大乘義章 17.30

17.30

次明家家。於中曲有四門分別：一總解釋家家之義、二明說意、三明建立家家所以、四對餘果料簡有無。初總解釋家家義者，論自釋言「從家至家，故曰家家。」此明須陀厭舊生處，異家受身，故名家家。云何異家？此人或時人中生已捨人生天，復捨天身還生人中，厭本生處異家受生；天中亦爾，離本生處異處受生，故曰異處。問曰：若此異處受身名家家者，何故論言在於人中或在一處，或二或三在於天中，或在一天或二或三？釋言：人中或一家者，或一張家、或一王家，名為一家，如是一切，不妨於中家門各別；天亦如是，於六天中或一天處，不妨於中住處各異，故得名為從家至家為家家矣。初門如是。次明宣說家家之意。為彰其勝，故論說言「須陀勝者，名為家家。」云何顯勝？須陀洹中結有厚薄，其結厚者不厭舊處，容使重生，不名家家，故用初品及第二品第三品結所受之身，非家家攝。薄者不爾，不肯重生。簡薄異厚，故說家家。說意如是。次明建立家家之義。依如論中，三義建立：一斷煩惱、二成無漏根、三者受生。言斷煩惱，簡異具薄須陀洹人。成無漏根，簡異退者，亦簡凡夫。言受生者，簡異現般須陀等。故論說言「若斷三四品，成就彼對治。餘二生三生，是說名家家。」斷三四品，是初義也。九品惑，或斷三品、或斷四品。問曰：何故要斷此惑方名家家？九品惑中初三麁重，於舊生處憎厭情微，容使重生，非家家義。為是要斷，方成家家。問曰：若言前三惑麁於舊生家有重生者，於人天中應併受生，何故從人必生於天、從天必人？釋言：當本現生之時，實覺其苦，厭人求天、厭天求人，為是不併。麁結覆心，久遠還愛，故得重生。問曰：於彼九品惑中，斷三用四、斷四用五並稱家家。何故不說斷五用六、斷六用於七八品等為家家乎？釋言：斷五必乘第六，不用受生，故非家家。七八品等，於人於天無二受身，故非家家。成就彼治，第二義也，謂成三品結四品法家對治無漏。凡夫亦能斷除三品四品之結，而非家家，故須說此。餘二生三生，是其第三受生義也。餘二生者，人二天二，合為四生。餘三生者，人三天三，合為六生。九品惑，中斷前三品，用第四品受其六生；斷第四品，用第五品受其四生。現般須陀具前兩義，以不受生，不成家家，故須說此。此第三門明其建立家家義竟。次對餘果料簡有無。問曰：何故初果之中偏說家家，餘果不說？釋言：初果於人天中往來多生，有其從家至家之義，所以偏說；餘無此義，為是不論。問曰：那含於上界中亦受多身，何故不說？彼一一處無量生義，故非家家（此四門竟）。

