瑜伽師地論略纂 4

English (machine translation) 4

Language: English

Among the nine gates of karma, in the fifth gate, that of karma, virile fruit (puruṣakāra-phala) is not mentioned because, apart from the three fruits, there is no distinct augmented characteristic. In granting the fruition fruit (vipāka-phala), it only says 'experiencing the fruition fruit in the narakas'. Fascicle seven of the Abhidharma and the Hetuphala-sūtra say: experiencing fruition among animals, hungry ghosts, and narakas. That is based on the fruitions experienced from the three grades—inferior, middling, and superior—of the karma of killing; this text is based solely on the superior grade, and therefore speaks only of hell. Furthermore, this text mentions one while that text states them completely; they also do not contradict each other.

4.3

Under 'short lifespan' in the outflow fruit (niṣyanda-phala), there are ten clauses, which match the ten unwholesome courses of action in sequence. A fruit resembling its cause is called an outflow fruit. Short lifespan is actually a dominant fruit (adhipati-phala), metaphorically called an outflow [fruit]. Regarding 'the outflow of wrong view is an increase in delusion': the Abhidharmasamuccaya states that with all wrong views, delusion is predominant; as for becoming a course of action, it is purely dominant. Question: If so, why is the course of action called wrong view, while the attained fruit is termed an increase in delusion? Answer: An increase in delusion initiates wrong view, and wrong view must entail an increase in delusion; wrong view must have delusion, but having delusion does not necessarily have wrong view. The course of action mentions the dependent factor, stating 'wrong [view]' and not 'delusion'; the attainment of fruit mentions the locus of dependence, stating 'delusion' and not 'wrong view'. The two gates imply each other, letting one know that the course of action is solely wrong view; delusion extends to dull faculties, and therefore is not designated as the course of action.

4.4

In the dominant fruit (adhipati-phala), this text distinguishes ten fruits based on a single object, whereas the Abhidharma distinguishes ten fruits based on multiple affairs; hence the two differ, and their meanings are distinct. Here there are ten clauses, which also correspond in sequence to the courses of action. 'Inopportune' means not conforming to human wishes.

4.5

Among the eight zealous applications, there are four divisions: first, directed toward the condition of one's own body and wealth; second, directed toward the field of compassion; third, directed toward the field of respect; fourth, directed toward the field of gratitude.

4.6

Regarding the five acts of immediate retribution (ānantarya-karma), the sixtieth [fascicle] explains: One is false speech, namely, creating a schism in the Saṅgha; four are bodily actions, among which three are taking life, and one is the preparatory action (prayoga) of taking life, namely, causing blood to flow from a Buddha's body. As applicable, bodily and vocal actions constitute their self-nature. First, the schism of the Saṅgha takes non-concordance among the mental dharmas not associated with the mind (citta-viprayukta-saṃskāra) within the Saṅgha broken apart as its essence; it is neutral without concealment (anivṛtāvyākṛta), relies on the ripening consciousness (vipākavijñāna), and is so because of discordance regarding the wheel of the Dharma and the like. That which accomplishes the schism is false speech, and it receives its name from its fruit, being termed 'creating a schism in the Saṅgha.' Second, [the perpetrator] must be a monk (bhikṣu), not a layperson. Third, one driven by view, not one driven by passion. Fourth, one of pure practice, not one who violates the precepts, because [the latter's] words lack authority and solemnity. Fifth, the schism occurs in a different location, not before the Buddha, because the Tathāgatas are difficult to slight or press. Sixth, it splits ordinary people (pṛthagjana), not noble ones (ārya). Seventh, at the time of accepting another teacher's holy path—meaning that five dharmas are the path, and the Eightfold Noble Path is not the path. Eighth, it definitely does not last past one night: schism in the Saṅgha of the wheel of the Dharma can obstruct the holy wheel of the Dharma and destroy the concord of the Saṅgha. Ninth, schism regarding the wheel of the Dharma occurs only in this continent [Jambudvīpa], because a Buddha is present; schism regarding karmic assembly-acts (karmavācanā) is common to three continents, because the teachings are present. Tenth, a schism regarding the wheel of the Dharma requires at least nine persons, as those being split form two groups and the one causing the split makes one; a schism regarding karmic assembly-acts requires at least eight persons, dividing into two quorums, and there is no objection to more. Eleventh, after the initial attainment of the path, when about to enter nirvāṇa, when the boils of wrong view and precept violation have not yet arisen, when the primary pair of śamatha and vipaśyanā have not yet been established, after the Buddha's passing, and before the precepts have been formulated—in these six stages there is no schism regarding the wheel of the Dharma; only aside from these other times can a schism in the Saṅgha occur. The *Kośa* verse says: 'At the beginning, at the end, before the boils and the pair, after the Buddha's passing, and before the precepts are formulated; in these six stages, there is no schism in the Saṅgha of the wheel of the Dharma.' This is something that occurs in transformation lands (nirmāṇa-kṣetra); in reward lands (saṃbhoga-kṣetra) there might be Amitābha, and Devadatta's name is calm. Alternatively, in the reward Buddha there is none, but in the transformation Amitābha there is. The Sarvāstivādin masters hold that it occurs because the Buddha has past karmic enmity, whereas the Mahāyāna holds that it is an expedient manifestation. Among these five heinous deeds, harming one's father and harming one's mother destroy the field of gratitude; the remaining three all destroy the field of merit. On this account they constitute heinous deeds, being common to the three vehicles. What is explained as the five heinous deeds in the *Satyakanirgranthasūtra* differs from this and belongs only to the Mahāyāna, differing according to capacity, so they do not contradict each other. Among these five heinous deeds, creating a schism in the Saṅgha is the gravest, because it destroys the dharmakāya of virtues and obstructs the path of liberation for gods and humans; entering the noble state to attain the fruits, and leaving defilement to exhaust the outflows, are all blocked, up to the point that the wheel of Dharma does not turn in the trichiliocosm, and the bodies and minds of gods, humans, nāgas, and others are thrown into turmoil; thus it definitely incurs all the great sins of immediate retribution. Next is shedding the blood of a Buddha's body; next is killing an arhat; next is mother, and next is father, each subsequent one becoming progressively lighter. The various detailed expositions are all as explained in fascicle 18 of the *Kośa*.

