大方廣佛華嚴經疏 36.13

36.13

第二四空。空處等名同心一境性，有何差別？《俱舍．定品》顯此差別。由離下地染故立四名，謂離第四禪立空無邊處，離空無邊處立識無邊處等。差別既爾，從何得名？彼次頌云「空無邊等三，名從加行立，非想非非想，昧劣故立名。」謂修定前起加行位厭壞色故，作勝解想思無邊空，加行成時名空無邊處。厭空想識，厭識想無所有，準此可知。其第四空由想昧劣，謂無下地明慧勝想得非想名，有昧劣想名非非想。故前三無色加行受名，第四無色當體受稱。以前三近分加行位中，唯緣空等入根本位，亦緣餘蘊，故從加行受名。第四非想加行根本同一所緣，故當體受稱。《瑜伽論》中亦同於此。加行等想、空識等殊，至文當辨。然此四空亦各有四，謂離障等。而經文中但各三句，義含於四，謂初段離障具對治義。問：若有治等，為有支不？答：準《雜集》等論，諸無色奢摩他一味相故，無有支分建立。若依《瓔珞本業》，四無色定各有五支，謂想、護、止、觀、一心。經論相違，云何會通？論依相似，不同四禪覺觀等異，又慧用劣名無支分。經就相似同皆有五，如初空定，厭下色相起於空想，即今對治，護彼色相令不現前。若超色想即名為止，是今離障空無邊行。照了分明即是觀義，是今利益一心。即是彼二所依，故五支顯然，豈得判無，違經依論？今初空處，謂觀虛空作無邊行相，能滅色想，心安空定，名空無邊處。文中三句：初句含二義，一明離障、二明對治。言離障者，曲有三句，謂離三有對等色。論云超一切色想者，過眼識相，此明超可見有對。二滅有對想者，耳鼻舌身識和合想滅故，此滅不可見有對。三不念種種想者，不念意識和合想故。意識分別一切法故，說名種種。此滅不可見無對。意識雖緣非色之境，今但取緣色自有種種。皆云想者，小乘以在色欲修起此定，未捨色形，故不言滅色，但言滅想，想取色相，故偏滅之。大乘之中決唯滅想，若超色相說無色者，後滅空識應無識空。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？遠公答云：「香味二想雖盡初禪，今云滅者，治有四種：一壞對治，謂方便道，觀下有漏無常等故。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，治色聲觸三。」云二禪雖滅者，二禪已上乃至四禪當地，雖無得借初禪三識之心見聞覺觸，是故乃至第四猶有此想，空定滅之。此上所釋，約次第修。若於色界頓修空定，則六識行境並皆得滅。故論上言意緣一切法亦無揀故。已明離障，云何對治？前三句中不念之言含於對治，謂不分別色等境故。何以不念？見無我故。約菩薩實治，故云無我。若依有漏，但厭苦麁以為加行。《順正理》云「謂若有法雖與色俱，而其自體不依屬色。諸有於色求出離者，必應最初思惟彼法，謂虛空體雖與色俱，而待色無方得顯了。」外法所攝，其相無邊，思惟彼時而能離色。此即加行之相也。二入無邊虛空者，是修行利益。謂三色想絕，則入空理，廓爾無邊故。三住虛空無邊處者，是彼二依止三昧。《瑜伽》云「由已超過近分加行究竟作意，入上根本加行究竟果作意定，是故說言空無邊處具足安住。」準《瑜伽》意，四義之中，離障是超下地，對治是加行究竟作意，利益是勝解作意，彼二依止是加行究竟果作意。前三為近分，後一是根本。後之三定，一同於此。又此四義，初何所超；次云何能超；三超前何緣；四超何所證。二識無邊處。心緣內識作無邊行相，故以為名。初超虛空無邊處，是明離障。彼何所障？外念為麁故。云何對治？見彼外念麁分別過患故。二入無邊識，是修行利益。前明捨外，今辨緣內。《正理》云「謂於純淨六識身能了知中，善取相已安住勝解，由假想力思惟觀察無邊識想。由此加行為先，得入根本。」後依止，可知。三無所有處者，即內外皆無也。初超無邊識，是明離障。何過須超？事念麁故。云何對治？見麁念事分別過患。次入無少所有者，修行利益。前以捨外緣內故為麁念，既無所取，能取亦無，故內外俱無，斯為利益。《正理》云「見前無邊行相麁動，起此加行，是故此處名最勝捨，以於此中不復樂作無邊行相，心於所緣捨諸所有寂然而住。」《瑜伽》云「從識處上進時，離其識外更求餘境都無所得。」此意明識既為麁，識外復無，故無所有。後住無所有處，是彼二依止。四非想中，無下七地明了之想，有昧劣想，故以為名。超一切無所有處，是所離障。云何對治；無彼無所有，以見麁念分別過患，故為能治。既寂無所有，云何名麁？猶有無所有想故。經闕一句，論經則具，彼云「知非有想非無想安隱」，即修行利益。即入非有想非無想處行，是二依止。《瑜伽》云「先入無所有處定，超過一切有所有想。今復超過無所有想，故言非想。」又言非無想者，非如無想及滅盡定，一切諸想皆悉滅盡，唯有微細想，緣無想境轉故。即於此處起勝解，則超近分而入根本。此中所以不出三界者，由緣無相境即是細想。外道不了，謂為涅槃。未能無緣，豈離心境？況計此為我，復生愛味。故《法華》喻頭上火然。若知此患，更求上進。求上進時，求上所緣竟無所得，無所得故滅而不轉，則得滅受想定也。若未得此定，厭想為先，後想不行，即入無想定。然《婆沙》百四十一、《顯揚》第三及諸論皆明，而文言浩博，上引二論文略義顯。今更約第一義修略示四空，謂觀色即空，心安於空，是空處定。次知空色不出於心，是識處定。次心境兩亡，為無所有。次亦亡無所有想，緣無想住，名非想非非想。若不緣此無想，則諸漏永寂。

Second, the four formless [attainments]. Since the names such as the Base of [Infinite] Space equally share the nature of one-pointedness of mind, what is their difference? The 'Chapter on Meditative Attainments' in the *Abhidharmakośa* reveals this difference: the four names are established because of relinquishing the defilements of the lower stages; that is, relinquishing the fourth dhyāna establishes the Base of Infinite Space, relinquishing the Base of Infinite Space establishes the Base of Infinite Consciousness, and so forth. If their difference is such, from what do they derive their names? Its subsequent verse states: / 'The three, [Infinite] Space and the rest, / Have names established from preparatory practice; / Neither Conception Nor Non-Conception, / Derives its name from [conception being] dim and inferior.' / That is to say, prior to cultivating the absorption, one arouses the stage of preparatory practice to cultivate revulsion for and destruction of form; forming a resolute conception, one contemplates infinite space, and when the preparatory practice is accomplished, it is called the Base of Infinite Space. Cultivating revulsion for space to contemplate consciousness, and revulsion for consciousness to contemplate nothingness, can be known by analogy with this. As for its fourth formless [attainment], because conception is dim and inferior—meaning it lacks the clear, bright, superior conception of the lower stages—it receives the name 'neither conception'; because it possesses a dim and inferior conception, it is called 'nor non-conception'. Thus, the first three formless attainments receive their names from preparatory practice, whereas the fourth formless attainment receives its appellation from its actual essence. Because in the preparatory stage of the threshold of the first three, they exclusively take space and so forth as objects, while upon entering the fundamental stage, they also take the remaining aggregates as objects, they receive their names from preparatory practice. In the fourth, [the Base of] Neither Conception, the preparatory and fundamental [stages] have the same cognitive object, and therefore it receives its appellation from its actual essence. In the *Yogācārabhūmi-śāstra*, it is also the same as this. The distinctions between the conceptions in preparatory practice and so forth, space and consciousness, and the like, will be differentiated when we come to the