Dharma · AI Companion

三漏

traya āsravāḥ

三漏,指欲漏、有漏、无明漏之合称,为佛经对三界根本烦恼之三分。AI-generated

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

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What this concept is saying

三漏 (Three Āsravas, “three outflows” or “three taints”) are 欲漏 (the outflow connected with the desire realm), 有漏 (the outflow connected with the higher realms of existence), and 無明漏 (the outflow of ignorance throughout all three realms).

“Outflow” is a useful image. A mind may appear composed, yet its energy continually leaks into grasping, resistance, self-construction, and confused interpretation. The term also suggests an influx: affliction seeps into perception and conduct until one experiences the world through it. The point is therefore not that human beings possess three detachable stains. It is that conditioned experience keeps being carried toward suffering through three pervasive channels.

The classical classification must be read precisely.

1. 欲漏 (kāma-āsrava, desire-realm outflow)

This means all afflictions bound to the 欲界 (desire realm), except ignorance, because ignorance is classified separately as the third outflow.

It must not be reduced to sexual desire, bodily pleasure, or “wanting things.” The desire realm includes ordinary sensory and emotional existence, so this category encompasses the relevant forms of craving, anger, pride, jealousy, possessiveness, agitation, and other afflictions operating there—again, with ignorance counted separately.

The *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* gives another angle: internally arising unwholesome reflection meets external conditions, and desire develops through their interaction. An image on a screen is not, by itself, “the taint.” Nor is an inner impulse isolated from conditions. The outflow occurs through the encounter: a sight, memory, advertisement, voice, or bodily sensation is taken up by a mind already disposed to pursue, reject, compare, or appropriate.

The *Yogācārabhūmi* explains the desire outflow through five aspects: its underlying tendencies arise in the unstable desire-realm level; it conduces to unwholesome conduct; it conflicts with what is wholesome; it clings to sensory desires; and it produces suffering as pain and suffering through change. The last point matters. A pleasure need not hurt while it lasts to participate in suffering: dependence upon what must change already contains vulnerability.

2. 有漏 (bhava-āsrava, outflow of higher existence)

Here 有 does not mean “having,” and 有漏 does not carry its broad, familiar meaning of “contaminated” or “conditioned.” As one member of this particular triad, it means all afflictions bound to the 色界 and 無色界—the form and formless realms—except ignorance.

These are subtler attachments associated with refined modes of existence: absorption, serenity, luminosity, immaterial attainment, elevated identity, and the wish to continue in such states. Coarse sensory appetite may be absent while attachment to being, attainment, purity, or exalted consciousness remains.

This is why translating 有漏 merely as “attachment to existence” is suggestive but incomplete. The classical definition is based on the higher two realms, not on every ordinary wish to stay alive or every ambition to become somebody. A person’s career ambition, for example, ordinarily operates within desire-realm affliction; it does not automatically become 有漏 merely because it concerns a future identity.

The *Yogācārabhūmi* establishes this outflow through five aspects concerning afflictions that generate relatively inferior, intermediate, and refined higher-world existence, including forms of existence with or without enjoyment of pleasure. Its lesson is severe but compassionate: spiritual refinement is not identical with liberation. A peaceful state can still become a place where appropriation hides.

3. 無明漏 (avidyā-āsrava, outflow of ignorance)

This is ignorance throughout all three realms. It is not lack of information, low intelligence, or failure to learn Buddhist vocabulary. The *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* describes it in terms of not understanding “I” and “mine,” and of constructing distorted identities upon the aggregates, sense fields, and elements. Its southern recension further associates inward ignorance with failing to discern impermanence, suffering, emptiness, and non-self.

Ignorance is both one of the three outflows and the root condition from which the others grow. There is no contradiction. Consider fire: one flame can be counted among the fires in a house while also igniting other rooms. As a distinct category, ignorance is the obscuration present across all realms; as a condition, it enables desire, aversion, conceit, and attachment to existence to arise.

The scriptures also describe ignorance and 不善思惟 (unwholesome or inappropriate reflection) as mutually reinforcing. Ignorance bends attention; bent attention deepens ignorance. The *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* treats unwholesome reflection as a proximate condition and ignorance as a more fundamental condition. In contemporary language, one might compare this to a feedback loop: a prior model filters the evidence, and the filtered evidence strengthens the model. But this is only an analogy. Cognitive science has no single agreed-upon construct equivalent to Buddhist 無明, much less proof that the Buddhist analysis has been scientifically established.

