大正蔵検索 INBUDS
|
成唯識論演祕 (No. 1833_ 智周説 ) in Vol. 43 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:有/無] [CITE]
T1833_.43.0834a01: 故復言亦異。如内宗中水波等喩。大意同 T1833_.43.0834a02: 疏 T1833_.43.0834a03: 疏。雙無之言無所表故者。但言無兒即知 T1833_.43.0834a04: 石女。何須復説無女之言 T1833_.43.0834a05: 疏。又此言表即同第二者。第四計中有四句 T1833_.43.0834a06: 破。表同第一不雙非難。遮同第二無所執 T1833_.43.0834a07: 難 問且如大乘一切色上有質礙性。此 T1833_.43.0834a08: 名有性。色法即有非色法無名同異性。此之 T1833_.43.0834a09: 二性與色等法。亦得名爲亦一亦異非一非 T1833_.43.0834a10: 異還同外道。如何破他 答大乘宗義假名 T1833_.43.0834a11: 施設。非識外實。迷悟有別。由是悟故四句 T1833_.43.0834a12: 皆是。若也迷者四句皆非。故不同彼 問今 T1833_.43.0834a13: 以四句破彼外宗。大乘正義何句所攝 T1833_.43.0834a14: 答有義大乘正法非四句收。不可言故。無定 T1833_.43.0834a15: 性故 詳曰。若同外計一句亦非。若依假 T1833_.43.0834a16: 詮通有四句而有何失。更互相望得成四 T1833_.43.0834a17: 句。如前應悉
T1833_.43.0834a20: T1833_.43.0834a21:
T1833_.43.0834a24: 疏。今言離識簡違宗過者。問設言異識何 T1833_.43.0834a25: 有違宗 答大乘宗中異識之色不是無 T1833_.43.0834a26: 故 T1833_.43.0834a27: 疏。稍相近等者。相似名近。大小倶説心爲 T1833_.43.0834a28: 能取心即是識 有云。體即識故談彼心 T1833_.43.0834a29: 王。稍相近故説彼心所 詳曰。此未必然。 T1833_.43.0834b01: 何意心所獨名相近。若似名近何不兼心。 T1833_.43.0834b02: 近王名近境相更近。何乃先破 或據一 T1833_.43.0834b03: 邊義必通也。然成繁碎 T1833_.43.0834b04: 疏。對有三種者。問對爲何義 答謂礙也。 T1833_.43.0834b05: 礙有二義。一障礙名礙。二拘礙名礙。三有 T1833_.43.0834b06: 對中障礙有對。障礙名礙。所縁・境界。拘礙 T1833_.43.0834b07: 名礙 T1833_.43.0834b08: 疏。境界有對等者。然境拘礙能照根・識有 T1833_.43.0834b09: 多差別。故施設論作如是言。有眼於水有 T1833_.43.0834b10: 礙非陸。如魚等眼。有眼於陸有礙非水。 T1833_.43.0834b11: 從多分説如人等眼。有眼倶礙。如畢舍遮・ T1833_.43.0834b12: 室獸摩羅等眼。有倶非礙。謂除前相。有眼 T1833_.43.0834b13: 於夜有礙非晝。如鵂鶹等眼。有眼於晝有 T1833_.43.0834b14: 礙非夜。從多分説如人等眼。有眼倶礙。 T1833_.43.0834b15: 如野干等眼。有倶不礙。謂除前相 釋施 T1833_.43.0834b16: 設論者六足中一。大迦多衍那造 畢舍遮 T1833_.43.0834b17: 者唐云食血肉。鬼之異名也 室獸摩羅傍 T1833_.43.0834b18: 生類也。形如壁蛒。小者二丈。大者百尺 倶 T1833_.43.0834b19: 不礙者。即諸盲者 問根・識各能縁照自 T1833_.43.0834b20: 境。何名爲礙 答祇爲自境拘自根・識。不 T1833_.43.0834b21: 令於餘境等轉故。或自境等和合轉時。於 T1833_.43.0834b22: 餘境等而不得起故名爲礙。故倶舍論云。 T1833_.43.0834b23: 云何眼等於自境界所縁轉時説名有對。越 T1833_.43.0834b24: 彼於餘此不轉故。或復礙者是和合義。謂 T1833_.43.0834b25: 眼等法於自境界・及自所縁和合轉故 釋 T1833_.43.0834b26: 曰。雙問雙答境界・所縁二有對也。釋中有 T1833_.43.0834b27: 二。並以拘礙名爲礙也 T1833_.43.0834b28: 疏。心心所法至名爲所縁者。顯所縁有對。執 T1833_.43.0834b29: 猶慮託。心・心所法其性羸劣非境不生。猶 T1833_.43.0834c01: 如羸人非杖不起。故彼境等是心所慮。名 T1833_.43.0834c02: 爲所縁。此據有縁其用方起。非必正起。故 T1833_.43.0834c03: 過・未心亦名有對。礙縁境用名所縁對 T1833_.43.0834c04: 疏。若於彼法等者。顯境界對。於彼色等此 T1833_.43.0834c05: 眼・耳等。有見・聞等取境功能。説此色等爲 T1833_.43.0834c06: 眼等境。功能所託名爲境界。如人於彼有 T1833_.43.0834c07: 勝功能。便説彼爲我之境界。此約有能。非 T1833_.43.0834c08: 要起用故彼同分仍名有對。礙取境用名 T1833_.43.0834c09: 境界對 問取・縁何別 答取謂照矚。縁謂 T1833_.43.0834c10: 縁慮。故二別也。又倶舍論句數聊簡云。若法 T1833_.43.0834c11: 境界有對亦障礙有對耶。應作四句。謂七心 T1833_.43.0834c12: 界・法界一分諸相應法是第一句。色等五境 T1833_.43.0834c13: 是第二句。眼等五根是第三句。法界一分非 T1833_.43.0834c14: 相應法是第四句。若法境界有對亦所縁有 T1833_.43.0834c15: 對耶。應順後句答。謂若所縁有對定是境 T1833_.43.0834c16: 界有對。有雖境界有對而非所縁有對。謂 T1833_.43.0834c17: 眼等五根 T1833_.43.0834c18: 疏。然經部至十處所攝者。亦如大乘十八界 T1833_.43.0834c19: 種第六・八縁以境對根合法處攝。從所生 T1833_.43.0834c20: 現十八界收。此亦相似 T1833_.43.0834c21: 疏正理論至別有色故者。問有部亦爾。何乃 T1833_.43.0834c22: 諍耶 答正理難意我麁細實。可細從麁在 T1833_.43.0834c23: 十處收。汝麁既假。云何實細從假十處非 T1833_.43.0834c24: 法處耶。經部意云。雖假實殊隨所成麁在 T1833_.43.0834c25: 於十處非法處攝。故有諍也 T1833_.43.0834c26: 疏。薩婆多等麁細倶實者。等説出世・及説假 T1833_.43.0834c27: 部。説假部計蘊門皆實。説出世言出世並 T1833_.43.0834c28: 實。故麁細色在蘊。出世悉皆實故。故疏等言 T1833_.43.0834c29: 等此二宗各小分也。餘部全同 或復全異。 T1833_.43.0835a01: 故不等之 T1833_.43.0835a02: 疏。五根等亦攝在中等者。問此量對誰 答 T1833_.43.0835a03: 略爲三釋 一對有部。五根・境等攝入宗 T1833_.43.0835a04: 中。故無不定。若對經部有相符失。經部根 T1833_.43.0835a05: 等皆是假故。雖破能成。爲遮不定兼破根 T1833_.43.0835a06: 等。亦無失矣 二對經部。五根・境等攝入 T1833_.43.0835a07: 同喩。論意但破能成微故 三雙破二宗。 T1833_.43.0835a08: 然別作量。若以一量破二宗者進退有過。 T1833_.43.0835a09: 思可知也。第三義備。前二理通 T1833_.43.0835a10: 疏。無爲至無不定者。非色喩言攝無爲等。無 T1833_.43.0835a11: 爲無礙。不成衣等。故入同中。故彼不得將 T1833_.43.0835a12: 爲不定 T1833_.43.0835a13: 疏。此二量破經部者。詳曰。以折宗法而爲 T1833_.43.0835a14: 其因成非實有。通前三量亦應無失。已 T1833_.43.0835a15: 成宗法得爲因故 T1833_.43.0835a16: 疏。極微有方分理不應成一者。以一極微 T1833_.43.0835a17: 對六方面名有方分。既有六方所對不同。 T1833_.43.0835a18: 能對之微云何體一 應立量云。所執極微。 T1833_.43.0835a19: 體應不一。可分折故。有方分故。如諸麁 T1833_.43.0835a20: 色 T1833_.43.0835a21: 疏。不然因有隨不成者。若以此文對經部 T1833_.43.0835a22: 者。無方分因便成隨一。經部不許無方分 T1833_.43.0835a23: 故 T1833_.43.0835a24: 疏。爲量同前者。同前承光發影中量。難彼 T1833_.43.0835a25: 極微令有方分 T1833_.43.0835a26: 疏。聚應如極微者。一極微處若有六微。應 T1833_.43.0835a27: 諸聚色如極微量。展轉相望不過量故。則 T1833_.43.0835a28: 應聚色亦不可見 T1833_.43.0835a29: 疏觸與不觸皆應有分者。若相觸者。相對礙 T1833_.43.0835b01: 故。理有方分。設不觸著擬宜六方亦須有 T1833_.43.0835b02: 分。若不爾者何名對色 T1833_.43.0835b03: 疏。聚不異無二者。聚不異言牒有宗救。聚色 T1833_.43.0835b04: 與微而無異故。無二之言天親難彼。聚色 T1833_.43.0835b05: 應無影・障二也。即極微故。猶如極微 T1833_.43.0835b06: 疏。此結非等者。既破極微非實有。已成前 T1833_.43.0835b07: 量云外有對色定非實有。因乃無過 T1833_.43.0835b08: 疏。此非他心等境者。他心智者但縁他心 T1833_.43.0835b09: 不縁根故。且依凡夫。六識散心之所不得。 T1833_.43.0835b10: 第六雖縁然非現得。故必除之。理實餘聖 T1833_.43.0835b11: 非定六識亦不得也。其第七識因中自他皆 T1833_.43.0835b12: 不縁根。果他不許故亦不簡 T1833_.43.0835b13: 論。以能發識比知是有者。汎明比知略有 T1833_.43.0835b14: 四種 一以因比果。如觀現法有引後 T1833_.43.0835b15: 用知所引果 二以果比因。即觀現法有 T1833_.43.0835b16: 酬前義知能引因 三以體比用。觀所成 T1833_.43.0835b17: 法而知作者・作具差別 四以用比體。觀 T1833_.43.0835b18: 作者等知所成法。今論所明以果知因。由 T1833_.43.0835b19: 用比體 T1833_.43.0835b20: 論。外有對色理不成等者。論中意明五根但 T1833_.43.0835b21: 是内識變現。爲下自明五塵境故。然有對 T1833_.43.0835b22: 言・及内識變義該根・境。疏主因叙諸宗五 T1833_.43.0835b23: 塵。不説此文是明塵也 故總結云心外 T1833_.43.0835b24: 有對前已遮破。故此諸根但是内識之所變 T1833_.43.0835b25: 現 若爾何故引觀所縁縁頌義而以爲 T1833_.43.0835b26: 證 答意取識變一邊爲證。有義破云。疏 T1833_.43.0835b27: 説此説所縁之境是識所變非外微成。今不 T1833_.43.0835b28: 依此。若已顯境是内識變。何故次下復云 T1833_.43.0835b29: 眼等外所縁縁理非有耶。明知此文但顯五 T1833_.43.0835c01: 根是識所變 詳曰。談何容易而見彈斥。疏 T1833_.43.0835c02: 何有云此説所縁豈不自加。又疏前科分 T1833_.43.0835c03: 明自指根・境等別。明疏不謬。當審尋之 T1833_.43.0835c04: 疏。有以過去五識相分爲五塵者。是過去世 T1833_.43.0835c05: 五識所變相分熏成後生現行今爲識境。故 T1833_.43.0835c06: 觀所縁論云。或前識相爲後識縁。引本識中 T1833_.43.0835c07: 生似自果功能令起。不違理故 T1833_.43.0835c08: 疏。不見香味通假者。雖無明文。以理言之 T1833_.43.0835c09: 亦得有假。如和合香可許是假。故瑜伽論 T1833_.43.0835c10: 五十四云。空行風中無倶生香。唯假合者。既 T1833_.43.0835c11: 云假合。明知是假味中必有和合之味類 T1833_.43.0835c12: 香通假 T1833_.43.0835c13: 疏。謂曾現見色等者。釋論解云。曾見色者。 T1833_.43.0835c14: 謂能持過去識受用義以顯界性。現見色 T1833_.43.0835c15: 者。謂能持現在識受用義以顯界性 釋 T1833_.43.0835c16: 曰。受者取也。即釋前現見。義者是境。即明 T1833_.43.0835c17: 前色由能持識根方取境。故擧所持以明 T1833_.43.0835c18: 界也。此但明界。界謂能持。不言眼義。或持 T1833_.43.0835c19: 識者顯其界義。受用義者明其眼義 T1833_.43.0835c20: 疏。及此種子者。釋論云。謂眼種子或唯積聚。 T1833_.43.0835c21: 爲引當來眼故。或已成就。