阿毘達磨俱舍論

CHAPTER 8: ANALYSIS OF MEDITATIVE CONCENTRATION

Part 28

The preceding section explained (kṛto nirdeśaḥ) the qualities (guṇa) accomplished through the knowledges (jñāna). This section will discuss qualities belonging to another essential nature, namely concentration (samādhis), and so forth. First, the supports (āśraya) of these qualities should be explained—that is, the states of mind from which these qualities arise. These supports are the various kinds of concentration.

Among these, the dhyānas should be discussed first.

[Each dhyāna is of two kinds;

Of these, birth has already been explained.

Concentration is a wholesome mind focused upon a single object,

And, together with its accompanying factors, comprises the five skandhas.

The first dhyāna possesses vicāra, joy, and bliss;

In each subsequent dhyāna, one preceding factor is successively relinquished.]

Treatise: Unlike the Formless concentrations (ārūpyas), the dhyānas are concentrations belonging to the realm of form (rūpa) and serve as the support for all kinds of qualities. Sometimes they are shared (sādhāraṇa), and sometimes particular; sometimes uncontaminated (anāsrana), and sometimes contaminated.

There are four dhyānas: the first dhyāna, the second dhyāna, the third dhyāna, and the fourth dhyāna.

Each dhyāna is of two kinds: attainment-dhyāna (samāpattidhyāna), namely causal dhyāna (kāraṇadhyāna); and birth-dhyāna (upapattidhyāna), namely resultant dhyāna (kāryadhyāna).

Birth-dhyāna was explained in the third chapter of this treatise (lokanirdeśa): each of the first three dhyānas has three kinds, while the fourth dhyāna has eight kinds.

Attainment-dhyāna, generally speaking (abhedena), is defined as the one-pointedness of wholesome minds upon a single object (śubhānāṃ cittānām āikagryam), because all dhyānas have concentration (samādhi) as their essential nature. When concentration is accompanied by associated factors (sānuga), attainment-dhyāna comprises all five skandhas.

(Question) Why is it called “mental focus upon a single object” or “concentration” (āikagrya; one-pointedness)?

(Answer) Because the minds have only one single object (ekālambanatā cittānām).

(Sautrāntika) If so, what is called “samādhi” is simply the minds that have the same single object (cittāny evaikālambanāni); one cannot admit, in addition, a separate real dharma—a certain mental factor—called samādhi.

(Vaibhāṣika) What is called samādhi is a separate dharma capable of causing minds to gather together and focus upon a single object. These concentrated minds are not themselves samādhi.

(Sautrāntika) Several problems arise here: ⁽¹⁾ Minds are by nature momentary and perish instantaneously (kṣaṇika); therefore, each mind apprehends only a single object. What need, then, is there for concentration (samādhi)? ⁽²⁾ If it is said that concentration prevents the second mind from becoming distracted or diverging (avikṣepa) from the object apprehended by the first mind, then concentration would have no effect upon the first mind, which is nevertheless regarded as associated with that concentration. ⁽³⁾ Why establish concentration as an additional, separate dharma?

Why not accept that minds remain focused upon one object because of certain causes, and that these causes are precisely what you call concentration? ⁽⁴⁾ You have defined concentration as a universal mental factor (mahābhūmika); consequently, all minds should function one-pointedly (ekāgra).

(Vaibhāṣika) [In reply to the fourth problem:] This does not follow, because the power of concentration may be extremely weak.

(Sautrāntika) When minds apprehend the same object, this constitutes concentration, and concentration does not exist independently of those minds. For the sutra states that the four dhyānas are “training in the higher mind” (adhicittaṃ śikṣa) and “the foremost factor in purifying the mind” (cittapariśuddhipradhāna).

(Question) What is the meaning of dhyāna?

(Answer) Through dhyāna, the practitioner becomes “concentrated and tranquil” (samādhita) and is able to “discern thoroughly” (upanidhyāna). Upanidhyai means “to cognize accurately,” as the sutra (Mahāvyutpatti, 81; Dīgha, iii. 241; Aṅguttara, ii. 21) states: “One who possesses concentration knows things as they truly are.” The verbal root dhyai is used in the sense of upanidhyāna.

Therefore, according to the Sarvāstivāda, thorough discernment has wisdom (prajñāna) as its essence; [whereas, according to other schools, thorough discernment has reflection (cintā) as its essence.]

(Question) If all dhyānas have concentration (samāpatti) as their essential nature, would all kinds of concentration—whether wholesome, unwholesome, or indeterminate—be dhyāna?

(Answer) It is not so. Only a concentration endowed with certain excellent qualities (prakasrṣayukta) is called dhyāna. Likewise, in the world, only the sun is called “the illuminator,” not a firefly (khadyokta).

Dhyāna is the most excellent kind of concentration. It is fully endowed with its factors (aṅgasamāyukta); it proceeds through tranquility (śamatha) and insight (vipaśyanā) yoked evenly together (yuganaddhavāhin, meaning that tranquility and insight are both in a state of equilibrium); and it is the kind of concentration that the sutra calls “a pleasant abiding in the present life” (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra) and “the easy path” (sukhapratipad), namely the path by which the practitioner can know more, and do so more easily. Therefore, this excellent kind of concentration is called dhyāna.

