清淨道論 次第等之決擇Visuddhimagga · Determination of Order and the Other Modes
五蘊講完，論主回頭問六個為什麼：為什麼這樣排、蘊與取蘊差在哪、為什麼是五、拿什麼比、該怎麼看、這樣看了得到什麼。「色受想行識」不是生起的順序、不是斷的順序，是教你的順序——從最粗的身體到最細的識，讓一個抓著「我」的人看見裡面沒有我；論主明說了目的：以聚之密的破析，使他從我執解脫。
蘊與取蘊的差別只有兩個字：有漏。問題從來不在有沒有身心，在抓不抓。為什麼是五？因為「我」能抓的東西只有這五樣——「這是我的，這是我，這是我的自我」，執的對象到此為極；五蘊的清單，是我執可能落腳的全部地點的清單。五喻是一間病房：身體是房，感受是病，想是病因，行是亂吃，識是躺在那裡的病人——連病人也只是不脫離病的那個識。
該怎麼看：略看，五取蘊是拔劍的怨敵、重擔、食者、殺者；廣看，色如聚沫、受如水泡、想如陽焰、行如芭蕉、識如幻——內色不淨、受苦、想行無我、識無常。這樣看能換來什麼：一種正確的看，同時解開七個結——遍知食、捨顛倒、度暴流、脫軛、漏盡、破繫、不取。每一句都是解脫的動詞。五蘊不是一張要背的清單，是把「我」攤開成五組無主零件的一刀——定段教你捨掉禪樂，慧段教你連那個受用禪樂的「我」也看穿、鬆手。
After explaining the five aggregates, the Commentator turns back to ask six why questions: Why this order? How do aggregates differ from aggregates subject to clinging? Why exactly five? What are they compared to? How should they be seen? What does seeing them this way accomplish? “Form, feeling, perception, formations, consciousness” is neither the order in which they arise nor the order in which they are abandoned; it is the order for teaching you—from the coarsest body to the subtlest consciousness, it lets a person grasping “I” see that no self is inside. The Commentator expressly gives the aim: to dissect the compactness of the mass and thereby free that person from self-grasping.
The difference between aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging comes down to a single phrase: with influxes. The issue has never been whether body and mind exist, but whether they are grasped. Why five? Because “I” can grasp only these five things—“This is mine, this I am, this is my self”—and the objects of grasping reach their limit here. The list of the five aggregates is the list of every possible landing place for self-grasping. The five similes form a hospital room: the body is the room, feeling the illness, perception the cause, formations the act of eating what is unsuitable, and consciousness the patient lying there—even the patient is only the consciousness not free from the illness.
How should they be seen? In brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are enemies with raised swords, a burden, eaters, and killers. In detail, form is like a lump of foam, feeling like a bubble, perception like a mirage, formations like a plantain, and consciousness like an illusion—internal form is foul, feeling painful, perception and formations not-self, and consciousness impermanent. What does such seeing accomplish? A single correct way of seeing simultaneously unties seven knots—fully understanding nutriment, abandoning inversion, crossing a flood, escaping a yoke, ending an influx, breaking a tie, and ceasing to cling. Every phrase is a verb of liberation. The five aggregates are not a list to memorize, but a blade that lays “I” open into five groups of ownerless parts—the concentration division teaches you to relinquish jhāna pleasure, while the wisdom division teaches you to see through and release even the “I” that enjoys jhāna pleasure.
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 決擇之偈與次第門 〔CSCD §504〕
次第等之決擇之論
這樣知道了以後，還要就這些〔蘊〕——
為於諸蘊分別智故，依次第，又依差別， 依不增不減，並且同樣依喻， 依所見之二種，又依如是見者的義成—— 明智者應當正確地了知決擇之法。
其中，「依次第」——這裡的次第有多種：生次第、斷次第、行道次第、地次第、說次第。
其中，「最初是羯羅藍，從羯羅藍成為頞部曇」這樣等等，是生次第。「依見所應斷的諸法、依修所應斷的諸法」這樣等等，是斷次第。「戒清淨、心清淨」¹這樣等等，是行道次第。「欲界的、色界的」這樣等等，是地次第。「四念處、四正勤」，或者「施論、戒論」這樣等等，是說次第。其中，這裡先說生次第是不相應的，因為諸蘊不像羯羅藍等等那樣依前後的確定而生起。不是斷次第，因為善的與無記的不是所應斷的。不是行道次第，因為諸不善不是所應行的。不是地次第，因為受等等是遍屬四地的。而說次第則是相應的。
因為世尊憐愍那在無差別的五蘊上墮於我執的所化之人，想要以顯示聚之密的破析而使他從我執中解脫，為了那個人與那個人的容易了取，就先說了那連眼等等也以之為境的、粗的色蘊。此後說了領納可意與不可意之色的受。然後依「凡所受的，就想它」這樣，說了取受之境的行相的想。依想而說了能行作的諸行。而說了那些受等等的所依、並且於它們為增上的識。這樣，就先應當依次第了知決擇之法。
§2 差別門——蘊與取蘊 〔CSCD §505〕
「依差別」——就是蘊與取蘊的差別。那麼它們的差別是什麼呢？先說諸蘊是無差別地說的；取蘊則是以有漏、順取²之性加以差別以後說的。如所說的——
「諸比丘，我要為你們說五蘊與五取蘊，你們聽吧。諸比丘，什麼是五蘊呢？諸比丘，凡所有色，過去的、未來的、現在的……乃至（廣說如前）……或近的，諸比丘，這就叫作色蘊。凡所有受……乃至（廣說如前）……凡所有識……乃至（廣說如前）……或近的，諸比丘，這就叫作識蘊。諸比丘，這些就叫作五蘊。而諸比丘，什麼是五取蘊呢？諸比丘，凡所有色……乃至（廣說如前）……或近的、有漏而順取的，諸比丘，這就叫作色取蘊。凡所有受……乃至（廣說如前）……凡所有識……乃至（廣說如前）……或近的、有漏而順取的，諸比丘，這就叫作識取蘊。諸比丘，這些就叫作五取蘊。」
而這裡，如同受等等也有無漏的，色卻不是這樣。而由於色以聚義³而蘊性得成，所以在諸蘊之中說了它；由於以聚義又以有漏義而取蘊性得成，所以在諸取蘊之中〔也〕說了它。而受等等，無漏的唯在諸蘊之中說，有漏的在諸取蘊之中〔說〕。而這裡的「取蘊」，其義就應當這樣了知：取的行處的諸蘊，就是取蘊。但這裡是把這一切合為一起而意許為「蘊」的。
§3 不增不減門 〔CSCD §506〕
「依不增不減」——那麼世尊為什麼唯說五蘊，不減不增呢？由於一切有為依同分而總攝為一故，由於我與我所之執的事以此為極故，又由於其餘者攝入於此故。
因為在種類眾多的諸有為法之中，當依同分而總攝的時候，色也依色的同分總攝為一而成為一蘊；受依受的同分總攝為一而成為一蘊；於想等等也是同樣的方法。所以，由於一切有為依同分而總攝為一，就唯說了五。
而我與我所之執的事，以此為極——就是色等等五者。因為說了這個：「諸比丘，於色存在時，取色、執著色，就這樣生起了見：『這是我的，這是我，這是我的自我。』於受、於想、於諸行、於識存在時，取識、執著識，就這樣生起了見：『這是我的，這是我，這是我的自我。』」所以，由於我與我所之執的事以此為極，也就唯說了五。
而其餘所說的戒等等五法蘊⁴，那些也由於攝在行蘊之中，就正攝入於此。所以，由於其餘者攝入於此，也就唯說了五。這樣，就應當依不增不減了知決擇之法。
§4 喻門——五取蘊之五喻 〔CSCD §507〕
「依喻」——這裡，色取蘊如病舍，因為它以所依、門、所緣而為如病人的識取蘊的住處。受取蘊如病，因為它能作患。想取蘊如病的起因，因為依欲想等等而有與貪等等相應的受。行取蘊如服用不宜之物，因為它是受之病的因緣——因為說了「他們為了受而行作受」；同樣，〔說了〕「由於作了、積集了不善業，與苦俱的異熟身識生起了」。識取蘊如病人，因為它不脫離受之病。此外，這些還有獄、刑、罪、作者、有罪者之喻，以及器、食、味、行食者、食者之喻。這樣，就應當依喻了知決擇之法。
§5 所見門——略之四與廣之五 〔CSCD §508〕
「依所見之二種」——就是依略與依廣二種；就這樣，這裡也應當依所見而了知決擇之法。
先說依略：五取蘊，依《毒蛇喻》中所說的方法，應當看作拔劍的怨敵；依《重擔經》，應當看作重擔；依《所食法門》，應當看作食者；依《雙經》，應當看作無常、苦、無我、有為、殺者。
而依廣：這裡，色應當看作像聚沫，因為它不堪揉搓。受像水泡，因為它只是須臾可樂。想像陽焰，因為它誑惑。諸行像芭蕉幹，因為它沒有實。識像幻，因為它欺誑。而特別是：內色縱使美好，也應當看作不淨。受由於不脫離三種苦性，是苦。想與諸行由於不可支配，是無我。識由於是生滅之法，應當看作無常。
§6 如是見者之義成・品末偈與奧書 〔CSCD §509〕
「依如是見者的義成」——這樣依略與廣二種而見的人所有的義成，也應當從那裡了知決擇之法。就是這樣：先說依略，把五取蘊看作拔劍的怨敵等等的人，就不為諸蘊所惱害。而依廣，把色等等看作像聚沫等等的人，就不於無實之中見實。
而特別是：把內色看作不淨的人，遍知段食，捨斷「於不淨為淨」的顛倒，度欲暴流，從欲軛解脫，於欲漏成為無漏，破貪欲身繫，不取欲取。⁵
把受看作苦的人，遍知觸食，捨斷「於苦為樂」的顛倒，度有暴流，從有軛解脫，於有漏成為無漏，破瞋恚身繫，不取戒禁取。
把想與諸行看作無我的人，遍知意思食，捨斷「於無我為我」的顛倒，度見暴流，從見軛解脫，於見漏成為無漏，破「此是諦」執身繫，不取我語取。
把識看作無常的人，遍知識食，捨斷「於無常為常」的顛倒，度無明暴流，從無明軛解脫，於無明漏成為無漏，破戒禁取身繫，不取見取。
由於依殺者等等而見有這樣的大利益， 所以智者應當依殺者等等來見諸蘊。
於為令善人歡喜而造的《清淨道論》中
慧之修習之章裡
名為蘊之解釋的
第十四品〔已竟〕。
註
¹ 戒清淨・心清淨：七清淨之首二，其全列在本品〈慧之總說〉之單元；本篇唯引其首二為行道次第之例。
² 有漏・順取（sāsava・upādāniya）：為漏所隨、為取所緣者；五取蘊即以此二義揀別於五蘊。
³ 聚義（rāsaṭṭha）：蘊之為蘊，以其把同類之一切總攝為一聚；此義之另一面（總聚之而總略之）在本品〈過去等之分別〉之單元。
⁴ 五法蘊：論所舉戒等五者，與色等五蘊異科；論判其攝於行蘊之內，行蘊之全目在本品〈行蘊〉之單元。
⁵ 四食・四顛倒・四暴流・四軛・四漏・四身繫・四取：本段四所見之下各配此七組之一目，四段句式全同而唯易其目；論於此唯逐一出其名而不總標其組。
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 Verse on Determination and the Mode of Order 〔CSCD §504〕
Discussion of the Determination of Order and the Other Modes
Having known thus, further regarding these [aggregates]—
For the sake of discerning knowledge among the aggregates, by order and again by distinction, by neither deficiency nor excess, and likewise by simile, by the two ways they should be seen, and by the accomplishment of the aim for whoever sees thus— the discerning person should rightly understand the method of determination.
