金剛三昧經論 1.9

1.9

次簡別者，於中有二：先別諸名、後簡通局。定名不同略有八種：一名三摩呬多，此云等引。遠離惛沈掉舉之偏故名為等，引發神通等諸功德故名為引。又此等引，無悔歡喜安樂所引，故名等引，由此不同欲界定故。二名三摩地，此云等持。等義同前。能制持心令不馳散故名等持，又定慧平等令不相離故名等持。舊云三摩提，亦即等持。三名三摩鉢提，此云等至，等持之中能至勝位故名等至。四名駄演那，此云靜慮。寂靜思慮故，又能靜散慮故。舊云禪那，或云持阿那，方俗異語，同謂靜慮也。五名奢摩他，此譯云止，令心止境故名為止。六名心一境性，令心專一於境之性故名心一境性。舊云一心，是略故也。七名為定，審定所緣故名為定。八名正思，義如前說。有師說言：三昧之名及三摩提，只是等持非是異名。是說不然。所以者何？如《金鼓經》十種定中，前三地中名三摩提，後七地中名為三昧。如是二名若同等持，何由改名前後異說？又此二名何由不同？若由方俗異故不同者，不應一處俱說二名；若由傳者前後故異者，不應一本有此二名。如三摩提及三摩地，此由前後傳者不同，故其是同，灼然可見。三昧之名與三摩提同在一本，何由不異？是故當知如前說也。

Next, regarding the distinctions, herein there are two parts: first, distinguishing the various names, and second, evaluating their broadness and narrowness. The different names for meditative concentration (*samādhi*) are, briefly, of eight kinds:
First is called *samāhita*, translated here as "equipoise" (*dengyin*). Because it is free from the deviations of torpor and restlessness, it is called "equi-"; because it brings forth various merits such as supernormal knowledges, it is called "-poise" (or "inducer"). Furthermore, this equipoise is induced by freedom from regret, joy, and bliss; hence it is called equipoise. Due to this, it differs from the concentrations of the desire realm.
Second is called *samādhi*, translated here as "equipoised holding" (*dengchi*). The meaning of "equi-" is the same as before. Because it can control and hold the mind so that it does not scatter, it is called "equipoised holding." Moreover, because concentration and wisdom are balanced and held together without parting, it is called equipoised holding. Formerly it was transcribed as *sanmati*, which is also equipoised holding.
Third is called *samāpatti*, translated here as "equipoised attainment" (*dengzhi*). Because within equipoised holding one is able to attain superior stages, it is called equipoised attainment.
Fourth is called *dhyāna*, translated here as "meditative absorption" (*jinglü*). It is because one ponders in serenity, and also because it can tranquilize scattered thoughts. Formerly it was transcribed as *channa* or *chiana*; these are regional dialectal variations, all meaning meditative absorption.
Fifth is called *śamatha*, translated here as "calm abiding" (*zhi*). Because it causes the mind to abide on an object, it is called calm abiding.
Sixth is called "one-pointedness of mind" (*citta-ekāgratā*). Because it causes the mind to focus exclusively on the nature of an object, it is called one-pointedness of mind. Formerly it was called "one mind," which was an abbreviation.
Seventh is called "concentration" (*ting*). Because it carefully fixes upon the cognitive object, it is called concentration.
Eighth is called "correct reflection" (*zhengsisi*), the meaning of which is as explained before.
Some masters say: "The names *sanmei* and *sanmati* are merely *dengchi* (equipoised holding) and are not different names." This statement is incorrect. Why is that? For example, among the ten kinds of concentration in the *Suvarṇaprabhāsa-sūtra*, in the first three grounds it is called *sanmati*, while in the latter seven grounds it is called *sanmei*. If these two names were both identical to *dengchi*, on what basis would the name be changed and stated differently before and after? Furthermore, on what basis are these two names different? If they were different because of regional variations, two names should not both be stated in one and the same place; if they were different because of earlier and later transmitters, a single text would not contain both names. In the case of *sanmati* and *samādhi*, this is due to differences in earlier and later transmitters; thus their identity is clearly evident. If the name *sanmei* and *sanmati* are present in the same text, on what basis could they not be distinct? Therefore, one should know that it is as stated previously.