(Question) If dhyāna is a kind of concentration comprising specific factors, why is defiled concentration (kliṣṭa)—that is, concentration that produces “relish” or is associated with relishing pleasure (āsvādanasaṃprayukta)—also called dhyāna?

(Answer) Because this defiled concentration is itself improper thorough discernment (upanidhyāna).

(Question) But this thorough discernment will clearly give rise to improper conclusions. [Indeed, one cultivates defiled dhyāna with a mind that has become prey to sensual desire (kāmarāga), and such a state cannot be regarded as dhyāna.]

(Answer) It is not so. We call this defiled state “dhyāna” because it resembles (pratirūpa) true dhyāna. Likewise, in the world, the expression “rotten seed” (pūtibīja) is not used for a stone or the like, but for something resembling a seed, even though that seed is no longer capable of sprouting. The sutra also speaks of unwholesome dhyānas.

(Question) On the basis of what characteristics are the various kinds of dhyāna established?

(Answer) The first dhyāna is one-pointed concentration (aikāgrya) endowed with vicāra, joy, and bliss [that is, associated with vicāra accompanied by joy and bliss, associated with joy (prīti), and associated with bliss (sukha)]. This statement also implies that it is “endowed with vitarka,” because vitarka must necessarily accompany it, just as smoke always accompanies fire. There can be no case in which vicāra is associated with joy and bliss but is not associated with vitarka.

The characteristics of the second, third, and fourth dhyānas are established through the successive elimination of each of these three factors. When vicāra is relinquished, the second dhyāna retains only joy and bliss; when joy is relinquished, the third dhyāna retains only bliss; and when bliss is relinquished, the fourth dhyāna is entirely devoid of all three factors.

For precisely this reason, the aforementioned “concentration upon a single object” is divided into four groups, or four dhyānas.

(Question) The dhyanas have been discussed above; what, then, are the “formless attainments” (arūpyas)?

The stanza answers:

[The formless attainments are likewise; they have four skandhas and arise from detachment from the lower sphere.

Together with the three higher preliminary stages,

They are collectively called “the elimination of the conception of form.”

The formless attainments are without form;

Later, form arises from the mind.

The three—Infinite Space, and so forth—

Are named according to their preparatory practices;

Neither-Conception-nor-Non-Conception

Is so named because conception there is faint and feeble.]

Treatise: The formless attainments are the various samadhis and modes of existence in the Formless Realm (ārūpyadhātu); their number and essential nature are the same as those of the dhyanas.

There are four formless attainments, and each is of two kinds: “rebirth” and “meditative absorption.” Rebirth in the formless attainments (eṣāmārūpyāṇāṃ upapattayaḥ) was explained in the third chapter. As for the formless meditative absorptions, their nature, generally speaking, is also “the concentration of wholesome minds upon a single object.”

It is because of these two similarities that the stanza says the formless attainments are like the dhyanas.

A dhyana has the five skandhas as its associated factors, but a formless attainment has only four skandhas, because all kinds of material dharmas (dhyānasaṃvara, anāsravasaṃvara) are absent from the Formless Realm (anuparivarta-karūpābhāvāt).

All the formless attainments are “concentration upon a single object”; yet they are divided into four kinds because this concentration arises from detachment (viveka) from a lower sphere.

The Sphere of Infinite Space (ākāśānantyāyatana) is the samadhi that arises from detachment from the fourth dhyana; and so on, up to the Sphere of Neither-Conception-nor-Non-Conception [or the Summit of Existence (bhavāgra)], which arises from detachment from the Sphere of Nothingness (ākiṃcanyāyatana).

(Question) What does “detachment” (viveka) mean?

(Answer) It is the path (ānantarya, vimuktimārga) that the practitioner has entered in order to become free from a lower sphere, because this path has turned away from that sphere on behalf of the practitioner (vairāgyagamanāttadvaimukhyagamanāt).

The fundamental formless attainments (maula), together with the preparatory stages (sāmantaka) for the three higher fundamental formless attainments, are also called “the elimination of the conception of form” (vibhūtarūpasaṃjña).

The first preliminary stage, namely the preparatory stage for the Sphere of Infinite Space, is not given this name because its object is the fourth dhyana, and in that dhyana the conception of form has not yet been transcended.

The formless attainments are called “the elimination of the conception of form” because no material dharmas exist in these meditative absorptions.

Other schools (nikāyāntariyāḥ) say that this must first be clearly demonstrated (sādhyam tāvad etad), because we maintain that form (rūpa) exists in the formless meditative absorptions.

(Question) If so, how can the formless meditative absorptions be called formless?

(Answer) They are so called because material dharmas have been diminished (īṣadrūpā ārupyāḥ) in these formless meditative absorptions, just as an object of a faint reddish color is commonly called “slightly red” (āpingala).

(Question) If so, according to you, what kind of form exists in the Formless Realm?

i. If it is said that this form is neither body nor speech but consists only of that produced by the restraints of body and speech (kāyavākṣaṃvaramātra—that is, the kind of form constituting part of the dharma-ayatana), how can restraint exist when there is neither body nor speech? And how can a derivative form (bhautika), such as restraint, exist without primary form, without the great elements (mahābhūtas)?

