大正蔵検索 INBUDS
|
阿毘達磨倶舍論法義 (No. 2251_ 快道撰 ) in Vol. 64 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE]
T2251_.64.0262a01: 但云梵天未辨初禪三天差別。彼經自元 T2251_.64.0262a02: 如是故。今依分明義
T2251_.64.0262a05: 體無有妨。故正理論以十二攝三藏。然今
T2251_.64.0262a08: 顯釋文義。是名法施。若雜心論主。約合門
T2251_.64.0262a11: 法施。有人云。光記各有據。竝存者未精。梵 T2251_.64.0262a12: 本據十二分彼舊論明。況正理云等餘十 T2251_.64.0262a13: 一廣釋。何可交三藏義。又寶疏辨法施法 T2251_.64.0262a14: 供養別。其意斥光記依集異門足法供養文。 T2251_.64.0262a15: 今詳。法施法供養互有寛狹。然但能者意樂 T2251_.64.0262a16: 受者意樂差別。不關法門物。故婆沙二十九
T2251_.64.0262a19: 若爲饒益故爲他説法。他聞法已不生未 T2251_.64.0262a20: 曾有善巧覺慧。如是名施不名供養。若爲 T2251_.64.0262a21: 損害故説譏剌他法。他聞是已住正憶念 T2251_.64.0262a22: 歡喜忍受。不數其過生未曾有善巧覺慧。 T2251_.64.0262a23: 此雖非施而名供養。若爲損害故説譏剌 T2251_.64.0262a24: 他法。他聞是已發恚恨心不生未曾有善
T2251_.64.0262a27: 非據法財。若爾以集異門法供養經律論 T2251_.64.0262a28: 爲法施。亦無有害
T2251_.64.0262b02: 三分帶數釋。順是能順。三分之順故名順三 T2251_.64.0262b03: 分依主釋。此業即善名順三分善持業釋。
T2251_.64.0262b06: 安足處故名爲根。準彼善言應屬所順。答。 T2251_.64.0262b07: 善根名隨處不定。今定能順。論言此善生已 T2251_.64.0262b08: 等故
T2251_.64.0262b11: 不同。後合初二。今云。後二非也。違下論二
T2251_.64.0262b14: 分。故下論云見道一分決擇之分故舊論十
T2251_.64.0262b21: 種子能生人中高族大貴。多饒財寶。眷屬圓 T2251_.64.0262b22: 滿。顔貌端嚴。身體細軟。乃至或作轉輪聖 T2251_.64.0262b23: 王。生天種子者。謂此種子能生欲色無色天 T2251_.64.0262b24: 中受勝妙果。或作帝釋魔王梵王。有大威 T2251_.64.0262b25: 勢。多所統領。順解脱分善根者。謂種決定 T2251_.64.0262b26: 解脱種子。因此決定得涅槃果。順決擇分 T2251_.64.0262b27: 善根者。謂煖頂忍世第一法。準此分是因 T2251_.64.0262b28: 義。順是引生義。資益義。順生益於決擇四 T2251_.64.0262b29: 諦之因種故名順決擇分
T2251_.64.0262c03: 發者。隨應能發彼三種業心心所法。即受 T2251_.64.0262c04: 想行識四種蘊。并者兼會義。三業各兼之 T2251_.64.0262c05: 故。上兩句總擧體。言如次等者。書印二倶 T2251_.64.0262c06: 身業竝能發。算文二倶語業竝能發。數一意 T2251_.64.0262c07: 業竝能發。如是五種爲二二一之三。如次 T2251_.64.0262c08: 配身語意三業。其能發三皆取之故言如 T2251_.64.0262c09: 次。此五種。舊論曰。字。印。算量。文章。數。婆沙 T2251_.64.0262c10: 云書。數。算。印。詩
T2251_.64.0262c13: 求故。不障解脱道故。然論略者。以諸準 T2251_.64.0262c14: 釋當了知。故是勸思惟 T2251_.64.0262c15: 寛政二戌正月二十日至二月五日夜子 T2251_.64.0262c16: 時記此卷了 T2251_.64.0262c17: 阿毘達磨倶舍論法義卷第十八終 T2251_.64.0262c18: T2251_.64.0262c19: T2251_.64.0262c20: T2251_.64.0262c21: T2251_.64.0262c22: 豐山寓居上毛沙門快道林常記 T2251_.64.0262c23: 隨眠品第五之一
T2251_.64.0263a07: 眠義。湛惠云。光記亦順此論者非也。如下 T2251_.64.0263a08: 具記
T2251_.64.0263a11: 由惑所以。後問隨眠體數。光記來由及總分 T2251_.64.0263a12: 科爲是。而頌前分文未具。又寶疏隨眠本故 T2251_.64.0263a13: 對未。光云約勝。義同也。光約初者。寶云 T2251_.64.0263a14: 品初。義終同也。又寶總分文中。開義門分 T2251_.64.0263a15: 別。及五蓋二科爲大莭非也。此頌前文。次 T2251_.64.0263a16: 頌文。長行竝同雜心。但彼約七隨眠爲異 T2251_.64.0263a17: 而已
T2251_.64.0263a21: 根本。五中業與有相違釋。故正理曰。能發 T2251_.64.0263a22: 業有。發起能招後有業。欲顯於發有遠 T2251_.64.0263a23: 近標云業有。於釋云招有業。光持業義非 T2251_.64.0263a24: 也。六中正理云攝資糧。與具義同。故舊論 T2251_.64.0263a25: 云。圓滿自資糧。八中舊論云引將識相續。 T2251_.64.0263a26: 此即引後染識等流相續。十中寶初釋。界爲
T2251_.64.0263a29: 所依中無堪任性故。五憎背功徳。性相能 T2251_.64.0263b01: 違諸功徳故。六爲厭訶本發智所。厭訶 T2251_.64.0263b02: 身語意業故。八擁解脱路。棄背親近正説 T2251_.64.0263b03: 者故。十二植衆苦種。能生一切生死苦故。 T2251_.64.0263b04: 十六攝世非愛諸增上果。因此外物皆衰變 T2251_.64.0263b05: 故
T2251_.64.0263b08: 法勝。甘露味等諸論中。未見有六隨眠説。
T2251_.64.0263b13: 者。欲貪有貪體同故合以爲六。是顯論主略 T2251_.64.0263b14: 説。故言略應知。顯無經説。次問何縁經説 T2251_.64.0263b15: 七而會相違。問。何故如是次第。答。準經七 T2251_.64.0263b16: 隨眠次故。而疑前有見爲分差別。謂見疑 T2251_.64.0263b17: 唯分別。餘四種通二故。若大乘諸論。列次。
T2251_.64.0263b22: 欲者。顯餘惑與欲同由境界隨眠故。此義
T2251_.64.0263b25: 等亦由貪力於境隨增。謂契經言因愛生 T2251_.64.0263b26: 恚。如瞋由貪力於境隨增。慢等亦由貪故 T2251_.64.0263b27: 復言亦。此釋無理。非文意故。謂此本爲標 T2251_.64.0263b28: 數列名。不明此因彼於境隨增義。今詳。 T2251_.64.0263b29: 亦字爲滿句言。若必欲令此有別義。更爲 T2251_.64.0263c01: 方便作無過釋。謂瞋如貪雖有多類。而 T2251_.64.0263c02: 可總説爲一隨眠。慢等亦然故復言亦。或 T2251_.64.0263c03: 此爲顯如貪與瞋行相不同。是故別立。如
T2251_.64.0263c07: 親造。頌作者兼含此意説亦聲。何云非文 T2251_.64.0263c08: 意。又爲滿句者。此不可許。前後頌置與幷 T2251_.64.0263c09: 及。或置二及以滿足句。更無以亦故。又多 T2251_.64.0263c10: 數爲一者。此亦應非文意。爲標數列名故 T2251_.64.0263c11: 招自言違失。亦復一向不顯彼此義。若許 T2251_.64.0263c12: 此義不可許彼義。彼此異因不可得。亦復 T2251_.64.0263c13: 貪瞋連列。則瞋由貪隨增既顯。何用多類爲 T2251_.64.0263c14: 一義爲。又約行相同不同不可然。以行相 T2251_.64.0263c15: 異故別立。例行相同法。豈有此理。故論主 T2251_.64.0263c16: 判爲勝處矣
T2251_.64.0263c29: 親已前造論。悉約七未見六使説也
T2251_.64.0264a03: 名體。謂有貪標名。上二界者出體。準此欲 T2251_.64.0264a04: 界貪名欲貪自成。故不別顯。後二句叙有
T2251_.64.0264a07: 未盡。但言名異故。又就欲貪不別説兩 T2251_.64.0264a08: 解。初釋爲是。順下論故。後釋非也。又下二 T2251_.64.0264a09: 句約名不名遮表未可也。寶疏釋初二句 T2251_.64.0264a10: 爲是而云。第三句釋有貪。第四句釋立有 T2251_.64.0264a11: 因者非也。但是於上界別立之二因。如下
T2251_.64.0264a15: 決擇名體。此即初二也。此七中初二唯欲界。 T2251_.64.0264a16: 後五通上界。故二貪中間説瞋惑以顯差 T2251_.64.0264a17: 別
T2251_.64.0264a20: 法勝。婆沙等論以分文得義。應無誤。雜心
T2251_.64.0264a23: 相應。育多婆提欲令相應。於此有疑。答。
T2251_.64.0264a26: 相應。是故生疑。答曰。決定相應。何以故 T2251_.64.0264a27: 爲心作煩惱 障礙淨相違 T2251_.64.0264a28: 諸妙善可得 故非不相應 T2251_.64.0264a29: 爲心作煩惱者。若使イヽ決定不相應者。不 T2251_.64.0264b01: 應爲心作煩惱。應如色等境界。然爲心 T2251_.64.0264b02: 作煩惱。如説貪欲穢心。以此言故當知 T2251_.64.0264b03: 相應。障礙者。若使イヽ心不相應者。善智生時 T2251_.64.0264b04: 不應障礙。應如虚空不作障礙。今爲障 T2251_.64.0264b05: 礙故知相應。淨相違者。若使イヽ與心不相應 T2251_.64.0264b06: 者。使應與善不相違。不相違故則應非 T2251_.64.0264b07: 過。然爲過故當知相違。若相違者故知相 T2251_.64.0264b08: 應。諸妙善可得者。若汝使與善相違。心取 T2251_.64.0264b09: 相應者。使恆相續。於中善應不能得起。現 T2251_.64.0264b10: 見善法能得起故。是故諸使非不相應是
T2251_.64.0264b13: 二叙有部義。三經部能破。四論主讃取經部。 T2251_.64.0264b14: 此即初門也。此中。之即言顯依主持業。初 T2251_.64.0264b15: 關於持業出違教過。既云幷隨眠斷。幷斷 T2251_.64.0264b16: 所顯。貪與隨眠別體明白。後關於依主出 T2251_.64.0264b17: 二過。一應體是不相應。言與貪別體故。若
T2251_.64.0264b26: 説。答。此中於得立隨眠名。得隨眠故説名 T2251_.64.0264b27: 隨眠。豈不違經者。爲通前經設外人徴。 T2251_.64.0264b28: 光記爲大衆部非也。如火等者。地獄火。天
T2251_.64.0264c04: 所立故。以諸至終。即法勝師順成及質文。 T2251_.64.0264c05: 如前引之。初標三因。次如次釋三因。後結 T2251_.64.0264c06: 成。光記三釋。第一各配義爲正。後二非也。 T2251_.64.0264c07: 不順綴文故。不會理致故。違乖法勝故。
T2251_.64.0264c10: 能爲障故。與善相違故。由心爲隨眠惑所 T2251_.64.0264c11: 染汚。未生善不得生。已生善亦退故。初二
T2251_.64.0264c15: 又文言不殊者。是疎略。力能與以諸故互
T2251_.64.0264c20: 於其要句標釋同
T2251_.64.0264c23: 此三義不執爲隨眠所作。但是上心所作。 T2251_.64.0264c24: 準舊論文。是經部師計度大衆部意。以破 T2251_.64.0264c25: 有部故言若許者。由是今文雖云隨眠非
T2251_.64.0264c28: 叙法勝説。後斥此。言此皆非證等故。彼論
T2251_.64.0265a03: 部所立破之。故云非相應。非言但遮有部 T2251_.64.0265a04: 相應。非表自是不相應。故舊論云不與心 T2251_.64.0265a05: 相應。不言有最上。是唯遮他。不爾應言與 T2251_.64.0265a06: 心不相應。正理不言若寫誤。牒此論故。若 T2251_.64.0265a07: 不非通用也。然光記。寶疏爲大衆部者非 T2251_.64.0265a08: 也。不順若許者故。違舊論故。又此論隨眠 T2251_.64.0265a09: 所爲下。脱二句八字。謂但許三事是纒所
T2251_.64.0265a24: 後。次更加定智。後更增五識相應。此三竝
T2251_.64.0265a29: 所。故言證智倶起念。加釋倶起念三字。此 T2251_.64.0265b01: 有疑。通釋有二釋。初但約智與念二前後 T2251_.64.0265b02: 各有。次總約一聚落。兩釋竝約强勝。大科 T2251_.64.0265b03: 第二解異長途。總心心所記持境皆通爲
T2251_.64.0265b08: 立十大地法。有念慧別。光初二釋皆此意。 T2251_.64.0265b09: 依前二師。如第二義。通一切名智名念。 T2251_.64.0265b10: 念智是假法故。寶疏同光約念智別中第二 T2251_.64.0265b11: 釋。今詳曰。經部設不立念智體。今對大衆 T2251_.64.0265b12: 部故。且許此引共許喩。由此光記初二釋 T2251_.64.0265b13: 爲勝。後釋大異通途。而前後行相各別。亦 T2251_.64.0265b14: 不免前後不同難。問。何以知證智言顯倶
T2251_.64.0265b17: 可知。問。彼正理出所立法不成過文。故言 T2251_.64.0265b18: 喩於法相去極遥何耶。答。彼以有部意顯 T2251_.64.0265b19: 他所立法不成。然今對大衆部。無別體共 T2251_.64.0265b20: 許喩。無有相違。故以念種反難大衆部。又 T2251_.64.0265b21: 設對有部。何得有失。汝言差別功能彼自 T2251_.64.0265b22: 體倶生。然無離前後念體別有彼功能體
T2251_.64.0265c01: 言。若觸樂受便生歡悅慶慰耽著堅執而 T2251_.64.0265c02: 住。即於樂受有貪隨眠。此中隨眠聲即説
T2251_.64.0265c05: 於諸五欲生樂受觸受五欲樂。受五欲樂 T2251_.64.0265c06: 故爲貪使所使
T2251_.64.0265c09: 有二。初釋第二句。二釋下二句。就釋第二 T2251_.64.0265c10: 句亦有二。初牒前。釋有貪二字示名。兼 T2251_.64.0265c11: 擧欲貪名爲準顯基本。後此中下。釋上二
T2251_.64.0265c14: 有三。初正釋下二句示二因。二此中下別 T2251_.64.0265c15: 釋有名。三由此下總結。初中有二。初釋第 T2251_.64.0265c16: 三句。二釋第四句。於初有標釋結。於後有 T2251_.64.0265c17: 標釋