爲生現在眼根 T1833_.43.0835c22: 釋曰。由此種子能生二世現行眼根。眼根 T1833_.43.0835c23: 因故亦名眼界。故彼論云。故此二種名眼 T1833_.43.0835c24: 界者。眼生因故。二世眼種名爲二種。因義 T1833_.43.0835c25: 名界。總以持・因二義名界。然瑜伽論五十 T1833_.43.0835c26: 六中六義名界。恐繁不具。餘根准此 T1833_.43.0835c27: 疏。由本熏時等者。根實唯種。由熏種時心 T1833_.43.0835c28: 變似色。對法據此熏時似色名爲現色。餘 T1833_.43.0835c29: 根亦然 T1833_.43.0836a01: 疏。對所生之果識等者。能生果法名爲功 T1833_.43.0836a02: 能。現行色根能生識果。據此假説現行色 T1833_.43.0836a03: 根名爲功能。功能即是種子異名 T1833_.43.0836a04: 疏。功能生識等者。大小皆許根名功能。所 T1833_.43.0836a05: 以論云發眼等識名眼等根。擧功能顯。 T1833_.43.0836a06: 由體有諍故論不出之根體也 詳曰。或 T1833_.43.0836a07: 唯現家會所縁論名功能意。彼言功能據 T1833_.43.0836a08: 極成説。雖實現色是眼等根。由不極成故 T1833_.43.0836a09: 彼不説 T1833_.43.0836a10: 疏。下破所縁縁至第三結正義者。詳曰。撿下 T1833_.43.0836a11: 文中歸正義處。乃是總破有對色中大文 T1833_.43.0836a12: 第三。除此更無歸正義處。破有部後雖 T1833_.43.0836a13: 復結云許有極微尚致此失。然無歸於正 T1833_.43.0836a14: 義之處。以理應云後總結也。即是復云許 T1833_.43.0836a15: 有極微文等是也 或可。文言況無識外 T1833_.43.0836a16: 眞實極微。即正義 T1833_.43.0836a17: 疏。外人執他身心至故今非之者。有義此亦 T1833_.43.0836a18: 不然。論文但破有對實色不破心故。又理 T1833_.43.0836a19: 非有。指前破文。前但破色不破心故。但言 T1833_.43.0836a20: 義便故總叙宗。非文意者即無有失 詳 T1833_.43.0836a21: 曰。雖復本意破外有對。論今以彼所縁縁 T1833_.43.0836a22: 破。所縁縁寛。有對義局。以寛成狹破他心 T1833_.43.0836a23: 等非自親縁斯有何失。若不許者即此論 T1833_.43.0836a24: 標所縁縁言。攝義不盡復不定失。他許他 T1833_.43.0836a25: 心雖是所縁非自識變。是自外故。故知論 T1833_.43.0836a26: 意總包一切所縁縁也。不得説言非文意 T1833_.43.0836a27: 也 又疏意云。他心・心等非自親縁縁。非 T1833_.43.0836a28: 所縁。不斥心義。云何難云論但破色不 T1833_.43.0836a29: 破心耶。難失疏旨。得論玄妙疏誠可觀 T1833_.43.0836b01: 疏。諸預流等者。一刹那頃受等心所還能自 T1833_.43.0836b02: 縁 問何獨初果 答一切皆得。凡夫不明。 T1833_.43.0836b03: 所以不説。預流初聖故擧例餘 T1833_.43.0836b04: 疏。此即總牒共許所縁縁義者。有義斥云。若 T1833_.43.0836b05: 牒共許何名汝執。又自宗義次前已説。何 T1833_.43.0836b06: 須重説。今辨親縁。豈大乘中能引自識。是 T1833_.43.0836b07: 此所引親所所縁 詳曰。所縁縁者爲境生 T1833_.43.0836b08: 識。此之名義大小通許。名之爲共。非言此 T1833_.43.0836b09: 縁體性差別一切率同名爲共也。亦如因明 T1833_.43.0836b10: 共比量義而所諍宗實不同故。前標所縁 T1833_.43.0836b11: 辨自識變。未明何義名所縁縁。今牒共許 T1833_.43.0836b12: 所縁縁中他所許義言執何違。何有重失。 T1833_.43.0836b13: 難引自識例此知非 T1833_.43.0836b14: 疏。法必有體至是所縁者。有義彼似境相非 T1833_.43.0836b15: 是所縁。屬能縁攝故説似境名所縁者必 T1833_.43.0836b16: 不應理 詳曰。此蓋似破。於無過中妄生 T1833_.43.0836b17: 過故。疏談彼意識上必有似境之相。其色 T1833_.43.0836b18: 等境方名所縁不爾便非。何以故。能縁無 T1833_.43.0836b19: 彼取境用故。又如眼識縁色之時。識上若 T1833_.43.0836b20: 無似境之相。色境名爲眼所縁者。色必應 T1833_.43.0836b21: 爲耳識所縁。耳識亦無似色相故。若不爾 T1833_.43.0836b22: 者比量相違。若許爾者有雜亂失。由此要 T1833_.43.0836b23: 須有似境相。然疏文約而義繁也。長披審思 T1833_.43.0836b24: 幽旨方悟。疏中不斷似境之相屬所縁也 T1833_.43.0836b25: 又疏次云。其似境相即是行相大小乘別。 T1833_.43.0836b26: 解四分處必自明也 T1833_.43.0836b27: 疏。今以爲喩意取小分者。但取非縁一分爲 T1833_.43.0836b28: 喩。名爲小分 T1833_.43.0836b29: 疏。以五識是有法所收等者。無過所以如燈 T1833_.43.0836c01: 具辨 問本成和合非五識縁。今意在法 T1833_.43.0836c02: 五在有法。乃成和合非是意縁。何關五識。 T1833_.43.0836c03: 若爾頌中何言五識 答五雖有法亦名 T1833_.43.0836c04: 所立。故如瑜伽云何所立有二謂自性・差別 T1833_.43.0836c05: 理門亦云但由法故成於法。如是成立於 T1833_.43.0836c06: 有法 問法中言設。明非實許。第二月上 T1833_.43.0836c07: 設五所縁。理竟何失。而於法中要除五耶 T1833_.43.0836c08: 答他許自違縱他名設。他元不許云何 T1833_.43.0836c09: 稱設 詳曰。歴觀群典設有二途。一者他 T1833_.43.0836c10: 許自宗不許而有設言。二者自他雖總不 T1833_.43.0836c11: 許。爲有所假縱於彼亦復言設。即攝 T1833_.43.0836c12: 大乘設許經部色・心互爲無間縁義。如下 T1833_.43.0836c13: 當悉。第二月喩他雖不許爲五所縁。爲 T1833_.43.0836c14: 於縁縱許所縁。理亦何失。同攝論故。若准 T1833_.43.0836c15: 此理。彼頌五識在於法中亦應無爽。當更 T1833_.43.0836c16: 審思 T1833_.43.0836c17: 疏。亦非法性等者。性者體也。無實體故名 T1833_.43.0836c18: 非法性 T1833_.43.0836c19: 疏。義須加減者。或有疏云。不須加減。略爲 T1833_.43.0836c20: 二釋。一云義是。不字非也。然有無境雖皆所 T1833_.43.0836c21: 縁。但意所縁非五識境。據義而言當須加 T1833_.43.0836c22: 減。非文不正須加減之 二不字正。義言 T1833_.43.0836c23: 謬也。彼文既正。第一解中不須減出五識 T1833_.43.0836c24: 設所縁等五字。但如初作五在有法。即無 T1833_.43.0836c25: 過故。二釋倶通。後解稍順 T1833_.43.0836c26: 疏。然觸至不同長等者。但地等増名澁・滑 T1833_.43.0836c27: 等。不同長等相形待立 問長・短何故聚・ T1833_.43.0836c28: 集攝耶 答若約相形即相待假。據多法 T1833_.43.0836c29: 成名聚集假。亦不相違 T1833_.43.0837a01: 疏。如命等者。大宗命根體是假法。意所縁縁。 T1833_.43.0837a02: 證自五識縁識内假 T1833_.43.0837a03: 疏。五識上無彼極微相如眼根者。問因言五 T1833_.43.0837a04: 識無極微相。喩上眼識無彼根相。根與極 T1833_.43.0837a05: 微二既不同。云何能立於喩得轉 答准 T1833_.43.0837a06: 所縁論。因中但云於眼識上無彼相故省 T1833_.43.0837a07: 極微言。即無過矣。以根等喩五識亦無彼 T1833_.43.0837a08: 之相故 T1833_.43.0837a09: 疏。若彼救言至准量亦爾者。詳曰。亦可 T1833_.43.0837a10: 以量難微隱相 量云。未和合時。和合之 T1833_.43.0837a11: 相亦應顯現。體即和合之極微故。如已合 T1833_.43.0837a12: 時 T1833_.43.0837a13: 疏。雖有多相等者。如一色上有苦・無常及 T1833_.43.0837a14: 愛・非愛乃至微圓一切等相故名爲多。五識 T1833_.43.0837a15: 唯縁色等自相言一分也 T1833_.43.0837a16: 論。有執色等爲此所縁等者。衆賢師義具如 T1833_.43.0837a17: 疏明。又正理論云。色等極微散未合時。同 T1833_.43.0837a18: 毘婆沙及經部師非五識境。以識上無極 T1833_.43.0837a19: 微相故。多微聚集展轉相望。一一極微有麁 T1833_.43.0837a20: 相生。方眼等識所縁之境。且如七微共聚相 T1833_.43.0837a21: 資。各各有一麁相而生量等七微。然此麁 T1833_.43.0837a22: 相唯現在有。雖是質礙互相渉入。如經部 T1833_.43.0837a23: 者所造之色。又與能生因細極微必得同 T1833_.43.0837a24: 處。如經部者能造所造互相渉入。故縁麁 T1833_.43.0837a25: 相必縁極微。以同處故。然和合相雖説生 T1833_.43.0837a26: 言。非異能生別有體性。但本極微無有麁 T1833_.43.0837a27: 相。今和集已。體雖不改相轉成麁。故説生 T1833_.43.0837a28: 言。非如本計多微共聚共成一相 T1833_.43.0837a29: 疏。問眼縁心土至何理不齊者。此難意 T1833_.43.0837b01: 云。如縁自相。爲更變相方乃縁之。爲更 T1833_.43.0837b02: 不變即能縁也。若不變者便同正量。正量 T1833_.43.0837b03: 縁境不變相故。有部縁微亦無相故。餘准 T1833_.43.0837b04: 可知 T1833_.43.0837b05: 論。然識變時頓現一相等者。問何故大色不 T1833_.43.0837b06: 合微成而頓變耶 答無實極微能生麁 T1833_.43.0837b07: 色。所以頓變。不以微成。故瑜伽論第三云。 T1833_.43.0837b08: 於色聚中曾無極微。若從自種生時唯聚 T1833_.43.0837b09: 集生。或細・或中・或大。又非極微集成色聚。 T1833_.43.0837b10: 故知麁色而但頓變 T1833_.43.0837b11: 疏。形量大者體是實有者。問瓶等頓變亦非 T1833_.43.0837b12: 微成。何故名假 答傳有兩釋 一云瓶・ T1833_.43.0837b13: 盆等相雖識頓變。然唯是形。故説名假。今 T1833_.43.0837b14: 説所縁識頓變者。意顯色故。故實非假。言 T1833_.43.0837b15: 一相者理實是形。今以形色標於色相。必 T1833_.43.0837b16: 無有違 二云瓶等頓變但四境相。故四境 T1833_.43.0837b17: 實説爲瓶等故名爲假。後説爲勝 T1833_.43.0837b18: 疏。後如悔等者。悔體雖有癡増名悔。待於 T1833_.43.0837b19: 無癡説癡爲悔 T1833_.43.0837b20: 疏。非如青等相待仍實者。青對黄等而得 T1833_.43.0837b21: 青名。然不得説青名爲黄。如短待長。非 T1833_.43.0837b22: 但不得名之爲長。必復不得定名爲短。 T1833_.43.0837b23: 所以不同青等顯色 T1833_.43.0837b24: 疏。無別縁假者。要兼實縁。無能離實而別 T1833_.43.0837b25: 縁假 T1833_.43.0837b26: 疏。唯意得之者。意識能得彼別假也 T1833_.43.0837b27: 疏。名縁假者。但言縁假。五識必能縁彼依 T1833_.43.0837b28: 青分位假故 T1833_.43.0837b29: 疏。然依他至所折色説者。而言此微爲依 T1833_.43.0837c01: 他者。但依所折色體説也。微體實無非依 T1833_.43.0837c02: 他也 T1833_.43.0837c03: 疏。由五縁故佛説極微者。按彼論云。建立 T1833_.43.0837c04: 極微有五勝利。謂由分折一合聚色安立 T1833_.43.0837c05: 方便。於所縁境便能清淨廣大修習。是初勝 T1833_.43.0837c06: 利。又能漸斷薩迦耶見。是第二利。如能漸 T1833_.43.0837c07: 斷薩迦耶見。如是必能漸斷憍慢。是第三 T1833_.43.0837c08: 利。又能漸伏諸煩惱纒。是第四利。又能速疾 T1833_.43.0837c09: 除遣諸相。是第五利 釋。第一破常而證 T1833_.43.0837c10: 無常。二知無常不計我等。三既無我。我倶 T1833_.43.0837c11: 憍慢必能斷滅。四斷見慢已於彼境界伏 T1833_.43.0837c12: 惑不起。五由伏惑故不取相能除法執 T1833_.43.0837c13: 或五勝利即三解脱。