成唯識論了義燈 4.94

4.94

問：戲忘、憤恚定是何天？答：本疏釋云：欲四空天，非下二天。西明云：通六天。《要集》斷云：此說近理，以《婆沙》說在下二天，大小雖殊，俱得為證。今謂不爾，四句自體，若不約定人、處而說，但據逢緣，可通六欲。若約定人、處，即本疏為正。然准道理據定人、處。不爾，但應人為他害，即非自害，若有自害，即非他害，何要戲忘、意、憤恚天及羯剌藍位？又戲、憤天既屬帝釋，豈與非天共戰之時，不為彼害。若為彼害，此即不定，即應佛使等，有自他害，俱不定故，即有雜亂，據無雜亂，大乘約定，即本疏正。無相亂失，及不定過，又《出曜》論云四空天。

Question: Exactly which devas are those of playful heedlessness and malicious anger? Answer: The root commentary explains: the four heavens of the desire realm [that dwell in] empty space, not the lower two heavens. Ximing says: they encompass all six heavens. The Yaoji judges: this statement is close to reason, because the Vibhāṣā speaks of them being in the lower two heavens; although Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna differ, both can serve as evidence. Now I say this is not so. If the intrinsic nature of the four propositions is not spoken of in terms of fixed persons and places, but merely in terms of meeting conditions, it could extend across the six [hevens of the] desire realm. If spoken of in terms of fixed persons and places, then the root commentary is correct. According to principle, it is indeed based on fixed persons and places. If not so, a person would only be harmed by another, and thus not harm themselves; or if they harmed themselves, they would not be harmed by another. Why would there need to be the devas of playful heedlessness and malicious anger, or the stage of the kalala? Moreover, since the devas of play and anger belong to Śakra, how could they not be harmed by the asuras when fighting against them? If they are harmed by them, then this is indefinite; then it would follow that the Buddha's messengers and others have both harming self and others, both being indefinite, which would lead to confusion. Relying on there being no confusion, the Mahāyāna determines it strictly, so the root commentary is correct, free from the fault of mutual confusion and the flaw of indefiniteness. Furthermore, the Chuyao lun says they are the four heavens [dwelling in] empty space.