[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [華嚴經探玄記](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733) › 12.14 # 華嚴經探玄記 12.14 華嚴經探玄記 12.14 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [12.14.1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14.1) 就四禪中，略作七門：一明入意、二顯體性、三立支數、四明假實、五顯廢立、六釋名、七辨相。 初中通論何故菩薩入禪無色無量神通？ 論釋為五種眾生：一為禪樂憍慢眾生故入諸禪。 解云：有得世間四禪之樂，恃著起慢難化以道； 菩薩現入過彼所得，息彼慢心，授之以道，而自不味著，故還捨之。 二為無色解脫憍慢眾生故，入無色定。 解云：有得無色定謂為涅槃，示入化之。 三為苦惱眾生入慈悲無量。 四為得解脫眾生入喜捨無量。 五為邪歸依眾生故，入勝神通力，令正信故。 二體性者，有八門：一隨事門，依薩婆多宗，支雖十八，事但十一，謂初定五法，一尋、二伺、三喜、四輕安、五一心。 二定中增內信，足成為六法。 三定中更增捨、念、正知、樂，帖成十法。 四定中不苦不樂故為十一，以喜樂及不苦不樂此三別說故。 二類攝門，以喜等三不別說故。 三同是受數名，唯有九法，一尋、二伺、三定、四慧、五受、六念、七輕安、八行捨、九信。 頌曰「安捨念各二，受定各分四，尋伺與信慧，守位不分支。 」釋云：輕安分二，謂初禪、二禪各有樂也。 捨念亦分二，謂三禪、四禪各有行捨及念。 受分四，謂初禪、二禪喜，三禪樂，四禪不苦不樂。 定分四，謂四禪各有心一境性。 信是內淨，慧是正知。 三會假門，依大乘宗，體唯七法，初二定樂亦以是受數，故除輕安。 二禪內淨，依捨念正知上假立故，除信，是故唯七。 頌曰「捨念各分二，定四受有六，尋伺及與慧，守位不分支。 」捨念各分二，謂三禪四禪。 定四，謂四禪。 受六，謂初二各喜樂，三樂，四不苦不樂。 又不定四中，二謂尋、伺。 別境五中，三謂念、定、慧。 遍行五中，一謂受。 善十一中，一謂行捨。 四重攝門，唯以五法為性，以尋伺二法用慧為性故。 此上約初教。 五會相門，此上禪門及上禪支，當相即空皆無所有，是禪支體，如《智論》勘。 六事盡門，即此禪門內攝如來藏真如功德，如《勝鬘》等經勘。 此約終教。 七泯絕門，如理無定無不定，如《文殊巡行經》等勘。 此約頓教。 八融攝門，謂此定門即攝無邊自在法界相即入等，如下〈離世間品〉勘。 此約圓教。 第三廢立者，有八門：一約無為問：無為是清淨法，何不立禪支？ 答：禪是有為故。 二約色行問：色及不相應行是有為，何不立禪支？ 答：禪支是有行有緣相應法，彼非行非緣非相應，故不立支。 三約心王問：心王為心法所依，是相應法，何不立禪支？ 答：隨順禪義是禪支義。 心王但為依，無別攝心用，是故不立支。 四約心法問：等是心法，何故遍行五中唯受立支，餘不立耶？ 答：汎論禪支要具三義，一是對治支、二利益支、三彼二依止自性。 於中隨入一數有隨順義，是支義。 以受通四禪利益支故，是故立支。 作意警心、觸三和生、想境分齊、思能役心，各順起心，不順靜慮，故不立支。 問：別境五中，何故念定慧三立支，餘二不立？ 答：定是心一境性，通為四禪； 彼二依止自性。 念是三四對治支故，明記所治過患相故； 慧是三禪對治支，分別所治深見過故，各有隨順，故得立支。 欲及勝解，於境希望，印持所緣，各非順定，故不立支。 問：善十一中，何故唯行捨立支，餘法不立？ 答：捨是三禪四禪對治支，以能捨彼所治障故，是故立支。 信者深忍樂欲心淨為性、慚者崇重賢善、愧者輕拒暴惡、無貪者無著為性、無瞋者無恚為性、無癡者理事明解、精進者勉勵策發、不放逸者妨惡修善、不害者不損有情，皆於靜慮無隨順義，不入三位，故不立支。 輕安在定調暢身心，為喜捨所覆，亦不立支。 問：不定四中，何故尋伺立支，餘二非支？ 答：尋伺是初禪對治支。 惡作、追悔、睡眠、昧略皆不順定，故不立支。 問：大小煩惱何不立支？ 答：禪不濁染，故彼不立。 > Regarding the four dhyānas, seven sections are briefly formulated: first, explaining the intention of entering \[them\]; second, revealing the essential nature; third, establishing the number of factors (aṅga); fourth, explaining provisional versus real; fifth, revealing exclusion and establishment; sixth, explaining the names; seventh, discerning the characteristics. In the first \[section\], discussing generally why the bodhisattva enters the dhyānas, formless \[attainments\], immeasurables, and spiritual superknowledges: the treatise explains that it is for the sake of five kinds of sentient beings. First, for the sake of sentient beings arrogant through the bliss of dhyāna, they enter the various dhyānas. The explanation states: There are those who attain the bliss of the worldly four dhyānas and, relying on and clinging to it, give rise to arrogance, so that it is difficult to transform them with the Path; the bodhisattva manifests entering \[a state\] surpassing what they have attained, pacifies their arrogant mind, and instructs them in the Path, yet does not relish or cling to it themselves, hence abandoning it again. Second, for the sake of sentient beings arrogant through formless liberation, they enter the formless absorptions. The explanation states: There are those who attain the formless absorptions and deem them to be nirvāṇa; \[the bodhisattva\] demonstrates entering them to transform them. Third, for the sake of suffering and afflicted sentient beings, they enter the immeasurables of loving-kindness and compassion. Fourth, for the sake of sentient beings who have attained liberation, they enter the immeasurables of sympathetic joy and equanimity. Fifth, for the sake of sentient beings who take false refuge, they enter superior powers of spiritual superknowledge to cause them to have right faith. Second, regarding the essential nature, there are eight approaches. 1. The approach according to individual real items: According to the Sarvāstivāda school, although there are eighteen factors, there are only eleven real items. Namely, in the first absorption there are five phenomena: first, initial application (vitarka); second, sustained application (vicāra); third, joy (prīti); fourth, pliancy (prasrabdhi); fifth, one-pointedness of mind (ekāgratā). In the second absorption, internal confidence (śraddhā) is added, augmenting it to become six phenomena. In the third absorption, equanimity (upekṣā), mindfulness (smṛti), correct comprehension (saṃprajanya), and bliss (sukha) are further added, bringing it to ten phenomena. In the fourth absorption, neither-pain-nor-pleasure \[is added\], making eleven, because joy, bliss, and neither-pain-nor-pleasure—these three—are stated separately. 2. The approach of subsumption by category: Because the three such as joy are not stated separately. 3. Since they share the name of feeling factors, there are only nine phenomena: first, initial application; second, sustained application; third, concentration; fourth, wisdom; fifth, feeling; sixth, mindfulness; seventh, pliancy; eighth, equanimity of formations; ninth, confidence. The verse says: 'Pliancy, equanimity, and mindfulness are each divided into two; feeling and concentration are each divided into four; initial application, sustained application, confidence, and wisdom hold their positions without dividing factors.' The explanation states: Pliancy is divided into two, meaning that the first dhyāna and second dhyāna each have bliss. Equanimity and mindfulness are also each divided into two, meaning that the third dhyāna and fourth dhyāna each have equanimity of formations and mindfulness. Feeling is divided into four, meaning joy in the first dhyāna and second dhyāna, bliss in the third dhyāna, and neither-pain-nor-pleasure in the fourth dhyāna. Concentration is divided into four, meaning that each of the four dhyānas has one-pointedness of mind. Confidence is internal clarity, and wisdom is correct comprehension. 