瑜伽師地論略纂 5.97

5.97

總於此三，「欲與樂等，為欲令彼不樂思慕不染污作意」等者，此釋捨行相，即以前三有情為境。無苦無樂有情，癡增上故，多樂思慕生死苦集，迷於境界，先與樂已，今欲令彼不樂思量、樂慕、迷醉生死苦集，捨其癡故；有苦有情，多生瞋恚，先拔苦已，今欲令彼不生瞋恚；有樂有情，多生貪欲，先不生嫉，樂其不離，為欲令彼不起貪欲。於三有情，勸捨三種，起此不染污作意。四十四說：菩薩即於無苦無樂、有苦、有樂三種有情，隨其次第，發起遠離癡、瞋、貪惑增上意樂，普緣十方，是名為捨。《顯揚論》說：慈以無瞋，悲以不害，喜以不嫉。《涅槃》亦言：慈除奪命瞋，悲除鞭撻瞋，喜除不樂。《大智度論》說：前三種無瞋為體。與此論同，俱性無瞋故。《涅槃》又言慈斷貪欲者，慳樂不與，說名貪欲，緣自樂生。斷眾生命，說名為瞋；今不斷命，說名無瞋。無貪緣樂生，無瞋緣有情起，故修慈者定斷貪瞋。前第十一及《顯揚論》、《涅槃經》皆言捨除貪欲、瞋恚，無貪、無瞋二法為性。下第十四捨除貪欲，《大智度論》說即無貪。此及三十四中，三善根為性。《智度論》等，依緣捨己樂，施與他人，故體無貪。《涅槃》亦言：自捨己樂，施與他人，是名大捨。順違二生，多起貪恚，平等勸除，相增說捨。《涅槃經》等，二法為性，法界有情，總為三聚，平等行捨故，以三善而為自性。各據一義，理不相違也。

Taken collectively toward these three, "wishing to grant pleasure and so forth, wishing that they do not delight in longing, undefiled manaskāra" and so forth: this explains the cognitive aspect of equanimity, which takes the aforementioned three classes of sentient beings as its object. Sentient beings who have neither suffering nor pleasure have an excess of delusion, and thus mostly take delight in longing for the suffering and arising of cyclic existence, being bewildered by objects; having previously granted them pleasure, one now wishes that they do not take delight in considering, yearning for, and becoming intoxicated with the suffering and arising of cyclic existence, thereby relinquishing their delusion. Sentient beings who have suffering mostly give rise to hatred; having previously removed their suffering, one now wishes that they do not give rise to hatred. Sentient beings who have pleasure mostly give rise to greed; having previously avoided giving rise to jealousy and taking delight in their non-separation [from joy], one wishes that they do not give rise to greed. Toward these three classes of sentient beings, urging the relinquishment of the three kinds [of defilement], one generates this undefiled manaskāra.
Fascicle forty-four states: toward the three kinds of sentient beings—those who have neither suffering nor pleasure, those who have suffering, and those who have pleasure—the bodhisattva, in respective order, generates the predominant aspiration to abandon the defilements of delusion, hatred, and greed, universally taking the ten directions as object; this is called equanimity.
The Prakaraṇāryavācā states: benevolence has non-hatred as its substance, compassion has non-harming, and sympathetic joy has non-jealousy. The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra also states: benevolence eliminates the hatred that takes life, compassion eliminates the hatred that flogs and beats, and sympathetic joy eliminates discontent. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states: the first three kinds take non-hatred as their substance. This agrees with this treatise, since both regard their nature as non-hatred.
The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra also states that benevolence severs greed: being stingy with joy and refusing to give it to others is termed greed, which arises with reference to one's own pleasure. Severing the lives of sentient beings is termed hatred; now, not severing life is termed non-hatred. Non-greed arises with reference to pleasure, while non-hatred arises with reference to sentient beings; therefore, one who cultivates benevolence definitely severs greed and hatred.
Fascicle eleven earlier, as well as the Prakaraṇāryavācā and the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra, all state that equanimity eliminates greed and hatred, taking the two dharmas of non-greed and non-hatred as its nature. Fascicle fourteen below states that equanimity eliminates greed; the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa states it is precisely non-greed. Here and in [fascicle] thirty-four, it takes the three wholesome roots as its nature. The Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa and others rely on relinquishing one's own pleasure and bestowing it upon others; hence its substance is non-greed. The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra also states: relinquishing one's own pleasure and bestowing it upon others is called great equanimity. Toward both agreeable and disagreeable [sentient] beings, greed and hatred mostly arise; urging their equal elimination, it is termed equanimity due to the predominance of its characteristic. In the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra and others, it takes two dharmas as its nature; taking the sentient beings of the dharma-realm collectively as three groups and practicing equanimity toward them equally, it takes the three wholesome [roots] as its self-nature. Each relies on a specific meaning, and they do not logically contradict one another.