Here, “by order”—order here is of many kinds: order of arising, order of abandoning, order of practice, order of planes, and order of teaching.
“First comes the kalala; from the kalala comes the abbuda,” and so forth, is the order of arising. “Phenomena to be abandoned through seeing, phenomena to be abandoned through development,” and so forth, is the order of abandoning. “Purification of virtue, purification of mind”¹, and so forth, is the order of practice. “Of the sense sphere, of the fine-material sphere,” and so forth, is the order of planes. “The four foundations of mindfulness, the four right efforts,” or “a discourse on giving, a discourse on virtue,” and so forth, is the order of teaching. Of these, the order of arising does not apply here, for the aggregates do not arise with a fixed sequence of before and after as the kalala and the rest do. It is not the order of abandoning, because the wholesome and the indeterminate are not to be abandoned. It is not the order of practice, because the unwholesome is not to be practiced. It is not the order of planes, because feeling and the rest are included in all four planes. The order of teaching, however, does apply.
For the Blessed One, compassionate toward people to be guided who had fallen into grasping a self in the undifferentiated five aggregates, wished to free them from self-grasping by showing the dissection of the compactness of the mass. To make apprehension easy for each person, he first taught the gross form aggregate, which is also an object of the eye and the other faculties. Thereafter he taught feeling, which experiences agreeable and disagreeable form. Then, in accordance with “Whatever is felt is perceived,” he taught perception, which grasps the mode of feeling’s object. Based on perception, he taught the formations, which construct. And he taught consciousness, the support of feeling and the rest and dominant over them. This is how the method of determination should first be understood by order.
§2 The Mode of Distinction—Aggregates and Aggregates Subject to Clinging 〔CSCD §505〕
“By distinction” means the distinction between aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging. What, then, is their distinction? First, aggregates are stated without distinction; aggregates subject to clinging are stated after being distinguished by the qualities of having influxes and being subject to clinging². As it is said:
“Bhikkhus, I shall teach you the five aggregates and the five aggregates subject to clinging; listen. And what, bhikkhus, are the five aggregates? Whatever form there is, bhikkhus—past, future, or present … up to (expanded as above) … or near—this, bhikkhus, is called the form aggregate. Whatever feeling there is … up to (expanded as above) … whatever consciousness there is … up to (expanded as above) … or near—this, bhikkhus, is called the consciousness aggregate. These, bhikkhus, are called the five aggregates. And what, bhikkhus, are the five aggregates subject to clinging? Whatever form there is, bhikkhus … up to (expanded as above) … or near, with influxes and subject to clinging—this, bhikkhus, is called the form aggregate subject to clinging. Whatever feeling there is … up to (expanded as above) … whatever consciousness there is … up to (expanded as above) … or near, with influxes and subject to clinging—this, bhikkhus, is called the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging. These, bhikkhus, are called the five aggregates subject to clinging.”
Here, feeling and the rest can also be without influxes; form is not so. But because form qualifies as an aggregate in the sense of a mass³, it is stated among the aggregates. Because it qualifies as an aggregate subject to clinging both in the sense of a mass and in the sense of having influxes, it is [also] stated among the aggregates subject to clinging. Of feeling and the rest, those without influxes are stated only among the aggregates, and those with influxes among the aggregates subject to clinging. Here, “aggregate subject to clinging” should be understood to mean this: aggregates that are the domain of clinging are aggregates subject to clinging. In this passage, however, all of these are taken together and intended simply as “aggregates.”
§3 The Mode of Neither Deficiency nor Excess 〔CSCD §506〕
“By neither deficiency nor excess”—why, then, did the Blessed One teach exactly five aggregates, neither fewer nor more? Because all conditioned phenomena are gathered into unity according to common nature, because the objects of grasping a self and what belongs to a self reach their limit in these, and because the rest are included within them.
For among conditioned phenomena of many kinds, when they are gathered according to common nature, form is gathered into unity by the common nature of form and becomes a single aggregate; feeling is gathered into unity by the common nature of feeling and becomes a single aggregate; and the same method applies to perception and the rest. Thus, because all conditioned phenomena are gathered into unity according to common nature, exactly five were taught.
And the objects of grasping a self and what belongs to a self reach their limit in these—namely, the five beginning with form. For this was said: “Bhikkhus, when form exists, by taking up form and insisting upon form, this view arises: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self.’ When feeling exists, when perception exists, when formations exist, when consciousness exists, by taking up consciousness and insisting upon consciousness, this view arises: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self.’” Thus, because the objects of grasping a self and what belongs to a self reach their limit in these, exactly five were taught.
And the other five aggregates of Dhamma beginning with virtue⁴ that were taught are properly included here because they are included within the formations aggregate. Thus, because the rest are included within them, exactly five were taught. This is how the method of determination should be understood by neither deficiency nor excess.
§4 The Mode of Simile—Five Similes for the Five Aggregates Subject to Clinging 〔CSCD §507〕
“By simile”—here the form aggregate subject to clinging is like a sick ward, because by way of basis, door, and object it is the dwelling place of the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging, which is like a patient. The feeling aggregate subject to clinging is like an illness, because it can afflict. The perception aggregate subject to clinging is like the cause of an illness, because through sensual perception and the rest there is feeling associated with greed and the rest. The formations aggregate subject to clinging is like taking something unsuitable, because it is a condition for the illness of feeling—for it was said, “They construct feeling for the sake of feeling”; likewise, [it was said], “Because unwholesome kamma has been done and accumulated, resultant body-consciousness has arisen associated with pain.” The consciousness aggregate subject to clinging is like a patient because it is not free from the illness of feeling. Further, these are also likened to prison, punishment, offense, perpetrator, and offender; and to vessel, food, flavor, server, and eater. This is how the method of determination should be understood by simile.
§5 The Mode of Seeing—Four in Brief and Five in Detail 〔CSCD §508〕
“By the two ways they should be seen” means in brief and in detail; here, too, the method of determination should be understood according to how they are to be seen.
First, in brief: according to the method stated in the Viper Simile, the five aggregates subject to clinging should be seen as enemies with raised swords; according to the Discourse on the Burden, as a burden; according to the Exposition of What Is Consumed, as eaters; and according to the Twin Discourse, as impermanent, painful, not-self, conditioned, and as killers.
In detail: here form should be seen as like a lump of foam, because it cannot withstand being kneaded; feeling as like a bubble, because it is delightful only for a moment; perception as like a mirage, because it deceives; formations as like a plantain trunk, because they have no core; and consciousness as like an illusion, because it beguiles. In particular, internal form, even if beautiful, should be seen as foul. Feeling, because it is not free from the three kinds of painfulness, should be seen as painful. Perception and formations, because they cannot be controlled, should be seen as not-self. Consciousness, because it is a phenomenon of arising and passing away, should be seen as impermanent.
§6 Accomplishment of the Aim for Whoever Sees Thus, the Chapter-Closing Verse, and the Colophon 〔CSCD §509〕
“By the accomplishment of the aim for whoever sees thus”—the accomplishment of the aim belonging to a person who sees in these two ways, in brief and in detail, should also be used to understand the method of determination. That is: first, in brief, a person who sees the five aggregates subject to clinging as enemies with raised swords and so forth is not afflicted by the aggregates. In detail, a person who sees form and the rest as resembling a lump of foam and so forth does not see substance in what is insubstantial.
In particular, a person who sees internal form as foul fully understands the nutriment of material food, abandons the inversion that sees beauty in what is foul, crosses the flood of sensuality, becomes disentangled from the yoke of sensuality, becomes free from the influx of sensual desire, breaks the bodily tie of covetousness, and does not cling to sensual clinging.⁵
A person who sees feeling as painful fully understands the nutriment of contact, abandons the inversion that sees pleasure in what is painful, crosses the flood of becoming, becomes disentangled from the yoke of becoming, becomes free from the influx of becoming, breaks the bodily tie of ill will, and does not cling to clinging to rules and observances.
A person who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands the nutriment of mental volition, abandons the inversion that sees a self in what is not-self, crosses the flood of views, becomes disentangled from the yoke of views, becomes free from the influx of views, breaks the bodily tie of insistence that “this is truth,” and does not cling to clinging to a doctrine of self.
A person who sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands the nutriment of consciousness, abandons the inversion that sees permanence in what is impermanent, crosses the flood of ignorance, becomes disentangled from the yoke of ignorance, becomes free from the influx of ignorance, breaks the bodily tie of adherence to rules and observances, and does not cling to clinging to views.
Since seeing in terms of a killer and the rest brings such great benefit, the wise should therefore see the aggregates in terms of a killer and the rest.
In the Path of Purity, composed to gladden good people,
in the division on the development of wisdom,
the chapter named the Exposition of the Aggregates,
the fourteenth [is concluded].
Notes
¹ Purification of virtue and purification of mind: the first two of the seven purifications, whose full list appears in this chapter’s unit on the General Explanation of Wisdom; this passage cites only the first two as examples of the order of practice.
² With influxes and subject to clinging (sāsava・upādāniya): followed by the influxes and serving as an object for clinging; these two meanings distinguish the five aggregates subject to clinging from the five aggregates.
³ The sense of a mass (rāsaṭṭha): an aggregate is an aggregate because it gathers everything of a common kind into a single mass; the other side of this meaning—gathering together and summarizing—appears in this chapter’s unit on the Analysis Beginning with the Past.
⁴ The five aggregates of Dhamma: the five items beginning with virtue cited by the treatise form a classification distinct from the five beginning with form; the treatise judges them to be included within the formations aggregate, whose full inventory appears in this chapter’s unit on Formations.
⁵ The four nutriments, four inversions, four floods, four yokes, four influxes, four bodily ties, and four kinds of clinging: under each of the four ways of seeing, this passage pairs one item from each of these seven groups; the treatise names each item in succession without first labeling the groups as wholes.
