俱舍論疏 29

English (machine translation) 29

Language: English

29.2

Chapter 8: Investigation of Concentration, Part Two.

The Śāstra says: "In this way the absorptions that serve as supports have been explained." This is the second major section, explaining the qualities that depend on absorption. Within this: first, explaining the four immeasurables; second, explaining the eight liberations; third, explaining the eight bases of mastery; fourth, explaining the ten totalities; fifth, explaining the bodily support for attainment; sixth, explaining the conditions for giving rise to absorption. The three stanzas below constitute the first, explaining the four immeasurables.

29.4

The Śāstra states: "Up to: Because they bring about immeasurable fruit." The first part explains the name "immeasurables" (apramāṇa). "Taking immeasurable sentient beings as their object" means naming them after their cognitive object. "Inducing immeasurable merit" refers to the immeasurable cause. "Bringing about immeasurable fruit" refers to the immeasurable result. Because they take immeasurable sentient beings as object and obtain immeasurable merit, they obtain immeasurable fruit. Because these four practices possess the three immeasurables, they are called "immeasurables." The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 81, further offers three explanations: "First: Because they counteract immeasurable defilements of conceptual proliferation; second: Because they counteract immeasurable defilements of heedlessness; third: Because these four kinds are the vast playing-grounds of all noble ones, they are called immeasurables (thus far the text)."

29.5

The Śāstra states: "For what reason are there only four?" The second part explains why there is neither increase nor decrease, first asking and then answering. This is the question.

29.6

The Śāstra states: "Because they counteract four kinds of predominant obstacles." This is the answer.

29.7

The Śāstra states: "What are the four obstacles?" This is the question.

29.8

The Śāstra states: "Namely, ill-will, harm... up to: love and the others are established." This is the answer. Because the predominant obstacles are four, there are only four, neither increasing nor decreasing. That is, love counteracts ill-will, compassion counteracts harm, sympathetic joy counteracts discontent, and equanimity counteracts sensual lust and ill-will. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Ill-will refers to the mental factor that desires to kill sentient beings; the mental factor that desires to afflict sentient beings is called harm. Attachment to cognitive objects, being the cause of not delighting to abide in wholesome factors, is called discontent. Giving rise to tainted delight regarding exquisite sensory objects, with feelings never satiated, is called sensual lust (thus far the text)."

29.9

The Śāstra states: "Between the repulsive and equanimity... what distinction is there?" This asks about the distinguishing characteristics between the two.

29.10

The Śāstra states: "The Vaibhāṣikas... respectively counteract them." This cites the Vibhāṣā in reply.

29.11

The Śāstra states: "In actual truth, the repulsive... equanimity can counteract." This is the author's correct interpretation.

29.12

The Śāstra states: "Among the four, the intrinsic nature of the first two is non-ill-will." This relates the explanation of an ancient master.

29.13

The Śāstra states: "In actual truth, it should be said that compassion is non-harm." This is the author's correct explanation. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Some say: Compassion is non-harm, because it directly counteracts harm. In actual truth it is so, but because harm resembles ill-will, it is spoken of using the name 'ill-will.' The mode of activity of compassion also resembles non-ill-will, so it is given the name 'non-ill-will,' whereas in truth it is non-harm (thus far the text)."

29.14

The Śāstra states: "Sympathetic joy is joyful sensation... up to: being induced by lust." This relates an ancient explanation. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Ancient masters said: Sympathetic joy is joyful sensation, and equanimity is non-greed."

29.15

The Śāstra states: "In actual truth, it should take two dharmas as its intrinsic nature." This is the author's correct explanation, meaning that equanimity should take non-greed and non-ill-will as its intrinsic nature. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Therefore, this sympathetic joy is definitely not joyful sensation; it takes joy as its nature. Or it is non-greed, meaning there is another greed that is a bad mental factor, which considers sentient beings in this way: 'How might all their happiness not be obtained by them, but belong wholly to me?' Sympathetic joy can counteract that, hence it is non-greed, because it must be concomitant with the faculty of joy. It can be found in the three levels, just as regret is concomitant with grief; sympathetic joy is also non-greed. As for its distinct characteristic: the mind is not greedily attached to the prosperity of others, and knowing that others have attained it, gives rise to deep joy and rejoicing; counteracting the burning of the mind is called sympathetic joy. Therefore one knows that this sympathetic joy also has non-greed as its nature (commentary says: because it counteracts greed, it is called having non-greed as its nature. Just as the contemplation of the repulsive, though it is wisdom, has non-greed as its nature because it counteracts greed)." It further states: "Furthermore, regarding the difference between equanimity and love: love can counteract ill-will induced by ill-will, and has non-ill-will as its intrinsic nature. Equanimity can counteract ill-will induced by greed, and has non-greed as its intrinsic nature. Would it not be that just as equanimity has non-greed as its nature and can also counteract ill-will induced by greed, likewise, granting that love has non-ill-will as its nature, it should also be able to counteract greed induced by ill-will? This objection is not valid, because their modes of activity are contradictory. That is, the mode of activity of equanimity is mutually contradictory with both greed and ill-will, because it discards the distinguishing marks of friend and non-friend. From this, neither attachment nor hostility arises. It is precisely because of this that equanimity is solely non-greed, directly counteracting greed while concurrently counteracting ill-will. The mode of activity of love contradicts ill-will, not greed, because it operates by giving happiness to sentient beings (because ill-will contradicts love's giving of happiness). From this, although love and equanimity both contradict ill-will, love accords with greed, whereas equanimity can oppose and harm it; therefore these two are extremely distinct (thus far the text)."