3. The approach of integrating the provisional: According to the Mahāyāna school, the essence is only seven phenomena. The bliss of the first two absorptions is also because it is of the category of feeling, hence pliancy is excluded. The internal clarity of the second dhyāna is provisionally established on the basis of equanimity, mindfulness, and correct comprehension, hence confidence is excluded; therefore there are only seven. The verse says: 'Equanimity and mindfulness are each divided into two; concentration is four, and feeling has six; initial application, sustained application, along with wisdom, hold their positions without dividing factors.' Equanimity and mindfulness are each divided into two, meaning the third dhyāna and fourth dhyāna. Concentration is four, meaning the four dhyānas. Feeling is six, meaning joy and bliss in each of the first two, bliss in the third, and neither-pain-nor-pleasure in the fourth. Furthermore, among the four indeterminates, two refer to initial application and sustained application. Among the five specific objects, three refer to mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom. Among the five omnipresents, one refers to feeling. Among the eleven wholesome \[factors\], one refers to equanimity of formations. 4. The approach of re-subsumption: Taking only five phenomena as the nature, because the two phenomena of initial application and sustained application take wisdom as their nature. The above is according to the Initial Teaching. 5. The approach of integrating characteristics: These preceding dhyāna portals and the preceding dhyāna factors are empty as their very characteristics, entirely non-existent, which is the essence of the dhyāna factors; examine as in the Dà zhìdù lùn. 6. The approach of the exhaustion of things: These very dhyāna portals internally subsume the virtues of the tathāgatagarbha and suchness; examine as in sūtras such as the Śrīmālā\[devī-siṃhanāda-sūtra\]. This is according to the Final Teaching. 7. The approach of obliteration: In accordance with the principle, there is neither absorption nor non-absorption; examine as in sūtras such as the Sūtra of Mañjuśrī's Touring. This is according to the Sudden Teaching. 8. The approach of interpenetrating subsumption: This absorption portal directly subsumes the boundless, unhindered dharmadhātu, mutually identical and entering, etc.; examine as in the 'Chapter on Detaching from the World' below. This is according to the Perfect Teaching. Third, regarding exclusion and establishment, there are eight approaches. 1. Questioning regarding the unconditioned: The unconditioned is pure phenomena; why are dhyāna factors not established \[from it\]? Answer: Because dhyāna is conditioned. 2. Questioning regarding form and formations: Form and non-concurrent formations are conditioned; why are dhyāna factors not established \[from them\]? Answer: Dhyāna factors are phenomena endowed with activity, endowed with cognitive objects, and concurrent; those are not active, lack cognitive objects, and are non-concurrent, therefore they are not established as factors. 3. Questioning regarding the primary mind: The primary mind is that which mental factors rely on and is a concurrent phenomenon; why is it not established as a dhyāna factor? Answer: That which accords with the meaning of dhyāna is the meaning of a dhyāna factor. The primary mind merely serves as a basis and has no distinct function of gathering the mind, therefore it is not established as a factor. 4. Questioning regarding mental factors: Equally being mental factors, why among the five omnipresents is only feeling established as a factor while the rest are not established? Answer: Generally speaking, a dhyāna factor must possess three meanings: first, an antidote factor; second, a benefit factor; third, the intrinsic nature serving as the basis for those two. Within these, entering any one category and having the meaning of conformity is the meaning of a factor. Because feeling serves as a benefit factor throughout the four dhyānas, it is therefore established as a factor. Attention alerts the mind, contact arises from the conjunction of the three, ideation delineates cognitive objects, and volition can impel the mind; each accords with giving rise to the mind and does not accord with quiet meditation, therefore they are not established as factors. Question: Among the five specific objects, why are the three of mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom established as factors, while the remaining two are not established? Answer: Concentration is one-pointedness of mind, common to the four dhyānas; it is the intrinsic nature serving as the basis for those two. Mindfulness is the antidote factor for the third and fourth \[dhyānas\] because it clearly remembers the characteristics of the faults to be countered; wisdom is the antidote factor for the third dhyāna because it discriminates the deep faults seen in what is to be countered; each has conformity, and therefore they can be established as factors. Aspiration and resolve expect objects and decisively grasp cognitive conditions; neither accords with absorption, therefore they are not established as factors. Question: Among the eleven wholesome \[factors\], why is only equanimity of formations established as a factor while the other phenomena are not established? Answer: Equanimity is the antidote factor for the third dhyāna and fourth dhyāna because it can abandon the hindrances that are to be countered; therefore it is established as a factor. Confidence has deep conviction, joy, aspiration, and mental clarity as its nature; shame values and respects the worthy and good; embarrassment shrinks from and rejects violence and evil; non-attachment has non-clinging as its nature; non-hatred has absence of malice as its nature; non-delusion is clear understanding of principle and phenomena; energy is encouragement and spurred effort; heedfulness prevents evil and cultivates the good; non-harming does not injure sentient beings; all of these have no meaning of conformity to quiet meditation and do not enter the three positions, therefore they are not established as factors. Pliancy, when in absorption, harmonizes and relaxes body and mind, but is obscured by joy and equanimity, so it is also not established as a factor. Question: Among the four indeterminates, why are initial application and sustained application established as factors, while the remaining two are not factors? Answer: Initial application and sustained application are antidote factors for the first dhyāna. Repentance, regret, sleep, and mental torpor all do not accord with absorption, therefore they are not established as factors. Question: Why are major and minor defilements not established as factors? Answer: Dhyāna is not turbid or defiled, therefore they are not established. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [12.14.2](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14.2) 五約支分者，問：等是隨順義是支義，何故初定以尋伺為對治，不立內淨等？ 答：為此定初故，尋求伺察欲界過患，而能治彼欲等尋伺，故立此支。 內淨為此尋伺麁相之所覆故，體不顯現，是故不立。 問：捨念正知何故二禪合為內淨，三禪四禪方乃分之？ 答：二禪捨等為喜麁相之所覆故，是故不分； 但約離外尋伺，名為內淨。 問：等分三法，何故第四不立正知，答：正知明顯，四定行捨其相微隱，相違不立。 又為勝捨所覆障故，以勝捨受是無明分，正知是明，相違害故，是故不立。 問：輕安在定一切地有，何故不立輕安支？ 答：輕安浮動，初二靜慮喜受浮動相順所覆，三四靜慮行捨沈靜相違所覆，總不立支。 問：若爾，小乘何故初二立輕安支？ 答：彼據除欲界五識身及初定三識身，各除所引身麁重，故立輕安； 後以二三定中無麁識身及所引身麁重可對治故，三四定不立輕安。 今依大乘，是樂受攝，故不別立。 六約建立者，問：禪既有四，支數應同，何故初三各有五、二四各唯四？ 答：為欲界欲惡難除，二定喜深難離，欲為牢強對治，是故初禪及三各立五支。 以初定及三無此難遣，是故二四唯立四支。 七約決擇者，問：若初定支，亦二禪耶？ 答：應作四句。 有是初支非第二，謂尋、伺； 有是第二非初禪，謂內等淨； 有通初二，謂喜、樂、定； 有非初二，謂除上說。 又問：若是初支，亦第三耶？ 答：亦作四句。 有是初禪非第三，謂尋、伺、喜； 有是第三非初禪，謂捨、念、慧； 有亦初禪亦第三，謂樂及心一境性； 有是俱非，謂除上說。 又尋伺喜樂是初非四、捨受捨念是四非初、心一境性亦初亦四，與上相違非初非四。 以第二等望，餘各四句，準之可見。 八約道品者，問：若是禪支，亦道支耶？ 答：應作四句。 或是禪支非道支，謂尋、伺、樂及不苦不樂； 或道支非禪支，謂精進、信、輕安、正思、語、業、命； 或俱，謂喜、行捨、念、定、慧； 或俱非，除上所說。 第四業用者，有四：一約發智斷惑、二約發通起用、三約諸定超間、四約定用自在。 初中，若諸外道修得四禪起有流智，伏欲界惑得生上界，或取無想以為涅槃。 若諸小乘，依此能發無漏聖智，斷人我惑得阿羅漢。 若菩薩人，或為眾生示入世定而不隨生，或復依此成於無相無生等觀發真聖智，斷除二障得成佛果。 若普賢等及諸如來，依此示入百千三昧。 第二發通者，外道依此發起五通，見過未等起諸邪見。 二乘依此所起六通，然有限分。 菩薩依此發五或六，分齊過小，隨位應知。 普賢及佛依此所發或六或十，皆無限分。 第三諸定超間者，外道於定不得自在。 二乘或有次第出入，或於九定次第超入，或雙雙超或首尾超。 菩薩能依一定出百千定等。 普賢及佛能入塵數定，一一復各生於塵等，如是自在無有限量。 第四定用者，外道總無。 二乘只有依定發用，不得即定為用。 若初教菩薩在於定中，雖無五識業用，由前願力擊發餘識示有作用，說為俱起。 若終教菩薩，能即定即用，雙行自在，以理事無礙故。 若頓教菩薩，定用為一，雙絕兩名故。 若圓教普賢，即在定為起用，而不改定相，以二事相即故。 七辨相者，四禪即為四，一一中各有四義：一離障、二修行對治、三修利益、四彼二依止三昧。 初禪離欲，等明離障，諸說不同。 依《毘曇》，離五欲故名離欲，斷十惡故名離惡，除五蓋故名離不善法。 依《成實》，斷貪欲心名為離欲，以離欲故亦捨殺等名離惡不善法。 依《智論》，離五欲名離欲，除五蓋名離惡不善。 又諸欲發惡行墮極下惡處名欲惡，違生善品名不善，或總欲界諸惡不善俱皆捨離。 依《雜集論》第八云「能斷欲界欲恚害等。 」二有覺有觀者，是修對治。 《智論》云「譬如振鈴，麁聲喻覺、細聲喻觀。 > Fifth, regarding \[their distribution among\] the limbs: Question: Since all equally have the meaning of compliance, which is the meaning of a limb, why does the first dhyāna take vitarka and vicāra as antidotes and not establish internal confidence, and so forth? Answer: Because this is the first dhyāna, one searches out and examines the faults of the desire realm, and is able to counter those coarse searchings and examinings of desire and the like; therefore, these limbs are established. Internal confidence is concealed by these coarse marks of vitarka and vicāra, and its essence is not manifested; therefore, it is not established. Question: Why are equanimity, mindfulness, and correct knowledge combined into internal confidence in the second dhyāna, and only distinguished in the third and fourth dhyānas? Answer: In the second dhyāna, equanimity and the others are concealed by the coarse mark of joy; therefore, they are not differentiated. It is merely designated as internal confidence in terms of departing from external vitarka and vicāra. Question: If the three dharmas are equally differentiated \[later\], why does the fourth dhyāna not establish correct knowledge? Answer: Correct knowledge is distinct and evident, whereas in the fourth dhyāna the mark of equanimity toward activities (saṃskāropekṣā) is subtle and concealed; since their marks are contrary, it is not established. Furthermore, because it is covered and obscured by superior equanimity—since the feeling of superior equanimity belongs to the portion of non-knowledge (avidyā), whereas correct knowledge is clarity, they oppose and obstruct each other—therefore, it is not established. Question: Pliancy (praśrabdhi) exists in concentration across all stages; why is a limb of pliancy not established? Answer: Pliancy is fluttering and light; in the first and second dhyānas, it is covered by its conformity with the fluctuating nature of the feeling of joy, while in the third and fourth dhyānas, it is covered by its opposition to the deep tranquility of equanimity toward activities; thus, it is not established as a limb at all. Question: If so, why does the Hīnayāna establish the limb of pliancy in the first and second dhyānas? Answer: They establish pliancy on the basis of eliminating the five-consciousness-bodies of the desire realm and the three-consciousness-bodies of the first dhyāna, each eliminating the bodily heaviness induced thereby; later, because in the second and third dhyānas there are no coarse consciousness-bodies or induced bodily heaviness to be countered, pliancy is not established in the third and fourth dhyānas. Now, according to the Mahāyāna, it is subsumed under the feeling of pleasure, and thus is not separately established. Sixth, regarding their constitution: Question: Since there are four dhyānas, the number of limbs should be identical; why do the first and third each have five, while the second and fourth each have only four? Answer: Because the desires and evils of the desire realm are difficult to eliminate, and the joy of the second dhyāna is profound and difficult to depart from, one wishes to provide strong antidotes; therefore, the first dhyāna and the third each establish five limbs. Since the first dhyāna and the third \[as antidotes to those difficulties\] leave the second and fourth without such intractable faults to discard, the second and fourth only establish four limbs. Seventh, regarding discrimination: Question: If it is a limb of the first dhyāna, is it also of the second dhyāna? Answer: One should form four propositions: (1) There are those that are limbs of the first and not of the second, namely vitarka and vicāra; (2) there are those that are of the second and not of the first, namely internal purity \[and confidence\]; (3) there are those common to both the first and second, namely joy, pleasure, and concentration; (4) there are those belonging to neither the first nor the second, namely those other than the above. Again, Question: If it is a limb of the first, is it also of the third? Answer: One likewise forms four propositions: (1) There are those of the first dhyāna and not of the