五蘊不是一張要背的清單，是把「我」攤開成五組無主零件的一刀
大局 — 六門決擇：為什麼是五、為什麼這樣排、該怎麼看
五蘊逐一講完、十一種分別講完，論主在品末回頭問六個「為什麼」（白話 §1 偈）：為什麼這樣排（次第）、蘊與取蘊差在哪（差別）、為什麼是五不多不少（不增不減）、拿什麼比（喻）、該怎麼看（所見二種）、這樣看了得到什麼（義成）。這六門是本品的收束，也是「五蘊」這把刀的持刀之法：前六單元把刀磨好，本單元教你握。這一品何以是全書減法的最深處？因為五蘊真正的修行名稱是五取蘊——「被執取的五蘊」（白話 §2）；而執取抓它們的方式，論主引經說得清楚（白話 §3）：「這是我的，這是我，這是我的自我。」修慧的那一刀，正是把這三句一一否定：於每一蘊，看它無常、苦、無我，於是「我所、我慢、我見」失去可抓之物。〔所見〕
§01 決擇之偈與次第門 → 白話 §1
偈：為於諸蘊分別智故，依次第、依差別、依不增不減、依喻、依所見之二種、依如是見者的義成——明智者應當正確了知決擇之法（白話 §1）。次第有多種：生次第（羯羅藍→頞部曇等）、斷次第（見所斷→修所斷）、行道次第（戒清淨→心清淨）、地次第（欲界→色界）、說次第（四念處四正勤、施論戒論）。諸蘊之次第非生次第（諸蘊不像羯羅藍等依前後確定而生）、非斷次第（善與無記非所應斷）、非行道次第（不善非所應行）、非地次第（受等遍屬四地）——是說次第：世尊憐愍在無差別的五蘊上墮於我執的所化之人，欲以顯示聚之密的破析使他從我執解脫，為其易了取，先說連眼等也以之為境的粗的色蘊；次說領納可意不可意之色的受；次依「凡所受的，就想它」說取受之境的行相的想；依想說能行作的諸行；末說受等之所依、於它們為增上的識。〔讀法〕「色受想行識」這個順序不是生起的順序、不是斷的順序，是教你的順序：從最粗的（身體）到最細的（識），一步一步讓一個抓著「我」的人看見裡面沒有我。而論主明說了目的——「以顯示聚之密的破析使他從我執解脫」——五蘊之教是為破執而設的，不是為分類。〔所見〕
§02 差別門——蘊與取蘊 → 白話 §2
蘊無差別地說；取蘊以有漏、順取加以差別後說（白話 §2）——經：五蘊＝凡所有色……或近的；五取蘊＝凡所有色……或近的、有漏而順取的。受等有無漏者，色則無；色以聚義而蘊性成、以聚義加有漏義而取蘊性成，故蘊與取蘊中皆說之；受等無漏者唯在蘊中說、有漏者在取蘊中說。「取蘊」＝取的行處的諸蘊。此處把一切合為一起而意許為「蘊」。〔讀法〕蘊與取蘊的差別只有兩個字：有漏。同一個受，被漏所隨、為取所緣，就叫取蘊；聖者的受也是受蘊，但不再是取蘊。所以問題從來不在五蘊本身——問題在「取」。這一節把矛頭從「有沒有身心」轉到「抓不抓」上。〔所見〕
§03 不增不減門 → 白話 §3
為什麼唯說五（白話 §3）：其一，一切有為依同分而總攝為一——色依色之同分成一蘊，受依受之同分成一蘊，餘同，故唯五；其二，我與我所之執的事以此為極——「諸比丘，於色存在時，取色、執著色，就這樣生起了見：『這是我的，這是我，這是我的自我。』於受、於想、於諸行、於識……」——執的對象到此為止，故唯五；其三，其餘者攝入於此——戒等五法蘊攝於行蘊。〔讀法〕三個理由裡第二個最重：五蘊之所以是五，因為「我」能抓的東西只有這五樣——多一樣沒有東西可抓，少一樣就有東西漏網。這是本品全部的底：五蘊的清單，是「我執可能落腳的全部地點」的清單。〔所見〕
§04 喻門——五取蘊之五喻 → 白話 §4
色取蘊如病舍（以所依門所緣為如病人的識之住處）、受取蘊如病（能作患）、想取蘊如病的起因（依欲想等而有與貪等相應的受）、行取蘊如服用不宜之物（受之病的因緣——「他們為了受而行作受」；「由於作了積集了不善業，與苦俱的異熟身識生起了」）、識取蘊如病人（不脫離受之病）（白話 §4）；此外有獄・刑・罪・作者・有罪者之喻，器・食・味・行食者・食者之喻。〔讀法〕病舍・病・病因・吃錯的東西・病人——五個喻合起來是一間病房：身體是房，感受是病，想是病因，行是亂吃，識是躺在那裡的病人。沒有一個是主人；連「病人」也只是不脫離病的那個識。
§05 所見門——略之四與廣之五 → 白話 §5
依略：五取蘊依《毒蛇喻》看作拔劍的怨敵，依《重擔經》看作重擔，依《所食法門》看作食者，依《雙經》看作無常、苦、無我、有為、殺者（白話 §5）。依廣：色像聚沫（不堪揉搓），受像水泡（只是須臾可樂），想像陽焰（誑惑），諸行像芭蕉幹（沒有實），識像幻（欺誑）；特別是：內色縱使美好應看作不淨，受由於不脫離三種苦性是苦，想與諸行由於不可支配是無我，識由於是生滅之法應看作無常。〔讀法〕聚沫・水泡・陽焰・芭蕉・幻——這五喻是全部佛教文獻裡最被傳誦的一組，論主放在品末：不是要你記得它們美，是要你用它們看。而「特別是」後面那四句，把四種顛倒（淨・樂・我・常）逐一對到四種蘊上——下一節會告訴你這樣看能換來什麼。
§06 如是見者之義成・品末偈與奧書 → 白話 §6
依略把五取蘊看作拔劍的怨敵等者，不為諸蘊所惱害；依廣把色等看作聚沫等者，不於無實之中見實（白話 §6）。特別是：把內色看作不淨者，遍知段食、捨斷「於不淨為淨」之顛倒、度欲暴流、從欲軛解脫、於欲漏成無漏、破貪欲身繫、不取欲取；把受看作苦者，遍知觸食、捨斷「於苦為樂」、度有暴流、脫有軛、於有漏成無漏、破瞋恚身繫、不取戒禁取；把想與諸行看作無我者，遍知意思食、捨斷「於無我為我」、度見暴流、脫見軛、於見漏成無漏、破「此是諦」執身繫、不取我語取；把識看作無常者，遍知識食、捨斷「於無常為常」、度無明暴流、脫無明軛、於無明漏成無漏、破戒禁取身繫、不取見取。偈：由於依殺者等而見有這樣的大利益，所以智者應當依殺者等來見諸蘊。品末奧書：於為令善人歡喜而造的《清淨道論》中，慧之修習之章裡，名為蘊之解釋的第十四品。〔讀法〕四段句式全同、唯易其目——四食・四顛倒・四暴流・四軛・四漏・四身繫・四取，七組各一目對一種看法：一種正確的看，同時解開七個結。 這是論主給「為什麼要這樣看五蘊」的最終回答：不是為了悲觀，是為了度暴流、脫軛、破繫、不取——每一句都是解脫的動詞。〔所見〕
破執 — 五取蘊與三種抓法〔解碼者的讀法〕
這一品何以是全書減法的最深處？因為五蘊真正的修行名稱是五取蘊（pañcupādānakkhandhā）——「被執取的五蘊」（白話 §2）。執取以三種方式抓住它們（這是經中反覆出現的判準，本品白話 §3 引之）：「這是我的」（etaṃ mama——渴愛）；「這是我」（esohamasmi——我慢）；「這是我的自我」（eso me attā——我見）。修慧的那一刀，正是把這三句一一否定：於每一蘊，看它無常、苦、無我（白話 §5–§6），於是「我所、我慢、我見」失去可抓之物。這與第 9 品的近敵、第 4 品的禪樂是同一把尺，只是抵達了最後一層：最難鬆手、也最該鬆手的「好東西」，是那個「我」本身。 五蘊分析，就是教你怎麼鬆這一手。〔所見〕
給一般讀者 — 你今天就能用的
- 拿那個「動作」，別背數目。 記住：你叫做「我」的，是色受想行識五個過程的暫時合流。光是常常這樣提醒自己，已經在鬆「有個固定的我」那一抓。
- 挑一蘊，看它生滅。 最好上手的是受（14-04）：此刻是樂、是苦、還是不苦不樂？看著一個感受升起、停留、消失——你會直接嚐到「它來了又走，而我沒被它定義」。
- 守那把尺。 慧段的減法不是自我否定（那是近敵——見第 8 品的提醒），是看穿一個投射、然後鬆手；看穿之後，心是輕的。
想讀本單元全文：本品七單元之白話（14-01 至 14-07）即蘊之解釋全品逐段全譯。
一句話收束：五蘊不是一張要背的清單，是把「我」攤開成五組無主零件的一刀——定段教你捨掉禪樂，慧段教你連那個受用禪樂的「我」也看穿、鬆手。
The five aggregates are not a list to memorize, but a blade that lays “I” open into five groups of ownerless parts
The Big Picture — Six Modes of Determination: Why Five, Why This Order, and How They Should Be Seen
After explaining each of the five aggregates and then the elevenfold analysis, the Commentator turns back at the chapter’s end to ask six “why” questions (the verse in vernacular §1): Why are they arranged this way (order)? How do aggregates differ from aggregates subject to clinging (distinction)? Why exactly five, neither more nor less (neither deficiency nor excess)? What are they compared to (simile)? How should they be seen (the two ways of seeing)? What does seeing them this way accomplish (accomplishment of the aim)? These six modes close the chapter and teach how to hold the blade of the “five aggregates”: the preceding six units sharpened the blade; this unit teaches you to grip it. Why is this chapter the deepest point in the book’s work of subtraction? Because the true name of the five aggregates in practice is the five aggregates subject to clinging—“the five aggregates that are clung to” (vernacular §2); and the way clinging grasps them is clearly stated in the discourse cited by the Commentator (vernacular §3): “This is mine, this I am, this is my self.” The blade of wisdom negates these three claims one by one: see each aggregate as impermanent, painful, and not-self, and then mine-making, conceit, and view lose what they can grasp. 〔Observation〕
§01 The Verse on Determination and the Mode of Order → Vernacular §1
The verse says: for the sake of discerning knowledge among the aggregates, by order, distinction, neither deficiency nor excess, simile, the two ways of seeing, and the accomplishment of the aim for whoever sees thus, the discerning person should rightly understand the method of determination (vernacular §1). Order is of many kinds: the order of arising (kalala → abbuda, and so forth); the order of abandoning (abandoned through seeing → abandoned through development); the order of practice (purification of virtue → purification of mind); the order of planes (sense sphere → fine-material sphere); and the order of teaching (four foundations of mindfulness and four right efforts; discourse on giving and discourse on virtue). The aggregates’ order is not the order of arising, for the aggregates do not arise in a fixed before-and-after sequence like the kalala and the rest; not the order of abandoning, for the wholesome and indeterminate are not to be abandoned; not the order of practice, for the unwholesome is not to be practiced; and not the order of planes, for feeling and the rest belong to all four planes. It is the order of teaching: the Blessed One, compassionate toward people to be guided who had fallen into self-grasping in the undifferentiated five aggregates, wished to free them from self-grasping by showing the dissection of the compactness of the mass. To make apprehension easy, he first taught the gross form aggregate, which even the eye and the other faculties have as object; next feeling, which experiences agreeable and disagreeable form; next, according to “Whatever is felt is perceived,” perception, which grasps the mode of feeling’s object; based on perception, formations, which construct; and last consciousness, the support of feeling and the rest and dominant over them. 〔Reading〕 The order “form, feeling, perception, formations, consciousness” is not an order of arising or abandoning but an order for teaching you: from the coarsest, the body, to the subtlest, consciousness, it lets a person who grasps “I” see step by step that no self is inside. The Commentator expressly states the purpose: “to free them from self-grasping by showing the dissection of the compactness of the mass.” The teaching of the five aggregates is designed to break grasping, not to classify. 〔Observation〕
§02 The Mode of Distinction—Aggregates and Aggregates Subject to Clinging → Vernacular §2
Aggregates are stated without distinction; aggregates subject to clinging are distinguished as with influxes and subject to clinging (vernacular §2). The discourse says: the five aggregates are whatever form there is … or near; the five aggregates subject to clinging are whatever form there is … or near, with influxes and subject to clinging. Feeling and the rest may be without influxes, but form may not. Form qualifies as an aggregate in the sense of a mass and as an aggregate subject to clinging in both the sense of a mass and the sense of having influxes; it is therefore taught under both aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging. Of feeling and the rest, those without influxes are taught only among the aggregates and those with influxes among the aggregates subject to clinging. “Aggregate subject to clinging” means an aggregate that is the domain of clinging. Here all are taken together and intended simply as “aggregates.” 〔Reading〕 The difference between aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging comes down to a single phrase: with influxes. The same feeling, when followed by influxes and made an object of clinging, is an aggregate subject to clinging; a noble person’s feeling is still a feeling aggregate but is no longer an aggregate subject to clinging. Thus the problem has never been the five aggregates themselves—the problem is “clinging.” This section shifts the target from “whether body and mind exist” to “whether they are grasped.” 〔Observation〕
§03 The Mode of Neither Deficiency nor Excess → Vernacular §3
