瑜伽師地論略纂 1.71

1.71

總聊簡中，文分為八：一、明三性何類先起；二、明死因；三、明善惡相；四、明潤生相；五、明解支節；六、明根沒頓漸；七、明死名差別；八、上下捨相。初文中，三緣先起：一、先所造業，強者先起；二、業若平等，隨初時自憶者，則最先所作業；三、縱強縱平等，臨時他教憶，隨何業起，不起餘心。則以上三業，隨其所應，我愛之所潤，受當來果。離上三緣，起無記心，或復無心，以前最初作業，受當來果。論明善惡性心死，不說第三，論受當果即有緣。　第二文中，「二因力」者，初是名言種子，唯無記，是第八識因緣；後是有支種子，通善不善，是第八識增上緣。謂由當來二因力故，現在命終。或由名言種子勢力盡故，現在不避不平等故死，或壽盡死；由有支種子勢力盡故，現在業盡故死；合由二因力故，福盡故死。　第三文中有二：初明善惡前相、後明差別。「受盡先業所引果」者，即業盡等死時，非不避不平等死，定亦有中有之相。「如日後分」者，日將沒時。「或山山峯影」者，下品惡業者當相如峯影懸覆，中品如山遍覆，上品如日後分極覆；或下品如日後分懸覆，中品如山遍覆，上品如峯影極覆。此是將命終時，由先惡業所見當果相。辨差別中，初善、後惡。惡中，上、中二品，如文自釋；造下品不善業多無惡相，故論不說。　四、明潤生相中，初明凡潤生、後明聖潤生。〈決擇分〉說七種受生，凡夫以現種潤生，由此我愛即是取支，潤前能引、所引支，轉名有支，便能建立後果中有及生支報。論說「初二果我愛潤生，不還無」者，《對法論》說：已離欲聖者，對治力強故，彼由隨眠力，令生相續。唯初二果，下界修道、治道未滿，雖能折伏，不相續、不堅著，仍以現行潤。〈決擇〉總言見聖諦者，以隨眠潤，勝異生故，相對辨故，實通現行。其無想有情異生身及不還者生自地，并凡聖相對。潤生勝劣，所有妨難，皆如《樞要》。〈決釋分〉言一切煩惱皆潤生者，謂是取支，初起取支故；此是後取支，亦不相違。又彼說餘時一切位煩惱；此說臨命終，亦不相違。　第五、解支節中，除天、那落迦者，化生頓死故。又天唯善業果，地獄恒解支節，更何須說。　第六、根沒頓漸者，具根、缺根別故。　第七、死名別中，得聖名清淨解脫，得無漏，離障縛故。或唯阿羅漢，證寂圓故。菩薩亦然。餘翻此，應知。　第八、上下捨相中，「當知後識唯心處捨」者，腹中初生，不淨成心，故最後捨。卷末當知。