T2251_.64.0265c22: 想定。此唯異生。得聖者如見深坑。初因總 T2251_.64.0265c23: 上界定。後因別第四禪無想定。又解。總於二 T2251_.64.0265c24: 界執。故正理論曰。於色無色起解脱想。入
T2251_.64.0266a02: 求解脱。於一切有不應希求。經主於斯復
T2251_.64.0266a05: 内門而轉。又説有人。於色無色生身有境 T2251_.64.0266a06: 起解脱想。則爲已説定。及生身皆得有名。 T2251_.64.0266a07: 倶自體故。詳經主釋義イイ不異前。但構浮
T2251_.64.0266a10: 生。是故別説有貪。今謂。此二段有差別。一 T2251_.64.0266a11: 離合異。謂上別爲二因。下合爲自體。二義 T2251_.64.0266a12: 有隱顯。謂上有爲自體未顯著。故更顯此。 T2251_.64.0266a13: 三爲合本説更作斯釋。故言故説等。勿妄 T2251_.64.0266a14: 破斥。今詳正理釋未盡。於一切有不可 T2251_.64.0266a15: 希求者。何得通三有釋此
T2251_.64.0266a19: 論有十隨眠名。今按。彼論中無有如今十
T2251_.64.0266a22: 曰。此中欲界異生。聖者幾隨眠隨增。幾結繫 T2251_.64.0266a23: 耶。答。異生九十八隨眠隨增。九結繫。聖者十 T2251_.64.0266a24: 隨眠隨增。六結繫。問。若爾出何論。答。於發 T2251_.64.0266a25: 智。六足。婆沙等中。未見五利五鈍立爲十
T2251_.64.0266a28: 殘闕。又施設論乎。現流殘缺故不可知之。 T2251_.64.0266a29: 又推尋九十八本原則是五鈍五利。不據 T2251_.64.0266b01: 五鈍利不得成數。故知義イイ容有。況諸論
T2251_.64.0266b12: 乖而意存求宗。故言選擇。所受非道。故言
T2251_.64.0266b15: 顯前三見行相勝。後取行相勝。如具下辨
T2251_.64.0266b20: 唯心心所縁境作用。行相者。有二種。一影 T2251_.64.0266b21: 像名行相。二行解名行相。若依小乘其影 T2251_.64.0266b22: 像無有別體。不離心等即能縁攝。依大 T2251_.64.0266b23: 乘者。有別法爲所縁境。此等分別如光記
T2251_.64.0266c03: 應言十種。何云六耶。答。顯隔段置又言。 T2251_.64.0266c04: 由是正理。顯宗云。如前所説六種隨眠。然 T2251_.64.0266c05: 舊論曰。復次此十隨眠惑。於阿毘達磨藏中 T2251_.64.0266c06: 更立爲九十八。彼十言似誤而未必爾。何 T2251_.64.0266c07: 者彼長行及頌其綴文大別。蓋梵本異。故彼 T2251_.64.0266c08: 長行初亦云是所説十惑等。於最後有今 T2251_.64.0266c09: 頌初二句義也。而大義二論無妨。何故標
T2251_.64.0266c19: 釋次四句明欲界三十六。第三色無下。釋 T2251_.64.0266c20: 後二句明上界六十二。第四由是下總結本 T2251_.64.0266c21: 論開九十八意通疑難。第五於此下。明九 T2251_.64.0266c22: 十八見修斷。就第一中初總釋。謂於下別 T2251_.64.0266c23: 釋。此有二。初釋行別。後即此下釋部界別。 T2251_.64.0266c24: 亦有總別。初總釋。部謂下別釋。此中有部 T2251_.64.0266c25: 界二文。就第二中大有五段。一正示三十 T2251_.64.0266c26: 六。二前三下見修分別。三如是下重辨十惑 T2251_.64.0266c27: 五部通局。四此中下明五部斷相。五如是下 T2251_.64.0266c28: 約六惑明三十六。就初正明三十六有 T2251_.64.0266c29: 三。初示五部各自數。初總釋。後別釋。正釋 T2251_.64.0267a01: 第三第四句。二即上下明十惑具闕。初總 T2251_.64.0267a02: 判。正釋第五六句。後謂見下別釋。三如是下 T2251_.64.0267a03: 結數
T2251_.64.0267a06: 是已顯
T2251_.64.0267a09: 相。而答文未盡理。何者夫五部惑中有二。 T2251_.64.0267a10: 一迷理。二迷事。貪瞋癡慢四是迷事惑。餘六
T2251_.64.0267a14: 縁理而縁縁彼惑故爲重迷。邪見。疑。獨頭 T2251_.64.0267a15: 無明。是親迷諦理故是親迷。身見邊見二取 T2251_.64.0267a16: 四通二種。然世親言縁見此所斷爲境故。 T2251_.64.0267a17: 唯顯重迷惑未顯親迷惑。謂親迷惑應但 T2251_.64.0267a18: 言見此所斷。不可言縁彼見此所斷惑爲
T2251_.64.0267a21: 若下身邊等縁集等爲境。則亦應言集所
T2251_.64.0267a24: 縁見此諦所斷。不縁彼可斷法無漏縁惑。
T2251_.64.0267a27: 言。但縁見此爲境。二縁見此所斷爲境。 T2251_.64.0267a28: 所難法皆初攝故。此論盡理。正理誤解文。唯 T2251_.64.0267a29: 約一邊。此論重複讀之常事。如彼根品明 T2251_.64.0267b01: 二十二根界繫。頌曰欲。色。無色繫。如次除 T2251_.64.0267b02: 後三兼女。男。憂。苦。幷餘色。喜。樂。正理師亦 T2251_.64.0267b03: 是如是也。寶疏意。此斷相唯約後四煩惱。 T2251_.64.0267b04: 此中言指餘貪等已下。是與光別。由是全 T2251_.64.0267b05: 如文得意故唯局四惑重縁。故言縁見此 T2251_.64.0267b06: 所斷爲境無有妨。然正理師。混科節。通 T2251_.64.0267b07: 十惑以致難。豈非誤解論。次破光記意加 T2251_.64.0267b08: 文救故。對正理任文解却非也。猶其救義 T2251_.64.0267b09: 未盡。他界縁惑失攝在故。圓暉評光寶曰。 T2251_.64.0267b10: 此中者。光法師解云。此十隨眠中也。寶法師 T2251_.64.0267b11: 云。此論前文。將五見疑配四諦竟後。言餘 T2251_.64.0267b12: 貪等四各通五部。則有此問故知。此中者
T2251_.64.0267b15: 舊論故。有人亦依光。而寶疏破言加字非 T2251_.64.0267b16: 也。唯是重複讀文。非加字。餘義如湛惠。 T2251_.64.0267b17: 又有別立一解。取光寶兩師意云。如是已 T2251_.64.0267b18: 顯下爲起問結上。已顯起盡如是。應科 T2251_.64.0267b19: 結前問起。問起通十惑。答中重迷惑。別 T2251_.64.0267b20: 斷相難知故殊答之。以影親迷惑。是文見 T2251_.64.0267b21: 相。雖然巧見文兼有重複義。然正理難全 T2251_.64.0267b22: 不當矣。今詳。諸註皆未精。須依同本異譯
T2251_.64.0267b27: 所斷。縁者由也。如處處問中。云何縁。是譯 T2251_.64.0267b28: 異耳。非縁慮義。此者。指苦集等各自。舊云 T2251_.64.0267b29: 彼。言異義同。所斷者。是親迷惑。爲境者。謂 T2251_.64.0267c01: 彼見此所斷爲境也。故舊論云能縁彼。然 T2251_.64.0267c02: 正理師不分句。依主意解文致破。豈得可 T2251_.64.0267c03: 當。光師救釋義イイ雖通不順文。何者於長 T2251_.64.0267c04: 行。無如是致除不除讀文。如頌者。從本 T2251_.64.0267c05: 勘故人皆諾之。長行散説。何有此理。又違 T2251_.64.0267c06: 舊論。汝以令爲境言不通兩處故。若見此 T2251_.64.0267c07: 言通所斷與爲境二種。應有如是讀。而 T2251_.64.0267c08: 有除中間得義乎。寶疏逼難妄分文。全 T2251_.64.0267c09: 非論意。此一章悉約十隨眠三十六。何唯 T2251_.64.0267c10: 據四。復前段通十惑無何簡別。無由得 T2251_.64.0267c11: 唯四解。復唯約四辨此。其益何詮。若唯四
T2251_.64.0267c14: 曉開。何以科節可爲反質。明知此十中。湛 T2251_.64.0267c15: 公開舊論可稱。光釋全順舊論者未精。其 T2251_.64.0267c16: 餘義非。思可知。問。梵本如舊論者。正理師 T2251_.64.0267c17: 不可致難。然就梵本有此難何。答。舊論 T2251_.64.0267c18: 明有及言。蓋正理師所覽梵本脱及。梵言脱 T2251_.64.0267c19: 遮一字。若有之無難故。梵本有脱誤等以
T2251_.64.0267c25: 本同衆賢所覽耶。若與舊論同然見正理 T2251_.64.0267c26: 所牒破斥譯場改之。若依文得義。今文難 T2251_.64.0267c27: 通解。若依義見文。今本有何難解。復若欲 T2251_.64.0267c28: 令論主盡理者。直依文亦義明。所謂文隨 T2251_.64.0267c29: 執見隱。義逐機根顯而已。古人有言。以言 T2251_.64.0268a01: 不害志。彼衆賢常欲報怨。終至此如是。
T2251_.64.0268a15: 十八見所斷等。此見修所斷爲定爾耶不爾
T2251_.64.0268a19: 智所害故。次有約界不約地之問答廣決
T2251_.64.0268a22: 後有汝所引結前生後。彼上廣論九十八是 T2251_.64.0268a23: 應本經説。結此云已辯隨眠本所説義。又 T2251_.64.0268a24: 指前已分別九十八見修門以生起後。云 T2251_.64.0268a25: 前説八十八見等。若開彼文。不足勞言耳。
T2251_.64.0268b04: 八十八等。如今論。無隔文故云如是見修 T2251_.64.0268b05: 等。如何以彼等可爲證。還成自害。上具 T2251_.64.0268b06: 就九十八分別見修文。全同今故。又於上 T2251_.64.0268b07: 三十六已分別見修。於總九十八何可不 T2251_.64.0268b08: 分別。故爲別科。順理會正顯。最爲善釋。況
T2251_.64.0268b11: 則見道斷。頌疏曰。論云。前八十八名見所 T2251_.64.0268b12: 斷。忍所害故。後十名修所斷。忍所害故。彼 T2251_.64.0268b13: 準前三十六見修分別文。謂脱前名後名 T2251_.64.0268b14: 字。而不成句私加四字。此釋全無智。前云 T2251_.64.0268b15: 十七七八四。故指以分前後。今見修惑交雜。 T2251_.64.0268b16: 謂欲界十七七八四。色界九六六七三。無色 T2251_.64.0268b17: 亦九六六七三。以如是雜不指前後。故正 T2251_.64.0268b18: 理。顯宗亦全如今文。是十字句法。勿謂必 T2251_.64.0268b19: 四字句而字脱
T2251_.64.0268b24: 國字爲致疑乎。蓋誤不作爾。終作爾乎。光
T2251_.64.0268b27: 何偈曰。正理亦通。有耶言故
T2251_.64.0268c01: 定。何見諦惑亦名修所斷。解云。據所迷法 T2251_.64.0268c02: 八十八種名見惑。十種名修惑。今約惑斷 T2251_.64.0268c03: 雖見惑亦名修所。由數習智所斷故。非
T2251_.64.0268c11: 擇滅。故説無過
T2251_.64.0268c14: 光記分伏與斷。而修斷伏非斷者。此釋不 T2251_.64.0268c15: 聞。何以不伏與斷。得顯伏而非斷。舊論
T2251_.64.0269a06: 見其證足故。然舊論標大業經名擧今梵網 T2251_.64.0269a07: 文。無叙今大業經文及梵網經名者。蓋脱 T2251_.64.0269a08: 落。於大業經中不説六十二見故
T2251_.64.0269a11: 定。起隨眠惑故無過。論主意在有部。故 T2251_.64.0269a12: 標有餘師而以有部通經證由是理。正理
T2251_.64.0269a15: 別也
T2251_.64.0269a19: 計我我所。於勝義中無我我所。如人見繩 T2251_.64.0269a20: 謂是蛇。見杌謂是人等。此亦如是。故無 T2251_.64.0269a21: 所縁。爲止彼執。顯示此見實有所縁故 T2251_.64.0269a22: 作是論。問。於勝義中無我我所。云何此見 T2251_.64.0269a23: 實有所縁。答。薩迦耶見縁五取蘊計我我 T2251_.64.0269a24: 所如縁繩杌謂是蛇人。行相顚倒非無所
T2251_.64.0269a27: 爲身見。於無我中而取我相故名爲見。述
T2251_.64.0269b01: 身是聚義。即聚集假。應言縁聚身起見名 T2251_.64.0269b02: 僞身。佛遮當來薩婆多等執爲有身見者 T2251_.64.0269b03: 故説虚僞言。雖一薩言亦目於有。然今説 T2251_.64.0269b04: 是思誕提底薩義。故薩言表僞。薩婆多言。薩 T2251_.64.0269b05: 是有義。迦耶等如前。雖是聚身而是實有。 T2251_.64.0269b06: 身者自體之異名。應言自體見。佛遮當來 T2251_.64.0269b07: 經部師等説。爲僞身見者故説薩有言。雖 T2251_.64.0269b08: 一薩言亦目於僞。今言應言阿悉提底薩 T2251_.64.0269b09: 義。故薩言表有。大乘應言僧吃爛底薩。便 T2251_.64.0269b10: 成移轉。由是薩迦耶見大小別説。薩婆多 T2251_.64.0269b11: 名有身見。經部名虚僞身見。今大乘意。心 T2251_.64.0269b12: 上所現似我之相。體非實有。是假法故也。 T2251_.64.0269b13: 又體非全無。依他起性成所縁縁故。既非 T2251_.64.0269b14: 實有亦非虚僞。唯是依他移轉之法。我之所
T2251_.64.0269b17: 利瑟底。此云我見。梵云薩迦耶。此云不實 T2251_.64.0269b18: 移轉身見。即攝我所
T2251_.64.0269b22: 者。不可界外説處。又應不説有漏亦説 T2251_.64.0269b23: 取蘊。又不應壞苦説。無苦是不壞故
T2251_.64.0269b26: 耶之見境第七依主。然有人。經部第五囀。從 T2251_.64.0269b27: 常一想起此見故者。是何謂乎。凡於六釋 T2251_.64.0269b28: 而論囀聲。必不離能所合以論能所差別。 T2251_.64.0269b29: 今薩迦之見依主。所依薩迦。能依爲見。然汝 T2251_.64.0269c01: 不薩迦耶爲所差別。別以常一想添加。成 T2251_.64.0269c02: 所別爲第五囀。豈有此理。今經部意。亦縁 T2251_.64.0269c03: 薩迦耶起此見。故必境第七。故成實論云。
T2251_.64.0269c08: 陰見我。等隨觀見句。光記致六解。何猶預
T2251_.64.0269c11: 在色中。受想行識亦爾。五蘊各四故有二 T2251_.64.0269c12: 十。本事經五曰。彼隨觀見色即是我。品類足
