俱舍論記 28.75

28.75

「論曰至足前為十一」者，釋初句。此支實事唯有十一，謂初五支尋、伺、喜、樂、定，即五實事。第二靜慮喜、樂、等持三支，如前增內淨支，足前為六。第三靜慮等持，如前增餘捨、念、慧、樂四支，足前為十。第四靜慮捨、念、定三支，如前增非苦樂支，足前為十一。此中別說喜、樂、捨三，故言十一。若據種類，唯有九種，喜、樂、捨三同是受故。所言九者，謂念、定、慧、受、信、輕安、行捨、尋、伺。今於此中略作二門分別：一廢立、二問答。言廢立者，問：七十五法中何故唯九立靜慮支，餘不立耶？解云：若順淨偏勝，與定同緣，立靜慮支；不爾不立。第一、色法十一不立支者，非與定同緣，故不立支。無表雖定俱有，非定同緣，故不立支。故《正理》云「何緣無表非靜慮支？諸靜慮支助定住境，彼不緣境，故不立支。」第二、心法不立支者，《婆沙》八十云「心順流轉，定順還滅，故心不立為靜慮支。復次心勝如王，諸心所法皆如臣佐。定是心所，故不立為靜慮支。如諸國王不事臣佐。」第三、四十六心所法中唯九立支餘不立者，大不善地法二、大煩惱地法六、小煩惱地法十，及不定地中貪、嗔、慢、疑，體皆是染，非順定故，并不立支。大地法十中雖并通善，唯四立支餘不立者，念、定、慧三順淨偏勝，故立為支。受於雜染、清淨分中勢用俱勝，是故俱立。由此流轉緣起分中立為受支，及於還滅清淨分中立為受支，據順淨邊立為支也。又《正理》七十一云「有餘師說：受於雜染雖是增上，而為淨品作饒益事亦有功能。如旃荼羅性雖卑劣，能與豪族作饒益事。故於靜慮為饒益事，菩提分中立覺支號。」問：何故五受唯三非二？解云：與定同緣立靜慮支。憂、苦唯欲，故三非二。想、思、觸、欲、作意、勝解不立支者，《婆沙》云「想、思、觸、欲皆順流轉作用偏勝，定順還滅，故不立為靜慮支。作意唯在欲界散地對境用勝，非諸定地，故亦不立為靜慮支。勝解唯於無學位勝，靜慮遍於一切位勝，故彼不立為靜慮支。大善地法十雖并是善，唯三立支餘不立者，信、捨、輕安順淨偏勝故立為支。信是一切眾行初基，或如清水珠置心品中令心澄淨，故立為支。無始時來惽、掉亂心不能得定，輕安治惛沈、行捨治掉舉，由此得定。或掉舉定障，行捨能治；惛沈是慧障，輕安能治。此二能治定、慧重障，是故別立。餘七雖善順淨非偏勝。」《婆沙》云「問：何故精進非靜慮支？答：諸靜慮支順自地勝，精進於順他地為勝。謂初靜慮精進順第二靜慮為勝，乃至無所有處精進順悲想非非想處為勝，故彼不立為靜慮支。復次精進損害三摩地因，三摩地因即是勝樂。如契經說樂故心定。勤精進者身、心多苦，修三摩地身、心多樂，是故精進非靜慮支。」又云「問：何故慚、愧、無貪、無嗔、不放逸、不害等非靜慮支耶？答：非極隨順諸靜慮故。此諸善法，多於欲界散地惡法為近對治勢力增強，非於定地，是故不立為靜慮支。」問：何故欣、厭不別立耶？解云：精進等七恒與心俱尚不別立，何況欣、厭定不俱起而立為支？不定地法中尋、伺、惡作、睡眠，雖并通善，二立、二不立者，尋、伺二法順淨偏強，能助等持制策於心，令離麁、細，對治欲惡，故并立支。惡作、睡眠不立支者，支唯加行唯在定地，此二生得唯在欲界，是故不立。第四、十四不相應行非靜慮支者，助定同緣立靜慮支，此非相應故不立支。第五、三無為不立靜慮支者，夫立靜慮支要須起用與定同緣，此非起用故不立支。言問答者，《婆沙》云「問：何故伺、樂受、捨受不立菩提分法耶？答：被覆損故。謂伺被正思惟之所覆損，樂受被輕安、樂之所覆損，捨受被行捨之所覆損，故不立為菩提分法。問：若爾，何故立靜慮支？答：菩提分中為策正見，立正思惟為菩提分。伺行相細，策正見中為尋覆損，立靜慮支。為遮下地惡不善法不相覆損，菩提分中輕安、樂受同一剎那有相覆損，靜慮支中地別建立無覆損義。菩提分中行捨、捨受同一剎那有相覆損，靜慮支中對治、利益支用各別不相覆損。精進非靜慮支，問答如前。問：何故正語、正業、正命非靜慮支？答：靜慮支者，謂與靜慮相應住境，必有所依、所緣行相，及有警覺，乃名相應。正語、業、命無如是義，是故不立為靜慮支。由此四相及諸得等不相應法，皆不應立為靜慮支，非助等持往一境故（已上論文）。」問：何故精進等四是菩提分？解云：菩提是慧，其性勤勇。精進亦勤，勇性相隨，順策精進馬而趣菩提。正語、業、命以戒為體，為成八正法輪轂故。此四皆順菩提強勝，故皆立為菩提分法。

"In the treatise: '... making eleven with the previous'" explains the first line [of the verse]. As real entities (dravyas), these factors are only eleven: namely, the initial five factors—investigation (vitarka), examination (vicāra), joy (prīti), pleasure (sukha), and concentration (samādhi)—which are five real entities. In the second dhyāna, with the three factors of joy, pleasure, and concentration as before, adding the factor of internal purity brings the total to six. In the third dhyāna, with concentration as before, adding the remaining four factors of equanimity, mindfulness, discernment, and pleasure brings the total to ten. In the fourth dhyāna, with the three factors of equanimity, mindfulness, and concentration as before, adding the factor of neither-pain-nor-pleasure brings the total to eleven. Because joy, pleasure, and equanimity are mentioned separately here, they are said to be eleven. If considered according to their generic types (jāti), there are only nine, because joy, pleasure, and equanimity are all sensation (vedanā). The nine are: mindfulness, concentration, discernment, sensation, faith, pliancy (praśrabdhi), mental equanimity (upekṣā), investigation, and examination.
