俱舍論 白話全本 · 冊8Abhidharmakośabhāṣya · Complete Vernacular · Vol. 8

〔Root 1 · First Half of Root 2〕The Four Meditative Absorptions — the Two Kinds, of Absorption and of Birth · Wholesome One-Pointedness of Mind upon a Single Object

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The various merits accomplished by knowledge (the class of the absorption free from contention, the knowledge of aspiration, and the supernormal knowledges) have already been spoken of above. There remains another class of merits, and these must next be adjudicated. Among these merits, first to be adjudicated is the “absorption” upon which they depend. What, then, among the several absorptions, is “meditative absorption”? The stanza says:

Stanza: Meditative absorption is of four stories in all, and each story is again of two kinds; of these, the kind that belongs to “birth” has already been spoken of in the Chapter on the World. As for the kind that is “absorption,” its entity is wholesome “one-pointedness of mind upon a single object”; and if one reckons together with it all the accompanying mind and mental factors, it has the five aggregates for its entity. The first story possesses the three factors of sustained thought, joy, and pleasure; the three stories thereafter withdraw the preceding factors one story at a time.

Treatise: All merits for the most part must depend upon meditative absorption in order to arise, and so the differences of meditative absorption should be adjudicated first. Meditative absorption is of four kinds in all, namely the first, the second, the third, and the fourth; and each kind again has two senses, one being “meditative absorption as absorption,” the other “meditative absorption as birth.” The entity of meditative absorption as birth has already been spoken of in the Chapter on the World — the level of the fourth meditative absorption has eight places, and the levels of the first three have three each.

The entity of meditative absorption as absorption is, spoken of generally, the “one-pointedness of mind upon a single object” gathered under the wholesome nature, since it has wholesome concentration for its own nature; and if one reckons in the mind and mental factors that arise along with it, it has the five aggregates for its entity.

What, then, is called “one-pointedness upon a single object”? It is being intent upon a single object of consciousness.

Here someone objects: if that is so, then let the very state of the mind’s being intent upon a single object be given the name “concentration,” and there is no need to establish besides it a further mental factor. The author answers: it is precisely because there is a “further dharma” able to make the mind turn upon a single object that it is called concentration; the entity of concentration is not the mind itself.

The opponent presses again: is it not that every mind arises and ceases moment by moment and that therefore every mind turns upon a single object? What need is there then for concentration?

The author answers: if you say “concentration is needed in order that the mind be undistracted in the second moment,” then as regards the concentration associated with the mind at the same moment it would be useless.

The opponent says further: and it is precisely because there is this concentration that concentration is established. The author counter-questions: why then not say straight off that it is because this mind itself turns upon a single object?

The opponent says again: and concentration is a “factor of the great ground” (a dharma present in every mind); therefore every mind ought to be turning upon a single object. The author answers: it is not so. The concentration in the remaining classes is feeble in force, and so it does not hold.

Here the treatise also records the account of one party: some masters say that the very state in which the mind turns continuously upon a single object is called concentration; the sūtras call this portion “the training in the higher mind,” and the utmost purity and excellence of mind is just the four meditative absorptions. (This account is recorded alongside; the author passes no settled judgment here.)

By what sense is the name “meditative absorption” established? Because by this dharma one is able, in stillness, to consider examiningly. What is called examining consideration is the sense of knowing as it really is — just as the sūtra says, “the mind being in absorption, it can know as it really is”; and upon this sense of “examining consideration” there is set a graph that expresses the ground, and so the name “meditative absorption” is formed. In this school’s view, examining consideration has discernment for its entity.

Someone objects: in that case every concentration ought to be called meditative absorption. The author answers: no. Only that portion which is excellent is given this name. It is as the world says that “what emits light is called the sun,” and not that a firefly or a candle may also be called the sun.

Again it is asked: on what ground does meditative absorption alone be called excellent? Answer: among all concentrations, it alone gathers the “factors,” it proceeds with calm and insight evenly matched and can consider examiningly best of all, and it obtains the names “abiding in ease in the present life” and “the pleasant mode of progress” — and so this one kind of concentration alone is called meditative absorption.

Again it is asked: if that is so, on what ground does a defiled meditative absorption also obtain this name? Answer: because it too can carry on a wrong examining consideration.

It is objected further: then there is the fault of over-extension (every wrong reflection might be called meditative absorption). Answer: there is no fault of over-extension. For the name is established only within the bounds of what resembles it, just as a spoiled seed is still called a seed. And the World-Honored One himself spoke of an “evil meditative absorption.”

How are the boundaries of the four stories established? If one-pointedness upon a single object is the entity of meditative absorption, then by what marks are the first, second, third, and fourth divided out? Answer: what possesses sustained thought, joy, and pleasure is established as the first meditative absorption. (Saying this has at the same time already made clear that it must possess applied thought, since applied and sustained thought certainly go together, as smoke and fire do; there will not be a case of having sustained thought, joy, and pleasure without applied thought at the same time.) Thereafter, story by story, the preceding factors are withdrawn, and the second, the third, and the fourth are established: withdraw sustained thought and the second remains; withdraw joy further and pleasure remains; withdraw all three and it is the fourth. Following this order, one “one-pointedness upon a single object” divides into four kinds.

〔Second Half of Root 2 · Root 3 · Root 4〕The Four Formless Absorptions — the Four Aggregates for Entity · Established by Leaving the Level Below · The Origin of Their Names

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Meditative absorption has now been adjudicated. What then of the formless? The stanza says:

Stanza: The formless too is as meditative absorption is (each divided into the two kinds, of absorption and of birth); it has the four aggregates for entity, and is divided into four stories by “leaving the level below.” Adding the preliminary stages of the upper three stories, the whole is named “the removal of the perception of form.” “Formless” means that there is no form; that after death from the formless realm the dharmas of form arise anew is from mind. The first three names, “boundless space” and the rest, are established from what is thought in the preparatory practice; the name “neither perception nor non-perception” is established because the perception there is dull and inferior.

Treatise: The formless and meditative absorption agree in number and in own nature — the same four stories, each divided into the two, absorption and birth. The formless as birth has already been spoken of above, namely what the Chapter on the World treated as “four by birth.” The entity of the formless as absorption is likewise, spoken of generally, the one-pointedness of mind upon a single object gathered under the wholesome nature; it is precisely for this reason that the stanza says “it too is thus.” Only on the side of the accompaniments must the aggregate of form be removed, since the formless realm has no form that turns along with mind.

Although the entity and mark of one-pointedness upon a single object have no difference, yet by the difference of the “leaving of the level below” at which one takes birth, it divides into four kinds: what has left the defilement of the fourth meditative absorption and taken birth is established as the sphere of boundless space; and so on until what has left the defilement of the sphere of nothingness and taken birth is established as the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception.

What does “leaving” mean? It is that by this path one is liberated from the afflictions of the level below, and this is called leaving the defilement of the level below.

These four basic absorptions, together with the preliminary stages of the upper three stories, are named as a whole “the removal of the perception of form.” The preliminary stage of the sphere of boundless space cannot obtain this name, because it still takes as object the form of the level below and gives rise to a perception of form.

Someone says: because there is no form at all there, it is called formless. The author points out that this reason does not hold, for there are those who maintain that there is form there.

On what ground, then, is the name “formless” established? Answer: because the form there is exceedingly subtle, it is called formless; just as a thing of exceedingly faint yellow may also be called “without yellow.”

Next the author presses the party maintaining “there is form in the formless realm,” story by story: granting that there is form in that realm, of what mark is that form? If it be said that there is there only the form of bodily and verbal discipline — but body and speech are both absent, so whence is discipline? Still more, there are not even the four great elements there, so whence derived form?

If it be said, “as with discipline without outflows (which does not depend upon the great elements)” — that is not so: discipline without outflows still arises in dependence upon the great elements with outflows; and moreover, in those absorptions even the “existence” of the great elements is blocked.

If it be allowed that there is there a body with faculties of form, how can it still be said that the form is exceedingly slight? If it be said that it is because the bodily measure there is small — then the fine worms in water and even the ultimate atoms ought also to be called formless, since they too are small in measure and invisible. If it be said that it is because the body there is exceedingly pure and fine — then the form-body of intermediate existence and the form-body of the form realm ought also to be called formless. If it be said that it must be pure and fine in the utmost degree — then only the summit of existence could obtain the name formless, since the bodies produced in absorption too have their better and worse; and still more, the form-body of one born in a level of meditative absorption is from the outset not something the faculties of the level below can apprehend, so wherein does it differ from the formless realm that it is not called formless?

If it be said, “the desire and form realms are named each according to its own sense, and the formless realm cannot be so named” — what principle is there in this?

The four passages of scripture adduced by the party that maintains there is form: if it be said that the sūtras speak of “lifespan conjoined with warmth,” and speak of “name-and-form and consciousness depending on one another, as two sheaves of reeds leaning together and standing,” and speak of “name-and-form having consciousness for condition,” and block “a consciousness coming and going apart from form and so on down to apart from the formations” — by these, the principle that there is form in the formless realm is established.

