成唯識論述記 9.405

9.405

The Commentary states: The above completes the explanation of the root verse. Below, the second part explains the two obstacles, in which: first, it presents their essence and explains their names, etc.; second, distinguishes them by seeing and cultivation; third, distinguishes them according to persons; fourth, distinguishes their subjugation and abandonment by sāsrava and anāsrava paths; fifth, concludes by returning to the text of the verse. In explaining the affliction obstacle first: first it presents the essence; afterwards it explains the name. Taking satkāyadṛṣṭi as the foremost, because ātmadṛṣṭi is the root that produces all afflictions, if ātmadṛṣṭi is absent, afflictions are accordingly severed; for both abandonment by seeing and abandonment by cultivation, the principle is also like this. Alternatively, although the afflictions produced may be removed before ātmadṛṣṭi, at the stage where they are not yet extinguished to the ultimate end, only due to the severing of ātmadṛṣṭi are the remainder completely severed. This is spoken according to the nine grades being severed separately: when severing the eight grades, etc., ātmadṛṣṭi is not severed and the afflictions are severed first, because ātmadṛṣṭi has no division of grades and is severed only upon complete detachment from desire. Another explanation is: since the produced afflictions have many grades, the producing view must also certainly have nine grades; that is, following the detachment from the nine grades of desire, ātmadṛṣṭi is gradually severed; hence when the root is severed, the remainder are also severed accordingly. Here it does not say 'ātmadṛṣṭi' but 'satkāyadṛṣṭi': if one said 'ātmadṛṣṭi', it would not subsume what belongs to the self. In Sanskrit it is *madiyadṛṣṭi*, translated here as 'ātmadṛṣṭi'; in Sanskrit it is *satkāya*, translated here as 'view of an unreal, shifting body', which subsumes what belongs to the self. In order to show that it subsumes what belongs to the self here, it says 'satkāya'. The one hundred and twenty-eight fundamental afflictions are: forty in the desire realm abandoned by the path of seeing, thirty-six in each of the two higher realms, and sixteen in the path of cultivation, making one hundred and twenty-eight kinds. And 'all their outflowing secondary afflictions' are the twenty kinds, or even more, as stated in the previously cited 'Compendium of Matters'. This sets forth their self-nature. If taken with their retinue and the remaining citta, caitasikas, and so forth, they have the five aggregates as their nature, as stated in the seventh fascicle of the Buddhabhūmi[-śāstra]. If the karma initiated by these and the fruits obtained are all subsumed within them, it is because they all take afflictions as their root. That treatise broadly encompasses the distant retinue, metaphorically naming them all 'obstacles'; here, based on obstacles of self-nature, it does not take karma and fruits. If it were not so, then the good actions of the three karmas and fruits induced by ignorance would be of a defiled nature and would be the substance of the obstacle. Since it is not so, the present text is superior.