[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [大乘百法明門論解](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836) › 1.64 # 大乘百法明門論解 1.64 大乘百法明門論解 1.64 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1.64) 言信者，於實德能深忍樂欲，心淨為性，對治不信，樂善為業。謂於諸法實事理中，深信忍故；於三寶真淨德中，深信樂故；於一切世出世善深信有力，能得能成，起希望故。此三種信也。言心淨為性者，謂此性澄清能淨心等，如水清珠能清濁水，故云心淨為性也。言精進者，於善惡品修斷事中勇捍為性，對治懈怠，滿善為業。謂善品修、惡品斷，勇表勝進，簡諸染法；捍表精純，簡淨無記。又云勇而無怯、捍而無懼。言滿善者，圓了善事名為滿善。故三根為作善，此名滿善，能滿彼故。或曰：「《唯識論》言精進一法，在三根後；《百法》則信後即言。何耶？」曰：「唯識乃立依次第，此乃因依次第。蓋信為欲依，欲為勤依，故此信後而便言勤，勤即精進也，但勤通三性，進唯善性攝也。」立依者，謂根依精進立捨等三，所依四法，立理須合說，故三根後方說精進。言慚者，依自法力崇重賢善為性，對治無慚，止息惡行為業。自法力者，自謂自身，法謂教法，言我如是身、解如是法，敢作諸惡耶？言愧者，依世間力，輕拒暴惡為性，對治無愧，止息惡行為業。世人譏呵名世間力輕，有惡者而不親，拒惡法業而不作也。言無貪者，於有、有具無著為性，對治貪著，作善為業。言有、有具者，上一有字，即三有之果，有具即三有之因。言無瞋者，於苦、苦具無恚為性，對治瞋恚，作善為業。言苦、苦具者，苦謂三苦，苦具者苦因。無癡者，於諸事理明解為性，對治愚癡，作善為業。言輕安者，遠離麁重，調暢身心，堪任為性，對治昏沈，轉依為業。離重名輕，調暢身心名安，謂此伏除能障定法，令所依止轉安適故。言堪任者，有所堪可，有所任受。言轉依者，令所依身心，去麁重、得安隱故。言不放逸者，精進三根，於所修斷防修為性，對治放逸，成滿一切世出世善事為業。防修者，於所斷惡防令不起，於所修善法，修令增長。言精進三根者，此不放逸，即四法防修功能，非別有體；或云：「信等亦有防修功能，何不依立？」曰：「餘六比四，勢用微劣，故不依立。偏何微劣？非善根故，非遍策故。」言行捨者，精進三根，令心平等、正直，無功用住為性，對治掉舉，靜住為業。言行捨者，乃行蘊中捨，簡受蘊捨故。言令心平等等者，由捨令心離昏掉時，初心平等，次心正直，後無功用，此初中後差別之位也。此亦即四法者，離彼四法，無別相用矣。何知無別？曰：「若能令靜即是四法，若所令靜即心等故。」或曰：「既即四法，何須別立？」曰：「若不別立，隱此能故。」言不害者，於諸有情不為損惱，無瞋為性，能對治害，悲愍為業。謂即無瞋，於有情所不為損惱，假名不害。無瞋翻對斷物命，瞋不害，但違損惱物害。無瞋與樂，不害拔苦，此二麁相差別，理實無瞋，實有自體，不害依彼，一分假立，為顯慈悲，二相別故，利樂有情，彼二勝故。 > Faith (śraddhā) has as its nature deep conviction, joy, and aspiration toward the real, the virtuous, and the capable, and purity of mind; its function is counteracting lack of faith and delighting in the good. That is, having deep conviction and endurance toward the true facts and principles of all dharmas; having deep faith and joy toward the true and pure virtues of the Three Jewels; and having deep faith that there is power in all mundane and supramundane good, that one can obtain and achieve them, and giving rise to aspiration. These are the three kinds of faith. 'Having purity of mind as its nature' means that this nature is clear and can purify the mind and so forth, just as a water-clearing pearl can clear muddy water; hence it is called 'having purity of mind as its nature'. Diligence (vīrya) has as its nature courage and persistence in the tasks of cultivating the wholesome and abandoning the unwholesome; its function is counteracting indolence and fulfilling the good. That is, cultivating the wholesome category and abandoning the unwholesome category; 'courage' signifies superior progress, setting aside all defiled dharmas; 'persistence' signifies pure refinement, setting aside the pure indeterminate. It is also said: 'courageous without cowardice, persistent without fear.' 'Fulfilling the good' means that bringing wholesome deeds to complete perfection is called fulfilling the good. Therefore, while the three roots perform the good, this is called fulfilling the good, because it can fulfill them. Someone might ask: 'The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi states that the single dharma of diligence comes after the three roots; why does the Hundred Dharmas state it immediately after faith?' The answer is: 'The Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi follows the sequence of what is based upon what, while this \[text\] follows the sequence of cause and dependence. For faith is the basis of desire, and desire is the basis of diligence; therefore here, right after faith, diligence is mentioned; diligence is indeed vīrya, but diligence (勤) runs through the three natures, whereas progress (進) is subsumed only under the wholesome nature.' As for 'the sequence of what is based upon what': the roots depend on diligence to establish the three \[dharmas\] such as equanimity; the four dharmas that serve as the basis must rationally be stated together; therefore diligence is only stated after the three roots. Shame (hrī) has as its nature revering and respecting the worthy and good based on the power of oneself and the Dharma; its function is counteracting shamelessness and bringing evil conduct to rest. Regarding 'the power of oneself and the Dharma': 'oneself' refers to one's own person; 'the Dharma' refers to the teaching of Dharma; it means, 'Given such a person as myself and my understanding of such a Dharma, would I dare commit various evils?' Guilt (apatrāpya) has as its nature slighting and rejecting violence and evil based on the power of the world; its function is counteracting absence of guilt and bringing evil conduct to rest. The censure and rebuke of worldly people is called the power of the world; it disdains evil-doers without associating with them, and rejects evil actions and deeds without committing them. Non-greed (alobha) has as its nature non-attachment to existence and the requisites of existence; its function is counteracting greedy attachment and performing good. Regarding 'existence and the