大乘義章 11.81

11.81

第七門中就處分別。於中有四：一所依處、二所緣處、三修起處、四成就處。所依處者，四無量心依禪定起，論說不同。《毘婆娑》中有一論師，說四無量唯依四禪中間禪起，餘皆不依。復有論師，說四無量依於四禪、未來、中間六地禪起，非四無色。就所依中，初禪二禪無悲無量，悲與喜違，彼處有喜，是故無悲。未來、中間、三禪、四禪無喜無量，彼處地法無喜受故。慈捨二行六地俱起。此前兩家，《雜心論》中舉束對破。《雜心》所立，亦說無量依六地禪。慈喜及捨，與前所列第二家同，悲行有異。彼說悲行念眾生心，喜者是其慶眾生心，兩不相返，故初二禪亦得起悲。何故不說依無色定？彼宗無量，緣欲界生，無色不緣下有漏故，是以不依。成實法中，四無量心具依八禪。故彼論言「是無量心三界皆有。」問曰：喜心在初二禪，三禪已上云何得有？《成實》釋言「我不說喜是喜根性，但為利生心得清不濁，說名為喜，故上有之。」問曰：云何知依四空亦起無量？《成》釋言「經說修悲生於空處、喜生識處，修捨生於無所有處，明知通依。」問曰：經中不說無量生於非想，非想應無。釋言：彼有，微故不說。大乘所論，凡夫二乘及小菩薩所修無量，與《毘曇》同；佛大菩薩四無量心，具依八禪。問曰：《地論》說慈心等欲色界中受正習果，非無色界。云何說言諸佛菩薩具依八禪？釋言：彼依世間相說，所以無過。云何得知如無色定？如經中說，修習悲心生於空處，乃至修捨生無所有，不說餘人。《成實》取此非阿毘曇，道理不應。所依如是（此一門竟）。

In the seventh section, distinctions are made according to realms/bases. Therein there are four: first, the base of reliance; second, the objective sphere; third, the locus of cultivation and arising; fourth, the locus of perfection. As for the base of reliance: the four immeasurable minds arise relying on dhyāna-concentration, regarding which the treatises explain differently. In the *Vibhāṣā*, there is a treatise master who says that the four immeasurables arise solely relying on the intermediate dhyāna of the four dhyānas, and not relying on any other. There is another treatise master who says that the four immeasurables arise relying on the six stages of dhyāna—the four dhyānas, the preparatory [dhyāna], and the intermediate [dhyāna]—and not the four formless [attainments]. Regarding what is relied upon: in the first dhyāna and second dhyāna there is no immeasurable compassion, because compassion conflicts with joy, and since joy exists in those places, there is no compassion; in the preparatory, intermediate, third dhyāna, and fourth dhyāna there is no immeasurable sympathetic joy, because among the dharmas of those stages there is no feeling of joy; the two practices of benevolence and equanimity arise together in all six stages. In the *Saṃyuktābhidharma-hṛdaya-śāstra*, these former two masters are both cited and refuted. What the *Saṃyuktābhidharma-hṛdaya* establishes also states that the immeasurables rely on the six stages of dhyāna. Benevolence, sympathetic joy, and equanimity are the same as the second master listed above, but the practice of compassion differs: it says that the practice of compassion is the mind that is mindful of sentient beings, while sympathetic joy is the mind that rejoices in sentient beings, and the two do not contradict each other; therefore, compassion can also arise in the first and second dhyānas. Why does it not say that they rely on the formless concentrations? In that school, the immeasurables arise conditioned by the desire realm, and the formless does not take lower tainted [realms] as conditions; therefore they do not rely on them. In the teachings of the *Tattvasiddhi*, the four immeasurable minds rely completely on the eight dhyānas. Therefore that treatise states: 'These immeasurable minds exist in all three realms.' Question: Since the mind of joy is in the first and second dhyānas, how can it exist in the third dhyāna and above? The *Tattvasiddhi* explains: 'I do not say that joy is of the nature of the faculty of joy; it is merely that for the benefit of beings the mind attains clarity without turbidity, which is called joy; therefore it exists above.' Question: How is it known that relying on the four formless [attainments] one also gives rise to the immeasurables? The *Tattvasiddhi* explains: 'The sūtras say that cultivating compassion leads to rebirth in the sphere of infinite space, sympathetic joy leads to rebirth in the sphere of infinite consciousness, and cultivating equanimity leads to rebirth in the sphere of nothingness; thus we clearly know that they rely universally on them.' Question: The sūtras do not speak of the immeasurables leading to rebirth in neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization, so it should not exist in neither-conceptualization-nor-non-conceptualization. Explanation: It exists there, but because it is subtle it is not mentioned. What is discussed in the Mahāyāna is that the immeasurables cultivated by ordinary beings, the two vehicles, and minor bodhisattvas are the same as in the *Abhidharma*; the four immeasurable minds of the Buddhas and great bodhisattvas rely completely on the eight dhyānas. Question: The *Daśabhūmika-śāstra* says that the mind of benevolence and the like experience the fruit of maturation and habituation in the desire and form realms, but not in the formless realm. Why say that the Buddhas and bodhisattvas rely completely on the eight dhyānas? Explanation: That is spoken relying on mundane characteristics, and so there is no fault. How is it known that they are like the formless concentrations? As the sūtra states, cultivating the mind of compassion leads to rebirth in the sphere of space, up to cultivating equanimity leading to rebirth in nothingness, and this does not speak of other people. That the *Tattvasiddhi* takes this to not be Abhidharma is not logically sound. The base of reliance is thus (this concludes one section).