大正蔵検索 INBUDS
|
阿毘達磨倶舍論法義 (No. 2251_ 快道撰 ) in Vol. 64 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE]
T2251_.64.0237a01: 言何曲謂諸惡見 與正理同也。又正理
T2251_.64.0237a04: 槃。障證彼因三業名穢。依外道見。於佛 T2251_.64.0237a05: 教中障淨信心不信名濁。以能擾濁淨信 T2251_.64.0237a06: 心故。從彼所起三業名濁。又墮斷常。違 T2251_.64.0237a07: 處中行。從彼所起身語意業違直道義。故 T2251_.64.0237a08: 立曲名。由損減見所起諸業能穢淨法故 T2251_.64.0237a09: 立穢名。穢名必依極穢義。故薩迦耶見所起 T2251_.64.0237a10: 諸業能障無我眞實淨見。依障淨義故立
T2251_.64.0237a13: T2251_.64.0237a14: T2251_.64.0237a15: T2251_.64.0237a16: T2251_.64.0237a17: 豐山寓居沙門釋快道記
T2251_.64.0237a23: 白無異熟業。能盡諸業。黒黒者。初黒是 T2251_.64.0237a24: 因。次黒即果。下皆準此。黒之黒依主。黒黒 T2251_.64.0237a25: 即異熟持業。黒黒異熟之業亦依主。白白異 T2251_.64.0237a26: 熟業亦爾。第三黒與白相違釋。第四亦非黒。 T2251_.64.0237a27: 亦非白。亦無異熟。亦業。亦能盡諸業竝皆 T2251_.64.0237a28: 持業釋
T2251_.64.0237b02: 所治。寶疏。頌疏。同光第二。然寶疏。初性不
T2251_.64.0237b08: 亦黒。不可意故。今於業示染一邊
T2251_.64.0237b13: 業同故。三約中生二有具不具。四約色非 T2251_.64.0237b14: 色二異熟具不具。五約色非色二業。六約三 T2251_.64.0237b15: 業具缺。七約五蘊。色皆具。無色缺色。八約 T2251_.64.0237b16: 十業道無色唯意三。九約二淨二明白具缺。 T2251_.64.0237b17: 此中初二無色許白。後七不許。有部宗中後
T2251_.64.0237b22: 説。不入無色也。今約第三第六兩説。後 T2251_.64.0237b23: 中光釋爲是。寶疏總屬下。爲黒白業釋謬
T2251_.64.0237c01: 皆名白白異熟業者。彼據純淨可意異熟。 T2251_.64.0237c02: 通立白名。然彼契經非了義經。以於上界 T2251_.64.0237c03: 四蘊五蘊一切善法説業名故。諸異熟因 T2251_.64.0237c04: 由業所顯。故非業者亦立業名。證知彼經 T2251_.64.0237c05: 非了義説。今彈云。彼經説但彼諸善業。云 T2251_.64.0237c06: 皆名故。不言一切善法皆名等
T2251_.64.0237c10: 訓。泥寶疏釋也 T2251_.64.0237c11: 此黒白名依相續立 光四釋。第二爲正。雜
T2251_.64.0237c15: 業耶。答。爲欲顯示一依止中。一相續中。 T2251_.64.0237c16: 受二種業所感異熟一黒二白
T2251_.64.0237c19: 欲據殘結邊造此。故與未離欲其雜義同。 T2251_.64.0237c20: 光二釋竝非也
T2251_.64.0237c24: 云何。謂善。及無覆無記法。黒白法。有覆無記 T2251_.64.0237c25: 法。順退。非順退法亦爾。既諸善云白法。無 T2251_.64.0237c26: 漏是善故。無覆無記句。同文故來
T2251_.64.0237c29: 今唯論欲界純黒。故但四法忍
T2251_.64.0238a03: 性。非四業攝。不同欲界九思皆斷純黒。故 T2251_.64.0238a04: 不説前八。不言無色。如前説不攝業故」
T2251_.64.0238a07: 然由下明縁縛斷盡時名斷。三由此下結成 T2251_.64.0238a08: 餘一品非斷。已斷不定現前。或有遇異
T2251_.64.0238a11: 已。而不現行。離欲捨故。欲界餘善斷已猶 T2251_.64.0238a12: 行。以成熟故 頌疏依之。此釋非也。以定 T2251_.64.0238a13: 法言起不起故。又憂根是別一類法。非 T2251_.64.0238a14: 由斷縁彼煩惱故不起。又憂是離欲捨法 T2251_.64.0238a15: 故。離欲染者。必不得起。何對此可施容 T2251_.64.0238a16: 言
T2251_.64.0238a22: 寂靜。此經云意業寂靜。云何答
T2251_.64.0238a25: 一也
T2251_.64.0238b01: 立。舊論云分別。婆沙云意。文異義同。準 T2251_.64.0238b02: 彼二文。煩惱與言相違釋。言語散動性故。光
T2251_.64.0238b08: 善行。口善行。意善行。正此文也。雜含十四
T2251_.64.0238b11: 善身業口業意業。是名善法。稽古出雜含十 T2251_.64.0238b12: 三者。彼無文也
T2251_.64.0238b26: 説一切惡妙行中麁顯者。以爲此性。前寛。 T2251_.64.0238b27: 通一切故。此狹。唯局根本故。勿濫於寛 T2251_.64.0238b28: 狹及能所攝。行與道語亦差別
T2251_.64.0238c02: 義等。二若身下兼示根本業道。而令知差 T2251_.64.0238c03: 別。此有二。初正明。後令遠下述佛別立所 T2251_.64.0238c04: 以通妨。妨云。前惡攝盡。何別立此。謂
T2251_.64.0238c07: 言輕。此身中何故不説。答。凡輕重於一物 T2251_.64.0238c08: 論。如殺盜婬。豈可有輕。殺害必斷命故。 T2251_.64.0238c09: 於身善惡倶但云餘。以身三三分餘故。竝
T2251_.64.0238c18: 今云。論主以前文不決定爲是。故今文亦 T2251_.64.0238c19: 簡去不從他受自然等言受生。依受生 T2251_.64.0238c20: 者云必具二。然下文約有部義以致。非 T2251_.64.0238c21: 論主本義。無有相違。光記初釋爲是。下文 T2251_.64.0238c22: 通二釋竝非也。大科第二非中非也。次數三 T2251_.64.0238c23: 義第一爲正。順理故。説戒自恣等作法。不
T2251_.64.0238c29: 受所觸如知證註生曰。梵語知證。與觸音 T2251_.64.0239a01: 相比故。即以爲喩也
T2251_.64.0239a11: 加行。今取要
T2251_.64.0239a14: 分標。然有失。後起名。何但可云起。亦不次 T2251_.64.0239a15: 第
T2251_.64.0239a18: 爲答。云何不同一句徴問加行三根不同 T2251_.64.0239a19: 寶疏至問餘亦爾。問三根生十業道。非諸
T2251_.64.0239a22: 可順正顯。正理於非諸等前更有問。還非
T2251_.64.0239b02: 等起者。即加行也。正文云。等起與加行應 T2251_.64.0239b03: 是前後。何云即加行
