The Three States of Existence
Fascicle 192 closes the Mindfulness-Foundations Nyāsa (念住納息第一之六) with the final scenes of the Buddha's own parinirvāṇa — Aniruddha's knowledge of the Buddha's hidden mind, Mahākāśyapa's fragrant milk, and Ānanda's vigil — before turning to the four states of existence (proper, death, intermediate, rebirth) and opening the Nyāsa of the Three States of Existence (三有納息): the many sūtra senses of "existence," why the noble path is excluded from that category, and an exhaustive accounting of what is relinquished and what continues at death and rebirth across every realm. This page carries Ru‑Yi's complete translation.
Translation Method
The Chinese source is Xuánzàng's seventh-century translation of the Abhidharma-mahāvibhāṣā-śāstra (阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論), preserved in the Taishō canon (T1545, vol. 27) via the CBETA digital edition — public domain text, translated directly from the Chinese. The English wording throughout is Ru-Yi's own, and the reading notes are original, grounded in standard Sarvāstivāda scholarship rather than a specific named commentator's lecture transcript.
Fascicle 192 closes the narrative of the Buddha's own final nirvāṇa begun in fascicle 191, then shifts into a new stretch of doctrinal analysis inside the Views Aggregate (見蘊第八): the four states of existence, and the opening of the Three States of Existence Nyāsa. Terms established across fascicles 93–191 recur here and are not re-explained at each occurrence.
Classical text is set in the left-hand column below, our English in the right.
1. Ānanda's Question and the Elephant Fording the River
The narrative of the Buddha's parinirvāṇa concludes: Ānanda's question to Aniruddha about whether the Buddha has already died or is merely in the attainment of cessation, and how Aniruddha could know the content of a mind he could not directly perceive — resolved through the image of an elephant-king fording a deep river, known not by direct sight but by the tracks left at the water's edge.
爾時世尊說此語已便入初靜慮。次第乃至入滅盡定。時尊者阿難則問尊者阿泥律陀言。世尊今者已般涅槃耶。答言未也。但是入滅盡定耳。復問云何知耶。答言我親從佛聞。世尊入第四靜慮依不動寂靜定而般涅槃世間眼滅。問尊者阿難為知故問為不知耶。若知者何故復問。若不知者云何名知佛心耶。有說。彼尊者知之。問若爾者何故復問。答亦有知而故問為發起言論故。如說世尊知而故問。復次尊者阿難欲顯尊者阿泥律陀有勝德故雖知而問。謂彼尊者雖有勝德而眾不知。欲令其知是以故問。有說。彼尊者不知。問若爾者云何名知佛心耶。答佛出定已阿難知其前心而彼時不知者以佛猶在定故。復次彼尊者若住常性心時能知佛心。爾時彼心由二憂惱所覆沒故不知佛心。一者失眷屬憂惱。二者失大師憂惱。問尊者阿泥律陀云何知耶。有說。世尊臨涅槃時入共聲聞等至故彼得知。評曰。不應作是說。以佛爾時現入不共一切聲聞獨覺靜慮解脫等持等至故。問若然者彼云何知。答世尊爾時起共聲聞獨覺入出定心。彼由此知是彼境故。猶如象王渡深河時。若正在河中則人無知者。但觀入出水跡則知象王所入出處。如是世尊若住甚深等至河時。一切聲聞獨覺不能現見。但觀如入出水跡入出定心便知。入如是定從如是定出。
At that time, the World-Honored One, having spoken these words, thereupon entered the first dhyāna, and, in succession, up to entering the attainment of cessation. The Venerable Ānanda then asked the Venerable Aniruddha, saying: has the World-Honored One now already entered final nirvāṇa? He answered: not yet — this is merely the attainment of cessation. Ānanda further asked: how do you know this? He answered: I have heard it directly from the Buddha himself that the World-Honored One will enter the fourth dhyāna and, in reliance upon the unshakeable, tranquil concentration, enter final nirvāṇa, and the eye of the world will be extinguished. Question: did the Venerable Ānanda ask this question knowing the answer already, or not knowing it? If he knew it, why did he ask again? If he did not know it, how could he be said to know the Buddha's own mind? Some say: that venerable one did indeed know it. Question: if so, then why did he ask again? Answer: there is also such a thing as asking deliberately although one already knows, in order to give rise to discussion — just as it is said that the World-Honored One, too, sometimes asked deliberately although he already knew. Furthermore, the Venerable Ānanda wished to display that the Venerable Aniruddha possessed a superior merit, and, though he himself knew, he asked nonetheless — that is, although that venerable one possessed a superior merit, the assembly did not know of it, and, wishing to make it known to them, he therefore asked deliberately. Some say: that venerable one did not, in fact, know it. Question: if so, then how could he be said to know the Buddha's own mind? Answer: once the Buddha had risen from concentration, Ānanda came to know his preceding mind; the reason he did not know it at that earlier moment was that the Buddha was still in concentration. Furthermore, that venerable one, when abiding in his ordinary, constant state of mind, would indeed have been able to know the Buddha's own mind; but, at that particular time, his own mind was overwhelmed and submerged by two griefs — first, the grief of losing his own kinsman, and second, the grief of losing his great Teacher — and it was for this reason that he did not know the Buddha's own mind. Question: how, then, did the Venerable Aniruddha come to know it? Some say: at the moment of his final nirvāṇa, the World-Honored One entered an attainment shared in common with the śrāvakas, and it was by this that Aniruddha was able to know it. Assessment: this ought not to be said, since, at that time, the Buddha manifestly entered dhyānas, liberations, concentrations, and attainments not shared in common with any śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha at all. Question: if this is so, then how did he come to know it? Answer: at that time, the World-Honored One gave rise to a mind of entering and rising from concentration that is shared in common with śrāvakas and pratyekabuddhas, and it was by means of this shared object that Aniruddha came to know it — just as, when the elephant-king fords a deep river, no one is able to perceive him while he is directly in the midst of the river, yet, by observing the tracks where he entered and emerged from the water, one is able to know the very places where the elephant-king entered and emerged. It is the same here: while the World-Honored One abides within the river of profound attainment, no śrāvaka or pratyekabuddha at all is able directly to perceive him, yet, by observing, as it were, the tracks of his entering and emerging from the water — that is, his mind of entering and rising from concentration — one comes to know that he has entered such-and-such a concentration and risen from such-and-such a concentration.
The elephant-fording-the-river simile resolves a genuinely delicate narrative problem — how could Aniruddha know the content of a mind he could not directly perceive? — by locating knowledge not in direct sight of the deep water itself but in the visible tracks at its edges, a model of inference from effect to cause that the text treats as no less certain than direct perception.
2. The Fragrant Milk and the Two Unburned Garments
Mahākāśyapa extinguishes the fire consuming the Buddha's own body with four streams of fragrant milk descending from the sky, explained through a careful physical account of which substances can and cannot extinguish flame; Ānanda's seven-day vigil closes with a verse on the two garments that alone survived the pyre, given four distinct symbolic readings.
如說爾時尊者大迦葉波作是念。我當以何滅焚如來身火。尋作是念。我今應以香乳滅之。則起心時便有四道香乳從空而下由此令焚如來身火一時而滅。問何故必以香乳滅焚如來身火耶。答欲顯與諸仙人相似法故。謂彼國俗若仙人命終則以乳滅焚身之火。若受欲者命終則以酒滅焚身之火。佛於諸仙中勝則是第一仙人。故今亦以香乳滅火。復次欲令佛設利羅極清淨故以乳灌之。復次佛生身是乳所長養故。今設利羅亦以乳浴之。復次乳性肥而能滅火。或有物雖性肥而不能滅火。乃令其熾如酥油等。有物雖能滅火而性不肥如水酒等。唯乳性肥又能滅火故唯以乳。由此義故尊者大迦葉波。現四道香乳用滅如來焚身之火。
As it is said, at that time the Venerable Mahākāśyapa reflected as follows: with what should I extinguish the fire consuming the Tathāgata's own body? He then reflected further: I ought now to extinguish it with fragrant milk. The very moment this thought arose, four streams of fragrant milk descended from the sky, and, by this, the fire consuming the Tathāgata's own body was extinguished all at once. Question: why was it necessary to extinguish the fire consuming the Tathāgata's own body specifically with fragrant milk? Answer: it is in order to display a practice resembling that of the various seers — that is, the custom of that land was that, when a seer died, milk was used to extinguish the fire consuming his body, whereas, when one given over to sensual desire died, wine was used to extinguish the fire consuming his body. The Buddha, being supreme among every seer, is himself the very foremost of seers, and it was for this reason that fragrant milk, too, was now used to extinguish the fire. Furthermore, it was in order that the Buddha's own relics should be utterly pure that they were bathed in milk. Furthermore, the Buddha's own born body was itself nourished and sustained by milk, and it was for this reason that his relics, too, were now bathed in milk. Furthermore, milk is, by its own nature, rich, and is able to extinguish fire; there exist substances that, though rich by nature, are unable to extinguish fire, and even cause it to blaze more fiercely instead — such as ghee and oil; and there exist substances that, though able to extinguish fire, are not rich by nature — such as water and wine. Milk alone is both rich by nature and able to extinguish fire, and it was for this reason that milk alone was used. It was on account of this meaning that the Venerable Mahākāśyapa manifested four streams of fragrant milk in order to extinguish the fire consuming the Tathāgata's own body.