The three outflows thus mark a progression in subtlety, not three sealed compartments:

- the mind leaks into sensory-emotional entanglement; - it can relinquish coarse entanglement yet leak into refined existence and attainment; - beneath both, it misapprehends conditioned processes as “I,” “mine,” stable, or finally satisfying.

Their place in the path is made explicit in the *Madhyama Āgama*. One should know the outflows as they actually are, know their arising, know their cessation, and know the path to their cessation. Their cessation path is the 八支聖道 (Noble Eightfold Path), from right view through right concentration. Thus the teaching is not principally a taxonomy of bad mental states. It is a Four Noble Truths–shaped diagnosis directed toward release.

The same collection says that the outflows are exhausted “through knowing and seeing,” not through failing to know or see. Yet knowing is not merely conceptual. The path trains view, intention, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and concentration because ignorance is embodied in the whole way one attends, chooses, speaks, and lives.

It also gives seven complementary methods of abandoning outflows:

- 見斷: abandoning through seeing or insight; - 護斷: abandoning through guarding, especially careful restraint of the senses; - 離斷: abandoning through avoiding dangerous conditions; - 用斷: abandoning through wise use of necessities; - 忍斷: abandoning through patient endurance of unavoidable discomfort; - 除斷: abandoning by removing an arisen unwholesome state; - 思惟斷: abandoning through cultivation and appropriate reflection.

This prevents a common oversimplification: not every affliction is handled in the same way. Some require understanding; some require boundaries; some require restraint; some require endurance; and some require sustained cultivation.

A walk-through in everyday life

Imagine an evening commute after a difficult day.

You open your phone “for a minute.” A food video appears. Then an advertisement, an attractive face, a luxury apartment, and photographs from a friend’s holiday. Sensation and perception alone are not yet 欲漏. The outflow becomes visible as internal tendencies engage external conditions: “I need that”; “Why is their life better?”; “I deserve relief”; “I cannot bear this boredom.” Attraction, envy, irritation, comparison, and compulsive continuation belong to the field of desire-realm affliction. Ignorance within them is analytically separated as 無明漏.

This is where people often map the teaching incorrectly. The phone, food, beauty, and comfort are not themselves the desire outflow. Neither does merely enjoying a pleasant image prove craving. The diagnostic question is how experience is being appropriated: Does enjoyment turn into demand? Does its disappearance produce hostility? Does comparison organize a self around deficiency?

A message from your manager then arrives: someone else will lead the project. The chest tightens. Thoughts begin: “They do not respect me. I must prove who I am.” In ordinary circumstances, resentment, rivalry, and status-craving are still desire-realm afflictions and therefore fall under 欲漏, apart from their ignorance. They should not automatically be labelled 有漏 just because they concern “becoming successful.” The technical category 有漏 refers to afflictions of the form and formless realms.

Nevertheless, the episode can reveal a structure that becomes subtler along the contemplative path. Suppose you put the phone away, practise meditation, and enter an unusually calm, unified state. Coarse wanting subsides. Later you think: “This purity is the real me. I must remain here. I am more advanced than people caught in ordinary life.” Attachment has not necessarily ended; it may have migrated toward refined state, attainment, and continued elevated existence. At the relevant level of meditative development, this illustrates the territory classified as 有漏. Ordinary relaxation or feeling “in the zone” at work is only a loose analogy and should not be mistaken for a form-realm absorption.

Now look beneath both episodes. Why did an advertisement become evidence that “my life is lacking”? Why did a workplace decision become a verdict on “what I am”? Why did meditative calm become “my attainment”?

Here 無明漏 is operating. Changing sensations, perceptions, intentions, and consciousness are gathered into an apparently solid owner: “I am being diminished”; “I possess this peace”; “this state will secure me.” Ignorance is not an extra thought added at the end. It is the mis-seeing that gives the entire drama its apparent solidity.

