Dharma · AI Companion

六十二見

dvāṣaṣṭidṛṣṭi

外道关于我与世界的六十二种见。AI-generated

Type ViewDifficulty IntermediateTruth-level span I · dependent arisingInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What Is the Sixty-Two Views (六十二見)?

In the landscape of early Buddhist thought, the human mind is often described as an anxious pattern-seeking machine. When confronted with the vast uncertainty of existence, we instinctively construct theories: *Where did I come from? What happens to me after death? Is the universe eternal, or will it vanish?*

The Sixty-Two Views (*dvāṣaṣṭi-dṛṣṭi*, 六十二見) represents the canonical Buddhist framework that exhaustively categorizes every possible ideological error, metaphysical speculation, and subtle identity trap the human mind can construct about the past and the future.

In the *Dīrgha Āgama* (*Long Discourses*, 長阿含經), the Buddha famously compares the Sixty-Two Views to a fine-meshed net thrown over a small pond (*細目網覆蓋小池*) [9830, 9831]. Every creature in that pond, no matter how frantically it swims, remains trapped within the mesh. Every philosophical doctrine, spiritual theory, or personal narrative regarding existence ultimately falls into one of these sixty-two knots [9830, 9831]. In the *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra* (*Great Heap Sūtra*, 大寶積經), it is termed the "tangled web of false views" (*眾邪疑網*)—a prison forged by delusion and the instinct to grasp at an ultimate "attainment" or permanent self [12298, 19011].

To understand where the Sixty-Two Views sits in the Buddhist path of liberation (*mōkṣa*), one must realize that Buddha’s teachings are not an alternative metaphysics, but a method to dissolve metaphysical clinging altogether.


