解脫道論 非想非非想處
本段說無所有定「近識為怨，與分明想共故成麁」；「近識」如何為怨，原文沒有另釋。隨後就本段近文說「見此想是患、是癰、是刺」，又說無想「是政、是寂寂、是妙」。
滅分明想，細想有餘
本段直接解說其名義：滅分明想，所以成於無想；細想有餘，所以成非想非非想。
入正住一節列三分、三種善、十相、二十二功德與修定果報；所生之天是非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫。
何故不成漏盡
答文只列兩個理由：一是「離分明想，不堪得見道」；二是此定最細微、「非非想不能分別」，所以不成漏盡處。
本段在這兩句後即收於「非非想定已竟」。原文沒有另述這一問為何置於段末，也沒有另說何地堪得見道。
The passage says that the concentration of nothingness is “near consciousness as an enemy and becomes coarse because it coexists with distinct perception.” How nearness to consciousness becomes an enemy is not further explained. It then says, with reference to the immediate perception under discussion, that “this perception is an affliction, a boil, and a thorn,” and that nonperception is “政, deeply quiet, and excellent.”
Distinct Perception Ceases; Subtle Perception Remains
The passage directly explains the name: because distinct perception ceases, it becomes nonperception; because subtle perception remains, it becomes neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
The section on entry and correct dwelling lists three portions, three kinds of goodness, ten characteristics, twenty-two virtues, and the result of concentration. The destination is the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception, with a lifespan of eighty-four thousand eons.
Why It Does Not Accomplish Exhaustion of the Taints
The answer gives only two reasons: first, “Having left distinct perception behind, one is incapable of attaining the path of seeing”; second, this concentration is most subtle and “neither-non-perception cannot discriminate,” so it does not become a base for exhaustion of the taints.
The passage closes immediately after these two statements with “the concentration of neither-non-perception is complete.” The source says nothing further about why the question stands at the end or at which base the path of seeing can be attained.
Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Base of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception · Doorway · Summer 2026
阿羅漢優波底沙造，梁扶南三藏僧伽婆羅譯《解脫道論》〈行門品〉「非想非非想處」· 大正藏 T32n1648〔起 T32 0421c〕。段首〔T32 …〕＝大正藏頁·欄錨。
〔T32 0421c〕
念無所有處過患，爾時坐禪人於無所有處已得自在，欲起非想非非想處定越無所有處。復更思惟無所有處麁、見非想非非想處細，復見無所有處過患，復見非想非非想處定功德。云何無所有定過患？此定近識為怨，與分明想共故成麁，成彼念著不得勝上。如是見無所有處過患，復見非想非非想入功德是其對治。復次見此想是患、是癰、是刺，無想是政、是寂寂、是妙，所謂非想非非想。彼坐禪人如是已見，念入無所有處安詳而起。彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定，如是現作意，不久從無所有處想心起，由非非想處想而心得安。彼明非非想定坐禪人，越一切無所有處故，成就入住非非想處。一切者，說於無餘。越無所有處者，成越無所有處超入正度，此謂越一切無所有處。非非想者，彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定，此謂非非想處。非非想處者，入非非想處心心數法，是謂非非想處。非非想處者何義？滅分明想故成於無想，細想有餘故，成非想非非想是其處，是謂非非想。入正住者，成得非非想處定，越無所有處，三分成就三種善，十相具足，二十二功德相應，住於寂寂明修定果報。以是功德生非非想天，如初廣說。是功德生非非想天者，修行非非想處定，命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫。
〔T32 0422a〕
問：何故說非非想處？何故不說為識處？答：離無邊執故、起想細故，不成識處。
問：何故依此定不成漏盡？答：離分明想，不堪得見道。復次此定最細微，非非想不能分別，是故不成漏盡處（非非想定已竟）。
The canonical text stands in Chinese only. This edition renders the essence, the plain reading, the exposition and the apparatus into English — never the sūtra itself. Switch to 漢讀本 or 並行雙語 above to read it.
念無所有處的過患而起非想非非想處定
念無所有處的過患。那時坐禪人於無所有處已得自在，想起非想非非想處定而越過無所有處。
又更思惟：無所有處是麁的、見非想非非想處是細的，又見無所有處的過患，又見非想非非想處定的功德。
無所有定的過患
什麼是無所有定的過患？這定近於識而為怨，與分明想共的緣故所以成麁，成為對它的念著而不得勝上。
這樣見了無所有處的過患，又見非想非非想入的功德，就是它的對治。
再者，見這想是患、是癰、是刺，無想是政、是寂寂、是妙——所謂非想非非想。此處大正底本作「政」；宋、元、明、宮四本作「正」。白話依底本保留「政」，尚無定論。
修非非想定的作意與成句
那位坐禪人這樣已見，就念入無所有處而安詳起；於那無所有處寂寂作意，修行其餘之定。這樣現前作意，不久就從無所有處之想心起，由非非想處之想而心得安。
那位明非非想定的坐禪人，因越一切無所有處的緣故，成就入住非非想處。
成句的逐語釋
所謂一切，是說於無餘。
所謂越無所有處，是成越無所有處而超入正度——這叫作越一切無所有處。
所謂非非想，是於那無所有處寂寂作意、修行其餘之定——這叫作非非想處。
所謂非非想處，是入非非想處的心、心數法——這叫作非非想處。
非非想處是什麼義？是滅了分明想的緣故成於無想，細想有餘的緣故，成非想非非想，這是它的處——這叫作非非想。
入正住與所生之天
所謂入正住，是成得非非想處定，越無所有處，三分成就三種善，十相具足，二十二功德相應，住於寂寂而明修定果報。以這功德生非非想天，如最初那裡廣說。
所謂這功德生非非想天，是修行非非想處定，命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫。
何故說非非想處，不說為識處
問：為什麼說非非想處？為什麼不說為識處？
答：因為離無邊之執的緣故、所起之想細的緣故，所以不成識處。
何故依此定不成漏盡
問：為什麼依這定不成漏盡？
答：因為離了分明想，不堪能得見道。
再者，這定最細微，非非想不能分別——所以不成漏盡之處。
（非非想定已竟）
Recollecting the Faults of Nothingness and Arousing the Base of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception
He recollects the faults of the base of nothingness. At that time the meditator has gained mastery of the base of nothingness and wishes to arouse concentration on the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception, going beyond nothingness.
