瑜伽師地論略纂 8.189

8.189

論解此九定與六種力相收中云「初由聽聞、思惟二力數聞數思等，乃至等遍安住」，此中若最初由聽聞等二力，即唯第一、內住，第二、等住；第三、第四，安住、近住，由憶念力。即初二力攝二種。文中復云及即於此相續方便、澄淨方便，等遍安住，即似并取第三、安住。前解安住，明知亦初二力，下第三、第四同憶念力，云何通？述曰：其實第三、安住是初二力收。憶念力中言安住、近住者，此中意，由憶念力安住於近住中，非即安住、近住二法是憶念力，即唯近住一種是憶念力。　又解：論云初由聽聞、思惟二力，即內住是初唯一，內住竝等住是初二力，其安住是憶念力，如下言調順、寂靜是二種定。今言安住、近住，亦明知收二種，非安住於近住中解。　若爾，何故言及即於此相續、澄淨方便，等遍安住之言？述曰：其安住通三力，若觀未成，即初二力收；若觀行成，即憶念力收。以最初錄心於內時，繫即相續、澄淨方便，復非已得安住，此乃初作安住觀心；後憶念力安住，觀成方憶念力。又等遍安住之言，即但等住一種，非取安住，以等遍於諸麁動法，等安遍之，非取安住為初二力。

Where the treatise explains the subsumption of these nine concentrations under the six powers, saying, “Initially, through the two powers of hearing and contemplation, repeatedly hearing and repeatedly contemplating, and so forth, up to equanimously and pervasively settling,” herein, if initially through the two powers of hearing and so forth, it is only the first, inner settling, and the second, equal settling; the third and fourth, settling down and settling close, are through the power of mindfulness. That is, the first two powers subsume the [first] two kinds. The text further says: and in continuous application and clarificatory application on this very [object], equanimously and pervasively settling; this seems to also include the third, settling down. The preceding explanation of settling down clearly shows it is also of the first two powers, while below the third and fourth are both [stated to be of] the power of mindfulness—how to resolve this? To state it: in reality, the third, settling down, is subsumed under the first two powers. When in [the section on] the power of mindfulness it speaks of “settling down and settling close,” the intention here is that through the power of mindfulness one settles down into settling close; it is not that both settling down and settling close are the power of mindfulness, but that only settling close alone is the power of mindfulness. Another explanation: The treatise states that initially, through the two powers of hearing and contemplation, inner settling is initially the only one; inner settling along with equal settling are the first two powers, while settling down is the power of mindfulness, just as below it states that taming and pacification are two kinds of concentration. Now, in speaking of settling down and settling close, it clearly also subsumes the two kinds, not interpreting it as settling down into settling close. If so, why does it speak of continuous and clarificatory application on this very [object], equanimously and pervasively settling? To state it: settling down extends through three powers. If the contemplation is not yet completed, it is subsumed under the first two powers; if the practice of contemplation is completed, it is subsumed under the power of mindfulness. Because when initially gathering the mind within, tying it in continuous and clarificatory application, one has not yet attained settling down; this is merely the initial mind contemplating settling down; later, when settling down through the power of mindfulness, only when contemplation is completed does it become the power of mindfulness. Furthermore, the words “equanimously and pervasively settling” refer solely to the single kind of equal settling, not including settling down, because it equanimously and pervasively settles upon all coarse moving phenomena, and does not take settling down to belong to the first two powers.