The author answers: this proof does not hold, and one ought to examine and consider carefully. All the passages of teaching adduced ought to be examined together — take “lifespan conjoined with warmth”: is it said with regard to all realms, or only with regard to the desire realm? “Name-and-form and consciousness depending on one another and abiding”: is it said with regard to all realms, or only with regard to the desire and form realms? “Name-and-form having consciousness for condition”: does it say that every consciousness serves as the condition of name-and-form, or that the arising of name-and-form is never without consciousness for condition? The blocking of “a consciousness coming and going apart from form and so on down to apart from the formations”: does it block “apart from any one of them severally,” or block “apart from the whole set”?

If it be said that since the text of the sūtra makes no distinction one ought not to go on examining — this account is not so, and there is a fault of over-extension. On this showing, the warmth outside ought also to be conjoined with lifespan; the name-and-form outside ought also to depend on consciousness and have consciousness for condition; and again, as the sūtra says that the four nutriments are like the four stations of consciousness, the form and formless realms ought also to have morsel nutriment. If it be said, “the sūtra says that a certain class of gods has gone beyond morsel nutriment,” and “it says further that those gods have joy for their nutriment,” and that therefore there is no such fault — then by the same token there ought not to be form in the formless realm, since the sūtra says expressly that it is “apart from form.”

Three passages of scripture the author adduces on his own side: the sūtra says, “the formless liberation is the most still of all, since it goes beyond all forms”; the sūtra says, “sentient beings of the formless have gone beyond every perception of form.” If the formless realm really had form, the intrinsic mark of that form would certainly be knowable, so how could it be said that “the perception of form is gone beyond”? If it be said that this is said with regard to “what is relative to the coarse form of the level below,” then morsel nutriment ought to be allowed in the same way (having gone beyond the coarse food of the level below, one would be called without nutriment). Still more, the meditative absorptions too go beyond the coarse form of the level below, so of them too it ought to be possible to say “apart from form,” and they too ought to be called the formless realm; and on this showing one ought also to say “apart from feeling and the rest,” since they also go beyond the coarse feelings and the rest of the level below. Since the sūtra does not speak so, it may be seen that in the formless realm form is gone beyond as a whole class, and not that feeling and the rest are gone beyond. From this it is decidedly known: in that realm there is no form.

As for the sūtra’s saying that “there is an existence that is not gone out from,” that is said of not being able to go out from within one’s own level, and does not mean not going out universally or not going out for ever.

Again, when the World-Honored One spoke of the meditative absorptions he spoke of the class of form and so on down to the class of consciousness; when he spoke of the formless he spoke only of the class of feeling and so on down to the class of consciousness, and did not speak of there being form. If there really were form in the formless, why did he not say “there is the class of form,” as he did in speaking of the meditative absorptions? Hence the reason the author has established is without the fault of “not holding.”

A hard question: in the formless realm, through many aeons, the continuum of form has been cut off; and afterwards one dies from there and is born in a lower realm — whence is the form produced? Answer: it is produced from mind, not arisen from form. That is to say: the maturation cause of the form aroused in former times has been perfumed into the mind, and that capability now ripens, and so the present form is produced out of that mind.

It is asked in return: there being no body of form there, upon what does mind turn? The author asks back: why should it not turn apart from a body? (You say it cannot, only because) in the levels below it has never been seen. In the same way, the form realm has no morsel nutriment, and upon what then does the body turn? (You too say so only because) in the levels below it has never been seen that a body turns apart from morsel nutriment. Still more, it has already been said above upon what the mind there turns.

The origin of the four names: the general name “formless” has already been explained. Are then the three names “boundless space” and the rest separate names obtained from the space and the rest that are taken as object? Answer: no. How then? Answer: in the three lower stories of the formless, in that same order, at the time of cultivating the preparatory practice one thinks respectively of “boundless space,” “boundless consciousness,” and “nothing at all,” and thereby the three names are established. The name of the fourth story is established from the dullness and inferiority of “perception”: because there is no keen perception, it obtains the name “non-perception”; and because a dull and inferior perception is still there, it is called “not non-perception.”

Although at the time of cultivating the preparatory practice one also thinks in this way — “perceptions are like a disease, like an arrow, like an abscess; if perception were altogether absent, that would be the same as the darkness of delusion; only in neither perception nor non-perception is it contrary to these, still and fine” — yet the name is not established with reference to this preparatory practice. For if one asks further, “on what ground does one think so in the preparatory practice?”, the answer must be, “because in that place perception is dull and inferior.” Hence it is just this “dullness and inferiority” that is the proper cause of the name.

〔Root 5 · Root 6〕The Eight Attainments — the Threefold Division into Savoring, Pure, and Without Outflows

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The formless has now been adjudicated. What then is “attainment”? The stanza says:

Stanza: The basic attainments are eight in all; the first seven have three kinds each, namely the attainment of savoring, the pure attainment, and the attainment without outflows; the last (the summit of existence) has only the two kinds, savoring and pure. What is called “savoring” is what is associated with craving; “pure” is the wholesome of the world; and the pure absorption is just that object which is savored by savoring; “without outflows” is the absorption that is beyond the world.

Treatise: Of the meditative absorptions and formless absorptions adjudicated above, the basic attainments are eight in all. Of these the first seven possess three kinds each; the attainment of the summit of existence has only two kinds, because this level is dull and inferior and has nothing without outflows.

The “attainment of savoring” is what is associated with craving: craving is able to savor, and hence is called savoring; and the attainment, being associated with it, thereby obtains the name of savoring.

The name “pure attainment” marks a mundane wholesome absorption: because it arises associated with the several bright and pure dharmas such as non-greed, it obtains the name pure.

That object which is savored by savoring is just the pure absorption: this moment’s pure absorption ceases and in the next moment the absorption of savoring arises; it is taking the past pure absorption as object that savoring deeply arises. At such a time, though one may be said to have “emerged from the absorption that is savored,” yet with regard to “the absorption that savors” it is called entering.

The “absorption without outflows” is the absorption beyond the world: craving cannot take it as object, and so it is not an object of savoring.

〔Root 7 · Root 8〕The Eighteen Factors of the Four Meditative Absorptions

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Among the eight attainments spoken of above, only meditative absorption gathers “factors,” and the formless has none. How many factors, then, has each of the four meditative absorptions? The stanza says:

Stanza: The first meditative absorption has five factors — applied thought, sustained thought, joy, pleasure, and absorption; the second has four — inner purity, joy, pleasure, and absorption; the third possesses five — equanimity, mindfulness, discernment, pleasure, and absorption; the fourth has four — equanimity, mindfulness, the feeling that is neither suffering nor pleasure, and absorption.

Treatise: Only within the pure and the without-outflows four meditative absorptions, the first meditative absorption possesses five factors: first applied thought, second sustained thought, third joy, fourth pleasure, fifth concentration. The concentration here the stanza states as “absorption” — concentration and absorption differ in name and are one in entity, and so the sūtra says, “the mind settled, evenly settled, is called right concentration.” This factor is also called “one-pointedness of mind upon a single object,” its sense being as explained above.

The transmitted account is: only absorption is both meditative absorption and a factor of meditative absorption; the remaining four factors are factors of meditative absorption only and not meditative absorption itself. But speaking by the sense as it really is, just as with an army of four limbs (elephant troops, horse troops, chariot troops, foot troops — each limb is also called army), so too should the remaining factors of meditative absorption be known to be.

The second meditative absorption has only four factors: first inner evenness and purity, second joy, third pleasure, fourth concentration. The third meditative absorption possesses five factors: first the equanimity that is a formation, second right mindfulness, third right discernment, fourth pleasure as feeling, fifth concentration. The fourth meditative absorption has only four factors: first the purity of the equanimity that is a formation, second the purity of mindfulness, third the feeling that is neither suffering nor pleasure, fourth concentration.

〔Root 9〕The Real Entities of the Eighteen Factors Are Only Eleven — Is Pleasure Pliancy or the Feeling of Pleasure

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The names of the factors of meditative absorption being eighteen, how many in all are the true “real entities” (the real dharmas without repetition) among them? The stanza says:

Stanza: The real entities are eleven in all. The pleasure of the first two meditative absorptions is pliancy; inner purity is the faculty of confidence; joy is the feeling of joy.

Treatise: The real entities of these factors are only eleven. The five factors of the first meditative absorption are five real entities. Three factors of the second are the same as the foregoing (joy, pleasure, concentration), and only one, the factor of inner purity, is added, which with the foregoing makes six. The concentration of the third is the same as the foregoing, and the remaining four factors are added (the equanimity that is a formation, right mindfulness, right discernment, pleasure as feeling), which with the foregoing makes ten. Three factors of the fourth are the same as the foregoing, and one factor, that which is neither suffering nor pleasure, is added, which with the foregoing makes eleven.

For this reason the treatise says that a fourfold analysis may be made: there is what is a factor of the first meditative absorption and not a factor of the second — the first alternative is applied thought and sustained thought; the second alternative is inner purity; the third alternative is joy, pleasure, and concentration; the fourth alternative is the remaining dharmas apart from those stated above. As for the remaining factors compared with one another, one should think them out for oneself according to principle.