Why are exactly five taught (vernacular §3)? First, all conditioned phenomena are gathered into unity according to common nature—form by the common nature of form into a single aggregate, feeling by the common nature of feeling into a single aggregate, and likewise the rest—so there are exactly five. Second, the objects of grasping a self and what belongs to a self reach their limit in these: “Bhikkhus, when form exists, by taking up form and insisting upon form, this view arises: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self.’ When feeling exists, when perception exists, when formations exist, when consciousness exists …” The objects of grasping end here, so there are exactly five. Third, the rest are included here: the five aggregates of Dhamma beginning with virtue are included within the formations aggregate. 〔Reading〕 Of the three reasons, the second carries the most weight: the things “I” can grasp are exhausted by these five—there is nothing for an extra item to grasp, while with one fewer, something would escape the net. The list of the five aggregates is the list of every possible landing place for self-grasping. 〔Observation〕
§04 The Mode of Simile—Five Similes for the Five Aggregates Subject to Clinging → Vernacular §4
The form aggregate subject to clinging is like a sick ward (by way of basis, door, and object it is the dwelling of consciousness, which resembles a patient); the feeling aggregate subject to clinging is like an illness (it afflicts); the perception aggregate subject to clinging is like the cause of an illness (through sensual perception and the rest there is feeling associated with greed and the rest); the formations aggregate subject to clinging is like taking something unsuitable (it conditions the illness of feeling—“They construct feeling for the sake of feeling”; “Because unwholesome kamma has been done and accumulated, resultant body-consciousness has arisen associated with pain”); and the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging is like a patient (it is not free from the illness of feeling) (vernacular §4). There are also the similes of prison, punishment, offense, perpetrator, and offender, and of vessel, food, flavor, server, and eater. 〔Reading〕 Sick ward, illness, cause of illness, unsuitable food, patient—the five similes together form a hospital room: the body is the room, feeling the illness, perception the cause, formations the act of eating what is unsuitable, and consciousness the patient lying there. Nothing among them is the master; even the “patient” is only the consciousness not free from that illness.
§05 The Mode of Seeing—Four in Brief and Five in Detail → Vernacular §5
In brief, according to the Viper Simile, the five aggregates subject to clinging are seen as enemies with raised swords; according to the Discourse on the Burden, as a burden; according to the Exposition of What Is Consumed, as eaters; and according to the Twin Discourse, as impermanent, painful, not-self, conditioned, and as killers (vernacular §5). In detail, form is like a lump of foam (it cannot withstand kneading); feeling like a bubble (delightful only for a moment); perception like a mirage (deceptive); formations like a plantain trunk (without a core); and consciousness like an illusion (beguiling). In particular, internal form, even if beautiful, should be seen as foul; feeling, because it is not free from the three kinds of painfulness, as painful; perception and formations, because they cannot be controlled, as not-self; and consciousness, because it is a phenomenon of arising and passing away, as impermanent. 〔Reading〕 Lump of foam, bubble, mirage, plantain, illusion—these five similes are among the most frequently recited sets in all Buddhist literature. The Commentator places them at the end of the chapter, not so that you remember their beauty, but so that you use them to see. The four statements after “in particular” pair the four inversions—beauty, pleasure, self, permanence—with four aggregate groupings in turn; the next section tells you what such seeing can accomplish.
§06 Accomplishment of the Aim for Whoever Sees Thus, the Chapter-Closing Verse, and the Colophon → Vernacular §6
A person who, in brief, sees the five aggregates subject to clinging as enemies with raised swords and the rest is not afflicted by the aggregates; a person who, in detail, sees form and the rest as a lump of foam and the rest does not see substance in what is insubstantial (vernacular §6). In particular, whoever sees internal form as foul fully understands material nutriment, abandons the inversion “beauty in the foul,” crosses the flood of sensuality, escapes the yoke of sensuality, becomes free from the influx of sensual desire, breaks the bodily tie of covetousness, and does not cling to sensual clinging; whoever sees feeling as painful fully understands contact nutriment, abandons “pleasure in the painful,” crosses the flood of becoming, escapes the yoke of becoming, becomes free from the influx of becoming, breaks the bodily tie of ill will, and does not cling to clinging to rules and observances; whoever sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands the nutriment of mental volition, abandons “a self in what is not-self,” crosses the flood of views, escapes the yoke of views, becomes free from the influx of views, breaks the bodily tie of insistence that “this is truth,” and does not cling to clinging to a doctrine of self; whoever sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands consciousness nutriment, abandons “permanence in the impermanent,” crosses the flood of ignorance, escapes the yoke of ignorance, becomes free from the influx of ignorance, breaks the bodily tie of adherence to rules and observances, and does not cling to clinging to views. The verse says: since seeing in terms of a killer and the rest brings such great benefit, the wise should see the aggregates in terms of a killer and the rest. The colophon closes the fourteenth chapter, named the Exposition of the Aggregates, in the division on the development of wisdom in the Path of Purity, composed to gladden good people. 〔Reading〕 The four passages have exactly the same syntax, changing only their items: four nutriments, four inversions, four floods, four yokes, four influxes, four bodily ties, and four kinds of clinging—one item from each of seven groups is paired with each way of seeing. A single correct way of seeing simultaneously unties seven knots. This is the Commentator’s final answer to “why see the five aggregates this way”: not for pessimism, but to cross the floods, escape the yokes, break the ties, and cease clinging—every phrase is a verb of liberation. 〔Observation〕
Breaking Clinging — The Five Aggregates Subject to Clinging and Three Ways of Grasping 〔The Decoder’s Reading〕
Why is this chapter the deepest point in the book’s work of subtraction? Because the true name of the five aggregates in practice is the five aggregates subject to clinging (pañcupādānakkhandhā)—“the five aggregates that are clung to” (vernacular §2). Clinging grasps them in three ways, a criterion repeated throughout the discourses and cited in this unit’s vernacular §3: “This is mine” (etaṃ mama—craving); “This I am” (esohamasmi—conceit); “This is my self” (eso me attā—self-view). The blade of wisdom negates these three claims one by one: see every aggregate as impermanent, painful, and not-self (vernacular §§5–6), and mine-making, conceit, and self-view lose what they can grasp. This is the same measure as the near enemies in Chapter 9 and jhāna pleasure in Chapter 4, only it has reached the final layer: the “good thing” hardest to release, and most necessary to release, is “I” itself. Analysis of the five aggregates teaches you how to release that grasp. 〔Observation〕
For the General Reader — What You Can Use Today
- Take the action; do not memorize the number. Remember: what you call “I” is the temporary confluence of five processes—form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. Simply reminding yourself of this often has already begun to loosen the grasp that there is a fixed self.
- Choose an aggregate and watch it arise and cease. Feeling is the easiest place to begin (14-04): right now, is it pleasant, painful, or neither painful nor pleasant? Watch a feeling arise, remain, and disappear—you will directly taste, “It came and went, and I was not defined by it.”
- Keep that measure. The subtraction of the wisdom division is not self-negation (that is a near enemy—see the reminder in Chapter 8); it is seeing through a projection and then releasing it. Once it is seen through, the mind is light.
To read this unit in full: the vernacular of the chapter’s seven units (14-01 through 14-07) is the complete, passage-by-passage translation of the entire Exposition of the Aggregates.
In a single sentence: the five aggregates are not a list to memorize, but a blade that lays “I” open into five groups of ownerless parts—the concentration division teaches you to relinquish jhāna pleasure, while the wisdom division teaches you to see through and release even the “I” that enjoys jhāna pleasure.
