成唯識論述記 10.212

10.212

述曰：彼言麁重，麁重者何？顯即是彼二愚之種。前二是現行，麁重是種故。問：現行久已滅，如何言斷？答：五十九說，諸煩惱斷略有二種：一、諸纏斷；二、隨眠斷，故二現行亦說斷也。問：彼何不是伏現行言斷也？答：不然。彼卷次文解「二斷」言：諸纏斷者，謂貪、嗔斷，乃至疑斷；五見斷，見苦所斷斷，乃至無色界所繫斷，斷離繫是隨眠斷，非伏惑時亦伏見道諸惑，故知二愚是現行，麁重是種子。又解，隨汝意前二是種，麁重非種。今此乃是二品所起無堪任性，如苦根等說其斷位。

The Commentary states: As for the term 'unserviceability' there, what is unserviceability? It shows that it is the seeds of those two kinds of ignorance. The preceding two are actual states, while unserviceability is seeds. Question: Since the actual states have long ceased, how can they be said to be severed? Answer: Fascicle 59 states that the severance of afflictions is briefly of two kinds: first, severance of the entanglements; second, severance of the latent dispositions; therefore, the two actual states are also said to be severed. Question: Why is that not speaking of severance in the sense of suppressing actual states? Answer: That is not so. The next passage of that fascicle explains the 'two severances': severance of the entanglements refers to severance of greed, anger, and up to severance of doubt; severance of the five views, severance of what is to be severed by seeing suffering, and up to severance of what is bound to the formless realm; severance that is separation from bondage is the severance of latent dispositions. It is not that when suppressing defilements one also suppresses the defilements of the path of vision; therefore, one knows that the two kinds of ignorance are actual states, and unserviceability is seeds. Another explanation: as you will, the preceding two are seeds, and unserviceability is not seeds. Here it is the unserviceability generated by the two categories, just as the stage of severing the faculty of pain and so forth is explained.