初之二種空解脱門。 T1833_.43.0837c14: 第三・第四無願解脱。第五一種即無相門。行 T1833_.43.0837c15: 相易准 T1833_.43.0837c16: 疏。更無細分者。按彼論第三云。然色聚有 T1833_.43.0837c17: 分非極微。何以故。由極微即是分。此是聚 T1833_.43.0837c18: 色所有。非極微復有餘極微。是故極微非 T1833_.43.0837c19: 有分也 T1833_.43.0837c20: 疏。非肉天眼境等者。問何所以者。答按彼 T1833_.43.0837c21: 論云。以彼天眼唯取聚色中表上下前後 T1833_.43.0837c22: 兩邊若明若闇。必不能取極微處所。由極 T1833_.43.0837c23: 微體以惠分析而建立故。論標天眼肉眼 T1833_.43.0837c24: 類知。故不別釋。即餘三眼皆縁極微 問 T1833_.43.0837c25: 惠・法二眼以何爲體能觀極微 答以慧 T1833_.43.0837c26: 爲體。然本・後智分爲兩釋。一云二眼皆後 T1833_.43.0837c27: 得智。惠眼觀空。法眼觀有。或二種眼通觀 T1833_.43.0837c28: 空・有。若爾空者云何縁微。答縁極微空空 T1833_.43.0837c29: 智得縁 二云惠眼觀如即根本智。法眼觀 T1833_.43.0838a01: 空即後得智。若爾惠眼云何縁微。答縁極 T1833_.43.0838a02: 微如名縁極微 詳曰。今依後解。有所 T1833_.43.0838a03: 憑故。對法論云。眞如唯是聖惠眼境。故知 T1833_.43.0838a04: 惠眼而縁眞如 問佛眼體何 答有二義。 T1833_.43.0838a05: 一云因別法・惠。果總佛眼。故智度論云。猶 T1833_.43.0838a06: 如四河而至大池總名爲海。二云無分別 T1833_.43.0838a07: 惠以爲其體。與惠・法眼體有別故。或以大 T1833_.43.0838a08: 悲名爲佛眼 詳曰。前解爲本。智度論文 T1833_.43.0838a09: 自明解故。後釋大悲義亦局故 問按智度 T1833_.43.0838a10: 論四眼至佛總名佛眼。云何極微非肉天 T1833_.43.0838a11: 境 答爲二釋。一云雖至佛位亦能縁微。 T1833_.43.0838a12: 因位不爾。不同惠・法因果皆能以微爲境。 T1833_.43.0838a13: 二云而言佛眼能縁者。但取一分慧爲性 T1833_.43.0838a14: 者。肉・天至佛雖名佛眼。以體非惠故 T1833_.43.0838a15: 不縁微。後釋爲勝 問大乘極微豈無本 T1833_.43.0838a16: 質 答聖教既云以假想惠分折建立。何 T1833_.43.0838a17: 有本質 有義極微有二。一者本性。二影像 T1833_.43.0838a18: 相。言本性者佛・大菩薩以神通力折彼大 T1833_.43.0838a19: 地而爲極微故名本性。問瑜伽等論但説 T1833_.43.0838a20: 惠折以爲極微。此即影像。何有本質。答對 T1833_.43.0838a21: 敵申宗略故不説。稍同外故。故順正理三 T1833_.43.0838a22: 十二云。極微有二。一實。二假。實謂極成色 T1833_.43.0838a23: 等自相。於和集位現量所得。假由分折比 T1833_.43.0838a24: 量所知。恐濫有宗故但説假。理實大乘亦 T1833_.43.0838a25: 有二也。而言聚色無極微者。亦准此知。豈 T1833_.43.0838a26: 於自宗無細礙色。又大乘中非由散微集 T1833_.43.0838a27: 成聚色。説聚色無。折聚成微義不違也。又 T1833_.43.0838a28: 菩薩等作水等觀。變於本質根・塵等類。皆 T1833_.43.0838a29: 爲水・火・金・銀・蘇等 何獨微觀不能變彼 T1833_.43.0838b01: 本質成微。若許成微云何不許有微本 T1833_.43.0838b02: 質。問既有本質云何名假。答且本質微第 T1833_.43.0838b03: 八所變。非識外故不同餘宗。故説名假。然 T1833_.43.0838b04: 有質礙故説爲實。本質極微異熟相故不 T1833_.43.0838b05: 熏成種。其影像微非如本質有質礙用故 T1833_.43.0838b06: 説爲假。作所縁縁生眼識故説爲實有。影 T1833_.43.0838b07: 像相微熏成種子。不爾後識無影像故。問 T1833_.43.0838b08: 於色等處何處所收。答質・影二微唯法處 T1833_.43.0838b09: 收。唯意境故。又與影像同一種故。質十處 T1833_.43.0838b10: 收。影必應爾 詳曰。仰觀所斷理則富矣 T1833_.43.0838b11: 教尟證焉。今據大宗粗申皂白。本性微略 T1833_.43.0838b12: 有五失 一義無憑失。大法王御宇迷者 T1833_.43.0838b13: 目決於金言。上士韜光惑者斷疑於玉牒。 T1833_.43.0838b14: 玉牒攸載可頂載奉持。出自人情固躊躇 T1833_.43.0838b15: 叵據。今所立義聖教逈無。欲令學者何憑 T1833_.43.0838b16: 信入 二違聖教失。按瑜伽五十四云。問 T1833_.43.0838b17: 何故極微無生無滅。答由諸聚色最初生時 T1833_.43.0838b18: 全分而生。最後滅時不至極微位中間盡 T1833_.43.0838b19: 滅。猶如水滴。復由五相應知名不如理 T1833_.43.0838b20: 思議極微。謂於色聚中有極微自性而住。 T1833_.43.0838b21: 或有生滅。或謂極微與極微或合或散。或 T1833_.43.0838b22: 謂衆色極微積集。或謂極微能生別異衆多 T1833_.43.0838b23: 聚色。又顯揚十八云。謂諸極微但假想立。自 T1833_.43.0838b24: 體實無。若言有微。豈不違上諸聖教耶。若 T1833_.43.0838b25: 言前教據無散微成聚色等名無極微。 T1833_.43.0838b26: 不障折麁所成微者。此非善救。折麁之 T1833_.43.0838b27: 微即最後滅。何非有滅。此所折微後合成 T1833_.43.0838b28: 麁。何不名生。豈所折微永不合耶。又聚色 T1833_.43.0838b29: 中即有二分。大聖所折極微自性又所折微。 T1833_.43.0838c01: 更互相望亦有合散。色聚亦有微量積集。亦 T1833_.43.0838c02: 得名爲別生衆聚。何意瑜伽總判名爲無 T1833_.43.0838c03: 生・無滅不如理思。又所折者體既不無。諸 T1833_.43.0838c04: 論云何判無實體但假想立。若言諸論對 T1833_.43.0838c05: 敵申宗恐濫外義略不説者。亦非成救 T1833_.43.0838c06: 自許實微元總不説何名申宗。既許假實 T1833_.43.0838c07: 兩種極微。何獨説假即申宗矣。又微自許恐 T1833_.43.0838c08: 濫不説。三科他有*必應懼濫大乘不説。若 T1833_.43.0838c09: 云三科同故故説。亦爲不可。若據名同。極 T1833_.43.0838c10: 微亦爾。若約體説。小大三科體性假實種種 T1833_.43.0838c11: 亦異。云何名同。又本質微第八所變。非識 T1833_.43.0838c12: 外故。故名假者。即根・塵等第八親縁並名 T1833_.43.0838c13: 假。眼等五識親所縁者類亦應然。非識外 T1833_.43.0838c14: 故。此等不然彼云何爾。故知本無故教不 T1833_.43.0838c15: 説 問豈佛・菩薩不能折麁爲極微耶。答 T1833_.43.0838c16: 亦不能折至於極微。故瑜伽云。不至極微 T1833_.43.0838c17: 中間盡滅猶如水滴 釋乃至神通分散聚 T1833_.43.0838c18: 色而滅其麁。猶麁不至極微之位。中間滅 T1833_.43.0838c19: 盡猶如水滴。從大至小亦不得至極微位 T1833_.43.0838c20: 也。所以爾者。以聚色中無極微性故。若 T1833_.43.0838c21: 佛・菩薩折麁成微教亦應説。教既不説無 T1833_.43.0838c22: 乃意乎 三縱有不熏失。設佛・菩薩折麁成 T1833_.43.0838c23: 微。此微菩薩六識縁不。若不縁者既自第 T1833_.43.0838c24: 六觀心所折。何得不縁。自在位識諸根互 T1833_.43.0838c25: 用。所折之微既許實色。如何不縁。若言縁 T1833_.43.0838c26: 者何不熏種。未果滿故。故不應言本質 T1833_.43.0838c27: 極微異熟相故不熏成種。若言異熟不熏 T1833_.43.0838c28: 成種。不障餘六熏成種者。何乃不言。若 T1833_.43.0838c29: 言易知故不説者。異熟不熏誰之不悟。何 T1833_.43.0839a01: 即説之 四無因種同失。若質・影微皆熏 T1833_.43.0839a02: 成種。容可影・質二微種同。自斷影熏而質 T1833_.43.0839a03: 不熏。因何而得二微同種。若言質微雖無 T1833_.43.0839a04: 新熏。而有本有與影同種者。理亦不可。因 T1833_.43.0839a05: 佛・菩薩折而方立云何本有。故不可言本・ T1833_.43.0839a06: 影同種 五假實種同失。設質・影微共同一 T1833_.43.0839a07: 種。影假質實。實假不同。如何種共。若許爾 T1833_.43.0839a08: 者。心・色等異應皆同種。許即違教。不許違 T1833_.43.0839a09: 理。由斯五失立本・質微甚難依也。若影 T1833_.43.0839a10: 像微許熏種者過亦多種。廣如燈辨 T1833_.43.0839a11: 疏。此義雖通等者。依止名身通諸根矣。而 T1833_.43.0839a12: 身根勝得總身名。餘立別稱 T1833_.43.0839a13: 疏。前已破表至今更破無表者。前破對色。表 T1833_.43.0839a14: 亦在中而已破訖。今爲外人於總色中別 T1833_.43.0839a15: 執表實。故更破之。破表令無名破無表。 T1833_.43.0839a16: 不是破彼無表之色名破無表 T1833_.43.0839a17: 論。若言是形等者。彼以總身一分形色。而能 T1833_.43.0839a18: 表示自發業心。故説形色名爲身表。身所 T1833_.43.0839a19: 造業名爲自業。故成業論云。此中有説。且 T1833_.43.0839a20: 身表業形色爲性。誰之形色。謂身形色。若身 T1833_.43.0839a21: 形色。何故前言身所造業故名身業。謂總名 T1833_.43.0839a22: 身一分攝故名身形色。依身大種而發生 T1833_.43.0839a23: 故名身所造。以總身言於別亦轉。此能表 T1833_.43.0839a24: 示自發業心令他知故。爲顯此義故説頌 T1833_.43.0839a25: 言。由外發身・語。表内心所思。譬彼潜淵 T1833_.43.0839a26: 魚。鼓波而自表。形色者何。謂長等性。何者 T1833_.43.0839a27: 長等。謂於彼生長等名想。此色處攝 T1833_.43.0839a28: 論。若言是動等者。動謂行動。行動即是色處 T1833_.43.0839a29: 所攝。故成業論云。有説身表行動爲性。何 T1833_.43.0839b01: 名行動。謂轉至餘方。此攝在何處。謂色處 T1833_.43.0839b02: 攝。何縁知此轉至餘方。謂差別相不可知 T1833_.43.0839b03: 故 釋曰。既差別相而故知有動至餘方 T1833_.43.0839b04: 也。倶舍亦云。動名身表。以身動時由業動 T1833_.43.0839b05: 故 T1833_.43.0839b06: 疏雖彼自宗至無不定過者。詳曰。或可因中 T1833_.43.0839b07: 以言簡之。應云除色・心等是有爲故。或 T1833_.43.0839b08: 色・心等攝入宗中。皆無不定。雖本破動。爲 T1833_.43.0839b09: 遮不定兼破色・心令刹那滅。違他順己 T1833_.43.0839b10: 亦無過矣 T1833_.43.0839b11: 疏。謂滅應更生至無不定者。詳曰。住不更 T1833_.43.0839b12: 生。待因之因於住得轉。何理不得成不 T1833_.43.0839b13: 定耶。若住非滅非不定者。夫不定者唯對 T1833_.43.0839b14: 宗法。滅既有法。住雖非滅何廢不定。由斯 T1833_.43.0839b15: 住相攝入宗中。或因中簡即無過矣 T1833_.43.0839b16: 論。非顯非形等者。按成業論云。日出論者 T1833_.43.0839b17: 作如是言。諸行實無至餘方義。有爲法性 T1833_.43.0839b18: 念念滅故。然別有法心差別爲因依手足 T1833_.43.0839b19: 等起。此法能作手足物異方生因。是名行 T1833_.43.0839b20: 動。亦名身表。謂色處攝。雖亦名動。然念念 T1833_.43.0839b21: 滅不至餘方。與前計別 T1833_.43.0839b22: 疏。五天有五論師者。按西域傳。東天馬鳴。 T1833_.43.0839b23: 南天提婆。西天室利羅多。北天鳩摩羅多。中 T1833_.43.0839b24: 天龍樹。具如彼辨 T1833_.43.0839b25: 疏。豈以顯等爲表知者。見佛相好色身生 T1833_.43.0839b26: 敬。此所見色但名顯色。無表示故。觸等准 T1833_.43.0839b27: 知 T1833_.43.0839b28: 疏。或復語等者。