondage by object; fourth, it asks about the suddenness or gradualness of abandonment; fifth, it asks about the order of abandoning the hindrances; sixth, it asks about the number of types to be abandoned; seventh, it asks about the modes of activity once afflictions have already been abandoned; eighth, [it asks about] the benefits gained from abandoning afflictions.

17.56

In the answers, there are seven [parts]. This is because the first two questions are answered together, and the remaining six questions are answered separately.

17.57

In the first part, which answers the two questions together, there are six points. The first states that the provisions of wholesome dharmas, etc., constitute the aids to liberation (mokṣabhāgīya). Having attained entry, etc., constitutes the aids to penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya). These two are the path of suppression; the path of seeing and the path of cultivation—these two are the path of abandonment that is able to abandon afflictions. This answers the first question. To state that "one has already abandoned all afflictions"—regarding the four yogas of the stage where abandonment has occurred, this refers to aspiration, mindfulness, vigor, and expedient means, as explained before. Being accomplished in continuous succession still pertains to the path of accumulation; obtaining conformity with teaching, etc., constitutes the path of preparation of the four wholesome roots. The arising of the path of antidotes, etc., constitutes the two paths of seeing and cultivation. This answers the first question.

17.58

Cultivating the path of antidotes and having reached culmination, etc., answers the second query. "Thoroughly knowing the matter of the affliction" refers to the object of delusion to be known, which is therefore impure, etc. "Thoroughly knowing the intrinsic nature of the affliction" means knowing that the nature of the afflictions is false and deceptive. "Knowing their faults" means knowing that a multitude of faults arise based on afflictions. "Not clinging stubbornly once they arise" means that based on knowing these, even if afflictions should arise again, one does not cling stubbornly to a great degree; this is the path of preparation. From "gathering the antidotes" onwards, it directly realizes the path of abandonment. "Bondage to signs" means the names and signs of the six sense objects; sentient beings grasp and attach to these, which is called bondage; the bondage that arises dependent on signs is termed bondage to signs. "Bondage to coarse heaviness" refers to the seeds of afflictions. Having attained liberation from these two kinds of bondage, one should be said to have already abandoned [them], for which scripture is further cited as proof. The sixth point means that because one thoroughly knows the objective support of the afflictions, one abandons it and does not contemplate it. "Delighting in the objective support" means delighting in contemplating tathatā. Since the basis that enables the abandonment of afflictions has already ceased and one has already attained the transformation of the basis, it is said that "they have already been abandoned," because the seeds are the basis, and since the basis has ceased, it is termed attaining the transformation of the basis. The above concludes the answers to the first two questions.

17.59

Next, in answering the third question: regarding the statement that "they can be abandoned both through conjunction and through objective supports, etc.," it clarifies that abandonment is possible both in terms of conjunction and in terms of the transformation of objective supports. According to the Hīnayāna treatises, only bondage by objective support is abandoned, and not being tied to the preceding object is called abandoning afflictions; since afflictions and the mind accompany each other as companions throughout the three times and cannot be separated from each other, conjunction is not abandoned. Now in the Mahāyāna, past and future dharmas do not exist, and bondage exists only in the present; because the noble path arises, mental dharmas conjoined with afflictions do not arise, which is called abandoning conjunction; once they are abandoned, not taking the object as an objective support again is called the abandonment of bondage by objective support. Furthermore, when the two bondages previously arose, they perfumed [the mind] to form seeds, which are called the two bondages; now when their seeds are severed, it is called abandoning the two bondages.

17.60

In answering the fourth question, regarding the statement that afflictions to be abandoned by seeing are abandoned suddenly because, through the direct realization of the truths by knowledge, the three mental states suddenly sever delusion regarding the truth of suffering, etc., Jing says: in the true path of seeing, it explains that through the simultaneous contemplation of the tathatā revealed by the two kinds of emptiness, the two hindrances are abandoned suddenly. In terms of abandoning the two hindrances, three mental states are spoken of conceptually, but in reality there is only a single mental state, because the direct realization of the truths by knowledge destroys the principle of tathatā taken as the object of the four truths.

17.61

Regarding "associated with the mental application that destroys the objective support," Ce says: based on textual proof, it refutes two theories. The first refutation: the claim that the three mental states are the path of seeing associated [with images] is an unreasonable explanation, because it is stated that they are able to abandon [afflictions]. The second refutation: the claim that the bodhisattva's path of seeing abandons afflictions in three mental states while the two vehicles' path of seeing does so in sixteen mental states is not the correct view.