If it is maintained that the restraints of body and speech can exist without the support of the primary form of the Formless Realm, just as undefiled restraint exists without requiring great elements of the same nature—that is, undefiled great elements—this explanation is invalid, because undefiled restraint has as its support the defiled great elements belonging to the sphere into which the noble one has been born.

This demonstration of the nonexistence of material dharmas applies not only to rebirth in the Formless Realm but also to the formless meditative absorptions, [meditative absorptions in which there is no restraint belonging to form].

ii. If it is maintained that beings in the Formless Realm possess material faculties (rūpīndriya), how can it be said that form in the Formless Realm is subtle? Will you answer that, because the dimensions of these material faculties are exceedingly small (parimāṇālpatvāt), beings there possess subtle form (īṣadrūpa) and are therefore called “formless”? If so, microorganisms in water should also be called “formless.”

If it is maintained that material dharmas in the Formless Realm are extremely translucent (accha; supremely clear and subtle), beings in the intermediate existence and in the Form Realm also possess extremely translucent material dharmas.

If it is maintained that form in the Formless Realm is more translucent and that only this kind of form is called “formless,” then the name “Formless Realm” should be reserved for a sphere higher than the Formless Realm, because these bodies would become increasingly translucent according to the distinctions among the meditative absorptions in their respective spheres (samāpattivad upapattiviśeṣāt).

Moreover, the material bodies of beings in the Form Realm (or in the dhyanas) cannot be perceived by an eye belonging to a lower sphere because that form is exceedingly translucent. How, then, would it differ from the kind of form that you attribute to the Formless Realm?

Finally, if you maintain that the first two realms (dhātu) are named in accordance with their objects (anvarthasaṃjñā), whereas the Formless Realm is otherwise, this is merely a groundless assertion.

iii. It is held that the doctrine asserting the existence of material dharmas in the Formless Realm has four scriptural arguments: ⁽¹⁾ the Sutra says that vitality (āyus) and heat are conjoined (saṃsṛṣṭa); ⁽²⁾ name (that is, the four skandhas that are not material dharmas) and form depend upon each other like two bundles of reeds; ⁽³⁾ both name-and-form (nāmarūpa) have consciousness (vijñāna) as their cause; ⁽⁴⁾ consciousness does not come or go independently of form, feeling, conception, and formations (saṃskāras). (Saṃyutta, ii. 53)

These passages from the sutras do not have a determinate meaning, because they still require examination (saṃpradhāryatvāt): ⁽¹⁾ The Sutra says that vitality is associated with heat, and heat belongs to material dharmas; nevertheless, does this statement refer to every kind of vitality, or only to vitality in the Desire Realm? ⁽²⁾ The Sutra says that name and form depend upon each other; but does this statement refer to all the realms, or only to the Desire Realm and the Form Realm? ⁽³⁾ The Sutra says that name-and-form has consciousness as its condition (vijñāna pratyayaṃ nāmarūpam);

but in saying this, does the Sutra intend to teach that every consciousness is a cause of name-and-form—that is, a consciousness having as its cause formations belonging to the Desire Realm or the Formless Realm—or a consciousness having as its cause formations belonging to the Formless Realm, [meaning a consciousness produced by the ripening karma of an existence in the Desire Realm, and so forth]? ⁽⁴⁾ The Sutra does not admit that consciousness comes (āgati) or goes (gati) independently of the four “stations of consciousness” (vijñānasthiti), that is, apart from form, feeling, conception, and formations; nevertheless, does the Sutra mean “apart from all the spheres (athitis)”?

It might be said that the sutra sets this forth in general terms (aviśeṣavacanāt), and that we should not interpret it further (na saṃpradhāryam etat); we have no right to suppose that the sutra speaks in this way only with reference to the Realm of Desire, and so forth. This assertion, however, is untenable, because if one adheres literally to every word of the sutra, the following absurd conclusions would result: ⁽¹⁾ life (āyus) would necessarily accompany warmth, even when that warmth exists outside the body (external warmth); ⁽²⁾ external matter would also depend upon name; ⁽³⁾ external matter would have consciousness as its cause; ⁽⁴⁾ material food would exist in the Realm of Form and the Formless Realm, because the sutra states only in general terms that there are four kinds of food;

likewise, it states in general terms that there are four abodes of consciousness, and on this basis you have concluded that an abode in form still exists in the Formless Realm.

(Question) Will you say that this is not so because, when generally setting forth the four kinds of food, the sutra specifies exceptional cases? It speaks of a class of devas who “have transcended the heavens whose beings subsist on material food,” and of devas who “subsist on joy.” If you say this, it is still untenable; for does not the sutra also say that material phenomena do not exist in the Formless Realm? The sutra says: ⁽¹⁾ “The Formless attainments are the escape from forms” (rūpaṇāṃ niḥsaraṇam ārūpyāḥ); ⁽²⁾ “These exceedingly peaceful liberations, beyond forms, are precisely the Formless attainments…”; ⁽³⁾ “There are modes of existence without form, entirely transcending every conception of form” (Madhyama, 24, 12).

Thus, if material phenomena existed in the modes of existence or attainments belonging to the Formless Realm, the beings there would necessarily have perceptions of form; and the sutra could not say that a practitioner attains these modes of existence and these attainments by transcending every conception of form.