29.16

The Śāstra states: "These four immeasurables... up to: enter the attainment of equanimity." This relates the distinctions among the four modes of activity. The Nyāyānusāra states: "Regarding the differences among these intentions (āśaya): contemplating sentient beings as oneself is love; desiring sentient beings to be free from suffering is compassion; rejoicing in the prosperity of others is sympathetic joy; not reflecting on the characteristics of friends and enemies is equanimity." The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 81, states: "The Venerable Vasumitra spoke thus: Bestowing benefit is the characteristic of love; removing decline is the characteristic of compassion; rejoicing in their attainment is the characteristic of sympathetic joy; abandoning partiality in impartiality is the characteristic of equanimity (thus far the text)."

29.17

The Śāstra states: "These four immeasurables... how are they not distortions?" This is the question.

29.18

The Śāstra states: "Because they aspire that they... up to: arise in association with." This is the answer. There are three points here: first, they are not distortions because they are wholesome aspirations; second, they are not distortions because of their intention; third, they are not distortions because of resolved determination (adhimokṣa).

29.19

The Śāstra states: "Even if they were distortions, what fault would there be?" This is a concessive explanation. The previous three explanations showed they are not distortions; this now explains what fault there would be even granting that they were distortions.

29.20

The Śāstra states: "If they should be unwholesome... up to: arise in association with." If it is argued that because they are distortions they must not be wholesome, the reasoning is incorrect, because they arise in association with the three wholesome roots.

29.21

The Śāstra states: "If they should induce unwholesome... up to: counteracting ill-will and so forth." If it is argued that because they are distortions they must induce what is bad, the reasoning is also incorrect, because they can counteract ill-will, harm, greed, and so forth.

29.22

The Śāstra states: "These take the desire realm... up to: obstacles such as ill-will." This explains that their cognitive object is solely all sentient beings of the desire realm, because they can counteract obstacles such as ill-will that take sentient beings as their object.

29.23

The Śāstra states: "Yet the sūtras say... up to: to indicate [sentient beings] within the container." This harmonizes with the sūtras. When the sūtras say that practicing love involves reflecting on one direction and all worlds, this mentions the container world of desire to encompass the sentient beings within it.

29.24

The Śāstra states: "The third relies only on... up to: not-yet-arrived and intermediate." This explains the levels upon which they rely.

29.25

The Śāstra states: "Or some would have it that... up to: only then can they be generated." This relates a divergent view. This master's intention is: they do not exist in the not-yet-arrived [dhyāna], because the four immeasurables are virtues of ease and unhurriedness, and only one who has already separated from desire can generate them. Those in the vessel of the not-yet-arrived are mostly hurried and not free from desire, hence he says they do not exist there.

29.26

The Śāstra states: "Or some would have it that... up to: all are subsumed under the immeasurables." This again relates a divergent view. This master's intention is: whether in meditative or non-meditative levels, fundamental or preparatory, because all take immeasurable sentient beings as their object, bestowing benefit, removing decline, rejoicing in attainment, and abandoning partiality in impartiality.

29.27

The Śāstra states: "Although previously it was said that these... up to: because their cognitive object is sentient beings." This explains that there are three reasons why they do not sever obstacles: First, because they are subsumed under the defiled fundamental dhyānas. As explained before, these do not sever defilements. Second, because they arise in association with mental application of resolved determination. Severing defilements requires mental application to universal characteristics, whereas these are resolved determination, hence they do not sever defilements. Third, because they universally take all sentient beings as their cognitive object. Severing defilements takes phenomena as object and does not take sentient beings as object; these take sentient beings as object, hence they do not sever defilements.

29.28

The Śāstra states: "In their preparatory stage... up to: they can counteract the four obstacles." This explains the reason for stating that they suppress and counteract the four obstacles. "The fundamental state of the four immeasurables" refers to the fundamental absorption; in this stage there are no obstacles such as ill-will. Speaking of counteracting the four obstacles applies to the preparatory stage. Or, in the fundamental state they are also called counteracting obstacles because they cause the already severed obstacles to become even further removed.

29.29

The Śāstra states: "Namely, in the desire realm and the not-yet-arrived... up to: can sever the various defilements." This explains the suppression of ill-will and so forth in the preparatory stage mentioned above. Namely, in the mind of hearing and reflection in the desire realm and in the not-yet-arrived absorption, one first cultivates the immeasurables as the preparatory practice for the path of abandoning to suppress ill-will and so forth, inducing the path of abandoning to arise to sever defilements such as ill-will, and only then do the fundamental four immeasurables arise. Stating that they can counteract the four obstacles is spoken in terms of the preparatory stage.

29.30

The Śāstra states: "After the various defilements have been severed... up to: being obscured and suppressed by them." This explains defilements. These can make what is already severed even further removed. The phrase "counteracting the four obstacles" is spoken in terms of making them further removed.

29.31

The Śāstra states: "In the stage of a beginner, how does one cultivate love?" This asks: How does one engage in the preparatory practice if one wishes to cultivate love?

29.32

The Śāstra states: "Namely, first reflecting... up to: such happiness." This relates the beginner's practice for one whose defilements are slight.

