清淨道論 壞滅隨觀智Visuddhimagga · Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution
洗淨的生滅智一再衡量色與非色，智一銳利，諸行迅速現起，就再也停不到「生」上了——念唯安住於盡、壞、破、滅。這是觀道的轉折點：從這裡起只看滅。前面像看漣漪一圈圈起落，這裡像只看每一圈碎掉的那一瞬。
第一個被看見壞的不是色，是看色的心：以色為所緣的心生起而破壞，省察那所緣，再用下一個心看那個心的壞。古師說：所知與智，二者都觀——不留一個觀者在旁邊。然後七隨觀成一條鏈：無常推出苦，苦推出無我，無常苦無我的東西不該歡喜，於是厭離；不該貪，於是離貪；令滅不令集；最後捨遣——捨遣有二義：把煩惱連同諸行一起放掉，是遍捨；傾向涅槃跳進去，是躍入。放手與跳躍是同一個動作。看見眼前這一壞，類推過去未來都是這樣壞；看到最後只剩一句：唯是諸行破壞，其破就是死，並沒有別的什麼——空之現起。
圖像是大雨打在池面：一個個大水泡起來、立刻破；你看的不是雨也不是水，是「破」。一切諸行就這樣破了又破。這智以八功德為眷屬：斷有見、不再抓著活命、常勤精進、活命清淨、斷憂勤、離怖畏、得忍與柔和、順逆都堪忍——看得輕，不是看得暗。古師說：如同衣與頭已著火的人，隨觀壞而為證不死。
Knowledge of arising and passing away, now cleansed, repeatedly weighs material and immaterial phenomena. Once knowledge becomes sharp and formations manifest rapidly, it can no longer rest upon “arising”—mindfulness settles only upon exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation. This is the turning point of the insight path: from here onward it sees only dissolution. Earlier it was like watching rings of ripples rise and fall; here it is like watching only the instant each ring shatters.
The first thing seen breaking up is not form but the mind that sees form. A mind with form as its object arises and breaks up; one reflects upon that object, then uses a subsequent mind to observe the dissolution of that mind. The ancient teachers say, “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated”—no observer is left standing to one side. The seven contemplations then form one chain: impermanence entails suffering, suffering entails not-self, and what is impermanent, suffering, and not-self should not be delighted in, so disenchantment follows; it should not be lusted after, so dispassion follows; one causes cessation and not arising; finally one relinquishes. Relinquishment has two meanings: releasing the defilements together with formations is giving up; inclining toward nibbāna and leaping in is entering into. Letting go and leaping are one movement. Seeing this present breakup, one infers that past and future break up in the same way. At the end only one statement remains: formations alone break up; their breakup is death, and there is nothing else—manifestation as emptiness.
The image is heavy rain striking a pond: one large water bubble after another rises and immediately bursts. You are watching neither the rain nor the water but the “bursting.” All formations break up again and again in this way. This knowledge is accompanied by eight benefits: abandoning the view of existence, no longer grasping at life, constant application to exertion, purity of livelihood, abandoning anxious striving, freedom from fear, gaining patience and gentleness, and enduring both discontent and delight—seeing lightly, not seeing darkly. The ancient teachers say: like one whose clothing and head are ablaze, contemplate dissolution in order to realize the deathless.
本單元白話為本編自巴利原典之譯疏（tr. mine）；底本事項詳本單元考據。
§1 壞滅隨觀智之生起與其所本之引 〔CSCD §741〕
壞滅隨觀智之說
他這樣觀察之後，一再地以「無常、苦、無我」而衡量、度察色法與非色法，那智就成為銳利而轉起，諸行也迅速地現起。智既銳利地轉起，諸行既迅速地現起，他就不再及於生、或住、或轉起、或相；念¹唯安住於盡、壞、破、滅。在他見「所謂諸行是這樣生起、這樣滅去」之時，於此處就生起名為壞滅隨觀的觀智。就是就這個而說了：
「怎樣是省察所緣²而於壞滅隨觀之慧、於觀之智呢？以色為所緣的心生起而破壞；省察那所緣，而隨觀那心之壞。『隨觀』——怎樣隨觀呢？以無常而隨觀，不以常；以苦而隨觀，不以樂；以無我而隨觀，不以我；厭離而不歡喜，離貪而不貪，令滅而不令集，捨遣而不執取。
「以無常而隨觀的人，斷常想。以苦而隨觀的人〔斷〕樂想，以無我而隨觀的人〔斷〕我想，厭離的人〔斷〕歡喜，離貪的人〔斷〕貪，令滅的人〔斷〕集，捨遣的人斷取。
「以受為所緣……乃至（廣說如前）……以想為所緣……以行為所緣……以識為所緣……以眼為所緣……乃至（廣說如前）……以老死為所緣的心生起而破壞……乃至（廣說如前）……捨遣的人斷取。
事之移轉，與慧之退轉，
與轉向之力——〔是〕省察觀。
以所緣之類推，二者一之安立，
於滅之勝解——〔是〕壞相觀。
省察所緣，而隨觀其壞，
與空之現起——〔是〕增上慧觀。
善巧於三隨觀，與於四觀，
於三現起之善巧——於種種見不動。
「那個以所知之義而為智，以了知之義而為慧；所以說『省察所緣而於壞滅隨觀之慧，是於觀之智』。」
§2 逐句釋——省察所緣・隨觀・捨遣 〔CSCD §742–743〕
其中，「省察所緣」，意思是：省察、了知任何所緣，從盡、從壞而見。「於壞滅隨觀之慧」——就他而言，省察所緣為盡、為壞而生起的那智，隨觀其壞的那慧，這就說為「於觀之智」。「那是怎樣的呢」——這先是欲說之問的意思。此後，為了顯示它是怎樣的，就說了「以色為所緣」等等。
其中，「以色為所緣的心生起而破壞」——就是說：以色為所緣的心生起而破壞；或者意思是：在以色為所緣的狀態之中，心生起而破壞。「省察那所緣」，意思是：省察、了知那色所緣，從盡、從壞而見。「隨觀那心之壞」，意思是：以那個心從盡、從壞而見了那色所緣，就再以後一個心隨觀那個心之壞。所以古師們說：「所知與智，二者都觀。」
而這裡的「隨觀」，意思是：隨隨而見，以種種行相一再地見。所以說了：「『隨觀』——怎樣隨觀呢？以無常而隨觀」等等。
其中，因為所謂「壞」是無常性的最極之邊，所以那隨觀壞的瑜伽者，就以無常隨觀一切諸行，不以常。此後，因為無常者是苦、苦者是無我，就以苦隨觀那同一者，不以樂；以無我隨觀，不以我。
而因為凡是無常、苦、無我者，不應當歡喜；凡是不應當歡喜者，於彼不應當貪著；所以他對這隨著壞滅隨觀而被見為「無常、苦、無我」的諸行，就厭離而不歡喜，離貪而不貪。他這樣不貪，就先以世間之智令貪滅而不令〔貪〕集——意思是不作集。
或者，他這樣離貪，就如同所見的諸行一般，對未見的也依類智³而令滅，不令集——就是唯以滅而作意；意思是他唯見其滅，不見其集。
他這樣行道，就捨遣而不執取。這是說什麼呢？這無常等隨觀，由於依彼分⁴而連同諸蘊之行一併遍捨諸煩惱，又由於見了有為之過患而傾向於與之相反的涅槃、躍入於彼，所以說它既是遍捨之捨遣，也是躍入之捨遣。所以具足它的比丘，就依上面所說的方式遍捨諸煩惱，而躍入於涅槃。他既不依令生而執取諸煩惱，也不依不見過患而執取有為的所緣。所以說「捨遣而不執取」。
如今，為了顯示由那些智而有哪些法之斷，就說了「以無常而隨觀的人斷常想」等等。其中，「歡喜」，就是有喜的渴愛。其餘的都是已說過的方式。
§3 初二偈之釋——事之移轉與所緣之類推 〔CSCD §744–745〕
而在諸偈之中：「事之移轉」，就是見了色之壞，又依見那見壞之心的壞，而自前一個事移轉到別的事。「慧之退轉」，就是捨了生而住立於滅。「轉向之力」，就是見了色之壞，為了見那以壞為所緣的心之壞，而能夠無間即轉向。「省察觀」，就是這所謂「省察所緣而隨觀壞」。
「以所緣之類推，二者一之安立」，意思是：依現見的所緣之類推、之隨行，而知「如同這個一般，過去的諸行也曾這樣破壞，未來的也將這樣破壞」——這樣把二者以同一自性而安立。古師們也說過：
於現前者見已清淨的人，
以其類推而導向過去未來：
一切諸行都是壞滅之法，
如日出時的露珠。
「於滅之勝解」，意思是：這樣依壞而作了二者之一之安立，就對那所謂「壞」的滅有勝解——即以彼為重、傾向於彼、趣向於彼、臨入於彼。「壞相觀」，就是說：這就叫作壞相觀。
§4 後二偈之釋——空之現起與三善巧 〔CSCD §746–747〕
「省察所緣」，就是了知前面的色等所緣。「而隨觀其壞」，就是見了那所緣之壞，而隨觀以彼為所緣的心之壞。「與空之現起」，就是在他這樣隨觀壞之時，「唯是諸行破壞，它們的破就是死，並沒有別的什麼」——這樣空之現起就成就了。所以古師們說：
諸蘊滅去，並沒有別的；
諸蘊之破，說之為死。
不放逸者見它們的盡，
如以金剛鑽穿寶珠，如理而〔見〕。
「增上慧觀」，就是說：省察所緣、隨觀壞、空之現起——這三者就叫作增上慧觀。
「善巧於三隨觀」，就是善巧於無常隨觀等三種的比丘。「與於四觀」，就是〔善巧〕於厭離等四觀。「於三現起之善巧」，就是善巧於「從盡、從壞、以空」這三種現起。「於種種見不動」，就是於常見等種種的見不震動。
§5 水泡之喻與壞滅隨觀之八功德 〔CSCD §748–749〕
他這樣不震動，作意這樣轉起：「未滅者正在滅，未破者正在破。」對於一切諸行——它們如同脆弱的器皿一般破碎，如同細塵一般飛散，如同胡麻一般被炒——他就捨了生、住、轉起、相，而唯見其破。就如同一個有眼的人，站在蓮池岸邊或河岸邊，在大滴的雨落下時，見水面上一個一個大大的水泡不斷生起而迅速破滅；同樣地，他見一切諸行破了又破。因為就是就這樣的瑜伽者，世尊說了：
如見水泡，如見陽焰，
這樣觀世間的人，死王不見他。
在他這樣恆常見「一切諸行破了又破」之時，以八功德為眷屬的壞滅隨觀智就得力了。其中的八功德是：斷有見、捨命之欣求⁵、常勤精進、活命清淨、斷憂勤、離怖畏、得忍與柔和、堪忍不樂與樂。所以古師們說：
見了這八種最上的功德，
牟尼就於彼一再思惟；
如同衣與頭已著火的人一般，
隨觀壞而為證得不死。
壞滅隨觀智〔之說〕終。
註
¹ 念（sati）：憶持所緣而不忘失之心所，論中恆與智、精進、定並行。與今日通行之「正念」一語所指之泛然覺察不同科，宜依本論所立而讀。
² 省察所緣（ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā）：論自釋為「省察、了知任何所緣，從盡、從壞而見」；本篇之題語之首分。
³ 類智（anvayañāṇa）：以現見者類推未見者之智；本篇以之通於過去未來之諸行。
⁴ 彼分（tadaṅga）：以相對之一法暫伏煩惱之捨斷；本篇諸捨斷皆依此而說。
⁵ 欣求（nikanti）：微細之欣樂；此處為對命之欣求，其為十觀隨染之末一之釋，在第二十品〈觀之隨染〉之單元。
The vernacular of this unit is this edition’s own rendering-with-exposition from the Pāli original (tr. mine); see this unit’s apparatus for the base-text particulars.
