Dharma · AI Companion

世間道

laukika-mārga

仍属有漏世间范围的修行道AI-generated

Type FrameworkDifficulty IntermediateTruth-level span outside the four-fold two-truths frameworkInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What This Concept Is Saying

Imagine someone who has learned to leave a noisy street and enter an extraordinarily quiet room. The noise disappears; the body settles; thought becomes subtle; even the ordinary sense of being a person may fade into a vast, nearly featureless stillness. This is no small achievement. Yet if the person must eventually return to the street—and the old machinery of attachment can start again—the quiet room is not liberation.

This is the central distinction expressed by 世間道 (laukika-mārga, the worldly path): a genuine path of cultivation that can calm affliction, develop concentration, and lift the mind through increasingly subtle levels of existence, but which has not in itself gone beyond the conditioned existence of the 三界 (three realms). It is therefore contrasted with 出世間道 (lokottara-mārga, the supramundane path), the uncontaminated path that penetrates liberating truth and brings about irreversible release.

“Worldly” here does not mean secular, materialistic, morally mediocre, or concerned only with money and pleasure. A practice may be austere, contemplative, ethically refined, and spiritually astonishing while still being “worldly” in this technical sense. The decisive question is not how sacred the practice looks, but what it actually uproots.

Its defining method: seeing the lower as coarse and the higher as peaceful

The characteristic method of the worldly path is to contemplate a lower plane as 麁 (coarse) and a higher plane as 靜 (peaceful or tranquil).

The *Yogācārabhūmi Śāstra* describes the lower level as beset by disadvantages: “like illness, like an abscess, like a poisoned arrow,” and as lacking true security. The higher level, being relatively free of those disadvantages, is contemplated as peaceful. Through repeatedly attending to this contrast, the practitioner becomes disenchanted with the lower state, loosens desire for it, and enters the concentration belonging to the higher state.

This proceeds in an ordered ascent:

- Sensual existence is seen as coarse; the first meditative absorption is seen as peaceful. - The first absorption is then seen as coarse relative to the second. - The second is seen as coarse relative to the third. - The ascent continues through the four absorptions and the immaterial attainments. - Finally, desire for the sphere of nothingness can be relinquished and the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception attained.

Thus “lower” and “higher” are relational terms. The first absorption is peaceful when compared with sensual agitation, but coarse when compared with the second absorption. The method does not merely condemn experience. It trains perception to discern degrees of agitation, burden, instability, and refinement.

The *Abhidharmakośabhāṣya* gives this method an even more exact structure. In the worldly path, the 無間道 (uninterrupted path, the phase directly counteracting the targeted defilement) attends to the lower level under three aspects:

- — coarse; - — painful or unsatisfactory; - — obstructive.

The corresponding 解脫道 (path of release, the phase in which release from that targeted bondage is acquired) attends to the higher level under three aspects:

- — peaceful; - — excellent or refined; - — separated or free from the lower level.

These are not six interchangeable adjectives. They form two correlated triads with different objects and functions: the lower is contemplated as coarse, painful, and obstructive; the higher as peaceful, excellent, and separated. The first loosens attachment to what is below; the second stabilizes orientation toward what is above.

What it can accomplish

The worldly path is not imaginary liberation. It has real causal power.

It can suppress or temporarily remove the active afflictions associated with lower levels. It can produce profound meditative well-being, establish the absorptions and immaterial attainments, and serve as a basis for extraordinary contemplative abilities traditionally described as the five higher knowledges. The *Yogācārabhūmi* therefore includes worldly cultivation among genuine forms of wholesome practice and explains that the supramundane path can use it as an assistant.

The treatise identifies several kinds of practitioners who may cultivate such a path without presently cultivating the supramundane path: non-Buddhist contemplatives; practitioners within the Dharma who first cultivate tranquillity because their faculties are weak; those whose faculties are sharp but whose wholesome roots are not yet mature; and bodhisattvas who orient their training toward future complete awakening. The category can therefore include both ordinary beings still bound by all fetters and trainees who have already entered the noble path.

This last point prevents a common oversimplification. “Worldly path” does not always mean “practice done by a non-Buddhist” or “practice done before any awakening.” It names the nature and function of a particular mode of cultivation. Even a noble disciple may employ a worldly method of meditative dispassion after entering the path of seeing. In that case, the practitioner’s person may be noble while this particular operation of mind remains worldly.

The *Abhidharmakośabhāṣya* also discusses stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, and arhatship within a technical analysis of the faculties involved in obtaining the fruits. In some cases, worldly and supramundane paths participate differently in the process by which a fruit is acquired. This does not mean that ordinary concentration, by itself and without any uncontaminated realization, manufactures noble liberation. The treatise explains that when the two intermediate fruits are obtained with the participation of the worldly path, their “fruit-body” is mixed with the unconditioned cessation previously obtained through the path of seeing and is sustained by uncontaminated abandonment. The surrounding Abhidharma qualification is essential: a worldly operation can participate in the acquisition of a noble fruit because supramundane realization already supports it.

