成唯識論了義燈 5.259

5.259

然西明釋能得人中，菩薩二種，漸悟如聲聞數，四萬、二萬、十千劫中亦入滅定，從信位乃至等覺，有五十一賢聖。今謂不爾。諸經但說有四十二賢聖，除等、妙覺猶有四十。若四、二、十千合之為一，還四十一。若開為三，即四十三，如何得有五十一耶？《仁王般若》雖說十信，頌中但云：聖胎三十不云四十。故今正釋。二乘如彼，菩薩有二，頓悟菩薩或十或四，初地、七地二說別故，漸悟菩薩或七十四，四萬中有七十二，二萬、十千各為一人，成四十七，四萬劫中分四十五，二萬、十千或四十七。以此《論》中有二說故，將此歷彼四十賢聖，或七十四个四十賢聖，或四十七个四十賢聖。漸悟之中伏離惑品根位別故，隨麁如是，細更有餘。如初二果，迴心已後，亦容得起。下唯遮凡，未斷見惑。又說要斷欲修惑等，據二乘說，不障迴心，雖不斷欲所有煩惱，然伏惑得第四靜慮，依邊際定受變易身。既有此能，何妨不得九次第定？又不得九定，具不能證得邊際定。故《雜集》第九云：靜慮、無色邊際定者，為欲引發勝品功德得自在等，修堪任定到究竟故。下論說云：或有七地滿心等起，據決定說，如變易生。不爾何故或有初地？由是此《論》但云：或有學聖，但簡凡夫決定不得，有學有得不唯身證，迴心者得。餘不說者據非迴心。若作此說，應符妙理。

However, in Ximing's explanation of the persons capable of attaining it, bodhisattvas are of two kinds. Those of gradual awakening correspond to the numbers of the śrāvakas: within forty thousand, twenty thousand, or ten thousand kalpas they also enter the attainment of cessation, from the stage of faith up to equal awakening, comprising fifty-one worthy ones and noble ones. Now I maintain that this is not so. The sūtras speak only of forty-two worthy ones and noble ones; excluding equal awakening and wondrous awakening, there are still forty. If forty thousand, twenty thousand, and ten thousand are combined as one, it still makes forty-one. If opened into three, it is then forty-three—how could there be fifty-one? Although the Renwang bore speaks of the ten faiths, the verse merely says: 'Thirty holy wombs', not forty. Therefore I now give the correct explanation. The two vehicles are as stated there. Bodhisattvas are of two kinds: bodhisattvas of sudden awakening are either ten or four, because the two explanations of the first bhūmi and seventh bhūmi differ; bodhisattvas of gradual awakening are either seventy-four (within forty thousand there are seventy-two, while twenty thousand and ten thousand are each one person, forming forty-seven; or within forty thousand kalpas they are divided into forty-five, while twenty thousand and ten thousand are perhaps forty-seven). Since there are two explanations in this treatise, applying these across those forty worthy ones and noble ones yields either seventy-four sets of forty worthy ones and noble ones, or forty-seven sets of forty worthy ones and noble ones. Because among gradual awakeners there are differences in the grades of subduing and departing from afflictions, faculties, and positions, according to gross characteristics it is like this, while subtly there are yet more. For instance, after turning their minds, those of the first two fruits are also allowed to be able to give rise to it. Below, it merely excludes ordinary persons who have not severed the afflictions of view. Moreover, when it says that one must sever the afflictions of desire to be abandoned by cultivation, etc., this is stated based on the two vehicles; it does not obstruct those who have turned their minds: although they have not severed all the afflictions of desire, yet having subdued afflictions, they attain the fourth dhyāna, and relying on the fringe concentration, they receive a transformational body. Since they have this capacity, what prevents them from attaining the nine successive attainments? Furthermore, if one does not attain the nine attainments, one cannot fully realize the fringe concentration. Therefore the ninth fascicle of the Samuccayavyākhyā says: 'Fringe concentrations of the dhyānas and formless attainments are for the purpose of engendering superior qualities, attaining mastery, etc., cultivating serviceable concentrations to their consummation.' Below, the treatise says: 'Or some arise at the fulfillment of the seventh bhūmi, etc.', which is stated based on the definite [rules], like transformational birth. Otherwise, why would it say 'or some at the first bhūmi'? For this reason, this treatise merely says 'or some trainee noble ones', merely excluding ordinary persons as definitely unable to attain it; trainees who attain it are not only those who are bodily witnesses, but also those who have turned their minds. That the rest are not mentioned is based on those who have not turned their minds. If one provides this explanation, it should accord with the wondrous principle.