如說爾時尊者阿難佛涅槃已經七晝夜右遶焚如來火聚。說伽他言。
As it is said, at that time the Venerable Ānanda, seven days and nights after the Buddha's final nirvāṇa, circumambulated the blazing pyre of the Tathāgata's own remains, keeping it to his right, and spoke a verse, saying:
千衣纏佛葬 唯二衣不燒謂外及襯身 此為奇特事問何故世尊唯二衣不燒耶。答有信敬佛諸天神等威力所持令不燒故。有說。是佛願力所持令內外淨故。謂一衣在內持如來馱都令不散染。
"a thousand garments wrapped the Buddha's own burial, yet only two garments were not burned — the outer one, and the one worn against the body — this indeed is a marvel." Question: why were only two of the World-Honored One's garments not burned? Answer: it was by the majestic power of the gods and spirits, out of faith and reverence for the Buddha, that they were sustained and kept from burning. Some say: it was by the power of the Buddha's own vow, sustaining them so that both the inner and outer should remain pure — that is, the one garment on the inside held the Tathāgata's own relics together, preventing them from scattering and becoming defiled,
一衣在外持所有灰令不飄坌。有說。此表如來正法有內外二種護故。內護者謂清淨苾芻苾芻尼等。外護者謂淨信國王大臣等。此則正法威力令其不燒。有說。此表如來內心外身俱清淨故。心清淨者謂已永離一切煩惱并習氣故。身清淨者謂從最勝相異熟業所引生故。
while the one garment on the outside held all the ashes together, preventing them from being scattered and blown about. Some say: this signifies that the Tathāgata's own true Dharma possesses two kinds of protection, internal and external — the internal protection being the pure monks and nuns, and the external protection being kings, ministers, and others of pure faith — and it was the majestic power of the true Dharma itself that kept these garments from burning. Some say: this signifies that the Tathāgata was pure both in mind within and in body without — pure in mind, since he had already permanently severed every affliction together with its residual habitual traces; and pure in body, since it was drawn forth and generated by the supremely excellent, marked karma of retribution.
Assigning Mahākāśyapa's four streams of milk to a rule about what can and cannot extinguish fire — some rich substances feed flame, some fire-quenching substances aren't rich, milk alone is both — turns a miraculous gesture into a claim answerable to ordinary physical reasoning, characteristic of how this treatise handles even its most legendary material.
3. The Four States of Existence
The treatise turns to a systematic account of the proper, death, intermediate, and rebirth states of existence — each defined, named, and cross-classified by duration, defilement, contamination, and the same-class or different-class character of its mind — before an intricate combinatorial analysis of how these states relate to the "five formations," the older term for the five aggregates that an earlier Buddha used before Śākyamuni renamed them.
如說四有。謂本有中有生有死有。有聲目多義如前廣說。此中有聲說屬眾同分有情數五蘊名有。云何本有。答除生分死分諸蘊中間諸有。此則一期五蘊四蘊為性。問何故此有說名本有。答此是前時所造業生故名本有。問若爾餘有亦是本有皆前時所造業所生故。答若是前時所造業生麁顯易覺明了現見者說名本有。餘雖前時所造業生而微隱難覺非明了現見是以不說。云何死有。答死分諸蘊則命終時五蘊四蘊為性。云何中有。答除死分生分諸蘊中間諸有則二有中間五蘊為性。問何故此有說名中有。答此於二有中間生故。名中有。
As it is said, there are four states of existence — namely, the proper state, the intermediate state, the rebirth-state, and the death-state. The term "existence" carries many meanings, as already explained at length above; here, the term "existence" refers to the five aggregates belonging to a sentient being, subsumed under a single class of common existence, and is so named. What is the proper state? Answer: it refers to every state of existence lying between the portion of rebirth and the portion of death, having as its own nature the five aggregates, or the four aggregates, throughout that entire span of life. Question: why is this state named the "proper" state? Answer: because it is generated by karma performed at an earlier time, it is named the proper state. Question: if so, then every other state, too, is likewise generated by karma performed at an earlier time — why is only this one so named? Answer: what is generated by karma performed at an earlier time, yet is coarse, manifest, easily perceived, and clearly and directly seen, is named the proper state; the others, although likewise generated by karma performed at an earlier time, are subtle, hidden, difficult to perceive, and not clearly and directly seen, and it is for this reason that they are not so named. What is the death-state? Answer: it refers to the aggregates belonging to the portion of death — that is, the five aggregates, or the four aggregates, at the very moment of dying. What is the intermediate state? Answer: it refers to every state of existence lying between the aggregates of the portion of death and the portion of rebirth — that is, the five aggregates lying between these two states of existence. Question: why is this state named the "intermediate" state? Answer: because it arises between these two states of existence, it is named the intermediate state.
問若爾餘有亦是中有皆於二有中間生故。答若於二有中間生非趣所攝者名中有。餘雖二有中間生而是趣攝不名中有。云何生有。答生分諸蘊則結生時五蘊四蘊為性。問此四有幾剎那幾相續。答二剎那謂死有生有二相續謂餘有。問此四有幾染污幾不染污。答皆通二種。問此四有心幾染污幾不染污。答生有心唯染污。餘心染污不染污。問此四有幾有漏幾無漏。答皆唯有漏。問此四有時心幾有漏幾無漏。答二唯有漏謂死有生有時心。二通有漏無漏謂餘有時心。問此四有時幾起同分心幾起不同分心。答二唯起同分心謂死有生有時。二起同分不同分心謂餘有時。
Question: if so, then every other state, too, arises between these same two states of existence — why is only this one named the intermediate state? Answer: what arises between these two states of existence, yet is not subsumed under any destiny, is named the intermediate state; the others, although they, too, arise between these two states of existence, are subsumed under a destiny, and are hence not named the intermediate state. What is the rebirth-state? Answer: it refers to the aggregates belonging to the portion of rebirth — that is, the five aggregates, or the four aggregates, at the very moment of forming the connective link of a new existence. Question: of these four states of existence, how many last a single moment, and how many last a continuous succession? Answer: two last a single moment — namely, the death-state and the rebirth-state; and two last a continuous succession — namely, the remaining two states. Question: of these four states of existence, how many are defiled, and how many are undefiled? Answer: all of them extend to both kinds. Question: of the minds belonging to these four states of existence, how many are defiled, and how many are undefiled? Answer: the mind of the rebirth-state is exclusively defiled; the minds of the others may be either defiled or undefiled. Question: of these four states of existence, how many are contaminated, and how many are uncontaminated? Answer: all of them are exclusively contaminated. Question: of the minds belonging to these four states of existence, how many are contaminated, and how many are uncontaminated? Answer: two are exclusively contaminated — namely, the minds of the death-state and the rebirth-state; and two extend to both the contaminated and the uncontaminated — namely, the minds of the remaining two states. Question: at these four states of existence, how many give rise to a same-class mind, and how many to a different-class mind? Answer: two give rise exclusively to a same-class mind — namely, at the death-state and the rebirth-state; and two give rise to either a same-class or a different-class mind — namely, at the remaining two states.
