俱舍論疏 28.160

28.160

論「又餘經說至是喜非樂」，引第二經證也。既言第四靜慮斷樂斷苦先喜、憂沒。喜既先樂後，故知第三定中無喜根也。經云斷樂斷苦先喜憂沒者，謂初定斷憂、苦，三定斷喜，四定斷樂。樂、苦相對故經先說，喜、憂非對說其先沒。故《婆沙》八十一云「言第四靜慮斷苦者，依雙法盡俱說斷聲。言雙法者，謂苦與樂。離欲染時雖苦已盡而樂未盡，今離第三靜慮染已，苦、樂俱盡，俱說斷聲。離三靜慮染，樂等皆斷，何為唯說斷樂根耶？答：爾時樂盡故，知離欲界及初定染。亦斷喜等，由未盡故，所以不說。」又《婆沙》八十一云「如契經說初定憂根滅，第二定苦根滅。問：離欲染時斷憂及苦，契經何故作是說耶？答：依過對治故作是說。謂離欲染位雖斷苦根，而未名為過苦對治。於初定得離染時，過苦對治故。苦對治者，謂初定也。復次依過族性及苦所依，故作是說。謂離欲染位雖斷苦根，而未過苦所依、族性。於初定得離染時，過苦所依及苦族性，故說苦滅。所依族性，謂諸識身。問：離欲染位雖斷憂根，而未過彼對治、所依及彼族性，不應說憂初定滅。答：憂根對治、所依、族性皆在意識，既與憂根同在意識，故正斷時即說彼滅。苦根所依及苦族性，不與對治同在一識，故過對治、所依、族性方說苦滅。有作是說：第二靜慮苦根滅者，謂尋、伺滅。以諸賢聖於尋、伺中發生苦想。過諸異生厭地獄苦，能生苦想，故名苦根。」已上論文。問：四定起時有善大地，通大地十，不定尋、伺及心王，二十三法相應而起。因何唯用九法以為靜慮支？大地中念、定、慧、受，善大地中行捨、輕安、信、不定尋、伺以立定支，餘十四法非定支攝。故《婆沙》八十廢立意云：心王是主，非心所支。大地法十，念、定、慧三順淨偏勝，故立為支。受於雜染、清淨分中勢用俱勝，是故亦立。然五受中，憂、苦非定相應，故不立支。想、思、觸、欲偏順流轉不是還滅，故不立支。作意唯是欲界散地對境用勝，非諸定地，故不立支。勝解唯於無學位勝，靜慮遍於一切位勝，是故不立。善中信為眾行初基，如清水珠令心澄淨，故立為支。掉舉定障，行捨能治；惛沈慧障，輕安能治，是故立支。慚、愧、無貪、無瞋、不放逸、不害，非極隨順諸靜慮故，此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。精進多苦身、心，定令身、心多樂，非極相順，故不立支，然順菩提立菩提分法。不定中尋、伺二法，順淨偏強，能助等持制策於心，令離麁細對治欲惡，故竝立支。自餘心所與定不相應故，不立支也。

