一　法苑義鏡五巻ページ63/98 - 翻刻

ページ: 63

翻刻

【右頁】【枠外右上】一二四【但し算用数字】【枠外右横上】法苑義鏡　斷障章【枠外右横下】一二四【二段構成】【上段】謂四根本￣ト初未至￣ト。及中間禪￣トナリ。無色四地。卽空處等。此等十地。卽是修道無漏所依。故皆能伏。有頂無漏￣ハ。不＿レ能＿レ斷＿レ惑。而勢分《送り仮名：ヲ以》。力亦能伏惑。言＿二方便根本俱能伏＿一者。方便卽初未至。根本卽四靜慮￣ト。四無色定。上未至唯有＿二￣レトモ欣厭行相＿一。猶局故不＿レ得＿レ作＿二￣コトヲ無漏所依＿一。若起＿二￣ス六行＿一之所依者。亦通＿二七未至＿一。今論＿二￣スルカ無漏之所依地＿一故唯十地。六行唯方便者。卽八未至皆名＿二方便＿一。七作意中。前六是方便。第七根本故。若以＿二無漏＿一伏＿レ之者。色界￣ニハ六地。非＿二是色界餘三方便＿一。非＿下起＿二無漏＿一之所依＿上故。無色￣ニハ四地皆有＿二無漏＿一故能伏＿レ之。有頂無漏￣ハ。雖＿二是闇鈍＿一。以＿二勢分力＿一。亦能伏＿レ之。纂云。煩惱障中伏通＿二九地＿一。謂色六地￣ト無色￣ノ四地。此解難＿レ知。言＿二九地＿一者。是何地也。若色界六￣ト無色四￣トナラ者。卽是十地。何唯名￣ケン＿レ九。若欲界地等九地￣ナラハ者。欲界唯散依。何伏￣セン＿レ惑￣ヲ。斯義難＿レ解。學者應＿レ思。文若正斷者。至＿二非斷惑道＿一者。下明＿二斷別＿一也。上明＿レ伏訖。若正斷者。煩惱障中。斷＿二￣スルニ分別起￣ヲ＿一。二乘唯依＿二色界五【下段】地＿一。說＿三三現觀依＿二￣ト五￣ノ依￣ニ＿一故。卽色界中四根本定￣ト。及初未至￣ト。是爲＿二五地＿一。中間雖有無漏眞道等者。彼無＿二明利《割書：頭#1利一作＿レ別形誤乎今｜疏九末[六九左]全文故#2》無漏＿一故。有＿二明利無漏＿一者能入故。又彼￣レニ梵王居￣シテ多＿二散亂＿一故。非＿二純淨地＿一故。無色惠劣非斷惑道者。就￣ク＿レ斷＿二￣スルニ分別惑￣ヲ＿一。若修惑￣ナラ者亦通＿二無色＿一。文六十九說。至＿二有見道故＿一者。此引＿二二文＿一。證＿二見道依＿一。瑜伽六十九云。唯依＿二諸靜慮及￣ヒ初近分未至＿一。能入＿二聖諦現觀＿一。非＿二無色定￣ニハ＿一無色定中￣ニハ。奢摩他￣ハ勝。毘鉢舍那劣￣ナリ。毘鉢舍那￣ノ劣￣ナル道￣ハ。不＿レ能＿レ入＿二現觀＿一。又《割書：考#1疏九末[六九左]文｜依＿二伽七十一＿一[四丁【〕：脱落？】》#2 云。三依＿二五依＿一生。一種一分亦爾。若中間禪￣ニモ有＿レ依入＿二現觀＿一。應＿レ言＿下三依＿二六依＿一生＿上。以＿下￣テ初￣テ生￣スル時。智諦￣ト及￣ヒ邊￣ト戒￣トノ三。唯依＿二四根本。及未至五￣ノ依￣ニ＿一生￣スルヲ＿上。而不＿レ說＿二￣カ六地￣ト＿一。明￣ケシ中間禪￣ニ無＿下入＿二￣ル現觀＿一者《返り点：上》。文若斷修惑。至＿二不能斷惑＿一者。此意說修道非見道者。此瑜伽意。說＿二二乘修道＿一。非＿二菩薩見道＿一也。又說三依五依生故者。此文引意。旣說＿下見道依＿二五依＿一生＿上。明知。第百卷文。卽說＿二修道之所依＿一也。何故￣ソ唯取＿二￣テ三無色＿一。不￣ルヤ＿レ說＿二有頂＿一。解【左頁】【枠外左上】一二五【但し算用数字】【枠外左横上】法苑義鏡　斷障章【枠外左横下】一二五【二段構成】【上段】　云。有頂雖＿レ有＿二遊觀無漏＿一。性闇微￣ナルカ故。非＿レ斷＿レ結也。　問。智諦現觀亦通＿二修道＿一。何故￣ニ說＿三￣ヤ三￣ハ唯依＿二￣ルト五￣ノ依＿一。云何￣ンカ得￣トナラ＿レ知＿三￣コトヲ彼通＿二￣スト修道＿一。《割書：考#1一本修道｜說等七字無》說＿三一得＿二九遍知果＿一故。又說＿三一得＿二四果＿一故。解云案＿二彼論文＿一。《割書：考#1七十一｜[四六左]#2》智諦現觀凡有＿二二種＿一。一唯依＿二見道＿一立。二通依＿二二道＿一立。依＿二初義＿一故。說￣ク＿レ依＿二￣ト五￣ノ依￣ニ＿一。由＿二￣カ後￣ノ義＿一故。說＿レ依＿二一切＿一。彼文亦說＿レ依＿二一切依＿一。或盡＿二￣コト諸漏＿一。雖＿レ通＿二￣スト九￣ノ依￣ニ＿一。立＿二￣コトハ現觀￣ヲ＿一者。唯在＿二五依＿一故不＿二相違＿一。戒￣ト邊￣ト智諦￣ト應＿レ知亦爾。文菩薩若斷。至＿二六無色三＿一者。唯第四定等者。二乘依＿二五地＿一。菩薩唯依＿二第四＿一。諸論通＿二方便＿一爲＿レ論言＿三菩薩亦依＿二五地＿一。前方便時。通＿二諸靜慮＿一而依＿二第四＿一。方得＿二成滿＿一。卽最後入時唯依＿二第四＿一。所＿二-以然＿一者。望＿二餘禪＿一時最殊勝故。若斷俱生等者。所知障中伏《割書：考#1伏｜恐衍》俱生。斷容＿レ通＿二九地＿一。斷＿二二習氣＿一亦爾。　問。習氣麤重其體是何。又與＿二不染無知＿一何別。　解云。若依＿二小乘＿一。不染無知。以＿下未＿二成佛＿一來￣タノ所有一切有漏無漏《割書：考#1漏一｜本作染》劣惠＿上爲＿レ體。無知狹習氣寬。然解＿レ習二解不＿レ同。【下段】　一云。劣惠俱生心心所法￣ヲ惣￣シテ名＿二習氣＿一。一云。習氣不＿三但通＿二心心所法＿一。亦通＿二相續身＿一。今大乘中￣ニハ。習氣￣ハ無體。無知有體。卽所知障攝￣ナリ。不染無明。名＿二不染無知＿一。故護法《割書：考#1伽六十四[十五]唯識九[二十九｜丁]佛地四[十六左]疏三末六[二右]》#2等宗。習氣卽是無堪任性。亦名＿二麤重＿一。而此麤重與＿二五滿《割書：頭#1五滿依＿二燈五本＿一[十二右]有漏｜形誤乎燈七本[二十七右]亦爾可＿二》#2 《割書：考｜合＿一》等＿一不＿レ一不＿レ異。無＿二別體＿一故。廣説＿二此義＿一。如＿二餘別抄＿一。文若斷俱生。至＿二恐煩不述＿一者。若斷俱生煩惱障唯第四定等者。此約＿二種子＿一。不＿レ言＿二麤重＿一。重重卽十地中亦斷￣スルカ故。俱生惑障￣ハ留而不＿レ斷。爲＿二利生＿一故。必至＿二金剛＿一。一時頓斷￣ス。此金剛心￣ハ。依＿二第四禪＿一。故云＿二亦唯第四定＿一。　問。金剛心中卽有＿二二道＿一。何中捨＿二￣ルヤ異熟識體＿一。　解云。論有＿二二釋＿一。《割書：考#1二釋｜唯識十》《割書：[八右十五左]出疏三末[八十]十本[五六｜右]十末[五一右]略對法三[十二右]說》#2　一云。因果相生。現種相望。亦是前後。無種已生￣トハ。集論￣ノ說￣ナルカ故。由＿二斯義＿一故。金剛三昧。未＿二現在前＿一。彼能￣ク生￣テ因亡能生＿レ果￣ヲ。金剛道時。雖＿レ無＿二因種＿一。異熟得＿レ生￣スルコト。前念生￣スルコト＿レ後￣ヲ不＿レ違＿レ理故。一云。現種相望必同刹那。由＿レ斯金剛無間道時。雖＿レ無＿二二障＿一。而有＿二名言￣ト及業種￣ト＿一故。異熟識生。初師無間道位智

現代語訳

