大乘義章 4.53

4.53

第一釋名辨其體性。能生曰根。根義不同，廣略難定，今據一門說二十二。名字是何？所謂眼耳鼻舌身意，即以為六。男根、女根及以命根，通前說九。苦、樂、憂、喜、捨，通前十四。信、進、念、定、慧，通前十九。未知根、知根及無知根，通前合有二十二也。初六根者，對色名眼，乃至第六對法名意。此之六種，能生六識，故名為根。男女根者，剛決為男、柔弱為女。身形小分，能別男女，從其所別，名男女根。根體即是身根小分，所生之識即是身識少分。言命根者，若依《成實》，現在時中色心相續名之為命。過去之業，能生於命，與命作根，故曰命根。若依《毘曇》，別有非色非心命報，此之命報能持色心相續不斷，故名為根。《地持論》中亦同此說。故彼文言「生理不壞，是其命根增上果也。」言苦根者，五識地中逼惱名苦，能生瞋結，故名為根。言樂根者，五識地中適悅名樂，能生貪結，故名為根。言憂根者，意識地中逼惱名憂，憂能生瞋，故名為根。言喜根者，意識地中慶悅名喜，能生貪結，故名為根。言捨根者，六識地中中容受心，捨前四受，故名為捨，能生癡結，目之為根。若在淨中，喜樂及捨能生淨法，故名為根。言信根者，於境決定名之為信，信能生道，故名信根。精進根者，練心於法名之為精，精心上達目之為進，根同前釋。言念根者，守境名念，根同前釋。言定根者，住緣不亂名之為定，根同前釋。言慧根者，於法觀達目之為慧，根同前釋。問曰：善法差別無量，以何義故偏說此五以之為根？釋言：此五遍生諸善，其力功強，故偏說之。又是五種大煩惱地之對治故，偏說為根。此義如後道品中釋。未知根者，《毘曇》名也；《成實》名為未知欲知，此見道中無漏慧也。《毘曇》何故說為未知？釋有三義。一義釋云：在於見道十五心中，解脫之智知諦未遍，故名未知。無道比智知上界道，故云未也。第二義者，在於見道十五心中，未曾有知重知諦理，故名未知。問曰：若言未重知故名未知者，彼見道中一一諦下皆有忍智，忍為初知、智為後知，云何不重？論自釋言「忍非智故，所以無過。何故非智？忍雖觀諦，與疑得俱，不能決了，是故非智。」故論說言諸忍非智。良以諸忍非是智故，不名重知。問曰：若使忍非智者，亦應非見。釋言：不類。見者是其推求之義。忍心推求，故得名見。智者是其決斷之義，忍不決斷，故不名智。第三義者，智望忍心，得名重知。重知未遍，故名未知，上界道諦未重知故。《毘曇》如是。彼《成實》中名為未知欲知根者，見道位中未有容豫解脫智知，故名未知。為欲簡去解脫道故，說為未矣，以解脫道修道攝故。言欲知者，去解脫中知之不遙，故名欲知。此言即是簡前之謂。見道已前，去解脫中知之玄隔，不得名欲；今為簡彼，故說欲耳。此見道中無漏聖慧能生於後，故名為根。言知根者，是修道中無漏慧也。准依《毘曇》，釋有三義。第一義者，修道門中，用解脫智知諦周遍，故名為知。第二義者，修道門中，於彼諦理有智重知，故名為知。第三義者，彼見道中，智望諸忍得名為重，重知未遍，故名未知。今修道中道比智起，重知周遍，故名為知。若依《成實》，釋有兩義。一義釋云：修道門中，有解脫智知於諦理，故名為知。此之一義，名當初果。第二義者，以修道智重觀諦理，故名為知。此之一義，名當斯陀那含果也。此能生後，故名為根。無知根者，《成實》說為已知根也。若依《毘曇》，無學果中觀諦已窮，不求更知，故曰無知。若依《成實》，先已知竟，故曰已知。無學果慧，能生後善同類相起，故名為根。問曰：信進念定慧根，及三無漏所生善法，於五果中是何果乎？《地持》宣說是增上果，二十二根望其所生，皆悉名為增上緣故。此望何善說為增上？謂望下善；若望同類及與上善，能生名為自分因故。因緣所收，所生善法，名為依果。何者是其三無漏根所生下善？謂學等見、無學等見。聖人順舊遊觀無漏，名等見矣。問曰：經說貪瞋癡等為不善根，無貪瞋等為三善根。二十二中何故不說？釋言：略故所以不論，更無餘義。如六通中無法智通、聖自在通，此亦如是。名義且爾。體狀云何？初眼根者，依如《毘曇》，以彼四大造色為體，體異四大。若依《成實》，攬大成眼，眼即四大，離大之外無別造色以為眼體。耳鼻舌身，類亦同爾。意根體者，依如《毘曇》，心王為體，想受行等皆非意根，法入收故。若依《成實》，無別心數，識想受行能生後義皆是意根。然《成實》中，行末之心生五識者不名意根，以其所生非意識故。自斯以外，一切心識悉是意根。若依《毘曇》，一切六識迭互相生皆是意根。男女二根與身根同，身根少分為此二故。良以此二既變心識，其力功強，別人相顯，故就身中分出此二。命根體者，依如《毘曇》，現在世中別有非色非心命法，為命根體。若依《成實》，過去世中善惡之業，為命根體。五受根者，依如《毘曇》，心數法中受數為體。若依《成實》，受心為體，更無別數。信等五根，論說不同。若依《毘曇》，善大地中信數為信根體，精進數為精進根體；通大地中念數為念根體，定數為定根體，慧數為慧根體。若依《成實》，用彼信心為信根體，乃至慧心為慧心慧根體，無別數法。後之三根，若依《毘曇》是智慧性，論其眷屬是五陰性。同時心王即為識陰，同時受數即為受陰，同時想數即為想陰，自餘教法以為行陰，道共無作即為色陰。若依《成實》，慧心為體，更無餘法。體性如是。

First, explaining the names and determining their essential nature. That which is capable of generating is called a "faculty" (indriya). The meaning of "faculty" varies; being extensive or concise, it is difficult to settle definitively, but relying now on one presentation, twenty-two are spoken of. What are their names? They are the so-called eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, and mind, which constitute six. The male faculty, female faculty, and life faculty, together with the preceding, make nine. Suffering, pleasure, distress, joy, and equanimity, together with the preceding, make fourteen. Faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, together with the preceding, make nineteen. The faculty of what is not yet known, the faculty of knowing, and the faculty of having known, together with the preceding, make twenty-two in total. Regarding the initial six faculties: facing form is called the eye, up to the sixth, facing phenomena (dharmas) is called the mind. Because these six kinds are capable of generating the six consciousnesses, they are called faculties. Regarding the male and female faculties: firmness and decisiveness constitute the male; gentleness and weakness constitute the female. A minor portion of the bodily form is capable of distinguishing male and female; derived from what they distinguish, they are named the male and female faculties. The essence of the faculty is simply a minor portion of the body faculty, and the consciousness generated is simply a minor portion of the body consciousness. Regarding the life faculty: if according to the Tattvasiddhi, the continuity of form and mind in the present time is called "life." Past karma is capable of generating life and acts as a faculty for life; hence it is called the life faculty. If according to the Abhidharma, there is distinctly a karmic retribution of life that is neither form nor mind; this karmic retribution of life is capable of sustaining form and mind in unbroken continuity, and therefore it is called a faculty. The Bodhisattvabhūmi (*Dichilun*) also agrees with this explanation. Hence that text states: "The principle of life not deteriorating is the sovereign fruit (adhipati-phala) of its life faculty." Regarding the faculty of suffering: painful affliction within the domain of the five consciousnesses is called suffering; because it can generate the fetter of anger, it is called a faculty. Regarding the faculty of pleasure: pleasant delight within the domain of the five consciousnesses is called pleasure; because it can generate the fetter of attachment, it is called a faculty. Regarding the faculty of distress: painful affliction within the domain of the mental consciousness is called distress; because distress can generate anger, it is called a faculty. Regarding the faculty of joy: joyful celebration within the domain of the mental consciousness is called joy; because it can generate the fetter of attachment, it is called a faculty. Regarding the faculty of equanimity: the neutral feeling-mind within the domain of the six consciousnesses, setting aside the preceding four feelings, is called equanimity; because it can generate the fetter of ignorance, it is termed a faculty. If in a pure state, joy, pleasure, and equanimity can generate pure phenomena; hence they are called faculties. Regarding the faculty of faith: being resolute regarding an object is called faith; because faith can generate the Path, it is called the faculty of faith. Regarding the faculty of energy (vīrya): refining the mind upon phenomena is called vigor; the refined mind ascending upward is termed progress; "faculty" is explained as before. Regarding the faculty of mindfulness: guarding the object is called mindfulness; "faculty" is explained as before. Regarding the faculty of concentration: abiding on an object without distraction is called concentration; "faculty" is explained as before. Regarding the faculty of wisdom: observing and penetrating phenomena is termed wisdom; "faculty" is explained as before. Question: Good phenomena have boundless differentiations; for what reason are only these five spoken of as faculties? Explanation: These five universally generate all goods and their functional power is strong, hence they are exclusively mentioned. Furthermore, because they are the antidotes to the five great defiled grounds, they are exclusively spoken of as faculties. This meaning will be explained later under the factors of the Path. The "faculty of what is not yet known" is the name in the Abhidharma; the Tattvasiddhi calls it "the faculty of having the desire to know what is not yet known"; this is untainted wisdom within the path of vision (darśana-mārga). Why does the Abhidharma speak of it as "not yet known"? There are three explanations. One explanation says: within the fifteen minds of the path of vision, the wisdom of liberation does not yet know the truths universally, hence it is called "not yet known." Because there is as yet no path-subsequent-cognition (mārga-anvaya-jñāna) knowing the path of the higher realms, it is called "not yet." The second explanation is: within the fifteen minds of the path of vision, there has never been any knowledge that re-knows the principle of the truths; hence it is called "not yet known." Question: If one says that it is called "not yet known" because of not yet re-knowing, then within that path of vision, under each and every truth there are both forbearance and knowledge; forbearance is initial knowing and knowledge is subsequent knowing—how is it not repeated? The treatise itself explains: "Forbearance is not knowledge, therefore there is no fault. Why is it not knowledge? Although forbearance contemplates the truths, it is accompanied by doubt and cannot decisively comprehend; therefore it is not knowledge." Hence the treatise states that all forbearances are not knowledge. Truly because all forbearances are not knowledge, it is not called re-knowing. Question: If forbearance is not knowledge, it should also not be a view (dṛṣṭi). Explanation: They are not comparable. "View" has the meaning of seeking out. The mind of forbearance seeks out, so it can be called a view. "Knowledge" has the meaning of decisive determination; forbearance