大方廣佛華嚴經疏 36.12

36.12

第二「佛子是菩薩」下證入中分二：初結前，即何時修證，謂在三昧地時是修行時，正修行竟是證入時。論經云「住此明地，因如說行」故。今經闕如說行言。若但云住地，豈初安住即得此禪？但前已有修行之言，故今略耳。後「即離」下即何所修。修何所證？謂證八定。八定之義廣如別章，略以四門分別：一入意；二釋名；三體性；四釋文，即當辨相。今初。下經云「但隨順法故，行而無所染著。」論云「以何義故入禪無色無量神通？為五種眾生故。一為禪樂憍慢眾生故入諸禪，謂得世禪恃以生慢。二為無色解脫憍慢眾生故入無色定，謂外道證此以為涅槃，恃以生慢；菩薩示入八禪，一一過彼，故攝伏之。三為苦惱眾生入慈悲無量，令安善處永與樂故入慈無量，應解彼苦令不受故入悲無量。四為得解脫眾住故入喜捨無量，謂喜其所得，自離動亂故。五為邪歸依眾生故入勝神通力，令正信故。」又示入禪定，示定寂靜超欲等過，令物倣故。善自調練，知純熟故。寄位次第，法應爾故。尚不同二乘自為，豈與凡外而同年？然無量神通即是厭果，論主併舉者，欲顯皆為順法故。云何順法？為順菩薩大悲化生法故。二釋名者，先通、後別。通中先釋四禪。禪那，西音，此云靜慮。靜謂寂靜，慮謂審慮。故《瑜伽》三十三云「於一所緣，繫念寂靜而審思慮，故名靜慮。」是以靜能斷結、慮能正觀。諸無色定有靜無慮，雖能斷結不能正觀；欲界等持有慮無靜，雖能正觀不能斷結；故唯色界獨受斯稱。次無色定者，《婆沙》百四十一云「此四地中，超過一切有色法故，違害一切有色法故，色法於彼無容生故。」《俱舍》云「無色謂無色。若大眾部及化地部，亦許有色，細故名無。」《俱舍論》中廣破有色。次釋別名者，初四禪者，一有尋有伺靜慮、二無尋無伺靜慮、三離喜靜慮、四離樂靜慮。《俱舍．定品》云「初具伺喜樂，後漸離前支」，即斯義也。無色別名，至文當釋。三體性者，《婆沙》云四靜慮有二種：一修得，《俱舍論》云是善性攝心一境性，以善等持為自性故。若兼助伴，五蘊為性。二生得，隨地所繫，五蘊為性。皆有色者，定共戒故。無色體性，但除於色，餘義同前，故《俱舍》云「無色亦如是」。四蘊離下地，大乘宗中亦無異轍。若會相歸性，則八定支林一切皆空，若事盡理現皆如來藏，泯絕無寄則定亂兩亡，若事理圓融一即一切。第四釋文，初明四禪、後說四空。四禪之中雖支有多少，論主並勒為四：一離障、二對治、三利益、四彼二依止三昧。四中後三是支，初一非支。雖後後所離是前前支，望於當地並皆非支。然四禪通說有十八支，謂初三各五、二四皆四。為欲惡難除，第二禪喜深難拔故初三各五，初三不然，故二四唯四。其間除重則唯有十，謂一覺、二觀，此唯初禪；三捨、四念，此通後二；五喜，局於前兩；六樂，該於前三；七者一心，遍於諸地；八內淨，唯二；九正知，唯三；十捨受，唯四。若分二樂則有十一，若內淨無別體則唯有九。此等皆為順益於禪，故立支名，故《瑜伽》十一云「諸靜慮中雖有餘法，然此勝故。於修定者為恩重故，偏立為支。」今初。初禪，一即離欲惡不善法者，此明離障，以一即離貫於下三。然諸論說大同小異。若《毘曇》離五欲故名為離欲，斷十惡故名為離惡，除五蓋故名離不善法。若《智論》八十八云「離欲者，謂離五欲惡不善法，謂離五蓋。五蓋將人入惡道故名惡，障善法故名不善法。」若辨蓋欲之相，廣如《智論》十九及《瑜伽》十一。《雜集》第八，斷欲恚害，恚即是惡，害即不善法。《瑜伽》三十三亦合惡不善法。彼論云「離欲者，欲有二種：一煩惱欲、二事欲。離亦有二：一相應離、二境界離。言離惡不善法者，煩惱欲因所生種種惡不善法，即身口惡行。」此意則總棄欲界諸惡不善，已明離障。二有覺有觀者，此有二支，是修行對治，新譯名尋伺，皆初麁後細。《俱舍》云「尋伺心麁細」。《智論》云「譬如振鈴，麁聲喻覺，細聲喻觀。」《瑜伽》十一，以尋求伺察不淨慈悲，治欲界欲恚害障。又五蓋中，有欲恚害，不死親里國土等覺，今對惡覺起善覺察。又《智論》四十四云「小乘以欲恚惱覺為麁，親里國土等覺為細。」又唯善覺為細，於摩訶衍準皆麁，則覺空為細。三離生喜樂者，是修行利益。慶離欲惡等，是故生喜。身心猗息及得解脫之樂，故名為樂。由此名利益支。《瑜伽》三十三云「離者，已得加行究竟作意故。所言生者，由此為因為緣無間生故，已獲加行究竟果作意故。喜樂者，謂已獲得所希義，故得大輕安，身心調暢有堪能故。」四住初禪者，是彼二依止三昧，謂於所緣審正觀察心一境性，為彼對治及利益支之所依止，依止定力尋等轉故。其所離障以無行體，非是支故，不為彼依。而言初者，欲界上進此最初故。而言住者，即安住義。《瑜伽》云「安住者，謂於後時由所修習多成辦故，得隨所樂得無艱難，乃至七日七夜能正安住四禪。」此句大旨不殊。第二禪中，一滅覺觀是所離障。覺觀麁動，發生三識亂於二禪，如淨水波動則無所見故。初禪能治，為此所治，則病盡藥亡。二內淨一心無覺無觀者，是修行對治。言內淨者，小乘是信能淨心相離外散動定等內流，大乘即攬三禪三支以成故。《顯揚》十九、《瑜伽》六十三皆云內淨，以捨念正知為體。以此三法尚為喜覆，力用未勝，但能離外尋伺，故合名內淨。言一心者，釋於內義。唯緣法塵，不同初禪有三識故。故《身子阿毘曇》云「欲界地中心行六處；初禪地中心行四處，謂無鼻舌識；二禪已上心行一處，唯意識身，緣法塵故。」無覺無觀釋於淨義，不同初禪有覺觀故。前滅覺觀顯於所治，此復言無，顯能治無，故非重也。本論釋一心云：修無漏不斷三昧，行一境故。欲異世間，是如實修故。不斷者，相續一心。行一境者，對緣一心。由此即名三昧無漏。三定生喜樂，此二支是修行利益，初禪慶背欲惡，故名離生；今慶覺觀心息，故名定生。如淨鑑止水，故身心適悅。若《智論》意，即從初禪定生，欲界無定故。初但云離。二禪雖離初禪煩惱，初禪有定故。又初禪離欲，大障故。四住第二禪，即彼二依止三昧。第三禪中，一離喜者是所離障，謂二禪利益支喜心分別想生動亂，三禪轉寂，故須除遣。如貧人得寶生喜、失則深憂，莫若雙絕喜憂方為快樂。二住捨、有念、正知三支，是修行對治。一住捨者，即是捨數，揀非捨受，故諸經論皆名行捨。行心調停，捨彼喜過。故《顯揚》云「住捨者，於己生喜，不忍可故。平等正直，無動安住。」二有念者，於喜不行中不忘明記故。三正知者，或時失念喜行，於此分別正知而住，謂住於捨。《瑜伽》三十三大同於此。上三即前內淨，漸修轉勝，至此別開深細寂靜，故能治下地喜踊浮動。三「身受樂」下是利益支。於中初身受樂，正顯支體。正對二禪喜心浮動，是故但言身受於樂。設心受樂亦名身受，故《瑜伽》云「由捨念正知數修習故，令心踊躍，俱行喜受便得除滅。離喜寂靜最極寂靜，與喜相違心受生起，彼於爾時色身意身領納受樂及輕安樂，是故說言有身受樂。」又初禪喜樂，如土石山頂而有池水，二禪喜樂，如純土山頂而有池水；三禪之樂，如純土山在大池內，樂遍身外身在樂中，是故心樂亦名身受。次諸聖所說能捨有念受樂者，釋成勝義，謂下諸地無如是樂及無間捨，上地有捨而復無樂，故諸佛及佛弟子說第三禪具有能捨及念正知，而復受樂，故諸樂中三禪樂勝。此《瑜伽》意，不應別解。文中略牒，尚闕正知，但有捨念已殊上下。四住第三禪，即彼二依止三昧。第四禪中，一斷樂先除苦喜憂滅者，即是離障。三禪勝樂於此為害，如重病人。觀妙音樂為障四禪，故須除遣，故云斷樂。得此定者，即於爾時所有苦樂皆得超越，故總集說先除苦等。先之一字，總貫下三。二禪先除苦受，三禪先滅喜受，初禪先滅憂受，并今斷樂則已滅四受。依禪次第應先明憂，為對前樂先言除苦。《瑜伽》十一云「何故苦根初禪未斷？答：彼品麁重猶未斷故。若爾，何不現行？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，是則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。」此意明不斷麁重，故異二禪而無現行，故立樂支。若依小乘，初二禪之樂但是輕安而非樂受，三是樂受，故不同也。二不苦不樂者，是利益支。餘禪皆先明治，今此先明益者，乘前總無四受便，舉不苦不樂明五受。內唯有於捨，是不動故。若爾，前來亦滅憂喜，此何不言不憂不喜？答：五受明義無別不憂不喜。三受明義，苦樂攝於憂喜，故但對之。又此正斷於樂，故宜對之。三捨念清淨，此二是對治支。三禪捨念與樂受俱，此斷樂受，故云清淨。然其能治大同三禪，但所治喜樂故分二別，喜心浮動常須正知，樂受深細但須捨念。若遠顯清淨者，《瑜伽》云「從初靜慮一切下地災患已斷，謂尋伺喜樂入息出息，是故此中捨念清淨鮮白，由是此禪心住無動。」此論略舉六事，應兼無苦及憂，故《俱舍》等明此禪中離八災患。然四禪雖曰不動，而猶有捨受，未名無受。《瑜伽》十一云「又無相者，經中說為無相心定，於此定中捨根永滅。若非無相，乃至有頂皆有捨受。」四住第四禪，即彼二依止三昧。然入上色定，其身相狀如處室中，入下四空如處虛空。