【右頁】【枠外右上】一二四【枠外右横上】法苑義鏡　断障章【枠外右横下】一二四【上段】（前頁より続く）すなわち四根本（定）と初未至（定）および中間禅（定）である。無色（界の）四地とはすなわち空処等（の四地）である。これら十地はすなわち修道の無漏（道の）所依である。それゆえすべて（煩悩を）伏することができる。有頂（地）の無漏（道）は（煩悩を）断ずることができない。しかし勢分（=勢いの分量）の力を以て、また煩悩を伏することができる。「方便（定）・根本（定）ともに伏することができる」とは、方便とはすなわち初未至（定）であり、根本とはすなわち四静慮（=四禅定）と四無色定（のこと）である。上（界の）未至（定）はただ欣（=喜び）・厭（=嫌い）の行相を有するとはいえ、なお局（=限定的）であるが故に無漏（道の）所依とすることができない。もし六行（=六行観）を起こす（ための）所依（を論ずる）ならば、また七（つの）未至（定）にも通ずる。今は無漏（道の）所依の地を論ずるが故に、ただ十地のみ（となる）。「六行（観）はただ方便（定）のみ（に通ずる）」とは、すなわち八（つの）未至（定）はすべて「方便」と名づけられる。七（種の）作意の中で、前の六（作意）は方便であり、第七（の作意）は根本（定）であるが故に（このように言う）。もし無漏（道）を以て（煩悩を）伏するならば、色界においては六地（のみ）であって、色界のその他の三（つの）方便（定）ではない。これは無漏（道）を起こす所依ではないからである。無色（界）においては四地すべてに無漏（道）があるが故にそれ（=煩悩）を伏することができる。有頂（地）の無漏（道）は、（智慧が）暗く鈍いとはいえ、勢分の力を以てまたそれを伏することができる。『纂（=唯識義纂）』に云う、「煩悩障の中で伏（すること）は九地に通ずる。すなわち色（界の）六地と無色の四地である」と。この解釈は知り難い。「九地」と言うのはどの地のことか。もし色界の六（地）と無色（界の）四（地）ならば、すなわちこれは十地である。どうしてただ九（地）と名づけるのか。もし欲界の地等の九地ならば、欲界はただ散（乱した）依（り所）であるのに、どうして（煩悩を）伏することができようか。この義は解し難い。学者は（よく）考えるべきである。「文、もし正しく断ずる者は、断惑の道にあらずにまで」について。以下は断（じること）の別（=個別説明）を明らかにする。上（の節）では伏（じること）を明らかにし終えた。「もし正しく断ずる者は」、煩悩障の中で分別起（の煩悩）を断ずるに際して、二乗はただ色界の五【下段】地に依る。三（種の）現観は五つの依（=所依の地）に依って生ずると説くが故に（そうなる）。すなわち色界の中の四根本定と初未至定と、これを五地とする。「中間（禅定）には無漏の真道等があるとはいえ」とは、かの（中間禅定）には明利〔考：「利」の一本は「別」に作る。形が似ているための誤りか。今、（慈恩）疏第九巻末（六十九丁左）の全文による〕（=明晰で鋭い）無漏（の智慧）がないが故に（のことである）。明利の無漏（道）を有する（地）においてこそ（現観に）入ることができるが故に（そうなる）。また、かの（中間禅定）には梵王（=梵天の王）が住しており散乱が多いが故に、純浄の地ではないが故に（のことである）。「無色（界の）慧（=智慧）は劣っており、断惑の道ではない」とは、（これは）分別惑を断ずることに即して（言われている）。もし修惑（=修道で断ずる惑）ならば無色（界）にも通ずる。「文、（瑜伽論）六十九（巻に）説く（ことについて）、見道有るが故にまで」について。ここでは二つの文を引用して、見道（の）依（=所依の地）を証明する。『瑜伽（論）』六十九（巻）に云う、「ただ諸（根本）静慮および初近分（定）・未至（定）に依ってのみ、聖諦の現観（=見道）に入ることができる。無色定においてはそうでない。無色定の中では奢摩他（=止）は勝れているが、毘鉢舍那（=観）は劣っている。毘鉢舍那の劣る道は現観に入ることができない」と。また〔考：（慈恩）疏第九巻末（六十九丁左）の文は（瑜伽論）第七十一（巻）に依る（第四丁〔脱落か〕）〕に云う、「三（種の現観は）五つの依（=所依）に依って生ずる。（現観の）一種・一分もまた同様である。もし中間禅定にも（現観に）入る依（=所依）があるならば、『三（種の現観は）六つの依に依って生ずる』と言うべきである。（しかし）初めて生じる時に、智諦（現観）・（法）辺（現観）・戒（清浄現観）の三（種）は、ただ四根本（定）および未至（定）の五つの依に依って生ずると（説いており）」と、六地（=中間禅定を加えた地）とは説かないので、中間禅定に（現観に）入る者がいないことは明らかである。「文、もし修惑を断ずるならば、断惑できないにまで」について。この意味は修道（について述べており）、見道（について述べているの）ではないということである。この『瑜伽（論）』の意味は、二乗の修道を説くのであって、菩薩の見道（を説くの）ではない。また「三（種の現観は）五つの依に依って生ずると説く」が故とは、この文を引用した意図は、既に見道が五つの依に依って生ずると説かれている（ことを証した上で）、（第）百（巻の）文は修道の所依を説くものと知ることができるということである。どのような理由から、ただ三（つの）無色（界の地）だけを取り、有頂（地）を説かないのか。解して云う。【左頁】【枠外左上】一二五【枠外左横上】法苑義鏡　断障章【枠外左横下】一二五【上段】有頂（地）には遊観の無漏（道）があるとはいえ、その性（=性質）が暗く微細であるが故に（煩悩の）結（=束縛）を断ずることはない。　問う。智諦現観も修道に通ずる。どのような理由から「三（種は）ただ五つの依に依る」と説くのか。かの（智諦現観が）修道に通ずると知ることはどうして得られるのか〔考：一本には「修道」の後に「説等」の七字がない〕。「（不定の者の）一（が悟りを）得れば九（種の）遍知の果（=証果）を得る」と説くが故に。また「一（が悟りを）得れば四（種の）果を得る」と説くが故に（である）。解して云う。かの論の文を案ずると〔考：（瑜伽論）第七十一（巻）（第四十六丁左）〕、智諦現観には凡そ二種がある。一（つ）はただ見道（のみ）に依って立てる（もの）。二（つ）は二道（=見道・修道）の両方に通じて依って立てる（もの）である。初（め）の義に依るが故に、五つの依（=所依）に依るとは言う。後（の）義に由るが故に、一切（の依）に依るとも言う。かの文にもまた「一切の依に依る」と説く。あるいは「諸漏を尽くすこと（=漏尽現観）」について、九（地の）依に通ずるとはいえ、現観を立てる者はただ五つの依（のみ）にあるが故に（両者は）相違しない。戒（清浄現観）・（法）辺（現観）・智諦（現観）についても同様であると知るべきである。「文、菩薩がもし断ずるならば、六（つの）無色（界の地の中の）三（地）にまで」について。「ただ第四（禅）定のみ」等とは、二乗は五地に依るのに対して、菩薩はただ第四（禅定）のみに依る（のである）。諸論では方便（定）にも通じて論じて、「菩薩もまた五地に依る」と言う。（すなわち）前の方便（定）の時には諸静慮（の定）に通ずるが、第四（禅定）に依ってこそ（見道が）成就・円満することができる。すなわち最後に入る時にはただ第四（禅定）のみに依るのである。そうである所以は、他の禅（定）と比べて最も殊勝であるが故に（そうなのである）。「もし倶生（惑）等を断ずるならば」とは、所知障の中で〔考：「伏」は衍字か〕倶生（の所知障）を（断ずれば）、断ずることは九地に通じ得る。二（種の）習気を断ずることもまた同様である。　問う。習気・麤重（=粗重）のその体（=本質）は何か。また不染無知（=染汚されない無知）とはどう異なるのか。　解して云う。