On the Śāstra's phrase: "Furthermore, another sūtra states [...] is joy, not bliss": this cites the second sūtra as proof. Since it says that the fourth dhyāna abandons bliss and abandons suffering, joy and grief having previously disappeared, and joy is prior while bliss is posterior, one knows that in the third dhyāna there is no faculty of joy. When the sūtra says "abandoning bliss and abandoning suffering, joy and grief having previously disappeared," it means that the first dhyāna abandons grief and suffering, the third dhyāna abandons joy, and the fourth dhyāna abandons bliss. Bliss and suffering are paired as opposites, so the sūtra mentions them first; joy and grief are not paired, so it speaks of their prior disappearance. Therefore, the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 81, says: "When it states that the fourth dhyāna abandons suffering, it speaks of abandoning based on the exhaustion of paired dharmas. By 'paired dharmas' is meant suffering and bliss. At the time of becoming free from the defilement of desire, although suffering is already exhausted, bliss is not yet exhausted; now, having become free from the defilement of the third dhyāna, suffering and bliss are both exhausted, so both are spoken of with the word 'abandoning.' Through freedom from the defilement of the three dhyānas, bliss and the rest are all abandoned; why then does it only speak of abandoning the faculty of bliss? Answer: Because at that time bliss is exhausted. One knows that freedom from the defilements of the desire realm and the first dhyāna also abandons joy and so forth, but because they are not yet exhausted, they are not mentioned." Furthermore, the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 81, says: "As the sūtra says, in the first dhyāna the faculty of grief ceases; in the second dhyāna the faculty of suffering ceases. Question: At the time of becoming free from the defilement of desire, both grief and suffering are abandoned; why does the sūtra make this statement? Answer: It makes this statement based on transcending their counteragents (pratipakṣa). That is, at the stage of freedom from the defilement of desire, although the faculty of suffering is abandoned, it is not yet termed having transcended the counteragent of suffering. At the time one attains freedom from defilement in the first dhyāna, one transcends the counteragent of suffering. As for the counteragent of suffering, it refers to the first dhyāna. Furthermore, it makes this statement based on transcending the family (gotra) and the basis of suffering. That is, at the stage of freedom from the defilement of desire, although the faculty of suffering is abandoned, one has not yet transcended the basis and family of suffering. When one attains freedom from defilement in the first dhyāna, one transcends the basis of suffering and the family of suffering; therefore suffering is said to cease. 'Basis and family' refers to the consciousness-bodies. Question: At the stage of freedom from the defilement of desire, although the faculty of grief is abandoned, one has not yet transcended its counteragent, basis, and family; it should not be said that grief ceases in the first dhyāna. Answer: The counteragent, basis, and family of the faculty of grief are all within the mental consciousness (manovijñāna). Since they are in the same mental consciousness as the faculty of grief, when it is being abandoned, it is immediately said to cease. The basis and family of the faculty of suffering are not in the same consciousness as its counteragent; therefore, only when one transcends its counteragent, basis, and family is suffering said to cease. Some say: the cessation of the faculty of suffering in the second dhyāna refers to the cessation of vitarka and vicāra, because the noble ones generate the notion of suffering regarding vitarka and vicāra, surpassing ordinary worldlings who revile the suffering of hell; since they are capable of producing the notion of suffering, they are called the faculty of suffering." The above is the treatise's text. Question: When the four dhyānas arise, there are the universal wholesome mental factors (kuśalamahābhūmika), the ten universal mental factors (mahābhūmika), indeterminate vitarka and vicāra, and the primary mind (citta)—twenty-three dharmas arising in association. Why are only nine dharmas used as factors of dhyāna? Among the universals, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, and sensation; among the universal wholesome factors, equanimity (upekṣā), pliancy (praśrabdhi), and faith (śraddhā); and the indeterminate vitarka and vicāra are established as factors of dhyāna; the remaining fourteen dharmas are not included among the factors of dhyāna. Therefore, the *Vibhāṣā*, fascicle 80, on the intention behind setting aside and establishing them, says: The primary mind is the master, not a factor (aṅga) belonging to mental factors. Among the ten universal dharmas, the three—mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom—are preeminently superior in according with purity; hence they are established as factors. Sensation has superior potency in both defiled and pure aspects; therefore it is also established. However, among the five sensations, grief and suffering are not associated with dhyāna; hence they are not established as factors. Ideation, volition, contact, and desire preeminently accord with saṃsāric transmigration and are not of cessation; hence they are not established as factors. Attention (manaskāra) is superior in potency only when confronting sensory objects in the uncollected plane of the desire realm, not in the meditative planes; hence it is not established as factors. Decisive resolve (adhimokṣa) is superior only in the stage of the non-learner (aśaikṣa), whereas dhyāna is universally superior across all stages; therefore it is not established. Among the wholesome, faith is the initial foundation of all practices, like a water-clearing jewel making the mind limpid and pure; hence it is established as a factor. Restlessness (auddhatya) is an obstacle to concentration, which equanimity can counteract; torpor (styāna) is an obstacle to wisdom, which pliancy can counteract; therefore they are established as factors. Shame, conscience, non-attachment, non-hatred, non-negligence, and non-harming do not intensely accord with the dhyānas, because these dharmas have increased strength as proximate counteragents mostly against evil dharmas of the uncollected plane of the desire realm, not in the meditative planes; therefore they are not established. Energy (vīrya) mostly tires body and mind, while concentration causes body and mind much bliss; they do not intensely accord, so it is not established as a factor; however, because it accords with bodhi, it is established as an aid to bodhi (bodhipakṣa). Among the indeterminate, the two dharmas vitarka and vicāra are preeminently strong in according with purity, capable of assisting samādhi in holding and directing the mind to abandon the gross and subtle and counteract the evils of desire; hence both are established as factors. Since all the other mental factors do not associate with dhyāna, they are not established as factors.