He further reflects: the base of nothingness is coarse; the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is subtle. Again he sees the faults of nothingness and the virtues of concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception.
The Faults of the Concentration of Nothingness
What are the faults of the concentration of nothingness? This concentration is near consciousness, which is an enemy. Because it coexists with distinct perception, it becomes coarse; attachment of mindfulness to it is formed, and the highest is not gained.
Having thus seen the faults of nothingness, he again sees that the virtues of entry into neither-perception-nor-non-perception are their counteragent.
Furthermore, he sees this perception as an affliction, a boil, and a thorn; nonperception as 政, deeply quiet, and excellent—the so-called neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Here the Taishō base reads 政, while the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong witnesses read 正. The vernacular follows the base and retains 政; the matter remains unresolved.
Attention in Cultivating Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception and Its Accomplishment Formula
Having seen in this way, the meditator recollects entry into the base of nothingness and emerges gently. At that base he attends in deep quiet and cultivates another concentration. Attending presently in this way, before long mind rises from perception of the base of nothingness. Through perception of the base of neither-non-perception, mind settles.
The meditator who has made clear the concentration of neither-non-perception goes beyond the whole base of nothingness and accomplishes entry and dwelling in the base of neither-non-perception.
Lexical Explanation of the Accomplishment Formula
“All” means without remainder.
“Going beyond the base of nothingness” means going beyond that base and entering by correct crossing. This is called going beyond the whole base of nothingness.
“Neither-non-perception” means attending in deep quiet at the base of nothingness and cultivating another concentration. This is called the base of neither-non-perception.
“The base of neither-non-perception” means the mind and mental factors entering that base. This is called the base of neither-non-perception.
What is the meaning of the base of neither-non-perception? Because distinct perception has ceased, it becomes nonperception; because subtle perception remains, it becomes neither-perception-nor-non-perception, which is its base. This is called neither-non-perception.
Entry and Correct Dwelling, and the Heaven of Rebirth
“One who enters and dwells correctly” comes to gain concentration on neither-non-perception, goes beyond the base of nothingness, accomplishes three portions and three kinds of goodness, fulfills ten characteristics, is associated with twenty-two virtues, dwells in deep quiet, and makes clear the result of cultivating concentration. By this virtue one is reborn in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception, as explained at length at the beginning.
“One whose virtue brings rebirth in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception” cultivates concentration on the base of neither-non-perception and at death is reborn in that heaven, with a lifespan of eighty-four thousand eons.
Why It Is Called the Base of Neither-Non-Perception and Not the Base of Consciousness
Question: Why is it called the base of neither-non-perception? Why is it not called the base of consciousness?
Answer: Because grasping at boundlessness has been left behind and the perception that arises is subtle, it does not become the base of consciousness.
Why This Concentration Does Not Accomplish Exhaustion of the Taints
Question: Why does dependence on this concentration not accomplish exhaustion of the taints?