Those who disagree with us will reply that various passages of scripture are not intended to speak generally of all material phenomena, but refer only to coarse form belonging to a lower plane. This claim, however, would entail that: ⁽¹⁾ the passage concerning material food should be understood in the same way, and thus material food would exist in a subtle form in the Realm of Form and the Formless Realm; ⁽²⁾ it should be said that a practitioner becomes detached from material phenomena through the dhyanas, and that the dhyanas all belong to the Formless Realm because they are above the coarse forms of the lower plane, the Realm of Desire;

⁽³⁾ it should be said that a practitioner becomes detached from feeling (vedanā), and so forth, through the Formless attainments, because these attainments are above the feelings of the lower planes, and they should therefore be called “without feeling,” and so forth.

Yet the sutra does not explain matters in this way. It must therefore be accepted that the Formless attainments transcend all material phenomena, whatever kind of material phenomena they may be.

(Question) How can the Formless attainments be called the “escape” (niḥsaraṇa) from material phenomena? For the Blessed One does not accept that one mode of existence (bhava) is itself the escape from existence.

(Answer) It is true that the Blessed One said this, because a practitioner cannot escape from a certain mode of existence by means of that very mode of existence. Moreover, while existing in any manner whatsoever, one cannot escape from all modes of existence (asarvaniḥsaraṇa), nor can one completely escape from a particular mode of existence (anatyantaniḥsaraṇa).

Finally, the Blessed One said that in the dhyanas there are form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness, whereas in the Formless attainments there are feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness. If form truly remained present in the Formless attainments, why did the Blessed One not say that form was present, as he did in speaking of the dhyanas?

The two arguments presented above demonstrate that no material phenomena exist in the Formless Realm. Any master of the treatises who maintains that material phenomena still exist in the Formless Realm advocates an erroneous and unreasonable doctrine.

(Question) If so, when a being obtains existence in the Formless Realm, the continuity of that being’s physical body will be interrupted for many kalpas. When that being is ultimately reborn in a lower realm, from where will that being’s form arise?

(Answer) At that time, form will arise from mind. That is to say, a cause—some particular karma, and so forth—had previously arisen, and when this cause “ripens,” it becomes form (a cause of the maturation of form). The trace (vāsanā, perfuming) of this cause abides in the mind, and at this stage its efficacy has “ripened.” Therefore, the material phenomena now arising are precisely material phenomena born from mind.

(Question) How, then, can the mind in the Formless Realm exist without being associated with form?

(Counterquestion) Why could the mind not exist without form?

(Reply) Because in this realm, the Realm of Desire, there has never been an instance of mind existing without a body.

(Explanation) If you rely on this reasoning, you will deny the possibility that beings in the Realm of Form transcend material food. Moreover, we have already explained that the supports of mind in the Formless Realm are the homogeneous class (nikāya) and the life faculty (jivata).

(Question) The general designation of the Formless attainments has been explained above. Do these attainments bear such specific names as the Sphere of Infinite Space, and so forth, because they take space (ākāśa), and so forth, as their objects?

(Answer) No. The three lower Formless attainments—the Sphere of Infinite Space, the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness, and the Sphere of Nothingness—bear their respective names because, during the preparatory stage, space and so forth are contemplated.

The name of the fourth Formless attainment is established because perception (saṃjñā) therein is extremely feeble. Yet although perception is indistinct or inactive (paṭu), this fourth Formless attainment is not devoid of perception; hence it is called Neither Perception nor Non-Perception.

Certainly, during the preparatory stage for this Formless attainment, one thinks: “Perception is a disease! Perception is a boil! Perception is an arrow! Non-perception is delusion (saṃmoha)! Neither perception nor non-perception (naivasaṃjñānāsaṃjñāyatana) alone is peaceful and sublime!” Nevertheless, it is not because of this preparatory stage that the fourth Formless attainment is so named.

(Question) Why does the practitioner, while in the preparatory stage, regard the fourth Formless attainment as “neither perception nor non-perception”?

(Answer) The answer must certainly be: “Because perceptions are exceedingly feeble” (mṛdutvāt saṃjñānām). This is the explanation of its name.

(Question) The Formless attainments have been discussed above. What are meditative attainments?

The stanza answers:

[There are eight fundamental meditative attainments;

Each of the first seven is of three kinds:

Savoring, pure, and uncontaminated;

The last is of two kinds: savoring and pure.

The savoring attainment is associated with craving;

The pure attainment is mundane wholesome,

And is the object of attachment of the savoring attainment.

The uncontaminated attainment is supramundane.]

Treatise: The four dhyanas and the four Formless attainments constitute the eight fundamental concentrations (maulasamāpattidravyas, fundamental meditative attainments).

The first seven fundamental meditative attainments can each be of three kinds. The eighth attainment, because of the feebleness of perception (saṃjñāmādyāt) [which consequently leads to the feebleness of insight (vipaśyanā)], is never uncontaminated (anāsrava).

The first type, namely the enjoyment attainment (āsvādanasamāpatti), is an attainment associated with craving. Because craving clings to and relishes it, it is called “enjoyment” (āsvādana). Thus, an attainment associated with craving is precisely an “enjoyment attainment” or “pleasurable attainment.”