What it cannot accomplish

The worldly path changes one’s relation to a lower state by preferring and entering a higher one. It does not, by that operation alone, expose the root structure of appropriation that makes every conditioned state into “I,” “me,” or “mine.”

Its fundamental limitation is expressed in the distinction between suppression and eradication. The *Yogācārabhūmi* says that its abandonment is temporary rather than ultimate because the afflictive continuum can arise again. Even when a noble disciple uses this mode of cultivation, it “can only weaken and suppress the seeds of affliction, not cut them off forever.”

A weed may disappear from view because it has been pressed under a stone. That is different from removing its root. Similarly, sensory craving may become completely inactive in deep concentration. Anger may find no object. Discursive thought may fall silent. But inactivity is not necessarily eradication. When supporting conditions change, what was dormant can return.

The *Abhidharmakośabhāṣya* draws the upper boundary sharply: “Only the uncontaminated path separates one from the defilement of the summit of existence, not the contaminated path.” The “summit of existence” is the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, the highest state within the three realms. Why can the worldly path not free one from its defilements?

- There is no still higher worldly state from which to view it as coarse. - A path belonging to the same level cannot cure the affliction of its own level. - Such a path remains susceptible to reinforcement by the afflictions of that very level.

The worldly method works by comparison: abandon this because something quieter lies above it. At the summit there is no further conditioned “above” to provide that leverage. The ladder ends while the structure of conditioned existence remains.

The *Yogācārabhūmi* identifies another decisive limitation: the worldly path does not eliminate 薩迦耶見 (satkāya-dṛṣṭi, identity view or the view that appropriates the aggregates as self and self-related). Consequently, a practitioner may ascend to the summit of existence and nevertheless return. The problem is not merely that the highest concentration eventually ends. More deeply, the tendency to appropriate conditioned experience has not been uprooted. A refined state can still be taken—subtly—as “what I am,” “what I have attained,” or “where I must remain.”

The supramundane path differs not simply by climbing higher but by seeing differently. It rightly contemplates the Four Noble Truths and uses uncontaminated wisdom to cut the root of bondage. In the terminology reported by the *Yogācārabhūmi*, the worldly path operates through conventionally established presentations and remains unable, by that mode alone, to escape the bondage of appearances and the burden of latent conditioning; the supramundane path penetrates truth in a manner that brings purification and ultimate release.

So the two paths are not merely two altitudes on one scale:

- The worldly path exchanges a coarser conditioned dwelling for a subtler conditioned dwelling. - The supramundane path understands the arising, unsatisfactoriness, cessation, and relinquishment of conditioned appropriation itself.

The first improves one’s position within the house. The second discovers why one is confined and opens the way out.

“Contaminated” does not mean morally corrupt

The worldly path is described as 有漏 (sāsrava, contaminated or accompanied by the outflows). This can sound harsher in English than intended. It does not mean that every worldly-path meditation is unethical or impure in the ordinary moral sense. Much of it is highly wholesome.

“Contaminated” means that the practice has not completely passed beyond the conditions sustaining cyclic existence. The *Yogācārabhūmi* characterizes the worldly domain through being contaminated, vulnerable to conflict, carrying the possibility of savoring or attachment, and resting on indulgent appropriation. Even a sublime meditation may be “tasted”: one becomes attached to its clarity, peace, power, purity, or the identity of being an accomplished meditator. The experience is refined; the grasping may be refined with it.

This is why Buddhist analysis measures a path by more than its pleasantness, intensity, unusualness, or prestige. A spectacular experience may leave identity view intact. A quiet and apparently ordinary moment of insight may do more to dismantle bondage.

Its place in the path to liberation

The worldly path is limited, but it is not therefore useless. It can serve the supramundane path in at least four closely related ways described in the *Yogācārabhūmi*: it can conceal or quiet the hindrances, hold afflictions at a distance, wear down fascination with them through disenchantment, and nourish the conditions in which liberating Dharma can mature.

This is its proper place in the architecture of the path: preparation, support, stabilization, and provisional freedom—not final emancipation.

A mind scattered by craving and agitation has difficulty seeing clearly. Ethical discipline and concentration make it less compelled, more serviceable, and more capable of sustained examination. Temporary freedom can also teach an indispensable lesson: an affliction is not identical with the mind. Anger can cease. Compulsion can weaken. Sensuality need not command obedience. That experiential knowledge creates room for deeper inquiry.

