大乘義章 13.9

13.9

次就禪地明味淨等通局之義。於中且就未來中間八禪地說。淨禪寬通，遍一切地。無漏禪者，依如《毘曇》，前九地有，非想地無。故《雜心》云「無漏大王不居邊地。」欲界非想名為邊地，以非想地心志微劣，故無無漏。若依《成實》，非想雖無增觀無漏，非無順舊遊觀無漏。故彼論說「入滅定三昧，必從非想無漏心入。」餘同毘曇。若依大乘，無漏遍在一切地中。云何得知？非想亦有。如龍樹說「云何菩薩非想處定？與實相俱，是為菩薩非想處定。」與實相俱，明是無漏。若論味定，八禪地中一向定有，未、中間有無不定。是義云何？味有二種：一正愛、二受生愛。得彼八禪根本定已，於中生著，名正受愛；求上界生，名受生愛。八禪地中具此兩愛，未來、中間無正受愛，但有受生連瑣之愛，故云不定。何故此處無正受愛？未來求彼初禪地中根本未得，中間求彼二禪地中根本未得，無可貪著，故無此愛。

Next, to clarify the pervasive or restricted scope of savour, purity, and untaintedness according to the dhyāna stages: herein, we shall speak provisionally with reference to the unarrived, intermediate, and eight dhyāna stages. Pure dhyāna is broad and pervasive, extending through all stages. As for untainted dhyāna, according to the Abhidharma, it exists in the first nine stages and does not exist in the stage of neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation. Hence the Miśrakābhidharmahṛdaya states: 'The great untainted king does not dwell in the borderlands.' The desire realm and [the stage of] neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation are called borderlands; because the mental intention in the stage of neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation is weak and inferior, it lacks untaintedness. If according to the Tattvasiddhi, although neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation lacks untaintedness that increases insight, it is not without untaintedness that accords with old, familiar discursions. Hence that treatise says: 'Entering the samādhi of cessation must occur from an untainted mind of neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation.' The rest is the same as the Abhidharma. If according to the Mahāyāna, untaintedness is pervasive throughout all stages. How is this known? It is present even in neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation. As Nāgārjuna says: 'What is a bodhisattva's samādhi of the station of neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation? Being conjoined with the real mark—this is a bodhisattva's samādhi of the station of neither-conceptualisation-nor-non-conceptualisation.' Being conjoined with the real mark makes clear that it is untainted. If discussing savour-samādhi, it definitely exists without exception in the eight dhyāna stages, whereas in the unarrived and intermediate it is indeterminate whether it exists or not. What is the meaning of this? Savour is of two kinds: first, attachment to direct attainment; second, attachment to rebirth. Having attained the root samādhi of those eight dhyānas, generating attachment therein is called attachment to direct attainment; seeking birth in an upper realm is called attachment to rebirth. The eight dhyāna stages are fully endowed with both of these attachments, whereas the unarrived and intermediate lack attachment to direct attainment, possessing only the chained attachment to rebirth; hence it is said to be indeterminate. Why does this place lack attachment to direct attainment? In the unarrived, one seeks the root of the first dhyāna stage without having yet attained it; in the intermediate, one seeks the root of the second dhyāna stage without having yet attained it; there being nothing to covet and attach to, it lacks this attachment.