止觀輔行傳弘決 5.20

5.20

「第一觀陰入」下，依章別解。初解陰入中，先重明境、次明修觀。初文先附小宗略釋三科，辨境離合，謂「五陰」下列名，「陰者」下，釋名。今文但以因果兩義釋名，即以因果攝餘盡故。《婆沙》中云「陰是何義？答：聚義、略義、積義、總義。如種種雜物以為一聚，色乃至識聚在一處，故名為聚。乃至含於三世內外，故名為總。」中間諸名，準說可知。問：五取蘊與蘊有何差別？答：蘊通漏無漏，取蘊唯有漏。蘊之與陰新舊異譯，蘊謂蘊積，與陰義同。準《俱舍》中，色攝五根境，及以二無作，行攝諸心所，唯除受想二，識即是心王，為今初觀境。「入者」，新名為處。《婆沙》云「入是何義？答：輸門義、輸道義、藏義、倉義、田義、流義、海義，是為入義。」隨名解釋亦應可見。今文「涉入」及以「輪門」，並是道義。然上釋義，初明根塵互相涉入。次義者，明根為外塵之所得，便由心心所流入根境，令塵得入，名為輸道。故彼論文門之與道，並是能通，使心心所得流入也。準《俱舍》中，法入最寬。界者，《婆沙》云「界是何義？分別是界義。如山中有寶，種類不同。」《俱舍》頌云「聚生門種族，是蘊處界義。」例《婆沙》文，可以意知。《俱舍》中廣以族、持、性等三義釋界。餘根、塵、識，如常可知。法界攝四，亦同法入。乃至廣以二十二門分別界義，委悉列名、辨相、出體，非今文意。唯依諸論以明開合而為觀境，故次明之。「婆沙」下，明境開合，與《俱舍》同。頌云「愚根樂三故，說蘊處界三。」愚謂迷也，根謂三品，樂謂所欲。今明觀境，不須兩義，故但從迷。言「少分」者，以法入法界中具含心色，今文略界，且從入說，故云法入含於色心成兩少分。意但是心，餘十唯色。若約界者，法界亦二，十界是色、七界是心。陰中四陰既純是心，故不須簡。於法入法界中言二少分者，以法入中有四類法，謂無表色、心所法、不相應行三無為法，是則無表是色、心所是心、不相應行非色非心。無為法者，非三聚攝，無為在下二乘境攝。得非得者，在下助道觀中。無想二定，復在禪境。餘並在此。若依經部大乘法相等，同時意識緣現五塵及落謝塵，法入所收，少分屬色、少分屬心。今且觀心，心即識也。又有宗五識及五意識并第六識，俱能引起受等三心。若依《成論》，五識定無起三心義。雖此同異，今初且觀諸識為境。問：識陰是王，有宗心王與數同起，如何別於心王修觀？答：此但宗計，意則不然。直爾觀心，義當觀王。「數人」下，兼示二論不同之相。數人即是薩婆多師，破成論師云：「心聚是一，何容前後？」論師復破薩婆多師云：「雖同心聚，四心各別，自有其體而共相應。」今並不從二論同別，但且用心為所觀境。「若就」下，且依空門以判前後。若前若後皆不得使數涉於王，故云不得「以數隔王」。數在前後、王在中央，名為數隔。是故心王非前則後。「四念」下，釋疑。疑云：何故念處王在中央？釋云：就言說便，非起次第，亦非約行。「又分別」下，正示境相三科不同。但論陰者，以界入中心界心入，則有少分、全分不同。五陰雖開，無少分故，故先約陰、後列界入。又此三科既開合異，欲以識界而為觀初，何往不得？但識名多故、陰在初故，又名略故，是故先用。故依經論明陰不同，皆從心造。見愛是穢，故兩所起名「污穢陰」，并起善惡並名造陰。初兩唯是果報陰耳。「變化」即是工巧故也。「五善根」者，總別念處但合為一，并煗等四名五方便，亦名五善根。五停但是對治五障，是故不論。念處等五，能為無漏作近方便。次引大小教證。又正法念中雖但列六，《華嚴》既云種種五陰，即通十界。「世間」下，次略示境相難思，故舉況以「寧可凡心知」。如世間陰，人中一種尚叵窮盡，況復六道陰；六道陰尚爾，況出世四聖？此中預以報陰比決，令識下文不思議陰。「凡眼」下舉譬，肉眼世智猶如凡眼。三惑所障名之為「翳」，尚不見於真諦之近，況能見於中道之遠？「彌生」下，合譬。界內偏真名為「一隅」，界外圓中名為「邊表」。四角曰隅。「如渴鹿」下，重譬不知之人，隨世色聲若偏小等，終不聞見真妙之理。「縱令」下，與而言之，但覩小法。「故大集」下，引證也。佛世值聖猶尚住小，各執一門異計不同。依毘曇門，用七方便名為常見，說異能斷；依成實門，但觀空心名為見，說一能斷。當知滅後，圓門不易。「況佛去世」者，舉佛滅後不知為況。「故龍樹」下，明佛滅後造論破計。「一」謂《毘曇》王數同時，異謂《成論》王數前後，四句三假皆如幻化。「然界內」下，欲示識心而為觀境，先且總攬心為起由，即前所引經論是也。「佛告」下，重引《阿含》、《大論》以證心造。「若欲」下，雙舉二譬。世出世陰如條如病，一念識心如根如穴。如華他治病，湯不過一種兩種、炙不過一穴兩穴。若爾，觀心即足，何故第四破遍文末更例觀於餘陰界入？答：欲融諸法示觀境遍，是故下文例餘界入。若示境體，觀心即足，以心遍故、攝餘法故。又非但心攝一切，亦乃一切攝心，故《四念處》云「非但唯識，亦乃唯聲唯香味等。」「今當」下，從廣之狹，正示境體。陰入界三並可為境，寬漫難示，故促指的。略二就陰，如「去丈就尺」，略四從識，如「去尺就寸」。以由界入所攝寬多，陰唯有為，有為之中義兼心色，故置色存心。心名復含心及心所，今且觀心王，置於心所，故初觀識。餘下例之。問：五識、五意識及第六識，並能生於受等三心，何等識心及所生三心是今觀境？答：五識、五意識定是今境，未屬煩惱，在無記故。於第六中取能招報者，仍須發得乃屬煩惱境，餘之分別方屬今境。又此五識及五意識雖在今境，仍在下文歷緣對境中明。又若探取不思議意以對喻者，則一念心十界三科如丈，一界五陰如尺，唯在識心如寸。若達心具一切法已，方能度入一切色心，如一一尺無非是寸，及一一丈無非是尺，是故丈尺全體是寸。

From "First, contemplating the aggregates and sense bases" onward, the text provides specific explanations according to the sections. In the first explanation of the aggregates and sense bases, it first clarifies the object again, and next explains the cultivation of contemplation. In the first passage, it first accords with the Hinayana tradition to briefly explain the three categories (skandhas, āyatanas, dhātus), distinguishing the combining and separating of the object: from "five aggregates" onward it lists the names, and from "'aggregates' means" onward it explains the name. The present text explains the name solely through the two meanings of cause and effect, because cause and effect completely subsume the rest. The Vibhāṣā says: "What is the meaning of aggregate (skandha)? Answer: It means accumulation, it means abbreviation, it means amassing, it means aggregate totality. Just as various mixed things form a single heap, [so] form up to consciousness gather in one place; therefore it is called an accumulation. It goes as far as encompassing the three times, the internal and external; therefore it is called an aggregate totality." The intervening names can be understood by analogy with this explanation. Question: What is the difference between the five appropriated aggregates (upādānaskandha) and the [mere] aggregates? Answer: Aggregates apply to both the contaminated and the uncontaminated, while appropriated aggregates are only