But the practitioner must not mistake the room for the destination. Concentration becomes an ally of liberation when it supports insight; it becomes another dwelling in saṃsāra when one clings to its peace as the final good.

The *Yogācārabhūmi* therefore says that teaching ascent through the worldly path is not, in the ultimate sense, the teaching that makes one ascend conclusively. The Buddha’s teaching corresponding to the Noble Truths deserves that designation because its result is final. This is not a rejection of meditative ascent. It is a refusal to call the highest point inside saṃsāra “outside saṃsāra.”

A Walk-Through in Everyday Life

Consider an overworked professional coming home after a tense day. On the train, she compulsively checks work messages, social media, market news, and family notifications. Her chest is tight; every vibration of the phone seems to demand an answer. She decides to put the phone away, breathe steadily, and practice meditation.

This ordinary scene can display the logic of the worldly path, although it should not be confused with the full technical attainment of meditative absorption.

Step one: recognizing the lower state as coarse

She first notices the lower condition accurately:

- Attention is repeatedly captured. - Each new message promises relief but renews agitation. - Comparison, fear, irritation, and anticipation jostle for control. - The body remains activated even when no immediate danger is present.

To see this state as coarse is not to despise herself or declare technology evil. It is to recognize the state’s texture: fragmented, dependent on constant stimulation, and unable to rest.

She sees it as painful or unsatisfactory because even pleasant updates do not provide stable ease. The relief is brief and demands renewal.

She sees it as obstructive because it prevents sustained attention, affectionate presence, sleep, and clear discernment.

These three mappings must not be collapsed into “the phone is bad.” The relevant lower object is the conditioned mode of engagement and its associated afflictions. A phone can carry a message of genuine need; putting it down can also become avoidance. Buddhist analysis concerns attachment and bondage, not a blanket moral verdict on devices.

Step two: orienting toward the higher state

She then attends to a quieter mode of mind:

- Peaceful: attention is no longer jerked from object to object. - Excellent or refined: the mind is more unified, lucid, and capable of care. - Separated: for the moment, it is free from the compulsive loop that governed the lower state.

Again, these three aspects do different work. “Peaceful” names the reduction of agitation. “Excellent” recognizes the relative quality of collectedness. “Separated” recognizes actual distance from the lower compulsion. Merely thinking “meditation is better than scrolling” does not accomplish this separation; the mind must cease feeding the loop.

With practice, she becomes less interested in the restless state and more able to remain collected. This resembles the directional logic of the worldly path: disenchantment with a coarser condition supports entry into a subtler one.

Step three: noticing temporary suppression

After meditation, she feels spacious and calm. Then her partner says, “You never listen when you come home.” Irritation flashes up: “After the day I’ve had, how can you criticize me?”

This is the diagnostic moment. The meditation was not false; calm really occurred. But the conditions that activate defensiveness have returned, and the underlying dispositions were not uprooted. The earlier affliction had been quiet, not necessarily ended.

The easiest mistaken mapping would be: “My partner destroyed my peace.” The more exact mapping is: contact with criticism supplied conditions under which a latent pattern became active again. The practice temporarily separated the mind from certain afflictions, but appropriation remained—“my exhaustion,” “my entitlement to peace,” “my identity as the one who is not appreciated.”

Step four: discovering that the higher state can also become an object of attachment

She may now start to think, “Meditation is the only place where people cannot disturb me.” Calm becomes a refuge, then a possession, and finally an identity: “I am peaceful; they are toxic.”

This is 愛味 (savoring or attachment to the taste of an experience) in an everyday form. The higher state is genuinely more peaceful, but craving has learned to inhabit it. She may use silence to avoid apology, concentration to avoid grief, or spiritual language to protect self-image.

The error is not enjoying calm. The error is taking the pleasant, refined condition as unconditional freedom or using it to strengthen appropriation.

Step five: turning from state-management toward liberating investigation

A supramundane orientation asks questions the simple lower-versus-higher comparison cannot finish:

- What conditions this defensiveness? - What is the suffering in grasping at the role of the blameless person? - Is anger a permanent self, or an impermanent event arising through conditions? - What happens when craving and appropriation are not fed? - What way of seeing and acting leads to their cessation rather than temporary concealment?

Now the aim is not merely to recover the pleasant meditative state. It is to understand suffering, its arising, its cessation, and the path— the structure of the Four Noble Truths—in the living event.

She may still use calm breathing and collected attention. The worldly support is not discarded. It becomes an assistant to clear seeing. The difference lies in function: concentration is no longer merely a better room into which she retreats; it supplies the steadiness needed to understand the process of building rooms and calling them “mine.”