4.7

'Equivalent category of an act of immediate retribution' refers to sins of the same kind as an act of immediate retribution. Defiling an arhat nun and one's mother belong to the class of killing a mother; striking a bodhisattva in their final existence belongs to the class of killing a father; committing murder in a heavenly temple and the like, doing harm to a trusted person, or turning around to harm and afflict the poor, suffering, and distressed after having bestowed fearlessness upon them, belong to the class of killing an arhat; pillaging the property of the Saṅgha belongs to the class of creating a schism in the Saṅgha; destroying sacred shrines and the like belongs to the class of shedding a Buddha's body blood. Or they may simply be subsumed into categories as a whole without needing specific distribution. The *Kośa* differs from this, stating: 'Defiling one's mother who is an aśaikṣa nun, killing a bodhisattva abiding in certainty, as well as an ārya of the training stage (śaikṣa), robbing the conditions of concordance in the Saṅgha, and destroying a stūpa, are equivalents of immediate retribution.' From practicing the karma for the excellent marks, one is called a bodhisattva abiding in certainty; in that text, such a one can be killed, but here there is no such thing. Since a bodhisattva in their final body definitely cannot be killed, here it is called 'striking.' Although killing an ārya of the training stage is reversing the flow, the categorization is not exhaustive; it merely belongs to the class of killing an arhat here, subsumed under the second of the three meanings, being categorized under the class of the venerable elders.

4.8

'Property of the Saṅgha' refers to all matters pertaining to what belongs to the Saṅgha, such as knowing that another gave an object to the Saṅgha and diverting it to oneself. 'Sacred shrine' means hall and pavilion. 'Stūpa' here translates as 'high and prominent,' 'pagoda,' and so forth. Each mentions a single name, and both are Buddha-activities. The *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states that the five acts of immediate retribution and the like are karma to be experienced in the next birth (upapadyavedanīya-karma); why are they termed 'results in the present life' (dṛṣṭadharmaphala) here? Here, because of committing heinous sins, one is killed and so forth in the present life, hence it is called 'experienced in the present life'; there, according to falling into the Avīci hell and so forth in the next birth, it is termed 'experienced in the next birth'; thus there is no contradiction. Question: If karma experienced in the present life does not induce a total result (saṃgraha-phala), does the karma of the five acts of immediate retribution experience a particular result (viśeṣa-phala)? Answer: Through preparatory action, one experiences a particular result in the present; through the primary karma (mūla-karma), one experiences the future total result; it is not that both the present and future are experienced through a single karma. Taking the designation from the beginning, it is termed 'experienced in the present life,' which does not mean that the five acts of immediate retribution do not incur a total result. It is precisely through this meaning that the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states: 'For one who commits numerous acts of immediate retribution, the instruments of suffering incurred are numerous and fierce, and one suddenly undergoes numerous sufferings.' The *Sūtra on Reproaching the Resentful Mind* states: 'Due to acts of immediate retribution, one repeatedly dies and is born in the narakas, experiencing the great suffering of ripening.' Sūtras such as the *Prajñāpāramitā* and *Lotus Sūtra* also state: 'Due to slandering the sūtra, one is born from one hell to another hell.' Taking the designation from the initial, they are all karma experienced in the next birth; this is also the case here. Question: Why is killing a pratyekabuddha not an act of immediate retribution? Answer: Because they are few, it is not mentioned; it is subsumed under the category of arhats.

4.9

'Making offerings to one emerging from the samādhi of benevolence (maitrī-samādhi) and the like obtains results in the present' applies to the state of initial emergence. Just as with initial emergence from the samādhi of benevolence, so too with the samādhi of non-contention (araṇā-samādhi), the absorption of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti), the fruit of stream-enterer (srotāpanna), and the fruit of arhat; it does not apply long after emerging. Pratyekabuddhas are not mentioned because they are few and thus omitted, though in fact it is also obtained. Once-returners (sakṛdāgāmin) and non-returners (anāgāmin) are not those who have newly attained the noble state, hence they are not mentioned. Question: Why is only the samādhi of benevolence mentioned, and not the samādhis of compassion (karuṇā), joy (muditā), equanimity (upekṣā), and the like? Answer: Because joy and equanimity are inferior, and compassion extends to distracted states, whereas benevolence and the rest excel at granting worldly and supramundane happiness. Non-contention and the like are also like this: internally one realizes true non-contention, and externally one must pacify all afflictions, excelling over the knowledge resulting from aspiration (praṇidhijñāna) and the like; hence the others are not mentioned.

