瑜伽師地論略纂 16

English (machine translation) 16

Language: English

'King Chual' (Out-of-Love King) is what was formerly called King Udayana. The correct original phonetic rendering is *udayan-si* (here meaning 'out'), *vatsa* (here meaning 'love'), *rājā* (here meaning 'king'). 'Udayana' [in the old translation] was corrupt.

16.3

The treatise states 'dissimilar son': this refers to a person of low base birth who, upon being born, does not resemble the king. A 'similar son' is a true son of the king, who resembles the king; because in bodily demeanour and so forth he resembles his father, everyone loves him, and there are no abusive looks or words toward him.

16.4

The treatise states, 'How is there suffering due to being attended by multiple sufferings? It refers to being born in the narakas and among the exclusively suffering hungry ghosts, up to being called suffering due to being attended by multiple sufferings': this means that here it should be stated that one part of the animal realm that undergoes suffering is also included. Previously, this passage has appeared several times, but here it speaks according to those who undergo suffering for the most part, because animals undergo less suffering than ghosts. For this suffering of birth, old age, sickness, and death, examine the detailed analysis in the previous tenth [fascicle] of the *Maulī Bhūmi* and the *Pratītyasamutpāda-sūtra*.

16.5

The treatise states, 'What is the suffering of the five clinging-aggregates? It should be known that this suffering is also due to five aspects: namely, being a vessel of the suffering of birth, being based on the vessel of the suffering of birth': this means that based on this, the suffering of birth is able to arise. Because it is a vessel of the suffering of birth, it says 'being a vessel of the suffering of birth'. Arising based on the remaining six sufferings—namely, the suffering of old age and the rest—is collectively named 'being based on the vessel of the suffering of birth'; because suffering arises based on this vessel, it says 'being based on the vessel of the suffering of birth'. Or, this is the vessel of the suffering of birth, and the remaining six sufferings arise based on the vessel of the suffering of birth, so it is called 'a vessel of the suffering of birth'. The remaining six exist based on the suffering of birth, so this takes the suffering of birth as a vessel; spoken of together, it is called 'being a vessel of the suffering of birth'. Or, the first is the suffering of birth, and the second is the vessel that produces all sufferings; spoken of together, both are called 'being based on the vessel of the suffering of birth'.

16.6

The treatise states, 'The limb of undertaking completely refers to the limb of intrinsic morality; the limb of undertaking the trainings that conform to the Dharma refers to when one undertakes the precepts, afterwards reciting the four resources and so forth; the limb of protecting the minds of others according to circumstances refers to the prohibitive precepts concerning deportment. These three constitute undertaking the precepts. The limb of following and guarding the trainings as previously undertaken': this refers to subsequent morality. That is, the two moralities of undertaking and following. Master Bei says: As explained previously in fascicle fifty-three regarding the disciplinary code, there are these four limbs, which are the four-limb precepts of a bhikṣu. Reducing six limbs to four limbs is different from this; the previous explanation is likely incorrect.

16.7

'Ten kinds of assemblies of sentient beings take delight and joy in ten kinds of dharmas': they can be known by matching them in sequence; the meaning is evident and easily understood. 'Initiating karma has three kinds: first, initiating through association', which is simultaneous arising; 'second, initiating through direct generation', which is proximate-cause arising; 'third, initiating through predominance', which refers to distant-cause arising. It further induces other afflictions to initiate karma. Or, the previous ones have already subsumed everything, and the fourth, predominance, gives rise to even more afflictions before initiating [karma]. The above four fascicles, from the fifty-eighth onward, cover the three bhūmis of coarse examination, subtle investigation, and so forth.

16.8

Fascicle Sixty-Two

16.9

The Bhūmi of Being in Meditative Equipoise (Samāhitā Bhūmi) and Others

16.10

Here, what are called 'secondary afflictions' (upakleśa): because they secondarily afflict the mind, they are called secondary afflictions; or because they arise following the afflictions, they are called secondary afflictions. There are two explanations here. If defiled mental factors arise following other afflictions, then as stated in the 'Chapter on Latent Tendencies' of the *Kośa*, all the mental factors of the saṃskāra-aggregate are such. Here, following what was said before, as in the *Kṣudrakavastu*, all are such. However, based on the prominent ones, this treatise mentions only twenty-two and so forth. Those existing outside the twenty-two here do not exceed the substance of the twenty-two; subsumed by their characteristics, they can be known upon investigation. For example, arrogance takes deceit and dissimulation as its substance; below it says 'here, due to the predominant power of deceit and dissimulation', which speaks of the predominant substance from which it arises. 'Advancing toward the front' refers to walking in the front when receiving offerings, being invited by others, and the like. 'What is leaving behind the yoke of the good? It refers to staying far away from marginal bedding and seats, and staying far away from rooms resembling quietude frequented by various evils, abandoning them from afar without generating desire or pleasure': 'marginal bedding and seats' refers to extremely poor bedding and seats, the margins of evil; being able to stay far away relying on this is called staying far away from marginal bedding and seats. Another explanation: marginal bedding and seats are the foremost, most supreme bedding and seats; being able to stay far away from such beloved or despised bedding and seats is called staying far away from marginal bedding and seats. 'Staying far away from rooms resembling quietude': one fully possesses an empty, leisurely, quiet place resembling a quiet room, such as a place for ascetic practices. That is, abandoning the place from which one should stay away is called leaving behind the yoke of the good. Another explanation: this is a place for engaging in sexual desire, frequented by various evils, which is called a room resembling quietude; one should stay far away from it and not generate desire or pleasure. The intention to abandon it is called leaving far behind the yoke of the good.