T2251_.64.0269c15: 應均等觀見色是我等。故言等隨觀見。於 T2251_.64.0269c16: 光六解中。第二似近理。而抱猶豫。於彼竝 T2251_.64.0269c17: 非也。有人第一約佛等觀見爲善者妄陋 T2251_.64.0269c18: 矣
T2251_.64.0269c25: 見。四復次此執。二邊行相轉故名邊執見。初 T2251_.64.0269c26: 釋邊之執。邊執即見。後三釋執即邊。邊執即 T2251_.64.0269c27: 見。兩重持業釋
T2251_.64.0270a01: 以
T2251_.64.0270a07: 何故但名見取耶。答。此因諸見通取五蘊。
T2251_.64.0270a22: 天因。此初也。非世間等二句通上三。舊論 T2251_.64.0270a23: 曰。如摩醯首羅非世間因彼觀爲因。世主 T2251_.64.0270a24: 天等餘諸物亦爾。生主者。光記兩釋。初生世 T2251_.64.0270a25: 間主主之生依主。後主爲天主。能生即天主 T2251_.64.0270a26: 持業釋。今云。準舊論云世主天。生者諸世 T2251_.64.0270a27: 間生法。是所生。生之主故名生主。言餘者。
T2251_.64.0270b01: 夫。時。方。空等生諸法故。如農夫秋收多 T2251_.64.0270b02: 實便作是言。私多末度天等所與。若生男 T2251_.64.0270b03: 女復作是言。是難陀等天神所與。若信自 T2251_.64.0270b04: 在者便作是言。毘瑟拏天矩陛羅等天神所 T2251_.64.0270b05: 與。如是等類非因計因
T2251_.64.0270b09: 三池中浴。由此便得淨脱出離至苦樂邊。 T2251_.64.0270b10: 此非因計因戒禁取見苦所斷
T2251_.64.0270b14: 鹿狗戒。露形戒等。由此便得淨脱出離至 T2251_.64.0270b15: 苦樂邊。此非因計因戒禁取見苦所斷。禁者。 T2251_.64.0270b16: 有諸外道。起此見立此論。諸補特伽羅受 T2251_.64.0270b17: 持烏禁。鵂鶹禁。默然禁等。由此便得淨脱 T2251_.64.0270b18: 出離至苦樂邊。此非因計因戒禁取見苦所 T2251_.64.0270b19: 斷。此約事別以分戒禁。而於釋名是持業 T2251_.64.0270b20: 釋。故於戒禁竝言戒禁。然光記。戒爲佛法
T2251_.64.0270b23: 道。何故相違。答。此有通別。通言之皆是非 T2251_.64.0270b24: 因計因。若差別言非涅槃之因爲非因計因。 T2251_.64.0270b25: 計涅槃因爲非道計道。彼依通。此約別。竝
T2251_.64.0270b29: 種邪行非生天因。妄執爲因名第一道。唯受 T2251_.64.0270c01: 持戒禁性士夫智等非解脱因。妄執爲因 T2251_.64.0270c02: 名第二道彼生天因屬道。何相違。解云。彼 T2251_.64.0270c03: 約生因縁因分之。謂自在等非世間能生 T2251_.64.0270c04: 因爲因。故投水火等非是生天縁因。由是 T2251_.64.0270c05: 分計因計道。於道約涅槃非涅槃亦分二。
T2251_.64.0270c09: 生道。若執爲涅槃道屬決定勝道。必非相
T2251_.64.0270c14: 論。論イヽ能生數亦名數論。相應者。梵云瑜
T2251_.64.0270c17: 與數相應之智了解不生故眞諦三藏殊恐 T2251_.64.0270c18: 後來迷特置本音也。言智者。外道求智惠 T2251_.64.0270c19: 計道故。正理云士夫。智。非謂相應之智。
T2251_.64.0270c24: 塗身以灰求出生死。此等類。然光記。數約 T2251_.64.0270c25: 算數。相應爲用字。智屬上竝非也
T2251_.64.0271a01: 因。依處故。滅道是彼怖畏處故。別謂別迷四
T2251_.64.0271a07: 倒起因執。故見苦所斷爾。執投水火是生 T2251_.64.0271a08: 天因等不應見苦斷。不從二倒起故。然發
T2251_.64.0271a13: 淫欲。又受種種苦行。又調象馬等。其前後 T2251_.64.0271a14: 語竝如今引文。各云非因計因戒禁取見苦 T2251_.64.0271a15: 所斷
T2251_.64.0271a22: 牛狗等戒禁戒取應見苦所斷。迷苦諦故。 T2251_.64.0271a23: 如身邊見等。如餘隨眠。此異品中。除無漏 T2251_.64.0271a24: 縁餘有漏縁。皆是迷苦故犯異分轉不定。若 T2251_.64.0271a25: 返難有太過失。量云。汝餘有漏縁惑應見苦 T2251_.64.0271a26: 所斷。皆迷苦故。如汝狗牛等戒禁取。如汝
T2251_.64.0271a29: 苦所斷縁牛苦等故。但計麁果爲彼因故。 T2251_.64.0271b01: 而於論主顯有隨一不成曰。以非一切縁 T2251_.64.0271b02: 有漏惑。皆以果苦爲所縁故。今詳。正理 T2251_.64.0271b03: 釋全非理。何者論主就迷苦諦故因致難。 T2251_.64.0271b04: 豈改以爲此。又論主以迷苦故爲太過失。 T2251_.64.0271b05: 汝密改爲縁苦而爲不成。夫迷對不迷。不 T2251_.64.0271b06: 迷即覺悟。縁對不縁。迷苦故起一切業惑。 T2251_.64.0271b07: 若於苦覺悟不起此。其理大別。汝宗何 T2251_.64.0271b08: 可許一切有漏縁惑皆覺苦諦光師致倶 T2251_.64.0271b09: 舍救。寶師意。以正理論理爲精當。以論主 T2251_.64.0271b10: 難義爲浮麁。破斥光記不異前難。寶師識 T2251_.64.0271b11: 見最可稱。釋倶舍論尙不强救。於惠道論 T2251_.64.0271b12: 豈可不貴。所謂不可必通非三藏所説 T2251_.64.0271b13: 故。誠是斯謂。然破光不異前難者實是也。 T2251_.64.0271b14: 正理爲精當非也。如前可思
T2251_.64.0271b18: 苦道。有何相差別二戒禁取。可説此爲見 T2251_.64.0271b19: 苦所斷。彼爲見道所斷。如諸縁見苦所斷 T2251_.64.0271b20: 法生戒禁取名迷苦諦故。如是諸縁見道 T2251_.64.0271b21: 所斷邪見疑等生戒禁。彼亦應名迷苦諦 T2251_.64.0271b22: 故。量云。汝縁見道所斷戒禁取應迷苦諦。 T2251_.64.0271b23: 縁彼所斷法故。如見苦斷戒禁取。又量云。 T2251_.64.0271b24: 汝見道所斷戒禁取應見苦所斷。迷苦諦故。 T2251_.64.0271b25: 如牛戒等戒禁取。正理師約力用强劣及行 T2251_.64.0271b26: 相麁細等通釋此難。此行相別於汝應成 T2251_.64.0271b27: 故。寶疏明正理無於此論破光救釋。今云。 T2251_.64.0271b28: 諸師皆非論意。此論但難迷苦故因。彼有 T2251_.64.0271b29: 相濫。所立不可成故。非廣難無別故。光師 T2251_.64.0271c01: 救釋不當。正理從本以別理判差別故。寶 T2251_.64.0271c02: 師亦妄無於此論。何不愼焉。彼正理論辨 T2251_.64.0271c03: 差別等。於婆沙等已有此故。爲破彼等 T2251_.64.0271c04: 有次二難。正理通釋竝墮後所破也
T2251_.64.0271c07: 者。舊論云若人。下又字亦爾也。是顯異前 T2251_.64.0271c08: 二難。初正難意執道下邪見疑爲如理。戒 T2251_.64.0271c09: 禁唯執彼是淨因。不執爲永淸淨。若爾非 T2251_.64.0271c10: 非道計道行相。何爲道諦攝戒取。若救言邪 T2251_.64.0271c11: 見撥眞道故。戒禁妄執別有無想等淨因。 T2251_.64.0271c12: 是執彼餘無想等得淸淨而非縁彼邪見 T2251_.64.0271c13: 爲永淨。是則見苦所斷。是故此戒禁。縁見 T2251_.64.0271c14: 道所斷邪見等諸法。非道爲道故。見道所斷 T2251_.64.0271c15: 理亦不成立。亦者對前迷苦諦故。已下二 T2251_.64.0271c16: 難。論主成欲自令戒取通四諦之義。於中 T2251_.64.0271c17: 此破他爲本。有部戒禁唯分非因計因非道 T2251_.64.0271c18: 計道二類。初唯見苦斷。後通見苦道。而論主 T2251_.64.0271c19: 意。縁四諦下邪見疑等。戒禁隨邪見疑竝 T2251_.64.0271c20: 攝四諦。如唯識論説可知。正理師以先 T2251_.64.0271c21: 蘊在餘道。後執邪見爲如理作救。而全 T2251_.64.0271c22: 不免破。先道計。後計因。豈可以後爲道所 T2251_.64.0271c23: 斷。光師反破爲允當。寶疏破光記全不當。 T2251_.64.0271c24: 正理本背婆沙縁道邪見等爲道。今云爲 T2251_.64.0271c25: 淨因道所斷。故有光破。又違道等行者 T2251_.64.0271c26: 可爾。何以彼理可通非淨道之難。又所 T2251_.64.0271c27: 縁イヽ斷故者。是論主第四所破
T2251_.64.0272a01: 取。斷彼所縁邪見等時。戒禁亦除故見道 T2251_.64.0272a02: 斷。若爾於集滅二諦執邪見等。戒禁取斷 T2251_.64.0272a03: 彼所縁。便亦被斷。則是應集滅斷。何不爾 T2251_.64.0272a04: 耶。正理以所斷所證無用通難。光師反破 T2251_.64.0272a05: 最爲應理。然寶疏云不應理。盲目之至矣。 T2251_.64.0272a06: 内外二道雖能證道言同而有其別。於集 T2251_.64.0272a07: 滅亦雖所斷所證言同而有其異。彼涅槃 T2251_.64.0272a08: 與此遥別。所斷煩惱亦大乖違。何云無撥 T2251_.64.0272a09: 佛世尊所説集滅。故論主通四諦立戒禁。 T2251_.64.0272a10: 於理爲善。古今學者於此四難無有正理。 T2251_.64.0272a11: 光。寶判談。故一向不改光寶所引正理及自 T2251_.64.0272a12: 釋中寫誤訓點。所以是難曉通。今悉改之。 T2251_.64.0272a13: 令義通暢以便初學
T2251_.64.0272a20: 此亦有二。初總釋。後謂邊下別釋。此亦 T2251_.64.0272a21: 有三。初釋常倒。二釋樂淨二倒。今就四諦。 T2251_.64.0272a22: 故云見取中。婆沙。正理唯就苦諦故云全。 T2251_.64.0272a23: 竝非相違
T2251_.64.0272a26: 我見イヽ。唯體業用異故。二我倒下前師問。三 T2251_.64.0272a27: 如何不攝者有説反責。四由倒纒故者前 T2251_.64.0272a28: 師答。由倒與纒別故。謂我見者是倒自體。 T2251_.64.0272a29: 纒是我所見五諸有下。有説立全攝理難前 T2251_.64.0272b01: 師。初立全攝理。於中先正示。後此即下結 T2251_.64.0272b02: 成。是顯無別體。二是我下難前師。謂是我 T2251_.64.0272b03: 屬。我唯是體業異非有別體。若是爲二別 T2251_.64.0272b04: 見。彼由我爲我見亦應成二別見。彼事者色 T2251_.64.0272b05: 等五蘊。屬由爲三竝是我所見差別。謂色屬 T2251_.64.0272b06: 我。色由我有。色爲我有所用。夫八轉一體 T2251_.64.0272b07: 轉多相。要非別體。故據轉聲以難絶彼。論 T2251_.64.0272b08: 主意在後師可知。然圓暉但擧後師不知 T2251_.64.0272b09: 論意。今據舊論。正理分文解釋如是。光寶
T2251_.64.0272b17: 責。何以此可爲有説證。未曉由倒纒故句
T2251_.64.0272b24: 所覽論本。纒作經乎。以言由四倒經故。若 T2251_.64.0272b25: 爾彼錯本。依正理。舊論應思之
T2251_.64.0272c01: 惠云。此論具三義之總勝。彼三中別義亦 T2251_.64.0272c02: 勝。何以彼別令此論同。故光爲勝詳曰。何 T2251_.64.0272c03: 迷文甚。今但示體勝故似總。彼示勝義所 T2251_.64.0272c04: 在故在第三於義全無異
T2251_.64.0272c12: 一女人極爲端正與世奇特。見已心意錯亂 T2251_.64.0272c13: 不與常同。是時多耆奢貪。即以偈向阿難 T2251_.64.0272c14: 説 欲火之所燒 心意極熾然 願説滅 T2251_.64.0272c15: 此義 多有所饒益 是時阿難復以偈 T2251_.64.0272c16: 報曰 知欲顚倒法 心意極熾然 當除想 T2251_.64.0272c17: 像念 欲念便自體。次觀彼女人三十六物 T2251_.64.0272c18: 不淨。次觀自身五盛陰無牢不堅固而曰。即 T2251_.64.0272c19: 於彼處有漏心得解脱。問。今論引四句。舊 T2251_.64.0272c20: 論唯二句何故異。解云。竝無相違。謂辨自在 T2251_.64.0272c21: 是有學聖人。彼已有想倒非唯見苦斷證 T2251_.64.0272c22: 足故。舊論唯示上二句。復不離貪即想倒 T2251_.64.0272c23: 有此。學人未盡貪。故想未斷顯然。故更示 T2251_.64.0272c24: 下二句。辨自在梵云婆耆舍。或鵬耆奢。増一 T2251_.64.0272c25: 弟子品曰。能造偈誦歎如來徳。所謂鵬耆 T2251_.64.0272c26: 奢比丘是。言論辯了而無疑滯者。亦是鵬耆
T2251_.64.0272c29: 作傍。法賢本作囀。囀爲彈舌。今本經作多 T2251_.64.0273a01: 蓋轉誤。辯自在順増一所言。或眞諦曰躬自 T2251_.64.0273a02: 在。支謙本亦然。順分別功徳論所説。然稽古
T2251_.64.0273a06: 詳曰。此兩釋竝順經文。彼亂倒非必四顚 T2251_.64.0273a07: 倒故。復辨自在得阿難偈。後觀不淨等。
T2251_.64.0273a12: 無常樂我淨想。不忘失者。煩惱可行。文中 T2251_.64.0273a13: 有三。初叙經部所立。由前經立此義故云 T2251_.64.0273a14: 故。次前有餘部故曰復。想心見三各有常 T2251_.64.0273a15: 樂我淨。見四唯見所斷。想心各四八通見修。 T2251_.64.0273a16: 前三果爲學。前經所説未得無學已前有 T2251_.64.0273a17: 彼想倒。知是學人未全斷。同大乘説。智論六 T2251_.64.0273a18: 十説想心見三種顚倒云。凡夫人三種顚倒。 T2251_.64.0273a19: 學人二種顚倒。二如是下通有部所引經。舊 T2251_.64.0273a20: 論有若爾云何不違佛經之問。纒字。舊論。
T2251_.64.0273a23: 若離此觀無餘有惑品永斷方便。故彼經 T2251_.64.0273a24: 由八種倒永斷處説聖諦知見。三故此下論 T2251_.64.0273a25: 主結成經部義
T2251_.64.0273b15: 名我慢。我是境故境第七依主釋。文中云於
T2251_.64.0273c01: 三彼通等勝功徳。此都無徳。四彼似功徳。此 T2251_.64.0273c02: 都無徳。五彼通内外道。此唯外道。六彼通 T2251_.64.0273c03: 凡聖。此唯異生。詳曰。彼有徳起。此無徳起。 T2251_.64.0273c04: 不可論已未也。三四義最好
