瑜伽師地論略纂 13.83

13.83

論云「此邪願思與不信、懈怠等俱行」者，此出體性，剋性出體，唯是惡思種子上假立。今取翻五根增者，故言不信等，其實常當十法俱轉，乃至邪欲、邪勝解等。此思即能起業思，如下八律儀中第二、能起律儀也。上來不律儀，一期心即成時節，謂未捨已來七支，七支運運增長。捨時節，謂受戒、命終、得定、二形生，四時。今大乘雖不受戒，誓捨作法，亦名為捨，故五時也。故論云「乃至此思未捨已來，名不律儀」者，明知捨思意業，亦捨不律儀。言「惡尸羅」者，尸羅者名清涼，行惡之人惡清涼，故我為惡尸羅，非其惡體即是尸羅。舊難云：防非以解戒，有戒不防非等者，此不善其名，若如今釋，即無過失，如不律儀名同。又難云：惡體非尸羅，行惡之者惡尸羅故，名惡尸羅；亦應見體非惡，行惡之者惡其見故，名為惡見。解云：見名為分別，善惡分別俱名見；尸羅名清涼，惡體非清涼，故不例同見。律儀體性亦以善惡俱時，亦取五數，剋體唯思種子上假立。今大乘准文，即亦取十善業道及思五蘊為體。若不律儀，翻此。發戒時節，出家五眾，第三羯磨已得戒。若沙彌、沙彌尼及三在家眾，受三歸已即得戒。若出家二眾，要他所受，苾芻攝故；在家三眾，得自然受，即亦三歸已即得戒。若菩薩戒，通自然受，雖攝一切戒盡，後出家已，要從他受。今明二乘戒，從他受。「二種受隨護支，所謂慚、愧」者，慚能自受，愧謂從他，二俱並行。然據增勝故，有一戒時，無第二，非即無一。若從他受戒，由身發七支，如往師所等；戒由語發七支，如發語請師等。若自然受者，唯有意表業。此不以身語為方便，唯以意為方便，受得身語七支無表也。　問曰：即有無表不從表生，無身語故，自有意成表故。若爾，即自受時，禮佛發言，豈非表業？今解：無表他令知，故說無身語，非自無身語業也，故亦有表生。如遣他行事，或語業等，為身等表，故身語得互相表。又此等約一切作法，如重病者不能動身發語，雖從他受，亦有無表不從表生，或自發期心，唯有無表，故為此論也。承西方三家釋戒體百行中，或言一分等，此同經部，受一二戒時亦發戒，不律儀等亦爾。誓受一時，亦名不律儀；若不誓受而行殺者，但名處中。別時別受，總名有十。此中問：如今分離已，與少時等何別，而言有百？或至盡壽十與自受、教他何異？解意：所緣趣求別故。然此中有三位：初三位約事，次三位約時，後四位約人。然就後中，第三自語分為二故。尸羅無悔等者，如《顯揚》第七云：成尸羅故無悔，無悔故生悅，生悅故心喜，心喜故身安，身安故受樂，受樂故心定，心定故觀如實，觀如實故起厭，起厭故離欲，離欲故解脫，解脫故，自謂我證解脫，我生已盡等。靜慮律儀，此中唯有四根本，如《對法》第八：於無色界，略不建立色或律儀。《顯揚》等文，無色亦有定共戒，然於欲界或修生見道，為遠分對治。此中隨順理門故，不說無色。於未來禪，亦有無間道，略而不論。若無漏者，先得靜慮者依五地入見，得不還果，得戒見道，九無間道為惡業道等對治道，後解脫等道乃至無學望見道惡戒，名遠分對治。若修道者，聖者身中微細罪隨所依初禪等，於九品無間道望所斷，名對治道，解脫道亦名遠分對治。然今大乘更有束三界九地，從初果即至無學，為九品對斷。其斷於斷，乃至隨依此地，即取九品無間道為對治道，餘地名遠分對治，唯除有頂中間禪。此據有學初得第三果人，斷惑為所斷斷故勝。若漸斷，第三果以去亦爾，但由能治勝故，得無學語。若頓斷三界九品者，乃至未得無學無間道來，皆是所治斷故勝，唯無學能治勝故勝。其入見道，此中約四根本作超越人作法，於未至禪作初果人法。其實未來禪亦得超越果，得七作意，依未來得不還果，第七加行究竟果作意必入根本。今約果滿為論。此論超越如次第果人，無色得斷欲界犯戒種子。法師云：見道依六地并取中間者，不然，准六現觀，三依五依生，除中間禪。餘處文雖云有無漏，然以梵王所居多散亂故。豈如有頂，雖云有無漏，不成斷惑？如餘處廣辨。然此定、道共戒，法師云：於見道俱現行思上建立，以名隨心轉色故。　問曰：何故道共無表耶？如正語、正業發語，如何為表？又准別解脫戒於思種上建立，即此亦應然。如別解脫戒從受已去，剎那剎那，運運增長，逢緣捨已，舊種不滅，非如小乘斷得名捨，但今新剎那七支不生名捨戒。道、定共亦然，有心之時，剎那增長，七支倍增；若無心已，一類者，種相續而生，無新增義，說名為捨。非如別解脫戒一受已去，有心、無心皆得增長。故名遂心轉。　問：如何以現行思為定戒體？有人云：此種上立，應重於前加行道中思種上建立，如發別解脫戒思，取前加行思業故。加行道中，此未成釋，如定道前加行道，皆非是定道戒，是散心或他地界繫，如何隨加行以判戒體？但應隨定道俱思而立。近事，名離惡行。惡行謂前三支及意，其中乃有離飲諸酒，隨是欲行，今據多分為論。　近住二因者，謂日夜持離欲、惡二行，與盡形持為因，根性劣故。因近果住，故名近住。　非梵行，若在家，制邪不制正，正名欲行；若出家，並不許，名離惡行。離惡行者是性罪故，與前三同，俱是性罪。離惡行者，從貪所生，制不許故，如後四罪，俱制貪故。苾芻四支：芻不謂執受學處，即初說四重、四依相等，如《顯揚》第七卷成就尸羅；第二、善能防護別解脫律儀；第三、軌則、所行皆悉圓滿；第四、見微細罪，生大怖畏，及成就尸羅，謂不毀犯，犯已能出，當《顯揚》受學彼彼學處。故此第一為第六，第六為第一，即聲聞六處。　鄔波言近，迦言事，索即男聲，斯即女聲。於近事上加以索、斯，斯女聲，故男女別也。　言「母色」者，正翻應云母村，家女人同母，故喚女人為母，同村邑類。

The treatise says: "This volition of evil vows operates together with lack of faith, indolence, and so forth." This identifies the essential nature. Disclosing the essential nature strictly, it is merely posited nominally upon the seeds of evil volition. Here, taking the antithesis of the predominance of the five [spiritual] faculties, it therefore says "lack of faith and so forth"; in reality, ten dharmas always operate together, up to evil desire, evil resolved determination, and so forth. This volition is precisely the volition capable of initiating action; as below among the eight restraints, it is the second: the restraint capable of initiating [karma]. The aforementioned non-restraint: the timing of its establishment occurs upon a single set intention—namely, until it is abandoned, the seven factors increase cumulatively from moment to moment. As for the timing of abandonment, it refers to four occasions: taking the precepts, death, attaining meditative absorption, and the arising of two sets of sexual organs. In Mahāyāna now, although one does not take the precepts, an intention to vow abandonment of the practice is also called abandonment, and thus there are five occasions. Hence the treatise says: "Up until this volition has not been abandoned, it is called non-restraint." This clearly shows that when the mental karma of volition is abandoned, non-restraint is also abandoned. As for the expression "evil śīla": *śīla* means cool and refreshing. A person who practices evil hates what is cool and refreshing; hence it is designated "evil śīla," not that its evil essence is itself śīla. An old objection stated: "If one explains precepts as preventing wrongdoing, there would be precepts that do not prevent wrongdoing, etc." This does not properly understand its designation; if explained as we do now, there is no error, just as with the name "non-restraint." Another objection stated: "The essence of evil is not śīla, but because one who practices evil hates śīla, it is called 'evil śīla'; accordingly, the essence of a view would not be evil, but because one who practices evil hates that view, it should be called 'evil view.'" The explanation is: *view* means