Why is it only at the third meditative absorption that “the feeling of pleasure is added”? Because the pleasure of the first and second meditative absorptions is what is gathered under “pliancy” (and is not the feeling of pleasure).

By what reasoned proof is it known that this is pliancy? Because within the first two absorptions there is no faculty of pleasure. It is not that within the first two absorptions there is a bodily feeling of pleasure — while one is in absorption there are no five consciousnesses; nor is there a mental feeling of pleasure — for it has already been said that there is joy there; and joy is the feeling of joy, and within one mind two feelings cannot proceed together, so there is no feeling of pleasure. Nor may it be said that joy and pleasure become present by turns, for the sūtra says expressly that the first meditative absorption possesses five factors and the second four (which they possess at the same time).

Here the treatise records the account of another party: some say that there is no “mental faculty of pleasure” at all; the factor of pleasure spoken of in the three meditative absorptions is in every case the faculty of pleasure gathered under bodily feeling.

The author objects: if that is so, why does a sūtra say, “what is the faculty of pleasure? It is the bodily and mental feeling of pleasure drawn forth by the force of a contact conducive to pleasure” (expressly stating a mental feeling of pleasure)?

The opponent answers: there someone has added in the word “mental,” for the sūtras of the several schools say only “bodily.” And moreover the factor of pleasure established for the third absorption is by the sūtra itself said to be “the pleasure felt by the body.”

The author objects again: if it be said that here “mind” is called “body,” what real virtue is there in calling mind body? Still more, the pliancy of the fourth absorption is redoubled beyond the foregoing, and yet the sūtra does not say that there is a factor of pleasure there.

The opponent answers: pliancy is called pleasure only when it follows upon the feeling of pleasure. The author objects: then the pliancy of the third meditative absorption also follows upon pleasure, and it ought to be a factor of pleasure.

The opponent answers: the pliancy there is damaged by the equanimity that is a formation. The author answers: not so; that equanimity rather augments pliancy; and moreover the pliancy there surpasses that of the first two absorptions.

A sūtra the author adduces on his own side: the sūtra says, “if at some time a noble disciple realizes with his body and dwells in the full attainment of the joy born of seclusion, he has at that time abandoned five dharmas and the five dharmas he cultivates are all fulfilled . . . What are the five dharmas he cultivates? First gladness, second joy, third pliancy, fourth pleasure, fifth concentration.” This sūtra speaks of pliancy and pleasure separately, and so the pleasure of the first two absorptions is not just pliancy.

Returning to the question whether there is bodily consciousness in absorption: if it be said, how should there be bodily consciousness within absorption? Answer: there may be, and there is no fault — it is allowed that within absorption there is a “wind of pliancy” aroused by an excellent absorption, which conduces to the arising of a feeling of pleasure and touches the whole body.

If it be said that (the wind touching the body) the mind is scattered outward and absorption is destroyed — there is no such fault: this wind of pliancy is produced from an excellent absorption, and drawing forth the pleasure of the inner body, it conduces in turn to the arising of concentration.

If it be said that as soon as bodily consciousness arises it ought to be called emerging from absorption — this objection does not hold, for the reason as before.

If it be said that in dependence upon a body faculty affiliated to the desire realm the contact and consciousness of the form realm ought not to arise — answer: a consciousness arising with pliancy for condition is allowed to arise, and there is no fault.

If it be said: then in the very midst of an absorption without outflows, do not contact and bodily consciousness become without outflows? Do not make it that a part of the factors established is with outflows and a part without, for that would be contrary to principle. Answer: there is no fault of contrariety to principle. Why? Because it is allowed to say that “bodily pliancy is gathered under the factors of awakening” (it extends to both from the outset).

If it be said that this is said with regard to “conducing to the factors of awakening” — then it ought to be allowed that what is without outflows may be spoken of in the same way. If it be said that once this is allowed one contradicts the sūtras — as the sūtra says, “whatever eyes there are,” and so on at length, and the fifteen elements spoken of in that sūtra are all with outflows. Answer: there is no fault of contradicting the sūtra; that is said with an implied reference to the remaining contacts and the remaining bodily consciousnesses.

It is asked again: when a meditative absorption without outflows is present, how should a few factors be with outflows and a few without? Answer: they do not arise at the same time; what fault is there in this?

It is asked again: if joy and pleasure do not arise at the same time, then the principle of “five factors” and “four factors” does not hold. Answer: there is no fault in this either — it is with regard to “what may be present” that a factor of joy and a factor of pleasure are said to be there, just as with applied and sustained thought.

It is asked again: if applied and sustained thought too are allowed to arise at the same time, then taking what does not arise at the same time as the comparison does not hold. Answer: this is not a case of not holding — the coarse and the fine of mind are contrary to one another, and so they ought not to arise at the same time. And of “not arising at the same time” you can state no fault.

From this it may be said: in dependence upon the five factors of the first meditative absorption, by subtracting two, three, and four factors the second and the rest are established; and it is by just this principle that five factors were stated at the outset — for the sake of withdrawing the preceding story by story and establishing what follows. Because there is nothing that could be subtracted by degrees, dharmas such as perception are not entered among the factors.

Or else it should be asked: why were only five factors established at the outset? If it be said that these five assist the first absorption most excellently and are therefore established as factors — this does not hold, since mindfulness and discernment assist applied and sustained thought yet more excellently.

Although one class of persons speaks so (counting mindfulness and discernment in as well), that is not what the preceptors of former times jointly set forth, and one ought to examine and consider carefully.

What inner evenness and purity is: it should be asked, what dharma is called inner evenness and purity? Answer: this absorption, being far removed from the agitation of applied and sustained thought, proceeds with a pure continuum, and is called inner evenness and purity. Where there is the agitation of applied and sustained thought, the continuum does not proceed purely, as when a river rises in waves.

Objection: if that is so, it would have no entity of its own, and how can there be said to be eleven real entities? Answer: therefore it should be said that it is just the “faculty of confidence.” That is to say: if one has realized the second meditative absorption, then with regard to the fact that “even a level of absorption may be apart from applied and sustained thought” a deep confidence arises, and this is called inner evenness and purity. Confidence is the mark of purity, and hence the name “purity” is established; being apart from an outward even flowing, it is called “inner and even”; being pure and also inner and even, the name “inner evenness and purity” is established.

Another party is also recorded: some masters say that inner evenness and purity, concentration, applied thought, and sustained thought have no separate entities. Objection: if they have no separate entity they do not amount to mental factors. The opponent answers: a difference of the stages of mind may also be called a mental factor. The author answers: though there is this principle, it is not the tenet of my school.

The making out that joy is the feeling of joy: it was said above that “joy is the feeling of joy”; by what is it proved to be decidedly so? The author asks back: do you then say that joy is not the feeling of joy? If it be allowed as in the remaining schools, I allow it likewise.

How do the remaining schools allow that it is not the feeling of joy? They say: there is besides a “joy” that is a mental factor; the pleasure in the three absorptions is in every case the feeling of joy, and so joy and the feeling of joy are each different in entity.

The author answers: the pleasure of the three absorptions may not be called the feeling of joy, for two āgamas prove it plainly. As the Sūtra Distinguishing the Inverted says, “in order and without remainder the five faculties of grief and the rest cease; within the third absorption joy ceases without remainder; in the fourth absorption pleasure ceases without remainder”; and again a sūtra says, “in the fourth meditative absorption pleasure is cut off and suffering is cut off, and joy and grief have already sunk away before.” Hence within the third absorption there is decidedly no faculty of joy — and from this it is known that the feeling of joy is joy and not pleasure.

〔Root 10〕Which Factors Are Wanting in a Defiled Meditative Absorption

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Are the several factors of meditative absorption spoken of above all present in a defiled meditative absorption as well? Answer: no. How then? The stanza says:

Stanza: A defiled meditative absorption, in order from the first story, is respectively without “the joy and pleasure born of seclusion,” without “inner purity,” without “right mindfulness and right discernment,” and without “the purity of equanimity and mindfulness”; another party says that it is without pliancy and without the equanimity that is a formation.

Treatise: The several factors of meditative absorption spoken of above are not all present in a defiled meditative absorption. Let it be granted that one class of persons speaks so, following the marks: within the first defiled absorption there is no “joy and pleasure born of seclusion,” since it is not born from having left the afflictions; within the second defiled there is no “inner evenness and purity,” since it is disturbed and made turbid by the afflictions; within the third defiled there is no “right mindfulness and right discernment,” since it is bewildered by a defiled pleasure; within the fourth defiled there is no “purity of equanimity and mindfulness,” since it is defiled by the afflictions.

Other masters say: within the first two defiled there is only no pliancy, and within the latter two defiled only no equanimity that is a formation — because these two are gathered under the factors of the great wholesome ground (and are certainly absent from a defiled mind).

