俱舍論頌疏論本 5
English (machine translation) 5
- Language
- English
5.1
From here, the second major section, explaining group-homogeneity: the treatise states: "Having thus explained the characteristics of possession and non-possession, what is homogeneity?" The verse says:
5.2
"Homogeneity is the likeness of sentient beings."
5.3
Explanation: 'Generic similarity' (sabhāgatā) introduces the topic. 'Sentient beings, etc.' is the direct explanation of 'similarity', meaning similarity of physical form and so forth, because the physical forms, activities, and desires of sentient beings are mutually similar to one another. 'Part' (bhāga) means cause, in that due to this part, it can cause sentient beings to have similar physical forms and so forth. Because it is the part of similarity, it is called generic similarity (sabhāgatā); this is a dependent determinative compound (tatpuruṣa). 'Sentient beings' refers to the basis of generic similarity, excluding the insentient. 'Etc.' excludes disparity and directly indicates the generic similarity that relies [upon them]. The Śāstra states: 'There is a distinct real entity called generic similarity, meaning that sentient beings are mutually similar in kind. The fundamental treatise calls this generic similarity (nikāyasabhāga).' The explanation states: 'Generic similarity' means the generic similarity of many. Furthermore, this is of two kinds: first, undifferentiated; second, differentiated. 'Undifferentiated' refers to [all] sentient beings having the generic similarity of sentient beings; because all sentient beings possess it equally, and because they are alike in being sentient beings, it is called undifferentiated. 'Generic similarity of sentient beings' excludes the insentient, for in this school the insentient has no generic similarity. 'Differentiated' refers to the distinct generic similarities among sentient beings according to realm, ground, destiny, mode of birth, caste, male or female, lay disciples, bhikṣus, those in training (śaikṣa), those beyond training (aśaikṣa), and so on, because each class of sentient beings possesses its own [similarity] equally. 'Realm' refers to the three realms; 'ground' refers to the nine grounds; 'destiny' refers to the five destinies; 'mode of birth' refers to the four modes of birth; and 'caste' refers to kṣatriyas and so forth. Because each possesses it distinctly, it is called differentiated. Furthermore, there is the generic similarity of dharmas, which refers to the mutual similarity within their own kind among the skandhas, āyatanas, and dhātus—the five skandhas, twelve āyatanas, and eighteen dhātus. The dharmas of these three categories are the basis of the generic similarity of dharmas. Because there is a real entity called the generic similarity of dharmas, it can cause the dharmas to be mutually similar to one another. The verse's word 'similar' subsumes both kinds of generic similarity. The word 'sentient beings' excludes the insentient; therefore, the word 'sentient beings' also subsumes the generic similarity of dharmas. The Śāstra states: 'If there were no real entity of undifferentiated character called generic similarity, then among mutually differentiated sentient beings, an undifferentiated cognition and designation of "sentient being, sentient being" would not be possible. Likewise, an undifferentiated cognition and designation of "skandha, skandha", and so forth should be understood according to reason. (Cognition refers to the cognitive awareness that takes generic similarity as an object. Designation refers to designating the name of generic similarity. Only because generic similarity really exists can there be a cognitive awareness taking generic similarity as an object and the designation of the name of generic similarity; each uses this cognition and name as proof to establish the real existence of generic similarity. According to the Sautrāntika school, generic similarity is conventionally designated; hence this indicates the school's intention to clarify its real existence).'
5.4
From this, third, clarifying the result of non-conception. The Śāstra states: 'Generic similarity having been analyzed, what is non-conception?' The verse states:
5.5
'In non-conception, cessation of mind and mental factors;
It is a retributive maturation abiding in the Bṛhatphala.'
5.6
Explanation: 'In non-conception, cessation of mind and mental factors' directly explains non-conception. The first mention of 'non-conception' is the retributive maturation of non-conception (āsaṃjñika). The second mention of 'non-conception' is the Heaven of Non-conception (Asaṃjñisattva). It means that within the Heaven of Non-conception, there is the retributive maturation of non-conception. The Śāstra states: 'If one is born among the gods of the non-conception sentient beings, there is a dharma that causes the cessation of mind and mental factors, which is called non-conception. It is a really existent entity that can block future mind and mental factors, causing them temporarily not to arise, like damming a river.' (The explanation states: Since it can cause the cessation of mind, it is clear that there is a real entity. Because according to the Sautrāntika school non-conception is nominal, this indicates the school's doctrine that it is a real entity.)