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 ### Kamādivinicchayakathā。
段號域 譯底欄之段號自〔CSCD §504〕至〔CSCD §509〕，實落段號 6 個，號序連續無缺。本篇於譯底欄之幅為 8,354 位元組。本篇為本品之末篇，其末並帶品之奧書（縮排二空格之四行）。
篇之骨——偈立六門而後逐門決擇 〔CSCD §504〕首立四行之偈（縮排四空格）為全篇之綱：Khandhesu ñāṇabhedatthaṃ, kamatotha visesato;／Anūnādhikato ceva, upamāto tatheva ca.／Daṭṭhabbato dvidhā evaṃ, passantassatthasiddhito;／Vinicchayanayo sammā, viññātabbo vibhāvinā.。本欄逐項切分其所立之門實測恰六目：次第（kamato）・差別（visesato）・不增不減（anūnādhikato）・喻（upamāto）・所見二種（Daṭṭhabbato dvidhā）・如是見者之義成（passantassatthasiddhito）。六門與其後六段〔CSCD §504〕至〔CSCD §509〕逐一相配——一門一段，且各段皆以其門之語為首（Tattha kamatoti・Visesatoti・Anūnādhikatoti・Upamātoti・Daṭṭhabbato dvidhāti・Evaṃ passantassatthasiddhito），為本品結構最整之篇。
五種次第之列與其四遮一取 〔CSCD §504〕列 uppattikkamo, pahānakkamo, paṭipattikkamo, bhūmikkamo, desanākkamoti bahuvidho kamo——恰五目；論繼以逐一遮其四而唯取其一：Tesu idha uppattikkamo tāva na yujjati⋯Na pahānakkamo⋯Napaṭipattikkamo⋯Na bhūmikkamo⋯Desanākkamo pana yujjati。四遮各繫其由（生次第以諸蘊無前後之生・斷次第以善無記非所斷・行道次第以不善非所行・地次第以受等遍四地），皆論主自陳，本目逐字錄其位而不代評。
前後接點 前承過去等之分別之單元：本篇首句 Evaṃ viditvā ca puna etesveva – 以 Evaṃ viditvā（既如是知已）逐字承前篇之全，etesveva（即於此諸蘊）指五蘊。後無次篇——本篇即本品之末，其末四行為品之奧書：Iti sādhujanapāmojjatthāya kate visuddhimagge／Paññābhāvanādhikāre／Khandhaniddeso nāma／Cuddasamo paricchedo.（於為令善人歡喜而造之《清淨道論》中，慧之修習之章，名為蘊之解釋，第十四品）。奧書自標本品之品次為第十四、其所屬之章為「慧之修習」——與慧之總說之單元所立之慧地之科相貫，誌其實。
movement 品夾《總覽》繫本單元於 §B〈「蘊」義與十一種分別〉；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。另誌：《總覽》之 §B 一節於譯底欄之文序上分落三單元（五蘊列名在慧之總說之單元、十一相在過去等之分別之單元、聚義即本篇〔CSCD §505〕之 rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati）；本篇所承者為其「蘊義」一事。本目誌其實而不代裁其歸屬。
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。前此諸品已立之讀不重解——本篇所涉之既立詞為 visesa（差別）・kāmāvacara／rūpāvacara（欲界／色界）・upādāna（取）・gantha（繫）・māyā（幻）・sukha（樂）・hīna（劣）。以下唯列本篇新出者。
決擇之六門〔CSCD §504〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| vinicchayanaya | 決擇之法 | 全篇之總名；論標其為 ñāṇabhedatthaṃ（為智之分別故）而說 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| kama | 次第 | 第一門 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| uppattikkama・pahānakkama・paṭipattikkama・bhūmikkama・desanākkama | 生次第・斷次第・行道次第・地次第・說次第 | 五種次第；唯末一為論所取 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| samūhaghanavinibbhogadassana | 見聚之密之破析 | 論所標之世尊說次第之意趣——為令執我者見蘊之析而離我執 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| veneyyajana | 所化之人 | 同上；論標其 attagāhapatita（墮於我執） | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| sukhagahaṇattha | 為易取故 | 說次第所以先色後識之由：色粗而為眼等之境，故先說 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| iṭṭhāniṭṭharūpasaṃvedanika | 領納可意不可意之色者 | 受所以次色而說之由 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| ākāragāhikā | 取行相者 | 想所以次受而說之由；論並引 Yaṃ vedayati, taṃ sañjānātī 為據 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| abhisaṅkhāraka | 能行作者 | 行所以次想而說之由 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| nissaya・adhipati | 所依・增上 | 識所以最後說之由：為受等之所依而於彼為增上 | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
蘊與取蘊之差別〔CSCD §505〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| upādānakkhandha | 取蘊 | 論自釋 upādānagocarā khandhā upādānakkhandhāti evamattho daṭṭhabbo（取之行處之蘊即取蘊） | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| sāsava・upādāniya | 有漏・順取 | 取蘊之揀別 | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| rāsaṭṭha | 聚義 | 蘊之所以為蘊；論以之判色之在蘊：Yasmā panassa rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati, tasmā khandhesu vuttaṃ | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| anāsava | 無漏 | 論之辨：受等有無漏者而色無，故色於二處皆說而受等分屬 | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
不增不減之三由〔CSCD §506〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| sabbasaṅkhatasabhāgekasaṅgaha | 一切有為依同分而總攝為一 | 第一由：色依色之同分而為一蘊，受等亦然 | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
| attattaniyagāhavatthu | 我與我所之執之事 | 第二由；論標其 etaparama（以此為極）並引經為據 | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
| aññesaṃ tadavarodha | 其餘者攝入於此 | 第三由；論舉 sīlādayo pañca dhammakkhandhā（戒等五法蘊）為例，判其攝於行蘊 | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
五喻〔CSCD §507〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| gilānasālupama | 如病舍 | 色取蘊——為如病人之識取蘊以所依門所緣而住之處 | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gelaññupama | 如病 | 受取蘊——以其能為患 | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gelaññasamuṭṭhānupama | 如病之起因 | 想取蘊——以欲想等而有與貪等相應之受 | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| asappāyasevanupama | 如服不宜之物 | 行取蘊——為受之病之因 | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gilānupama | 如病人 | 識取蘊——以其不脫於受之病 | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
論並附二組喻而不釋 〔CSCD §507〕末以一長複合詞出之：Apica cārakakāraṇaaparādhakāraṇakārakaaparādhikupamā ete bhājanabhojanabyañjanaparivesakabhuñjakūpamā cāti——論唯列其名而不逐一配之（前組五：獄・刑・罪・作者・有罪者；後組五：器・食・味・行食者・食者）。本目誌其實，不代配、不代釋。
所見之二門〔CSCD §508〕
| 巴利 | 本編用語 | 本篇用法之要 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|---|
| saṅkhepato／vitthārato | 略／廣 | 所見之二門 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| ukkhittāsikapaccatthika | 拔劍之怨敵 | 略門之第一；論繫其所出之經 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| bhāra | 重擔 | 略門之第二 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| khādaka | 食者 | 略門之第三 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| aniccadukkhānattasaṅkhatavadhaka | 無常苦無我有為殺者 | 略門之第四 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| pheṇapiṇḍa・udakapubbuḷa・marīcikā・kadalikkhandha・māyā | 聚沫・水泡・陽焰・芭蕉幹・幻 | 廣門之五喻，逐一配色受想行識；各繫其所以（parimaddanāsahanato・muhuttaramaṇīyato・vippalambhanato・asārakato・vañcakato） | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| asubha・dukkha・anatta・anicca | 不淨・苦・無我・無常 | 別配之四：內色不淨・受苦・想行無我・識無常 | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
如是見者之義成——四門之對配〔CSCD §509〕
| 所見 | 論所標之五事〔逐字之首〕 | 定位 |
|---|---|---|
| 內色為不淨 | 遍知 kabaḷīkārāhāraṃ・捨 asubhe subhanti vipallāsaṃ・度 Kāmoghaṃ・離 kāmayogena・不取 kāmupādānaṃ；並破 abhijjhākāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| 受為苦 | 遍知 phassāhāraṃ・捨 dukkhe sukhanti vipallāsaṃ・度 bhavoghaṃ・離 bhavayogena・不取 sīlabbatupādānaṃ；並破 byāpādakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| 想與行為無我 | 遍知 manosañcetanāhāraṃ・捨 anattani attāti vipallāsaṃ・度 diṭṭhoghaṃ・離 diṭṭhiyogena・不取 attavādupādānaṃ；並破 Idaṃsaccābhinivesakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| 識為無常 | 遍知 viññāṇāhāraṃ・捨 anicce niccanti vipallāsaṃ・度 avijjoghaṃ・離 avijjāyogena・不取 diṭṭhupādānaṃ；並破 sīlabbataparāmāsakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
四行之對配為五重 本欄實測：四食・四顛倒・四暴流・四軛・四漏（kāmāsavena・bhavāsavena・diṭṭhāsavena・avijjāsavena 各作 anāsavo hoti）・四身繫・四取——七組四法逐一與四所見相配，四段句式全同而唯易其目。論於此不出「四」之數詞亦不總標其組名，本欄逐段反查而得其配，誌其可核而不代命其組名。
本編既有校讀須併觀之二處 ①既有校讀之 §B 立蘊之義為「聚、堆、類」——其明文之據即本篇〔CSCD §505〕之 rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati（依聚義而蘊性得成），定讀逐字保入。②既有校讀之 §B 未及取蘊與蘊之差別、未及不增不減之三由、未及五喻與所見二門、亦未及〔CSCD §509〕之七組四法之對配——即本篇全幅。本目誌其實，不代補於彼。另誌：本品之末篇於既有校讀之全七 § 中無專屬之 §（其所繫之 §B 之主體在過去等之分別之單元），而本篇之幅為 8,354 位元組且獨立成六門之決擇。
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；異說之標識詞 Porāṇā／porāṇā 零命中。方括注唯二式（[§NN] 段號 6 個與版頁記 8 個，後者皆在註記之內）。引號 '' 實測 22 處為偶數，逐一成對。查無即記無：譯底欄自身無異讀之記。
本欄自出之一處字面之不齊——Napaṭipattikkamo 〔CSCD §504〕四遮之列作 Tesu idha uppattikkamo tāva na yujjati⋯Na pahānakkamo, kusalābyākatānaṃ appahātabbato. Napaṭipattikkamo, akusalānaṃ appaṭipajjanīyato. Na bhūmikkamo, vedanādīnaṃ catubhūmipariyāpannattā.——其第三遮作 Napaṭipattikkamo（Na 與其後之詞連書無間），而同列之他二遮作 Na pahānakkamo・Na bhūmikkamo（分寫）。一列四遮而一形獨異。本欄不判其為傳本之異讀、連聲之式或清檔之空白之疵，亦不代改。誌其字面與其位。
本欄自出之一處括注體例之不齊 全篇之圓括注 14 處（為本品第二多），其十三為單源，而 (ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) 一處以半形分號繫二源。全品之繫二號者三式並見（本篇之分號・過去等之分別之單元之逗點 (vibha. 2,26)・色蘊之單元之連字號 (dha. sa. 641-642)），本欄不判其式（同族之誌見彼二單元之目三）。
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 §504〕 | ''paṭhamaṃ kalalaṃ hoti, kalalā hoti abbuda''nti | 生次第之例——胎之次第 | (saṃ. ni. 1.235) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Dassanena pahātabbā dhammā, bhāvanāya pahātabbā dhammā''ti | 斷次第之例 | (dha. sa. tikamātikā 8) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Sīlavisuddhi, cittavisuddhī''ti | 行道次第之例——其目即慧之總說之單元所立之七清淨之首二 | (ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Kāmāvacarā, rūpāvacarā''ti | 地次第之例 | (dha. sa. 987) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Cattāro satipaṭṭhānā, cattāro sammappadhānā''ti | 說次第之例之一 | (dī. ni. 3.145) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''dānakathaṃ, sīlakatha''nti | 說次第之例之二 | (dī. ni. 1.298) |
| 〔CSCD §505〕 | Yathāha –／''Pañca ceva vo, bhikkhave, khandhe desessāmi pañcupādānakkhandhe ca, taṃ suṇātha. | 蘊與取蘊之別之經證——本篇最長之引（縮排二空格之引塊） | (saṃ. ni. 3.48) |