〔Root 11〕The Fourth Meditative Absorption Is Named “Unmoving” — Being Apart from the Eight Calamities

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The sūtra says that three meditative absorptions have movement and that the fourth is unmoving. With regard to what sense is this said? The stanza says:

Stanza: The fourth meditative absorption is called unmoving, because it is apart from eight calamities; the eight are applied thought, sustained thought, the four feelings, in-breath, and out-breath.

Treatise: The lower three meditative absorptions are called “having movement,” because they have calamities; the fourth meditative absorption is called “unmoving,” because it has no calamities. The calamities are eight; which eight? Applied thought, sustained thought, the four feelings (grief, suffering, joy, pleasure), in-breath, and out-breath. All eight of these calamities are absent from the fourth meditative absorption, and so the Buddha, the World-Honored One, says that it is unmoving.

Yet what the sūtra says is that “the fourth meditative absorption is not moved by applied thought, sustained thought, joy, or pleasure” (naming only four). Other masters say: the fourth meditative absorption is like a lamp within a closed room, which shines and does not waver.

〔Root 12〕The Feelings of One Born in a Level of Meditative Absorption

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Are all the feelings of meditative absorption as birth the same as those of meditative absorption as absorption? Answer: no. How then? The stanza says:

Stanza: For one born in a level of meditative absorption there are, from the first story, the three feelings of joy, pleasure, and equanimity; the second has joy and equanimity, the third pleasure and equanimity, the fourth equanimity alone — each in its own order.

Treatise: Of those born within the levels of meditative absorption, the first story has three feelings: first the feeling of joy, associated with mental consciousness; second the feeling of pleasure, associated with the three consciousnesses (eye, ear, and body consciousness); third the feeling of equanimity, associated with the four consciousnesses (eye, ear, and body consciousness together with mental consciousness). The second story has two feelings, namely joy and equanimity, both associated with mental consciousness — there is no feeling of pleasure, because there are none of the remaining consciousnesses there and because the gladness of mind is still coarse. The third story has two feelings, namely pleasure and equanimity, both associated with mental consciousness. The fourth story has one feeling only, namely the feeling of equanimity, associated with mental consciousness. Such are the differences of the feelings belonging to the levels of meditative absorption as birth.

〔Root 13〕How Those Born in the Upper Three Meditative Absorptions See, Hear, Touch, and Issue Speech

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The upper three meditative absorptions have no group of three consciousnesses and no applied or sustained thought; how then can those born there see, hear, touch, and set going manifest action? Answer: it is not that those born there have no eye consciousness and the rest; only that those consciousnesses are not affiliated to that level. Why is it said so? The stanza says:

Stanza: For one born in the upper three meditative absorptions, the three consciousnesses that arise and the mind that issues manifest action are all gathered under the first meditative absorption, and are unobscured-indeterminate alone.

Treatise: The group of three consciousnesses that arise in one born in the upper three levels, as well as the mind that issues verbal manifest action, are all affiliated to the first absorption. That one born in an upper level arouses a mind of a lower level is just as with arousing a mind of transformation, and so he is able to see, to hear, to touch, and to set going manifest speech; and these four are unobscured-indeterminate alone. He does not arouse the defiled of the level below, since he has already left the defilement of the level below; he does not arouse the wholesome of the level below, since the wholesome of the level below is too inferior.

〔Root 14〕How the Pure Attainment and the Attainment without Outflows Are First Obtained

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Thus the matters of meditative absorption have been separately explained one by one. How then is the pure attainment and the rest first obtained? The stanza says:

Stanza: In the case of “obtaining what is not accomplished at all” — the pure absorption is obtained by leaving defilement and by taking birth, that without outflows by leaving defilement, and the defiled by taking birth and by falling back.

Treatise: Of the eight basic attainments, each according to its case: if it is a matter of obtaining what is not accomplished at all, the pure absorption is obtained “by leaving defilement” and “by taking birth” — that is, at the time of leaving the defilement of a lower level while in a lower level, and at the time of dying from an upper level and being born in one’s own level. So it is for all the seven levels below; the summit of existence is otherwise, being obtained only by leaving defilement, with no case of “obtaining by birth” (since there is no level above it).

Why must it say “not accomplished at all”? In order to block the case of “obtaining some portion further when it is already accomplished” — for instance obtaining the portion conducive to penetration by preparatory practice, and obtaining the absorption of the portion conducive to falling back by falling back.

On this sense the following question and answer may be made: is there a pure absorption that is obtained by leaving defilement, relinquished by leaving defilement, obtained by falling back, and obtained by taking birth? And so on, asking in the same way. Answer: there is, namely the absorption of the portion conducive to falling back. Take the portion conducive to falling back of the first meditative absorption as an instance: it is obtained when one leaves the defilement of the desire realm, relinquished when one leaves the defilement of one’s own level, obtained again when one falls back from having left the defilement of one’s own level, and relinquished again when one falls back from having left the defilement of the desire realm; it is obtained when one is born into one’s own level from an upper level, and relinquished when one is born into a lower level from one’s own. As for what is gathered under the remaining levels, it should be thought out according to principle.

The absorption without outflows is obtained only by leaving defilement — that is, when a noble one leaves the defilement of a lower level he obtains the without-outflows of an upper level. This too is said only with regard to what “is not accomplished at all”; if it has been accomplished before, it is obtained at other times as well, as for instance obtaining the path beyond learning at the stage of the knowledge of exhaustion, and obtaining the path of learning and the path beyond learning at the time of sharpening the faculties. The rest, obtained by preparatory practice and obtained by falling back, should all be thought out according to principle.

Someone asks: is it not that by “entering into the certainty of the noble path” one is also said first to obtain an attainment without outflows? Answer: this is not settled. For one who cultivates in the gradual order has not at that time obtained a basic absorption; what is treated here is only what is decidedly obtained.

The defiled absorption is obtained by taking birth and by falling back: that is, when one dies from an upper level and is born into a lower level one obtains the defiled of the lower level; and when, having left defilement in a given level, one falls back, one obtains again the defiled of that level.

〔Root 15 · Root 16〕How Many Attainments Can Arise after One Attainment

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): After a given attainment, how many attainments can arise? The stanza says:

Stanza: After the absorption without outflows there arises the wholesome of one’s own level and of those above and below, as far as the third above and below; after the pure absorption it is likewise, and it further produces besides the defiled of its own level. After the defiled absorption there arise the pure and the defiled of its own level, and the pure of the next level below. At the time of death, after a pure absorption all may arise, and after a defiled absorption there arise the defiled of one’s own level and of the levels below.

Treatise: After an absorption without outflows there arises the wholesome of one’s own level and of the levels above and below — the “wholesome” here gathering in both the pure absorption and what is without outflows. Yet it reaches only as far as the third level above and below, since beyond that it is too far and it cannot leap so as to produce the fourth.

Hence among the seven attainments without outflows: from the first meditative absorption six can arise with nothing intervening — namely the pure and the without-outflows of one’s own level and of the second and third levels. From the sphere of nothingness seven arise with nothing intervening — namely one’s own level and the six below, while of the upper level there is only the pure. From the second meditative absorption eight arise with nothing intervening — one’s own level and the six above, together with the two of the level below. From the sphere of boundless consciousness nine arise with nothing intervening — one’s own level and the six below, together with the three of the levels above. From the third meditative absorption and the four formless (the first three of them) ten arise with nothing intervening — the eight above and below together with the two of one’s own level.

(A further restriction) A knowledge of the class of inference can with nothing intervening produce the formless; a knowledge of the dharma cannot, since a knowledge of the dharma depends upon and takes as object the levels below.

What arises after a pure attainment is likewise, and each further produces besides the defiled of its own level. Hence: after the pure of the summit of existence six arise with nothing intervening — the pure and the defiled of its own level, and the pure and the without-outflows of the level below. After the pure of the first meditative absorption seven arise with nothing intervening; from the sphere of nothingness eight; from the second absorption nine; from the sphere of consciousness ten; and from the rest eleven.

After a defiled attainment there can arise the pure and the defiled of one’s own level, together with the pure absorption of the next level below. Why? Because, oppressed by the afflictions of one’s own level, one comes to hold in esteem even the pure absorption of the level below, and so there is the case of producing from the defiled the pure absorption of the next level below.

Someone asks: only if one could rightly know the defiled and the pure could one turn from the defiled and produce the pure of a lower level; but a defiled dharma cannot rightly know, so how can it produce the pure out of the defiled? Answer: it is by the force of a prior vow. That is, one had formerly made the vow, “rather let me obtain the pure of the level below than the defiled of the level above”; the force of that prior vow turns along with the continuum, and so afterwards one can produce out of the defiled the pure absorption of the level below. It is just as when one first makes a resolve and then goes to sleep, and at the time appointed is able to wake.

What is without outflows and what is defiled certainly do not produce one another; the pure absorption can be produced by and produce them both; and so the three have this difference.

All that has been said of “the pure and the defiled producing the defiled” is said only of the pure and the defiled while in absorption. At the time of taking birth the case is otherwise: at the time of death, from a pure absorption obtained at birth every defiled can be produced with nothing intervening, one by one; and from a defiled obtained at birth every defiled of one’s own level and the defiled of the levels below can be produced with nothing intervening, one by one, but not that of an upper level, since one has not yet left the defilement of the level below.

