大乘義章 7.33

7.33

次辨其相，論釋不同。若依《毘曇》，色界善業，名為白白。三塗所受一切惡業，名為黑黑。鬼畜之中別報善業，欲界人天一切所受善惡二業，名黑白業，亦名雜業。此前三種，對治無漏是第四業。故《雜心》云「色有中善業，是白有白報。黑白在欲中，俱黑說不淨。若有思能斷，是諸業無餘，當知第四業。」問曰：何故色界善業偏名為白？白相顯故，離無慚愧及瞋恚故。欲界善業何故非白？雜不善故。無色善業何故非白？彼實是白，白相不顯，是以不說。云何不顯？造因之時，不具三業十善道相；受報之時，但有生陰而無中陰；又生陰中，但有四陰而無色陰。以如是等白相不具，故不名白。何故三塗一切惡業皆為黑黑？以其因果一向黑故。故彼《成實》破毘曇云「有人宣說：色界善業以為白白，三塗之業以為黑黑，欲界人天所受之業以為黑白，十七學思為不黑白。是義不然。」准彼以驗，故知《毘曇》三塗惡業以為黑黑。何故宣說鬼畜之中別報善業以為雜業？彼作因時與惡和雜，得報之時與苦參受，故說為雜。問曰：何故別報善業偏在鬼畜，不通地獄？地獄苦重，能感之因唯不善故。鬼畜報輕，能感之因得雜善故。此云何知？如《雜心》中辨明現報、生報、後報、不定報業，此四善業，地獄有三，除現報業，以地獄中無善果故。餘四趣中，具造四業，明知鬼畜有善業果，以其得造現報善故。又如經說「阿修羅等受報如天。」明有善業。問曰：若言鬼畜之中有善果者，何故《成實》破《毘曇》云有人宣說三塗之業為黑黑乎？彼舉惡業，不妨有善。若有善者，與《成實》同。成實論家竟何所破？釋言：同者《成實》不破；於中異者，《成實》破之。《成實》宣說「地獄之中初出炎火，則得寒氷觸身之樂，并猪犬等食糞之樂。如是一切皆是善果。」《毘曇》說為不善之報，此乖《成實》，《成實》破之，不破善果。何故人天一切善惡悉為雜業？以因雜惡、果雜苦故。第四業者，如彼論說，有其十七無漏學思，為第四業。思是思數，此是業體，故偏說之。何者十七？如彼論說「說有十二思，斷於黑報業，四思能斷白，一思二俱離。」是則通合有十七思。所言十二斷黑業者，見道之中有其四思，修道之中有八思，是故通合有其十二。見道四者，謂四法忍相應思也。此四正斷欲界地中三塗惡業，故云斷黑。問曰：忍體亦斷惡法，以何義故偏說思乎？釋言：忍心非不斷惡，但思是業，今為辨業故偏說之。相從以論，忍等是其思業眷屬，亦得名思。問曰：法智相應之思，何故不說？釋言：法智累外證除，非正斷故，所以不論。又問：比忍相應之思，何故不說？釋言：比忍相應思者，但斷上界無記染思，不斷不善，所以不說。修道八者，欲界地中修道對治有九無礙、九解脫道。九無礙中前八無礙，相應思也，此八正斷欲界黑業，故云斷黑。問曰：《毘曇》說三塗業以為黑黑，見道中斷。是中何處更有黑業，而言修道八思斷黑？此如上釋。凡夫具依見修二惑發三塗業，見道煩惱，迷理生故，但發意業；修道煩惱，緣事起故，具發三業。見修煩惱所發意業，起已謝往有得得之，入聖道時斷彼業得令不屬己，名之為斷。見惑所起，見道中斷。修惑所起。欲界修道九無礙斷。第九一品在後別論。故說前八斷黑報業。