Next comes the feedback loop of attention. You replay the manager’s message, select details that confirm rejection, imagine hostile motives, and ignore alternative explanations. This is 不善思惟. It intensifies anger and self-construction; those afflictions then make further distorted reflection seem reasonable. An algorithmic feed can amplify the loop by repeatedly presenting material likely to hold attention, but the algorithm is neither a complete explanation of craving nor a modern equivalent of 無明. It supplies conditions; it does not erase agency, karmic intention, or the need to understand appropriation.

How might the seven methods work here?

- Through seeing, you recognize the distress as conditioned rather than as proof of a threatened permanent self. - Through guarding, you do not continue feeding agitation with another hour of comparison-driven scrolling. - Through avoiding, you step away from a conversation in which you are likely to retaliate. - Through wise use, you treat the phone as a tool rather than as an unlimited anaesthetic. - Through endurance, you allow fatigue, disappointment, and bodily tension to be present without immediately escaping into consumption. - Through removing, you interrupt an already arisen revenge fantasy instead of rehearsing it. - Through cultivation, you establish appropriate reflection, mindfulness, loving-kindness, concentration, and the factors of the path.

None of this requires pretending that the disappointment is pleasant or that workplace injustice never occurs. Practice changes the manner of knowing and responding; it does not prohibit clear speech, boundaries, negotiation, or structural criticism. The question is whether action proceeds from discernment or from a leaking mind that must defend and enlarge “me and mine.”

Why contemporary people need it

Contemporary culture is extremely skilled at diagnosing coarse desire and remarkably poor at recognizing refined bondage.

We may notice compulsive shopping yet celebrate compulsive self-optimization. We may criticize addiction to pleasure yet admire addiction to status, productivity, visibility, moral superiority, or spiritual specialness. The teaching of the three outflows refuses to let liberation collapse into better consumption, a more impressive identity, or a more serene private state.

欲漏 helps us see how attention is continually recruited by sensory promises and emotional provocations. Much of algorithmic life is organized around predicting what will make us click, linger, desire, fear, or argue. The Buddhist claim is not that technology invented craving. It is that conditions can be deliberately arranged to stimulate tendencies already present. Sense restraint is therefore not hostility toward the world; it is stewardship of attention.

有漏 matters because even a disciplined mind can convert practice into self-continuation. “I am calm,” “I have transcended ordinary people,” and “I must never lose this state” can preserve bondage in subtler form. Concentration is indispensable in the Noble Eightfold Path, but concentration accompanied by appropriation is not yet final release. The *Yogācārabhūmi* explicitly distinguishes a worldly form of the path, still bound by the three outflows and four kinds of clinging, from the supramundane path capable of exhausting suffering.

無明漏 matters because techniques alone can leave the owner of the project unquestioned. One may regulate emotion, improve focus, and develop pleasant states while continuing to assume that there is a stable controller who must be perfected and defended. Buddhist practice goes further: it examines how the apparent owner is constructed in dependence upon changing aggregates, sense experience, conditions, and acts of appropriation.

This is also why the outflows cannot be ended simply by shame. Shame often strengthens the very self-construction under examination: “I am a terrible person for craving.” The scriptural approach is diagnostic. Like a physician examining the pulse before prescribing medicine, the practitioner studies conditions, arising, consequences, and appropriate remedies. The *Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra* accordingly urges the wise to contemplate the dangers of the three outflows. Seeing danger here does not mean cultivating disgust toward oneself. It means understanding what a pattern does when followed.

The southern recension makes this inquiry strikingly practical: observe through what conditions an affliction arises, during which activities, around which people, in which places, concerning which objects, and through the use of which resources; then observe how it develops from weaker to stronger forms. This resembles careful behavioural tracking, but its horizon is larger than habit management. The aim is not merely a more efficient personality. It is dispassion, cessation, and liberation.

The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra* compares the three realms and three outflows to water, the six perfections to a boat, and buddhahood to the further shore. The image locates the teaching within the entire path: the task is not to win a more comfortable position in the water. Generosity, ethical discipline, patience, energy, concentration, and wisdom form a way of crossing.

Common misreadings and clarifications

1. “The three outflows are lust, desire to exist, and ignorance.”

This is too narrow. 欲漏 includes desire-realm afflictions other than ignorance, not lust alone. 有漏 technically includes the afflictions of the form and formless realms other than ignorance, not every ordinary survival instinct or ambition. 無明漏 is ignorance throughout all three realms.