Answer: Having left distinct perception behind, one is incapable of attaining the path of seeing.
Furthermore, this concentration is most subtle; neither-non-perception cannot discriminate. Therefore it does not become a base for exhaustion of the taints.
(The concentration of neither-non-perception is complete.)
Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Base of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception · Vernacular · Summer 2026
本段先列無所有定的過患與非想非非想處定的功德，再寫作意、成句、逐語釋、入正住與所生天，末以兩問分別說明何以不成識處，以及何以依此定不成漏盡。
無所有定的過患
「念無所有處過患，爾時坐禪人於無所有處已得自在，欲起非想非非想處定越無所有處」〔T32 421c26–28〕。本段依次說已於無所有處得自在、欲起非想非非想處定、越無所有處；隨後列「無所有處麁、見非想非非想處細」〔T32 421c28–29〕。本段所列過患是：「此定近識為怨，與分明想共故成麁，成彼念著不得勝上」〔T32 422a01–03〕。可以確定的只是此定近識為怨，又與分明想共而成麁，末句則作「成彼念著不得勝上」；「近識」如何為怨，以及末句如何連屬，原文沒有另釋。四本於「共」下多「起」字；本文保留本單元原句，不把「近識為怨」串成跨越諸定的通則。
隨後論文說：「見此想是患、是癰、是刺，無想是政、是寂寂、是妙」〔T32 422a04–05〕。三語繫於「此想」，三語繫於「無想」，原文並列而不各釋；「此想」只按本段近文，指此處正在說的想。它前面先說已見無所有處過患，又見非想非非想入功德為其對治〔T32 422a03–04〕，然後才加上這組患、癰、刺與政、寂寂、妙的對舉。大正底本作「政」，宋、元、明、宮四本作「正」；本文從底本保留「政」，異讀並錄不判。
作意、成句與名義
轉站次序是：「念入無所有處安詳而起。彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定」〔T32 422a06–07〕；接著「不久從無所有處想心起，由非非想處想而心得安」〔T32 422a08–09〕。原文依次寫安詳而起、寂寂作意修行餘定、從無所有處想心起，以及由非非想處想而心得安；「寂寂作意」與「餘定」的確切關係不另補定。成句隨後立起：「彼明非非想定坐禪人，越一切無所有處故，成就入住非非想處」〔T32 422a09–10〕。逐釋先說「一切者，說於無餘」，再說「越無所有處者，成越無所有處超入正度」〔T32 422a11–12〕；釋「非非想」時，又逐字重出「彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定」〔T32 422a07／422a13〕。可確認的是作意文與逐語釋重複同一句，並以此句釋非非想處。
逐語釋按成句次序列成四項：一切，以「說於無餘」釋；越無所有處，以「成越無所有處超入正度」釋；非非想，以「彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定」釋；非非想處，則以「入非非想處心心數法」釋〔T32 422a10–15〕。四項之後才另問「非非想處者何義」，轉入滅分明想與細想有餘的名義說明。
逐語釋的名目和收句並非全都同形。「非非想者」一條，釋文是「彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定」，收句卻作「此謂非非想處」；下一條才以「非非想處者」起句，答「入非非想處心心數法」，又收「是謂非非想處」〔T32 422a15〕。其後再問「非非想處者何義」，以滅分明想、細想有餘解名〔T32 422a15–17〕。因此，本段實有作意句、心心數法句、名義問三個相鄰層次；照原次序分列即可，不把前一條的收句改成另一個名目，也不把三層合為一條另造的定義。
成句與逐釋畢，論文自問其名義：「非非想處者何義？滅分明想故成於無想，細想有餘故，成非想非非想是其處」〔T32 422a15–17〕。答文有一名兩義：一邊明說滅分明想，所以成於無想；另一邊明說細想有餘，所以成非想非非想。兩個「故」各自帶出一項結果，這是本段對名稱的直接解說；「分明／分別」有異讀，本文從底本保留「分明想」。
入正住一節說：「成得非非想處定，越無所有處，三分成就三種善，十相具足，二十二功德相應，住於寂寂明修定果報。以是功德生非非想天，如初廣說」〔T32 422a17–20〕。其後另說：「是功德生非非想天者，修行非非想處定，命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫」〔T32 422a20–22〕。本段明載的壽命就是八萬四千劫，沒有再說明其數成立的理由。
兩句所說層次不同：前句列入正住後的三分、三種善、十相、二十二功德、寂寂與修定果報，並總說功德生非非想天；後句再明列修行此定、命終、所生之天與八萬四千劫壽命〔T32 422a17–22〕。這些項目依原次序相接，其中三分之目未在本段列出。
「入正住者」之下按次列「成得非非想處定」「越無所有處」「三分成就三種善」「十相具足」「二十二功德相應」「住於寂寂明修定果報」〔T32 422a17–20〕。原文沒有列出「三分」所指，也沒有解釋「明」怎樣連接「住於寂寂」與「修定果報」，故只保存句次。隨後先說「以是功德生非非想天，如初廣說」，再用「是功德生非非想天者」重起，列修行此定、命終、生彼天、壽八萬四千劫〔T32 422a20–22〕。前句總說、後句重釋的形式是原文可見；除這些列項外，不補果報成立的機制。
何故依此定不成漏盡
「問：何故依此定不成漏盡？」〔T32 422a24–25〕——在此停問。這一問接在「何故說非非想處？何故不說為識處？」及其答語之後，兩問依原次序分開。
「答：離分明想，不堪得見道。復次此定最細微，非非想不能分別，是故不成漏盡處」〔T32 422a25–26〕——答文只列兩個理由。第一，把「不堪得見道」繫於「離分明想」；第二，把「不成漏盡處」繫於此定最細微及「非非想不能分別」。本段沒有再說其餘因由。前一問作：「何故說非非想處？何故不說為識處？」答曰：「離無邊執故、起想細故，不成識處」〔T32 422a23–24〕。這一答只列離無邊執與起想細二由，沒有另解二語如何成立「不成識處」，故此處只依句次並列。
末二問的句法也宜分開。第一問一連問「何故說非非想處」「何故不說為識處」，答句只作「離無邊執故、起想細故，不成識處」〔T32 422a23–24〕；「無邊執」所執何物、兩個「故」各自對應哪一問，原文沒有逐項配對。第二問以「復次」分開兩答：先說離分明想，因而不堪得見道；再說此定最細微，接「非非想不能分別」，所以不成漏盡處〔T32 422a24–26〕。「復次」明標第二理由的開始，「是故」只出現在第二理由末；兩處連詞的位置保留，不把兩理由合成另一條因果鏈。「非非想不能分別」中「非非想」如何與「不能分別」連屬，亦未另釋。兩問、四項理由及兩處未決都依原次序保留；第一問的「起想細」不移作第二問的見道理由，第二問也只按本段兩項理由解說。
兩番問答在段末相接：先問何故不說為識處，再問何故依此定不成漏盡；末句後即有夾註「非非想定已竟」〔T32 422a27〕。問答位置與夾註均依原次序保留，原文沒有另述篇章安排的意圖。
收束
回到本段：無所有定的過患是近識為怨、與分明想共故成麁，末說念著不得勝上；非非想處的名義以滅分明想、細想有餘兩句解說。入正住後列成得此定、越無所有處、三分、三種善、十相、二十二功德、寂寂與果報，並明載命終生非非想天、壽八萬四千劫。依此定不成漏盡的理由只有兩項：「離分明想，不堪得見道」；此定最細微、「非非想不能分別」。夾註「非非想定已竟」〔T32 422a27〕保留。
This passage first lists the faults of the concentration of nothingness and the virtues of neither-perception-nor-non-perception. It then gives attention, the accomplishment formula, lexical explanation, entry and correct dwelling, and the heaven of rebirth. Two questions at the end separately explain why it does not become the base of consciousness and why this concentration does not accomplish exhaustion of the taints.