もし小乗に依れば、不染無知は、（まだ）成仏するに至っていない間（に存在する）一切の有漏・無漏〔考：「漏」の一本は「染」に作る〕の劣った智慧を以て体（=本質）とする。無知は（その範囲が）狭く、習気は（その範囲が）広い。しかし「習気」の解釈については二種の解釈があり、同じではない。【下段】一（つに）は云う、劣った智慧（=慧）と倶生（して起こる）心・心所の法を総じて「習気」と名づける（と）。もう一（つに）は云う、習気はただ心・心所の法に通ずるのみならず、相続する身にも通ずる（と）。今（の）大乗の中では、習気には（独自の）体（=実体）がない。無知には体がある。すなわち所知障に摂（=包摂）される（のである）。染汚されない無明（=不染無明）を「不染無知」と名づける。それゆえ護法〔考：（瑜伽論）第六十四（巻）（第十五丁）・唯識（論）第九（巻）（第二十九丁）・仏地（経論）第四（巻）（第十六丁左）・疏第三巻末の第六（丁右）〕等（を宗とする者）の宗では、習気はすなわち無堪任性（=能力を担うことができない性質）であり、また「麤重（=粗重、dauṣṭhulya）」とも名づける。しかしこの麤重と五（種の）満（ちた有漏のもの）〔頭注：「五満」については『（義林章）灯』第五巻本（第十二丁右）に依れば「有漏」（と読む）。形が似ているための誤りか。『灯』第七巻本（第二十七丁右）もまた同様。合わせて確認すべきである〕等とは、一でも異でもない（=同じでも違いでもない）。別の体がないが故に（のことである）。この義を広く説くことは他の別抄（=別の抄物）の如くである。「文、もし倶生（惑）を断ずるならば、煩わしくなることを恐れて述べないにまで」について。「もし倶生（の）煩悩障を断ずるならばただ第四定（のみ）等」とは、これは種子（=阿頼耶識の種子）に約（=関係）して（言うの）であり、麤重（=粗重）について言う（の）ではない。（ここで）麤重とは（=の場合は）すなわち十地の中においても（その都度）断ずるが故に（そのように言う）。倶生惑障（=倶生の煩悩障）は（十地の段階では）留めておいて断じない。衆生を利益するが故に（そうするのであり）、必ず金剛（喩定）（=vajropamasamādhi）に至って一時に頓（=一挙）に断ずる。この金剛心（=金剛喩定）は第四禅（定）に依る。それゆえ「またただ第四定のみ」と云う。　問う。金剛（喩定の）心の中にはすなわち二（種の）道（=無間道と解脱道）がある。（そのうちの）何れの（道）において異熟識の体を捨てるのか。　解して云う。論に二釈がある〔考：二釈については唯識（論）第十（巻）（第八丁右・第十五丁左）に出づ。疏第三巻末（第八十丁）・第十巻本（第五十六丁右）・第十巻末（第五十一丁右）・略（=略続対法論）対法（論）第三（巻）（第十二丁右）（に）説く〕。一（つに）は云う、因と果は相い生ずる（=互いに生じ合う）。現行（の識）と種子（の識）との相互関係においても、また前後（の）関係にある。「（種子のない無種子は）已（=すでに）生じた（のではなく）、（種子が）無（くなって）（から果が）生ずる」とは、『集論』の説であるが故に（そう言う）。この義に由って、金剛（喩定の）三昧が未だ現在（の前に）ある（状態に）至っていない（時に）、かの（阿頼耶識を）生じることができる因（=種子）が（まず）亡（=消滅）し（て）、（それから）果を生じることができる（のである）。金剛道の時は、因（=）種子がないとはいえ、異熟（識）が生ずることができる（のは）、前の念（=刹那）が後（の念）を生ずることが理に違わないが故に（そうなのである）。もう一（つに）は云う、現行（の識）と種子（の識）との相互関係においては必ず同一刹那（でなければならない）。これによって金剛（喩定の）無間道の時には二障（=煩悩障・所知障）がないとはいえ、名言（種子）および業（の）種（=種子）があるが故に、異熟識が生ずる（のである）。初（め）の師（の説では）無間道の位（において）、智（が…）

英語訳

【Right Page】【Outside frame, upper right】 One hundred and twenty-four 【Outside frame, upper right horizontal】 Dharma Garden Meaning Mirror — Eliminating Obstacles Chapter 【Outside frame, lower right horizontal】 One hundred and twenty-four 【Upper Section】 (Continued from the previous page) ...namely the four root [meditations] (*四根本定*), the initial access concentration (*初未至定*), and the intermediate meditation (*中間禅定*). The four grounds of the formless realm (*無色界四地*) are precisely [the grounds beginning with] the sphere of boundless space (*空処*) and so on. These ten grounds are precisely the supporting grounds (*所依*) for the uncontaminated [path] (*無漏道*) of the path of cultivation (*修道*). Therefore all [of them] are capable of suppressing [afflictions]. The uncontaminated [path] of the pinnacle of existence (*有頂地*) cannot eliminate (*断*) afflictions. However, through the power of its "momentum share" (*勢分力*), it is also capable of suppressing (*伏*) afflictions. Regarding "[both] the preparatory [meditation] (*方便定*) and the root [meditation] (*根本定*) can both suppress [afflictions]": the preparatory [meditation] is precisely the initial access concentration (*初未至定*), and the root [meditation] is precisely the four meditations (*四静慮*) and four formless absorptions (*四無色定*). Although the access concentration of the upper [realms] (*上未至定*) possesses