大乘義章 13.14

13.14

次明捨義。所言捨者，先成今失，名之為捨。論釋不同。《毘曇》淨定有二種捨：一是退捨。先得禪已，後還退失。二是生捨。生上地時失於下法，有漏生上必失下故。《成實》、大乘唯一退捨。無漏禪者，依如《毘曇》，有三種捨：一是退捨，先得還失；二得果捨，得四果時捨向無漏；三轉根捨，轉根之時得利捨鈍。若通無餘涅槃時捨，則有四種。《成實》唯一涅槃時捨，餘三皆無。大乘法中，緣照無漏入證時捨，真則無捨。味定唯有斷滅時捨。問曰：淨禪何故無其得果轉根及斷捨乎？釋言：此非向果法故，得果不捨。有漏之法於同地中，設令重習，唯可純熟，無捨得義，是故無其轉根時捨。非煩惱故，無斷時捨。問曰：何故無漏轉根有得有捨，淨禪不爾？解有兩義：一無漏法轉根之時，具以無礙解脫之道斷障轉根，階別皆定，故轉根時有得有捨。有漏不以無礙解脫斷障轉根，數習便利、久廢還鈍，階別不定，故無得捨。一義如是。二無漏力大，於自地法能得捨。有漏力微，於自地中同類之法不能裁斷全令別異，故無得捨；非煩惱故，無斷時捨。問曰：無漏何故無其生斷二捨？釋言：無漏是不繫法，雖生上地，不失下故，無生時捨；非煩惱故，無其斷捨。問曰：味定何故無其退失、得果、轉根捨乎？釋言：退起下地結時不失上味，故無退捨。凡夫上生必先得定，得定之時已捨下味，非生始失，故無生捨。餘義如前淨禪中釋（此二門竟）。

Next, the meaning of abandonment is explained. As for what is called 'abandonment', that which was previously possessed is now lost; this is termed 'abandonment'. The explanations of the treatises differ. According to the Abhidharma, pure concentration has two kinds of abandonment: The first is abandonment through regression. Having previously attained dhyāna, one later regresses and loses it. The second is abandonment through rebirth. When reborn in a higher stage, one loses lower dharmas, because when a sāsrava state is reborn above, it necessarily loses the lower. The Tattvasiddhi and Mahāyāna have only the single abandonment through regression. As for anāsrava dhyāna, according to the Abhidharma, there are three kinds of abandonment: The first is abandonment through regression: having previously attained it, one loses it again. The second is abandonment through attaining a fruit: when attaining the four fruits, one abandons the anāsrava of the path. The third is abandonment through transforming faculties: when transforming faculties, one acquires the sharp and abandons the dull. If one broadly includes abandonment at the time of remainderless nirvāṇa, there are four kinds. The Tattvasiddhi has only the single abandonment at the time of nirvāṇa; the other three are all absent. In the Mahāyāna Dharma, condition-illuminating anāsrava is abandoned upon entering realization; the true [anāsrava] has no abandonment. Relished concentration has only abandonment through severance and annihilation. Question: Why does pure dhyāna lack abandonment through attaining a fruit, transforming faculties, or severance? Explanation: Because this is not a dharma belonging to the path toward a fruit, it is not abandoned upon attaining a fruit. With sāsrava dharmas within the same stage, even if repeatedly practiced, they can only become thoroughly seasoned; there is no sense of abandonment and acquisition, and therefore there is no abandonment when transforming faculties. Because it is not an affliction, there is no abandonment at the time of severance. Question: Why is it that when anāsrava transforms faculties there is acquisition and abandonment, whereas pure dhyāna is not so? The explanation has two aspects: First, when anāsrava dharmas transform faculties, they fully sever obstacles and transform faculties by means of the unhindered and liberation paths, and the distinctions of stages are all fixed; therefore, when transforming faculties, there is acquisition and abandonment. Sāsrava does not sever obstacles and transform faculties by means of the unhindered and liberation paths; frequent practice makes it facile, while long neglect returns it to dullness, and the distinctions of stages are not fixed; therefore there is no acquisition or abandonment. Such is the first explanation. Second, the power of anāsrava is great; regarding dharmas of its own stage, it is capable of acquisition and abandonment. The power of sāsrava is weak; regarding dharmas of the same class within its own stage, it cannot cut them off to make them completely distinct, hence there is no acquisition or abandonment. Because it is not an affliction, there is no abandonment at the time of severance. Question: Why does anāsrava lack both abandonments, through rebirth and through severance? Explanation: Anāsrava is an unattached dharma; although reborn in a higher stage, it does not lose the lower, hence there is no abandonment at the time of rebirth. Because it is not an affliction, it has no abandonment through severance. Question: Why does relished concentration lack abandonment through regression and loss, attaining a fruit, and transforming faculties? Explanation: When regressing to arouse lower fetters, one does not lose the higher relish, hence there is no abandonment through regression. An ordinary being reborn above must first attain concentration; having already abandoned the lower relish at the time of attaining concentration, it is not lost anew at rebirth, hence there is no abandonment through rebirth. The remaining points are as explained previously under pure dhyāna. (This concludes the second section.)