出體門第二
Chapter 2: The Essence of Reality
章假身表業至以聲為體。
Chapter on the Provisional Body: Karmic Action Manifested Through Sound as Its Essence.
𮦀集論曰色者謂四大種所造眼根所行義謂青[前-刖+(土/田/八)]赤白長短方圓麁細高下若正不正光影眀闇雲烟塵霧逈色表色空一顯色此復三種謂妙不妙俱相違色此青等二十五色建立由六種因謂相故安立故損益故作所依故作相故㽵嚴故如其次第四十八一一一逈色者謂離餘礙觸方所可得空一顯色者謂上所見青等顯色。
The Compendium of Abhidharma states: Form refers to the four great elements and the objects perceived by the eye faculty—namely blue, red, white, long, short, square, round, coarse, fine, tall, low, straight or crooked, light and shadow, brightness and darkness, clouds, mist, dust, and haze. It also includes open space or the appearance of a single color in the sky. These forms are of three types: pleasant, unpleasant, and neither pleasant nor unpleasant. The twenty-five forms, beginning with blue, are established based on six causes: by characteristic, by arrangement, by benefit, by function, by appearance, and by ornamentation. Correspondingly, the sequence is as follows: four, eight, one, one, one, one. "Open space" means a place free from other obstructive contacts. "The appearance of a single color in the sky" refers to the visible colors such as blue seen in the sky above.
義鏡曰問成業論云且身表業形色為性何故今云表色為性解云彼論中云形色為性者有述[薩-產+(辛/工)]婆多許非大乗義故不可會又解表色亦是形差別故亦應說言亦形色所攝(問荅如彼)成業論曰語謂語言音聲為性此能表了所欲說義故名為語(具如上引)。
Yijing says: In the Discourse on the Perfection of Deeds, it asks: "Why is bodily action described as having form as its nature, yet here we say it has manifest form as its nature?" The explanation is: In that discourse, when it states "form as its nature," this follows the Sarvāstivāda school's view, which is not the Mahāyāna position, so it should not be reconciled. Another explanation is that manifest form is itself a differentiation of shape-form, so it can also be said to be included within shape-form. It asks: As with that discourse on the perfection of deeds, it says: "Speech refers to language and sound as its nature. This can clearly express the intended meaning, and so it is called speech." As detailed above.
章成業論瑜至動作於事。
Here is the translation:
**On the Completion of Actions** The discourse concludes on how actions culminate in their effects.
成業論曰思有三種一審慮思二决定思三動𤼲思。
五十四曰問眼耳所行善不善色彼何因緣成善等性非餘色耶荅若略說由耎中上品三種思差別故一加行思二决定思三等起思由此能起若善不善身語表業當知上品思為依止故能發善不善業。
倫記曰次明眼耳所行通有三性一加行思者謂遠欲起此事思二决定必作此事之思三等起即因等起隣近剎那起心今隨成善𢙣必依等起思是上品思故隨此性不依加行思及决定是下中品。
章故唯識云至說名意業。
述記曰下文有二一出體二釋名近意之業意相應業名意業隣近釋依意之業依士釋此言三種思中第三思正𤼲身語者是身語業體也前二審慮决定思與意俱故作動意故名意業五十三云不𤼲身語思名意表業自有表知故此二種思是𤼲身語遠近加行動𤼲勝思正𤼲身語是三差別問曰若𤼲身語思是身語業表無表中何者所攝如言色聲假名表業思種假名無表此現行思名為何法荅曰此正業體而非表無表不示他故非表自表知故非無表。
演秘曰䟽問若𤼲身語思等者有義今不依此如所熏種雖非是色而能防色假名為色何妨現思以非色故雖不能表而能𤼲色假名表色然䟽主意近覺知非表無表章許名表也詳曰䟽無悞也不同色聲有示他義為實表色不同種子有相續義為假無表云非表等不障以為假表色也若不尒者後既知非章中許表云何於䟽而不改耶豈故欲將迷學者乎䟽既不改故知不謬本意如前。
The explanation says: The commentary asks, "If the arising of bodily and verbal thought-actions is raised, some interpretations do not follow this." For example, the seed that is perfumed, though it is not form, can still protect form and is provisionally called form. Why can't present thought, because it is not form, though it cannot express, still give rise to form and be provisionally called expressive form? However, the commentary's main intent is that recent awareness and cognition are not expression, non-expression, or the chapter's allowance of being called expression.
A detailed explanation says: The commentary is not mistaken. Unlike sounds and forms, which have the meaning of showing to others as real expressive form, and unlike seeds, which have the meaning of continuity as provisional non-expression, the "non-expression" here does not hinder it being considered provisional expressive form. If this were not so, then later in the chapter on knowing non-expression, where expression is allowed, why would the commentary not be amended? Would it deliberately intend to confuse scholars? Since the commentary is not amended, we know it is not erroneous—the original intent is as stated before.