4.10

'Toward the Saṅgha of those in training and beyond training': The *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states that the Buddha is the leader of the Saṅgha, meaning that all the Saṅgha before the Buddha, or the disciples of the Buddha—whether ordinary or noble, in training or beyond training—are termed the Saṅgha with the Buddha as leader. Because it says 'Saṅgha' here, it is not an individual person.

4.11

In 'giving others sovereign results and so forth, it is also through karma that experiences results in the present life': This means that it is not only due to others, but also due to one's own present karma. That is, where the Buddha dwells, he causes well-being to arise, and sentient beings, seeing the Buddha, perform the karma of making offerings. The Buddha causes them to be free from suffering and abide in well-being; by the power of the place, he gathers other sentient beings so that they all attain well-being. When a wheel-turning king exhorts and transforms [people] to practice the ten wholesome courses of action, sentient beings who follow and practice them attain happiness in the same way. When a bodhisattva in the samādhi of benevolence activates the mind to bestow happiness, making offerings to obtain peace is also like this. Through the sovereign influence of others, one's own present karma matures, and one thereupon obtains results in the present.

4.12

'Karma-heaven': Most worldly people believe that good and bad depend on heaven, but in truth they depend on karma; karma is metaphorically called heaven. First due to compassion, later a mind of benevolence arises to bestow happiness upon them; hence only benevolence is mentioned.

4.13

There are eight gates of harm and benefit: the first seven are the three bodily and four vocal [actions], mapped in that order; the eighth combines the three mental paths of action. 'Companions' means relatives and friends.

4.14

Sixth, the predominance of karma has six aspects: the first is the characteristic of sharp [faculty]; the second is the characteristic of diligence.

4.15

Third, regarding self-nature: first is the comparison of the four vocal actions, next the three bodily kinds, and last the three mental ones, from light to heavy, generally comparing the three karmas and specifically weighing the ten courses of action. Among paths of action, form comes first, followed by mind. Within form, the heavy comes first, followed by the light; all form paths of action proceed from heavy to light; within mental paths of action, the light comes first, followed by the heavy. Although the method differs, there is no error.

4.16

However, among the three karmas of punishment, mental karma is the gravest; among the five perverted views, wrong view is the gravest; among the five acts of immediate retribution, creating a schism in the Saṅgha is the gravest. This is because what is considered varies. Here, in explaining karma, it is not viewed in relation to immediate retribution; therefore vocal karma is lighter, and there is logically no fault.

4.17

Seventh, regarding karmic perversion: 'an offense equivalent to killing living beings' means that the preparatory path of action resembles the primary one. There are two examples of this: first, killing sentient beings; second, killing non-sentient things; both consist in mistaking what is not that for that, so there is no primary offense. In the perversion of appropriation, it only mentions up to frivolous talk and does not speak of the three mental paths of action, because the seven limbs of body and speech are common to the nature of precepts, are commonly known, and form is easy to grasp. The above explains non-offense. From 'there is also no giving, keeping the precepts, and cultivating merit' downward, because there is no field of merit and wrong views arise, this attachment is formed.

4.18

Eighth, regarding the distinctions of karma, there are two parts: first, listing the names of karma in the preceding four positions, and next, explaining them individually according to the list. The positions listed are four: first, there are five kinds of two gates; second, there are ten kinds of three gates; third, there is one kind of four gates; fourth, there is one kind of five gates. 'Performed karma' refers to either volitional karma (cetanā-karma) or bodily and vocal karma initiated after volition (cetayitvā karma). In 'unperformed karma up to bodily karma and vocal karma': deliberative and decisive volitions are called mental karma; the prominent volition that mobilizes and activates is called bodily and vocal karma initiated after volition. Alternatively, the prominent volition that mobilizes and activates is called volitional karma; the bodily and vocal karma initiated by this volition is called karma initiated after volition. This explanation agrees with the *Abhidharmasamuccaya*, which states: 'Volitional karma refers to meritorious, non-meritorious, and immovable karma; karma initiated after volition refers to bodily, vocal, and mental karma.' Therefore, this performed karma extends to the informative and uninformative karma of both preparatory and primary paths of action; when not yet destroyed and not yet abandoned, it is called performed karma, which is the seeds of both karmas. When the informative and uninformative karma of the preparatory and primary have been destroyed and abandoned, it is called unperformed karma, because it is not accomplished and lacks prominent activity. This is the explanation of Master Bei. Master Jing says: What is born spontaneously and is not subsumed under the paths of action—all wholesome, unwholesome, and neutral karma—is called unperformed karma; wholesome and unwholesome karma born of primary paths of action and preparations is called performed karma. As explained now: all informative karma of preparation and primary is called performed karma, because there is initiation and action; all uninformative karma is called unperformed karma, because there is no initiation and action. This applies to the informative and uninformative karma of the three vehicles; hence mind is not mentioned.

4.19

Regarding accrued and unaccrued karma: 'Eighth, karma neutral by self-nature' refers to the middling and lower qualities of wholesome and unwholesome karma not subsumed under paths of action, not the neutral nature among the three natures, because its self-nature does not increase and is called neutral. Alternatively, it refers to neutral karma among the three natures.