The Faults of the Concentration of Nothingness
“Recollecting the faults of the base of nothingness, at that time the meditator has gained mastery of the base of nothingness and wishes to arouse concentration on neither-perception-nor-non-perception, going beyond nothingness” 〔T32 421c26–28〕. The passage says in order that he has gained mastery of nothingness, wishes to arouse this concentration, and goes beyond nothingness. It then lists “the base of nothingness is coarse; the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is subtle” 〔T32 421c28–29〕. The faults given here are: “This concentration is near consciousness, which is an enemy; because it coexists with distinct perception it becomes coarse; attachment of mindfulness to it is formed, and the highest is not gained” 〔T32 422a01–03〕. What can be confirmed is only that it is near consciousness, which is an enemy, and becomes coarse because it coexists with distinct perception, followed by “attachment of mindfulness to it is formed, and the highest is not gained.” How nearness to consciousness becomes an enemy and how the last clause attaches are not further explained. The four witnesses add 起 after 共. The body retains the sentence of this unit and does not string “near consciousness as an enemy” into a law spanning the concentrations.
The treatise next says, “He sees this perception as an affliction, a boil, and a thorn; nonperception as 政, deeply quiet, and excellent” 〔T32 422a04–05〕. Three expressions attach to “this perception” and three to nonperception, parallel but separately unexplained. “This perception” refers only to the perception discussed in the immediate passage. The text first says that he has seen the faults of nothingness and the virtues of entry into neither-non-perception as their counteragent 〔T32 422a03–04〕, then adds this opposition of affliction, boil, and thorn to 政, deep quiet, and excellence. The Taishō base reads 政, while the Song, Yuan, Ming, and Gong witnesses read 正. The body retains 政 and records the variant without adjudication.
Attention, Accomplishment Formula, and Meaning of the Name
The order of transition is: “He recollects entry into the base of nothingness and emerges gently. At that base he attends in deep quiet and cultivates another concentration” 〔T32 422a06–07〕. Next, “Before long mind rises from perception of the base of nothingness; through perception of the base of neither-non-perception, mind settles” 〔T32 422a08–09〕. The source writes gentle emergence, attending in deep quiet and cultivating another concentration, rising from perception of nothingness, and settling through perception of neither-non-perception in that order. No exact relation between “attending in deep quiet” and “another concentration” is supplied. The formula follows: “The meditator who has made clear the concentration of neither-non-perception goes beyond the whole base of nothingness and accomplishes entry and dwelling in the base of neither-non-perception” 〔T32 422a09–10〕. The explanation first says, “All means without remainder,” then “Going beyond the base of nothingness means going beyond that base and entering by correct crossing” 〔T32 422a11–12〕. In explaining neither-non-perception it repeats word for word “At the base of nothingness he attends in deep quiet and cultivates another concentration” 〔T32 422a07／422a13〕. What can be confirmed is that the practice sentence and lexical explanation repeat the same words, using them to explain the base of neither-non-perception.
The lexical explanation follows the formula through four items. “All” is explained by “without remainder.” “Going beyond the base of nothingness” is explained by “going beyond that base and entering by correct crossing.” “Neither-non-perception” is explained by “at the base of nothingness he attends in deep quiet and cultivates another concentration.” “Base of neither-non-perception” is explained through the mind and mental factors that enter it 〔T32 422a10–15〕. Only after these four does the source ask the meaning of the base and turn to cessation of distinct perception and remaining subtle perception.
The headwords and conclusions do not all have the same form. The entry beginning 非非想者 explains “at the base of nothingness he attends in deep quiet and cultivates another concentration,” but concludes “this is called the base of neither-non-perception.” The next entry begins 非非想處者, answers “the mind and mental factors entering the base of neither-non-perception,” and again concludes “this is called the base of neither-non-perception” 〔T32 422a15〕. Then “What is the meaning of the base of neither-non-perception?” is asked, and the name is explained by cessation of distinct perception and remaining subtle perception 〔T32 422a15–17〕. The passage therefore has three neighboring levels: the practice sentence, the mind-and-mental-factors sentence, and the question on the name. Their original order is sufficient. The earlier conclusion is not changed to another headword, and the three levels are not merged into a newly made definition.
After the formula and its explanation, the treatise asks for the name’s meaning: “What is the meaning of the base of neither-non-perception? Because distinct perception has ceased, it becomes nonperception; because subtle perception remains, it becomes neither-perception-nor-non-perception, which is its base” 〔T32 422a15–17〕. One name has two explanations. On one side, cessation of distinct perception makes nonperception; on the other, remaining subtle perception makes neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Each occurrence of “because” brings its own result. This is the passage’s direct explanation of the double name. 分明 / 分別 is a variant; the body follows 分明想.
The section on entry and correct dwelling says: “He comes to gain concentration on neither-non-perception, goes beyond the base of nothingness, accomplishes three portions and three kinds of goodness, fulfills ten characteristics, is associated with twenty-two virtues, dwells in deep quiet, and makes clear the result of cultivating concentration. By this virtue one is reborn in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception, as explained at length at the beginning” 〔T32 422a17–20〕. It then separately says, “One whose virtue brings rebirth in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception cultivates concentration on the base of neither-non-perception and at death is reborn in that heaven, with a lifespan of eighty-four thousand eons” 〔T32 422a20–22〕. The lifespan explicitly stated is eighty-four thousand eons, and the passage does not explain why this number holds.
The two sentences concern different levels. The first lists the three portions, three kinds of goodness, ten characteristics, twenty-two virtues, deep quiet, and result after entry and correct dwelling, then gives the general statement that virtue brings rebirth in that heaven. The second separately lists cultivation of this concentration, death, the heaven, and the lifespan 〔T32 422a17–22〕. The items remain in their original sequence, and the three portions are not listed here.
Under “one who enters and dwells correctly,” the source lists in order “comes to gain concentration on neither-non-perception,” “goes beyond the base of nothingness,” “three portions accomplish three kinds of goodness,” “fulfills ten characteristics,” “is associated with twenty-two virtues,” and “dwells in deep quiet and makes clear the result of cultivating concentration” 〔T32 422a17–20〕. It neither lists the three portions nor explains how 明 joins dwelling in deep quiet to the result of cultivation, so only the sentence order is preserved. It then first says, “By this virtue one is reborn in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception, as explained at length at the beginning,” and begins again with “One whose virtue brings rebirth in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception,” listing cultivation, death, rebirth, and eighty-four thousand eons 〔T32 422a20–22〕. The pattern of a general statement followed by renewed explanation is visible in the source. No mechanism of the result is added beyond the listed items.