third, namely vitarka, vicāra, and joy; (2) there are those of the third and not of the first, namely equanimity, mindfulness, and wisdom; (3) there are those of both the first dhyāna and the third, namely pleasure and one-pointedness of mind; (4) there are those that are neither, namely those other than the above. Furthermore, vitarka, vicāra, joy, and pleasure belong to the first and not the fourth; the feeling of equanimity and equanimous mindfulness belong to the fourth and not the first; one-pointedness of mind belongs to both the first and the fourth; those contrary to the above belong to neither the first nor the fourth. Comparing the second and the rest, each likewise has four propositions, which can be understood accordingly. Eighth, regarding the factors of awakening: Question: If it is a dhyāna limb, is it also a limb of the path (mārgāṅga)? Answer: One should form four propositions: (1) It may be a dhyāna limb and not a path limb, namely vitarka, vicāra, pleasure, and neither-pain-nor-pleasure; (2) or a path limb and not a dhyāna limb, namely vigor, faith, pliancy, correct thought, \[correct\] speech, \[correct\] action, and \[correct\] livelihood; (3) or both, namely joy, equanimity toward activities, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom; (4) or neither, those other than the above. Fourth, karmic function has four aspects: (1) regarding generating wisdom and cutting off defilements; (2) regarding generating supernormal powers and producing activities; (3) regarding leaping over and intervening among various concentrations; (4) regarding sovereignty in the function of concentration. First, if non-Buddhists cultivate and attain the four dhyānas, they give rise to defiled wisdom, subdue the defilements of the desire realm, and obtain rebirth in higher realms, or take the non-ideation \[state\] to be nirvāṇa. If Hīnayāna practitioners, relying on this, they can generate uncontaminated noble wisdom, cut off the defilement of self-grasping, and attain arhatship. If bodhisattvas, they may, for the sake of sentient beings, manifest entering mundane concentrations without being reborn accordingly, or relying on this, fulfill contemplations of signlessness, non-arising, and the like, generate true noble wisdom, sever the two obscurations, and attain the fruit of Buddhahood. If Samantabhadra and others, as well as the Tathāgatas, relying on this, they manifest entering hundreds of thousands of samādhis. Second, regarding generating supernormal powers: non-Buddhists, relying on this, generate the five supernormal powers, seeing past and future, and so forth, yet giving rise to various wrong views. The two vehicles, relying on this, give rise to the six supernormal powers, yet these have finite limits. Bodhisattvas, relying on this, generate five or six; their scope surpasses the Hīnayāna, and should be known according to their bhūmis. Samantabhadra and the Buddhas, relying on this, generate six or ten, all without limitation. Third, regarding leaping over various concentrations: non-Buddhists do not attain sovereignty over concentration. The two vehicles may enter and emerge sequentially, or leap through the nine concentrations in sequence, or leap in pairs, or leap from start to finish. Bodhisattvas can, relying on a single concentration, manifest hundreds of thousands of concentrations, and so forth. Samantabhadra and the Buddhas can enter concentrations as numerous as dust particles, and within each one, further produce dust-particle-like \[concentrations\] and the like; such sovereignty has no limit. Fourth, regarding the function of concentration: non-Buddhists have none at all. The two vehicles only produce functions by relying on concentration; they cannot take concentration itself as function. If it is a bodhisattva of the Initial Teaching, while in concentration, although devoid of the karmic function of the five consciousnesses, due to the power of prior vows they stimulate the remaining consciousnesses to manifest having function, which is described as arising simultaneously. If it is a bodhisattva of the Final Teaching, they are able to be simultaneously in concentration and in function, acting doubly with sovereignty, because principle and phenomena are unhindered. If it is a bodhisattva of the Sudden Teaching, concentration and function are one, because both designations are obliterated. If it is Samantabhadra of the Perfect Teaching, entering concentration is itself producing function without altering the characteristics of concentration, because the two phenomena are mutually identical. Seventh, distinguishing the characteristics: the four dhyānas constitute four, and within each there are four meanings: (1) departing from hindrances; (2) cultivating the antidotes; (3) cultivating benefits; (4) the samādhi that is the basis of both. In the first dhyāna, 'departing from desires' and so forth elucidate departing from hindrances; various explanations differ. According to the Abhidharma, departing from the five desires is called 'departing from desires,' cutting off the ten evils is called 'departing from evils,' and eliminating the five hindrances is called 'departing from unwholesome dharmas.' According to the Tattvasiddhi, severing the mind of greedy desire is called 'departing from desires,' and because one departs from desires, one also abandons killing and the rest, which is called 'departing from evil and unwholesome dharmas.' According to the Dà zhìdù lùn, departing from the five desires is called 'departing from desires,' and eliminating the five hindrances is called 'departing from evil and unwholesome \[dharmas\].' Furthermore, desires that give rise to evil actions and cause one to fall into the lowest evil destinies are called 'desire-evils'; those that conflict with the generation of wholesome factors are called 'unwholesome'; or all evils and unwholesome states of the desire realm are collectively abandoned. According to fascicle eight of the Samuccaya: 'It can cut off the desire, ill will, harmfulness, and the like of the desire realm.' Second, 'having vitarka and vicāra' constitutes cultivating the antidotes. The Dà zhìdù lùn states: 'For example, like shaking a bell, the coarse sound is an analogy for vitarka, and the subtle sound is an analogy for vicāra.' > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [12.14.