大乘義章 14.37

14.37

次辨離合廢立之義。先釋離合。問曰：悲慈心數法中一無瞋性，何故分二？慚之與愧，心數法中是別心數，何故合乎？釋言：悲慈心法雖一，四義不同，故分二種。一功能不同，悲能拔苦，慈能與樂。二治患不同，悲止害覺，慈息貪欲。又悲能除微細之瞋，慈遣麁重。三境界不同，悲心多緣苦眾生起，慈緣無樂眾生而起。四得報不同，悲得空處，慈生遍淨。慚之與愧，心法雖別，四義同故，合之為一。一功能同，同令諸行出障清淨。二治過同，同離殺盜邪婬等過。三境界同，同於離過集善行中生慚愧心。四果報同，所得果報無異處故。離合如是。次辨廢立。問曰：經說四無量心為利他行，今此何故偏說悲慈，不論喜捨？釋言：法門有其二種，一具義門，有行皆說；二隱顯門，有立有廢。今據隱顯偏立悲慈，廢其喜捨。良以悲慈正是拔苦與樂行故，所以偏立；喜捨助行不能正益，故廢不論（此八門竟）。

Next, the meaning of separation and combination, and of setting aside and establishing, is distinguished. First, explaining separation and combination: Question: Within the mental factors (caitta), compassion and loving-kindness have the single nature of non-hatred; why are they divided into two? Shame and remorse, within the mental factors, are distinct mental factors; why are they combined into one? Answer: Although compassion and loving-kindness are a single mental factor, they differ in four senses, and are therefore divided into two. First, their functions differ: compassion can extract suffering, and loving-kindness can bestow happiness. Second, their counteracting of afflictions differs: compassion stops harmful ideation, and loving-kindness puts an end to lustful craving. Furthermore, compassion can eliminate subtle anger, while loving-kindness dispels coarse anger. Third, their objective realms differ: the mind of compassion mostly arises taking suffering sentient beings as its object, while loving-kindness arises taking sentient beings devoid of joy as its object. Fourth, their attained retributions differ: compassion attains the stage of space, while loving-kindness is born in the realm of universal purity (śubhakṛtsna). Although shame and remorse are distinct mental factors, because their four senses are identical, they are combined into one. First, their functions are identical: they identically cause all practices to transcend hindrances and become pure. Second, their counteracting of faults is identical: they identically stay away from the faults of killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, and so forth. Third, their objective realms are identical: they identically give rise to the mind of shame and remorse amidst practices of leaving behind faults and accumulating the good. Fourth, their fruit-retributions are identical: the fruit-retribution attained has no different destination. Separation and combination are as such. Next, distinguishing setting aside and establishing: Question: The sūtras say that the four immeasurables are practices of benefiting others; why is it that here only compassion and loving-kindness are specifically discussed, without discussing sympathetic joy and equanimity? Answer: There are two kinds of Dharma gates: first, the gate of complete meaning, where whenever there are practices, all are spoken of; second, the gate of concealment and revelation, where there is establishing and setting aside. Now, based on concealment and revelation, compassion and loving-kindness are specifically established, and sympathetic joy and equanimity are set aside. Truly because compassion and loving-kindness are precisely practices of extracting suffering and bestowing joy, they are specifically established; sympathetic joy and equanimity are auxiliary practices and cannot directly benefit, and are therefore set aside and not discussed. (This concludes the eighth gate.)