問前解何別 答前釋但言 T1833_.43.0839b29: 語能表了。而不分別。後解分別。由其語聲 T1833_.43.0839c01: 有假名等而有表也 T1833_.43.0839c02: 疏。識變簡經部等者。問身・語二表經部・有宗 T1833_.43.0839c03: 倶非識變。何故身表而言識變即簡有宗。 T1833_.43.0839c04: 語表識變即簡經部 答經部執有動爲 T1833_.43.0839c05: 身表。眞・似相對似簡眞動。有宗不然。故識 T1833_.43.0839c06: 變簡。有宗麁實故聲是實。所以似簡。經部不 T1833_.43.0839c07: 然。但識變簡。各據一義亦不相違 T1833_.43.0839c08: 疏。謂身勇身精進者。勇謂策勵。精進謂勤。 T1833_.43.0839c09: 由二在内不示他故名爲無表 T1833_.43.0839c10: 疏。心勇等者。此心勇等者心所所攝。今明於 T1833_.43.0839c11: 色故不取也。文同表矣 T1833_.43.0839c12: 論。然依思願等者。有義定道亦依誓願所起 T1833_.43.0839c13: 思立。謂將起彼定道惑時願云。我當許時 T1833_.43.0839c14: 入定。由此便能引起勝思遮於惡色假名 T1833_.43.0839c15: 無表。又約自性言但依思。若通眷屬。即 T1833_.43.0839c16: 依倶行心・心所立。義亦無違。能遮惡惑 T1833_.43.0839c17: 通相應故。如二定體眷屬而言。依二十二 T1833_.43.0839c18: 心等種立。若自性者但依能厭惠種上立。 T1833_.43.0839c19: 今此*必爾。聖説依思業自性故 詳曰。入 T1833_.43.0839c20: 定起願。但爲出定時分限也。不縁於*惑 T1833_.43.0839c21: 而方發願。與別解脱願有別也。不可爲 T1833_.43.0839c22: 例。又彼眷屬通依餘立。有理無教。理亦難 T1833_.43.0839c23: 據。何所以者。若以二定依多種立例*惑 T1833_.43.0839c24: 同者。別解脱*惑理亦應爾。思種同時有多 T1833_.43.0839c25: 種故。又應表*惑亦依現思相應法立。若 T1833_.43.0839c26: 言此等無遮惡能故不依立。定道相應何 T1833_.43.0839c27: 得即有。若言非勝復非業性而不立者。定 T1833_.43.0839c28: 道應爾。若表*惑及別解脱亦依倶時種及 T1833_.43.0839c29: 相應。理即有也。而教未見 T1833_.43.0840a01: 論。善惡思種増長位立者。此散無表何要依 T1833_.43.0840a02: 種 若不依種。受惑已後散亂等心。應 T1833_.43.0840a03: 不名爲具律儀等。爲遮此過故依種立。 T1833_.43.0840a04: 故成業論云。若三種業但思爲體。於散亂 T1833_.43.0840a05: 心・及無心位爾時無思。如何得有名具律 T1833_.43.0840a06: 儀・不律儀者。由思差別所熏成種不損壞 T1833_.43.0840a07: 故。名具律儀・不律儀者。故無有過 T1833_.43.0840a08: 疏。殊勝思者。簡下中思不發無表者。按成 T1833_.43.0840a09: 業論云。思差別者簡取勝思能發律儀・不 T1833_.43.0840a10: 律儀表。由此思故熏成二種殊勝種子。依 T1833_.43.0840a11: 二種子未損壞位。假立善・惡律儀無表 T1833_.43.0840a12: 疏。猶現無依諸福業事者。無依之義略有 T1833_.43.0840a13: 兩釋 一云依謂所施財物等類。此財物等 T1833_.43.0840a14: 是業所託名之爲依。今者雖無所依諸物 T1833_.43.0840a15: 不起身業。但聞諸善而起深心隨喜恭敬。 T1833_.43.0840a16: 而於身中福亦續起。此所起福名無依福 T1833_.43.0840a17: 二云非唯起心亦身恭敬所増之福。但 T1833_.43.0840a18: 無施物總名無依 T1833_.43.0840a19: 疏。施主遠處等者。此有依福。即所施物名之 T1833_.43.0840a20: 爲依。故倶舍論第十三云。如契經云。善男 T1833_.43.0840a21: 子等成熟有依七福業事。若行・若住・若寐・ T1833_.43.0840a22: 若覺恒時相續福業漸増 釋七福事者。一 T1833_.43.0840a23: 施羈旅客。二施路行人。三施病人。四施侍 T1833_.43.0840a24: 病人。五施園林。六施常食。七隨時施。如 T1833_.43.0840a25: 是七種有所依事故名有依。善故名福。作 T1833_.43.0840a26: 故名業。思託名事 T1833_.43.0840a27: 疏。若新熏種等者。難陀師義。唯是新熏。而 T1833_.43.0840a28: 於彼宗分爲二釋。一云。種子念念體増。即 T1833_.43.0840a29: 如疏辨 若爾後時既無現熏種云何増 T1833_.43.0840b01: 答由發惑思能熏力勝合所熏種後後體 T1833_.43.0840b02: 増。如水・土等有勝功能令麥等種生芽莖 T1833_.43.0840b03: 等種種多果。*惑等種體既復倍増。有依・無 T1833_.43.0840b04: 依福業事等亦體増也 二云増者但種子 T1833_.43.0840b05: 上能防惡*惑七支功能而倍倍増。何所以 T1833_.43.0840b06: 者。要現熏習種方生故。又若體増後時現生 T1833_.43.0840b07: 從何種起。不可有生有不生者。種勢等 T1833_.43.0840b08: 故。後亦不得多種共生。違世間故。故但用 T1833_.43.0840b09: 増 詳曰。雖有兩釋用増爲正 T1833_.43.0840b10: 疏。若新舊合用者。此護法釋。傳有五解 T1833_.43.0840b11: 一云體増。體有二種。一新。二舊。唯新熏増 T1833_.43.0840b12: 而非本有。本有勢力不及新故。又非今時 T1833_.43.0840b13: 思願起故 二云由發*惑思合新體増本 T1833_.43.0840b14: 有用増。依體増立 三云新舊悉體増長。 T1833_.43.0840b15: 依二増立 四云新種用増。其體不増。本 T1833_.43.0840b16: 有體用皆悉不増。理同前師。尋可知也 T1833_.43.0840b17: 五云本亦用増而體不増。然唯本有倶爲一 T1833_.43.0840b18: 釋。如疏所明。三師合論總有八釋。皆用増 T1833_.43.0840b19: 勝。正如疏斷 問無表之色依表種立。表 T1833_.43.0840b20: 種既多。爲依何立 答正釋如燈。傳有五 T1833_.43.0840b21: 解 一云第三羯磨末後念心。若住求*惑 T1833_.43.0840b22: 等流善心。即依此種而假建立。若於此時 T1833_.43.0840b23: 起住不同分心。或在無心。即依前位近因 T1833_.43.0840b24: 等起末後心立 二云始初乞*惑乃至第三 T1833_.43.0840b25: 羯磨後念所熏成種。期心滿故皆可増長。 T1833_.43.0840b26: 故可總依多種假立 若爾如何初念唯 T1833_.43.0840b27: 立一具七支無表色耶 答種雖有多各各 T1833_.43.0840b28: 有能。唯防一具身・語七支。故説初念唯有 T1833_.43.0840b29: 七支。實非唯七。又種子和合不可分別。勢 T1833_.43.0840c01: 力既同。總立無失 三云唯依近因等起末 T1833_.43.0840c02: 後念心思種子立。非依多種無有前失。此 T1833_.43.0840c03: 一念心近能發*惑故唯依此 四云唯依近 T1833_.43.0840c04: 因等起初念心種發身・語中。此最勝故。身・ T1833_.43.0840c05: 語因此成善・惡故。後皆隨轉。非轉因故。 T1833_.43.0840c06: 如刹那思性不定故。由此最初能發無表 T1833_.43.0840c07: 五云近因等起中無論初後。但最勝者事 T1833_.43.0840c08: 究竟時。思種増長能發無表 有義斷云。可 T1833_.43.0840c09: 依第二勝思相續。功能力齊有依・不依所 T1833_.43.0840c10: 以無故。非如有宗表唯一念。大乘身・語既 T1833_.43.0840c11: 相續流。能發彼思皆名表故。故無表色依 T1833_.43.0840c12: 多念思。但表皆能發無表故。律儀既爾。不 T1833_.43.0840c13: 律儀等准此應知 詳曰。觀此斷意其理 T1833_.43.0840c14: 非無。然稍雜亂。轉與隨轉有何差別。近因・ T1833_.43.0840c15: 刹那二起何殊。許於初念有多七支復無 T1833_.43.0840c16: 文故。故第四釋理最爲勝。餘皆有失思准 T1833_.43.0840c17: 可悟。又新熏等前有八釋。以今無表所依 T1833_.43.0840c18: 種義所有五釋歴彼前八。一一有五成四 T1833_.43.0840c19: 十釋。其正不正量可知矣 T1833_.43.0840c20: 疏。初熏種時舊亦生種者。現行熏彼新熏種 T1833_.43.0840c21: 時。本有舊種亦復搏。生一種子也。即是四 T1833_.43.0840c22: 法同時起也。此非正義 T1833_.43.0840c23: 疏。又簡遠近等者。審慮決定遠近如次皆是 T1833_.43.0840c24: 所起身・語加行。加行之中分遠近也 T1833_.43.0840c25: 疏。及與刹那者。其動發思發身・語者多爲 T1833_.43.0840c26: 近因。爲因引起身・語二故。故名等起。能起 T1833_.43.0840c27: 名起。第二念後心・心所等但名刹那。刹那 T1833_.43.0840c28: 刹那自相引起。近因起者名之爲轉。依彼 T1833_.43.0840c29: 現・種立表・無表。刹那等起名爲隨轉。隨前 T1833_.43.0841a01: 轉故。不依現・種立無表等。以非決定是 T1833_.43.0841a02: 善・惡性起身・語故。由有隨轉業起分明。 T1833_.43.0841a03: 故立有也 T1833_.43.0841a04: 疏。彼決定得色名因等者。諸律儀*惑悉皆能 T1833_.43.0841a05: 止身・語惡色。顯揚據此故能止*惑。從所止 T1833_.43.0841a06: 法以立色名。若發身・語諸*惑不定故。彼 T1833_.43.0841a07: 不依所發身・語而立色號 T1833_.43.0841a08: 疏。定道合説者。彼顯揚論定・道・別脱三*惑 T1833_.43.0841a09: 合説。云依不現行建立色性。三皆能止惡 T1833_.43.0841a10: 身・語故 T1833_.43.0841a11: 疏。此顯差別等者。此唯識論顯隨心*惑・及 T1833_.43.0841a12: 不隨心二*惑差別。故別脱言發身・語也。 T1833_.43.0841a13: 定・道不必皆能發故 問律儀防惡。惡通 T1833_.43.0841a14: 三世。防何世耶 答傳有三釋。一云通防 T1833_.43.0841a15: 三世。過・未雖無依現立故。故防現在義即 T1833_.43.0841a16: 防三。二云唯防現在。過・未無故。三云唯防 T1833_.43.0841a17: 未來。過・現已起。防無用故 詳曰。初釋爲 T1833_.43.0841a18: 勝。如無漏見依瑜伽等亦得説言斷三世 T1833_.43.0841a19: 惑。此亦應爾。至下當悉 問發*惑之思願 T1833_.43.0841a20: 遮惡色。惡色既七皆是所縁。應熏七種依 T1833_.43.0841a21: 立無表 答如二定體依能厭立。此亦應 T1833_.43.0841a22: 然。依能遮種 T1833_.43.0841a23: 疏。非是表者。不發身・語但名無表 若爾 T1833_.43.0841a24: 何故名正語等 答止惡身・語名正語等 T1833_.43.0841a25: 疏。如發身語思等者。不示他故。非種子故 T1833_.43.0841a26: 問道相應思非表・無表。而依何法名道 T1833_.43.0841a27: 律儀 答且約別脱依種子立。道相應思 T1833_.43.0841a28: 非種子故云非表・無表。非盡理也 T1833_.43.0841a29: 疏。又望不同等者。望發身・語而名爲表。據 T1833_.43.0841b01: 防惡色名爲無表 T1833_.43.0841b02: 疏。不爾等者。此顯理也。八地已去及乎。如 T1833_.43.0841b03: 來既恒在定。六純無漏。豈可不有身・語表 T1833_.43.0841b04: 耶。疏雖三釋後解爲正 T1833_.43.0841b05: 疏。不發善身語等者。據八地前及八地中不 T1833_.43.0841b06: 發時説 T1833_.43.0841b07: 疏。然無無表者。章有兩説。今疏同章第二 T1833_.43.0841b08: 師説 問表義云何 答後思表前思名意 T1833_.43.0841b09: 表業 問前思已滅何所表耶 答如第三 T1833_.43.0841b10: 羯磨無心之時方名表者。表前方便思故 T1833_.43.0841b11: 得名爲表。此亦爾也。又思見分及自證分更 T1833_.43.0841b12: 互相表。名爲表也 T1833_.43.0841b13: 疏。三業無表皆假等者。按佛地論云。雖有 T1833_.43.0841b14: 毀犯制立學處。但假安立而非實有。諸無 T1833_.43.0841b15: 表業唯以不作爲其性故亦非實有 T1833_.43.0841b16: 論。能動身思等者。