Second, under “Son of the Buddha, this bodhisattva…,” the realization is divided into two: first, concluding the preceding, which is when one practices and realizes—namely, being in the samādhi-stage is the time of practicing, and directly completing the practice is the time of realization. The Treatise-sūtra says: “Abiding in this stage of illumination, by practicing as taught…” Therefore, the current sūtra lacks the words “practicing as taught.” If it merely said “abiding in the stage,” could one attain this dhyāna upon first abiding? It is only because the words “practicing” were already present earlier that they are now omitted here. Next, under “namely, detached from…,” this is what is cultivated: what does cultivation realize? That is, it realizes the eight absorptions. The meaning of the eight absorptions is extensively explained in a separate chapter; here they are distinguished briefly through four gates: first, the intention for entering; second, explaining the names; third, essential nature; fourth, explaining the text, which is to distinguish their marks. Now the first: below, the sūtra says: “Merely in accord with the Dharma, they practice without attachment.” The Treatise says: “For what reason do they enter the dhyānas, formless attainments, immeasurables, and spiritual superknowledges? It is for the sake of five kinds of sentient beings. First, for the sake of sentient beings who are arrogant regarding the bliss of dhyāna, they enter the dhyānas; that is, having attained worldly dhyāna, they rely on it to give rise to arrogance. Second, for the sake of sentient beings who are arrogant regarding formless liberation, they enter the formless absorptions; that is, non-Buddhists realize this and consider it nirvāṇa, relying on it to give rise to arrogance; the bodhisattva demonstrates entry into the eight dhyānas, surpassing them in each one, thereby subduing them. Third, for the sake of suffering sentient beings, they enter the immeasurables of loving-kindness and compassion: to establish them in good stations and bestow everlasting bliss, they enter the immeasurable loving-kindness; to resolve their suffering so that they do not experience it, they enter the immeasurable compassion. Fourth, for the sake of the assembly of those who have attained liberation, they enter the immeasurables of sympathetic joy and equanimity: that is, rejoicing in what they have attained, while being personally free from agitation. Fifth, for the sake of sentient beings with deviant refuges, they enter supreme supernormal powers to lead them to correct faith.” Furthermore, by demonstrating entry into dhyāna absorptions, they demonstrate the serenity of absorption transcending faults such as desire, causing beings to emulate them; this is because they skillfully train themselves and know when [faculties] are mature; and because according to the sequence of stations, the Dharma should be thus. This is not even the same as the two vehicles acting for their own sakes, how could it be compared with ordinary beings and non-Buddhists? However, the immeasurable supernormal powers are indeed the fruits of revulsion; that the author of the Treatise mentions them together is to show that all are for the sake of conforming to the Dharma. What is conforming to the Dharma? It is to conform to the bodhisattva's dharma of transforming sentient beings with great compassion. Second, explaining the names: first general, then specific. In the general, first explaining the four dhyānas: Dhyāna is a Western sound; here translated as “quiet contemplation” (jìnglǜ). “Quiet” means