《俱舍》英譯本問題若干
王
王路在隐身约 39 分钟
王路在隐身约 39 分钟
上个月，我开始翻阅《俱舍》的两个英译本，并随手记下错误。因为一开始只打算翻翻颂，看看阿毗达磨术语用英文怎么表达，所以长行基本上是跳过去的，碰到复杂一点的地方，才会看看英文长行对不对。
我记下错误的方式非常简单粗暴，就是直接把有问题的句子复制下来， 如果句子长，甚至只复制半个句子，加个按语说“某某词错了”，就完了。非常简单省事，写汉语跟写英语是一样的，只需要写“is wrong”就行。 后来，丁一老师帮助我 核对法文和梵文 ，并补充了英文解释。这之后，我就把活儿干得细一点了。所以，第六品和第八品，我基本上把长行都读了，少数尾注也读了。
第六品和第八品里，找出了38个问题，又从第七品里拽出两条，凑够40个。40个已经不算太少了。而且我最近的劲头也不是很大了，所以先把它们贴出来。第一二品的10个问题，我们贴在了H-Buddhism上。加上这里的40条，就50条了。
前两天，我和许国明（水果）在毗昙群里讨论欲界色的法后得问题，他纠正了我的一个误解。我之前以为欲界色的法后得是限于无表的，实际上表色也有（这个问题在应用上很值得展开聊聊，回头有空再写）。每当琢磨这些问题的时候，我会觉得比读英文《俱舍》或者现当代的阿毗达磨论文更费劲——是费劲得多。我以前学阿毗达磨，主要是通过这种办法的。经常会有一个问题卡住，三天想不通，甚至三个月想不通，乃至半年一年都没有准确理解和消化的。
也就是在这种困顿中，进步是最大的。你哪怕不能得到想要的问题结论，但在探索过程中，会对一些知识理解得更清晰，纠正先前的误解也是家常便饭。而读论文，可以读得很快，英文论文，写notes的话，可以一天一篇；中文的话，两小时就差不多了。但对学习阿毗达磨的帮助，是非常有限的。不过读论文会比琢磨问题轻松，而且容易满足虚荣心，比较好 读 下去。琢磨问题的话，一开始是有兴趣的，而一旦卡住没有进展，慢慢就有点灰心了，还会挫败。虽然在挫败中总归知道这是进步的必由之路，但头一懵还是想睡觉或者搞别的了。
琢磨问题的话，除了问题本身带来的激励，是很少有别的激励的。不过， 我认为，这是学习阿毗达磨的正确道路。前提是，问题确实是问题（这是另外的话题）。 但抛开“ 我认为” ， 这种方式 在今天的 阿 毗达磨研究当中，是绝对的非主 流。 有时候，我会想到别的专业工作的验证标准，比如计算机或者工程，他们是可以在应用上见分晓的。 就像两辆车 ，谁跑得快，遛遛就 知道了。 所谓“少废话， show me the code ” 。 但有些领域，很多时候是没有code的。
1.
Pruden (6-19a-b 長行pp. 932-933) Strong Patience exists when the ascetic considers, in a single thought, only one aspect [=impermanence] applied to the sufferings of Kamadhatu. Such is the explanation of the Vaibhasi- kas.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-19ab 長行，p. 1914) When the practitioners consider, in one single thought, no more than one aspect or mode of activity ("impermanent") applied to the unsatisfactoriness of the realm of desire, that is the strong receptivity.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「從此位無間起勝善根一行一剎那名上品忍」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 119c11-12)
兩處不必然是"impermanent"行相 。其實，前面的"they apply their mind to no more than two aspects or modes of activity ("impermanent", "unsatisfactory") "也錯了，因為是同類型的問題，不單獨列出來了。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「世第一法，緣欲苦諦法念住現在修未來四，隨一行相現在修未來四，無異分故、似見道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120a7-9)
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷109：「又見行者復有二種。著我見者依非我行相入正性離生。著我所見者依空行相入正性離生。諸愛行者亦有二種。我慢增者依非常行相入正性離生。懈怠增者依苦行相入正性離生。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, pp. 563c26-564a2)
2. Pruden (6-22d 長行pp. 938-939) Loss through falling necessarily results from the defilements; but not unqualified loss {vihdni), which can result from a quality, for example, the loss of the quality of Prthagjana at the production of the Path, etc.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1920) Loss-through-retrogressing necessarily results from defilements [do,m; klesa]; but not unqualified (na avasyam) loss (vihani), which can result from something good (gu,:ta), for example, the loss of the status of ordinary worldling when producing the (noble) path, etc.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「失退二捨非得為性，退必起過，失不必然。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120b20-21)
兩個英譯本的例子錯了，「見道」根本不會捨此善根。 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「聖由失地捨， 異生由命終， 初二亦退捨， 依本必見諦」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120a14-15) 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「然除彼得，勿諸聖者煖等善根重現前故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 119c18-19)
3. Pruden (6-23b 長行p. 940) and those defilements which are abandoned by the Seeing of the Truths.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1921) defilements (klesa), those that have been abandoned by insight into the truths. (MYS, 165b6) <175>
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「惑謂見所斷惑」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120c8-9)
由於「忍位」在見道之前，這裡想說的是「那些『見所斷的煩惱』從現在開始就永遠不會再生起了」，不是說「已經被見道斷除的煩惱」。有必要補充的兩點是：1,「見所斷惑」不一定都是通過「見道」斷除的。2，「見所斷惑」中，有一部分是有可能在「忍位」之前由世俗道斷除的，即有頂之外的「見所斷惑」。不管「見所斷惑」此時有沒有斷除，斷除了多少，它們從「上忍位」開始，就再也不會生起。
4. Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1921) through weak receptivity, unfortunate planes of existence enter into the condition destined to arise;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「此於下上位，隨所應而得，謂於下忍得惡趣不生，所餘不生至上忍方得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120c9-10)
應該是not to arise, Pruden (6-23b 長行p. 940)是對的：through weak Patience, the painful realms of rebirth enter into the condition of not arising。
5. Pruden (6-24a-b note148, p. 1054) 148. Hsiian-tsang: After having produced the first two nirvedhabhdgiyas, he can change to another vehicle.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-24a-b note271, p. 2078) LVP: Hstian-tsang: After having produced the first two stages conducive to penetration, they can change to another vehicle.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「有餘獨覺異麟角喻，起彼種性初二善根，轉向餘乘，理無遮礙。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 121a3-5)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「若有人執，有別獨覺異犀角喻獨覺，於彼人轉二善根成菩薩。此義無遮。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 273a17-19)
玄奘的意思是，除了麟角喻之外的獨覺，可以在初二善根（即煖善根或頂善根）的階段轉向餘乘，也就是說，可以在生起第三善根（忍善根）之前轉向餘乘；而不是說在生起初二善根之後轉向餘乘。
6. Pruden (7-1c, p. 1088) This refers to the eight abhtsamaya knowledges (duhkhe jridna, etc., vi. 26) [and also to all prajnd of the pure Path of Meditation up to the Knowledge of Extinction].
Lodrö Sangpo (7-1c, p. 2171) This refers to the eight cognitions of direct realization (abhisamaya) (cognition with regard to unsatisfactoriness [dub,khe jiiiina], etc.; vi. 26) (and also to any understanding of the pure path of cultivation up to [but not including] the cognition of exhaustion).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷26〈7 分別智品〉：「所餘皆通智見二性」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 134b27-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷19〈7 分別慧品〉：「釋曰：異於忍及盡智無生智，所餘無流般若，亦見亦智。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 285c18-19)
兩個英譯本中對「所餘」進行了解釋。從解釋看，他們都把「現觀」理解為等同於「見道」了，實際上，其中的「道類智」屬於修道。更重要的是，他們都沒有提到「無學道」的諸智。
7. Pruden (6-32, 長行, p. 955) As a consequence, the abider in a result, as long as he does not exert himself with a view to a higher progress for the acquisition of a new state, that is, as long as he does not cultivate the preparatory exercises which have for their result the abandoning of the defilements not yet abandoned and which is the cause of the acquisition of a new state, this resident is not a candidate for this new state.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, 長行, p. 1938) Consequently, the abiders in the fruit, as long as they do not devote themselves (prayujyate) to a higher progress (vise~iiya) in mind, for the acquisition of a new fruit, i.e., as long as they do not cultivate the preparatory effort (prayoga) which has for its result the abandonment of defilements not yet abandoned and which is the cause for the acquisition of a new fruit, so long are these abiders not approachers of this new fruit.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「然諸先斷欲界修惑一至五等，至得果時，此生必定起勝果道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c23-24)
“the defilements not yet abandoned”错了。这里之所以「此生必定起勝果道」，不是此生要進斷尚未斷的煩惱，而是對見道前以世俗道斷的煩惱(非果道攝者)起無漏離繫得。
8. Pruden (6-32, 長行, p. 956) Nevertheless, the ascetic who, [previously] detached from the Third Dhyana [by a worldly path], enters into niydma (vi.26a) or the Path of Seeing in a sphere lower than this Dhyana [that is, in anagamya, the First or Second Dhyana, or an intermediate state], certainly realizes a path higher than the result.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, 長行, p. 1938) Nevertheless, the practitioners who, (previously) detached from the third meditation (dhyiina) (through a mundane path), enter into the assurance (niyiima; vi. 26a) or the path of insight (darsanamiirga) by relying on a stage lower than this meditation (i.e., by relying on the preparatory meditation [aniigamya], the first and second meditation, the intermediate meditation [dhyiiniintara]), certainly realize a path higher than the fruit (phalavisi~fa'!l miirgam).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「由此先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道者，彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c24-27)
"Nevertheless"錯了，這裡不是轉折關係，是解釋說明前面的原則，即玄奘的“由此”。
9. Pruden (6-32, note199, p. 1060) It is certain that this ascetic acquires, by means of the Path of Seeing, a pure sukhendriya of the sphere of the Third Dhyana;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, note375, p. 2105) It is certain that these practitioners acquire, by means of the path of insight, a pure faculty of sensation of pleasure (sukhendriya) of the sphere of the third meditation;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「由此先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道者，彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道。若異此者，聖生上地應不可說定成樂根。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c24-27)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「若人離欲第三定，更依下地[1]入正定，此人必定現前由果勝道。若不爾，從下生上界則不應與樂根相應」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 275a3-5)[1] 入【大】，人【宋】
實際上，這種情況（「先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道」），在見道階段，恰恰是不能得「第三靜慮無漏樂根」的——這正是為什麼「彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道」的原因，假如通過見道得了無漏樂根，就不需要再「起勝果道」得無漏樂根了。兩個注釋隨後的解釋邏輯也是錯誤的。
10. Lodrö Sangpo (6-38ab, p. 1951) Those who are called half-leapers (ardhapluta) are the noble ones who, leaping over only one place,452 { 4 b} enter among those of the Highest (Akani~thas) after being reborn among those of the pure abodes.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「言半超者，從彼漸次生下淨居，乃至中間能越一處生色究竟，超非全故名為半超。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 124c14-16)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「半超出者，從初定生淨居已，乃至超一別處，方生阿迦尼師吒。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 276b20-21)
"only one" 錯了，實際上，超任意一處即可，超多處亦可。Pruden (p. 968) "passing beyond any one place"，是合適的。
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷174：「半超者謂欲界歿生梵眾天。梵眾天歿於上一切天處或更生一處或二或三或四或五。乃至或唯超一處遍生餘處然後生色究竟。或生非想非非想處而般涅槃。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, p. 875c8-12)
《俱舍論記》卷24：「此半超人於十六天極少三生。初生梵眾。次十四天中隨生一處。後生色究竟 若極多生十五。於十六天隨其所應中間越一。生餘十五」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 361b17-20)
11. Pruden (6-41a-b, 長行, p. 973) But the Aryan who obtains the state of Anagamin after having been reborn in Rupadhatu, goes sometimes to Arupyadhatu as a Bhavagraparana Urdhvasrota.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-41a-b, 長行, p. 1956) But the noble ones who obtain the fruit of non-returner after having been reborn in the realm of fine-materiality sometimes go to the realm of immateriality in the status of those who go higher (iirdhvasrotas) that are destined to the limit of the summit of cyclic existence (bhaviigraparama).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「若於色界經生聖者，容有上生無色界義，如行色界極有頂者。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 125b22-23)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「於色界中，若轉生聖人，有時入無色界。若上流，有頂為勝。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 277a14-15)
實際上，說的是先得阿那含果，然後生色界，不可能生色界後得阿那含。阿那含只能依欲界身得。見55a, Lodrö Sangpo (p. 1981): " The [first] three [fruits of the way of virtuous endeavor: (1) stream- enterer (2) once-returner, (3) non-returner,] are acquired only in Kama."（看note605, p. 2127, LVP是懂這個的，可能不熟練。）
12. Pruden (6-41cd, 長行, p. 974) The Aryan who has become an Anagamin by being reborn in Kamadhatu and one who is born in a higher sphere are not even capable of modifying their faculties;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-41cd, 長行, p. 1957) (1) The noble ones who have become non-returners by being reborn in the realm of desire (kiime parivrttajanmii) and (2) those who are born in a higher realm are not even capable of modifying their (praxis-oriented) faculties (indriyasa,p,ciira);
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「即此已經欲界生者及已從此往上界生諸聖，必無練根并退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 125b26-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「此者是於欲界轉生聖人及有別聖人，往上界受生。此等人無練根修行，又無因緣得退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 277a20-22)
不需要是「阿那含」，只要是經欲界生的聖人，無論是不是阿那含，都沒有練根和退失。
13. Pruden (6-42b, 長行, p. 976) In our opinion, the combination of a single, unique impure moment with two pure moments, is impossible to everyone, with the exception of the Buddha. Consequently the combination of a Dhyana is achieved when one enters, for the period of time that one wants, into three prolongued Dhyanas, pure, impure, and pure.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-42b, 長行, p. 1959) In our opinion, the combination of one single impure moment (k~a,:za) with two pure moments [k~a,:zavyavakira,:za] is impossible for anyone except the Buddha. Conse- quently, the combination of one meditation is achieved when one enters into three prolonged fpravaha; prabandhika] meditations, (1) pure, (2) impure, (3) pure, for the desired period of time.
