大正蔵検索 INBUDS
|
阿毘達磨倶舍論法義 (No. 2251_ 快道撰 ) in Vol. 64 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE]
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
T2251_.64.0252a01: 攝。破僧罪是虚誑語不善。語業。色蘊所攝。如 T2251_.64.0252a02: 退體異。退法亦異。退體是不成就。無覆無記。 T2251_.64.0252a03: 不相應行蘊所攝。退法是不善。無覆無記五 T2251_.64.0252a04: 蘊所攝。此亦如是。僧破異破僧罪異。由是
T2251_.64.0252a07: 慧云。寶師未辨僧破破僧別。於婆沙具辨 T2251_.64.0252a08: 差別。寶師雖引婆沙。闕略要文。今謂。湛師 T2251_.64.0252a09: 但見寶疏誤文致破。可謂還無眼目。寶師
T2251_.64.0252a13: 書前後哉
T2251_.64.0252a17: 故。答。如是無記僧破。因從誑語不善性者 T2251_.64.0252a18: 生所生果。故説此僧破是無間業之果不 T2251_.64.0252a19: 説是無間業。此因果但能所生因果非能所 T2251_.64.0252a20: 感。無間業所感果。無間大地獄果報故 此 T2251_.64.0252a21: 中破僧言。明本及正理。顯宗。光記。頌疏。竝 T2251_.64.0252a22: 如今。然未詳。何者是結所生僧破是果非 T2251_.64.0252a23: 因故。又破僧是能破名故因非果。何得説 T2251_.64.0252a24: 是無間果。蓋僧破倒寫。又解。破僧名通能所 T2251_.64.0252a25: 破。今且約所破邊呼僧破。亦名破僧乎。然 T2251_.64.0252a26: 有相濫應改僧破又寶疏所覽論本。果字 T2251_.64.0252a27: 作罪。故釋云果雖無記。因是不善故成無 T2251_.64.0252a28: 間。意正答無間罪業。此釋順破僧言。然問 T2251_.64.0252a29: 本依僧破無記起故。應答彼無記故果非 T2251_.64.0252b01: 因。不爾者不應問也。又若罪字ナラハ應言 T2251_.64.0252b02: 誑語能生僧破故説等。既不爾。不順綴文。 T2251_.64.0252b03: 然湛公辨上下差別曰。上於妄語立破僧 T2251_.64.0252b04: 稱。此於破僧與無間名。所目雖異竝是因
T2251_.64.0252b07: 於破僧與無間名於因立果名。
T2251_.64.0252b10: 記不分明。各雖義通作異熟爲勝也
T2251_.64.0252b23: 此意。證立世論。然如是説意。亦以二十中 T2251_.64.0252b24: 劫爲一中劫無妨。全不相違。爲證減二 T2251_.64.0252b25: 十中劫爲一中劫中證調達。故立世經八
T2251_.64.0252c01: 同感一劫。寶以逆多少以難同感一生。此 T2251_.64.0252c02: 會論意
T2251_.64.0252c05: 由大柔軟身及多猛苦具二因。舊論曰。此人 T2251_.64.0252c06: 由多無間業熟。於阿毘指地獄得最大最 T2251_.64.0252c07: 厚柔軟依止。是苦惱事最多種。最難忍起。 T2251_.64.0252c08: 由此二因所受受苦二三四五分増
T2251_.64.0252c11: 破義。法輪一種唯據比丘。餘衆不可故。尼是 T2251_.64.0252c12: 女報。號佛無信。三衆未具不合羯磨也」
T2251_.64.0252c17: 破法輪僧。故僧祇云。調達向伽耶山。佛喚不 T2251_.64.0252c18: 得。便作羯磨爲後世名譽。乃至三喚。云我 T2251_.64.0252c19: 已説戒竟。佛言。非法人已作竟。如法人自作
T2251_.64.0252c22: 於王舍行化。有五百新學比丘信受五法。
T2251_.64.0252c26: 法輪破僧。唯俗諦僧。聖人識達不從化故。 T2251_.64.0252c27: 成實云。凡夫輕澡易可破壞。若得世間空 T2251_.64.0252c28: 無我心尚不可破。況無漏也
T2251_.64.0253a02: 舍利弗及目連故。目連以通令其調達眠而 T2251_.64.0253a03: 不覺。又現勝通。化彼新學五百比丘令其 T2251_.64.0253a04: 生信。舍利弗辯説ヲ以令其生解。還來歸正 T2251_.64.0253a05: 故得和合
T2251_.64.0253a08: 達。邪佛替正佛寶。所説五邪替正法寶。三 T2251_.64.0253a09: 聞達等替正僧寶。故能破正人。一佛。四僧。 T2251_.64.0253a10: 所破唯四。故九成破。所以如來不入十數 T2251_.64.0253a11: 者。倶舍云。破在別處。不須親對世尊等