T2251_.64.0239b06: 名也。臨近西海。最饒其寶。諸國商人皆取 T2251_.64.0239b07: 其貨。斯以龍威珠力古昔推焉耳。域記十一
T2251_.64.0239b13: 所以者何。夫衰老者。諸根朽敗。不能飮食。 T2251_.64.0239b14: 若死更得新勝諸根。飮新煖乳。若遭痼疾。 T2251_.64.0239b15: 多受苦惱。死便解脱。故無罪。如是等殺名 T2251_.64.0239b16: 從痴生。以迷業果起邪謗故
T2251_.64.0239b21: 後釋對自他爲別。竝非也
T2251_.64.0239b24: 釋甚非也。後釋爲是
T2251_.64.0239b27: 一共。竝皆顯此義
T2251_.64.0239c01: 事 今云。但離前惡何成善加行。如有人 T2251_.64.0239c02: 雖止殺生不作善事。由此遠離前不善三 T2251_.64.0239c03: 位。修此善三位名善三位。故但後意。是論 T2251_.64.0239c04: 之意矣 T2251_.64.0239c05: 第三羯磨竟 諸師異義如別辨 T2251_.64.0239c06: 至説四依 光云。常乞食。樹下坐。著糞掃
T2251_.64.0239c09: 得出家。受具足戒。成比丘法。是中盡形壽。 T2251_.64.0239c10: 能持不。答曰。能持。二三四受持如前。羯磨疏
T2251_.64.0239c13: 間煮殘査滓可棄者。取重煮之。得療便止。
T2251_.64.0239c17: 及餘依前 頌疏云。餘依前者。謂未死已來 T2251_.64.0239c18: 身也。惠暉云。第二念已後作持無表是。今生 T2251_.64.0239c19: 未死。來生身未來。未來餘依身前所有表無 T2251_.64.0239c20: 表。相續生名後起。此解同此疏。今云。論意 T2251_.64.0239c21: 全不爾。餘者對説四依。四依是作業後起。 T2251_.64.0239c22: 此無表相續後起。故云餘。依者能依無表。
T2251_.64.0239c27: 業。乃至相續未斷。是名後分光云。及餘依
T2251_.64.0240a03: 那等起。實爲精當矣。然今文云麁惡現前 T2251_.64.0240a04: 時此三成故等。時成言所顯約刹那明也
T2251_.64.0240a08: 第二爲正。第一非也。釋義不成故。不順彼 T2251_.64.0240a09: 長行同此論故。又此論意何可成。頌釋全 T2251_.64.0240a10: 同故 問。正理論體制。頌文全同此。於有 T2251_.64.0240a11: 異長行中質之。或更作頌。顯宗論體制。頌 T2251_.64.0240a12: 文改之任自意。然此頌釋全同此論。無如 T2251_.64.0240a13: 正理之決擇。又不言如餘更有異義如順 T2251_.64.0240a14: 正理。其意如何 答。於正理雖決擇如是。 T2251_.64.0240a15: 於顯宗時亦欲倶舍義。故不改作。又解。正 T2251_.64.0240a16: 理頌釋全同此。故顯宗亦如是。但略後決 T2251_.64.0240a17: 擇異義。若爾違體制。故前解爲勝 今破 T2251_.64.0240a18: 正理師云。契經既説貪瞋邪見皆從三根 T2251_.64.0240a19: 生。何不此法由此究竟
T2251_.64.0240a23: 成。若無光細釋。未成示南
T2251_.64.0240a29: 死。其所殺命猶有。故不成殺罪。若爾同死 T2251_.64.0240b01: 所殺命無。應成罪。由此第二非能下答同 T2251_.64.0240b02: 死邊。此中有總釋別釋。謂同死雖所殺命 T2251_.64.0240b03: 無。能殺命已斷。亦無可受罪依身 故舊
T2251_.64.0240b06: 相應。云何不相應。偈曰。別依生。釋曰。由此 T2251_.64.0240b07: 依止於彼行殺事。此依止已斷滅。有別依
T2251_.64.0240b15: 此三義。殺生成業道。又如下辨
T2251_.64.0240b21: 等一期生。於外法中山河等一期生。燈聲 T2251_.64.0240b22: 等。有部。一切有爲。皆刹那滅。刹那如論五
T2251_.64.0240b28: 説爲正。次引契經説壽捨身爲死故。又命 T2251_.64.0240b29: 根無後現見有風動。故惠暉云。初説不正 T2251_.64.0240c01: 義。胎内四位無息風。殺應不成業道。故 T2251_.64.0240c02: 五分律云。若人似人。似人即胎内前四位也
T2251_.64.0240c05: 有胎人。識所依止。隨有損害。無非極刑。 T2251_.64.0240c06: 即如五分若人似人。意等可見
T2251_.64.0240c09: 也 T2251_.64.0240c10: 破我論中當廣思擇 舊論云。於彼破説我
T2251_.64.0240c15: 命離不離。別死活故。前正證三法。今正證 T2251_.64.0240c16: 壽身。其意別
T2251_.64.0240c20: 殺亦得殺罪者。是立宗故。今亦立義者。是 T2251_.64.0240c21: 所成宗義
T2251_.64.0240c24: 是不誤加行。全非別縁。故舊論云。若人由
T2251_.64.0241a02: 中伏藏。若是王地。盡屬於王。無主物。若疑 T2251_.64.0241a03: 心取偸蘭遮。青丘云。然有主物略有五種。一 T2251_.64.0241a04: 三寶物。二屬人物。三畜生物。四鬼神物。五劫
T2251_.64.0241a07: 物名無主物。又如一王征破異國。所破國 T2251_.64.0241a08: 王。若死若走後。王未統攝此國。爾時地有 T2251_.64.0241a09: 物名無主物。若無主物。有主心取。輕偸蘭。 T2251_.64.0241a10: 若有主物。無主心取。突吉羅。今論由王地中 T2251_.64.0241a11: 無敵屬主言無主。非無國主。故言國主邊 T2251_.64.0241a12: 得。如彼多論兩國中間。總亦無國主。故云
T2251_.64.0241a15: 道。答。於王處得。大地所有皆屬王故。復有 T2251_.64.0241a16: 説。於其田宅所屬處得。所以者何。彼於此 T2251_.64.0241a17: 中被税利故。如是説者於王所得。大地所 T2251_.64.0241a18: 有王爲主故。其田宅主。惟輸地利。非伏藏 T2251_.64.0241a19: 利。準此是田宅中伏藏。又婆沙。兩國中間伏 T2251_.64.0241a20: 藏。輪王出於輪王受。不出時無處得。彼輪 T2251_.64.0241a21: 王一切地皆所領故如是。光記初釋論。次云 T2251_.64.0241a22: 又。引無失。然寶直引婆沙兩國文。合此論
T2251_.64.0241a25: 此誤之甚。婆沙既云無處得故。又多論三
T2251_.64.0241b03: 現前僧得罪。若臨終時隨。亡人屬授物盜 T2251_.64.0241b04: 者。隨約所與人結罪也。又云。四衆僧物如 T2251_.64.0241b05: 亡比丘物。作如法羯磨竟。屬現前一衆。或 T2251_.64.0241b06: 非分賊賣。或分可不均。或不和僧。別賞 T2251_.64.0241b07: 餘人等。倶重