Pure attainment (śuddha, śuddhaka) is a wholesome mundane concentration (samādhi). This concentration is wholesome in nature when it arises through association with “pure dharmas” such as non-greed (alobha), and so forth.

Pure attainment is the object to which enjoyment attainment clings. Immediately after a pure attainment ceases, an enjoyment attainment arises and clings to the pure attainment that has just ceased. At that time, although the practitioner has emerged (vyutthita) from the pure attainment being relished, the practitioner is still in an attainment, because there is the enjoyment attainment upon which the practitioner must rely in order to relish it.

Undefiled attainment is supramundane. It can be neither a cause nor an object of craving; therefore, it is not relished.

Among the eight attainments, only the dhyānas—not the four formless attainments—have factors (aṅga), [because calm abiding (śamatha) and insight (vipaśyanā) are balanced only in them].

(Question) How many factors does each dhyāna have?

The stanza answers:

[The first dhyāna has five factors:

Initial application, sustained application, joy, bliss, and concentration.

The second has four factors:

Inner clarity, joy, bliss, and concentration.

The third has five factors:

Equanimity, mindfulness, wisdom, bliss, and concentration.

The fourth has four factors:

Equanimity, mindfulness, neutral feeling, and concentration.]

Commentary: The first dhyāna—when pure or undefiled in nature—possesses all five factors: initial application (vitarka), sustained application (vicāra), joy (prīti), bliss (sukha), and one-pointedness of mind (cittaikāgratā = samādhi, concentration).

According to tradition, concentration is both dhyāna and a factor of dhyāna, whereas the other factors are merely factors of dhyāna and are not themselves dhyāna. In our view, however, dhyāna nevertheless has five factors, just as an army is divided into four divisions: the army does not exist separately from its divisions.

The second dhyāna has four factors: joy and the others—that is, joy, bliss, and one-pointedness of mind—together with inner clarity (adhyātmasaṃprasāda).

The third dhyāna has five factors: ⁽¹⁾ equanimity (upekṣā), not equanimous feeling (vedanopekṣā) but formative equanimity (saṃskāropekṣā), namely a kind of joy (prīti) directed effortlessly toward any given object (anābhogalakṣaṇa); ⁽²⁾ mindfulness (smṛti), namely not losing the cause or basis (nimitta) of this equanimity (upekṣanimittāsaṃpramoṣa); ⁽³⁾ clear comprehension (saṃprajñāna), namely the understanding connected with the aforementioned mindfulness; ⁽⁴⁾ bliss; and ⁽⁵⁾ concentration.

The fourth dhyāna has four factors: ⁽¹⁾ purity of formative equanimity (upekṣāpariśuddhi), ⁽²⁾ purity of mindfulness (smṛtipariśuddhi), ⁽³⁾ neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling (aduḥkhāsukhā vedanā), or equanimous feeling, and ⁽⁴⁾ concentration.

(Question) Thus, in terms of their names, there are as many as eighteen factors. But if they are not analyzed in such minute detail, how many real dharmas do these eighteen factors constitute?

The stanza answers:

[There are eleven real dharmas:

In the first two dhyānas, bliss is merely pliancy;

Inner clarity is the faculty of faith;

Joy is precisely joyful feeling.]

Commentary: There are eleven real dharmas, comprising the five found only in the first dhyāna, together with ⁽¹⁾ the inner clarity of the second dhyāna; (2–5) the equanimity, mindfulness, clear comprehension, and bliss of the third dhyāna; and ⁽⁶⁾ the neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling of the fourth dhyāna. Together, these constitute eleven distinct dharmas.

Thus, there are factors of the first dhyāna that are not factors of the second dhyāna.

Altogether there are four cases: ⁽¹⁾ factors of the first dhyāna that are not factors of the second dhyāna: initial application and sustained application; ⁽²⁾ a factor of the second dhyāna that is not a factor of the first dhyāna: inner clarity; ⁽³⁾ factors common to the first two dhyānas: joy, bliss, and one-pointedness of mind; and ⁽⁴⁾ factors belonging to neither of the first two dhyānas: the remaining factors.

The relationships among the factors of the other two dhyānas are likewise established according to the foregoing principles.

(Question) Why is the bliss of the third dhyāna said to constitute a new factor? Was bliss not already present in the first two dhyānas?

(Answer) Because the bliss of the third dhyāna is truly pleasant feeling (sukha vedanā), whereas in the first and second dhyānas what is called “bliss” is merely pliancy (praśrabdhi = karmaṇyatā): there is only the bliss of pliancy (praśrabdhisukha), namely the kind of bliss found solely within pliancy.

The faculty of pleasure cannot be present in the first two dhyānas (sukhendriyāyogāt = asaṃbhavāt). Why? Because ⁽¹⁾ the bliss in these dhyānas cannot be bodily pleasure: for one absorbed in attainment, the five bodily consciousnesses are absent; and ⁽²⁾ the bliss in these dhyānas cannot be mental (caitasika), that is, pleasant mental feeling, because these dhyānas already possess joy. This joy is precisely joyful mental feeling (saumanasya), and it is unacceptable that joy and bliss should both operate simultaneously.

