[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [止觀輔行傳弘決](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912) › 5.56.2 # 止觀輔行傳弘決 5.56.2 止觀輔行傳弘決 5.56.2 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [5.56.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56.2) 問：八十八中，初果所斷既唯見惑，何故中有五十二思？ 答：此思依見，見為根本，但斷於見，根壞條枯。 若迷事思，此中不攝。 故文云是己法者愛，即指五見為己法也。 問：修所斷中何故無疑？ 答：見道已斷，理合無疑。 餘三見下但例於有，則三見可解，但以無等而為根本，如計我是無乃至非有非無也。 「若歷」下，明歷六十二，各生八十八。 「瀾」（力旦反，又力丹反）。 瀾，漫游波也。 「漫」亦散漫，縱逸也。 言此倒惑如波之逸。 「五十校計」下，明生百八也。 此經是後漢安世高譯，所立法相稍異諸經。 經云：佛在王舍，十方菩薩問佛：「何故諸行因緣不同？ 」佛言：「校計五根及以意識為一切法本，得十方佛智。 」問：「云何具足行道？ 」「謂常守根識修校計者為黠菩薩，若不修校計者為癡菩薩。 」問：「云何不修校計為癡、修校計為黠？ 」佛以五十法答，一一法中皆云校計，故云五十校計。 一一法中皆有百八，初盡百八癡、次盡百八欲，乃至得百八真證、百八盡力。 諸菩薩問：「云何百八？ 」佛言：「有所念不自知，心生心滅中有陰有集，不知為癡。 轉入意地亦如是，識亦如是，是為意三。 見好色、中色、惡色，不自知著、不自知滅。 有陰有集，乃至觸亦如是。 」彼經但列六根各六，雖無三世之語，而結云百八，故知是約剎那而為三世也。 既以心、意、識三為意地三，故通三世。 如云集起名心、籌量名意、別知名識。 意三既爾，故使所依五根亦爾。 三世三箇三十六故，故有百八。 經又問云：「我設知百八癡滅，為癡為黠？ 」佛言：「未黠。 」諸菩薩言：「何故爾耶？ 」佛言：「猶有百八癡，乃至未得百八盡力。 」以念念中不離六根剎那三世，故一一見皆一百八，乃至五十箇百八煩惱。 故彼經云「舉心動念，生死無盡。 」若準《大論》，六根各三受，三受對三塵，三世為百八。 此則約果報以論三世。 若諸論中，復以十纏加八十八為九十八，加十思惟合一百八。 言十纏者，論云「纏八無慚愧，嫉慳并悔眠，及掉舉昏沈，或十加忿覆。 」故知念念有多百八，理含義別。 《大論》又總以十四難而攝六十二見，謂三世各四句，并根本二句。 有此難者，不應為答。 「當知」下，結也。 心昏眼盲，盲故不見，昏故不覺。 即是無明心昏，智慧眼盲，故不見不覺真諦之理。 「世講者」下，斥謬也。 以彼不知俱是見故，謬生去取，講者私解也。 「此語」下，明其謬見「違經負心」。 世人但云初三是見、二四非見，則六十二中但有其半，故云「欠少」，是故違經。 言「負心」者，若實作此見，但有違經之失。 若隱知虛說，則有負心之過。 「中論」下，且證有無俱是性計，計即是見也。 無既成見，當知第四句悉亦是見。 「又此」下，驗無非證，故知屬見。 「諸外道」下，是邪人所得，驗知是見。 初文通舉外道所計以辨人非。 言「本劫本見」等者，《長阿含》十三云「佛告善念梵志：『此本末見不出六十二也。 本劫本見一十八，末劫末見四十四，合六十二。 言十八者，有四四句及根本二。 初四句者，一見二十劫成敗、二見四十劫、三見八十劫、四以捷疾智說（一一句皆云神及世間常）。 第二四句者，一我及世間半常半無常、二計由戲笑、三計失意生、四以捷疾智說（廣如初句）。 第三四句者，一神及世間有邊、二無邊、三上下方有邊四方無邊、四以捷疾智說（廣如初句。 此三四句初皆云：或有沙門婆羅門，以種種方便定意，觀見二十劫等）。 第四四句者，一我不知不見善惡有報無報耶、二我不知不見有他世無他世耶、三我不知不見何者善何者惡耶、四愚癡暗鈍隨他問答（此四句頭皆說異問異答）。 根本二句者，一定意知眾生未來無因緣而有、二者捷疾智說。 > Question: Among the eighty-eight \[afflictions\], since what is severed by the first fruit (srotāpanna) consists only of the afflictions of view, why are there fifty-two \[afflictions\] of thought among them? Answer: This thought relies upon views, and views serve as its root; when views alone are severed, the root is broken and the branches wither. If it were the thought that is deluded about phenomenal matters, it would not be subsumed here. Therefore, the text states that it is love for one's own dharmas, which directly points to the five views as being one's own dharmas. Question: Why is there no doubt among what is severed by cultivation? Answer: It has already been severed in the path of seeing, so in principle there should rightly be no doubt. Below, where the remaining three views are merely analogized to existence, the three views can thus be understood; they merely take non-existence and the like as their root, such as reckoning 'I am non-existent,' up to 'neither existent nor non-existent.' Below, where it says 'if traversing,' this explains traversing the sixty-two \[views\], each generating eighty-eight \[afflictions\]. 'Lan' (pronounced li + dan, or li + dan): 'lan' refers to unrestrained, roaming waves. 'Man' also means dispersed, loose, and unrestrained. This says that these inverted delusions are as unrestrained as waves. Below, where it says 'fifty calibrations,' this clarifies the generation of the one hundred and eight. This sūtra was translated by An Shigao in the Later Han, and its presentation of dharmic marks is slightly different from other sūtras. The sūtra says: The Buddha was in Rājagṛha, and the bodhisattvas of the ten directions asked the Buddha: 'Why are the causes and conditions of the conditioned formations not the same?' The Buddha said: 'Calibrating the five sense faculties and the mental consciousness serves as the root of all dharmas, through which one attains the wisdom of the Buddhas of the ten directions.' They asked: 'How does one practice the path completely?' 