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14.3) 」《雜集》等論名為尋伺，謂麁緣曰尋、細緣曰伺，如《唯識論》第七說也。 以尋求伺察欲界過患，能除滅故。 《瑜伽》第十一，以不淨治欲、慈治恚、悲治害故，修三行對治三患，入初禪定也。 三離生喜樂者，是修行利益。 遠法師云：慶背欲惡是故生喜，離過猗息故名為樂。 又欣悅名喜。 依薩婆多，身心調暢故名為樂，體是輕安。 依大乘，適悅名樂，體是受數。 又《雜集》第八，由尋伺支治所治已，得離生喜樂故。 解云：得離所治，生此喜樂，故為利益。 四入初禪者，是彼二依止三昧，是彼對治及利益支所依止定，何故不說所離障，但云前二？ 釋：障為所斷，非是支故。 《雜集》第八云「心一境性是彼二所依自性支，依止定力尋等轉故。 」解云：專住一境，令心不散，名心一境。 第二禪中，初滅覺觀者是離障，謂覺觀麁動，發生三識，嬈亂二禪，如淨水波動名無所見。 二內清淨等者，明對治行等。 小乘是信能淨心相，謂內等淨離外鼓動，定等內流名內等淨。 大乘內淨，即攬三禪捨、念、正知三法為性，《顯揚論》第十九云「內等淨以捨念正知為其體。 」《瑜伽》六十三亦同此說。 心一處無覺觀者，《舍利弗阿毘曇》言欲界地中心行六處，以六識身取六塵故。 初禪地中心行四處，以四識身取四境故，以初禪已上無鼻舌識故。 二禪已上心行一處，唯意識身，緣法塵故。 又復相續不斷亦名一處，論云「修無流不斷三昧，行一境故。 」解云：無流觸實修治。 不斷等，釋一處等也。 三定生喜樂者，是修行利益支。 前初禪中創背欲惡慶離生喜，此二禪中法從內生慶得生喜。 喜樂同前釋。 四入二禪者，是彼二依止三昧。 第三禪中離喜者，是其離障，謂二禪喜心分別想生動亂多過，三禪轉寂，故須除遣。 猶如貧人得寶生喜、失則深憂，莫若憂喜俱絕方為快樂。 二行捨成就念慧者，是修對治支。 謂捨是捨支，行心調停捨彼喜過，故名為捨。 此是捨數，簡別捨受，故名行捨成就。 念者是念支，謂念前喜過，守心一境故。 慧者，餘論名正知支，謂分別喜過，明見其失，故成對治。 又此三沈細寂靜，下地喜踴躍浮動，動靜相違，故成治也。 《顯揚論》云「住捨者，於已生喜不忍可故，平等正直無動安住。 念者，於喜不行中，不忘明記故。 正知者，或時失念喜行，於此分別正知而住。 三身受樂者，是利益支，謂喜在意地、樂在五識，故云身受。 」又釋：樂受有二，一下品適悅在心、二上品遍身心。 就所遍處，從末為名，故曰身受。 言諸賢聖能說能捨者，顯樂深勝，唯有賢聖能說為過、堪能捨離，非凡所能，故是深也。 四常念樂受入三禪者，是彼二依止三昧，謂常念自地樂受利益，入此禪矣。 第四禪中，初斷棄苦等者，是其離障。 三禪得樂雖是利益，望第四禪極為妨害，如重病人觀妙音樂為障四禪，故須除遣。 若爾，應但除樂，何故斷苦？ 釋云：理實苦根前位已離，至此云斷，為欲對樂雙辨故也。 憂喜已滅者，總絕四受，明禪不動故。 《瑜伽》第十一云「初靜慮出離憂根，第二靜慮出離苦根，第三靜慮出離喜根，第四靜慮出離樂根。 」又彼論云「問：何故苦根初靜慮中說未斷耶？ 答：彼品麁重，猶未斷故。 問：何緣生在初靜慮者，苦根未斷而不現行？ 答：由其助伴相對憂根所攝諸苦，彼已斷故。 若初靜慮已斷苦根，是即行者入初靜慮及第二時，受所作住差別應無，由二俱有喜及樂故。 」解云：以初二定俱有喜樂，若齊離苦即二受不殊故。 初不斷苦之麁重，然無現行，故有樂支。 又小乘此樂受但是輕安，非樂受故。 又初禪喜劣，猶為苦根，麁重隨故，不名滅苦； 二禪喜勝，滅苦麁重，名滅苦根。 問。 憂喜先除，文言已滅。 苦亦久除，何不言先滅？ 答：為苦對樂，樂未亡故，雙言不便故不言先； 憂喜不爾，故不例也。 > Treatises such as the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā name them investigation and discernment: coarse mental engagement is called investigation, and subtle mental engagement is called discernment, as explained in the seventh fascicle of the Vijñaptimātratāsiddhi-śāstra. Because one investigates and discerns the faults and afflictions of the desire realm, one is able to eradicate them. Fascicle eleven of the Yogācārabhūmi explains that because foulness remedies desire, loving-kindness remedies malice, and compassion remedies cruelty, one cultivates these three practices to counter the three afflictions and enters the concentration of the first dhyāna. Third, 'joy and pleasure born of separation' is the benefit of practice. Master Yuan states: 'Rejoicing in turning one's back on the evils of desire gives rise to joy; the tranquil cessation that comes from leaving faults behind is called pleasure.' Furthermore, delight is called joy. According to the Sarvāstivāda, the harmonious ease of body and mind is called pleasure, its essence being pliancy (praśrabdhi). According to the Mahāyāna, gratification is called pleasure, its essence being the mental factor of sensation (vedanā). Moreover, the eighth fascicle of the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā states that by means of the factors of investigation and discernment, having remedied what was to be remedied, one attains the joy and pleasure born of separation. The explanation says: attaining separation from what is to be remedied gives rise to this joy and pleasure, which therefore constitute the benefit. Fourth, 'entering the first dhyāna' is the samādhi that serves as the basis for those two: it is the concentration on which both the antidotal factors and the benefit factors rely. Why does it not mention the hindrances departed from, but only refers to the former two? Explanation: hindrances are what is eliminated, not factors of dhyāna. Fascicle eight of the Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā says: 'One-pointedness of mind is the intrinsic factor that serves as the basis for those two, because investigation and the rest operate in reliance upon the power of concentration.' The explanation says: fixing solely on a single object so that the mind is not scattered is called one-pointedness of mind. In the second dhyāna, first, 'quelling initial and sustained application' is the departure from hindrances: initial and sustained application are coarse and agitated, giving rise to three consciousnesses and troubling the second dhyāna, just as when clear water is stirred by waves nothing can be seen. Second, 'inner clarity and so forth' clarifies the practice of the antidote and so forth. In the Hīnayāna, this is faith, which is able to purify the marks of the mind; that is, inner tranquility is free from external agitation, and the inward flow of concentration and the rest is called inner tranquility. In the Mahāyāna, inner clarity takes the three factors of the third dhyāna—equanimity, mindfulness, and correct awareness—as its nature. Fascicle nineteen of the Prakaraṇāryavācā says: 'Inner tranquility takes equanimity, mindfulness, and correct awareness as its essence.' Fascicle sixty-three of the Yogācārabhūmi also agrees with this explanation. As for 'the mind fixed on one place without initial and sustained application,' the Śāriputrābhidharma states that on the level of the desire realm the mind operates in six places, because the six consciousness-bodies grasp the six sense-objects. On the level of the first dhyāna the mind operates in four places, because four consciousness-bodies grasp four sense-objects, since from the first dhyāna upward the nose and tongue consciousnesses do not exist. From the second dhyāna upward the mind operates in one place, solely as the mental-consciousness body apprehending mental objects (dharmas). Furthermore, continuous unbroken succession is also called 'one place'; the treatise states: 'Cultivating the continuous undefiled samādhi, one proceeds in a single object.' The explanation says: the undefiled touches the real, which is cultivation; 'continuous,' etc., explains 'one place,' etc. Third, 'joy and pleasure born of concentration' is the factor of the benefit of practice. In the preceding first dhyāna, one first turned one's back on the evils of desire, rejoicing in separation and thereby giving rise to joy; in this second dhyāna, phenomena arise from within, rejoicing in attainment and thereby giving rise to joy. Joy and pleasure are explained as before. Fourth, 'entering the second dhyāna' is the samādhi that serves as the basis for those two. In the third dhyāna, 'freedom from joy' is its departure from hindrances: the joyous mind of the second dhyāna gives rise to agitation and numerous faults through conceptualization, whereas the third dhyāna is increasingly quiescent, and thus \[joy\] must be dispelled. It is like a poor person who feels joy on finding a jewel and deep distress on losing it; nothing is better than the severance of both distress and joy, which alone is true happiness. Second, 'accomplishing mindfulness and wisdom with equanimity of mental formations' is the cultivation of the antidotal factors. 