16.11

The treatise states, 'Cultivating the ten totality-bases is capable of performing five tasks', and so forth: Master Bei says: The five tasks mean that by virtue of the first eight totality-bases, one is able to bring about three tasks—namely, magical creation as the first, transformation as the second, and the supernormal powers of the noble ones as the third, this possessing supernormal powers; by virtue of the totality-base of space, one brings about the unobstructed coming and going of the supernormal powers of the noble ones as the fourth; and by virtue of the totality-base of consciousness, one brings about the supreme virtues such as non-contention as the fifth. For the subsequent text explains the function of the fifth, the totality-base of consciousness. If, following this reasoning and textual momentum, one says that among the things brought about by the first eight, the supernormal powers of the noble ones form a distinct one, then among the things brought about by space, where it mentions the unobstructed coming and going of the supernormal powers of the noble ones, the words 'supernormal powers of the noble ones' should also have a distinct entity to form one. Now it is explained: The first eight bring about one task—magical creation and transformation are merely one thing, differing only as fundamentally non-existent versus fundamentally existent; the totality-base of space brings about the supernormal power of unobstructed coming and going as the second; and in what the base of consciousness brings about, there are three, hence making five. That is to say, virtues such as the unobstructed analytical knowledges are the first; accomplishing the liberation of nothingness, the liberation of neither-perception, and the liberation of cessation are the second; and boundless, limitless, pervasive activity is the third. Question: Why does the liberation of cessation have a separate 'moreover' character, combining nothingness and the like into one? Answer: Because the textual momentum is like this. Only the base of consciousness has three. Above and below, it repeatedly says 'due to this boundless base of consciousness'; here, within the liberation of cessation, it is absent, merely saying 'due to this cause of accomplishment'—that is, due to this cause accomplishing nothingness and so forth—hence we know they are combined into one, because they are of the category of liberations. The Great Master says: The base of consciousness has three: first, bringing about non-contention, knowledge, and so forth; second, the liberations of the stages of nothingness and neither-perception; third, the liberation of cessation. The phrase 'boundless, limitless, pervasive activity' is a general conclusion that because of the accomplishment of the previous base of consciousness, one obtains various virtues. What follows are all the Great Master's views. These virtues are explained in the twentieth fascicle of the *Prakaraṇāryavācā*. Question: Why does accomplishing the previous eight totality-bases bring about magical creation and transformation? Answer: Because through the previous totality-bases one attains mastery in the objective realm of form; therefore, one can bring about magical creation and transformation. The obstructed supernormal powers here, before attaining the concentration of the base of space, are both obtained relying on the fourth dhyāna; how could one not obtain magical creation and transformation? Speaking in terms of the prominent, ordinary beings do not obtain the first eight totality-bases. Question: Why does obtaining the totality-base of space bring about the supernormal power of unobstructed coming and going? Answer: Because space is formless, it can induce unobstructed coming and going; thus the thirteenth fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states: 'Because one attains the formless concentration, suppressing and eliminating the marks of form so that they are absent, there is nothing capable of eliminating form.' If one attains unobstructed coming and going, one may also attain it without having yet attained the base of space, but the obstructions are not yet exhausted. Now, speaking in terms of where the obstructions to concentration are exhausted, one must attain the base of space to sever those obstructions. Question: Why does cultivating the totality-base of consciousness bring about supreme virtues such as non-contention and knowledge of aspiration? Answer: All virtuous dharmas are mental consciousness, for virtues are all mental dharmas. Because one attains mastery through the base of consciousness, it is just as taking consciousness as an object; after attaining mastery, one brings about this non-contention, knowledge, and so forth relying on the fourth dhyāna. The previous supernormal power of unobstructed coming and going also relies on the fourth dhyāna; one must rely on the base of space to eliminate the obstruction of resistant form, and then re-enter the four dhyānas to come and go without obstruction. Although there are those who do not obtain the totality-base of space and the like yet obtain unobstructed coming and going, this is not said of the superior ones; because their obstructive hindrances of material form in concentration are not yet exhausted, in some places there is obstruction. Now, based on the prominent ones, there is no obstruction anywhere. Furthermore, regarding 'limitless, pervasive activity': practicing this base of consciousness, one performs limitless and boundless contemplation; because one's boundless practice of this base reaches its culmination, no further totality-base is established. 'The bases of mastery and totality-bases are the path capable of purifying the liberations': this means taking liberation as the fruit and the bases of mastery and totality-bases as the preliminary expedient. The end of the thirteenth fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* states: 'Relying on liberation, one engages in cultivation; due to the bases of mastery, one initiates preparatory practice; due to the totality-bases, there is accomplishment; because of accomplishment, one reaches the culmination of liberation.' This is the same as the Sarvāstivāda view that liberation is exclusively cause: in initial cultivation, one must first rely on a part of liberation to seize the severance of obstructions; the totality-bases are exclusively fruit, being cultivated at the very end; the bases of mastery apply to both cause and fruit, being cultivated after liberation and before the totality-bases. This is exactly like the text of the *Abhidharmasamuccaya*. Here, taking liberation as fruit and the bases of mastery and totality-bases as cause is the same as the *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra*, which says: 'Those totality-bases are the cause, liberation is the fruit, and the bases of mastery apply to both cause and fruit. If subsequent cultivation is complete, such is the sequence.' Thus it is the same as this treatise. Furthermore, the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* says: 'the path that culminates liberation.' The Sarvāstivādins speak in terms of the initial time: when first practicing and beginning cultivation, they take liberation as the beginning; hence the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* says 'relying on liberation, one engages in cultivation', because one relies on liberation to sever obstructions. The *Tattvasiddhi-śāstra* speaks in terms of the end: at the time of culmination, one must accomplish the bases of mastery and totality-bases, and only then is liberation complete, because liberation is taken as the fruit. Here it says that the bases of mastery and totality-bases are the path capable of purifying liberation; the *Abhidharmasamuccaya* also says that if the totality-bases are accomplished, liberation reaches culmination; here it speaks according to the time of culmination. Harmonizing them like this here accords greatly with the principles, and exhausts the collected texts.