T2251_.64.0241b14: 故舊論言修梵行處 T2251_.64.0241b15: 謂懷胎時飮兒乳時 胎時者損胎中子。令 T2251_.64.0241b16: 受多病故。飮乳時。智論十五云。若行婬 T2251_.64.0241b17: 欲。母乳則渇。又以心著婬欲不復護兒
T2251_.64.0241b20: 欲後説。故特擧餘部説。若夫不許者。或本 T2251_.64.0241b21: 不知。設願不許者。於夫非受授戒婦。犯何 T2251_.64.0241b22: 有罪
T2251_.64.0241b27: 加行。究竟時。前境各別故 今云。後説爲 T2251_.64.0241b28: 勝。既於自妻作他婦想。於他婦謂自妻。 T2251_.64.0241b29: 竝是誤故非罪。是若約想。作他婦想。應是 T2251_.64.0241c01: 罪。若約所犯人。雖謂自婦。而是他婦故應 T2251_.64.0241c02: 受罪。然此等竝誤故不成罪。今亦雖同他 T2251_.64.0241c03: 中。加行。果滿別故非罪。所犯人。能犯想異 T2251_.64.0241c04: 故。如殺生能殺想。所殺人異不成。若言同 T2251_.64.0241c05: 他境故。彼殺生同於他境。何不成罪。如彼 T2251_.64.0241c06: 殺生斷生命。尚非過。況誤犯他婦
T2251_.64.0241c09: 解。前師爲勝 寶疏不許論文爲兩説。彼 T2251_.64.0241c10: 曰。此論引自妻妾爲例。而釋從國王得。 T2251_.64.0241c11: 更無異解 今按。光釋最爲精密。雖無有 T2251_.64.0241c12: 説言。其義遥別。而寶疏爲例。爲何例。若言 T2251_.64.0241c13: 王所例。彼自妻非王所受。若言受罪例。問。 T2251_.64.0241c14: 已許受罪。唯問處何以例可成。由此理 T2251_.64.0241c15: 雖舊論文亦全同新。準正理論。及顯宗。但 T2251_.64.0241c16: 擧自妻等義。無從王所文故。於自之上脱 T2251_.64.0241c17: 有説言。猶如四取。及數息觀論文。寶疏泥 T2251_.64.0241c18: 文失義
T2251_.64.0241c22: 於其父母諸親處得 此論答中有二。初正 T2251_.64.0241c23: 約童女。第二此及下兼示餘事。言此及所 T2251_.64.0241c24: 餘者。舊論但曰乃至。按此論此及言蓋倒 T2251_.64.0241c25: 寫。應言及此。謂此之所餘。即客女貨女等 T2251_.64.0241c26: 然光記云此童女及餘女邊。而設於正理 T2251_.64.0241c27: 等。竝泥文失義 寶疏又云。此謂童女。 T2251_.64.0241c28: 餘謂他妻等。而論通別。以和會正理者。是 T2251_.64.0241c29: 何謂乎。他妻何再可釋。結罪通別豈可有 T2251_.64.0242a01: 此 又解。此及下論主質於能護人約王 T2251_.64.0242a02: 故云此。兼明餘。故言及所餘。依此義光釋
T2251_.64.0242a17: 事説爲四。今約境見不見爲八聖。如集異 T2251_.64.0242a18: 門等者。境與想相望爲十六聖言。非聖亦 T2251_.64.0242a19: 爾
T2251_.64.0242a23: 見於彼色。起欲起愛起念起染著不。答 T2251_.64.0242a24: 言。不也。世尊耳聲鼻香舌味身觸意法亦如 T2251_.64.0242a25: 是説。佛告磨羅迦舅。善哉善哉。磨羅迦舅 T2251_.64.0242a26: 見以見爲量。聞以聞爲量。覺以覺爲量。 T2251_.64.0242a27: 識以識爲量 大母。光記作鬘母。寶疏作 T2251_.64.0242a28: 鬘。或作大。正理。顯宗竝悉作大母。今作大
T2251_.64.0242b03: 亦挍者誤。或寫誤也。前文具六根六境對説。 T2251_.64.0242b04: 而後文云見聞覺知。定知。香味觸三爲所 T2251_.64.0242b05: 覺。元寶釋義煩雜。猶似爲前文不説香味
T2251_.64.0242b08: 也。而云。此云深入義。貪之異名也。言窮極 T2251_.64.0242b09: 無厭。故以名之
T2251_.64.0242b14: 先舊諸師 今應圖諸異説 T2251_.64.0242b15: T2251_.64.0242b16: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b17: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b18: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b19: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b20: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b21: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b22: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b23: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b24: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b25: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b26: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b27: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b28: [IMAGE] T2251_.64.0242b29: [IMAGE]
T2251_.64.0242c05: 布灑他。正答問。其第一應爲例答問
T2251_.64.0242c08: 由是正理。顯宗如前十種得戒。一切皆必依 T2251_.64.0242c09: 表。今亦如是。非論主本意故。舊論云。汝今 T2251_.64.0242c10: 於中應作功用。如先辨。然光記云云。竝皆 T2251_.64.0242c11: 非也。問。以何知就有部本計耶。答。正 T2251_.64.0242c12: 理師盡力會此。布灑他默然表語義。仙
T2251_.64.0242c16: 開爲二故。離隔和合中間故。名離間。間之
T2251_.64.0242c21: 釋 麁強非好語名麁惡語。或非善爲惡。 T2251_.64.0242c22: 竝兩重持業
T2251_.64.0242c25: 種既染心。及壞他語。并非愛語爲二故。今云。 T2251_.64.0242c26: 三性雜柔不淨。故名雜穢。如雜染名。能發
T2251_.64.0242c29: 亦名散語。於義不相攝故
T2251_.64.0243a05: 品。論主意後師爲正。前文爾故。正理師意 T2251_.64.0243a06: 亦爾。光師爲總別。然寶疏爲三説。初説 T2251_.64.0243a07: 唯約外財。第三説通情非情。故爲別 今 T2251_.64.0243a08: 云。寶疏非也。唯總別異故。言他財物。總有
T2251_.64.0243a11: 物。餘準之。光記設四釋。竝非也