29.33

The Śāstra states: "If originally that person... up to: making seven classes in all." This relates that in the preparatory stage for one with defilements, one first divides sentient beings into seven classes.

29.34

The Śāstra states: "Having divided them into classes... up to: equal to the superior friend." This relates the mind resolved on giving happiness, making the superior enemy and others equal to the superior friend. Although able to take them as object, it is not yet universal and has not reached the fundamental state.

29.35

The Śāstra states: "Cultivating this resolved determination... up to: the immeasurable of love is accomplished." This explains how it gradually expands until reaching the stage of accomplishment.

29.36

The Śāstra states: "If toward sentient beings... up to: because it can currently be seen." This explains the differences among practitioners. All sentient beings are of two types: first, those who delight in seeking others' virtues; second, those who delight in seeking others' faults. All sentient beings also have two characteristics: first, the characteristic of virtue; second, the characteristic of fault. Even one who has severed the roots of good has characteristics of virtue; even a pratyekabuddha has characteristics of fault. One who delights in seeking virtue sees the virtue of an icchantika, because seeing the fruit-characteristic of an icchantika, one knows they have wholesome causes. One who delights in seeking faults sees the fault of a pratyekabuddha, because seeing their fruit-characteristic, one knows they have unwholesome causes. For one who delights in seeking virtues, cultivating love is easily accomplished, but not for one who delights in seeking faults.

29.37

The Śāstra states: "The method of cultivating compassion and sympathetic joy should be understood by analogy with this." Following the explanation of love, there are seven equals, beginning with the superior friend. The preparatory cultivation of equanimity is not mentioned because it begins with the neutral ones.

29.38

The Śāstra states: "Namely, contemplating sentient beings... up to: 'Truly what happiness!'" This expounds the two modes of activity of compassion and sympathetic joy. Although the preparatory practices are the same, their modes of activity differ.

29.39

The passage of the treatise starting with "When cultivating equanimity, at first... until: equal to the neutral" explains the preparatory practice (prayoga) of cultivating equanimity. In this equanimity, one first casts off the neutral person, next casts off inferior enemies and so forth up to supreme friends, because greed is difficult to cast off while hatred is easy to cast off. The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 82, says: "Evaluation: It should be stated thus: it is not the case that the four immeasurables arise strictly in the order described. Why is this? Because the practitioner of contemplative cultivation generates them according to their inclination; their sequence is not fixed, just as with the superknowledges, liberations (vimokṣa), bases of mastery (abhibhvāyatana), and bases of totality (kṛtsnāyatana). Question: If one has not yet aroused the immeasurables of the first dhyāna, can one arouse the immeasurables of the second dhyāna? One opinion says one cannot; another opinion says one can. Just as if one has not yet aroused the uncontaminated [dharma] of a lower stage, whether one can arouse the uncontaminated of a higher stage is also like this. Question: Is it quicker to arouse the immeasurables of a higher stage after the immeasurables of a lower stage, or quicker to arouse the immeasurables of a lower stage after the immeasurables of a higher stage? Answer: It is quicker to arouse the immeasurables of a lower stage after the immeasurables of a higher stage; it is not quicker to arouse the immeasurables of a higher stage after the immeasurables of a lower stage, just like learning calligraphy. Question: Can one, immediately without interval after the immeasurables of the first dhyāna, arouse the immeasurables of the second dhyāna? Some say one cannot, because one must cultivate the preparatory practice of its own stage to induce it before it can manifest. Some say one can also do so, because one who has practiced thoroughly can arouse a single preparatory practice, or even without preparatory practice can traverse the various stages, arousing the immeasurables either upward or downward." Fascicle 83 of the Vibhāṣā says: "As the sūtras say: For one dwelling in the absorption of loving-kindness, swords, poison, water, and fire cannot harm them; they will certainly meet no sudden disaster leading to death. Question: Why is this so? The Venerable Vasumitra explains thus: Because loving-kindness is a state of non-harming. Some say: Because the power of loving-kindness is great. Some say: Because loving-kindness benefits others, all the devas and benevolent deities protect them. The Bhadanta says: If one dwells in the absorption of loving-kindness, the great elements of the form realm arise throughout all parts of the body, making the supporting physical body as solid and compact as stone; hence it cannot be harmed. Because the absorption of loving-kindness is first, loving-kindness absorption is mentioned. While many state that compassion and the rest do not equal loving-kindness, the Bhadanta says: Due to two causes and conditions, equanimity is the supreme. First, by virtue of what it accomplishes, that is, if one enacts equanimity, one can sever greed and hatred; second, by virtue of quiescence, that is, it operates without discrimination toward sentient beings, and therefore equanimity is the supreme (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.40

The passage of the treatise starting with "These four immeasurables... until: only joy is not accomplished" explains that humans across the three continents have them, whereas non-humans (devas and the like) do not. If in the first dhyāna one attains one, one necessarily attains all four; if in the third dhyāna and above one attains one, one necessarily attains three.

29.41

The passage of the treatise starting with "Having analyzed the immeasurables, next we analyze the liberations": the three lines of verse below form the second section, explaining the liberations (vimokṣa).