conceptual discernment, and both good and evil discernment are called views; *śīla* means cool and refreshing, and the essence of evil is not cool and refreshing, so it cannot be analogized to views. The essential nature of restraint also encompasses good and evil simultaneously, and also takes five mental factors; strictly as its essence, it is merely posited nominally upon the seeds of volition. Now in Mahāyāna, according to the text, it also takes the ten virtuous courses of karma and the five aggregates of volition as its essence. Non-restraint is the reverse of this. As for the timing of receiving the precepts: for the five monastic assemblies, they obtain the precepts upon the conclusion of the third karmavācanā. For śrāmaṇeras, śrāmaṇerikās, and the three lay assemblies, they obtain the precepts immediately upon taking the three refuges. For the two fully ordained monastic assemblies, they must receive them from another because they are included under bhikṣus; the three lay assemblies may receive them by self-initiation, and also obtain the precepts immediately upon taking the three refuges. As for the bodhisattva precepts, they are open to self-initiation; although they subsume all precepts completely, after subsequently going forth as a monastic, one must receive them from another. Here we elucidate the precepts of the two vehicles, which are received from another. "The two kinds of factors that attend and guard the reception, namely, moral shame and fear of blame": moral shame enables receiving on one's own; fear of blame refers to [receiving] from another; both operate concurrently. However, on the basis of predominance, when there is one precept, there is not the second; it does not mean there is none at all. If one receives the precepts from another, the seven factors are initiated by the body, as in going to the master's presence, etc.; the precepts' seven factors are initiated by speech, as in uttering words to request the master, etc. If received by self-initiation, there is only mental manifest karma. Here, without taking body and speech as preliminary means, taking only the mind as preliminary means, one receives and obtains the non-manifest [karma] of the seven factors of body and speech. Question: "Then there would be non-manifest [karma] that is not produced from manifest karma, since there is no body and speech, and mind itself constitutes manifest [karma]. If so, when receiving on one's own, in bowing to the Buddha and uttering words, how is that not manifest karma?" We now explain: it is said to lack body and speech because it is non-manifest to others, not that one personally lacks bodily and vocal karma; hence it is also produced from manifest karma. Just as when sending another to perform an action, or when vocal karma serves as a manifestation for the body, bodily and vocal [actions] can manifest each other. Furthermore, these are stated in terms of all rituals: for instance, a severely ill person cannot move their body or utter words; though receiving from another, they also have non-manifest [karma] not produced from manifest karma; or if one generates a set intention on one's own, there is only non-manifest karma—hence this exposition is made. Adopting the explanations of the three Western masters concerning the hundred kinds of practices of the precept-essence: some say "one part," etc., which is the same as the Sautrāntika view that when taking one or two precepts, precepts are also initiated; non-restraint and so forth are also like this. Vowing to undertake it for a single period of time is also called non-restraint; if one carries out killing without a vow to undertake it, it is merely called intermediate. Undertaking them at different times and in different ways yields a total designation of ten. Here it is asked: "If we now divide them like this, what difference is there between 'short duration' and the others, such that there are said to be a hundred? Or what difference is there between the ten 'up to the end of life' and 'receiving by oneself' or 'instructing another'?" The meaning explained is: because the objects and the aims sought differ. However, herein are three positions: the first three positions concern the matter, the next three positions concern the time, and the last four positions concern the person. Yet within the last, the third, one's own speech, is divided into two. Regarding "śīla is without regret, and