〔Root 17 · Root 18〕The Four Portions of the Pure Absorption — Conducive to Falling Back, to Abiding, to Advancing, to Penetration

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): It was said above that “the without-outflows arises from the pure”; is it said that every kind of pure absorption can produce it? Answer: no. How then? The stanza says:

Stanza: The pure absorption is of four kinds, namely what is gathered under the portion conducive to falling back, the portion conducive to abiding, the portion conducive to advancing, and the portion conducive to penetration. In that same order they are conducive respectively to the afflictions, to one’s own level, to the upper level, and to what is without outflows. The four compared with one another can produce, in order, two, three, three, and one.

Treatise: The several pure attainments are of four kinds in all: first what is gathered under the portion conducive to falling back, second under the portion conducive to abiding, third under the portion conducive to advancing, fourth under the portion conducive to penetration. Each level has the four; the summit of existence has only three — because there is no level above it to which one might proceed, and so that level has nothing gathered under the portion conducive to advancing.

Of these four, only the fourth portion can produce what is without outflows. Why? Because these four have these marks: the portion conducive to falling back is conducive to the afflictions, the portion conducive to abiding is conducive to one’s own level, the portion conducive to advancing is conducive to the upper level, and the portion conducive to penetration is conducive to what is without outflows; and so the several without-outflows are produced from this portion alone.

The way the four produce one another, compared one with another, is this: the first can produce two, namely those conducive to falling back and to abiding; the second can produce three, excepting that conducive to penetration; the third can produce three, excepting that conducive to falling back; the fourth produces one only, namely itself, and not the rest.

〔Root 19〕How the Leaping Attainment Is Cultivated

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): As said above, both the pure absorption and the without-outflows can leap as far as the third level above and below. How then is a practitioner to cultivate the leaping attainment? The stanza says:

Stanza: The wholesome basic attainments are divided into two classes, and there are ascending and descending, even and alternating, adjacent and leaping; when one can perform the “alternating leap,” it counts as cultivated. This is confined to those beyond learning of keen faculties in the three continents.

Treatise: The wholesome attainments of the basic levels divide into two classes: first with outflows, second without outflows. Going upward is called “ascending” and returning downward “descending”; the same class is called “even” and a different class “alternating”; the adjacent is called “next” and passing over one is called “leaping.”

The practitioner who cultivates the leaping absorption first, upon the eight levels of attainment with outflows, makes them present ascending and descending, even and next, and practices this over and over; next, upon the seven levels of attainment without outflows, makes them present ascending and descending, even and next, and practices this over and over; next, upon the attainments with and without outflows, makes them present ascending and descending, alternating and next, and practices this over and over; next, upon those with outflows, makes them present ascending and descending, even and leaping, and practices this over and over; next, upon those without outflows, makes them present ascending and descending, even and leaping, and practices this over and over — this is called “the fulfilling of the preparatory practice of cultivating the leap.” Last, upon the attainments with and without outflows he performs the ascending and descending, alternating and leaping, and only then is it called the accomplishment of the leaping absorption.

The “leaping” here can pass over only one, since beyond that it is too far and one cannot leap into the fourth.

Those who cultivate the leaping attainment are confined to men of the three continents and to those arhats whose liberation does not depend upon circumstance — because they have mastery over absorption and are without afflictions. Those whose liberation depends upon circumstance, though without afflictions, have no mastery over absorption; those attained through view, though they have mastery over absorption, still have remaining afflictions: and so neither can cultivate the leaping attainment.

〔Root 20〕Upon What Body the Several Attainments Arise

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Upon what body do these attainments arise? The stanza says:

Stanza: The several absorptions arise in dependence upon a body of one’s own level and of the levels below, and not upon an upper one, since that is of no use. Only a noble one born at the summit of existence arouses an absorption of a lower level so as to exhaust the remaining afflictions.

Treatise: The arising of the several attainments is in dependence upon a body of one’s own level and of the levels below. In dependence upon a body of an upper level there is no way to arouse an absorption of a lower level — because for an upper level to arouse a lower is of no use, because one has an excellent absorption of one’s own, because the force of the lower is feeble and inferior, because it has already been cast away, and because it is fit to be spurned.

Though the general mark is thus, yet if one speaks in detail: a noble one born at the summit of existence must arouse the absorption of the sphere of nothingness without outflows, in order to exhaust the remaining afflictions of his own level — because in his own level there is no noble path he might delight in and arouse, and because the sphere of nothingness is the nearest; and so he makes it present and exhausts the remaining afflictions.

〔Root 21〕What Objects the Several Attainments Take

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Taking what object do these attainments arise? The stanza says:

Stanza: The absorption of savoring takes as object only what is affiliated to its own level; the pure and the without-outflows can take objects universally. The wholesome formless absorptions gathered under the basic levels do not take as object the dharmas with outflows of the level below.

Treatise: The absorption of savoring takes as object only what is with outflows of its own level, and certainly does not take the level below — because it has already left the defilement of the level below; nor the level above — because the level loved is a separate one; nor what is without outflows — because (were it to take that as object) it would have to become wholesome.

The pure and the without-outflows can universally take as object the conditioned and unconditioned of their own level and of the levels above and below, all of which may serve them as object. Wherein there is a difference: an indeterminate unconditioned (cessation independent of discernment) is not the object of an absorption without outflows.

The wholesome formless absorptions gathered under the basic levels do not take as object the dharmas with outflows of the level below; as for the dharmas of their own level and of the levels above, there is none they cannot take as object. Though they can also take as object what is without outflows of the level below, that is taking as object the path of the class of the knowledge of inference and not that of the class of the knowledge of the dharma; nor can they take as object the cessation of the several dharmas of the level below.

As for the preliminary stages of the formless, these do take the level below as object — because their uninterrupted path must take the level below as object.

〔First Half of Root 22〕Which Absorption Can Cut Off the Afflictions

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Among the three attainments of savoring, pure, and without outflows, which has the power to cut off the several afflictions? The stanza says:

Stanza: What is without outflows can cut off the afflictions, and so can the preliminary stages of the several pure absorptions.

Treatise: All absorptions without outflows can cut off the afflictions. The basic pure absorption does not even have this power, still less can a defiled absorption cut off the afflictions. (Why the basic pure absorption cannot cut off) It cannot cut off the level below, because it has already left the defilement of the level below; it cannot cut off its own level, because it is bound by its own level; it cannot cut off the level above, because the level above surpasses it.

As for the pure preliminary stages, these too can cut off the afflictions, because they can every one of them cut off the afflictions of the next level below. The pure absorption gathered under the intermediate absorption, however, cannot cut off.

〔Second Half of Root 22〕How Many Preliminary-Stage Absorptions There Are · With What Feeling They Are Associated

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): How many preliminary-stage absorptions are there? With what feeling are they associated? Do they possess all three of savoring, pure, and without outflows? The stanza says:

Stanza: The preliminary stages are eight, all associated with the feeling of equanimity, and all gathered under the pure; the first also extends to what is without outflows; another account gives it all three.

Treatise: The several preliminary-stage absorptions are eight in number too, because they serve as the gateways of the eight basic absorptions. They are all associated with one kind of feeling only, that of equanimity — because they proceed by applying effort, and because they have not yet left the dread of the level below.

These eight preliminary stages are all gathered under the pure absorption; only the first preliminary stage (access concentration) also extends to what is without outflows. They are all without anything associated with savoring, since they are the path of leaving defilement. (Someone asks: does not the mind of a preliminary stage also have the defilement of linking to a new birth?) Though the mind of a preliminary stage has the defilement of linking to a new birth, yet here it is said so with reference to “blocking out the defilement of absorption.”

Another account: access concentration too has something associated with savoring — because before one has aroused a basic absorption one is greedy even for this access concentration; and by this access concentration comes to possess all three kinds.

Next it is asked concerning the intermediate meditative absorption: is there any difference between the intermediate meditative absorption and the several preliminary-stage absorptions, or is there also a divergence? Answer: in sense too there is a divergence. That is to say: the several preliminary stages are for the sake of leaving the defilement of the level below and are the cause of entering a basic absorption; the intermediate absorption is not so. Besides this there are still other divergences, and the stanza says:

〔First Half of Root 23〕The Intermediate Meditative Absorption

Stanza: The intermediate meditative absorption is without applied thought, possesses the three kinds (savoring, pure, and without outflows), and is associated with the feeling of equanimity alone.

Treatise: The first basic absorption and its preliminary stage are associated with applied and sustained thought; among the seven absorptions above there is neither applied nor sustained thought; only the intermediate meditative absorption has sustained thought without applied thought, and so it surpasses the first absorption and has not yet come up to the second — and it is with reference to this sense that the name “intermediate” is established. It is for this reason too that there is no intermediate meditative absorption above, since within one and the same level there is no such rising and descending.