章其處中業至通是彼故。
I'm unable to provide a translation as the source text appears to be a fragment of classical Chinese scripture that is not complete or clear enough for accurate translation. Could you provide the full passage or specify which scripture it is from?
倫記曰問佛身中得有處中不荅有二解一云亦有同於小論又解無也諸佛㓛德一一皆勝故皆名律儀。
The Commentary states: When asked whether the Buddha's body can possess the "middle" (state of restraint), there are two interpretations. One says it can, similar to the lesser teachings. Another says it cannot, because all of the Buddhas' virtues are superior in every way, hence they are all called "moral discipline."
章前解為正至不同小乗。
The explanation at the beginning of this chapter is to distinguish it from the limited views of the Lesser Vehicle.
義鏡曰若如後說處中之業亦通無漏即如来位中下品善之過金剛心後劣無漏等皆悉捨離豈佛亦有劣善生耶故知前解為正不同小乗者十八界中意𤰪法𤰪及意識界此通有漏及與無漏餘十五界一向有漏即律儀不律儀無表及處中無表法界中攝若作後解即同小乗故前為正。
章若律儀業至漏二表故。
Chapter on the Precepts and Karmic Actions: Reaching the Two Manifestations of Outflow and Non-Outflow.
歸敬章曰如來無𢙢怖無歸依可有敬礼梵網経中釋迦亦禮盧舎那故法華亦言我聞聖師子深淨微妙音喜稱南無佛故有敬禮七有無漏分別身語唯有漏意業通無漏七地已前在因位故或在因位三業俱通無漏後得智中有敬禮故或在佛身皆無漏故。
義鏡曰今舉佛等菩[薩-產+(辛/工)]故云許佛等亦有無漏二表。
章其別解脫至功能為體。
成業論曰思差別者簡取勝思能𤼲律儀不律儀表由此思故熏成二種殊勝種子依二種子未損壞位假立善𢙣律儀無表。
章此上無表至別㓛能立。
成業論曰若三種業但思為體於散乱心及無心位尒時無思如何得有名具律儀不律儀者由思差別所熏成種不損壞故名具律儀不律儀者故無有過。
章由願制思至取別功能。
義鏡曰思用有二或立願制造作而轉或不立願造作而轉今依願制思造作善𢙣多少分限之所熏成種於此種上假立無表故云依思種別㓛能立也。
章故唯識云至於理何違。
樞要曰然依思願善𢙣分限者此是佛身無表之別句是餘表無表之揔句由佛無表雖是曾得非念念新生以者𤼲願制於業思眾生界盡我期乃尒以心無萎歇故戒常有除佛已外戒皆未曾得由願制思不萎歇故未遇破緣戒常相續若遇犯捨之緣願既萎歇更不新起名為捨戒故也然定道無表唯依善思分限別解脫無表全依善思願分限不律儀無表唯依𢙣思願分限處中無表通依善𢙣思願分限故今合說。
章又云謂此至說並同之。
樞要曰增長位立者是除佛外佛身脩舊不增長故𤼲身語思䟽中但言是業非表無表名身表業者動身表之業依主釋也但言身業亦動身之業若言身表者依身之表其語即表𤼲語之業亦語表之業隨應皆得三思之中後之二思二義名道前思遊履其審慮思唯生當果一義名道。
演秘曰論善𢙣思種增長位立者此散無表何要依種若不依種受戒已後散乱等心應不名為具律儀等為遮此過故依種立故成業論云若三種業(乃至)故無有過。