修惑所起身口二業。以其世斷。剎那斷故。無得得之，但為修惑緣縛彼業。修惑斷時，修業免縛，名之為斷。斷之品數，與斷修惑所發意業其義相似。所言四思能斷白者，四禪地中修道煩惱相應染思，皆能繫縛自地善業。一一地中，各有九品無礙解脫斷其繫縛。就彼四禪九無礙中，分取第九相應思業以為四思，此四正斷四禪善上繫縛之義，名為斷白，不斷善體。問曰：四禪九無礙思皆能斷除善上繫縛，以何義故偏說第九能斷白乎？釋言：前八非不能斷，但彼四禪地地之中九品染思共縛自地一切善法，前八重縛雖復斷竟，第九一重繫縛猶在，令自地中一切善法皆不得脫，故不名斷。彼第九品無礙起時，斷彼微品染污業思，令自地中一切善法皆得解脫，故偏就之以說斷白。所言一思二俱離者，欲界修道九無礙中，第九品邊相應業思以之為一，此思正斷黑黑業中第九微品，并斷欲界一切雜業，名為俱離。故《雜心》云「斷黑黑業及黑白業，名俱離矣。」於彼黑業及雜業中，不善意業斷其得體，自餘一切不善身口，及雜業中一切善法，但斷繫縛，不斷得體。問曰：欲界前八無礙非但斷黑亦斷雜業，以何義故不名俱離？釋言：前八斷黑業時，雜中惡業隨分亦斷，但雜善上繫縛未盡，是故不得說斷雜業，彼雜善業猶為自地微品黑業及雜惡業所繫縛故。問曰：若言雜善之上繫縛未盡不得名為斷雜業者，前八無礙斷黑未盡，亦應不得說斷黑業。釋言：惡業斷體名斷。以斷體故，隨分盡處得與斷名。善斷繫縛，不斷其體。善斷縛故，欲界地中九品不善共縛欲界一切善法，前八無礙雖斷善上八重繫縛，第九一重繫縛猶在。繫縛在故，一切善法未有脫處，故不說斷。問曰：若使惡斷體故隨分盡處得名斷者，前八無礙亦斷雜中八品惡業，以何義故不說斷雜？釋言：彼惡與欲界善合為雜業，雖斷雜惡，雜善未出，故不說斷。其猶頭頂手足等事共成人身，雖斷手足不名殺人，此亦如是。問曰：若言前八思時雜善未出，雖斷雜惡不名斷者，黑業之中雖斷意業，身口二業未免緣縛，以何義故得名斷黑？釋言：有以。彼黑業中意為正業，身口隨業。意為正故，前八思時雖身口業未免緣縛，正業已除故說斷黑。如人斬頭或復截腰，手足雖在而名被殺。雜中雖斷不善意業，善中意業被縛未出，善惡身口亦未免縛，故不說斷。問曰：無色無漏業思，何故不說為無漏業？理亦通是，但非前三對治法故，所以不論。毘曇如是。成實法中，四業復異，彼說色界無色界業一向是白，及欲界中純善之業亦名為白。阿鼻之業一向是黑，自餘地獄及鬼畜中純苦之業亦名為黑。欲界人天非純樂業，及下三趣非純苦業，通名為雜。一切無漏通名不黑不白業也。就無漏中別而論之，唯取思心以為業體，故彼《成實．九業品》云「意思名業，通則俱是。」《大智論》中，地獄之業，鬼畜少分是其黑業。論自釋言「是中眾生大苦悶極，故名為黑。」一切天業是其白業，論自釋言「三界諸天所受樂報，自在明了，故名為白。人及修羅八部神等所受之業，名黑白雜，以此業中有善有惡，受報之時苦樂雜故。一切無漏，能破不善及有漏善，并拔眾生善惡之果，名不黑不白。」《涅槃經》中，三塗之業名之為黑，上二界業說之為白，欲界地中人天之業以之為雜，一切無漏為不黑不白。四業如是。