4.20

Regarding “9. Karma impaired by remorse”: Fascicle 89 states that for all karmas performed but not accumulated, if there is no remorse and no cultivation of counteragents, they will definitely experience their retribution and are called accumulated karma; if one feels remorse, and so forth, they are called not accumulated. Alternatively, karma previously accumulated may, through remorse and so on—as with Ajātaśatru—become unaccumulated; without remorse and so forth, it is called accumulated karma. Fascicle 60 states that karma of determinate retribution is established based on those who are not yet liberated. Therefore, those who are liberated generate the path and suppress or sever it. The Abhidharma-samuccaya states that there are five kinds of karma performed with intention: (1) commanded by another; (2) urged by another; (3) without clear understanding; (4) based on fundamental clinging—meaning all karma produced by minds obscured by the three poisons and intense clinging; (5) inverted conceptualization—meaning unwholesome karma performed under the idea that it is superior and faultless. Among these five, karma performed based on fundamental clinging and inverted conceptualization, whether performed or accumulated, never fails to undergo retribution, because it is grave; the remaining three, though performed, are not accumulated and need not undergo retribution, because they are light. That treatise explains: “performed” means initiating and performing various karmas, causing them to become actively manifest; “accumulated” means causing the habit-energies to increase. That treatise speaks of only five kinds of intentional karma, whereas here intentional and unintentional karma are treated comprehensively, so there are ten kinds. The second kind here corresponds to the third there, and the seventh here corresponds to the first two there, which is not contradictory. The last two in that treatise are subsumed under accumulated karma, so they are not included in the ten.

4.21

Regarding “Karma performed with intention means: having intended, whether performing the karma, or accumulating the karma, etc.”: Here, what is intentionally performed or accumulated is called intentional karma; what is not intentionally performed or accumulated is called unintentional karma. The Abhidharma-samuccaya explains volitional karma and karma after volition: the former is meritorious, non-meritorious, and immovable karma, while the latter is bodily, vocal, and mental karma, which differs from this text. Moreover, that treatise states there are five kinds of intentional karma, as just explained above, which conflicts with this text because here it applies to both accumulated and non-accumulated karma. Here, intentional karma is established based on superior and strong intention that is bound to definitely incur retribution; there, it is established based merely on what is done with intention rather than spontaneously, covering both what will and will not definitely attain its fruit, both of which are termed intentional. Because their perspectives differ, there is likewise no contradiction.

4.22

Regarding “Karma of determinate fruition and karma of indeterminate fruition”: The former is the aforementioned intentional karma, which will definitely incur retribution; the latter is the aforementioned unintentional karma, which will not definitely incur retribution. The Abhidharma-samuccaya states that with regard to karma of determinate fruition, determinacy is threefold: (1) determinate performance of karma—owing to the power of past karma, one obtains a determinate body, and in this life one must perform this karma, being temporally determined so that one ultimately does not fail to do so, nor can the supernatural power of the Buddhas and others prevent it; (2) determinate undergoing of retribution—this is the karma of determinate fruition spoken of here, where the fruit is bound to be experienced, although the time is not yet determined; (3) determinate stage—meaning karma whose stage is determinate as to whether it is experienced in the present life, in the next life, or in subsequent lives. Here the meaning indicated is that if a karma is subsumed under a path of karma, it is termed karma of determinate fruition; preliminary and subsequent actions may be either determinate or indeterminate. If not yet repented and not yet liberated, it is called determinate karma; if already repented and already liberated, it is called indeterminate karma.

4.23

Regarding “Matured and unmatured karma”: Karma that produced its fruit in the past or is presently producing its fruit is called matured karma; karma that will produce its fruit in the future or presently is called unmatured karma. This concludes the explanation of the five sets of twofold divisions above.

4.24

Among karma of the three natures, veiled-unobscured karma is also called indeterminate karma, because it does not take the three wholesome roots or the three unwholesome roots as its causal condition.

4.25

Regarding “Karma subsumed under restraint”, etc.: As for prātimokṣa restraint, the Abhidharma-samuccaya states that it refers to the restraint undertaken by the seven assemblies: the five assemblies of renunciants, as well as laymen and those observing the eight precepts. Renunciants abandon unwholesome conduct and sensual conduct for the duration of life; laymen abandon unwholesome conduct for the duration of life but do not abandon sensual conduct; those observing the eight precepts cannot abandon unwholesome conduct and sensual conduct for the duration of life; thus prātimokṣa is established in three categories.

4.26

Regarding “Or karma subsumed under restraint of dhyāna, samāpatti, and abandonment-fruit”: “Dhyāna” refers to the four dhyānas of the form realm. “Samāpatti” refers to the four formless attainments. “Fruit” refers to the virtues cultivated and produced on the basis of dhyāna and the formless attainments. “Abandonment” refers to the active volition associated with dhyāna and the formless attainments, which remotely guards against the faults of transgressing precepts in the desire realm—the moral restraint of abandonment. The fruit is itself the restraint of abandonment; it is the abandonment of the fruit, its substance being the restraint born of meditative concentration. Across the three vehicles it generally applies to body and speech, and the Mahāyāna additionally includes mental karma. There is an explanation saying: abandonment is the nature-restraint of unconditioned dharmas, while fruit is the restraint born of meditative concentration. Now, in explaining karma here, since it says “abandonment-fruit” and not “fruit of abandonment,” abandonment is not unconditioned, just as wholesome dharmas were explained before. Alternatively, both fruit and abandonment are the substance of the restraint, so both are taken together. Only the initial threshold concentration has the counteragent of abandonment; in all the higher stages, it constitutes abandonment by distance. This is based on the meaning of contaminated restraint born of concentration. The Viniścayasaṃgrahaṇī states that it exists in the form realm, but here it generally applies to the formless realm as well. The Abhidharma-samuccaya establishes it solely on the basis of the form realm, and that text reconciles this itself by saying: because coarse form does not exist in the formless realm, it is omitted from establishment.