29.42

"The treatise says: ... until: the liberation of contemplating external forms" explains the first liberation. As for "possessing the notion of internal form and contemplating external form", this refers to attention through resolve (adhimokṣa-manaskāra). Contemplating one's own body being eaten by worms and so forth, one perceives the appearance of the internal body and perceives external worms; hence it is called "possessing the notion of internal form and contemplating external forms liberation". Therefore the Nyāyānusāra states: "When the sūtra says 'possessing form, one contemplates forms', what meaning does this demonstrate? It is not that without having eliminated form, one can truly penetrate the profound meaning of this sūtra. However, the ancient noble masters passed down the explanation saying: not yet having subdued and eliminated the ideation that objectifies internal form is the meaning of 'possessing form'. How is this known to be so? Because of the distinct statement in the second liberation. That is, regarding the second, since it is said thus: 'Having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms.' Therefore, we know that the first liberation has not yet eliminated the ideation of internal form. Based on this, the author of the treatise established the initial one, naming it 'possessing the ideation of internal form and contemplating external forms liberation'. That is, the practitioner of contemplation, like one facing the corpse of an enemy, although already detached from sensual desire (kāmarāga), in order to make it firm, again contemplates external forms with the aspect of impurity. Because of repeatedly observing external forms, the notion of revulsion also arises regarding internal forms. Just as someone who delights in purity, having a dog corpse tied to their neck, feels extreme shame and conceives profound revulsion. After contemplating the external impure marks in this way, only then does one see that the internal physical body is also impure. Because the contemplating mind is pure, one sees that inside the internal body, the thirty-six substances are filled with impurity, just like seeing objects of various colors within a box—this is called the fully perfected stage of the first liberation. At this perfected stage, from what dharma is one liberated? It means that the mind does not delight in forms, hates and turns away from them, condemns them, and is repulsed by them, hindering sensual desire; this is being liberated from sensual desire, because its nature is non-greed (alobha) (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.43

The treatise stating "Second: having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms liberation" explains the second liberation. "Having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms" refers to attention through resolve: seeing one's own internal body being eaten by worms and the like, one does not see the appearance of the body, but sees only worms and the like; hence it is called "having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms liberation". Therefore the Nyāyānusāra says: "The practitioner of contemplation, from this time onward, gradually further expels the ideation that objectifies internal form. That is, through resolve, one imagines one's own life ending, one's remaining corpse being carried on a bier and placed in a cemetery, where various birds and beasts fight to devour it, until in an instant the body is gone and one sees only the birds and beasts. Or in that place it is burned by fire, until the remaining ashes are blown by the wind, and in an instant the body is gone and one sees only empty space. Or one imagines one's own body to be like clarified butter or salt, melted away by fire or water, until the body ceases to exist and one sees only the fire and so forth—this is called 'having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms liberation'. Because this power of resolve eliminates the ideation of form, although it is aroused in relation to the body, one does not see the body. Having already expelled the ideation that objectifies internal form, the mental continuum proceeds without other activity, and supreme pliancy and bliss manifest spontaneously. Frequently cultivating within this state the mental aspect of revulsion and turning away from the objective sphere of the form-source—this is called the perfection of the second liberation. It also, like the first liberation, liberates from sensual desire: although previously by cultivating the ideation of impurity one had already attained liberation from sensual desire objectifying form, yet since beginningless time self-attachment has been difficult to cast off; if one contemplates the body as existing, one still fears regression and arising [of desire]. Therefore, one subsequently further cultivates the ideation of no internal form and the contemplation of revulsion toward form. Its purity exceeds the former. The practitioner at that time, having attained these two contemplations based on the first dhyāna, profoundly develops attachment to them; in order to make these further advance, one enters the second dhyāna and again cultivates the two liberations, again cultivating the two dharmas in sequence as before (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.44

The treatise stating "Third: the pure liberation, having bodily realized it, one abides fully endowed" explains the third liberation. Therefore the Nyāyānusāra says: "Because that yogin has long contemplated impurity, their mind sinks into dejection due to the operation of revulsion. In order to stimulate it to temporarily arouse joy, or to temporarily relieve the fatigue of long cultivation, or to test for oneself the capability of the contemplation of impurity, that person further relies on the fourth dhyāna to arouse pure resolve regarding forms of the desire realm: first grasping pure marks such as precious garments and flowers, by the power of resolve gradually and broadly reflecting, universally producing pure aspects regarding the objective support. As the sūtra says: 'That person subsequently should grasp a few pure marks and comprehensively reflect upon forms.' Although this stimulates the mind, there is no restlessness; although one contemplates pure marks, greed does not arise. Knowing that the power of wholesome roots has increased, one next concentrates the mind briefly on the object, dwelling in contemplation of the pure regarding a single objective support—this stage is called the fulfillment of the pure liberation, because it can completely abandon the ideation of impurity. This pure liberation is also like the second: having no ideation of internal form, one contemplates external forms (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.45

The passage of the treatise starting with "The four formless absorptions... until: the eighth liberation" lists the names of the remaining liberations; their meanings are explained below.

29.46

The passage of the treatise starting with "Among the eight, the first three... until: because ideation and contemplation are prominent" explains the essence of the first three. That the first three have non-greed as their essence is because they directly counteract greed. However, when the sūtra speaks of 'possessing the notion of internal form, one contemplates external forms', it does not mean that they have ideation and discernment (prajñā) as their essence, but rather that at this time ideation and contemplation are prominent. Just as with the four applications of mindfulness (smṛtyupasthāna) and the recollection of past lives (pūrvanivāsānusmṛti), which actually have wisdom as their essence and yet are called mindfulness. If wisdom were their essence, the direct counteragent would be abolished.