5.7
'It is a retributive maturation abiding in the Bṛhatphala' distinguishes it through two aspects. 'Retributive maturation' is the distinguishing aspect among the five categories [of dharmas], meaning that cultivating the absorption of non-conception serves as the retributive cause, which induces the retributive maturation of non-conception for five hundred great kalpas as its fruit. 'Abiding in the Bṛhatphala' is the second [aspect], clarifying its dwelling place. The sentient beings without conception dwell in the Bṛhatphala heaven; it is not a separate ground. It means that within the Bṛhatphala heaven there is an elevated and superior place called the Heaven of Non-conception, just as in the first dhyāna there is an elevated tower where the Great Brahmā King dwells, called the intermediate dhyāna. Question: 'Are they constantly without conception, or do they also have conception?' Answer: 'In the states of birth and death, they have conception for much of the time. It is called non-conception because during the intervening five hundred great kalpas, conception does not arise. Having conception at birth and death means that in the Heaven of Non-conception, there is mind at initial birth and there is mind at death. Thus the sūtra states: "Those sentient beings, due to the arising of conception, pass away from that place. Yet those sentient beings, like waking from a long sleep, again give rise to conception."' The Śāstra states: 'Passing away from that place, they are definitely reborn in the desire realm, not in any other place, because the force of previously cultivating meditative absorption is exhausted and they cannot cultivate meditative absorption further there. Just like an arrow shot into the sky falls once its force is exhausted. If sentient beings are to be born in that place, they must have karma to be experienced in a subsequent life in the desire realm. Just as if one is to be born in Uttarakuru, one must definitely have karma leading to birth in heaven.' The explanation states: This clarifies that from the Heaven of Non-conception one must fall. The rest of the meaning can be understood. Question: 'Into which destiny of the desire realm are they born?' Answer: 'The Vibhāṣā, fascicle 154, states: "Some say they are born in the hells; some say they are born in the evil destinies." The correct statement is: they are definitely born in the desire realm, but the place is not fixed; they may be born in the divine destiny, or the human destiny, or an evil destiny.' Question: 'Why is it that upon being born in the desire [realm], the five destinies are not fixed?' The explanation states: When tīrthikas cultivate the absorption of non-conception, at the time of preparatory application (prayogāvasthā) they may give rise to wrong views, slandering the nirvāṇa of the Śākya clan; or give rise to the attachment to views (dṛṣṭiparāmarśa), considering the Heaven of Non-conception to be true liberation; or give rise to the attachment to rules and vows (śīlavrataparāmarśa), considering the absorption of non-conception to be the true path. Such defilements are the causes of evil destinies. Having cultivated this absorption, they subsequently detach from desire, or give rise to [wholesome states] born of acquisition, hearing, or reflection; such wholesome factors are the causes of good destinies. Because good and evil arise in a mixed manner, rebirth among the five destinies is not fixed.
5.8
From this, major section four, clarifying the two meditative absorptions (samāpatti). Within this there are three parts: first, clarifying the absorption of non-conception (asaṃjñisamāpatti); second, clarifying the absorption of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti); third, clarifying the body of reliance.
5.9
First, clarifying the absorption of non-conception. The Śāstra states: 'Non-conception having been analyzed, what are the two meditative absorptions (general question)? They are the absorption of non-conception and the absorption of cessation (general answer). First, what is the character of the absorption of non-conception (specific question)?' The verse states:
5.10
'Likewise is the absorption of non-conception;
Cultivated in the final dhyāna seeking liberation,
Wholesome, experienced only in the next rebirth,
Not attained by noble ones, attained in a single lifetime.'
5.11
Explanation: 'Likewise is the absorption of non-conception': previously it was clarified that non-conception brings about the cessation of mind and mental factors and possesses a real intrinsic nature. Likewise, there is another entity, a conditioning factor disassociated from thought, that brings about the cessation of mind and mental factors, called the absorption of non-conception. In terms of their similarity in ceasing the mind, it is called 'likewise'. The absorption of one who is without conception is called the absorption of non-conception; or the absorption that is itself non-conception is called the absorption of non-conception. The words 'one who is without conception' refers to the nominal person. The nominal person is the person cultivating non-conception. Because the person cultivating non-conception accomplishes this absorption, it is called the absorption of non-conception. 'The absorption of non-conception' is a dependent determinative compound (tatpuruṣa). 'Or the absorption that is itself non-conception' means that non-conception is itself the absorption; this is an appositional compound (karmadhāraya).
5.12
'The final dhyāna' clarifies the ground upon which it relies. Cultivation of the absorption of non-conception relies on the fourth dhyāna, because among the dhyānas it is the very last. 'Seeking liberation' clarifies the mental orientation (manaskāra). It means that tīrthikas consider the result of non-conception to be true liberation, and in order to seek that, they cultivate the absorption of non-conception.
5.13
'Wholesome, experienced only in the next rebirth': 'wholesome' refers to the category of the three natures. This absorption of non-conception is exclusively of a wholesome nature. Because it is wholesome, it can invite the retributive maturation of the five skandhas in the Heaven of Non-conception. 'Experienced only in the next rebirth' clarifies the time of retribution. It means that the absorption of non-conception definitely experiences its fruit in the second lifetime. The word 'only' is to exclude karmas to be experienced in the present life, in subsequent lives, or of unfixed fruition. Therefore the Śāstra states: 'If one gives rise to this absorption and later falls away from it, tradition states that in this present life one will definitely regain the ability to give rise to it and be born in the heaven of sentient beings without conception. Therefore, one who attains this absorption definitely cannot enter into the certainty of acquiring right view (samyaktvaniyāmāvakrānti).' (The intention of this text is to clarify that it is experienced exclusively in the next rebirth.)