諸欲有彼一切有五行耶乃至廣說。此中諸蘊以行聲說。過去如來應正等覺說蘊為行。今釋迦牟尼如來應正等覺說行為蘊。以先佛說五行今佛說五取蘊故。此阿毘達磨中說五行者。欲顯今佛所說五蘊則是先佛所說五行故。問何故先佛說蘊為行今佛說行為蘊耶。答佛觀所化有情隨所應而說故。謂先佛所化應聞說行而得正解。今佛所化應聞說蘊而得正解。問何故名行。答流轉故名行謂前生諸蘊由後生諸蘊故流轉。或後生諸蘊由前生諸蘊故流轉。若生欲界以欲界心為同分心與彼命根眾同分為同分故。以色無色界及無漏心為不同分心。不與彼命根眾同分為同分故。若生色界以色界心為同分心。以欲無色界及無漏心為不同分心。若生無色界以無色界心為同分心。
Does every instance of desire-existence thereby possess the five formations? — and so on at length. Here, the aggregates are spoken of under the term "formations." A past Tathāgata, Arhat, Fully and Perfectly Awakened One spoke of the aggregates as "formations"; the present Śākyamuni Tathāgata, Arhat, Fully and Perfectly Awakened One speaks of "formations" as the aggregates — that is, an earlier Buddha spoke of the "five formations," whereas the present Buddha speaks of the "five aggregates of grasping." That this Abhidharma text speaks of the "five formations" is in order to display that the five aggregates spoken of by the present Buddha are precisely the five formations spoken of by an earlier Buddha. Question: why did an earlier Buddha speak of the aggregates as "formations," while the present Buddha speaks of "formations" as the aggregates? Answer: the Buddha teaches according to whatever accords with the sentient beings he is converting — that is, those converted by an earlier Buddha attained correct understanding upon hearing them spoken of as "formations," whereas those converted by the present Buddha attain correct understanding upon hearing them spoken of as "aggregates." Question: why are they named "formations"? Answer: because they flow and transmigrate, they are named formations — that is, the aggregates of an earlier life flow and transmigrate by means of the aggregates of a later life, or the aggregates of a later life flow and transmigrate by means of the aggregates of an earlier life. If one is born in the desire realm, a mind of the desire realm is a same-class mind, since it belongs to the same class as the life-faculty and the class of common existence of that being, while a mind of the form or formless realm, or an uncontaminated mind, is a different-class mind, since it does not belong to the same class as the life-faculty and the class of common existence of that being. If one is born in the form realm, a mind of the form realm is a same-class mind, while a mind of the desire or formless realm, or an uncontaminated mind, is a different-class mind. If one is born in the formless realm, a mind of the formless realm is a same-class mind,
以無漏心為不同分心。
while an uncontaminated mind is a different-class mind.
諸欲有彼一切五行耶。設五行彼一切欲有耶。答應作四句。有欲有非五行。謂欲界有情住不同分心及住無想滅盡定。彼時欲有唯二行故。有五行非欲有。謂色界有想天住同分心。若無想天不得無想。
Does every instance of desire-existence thereby possess the five formations? And does every instance of the five formations thereby belong to desire-existence? Answer: a full tetralemma must be formed. There is a case of desire-existence without the five formations — that is, a being of the desire realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation, at which time his desire-existence possesses only two formations. There is a case of the five formations without desire-existence — that is, a perceiving god of the form realm abiding in a same-class mind, or a non-perceiving god not yet having attained the state of no-perception,
爾時皆具五行彼無想天有心位。必不起不同分心故而彼行非欲有。
at which time both alike are complete with the five formations — since a non-perceiving god, at the stage possessing mind, never gives rise to a different-class mind — yet these formations do not belong to desire-existence.
有欲有亦五行。謂欲界有情住同分心。彼時欲有具五行故。有非欲有亦非五行。謂色界有想天住不同分心及住無想滅盡定。若無想天得無想若生無色界。爾時但有二行或四行或一行。彼行又非欲有故。諸色有有想天彼一切五行耶。設五行彼一切色有有想天耶。答應作四句。有色有有想天非五行。謂色界有想天住不同分心。及住無想滅盡定。爾時色有有想天皆唯二行故。有五行非色有有想天。
There is a case of both desire-existence and the five formations — that is, a being of the desire realm abiding in a same-class mind, at which time his desire-existence is complete with the five formations. There is a case of neither desire-existence nor the five formations — that is, a perceiving god of the form realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation; or a non-perceiving god who has attained the state of no-perception; or one born in the formless realm — at which time there are only two formations, or four formations, or a single formation, and these formations, moreover, do not belong to desire-existence. Does every perceiving god of form-existence thereby possess the five formations? And does every instance of the five formations thereby belong to a perceiving god of form-existence? Answer: a full tetralemma must be formed. There is a case of a perceiving god of form-existence without the five formations — that is, a perceiving god of the form realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation, at which time the perceiving god of form-existence possesses only two formations. There is a case of the five formations without being a perceiving god of form-existence —
謂欲界有情住同分心。若無想天不得無想。爾時雖皆五行。而彼行非色有有想天故。有色有有想天亦五行。謂色界有想天住同分心。
that is, a being of the desire realm abiding in a same-class mind, or a non-perceiving god not yet having attained the state of no-perception — at which time both alike are complete with the five formations, yet these formations do not belong to a perceiving god of form-existence. There is a case of both being a perceiving god of form-existence and possessing the five formations — that is, a perceiving god of the form realm abiding in a same-class mind,
爾時色有有想天具五行故。有非色有有想天亦非五行。謂欲界有情住不同分心。及住無想滅盡定。若無想天得無想若生無色界。爾時但有二行或四行或一行。彼行又非色有有想天故。諸色有無想天彼一切二行耶。設二行彼一切色有無想天耶。答應作四句。有色有無想天非二行。謂無想天不得無想。爾時彼色有無想天具五行故所以如前。有二行非色有無想天。謂欲界有情住不同分心。及住無想滅盡定。若色界有想天住不同分心。及住無想滅盡定。爾時雖皆二行而彼行非色有無想天故。有色有無想天亦二行。謂無想天得無想。
at which time the perceiving god of form-existence is complete with the five formations. There is a case of neither being a perceiving god of form-existence nor possessing the five formations — that is, a being of the desire realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation; or a non-perceiving god who has attained the state of no-perception; or one born in the formless realm — at which time there are only two formations, or four formations, or a single formation, and these formations, moreover, do not belong to a perceiving god of form-existence. Does every non-perceiving god of form-existence thereby possess two formations? And does every instance of two formations thereby belong to a non-perceiving god of form-existence? Answer: a full tetralemma must be formed. There is a case of a non-perceiving god of form-existence without two formations — that is, a non-perceiving god not yet having attained the state of no-perception, at which time that non-perceiving god of form-existence is complete with the five formations, for the reason already given above. There is a case of two formations without being a non-perceiving god of form-existence — that is, a being of the desire realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation; or a perceiving god of the form realm abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation — at which time, although both alike possess two formations, these formations do not belong to a non-perceiving god of form-existence. There is a case of both being a non-perceiving god of form-existence and possessing two formations — that is, a non-perceiving god who has attained the state of no-perception,
爾時彼色有無想天唯二行故。有非色有無想天亦非二行。謂欲界有情及色界有想天住同分心若生無色界。爾時乃有五行或四行或一行。彼行又非色有無想天故。諸無色有彼一切四行耶。設四行彼一切無色有耶。答諸四行彼一切無色有。非欲色界有情有四行故。有無色有非四行。謂無色界有情住不同分心。爾時彼無色有唯一行故。頗有有五行耶。乃至廣說。問何故復作此論。答前文雖成立有二行有而未遮止有三行有。亦未成立有一行有今為遮止有三行有。
at which time that non-perceiving god of form-existence possesses only two formations. There is a case of neither being a non-perceiving god of form-existence nor possessing two formations — that is, a being of the desire realm, or a perceiving god of the form realm, abiding in a same-class mind, or one born in the formless realm — at which time there are five formations, or four formations, or a single formation, and these formations, moreover, do not belong to a non-perceiving god of form-existence. Does every instance of formless-existence thereby possess four formations? And does every instance of four formations thereby belong to formless-existence? Answer: every instance of four formations does indeed belong to formless-existence, since no being of the desire or form realm ever possesses four formations. There is a case of formless-existence without four formations — that is, a being of the formless realm abiding in a different-class mind, at which time that instance of formless-existence possesses only a single formation. Is there any case of possessing five formations? — and so on at length. Question: why is this further treatise composed? Answer: the preceding passage, although it established that there is a case of possessing two formations, had not yet ruled out the possibility of a case of possessing three formations, nor yet established that there is a case of possessing only a single formation — it is now, in order to rule out the possibility of a case of possessing three formations,
及欲成立有一行有故作斯論。頗有有五行耶。答有。謂欲界有情及色界有想天住同分心。若無想天不得無想彼必有自地現在五行故。
and in order to establish that there is a case of possessing only a single formation, that this treatise is composed. Is there any case of possessing five formations? Answer: there is — namely, a being of the desire realm, or a perceiving god of the form realm, abiding in a same-class mind, or a non-perceiving god not yet having attained the state of no-perception, since he necessarily possesses, at present, all five formations belonging to his own ground.
頗有有四行耶。答有。謂無色界有情住同分心。頗有有三行耶。答無。以無有情三蘊成故。所以者何。心心所法定不相離受想思等恒相應故。頗有有二行耶。答有。謂欲界有情及色界有想天住不同分心。若住無想滅盡定。若無想天得無想彼但有二行故。頗有有一行耶。答有。謂無色界有情住不同分心彼但有一行故。頗有有無行耶。答無。以無有情非蘊成故。一切有情必有自地命根等故。
Is there any case of possessing four formations? Answer: there is — namely, a being of the formless realm abiding in a same-class mind. Is there any case of possessing three formations? Answer: there is not, since there is no being at all constituted by only three aggregates — why is this? Because mind and mental factors are necessarily inseparable, and feeling, perception, volition, and the rest are invariably conjoined together. Is there any case of possessing two formations? Answer: there is — namely, a being of the desire realm, or a perceiving god of the form realm, abiding in a different-class mind, or abiding in the attainment of no-perception or of cessation, or a non-perceiving god who has attained the state of no-perception, since he possesses only two formations in that case. Is there any case of possessing a single formation? Answer: there is — namely, a being of the formless realm abiding in a different-class mind, since he possesses only a single formation in that case. Is there any case of possessing no formation at all? Answer: there is not, since there is no being at all not constituted by the aggregates — every sentient being necessarily possesses the life-faculty and the rest belonging to his own ground.