so forth": as *Prakaraṇāryavācā* fascicle seven states: "Because of accomplishing śīla, there is no regret; because there is no regret, joy arises; because joy arises, the mind is delighted; because the mind is delighted, the body is tranquil; because the body is tranquil, one experiences pleasure; because one experiences pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated; because the mind is concentrated, one contemplates in accordance with reality; because one contemplates in accordance with reality, revulsion arises; because revulsion arises, one is freed from desire; because one is freed from desire, one is liberated; because one is liberated, one knows for oneself: 'I have realized liberation, my rebirths are exhausted,' and so forth." As for the restraint of dhyāna, herein there are only the four fundamental [absorptions], as in *Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya* fascicle eight: in the immaterial realm, matter or restraint is briefly not established. Texts such as the *Prakaraṇāryavācā* state that the immaterial realm also possesses absorption-concomitant precepts; however, with respect to the desire realm or the path of seeing produced through cultivation, they serve as distant antidotes. Here, in accordance with the logical approach, the immaterial realm is not mentioned. In the unarrived dhyāna, there is also an uninterrupted path, which is omitted without discussion. If it is uncontaminated: for one who has previously attained dhyāna, relying on the five stages they enter the path of seeing and attain the fruit of non-returner, attaining the precepts of the path of seeing; the nine uninterrupted paths serve as the antidote paths to the evil courses of karma, and the subsequent paths of liberation up to the non-learner, viewed in relation to the evil precepts of the path of seeing, are called distant antidotes. As for the path of cultivation: the subtle transgressions in the body of a noble one, according to the first dhyāna or other stage relied upon, are called antidote paths in the nine grades of uninterrupted paths viewed in relation to what is to be abandoned; the paths of liberation are also called distant antidotes. However, the Mahāyāna now further binds together the nine stages of the three realms, from the first fruit directly to the non-learner, as nine grades of counteracting abandonment. In its abandoning step by step, according to whichever stage one relies upon, one takes the nine grades of uninterrupted paths as the antidote path, while the other stages are called distant antidotes, with the sole exception of the peak of existence and the intermediate dhyāna. This is based on a learner who has newly attained the third fruit; because the defilements are abandoned through the abandonment of what is to be abandoned, it is superior. If abandonment is gradual, from the third fruit onward it is also like this, but because the counteracting capacity is superior, it receives the designation of non-learner. If one abandons the nine grades of the three realms instantaneously, up until the uninterrupted path of the non-learner is attained, all are superior because what is to be counteracted is abandoned; only the non-learner is superior because the counteracting capacity is superior. As for entering the path of seeing: here, in terms of the four fundamental [dhyānas], the method is for those of jumping progression; in terms of the unarrived dhyāna, it is the method for persons of the first fruit. In fact, in the unarrived dhyāna one can also attain the skipping fruits; having attained the seven modes of attention, relying on the unarrived [dhyāna] one attains the fruit of non-returner, and at the seventh attention—the attention of the culmination of preliminary practice—one inevitably enters the fundamental [dhyāna]. Here the discussion is framed around the completion of the fruit. This treatise describes skipping just like those of gradual fruits: in the immaterial realm, one can abandon the seeds of precept violation of the desire realm. The Dharma Master says that the path of seeing relies on the six stages including the intermediate dhyāna; this is incorrect. According to the six abhisamayas, three rely on five, excluding the intermediate dhyāna. Although texts elsewhere state that uncontaminated [dharmas] exist there, it is because the dwelling of the Brahmā kings is full of distraction. How could it be like the