| 〔CSCD §506〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ ''rūpe kho, bhikkhave, sati rūpaṃ upādāya rūpaṃ abhinivissa evaṃ diṭṭhi uppajjati | 我與我所之執唯以五蘊為事之證 | (saṃ. ni. 3.207) |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | ''Vedanaṃ vedanatthāya abhisaṅkharontī''ti | 行為受之病之因之證 | (saṃ. ni. 3.79) |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | Tathā ''akusalassa kammassa katattā upacitattā vipākaṃ kāyaviññāṇaṃ uppannaṃ hoti dukkhasahagata''nti | 同上之第二證 | (dha. sa. 556) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | āsīvisūpame⋯vuttanayena ukkhittāsikapaccatthikato | 略門第一喻之所出 | (saṃ. ni. 4.238) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | bhārasuttavasena⋯bhārato | 略門第二喻之所出——論自標其經名 bhārasutta | (saṃ. ni. 3.22) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | khajjanīyapariyāyavasena⋯khādakato | 略門第三喻之所出——論自標其法門名 khajjanīyapariyāya | (saṃ. ni. 3.79) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | yamakasuttavasena⋯aniccadukkhānattasaṅkhatavadhakato | 略門第四喻之所出——論自標其經名 yamakasutta | (saṃ. ni. 3.85) |
引式之數〔本欄實測〕 Yathāha 1 處・Vuttañhetaṃ 1 處・Vuttampi cetaṃ・Tena vuttaṃ・Porāṇā・kira 俱零命中。本文自標之圓括注出處 14 處，其分布為 saṃ. ni. 7・dha. sa.／dha. sa. tikamātikā 3・dī. ni. 2・ma. ni. 1・paṭi. ma. 1（(ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) 一括注內二源，故源數之和逾括注數）——《相應部》為本篇引據之主源，與行蘊單元（《法集論》為主）、過去等之分別之單元（《分別論》為唯一源）皆異族。此數唯就本篇之域，不及全書。
經名自標之四式 〔CSCD §508〕之略門四喻逐一自標其所出之經名或法門名（āsīvisūpame・bhārasuttavasena・khajjanīyapariyāyavasena・yamakasuttavasena），而後各繫括注——四引皆二重之標（名＋號）。此式於本品他六單元零命中：他篇之引或唯繫號、或唯標書名，未有逐引並標經名與號者。誌其實不判其因。
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「喻」之語幹諸形 9 見、viya 詞界 6 見、sadis- 諸形 1 見——本篇為本品唯一以「喻」自立一門之篇（決擇六門之第四即 upamāto），故其比況語不散在文中而聚於二段（〔CSCD §507〕與〔CSCD §508〕）。
| 位置 | 譬喻 | 所配之義 |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | gilānasālupamo rūpupādānakkhandho／Gelaññupamo vedanupādānakkhandho／Gelaññasamuṭṭhānupamo saññupādānakkhandho／Asappāyasevanupamo saṅkhārupādānakkhandho／Gilānupamo viññāṇupādānakkhandho | 病舍・病・病之起因・服不宜之物・病人——五取蘊之五喻，一組五喻而逐一相配 |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | cārakakāraṇaaparādhakāraṇakārakaaparādhikupamā／bhājanabhojanabyañjanaparivesakabhuñjakūpamā | 獄等五・器等五——二組十喻論唯列名而不配（見目二） |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | pheṇapiṇḍo viya rūpaṃ daṭṭhabbaṃ, parimaddanāsahanato | 如聚沫，以不堪揉——色 |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Udakapubbuḷaṃ viya vedanā, muhuttaramaṇīyato | 如水泡，以須臾可樂——受 |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Marīcikā viya saññā, vippalambhanato | 如陽焰，以誑惑——想 |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Kadalikkhandho viya saṅkhārā, asārakato | 如芭蕉幹，以無實——行 |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Māyā viya viññāṇaṃ, vañcakato | 如幻，以欺誑——識 |
| 〔CSCD §509〕 | rūpādīni pheṇapiṇḍādisadisabhāvena passanto na asāresu sāradassī hoti | 承上五喻而收：如是見者不於無實中見實——sadis- 之唯一命中即在此收句 |
乙・修辭之可核觀察 ①本篇之骨為偈立綱而後逐門開之：六門之語逐一於其段之首復出（kamatoti・Visesatoti・Anūnādhikatoti・Upamātoti・Daṭṭhabbato dvidhāti・Evaṃ passantassatthasiddhito），六段六首語與偈之六目逐字相符——為本品結構最整之篇。②四段全同之排比：〔CSCD §509〕之四所見各以「遍知某食・捨某顛倒・度某暴流・離某軛・於某漏成無漏・破某身繫・不取某取」七事成句，四段句式全同而唯易其目，為本品最長之整齊排比。③…pe… 省略式 6 見，皆在所引之經句之內（〔CSCD §505〕之長引獨佔其六）。④? 零命中・Kasmā? 自問零命中——本篇雖有 kasmā pana bhagavatā pañceva khandhā vuttā anūnā anadhikāti 一問，然其以 ti 收而不著問號，本欄誌其為無問號之設問。⑤偈頌 2 首 6 行（決擇之綱之偈 4 行・品末之偈 2 行，皆縮排四空格）；引塊 1 處與奧書 4 行（縮排二空格）——本篇為本品縮排行最多之篇（四空格 6 行・二空格 5 行）。⑥品末之偈 Evaṃ mahānisaṃsaṃ, vadhakādivasena dassanaṃ yasmā;／Tasmā khandhe dhīro, vadhakādivasena passeyyāti. 之首行內含一版頁記（Evaṃ mahānisaṃsaṃ）——版頁記落於偈行之中，為本品偈行內見版頁記之唯一處，誌之。
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 §504〕 Evaṃ viditvā ca puna etesveva – | 過去等之分別之單元〔CSCD §503〕 | 以 Evaṃ viditvā 逐字承前篇之全 |
〔CSCD §504〕 ''Sīlavisuddhi, cittavisuddhī''ti 之引 | 慧之總說之單元〔CSCD §430〕 | 彼篇立七清淨而以戒清淨・心清淨為「根」，本篇引之為行道次第之例——二篇引同一組目而用異 |
〔CSCD §504〕 cakkhuādīnampi visayabhūtaṃ oḷārikaṃ paṭhamaṃ rūpakkhandhaṃ desesi | 色蘊之單元〔CSCD §447〕 | 彼篇以 oḷārikaṃ 判十二色為粗，本篇以色之粗為先說之由 |
〔CSCD §504〕 Tesaṃ vedanādīnaṃ nissayaṃ adhipatibhūtañca nesaṃ viññāṇanti | 識蘊之單元〔CSCD §451〕 | 彼篇自標「識蘊既知則餘者易知」而先釋識，本篇則以識為所依而後說——二篇之次第之由不同，一為釋之便，一為說之序，本目誌其實不代裁 |
〔CSCD §505〕 rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati | 過去等之分別之單元〔CSCD §497〕 | 彼篇以 rāsibhāvūpagamanena 立聚義，本篇以 rāsaṭṭhena 明立之——二篇併觀而聚義乃全 |
〔CSCD §506〕 sīlādayo pañca dhammakkhandhā⋯saṅkhārakkhandhe pariyāpannattā | 行蘊之單元〔CSCD §458〕–〔CSCD §492〕 | 戒等五法蘊攝於行蘊，行蘊之全目在彼篇 |
〔CSCD §507〕 vipākaṃ kāyaviññāṇaṃ uppannaṃ hoti dukkhasahagata | 識蘊之單元〔CSCD §454〕・受想二蘊之單元〔CSCD §456〕 | 不善異熟身識與苦受相應立於彼二篇 |
〔CSCD §509〕 kabaḷīkārāhāraṃ parijānāti | 色蘊之單元〔CSCD §445〕 | 彼篇立段食之四事（Ojālakkhaṇo kabaḷīkāro āhāro），本篇以遍知段食為觀內色不淨之果 |
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 published). Every Pāli item in this layer is taken verbatim from the base-text column in this unit’s source file. A single locus form is used: 〔CSCD §NN〕, checkable verbatim against the base-text column. This chapter has no in-house Pāli aligned by page, so page ranges are not recorded.
Title The base-text column contains one ### subsection, whose title is this division’s ### Kamādivinicchayakathā.
Paragraph-number range The base-text column runs from 〔CSCD §504〕 through 〔CSCD §509〕, containing 6 paragraph numbers, continuous with none missing. The span of this unit in the base-text column is 8,354 bytes. This is the last division of the chapter, and it ends with the chapter colophon in four lines indented two spaces.
The unit’s backbone—a stanza establishes six modes, each then determined in sequence The four-line stanza opening 〔CSCD §504〕 (indented four spaces) provides the framework for the whole division: Khandhesu ñāṇabhedatthaṃ, kamatotha visesato;／Anūnādhikato ceva, upamāto tatheva ca.／Daṭṭhabbato dvidhā evaṃ, passantassatthasiddhito;／Vinicchayanayo sammā, viññātabbo vibhāvinā. Fresh itemization in this column yields exactly six modes: order (kamato)・distinction (visesato)・neither fewer nor more (anūnādhikato)・simile (upamāto)・two ways they should be seen (Daṭṭhabbato dvidhā)・success in meaning for the person seeing thus (passantassatthasiddhito). The six modes correspond item by item to the six paragraphs from 〔CSCD §504〕 through 〔CSCD §509〕—a single mode to each paragraph, with every paragraph opening in the words of its mode (Tattha kamatoti・Visesatoti・Anūnādhikatoti・Upamātoti・Daṭṭhabbato dvidhāti・Evaṃ passantassatthasiddhito). This is the most structurally regular division in the chapter.
The list of five possible orders and its four rejections and single acceptance 〔CSCD §504〕 lists uppattikkamo, pahānakkamo, paṭipattikkamo, bhūmikkamo, desanākkamoti bahuvidho kamo—exactly five items. The treatise then rejects four in sequence and accepts only the fifth: Tesu idha uppattikkamo tāva na yujjati⋯Na pahānakkamo⋯Napaṭipattikkamo⋯Na bhūmikkamo⋯Desanākkamo pana yujjati. Each of the four rejections carries its reason (arising order: the aggregates do not arise in a fixed before-and-after sequence; abandoning order: wholesome and indeterminate states are not to be abandoned; practice order: unwholesome states are not to be practiced; plane order: feeling and the rest extend through all four planes). All four are stated in the Commentator’s own voice; this section records their wording and location verbatim without evaluating them.
Connections before and after The preceding unit classifies the past and the rest. This division opens, Evaṃ viditvā ca puna etesveva –: Evaṃ viditvā (having understood thus) takes up the whole preceding division verbatim, while etesveva (precisely among these aggregates) refers to the five aggregates. No division follows—this is the chapter’s last division. Its final four lines form the chapter colophon: Iti sādhujanapāmojjatthāya kate visuddhimagge／Paññābhāvanādhikāre／Khandhaniddeso nāma／Cuddasamo paricchedo. (in the Visuddhimagga, made for the joy of good people, in the section on the development of wisdom, the exposition named “Aggregates,” the fourteenth chapter). The colophon itself marks this as the fourteenth chapter and places it within “the development of wisdom”—continuing the structure of grounds for wisdom established in the unit on the general account of wisdom. The fact is recorded as found.
Movement The chapter’s accompanying Overview links this unit to §B “The Meaning of ‘Aggregate’ and the Elevenfold Classification.” The wording of the chapter section linked there appears verbatim in that table and is not reproduced or excerpted here—the mapping between paragraph numbers and chapter sections is unknown and is neither estimated nor converted. A further fact is recorded: in the textual order of the base-text column, the Overview’s §B is distributed across three units (the list of the five aggregates occurs in the unit on the general account of wisdom, the eleven aspects in the unit classifying the past and the rest, and the meaning of a mass in this division, where 〔CSCD §505〕 states rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati). This division takes up “the meaning of aggregate.” The facts are recorded without determining their assignment on the Overview’s behalf.