The same walk-through applies elsewhere in contemporary life:

- A parent leaves a chaotic room to regain composure. This may beneficially suppress anger, but it has not necessarily uprooted the demand that the child conform to the parent’s self-image. - An exhausted employee takes a silent retreat and becomes deeply calm. Returning to work reveals whether fear, status attachment, and resentment were understood or only deprived of stimulation. - Someone ends one turbulent relationship and seeks a “more peaceful” partner. The external change may be wise, yet changing partners does not by itself end possessiveness, abandonment anxiety, or identity view. - A person replaces endless social media with fascination for meditation metrics, brainwave devices, or spiritual achievement. The object becomes subtler while comparison and appropriation continue.

In each case, the worldly-path logic is not “ordinary activity bad, silence good.” It is the movement from a relatively coarse, afflictive state to a relatively peaceful one. Its limit appears when the higher state becomes another conditioned identity or when dormant affliction returns.

Why Contemporary People Need It

Contemporary culture often recognizes only two possibilities: either satisfy an impulse or repress it. The worldly path introduces a more precise possibility—systematically weakening the conditions that keep an impulse in command and cultivating a mind in which it temporarily has no footing.

That is already transformative. A person who discovers that attention can be trained is less helpless before notifications, advertising, outrage cycles, and algorithmically optimized stimulation. Algorithms can estimate which objects will prolong engagement, but they do not thereby determine how a person must relate to those objects. The discipline of turning away from the coarse and stabilizing the peaceful restores a degree of agency.

Yet the Buddhist analysis adds a warning equally relevant to algorithmic life: changing content is not the same as ending craving. One can leave entertainment feeds for productivity feeds, productivity feeds for wellness feeds, and wellness feeds for spiritual feeds while the underlying hunger for confirmation remains intact. Saṃsāra is not defined by a particular app category.

AI offers another useful but limited analogy. A system can reduce undesirable outputs by changing prompts, filters, reward signals, or operating conditions. That does not necessarily mean the generative tendencies have ceased to exist; different inputs may reveal them again. Similarly, meditation can alter the conditions under which an affliction becomes active without uprooting its basis. But this is only an analogy. Human consciousness, karmic continuity, contemplative realization, and machine computation are not established as equivalent by the comparison.

Research in psychology and neuroscience may examine attention, emotional regulation, habit, and meditative states, but such research does not scientifically establish the Buddhist distinction between contaminated and uncontaminated paths, nor does it directly measure liberation from saṃsāra. Definitions, experimental methods, interpretation of subjective reports, and the relationship between neural correlates and lived experience remain contested. Scientific findings can illuminate certain mechanisms of training; they cannot simply certify the full soteriological claims of Buddhist doctrine.

The concept is especially needed because contemporary spiritual language frequently treats intensity as depth. People may assume that visions, bliss, silence, non-discursive awareness, loss of bodily sensation, or a temporary disappearance of ordinary self-consciousness must be awakening. The doctrine of the worldly path refuses that shortcut. The highest conditioned attainment is still conditioned. The relevant test is not “How unusual was it?” but “What bondage was irreversibly ended?”

At the same time, the teaching protects us from the opposite mistake: belittling calm, discipline, and concentration because they are “not ultimate.” A bridge is not the far shore, but refusing the bridge does not bring the shore nearer. Worldly cultivation can restrain the hindrances, deepen dispassion, make the mind workable, and nourish liberating understanding. Its value becomes clearest when its limits are understood.

This yields a mature threefold attitude:

- Cultivate wholesome calm without dismissing it. - Do not claim final liberation for a temporary state. - Use the stability gained to investigate and uproot the causes of bondage.

Common Misreadings and Clarifications

“Worldly path” means ordinary career and family life

Not in this technical usage. Career, household life, and social responsibility belong to worldly existence in a broad sense, but 世間道 specifically denotes a path of cultivation that remains within the three realms. It can include advanced meditation far beyond ordinary experience.

Conversely, “supramundane” does not simply mean leaving one’s job, family, or city. Physical withdrawal may support practice, but the defining issue is uncontaminated liberating realization, not geography or lifestyle aesthetics.

It is just non-Buddhist meditation

Non-Buddhist contemplatives are included among its practitioners, but the category is wider. Buddhist practitioners may cultivate worldly tranquillity; noble trainees may also use worldly methods of dispassion. A method is classified by its cognitive object, function, and power of abandonment—not solely by the religious identity of its practitioner.

It is useless because it cannot liberate ultimately

This confuses “not sufficient” with “having no value.” The worldly path can weaken affliction, establish concentration, provide present-life meditative well-being, and assist the supramundane path. The classical sources explicitly give it a supportive place.

Medicine that temporarily stabilizes a patient is not a complete cure, but stabilization can make definitive treatment possible. The danger lies in mistaking stabilization for cure, not in stabilization itself.