2. “有漏 here means everything contaminated.”

Not in this triadic definition. Buddhist texts also use 有漏 in a broader sense for contaminated phenomena, karma, affliction, or obstructive results. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā Śāstra* exhibits such a broader usage. Context decides. As the second member of 三漏, however, it has the narrower higher-realm definition.

3. “Desire outflow means that pleasure, beauty, relationships, and comfort are sinful.”

The classification concerns afflictive bondage, not a divine prohibition against pleasant experience. The issue is craving, appropriation, resistance to change, and the conduct these generate. Enjoyment known as conditioned and relinquishable is not identical with enslavement to enjoyment.

4. “Any wish to improve myself is 有漏.”

This confuses an accessible modern analogy with the classical category. Most career, lifestyle, and social-identity striving operates within desire-realm affliction. 有漏, strictly speaking, concerns afflictions bound to the form and formless realms. Modern self-optimization can help us notice the broader mechanism of becoming, but it should not replace the canonical definition.

5. “Ignorance means not believing Buddhist doctrine.”

Ignorance is not mere disagreement or absence of information. A person may recite impermanence and non-self while reacting as though possessions, reputation, feelings, and meditative experiences had a permanent owner. Conversely, the teaching calls for investigation and realization, not verbal conformity.

6. “If ignorance causes all outflows, there should only be one outflow.”

A root can be one member of a classification while also conditioning the other members. 無明漏 identifies ignorance as a pervasive affliction; the statement that ignorance is the root of all outflows explains causal dependence. Classification and causation answer different questions.

7. “Right thinking alone eliminates them.”

The *Madhyama Āgama* does say that appropriate reflection prevents unarisen outflows from arising and brings arisen ones to cessation. But it also names seven methods of abandonment and identifies the Noble Eightfold Path as the path of cessation. Ethical conduct, sense restraint, effort, mindfulness, concentration, insight, avoidance, wise use, and patient endurance all matter.

8. “A peaceful or mystical experience proves the outflows have ended.”

Peace can weaken coarse affliction, but attachment to peace, attainment, or elevated existence is precisely why 有漏 must be taught. The *Yogācārabhūmi* places complete freedom at the culmination of both insight and cultivation, when the mind is liberated from the outflows and knowledge of their exhaustion arises.

9. “洞山’s three leakages are another translation of the same triad.”

They are not. The *Record of Dongshan Liangjie* speaks of 見滲漏, 情滲漏, and 語滲漏—leakage through fixed views, affective preference, and fascination with language. These diagnose defects in a Chan practitioner’s realization. They share the metaphor of leakage but are not equivalent to 欲漏、有漏、無明漏 as classified in the Āgama, Nirvāṇa, and Yogācāra traditions.

10. “The three realms must be reduced to three psychological moods—or accepted only as physical locations.”

Classical Buddhist cosmology treats the desire, form, and formless realms as domains of rebirth correlated with kinds of karma and meditative attainment. They also illuminate increasingly subtle structures of attachment. A psychological reading can make the teaching experientially accessible, but it should be presented as an interpretive application, not substituted for the textual definition.

The deepest purpose of 三漏 is therefore not to make us suspicious of every pleasure or ashamed of every ambition. It is to show why suffering can survive successive improvements in its surroundings. Give craving better objects and it continues. Replace coarse pleasure with refined existence and appropriation continues. Leave ignorance untouched and even “spirituality” can become material for “I” and “mine.”

The path works in the opposite direction: know the outflow, know its conditions, know its cessation, and cultivate the way leading to cessation. What gradually stops leaking is not a metaphysical substance called the self. It is the compulsive investment of attention, intention, and identity in what cannot be possessed or made permanent. When that investment ends, experience need not disappear; bondage does.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

1. 定义与核心要义

三漏(traya āsravāḥ),即欲漏、有漏、无明漏之合称,为佛经对三界根本烦恼之三分。阿含部以「漏」字径用,涅槃部以「如来非有漏」立论,瑜伽部以界地与五相详建其相,释经论以总标别解广开其义。诸部对三漏具体界定略异,然大要以欲界烦恼除无明为欲漏、色无色界烦恼除无明为有漏、三界之无明为无明漏为通途。

