大正蔵検索


punctuation    Hangul    Eng   

Citation style A:
Citation style B:
()
Citation style C:
()
Citation style D:
()
TextNo.
Vol.
Page

  INBUDS
INBUDS(Bibliographic Database)
  Digital Dictionary of Buddhism
電子佛教辭典
パスワードがない場合は「guest」でログインしてください。
Users who do not have a password can log in with the userID "guest".

本文をドラッグして選択するとDDBの見出し語検索結果が表示されます。

Select a portion of the text by dragging your mouse to view all terms in the text contained in the DDB. ・

Password Access Policies

因明大疏抄 (No. 2271_ 藏俊撰 ) in Vol. 68

[First] [Prev+100] [Prev] 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 [Next] [Next+100] [Last] [行番号:/]   [返り点:/] [CITE]

T2271_.68.0712a01: 弟子成。五頂不成。若就離實有有一實
T2271_.68.0712a02: 者。即五頂成。弟子不成。如數論師對佛弟
T2271_.68.0712a03: 宗云。覺惠非思。因云無常。同
T2271_.68.0712a04: 喩云色等。此無常因若就隱顯義釋。即
T2271_.68.0712a05: 數論成。佛法不成。若就生滅義釋。即佛法
T2271_.68.0712a06: 成。數論不成。有隨一過也。答。生滅・隱顯即
T2271_.68.0712a07: 是無常。離此二外無無常義。故就此二
T2271_.68.0712a08: 別不成。即離本非有一實義。約此分別因
T2271_.68.0712a09: 不成。今此但據一實自體不無之義。自他
T2271_.68.0712a10: 倶許名有一實故。此立因無隨一過。若即
T2271_.68.0712a11: 離分別亦是過者。即一切因皆有斯過。何者。
T2271_.68.0712a12: 且如大乘對小乘等宗云。過未體無。立
T2271_.68.0712a13: 因云。現在無爲所不攝故。同喩云。如龜毛
T2271_.68.0712a14: 。如此之因應此過。謂若就識變。現在
T2271_.68.0712a15: 無爲所不攝故。名現在無爲所不攝者。即大
T2271_.68.0712a16: 乘成。小乘不成。若就實有。現在無爲所不
T2271_.68.0712a17: 攝故。名現在無爲所不攝者。即小乘成。大
T2271_.68.0712a18: 乘不成。有隨一過。此既不可。如此分別故。
T2271_.68.0712a19: 即離別此因隨一過云云
T2271_.68.0712a20:   尋云 爾者正義何異有人之義
T2271_.68.0712a21: 纂云。今解。如大有有法何須分別
T2271_.68.0712a22: 是即カト。不隨一
T2271_.68.0712a23:   三十三帖卷首表紙ノウラニ
T2271_.68.0712a24:   梗概 明燈抄云。大旨也。梗柯杏反。直也。略也
T2271_.68.0712a25:   概柯亥反
T2271_.68.0712a26:   明詮噵云。總相而説云云
T2271_.68.0712a27: 廣百論云。世間・自宗。皆許父子業果體異
T2271_.68.0712a28: 而得相生云云因中有果論者之文也
T2271_.68.0712a29: 以上ウラニ
T2271_.68.0712b01: 因明大疏抄卷第三十三
T2271_.68.0712b02:   延寶二年甲寅晩春初二日校正。初一初二日書寫
T2271_.68.0712b03:
T2271_.68.0712b04:
T2271_.68.0712b05: 因明大疏抄卷第三十四(第三十
四 帖
T2271_.68.0712b06:   問。付覺惠非思量。爾者可別以無常
T2271_.68.0712b07: 故因
T2271_.68.0712b08: 纂云。又此有一實因。同異之句 又因亦過。
T2271_.68.0712b09: 法差別相違故○
T2271_.68.0712b10:   今案。九句義私記云。護法菩薩云。不
T2271_.68.0712b11: 別因喩若指現在無爲所不攝故之因
T2271_.68.0712b12: 歟。依之以無常故因分別者。非實義歟。
T2271_.68.0712b13: 能能可案學
T2271_.68.0712b14: 廣百論三云
T2271_.68.0712b15: 明詮三十三過作法云。問。菩薩既分別無常
T2271_.68.0712b16: 性故之因自他隨一過。而物何纂師
T2271_.68.0712b17: 今此云不可分別耶。答。此從昔古徳所
T2271_.68.0712b18: 耳。此未決也云云
T2271_.68.0712b19:   問。以無常故因。可法差別相違過
T2271_.68.0712b20: 云。又因亦過。成法差別相違猶有
T2271_.68.0712b21:   前過。故是似量
T2271_.68.0712b22: 清記云。法差別者。非思是法自相。差別者。
T2271_.68.0712b23: 許除思以外餘心心所並非是思。餘色等
T2271_.68.0712b24: 法亦非是思。是其差別。今言覺惠非思。除
T2271_.68.0712b25: 思以外餘心所故言非思。非是色等言
T2271_.68.0712b26: 也。今作相違量云。覺惠是有法。應
T2271_.68.0712b27: 思以外餘心所法。因云。以無常故。如
T2271_.68.0712b28: 。色等雖無常。色等非心所
T2271_.68.0712b29: 如理記云。言又因亦過至故成相違者。前是
T2271_.68.0712b30: 宗中。今説因過。意説。數論立覺惠非思。無
T2271_.68.0712c01: 常故因。犯法差別相違過。數論成覺惠非
T2271_.68.0712c02: 思。意許餘心心所是思。即色爲異喩。今無
T2271_.68.0712c03: 常故因於色上轉。而無同喩。言設若非爭
T2271_.68.0712c04: 至猶有前過者。意云。若不餘心心所。但
T2271_.68.0712c05: 覺惠非思。亦犯前相符過。此出數論比
T2271_.68.0712c06: 量因宗有過也。如大乘對小乘量。因即
T2271_.68.0712c07: 過。彼此許過去未來非現無爲所攝故。
T2271_.68.0712c08: 共量他量諸無過故
T2271_.68.0712c09:   今勘法差別意許差別三義
T2271_.68.0712c10:   一云。餘心心所之非思。餘色等之非思
T2271_.68.0712c11: 二云。縁慮之非思。不縁慮之非思
T2271_.68.0712c12: 三云。餘心所非思。非心所非思