Temporary abandonment is fake abandonment

It is better described as a real but reversible freedom. When the conditions sustaining an active affliction are absent, the mind can genuinely be free of that affliction at that time. Yet the latent disposition has not necessarily been destroyed. The *Yogācārabhūmi* carefully says that the seeds are damaged or suppressed, “not cut off forever.”

Both halves matter. Calling suppression “eradication” exaggerates it; calling it “nothing” ignores its genuine contemplative and ethical effect.

The method is simply positive thinking: “This is bad; that is good”

The contemplation of lower and higher is disciplined discernment, not motivational labeling. “Coarse, painful, obstructive” identifies specific defects of the lower level; “peaceful, excellent, separated” identifies specific advantages of the higher. The practitioner repeatedly attends to these features until attachment to the lower level weakens and actual meditative separation occurs.

It is also not a universal command to hate everything lower. Hatred is itself an affliction. The contemplation develops disenchantment and dispassion, not aversion toward oneself or contempt for people living in less refined states.

“Coarse” means morally evil, while “subtle” means morally pure

These are not identical scales. “Coarse” and “subtle” here chiefly describe relative levels of agitation and meditative refinement. A subtle state may still be contaminated and appropriated. Refinement is not yet emancipation.

This is why the summit of conditioned existence remains within the worldly domain. Nothing higher is available within that domain, yet identity view and the basis of return have not thereby vanished.

The worldly path can attain noble fruits entirely on its own

This is too broad. The *Abhidharmakośabhāṣya* technically distinguishes the faculties involved when certain fruits are obtained through worldly or supramundane paths. But where a worldly path participates in obtaining the once-returner or non-returner fruit, the fruit incorporates cessation gained through the earlier path of seeing and is upheld by uncontaminated abandonment. One must not extract “worldly path obtains a fruit” from that doctrinal framework and turn it into “ordinary contaminated concentration alone produces noble realization.”

The worldly path removes every lower defilement permanently

The classical claim is more exact. Worldly and supramundane paths can both bring separation from the defilements of the lower eight levels in the relevant Abhidharma analysis, but only the uncontaminated path can separate one from the defilement of the summit of existence. Moreover, the *Yogācārabhūmi* stresses that worldly cultivation suppresses seeds rather than eradicating them ultimately. Different analytical contexts must be preserved rather than flattened into one vague statement about “removing negativity.”

Reaching the highest concentration is awakening

No. The sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is the peak of conditioned existence, not liberation from conditioned existence. There is no higher worldly state from which to contemplate it as coarse, and a path belonging to that level cannot cure its own defilement. Only the uncontaminated path crosses this boundary.

An experience may be almost devoid of ordinary perception and still not have uprooted ignorance. Minimal mental content is not identical with wisdom.

Identity view is merely having a personality

薩迦耶見 is not the everyday fact that a person has a name, history, temperament, and social responsibilities. It is the deep misapprehension and appropriation of the psycho-physical aggregates in terms of self and what belongs to self. Functional use of “I” does not by itself settle the matter; the bondage lies in how conditioned phenomena are grasped.

This is why a practitioner may have an extremely attenuated ordinary self-experience in meditation while identity view remains uncut. The manifestation of self-consciousness has quieted, but its root has not necessarily been penetrated.

Supramundane practice makes tranquillity unnecessary

The sources present a more integrated relationship. The worldly path can be an assistant and resource for the supramundane path. Tranquillity can cover the hindrances, distance the mind from affliction, deepen disenchantment, and nourish the Dharma. What changes is the governing aim: collectedness is put in the service of liberating wisdom rather than treated as final release.

If attachment to peaceful meditation is possible, peace should be avoided

Anything conditioned can be appropriated; that does not make every wholesome condition dispensable. The solution to attachment to concentration is not compulsory distraction. It is to cultivate concentration without mistaking it for self, possession, status, or the final goal.

The worldly path teaches that a quieter mind is possible. Its limitation teaches that quiet is not enough. Its proper integration into the path teaches something still wiser: use quiet to see clearly, and use clear seeing to relinquish what even the most exalted quiet cannot uproot by itself.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

【定义与核心要义】

世间道指尚未出离三界的有漏修行之道,以观下为麁、观上为静为修法要门,与出离三界的出世无漏道相对而立。其能暂断下地烦恼、证得禅定乃至沙门果,然属暂伏非究竟,且不能断有顶地染及萨迦耶见,仍是有漏、有诤、有爱味之域。

【主要阐述】

(一)得果之差别。《阿毘达磨俱舍论》以沙门四果为框架,分别世间道与出世道所得根数之异。一来果、不还果次第证者,依世间道由七根得,依出世道由八根得;不还果于第九解脱道入根本地者,依世间道由八根得,依出世道由九根得;超越证者由九根得。

