成唯識論述記 10.202

10.202

述曰：無間道俱雖無惑種，而未捨彼無堪任性，為捨此故起解脫道。解脫道起非唯為此，及證此品擇滅無為，即無堪任與無間道俱滅，證無為得與解脫道俱生故，解脫道雖不違惑得，而亦有用。此後意說，種生現雖同時，菩薩金剛心由有麁重性故，不名為佛，明此位第八識猶有漏，為麁重所依，不然如何不名為佛？前解但為證無為者，金剛心中第八已無漏，未圓明故不名為佛。後解為勝。依此二解，并前第八識捨位合解有三，加此一說云：金剛道生有漏皆捨，種生現同時故。此中麁重言，非謂種子，由種子等令所依無堪任性，此名麁重，雖前已說，至下當知。問：此義可然。彼十地中地地斷煩惱障麁重，既不斷種子，起無間道時復不斷麁重，無間道起何所斷耶？若無間道中有斷煩惱種用，於解脫道位可說除麁重；無間道中既無所斷，如何說麁重解脫道治耶？答：修道十地中斷煩惱麁重者，非離所知障外別起無間道等治。然煩惱麁重障無始以來與所知障俱，所知障為本，由無間道本障斷故；其未煩惱障麁重與所知障麁重解脫道中捨，故無此過。由此煩惱麁重非能受生，但障於地，所以與所知障俱斷而不留之，故無，斯咎如身見等，至下當知。問：若爾，如二乘者唯斷定障，不斷種子，無間道生位無麁重，何用復起解脫道為？答：無間斷麁重，解脫道中得自在故。問：既斷麁重得無為不？答：《大般若經》第三百六十卷說：善現問言：若無為法無差別者，佛何故說習氣相續如來永無，二乘猶有？世尊答言：習氣相續實非煩惱，二乘身中不能引無義，菩薩身中能引無義，如來永無。即由此文，顯斷習氣不得無為。不爾，無為應有差別，亦顯所知障斷，不得無為，若所知障斷，得無為，便顯三乘亦得無為而有差別。第五，以此障即二十二愚。

The Commentary states: Although there are no seeds of defilement simultaneous with the uninterrupted path, one has not yet abandoned their unserviceability; it is to abandon this that the path of liberation arises. The path of liberation arises not only for this, but also to realize the unconditioned [attainment] of analytical cessation belonging to this grade. Because the unserviceability ceases simultaneously with the uninterrupted path, and the attainment of realizing the unconditioned arises simultaneously with the path of liberation, although the path of liberation does not oppose the defilements, it also has its function. What is intended by this latter [explanation] is that, although seeds produce actual states simultaneously, because the bodhisattva at the adamantine mind still has unserviceability, they are not named a Buddha. This clarifies that the eighth consciousness at this stage is still sāsrava, serving as the basis for the unserviceability; otherwise, why would one not be called a Buddha? According to the former explanation, [the path of liberation arises] merely to realize the unconditioned, and the eighth [consciousness] in the adamantine mind is already anāsrava; it is because it is not yet fully perfected and luminous that one is not named a Buddha. The latter explanation is superior. Relying on these two explanations, together with the aforementioned stages of abandoning the eighth consciousness, there are three [positions] in all. Adding this one explanation, it says: when the adamantine path arises, all that is sāsrava is abandoned, because seeds produce actual states simultaneously. The word 'unserviceability' (dauṣṭhulya) here does not refer to seeds; it is because seeds and so forth render their basis unserviceable that this is called unserviceability. Although this has already been stated before, it will be understood below. Question: This principle may be so. But when one abandons the unserviceability of the affliction obstacle ground by ground throughout the ten grounds, since one does not sever the seeds, and when the uninterrupted path arises one again does not sever the unserviceability, what does the uninterrupted path sever when it arises? If within the uninterrupted path there were the function of severing the seeds of affliction, then at the stage of the path of liberation one could speak of eliminating unserviceability; but since nothing is severed in the uninterrupted path, how can it be said that unserviceability is remedied by the path of liberation? Answer: The abandonment of the unserviceability of afflictions in the ten grounds of the path of cultivation does not involve arising a separate uninterrupted path and so forth apart from [that which remedies] the cognitive obstacle. Rather, from beginningless time the obstacle of affliction-unserviceability has accompanied the cognitive obstacle, with the cognitive obstacle as its root. Because the root obstacle is severed by the uninterrupted path, the unserviceability of the affliction obstacle and the unserviceability of the cognitive obstacle are abandoned in the path of liberation; therefore, there is no such fault. Because this unserviceability of affliction cannot produce rebirth, but merely obstructs the grounds, it is severed together with the cognitive obstacle and not retained; hence there is no fault, as with the view of selfhood and so forth, as will be understood below. Question: If so, as when practitioners of the two vehicles sever only the meditative obstacles without severing the seeds, and there is no unserviceability at the stage where the uninterrupted path arises, why do they again arise the path of liberation? Answer: The uninterrupted [path] severs unserviceability, and in the path of liberation one attains mastery. Question: Having severed unserviceability, does one attain the unconditioned or not? Answer: Fascicle 360 of the Mahāprajñāpāramitā-sūtra states: Subhūti asked, 'If unconditioned dharmas have no distinctions, why does the Buddha say that the continuity of habit-energy is eternally absent in the Tathāgata, but still present in [followers of] the two vehicles?' The World-Honoured One answered, 'The continuity of habit-energy is truly not an affliction. In the bodies of [followers of] the two vehicles, it cannot lead to what is meaningless; in the bodies of bodhisattvas, it can lead to what is meaningless; in the Tathāgata, it is eternally absent.' By this text, it is shown that severing habit-energy does not attain the unconditioned. Otherwise, the unconditioned would have distinctions. It also shows that when the cognitive obstacle is severed, one does not attain the unconditioned. If the severance of the cognitive obstacle attained the unconditioned, this would show that the unconditioned attained by the three vehicles also has distinctions. Fifth, taking this obstacle as identical to the twenty-two kinds of ignorance.