does not decisively determine, so it is not called knowledge. The third explanation is: knowledge, relative to the mind of forbearance, can be called re-knowing. Re-knowing is not yet universal, hence it is called "not yet known," because the truth of the path of the higher realms has not yet been re-known. The Abhidharma is as such. In that Tattvasiddhi, it is named the "faculty of having the desire to know what is not yet known" because in the stage of the path of vision there is not yet the leisurely knowledge of the wisdom of liberation, hence it is called "not yet known." To exclude the path of liberation, it is spoken of as "not yet," because the path of liberation is subsumed under the path of cultivation (bhāvanā-mārga). Speaking of "desiring to know": being not far from knowing within liberation, it is called "desiring to know." This expression serves precisely to exclude what comes before. Prior to the path of vision, one is profoundly distant from knowing within liberation, and cannot be called "desiring"; now, to exclude that, it says "desiring." This untainted noble wisdom in the path of vision can generate what comes after, hence it is called a faculty. Regarding the "faculty of knowing": this is untainted wisdom in the path of cultivation. Drawing upon the Abhidharma, there are three explanations. The first explanation is: in the approach of the path of cultivation, one uses the wisdom of liberation to know the truths universally, hence it is called "knowing." The second explanation is: in the approach of the path of cultivation, there is knowledge that re-knows those principles of the truths, hence it is called "knowing." The third explanation is: in that path of vision, knowledge relative to the forbearances could be called repeated, but re-knowing was not yet universal, hence it was called "not yet known." Now in the path of cultivation, path-subsequent-cognition arises, and re-knowing is universal, hence it is called "knowing." If according to the Tattvasiddhi, there are two explanations. One explanation says: in the approach of the path of cultivation, there is the wisdom of liberation that knows the principle of the truths, hence it is called "knowing." This one explanation corresponds to the initial fruit [of the srotāpanna]. The second explanation is: using the wisdom of the path of cultivation to re-contemplate the principles of the truths, hence it is called "knowing." This one explanation corresponds to the fruit of the sakṛdāgāmin. This can generate what comes after, hence it is called a faculty. Regarding the "faculty of having no knowledge": the Tattvasiddhi calls it the "faculty of already knowing." If according to the Abhidharma, in the fruit of the non-learner (aśaikṣa), the contemplation of the truths has already been exhausted, and one does not seek to know further, hence it is called "no knowledge." If according to the Tattvasiddhi, one has already known previously, hence it is called "already knowing." The wisdom of the fruit of the non-learner can generate subsequent good phenomena arising as its own kind, hence it is called a faculty. Question: The faculties of faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom, as well as the good dharmas generated by the three untainted faculties—among the five fruits, what fruit are they? The Bodhisattvabhūmi proclaims that they are sovereign fruits (adhipati-phala), because the twenty-two faculties, relative to what they generate, are all called sovereign conditions (adhipati-pratyaya). Relative to what good are they spoken of as sovereign? Namely, relative to lower good; if relative to their own kind and higher good, because they are capable of generating them, they are called causes of their own category (sabhāga-hetu). Subsumed under direct causes and conditions (hetu-pratyaya), the generated good dharmas are called conditioned fruits. What are the lower goods generated by the three untainted faculties? Namely, the equanimous views of learners and the equanimous views of non-learners. When the noble ones, according with their former habits, wander and contemplate without taint, it is called equanimous view. Question: The sūtras state that