這一段在玄奘、真諦譯本中都沒有，而且與玄奘、真諦譯本「成由一念雜」的頌文矛盾，還與英譯本43ab的長行相矛盾，可能不是《俱舍論》的觀點。
14. Lodrö Sangpo (6-44d, 長行, p. 1965) For the formless meditative attainments, there are twenty, thirty-two and forty-eight [adamantine concentrations].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「空處四十，識處三十二，無所有處二十四。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 126c14-15)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「於空處等依止，次第有四十、三十二、二十四三摩提。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278a20-21)
Lodrö Sangpo這裡的數字錯了，這是在前面28、24、20的基礎上，分別加上12、8、4。Pruden (p. 982)是正確的: "For the Arupyas, we have forty, thirty-two and twenty-four."
15. Pruden (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 985) the worldly path of a certain sphere cannot be opposed to this same sphere
Lodrö Sangpo (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 1969) the mundane path of a certain stage [bhumi] cannot be opposed to this same stage,
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「自地不能治自地故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127a25-26)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「依自地道非對治故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278b28-29)
應該說：自地世俗道不能治自地煩惱；或者：自地煩惱不能被自地世俗道對治。被治(be opposed)的是煩惱。
16. Pruden (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 986) This possession is worldly and transworldly.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-46ab, 長行, p. 1969) This possession is mundane [laukika] and supramundane [lokottara].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「論曰：諸有學聖用有漏道離下八地修斷染時，能具引生二離繫得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127b4-5)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「釋曰：由世間道，若聖人至得離欲，則有二種滅離至得起：一世間至得、二出世至得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278c7-8)
實際上，是兩種得，一種有漏（世間），一種無漏（出世間）；不是一種得同時是「世間」和「出世間」。英譯本46c有類似的表述，不再重複了。
17. Pruden (6-47ab, 頌與長行, p. 987) 47a-b. But, if he is not filled with these defilements, he is like a saint half delivered from Bhavagra, like a person who is reborn above. This Aryan does not have worldly acquisition of disconnection; nevertheless this Aryan is not filled with the said defilements.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-47ab, 頌與長行, p. 1970) 47ab. But, if they are not endowed with these defilements, that is like the noble ones who are half-liberated from the summit of cyclic existence, like the persons who are reborn above. There is no mundane acquisition of the disconnection for these noble ones; nevertheless, these noble ones are not endowed with the aforementioned defilements.
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「偈曰：有頂半解脫，如上生不應。釋曰：此人雖無世間滅離至得，亦不得與彼惑相應。譬如有學人於有頂惑[6]以得半解脫，於中必無世間滅離至得。由修練根行故，已捨出世至得，與彼地惑亦不相應。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278c16-20)[6] 以【大】，已【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「此證非理。所以者何？彼聖設無有漏斷得，亦不成就上地煩惱。如分離有頂得轉根時及異生上生不成惑故。謂如分離有頂地染，後依靜慮得轉根時，無漏斷得既已頓捨，彼地離繫無有漏得，而彼地惑亦不成就。又如異生生二定等，雖捨欲界等煩惱斷得，而不成就欲界等煩惱，此亦應然。故不成證。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127b13-20)
這裡很明顯，LVP所據本，相比玄奘譯本，是和真諦譯本更接近的。英譯本的頌，在真諦譯本存在，在玄奘譯本中只有長行（沒有以頌文的形式顯示）。兩個英譯本中，“if he is not filled with these defilements”的意思都錯了。世親菩薩想表達的是：即便不成就有漏離繫得，也不會成就（之前斷過的）上地煩惱。兩個英譯本的長行中，假設的意思不見了，變成了肯定（There is no mundane acquisition of the disconnection for these noble ones）——實際上，是假設不存在（世親菩薩是認為存在的），這種假設是為了反駁「餘師」的論證方式，並不是反駁餘師的結論；也就是玄奘開頭和結尾說的「此證非理」「故不成證」。玄奘譯本精確地表達了世親菩薩的意思。還可參考《順正理論》。
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷66：「此證非理。所以者何？彼聖設無有漏斷得，亦不成就上地煩惱，如分離有頂得轉根時，及異生上生不成惑故。謂如分離有頂地染，後依靜慮得轉根時，無漏斷得既已頓捨，彼地離繫無有漏得，而彼地惑亦不成就。又如異生生二定等，雖捨欲界等煩惱斷得，而不成就欲界等煩惱，以欲界等有漏離繫得初定等攝，唯彼能治故，若生上地此得必捨，生上地必捨下有漏善故。此二雖無煩惱斷得，而勝進故遮惑得生；彼亦應然，故證非理。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 701c18-28)
18. Lodrö Sangpo (6-50ab, note558, p. 2122) LS: Dhammajoti comments (SA.IV.463) that the unshakable ones have "then absolutely abandoned all defilements along with their traces (viisanii) and overcome the undefiled igno- rance (akli~fa-ajiiiina)".
「習氣」和「不染無知」只有佛能斷除，而不是不動阿羅漢。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷1〈1 分別界品〉：「聲聞獨覺雖滅諸冥，以[8]染無知畢竟[9]斷故；非[10]一切種，所以者何？由於佛法極遠時處及諸義類無邊差別，[11]不染無知猶未斷故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 1a16-19)[8] Kliṣṭa-saṃmoha. [9] 〔－〕【CB】【磧-CB】【宋】【元】【明】【宮】，未【大】(cf. Q25_p0635a12; T29n1563_p0779a03) [10] Sarvathā. [11] Akliṣṭam ajñānam.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷27：「何故名力？以於一切所知境中智無礙轉，故名為力。由此十力唯依佛身，唯佛已除諸惑習氣於一切境隨欲能知，餘此相違故不名力。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 140b23-26)
19. Pruden (6-52c-53b, 長行, p. 994) That is to say: (1-2) there is the abandoning of the path of the candidate, and the acquisition of the path of the result;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-52c-53b, 頌與長行, p. 1976) In one fruit, there is (1) the abandonment of a previous path [i.e., of the path of the approacher], … 1.the abandonment of the path of the approacher;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「一捨曾道，謂捨[1]先得果向道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 128a29-b1)[1] 先【大】，無【宋】【元】【明】
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「一先捨離前道。二至得未曾得道，由捨離至得向道道果故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 279c7-8)
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷70：「諸住果位修練根時，捨果得果；住勝道位修練根時，捨二得果。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 723c24-26)
兩個英譯本只說了捨「向道」，實際上，如果有先得「果道」，先得「果道」和「向道」都會捨棄。
20. Pruden (6-58b, 長行, p. 1004) When an Arhat again becomes a Saiksa, he dwells in the same family that was his first family. Otherwise, in the hypothesis that he would obtain a better family, he would progress, and he would not fall away.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-58b, 長行, p. 1986) When perfected beings again become those in training, they dwell in the same family that was their first family. Otherwise, in the hypothesis where they should obtain a better family, they would progress, they would not retrogress.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「思法等四退住學位，時還住退非餘。若異此者，得勝種性故，應是進非退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 129c18-19)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「若退成有學人，於中得住，不住餘性。若不爾，由得增[1]長性，轉增不成退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 281a9-10)[1] 長【大】，進【宋】【元】【明】
英譯本中說的“his first family”，其實就是「退法」種性；因為，假如得阿羅漢果時不是退法種性，他是不會退的。「思法種性」退果，是因為他在得阿羅漢果時是退法種性，然後通過練根成為思法種性，因此，他的first family還是「退法種性」，而不是「思法種性」。這一點，玄奘譯本中有：「二先位中住思等性，必亦無退此所得果，唯先退法有退果義。」這一層含義，其他本似乎都沒有提到。根據阿毘達磨的理論來講，如果從無學果退成有學，成為有學時一定是「退法種性」。英譯本說“first family”，我認為是沒有問題的。只是隨後的表達不太精確：“Otherwise, in the hypothesis that he would obtain a better family, he would progress, and he would not fall away.”按照阿毘達磨的邏輯，應該是玄奘所說：由於那些從無學退成有學的人，在之前得阿羅漢果時是退法種性，現在退成有學時如果不是「退法種性」——這應該叫做「進」而不是「退」，雖然他的果退了，但他的種性（相比他之前是有學時）進了。兩個英譯本沒有表達出這個邏輯。
21. Pruden (6-61a, 長行, pp. 1013-1014) For the transformation of the faculties by which a Sraddhad- himukta [=a Saiksa of weak faculties] becomes a Drstiprapta [=a Saiksa of sharp faculties], there must be an Irresistible Path and a Path of Deliverance.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61a, 長行, p. 1996) For the transformation of the (praxis-oriented) faculties by which those who are freed through predominance of faith (sraddhadhimukta) (= those in training of weak praxis-oriented faculties) become those who have attained through views (dr~{ipriipta) (= those in training of sharp praxis-oriented faculties), there should be one unhindered path (anantaryamarga) and one path of liberation (vimuktimārga).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「有學位中轉一一性，各一無間、一解脫道」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b1-2)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「偈曰：於見至一一。釋曰：若人欲通達見至性，修無間道唯一，解脫道亦一」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282b21-23)
這裡，兩個英文本都沒有區別「根」和「性」，六種「種性」中，前五種都是鈍根，因此，不能一概說有學由利根轉成鈍根都只需要一無間道一解脫道，比如，有學由退法種性轉成思法種性，需要一無間道一解脫道，但二者都是鈍根。兩個英譯本頌文中都說到了“each type ”，這指的是「每一種性」，長行解釋成了「每一根」。
22. Pruden (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) When the Saiksa perfects his faculties, he loses a state (=Sakrdagamiphala), a state that he had acquired by the path of weak faculties; he loses his visesa, that is, the progress that he had made—preparatory paths, Irresistible Path, Path of Deliverance, and Path of Excellence,—in the detachment of the Dhyanas, a progress realized with his weak faculties.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) Because those in training who increase their (praxis-oriented) faculties (i-ii) abandon the fruit [of the once-returner] and the advancement [savise~a], (iii) obtain only the fruit [belonging to the family of sharp praxis-oriented faculties]. When those in training perfect their (praxis-oriented) faculties, they lose a fruit (= the fruit of once-returner), a fruit which they have acquired by the path of weak (praxis-oriented) faculties; they lose the vise~a, i.e., the advancement which they have made-the preparatory path, the unhindered path (iinantarya), the path of liberation (,.,imukti) and the path of advancement (vise~a)-in the detachment of the meditations, an advancement realized with weak (praxis-oriented) faculties.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「夫轉根者，容有捨果及勝果道，所得唯果非向道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b8-9)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「釋曰：若人修練根行，捨果及果勝軟根道，即得利根性果及道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282c4-5)
