大乘義章 6.33

6.33

第一釋名。十障之義，出《十地論》。名字是何？一凡夫我相障、二邪行於眾生身等障、三闇相於聞思修等諸法忘障、四解法慢障、五身淨我慢障、六微煩惱習障、七細相習障、八於無相有行障、九不能善利益眾生障、十於諸法中不得自在障。初言凡夫我相障者，此對初地無我真解，以我為障。我有二種：一自在名我，謂八自在，此就用也；二自實名我，此據體也。實有二種：一者理實，所謂佛性。是故經言「我者所謂如來之藏」；二者情實，所謂凡夫妄情所立生法自性。論其理實，得之在聖；妄情所立，起之在凡。為別真我，就人以分，故舉凡夫。凡謂生死凡鄙之法，夫謂士夫，凡法成夫，故曰凡夫，此猶我人之別名也。執實名我。取我體狀，目之為相。礙聖名障。邪行於眾生身等障者，此對二地持戒淨行，說彼惡業以為障也。惡業乖正，目之為邪。集起名行，行起在緣，集必依具。言於生者，即是緣也。言身等者，即是具也。舉身統攝口意二業，故名為等。礙彼戒行，故名為障。闇相於聞等諸法忘者，此對三地聞法之解，說闇為障。心無慧明，故稱為闇。闇狀名相，此是障體。闇心迷境，境謂聞等三慧之法。於此法中，不能照了明記在心，故名為忘。解法慢者，此對四地出世真證，說三地中解心為障。此解當地，雖能解法，取相而知，名解法慢，慢故是障。前三地中，以我邪行闇忌為障。今此何故說解為障？彼前三地世間行故，以福捨罪。四地已上出世行故，以智捨相。是故不類。身淨慢者，此對五地十平等心，以彼四地取淨為障。前四地中得淨法身，取身淨相，名為我慢，慢故是障。微煩惱習者，此對六地十法平等，說五地中取染淨法分別慢心以之為障。然慢有三，謂上、中、下。前解法慢以之為上，障於四地下忍之心。身淨為中，障於五地中忍之解。取染淨慢，慢中最下，障六地中上忍之智。六地所除，對前中上，故說為微。性是取慢惑障之法，就過說惱。據微煩惱，顯前中上，類亦同然。俱是煩惱，何故前二說為慢乎？為障出世。所除之障，隨道取執，為過輕微。不同前三性相俱違，故約所取以別其障，說為慢矣。就初障慢，類後皆爾。然此微是其麁家殘氣，故名為習。細相習者，此對七地發起勝行，說六地中樂空為障。以六地中得法平等於空樂住，不能即空發起勝行，所以為障。取有為麁、著空為細，細狀名相，麁家殘氣目之為習。然其所取雖別空有，執性同故，猶得說為麁家習也。言於無相有行障者，此對八地無功用行，說七地中功用為障。第八地中報行純熟，捨離功用，名曰無相。望於無相，名功用修以為有行，礙於無相，故目為障。不能善益眾生障者，此對九地無礙說法，以彼八地不能為障。前八地中，雖能淨土教化眾生，不堪無礙辨才益物，名為不能。以不能故，說之為障。言於諸法不自在者，此對十地自在之智，說九地中無智為障。前九地中，雖復無礙辨才說法，未能於佛所知深法照用無礙，名不自在。又復不能受佛如來雲雨說法，降注法雨滅惡生善，名不自在。以不自在，故說為障。