4. The Nyāsa of the Three States of Existence Opens
A new section of the Views Aggregate begins: the Nyāsa of the Three States of Existence, gathering together the many sūtra senses of the term "existence" — from the retinue of the rebirth-linking mind, to the volitional intention that draws forth future existence, to the seven existences of hell, animal, ghost, human, heaven, karma, and the intermediate state — and settling, after careful reconciliation, on contaminated dharmas themselves as what the term most properly names.
見蘊第八中三有納息第二之一諸捨欲有欲有相續。彼一切欲界法滅。欲界法現在前耶。如是等章及解章義既領會已。應廣分別然有聲目多義。此中說屬眾同分有情數五蘊名有。如說欲界死生欲界。彼一切欲有相續耶。乃至廣說。
Within the Views Aggregate, the Nyāsa of the Three States of Existence, part one of two. Does everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into desire-existence thereby have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind? Such chapter headings as this, once their meaning has been grasped, are to be analyzed at length. Now, the term "existence" carries many meanings; here, it refers to the five aggregates belonging to a sentient being, subsumed under a single class of common existence. As it is said, does one who dies in the desire realm and is reborn in the desire realm thereby continue on in every instance of desire-existence? — and so on at length.
彼亦說屬眾同分有情數五蘊名有。如說諸纏所纏地獄有相續。彼初所得諸根大種與此心心所法為一增上。乃至廣說。又復如說欲有相續時。最初得幾業所生根。乃至廣說。又如說四有。謂本有死有中有生有。當知彼文皆說屬眾同分有情數五蘊名有。如說頗勒窶那識食所引能感後有令其現前。彼說續生時心眷屬名有。如說阿難陀。
that sūtra, too, speaks of the five aggregates belonging to a sentient being, subsumed under a single class of common existence, as "existence." As it is said, whoever is bound by these various entanglements has his hell-existence continue on — the faculties and great elements first attained by him, together with this mind and its mental factors, constitute a single predominant condition, and so on at length. And, further, as it is said, at the moment when desire-existence continues on, how many faculties produced by karma are first attained? — and so on at length. And, as it is said, there are four states of existence — namely, the proper state, the death-state, the intermediate state, and the rebirth-state — it should be understood that this passage, too, speaks entirely of the five aggregates belonging to a sentient being, subsumed under a single class of common existence, as "existence." As it is said, the nutriment of consciousness of a fine and subtle kind, drawn forth, is able to bring about a future existence and cause it to manifest before the mind — that sūtra speaks of the mind, together with its retinue, at the moment of continuing on into rebirth, as "existence." As it is said to Ānanda:
如是業有能牽後有。彼說牽後有思名有。如說取緣有彼說分位五蘊名有。尊者妙音說曰。彼說牽後有業名有。如說云何有法謂一切有漏。彼說諸有漏法名有。如說七有謂地獄有傍生有鬼界有人有天有業有中有。彼說五趣五趣因五趣方便名有。如說欲有云何。謂業能感欲界後有。乃至廣說。彼說業及異熟名有。不說取所緣有。問若爾彼後所說當云何通。如說欲有欲界一切隨眠隨增。乃至廣說。欲有五部業皆能感異熟可說欲界一切隨眠隨增。色無色有唯修所斷業能感異熟。如何可說色無色界一切隨眠隨增耶。答後文應作是說。
"such karmic existence is able to draw forth a future existence" — that sūtra speaks of the very volitional intention that draws forth a future existence as "existence." As it is said, existence conditioned by clinging — that sūtra speaks of the five aggregates at a given stage as "existence." The Venerable Ghoṣa said: that sūtra speaks of the very karma that draws forth a future existence as "existence." As it is said, what is the dharma of existence? It is every contaminated dharma — that sūtra speaks of every contaminated dharma as "existence." As it is said, there are seven existences — namely, hell-existence, animal-existence, hungry-ghost-existence, human existence, heavenly existence, karmic existence, and intermediate existence — that sūtra speaks of the five destinies, the causes of the five destinies, and the means to the five destinies, as "existence." As it is said, what is desire-existence? It is karma able to bring about a future existence in the desire realm, and so on at length — that sūtra speaks of karma and its retribution as "existence," without speaking of the existence conditioned by clinging's own objective support. Question: if so, then how is the following, further statement of that same sūtra to be reconciled — as it is said, with respect to desire-existence, every latent tendency of the desire realm increases its underlying force, and so on at length? Desire-existence's own karma, belonging to all five categories, is able to bring about retribution, and hence it can be said that every latent tendency of the desire realm increases its underlying force; but form-existence and formless-existence have only karma abandoned by cultivation able to bring about retribution — how, then, can it be said that every latent tendency of the form and formless realms increases its underlying force? Answer: the later passage ought to state it as follows:
5. Why It Is Called "Existence"
Working through several substantive criteria — able to exist and able to not-exist, yet also able to nourish and sustain, to keep transmigration unbroken, to tend toward the accumulation rather than the cessation of suffering, and to serve as the basis of affliction — the treatise excludes the noble path from the category of "existence" despite the path technically satisfying the same formal test, before considering and refining two further candidate definitions: a vessel of suffering, and something fearsome.
欲有欲界一切隨眠隨增。色無色有色無色界遍行。及修所斷隨眠隨增。應作是說。而不說者當知彼說有及眷屬悉名為有。和合有法亦名有故。有餘師說。前說業及異熟名有。不說取所緣有。後說業及異熟名有。亦說取所緣有。彼不應作是說。諸作論者。依章立門不可章所說異門所說異。是故如前所說者好。問何故名有。答能有能非有故名有。問若爾聖道應名有聖道亦是能有能非有故。答若能有能非有能長養攝益任持諸有者名有。聖道雖能有能非有而於諸有損壞離散故不名有。復次若能有能非有能令諸有相續流轉令老死道不斷者名有。聖道雖能有能非有而令諸有不相續不流轉。斷老死道故不名有。復次若能有能非有是趣苦集行趣有世間。流轉生死老死集行者名有。聖道雖能有能非有。而是趣苦滅行趣有世間流轉生死老死滅行故不名有。復次若能有能非有。是有身見事顛倒事隨眠事愛事。貪瞋癡安足處。有垢有毒諸有所攝。墮苦集諦者名有。聖道雖能有能非有而非有身見事乃至愛事非貪瞋癡安足處。無垢無穢無濁無毒非諸有攝。不墮苦集諦故不名有。有餘師說。是苦器故名有。
with respect to desire-existence, every latent tendency of the desire realm increases its underlying force; with respect to form-existence and formless-existence, the pervasive latent tendencies of the form and formless realms, together with those abandoned by cultivation, increase their underlying force — this is how it ought to be stated. As for why it is not stated in this way, it should be understood that that sūtra, in speaking of "existence" together with its retinue, names both together as "existence," since a combination of dharmas of existence is likewise named "existence." Other masters say: the earlier passage speaks of karma and its retribution as "existence," without speaking of the existence conditioned by clinging's own objective support, whereas the later passage speaks of karma and its retribution as "existence," and also speaks of the existence conditioned by clinging's own objective support — but this ought not to be said in this way, since the authors of treatises, in establishing a topic-gate with reference to a given chapter, cannot have what is stated under one gate differ from what is stated under a different gate — and it is for this reason that the earlier explanation is preferable. Question: why is it named "existence"? Answer: because it is able to exist, and able to not-exist, it is named existence. Question: if so, then the noble path, too, ought to be named existence, since the noble path is likewise able to exist and able to not-exist. Answer: whatever is able to exist and able to not-exist, and is moreover able to nourish, gather in, benefit, and sustain the various states of existence, is named existence; the noble path, although able to exist and able to not-exist, damages and scatters the various states of existence, and is hence not named existence. Furthermore, whatever is able to exist and able to not-exist, and is moreover able to cause the various states of existence to continue on in transmigration, keeping the path of aging and death unbroken, is named existence; the noble path, although able to exist and able to not-exist, causes the various states of existence not to continue on, not to transmigrate, severing the very path of aging and death, and is hence not named existence. Furthermore, whatever is able to exist and able to not-exist, and is a mode of activity proceeding toward the accumulation of suffering, proceeding toward existence and the world, a mode of activity of the accumulation of transmigratory birth-and-death, aging, and death, is named existence; the noble path, although able to exist and able to not-exist, is a mode of activity proceeding toward the cessation of suffering, proceeding toward the cessation of existence and the world, of transmigratory birth-and-death, aging, and death, and is hence not named existence. Furthermore, whatever is able to exist and able to not-exist, and is the very basis of the view of the perishable aggregates, the basis of inverted views, the basis of the latent tendencies, and the basis of craving, the very resting-place of craving, hatred, and delusion, subsumed under the states of existence that are defiled and poisoned, and falls within the truths of suffering and origin, is named existence; the noble path, although able to exist and able to not-exist, is not the basis of the view of the perishable aggregates, and so on up to not the basis of craving, nor the resting-place of craving, hatred, or delusion, being undefiled, unstained, untainted, and unpoisoned, not subsumed under the states of existence, and not falling within the truths of suffering and origin, and is hence not named existence. Other masters say: it is because it is a vessel of suffering that it is named existence.