peak of existence, where although uncontaminated [dharmas] are spoken of, they do not accomplish the abandonment of defilements? This is analyzed extensively elsewhere. However, regarding these absorption-concomitant and path-concomitant precepts, the Dharma Master says: they are posited upon the active volition concomitant with the path of seeing, because they are designated "matter that conforms to the movements of mind." Question: "Why are the path-concomitant ones non-manifest? As in right speech and right action giving rise to speech, how can they be manifest? Moreover, according to the prātimokṣa precepts being posited upon seeds of volition, this should also be the case here. Just as the prātimokṣa precepts, from the time of reception onward, increase cumulatively moment by moment, and when abandoned upon meeting conditions, the old seeds are not destroyed—unlike the Hīnayāna where the severance of attainment is called abandonment, but rather that the non-arising of new moments of the seven factors is called abandoning the precepts. Path-concomitant and absorption-concomitant are also like this: when the mind is present, they increase moment by moment, and the seven factors are doubled; once mind is absent, for homogeneous states, the seeds arise in succession without any new increase, which is described as abandonment. It is not like the prātimokṣa precepts where once received, whether the mind is present or absent, they both increase. Therefore they are named 'conforming to the movements of mind.'" Question: "How can active volition be the essence of the absorption precepts?" Someone says: "Posited upon these seeds, they should again be posited upon the seeds of volition in the preceding preliminary path, just as the volition initiating the prātimokṣa precepts takes the karma of the preceding preliminary volition." In the preliminary path, this explanation is not yet established, because the preliminary paths before absorption and path are neither absorption nor path precepts, but belong to the distracted mind or are bound to other stages and realms; how could one determine the essence of the precepts in accordance with the preliminary practice? They should only be posited in accordance with the volition concomitant with absorption and path. *Upāsaka* means departing from bad conduct. Bad conduct refers to the first three factors and mind; within this, there is departing from drinking various liquors, which belongs to conduct of desire, but here the discussion is based on the majority. As for the two causes of the *upavāsa*: namely, observing day and night the departure from the two conducts of desire and evil serves as the cause for observing throughout life; because their faculties and nature are inferior, the cause abides near the fruit, hence it is called *upavāsa* [abiding near]. Regarding unchaste conduct: for the laity, sexual misconduct is prohibited while proper conduct is not; proper conduct is called the conduct of desire. For monastics, neither is permitted, which is called departing from bad conduct. Departing from bad conduct is an intrinsic offense; hence it is identical to the first three, all being intrinsic offenses. Departing from bad conduct arises from greed; because it is prohibited and not permitted, it is like the latter four offenses, all of which prohibit greed. A bhikṣu has four factors: first, taking up the training rules, which refers to what was initially taught regarding the four parājikas, the four dependences, and so forth, as in fascicle seven of *Prakaraṇāryavācā* on accomplishing śīla; second, being well able to guard the prātimokṣa restraint; third, deportment and spheres of action being entirely complete; fourth, seeing great dread in minute offenses, and accomplishing śīla, meaning not transgressing, and being able to emerge after transgression, corresponding in *Prakaraṇāryavācā* to undertaking the training in various training rules. Thus, here the first is the sixth, and the sixth is the first, which constitutes the six grounds of the śrāvaka. *Upa* means near; *ka* means service; *sa* is masculine, and *sī* is feminine. Affixing *sa* or *sī* to *upavāsa/upāsaka*—*sī* being feminine—distinguishes male and female. As for the term "mother-group": the proper translation should be "mother-village"; women within a household are akin to mothers, hence women are called "mothers," akin to the category of a village or hamlet.