4.27

Regarding “Karma subsumed under uncontaminated restraint”: This refers to the nature of renunciation attained by one who sees the truths through the power of uncontaminated dharmas; that is, the restraint concurrent with the path. This is explained at length as in the Chapter on Manifest and Unmanifest.

4.28

Among non-restraints, “slandering and stinging” refers to those who only practice slanderous fawning and jeer at others to make a living, of an ill-natured sort, the intimidation type. “Executing judgment” refers to persons in the Western Regions separately designated to pass judicial sentence, who seek wealth to make a living. Here there are twelve kinds; the Abhidharma-samuccaya has fourteen. This text lacks three of theirs: (1) hunting deer; (2) catching fish; (3) harming cattle. That text lacks this one: executing judgment. The Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra speaks of sixteen: cattle, sheep, pigs, and chickens, raised for profit, resold after fattening, bought for profit, and slaughtered after purchase, making eight kinds; catching fish, catching birds, hunters, robbers, executioners, backbiters, jailers, and snake-charmers make another eight. It lacks this executing judgment and binding elephants. The Saṃyuktābhidharma-hṛdaya speaks of twelve: slaughtering sheep, raising pigs, raising chickens, catching fish, catching birds, hunters, thieves, executioners, jailers, snake-charmers, ambushing birds, and slaughtering dogs. The various texts differ, but simply speaking, where harmful mental karma is extensive and taken as one's primary trade to make a living, these are all non-restraint. A few examples are cited in brief, not limited to just these. If not so, would not someone specializing in killing horses and donkeys also be included? The full list of members and the conditions for obtaining and relinquishing them are also as in the separate chapter. Intermediate karma and the like, manifest and unmanifest, and whether attained by a Buddha or not, are all as explained in that chapter.

4.29

Regarding “The intrinsic nature of giving is the bodily and vocal karma produced by intention that can relinquish objects given”: The Abhidharma-samuccaya and the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi both take the three karmas, taking intention together with non-attachment as the nature. Here, non-attachment is stated as the causal condition, and intention is mentioned under the aspect of co-arising; therefore, within intrinsic nature, bodily and vocal karma are taken. In terms of external manifestation, discussing it generally across the three vehicles, only body and speech are mentioned, not mental karma. In the intrinsic nature of morality, the three karmas are taken as its nature, so it says “bodily and vocal karma, etc.” As stated in the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, because one undertakes the bodhisattva precepts, it applies to all three karmas. Regarding “The bases extend to both sentient and insentient”: Because natural morality and prescriptive morality, as appropriate, extend to both bases.

4.30

Regarding “The intrinsic nature of cultivation is samādhi”: As for the four immeasurables: the substance of benevolence is non-hatred; the substance of compassion is non-harming; the substance of sympathetic joy is non-jealousy; equanimity is the three wholesome roots, namely the mental factor of wholesome equanimity. Here, proceeding from their basis, meditative concentration is taken as their substance, as in the second fascicle of the Vimalaprabhā-ṭīkā.

4.31

Regarding “Bases”: These are the sentient beings of the three realms who are their objects, classified into three categories: (1) those without suffering and without pleasure—giving them pleasure is benevolence; (2) those with suffering—rescuing them is compassion; (3) those with pleasure—rejoicing with them is sympathetic joy. Toward the first category, one generates the thought of departing from delusion; toward the second category, the thought of departing from hatred; toward the third category, the thought of departing from attachment. Bringing about departure from evil with impartiality is equanimity. This cites the object of benevolence to subsume the other three. Each of these has three aspects, as explained elsewhere in the text.

4.32

Regarding “Meritorious karma refers to that which incurs the maturation of favorable destinies, etc.”: Meritorious karma experiences overall maturation in the human and heavenly realms. Regarding “And accords with experience in the five destinies”: In four destinies one experiences particular maturations; in the hells one experiences equal-outflow results, resembling particular retribution, which is collectively referred to as according with the five destinies. One opinion holds that this is not so. The Cheng weishi lun states: when it is said elsewhere that they have equal-outflow pleasure, one should know that this is spoken in accordance with provisional doctrine. Therefore, in the Mahāyāna, there is no wholesome fruit there; due to wholesome karma, the suffering experienced is slight, which is called obtaining a fruit, and there is no separate particular retribution; this is unlike the Hīnayāna, which accepts that the four sense-data in the hells are incurred by wholesome karma. Another explanation is: this is spoken comprehensively of five destinies in terms of number, but particularly it is only four destinies. Yet another explanation is: excluding the asuras as one and combining them into six destinies, it is said that wholesome karma accords with the five destinies, but in reality does not exist in the hells.