5.14
'Not attained by noble ones, attained in a single lifetime': 'not attained by noble ones' clarifies the person who cultivates it. It means that only tīrthikas cultivate the absorption of non-conception; it is definitely not cultivated by noble ones. The Śāstra states: 'Because noble ones look upon the absorption of non-conception as if seeing a deep pit and have no desire to enter it. One must grasp non-conception as true liberation and cultivate this absorption with the notion of renunciation; all noble ones do not grasp what is defiled (sāsrava) as true liberation and true renunciation, hence they definitely do not cultivate this absorption.' (The explanation states: They grasp the Heaven of Non-conception as true liberation and the absorption of non-conception as true renunciation, yet it is not renunciation of saṃsāra.) 'Attained in a single lifetime' clarifies accomplishment (samanvāgama). It means that when the absorption of non-conception first arises for a single moment, one only attains it in the present lifetime; hence it is called 'a single lifetime', like initially receiving and attaining the prātimokṣa precepts. From the second moment onward, until it is abandoned, because it is determinate, one also accomplishes it as past, and there is acquisition posterior to the dharma. Therefore one knows that in the first moment, it is accomplished only in a single lifetime. In the second moment and so on, if one has not yet emerged from contemplation, one accomplishes both past and present; because it is mindless, there is no future cultivation, nor acquisition prior to the dharma. If one has already emerged from contemplation, one accomplishes only the past. The Śāstra states: 'When noble ones cultivate and attain the ground of the fourth dhyāna, is it like the dhyānas, wherein they also attain past and future absorptions of non-conception, or not?' The explanation states: The intention of this question is: when a noble person initially cultivates and attains the fourth dhyāna, the past dhyāna that was lost and the future dhyāna that has not yet arisen, because of prior habituation, are all attained at the present time, because dhyānas with mind are accomplished across the three times. For this noble person, is it like the dhyānas, wherein they also attain the previously habituated past absorption of non-conception and the future absorption of non-conception that has not yet arisen, or not? Since the absorption of non-conception belongs to the fourth dhyāna, when a noble person cultivates and attains the fourth dhyāna, since they attain past and future dhyānas with mind, they should also attain past and future non-conception; hence this question is asked. Others also do not attain it (this is the answer: other ordinary beings who attain the fourth dhyāna also do not attain past and future absorptions of non-conception, how much less a noble person!). Why is this (investigation)? Although they were previously habituated to it, because it is mindless, it must await preparatory effort (prayogābhisaskāra) and expedient means to be cultivated and attained; therefore, when initially attained, it is attained only in a single lifetime (answering the preceding investigation: although one was previously habituated to that absorption of non-conception in past lives, because it is mindless, at the present time one must further cultivate preparatory effort before it can be attained. Therefore one knows that if an ordinary person cultivates and attains the fourth dhyāna without having cultivated the absorption of non-conception, it cannot be attained).
5.15
From this, second, clarifying the absorption of cessation. The Śāstra states: 'Next, what is the character of the absorption of cessation?' The verse states:
5.16
'The absorption of cessation is also like this;
Cultivated for peaceful abiding in the Peak of Existence,
Wholesome, of two retributions, or indefinite,
Attained by noble ones through preparatory effort,
Attained upon becoming a Buddha, not before,
Because of the thirty-four moments of thought.'
5.17
Explanation: The first line identifies its intrinsic entity, the next three lines distinguish its particulars, and the fifth and sixth lines clarify its attainment by the Buddha. 'The absorption of cessation is also like this': this absorption of cessation has a real intrinsic nature and brings about the cessation of mind and mental factors, identical to the preceding non-conception. Because it ceases mind and mental factors, it says 'is also like this'.
5.18
'Cultivated for peaceful abiding' clarifies the mental orientation. The preceding absorption of non-conception was for the sake of seeking liberation, preceded by mental orientation with the notion of renunciation. This absorption of cessation is for the sake of seeking peaceful abiding, preceded by mental orientation with the notion of tranquil cessation. 'The Peak of Existence' clarifies the ground upon which it relies. The preceding absorption of non-conception relies on the fourth dhyāna; this absorption of cessation relies exclusively on the Peak of Existence (bhavāgra). That is to say, all the lower grounds are termed 'having conception', where the mental activities and conceptions are coarse and agitated, and difficult to bring to cessation. This ground of the Peak of Existence is called 'neither conception [nor non-conception]', where the mental activities are subtle and easy to bring to cessation; therefore the absorption of cessation exists only in the Peak of Existence.
5.19
Regarding "Good, [and of] two kinds of feeling or indeterminate": "Good" refers to the section on the three natures. That is, the nature of the absorption of cessation is solely good; it is not indeterminate or defiled, because it is equitably raised by a good mind. "[Of] two kinds of feeling or indeterminate" clarifies the timing of its retribution. The two kinds of feeling refer to the two feelings: to be experienced in the next lifetime, and to be experienced in a subsequent lifetime. This absorption of cessation extends to [retribution] to be experienced in the next lifetime, to be experienced in a subsequent lifetime, and of indeterminate experience; that is, in terms of retribution, it has [the karma of] feeling in the next lifetime or feeling in a subsequent lifetime. When the verse says "indeterminate", it subsumes two kinds of indeterminacy: first, the retribution is determinate while the timing is indeterminate; second, both timing and retribution are indeterminate. Thus the treatise says: "Either it has indeterminate feeling—here the retribution is determinate and the timing is indeterminate; or it is not felt at all—that is, if one attains parinirvāṇa in a lower [realm], both its timing and its retribution are indeterminate. Just as an arhat, having attained the absorption of cessation, enters parinirvāṇa and does not experience its fruit." This absorption of cessation only attracts the retribution of the four skandhas of the Peak of Existence.
