Abhidharmakosha-bhashya, Fascicle 7 (Sarvastivada)

尊者世親造

Composed by the Venerable Vasubandhu.

三藏法師玄奘奉詔譯

Translated by Tripitaka Master Xuanzang by imperial command.

分別世品第三之一

Chapter 3, Analysis of the World, Part 1.

已依三界分別心等。今次應說，三界是何？各於其中處別有幾？頌曰：

The mind and the rest have been analyzed according to the three realms. Now it should be explained: what are the three realms, and how many separate places are there in each? The verse says:

地獄傍生鬼，人及六慾天，

Hells, animals, hungry ghosts, humans, and the six heavens of desire,

名欲界二十，由地獄洲異。

are called the desire realm, twenty in number, differing by the hells and the continents.

此上十七處，名色界於中，

Above this are seventeen places, called the form realm, among which

三靜慮各三，第四靜慮八。

the first three meditations each have three, and the fourth meditation has eight.

無色界無處，由生有四種，

The formless realm has no place; it has four kinds by birth,

依同分及命，令心等相續。

in dependence on the same class and the life faculty, the mind and the rest continue.

論曰：地獄等四及六慾天並器世間，是名欲界。六慾天者，一、四大王眾天；二、三十三天；三、夜摩天；四、覩史多天；五、樂變化天；六、他化自在天。如是欲界處別有幾？地獄洲異，故成二十。八大地獄，名地獄異。一等活地獄、二黑繩地獄、三眾合地獄、四號叫地獄、五大叫地獄、六炎熱地獄、七大熱地獄、八無間地獄。言洲異者，謂四大洲：一南贍部洲、二東勝身洲、三西牛貨洲、四北俱盧洲。如是十二並六慾天、傍生、餓鬼處成二十。若有情界從自在天至無間獄，若器世界乃至風輪，皆欲界攝。此欲界上處有十七，謂三靜慮處各有三，第四靜慮處獨有八，器及有情總名色界。第一靜慮處有三者，一梵眾天、二梵輔天、三大梵天。第二靜慮處有三者，一少光天、二無量光天、三極光淨天。第三靜慮處有三者，一少淨天、二無量淨天、三遍淨天。第四靜慮處有八者，一無雲天、二福生天、三廣果天、四無煩天、五無熱天、六善現天、七善見天、八色究竟天。迦濕彌羅國諸大論師皆言：色界處但有十六。彼謂：即於梵輔天處有高臺閣，名大梵天，一主所居非有別地，如尊處座四眾圍繞。無色界中都無有處，以無色法無有方所，過去未來無表無色不住方所，理決然故。但異熟生，差別有四：一空無邊處、二識無邊處、三無所有處、四非想非非想處，如是四種名無色界。此四非由處有上下，但由生故勝劣有殊。復如何知彼無方處？謂於是處得彼定者，命終即於是處生故。復從彼沒生欲色時，即於是處中有起故。如有色界一切有情，要依色身心等相續。於無色界受生有情，以何為依心等相續？對法諸師說彼心等依眾同分及與命根而得相續。若爾，有色有情心等，何不但依此二相續？有色界生此二劣故。無色此二因何故強？彼界二從勝定生故，由彼等至能伏色想。若爾，於彼心等相續，但依勝定，何用別依？

The treatise says: The four beginning with hells, the six heavens of desire, and the world of vessels are called the desire realm. The six heavens of desire are: first, the Heaven of the Four Great Kings; second, the Heaven of the Thirty-three; third, the Yama Heaven; fourth, the Tushita Heaven; fifth, the Heaven of Delight in Transformation; and sixth, the Heaven of Mastery over Others' Transformations. How many separate places does the desire realm have? Differing by hells and continents, they make twenty. The eight great hells are the differences of hells: first, the Reviving Hell; second, the Black Rope Hell; third, the Crushing Hell; fourth, the Screaming Hell; fifth, the Great Screaming Hell; sixth, the Burning Hell; seventh, the Great Burning Hell; eighth, the Uninterrupted Hell (Avici). The differences of continents are the four great continents: first, Jambudvipa in the south; second, Purvavideha in the east; third, Aparagodaniya in the west; and fourth, Uttarakuru in the north. These twelve, together with the six heavens of desire, the animals, and the hungry ghosts, make twenty. The realm of sentient beings from the Heaven of Mastery down to the Uninterrupted Hell, and the world of vessels down to the wind circle, are all included in the desire realm. Above this desire realm there are seventeen places, namely three places each for the first three meditations and eight places for the fourth meditation alone; the vessels and sentient beings together are called the form realm. The first meditation has three places: first, the Heaven of the Brahma Assembly; second, the Heaven of the Brahma Ministers; and third, the Heaven of Great Brahma. The second meditation has three places: first, the Heaven of Lesser Light; second, the Heaven of Immeasurable Light; and third, the Heaven of Utmost Radiance. The third meditation has three places: first, the Heaven of Lesser Purity; second, the Heaven of Immeasurable Purity; and third, the Heaven of Universal Purity. The fourth meditation has eight places: first, the Heaven of No Clouds; second, the Heaven of Born of Merit; third, the Heaven of Great Fruit; fourth, the Heaven of No Affliction; fifth, the Heaven of No Heat; sixth, the Heaven of Excellent Appearance; seventh, the Heaven of Excellent Seeing; and eighth, the Heaven of Akanishtha (the Highest Form). The great masters of Kashmir all say that the places of the form realm are only sixteen. They say that in the place of the Brahma Ministers there is a high pavilion called the Heaven of Great Brahma, the residence of one sovereign and not a separate plane, like a venerable seat surrounded by the fourfold assembly. In the formless realm there are no places at all, because formless dharmas have no location; the past and future, unmanifested action, and the formless do not abide in any location, which is certain by reason. There are only four distinct kinds of maturation-born existence: first, the sphere of infinite space; second, the sphere of infinite consciousness; third, the sphere of nothing whatsoever; and fourth, the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception; these four kinds are called the formless realm. These four are not higher or lower by place, but differ in superiority and inferiority by birth. How then do we know that they have no location? Because when one attains that absorption in some place, at death one is born in that very place; and when, after passing away from that realm, one is born into the desire or form realm, the intermediate existence arises in that very place. In the form realm, all sentient beings necessarily continue the mind and the rest in dependence on the body of form. For beings born in the formless realm, in dependence on what does the mind and the rest continue? The Abhidharma masters say that the mind and the rest there continue by relying on the same class of beings and on the life faculty. If so, why do the minds and the rest of beings with form not continue merely in dependence on these two? Because in the form realm these two are weak. Why are these two strong in the formless realm? Because in that realm these two are born from superior absorption, and by that attainment one can subdue the perception of form. If so, in that realm, the continuity of the mind and the rest depends only on superior absorption; what use is there in depending on anything else?