T2251_.64.0273c12: 不同。發智論一一説依見起某慢。今總説。 T2251_.64.0273c13: 二初三下正配九類。第三於多下問答我劣。 T2251_.64.0273c14: 第四如是下結成
T2251_.64.0273c17: 義。如是指下愛樂有情。自者簡他稍似義
T2251_.64.0273c22: 發惠論中分明説此事。如言我是王旃陀
T2251_.64.0273c25: 言。又云於中。是於彼中可反顧。今唯云於 T2251_.64.0273c26: 聚。意即於聚中。若不爾聚言無用。應言謂 T2251_.64.0273c27: 有如是於自所樂劣有情聚。故正理四十七
T2251_.64.0274a02: 錯誤哉。反顧明本。光記如是。鮮本。正理。顯 T2251_.64.0274a03: 宗作雖於爲正
T2251_.64.0274a09: 勝。故唯是過慢。餘亦如是。品類足意。唯 T2251_.64.0274a10: 約能執相云我勝。其所對境不可局。故三 T2251_.64.0274a11: 慢集在。謂於劣爲勝是慢。於等謂勝是過 T2251_.64.0274a12: 慢。於勝計勝是慢過慢。婆沙曰。餘八慢類 T2251_.64.0274a13: 如理應説。我等從二慢。謂於等執等是慢。 T2251_.64.0274a14: 於勝爲等是過慢。我劣有勝我二。唯從卑 T2251_.64.0274a15: 慢。餘準可思。問。兩論何盡理。答。婆沙不顯 T2251_.64.0274a16: 優劣。此論顯示發智是有餘説故云且。實是
T2251_.64.0274a21: 唯衆同分無常。後解文通五陰無常。其意唯 T2251_.64.0274a22: 衆同分無常。而無取捨。寶疏泛言。三界無常 T2251_.64.0274a23: 者通二。今唯約衆同分。今詳。光記後釋爲
T2251_.64.0274a27: 定故。謂或有疑。造此論者。唯解隨經義。 T2251_.64.0274a28: 不解隨實義。欲令此疑得決定故。顯此 T2251_.64.0274a29: 論者前來成立。隨契經義説無有愛。唯修 T2251_.64.0274b01: 所斷。今隨實義顯無有愛通二所斷。三界 T2251_.64.0274b02: 無常通二斷故。有作是説。前來説愛。今 T2251_.64.0274b03: 説無有。欲顯此二倶修所斷。此中所説三 T2251_.64.0274b04: 界無常。但説三界衆同分滅不説一切。評 T2251_.64.0274b05: 曰。如前所説爲善。三界無常言無簡故。縁 T2251_.64.0274b06: 善法斷尙有起愛。縁見所斷諸法無常寧 T2251_.64.0274b07: 不起愛以斷見者總計五部爲我我所。當 T2251_.64.0274b08: 來斷滅後隨起愛。雖不總縁而縁一一別別
T2251_.64.0274b11: 死後此五蘊斷滅。問。通見修何論云全。答。 T2251_.64.0274b12: 既論聖人。無見惑必。唯就未斷故云全」
T2251_.64.0274b15: 果等有愛亦起。簡彼云一分也。舊論云伊 T2251_.64.0274b16: 羅槃那象王。正理。顯宗全同此論。應音二十
T2251_.64.0274b19: 名香葉象也。此論終音今亦爾也。又光記云。
T2251_.64.0274b23: 也
T2251_.64.0274c02: 問未斷故。正理曰。故聖身中雖有未斷。而 T2251_.64.0274c03: 由背折皆定不行
T2251_.64.0274c06: 續理。故此慢類等。我慢。惡悔。聖雖未斷而 T2251_.64.0274c07: 定不行
T2251_.64.0274c10: 亦遍行。非正遍行故曰攝。由此舊論三段 T2251_.64.0274c11: 別有頌及釋。初中及言。通上二處顯其體 T2251_.64.0274c12: 別。故長行云及彼相應。而別在此欲顯示 T2251_.64.0274c13: 此相應言。是相應無明非諸隨行。下無明言 T2251_.64.0274c14: 通相應。即合集義。故舊論偈曰疑共彼無 T2251_.64.0274c15: 明。及獨行無明。又顯示相應無明屬所相應
T2251_.64.0274c23: 瞋慢相應無明。非遍行。故簡他界地言自
T2251_.64.0274c26: 簡彼。故言自界自地
T2251_.64.0275a02: 所斷無明。有是遍行。有是非遍行。何故彼説 T2251_.64.0275a03: 三十三是遍行。六十五是非遍行耶。答。西方
T2251_.64.0275a06: 別。謂見苦集所斷無明通遍非遍。謂見苦集
T2251_.64.0275a10: 則便不攝不共無明。於義爲善。若爾迦濕 T2251_.64.0275a11: 彌羅國諸師何不誦此。答。亦應誦此。而不 T2251_.64.0275a12: 爾者有別意故。以彼多分是遍行故。謂見
T2251_.64.0275a15: 相應無明。見集所斷有七無明。四是遍行。即 T2251_.64.0275a16: 二見。疑相應及不共無明。三非如前。又此國 T2251_.64.0275a17: 誦。無明皆説不共無明惟遍非遍。自力起故
T2251_.64.0275a20: 力現在前故。説所應即亦説彼性。不定故 T2251_.64.0275a21: 不別説之
T2251_.64.0275a24: 執。五部煩惱皆有遍非遍。或復有執。見苦集 T2251_.64.0275a25: 煩惱皆是遍行。見滅道煩惱皆是無漏縁。或 T2251_.64.0275a26: 復有執。若諸煩惱通三界者皆是遍行。或復 T2251_.64.0275a27: 有執。遍行有二。一無明。縁起根本故。二有 T2251_.64.0275a28: 愛。後際根本故如譬喩者。或復有執。若煩惱 T2251_.64.0275a29: 通五部者名遍行。即無明及貪。瞋。慢或復 T2251_.64.0275b01: 有執。五法是遍行。謂無明。愛。見。慢及心如
T2251_.64.0275b06: 通不云經主難故。是此唯乘前外人難。故 T2251_.64.0275b07: 於婆沙諸説無十三遍行義。或分別論者 T2251_.64.0275b08: 難。但以自義愛慢難彼。非必謂十三是遍 T2251_.64.0275b09: 行。此中雖言。明本及光。寶所唱竝如今。按 T2251_.64.0275b10: 義不通。此承力能頓縁五部此難來。宜作
T2251_.64.0275b23: 有六十九。五合縁有五十六。六合縁有二 T2251_.64.0275b24: 十八。七合縁有八。八合縁唯一種。此且就 T2251_.64.0275b25: 於欲界繫縁上八地。若初禪繫縁上七地。乃 T2251_.64.0275b26: 至無所有處繫縁有頂。如理可思
T2251_.64.0275c02: 解第一爲盡理。後二非也。如縁非擇滅名
T2251_.64.0275c05: 故何可例彼。寶疏云不染汚邪行相智。湛
T2251_.64.0275c08: 説。云何邪智。謂染汚惠。答。邪智有二。一染 T2251_.64.0275c09: 汚。二不染汚。染汚者無明相應。不染汚者無
T2251_.64.0275c12: 者。應是無覆無記。若爾與下云無覆無記 T2251_.64.0275c13: 不縁於上大爲違害。今按寶疏不染汚之不 T2251_.64.0275c14: 蓋衍字。寶亦爲染汚邪智無明相應。由是雖 T2251_.64.0275c15: 破光後解。未破初解其意同故詳曰。此判 T2251_.64.0275c16: 爲善也。問。論主意何。答。論主意欲令身邊 T2251_.64.0275c17: 縁上地。故簡別言對法者。云以宗爲量是
T2251_.64.0275c22: 前後相違。謂今執梵王爲常我爲邪智。前 T2251_.64.0275c23: 爲身邊故。二有違宗失。前釋違對法者義 T2251_.64.0275c24: 故。詳曰。此難麁也。今是上縁章。故生在欲 T2251_.64.0275c25: 界上縁否。故有宗不以他界自我執。故爲 T2251_.64.0275c26: 邪智。上論非因計因能生常我二倒故定是 T2251_.64.0275c27: 身邊見。常我二倒是身邊見對法宗常談。何 T2251_.64.0275c28: 可疑彼釋
T2251_.64.0276a02: 眠。故此頌釋來。證四句以顯遍行因通彼
T2251_.64.0276a05: 有遍行隨眠亦遍行因。謂過去現在遍行隨 T2251_.64.0276a06: 眠。有非遍行隨眠亦非遍行因。若不依彼 T2251_.64.0276a07: 種類説者。謂除前相。若依彼種類説者。
T2251_.64.0276a11: 成六。上二界亦爾。三六十八爲無漏縁。九十 T2251_.64.0276a12: 八中。餘八十是有漏縁。然此中約九地各有
T2251_.64.0276a16: 於中五十四無漏縁。二百三十有漏縁。是據 T2251_.64.0276a17: 地別以論。若依界門如常途九十八。故於
T2251_.64.0276a20: 準此爲正。明本。光牒文如今可知。形誤」
T2251_.64.0276a23: 各別治煩惱故。其相如文。然光寶等皆以 T2251_.64.0276a24: 雖法類品已下爲由別治故釋。是似而非也。 T2251_.64.0276a25: 一次第異故。謂乘互相因故有妨難。通彼 T2251_.64.0276a26: 云雖法等。何不頌由相因別治故。二闕六 T2251_.64.0276a27: 九異所以故。標六九何不述其異由。又解 T2251_.64.0276a28: 此唯一因。簡縁滅唯自地。謂九地異云別。 T2251_.64.0276a29: 能治道云治。諸地各別無漏能治。是互相 T2251_.64.0276b01: 因故滅通縁。由此舊論頌無別治言。長行 T2251_.64.0276b02: 如今。今云諸地道互相因故。諸地釋別。道
T2251_.64.0276b05: 爲因果故。由是邪見六九總縁。滅不相因 T2251_.64.0276b06: 唯縁自地。此中論能縁惑及所治便據有 T2251_.64.0276b07: 漏九地以未至中間不別立所斷惑品故。 T2251_.64.0276b08: 談所縁道及能治便依無漏九地。以欲界 T2251_.64.0276b09: 有頂無無漏治道故。下皆準之。唯縁六地 T2251_.64.0276b10: 者。是所縁而能治故。即無漏九地中未至中 T2251_.64.0276b11: 間四根本。唯者簡欲界。無治道故。又簡無 T2251_.64.0276b12: 色。謂六地法智觀欲界境起。無色於欲四
T2251_.64.0276b15: 縁下。對治別故。爲攝忍智及倶起品法言 T2251_.64.0276b16: 品。若治欲界若能治餘者。光記治欲界見 T2251_.64.0276b17: 道諦惑唯未至。治餘者。六地中滅道法智。
T2251_.64.0276b20: 亦治餘五地。何故治修惑。答。法智唯是欲惑 T2251_.64.0276b21: 治道。於上界無法智所斷惑。何可云治自 T2251_.64.0276b22: 及治餘五地。不同類智是上界惑治道。由是 T2251_.64.0276b23: 下云法智品既治色無色。躡此治餘義也。
T2251_.64.0276b29: 能治。以能治類同故爲所縁。故正理四十八
T2251_.64.0276c03: 故。未至地亦非全屬上地者。非欲治故。 T2251_.64.0276c04: 治欲者亦非全邪見。唯是忍所治故。通此 T2251_.64.0276c05: 難曰。謂法智道。同是欲界中。縁道諦惑對 T2251_.64.0276c06: 治種類。此同類道由互相因互相縁故。設
T2251_.64.0276c10: 者。未至中間所起無漏道。爲治初定惑謂 T2251_.64.0276c11: 之治自地。於未至中間無自惑故。是則治 T2251_.64.0276c12: 二禪等七地惑言治餘。問。九地無漏道各互 T2251_.64.0276c13: 治上下。解云。唯能治自與上。不能治下。
T2251_.64.0276c16: 能對治上二界中諸煩惱故。謂非第二靜慮 T2251_.64.0276c17: 地等類智品道。亦能爲初靜慮地等煩惱對
T2251_.64.0276c20: 對治而可總爲上八地中縁道惑境。依此 T2251_.64.0276c21: 應知必不治下。雖於能治有差別。然爲 T2251_.64.0276c22: 所縁則無有差別。謂八地惑各皆通縁九地 T2251_.64.0276c23: 道。光記治餘七地者。總相未成指南
T2251_.64.0276c29: 滅道法智非苦集法智。亦非滅道法智全爲 T2251_.64.0277a01: 色無色界對治。唯修道法智對治非見道。彼 T2251_.64.0277a02: 初非分故。是故汝所説不然。詳曰。雜心唯 T2251_.64.0277a03: 示不治彼上界見道所以。非總結故云彼 T2251_.64.0277a04: 初。婆沙約闕苦集法智是能治云非初。今 T2251_.64.0277a05: 正所論就見道四諦決擇。而彼闕治見道 T2251_.64.0277a06: 故云非今。於義同此。舊論據前文二段次 T2251_.64.0277a07: 第。謂前言苦集對治無後言見道對治無。是 T2251_.64.0277a08: 亦言異義同。然慧暉云。或更有釋。四諦闕二 T2251_.64.0277a09: 諦下智二無。見修惑中不斷上界見惑初 T2251_.64.0277a10: 無。此釋穿空最。非唯違諸論亦何不言二 T2251_.64.0277a11: 四無。上界見道四諦惑。皆不能治故對二 T2251_.64.0277a12: 應四
T2251_.64.0277a15: 由是具聲。因即所以因由。是縁滅唯一地。 T2251_.64.0277a16: 縁道六九地所以。境互爲縁因者。簡滅互非
T2251_.64.0277a21: 總爲四解未精。非能對治故者。簡道能治
T2251_.64.0277a24: 地。今此二因。依彼兩説而簡滅道。以顯九 T2251_.64.0277a25: 上縁九地自在
T2251_.64.0277a28: 然答中。於戒禁滅道竝言相乘而來。或 T2251_.64.0277a29: 恐謂道所斷可縁滅故。或兼示論主令戒 T2251_.64.0277b01: 禁通滅諦
T2251_.64.0277b04: 縁惑非唯下地故。然光記諸言。兩讀言諸 T2251_.64.0277b05: 身邊及諸下身見非也。下處處釋準之。又 T2251_.64.0277b06: 縁彼惑及下惑。下論中準此。故舊論十四
T2251_.64.0277b10: 思此
T2251_.64.0277b15: 隨長爲義。雖可縁於中無有隨長。婆沙文 T2251_.64.0277b16: 如次下引。蓋此論有説言應衍文。隨順。舊 T2251_.64.0277b17: 論云隨長。正理於前説中云。諸隨眠於此 T2251_.64.0277b18: 法中隨住増長即是隨縛。今義同彼。且今論 T2251_.64.0277b19: 上無釋名義。故何得爲別義。問。若爾何故 T2251_.64.0277b20: 此説來。答。通伏難。難云。彼無漏及上法應
T2251_.64.0277b23: 及無漏法亦應隨増。是所縁故。如自界地。 T2251_.64.0277b24: 爲通此難故云雖是所縁。具設譬喩。正理 T2251_.64.0277b25: 於上釋名義意通此疑。故更不説。若不爾 T2251_.64.0277b26: 雖是所縁言及服藥喩成唐捐