Now, herein, we briefly make a twofold distinction: first, inclusion and exclusion; second, questions and answers.
Regarding inclusion and exclusion: Question: Why are only nine established as dhyāna-factors out of the seventy-five dharmas, while the rest are not established? Explanation: If a factor is predominantly concordant with purity and shares the same object with concentration, it is established as a dhyāna-factor; otherwise, it is not established. First, the reason the eleven physical dharmas (rūpa) are not established as factors is that they do not share the same object with concentration; hence they are not established as factors. Although unmanifest form (avijñapti) is co-existent with concentration, it does not share the same object with concentration, and therefore is not established as a factor. Hence the Nyāyānusāra states: "For what reason is unmanifest form not a dhyāna-factor? The dhyāna-factors assist concentration in abiding in its object; [unmanifest form] does not take an object, hence it is not established as a factor." Second, the reason mind (citta) is not established as a factor: the Mahāvibhāṣā, fascicle 80, states: "Mind conforms to transmigration (pravṛtti), whereas concentration conforms to cessation (nivṛtti); therefore mind is not established as a dhyāna-factor. Furthermore, mind is supreme like a king, while the mental concomitants (caittas) are all like ministers and assistants. Concentration is a mental concomitant; therefore [mind] is not established as a dhyāna-factor, just as kings do not serve ministers and assistants." Third, among the forty-six mental concomitants, only nine are established as factors and the rest are not, because: the two universally unwholesome factors, the six major defilements, the ten minor defilements, and attachment, aversion, conceit, and doubt among the indeterminate factors are all defiled in substance and do not conform to concentration; thus none of them are established as factors. Among the ten universal mental factors (mahābhūmikas), although they all extend to the wholesome, only four are established as factors while the rest are not, because: mindfulness, concentration, and discernment are predominantly concordant with purity, so they are established as factors. Sensation has strong efficacy in both the defiled and purified portions; therefore it is established in both. For this reason, it is established as the factor of sensation within the transmigration portion of dependent origination, and it is established as a factor within the cessation-purification portion; it is established as a factor in terms of its concordance with purity. Furthermore, the Nyāyānusāra, fascicle 71, states: "Other masters say: Although sensation is predominant in defilement, it also has the functional capacity to perform beneficial actions for the purified category. Just as a caṇḍāla, though base in nature, can perform beneficial services for a noble family, so too in the dhyānas it performs beneficial actions, and among the factors of awakening it receives the designation of an awakening factor (bodhyaṅga)." Question: Why among the five sensations are only three included and not the other two? Explanation: Those that share the same object with concentration are established as dhyāna-factors; grief (daurmanasya) and pain (duḥkha) exist only in the desire realm, so three are included and not the [other] two. As for conception (saṃjñā), volition (cetanā), contact (sparśa), desire (chanda), attention (manaskāra), and resolve (adhimokṣa) not being established as factors, the Mahāvibhāṣā states: "Conception, volition, contact, and desire all have predominant activity conforming to transmigration, whereas concentration conforms to cessation; thus they are not established as dhyāna-factors. Attention has predominant efficacy facing objects only in the distracted state of the desire realm, not in the concentrated realms; thus it also is not established as a dhyāna-factor. Resolve is predominant only at the stage of non-learning, whereas dhyāna is universally predominant across all stages; therefore it is not established as a dhyāna-factor. Although the ten major wholesome mental factors (kuśalamahābhūmikas) are all wholesome, only three are established as factors and the rest are not, because: faith, equanimity, and pliancy are predominantly concordant with purity, and are thus established as factors. Faith is the initial foundation of all practices, or like a water-clearing jewel placed in the mental series to make the mind serene and clear; hence it is established as a factor. From beginningless time, torpor and restlessness distract the mind so that concentration cannot be attained; pliancy cures torpor (styāna), and mental equanimity cures restlessness (auddhatya), through which concentration is attained. Alternatively, restlessness is an obstacle to concentration, which mental equanimity can cure; torpor is an obstacle to discernment, which pliancy can cure. These two can cure the heavy obstacles to concentration and discernment; therefore they are separately established. The remaining seven, though wholesome, are not predominantly concordant with purity." The Mahāvibhāṣā states: "Question: Why is vigor (vīrya) not a dhyāna-factor? Answer: The dhyāna-factors are predominantly concordant with their own stage, whereas vigor is predominantly concordant with other [higher] stages. That is, the vigor of the first