'One who constantly guards the faculties and consciousness and cultivates calibration is a wise bodhisattva; if one does not cultivate calibration, one is a foolish bodhisattva.' They asked: 'Why is not cultivating calibration being foolish, while cultivating calibration is being wise?' The Buddha answered with fifty dharmas, and within every single dharma it spoke of calibration, which is why it is called the fifty calibrations. Within every single dharma there are one hundred and eight: first exhausting the one hundred and eight foolishnesses, next exhausting the one hundred and eight desires, up to attaining the one hundred and eight true realizations and the one hundred and eight exhaustive powers. The bodhisattvas asked: 'What are the one hundred and eight?' The Buddha said: 'Having a thought and not knowing it oneself, where within the arising and ceasing of mind there is aggregate and there is accumulation, not knowing it is foolishness. Proceeding into the mental ground is also like this, and consciousness is also like this; these are the three of the mind. Seeing good form, intermediate form, or bad form, not knowing attachment oneself, not knowing cessation oneself, having aggregate and having accumulation, up to contact being also like this.' That sūtra merely lists six for each of the six sense faculties, and although it lacks the words 'three periods of time,' it concludes by stating one hundred and eight; thus we know it treats the kṣaṇa as the three periods of time. Since it takes the three—mind, thought, and consciousness—as the three of the mental ground, they thus pervade the three periods of time. For instance, accumulation and arising is called 'mind,' deliberation is called 'thought,' and distinctive knowing is called 'consciousness.' Since the three of the mind are like this, they cause the five sense faculties upon which they rely to be likewise. Because the three periods of time each have thirty-six, there are thus one hundred and eight. The sūtra further asks: 'Supposing I know the cessation of the one hundred and eight foolishnesses, is that foolish or wise?' The Buddha said: 'Not yet wise.' The bodhisattvas said: 'Why is that so?' The Buddha said: 'There are still one hundred and eight foolishnesses, up to not having yet attained the one hundred and eight exhaustive powers.' Because in thought after thought they do not leave the six sense faculties and the kṣaṇas of the three periods of time, each and every view has one hundred and eight, up to fifty sets of one hundred and eight afflictions. Therefore that sūtra states: 'With every stir of the mind and movement of thought, saṃsāra is endless.' If based on the Dazhidulun, the six sense faculties each have three feelings, the three feelings correspond to the three dusts (sense objects), and the three periods of time yield one hundred and eight. This discusses the three periods of time in terms of karmic retribution. In the various treatises, they furthermore add the ten entanglements to the eighty-eight to make ninety-eight, and add the ten contemplations to total one hundred and eight. As for the ten entanglements, the treatise states: 'The eight entanglements are shamelessness, remorselessness, jealousy, stinginess, along with regret and torpor, as well as restlessness and drowsiness; or ten by adding anger and concealment.' Thus we know that in thought after thought there are many hundreds and eights, their underlying principle implicit and their meanings distinct. The Dazhidulun also summarily subsumes the sixty-two views with the fourteen unanswerable questions, meaning four propositions for each of the three periods of time, along with the two root propositions. When such questions are raised, one should not provide an answer. Below, where it says 'one should know,' this is the conclusion. The mind is dim and the eyes are blind: blind, thus they do not see; dim, thus they do not awaken. This means that with ignorance the mind is dim and the eye of wisdom is blind, so that they neither see nor awaken to the principle of the truth of reality. Below, where it says 'worldly lecturers,' this