問若爾此亦是樂器。如說大名若色一向是苦非樂非隨順樂不增長喜樂。唯是離樂因者則諸有情不應於色起貪起染。大名以色非一向苦亦是樂亦隨順樂亦增長喜樂。非唯是離樂因故。有情於色起貪起染。又佛決定建立三受不相雜亂。謂樂受苦受不苦不樂受。如是有漏法亦是樂器。何故但說是苦器故名為有耶。答以苦多故。謂生死中苦多樂少順苦法多順樂法少。以樂少故置在苦品。如一渧蜜墮毒器中不名蜜器。猶名毒器。以毒多故此亦如是。復有說者。可怖畏故名有。問若爾涅槃應亦名。有如說苾芻諸愚夫類無聞異生於涅槃中生大怖畏。謂我不有我所不有我當不有我所當不有。彼於涅槃既生怖畏是則涅槃亦應名有。答於有生怖是則為正。於涅槃生怖是則為邪。以涅槃非可怖故。由此不名為有。復次若令異生聖者皆生怖畏乃名為有。涅槃但令異生生怖故不名有相續有五。一中有相續。二生有相續。三分位相續。四法相續。五剎那相續。中有相續者。謂死有蘊滅中有蘊生。死有諸蘊由中有諸蘊說名相續故名中有相續。生有相續者。謂中有蘊滅生有蘊生。中有諸蘊由生有諸蘊說名相續故名生有相續。分位相續者。謂羯邏藍分位滅頞部曇分位生。羯邏藍分位由頞部曇分位說名相續。乃至壯年分位滅老年分位生。壯年分位由老年分位說名相續。故名分位相續。法相續者。謂善法無間染或無記法現在前。善法由染及無記法說名相續。染法無記法無間各二現前廣說亦爾故名法相續。剎那相續者。前剎那無間後剎那現在前。前剎那由後剎那說名相續故名剎那相續。此五相續皆攝二相續中。謂法相續剎那相續。以中有生有分位相續皆名為法及剎那故。欲界具五相續。色界有四除分位。無色界有三除中有及分位。天那落迦及化生有四相續除分位。餘皆具五。有說。天及化生亦具五相續。於五相續中。此中依二相續而作論。謂中有生有。諸捨欲有。欲有相續。彼一切欲界法滅。欲界法現在前耶。答諸捨欲有。欲有相續彼一切欲界法滅。欲界法現在前。謂欲界命終還生欲界。從死有往中有時。捨欲有者。謂欲界死有。欲有相續者謂欲界中有。欲界法滅者謂欲界死有諸蘊。欲界法現在前者謂欲界中有諸蘊。若從中有往生有時。捨欲有者謂欲界中有。欲有相續者謂欲界生有。欲界法滅者。
Question: if so, then it is likewise a vessel of pleasure. As it is said, Mahānāman, were form exclusively suffering, not pleasure, not conducive to pleasure, not increasing joy and happiness, being solely a cause productive of the removal of pleasure, then sentient beings would not give rise to craving for form, nor become attached to it; but, Mahānāman, form is not exclusively suffering — it is also pleasure, also conducive to pleasure, also increasing joy and happiness, and not solely a cause productive of the removal of pleasure, and it is for this reason that sentient beings give rise to craving for form and become attached to it. And the Buddha has definitively established the three feelings without confusing them together — namely, pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. Given this, contaminated dharmas, too, are equally a vessel of pleasure — why, then, is it said only that they are a vessel of suffering, and are therefore named existence? Answer: because suffering predominates — that is, within birth-and-death, suffering is abundant and pleasure is scarce; dharmas conducive to suffering are many, and dharmas conducive to pleasure are few, and it is on account of pleasure being scarce that existence is placed within the category of suffering — just as a single drop of honey, having fallen into a vessel of poison, does not thereby cause that vessel to be named a vessel of honey, but is still named a vessel of poison, since poison predominates; it is the same here. Others, further, say: it is because it is fearsome that it is named existence. Question: if so, then nirvāṇa, too, ought to be named existence — as it is said, monks, foolish, unlearned ordinary worldlings give rise to profound terror with respect to nirvāṇa, thinking, "I shall not exist, and what is mine shall not exist; I shall come not to exist, and what is mine shall come not to exist" — since they give rise to terror with respect to nirvāṇa in just this way, would this not mean that nirvāṇa, too, ought to be named existence? Answer: to give rise to terror with respect to existence is indeed correct; but to give rise to terror with respect to nirvāṇa is a mistaken response, since nirvāṇa is not, in fact, fearsome at all, and it is for this reason that it is not named existence. Furthermore, only that which causes both ordinary worldlings and noble ones alike to give rise to terror is named existence; nirvāṇa causes only ordinary worldlings to give rise to terror, and hence is not named existence. Continuity is of five kinds: first, the continuity of the intermediate existence; second, the continuity of the rebirth-existence; third, the continuity of positional stage; fourth, the continuity of dharma; and fifth, the continuity of the moment. The continuity of the intermediate existence refers to the aggregates of the death-existence ceasing and the aggregates of the intermediate existence arising — the aggregates of the death-existence, by means of the aggregates of the intermediate existence, are spoken of as continuous, and it is for this reason that this is named the continuity of the intermediate existence. The continuity of the rebirth-existence refers to the aggregates of the intermediate existence ceasing and the aggregates of the rebirth-existence arising — the aggregates of the intermediate existence, by means of the aggregates of the rebirth-existence, are spoken of as continuous, and it is for this reason that this is named the continuity of the rebirth-existence. The continuity of positional stage refers to the stage of the kalala ceasing and the stage of the arbuda arising — the stage of the kalala, by means of the stage of the arbuda, is spoken of as continuous; and so on, up to the stage of one's prime ceasing and the stage of old age arising — the stage of one's prime, by means of the stage of old age, is spoken of as continuous — and it is for this reason that this is named the continuity of positional stage. The continuity of dharma refers to a wholesome dharma ceasing, and, immediately following it, a defiled or a neutral dharma manifesting before the mind — the wholesome dharma, by means of the defiled and the neutral dharma, is spoken of as continuous; and, immediately following a defiled dharma or a neutral dharma, either of the other two manifesting before the mind is likewise to be explained at length in the same way — and it is for this reason that this is named the continuity of dharma. The continuity of the moment refers to the preceding moment ceasing, and, immediately following it, the succeeding moment manifesting before the mind — the preceding moment, by means of the succeeding moment, is spoken of as continuous, and it is for this reason that this is named the continuity of the moment. These five kinds of continuity are all subsumed under two kinds of continuity — namely, the continuity of dharma and the continuity of the moment — since the continuity of the intermediate existence, of the rebirth-existence, and of positional stage are all alike named continuity of dharma and of the moment. The desire realm is complete with all five kinds of continuity; the form realm has four, excepting that of positional stage; the formless realm has three, excepting that of the intermediate existence and of positional stage. The gods, the hell-beings, and those of miraculous birth have four kinds of continuity, excepting that of positional stage; all others are complete with all five. Some say: the gods and those of miraculous birth, too, are complete with all five kinds of continuity. Among these five kinds of continuity, the treatise here is composed with reference to two kinds — namely, that of the intermediate existence and that of the rebirth-existence. Does everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into desire-existence thereby have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into desire-existence does indeed have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the desire realm and is reborn again in the desire realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the intermediate existence, "relinquishing desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own intermediate existence, "the dharmas of the desire realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the desire realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the desire realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the desire realm's own intermediate existence. If proceeding from the intermediate existence to the rebirth-existence, "relinquishing desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own intermediate existence, "continuing on into desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own rebirth-existence, and "the dharmas of the desire realm ceasing" refers to
The four states of existence quietly relativize what counts as "proper": the proper state (本有) earns its name only because it happens to be coarse and easily observed, not because it is metaphysically more real than the death-state, intermediate state, or rebirth-state, which are dismissed from that title solely for being too subtle to notice — a reminder that the ordinary sense of a normal, continuous life is itself a matter of perceptual salience rather than existing on some more fundamental footing than birth or death.