dhyāna is predominantly concordant with the second dhyāna, and so on up to the vigor of the sphere of nothingness being predominantly concordant with the sphere of neither-conception-nor-non-conception; therefore it is not established as a dhyāna-factor. Furthermore, vigor impairs the cause of samādhi. The cause of samādhi is supreme pleasure, as the sūtra states: 'Because of pleasure, the mind becomes concentrated.' One who strives with vigor experiences much suffering in body and mind, whereas one who cultivates samādhi experiences much pleasure in body and mind; therefore vigor is not a dhyāna-factor." It also states: "Question: Why are shame, embarrassment, non-attachment, non-aversion, heedfulness, non-harming, and so forth not dhyāna-factors? Answer: Because they do not exceedingly conform to the dhyānas. These wholesome dharmas have increased strength mostly as proximate antidotes against evil dharmas in the distracted state of the desire realm, but not in the concentrated realms; therefore they are not established as dhyāna-factors." Question: Why are joyfulness (muditā/prāmodya) and revulsion (nirvid) not separately established? Explanation: Even the seven factors such as vigor, which are constantly associated with the mind, are not separately established; how much less could joyfulness and revulsion, which definitely do not arise concomitantly [with every state of concentration], be established as factors? Among the indeterminate mental factors, although investigation, examination, remorse (kaukṛtya), and drowsiness (middha) all extend to the wholesome, two are established and two are not, because: investigation and examination are predominantly strong in conforming to purity, able to assist concentration in checking and urging the mind, causing it to leave coarse and subtle [distractions], and counteracting desire and evil; hence both are established as factors. Remorse and drowsiness are not established as factors because factors belong exclusively to preparatory effort (prayogika) and exist exclusively in the concentrated realms, whereas these two are inborn and exist exclusively in the desire realm; therefore they are not established. Fourth, the fourteen dharmas not associated with mind (cittaviprayukta-saṃskāras) are not dhyāna-factors because dhyāna-factors are established by assisting concentration and sharing the same object, while these are not associated; hence they are not established as factors. Fifth, the three unconditioned dharmas (asaṃskṛtas) are not established as dhyāna-factors because establishing a dhyāna-factor requires generating function and sharing the same object with concentration, while these do not generate function; hence they are not established as factors.
Regarding questions and answers: The Mahāvibhāṣā states: "Question: Why are examination, pleasant sensation, and neutral sensation not established as bodhipakṣa-dharmas? Answer: Because they are eclipsed and impaired. That is, examination is eclipsed and impaired by right thought (samyak-saṃkalpa); pleasant sensation is eclipsed and impaired by pliancy and pleasure; neutral sensation is eclipsed and impaired by mental equanimity. Therefore they are not established as bodhipakṣa-dharmas. Question: If so, why are they established as dhyāna-factors? Answer: Among the bodhipakṣa-dharmas, in order to stimulate right view, right thought is established as a factor of awakening. Examination has a subtle mode of activity; in stimulating right view it is eclipsed by investigation, [so it is not established there, but] it is established as a dhyāna-factor to ward off unwholesome and bad states of the lower stages, where they do not eclipse each other. Among the bodhipakṣa-dharmas, pliancy and pleasant sensation would eclipse each other in the same moment, but among the dhyāna-factors they are established in different stages, so there is no meaning of mutual eclipse. Among the bodhipakṣa-dharmas, mental equanimity and neutral sensation would eclipse each other in the same moment, but among the dhyāna-factors the functions of antidote and benefit are distinct and do not eclipse each other. Vigor not being a dhyāna-factor is as answered in the previous question and answer. Question: Why are right speech, right action, and right livelihood not dhyāna-factors? Answer: A dhyāna-factor refers to what is associated with dhyāna and abides in an object; it must have a basis, an objective support, a mode of activity, and alertness to be called associated. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood do not possess such characteristics; therefore they are not established as dhyāna-factors. For this reason, the four characteristics [of conditioned phenomena] and all unassociated dharmas such as acquisition (prāpti) should not be established as dhyāna-factors, because they do not assist concentration in directedness to a single object (end of treatise citation)." Question: Why are the four beginning with vigor bodhipakṣa-dharmas? Explanation: Awakening is discernment, whose nature is diligent and energetic. Vigor is also diligent, its energetic nature following along, suitably spurring the horse of vigor to advance toward awakening. Right speech, right action, and right livelihood take morality as their essence, forming the hub of the eightfold right wheel of the Dharma. Because these four are strongly concordant with awakening, they are all established as bodhipakṣa-dharmas.