大乘義章 5.39

5.39

第八明其治斷分齊。治斷之義，如二障中具廣分別，今略顯之。於中有二：一就大小相對分別、二直就大乘世出世間相對分別。就初對中，義別有三：一隱顯互論。小乘法中唯斷四住，大乘法中唯滅無明。故《勝鬘》云「聲聞緣覺，斷除四住，不斷無明。無明住地，唯佛所斷。」小乘法中非不亦有分斷無明，所斷微少，隱細從麁，故不說斷。設有無明四住所攝，大乘法中非不亦有分斷四住，所斷相微，隱麁從細，是故不說。二優劣相形。小乘解劣，唯斷四住；大乘治廣，通滅五住。故《地持》云「聲聞種性，煩惱障淨，非智障淨。菩薩種性，具足二淨。」聲聞之人煩惱障淨，當知即是四住斷也；菩薩二淨，當知即是五住斷也。三就實通論。小乘法中分斷五住，大乘亦然。小乘法中除愛除見，即是四住；所斷無明，即是第五無明氣分。此初對竟。第二直就大乘之中世出世間相對分別。解行已前名為世間，初地已上名為出世。於中分別，乃有四種：一癈麁論細。地前菩薩，五住煩惱一向未斷。初地已上，五住之結一切皆除。故《涅槃》云「地前菩薩具煩惱性。」良在斯矣。然初地上，理實念念齊斷五住，隨相別分非無先後。先後如何？初地見道，斷初住地；二地已上乃至七地，除滅愛結，斷彼欲愛、色愛、有愛三種住地；八地已上，斷除無明。先後如是。二隱顯互論。地前世間，唯斷四住；初地已上，唯滅無明。地前非不分斷無明，所斷微少，隱細從麁，是故但說斷除四住；初地已上非不亦有斷四住義，所斷相微，隱麁從細，是故但說斷除無明。雖無明文，義亦應爾，准彼證教，類之可知。三優劣相形。地前解劣，唯斷四住；地上解勝，五住皆斷。四就實通論。地前地上並斷五住，始從種性斷除五住，二障清淨，乃至佛地皆亦如是。五住之義難以具論，且隨麁相略之云爾。

The eighth section clarifies the limits of their countering and severing. The meaning of countering and severing is fully and extensively distinguished as in [the chapter on] the two obstacles; now it is briefly revealed. Within this there are two: first, relative distinction with respect to Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna; second, relative distinction directly with respect to mundane and supramundane within Mahāyāna. Within the first pair, there are distinctly three points: First, mutual discussion in terms of implicit and explicit. In the Hīnayāna Dharma one severs only the four entrenchments; in the Mahāyāna Dharma one extinguishes only ignorance. Thus the Śrīmālādevī-sūtra states: "Śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas sever the four entrenchments, but do not sever ignorance. The entrenchment of ignorance is severed only by a Buddha." In the Hīnayāna Dharma, it is not that there is no partial severing of ignorance at all; what is severed is miniscule, so the subtle is subsumed under the coarse, and thus its severing is not spoken of. If there is ignorance, it is subsumed under the four entrenchments. In the Mahāyāna Dharma, it is not that there is no partial severing of the four entrenchments; the characteristics of what is severed are subtle, so the coarse is subsumed under the subtle, and for this reason it is not spoken of. Second, mutual comparison of superior and inferior. Hīnayāna understanding is inferior, severing only the four entrenchments; Mahāyāna countering is broad, extinguishing all five entrenchments. Thus the Bodhisattvabhūmi states: "The śrāvaka lineage is pure in the affliction obstacle, but not pure in the knowledge obstacle. The bodhisattva lineage is complete in both purities." That śrāvakas are pure in the affliction obstacle should be known to be the severing of the four entrenchments; the two purities of bodhisattvas should be known to be the severing of the five entrenchments. Third, broad discussion in terms of reality. In the Hīnayāna Dharma one partially severs the five entrenchments, and so too in the Mahāyāna. In the Hīnayāna Dharma, eliminating craving and eliminating views are just the four entrenchments; the ignorance that is severed is just a portion of the fifth, ignorance. This ends the first pair. Second, relative distinction directly with respect to mundane and supramundane within the Mahāyāna. Prior to understanding and practice is called mundane; from the initial ground upward is called supramundane. Distinguishing within this, there are four kinds: First, setting aside the coarse to discuss the subtle. Bodhisattvas prior to the grounds consistently have not severed the afflictions of the five entrenchments. From the initial ground upward, the fetters of the five entrenchments are all entirely eliminated. Thus the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra says: "Bodhisattvas prior to the grounds possess the nature of affliction." Truly it lies herein! However, on the initial ground and above, in real principle one equally severs the five entrenchments thought-moment by thought-moment, though differentiated according to characteristics there is not an absence of precedence. What is the precedence? The path of vision of the initial ground severs the first entrenchment; from the second ground up to the seventh ground, one eliminates the fetter of craving, severing the three entrenchments of desire craving, form craving, and existence craving; on the eighth ground and above, one severs ignorance. Such is the precedence. Second, mutual discussion in terms of implicit and explicit. In the mundane prior to the grounds, one severs only the four entrenchments; from the initial ground upward, one extinguishes only ignorance. Prior to the grounds, it is not that one does not partially sever ignorance; what is severed is miniscule, so the subtle is subsumed under the coarse, and for this reason it is merely said that one severs the four entrenchments; from the initial ground upward, it is not that there is no meaning of severing the four entrenchments; the characteristics of what is severed are subtle, so the coarse is subsumed under the subtle, and for this reason it is merely said that one severs ignorance. Although there is no explicit text, the principle should also be like this, and by analogy with that scriptural authority, it can be known. Third, mutual comparison of superior and inferior. Prior to the grounds understanding is inferior, severing only the four entrenchments; on the grounds understanding is superior, severing all five entrenchments. Fourth, broad discussion in terms of reality. Both prior to the grounds and on the grounds, one severs the five entrenchments; beginning from the lineage one severs the five entrenchments and purifies the two obstacles, and so on up to the Buddha ground it is also entirely like this. The meaning of the five entrenchments is difficult to treat exhaustively; for now, following their coarse characteristics, it is briefly discussed as such.