摩訶止觀 4.188

4.188

《成論》用四支為方便，一心為定體。若然者，四禪皆有一心，一心無異，云何判四禪之別？今不用此。若《瓔珞》云：「五支皆方便，第六默然為定體。」四禪俱有默然，亦難分別。若《毘曇》，用五法為方便，五支皆為定體，所以有四禪通別之異。一心為通體，初支為別體，故云覺觀俱禪乃至捨俱禪。別支與一心同起，得簡一心有深淺異。《釋論》同此說，今亦用之。

The *Tattvasiddhi* takes four limbs as expedients and single-mindedness as the substance of concentration. If that were so, all four dhyānas possess single-mindedness; if single-mindedness does not differ, how could one determine the distinction among the four dhyānas? We do not adopt this now. If, as the *Yingluo jing* says: 'The five limbs are all expedients, and the sixth, silence, is the substance of concentration,' all four dhyānas possess silence, so it would also be difficult to distinguish them. As for the *Abhidharma*, it takes the five dharmas as expedients and all five limbs as the substance of concentration, which is why there are shared and distinctive differences among the four dhyānas. Single-mindedness is the shared substance, while the specific limbs are the distinctive substances; therefore it speaks of dhyāna co-arising with vitarka and vicāra up to dhyāna co-arising with upekṣā. The distinctive limbs arise together with single-mindedness, allowing one to differentiate the variations of depth in single-mindedness. The *Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa* agrees with this explanation, and we also adopt it now.