瑜伽師地論略纂 13.79

13.79

論云「復次，云何表業」等者，此准此卷下解虛空等二無為已，結云「如是二十四不相應等皆是假有」，看文勢即兼結前第五十二已來。前卷末種子及此業等皆是伏難，謂前不相應證成假有。前言種子為假為實？既明種子假實已，業於種子上立明之。設假立種子已，前不相應未盡，故於種子上而建立無相定等，故業下明無想定等三不相應，便決擇本第八卷業道義。彼是尋伺地，此是意地，故非正決擇。此業等體，如前第八卷抄，然未盡者，我今重辨。此發業等，有三種思，下自當辨。此不共無明皆是見斷，若共無明等者，或唯發福、不動。此是內異生。若外異生，要由不共方發福、非福等。若有學聖者，不發總報。如《緣起經》，我說依明，不依煩惱。雖如是言，此據不迷因果，簡異凡夫外道，然亦從無明發故。《對法》第四云：若任運起能發業者是不善。故知修道亦發業，然非總報。迷二愚等，如《對法》說。

The treatise says: "Next, what is overt karma..." and so forth: this conforms to the conclusion drawn below in this fascicle after explaining the two unconditioned dharmas such as space: "Such twenty-four non-concomitant [formations] and so forth are all conventionally existent." Observing the phrasing, it also gathers up the preceding from the fifty-second fascicle onward. Seeds at the end of the preceding fascicle as well as karma here are all implicit objections; that is, proving that the preceding non-concomitant [formations] are conventionally existent. Previously it asked: are seeds conventional or real? Having explained whether seeds are conventional or real, karma is explained as established upon seeds. Even if seeds are conventionally established, the preceding non-concomitant dharmas are not yet exhausted; therefore, upon seeds the attainment of non-ideation and so forth are established. Hence, below karma, the three non-concomitant dharmas including the attainment of non-ideation are explained, conveniently resolving the meaning of the paths of karma in the original eighth fascicle. That was the bhūmi with vitarka and vicāra, whereas this is the bhūmi of mind, so it is not the primary resolution. The substance of this karma and so forth is as in the previous notes to the eighth fascicle; what was not exhausted there, I will now re-examine. For this instigation of karma and so forth, there are three kinds of volition (cetanā), which will be explained below. This unshared ignorance is entirely severed by seeing; if it is shared ignorance and so forth, it may only instigate meritorious and unmoving [karma]. This applies to internal ordinary beings. In the case of external ordinary beings, it is necessarily due to unshared [ignorance] that they instigate meritorious, non-meritorious [karma], and so forth. If one is a noble one in training (śaikṣa), one does not instigate total karmic retributions. As the Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra says: "I declare that it is based on knowledge, not based on defilement." Although it says this, it is based on not being confused about cause and effect to distinguish them from ordinary persons and non-Buddhists, yet it is also instigated from ignorance. The fourth fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccaya says: "If arising spontaneously it can instigate karma, it is unwholesome." Hence we know that the path of cultivation also instigates karma, but not total karmic retributions. Confusion regarding the two kinds of delusion and so forth are as explained in the Abhidharmasamuccaya.