大乘義章 17.9.1

17.9.1

次第五門當相分別。 於中有二：一通相以論、二隨別解釋。 通相論中開合不定，增數辨之。 或總為一，謂三乘中一聲聞乘。 或分為二，謂賢與聖，見諦道前調心離過名之為賢，見道已上證理成德說以為聖。 或分為三，三有三門：一約三慧以說三種，謂聞、思、修。 五停心觀親依教起，說為聞慧。 總別念處去教已遠，繫意思察身受心法判為思慧，以此欲界想心觀行未依定起故不名修。 煗頂已上，依於禪定修慧而起，判之為修。 二約外凡內凡及聖以別三種。 五停心觀總別念處判為外凡，𤏙等四心說為內凡，見道已上說以為聖，義如後釋。 三約方便學無學道開分為三。 見道已前修七方便名方便道，五停心觀、總別念處、煗等四心是七方便。 苦忍已上於理專求，說為學道。 阿羅漢人於理息求，名無學道。 問曰：煗等亦求於理，以何義故不名學道？ 釋言：通說彼亦是學。 於中別分，彼學不專，又學不成，故不名學。 問曰：修學其義相似，煗等四心學意不專、學行不成不名學者； 修心不專、修行不成，以何義故三慧門中判為修慧？ 釋言：修學並有通局。 學中通者依三學門，一切修學戒定慧等亦得名學，是則𤏙等亦得名學。 學中局者，苦忍已上學心專精、學行成就方名為學，煗頂忍等學未專成故不名學。 修中通者依三慧門，依聞依思所起諸行齊名為修，是則煗等俱得名修。 修中局者，須陀果後於諦重觀方得名修，餘者隨義更與異名不得名修。 齊釋如是，隱顯論之。 修寬學狹，不得齊類。 修云何寬？ 世俗八禪皆修慧攝，𤏙等並依禪定修起，故得名修。 學云何狹？ 學唯望理，𤏙等於理始學觀察，未專未成，故不名學。 問曰：何故修通世俗，學唯望理？ 釋言：修者具有兩義，一修習義，於未得法修習令起； 二修治義，於已得法修治令得。 凡夫本來已得禪定，後起染污或令不淨，修令淨故，望世俗八禪定等得名為修。 學者唯是故習之義，於未得法故習令起。 出世聖道由未來得，習學方證，故望聖道說之為學。 於已得法學義微隱，故於世俗曾得之法不說其學。 隱顯且爾。 或分為四，四有兩門：一約道說四。 謂方便道、見道、修道及無學道，是其四也。 苦忍已前修七方便道，名方便道。 見道、修道其義云何？ 入聖之初，於四真諦推求明白，名為見道； 於四聖諦重慮增進，說為修道。 位分何處？ 若依《成實》，入無相位名為見道，故彼論言「信法二人入見諦道，名無相行。 世第一後、須陀果前，空觀無間，名無相行。 」若依《毘曇》，苦忍已去十五心頂，名為見道。 言十五者，斷見諦惑有十六心，謂八忍、八智，八忍無礙，八智解脫。 彼斷欲界見諦煩惱，有四法忍以為無礙，謂苦法忍乃至道法忍； 有四法智以為解脫，謂苦法智乃至道法智。 斷上見惑，有四比忍以為無礙，謂苦比忍乃至道比； 有四比智以為解脫，謂苦比智乃至道比。 此十六中，前十五心是須陀向，判為見道； 末後一心是須陀果，見道不收，為是不說。 見道如是。 問曰：煗等亦觀四諦，以何義故不名見道？ 彼雖學觀而未能見，為是不取。 斯陀行後乃至那含金剛已還定判修道，重緣諦理斷修惑故。 須陀洹果，毘曇法中判為修道，成實法中文無定判，唯義推之亦判為修。 此云何知？ 彼論說言「信法二人入見諦道名無相行。 」不言入見名須名須陀洹，明知須陀是修非見。 又《毘曇》中判為修道，《成實》不非，明知共用。 論判如是，以理細推，彼須陀果亦見非見、亦修非修。 云何是見復言非見？ 見有二種：一推求義、二明白義。 彼須陀果，證斷見惑迷諦闇盡，照諦明白，故得名見。 以是見故，《大智論》中名為見地。 又須陀果，於大乘中義當初地，《地經論》中宣說初地名為見道，明知須陀得說為見。

Next, the fifth section distinguishes their intrinsic characteristics. Within this, there are two parts: 1. discussing them in general terms, and 2. explaining them individually. In discussing general terms, division and combination are not fixed, and they are analyzed by increasing numbers. They may be subsumed as one: namely, the single śrāvaka vehicle among the three vehicles. Or they may be divided into two: namely, the worthy and the noble. Before the path of seeing the truths, harmonizing the mind and departing from faults is called being a worthy; from the path of seeing upward, realizing the truth and fulfilling virtue is called being a noble. Or they may be divided into three. The division into three has three approaches: First, explaining three kinds according to the three types of wisdom: namely, [wisdom arisen from] hearing, reflection, and cultivation. The contemplation of the fivefold pacification of the mind directly arises by relying on instruction, and is described as the wisdom of hearing. The general and specific applications of mindfulness are already distant from instruction; focusing thought to reflect upon the body, feelings, mind, and dharmas is determined to be the wisdom of reflection; because this contemplative practice of the conceptual mind of the desire realm does not arise in reliance upon absorption, it is not called cultivation. From warmth and summit upward, arising in reliance upon the wisdom of cultivation in dhyāna absorption, it is determined to be cultivation. Second, distinguishing three kinds according to outer worldlings, inner worldlings, and nobles. The contemplation of the fivefold pacification of the mind and the general and specific applications of mindfulness are determined to be outer worldlings; the four mental states of warmth and the rest are described as inner worldlings; from the path of seeing upward is described as noble, the meaning of which will be explained later. Third, dividing into three according to the paths of provisional means, of the learner, and of the non-learner. Practicing the seven provisional means prior to the path of seeing is called the path of provisional means: the contemplation of the fivefold pacification of the mind, the general and specific applications of mindfulness, and the four mental states of warmth and the rest are the seven provisional means. From the forbearance of suffering upward, intensely seeking the truth is described as the path of the learner. The arhat who ceases seeking the truth is called the path of the non-learner. Question: Warmth and the rest also seek