5.20
Regarding "Noble ones attain [it] through preparation": "Noble ones" clarifies the persons who cultivate it. This absorption of cessation is attained only by noble ones. The treatise says: "Ordinary worldlings are not capable of generating it, because they fear annihilation, because it is only within the capacity of the power of the noble path to generate it, and because one enters it through the resolute intention of nirvāṇa in the present life." The explanation says: This means that the absorption of cessation is generated based on the Peak of Existence, which already lacks form. If mind were to be further extinguished, it would become total annihilation, and hence they fear it. When a noble one enters the absorption of cessation, they produce a mind of resolute intention as though entering nirvāṇa; therefore, ordinary worldlings do not generate it. "Attained through preparation": this absorption of cessation is attained only through preparation, not through detachment from defilement; because mind is absent, it requires great preparation before it can be attained. Furthermore, at the moment of initial attainment, one attains [possession of] it only in the present period. From the second moment onward until it has not yet been lost, one possesses it across both past and present. If one has already emerged from the contemplation, one possesses it only in the past.
5.21
Regarding "Attained upon becoming a Buddha, not earlier": this clarifies the Buddha's attainment of the absorption of cessation. "Attained upon becoming a Buddha" clarifies that he attains the absorption of cessation at the time of becoming a Buddha. "Not earlier" means not attained earlier through preparation. The words "attained upon becoming a Buddha" reveal attainment through detachment from defilement; that is, the time when the knowledge of exhaustion arises in the Buddha, the World-Honoured One, is the stage of becoming a Buddha. At this time, through detachment from defilement, he attains the absorption of cessation, not having cultivated and attained it through preparation. Thus the treatise says: "Not a single quality of a Buddha is attained through preparation; when a momentary wish or delight presents itself, all perfect qualities arise in accordance with his wish; therefore, the multitude of qualities of a Buddha are all attained through detachment from defilement." The explanation says: It is simply that at the time of detachment from defilement he attains all merits; therefore, all merits are called 'attained through detachment from defilement.' Arising in accordance with his wish, they are not [attained through] preparation. Furthermore, the treatise says: "Since the World-Honoured One had never previously generated the absorption of cessation, when he attained the knowledge of exhaustion, how could he become one liberated in both ways?" The explanation says: In the stage of a bodhisattva as a learner, he had not yet generated the absorption of cessation; at the time of becoming a Buddha, he should have the hindrance to absorption—how then could he become one liberated in both ways? "One liberated in both ways" means one who is free from the hindrances of absorption and wisdom. Because he has obtained mastery over generating the absorption of cessation, he is called 'liberated in both ways' just like one who has already generated it. The explanation says: this is the answer. Although this absorption of cessation has not yet arisen at the time of becoming a Buddha, because he has obtained mastery, he is called 'liberated in both ways' just like one who has already generated it. Alternatively, because he has attained the mind that enters and emerges from the absorption of cessation, he is called 'liberated in both ways.' Precisely by this reasoning is it called 'attained through detachment from defilement.' Because in subsequent times it is generated without preparation, it is not an acquisition of the absorption's entity itself; since the absorption of cessation cannot have an acquisition prior to the dharma, it is not attained [earlier]. The Western Masters say: in the bodhisattva's stage of a learner, he first generates this absorption, and afterward attains bodhi—why does [the Sarvāstivāda] here not accept their statement? The explanation says: this is the Sautrāntika school, which allows that when the bodhisattva emerges from the path of seeing, he then enters the absorption of cessation; only after emerging from the absorption of cessation does he sever [the defilements of] the Peak of Existence. Therefore, upon the arising of the knowledge of exhaustion, he becomes liberated in both ways. The treatise master asks the Sarvāstivāda school why it does not accept their assertion here. If one accepted their assertion, it would accord with the Venerable Upagupta's *Netrānusāra*. As that treatise says: "It should be said that the Tathāgata first generated the absorption of cessation, and afterward produced the knowledge of exhaustion." The explanation says: The treatise master sided with the Western Masters, and therefore gave this explanation.
5.22
Regarding "Because of the thirty-four thought-moments": this refutes the statement of the Western Masters. That is, the Vaibhāṣikas of Kaśmīra say: it is not the case that he first generated the absorption of cessation and only afterward produced the knowledge of exhaustion. Why is that? Because it is traditionally said that the bodhisattva accomplishes bodhi in thirty-four thought-moments. In the direct realization of the truths there are sixteen thought-moments; in becoming detached from greed for the Peak of Existence there are eighteen thought-moments, namely the nine uninterrupted paths and nine paths of liberation that sever [the defilements of] the Peak of Existence. These eighteen, added to the previous sixteen, make thirty-four. All bodhisattvas are definitively already detached from greed in the sphere of nothingness beforehand, and only then enter the path of seeing, no longer needing to sever the afflictions of the lower stages; in this interval, there is no possibility of generating a thought-moment of a disparate category. The explanation says: The bodhisattva first severs greed in the sphere of nothingness, and afterward, relying on the fourth dhyāna, generates the thirty-four thought-moments. These thirty-four thought-moments are exclusively uncontaminated minds; hence it cannot be said that upon emerging from the path of seeing he generates the absorption of cessation, because the mind that enters the absorption of cessation is contaminated. Compared to the thirty-four thought-moments, this contaminated mind is termed of a 'disparate category,' and therefore cannot be generated.
5.23
Next is the third [section], clarifying the basis of the two absorptions. The treatise says: "Having already explained the many similarities and differences of the two absorptions, among them there are yet further similarities and differences." The verse says:
5.24
"The two absorptions are based on desire and form;
Cessation is initial in humans."