T2271_.68.0712c13:   尋云。准法差別意許差別者。以同喩色
T2271_.68.0712c14: 意許片差別歟。若爾淄洲大師餘處
T2271_.68.0712c15: 中。不同喩爲片差別之義タリ所謂
T2271_.68.0712c16: 有三卷私記下卷裏書云。平忍大徳九句義
T2271_.68.0712c17: 中。云此差別。覺惠非思者法自相。此下餘心
T2271_.68.0712c18: 所非思・非心所非思法差別云云此正
T2271_.68.0712c19: 云云
T2271_.68.0712c20:   問。纂云。約義爲過。是相違因。不
T2271_.68.0712c21: 難。故非喩過云云意何
T2271_.68.0712c22: 纂云。又云。後三相違既約臥具 豈唯宗過
T2271_.68.0712c23: 而無因過文 亦兼所依不成
T2271_.68.0712c24: 如理記云。言又云後三相違至相違因耶者。
T2271_.68.0712c25: 意云。如法差別相違云。眼等必爲他受用。
T2271_.68.0712c26: 即無同喩。同喩上無所立眞我宗。故異喩亦
T2271_.68.0712c27: 能立不遣也。如後二相違皆成意許離實
T2271_.68.0712c28: 大有。然同異性非是大有。故爲異喩。今將
T2271_.68.0712c29: 同喩者。亦是同喩無所立。異喩犯能立
T2271_.68.0713a01: 不遣也。既尋其意。皆是喩過。如何乃説
T2271_.68.0713a02: 相違因耶。言答至非喩過者。意云。但約
T2271_.68.0713a03: 許義難。故是相違。不言陳難。故非
T2271_.68.0713a04: 喩過。若約意許義難。因皆違所立。故是因
T2271_.68.0713a05: 過也。言今此二喩。即臥具同異性也。言
T2271_.68.0713a06: 有能立不遣非相違過。即如不定因。雖異喩
T2271_.68.0713a07: 能立不遣。然不相違也。故云即不
T2271_.68.0713a08: 定是。言何非喩過。意説。相違因亦得是喩
T2271_.68.0713a09: 。若爾四相違中。何不喩過。但言是因
T2271_.68.0713a10: 耶。答。以四相違解似因體故。所以不
T2271_.68.0713a11: 喩過。其實是喩過。故云非非喩過。如
T2271_.68.0713a12: 中犯所別不成。豈不是因中所依不成過
T2271_.68.0713a13: 耶。道理相例。其義可知。如法差別臥具無
T2271_.68.0713a14: 所立過。臥具既眞我爲異喩。因於彼轉。亦
T2271_.68.0713a15: 是異喩能立不遣過。同異句望大有性
T2271_.68.0713a16: 所立。爲異即能立不遺也。故亦是喩過
T2271_.68.0713a17: 也。如後學者幸披鑒矣
T2271_.68.0713a18:   噵云。此通伏難。難云。若相違因亦是喩
T2271_.68.0713a19: 過。非唯因過者。如何疏云學者知
T2271_.68.0713a20: 因決定非喩過耶。答如云云
T2271_.68.0713a21: 清水注云。非非喩過等者。問。若爾何疏云
T2271_.68.0713a22: 學者知因決定非喩過答。今
T2271_.68.0713a23: 此辨因之處故云云
T2271_.68.0713a24: 疏下文云。論能立法不成至猶如極微。述曰。
T2271_.68.0713a25: 若據合顯。亦是因過。以心心所爲因同法
T2271_.68.0713a26: 無礙因轉。前已明因。今辨喩過。故不
T2271_.68.0713a27:
T2271_.68.0713a28: 明燈抄云。若據合顯亦是因過者。同喩合云。
T2271_.68.0713a29: 諸無質礙見彼是常。據此合文其過者。
T2271_.68.0713b01: 亦是因過。以心心所因同法。以心心所
T2271_.68.0713b02: 體是無常還入異品。無質礙因於彼上轉。
T2271_.68.0713b03: 其無礙因異有同無。故言因過。即是因中法
T2271_.68.0713b04: 自相相違過。故作相違云。聲是無常。無質
T2271_.68.0713b05: 礙故。如心心所。今爲辨喩過。故隱相違因
T2271_.68.0713b06: 。故云前已明因今辨喩過故不言因
T2271_.68.0713b07: 邑記云。疏若據合顯亦是因過者若合云。諸
T2271_.68.0713b08: 無質礙彼是常。即心心所雖無質礙而是無
T2271_.68.0713b09: 常。便爲異喩。因於異轉。即是因中共不定
T2271_.68.0713b10: 過。此明喩過故不
T2271_.68.0713b11:   今案。以此文例。而明燈抄心難思。能
T2271_.68.0713b12: 違可不定故。可
T2271_.68.0713b13: 問。斷云。有人解四相違古人釋云云
T2271_.68.0713b14: 人者誰人*耶。文軌師名古人云云之。
T2271_.68.0713b15: 文軌者三藏門人。可慈恩同時之人
T2271_.68.0713b16: 何云古人
T2271_.68.0713b17: 問。斷云。又叙舊通軌法師疏云云彼疏
T2271_.68.0713b18: 誰人難
T2271_.68.0713b19: 尋云。璧公是文軌之後人也。何通彼師
T2271_.68.0713b20:
T2271_.68.0713b21: 斷云。有人解四相違古人釋。言顯意許
T2271_.68.0713b22: 舊通。如軌法師疏云云
T2271_.68.0713b23: 文軌疏二云。宗有二種。一言顯宗有二。一
T2271_.68.0713b24: 法自相。如無常等。二有法自相。如聲等。二
T2271_.68.0713b25: 意許宗亦二。一法差別。謂於前法自相言宗
T2271_.68.0713b26: 之上自意許。如大乘唯識所變無常等
T2271_.68.0713b27: 二有法差別。謂於前有法自相言宗之上
T2271_.68.0713b28: 自意許。如大乘無漏聲等。問。如大乘識變
T2271_.68.0713b29: 聲等是差別。何故不説。答。識變聲等是
T2271_.68.0713c01: 有法自相。以大乘唯許聲從識變。無
T2271_.68.0713c02: 故也。其識變無常該色等。故是法差別。
T2271_.68.0713c03: 此則言中彰者爲自相。言中不彰意含許者
T2271_.68.0713c04: 差別。非色聲等法體爲自相常無
T2271_.68.0713c05: 等爲差別云云
T2271_.68.0713c06: 下文云。問。有性即實・離實異。唯違離實有
T2271_.68.0713c07: 自相。亦應必爲他用含眞假。唯
T2271_.68.0713c08: 眞他用自相因。答。五頂立有唯離
T2271_.68.0713c09: 實。此有若也成有。實等不無宗即無。故
T2271_.68.0713c10: 自相差別。數論他用通眞假。眞他受
T2271_.68.0713c11: 用義雖眼等。他用宗不失故。違差別
T2271_.68.0713c12: 自相
T2271_.68.0713c13:   本説私記云。慈恩三藏分歸數資於兩