'Equanimity' is the factor of equanimity (upekṣā): adjusting and harmonizing the active mind to abandon the faults of that joy is called equanimity. This is the mental factor of equanimity of mental formations (saṃskāropekṣā), distinguished from neutral sensation (upekṣā-vedanā), and is therefore called 'accomplishing equanimity of mental formations.' 'Mindfulness' is the factor of mindfulness: mindfully recollecting the previous faults of joy and guarding the mind in one-pointedness. 'Wisdom' is named the factor of correct awareness in other treatises: discerning the faults of joy and clearly seeing its defects, it thereby constitutes an antidote. Moreover, these three are quiet, subtle, and quiescent, whereas the joy of the lower level is leaping and buoyant; agitation and quiescence are mutually opposed, and thus they constitute an antidote. The Prakaraṇāryavācā states: 'Abiding in equanimity means not delighting in or approving of arisen joy, and abiding impartial, upright, unmoving. Mindfulness means not forgetting and clearly retaining while joy is inactive. Correct awareness means, if at times mindfulness is lost and joy operates, discerning it, correctly knowing it, and abiding.' Third, 'experiencing pleasure in the body' is the factor of benefit: joy resides in the mental ground, whereas pleasure resides in the five consciousnesses, which is why it is called 'experienced in the body.' Another explanation: pleasurable sensation is of two kinds: first, inferior gratification in the mind; second, superior gratification pervading both body and mind. Named after its peripheral aspect based on where it pervades, it is therefore called 'experienced in the body.' The phrase 'which the noble ones can speak of and can abandon' reveals that this pleasure is deep and supreme: only the noble ones are able to speak of it as a fault and are competent to abandon it; it is beyond the capability of ordinary beings, and therefore it is deep. Fourth, 'constantly mindful of the sensation of pleasure, one enters the third dhyāna' is the samādhi that serves as the basis for those two: constantly mindful of the benefit of the pleasurable sensation of one's own level, one enters this dhyāna. In the fourth dhyāna, first, 'completely abandoning suffering and \[pleasure\]' is its departure from hindrances. Although attaining pleasure in the third dhyāna is a benefit, with respect to the fourth dhyāna it is an extreme impediment; just as a severely ill person regards exquisite music as an obstacle to the fourth dhyāna, it must be dispelled. If so, one should only eliminate pleasure; why abandon suffering? Explanation: in actual truth, the faculty of suffering was already departed from in a previous stage; stating 'abandoned' here is done for the purpose of clarifying both together in opposition to pleasure. 'Grief and joy having already ceased' marks the complete cessation of the four sensations, clarifying that the dhyāna is unmoving. Fascicle eleven of the Yogācārabhūmi states: 'In the first dhyāna one transcends the faculty of grief; in the second dhyāna one transcends the faculty of suffering; in the third dhyāna one transcends the faculty of joy; in the fourth dhyāna one transcends the faculty of pleasure.' Furthermore, that treatise says: 'Question: Why is the faculty of suffering said not to be abandoned in the first dhyāna? Answer: Because the coarseness of that category has not yet been abandoned. Question: For what reason does one born in the first dhyāna not have the faculty of suffering actively present, even though it has not been abandoned? Answer: Because its companion, the various sufferings comprised by the corresponding faculty of grief, has already been abandoned. If the faculty of suffering were already abandoned in the first dhyāna, then there would be no distinction between the sensations produced and abiding when a practitioner enters the first dhyāna and when entering the second, since both possess joy and pleasure.' The explanation says: because both the first and second dhyānas possess joy and pleasure, if they were equally free from suffering, the two sensations would not differ. In the first dhyāna, the coarseness of suffering is not abandoned, yet there is no active manifestation, and therefore it possesses the factor of pleasure. Moreover, in the Hīnayāna, this sensation of pleasure is merely pliancy, not the sensation of pleasure. Furthermore, the joy of the first dhyāna is inferior and still accompanied by the coarseness of the faculty of suffering, and thus is not called the cessation of suffering; the joy of the second dhyāna is superior and eliminates the coarseness of suffering, and thus is called the cessation of the faculty of suffering. Question: Grief and joy are eliminated beforehand, and the text says 'having already ceased.' Suffering was also eliminated long before; why does it not say 'having previously ceased'? Answer: Because suffering is paired against pleasure, and pleasure has not yet vanished; stating both together \[with 'previously'\] would be inconvenient, so it does not say 'previously.' Grief and joy are not like this, and therefore they do not follow this precedent. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ### [12.14.