§1 The Arising of Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution and the Citation on Which It Rests 〔CSCD §741〕
Discourse on Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution
After observing in this way, he repeatedly weighs and investigates material and immaterial phenomena as “impermanent, suffering, and not-self.” His knowledge becomes sharp and proceeds, and formations manifest rapidly. Once knowledge proceeds sharply and formations manifest rapidly, he no longer reaches arising, presence, occurrence, or the sign; mindfulness¹ settles only upon exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation. When he sees, “Formations arise in this way and pass away in this way,” insight knowledge called contemplation of dissolution arises in him. With reference to precisely this it was said:
“How is the understanding that reflects on the object and contemplates dissolution knowledge belonging to insight? A mind with form as its object arises and breaks up. Having reflected upon that object, one contemplates the dissolution of that mind. ‘Contemplates’—how does one contemplate? One contemplates as impermanent, not as permanent; as suffering, not as pleasure; as not-self, not as self. One becomes disenchanted and does not delight, becomes dispassionate and does not lust, causes cessation and does not cause arising, relinquishes and does not grasp.”
“One who contemplates as impermanent abandons the perception of permanence. One who contemplates as suffering abandons the perception of pleasure; one who contemplates as not-self abandons the perception of self; one who becomes disenchanted abandons delight; one who becomes dispassionate abandons lust; one who causes cessation abandons arising; one who relinquishes abandons grasping.”
“A mind with feeling as its object … and so on in full as before … with perception as its object … with formations as its object … with consciousness as its object … with the eye as its object … and so on in full as before … a mind with aging-and-death as its object arises and breaks up … and so on in full as before … one who relinquishes abandons grasping.”
The shifting of the basis, the withdrawal of understanding,
And the strength of adverting—these are reflective insight.
Through inference from the object, the two are established as one;
Resolve upon cessation—this is insight into the characteristic of dissolution.
Having reflected upon the object, one contemplates its dissolution,
Together with manifestation as emptiness—this is higher-wisdom insight.
Skill in the three contemplations, and in the four contemplations,
Skill in the three manifestations—one is unmoved by various views.
“That which is knowledge in the sense of what is known is understanding in the sense of comprehending. Therefore it is said: ‘The understanding that reflects on the object and contemplates dissolution is knowledge belonging to insight.’”
§2 Phrase-by-Phrase Explanation—Reflection on the Object, Contemplation, and Relinquishment 〔CSCD §742–743〕
Here, “reflection on the object” means reflecting upon and comprehending any object, seeing it in terms of exhaustion and dissolution. “Understanding in contemplating dissolution”: for him, the knowledge that arises after reflecting upon the object as exhausted and dissolved, the understanding that contemplates its dissolution, is what is called “knowledge belonging to insight.” “How is that?”—this first has the sense of a question asked from a wish to explain. Thereafter, to show what it is like, the passage beginning “with form as its object” is spoken.
Here, “a mind with form as its object arises and breaks up” means that a mind having form as its object arises and breaks up; alternatively, it means that within the condition of having form as object, a mind arises and breaks up. “Having reflected upon that object” means reflecting upon and comprehending that form as object, seeing it in terms of exhaustion and dissolution. “One contemplates the dissolution of that mind” means that, after seeing that form-object in terms of exhaustion and dissolution with that mind, one next contemplates the dissolution of that mind with a subsequent mind. Thus the ancient teachers said: “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated.”
Here, “contemplates” means seeing successively, seeing repeatedly in various modes. Therefore it was said: “‘Contemplates’—how does one contemplate? One contemplates as impermanent,” and so forth.
Because what is called “dissolution” is the furthest limit of impermanence, the meditator who contemplates dissolution contemplates all formations as impermanent, not as permanent. Thereafter, because what is impermanent is suffering and what is suffering is not-self, he contemplates that same thing as suffering, not as pleasure; as not-self, not as self.
And because anything impermanent, suffering, and not-self should not be delighted in, and anything not to be delighted in should not be lusted after, he becomes disenchanted and does not delight in the formations seen as “impermanent, suffering, and not-self” through contemplation of dissolution; he becomes dispassionate and does not lust. Since he does not lust in this way, he first causes lust to cease by mundane knowledge and does not cause it to arise—that is, he does not produce arising.
Alternatively, when he has become dispassionate in this way, then just as with the formations he has seen, so too with those he has not seen, he causes cessation through inferential knowledge³ and does not cause arising. He attends only to cessation: the meaning is that he sees only their cessation and does not see their arising.
Practicing in this way, he relinquishes and does not grasp. What does this mean? Because these contemplations of impermanence and the rest abandon the defilements in their entirety, together with formations comprised in the aggregates, by suppression through the opposite factor,⁴ and because, having seen the danger in the conditioned, they incline toward its opposite, nibbāna, and enter into it, they are said to be both relinquishment by giving up and relinquishment by entering into. Thus a bhikkhu who possesses this contemplation completely gives up the defilements in the way stated above and enters into nibbāna. He neither grasps defilements by causing them to arise nor grasps a conditioned object by failing to see its danger. Therefore it is said, “He relinquishes and does not grasp.”
Now, to show which phenomena are abandoned by those knowledges, the passage beginning “One who contemplates as impermanent abandons the perception of permanence” is spoken. Here, “delight” is craving accompanied by rapture. The rest follows the method already explained.
§3 Explanation of the First Two Verses—the Shifting of the Basis and Inference from the Object 〔CSCD §744–745〕
In the verses, “the shifting of the basis” means that, having seen the dissolution of form and then seeing the dissolution of the mind that saw that dissolution, one shifts from the former basis to another basis. “The withdrawal of understanding” means abandoning arising and taking one’s stand upon dissolution. “The strength of adverting” means that, after seeing the dissolution of form, one is able immediately to advert to seeing the dissolution of the mind that had dissolution as its object. “Reflective insight” is what is called “reflecting upon the object and contemplating dissolution.”
“Through inference from the object, the two are established as one” means that, by inference and extension from the object directly seen, one knows, “Just as this is breaking up, so too formations in the past broke up in this way, and those in the future will break up in this way.” Thus the two are established as having a single nature. The ancient teachers also said:
The one of purified vision, having seen what is present,
Extends it by inference to the past and future:
All formations have the nature of dissolution,
Like drops of dew when the sun has risen.
“Resolve upon cessation” means that, after the two have thus been established as one by way of dissolution, one resolves upon the cessation called “dissolution”—giving it weight, inclining toward it, tending toward it, and leaning into it. “Insight into the characteristic of dissolution” means: this is what is called insight into the characteristic of dissolution.
§4 Explanation of the Last Two Verses—Manifestation as Emptiness and the Three Skills 〔CSCD §746–747〕
“Having reflected upon the object” means comprehending the preceding objects such as form. “One contemplates its dissolution” means that, having seen the dissolution of that object, one contemplates the dissolution of the mind that had it as its object. “Together with manifestation as emptiness” means that, while one thus contemplates dissolution, manifestation as emptiness is accomplished in this way: “Only formations break up; their breakup is death, and there is nothing else.” Thus the ancient teachers said:
The aggregates cease, and there is nothing else;
The breakup of the aggregates is called death.