又今應說，如有色界受生有情同分命根依色而轉，無色此二以何為依？此二更互相依而轉。有色此二何不相依？有色界生此二劣故。無色此二因何故強？彼界此二種，從勝定生故。前說彼定能伏色想，是則還同心相續難。或心心所唯互相依，故經部師說無色界心等相續無別有依。謂若有因未離色愛引起心等，所引心等與色俱生依色而轉。若因於色已得離愛，厭背色故，所引心等非色俱生不依色轉。何故名為欲等三界？能持自相故名為界。或種族義，如前已釋。欲所屬界說名欲界，色所屬界說名色界，略去中言故作是說，如胡椒飲如金剛環。於彼界中色非有故名為無色。所言色者，是變礙義，或示現義。彼體非色立無色名，非彼但用色無為體。無色所屬界，說名無色界，略去中言，喻如前說。又欲之界名為欲界，此界力能任持欲故。色無色界應知亦然。此中欲言為說何法？略說段食婬所引貪。如經頌言：

(The treatise continues:) Further, it should now be said: as in the form realm, for beings taking birth, the same class and the life faculty turn in dependence on form, on what do these two depend in the formless realm? These two turn in mutual dependence. Why do they not depend on each other in the form realm? Because in the form realm these two are weak. Why are these two strong in the formless realm? Because in that realm these two kinds are born from superior absorption. Since it was said earlier that that absorption can subdue the perception of form, this again returns to the difficulty about the continuity of mind. Or it may be that mind and mental factors depend only on one another; therefore the Sautrantika masters say that in the formless realm the continuity of the mind and the rest has no other dependence. That is, if the cause that brings forth the mind and the rest has not yet become free of love for form, the mind and the rest so brought forth arise together with form and turn in dependence on form. If the cause has become free of love for form, because one is averse to form, the mind and the rest so brought forth do not arise together with form and do not turn in dependence on form. Why are the three realms called desire and so on? Because they can sustain their own characteristics, they are called realms (dhatu). Or the meaning is lineage, as already explained. The realm belonging to desire is called the desire realm, the realm belonging to form is called the form realm, and this is said by omitting the middle word, like pepper drink or like a vajra ring. In that realm form is non-existent, so it is called formless. What is called form means resistance, or manifestation. Its substance is not form, so the name formless is established; it does not mean that it uses the unconditioned of form as its substance. The realm belonging to the formless is called the formless realm, the middle word being omitted, as in the example above. Furthermore, the realm of desire is called the desire realm, because this realm is able to sustain desire. The form and formless realms should be understood likewise. What dharma does the word desire speak of here? Briefly, it is the greed brought on by food as nourishment and by sexual intercourse. As the sutra verse says:

世諸妙境非真欲，真欲謂人分別貪，

The splendid objects of the world are not true desire; true desire is people's discriminating greed;

妙境如本住世間，智者於中已除欲。

the splendid objects remain as they are in the world, but the wise have already removed desire from them.

邪命外道便詰尊者舍利子言：

A heretic of the wrong livelihood then challenged the Venerable Shariputra, saying:

若世妙境非真欲，說欲是人分別貪，

If the splendid objects of the world are not true desire, and desire is people's discriminating greed,

比丘應名受欲人，起惡分別尋思故。

then monks should be called people who indulge in desire, because they give rise to evil discriminating thought.

時舍利子反質彼言：

At that time Shariputra turned the question back on him, saying:

若世妙境是真欲，說欲非人分別貪，

If the splendid objects of the world are true desire, and desire is not people's discriminating greed,

汝師應名受欲人，恆觀可意妙色故。

your teacher should be called a person who indulges in desire, because he constantly contemplates pleasing and splendid forms.

若法於彼三界現行，此法即說三界繫不？不爾。云何於中隨增三界貪者是三界繫？此中何法名三界貪？謂三界中各隨增者，今此所言同縛馬答。猶如有問縛馬者誰？答言馬主。即彼復問馬主是誰？答言縛者。如是二答皆不令解。今此所言不同彼答，謂於前說欲界諸處未離貪者，貪名欲貪，此所隨增名欲界繫。於前所說色無色中，隨其所應當知亦爾。或不定地貪名欲貪，此所隨增名欲界繫。諸靜慮地貪名色貪，此所隨增名色界繫。諸無色地貪名無色貪，此所隨增名為無色界繫。於欲化心上如何起欲貪？從他所聞，或自退失生愛味故。或觀化者自在勢力，於彼化心生貪愛故。若心能化香味二法，此能化心是欲界繫，色界心不能化作香味故。如是三界唯有一耶？三界無邊如虛空量，故雖無有始起有情，無量無邊佛出於世，一一化度無數有情令證無餘般涅槃界而不窮盡猶若虛空。世界當言云何安住？當言傍住，故契經言：譬如天雨滴如車軸，無間無斷從空下澍。如是東方無間無斷無量世界或壞或成，如於東方，南西北方亦復如是，不說上下。有說亦有上下二方，餘部經中說十方故。色究竟上復有欲界，於欲界下有色究竟。若有離一欲界貪時，諸欲界貪皆得滅離。離色無色應知亦爾。依初靜慮起通慧時，所發神通但能往至自所生界梵世非餘，所餘通慧應知亦爾。已說三界。五趣云何？頌曰：

(The treatise continues:) If a dharma operates in those three realms, is that dharma said to belong to the three realms? No. How then is that which accompanies and increases greed of the three realms in them said to belong to the three realms? What dharma here is called greed of the three realms? It is what increases in each of the three realms; this statement here is not like the answer to the question about tying the horse. It is like when one asks who ties the horse and is answered, the horse's owner; and when one asks again who the horse's owner is, and is answered, the one who ties it. Such two answers do not make one understand. What is said here is not the same as that answer: namely, among the places of the desire realm spoken of earlier, for those not yet free of greed, the greed is called desire-greed, and what accompanies and increases it is called belonging to the desire realm. In the form and formless realms spoken of earlier, it should be understood likewise as appropriate. Or the greed of the indeterminate grounds is called desire-greed, and what accompanies and increases it is called belonging to the desire realm; the greed of the meditation grounds is called form-greed, and what accompanies and increases it is called belonging to the form realm; the greed of the formless grounds is called formless greed, and what accompanies and increases it is called belonging to the formless realm. How does desire-greed arise toward a transformed mind in the desire realm? Because one hears of it from others, or because one has oneself fallen away and developed love and relish for it. Or because one sees the sovereign power of what is transformed and develops greed and love toward that transformed mind. If a mind can transform smell and taste, this transforming mind belongs to the desire realm; a mind of the form realm cannot transform and make smell and taste. Is there only one such set of three realms? The three realms are boundless like the measure of space, so even though no sentient being has a beginning, immeasurable and boundless Buddhas appear in the world and each transforms and liberates countless sentient beings, leading them to realize the realm of nirvana without remainder, yet they do not exhaust them, just like space. How should it be said that the worlds are situated? It should be said they are situated sideways, so the sutra says: just as rain from the sky falls with drops like chariot axles, without gap and without break. Thus in the east, immeasurable worlds without gap or break are either being destroyed or formed; as in the east, so too in the south, west, and north; above and below are not mentioned. Some say there are also upper and lower directions, because other sutras speak of ten directions. Above Akanishtha there is again a desire realm, and below the desire realm there is Akanishtha. If one becomes free of greed in one desire realm, all desire-realm greed is extinguished and left behind. Becoming free of the form and formless realms should be understood likewise. When one produces supernormal wisdom relying on the first meditation, the supernormal powers produced can reach only the Brahma world of the realm in which one was born and no other; the other supernormal wisdoms should be understood likewise. The three realms have been explained. What of the five destinies? The verse says:

於中地獄等，自名說五趣，

Among them, the hells and so on are, by their own names, said to be the five destinies;

唯無覆無記，有情非中有。

they are only unobscured indeterminate, sentient beings, and not the intermediate existence.