Next, in distinguishing their characteristics, the explanations in the treatises differ. According to the Abhidharma, the wholesome karma of the form realm is called white-white. All unwholesome karma undergone in the three bad destinies is called black-black. The wholesome karma of individual retribution among pretas and animals, along with all the two kinds of karma—wholesome and unwholesome—undergone by humans and devas of the desire realm, are called black-white karma, also called mixed karma. The fourth karma is the untainted [karma] that is the antidote to these preceding three kinds. Thus the *Za xin* states:
'Wholesome karma in the form existence
Is white, having white retribution.
Black-and-white is in the desire [realm];
Being completely black is said to be impure.
If there is volition able to sever
These karmas without remainder,
One should know that this is the fourth karma.'

Question: Why is the wholesome karma of the form realm exclusively called white? Because the white characteristic is evident, and because it is free from absence of shame and remorse as well as hatred. Why is wholesome karma of the desire realm not white? Because it is mixed with the unwholesome. Why is wholesome karma of the formless [realm] not white? It is indeed white, but the white characteristic is not evident, and therefore it is not stated. Why is it not evident? When creating the cause, it does not possess the characteristics of the three karmas and the ten wholesome pathways of action; when receiving the retribution, there is only the rebirth-skandha and no intermediate skandha; furthermore, within the rebirth-skandha, there are only four skandhas and no form-skandha. Because it lacks such white characteristics, it is not called white. Why is all unwholesome karma of the three bad destinies black-black? Because its cause and effect are exclusively black. Therefore, the *Tattvasiddhi*, in refuting the Abhidharma, states: 'Certain people declare: Wholesome karma of the form realm is considered white-white; karma of the three bad destinies is considered black-black; karma undergone by humans and devas of the desire realm is considered black-white; and the seventeen volitions of the trainee are non-black-non-white. This doctrine is incorrect.' Verifying by reference to that, we thus know that the Abhidharma considers unwholesome karma of the three bad destinies to be black-black. Why is it declared that the wholesome karma of individual retribution among pretas and animals is mixed karma? When creating the cause, it is mixed with evil; when obtaining the retribution, it is experienced mixed with suffering; therefore it is said to be mixed.

Question: Why is wholesome karma of individual retribution exclusively among pretas and animals, and does not extend to the hells? The suffering of the hells is heavy, and the cause capable of inducing it is solely unwholesome. The retribution of pretas and animals is lighter, and the cause capable of inducing it can be mixed with good. How is this known? As explained in the *Za xin*, which clarifies the karmas of retribution in the present life, retribution in the next rebirth, retribution in subsequent rebirths, and indefinite retribution: among these four wholesome karmas, the hells have three, excluding karma of retribution in the present life, because there are no wholesome fruits in the hells. In the remaining four destinies, they fully create the four karmas, clearly showing that pretas and animals have wholesome karmic fruits, since they can create wholesome [karma of] retribution in the present life. Moreover, as a sūtra says: 'Asuras and the like receive retributions like devas.' This clearly indicates that there is wholesome karma.

Question: If it is said that there are wholesome fruits among pretas and animals, why does the *Tattvasiddhi*, refuting the Abhidharma, say that certain people declare the karma of the three bad destinies to be black-black? That refers to their unwholesome karma, which does not prevent there from being wholesome [karma]. If there is wholesome [karma], it is the same as the *Tattvasiddhi*. What then does the master of the *Tattvasiddhi* refute? Explanation: What is the same, the *Tattvasiddhi* does not refute; what differs among them, the *Tattvasiddhi* refutes. The *Tattvasiddhi* declares: 'In the hells, when first emerging from the blazing fire, one experiences the pleasure of cold ice touching the body; as well as the pleasure of pigs, dogs, and the like eating feces. All such things are wholesome fruits.' The Abhidharma states that they are retributions of the unwholesome; this contradicts the *Tattvasiddhi*, and the *Tattvasiddhi* refutes it, not refuting wholesome fruits [as such]. Why are all the wholesome and unwholesome [karmas] of humans and devas mixed karma? Because the cause is mixed with evil, and the fruit is mixed with suffering.

As for the fourth karma, as explained in that treatise, there are seventeen untainted volitions of the trainee that constitute the fourth karma. Volition is the mental factor of volition (cetanā), which is the essence of karma, and therefore it is spoken of specifically. What are the seventeen? As stated in that treatise:
'It is said that twelve volitions
Sever karma of black retribution;
Four volitions can sever the white;
One volition is free from both.'
Thus, collectively there are seventeen volitions. As for the statement that twelve sever black karma: within the path of seeing there are four volitions, and within the path of cultivation there are eight volitions; therefore, collectively there are twelve. The four of the path of seeing refer to the volitions associated with the four dharmakṣāntis. These four directly sever the unwholesome karma of the three bad destinies in the stage of the desire realm; hence they are said to sever the black.