The heedful one sees their exhaustion
Rightly, as if piercing a jewel with a diamond.
“Higher-wisdom insight” means that these three—reflection on the object, contemplation of dissolution, and manifestation as emptiness—are called higher-wisdom insight.
“Skill in the three contemplations” means a bhikkhu skilled in the three beginning with contemplation of impermanence. “And in the four contemplations” means skilled in the four beginning with disenchantment. “Skill in the three manifestations” means skill in the three manifestations “as exhaustion, as dissolution, and as emptiness.” “Unmoved by various views” means that one does not tremble before the various views beginning with the view of permanence.
§5 The Simile of Water Bubbles and the Eight Benefits of Contemplation of Dissolution 〔CSCD §748–749〕
Unmoved in this way, he attends thus: “What has not ceased is ceasing; what has not broken up is breaking up.” Regarding all formations—as they break like fragile vessels, scatter like fine dust, and are roasted like sesame seeds—he abandons arising, presence, occurrence, and the sign and sees only their breakup. Suppose a person with eyes stood on the bank of a lotus pond or a river when heavy drops of rain were falling and saw large water bubbles, one after another, continually arise upon the surface and rapidly burst. In the same way, he sees all formations breaking up again and again. It was with reference to precisely such a meditator that the Blessed One said:
As one would see a water bubble, as one would see a mirage,
So one who looks upon the world is not seen by the King of Death.
As he constantly sees “all formations breaking up again and again,” knowledge of contemplation of dissolution, accompanied by eight benefits, gains strength. The eight benefits are: abandoning the view of existence, giving up longing for life, constant application to exertion, purity of livelihood, abandoning anxious striving, freedom from fear, gaining patience and gentleness, and enduring discontent and delight. Thus the ancient teachers said:
Having seen these eight supreme benefits,
The sage reflects on them again and again;
Like one whose clothing and head are ablaze,
He contemplates dissolution to realize the deathless.
The Discourse on Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution is concluded.
Notes
¹ Mindfulness (sati): the mental factor that remembers its object without losing it; throughout the treatise it operates together with knowledge, exertion, and concentration. It is a different category from the diffuse awareness commonly indicated by the modern expression “right mindfulness” and should be read according to the framework established in this treatise.
² Reflection on the object (ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā): the text itself explains it as “reflecting upon and comprehending any object, seeing it in terms of exhaustion and dissolution”; the first part of the titular expression in this discourse.
³ Inferential knowledge (anvayañāṇa): knowledge that infers what has not been seen from what is directly seen; this discourse thereby extends to formations in the past and future.
⁴ The opposite factor (tadaṅga): relinquishment that temporarily suppresses a defilement by means of an opposing phenomenon; all the forms of abandonment in this discourse are described on this basis.
⁵ Longing (nikanti): a subtle delight; here it is longing for life. Its explanation as the last of the ten corruptions of insight occurs in the Chapter Twenty unit “Corruptions of Insight.”
智一銳利，就再也看不到「生」了——念唯安住於盡、壞、破、滅；看見色壞，再看見那個看見色壞的心也壞：「所知與智，二者都觀」；到最後只剩一件事：一切諸行破了又破，如大雨中的水泡
大局 — 觀道的轉折點：從看生滅到只看滅
洗淨的生滅智一再衡量色非色，智銳利、諸行迅速現起，於是行者不再及於生、住、轉起、相——念唯安住於盡壞破滅：這就是壞滅隨觀智（§1，附聖典全文與四偈）。論主逐句釋聖典（§2）：省察所緣＝從盡從壞見所緣；隨觀壞＝以後一心觀前一心之壞——「所知與智二者都觀」；然後七隨觀（無常苦無我厭離離貪滅捨遣）與其所斷；「捨遣」有二義——遍捨煩惱與躍入涅槃。再釋四偈（§3–4）：事之移轉・慧之退轉・轉向之力＝省察觀；以所緣之類推把過去未來與現在「二者一之安立」・於滅之勝解＝壞相觀；省察所緣・隨觀壞・空之現起（「唯是諸行破壞，其破就是死，並沒有別的」）＝增上慧觀；三隨觀・四觀・三現起之善巧＝於種種見不動。末段水泡之喻與八功德（§5）。〔所見〕這是那條「一路鬆手」之路真正的第一步：觀道從這裡起只看滅——生還在發生，但智不再停在它上面。前面的生滅智像看漣漪一圈圈起落；壞滅智像只看每一圈碎掉的那一瞬。論主說這智「以八功德為眷屬」——斷有見、捨命之欣求、常勤精進……——這幾步「不好受」，但論主列的都是好處。
§01 壞滅隨觀智之生起與其所本之引 → 白話 §1
一再以無常苦無我衡量度察色非色，智銳利諸行迅速現起，不再及於生住轉起相，念唯安住於盡壞破滅；見「諸行這樣生起這樣滅去」時生壞滅隨觀之觀智。聖典：省察所緣而於壞滅隨觀之慧＝觀之智——以色為所緣之心生起而破壞，省察那所緣而隨觀那心之壞；隨觀＝以無常不以常、以苦不以樂、以無我不以我、厭離不歡喜、離貪不貪、令滅不令集、捨遣不執取；無常隨觀斷常想・苦斷樂想・無我斷我想・厭離斷歡喜・離貪斷貪・令滅斷集・捨遣斷取；受想行識眼乃至老死同。四偈：事之移轉・慧之退轉・轉向之力＝省察觀；以所緣之類推二者一之安立・於滅之勝解＝壞相觀；省察所緣隨觀其壞・空之現起＝增上慧觀；善巧三隨觀四觀三現起——於種種見不動（白話 §1）。〔讀法〕注意動詞的變化：前面是「見生滅」，這裡是「衡量、度察」，然後「不再及於生」——不是決定不看生，是智快到來不及停在生上。〔所見〕聖典把「以色為所緣的心生起而破壞」放在最前——第一個被看見壞的，不是色，是看色的心。壞滅智從一開始就是反身的。
§02 逐句釋——省察所緣・隨觀・捨遣 → 白話 §2
省察所緣＝省察了知任何所緣從盡從壞而見；於壞滅隨觀之慧＝省察所緣為盡壞而生之智、隨觀其壞之慧。「以色為所緣的心生起而破壞」——以色為所緣之心生而壞、或於以色為所緣之中心生而壞；省察那所緣＝從盡壞見那色所緣；隨觀那心之壞＝以那心從盡壞見了色所緣，再以後一心隨觀那心之壞——古師：「所知與智二者都觀」。隨觀＝隨隨而見、種種行相一再見。壞是無常性之最極之邊故以無常隨觀一切行不以常；無常者苦苦者無我故以苦以無我隨觀；無常苦無我者不應歡喜、不應貪著故厭離不歡喜、離貪不貪；不貪則以世間智令貪滅不令集——不作集；或如所見諸行對未見亦依類智令滅不令集——唯以滅作意；如是行道捨遣不執取：無常等隨觀依彼分連同諸蘊之行遍捨煩惱（遍捨之捨遣）、見有為之過患傾向躍入涅槃（躍入之捨遣）——既不依令生執取煩惱、亦不依不見過患執取有為所緣。歡喜＝有喜之渴愛（白話 §2）。〔讀法〕七隨觀在這裡是一條鏈：無常→苦→無我→（不應歡喜）厭離→（不應貪）離貪→令滅→捨遣。每一環都由前一環推出來，不是七件事並列。〔所見〕「捨遣」二義極美：遍捨是把煩惱連同諸行一起放掉，躍入是傾向涅槃、跳進去——放手與跳躍是同一個動作。「所知與智，二者都觀」是全單元的心：不留一個「觀者」在旁邊。
§03 初二偈之釋——事之移轉與所緣之類推 → 白話 §3
事之移轉＝見色之壞、又見那見壞之心之壞，自前一事移轉到別事；慧之退轉＝捨生而住於滅；轉向之力＝見色之壞後能無間轉向去見以壞為所緣之心之壞；此三＝省察觀。以所緣之類推二者一之安立＝依現見所緣類推「過去諸行曾這樣壞、未來亦將這樣壞」而把二者以同一自性安立（古師：於現前者見已清淨，以類推導向過去未來，一切諸行壞滅之法如日出之露珠）；於滅之勝解＝對壞之滅以彼為重傾向趣向臨入；此＝壞相觀（白話 §3）。〔讀法〕「事之移轉」寫的是觀的節奏：看見色壞→看見那看的心壞→移到下一個——觀不停在任何一個「事」上。「慧之退轉」的「退」不是退步，是從生退到滅、住在滅上。〔所見〕「以類推導向過去未來」——壞滅智不需要親眼看過去未來，從眼前這一壞類推：都是這樣壞的。這是把「無常」從現在推到三世的方法，與 19-01 的「現在如此、過去亦然」同一手法。
§04 後二偈之釋——空之現起與三善巧 → 白話 §4
省察所緣＝了知前面色等所緣；隨觀其壞＝見所緣之壞而隨觀以彼為所緣之心之壞；空之現起＝隨觀壞時「唯是諸行破壞，其破就是死，並沒有別的什麼」（古師：諸蘊滅去並沒有別的，諸蘊之破說之為死；不放逸者見其盡，如以金剛鑽穿寶珠如理而見）；此三＝增上慧觀。三隨觀之善巧＝無常等三；四觀＝厭離等四；三現起＝從盡從壞以空；於種種見不動＝於常見等不震動（白話 §4）。〔讀法〕「空之現起」是這一單元的頂：「唯是諸行破壞，它們的破就是死，並沒有別的什麼」——死在這裡被還原成「諸蘊之破」，沒有一個「死去的人」。〔所見〕「如以金剛鑽穿寶珠」——不放逸者見諸蘊之盡，用的是最硬的工具穿最硬的東西；這一句是在說壞滅智的銳利，也是在說寶珠（諸蘊）不是不能穿。
§05 水泡之喻與壞滅隨觀之八功德 → 白話 §5
不震動者作意「未滅者正在滅、未破者正在破」，於一切行如脆器破碎、如細塵飛散、如胡麻被炒，捨生住轉起相唯見其破——如有眼者立於蓮池或河岸見大雨中水面大水泡一一生起而迅速破滅，見一切諸行破了又破（世尊偈：如見水泡如見陽焰，如是觀世間者死王不見他）。恆見「一切諸行破了又破」時，以八功德為眷屬之壞滅隨觀智得力：斷有見・捨命之欣求・常勤精進・活命清淨・斷憂勤・離怖畏・得忍與柔和・堪忍不樂與樂（古師：見此八最上功德，牟尼於彼一再思惟，如衣與頭已著火之人隨觀壞而為證不死）。〔壞滅隨觀智之說終〕（白話 §5）。〔讀法〕水泡之喻是本單元的圖像：大雨打在水面上，一個個大水泡起來、立刻破——你看的不是雨也不是水，是「破」。八功德讀一遍：捨命之欣求（不再抓著活命）、離怖畏、堪忍不樂與樂——壞滅智不是把人看得灰暗，是把人看得輕。〔所見〕「如同衣與頭已著火的人一般」——這是全書形容精進最急的一句：頭髮著火的人不會慢慢來。論主把它放在壞滅智末尾：看見諸行破了又破的人，自然會有這種急——不是焦慮，是不再耽擱。
給一般讀者
帶走一幅畫與一句話。畫：大雨打在池面，一個個大水泡起來、立刻破——你看的不是雨也不是水，是「破」；一切諸行就是這樣破了又破。話：「所知與智，二者都觀」——看見東西壞，再看見那個看見的心也壞，不留一個觀者在旁邊。這一步以後觀道只看滅、不停在生上；它不會把你看得灰暗，論主列的八功德是：不再抓著活命、離怖畏、得忍與柔和、順逆都堪忍——看得輕，不是看得暗。
想讀本單元全文：白話 §1–§5 即壞滅隨觀智之生起與聖典、逐句釋與捨遣二義、初二偈之釋、後二偈之釋與空之現起、水泡喻與八功德的全段逐段全譯。
Once knowledge becomes sharp, it no longer sees “arising”—mindfulness settles only upon exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation; it sees form break up, then sees that the mind which saw form break up also breaks up: “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated”; in the end only one thing remains—all formations breaking up again and again, like water bubbles in heavy rain
The Big Picture — The Turning Point of the Insight Path: From Seeing Arising and Passing Away to Seeing Only Dissolution