the mental aspects of longing [for what is above] and weariness [of what is below], it is still restricted — hence it cannot serve as the supporting ground for the uncontaminated [path]. If one discusses the supporting grounds for giving rise to the six contemplations (*六行観*), [the discussion] also extends to the seven access concentrations (*七未至定*). [However,] since [the current text] discusses the supporting grounds for the uncontaminated [path], there are only ten grounds. Regarding "the six contemplations [pertain] only to the preparatory [meditations]": all eight access concentrations (*八未至定*) are called "preparatory (*方便*)." Among the seven mental engagements (*七作意*), the first six are preparatory, and the seventh is the root [meditation]. If one suppresses [afflictions] by means of the uncontaminated [path], in the form realm there are only six grounds — not the other three preparatory [concentrations] of the form realm, since those are not supporting grounds for giving rise to the uncontaminated [path]. In the formless realm, all four grounds possess the uncontaminated [path] and hence are capable of suppressing them. The uncontaminated [path] of the pinnacle of existence (*有頂*), though dull and dim, is through the power of its momentum share also capable of suppressing [afflictions]. The *Zuan* (*纂*, i.e., the *Vijñaptimātratā Yizuan* 唯識義纂) says: "Within the affliction obstruction, suppression extends through nine grounds — namely the six grounds of the form realm and the four grounds of the formless realm." This interpretation is difficult to understand. When [the text] says "nine grounds," what grounds are these? If [it means] the six [grounds] of the form realm and the four [grounds] of the formless realm, that would be ten grounds. Why name them just nine? If [it means] the desire realm ground and [eight others making] nine grounds, the desire realm is merely a scattered [and hence unsuitable] supporting basis — how could it suppress afflictions? This meaning is difficult to resolve. Students should think carefully about it. Regarding "The text: 'If one is truly eliminating,' up to 'not the path of eliminating afflictions'": What follows clarifies the distinctions in elimination (*断*). The above [section] has finished clarifying suppression (*伏*). "If one is truly eliminating [afflictions]" — in [the process of] eliminating conceptually-arisen [afflictions] (*分別起*) within the affliction obstruction (*煩悩障*), the two vehicles depend only on the five grounds of the form realm. 【Lower Section】 This is because [the text] explains that the three kinds of direct realizations (*三現観*) are born depending on the five supporting grounds (*五依*). That is to say: the four root meditations (*四根本定*) of the form realm and the initial access concentration (*初未至定*) constitute the five grounds. "Although the intermediate meditation (*中間禅*) possesses the uncontaminated true path (*無漏真道*) and so on" — [this is] because that [intermediate meditation] lacks the clear and