T2251_.64.0253a14: 舍那雙未起時。由已破不經宿故。由二更 T2251_.64.0253a15: 和合。婆沙亦云第一雙賢聖弟子然靈芝行
T2251_.64.0253a18: 止觀二法名雙。超諸法門故云第一。由立
T2251_.64.0253a21: 沙致如是誤
T2251_.64.0253a26: 此業。餘佛不爾。一説。餘佛亦有破僧。曾聞 T2251_.64.0253a27: 迦葉波佛時有苾芻名曰華上。是譽上子。
T2251_.64.0253b01: 於此賢劫迦葉波佛時。釋迦牟尼曾破他衆 T2251_.64.0253b02: 故。彼婆沙初説局釋迦。後説約業有無。此 T2251_.64.0253b03: 論同後師。正理亦約業有無。擧釋尊者。雖 T2251_.64.0253b04: 似局彼而不言唯。故無妨。又婆沙中。述 T2251_.64.0253b05: 釋尊事云昔無量無數劫。正理云賢劫迦葉 T2251_.64.0253b06: 佛時。若事別也。或同時。約時長云無量劫
T2251_.64.0253b09: 阿彌陀有。薩婆多師。將佛有宿業怨對故 T2251_.64.0253b10: 有。大乘示現。大乘義章及基師等。引此論 T2251_.64.0253b11: 等分別。蓋於大乘經論無明説
T2251_.64.0253b14: 於中先擧頌。答前母是生母而成逆。後諸
T2251_.64.0253b17: 産門中。此人以何女爲母。若殺於何女成 T2251_.64.0253b18: 無間業。偈曰。從血生是母。釋曰。若從此女 T2251_.64.0253b19: 人血成此人身。此女是生母。於第二女人 T2251_.64.0253b20: 一切事中皆應問聽。何以故。此女能飮此兒。
T2251_.64.0253b23: 孕生子等雖人畜異。卵與凝骨。産門與呑 T2251_.64.0253b24: 差違。而稍相似。於西方有是事。惠暉云。童 T2251_.64.0253b25: 子迦葉是也。又日種甘蔗種因縁粗似之。正
T2251_.64.0253b28: 情必無住糞穢。故由無是事爲問唐捐。設 T2251_.64.0253b29: 有如斯害後成逆。棄重恩故。害前不爾。 T2251_.64.0253c01: 於子重恩非關彼故。上座決定於業趣 T2251_.64.0253c02: 中不能審知功能差別。如何中有穿度金 T2251_.64.0253c03: 剛。母腹所拘不往餘處。母腹中火能銷 T2251_.64.0253c04: 金石。而羯剌藍於中増長。地獄中有現母 T2251_.64.0253c05: 腹中而不能燒腹及同類。此亦應爾。業力 T2251_.64.0253c06: 難思。雖此腹中羯剌藍墮。何妨轉至餘腹 T2251_.64.0253c07: 中。増曾聞經中。説有尊者童子迦葉如是 T2251_.64.0253c08: 而生。既置産門吸至胎處。故不可説住 T2251_.64.0253c09: 糞穢中。或有但從口飮入腹。亦由業力 T2251_.64.0253c10: 轉至胎處。有情業用不可思儀。雖無欲心。 T2251_.64.0253c11: 而由業力有吸至腹即成胎藏。後母雖有 T2251_.64.0253c12: 持養等恩。而於子身非能生本。若持養等 T2251_.64.0253c13: 害便成逆。殺養母人應成無間。故彼所
T2251_.64.0253c19: 如何所説於子有怨。子反害之。應無無 T2251_.64.0253c20: 間故。彼所立非。關彼因亦有不成。及不定
T2251_.64.0254a02: 起加行果究竟故。又解。由父走母謂父殺。 T2251_.64.0254a03: 故母死曰故死若依此論。子欲除父身喫 T2251_.64.0254a04: 蚤苦執杖。母隱床中。而謂餘人在我父床 T2251_.64.0254a05: 中殺之。是誤故非逆。此兩文今文未審。一 T2251_.64.0254a06: 如指事不應故。二取身蚤何用杖。三何故 T2251_.64.0254a07: 母隱。四闕脱逆成或不成結。故此論梵文 T2251_.64.0254a08: 錯脱必焉。應依舊論。又若蚤作走義稍通。 T2251_.64.0254a09: 欲撃父身其父走。而脱此成逆罪一句。是 T2251_.64.0254a10: 故頌云誤等無或有。蓋梵本錯脱不可強 T2251_.64.0254a11: 論。問。依後解。舊論亦未審。不具二縁故 T2251_.64.0254a12: 不可成逆。一起加行。二果究竟。彼加行 T2251_.64.0254a13: 起父。果究竟於母。故由是理。婆沙百十九
T2251_.64.0254a16: 母。以刀害之。害已方更往穀𧂐中楷拭刀 T2251_.64.0254a17: 刄。刀觸母身因茲喪命。起加行時果未 T2251_.64.0254a18: 究竟。果究竟時已無加行由此不成無間