29.47

The passage of the treatise starting with "Among the three, the first two... until: because of operating through mental aspects" explains the differences in mental aspects among the first three liberations.

29.48

The passage of the treatise stating "The three, along with their retinue, are all of the nature of the five aggregates" explains the essence of the retinues of the three liberations.

29.49

The passage of the treatise starting with "The first two liberations... until: because the mind is clear and pure" explains the differences in the supporting stages of the three liberations. The reason greed for visible color exists in the desire realm and the first dhyāna is that it is induced by the aggregate of eye-consciousness.

29.50

The passage of the treatise starting with "The other stages also possess them... until: because they are not predominant" explains that the wisdom arisen from hearing in the desire realm also possesses these three. In the third dhyāna there are also three types; but because they are not predominant, they are not established as liberations. In the first and second dhyānas there is also the third, and in the fourth dhyāna there are also the first and second; because they are not predominant, they are not established. The Nyāyānusāra says: "Although they can also occur in the desire realm, because they are intermingled and suppressed by the greed of the desire realm, the designation of the two liberations is not established. Although they can also occur in the third and fourth dhyānas, being far from what is to be counteracted, their power is weak, and furthermore, they are subdued by joy and purity; hence they do not receive the designation (subdued by joy in the third dhyāna, and subdued by purity in the fourth dhyāna). The third liberation relies on the final dhyāna because it is free from the eight afflictions and the mind is clear and pure. The fourth along with its threshold stage are established with the designation of the 'final dhyāna'. Although similar wholesome roots exist in lower stages, because they are not predominant, they are not called liberations, because they are intermingled and suppressed by the sensual greed of the desire realm. Because they are subdued by impurity in the first and second dhyānas, and because one is deluded by joy in the third dhyāna, the pure liberation is in neither case established (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.51

The passage of the treatise starting with "The next four liberations... until: because their nature is weak and inferior" sets forth the essence of the next four formless liberations. In the four formless realms, only absorbed wholesome [states] are taken, not unabsorbed wholesome nor defiled [states].

29.52

The passage of the treatise starting with "Not unabsorbed wholesome... until: also have unabsorbed wholesome" explains the difference between the two theories regarding unabsorbed wholesome [states]. The unabsorbed wholesome [states] of that stage are solely innately acquired wholesome states, because there is no [wisdom arisen from] hearing or reflection.

29.53

The passage of the treatise starting with "The path of liberation in the threshold stage... until: only then is it called liberation" explains that the path of liberation in the threshold stage of the sphere of boundless space, because it objectifies the sphere of boundless space, receives the name 'liberation'. Because the uninterrupted path objectifies the lower stage, it is not called liberation, since it does not turn away from the lower. The Nyāyānusāra has another explanation: "The nine uninterrupted paths and eight paths of liberation of all threshold stages are also not liberations, because they do not turn away from the lower stage, because they are intermingled with paths objectifying the lower, and furthermore because one is not yet completely freed from the defilements of the lower stage (above is the text of the treatise)."

29.54

The passage of the treatise starting with "However, elsewhere... until: not in their entirety" harmonizes statements made in other places.

29.55

The passage of the treatise starting with "The eighth liberation... until: attains the name of liberation" explains the intrinsic nature of the eighth liberation. As explained in the Chapter on Faculties, there are two interpretations: first, because it arises turning away from and repulsed by feeling and ideation, it is called liberation, which in other places is called the cessation of ideation and feeling; or, because it comprehensively turns away from and is repulsed by that which has an intentional object, which means revulsion toward all mind and mental factors, it is thereby called the meditative absorption of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti).

29.56

The passage of the treatise starting with "Some say that due to this... until: emerging with an uncontaminated mind" explains the difference in the minds of entering and emerging from this absorption.

29.57

The passage of the treatise starting with "Among the eight, the first three... until: as their objective domain" explains the differences in the objects of the liberations. Impurity is repulsive; pure objects are called attractive. "Their non-analytical cessation" (apratisaṃkhyānirodha) refers to the non-analytical cessation of contaminated dharmas of one's own and higher stages, and of the path of the category of subsequent cognition.

29.58

The passage of the treatise starting with "The third dhyāna... until: because of being disturbed by it" explains the reason why the third dhyāna has no liberations.

29.59

The passage of the treatise starting with "For what reason does the practitioner... until: only then does it succeed" explains the intention in cultivating the pure liberation.

29.60

The passage of the treatise starting with "Due to two conditions... until: attains supreme mastery" explains the intention in cultivating the liberations. The phrase 'and so forth' includes the bases of mastery and so on.

29.61

The passage of the treatise starting with "Therefore one is able to induce... until: various functions" explains that attaining mastery in absorption enables one to arouse various functions such as non-conflict (araṇā) and the like.

29.62

The passage of the treatise starting with "Why is it that in the sūtra... until: each being at an extreme" explains the reason why two liberations in the sūtra receive the designation 'bodily witness' (kāyasākṣin).

29.63

The passage of the treatise starting with "Having analyzed the liberations, next we analyze the bases of mastery": the single verse below forms the third section, explaining the eight bases of mastery (abhibhvāyatana).

29.64

"The treatise says: ... until: completing the previous to make eight" lists the eight names.