sharp [Note: "sharp (利)" in one version is written "distinct (別)," perhaps an error due to similar forms; the current reading follows the full text of the Commentary (*疏*), fascicle nine, end, folio sixty-nine left] uncontaminated [wisdom]. Since only [grounds] possessing clear and sharp uncontaminated [wisdom] can enter [direct realization], [the intermediate meditation cannot]. Furthermore, since the Brahmā King (*梵王*) dwells in that [intermediate meditation ground] and there is much distraction there, it is not a ground of pure purity. "The wisdom of the formless realm is inferior and is not the path of eliminating afflictions" — this is stated with respect to the elimination of conceptually-[arisen] afflictions (*分別惑*). If [one speaks of] the cultivation-afflictions (*修惑*), [their elimination] also extends to the formless realm. Regarding "The text: '[The *Yogācārabhūmi*,] fascicle sixty-nine explains,' up to 'because there is the path of direct seeing (*見道*)' ": Here two passages are cited as proof of the supporting ground for the path of direct seeing (*見道*). The *Yogācārabhūmi* (*瑜伽論*), fascicle sixty-nine, says: "Only by depending on the root meditations (*諸静慮*) and the initial access concentration (*初近分*) and access concentration (*未至定*) can one enter the direct realization of the noble truths (*聖諦現観*). This is not [possible] in the formless absorptions. In the formless absorptions, serenity (*奢摩他*, *śamatha*) is superior, while insight (*毘鉢舍那*, *vipaśyanā*) is inferior. The path of inferior insight cannot enter direct realization." And [another passage] [Note: the text of the Commentary (*疏*), fascicle nine, end (folio sixty-nine left), based on the *Yogācārabhūmi* fascicle seventy-one (folio four — possibly missing)] says: "The three [kinds of direct realization] are born depending on five supporting grounds. The one type and the one portion are likewise. If there were a supporting basis for entering direct realization even in the intermediate meditation (*中間禅*), one should say 'the three [kinds of direct realization] are born depending on six supporting grounds.' [But since] when first arising, the three of wisdom-truth [realization] (*智諦現観*), dharma-boundary [realization] (*法辺現観*), and precept [purity realization] (*戒清浄現観*) are [said to] be born depending only on the five supporting grounds of the four root [meditations] and the access concentration" — and six grounds [including the intermediate meditation] are not mentioned — it is clear that there is no one who enters direct realization in the intermediate meditation. Regarding "The text: 'If one eliminates cultivation-afflictions (*修惑*),' up to 'cannot eliminate afflictions' ": The meaning here concerns the path of cultivation (*修道*), not the path of direct seeing (*見道*). The intent of this *Yogācārabhūmi* [passage] is to explain the path of cultivation of the two vehicles, not the path of direct seeing of bodhisattvas. "And because [the text] explains that the three [kinds of direct realization] are