2. 主要阐述

阿含部,《中阿含经》对三漏之论述分两路。其一从正、邪思惟论三漏之当下了断:不正思惟者未生欲漏便生、已生者增广,未生有漏、无明漏亦生、已生者亦增广;正思惟者则未生者不生、已生便灭。经以「凡夫愚人」与「多闻圣弟子」作对照,明前者不值真知识、不正思惟以致漏增,后者调御圣法、正思惟以致漏灭。经列「见断、护断、离断、用断、忍断、除断、思惟断」七断漏法门。其二以「知漏如真、知漏习如真、知漏灭如真、知漏灭道如真」四阶框架明列三漏之集为「因无明便有漏」、其灭为「无明灭漏便灭」、其灭道为「八支圣道」。

涅槃部,《大般涅槃经》北本与南本俱以「如来非有漏」之义立论,欲界一切烦恼除无明为欲漏,色界、无色界一切烦恼除无明为有漏,三界之无明为无明漏。两本皆以医师诊脉、将盲人至蕀林中为喻,劝智者观察三漏所有罪过,能知罪过则能远离,受报轻微。在释名上,两本以「内恶觉观」因「外诸因缘」而生释欲漏,以不能了知「我及我所」释无明漏。两本并明无明为一切诸漏根本,强调无明与不善思惟互为因果、互相增长——不善思惟为近因,无明如四大之远因。南本更详述修观方法,劝智者详察烦恼之因缘、行止、共住、受用等由下转中之次第,并观其果报能生地狱、饿鬼、畜生乃至人天。

释经论部,《大智度论》以「总标——别解」方式开演,首明佛作「一切漏尽」之至诚语,随即开列三漏之名。复以「六情中出垢心相应心数法」为第二义,并引《一切漏障经》以七漏为第三义;又以「有漏」通于有漏业、烦恼、恶道果报之障道法。另以船水之喻,三界、三漏为水,六波罗蜜为船,彼岸为佛道。

瑜伽部,《瑜伽师地论》于界地分类之外,更从五相建立欲漏:一不定地事生随眠故、二随顺恶行故、三善相违故、四耽着诸欲故、五能生坏苦苦果故。有漏亦由五相建立:能生劣界、中界、妙界诸烦恼,及有欲乐有、无欲乐有之诸烦恼。论中区分见道所断八种烦恼随眠与修道所断之欲界瞋恚及三界贪、慢、无明;于无学位心得解脱,得尽智,以寂静行攀缘而住,慧无有垢。略说八圣道支二处所摄:世间者三漏、四取所随缚故不能尽苦;出世间者能尽众苦。

诸宗部,《瑞州洞山良价禅师语录》所用「三漏」之名相与通行者不同,不立「漏」义而立「三种渗漏」——见渗漏、情渗漏、语渗漏。见渗漏为「机不离位,堕在毒海」——见地犹执著于阶位高下之差别;情渗漏为「滞在向背,见处偏枯」——情识滞著于欣慕厌弃之向背取舍;语渗漏为「究妙失宗,机昧终始」——穷究语言文字之玄妙却失于宗旨之本。此乃曹洞宗就末法时代人多干慧之流弊,从见地、情识、语言三面向辨验学人悟境真伪之施设,与阿毘达磨传统所言之三漏不可直接等同。