(二)断惑之范围。俱舍论明言:「唯无漏道离有顶染,非有漏道」,并举三因:一者此上更无世俗道故;二者自地不能治自地故;三者自地烦恼所随增故。论以「自地烦恼不为自地道所治」为通则:有顶地染必须以无漏道断之,其余八地之染世出世道俱能离之。

(三)所证果之体性。俱舍论颂云:「世无间解脱,如次缘下上,作麁苦障行,及静妙离三」,明世间道之无间道缘下境行麁、苦、障三相,解脱道缘上境行静、妙、离三相。又世俗道得二果时,果体兼以见道所得择灭相杂,由无漏断得任持,退亦不命终,故亦名「沙门果体」。

(四)修法与所缘。《瑜伽师地论》明世间道修法:于下地观为麁相、于上地观为静相,展转乃至离无所有处欲、证入非想非非想处。下地过患「如病、如痈,犹如毒箭,不安隐性」,名为麁性;上地与此相违,名为静性。此为世间世俗道净惑所缘,能断下地烦恼,然「此是暂断,非究竟断,以于后时更相续故」。

(五)修习者之四类。瑜伽论列现法乐住世间道、非修出世道者有四种:一切外道、正法中根性羸劣先修止者、根性虽利善根未熟者、一切菩萨乐当来世证大菩提者。具缚(异生)与不具缚(有学)二类俱摄。修世间道之果可引无想定等及发五神通等。

(六)世间道修与出世道修之别。瑜伽论列十一种修:世间道修为「于诸下地见麁相故,于诸上地见静相故,乃至能趣无所有处一切离欲」;出世道修则正思惟四圣谛,以无漏圣道趣非想非非想处一切离欲。近分定中之方便道、无间道、解脱道,观下过失、观上寂静,属世间道之修。

(七)有相、无相之别。二道之建立由有相、无相而别:行于安立谛皆有相,于相缚、麁重缚不得解脱;行于非安立谛则解脱清净。于果上,世间道非由究竟离系果得名有果,出世道由究竟离系果得名有果。

(八)对治修之地位。厌患对治摄一切世间善道,远分对治为「世间修道」,持对治为后得世出世道。出世道以世间道为助伴,由隐障诸盖、远分制伏、厌患朽坏、法力滋润四缘。

(九)有限性。圣者出见道后亦修世间离欲之道,「但能损伏烦恼种子,非谓永断」。依世间道虽能离无所有处欲、其余烦恼心得解脱,却未能脱萨迦耶见,因此「虽升有顶,而复退还」。唯有出世道先断萨迦耶见,后永断余烦恼,无复退转。

(十)世间之体性与终极局限。瑜伽论解「出离」为「世间道,断除众苦得出离故」,「趣等觉」为出世道。又以有漏、有诤、有爱味、依耽嗜四义建立世间,依出离为出世间。依世俗谛所起俗智及所引法亦名世间。又为他说世间道虽能上升有顶,「当知此说,非第一义令上升教」,非毕竟故;如来圣谛相应言教方是第一义上升教,以其毕竟故。

【不同部类与译本的表述差异】

两部论对「世间道」之表述异同如下:

一、用语方面。《阿毘达磨俱舍论》使用「世间道」、「世俗道」、「有漏道」三词并用,而以「出世道」、「无漏道」相对。如得果根数之分析用「世间道」(「依世间道由七根得」),断惑范围用「世俗道」、「有漏道」(「此上更无世俗道故」、「唯无漏道离有顶染,非有漏道」),果之体性分析用「世俗道」(「以世俗道得二果时」、「世俗道所得择灭」)。《瑜伽师地论》主要用「世间道」一词(亦见「世俗道」),以「出世道」相对,未见「有漏道/无漏道」之对举用法。