英譯本把有學練根解釋為「一來果」，實際上，「預流果」和「不還果」也包括在內，它們在練根時也會被捨棄。
23. Pruden (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) He obtains only a state belonging to the family of sharp faculties, a state forming part of the detachment of Kamadhatu, not the state of Anagamin which is of Arupyadhatu. Note400 (p. 1078) Paramartha: He obtains, in the family of sharp faculties, both result and Path; not the result of Anagamin included in Arupyadhatu. This is because the Saiksa does not transform his faculties in Arupyadhatu.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) They obtain only a fruit belonging to the family of sharp (praxis-oriented) faculties, a fruit forming part of the detachment of the realm of desire, not the fruit of non-returner that is of the realm of immateriality. Note696 (p. 2138) Paramārtha: - They obtain, of the family of sharp (praxis-oriented) faculties, a fruit and a path; not the fruit of non-returner included in the realm of immateriality. This is why those in training do not transform their (praxis-oriented) faculties in Ārūpyadhātu. 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「夫轉根者，容有捨果及勝果道，所得唯果非向道故。無有學果無色地攝，故學練根但依六地。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b8-10)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「釋曰：若人修練根行，捨果及果勝軟根道，即得利根性果及道。無阿那含果是無色界攝，由此因故，有學於無色界無練根行。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282c4-6)
兩個英譯本似乎都認為有阿那含果是無色界攝，只是無法通過練根得到。實際上，沒有無色界攝的阿那含果。他們都翻譯錯了真諦的意思。有意思的是，LVP似乎在note中暗示玄奘是正確的。實際上，真諦本和玄奘本是一致的，玄奘本說，沒有學果是無色地攝，真諦本說，沒有阿那含果是無色界攝，雖然表述上似乎不同，實際上是一致的，因為初果、二果顯然不是無色界攝。
24. Pruden (6-65bd, 長行, p. 1021) Because the Path of Deliverance and the Path of Excellence are parallel to the paths of abandoning (Prahanamarga = the Irresistible Path par excellence) from the point of view of their object (the Truths), their aspects (sixteen aspects, impermanence, etc.), and their purity; they are distinguished by being superior, for they have for their causes all the causes of the paths of abandoning plus the paths of abandoning themselves.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-65bd, 長行, p. 2004) [Answer:] - (1) Because the path of liberation and the path of advancement <279> are the same as [tajjatfya] the paths of abandonment (praha,:iamarga =the unhin- dered path par excellence) from the point of view (i) of their object (i.e., the truths), (ii) of their aspects or modes of activity (i.e., sixteen akaras, impermanent, etc.) and (iii) of their purity (anasrava); they are distinguished from them by being superior (adhimatratara), for they have for their causes all the "causes" of the paths of abandonment plus the paths of abandonment themselves.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「解脫、勝進如何名道？與道類同，轉上品故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 132a13-14)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「解脫增進云何名道？由是前道種類故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 283b10)
相比梵本，英譯本增加了補充解釋（見LVP note725，LS p. 2141）。但補充解釋是有問題的。原文的「同」，英譯本解釋為所緣同、行相同、無漏同。然而，金剛喻定和盡智，分別作為無間道和解脫道，它們的行相、所緣有時候是有差別的。
25. Pruden (6-68d-69b, 長行, p. 2008) According to the Vaibha§ikas, there are eleven items; Right Speech and Right Actions together form one item, and Right Livelihood is another item.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-68d-69b, 長行, p. 2008) According to the V~:ibha~ikas, there are eleven real entities: right speech (samyag- viic; viikkarma) aud right action (samyakkarmiinta; kiiyakarma) form together one real entity, right livelihood (samyagajfva) is another real entity (see iv. 86).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「毘婆沙師說有十一，身業語業不相雜故戒分為二」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 132b21-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「苦（若）依毘婆沙師執，有十一物，身口二業不相通故，是故戒分成二物」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 283c24-25)
實際上，如果說成十一，是正語、正業各是一種，正命要麼攝在正語中，要麼攝在正業中。英譯本誤解為正語正業合為一種，正命為另一種。可參考《大毘婆沙論》。另，《光記》引《婆沙》作「婆沙九十五」，應為「婆沙九十六」。
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷96：「問菩提分法名有三十七。實體有幾耶。答此實體。有十一或十二。若以一切攝入覺支即七覺支。名既有七實體亦七信正思惟各唯一種正語業命。有說為二。正命即是正語業故。有說為三。正語業外有正命故。若說為二即唯十一。若說為三則有十二。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, p. 496a22-28)
《俱舍論記》卷25：「婆沙九十五有三說。兩說同此論。復有一說。正語．業外有正命故。若說有三即有十二。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 378a27-29)
26. Pruden (6-79d, 長行, p. 1040) Let us remark, with respect to the first and the fourth alternative, that the ascetic who, already detached from craving, enters the Path of Seeing, does not abandon defilements through the Path of the Dharma Knowledge and the Dharma Knowledges.
這裡想說的是「法忍」和「法智」，結果都說成了「法智」。LS這裡對了。
27. Lodrö Sangpo (6-79d, 長行, p. 2021) Moreover, one does not abandon the paths of liberation (vimuktimarga) and the paths of advancement (vise(famiirga) (vi. 65b)829 by the cognitions which form part of the preparatory paths (prayoga- marga).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「應知此中先離欲染後見諦者所有法忍，及諸智中加行解脫勝進道攝不令惑斷，惑已斷故、非斷治故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 134b8-11)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「此中若已離欲人重觀四諦，由法智忍不能滅惑。若智加行解脫增進道所攝，此智亦不能滅惑。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 285b28-c1)
這是緊跟著前一條的一句，LS完全沒有理解，Pruden 是沒問題的，Pruden譯文中“abandon them ”的them指的是「惑」，即“abandon defilements ”；LS理解成了“abandon the paths of liberation and the paths of advancement”。
28. Pruden (6-79d, note474, p. 1086) But the "detached" ascetic necessarily abandons by means of anvayajnanaksantis and anvayajndnas, since no worldly path bears on Bhavagra (vi.45c).
Lodrö Sangpo (6-79d, note828, p. 2162) On the contrary, the detached practitioners necessarily abandon by the receptivity to the subsequent cognition (anvayajiianak:jdnti) and the subsequent cognition (anvayajiiana) since no mundane path are concerned with the summit of cyclic existence (bhavagra; vi. 45c).
實際上，見道位中，只能用忍斷惑。所以提到類智（the subsequent cognition）是不對的。
以下第八《定品》。
29. Pruden (8-2a-b, note18, p. 2443) There is a difficulty. How does the author, by saying that the First Dhyana is vicarapritisukhavat, say implicitly that this Dhyana also "contains vitarka"} In fact, dhydndntara "contains vicdra' and "contains vitarka."… Vasubandhu does not say vitarkapritisukhavat, because he wishes to say that the other Dhyanas lose, in this order, the parts indicated. If one were to define the Second Dhyana as without vitarka, then dhyānāntara would be confused with the Second Dhyana.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-2a-b, note40, p. 2443) LVP: There is a difficulty. How does the author, by saying that the first meditation is endowed with investigation-joy-pleasure (viciiraprftisukhavat), implicitly say that this medi- tation is also "with initial inquiry"? As a matter of fact, the intermediate meditation (dhyiina- antara) is "with investigation" and "without initial inquiry". … Vasubandhu does. not say "endowed with initial-inquiry-joy-pleasure" (vitarkapritisukhavat), because he wishes to say that the other meditations lose the indicated members in order. If one would define the second meditation as without initial inquiry (vitarka), the intermediate medi- tation (dhyiiniintara) would be mingled with the second meditation.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「具伺喜樂建立為初，由此已明亦具尋義，必俱行故，如煙與火。非伺有喜樂而不與尋[4]俱。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 145b23-25)[4] 俱【大】，復【宋】【元】【宮】
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「偈曰：有觀及喜樂。釋曰：覺觀喜樂相應[10]善一類，說名初定。由說觀，覺即[11]被說。覺觀如[12]火及烟相應行故，有不相離相離故，無有觀有喜樂與覺相離。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 296c15-18)[10] 善【大】，喜【宋】【元】【明】 [11] 被【大】，彼【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 [12] 火及烟【大】，烟及火【宋】【元】【明】
注釋中有一段梵文的解釋。玄奘說的是，當伺有喜樂的時候，是不可能不與尋俱的。這就排除了「靜慮中間」的可能，因為靜慮中間的伺是沒有喜禪支的。真諦的「無有觀有喜樂與覺相離」，也是同樣的意思。——這個意思在note之後的一句中被正確翻譯出來了。所以，LVP有這個疑問，顯得有點奇怪。
30. Pruden (7-9a-c, 頌與長行, p. 1098) The knowledge of dharmas, in the Pathway of Meditation, when it bears on Extinction and the Path, is opposed to the three spheres. A knowledge of dharmas with respect to Extinction and the Path, realized in the course of the Path of Meditation is opposed to the three spheres—that is to say, these two knowledges oppose the defilements of the higher spheres which are abandoned through Meditation.