1. The Structure of the Sixty-Two Views: Past and Future

In early texts like the *Brahmajāla Sūtra* (found in the *Dīrgha Āgama*), the sixty-two views are divided into two main temporal axes:

``` ┌── Eternalism (4 Views) ├── Partial Eternalism (4 Views) ┌── Past Views ──────┼── Finitude / Infinitude (4 Views) │ (本劫本見, 18) ├── Evasive / "Eel-wriggling" (4 Views) │ └── Fortuitous Origin / Chance (2 Views) │ 62 VIEWS (六十二見) │ ┌── Conscious Post-Mortem Existence (16 Views) │ ├── Unconscious Post-Mortem Existence (8 Views) └── Future Views ────┼── Neither Conscious nor Unconscious (8 Views) (末劫末見, 44) ├── Annihilationism (7 Views) └── Post-Mortem Bliss / Nirvana Here & Now (5 Views) ```

##### A. Views Regarding the Past (本劫本見, 18 Views) These are speculative theories concerning the origin of the self and the universe: * Eternalism (常論, 4 Views): Postulating that both the self (*ātman*) and the world are eternal [9831]. These views often arise when a meditator reaches deep states of samādhi, gains recollection of past lives across eons, and prematurely concludes: *"My body changes, but my observing essence has survived through eons; therefore, the self and the universe are eternal."* [9831] * Partial Eternalism (半常半無常論, 4 Views): Holding that some things (like a creator god or the higher self) are eternal, while other things (like lower beings or the material world) are impermanent. * Finitude and Infinitude (邊無邊論, 4 Views): Speculating whether the universe is spatially finite, infinite, both, or neither [10255]. * Evasive Speculation / "Eel-Wriggling" (異問異答 / 鰻魚滑條論, 4 Views): Refusing to commit to any assertion out of fear of error or moral responsibility, wiggling between "is," "is not," "both," or "neither." * Fortuitous Origin / Non-Causality (無因論 / 忽然而有, 2 Views): Asserting that the self and the world arise purely by chance (*無因生*), without past conditions or karma [9497].

##### B. Views Regarding the Future (末劫末見, 44 Views) These are speculative theories concerning what happens to the self after death: * Conscious Post-Mortem Existence (有想論, 16 Views): Claiming the self survives death in a conscious state—either with form (*有色*), without form (*無色*), finite, infinite, experiencing singular perception, or mixed perception [9838]. * Unconscious Post-Mortem Existence (無想論, 8 Views): Claiming the self survives death completely unconscious. * Neither Conscious nor Unconscious Existence (非有想非無想論, 8 Views): Claiming a subtle, indescribable state of survival after death. * Annihilationism (斷滅論, 7 Views): Claiming that death is the absolute end, and that the self (whether physical or mental) is totally obliterated at death. * Nirvana Here and Now (現法涅槃論, 5 Views): Equating the ultimate liberation with the maximum enjoyment of the five senses or the attainment of the four worldly meditative absorptions (*jhānas*).


2. The Engine Behind the Views: How Views Are Born

Why does the human mind generate these sixty-two errors? Early Buddhism does not treat these views as intellectual mistakes, but as symptoms of subtle psychological grasping.

The *Dīrgha Āgama* points directly to the mechanism of Dependent Origination (*pratītyasamutpāda*, 因緣生起):

$$\text{Six Sense Spheres (六入)} \longrightarrow \text{Contact (觸)} \longrightarrow \text{Feeling (受)} \longrightarrow \text{Craving (愛)} \longrightarrow \text{Clinging (取)} \longrightarrow \text{Views (見)}$$

When sense objects touch sense faculties, feeling (*vedanā*) arises [9497, 9842]. Because of raw, instinctual reactivity to pleasure, pain, or neutrality, craving (*tṛṣṇā*) takes root [9842, 10255]. Craving demands security, which crystallizes into Clinging (*upādāna*).

When we cling to experience, the mental conditioning process (*saṃskāra-skandha*, 行蘊) creates rigid mental fabrications—projecting an enduring "I" (*我見*), an essential identity (*命見*), or a fixed world (*世間見*) [10255]. **All sixty-two views are simply sophisticated coping mechanisms created by the mind to evade the raw reality of impermanence (*anitya*) and non-self (*anātman*).**


3. The Mahāyāna Expansion: Subtler Forms of Ideological Trap

In Mahāyāna texts like the *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra*, the definition of "false view" (*dṛṣṭi*, 見) expands beyond classic metaphysical theories.

Even if you abandon worldly views, if you grasp onto spiritual concepts and form dualistic attachments, you are still inside the net: * Attaching to Spiritual Concepts (戒見、多聞見): Grasping at moral codes or vast intellectual knowledge as absolute grounds for superiority [11354]. * Attaching to the Sacred (佛見、法見、涅槃見): Objectifying the Buddha, the Dharma, or Liberation itself [11354]. If one conceptualizes "Nirvana" as a realm to be attained, a status to achieve, or something superior to samsara, this subtle dualism is condemned as a *dṛṣṭi* (false view) [11354, 19470]. * Dualistic Discrimination (二元對立): Viewing ordinary worldly existence (*pṛthagjana-dharma*) as defiled or lowly, while viewing the path of a Bodhisattva as pure, lofty, or unconditioned [19470].

True Right View (*samyag-dṛṣṭi*), as defined in the *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra*, is not holding a "correct" theoretical position, but the complete transcendence of all conceptual clinging (*於諸見無所想念*)—seeing that all phenomena are intrinsically pure, equal, and devoid of fixed dualities [19470].


A Walkthrough in Daily Life (生活里的走查)

To see how the Sixty-Two Views operates today, let us examine how our daily digital, professional, and personal lives reproduce these ancient mental nets. We do not need ancient Indian ascetics; our modern minds run the exact same cognitive scripts.

``` Daily Life Contact (Sensory Input / Stimulus) │ ▼ Feeling (Pleasure / Anxiety) │ ▼ Craving & Psychological Need │ ┌──────────────┴──────────────┐ ▼ ▼ Past Speculations Future Speculations (本劫本見 / Historical) (末劫末見 / Post-Mortem/Fate) │ │ ├─ Eternalism ├─ Conscious Post-Mortem ├─ Fortuitous Origin ├─ Annihilationism └─ Moral Dogmatism └─ Modern "Nirvana Here & Now" ```

Scenario 1: The Modern Career Crisis and "Annihilationism vs. Eternalism"