論曰：於三界中說有五趣，即地獄等如自名說，謂前所說地獄、傍生、鬼及人、天是名五趣。唯於欲界有四趣全，三界各有天趣一分。為有三界非趣所攝，而於界中說有五趣？有，謂善染外器中有，雖是界性而非趣攝。五趣體唯無覆無記，若異此者趣應相雜，於一趣中具有五趣業煩惱故。五趣唯是有情數攝，體非中有。《施設足論》作如是說：四生攝五趣，非五攝四生。不攝者何？所謂中有。《法蘊足論》亦作是言：眼界云何？謂四大種所造淨色是眼，眼根、眼處、眼界。地獄、傍生、鬼、人、天趣，修成中有。契經亦簡中有異趣。是何契經？謂《七有經》。彼說七有，謂地獄有、傍生有、餓鬼有、天有、人有、業有、中有。彼經中說五趣及因並趣方便，故趣唯是無覆無記，其理極成。簡業有因，異諸趣故。迦濕彌羅國誦如是契經：尊者舍利子作是言：具壽！若有地獄諸漏現前故，造作增長順地獄受業，彼身語意曲穢濁故，於㮏落迦中受五蘊異熟，異熟起已名那落迦，除五蘊法，彼那落迦都不可得。故趣唯是無覆無記。若如是者，《品類足論》當云何通？彼說五趣一切隨眠所隨增故。彼說五趣續生心中容有五部一切煩惱趣及入心。總說為趣，無相違失。譬如村落及村落邊總名村落。有說：趣體亦通善染。然《七有經》簡業有者，非別說故，定非彼攝。如五濁中煩惱與見別說為濁，非別說故，彼見定非煩惱所攝。如是業有雖亦是趣，為顯趣因，是故別說。若爾，中有亦應是趣。不爾，趣義不相應故。趣謂所往，不可說言中有是所往，即死處生故。若爾，無色亦應非趣，即於死處而受生故。既爾，中有名中有，故不應名趣。二趣中故名為中有，此若趣攝非中間故，是則不應說名中有。然彼尊者舍利子言異熟起已名地獄者，說異熟起方名地獄，非說地獄唯是異熟。

The Treatise says: Among the three realms, five destinies are spoken of, namely hell and the rest, as their names say: the hell beings, animals, hungry ghosts, humans, and gods mentioned before are called the five destinies. Only the desire realm has all four lower destinies complete, while each of the three realms has a portion of the god destiny. Is there something in the three realms not included in a destiny, yet five destinies are spoken of in the realms? There is: namely the wholesome and defiled external vessel-world, which, though of the nature of a realm, is not included in a destiny. The essence of the five destinies is only the unobstructed and neutral; if it were otherwise, the destinies would be mixed together, since in a single destiny the karma and afflictions of all five destinies are present. The five destinies are included only among the number of sentient beings, and their essence is not the intermediate existence. The Prajnaptisastra says thus: The four modes of birth include the five destinies, but the five destinies do not include the four modes of birth. What is not included? Namely the intermediate existence. The Dharmaskandha-pada also says: What is the eye element? It is the clear form derived from the four great elements, which is the eye faculty, the eye base, and the eye element. The destinies of hell, animals, ghosts, humans, and gods are cultivated into the intermediate existence. The sutras also distinguish the intermediate existence from the destinies. Which sutra? Namely the Sutra of Seven Existences. It speaks of seven existences, namely hell existence, animal existence, hungry ghost existence, god existence, human existence, karmic existence, and intermediate existence. That sutra speaks of the five destinies, their causes, and the means to the destinies, and so it is fully established that the destinies are only unobstructed and neutral. The karmic existence is set apart as a cause, being different from the destinies. The people of Kashmir recite this sutra: Venerable Sariputra said thus: Venerable ones! When the outflows of hell are manifest, one performs and increases karma that leads to the experience of hell; because that body, speech, and mind are crooked, foul, and turbid, one receives the ripened result of the five aggregates in Naraka (the original uses a rare variant character for "Na"); once the ripened result has arisen it is called a Naraka being, but apart from the five aggregates, that Naraka being cannot be found at all. Therefore the destinies are only unobstructed and neutral. If so, how is the Prakaranapada to be reconciled? It says the five destinies are what all latent afflictions increasingly follow. There, in the rebirth-linking mind of the five destinies, all afflictions of the five groups may be present, and so both the destiny and the mind that enters it are spoken of together as the destiny, with no contradiction. It is like a village and the surroundings of a village both being called the village. Some say: The essence of the destinies also includes the wholesome and defiled. But the Sutra of Seven Existences sets apart karmic existence, which is not spoken of separately and so is surely not included in them. Just as among the five turbidities, afflictions and views are spoken of separately as turbidities, because they are not spoken of separately, those views are surely not included in afflictions. In the same way, although karmic existence is also a destiny, it is spoken of separately in order to show the cause of destinies. If so, the intermediate existence should also be a destiny. No, because the meaning of destiny does not correspond. A destiny is what one goes to, and one cannot say that the intermediate existence is what one goes to, since one is born in the very place of death. If so, the formless realm would also not be a destiny, since one is reborn in the very place of death. Since that is so, the intermediate existence is called intermediate, so it should not be called a destiny. Because it is between two destinies it is called intermediate; if this were included in a destiny, it would not be in between, and then it should not be called intermediate. As for what Venerable Sariputra said, that once the ripened result has arisen it is called hell, he means that only when the ripened result has arisen is it called hell, not that hell is only the ripened result.

然復說言，除五蘊法彼那落迦不可得者，為遮實有能往諸趣補特伽羅故作是說，非遮餘蘊故作是言。毘婆沙師說：趣唯是無覆無記。有說：一向是異熟生。有餘師言：亦通長養。即於三界及五趣中，如其次第識住有七。其七者何？頌曰：

(The Treatise continues:) Moreover, when he said that apart from the five aggregates that Naraka being cannot be found, he said so in order to deny a really existing person who goes into the various destinies, and did not say so to deny the other aggregates. The Vaibhashika masters say: The destinies are only unobstructed and neutral. Some say: They are always born of ripening. Some other masters say: They also include the nourished. Among the three realms and five destinies, there are seven abodes of consciousness, in order. What are the seven? The verse says:

身異及想異，身異同一想，

Different bodies and different perceptions, different bodies with one perception,

翻此身想一，並無色下三，

the reverse, one body and one perception, and the lower three formless states,

故識住有七，餘非有損壞。

so there are seven abodes of consciousness; the others are not, because of damage and destruction.

