大乘義章 9.39

9.39

次釋其文。如經中說「過一切非想非非想處，想受滅，身作證，名滅盡定。」言過非想非非想者，論釋不同。《毘曇》釋云「過者名到，到非想地即能滅心，故名為過，非謂要斷非想煩惱超出名過。」《成實》釋云「超出名過。」故彼論言「學人能見非想地中一切行空，斷非想結，名之為過。但斷未盡，不能不生，故名學人，非是始到說之為過。」大乘法中，文無定判，唯義判之與《毘曇》同。菩薩雖未斷非想惑，隨分亦得滅盡定故。想受滅者，依如《毘曇》，理實通滅一切心法，但想及受二數強故，偏說滅之。此云何強？如論中說「煩惱法中，受為愛根、想為見本。淨法之中，受修諸禪、想修無色。故說為強。」成實非此，若說想受二數強故偏言滅者，心王最強，何故經中不說心滅？又復想受皆依心王，何不說心？若欲釋通，就主而言應云心滅。但彼滅定滅八禪心，八禪定中受修諸禪，想修無色，故對想受以彰滅矣。《成》實所立滅盡定中，滅一切心、滅一切法，通名為受。受有二種：一者想受、二者慧受，有為緣心名為想受，無為緣心名為慧受。言滅想者，明有為緣想受滅也，隱受在想，故云滅想。言滅受者，明無為緣慧受滅也，隱慧彰受，故說滅受。問曰：心滅通攝空有，何不就通說心滅乎？為彰空有二心滅故，餘經論中多同《毘曇》。身作證者，是中無心，唯有色身，定與身合，名身作證。故《成實》言「八解脫等皆是身證。」何故獨說滅定身證？答曰：是中更無有心，唯有身故。滅定如是。

Next is the explanation of the text. As the sūtra states: 'Transcending all [stages of] the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, with the cessation of perception and sensation, one directly realizes [it] with the body: this is called the meditative absorption of cessation (nirodha-samāpatti).' Regarding the phrase 'transcending neither-perception-nor-non-perception', the treatises explain it differently. The Abhidharma explains: 'Transcending means arriving; upon arriving at the stage of neither-perception[-nor-non-perception], one is able to cease the mind, and thus it is called transcending; it does not mean that one must sever the afflictions of neither-perception and pass beyond it to be called transcending.' The Tattvasiddhi explains: 'Passing beyond it is called transcending.' Therefore that treatise states: 'When a trainee (śaikṣa) can see that all conditioned formations in the stage of neither-perception are empty, and severs the fetters of neither-perception, this is called transcending. But because the severance is not yet complete, they are not yet unable to be reborn [there], and hence are called a trainee; it is not merely arriving for the first time that is spoken of as transcending.' In the Mahāyāna, the text has no definitive judgment, but judging only by the doctrine, it agrees with the Abhidharma, because a bodhisattva, even though they have not yet severed the delusions of neither-perception, also partially attains the meditative absorption of cessation according to their portion. Regarding 'the cessation of perception and sensation': according to the Abhidharma, in terms of actual principle, all mental dharmas are completely ceased; however, because the two caittas of perception and sensation are powerful, it selectively speaks of their cessation. How are they powerful? As stated in the treatise: 'Among defiled dharmas, sensation is the root of craving, and perception is the basis of view. Among pure dharmas, sensation cultivates the dhyānas, and perception cultivates the formless [absorptions]. Therefore they are spoken of as powerful.' The Tattvasiddhi rejects this: if one says that because the two caittas of perception and sensation are powerful it selectively speaks of their cessation, the mental sovereign (citta) is the most powerful; why does the sūtra not speak of the cessation of the mind? Furthermore, perception and sensation both depend on the mental sovereign; why not speak of the mind? If one wishes to resolve the contradiction, in terms of the primary [factor] one ought to say that the mind is ceased. However, because that meditative absorption of cessation ceases the mind of the eight dhyānas, and within the eight dhyāna absorptions sensation cultivates the dhyānas while perception cultivates the formless [absorptions], it is with reference to perception and sensation that cessation is made manifest. In the meditative absorption of cessation established by the Tattvasiddhi, the cessation of all mind and the cessation of all dharmas are generally called sensation. There are two kinds of sensation: first, perception-sensation; second, prajñā-sensation. The mind taking conditioned [dharmas] as its object is called perception-sensation, and the mind taking the unconditioned as its object is called prajñā-sensation. The phrase 'ceasing perception' clarifies the cessation of the perception-sensation that takes conditioned [dharmas] as its object; concealing sensation within perception, it therefore says 'ceasing perception'. The phrase 'ceasing sensation' clarifies the cessation of the prajñā-sensation that takes the unconditioned as its object; concealing prajñā and manifesting sensation, it therefore says 'ceasing sensation'. Question: The cessation of the mind comprehensively includes both emptiness and existence; why not speak generally of the cessation of the mind? [Answer:] It is in order to reveal the cessation of the two minds of emptiness and existence; other sūtras and treatises mostly agree with the Abhidharma. 'Directly realizes with the body': in this [state] there is no mind, only the physical body; when the absorption unites with the body, it is called directly realizing with the body. Therefore the Tattvasiddhi states: 'The eight liberations and so forth are all realizations with the body.' Why is it said exclusively of the meditative absorption of cessation that it is realized with the body? Answer: In this [state] there is no longer any mind, but only the body. Such is the meditative absorption of cessation.