T2271_.68.0713c14: 。即文軌・靖邁師等令三論。弘道・光
T2271_.68.0713c15: 法師等令唯識也。今三論興是爲
T2271_.68.0713c16: 。故從所歸古人耳。非人是古
T2271_.68.0713c17: 云云
T2271_.68.0713c18: 貞松房云。雖文軌與慈恩同時人。而所
T2271_.68.0713c19: 以云古人者。蓋以文軌疏先出。慈恩疏
T2271_.68.0713c20: 後述。然以先出名爲古人也。故邑云。莊
T2271_.68.0713c21: 嚴法師創
T2271_.68.0713c22: 問。付有法自相相違。爾者能違作法如何」
T2271_.68.0713c23: 斷云○本立宗云。有性爲宗有法 成
T2271_.68.0713c24: 故。不是自違
T2271_.68.0713c25:   尋云。若如此文者。可他比量歟。若爾
T2271_.68.0713c26: 論文所説皆共違共之文*耶
T2271_.68.0713c27: 祕一云
T2271_.68.0713c28:   問。有法有性可即離*耶
T2271_.68.0713c29: 斷云。又難。若云。數論他用含眞假
T2271_.68.0714a01: 他。倶不
T2271_.68.0714a02: 下文云。又五頂若許即實等有。今總成
T2271_.68.0714a03: 實等。豈非自違。故知五頂不即實等
T2271_.68.0714a04:
T2271_.68.0714a05:   尋云。樸陽處處之中。有性含即離 如
T2271_.68.0714a06:
T2271_.68.0714a07: 私記云 延長三年五月二十二日。請山階北室下階
T2271_.68.0714a08:  大師御傳。而同年十一月十日。遭火災
T2271_.68.0714a09:  失。仍於神野山寺改寫了。云云
T2271_.68.0714a10: 共許有性奄トモ離實即實。五頂立有性非
T2271_.68.0714a11: 實等時。但唯離實有。而非奄含有。故爲
T2271_.68.0714a12: 此云有性非有性時唯離實有被難。不
T2271_.68.0714a13: 即實有不失。故云有法自相相違。不
T2271_.68.0714a14: 差別相違
T2271_.68.0714a15: 又云。問云。有性非實徳業時。擧トモ奄含有
T2271_.68.0714a16: 實徳業離實有。離實有而非
T2271_.68.0714a17: 者。何處有有云即離共許有耶。答。此
T2271_.68.0714a18: 有法擧有性。云即離共許有也。問。爾何
T2271_.68.0714a19: 即離耶。答。其意含即離共許有。
T2271_.68.0714a20: 若立離實有時。成離實有。若立即實有時。
T2271_.68.0714a21: 即實有。故有法擧共許有。云有性非
T2271_.68.0714a22: 徳業時。偏成離實有。故云不即離也。
T2271_.68.0714a23: 問。若云奄含有擧有法之時。猶例他用量
T2271_.68.0714a24: 差別相違耶。答。斷下文通此云。離
T2271_.68.0714a25: 有。雖是意許。言有之時。即言所顯。離
T2271_.68.0714a26: 所顯有外更無別有。不他用離眞他
T2271_.68.0714a27: 假他用。眞他他雖成。假他他自同
T2271_.68.0714a28: 許故。成眞他不用眼等。假他用在不
T2271_.68.0714a29: 。故差別云云
T2271_.68.0714b01:   如下抄之。可
T2271_.68.0714b02:   五頂爲立者之事
T2271_.68.0714b03: 噵云。本疏以勝論立者。以五頂
T2271_.68.0714b04: 。而斷家所以五頂爲立者弟子爲敵者
T2271_.68.0714b05: 文軌・璧公。隨轉所破人爾也。若不
T2271_.68.0714b06: 爾者。能破所破不相似故。條者披文難致
T2271_.68.0714b07: 惑之
T2271_.68.0714b08: 斷私記云。此云五頂者勝論也云云
T2271_.68.0714b09:   問。師主意以同異性有耶
T2271_.68.0714b10: 斷云。以同異性離實等。得非實等
T2271_.68.0714b11: 相違。諸過類知
T2271_.68.0714b12:   所立不成歟
T2271_.68.0714b13: 又尋云。如此文者。可共比。豈不
T2271_.68.0714b14: 上文*耶
T2271_.68.0714b15: 問。斷云。此解不古徳意云心何
T2271_.68.0714b16: 斷云。三解自相差別。第三云隨應意所
T2271_.68.0714b17: 諍者名差別云云
T2271_.68.0714b18:   尋云。古徳心。以言顯自相。意許爲
T2271_.68.0714b19: 。璧公不言陳意許對何云違耶
T2271_.68.0714b20: 噵云。總相不本疏言也。然其判意與
T2271_.68.0714b21: 懸隔也。具如下破之。本疏意云。以言顯
T2271_.68.0714b22: 自相。以意許差別也。汴公異此故
T2271_.68.0714b23: 也。可云云
T2271_.68.0714b24: 又云。又釋云。此解不違者。汴公第三重不
T2271_.68.0714b25: 體義對言也。言古徳意云者。古徳第三
T2271_.68.0714b26: 重意者。言陳爲自。意許爲別。汝第三重雖
T2271_.68.0714b27: 局通對。而違言陳意許對。故汝初重
T2271_.68.0714b28: 第三重義無差別。問。以何知汴公初重
T2271_.68.0714b29: 是體義耶。答。下云。初二如云云
T2271_.68.0714c01: 又云。第三重意云。諸法自體爲自性。其上別
T2271_.68.0714c02: 義爲差別。此自性差別在於法與有法
T2271_.68.0714c03: 若在法上法自相・法差別。若在有法上
T2271_.68.0714c04: 有法自相・有法差別。但辨自性差別。雖
T2271_.68.0714c05: 本疏。而法有法有自體別義者。違
T2271_.68.0714c06: 疏義。故斷主非
T2271_.68.0714c07:   尋云。自相相違量有意許之事。可尋學
T2271_.68.0714c08:
T2271_.68.0714c09: 斷下文云。又釋自性差別三重若即聲
T2271_.68.0714c10: 等體上別義。不各有云云
T2271_.68.0714c11: 又云。若云。依第三解。以法有法各有自體
T2271_.68.0714c12: 不遷不滅等即名別義云云
T2271_.68.0714c13:   噵云。別立有爲相。不無爲相故也云云
T2271_.68.0714c14: 尋云。二相應齊難
T2271_.68.0714c15: 延義大徳私記云。文以爭彼差別必非言顯
T2271_.68.0714c16: 云云問。此文意何。答。釋此文下。周記有
T2271_.68.0714c17: 問答也。問。其問答何。答。記云。如上有法差
T2271_.68.0714c18: 別相違爲別立量。而爲差別。爲當自性。意
T2271_.68.0714c19: 許中作大有有縁性・作非有縁性即名差別