16.12

Regarding the treatise stating: "Furthermore, the liberations are manifested by liberation from the cognitive obscurations. By this, śrāvakas, pratyekabuddhas, and others attain mental liberation from the cognitive obscurations," and so forth: This refers to feeling born of transformed and untransformed vipāka; that is, it is a pure, neutral (avyākṛta) phenomenon. Because it obstructs the knowable, it belongs to the category of cognitive obscurations. Moreover, it also extends to defiled feeling; simply because it obstructs the knowable, it receives the name 'cognitive obscuration'. When the two vehicles sever this, it is called 'severing the cognitive obscurations'.

16.13

Regarding the treatise stating: "Briefly, through [three] aspects, one who cultivates meditative attainments relishes the attainments": First, having attained a concentration and emerged from it, only then does one relish the past attainment. Second, either having not yet realized it, one relishes the future [attainment], relishing a future concentration; or, having already attained the threshold concentration (sāmantaka), one relishes the future fundamental [dhyāna]; or, having already attained the inferior grade, one relishes the superior grade. Due to the predominant influence of relishing, one pursues the future concentration, etc., and gives rise to relishing. Third, having already attained the threshold, fundamental, etc., in accordance with whichever one [it is], entering and emerging together with the concentrated mind, appearing like a concentrated mind while remaining in a non-distracted state, one gives rise to relishing. Below, an objection is resolved by stating: emerging from concentration, relishing can arise; when directly in concentration, there is no relishing, because relishing is defiled, whereas concentration is wholesome.

16.14

Regarding the treatise stating: "If one born in a lower level gives rise to craving toward a higher [level] and has not yet attained freedom from desire, possessing an unstable mind, it should be known that this craving is bound to the desire realm": This means that among the three aspects of relishing mentioned earlier, the first—relishing without having attained the concentration—is craving of the desire realm. Taking a higher realm as object to generate craving is taking another realm as object. Or, unlike the Hīnayāna where seeking a higher concentration is entirely called desire for wholesome dharmas (kuśaladharmacchanda), here it depends on whether there is defilement or non-defilement in that mind. As the textual characteristics indicate, it is the same as fascicle 59 above, where a higher level takes a lower as object, and lower, etc., mutually take each other as object. Here it also says that when I shall attain it, such relishing arises, which is taking the higher as object, called the object-aspect (nimittabhāga) of one's own mind.

"Retrogression from the unattained" means that one is unable to give rise to and attain dharmas not yet attained; hence it is called retrogression.

"Retrogression from what has been attained" means that having retrogressed from dharmas already attained, defilements arise.

"Retrogression in habitual practice" means that dharmas presently acquired do not manifest; this is called retrogression.

Question: How are the latter two retrogressions distinguished? Answer: When an ārya has already severed the seeds of delusion, but retrogresses and [delusion] arises in active manifestation, losing all qualities, this is called retrogression from what has been attained. If an ārya's various qualities cannot arise simultaneously, this is called retrogression in habitual practice, because it merely involves defilements not arising, unlike retrogression from what has been attained.

16.15

Regarding the treatise stating: "If it is the path of excellence (viśeṣamārga), it should be known that it is an all-pervasive cognitive object, or an undefiled (anāsrava) object," and so forth: This means that relying on the three paths of application (prayogamārga), unhindered path (ānantaryamārga), and liberation path (vimuktimārga) of the threshold to the four dhyānas, one contemplates the lower six levels as faulty and the higher levels as tranquil. Only in the fourth, the path of excellence, does one either make the selflessness of all dharmas an all-pervasive cognitive object that is with-outflows (sāsrava), or make the direct realization of the truths (satyābhisamaya) without-outflows. In taking a higher level as an object, this is an undefiled [path] of discursive contemplation. If one wishes to sever or contemplate, whatever level it may be, undefiled [paths] do it all.

16.16

Regarding the treatise's subsumption of the four paths within the seven manaskāras, compare it with what is cited in the ninth fascicle of the Abhidharma[-samuccaya-bhāṣya].