Knowledge of arising and passing away, now cleansed, repeatedly weighs material and immaterial phenomena. Knowledge becomes sharp and formations manifest rapidly, so the meditator no longer reaches arising, presence, occurrence, or the sign—mindfulness settles only upon exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation. This is knowledge of contemplation of dissolution (§1, which includes the full canonical citation and four verses). The author then explains the citation phrase by phrase (§2): reflecting on the object means seeing the object in terms of exhaustion and dissolution; contemplating dissolution means that a later mind observes the dissolution of the preceding mind—“Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated.” Next come the seven contemplations—impermanence, suffering, not-self, disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, and relinquishment—and what each abandons. “Relinquishment” has two meanings: fully giving up the defilements and entering into nibbāna. The four verses are then explained (§§3–4). Shifting the basis, withdrawing understanding, and the strength of adverting constitute reflective insight. Through inference from the object, past and future are established as one with the present; resolve upon cessation constitutes insight into the characteristic of dissolution. Reflection on the object, contemplation of dissolution, and manifestation as emptiness—“Only formations break up; their breakup is death, and there is nothing else”—constitute higher-wisdom insight. Skill in the three contemplations, the four contemplations, and the three manifestations leaves one unmoved by various views. The final passage gives the water-bubble simile and eight benefits (§5). 〔What is seen〕This is the true first step on the road of “letting go all the way”: from this point, the insight path sees only dissolution. Arising is still occurring, but knowledge no longer rests upon it. Knowledge of arising and passing away is like watching rings of ripples rise and fall; knowledge of dissolution is like watching only the instant each ring shatters. The author says that this knowledge is “accompanied by eight benefits”—abandoning the view of existence, relinquishing longing for life, constant exertion, and so on. These stages can feel unpleasant, but everything the author lists is a benefit.
§01 The Arising of Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution and the Citation on Which It Rests → Vernacular §1
By repeatedly weighing and investigating material and immaterial phenomena as impermanent, suffering, and not-self, knowledge becomes sharp and formations manifest rapidly. It no longer reaches arising, presence, occurrence, or the sign; mindfulness settles only upon exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation. Seeing “formations arise in this way and pass away in this way,” insight knowledge of contemplation of dissolution arises. The canonical passage says: understanding that reflects on the object and contemplates dissolution is knowledge belonging to insight. A mind with form as object arises and breaks up; one reflects on that object and contemplates the dissolution of that mind. To contemplate is to contemplate as impermanent, not permanent; as suffering, not pleasure; as not-self, not self; to become disenchanted, not delight; dispassionate, not lust; to cause cessation, not arising; to relinquish, not grasp. Contemplation as impermanent abandons the perception of permanence; as suffering, the perception of pleasure; as not-self, the perception of self; disenchantment abandons delight; dispassion, lust; causing cessation, arising; relinquishing, grasping. The same applies to feeling, perception, formations, consciousness, the eye, through aging-and-death. The four verses say: shifting the basis, withdrawing understanding, and the strength of adverting constitute reflective insight; inference from the object, establishment of the two as one, and resolve upon cessation constitute insight into the characteristic of dissolution; reflection on the object, contemplation of its dissolution, and manifestation as emptiness constitute higher-wisdom insight; one skilled in the three contemplations, four contemplations, and three manifestations is unmoved by various views (Vernacular §1). 〔How to read〕Notice the change in verbs. Earlier one “saw arising and passing away”; here one “weighs and investigates,” then “no longer reaches arising.” This is not a decision to ignore arising; knowledge moves so quickly that it has no time to rest upon arising. 〔What is seen〕The canonical passage puts “a mind with form as its object arises and breaks up” first. The first thing seen breaking up is not form but the mind that sees form. From the outset, knowledge of dissolution is reflexive.
§02 Phrase-by-Phrase Explanation—Reflection on the Object, Contemplation, and Relinquishment → Vernacular §2
Reflection on the object means reflecting upon and comprehending any object, seeing it in terms of exhaustion and dissolution. Understanding in contemplating dissolution is the knowledge arising from reflecting upon the object as exhausted and dissolved, the understanding that contemplates its dissolution. “A mind with form as its object arises and breaks up” means that a mind having form as object arises and breaks up, or that within the condition of having form as object a mind arises and breaks up. Reflecting upon that object means seeing that form-object in terms of exhaustion and dissolution. Contemplating the dissolution of that mind means that after the mind sees the form-object in terms of exhaustion and dissolution, a subsequent mind contemplates the dissolution of that mind—hence the ancient teachers’ statement, “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated.” Contemplation means seeing successively, seeing repeatedly in various modes. Since dissolution is the furthest limit of impermanence, all formations are contemplated as impermanent, not permanent. Since the impermanent is suffering and suffering is not-self, they are contemplated as suffering and not-self. Since what is impermanent, suffering, and not-self should not be delighted in or lusted after, one becomes disenchanted and does not delight, dispassionate and does not lust. Not lusting, one causes lust to cease through mundane knowledge and does not cause it to arise—that is, one does not produce arising. Alternatively, as with formations already seen, so with those not seen, inferential knowledge causes cessation and not arising: it attends only to cessation, sees cessation alone, and does not see arising. Practicing thus, one relinquishes and does not grasp. The contemplations of impermanence and the rest, by suppression through the opposite factor, fully abandon the defilements together with formations comprised in the aggregates—relinquishment by giving up. Seeing the danger in the conditioned, they incline and enter into nibbāna—relinquishment by entering into. One neither grasps defilements by causing them to arise nor grasps conditioned objects by failing to see their danger. Delight is craving accompanied by rapture (Vernacular §2). 〔How to read〕The seven contemplations form a chain here: impermanence → suffering → not-self → because these should not be delighted in, disenchantment → because they should not be lusted after, dispassion → causing cessation → relinquishment. Each link follows from the preceding link; they are not seven independent items. 〔What is seen〕The two meanings of “relinquishment” are especially beautiful. Giving up releases the defilements together with formations; entering into inclines toward nibbāna and leaps in. Letting go and leaping are one movement. “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated” is the heart of the entire unit: no observer is left standing to one side.