29.65

The treatise says, "Among the eight, the first two ... to the third vimokṣa," which points out that they are the same as before.

29.66

The treatise says, "If so, the eight abhibhvāyatanas ... or does not arise at all," which states that although their essence and the like are identical with the vimokṣas, their dynamic function differs. That is to say, because they master their cognitive objects, they are called abhibhvāyatanas ("bases of overcoming"). The vimokṣas are the cause, and the abhibhvāyatanas are the fruit, because by practicing the vimokṣas one enters the abhibhvāyatanas. The previous three vimokṣas, with respect to forms, can only grasp the foul and pure aspects generally. Now, the eight abhibhvāyatanas distinguish different aspects with respect to forms, such as few, many, blue, and so forth. The previous vimokṣas merely turn away from sensual lust and notions of impurity with respect to form, whereas the eight abhibhvāyatanas can analyze and subdue the cognitive objects, making them turn in accordance with one's mind. From this it is proven that because the third vimokṣa generally grasps the aspect of purity, it is established as a single item; whereas among the eight abhibhvāyatanas, because the latter four abhibhvāyatanas grasp distinctly, they are divided into four kinds. As for the term "abhibhvāyatana", Vibhāṣā fascicle 141 states: "Question: Why are they called abhibhvāyatanas? Answer: Because they subdue their cognitive objects and crush desire, they are called abhibhvāyatanas." The Nyāyānusāra states: "Or, because one transforms [things] freely with respect to these bases and does not give rise to defilements following them, they are called abhibhvāyatanas. Because they overcome the bases (āyatana), the name abhibhvāyatana is established. Or, these wholesome roots themselves are called 'bases' (āyatana), and because the bases can overcome, the name abhibhvāyatana is established" (end of treatise citation).

29.67

The treatise says: "Having analyzed the abhibhvāyatanas, the kṛtsnāyatanas are analyzed next." Below is one line of verse, the fourth section, which explains the ten kṛtsnāyatanas.

29.68

"The treatise says ... hence they are called kṛtsnāyatanas": this explains the name. That is, pervading and cognizing these four great elements, four colors, as well as space, consciousness, and so forth, is called kṛtsnāyatana ("base of totality"). The Nyāyānusāra states: "The sūtras say with respect to these bases that they are all of 'a single notion, above, below, and across, non-dual and immeasurable, contemplating everywhere without gap or interval'; hence they are called kṛtsnāyatanas. Because they pervade the bases, the name kṛtsnāyatana is established. Or, these wholesome roots themselves are called 'bases', and because their mode of activity is pervasive, the name kṛtsnāyatana is established. Here, earth and so forth indicate the cognitive objects, and the word 'pervasive' (kṛtsna) indicates the mode of activity. Although the mode of activity is equal, the cognitive objects are distinct; therefore, the kṛtsnāyatanas are divided into ten kinds. The sūtra says 'one' to indicate that this meditative attainment contemplates a single class of objective aspect appearing before it. The word 'notion' (saṃjñā) indicates that this is mental engagement of resolve (adhimokṣamanaskāra). Why do only ten receive the name kṛtsnāyatana? Because above these there is no further pervasive mode of activity; only the fourth dhyāna, infinite space, and infinite consciousness can be said to have an infinite mode of activity" (end of treatise citation).

29.69

The treatise says, "Among the ten, the first eight ... having the five skandhas as their nature," which explains their intrinsic nature.

29.70

The treatise says, "Relying on the fourth dhyāna, they take the visible form of the desire realm as their cognitive object," which explains their cognitive object. That is, they take the āyatana of form as their cognitive object, because they cognize the nominal four great elements.

29.71

The treatise says, "Other masters say ... take the wind element as cognitive object," which explains an alternative explanation.

29.72

The treatise says, "The latter two kṛtsnāyatanas ... take the skandhas as their cognitive object," which explains their cognitive objects.

29.73

The treatise says, "It should be understood that herein ... because each surpasses the preceding," which explains their superiority and inferiority.

29.74

The treatise says, "These three categories of qualities including the vimokṣas ...", below is one line of verse, the fifth section, which explains the two kinds of attainment and their supporting bodies.

29.75

"The treatise says ... because it is the attainment of cessation": this points to the previous explanation, namely the explanation in the preceding section on conditioned factors disconnected [from thought] (cittaviprayuktasaṃskāra).

29.76

The treatise says, "The remaining vimokṣas and so forth ... because they were not previously practiced," which states that the remaining seven vimokṣas are accessible through both attainments. The word "and so forth" encompasses the eight abhibhvāyatanas and the ten kṛtsnāyatanas. Those that were previously practiced are attained through detachment; those that are newly practiced are attained through application (prayoga).

29.77

The treatise says, "The four formless vimokṣas ... due to the power of instruction," which explains their supporting bodies. Because the body of a lower level can admit the arising of the absorption of a higher level, formless absorptions arise relying on the bodies of the three realms. The three vimokṣas, eight abhibhvāyatanas, and eight kṛtsnāyatanas arise only in the desire realm due to the power of instruction, because the teaching exists in the desire realm.

29.78

The treatise says, "Ordinary persons and noble ones can both make them present," which explains the persons who give rise to them. The eighth vimokṣa is generated only by noble ones, as stated before; the first seven vimokṣas are generated by both ordinary persons and noble ones.

29.79

The treatise says: "Those who are born in the form or formless realms ...", below is one line of verse, the sixth section, which explains the conditions for generating absorption.