論曰：契經中說，有色有情身異想異，如人一分天，是第一識住。一分天者，謂欲界天及初靜慮，除劫初起。言身異者，謂彼色身種種顯形，狀貌異故。彼由身異，或有異身，故彼有情說名身異。言想異者，謂彼苦樂不苦不樂想差別故。彼由想異，或有異想，故彼有情說名想異。有色有情身異想一，如梵眾天謂劫初起，是第二識住。所以者何？以劫初起，彼諸梵眾起如是想：我等皆是大梵所生。大梵爾時亦起此想：是諸梵眾皆我所生。同想一因故名想一。大梵王身其量高廣，容貌威德言語光明衣冠等事，一一皆與梵眾不同，故名身異。經說：梵眾作是念言：我等曾見如是有情長壽久住，乃至起願：云何當令諸餘有情生我同分？於彼正起此心願時，我等便生彼同分內。梵眾何處曾見梵王？有餘師言：住極光淨，從彼天沒來生此故。云何今時不得第二靜慮，而能憶念彼地宿住事耶？若彼已得第二靜慮，云何緣大梵猶起戒禁取？有餘師說：住中有中，彼住中有中，無長時住義，以於受生無障礙故。如何梵眾可作念言：我等曾見如是有情長壽久住。是故梵眾即住自天，憶念此生前所更事，謂先見彼長壽久住，後重見時起如是念。有色有情身一想異，如極光淨天，是第三識住。此中舉後兼以攝初，應知具攝第二靜慮。若不爾者，彼少光天、無量光天何識住攝？彼天顯形狀貌不異，故名身一。樂非苦樂二想交參，故名想異。傳說彼天厭根本地喜根，已起近分地捨根現前；厭近分地捨根，已起根本地喜根現前。如富貴人厭欲樂已便受法樂，厭法樂已復受欲樂。豈不遍淨想亦應然？非遍淨天曾有厭樂，以樂寂靜曾無厭時；喜則不然，擾動心故。經部師說：有餘契經釋彼天中有想異義，謂極光淨有天新生，未善了知世間成壞。彼見下地火焰洞然，見已便生驚怖厭離：勿彼火焰燒盡梵宮令彼皆空上侵我處。

The Treatise says: The sutra says: Sentient beings with form, with different bodies and different perceptions, such as humans and a portion of the gods, are the first abode of consciousness. A portion of the gods means the gods of the desire realm and the first meditation, excluding the beginning of an eon. They are called different in body because their bodies of form show many kinds of appearance and their shapes and looks differ. Because of this difference of body, or because there are different bodies, those sentient beings are called different in body. They are called different in perception because their perceptions of pain, pleasure, and neither pain nor pleasure differ. Because of this difference of perception, or because there are different perceptions, those sentient beings are called different in perception. Sentient beings with form, with different bodies and one perception, such as the Brahma assembly gods at the beginning of an eon, are the second abode of consciousness. Why? Because at the beginning of an eon, those Brahma assembly gods think thus: We were all born of Great Brahma. Great Brahma at that time also thinks: These Brahma assembly gods were all born of me. Because they share one cause for the same thought, it is called one perception. The body of the Great Brahma King, in its height and breadth, appearance, majesty, speech, radiance, dress, and so on, is in every point different from that of the Brahma assembly, and so it is called different in body. The sutra says: The Brahma assembly think: We once saw such a sentient being long-lived and abiding long, and even made a vow: How might we cause other sentient beings to be born in our company? At the moment this thought and vow arose in them, we were then born into that company. Where did the Brahma assembly once see the Brahma King? Some other masters say: They lived in Abhasvara (Utmost Radiance), and having died there, came to be born here. How, then, can they now, without having attained the second meditation, recall the past lives of that plane? If they had already attained the second meditation, how could they still give rise to clinging to rules and rituals toward Great Brahma? Some other masters say: They were in the intermediate existence, and in the intermediate existence there is no meaning of long abiding, because there is no obstruction to taking rebirth. How, then, could the Brahma assembly think: We once saw such a sentient being long-lived and abiding long? Therefore the Brahma assembly, remaining in their own heaven, recall what they experienced before this life, namely that they first saw that being long-lived and abiding long, and when they saw him again they had this thought. Sentient beings with form, with one body and different perceptions, such as the Abhasvara gods, are the third abode of consciousness. Here, by citing the latter, the first is also included, and it should be known that the second meditation is fully included. If it were not so, in which abode of consciousness would the Lesser Light gods and the Limitless Light gods be included? Their appearance and shape do not differ, and so they are called one in body. Because perceptions of pleasure and of neither pain nor pleasure mingle, they are called different in perception. It is said that those gods, tiring of the joy faculty of the basic ground, give rise to the equanimity faculty of the proximate ground and it becomes present; tiring of the equanimity faculty of the proximate ground, they give rise to the joy faculty of the basic ground and it becomes present. It is like a rich and noble person who, having wearied of the pleasure of desire, takes pleasure in the Dharma, and having wearied of the pleasure of the Dharma, again takes pleasure in desire. Would it not be the same for perception in the Subhakrtsna (Universal Purity) heaven? The Universal Purity gods have never tired of pleasure, because they take delight in stillness and never tire of it; joy is not so, because it disturbs the mind. The Sautrantika masters say: Another sutra explains the meaning of different perceptions among those gods: namely that in the Abhasvara heaven some gods are newly born and do not yet well understand the formation and destruction of the world. They see the fire of the lower ground burning brightly, and seeing it, they are seized with terror and aversion: May that fire not burn up the Brahma palaces and empty them all, and rise up to invade our place.

彼極光淨有舊生天，已善了知世間成壞，便慰喻彼驚怖天言：淨仙淨仙。勿怖勿怖。昔彼火焰燒盡梵宮，令其皆空即於彼滅。彼於火焰有來不來想及怖不怖想故名想異，非由有樂非苦樂想有交參故得想異名。有色有情身一想一，如遍淨天，是第四識住。唯有樂想故名想一。初靜慮中由染汙想故言想一，第二靜慮由二善想故言想異，第三靜慮由異熟想故言想一，下三無色名別，如經即三識住是名為七。此中何法名為識住？謂彼所繫五蘊四蘊，如其所應是名識住。所餘何故非識住耶？於餘處皆有損壞識法故。餘處者何？謂諸惡處第四靜慮及與有頂。所以者何？由彼處有損壞識法，故非識住。何等名為損壞識法？謂諸惡處有重苦受能損於識，第四靜慮有無想定及無想事，有頂天中有滅盡定能壞於識，令相續斷故非識住。復說：若處餘處有情心樂來止，若至於此不更求出，說名識住。於諸惡處，二義俱無。第四靜慮心恆求出，謂諸異生求入無想，若諸聖者樂入淨居或無色處，若淨居天樂證寂滅，有頂昧劣故非識住。如是分別七識住已。因茲復說九有情居。其九者何？頌曰：