按成業論釋三名云。身 T1833_.43.0841b17: 論諸根大造和合差別爲體。積集所成是 T1833_.43.0841b18: 爲身義。業即是思差別爲性。有所造作是 T1833_.43.0841b19: 爲業義。思能動身説爲身業。令身相續異 T1833_.43.0841b20: 方生因。風界起故具足應言動身之業。除 T1833_.43.0841b21: 動身言但名身業。如益力油但言力油。如 T1833_.43.0841b22: 動塵風但名塵風 語謂語言。音聲爲性。 T1833_.43.0841b23: 此能表了所欲説義故名爲語。或復語者 T1833_.43.0841b24: 字等所依。由帶字等能詮表義。故名爲語。 T1833_.43.0841b25: 能發語思説名爲業。具足應言發語之業。 T1833_.43.0841b26: 除發語言但名語業。喩同身業 意謂意 T1833_.43.0841b27: 識。能思量故。趣向餘生・及境界故説名爲 T1833_.43.0841b28: 意。作動意思説名意業。具足應言作意 T1833_.43.0841b29: 之業。或意相應業。除彼作字・及相應言但 T1833_.43.0841c01: 云意業。喩如前説。略提大意。具如彼辨 T1833_.43.0841c02: 論。能動身思至説名意業者。問思有四種。三 T1833_.43.0841c03: 如論辨。第四刹那。此何不説 答。有義刹 T1833_.43.0841c04: 那等起三性不定。罪・福二行彼非定依故。 T1833_.43.0841c05: 此説業不論第四。若末後思性類同者即動 T1833_.43.0841c06: 發收。第三通轉・及隨轉故。故不別説。其初 T1833_.43.0841c07: 二思望身・語業遠因等起。動發近因。由此 T1833_.43.0841c08: 應言遠因等起必初二思。有初二思非遠因 T1833_.43.0841c09: 起。如邪見倶不發身・語。近因等起必動發 T1833_.43.0841c10: 思。有動發思非近因起。如刹那思 T1833_.43.0841c11: 疏。問若發身語思等者。有義今不依此。如 T1833_.43.0841c12: 所熏種雖非是色。而能防色假名爲色何 T1833_.43.0841c13: 妨。現思以非色故雖不能表。而能發色 T1833_.43.0841c14: 假名表色。然疏主意近覺知非。表無表章 T1833_.43.0841c15: 許名表也 詳曰。疏無誤也。不同色・聲 T1833_.43.0841c16: 有示他義爲實表色。不同種子有相續 T1833_.43.0841c17: 義爲假無表。云非表等。不障以爲假表 T1833_.43.0841c18: 色也。若不爾者。後既知非章中許表。云何 T1833_.43.0841c19: 於疏而不改耶。豈故欲將迷學者乎。疏既 T1833_.43.0841c20: 不改。故知不謬。本意如前 T1833_.43.0841c21: 疏。造作於心等者。問若造作心何非意業 T1833_.43.0841c22: 答彼唯動意。今此復能動身・語故故非 T1833_.43.0841c23: 意業 有云。此思能起身・語所起身・語有 T1833_.43.0841c24: 所造作 有義由發動思能起身・語即 T1833_.43.0841c25: 名造作。身・語是思所造作故 詳曰。疏釋爲 T1833_.43.0841c26: 正。故下論云。思謂令心造作爲性。於善 T1833_.43.0841c27: 等品沒心爲業。驅役自心令造善等。 T1833_.43.0841c28: 彼既明文。此何不許造作於心名有所造。 T1833_.43.0841c29: 不可説彼唯明意業。文無有簡通明思故 T1833_.43.0842a01: 復云心令造作善等。豈身・語二無善等耶。 T1833_.43.0842a02: 令心既是造作心義。餘解紕謬思可知矣 T1833_.43.0842a03: 疏。道有二義等者。有義彈云。言遊履者是 T1833_.43.0842a04: 所縁義。此且非理。若對現在説過名前。過 T1833_.43.0842a05: 去無體何名能履。若對未來現在名前。未 T1833_.43.0842a06: 來未生何爲所履。若引發義名遊履者。理 T1833_.43.0842a07: 亦不然。其引發者是通生義。既前二思是能 T1833_.43.0842a08: 引發。道義即是前審決思。如何所引第三名 T1833_.43.0842a09: 道 詳曰。疏立無違。彈者似破。現在名前。 T1833_.43.0842a10: 未來名履。豈不許意縁未來耶。若許縁者 T1833_.43.0842a11: 所縁名履竟有何失。若言引發是通生義是 T1833_.43.0842a12: 審決者。難亦誣謬。設縱引發是通生義。何 T1833_.43.0842a13: 唯審決。豈發動思非通生耶。若言非者違 T1833_.43.0842a14: 諸聖教。三業皆能招異熟故。又疏但云所 T1833_.43.0842a15: 引發義名所遊履。而不説爲屬能引也。且 T1833_.43.0842a16: 猶荒野本無路徑。後因人履其路方有。此 T1833_.43.0842a17: 道豈非人所引耶。發動所引而得道名於 T1833_.43.0842a18: 理何失見彈斥乎 T1833_.43.0842a19: 疏。身語是業道義者。業道之義。義即境也 T1833_.43.0842a20: 疏。不相似故者。不相似故名不相應。不似 T1833_.43.0842a21: 色・心質礙・縁慮 T1833_.43.0842a22: 論。非如色心至有體可得者。有義非疏釋 T1833_.43.0842a23: 云。因非如色等現量所得。非如心等比量 T1833_.43.0842a24: 所得。作此立因。因不定失。彼説無爲非如 T1833_.43.0842a25: 色・心二量所得體相可得。應言許是有爲 T1833_.43.0842a26: 非如色・心質礙・縁慮二量所得體相可得 T1833_.43.0842a27: 者。即無不定 詳曰。疏已簡云自無爲法 T1833_.43.0842a28: 擧色等等他宗無爲非此所許遮過已盡。 T1833_.43.0842a29: 何有不定。准有義因。乃有相違決定過也。 T1833_.43.0842b01: 相違因云。許非慮・礙及假無爲。爲・無爲中 T1833_.43.0842b02: 隨一攝故。如實無爲。宗義可知。又豈彼宗 T1833_.43.0842b03: 不許聖者證得無爲。若許得者。無爲何非 T1833_.43.0842b04: 現量所得。除現量智更有何法能證無爲。 T1833_.43.0842b05: 若言不同色・心而得名非得者。亦爲不 T1833_.43.0842b06: 可。喩取少分。有現量得即爲喩也 T1833_.43.0842b07: 疏。又擇滅等非此所許亦無不定者。有義此 T1833_.43.0842b08: 亦不然。共比量於他有不定過名不定 T1833_.43.0842b09: 故。故但如文即無不定。無爲亦如色・心・心 T1833_.43.0842b10: 所體相可得。非無體故者 詳曰。若共比 T1833_.43.0842b11: 量犯他不定即爲過者。何有正量。且如九 T1833_.43.0842b12: 句第二之因。亦犯他宗決定相違。以彼自 T1833_.43.0842b13: 許有聲性故。域龍何乃斷爲正因。及將此 T1833_.43.0842b14: 因聲・勝相對便爲不定。以此故知。共比量 T1833_.43.0842b15: 者違共及自方名爲過。違他便非。不爾乃 T1833_.43.0842b16: 違諸教理也。又言無爲如色・心等非無 T1833_.43.0842b17: 體者。爲自・他耶。若他無爲許之心外。心外 T1833_.43.0842b18: 不有何言非無。若自宗者。何乃不有他不 T1833_.43.0842b19: 定耶。若言非許無不定者。與疏何別。雖 T1833_.43.0842b20: 有異端固難爲據 T1833_.43.0842b21: 論。非異色心作用可得者。如疏具簡眞如 T1833_.43.0842b22: 等法不定失矣。有義説因應云許是有爲 T1833_.43.0842b23: 或無爲不攝。非異色・心及諸心所作用可 T1833_.43.0842b24: 得。即簡不定 詳曰。自宗無爲非定異心。 T1833_.43.0842b25: 他宗無爲非自共許。何有不定須加論乎 T1833_.43.0842b26: 問色・心・心所爲即是因。爲不爾耶 設 T1833_.43.0842b27: 爾何過 二倶有失。若云因者。因但取彼 T1833_.43.0842b28: 不異色・心作用之義。豈取彼體。又因是彼 T1833_.43.0842b29: 有法之義。若實色・心依假得等豈非倒乎。 T1833_.43.0842c01: 若非因者。成非實宗。實色・心等豈非異喩。 T1833_.43.0842c02: 因於彼轉。何非不定。色・心亦非異色・心 T1833_.43.0842c03: 等有作用故 答爲二釋。一云因攝。雖因 T1833_.43.0842c04: 正取非異作用。色・心乃是所不異法。故在 T1833_.43.0842c05: 因收。正因依宗無倒依失 二云。異喩。因 T1833_.43.0842c06: 應加云。許無慮・礙非異色・心・及諸心所 T1833_.43.0842c07: 作用可得便無不定。色・心異喩。有慮・礙 T1833_.43.0842c08: 故。二釋任取 T1833_.43.0842c09: 論。畢竟無等者。按瑜伽論第十六。説有五 T1833_.43.0842c10: 種無。一未生無。謂未來諸行。二已滅無。謂過 T1833_.43.0842c11: 去諸行。三互相無。謂諸餘法由所餘相。若遠 T1833_.43.0842c12: 離性。若非有性。或所餘法。與諸餘法不和 T1833_.43.0842c13: 合性。四勝義無者。謂由世俗言説自性。假 T1833_.43.0842c14: 設言論所安立性。五畢竟無。謂石女兒等 T1833_.43.0842c15: 論。或餘實法所不攝等者。有義疏説假實相 T1833_.43.0842c16: 對因。謂假法之餘。乃實法之餘。此非理也。彼 T1833_.43.0842c17: 宗得等皆是假法之餘。實法攝故。因便不成。 T1833_.43.0842c18: 故今別説除不相應外餘色・心等實法不攝 T1833_.43.0842c19: 故 詳曰。依觀疏中重疊簡略誠無過矣。 T1833_.43.0842c20: 何枉剩焉。故疏簡云。此中餘言顯色・心等所 T1833_.43.0842c21: 不攝也。既云色・心之所不攝。豈不遮彼隨 T1833_.43.0842c22: 一過耶。又疏復云。不言許者隨一不成。此 T1833_.43.0842c23: 乃顯得他雖實攝。明自許得實法不攝故 T1833_.43.0842c24: 置許言。許言有二。一許色・心實法不攝。自 T1833_.43.0842c25: 他皆許。敵者許得亦非色・心。二許但是實 T1833_.43.0842c26: 法不攝。唯自宗許。許言寛狹。簡過乃窮。疏 T1833_.43.0842c27: 何非理 T1833_.43.0842c28: 疏。不能起因有三者。外以三因明得能起。 T1833_.43.0842c29: 即下論中外救等是 T1833_.43.0843a01: 疏。論主六難者。以六箇難而破三因 T1833_.43.0843a02: 論。未得已失應永不生者。問未來應生。闕 T1833_.43.0843a03: 縁不起亦名已失。此定不生。得非擇故。今 T1833_.43.0843a04: 難於此豈不相符 答論中言總。量應簡 T1833_.43.0843a05: 之 T1833_.43.0843a06: 論。一切非情應永不起者。彼宗不許他身・ T1833_.43.0843a07: 非情而立得故。故倶舍論第四云。非他相 T1833_.43.0843a08: 續。無有成就他身法故。非非相續。無有 T1833_.43.0843a09: 成就非情法故 釋曰。若成他身有趣身 T1833_.43.0843a10: 業自他雜過 非非相續。謂是非情。若成 T1833_.43.0843a11: 非情便壞法性。爲是有情。爲非情耶 T1833_.43.0843a12: 疏。須即縁者。即無漏智欲縁眞如而即能 T1833_.43.0843a13: 縁。由智有種能起現縁 T1833_.43.0843a14: 疏。前何須者。不離有情法自成就。詎假得 T1833_.43.0843a15: 乎 T1833_.43.0843a16: 疏。後即無故者。離有情法法體即無。如龜 T1833_.43.0843a17: 毛等。何依立得 T1833_.43.0843a18: 論。然依有情至立三種成就者。問得・獲・成就 T1833_.43.0843a19: 三何別耶。答若依小宗總別有異。得總餘 T1833_.43.0843a20: 別。故倶舍論第四云。得有二種。一者未得已 T1833_.43.0843a21: 失今獲。二者得已不失成就。故體義同。依 T1833_.43.0843a22: 總別門分差別稱 釋獲・成就二差別者。 T1833_.43.0843a23: 有云。若法未得及得已失倶今初得。此法上 T1833_.43.0843a24: 得創至生相即名爲獲。若流至現得已不 T1833_.43.0843a25: 失名爲成就。獲時不名成。成就不名獲。 T1833_.43.0843a26: 若古徳釋。成通新舊。獲唯據新。其中得失 T1833_.43.0843a27: 如彼論鈔。若大乘者義乃通矣。如現行法 T1833_.43.0843a28: 雖唯新得。亦得名爲現行成就。種有新 T1833_.43.0843a29: 重・本有二別。倶名成就亦名得・獲。故瑜 T1833_.43.0843b01: 伽論五十二云。云何得・獲・成就。謂若略説。 T1833_.43.0843b02: 生縁・攝受・増盛之因説名爲得 釋曰。