4.33

Regarding “Among karma according with neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, particular retribution is solely karma of the fourth dhyāna and above”: There are two explanations here. The first says: below the third dhyāna there is particular retribution fruit experienced. That this text and the Abhidharma-samuccaya do not speak of such karma is because the majority of wholesome karma incurs pleasant feeling as fruit, and only a minority of wholesome karma incurs neutral feeling as fruit; hence it is omitted in brief. If not so, why would wholesome karma of lower realms not obtain that fruit? The second says: below the third dhyāna there is no separate wholesome karma of neutral feeling; in the sixth consciousness the neutral fruit is tranquil, and since lower karma is coarse, wholesome karma only incurs pleasure, hence there is no neutral fruit. Question: If lower wholesome karma is coarse and does not incur a neutral fruit, why does lower karma incur the neutral fruit of the eighth consciousness? Answer: Because overall and particular retribution differ, this should not be made a parallel.

4.34

Regarding “Karma experienced in the present life”, etc.: Both this text and the Abhidharma-samuccaya state there are three kinds, named from the first; the present refers solely to particular retribution, while the others apply to both overall and particular retribution. Earlier, two kinds were spoken of, namely determinate and indeterminate. Fascicle 60 speaks of four karmas: (1) determinate maturation; (2) determinate time; (3) both determinate; (4) both indeterminate. The Prakaraṇāryavācā, fascicle 19, speaks of five karmas: (1) determinate experience in the present life; (2) determinate experience in the next life; (3) determinate experience in subsequent lives; (4) determinate experience of retribution; (5) determinate performance of karma. Without relying on time, but discussing only retribution, there are only two kinds: determinate and indeterminate. If discussing time together with retribution, there are only three karmas, which does not exceed this. When time and retribution are correlated, combining and separating them yields four, because specific times are not mentioned, but only spoken of generally. Only when relying on time, fruit, and determinate performance of karma are five kinds stated, excluding the indeterminate. Although the texts differ, there is no contradiction in meaning, because their perspectives differ.

4.35

Regarding “Karma of one in training refers to, if an ordinary being”, etc.: This means that when ordinary beings generate the mind of the three vehicles and [cultivate] wholesome roots conducive to liberation, from that point on they are all called those in training. The karma of one in training applies to both contaminated and uncontaminated; the same applies to those beyond training. Regarding “Neither in training nor beyond training”: This refers to all karma in the stage of ordinary beings prior to generating the aspiration. In Fascicle 66, only noble ones are called those in training because of realizing superior attainment; this text combines them on the basis of their underlying support. Innately acquired wholesome roots and the like of a practitioner in training are also called karma of one in training; if not so, they would not be, because they would not accord with that stage.

4.36

Regarding "Among karma abandoned by seeing, etc., it is only said that unwholesome karma of the bad destinies is abandoned by seeing": this is stated in terms of projecting karma; if concluding karma is also included, it extends to all five destinies, which is why the treatise says "etc." Chapter 53 states: "Actions going to bad destinies can only be generated by conceptually arisen afflictions." As for projecting and concluding karmas in the three bad destinies, because they arise conceptually, this specifically states that they are not distinct bad karmas induced among humans, are not abandoned by the path of seeing, and also that innate ones do not induce the bad destinies. Although [states such as] the non-conceptual absorption are also abandoned by seeing, they are not abandoned by detachment from bondage; therefore they are not mentioned here, or else they are subsumed under the word "etc." This is explained as in the commentary to the eighth fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi, the fourth fascicle of the Abhidharma[-samuccaya], and so on. The ten three-gate karmas above have now been explained.

4.37

Among the four karmas such as black-black, etc.: non-meritorious karma is called black-black, referring to general karma of the three bad destinies and specific bad karma of the five destinies. Immovable karma is called white-white, referring to general and specific wholesome karma of the form and formless realms. Meritorious karmas are called black-white-black-white karma, referring to general karma of humans and gods in the desire realm, and specific wholesome karma corresponding to the five destinies. Because the wholesome is opposed by the unwholesome, it is called black-white-black-white karma. Because black karma has not yet been abandoned, meritorious karma obtains this name; even if black karma has already been abandoned, because it is of that former category, it is also called black-white-black-white karma. Regarding these three, the Abhidharmasamuccaya states: both as cause and as fruit they obtain their names. The black-black cause is defiled, and its fruit is not delightful; the white-white cause is undefiled, and its fruit is delightful; the black-white-black-white cause is evil mixed with good, and its fruit is mixed with bad fruit; because the fruit of meritorious karma in the desire realm is necessarily mixed with non-merit, it is called black-white-black-white. Since there is non-meritorious fruit that is not mixed with merit, it is not called white-black-white-black karma. Fascicle 8 and Chapter 66 of the Abhidharma[samuccaya] state that black-black karma is the same as this. As for white-white karma, it refers to wholesome karma of the three realms. Black-white-black-white karma refers to mixed karma of the desire realm. It is not that karma of a single moment is both wholesome and unwholesome; rather, based on the intention and through the expedient means, they are collectively called a single karma, named "mixed karma." That is, there is karma that is black in intention and white in expedient means, namely, cultivating various goods with a deceitful mind; or there is karma that is white in intention and black in expedient means, namely, disciplining disciples by generating bodily or vocal evils. This black-white karma extends to both wholesome and unwholesome natures. This treatise explains black-black, etc., karma based on the three karmas—meritorious, non-meritorious, and immovable—while that treatise explains black-black, etc., karma based on pure, mixed, wholesome, and unwholesome; thus they do not contradict each other. Furthermore, Chapter 66 and the Abhidharma[samuccaya] rely on the approach of absolute truth, whereas here it relies on the approach that conforms to provisional truth. The Abhidharmakośa, fascicle 16, says: "Evil, form-realm, desire-realm wholesome, and the undefiled that can exhaust them, should be known respectively as black, white, both, and neither." If one were to say that this treatise conforms to that school, its white-white karma should only be form-realm wholesome karma. Since reason shows it is not so, it is as stated before.