(The Treatise continues:) The Abhasvara gods who were born long ago and already understand well the formation and destruction of the world comfort the frightened gods, saying: Pure sages, pure sages, do not fear, do not fear. In the past that fire burned up the Brahma palaces and emptied them all, and ended just there. Because they differ in perceptions of whether the fire comes or does not come and whether to fear or not to fear, they are called different in perception, not because pleasure and neither-pain-nor-pleasure perceptions mingle in them. Sentient beings with form, with one body and one perception, such as the Universal Purity gods, are the fourth abode of consciousness. Because they have only the perception of pleasure, they are called one in perception. In the first meditation, because of defiled perception, it is said to be one in perception; in the second meditation, because of two wholesome perceptions, it is said to be different in perception; in the third meditation, because of the perception of ripening, it is said to be one in perception; the lower three formless states are named separately, as in the sutra, and these three abodes of consciousness together make seven. Here, what dharma is called an abode of consciousness? It is the five aggregates or four aggregates bound to those places, as is appropriate, and these are called abodes of consciousness. Why are the other places not abodes of consciousness? Because in the other places there are dharmas that damage and destroy consciousness. What are the other places? Namely the evil destinies, the fourth meditation, and the Peak of Existence. Why? Because in those places there are dharmas that damage consciousness, they are not abodes of consciousness. What are the dharmas that damage consciousness? In the evil destinies there is heavy painful feeling that can injure consciousness; in the fourth meditation there is the attainment of non-perception and the matter of non-perceivers; in the Peak of Existence there is the attainment of cessation, which can destroy consciousness and cut the continuum; and so they are not abodes of consciousness. It is also said: A place where sentient beings in other places happily come to dwell in mind, and where, having arrived, they do not seek to leave again, is called an abode of consciousness. In the evil destinies, both meanings are absent. In the fourth meditation the mind constantly seeks to leave: ordinary beings seek to enter non-perception, the noble ones delight to enter the Pure Abodes or the formless realms, the gods of the Pure Abodes delight to realize quiescence, and the Peak of Existence is dim and weak, and so they are not abodes of consciousness. Having thus distinguished the seven abodes of consciousness, we next speak of the nine dwellings of sentient beings. What are the nine? The verse says:

應知兼有頂，及無想有情，

It should be known to add the Peak of Existence and the non-percipient beings,

是九有情居，餘非不樂住。

which are the nine dwellings of sentient beings; the others are not places where they willingly dwell.

論曰：前七識住及第一有、無想有情，是名為九，諸有情類唯於此九欣樂住故立有情居。餘處皆非，不樂住故。言餘處者，謂諸惡處，非有情類自樂居中，惡業羅剎逼之令住故。彼如牢獄不立有情居。第四靜慮除無想天，餘非有情居，如識住中釋。前所引經說七識住，復有餘經說四識住。其四者何？頌曰：

The Treatise says: The seven abodes of consciousness, the first existence, and the non-percipient beings are called the nine; because the various kinds of sentient beings delight to dwell only in these nine, they are established as dwellings of sentient beings. The other places are not, because they do not delight to dwell there. As for the other places, namely the evil destinies, sentient beings do not live there by their own pleasure; evil karma and rakshasas press them to remain. They are like prisons and are not established as dwellings of sentient beings. In the fourth meditation, apart from the non-percipient heaven, the rest are not dwellings of sentient beings, as explained under the abodes of consciousness. The sutra cited above speaks of seven abodes of consciousness, and other sutras speak of four abodes of consciousness. What are the four? The verse says:

四識住當知，四蘊唯自地，

The four abodes of consciousness should be known as the four aggregates, only of their own plane,

說獨識非住，有漏四句攝。

and consciousness alone is said not to be an abode; the defiled are included in four alternatives.

論曰：如契經言：識隨色住，識隨受住，識隨想住，識隨行住，是名四種。如是四種其體云何？謂隨次第有漏四蘊。又此唯在自地非餘，識所依著，名識住故。非於異地色等蘊中識隨愛力依著於彼。如何不說識為識住？由離能住立所住故。非能住識可名所住，如非即王可名王座。或若有法識所乘御，如人船理說名識住。非識即能乘御自體，是故不說識為識住。毘婆沙師所說如是。若爾，何故餘契經言：於識食中有喜有染，有喜染故識住其中、識所乘御。又如何言前七識住五蘊為體？雖有是說，而於生處所攝蘊中不別分析，總生喜染故。識轉時亦名識住，非獨說識。然色等蘊一一能生種種喜染令識依著，獨識不然，故言非住。是故於此四識住中識非識住，於餘可說。又佛意說，此四識住猶如良田，總說一切有取諸識猶如種子，不可種子立為良田。仰測世尊教意如是。又法與識可俱時生，為識良田可立識住。識蘊不爾，故非識住。如是所說七種四種，識住雖殊而皆有漏。為七攝四、四攝七耶？非遍相攝。可為四句。謂審觀察應知二門體互寬陿得成四句，或有七攝非四攝等。第一句者，謂七中識。第二句者，謂諸惡處、第四靜慮及有頂中，除識餘蘊。第三句者，七中四蘊。第四句者，謂除前相。於前所說諸界趣中，應知其生略有四種。何等為四？何處有何？頌曰：

The Treatise says: As the sutra says: Consciousness abides following form, consciousness abides following feeling, consciousness abides following perception, consciousness abides following formations; these are called the four kinds. What is the essence of these four kinds? Namely the four defiled aggregates in order. Moreover, these are only in their own plane and not in others, because consciousness clings to them as its support, and so they are called abodes of consciousness. In the aggregates of form and so on in other planes, consciousness does not cling to them through the force of craving. Why is consciousness itself not called an abode of consciousness? Because the abode must be established apart from what abides. The abiding consciousness cannot be called the abode, just as a king cannot be called the king's seat. Or, if a dharma is something consciousness mounts and drives, as a person does a boat, it is called an abode of consciousness. Consciousness itself is not its own mount and driver, and so consciousness is not called an abode of consciousness. This is what the Vaibhashika masters say. If so, why do other sutras say: In the nutriment of consciousness there is delight and there is defilement, and because there is delight and defilement, consciousness abides in it and is mounted and driven by it? And why, moreover, are the five aggregates said to be the essence of the previous seven abodes of consciousness? Although this is said, in the aggregates included in the place of birth they are not analyzed separately, because they generally give rise to delight and defilement. At the time of its turning, consciousness is also called an abode of consciousness, but it is not that consciousness alone is spoken of. Form and the other aggregates each can give rise to various delights and defilements and make consciousness cling to them, but consciousness alone does not do so, and so it is said not to be an abode. Therefore among these four abodes of consciousness, consciousness is not an abode of consciousness, but it can be said of the others. Further, the Buddha's intention is that these four abodes of consciousness are like fertile fields, and all consciousnesses that grasp are like seeds; seeds cannot be established as fertile fields. This is what we infer of the World-Honored One's teaching. Moreover, dharmas and consciousness can arise at the same time, so one can establish a fertile field for consciousness as an abode of consciousness; the aggregate of consciousness is not like this, and so it is not an abode of consciousness. The seven kinds and four kinds spoken of thus, though the abodes of consciousness differ, are all defiled. Do the seven include the four, or the four include the seven? They do not include each other completely. There can be four alternatives. That is, by carefully examining the two gateways, one should know that their essences are mutually wide and narrow and so make four alternatives: some are included in the seven but not in the four, and so on. The first alternative is the consciousness within the seven. The second is, in the evil destinies, the fourth meditation, and the Peak of Existence, the aggregates other than consciousness. The third is the four aggregates within the seven. The fourth is what is other than the foregoing. Among the realms and destinies described above, it should be known that there are briefly four kinds of birth. What are the four? Where is each found? The verse says:

於中有四生，有情謂卵等，

Among them there are four births, for sentient beings, namely egg-born and so on,

人傍生具四，地獄及諸天，

humans and animals have all four; hell beings and gods,

中有唯化生，鬼通胎化二。

and the intermediate existence, are only spontaneously born; ghosts include womb-born and spontaneously born.