T2251_.64.0277b29: 記病者喩境。藥喩惑。是唯見順言未深思 T2251_.64.0277c01: 致此釋非也。實是煩惱能順。而爲顯能所 T2251_.64.0277c02: 和順義境爲能順。又爲顯煩惱常欲順彼。 T2251_.64.0277c03: 彼不順此故無隨増義故。雖是下以境爲 T2251_.64.0277c04: 所隨増。惑爲能隨増。此喩正雖是下用
T2251_.64.0277c09: 長故。隨眠於心増縛事故。若已斷。則不 T2251_.64.0277c10: 隨増不相隨順非増長故。隨眠於心無縛 T2251_.64.0277c11: 事故。此文亦證前隨順義イヽ非別義
T2251_.64.0277c14: 此與下總釋。爲我下別釋。此有二。初明身 T2251_.64.0277c15: 見。後執斷下明斷見。寶總爲三節非也。 T2251_.64.0277c16: 不順義故。不應又言故
T2251_.64.0277c24: 處。六十二見所歸例處。故云諸見趣。景云。
T2251_.64.0278a04: 有果報。今論蓋脱乎。又雜心。法勝兩論唯 T2251_.64.0278a05: 因無宗。然光記過怪者未精也
T2251_.64.0278a09: 見力於天快樂起希求故。謂爲我當受天 T2251_.64.0278a10: 快樂。即此爲門能造福業。然貪於彼斷善 T2251_.64.0278a11: 根時。説爲強因故是不善。或由我見天愛 T2251_.64.0278a12: 方行。由見我當受天樂方於彼樂起貪求。 T2251_.64.0278a13: 故我慢亦隨身見後起令心高擧。故不順 T2251_.64.0278a14: 修善業。又違親近善友等。故謂由我慢心
T2251_.64.0278a25: 所説不善惑中。豈於此簡隨煩惱爲
T2251_.64.0278a28: 無記惠亦能爲因。故無記根攝。此三有力 T2251_.64.0278a29: 生諸無記。光記生諸法者未詳。問。此兩説 T2251_.64.0278b01: 於婆沙百五十六。評家前説爲善。正理。顯 T2251_.64.0278b02: 宗無明評。此論亦無評。論主意在何。解 T2251_.64.0278b03: 曰。論主意在初説。雖無明判而文顯此。謂 T2251_.64.0278b04: 言亦有三種。對善不善竝是三根。全同評
T2251_.64.0278b09: 記羸劣不由功用。任運而起何藉根爲。廣 T2251_.64.0278b10: 有破立。然圓暉等今外方師爲經部義。正理 T2251_.64.0278b11: 上座云上座部。加部竝非
T2251_.64.0278b18: 問相。雖頌前竝問問記二。頌問影記四。何 T2251_.64.0278b19: 者所依四名即是記四故。而光記初二句正 T2251_.64.0278b20: 答。後二句指事者非也。於問已問兩種體。 T2251_.64.0278b21: 唯上二句何正答
T2251_.64.0278b26: 明記四相。初中有三。初總標。二列名。三此 T2251_.64.0278b27: 四下正示問相。未明答故言且。問。此列名 T2251_.64.0278b28: 者是記四名。若問四名各有問字。謂應一向
T2251_.64.0278c03: 如此比也。應分別答問者。更有因縁。如死 T2251_.64.0278c04: 相續等。應反質答問者。如有人問還問令 T2251_.64.0278c05: 答。應置答問者。若法無實體但有假名。若 T2251_.64.0278c06: 問此法爲一爲異。常無常等。是不答義惟 T2251_.64.0278c07: 解佛法者乃解知耳。今何故不云問。舊論。 T2251_.64.0278c08: 正理。顯宗竝如是。解云。於問本無別四名。 T2251_.64.0278c09: 隨答四以立四名。如十六能入隨十六所 T2251_.64.0278c10: 立立名。此亦如是。爲顯此義於標言問。 T2251_.64.0278c11: 次列記四而言此四等。示問四相故答四 T2251_.64.0278c12: 云此四。於此有四問故成問四。應一向之 T2251_.64.0278c13: 問依主釋。然光記此四如次句屬上。如次 T2251_.64.0278c14: 答彼四間即釋上半頌者非也。問四者標
T2251_.64.0278c23: 故
T2251_.64.0278c29: 此不可記。而實已與答理相應。是根本答 T2251_.64.0279a01: 故亦名記。令彼問者得正解故。或有默然 T2251_.64.0279a02: 於理得勝。況酬彼問而非記耶。廣引外道
T2251_.64.0279a12: 應記。雖復有言以遮止故名置記。或有 T2251_.64.0279a13: 默然。於理得勝亦名置記。如婆莠羅默然
T2251_.64.0279a17: 對反詰非也。寶疏云但得論意矣。此難者 T2251_.64.0279a18: 謂雙問。故云亦勝亦劣
T2251_.64.0279a21: 義門容有二記。謂一分別記。二反詰記。今 T2251_.64.0279a22: 據一邊爲反詰記。汝難應一向記全不知 T2251_.64.0279a23: 問意。後解釋文。然彼問者一向爲將爲勝 T2251_.64.0279a24: 將爲劣問。不爲亦勝亦劣問。雖有爲勝爲 T2251_.64.0279a25: 劣二語而意但各一途。謂爲字所顯唯勝唯
T2251_.64.0279a29: 不尋問意直據事法應成分別答。謂望天 T2251_.64.0279b01: 是劣。望下是勝。今但欲尋問者所方故。 T2251_.64.0279b02: 反詰言爲何所方。寶疏得論意。然爲先 T2251_.64.0279b03: 作反詰後分別記者若可然也。光記解釋 T2251_.64.0279b04: 大誤也。有云。正理論通此難但言爲勝 T2251_.64.0279b05: 不言劣。而言説一爲聲云不雙問。準彼 T2251_.64.0279b06: 此人問爲勝。此人問爲劣。非一人問爲勝 T2251_.64.0279b07: 爲劣二。故論文言一向爲問。詳曰。泥正理 T2251_.64.0279b08: 文。彼爲令知非一體兩用雙問但約爲勝 T2251_.64.0279b09: 一邊。然非不問爲勝爲劣。雖問爲勝爲劣 T2251_.64.0279b10: 然是意各別問。若爲勝則唯勝。爲劣亦爾。 T2251_.64.0279b11: 學者可思
T2251_.64.0279b15: 心等決二三差別。今全擧婆沙義。然光。寶 T2251_.64.0279b16: 前章爲毘婆沙義。此爲本論師非也
T2251_.64.0279b19: 初説唯指事別。於義不違經。彼對法師義。 T2251_.64.0279b20: 二三差別難辨。倶反詰故。問。亦同唯請説 T2251_.64.0279b21: 於内心分直諂。是唯自立非經意。豈一切 T2251_.64.0279b22: 人可得知内心答此。故殊論主依經説 T2251_.64.0279b23: 斥彼。此一段皆是契經文。云依經故。舊論
T2251_.64.0279b29: 共説若使此賢者一向論不一向答者。分 T2251_.64.0279c01: 別論不分別答者。詰論不詰答者。止論不 T2251_.64.0279c02: 止答者。如是此賢者不得共説亦不得共 T2251_.64.0279c03: 論。若使此賢者一向論便一向答者。分別論 T2251_.64.0279c04: 分別答者。詰論詰答者。止論止答者。如是此 T2251_.64.0279c05: 賢者得共説亦得共論。次復處非處住。所
T2251_.64.0279c08: 四事觀察而示四問記。其相同此經。彼多
T2251_.64.0279c17: T2251_.64.0279c18: T2251_.64.0279c19: T2251_.64.0279c20: 豐山寓居上毛沙門快道記 T2251_.64.0279c21: 隨眠品第五之二
T2251_.64.0279c24: 相惑。後二句約共相惑。自相惑中。初二句 T2251_.64.0279c25: 明過現意相應。次三句明未來六識相應。未 T2251_.64.0279c26: 斷言與能繫言各通中間五處。貪瞋慢言 T2251_.64.0279c27: 與意五字能所相應互影發。一若言隨應 T2251_.64.0279c28: 通下。一未來言流次二句
T2251_.64.0280a06: 結。二迷自相。謂愛。恚。慢。嫉。慳結。簡彼故 T2251_.64.0280a07: 言且。諸者。非一義。煩惱六故。故言諸。總者。
T2251_.64.0280a12: 散釋明不別可釋。而釋未斷一令人準思 T2251_.64.0280a13: 能繫未來等亦如是。故據初殊擧未斷
T2251_.64.0280a16: 初正明。後所由。已生簡未生。未斷簡已斷。 T2251_.64.0280a17: 謂前未生設生已斷即不繫。故於現在無 T2251_.64.0280a18: 未斷言者。既體現前。約未斷者。理在絶言。 T2251_.64.0280a19: 故且略之。或準過去可知。故頌文言未斷 T2251_.64.0280a20: 過現。舊論曰。過去現在欲瞋慢。是處已起乃
T2251_.64.0280a25: 爲通此疑有所由釋。一以貪瞋慢自相惑 T2251_.64.0280a26: 非如共相遍行故。二雖繫三世。以非三 T2251_.64.0280a27: 界諸有情決定遍起繫三世諸有漏法盡故。 T2251_.64.0280a28: 是簡未來遍行。彼婆沙總説不論盡不盡 T2251_.64.0280a29: 故不言遍。是故論唯言能繫此事。與共相
T2251_.64.0280b03: 世縛。何以故。非不見不聞不分別事起貪 T2251_.64.0280b04: 瞋慢。何以故。分齊縁故。或時有人於眼 T2251_.64.0280b05: 生貪。非餘身分。何以故。自相使故。非貪等
T2251_.64.0280b08: 來中未盡非不繋未來也。光記於遍存兩 T2251_.64.0280b09: 種以簡釋。全非論意。此論遍三世有漏法 T2251_.64.0280b10: 盡名遍行。故言遍於三世。能縛三世。遍縛 T2251_.64.0280b11: 三世。非唯繫三世名遍行。何況遍自境。寶
T2251_.64.0280b22: 正理。法寶於此所纒歴六小七大七等多端 T2251_.64.0280b23: 忘却讀正理。光記下引正理不謬也。問。 T2251_.64.0280b24: 論文於未來分意五。於此不爲豈非通六 T2251_.64.0280b25: 文勢常規。解云。既説慢無五理在絶言。 T2251_.64.0280b26: 故無意言簡。又頌云未來意遍行。前二句 T2251_.64.0280b27: 即意自顯成。應依義不依文。問。是繫三 T2251_.64.0280b28: 世於文無驗何。解云。既言非定遍顯不定 T2251_.64.0280b29: 繫三世。又望下自世及遍行。是顯示非自 T2251_.64.0280c01: 世亦非遍行而但繫三世。顯宗論二十六
T2251_.64.0280c04: 未斷。此未斷言應成無用。無無用過。此未 T2251_.64.0280c05: 斷言顯有品別漸次斷故。即於此論次下 T2251_.64.0280c06: 文中。亦説未來意遍行等。謂彼貪等九品 T2251_.64.0280c07: 不同。修道斷時九品別斷。有縁此事上品 T2251_.64.0280c08: 隨眠已起已滅已得永斷。彼於此事尙有未 T2251_.64.0280c09: 來餘品隨眠未起未滅未得永斷猶能爲繫。 T2251_.64.0280c10: 是故本論於此義中雖説未來愛等所繫。而 T2251_.64.0280c11: 於過去説未斷言。故未斷言深成有用。然
T2251_.64.0280c16: 引九結婆沙。令此段通六識。過現意繫過 T2251_.64.0280c17: 現等。依義皆思簡
T2251_.64.0280c20: 是過現及未來兩段而非識五意分莭。故於 T2251_.64.0280c21: 此言若無五識上。未來意地生不生竝皆 T2251_.64.0280c22: 繫三世。故言乃至未斷。不別言已生未斷。
T2251_.64.0281a03: 唯簡過現。以五若已生唯現量縁。是故可生 T2251_.64.0281a04: 亦唯未來。可生既唯未來。已生唯現。已滅唯
T2251_.64.0281a07: 去至現亦爾。義准若與意識相應可生隨
T2251_.64.0281a12: 諸與五識相應隨眠。若定不生亦縛三世。 T2251_.64.0281a13: 謂彼境界。或在未來。或在現在。或在過去。 T2251_.64.0281a14: 彼雖已得畢竟不生。而未斷時性能繫縛。
T2251_.64.0281a17: 未來。次流在現。後滅落遮。境已渉三世故 T2251_.64.0281a18: 名繫三世。由是須知縁與繫別。雖是不 T2251_.64.0281a19: 縁而即能繫。若眼識不得縁闕不生。隨境 T2251_.64.0281a20: 渉三世繫自世。然得永不生。常居未來。雖
T2251_.64.0281a23: 參差三世。如有眼識定縁靑黃赤色三境 T2251_.64.0281a24: 而起。隨闕一境識即不生。其所闕境。或一 T2251_.64.0281a25: 未來。或一現在。或一過去。故説五識遍縛三
T2251_.64.0281a29: 境異時渉歴三世。後三境同時居未現過位。 T2251_.64.0281b01: 詳曰。前解爲勝。以決定故。後解未也。不定 T2251_.64.0281b02: 而少分。一識同時多境豈是論意
T2251_.64.0281b05: 由準前可知。現在中言正縁者。顯示縁境 T2251_.64.0281b06: T2251_.64.0281b07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b13: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b14: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b15: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281b16: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0281b19: 爲生起。湛惠云。寶疏爲優。符順正理及舊
T2251_.64.0281b24: 論此。正理亦爾。爲頌廣顯於前略述。舊論 T2251_.64.0281b25: 却屬後段之證。曰毘婆沙師成立一切有爲 T2251_.64.0281b26: 法非常住。由與行相相應故。彼成立此
T2251_.64.0281c02: 必現量。現正縁色唯繫現色事。若意識現在 T2251_.64.0281c03: 前。正縁過未境即繫過未。餘一切準此應 T2251_.64.0281c04: 知 T2251_.64.0281c05: T2251_.64.0281c06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c13: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c14: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c15: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0281c16: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0281c21: 初有彼結前。是幷頌前生起。汝但見頌前 T2251_.64.0281c22: 片文可笑矣。此中爲五。初經部兩關徴責。 T2251_.64.0281c23: 二有部略答。三生起頌文。四擧頌。五長行」