T2251_.64.0254a21: 故成道逆。是則釋頌誤或有
T2251_.64.0254a24: 説非逆殺生表無。逆罪有故云無或有。後説 T2251_.64.0254a25: 但當或有。二若害下。明無決想殺羅漢 T2251_.64.0254a26: 成逆。是但釋等或有。三若有下。明父是羅 T2251_.64.0254a27: 漢害但成一逆
T2251_.64.0254b01: 告頂髻王之語而非如來之言。且舊論十三
T2251_.64.0254b07: 二之逆也。後説雖體是一逆。欲顯其罪重
T2251_.64.0254b10: 及阿羅漢而言得二罪。欲以二罪訶責 T2251_.64.0254b11: 彼故。有餘師言。罪體雖一所感苦倍。是以
T2251_.64.0254b16: 無間罪。謂起欲打心而出血。有起惡心 T2251_.64.0254b17: 不至出血。而得無間罪。謂起欲殺心乃至 T2251_.64.0254b18: 令血移處。有起惡心出佛身血。亦得無間 T2251_.64.0254b19: 罪。謂起欲殺心而出血。有起惡心不至 T2251_.64.0254b20: 出血。不得無間罪。謂起欲打心乃至令血 T2251_.64.0254b21: 移處。今約出血爲問。故但示第一第三 T2251_.64.0254b22: 句影現第二第四句
T2251_.64.0254b25: 後業道不生。今約勝但擧聖道。光兩釋後 T2251_.64.0254b26: 釋爲善也
T2251_.64.0254c04: 故。有人云五解脱處者非也
T2251_.64.0254c07: 應得入正性離生者不得入正性離生。 T2251_.64.0254c08: 應得果證者不得果證。應離欲者不得 T2251_.64.0254c09: 離欲。應漏盡者不得漏盡。不得誦持思 T2251_.64.0254c10: 惟三藏。不得靜慮。思惟。諸法。修習。靜慮。無 T2251_.64.0254c11: 色等至。不得種植三乘種子。三千大千世 T2251_.64.0254c12: 界法輪不轉。展轉聲至淨居。諸天令其覺
T2251_.64.0254c15: 滿一劫。是亦顯過重
T2251_.64.0254c19: 佛告彼曰。彈宅迦林。羯凌伽林等誰之所作。 T2251_.64.0254c20: 豈非仙人惡意所作。彼答曰爾
T2251_.64.0254c23: 謂妄語。意業。邪見總相望。招大果妄語 T2251_.64.0254c24: 勝餘二。若約害多人意業勝餘二。若約斷 T2251_.64.0254c25: 善邪見勝餘二。前説妄語。次意。後邪見故。 T2251_.64.0254c26: 爲配大果等言如次。非謂初輕。後後次第
T2251_.64.0254c29: 有一義曰。或約見修倶所斷罪。如其次第
T2251_.64.0255a05: 罰故。可呵嘖故。名之爲罰。此釋約所對
T2251_.64.0255a11: 破僧罪。破僧罪。是虚誑語故。今云。此違論 T2251_.64.0255a12: 意。合得相望辨輕重。約建立各別門故。復 T2251_.64.0255a13: 擧後説曰。依彼宗説。即其罪大後感果時 T2251_.64.0255a14: 雖但一劫。倍於破僧受無間等。皆生報故 T2251_.64.0255a15: 不可多生感無間果。此亦非論意。論總約 T2251_.64.0255a16: 義門不同。非謂意罪果報倍於無間也
T2251_.64.0255a19: 亦定生彼。後説別示定生地獄而非定無 T2251_.64.0255a20: 間生。順生順次等不定。故舊論曰。有餘師説。 T2251_.64.0255a21: 惟由無間業必定得無間生。由同類不定。 T2251_.64.0255a22: 此兩説唯總別故具足爲全。故正理爲一説
T2251_.64.0255a26: 業也。故云恩深猶父等。寶疏約得罪解。業 T2251_.64.0255a27: 即同類也。今謂。各有理。若尋其所以。如光 T2251_.64.0255a28: 記釋。若依立名如寶解。於中寶爲勝。論頌 T2251_.64.0255a29: 前及結文。舊論等但云同類故。依大乘。瑜 T2251_.64.0255b01: 伽第九説同類業未明配也。倫記三上云。 T2251_.64.0255b02: 無間業同分者。謂無間業之同類之罪。基云。 T2251_.64.0255b03: 汚阿羅漢尼及母是害母類。打最後有菩 T2251_.64.0255b04: 薩是殺父類。或於天廟等行殺。或於委重
T2251_.64.0255b07: 破壞靈廟等是出佛身血。或總稱類不須 T2251_.64.0255b08: 別配。今解。染無學尼是殺阿羅漢類。染母 T2251_.64.0255b09: 是殺母類。打最後有及破壞靈廟是出佛 T2251_.64.0255b10: 身血類。劫奪僧門是破僧類。餘是殺父等 T2251_.64.0255b11: 類。倫師私爲配。基師依此論。雖大小別同 T2251_.64.0255b12: 類義齊。故基爲正