born depending on five supporting grounds" — the intent in citing this passage is: having already proved that the path of direct seeing is born depending on five supporting grounds, one thereby knows that the text of the hundredth fascicle [of the *Yogācārabhūmi*] is explaining the supporting grounds of the path of cultivation. For what reason does [that text] take only the three [grounds of the] formless realm [excluding the highest], without mentioning the pinnacle of existence (*有頂*)? Answer: 【Left Page】【Outside frame, upper left】 One hundred and twenty-five 【Outside frame, upper left horizontal】 Dharma Garden Meaning Mirror — Eliminating Obstacles Chapter 【Outside frame, lower left horizontal】 One hundred and twenty-five 【Upper Section】 Although the pinnacle of existence (*有頂*) possesses the uncontaminated [wisdom] of contemplative observation (*遊観無漏*), since its nature is dim and subtle, it does not eliminate the fetters (*結*). Question: The wisdom-truth direct realization (*智諦現観*) also extends to the path of cultivation (*修道*). For what reason does [the text] explain that "the three [kinds] depend only on five supporting grounds"? How can one know that that [wisdom-truth direct realization] extends to the path of cultivation? [Note: In one edition, the seven characters "説等" do not appear after "修道."] [Answer:] Because [the text] explains that "one [type of person] gaining [realization] obtains the nine comprehensive-knowledge fruits (*九遍知果*)" and because [the text] explains that "one gaining [realization] obtains the four fruits (*四果*)." Answer: Examining the text of that treatise [Note: *Yogācārabhūmi* fascicle seventy-one (folio forty-six left)], the wisdom-truth direct realization (*智諦現観*) has broadly two types. First: that which is established depending only on the path of direct seeing (*見道*). Second: that which is established depending on both paths (*見道* and *修道*) in common. Because of the first meaning, [the text] says it depends on five supporting grounds. Because of the second meaning, [the text] also says it depends on all [grounds]. That text also explains it "depends on all supporting grounds." Or regarding "the exhaustion of all outflows (*諸漏*) [i.e., the leakage-extinction direct realization]" — although [this] extends through nine supporting grounds, [the establishment of] direct realization (*現観*) occurs only within five supporting grounds — hence there is no contradiction. The same should be understood to apply likewise to the precept [purity realization] (*戒*), the dharma-boundary [realization] (*辺*), and the wisdom-truth [realization] (*智諦*). Regarding "The text: 'If the bodhisattva eliminates,' up to 'six [grounds of the] formless realm [and their] three' ": "Only the fourth meditation (*第四定*), etc." — While the two vehicles depend on five grounds, bodhisattvas depend only on the fourth [meditation]. The various treatises, extending [their discussion] to include the preparatory meditations, say "bodhisattvas also depend on five grounds." During