T2251_.64.0281c27: 觀察已。不顧過去色。不欣未來色。於現在 T2251_.64.0281c28: 色厭離。欲滅寂靜。受想行識亦復如是。次 T2251_.64.0281c29: 廣約三世説。今現在極成。故但引過未文。 T2251_.64.0282a01: 光記作兩解。第一爲正。順本經故。後釋分 T2251_.64.0282a02: 厭與捨大鑿也。經文既云已。又無求言故。 T2251_.64.0282a03: 惠暉過去色定共別解脱戒。未來色定道二 T2251_.64.0282a04: 戒。未檢本經坐以談妄。彼總約五蘊説。 T2251_.64.0282a05: 定唯戒色
T2251_.64.0282a11: 亦從光
T2251_.64.0282a21: 可得用。彼婆沙前文亦有同此論。學者得 T2251_.64.0282a22: 造者意勿纒他文
T2251_.64.0282a25: 相。二以設下二擧頌示所以。三謂若下正 T2251_.64.0282a26: 簡別部宗有二。初擧有部宗。先擧所説。後 T2251_.64.0282a27: 方許下判屬宗。二若人下擧相濫簡別。先 T2251_.64.0282a28: 擧所説。後彼可下簡別。此一章文易意難探。
T2251_.64.0282b02: 由執説一切有許 釋曰。若人説一切有。 T2251_.64.0282b03: 謂過去未來現在虚空擇滅非擇滅。許彼爲 T2251_.64.0282b04: 説一切有部。復有餘人。説現世法必有。過 T2251_.64.0282b05: 去業若未與果是有。若過去業已與果。及未 T2251_.64.0282b06: 來無果此皆是無。若如是分別故説三世 T2251_.64.0282b07: 有。此人非説一切有部攝。是説分別部所攝
T2251_.64.0282b11: 位其體猶有。果イヽ若熟已其體便無。如外種 T2251_.64.0282b12: 子芽未生位其體猶有。芽若生已其體更無
T2251_.64.0282b19: 謂尊者法救説類有異。尊者妙音説相有 T2251_.64.0282b20: 異。尊者世友説位有異。尊者覺天説待
T2251_.64.0282b23: 無擧名。唯示所立四別。諸論竝讃世友説 T2251_.64.0282b24: 揑餘三。今論亦同彼。非是論主創評決
T2251_.64.0282b29: 色。正理。顯宗及鮮本作體。詳曰。作體爲正。 T2251_.64.0282c01: 論主欲令二喩有別改用金喩。故舊論曰 T2251_.64.0282c02: 物。取二喩其意應知
T2251_.64.0282c06: 能鳴。或能宣唱故號能鳴。準彼今就體其 T2251_.64.0282c07: 音聲體是妙故
T2251_.64.0282c10: 意。過去相。現在相。未來相爲一類世相不
T2251_.64.0282c13: 云。相謂相狀。非生等四相。爲勝也。光記亦 T2251_.64.0282c14: 釋合有兩釋。後釋非也。一蛇畫有用無用 T2251_.64.0282c15: 足故。二未來相有用不成故
T2251_.64.0282c18: 名也。姬亦女宦也。秩比二千石。位次婕妤 T2251_.64.0282c19: 下。左傳。以媵秦穆姬。杜預曰。送女曰媵。媵 T2251_.64.0282c20: 送也。寄也。公羊傳云。媵者何。諸侯一國。則二 T2251_.64.0282c21: 國媵之以姪娣從。釋名云。姪娣曰媵。媵承 T2251_.64.0282c22: 也。承事適他也。今三品曰姬。五品曰媵是
T2251_.64.0282c29: 名現在。詳曰。婆沙既倶時名現在。準彼 T2251_.64.0283a01: 現在爲本。從前後待對。一女喩如是。而婆 T2251_.64.0283a02: 沙七十六判三世差別有十七復次。第十四 T2251_.64.0283a03: 復次全同正理。竝無有妨。但是通別遠近 T2251_.64.0283a04: 異
T2251_.64.0283a07: 簡者非也。是自古對法宗評簡如是故。此
T2251_.64.0283a10: 婆沙破亦不異此。彼細述理。此總云數論 T2251_.64.0283a11: 朋。若欲爲朋所以應如婆沙。而文言各別
T2251_.64.0283a14: 歴三世時法隱法顯。但説諸法行於世時。 T2251_.64.0283a15: 體相雖同而性類異。此與尊者世友分同。
T2251_.64.0283a18: 乳酪喩豈爲不然。又三世流入而未來有 T2251_.64.0283a19: 滅過去有生類。是同數論性常用轉變。何 T2251_.64.0283a20: 云不同。若言分同世友不可破。餘師亦 T2251_.64.0283a21: 有分同。謂體不異竝同故
T2251_.64.0283a24: 貪現行成就倶有。雜心云。於一色愛著亦行 T2251_.64.0283a25: 亦成就。於餘成就而不行。是故彼説世亂。 T2251_.64.0283a26: 譬亦相違
T2251_.64.0283a29: 也。光記爲小科得。入前段不也。寶疏入後 T2251_.64.0283b01: 段得。爲第四非也。於中有五。一經部難。 T2251_.64.0283b02: 二有部答。三經部重徴。四有部通。五經部難 T2251_.64.0283b03: 絶。此是初也。此三世實有已具知有四師差 T2251_.64.0283b04: 別。及世友約位爲善。彼世友約位義應更 T2251_.64.0283b05: 復分別思惟而説。難云。汝去來世應名現 T2251_.64.0283b06: 在。執體實有故。如正有作用時。如馬角 T2251_.64.0283b07: 等或汝去來世應非去來世。執體實有故。 T2251_.64.0283b08: 如汝現在
T2251_.64.0283b11: 類因異熟因等既極成能與果。以能與果 T2251_.64.0283b12: 應許有作用。如是過去有作用亦應名 T2251_.64.0283b13: 現在。若爾世相應雜亂。又若救言彼唯與果 T2251_.64.0283b14: 無有取果。取與不具故非難。已彼過去有 T2251_.64.0283b15: 取與中與果半作用。由是過去世法無作用 T2251_.64.0283b16: 邊名過去。有與果用邊名現在。若爾世相 T2251_.64.0283b17: 應雜。有半作用一句是遮救。若述上文鄭 T2251_.64.0283b18: 重失。既過去作用成。即雜亂故。由是舊論
T2251_.64.0283b21: 相相雜。光記得論意。便於有半作用前致 T2251_.64.0283b22: 亦應名現在結。寶疏未得論意。替既作唯。 T2251_.64.0283b23: 以現在異熟因添蛇足。誤半作用文以鑿。 T2251_.64.0283b24: 不忍視之也。若隨現在法中。唯或取果或 T2251_.64.0283b25: 與果多有之。如何以彼一得致雜亂難。又 T2251_.64.0283b26: 若如汝言。彼正理師何不救此理。彼論五
T2251_.64.0283b29: 何作用。若謂彼能取果與果。是則過去同類 T2251_.64.0283c01: 因等既能與果。應有作用。有半作用世相 T2251_.64.0283c02: 應雜。此難都由不了法性。諸法勢力總有 T2251_.64.0283c03: 二種。一名作用。二謂功能。引果功能名爲 T2251_.64.0283c04: 作用。非唯作用總攝功能。亦有功能異於 T2251_.64.0283c05: 作用。且闇中眼見色功能。爲闇所違非違 T2251_.64.0283c06: 作用。謂有闇障違見功能。故眼闇中不能 T2251_.64.0283c07: 見色。引果作用非闇所違。故眼闇中亦能 T2251_.64.0283c08: 引果。無現在位作用有闕。現在唯依作用 T2251_.64.0283c09: 立故。諸作用滅不至無爲。於餘性生能爲 T2251_.64.0283c10: 因性。此非作用但是功能。唯現在時能引 T2251_.64.0283c11: 果故。無爲不能引自果故。唯引自果名
T2251_.64.0283c16: 救。是一己新立今就功能作用無別毘婆沙 T2251_.64.0283c17: 宗以加彈斥。若如汝言違背婆沙百十六
T2251_.64.0283c22: 宗論顚末之法。舊論頌異此而長行同。彼十
T2251_.64.0283c27: 中初三句經部破有部。終一句有部唱法性 T2251_.64.0283c28: 難思。光記用字通上下者非也。唯屬下不 T2251_.64.0283c29: 可通上。義善顯故。若不爾者何不言何礙 T2251_.64.0284a01: 用用何。故舊論無用言。而唯牒釋何礙二 T2251_.64.0284a02: 字。次牒釋此云何三字
T2251_.64.0284a11: 正礙力難。三擧衆縁救破。此中初應説言 T2251_.64.0284a12: 蒙能起作用。故應説下有若言。舊論十四
T2251_.64.0284a17: 別。此能成作用亦有三世。其去來今誰令去 T2251_.64.0284a18: 來今。若有別作用令作用成去來今重重 T2251_.64.0284a19: 無窮。舊論別有頌文破救
T2251_.64.0284a22: 非去來今。無別能成作用故。而是有非無。 T2251_.64.0284a23: 二則無下經部破。若非去來今則無爲故應 T2251_.64.0284a24: 常住。違無爲無作用宗。若言作用是有則 T2251_.64.0284a25: 非無故是恒有。不應言已滅未有。舊論別 T2251_.64.0284a26: 有頌破此。此是下救破由漸。應屬後段。光・ T2251_.64.0284a27: 寶屬前段者非也。三若許下有部救釋無 T2251_.64.0284a28: 異。四若爾下經部破釋世便壞。此中有三。 T2251_.64.0284a29: 一正破。二有部反問。三經部示不成所以。初 T2251_.64.0284b01: 中有總破別破總結三莭如文可知。何爲 T2251_.64.0284b02: 不成已下。光記總爲有部救非也。不順前 T2251_.64.0284b03: 何得有時名爲過未文故。寶疏但何爲不成 T2251_.64.0284b04: 句爲反問爲勝也
T2251_.64.0284b07: 若不許諸本無名未來。今有名現在。有已 T2251_.64.0284b08: 還無名過去是則三世義。應一切種有爲法
T2251_.64.0284b11: 言可在不成上。文言便故在下。猶如成唯
T2251_.64.0284b23: 光・寶竝不得論意。今謂。果之因依主釋。有 T2251_.64.0284b24: 得果之因故當來可有果。故未來當有名 T2251_.64.0284b25: 有。此但未來當有所以不關過去。故言果
T2251_.64.0284b28: 果言
T2251_.64.0284c02: 成差別。光可也。寶釋倶爲三世非也
T2251_.64.0284c05: 謂非彼外道不許業曾有性故而今世尊重 T2251_.64.0284c06: 爲彼説有。是彼許曾有性而不許實有。故 T2251_.64.0284c07: 今爲成實有佛重説此有。寶疏屬下爲經 T2251_.64.0284c08: 部通釋。豈字短讀絶曾有性。而今已下更牒 T2251_.64.0284c09: 重説有爲通釋基。謂豈彼外道不許業是 T2251_.64.0284c10: 曾有性。如是許曾有性。而今世尊重爲説 T2251_.64.0284c11: 有者。今詳曰。此論文錯義難通曉故致異
T2251_.64.0284c15: 是有爲已許。若爾佛何故爲彼更説有。此 T2251_.64.0284c16: 中佛世尊依自相續有宿業功能。能與今後
T2251_.64.0284c19: 爾佛何。則是有部徴。依彼已下經部釋。如是 T2251_.64.0284c20: 云文云義隱暢
T2251_.64.0284c26: 處。滅時無有去處。如是眼不實而生。生已 T2251_.64.0284c27: 滅盡。是從所明立名。舊論云眞實空經。増
T2251_.64.0285a04: 故。又初唯就現世言。後就本無等言。是二 T2251_.64.0285a05: 破差別。彼救意有兩意。一唯依現世。二依 T2251_.64.0285a06: 現世眼根。於破中。初破唯依現世。故云現 T2251_.64.0285a07: 世性與彼眼根體無別。舊論曰世與法義
T2251_.64.0285a10: 汝執於自體イヽ未有有
T2251_.64.0285a13: 論云此境一故故。此中四重救破展轉相起。 T2251_.64.0285a14: 謂若縁彼聲應更發聲。更不發住未來 T2251_.64.0285a15: 故。汝宗立未來實有。何云是無。雖實有去 T2251_.64.0285a16: 來聲無現在聲。故云無無妨是非理。於三 T2251_.64.0285a17: 世竝聲體同一故若言有少別非同一。我 T2251_.64.0285a18: 本無今有義自成
T2251_.64.0285a29: 是於境得有猶預。謂我於此所見境中。爲 T2251_.64.0285b01: 是正智爲是顛倒。即由此故差別理成。同 T2251_.64.0285b02: 有相中見有別。故非無與有少有相同。如 T2251_.64.0285b03: 何於中得有差別。唯於有法有差別故 T2251_.64.0285b04: 但於有境覺有差別。故唯有境覺有差別
T2251_.64.0285b13: 知妙非妙義。言妙非妙者是無失有失。有 T2251_.64.0285b14: 失是有上。無失是無上。故有上無上顯妙非 T2251_.64.0285b15: 妙義。或顯此妙非妙中有勝有劣。故復爲
T2251_.64.0285b18: 故。而即爲上無上非也。文既四各別故。後 T2251_.64.0285b19: 釋亦非也。以爲妙非妙中勝劣故
T2251_.64.0285b22: 實有。識必有境故。如現在。是他隨一不成 T2251_.64.0285b23: 因。經部過未世縁無識生。不許識必有境 T2251_.64.0285b24: 故
T2251_.64.0285c02: 具如已辨。若言不爾。鮮本破言作彼何爲。 T2251_.64.0285c03: 由是彼正理論。於此不指破我。即具説業 T2251_.64.0285c04: 爲先相續等生當果之相。即同我論文。所 T2251_.64.0285c05: 以是破我別論非倶舍。彼師所造無破我論 T2251_.64.0285c06: 故不能指示。故以破我論意具釋於此也」
T2251_.64.0285c09: 過未實有破。此有二失。初過去業無用失。 T2251_.64.0285c10: 後未來果無體失。二若一下總牒三世實有 T2251_.64.0285c11: 法體恒有破。亦有二失。初因果不成失。後 T2251_.64.0285c12: 同外道失。寶疏總爲四失麁也
T2251_.64.0285c21: 未是實有。故世尊如其所有説有言。謂現 T2251_.64.0285c22: 實有。過曾有。未當有。於現中亦有實有假 T2251_.64.0285c23: 有。舊論曰。若如道理應有必如此有。問。二
T2251_.64.0285c26: 意答我。婆羅門於意云何。眼是有不。答言 T2251_.64.0285c27: 是有。沙門瞿曇色是有不。答言是有。沙門瞿 T2251_.64.0285c28: 曇婆羅門有色有眼識有眼觸。有眼觸因 T2251_.64.0285c29: 縁生受若苦若樂不苦不樂不。答言有。沙門