requisites of existence': the former word 'existence' is the fruit of the three realms of existence; 'requisites of existence' are the causes of the three realms of existence. Non-anger (adveṣa) has as its nature absence of malice toward suffering and the requisites of suffering; its function is counteracting malice and performing good. Regarding 'suffering and the requisites of suffering': 'suffering' refers to the three sufferings; 'requisites of suffering' are the causes of suffering. Non-delusion (amoha) has as its nature clear understanding of various facts and principles; its function is counteracting foolish delusion and performing good. Pliancy (prasrabdhi) has as its nature freedom from heaviness, harmonizing and easing the body and mind, and fitness; its function is counteracting torpor and bringing about the transformation of the basis (āśraya-parāvṛtti). Leaving behind heaviness is called 'light' (輕); harmonizing and easing the body and mind is called 'peace' (安); that is, this suppresses and removes dharmas that obstruct concentration, causing the foundation to become increasingly comfortable. 'Fitness' means being capable and competent to endure. 'Transformation of the basis' means causing the body and mind that serve as the basis to cast off heaviness and attain security. Vigilance (apramāda) has as its nature guarding and cultivating through diligence and the three roots regarding what is to be cultivated and abandoned; its function is counteracting laxity and bringing to fulfillment all mundane and supramundane wholesome deeds. 'Guarding and cultivating': guarding against the evil to be severed so that it does not arise, and cultivating the wholesome dharmas to be cultivated so that they increase. 'Diligence and the three roots': this vigilance is precisely the guarding and cultivating function of these four dharmas; it does not have a separate substantial entity. Or someone might say: 'Faith and so on also possess the function of guarding and cultivating; why are they not relied upon to establish it?' The answer is: 'The remaining six are weaker in power and function compared to the four; hence they are not relied upon for its establishment. Why are they particularly weak? Because they are not wholesome roots, and because they do not universally urge \[the mind\] on.' Equanimity (upekṣā) has as its nature causing the mind to remain in impartiality, uprightness, and effortless abiding through diligence and the three roots; its function is counteracting restlessness and abiding in stillness. 'Formational equanimity' (行捨) is equanimity within the aggregate of formations (saṃskāra-skandha), distinguished from the equanimity of the aggregate of feeling (vedanā-skandha). Regarding 'causing the mind to be impartial, etc.': because equanimity causes the mind to depart from torpor and restlessness, the initial mind is impartial, the next mind is upright, and the final mind is effortless; these are the different stages of beginning, middle, and end. This too consists of the four dharmas; apart from those four dharmas, there are no distinct characteristics or functions. How is it known that there are none distinct? The answer is: 'What can cause stillness is precisely the four dharmas; what is caused to be still is precisely the mind and so on.' Or someone might say: 'Since it is identical with the four dharmas, why establish it separately?' The answer is: 'If it were not established separately, this capability would be concealed.' Non-harming (ahiṃsā) has as its nature not injuring or harassing sentient beings, which is non-anger; its function is being able to counteract harming, and compassion. That is, it is simply non-anger that does not injure or harass sentient beings, nominally designated as non-harming. Non-anger directly opposes anger that terminates the lives of beings; non-harming only opposes harm that injures and harasses beings. Non-anger gives happiness; non-harming uproots suffering. These two are crude distinctions in appearance; in truth, non-anger has a real self-entity, whereas non-harming is a nominal designation established based on a portion of it, in order to display the distinct aspects of benevolence (maitrī) and compassion (karuṇā), because those two are supreme in benefiting and gladdening sentient beings. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.63](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1.63) - [Next: 1.65](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1.65) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836~en-mt.1.64) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [唯識三十論要釋](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.2804.1.21) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1.64](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1836.1.64) · Pramāṇa