論曰：謂有情類卵生、胎生、濕生、化生，是名為四。生謂生類。諸有情中雖餘類雜，而生類等。云何卵生？謂有情類生從卵㲉是名卵生，如鵝孔雀鸚鵡鴈等。云何胎生？謂有情類生從胎藏是名胎生，如象馬牛豬羊驢等。云何濕生？謂有情類生從濕氣是名濕生，如蟲飛蛾蚊蚰蜒等。云何化生？謂有情類生無所託是名化生，如那落迦、天、中有等，具根無缺支分頓生，無而欻有故名為化。人傍生趣各具四種。人卵生者，謂如世羅鄔波世羅生從鶴卵，鹿母所生三十二子，般遮羅王五百子等。人胎生者，如今世人。人濕生者，如曼馱多遮盧鄔波遮盧，鴿鬘菴羅衛等。人化生者，唯劫初人。傍生三種，共所現見。化生如龍揭路荼等。一切地獄、諸天、中有，皆唯化生。鬼趣唯通胎化二種。鬼胎生者，如餓鬼女白目連云：

The Treatise says: Sentient beings that are egg-born, womb-born, moisture-born, and spontaneously born are called the four. Birth means kind of birth. Among sentient beings, though other kinds are mixed, the kinds of birth are equal. What is egg-born? Sentient beings born from an eggshell are called egg-born, such as geese, peacocks, parrots, and wild geese. What is womb-born? Sentient beings born from a womb are called womb-born, such as elephants, horses, cattle, pigs, sheep, and donkeys. What is moisture-born? Sentient beings born from damp vapor are called moisture-born, such as insects, flying moths, mosquitoes, and centipedes. What is spontaneously born? Sentient beings born without any support are called spontaneously born, such as Naraka beings, gods, and intermediate beings, who are born at once with their faculties complete and their limbs without defect; because they suddenly come to be from nothing, it is called spontaneous. Humans and animals each have all four kinds. Egg-born humans are, for example, Lorupasera in the world, who was born from a crane's egg, the thirty-two sons born of the deer-mother, the five hundred sons of the King of Pancala, and so on. Womb-born humans are like the people of the world today. Moisture-born humans are such as Mandhata, Carupacaru, Kapotamala, Amra-palika, and so on. Spontaneously born humans are only the people at the beginning of an eon. Animals of three kinds are commonly seen; spontaneously born ones are like dragons and garudas. All hell beings, gods, and intermediate beings are only spontaneously born. The ghost destiny includes only two kinds, womb-born and spontaneously born. As for womb-born ghosts, a hungry ghost woman said to Maudgalyayana:

我夜生五子，隨生皆自食，

At night I give birth to five sons, and as each is born I eat him myself;

晝生五亦然，雖盡而無飽。

by day I give birth to five as well, and though I finish them, I am never full.

一切生中何生最勝？應言最勝唯是化生。若爾，何緣後身菩薩得生自在而受胎生？現受胎生有大利故，謂為引導諸大釋種親屬相因令入正法。又引餘類令知菩薩是輪王種生敬慕心，因得捨邪趣於正法。又令所化生增上心：彼既是人，能成大義；我曹亦爾，何為不能因發正勤專修正法？又若不爾，族姓難知，恐疑幻化為天為鬼。如外道論矯設謗言：過百劫後當有大幻出現於世噉食世間。故受胎生息諸疑謗。有餘師說：為留身界故受胎生，令無量人及諸異類一興供養千返生天及證解脫。若受化生無外種故，身才殞逝無復遺形，如滅燈光即無所見。若人信佛有持願通能久留身，此不成釋因論生論。若化生身如滅燈光死無遺者，何故契經說化生揭路荼取化生龍為充所食？以不知故為食取龍，不說充飢。斯有何失？或龍未死暫得充飢，死已還飢。暫食何咎！於四生內何者最多？唯化生。何以故？三趣少分及二趣全、一切中有皆化生故。此中何法說名中有？何緣中有非即名生？頌曰：

(The Treatise continues:) Among all kinds of birth, which is the most excellent? It should be said that the most excellent is only spontaneous birth. If so, why did the Bodhisattva of his last body, who had mastery over birth, take birth in the womb? Because taking womb-birth presented great benefits: namely, in order to guide the great Shakya relatives, who were connected to him by kinship, to enter the true Dharma; also to lead other kinds of beings to know that the Bodhisattva was born of a wheel-turning king's lineage and to give rise to reverence, so that through this they would abandon wrong paths and turn to the true Dharma; also to make those to be taught give rise to superior resolve: He was a human and could accomplish great things; we too are the same, why can we not therefore arouse diligence and devote ourselves to the true Dharma? Moreover, if it were not so, his lineage would be hard to know, and people might suspect that he was a magical creation, a god or a ghost. As the non-Buddhist treatises falsely slander, saying: After a hundred eons a great illusionist will appear in the world and devour the world. Therefore he took womb-birth to put an end to doubts and slanders. Some other masters say: He took womb-birth in order to leave his bodily relics, so that countless people and beings of other kinds, by making offerings once, would be reborn in heaven a thousand times and attain liberation. If he had taken spontaneous birth, since there is no external seed, his body would vanish at death leaving no form behind, like the light of an extinguished lamp, which can no longer be seen. If a person has faith in the Buddha and holds a vow with spiritual power to remain long, this does not make a valid explanation, since it concerns the cause and the birth. If the spontaneously born body, like the light of an extinguished lamp, leaves nothing behind at death, why does the sutra say that spontaneously born garudas take spontaneously born dragons as food? Because they do not know, they take dragons as food; it is not said that this fills their hunger. What fault is there in this? Or the dragon, not yet dead, can fill the hunger for a time, and when it dies, hunger returns. What fault is there in eating for a while? Among the four births, which is the most numerous? Only spontaneous birth. Why? Because a portion of three destinies, two destinies entire, and all intermediate beings are spontaneously born. Here, what dharma is called the intermediate existence? Why is the intermediate existence not itself called birth? The verse says:

死生二有中，五蘊名中有，

Between the existence of death and the existence of birth, the five aggregates are called the intermediate existence,

未至應至處，故中有非生。

since they have not yet reached the place they are to reach, the intermediate existence is not birth.