Why This Concentration Does Not Accomplish Exhaustion of the Taints
“Question: Why does dependence on this concentration not accomplish exhaustion of the taints?” 〔T32 422a24–25〕. Pause here. This question follows the preceding “Why is it called the base of neither-non-perception? Why is it not called the base of consciousness?” and its answer. The two questions remain separate in their original order.
“Answer: Having left distinct perception behind, one is incapable of attaining the path of seeing. Furthermore, this concentration is most subtle; neither-non-perception cannot discriminate. Therefore it does not become a base for exhaustion of the taints” 〔T32 422a25–26〕. The answer gives only two reasons. First, inability to attain the path of seeing is attached to leaving distinct perception. Second, failure to become a base for exhaustion is attached to the extreme subtlety of the concentration and to “neither-non-perception cannot discriminate.” No further reason is supplied. The preceding question asks, “Why is it called the base of neither-non-perception? Why is it not called the base of consciousness?” and the answer says, “Because grasping at boundlessness has been left behind and the perception that arises is subtle, it does not become the base of consciousness” 〔T32 422a23–24〕. It lists leaving grasping at boundlessness and subtle arising perception without explaining how the two establish “does not become the base of consciousness.” Only the sentence order is kept.
The syntax of the two final exchanges must also remain separate. The first asks in succession why the base is called neither-non-perception and why it is not called consciousness; its answer only reads “because grasping at boundlessness has been left behind and the perception that arises is subtle, it does not become the base of consciousness” 〔T32 422a23–24〕. What is grasped under “grasping at boundlessness,” and which of the two “because” statements answers which question, are not assigned individually. The second uses “furthermore” to divide two reasons: first leaving distinct perception and consequently being incapable of attaining the path of seeing; then the concentration’s extreme subtlety followed by “neither-non-perception cannot discriminate,” and therefore failure to become a base for exhaustion of the taints 〔T32 422a24–26〕. “Furthermore” explicitly begins the second reason, while “therefore” appears only at its end. The conjunctions remain in their positions, and the two reasons are not merged into another causal chain. How “neither-non-perception” relates grammatically to “cannot discriminate” is not further explained. The two questions, four stated reasons, and two uncertainties all retain their original sequence. “The perception that arises is subtle” from the first question is not moved into the path-of-seeing reason of the second, which remains limited to the two reasons given here.
The two exchanges stand together at the end, followed immediately by the inline note “the concentration of neither-non-perception is complete” 〔T32 422a27〕. Their positions and the note are retained. The source gives no further account of the intention behind this arrangement.
Conclusion
Return to the passage. The faults of the concentration of nothingness are nearness to consciousness as an enemy, coexistence with distinct perception making it coarse, and the final statement that attachment forms and the highest is not gained. The name of the base is explained by two clauses: distinct perception ceases, while subtle perception remains. Entry and correct dwelling list gaining the concentration, going beyond nothingness, three portions, three kinds of goodness, ten characteristics, twenty-two virtues, deep quiet, and result, and expressly state rebirth in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception for eighty-four thousand eons. The only two reasons given for not exhausting the taints are “having left distinct perception behind, one is incapable of attaining the path of seeing,” and that the concentration is most subtle and “neither-non-perception cannot discriminate.” The inline note “the concentration of neither-non-perception is complete” 〔T32 422a27〕 is retained.
Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Base of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception · Exposition · Summer 2026
考據Apparatus
全段定位 本段出自《解脫道論》卷第五〈行門品〉之二，接前段夾註「（無所有定竟）」〔T32 421c25〕而下，為四無色定之第四段。先念無所有處過而起非非想定，出無所有定過患（並以患·癰·刺三喻與政·寂寂·妙三讚對舉），立非非想處成句並逐語還釋，次入正住與所生天；末二問料簡（何故不說為識處·何故不成漏盡），段末以夾註「（非非想定已竟）」〔T32 422a27〕標一門之畢。其下「重明上義」〔T32 422a28〕另起一節，屬下一單元。
一、科判定位
本段明書「問」者二，設問以「云何」者一；問答之界與節次逐字可核：
| 節 | 經文起訖逐字（各繫其錨） |
|---|---|
| 念無所有處過而起非非想定 | 「念無所有處過患」〔T32 421c26〕…「無所有處麁、見非想非非想處細」〔T32 421c28–29〕 |