This absorption possesses all three kinds, savoring, pure, and without outflows, because it has excellent virtues that may be savored with craving. Like the several preliminary-stage absorptions, it is associated with equanimity alone — because it proceeds by applying effort. And for this reason it is said to be gathered under “the painful mode of progress.”

This absorption can draw down the result of the station of Mahābrahmā, and one who cultivates it much becomes a Mahābrahmā.

〔Second Half of Root 23〕The Three Concentrations — with Applied and Sustained Thought · with Sustained Thought Alone · with Neither

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The attainments have now been spoken of. What then is “concentration”? The sūtra says that concentration is of three kinds in all: first with applied and sustained thought, second with sustained thought alone and no applied thought, third with neither applied nor sustained thought. What are their marks? The stanza says:

Stanza: The first meditative absorption and what is below it have applied and sustained thought; the intermediate absorption has sustained thought alone; above them there is neither.

Treatise: “Concentration with applied and sustained thought” is the concentration associated with applied and sustained thought — this is gathered under the first meditative absorption and access concentration. “Concentration with sustained thought alone and no applied thought” is the concentration associated with sustained thought alone — this is gathered under the level of the intermediate meditative absorption. “Concentration with neither applied nor sustained thought” is the concentration not associated with applied and sustained thought — this is gathered under everything from the preliminary stage of the second meditative absorption as far as the sphere of neither perception nor non-perception.

〔Root 24 · First Half of Root 25〕The Three Concentrations of Emptiness, Wishlessness, and Signlessness

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The sūtra speaks besides of three concentrations: first emptiness, second wishlessness, third signlessness. What are their marks? The stanza says:

Stanza: Emptiness is the two modes of apprehension, empty and not-self; signlessness is the four modes of apprehension of the truth of cessation; wishlessness is the remaining ten modes of apprehension — all of them being associated with the modes of apprehension of the truths. These three extend to both the pure and the without-outflows; those among them that are without outflows are called the three gates of liberation.

Treatise: The concentration of emptiness is the concentration associated with the two modes of apprehension, “empty” and “not-self.”

The concentration of signlessness is the concentration associated with the four modes of apprehension that take the truth of cessation as object. Nirvāṇa is apart from ten signs, and so it is called signless; and the concentration that takes it as object thereby obtains the name signless. Which are the ten signs? They are the five objects such as visible form, the two of male and female, and the three marks of the conditioned (arising, abiding-and-change, and cessation).

The concentration of wishlessness is the concentration associated with the ten modes of apprehension that take as object the remaining truths — since impermanence, suffering, and the causes of the origin are fit to be spurned, and the path is like a raft which in the end must be relinquished, the absorption able to take them as object obtains the name “wishless,” all of it being for the sake of passing beyond what is presently to be counteracted. As for the two modes of apprehension “empty” and “not-self,” these are not what is spurned and relinquished, because they resemble the mark of nirvāṇa.

Each of these three has two classes, namely the pure and the without-outflows, since the concentration of the world and that beyond the world are distinct. What is gathered under the world extends to eleven levels; what is gathered under the beyond-worldly extends to nine levels alone. Those among them that are without outflows are called “the three gates of liberation,” because they can serve as the gateway to nirvāṇa.

〔Second Half of Root 25 · Root 26〕The Threefold Redoubled Concentration — Emptiness of Emptiness, Wishlessness of Wishlessness, Signlessness of Signlessness

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The sūtra speaks besides of three redoubled concentrations: first emptiness of emptiness, second wishlessness of wishlessness, third signlessness of signlessness. What are their marks? The stanza says:

Stanza: Of the threefold redoubled concentration the first two take as object an absorption of the stage beyond learning, apprehending respectively the sign “empty” and the sign “impermanent”; the last takes as object the cessation independent of discernment of the signless absorption of the stage beyond learning, apprehending the sign “still.” These three are with outflows alone, can be aroused by men alone and by those whose liberation does not depend upon circumstance alone, and rest upon eleven levels, seven preliminary stages being excepted.

Treatise: These three concentrations take as object the foregoing emptiness and the rest and apprehend the signs of emptiness and the rest, and so the names “emptiness of emptiness” and the rest are established.

The concentration of emptiness of emptiness takes as object the foregoing concentration of emptiness of the stage beyond learning and apprehends its sign “empty” — because the sign “empty” is more conducive to spurning than the sign “not-self.”

Wishlessness of wishlessness takes as object the foregoing concentration of wishlessness of the stage beyond learning and apprehends the sign “impermanent”; it does not apprehend the signs “suffering” and “cause,” because (the path without outflows that it takes as object) is not what such signs without outflows should have (suffering and the cause of the origin being signs of what is with outflows); nor does it apprehend the signs “path” and the rest, because that is what is to be spurned and relinquished.

Signlessness of signlessness takes as object precisely the cessation independent of discernment of the signless concentration of the stage beyond learning — because a dharma without outflows has no cessation through discernment to speak of. It apprehends only the sign “still,” and does not apprehend the three signs “cessation,” “excellent,” and “separation” — because (cessation independent of discernment) is confusable with the cessation that is impermanence, because it is of indeterminate nature, and because it is not the result of release from bondage.

These three concentrations are with outflows alone, because they spurn and turn from the noble path; what is without outflows would not be so. Only men of the three continents and those whose liberation does not depend upon circumstance can arouse such redoubled concentrations. They rest upon eleven levels, seven preliminary stages being excepted — namely the desire realm, access concentration, the eight basic absorptions, and the intermediate absorption.

〔Root 27 · Root 28〕The Four Kinds of Cultivating Concentration

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The sūtra speaks besides of four kinds of cultivating concentration: first for abiding in the ease of the present life, second for obtaining superior knowledge and vision, third for obtaining discriminating discernment, fourth for the everlasting exhaustion of the outflows one cultivates concentration. What are their marks? The stanza says:

Stanza: For obtaining the ease of the present life, one cultivates the several wholesome meditative absorptions; for obtaining superior knowledge and vision, one cultivates the purified supernormal knowledge of the divine eye; for obtaining discriminating discernment, one cultivates the several wholesome things of preparatory practice; for obtaining the exhaustion of the outflows, one cultivates the vajra-like concentration.

Treatise: As the sūtra says, “there is a cultivating of concentration such that by practicing it, cultivating it, and doing much of it one can obtain an abiding in present ease,” and so on at length. The word “wholesome” here gathers in both the pure absorption and the without-outflows. By cultivating the several wholesome meditative absorptions one can obtain an abiding in the ease of the present life. The sūtra speaks only of the first meditative absorption; that is adducing the first so as to show the rest, and in principle it extends in truth to the remaining meditative absorptions.

That it does not say “for abiding in the ease of a later life” is because the ease of a later life is not an abiding that is settled — one may fall back, or be born above, or attain final nirvāṇa, and then one does not abide.

If in dependence upon the several absorptions one cultivates the supernormal knowledge of the divine eye, one is able to obtain superior knowledge and vision. If one cultivates the several wholesome things of preparatory practice of the three realms and the wholesome without outflows, one obtains discriminating discernment. If one cultivates the vajra-like concentration, one obtains the everlasting exhaustion of the outflows.

In principle the cultivation of the vajra-like concentration extends in truth to all the levels, while the sūtra speaks only of the fourth meditative absorption — the transmitted account is that the World-Honored One spoke with reference to his own (the level upon which he depended when he awakened).

〔Roots 29–31〕The Four Immeasurables — Loving-Kindness, Compassion, Sympathetic Joy, and Equanimity

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes · Fascicle Twenty-Nine): Thus the absorptions relied upon have been spoken of; next are to be adjudicated the several merits that arise in dependence upon absorption. Among the several merits, the four immeasurables are adjudicated first. The stanza says:

Stanza: The immeasurables are of four kinds, because they counteract the four obstructions of hatred and the rest. Loving-kindness and compassion have non-hatred for their nature, sympathetic joy is the feeling of joy, and equanimity has non-greed for its nature. Their modes of apprehension are, in order, to give ease, to draw out suffering, to be glad on behalf of sentient beings, and to be even toward sentient beings; and all of them take the sentient beings of the desire realm as object. Sympathetic joy rests upon the first two meditative absorptions; the other three upon six levels, or by another account five, or by another ten. They cannot cut off the several afflictions. Only men can arouse them, and when aroused three are necessarily accomplished.

Treatise: The immeasurables are four: first loving-kindness, second compassion, third sympathetic joy, fourth equanimity. They are called “immeasurable” because they take immeasurable sentient beings as object, because they draw forth immeasurable merit, and because they draw down an immeasurable result.

Why are there only four kinds? Because they counteract four obstructions that are much practiced. Which four obstructions? They are hatred, harmfulness, want of gladness, and greed for desire together with hatred. Counteracting these four, the four immeasurables of loving-kindness and the rest are established in that order.

Someone asks: the contemplation of the impure and the immeasurable of equanimity both counteract greed for desire; what difference is there between them? Answer: one account is that greed for desire is of two kinds, first greed for visible color, second greed for sexual union, which the impure and equanimity counteract in that order. In principle the impure in truth counteracts sexual greed, and the remaining greed toward those dear to one is counteracted by equanimity.