T2271_.68.0714c20: 答。設爾何失。二倶有云云問。其倶有失之
T2271_.68.0714c21: 意何。答。云此記出二不可也。問。其二不可
T2271_.68.0714c22: 者何。答。文云。若別立量名差別。何故論中
T2271_.68.0714c23: 其法。而但指己。即於前宗差別等
T2271_.68.0714c24: 既別立量即是言顯。何得唯是意許。故
T2271_.68.0714c25: 知不可是一不可若立自相意所許即名
T2271_.68.0714c26: 。有相例失。其法差別。而是差別。即別立
T2271_.68.0714c27: 量而差別。有法差別。何即不然。故亦不
T2271_.68.0714c28: 是二不可此二不可意。然可尋知之。問。爾
T2271_.68.0714c29: 此二不可何通。答。記次文云。今有二解云云
T2271_.68.0715a01: 問。其二解何。答。一云。不別立量。二云。亦別
T2271_.68.0715a02: 量也。問。此二解意何。答。文云。不別立
T2271_.68.0715a03: 量。如有法自相已者。是正所立意中。兼
T2271_.68.0715a04: 作有縁性即名差別。何故如是耶。凡差
T2271_.68.0715a05: 別者。非言顯故。又復論中不作法故。豈無
T2271_.68.0715a06: 相例。答。亦不例。法差別過。其法自相因等
T2271_.68.0715a07: 者各別。故別立量。有法差別。即取前因
T2271_.68.0715a08: 差別。故不量。二云。亦別立量。論不
T2271_.68.0715a09: 擧者。影略故。亦擧法差別此有法差別
T2271_.68.0715a10: 立量。何成意許。若亦成意許。如量言
T2271_.68.0715a11: 作有縁性。有性之言含於即實。意成離實有
T2271_.68.0715a12: 縁性故。亦非言顯也。問。有法自相・有法差
T2271_.68.0715a13: 別。一因違前得自相時。兼許必多差別。假
T2271_.68.0715a14: 令立量。若有一因成法自相及法差別。立
T2271_.68.0715a15: 自相時兼許之者。即得名爲法差別不。答。
T2271_.68.0715a16: 有法等。許亦無失。然二解中。後解爲
T2271_.68.0715a17: 云云清記云。以爭彼差別必非言陳者。此清含
T2271_.68.0715a18: 量答難清也。難云。若言即於此法所有別
T2271_.68.0715a19: 名云差別。不古徳者。唯此差別不
T2271_.68.0715a20: 言顯。即與古相違。何得而相違也。
T2271_.68.0715a21: 清難也。斷主答。今正所諍差別必非言顯
T2271_.68.0715a22: 唯意許故云云自相亦有意許。通言顯
T2271_.68.0715a23: 故之意何。答。清云。不自相上有意許等
T2271_.68.0715a24: 者。言中前陳後陳自相。亦各有意許故。疏
T2271_.68.0715a25: 意通言顯故。差別亦有言陳意許。言陳唯
T2271_.68.0715a26: 一差別。意許有二差別云云問。云爾意何歟。
T2271_.68.0715a27:
T2271_.68.0715a28: 喜多院私記云。今云。記意約論所陳量。既
T2271_.68.0715a29: 影略説故。有法自相有法差別作法作
T2271_.68.0715b01: 物者。如應師等所判。是各別違作法也。若
T2271_.68.0715b02: 一量備二意二過者。如本疏所判。違
T2271_.68.0715b03: 之中一量也。約法自相法差別。亦論所説各
T2271_.68.0715b04: 別違。約此眼等必爲他用量。多師無諍。若
T2271_.68.0715b05: 有性量法自相法差別相並有作法
T2271_.68.0715b06: 者。別作法可出故。本傳未理致云云
T2271_.68.0715b07:   以此私記意智周記
T2271_.68.0715b08:   問。斷云。此問元非。有縁性是別義等云云
T2271_.68.0715b09:
T2271_.68.0715b10: 斷云。又云。相違有三。一自體相違豈離
T2271_.68.0715b11: 外有別體
T2271_.68.0715b12:   尋云
T2271_.68.0715b13: 今案。璧公問元ヨリ非也。何者。義別相違名
T2271_.68.0715b14: 差別相違。其義別相違非意許差別。此即
T2271_.68.0715b15: 差別之本ヨリナルモ之義也。又作有縁性・作
T2271_.68.0715b16: 非有縁性者。是義之相違也。而定是自體
T2271_.68.0715b17: 了。是又元非也。元ヨリ是致問之。
T2271_.68.0715b18: 故云此問元非也。汎爾不問從非不
T2271_.68.0715b19: 起也。仍元字可其深意
T2271_.68.0715b20: 問。作大有有縁者。大有與大有能縁
T2271_.68.0715b21: 境界性云歟。爾也。付之。若爾如何
T2271_.68.0715b22: 疏云
T2271_.68.0715b23: 斷云。然自解云。不然。若言非作有縁性
T2271_.68.0715b24: 有法之上別義云云
T2271_.68.0715b25:   問。斷云。又更解云。或可。不自違等文
T2271_.68.0715b26: 心何
T2271_.68.0715b27: 斷云。又更解云。或可。不自違。縁有之心
T2271_.68.0715b28: 餘之義心不失耶云云
T2271_.68.0715b29:   問。斷云。又解三相違中。第三性別相違等
T2271_.68.0715c01: 云云意何
T2271_.68.0715c02: 斷云。又解三相違中。第三性別相違與
T2271_.68.0715c03: 自體相違何別
T2271_.68.0715c04:   尋云。自體相違如常非常等。性別相違如
T2271_.68.0715c05: 色心等云云其名既別。其義不同。如
T2271_.68.0715c06: 何云
T2271_.68.0715c07: 噵云。性別相違・自體相違。名義無別。言
T2271_.68.0715c08: 無別者。自體與自性何差別。體性二法
T2271_.68.0715c09: 名無異故。言義無別者。且約我體。或計
T2271_.68.0715c10: 常。或計我爲無常。若以之爲自體相違
T2271_.68.0715c11: 者。亦可或計我爲色。或計我爲心。應
T2271_.68.0715c12: 是自體相違。有何別因。以常無常自體
T2271_.68.0715c13: 相違。以色心性別相違。是名義無別
T2271_.68.0715c14: 問。何故不形對相違餘二此問難
T2271_.68.0715c15: *耶。答。形對相違與餘義別無違害。又以
T2271_.68.0715c16: 三相違四相違宗。以自相自體相違
T2271_.68.0715c17: 差別形對相違。若性別相違異自體
T2271_.68.0715c18: 相違者。自性差別之外。更以何物爲性別
T2271_.68.0715c19: 相違。又言詮有二。遮詮與表詮也。以遮詮
T2271_.68.0715c20: 自體相違。以表詮爲形待相違。若性別