| 無所有定之過患 | 「云何無所有定過患？」〔T32 422a01〕…「無想是政、是寂寂、是妙」〔T32 422a05〕 |
| 修非非想定之作意與成句 | 「念入無所有處安詳而起」〔T32 422a06–07〕…「成就入住非非想處」〔T32 422a10〕 |
| 成句之逐語釋 | 「一切者，說於無餘」〔T32 422a10–11〕…「是謂非非想」〔T32 422a17〕 |
| 入正住與所生天 | 「越無所有處，三分成就三種善」〔T32 422a18〕…「命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫」〔T32 422a21–22〕 |
| 何故不說為識處 | 「問：何故說非非想處？何故不說為識處？」〔T32 422a22–23〕…「離無邊執故、起想細故，不成識處」〔T32 422a23–24〕 |
| 何故不成漏盡 | 「問：何故依此定不成漏盡？」〔T32 422a24–25〕…「是故不成漏盡處」〔T32 422a26〕 |
單元界與問答界相合：本單元起於 421c26 念無所有處過患之語、止於 422a27 非非想定已竟之夾註，不切斷任何一問。四無色定至此畢，本段獨多料簡二問——四定之中唯此定別問其何以不成漏盡。
全段定位錨
〔T32, 421c26–422a27〕
二、詞義與譯語（逐字各繫其錨）
| 名相 | 本段用法 | 章內接點（可核） |
|---|---|---|
| 無所有定過患 | 「此定近識為怨」〔T32 422a01–02〕、「與分明想共故成麁」〔T32 422a02〕 | 本段未另釋「近識」如何為怨；只按本單元原句保留，不立跨定通則 |
| 分明想 | 「與分明想共故成麁」〔T32 422a02〕，逐語釋作「滅分明想故成於無想」〔T32 422a15–16〕，末問復作「離分明想，不堪得見道」〔T32 422a25〕 | 全段三見；「分明」二字有校記（見目三）。此詞為本段樞語——過患·成就·不成漏盡三處皆繫於此 |
| 患·癰·刺 | 「見此想是患、是癰、是刺」〔T32 422a04–05〕 | 三喻並下而論文不各釋，照字面保留 |
| 政·寂寂·妙 | 「無想是政、是寂寂、是妙」〔T32 422a05〕 | 與上三喻對舉；「政」字論文不釋，有覆出＊校記（見目三，四本作「正」），照錄不改、不代改字 |
| 非非想（自釋） | 「彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定，此謂非非想處」〔T32 422a13–14〕 | 此語與作意之文〔T32 422a07〕字面全同，先見於作意次序，後重出於逐語之釋 |
| 非非想處 | 「入非非想處心心數法，是謂非非想處」〔T32 422a14–15〕 | 與 08-21〔T32 421a24–25〕、08-22〔T32 421b23〕、08-23〔T32 421c17–18〕同式，四定一貫 |
| 滅分明想·細想有餘 | 「滅分明想故成於無想，細想有餘故，成非想非非想是其處」〔T32 422a15–17〕 | 一名兩義：無想由滅分明想、非非想由細想有餘，論文以此釋其名之二重 |
| 越無所有處三分 | 「越無所有處，三分成就三種善」〔T32 422a18〕 | 08-21「越色事三分」〔T32 421a28〕、08-22「越虛空事，三分成就」〔T32 421b26〕、08-23「越識事三分」〔T32 421c21〕；四處皆不列其目，照字面保留，不代配數 |
| 非非想天 | 「命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫」〔T32 422a21–22〕 | 虛空天二千劫 08-21〔T32 421b01–02〕、識處天四千劫 08-22〔T32 421b29–421c01〕、無所有天六千劫 08-23〔T32 421c24–25〕；本天之數不循前三之序，論文不出其所以，照錄不補 |
| 漏盡 | 「是故不成漏盡處」〔T32 422a26〕 | 四無色定唯此定別問其不成漏盡之故，答以離分明想、定最細微二事 |
| 非非想定已竟 | 夾註「（非非想定已竟）」〔T32 422a27〕 | 與 08-22「（識入已竟）」〔T32 421c01〕、08-23「（無所有定竟）」〔T32 421c25〕同例，一門之畢語，照錄不改 |
三、校記與異讀
本段範圍內大正藏校記七條（其中訂正讀二處），另有「政／正」＊條覆出一處（繫錨 422a05），均誌而不改；本文之讀依大正本，唯訂正讀二處從【CB】：
| 錨 | 底本 | 異讀 | 見證 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 422a02 | 分明（與分明想共故成麁） | 分別 | 【明】 |
| 422a02 | 共（與分明想共故成麁） | 共起 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a03 | 非想（復見非想非非想入功德） | 〔－〕（無此二字） | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a09 | 想（彼明非非想定坐禪人） | 想處想 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a10 | 相（大正本作「成就入住非非相處」） | 想 | 【CB】【麗-CB】（訂正讀；本文從「想」） |
| 422a19 | 想（大正本作「十想具足」） | 相 | 【CB】（訂正讀；【麗-CB】【磧-CB】作「想」；本文從「相」） |
| 422a24 | 問（問：何故依此定不成漏盡） | 又問 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a05 | 政（無想是政） | 正 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】（＊條之覆出） |
誌錄不判六事：
- 422a02「分明想」，明本作「分別想」。此詞為本段樞語，全段三見而校記唯繫其首見；二讀所指是否同一，論文不能於本段內決。並錄不判。
- 422a03「復見非想非非想入功德」，四本無「非想」二字（作「復見非非想入功德」）。並錄不判。
- 422a09「彼明非非想定坐禪人」之「想」，四本其下有「處想」二字。並錄不判。
- 422a10 大正本作「成就入住非非相處」，【CB】據麗本訂「相」為「想」；422a19 大正本作「十想具足」，【CB】訂為「相」而【麗-CB】【磧-CB】仍作「想」——同一「相／想」之異，二處訂向相反。本文皆從訂正之讀，並誌其不齊。
- 422a24「問：何故依此定不成漏盡」，四本作「又問」。並錄不判。
- 422a05「無想是政」之「政」，四本作「正」，為本論覆出之異讀。本文從底本存「政」，不逕改「正」。並錄不判。
校本命中二項：本段正文缺字零命中；夾註一命中——「（非非想定已竟）」〔T32 422a27〕。
四、論主引據
本段無標為佛語或他說之引據，查無所獲；「如初廣說」〔T32 422a20〕指本論前文而非他書，不入引據。
五、譬喻·修辭
- 三喻三讚之對舉〔T32 422a04–05〕：「是患、是癰、是刺」對「是政、是寂寂、是妙」——三對三，前繫想、後繫無想，句式一律而不各釋。
- 麁細對舉〔T32 421c28–29〕：「無所有處麁、見非想非非想處細」——四無色定各以此式遞轉，本段為其第四，至此而畢。
- 前後全同之句〔T32 422a07·422a13〕：「彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定」一語，先出於作意之文、再出於逐語之釋，字面全同——與 08-23〔T32 421c09–10·421c15–16〕同型。
- 四目逐釋〔T32 422a10–17〕：成句既立，取「一切」「越無所有處」「非非想」「非非想處」四語逐一還釋，末以「是謂非非想」自收。
- 一名兩義〔T32 422a15–17〕：以「滅分明想」釋其「無想」之分、以「細想有餘」釋其「非非想」之分——一名而兩釋並存。
六、章內互讀
- 前指：無所有處成句與所生天 08-23〔T32 421c17–25〕（本段所承）；「成越此識超入正度」08-23〔T32 421c14–15〕；「越識事三分」08-23〔T32 421c21〕；三禪過患「謂近喜為怨」08-19〔T32 420a10〕；「一切者，說於無餘」前三見〔T32 420c28〕〔T32 421b15–16〕〔T32 421c13–14〕。
- 後指：定處散句自「重明上義」〔T32 422a28〕起（下一單元）。
七、傳本
作者、譯者與傳本諸問題，本編不於考據內立說。
Location of the complete passage. This passage is from fascicle five, the second part of the Chapter on Fields of Practice in the Path of Freedom. It follows the inline note “（無所有定竟）,” “concentration on nothingness is complete” 〔T32 421c25〕, and is the fourth of the four formless concentrations. It recollects the faults of nothingness and arouses neither-non-perception; gives the faults of the concentration of nothingness, opposing three images—affliction, boil, thorn—to three praises—政, deeply quiet, excellent; establishes and explains the formula; and gives entry and correct dwelling and the heaven of rebirth. Two analytical questions at the end ask why it is not called the base of consciousness and why it does not accomplish exhaustion of the taints. The inline note “（非非想定已竟）,” “concentration on neither-non-perception is complete” 〔T32 422a27〕, marks completion. “Further clarification of the preceding meaning” 〔T32 422a28〕 begins the next unit.
