法苑珠林 72.69

72.69

述曰。此十使煩惱斷有難易者。夫論使性凡常具有。今明入道故敘難易。但諸見惑難識易斷。貪等四使易識難除。見難識者。謂凡常迷。理易斷者。見理即盡。所謂若能學觀無我。創見理時。則名初果。即先斷除八十八使。但初見諦有利有鈍。若利根者。總觀諸法。皆假無性。不見我人。一念之中斷八十八。即此一念名為見道。若鈍根者。別觀四諦。次第漸斷八十八使。故佛性論云。若利根人於一念中則等觀四諦。八十八使一時俱斷。皆名見諦。若鈍根人於次第觀者。則初念觀苦。不見餘三諦。但斷苦下。以此文證。總別觀法。皆得入道。不得偏執。若依諸經教人入道。多直說觀生滅無我。則斷諸結出離生死。如地持經說。世間受生皆由著我。若離著我則無世間受身生處。又如經說。緣覺性人不解四諦法門名字。直籍事緣觀生無我。便斷諸結過諸聲聞。於此直作無我觀中。雖不作其四諦別解。如此觀時具有四諦。謂彼所觀有漏報身念念生滅。是理苦集。從前名苦。生後名集。知無我時即是見苦。爾時無我即斷事集。所斷不生即是證滅。此能觀智即是聖道。是故直觀無我之時。具有四諦斷結得出。不要別觀四諦方出。故成論引經說言。如甄叔迦經中說種種得道因緣。非但以四諦得道。故知入道不要別觀。總觀無我一行亦得。若能明見身心無我。則是見道。斷諸見惑。但諸見惑約諦分別。三界合說有八十八。若就一人以論迷心。總則唯是五見及疑。此六望愚則名難識。若望智人復名易斷。謂諸凡愚學修善者。多皆知厭貪瞋癡慢。於其我心及執戒等。不覺是過。是故難識。以難識故。經說為重。如涅槃釋。我見戒取及以疑等。一切眾生常所起故。又難覺故。如病常發名為重病。又難識故。亦名重病。又成論云。世間人於戒取中不見其過。故使為結。故知利使愚人不識。言望智人名易斷者。謂若學觀身心生滅。分見無我。煩惱薄時。即知觀智是斷法道。心中六使自然永無。謂知色心生滅非人。則無我心邊見自斷。以觀見理識聖道故。正信無疑。謗無自斷。智慧是道。戒等非勝。則無戒取。見取自斷。是故六使難識易斷。以難識故。無始來迷。以易斷故。解理則盡。不同貪等易識難斷。以易識故。人多不執。以難斷故。那含亦有。是故利使迷理邪心。親覆聖解合行不出。不同貪等別緣事起唯妨修觀非親迷理。故諸小聖雖有貪瞋。不妨仍得解理無疑。是故智人學修業者。唯修觀解除迷入道。若學觀行雖昧名凡。少解理時即無妄取。若不學解常迷道法。雖修諸善不除邪執。非直妄執自不能出。多謗正法及行道者。以其迷心未識邪正。不知他是不與己同。即謂己是。說他為非。是故迷人心無道法。多依世善妄執相非。故俱舍論云。在家由取五塵故。與在家起鬪爭。出家由取諸見各不同故。與出家起鬪爭。又成論云。若人持戒取為清淨。名戒取結。即謂所取。以為真實。餘皆妄語。名見取結。此二是其出家之人鬪爭根本。亦即名為隨順苦邊。又依此戒取能捨八真聖道。此非正道。非清淨道。能隨苦過。又戒取是出家人縛。諸欲是在家人縛。又戒取者。雖復種種行出家法。空無所得。又因此戒取能謗正道及行正道者。又戒取是諸外道起憍慢處。作如是念。能勝餘人。以此等文證知。戒取等唯是世善招生死果。故名隨苦。非真道法。愚人多迷妄執生罪。是故十使雖皆不善。論其障道起過之原。則唯六使迷心為本。若不能斷。非直不出。因起麁罪當生惡道。此明十使斷有難易竟。

The explanation says: As for the severance of these ten drive afflictions having varying degrees of difficulty, generally speaking, the nature of these drives is always present in ordinary persons. Now, to clarify entry into the Path, their difficulty and ease are described. The defilements of views are hard to recognise but easy to sever, whereas the four drives such as craving are easy to recognise but hard to eliminate. 'Views are hard to recognise' means that ordinary persons are constantly deluded by them. 'They are easy to sever in terms of principle' means that upon seeing the principle, they are immediately exhausted. That is to say, if one can train in contemplating non-self, when one first sees the principle, one is called [an attainer of] the first fruit [of srotāpanna], immediately severing first the eighty-eight drives. However, in first seeing the truths there are the sharp and the dull [faculties]. Those of sharp faculties contemplate all phenomena collectively as mere designations lacking intrinsic nature and do not see a self or a person; in a single thought-moment they sever the eighty-eight [drives], and this single thought-moment is called the Path of Seeing. Those of dull faculties contemplate the Four Truths separately, gradually severing the eighty-eight drives in sequence. Therefore, the Treatise on Buddha-Nature says: 'If a person of sharp faculties in a single thought-moment equally contemplates the Four Truths, the eighty-eight drives are severed simultaneously at once; all are called "seeing the truths". If a person of dull faculties contemplates in sequence, in the first thought-moment he contemplates suffering and does not see the other three truths; he severs only what is under suffering.' Proven by this text, whether by collective or separate contemplation, both can enter the Path, and one must not cling to one alone. If one follows the sūtras to instruct people in entering the Path, they mostly directly speak of contemplating arising, ceasing, and non-self, whereupon one severs the fetters and escapes saṃsāra. As the Bodhisattvabhūmi-sūtra says: 'Rebirth in the world is entirely due to attachment to self; if one is free from attachment to self, there is no place in the world to receive a body or be born.' Also, as a sūtra says: 'Those of the pratyekabuddha disposition do not comprehend the names of the Dharma-gates of the Four Truths; they directly rely on factual conditions to contemplate that arising is non-self, and thus sever the