Lodrö Sangpo (7-9a-c, 頌, p. 2180) the cognition of the factors, in the path of cultivation, when it concerns cessation and the path, opposes three realms.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷26〈7 分別智品〉：「修道所攝滅道法智，兼能對治上界修斷」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 135b26-27)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷19〈7 分別慧品〉：「復次偈曰：法智於滅諦，及道諦修道，是三界對治。釋曰：滅道二法智，若修道所攝，能對治三界。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 286c15-17)
“it bears on Extinction and the Path”，“with respect to Extinction and the Path ”的“and”應該改成“or”。這裡說的是「滅法智」「道法智」兩種智，並不是一種智同時緣「滅和道」。真諦頌中的「法智於滅諦，及道諦」，是可以理解為「法智於滅諦，及法智於道諦」的，而不能理解為「一法智於『滅諦及道諦』」。Pruden說“A knowledge”，這裡就錯了，下文說“these two knowledges”是對的。LS說“it concerns cessation and the path”，也錯了；不過LS的長行是對的。
31.
Pruden (8-14ab, 長行, p. 1242) one obtains it by rebirth from here up to Brahmaloka;
Lodrö Sangpo (8-14ab, 長行, p. 2399) one obtains it by being reborn above in the world of Brahma
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「從上生自得」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148b1-2)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「由[5]捨上大梵處受生得此故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 299c6-7)[5] 捨【大】，於【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
這裡是說，從梵天以上的地方生到梵天。「自」是指「梵天」，「上」指「梵天」以上。也就是說，從第二靜慮以上地命終，生到初靜慮地。
32. Pruden (8-16cd, 長行, p. 1246) At death, a defiled mind of any sphere can arise following a pure absorption obtained through birth.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, 頌與長行, p. 2403) (But) at death, following the clean [meditative attainment], the defiled [meditative attainment] of any type [can arise]. At death, following the clean meditative attainment acquired through birth, a defiled thought of any stage can arise.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「若生淨染，生染不然，謂命終時從生得淨，一一無間生一切染。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148c8-9)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「死墮時從生得清淨定，後次第一切地染污定生。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 300a20-21)
兩英譯本中的“absorption”“ meditative attainment”是錯的。真諦譯本中的「定」也不夠準確。“meditative attainment”和“acquired through birth”是矛盾的。「生得淨」，就表示這是在散心位，不是在定位。因為在定位是不可能命終的。「定位」是「加行善」，不是「生得善」。這裡的「生得淨」，不僅包括「生得善」，還包括「無覆無記」。這是說：以生得淨心死，下一剎那可能生起任何地的染污心。有意思的是，從LVP的注釋（LS，note232，p. 2469）看，LVP是知道定位不可能命終、受生的。我們下一條討論LVP的注釋。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷10：「死生唯許捨受相應，捨相應心不明利故，餘受明利不順死生。又此二時唯散非定，要有心位必非無心。非在定心有死生義，界地別故、加行生故、能攝益故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 56a28-b3)
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷7：「三界善心各分二種，謂加行得、生得別故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 39a21-22)
33. Pruden (8-16cd, 長行, p. 1293) Up to here the author has spoken of the samdpattidhydnas, absorptions, or states of contemplation, and their succession; but the kuśalasaṁhita, the "good mind of absorption," which exists in the upapattidhydnas, that is, in Ruapadhatu (-oi dhyana; brahmaloka, etc.), and which is acquired through arising (upapattildbhika), is also called pure dhyana (fuddhaka dhyana). When a being in Rupadhatu dies, this pure dhyana comes to an end; can it be followed only by a defiled dhyana of the same sphere? No: "At death, following upon the pure, there is a defiled state of some sphere." In fact, death (maranabhava) is never absorbed (samdhita) (iii.43): a being in Rupadhatu, at the moment when he dies, never possesses the dhyana of pure absorption. The "mind of reincarnation" (pratisamdhicitta) which follows "the mind at death" (maranabhava) will be defiled, not absorbed.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, note232, p. 2403) but the wholesome concentrated thought (kuśalasaṁhita) which exists in the meditations as birth (upapattidhyiina), that is to say, in the births of the realm of fine-materiality (= of meditation [dhyiina}; the world of Brahma [brahmaloka], etc.) and which is acquired through birth (upapattiliibhika), receives the name of clean meditation (śuddhaka dhyāna) also. When beings in the realm of fine-materiality die, this clean meditation comes to an end; can it be followed only by a defiled meditation of the same stage? - No: "At death, following the clean [meditative attainment], there is the defiled [meditative attainment] of whatever stage." - Indeed, death (mararJ,abhava) is never concentrated (samiihita) (iii. 43): at the moment they die, the sentient beings of the realm of fine-materiality never possess the meditation of clean meditative attainment.
有兩點，1，「死淨生一切」的「淨」，不僅是生得善心，也包括無覆無記心；2，LVP認為生得善心也叫做定心，这是错误的，定地有生得善心，它是属于定地的散心。
34. Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, 頌, p. 2403) Following the defiled [Rūpas and Ārūpyas], no [defiled thought of] a higher stage [can follow]
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28：「染生自下染」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148b15) 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「若從生染，一一無間能生自地一切下染」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148c9-10)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「偈曰：染非上。釋曰：從染污四色定四無色定後死墮時，次第自地下地染污定生，非上地。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 300a21-23)
[defiled thought of]的補充有造成誤解的風險，因為「非」只是對「上地」的否定，不是對「染」的否定。如果改成「所生的染心不可能在上地」，會更合適。
35. Pruden (8-21d, 長行, p. 1253) If the sdmantakas of the dhyanas and the ampyas are pure, they cut off the defilements, because they are opposed to a lower sphere.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-21d, 頌與長行, p. 2410) And [the defilements are] also [abandoned] by means of the pre- liminary concentration, when clean, [and not only when "free from fluxes"]. The preliminary concentrations (slimantaka) of the meditations (dhylina) and of the formless meditative attainments (ariipya), if they were "clean",273 [-and not only if they were "free from fluxes" (vi. 47cd)-] cut off the defilements , because they oppose the lower stage.
“are pure”和“not only when "free from fluxes"”錯了，近分定斷惑不需要無漏。這裡說的就是有漏的近分定。
36. Pruden (8-24a, 長行, p. 1257) the three characteristics of conditioned things (the samskrtalaksanas, ii.45), arising, duration-and-change, and death.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-24a, 長行, p. 2414) the three characteristics of the conditioned (sarriskrtalak~a~a; ii. 45cd), (i) arising, (ii) duration-change, (iii) passing away.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「三有為相」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 149c21-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「三有為相」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 301b7)
Duration應該刪掉。有為三相不包括「住相」。這裡不應該解釋為「住異」，而應該解釋為「異」。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷5：「豈不經說有三有為之有為相？於此經中應說有四，不說者何？所謂住相。然經說住異，是此異別名。如生名起，滅名為盡。如是應知，異名住異。若法令行三世遷流，此經說為有為之相，令諸有情生厭畏故。謂彼諸行生力所遷，令從未來流入現在。異及滅相力所遷迫，令從現在流入過去，令其衰異及壞滅故。傳說如有人處稠林，有三怨敵欲為損害，一從稠林牽之令出、一衰其力、一壞命根。三相於行應知亦爾。住於彼行攝受安立，常樂與彼不相捨離，故不立在有為相中。又無為法有自相住，住相濫彼故經不說。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 27a17-29)
37. Lodrö Sangpo (8-27b, 長行, p. 2418) [These concentrations have eleven stages for their basis,] with the exception of seven preliminary concentrations [and the intermediate meditation].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「依十一地，除七近分，謂欲未至八本中間。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 150a15-16)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「除七近分定，於十一地，謂欲界、非至定、中間定、四色定、四無色定。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 301c10-11)
“and the intermediate meditation”不需要加。
38. Lodrö Sangpo (8-31c, 長行, p. 2424) the immeasurables, [considered.in their fundamental meditation,] remove or "make distant" (diirfkara,:za) [malice, etc.,] already abandoned [through a path of abandonment]: this is why we have said above that the immeasurables are the counter-agent (pratipak$a) to malice, etc.
這裡的“through a path of abandonment”，如果是指the immeasurables，through a path of abandonment，令已斷惑更遠，就是錯的。因為它不是通過「斷道」（無間道），而是通過「遠道」（勝進道）。見頌「應知一切道，略說唯有四」「對治有四種，謂斷持緣厭」。如果是指abandoned本身，就是沒問題的。Pruden (p. 1268) 沒問題。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「此加行位制伏瞋等，或此能令已斷更遠，故前說此能治四障；謂欲未至亦有慈等，似所修成根本無量；由此制伏瞋等障已，引斷道生能斷諸惑，諸惑斷已離染位中，方得根本四種無量。於此後位雖遇強緣，而非瞋等之所蔽伏。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 150c23-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「由修彼加行能制伏瞋恚等故，說彼是瞋恚等對治，已滅能令遠故，有慈等觀以欲界及[7]非[8]至定為地，有以根本定為地，由前制伏諸惑已，後由滅道滅除諸惑。次於離欲位中，由得根本無量定故，若得定強力緣時，非復彼所能逼故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 302b13-19)[7] 非【大】，未【元】【明】【宮】 [8] 至【大】，來【宮】
39. Pruden (8-31f, 長行, p. 1271) The person who has produced the Third Dhyana or the Fourth Dhyana cannot possess joy, since satisfaction is absent in these Dhyanas.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-31d, 長行, p. 2426) Those who produce the third or the fourth meditation cannot be accompanied by sympathetic joy, since satisfaction is absent in these meditations.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「此四無量人起非餘，隨得一時必成三種。生第三定等，唯不成喜故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 151a20-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「若人生第三第四定，與喜不相應。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 302c13-14)
英譯本的“produce”錯了，“生”指的是born，也就是說，一個人從欲界死，生到第三靜慮、第四靜慮，不成就喜無量。並不是依下地身起第三、第四靜慮。這是「生靜慮」和「定靜慮」的區別。見（LS，p. 2372）：“Meditation is twofold [i.e., meditation as meditative attainment (samiipatti-dhyiina) and meditation as birth (upapatti-dhyiina)]. ”
40． Pruden (8-32d, 長行, pp. 1272-1273) The Third to the Seventh Deliverances are the good arupyas … According to others, the mind and mental states produced by retribution among beings born in Arupyadhatu are not concentrated.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-32d, 長行, p. 2427) they are not the formless meditative attainment which occurs at the end of life. According to other masters, the thought and thought-concomitants produced by ripening (vipaka)--: among sentient beings born in the realm of immateriality-are also "non-concentrated" (asamahita).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「次四解脫如其次第，以四無色定善為性。非無記染，非解脫故。亦非散善，性微劣故。彼散善者，如命終心。有說餘時亦有散善。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 151b11-14)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「若善若定地，四無色觀是四無色解脫，非不定地，譬如於[15]死有中。餘部師說：無色定有時非定，如目乾連所修。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, pp. 302c28-303a1)[15] 死【大】，無【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷80：「有說餘時亦有散善，唯生得善無聞思故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 771c8-9)
《俱舍論記》卷29：「有說不但命終有善。餘時亦有生得散善。但無聞．思。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 436a25-26)
Pruden的“Third ”應該作“fourth”；LS的“the formless meditative attainment”應該作ārūpya，這裡說的是「無色界」，但不是「無色界定」。因為是散心。LVP在note418 ( p. 2501) 也表明了。兩英譯本想說「生得（善）」是散心，但是把「生得」解釋成「異熟」，“produced by retribution”，“ produced by ripening”，這就錯了。因為「生得善」不是異熟，異熟是無記法。
我记下错误的方式非常简单粗暴，就是直接把有问题的句子复制下来， 如果句子长，甚至只复制半个句子，加个按语说“某某词错了”，就完了。非常简单省事，写汉语跟写英语是一样的，只需要写“is wrong”就行。 后来，丁一老师帮助我 核对法文和梵文 ，并补充了英文解释。这之后，我就把活儿干得细一点了。所以，第六品和第八品，我基本上把长行都读了，少数尾注也读了。
第六品和第八品里，找出了38个问题，又从第七品里拽出两条，凑够40个。40个已经不算太少了。而且我最近的劲头也不是很大了，所以先把它们贴出来。第一二品的10个问题，我们贴在了H-Buddhism上。加上这里的40条，就50条了。
前两天，我和许国明（水果）在毗昙群里讨论欲界色的法后得问题，他纠正了我的一个误解。我之前以为欲界色的法后得是限于无表的，实际上表色也有（这个问题在应用上很值得展开聊聊，回头有空再写）。每当琢磨这些问题的时候，我会觉得比读英文《俱舍》或者现当代的阿毗达磨论文更费劲——是费劲得多。我以前学阿毗达磨，主要是通过这种办法的。经常会有一个问题卡住，三天想不通，甚至三个月想不通，乃至半年一年都没有准确理解和消化的。
也就是在这种困顿中，进步是最大的。你哪怕不能得到想要的问题结论，但在探索过程中，会对一些知识理解得更清晰，纠正先前的误解也是家常便饭。而读论文，可以读得很快，英文论文，写notes的话，可以一天一篇；中文的话，两小时就差不多了。但对学习阿毗达磨的帮助，是非常有限的。不过读论文会比琢磨问题轻松，而且容易满足虚荣心，比较好 读 下去。琢磨问题的话，一开始是有兴趣的，而一旦卡住没有进展，慢慢就有点灰心了，还会挫败。虽然在挫败中总归知道这是进步的必由之路，但头一懵还是想睡觉或者搞别的了。
琢磨问题的话，除了问题本身带来的激励，是很少有别的激励的。不过， 我认为，这是学习阿毗达磨的正确道路。前提是，问题确实是问题（这是另外的话题）。 但抛开“ 我认为” ， 这种方式 在今天的 阿 毗达磨研究当中，是绝对的非主 流。 有时候，我会想到别的专业工作的验证标准，比如计算机或者工程，他们是可以在应用上见分晓的。 就像两辆车 ，谁跑得快，遛遛就 知道了。 所谓“少废话， show me the code ” 。 但有些领域，很多时候是没有code的。
1.