contaminated. "Aggregate" as yùn and yīn are new and old translations; yùn means amassing, which is identical in meaning to yīn. According to the Kośa, form subsumes the five sense faculties and five objects, as well as the two unmanifest forms; mental formations subsume all mental concomitants, except only sensation and perception; and consciousness is the primary mind (citta-rāja)—these serve as the initial object of contemplation here. "Bases" (rù) are newly named āyatana (chù). The Vibhāṣā says: "What is the meaning of base? Answer: It means an entry gate, an entry path, a treasury, a granary, a field, a stream, an ocean—these are the meanings of base." Explaining them in accordance with their names should likewise be evident. In the present text, "mutual penetration" and "wheel gate" are both the meaning of path. Now, the above explanations of meaning: first, they explain that sense faculties and sense objects penetrate into each other. The second meaning explains that the sense faculties are obtained by external objects, and on this basis the mind and mental concomitants flow into the faculties and objects, allowing the objects to enter; this is called an entry path. Therefore, that treatise says that gate and path are both what can provide passage, causing mind and mental concomitants to flow in. According to the Kośa, the mental-object base (dharmāyatana) is the broadest. Regarding elements (dhātu), the Vibhāṣā says: "What is the meaning of element? Differentiation is the meaning of element. Just as there are treasures in a mountain whose kinds are diverse." A Kośa verse says: "Accumulation, gateway of arising, and lineage: these are the meanings of aggregate, base, and element." By analogy with the Vibhāṣā text, this can be understood conceptually. In the Kośa, element is extensively explained through the three meanings of lineage, holding, and nature. The remaining faculties, objects, and consciousnesses can be known as usual. The mental-object element (dharma-dhātu) subsumes four things, which is also the same as the mental-object base. Going as far as differentiating the meaning of element broadly through twenty-two categories, exhaustively listing names, distinguishing characteristics, and identifying their substance—this is not the intention of the present text. It relies solely on the treatises to clarify their combining and separating to serve as the object of contemplation; hence it explains this next. From "Vibhāṣā" onward, it clarifies the combining and separating of the object, which is identical to the Kośa. A verse says: "Because of delusion, faculties, and inclinations being three, the aggregates, bases, and elements are taught as three." Delusion means bewilderment; faculties refers to the three grades; inclinations refers to what is desired. Now, in clarifying the object of contemplation, the latter two meanings are not required; thus it proceeds only from delusion. Speaking of "a minor portion": because the mental-object base and the mental-object element fully encompass both mind and form, the present text abbreviates the elements and speaks provisionally from the perspective of the bases; hence it says that the mental-object base encompasses form and mind, making two minor portions. The mental faculty is only mind; the remaining ten bases are exclusively form. If evaluated by elements: the mental-object element also has two [portions], ten elements are form, and seven elements are mind. Within the aggregates, since the four aggregates are purely mind, there is no need to select among them. Speaking of "two minor portions" in the mental-object base and mental-object element: because there are four classes of dharmas in the mental-object base, namely unmanifest form, mental