大乘義章 13.35

13.35

言先後者，依如《毘曇》，初禪五支體性同時、用有先後，乃至四禪類亦同然。若依《成實》，初禪五支定在先後，不得一時，彼說心數不同時故。不同時故，前四滅已方得一心。問曰：若言前四滅已方得一心，是則初禪非五支成。又經中說：初禪地中有五支俱。云何先後？又一心時若無覺觀，與二禪何別？彼《成實論》二禪品中釋通此義，向言初禪非五成者，我不說五支盡是初禪，但近初禪有覺觀等，故說五支成其初禪。經言初禪五支俱者，雖小相違，亦名為俱。如言弟子與師俱，雖小前後，亦名俱矣。言與二禪有何別者，初禪近亂，定未深靜，出入皆有覺觀之心；二禪不爾，出入皆無，是故不同。問曰：初禪近覺觀故說為支者，亦近五欲，何故不說五欲為支？論言「五欲背故，不名為近。又復五欲不住為因，故不說近。」問曰：若言至一心時已無喜樂，喜樂云何得至二禪，釋言：彼宗心法不並，故一心邊無其喜樂，非斷無故至二禪支。初禪既然，餘禪類爾。彼論偏執用相先後，故違一時。大乘所說與《毘曇》同，故龍樹言「譬如晝日，眾星不現，非無眾星。心法如是，隨時受名，非無諸數（此二門竟）。」

Regarding sequence: according to the Abhidharma, the substances of the five factors of the first dhyāna are simultaneous, while their functions have a sequence, and this is likewise analogous up to the fourth dhyāna. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, the five factors of the first dhyāna must exist in sequence and cannot be simultaneous, because it states that caittas are not simultaneous. Because they are not simultaneous, one attains one-pointedness of mind only after the preceding four have ceased. Question: If you say that one attains one-pointedness of mind only after the preceding four have ceased, then the first dhyāna is not constituted by five factors. Moreover, the sūtras state: "In the stage of the first dhyāna, five factors are conjoined." How could there be a sequence? Furthermore, at the time of one-pointedness of mind, if there are no investigation and analysis, how does it differ from the second dhyāna? The Tattvasiddhi-śāstra, in its chapter on the second dhyāna, explains and resolves this meaning: regarding the statement above that the first dhyāna is not constituted by five factors, I do not say that the five factors are entirely the first dhyāna, but rather that proximate to the first dhyāna there are investigation, analysis, and so forth; hence it is said that the five factors constitute its first dhyāna. When the sūtras say that the five factors of the first dhyāna are conjoined, even though there is a slight contradiction, they are still called conjoined; just as when it is said that a disciple is together with the master, although there is a slight earlier and later, it is still called "together." Regarding the question of how it differs from the second dhyāna: the first dhyāna is proximate to distraction, its samādhi is not yet deeply quiet, and entering and exiting both involve the mind of investigation and analysis; the second dhyāna is not like that, for entering and exiting both lack them; therefore they are not the same. Question: If they are spoken of as factors because the first dhyāna is proximate to investigation and analysis, it is also proximate to the five desires; why are the five desires not spoken of as factors? The treatise states: "Because the five desires are turned away from, they are not called proximate. Furthermore, because the five desires do not abide as causes, they are not spoken of as proximate." Question: If you say that upon reaching one-pointedness of mind joy and pleasure are already absent, how can joy and pleasure reach the second dhyāna? Explanation: In that school, mental dharmas do not occur side by side; therefore, beside one-pointedness of mind there is no joy or pleasure, yet because they are not severed into nonexistence, they reach the factors of the second dhyāna. Since the first dhyāna is like this, the remaining dhyānas are analogous. Because that treatise clings exclusively to the sequence of functional characteristics, it contradicts simultaneity. What the Mahāyāna teaches is the same as the Abhidharma; hence Nāgārjuna says: "Just as by day the multitude of stars does not appear, yet it is not that there are no stars; mental dharmas are just like this: they receive their names according to the occasion, yet it is not that the caittas are absent." (This concludes the second subsection.)