* The Experience: You receive a critical performance review at work, or an AI tool automates a task you spent ten years mastering. Anxiety swells (*Contact $\rightarrow$ Painful Feeling*). * The View Triggered: * *Modern Eternalism (常論):* "My true identity is my intelligence and core competence. If I just optimize my routine, build my personal brand, and lock in financial independence, I can secure a permanent, untouchable safe space." You are treating your mental attributes (*saṃskāra/vijñāna*) as an enduring self (*ātman*) [9831]. * *Modern Annihilationism (斷滅論):* "We are just carbon-based biological algorithms anyway. Life has no inherent meaning, death is total blackness, so why bother trying?" You collapse into nihilism, viewing consciousness as a mere temporary physical byproduct that vanishes completely [9838]. * Where People Misapply the Concept: People often think "Eternalism" means believing in a literal soul going to heaven, or "Annihilationism" means being an atheist. In reality, any time you treat your current ego status as something that must be made permanent, you are acting under Eternalism; any time you use the briefness of life to justify ethical carelessness, you are acting under Annihilationism.

Scenario 2: Social Media, Algorithms, and "Fortuitous Origin" (無因論)

* The Experience: You spend two hours doom-scrolling. Suddenly, someone you know gets lucky with a massive stock trade, while another friend faces an unexpected family tragedy. * The View Triggered: * *Modern Fortuitous Origin (無因論 / 忽然而有):* "Success and failure in this world are completely random. The algorithm picks winners arbitrarily. Cause and effect don't exist!" [9497] * *Modern Rigidity / Eel-Wriggling:* "Nothing can be proven anyway, so I won't commit to any ethical stance or life principle." * Where People Misapply the Concept: We mistake complex, unseen karma and systemic conditions for "pure randomness." Denying causality removes moral agency, pushing us into helpless apathy.

Scenario 3: The Spiritual Trap of "Nirvana Here & Now" (現法涅槃論)

* The Experience: You attend a wellness retreat, practice mindfulness, or master a high-focus flow state while coding or meditating. You feel intense inner calm and psychological clarity. * The View Triggered: * *Nirvana Here and Now (現法涅槃論):* "This quiet, stress-free feeling *is* enlightenment! I have transcended normal human messiness." You turn a fleeting conditioned state (*samskṛta*) into an ultimate refuge. * *Spiritual Elitism (佛見 / 涅槃見):* "Other people are stuck in noisy worldly distractions (*pṛthagjana*), but I am practicing high-level spiritual growth." You create a binary wall between "spiritual" and "secular." [11354, 19470] * Where People Misapply the Concept: The *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra* explicitly warns that turning "Nirvana" or "Buddha" into an object of spiritual pride is itself a false view (*邪見*) [11354]. Real awakening is not an elevated emotional state; it is the non-clinging that remains when all dualities are seen through [19470].


Why Contemporary Readers Need This Concept

Contemporary culture is drowning in unexamined metaphysical positions. We often assume that ancient religious debate was merely superstitious, whereas modern thought is rational. However, cognitive science, digital media, and artificial intelligence have simply rewrapped the Sixty-Two Views in modern terminology.

1. De-constructing Modern Ideological Extremes

* The Digital Soul vs. Algorithmic Materialism: Transhumanist dreams of uploading human consciousness to a cloud server are modern iterations of Conscious Post-Mortem Existence (*有想論*) [9838]. Conversely, reducing human experience strictly to biochemical mechanics while denying subjective responsibility mirrors ancient Annihilationism (*斷滅論*). * The Trap of Mental Models: The Sixty-Two Views acts as an ultimate diagnostic tool for cognitive biases. It shows that human beings do not suffer because reality is confusing; we suffer because we construct rigid, totalizing narratives about reality to quell our inner anxiety.

2. The Illusion of Rational Neutrality

Many contemporary thinkers take pride in being "non-ideological." Yet, as the *Brahmajāla Sūtra* shows through the "eel-wriggling" views (*鰻魚滑條論*), taking refuge in total skepticism or ironical detachment is often just another psychological defense mechanism designed to protect the ego from being wrong.

3. Science, Brain Science, and Its Limits

Modern neuroscience demonstrates that the brain is a predictive engine—constantly generating models of the world to minimize uncertainty.