concomitants, non-concurrent formations, and the three unconditioned dharmas; thus unmanifest form is form, mental concomitants are mind, and non-concurrent formations are neither form nor mind. Unconditioned dharmas are not subsumed within the three aggregates; the unconditioned is subsumed below under the object of the two vehicles. Possession and non-possession are subsumed below under the contemplation on auxiliary paths. Non-conceptualization and the two absorptions are further located under the object of dhyāna. All the rest are located here. If relying on the Sautrāntika, Mahāyāna Vijñānavāda, and the like: the simultaneous mental consciousness cognizes the present five sense objects as well as past objects that have fallen away; these are subsumed by the mental-object base, a minor portion belonging to form and a minor portion belonging to mind. Now, we provisionally contemplate mind, and mind is consciousness. Furthermore, according to the Sarvāstivāda, the five consciousnesses, the five mental consciousnesses, and the sixth consciousness are all able to induce the three minds of sensation and the like. According to the Satyasiddhi, the five consciousnesses definitely have no capacity to arouse the three minds. Despite these agreements and differences, now at the beginning we provisionally contemplate all consciousnesses as the object. Question: The aggregate of consciousness is the primary mind; in the Sarvāstivāda, the primary mind arises simultaneously with the mental concomitants. How can one cultivate contemplation specifically on the primary mind? Answer: This is merely their sectarian tenet; our intention is not such. Directly contemplating the mind inherently amounts to contemplating the primary mind. From "The Sarvāstivādins" onward, the text additionally demonstrates the contrasting characteristics of the two treatises. "The Sarvāstivādins" refers to the Sarvāstivāda masters, who refute the Satyasiddhi masters, saying: "The mental cluster is one; how can it admit before and after?" The Satyasiddhi masters in turn refute the Sarvāstivāda masters, saying: "Although belonging to the same mental cluster, the four minds are each distinct, having their own essence while functioning in mutual association." Now, we do not follow the agreements or differences of the two treatises, but merely use mind as the contemplated object. From "If proceeding from" onward, the text provisionally relies on the gate of emptiness to determine before and after. Whether before or after, one must not allow the mental concomitants to intrude into the primary mind; hence it says that one must not "separate the primary mind by mental concomitants." Having mental concomitants before and after, with the primary mind in the middle, is called separation by mental concomitants. Therefore, the primary mind must be either before or after. From "The four stations of mindfulness" onward, it resolves a doubt. The doubt asks: Why in the stations of mindfulness is the primary mind in the middle? The resolution says: It is merely for convenience of verbal exposition, not an order of arising, nor is it based on practice. From "Further differentiating" onward, the text directly shows that the three categories differ in the characteristics of their objects. Discussing only the aggregates is because, among the elements and bases, the mental element and mental base differ in having minor portions versus complete portions. Although the five aggregates are separated, they contain no minor portions; therefore it first proceeds by the aggregates, and afterward lists the elements and bases. Moreover, since these three categories differ in combining and separating, if one wished to take the consciousness element as the beginning of contemplation, where