T2251_.64.0243a14: 面前。斷世貪愛。離欲清淨。瞋恚。睡眠。掉悔。 T2251_.64.0243a15: 疑。斷遠離五蓋煩惱。對下文以知世貪是 T2251_.64.0243a16: 欲貪蓋。故言依欲貪。蓋但言世貪。總是欲
T2251_.64.0243a20: 明七覺中。非今文意。凡四念中五蓋非一。 T2251_.64.0243a21: 而餘非也
T2251_.64.0243a25: 無善惡業果報。無此世。無他世。無父母。
T2251_.64.0243b08: 無施與。無愛樂。無祠祀。無妙行。無惡行。 T2251_.64.0243b09: 無妙惡行業果異熟等見名邪見。婆沙九十
T2251_.64.0243b15: 本經。豈是當理 今云。一無施與。二無愛 T2251_.64.0243b16: 樂。是撥可愛樂欲果之因。雜含云無報。中 T2251_.64.0243b17: 含云無齋。三無祠祀。是祭天地之福。四無 T2251_.64.0243b18: 妙行。無惡行。雖有二無。唯是業一類故。發 T2251_.64.0243b19: 智云無妙行惡行。雜含云無善行惡行。中含 T2251_.64.0243b20: 云無善惡業。竝無第二無。亦合異熟。是何 T2251_.64.0243b21: 可開。五無妙惡行業果異熟。六無此世間。 T2251_.64.0243b22: 無彼世間。雖彼此異。同世一類。故中含云
T2251_.64.0243b25: 無父母。婆沙釋云無父母感子之業。若父
T2251_.64.0243b28: 是阿羅漢。謂撥無沙門或婆羅門具殺賊應 T2251_.64.0243b29: 供等徳可稱是阿羅漢。此實撥羅漢故言 T2251_.64.0243c01: 是。光記作及非也。舊論。寶疏亦作是。發智 T2251_.64.0243c02: 但云世間無阿羅漢。雜含亦爾。中含云世 T2251_.64.0243c03: 無眞人。十無正至。發智云。無正至此謗滅 T2251_.64.0243c04: 邪見。見滅所斷。雜含云等起。中含云往至 T2251_.64.0243c05: 善處。十一發智云。無正行。此世。他世。即於 T2251_.64.0243c06: 現法。知自通達。作證具足住。我生已盡。梵 T2251_.64.0243c07: 行已立。所作已辨。不受後有。如實知。此謗 T2251_.64.0243c08: 道邪見。見道所斷。中雜二含其文意同。正理 T2251_.64.0243c09: 論師所言十一類者。蓋以如是
T2251_.64.0243c12: T2251_.64.0243c13: T2251_.64.0243c14: T2251_.64.0243c15: 豐山寓居上毛沙門快道記 T2251_.64.0243c16: 業品第四之五
T2251_.64.0243c19: 相下。釋思業隨貪等行故於貪等得道名。 T2251_.64.0243c20: 初二句。示業所目。次二句明隨貪等行。故 T2251_.64.0243c21: 轉故行顯貪等得道名。後二句成思名業
T2251_.64.0243c24: 依第七依主釋。次一句所由。由能下述釋身 T2251_.64.0243c25: 語業。爲思業所依託故。於此得道名。三業 T2251_.64.0243c26: 業下結名
T2251_.64.0243c29: 道。寶疏爲是。順正理故。光記分業與道
T2251_.64.0244a06: 中倶極成故。或業之道故名業道。亦業亦道 T2251_.64.0244a07: 故名業道。具足應言業道。業道以一爲餘 T2251_.64.0244a08: 但言業道。依此倶言可了。若不爾正理 T2251_.64.0244a09: 倶言何消 又準正理亦業亦道。於身語者 T2251_.64.0244a10: 有三。一唯業。二業之道。三自體業。亦思所 T2251_.64.0244a11: 依故名道。是持業釋。此論且略第三
T2251_.64.0244a14: 釋但増減相配異而其義同。謂惡業増必惡 T2251_.64.0244a15: 物増。如放逸増則遊具盛。由惡物増好物 T2251_.64.0244a16: 必減。惡業減。必惡物亦減。如劫初惡業減 T2251_.64.0244a17: 無墮獄者由惡物減。好物必増。善業増減 T2251_.64.0244a18: 類。亦如是。由是三釋竝無害。故婆沙百十
T2251_.64.0244a22: 増。次云増減故。正理。顯宗亦爾 然舊論
T2251_.64.0244a28: 業釋舊論曰。彼是業亦是惡趣道故。彼名爲 T2251_.64.0244a29: 業道。後釋貪瞋邪見互爲能所生。乘言釋 T2251_.64.0244b01: 道字。亦持業釋。論主意朋經部故。於前論
T2251_.64.0244b05: 唯屬下爲句頭。出體故特標擧。故行者中答 T2251_.64.0244b06: 文不云斷。出體中標釋結倶云斷。由此舊
T2251_.64.0244b11: 屬下見。長行釋疑但云生疑。釋次云。生正 T2251_.64.0244b12: 見定有非無 是起定有之正見。由是舊
T2251_.64.0244b17: 言至得是斷得也。而在依言上。約能得明 T2251_.64.0244b18: 矣。光記如論。寶疏意。欲善尚斷。雖上善正 T2251_.64.0244b19: 不斷猶令得更遠。彼中由言顯此義。全非 T2251_.64.0244b20: 論意。今論意者。欲界善已斷遠離。上善得尚 T2251_.64.0244b21: 遠故云更。爲顯非彼器總云斷。實上善未 T2251_.64.0244b22: 斷之遠離欲善已斷遠離。惠暉。麟竝不可
T2251_.64.0244b25: 斷善根縁何境界
T2251_.64.0244b28: 因邪見如無間道。謗果邪見如解脱道。謗因 T2251_.64.0244b29: 者。與善根成就得倶滅。謗果者。與善根不 T2251_.64.0244c01: 成就得倶生。是故此二倶能斷善 論主意 T2251_.64.0244c02: 雖取謗因謗果邊。而不欲擬二道。故但二 T2251_.64.0244c03: 道邊標別云有餘師。何者撥無之理豈有別。 T2251_.64.0244c04: 二別依境異耳
T2251_.64.0244c08: 於有漏中亦不取他界縁。此文所由。能縁 T2251_.64.0244c09: 無漏縁他界縁邪見云彼。簡所縁隨増言 T2251_.64.0244c10: 唯。與彼相應心心所名相應。言隨眠者。光 T2251_.64.0244c11: 寶及舊論如是義難曉。光等加釋隨増言。 T2251_.64.0244c12: 撿鮮本作隨増爲正也。能縁有漏邪見。所 T2251_.64.0244c13: 縁境無漏。互相違自他界別故言境不隨増。 T2251_.64.0244c14: 由此彼無漏縁等邪見勢力弱故不能斷 T2251_.64.0244c15: 善。舊論曰。唯由相應隨眠故。故彼力弱 T2251_.64.0244c16: 上由故下故彼思之 惠暉云。他界縁不縁 T2251_.64.0244c17: 自界因果。無漏縁不縁有漏因果。故不斷 T2251_.64.0244c18: 善者非也
T2251_.64.0244c21: 言對與境不隨増。因爲増也。寶疏隨爲不 T2251_.64.0244c22: 定義。隨應義。因位加行爲因。謂加行位隨増