16.17

Regarding the treatise stating: "If it is the dhyāna manifested by the doors of liberation—emptiness, signlessness, and wishlessness—subsumed by the aids to penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya), it should be known as the fourth": this is the supramundane concentration. The aids to penetration are with-outflows, whereas the doors of liberation such as emptiness are the undefiled [path] of the darśanamārga. Because of the aids to penetration, one is able to attain emptiness and the like; hence it is said to be 'subsumed'. Although emptiness and the rest exist within the aids to penetration, they are not named doors of liberation. How is this known? As the second fascicle of the Prakaraṇāryavācā says: the term 'doors of liberation' refers solely to undefiled cultivation; hence, as the aids to penetration can induce them, one takes what is subsumed as undefiled. That is, in order to attain them by relying on that condition, one cultivates the aids to penetration. 'Relying' means relying on the aspiration to seek; that is, to seek them, taking what is sought as the reliance, up to the first, cultivating for the sake of attaining the threshold, and so on. Furthermore, within the aids to penetration, emptiness and the rest perform the supramundane practice of liberation; hence it is called the fourth, the supramundane concentration. Being named after the understanding of the practice of the fruit, they are called doors of liberation. Herein, the first is the essential meaning, while the latter is a general explanation.

16.18

Regarding "the attainment of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti) can be entered by bodhisattvas on distant bhūmis": An essential explanation states: 'Distant' refers to the seventh bhūmi; because they engage in signless practice, only then can they enter it. Prior to the sixth bhūmi, defilements still arise and they have not subdued the obstacles to concentration; bodhisattvas entering the seventh bhūmi subdue all defilements of the three realms and attain that concentration; this is spoken from the perspective of preeminence. In reality, as the Buddhabhūmi-sūtra-śāstra states, those who advance directly can also enter it upon the first bhūmi. Although the eighth fascicle of the Yogācārabhūmi states that they can [enter] upon the bhūmi, they can enter it thought-moment by thought-moment on the seventh bhūmi. That explanation provides great discerning clarity. Another explanation states: The 'distant bhūmi' spoken of here is the first bhūmi itself; because of the practice of application, it is called a 'distant bhūmi', not because it is the Far-Going Bhūmi (Dūraṅgamā-bhūmi). The treatise states 'not enterable by worldlings (pṛthagjana)', which means enterable by bodhisattvas; entering the bhūmi is precisely being a bodhisattva; therefore, 'distant bhūmi' is the first bhūmi. Although a bodhisattva gives rise to supramundane wholesome dharmas to make this concentration manifest, through skill-in-means that benefits sentient beings, they do not abandon the continuous arising of defiled thoughts—what was formerly called 'retaining the defilements'. This is an empty assertion. Here it is spoken with respect to those who advance directly; for those who make a circuitous detour can also attain it prior to the bhūmis. Furthermore, the essential meaning states: 'Distant bhūmi' refers to those who have entered the minds of the ten understandings, who also attain the cessation attainment; the cessation attainment is a semblance of the undefiled, but its essence is with-outflows. Now, when it is said 'not worldlings or with-outflows', it means not all ordinary worldlings and ordinary with-outflows [states]. Or perhaps it is worldlings who have entered the stage and produce the notion of nirvāṇa who only then attain it. If a bodhisattva attains it, they can also attain it by subduing the obstacles to concentration. Or it is both with-outflows and without-outflows; the two vehicles are exclusively without-outflows, unable to attain it by subduing the obstacles to concentration. Even if they attain it by severing the obstacles to concentration above the fourth dhyāna, there is no impediment. Because this is not their sphere of action, it is provisionally designated as neither in-training (śaikṣa) nor beyond-training (aśaikṣa). Because it is completed in the path of training, and attained in the completion of the path beyond training, it should also be called both in-training and beyond-training.

16.19

"Six kinds of manaskāra": this refers to dividing the second of the four manaskāras mentioned above—correct knowing, etc.—into three manaskāras, as in the text. What is severed by the above can be understood by examining it.

16.20

"Relying on three bases": this refers to (1) the higher mind, (2) the prajñā of hearing and reflection, and (3) the stage of cultivating karma. The three conditions are prajñā not shared with non-Buddhists, which refers to the dharmas of the three bases following immediately below.

16.21

"The purity of the four fruits": this refers to defilements not arising in the four bases immediately below. "The purity of the five fruits": the four dhyānas and tranquil liberations. Attaining formless concentrations and entering the cessation attainment; the cessation attainment is the tranquil liberation. "The nine fruits": the first three of the four śramaṇa fruits, plus the six supernormal knowledges (abhijñā); the fourth fruit is not taken because it is the knowledge of the exhaustion of outflows (āsravakṣayajñāna). The concluding text below contains the word 'therefore' five times. "Purity of the unstable stage": this means severing the purity of the four unstable stages mentioned above, namely violating the precepts and so on. "Purity of the stage": such manaskāra, referring to having the realization of joy and pleasure down to understanding impermanence and so on. "Purity of subsumption": referring to subsuming all dharmas of the wings of awakening relying on the three bases of the higher mind and so on. The remaining two can be understood.