Pruden (6-19a-b 長行pp. 932-933) Strong Patience exists when the ascetic considers, in a single thought, only one aspect [=impermanence] applied to the sufferings of Kamadhatu. Such is the explanation of the Vaibhasi- kas.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-19ab 長行，p. 1914) When the practitioners consider, in one single thought, no more than one aspect or mode of activity ("impermanent") applied to the unsatisfactoriness of the realm of desire, that is the strong receptivity.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「從此位無間起勝善根一行一剎那名上品忍」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 119c11-12)
兩處不必然是"impermanent"行相 。其實，前面的"they apply their mind to no more than two aspects or modes of activity ("impermanent", "unsatisfactory") "也錯了，因為是同類型的問題，不單獨列出來了。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「世第一法，緣欲苦諦法念住現在修未來四，隨一行相現在修未來四，無異分故、似見道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120a7-9)
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷109：「又見行者復有二種。著我見者依非我行相入正性離生。著我所見者依空行相入正性離生。諸愛行者亦有二種。我慢增者依非常行相入正性離生。懈怠增者依苦行相入正性離生。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, pp. 563c26-564a2)
2. Pruden (6-22d 長行pp. 938-939) Loss through falling necessarily results from the defilements; but not unqualified loss {vihdni), which can result from a quality, for example, the loss of the quality of Prthagjana at the production of the Path, etc.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1920) Loss-through-retrogressing necessarily results from defilements [do,m; klesa]; but not unqualified (na avasyam) loss (vihani), which can result from something good (gu,:ta), for example, the loss of the status of ordinary worldling when producing the (noble) path, etc.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「失退二捨非得為性，退必起過，失不必然。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120b20-21)
兩個英譯本的例子錯了，「見道」根本不會捨此善根。 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「聖由失地捨， 異生由命終， 初二亦退捨， 依本必見諦」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120a14-15) 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「然除彼得，勿諸聖者煖等善根重現前故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 119c18-19)
3. Pruden (6-23b 長行p. 940) and those defilements which are abandoned by the Seeing of the Truths.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1921) defilements (klesa), those that have been abandoned by insight into the truths. (MYS, 165b6) <175>
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「惑謂見所斷惑」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120c8-9)
由於「忍位」在見道之前，這裡想說的是「那些『見所斷的煩惱』從現在開始就永遠不會再生起了」，不是說「已經被見道斷除的煩惱」。有必要補充的兩點是：1,「見所斷惑」不一定都是通過「見道」斷除的。2，「見所斷惑」中，有一部分是有可能在「忍位」之前由世俗道斷除的，即有頂之外的「見所斷惑」。不管「見所斷惑」此時有沒有斷除，斷除了多少，它們從「上忍位」開始，就再也不會生起。
4. Lodrö Sangpo (6-22d 長行p. 1921) through weak receptivity, unfortunate planes of existence enter into the condition destined to arise;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「此於下上位，隨所應而得，謂於下忍得惡趣不生，所餘不生至上忍方得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 120c9-10)
應該是not to arise, Pruden (6-23b 長行p. 940)是對的：through weak Patience, the painful realms of rebirth enter into the condition of not arising。
5. Pruden (6-24a-b note148, p. 1054) 148. Hsiian-tsang: After having produced the first two nirvedhabhdgiyas, he can change to another vehicle.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-24a-b note271, p. 2078) LVP: Hstian-tsang: After having produced the first two stages conducive to penetration, they can change to another vehicle.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「有餘獨覺異麟角喻，起彼種性初二善根，轉向餘乘，理無遮礙。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 121a3-5)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「若有人執，有別獨覺異犀角喻獨覺，於彼人轉二善根成菩薩。此義無遮。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 273a17-19)
玄奘的意思是，除了麟角喻之外的獨覺，可以在初二善根（即煖善根或頂善根）的階段轉向餘乘，也就是說，可以在生起第三善根（忍善根）之前轉向餘乘；而不是說在生起初二善根之後轉向餘乘。
6. Pruden (7-1c, p. 1088) This refers to the eight abhtsamaya knowledges (duhkhe jridna, etc., vi. 26) [and also to all prajnd of the pure Path of Meditation up to the Knowledge of Extinction].
Lodrö Sangpo (7-1c, p. 2171) This refers to the eight cognitions of direct realization (abhisamaya) (cognition with regard to unsatisfactoriness [dub,khe jiiiina], etc.; vi. 26) (and also to any understanding of the pure path of cultivation up to [but not including] the cognition of exhaustion).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷26〈7 分別智品〉：「所餘皆通智見二性」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 134b27-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷19〈7 分別慧品〉：「釋曰：異於忍及盡智無生智，所餘無流般若，亦見亦智。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 285c18-19)
兩個英譯本中對「所餘」進行了解釋。從解釋看，他們都把「現觀」理解為等同於「見道」了，實際上，其中的「道類智」屬於修道。更重要的是，他們都沒有提到「無學道」的諸智。
7. Pruden (6-32, 長行, p. 955) As a consequence, the abider in a result, as long as he does not exert himself with a view to a higher progress for the acquisition of a new state, that is, as long as he does not cultivate the preparatory exercises which have for their result the abandoning of the defilements not yet abandoned and which is the cause of the acquisition of a new state, this resident is not a candidate for this new state.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, 長行, p. 1938) Consequently, the abiders in the fruit, as long as they do not devote themselves (prayujyate) to a higher progress (vise~iiya) in mind, for the acquisition of a new fruit, i.e., as long as they do not cultivate the preparatory effort (prayoga) which has for its result the abandonment of defilements not yet abandoned and which is the cause for the acquisition of a new fruit, so long are these abiders not approachers of this new fruit.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「然諸先斷欲界修惑一至五等，至得果時，此生必定起勝果道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c23-24)
“the defilements not yet abandoned”错了。这里之所以「此生必定起勝果道」，不是此生要進斷尚未斷的煩惱，而是對見道前以世俗道斷的煩惱(非果道攝者)起無漏離繫得。
8. Pruden (6-32, 長行, p. 956) Nevertheless, the ascetic who, [previously] detached from the Third Dhyana [by a worldly path], enters into niydma (vi.26a) or the Path of Seeing in a sphere lower than this Dhyana [that is, in anagamya, the First or Second Dhyana, or an intermediate state], certainly realizes a path higher than the result.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, 長行, p. 1938) Nevertheless, the practitioners who, (previously) detached from the third meditation (dhyiina) (through a mundane path), enter into the assurance (niyiima; vi. 26a) or the path of insight (darsanamiirga) by relying on a stage lower than this meditation (i.e., by relying on the preparatory meditation [aniigamya], the first and second meditation, the intermediate meditation [dhyiiniintara]), certainly realize a path higher than the fruit (phalavisi~fa'!l miirgam).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「由此先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道者，彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c24-27)
"Nevertheless"錯了，這裡不是轉折關係，是解釋說明前面的原則，即玄奘的“由此”。
9. Pruden (6-32, note199, p. 1060) It is certain that this ascetic acquires, by means of the Path of Seeing, a pure sukhendriya of the sphere of the Third Dhyana;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-32, note375, p. 2105) It is certain that these practitioners acquire, by means of the path of insight, a pure faculty of sensation of pleasure (sukhendriya) of the sphere of the third meditation;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷23：「由此先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道者，彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道。若異此者，聖生上地應不可說定成樂根。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 122c24-27)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「若人離欲第三定，更依下地[1]入正定，此人必定現前由果勝道。若不爾，從下生上界則不應與樂根相應」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 275a3-5)[1] 入【大】，人【宋】
實際上，這種情況（「先離三靜慮染後依下地入見道」），在見道階段，恰恰是不能得「第三靜慮無漏樂根」的——這正是為什麼「彼得果已於現生中必能引生後勝果道」的原因，假如通過見道得了無漏樂根，就不需要再「起勝果道」得無漏樂根了。兩個注釋隨後的解釋邏輯也是錯誤的。
10. Lodrö Sangpo (6-38ab, p. 1951) Those who are called half-leapers (ardhapluta) are the noble ones who, leaping over only one place,452 { 4 b} enter among those of the Highest (Akani~thas) after being reborn among those of the pure abodes.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「言半超者，從彼漸次生下淨居，乃至中間能越一處生色究竟，超非全故名為半超。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 124c14-16)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「半超出者，從初定生淨居已，乃至超一別處，方生阿迦尼師吒。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 276b20-21)
"only one" 錯了，實際上，超任意一處即可，超多處亦可。Pruden (p. 968) "passing beyond any one place"，是合適的。
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷174：「半超者謂欲界歿生梵眾天。梵眾天歿於上一切天處或更生一處或二或三或四或五。乃至或唯超一處遍生餘處然後生色究竟。或生非想非非想處而般涅槃。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, p. 875c8-12)
《俱舍論記》卷24：「此半超人於十六天極少三生。初生梵眾。次十四天中隨生一處。後生色究竟 若極多生十五。於十六天隨其所應中間越一。生餘十五」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 361b17-20)
11. Pruden (6-41a-b, 長行, p. 973) But the Aryan who obtains the state of Anagamin after having been reborn in Rupadhatu, goes sometimes to Arupyadhatu as a Bhavagraparana Urdhvasrota.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-41a-b, 長行, p. 1956) But the noble ones who obtain the fruit of non-returner after having been reborn in the realm of fine-materiality sometimes go to the realm of immateriality in the status of those who go higher (iirdhvasrotas) that are destined to the limit of the summit of cyclic existence (bhaviigraparama).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「若於色界經生聖者，容有上生無色界義，如行色界極有頂者。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 125b22-23)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「於色界中，若轉生聖人，有時入無色界。若上流，有頂為勝。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 277a14-15)
實際上，說的是先得阿那含果，然後生色界，不可能生色界後得阿那含。阿那含只能依欲界身得。見55a, Lodrö Sangpo (p. 1981): " The [first] three [fruits of the way of virtuous endeavor: (1) stream- enterer (2) once-returner, (3) non-returner,] are acquired only in Kama."（看note605, p. 2127, LVP是懂這個的，可能不熟練。）
12. Pruden (6-41cd, 長行, p. 974) The Aryan who has become an Anagamin by being reborn in Kamadhatu and one who is born in a higher sphere are not even capable of modifying their faculties;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-41cd, 長行, p. 1957) (1) The noble ones who have become non-returners by being reborn in the realm of desire (kiime parivrttajanmii) and (2) those who are born in a higher realm are not even capable of modifying their (praxis-oriented) faculties (indriyasa,p,ciira);
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「即此已經欲界生者及已從此往上界生諸聖，必無練根并退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 125b26-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「此者是於欲界轉生聖人及有別聖人，往上界受生。此等人無練根修行，又無因緣得退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 277a20-22)
不需要是「阿那含」，只要是經欲界生的聖人，無論是不是阿那含，都沒有練根和退失。
13. Pruden (6-42b, 長行, p. 976) In our opinion, the combination of a single, unique impure moment with two pure moments, is impossible to everyone, with the exception of the Buddha. Consequently the combination of a Dhyana is achieved when one enters, for the period of time that one wants, into three prolongued Dhyanas, pure, impure, and pure.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-42b, 長行, p. 1959) In our opinion, the combination of one single impure moment (k~a,:za) with two pure moments [k~a,:zavyavakira,:za] is impossible for anyone except the Buddha. Conse- quently, the combination of one meditation is achieved when one enters into three prolonged fpravaha; prabandhika] meditations, (1) pure, (2) impure, (3) pure, for the desired period of time.
