大乘義章 9.31

9.31

第一門中先釋其名後辨體性。名別不同，乃有四種：一名無心定、二名斷受定、三名滅受想定、四名滅盡定。通釋是一，於中別分非無差異。無心定者，偏對心王以彰其名。心識盡謝故曰無心，離於有心分別散動名無心定。斷受定者，《地持論》中名斷受樂，此對受數以彰其名。五受皆亡故曰斷受，離受散動名斷受定。良以諸苦皆在受中，故斷此受名斷受樂。故《地持》言「隨所有受是真實苦。住定受滅，名斷受樂。」滅受想者，偏對受想二陰彰名。想絕受亡，名滅受想。滅盡定者，通對一切心心數法以彰名也。心及心法一切俱亡，名曰滅盡。又復三界緣心都盡，亦名滅盡。如初禪中，雖滅欲惡，覺觀猶在。乃至非想，雖滅下過，自地心在。以是義故，不名滅盡。至此定中，一切斯亡，故曰滅盡。定如前釋。名字如是。體性云何？論者不同，所說各異。如彼佛陀提婆所說，心法為體。彼人何故作如是說？入滅定者猶名眾生，若全無心不名眾生，是眾生故明知有心。體雖是心，絕離麁想，故云滅盡。《毘曇》所說，非色心法為滅定體。是義云何？彼論宣說，絕去心慮，得一非色非心之法，在於身中須補心處，故說非色非心為體。問曰：是中滅去心慮。心得滅不？釋言：不滅。何故不滅？能滅所滅同地法故。如欲界善雖滅欲惡，不滅彼得，此亦如是。問曰：若此能滅所滅同地法故不滅得者，斷善根時以欲界惡斷欲界善，何故斷得？釋言：闡提斷善根時，具以方便、無礙、解脫三道斷善，極違善故，通斷其得。滅定唯以方便滅心，故不捨得。《毘曇》如是。《成實》宣說心識盡處數滅無為為滅定體。問曰：若說心識盡處為滅定體，是滅定中便無心識，應非眾生。又若無心，草木何別？《成實》釋言「心得在故猶名有心。以有心故亦名眾生，不同草木。」何者心得入滅定者，成就過去未來世心，故名心得。不同《毘曇》別立非色非心得也。大乘法中，尋名取義，心識盡處為滅定體。以實具論，滅盡定中亦得有心亦得無心。言無心者，聲聞滅定，無六識心；菩薩滅定，全無六識，分有妄識；諸佛滅定，六七全無。言有心者，聲聞菩薩滅定之中猶有本識，真妄和合為本識故；佛滅定中猶有真心。若有心識，云何滅盡？滅麁心故。體性如是（此一門竟）。