Nor can it be maintained that they operate successively, because the first dhyāna has as many as five factors, whereas the second dhyāna has only four.

The doctrine of the Dārṣṭāntikas:

i. In the first three dhyānas, there is no mental faculty of pleasure, but only a bodily faculty of pleasure, which constitutes the factor of bliss in these dhyānas [and operates simultaneously with concentration].

(Question) If you maintain this position, you must explain why the sūtra says: “What is the faculty of pleasure (sukhendriya)? The bodily (kāyika) and mental (caitasika) pleasure that arises through pleasant contact is the faculty of pleasure.”

(The Dārṣṭāntikas reply:) The foregoing citation is inaccurate because the word “mental” has been added. In the texts of all the schools, only the word “bodily” is found. Moreover, when referring to bliss as a factor of the third dhyāna, the sūtra states very clearly that in this dhyāna the practitioner “experiences bliss with the body” (sukhaṃ... kāyena saṃpravedayate; bliss experienced by the body). If it is maintained that “body” (kāyena) means the mental body (manaḥkāyena = manaḥsamudāyena), and that the phrase should therefore be rendered, “the practitioner experiences bliss through this very aggregate that is mind,” then why does the sūtra still employ the word “body” to express that meaning?

ii. The Vaibhāṣika explanation that the factor of bliss in the first two dhyānas is precisely pliancy (praśrabdhi = karmaṇyatā) is untenable, because the pliancy of the fourth dhyāna must certainly be greater than that of the first two dhyānas, yet the sūtra does not say that the fourth dhyāna has a factor of bliss.

If the Vaibhāṣikas reply, “The pliancy of the first two dhyānas is called bliss because this pliancy is conducive to pleasant feeling, whereas the pliancy of the fourth dhyāna does not possess this quality,” then the Dārṣṭāntikas will answer: “The pliancy of the third dhyāna is also like that of the first two dhyānas, in that it too is conducive to pleasant feeling. Why, then, do the Vaibhāṣikas not say that the third dhyāna has the bliss of pliancy—that is, the kind of bliss included within pliancy—but instead say that it has only pleasant feeling—that is, the kind of bliss included within pleasant mental feeling?”

If the Vaibhāṣikas reply, “In the third dhyāna, pliancy is impaired (upahata) by equanimity,” the Dārṣṭāntikas will reject this explanation: It is precisely equanimity that causes pliancy to increase, for the pliancy of the third dhyāna is greater than that of the first two dhyānas.

Finally, the sutra says: “When the noble disciple still abides in concentration after attaining the joy born of seclusion, then five dharmas have been abandoned in that person, while the cultivation of five dharmas—joy, pliancy, bliss, wisdom, and concentration—has been accomplished.” According to this sutra, pliancy is named separately from bliss; therefore, pliancy must be distinct from bliss for this enumeration of five dharmas to be complete. Thus, in the first two dhyānas, bliss is not pliancy.

iii. The Vaibhāṣikas’ objection: If the bliss of the first two dhyānas is to be a bodily feeling, a pleasant bodily feeling, then bodily consciousness (kāyajñāna) must arise in one who is absorbed in meditation (samāpanna). This, however, cannot occur.

The Dārṣṭāntikas’ reply: During meditative absorption, the body is pervaded (spharaṇa) by a kind of wind (vāyu) produced by an extraordinary concentration (samādhiviśeṣaja); and this wind [which is itself also a kind of contact] is experienced as pleasant (sukhavedanīya = sukhavedanānukūla; conducive to the arising of pleasant feeling) [and is called pliancy]. Therefore, a kind of bodily consciousness still arises [together with the pleasant feeling associated with this bodily consciousness].

The Vaibhāṣikas’ criticism: When this consciousness arises, there will be a “distraction of the mind toward an external object” (bahirvikṣepa, bāhyaviṣayavikṣepa); and if so, the practitioner will fall away from samādhi (samādhibhraṃśa).

The Dārṣṭāntikas’ reply: This is not so, because the pleasant bodily feeling is itself produced by concentration—that is, it remains within the body—and therefore is still in harmony with samādhi.

The Vaibhāṣikas’ criticism: But will the practitioner not fall away from samādhi at the moment bodily consciousness arises?

The Dārṣṭāntikas’ reply: That cannot be so, for the reason is just as we have explained above: This kind of consciousness remains in harmony with concentration, and as soon as it ceases, concentration arises again.

The Vaibhāṣikas: How can the bodily faculty, or faculty of contact (kāyendriya), belonging to the Desire Realm give rise to a consciousness of contact belonging to the Form Realm, which you call pliancy?

The Dārṣṭāntikas: This objection is incorrect, because a consciousness of contact still arises dependent upon pliancy (a consciousness conditioned by pliancy).

The Vaibhāṣikas: It is difficult to maintain that pliancy is contact. Suppose the practitioner attains a supramundane (anāsrava, uncontaminated) dhyāna. Contact (praśrabdhi) and the consciousness of contact (kāyavijñāna) would then be conjoined and would both be uncontaminated, because among the factors of an uncontaminated dhyāna, one factor cannot be uncontaminated while another is contaminated. [Yet the sutra says: “All eye-consciousness ... and contact are contaminated.”]