Of the four, the entity of the first two (loving-kindness and compassion) is non-hatred. In principle it should in truth be said: compassion is “non-harming,” sympathetic joy is the feeling of joy, and equanimity is just non-greed. If one reckons them together with their retinue, they have the five aggregates for entity.

Someone asks: if equanimity has non-greed for its nature, how can it counteract hatred? Answer: the hatred counteracted here is drawn forth by greed; and in principle it should in truth take the two dharmas (non-greed and non-hatred) for its entity.

The distinction of the modes of apprehension of the four: “How may the classes of sentient beings obtain such ease?” — thinking thus, one enters the attainment of loving-kindness. “How may the classes of sentient beings be freed from such suffering?” — thinking thus, one enters the attainment of compassion. “That the classes of sentient beings should obtain ease and be freed from suffering — is that not a joy!” — thinking thus, one enters the attainment of sympathetic joy. “The classes of sentient beings are even, even, with no distinction of dear and hostile.” — thinking thus, one enters the attainment of equanimity.

Whether they are inverted: these four immeasurables cannot really make others obtain ease and the rest; are they not then inverted? Answer: because it is only a wish and desire that they should obtain ease and the rest; or because that “disposition” (āśaya) is not inverted; and again because they arise associated with a perception of resolve.

Further, even granting that they were inverted, what fault would there be? If it be said, “then they ought not to be wholesome,” the principle is not so, for they arise associated with the wholesome roots. If it be said, “then they ought to draw forth what is evil,” the principle is not so either, for by their force they can counteract hatred and the rest.

The object taken and what is counteracted: these four immeasurables take as object all sentient beings of the desire realm, because what they counteract is just the hatred and the other obstructions that arise taking the sentient beings of the desire realm as object. As for the sūtra’s saying, “in cultivating loving-kindness and the rest one thinks upon one quarter and all worlds,” that is adducing the receptacle world so as to show the sentient beings within the receptacle.

The levels they rest upon: the third kind (the immeasurable of sympathetic joy) rests upon the first two meditative absorptions alone, because it is gathered under the feeling of joy, and the remaining levels of absorption have no feeling of joy. The other three extend to six levels, namely the four meditative absorptions, access concentration, and the intermediate absorption. Or some maintain that they rest upon five levels only, access concentration being excepted, because (the immeasurables) are a merit of leisured ease and only one who has already left desire can arouse them. Or some maintain that these four immeasurables, each according to its case, extend to ten levels, namely the desire realm, the four basic absorptions, the four preliminary stages, and the intermediate absorption — this position would have the levels of absorption and what is not of a level of absorption, the basic and the preparatory, all gathered in by the immeasurables.

Whether they can cut off the afflictions: though it was said above that they can counteract the four obstructions, yet they cannot make the several afflictions really be cut off — because they are gathered under a basic meditative absorption with outflows, because they arise associated with an attention through resolve, and because they take all sentient beings universally as their object. What they can do is at the stage of preparatory practice to hold down hatred and the rest, or to make what has already been cut off yet further removed.

That it was said above that they can counteract the four obstructions is to say this: in the desire realm and in access concentration there are also loving-kindness and the rest, resembling the basic immeasurables that are to be accomplished; when by this resembling immeasurable one has held down hatred and the other obstructions, one draws forth and produces the path that cuts off, and only then can cut off the several afflictions; and the several afflictions being cut off, it is at the stage of leaving defilement that one obtains the basic four immeasurables. At that stage, even meeting with a strong condition, one is not overborne by hatred and the rest.

How loving-kindness is first cultivated: at the stage of first taking up the work, how is loving-kindness cultivated? One first thinks upon the ease one has oneself received, or upon the pleasures said to be received by Buddhas, bodhisattvas, śrāvakas, and pratyekabuddhas, and then gives rise to the thought: “May all sentient beings alike receive such pleasure.”

If his afflictions are strong from the outset, so that he cannot move his mind evenly in this way, he should divide sentient beings into three classes, namely dear ones, those in between, and hostile ones. The dear are further divided into three classes, namely high, middle, and low; those in between are one class only; the hostile are also divided into three classes, namely low, middle, and high — seven classes in all.

Having divided the classes, he first gives rise to a sincere resolve of giving ease toward the “high dear”; and this wish being accomplished, he cultivates such a resolve by degrees toward the middle and low dear as well. Having obtained evenness toward the three classes of the dear, he cultivates such a resolve by degrees toward those in between, and toward the low, middle, and high hostile as well. By the force of repeated cultivation he becomes able to give rise, toward the “high hostile,” to a wish of giving ease equal to that toward the “high dear.”

This resolve being cultivated and made irreversible, he next makes it grow wide by degrees upon its object — by degrees conveying his thought to one town, one country, one quarter, and all worlds, so that the mode of apprehension of giving ease is everywhere full. This is called the accomplished cultivation of the immeasurable of loving-kindness.

One who as regards sentient beings delights to seek their virtues can make the absorption of loving-kindness be accomplished quickly; one who delights to seek their faults cannot. For even one who has cut off the wholesome roots has virtues that may be set down, and even a pratyekabuddha of the rhinoceros-horn kind has faults that may be picked out — the results of former meritorious and sinful actions are now all in view (so that whether one seeks virtues or faults, both are to be found, and the difference lies only in one’s own bent).

The way of cultivating compassion and of cultivating sympathetic joy should be known by comparison with this: namely, contemplating that sentient beings are sunk in the great sea of the several sufferings, one wishes that they may all be liberated; and thinking that sentient beings obtain ease and are freed from suffering, one is deeply glad, “how joyful indeed!”

In cultivating equanimity, one begins the cultivation from those “in between,” and by degrees becomes able to give rise toward the “high dear” to an even mind equal to that toward those in between.

The body they rest upon and their accomplishment: these four immeasurables can be aroused by men alone, and not by the other destinies. As one obtains any one of them, three are necessarily accomplished. Those born in the third meditative absorption and the like alone fail to accomplish sympathetic joy (because there is no feeling of joy there).

〔Roots 32–34〕The Eight Liberations

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The immeasurables have now been adjudicated; next the liberations are adjudicated. The stanza says:

Stanza: The liberations are eight. The first three have non-greed for their nature — two, two, one, one being the levels they severally rest upon. The fourth class is the wholesome of the four formless absorptions. The liberation of the cessation of feeling and perception arises with nothing intervening after the “exceedingly subtle mind.” One emerges by a pure mind of one’s own level or by what is without outflows of the level below. The object of the first three is the visible form of the desire realm; the object of the latter four is the truths of suffering, origin, and cessation of one’s own and the upper levels, the path of the class of inference, cessation independent of discernment, and space.

Treatise: The liberations are eight: first the liberation “with perception of form within, one contemplates forms without”; second the liberation “without perception of form within, one contemplates forms without”; third “the pure liberation, realizing it with the body and dwelling in its full attainment”; fourth, taking the four formless absorptions as the next four liberations; and the absorption of the cessation of feeling and perception as the eighth liberation.

Of the eight, the first three have non-greed for their nature, because they are the near counteragent of greed. That the sūtra speaks of “perception” and “contemplation” is because perception and contemplation are strong there. Of the three, the first two proceed upon the impure mark, making the several modes of apprehension of the livid and the rest; the third proceeds upon the pure mark, making the mode of apprehension of what is pure and bright. All three, together with their accompaniments, have the five aggregates for their nature.

The first two liberations extend, each of them, to the first two meditative absorptions, because they must counteract the greed for visible color within the desire realm and the first meditative absorption. The third liberation rests upon the latter meditative absorption (the fourth), because it is apart from the eight calamities and its mind is clear and pure. The remaining levels too have resembling liberations, and yet these are not established as liberations, because they are not dominant.

The next four liberations have, in that same order, the wholesome of the four formless absorptions for their nature. They are not the indeterminate and the defiled, because these are not liberation; nor are they the unconcentrated wholesome, because its nature is too feeble and inferior (the unconcentrated wholesome being, for instance, the mind at the time of death; and another account says that at other times too there is unconcentrated wholesome).

The path of liberation of a preliminary stage also obtains the name of liberation; the uninterrupted path does not, because it takes the level below as object. Only when one turns his back on the level below is it called liberation. Yet in most other places only the basic levels are said to be liberations, because within the preliminary stages it is not the whole portion (that may be called liberation).

The eighth liberation is just the absorption of cessation, its own nature and the rest being as already said above. Because one turns his back in spurning feeling and perception and thereupon arouses this absorption, or because one turns his back in spurning all that has an object at all, this absorption of cessation obtains the name “liberation.” Another account says: it is because it liberates from the obstruction to absorption (that it is called liberation).

It becomes present after an “exceedingly subtle mind”: the mind that formerly counteracted perception is already called subtle, and this one is more subtle still, and so it is called “exceedingly subtle.” Following such a mind, one enters the absorption of cessation. When emerging from the absorption of cessation, one either arouses the pure mind of absorption of the summit of existence, or is able to arouse the mind without outflows of the sphere of nothingness. Such a mind of entering is with outflows alone, while one emerges by way of both a mind with outflows and a mind without outflows.