3. 不同部类与译本的表述差异

界地分类用语:阿含、涅槃、瑜伽诸部俱以「欲界、色界、无色界」为分类基础;瑜伽部作「欲界系、色无色二界系」。

新旧译名之异:涅槃部北本、南本皆用「阴、入、界」之旧译表述,而非新译之「蕴、处、界」。

术语使用之异:阿含部论思惟用「正思惟/不正思惟」,未用后世「正观/邪观」之语。

「有漏」一词之歧义:涅槃部「有漏」为三漏之一,专指色、无色界除无明外之烦恼;大智度论「有漏」兼通有漏业、烦恼、恶道果报之障道法。

南北本之异:涅槃部北本与南本所述大体相同,南本于修观方面多所发挥,详述观察烦恼因缘及果报之方法。

禅宗之别义:洞山语录之「见渗漏、情渗漏、语渗漏」与阿毘达磨传统之三漏名同实异,不可直接等同。

4. 与相关概念的关系

与八支圣道:三漏之灭道为八支圣道,正见乃至正定为八。

与无明:无明既列为三漏之一(无明漏),又为其余诸漏之根源因缘(因无明便有漏),二者并存而不冲突。

与不善思惟:无明与不善思惟互为因果、互相增长。

与五盖、三不善根、三匮:三漏在瑜伽部与之并列为随烦恼品类。

与四取:世间八圣道支为三漏、四取所随缚。

5. 代表性原文引用

「以知、以见故诸漏得尽,非不知、非不见也」 「不正思惟者,未生欲漏便生,已生者增广」 「知漏如真、知漏习如真、知漏灭如真、知漏灭道如真」 「因无明便有漏,无明灭漏便灭」 「如来非有漏」 「智者应当观三漏所有罪过」 「无明即是一切诸漏根本」 「不善思惟为近因,无明如四大之远因」 「漏名三漏:欲漏、有漏、无明漏」 「三界、三漏为水,六波罗蜜为船」 「机不离位,堕在毒海」 「学者浊智流转,不出此三种」

By SutraAI-generated

中阿含經T0026 · 阿含部

本部經論述「三漏」——欲漏、有漏、無明漏——主要有兩處脈絡:

第一處從「知、見」與「正思惟/不正思惟」的關係展開。經文明言「以知、以見故諸漏得盡,非不知、非不見也」,指出漏的止息繫於如實知見與如理思惟。其具體運作如下:不正思惟者,未生欲漏便生,已生者增廣,未生有漏、無明漏亦生,已生者亦增廣;反之,正思惟者,未生欲漏而不生,已生便滅,未生有漏、無明漏亦爾。經中以「凡夫愚人」與「多聞聖弟子」作對照:前者不得聞正法、不值真知識、不正思惟、未調御聖法,不知如真法,是故漏生而增廣;後者得聞正法、值真知識、調御聖法、知如真法、正思惟,是故漏不生而便滅。此段並具體描述凡夫「不應念法而念,應念法而不念」,以致漏增;聖弟子則「不應念法不念,應念法便念」,以致漏滅。本段又列出「七斷漏、煩惱、憂慼法」——見斷、護斷、離斷、用斷、忍斷、除斷、思惟斷——顯示斷漏有多門徑。

第二處以「如真」(如實知)的四階框架——知漏如真、知漏習如真、知漏滅如真、知漏滅道如真——明列三漏的內涵與對治。經文明確定義:「謂有三漏:欲漏、有漏、無明漏」;其集(習)為「因無明便有漏」,其滅為「無明滅漏便滅」,其滅道為「八支聖道,正見乃至正定為八」。此處值得注意者,是將無明既列為三漏之一(無明漏),又定位為其餘諸漏的根源因緣(因無明便有漏),二者並存而不衝突。成就此四如真知者,經文判為「成就見,得正見,於法得不壞淨,入正法中」。

本部經所用術語值得注意:「漏」字徑用,「欲漏、有漏、無明漏」三漏名稱一貫,未見異名別稱;論漏生滅採「生」、「增廣」、「滅」三層描述;論思惟則用「正思惟/不正思惟」(非後世「正觀/邪觀」之類用語);論修道則歸於「八支聖道,正見乃至正定為八」之八項。兩處論述角度不同:第一處從正、邪思惟論三漏的當下生滅機制,第二處從如實知見論三漏的見地與修道——二者並不矛盾,而是從行與知兩方面共同收束三漏。

大般涅槃經(北本)T0374 · 涅槃部

《大般涅槃經(北本)》論述「三漏」之義,主要從以下幾個層面展開:

一、三漏之名相與如來斷證 經文以「如來非有漏」之義立論,明確列舉三漏之名及其界定:(一)欲漏——欲界一切煩惱,除無明;(二)有漏——色、無色界一切煩惱,除無明;(三)無明漏——三界之無明。如來已永斷此三,故非有漏。此處「有漏」一詞並非泛指一切有漏法,而是專指色、無色界除無明外之煩惱,與「欲漏」對舉,此為本經術語使用之特色。