這一段在玄奘、真諦譯本中都沒有，而且與玄奘、真諦譯本「成由一念雜」的頌文矛盾，還與英譯本43ab的長行相矛盾，可能不是《俱舍論》的觀點。
14. Lodrö Sangpo (6-44d, 長行, p. 1965) For the formless meditative attainments, there are twenty, thirty-two and forty-eight [adamantine concentrations].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「空處四十，識處三十二，無所有處二十四。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 126c14-15)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「於空處等依止，次第有四十、三十二、二十四三摩提。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278a20-21)
Lodrö Sangpo這裡的數字錯了，這是在前面28、24、20的基礎上，分別加上12、8、4。Pruden (p. 982)是正確的: "For the Arupyas, we have forty, thirty-two and twenty-four."
15. Pruden (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 985) the worldly path of a certain sphere cannot be opposed to this same sphere
Lodrö Sangpo (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 1969) the mundane path of a certain stage [bhumi] cannot be opposed to this same stage,
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「自地不能治自地故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127a25-26)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「依自地道非對治故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278b28-29)
應該說：自地世俗道不能治自地煩惱；或者：自地煩惱不能被自地世俗道對治。被治(be opposed)的是煩惱。
16. Pruden (6-45c-d, 長行, p. 986) This possession is worldly and transworldly.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-46ab, 長行, p. 1969) This possession is mundane [laukika] and supramundane [lokottara].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「論曰：諸有學聖用有漏道離下八地修斷染時，能具引生二離繫得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127b4-5)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「釋曰：由世間道，若聖人至得離欲，則有二種滅離至得起：一世間至得、二出世至得。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278c7-8)
實際上，是兩種得，一種有漏（世間），一種無漏（出世間）；不是一種得同時是「世間」和「出世間」。英譯本46c有類似的表述，不再重複了。
17. Pruden (6-47ab, 頌與長行, p. 987) 47a-b. But, if he is not filled with these defilements, he is like a saint half delivered from Bhavagra, like a person who is reborn above. This Aryan does not have worldly acquisition of disconnection; nevertheless this Aryan is not filled with the said defilements.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-47ab, 頌與長行, p. 1970) 47ab. But, if they are not endowed with these defilements, that is like the noble ones who are half-liberated from the summit of cyclic existence, like the persons who are reborn above. There is no mundane acquisition of the disconnection for these noble ones; nevertheless, these noble ones are not endowed with the aforementioned defilements.
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷17：「偈曰：有頂半解脫，如上生不應。釋曰：此人雖無世間滅離至得，亦不得與彼惑相應。譬如有學人於有頂惑[6]以得半解脫，於中必無世間滅離至得。由修練根行故，已捨出世至得，與彼地惑亦不相應。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 278c16-20)[6] 以【大】，已【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「此證非理。所以者何？彼聖設無有漏斷得，亦不成就上地煩惱。如分離有頂得轉根時及異生上生不成惑故。謂如分離有頂地染，後依靜慮得轉根時，無漏斷得既已頓捨，彼地離繫無有漏得，而彼地惑亦不成就。又如異生生二定等，雖捨欲界等煩惱斷得，而不成就欲界等煩惱，此亦應然。故不成證。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 127b13-20)
這裡很明顯，LVP所據本，相比玄奘譯本，是和真諦譯本更接近的。英譯本的頌，在真諦譯本存在，在玄奘譯本中只有長行（沒有以頌文的形式顯示）。兩個英譯本中，“if he is not filled with these defilements”的意思都錯了。世親菩薩想表達的是：即便不成就有漏離繫得，也不會成就（之前斷過的）上地煩惱。兩個英譯本的長行中，假設的意思不見了，變成了肯定（There is no mundane acquisition of the disconnection for these noble ones）——實際上，是假設不存在（世親菩薩是認為存在的），這種假設是為了反駁「餘師」的論證方式，並不是反駁餘師的結論；也就是玄奘開頭和結尾說的「此證非理」「故不成證」。玄奘譯本精確地表達了世親菩薩的意思。還可參考《順正理論》。
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷66：「此證非理。所以者何？彼聖設無有漏斷得，亦不成就上地煩惱，如分離有頂得轉根時，及異生上生不成惑故。謂如分離有頂地染，後依靜慮得轉根時，無漏斷得既已頓捨，彼地離繫無有漏得，而彼地惑亦不成就。又如異生生二定等，雖捨欲界等煩惱斷得，而不成就欲界等煩惱，以欲界等有漏離繫得初定等攝，唯彼能治故，若生上地此得必捨，生上地必捨下有漏善故。此二雖無煩惱斷得，而勝進故遮惑得生；彼亦應然，故證非理。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 701c18-28)
18. Lodrö Sangpo (6-50ab, note558, p. 2122) LS: Dhammajoti comments (SA.IV.463) that the unshakable ones have "then absolutely abandoned all defilements along with their traces (viisanii) and overcome the undefiled igno- rance (akli~fa-ajiiiina)".
「習氣」和「不染無知」只有佛能斷除，而不是不動阿羅漢。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷1〈1 分別界品〉：「聲聞獨覺雖滅諸冥，以[8]染無知畢竟[9]斷故；非[10]一切種，所以者何？由於佛法極遠時處及諸義類無邊差別，[11]不染無知猶未斷故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 1a16-19)[8] Kliṣṭa-saṃmoha. [9] 〔－〕【CB】【磧-CB】【宋】【元】【明】【宮】，未【大】(cf. Q25_p0635a12; T29n1563_p0779a03) [10] Sarvathā. [11] Akliṣṭam ajñānam.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷27：「何故名力？以於一切所知境中智無礙轉，故名為力。由此十力唯依佛身，唯佛已除諸惑習氣於一切境隨欲能知，餘此相違故不名力。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 140b23-26)
19. Pruden (6-52c-53b, 長行, p. 994) That is to say: (1-2) there is the abandoning of the path of the candidate, and the acquisition of the path of the result;
Lodrö Sangpo (6-52c-53b, 頌與長行, p. 1976) In one fruit, there is (1) the abandonment of a previous path [i.e., of the path of the approacher], … 1.the abandonment of the path of the approacher;
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷24：「一捨曾道，謂捨[1]先得果向道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 128a29-b1)[1] 先【大】，無【宋】【元】【明】
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「一先捨離前道。二至得未曾得道，由捨離至得向道道果故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 279c7-8)
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷70：「諸住果位修練根時，捨果得果；住勝道位修練根時，捨二得果。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 723c24-26)
兩個英譯本只說了捨「向道」，實際上，如果有先得「果道」，先得「果道」和「向道」都會捨棄。
20. Pruden (6-58b, 長行, p. 1004) When an Arhat again becomes a Saiksa, he dwells in the same family that was his first family. Otherwise, in the hypothesis that he would obtain a better family, he would progress, and he would not fall away.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-58b, 長行, p. 1986) When perfected beings again become those in training, they dwell in the same family that was their first family. Otherwise, in the hypothesis where they should obtain a better family, they would progress, they would not retrogress.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「思法等四退住學位，時還住退非餘。若異此者，得勝種性故，應是進非退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 129c18-19)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「若退成有學人，於中得住，不住餘性。若不爾，由得增[1]長性，轉增不成退。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 281a9-10)[1] 長【大】，進【宋】【元】【明】
英譯本中說的“his first family”，其實就是「退法」種性；因為，假如得阿羅漢果時不是退法種性，他是不會退的。「思法種性」退果，是因為他在得阿羅漢果時是退法種性，然後通過練根成為思法種性，因此，他的first family還是「退法種性」，而不是「思法種性」。這一點，玄奘譯本中有：「二先位中住思等性，必亦無退此所得果，唯先退法有退果義。」這一層含義，其他本似乎都沒有提到。根據阿毘達磨的理論來講，如果從無學果退成有學，成為有學時一定是「退法種性」。英譯本說“first family”，我認為是沒有問題的。只是隨後的表達不太精確：“Otherwise, in the hypothesis that he would obtain a better family, he would progress, and he would not fall away.”按照阿毘達磨的邏輯，應該是玄奘所說：由於那些從無學退成有學的人，在之前得阿羅漢果時是退法種性，現在退成有學時如果不是「退法種性」——這應該叫做「進」而不是「退」，雖然他的果退了，但他的種性（相比他之前是有學時）進了。兩個英譯本沒有表達出這個邏輯。
21. Pruden (6-61a, 長行, pp. 1013-1014) For the transformation of the faculties by which a Sraddhad- himukta [=a Saiksa of weak faculties] becomes a Drstiprapta [=a Saiksa of sharp faculties], there must be an Irresistible Path and a Path of Deliverance.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61a, 長行, p. 1996) For the transformation of the (praxis-oriented) faculties by which those who are freed through predominance of faith (sraddhadhimukta) (= those in training of weak praxis-oriented faculties) become those who have attained through views (dr~{ipriipta) (= those in training of sharp praxis-oriented faculties), there should be one unhindered path (anantaryamarga) and one path of liberation (vimuktimārga).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「有學位中轉一一性，各一無間、一解脫道」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b1-2)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「偈曰：於見至一一。釋曰：若人欲通達見至性，修無間道唯一，解脫道亦一」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282b21-23)
這裡，兩個英文本都沒有區別「根」和「性」，六種「種性」中，前五種都是鈍根，因此，不能一概說有學由利根轉成鈍根都只需要一無間道一解脫道，比如，有學由退法種性轉成思法種性，需要一無間道一解脫道，但二者都是鈍根。兩個英譯本頌文中都說到了“each type ”，這指的是「每一種性」，長行解釋成了「每一根」。
22. Pruden (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) When the Saiksa perfects his faculties, he loses a state (=Sakrdagamiphala), a state that he had acquired by the path of weak faculties; he loses his visesa, that is, the progress that he had made—preparatory paths, Irresistible Path, Path of Deliverance, and Path of Excellence,—in the detachment of the Dhyanas, a progress realized with his weak faculties.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) Because those in training who increase their (praxis-oriented) faculties (i-ii) abandon the fruit [of the once-returner] and the advancement [savise~a], (iii) obtain only the fruit [belonging to the family of sharp praxis-oriented faculties]. When those in training perfect their (praxis-oriented) faculties, they lose a fruit (= the fruit of once-returner), a fruit which they have acquired by the path of weak (praxis-oriented) faculties; they lose the vise~a, i.e., the advancement which they have made-the preparatory path, the unhindered path (iinantarya), the path of liberation (,.,imukti) and the path of advancement (vise~a)-in the detachment of the meditations, an advancement realized with weak (praxis-oriented) faculties.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「夫轉根者，容有捨果及勝果道，所得唯果非向道故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b8-9)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「釋曰：若人修練根行，捨果及果勝軟根道，即得利根性果及道。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282c4-5)