the truth; for what reason are they not called the path of the learner? Explanation: Broadly speaking, they are also learners. Distinguishing them specifically within that, their learning is not exclusive, nor is their learning yet accomplished; therefore they are not called learners. Question: Cultivation and learning are similar in meaning. If the four mental states of warmth and the rest are not called learners because their intent to learn is not exclusive and their practice of learning is not accomplished, then since their mind of cultivation is not exclusive and their practice of cultivation is not accomplished, for what reason are they determined to be the wisdom of cultivation within the approach of the three types of wisdom? Explanation: Both cultivation and learning have broad and restricted senses. In the broad sense of learning, relying on the gate of the three trainings, all practices of learning morality, absorption, wisdom, and so forth may also be called learning; thus warmth and the rest may also be called learning. In the restricted sense of learning, only when from the forbearance of suffering upward the mind of learning is pure and focused, and the practice of learning is accomplished, is it called learning; since warmth, summit, forbearance, and the rest are not yet focused and accomplished in learning, they are not called learning. In the broad sense of cultivation, relying on the approach of the three types of wisdom, all practices arising based on hearing and based on reflection are equally called cultivation; thus warmth and the rest may all be called cultivation. In the restricted sense of cultivation, only after the fruit of srotāpanna when one repeatedly contemplates the truths does it receive the name cultivation; others are given different names according to their meanings and cannot be called cultivation. When equated, the explanations are like this; but discussing them in terms of implicit and explicit: cultivation is broad and learning is narrow, so they cannot be equated. How is cultivation broad? The eight worldly dhyānas are all subsumed under the wisdom of cultivation, and warmth and the rest all arise cultivated in reliance upon dhyāna absorption; therefore they can be called cultivation. How is learning narrow? Learning looks solely toward the truth, whereas warmth and the rest are only beginning to learn contemplation with respect to the truth, being neither exclusive nor accomplished; therefore they are not called learning. Question: Why does cultivation extend to the worldly, whereas learning looks solely toward the truth? Explanation: Cultivation has two meanings: 1. the meaning of cultivating habituation, cultivating dharmas not yet attained so that they arise; 2. the meaning of cultivating rectification, cultivating and rectifying dharmas already attained so that they are maintained. Worldlings originally have already attained dhyāna absorption, but later defilement arises or makes it impure; because they cultivate it to purify it, with respect to the eight worldly dhyāna absorptions and the like it can be called cultivation. Learning is solely the meaning of intentional practice: intentionally practicing dharmas not yet attained so that they arise. The supramundane noble path has not yet been attained; one realizes it only through habituation and learning; therefore it is called learning with respect to the noble path. With respect to dharmas already attained, the meaning of learning is subtle and hidden; therefore, one does not speak of learning with respect to previously attained worldly dharmas. So much for implicit and explicit. Or they may be divided into four. The division into four has two approaches: First, explaining four according to the paths: namely, the path of provisional means, the path of seeing, the path of cultivation, and the path of the non-learner—these are the four. Practicing the seven provisional means prior to the forbearance of suffering is called the path of provisional means. What are the meanings of the path of seeing and the path of cultivation? At