T2251_.64.0255b15: 相違釋。同瑜伽第九阿羅漢尼及母文。於中 T2251_.64.0255b16: 相違釋爲盡理。若母是羅漢不可言尼。瑜 T2251_.64.0255b17: 伽明云及故。舊論且略尼言。或梵本恐脱 T2251_.64.0255b18: 女聲
T2251_.64.0255b21: 業。問。若諸有情。發阿耨多羅三藐三菩提 T2251_.64.0255b22: 心能不退轉。從此便應説爲菩薩。何故乃 T2251_.64.0255b23: 至造作増長相異熟業方名菩薩耶。答。若 T2251_.64.0255b24: 於菩提決定。及趣決定乃名眞實菩薩。從 T2251_.64.0255b25: 初發心乃至未修妙相業來。雖於菩提決 T2251_.64.0255b26: 定。而趣未決定。未得名爲眞實菩薩。復次 T2251_.64.0255b27: 修妙相業時。若人若天共識知彼是菩薩 T2251_.64.0255b28: 故名眞菩薩。未修妙相業時惟天所知。是 T2251_.64.0255b29: 故未得名眞菩薩。復次修妙相業時。捨五 T2251_.64.0255c01: 劣時得五勝事。一捨諸惡趣恒生善趣。二 T2251_.64.0255c02: 捨下劣家恒生貴家。三捨非男身。恒得男 T2251_.64.0255c03: 身。四捨不具根恒具諸根。五捨有妄失念 T2251_.64.0255c04: 恒得自性生念。由是得名眞實菩薩。雜心
T2251_.64.0255c07: 與得各影顯不異婆沙也。此論五勝事外 T2251_.64.0255c08: 更加堅也
T2251_.64.0255c17: 審。蓋婆誤。猶今駄婆鮮本作娑。故玄應音
T2251_.64.0255c22: 大娑羅此云陰覆。如上三家能多陰覆一切 T2251_.64.0255c23: 有情名大娑羅家。此師出翻名而通上三
T2251_.64.0255c26: 字衍也。舊論。應音。泰疏等無故。婆羅門此 T2251_.64.0255c27: 云靜志。或云淨行。又何云大婆羅門。故大 T2251_.64.0255c28: 娑羅誤也。多羅要抄中往往娑羅此云勝。是 T2251_.64.0255c29: 同豪族義也
T2251_.64.0256a03: 堅故爲勝。鮮本如是故。明本及本頌。光。頌 T2251_.64.0256a04: 疏如今未詳。此大爲二。初總釋。謂於下別 T2251_.64.0256a05: 釋。此中爲三。初通自他苦釋。二雖他下。約 T2251_.64.0256a06: 他苦釋。三如世下引世言顯無退窟義。此 T2251_.64.0256a07: 第三中。初引世言。後當知下明顯彼言名 T2251_.64.0256a08: 菩薩爲二。初標。二由。彼下述釋。此有三。初 T2251_.64.0256a09: 約驅役義。二普於下依僕使義。三及於下 T2251_.64.0256a10: 約荷負義。此三義是駄婆含具義故。故舊論 T2251_.64.0256a11: 總結曰是故説非直置得。勿妄分章句
T2251_.64.0256a14: 劫量。七福數。光記意如是。寶疏爲六門誤 T2251_.64.0256a15: 也。又科名雜亂。此初釋初二字明修處也。」
T2251_.64.0256a20: 今説爲明初造此業亦非女等故。此與前 T2251_.64.0256a21: 義有差別。此救非理。義已成故。謂先已説 T2251_.64.0256a22: 造此業已非女等身。已顯造時亦非女等身。 T2251_.64.0256a23: 以非女等適造此業即轉形故。能招善逝 T2251_.64.0256a24: 殊妙相業。必依淨身方能引起。故由先説
T2251_.64.0256a27: 是允當。前已顯説決定之相實是擲重。豈
T2251_.64.0256b05: 現前縁佛起勝思願。不縁餘境。顯宗二十
T2251_.64.0256b13: 有二。初正釋。後簡濫。簡濫中有三。初正示。
T2251_.64.0256b18: 難行苦行。而未能決定自知作佛。第二無 T2251_.64.0256b19: 數滿時。雖能決定自知作佛。而猶未敢發 T2251_.64.0256b20: 無畏言我當作佛。第三無數劫滿已修妙 T2251_.64.0256b21: 相業時。亦決定知我當作佛。亦發無畏師 T2251_.64.0256b22: 子吼言。我當作佛。從此自性恒憶宿生者。