16.22

"Mahākoṣṭhila": formerly called Mahākoṭṭhita. 'Mahā' means great; 'koṣṭhi' means belly; 'la' means holder. That is, 'Great Belly-Holder'. This is the maternal uncle of Śāriputra, the Long-Nail Wanderer (Dīrghanakha). In the belly is the meaning of the Tripiṭaka. Because he held the meaning of the Tripiṭaka, he was named 'Great Belly-Holder'.

16.23

Liberation through wisdom (prajñāvimukti) and liberation of mind (cetovimukti) each extend to both with-outflows and without-outflows. In this single scriptural passage, here it is named 'mundane and wisdom'; it first clarifies mundane (with-outflows) liberation of mind and wisdom, and next clarifies undefiled liberation of mind and wisdom.

16.24

From "Herein, relying on liberation through wisdom" below, up to "precisely through the predominant influence of liberation through wisdom" above, it clarifies mundane liberation through wisdom and of mind.

16.25

From "That which is the sphere of activity of supramundane wisdom" below, it clarifies undefiled liberation through wisdom and of mind. In first clarifying the with-outflows: from "Herein, relying on liberation through wisdom" below up to "Furthermore, relying on liberation of mind" above, it clarifies wisdom; from "Furthermore, relying on liberation of mind" below, it clarifies mind. Within clarifying wisdom: first it clarifies the object of wisdom; from "Its intrinsic nature" below, it clarifies the substance of wisdom, which is intelligible. Within clarifying liberation of mind, it is also like this: first it clarifies the mind to be defiled or purified, and next it clarifies the fruit of mental liberation. That is, from "Furthermore, relying on liberation of mind" down to "capable of apprehending and discerning", it clarifies the mind to be defiled or purified, which is the mind capable of apprehending the objective realms of form, etc. From "The fruit of the mental liberation of mundane wisdom" down to "precisely through the predominant influence of liberation through wisdom", it clarifies the fruit of mental liberation. That is, through the power of the aforementioned mundane wisdom, its mind emerges from associated bondage and objective bondage. "Associated" means associated bondage. "Intermixed" means objective-condition bondage. Furthermore, 'associated' means defilements arising simultaneously; 'intermixed' means arising mixed before and after. This is the fruit of mundane mental liberation, being able not to be defiled by associated [defilements] and intermittent arisings, but not yet separated from objective-condition bondage, etc. If it is separated, that is the fruit of undefiled mental liberation. Undefiled liberation through wisdom and of mind also has two parts: the object of antidotal treatment and the characteristics of the fruit.

16.26

Regarding the treatise stating: "Furthermore, the characteristic of the fruit of supramundane right view should be known as being permanent before and after," and so forth below: It clarifies that the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) is the fruit of right view, and is therefore said to be permanent. From "If the dharma that is the object of antidote" below, it distinguishes the conditioned (saṃskṛta) as impermanent. One explanation says: 'If the dharma' is a general term for all phenomena.

16.27

"If the object of antidote exists, having arisen it does not perish": this means that if the delusion that is the object of antidote exists, once the unhindered path has arisen, it does not perish together with the delusion.

16.28

"If the object of antidote does not exist, having perished there is arising": this means that if the delusion that is the object of antidote does not exist, when the unhindered path and the delusion have both perished, the liberation path arises. Because these—the object of antidote and the antidote—undergo perishing and arising, it should be known that they have an opposing counterpart, and hence are impermanent. Another explanation states: 'If the dharma' refers to the dharmas of the truth of the path (mārgasatya). 'If the object of antidote exists' means that prior to the vajropamasamādhi, down to the darśanamārga, because delusion still exists, it is called 'the object of antidote exists'. The path and so forth prior to the vajropamasamādhi are called 'having arisen, they do not perish' because they arise repeatedly and are presently able to arise; later, at the time of the vajropamasamādhi, all delusions are absent, which is called 'if the object of antidote does not exist'. When the path previously attained has perished, the subsequent path of the consummate fruit arises; hence it is said 'having perished, there is arising'. Because this truth of the path involves arising and perishing, it is called impermanent; the unconditioned is not like this, and is therefore permanent. This solely distinguishes the truth of the path. If one does not explain it in terms of prior to the vajropamasamādhi, etc., then since in the Mahāyāna [remedies and delusions] cannot coexist, how could the object of antidote exist and having arisen not perish, with path and delusion coexisting? In "among feelings and causal conditions": contact is the causal condition of craving; taking it as a condition gives rise to craving, grasping, and so forth, so that future existence arises.

16.29

Regarding the treatise stating: "Furthermore, because they are intermixed and associated, the mental dharmas on which it relies are purified; it should be known that this is because it experiences them without being defiled by present conditions": this explains right view; the fruit has no separate meaning.

16.30

Regarding the treatise's statement, "because of the six tranquillities": this refers to the passage below, "in three periods when the mind emerges from seclusion; in three periods when the mind is tranquil upon drawing near." Regarding "due to the equality of the cessation of pure consciousness, and not due to the equality of its physical basis (āśraya)": this explains the superior function within the absorption of cessation (nirodhasamāpatti). That is to say, the cessation of the uncontaminated (anāsrava), pure consciousness concurrent with the absorption of cessation is equal [in its cessation], not because the body that serves as the basis of the absorption with mind (the prior preparatory stage) is equal to that of the absorption of cessation; hence it is called the absorption of cessation. Regarding "the three activities do not function": when emerging from absorption, first mental activity arises, next bodily activity arises, and finally vocal activity arises. In the present absorption they are absent, so you must not hold that bodily activity and the rest exist within an absorption with mind. In the *Sūtra on the Causal Conditions of Phenomena* (Dharmapratyayitā-sūtra?), "thoroughly understanding what is to be counteracted" means: because one thoroughly understands the affliction of craving, one does not delight in future existence; because one thoroughly understands the affliction of views, one cannot realize it.