4.38

Regarding "karma that is neither black nor white, without maturation, and able to exhaust all karmas," etc.: because it is undefiled, it is called "neither black"; because it is not contaminated wholesome [karma], it is called "neither white"; because it does not incur unobstructed neutral fruit, it is called "karma without maturation." Because it can sever the previous three karmas, it is called "able to exhaust all karmas." The Abhidharma[samuccaya] calls it "karma that is neither black nor white, without maturation, and able to exhaust all karmas." Its saying "neither black" is because it is free from afflictions. "White" refers to being purely immaculate, distinguishing it from contaminated white wholesome karma; because it is contrary to saṃsāra, it is called "without maturation," which shows that not all undefiled [states] are taken to be this karma. Saying "able to exhaust all karmas" takes the antidotes that sever the previous three karmas. In the Abhidharmakośa, its essential nature is stated as follows:

4.39

Four dharmakṣāntis and detaching from desire, / with the first eight uninterrupted [paths]— / twelve undefiled volitions / exhaust only purely black karma. / Detaching from the desires of the four dhyānas, / the ninth uninterrupted volition: / one exhausts mixed and purely black, / while four cause purely white to be exhausted.

4.40

If relying on the Yogācārabhūmi, one should state in verse:

4.41

In succession, ten in the desire realm: / the first nine sever purely black karma; / the last one severs purely black and mixed; / the upper eight sever purely white. / Detaching only from desire-realm desire, / relying on the preliminary, transcending to the third: / one exhausts purely black and mixed; / detaching from the upper, one severs all. / Transcending from the first to the fourth, / collectively said to have ten evils: / the first nine sever only black; / the tenth severs all three. / The Bodhisattva's seeing is volition alone; / the vajra[-like samādhi] removes all three. / This speaks of the uninterrupted path, / the yoga that can sever karma; / if preparatory suppression and eradication, / all add [stages] except the path of seeing.

4.42

If relying on the text of this fascicle: in the path of seeing of the two vehicles, the single uninterrupted path and the first eight uninterrupted volitions of gradually detaching from desire exhaust only black-black karma; the ninth uninterrupted path exhausts both purely black and mixed karma; detaching from the four dhyānas and the four formless [attainments], the ninth uninterrupted path exhausts only white-white karma. This is stated in terms of those who attain the fruits successively.

4.43

If, relying on the first unarrived [dhyāna] and the first dhyāna, one transcends to enter the path of seeing and attains the third fruit, a single uninterrupted path detaches from purely black and mixed [karma]. If one has previously detached from the defilements of the upper stages and attains the third fruit relying on the four dhyānas, a single uninterrupted volition detaches from purely black and mixed, and, as appropriate, also white-white karma. If, from the first fruit, one attains the fourth fruit, the first eight uninterrupted volitions detach only from black-black karma, and the ninth uninterrupted volition detaches from all three karmas together. In the path of seeing of bodhisattvas, a single uninterrupted volition detaches only from black-black karma; in the vajra-like samādhi, a single uninterrupted volition severs all three karmas together. All evil karmas are severed as soon as the path arises; all wholesome karmas, because of being detached from the bondage of conditions, are exhausted only when defilement of their own stage is completely detached from, and therefore the ninth uninterrupted volition is said to exhaust white karma. What has been discussed above speaks of severing the volition-karma of contaminated seeds. As for suppressing active manifestations, with the sole exception that the path of seeing lacks an undefiled preparatory [path], all remaining paths of cultivation alongside the preparatory paths can suppress active manifestations. Here, it is only stated that various undefiled karmas are antidotes that sever the previous three karmas; although the liberation paths of the two vehicles also have severing, and the antidotes to the cognitive obscurations of the ten bodhisattva stages are also severed, none of them are karma, and therefore they are not mentioned. Thus the Abhidharma[samuccaya] states: "karma that is neither black nor white, etc., refers to the undefiled karmas in the preparatory and uninterrupted paths, because they are antidotes that sever those karmas." Because it is established based on the superior, other paths of advancement, etc., are not taken, as they all rely on distinct practices and do not completely suppress karmas of all grades; thus they are not mentioned. The four karmas discussed above, as appropriate, although differing as defiled or pure, all have volition as their nature. If relying on the Abhidharma[samuccaya], one should state in verse:

4.44

In succession, ten volitions of desire: / nine sever purely black and mixed; / the last one detaches from all three; / the upper eight exhaust only their own. / If transcending to realize the third, / only one severs all three. / Going from the first to take the non-learner, / the first eight and the Bodhisattva's seeing / exhaust only purely black and mixed; / the vajra severs all three. / This speaks of the uninterrupted path, / the antidote able to sever karma. / If preparatory suppression and eradication, / all exist except in seeing; / only the preparatory and uninterrupted / can suppress, exhaust, and sever. / Prior, advanced, and liberated / are excluded for lack of superior function; / this speaks of severing by detachment from bondage, / not the sense of non-arising, etc.