T2251_.64.0256b29: 因果。善攝徒衆。所説教誡終不唐捐。菩提 T2251_.64.0256c01: 資糧轉復圓滿。是爲利益。惠暉云。菩薩相 T2251_.64.0256c02: 者。大乘三無數劫修菩提資糧。百劫修相 T2251_.64.0256c03: 好。百劫學神通。千劫學威儀。萬劫學萬行。 T2251_.64.0256c04: 此論宗即四階成佛。第一三無數劫修菩提 T2251_.64.0256c05: 資糧。第二百劫修相好。第三王宮下生。踰 T2251_.64.0256c06: 城出家。以有漏道斷下八地煩惱。第四三 T2251_.64.0256c07: 十四心成等正覺。梵云菩提薩埵。略云菩
T2251_.64.0256c10: 後種三十二相因縁。從是已來名阿鞞跋 T2251_.64.0256c11: 致。又第四云。若過三阿僧祇劫。是時菩薩 T2251_.64.0256c12: 種三十二相業因縁。至相要問答云。依小乘 T2251_.64.0256c13: 教。從發心初次第修行。臨欲成佛十地終 T2251_.64.0256c14: 心。百劫別修相好別業。是實非化。若依三 T2251_.64.0256c15: 乘始教是化非實。若依終教及直進菩薩。 T2251_.64.0256c16: 竝從發心以來一切竝修。十地終後無別百 T2251_.64.0256c17: 劫修相好業。現十地後修相好業者爲廻
T2251_.64.0256c20: 菩提。證三祇外更經多劫。以小乘三祇滿 T2251_.64.0256c21: 後更經百劫修相好業。此事不爾。此處論
T2251_.64.0256c24: 王歩等。猶是三祇數内而無有過。神泰。文 T2251_.64.0256c25: 備竝云。瓔珞前譯而今三藏不信等。釋尊超 T2251_.64.0256c26: 九劫異説。麟云。准大乘總超四十劫。一翹 T2251_.64.0256c27: 足超九劫。二由精進布髮掩泥超八劫。三 T2251_.64.0256c28: 由雪山捨身求半偈超十二劫。四由薩埵
T2251_.64.0257a12: 劫者。章安云。出曜經。佛藏經等説也。又天 T2251_.64.0257a13: 台妙經疏竝嘉祥玄論云涅槃超九劫。輔正 T2251_.64.0257a14: 記云。恐文誤也。涅槃經第十三説超十二 T2251_.64.0257a15: 劫故。具如基師上生經疏
T2251_.64.0257a22: 云寶非也。光爲是。何呼上來所説三十二 T2251_.64.0257a23: 相以言一一妙相等故。舊論曰。於菩薩諸
T2251_.64.0257a27: 證
T2251_.64.0257b02: 九評家。如次爲三説。舊論擧前兩説。結毘 T2251_.64.0257b03: 婆沙師説如此。而標有餘師有第三説。是
T2251_.64.0257b06: 薩者。光云。百劫修福業人。所以須除。又第
T2251_.64.0257b12: 佛地菩薩不一准。或最後有爲近佛。如雜
T2251_.64.0257b19: 名釋迦牟尼。最後名寶髻。第二劫逢事七 T2251_.64.0257b20: 萬六千佛。最初即寶髻。最後名燃灯。第三 T2251_.64.0257b21: 劫逢事七萬七千佛。最初即燃灯。最後名勝 T2251_.64.0257b22: 觀於修相異熟業九十一劫中逢事六佛。 T2251_.64.0257b23: 最初即勝觀。最後名迦葉波。應知此依釋 T2251_.64.0257b24: 迦菩薩説。若餘菩薩不定。光云。於三劫中 T2251_.64.0257b25: 後位漸勝。故供養佛多。前位劣後。故供養
T2251_.64.0257b28: 養。減二千佛。第二劫減一千佛。第三劫時 T2251_.64.0257b29: 雖亦三塗受生教化衆生。爾時業用自在 T2251_.64.0257c01: 故。但佛出世即來人中受生供養。故具供
T2251_.64.0257c12: 乃至眼及骨髓
T2251_.64.0257c16: 有佛號曰底沙。或曰補沙。此讃頌出本行
T2251_.64.0257c19: 門所纂。則其説異同不必辨者。是未知底 T2251_.64.0257c20: 沙補沙同體異名也
T2251_.64.0258a02: 一者布施。二者調伏。三者修道。中含十一
T2251_.64.0258a05: 大福祐。有大威神。一者布施。二者調御。三
T2251_.64.0258a12: 故不別論得名差別。舊論類言同此論事 T2251_.64.0258a13: 字。是則類事義
T2251_.64.0258a16: 言衍文不成句。義理不流。鮮本及正理。顯 T2251_.64.0258a17: 宗。光記無之
T2251_.64.0258a22: 塗散等香。房舍臥具灯燭等物。是名施類。復 T2251_.64.0258a23: 次或由身布施。謂或施身。或施身業。或施 T2251_.64.0258a24: 所捨物。或由語布施。謂或施語。或施語業。
T2251_.64.0258a28: 故云中。集異門云。慈悲喜捨四無量是名修 T2251_.64.0258a29: 類
T2251_.64.0258b03: 可知。此義福名現當所感果。是故契經所 T2251_.64.0258b04: 感果云大福祐。業是前加行。故倒文言作