II. Terms and Renderings
This section records only this division’s usages and locations; fixed readings of terms follow the normative glossary, and this section does not decide terms not fixed there. Readings established in preceding chapters are not explained again. Previously established terms appearing here are visesa (distinction)・kāmāvacara／rūpāvacara (sense sphere／fine-material sphere)・upādāna (clinging)・gantha (tie)・māyā (illusion)・sukha (pleasure)・hīna (inferior). Only terms new in this division are listed below.
Six Modes of Determination 〔CSCD §504〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| vinicchayanaya | method of determination | The general designation for the whole division; the treatise states that it is presented ñāṇabhedatthaṃ (for the differentiation of knowledge) | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| kama | order | The first mode | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| uppattikkama・pahānakkama・paṭipattikkama・bhūmikkama・desanākkama | order of arising・order of abandoning・order of practice・order of planes・order of teaching | The five possible orders; only the last is accepted by the treatise | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| samūhaghanavinibbhogadassana | seeing the breaking apart of the compact mass | The purpose the treatise assigns to the Blessed One’s order of teaching—to free a person who grasps self by showing the analysis of the aggregates | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| veneyyajana | person to be trained | The same passage; the treatise describes the person as attagāhapatita (fallen into grasping self) | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| sukhagahaṇattha | for ease of grasping | Why materiality is taught before consciousness in the teaching order: because materiality is coarse and is the object of the eye and the rest, it is taught first | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| iṭṭhāniṭṭharūpasaṃvedanika | experiencing pleasant and unpleasant materiality | Why feeling is taught after materiality | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| ākāragāhikā | grasping the mode | Why perception is taught after feeling; the treatise also cites Yaṃ vedayati, taṃ sañjānātī as authority | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| abhisaṅkhāraka | forming agent | Why formations are taught after perception | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
| nissaya・adhipati | support・dominance | Why consciousness is taught last: it is the support for feeling and the rest and exercises dominance over them | 〔CSCD §504〕 |
Distinction Between Aggregates and Aggregates Subject to Clinging 〔CSCD §505〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| upādānakkhandha | aggregate subject to clinging | The treatise itself explains, upādānagocarā khandhā upādānakkhandhāti evamattho daṭṭhabbo (aggregates that are the domain of clinging are aggregates subject to clinging) | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| sāsava・upādāniya | with influxes・subject to clinging | The qualification that distinguishes aggregates subject to clinging | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| rāsaṭṭha | meaning of a mass | Why an aggregate is an aggregate; the treatise uses this to judge materiality’s inclusion among aggregates: Yasmā panassa rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati, tasmā khandhesu vuttaṃ | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
| anāsava | without influxes | The treatise’s distinction: feeling and the rest can be without influxes, whereas materiality cannot; materiality is therefore stated in both places, while feeling and the rest are distributed between them | 〔CSCD §505〕 |
Three Reasons for Neither Fewer nor More 〔CSCD §506〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| sabbasaṅkhatasabhāgekasaṅgaha | gathering all conditioned phenomena into a single group according to common nature | First reason: materiality forms a single aggregate according to the common nature of materiality, and the same applies to feeling and the rest | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
| attattaniyagāhavatthu | basis for grasping self and what belongs to self | Second reason; the treatise calls it etaparama (having this as its limit) and cites a discourse as authority | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
| aññesaṃ tadavarodha | inclusion of the rest within these | Third reason; the treatise gives sīlādayo pañca dhammakkhandhā (the five aggregates of dhammas beginning with virtue) as an example and judges that they are included in the formations aggregate | 〔CSCD §506〕 |
Five Similes 〔CSCD §507〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| gilānasālupama | like a sick ward | The materiality aggregate subject to clinging—the dwelling through support, door, and object for the consciousness aggregate subject to clinging, which is like a sick person | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gelaññupama | like sickness | The feeling aggregate subject to clinging—because it afflicts | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gelaññasamuṭṭhānupama | like the cause of sickness | The perception aggregate subject to clinging—because perceptions of sensual desire and the rest condition feelings associated with greed and the rest | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| asappāyasevanupama | like taking what is unsuitable | The formations aggregate subject to clinging—as the cause of the sickness of feeling | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
| gilānupama | like a sick person | The consciousness aggregate subject to clinging—because it is not free from the sickness of feeling | 〔CSCD §507〕 |
The treatise appends two further sets of similes without explaining them At the end of 〔CSCD §507〕, a single long compound gives them as Apica cārakakāraṇaaparādhakāraṇakārakaaparādhikupamā ete bhājanabhojanabyañjanaparivesakabhuñjakūpamā cāti—the treatise only lists their names and does not assign them item by item (the first five: prison・punishment・offense・agent・offender; the second five: vessel・food・condiment・server・eater). This section records the fact without assigning or explaining the similes on the treatise’s behalf.
Two Modes in Which They Should Be Seen 〔CSCD §508〕
| Pāli | Rendering | Usage in this unit | Locus |
|---|---|---|---|
| saṅkhepato／vitthārato | in brief／in detail | The two modes in which they should be seen | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| ukkhittāsikapaccatthika | enemy with drawn sword | The first item in the brief mode; the treatise supplies the source of the simile | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| bhāra | burden | The second item in the brief mode | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| khādaka | eater | The third item in the brief mode | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| aniccadukkhānattasaṅkhatavadhaka | impermanent-suffering-non-self-conditioned killer | The fourth item in the brief mode | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| pheṇapiṇḍa・udakapubbuḷa・marīcikā・kadalikkhandha・māyā | lump of foam・water bubble・mirage・plantain trunk・illusion | The five similes of the detailed mode, applied respectively to materiality, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness; each carries its reason (parimaddanāsahanato・muhuttaramaṇīyato・vippalambhanato・asārakato・vañcakato) | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
| asubha・dukkha・anatta・anicca | foul・suffering・not-self・impermanent | Four distinct applications: internal materiality as foul, feeling as suffering, perception and formations as not-self, and consciousness as impermanent | 〔CSCD §508〕 |
Success in Meaning for the Person Seeing Thus—Correspondence Across Four Modes of Seeing 〔CSCD §509〕
| Seen As | The Treatise’s Five Items 〔verbatim openings〕 | Location |
|---|---|---|
| Internal materiality as foul | fully understands kabaḷīkārāhāraṃ・abandons asubhe subhanti vipallāsaṃ・crosses Kāmoghaṃ・becomes disconnected from kāmayogena・does not cling to kāmupādānaṃ; and breaks abhijjhākāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| Feeling as suffering | fully understands phassāhāraṃ・abandons dukkhe sukhanti vipallāsaṃ・crosses bhavoghaṃ・becomes disconnected from bhavayogena・does not cling to sīlabbatupādānaṃ; and breaks byāpādakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| Perception and formations as not-self | fully understands manosañcetanāhāraṃ・abandons anattani attāti vipallāsaṃ・crosses diṭṭhoghaṃ・becomes disconnected from diṭṭhiyogena・does not cling to attavādupādānaṃ; and breaks Idaṃsaccābhinivesakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
| Consciousness as impermanent | fully understands viññāṇāhāraṃ・abandons anicce niccanti vipallāsaṃ・crosses avijjoghaṃ・becomes disconnected from avijjāyogena・does not cling to diṭṭhupādānaṃ; and breaks sīlabbataparāmāsakāyaganthaṃ | 〔CSCD §509〕 |
The four passages correspond across seven tetrads Fresh checking in this column finds four distinct nutriments—physical nutriment, contact as nutriment, mental volition as nutriment, and consciousness as nutriment—together with four inversions, four floods, four yokes, four influxes (kāmāsavena・bhavāsavena・diṭṭhāsavena・avijjāsavena, each followed by anāsavo hoti), four bodily ties, and four kinds of clinging. Seven sets of four correspond item by item to the four modes of seeing, and all four passages have the same syntax with only their members changed. The treatise neither states the number word “four” here nor gives an overall name to the groups; the correspondence results from checking each passage in turn. This section records what can be verified without naming the groups on the treatise’s behalf.
Two places where this edition’s existing critical reading must be considered together ① The existing critical reading’s §B gives the meaning of aggregate as “mass, heap, class”—its explicit authority is rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati at 〔CSCD §505〕 in this division (being an aggregate is fitting through the meaning of a mass), and the fixed reading is preserved verbatim. ② The existing critical reading’s §B does not reach the distinction between aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging, the three reasons for neither fewer nor more, the five similes and two modes of seeing, or the seven tetrads corresponding at 〔CSCD §509〕—the entire span of this division. This section records the fact without supplying the material there on its behalf. A further fact is recorded: this last division of the chapter has no dedicated section among the seven sections of the existing critical reading (the principal content of the linked §B occurs in the unit classifying the past and the rest), although this division spans 8,354 bytes and independently develops a determination through six modes.
III. Variant Readings
Material surface This division has no in-house Pāli aligned by page, so no collation passage can be recorded; the only inspectable surface is the base-text column itself. The record does not judge.
Measured comprehensive scan A verbatim scan of the entire division’s base-text column found zero occurrences of parenthetical variant forms such as (sī.)・(syā.)・(kaṃ.)・(pī.); zero occurrences of the variant-reading marker pāṭho; and zero occurrences of the alternative-account markers Porāṇā／porāṇā. Square brackets occur in only two forms: 6 [§NN] paragraph numbers and 8 edition-page records, all of the latter inside annotations. The quotation marker '' occurs 22 times, an even number, and every occurrence forms a pair. Absence found is recorded as absence: the base-text column itself records no variant readings.
A single literal inconsistency arising within this column—Napaṭipattikkamo The four rejections at 〔CSCD §504〕 read Tesu idha uppattikkamo tāva na yujjati⋯Na pahānakkamo, kusalābyākatānaṃ appahātabbato. Napaṭipattikkamo, akusalānaṃ appaṭipajjanīyato. Na bhūmikkamo, vedanādīnaṃ catubhūmipariyāpannattā.—the third rejection is written Napaṭipattikkamo, with no space between Na and the following term, while two others in the same list are written Na pahānakkamo and Na bhūmikkamo, with a space. A single form differs within a list of four rejections. This column does not determine whether it is a witness’s variant reading, a sandhi convention, or a spacing defect introduced during file preparation, and does not correct it. Its literal form and location are recorded.
A single inconsistency in the form of parenthetical annotations arising within this column The division contains 14 parenthetical annotations (the second-highest figure in this chapter). Thirteen give a single source, while (ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) joins two sources with an ASCII semicolon. Three forms for joining two numbers occur across the chapter: the semicolon in this division; the comma in (vibha. 2,26) in the unit classifying the past and the rest; and the hyphen in (dha. sa. 641-642) in the materiality-aggregate unit. This column does not determine the status of the form (the same family of facts is recorded in Section III of those two units).
Scope of this column Everything listed above is the literal fact of the base-text column. This column has not been collated against the scanned PTS pages. The zero-occurrence findings in this column apply only to the single base-text surface and do not support an inference about other editions.