T2271_.68.0715c21: 相違異自體相違者。遮詮・表詮之外。更有
T2271_.68.0715c22: 何物性別相違。故可唯二種相違。不
T2271_.68.0715c23: 三相違。爲文約。雖此。而其
T2271_.68.0715c24: 義散在。不求之
T2271_.68.0715c25: 倶舍論二十云。許體恒有性非常。如
T2271_.68.0715c26: 義言所曾有。依是義故。有頌言。許
T2271_.68.0715c27: 法體恒有。而説性非常。性體復無別。此眞
T2271_.68.0715c28: 自在作
T2271_.68.0715c29: 慧日論三云。又通三十五諍論云教有三。一
T2271_.68.0716a01: 始終無二教。二隨機不定教。三後説決定教。
T2271_.68.0716a02: 此判爲三。理必不爾。何者。始終無二與
T2271_.68.0716a03: 決定。二教何別等文
T2271_.68.0716a04: 延義私記云。意彼師所解之三相違中。第三
T2271_.68.0716a05: 性別相違。如色心等云云即性者是心自性。
T2271_.68.0716a06: 別者色心差別。又約自體相違。如常無
T2271_.68.0716a07: 常等云云此即色心等之常無常。離色心等
T2271_.68.0716a08: 亦有何常無常*耶。若爾性別相違與
T2271_.68.0716a09: 體相違。有何差別言也云云
T2271_.68.0716a10: 光記十一云
T2271_.68.0716a11:   問。斷云。非之與無義相似故云云心何
T2271_.68.0716a12: 問。斷云。如非有非無非人非天等文
T2271_.68.0716a13:
T2271_.68.0716a14: 問。斷云。既許無常亦遮亦表等文意何
T2271_.68.0716a15: 問。斷云。有表必遮詮。有遮非表詮
T2271_.68.0716a16:
T2271_.68.0716a17: 斷云。又云。一遮詮。如有非 有
T2271_.68.0716a18: 遮非表詮云云
T2271_.68.0716a19:   尋云。璧公心。無我無常唯遮非若爾
T2271_.68.0716a20: 既許無常亦遮亦表之文。誰人之義而爲
T2271_.68.0716a21: 耶。況論中破邪命外道計云。亦遮亦
T2271_.68.0716a22: 表。應互相違此破心。遮表不
T2271_.68.0716a23: タリ如何
T2271_.68.0716a24: 燈三云。舊倶舍無爲非因果者。錯翻
T2271_.68.0716a25: 以爲非字。若言非者。即不是六因五果
T2271_.68.0716a26: 他宗自許六因之内爲作因。五果之中
T2271_.68.0716a27: 是離繋果。今言無因果者。雖能作因。無
T2271_.68.0716a28: 取與果用故。無有力能令生。故云無果
T2271_.68.0716a29: 等文
T2271_.68.0716b01:   准此文。無之與非。其義異也。如何
T2271_.68.0716b02: 問。斷云。此與唯識亦有相違云云意何
T2271_.68.0716b03: 斷云。又釋云。若但言非有非無
T2271_.68.0716b04: 雙非。故相違也云云
T2271_.68.0716b05: 噵云。佛地第一。如實義者。云如來身土非
T2271_.68.0716b06: 有非無。是遮前師云有。云無之計也。既雙
T2271_.68.0716b07: 非有非無。唯遮非表。何得但言非有
T2271_.68.0716b08: 非無即唯是遮耶。難意如是。答。意
T2271_.68.0716b09: 云。雙言非有非無。非唯是遮。亦顯是表。何
T2271_.68.0716b10: 以知之。般若等經言非空非有者。是表
T2271_.68.0716b11: 也。以知佛地意顯佛徳中道云云
T2271_.68.0716b12:   尋云。見論文云。若唯是表。應雙非
T2271_.68.0716b13: 意云。唯表非遮。可雙非。明知雙非具
T2271_.68.0716b14: 遮表也。若爾返叶璧公之證文。如何
T2271_.68.0716b15: 清記云。若但言非有至故相違也者。此斷主
T2271_.68.0716b16: 難意。若言唯非有即是遮者。何故自引
T2271_.68.0716b17: 地經如來功徳非有非無。方是遮也。即與
T2271_.68.0716b18: 唯非有是遮義相違。即自引般若佛地
T2271_.68.0716b19: 云。雙言非有非無方具遮表。雖是説。彼
T2271_.68.0716b20: 唯識論文。進退有失。進具遮表即違
T2271_.68.0716b21: 。退唯非有即違佛地
T2271_.68.0716b22: 憲記云。言通云般若雙言方有其表者。意
T2271_.68.0716b23: 般若經佛地等。彼經亦説非有非無
T2271_.68.0716b24: 是表詮也
T2271_.68.0716b25:   今案。依璧公意。述雙非之言二義
T2271_.68.0716b26: 若依清記意。可云雙非之言遮表並具
T2271_.68.0716b27: 若准憲意。可唯表也。若依後義意
T2271_.68.0716b28: 若唯是表。應雙非之文。如何故云
T2271_.68.0716b29: 遮故不文*耶。若依前記者。非有非
T2271_.68.0716c01: 無之言雖表義。雙非之邊皆遮詮也。既
T2271_.68.0716c02: 雙非。豈表詮*耶。故唯識疏云。雙非之
T2271_.68.0716c03: 表故。如石女無兒無女。雙無之言無
T2271_.68.0716c04: 所表
T2271_.68.0716c05:   此義頗闇。尚可審定
T2271_.68.0716c06: 延義私記云。問。此記文意何。答。彼師可
T2271_.68.0716c07: 擬若但云非有。不非無。即是遮義者。
T2271_.68.0716c08: 但言非有而不非無之文證。
T2271_.68.0716c09: 而何引佛地論如來功徳非有非無之文
T2271_.68.0716c10: 證*耶。即自般若經證佛地論。雙言方有
T2271_.68.0716c11: 其表是亦遮。爲自害文。若雙言非有非無
T2271_.68.0716c12: 是具遮表者。何唯識論。若言是表。應
T2271_.68.0716c13: 云云故進退有難言也云云
T2271_.68.0716c14:   問。斷云。但詮不無有。此有相符 爾者
T2271_.68.0716c15: 此過付能違量歟。付所違量
T2271_.68.0716c16: 斷云又云。今但約自體相違自相相違
T2271_.68.0716c17: 如何得言顯
T2271_.68.0716c18:   尋云
T2271_.68.0716c19: 問。斷云。又云。二細微共生一麁等文心何
T2271_.68.0716c20: 斷云。又云。二細微共生一麁唯識論
T2271_.68.0716c21:
T2271_.68.0716c22: 論一云。若謂果因體相受入。如沙受水藥
T2271_.68.0716c23: 鎔銅
T2271_.68.0716c24:   問。斷云。云何但許五知。不用餘
T2271_.68.0716c25: 心何