In the general assessment, the text is divided into eight: 1. explaining which category among the three natures arises first; 2. explaining the causes of death; 3. explaining the signs of good and evil; 4. explaining the marks of moistening rebirth; 5. explaining the dismemberment of joints and limbs; 6. explaining whether the faculties submerge suddenly or gradually; 7. explaining the differences in names for death; 8. the marks of discarding [the body] from above or below. In the first text, three conditions arise first: 1. karma previously performed: the stronger arises first; 2. if the karmas are equal, according to whatever is initially recalled by oneself, it is the karma performed earliest; 3. whether strong or equal, if at the time one is reminded by another, whichever karma arises, no other mind arises. Then, through the above three karmas, as appropriate, moistened by self-love, one receives future fruit. Apart from the above three conditions, one gives rise to an indeterminate mind or is without mind, and through the karma performed earliest, one receives future fruit. The treatise explains dying with wholesome and unwholesome minds without mentioning the third; when the treatise discusses receiving future fruit, the conditions are present. In the second text, "the power of the two causes": the first is the nominal seed, which is solely indeterminate and serves as the primary cause (hetu-pratyaya) of the eighth consciousness; the second is the seed of the existence-constituent, which encompasses wholesome and unwholesome and serves as the sovereign condition (adhipati-pratyaya) of the eighth consciousness. That is, due to the power of the two future causes, present life comes to an end. Or, because the potency of nominal seeds is exhausted, in the present one dies through failing to avoid unevenness, or dies through the exhaustion of life; because the potency of the seed of the existence-constituent is exhausted, in the present one dies through the exhaustion of karma; and through the combined power of both causes, one dies through the exhaustion of merit. The third text has two: first, explaining the prior signs of good and evil; second, explaining the differences. "Receiving the fruit induced by previous karma to its end" refers to the time of death through the exhaustion of karma and so forth; in death not caused by avoiding unevenness, there certainly are signs of intermediate existence as well. "Like the latter part of the day" means when the sun is about to set. "Or the shadow of a mountain or mountain peak": for lower-grade unwholesome karma, the corresponding sign is overhanging and covering like the shadow of a peak; for middle-grade, it covers completely like a mountain; for upper-grade, it covers deeply like the latter part of the day. Alternatively, the lower-grade is overhanging and covering like the latter part of the day; the middle-grade covers completely like a mountain; and the upper-grade covers deeply like the shadow of a peak. These are the signs of future fruit seen at the point of life's end due to prior unwholesome karma. In analyzing the differences, wholesome comes first, followed by unwholesome. Within the unwholesome, the upper and middle grades are explained as in the text itself; those who commit lower-grade unwholesome karma mostly have no bad signs, so the treatise does not mention them. 4. In explaining the marks of moistening rebirth, first explaining ordinary beings moistening rebirth, and second explaining noble ones moistening rebirth. The *Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī* speaks of seven kinds of taking rebirth: ordinary beings moisten rebirth by means of active [defilements] and seeds; because of this, self-love is precisely the grasping constituent, which moistens the preceding projectable and projected constituents, being redesignated as the existence-constituent, and can then establish the future fruit of the intermediate existence and the retribution of the birth constituent. The treatise says, "the first two fruits moisten rebirth with self-love, whereas the non-returner does not"; the *Abhidharma-śāstra* says that for noble ones who have already departed from desire, because the power of their antidote is strong, their birth is continued through the force of latencies (anuśaya). Only in the first two fruits, where the path of cultivation and the path of antidotes for the lower realm are not yet complete, although they can suppress [defilements], these are not continuous and not firmly clinging, so they still moisten by means of active defilements. The *Viniścaya* speaks generally of those who see the noble truths as moistening through latencies because they are superior to ordinary beings and analyzed in contrast to them, but in reality it extends to active defilements. The non-ideational sentient ordinary bodies, non-returners born in their own stage, and the contrast between ordinary and noble beings, along with all difficulties regarding the superiority or inferiority of moistening rebirth, are as explained in the *Shuyao*. When the *Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī* says that all defilements moisten rebirth, it means that they are the grasping constituent, referring to the initial arising of the grasping constituent; here it refers to the subsequent grasping constituent, so there is also no conflict. Furthermore, that refers to defilements of all stages at other times, while this refers to the verge of life's end, so there is likewise no conflict. 5. In the dismemberment of joints and limbs, devas and narakas are excluded because their apparitional birth involves sudden death. Moreover, devas are solely the fruit of wholesome karma, and in hell the joints and limbs are constantly being dismembered, so why would it need to be stated? 6. Regarding the sudden or gradual submersion of faculties, it is due to the difference between having complete faculties and deficient faculties. 7. In the differences in names for death: gaining the noble state is called pure liberation because one attains the uncontaminated and is freed from obstacles and bonds. Or, it is solely for arhats because they realize perfect quiescence; bodhisattvas are also like this. The rest are the reverse of this, as should be known. 8. In the marks of discarding [the body] from above or below: "One should know that the final consciousness is discarded solely at the heart" means that when first born in the womb, the heart is formed from impurities, hence it is discarded last. This should be known at the end of the fascicle.