17.62

Furthermore, according to the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*, on the stages of hearing and reflection, one contemplates suffering and impermanence to abandon nominal entities, or among the four direct patiences, one contemplates suffering and impermanence to abandon the delusion regarding real dharmas; at the position of the path of seeing, one simultaneously abandons the subtle grades of both delusions, nominal and real. Now the text of this treatise is also in accord with that meaning: in the path of three mental states, the first mental state abandons the delusion regarding nominal entities within one's own and others' bodies; the second mental state abandons the delusion regarding real dharmas within one's own and others' bodies. However, the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states that "one's own continuum" means that the mental representations projected by taking another's body as an object are the mental marks of one's own mind, and hence it is called taking oneself as an object; the third mental state is precisely the path of liberation. Following the *Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi*, the meaning accords with the former explanation. Regarding "the gradual order of abandonment through cultivation, etc.," Ce says: because bodhisattvas on the first ten stages do not abandon the seeds of the hindrances to the path of cultivation that are afflictions, we know that the intention of this text is to speak of the abandonment of afflictions on the two paths of seeing and cultivation by the two vehicles. Now it is explained: although bodhisattvas on the ten stages do not abandon seeds, they gradually abandon coarse heaviness, and the path is repeatedly cultivated. Therefore, we know that this text speaks generally with respect to the three vehicles.

17.63

Answering the fifth question to clarify the order of abandoning hindrances, Jing says: first one abandons the hindrances of an ordinary person at home; having succeeded in going forth, one next wishes to cultivate concentration and must abandon the hindrances to that concentration, which are dependents, investigation, reflection, and so forth. Next, one abandons the hindrances closely impeding it: because one has not yet attained the six kinds of mental application in the not-yet-arrived concentration, one must instantaneously abandon the coarse heaviness of the body that hindrances the attainment of mental application, and so forth. The above has already removed the hindrances to the preliminary preparations of the noble path. Next, it clarifies the order of abandoning hindrances for noble persons: first one abandons the afflictions of seeing, and next eliminates the afflictions of cultivation; when the afflictions of seeing and cultivation are exhausted, one then eliminates the natural hindrances belonging to taintless concentration; next, one eliminates the phenomenal hindrances, which pertain to the unpliable nature of the five feelings that hinder superior concentration; this hindrance to concentration is a portion of the hindrance to the knowable.

17.64

Therefore, the treatise below says: the eight liberations eliminate the hindrance to the knowable. Having eliminated the hindrances to concentration, those seeking the Mahāyāna should next abandon all hindrances belonging to the category of the hindrance to the knowable, as stated: "Next, there is another person, etc."

17.65

Ji says: regarding "the bodily coarse heaviness belonging to the category of delighting in seclusion," it refers to the fatigued nature of the body of a meditator. "Next, one should further abandon those belonging to the category of hindrances to concentration from grief up to equanimity" refers to the hindrances to the unconditioned state of unshakeability in the path of cultivation, which should be matched accordingly. The first four are hindrances common to the three vehicles: prior to the path of seeing they are ordinary persons' hindrances; from the path of seeing onwards they are noble persons' hindrances, which also apply to the two vehicles; the hindrances to concentration reside only in the śrāvakas; the hindrance to the knowable resides only in bodhisattvas. The arising of this hindrance to concentration is subsumed under the category of the maturation-type hindrance to the knowable.

17.66

One explanation says: here it only explains the order of abandoning afflictions for the two vehicles; based on the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*, sharp-rooted [practitioners of the] two vehicles also abandon the grasping at dharmas, hence it says "there is another." This explanation is not exhaustive.

17.67

In answering the sixth question to clarify the number of types of afflictions to be abandoned, they are briefly divided into two kinds of abandonment: namely, entanglements and latencies (anuśaya). There are nine entanglements: 1. abandonment of the five dull [afflictions]; 2. abandonment of the five sharp [afflictions]; 3. abandonment through eliminating the five; 4. eliminating the three realms; 5. eliminating distraction, which means eliminating afflictions arisen from sleep; 6. abandonment through awakening, which means eliminating fierce afflictions arisen upon waking; 7. abandonment of the feeble, which means when inferior grades of afflictions arise from a feeble mind, now abandoning these afflictions is called abandonment of the feeble; 8. abandonment through suppression, which is suppressing afflictions through the six practices; 9. abandonment through detachment, which is the abandonment of latencies.