T2251_.64.0244c25: 彼雖無所縁縛。而因力長養亦増盛故。説 T2251_.64.0244c26: 無爲縁他界縁亦復如是 T2251_.64.0244c27: 準婆沙。隨於因力長養。無漏縁等邪見亦増 T2251_.64.0244c28: 盛。如是有強力故彼能斷善。寶釋全非也。 T2251_.64.0244c29: 光解因爲是。於亦増下云邪見非也
T2251_.64.0245a05: 上上品善根不行。如是乃至若上中品邪見 T2251_.64.0245a06: 現前。令下下品善根不行。若上上品邪見現 T2251_.64.0245a07: 前。令下下品善根不行。及令九品皆不成 T2251_.64.0245a08: 就。故前八品善根先得不現行。後得不成 T2251_.64.0245a09: 就。第九品善根得不現行時。即得不成就。
T2251_.64.0245a15: 理趣等。如寶所引。然全非本論意。先引本
T2251_.64.0245a18: 最初所捨。云何微倶行不善根。答。諸不善根 T2251_.64.0245a19: 離欲染時最後所捨。由捨彼故名離欲染。 T2251_.64.0245a20: 云何欲界増上善根。答。菩薩入正性離生時 T2251_.64.0245a21: 所得欲界現觀邊世俗智。及如來得盡智時 T2251_.64.0245a22: 所得欲界無貪無瞋無癡善根。云何微倶行 T2251_.64.0245a23: 善根。答。斷善根時。最後所捨。由捨彼故名
T2251_.64.0245a26: 各上微相對非乘所斷問。又但問各自上 T2251_.64.0245a27: 微必非問能斷。故問中無能斷言。又上品 T2251_.64.0245a28: 能斷是上品收。今難者所許。何言理上品 T2251_.64.0245a29: 收。以得爲通釋。又此難總言能斷善根。未 T2251_.64.0245b01: 説何品。以此難應上品一品頓斷。意在所 T2251_.64.0245b02: 斷善根言。何約能斷致通。全非難意。由此 T2251_.64.0245b03: 應如世親。若不爾者。非唯背論亦不敵 T2251_.64.0245b04: 難
T2251_.64.0245b07: 起斷如修道。評曰。應説不定。或有不起而 T2251_.64.0245b08: 能相續斷九品盡。或有唯斷一品便起。或 T2251_.64.0245b09: 二或三乃至或八然後方起復斷後品。光記 T2251_.64.0245b10: 云。如是説者通出不出。如斷修惑。古今疑 T2251_.64.0245b11: 言。修道例第二師不正義。而光師例第三師 T2251_.64.0245b12: 何哉。今云。修道有起不起。第二師且例數 T2251_.64.0245b13: 起邊。今光起不起竝例有何怪。勿只文爲
T2251_.64.0245b18: 愛行而行也。行宗三上云。今詳。内外兩凡具 T2251_.64.0245b19: 見惑者名見行人。又内凡尚淺故云増上。 T2251_.64.0245b20: 初果已去未盡思惑名愛行人。聖人證眞 T2251_.64.0245b21: 不可怪動。故云非也。湛惠云。行宗釋謬也。 T2251_.64.0245b22: 頌疏爲善。今云。行宗約見修二惑爲正。今 T2251_.64.0245b23: 論亦如是。邪見唯見惑故。唯見行者也。故婆
T2251_.64.0245b26: 行相入。諸愛行者亦有二種。我慢増者依 T2251_.64.0245b27: 非常行相入。懈怠増者依苦行相入正性 T2251_.64.0245b28: 離生。頌疏釋混亂隨信隨法 又見愛各有
T2251_.64.0245c04: 所以者何。前説彼扇搋等。意樂輕動所作劣 T2251_.64.0245c05: 故。復次見行者能斷善根。彼是愛行故。復次 T2251_.64.0245c06: 多瞋者能斷善根。彼多貪故
T2251_.64.0245c09: 應師釋非今論意。今則替代也。今云不爾。 T2251_.64.0245c10: 應師爲善。凡替代也。於兩物存言之。如無 T2251_.64.0245c11: 畏疏以除蓋障替絶者。今不爾。令彼得滅 T2251_.64.0245c12: 故。況對非得生。可知滅義。今不云滅特云 T2251_.64.0245c13: 替。爾雅釋言替廢也。疏云替謂廢已也
T2251_.64.0245c16: 終亦有此四句。光云義便未盡。邪定者謂
T2251_.64.0245c23: 世未生之時仙人相。合有仙人與王爲子。 T2251_.64.0245c24: 其子害父。是王之怨以未生時知故名未 T2251_.64.0245c25: 生怨
T2251_.64.0246a01: 染汚心者。善無記心。簡染故云不染。正理 T2251_.64.0246a02: 論意通自作他作。如寶引。湛惠云。光約 T2251_.64.0246a03: 遣他。頌疏亦爾。寶則正理以爲自作。寶爲 T2251_.64.0246a04: 正。論但云加行不簡別故。若準舊論光 T2251_.64.0246a05: 爲正也。今云。何謂乎。寶云通。何云自作。 T2251_.64.0246a06: 今此論云加行。皆是遣他也。故下八倶轉云 T2251_.64.0246a07: 加行。對自行邪欲遣他決定故。勿泥文。同 T2251_.64.0246a08: 本舊論義明。何懷猶預。如彼正理存破斥。 T2251_.64.0246a09: 何可依怙
T2251_.64.0246a14: 約前文誰可疑之。今亦云如是指難引 T2251_.64.0246a15: 文。若不爾何不言故作此説 不異者。加
T2251_.64.0246a19: 答。不與取。欲邪行及貪欲三爲加行由貪 T2251_.64.0246a20: 究竟。三爲加行者貪瞋邪見。其中貪與究 T2251_.64.0246a21: 竟貪同。故云不異。前文決判如是。光二釋。 T2251_.64.0246a22: 初釋爲正。後釋非也。寶疏意。彼云依不異 T2251_.64.0246a23: 心造二業説者指今文。瞋爲不異心。殺盜 T2251_.64.0246a24: 爲二業。同依瞋故。言若異心自作兩業究 T2251_.64.0246a25: 竟必異指前文。上由貪成盜。由瞋成殺 T2251_.64.0246a26: 故。此師於殺與盜論異不異。故言造二業。 T2251_.64.0246a27: 不約加行究竟。此有三非。一誤異不異。二 T2251_.64.0246a28: 失曾今。三違舊論。而指要同光後釋者非 T2251_.64.0246a29: 也。唯今文爲不異。一邊同。而其義大別也
T2251_.64.0246b03: 遣他爲正。寶通自他非也
T2251_.64.0246b06: 意説妄語惡語。此中意業道隨一。口語道有 T2251_.64.0246b07: 三。雜語於三語必兼理。在絶言故但言
T2251_.64.0246b10: 語離間語。非時故有雜穢語。或作虚誑語麁 T2251_.64.0246b11: 惡語。非時故有雜穢語。或作離間語麁惡 T2251_.64.0246b12: 語。非時故有雜穢語。必兼可知。又準約四 T2251_.64.0246b13: 自性。念法師ノ即ト獨トノ辨違宗也
T2251_.64.0246b18: 意三業道隨一現前。如是八種業道倶生思 T2251_.64.0246b19: 究竟轉。當知意三各別現起思究竟轉。無倶 T2251_.64.0246b20: 生義。無二心故。無遣他故。由此不説或 T2251_.64.0246b21: 九或十倶生之義。光記必有貪故別不説者 T2251_.64.0246b22: 未足。應言意三隨一必有。言自力者。婆沙