6. The Five Kinds of Continuity
Distinguishing the continuity of the intermediate existence, of the rebirth-existence, of positional stage, of dharma, and of the moment, the treatise narrows its analysis to the first two kinds and opens an exhaustive account of what is relinquished and what continues, and which dharmas cease and which manifest before the mind, at the moment of death and rebirth within the desire realm.
謂欲界中有諸蘊。欲界法現在前者謂欲界生有諸蘊。問若住欲界無覆無記心命終者住中有時。不成就死有住生有時。不成就中有可名為捨。若住善或染心而命終者住中有時。成就死有。住生有時。成就中有。云何名捨。有說。此中但依住無覆無記心命終者。說是故無過。有說。此中依現行捨說雖住中有成就死有住生有成就中有。
the aggregates of the desire realm's own intermediate existence, and "the dharmas of the desire realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the desire realm's own rebirth-existence. Question: if one dies with a neutral, unobscured mind of the desire realm, then, at the stage of the intermediate existence, one no longer possesses the death-existence, and, at the stage of the rebirth-existence, one no longer possesses the intermediate existence — this may indeed be named "relinquishing"; but if one dies with a wholesome or a defiled mind, then, at the stage of the intermediate existence, one still possesses the death-existence, and, at the stage of the rebirth-existence, one still possesses the intermediate existence — how, then, can this be named "relinquishing"? Some say: what is spoken of here refers only to one who dies with a neutral, unobscured mind, and hence there is no such difficulty. Some say: what is spoken of here refers to relinquishing in the sense of currently manifesting — that is, although, at the stage of the intermediate existence, one still possesses the death-existence, and, at the stage of the rebirth-existence, one still possesses the intermediate existence,
而不現行故說為捨。有說。此中棄背前蘊說名為捨。不說成就不成就義。有欲界法滅欲界法現在前。而非捨欲有欲有相續。謂不命終而欲界法滅欲界法現在前其事云何。謂羯邏藍位無間頞部曇位現在前。乃至壯年位無間老年位現在前。善法無間染或無記法現在前。
these no longer currently manifest, and it is for this reason that this is spoken of as "relinquishing." Some say: what is spoken of here as "relinquishing" refers to turning one's back on the preceding aggregates, without speaking to the question of whether one still possesses them or not. There is a case of a dharma of the desire realm ceasing and a dharma of the desire realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing desire-existence and continuing on into desire-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the desire realm ceases and a dharma of the desire realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? It refers to the stage of the kalala ceasing, immediately followed by the stage of the arbuda manifesting before the mind, and so on up to the stage of one's prime ceasing, immediately followed by the stage of old age manifesting before the mind; or a wholesome dharma ceasing, immediately followed by a defiled or a neutral dharma manifesting before the mind;
7. Relinquishing and Continuing Across Every Pairing of Realms
An exhaustive combinatorial survey works through every possible pairing of realms at death and rebirth — desire to desire, desire to form, desire to formless, form to form, form to desire, form to formless, formless to formless, formless to desire, and formless to form — specifying for each what is relinquished, what continues, and, distinctly, what can cease and manifest between meditative stages without any death occurring at all.
染法無間善或無記法現在前。無記法無間善及染法現在前。前剎那無間後剎那現在前。諸捨欲有色有相續。彼一切欲界法滅色界法現在前耶。答諸捨欲有色有相續。彼一切欲界法滅色界法現在前。謂欲界命終生色界。從死有往中有時捨欲有者。謂欲界死有。色有相續者謂色界中有。欲界法滅者謂欲界死有諸蘊。色界法現在前者謂色界中有諸蘊。有欲界法滅色界法現在前。而非捨欲有色有相續。
or a defiled dharma ceasing, immediately followed by a wholesome or a neutral dharma manifesting before the mind; or a neutral dharma ceasing, immediately followed by a wholesome or a defiled dharma manifesting before the mind; or the preceding moment ceasing, immediately followed by the succeeding moment manifesting before the mind. Does everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into form-existence thereby have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into form-existence does indeed have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the desire realm and is reborn in the form realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the intermediate existence, "relinquishing desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into form-existence" refers to the form realm's own intermediate existence, "the dharmas of the desire realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the desire realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the form realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own intermediate existence. There is a case of a dharma of the desire realm ceasing and a dharma of the form realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing desire-existence and continuing on into form-existence —
謂不命終欲界法滅色界法現在前其事云何。此中有說。欲界善心無間未至定現在前。有說。欲界善心無間未至定初靜慮現在前。有說。欲界善心無間未至定初靜慮靜慮中間現在前。尊者妙音說曰。
that is, without dying, a dharma of the desire realm ceases and a dharma of the form realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? Here, some say: a wholesome mind of the desire realm ceases, immediately followed by the stage not yet attained manifesting before the mind. Some say: a wholesome mind of the desire realm ceases, immediately followed by the stage not yet attained, then the first dhyāna, manifesting before the mind. Some say: a wholesome mind of the desire realm ceases, immediately followed by the stage not yet attained, the first dhyāna, and the intermediate dhyāna-stage, manifesting before the mind. The Venerable Ghoṣa said:
欲界善心無間未至定初靜慮靜慮中間第二靜慮現在前。所以者何。
a wholesome mind of the desire realm ceases, immediately followed by the stage not yet attained, the first dhyāna, the intermediate dhyāna-stage, and the second dhyāna, manifesting before the mind. Why is this?
如超定時。初靜慮無間第三靜慮現在前此亦應爾。又欲界有四種變化心。謂初靜慮果乃至第四靜慮果。欲界初靜慮果變化心無間淨初靜慮現在前。乃至欲界第四靜慮果變化心無間淨第四靜慮現在前。
because, just as, at the moment of superseded concentration, the first dhyāna, immediately followed, has the third dhyāna manifest before the mind, so, too, ought it to be here. Furthermore, the desire realm possesses four kinds of transformation-mind — namely, the fruit of the first dhyāna, and so on up to the fruit of the fourth dhyāna. The desire realm's transformation-mind, the fruit of the first dhyāna, ceases, immediately followed by the pure first dhyāna manifesting before the mind; and so on up to the desire realm's transformation-mind, the fruit of the fourth dhyāna, ceases, immediately followed by the pure fourth dhyāna manifesting before the mind.
諸捨欲有無色有相續。彼一切欲界法滅無色界法現在前耶。答如是。設欲界法滅無色界法現在前。彼一切捨欲有無色有相續耶。答如是。問此中何故不說不命終欲界法滅。無色界法現在前耶。答理必無有在無色界不命終而有欲界法滅。無色界法現在前故。問豈不容有在欲界不命終。而欲界得滅無色界得現在前耶。答此中說同類法滅同類法現在前。無有在欲界。不命終而欲界同類法得滅。無色界同類法得而現在前是以不說。有說。此中說心心所法滅。心心所法現在前無有在欲界不命終而欲界心心所法滅。無色界心心所法現在前是故不說。諸捨色有色有相續。彼一切色界法滅色界法現在前耶。答諸捨色有色有相續彼一切色界法滅。色界法現在前。謂色界命終還生色界。從死有往中有時。捨色有者謂色界死有。色有相續者謂色界中有。色界法滅者謂色界死有諸蘊。色界法現在前者謂色界中有諸蘊。從中有往生有時。捨色有者謂色界中有。色有相續者謂色界生有。色界法滅者謂色界中有諸蘊。色界法現在前者謂色界生有諸蘊。此中若住無覆無記心命終。及住善心或染心命終時皆名捨色有。問答分別如前應知。有色界法滅色界法現在前。而非捨色有色有相續。謂不命終色界法滅。色界法現在前其事云何。謂初靜慮無間第二第三靜慮現在前。第二靜慮無間初第三第四靜慮現在前。第三靜慮無間初第二第四靜慮現在前。第四靜慮無間第二第三靜慮現在前。善法無間染或無記法現在前。染法無記法說亦爾。前剎那無間後剎那現在前。諸捨色有欲有相續。彼一切色界法滅欲界法現在前耶。答諸捨色有欲有相續。彼一切色界法滅欲界法現在前。謂色界命終生欲界。從死有往中有時。捨色有者謂色界死有。
Does everyone who relinquishes desire-existence and continues on into formless-existence thereby have every dharma of the desire realm cease, and every dharma of the formless realm manifest before the mind? Answer: it is so. And does everyone for whom a dharma of the desire realm ceases and a dharma of the formless realm manifests before the mind thereby relinquish desire-existence and continue on into formless-existence? Answer: it is so. Question: why is there, here, no case spoken of in which, without dying, a dharma of the desire realm ceases and a dharma of the formless realm manifests before the mind? Answer: because there can, in principle, be no case at all, without dying in the desire realm, of a dharma of the desire realm ceasing and a dharma of the formless realm manifesting before the mind. Question: is it not possible, without dying in the desire realm, for a dharma of the desire realm to cease and a dharma of the formless realm to manifest before the mind? Answer: what is spoken of here is a dharma of a given class ceasing and a dharma of the very same class manifesting before the mind — there is no case, without dying in the desire realm, of a dharma of the desire realm's own class ceasing and a dharma of the formless realm's own class manifesting before the mind, and it is for this reason that this case is not spoken of. Some say: what is spoken of here is mind and mental factors ceasing, and mind and mental factors manifesting before the mind — there is no case, without dying in the desire realm, of the desire realm's own mind and mental factors ceasing and the formless realm's own mind and mental factors manifesting before the mind, and it is for this reason that this is not spoken of. Does everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into form-existence thereby have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into form-existence does indeed have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the form realm and is reborn again in the form realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the intermediate existence, "relinquishing form-existence" refers to the form realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into form-existence" refers to the form realm's own intermediate existence, "the dharmas of the form realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the form realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own intermediate existence. At the moment of proceeding from the intermediate existence to the rebirth-existence, "relinquishing form-existence" refers to the form realm's own intermediate existence, "continuing on into form-existence" refers to the form realm's own rebirth-existence, "the dharmas of the form realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own intermediate existence, and "the dharmas of the form realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own rebirth-existence. Here, whether one dies with a neutral, unobscured mind, or with a wholesome or a defiled mind, in every case this is named relinquishing form-existence; the question and answer analysis is to be understood as before. There is a case of a dharma of the form realm ceasing and a dharma of the form realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing form-existence and continuing on into form-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the form realm ceases and a dharma of the form realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? It refers to the first dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the second or the third dhyāna manifesting before the mind; the second dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the first, the third, or the fourth dhyāna manifesting before the mind; the third dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the first, the second, or the fourth dhyāna manifesting before the mind; or the fourth dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the second or the third dhyāna manifesting before the mind; or a wholesome dharma ceasing, immediately followed by a defiled or a neutral dharma manifesting before the mind, and likewise, correspondingly, for a defiled or a neutral dharma; or the preceding moment ceasing, immediately followed by the succeeding moment manifesting before the mind. Does everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into desire-existence thereby have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into desire-existence does indeed have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the form realm and is reborn in the desire realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the intermediate existence, "relinquishing form-existence" refers to the form realm's own death-existence,