fetters, surpassing the śrāvakas.' In this direct practice of contemplation on non-self, although one does not form separate understandings of the Four Truths, when contemplating in this manner, the Four Truths are completely present: that is, the conditioned retributive body under contemplation arises and ceases from moment to moment, which in principle is suffering and origination; coming from the prior [moment] is called suffering, and producing the subsequent [moment] is called origination. Knowing non-self is seeing suffering; at that time, being free from self severs the factual origination; that which is severed does not arise, which is realising cessation; and this wisdom capable of contemplation is the noble path. Therefore, at the time of directly contemplating non-self, the Four Truths are completely present, the fetters are severed, and escape is achieved; it is not necessary to contemplate the Four Truths separately in order to escape. Therefore the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra cites a sūtra saying: 'As stated in the Kiṃśuka-sūtra, there are various causes and conditions for attaining the Path, and it is not only through the Four Truths that one attains the Path.' Hence we know that to enter the Path it is not necessary to contemplate separately; collective contemplation of non-self as a single practice also succeeds. If one can clearly see that body and mind are without a self, this is the Path of Seeing, severing the defilements of views. However, when these defilements of views are distinguished according to the truths, collectively across the tridhātu there are eighty-eight. If discussed with respect to a single person's deluded mind, in general they are merely the five views and doubt. These six, viewed from the perspective of fools, are called hard to recognise; yet viewed from the perspective of the wise, they are called easy to sever. This means that ordinary fools who train in cultivating the good mostly know how to detest craving, anger, delusion, and arrogance, yet regarding their concept of self and grasping at precepts, they do not perceive them as faults; thus they are hard to recognise. Because they are hard to recognise, the sūtras describe them as grave. As explained in the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra]: 'Because view of self, adherence to precepts and vows, doubt, and the rest are constantly arisen by all sentient beings and are hard to become aware of, just as a chronic disease that constantly breaks out is called a grave illness, being hard to recognise they are likewise called a grave illness.' Also the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra says: 'Worldly people do not see the fault in adherence to precepts and vows; therefore it acts as a fetter.' Hence we know that fools do not recognise the sharp drives. The statement that 'from the perspective of the wise they are easy to sever' means that if one trains in contemplating the arising and ceasing of body and mind and partially sees non-self, when afflictions become thin, one knows that the contemplative wisdom is the path of the dharma of cessation, and the six drives in the mind are naturally gone forever. That is, knowing that the arising and ceasing of form and mind is not a person, the concept of self and extreme views are severed of themselves. Because through contemplating and seeing the principle one recognises the noble path, one has right faith without doubt, and slander of non-existence is severed of itself. Wisdom is the Path, while precepts and the like are not superior; hence there is no adherence to precepts and vows, and adherence to views is severed of itself. Therefore the six drives are hard to recognise but easy to sever. Because they are hard to recognise, beings have been deluded since beginningless time; because they are easy