16.31

Regarding "establishing the three aggregates in order to counteract the three kinds of defilement": the first is the aggregate of morality; the second is the aggregate of concentration; the third is the aggregate of wisdom. It is precisely these three aggregates that subsume the eightfold noble path.

16.32

Regarding "thoroughly understanding the basis, which furthermore has four [aspects]": the first can be understood; the second, "characteristics" (lakṣaṇa), refers to the essential nature and characteristic of concentration—characteristic being nature; the third, "focal object" (ālambana), refers to the objective sphere of concentration; "the causes and conditions of accomplishment" refers to the causes and conditions for attaining concentration, and it is also said that concentration is the cause and condition for accomplishing all merits. Regarding "thoroughly understanding merit, which refers to the absorption of cessation up to... this has five kinds: because of the state of cessation": this is the very essence of the absorption, which takes the functional capacity of the seeds of the non-concomitant mind of disgust as the entity of the state of cessation. Regarding "because it is a mental image resembling tranquility": this shows that concentration is nominally existent and lacks substantial reality, being merely a resembling mental image. Another explanation: as one wishes to enter this concentration, one takes nirvāṇa as the focal object; nirvāṇa is truly tranquil, and this concentration is a mental image resembling the tranquility of nirvāṇa, which is the absorption of cessation. Although it is conditioned, because it resembles nirvāṇa, it is called a mental image. "Contemplation through eight aspects" is as described at the end of the eighth chapter of the *Maulī Bhūmi*, and also as explained at the end of the fifty-third. Here, "mutual opposition" means: opposing painful feeling, speaking of pleasant feeling, neither pleasant nor painful. There are three such mutual oppositions; examine and correlate them as stated in the fifty-sixth.

16.33

Regarding "the entanglement of drowsiness": it refers to light as the cause for entering concentration from drowsiness, hence it is called the entanglement of drowsiness. "The five kinds of counteractive characteristics": (1) distancing oneself from the mark of darkness; (2) arriving at the principle of preparation; (3) damaging various views; (4) the active functioning of various views; and (5) the active functioning of the basis of various views. The first is distancing oneself from the mark of darkness and cultivating luminosity. The second is taking a pure object as one's focal object and eliminating torpor. The third is impairing various views so that one does not give rise to views such as grasping at views. The fourth is the active functioning of views, meaning that they can generate evil conduct and can generate the sixty-two views, which are now counteracted. The fifth is the active functioning of the basis of views, which refers to the merits of views.

16.34

Regarding "the five dharmas that sustain concentration": the first is "seclusion," which is the concentration's seclusion from afflictions; the second is "the place of seclusion," which refers to the place where concentration is cultivated and the verbal teachings that conform to concentration; the third is "requisites conforming to an undefiled mind," namely bedding and seats situated at the edge; the fourth is the passage below beginning with "from the wise"; the fifth is the passage below beginning with "regarding all worldly...". Another explanation: seclusion and the place of seclusion constitute the first; the passage below beginning with conforming to an undefiled mind is the second; from those who have suffering below is the third; regarding all samādhis below is the fourth; the previous fifth is divided into two, with uncontaminated practice serving as the fifth.

16.35

Below, "the realms of renunciation" refers to three persons each cultivating one aspect of practice; as when the three texts below combine persons and dharmas in their exposition, there are therefore six. This realm of renunciation is precisely nirvāṇa; the six dharmas conforming to nirvāṇa are called the six cultivations. Another explanation: three persons practice six practices, and the six practices constitute the six renunciations. That is, the first person cultivates four practices, and the remaining two cultivate one practice each. Namely, cultivating loving-kindness toward hostile conduct, giving rise to compassion toward evil conduct, giving rise to sympathetic joy toward pure conduct, and giving rise to equanimity toward beneficent conduct—these are all called "concentration with sentient beings as focal object," which makes four, combined into one because they share the same focal object of sentient beings. The second, "concentration with dharmas as focal object," belongs to persons possessing the roots of good conducive to liberation. The third, "cultivating contemplation of the truths," belongs to persons possessing the roots of good conducive to decisive penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya). Because dharmas conform to the fruit of nirvāṇa, there are six. Although three persons are cited, because dharmas have three practices and the objective spheres taken as focal objects have six distinctions, there are six conforming dharmas.

16.36

Fascicle Sixty-Three

16.37

Among the three aspects of impurity, "naturally flowing" means having an aspect that is a natural outflow of excrement and filth. The first is that its very substance is excrement and filth; the second is the natural outflow of excrement and filth; the third is merely having the fundamental elements and derived form as basis and supported.