5.25
The commentary says: "The two absorptions are based on desire and form" explains the physical basis. "The two absorptions" refers to the non-conceptual absorption and the absorption of cessation; both of these are generated based on a body of the desire or form realms. Question: "That the previous non-conceptual absorption is not based on the formless realm is beyond doubt; why is the absorption of cessation not based on the formless realm?" Answer: "The life-faculty functions based on two dharmas: first, form; second, mind. If one generates the absorption of cessation in the desire or form realms, although there is no mind at that time, the life-faculty functions based on form. When born into the formless realm, there is already no physical body of form; if one were to generate the absorption of cessation, there would be neither form nor mind—on what would life function? That would be total annihilation, not entering absorption; therefore, the absorption of cessation is not generated in the formless realm." The treatise says: "If someone does not allow that the non-conceptual absorption is also generated based on the form realm, they contradict this text. For the fundamental treatise says: 'There may be an existence of form, but this existence is not of the five conditioning factors; that is, a sentient being bound to form, who either is born among the devas with conceptualization and abides in a mind of a disparate category, or enters the non-conceptual absorption, or enters the absorption of cessation, or is born among the non-conceptual devas having already attained entry into the non-conceptual [state]—this is called an existence of form, but this existence is not of the five conditioning factors.'" The explanation says: According to the *Vibhāṣā*, there was an opinion that did not allow that the non-conceptual absorption is generated in the form realm; therefore it cites the fundamental treatise to show that they are wrong. "There may be an existence of form" refers to sentient beings of the form realm. "This existence is not of the five conditioning factors" means that although they are sentient beings of form, they do not possess the five skandhas. The past Buddha Kāśyapa spoke of the five skandhas as the five conditioning factors. There are four categories of these: First, being born among the devas with conceptualization and abiding in a mind of a disparate category. "Being born among the devas with conceptualization" means that among the devas of the form realm, excluding the non-conceptual devas, the remaining devas are called 'with conceptualization.' When in the heavens with conceptualization one generates a mind of the formless realm or an uncontaminated mind, because its category is different from the mind of the form realm, it is called 'disparate.' In this state there are only the two skandhas of form and conditioning factors, and no remaining three skandhas, because they are not bound to form. Second, having been born among the devas with conceptualization, having entered the non-conceptual absorption. Third, having been born among the devas with conceptualization, having entered the absorption of cessation. Fourth, having been born among the non-conceptual devas, having already attained entry into non-conceptual retribution. In these latter three categories, feeling, conceptualization, and consciousness have ceased, and there are only the two skandhas of form and conditioning factors; therefore, these four categories do not possess the five conditioning factors. Since this text of the fundamental treatise states that being born among the devas with conceptualization, one 'either enters the non-conceptual absorption, or enters the absorption of cessation,' we know that both absorptions are generated in the form realm.
5.26
"Cessation is initial in humans" clarifies that the absorption of cessation is initially generated among humans. The non-conceptual absorption has been practiced from beginningless time and is easy to generate, so it can be initially generated in both realms. This absorption of cessation has never been cultivated or practiced before, and is difficult to generate; therefore, it must be generated in humans first, because among humans there is the power of teaching and their intellectual comprehension is sharp. The treatise says: "After this is initially cultivated and generated among humans, with regression as a prior condition, one is then born into the form realm, and based on a body of the form realm one subsequently cultivates and generates it again." The explanation says: There is regression from the absorption of cessation, and therefore one is born into the form realm; if one does not regress, one is born directly into the Peak of Existence. Having been born into the form realm, by the power of previous practice one is able to generate the absorption of cessation. Now, these two absorptions extinguish mind and mental factors. Yet they are designated simply as 'non-conceptual' or 'extinction of feeling and conceptualization' because during preparation one is particularly averse to these; hence they are distinctively labeled. For instance, tīrthikas postulate that suffering and pleasure constitute saṃsāra; wishing to cultivate the non-conceptual [absorption], they first think: 'In the desire realm there is suffering; in the first, second, and third dhyānas there are the feelings of joy and pleasure.' Failing to understand that in the fourth there is equanimity and other minds and mental factors, they say: 'Although the fourth dhyāna is free from suffering and pleasure, there are still conceptions and thoughts, and nirvāṇa is not yet attained; I must now extinguish them.' Therefore, during preparation they are particularly averse to conceptualization. As for the noble ones, because in the desire and form realms there are feelings of fatigue, and in the fourth dhyāna and formless realms there are coarse, active conceptualizations, seeking a peaceful dwelling and wishing temporarily to quiet the mind, they are particularly averse to feeling and conceptualization during preparation. Thus, these two absorptions are named on the basis of their preparation. Therefore the treatise says: "Because during the preparation for these two absorptions there is aversion toward these, just as [a knowledge] that also knows feelings and so forth is named solely 'knowledge of another's mind.'" The explanation says: Although the knowledge of another's mind also knows mental factors, in cultivating preparation one only desires to know the mind; hence, following the preparation, it is named 'knowledge of another's mind.' Furthermore, these two absorptions have twenty-two entities as their substance. Prior to cultivating the absorption, there are twenty-one mental factors and one primary mind. The twenty-one mental factors are: the ten universal mental factors, the ten major good mental factors, and either delight or disgust. In order to extinguish these, there are twenty-two entities of conditioned factors dissociated from mind that take their place, termed 'non-conceptual' and so on; thus, the absorption's substance corresponds to the extinction of precisely that number of minds and mental factors.