4.45

If explaining the former three karmas relying on the Abhidharma[samuccaya]: in the path of seeing of the two vehicles who attain the fruits successively, a single uninterrupted volition and the first eight uninterrupted volitions of gradual detachment from desire detach from purely black and mixed [karma]—since mixed extends to both natures—and the ninth uninterrupted volition completely detaches from purely black and mixed, as well as white-white karma; detaching from the four form and four formless [stages], the ninth uninterrupted volition detaches only from white-white karma. This is stated in terms of gradual attainment of the fruits. If, relying on the four dhyānas, one transcends to enter the path of seeing and attains the third fruit, a single uninterrupted volition also detaches from the three types. If, from the first fruit, one transcends to attain the fourth fruit, the first eight uninterrupted volitions and the bodhisattva's path of seeing detach only from purely black and mixed karma, and the ninth uninterrupted volition and the bodhisattva's vajra-like samādhi detach from all three karmas together. This speaks of severing seeds. As for suppressing active manifestations, with the sole exception of the path of seeing, all other stages add the preparatory path; the remaining meanings are the same as before. If one speaks of severing by detachment from bondage, etc., the meaning is also not fixed, and should be contemplated in accord with reason.

4.46

Regarding the five kinds of karma, there are two alternatives, making three explanations in total. The first interpretation states: The wholesome and unwholesome karma of non-Buddhists is called 'crooked' because it obstructs the straight path of the Buddha's Dharma; second, this very crooked [karma] is called 'defiled' because it stains the True Dharma and stains body and mind; this very crooked and defiled [karma] is called 'turbid' because it dregs vicious dharmas and muddies body and mind. These all pervade all wholesome and unwholesome karma. Therefore, this treatise says: 'That is to say, crooked karma is also called defiled karma; crooked and defiled karma is also called turbid karma.' The second interpretation states: Crooked karma is as described above. As for defiled karma, it refers to the ignorance, greed, anger, arrogance, view of identity, and extreme view of ordinary beings within the Buddhist teaching, collectively termed 'those with inverted views'; view-clinging and rule-and-vow clinging are called 'those abiding in attachment to their own views'; wrong view is called 'those with wrong determination'; doubt is called 'those with wavering perception.' According to the case—whether corresponding, serving as a proximate cause, or serving as a remote cause—the wholesome and unwholesome threefold karma engendered thereby is called defiled karma, because it stains the True Dharma and is profoundly defiled and evil. If an ordinary being within the teaching is undetermined regarding both the wrong and the correct gates, and with doubt leading the way is called 'one of wavering perception', their wholesome and unwholesome [actions] are called turbid karma, because arising on the basis of doubt, they are extremely dreggy and defiled and leave behind evil residue. In the previous defilement, doubt arises based on wrong determination; here it arises based on being undetermined, hence establishing the distinction. It is not that it prevents the straight path of the Buddha's Dharma from being entered at all, which is why it is not said that internal ordinary beings also have crooked karma. The third interpretation states: All three karmas, when initiated by non-Buddhists who generate wrong understanding and practice, are called crooked; these very crooked karmas obstruct the arising of conditioned virtues, and are thus called defiled; they obstruct the realization of unconditioned virtues, and are thus called turbid. They all pervade the wholesome and unwholesome threefold karma. The eighth fascicle of the Abhidharma[-samuccaya-vyākhyā] has two alternatives explaining the first three karmas. The first says: When the three karmas obstruct the eightfold path, they are called crooked; when they can stain the mental continuum and generate obstructive karma, they are called defiled; when they arise based on the inverted views of non-Buddhists, they are called turbid. Only this turbid karma is said to arise from non-Buddhists, without stating by whom the first two are generated; hence one knows that logically they pervade what is generated both internally and externally. Since its nature is not distinguished, one clearly knows that it pervades good and evil, yet like this alternative, there is no fault. That [work] further explains: The various karmas initiated respectively by extreme view, wrong view, and satkāyadṛṣṭi are called crooked, defiled, and turbid. According to this, they are also initiated solely by non-Buddhists. Such three karmas arise internally or among non-Buddhists according to those afflictions; their meanings are explained distinctively, not having a fixed entity each. Although the meanings differ, they do not contradict one another. They differ from the Hīnayāna statement that crooked, defiled, and turbid karma are born based on deceit, anger, and greed. Within this meaning, they are bundled into three classes: first, the three karmas initiated by non-Buddhists are called crooked. Internal ordinary beings have three further categories: first, wrong determination generates defiled karma; second, non-determination generates turbid karma; third, correct determination generates pure karma. All tainted and untainted superior karmas possessed by all noble ones are called muni karma. 'Muni' means quietude/silence, translated here as tranquil, because of realizing the tranquil principle. If one follows the Bhūmi of Wisdom Arisen from Hearing below, all bodily and vocal karmas and the mind in the persons of all noble ones constitute the entity of the three pure karmas. 'Mind' is mental karma, which differs from this. That [passage] says that the muni karma in a noble one's person takes only the untainted, and tainted karma is called the three pure karmas, without making a distinction in contrast to ordinary beings. Here, however, in contrast to the differences between ordinary and noble, internal and non-Buddhist, pure karma belongs solely to ordinary beings, and all three karmas in the person of a noble one are called muni karma. Because the contrasts differ, they also do not contradict each other. The Abhidharmakośa-bhāṣya states: 'The bodily and vocal karmas of an aśaikṣa, along with mind, are the three munis; the three purities should be known as the three excellent conducts.'

First 46 of 175 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

瑜伽師地論略纂 — Classical Chinese