瑜伽師地論略纂 5.20

5.20

問答中有三：初諸根相、次明苦根、後釋無相。　初靜慮中，「苦根麁重猶未斷」者，由諸憂根，無知等引，彼離染時，一切不行，麁重亦捨。設於無上法希慕愁慼，亦無知引，故離欲捨。由諸苦根有，不由癡引，離欲猶行，故彼麁重無堪任性，二定方滅。　問：苦根離欲起，麁重二禪滅；喜、樂離下捨，麁重上地除。答：苦根所依及尋、伺，初定有故，二禪滅；喜、樂所依無別引，離染之時，麁重亡。　「若初靜慮已斷苦根，是則行者入初靜慮及第二時，受所作住差別應無」等者，此意說言：初定滅憂，二定滅苦，由此雖有現法樂住，遂成差別。若初定中已滅苦者，二定無別，現法樂住應無差別，經說靜慮出受差別，住成差別故。又此斷受有差別故：初定尋、伺不寂靜，麁重不斷滅；二定中寂靜，麁重方斷滅。若初定中苦根已斷，此別應無。　「又無相」等者，謂無學人所入空定，名無相心定。有漏捨種子為煩惱縛，假名隨眠，名為麁重，入此定中說之為斷。現行無漏捨假名現纏，在定猶起，非彼諸受為煩惱染得有隨眠。即此隨眠說名麁重，非無漏受而無種子。喜根、樂根及此捨根但說依上地者，以地增故，非餘。

Within the questions and answers there are three [parts]: first, the characteristics of the faculties; next, clarifying the faculty of suffering; and finally, explaining the signless. / In the first dhyāna, 'the dauṣṭhulya of the faculty of suffering has not yet been severed': because all faculties of grief are induced by ignorance and the like, when one is freed from defilement, they cease to function altogether, and dauṣṭhulya is also abandoned. Even yearning and dejection regarding the unexcelled Dharma are induced by ignorance, and so upon detachment from desire they are abandoned. Because all faculties of suffering exist without being induced by delusion, when one is detached from desire they still function; therefore, their dauṣṭhulya—unadaptability—is only extinguished in the second dhyāna. / Question: The faculty of suffering arises upon detachment from desire, yet its dauṣṭhulya is extinguished in the second dhyāna; joy and pleasure are abandoned upon detachment from the lower, yet their dauṣṭhulya is eliminated in higher bhūmis. / Answer: The basis of the faculty of suffering as well as vitarka and vicāra exist in the first dhyāna, and therefore it is extinguished in the second dhyāna; the basis of joy and pleasure has no distinct inducement, and at the time of freedom from defilement, dauṣṭhulya vanishes. / 'If the faculty of suffering had already been severed in the first dhyāna, then when the practitioner enters the first dhyāna and the second, there would be no distinction in the dwelling produced by sensation' and so forth: the intent of this is to say that the first dhyāna extinguishes grief and the second dhyāna extinguishes suffering; thereby, although both are dwellings of happiness in the present life, they come to have distinctions. If suffering were already extinguished in the first dhyāna, the second dhyāna would not be distinct, and there would be no distinction in their dwelling happily in the present life, because the sūtras state that the dhyānas' transcending of sensations is distinct, causing their dwellings to be distinct. Furthermore, there is a distinction in this severing of sensations: in the first dhyāna, vitarka and vicāra are not quieted, so dauṣṭhulya is not severed and extinguished; in the second dhyāna, they are quieted, so dauṣṭhulya is only then severed and extinguished. If the faculty of suffering were already severed in the first dhyāna, this distinction would not exist. / 'Moreover, the signless' and so on: this refers to the concentration on emptiness entered by an aśaikṣa, called the concentration of the signless mind. Seeds of defiled equanimity bound by afflictions are metaphorically called anusaya, designated as dauṣṭhulya; entering into this concentration is said to sever them. Active undefiled equanimity is metaphorically called active entanglement (paryavasthāna); it still arises while in concentration, but it is not that those sensations, being defiled by afflictions, come to possess anusaya. It is precisely these anusayas that are called dauṣṭhulya; it is not that undefiled sensations lack seeds. The fact that the faculty of joy, the faculty of pleasure, and this faculty of equanimity are said to rely only on higher bhūmis is due to the superiority of the bhūmis, and not for any other reason.