T2251_.64.0286a06: 以爲經文者謬矣。是則文理不屬。是亦不 T2251_.64.0286a07: 讀經本故也。今謂。汝却未考論意也。又 T2251_.64.0286a08: 未知諸註爲經本之意而妄斥破。豈可當 T2251_.64.0286a09: 哉。問。經本無量。若應是一經。舊論文亦全 T2251_.64.0286a10: 同此故。解云不爾。以何知此。顯宗論二十
T2251_.64.0286a13: 顯宗豈可置不引
T2251_.64.0286a17: 沙名。眞毘婆沙都無此語。又不如彼自率 T2251_.64.0286a18: 己情妄説去來如現實有。三世實有性各別 T2251_.64.0286a19: 故。詳彼意。欲爲聖教災詭設虚言謗正 T2251_.64.0286a20: 論者。豈由如是所設謗言令我義宗所有 T2251_.64.0286a21: 虧損寧有。我部諸大論師博究精通聖道正 T2251_.64.0286a22: 理。具苞衆徳。名稱普聞。於小難中不能通 T2251_.64.0286a23: 釋故。於非處詭設謗言。既率己情妄標 T2251_.64.0286a24: 宗致。似未披覽眞毘婆沙。所設難辭我已
T2251_.64.0286a27: 過未實有。其同法喩是不現在而用何爲。 T2251_.64.0286a28: 由如是理言如現實有去來。何得言詭
T2251_.64.0286b02: 世實有非無即同現在。故言三世實有。豈 T2251_.64.0286b03: 可言眞婆沙都無此語。何可言似未披 T2251_.64.0286b04: 覽。又雖汝通諸難。唯是自情所他未許。豈 T2251_.64.0286b05: 成通釋。故言不能亦是不宜
T2251_.64.0286b08: 位。於者境聲而流修位。是簡不縁。初餘言 T2251_.64.0286b09: 廣渉集滅道修。故加遍行顯唯集惑。以遍 T2251_.64.0286b10: 行惑唯苦集故。及聲顯見修界畔。而亦顯 T2251_.64.0286b11: 倶是縁此猶繫。猶者尙也。隨眠言流下餘 T2251_.64.0286b12: 字。兩種餘字竝是未斷。對前已斷故。正理
T2251_.64.0286b16: 縁者有時非所縁。故縁此言定爲無用。若 T2251_.64.0286b17: 謂別説有不能縁。則遍行中亦應簡別。以 T2251_.64.0286b18: 有見集所斷遍行不縁見苦所斷事故。經
T2251_.64.0286b21: 應總分見修所斷煩惱以爲九品。漸次斷 T2251_.64.0286b22: 除。前品已斷中有餘未斷遍行煩惱亦能爲 T2251_.64.0286b23: 繫。簡縁他地遍行隨眠。説縁此言。可成 T2251_.64.0286b24: 有用。然於前説餘遍行中闕縁此言。義不 T2251_.64.0286b25: 成立。或應以後。所説及聲兼顯前文攝縁 T2251_.64.0286b26: 此義。謂於前説見苦已斷及此前品已斷事 T2251_.64.0286b27: 中。皆有所餘縁此猶繫。若爾此文雜亂。於 T2251_.64.0286b28: 見位中餘及遍行應隨去一。然此煩説闕
T2251_.64.0286c03: 之。何爲縁此言闕。若餘及遍行隨一煩説 T2251_.64.0286c04: 者。於顯宗餘縁此前後兩説。豈非鄭重。若 T2251_.64.0286c05: 遍行言無用故除此者。何故於長行云遍 T2251_.64.0286c06: 行隨眠
T2251_.64.0286c12: 漏法境識。爲避文煩及令義路明知。五部
T2251_.64.0286c15: 以示圖入論中。圖記。冠註等圖有其不正 T2251_.64.0286c16: 矚而可知
T2251_.64.0286c19: 結前生後。二若別下正明繫事隨増。於中 T2251_.64.0286c20: 有三。一標去廣就略。二且有下略示事。 T2251_.64.0286c21: 三準思下勸思餘法。此即初也。光記分文不 T2251_.64.0286c22: 可也
T2251_.64.0286c25: 界。有色無色法。有見無見法。有對無對法。有 T2251_.64.0286c26: 漏無漏法。有爲無爲法。過去未現在法。善不 T2251_.64.0286c27: 善無記法。欲界色界無色界繋法。學無學非 T2251_.64.0286c28: 學非無學法。見所斷修所斷無斷法。四諦。四 T2251_.64.0286c29: 靜慮。四無量。四無色。八解脱。八勝處。十遍 T2251_.64.0287a01: 處。八智。三三摩地。三重三摩地。三結。三不 T2251_.64.0287a02: 善根。三漏。四瀑流。四軛。四取。四身繫。五蓋。 T2251_.64.0287a03: 五結。五順下分結。五順上分結。五見。六愛
T2251_.64.0287a10: 示樂根一例勸餘。然諸註。本論等云就二 T2251_.64.0287a11: 十二根者未委讀也。彼唯四十二章之一章 T2251_.64.0287a12: 故 光師釋甚略。寶疏具簡釋
T2251_.64.0287a15: 諸法非一。今就樂根一云且。答中有三。先 T2251_.64.0287a16: T2251_.64.0287a17: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a18: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a19: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a20: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a21: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a22: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a23: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a24: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a25: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a26: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a27: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a28: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287a29: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0287b01: 示所隨増樂根數。若不知此何可知能隨 T2251_.64.0287b02: 増是幾二簡無漏非所隨増。三此中下正
T2251_.64.0287b05: 三識身相應。此二唯有漏修所斷。第三靜慮 T2251_.64.0287b06: 者意識相應通有漏無漏。有漏通五部。無漏
T2251_.64.0287b12: 者。通五部故云一切。若細分別除見滅中 T2251_.64.0287b13: 無爲縁。謂邪見。疑。無明。由是欲修三惑。苦 T2251_.64.0287b14: 集十一遍使。色界二十八總四十二隨増。寶 T2251_.64.0287b15: 疏不簡別云四十六非也。問。若爾何不如 T2251_.64.0287b16: [IMAGE]下縁識言有爲縁。 T2251_.64.0287b17: [IMAGE]答。一切顯五部。有 T2251_.64.0287b18: [IMAGE]爲簡無爲縁。文互
T2251_.64.0287b21: [IMAGE]亦細分別。婆沙八
T2251_.64.0287b24: [IMAGE]在意識。通有漏無 T2251_.64.0287b25: [IMAGE]漏。有漏者通五部。 T2251_.64.0287b26: [IMAGE]及通一切隨眠相 T2251_.64.0287b27: [IMAGE]應。故自地一切隨 T2251_.64.0287b28: [IMAGE]眠隨増。故不可除 T2251_.64.0287b29: [IMAGE]無爲縁。又欲界瞋 T2251_.64.0287b30: [IMAGE]雖非相應所縁隨 T2251_.64.0287c01: 増。如於他樂發瞋恚。亦不可除。問。若爾 T2251_.64.0287c02: 何故單縁等中除無爲縁答。彼約縁識樂 T2251_.64.0287c03: 非無爲故除去。今據相應故取不除問本 T2251_.64.0287c04: 論已先説二十二根首眼根。若示方隅何不 T2251_.64.0287c05: 約初。故正理。顯宗改此論以眼根示方 T2251_.64.0287c06: 隅。若約四十二章隨一者。何不十八界及 T2251_.64.0287c07: 五蘊初。有何由致據根中間。亦復不五受 T2251_.64.0287c08: 初憂根。解云。顯無定準。以示方隅。亦復樂 T2251_.64.0287c09: 根以可愛樂。今爲初學此三品示圖以入 T2251_.64.0287c10: 論中。圖記及冠註圖有其不正。依婆沙八十
T2251_.64.0287c20: 體名等何。答。隨眠者即五部九十八惑是。心 T2251_.64.0287c21: 者上十六識中前有漏十五心是也。有者由
T2251_.64.0287c24: 等名有隨眠。且前所言三界各五部十五種 T2251_.64.0287c25: 識名有隨眠心。如是諸心各有二種。謂遍 T2251_.64.0287c26: 非遍行。有漏無漏縁。染不染心有差別故
T2251_.64.0288a02: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a03: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a04: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a05: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a13: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a14: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a15: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a16: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a17: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a18: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a19: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a20: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a21: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a22: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a23: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a24: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a25: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a26: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a27: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a28: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288a29: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0288b01: 心イヽ能有隨眠。隨眠之有名有隨眠。有隨眠 T2251_.64.0288b02: 即心名有隨眠心。有者相應義。於此相應 T2251_.64.0288b03: 義即含隨増助伴二事
T2251_.64.0288b06: 位。唯有隨眠非隨増。現無惑故即非隨増 T2251_.64.0288b07: 而助伴性恒相應故猶有隨眠。助伴性者。所 T2251_.64.0288b08: 謂染汚習氣即類性謂先來隨眠與心倶。今 T2251_.64.0288b09: 雖斷隨眠。而所相應心非由道力所斷。仍 T2251_.64.0288b10: 名有隨眠。如人前盜賊。今不作其業仍名 T2251_.64.0288b11: 盜賊。若所縁縛已斷非唯不隨増亦不名 T2251_.64.0288b12: 有隨眠。何以故。親疎別故。如是有隨眠心 T2251_.64.0288b13: 有兩種。一有染。四部全。修道一分即染汚 T2251_.64.0288b14: 心。二無染心。修道善無記心。有染心亦有 T2251_.64.0288b15: 二。一隨増有隨眠心。二不隨増有隨眠心。若 T2251_.64.0288b16: 無染心。唯隨増有隨眠無不隨増有隨眠心。 T2251_.64.0288b17: 由是示圖曰
T2251_.64.0288b20: 頌及明本竝正理。顯宗悉作見可知。倶是誤 T2251_.64.0288b21: 形也
T2251_.64.0288b29: 生故。然有一類。煩惱現行前後相牽非無 T2251_.64.0288b30: 次第。而示三種次。一約一類不善觀察。身。 T2251_.64.0289a01: T2251_.64.0289a02: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a03: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a04: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a05: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a13: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a14: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a15: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a16: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a17: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a18: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289a19: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0289b20: 邊。邪。見取。戒禁。疑。貪慢。瞋。癡如次生。二 T2251_.64.0289b21: 約一類禀性愚癡。癡。疑。身。邊。戒禁。邪。見 T2251_.64.0289b22: 取。貪。慢。瞋如次生。三云復有於此別立次 T2251_.64.0289b23: 第擧此論頌文述釋。而後云。理實煩惱行 T2251_.64.0289b24: 相無邊。以所待縁有差別故。無有決定次 T2251_.64.0289b25: 第而生