Next, the "clan-to-clan" (kulaṃkula) is explained. Within this, there are four sections: first, a general explanation of the meaning of clan-to-clan; second, clarifying the intention behind teaching it; third, clarifying the rationale for establishing the clan-to-clan; fourth, distinguishing its presence or absence in relation to the other fruits. First, regarding the general explanation of the meaning of clan-to-clan: the treatise itself explains, "Going from clan to clan, it is therefore called 'clan-to-clan'." This explains that the srotāpanna is revulsed by their former place of birth and takes rebirth in a different clan; hence it is called "clan-to-clan". What is meant by a different clan? This person, having perhaps been born among humans, abandons human existence and is born in heaven, and then abandons the heavenly body and is reborn back among humans, being revulsed by the original place of birth and taking rebirth in a different clan. In heaven it is also like this: leaving the original place of birth and taking rebirth in a different place; hence it is said to be a "different place". Question: If taking rebirth in such a different place is called clan-to-clan, why does the treatise state that among humans [they may be born] in one place, or two, or three, and in heaven in one heaven, or two, or three? Explanation: Among humans, "one clan" refers to, for example, the Zhang clan or a royal clan being termed "one clan"; all cases are like this, which does not prevent the individual households therein from being distinct from one another. Heaven is also like this: within the six heavens, [being born] in one heavenly place does not prevent the residences therein from being distinct from one another; therefore it can be called going "from clan to clan", which is "clan-to-clan". The first section is thus concluded. Next, clarifying the intention behind declaring clan-to-clan. To highlight their superiority, the treatise states: "Superior srotāpannas are called 'clan-to-clan'." How is superiority revealed? Among srotāpannas, their fetters may be thick or thin. Those whose fetters are thick are not revulsed by their former place, allowing them to be reborn there again; they are not called clan-to-clan. Therefore, the embodiments received through the fetters of the first, second, and third grades are not subsumed under clan-to-clan. Those whose [fetters] are thin are not like this; they refuse to be reborn there again. To distinguish the thin from the thick, "clan-to-clan" is taught. The intention behind teaching it is thus concluded. Next, clarifying the rationale for establishing the clan-to-clan. According to the treatise, it is established based on three criteria: first, severing afflictions; second, accomplishing untainted faculties; third, taking rebirth. "Severing afflictions" distinguishes them from fully fettered srotāpannas. "Accomplishing untainted faculties" distinguishes them from those who fall back, and also distinguishes them from ordinary persons. "Taking rebirth" distinguishes them from srotāpannas who attain parinirvāṇa in the present life, and the like. Therefore the treatise states: "If one severs three or four grades, accomplishes their antidotes, and has two or three births remaining, this is called clan-to-clan." Severing three or four grades is the first criterion. Among the nine grades of afflictions, one severs either three grades or four grades. Question: Why must one sever these afflictions before being called clan-to-clan? Among the nine grades of afflictions, the first three are coarse and heavy, so one's feelings of revulsion toward the former place of birth are faint, allowing one to be reborn there again; this is not the meaning of clan-to-clan. For this reason, they must be severed before one becomes a clan-to-clan. Question: If you say that because the first three afflictions are coarse one may be reborn in the former clan of birth, then among humans and devas one should take rebirth consecutively [in the same realm]; why must one go from humans to devas, and from devas to humans? Explanation: At the time of that actual present birth, one truly perceives its suffering; being revulsed by humans one seeks devas, and being revulsed by devas one seeks humans; for this reason they are not consecutive. Coarse fetters shroud the mind, so after a long time one cherishes it again; thus one can be reborn there again. Question: Among those nine grades of afflictions, severing three and utilizing the fourth, or severing four and utilizing the fifth, are both called clan-to-clan. Why is severing five and utilizing the sixth, or severing six and utilizing the seventh and eighth grades, not called clan-to-clan? Explanation: Severing the fifth necessarily takes advantage [of the momentum] to sever the sixth, so one does not use it to take rebirth; hence it is not clan-to-clan. With the seventh, eighth, and subsequent grades, one does not take two rebirths among humans or devas; hence it is not clan-to-clan. "Accomplishing their antidotes" is the second criterion; that is, accomplishing the untainted [faculties] that act as antidotes to the fetters of the three or four grades. Ordinary persons can also sever the fetters of three or four grades, but are not clan-to-clan; therefore this must be stated. "Two or three births remaining" is the third criterion of taking rebirth. "Two births remaining" means two human and two heavenly, totaling four births. "Three births remaining" means three human and three heavenly, totaling six births. Among the nine grades of afflictions, one who severs the first three grades uses the fourth grade to receive those six births; one who severs the fourth grade uses the fifth grade to receive those four births. A srotāpanna who attains parinirvāṇa in the present life possesses the previous two criteria, but because they do not take rebirth, they do not constitute a clan-to-clan; therefore this must be stated. This concludes the third section clarifying the rationale for establishing clan-to-clan. Next, distinguishing its presence or absence in relation to the other fruits. Question: Why is clan-to-clan spoken of specifically in the first fruit and not in the other fruits? Explanation: The first fruit involves transmigrating through multiple births among humans and devas, having the meaning of going "from clan to clan"; therefore it is spoken of specifically. The others lack this meaning; for this reason it is not discussed. Question: The anāgāmin also takes multiple embodiments in the higher realms; why is it not spoken of [there]? In each and every place there is the meaning of immeasurable births; hence it is not clan-to-clan. (These four sections are concluded).