瑜伽論記 8.34

8.34

From "Furthermore, the mental orientation of comprehending characteristics toward what ought to be severed..." downwards is the third part, re-explaining the distinctions in the functions of the mental orientations. The mental orientation of comprehending characteristics understands that the evils of desire ought to be severed and dhyāna ought to be attained; the mental orientation of examination understands limits and abandons presumption; the remaining five are as in the text. Tai says: The Hīnayāna universally accepts that in the threshold concentration there is no feeling of joy or bliss; now this treatise alone distinguishes the feelings of joy and bliss. When detachment and collecting bliss sever the first two grades, joy and bliss run concurrent in the threshold concentration; however, because they are interrupted by equanimity, they arise only from time to time. The joy and bliss concurrent with the culmination of preparatory practice have not yet pervaded the body and are also interspersed with equanimity. At the time of the fruit, joy and bliss constantly arise in continuity, so it does not say "from time to time." Ji says: As Fascicle 28 states, the first two are both paths of preparatory practice; that here only resolute resolve is taken as the actual preparatory practice is stated on the basis of its superior position, its proximity to the uninterrupted path, and its not being interrupted by hearing and thinking; therefore only resolute resolve is said to be the actual preparatory practice. The previous Fascicle 28 treats the matter in terms of reality: comprehending characteristics is also preparatory practice. Another explanation: saying that this actually generates preparatory practice does not necessarily exclude comprehending characteristics from being a path of preparatory practice; because the resolute resolve of the access stage is superior, it is said definitely to generate actual preparatory practice, tentatively speaking of resolute resolve as the actual preparatory practice without excluding comprehending characteristics; according to reality there is no contradiction. Furthermore, why is it that when severing the upper grades it does not speak of abandoning presumption, nor does it speak of abandoning presumption after severing the third grade, but speaks of abandoning presumption after severing the intermediate and lower grades?