T2251_.64.0258b11: 爲前加行。初釋非也。不順作福文故。後釋 T2251_.64.0258b12: 者爲依主是爲得。而福爲施等是失。所作 T2251_.64.0258b13: 福亦復何爲所依。第二解。福業與事相違 T2251_.64.0258b14: 釋。故言能所依合説。而論言之唯顯能所
T2251_.64.0258b17: 故。湛慧云。加行之言廣通多類。如淨影等 T2251_.64.0258b18: 釋。舊云方便。新云加行。方便之言亦通多
T2251_.64.0258b24: 故。事約所縁事。以三爲所縁門。意業轉 T2251_.64.0258b25: 故。故舊論云。此三是故意所縁。又集異門五
T2251_.64.0258b28: 非也
T2251_.64.0258c12: 凡聖。簡聖不取故言諸異生。顯示寛狹通 T2251_.64.0258c13: 局之異故説及言。下倶句文亦爾也。舊論
T2251_.64.0258c17: 理論擧此論全如今。故知舊論文闕脱
T2251_.64.0258c20: 益。若攝順現。容有自益故除之。超果地 T2251_.64.0258c21: 者。舊論曰。此業果報地永已過故。是不再 T2251_.64.0258c22: 生故。下文準此。倶句中彼者。即指初句人。 T2251_.64.0258c23: 而以施有情差別之故言彼。倶非句中彼 T2251_.64.0258c24: 者指第二句人。以施制多簡別之故言彼。 T2251_.64.0258c25: 正理論師釋此頌別此論。彼曰。施主施時 T2251_.64.0258c26: 觀於二益。一爲自益感果善根。二爲益他 T2251_.64.0258c27: 諸根大種。施主有二。一有煩惱。二無煩惱。 T2251_.64.0258c28: 有煩惱者復有二種。一未離欲貪。二已離欲 T2251_.64.0258c29: 貪。於此二中各有二種。一諸聖者。二諸異 T2251_.64.0259a01: 生。此中未離欲貪聖者及已未離欲貪異生 T2251_.64.0259a02: 奉施制多唯爲自益。謂自増長二種善根。
T2251_.64.0259a06: 能畢竟超彼異熟地故。而容爲得上義資 T2251_.64.0259a07: 糧。是故亦名唯爲自益。非此能益他根大 T2251_.64.0259a08: 種故不益他。無煩惱者施他有情唯爲益 T2251_.64.0259a09: 他。謂能益2他諸根大種。非自増長二種善
T2251_.64.0259a12: 現受。不爲二益。有師唯約施招大富分
T2251_.64.0259a18: 因。謂施差別之因主財等。果差別之因施差 T2251_.64.0259a19: 別。光三釋。後釋別通果及施。彼因者指施。
T2251_.64.0259a22: 初釋爲施果別家因。未辨施與果相違釋。 T2251_.64.0259a23: 彼意施之果。第三釋但云果略施故
T2251_.64.0259a26: 除果字釋餘九字。後施差別故釋施果差 T2251_.64.0259a27: 別四字。一因字。最後故字。並是因義應頌前 T2251_.64.0259a28: 因言兩意
T2251_.64.0259b05: 理。顯宗及鮮本作得果有異。於義並無妨。 T2251_.64.0259b06: 然準舊論梵正本蓋與字
T2251_.64.0259b09: 施。彼不行人受損害。若於此處行則致諸 T2251_.64.0259b10: 障礙。然慧暉抄云。施者不損惱所施人。或 T2251_.64.0259b11: 財物無損者。豈得關財物。又何可局所施 T2251_.64.0259b12: 人。光師依正理總云。行施時不損惱他。施
T2251_.64.0259b16: 有三。一四種皆具。二一二三隨具。三四種圓 T2251_.64.0259b17: 滿。今論且約一種具故云色具足等。光記
T2251_.64.0259b24: 福故言先説。或對復説顯示前六後一差 T2251_.64.0259b25: 別。置及言。初但苦別。更證果報故言復説。
T2251_.64.0259b29: 翻異。熊音雄。説文。熊獸似豕。山居冬蟄從 T2251_.64.0259c01: 能炎省。羆班糜切。音陂。爾雅釋畜。羆如熊 T2251_.64.0259c02: 黄白文。註。似熊而長頭高脚。憨悍多力能 T2251_.64.0259c03: 拔樹木。陸璣詩疏。羆有黄羆。有赤羆。大于
T2251_.64.0259c07: 九色鹿經。彼大乘部不關今論。且惠暉云。 T2251_.64.0259c08: 鹿菩薩事是婆沙説。鳳潭妄見彼釋自標又 T2251_.64.0259c09: 婆沙説。而言菩薩苦爲鹿王等寫光記文 T2251_.64.0259c10: 此常雜駁如是矣。於婆沙中無有此事也。 T2251_.64.0259c11: 婆沙更有屠牛人。饑渇絶牛舌以濟饑時。 T2251_.64.0259c12: 擘以刮舌。因縁。及搐牛乳還散母受白癩 T2251_.64.0259c13: 因縁。爲攝彼等言等也
