成唯識論了義燈 7.271

7.271

四、依界地，五、漏無漏，並如《疏》辨。《疏》云：有頂有解脫道，類名解脫，亦有非次無間後之解脫者。解云：「道類名解脫」者，非無間後解脫，是此類故。如容豫時，重緣先時所得解脫，非次無間後之解脫者。若是證真無間後之解脫，亦親證理。此有頂解脫，次此無間後即起之者，如無學身中餘時所起之者，非次第也。今又助解：如六行伏依近分定，皆具四道。根本地中修八解脫，亦通有漏。依有頂地，無漏四道斷惑者無。修八解脫，第七、第八皆依彼地，許有四道，此亦何失？諸處但說為斷惑故修四道者，且約一義，非謂修餘不有四道。六十九云「第一有中所有諸智，皆俗智攝」者，據初學者。設久學者，約不親證真如理說。何以得知？彼云：「但作非想非非想行，出世作意，有想諸定所攝受故。」既云「出世作意」，明通無漏。又復遊觀無漏極成，又彼地心亦緣真如。准前第十二，入滅盡定有二方便：一緣非想非非想入；一緣無相界相入。故知《論》云「但作非想非非想」者，不盡理說。

Fourth, based on realms and bhūmis, and fifth, [distinguished by] sāsrava and anāsrava, are both analysed as in the Commentary. The Commentary states: "At the summit of existence (bhavāgra) there is a vimuktimārga that is named 'vimukti' by category, and there are also [vimuktis] that do not follow immediately after an ānantaryamārga." The explanation says: "Named 'vimukti' by the category of the path" means that it is not a vimukti immediately following an [ānantaryamārga], because it is of this category. It is like when, at an unhurried time, one re-cognises the vimukti attained previously; it is not a vimukti immediately following an ānantaryamārga. If it is a vimukti following immediately upon the direct realization of truth, it also directly realizes the principle. This bhavāgra vimukti that arises immediately after this ānantaryamārga is like that which arises at other times in the person of an aśaikṣa; it is not sequential. Now, to offer a supplementary explanation: just as the six mental practices of suppression based on the sāmantaka all possess the four paths, so also when practicing the eight liberations (aṣṭa vimokṣāḥ) in the mūladhyāna stages, these also extend to the sāsrava. Based on the bhavāgra stage, an anāsrava fourfold path that severs defilements does not exist. In practicing the eight liberations, the seventh and eighth are both based on that stage; if one allows that they have the four paths, what fault is there in this? The statements in various places that the four paths are practiced only to sever defilements merely take up one sense, and do not mean that in practicing the others the four paths do not exist. As for [fascicle] 69 stating that "all cognitions within the first existence (bhavāgra) are subsumed under conventional cognition," this is said with respect to beginners. Even for long-practicing ones, it is spoken with respect to not directly realizing the principle of tathatā. How is this known? That text states: "Because it only carries out the mental practice of neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization (naivasaṃjñānāsaṃjñā), which is a supramundane manaskāra, and is embraced by conceptual dhyānas." Since it says "supramundane manaskāra," it clearly extends to the anāsrava. Furthermore, anāsrava discursive contemplation is thoroughly established, and the mind of that stage also takes tathatā as an object. In accordance with the previous twelfth fascicle, entering the meditative attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti) has two expedients: one is entering by taking neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization as object; the other is entering by taking the marks of the markless realm (animittadhātu) as object. Therefore, one knows that when the treatise states "only carries out neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization," it does not state the ultimate truth.