(The Dārṣṭāntikas:) There is nothing wrong with saying this, because bodily pliancy (kāyasya karmaṇyatā) has been defined as an awakening factor. If the Vaibhāṣikas reply, “Although bodily pliancy is not itself an awakening factor, it has been defined in this way because it accords with the awakening factor called pliancy, which is a kind of mental pliancy,” we shall reply that, according to this explanation, bodily pliancy may likewise be regarded as uncontaminated.

If the Vaibhāṣikas reply, “Bodily pliancy cannot be uncontaminated because the sutra declares that all contacts are contaminated,” we shall answer that the sutra states this with an implicit intention (a statement of hidden intent): It refers to kinds of contact other than pliancy and to consciousnesses of contact other than the consciousness of contact that apprehends pliancy.

The Vaibhāṣikas: How can it be accepted that some factors of an uncontaminated dhyāna are uncontaminated while other factors are not uncontaminated?

The Dārṣṭāntikas: Because the uncontaminated factor does not arise simultaneously (ayaugapadya) with the factor that is not uncontaminated; it is known that pleasant bodily feeling cannot coexist (asamavadhāna) with mental joyful feeling.

The Vaibhāṣikas: If so, the first dhyāna will not possess all five factors, and the second dhyāna will not possess all four factors.

The Dārṣṭāntikas: If the sutra includes the factors of bliss and joy among the first two dhyānas, it is because these two dhyānas, respectively, are capable of possessing bliss and joy; just as the sutra includes in the first dhyāna the two mental activities of initial application and sustained application, which can arise only successively.

The Vaibhāṣikas: We have affirmed that initial application and sustained application arise simultaneously. Therefore, the example you offer to demonstrate that the factors do not arise simultaneously is untenable.

The Dārṣṭāntikas: This example remains tenable, because initial application, which is a coarse mode of mind, and sustained application, which is a subtle mode of mind, are mutually incompatible and therefore cannot arise simultaneously. Moreover, we do not say that their non-simultaneous arising is erroneous. We are addressing the question of “factors”: The distinctive character of the second dhyāna and the subsequent dhyānas is determined by the exclusion (apakarṣa) of two, three, and four factors.

It is precisely for this reason that the first dhyāna is said to have five factors: The other dhyānas are to be defined through the progressive exclusion of the initial factors from among these. For this very reason, perception (saṃjñā) and the other dharmas of the first dhyāna are not regarded as factors, simply because they are not excluded in the subsequent dhyānas. If you do not accept this explanation, why does the first dhyāna have only five factors?

The Vaibhāṣikas: Only these five are called factors because they are beneficial to (upakāratvāt) the first dhyāna.

The Dārṣṭāntikas: That is not so, because mindfulness and wisdom are even more beneficial to the first dhyāna than initial application and sustained application.

Although one school has maintained the presentation given above, the earlier masters (pūrvācāryas) did not explain it in the same way. Therefore, this matter requires further consideration.

(Question) What is inner serenity (adhyātmasaṃprasāda)?

(Answer) When the agitation caused by initial application and sustained application ceases, the continuum proceeds peacefully and lucidly (praśāntavāhitā): This is called inner serenity. Just as a river may be rippled by waves, so too is the continuum: When agitated by initial application and sustained application, it is neither tranquil nor lucid [this is the explanation of the Sautrāntikas].

However, to accept this explanation, inner serenity would have to be denied the status of a real dharma possessing its own intrinsic nature; consequently, there would not be eleven real dharmas among the dhyānas. Therefore, it must be said that faith itself is serenity (prasāda).

Purity is a real dharma: it is faith (śraddhā). When the practitioner attains the plane of the second dhyana, they acquire profound faith: the practitioner acknowledges that even the planes of concentration can be abandoned. This faith is precisely inner equipoise and purity. Faith is called purity because it has the nature of purity. After relinquishing external objects, faith functions evenly; it is therefore called “inner equipoise” (adhyalmaṃ sama). Because purity is a dharma that is inward and even, it is called “inner equipoise and purity.”

According to other masters (the Sautrantikas), initial application, sustained application, concentration, and inner equipoise and purity are not dharmas possessing distinct real entities (dṛvyāntara).

(Question) If they do not possess distinct real entities, how can they be said to be mental factors?

(Answer) The different phases of the mind are called mental factors (caitasika) because they arise in the mind, but the Abhidharma does not accept this position, which is not the doctrine of our school.

(Sautrantikas) Above, you said that joy (prīti) is the feeling of gladness (saumanasya). On what basis have you established this definition?

(Question) Joy is not the feeling of gladness. If joy is not the feeling of gladness, then according to you, what dharma is the feeling of gladness?

(Answer) We follow another school. According to this school, besides the feeling of gladness there is another distinct dharma: a mental factor called joy. The pleasure of the three dhyanas is the feeling of gladness (saumanasya); therefore joy (prīti), being different from pleasure, is also different from the feeling of gladness.

(Explanation) It cannot be accepted that the pleasure in the dhyanas is the feeling of gladness.