論曰：於死有後、在生有前，即彼中間有自體起，為至生處故起此身，二趣中間故名中有。此身已起，何不名生？生謂當來所應至處，依所至義建立生名。此中有身其體雖起而未至彼，故不名生。何謂當來所應至處？所引異熟究竟分明，是謂當來所應至處。有餘部說：從死至生處容間絕，故無中有。此不應許。所以者何？依理教故。理教者何？頌曰：

The Treatise says: After the existence at death and before the existence at birth, in between the two, a self-nature arises; because it arises in order to reach the place of birth, and it is between two destinies, it is called the intermediate existence. This body has already arisen, so why is it not called birth? Birth means the place that will in future be reached, and the name birth is established according to the meaning of arrival. Although the essence of this intermediate body has arisen, it has not yet arrived there, so it is not called birth. What is meant by the place to be reached in future? When the ripened result that has been drawn forth becomes finally distinct, this is called the place to be reached in future. Some other schools say: From death to the place of birth there may be an interruption, and so there is no intermediate existence. This should not be admitted. Why? Because of reasoning and scripture. What are the reasoning and scripture? The verse says:

如穀等相續，處無間續生，

As with grain and so on in continuity, the place continues without interval in birth;

像實有不成，不等故非譬。

the really existing image is not established, and since it is not equal it is no analogy.

一處無二並，非相續二生，

In one place there are not two together, and it is not that two births are in continuity;

說有健達縛，及五七經故。

because the gandharva is spoken of, and because of the five-seven sutras.

論曰：且依正理中有非無。現見世間相續轉法，要處無間剎那續生。且如世間穀等相續，有情相續理亦應然，剎那續生處必無間。豈不現見有法續生，而於其中處亦有間？如依鏡等從質像生。如是有情死有生有，處雖有間何妨續生？實有諸像理不成故，又非等故為喻不成。謂別色生說名為像，其體實有理所不成。設成非等，故不成喻。言像不成故非喻者，以一處所無二並故。謂於一處鏡色及像並見現前，二色不應同處並有，依異大故。又陿水上兩岸色形，同處一時俱現二像。居兩岸者互見分明，曾無一處並見二色，不應謂此二色俱生。又影與光未嘗同處，然曾見鏡懸置影中，光像顯然現於鏡面，不應於此謂二並生。或言一處無二並者，鏡面月像謂之為二，近遠別見如觀井水，若有並生如何別見？故知諸像於理實無。然諸因緣和合勢力令如是見，以諸法性功能差別難可思議。已辯不成所以非喻。言非等故亦非喻者，以質與像非相續故。謂質與像非一相續，唯依鏡等有像現故，像與本質俱時有故。如死生有是一相續前後無間餘處續生，質像相望無此相續，以不相似故不成喻。又所現像由二生故，謂二緣故諸像得生：一者本質、二者鏡等。二中勝者像依彼生，生有無容由二緣起，唯有死有無別勝依，故所引喻非等於法。亦不可說以外非情精血等緣為勝依性，由化生者空中欻生，於中計何為勝依性？已依正理對破彼宗從死至生處容間絕，是故中有決定非無。次依聖教證有中有，謂契經言：有有七種，即五趣有、業有、中有。若此契經彼部不誦，豈亦不誦《健達縛經》？如契經言：入母胎者要由三事俱現在前，一者母身是時調適、二者父母交愛和合、三健達縛正現在前。除中有身，何健達縛？前蘊已壞，何現在前？若此契經彼亦不誦，復云何釋《掌馬族經》？如彼經言：汝今知不？

The Treatise says: First, by correct reasoning, the intermediate existence is not non-existent. We see in the world that for dharmas that proceed in continuity, the place must continue without interval from moment to moment. Just as the continuity of grain and so on in the world, so the continuity of sentient beings should reasonably be the same: the place must be without interval as moments continue. Do we not see that dharmas arise in continuity and yet the place between them has a gap? For example, an image arises from a form in a mirror and so on. Likewise for sentient beings, from the existence of death to the existence of birth, though there is a gap in place, what harm is there to their continuing to arise? Because the reality of various images cannot be established, and because it is not equal, it fails as an analogy. Namely, the form that arises separately and is called an image has a real essence that cannot be established by reasoning. Even if established, it is not equal, and so it fails as an analogy. It is said that images are not established and so are no analogy, because in one place there cannot be two together. That is, in one place both the mirror's form and the image are seen present, but two forms should not coexist in one place, since they depend on different great elements. Again, on a narrow stretch of water, the forms of the two banks both appear as images at the same moment in the same place. Those on the two banks see each other clearly, but never in one place see two forms together, and it should not be said that these two forms are born together. Furthermore, shadow and light never occupy the same place, yet we have seen a mirror hung in the shadow, with the light and image clearly appearing on the mirror's surface; here it should not be said that the two are born together. Or, regarding the saying that there are not two in one place: the moon's image on a mirror's surface is called two, and it is seen as near and far separately, like looking into a well; if they were born together, how could they be seen separately? Therefore know that images in reason are in truth non-existent. Rather, the force of the combination of various causes and conditions makes it seen thus, because the capacities and differences of the nature of dharmas are hard to conceive. Having explained that it is not established and so no analogy: as to saying it is not equal and so also not an analogy, because the original form and the image are not a continuity. That is, the original form and the image are not one continuity, since the image appears only depending on the mirror and so on, and because the image and the original form exist at the same time. The existence of death and the existence of birth are one continuity, before and after without interval, with the continuation taking place elsewhere; the original form and the image have no such continuity in relation to each other, and since they are not alike, the analogy fails. Moreover, the image that appears arises from two, namely because images arise through two conditions: one, the original form, and two, the mirror and so on. Of the two, the image depends on the superior one for arising, but for the existence of birth, which arises from two conditions, only the existence of death is there and there is no other superior support, and so the cited analogy is not equal to the thing it illustrates. Nor can one say that external non-sentient things such as semen and blood are the superior support, because for spontaneous birth, which suddenly arises in space, what could be reckoned as the superior support in it? Having refuted by correct reasoning the position that between death and the place of birth there may be an interruption, the intermediate existence is therefore definitely not non-existent. Next, from the holy teaching we establish the existence of the intermediate existence. The sutra says: There are seven existences, namely the five destinies, karmic existence, and intermediate existence. If that school does not recite this sutra, does it also not recite the Gandharva Sutra? As the sutra says: Entering a mother's womb requires three things to be present together: first, the mother's body is in good condition at that time; second, father and mother unite in love; third, the gandharva is actually present. Apart from the intermediate body, what gandharva could there be? The previous aggregates have already been destroyed, so what would be present? If that school also does not recite this sutra, then how do they explain the Sutra of the Horse-Keepers' Clan? As that sutra says: Do you now know?