欲有相續者謂欲界中有。色界法滅者謂色界死有諸蘊。欲界法現前者謂欲界中有諸蘊。有色界法滅欲界法現在前。而非捨色有欲有相續。謂不命終而色界法滅欲界法現在前其事云何。此中有說。未至定無間欲界善心現在前。有說。未至定初靜慮無間欲界善心現在前。有說。未至定初靜慮靜慮中間無間欲界善心現在前。尊者妙音說曰。未至定初靜慮靜慮中間第二靜慮無間欲界善心現在前。所以者何。如超定時第三靜慮無間初靜慮現在前此亦應爾。又欲界有四種變化心。謂初靜慮果乃至第四靜慮果。淨初靜慮無間欲界初靜慮果變化心現在前。乃至淨第四靜慮無間欲界第四靜慮果變化心現在前。諸捨色有無色有相續。彼一切色界法滅無色界法現在前耶。答諸捨色有無色有相續。彼一切色界法滅無色界法現在前。謂色界命終生無色界從死有往生有時。捨色有者謂色界死有。無色有相續者謂無色界生有。色界法滅者謂色界死有諸蘊。無色界法現在前者謂無色界生有諸蘊。有色界法滅無色界法現在前。而非捨色有無色有相續。謂不命終色界法滅。無色界法現在前其事云何。謂第三靜慮無間空無邊處現在前。第四靜慮無間空識無邊處現在前。
"continuing on into desire-existence" refers to the desire realm's own intermediate existence, "the dharmas of the form realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the desire realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the desire realm's own intermediate existence. There is a case of a dharma of the form realm ceasing and a dharma of the desire realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing form-existence and continuing on into desire-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the form realm ceases and a dharma of the desire realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? Here, some say: the stage not yet attained ceases, immediately followed by a wholesome mind of the desire realm manifesting before the mind. Some say: the stage not yet attained and the first dhyāna cease, immediately followed by a wholesome mind of the desire realm manifesting before the mind. Some say: the stage not yet attained, the first dhyāna, and the intermediate dhyāna-stage cease, immediately followed by a wholesome mind of the desire realm manifesting before the mind. The Venerable Ghoṣa said: the stage not yet attained, the first dhyāna, the intermediate dhyāna-stage, and the second dhyāna cease, immediately followed by a wholesome mind of the desire realm manifesting before the mind. Why is this? Because, just as, at the moment of superseded concentration, the third dhyāna, immediately followed, has the first dhyāna manifest before the mind, so, too, ought it to be here. Furthermore, the desire realm possesses four kinds of transformation-mind — namely, the fruit of the first dhyāna, and so on up to the fruit of the fourth dhyāna. The pure first dhyāna ceases, immediately followed by the desire realm's own transformation-mind, the fruit of the first dhyāna, manifesting before the mind; and so on up to the pure fourth dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the desire realm's own transformation-mind, the fruit of the fourth dhyāna, manifesting before the mind. Does everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into formless-existence thereby have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the formless realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes form-existence and continues on into formless-existence does indeed have every dharma of the form realm cease, and every dharma of the formless realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the form realm and is reborn in the formless realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the rebirth-existence, "relinquishing form-existence" refers to the form realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into formless-existence" refers to the formless realm's own rebirth-existence, "the dharmas of the form realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the formless realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the formless realm's own rebirth-existence. There is a case of a dharma of the form realm ceasing and a dharma of the formless realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing form-existence and continuing on into formless-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the form realm ceases and a dharma of the formless realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? It refers to the third dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the sphere of infinite space manifesting before the mind; or the fourth dhyāna ceasing, immediately followed by the spheres of infinite space and infinite consciousness manifesting before the mind.
諸捨無色有無色有相續。彼一切無色界法滅無色界法現在前耶。答諸捨無色有無色有相續。彼一切無色界法滅無色界。法現在前謂無色界命終。還生無色界。從死有至生有時。捨無色有者謂無色界死有。無色有相續者謂無色界生有。無色界法滅者謂無色界死有諸蘊。無色界法現在前者謂無色界生有諸蘊。有無色界法滅無色界法現在前。而非捨無色有無色有相續。謂不命終無色界法滅無色界法現在前其事云何。謂空無邊處無間識無邊處無所有處現在前。識無邊處無間空無邊處無所有處非想非非想處現在前。無所有處無間空識無邊處非想非非想處現在前。非想非非想處無間識無邊處無所有處現在前。善法無間染或無記法現在前。染法無記法說亦爾。前剎那無間後剎那現在前。諸捨無色有欲有相續。彼一切無色界法滅欲界法現在前耶。答如是。設無色界法滅欲界法現在前。彼一切捨無色有欲有相續耶。答如是。問此中何故不說不命終無色界法滅欲界法現在前耶。答理必無有在無色界不命終。而有無色界法滅欲界法現在前故。餘問答如前。諸捨無色有色有相續。彼一切無色界法滅色界法現在前耶。答諸捨無色有色有相續。彼一切無色界法滅色界法現在前。謂無色界命終生色界。從死有往中有時。捨無色有者謂無色界死有。色有相續者謂色界中有。無色界法滅者謂無色界死有諸蘊。色界法現在前者謂色界中有諸蘊。有無色界法滅色界法現在前而非捨無色有色有相續。謂不命終而無色界法滅色界法現在前其事云何。謂識無邊處無間第四靜慮現在前。空無邊處無間第三第四靜慮現在前。
Does everyone who relinquishes formless-existence and continues on into formless-existence thereby have every dharma of the formless realm cease, and every dharma of the formless realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes formless-existence and continues on into formless-existence does indeed have every dharma of the formless realm cease, and every dharma of the formless realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the formless realm and is reborn again in the formless realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the rebirth-existence, "relinquishing formless-existence" refers to the formless realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into formless-existence" refers to the formless realm's own rebirth-existence, "the dharmas of the formless realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the formless realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the formless realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the formless realm's own rebirth-existence. There is a case of a dharma of the formless realm ceasing and a dharma of the formless realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing formless-existence and continuing on into formless-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the formless realm ceases and a dharma of the formless realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? It refers to the sphere of infinite space ceasing, immediately followed by the sphere of infinite consciousness or the sphere of nothing-whatsoever manifesting before the mind; the sphere of infinite consciousness ceasing, immediately followed by the sphere of infinite space, the sphere of nothing-whatsoever, or the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception manifesting before the mind; the sphere of nothing-whatsoever ceasing, immediately followed by the sphere of infinite space, the sphere of infinite consciousness, or the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception manifesting before the mind; or the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception ceasing, immediately followed by the sphere of infinite consciousness or the sphere of nothing-whatsoever manifesting before the mind; or a wholesome dharma ceasing, immediately followed by a defiled or a neutral dharma manifesting before the mind, and likewise, correspondingly, for a defiled or a neutral dharma; or the preceding moment ceasing, immediately followed by the succeeding moment manifesting before the mind. Does everyone who relinquishes formless-existence and continues on into desire-existence thereby have every dharma of the formless realm cease, and every dharma of the desire realm manifest before the mind? Answer: it is so. And does everyone for whom a dharma of the formless realm ceases and a dharma of the desire realm manifests before the mind thereby relinquish formless-existence and continue on into desire-existence? Answer: it is so. Question: why is there, here, no case spoken of in which, without dying, a dharma of the formless realm ceases and a dharma of the desire realm manifests before the mind? Answer: because there can, in principle, be no case at all, without dying in the formless realm, of a dharma of the formless realm ceasing and a dharma of the desire realm manifesting before the mind; the remaining question and answer are as before. Does everyone who relinquishes formless-existence and continues on into form-existence thereby have every dharma of the formless realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind? Answer: everyone who relinquishes formless-existence and continues on into form-existence does indeed have every dharma of the formless realm cease, and every dharma of the form realm manifest before the mind — that is, one who dies in the formless realm and is reborn in the form realm: at the moment of proceeding from the death-existence to the intermediate existence, "relinquishing formless-existence" refers to the formless realm's own death-existence, "continuing on into form-existence" refers to the form realm's own intermediate existence, "the dharmas of the formless realm ceasing" refers to the aggregates of the formless realm's own death-existence, and "the dharmas of the form realm manifesting before the mind" refers to the aggregates of the form realm's own intermediate existence. There is a case of a dharma of the formless realm ceasing and a dharma of the form realm manifesting before the mind, which is nevertheless not a case of relinquishing formless-existence and continuing on into form-existence — that is, without dying, a dharma of the formless realm ceases and a dharma of the form realm manifests before the mind: what is this case? It refers to the sphere of infinite consciousness ceasing, immediately followed by the fourth dhyāna manifesting before the mind; or the sphere of infinite space ceasing, immediately followed by the third or the fourth dhyāna manifesting before the mind.