§03 Explanation of the First Two Verses—the Shifting of the Basis and Inference from the Object → Vernacular §3
The shifting of the basis means seeing the dissolution of form, then seeing the dissolution of the mind that saw it, and shifting from the former basis to another. The withdrawal of understanding means abandoning arising and taking one’s stand upon dissolution. The strength of adverting means being able, immediately after seeing the dissolution of form, to advert to the dissolution of the mind that had dissolution as its object. These three constitute reflective insight. Through inference from the object, the two are established as one: from the object directly seen, one infers that “past formations broke up in this way, and future formations will break up in this way,” establishing the two as having one nature. The ancient teachers say that the one of purified vision, having seen what is present, extends it by inference to past and future; all formations have the nature of dissolution, like dew when the sun rises. Resolve upon cessation means giving weight to, inclining toward, tending toward, and leaning into the cessation called dissolution. This constitutes insight into the characteristic of dissolution (Vernacular §3). 〔How to read〕“The shifting of the basis” describes the rhythm of contemplation: see form break up → see the mind that sees it break up → move to the next thing. Contemplation does not stop at any “basis.” The “withdrawal” in “withdrawal of understanding” is not regression; understanding withdraws from arising, moves to dissolution, and stands there. 〔What is seen〕“Extending by inference to past and future”: knowledge of dissolution need not personally witness past or future. From this breakup before one’s eyes, it infers that all break up in the same way. This is the method by which “impermanence” is extended from the present across the three times, the same method as “the present is thus, and so was the past” in 19-01.
§04 Explanation of the Last Two Verses—Manifestation as Emptiness and the Three Skills → Vernacular §4
Reflection on the object means comprehending preceding objects such as form. Contemplating its dissolution means seeing the dissolution of the object and then contemplating the dissolution of the mind that had it as object. Manifestation as emptiness occurs while contemplating dissolution: “Only formations break up; their breakup is death, and there is nothing else.” The ancient teachers say that the aggregates cease and there is nothing else; the breakup of the aggregates is called death; the heedful one sees their exhaustion rightly, as if piercing a jewel with a diamond. These three constitute higher-wisdom insight. Skill in the three contemplations means the three beginning with impermanence; the four contemplations are the four beginning with disenchantment; the three manifestations are as exhaustion, as dissolution, and as emptiness; being unmoved by various views means not trembling before views beginning with permanence (Vernacular §4). 〔How to read〕“Manifestation as emptiness” is the summit of the unit: “Only formations break up; their breakup is death, and there is nothing else.” Death is reduced here to “the breakup of the aggregates”; there is no “person who dies.” 〔What is seen〕“As if piercing a jewel with a diamond”: the heedful one sees the exhaustion of the aggregates by using the hardest tool to penetrate the hardest object. The statement describes the sharpness of knowledge of dissolution, and also says that the jewel—the aggregates—is not impenetrable.
§05 The Simile of Water Bubbles and the Eight Benefits of Contemplation of Dissolution → Vernacular §5
Unmoved, one attends: “What has not ceased is ceasing; what has not broken up is breaking up.” All formations break like fragile vessels, scatter like fine dust, and are roasted like sesame seeds. One abandons arising, presence, occurrence, and the sign and sees only their breakup. It is like a person with eyes standing by a lotus pond or river and seeing, in heavy rain, large water bubbles arise one after another and rapidly burst; thus one sees all formations breaking up again and again. The Blessed One’s verse says: as one sees a water bubble or a mirage, so the one who looks upon the world is not seen by the King of Death. Constantly seeing “all formations breaking up again and again,” knowledge of contemplation of dissolution gains strength accompanied by eight benefits: abandoning the view of existence, relinquishing longing for life, constant application to exertion, purity of livelihood, abandoning anxious striving, freedom from fear, gaining patience and gentleness, and enduring discontent and delight. The ancient teachers say: having seen these eight supreme benefits, the sage reflects on them repeatedly; like one whose clothing and head are ablaze, one contemplates dissolution to realize the deathless. 〔The Discourse on Knowledge of Contemplation of Dissolution is concluded〕 (Vernacular §5). 〔How to read〕The water-bubble simile is the image of this unit: heavy rain strikes the surface, and one large bubble after another rises and immediately bursts. You are watching neither the rain nor the water but the “bursting.” Read through the eight benefits: relinquishing longing for life, freedom from fear, enduring discontent and delight—knowledge of dissolution does not make a person dark; it makes a person light. 〔What is seen〕“Like one whose clothing and head are ablaze”: this is one of the book’s most urgent images for exertion. A person whose hair is on fire does not proceed slowly. The author places it at the close of knowledge of dissolution: one who sees formations breaking up again and again naturally has this urgency—not anxiety, but no further delay.
For the General Reader
Take away one picture and one statement. The picture: heavy rain strikes a pond; large water bubbles rise one by one and immediately burst. You are watching neither rain nor water but the “bursting”; all formations break up again and again in precisely this way. The statement: “Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated.” See the thing break, then see the mind that saw it break as well, leaving no observer standing to one side. From this point the insight path sees only dissolution and does not rest upon arising. This will not make you dark. The eight benefits listed by the author include no longer grasping at life, freedom from fear, gaining patience and gentleness, and enduring both the agreeable and the disagreeable—seeing lightly, not seeing darkly.
To read this unit in full: Vernacular §§1–5 present the complete, paragraph-by-paragraph rendering of the arising of knowledge of contemplation of dissolution and its canonical source, the phrase-by-phrase explanation and the two meanings of relinquishment, the explanation of the first two verses, the explanation of the last two verses and manifestation as emptiness, and the water-bubble simile with the eight benefits.
考據Apparatus
一、科判定位
譯底 本單元之譯底＝CSCD（內用不上站）。本層一切巴利逐字取自本單元原典欄之譯底，定位一式：〔CSCD §NN〕式對譯底欄逐字可核。本品無自家對頁之巴利，故頁域一概不記。
篇名 譯底欄自帶 ### 小節 1 個，即本篇之題 ### Bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇakathā。
段號域 譯底欄之段號自〔CSCD §741〕至〔CSCD §749〕，實落段號 9 個，無缺無重。本篇於譯底欄之幅為 9,082 位元組——為本品八單元中第二長之篇（次於行捨智之 34,794 與過患隨觀智之 6,789 之上）。
篇之骨——三層 ①〔CSCD §741〕述壞滅隨觀智之生起，而以一長引（paṭi. ma. 之問答與四偈）為其所本；②〔CSCD §742〕至〔CSCD §747〕逐句釋所引之文——先釋散文之問答（§742–§743），次逐偈逐句釋其四偈（§744–§747）；③〔CSCD §748〕至〔CSCD §749〕以水泡之喻收其觀，並列壞滅隨觀智之八功德。
論主自標之引釋式 本篇為本品中最典型之「先引後釋」之篇：〔CSCD §741〕以 Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ – 開引，其後六段逐一以所引之語為題而釋之（Tattha ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhāti・Gāthāsu pana vatthusaṅkamanāti・Ārammaṇaanvayena ubho ekavavatthanāti・Ārammaṇañca paṭisaṅkhāti・Kusalo tīsu anupassanāsūti 等）——引文之次第即釋文之次第，逐句相配無一遺。
篇末之收 本篇收於一縮排之句 Bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇaṃ niṭṭhitaṃ.（壞滅隨觀智竟）——本品之通收式。
前後接點 前承離隨染之生滅智之單元：本篇首句 Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā punappunaṃ ''aniccaṃ dukkhamanattā''ti rūpārūpadhamme tulayato tīrayato 之 sallakkhetvā，即彼篇末句 yāthāvasarasato sallakkheti 之承。後接怖畏現起智之單元：本篇末所立之 bhaṅgānupassanaṃ，即次篇首句 Tassevaṃ sabbasaṅkhārānaṃ khayavayabhedanirodhārammaṇaṃ bhaṅgānupassanaṃ āsevantassa 之所承——「修習・多作」之式為本品連篇之關節，自本篇至過患隨觀智之單元凡三見。