英譯本把有學練根解釋為「一來果」，實際上，「預流果」和「不還果」也包括在內，它們在練根時也會被捨棄。
23. Pruden (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) He obtains only a state belonging to the family of sharp faculties, a state forming part of the detachment of Kamadhatu, not the state of Anagamin which is of Arupyadhatu. Note400 (p. 1078) Paramartha: He obtains, in the family of sharp faculties, both result and Path; not the result of Anagamin included in Arupyadhatu. This is because the Saiksa does not transform his faculties in Arupyadhatu.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-61d-62b, 頌與長行, p. 1997) They obtain only a fruit belonging to the family of sharp (praxis-oriented) faculties, a fruit forming part of the detachment of the realm of desire, not the fruit of non-returner that is of the realm of immateriality. Note696 (p. 2138) Paramārtha: - They obtain, of the family of sharp (praxis-oriented) faculties, a fruit and a path; not the fruit of non-returner included in the realm of immateriality. This is why those in training do not transform their (praxis-oriented) faculties in Ārūpyadhātu. 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「夫轉根者，容有捨果及勝果道，所得唯果非向道故。無有學果無色地攝，故學練根但依六地。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 131b8-10)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「釋曰：若人修練根行，捨果及果勝軟根道，即得利根性果及道。無阿那含果是無色界攝，由此因故，有學於無色界無練根行。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 282c4-6)
兩個英譯本似乎都認為有阿那含果是無色界攝，只是無法通過練根得到。實際上，沒有無色界攝的阿那含果。他們都翻譯錯了真諦的意思。有意思的是，LVP似乎在note中暗示玄奘是正確的。實際上，真諦本和玄奘本是一致的，玄奘本說，沒有學果是無色地攝，真諦本說，沒有阿那含果是無色界攝，雖然表述上似乎不同，實際上是一致的，因為初果、二果顯然不是無色界攝。
24. Pruden (6-65bd, 長行, p. 1021) Because the Path of Deliverance and the Path of Excellence are parallel to the paths of abandoning (Prahanamarga = the Irresistible Path par excellence) from the point of view of their object (the Truths), their aspects (sixteen aspects, impermanence, etc.), and their purity; they are distinguished by being superior, for they have for their causes all the causes of the paths of abandoning plus the paths of abandoning themselves.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-65bd, 長行, p. 2004) [Answer:] - (1) Because the path of liberation and the path of advancement <279> are the same as [tajjatfya] the paths of abandonment (praha,:iamarga =the unhin- dered path par excellence) from the point of view (i) of their object (i.e., the truths), (ii) of their aspects or modes of activity (i.e., sixteen akaras, impermanent, etc.) and (iii) of their purity (anasrava); they are distinguished from them by being superior (adhimatratara), for they have for their causes all the "causes" of the paths of abandonment plus the paths of abandonment themselves.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「解脫、勝進如何名道？與道類同，轉上品故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 132a13-14)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「解脫增進云何名道？由是前道種類故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 283b10)
相比梵本，英譯本增加了補充解釋（見LVP note725，LS p. 2141）。但補充解釋是有問題的。原文的「同」，英譯本解釋為所緣同、行相同、無漏同。然而，金剛喻定和盡智，分別作為無間道和解脫道，它們的行相、所緣有時候是有差別的。
25. Pruden (6-68d-69b, 長行, p. 2008) According to the Vaibha§ikas, there are eleven items; Right Speech and Right Actions together form one item, and Right Livelihood is another item.
Lodrö Sangpo (6-68d-69b, 長行, p. 2008) According to the V~:ibha~ikas, there are eleven real entities: right speech (samyag- viic; viikkarma) aud right action (samyakkarmiinta; kiiyakarma) form together one real entity, right livelihood (samyagajfva) is another real entity (see iv. 86).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「毘婆沙師說有十一，身業語業不相雜故戒分為二」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 132b21-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「苦（若）依毘婆沙師執，有十一物，身口二業不相通故，是故戒分成二物」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 283c24-25)
實際上，如果說成十一，是正語、正業各是一種，正命要麼攝在正語中，要麼攝在正業中。英譯本誤解為正語正業合為一種，正命為另一種。可參考《大毘婆沙論》。另，《光記》引《婆沙》作「婆沙九十五」，應為「婆沙九十六」。
《阿毘達磨大毘婆沙論》卷96：「問菩提分法名有三十七。實體有幾耶。答此實體。有十一或十二。若以一切攝入覺支即七覺支。名既有七實體亦七信正思惟各唯一種正語業命。有說為二。正命即是正語業故。有說為三。正語業外有正命故。若說為二即唯十一。若說為三則有十二。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T27, no. 1545, p. 496a22-28)
《俱舍論記》卷25：「婆沙九十五有三說。兩說同此論。復有一說。正語．業外有正命故。若說有三即有十二。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 378a27-29)
26. Pruden (6-79d, 長行, p. 1040) Let us remark, with respect to the first and the fourth alternative, that the ascetic who, already detached from craving, enters the Path of Seeing, does not abandon defilements through the Path of the Dharma Knowledge and the Dharma Knowledges.
這裡想說的是「法忍」和「法智」，結果都說成了「法智」。LS這裡對了。
27. Lodrö Sangpo (6-79d, 長行, p. 2021) Moreover, one does not abandon the paths of liberation (vimuktimarga) and the paths of advancement (vise(famiirga) (vi. 65b)829 by the cognitions which form part of the preparatory paths (prayoga- marga).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷25：「應知此中先離欲染後見諦者所有法忍，及諸智中加行解脫勝進道攝不令惑斷，惑已斷故、非斷治故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 134b8-11)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷18：「此中若已離欲人重觀四諦，由法智忍不能滅惑。若智加行解脫增進道所攝，此智亦不能滅惑。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 285b28-c1)
這是緊跟著前一條的一句，LS完全沒有理解，Pruden 是沒問題的，Pruden譯文中“abandon them ”的them指的是「惑」，即“abandon defilements ”；LS理解成了“abandon the paths of liberation and the paths of advancement”。
28. Pruden (6-79d, note474, p. 1086) But the "detached" ascetic necessarily abandons by means of anvayajnanaksantis and anvayajndnas, since no worldly path bears on Bhavagra (vi.45c).
Lodrö Sangpo (6-79d, note828, p. 2162) On the contrary, the detached practitioners necessarily abandon by the receptivity to the subsequent cognition (anvayajiianak:jdnti) and the subsequent cognition (anvayajiiana) since no mundane path are concerned with the summit of cyclic existence (bhavagra; vi. 45c).
實際上，見道位中，只能用忍斷惑。所以提到類智（the subsequent cognition）是不對的。
以下第八《定品》。
29. Pruden (8-2a-b, note18, p. 2443) There is a difficulty. How does the author, by saying that the First Dhyana is vicarapritisukhavat, say implicitly that this Dhyana also "contains vitarka"} In fact, dhydndntara "contains vicdra' and "contains vitarka."… Vasubandhu does not say vitarkapritisukhavat, because he wishes to say that the other Dhyanas lose, in this order, the parts indicated. If one were to define the Second Dhyana as without vitarka, then dhyānāntara would be confused with the Second Dhyana.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-2a-b, note40, p. 2443) LVP: There is a difficulty. How does the author, by saying that the first meditation is endowed with investigation-joy-pleasure (viciiraprftisukhavat), implicitly say that this medi- tation is also "with initial inquiry"? As a matter of fact, the intermediate meditation (dhyiina- antara) is "with investigation" and "without initial inquiry". … Vasubandhu does. not say "endowed with initial-inquiry-joy-pleasure" (vitarkapritisukhavat), because he wishes to say that the other meditations lose the indicated members in order. If one would define the second meditation as without initial inquiry (vitarka), the intermediate medi- tation (dhyiiniintara) would be mingled with the second meditation.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「具伺喜樂建立為初，由此已明亦具尋義，必俱行故，如煙與火。非伺有喜樂而不與尋[4]俱。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 145b23-25)[4] 俱【大】，復【宋】【元】【宮】
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「偈曰：有觀及喜樂。釋曰：覺觀喜樂相應[10]善一類，說名初定。由說觀，覺即[11]被說。覺觀如[12]火及烟相應行故，有不相離相離故，無有觀有喜樂與覺相離。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 296c15-18)[10] 善【大】，喜【宋】【元】【明】 [11] 被【大】，彼【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 [12] 火及烟【大】，烟及火【宋】【元】【明】
注釋中有一段梵文的解釋。玄奘說的是，當伺有喜樂的時候，是不可能不與尋俱的。這就排除了「靜慮中間」的可能，因為靜慮中間的伺是沒有喜禪支的。真諦的「無有觀有喜樂與覺相離」，也是同樣的意思。——這個意思在note之後的一句中被正確翻譯出來了。所以，LVP有這個疑問，顯得有點奇怪。
30. Pruden (7-9a-c, 頌與長行, p. 1098) The knowledge of dharmas, in the Pathway of Meditation, when it bears on Extinction and the Path, is opposed to the three spheres. A knowledge of dharmas with respect to Extinction and the Path, realized in the course of the Path of Meditation is opposed to the three spheres—that is to say, these two knowledges oppose the defilements of the higher spheres which are abandoned through Meditation.
Lodrö Sangpo (7-9a-c, 頌, p. 2180) the cognition of the factors, in the path of cultivation, when it concerns cessation and the path, opposes three realms.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷26〈7 分別智品〉：「修道所攝滅道法智，兼能對治上界修斷」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 135b26-27)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷19〈7 分別慧品〉：「復次偈曰：法智於滅諦，及道諦修道，是三界對治。釋曰：滅道二法智，若修道所攝，能對治三界。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 286c15-17)
“it bears on Extinction and the Path”，“with respect to Extinction and the Path ”的“and”應該改成“or”。這裡說的是「滅法智」「道法智」兩種智，並不是一種智同時緣「滅和道」。真諦頌中的「法智於滅諦，及道諦」，是可以理解為「法智於滅諦，及法智於道諦」的，而不能理解為「一法智於『滅諦及道諦』」。Pruden說“A knowledge”，這裡就錯了，下文說“these two knowledges”是對的。LS說“it concerns cessation and the path”，也錯了；不過LS的長行是對的。
31.