17.68

Answering the seventh question to clarify the signs of one who has already abandoned afflictions: "Furthermore, seeing forms with the eyes, one is neither joyful nor sorrowful, etc."—these are the six constant dwellings. Furthermore, from "naturally having few desires" onwards, these are the eight thoughts of a great person: 1. few desires; 2. contentment; 3. seclusion; 4. fierce vigor; 5. unforgotten mindfulness; 6. meditative concentration; 7. wisdom; 8. non-proliferation. These are the same as in the *Sūtra of the Buddha's Bequeathed Teaching*.

17.69

In answering the eighth question to clarify the benefits of abandoning afflictions: regarding "namely, in accordance with what is realized, transcending grief," this is abandoning the cultivation-abandoned afflictions of the desire realm; "transcending suffering" is abandoning the cultivation-abandoned afflictions of the first dhyāna; abandoning the cultivation-abandoned afflictions of the second dhyāna transcends joy; abandoning the cultivation-abandoned afflictions of the third dhyāna transcends pleasure; abandoning the cultivation-abandoned afflictions of the fourth dhyāna transcends the ideation of color borrowed from eye-consciousness, also transcends the ideation of resistance borrowed from the eye-, ear-, and body-consciousnesses, and further transcends the ideation of universally taking the ten bases of its own stage as objects in the fourth dhyāna, as well as transcending the ideation of taking the twelve lower bases as objects. By abandoning the afflictions of seeing, one transcends the suffering of the miserable destinies, transcends female bodies, karma leading to an eighth existence, and karma of the northern continent and the realm of non-conception, and furthermore transcends the eight sufferings such as birth.

17.70

Regarding "moreover, realizing security and coolness," it means realizing that nirvāṇa of the dharma of cessation. "Moreover, obtaining the supreme pleasant dwelling in the present life, etc.," means realizing that bliss of bodhi of the truth of the path. Moreover, obtaining the benefits of the eight concentrations is common to both ordinary persons and noble ones. The preceding three fruitions transcend the suffering of the miserable destinies; the non-learner transcends the eight sufferings. "Security" refers to the cessation with remainder: within this, abandoning the afflictions of seeing is called security; abandoning the afflictions of cultivation is called supreme security. "Coolness" refers to the cessation without remainder: pacifying the seven sufferings is called coolness; pacifying the suffering of the aggregates is called supreme coolness. Furthermore, because one obtains the supreme pleasant dwelling in the present life, one no longer falls away from the realized dharma in the four postures, and since one's self-benefit is fully perfected, one has no further hope. The above explains the benefits of the śrāvaka. From "or alternatively" onwards, it clarifies the benefits of the bodhisattva. The above seven passages have answered the eight questions, concluding the clarification of the sixth topic.

17.71

Seventh, explaining the section on the objective spheres. There are briefly fifteen, grouped into seven pairs: 1. the pair of complete and partial: taking all objects is called complete, not taking all objects is called partial; 2. the pair of having an objective basis and lacking an objective basis; 3. the pair of internal objects and external objects: taking the six internal sense bases as objects applies to both concentrated and non-concentrated stages, or taking the five wondrous sensory desires as external objects; 4. the pair of presently seen and not presently seen; 5. the pair of one's own category and other categories: greed taking greed as its object is called taking one's own category as an object; greed taking anger and the five aggregates as its object is called taking other categories as an object, and so forth; 6. the pair of having and non-having as objects: being conjoined with craving for future existence is called taking existence as an object; being conjoined with craving for non-existence is called taking non-existence as an object; 7. the pair of one's own sphere, another's sphere, and non-sphere: afflictions operating in desire taking the desire realm [as sphere] are called one's own sphere; taking the form realm as sphere, afflictions operating in desire take higher realms as object; taking the formless realm as sphere, afflictions operating in the form realm take higher realms as object; "operating" means arranged in rows, residing like rows in a market street. Furthermore, lower stages serving as spheres can be taken as objects by higher afflictions.