T2251_.64.0259c16: 八種中。前七非勝而是便釋。第八獨最勝而
T2251_.64.0259c19: 前八名便釋莊嚴心也者。蓋應前七名便釋 T2251_.64.0259c20: 莊嚴心正明也誤也。頌疏云。八爲莊嚴心
T2251_.64.0259c24: 云。頌疏意。於第八雖四類別。而立八施名 T2251_.64.0259c25: 則名莊心施。是故結名莊嚴心。由之雜心 T2251_.64.0259c26: 但云第八莊嚴心。然湛慧未知頌疏・寶疏 T2251_.64.0259c27: 等意破斥者非也。爲得上義者。正理論主
T2251_.64.0260a05: 者施。是舊阿毘曇説悕望施。初説同正理。
T2251_.64.0260a10: 行惠施。正理。兩説並示
T2251_.64.0260a19: 現本。作身非也。湛惠云。後生後身大有差 T2251_.64.0260a20: 別。光師云。最後生即王宮所生身也。此釋未
T2251_.64.0260a23: 生所繋。望當佛位應有四生。人天本有及 T2251_.64.0260a24: 二中有。如七生等名一大生。若住天中稱
T2251_.64.0260a27: 也。二最後身。三坐道場。此二局在成佛身位。 T2251_.64.0260a28: 化身既通二。受用身雖不見文準此應悉。 T2251_.64.0260a29: 自受用身七地以前名一生繋。八地以後名 T2251_.64.0260b01: 最後身。更無生故。處蓮花座名坐道場。他 T2251_.64.0260b02: 受用身如觀音前身名一生所繋。觀音之身 T2251_.64.0260b03: 名最後身。處七寶座名坐道場。法身無生
T2251_.64.0260b08: 無後生身故云最後。如彼彌勒。今處天中。 T2251_.64.0260b09: 猶有人中一生所繋。故名一生所繋不名 T2251_.64.0260b10: 言最後生。迷一生繋最後身有差別。以認 T2251_.64.0260b11: 後身後生亦有大別。是何謂哉
T2251_.64.0260b14: 顯宗作施者。舊論云行施。若行字誤。次下 T2251_.64.0260b15: 云於彼行施故
T2251_.64.0260b18: 一明重故不言最。今依六具下上故特 T2251_.64.0260b19: 言最。六種因皆是上品業此業最重。若六因 T2251_.64.0260b20: 皆是下品此業最輕。若六因中。三上品。三下 T2251_.64.0260b21: 品應分別此。三是重非最。三是輕非最。若 T2251_.64.0260b22: 四上。二下亦應分別。若但四上無餘二只是 T2251_.64.0260b23: 重。若四下無餘二只是輕。餘一切準此。論 T2251_.64.0260b24: 主顯彰此旨言皆是。豈非顯非六因皆是 T2251_.64.0260b25: 上非六因皆是下而不具。是非極輕重但
T2251_.64.0260b28: 此六因一切皆是下品。應知此業是輕品。此 T2251_.64.0260b29: 證最重最輕。具足六因若下若上。正理論 T2251_.64.0260c01: 曰。若有六因皆是上品此業最重。翻此最 T2251_.64.0260c02: 輕。除此中間非最輕重謂或有業唯由後 T2251_.64.0260c03: 分所攝受故得成重品。定安立彼異熟果 T2251_.64.0260c04: 故。乃至或有唯由意樂。由二三等如理應
T2251_.64.0260c08: 除此中間業非輕重者。未見最言之失。論 T2251_.64.0260c09: 明重最重輕最輕。何得偏言非輕重。麟云。 T2251_.64.0260c10: 言除此中間等者。如具二三四五等因也。 T2251_.64.0260c11: 有云。若具六因皆上品業最重。若不具六 T2251_.64.0260c12: 因皆下品此業最輕。二三是下名非輕重。 T2251_.64.0260c13: 此釋約六全具全不具辨最重最輕。復云 T2251_.64.0260c14: 名非輕重並誤也。又湛慧於六皆具中立 T2251_.64.0260c15: 上中下三品。彼言。六因上品是重。六因下品 T2251_.64.0260c16: 是輕。除上中品六因是中。業非最重亦非 T2251_.64.0260c17: 最輕。此中容業。並就皆具非約具闕。而大 T2251_.64.0260c18: 彈斥寶疏。此言還非也。頌既云由此下上 T2251_.64.0260c19: 故。未説中容。又長行有業唯由後起成 T2251_.64.0260c20: 重。是約闕。故知頌總説。長行於二各分最 T2251_.64.0260c21: 極未最。而唯輕重。全非立第三中容品也」