此健達縛正現前者，為婆羅門、為剎帝利、為是吠舍、為戍達羅？為東方來、為南西北？前蘊已壞不可言來，此所言來固唯中有。若復不誦如是契經，《五不還經》當云何釋？如契經說：有五不還，一者中般、二者生般、三無行般、四有行般、五者上流。中有若無，何名中般？有餘師執：有天名中，住彼般涅槃，是故名中般。是則應許有生等天；既不許然，故執非善。又經說有七善士趣，謂於前五，中般分三，由處及時近中遠故。譬如札火小星迸時，才起近即滅，初善士亦爾。譬如鐵火小星迸時，起至中乃滅，二善士亦爾。譬如鐵火大星迸時，遠未墮而滅，三善士亦爾。非彼所執別有中天，有此時處三品差別，故彼所執定非應理。有餘復說：或壽量中間、或近天中間，斷餘煩惱成阿羅漢，是名中般。由至界位或想或尋而般涅槃，故有三品：或取色界眾同分已即般涅槃，是名第一。從是次後受天樂已方般涅槃，是名第二。復從此後入天法會乃般涅槃，是名第三。入法會已復經多時方般涅槃，是名生般。或減多壽方般涅槃非創生時，故名生般。如是所說與火星喻皆不相應。所以者何？以彼處行無差別故。又無色界亦應說有中般涅槃，由彼亦有壽量中間般涅槃故。然不說彼有中般者，如嗢拕南伽他中說：

(The treatise continues:) When this gandharva is actually present, is it a Brahmin, a kshatriya, a vaishya, or a shudra? Does it come from the east, or from the south, west, or north? Since the former aggregates have already perished it cannot be said to come from anywhere; what is said here to come is surely the intermediate existence only. If one does not recite such a sutra, how should the Sutra of the Five Non-Returners be explained? As the sutra says: there are five non-returners: first, one who attains nirvana in the intermediate state; second, one who attains it upon birth; third, one who attains it without exertion; fourth, one who attains it with exertion; and fifth, one who goes upstream. If there were no intermediate existence, why would the first be called one who attains nirvana in the intermediate state? Some other masters hold: there is a heaven called Intermediate, and one who dwells there and attains nirvana is therefore called one who attains nirvana in the intermediate state. In that case it should be admitted that there are also heavens of birth and so on; since this is not admitted, that view is not sound. Again the sutra speaks of seven good persons' destinies, namely, among the five before, the one who attains nirvana in the intermediate state is divided into three, by the nearness, middle, and distance of place and time. It is like a spark flying from a piece of hot kindling: it dies out as soon as it rises, near the source; the first good person is likewise. It is like a small spark flying from hot iron: it rises to the middle and then dies out; the second good person is likewise. It is like a large spark flying from hot iron: it dies out far away before it falls; the third good person is likewise. It is not that there is a separate intermediate heaven as they hold, with these three grades of time and place; so what they hold is surely unreasonable. Other masters further say: either in the middle of the lifespan or near a heaven's middle, one severs the other afflictions and becomes an arhat, which is called attaining nirvana in the intermediate state. Upon reaching the realm and the stage, through perception or reflection one attains nirvana, so there are three grades: either one takes on the common class of the form realm and then at once attains nirvana, which is called the first; or, after enjoying heavenly pleasure after that, one then attains nirvana, which is called the second; or, after this, one enters a heavenly assembly of the Dharma and then attains nirvana, which is called the third. One who, after entering the Dharma assembly, passes through much time before attaining nirvana is called one who attains it upon birth; or, having shortened much of the lifespan, one attains nirvana not at the start of birth, and is therefore called one who attains it upon birth. What is said thus does not correspond to the analogy of the sparks. Why? Because there is no difference in the practice at those places. Furthermore, in the formless realm too one should speak of attaining nirvana in the intermediate state, since there also one attains nirvana in the middle of the lifespan. Yet it is not said that they have this, as the Udana verse says:

總集眾聖賢，四靜慮各十，

All the assembled noble worthies: ten in each of the four meditations,

三無色各七，唯六謂非想。

seven in each of the three formless states, and only six in neither perception nor non-perception.

故彼所執皆是虛妄。若復不誦如是等經，無上法王久已滅度，諸大法將亦般涅槃，聖教支離已成多部，其於文義異執交馳，取捨任情於今轉盛。哀哉汝等固守愚迷違理拒教，可傷之甚。諸有馮前理教為量，中有於彼實有極成。若爾，云何契經中說造極惡業度使魔羅，現身顛墜無間地獄。此經意說，彼命未捨，地獄猛焰已燒其身，因此命終受彼中有，乘茲乃墮無間地獄。由彼惡業勢力增強，不待命終苦相已至，先受現受、後受生受。何故經說：一類有情於五無間業作及增長已，無間必定生那落迦？此經意遮彼往異趣，及顯彼業定順生受。若但執文，應要具五方生地獄，非隨闕一或餘業因，便成大過。又言：無間生那落迦，應作即生不待身壞。或誰不許中有是生？那落迦名亦通中有，死有無間中有起時亦得名生，生方便故。經言無間生那落迦，不言爾時即是生有。若爾，經頌復云何通？如經頌言：

(The treatise continues:) Therefore all that they hold is false. If one does not recite sutras such as these, the unsurpassed Dharma King has long since passed into nirvana, the great Dharma generals have also entered nirvana, the holy teaching has been fragmented into many schools, and in regard to text and meaning divergent views race about, with acceptance and rejection following personal feeling, now more flourishing than ever. Alas, you cling to foolish delusion, going against reason and rejecting the teaching; how deeply to be lamented. For those who take the preceding reasoning and scripture as the standard, the intermediate existence is truly established. If so, how does the sutra say that one who has committed extremely evil karma crosses over by the messenger Mara and falls alive into the Uninterrupted Hell? The meaning of this sutra is that before that person's life is given up, the fierce flames of the hell have already burned his body, and because of this he dies and receives that intermediate existence, riding on which he then falls into the Uninterrupted Hell. Because the power of that evil karma is so strong, the signs of suffering arrive without waiting for death, and one first receives the result in the present life and later the result in the next birth. Why does the sutra say: a certain kind of sentient being, having committed and accumulated the five uninterrupted karmas, is necessarily born in hell without interval? The meaning of this sutra is to prevent them from going to other destinies and to show that this karma will surely ripen in birth. If one holds only to the text, one should have to complete all five before being born in hell, and if any one were lacking, or if other karmic causes intervened, it would become a great error. Also, it is said: without interval one is born in hell; this should be taken to mean immediately born without waiting for the body to break up. Or who does not admit that the intermediate existence is a birth? The word hell also covers the intermediate existence, and when the intermediate existence arises without interval after the death existence it is also called birth, as a means toward birth. The sutra says one is born in hell without interval, and does not say that at that time it is the birth existence. If so, how is the sutra verse to be explained? As the sutra verse says:

再生汝今過盛位，至衰將近琰魔王，

You, born again, have now passed the prime of life, and in decline you draw near to King Yama;

欲往前路無資糧，求住中間無所止。

you wish to go on the road ahead but have no provisions, you seek a place to stay in between but there is nowhere to stop.

若有中有，如何世尊言彼中間無有所止？此頌意顯彼於人中速歸磨滅無暫停義。或彼中有為至所生亦無暫停，行無礙故。寧知經意如此非餘？汝復焉知如餘非此？二責既等，何乃偏徵？二釋於經並無違害，如何偏證中有是無。凡引證言理無異趣，此有異趣為證不成。

(The treatise continues:) If there is an intermediate existence, how does the World-Honored One say that in the middle there is nowhere to stop? The meaning of this verse is to show that among humans one swiftly passes away without any pause. Or the intermediate being, in reaching where it is to be born, also has no pause, because its movement is unobstructed. How do you know the sutra's meaning is thus and not otherwise? And how do you know it is otherwise and not thus? The two challenges being equal, why press only one? Both explanations are in no conflict with the sutra, so how can one use it to prove only that the intermediate existence does not exist? In all citation of proof, reason does not differ; since this one allows a different reading, the proof is not established.