二、二道并立之式。俱舍论将沙门四果分依世间道或出世道所得,论其根数差别;瑜伽论将趣向离欲之道分为世间、出世二种,二者资粮合称出离地。

【与相关概念的关系】

一、与「出世道」相对:世间道为有漏修行道,出世道为无漏圣道,二者并举为趣向离欲之二道。出世道以世间道为助伴,世间道亦为出世道之资粮。

二、与「世俗谛」相关:依世俗谛所起俗智及所引法,亦名世间;以有漏、有诤、有爱味、依耽嗜四义建立为世间,依出离为出世间。

三、与「相缚、麁重缚」相关:行于安立谛之世间道,于此二缚不得解脱;出世道行非安立谛则解脱清净。

四、与「萨迦耶见」相关:世间道不能断萨迦耶见,故虽升有顶而仍退还;唯有出世道先断萨迦耶见,后永断余烦恼,无复退转。

【代表性原文引用】

《阿毘达磨俱舍论》:「唯无漏道离有顶染,非有漏道。」

《阿毘达磨俱舍论》颂:「世无间解脱,如次缘下上,作麁苦障行,及静妙离三。」

《瑜伽师地论》:下地过患「如病、如痈,犹如毒箭,不安隐性」,名为麁性;此是世间世俗道净惑所缘,「此是暂断,非究竟断,以于后时更相续故」。

《瑜伽师地论》:圣者出见道后修世间离欲之道,「但能损伏烦恼种子,非谓永断」。

By SutraAI-generated

阿毘達磨俱舍論T1558 · 毘曇部

《阿毘達磨俱舍論》以「世間道」「世俗道」「有漏道」三名互稱同一概念,與「出世道」「無漏道」對舉,構成修道論中二道並立的基本框架。論中明確界定:見道唯是無漏,修道通有漏、無漏二種。其所以然者,「見道速能治三界故,頓斷九品見所斷故,非世間道有此堪能」——世間道不具備頓斷見惑之功能,故見道位中道唯無漏。修道則因「有異故通二種」,世間道於修道位中始得預入。

在世間道所能對治的範圍上,論中劃出嚴格界限:離有頂(非想非非想處)之染,「唯無漏道」能辦,「非有漏道」。理由有三:一、有頂之上更無世俗道可資依憑;二、「自地不能治自地故」——同一地之道無法對治自地煩惱;三、「自地煩惱所隨增故」——若煩惱於此隨增,此道必不能治彼煩惱。除此之外,離其餘八地之染則「通由二道,世出世道俱能離故」。此即世間道之有效邊界:下八地可治,有頂不可治。

就沙門四果而言,世間道僅能參與中間二果(一來、不還)之證得,且限於「次第證」一路。論云:「且一來果次第證者,依世間道由七根得,謂意及捨、信等五根;依出世道由八根得,謂即前七根、已知根第八。」不還果次第證者亦然,「依世間道由七根得,依出世道由八根得」。若第九解脫道中入根本地,則依世間道由八根得,以無間道捨受相應、解脫道中復有喜受,「此二相資得第三果」。至於預流果與阿羅漢果,則純由出世道(九根)得,世間道不預焉。

論中又特別處理一難題:以世俗道得二果時,此果之體性如何安立?答曰:「此果非唯以世俗道所得擇滅為斷果性,兼以見道所得擇滅於中相雜總成一果,同一果道得所得故。」 亦即世間道所證擇滅並非獨立成果,必須與見道所斷之擇滅合為一果體。論又引契經為證:「云何一來果?謂斷三結薄貪瞋癡。云何不還果?謂斷五下結。」 此外,「世俗道所得擇滅,無漏斷得所任持故,由此力所持退不命終故,亦得名為沙門果體」——世間道之擇滅賴無漏斷得任持方得不退,據此得立沙門果名。

末後頌文總括修習原則:「諸道依得此,修此地有漏,為離得起此,修此下無漏。唯初盡遍修,九地有漏德,生上不修下,曾所得非修。」 其中有漏(世間)道之修習以「此地」為限,無漏道則可修「下」地,二者所修地範圍不同,顯示世間道在修道位中雖與無漏道並行,其作用域仍受自地拘束。

瑜伽師地論T1579 · 瑜伽部

《瑜伽師地論》以「世間道」與「出世道」對舉立義,將二者並其資糧總略為一,名為「出離地」。其核心表述為「由世間道而趣離欲」:行者於下地(欲界)觀為「麁相」,於上地(初靜慮之若定、若生)觀為「靜相」,多住此觀即於欲界得離欲、證入初靜慮;如是展轉,一切下地觀為麁相、一切上地觀為靜相,乃至於無所有處得離欲、證入非想非非想處,論中明言「除此更無若過若增」。此即世間道之體性:以「麁相」「靜相」為所緣,逐地離下證上。論中又稱此為「世間由世俗道淨惑所緣」,謂觀下地多諸過患,如病、如癰、猶如毒箭、不安隱性以為麁性,觀上地與彼相違以為靜性,斷除自欲界乃至無所有處之煩惱;然此「是暫斷,非究竟斷,以於後時、更相續故」,此為世間道與出世道(依苦集滅道四聖諦、由正見等無漏聖道)之根本分際。

論中特以問答標舉樂往世間道發起加行之四種補特伽羅:一、一切外道;二、於正法中根性羸劣、先修止行者;三、根性雖利、善根未熟者;四、樂當來世證大菩提、非於現法之一切菩薩;此中復分「具縛」(諸異生)與「不具縛」(諸有學)二種,並謂依靜慮等能引無想定及發五神通。於「十一種修」中,「世間道修」與「出世道修」並列,前者謂於諸下地見麁相、於諸上地見靜相,乃至能趣無所有處一切離欲。依諸近分定而修者,其方便道、無間道、解脫道於所緣或觀過失、或觀寂靜,即「觀下過失,觀上寂靜」;勝進道則為遍滿所緣或無漏緣。