Question: The essence of kṣānti also severs unwholesome dharmas; for what reason is volition spoken of specifically? Explanation: It is not that the mind of kṣānti does not sever evil; but volition is karma, and now, to distinguish karma, it is spoken of specifically. In inclusive terms, kṣānti and so forth are the retinue of the karma of volition, and may also be called volition. Question: Why is volition associated with dharma-knowledge (dharmajñāna) not mentioned? Explanation: Because dharma-knowledge realizes elimination beyond the defilements and is not the direct severing, it is not discussed. Further question: Why is volition associated with inductive patience (anvayakṣānti) not mentioned? Explanation: The volition associated with inductive patience only severs the neutral defiled volition of the higher realms and does not sever the unwholesome, which is why it is not mentioned.

As for the eight of the path of cultivation: the antidotes of the path of cultivation in the stage of the desire realm comprise nine unimpeded paths and nine paths of liberation. Among the nine unimpeded [paths], they are the volitions associated with the first eight unimpeded [paths]; these eight directly sever the black karma of the desire realm, hence they are said to sever the black. Question: The Abhidharma states that karma of the three bad destinies is considered black-black, and is severed in the path of seeing. Where in this is there further black karma, such that it is said that the eight volitions of the path of cultivation sever the black? This is as explained above: ordinary beings generate karma of the three bad destinies on the basis of both the afflictions of seeing and of cultivation. Because afflictions of the path of seeing arise from delusion regarding principle, they generate only mental karma; because afflictions of the path of cultivation arise in relation to phenomena, they generate all three karmas. Regarding mental karma generated by afflictions of seeing and cultivation: once arisen and passed away, there is possession (prāpti) that acquires it; when entering the noble path, severing the possession of that karma so that it no longer belongs to oneself is called 'severing'. That which arises from the afflictions of seeing is severed in the path of seeing. That which arises from the afflictions of cultivation is severed by the nine unimpeded [paths] of the path of cultivation in the desire realm. The ninth grade is discussed separately below; hence the first eight are said to sever karma of black retribution. As for physical and vocal karmas generated by afflictions of cultivation: because their cessation is mundane and momentary, there is no possession that acquires them; they are merely bound as objects by the afflictions of cultivation. When the afflictions of cultivation are severed, the karma of cultivation is freed from bondage, which is called 'severing'. The grades of its severing are similar in meaning to severing the mental karma generated by afflictions of cultivation.

As for the statement that four volitions can sever the white: in the stages of the four dhyānas, the defiled volitions associated with the afflictions of the path of cultivation can all bind the wholesome karma of their own stage. In each stage, there are nine grades of unimpeded [paths] and liberations that sever their bondage. From among the nine unimpeded [paths] of those four dhyānas, separately taking the karmas of volition associated with the ninth [unimpeded path] constitutes the four volitions. These four directly sever the binding on the wholesome in the four dhyānas, which is called 'severing the white', not severing the wholesome essence itself. Question: Since the volitions of the nine unimpeded [paths] of the four dhyānas can all sever the bondage upon the wholesome, for what reason is only the ninth specifically said to sever the white? Explanation: It is not that the first eight cannot sever; but in each stage of those four dhyānas, the nine grades of defiled volition jointly bind all wholesome dharmas of their own stage. Although the first eight layers of bondage have already been severed, the single ninth layer of bondage still remains, preventing all wholesome dharmas in their own stage from being released; therefore it is not called severed. When that ninth grade of the unimpeded [path] arises, it severs that subtle grade of defiled karmic volition, causing all wholesome dharmas in their own stage to obtain liberation; hence it is specifically in reference to this that it is said to sever the white.

As for the statement that one volition is free from both: among the nine unimpeded [paths] of the path of cultivation in the desire realm, the karmic volition associated with the ninth grade is taken as this one. This volition directly severs the ninth subtle grade within black-black karma and also severs all mixed karma of the desire realm, which is called 'free from both'. Therefore the *Za xin* states: 'Severing black-black karma and black-white karma is called being free from both.' In those black karmas and mixed karmas, for unwholesome mental karma one severs its essence of possession; for all remaining unwholesome physical and vocal [karmas], as well as all wholesome dharmas within mixed karma, one only severs the bondage, not severing the essence of possession. Question: Since the first eight unimpeded [paths] of the desire realm not only sever black but also sever mixed karma, for what reason are they not called 'free from both'? Explanation: When the first eight sever black karma, the evil karma within the mixed is also severed according to its portion; but because the bondage upon mixed wholesome [karma] has not been exhausted, one cannot say that mixed karma is severed, since that mixed wholesome karma is still bound by the subtle grade of black karma and mixed evil karma of its own stage.