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14.4) 若爾憂喜既不對樂，何須舉之？ 釋云：樂盡之處總結四亡，顯禪不動故須舉耳。 二不苦不樂者，是利益支。 餘禪之中皆先明治，今此先明利益。 乘前斷苦斷樂，對之即明不苦不樂，彰利益義便故次論之，理實在後。 問：此正遣樂，何不但言不樂，而云不苦不樂？ 答：為明捨受不同苦樂故。 問：前離障云憂喜已滅，何不亦言不憂不喜？ 答：有二義。 一非此正滅，亦不與樂相對，故不類苦。 二若攝五受為三受時，憂喜攝入苦樂中故，以苦樂寬故，是故捨受對彼但名不苦不樂。 三行捨念淨者，是對治支。 前三禪中為樂所覆故捨念不淨，今此離彼下地樂貪故云清淨。 清淨捨念與樂貪相違，故成對治。 四入四禪者，是彼二依止三昧。 下釋四空亦各有四，然此經中略無對治行，論主準義置之。 初所離中過色想者，依《成實論》，遠離色想者，遠離香味觸想。 滅有對者，還滅色香味觸之想，以彼色等對礙故。 不念別異想者，滅緣聲想，以聲藉眾緣擊發而生，故名別異。 亦依大乘不同前說，謂色雖多種，統攝為六，謂五塵及法處。 要略唯三：一可見有對，眼識所行； 二不可見有對，餘四識所行； 三不可見無對，謂意識所行表無表色等。 此中過色想者，以離眼識所行可見色想故。 何故不言過色，但言過色想耶？ 釋：以在色地修起此定，未捨色形故。 何故但言滅想，而不言餘心法耶？ 釋：理實通有，以想取相強故。 滅有對者，離餘四識所行不可見有對四境色故，以想與心俱名為和合，亦是心與境合故也。 不念別異想者，離意識所緣法處色想，論言意識分別一切法故。 說別異想者，以相隱重釋，謂意識通緣一切諸法，於法處中簡取緣色義邊意識想滅，緣餘意識此中不遣，舉其所滅簡所不滅，故云別異。 問：香味之想初禪已離，色聲觸想二禪已除，今云何言空定滅耶？ 答：遠釋云「治有四種：一壞對治，謂方便道觀下有流無常等故； 二斷對治，謂無礙道正斷下過； 三持對治，謂解脫道為首，及後一切無間解脫持彼無為不令失壞； 四遠分對治，謂解脫道為首，及後一切無礙解脫遠令前障畢竟不起。 今此空定據第四治，故說此離。 」今更釋：於二禪中雖無色聲觸想，得借初禪三識之心見聞覺觸，是故乃至第四禪中猶有此想，今得空定故說滅之。 若爾，香味二想何故亦說？ 釋：有二義，一亦有借故； 二以與聲觸同是不可見有對色故同辨，如第四禪滅憂苦等準之，是名離障。 二對治者，論有三句。 過色等境界想者，空定離彼色等境想故名過也。 云何過？ 以不分別故。 云何不分別？ 以見無我故。 此辨實治也。 問：此中既有修行對治，為有支不？ 答：依《瓔珞本業經》，四無色定各有五支，謂想、護、止、觀、一心。 今依《雜集》等論，諸無色定，奢摩他一味想故，無支分建立也。 論主但約翻所離障、顯能治行，以義說之，非約支分。 知無邊虛空者，是修行利益。 謂三色想絕、廓爾無邊，即入虛空無色定者，是彼二依止三昧。 二過虛空相者是名離障，見外念麁分別過患是名修行對治，謂外緣虛空心念麁患故。 能見此失，知過而除彼想，故云對治也。 知無邊識者，是修行利益，謂捨外住內也。 定體可知。 三中過識是離障。 見其麁事念分別過患，是修行對治，謂猶見住識為麁患故。 知無所有者，是修行利益。 謂前捨外住內猶為麁念，莫若內外雙離、俱無所有，方為利益。 定體可知。 四中離障可知。 見彼住無所有想麁念過故，能治彼想，名修對治。 知非有想非無想安隱者，麁想既盡名為非有、細想未泯名曰非無。 此中非無，約聖智說，非謂世定覺此非無。 定體可知。 下明入意，謂但隨順化眾生法入此八定，非是自行所樂故云也。 > If so, since sorrow and joy do not directly correspond to pleasure, why must they be mentioned? The explanation says: at the point where pleasure is exhausted, all four are summed up as gone, in order to show that the dhyāna is unmoving; hence they must be mentioned. Second, 'neither-pain-nor-pleasure' is the benefit limb. In the other dhyānas, the antidote is always clarified first, whereas here the benefit is clarified first. Following upon the preceding abandonment of pain and abandonment of pleasure, in contrast with them it immediately clarifies neither-pain-nor-pleasure; to demonstrate the meaning of benefit expediently, it is discussed next, though in principle it is actually subsequent. Question: This precisely dispels pleasure; why does it not simply say 'not pleasure', but says 'neither pain nor pleasure'? Answer: In order to clarify that neutral feeling (upekṣā-vedanā) is not the same as pain or pleasure. Question: In the preceding abandonment of hindrances it said that sorrow and joy are already extinguished; why does it not also say 'neither sorrow nor joy'? Answer: There are two senses. First, they are not what is precisely extinguished here, nor do they directly correspond to pleasure; hence they are not classed with pain. Second, when the five feelings are subsumed into the three feelings, sorrow and joy are subsumed into pain and pleasure, because pain and pleasure are broader; therefore, in contrast to them, neutral feeling is merely called 'neither pain nor pleasure'. Third, 'the purification of mindfulness in equanimity' is the antidote limb. In the preceding three dhyānas, equanimity and mindfulness were not pure because they were veiled by pleasure; here, being free from craving for the pleasure of those lower stages, it is said to be purified. Purified equanimity and mindfulness conflict with craving for pleasure, and thus constitute an antidote. Fourth, 'entering the fourth dhyāna' is the samādhi that serves as the basis for both. Below, in explaining the four formless attainments, each also has four \[aspects\]; however, in this sūtra the practice of the antidote is omitted, and the Treatise Master supplied it based on the principle. In the first, under what is abandoned, 'transcending perceptions of form': according to the \*Tattvasiddhi-śāstra\*, being far removed from perceptions of form means being far removed from perceptions of odors, tastes, and tangibles. 'Extinguishing \[perceptions of\] resistance' means likewise extinguishing perceptions of visible form, odors, tastes, and tangibles, because those forms and so forth possess obstructive resistance. 'Not attending to perceptions of variety' means extinguishing perceptions that take sounds as object, because sound arises depending on the striking of multiple conditions, and is therefore called variety. Also, relying on the Mahāyāna, it differs from the preceding explanation: although form is of many kinds, it is subsumed under six, namely the five sense objects and the dharmāyatana. In summary there are only three: first, visible with resistance, the domain of the eye consciousness; second, invisible with resistance, the domain of the remaining four consciousnesses; third, invisible without resistance, meaning unmanifest form and so forth, which are the domain of the mental consciousness. Here, 'transcending perceptions of form' means being free from perceptions of visible form, which is the domain of the eye consciousness. Why does it not say 'transcending form', but only says 'transcending perceptions of form'? Explanation: Because one cultivates and gives rise to this concentration while in the form realm, not yet having abandoned the physical shape of form. Why does it only say 'extinguishing perceptions' and not mention the remaining mental factors? Explanation: In principle they are actually all present, but perception is strong in grasping characteristics. 'Extinguishing \[perceptions of\] resistance' means being free from the invisible resistant form of the four sense objects, which are the domain of the remaining four consciousnesses, because perception being accompanied by the mind is called conjunction, and it also means the conjunction of mind with object. 