T2251_.64.0246b27: 顯謂律儀也。隱顯通論有十倶轉。別據顯 T2251_.64.0246b28: 相。無一無八無五倶轉。唯據律儀不約 T2251_.64.0246b29: 處中名爲顯也。問。何故言八五。答。應結頌 T2251_.64.0246c01: 音便。若約義次第五八。故別釋如是
T2251_.64.0246c06: 云不爾。靜慮無漏通云若定。全非衍文。定
T2251_.64.0246c09: 色界善心及彼地無漏。正見倶生心。竝皆由 T2251_.64.0246c10: 三善業道倶生思究竟轉。生初靜慮者。若 T2251_.64.0246c11: 起自地意識不定善心。若起無色界善心及 T2251_.64.0246c12: 彼地無漏正見倶生心。竝皆由三善業道倶 T2251_.64.0246c13: 生思究竟轉
T2251_.64.0246c16: 力計切。狼戻也。謂狼戻剛強也。此論。正理等 T2251_.64.0246c17: 音釋。悷多惡不稠也。集韵悷很也
T2251_.64.0246c25: 別釋。光爲正。寶疏牒一段文。云無意業三 T2251_.64.0246c26: 者文錯。隨其所應四字。應作及女人故。蓋 T2251_.64.0246c27: 隣行亂入也。而未分總別非也
T2251_.64.0247a01: 害故如是説。諸天手足隨斷隨生。斬首中
T2251_.64.0247a04: 説寫誤乎
T2251_.64.0247a09: 地。以有不曾起。云曾起等。頌疏云。無 T2251_.64.0247a10: 色那含。於欲色界五地身中隨依何地或 T2251_.64.0247a11: 二三四五地曾起曾滅無漏律儀。生無色 T2251_.64.0247a12: 時成彼已去。曾起一地成已去一地戒。乃 T2251_.64.0247a13: 至曾起五地成已去五地戒也。慧暉云。此 T2251_.64.0247a14: 説已去依身起無漏道。不説依地。有已去
T2251_.64.0247a17: 共戒。若三地身即起三地道共戒。若四地身 T2251_.64.0247a18: 即起二地道共戒五地身即起一地道共戒。 T2251_.64.0247a19: 謂生上地即不起下地道共戒也。從此已 T2251_.64.0247a20: 後生無色界。曾一地身起道共戒。即成一 T2251_.64.0247a21: 地身道共戒。乃至曾五地身起道共戒。即 T2251_.64.0247a22: 成五地身道共戒也。光・寶竝引婆沙三文。
T2251_.64.0247a28: 機類不同。依地及依身差別多故。由此今論 T2251_.64.0247a29: 及正理其文義同初師。若不爾者。今論等何 T2251_.64.0247b01: 故不已未同説如是別判。又云容耶。汝初 T2251_.64.0247b02: 師據一色爲失。是有何害。明身表文故
T2251_.64.0247b13: 何云同。前漢東方朔傳云。於是呉王穆然。 T2251_.64.0247b14: 註張晏曰。穆音默。師古曰。穆然靜思貌
T2251_.64.0247b17: 相應品。於中癡増上故別爲邪見等流。舊論
T2251_.64.0247b21: 綴文故。違舊論故。背正理述此論意故」
T2251_.64.0247b27: 地也。通俗文物堅鞭謂之丨丨。地堅鞕則 T2251_.64.0247b28: 不宜五穀也 T2251_.64.0247b29: 果辣 應音云。字苑作同。盧葛切。通俗 T2251_.64.0247c01: 文。辛甚曰辣。江南言辣。中國言辛
T2251_.64.0247c08: 十種。不簡別言殺生等流故。光二釋。初釋 T2251_.64.0247c09: 局殺一非也。後釋爲正。然湛惠取第一而 T2251_.64.0247c10: 云。寶疏同之者非也。寶疏同後釋。但總相 T2251_.64.0247c11: 釋故
T2251_.64.0247c14: 善業道。而證正理者是麁見也。今論上云 T2251_.64.0247c15: 離殺等總擧十。正理云且於離殺約一種。 T2251_.64.0247c16: 綴文各別
T2251_.64.0247c19: 遮彼意顯正命等皆即語業作斯論
T2251_.64.0247c23: 語。不名邪命不爲命而起故。於不善身 T2251_.64.0247c24: 業道中。若貧所起名爲邪業。亦爲邪命。瞋
T2251_.64.0247c27: 惑於人微細難覺故。復有説者。以諸邪命 T2251_.64.0247c28: 難可淨除故。云何難可淨除。謂有二法難 T2251_.64.0247c29: 除難捨。即在家者邪見。及出家者邪命。諸在 T2251_.64.0248a01: 家人雖極聰惠受持五戒。若苦所逼則以
T2251_.64.0248a04: 見施主時整威儀現親善相。是故別説邪 T2251_.64.0248a05: 命正命。今依有説立所以於難除。如有頌 T2251_.64.0248a06: 曰者。曰字言誤。上下爾故。舊論云。此中説
T2251_.64.0248a10: 集散文爲頌。然今文明引證。舊論云此中 T2251_.64.0248a11: 説偈者非必自造。故不成證也。如婆沙。正 T2251_.64.0248a12: 理等者。以他頌意而致釋。勿以彼疑此。 T2251_.64.0248a13: 若言自頌所明義者。上兩句爲何。故知定 T2251_.64.0248a14: 證他頌
T2251_.64.0248a19: 無此經。蓋殘缺矣。或曰出増一。或曰出雜
T2251_.64.0248a24: 初總明。二別明。別明中有五門。而光・寶束 T2251_.64.0248a25: 分爲六段未詳審也
T2251_.64.0248a28: 義乃得斷名。復能正斷煩惱品得名爲斷。
T2251_.64.0248b02: 此中所爲所由差別可知
T2251_.64.0248b05: 何乎。寶疏但擧正理第二説耳。雜心論三
T2251_.64.0248b08: 心勢力生縁闕故是士用果攝。若不爾何不 T2251_.64.0248b09: 説言擇滅耶。或應言諸無爲。雜心云一切 T2251_.64.0248b10: 法約有爲論。決定故若作是説
T2251_.64.0248b13: 諸無漏業。離諸煩惱非三界繋。故無異熟。 T2251_.64.0248b14: 所以者何。若所起業イゝ自性堅強。煩惱所繋
T2251_.64.0248b21: 義云隨其所應。寶疏但云前諸門不指數。 T2251_.64.0248b22: 得論旨焉。舊論於初三性門頌有如次第 T2251_.64.0248b23: 言。復於後三斷門頌亦有次第言。而於初 T2251_.64.0248b24: 長行無次第釋。於最後長行釋曰。更説次 T2251_.64.0248b25: 第言者。應知於前中後爲顯因果。更字起 T2251_.64.0248b26: 盡梵本於初後頌有次第言必矣。蓋今文 T2251_.64.0248b27: 據譯者省也。正理。顯宗亦爾也
T2251_.64.0248c01: 善故除之。善望不善性類不同。故無等 T2251_.64.0248c02: 流。以非無記亦無異熟。非斷道故無離 T2251_.64.0248c03: 繋果。故但二果。若望無記有士用増上如 T2251_.64.0248c04: 前。異熟無記ナレハ亦有。不善與無記性類 T2251_.64.0248c05: 別ナレハ無等流。離繋果性善故亦無