種是 T1833_.43.0843b03: 生果之因縁故名爲生縁。由種有生果之 T1833_.43.0843b04: 功能果方得有種名攝受。即所生果名爲 T1833_.43.0843b05: 増盛。或種有彼生果勢用名爲増盛。増盛 T1833_.43.0843b06: 即因。由有此能假立爲得。廣有同異如 T1833_.43.0843b07: 彼鈔釋 問於彼他身・及非情上而有得 T1833_.43.0843b08: 耶 答正辨如疏。復有二説 一云非情外 T1833_.43.0843b09: 器自所變者種成非現。現行非情非内身 T1833_.43.0843b10: 故。若成就彼應名有情。若他所變非自種 T1833_.43.0843b11: 生。若種若現倶非成就。若於他身自所變 T1833_.43.0843b12: 者。種成非現。若成現行應自身攝。若他所 T1833_.43.0843b13: 變若種若現皆非所成 一云非情・及與他 T1833_.43.0843b14: 身自所變者。種現倶成。雖非執受攝爲己 T1833_.43.0843b15: 體。從自種子非外起故。自識變故。不離 T1833_.43.0843b16: 識故。彼亦説名爲可成法。他變他身外器虚 T1833_.43.0843b17: 空名非可成。非自種生・自識變故 詳曰。 T1833_.43.0843b18: 後説爲勝。不違唯識。復順下説變他扶 T1833_.43.0843b19: 塵正義所説。若變他・器現不成者。云何受 T1833_.43.0843b20: 用他之扶塵及外器色。又豈所受但種非現。 T1833_.43.0843b21: 而言種成非現成耶 T1833_.43.0843b22: 疏。然五十六者。依撿彼論云。得依因・自在・ T1833_.43.0843b23: 現行分位建立。此復三種。謂種子・自在・現 T1833_.43.0843b24: 行成就。更無餘也。疏對雜集而擧來者。意 T1833_.43.0843b25: 明是説得等之文。不言彼即與雜集同一 T1833_.43.0843b26: 處引也 T1833_.43.0843b27: 疏。對法第五至亦名不成就者。按彼論云。 T1833_.43.0843b28: 種子成者謂若生欲界。色・無色界繋煩惱・隨 T1833_.43.0843b29: 煩惱由種子成就故成熟及生得善 釋曰 T1833_.43.0843c01: 是本論也。唯明煩惱・及生得善。論依未離 T1833_.43.0843c02: 欲異生説。若已離欲或生上地。隨所離欲。 T1833_.43.0843c03: 即此地煩惱・隨煩惱。亦成就亦不成就未 T1833_.43.0843c04: 永言隨眠故。對治道所損故。如其次第。 T1833_.43.0843c05: 及生得善隨所生地即此地成就 釋曰師 T1833_.43.0843c06: 子覺釋。本論但依欲界未離欲説。釋論兼 T1833_.43.0843c07: 據離欲生上及上二界明成不成。此即欲 T1833_.43.0843c08: 界。論若生色界欲界繋煩惱・隨煩惱。由種 T1833_.43.0843c09: 子成就故。成就亦名不成就。色・無色界繋 T1833_.43.0843c10: 煩惱・隨煩惱。由種子成就故。成就及生得 T1833_.43.0843c11: 善。若生無色界欲・色界繋煩惱・隨煩惱。由 T1833_.43.0843c12: 種子成就故。成就亦名不成。無色界繋煩 T1833_.43.0843c13: 惱・隨煩惱。由種子成就故。成就及生得善 T1833_.43.0843c14: 釋曰。此釋論者明上二界成・不成就。夫 T1833_.43.0843c15: 生上地必伏下惑。故上對下名成・不成。 T1833_.43.0843c16: 種在名成。其生得善不起異界。故皆當地 T1833_.43.0843c17: 名之爲成 問生上二界有離自染。何故 T1833_.43.0843c18: 自地不名不成 答文略故也 或前欲界 T1833_.43.0843c19: 明離自染名成・不成。例上應爾。故不擧 T1833_.43.0843c20: 也 問如上將下起下地愛此即唯成。云 T1833_.43.0843c21: 何名爲亦不成耶 答據多分説。又依上 T1833_.43.0843c22: 生不説生下。非委談也 問生二界上 T1833_.43.0843c23: 地之時亦離下染。云何生上當界之惑總 T1833_.43.0843c24: 名成耶 答依界而論。不據地説 T1833_.43.0843c25: 疏。無不成就者。無煩惱用名不成就 T1833_.43.0843c26: 疏。然准對法至通成不成者。如在一界。餘 T1833_.43.0843c27: 界生得望有種故名爲成就。現行不起名 T1833_.43.0843c28: 不成就 T1833_.43.0844a01: 疏。以在他界至唯説成就者。釋對法論不 T1833_.43.0844a02: 説所以。煩惱容有起他地者。對起・不起 T1833_.43.0844a03: 名成・不成。生得善法無起異界。不同煩 T1833_.43.0844a04: 惱故但説成 T1833_.43.0844a05: 疏。亦不説現行名種子成就者。但生得善種 T1833_.43.0844a06: 有其用即名成就。不要生現方始名爲種 T1833_.43.0844a07: 子成就 有云。此論第八説於現行亦名爲 T1833_.43.0844a08: 種。故今簡之 詳曰。雖有此理然乖疏 T1833_.43.0844a09: 旨 T1833_.43.0844a10: 疏。此依我見至及不成者。此我見斷而有兩 T1833_.43.0844a11: 説 一云即與當地第九惑同時斷 一云 T1833_.43.0844a12: 九地第六我見。皆至金剛一時頓斷。今依 T1833_.43.0844a13: 初義。若後義者。離欲之時有斷・未斷 有 T1833_.43.0844a14: 云。約伏有成・不成 詳曰。不然。疏自標 T1833_.43.0844a15: 云若無漏道依染種體名成・不成。故知約 T1833_.43.0844a16: 斷。若是伏者前已明訖。何須重明 T1833_.43.0844a17: 疏。如斷善根用不成者。問正斷善際但除生 T1833_.43.0844a18: 得。云何加行用不成耶 答生得劣善彼時 T1833_.43.0844a19: 猶無。加行勝善云何得有。又若斷善加行位 T1833_.43.0844a20: 時。彼方便善而已不起。後方正斷生得善 T1833_.43.0844a21: 也。若不爾者彼邪見心。何力能斷生得善 T1833_.43.0844a22: 耶。由此總言邪見斷善。邪見加行亦名邪 T1833_.43.0844a23: 見。即斷加行・生得二善。若根本邪見名爲 T1833_.43.0844a24: 邪見言見斷善。唯斷生得故。諸聖教説 T1833_.43.0844a25: 斷於善。寛狹不同當如斯會 T1833_.43.0844a26: 疏。以種隱難知等者。問按顯揚論。種合爲 T1833_.43.0844a27: 一。現行開二。何乃不同 答有二釋。一如 T1833_.43.0844a28: 義燈。一云有義顯揚論意種子類同故合爲 T1833_.43.0844a29: 一。現行相別故開二種 問如小乘中得 T1833_.43.0844b01: 有三種。謂倶・前・後。大乘同耶 答有義兩 T1833_.43.0844b02: 釋。一云既無二世無前後得。但隨所成可 T1833_.43.0844b03: 名法倶。二云或可義説應別安立。如現 T1833_.43.0844b04: 行法由熏習力得而不失名法後得。引發 T1833_.43.0844b05: 種子爲生現行名法前得。此前・後時唯 T1833_.43.0844b06: 依種立。倶時種・現名法倶得。無爲之得名 T1833_.43.0844b07: 非前・後 詳曰。理雖可通然義稍狹。不 T1833_.43.0844b08: 説種有三種得故。而今釋者。過・未雖無而 T1833_.43.0844b09: 於現在假立三世。依於三世如次立彼 T1833_.43.0844b10: 後・倶・前得 T1833_.43.0844b11: 疏。今者大乘擇滅之得定屬道等者。有説得 T1833_.43.0844b12: 者唯依有爲。分位別故。無爲無得。無有功 T1833_.43.0844b13: 能前後分位差別義故。諸論皆言於其種・ T1833_.43.0844b14: 現而立得故。未曾有處於無爲法立不相 T1833_.43.0844b15: 應。而餘處言得擇滅者。由解脱道證會擇 T1833_.43.0844b16: 滅假説得言。不別建立不相應得。故於無 T1833_.43.0844b17: 爲唯有智證 詳曰。按教准理。諸無爲法 T1833_.43.0844b18: 亦有得得。故雜集論第五云。謂於善・不善・ T1833_.43.0844b19: 無記法。若増若減假立得・獲・成就。既云於 T1833_.43.0844b20: 善而立得等。無爲何無。文不遮故。言増減 T1833_.43.0844b21: 者即得・非得。證得名増。不得名減 又云。 T1833_.43.0844b22: 問何等名爲解脱得因。答若於眞如先已 T1833_.43.0844b23: 集起煩惱麁重。若遇隨順得對治縁便能 T1833_.43.0844b24: 永害。此堪任性名解脱得因 釋曰。無始時 T1833_.43.0844b25: 來障眞理惑名先起惑。善友正教名爲隨 T1833_.43.0844b26: 順得對治縁。此堪任性即能對治。體無漏 T1833_.43.0844b27: 種。或即現行無漏聖道。無漏聖道即是解脱 T1833_.43.0844b28: 得之因也 既自明言解脱之得。明知無爲 T1833_.43.0844b29: 立得何失。又説聖道爲能得因。故無爲得 T1833_.43.0844c01: 屬能得道 又按倶舍。擇滅之得屬能得 T1833_.43.0844c02: 道。非擇滅得隨所依身。雖復小教大乘不 T1833_.43.0844c03: 破亦可爲證。此明有教。不同有爲有多 T1833_.43.0844c04: 分位得屬所得。故諸聖教而不具言亦無 T1833_.43.0844c05: 失矣。而言理者。且實眞如體唯一種。對望 T1833_.43.0844c06: 不同。分爲三・四・及六・八等。今望證會而 T1833_.43.0844c07: 有不同。立得何失。若無分位不許立得。 T1833_.43.0844c08: 既無分位。亦應不得説多差別。彼此別因 T1833_.43.0844c09: 誠不可得。故立爲善 T1833_.43.0844c10: 論。翻此假立不成就名者。問既翻得等非得 T1833_.43.0844c11: 亦名不獲・不成。不獲・不成云何差異 答大 T1833_.43.0844c12: 乘無文。習小乘者而傳釋云。謂若有法先 T1833_.43.0844c13: 未曾失。及重得已但今初失。此法非得創 T1833_.43.0844c14: 至生相將不成時説名不獲。若流至現名 T1833_.43.0844c15: 不成時。然不獲時未名不成就。不成就時 T1833_.43.0844c16: 不名不獲 問小乘非得有法前等三種 T1833_.43.0844c17: 差別。大乘同耶 答有三釋。翻前得義義 T1833_.43.0844c18: 准可知。同於小乘立亦無妨。但假實殊 T1833_.43.0844c19: 疏。一屬所得等者屬謂繋屬。有爲法上所有 T1833_.43.0844c20: 能得皆屬所得。同有爲故 T1833_.43.0844c21: 疏。二屬能得道等者。得是有爲。故滅能得不 T1833_.43.0844c22: 屬所得。爲・無爲別。六行斷惑。此能得得即 T1833_.43.0844c23: 是有漏。若無漏智所證滅得得即無漏。有宗 T1833_.43.0844c24: 六行而能斷惑得擇滅也 T1833_.43.0844c25: 疏。三屬所依者。問何乃爾耶 答有・無爲別。 T1833_.43.0844c26: 不屬非擇。非漏・無漏二道所得故。不屬 T1833_.43.0844c27: 道故屬所依 T1833_.43.0844c28: 疏。一屬道至世道得故者。問六行得滅亦由 T1833_.43.0844c29: 智惠簡擇方證何非擇滅 答若智簡擇能 T1833_.43.0845a01: 斷惑種所顯之理方名擇滅。六行不爾故 T1833_.43.0845a02: 理非擇 T1833_.43.0845a03: 疏。如畢竟得非擇等者。如入見道。黄門身等 T1833_.43.0845a04: 永更不生皆名畢竟得非擇滅。耶理如燈 T1833_.43.0845a05: 疏。三屬種子等者。此縁闕法有更生義故屬 T1833_.43.0845a06: 種子 T1833_.43.0845a07: 疏。非心縁證者。縁六行道 證無漏道 T1833_.43.0845a08: 疏。通有漏三性等者。具如燈説 T1833_.43.0845a09: 論。此類雖多至名異生性者。按婆沙論四十 T1833_.43.0845a10: 五中而釋名云。尊者世友作如是説。能令 T1833_.43.0845a11: 有情起異類見・異類煩惱。造異類業受異 T1833_.43.0845a12: 類生故名異生。復次能令有情墮異界故 T1833_.43.0845a13: 往異趣故受異生故名異生性 T1833_.43.0845a14: 論。於諸聖法未成就故者。問既於諸聖未 T1833_.43.0845a15: 成就故名爲異生。若於諸聖隨得一種應 T1833_.43.0845a16: 唯名聖 答有義兩釋。一云義同小乘。不 T1833_.43.0845a17: 獲一切三乘聖法名爲異生。若獲小分即 T1833_.43.0845a18: 名聖者。故倶舍論第四云。不獲何聖法名 T1833_.43.0845a19: 異生性。謂不獲一切。此不獲言表異於獲。 T1833_.43.0845a20: 若異此者。謂諸佛世尊亦不成就二乘聖 T1833_.43.0845a21: 法應名異生。