the preceding preparatory [meditation] time, [the bodhisattva] extends through all the meditations, but only by depending on the fourth [meditation] can [the path] be accomplished and completed. That is to say, at the moment of final entry, [the bodhisattva] depends only on the fourth [meditation]. The reason for this is that [the fourth meditation] is most supremely excellent compared to the other meditations. "If [one] eliminates innately-arisen [afflictions] (*倶生惑*), etc." — within the cognitive obstruction (*所知障*), [Note: "suppression (*伏*)" is likely a superfluous character] the elimination of innately-arisen [afflictions] can extend through nine grounds. The elimination of the two kinds of latent tendencies (*二習気*) is likewise. Question: What is the essential nature (*体*) of latent tendencies (*習気*, *vāsanā*) and gross impediments (*麤重*, *dauṣṭhulya*)? Furthermore, in what way do they differ from non-defiled ignorance (*不染無知*)? Answer: If one follows the Hīnayāna (*小乗*), non-defiled ignorance takes as its essential nature all the defiled and undefiled [Note: in one edition "defiled (染)" appears instead of "undefiled (漏)"] inferior wisdoms that exist throughout the period before buddhahood is attained. Non-defiled ignorance is narrower [in scope] and latent tendencies are broader [in scope]. However, there are two interpretations of "latent tendency" (*習気*) and they are not the same. 【Lower Section】 One [interpretation] says: inferior wisdom (*劣慧*) and the mental factors (*心心所法*) co-arising with [the mind] are altogether named "latent tendencies (*習気*)." Another [interpretation] says: latent tendencies extend not only to mental factors (*心心所法*) but also to the continuum-body (*相続身*). In the present Mahāyāna (*大乗*), latent tendencies have no [independent] essential nature (*体*); non-defiled ignorance does have an essential nature. [Latent tendencies are] precisely included within the cognitive obstruction (*所知障*). The non-defiled nescience (*不染無明*) is called "non-defiled ignorance (*不染無知*)." Therefore, according to the doctrine of Dharmapāla (*護法*) [Note: See *Yogācārabhūmi* fascicle sixty-four (folio fifteen), *Vijñaptimātratā-śāstra* fascicle nine (folio twenty-nine), *Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra* fascicle four (folio sixteen left), Commentary fascicle three, end, (folio six right)] and others, latent tendencies are precisely the nature of incapacity (*無堪任性*), also called "gross impediments (*麤重*, dauṣṭhulya)." However, these gross impediments and the five [kinds of] fulfillment [as defiled things (*五満有漏*)] [Head-note: regarding "five fulfillments (*五満*)," according to the *Tō* (*灯*, Torch Commentary) fascicle five, main text (folio twelve right), [this should be read as] "defiled (*有漏*)"; it may be an error due to similar forms. The *Tō* fascicle seven, main text (folio twenty-seven right) is also the same; these should be compared and verified.] etc. are neither identical nor different [from each other]. This is because they