In the first gate, we first explain its names and then determine its essential nature. The distinct names are of four kinds: first, it is called the mindless samādhi; second, it is called the samādhi of severed feeling; third, it is called the samādhi of the cessation of feeling and ideation; fourth, it is called the cessation samādhi. In a general sense they are one, but when distinguished individually among them they are not without differences. 'Mindless samādhi' designates its name specifically in contrast to the mind-king. Because the mind and consciousness are completely exhausted, it is called 'mindless'; being free from discursive scattering and agitation of a mind that has ideation, it is called the mindless samādhi. 'Samādhi of severed feeling' is called the 'severance of feeling-bliss' in the Bodhisattvabhūmi-śāstra; this designates its name in contrast to the mental factor of feeling. Because all five feelings have ceased, it is called 'severed feeling'; being free from the scattering and agitation of feeling, it is called the samādhi of severed feeling. Truly, because all sufferings reside within feeling, severing this feeling is called the severance of feeling-bliss. Thus the Bodhisattvabhūmi-śāstra says: 'Whatever feeling there may be is real suffering. Abiding in samādhi where feeling ceases is called the severance of feeling-bliss.' 'Cessation of feeling and ideation' designates its name specifically in contrast to the two aggregates of feeling and ideation. When ideation is terminated and feeling is gone, it is called the cessation of feeling and ideation. 'Cessation samādhi' designates its name comprehensively in contrast to all minds and mental factors. When the mind and mental dharmas are all entirely gone, it is called 'cessation'. Furthermore, when the minds conditioned by the three realms are completely exhausted, it is also called 'cessation'. Just as in the first dhyāna, although the evils of desire are extinguished, vitarka and vicāra are still present, up to the stage of neither-ideation-[nor-non-ideation], where although lower faults are extinguished, the mind of its own stage remains; on account of this meaning, they are not called 'cessation'. When one reaches this samādhi, everything whatsoever has ceased; therefore it is called 'cessation'. 'Samādhi' is as explained before. Such are the names. What is its essential nature? The treatises differ, and their explanations vary. As expounded by Buddhadeva, mental dharmas constitute its substance. Why does he make such an explanation? One who enters the cessation samādhi is still called a sentient being; if there were completely no mind, one would not be called a sentient being. Because one is a sentient being, one clearly knows that mind exists. Although its substance is mind, coarse ideation is cut off; hence it is called 'cessation'. What the Abhidharma expounds is that a dharma that is neither matter nor mind constitutes the substance of the cessation samādhi. What does this mean? That treatise declares that when mental deliberation is cut off, one attains a dharma that is neither matter nor mind, which resides in the body to substitute for the place of the mind; therefore it states that what is neither matter nor mind is its substance. Question: In this state, mental deliberation is extinguished; is the possession of mind extinguished or not? Explanation: It is not extinguished. Why is it not extinguished? Because that which can extinguish and that which is extinguished are dharmas of the same stage. Just as good in the desire realm, although extinguishing evil of the desire realm, does not extinguish the possession of that, this is also like that. Question: If because that which can extinguish and that which is extinguished are dharmas of the same stage, possession is not extinguished, then when cutting off the roots of good, where evil of the desire realm cuts off good of the desire realm, why is possession severed? Explanation: When an icchantika cuts off the roots of good, he fully uses the three paths of expedient means, unobstructedness, and liberation to cut off good; because this is extremely contrary to good, it completely severs its possession. The cessation samādhi extinguishes mind only through expedient means; therefore it does not abandon possession. Such is the Abhidharma. The Tattvasiddhi declares that the place where mind and consciousness are exhausted—the unconditioned of analytical cessation—is the substance of the cessation samādhi. Question: If one says that the place where mind and consciousness are exhausted is the substance of the cessation samādhi, then in this cessation samādhi there would be no mind or consciousness, and one ought not to be a sentient being. Furthermore, if there were no mind, how would it differ from grass and trees? The Tattvasiddhi explains: 'Because the possession of mind remains, one is still called having a mind. Because one has a mind, one is also called a sentient being, and does not resemble grass and trees.' What is the 'possession of mind'? One who enters the cessation samādhi possesses the mind of past and future lifetimes; therefore it is called 'possession of mind'. It is not like the Abhidharma, which separately posits a possession that is neither matter nor mind. In the Mahāyāna, investigating the name to grasp the meaning, the place where mind and consciousness are exhausted is the substance of the cessation samādhi. To explain it fully according to reality, within the cessation samādhi one may also be said to have a mind and may also be said to be mindless. Saying 'mindless': in the śrāvaka's cessation samādhi, there are no minds of the six consciousnesses; in the bodhisattva's cessation samādhi, there are completely no six consciousnesses, but there is partially the deluded consciousness; in the buddhas' cessation samādhi, both the sixth and seventh are entirely absent. Saying 'having a mind': within the cessation samādhi of śrāvakas and bodhisattvas, there still exists the fundamental consciousness, because the union of the true and deluded constitutes the fundamental consciousness; within the buddha's cessation samādhi, there still exists the true mind. If there is mind and consciousness, how is it 'complete cessation'? It is because coarse minds are extinguished. Such is its essential nature (this concludes the first gate).