29.80

"The treatise says ... because it serves as the cause of arising": this explains the power of causes. Here, with respect to what was recent in earlier times—that which was recently generated—and what was frequently cultivated, because it was repeatedly cultivated, this is a recent similar cause (sabhāgahetu). Through the power of these two causes, one is born in the form and formless realms; and even without the power of instruction, they are able to arise.

29.81

The treatise says, "Second, through the power of karma ... to be born in a higher stage," which explains the second power. That is to say, previously in the desire realm, or in the form realm, etc., one created karma to be experienced upon rebirth (upapadyavedanīya) or karma to be experienced in subsequent lives (aparaparyāyavedanīya), and when it is time to experience the karmic fruit in a higher stage, through the power of this karma, the sentient being is necessarily made to detach from lower defilements and obtain higher absorptions so that they may be born there. This is because if one has not detached from the defilements of a lower stage, there is definitely no possibility of being born in a higher stage.

29.82

The treatise says, "Third, through the power of nature (dharmatā) ... because all are augmented," which explains the power of nature. When an eon is about to be destroyed, sentient beings by nature all take birth in the higher realms. Desiring to take birth in the higher realms, their wholesome roots are augmented by nature, and they attain the absorptions of the higher stages and sever lower defilements.

29.83

The treatise says, "Those who are born in ... are destroyed by," which states that those born in the two higher realms generate formless absorptions through the power of cause and karma, and not through the power of nature, because the fourth dhyāna is not destroyed by the three calamities.

29.84

The treatise says, "Born in the form realm ... with the addition of the power of instruction," which explains that when in the form realm one generates higher dhyānas, it is through the power of cause, the power of karma, and the power of nature. If born in the desire realm, one generates higher formless [absorptions] through the power of cause, the power of karma, and the power of instruction. One generates form realm absorptions through the power of karma, the power of cause, the power of nature, and the power of instruction. Therefore it says, "in each case it should be understood that the power of instruction is added."

29.85

The treatise says: "Hitherto various teachings have been analyzed ...", from here down is one line of verse, the third main section, which explains the duration of the Dharma's persistence.

29.86

"The treatise says ... the factors of awakening (bodhipākṣikadharmas)": this text has three parts: first, explaining the two kinds of True Dharma; second, explaining the persons who can uphold it; third, explaining the duration of its persistence. This passage is the first, explaining the two kinds of True Dharma: first, the Dharma of teaching; second, the Dharma of realization. Teaching refers to the Tripiṭaka; realization refers to the factors of awakening of the three vehicles. Because realization is obtained through teaching, the Dharma of teaching is explained first. If one compares the ancient teachings with the present Buddha, the teaching comes first and the Buddha comes later, because the Buddha attained realization through the teaching. If one compares the present teaching with the speaker, the Buddha comes first and the teaching comes later, because the Buddha spoke the teaching. If taking the present realization and the present teaching, the teaching comes first and realization comes later; therefore realization is spoken of next. If through realization one can propagate the teaching, then when there is realization, the teaching persists.

29.87

The treatise says, "As long as there are those who can uphold ... it will remain for that long": the second part explains the persons who can uphold it. Because there are those who can uphold it, the Dharma is maintained and not extinguished; because there are those who explain it correctly, the transmission of the Dharma is not extinguished. If one only upholds it but cannot explain it, then the transmission of the lamp is deficient; if one only explains it but does not uphold it, then it falls into disuse, is forgotten, and is not put into practice; therefore both are combined. If there are those who can practice in accordance with the teaching, then the Dharma of realization abides in the world. If one upholds the Dharma but does not practice it, there is no wholesome root of application. If one practices correctly in accordance with the teaching, then the factors of awakening arise. Therefore, through the two persons who uphold and correctly explain, the teaching abides in the world. Through the one person who cultivates practice, the Dharma of realization abides in the world. Therefore, in accordance with the duration of these three persons abiding in the world, one should know that the True Dharma abides for that long.