* The Parallel: This directly aligns with the Buddhist insight that the mind uses memory and projection to fabricate theories of past and future to protect the "self." * The Boundary: Neuroscience can explain *how* the brain constructs the illusion of a continuous self through neural firing and memory integration. However, empirical science operates within the domain of measurable phenomena (*samskṛta*). It cannot deliver ethical liberation (*vimukti*) or solve the existential problem of mental clinging (*upādāna*). Science describes the mechanism of the cage; the Buddha's teachings provide the method to unlock the door.


Common Misinterpretations and Clarifications

Misinterpretation 1: "The Sixty-Two Views means philosophy is useless, and Buddhists should not think."

* Clarification: The Buddha did not oppose clear thinking or logic. What is condemned is *dṛṣṭi-parāmarśa*—clinging to speculative views (*取著諸見*) as ultimate realities or identity anchors [19011]. In Buddhism, conceptual thought is a raft (*kulla*) to cross the river of suffering. Once you reach the other shore, you do not carry the raft on your head. The Sixty-Two Views warns us against mistaking the raft for the shore.

Misinterpretation 2: "Right View (正見) is just the sixty-third view—a better set of dogmas to believe in."

* Clarification: Right View (*samyag-dṛṣṭi*) in early Buddhism has two levels. *Worldly Right View* understands karma, cause, and effect. But *Ultimate Right View* (as stressed in the *Mahāratnakūṭa Sūtra*) is not a theoretical position at all—it is the cessation of all speculative views (*於諸見無所想念*) [19470]. It is the wisdom that sees phenomena as dependently arisen, intrinsically empty (*śūnya*), and free from binary extremes [19470].

Misinterpretation 3: "If I don't believe in past lives or post-mortem states, I am immune to the Sixty-Two Views."

* Clarification: You do not need to hold explicit religious beliefs to fall into the net. Every time you construct an absolute story about your past ("I am broken because of my upbringing") or your future ("If I don't achieve X, my life is ruined"), you are constructing a micro-version of the Sixty-Two Views. Wherever there is grasping at "I," "Mine," or "What will become of me," the fine-meshed net is active [9830, 10255].