movement 品夾《總覽》繫本單元於 §D〈行道智見清淨（第 21 品）— 觀智之序，至行捨〉；其所繫之章§逐字見該表，本目不重錄、不截取——段號與章§二系不明對映，不推估不換算。
二、詞義與譯語
本目只記本篇用法與其定位；名相定讀以規範詞表為準，詞表所未定者，本目不代定。前此諸品或本品前單元已立之讀不重解——本篇所涉者為 vipassanā（觀）・ñāṇa（智）・paññā（慧）・saṅkhāra（行）・nibbāna（涅槃）・rāga（貪）・taṇhā（渴愛）等。以下唯列本篇新出者。
壞滅隨觀之立與其所觀〔CSCD §741〕–〔CSCD §743〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| khayavayabhedanirodha | 盡・壞・破・滅 | 智所安住之處：Khayavayabhedanirodheyeva sati santiṭṭhati | 〔CSCD §741〕 |
| ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā | 省察所緣 | 本篇之題語之首分；論釋為 yaṃkiñci ārammaṇaṃ paṭisaṅkhāya jānitvā, khayato vayato disvā | 〔CSCD §741〕・〔CSCD §742〕 |
| khayato vayato | 從盡從壞 | 省察所緣之行相；本篇之骨語，實測 5 見 | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| anupassati | 隨觀 | 論自釋其語：anu anu passati, anekehi ākārehi punappunaṃ passatīti attho | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| ñātañca ñāṇañca | 所知與智 | 古師之語所立：二者俱觀 | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| anvayañāṇa | 類智 | 以現見者類推未見者之智 | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| tadaṅga | 彼分 | 本篇諸捨斷之所依：tadaṅgavasena | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| pariccāgapaṭinissagga | 遍捨之捨遣 | 捨遣二義之一 | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| pakkhandanapaṭinissagga | 跳入之捨遣 | 捨遣二義之二；以見有為之過而傾入涅槃 | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| nandi | 喜 | 論自釋為 sappītikaṃ taṇhaṃ（有喜之渴愛）——本篇之定義句 | 〔CSCD §743〕 |
四偈之名相〔CSCD §744〕–〔CSCD §747〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| vatthusaṅkamanā | 事之移轉 | 見色之壞已，轉觀能見之心之壞 | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| paññāya vivaṭṭanā | 慧之退轉 | 論釋為 udayaṃ pahāya vaye santiṭṭhanā（捨生而住於滅） | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| āvajjanābala | 轉向之力 | 見色之壞已無間即能轉向於心之壞 | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| paṭisaṅkhāvipassanā | 省察觀 | 上三合之名 | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| ārammaṇaanvaya | 所緣之類推 | 由現見之所緣類推過去未來 | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| ekavavatthanā | 一之安立 | 過去未來二者以一自性安立 | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| nirodhe adhimuttatā | 於滅之勝解 | 論以四語釋之：taggarutā tanninnatā tappoṇatā tappabbhāratā | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| vayalakkhaṇavipassanā | 壞相觀 | 上二合之名 | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| suññato upaṭṭhāna | 空之現起 | saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, tesaṃ bhedo maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī | 〔CSCD §746〕 |
| adhipaññāvipassanā | 增上慧觀 | 省察所緣・隨觀壞・空之現起三者合之名 | 〔CSCD §746〕 |
| tayo upaṭṭhāne kusalatā | 於三現起之善巧 | 即 khayato vayato suññato 三 | 〔CSCD §747〕 |
| na kampati | 不動 | 於種種見不動搖；論釋為 na vedhati | 〔CSCD §747〕 |
壞滅隨觀智之八功德〔CSCD §749〕 論逐一列之而不釋：bhavadiṭṭhippahānaṃ（捨有見）・jīvitanikantipariccāgo（捨命之欣求）・sadāyuttapayuttatā（常勤精進）・visuddhājīvitā（活命清淨）・ussukkappahānaṃ（捨憂勤）・vigatabhayatā（離怖畏）・khantisoraccapaṭilābho（得忍與柔和）・aratiratisahanatā（堪忍不樂與樂）。八目之名逐字如上，論不逐一釋其義——本目誌其位而不代釋。
三、異讀
材料之面 本篇無自家對頁之巴利，故無校勘段可錄；可查之面唯譯底欄自身。誌錄不判。
普查之實測 譯底欄全篇逐字普查：異讀括注式（(sī.)・(syā.)・(kaṃ.)・(pī.) 等）零命中；異誦之標識詞 pāṭho 零命中。方括注唯二式（段號 9 個與版頁記 10 個，後者皆在註記之內）。圓括注 2 處，逐一為出處標記，無非出處之括注。引號 '' 實測 40 處為偶數，逐一成對——為本品八單元中引號最密者之一，其由在本篇之引文最長（〔CSCD §741〕一段之引含散文問答與四偈）。
古師之語四處 本篇引古師之語 4 處：Tenāhu 之開引 3 見（其二為版頁記所割而其語不斷）與 Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi 1 見；古師一語之屈折諸形合 4 見（porāṇā 3・porāṇehi 1）——為本品八單元中古師之語最密之篇。四處逐一為：〔CSCD §742〕之 ''ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī''ti（散文一句）・〔CSCD §745〕之 ''Saṃvijjamānamhi visuddhadassano, 起之四行偈・〔CSCD §746〕之 ''Khandhā nirujjhanti na catthi añño, 起之四行偈・〔CSCD §749〕之 ''Imāni aṭṭhagguṇamuttamāni, 起之四行偈。四處之古師之語皆不繫出處括注——與所引之聖典之文（二處皆繫括注）成對照，誌其字面之實而不判其族。
本欄之界 上列皆為譯底欄之字面之實；未與 PTS 掃描頁對勘。本欄之零命中唯就譯底欄一面，不以之推斷他本。
四、論主引據
論主自引之處，逐處繫段號錨；出處唯本文自標者記之，不代考定。「本文自標之出處」欄之括注逐字照錄，不代譯其經名。
| 位置 | 引式〔逐字〕 | 所引之要 | 本文自標之出處 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §741〕 | Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ –／''Kathaṃ ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā bhaṅgānupassane paññā vipassane ñāṇaṃ? | 壞滅隨觀智之定義問答與其四偈——本篇之所本，全篇之釋皆繫之 | (paṭi. ma. 1.51-52) |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | Evarūpaṃ hi yogāvacaraṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ bhagavatā –／''Yathā bubbuḷakaṃ passe, yathā passe marīcikaṃ; | 觀世如水泡如陽焰者，死王不見——證水泡之喻 | (dha. pa. 170) |
| 〔CSCD §742〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā ''ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī''ti | 所知與智二者俱觀——古師之語，不繫出處 | 〔無自標之出處〕 |
| 〔CSCD §745〕 | Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi –／''Saṃvijjamānamhi visuddhadassano, | 淨見者以現在類推過去未來，諸行如日出之露珠——古師之偈，不繫出處 | 〔無自標之出處〕 |
| 〔CSCD §746〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā –／''Khandhā nirujjhanti na catthi añño, | 唯蘊滅而無他，蘊之破名為死——古師之偈，不繫出處 | 〔無自標之出處〕 |
| 〔CSCD §749〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā –／''Imāni aṭṭhagguṇamuttamāni, | 見八勝德而屢屢思惟，如衣髮著火之牟尼——古師之偈，不繫出處 | 〔無自標之出處〕 |
引之分二族〔本欄實測〕 本篇之引六處而分二族：聖典之引二處皆繫圓括注（paṭi. ma. 1.51-52・dha. pa. 170），古師之引四處皆不繫。前者以 Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ 與 sandhāya vuttaṃ bhagavatā 開，後者以 Tenāhu（3 見）與 Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi（1 見）開。引式之數：Yathāha・Vuttaṃ hetaṃ・Tena vuttaṃ・kira 俱零命中；Tena vuccati 1 見（〔CSCD §742〕之收句）。此數唯就本篇之域，不及全書。
五、譬喻·修辭
本目只記本篇譬喻之所在與其所配，不作文學評價。
甲・譬喻 本篇之比況語實測：viya 詞界 2 見、yathā 諸形 7 見（大寫之 Yathā 1 見）、sadisa 諸形 零命中、upamā 諸形 零命中。本篇之譬喻集於〔CSCD §748〕一段——三小喻並列而後以一大喻收，另二喻在古師之偈中。
| 位置 | 譬喻 | 所配之義 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | dubbalabhājanassa viya bhijjamānassa | 如脆器之破——諸行之壞 |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | sukhumarajasseva vippakiriyamānassa | 如細塵之散——諸行之壞（連聲之比況形） |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | tilānaṃ viya bhajjiyamānānaṃ | 如胡麻之炒——諸行之壞 |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | thūlaphusitake deve vassante udakapiṭṭhe mahantamahantāni udakabubbuḷakāni uppajjitvā uppajjitvā sīghaṃ sīghaṃ bhijjamānāni passeyya | 如大雨落水面，大水泡起而速破——本篇之主喻，明「諸行破而復破」 |
| 〔CSCD §745〕 | Ussāvabindū sūriyeva uggate | 如日出時之露珠——古師偈中之喻，明諸行皆壞 |
| 〔CSCD §746〕 | Maṇiṃva vijjhaṃ vajirena yoniso | 如以金剛如理鑽寶珠——古師偈中之喻，明觀其盡 |
| 〔CSCD §749〕 | Ādittacelassirasūpamo muni | 如衣與頭著火之牟尼——古師偈中之喻，明其急 |
乙・修辭之可核觀察 ①逐句回提為本篇之主式：所引之文之語逐一為釋段之題，其式為「某語＋ti＋釋」，實測六段皆然。②? 全篇 3 見，皆在所引之文之內（Kathaṃ ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā bhaṅgānupassane paññā vipassane ñāṇaṃ?・Anupassatīti kathaṃ anupassati?・Kiṃ vuttaṃ hoti?）——本篇之問皆非論主自設，而係所引之文之問或引釋之套語。③否定之對句為所引之文之骨：no niccato・no sukhato・no attato・no nandati・no rajjati・no samudeti・no ādiyati 七對，其後之釋段逐一承之。④…pe… 省略式 3 見，皆在所引之文之列舉之內。⑤縮排之行 47 行，其中四偈之行二十行、所引散文之行五行、古師三偈之行十二行，餘為引文之續行與篇末之收。⑥punappunaṃ 3 見（〔CSCD §741〕・〔CSCD §742〕・〔CSCD §749〕之古師偈），皆狀其觀之重複。
以上諸數唯就本篇之域實測，不及全書。
六、章內互讀
每指皆帶段號錨；所指之處唯就本篇文中可核之名相立——本篇之段號與章§二系不明對映，故所指不繫章§，亦不推估換算。不代考定。
| 本篇之處 | 所指 | 可核之由 |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §741〕 Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā punappunaṃ | 離隨染之生滅智之單元〔CSCD §740〕 | 彼篇末以 yāthāvasarasato sallakkheti 收，本篇即以其動詞之絕對分詞起 |
〔CSCD §744〕 Paññāya ca vivaṭṭanāti udayaṃ pahāya vaye santiṭṭhanā | 離隨染之生滅智之單元〔CSCD §737〕 | 彼篇立八智之第一為生滅隨觀，本篇之「捨生住滅」即自彼智轉入本智之界 |
〔CSCD §746〕 ''saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, tesaṃ bhedo maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī''ti suññato upaṭṭhānaṃ ijjhati | 遍知等之分別之單元〔CSCD §850〕 | 彼篇釋增上慧觀而復以近同之語出之（saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, saṅkhārānaṃ maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī）——二處之語幾同而一字有異（tesaṃ bhedo／saṅkhārānaṃ），誌其實而不判 |
〔CSCD §745〕 Nirodhe adhimuttatāti | 遍知等之分別之單元〔CSCD §850〕 | 彼篇釋十八大觀之壞滅隨觀而逐字重錄本篇所釋之偈之二行 |
〔CSCD §749〕 aṭṭhānisaṃsaparivāraṃ bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇaṃ balappattaṃ hoti | 怖畏現起智之單元〔CSCD §750〕 | 彼篇以本智之「修習・多作」為其生起之緣，即本篇之力成之後 |
〔CSCD §742〕 Tenāhu porāṇā | 厭離隨觀智之單元〔CSCD §755〕・行捨智之單元〔CSCD §778〕 | 二處亦以古師之語立「三名一義」，其開引之式與本篇同 |
七、傳本
作者、傳本與注疏源流諸問題，本編不於考據內立說。
I. Placement in the Outline
Base text This unit’s base text is CSCD (internal and not placed online). Every Pāli form in this layer is taken verbatim from this unit’s internal base-text column. There is one form of location: 〔CSCD §NN〕, byte-verifiable against that column. This chapter has no in-house Pāli collated to the pages, so no page range is recorded.