Pruden (8-14ab, 長行, p. 1242) one obtains it by rebirth from here up to Brahmaloka;
Lodrö Sangpo (8-14ab, 長行, p. 2399) one obtains it by being reborn above in the world of Brahma
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「從上生自得」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148b1-2)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「由[5]捨上大梵處受生得此故」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 299c6-7)[5] 捨【大】，於【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
這裡是說，從梵天以上的地方生到梵天。「自」是指「梵天」，「上」指「梵天」以上。也就是說，從第二靜慮以上地命終，生到初靜慮地。
32. Pruden (8-16cd, 長行, p. 1246) At death, a defiled mind of any sphere can arise following a pure absorption obtained through birth.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, 頌與長行, p. 2403) (But) at death, following the clean [meditative attainment], the defiled [meditative attainment] of any type [can arise]. At death, following the clean meditative attainment acquired through birth, a defiled thought of any stage can arise.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「若生淨染，生染不然，謂命終時從生得淨，一一無間生一切染。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148c8-9)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「死墮時從生得清淨定，後次第一切地染污定生。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 300a20-21)
兩英譯本中的“absorption”“ meditative attainment”是錯的。真諦譯本中的「定」也不夠準確。“meditative attainment”和“acquired through birth”是矛盾的。「生得淨」，就表示這是在散心位，不是在定位。因為在定位是不可能命終的。「定位」是「加行善」，不是「生得善」。這裡的「生得淨」，不僅包括「生得善」，還包括「無覆無記」。這是說：以生得淨心死，下一剎那可能生起任何地的染污心。有意思的是，從LVP的注釋（LS，note232，p. 2469）看，LVP是知道定位不可能命終、受生的。我們下一條討論LVP的注釋。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷10：「死生唯許捨受相應，捨相應心不明利故，餘受明利不順死生。又此二時唯散非定，要有心位必非無心。非在定心有死生義，界地別故、加行生故、能攝益故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 56a28-b3)
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷7：「三界善心各分二種，謂加行得、生得別故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 39a21-22)
33. Pruden (8-16cd, 長行, p. 1293) Up to here the author has spoken of the samdpattidhydnas, absorptions, or states of contemplation, and their succession; but the kuśalasaṁhita, the "good mind of absorption," which exists in the upapattidhydnas, that is, in Ruapadhatu (-oi dhyana; brahmaloka, etc.), and which is acquired through arising (upapattildbhika), is also called pure dhyana (fuddhaka dhyana). When a being in Rupadhatu dies, this pure dhyana comes to an end; can it be followed only by a defiled dhyana of the same sphere? No: "At death, following upon the pure, there is a defiled state of some sphere." In fact, death (maranabhava) is never absorbed (samdhita) (iii.43): a being in Rupadhatu, at the moment when he dies, never possesses the dhyana of pure absorption. The "mind of reincarnation" (pratisamdhicitta) which follows "the mind at death" (maranabhava) will be defiled, not absorbed.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, note232, p. 2403) but the wholesome concentrated thought (kuśalasaṁhita) which exists in the meditations as birth (upapattidhyiina), that is to say, in the births of the realm of fine-materiality (= of meditation [dhyiina}; the world of Brahma [brahmaloka], etc.) and which is acquired through birth (upapattiliibhika), receives the name of clean meditation (śuddhaka dhyāna) also. When beings in the realm of fine-materiality die, this clean meditation comes to an end; can it be followed only by a defiled meditation of the same stage? - No: "At death, following the clean [meditative attainment], there is the defiled [meditative attainment] of whatever stage." - Indeed, death (mararJ,abhava) is never concentrated (samiihita) (iii. 43): at the moment they die, the sentient beings of the realm of fine-materiality never possess the meditation of clean meditative attainment.
有兩點，1，「死淨生一切」的「淨」，不僅是生得善心，也包括無覆無記心；2，LVP認為生得善心也叫做定心，这是错误的，定地有生得善心，它是属于定地的散心。
34. Lodrö Sangpo (8-16cd, 頌, p. 2403) Following the defiled [Rūpas and Ārūpyas], no [defiled thought of] a higher stage [can follow]
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28：「染生自下染」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148b15) 《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「若從生染，一一無間能生自地一切下染」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 148c9-10)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「偈曰：染非上。釋曰：從染污四色定四無色定後死墮時，次第自地下地染污定生，非上地。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 300a21-23)
[defiled thought of]的補充有造成誤解的風險，因為「非」只是對「上地」的否定，不是對「染」的否定。如果改成「所生的染心不可能在上地」，會更合適。
35. Pruden (8-21d, 長行, p. 1253) If the sdmantakas of the dhyanas and the ampyas are pure, they cut off the defilements, because they are opposed to a lower sphere.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-21d, 頌與長行, p. 2410) And [the defilements are] also [abandoned] by means of the pre- liminary concentration, when clean, [and not only when "free from fluxes"]. The preliminary concentrations (slimantaka) of the meditations (dhylina) and of the formless meditative attainments (ariipya), if they were "clean",273 [-and not only if they were "free from fluxes" (vi. 47cd)-] cut off the defilements , because they oppose the lower stage.
“are pure”和“not only when "free from fluxes"”錯了，近分定斷惑不需要無漏。這裡說的就是有漏的近分定。
36. Pruden (8-24a, 長行, p. 1257) the three characteristics of conditioned things (the samskrtalaksanas, ii.45), arising, duration-and-change, and death.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-24a, 長行, p. 2414) the three characteristics of the conditioned (sarriskrtalak~a~a; ii. 45cd), (i) arising, (ii) duration-change, (iii) passing away.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「三有為相」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 149c21-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「三有為相」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 301b7)
Duration應該刪掉。有為三相不包括「住相」。這裡不應該解釋為「住異」，而應該解釋為「異」。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷5：「豈不經說有三有為之有為相？於此經中應說有四，不說者何？所謂住相。然經說住異，是此異別名。如生名起，滅名為盡。如是應知，異名住異。若法令行三世遷流，此經說為有為之相，令諸有情生厭畏故。謂彼諸行生力所遷，令從未來流入現在。異及滅相力所遷迫，令從現在流入過去，令其衰異及壞滅故。傳說如有人處稠林，有三怨敵欲為損害，一從稠林牽之令出、一衰其力、一壞命根。三相於行應知亦爾。住於彼行攝受安立，常樂與彼不相捨離，故不立在有為相中。又無為法有自相住，住相濫彼故經不說。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 27a17-29)
37. Lodrö Sangpo (8-27b, 長行, p. 2418) [These concentrations have eleven stages for their basis,] with the exception of seven preliminary concentrations [and the intermediate meditation].
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷28〈8 分別定品〉：「依十一地，除七近分，謂欲未至八本中間。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 150a15-16)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「除七近分定，於十一地，謂欲界、非至定、中間定、四色定、四無色定。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 301c10-11)
“and the intermediate meditation”不需要加。
38. Lodrö Sangpo (8-31c, 長行, p. 2424) the immeasurables, [considered.in their fundamental meditation,] remove or "make distant" (diirfkara,:za) [malice, etc.,] already abandoned [through a path of abandonment]: this is why we have said above that the immeasurables are the counter-agent (pratipak$a) to malice, etc.
這裡的“through a path of abandonment”，如果是指the immeasurables，through a path of abandonment，令已斷惑更遠，就是錯的。因為它不是通過「斷道」（無間道），而是通過「遠道」（勝進道）。見頌「應知一切道，略說唯有四」「對治有四種，謂斷持緣厭」。如果是指abandoned本身，就是沒問題的。Pruden (p. 1268) 沒問題。
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「此加行位制伏瞋等，或此能令已斷更遠，故前說此能治四障；謂欲未至亦有慈等，似所修成根本無量；由此制伏瞋等障已，引斷道生能斷諸惑，諸惑斷已離染位中，方得根本四種無量。於此後位雖遇強緣，而非瞋等之所蔽伏。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 150c23-28)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「由修彼加行能制伏瞋恚等故，說彼是瞋恚等對治，已滅能令遠故，有慈等觀以欲界及[7]非[8]至定為地，有以根本定為地，由前制伏諸惑已，後由滅道滅除諸惑。次於離欲位中，由得根本無量定故，若得定強力緣時，非復彼所能逼故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 302b13-19)[7] 非【大】，未【元】【明】【宮】 [8] 至【大】，來【宮】
39. Pruden (8-31f, 長行, p. 1271) The person who has produced the Third Dhyana or the Fourth Dhyana cannot possess joy, since satisfaction is absent in these Dhyanas.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-31d, 長行, p. 2426) Those who produce the third or the fourth meditation cannot be accompanied by sympathetic joy, since satisfaction is absent in these meditations.
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「此四無量人起非餘，隨得一時必成三種。生第三定等，唯不成喜故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 151a20-22)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「若人生第三第四定，與喜不相應。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, p. 302c13-14)
英譯本的“produce”錯了，“生”指的是born，也就是說，一個人從欲界死，生到第三靜慮、第四靜慮，不成就喜無量。並不是依下地身起第三、第四靜慮。這是「生靜慮」和「定靜慮」的區別。見（LS，p. 2372）：“Meditation is twofold [i.e., meditation as meditative attainment (samiipatti-dhyiina) and meditation as birth (upapatti-dhyiina)]. ”
40． Pruden (8-32d, 長行, pp. 1272-1273) The Third to the Seventh Deliverances are the good arupyas … According to others, the mind and mental states produced by retribution among beings born in Arupyadhatu are not concentrated.
Lodrö Sangpo (8-32d, 長行, p. 2427) they are not the formless meditative attainment which occurs at the end of life. According to other masters, the thought and thought-concomitants produced by ripening (vipaka)--: among sentient beings born in the realm of immateriality-are also "non-concentrated" (asamahita).
《阿毘達磨俱舍論》卷29：「次四解脫如其次第，以四無色定善為性。非無記染，非解脫故。亦非散善，性微劣故。彼散善者，如命終心。有說餘時亦有散善。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1558, p. 151b11-14)
《阿毘達磨俱舍釋論》卷21〈8 分別三摩跋提品〉：「若善若定地，四無色觀是四無色解脫，非不定地，譬如於[15]死有中。餘部師說：無色定有時非定，如目乾連所修。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1559, pp. 302c28-303a1)[15] 死【大】，無【宋】【元】【明】【宮】
《阿毘達磨順正理論》卷80：「有說餘時亦有散善，唯生得善無聞思故。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T29, no. 1562, p. 771c8-9)
《俱舍論記》卷29：「有說不但命終有善。餘時亦有生得散善。但無聞．思。」(CBETA 2023.Q1, T41, no. 1821, p. 436a25-26)
Pruden的“Third ”應該作“fourth”；LS的“the formless meditative attainment”應該作ārūpya，這裡說的是「無色界」，但不是「無色界定」。因為是散心。LVP在note418 ( p. 2501) 也表明了。兩英譯本想說「生得（善）」是散心，但是把「生得」解釋成「異熟」，“produced by retribution”，“ produced by ripening”，這就錯了。因為「生得善」不是異熟，異熟是無記法。