text. However, these four formless attainments also each possess four [aspects], namely the relinquishment of hindrances and so forth. Yet the sūtra text has only three phrases for each, the meaning implicitly containing the four; that is, the initial section on relinquishing hindrances possesses the meaning of the antidote. Question: If there are antidotes and so forth, do they have limbs or not? Answer: In accordance with treatises such as the *Abhidharma-samuccaya*, because the shamatha of all formless [attainments] has a single uniform mark, there is no establishment of limbs. If one relies on the *Yingluo benye [jing]*, the four formless meditative attainments each have five limbs: conception, protection, calming, discernment, and one-pointedness of mind. The sūtra and treatises contradict each other; how are they to be reconciled? The treatises rely on their similarity [in quietude], where they do not differ like the investigation and examination of the four dhyānas, and because the function of discernment is inferior, they are said to have no limbs. The sūtra, based on their similar [functions], uniformly holds that they have five. For example, in the initial Base of Space, feeling revulsion for the lower mark of form and giving rise to the conception of space is the present antidote, protecting against those marks of form so that they do not appear. Transcending the conception of form is called calming, which is the present relinquishment of hindrances, the practice of infinite space. Clear and distinct illumination is the meaning of discernment, which is the present benefit. One-pointedness of mind is the support for both of them. Therefore, the five limbs are evident; how could one judge them to be non-existent, contradicting the sūtra to rely on the treatises? Now, first, the Base of Space: contemplating empty space and producing the mental aspect of infinity can extinguish the conception of form; the mind resting securely in the absorption of space is called the Base of Infinite Space. In the text, there are three phrases: the first phrase contains two meanings: first, explaining the relinquishment of hindrances; second, explaining the antidote. As for relinquishing hindrances, it meticulously has three phrases, meaning relinquishing the three [types of form, such as form with] resistance. The treatise states that transcending all conceptions of form means surpassing the marks of eye-consciousness; this explains transcending form that is visible and resistant. Second, extinguishing conceptions of resistance means the extinguishment of conceptions associated with ear-, nose-, tongue-, and body-consciousness; this extinguishes [form that is] invisible and resistant. Third, not adverting to manifold conceptions means not adverting to conceptions associated with mind-consciousness. Because mind-consciousness discriminates all phenomena, it is called 'manifold'. This extinguishes [form that is] invisible and non-resistant. Although mind-consciousness takes non-material objects as cognitive objects, here it only takes the various sorts that inherently take form as cognitive objects. All are called 'conceptions' because the Hīnayāna holds that this absorption is cultivated and aroused within [the realm of] form and desire, and the physical form has not yet been cast off; hence it does not speak of extinguishing form, but only of extinguishing conception. Conception grasps the marks of form, and therefore it is extinguished in particular. Within the Mahāyāna, it is definitively the extinguishment of conception alone; if transcending marks of form were said to be 'formless', then subsequently extinguishing space and consciousness should result in there being no consciousness or space. Question: If conceptions of fragrance and taste are already relinquished in the first dhyāna, and conceptions of form, sound, and touch are already eliminated in the second dhyāna, why does [the text] now say that the absorption of space extinguishes them? Master Yuan answered: 'Although the two conceptions of fragrance and taste are exhausted in the first dhyāna, the present statement of their extinguishment is because antidotes are of four kinds: First, the antidote of destruction, which refers to the path of expedient means, contemplating the impermanence and so forth of the lower defiled [states]. Second, the antidote of abandonment, which refers to the unobstructed path, directly abandoning the lower faults. Third, the antidote of maintenance, which has the path of liberation as foremost and all subsequent uninterrupted liberations, maintaining that unconditioned state so that