Title of the part The base-text column carries one ### subsection, the title of this discourse: ### Bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇakathā.
Paragraph-number range The base-text column runs from 〔CSCD §741〕 through 〔CSCD §749〕, with 9 paragraph numbers actually present and none missing or repeated. Its span in the base-text column is 9,082 bytes—the second-longest of the chapter’s eight units (after the 34,794-byte discourse on equanimity about formations and ahead of the 6,789-byte discourse on contemplation of danger).
The discourse’s threefold spine ① 〔CSCD §741〕 describes the arising of knowledge of contemplation of dissolution and grounds it upon a long citation—the question and answer and four verses from paṭi. ma.; ② 〔CSCD §742〕 through 〔CSCD §747〕 explain the cited text phrase by phrase, first the prose question and answer (§742–§743), then each phrase of the four verses (§744–§747); ③ 〔CSCD §748〕 through 〔CSCD §749〕 close the contemplation with the simile of water bubbles and list the eight benefits of knowledge of contemplation of dissolution.
The author’s citation-and-explanation pattern This discourse is the chapter’s most typical example of “citation first, explanation afterward.” At 〔CSCD §741〕 the citation opens with Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ –; the six passages that follow each take a phrase from the citation as their heading and explain it (Tattha ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhāti, Gāthāsu pana vatthusaṅkamanāti, Ārammaṇaanvayena ubho ekavavatthanāti, Ārammaṇañca paṭisaṅkhāti, Kusalo tīsu anupassanāsūti, and so forth). The order of the citation is exactly the order of the explanation, with every phrase matched and none omitted.
The discourse’s close The discourse closes with the indented statement Bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇaṃ niṭṭhitaṃ. (Knowledge of contemplation of dissolution is concluded), the standard closing formula of this chapter.
Forward and backward joins The preceding unit treats knowledge of arising and passing away freed from corruptions. The sallakkhetvā in this discourse’s opening statement, Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā punappunaṃ ''aniccaṃ dukkhamanattā''ti rūpārūpadhamme tulayato tīrayato, carries forward the yāthāvasarasato sallakkheti that closes the preceding discourse. The following unit treats knowledge of the manifestation of fear. The bhaṅgānupassanaṃ established at the end of this discourse is taken up in its opening statement, Tassevaṃ sabbasaṅkhārānaṃ khayavayabhedanirodhārammaṇaṃ bhaṅgānupassanaṃ āsevantassa. The formula “cultivated and made much of” forms a joint between discourses in this chapter, occurring three times from the present discourse through the unit on contemplation of danger.
Movement The chapter Overview links this unit to §D, “Purification by Knowledge and Vision of the Way (Chapter 21)—the Sequence of Insight Knowledges, through Equanimity about Formations.” The exact chapter section attached to it appears in that table; this heading neither repeats nor excerpts it. The mapping between paragraph numbers and chapter sections is unknown and is neither estimated nor converted.
II. Terms and Renderings
This heading records only usage in this discourse and its location; the normative glossary governs settled renderings, and this heading does not decide what the glossary leaves unsettled. Readings established in preceding chapters or in the preceding unit are not re-explained. Terms relevant here include vipassanā (insight), ñāṇa (knowledge), paññā (understanding), saṅkhāra (formations), nibbāna (nibbāna), rāga (lust), and taṇhā (craving). Only forms new in this discourse are listed below.
The establishment of contemplation of dissolution and what it observes 〔CSCD §741〕–〔CSCD §743〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| khayavayabhedanirodha | exhaustion, dissolution, breakup, and cessation | Where knowledge settles: Khayavayabhedanirodheyeva sati santiṭṭhati | 〔CSCD §741〕 |
| ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā | reflection on the object | The first part of the titular expression; the text explains it as yaṃkiñci ārammaṇaṃ paṭisaṅkhāya jānitvā, khayato vayato disvā | 〔CSCD §741〕・〔CSCD §742〕 |
| khayato vayato | in terms of exhaustion and dissolution | The mode of reflecting on the object and a pivotal expression in this discourse, measured at 5 occurrences | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| anupassati | contemplates | The text explains the term as anu anu passati, anekehi ākārehi punappunaṃ passatīti attho | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| ñātañca ñāṇañca | the known and the knowledge | The ancient teachers’ statement establishes that both are contemplated | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| anvayañāṇa | inferential knowledge | Knowledge that infers what is not seen from what is directly seen | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| tadaṅga | opposite factor | The basis of the forms of abandonment in this discourse: tadaṅgavasena | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| pariccāgapaṭinissagga | relinquishment by giving up | The first of the two meanings of relinquishment | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| pakkhandanapaṭinissagga | relinquishment by entering into | The second of the two meanings of relinquishment: seeing the danger in the conditioned and inclining into nibbāna | 〔CSCD §742〕 |
| nandi | delight | The text explains it as sappītikaṃ taṇhaṃ (craving accompanied by rapture)—the defining statement in this discourse | 〔CSCD §743〕 |
Terms in the four verses 〔CSCD §744〕–〔CSCD §747〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| vatthusaṅkamanā | shifting of the basis | After seeing the dissolution of form, turning to contemplate the dissolution of the mind capable of seeing it | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| paññāya vivaṭṭanā | withdrawal of understanding | The text explains it as udayaṃ pahāya vaye santiṭṭhanā (abandoning arising and taking one’s stand upon dissolution) | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| āvajjanābala | strength of adverting | After seeing the dissolution of form, the ability immediately to advert to the dissolution of the mind | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| paṭisaṅkhāvipassanā | reflective insight | The name combining the preceding three | 〔CSCD §744〕 |
| ārammaṇaanvaya | inference from the object | Inferring past and future from the object directly seen | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| ekavavatthanā | establishment as one | Establishing past and future as having one nature | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| nirodhe adhimuttatā | resolve upon cessation | The text explains it with four expressions: taggarutā tanninnatā tappoṇatā tappabbhāratā | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| vayalakkhaṇavipassanā | insight into the characteristic of dissolution | The name combining the preceding two | 〔CSCD §745〕 |
| suññato upaṭṭhāna | manifestation as emptiness | saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, tesaṃ bhedo maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī | 〔CSCD §746〕 |
| adhipaññāvipassanā | higher-wisdom insight | The name combining reflection on the object, contemplation of dissolution, and manifestation as emptiness | 〔CSCD §746〕 |
| tayo upaṭṭhāne kusalatā | skill in the three manifestations | The three khayato vayato suññato | 〔CSCD §747〕 |
| na kampati | unmoved | Unshaken by various views; the text explains it as na vedhati | 〔CSCD §747〕 |
The eight benefits of knowledge of contemplation of dissolution 〔CSCD §749〕 The text lists these one by one without explanation: bhavadiṭṭhippahānaṃ (abandoning the view of existence), jīvitanikantipariccāgo (relinquishing longing for life), sadāyuttapayuttatā (constant application to exertion), visuddhājīvitā (purity of livelihood), ussukkappahānaṃ (abandoning anxious striving), vigatabhayatā (freedom from fear), khantisoraccapaṭilābho (gaining patience and gentleness), and aratiratisahanatā (enduring discontent and delight). The eight names are given verbatim above; the text does not explain their meanings one by one. This heading records their location without supplying an explanation.
III. Variant Readings
Material basis This discourse has no in-house Pāli collated to the pages, so there is no collation passage to record. The only available surface is the base-text column itself. This apparatus records without adjudicating.
Measured comprehensive scan A literal scan of the entire base-text column found zero matches for parenthetical variant sigla such as (sī.), (syā.), (kaṃ.), and (pī.), and zero matches for the variant-recitation marker pāṭho. Square brackets occur in only two forms: nine paragraph numbers and ten edition-page notes, all of the latter within comments. There are 2 parenthetical notes, each a source marker, and no parenthetical notes other than source markers. The quotation marks '' occur 40 times, an even number, forming pairs throughout—among the densest quotation-mark use in the chapter’s eight units, because this discourse has the longest citation: the single passage at 〔CSCD §741〕 contains a prose question and answer together with four verses.