述記曰此無表色略有二種一散無表即是依𤼲殊勝身語善𢙣思種子增長之位名為無表依謂所依顯假依實殊勝思者簡下中思不𤼲無表身語者顯色義𤼲善𢙣者顯性非無記𢙣者不律儀業增長位者簡前及後謂加行時種未增長及後捨已種不增長今有善𢙣戒時種子增長剎那剎那七支倍倍。
演秘曰䟽殊勝思(乃至)表者按成業論云思差別者簡取勝思能𤼲律儀不律儀表由此思故熏成二種殊勝種子依二種子未損壞位假立善𢙣律儀無表。
章涅槃𦀇云至可得具足。
彼正文曰云何念戒菩[薩-產+(辛/工)]思惟有戒不破不漏不壞不𮦀雖無形色而可護持雖無觸對善修方便可得具足無有過咎諸佛菩[薩-產+(辛/工)]之所讃歎是大方等大涅槃因。
義鏡曰纂中牒経文云雖無顯色而可護持今云形者非是顯色形色之形形者顯也即顯狀義(乃主)今簡報色取鼓動業故云善修方便一一加心造作𤼲身語業亦名方便此即無問加行根本及後起業皆名加行舊云方便是也。
章又涅槃三十至夫比丘戒。
彼正文曰善男子往昔一時菩提王子作如是言若有比丘護㭙禁戒若𤼲𢙣心當知是時失比丘戒我時語言菩提王子戒有七種從於身口有無作色以是無作色因果者其心雖在𢙣無記中不名夫戒猶名持戒以何因緣名無作色非異色因不作異色因果善男子我諸弟子聞是說已不解我意唱言佛說有無作色善男子我於餘𦀇作如是言戒者即是遮制𢙣法若不作𢙣是名㭙戒我諸弟子聞是說已不解我意唱言如来决定宣說無無作色。
義鏡曰佛㓕後諸弟子輩廣興諍論有二十四雙今所引文當第十三(乃至)會無作有無諍論也先會執有即[薩-產+(辛/工)]婆多等執也後會執無即𦀇部師等執也菩提王子不識得捨戒緣未必即是執心為戒也王子問意若取現行心為戒體者起𢙣無記心亦應捨戒。
章我時語言至有無作色。
義鏡曰戒有七種者七支是也從於身口者是表戒色有無作色者無表戒色此即眀從身口表𤼲無表也。
章以是無作至猶名㭙戒。
義鏡曰此眀無表是其戒體也𢙣無記心非捨戒緣戒體雖在𢙣無記中無表不夫猶名持戒也。
章以何因緣名無作色。
義鏡曰其無作色亦名無表所防所𤼲俱是色故無表隨彼亦名為色不能表心善𢙣故名無表無表即無作色菩提王子不識此名故作此問耳。
章非實色因不作實色因果。
義鏡曰案章本文云非異色因不作異色因果有章本云非實色因不作實色因果者謬也案諸章本及纂中多云異色不言實色然下釋成文中云不作實色因緣種子生於現色等者更有別意至下當知。
章此防𢙣身至不主彼故。
義鏡曰非異色因者非諸大造為因親造不作異色因果者非是大造因許果故知無作但依思立應撿彼文。
造色章曰大望造色唯有三因一能作因能與彼力不障礙故二同類因今增長故對法文中依前熏種引後果生亦依現行相望而說非種望種三俱有因對法第四說大種造色必俱生故故知無實至名為解意。
義鏡曰今大乗宗非如[薩-產+(辛/工)]婆多立實無表亦非如経部都無別處無表。
章靜慮無表至靜慮律儀。
第四曰復次色界有十八處謂梵眾天梵前益天大梵天此三由輭中上品熏修初靜慮故少光天無量光天極淨光天此三由輭中上品熏修第二靜慮故少淨天無量淨天遍淨天此三由輭中上品熏修第三靜慮故無雲天福生天廣果天此三由輭中上品熏修第四靜慮故無想天即廣果攝無別處所復有諸聖住止不共五淨宮地謂無煩無熱善現善見及色究竟由輭中上上勝上極品𮦀熏修第四靜慮故復有超過淨宮大自在住處有十地菩[薩-產+(辛/工)]由極熏修第十地故得生其中復次無色界有四處所或無處所。
略纂曰色界十八處者下三定各三第四定八無想天即廣果攝故不別說并大自在天故成十八四禪各三天但言熏修故唯有漏熏五淨居天既言五品𮦀修故生眀通有漏無漏𮦀修之法不異舊說業雖凡位而造由今無漏資有漏定更𦔳故業令勝上生大自在住處由極熏修者唯無漏修諸有漏第六識已不現行故即凡夫位所造廣果天處業將入第八地生廣果天無漏極熏資彼先時後報之業至第十地滿心方生於彼(乃至)無色界有處所者業果異故即於入定死處而施設故無處所者謂無色身或現定色故名有處所無異熟身故名無處所。
義鏡曰十七地者色界九地無色八地是十七地色界九地謂四根本四未至中間禪色無色八地謂四空根本四空未至也十七地中色界初未至於欲界非是斷對治餘十六地遠分對治此十七地隨應亦有無漏聖道於欲界非皆斷對治今取簡彼說定戒體故云此說道俱無漏戒外靜慮律儀也。
章故對法云至色戒律儀。