it is not lost or ruined. Fourth, the antidote of remote distancing, which has liberation as foremost and all subsequent unobstructed liberations, remotely causing former hindrances never to arise again. Here, this absorption of space is based on the fourth [kind of antidote], acting as an antidote to form, sound, and touch.' As for saying they are eliminated in the second dhyāna: from the second dhyāna upward, reaching to the fourth dhyāna, in their own stages, although they do not possess them, they can borrow the mind of the three consciousnesses of the first dhyāna to see, hear, perceive, and touch. For this reason, even up to the fourth [dhyāna] there are still these conceptions, and the absorption of space extinguishes them. The above explanation concerns sequential cultivation. If one abruptly cultivates the absorption of space in the form realm, then the spheres of activity of all six consciousnesses are completely extinguished. Therefore, the treatise stated above that the mind takes all phenomena as cognitive objects without exclusion. Having explained the relinquishment of hindrances, what is the antidote? In the preceding three phrases, the words 'not adverting' contain the antidote, meaning not discriminating cognitive objects such as form. Why does one not advert? Because one sees selflessness. This is said with respect to the bodhisattva's real antidote, hence it says 'selflessness'. If relying on defiled [states], one merely cultivates revulsion for suffering and coarseness as the preparatory practice. The *Nyāyānusāra* states: 'If there is a phenomenon that, although concurrent with form, its own essence is not dependent on form: whoever seeks liberation from form must first contemplate that phenomenon; that is, although the essence of empty space is concurrent with form, it becomes apparent only by depending on the absence of form.' Being subsumed under external phenomena, its mark is infinite; when contemplating it, one is able to be free from form. This is the mark of the preparatory practice. Second, 'entering infinite empty space' is the benefit of cultivation. When the three conceptions of form cease, one enters the principle of space, vast and infinite. Third, 'dwelling in the Base of Infinite Space' is the samādhi that serves as the support for both of them. The *Yogācārabhūmi* states: 'Because one has surpassed the threshold mental application of culmination of preparatory practice and entered the absorption of the higher fundamental mental application of the fruition of culmination of preparatory practice, it is therefore said to fully dwell in the Base of Infinite Space.' According to the intent of the *Yogācārabhūmi*, among the four meanings: relinquishing hindrances is transcending the lower stage; the antidote is the mental application of culmination of preparatory practice; the benefit is the mental application of resolute intention; the support for both of them is the mental application of the fruition of culmination of preparatory practice. The first three are the threshold, and the last one is the fundamental. The remaining three attainments are all identical to this. Moreover, regarding these four meanings: first, what is transcended; next, how one is able to transcend; third, by what cognitive object one transcends the former; fourth, what is realized through transcending. Second, the Base of Infinite Consciousness. The mind takes internal consciousness as a cognitive object and makes it the mental aspect of infinity, hence it takes its name from this. First, transcending the Base of Infinite Space explains the relinquishment of hindrances. What is the hindrance there? Because external mindfulness is coarse. What is the antidote? Because one sees the faults of coarse discrimination in that external mindfulness. Second, 'entering infinite consciousness' is the benefit of cultivation. The former explained casting off the external; now it differentiates taking the internal as cognitive object. The *Nyāyānusāra* states: 'Taking the marks well in the cognitive capacity of the pure group of six consciousnesses, one abides in resolute intention; through the power of provisional conception, one contemplates and examines the conception of infinite consciousness. Having this preparatory practice as a precursor, one is able to enter the fundamental.' The subsequent 'support' can be known [by analogy]. Third, the Base of Nothingness means that both internal and external are absent. First, transcending infinite consciousness explains the relinquishment of hindrances. What fault requires it to be transcended? Because mindfulness of phenomena