T2251_.64.0260c24: 答。但増長難知。是故問一。答中對來。光釋 T2251_.64.0260c25: 非也。於頌文無造作故
T2251_.64.0261a03: 疾。即此國苦練。是苦檀之類也。寶疏曰。二果 T2251_.64.0261a04: 此土無故不翻
T2251_.64.0261a08: 所侵觸。四四念處所攝持。五於涅槃所迴 T2251_.64.0261a09: 向。舊論既簡後起言前分。今云非尋害者 T2251_.64.0261a10: 非三尋所害。三尋者。謂欲尋。恚尋。害尋。具
T2251_.64.0261a13: 攝受舊論云四念處。雜心云攝受佛法僧 T2251_.64.0261a14: 正念。今應依舊論也。問。此二有説出雜心
T2251_.64.0261a17: 淨四種戒。次就前四中第四清淨問其義。 T2251_.64.0261a18: 示由五因故名清淨之義。故知非是別義。 T2251_.64.0261a19: 今何爲二説。答。以樂欲別故。謂彼論如是。 T2251_.64.0261a20: 今論初唯具四徳名淨。反此不淨。戒總分 T2251_.64.0261a21: 淨不淨二。而就四義具爲淨。對此四義淨 T2251_.64.0261a22: 以次出五因義。是亦五因内隨一闕名爲不 T2251_.64.0261a23: 淨也。後四種戒義者不大分淨不淨。於不 T2251_.64.0261a24: 淨開三種。是戒體開合異説。所望異全非 T2251_.64.0261a25: 相違。舊論。正理同今。有二有説。顯宗唯初 T2251_.64.0261a26: 説。頌疏亦唯擧初説。湛慧引婆沙百七十七
T2251_.64.0261a29: 攝受文。令同初説。今詳互有闕少。彼無 T2251_.64.0261b01: 迴向寂。此無後起淨。何得令同 T2251_.64.0261b02: 冠註者言。依光記二説倶爲異説。若據寶 T2251_.64.0261b03: 疏初爲本説。但以後師爲異説。最得論 T2251_.64.0261b04: 意。何者初師即當頌中淨義。後師非唯淨
T2251_.64.0261b07: 説倶等所攝文煥然。寶疏亦倶爲異説
T2251_.64.0261b10: 曰。能熏習心能令心與徳成一性故。及相 T2251_.64.0261b11: 續亦爾。言苣蕂者。舊論。正理。顯宗並云麻。 T2251_.64.0261b12: 此音釋云胡麻
T2251_.64.0261b17: 文異此。經自挍量福量曰。閻浮衆生所有 T2251_.64.0261b18: 功徳。可與一輪王功徳等。閻浮人及一輪 T2251_.64.0261b19: 王徳。等於瞿耶尼一人徳。閻浮瞿耶二方 T2251_.64.0261b20: 之福。不如弗于達一人福。三方人福。不如 T2251_.64.0261b21: 欝單越一人福。四天下人福。不如四天王 T2251_.64.0261b22: 之福四天下及四天王之福。不如三十三天
T2251_.64.0261b25: 之福
T2251_.64.0261c02: 竝非也。若餘部者。於正理。顯宗。呼此及 T2251_.64.0261c03: 下毘婆沙師倶言有餘師。其義無降劣竝 T2251_.64.0261c04: 取。豈可有此理。第三義爲當部則得矣。爲 T2251_.64.0261c05: 異説失矣。是論主本懷義故。問。増一契經 T2251_.64.0261c06: 曰等梵天王之福。今何爲梵補天。答。彼未 T2251_.64.0261c07: 明説梵衆梵輔大梵差別。但對他化自在已 T2251_.64.0261c08: 下以總云梵天福。無有相違
T2251_.64.0261c12: 證劫天而已。光記三釋。第三眞諦説爲正。 T2251_.64.0261c13: 初二解但是己情耳。寶疏同第三第一。頌疏 T2251_.64.0261c14: 但取第三也。光記依正理。後一生上界。前 T2251_.64.0261c15: 三生欲天。寶疏亦依正理。今詳四竝生上 T2251_.64.0261c16: 界。同名梵福故。諸論不辨差別。故彼正理 T2251_.64.0261c17: 別是自案説也
T2251_.64.0261c24: 生天。彼妙相福不爾。如來相獸。然婆沙七 T2251_.64.0261c25: 説。竝但言感果未言時量。復何可同相 T2251_.64.0261c26: 福。問。婆沙第四義言。若業能招梵天王果 T2251_.64.0261c27: 齊此名爲一梵福量。是説善會増一契經。
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
Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: Footnote: 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 [行番号:有/無] [返り点:無/有] [CITE] |