Summary: Slicing Through the Net

``` [ The Tangled Net of 62 Views ] (Grasping past/future, dualism, self) │ │ Insight into Six Touches & Dependent Origination ▼ (如實知六觸集、滅、味、過、出要) [ Ultimate Right View / Emptiness ] (Transcendence of views, intrinsically pure) ```

The Sixty-Two Views is not an ancient catalog of obsolete doctrines; it is a profound map of human cognitive self-deception. Whether we project our desires onto eons of cosmic evolution or onto next week's career goals, the root mechanism remains unchanged: Contact breeds feeling, feeling breeds craving, and craving crystallizes into rigid views [9497, 9842].

To break through this web, the *Dīrgha Āgama* advises us to observe the origin, cessation, gratification, danger, and escape regarding the six sensory spheres (*六觸集、滅、味、過、出要*) [9842]. When we see that every thought, identity, and theory is a impermanent, dependently arisen wave upon the ocean of experience, the net tears open [12298]. We step out of speculative exhaustion and into the spacious, unshakeable freedom of liberation.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

一、定义与核心要义 六十二见(dvāṣaṣṭi-dṛṣṭi)是佛教用以总括世间一切邪执偏见的范畴。在《长阿含经》中,它被形容为覆盖小池的细目网,世间沙门、婆罗门对于过去与未来所作的种种随意学说,皆无法超越此网。在《大宝积经》中,六十二见则被形象地比喻为「众邪疑网」,是凡夫因愚痴而取着、妄言有所得的根源。

二、主要阐述 1. 邪见的分类与结构:根据《长阿含经》,六十二见主要分为「本劫本见」(过去见,共十八见)与「末劫末见」(未来见,共四十四见)两大类。「本劫本见」中包括「常论」四见,即沙门、婆罗门通过禅定三昧忆及过去成劫败劫,执着「我及世间是常,此实余虚」。「末劫末见」中包括「有想论」十六见,论及死后自我的状态(如「我此终后,生有色有想」等)。此外,还有关于自我与想的对立观点(如「色装是我,从想有终」等「未见未生」之邪见)。经中亦提及世间起源的执着(如「世间自造」、「他造」等),以及关于我与世间常/无常、有边/无边、是命是身/是命异身异等执着。 2. 邪见的广泛界定与二元对立:《大宝积经》对邪见的范畴进行了更为广泛的界定。凡夫执着的「我见、众生见、命见(或寿者见)、数取趣见(或补特伽罗见)、有见」等皆属邪见。更独特的是,若依诸蕴起于「戒见、多闻见、佛见、法见、涅槃见」,甚至对「涅槃」本身产生分别心和有所得的心态,亦被判定为「邪见」。《大宝积经》进一步指出,凡是带有二元对立、高下之分的观察皆属邪见或邪观。例如:视凡夫法为卑贱、所学法为尊高;视凡夫法有秽、菩萨法无尘劳;视凡夫法为有漏、无所学法为无漏;乃至将凡夫法视为放逸、有为,而将菩萨或佛法视为无欲、无为等。 3. 邪见的危害与衍生邪行:执着邪见者无法在佛法中真正出家,会因无智、损害而成为愚夫,远离大菩提与生天胜道。邪见会衍生出「邪思惟、邪语、邪业、邪命、邪精进、邪念、邪定、邪解脱、邪智见」等邪行,构成愚夫所依的「邪性决定聚」,导致「行于邪分别,为他说邪行」的颠倒状态。此外,《长阿含经》提到外道持守「龙戒、金翅鸟戒、狗戒、牛戒」或进行日月、水火等苦行,期盼以此功德生天,亦被判定为「邪见」。