17.72

From "For what reason?" onwards, it explains the signs of taking lower realms as objects. Jing says: this text specifically speaks of conceit in higher stages taking lower stages as objects, or wrong views negating what is lower, while other afflictions do not take lower realms as objects. Ji says: this means that in Mahāyāna, higher stages are able to take lower stages as objects to give rise to afflictions.

17.73

Question: What afflictions are these?

17.74

Answer: One explanation states that this is the conceit of view, as in other places, where it further only states, "I am superior to that, [which is] inferior, etc." Even if conceit of self arises, not all afflictions arise. Another explanation states: all afflictions such as greed, etc., are like this, because seeing things as permanent is the view of permanence, seeing them as pure and superior is the clinging to views, and so on; thus, although there is such an objective support, it does not resemble the fundamental substance, and taking the name as an object constitutes the sphere. Where other places say that higher realms do not take lower realms as objects, that is a text conforming to conventional reason.

17.75

Question: If greed and conceit of lower stages cannot take higher realms as objects, how can conceit of the higher realm take lower realms as objects?

17.76

Answer: Because the lower stage is inferior, conceit does not arise toward that; because the higher is superior, it can arise.

17.77

Regarding "lacking an objective sphere, which means taking cessation and the path conceptualized through discrimination as objects, etc.": cessation, the path, and tathatā are not perceived through perceptual ideation, because they are the spheres of the mind of shared [realization]; taking cessation, the path, and tathatā collectively is in all cases called lacking an objective sphere, as it arises merely by taking names as objects.

17.78

Eighth, explaining the section on active manifestations. First, an overview is presented; then, specific explanations follow.

17.79

In the explanation, first it explains the twenty persons; next it explains the active manifestations of the twenty afflictions; finally it explains the conditions for the active manifestation of the twenty afflictions.

17.80

These three sets of twenty are linked in sequential correspondence. Namely: (1) for a householder, conditioned by attachment to pleasure, active defilements manifest as desired; (2) for a monastic, conditioned by effort regarding defilements, active defilements manifest not as desired; (3) for one dwelling in poorly expounded teachings, not relying on the Buddha-Dharma to engage in arduous austerities and not relying on the household life to be attached to the pleasures of the five desires, conditioned by the neither-painful-nor-pleasurable, active defilements of non-comprehension manifest; (4) for one dwelling in well expounded teachings, conditioned by the five desires, active defilements of comprehension arise and manifest; (5) for one with an excess of defilements, conditioned by investigation and reflection, coarse afflictions manifest; (6) for one of balanced practice, conditioned by painful touch, pleasurable touch, and the like, defilements of equal proportions manifest; (7) for one of attenuated dust [i.e., defilement], conditioned by latent dispositions, subtle defilements manifest; (8) for one who has attained mundane dispassion, conditioned by past habituation, internal defilements of the higher realms manifest; (9) for one who has not attained dispassion, conditioned by the bad circumstance of associating with bad friends, external defilements of the desire realm manifest; (10) for one who has seen the footprints of the noble, because the mind feels aversion upon hearing incorrect teachings, active defilements of loss of mindfulness arise; (11) for one who has not seen the footprints of the noble, conditioned by incorrect mental application, vehement defilements manifest; (12) for one who clings, conditioned by lack of faith, defilements arisen from conceptual differentiation manifest; (13) for one who does not cling, conditioned by indolence, spontaneous defilements arise and manifest; (14) for one who investigates, conditioned by loss of mindfulness, defilements of cogitation manifest; (15) for one who is asleep, conditioned by distraction, unfree defilements manifest—arising during sleep or being weak and feeble is called "unfree"; (16) for one who is awake, conditioned by bad discernment, sovereign and intense defilements manifest; (17) for a youthful person, conditioned by heedlessness and because it is not the stage of the basis, they manifest together—for infants and youths up to fifteen or sixteen, afflictions arise but are not yet perfected, hence it is called "not the stage of the basis"; (18) for one whose faculties and practices have matured, conditioned by defilements, defilements belonging to the stage of the basis manifest—namely, for those twenty years and above, because of vehement pursuit conditioned by defilement, it is called "the stage of the basis"; (19) for one destined for parinirvāṇa, because dispassion has not yet been attained, remediable defilements arise and manifest; (20) for one not destined for parinirvāṇa, conditioned by the nature of an ordinary worldling, irremediable defilements manifest.

First 80 of 577 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

瑜伽論記 — Classical Chinese