故知不要具獲諸聖方名聖 T1833_.43.0845a22: 者。大乘亦爾。下云依於二障立異生性。二 T1833_.43.0845a23: 乘斷一即非異生。即同倶舍不獲一切聖 T1833_.43.0845a24: 法名異生性。若獲小分即名聖者。二云與 T1833_.43.0845a25: 薩婆多義有差別。二乘迴心未至上地亦 T1833_.43.0845a26: 名聖者。得生空智斷煩惱故亦名異生。 T1833_.43.0845a27: 未得法空智未斷所知故。然依彼説將 T1833_.43.0845a28: 爲順理。今此亦言於諸聖法不成就故 T1833_.43.0845a29: 詳曰。今取後釋。如二乘者迴趣大乘至於 T1833_.43.0845b01: 初地名得聖性。若得小聖即全名聖無異 T1833_.43.0845b02: 生義。何至初地云得聖耶。若云得彼大乘 T1833_.43.0845b03: 聖性名得聖者。未得大前何得不名爲 T1833_.43.0845b04: 異生耶。又此但云未成諸聖名爲異生。不 T1833_.43.0845b05: 言小獲即全名聖 問二乘無學未迴心 T1833_.43.0845b06: 前。爲唯聖性。爲倶句耶 答若決定性唯 T1833_.43.0845b07: 名聖性。自果滿故。若不定性而有兩種。一 T1833_.43.0845b08: 云唯聖。據所求果今已滿故。二云倶句。雖 T1833_.43.0845b09: 未迴心求於大乘。然有彼性障而未顯故 T1833_.43.0845b10: 得倶句 問大乘異生性三非得中何非得 T1833_.43.0845b11: 攝 答聖性唯通自在・現行。非種子成就。 T1833_.43.0845b12: 異生反彼。故但自在・現行不成 問自在據 T1833_.43.0845b13: 種有種姓者。云何亦名自在不成 答雖 T1833_.43.0845b14: 有種體用不成故。故亦不成。若用成者非 T1833_.43.0845b15: 異生故。有説論既自言依障種立。故應但 T1833_.43.0845b16: 説名種不成 詳曰。此非善釋。若望障種 T1833_.43.0845b17: 此即種成。何名不成。故知非得望所未得 T1833_.43.0845b18: 名爲非得。如前説善 T1833_.43.0845b19: 疏。唯倶舍正理立等者。按倶舍論第五云。 T1833_.43.0845b20: 此復二種。一無差別。二有差別。無差別者謂 T1833_.43.0845b21: 諸有情同分。一切有情各等有故。有差別 T1833_.43.0845b22: 者謂諸有情界・地・趣・生・種姓・男・女・近事・苾 T1833_.43.0845b23: 芻・學・無學等各別同分。一類有情各等有故。 T1833_.43.0845b24: 復有法同分謂隨蘊・處・界 釋曰。一切有 T1833_.43.0845b25: 情而等有故名無差別。差別有情同類等有 T1833_.43.0845b26: 名有差別。准法同分亦合有二。但論略也。 T1833_.43.0845b27: 且如五蘊。蘊義是同。此相似因名無差別。 T1833_.43.0845b28: 蘊蘊各別自相似因名有差別。界・處等法皆 T1833_.43.0845b29: 倣於此 問有情同分無差別者。爲體一・ T1833_.43.0845c01: 多 答有兩釋。一云體一。猶如命根。一云 T1833_.43.0845c02: 體多。如所依法。後説有憑。前無文也。故正 T1833_.43.0845c03: 理論云。云何異熟。謂趣・生等同分。云何等 T1833_.43.0845c04: 流。謂種性等。又先業所引是爲異熟。現加行 T1833_.43.0845c05: 起是名等流。若同命根即唯異熟何有等 T1833_.43.0845c06: 流。其法同分亦有兩釋。准前可知 T1833_.43.0845c07: 疏。如異熟色等者。即内有情五根等色業所 T1833_.43.0845c08: 感者名爲異熟。若外諸色。及内身中非業所 T1833_.43.0845c09: 感而有二分是等流色 T1833_.43.0845c10: 疏。更有餘難准生爲之者。難云外法非趣・ T1833_.43.0845c11: 生。非趣生故無同分。外法非趣・生。非趣・ T1833_.43.0845c12: 生故無生等。若言外法是有爲。外同内法 T1833_.43.0845c13: 有生等。亦應外法有相似。外同内法立同 T1833_.43.0845c14: 分。以古有宗外無同分故爲此難 T1833_.43.0845c15: 疏。此設外救出自論文者。出順正理 T1833_.43.0845c16: 疏。後爲微逐文外意者。而無論文。疏主自 T1833_.43.0845c17: 意。又安惠師救倶舍中亦有此微。疏主小 T1833_.43.0845c18: 同 T1833_.43.0845c19: 疏此義失宗者。小乘失宗。本不以造而解 T1833_.43.0845c20: 於色。今者以造而爲其難。故乖本宗。即 T1833_.43.0845c21: 就本計更難彼云。質礙名爲色。故能所造 T1833_.43.0845c22: 皆攝色。但相似故立同分。同分相似何不 T1833_.43.0845c23: 有 T1833_.43.0845c24: 疏。設欲翻勝論等者。改彼勝論所説同句以 T1833_.43.0845c25: 爲同分。名翻勝論。故倶舍論第五云。又應 T1833_.43.0845c26: 顯成勝論所執。彼宗執有總同義句。於 T1833_.43.0845c27: 一切法總同言智由此發生。有云。善妙談論 T1833_.43.0845c28: 名爲勝論。翻此妙論云我不立。理亦難 T1833_.43.0845c29: 知。經許假有。今翻爲無有違教失故云難 T1833_.43.0846a01: 知 詳曰。前解爲正。順疏論故 T1833_.43.0846a02: 疏。不同小乘等者。按順正理第十三云。此 T1833_.43.0846a03: 中身形・業用・樂欲展轉相似故名爲同。分是 T1833_.43.0846a04: 因義。即別實物是此同因。故名同分 T1833_.43.0846a05: 疏。倶舍經部等者。按彼論云。若爾所説同 T1833_.43.0846a06: 分是何。即如是類諸行生時。於中假立人 T1833_.43.0846a07: 同分等。如諸穀麥等同分也 T1833_.43.0846a08: 疏。及無色界起不同分心等者。此叙有宗難 T1833_.43.0846a09: 經部也。按順正理第十三云。若處無所引 T1833_.43.0846a10: 異熟内五色處。於彼或時無業所引第六意 T1833_.43.0846a11: 處。謂於長時起染汚識・或善有漏・及無漏 T1833_.43.0846a12: 識相續位中。無業所引異熟分故。説何爲 T1833_.43.0846a13: 命 釋曰。正理難意於無色界無内五處。 T1833_.43.0846a14: 或起餘心無異熟意。異熟勢分於彼既無。 T1833_.43.0846a15: 説何爲壽。疏中叙難但取彼意不具彼 T1833_.43.0846a16: 文 言不同分心者。即是染汚・有漏善等。 T1833_.43.0846a17: 與業所引異熟心別名不同分。雖無漏心 T1833_.43.0846a18: 亦非同分。無漏・漏別故別言之 經部命根 T1833_.43.0846a19: 而有兩説。一正理説依六處立。二倶舍説 T1833_.43.0846a20: 依衆同分。然倶舍師救前破云。若依異熟 T1833_.43.0846a21: 立者是異熟。若依餘立者。雖依彼立非隨 T1833_.43.0846a22: 彼法而判性。如名・句等依善・惡聲 T1833_.43.0846a23: 論。然依此識立命根等者。若依此論。唯依 T1833_.43.0846a24: 種子以爲命根。命即是根。持業釋也。若顯 T1833_.43.0846a25: 揚論謂業所引異熟六處住時決定名爲命 T1833_.43.0846a26: 根。現行第八在第六處取彼爲命。即命之 T1833_.43.0846a27: 根。根是種故。或命即根。倶是現故 T1833_.43.0846a28: 疏。言識者簡相應法種者。問第八王・所倶業 T1833_.43.0846a29: 所引。應齊有能令住決定。何不依所種 T1833_.43.0846b01: 立命耶 答有兩説。一云若爾一身即有六 T1833_.43.0846b02: 命。隨所依種而有六故。二説依六滅生心 T1833_.43.0846b03: 同。事業等故。論説識種以劣從勝。如説 T1833_.43.0846b04: 唯心亦攝心所。又倶異熟。業所引故。如依 T1833_.43.0846b05: 五蘊立一同分。命依多種。體亦唯一 詳 T1833_.43.0846b06: 曰。前正。相應種子無力持故。如所變相無 T1833_.43.0846b07: 實用故。持用既無依何立命。不以小同 T1833_.43.0846b08: 令一切等 T1833_.43.0846b09: 疏。非取生現行識等者。有説此種由業所引。 T1833_.43.0846b10: 有能生識一期分位差別功能。依此假立 T1833_.43.0846b11: 詳曰。疏釋正也。大小乘教無説能生名命 T1833_.43.0846b12: 根也。且倶舍頌曰。命根體即壽。能持燸及 T1833_.43.0846b13: 識 雜集論云。識蘊相續住時決定令衆 T1833_.43.0846b14: 同分常得安住或百年等。名爲命根。瑜伽・ T1833_.43.0846b15: 顯揚・五蘊等論皆以住持而名命也 問 T1833_.43.0846b16: 若以能持爲命之義。業種亦有能持之功。 T1833_.43.0846b17: 何不取耶 答大・小乘教皆言命是業之所 T1833_.43.0846b18: 引異熟無記。若取業種便乖前義。故以 T1833_.43.0846b19: 簡之 T1833_.43.0846b20: 疏。命根無屬等者。按五十七云。問命根何 T1833_.43.0846b21: 等根分 釋曰。二十二根中是何根分 論 T1833_.43.0846b22: 主答云。此無所屬。先業所引時量決定而 T1833_.43.0846b23: 建立故唯説假有 釋曰故知命根非依現 T1833_.43.0846b24: 識。現識即屬意根攝故 問種從於現亦 T1833_.43.0846b25: 意處收。何無屬耶 答如男女二・三無漏根。 T1833_.43.0846b26: 以彼所依身根・九根小分爲體。不名無屬。 T1833_.43.0846b27: 此但依彼種上假立。不是所依根之分故 T1833_.43.0846b28: 名無所屬 問依現假立不取現體。何非 T1833_.43.0846b29: 無屬 答准於斯理依現假立不違瑜伽 T1833_.43.0846c01: 依唯識文明言種故。復依種立有多理 T1833_.43.0846c02: 故。故取依種 問三科之中法處・法界・行 T1833_.43.0846c03: 蘊攝命。何名無屬 答有義假立命根約 T1833_.43.0846c04: 功能異。故説非根非法處攝 詳曰。不然。 T1833_.43.0846c05: 瑜伽意問二十二中是何根分。不約三科 T1833_.43.0846c06: 明所攝故。故彼論云。問男・女二根何等根 T1833_.43.0846c07: 分。答是身根分。問最後三根何等根分。答是 T1833_.43.0846c08: 九根分。謂信等九。問命根何等分。答此無所 T1833_.43.0846c09: 屬。唯假立故。准此故知。對二十二明相攝 T1833_.43.0846c10: 也 問種有新舊依何種立 答有二釋。 T1833_.43.0846c11: 一云法爾・新熏隨其所應先業所引正作 T1833_.43.0846c12: 因縁生現識者。依彼種立。二云依二種 T1833_.43.0846c13: 立。共作因縁生第八識。勢力等故和合似 T1833_.43.0846c14: 一。不可説有體各別故。無二命失 有 T1833_.43.0846c15: 義斷云。今依前説。名言種子既有衆多。不 T1833_.43.0846c16: 可一切共生果故。然今命根所依之種。要 T1833_.43.0846c17: 前生熏。先業引故 詳曰。護法既許新・舊 T1833_.43.0846c18: 合用。命根所依亦應如是。或唯依舊。或唯 T1833_.43.0846c19: 依新。或通依二。遇縁即依不可定判。又但 T1833_.43.0846c20: 許依新・舊二種。不言一切皆悉總依。言所 T1833_.43.0846c21: 依種要前生熏。即唯新舊。如何斷取前之 T1833_.43.0846c22: 所釋 T1833_.43.0846c23: 疏。又是現行識所持等者。此第二釋。於此釋 T1833_.43.0846c24: 中典有三意 一云是現行者。顯揚六處倶 T1833_.43.0846c25: 是現行。現行即是種識所持 二云是現行者。 T1833_.43.0846c26: 顯揚六處是第六現。六現者第八現識。第八 T1833_.43.0846c27: 現識識種所持 三云是現行者。顯揚六處是 T1833_.43.0846c28: 現行也。識所持者。六現是彼第八識持。從所 T1833_.43.0846c29: 持説。能持等者。六現現八倶名所持。八種 T1833_.43.0847a01: 持故 雖有三義前解爲本。後二理通 T1833_.43.0847a02: 疏。雖二解者。前又解以上名第一釋。又解以 T1833_.43.0847a03: 下爲第二解 T1833_.43.0847a04: 疏。或本識種或六處種等者。牒前二解。識種 T1833_.43.0847a05: 第一。六處第二 T1833_.43.0847a06: 疏。取五根種等者。問既以種子名爲命根。 T1833_.43.0847a07: 設現間斷而種不已。何得難云即應名死 T1833_.43.0847a08: 答種有功能現不應斷。