29.88

On the treatise's statement, "The holy teaching collectively states ... exceeds even this": This is the third part, explaining the duration of the dwelling [of the Dharma]. Within this there are two explanations: one explanation says that both the teaching and realization Dharmas dwell for only one thousand years; the second explanation says that the Dharma of realization dwells for only one thousand years, while the Dharma of teaching exceeds one thousand years. Here it speaks only of the True Dharma (saddharma), not of the Semblance Dharma (pratirūpaka-dharma) or the Final Dharma (paścimakāla-dharma). This is explained in detail in the Vibhāṣā, scroll 182. This explanation agrees with the Nirvāṇa-sūtra, scroll 22, which says: "How long will it be until the unsurpassed Buddha-Dharma perishes? Answer: If among my disciples there are those who can uphold, read, recite, copy, and expound its meaning, and are revered, respected, praised, and variously provided for by all sentient beings, you should know that at that time the Buddha-Dharma has not yet perished. ... Even to the point that upon seeing those who uphold it and so forth, people slight, disparage, and slander them, [saying,] 'You belong to the six teachers and are not disciples of the Buddha'—you should know that the Buddha-Dharma will perish before long." The Three Stages school states: "The Vinaya and Dhyāna masters are the same as the thirteen kinds of evil non-Buddhists and the six teachers"; this corresponds to that prophecy. Examining the two explanations now, the latter explanation is correct. How is this known? Because at the present time the Dharma of teaching still exists. However, saying that the Dharma of realization [dwells for one thousand years] is also based on the majority. Furthermore, according to many sūtra passages, it is said to exceed a thousand years. However, what various sūtras state varies according to the capacities [of beings], and speaks of the disappearance of the Dharma with reference to particular places and particular persons. The Kāśyapa-sūtra speaks of five hundred years, the Āgama-sūtras speak of one thousand years, the Mahāsaṃnipāta-sūtra speaks of one thousand five hundred years and speaks of the five stages of firmness, and further speaks of the Buddhas giving their wish that the spoken Dharma remain for a long time. Furthermore, the Bodhisattva-garbhastha-sūtra, "Chapter on the Dwelling of the Dharma", states that this sūtra will remain for up to two thousand years or up to three thousand years. Furthermore, the second scroll of the Benevolent Kings [Sūtra] says: "Eighty years, eight hundred years, and eight thousand years after my parinirvāṇa, at a time when there is no Buddha, no Dharma, no Saṅgha, no faithful laymen, and no faithful laywomen, this sūtra and the Three Jewels are entrusted to the kings of nations and the fourfold assembly of disciples, to uphold, read, recite, and explain its meaning, opening the path of empty wisdom for the sentient beings of the three realms, practicing the deeds of the seven sages and the ten good deeds, and transforming all sentient beings." Dharma Master Paramārtha explains: "Eighty years refers to the final eighty years of the True Dharma. Eight hundred years refers to the final eight hundred years of the Semblance Dharma. Eight thousand years refers to the final eight thousand years of the ten thousand years of the Final Dharma." According to the meaning of this text, there is a Final Dharma. Furthermore, according to the lower fascicle of the Mahāyāna-samajātīya-sūtra, it says: "The Tathāgata's manifestation descending from Tuṣita, up to maintaining all Semblance Dharma, all Vanishing Dharma, and the Dharma of the good man: you should know that such transforming activities are all the nirmāṇakāya." According to this sūtra, "Vanishing Dharma" is another name for the Final Dharma. Furthermore, in the Lotus Sūtra, chapter five, "Sukhavihāra", it says: "After the Tathāgata's extinction, in the Final Dharma, whoever wishes to preach this sūtra should abide in peaceful practices." According to this sūtra passage, there is a Final Dharma. As for the prophecies among the Śrāvakas that mention only the True Dharma and the Semblance Dharma, they simply omit the Final Dharma. The Samantapāsādikā says: "In the first one thousand years, if all disciples practice with diligence, they attain the fruit of arhat; in the second one thousand years, they attain the third fruit; in the third one thousand years, they attain the second fruit; in the fourth one thousand years, they attain the first fruit. From then on is my Final Dharma." According to the above treatise text, during the time of the True Dharma, many attain the stage of the non-learner (aśaikṣa); during the time of the Semblance Dharma, they attain the prior three fruits; during the time of the Final Dharma, they do not attain the fruits of the path. Furthermore, the Samantapāsādikā says: "The Tathāgata's True Dharma was to last one thousand years; because of ordaining Gautamī, five hundred years were subtracted. Because the Buddha enjoined the practice of the eight guru-dharmas, and the five hundred Śākya women ordained all attained arhatship, each increased it by one year, and therefore the True Dharma regained one thousand years." According to this treatise text, what various sūtras and treatises say about the True Dharma lasting five hundred years was stated just after women were first ordained; that it lasts one thousand years was stated before women were ordained and after the eight guru-dharmas. Furthermore, the Nandimitrāvadāna states: "The sixteen arhats will each lead an immeasurable retinue, and when the human lifespan gradually increases to seventy thousand years, by the power of their fundamental vows they will use the seven jewels to build a stūpa for the Buddha, and the relics of Śākyamuni will naturally flow into the stūpa. Afterwards, the Buddha's relic stūpa will sink entirely into the earth down to the vajra-stratum; at that time the arhats will transform into fire, burn their bodies, and enter parinirvāṇa. Next, seven koṭis of pratyekabuddhas will appear in the world to transform sentient beings, and when the human lifespan gradually increases and decreases to eighty thousand years, they will all enter parinirvāṇa without remainder at one time. Next, after that, Maitreya Buddha will appear in the world." Furthermore, the Padmamukha-sūtra states: "At the very end, when the Buddha-Dharma is completely extinguished, the Tathāgata's relics will sink into the dragon palace; when the Dharma in the dragon palace is extinguished, they will sink down to the vajra-stratum. Thereafter, for seven days and seven nights, heaven and earth will become pitch black. A non-Buddhist will say in the sky: 'The Dharma of the ascetic Gautama is now completely extinguished. We shall now teach and transform all sentient beings of the dharmadhātu.' Having uttered these words, he will sink in his present body into Avīci Hell. Next, after that, Maitreya Buddha will appear in the world." The above two scriptures only take into account the presence of the Dharma, not practice and study. Although they transform sentient beings, they do not speak of delighting in cultivating transcendent practice. Just as when the delimitation of boundaries (sīmābandha) and karmans cease and are not practiced, it does not mean that the Vinaya teachings are not present in the world. The sinking and extinction of the Buddha-Dharma does not occur in merely one place; that what is stated differs is due to these scriptural variations.

First 88 of 208 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

俱舍論疏 — Classical Chinese