1. Textual and Structural Location
The passage has two questions explicitly marked “Question:” and one introduced by “what/how.” Its sections can be checked word for word:
| Section | Exact beginning and end of the source, each with its anchor |
|---|---|
| Recollecting the faults of nothingness and arousing neither-non-perception | “Recollect the faults of the base of nothingness” 〔T32 421c26〕 … “sees the base of nothingness as coarse and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as subtle” 〔T32 421c28–29〕 |
| Faults of the concentration of nothingness | “What are the faults of concentration on nothingness?” 〔T32 422a01〕 … “nonperception is 政, deeply quiet, and excellent” 〔T32 422a05〕 |
| Attention and the accomplishment formula | “Recollects entry into the base of nothingness and emerges gently” 〔T32 422a06–07〕 … “accomplishes entry and dwelling in the base of neither-non-perception” 〔T32 422a10〕 |
| Lexical explanation of the formula | “All means that it is stated without remainder” 〔T32 422a10–11〕 … “this is called neither-non-perception” 〔T32 422a17〕 |
| Entry and correct dwelling and heavenly rebirth | “Going beyond the base of nothingness, through three portions one accomplishes three kinds of goodness” 〔T32 422a18〕 … “at death one is born in the Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception, with a lifespan of eighty-four thousand eons” 〔T32 422a21–22〕 |
| Why it is not called the base of consciousness | “Question: Why is it called the base of neither-non-perception? Why is it not called the base of consciousness?” 〔T32 422a22–23〕 … “because boundless apprehending has been left and the arisen perception is subtle, it does not become a base of consciousness” 〔T32 422a23–24〕 |
| Why it does not accomplish exhaustion of the taints | “Question: Why, by relying on this concentration, does one not accomplish exhaustion of the taints?” 〔T32 422a24–25〕 … “therefore it does not become a place for exhaustion of the taints” 〔T32 422a26〕 |
The unit boundary coincides with question-and-answer boundaries. It begins at 421c26 with recollection of the faults of nothingness and ends at 422a27 with the completion note, cutting no question. The four formless concentrations end here. Only this concentration receives the separate question why it does not accomplish exhaustion of the taints.
Anchor for the complete passage
〔T32, 421c26–422a27〕
2. Terms and Translation (Every Citation Anchored)
| Term | Use in this passage | Checkable connection within the chapter |
|---|---|---|
| Faults of the concentration of nothingness | “此定近識為怨” 〔T32 422a01–02〕 and “與分明想共故成麁” 〔T32 422a02〕 | The passage does not explain how nearness to consciousness becomes an enemy. Its source sentence is retained without constructing a rule spanning concentrations |
| Distinct perception | “與分明想共故成麁” 〔T32 422a02〕; “滅分明想故成於無想” 〔T32 422a15–16〕; and “離分明想，不堪得見道” 〔T32 422a25〕 | It occurs three times and is the pivot of the passage—fault, accomplishment, and failure to exhaust the taints all attach to it. 分明 has a variant 分別; see section 3 |
| Affliction, boil, and thorn | “見此想是患、是癰、是刺” 〔T32 422a04–05〕 | Three images occur together without separate explanations and are retained literally |
| 政, deeply quiet, and excellent | “無想是政、是寂寂、是妙” 〔T32 422a05〕 | They oppose the three images above. 政 is unexplained and has a repeated starred variant 正 in the four witnesses; see section 3. It is retained without correction |
| Neither-non-perception: direct explanation | “彼無所有處寂寂作意修行餘定，此謂非非想處” 〔T32 422a13–14〕 | The exact sentence first occurs in the practice sequence at 〔T32 422a07〕 and then in the lexical explanation |
| Base of neither-non-perception | “入非非想處心心數法，是謂非非想處” 〔T32 422a14–15〕 | It parallels the explanations in 08-21 〔T32 421a24–25〕, 08-22 〔T32 421b23〕, and 08-23 〔T32 421c17–18〕 across all four concentrations |
| Cessation of distinct perception and remaining subtle perception | “滅分明想故成於無想，細想有餘故，成非想非非想是其處” 〔T32 422a15–17〕 | One name has two explanations: nonperception through cessation of distinct perception; neither-non-perception through remaining subtle perception |
| Going beyond the base of nothingness, three portions | “越無所有處，三分成就三種善” 〔T32 422a18〕 | The preceding passages have “越色事三分” 〔T32 421a28〕, “越虛空事，三分成就” 〔T32 421b26〕, and “越識事三分” 〔T32 421c21〕. None lists the portions; all remain unassigned |
| Heaven of Neither-Non-Perception | “命終生非非想天，壽命八萬四千劫” 〔T32 422a21–22〕 | The Heaven of Space has two thousand eons 〔T32 421b01–02〕, Consciousness four thousand 〔T32 421b29–421c01〕, and Nothingness six thousand 〔T32 421c24–25〕. This number does not follow that sequence, and the treatise gives no reason; nothing is supplied |
| Exhaustion of the taints | “是故不成漏盡處” 〔T32 422a26〕 | Only this one of the four formless concentrations separately asks why it does not accomplish exhaustion. The answer gives leaving distinct perception and the concentration’s extreme subtlety |