Question: If it is said that because bondage upon mixed wholesome [karma] has not been exhausted, it cannot be called severing mixed karma, then since the first eight unimpeded [paths] have not exhausted the severing of black [karma], one should likewise not be able to say that they sever black karma. Explanation: For evil karma, severing the essence is called severing. Because it is severing the essence, at the point where it is exhausted according to its portion, it obtains the name of severing. Wholesome [karma] severs bondage, not severing its essence. Because the wholesome severs bondage: in the stage of the desire realm, the nine grades of the unwholesome jointly bind all wholesome dharmas of the desire realm; although the first eight unimpeded [paths] sever the eight layers of bondage upon the wholesome, the single ninth layer of bondage still remains. Because the bondage remains, none of the wholesome dharmas has attained release; therefore it is not said to be severed. Question: If evil [karma] is called severed at the point where it is exhausted according to its portion because of severing the essence, then since the first eight unimpeded [paths] also sever eight grades of evil karma within the mixed, for what reason is it not said to sever the mixed? Explanation: That evil combines with the wholesome of the desire realm to form mixed karma; although the mixed evil is severed, the mixed wholesome has not emerged, and therefore it is not said to be severed. It is just as when head, hands, feet, and so forth together form a human body: although hands and feet are severed, it is not called killing a person; this is also like that. Question: If it is said that during the first eight volitions, the mixed wholesome has not emerged, and although mixed evil is severed it is not called severed, then within black karma, although mental karma is severed, physical and vocal karmas are not yet free from relational bondage; for what reason does it obtain the name of severing the black? Explanation: There is a reason. Within that black karma, mind is the primary karma, and body and speech are attendant karma. Because mind is primary, during the first eight volitions, although physical and vocal karma are not yet free from relational bondage, the primary karma is already eliminated; therefore it is said to sever the black. Just as when a person's head is cut off or their waist is severed, though hands and feet remain, they are called killed. In the mixed, although unwholesome mental karma is severed, mental karma within the wholesome remains bound and unreleased, and wholesome and unwholesome body and speech are also not yet free from bondage; therefore it is not said to be severed.

Question: Why are the untainted karmic volitions of the formless [realm] not spoken of as untainted karma? In principle, they also universally are, but because they are not antidotes to the preceding three, they are not discussed. Such is the Abhidharma.

In the doctrine of the *Tattvasiddhi*, the four karmas are again different: it says that karma of the form realm and the formless realm is exclusively white, and purely wholesome karma in the desire realm is also called white. Karma of Avīci is exclusively black, and karma of pure suffering in the remaining hells and among pretas and animals is also called black. Karma of non-pure pleasure among humans and devas of the desire realm, and karma of non-pure suffering in the three lower destinies, are collectively called mixed. All untainted [karma] is collectively called non-black-non-white karma. Treating untainted [karma] specifically, it takes only the mental factor of volition as the essence of karma; therefore the 'Chapter on the Nine Karmas' of that *Tattvasiddhi* states: 'The volition of mind is called karma; in a general sense, both are.' In the *Dazhidulun*, the karma of the hells and a small portion of pretas and animals are its black karma. The treatise itself explains: 'Sentient beings therein experience extreme torment of great suffering, hence it is called black.' All deva karma is its white karma; the treatise itself explains: 'The pleasurable retributions received by all devas of the three realms are autonomous and clear, hence it is called white. The karma received by humans, asuras, the eight classes of spirits, and so forth is called mixed black-and-white, because within this karma there is both good and evil, and when receiving retribution, pleasure and suffering are mixed. All untainted [karma], able to destroy the unwholesome and the tainted wholesome, and to uproot the wholesome and unwholesome fruits of sentient beings, is called non-black-non-white.' In the *Nirvāṇa Sūtra*, karma of the three bad destinies is called black, karma of the upper two realms is said to be white, karma of humans and devas in the stage of the desire realm is considered mixed, and all untainted [karma] is non-black-non-white. Such are the four karmas.