8. The Aggregates Relinquished, Attained, and Manifest at Death
Closing the fascicle, an intricate combinatorial accounting works out, for every combination of prior moral discipline (full precepts, non-restraint, or neither, each with or without unlost bodily and verbal expression) crossed with the mind one dies in (wholesome, defiled, or neutral), exactly how many wholesome, defiled, and neutral aggregates are relinquished, attained, cease, and manifest before the mind at the moment of death.
且隨本文分別義已當隨其義復廣分別。問若欲界命終還生欲界。彼何所捨何所得何法滅何法現在前。乃至若無色界命終生色界。彼何所捨何所得何法滅何法現在前。答諸欲界命終還生欲界。若本住別解脫律儀無不善身語表。設有已失者若住善心命終。彼捨善蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。即於彼時善五蘊染一蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住染心命終。彼捨善蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。即於彼時善二蘊染四蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住無記心命終。彼捨善蘊二無記蘊五。得無記蘊二。即於彼時善二蘊染一蘊無記五蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。則彼若有不善身語表不失者。若住善心命終。彼捨善蘊二染蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善五蘊染二蘊無記二蘊滅。
Having thus far analyzed the meaning following the original text, it is now fitting to analyze its meaning still further, at length. Question: if one dies in the desire realm and is reborn again in the desire realm, what does one relinquish, what does one attain, which dharmas cease, and which dharmas manifest before the mind? — and so on up to, if one dies in the formless realm and is reborn in the form realm, what does one relinquish, what does one attain, which dharmas cease, and which dharmas manifest before the mind? Answer: as for one who dies in the desire realm and is reborn again in the desire realm: if he originally abided in the moral discipline of individual liberation, possessing no unwholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost — and dies with a wholesome mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, five wholesome aggregates, one defiled aggregate, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a defiled mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, two wholesome aggregates, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a neutral mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates and five neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, two wholesome aggregates, one defiled aggregate, and five neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. As for one who, in that same case, possesses unwholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost: if he dies with a wholesome mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, five wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease,
善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住染心命終。彼捨善蘊二染蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善二蘊染五蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住無記心命終。彼捨善蘊二染蘊二無記蘊五。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善二蘊染二蘊無記五蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若本住不律儀無善身語表。設有已失者。
while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a defiled mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, two wholesome aggregates, five defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a neutral mind, he relinquishes two wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and five neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, two wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and five neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. As for one who originally abided in non-restraint, possessing no wholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost —
若住善心命終。彼捨染蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善四蘊染二蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記。二蘊現在前。若住染心命終。彼捨染蘊二無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善一蘊。染五蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住無記心命終。
if he dies with a wholesome mind, he relinquishes two defiled aggregates and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, four wholesome aggregates, two defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a defiled mind, he relinquishes two defiled aggregates and two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, one wholesome aggregate, five defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a neutral mind,
彼捨染蘊二無記蘊五。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善一蘊染二蘊無記五蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。即彼若有善身語表不失者。
he relinquishes two defiled aggregates and five neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, one wholesome aggregate, two defiled aggregates, and five neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. As for one who, in that same case, possesses wholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost:
若住善心命終等廣如住別解脫律儀。有不善身語表說。若本住非律儀非不律儀無善不善身語表設有已失者。若住善心命終。彼捨無記蘊二。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善四蘊染一蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住染心命終。彼捨無記蘊二得無記蘊二。
if he dies with a wholesome mind, and so on, this is to be explained at length exactly as with one who abides in the moral discipline of individual liberation, possessing unwholesome bodily or verbal expression. As for one who originally abided in neither restraint nor non-restraint, possessing no wholesome or unwholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost: if he dies with a wholesome mind, he relinquishes two neutral aggregates, and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, four wholesome aggregates, one defiled aggregate, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a defiled mind, he relinquishes two neutral aggregates and attains two neutral aggregates;
則於彼時善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。若住無記心命終。彼捨無記蘊五。得無記蘊二。則於彼時善一蘊染一蘊無記五蘊滅。善一蘊染四蘊無記二蘊現在前。即彼若有善身語表不失。無不善身語表設有已失者。若住善染無記心命終。如住別解脫律儀。無不善身語表設有已失者住三種心命終說。即彼若有不善身語表不失無善身語表設有已失者。若住善染無記心命終。
at that very moment, one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. If he dies with a neutral mind, he relinquishes five neutral aggregates and attains two neutral aggregates; at that very moment, one wholesome aggregate, one defiled aggregate, and five neutral aggregates cease, while one wholesome aggregate, four defiled aggregates, and two neutral aggregates manifest before the mind. As for one who, in that same case, possesses wholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost, and no unwholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost — dying with a wholesome, a defiled, or a neutral mind, this is to be explained exactly as with one who abides in the moral discipline of individual liberation, possessing no unwholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost — dying with each of the three kinds of mind. As for one who, in that same case, possesses unwholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost, and no wholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost — dying with a wholesome, a defiled, or a neutral mind,
如住不律儀無善身語表設有已失者。住三種心命終說。則彼若有善不善身語表不失者。若住善染無記心命終。如住別解脫律儀。有不善身語表不失者。及住不律儀有善身語表不失者。住三種心命終說。
this is to be explained exactly as with one who abides in non-restraint, possessing no wholesome bodily or verbal expression — or, if he had possessed such expression, it had already been lost — dying with each of the three kinds of mind. As for one who, in that same case, possesses both wholesome and unwholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost, dying with a wholesome, a defiled, or a neutral mind, this is to be explained exactly as with one who abides in the moral discipline of individual liberation, possessing unwholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost, and one who abides in non-restraint, possessing wholesome bodily or verbal expression not yet lost, dying with each of the three kinds of mind.
Fascicle 192 Complete
This closes fascicle 192 of Ru‑Yi's translation. Fascicle 192 closes the Mindfulness-Foundations Nyāsa (念住納息第一之六) with the final scenes of the Buddha's own parinirvāṇa: Aniruddha's knowledge of the Buddha's hidden mind through the elephant-fording-the-river simile, Mahākāśyapa's fragrant milk extinguishing the funeral pyre, and Ānanda's seven-day vigil and verse on the two unburned garments. It then opens a new stretch of the Views Aggregate (見蘊第八): the four states of existence — proper, death, intermediate, and rebirth — cross-classified by duration, defilement, and contamination, and their relation to the "five formations"; and the opening of the Nyāsa of the Three States of Existence (三有納息), reconciling the many sūtra senses of "existence," explaining through five substantive criteria why the noble path itself is excluded from that category despite formally qualifying, considering and refining "vessel of suffering" and "something fearsome" as candidate definitions, and closing with an exhaustive combinatorial accounting of what is relinquished, attained, ceases, and manifests before the mind at death and rebirth across every pairing of realms, cross-referenced against prior moral discipline. Fascicle 193 continues within the Three States of Existence Nyāsa.