to sever, upon understanding the principle they are exhausted—unlike craving and the rest, which are easy to recognise but hard to sever. Because they are easy to recognise, people mostly do not cling to them; because they are hard to sever, even an anāgāmin still possesses them. Therefore, the sharp drives are erroneous minds deluded about principle; they directly obscure noble understanding and, acting together, prevent escape. They are unlike craving and the rest, which arise dependent on particular factual objects, only obstructing the cultivation of contemplation without directly obscuring principle. Therefore, although lesser noble ones still possess craving and anger, this does not hinder them from still understanding principle without doubt. Therefore, when wise persons train in cultivating their practice, they solely cultivate contemplative understanding to eliminate delusion and enter the Path. If one trains in contemplative practice, though still called an ordinary person while unrefined, upon slightly understanding the principle one is free from false grasping. If one does not train in understanding, one is constantly deluded about the Dharma of the Path; though one cultivates various goods, one does not eliminate erroneous clinging. Not only can one not escape on account of false clinging, but one mostly slanders the saddharma and practitioners of the Path. Because of their deluded minds not yet recognising the erroneous and the correct, they do not understand that when others are right, they simply differ from themselves; they immediately consider themselves right and say others are wrong. Therefore, the minds of deluded people lack the Dharma of the Path; mostly relying on worldly goodness, they falsely cling to finding fault with one another. Thus the Kośa-śāstra says: 'Householders, by grasping at the five sense objects, give rise to disputes with householders; renunciants, by grasping at various views that differ from one another, give rise to disputes with renunciants.' Also the Tattvasiddhi-śāstra says: 'If a person grasps at holding precepts as purity, it is called the fetter of adherence to precepts and vows. Considering that which is grasped as real and all else as falsehood is called the fetter of adherence to views. These two are the root of disputes among renunciants, and they are also called according with the extremes of suffering. Furthermore, relying on this adherence to precepts and vows, one can abandon the eightfold noble path; this is not the right path, not the pure path, and can follow along with the faults of suffering. Furthermore, adherence to precepts and vows is the bondage of renunciants, while the various desires are the bondage of householders. Furthermore, with adherence to precepts and vows, though one practices the renunciant's dharma in various ways, one gains nothing in vain. Furthermore, on account of this adherence to precepts and vows, one can slander the right path and those who practice the right path. Furthermore, adherence to precepts and vows is the source of arrogance for non-Buddhists, who form the thought: "I can surpass others."' Proven by these texts, adherence to precepts and vows and the like are merely worldly goods that incur the fruit of saṃsāra; hence they are called according with suffering, not the true Dharma of the Path. Fools are mostly deluded by them and give rise to offenses through false clinging. Therefore, although the ten drives are all unwholesome, when considering the origin of their obstructing the Path and generating faults, the deluded minds of the six drives are the fundamental root. If one cannot sever them, not only will one fail to escape, but by generating coarse offenses one will inevitably be born into evil destinies. This concludes the clarification of the difficulty and ease in severing the ten drives.