the initial entry into nobility, investigating and clarifying the four noble truths is called the path of seeing; repeatedly reflecting and advancing upon the four noble truths is described as the path of cultivation. Where are their stages divided? If based on the *Tattvasiddhi*, entering the stage of signlessness is called the path of seeing; thus that treatise states, 'The two persons of faith and dharma entering the path of seeing the truths is called signless practice. Between after the worldly supreme dharmas and before the fruit of srotāpanna, the uninterrupted contemplation of emptiness is called signless practice.' If based on the *Abhidharma*, from the forbearance of suffering onward through the culmination of fifteen moments of mind is called the path of seeing. As for 'fifteen': abandoning the afflictions of seeing the truths has sixteen moments of mind, namely eight forbearances and eight knowledges—the eight forbearances being unobstructed [paths], and the eight knowledges being [paths of] liberation. In severing the defilements of seeing the truths of the desire realm, there are four dharma-forbearances as unobstructed [paths], namely dharma-forbearance of suffering up to dharma-forbearance of the path; there are four dharma-knowledges as liberation, namely dharma-knowledge of suffering up to dharma-knowledge of the path. In severing the defilements of seeing of the higher realms, there are four subsequent forbearances as unobstructed [paths], namely subsequent forbearance of suffering up to subsequent forbearance of the path; there are four subsequent knowledges as liberation, namely subsequent knowledge of suffering up to subsequent knowledge of the path. Among these sixteen, the first fifteen moments of mind are the candidate for srotāpanna, determined to be the path of seeing; the final single moment of mind is the fruit of srotāpanna, not included in the path of seeing, and for this reason is not mentioned. Such is the path of seeing. Question: Warmth and the rest also contemplate the four truths; for what reason are they not called the path of seeing? Although they learn contemplation, they are not yet able to see; for this reason they are not taken as such. From after the candidate for sakṛdāgāmin up to before the diamond-like [samādhi] of the anāgāmin is definitively determined to be the path of cultivation, because they repeatedly take the truth of the truths as object to sever the defilements of cultivation. The fruit of srotāpanna is determined to be the path of cultivation in the Abhidharma doctrine; in the Tattvasiddhi doctrine there is no definitive determination in the text, but deduced purely by principle it is also determined to be cultivation. How is this known? That treatise states, 'The two persons of faith and dharma entering the path of seeing the truths is called signless practice.' It does not say that entering seeing is called srotāpanna; thus it is clear that srotāpanna is cultivation, not seeing. Moreover, in the *Abhidharma* it is determined to be the path of cultivation, and the *Tattvasiddhi* does not refute this; thus it is clear that they share this view. The determinations of the treatises are like this, but deducing finely according to principle, that fruit of srotāpanna is both seeing and non-seeing, and both cultivation and non-cultivation. How is it seeing and yet also non-seeing? Seeing has two meanings: 1. the meaning of investigation; 2. the meaning of clarity. That fruit of srotāpanna realizes the abandonment of the defilements of seeing, the darkness confusing the truths being exhausted, and illuminates the truths with clarity; therefore it can be called seeing. Because it is seeing in this sense, it is called the stage of seeing in the *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa*. Furthermore, the fruit of srotāpanna corresponds in meaning to the first bhūmi in the Mahāyāna, and the *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* proclaims that the first bhūmi is called the path of seeing; hence it is clear that srotāpanna can be described as seeing.