T2271_.68.0716c26: 斷云。釋法差別相違中。自云。同無異有
T2271_.68.0716c27: 用餘。故此釋非云云
T2271_.68.0716c28:   尋云。今立敵相對所諍受用者。約親用
T2271_.68.0716c29: 説。論文云。二十三諦者約疎用説。豈成
T2271_.68.0717a01: 相違*耶。依之莊嚴法師疏中
T2271_.68.0717a02: 記私記云。問。此難意何。答。既論神我受
T2271_.68.0717a03: 用二十三諦云云而何言宗以外諸臥具
T2271_.68.0717a04: 等皆不無積聚他用言也。問。爾臥具等
T2271_.68.0717a05: 亦約實我所用者。何同喩臥具等望意許
T2271_.68.0717a06: 宗爲異品。答。其臥具等非神我受用勝
T2271_.68.0717a07: 物。望眼等爲神我他用勝之意許宗。自爲
T2271_.68.0717a08: 異品言也。問。此文在軌法師疏中。而何云
T2271_.68.0717a09: 璧公之文。答。其軌正文如何。問。彼疏解
T2271_.68.0717a10: 差別相違中云。問。同無異有。方此相違。今
T2271_.68.0717a11: 此所立積聚性故因。既於他用臥具等有。
T2271_.68.0717a12: 非他用龜毛遍無。是即此因應正攝。具
T2271_.68.0717a13: 三相故。猶如因。答乃至宗以外諸臥具等。
T2271_.68.0717a14: 皆不無積聚他用。無同品故。是同品無。
T2271_.68.0717a15: 臥具等即是異品。此積聚因於中有故。是異
T2271_.68.0717a16: 品有等云云此答中有二釋之中。第二釋也。
T2271_.68.0717a17: 既顯然有此文。而何云璧公文。答。此文雖
T2271_.68.0717a18: 斷主所引載之文。斷師所破璧法師文
T2271_.68.0717a19: 也。問。何以知爾。答。斷云。又釋法差別相違
T2271_.68.0717a20: 中。問云。同無異有方是相違相等云云既上
T2271_.68.0717a21: 法師文已。指次文云云是處非
T2271_.68.0717a22: 他師文。例甚明也。問。非破軌師而已。既文
T2271_.68.0717a23: 義相似。豈不所破*耶。答。甚然。軌師疏
T2271_.68.0717a24: 意又有成之樣也。問。何成耶。軌師案
T2271_.68.0717a25: 論計云。神我不親受用臥具等也。問。若爾
T2271_.68.0717a26: 唯識論。既云我是思。受用二十三法
T2271_.68.0717a27: 云云答。其論意。神我以所思義。受用二十三
T2271_.68.0717a28: 言也。故論文執我是思。受用等云云今因
T2271_.68.0717a29: 明門中。數論與佛法相對所諍。正諍所受
T2271_.68.0717b01: 用義。故彼論云。今據親用故。臥具等同喩
T2271_.68.0717b02: 極成云云所思量故。展轉受用之義。非立敵
T2271_.68.0717b03: 相對所諍。非因所成。非意所諍。何爲所論
T2271_.68.0717b04: 乎。故彼師自嘆云。此釋應因明玄旨。幸
T2271_.68.0717b05: 有識者詳云云
T2271_.68.0717b06:   問。斷云。既違意許。應是差別。何名自相
T2271_.68.0717b07: 云云心何
T2271_.68.0717b08: 又方問。斷云。今共詳云云云意何
T2271_.68.0717b09: 斷云。解有法自相中云。有人云。既違
T2271_.68.0717b10: 意所許差別宗云云
T2271_.68.0717b11:   已上璧公引文軌師義
T2271_.68.0717b12: 文軌疏二云。問。夫同異品望宗法立。其有
T2271_.68.0717b13: 一實等因。既於同品同異性有。於其異品
T2271_.68.0717b14: 龜毛遍無。何故此中入約有法相違過
T2271_.68.0717b15: 答。此所立因雖三相。違自許故。成相違
T2271_.68.0717b16: 。又釋宗言有性者。此即意詮實等
T2271_.68.0717b17: 有性有法宗。雖此宗云有性即是離
T2271_.68.0717b18: 實等。今望此宗同異品。其同異句即
T2271_.68.0717b19: 是異品。此所立因唯異品有。故是相違。問。既
T2271_.68.0717b20: 意許。應是差別。何故名有法自相。答。
T2271_.68.0717b21: 今言有性者。意詮實等有爲有法自
T2271_.68.0717b22: 。然以有法須極成故。不例云
T2271_.68.0717b23: 有故。雖意許而是言顯爲自相宗。不
T2271_.68.0717b24: 作有縁性是離實等差別之義。爲意所
T2271_.68.0717b25: 許差別宗也。此二釋應勝。餘義可法差
T2271_.68.0717b26: 別中云云
T2271_.68.0717b27: 延義傳云。問。且此有性量。何爲異品歟。答。
T2271_.68.0717b28: 既於異品龜毛遍無云云問。若爾何故上文。
T2271_.68.0717b29: 此中略無異品。別之應若是實徳業者。
T2271_.68.0717c01: 即非有一實有徳業實句等云云耶。
T2271_.68.0717c02: 答。彼望非實等宗。實句等皆爲異品。又龜
T2271_.68.0717c03: 毛等是無法者者。不本爲異品言也
T2271_.68.0717c04:
T2271_.68.0717c05: 斷云。難云。此解不然。若以今言有性
T2271_.68.0717c06: 相差別者未當理上他叙難云云
T2271_.68.0717c07:   以上璧公難文軌師
T2271_.68.0717c08: 延義記云。汴法師引莊嚴疏而難也。問。若
T2271_.68.0717c09: 爾何記云。難云等者。是斷家難云云答。此記
T2271_.68.0717c10: 誤也。既斷注云。上他叙難云云
T2271_.68.0717c11:   璧公心。自性差別不言陳意許對
T2271_.68.0717c12: 之事。以此斷文之也
T2271_.68.0717c13:   尋云。爾者此等義如何破之耶
T2271_.68.0717c14: 斷云。今共詳云。若彼大有意許 若非言所
T2271_.68.0717c15: 。何故尋言難云云殘文如下抄
T2271_.68.0717c16: 延義記云。次云。今共詳云云云此則上引
T2271_.68.0717c17: 師文故。云今詳云云云
T2271_.68.0717c18: 噵云。軌公不言立大有故成所破。然而
T2271_.68.0717c19: 大義同本疏故。斷家救云云
T2271_.68.0717c20:   有法有性共許之事
T2271_.68.0717c21: 斷云。又五頂不即實等有。弟子不
T2271_.68.0717c22: 假他用在不言顯。故違差別
T2271_.68.0717c23:   尋云。有法有性非即實離實。以共許
T2271_.68.0717c24: 有性有法也。他用言顯亦非眞他用
T2271_.68.0717c25: 假他用。自他共許他用也。若爾其義可
T2271_.68.0717c26: 同。如何令彼此別*耶。又言顯共許有性