is coarse. What is the antidote? Seeing the faults of discriminating coarse mindfulness of phenomena. Next, 'entering that which is without the slightest thing' is the benefit of cultivation. Formerly, because of casting off the external to take the internal as cognitive object, it was coarse mindfulness; since there is nothing to be grasped, that which grasps is also absent. Therefore, both internal and external are absent, and this serves as the benefit. The *Nyāyānusāra* states: 'Seeing that the former infinite mental aspect is coarse and agitated, one gives rise to this preparatory practice. For this reason, this base is called supreme equanimity, because in this, one no longer delights in producing the infinite mental aspect; the mind abandons all things with respect to the cognitive object and dwells in tranquility.' The *Yogācārabhūmi* states: 'When progressing upward from the Base of Consciousness, seeking further cognitive objects apart from consciousness, absolutely nothing is found.' The intent here is that since consciousness is coarse and there is nothing outside consciousness, there is nothingness. Subsequently, 'dwelling in the Base of Nothingness' is the support for both of them. Fourth, in [the Base of] Neither Conception, one lacks the clear conceptions of the lower seven stages and possesses dim and inferior conceptions, hence taking its name from this. Transcending all bases of nothingness is the hindrance that is relinquished. What is the antidote? Having no such nothingness, because one sees the faults of coarse mindfulness and discrimination, this serves as that which can act as the antidote. Since it is tranquil and without anything, why is it called coarse? Because there is still the conception of nothingness. The sūtra lacks one phrase, but the treatise sūtra has it complete, stating: 'knowing that neither conception nor non-conception is peace,' which is the benefit of cultivation. Then 'entering the practice of the Base of Neither Conception Nor Non-Conception' is the support for both of them. The *Yogācārabhūmi* states: 'Having first entered the absorption of the Base of Nothingness, one transcends all conceptions of having something. Now one further transcends the conception of nothingness, hence it says neither conception.' Furthermore, as for saying 'nor non-conception', it is not like the non-conceptual attainment and the cessation attainment, where all conceptions are entirely extinguished; there is only subtle conception operating by taking the non-conceptual object as its cognitive object. Directly at this point, one gives rise to resolute intention, thus transcending the threshold and entering the fundamental. The reason why one does not transcend the three realms here is that taking a signless object as a cognitive object is itself subtle conception. Heterodox practitioners do not understand this and deem it to be nirvāṇa. Since they are not yet able to be without cognitive objects, how could they be free from mind and its objects? How much less so when they grasp this as a self and further give rise to attachment and craving. Therefore, the *Lotus Sūtra* compares it to a fire burning on one's head. If one knows this fault, one seeks further to advance upward. When seeking to advance upward, one seeks a higher cognitive object and ultimately finds nothing; because there is nothing to be found, [conceptions] cease and do not operate, and thus one attains the meditative attainment of the cessation of feeling and conception. If one has not yet attained this absorption, taking revulsion for conception as the precursor, subsequent conceptions do not operate, and one enters the non-conceptual attainment. Furthermore, the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 141, *Prakaraṇāryavācā*, fascicle 3, and various treatises all explain this, yet their texts and words are vast and extensive; the two treatises cited above are concise in text and clear in meaning. Now, further relying on cultivation of the ultimate truth, I shall briefly demonstrate the four formless attainments: contemplating that form is itself empty, the mind resting securely in emptiness, is the absorption of the Base of Space. Next, knowing that emptiness and form do not go beyond the mind is the absorption of the Base of Consciousness. Next, both mind and object being forgotten is nothingness. Next, also forgetting the conception of nothingness and dwelling by taking non-conception as the cognitive object is called neither conception nor non-conception. If one does not take this non-conception as a cognitive object, then all defilements are eternally stilled.