T2251_.64.0248c08: 道性故無離繋。以善爲果無異熟果。善不 T2251_.64.0248c09: 善異レハ無等流。望不善果。因果同類ナレハ加 T2251_.64.0248c10: 等流果。無餘二如前。望無記果。離繋善性 T2251_.64.0248c11: 故除之。士用増上準前可知。約不善業所 T2251_.64.0248c12: 感故有異熟。不善與無記相違而有等流 T2251_.64.0248c13: 難了故問答顯之。麟云。遍行不善。即苦諦 T2251_.64.0248c14: 下邪見等三及癡。無明。竝集諦下二見。疑。無 T2251_.64.0248c15: 明。相應惑業是謂遍行不善。以言不善故 T2251_.64.0248c16: 不得總言十一遍使。言及見苦所斷等者。 T2251_.64.0248c17: 即遍行外苦下貪瞋慢等非遍行相應惑業 T2251_.64.0248c18: 爲同類因也。此等皆能引生身邊二見。二 T2251_.64.0248c19: 見望彼。雖性不同以同染汚故與不善 T2251_.64.0248c20: 爲等流果。身邊二見内門轉故。故是無記。 T2251_.64.0248c21: 如品初釋
T2251_.64.0248c24: 等流果。無記不招異熟。及善法非異熟性 T2251_.64.0248c25: 故無異熟果。故但二果。望不善除異熟者 T2251_.64.0248c26: 如望善説。言身邊二見爲同類因者。且望 T2251_.64.0248c27: 當諦諸不善法故言同類。理實二見能遍取 T2251_.64.0248c28: 五部不善法。若望他部應言爲遍行因。以 T2251_.64.0248c29: 此二見是遍行惑故。今論不言遍行同類差 T2251_.64.0249a01: 別故理圓足。如光釋也。望無記中。異熟果 T2251_.64.0249a02: 非無記牽故。離繋果唯善之果故。故除二」
T2251_.64.0249a05: 體非三世攝故。故除之。有餘四者。以相 T2251_.64.0249a06: 應倶有能作等因。通三世攝。所以有士用増 T2251_.64.0249a07: 上。有異熟。謂過去善惡爲因感異熟果。今 T2251_.64.0249a08: 時同在過去也。等流果者。後似於前故亦 T2251_.64.0249a09: 有之。望於現未準過去説
T2251_.64.0249a12: 後故無等流果。以世中故無離繋果。倶有 T2251_.64.0249a13: 相應因故有士用果。其増上可知
T2251_.64.0249a16: 無前後。其異熟因約體建立。以善惡性爲 T2251_.64.0249a17: 因。無記性爲果故得有也。無等流者。同類 T2251_.64.0249a18: 因就位建立。未來無前後。故無等流也。新 T2251_.64.0249a19: 云。異熟等流必前後故者。若爾未來無前後。 T2251_.64.0249a20: 應無異熟。湛云。麟破過當。寶意明現現相 T2251_.64.0249a21: 對。無異熟等流。故云必前後。非謂未來有
T2251_.64.0249a24: 破允當。湛救不成。以云必前後故。彼立因 T2251_.64.0249a25: 不決定故
T2251_.64.0249a28: 前因後果。或因果同時。必無後以前爲果 T2251_.64.0249a29: 故。問。於三世有三品。約因果門過現未。 T2251_.64.0249b01: 如十二因縁。依生滅門未現過。如四相所 T2251_.64.0249b02: 説。就法生起義過未現。如得非得諸論。若 T2251_.64.0249b03: 爾何但如是無現等無餘耶。答。今約因果 T2251_.64.0249b04: 門故因果對辨。不可致以異門難異門
T2251_.64.0249b07: 上。色蘊即定共無表。行蘊即思。空處已上唯 T2251_.64.0249b08: 行蘊思爲體也。又云。同地業望法。即通性 T2251_.64.0249b09: 同及異。有四果者準前總説知。無爲非地 T2251_.64.0249b10: 法攝故此章總除。光兩釋第二違論文
T2251_.64.0249b13: 是士用果。増上可知。無欲界業感初禪異 T2251_.64.0249b14: 熟故無異熟果。有漏異地無同類因故無 T2251_.64.0249b15: 等流果
T2251_.64.0249b18: 以無漏不墮界故異地有同類因。由是有 T2251_.64.0249b19: 等流果。故言不墮界故不遮等流。雜心三
T2251_.64.0249b22: 者。自地業以自地法爲四果。除解脱果。如 T2251_.64.0249b23: 欲界繋以欲界繋。乃至非想非非想亦如是。 T2251_.64.0249b24: 或以他地二者。他地業以他地法爲二果。 T2251_.64.0249b25: 功用果増上果。若無漏業以他地無漏爲依
T2251_.64.0249b28: 按彼論分別定散。約散位漏無漏業同此 T2251_.64.0249b29: 論。更約定地無漏。加解脱果此論所無。全
T2251_.64.0249c03: 亦約無漏説因果應言無漏是界地攝耶。 T2251_.64.0249c04: 然今説無漏者。寄所起地談此也。問。何故 T2251_.64.0249c05: 無漏言地耶。答。約所起如是説。如説有
T2251_.64.0249c09: 漏故有等流果。引起力故有士用果。増上極 T2251_.64.0249c10: 廣。如上可知。無漏故無異熟。有爲故無離 T2251_.64.0249c11: 繋。若對無學。金剛定時引生盡智。是士用 T2251_.64.0249c12: 果。餘可知。若對非二學業斷惑證理。是離 T2251_.64.0249c13: 繋果。從無漏觀出生非二有漏善心是士 T2251_.64.0249c14: 用果。増上可知。因無漏故無異熟果。學有 T2251_.64.0249c15: 爲無漏與非二無爲及有漏性類異。故無等 T2251_.64.0249c16: 流
T2251_.64.0249c19: 果。等勝爲等流果故。非是無爲故無離 T2251_.64.0249c20: 繋。無有無學引起學心故無士用果。正理
T2251_.64.0249c26: 根者。若退已是非學非無學法非無學法。故 T2251_.64.0249c27: 望無學有三無二。準上可知。望非二爲 T2251_.64.0249c28: 二果者。如學業對非學。於中無離繋者。 T2251_.64.0249c29: 以無學不更斷惑證滅。無無間道故
T2251_.64.0250a03: 引生力。即士用果。増上可知。無餘三果者。 T2251_.64.0250a04: 學法無漏。故無異熟。性類不同無等流果。 T2251_.64.0250a05: 學有爲故無離繋果。望無學二果準前。望
T2251_.64.0250a09: 邊見等。是士用果。同染汚法相生。是等流果。 T2251_.64.0250a10: 餘法不障是増上。望修斷有四果者。見斷 T2251_.64.0250a11: 業通不善。修斷法通無記。故有異熟果。遍
T2251_.64.0250a15: 遍行惑取他部界故無等流果。法非無爲 T2251_.64.0250a16: 故無離繋果。無間生故有士用果。除離繋