5.27
From here, the fifth major section clarifies the life-faculty. The treatise says: "Having explained the two absorptions, what is the life-faculty?" The verse says:
5.28
"The entity of the life-faculty is vitality;
It is able to support heat and consciousness."
5.29
The commentary says: The first line matches the name, and the second line verifies it by its function. The treatise says: "The entity of life is vitality; therefore the *Abhidharma* states: 'What is the life-faculty? It is vitality in the three realms.'" The explanation says: Since vitality is used to explain life, we know that life is vitality. Yet it is not yet understood what dharma is named vitality: there is a distinct dharma that is able to support heat and consciousness, which is spoken of as vitality.
5.30
From here, the sixth [section] clarifies the four characteristics, in which there are two parts: first, directly explaining the four characteristics; second, resolving objections.
5.31
Within the first part, directly explaining the four characteristics: first, explaining the primary characteristics; second, explaining the secondary characteristics.
5.32
First, to explain the primary characteristics, the treatise says: "Having explained the life-faculty, what are the four characteristics?" The verse says:
5.33
"The characteristics are the natures of birth, subsistence,
Decay, and cessation of all conditioned things."
5.34
The commentary says: The upper line introduces the topic, and the lower line identifies the entity. "Characteristics" are the characterizing agents. "All conditioned things" refers to the dharmas that are characterized. "All conditioned things" means the dharmas of the five skandhas that are constructed by causes and conditions, and hence are called 'conditioned.' Dharmas such as form and mind arise from causes and conditions, and because they have that conditioning activity, they are named 'conditioned.' "Characteristics" are marking features, meaning that they characterize the entities of dharmas, causing them to be conditioned. Thus the treatise says: "Because of these four kinds, there are characteristics of the conditioned; if a dharma possesses these, it should be conditioned; that which is contrary to this is an unconditioned dharma." The explanation says: This directly explains the meaning of characteristics.
5.35
"The natures of arising, staying, change, and destruction" discloses the essential nature. Here, in regard to dharmas, that which can cause to arise is called "arising"; that which can stabilize is called "staying"; that which can decay is called "change"; that which can disintegrate is called "destruction." "Nature" means essential nature, because according to the Sarvāstivāda school the four characteristics are real entities. The Śāstra states: "Does the sūtra not speak of 'three conditioned characteristics of the conditioned'?" Explanation: this cites a sūtra to raise an objection. The sūtra speaks of three characteristics, whereas this treatise now speaks of four; are they not contradictory? "There are three" refers to the characterizing factors. "The conditioned" refers to the characterized dharmas. The word "of" indicates a genitive tatpuruṣa compound. Repeating the word "conditioned" is to make known that these characteristics designate the substantial entity of the dharma, establishing it as conditioned. [The Śāstra continues:] "These three characteristics are characteristics of the conditioned; in this sūtra, four should have been taught." Explanation: logically, four should have been taught in this sūtra. Why were [four] not taught (this is an inquiry)? Namely, the characteristic of staying. However, the sūtra speaks of "the change of staying," which is another name for this change, just as arising is called origination and destruction is called cessation; thus one should know that change is called "the change of staying." Explanation: three masters explain the sūtra; this is the explanation of the first master. The sūtra does not speak of staying, but speaks of three characteristics: first, origination; second, the change of staying; third, cessation. However, the sūtra's statement of the characteristic of "the change of staying" is an alternative name for the characteristic of change discussed in this treatise, meaning that change is discerned with reference to staying, and therefore change is named "the change of staying." Just as origination is an alternative name for arising, and the characteristic of cessation is an alternative name for destruction, one thus knows that the characteristic of change is an alternative name for "the change of staying." If a dharma causes conditioned factors to migrate and flow through the three times, this sūtra speaks of it as a characteristic of the conditioned in order to induce disgust and fear in sentient beings. That is, those conditioned factors are impelled by the power of arising, causing them to flow from the future into the present. They are impelled and driven by the power of the characteristics of change and destruction, causing them to flow from the present into the past, causing them to decay and change, and to disintegrate and perish. Staying brings about peace and happiness for those conditioned factors, constantly delighting in being unseparated from them, and therefore it is not established among the characteristics of the conditioned. Explanation: this is the intention of the first master in explaining the sūtra. The three characteristics cause conditioned factors to migrate, and therefore the sūtra speaks of them. Staying establishes them in happiness, and therefore the sūtra does not speak of it. Furthermore, unconditioned dharmas have staying as their own intrinsic mark; because the characteristic of staying could be confused with them, the sūtra does not speak of it. Note: this is the second master's explanation of the sūtra. The unconditioned is serene and still; this is staying as its own intrinsic mark. Some say this sūtra speaks by combining staying and change together as one, naming it the characteristic of "the change of staying." Note: this is the explanation of the third master. The sūtra speaks of "the change of staying," combining the two characteristics together in speech, unlike the first master for whom it is solely the characteristic of change. Why should they be spoken of in combination like this (this is an inquiry)? Staying is an object of attachment for sentient beings; in order to cause them to feel disgust and abandon it, it is spoken of in combination with change, just as showing Kālakarṇī accompanied by Lakṣmī; therefore, there are definitely four characteristics of the conditioned (this is the reply). Lakṣmī and Kālakarṇī are two sisters who constantly accompany each other. The elder sister is named Lakṣmī; wherever she goes, she brings auspicious matters. The younger sister is named Kālakarṇī; because her ears are black, she is named after that; wherever she goes, she can cause decline and loss. Foolish people crave Lakṣmī; the wise, in order to make them feel disgust and abandon her, first show them Kālakarṇī. Staying is analogized to Lakṣmī, and change is analogized to Kālakarṇī; wishing to cause disgust toward staying, it is spoken of in combination with change.