IV. The Commentator’s Citations
Each citation made by the Commentator is linked to a paragraph-number anchor. A source is recorded only when the text itself marks it; none is identified on its behalf. Parentheses in the “Source Marked by the Text” column are copied verbatim without translating the title.
| Location | Citation Formula 〔verbatim〕 | Point of the Citation | Source Marked by the Text |
|---|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''paṭhamaṃ kalalaṃ hoti, kalalā hoti abbuda''nti | Example of arising order—the embryonic sequence | (saṃ. ni. 1.235) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Dassanena pahātabbā dhammā, bhāvanāya pahātabbā dhammā''ti | Example of abandoning order | (dha. sa. tikamātikā 8) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Sīlavisuddhi, cittavisuddhī''ti | Example of practice order—these are the first two of the seven purifications established in the unit on the general account of wisdom | (ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Kāmāvacarā, rūpāvacarā''ti | Example of plane order | (dha. sa. 987) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''Cattāro satipaṭṭhānā, cattāro sammappadhānā''ti | First example of teaching order | (dī. ni. 3.145) |
| 〔CSCD §504〕 | ''dānakathaṃ, sīlakatha''nti | Second example of teaching order | (dī. ni. 1.298) |
| 〔CSCD §505〕 | Yathāha –／''Pañca ceva vo, bhikkhave, khandhe desessāmi pañcupādānakkhandhe ca, taṃ suṇātha. | Canonical authority for the distinction between aggregates and aggregates subject to clinging—the longest citation in this division (a cited block indented two spaces) | (saṃ. ni. 3.48) |
| 〔CSCD §506〕 | Vuttañhetaṃ ''rūpe kho, bhikkhave, sati rūpaṃ upādāya rūpaṃ abhinivissa evaṃ diṭṭhi uppajjati | Authority that grasping self and what belongs to self takes only the five aggregates as its basis | (saṃ. ni. 3.207) |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | ''Vedanaṃ vedanatthāya abhisaṅkharontī''ti | Authority for formations as the cause of feeling’s sickness | (saṃ. ni. 3.79) |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | Tathā ''akusalassa kammassa katattā upacitattā vipākaṃ kāyaviññāṇaṃ uppannaṃ hoti dukkhasahagata''nti | A second authority for the same point | (dha. sa. 556) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | āsīvisūpame⋯vuttanayena ukkhittāsikapaccatthikato | Source of the first simile in the brief mode | (saṃ. ni. 4.238) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | bhārasuttavasena⋯bhārato | Source of the second simile in the brief mode—the treatise itself names the discourse bhārasutta | (saṃ. ni. 3.22) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | khajjanīyapariyāyavasena⋯khādakato | Source of the third simile in the brief mode—the treatise itself names the exposition khajjanīyapariyāya | (saṃ. ni. 3.79) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | yamakasuttavasena⋯aniccadukkhānattasaṅkhatavadhakato | Source of the fourth simile in the brief mode—the treatise itself names the discourse yamakasutta | (saṃ. ni. 3.85) |
Number of citation formulas 〔measured in this column〕 Yathāha occurs once and Vuttañhetaṃ once, while Vuttampi cetaṃ・Tena vuttaṃ・Porāṇā・kira all have zero occurrences. The text marks sources in parenthetical annotations 14 times, distributed as saṃ. ni. 7・dha. sa.／dha. sa. tikamātikā 3・dī. ni. 2・ma. ni. 1・paṭi. ma. 1 (the single annotation (ma. ni. 1.259; paṭi. ma. 3.41) names two sources, so the sum of sources exceeds the number of annotations)—the Saṃyutta Nikāya is the principal source in this division, unlike the formations-aggregate unit, where the Dhammasaṅgaṇī predominates, and the unit classifying the past and the rest, where the Vibhaṅga is the sole source. These figures apply only to this division’s scope, not the whole work.
Four forms that name the discourse Each of the four similes in the brief mode at 〔CSCD §508〕 names its source discourse or exposition (āsīvisūpame・bhārasuttavasena・khajjanīyapariyāyavasena・yamakasuttavasena) and then supplies a parenthetical note—all four citations are marked twice (name＋number). This pattern has zero occurrences in the other six units of this chapter: their citations either supply only a number or name only the work, and none names both the discourse and its number for every citation in a sequence. The fact is recorded without determining why.
V. Similes and Rhetoric
This section records only the location of each simile and what it corresponds to, without literary evaluation.
A. Similes Forms built on the stem for “simile” occur 9 times in this division, the word-bounded viya 6 times, and forms built on sadis- once—this is the only division in the chapter to establish “simile” as a mode in its own right (the fourth of the six modes of determination is upamāto), so comparison language is concentrated in two paragraphs, 〔CSCD §507〕 and 〔CSCD §508〕, rather than scattered through the division.
| Location | Simile | Correspondence |
|---|---|---|
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | gilānasālupamo rūpupādānakkhandho／Gelaññupamo vedanupādānakkhandho／Gelaññasamuṭṭhānupamo saññupādānakkhandho／Asappāyasevanupamo saṅkhārupādānakkhandho／Gilānupamo viññāṇupādānakkhandho | Sick ward・sickness・cause of sickness・taking what is unsuitable・sick person—the five similes for the five aggregates subject to clinging, a set of five assigned item by item |
| 〔CSCD §507〕 | cārakakāraṇaaparādhakāraṇakārakaaparādhikupamā／bhājanabhojanabyañjanaparivesakabhuñjakūpamā | The five beginning with prison and the five beginning with vessel—two groups of five—ten similes in all—whose names the treatise lists without assigning them (see Section II) |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | pheṇapiṇḍo viya rūpaṃ daṭṭhabbaṃ, parimaddanāsahanato | Like a lump of foam, because it cannot withstand being kneaded—materiality |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Udakapubbuḷaṃ viya vedanā, muhuttaramaṇīyato | Like a water bubble, because it delights for a moment—feeling |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Marīcikā viya saññā, vippalambhanato | Like a mirage, because it deceives—perception |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Kadalikkhandho viya saṅkhārā, asārakato | Like a plantain trunk, because it has no core—formations |
| 〔CSCD §508〕 | Māyā viya viññāṇaṃ, vañcakato | Like an illusion, because it cheats—consciousness |
| 〔CSCD §509〕 | rūpādīni pheṇapiṇḍādisadisabhāvena passanto na asāresu sāradassī hoti | The conclusion drawing on the preceding five similes: a person seeing thus does not see a core in what has no core—the sole occurrence of sadis- appears in this closing sentence |
B. Verifiable rhetorical observations ① The division’s backbone is a stanza establishing the framework, followed by each mode’s expansion: the terms for the six modes recur at the beginning of their respective paragraphs (kamatoti・Visesatoti・Anūnādhikatoti・Upamātoti・Daṭṭhabbato dvidhāti・Evaṃ passantassatthasiddhito), and the six paragraph openings agree verbatim with the stanza’s six items—the most structurally regular division in the chapter. ② A four-passage parallel with identical syntax: each of the four modes of seeing at 〔CSCD §509〕 states seven results—fully understanding a nutriment, abandoning an inversion, crossing a flood, becoming disconnected from a yoke, becoming without influxes in respect of an influx, breaking a bodily tie, and not clinging to a kind of clinging. All four passages have the same syntax with only their members changed, forming the longest sustained parallel in the chapter. ③ The ellipsis form …pe… occurs 6 times, all within the cited canonical sentence (the long citation at 〔CSCD §505〕 alone contains all six). ④ ? has zero occurrences, and the self-question Kasmā? has zero occurrences. Although the division contains kasmā pana bhagavatā pañceva khandhā vuttā anūnā anadhikāti, it closes the question with ti and carries no question mark—this column records it as a question without a question mark. ⑤ The division contains 2 stanzas in 6 lines (the four-line stanza giving the framework of determination and the two-line stanza at the chapter’s end, Evaṃ mahānisaṃsaṃ, vadhakādivasena dassanaṃ yasmā;／Tasmā khandhe dhīro, vadhakādivasena passeyyāti., both indented four spaces), a single cited block and a four-line colophon (indented two spaces)—more indented lines than any other unit in the chapter (six lines at four spaces and five at two spaces). ⑥ The first line of the final stanza contains an edition-page record within the line (Evaṃ mahānisaṃsaṃ)—the only edition-page record within a stanza line in this chapter. The fact is recorded.
All figures above were measured only within this division and do not extend to the whole work.
VI. Intratextual Cross-Reading
Every reference carries a paragraph-number anchor. Each target is established only from a term verifiable in this division—the mapping between this division’s paragraph numbers and chapter sections is unknown, so these references do not attach chapter-section numbers and do not estimate or convert them. Nothing is determined on the target’s behalf.
| Place in This Division | Target | Verifiable Basis |
|---|---|---|
〔CSCD §504〕 Evaṃ viditvā ca puna etesveva – | Unit classifying the past and the rest 〔CSCD §503〕 | Evaṃ viditvā takes up the whole preceding division verbatim |
〔CSCD §504〕 Citation ''Sīlavisuddhi, cittavisuddhī''ti | Unit on the general account of wisdom 〔CSCD §430〕 | That unit establishes the seven purifications and makes purification of virtue and purification of mind their “roots”; this division cites them as an example of practice order—the two divisions use the same set of terms differently |
〔CSCD §504〕 cakkhuādīnampi visayabhūtaṃ oḷārikaṃ paṭhamaṃ rūpakkhandhaṃ desesi | Materiality-aggregate unit 〔CSCD §447〕 | That division judges twelve kinds of materiality coarse through oḷārikaṃ; this division makes materiality’s coarseness the reason it is taught first |
〔CSCD §504〕 Tesaṃ vedanādīnaṃ nissayaṃ adhipatibhūtañca nesaṃ viññāṇanti | Consciousness-aggregate unit 〔CSCD §451〕 | That division explains consciousness first because “when the consciousness aggregate is known, the rest are easily known,” whereas this division teaches consciousness last because it is their support—the two divisions give different reasons for their respective orders, ease of explanation and order of teaching. This section records the fact without deciding between them |
〔CSCD §505〕 rāsaṭṭhena khandhabhāvo yujjati | Unit classifying the past and the rest 〔CSCD §497〕 | That division establishes the meaning of a mass through rāsibhāvūpagamanena; this division establishes it explicitly through rāsaṭṭhena—the meaning of a mass becomes complete when the two divisions are read together |
〔CSCD §506〕 sīlādayo pañca dhammakkhandhā⋯saṅkhārakkhandhe pariyāpannattā | Formations-aggregate unit 〔CSCD §458〕–〔CSCD §492〕 | The five aggregates of dhammas beginning with virtue are included in the formations aggregate; the full enumeration of the formations aggregate occurs in that division |
〔CSCD §507〕 vipākaṃ kāyaviññāṇaṃ uppannaṃ hoti dukkhasahagata | Consciousness-aggregate unit 〔CSCD §454〕・feeling-and-perception unit 〔CSCD §456〕 | Unwholesome-resultant body-consciousness and its association with painful feeling are established in those two units |
〔CSCD §509〕 kabaḷīkārāhāraṃ parijānāti | Materiality-aggregate unit 〔CSCD §445〕 | That division establishes the four aspects of physical nutriment (Ojālakkhaṇo kabaḷīkāro āhāro); this division makes full understanding of physical nutriment a result of seeing internal materiality as foul |
VII. Transmission
This edition does not establish positions in the apparatus on questions of authorship, transmission, or commentarial lineage.