greed, anger, ignorance, and so forth are unwholesome roots, and non-greed, non-anger, and so forth are the three wholesome roots. Why are they not spoken of among the twenty-two? Explanation: Because of conciseness they are not discussed; there is no other reason. Just as among the six supernormal powers (abhijñā) there are no supernormal power of knowing dharmas and supernormal power of noble sovereignty, this is also like that. The names and meanings are such for now. What is their essential form? Regarding the first, the eye faculty: according to the Abhidharma, its essence consists of derived form (upādāyarūpa) made of the four great elements, its essence being distinct from the four great elements. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, assembling the great elements forms the eye; the eye is simply the four great elements, and apart from the great elements there is no distinct derived form that constitutes the essence of the eye. The ear, nose, tongue, and body are also like this. Regarding the essence of the mind faculty: according to the Abhidharma, the king of mind is its essence; ideation, feeling, mental formations, and so forth are not the mind faculty, because they are subsumed under the dharma sensory base (dharmāyatana). If according to the Tattvasiddhi, there are no separate mental factors (caitta); the meaning that consciousness, ideation, feeling, and mental formations can generate subsequent moments is entirely the mind faculty. However, in the Tattvasiddhi, the mind at the end of mental formations that generates the five consciousnesses is not called the mind faculty, because what it generates is not mental consciousness. Apart from this, all consciousnesses and minds are entirely the mind faculty. If according to the Abhidharma, all six consciousnesses generating each other in turn are entirely the mind faculty. The male and female faculties are the same as the body faculty, because minor portions of the body faculty constitute these two. Truly, because these two both transform consciousness, their functional power is strong and they clearly distinguish persons, therefore these two are distinguished from within the body. Regarding the essence of the life faculty: according to the Abhidharma, in the present lifetime there is distinctly a life dharma that is neither form nor mind, serving as the essence of the life faculty. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, wholesome and unwholesome karma in past lifetimes serves as the essence of the life faculty. Regarding the five feeling faculties: according to the Abhidharma, feeling among mental factors serves as their essence. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, feeling-minds serve as their essence, and there are no separate factors. Regarding the five faculties of faith and so forth, treatises explain them differently. If according to the Abhidharma, faith among the wholesome universal factors serves as the essence of the faculty of faith, and energy serves as the essence of the faculty of energy; mindfulness among the universally pervasive factors serves as the essence of the faculty of mindfulness, concentration serves as the essence of the faculty of concentration, and wisdom serves as the essence of the faculty of wisdom. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, the mind of faith serves as the essence of the faculty of faith, up to the mind of wisdom serving as the essence of the faculty of wisdom; there are no separate factor dharmas. Regarding the final three faculties: according to the Abhidharma, their nature is wisdom; in terms of their retinues, their nature is the five aggregates. The simultaneous king of mind is the aggregate of consciousness, the simultaneous factor of feeling is the aggregate of feeling, the simultaneous factor of ideation is the aggregate of ideation, the remaining conditioned dharmas are the aggregate of formations, and non-informative form concurrent with the Path (mārgānuparivartī avijñapti) is the aggregate of form. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, the mind of wisdom is their essence, and there are no other dharmas. Such is their essential nature.