5.36
From here, the second part explains the secondary characteristics. The Śāstra states: "Since these characteristics such as arising are themselves conditioned, must there further be another four characteristics such as arising? (An inquiry.) If there were further another [set], it would result in an infinite regress, because those too would have further characteristics such as arising. (An objection.) The characteristics being conditioned, there would be another four characteristics; having characteristics upon characteristics, this results in the fault of an infinite regress. It should be stated that there are further ones, yet there is no infinite regress. (A twofold reply.) Why is that? (An inquiry.)" The verse states:
5.37
"These have arising-arising and the rest; / they have efficacy regarding eight and one."
5.38
Explanation: the first line answers the inquiry, and the second line answers the objection. "These" refers to these preceding four primary characteristics. "Arising-arising and the rest" refers to the four minor characteristics. That is, the preceding four characteristics have the four kinds of secondary characteristics, namely arising-arising and the rest, and are therefore established as conditioned. The Śāstra states: "Conditioned factors are conditioned by virtue of the four primary characteristics; the primary characteristics are conditioned by virtue of the four secondary characteristics." Explanation: conditioned factors become conditioned because they are characterized by the four primary characteristics. The primary characteristics become conditioned because they are characterized by the four secondary characteristics. "Arising-arising and the rest" includes staying-staying, change-change, and destruction-destruction. These have three names: first, they are called "arising-arising and the rest." The upper character "arising" is the minor arising, and the lower character "arising" is the primary arising; because it arises from the minor arising, the primary arising is called "arising-arising." Staying among the minor characteristics causes the staying of the primary characteristic of staying, so it is called "staying-staying." Change among the minor characteristics changes the primary characteristic of change, so it is called "change-change." Destruction among the minor characteristics destroys the primary characteristic of destruction, so it is called "destruction-destruction"; this is explained just like arising-arising. Second, they are called "secondary characteristics," because they follow the primary characteristics. Third, they are called "minor characteristics," because they characterize only one dharma. The primary characteristics also have three names: first, they are called "primary characteristics," because they characterize the primary dharma. Second, they are called "major characteristics," because they characterize eight dharmas. Third, they are called "arising and the rest," because they give rise to eight dharmas. Unlike the minor arising which only gives rise to arising, it is simply called "arising"; the same applies to staying and the rest.
5.39
"They have efficacy regarding eight and one" resolves the objection of an infinite regress. Would it not be that the primary characteristics, like the characterized dharma, should each have four kinds of secondary characteristics? And would these not each have four, endlessly in turn? In order to resolve this objection, there is this verse. The four kinds of primary characteristics have efficacy regarding eight; the four kinds of secondary characteristics have efficacy regarding one. Because their functions are distinct, there is no fault of an infinite regress. To illustrate: when the characteristic of arising gives rise to a material dharma, nine dharmas arise together: one is the primary dharma, namely the intrinsic nature of matter; upon this, there must be four primary and four secondary, thus making nine dharmas. Among these nine dharmas, arising cannot give rise to itself; excluding its own entity, arising can give rise to the remaining eight. Staying among the primary characteristics cannot stabilize itself; it stabilizes the remaining eight dharmas. Change among the primary characteristics cannot change itself; it changes the remaining eight dharmas. Destruction among the primary characteristics cannot destroy itself; it destroys the remaining eight dharmas. Therefore, the four primary characteristics have efficacy regarding eight dharmas. Among the nine dharmas, arising does not give rise to itself, it is arisen by arising-arising; staying does not stabilize itself, it is stabilized by staying-staying; change does not change itself, it is changed by change-change; destruction does not destroy itself, it is destroyed by destruction-destruction. Therefore, the four secondary characteristics have efficacy regarding one dharma. By this reasoning, there is no fault of an infinite regress. Therefore the Śāstra states: "Therefore, the characteristics such as arising again have characteristics; since the secondary characteristics are only four, there is no fault of an infinite regress." Furthermore, the sūtra states: "There are three conditioned characteristics of the conditioned." The Śāstra states: "The sūtra's repetition of the word 'conditioned' is to make known that this characteristic designates that it is conditioned, not to say that this characteristic designates that the conditioned exists—as the presence of a white heron indicates that water is not absent; nor to say that it designates whether the conditioned is wholesome or unwholesome—as the marks of a maiden indicate whether she is auspicious or inauspicious." Explanation: seeing a white heron in the distance indicates and makes known that there is water. Just as when a maiden has good bodily marks it indicates that she will give birth to a good son, and having bad marks indicates that she will give birth to a bad son. Now these four characteristics solely designate that it is conditioned, being a conditioned dharma; they do not designate the meaning that the conditioned exists, and thus are not like the white heron designating existence. Furthermore, these four characteristics do not designate the wholesome or unwholesome nature of the conditioned, and thus are not like the maiden designating auspiciousness or inauspiciousness.
5.40
From here, the second part resolves an objection. According to the Sautrāntika school, the four characteristics are designated as nominal; they do not accept the Sarvāstivāda view that the future has an entity and that the characteristic of arising truly exists. Therefore the Śāstra states: "If arising exists in the future and gives rise to that which is to be arisen, why do not all future dharmas arise all at once?" The verse states:
5.41
"Arising can give rise to that which is to be arisen, / not apart from the combination of causes and conditions."