serenity; “contemplation” means careful examination. Thus Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle thirty-three, says: “Tying mindfulness in serenity to a single object and carefully contemplating, it is therefore called quiet contemplation.” Thus, serenity can sever defilements, and contemplation can practice correct observation. The various formless absorptions have serenity but lack contemplation: although they can sever defilements, they cannot practice correct observation; the samādhis of the desire realm have contemplation but lack serenity: although they can practice correct observation, they cannot sever defilements; therefore, only the form realm exclusively receives this designation. Next, regarding the formless absorptions: the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 141, says: “In these four stages, because they transcend all dharmas with form, because they oppose and eliminate all dharmas with form, and because dharmas with form have no possibility of arising there.” The *Kośa* says: “Formless means without form. As for the Mahāsāṃghika and Mahīśāsaka, they also allow that there is form, but call it ‘none’ because it is subtle.” The *Abhidharmakośa-śāstra* extensively refutes [the existence of] form. Next, explaining the specific names: of the first four dhyānas, the first is quiet contemplation with vitarka and vicāra; second, quiet contemplation without vitarka and vicāra; third, quiet contemplation detached from joy; fourth, quiet contemplation detached from pleasure. The *Kośa* chapter on *Samādhi* says: “The first is endowed with vicāra, joy, and pleasure; the subsequent progressively abandon earlier factors,” which is this very meaning. The specific names of the formless will be explained when coming to the text. Third, essential nature: the *Vibhāṣā* says the four quiet contemplations are of two kinds: first, obtained through cultivation: the *Abhidharmakośa-śāstra* says this is one-pointedness of mind subsumed under wholesome nature, because wholesome samādhi is its intrinsic nature; if including accompanying factors, the five aggregates are its nature. Second, obtained through birth: bound to the respective stage, the five aggregates are its nature. That all possess form is due to the discipline accompanying absorption. The essential nature of the formless merely eliminates form; the remaining meanings are the same as above; thus the *Kośa* says: “The formless is also like this.” The four aggregates detach from lower stages; within the Mahāyāna tradition there is also no different track. If phenomena are merged into their nature, then all the branches of the eight absorptions are empty; if phenomena are exhausted and noumenon appears, all are the tathāgatagarbha; if utterly eradicated without resting place, then absorption and distraction are both extinguished; if noumenon and phenomena are completely interpenetrated, the one is precisely the all. Fourth, explaining the text: first explaining the four dhyānas, and afterward speaking of the four formless attainments. Within the four dhyānas, although the branches vary in number, the author of the Treatise unifies them into four: first, abandoning hindrances; second, antidotes; third, benefits; fourth, the samādhi upon which those two rely. Among the four, the latter three are branches; the first is not a branch. Although what is abandoned in each successive stage is the branch of each preceding stage, in relation to the respective stage itself they are none of them branches. However, the four dhyānas are generally spoken of as