16.38

There are eight causes and conditions for abandoning a co-resident disciple: (1) hating the disciple and wishing to receive reverence oneself; (2) material gain; (3) transgressing precepts and appropriately abandoning them; (4) needing one who benefits the teacher and not needing one who causes detriment to the teacher; (5) morality; (6) concentration; (7) wisdom; (8) being unable to tolerate the business of the great assembly and monastic affairs regarding the disciple—though one treats the great assembly well, one cannot tolerate it on account of this disciple. Another explanation: hating the disciple and abandoning them is one; material gain and reverence are combined as the second; the remaining six are the same as before.

16.39

Here, that the obstacles to the first dhyāna differ from the text of the *Prakaraṇāryavācā* is as explained in the ninth fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā*. Among the objects counteracted by the four dhyānas of the solar sphere(?), the first dhyāna eliminates suffering, and the second dhyāna is also said to eliminate suffering. It is said that the first eliminates active manifestation, while the second severs the momentum of dauṣṭhulya. For the counteracted object of the third, it says "three: exuberant leap," which is precisely predominant joy (prīti). The former is the substance, the latter is the predominant function. Another explanation: this is attention (manaskāra) taking joy as focal object, giving rise to exuberant leap through extreme attention. The inferior nature of concentration occurs in the second dhyāna when this joy is followed by unskillful prajñā, and it is caused to cease; hence it is said to eliminate the inferior nature of concentration. Although this joy exists within the first and second dhyānas, it cannot be called inferior, yet piece by piece the inferior nature can also be eliminated. In the fourth dhyāna, "awakening toward pleasure" refers to attention taking pleasure as focal object. Because pleasure is extreme, attention takes it as focal object, which is called awakening. This is what the *Saṃyuktābhidharmahṛdaya* calls "awakening toward the focal object" and the *Prakaraṇāryavācā* calls "attention toward pleasure."

16.40

Regarding the treatise's statement, "the dhyāna factors are established in order to counteract painful afflictive practices": first, "counteracting the deficiency of the antidote" means that because the afflictions of ascetic pain can counteract the noble path, they can cause deficiency in the noble path; these afflictions are termed the deficiency of the antidote. Applied thought (vitarka) and sustained thought (vicāra) can counteract this, hence it is termed counteracting the deficiency, and so forth. Below may be understood.

16.41

Regarding the treatise's statement: "For what reason is it known that the faculty of pain has not yet been severed in the first dhyāna? Answer: Because dauṣṭhulya of that category has not yet been distanced. If the faculty of pain were severed, there would be no difference from abiding in the second dhyāna": The Master of Great Righteousness says: The dauṣṭhulya of the faculty of pain in the first dhyāna still remains, and is exhausted only upon attaining the second dhyāna; therefore it says "dauṣṭhulya of that category." Not having distanced oneself from dauṣṭhulya means the lack of serviceability following the basis (āśraya). It is merely because in the first dhyāna the three consciousnesses still exist, joy is not yet fully perfected, and dauṣṭhulya is not yet exhausted; the three consciousnesses and the faculty of pain correspond to each other, and joy directly opposes the faculty of pain. In the stage of the second dhyāna, because the three consciousnesses do not exist and joy reaches its utmost fullness, dauṣṭhulya is therefore eliminated. If the first dhyāna were freed from the dauṣṭhulya of pain, that would be the fullness of joy; with joy being fulfilled, there would be no three consciousnesses, and it would be indistinguishable from the second dhyāna. This "severing" means severing the nature of dependence of the contaminated dauṣṭhulya upon the faculty of pain and so forth; it does not mean severing the seeds or the association with consciousness, because these have already been severed previously. If they were unwholesome seeds, one could say they were already severed in the first dhyāna, because they are accompanied by afflictions; if they are wholesome or neutral, an arhat still gives rise to them. Now when severing is spoken of, it only means severing the nature of dauṣṭhulya upon them. For example, when black iron enters fire, the black color immediately ceases because red color is produced; once it emerges from the fire, the black returns because the red color ceases. This is also like that: upon attaining entry into the second dhyāna, the dauṣṭhulya of the faculty of pain ceases, the three consciousnesses do not arise, and uncontaminated, fulfilling joy arises; upon emerging from the second dhyāna and falling back into the first dhyāna, blackness returns because fulfilling joy is absent. The application to the principle is like this. The contaminated second dhyāna suppresses the dauṣṭhulya of pain because it is contaminated; the uncontaminated second dhyāna severs the dauṣṭhulya of pain because of uncontaminated joy. Therefore, it is not that those who do not regress and their like have this dauṣṭhulya arising upon entering the first dhyāna.

