大乘義章 6.7

6.7

次分見修。如《毘曇》中，苦忍已去十五心來名為見道，須陀已上終至無學名為修道。若依《成實》總相觀諦，不得說言苦忍已去，但得說言無想位中名為見道，修道如前。大乘法中，初地見道，二地已上名為修道。見修如是。就十使中，五見及疑唯障見諦，名為見惑；貪瞋慢癡通障見修，障見諦者判為見惑，障修道者判為修惑。毘曇法中，依見所起貪瞋癡慢，能障見諦；緣事生者，能障修道。成實法中，貪瞋癡慢皆帶取性，取性重者能障見諦，取性微者能障修道。大乘所說，一切煩惱無不迷理，於中麁者判為見惑，細為修惑。問曰：此二起在何處？若依《毘曇》，見道已前二輪並起，須陀已上單起修惑。成實法中，文無定判，准義以分，見道已前單起見惑，修惑成就而不現行；須陀已上單起修惑。問曰：何故毘曇法中見諦已前二輪並起，《成實》見前單起見惑？釋言：《毘曇》約境分惑，迷理生者判為見惑，緣事生者判為修惑。凡夫本來常具此二，是故並起。成實法中，一切十使斯帶取性、因皆迷理，但約輕重以分二惑。凡夫所起一切煩惱，取性心重，入見道時重取永亡，故凡所起悉名見惑；聖人煩惱取性輕薄，凡夫起惑不能如是，是故凡夫不起修惑，但可成就。問曰：修惑由來未起，云何成就？釋言：見惑是修惑因，以有見因，修果定起，故曰成就。問曰：成實破毘曇家，離欲界欲，初禪未現已得成就。彼文破曰「云何未入，已得成就？如人不識一字，自言解書，是所不應。」准彼類惑，不應未起，已得成就。釋言：惑心與善心異，不得相類。惑則久習，堅強難斷，雖復未起，剋必當生，故說成就；善法難生，雖有前因，未必當起，故未起者不名成就。不類在斯。大乘法中見修二惑，凡時並起，無明住地，先常行故；見諦已上，唯起修惑。見修如是。

Next, distinguishing [what is severed by] vision and cultivation: As in the Abhidharma, from the forbearance of suffering onward through the fifteen moments of mind is called the path of vision; from the srotāpanna upward through the stage of non-learning (aśaikṣa) is called the path of cultivation. If based on the *Tattvasiddhi*, which contemplates the truths in their general characteristics, one cannot say 'from the forbearance of suffering onward,' but can only say that within the state of non-conceptualization is called the path of vision, while the path of cultivation is as above. In the Mahāyāna teaching, the first bhūmi is the path of vision, and the second bhūmi and above is called the path of cultivation. Vision and cultivation are like this. Concerning the ten proclivities, the five views and doubt obstruct only the vision of the truths, and are called afflictions of vision; greed, anger, pride, and delusion obstruct both vision and cultivation: those obstructing the vision of the truths are categorized as afflictions of vision, and those obstructing the path of cultivation are categorized as afflictions of cultivation. In the Abhidharma system, the greed, anger, delusion, and pride that arise relying on views can obstruct the vision of the truths; those that arise by conditioning on concrete matters can obstruct the path of cultivation. In the *Tattvasiddhi* system, greed, anger, delusion, and pride all carry grasping-at-nature; where grasping-at-nature is heavy, it can obstruct the vision of the truths, and where grasping-at-nature is slight, it can obstruct the path of cultivation. What is taught in the Mahāyāna is that no affliction fails to be confused about principle; among them, the coarse are categorized as afflictions of vision, and the subtle as afflictions of cultivation. Question: Where do these two arise? If based on the Abhidharma, before the path of vision both wheels arise together; from the srotāpanna upward, only afflictions of cultivation arise singly. In the *Tattvasiddhi* system, there is no definitive statement in the text, but inferring according to principle: before the path of vision, afflictions of vision arise singly, while afflictions of cultivation are possessed (samanvāgata) but do not manifest; from the srotāpanna upward, only afflictions of cultivation arise singly. Question: Why is it that in the Abhidharma both wheels arise together before the vision of the truths, whereas in the *Tattvasiddhi* only afflictions of vision arise singly before vision? Explanation: The Abhidharma divides afflictions according to their cognitive objects: those arising from confusion regarding principle are categorized as afflictions of vision, and those arising by conditioning on concrete matters are categorized as afflictions of cultivation. Ordinary beings originally always possess both, and therefore they arise together. In the *Tattvasiddhi* system, all ten proclivities carry grasping-at-nature and their causes are all confusion regarding principle; the two afflictions are divided solely according to lightness and heaviness. All afflictions arisen in ordinary beings have a heavy mind of grasping-at-nature, and when entering the path of vision, heavy grasping is forever destroyed; hence all that arise in ordinary beings are called afflictions of vision. The afflictions of noble ones have slight and thin grasping-at-nature, but ordinary beings when giving rise to afflictions cannot be like this; therefore ordinary beings do not give rise to afflictions of cultivation, but can only possess them. Question: If afflictions of cultivation have never yet arisen, how are they possessed? Explanation: Afflictions of vision are the cause of afflictions of cultivation; because there is the cause of vision, the fruit of cultivation will definitely arise, hence they are called possessed. Question: The *Tattvasiddhi* refutes the Abhidharma school regarding being free from desire of the desire realm and possessing the first dhyāna before it has manifested; that text refutes it, saying: 'How could one possess it before having entered it? Like a person who does not know a single character but claims to understand writing, this is inadmissible.' Following that analogy for afflictions, they should not be possessed before having arisen. Explanation: The afflicted mind and the good mind are different, and cannot be compared to each other. Afflictions have long been practiced, being firm and difficult to sever; although they have not yet arisen, they will definitely be produced in the end, so they are said to be possessed. Good dharmas are difficult to produce; though there is a prior cause, they may not necessarily arise, so those not yet arisen are not called possessed. The dissimilarity lies here. In the Mahāyāna teaching, the two afflictions of vision and cultivation arise together in the stage of ordinary beings, because the ground of ignorance always operates beforehand; from the vision of the truths upward, only afflictions of cultivation arise. Vision and cultivation are like this.