T2271_.68.0717c27: 之外。有別離實有性。如何云離實等雖
T2271_.68.0717c28: 是意許。言有之時即言所顯
T2271_.68.0717c29: 私記云。文若直言大有○故得爲宗者。此斷
T2271_.68.0718a01: 主述自意也。意。有法有性大有性
T2271_.68.0718a02: 許詞而擧。更不別即實離實。以
T2271_.68.0718a03: 實等即實有。以爲宗也。問。爾斷主有
T2271_.68.0718a04: 法有性不奄含有耶。答。云奄含有
T2271_.68.0718a05: 事不止也。問。爾云何云大有性爲共許
T2271_.68.0718a06: 而擧耶。答。其意。有法自相相違與有法
T2271_.68.0718a07: 差別。約此二有法有性別。約有法自相
T2271_.68.0718a08: 相違。有法所擧有性奄含有。此有法有性見
T2271_.68.0718a09: 離實大有。云有性非有性。有法差別相違。
T2271_.68.0718a10: 言顯奄含有。而難意許作有縁性。所
T2271_.68.0718a11: 以斷主意云奄含有*止言也。文由此故
T2271_.68.0718a12: 知○故違差別者。意。意許大有性即言顯
T2271_.68.0718a13: 有。故是云自相相違。約必爲他用宗。言顯
T2271_.68.0718a14: 他用共許他用。意許他用非共許。假他
T2271_.68.0718a15: 用此共許。故此能違量云眼等假他用時。其
T2271_.68.0718a16: 假他用替處。不言顯自相。故此云差別
T2271_.68.0718a17: 相違。所以云此有法自相相違。不
T2271_.68.0718a18: 差別相違
T2271_.68.0718a19:   問。斷云。勝論但云同異是實等性。不
T2271_.68.0718a20: 有故爾者斷主破璧公義歟。爲當璧公
T2271_.68.0718a21: 文軌師
T2271_.68.0718a22: 斷云。解有一實因云云トモ一可
T2271_.68.0718a23: 是實等性。不有故
T2271_.68.0718a24: 私記云。問。下文解有一實因○答。林記云。
T2271_.68.0718a25: 此璧法師破軌法師之詞也云云問。何破。答。
T2271_.68.0718a26: 其弟子破師主。有性非有性立時。同異性
T2271_.68.0718a27: 實等。及彼能有性。故有非有。有實等
T2271_.68.0718a28: 故。如同異性立。其軌法師釋事。依
T2271_.68.0718a29: 道理云事。若爾云時。其能違量有不定過
T2271_.68.0718b01: 故不能違量。所以知所釋無道理言也。
T2271_.68.0718b02: 問。爾其不定過有方何。答。爲シハ同異性
T2271_.68.0718b03: 一實等故。有性是非有性。爲シハ實等
T2271_.68.0718b04: 一實故。有性是有性也。問。文勝論但云
T2271_.68.0718b05: ○不云有故者。此文意何。答。此璧法師正破
T2271_.68.0718b06: 前軌法師義也。意。勝論同異性但云
T2271_.68.0718b07: 等同異之性。不有。而物何同異性
T2271_.68.0718b08: 實等故。有實等故因能云轉遍。爲能違
T2271_.68.0718b09: 同品言也
T2271_.68.0718b10: 周記云。以同異性含於實等者。此意即説。有
T2271_.68.0718b11: 實爲因。擧同異性而爲喩者。以同異性能
T2271_.68.0718b12: 實等。以虚空容受一切。餘可准知此本疏
T2271_.68.0718b13: 義璧牒爲非 文
T2271_.68.0718b14: 憲記云。如破他立至不云有故者。此叙他破
T2271_.68.0718b15: 本疏義也。若爾何故斷主而無救處。故
T2271_.68.0718b16: 此義猶未盡理
T2271_.68.0718b17: 清記云。如破他立以同異性含於實等者。汴
T2271_.68.0718b18: 法師意者。有一實因於同異轉者。爲同異
T2271_.68.0718b19: 性苞含實等。今此實等有同爲異。由此有
T2271_.68.0718b20: 一實因於彼遍轉。故知此義猶未盡理
T2271_.68.0718b21: 林記云。解有一實因等者。璧法師破軌法師
T2271_.68.0718b22:
T2271_.68.0718b23: 延義記云。文解有一實因廣事云云無一可取
T2271_.68.0718b24: 者。林記云。璧法師破軌法師云云問。其廣
T2271_.68.0718b25: 云云意何。答。軌師疏中廣説有一實因。今
T2271_.68.0718b26: 之詞也。然而彼軌疏説有一實因文。與
T2271_.68.0718b27: 本疏同。故含法師之詞尤不足也。問。軌疏
T2271_.68.0718b28: 如何説有一實因。答。彼疏云。有及同異有
T2271_.68.0718b29: 一切實。一一實上有大有同異句含。故説
T2271_.68.0718c01: 有等有一實。縱有子孫麁微。亦名有一
T2271_.68.0718c02: 云云文如破他立○不云有故者。記云。
T2271_.68.0718c03: 此本疏義璧牒爲云云問。若爾何憲記云
T2271_.68.0718c04: 如破他立至不云有故者。此叙他破本疏義
T2271_.68.0718c05: 也。若爾何故斷主而無救處。故知此義猶未
T2271_.68.0718c06: 盡理云云歟。答。其雖此不救。而牒集諸
T2271_.68.0718c07: 不正義。一被而難而已。問。爾璧法師文有
T2271_.68.0718c08: 道理。答。可何道理*耶。但同異性體雖
T2271_.68.0718c09: 不無。而不有。其不無義爲能有共許故。
T2271_.68.0718c10: 有一實也。既論有性非實。有一實故。如
T2271_.68.0718c11: 同異性云云而何偏可有乎
T2271_.68.0718c12: 私記云。文解有一實○無一可取者。此斷主
T2271_.68.0718c13: 言也。意。今此處所破義。説有一實因。雖
T2271_.68.0718c14: 云云多。一無取爲言也。文如破他立○
T2271_.68.0718c15: 出何典據者。憲師此述他破本疏義云云
T2271_.68.0718c16: 意云。次文云勝論但云同異是實等性。不
T2271_.68.0718c17: 有故
T2271_.68.0718c18:   今案。若依智周并古徳意。是璧公破
T2271_.68.0718c19: 也。若准貞松房・子嶋等義者。斷主
T2271_.68.0718c20: 璧公也。爾者二義之中。可何義
T2271_.68.0718c21: *耶。若如前義者。解有一實因廣事云云
T2271_.68.0718c22: 一可取者。總斷主破璧公義也。如破他立
T2271_.68.0718c23: 乃至有實等者。牒璧公義也。出何典據云
T2271_.68.0718c24: 下。斷主破璧公義也。不爾何處破白公
T2271_.68.0718c25: 。亦何處救本疏義*耶。況本疏心。云
T2271_.68.0718c26: 一實。不名有實等。既云名有實等。尤