二、觀察三漏罪過以為修道之要 如來告迦葉:智者應當觀三漏所有罪過,知罪過已則能遠離。經中以醫師先診病脈方授藥為喻,又以「將盲人至蕀林中」為喻,說明凡夫不知三漏過患則隨逐行,知者則能遠離,所受果報輕微。並舉四種人之作業與受報輕重,結云「若人能觀煩惱罪過,是人作業受果俱輕」。

三、三漏之內外因緣詳釋 迦葉進問三有漏之細別,如來分別解說:(一)欲漏——內惡覺觀,因於外緣而生,故一切內惡覺觀及外諸因緣,名之為欲;(二)有漏——色、無色界之內諸惡法及外諸因緣,除去欲界中之內覺觀與外諸因緣;(三)無明漏——不能了知我及我所,不別內外。

四、無明為諸漏根本 經中強調「無明即是一切諸漏根本」,一切眾生以無明為因緣,於陰、入、界中憶想作相,是名眾生,即是想倒、心倒、見倒,以此因緣生一切漏。本經於此以「陰、入、界」之舊譯表述,與新譯之「蘊、處、界」用詞有異,此為本經用詞之特色。又於十二部經中說無明為貪、瞋、癡之因。

五、無明與不善思惟之因果會通 迦葉問:如來昔說不善思惟因緣生貪瞋癡,今何因緣乃說無明?佛答:此二法互為因果、互相增長。譬如子生芽,不善思惟為近因,無明如四大之遠因。又區分「無明漏」(內無明)與「因無明生諸漏」(兼內外因)之別,說無明漏是無始無終,從無明生陰入界等。

大般涅槃經(南本)T0375 · 涅槃部

《大般涅槃經(南本)》以「三漏」總攝三種煩惱,即「欲漏、有漏、無明漏」,亦稱「三有漏」。經中先依界地分判:欲界一切煩惱除去無明,名為欲漏;色界、無色界一切煩惱除去無明,名為有漏;三界之無明,名為無明漏。如來已永斷此三漏,故稱「非有漏」。此處「有漏」既是三漏之一,又見於「三有漏」的總稱,須依上下文辨別。 經中又從煩惱與色身的關係申論三漏:凡夫之色從煩惱生,故為無常、苦、空、無我;如來之色遠離煩惱,故說常、恒、無變。由此勸智者觀察三漏的罪過;若不能知見其過患,便隨逐而行,若能知其罪過,則可遠離,即使受報,果報亦較輕微。 在進一步釋名時,經文以內心與外緣的交涉說明欲漏:內在的惡覺觀因外緣而生,故「一切內惡覺觀、外諸因緣」名為欲,亦名欲漏。有漏則指色界、無色界的內諸惡法及外諸因緣,並排除欲界中的外緣與內在覺觀。無明漏被界定為不能了知「我及我所」、不能分別內外。這是本經在界地分類之外,另以「內惡覺觀」「外諸因緣」「我及我所」等語具體解說三漏的獨特側面。 本經尤其指出,無明是「一切諸漏根本」:眾生由無明,對「陰、入、界」憶想作相,施設眾生之相,遂成想倒、心倒、見倒,並由此生起一切漏。經文在此使用「陰、入、界」之稱,而非改稱「蘊、處、界」。無明與不善思惟又被說為互為因果、互相增長;不善思惟生無明,無明亦生不善思惟。 對「無明既是漏,何以又能生諸漏」的疑問,本經區分其所指:稱「無明漏」時,是說內無明、內倒,即不識無常、苦、空、無我;稱無明為諸漏之因時,則兼指內外因及不知外在的我、我所。無明漏並被說為無始無終,從之生起陰、入、界等。 修觀方面,本經要求智者詳察煩惱由何因緣、何種行為、何時、與誰共住、在何處、緣何事物及受用何種資具而生,並觀其如何由下轉中、由中轉上。如此觀察,能遠離生漏因緣,使未生煩惱不生、已生煩惱除滅。又應觀諸漏因緣所招感的果報:能生地獄、餓鬼、畜生,亦能得人天之身,而此身仍是無常、苦、空、無我;三漏因緣還能令眾生造五逆、受惡報、斷善根、犯四重禁及誹謗三寶。

Related