having eighteen branches: namely, the first and third each have five, while the second and fourth each have four. Because desire and evil are difficult to eliminate, and the joy of the second dhyāna is deeply rooted and difficult to uproot, the first and third each have five; the second and fourth are not like this, so they only have four. Eliminating overlaps among them, there are only ten: first, initial thought (vitarka); second, discursive examination (vicāra)—these are only in the first dhyāna; third, equanimity; fourth, mindfulness—these extend through the latter two; fifth, joy, restricted to the first two; sixth, pleasure, covering the first three; seventh, one-pointedness of mind, pervasive throughout all stages; eighth, internal serenity, only in the second; ninth, correct comprehension, only in the third; tenth, feeling of equanimity, only in the fourth. If one divides the two pleasures, there are eleven; if internal serenity has no separate substance, then there are only nine. These all accord with and benefit dhyāna, and are thus established as branches; therefore Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle eleven, says: “Although there are other dharmas in the quiet contemplations, yet because these are superior, and because their benefit to the practitioner of absorption is profound, they are specifically established as branches.” Now the first: in the first dhyāna, first, “namely, detached from desires and evil, unwholesome dharmas,” explains the abandonment of hindrances, with the single phrase “namely, detached from” running through the three below. However, the treatises speak of this with slight differences. In the Abhidharma, abandoning the five desires is called being detached from desires, severing the ten unwholesome deeds is called being detached from evil, and eliminating the five hindrances is called being detached from unwholesome dharmas. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*, fascicle eighty-eight, says: “Detached from desires means being detached from the five desires; evil, unwholesome dharmas means being detached from the five hindrances. Because the five hindrances lead people into evil destinies, they are called evil; because they obstruct wholesome dharmas, they are called unwholesome dharmas.” If distinguishing the marks of hindrances and desires, it is extensive as in the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*, fascicle nineteen, and Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle eleven. Fascicle eight of the *Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā* says: severing desire, malice, and harmfulness—malice is evil, and harmfulness is unwholesome dharmas. Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle thirty-three, also combines evil and unwholesome dharmas. That treatise says: “Regarding ‘detached from desires,’ desires are of two kinds: first, defilement-desires; second, objective desires. Detachment is also of two kinds: first, detachment in conjoined state; second, detachment from cognitive objects. Speaking of ‘detached from evil, unwholesome dharmas,’ these are various evil, unwholesome dharmas arisen due to defilement-desires, namely evil actions of body and speech.” This intent then generally discards all evils and unwholesome deeds of the desire realm; this has explained the abandonment of hindrances. Second, “having initial thought and discursive examination”: these are two branches, serving as the antidotes of practice, newly translated as vitarka and vicāra, both being coarse first and subtle later. The *Kośa* says: “Vitarka and vicāra are coarseness and subtlety of mind.” The *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra* says: “Just like ringing a bell, the coarse sound illustrates vitarka, and the subtle sound illustrates vicāra.” Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle eleven, uses investigation and examination of impurity, loving-kindness, and compassion to remedy the obstacles of desire, malice, and harmfulness in the desire realm. Furthermore, among the five hindrances, there are thoughts of desire, malice, harm, non-death, relatives, and homeland; now, in contrast to evil thoughts, wholesome investigation and examination are aroused. Furthermore, the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*, fascicle forty-four, says: “The Hīnayāna considers thoughts of desire, malice, and vexation coarse, and thoughts of relatives and homeland subtle.” Moreover, only wholesome thoughts are subtle; according to the Mahāyāna, all are coarse, so contemplating emptiness is subtle. Third, “joy and pleasure born of detachment”: these are the benefits of practice. Rejoicing over detachment from desires, evils, and so forth, joy is therefore born. The soothing and calming of body and mind and the attainment of the bliss of liberation are therefore called pleasure. By this, they are named the branch of benefit. Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle thirty-three, says: “’Detachment’ means having attained the mental engagement of the culmination of preliminary practice. The stated ‘born’ means arising immediately with this as cause and condition, having obtained the mental engagement of the fruit of the culmination of preliminary practice. ‘Joy and pleasure’ means having attained the sought-after purpose, thus obtaining great pliancy, with body and mind harmonious and competent.” Fourth, “abiding in the first dhyāna”: this is the samādhi upon which those two rely; that is, the one-pointedness of mind that carefully and correctly observes the cognitive object serves as the basis upon which the branches of antidote and benefit rely, because vitarka and the rest operate in reliance upon the power of absorption. The abandoned hindrances, having no active nature and not being branches, do not serve as their basis. Saying “first” is because this is the very first step in advancing upward from the desire realm. Saying “abides” is the meaning of being securely settled. The *Yogācāra* says: “Abiding means that later, because what has been practiced has mostly been accomplished, one attains whatever one wishes without difficulty, even being able to correctly abide in the four dhyānas for seven days and seven nights.” The main import of this sentence is no different. In the second dhyāna, first, extinguishing vitarka and vicāra is the hindrance abandoned. Vitarka and vicāra are coarse and active, giving rise to three consciousnesses that disturb the second dhyāna, just as when clear water is agitated by waves nothing can be seen. The antidote of the first dhyāna becomes what is remedied by this, so the sickness being exhausted, the medicine is discarded. Second, internal serenity, one-pointedness of mind, without vitarka and without vicāra: these are the antidotes of practice. Speaking of “internal serenity,” in the Hīnayāna it is faith that can purify the marks of mind, free from external distraction, with absorption and the like flowing internally; in the Mahāyāna, it is formed by gathering the three branches of the third dhyāna. The *Prakaraṇāryavācā*, fascicle nineteen, and Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle sixty-three, both