論中反覆申明世間道之有漏、不究竟義。依果而言,「若世間道,非由究竟離繫果故,名有果法」,與能證涅槃之出世聖道由究竟離繫果者相別。於對治中,「一切世間善道」屬厭患對治(除諸無量及遊戲神通所引作意),「世間修道」屬遠分對治,而斷對治唯是緣真如之出世間道。聖者以出世間智後所得之世俗智、依世間道離欲時,「同彼非聖道者所作離欲,但能損伏煩惱種子,非謂永斷」;此智「亦是世間,亦出世間,不應一向名為世間」。論又說出世間道以世間道為助伴,由四因緣:隱障諸蓋、遠分制伏、厭患朽壞、法力滋潤。

其局限之喻尤切:煩惱隨眠未永拔故,「雖世間道方便逃避遠至有頂,復執將還」;「由世間道雖生有頂,未脫魔羂」;依世間道雖能離無所有處貪欲、於下地煩惱心得解脫,「而未能脫薩迦耶見」,故「雖昇有頂,而復退還」,唯出世道先斷薩迦耶見、後永斷餘惑,方無退轉。聖弟子亦得「以世間道及出世道修習空性」,論中以客舍喻明空與不空之無倒趣入。論中並判:為他說世間道乃至上昇有頂,「非第一義令上昇教」,以「如是上昇非畢竟故」;唯如來聖諦相應言教為第一義令上昇教,以是畢竟故。若苾芻以世間道離欲界愛乃至第一有定具足安住,卻於定生愛味、喜足,不上勤求得所未得,「不名大士」,以其心未得善解脫故。末後論中界定世間之體性:若法「有漏、有諍、有愛味、依耽嗜」名為世間,能治此而依世俗諦所起之俗智及所引法「亦名世間」;世間即「墮攝法」,墮欲、色、無色世間攝,出世間則非墮攝法。

大乘阿毘達磨雜集論T1606 · 瑜伽部

本論對「世間道」的論述,可從定義、功能、與出世間道的對比,以及其在修行位次中的位置等方面來歸納。

一、定義

論中明確列出世間道的具體內容:「世間道者,謂世間初靜慮、第二靜慮、第三靜慮、第四靜慮,空無邊處、識無邊處、無所有處、非想非非想處。」即以欲界、色界、無色界中四靜慮與四無色定共八定為世間道的全體範圍。

二、功能:損伏而非永害

本論在十種離欲的分類中,將世間道界定為「損伏」而非「永害」的作用:「損伏離欲者,謂由世間道離欲;永害離欲者,謂由出世間道離欲。」同一段亦以「對治離欲」一項,統攝世出世二道之用:「對治離欲者,謂由世出世道斷諸煩惱。」又以「有上離欲」攝世間聲聞獨覺之離欲,「無上離欲」攝佛菩薩之離欲,由此凸顯世間道所得離欲猶有上位可超。

三、不畢竟出離的性質

本論以出離的究竟與否判攝二道:「不畢竟出離者,謂由世間道;畢竟出離者,謂由出世間道。」此處世間道與出世間道並列為出離的兩種道,前者所得為非究竟。

四、雜染與清白二相

世間道依其心品是否攝煩惱,可分為「雜染」與「清白」二相。論云:雜染之相由四無記根——愛、見、慢、無明——染污心品,使靜慮定門帶有覆無記性,煩惱隨煩惱相續流轉;清白之相為淨靜慮無色,由性善故說名清白,「雖是世間,離纏垢故亦名為淨」。

五、修道位中的方便數習

本論界定「修道」為已得諦現觀以後的修行階段:「諸佛聖弟子已得諦現觀,從此已上為斷餘結,方便數習世間道等,是名修道。」可知世間道不僅為凡夫所修,亦為聖弟子進入修道位以後繼續「方便數習」以斷餘結所依,此為世間道在本論修行位次中的特殊位置。

六、術語對照

本論恆以「世間道」對「出世間道」,並以「世出世道」合稱二者;具體內容稱為「靜慮」與「無色」(無色處);形容其功能者有「損伏」、「永害」;判攝出離型態者有「不畢竟」、「畢竟」;形容其所攝心品者有「雜染」、「清白」。諸詞並列,可見本論從世俗諦與勝義諦兩端交代世間道的範圍與作用。這些術語形式與其他經論之異同,須由上層條目統攝歸納,本論本身並未另立專名以替代上述諸詞。

Related