First is the explanation of the names. The doctrine of the ten obstructions comes from the Daśabhūmika-śāstra. What are the names? (1) The obstruction of the ordinary person's self-characteristic; (2) The obstruction of wrong practice concerning the bodies of sentient beings, etc.; (3) The obstruction of the characteristic of darkness in forgetting dharmas such as hearing, reflecting, and cultivating; (4) The obstruction of arrogance regarding the understanding of dharmas; (5) The obstruction of the self-arrogance of the purified body; (6) The obstruction of the subtle habit-energy of afflictions; (7) The obstruction of the habit-energy of subtle characteristics; (8) The obstruction of active practice with respect to the signless; (9) The obstruction of the inability to skillfully benefit sentient beings; (10) The obstruction of not attaining mastery over all dharmas. First, regarding 'the obstruction of the ordinary person's self-characteristic': in contrast to the true understanding of selflessness on the first bhūmi, the self is taken as an obstruction. There are two kinds of self: first, being self-sovereign is called self, referring to the eight sovereign powers, which is based on function; second, being intrinsically real is called self, which is based on essence. The real has two kinds: first, the reality of principle, namely the Buddha-nature, which is why the sūtra says: 'The self is what is called the tathāgatagarbha'; second, the reality of delusion, namely the self-nature of sentient beings and dharmas established by the deluded feelings of ordinary persons. In discussing the reality of principle, its attainment resides in the noble ones; that established by deluded feelings arises in ordinary persons. In order to distinguish it from the true self, it is separated according to persons, and therefore 'ordinary person' is mentioned. 'Ordinary' refers to the common and base phenomena of birth and death; 'person' refers to a person. Common phenomena composing a person is thus called an 'ordinary person' (pṛthagjana), which is another name for an individual self. Grasping at reality is called 'self'. Apprehending the bodily form of the self is designated 'characteristic'. Obstructing the noble is called 'obstruction'. Regarding 'the obstruction of wrong practice concerning the bodies of sentient beings, etc.': in contrast to the pure practice of upholding the precepts on the second bhūmi, those unwholesome karmas are explained as the obstruction. Unwholesome karma deviates from correctness, so it is designated 'wrong'. Arising through accumulation is called 'practice'. Practice arises dependent on conditions, and accumulation must rely on instruments. Saying 'concerning beings' refers to the conditions. Saying 'the body, etc.' refers to the instruments. Mentioning the body subsumes the two karmas of speech and mind, hence the term 'etc.' Obstructing those precept practices is called 'obstruction'. Regarding 'forgetting dharmas such as hearing, etc. through the characteristic of darkness': in contrast to the understanding of hearing the Dharma on the third bhūmi, darkness is explained as the obstruction. The mind lacking the illumination of wisdom is called 'darkness'. The form of darkness is called 'characteristic', which is the essence of the obstruction. The dark mind is confused about its objects; 'objects' refers to the dharmas of the three wisdoms of hearing, reflecting, and cultivating. Being unable to clearly comprehend and distinctly remember these dharmas in one's mind is named 'forgetting'. Regarding 'arrogance regarding the understanding of dharmas': in contrast to the supramundane true realization of the fourth bhūmi, the mind of understanding in the third bhūmi is explained as the obstruction. Although this understanding can comprehend dharmas on its own bhūmi, apprehending characteristics in knowing is called arrogance regarding the understanding of dharmas; being arrogant, it is an obstruction. In the preceding three bhūmis, the self, wrong practice, and darkness were taken as obstructions. Why here is understanding explained as an obstruction? Because those preceding three bhūmis are mundane practices, abandoning sin through merit. From the fourth bhūmi onward are supramundane practices, abandoning characteristics through wisdom. Therefore, they are not of the same category. Regarding 'arrogance of the purified body': in contrast to the ten minds of equanimity on the fifth bhūmi, the apprehension of purity in the fourth bhūmi is taken as the obstruction. In the preceding fourth bhūmi, one attains the pure dharmakāya; apprehending the characteristic of purity of the body is called self-arrogance; being arrogant, it is an obstruction. Regarding 'the subtle habit-energy of afflictions': in contrast to the equanimity of the ten dharmas on the sixth bhūmi, the arrogant mind that discriminates defiled and pure dharmas in the fifth bhūmi is explained as the obstruction. Now, arrogance has three grades: superior, middling, and inferior. The previous arrogance regarding understanding dharmas is taken as superior, obstructing the mind of lower forbearance on the fourth bhūmi. The purity of the body is middling, obstructing the understanding of middle forbearance on the fifth bhūmi. The arrogance of grasping defilement and purity is the lowest among arrogances, obstructing the wisdom of upper forbearance on the sixth bhūmi. That which is eliminated on the sixth bhūmi is called 'subtle' in contrast to the preceding middle and superior ones. Its nature is the dharma of grasping arrogance, confusion, and obstruction; it is called affliction with respect to its fault. Based on subtle affliction, the preceding middle and superior ones are illuminated, and their category is also the same. Since both are afflictions, why are the former two explained as arrogance? Because they obstruct the supramundane. The obstructions to be eliminated are attachments conforming to the path, so their faults are light and subtle. Unlike the first three, whose nature and characteristics are entirely contrary [to the path], the obstruction is distinguished according to what is grasped, and is therefore called arrogance. With respect to the initial obstruction being arrogance, the subsequent ones are analogous. However, this subtlety is the residue of the coarse, and is therefore called 'habit-energy'. Regarding 'the habit-energy of subtle characteristics': in contrast to generating superior practices on the seventh bhūmi, delighting in emptiness in the sixth bhūmi is explained as the obstruction. Because in the sixth bhūmi one attains the equanimity of dharmas and dwells delightfully in emptiness, being unable to generate superior practices right within emptiness, it is an obstruction. Grasping existence is coarse, while clinging to emptiness is subtle; the subtle form is called 'characteristic', and the residue of the coarse is designated 'habit-energy'. Although what they grasp differs as emptiness or existence, because the nature of clinging is identical, it can still be explained as the habit-energy of the coarse. Saying 'the obstruction of active practice with respect to the signless': in contrast to the effortless practice on the eighth bhūmi, effort in the seventh bhūmi is explained as the obstruction. On the eighth bhūmi, retribution practice is completely ripened and effortlessly abandoned; this is called the signless. Compared to the signless, cultivation with effort is called having activity; because it obstructs the signless, it is designated an obstruction. Saying 'the obstruction of the inability to skillfully benefit sentient beings': in contrast to the unhindered exposition of the Dharma on the ninth bhūmi, the inability on the eighth bhūmi is taken as the obstruction. Although in the preceding eighth bhūmi one can purify Buddha-lands and teach sentient beings, one is not capable of benefiting beings with unhindered eloquence; this is called inability. Because of this inability, it is explained as an obstruction. Saying 'not attaining mastery over all dharmas': in contrast to the wisdom of mastery on the tenth bhūmi, the lack of wisdom in the ninth bhūmi is explained as the obstruction. In the preceding ninth bhūmi, although one expounds the Dharma with unhindered eloquence, one is not yet able to illuminate and function without hindrance regarding the profound dharmas known by the Buddha; this is called not attaining mastery. Furthermore, one is not yet able to receive the cloud-and-rain preaching of the Buddha Tathāgata to shower down the rain of Dharma, extinguishing evil and giving birth to good; this is called not attaining mastery. Because of not attaining mastery, it is explained as an obstruction.