T2251_.64.0289b28: 舊論同此。論主欲取後説故示見諦所斷 T2251_.64.0289b29: 等所由。入論。正。顯竝無所由。寶疏以迷理 T2251_.64.0289c20: 迷事瞋和會。是雖非理無。今既明十惑生 T2251_.64.0289c21: 起。故從初約諦。故後師爲勝。如是等結釋 T2251_.64.0289c22: 頌如次。故於舊論牒如次第有此結釋。然 T2251_.64.0289c23: 所由文屬如次釋有餘下闕。蓋是錯亂
T2251_.64.0289c26: 若無惑言此頌是爲誰三因。若或字何不
T2251_.64.0289c29: 音誤。有人云。正理等長行順或字。論意各別 T2251_.64.0289c30: 漏等中全不攝彼。有作是説。有漏乃至我 T2251_.64.0289d01: 者非也。正理顚末無一與此論頌有異故。 T2251_.64.0289d02: 然彼長行以兩義通難故有二或。必非釋 T2251_.64.0289d03: 頌或言以致言也。然此句顯有不具三因 T2251_.64.0289d04: 而惑起
T2251_.64.0289d09: 煩惱已斷故無未斷隨眠。意樂淸淨故無非 T2251_.64.0289d10: 理作意
T2251_.64.0289d14: 言。有漏者三有漏。謂欲有漏。有有漏。無明有 T2251_.64.0289d15: 漏。長含標三有漏云欲漏。有漏。無明漏
T2251_.64.0289d21: 在故。由是唯説煩惱。若纒亦依界分別者。
T2251_.64.0289d25: 界亦有二纒何不説爲有漏。二品類下違 T2251_.64.0289d26: 教失。亦者示有體。或對彼欲漏攝纒。集異
T2251_.64.0290a01: T2251_.64.0290a02: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290a03: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290a04: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290a05: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290a06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290a07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0290b08: 語取中亦攝諸纒。品類足説。云何有漏乃至 T2251_.64.0290b09: 是名有漏。有瀑流軛及我語取亦應攝纒。 T2251_.64.0290b10: 應作是説。上界纒少。不自在故不説爲有 T2251_.64.0290b11: 漏。乃至我語取欲界雖多而見所斷。不具 T2251_.64.0290b12: 足故不自在故但總説十纒。不別説五部。 T2251_.64.0290b13: 今且就有漏問答。顯餘亦如是。此中論主。 T2251_.64.0290b14: 欲如有作是説可據本論攝一切故。特 T2251_.64.0290b15: 簡別言迦濕彌羅等
T2251_.64.0290b20: 由釋第七八句。此即初也。謂準此欲漏有 T2251_.64.0290b21: 漏三界十五部三十一五十二。於無明亦三 T2251_.64.0290b22: 界十五纒無明自成。又於欲漏有漏。既除無 T2251_.64.0290b23: 明義准已成立説爲無明漏。至言是至理決 T2251_.64.0290b24: 定義。又鮮本。寶疏竝作准各義通
T2251_.64.0290b27: 通用諸煩惱爲體。詳曰。據體如寶疏有 T2251_.64.0290b28: 寬狹。若依名義如光記其義有同。由是論
T2251_.64.0290c09: 現行故。如説王行。非無導從。王但勝故總
T2251_.64.0290c14: 一句於爲淸上。莫唯有能爲淸淨道無所
T2251_.64.0290c19: 彼曰。欲取及見取者。是在家出家二部鬪諍 T2251_.64.0290c20: 因故立爲二取。在家由取五塵故與在家 T2251_.64.0290c21: 起鬪諍。出家由取諸見各不同故與出家 T2251_.64.0290c22: 起鬪諍。此二部取定及定果爲解脱道解脱
T2251_.64.0290d03: 明軛。彼唯擧經無有解釋。問。集異門是六 T2251_.64.0290d04: 足隨一。薩婆多宗根本依據。彼既但擧此經 T2251_.64.0290d05: 以示四軛。何故異彼攝諸煩惱。亦復不別 T2251_.64.0290d06: 是經部義。已六足中如是故。解云。集異門舍 T2251_.64.0290d07: 利子造。偏依經説故示此經。與經部不 T2251_.64.0290d08: 異。後門徒起異見故致別宗。由是正理五
T2251_.64.0290d11: 爲貪自體非也。後釋爲五妙欲境冥舊論」
T2251_.64.0290d17: 釋隨眠而破光記。詳曰寶師判決盡理。婆
T2251_.64.0290d21: 眠義。何唯爲眼。湛惠云。若准正理如寶疏。 T2251_.64.0290d22: 然光記非全無理。睡眠行相不易知故。由
T2251_.64.0290d26: 故寶疏爲正
T2251_.64.0290d29: 等二句是也。而數下二句通上二。正理曰。 T2251_.64.0290d30: 言隨縛者極難離故。入論上曰。隨縛義謂 T2251_.64.0291a01: 隨身心相續而轉。如空行影水行隨
T2251_.64.0291a04: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a05: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291a13: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0291a16: 初約生死流轉釋流。後由彼下約不淨流 T2251_.64.0291a17: 出釋流。諸註未曉。如寶疏尚致總別判
T2251_.64.0291a20: 頂天至無間獄故名爲漏。或彼相續於六
T2251_.64.0291a25: 中淹貯業種能生後有。三流派義。如泉 T2251_.64.0291a26: 出水乳房出乳。如是有情從六處門諸漏 T2251_.64.0291a27: 流派。四禁持義。如人爲他所禁持。故不能 T2251_.64.0291a28: 隨意遊適四方。如是有情爲煩惱所禁持。 T2251_.64.0291a29: 故循環諸界諸趣諸生。不得自在趣涅槃
T2251_.64.0291b04: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b05: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b06: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b07: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b08: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b09: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b10: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b11: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b12: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0291b13: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0291b16: 思。如是有情爲諸煩惱所惑。故起身語 T2251_.64.0291b17: 意三種惡行。六醉亂義。如人多飮根莖枝葉 T2251_.64.0291b18: 花菓等酒。便不了應作不應作事無慚無愧 T2251_.64.0291b19: 顚倒放逸。如是有情飮煩惱酒不了應作 T2251_.64.0291b20: 不應作事無慚無愧顚倒放逸。聲論者説。阿 T2251_.64.0291b21: 薩臘縛者。薩臘縛是流義。阿是分齊義。如言 T2251_.64.0291b22: 天雨阿波吒梨。或施財食。阿旃荼羅阿言 T2251_.64.0291b23: 顯此。乃至彼義如是。煩惱流轉有情乃至
T2251_.64.0291c01: 諸生生死流轉。二騰注義。謂諸煩惱等騰注 T2251_.64.0291c02: 有情。令於界趣生生死流轉。三墜溺義。謂諸 T2251_.64.0291c03: 煩惱等墜溺有情。令於界趣生生死流轉」
T2251_.64.0291c06: 漂溺已復爲四軛和合繋礙。便能荷擔生 T2251_.64.0291c07: 死重苦。如牽搖牛置之轅軛勒以鞦鞅 T2251_.64.0291c08: 能挽重擔。故一切處説暴流已即便説軛 T2251_.64.0291c09: 義イヽ相隣故
T2251_.64.0291c14: 爲依因執取欲見等故名取。與執取之依 T2251_.64.0291c15: 因故云依執。光四解竝穿空。寶疏云執取
T2251_.64.0291c18: 故火得熾然。如是有煩惱故有情業得生 T2251_.64.0291c19: 長。又猛利義是取義。或纒裹義是取義。如蠶 T2251_.64.0291c20: 處蠒自纒而死。如是有情四取所纒流轉
T2251_.64.0291c24: 是釋名。應不有經部如是全釋
T2251_.64.0291c29: 漏有別相續。由彼勢力於境泄過。即諸煩 T2251_.64.0291c30: 惱或總或別流注不絶得相續名。説於六瘡 T2251_.64.0292a01: 門即説於六境彼言不絶。即我無窮與我 T2251_.64.0292a02: 何殊獨言彼善。今彈云。汝是三義。我是一 T2251_.64.0292a03: 義。又汝六根。我是六境。又汝流義。我即相續 T2251_.64.0292a04: 不絶義。豈爲是同
T2251_.64.0292a07: 善品。與我何別彼獨善哉。今彈云。漂奪義 T2251_.64.0292a08: 與勢増上義何可不同。於中勢増上義親 T2251_.64.0292a09: 暴流名
T2251_.64.0292a12: 行時若非増上何能令與種種苦合。如何
T2251_.64.0292a15: 倶立軛名。若言我釋亦同此過。此唯非理。
T2251_.64.0292a20: 取故故名爲取。彼三由。此但一義。正理破 T2251_.64.0292a21: 曰。所釋取義亦與理違。謂若取名唯因愛 T2251_.64.0292a22: 者。説取縁有義イヽ如何成。應但説言愛縁 T2251_.64.0292a23: 有。又如前際後際業縁亦應通攝一切煩 T2251_.64.0292a24: 惱。如縁起中已廣思擇。今彈云。從三受生 T2251_.64.0292a25: 欲色無色三愛故説受縁愛。從欣受愛起 T2251_.64.0292a26: 欲等取。故説愛縁取。由取爲縁積集種種 T2251_.64.0292a27: 招後有業。故説取縁有。欲色無色三愛 T2251_.64.0292a28: 爲愛。欲等之取名取。同愛爲體然其行相 T2251_.64.0292a29: 各別。何妨因果。又如前際後際業縁唯是 T2251_.64.0292a30: 欲貪必無違理 T2251_.64.0292a31: 倶舍論法義卷第二十終 T2251_.64.0292b01: T2251_.64.0292b02: T2251_.64.0292b03: 十一 T2251_.64.0292b04: 豐山寓居上毛沙門快道林常記 T2251_.64.0292b05: 分別隨眠品第五之三
T2251_.64.0292b12: 體雖未説。已説纒名爲漏等及一百八煩 T2251_.64.0292b13: 惱此釋問本誤。答何可正。何以故。此但結 T2251_.64.0292b14: 以隨眠及纒説爲漏等。非結即隨眠幷纒。 T2251_.64.0292b15: 然問者。隨眠上廣説故言已説可然。纒未 T2251_.64.0292b16: 説何云已説。豈非誤哉。答亦從彼故非也」
T2251_.64.0292b19: 門故言復説。問。前漏等四門皆説幷纒。今 T2251_.64.0292b20: 結等中何言煩惱答。煩惱言有通別。此通 T2251_.64.0292b21: 諸惑故無相違。前以隨眠及纒説爲漏等 T2251_.64.0292b22: 故殊言隨眠并纒。今所説中既有纒。不可
T2251_.64.0292b28: 説。如業道名
T2251_.64.0292c02: 句明見取二結廢立。後下二行明嫉慳廢立。 T2251_.64.0292c03: 此中前一行約八纒家。後一行約十纒家
T2251_.64.0292c06: 爲愛結。餘結皆應依界辨體。其十隨眠前 T2251_.64.0292c07: 已辨。嫉慳唯欲界修斷故勸示言當辨。雜含
T2251_.64.0292c13: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c14: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c15: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c16: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c17: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c18: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c19: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c20: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0292c21: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0292c24: 見結。合二取爲取結之義言如是理。此證 T2251_.64.0292c25: 見結三爲體。取結二爲體之理。問中見相應 T2251_.64.0292c26: 法者。約五見隨應。光記云五見意通言未 T2251_.64.0292c27: 足。寶疏爲二取非也。依答害問意也。見 T2251_.64.0292c28: 隨眠者。十隨眠中見隨眠隨應隨増。光記亦 T2251_.64.0292c29: 云五見言未足。寶疏唯云十隨眠中見隨 Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE] |