| 非非想定已竟 | Inline note “（非非想定已竟）” 〔T32 422a27〕 | It parallels “（識入已竟）” in 08-22 〔T32 421c01〕 and “（無所有定竟）” in 08-23 〔T32 421c25〕. It is a closing phrase and is retained |
3. Critical Notes and Variant Readings
Within this passage the Taishō apparatus has seven notes, two corrected readings, together with a repeated 政 / 正 starred note at 422a05. They are recorded without changing the body except that the two corrected readings follow 【CB】:
| Anchor | Base text | Variant | Witnesses |
|---|---|---|---|
| 422a02 | 分明, in 與分明想共故成麁 | 分別 | 【明】 |
| 422a02 | 共, in 與分明想共故成麁 | 共起 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a03 | 非想, in 復見非想非非想入功德 | 〔－〕, absent | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a09 | 想, in 彼明非非想定坐禪人 | 想處想 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a10 | 相, in the Taishō reading 成就入住非非相處 | 想 | 【CB】【麗-CB】 (corrected reading; the body follows 想) |
| 422a19 | 想, in the Taishō reading 十想具足 | 相 | 【CB】 (corrected reading; 【麗-CB】【磧-CB】 read 想; the body follows 相) |
| 422a24 | 問, in 問：何故依此定不成漏盡 | 又問 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 |
| 422a05 | 政, in 無想是政 | 正 | 【宋】【元】【明】【宮】 (repeated starred variant) |
Six matters are recorded without adjudication:
- At 422a02, the Ming witness reads 分別想 where the base has 分明想. The term occurs three times in the passage, but the note is attached only to the first. Whether the two forms denote the same is not decidable here; both are recorded.
- At 422a03, the four witnesses omit the first 非想 from “復見非想非非想入功德,” yielding “復見非非想入功德.” Both are recorded.
- At 422a09, the four witnesses add 處想 after 想 in “彼明非非想定坐禪人.” Both are recorded.
- At 422a10, the Taishō base reads “成就入住非非相處” and 【CB】 corrects 相 to 想 from the Korean witness. At 422a19, the base reads “十想具足” and 【CB】 corrects 想 to 相 while 【麗-CB】【磧-CB】 retain 想. The directions of correction are opposite. The body follows both corrected readings and records the mismatch.
- At 422a24, the four witnesses read 又問 where the base has 問 in “問：何故依此定不成漏盡.” Both are recorded.
- At 422a05, the four witnesses read 正 where the base has 政 in “無想是政.” This is a repeated variant. The body retains 政 and does not silently correct it.
Two critical-text results: no missing-character marker occurs in the body; one inline note occurs, “（非非想定已竟）” 〔T32 422a27〕.
4. Authorities Cited by the Treatise
No statement in this passage is marked as the Buddha’s words or another authority’s saying. The check returned no result. “As explained at length above” 〔T32 422a20〕 points to earlier material in this treatise, not another work.
5. Simile and Rhetoric
- Three images opposed to three praises 〔T32 422a04–05〕: “is an affliction, a boil, and a thorn” is opposed to “is 政, deeply quiet, and excellent.” Three stand against three, the first attached to perception and the second to nonperception, in parallel sentences without separate explanations. The unresolved source form 政 is retained.
- Coarse and subtle opposed 〔T32 421c28–29〕: “The base of nothingness is coarse; one sees the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as subtle.” Each formless concentration uses this turn; this is the fourth and final instance.
- A sentence identical in practice and explanation 〔T32 422a07·422a13〕: “At that base of nothingness, he attends deeply quietly and cultivates the remaining concentration” occurs first in the practice sequence and then in the lexical explanation without change, paralleling 08-23 〔T32 421c09–10·421c15–16〕.
- Four lexical explanations 〔T32 422a10–17〕: “all,” “going beyond the base of nothingness,” “neither-non-perception,” and “base of neither-non-perception” are explained in order, closing “this is called neither-non-perception.”
- One name with two meanings 〔T32 422a15–17〕: “cessation of distinct perception” explains the nonperception side, while “remaining subtle perception” explains the neither-non-perception side. Both explanations remain together.
6. Internal Cross-Reading
- Backward: the formula and heaven of nothingness in 08-23 〔T32 421c17–25〕; “goes beyond this consciousness and enters by correct crossing” in 08-23 〔T32 421c14–15〕; “going beyond the three portions of the affair of consciousness” in 08-23 〔T32 421c21〕; the third-jhāna fault “near rapture as an enemy” in 08-19 〔T32 420a10〕; and the first three occurrences of “All means that it is stated without remainder” 〔T32 420c28〕 〔T32 421b15–16〕 〔T32 421c13–14〕.
- Forward: the scattered statements on the bases of concentration begin “Further clarification of the preceding meaning” 〔T32 422a28〕 in the next unit.
7. Transmission
Questions concerning the author, translator, and transmission history are not adjudicated in this apparatus.
Shi Huijing · Waken · The Path of Freedom · The Base of Neither-Perception-nor-Non-Perception · Apparatus · Summer 2026