refutes their error. Because they do not know that all alike are views, they erroneously make selections and rejections, which is the lecturers' own private interpretation. Below, where it says 'these words,' this clarifies that their erroneous views 'contravene the sūtras and betray their own minds.' Worldly people merely say that the first and third are views while the second and fourth are not views, in which case there is only half among the sixty-two, which is why it says 'deficient and missing,' and thus contravenes the sūtras. As for 'betraying their own minds,' if they truly hold this view, there is merely the error of contravening the sūtras; but if they secretly know \[the truth\] yet speak falsely, then there is the fault of betraying their own minds. Below, where it says 'Mūlamadhyamakakārikā,' this provisionally verifies that both existence and non-existence are reckonings of inherent nature, and reckoning is precisely view. Since non-existence is established as a view, one should know that the fourth proposition is also entirely a view. Below, where it says 'furthermore this,' it proves that non-existence is not realization, so we know it belongs to view. Below, where it says 'the various heterodox practitioners,' this is what is attained by deviant people, proving and verifying that it is view. The opening text generally brings up what is reckoned by the heterodox to discern the errors of the persons. As for 'the views of the original kalpa,' the thirteenth fascicle of the Dīrgha Āgama states: 'The Buddha told the Brahmin Supratiṣṭha: "These views of the original and the subsequent do not exceed sixty-two. The views of the original kalpa are eighteen, and the views of the subsequent kalpa are forty-four, totaling sixty-two. As for the eighteen, there are four tetralemmas and two root \[propositions\]. As for the first tetralemma: first, seeing twenty kalpas of formation and destruction; second, seeing forty kalpas; third, seeing eighty kalpas; fourth, expounding through rapid wisdom (every single phrase says that the spirit and the world are eternal). As for the second tetralemma: first, I and the world are half-eternal and half-impermanent; second, reckoning that it arises from joking and play; third, reckoning that it arises from loss of mindfulness; fourth, expounding through rapid wisdom (elaborated as in the first proposition). As for the third tetralemma: first, the spirit and the world are bounded; second, unbounded; third, the vertical directions are bounded while the four horizontal directions are unbounded; fourth, expounding through rapid wisdom (elaborated as in the first proposition. The beginning of each of these three tetralemmas says: there may be a śramaṇa or brāhmaṇa who, through various expedient methods of concentrated mind, contemplates and sees twenty kalpas, etc.). As for the fourth tetralemma: first, 'I neither know nor see whether good and evil have retribution or no retribution'; second, 'I neither know nor see whether there is another world or no other world'; third, 'I neither know nor see what is good and what is evil'; fourth, being foolish, ignorant, and obtuse, answering according to what others ask (the head of each of these four propositions speaks of answering differently to different questions). As for the two root propositions: first, knowing with concentrated mind that sentient beings in the future exist without causes and conditions; second, expounding through rapid wisdom." > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 5.56.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56.1) - [Next: 5.56.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56.3) - [Up: 5.56](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912~en-mt.5.56.2) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (1) - [俱舍論頌疏論本](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1823.21.31) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1912.5.56.2) · Pramāṇa