say internal serenity takes equanimity, mindfulness, and correct comprehension as its substance. Because these three dharmas are still covered by joy and their power and function are not yet superior, only able to detach from external vitarka and vicāra, they are collectively called internal serenity. Speaking of “one-pointedness of mind” explains the meaning of “internal.” It solely cognizes the mental object-datum (dharmāyatana), unlike the first dhyāna which has three consciousnesses. Thus the *Śāriputrābhidharma* says: “In the stage of the desire realm, the mind moves in six places; in the stage of the first dhyāna, the mind moves in four places, namely lacking the nose and tongue consciousnesses; from the second dhyāna upward, the mind moves in one place, solely the body of mental consciousness, because it cognizes the mental object-datum.” “Without vitarka and without vicāra” explains the meaning of “serenity,” unlike the first dhyāna which has vitarka and vicāra. The earlier “extinguishing vitarka and vicāra” showed what was remedied; stating “without” again here shows the absence of the remedy itself, so it is not redundant. The root treatise explains “one-pointedness of mind” as: cultivating the uninterrupted samādhi of uncontaminated [wisdom], moving in a single cognitive realm. Desiring to differ from the worldly, this is cultivating in accordance with reality. “Uninterrupted” means a continuous, unified mind. “Moving in a single realm” means a unified mind toward cognitive objects. Because of this, it is named the uncontaminated state of samādhi. Third, “joy and pleasure born of absorption”: these two branches are the benefits of practice. The first dhyāna rejoiced in turning away from desires and evils, hence called “born of detachment”; now, rejoicing in the calming of the mind of vitarka and vicāra, it is called “born of absorption.” Like a clear mirror or still water, body and mind are delightfully at ease. According to the intent of the *Mahāprajñāpāramitā-śāstra*, it is born from the absorption of the first dhyāna, because the desire realm lacks absorption; the first merely said “detachment.” Although the second dhyāna is detached from the defilements of the first dhyāna, the first dhyāna possesses absorption. Furthermore, the first dhyāna is detached from desire, which is a great hindrance. Fourth, “abiding in the second dhyāna” is the samādhi upon which those two rely. In the third dhyāna, first, “detached from joy” is the hindrance abandoned; that is, the joy of the second dhyāna's benefit branch gives rise to agitation through conceptualizations, and since the third dhyāna becomes increasingly serene, it must be expelled. Just as a poor person who finds a jewel gives rise to joy and deeply grieves upon losing it, nothing compares to cutting off both joy and grief to achieve true pleasure. Second, the three branches of abiding in equanimity, having mindfulness, and correct comprehension are the antidotes of practice. First, “abiding in equanimity” refers to the mental factor of equanimity, distinguished from the feeling of equanimity; hence various sūtras and treatises all call it equanimity of formations (saṃskāropekṣā). The mental formation is regulated and abandons the fault of that joy. Thus the *Prakaraṇāryavācā* says: “Abiding in equanimity means not consenting to the joy that has arisen in oneself; being impartial and upright, one abides immovably.” Second, “having mindfulness” means not forgetting and clearly remembering amid the non-operation of joy. Third, “correct comprehension” means that if at times mindfulness is lost and joy operates, one discriminates with correct comprehension and abides, namely abiding in equanimity. Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle thirty-three, is largely identical to this. The above three are the aforementioned internal serenity, which through gradual cultivation becomes progressively superior; arriving here, they are separately opened into deep, subtle serenity, thus able to remedy the soaring agitation of joy in the lower stage. Third, from “experiencing pleasure with the body” downward is the branch of benefit. Within this, first, “experiencing pleasure with the body” directly reveals the substance of the branch. Directly contrasting with the fluctuating mind of joy in the second dhyāna, it therefore merely speaks of experiencing pleasure with the body. Even if the mind experiences pleasure, it is also called experiencing with the body. Thus the *Yogācāra* says: “By repeatedly cultivating equanimity, mindfulness, and correct comprehension, the mind's exultation and the co-arising feeling of joy are eliminated. Calmness detached from joy, most utterly serene, and mental feeling contrary to joy arise; at that time, one's physical body and mental body experience pleasure and the bliss of pliancy; therefore, it is said that there is experiencing pleasure with the body.” Furthermore, the joy and pleasure of the first dhyāna are like a pool of water on a peak of earth and stone; the joy and pleasure of the second dhyāna are like a pool of water on a peak of pure earth; the pleasure of the third dhyāna is like a mountain of pure earth submerged inside a vast pool, with pleasure pervading outside the body and the body situated within pleasure; therefore mental pleasure is also called experiencing with the body. Next, “what the nobles describe as being able to maintain equanimity, having mindfulness, and experiencing pleasure” explains and accomplishes the superior meaning: that is, the lower stages lack such pleasure and uninterrupted equanimity, while the higher stages have equanimity but lack pleasure; therefore the Buddhas and their disciples say that the third dhyāna fully possesses the capacity for equanimity, mindfulness, and correct comprehension, while further experiencing pleasure; hence among all pleasures, the pleasure of the third dhyāna is supreme. This is the intent of the *Yogācāra*, and one should not interpret it otherwise. The text briefly cites it and still lacks correct comprehension, but possessing equanimity and mindfulness is already distinct from above and below. Fourth, “abiding in the third dhyāna” is the samādhi upon which those two rely. In the fourth dhyāna, first, “with the severing of pleasure, the prior elimination of pain, and the extinction of joy and grief” is the abandonment of hindrances. The supreme pleasure of the third dhyāna is harmful here, like a gravely ill person viewing exquisite music as an obstacle to the fourth dhyāna, so it must be expelled; hence it says “severing pleasure.” One who attains this absorption transcends all pain and pleasure at that very time; hence it collectively states “prior elimination of pain,” and so forth. The single word “prior” generally governs the three below: the second dhyāna previously eliminated painful feelings; the third dhyāna previously extinguished joyful feelings; the first dhyāna previously extinguished grief feelings; and together with the present severing of pleasure, four feelings have been extinguished. Following the order of dhyāna, one should first explain grief, but to contrast with the preceding pleasure, it first speaks of eliminating pain. Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle eleven, says: “Why is the faculty of pain not severed in the first dhyāna? Answer: Because that category of coarseness and heaviness has not yet been severed. If so, why does it not actively manifest? Answer: Because the various pains subsumed under its accompanying, counterpart faculty of grief have already been severed there. If the first quiet contemplation had already severed the faculty of pain, then for a practitioner entering the first quiet contemplation and the second, there would be no distinction in the abiding produced by feeling, because both possess joy and pleasure.” This means that coarseness and heaviness are not severed, so it differs from the second dhyāna, yet there is no active manifestation; thus the branch of pleasure is established. According to the Hīnayāna, the pleasure of the first and second dhyānas is merely pliancy and not a pleasurable feeling, whereas the third is a pleasurable feeling; hence they are not the same. Second, “neither painful nor pleasurable” is the branch of benefit. Other dhyānas all first explain the antidote; here, first explaining the benefit takes advantage of the prior total absence of the four feelings to present “neither painful nor pleasurable,” explaining that among the five feelings, there is only equanimity internally, because it is immovable. If so, earlier grief and joy were also extinguished; why does it not say “neither grief nor joy” here? Answer: When explaining the meaning through the five feelings, there is no distinct “neither grief nor joy.” When explaining the meaning through the three feelings, pain and pleasure subsume grief and joy, so it is merely contrasted with them. Furthermore, this directly severs pleasure, so it is appropriate to contrast with it. Third, “purity of equanimity and mindfulness”: these two are the antidote branches. In the third dhyāna, equanimity and mindfulness coexist with pleasurable feeling; here, pleasurable feeling is severed, so it is called purity. However, their antidotes are largely identical to the third dhyāna, but because the remedied factors are joy and pleasure, they are divided into two: the mind of joy is fluctuating, constantly requiring correct comprehension; pleasurable feeling is deep and subtle, merely requiring equanimity and mindfulness. If showing purity from a broader perspective, the *Yogācāra* says: “From the first quiet contemplation, all calamities of the lower stages have been severed—namely vitarka, vicāra, joy, pleasure, inhalation, and exhalation; therefore, herein equanimity and mindfulness are pure and spotless; because of this, the mind of this dhyāna abides immovably.” This treatise briefly lists six matters, which should also include the absence of pain and grief; thus the *Kośa* and other texts explain that in this dhyāna one is detached from eight calamities. However, although the fourth dhyāna is said to be immovable, it still has the feeling of equanimity and is not yet called the absence of feeling. Yogācārabhūmi, fascicle eleven, says: “Furthermore, the signless is described in the sūtras as the signless mental absorption; in this absorption, the faculty of equanimity is forever extinguished. If not signless, up to the summit of existence, all possess the feeling of equanimity.” Fourth, “abiding in the fourth dhyāna” is the samādhi upon which those two rely. When entering the above absorptions of form, one's bodily manifestation is like dwelling in a room; entering the four formless absorptions below is like dwelling in open space.