'Not attending to perceptions of variety' means being free from perceptions of form included in the dharmāyatana, which is the objective realm of the mental consciousness, for the treatises state that the mental consciousness discriminates all phenomena. Speaking of 'perceptions of variety' is an explanation based on the hiddenness of the characteristic: the mental consciousness universally takes all phenomena as object, and within the dharmāyatana it isolates and takes the mental consciousness's perceptions on the side of taking form as object to be extinguished; the mental consciousness that takes the remainder as object is not dispelled here; by adducing what is extinguished it distinguishes what is not extinguished, and therefore it is called 'variety'. Question: Perceptions of odor and taste are already abandoned in the first dhyāna, and perceptions of form, sound, and tangible are already eliminated in the second dhyāna; why is it now said that the concentration of \[infinite\] space extinguishes them? Answer: Master Yuan explained: 'There are four kinds of antidotes: first, the destructive antidote (prahāṇa-pratipakṣa), namely the expedient path contemplating that the lower outflows are impermanent and so forth; second, the abandonment antidote (pratipakṣa-prahāṇa), namely the unimpeded path directly cutting off the faults of the lower stages; third, the maintenance antidote (dhāraṇa-pratipakṣa), taking the path of liberation as foremost along with all subsequent uninterrupted liberations holding that unconditioned state so it is not lost; fourth, the distantly separated antidote (dūrībhāva-pratipakṣa), taking the path of liberation as foremost along with all subsequent unimpeded liberations causing the preceding obstacles never to arise at all. Here, this concentration of space is based on the fourth antidote, which is why it speaks of this abandonment.' Now to explain further: although in the second dhyāna there are no perceptions of form, sound, and tangible, one is able to borrow the mind of the three consciousnesses of the first dhyāna to see, hear, perceive, and touch; therefore, even up to the fourth dhyāna, there are still these perceptions; now that one attains the concentration of space, it is said that they are extinguished. If so, why are the two perceptions of odor and taste also mentioned? Explanation: There are two senses: first, they can also be borrowed; second, because together with sound and tangible they are equally invisible resistant forms, they are treated alike, which should be understood in analogy to the fourth dhyāna extinguishing sorrow, pain, and so forth. This is called the abandonment of obstacles. Second, as for the antidote, the treatise has three clauses. 'Transcending perceptions of objects such as form': because the concentration of space is free from those perceptions of objects such as form, it is called 'transcending'. How does one transcend? By not discriminating. How does one not discriminate? By seeing selflessness. This distinguishes the actual antidote. Question: Since here there is the practice of the antidote, are there limbs or not? Answer: According to the \*Yingluo benye jing\*, the four formless concentrations each have five limbs, namely perception, protection, śamatha, vipaśyanā, and one-pointedness of mind. Now, according to treatises such as the \*Abhidharmasamuccaya-bhāṣya\*, all formless concentrations have the notion of a single taste of śamatha, and therefore no establishment of limbs. The Treatise Master merely spoke of them in terms of meaning to reverse the obstacles abandoned and to reveal the practicing antidote, not in terms of limbs. 'Knowing boundless space' is the benefit of cultivation. That is, the three perceptions of form are severed, vast and boundless, and 'entering the formless concentration of space' is the samādhi that serves as the basis for both. Second, 'transcending the marks of space' is called the abandonment of obstacles; 'seeing the faults of the coarse discrimination of outward attention' is called the cultivation of the antidote, meaning that the coarse fault is the mind's attention outwardly taking space as an object. Being able to see this fault, knowing the error and removing that perception, is therefore called the antidote. 'Knowing boundless consciousness' is the benefit of cultivation, meaning abandoning the outer and abiding in the inner. The essence of the concentration can be understood. In the third, 'transcending consciousness' is the abandonment of obstacles. 'Seeing the faults of the coarse discrimination of thinking about things' is the cultivation of the antidote, meaning still seeing abiding in consciousness as a coarse fault. 'Knowing nothingness' is the benefit of cultivation. That is, the preceding abandonment of the outer to abide in the inner was still a coarse thought; nothing is better than abandoning both inner and outer so that both are nothing at all, which only then constitutes the benefit. The essence of the concentration can be understood. In the fourth, the abandonment of obstacles can be understood. 'Seeing the coarse thought fault of abiding in the perception of nothingness', being able to remedy that perception is called cultivating the antidote. 'Knowing the tranquility of neither-perception-nor-non-perception': since coarse perception is already exhausted it is called 'neither-perception', and since subtle perception has not yet disappeared it is called 'nor-non-perception'. Here, 'non-non-perception' is spoken in terms of noble wisdom, not meaning that worldly concentration is aware of this non-non-perception. The essence of the concentration can be understood. Below, the intention of entering is clarified, meaning that one enters these eight concentrations merely in accord with the Dharma of transforming sentient beings, not because it is what is relished in one's own practice; hence it is stated. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733~en-mt.12.14.1) — English, machine translation ## Linked texts (3) - [འཕགས་པ་བློ་གྲོས་མི་ཟད་པས་བསྟན་པ་རྒྱ་ཆེར་འགྲེལ་པ](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.sanskrit.mahayanasutra.sastra.ksayamatinirdesatika*bo.298) — Classical Tibetan - [大方廣佛華嚴經隨疏演義鈔](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1736.61.63) — Classical Chinese - [大方廣佛華嚴經疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1735.36.13) — Classical Chinese --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1733.12.14) · Pramāṇa