Four statements by the ancient teachers This discourse cites the ancient teachers 4 times: openings with Tenāhu occur 3 times (one is divided by an edition-page note without interrupting the statement), and Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi occurs once. Inflected forms referring to the ancient teachers likewise total 4 occurrences (porāṇā 3, porāṇehi 1)—the highest density of the ancient teachers’ statements among the chapter’s eight units. The four are: ''ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī''ti at 〔CSCD §742〕, a single prose statement; the four-line verse beginning ''Saṃvijjamānamhi visuddhadassano, at 〔CSCD §745〕; the four-line verse beginning ''Khandhā nirujjhanti na catthi añño, at 〔CSCD §746〕; and the four-line verse beginning ''Imāni aṭṭhagguṇamuttamāni, at 〔CSCD §749〕. None of the four statements by the ancient teachers carries a parenthetical source marker, in contrast with the two canonical citations, both of which do. This records the literal distinction without classifying the sources.
Boundary of this column All the statements above are literal facts about the base-text column; it has not been collated against the PTS scan pages. The zero-match statements apply only to this base-text surface and imply nothing about other editions.
IV. The Commentator’s Citations
Each citation made by the author is tied to a paragraph-number anchor. A source is recorded only where the text itself marks it, without independently determining it. The parenthetical strings in the “Source marked by the text” column are reproduced verbatim; their work titles are not translated.
| Location | Citation formula [verbatim] | Point cited | Source marked by the text |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §741〕 | Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ –／''Kathaṃ ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā bhaṅgānupassane paññā vipassane ñāṇaṃ? | The defining question and answer on knowledge of contemplation of dissolution together with its four verses—the basis of this discourse, to which the entire explanation is tied | (paṭi. ma. 1.51-52) |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | Evarūpaṃ hi yogāvacaraṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ bhagavatā –／''Yathā bubbuḷakaṃ passe, yathā passe marīcikaṃ; | The King of Death does not see one who looks upon the world as a water bubble and a mirage—grounds the water-bubble simile | (dha. pa. 170) |
| 〔CSCD §742〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā ''ñātañca ñāṇañca ubhopi vipassatī''ti | Both the known and the knowledge are contemplated—a statement by the ancient teachers, with no source marked | 〔no source marked by the text〕 |
| 〔CSCD §745〕 | Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi –／''Saṃvijjamānamhi visuddhadassano, | The one of purified vision infers past and future from the present; formations are like dew when the sun rises—a verse of the ancient teachers, with no source marked | 〔no source marked by the text〕 |
| 〔CSCD §746〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā –／''Khandhā nirujjhanti na catthi añño, | Only the aggregates cease, with nothing else; the breakup of the aggregates is called death—a verse of the ancient teachers, with no source marked | 〔no source marked by the text〕 |
| 〔CSCD §749〕 | Tenāhu porāṇā –／''Imāni aṭṭhagguṇamuttamāni, | Having seen the eight supreme benefits, the sage reflects repeatedly, like one whose clothing and head are ablaze—a verse of the ancient teachers, with no source marked | 〔no source marked by the text〕 |
Two families of citations [measured in this column] The discourse has six citations in two families: the two canonical citations each carry a parenthetical source marker (paṭi. ma. 1.51-52 and dha. pa. 170), while none of the four citations from the ancient teachers does. The former open with Yaṃ sandhāya vuttaṃ and sandhāya vuttaṃ bhagavatā; the latter open with Tenāhu (3 occurrences) and Vuttampi cetaṃ porāṇehi (1 occurrence). Counts of citation formulas: Yathāha, Vuttaṃ hetaṃ, Tena vuttaṃ, and kira all have zero matches; Tena vuccati occurs once, in the closing statement at 〔CSCD §742〕. These counts apply only to this discourse, not to the entire work.
V. Similes and Rhetoric
This heading records only where similes occur and what they correspond to; it does not offer literary evaluation.
A. Similes A measured scan finds 2 word-boundary occurrences of viya, 7 forms of yathā (including one capitalized Yathā), zero matches for forms of sadisa, and zero matches for forms of upamā. The similes of this discourse cluster in the one paragraph at 〔CSCD §748〕: three small similes appear side by side and are gathered into one extended simile, while two further similes occur in verses of the ancient teachers.
| Location | Simile | Corresponding point |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | dubbalabhājanassa viya bhijjamānassa | breaking like a fragile vessel—the dissolution of formations |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | sukhumarajasseva vippakiriyamānassa | scattering like fine dust—the dissolution of formations, in a sandhi comparison form |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | tilānaṃ viya bhajjiyamānānaṃ | being roasted like sesame seeds—the dissolution of formations |
| 〔CSCD §748〕 | thūlaphusitake deve vassante udakapiṭṭhe mahantamahantāni udakabubbuḷakāni uppajjitvā uppajjitvā sīghaṃ sīghaṃ bhijjamānāni passeyya | as large water bubbles arise and rapidly burst when heavy rain falls on the surface—the discourse’s principal simile, illustrating “formations break up again and again” |
| 〔CSCD §745〕 | Ussāvabindū sūriyeva uggate | like dew when the sun rises—a simile in the ancient teachers’ verse, showing that all formations dissolve |
| 〔CSCD §746〕 | Maṇiṃva vijjhaṃ vajirena yoniso | like rightly piercing a jewel with a diamond—a simile in the ancient teachers’ verse, illustrating contemplation of exhaustion |
| 〔CSCD §749〕 | Ādittacelassirasūpamo muni | like a sage whose clothing and head are ablaze—a simile in the ancient teachers’ verse, illustrating urgency |
B. Verifiable rhetorical observations ① Taking up each phrase again is the discourse’s primary pattern: phrases from the cited text become the headings of the explanatory passages one by one, in the form “phrase + ti + explanation,” measured in all six passages. ② ? occurs 3 times in the discourse, all within the cited text (Kathaṃ ārammaṇapaṭisaṅkhā bhaṅgānupassane paññā vipassane ñāṇaṃ?, Anupassatīti kathaṃ anupassati?, and Kiṃ vuttaṃ hoti?)—none of the questions is independently posed by the author; each belongs either to the cited passage or to a formula introducing its explanation. ③ Negative pairs form the spine of the cited text: the seven pairs no niccato, no sukhato, no attato, no nandati, no rajjati, no samudeti, and no ādiyati, each taken up by the explanatory passage that follows. ④ The omission formula …pe… occurs 3 times, all within an enumeration in the cited text. ⑤ There are 47 indented lines: twenty lines of the four verses, five lines of cited prose, twelve lines in the ancient teachers’ three verses, and the remainder as continuation lines of citations and the discourse’s close. ⑥ punappunaṃ occurs 3 times (at 〔CSCD §741〕, 〔CSCD §742〕, and in the ancient teachers’ verse at 〔CSCD §749〕), each describing repetition in contemplation.
All these counts apply only to this discourse, not to the entire work.
VI. Intratextual Cross-Reading
Each cross-reference carries a paragraph-number anchor. The target is established only from terms verifiable in this discourse. Because the mapping between the discourse’s paragraph numbers and chapter sections is unknown, the targets are not tied to chapter sections, and no conversion is estimated. This apparatus does not independently determine the matter.
| Place in this discourse | Target | Verifiable basis |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §741〕 Tassevaṃ sallakkhetvā punappunaṃ | unit on knowledge of arising and passing away freed from corruptions 〔CSCD §740〕 | that discourse closes with yāthāvasarasato sallakkheti, and the present one begins with its absolutive form |
〔CSCD §744〕 Paññāya ca vivaṭṭanāti udayaṃ pahāya vaye santiṭṭhanā | unit on knowledge of arising and passing away freed from corruptions 〔CSCD §737〕 | that discourse establishes contemplation of arising and passing away as the first of the eight knowledges; the present discourse’s “abandoning arising and standing upon dissolution” marks the boundary at which that knowledge turns into this one |
〔CSCD §746〕 ''saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, tesaṃ bhedo maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī''ti suññato upaṭṭhānaṃ ijjhati | unit on the distinctions among the full understandings and the rest 〔CSCD §850〕 | that discourse explains higher-wisdom insight and gives nearly the same statement again (saṅkhārāva bhijjanti, saṅkhārānaṃ maraṇaṃ, na añño koci atthī)—the two passages are almost identical but differ in one phrase (tesaṃ bhedo versus saṅkhārānaṃ), a fact recorded without adjudication |
〔CSCD §745〕 Nirodhe adhimuttatāti | unit on the distinctions among the full understandings and the rest 〔CSCD §850〕 | in explaining contemplation of dissolution among the eighteen great insights, that discourse reproduces verbatim two lines of the verse explained here |
〔CSCD §749〕 aṭṭhānisaṃsaparivāraṃ bhaṅgānupassanāñāṇaṃ balappattaṃ hoti | unit on knowledge of the manifestation of fear 〔CSCD §750〕 | that discourse makes the cultivation and repeated practice of this knowledge the condition for its own arising, immediately after the present knowledge gains strength |
〔CSCD §742〕 Tenāhu porāṇā | unit on knowledge of contemplation of disenchantment 〔CSCD §755〕 and unit on knowledge of equanimity about formations 〔CSCD §778〕 | both passages likewise use statements by the ancient teachers to establish “three names, one meaning,” with the same opening citation formula as here |
VII. Transmission
This edition advances no claims in the apparatus concerning the author, textual transmission, or the lineage of commentaries.