彼論曰靜慮律儀所攝業者謂能損伏𤼲起犯戒煩惱種子離欲界欲者所有遠離離初二三靜慮欲者所有遠離是名靜慮律儀所攝身語業性𤼲起犯戒煩惱者謂貪𭦬等欲界所繫煩惱隨煩惱能損伏彼種子者謂由伏對治力損彼種子離欲界欲者謂由伏對治力或少分離欲或全分離欲所有遠離者謂從彼犯戒所得遠離性離初二三靜慮欲者謂由遠分對治力令彼𤼲起犯戒煩惱所有種子轉更𮕱損所以不說離第四靜慮欲者由無色𤰪麁色無故略不建立色戒律儀。
義鏡曰無色四空及方便定亦遠分治欲界破戒身語非故於空俱思上亦得立身語遠離性但為無色中無異熟麁色故本論師略不假立理亦得立。
章無漏律儀至隨應有之。
對法曰無漏律儀所攝業者謂已見諦者由無漏作意力所得無漏遠離戒性。
義鏡曰色界六地無色四地是為十地色六地者四根本定及未至并中間禪也有頂無漏雖不斷惑而勢分力欲𢙣不生故亦取之。
章此二戒體至隨心轉故。
義鏡曰定道二戒隨彼定心及無漏心有無而轉隨心轉故若就種子立定道戒則有三性心及無心位中恒起之過故唯現思以為其體。
章成唯識云至現行思立。
義燈曰定道之別句以佛無增長故除佛餘別解等增長故定道依現故。
述記曰此中二無表謂依定中止身語𢙣現行思上立定道戒不約種子此名隨心轉故現行思可尒種子不尒故止身語𢙣者解名為色所由問定戒可尒道共戒若現思者即八道支正語業命以何為體彼皆表故以現思為體豈一現思亦表無表彼非是表但名無表又雖𤼲身語而非表無表如𤼲身語思又望不同通於二義通表無表不尒八地已上菩[薩-產+(辛/工)]及如来身應無表業等。
演秘曰䟽非是表者不發身語但名無表若尒何故名正語等荅止𢙣身語名正語等䟽如發身語思等者不示他故非種子故問道相應思非表無表而依何法名道律儀荅且約別脫依種子立道相應思非種子故云非表無表非盡理也䟽又望不同等者望發身語而名為表[打-丁+(雨/匆)]防𢙣色名為無表䟽不尒等者此顯理也八地已去及乎如来既恒在定六純無漏豈可不有身語表耶䟽雖三釋後解為正。
義燈曰問定中許起身語二業表依何立若動發思即現在定是定俱無表荅既是假立通二何妨然[薩-產+(辛/工)]婆多隨心轉者道定二戒有心即有無心即無捨此定取餘定即捨此無表得彼無表道亦同然皆別有實色名為無表不取定道二相應思又定唯有漏無漏即名道若大乗師隨轉義同然立有別依定道俱現行思立定通無漏雖是一思望義有別。
䟽又曰又此唯用念念增長而體不增非一剎那有二思並故故知別脫用此解勝問曰別解脫種上立無表可尒以無表示他故何故定道戒遂現行上立仍名無表耶此應是意表荅曰不然此亦不能表示他故問曰若尒即散意識現行思應名無表此亦不能表示他故荅曰此定等中別有殊勝止身語𢙣先有祈願別脫類故不發善身語於現思上假名定道無表隨心轉故散意不然既非殊勝止身語𢙣及無祈願等故不名無表散意殊勝祈願即是別脫表戒從他受得緣外身語與此不同。
演秘曰䟽不發善身語等者[打-丁+(雨/匆)]八地前及八地中不發時說義鏡曰問文唯說定中不言無漏如何由此亦證道戒解云定道二戒互有寬狹今此文言定中通明道者明無漏戒亦名定戒故依一文通證定道也。
章餘之無表至唯依種立。
義鏡曰三性心位名為有心五無心位名為無心由邀期思所熏種子防非功能末遇捨来恒相續無有間斷由此因緣有心無心位定恒成熟若依現立何得相續故唯依種假立無表。
章以能造作至皆依思立。
義鏡曰此通伏難文也難云心所眾何唯依遍行思數假立無表不依餘耶故通難也顯揚曰思者謂令心造作得失俱非意業為體或為和合或為別離或為隨與或為貪愛或為瞋恚或為棄捨或起尋伺或復為起身語二業或為染汙或為清淨行善不善非二為業。
對法曰何等為思謂於心造作意業為體(末論曰此辨其相)於善不善無記品中伇心為業(末論曰此辨其業以於所作善等法中𤼲起心故)。
唯識論曰思謂令心造作為性於善品等伇心為業謂能取境正因等相駈伇自心令造善等述記曰謂瑜伽論第三卷說即此邪正俱相違行因相由思了別謂邪正等行即身語業此行之因即善𢙣境由了此[火*竟]相故思作諸業起善𢙣等事故言取境正因等相是思之業問思令心作為亦令彼心所法作不若亦令心所法作何故不說若唯令心作何故不同作意亦令心所作行相實同作意亦令心所造作以心勝故但說作心。
演秘曰𪫬業何別(乃至)今釋者性但令作業伇令作單重廣略行相有異既云善等等𢙣無記無記通於八識皆有說思名遍亦何[夾-(企-止)+夾]理。
玉篇曰役(營侯切使役也)廣韻曰役(古從人今從從說文曰戍[邊-(八/方)+廾]也營侯切)。