T2251_.64.0250a19: 果。修斷業通不善法貫無記。故有異熟果。 T2251_.64.0250a20: 離繋非斷故除之。望非斷爲三果者。非斷 T2251_.64.0250a21: 無漏故無異熟。業有漏。法無漏。性異無等 T2251_.64.0250a22: 流果。由有漏道斷惑證非斷滅。故有離繋。 T2251_.64.0250a23: 有漏善心無間引生非斷無漏心故有士用 T2251_.64.0250a24: 果。増上可知
T2251_.64.0250a27: 増上果。無餘四果者。善染漏無漏別故無 T2251_.64.0250a28: 等流果。無漏業不感異熟。見斷法無異熟 T2251_.64.0250a29: 故除異熟果。無引生義故無士用果。見斷 T2251_.64.0250b01: 法不攝無爲故無離繋望修斷爲二果 T2251_.64.0250b02: 者。從無漏觀出入有漏心。是引生義故有。 T2251_.64.0250b03: 士用。餘有無如前。望非斷爲四果。同是無 T2251_.64.0250b04: 漏ナレハ有等流果。無間相生故有士用。斷惑 T2251_.64.0250b05: 證理スレハ有離繋果。増上法寛故有此。因果 T2251_.64.0250b06: 竝無漏故無有異熟
T2251_.64.0250b11: 師言。諸壞軌則身語意業。設是不染亦不 T2251_.64.0250b12: 應作。由彼不合世軌則故。謂諸無覆無
T2251_.64.0250b17: 是名壞軌意業。此及染業名不應作。應作 T2251_.64.0250b18: 業者與此相違。倶違前二是第三業。光記 T2251_.64.0250b19: 依正理解釋。會論身語意業亦不應作文。 T2251_.64.0250b20: 今論言應如是説者約語工巧。言等者等 T2251_.64.0250b21: 取能等起思。即意業。然惠暉云。即四無記 T2251_.64.0250b22: 中不合威儀無記。此約不順世俗禮儀者 T2251_.64.0250b23: 誤也。頌疏本略述應如是説一句。而未見 T2251_.64.0250b24: 論本及正理等故致此誤也。又云。第一師 T2251_.64.0250b25: 即取四無記及有覆無記。第二師除威儀無 T2251_.64.0250b26: 記外餘三無記及有覆無記爲第三業。此釋 T2251_.64.0250b27: 非也
T2251_.64.0250c01: 一業引故。一生言答前問。唯引一生不
T2251_.64.0250c11: 耶。而不堪任遠塵離垢。於諸法中生淨法 T2251_.64.0250c12: 眼。何等爲六。一煩惱障。二業障。三異熟障。 T2251_.64.0250c13: 四不信。五不樂。六惡慧。於彼六中。取初障
T2251_.64.0250c18: 經次耶。答。煩惱與業互爲因縁。約由惑 T2251_.64.0250c19: 起業説爲煩惱業。據由業起煩惱説爲 T2251_.64.0250c20: 業煩惱。是故佛説二次第。異熟定果故必爲 T2251_.64.0250c21: 後彼婆沙等。欲煩惱爲最重。故依煩惱業 T2251_.64.0250c22: 經文。法勝論主。今論師。欲初二無優劣同 T2251_.64.0250c23: 罪重故。特異彼憑業煩惱經。品次約逆爲 T2251_.64.0250c24: 世業隨。對此顯惑業無優劣
T2251_.64.0250c28: 教誨。難可開悟。難得免離。難得解脱。此 T2251_.64.0250c29: 中本性具足熾然猛利貪瞋癡者。貪者如難
T2251_.64.0251a03: 門等。瞋者如氣嘘等。癡者如六師等。雜心
T2251_.64.0251a09: 心亦爾也。然寶疏云。明所障法者非也。法 T2251_.64.0251a10: 勝四卷本但云聖法。六卷本及雜心。婆沙。此 T2251_.64.0251a11: 論加加行。正理更加離染。光寶意以正理 T2251_.64.0251a12: 爲盡理。此論等爲有餘。今謂不爾。大梵天 T2251_.64.0251a13: 有漏道離染必七方便位。此論加行攝
T2251_.64.0251a16: 義。言一自性。謂此五決定極重惡業。罪極重 T2251_.64.0251a17: 與依處義似異。而依殺母等起故是極重。 T2251_.64.0251a18: 終不相違故正理。顯宗標毘婆沙説示處
T2251_.64.0251a27: 障。如是皆以煩惱爲本。是故最重。正理論 T2251_.64.0251a28: 以婆沙義爲初。今論初爲後。貶云有餘師。
T2251_.64.0251b02: 次説毘婆沙義同此。彼舊論文不異婆沙 T2251_.64.0251b03: 義。正理。顯宗。此論竝兩説各別。若爾舊論次 T2251_.64.0251b04: 字應同字。不爾者不順所由故。問。此論 T2251_.64.0251b05: 説婆沙義。其義難了。何者今標釋倶業ト煩 T2251_.64.0251b06: 惱ト異熟トノ次第。以此約前引後業障最重。 T2251_.64.0251b07: 若爾違婆沙。由是正理改文曰。此三障中 T2251_.64.0251b08: 煩惱最重。以能發業業感果故。答。準上頌 T2251_.64.0251b09: 及釋應有疑。然今既改次云煩惱與業。 T2251_.64.0251b10: 以此次第前引後故不違婆沙意
T2251_.64.0251b13: 説。初説約造此業人入地獄決定無餘業 T2251_.64.0251b14: 果不可爲隔礙。後説約造此業人死入地 T2251_.64.0251b15: 獄疾速於中間無間隔暇。然光記。初約法 T2251_.64.0251b16: 後約人者非也。初説亦約造是業定受惡 T2251_.64.0251b17: 趣異熟故
T2251_.64.0251b20: 約有財。彼人有無間業故名無間業人。後 T2251_.64.0251b21: 約隣近。彼人與無間業法相應故名無間 T2251_.64.0251b22: 業人。合相應義。故舊論曰相應。沙門例者。 T2251_.64.0251b23: 正但例後云合故。然非無初有財義。故寶 T2251_.64.0251b24: 疏通二。光但任文。竝無妨
T2251_.64.0251b27: 殺人。人殺非人。應知亦爾。惟有人類殺人 T2251_.64.0251b28: 父母方得無間
T2251_.64.0251c02: 障通餘三趣全。亦復通五趣全是煩惱
T2251_.64.0251c05: 中無想天。準彼今論然於人趣言。應作然 T2251_.64.0251c06: 異熟障於人趣中八字。若無異熟障簡別。 T2251_.64.0251c07: 不可知二障中何釋故。是故舊論分明標 T2251_.64.0251c08: 果報障 T2251_.64.0251c09: T2251_.64.0251c10: T2251_.64.0251c11: T2251_.64.0251c12:
T2251_.64.0251c16: 行言顯彰前是根本
T2251_.64.0251c19: 名。今以誑語爲破僧名爲破僧。是於因立 T2251_.64.0251c20: 果名。全分有財。若破屬能僧之破故名破 T2251_.64.0251c21: 僧。第六詞別體依主釋。以於虚誑語有能 T2251_.64.0251c22: 破作用得破名也
T2251_.64.0251c25: 僧破言亘能所有兩釋。今云僧破。局所破 T2251_.64.0251c26: 僧。承因得果名云若爾。顯局所破特云 T2251_.64.0251c27: 僧破。婆沙。舊論。雜心等竝辨僧破破僧差
Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE] |