Of the eight, the first three take the sphere of visible form of the desire realm alone as their object. Wherein there is a difference: the object of two of them is what is repugnant (the livid and the rest), and the object of one is what is lovely (pure visible form). The next four liberations take, each of them, the truths of suffering, origin, and cessation of their own and the upper levels, together with the path of the class of the knowledge of inference of all levels, and their cessation independent of discernment and space, for the objects they take.

Why is there no liberation in the third meditative absorption? Because within the third absorption there is no greed for visible color, and because one is disturbed by the excellent pleasure of one’s own level.

For what is the pure liberation cultivated? For the sake of making the mind for a while glad. The foregoing contemplation of the impure makes the mind sunken and sad; now one cultivates the contemplation of the pure, to rouse and set it going so that it be glad. Or else it is for the sake of knowing examiningly one’s own capability — namely, to test whether the contemplation of the impure cultivated before is accomplished or not: only if, contemplating the pure mark, the afflictions do not arise, is it accomplished.

For two reasons the several yogins cultivate the liberations and the rest: first, in order that the several afflictions already cut off be yet further removed; second, in order to obtain excellent mastery over absorption. For this reason they can draw forth such merits as the absorption free from contention, and the noble supernormal powers, by which they are able to transform the several things and set going the several functions of retaining, relinquishing, and the rest.

Why does the sūtra speak of “realizing with the body” only in the third and the eighth, and not in the remaining six? Because among the eight these two are the most excellent, and because within the two realms (the form realm and the formless realm) each of them stands at the border.

〔Root 35〕The Eight Bases of Mastery

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The liberations have now been adjudicated; next the bases of mastery are adjudicated. The stanza says:

Stanza: The bases of mastery are eight. The first two are as the first liberation, the next two as the second liberation, and the latter four as the third liberation.

Treatise: The bases of mastery are eight: first, with perception of form within, one contemplates few forms without; second, with perception of form within, one contemplates many forms without; third, without perception of form within, one contemplates few forms without; fourth, without perception of form within, one contemplates many forms without; and adding the four of contemplating, without perception of form within, the blue, yellow, red, and white without, these with the foregoing make eight.

Of the eight, the first two are as the first liberation, the next two as the second liberation, and the latter four as the third liberation.

Someone asks: if that is so, what difference is there between the eight bases of mastery and the three liberations? Answer: in the foregoing cultivating of the liberations one can only “cast away and turn from” what is taken as object; in the latter cultivating of the bases of mastery one can “master” what is taken as object — one contemplates as one pleases, and the afflictions in the end do not arise.

〔Root 36〕The Ten Totalities

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The bases of mastery have now been adjudicated; next the totalities are adjudicated. The stanza says:

Stanza: The totalities are ten. The first eight are as the pure liberation; the latter two are the purified formless absorptions, taking as object the four aggregates of their own level.

Treatise: The totalities are ten, namely contemplating universally earth, water, fire, wind, blue, yellow, red, and white, together with the sphere of boundless space and the sphere of boundless consciousness. In every place one contemplates universally with no gap at all, and so they are called totalities.

Of the ten, the first eight are as the pure liberation — namely, the own nature of all eight is non-greed; reckoned together with their accompaniments they have the five aggregates for nature; they rest upon the fourth meditative absorption; and they take as object the visible form of the desire realm. (Other masters say: only the totality of wind takes as its object the wind element among the tangibles.)

The latter two totalities have, in that same order, the two purified formless absorptions of space and consciousness for their own nature, and take as object the four aggregates of their own level.

It should be known: one who cultivates contemplation goes from the several liberations into the several bases of mastery, and from the several bases of mastery into the several totalities — because each latter arises as more excellent than each former.

〔Root 37〕By What the Merits of the Three Gates, Liberation and the Rest, Are Obtained · Upon What Body They Arise

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): These three gates of merit — the liberations, the bases of mastery, and the totalities — by what are they obtained? Upon what body do they arise? The stanza says:

Stanza: The absorption of cessation is as adjudicated above; the rest extend to two ways of obtaining. The formless ones arise in dependence upon a body of the three realms; the rest can be aroused by men alone.

Treatise: The eighth liberation is as adjudicated above, because it is just the foregoing absorption of cessation.

The remaining liberations and the rest extend to two ways of obtaining, namely obtaining by leaving defilement and obtaining by preparatory practice — because there are those that have been practiced before and those that have not been practiced before.

The four formless liberations and the two formless totalities arise, each of them, in dependence upon a body of any of the three realms; the rest can be aroused by men alone. By the force of the teaching, both ordinary beings and noble ones are able to make them present.

〔Root 38〕By What Condition Those Born in the Two Upper Realms Arouse Absorption

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): Those sentient beings born in the form realm and the formless realm — by what particular condition do they arouse meditative absorption and the formless absorptions? The stanza says:

Stanza: In the two realms it is by the force of cause and by the force of action that the formless absorptions can be aroused; and where one is born in the form realm and arouses meditative absorption, it may also be by the force of the nature of things.

Treatise: Those born in the two upper realms are able, by three conditions in all, to go on and draw forth the absorptions of the form realm and the formless realm:

First, by the “force of cause” — namely, having drawn near and repeatedly cultivated them in former times, this serves as the cause of their arising.

Second, by the “force of action” — namely, having formerly done an action to be experienced in a later life that draws down birth in an upper level, the maturation of that action is about to become present, and its force is able to make him go on and arouse that absorption; for if he had not left the afflictions of the level below, it would certainly be impossible to be born into an upper level.

Third, by the “force of the nature of things” — namely, when the receptacle world is about to be dissolved, sentient beings of the levels below by the nature of things are able to arouse the meditative absorptions of the upper levels; because at that time all wholesome dharmas increase by the force of the nature of things.

Those born within the two upper realms who arouse the formless absorptions do so by the force of cause and the force of action, and not by the force of the nature of things — because the Anabhraka Heaven and the rest are not destroyed by the three catastrophes. When one born in the form realm arouses meditative absorption, it is by the two conditions above together with the force of the nature of things.

As for one born in the desire realm arousing an absorption of an upper level, it should be known that in every case it is by the “force of the teaching” (cultivating in accordance with the teaching).

〔Root 39〕The Abiding of the True Dharma in the World

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): The various dharma-gates analyzed above are all for the sake of spreading and upholding the true Dharma of the World-Honored One. What is called the true Dharma? And how long should it abide in the world? The stanza says:

Stanza: The true Dharma of the Buddha is twofold, having teaching and realization for its entity; as there are those able to uphold and expound it and those able to practice according to the teaching, the true Dharma abides in the world.

Treatise: The entity of the true Dharma of the World-Honored One is of two kinds, first teaching and second realization. “Teaching” is the sūtras, the discipline, and the Abhidharma (the three baskets); “realization” is the factors of awakening of the three vehicles.

As there are those able to uphold and rightly to expound it, the true teaching-Dharma of the Buddha abides in the world; as there are those able rightly to practice according to the teaching, the true realization-Dharma of the Buddha abides in the world. Hence, according to the measure of time that these three persons abide in the world, one may know the measure of time that the true Dharma abides in the world.

The general saying of the holy teaching is that it abides one thousand years alone. Another explanation says: the realization-Dharma abides one thousand years alone, while the time that the teaching-Dharma abides in the world exceeds even this.

〔Closing Stanza 1〕The Purport of the Treatise’s Composition

Treatise (taking up the question from what precedes): This treatise is composed in dependence upon and as gathering in the Abhidharma; by what principle, then, is the Abhidharma explained? The stanza says:

Stanza: The principle argued by the treatise masters of Kaśmīra is well established, and I mostly follow them in explaining the Abhidharma; if there is any small disparagement, that is my own fault — the right principle for adjudicating the dharma rests in the Sage alone.

Treatise: The principle of the Abhidharma argued by the Vaibhāṣika masters of the country of Kaśmīra is well established, and I mostly follow them in explaining the tenets of the Abhidharma; if there is any small disparagement, that is my own fault. Those able to adjudicate the right principle of the dharma are the World-Honored One alone, together with the great noble disciples of the Tathāgatas.

〔Closing Stanzas 2–4〕The Lament and the Exhortation to Study

Stanza: The world-eye of the great Master has long since closed, and those fit to bear witness are for the most part scattered and gone; the true principle is not seen, and there is none to check it, and by mean speculation the holy teaching is thrown into confusion.

He who awakened by himself has returned to the excellent stillness, and those who upheld that teaching have for the most part perished after him; the world is without refuge and has lost the several virtues, and with no hook to check delusion, delusion turns at its own will.

Since you know that the lifespan of the Tathāgata’s true Dharma is sinking away by degrees and is now as though it had reached the throat; and since this is the very time when the force of these afflictions increases — you should seek liberation and not be heedless.

(These four stanzas in seven-character lines are the closing of the whole treatise. The first three lament, the last exhorts to study. What follows is the Chapter on Refuting the Grasped Self.)