大方廣佛華嚴經疏 36.12

36.12

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.