5.42
Explanation: these two lines answer the objection of the Sautrāntika school. "Causes" refers to the six causes. "Conditions" refers to the four conditions. The Śāstra states: "It is not apart from the combination of the remaining causes and conditions that the power of the characteristic of arising alone can give rise to that which is to be arisen; therefore, all future [dharmas] do not arise all at once."
5.43
From here, the seventh major section explains the collection of names and so forth. The Śāstra states: "Having thus already discerned the characteristics of the conditioned, what is the meaning of categories such as the collection of names?" The verse states:
5.44
"The collection of names and so forth are called / the totality of concepts, sentences, and phonemes."
5.45
The commentary explains: 'Name-group and so forth' sets forth the topic. 'What is called' and following begins the actual exposition. 'And so forth' includes phrase-groups and phoneme-groups. 'Idea, clause, letter, and generic expression' explains the preceding terms: 'idea' explains name (nāma); 'clause' explains phrase (pada); 'letter' explains phoneme (vyañjana); and 'generic expression' explains group (kāya). The treatise states: '"Name" means making an idea.' The explanation says: An idea is the grasping of an image, or it means convention. If grasping an image is called an idea, the idea is a mental factor; for example, when the name 'matter' (rūpa) is spoken, it can produce the idea of matter—because the idea arises due to the name, it is called 'making an idea'. If it means convention, the idea is itself the name: the noble sages jointly made conventions, establishing names such as 'matter', so the name is itself the idea. Because such names and ideas are capable of expressing meaning, they are called 'making an idea'. In Sanskrit it is called nāma, which is translated into Chinese as 'ming' (name). It conveys the senses of following, resorting, and tending toward: namely, following sound, it resorts and tends toward the referent. Calling out 'matter' and so forth, the name is capable of expressing the referent. The treatise states: '"Phrase" means a clause, which expresses a referent completely. As when one speaks clauses such as "all conditioned things are impermanent", or when it is able to distinguish actions, functions, qualities, and temporal associations and differentiations—such a clause is called a phrase.' The explanation says: Take, for example, a single instance of matter: it has the activity of being seen, and can trigger the function of consciousness. Qualities such as blue and yellow, times such as past and future, and its conjoining with the four characteristics are called 'association'. That which is not associated is called 'differentiation'. Being able to distinguish that matter is what is seen and so forth—such a clause is called a phrase. In Sanskrit it is called pada; translated according to its meaning, it is 'phrase' (sentence), but literally translated it is 'footprint' or 'step', just as an elephant's body has four footprints, and just as a single stanza (gāthā) is formed of four lines (pāda); thus it is now translated according to meaning as 'phrase'. In Sanskrit it is called vākya, which is translated here as 'clause'. A clause expresses a referent completely, and therefore 'clause' is used to explain 'phrase'. 'Phoneme' means letter (akṣara), such as the letters a, ā, i, ī, and so forth; these are letters among the conditioned factors disassociated from thought, unlike the letters written in black ink in this land. In Sanskrit it is called vyañjana, which is called 'wen' (phoneme/manifestation) in Chinese, meaning that which reveals or manifests. Directly it reveals names and phrases; indirectly it reveals meaning. In Western customs, fans, salt, and vinegar are also called vyañjana, which also carries the meaning of revealing: a fan can reveal wind, and salt and vinegar can reveal flavors in food. Therefore the older translation as 'flavor' (wei) was an erroneous rendering. 'Group' (kāya) means an assemblage. 'Generic expression' (samukti) means a combination: bringing together and expressing two or three names collectively constitutes an assemblage, and therefore 'generic expression' is used to explain the meaning of 'group'. The treatise states: '"Generic expression" means combination, because the root uc- is used in the sense of combination.' The explanation says: In the grammatical science of the Western regions for forming words, there are roots (dhātu) and affixes (pratyaya). The root is the basic meaning, and affixes assist in forming various meanings. Here, uc- is the verbal root: the ancient grammarians established the root uc- with the meaning of combination, and later, by adding affixes to the root uc-, it became samukti, which in Chinese is 'generic expression'. Knowing that the meaning of 'generic expression' derives from uc-, and that uc- means combination, it is clear that 'generic expression' also means combination. This passage states that the root uc- is used in the sense of combination to prove that 'generic expression' means combination. Since 'generic expression' explains 'group', we know that a collection of multiple names constitutes a 'name-group' and so forth. However, a single name is just a name, not a name-group. Two names are called a name-group, such as saying 'matter, sound'. Three or more names are called a group of many names, such as saying 'matter, sound, fragrance', where there are three names. A single phrase is a phrase, not a phrase-group; two phrases are phrases and also a phrase-group; three or more phrases are called a group of many phrases. As when saying 'all conditioned factors are impermanent, all dharmas are non-self, nirvāṇa is quiescence'—these are three phrases, called a group of many phrases. A single letter is a phoneme, not a phoneme-group; two letters are phonemes and also a phoneme-group; three or more letters are called a group of many phonemes. As with ka, kha, ga, having three letters, it is called a group of many phonemes. The treatise states: 'For example, the ancients established a single sound "go" with respect to nine meanings, as an established measure of expression.' There is a verse that says:
First 45 of 60 passages. Read on
Linked texts (1)
- 俱舍論頌疏論本 — Classical Chinese