16.42

Regarding the treatise's statement, "Furthermore, there are four kinds of cultivation of samādhi," and so forth: The Master of Great Righteousness says: The first is a trainee (śaikṣa) who has seen the truths, abides in the threshold concentration (anāgamya), and seeks the fundamental dhyāna. The second is an ordinary person (pṛthagjana) who has already attained dhyāna concentration, has not yet attained the five superknowledges (abhijñā), and seeks the superknowledge of the cognition of birth and death (cyutyupapādajñāna), etc. The third is one of dull faculties who has seen the truths, dwells in the fundamental dhyāna, and seeks sharp faculties. The fourth is one of sharp faculties who has seen the truths and seeks the fruit of the non-trainee (aśaikṣa). Herein, why is there no one of dull faculties among those who have seen the truths who abides in the threshold concentration and seeks the fundamental stage and sharp faculties? Why is there no ordinary person who seeks seeing the truths, or one who has seen the truths and does not seek them, but seeks the five superknowledges? Instances like this merely present a certain scope and do not exhaustively subsume all phenomena. Furthermore, for one of dull faculties who has seen the truths and abides in the threshold concentration, being unable to seek entry into the fundamental stage and transformation into sharp faculties, because the initial faculties are dull and progress is slow, it is omitted and not discussed. That an ordinary person seeing the truths is not mentioned is because attaining the five superknowledges is sufficient. Here, the superknowledge of the cognition of birth and death is cited as superior because it knows the matter of future causes and fruits. It never says that others who lack seeing the truths do not have the five superknowledges, because those fully endowed with the five superknowledges also collectively seek the state of non-training. "Immeasurables with sentient beings as focal object" refers to having already attained the four immeasurables with sentient beings as their focal object.

16.43

Regarding the treatise's statement: "When one of pleasant-and-slow progress functions in practice, although having already seen the truths, etc., up to: furthermore, toward feeling, perception, and applied thought in the desire realm, one should dwell in correct mindfulness and give rise to correct awareness": this means that because this person has dull faculties, toward wholesome feeling, perception, and applied thought of the desire realm, they dwell in correct mindfulness and dwell in discriminatory prajñā of correct awareness; that is, they seek sharp faculties yet fear falling away from the Dharma. "Feeling" refers to the feeling mental factor, with the sense of experiencing, which augments the experience of the pleasures of desire-realm phenomena. "Perception" refers to grasping appearances of the objective spheres of all phenomena. "Thought" refers to applied thought concurrent with feeling and perception. Within this, giving rise to perception of correct mindfulness, and because of lapse of mindfulness, one should give rise to correct awareness, producing discriminatory prajñā.

16.44

The six kinds of dispassion are ten kinds in the sixth fascicle of the *Abhidharmasamuccayavyākhyā*, differing only in division and combination.

16.45

"Ma-sheng" (Aśvajit) is what the old *Abhidharmakośa* calls Ashushi. It should be: A-shi-fa (meaning horse) fa-duo (meaning victory), the monk who debated with Brahmā.

16.46

Regarding the treatise's statement: "Furthermore, there is a person (pudgala) who, having already attained dispassion, upon emerging from concentration, or at one time, their concentration aspect becomes mingled, and attention operates," etc.: this means that, generally speaking, when ordinary persons or noble ones have attained the nine uninterrupted and liberation paths and dwell in the path of special progress, at one time the mind of their path of special progress and distracted minds arise mingled together. This distracted mind is either bound to the form realm, because it is subsumed under wisdom arisen from hearing, etc.; otherwise, it is wisdom arisen from hearing and reflection of the desire realm, etc. Or at one time, a purely concentrated mind constitutes the path of special progress, not the uninterrupted or liberation path. While dwelling in the path of special progress, if one encounters a strong external sound condition and emerges from concentration, the ear-consciousness takes it as focal object and operates simultaneously with the sixth consciousness of the concentrated mind. This is where solely the ear-consciousness takes it as focal object, and there is no sixth consciousness taking the same single object as the ear-consciousness.

16.47

The treatise states: 'It is not that the mental consciousness associated with that very absorption is capable of apprehending this sound.' The meaning intended here is: as for sound within absorption, an auditory consciousness that arises upon emerging from absorption hears it and operates concurrently with the mental consciousness; however, the mind does not take the same object together with the auditory consciousness. Therefore, it is said that it is not the mental consciousness associated with absorption that is capable of apprehending this sound. Question: As the Sandhinirmocana-sūtra states: When any single consciousness such as visual consciousness arises, it necessarily operates concurrently with mental consciousness. How is it that here the auditory consciousness arises alone, and the mind does not take the same object? Explanation: That sūtra is based on the distracted state of mind: whenever the five consciousnesses arise, they constantly operate concurrently, necessarily having mental consciousness. Question: If so, why does the seventh [fascicle] of the Abhidharma[-samuccaya-bhāṣya] state that because one is within absorption, the five consciousnesses are absent? Explanation: That treatise speaks based on an absorption that lacks the five consciousnesses. Furthermore, it is based on spontaneous objects, in which case the five consciousnesses within absorption do not arise; but if an augmented, novel object manifests before one, it is as stated in this text. That auditory consciousness exists within absorption is an explanation shared by the Great Masters. Moreover, to say that there are definitively no five consciousnesses within absorption is incorrect. Question: If, by analogy with the distracted mind, the five consciousnesses also exist in the concentrated mind, do they take the same object together with the mind? Answer: No, because apprehending an evident object must be direct perception (pratyakṣa). If it took a different object, that would incur the error of contradicting the Pramāṇasamuccaya and other texts, which state that the mental consciousness concurrent with the five consciousnesses is direct perception. Because in the state of a distracted mind mental consciousness does not occur separately, the five consciousnesses do not arise [without it]; if they do arise, they must be concurrent. This is not like within absorption, where due to hearing an intense object, the auditory consciousness is able to apprehend it, while the mental consciousness remains firmly abiding on its single object, and hence does not take the same object with it.

First 47 of 96 passages. Read on

Linked texts (1)

瑜伽師地論略纂 — Classical Chinese