三、不同部类与译本的表述差异 1. 核心分类术语:《长阿含经》使用「本劫本见」与「末劫末见」来指代对过去和未来的见解,而《大宝积经》则直接使用「六十二见」并比喻为「众邪疑网」。 2. 五蕴/五阴的译语:《大宝积经》在不同章节中译语有所不同,既有使用「五阴」之处(如「取着五阴故得陀罗尼」),也有使用「诸蕴」之处(如「依诸蕴起于戒见」)。 3. 六处与涅槃的译语:《长阿含经》使用「六入身」指代六处,并以「泥洹」指代涅槃;而《大宝积经》则直接使用「涅槃」。 4. 邪见生起之处的表述:《长阿含经》指出邪见是在「行」(相当于行蕴)中生起「我见、命见、身见、世间见」;而《大宝积经》则表述为「依诸蕴起于戒见」。

四、与相关概念的关系 1. 与「因缘生起」的关系:《长阿含经》强调,所有邪见皆因「触因缘」而起,若离触因则无法立论。具体而言,是「由六入身故生触,由触故生受,由受故生爱,由爱故生取,由取故生有,由有故生生……」。沙门、婆罗门因「受缘」而起爱、染著于爱,因而产生种种邪见。 2. 与「正见」及「解脱」的关系:《长阿含经》指出,唯有比丘如实了知「六触集、灭、味、过、出要」,方能超越这一切诸见,达到最胜境界。《大宝积经》则重新定义了「正见」,指出真正的正见是超越二元对立,观身、人、空、寿命、生死等平等无二,不执著于断灭常见,且「于诸见无所想念」,了知一切法本净。要断除六十二见,菩萨应当发精勤心,不执著于我、众生、寿、数取趣、有见及涅槃见,广说正法;受持奉行《大宝积经》的至要教法,则能「裂坏六十二见众邪疑网」,脱离三途之难。

五、代表性原文引用 1. 《长阿含经》:「犹如渔师以细目网覆盖小池,其中鱼类皆入网中,无一遗漏。世间沙门、婆罗门对于过去与未来所作的种种随意学说,皆入此六十二见中。」 2. 《长阿含经》:「由六入身故生触,由触故生受,由受故生爱,由爱故生取,由取故生有,由有故生生……」 3. 《大宝积经》:「若依诸蕴起于戒见、多闻见、佛见、法见、涅槃见,如来悉知见是邪见。」 4. 《大宝积经》:「于诸见无所想念,观身、人、空、寿命、生死等平等无二,不执著于断灭常见,了知一切法本净,方为正见。」

By SutraAI-generated

長阿含經T0001 · 阿含部

《長阿含經》以「本劫本見」與「末劫末見」二分架構統攝六十二見:關於過去(本劫本見)者盡入十八見,關於未來(末劫末見)者盡入四十四見,合為六十二。經文反覆以「盡入六十二見中」「齊此不過」標示其窮盡性,謂諸沙門、婆羅門「種種無數,隨意所說」,皆不能出此範圍。

十八本見之中,首要為「常論」四見,即計「我及世間是常」。經中逐一列出四種因緣:行者以種種方便入定意三昧,分別憶念二十成劫敗劫、四十成劫敗劫、八十成劫敗劫,遂執我及世間常存,「此實餘虛」。此處術語形式為「本劫本見,起常論,言:『我及世間常存』」,以「此實餘虛」為諸見之標句,以「齊是不過」為歸結之定式。

四十四末見中,「有想論」佔十六見,逐一列舉死後生起之形態組合:有色有想、無色有想、有色無色有想、非有色非無色有想;有邊有想、無邊有想、有邊無邊有想、非有邊非無邊有想;一向有樂有想、一向有苦有想、有樂有苦有想、不苦不樂有想;有一想、有若干想、少想、無量想。經文以「我此終後,生……此實餘虛」為每一見之固定句式。

本經論述六十二見之獨特處,在於不止於列舉,更追問諸見生起之因緣。經云諸見「因觸因緣」而生,「由六入身故生觸,由觸故生受,由受故生愛,由愛故生取,由取故生有,由有故生生,由生故有老、死、憂、悲、苦惱,大患陰集」,將一切邪見攝入緣起鏈中。又云諸見「因受緣,起愛生愛而不自覺知,染著於愛,為愛所伏」,並強調「若離觸緣而立論者,無有是處」。

經中以捕魚師之喻總結:「猶如巧捕魚師,以細目網覆小池上,當知池中水性之類,皆入網內,無逃避處,齊是不過。諸沙門、婆羅門亦復如是,於本劫本見、末劫末見,種種所說,盡入六十二見中,齊是不過。」 而佛之超越諸見,在於「於六觸集、滅、味、過、出要,如實而知,則為最勝,出彼諸見」,如來「已斷生死,永不復生」,「猶如多羅樹斷其頭者,則不復生」。

此外,經中另列一組「未見未生」之邪見——色是我、無色是我、亦有色亦無色是我、非有色非無色是我,從想有終;我有邊、無邊、有邊無邊、非有邊非無邊,從想有終;我有樂、無樂、有苦樂、無苦樂,從想有終;一想、種種想、少想、無量想是我,從想有終——並歸之為「邪見本見本生」。此組以「從想有終」為標句,與末見十六有想論之「我此終後,生……」句式相為表裏,皆以「想」為諸見生滅之樞紐。經末阿難問「此法甚深,當以何名」,顯示本經自視此六十二見之開析為甚深大法。