現行既斷明種 T1833_.43.0847a09: 無能。能既謝焉何不名死 有云取六根 T1833_.43.0847a10: 種立命爲善 詳曰。不然。有分捨命。三 T1833_.43.0847a11: 界命差。種種之遇。如疏斷善 T1833_.43.0847a12: 論。應無色時有別實法等者。疏中假叙有五 T1833_.43.0847a13: 問答。准理言之他難未息。且第五翻云。心 T1833_.43.0847a14: 法通能状。唯有心種名無心。色法唯所厭。 T1833_.43.0847a15: 唯有心法名無色。外言亦爾。心法通能厭。 T1833_.43.0847a16: 非色非心名無心。色法唯所厭。唯有心法名 T1833_.43.0847a17: 無色。故未息諍 又釋疏中第二外難。傳 T1833_.43.0847a18: 四師釋 一云厭心能厭無。依種立無心。厭 T1833_.43.0847a19: 色能厭在。不依種假立。此釋不然。外云亦 T1833_.43.0847a20: 然。厭心能厭無。有別實法礙。厭色能厭在。 T1833_.43.0847a21: 無別實法遮 二云我説無心是假法故。故 T1833_.43.0847a22: 於二位有無不定。汝説實有不依色・心。 T1833_.43.0847a23: 如何不許二處倶有。此亦不然。外人難云。 T1833_.43.0847a24: 汝既是假一有一無。何妨我實一無一有 T1833_.43.0847a25: 三云厭心入無心。依厭心種立。厭色入無 T1833_.43.0847a26: 色。亦依厭心種立。此亦不然。厭心心不 T1833_.43.0847a27: 行。可依心種立。厭色心尚行。何得依心 T1833_.43.0847a28: 種。又無聖教説無色定是假立也 四云爲 T1833_.43.0847a29: 破執實依種立假。實執若無假亦非有。此 T1833_.43.0847b01: 亦不然。且滅盡定三乘通得。豈爲對執而 T1833_.43.0847b02: 施設耶 詳曰。觀前諸釋雖總有理皆未 T1833_.43.0847b03: 窮難。今助二解。一我無心定能厭無。無心 T1833_.43.0847b04: 依心種假立。無色能厭心不*已。無色不 T1833_.43.0847b05: 依色種立。汝無色定能厭在。無色容實不 T1833_.43.0847b06: 依餘。無心能厭既云無。無心應假依他立。 T1833_.43.0847b07: 由彼宗説非色非心即爲定體。不説依他 T1833_.43.0847b08: 而假立故。故爲斯難。二以無色定且抑他 T1833_.43.0847b09: 爾。不息他救。意者思之可知。由此故有 T1833_.43.0847b10: 第二假遮非實破也 T1833_.43.0847b11: 論。假亦能遮等者。有義疏説極微是實和合 T1833_.43.0847b12: 是假。又説彼宗瓶等能遮實不能遮。此皆 T1833_.43.0847b13: 是錯。一切有宗能成・所成皆是實故。即所成 T1833_.43.0847b14: 實亦是能遮者 詳曰。有宗所成五塵雖實。 T1833_.43.0847b15: 塵合成瓶。瓶等是假。疏説彼瓶爲和合假。 T1833_.43.0847b16: 不説所成五塵爲假 又疏説云實極微法 T1833_.43.0847b17: 而不能遮。不和合故。明知所成既是和合。 T1833_.43.0847b18: 許是能遮一何妄破 又此疏初而以四句 T1833_.43.0847b19: 辨宗別。云薩婆多麁細皆實。豈可前後自 T1833_.43.0847b20: 柕楯耶。疏文文約而義包也 T1833_.43.0847b21: 疏。此引有別法等者。此倶舍也。問按倶舍 T1833_.43.0847b22: 云。若生無想有情天中。有法能令心・心所 T1833_.43.0847b23: 滅名爲無想。是實有物能遮未來心・心所 T1833_.43.0847b24: 法令暫不起。如堰江河。既證無想是實有 T1833_.43.0847b25: 物。云何得言非謂假實以爲喩耶 答喩 T1833_.43.0847b26: 意成前有法能令心・心所滅。顯所遮外而 T1833_.43.0847b27: 有能遮不成實有。若不爾者有宗・經部皆 T1833_.43.0847b28: 許堰等非是實有。爲實之喩。喩豈不有兩 T1833_.43.0847b29: 倶所立不成過耶。爲離此過故不成實。斯 T1833_.43.0847c01: 乃疏主深得彼旨。有義如堤塘言。與外人 T1833_.43.0847c02: 量爲不定過。謂外量云。二無心定・無想異 T1833_.43.0847c03: 熟。定是實有。是能遮故。如無色定。與作過 T1833_.43.0847c04: 云。爲如無色定是能遮故是實有耶。爲如 T1833_.43.0847c05: 堤塘是能遮故非實有耶 詳曰。是法差別 T1833_.43.0847c06: 過。以實有者是法自相。離色・心實有。不離 T1833_.43.0847c07: 色・心實有是法差別。有宗意成離色・心有。 T1833_.43.0847c08: 無也定者是不離心。反爲異喩。因於彼轉 T1833_.43.0847c09: 成差別過 T1833_.43.0847c10: 論。發勝期願等者。問加行之中通於定散。散 T1833_.43.0847c11: 發願者理在不疑。定加行中亦能發不 答 T1833_.43.0847c12: 有二釋。一云能發。一云初修專注厭心無 T1833_.43.0847c13: 由能發。若得自在發無有失 T1833_.43.0847c14: 論。無想定前求無想果故所熏種招異熟識 T1833_.43.0847c15: 者。有義明了心中求無想果故。微微心所 T1833_.43.0847c16: 熏成種爲果熟因能招異熟。微微心中行 T1833_.43.0847c17: 想微劣。非別能求當異熟故 詳曰。論自 T1833_.43.0847c18: 明言無想定前求無想果不簡遠近。微微 T1833_.43.0847c19: 之心豈非定前。若微微心劣不求者。云何前 T1833_.43.0847c20: 云微微心時熏異熟識成極増上厭心等 T1833_.43.0847c21: 種。豈劣現行所熏得種乃成増上。故行相 T1833_.43.0847c22: 細名爲微微。非據微劣名微微也。故疏説 T1833_.43.0847c23: 正 T1833_.43.0847c24: 疏。明了心時種子招異熟者。即微微心名爲 T1833_.43.0847c25: 明了。對彼無心故稱明了。第二解言明了 T1833_.43.0847c26: 心者對微微心名爲明了 T1833_.43.0847c27: 疏。此言雖總至二果別故者。有義一種子體 T1833_.43.0847c28: 約前後位招二種果等者。微心時種滅已 T1833_.43.0847c29: 即無。如何別説招總異熟。故亦非理。若依 T1833_.43.0848a01: 別報轉識諸根説別業招即無有失。然應 T1833_.43.0848a02: 云明了心等招別異熟微微心時招總異 T1833_.43.0848a03: 熟。或微微心通招總別。瑜伽論云。能引定 T1833_.43.0848a04: 思能感彼天異熟果故。如何違教倒説招 T1833_.43.0848a05: 別 詳曰。若言明了招彼轉識別報異熟 T1833_.43.0848a06: 微微招彼總報異熟。無想異熟假故不招。如 T1833_.43.0848a07: 何聖説無想定因。無想異熟而爲果耶。假名 T1833_.43.0848a08: 爲招如燈具辨 T1833_.43.0848a09: 疏。無心以去至無想異熟者。即是彼天第六 T1833_.43.0848a10: 識等種子之上。能遮彼地六識等現不起功 T1833_.43.0848a11: 能。名爲無想異熟體也 T1833_.43.0848a12: 疏。故前解爲勝者。問勝義何也 答言無想 T1833_.43.0848a13: 定招彼果故。以微微種建立定故。以前 T1833_.43.0848a14: 非定。若取前心而減彼者。云何得説由 T1833_.43.0848a15: 定生彼。又彼別報而無其體。云何實種能 T1833_.43.0848a16: 招彼耶。故前解勝 有義疏云微微心至各 T1833_.43.0848a17: 招一果。今不依彼者 詳曰。疏已斷訖。何 T1833_.43.0848a18: 煩重非 T1833_.43.0848a19: 疏。今解等者。疏主出彼無想事體疏有兩 T1833_.43.0848a20: 釋。復有説云。彼本有初別報異熟轉識暫起 T1833_.43.0848a21: 宿因縁力後不復生。故依第八生得無記 T1833_.43.0848a22: 心・心所滅。此不行位假立無想。彼無生得 T1833_.43.0848a23: 心・心所時。依彼現八而假建立無想異熟。 T1833_.43.0848a24: 無想異熟既果非因。故不可説依種子立。 T1833_.43.0848a25: 有義斷此以爲正説 詳曰。依種爲正。若 T1833_.43.0848a26: 言彼位有現第八故依立者。二無心定亦 T1833_.43.0848a27: 有第八。何不依立而依種耶。若言是果下 T1833_.43.0848a28: 依種者。種被現熏種應非果。種上功能翻 T1833_.43.0848a29: 往往時定爲果何失 T1833_.43.0848b01: 疏。善等恒行心等者。等言等彼有覆・無覆。 T1833_.43.0848b02: 長途所起名爲恒行。非不間斷名恒行也 T1833_.43.0848b03: 或疏脱也。應云不恒行 T1833_.43.0848b04: 疏。無想異熟通持業依士者。當體立名即持 T1833_.43.0848b05: 業也。從因受稱故依士也◎
T1833_.43.0848b08: T1833_.43.0848b09:
T1833_.43.0848b12: 表有吉祥。又如童女齒白脣薄脚膝纖團。 T1833_.43.0848b13: 表此女人生子必善。異前相者生子必 T1833_.43.0848b14: 惡 T1833_.43.0848b15: 疏。然遮生等至決定相違者。遮彼生等定別 T1833_.43.0848b16: 有故。與彼定別而作違故名決定違。非是 T1833_.43.0848b17: 第六決定相違。決定相違改他宗法・及因喩 T1833_.43.0848b18: 故 有云。第六雖不改因亦得成故 詳 T1833_.43.0848b19: 曰。不然。第一・第六二種不定更有何別。故 T1833_.43.0848b20: 初釋正 T1833_.43.0848b21: 疏。無爲無生至三種能相者。此外人難 T1833_.43.0848b22: 疏。體無起盡等者。論主答也 T1833_.43.0848b23: 疏。此難不然等者。問外言亦爾。立・不立別。 T1833_.43.0848b24: 何能息難 答我宗無爲亦立假想。故大集 T1833_.43.0848b25: 經第二十云。無爲之法有三種相。謂無出・無 T1833_.43.0848b26: 滅・無住。瑜伽八十八云。有爲是無常。三有爲 T1833_.43.0848b27: 相施設可得。與此相違應知常住無爲三相 T1833_.43.0848b28: 若爾何故不相應法但二十四 答擧勝 T1833_.43.0848b29: 而談二十四也。我既假施。汝應實立。又難 T1833_.43.0848c01: 彼六。我宗無爲體是一無差別故無假相。 T1833_.43.0848c02: 汝宗滅等許體多同有爲多有實相 T1833_.43.0848c03: 疏。因有親疎者。謂六因中除能作因餘五皆 T1833_.43.0848c04: 是因縁所攝。且同類因三性五蘊各自爲因。 T1833_.43.0848c05: 如善識蘊望自爲親。望餘四蘊名之爲 T1833_.43.0848c06: 疎。以非識故。餘互相望親疎准此 T1833_.43.0848c07: 疏。縁法亦爾者。四縁之中除因縁外皆名爲 T1833_.43.0848c08: 縁。且自六根望自六識名親増上。餘望六 T1833_.43.0848c09: 識名之爲疎。不爲礙故。非近生故。餘准 T1833_.43.0848c10: 此知 T1833_.43.0848c11: 疏。正理師至是取用者。按正理論第十四意。 T1833_.43.0848c12: 生相未來但起功能非是作用。現取果用 T1833_.43.0848c13: 方是作用。作用必功能。功能非必有作用 T1833_.43.0848c14: 倶舍師破。功能・作用眼目異名。何故生用但 T1833_.43.0848c15: 名功能。住等三種名爲作用。又違娑沙評 T1833_.43.0848c16: 家所説。説云無有等無間縁異時取果異時 T1833_.43.0848c17: 與果。准彼論主。入無心定即是過去取・與 T1833_.43.0848c18: 果也。既過去取應名現在 正理師言。等 T1833_.43.0848c19: 無間縁現在頓取過去漸與者。此爲不可。即 T1833_.43.0848c20: 無間縁異時取・與違前婆沙 T1833_.43.0848c21: 疏。何不去來法皆有功能者。此難過・未一切 T1833_.43.0848c22: 諸法皆有功能。不但生相及與果也。倶本 T1833_.43.0848c23: 有故 T1833_.43.0848c24: 疏生。非作用等者。此乃牒計成前難意。由 T1833_.43.0848c25: 汝本言生與果等不是作用顯是功能。不 T1833_.43.0848c26: 言餘法有功能故。又難生相無作功。作功 T1833_.43.0848c27: 無故名功能。餘未來亦無作用。無作用故 T1833_.43.0848c28: 名功能。難過去法亦准此知 T1833_.43.0848c29: 疏。異滅至便非現在者。問准正理論。住・異・ Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:有/無] [CITE] |