would that not be acceptable? However, because consciousness has many names, because aggregates are listed first, and because the name is concise, they are used first. Therefore, the differences among aggregates clarified on the basis of sūtras and treatises all arise from the creation by the mind. Views and craving are defilement; hence what is aroused by both is called the "defiled aggregates"; also, arousing good and evil are together called "created aggregates." The first two are merely retribution aggregates. "Transformation" refers to skillful craft. The "five wholesome roots": the general and specific stations of mindfulness are combined into one, and together with the four stages of heat and the like, they are called the five provisional expedients, also called the five wholesome roots. The five methods for stilling the mind merely counteract the five hindrances; therefore they are not discussed. The five, beginning with the stations of mindfulness, are capable of serving as the proximate expedients for the uncontaminated. Next, it cites proof from the Great and Small teachings. Furthermore, although only six are listed in the Saddharmasmṛtyupasthāna Sūtra, since the Avataṃsaka Sūtra speaks of "diverse five aggregates," this extends through the ten realms. From "Worldly" onward, the text next briefly indicates that the characteristics of the object are difficult to conceive, thus raising a comparison: "how could an ordinary mind know it?" Take the worldly aggregates: even a single category among humans cannot be exhausted; how much less the aggregates of the six destinies? If the aggregates of the six destinies are already so, how much more so the four transmundane noble ones? Here, retribution aggregates are determined in advance through comparison, so that one may recognize the inconceivable aggregates discussed below. From "Ordinary eyes" onward, an analogy is raised: the physical eye and worldly knowledge are like ordinary eyes. What is obstructed by the three delusions is called a "cataract"; when one cannot even see the proximity of the truth of emptiness, how could one see the distance of the middle way? From "Proliferating yet more" onward, the analogy is applied. The biased truth within the three realms is called "one corner"; the perfect middle beyond the realms is called the "outer boundary." The four angles are called corners. From "Like a thirsty deer" onward, it reiterates the analogy of one who does not know: following worldly form and sound or biased and small [teachings], in the end they never hear or see the true and wondrous principle. From "Even if" onward, making a concession: they only perceive minor dharmas. From "Therefore the Mahāsaṃnipāta" onward, this cites proof. In the Buddha's lifetime, even meeting the sage, people still abided in the small vehicle, each clinging to one gate with different views. Relying on the Abhidharma gate, using the seven provisional expedients is called the view of permanence, teaching that differentiation can sever [defilements]; relying on the Satyasiddhi gate, merely contemplating the empty mind is called view, teaching that oneness can sever [defilements]. One should know that after the Parinirvāṇa, the perfect gate is not easy. "How much less after the Buddha passed away": this raises the lack of knowledge after the Buddha's passing as a comparison. From "Therefore Nāgārjuna" onward, this explains his composing treatises after the Buddha's passing to refute wrong views. "One" means the Abhidharma view that primary mind and mental concomitants are simultaneous; "different" means the Satyasiddhi view that primary mind and mental concomitants are sequential; the four propositions and the three provisionalities are all like illusions. From "However, within the realms" onward: wishing to point out the conscious mind as the object of contemplation, it first generally grasps the mind as the origin of arising, which is precisely what was cited above from the sūtras and treatises. From "The Buddha told" onward, it again cites the Āgamas and the Dazhidulun to verify that all is created by mind. From "If one wishes" onward, it raises two analogies together. The worldly and transmundane aggregates are like branches and diseases; the conscious mind of a single thought is like the root and the acupuncture point. Just as Hua Tuo in treating disease used decoctions of no more than one or two types, and moxibustion on no more than one or two points. If so, contemplating the mind would suffice; why at the end of the fourth section on universal refutation does it further analogously contemplate the remaining aggregates, bases, and elements? Answer: Wishing to harmonize all dharmas and show that the contemplated object is pervasive, therefore the text below draws analogies to the remaining bases and elements. If demonstrating the substance of the object, contemplating the mind suffices, because mind is pervasive and subsumes the remaining dharmas. Furthermore, not only does mind subsume all, but all also subsumes mind; hence the Four Stations of Mindfulness says: "It is not only consciousness-only, but also sound-only, scent-only, taste-only, and the like." From "Now we shall" onward, going from broad to narrow, it directly indicates the substance of the object. The three categories of aggregates, bases, and elements can all serve as objects, but being broad and diffuse, they are difficult to point out; hence it narrows them down to a specific target. Abbreviating two and proceeding to the aggregates is like "relinquishing the zhang and proceeding to the chi"; abbreviating four and following consciousness is like "relinquishing the chi and proceeding to the cun." Because what is subsumed by bases and elements is broad and numerous, whereas aggregates are solely conditioned; and among the conditioned, the meaning encompasses both mind and form, we therefore set aside form and retain mind. The name "mind" further encompasses primary mind and mental concomitants; now we provisionally contemplate the primary mind and set aside mental concomitants; hence we first contemplate consciousness. The rest below follow this by analogy. Question: The five consciousnesses, the five mental consciousnesses, and the sixth consciousness can all generate the three minds of sensation and the like; which conscious mind and which three generated minds are the present object of contemplation? Answer: The five consciousnesses and five mental consciousnesses are definitely the present object; not yet belonging to affliction, they reside in the indeterminate. Among the sixth, taking that which is capable of incurring retribution, it must still become manifest before belonging to the object of affliction; the remaining discriminations then belong to the present object. Furthermore, although these five consciousnesses and five mental consciousnesses are within the present object, they are still explained below in "applying to conditions and facing objects." Again, if anticipating the inconceivable meaning to match the analogy: the three categories of the ten realms in a single thought-moment are like the zhang; the five aggregates of a single realm are like the chi; resting solely in the conscious mind is like the cun. Only when one has realized that the mind contains all dharmas can one measure and enter into all form and mind, just as each and every chi is nothing other than cun, and each and every zhang is nothing other than chi; therefore, the whole substance of the zhang and chi is cun.