have no separate essential nature. A broad explanation of this meaning is as in the other separate abstracts (*別抄*). Regarding "The text: 'If one eliminates innately-arisen [afflictions],' up to 'fearing it would be tedious, [I] shall not elaborate'": "If one eliminates innately-arisen afflictions (*倶生煩悩障*), [depending] only on the fourth meditation, etc." — this concerns the seeds (*種子*) [in the ālayavijñāna] and does not speak of the gross impediments (*麤重*). [When discussing] gross impediments, since [they] are also eliminated within the ten [bodhisattva] stages, the innately-arisen affliction obstructions (*倶生惑障*) are retained and not eliminated [during the ten stages], for the sake of benefiting sentient beings. [These afflictions are] necessarily [carried] until the vajra-like [meditative absorption] (*金剛喩定*), at which point they are suddenly eliminated all at once. This vajra-mind (*金剛心*) depends on the fourth meditation (*第四禅*). Hence [the text] says "also only the fourth meditation." Question: Within the vajra-mind (*金剛心*), there are precisely two paths [the uninterrupted path (*無間道*) and the path of liberation (*解脱道*)]. In which of these is the essential nature of the ālaya-consciousness (*異熟識体*) relinquished? Answer: The treatise has two explanations [Note: the two explanations appear in the *Vijñaptimātratā-śāstra* fascicle ten (folios eight right and fifteen left); see also the Commentary fascicle three, end (folio eighty), fascicle ten, main text (folio fifty-six right), fascicle ten, end (folio fifty-one right), and the *Abridged Abhidharmasamuccaya* (*略対法論*) fascicle three (folio twelve right)]. One says: cause and effect mutually generate [each other]. With respect to the relationship between [currently] manifest [consciousness] (*現行*) and seeds (*種子*), this too is [a relationship of] before and after. "When [the seed is] gone, [the fruit] has already arisen" — because this is the explanation of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* (*集論*). By virtue of this principle, [even] before the vajra-meditative absorption (*金剛三昧*) has come to the present [moment], the cause that is capable of generating [the ālaya-consciousness] perishes and [then] is capable of generating its fruit. At the time of the vajra path (*金剛道*), although there is no seed-cause (*因種*), the ripened [consciousness] (*異熟識*) is able to arise, because it does not violate principle that the preceding moment generates what comes after. The other [explanation] says: the mutual relationship of manifested [consciousness] and seeds must be in the same instant (*同一刹那*). Because of this, at the time of the vajra[-like meditative absorption's] uninterrupted path (*無間道*), although the two obstructions (*二障*) are absent, there are the seeds of linguistic expression (*名言種子*) and the seeds of karma (*業種子*) — hence the ālaya-consciousness (*異熟識*) arises. According to the first master, [at] the position of the uninterrupted path, wisdom (*智*)...

日本の仏典を翻刻

一　法苑義鏡五巻 - 翻刻

翻刻

現代語訳

英語訳