增壹阿含經T0125 · 阿含部

《增壹阿含經》論六十二見,見於兩處經文,用語與歸類方式頗具本部特色。

一、以「二見」統攝,六十二見歸入「無見」名下。經中佛告諸比丘:「有此二見。云何為二見?所謂有見、無見。」有見指欲有見、色有見、無色有見,即於三界生愛著;無見則列舉常見、無常見、斷滅見、無斷滅見、邊見、無邊見、身見、無身見、命見、無命見、異身見、異命見等十二對,而後總結曰:「此六十二見,名曰無見,亦非真見,是謂名為無見。」 此處最可注意者,乃本經將六十二見整體判屬「無見」一類,並以「亦非真見」四字加以否定。此與他經(如《梵網經》)將六十二見分屬「本劫本見」與「末劫末見」、或分屬常見與斷見兩類之歸納方式不同。本經不逐條展開六十二見之內容,僅以十二對名目代表,隨即以一句「名曰無見」收束,重心落在「當捨此二見」之修行教誡上。

二、有見之展開以「五欲」為核心。經中釋欲有見云:「所謂五欲是也。云何為五欲?所謂眼見色,甚愛敬念,未曾捨離,世人宗奉。若耳聞聲,鼻嗅香,口知味,身知細滑,意了諸法,是謂有見。」 此處以六根對六境之貪著為有見之實質,用「五欲」一詞概括,且以「甚愛敬念,未曾捨離,世人宗奉」形容其執取之深。本經未用「五取蘊」或「五盛陰」等術語來界定有見,而徑以感官欲樂當之,用語較為質樸直截。

三、六十二見作為未斷煩惱之標記。第二處經文為佛囑累阿難之場景。佛評大天王(即轉輪聖王)云:「大天王雖行善法,未得漏盡出世間,未得度,未得斷欲,未得破二十億結,六十二見未除,三垢未淨,未得神通,未得解脫真道,不得涅槃,大天所行善法,不過生梵天。」 此處六十二見與「二十億結」「三垢」並列,同屬障礙解脫之染法。值得注意的是本經用「結」字(「二十億結」),而非僅用「見」或「惑」;六十二見在此語境中並非純粹的認知錯誤,而是與結縛、垢染同類的繫縛法,須「除」而後可證涅槃。又,本經以「漏盡」「真際」「無漏」「無欲」「通解脫」「真沙門」等語形容佛所證之道,與六十二見所屬之世間善法(「不過生梵天」)形成對照。

四、術語形式小結。本經稱「六十二見」,不稱「六十二見趣」或「六十二見網」;稱「二見」(有見、無見)為其上位分類;用「結」稱煩惱繫縛(「二十億結」);用「五欲」指感官對象之貪著,不另立「五陰」「五蘊」之名來解釋有見。整體而言,《增壹阿含經》對六十二見之處理偏重修行論上的「捨」,而非認識論上的逐條辨析。

大寶積經T0310 · 寶積部

《大寶積經》論及「六十二見」見於兩處語境,取徑截然不同,一為破斥對象,一為反諷式「得」。

其一,以六十二見為邪疑之網,持經者能裂壞之。佛告寂意菩薩,以地裂出水為喻:大地無思無想而自然劈裂,水渧涌出高至梵天、灑遍三千大千世界;諸法師受持是經、住如上教而奉行法,亦復如是,「皆當裂壞六十二見眾邪疑網,逮得於此不可盡明法辯才之慧」。此處術語形式為「六十二見眾邪疑網」,將六十二見與「邪疑」合說為一「網」,強調其纏縛義;動詞用「裂壞」,與地裂出水之喻相應——非漸次拆解,乃一時劈破。持經之功德即在於此:裂邪網已,得「不可盡明法辯才之慧」,復能「為諸眾生快說正法普悅眾心」,並「盡脫眾惡三塗之難」。是知此處六十二見純為所破,是障道之邪執總稱。

其二,文殊師利與善住意天子論陀羅尼時,以反語將六十二見列為凡夫「所得」。經文歷舉「取著我故得陀羅尼、取著人故得陀羅尼……取著身見故得陀羅尼、取著五陰故得陀羅尼、取著十二入故得陀羅尼、取著十八界故得陀羅尼……取著六十二見故得陀羅尼,如是乃至取著一切諸行故得陀羅尼」,結云「是故凡夫得陀羅尼」。此處六十二見與我、人、壽命、丈夫、斷滅、常恒、貪瞋癡、無明、有愛、身見、五陰、十二入、十八界等並列,同屬凡夫以愚癡故妄言「有取得」之對象;佛、聲聞、辟支佛、菩薩皆無所得,故不墮此數。文殊更進一層,自承「我真頑鈍」「乃至一法我無所得」,以「頑鈍」翻轉凡聖:一切凡夫「在於數中」,諸餘智人「盡入頑鈍」。六十二見在此非被正面破斥,而是作為「取著」之一目,反顯凡夫以有所得心妄計為得,聖者則以無所得故超然數外。

術語方面須注意:此經用「五陰」而非「五蘊」,用「十二入」而非「十二處」,皆存古譯面貌。「六十二見」之名本身與通行稱呼一致,無異稱。兩處語境一顯一密:前者就修行功德說,持經即裂邪網;后者就般若無得說,取著六十二見正是凡夫數中之事,聖者無所得故不與焉。

Related