T2271_.68.0718c27: 本疏心。若如後義者。諸徳傳如何
T2271_.68.0718c28: 之耶。況同異性實等性之義。豈非
T2271_.68.0718c29: 有一實義*耶。故疏云。皆有同異令三有
T2271_.68.0719a01: 別。名有一實如何。雖二義。然*貞
T2271_.68.0719a02: 松房傳似穩便。可
T2271_.68.0719a03: 問。斷云。此從何聞耶云云誰人難何義
T2271_.68.0719a04: *耶
T2271_.68.0719a05: 斷云。又自云。戒賢師解。應實故
T2271_.68.0719a06: 禹何因漫談
T2271_.68.0719a07: 私記云。言游夏者。子游・子夏二人名也。即
T2271_.68.0719a08: 孔子弟子也。言張禹者。前漢時賢臣名也。
T2271_.68.0719a09: 意。固可實。今加一字有一實トイフハ者。
T2271_.68.0719a10: 此義不爾。何者。往古賢人。皆共云有實。不
T2271_.68.0719a11: 有一實。今輒加一字傳有一實云事。甚
T2271_.68.0719a12: 不可云也云云
T2271_.68.0719a13: 延義記云。文又自云漫談者。是其不正義也。
T2271_.68.0719a14: 若直言有實故不言有一實故者。有多許
T2271_.68.0719a15: 之失因者是璧法師詞云云戒賢師者。
T2271_.68.0719a16: 是古師也。記云。游夏者。子游・子夏二人。
T2271_.68.0719a17: 孔子之親資也。言張禹者。先漢時大宅之名
T2271_.68.0719a18: 云云大宅者。大臣之名也云云
T2271_.68.0719a19:   今案。依諸徳意者。璧公破文軌義。子嶋
T2271_.68.0719a20: 等心。斷主破白公義也。然勘文軌并疏
T2271_.68.0719a21: 。全無一云有實故之釋。准此可
T2271_.68.0719a22: 松房傳
T2271_.68.0719a23:
T2271_.68.0719a24: 斷云。未此釋。虚空不同法處
T2271_.68.0719a25:
T2271_.68.0719a26:   尋云。此釋云虚空法處攝歟。若爾識變四
T2271_.68.0719a27: 蘊。依如無爲太虚空。非法數。今云法處
T2271_.68.0719a28: 何處*耶
T2271_.68.0719a29: 本ノヲクニ
T2271_.68.0719b01: 涅槃經興疏十八
T2271_.68.0719b02:   無諍者。即無學位中大羅漢。縁欲界迷
T2271_.68.0719b03: 事煩惱將令世俗智。名無諍定。對
T2271_.68.0719b04: 法論中。唯云靜慮。即知通四禪。智云
T2271_.68.0719b05: 四禪。欲界者。蓋隨他宗而兼方便云云
T2271_.68.0719b06: 三十四卷首ノ表紙ノウラニ
T2271_.68.0719b07: 有記云。纂主本諱惠玄。爲三藏改爲
T2271_.68.0719b08: 云云
T2271_.68.0719b09: 淨眼師
T2271_.68.0719b10: 斷私記云。沼法師本名玄也。而却崇於三
T2271_.68.0719b11: 改成沼也云云
T2271_.68.0719b12:   以上表紙ノウラ
T2271_.68.0719b13: 因明大疏抄卷第三十四
T2271_.68.0719b14:   延寶二年甲寅三月三四書寫。初五上午校正
T2271_.68.0719b15: 寫本云。文字不審多之。大旨任本了。後見可
T2271_.68.0719b16: 之云
T2271_.68.0719b17:
T2271_.68.0719b18:
T2271_.68.0719b19: 因明大疏抄卷第三十五(第三十
五 帖
T2271_.68.0719b20:   問。有一實因可不定過
T2271_.68.0719b21: 斷云。問。若取有二實等因不分別
T2271_.68.0719b22: 但云有一實等
T2271_.68.0719b23:   尋云
T2271_.68.0719b24: 私記云。問。共許有云有一實。可此不定
T2271_.68.0719b25: 言歟。答。不爾。共許有非實徳業。而奄含離
T2271_.68.0719b26: 實即實有。奄含有故共許有云有一實時。
T2271_.68.0719b27: 無此不定
T2271_.68.0719b28:   問。斷云。何故不無實・二實・多實。耶
T2271_.68.0719b29: 誰問耶
T2271_.68.0719c01: 斷云。又問云。何故不無實二實多實耶。
T2271_.68.0719c02: 古人簡云何分師弟。二倶爾故
T2271_.68.0719c03:   尋云。准此文。斷主心。有二實爲因之時。
T2271_.68.0719c04: 兩倶不成歟。若爾違疏文
T2271_.68.0719c05: 又但自有故者。實徳業上能非無性。一一
T2271_.68.0719c06: 自有云歟。若爾可即實有性。依之可
T2271_.68.0719c07: 即實有性一一別有。非互有餘。共許
T2271_.68.0719c08: 有性通有一一實。如何云但自有故
T2271_.68.0719c09: 疏抄
T2271_.68.0719c10: 問。實等上能非無性有和合句云事。師弟
T2271_.68.0719c11: 之耶爾也。付
T2271_.68.0719c12: 斷云。若云和合句義既和合實等云得
T2271_.68.0719c13: 師不成。弟子得
T2271_.68.0719c14:   尋云。若共許有性有和合句義者。如何
T2271_.68.0719c15: 無實因有不定過
T2271_.68.0719c16: 又和合句義
T2271_.68.0719c17: 問。斷云。不有二實爲因不心何
T2271_.68.0719c18: 斷云。又本簡云。若云二多實因。有
T2271_.68.0719c19: 故應本簡過成
T2271_.68.0719c20:   尋云。璧法師引文軌疏難也。何擧慈恩
T2271_.68.0719c21: 而破之耶
T2271_.68.0719c22: 文軌疏二云。若以無實及有二實以爲
T2271_.68.0719c23: 者。便有兩倶不成過失故。此不言無實及
T2271_.68.0719c24: 有二實也。若以有多實因者。若依前解
T2271_.68.0719c25: 不定過。以其孫微能有多實體是實故。
T2271_.68.0719c26: 若依後解。有不成過。故亦不有多實
T2271_.68.0719c27:
T2271_.68.0719c28: 上文云。問。彼散極微及時方等。皆爲大有同
T2271_.68.0719c29: 異句含。何不即同含麁微時及同子孫微名
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 
Footnote:
 

[First] [Prev+100] [Prev] 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 [Next] [Next+100] [Last] [行番号:/]   [返り点:/] [CITE]