Joy itself is the feeling of gladness, and this has been demonstrated by the sutras. In the Viparītasūtra, the Buddha said: “In the third dhyana, the faculty of gladness (saumanasayendriya) that had previously arisen is completely destroyed without remainder; in the fourth dhyana, the faculty of pleasure (sukhendriya) is completely destroyed.” In another sutra, the Buddha said: “Through the abandonment of the faculty of pleasure and the faculty of pain (duḥkhendriya), and through the prior destruction of the faculty of grief (daurmanasyendriya) and the faculty of gladness.” Both sutras demonstrate that the faculty of gladness does not exist in the third dhyana. Therefore, joy is precisely the feeling of gladness.

(Question) Are the factors just mentioned present in the defiled (kliṣṭa) dhyanas?

(Answer) They are not.

(Question) Which factors are absent from the defiled dhyanas?

The stanza answers:

[In the defiled dhyanas, beginning with the first in sequence,

There are no joy and pleasure; inner purity;

Right mindfulness, discernment, equanimity, and mindfulness.

Some say tranquility is equanimity.]

Commentary: When defiled, the first dhyana does not possess joy and pleasure “born of seclusion,” because this first dhyana is not separated from the afflictions of the Desire Realm (kleśāviviktatvāt). (Vibhāṣā, 160, 15),

The second dhyana does not possess inner equipoise and purity because it is disturbed by the afflictions (kleśāvilatvāt); the afflictions prevent it from being clear and pure (kleśair aprasannatvāt).

The third dhyana does not possess mindfulness (smṛti) and discernment (saṃprajanya), because it is bewildered by defiled pleasure (kliṣṭasukhasaṃbhramitatvāt).

The fourth dhyana does not possess purity of equanimity (upekṣāpariśuddhi) or purity of mindfulness (smṛtipariśuddhi), because it is defiled by the afflictions (kleśamatinatvāt).

Some masters say: ⁽¹⁾ tranquility is absent from the first two dhyanas; ⁽²⁾ equanimity is absent from the last two dhyanas, because tranquility and equanimity are dharmas that exist only in wholesome minds (kuśalamahābhūmika; universally wholesome mental factors).

The sutras (Madhyama, 5, 1; Majjhima, i. 454, ii, 261; Anguttara, etc., 135) teach that the first three dhyanas are subject to disturbance (sa-injita) because of calamities (apakṣālas).

[The fourth is called immovable

Because it is free from eight calamities.

The eight calamities are initial application, sustained application,

The four feelings, inhalation, and exhalation.]

Commentary: The fourth dhyana is called immovable because it has escaped the eight calamities.

(Question) What are the eight calamities?

(Answer) They are initial application, sustained application, pleasure, pain, gladness, grief, inhalation (āśvāsa), and exhalation (praśvāsa). All eight are absent from the fourth dhyana; therefore, this dhyana alone is immovable. In fact, the sutra says that the fourth dhyana is immovable because it is not disturbed by initial application, sustained application, joy, or pleasure. [It does not intend thereby to add inhalation and the other factors to the fourth dhyana; the sutra merely seeks to distinguish it from the other dhyanas].

Other masters hold that the fourth dhyana is immovable because it resembles a lamp in a sheltered place, undisturbed by the wind.

(Question) Do the modes of birth in the dhyanas (dhyānopapattayaḥ), or the states of existence in the Form Realm, have feelings (vedanās) like those in the concentrations of the dhyanas?

The stanza answers:

[For those born in the dhyanas, beginning with the first in sequence,

There are feelings of gladness, pleasure, and equanimity;

Gladness and equanimity; pleasure and equanimity;

And equanimity alone.]

Commentary: Birth in the first dhyana entails three feelings: ⁽¹⁾ the feeling of pleasure, associated with three consciousnesses—visual, auditory, and bodily; ⁽²⁾ the feeling of gladness, belonging to the element of mental consciousness; ⁽³⁾ the feeling of equanimity, associated with four consciousnesses—visual, auditory, bodily, and mental.

Birth in the second dhyana entails two feelings, gladness and equanimity, both belonging to the mental element (manas). There is no pleasure because the five sensory consciousnesses (vijñāna) are absent.

Birth in the third dhyana entails two feelings, pleasure and equanimity, both belonging to the mental element.

Birth in the fourth dhyana entails only one feeling: equanimity.

The foregoing describes the difference in feelings between modes of existence and the concentrations belonging to the dhyanas.

(Question) Beyond the second dhyana, if the three consciousnesses—visual, auditory, and bodily—are also absent, like initial and sustained application, how can beings in the three higher celestial realms of dhyana see, hear, and touch? How can they initiate manifest karma of body and speech?

(Answer) We do not say that beings in these realms lack visual consciousness and so forth. They still possess these consciousnesses, but they do not belong to the planes of the second, third, or fourth dhyana.

(Question) Why?

The stanza answers:

[Those born in the three higher dhyanas

Produce the three consciousnesses and the mind that initiates manifest karma;

All belong to the first dhyana

And are only unobscured and indeterminate.]

Commentary: Visual consciousness and so forth, as well as the type of consciousness that produces manifest karma, do not exist in the second dhyana or the higher dhyanas. Yet beings in these dhyanas can still bring these consciousnesses into manifestation (saṃmukhīkurvanti), just as they can bring into manifestation a mind of magical creation (nirmāṇacitta) belonging to a lower plane; by means of these consciousnesses, they can still see, hear, touch, and initiate manifest karma.

The four consciousnesses thus brought into manifestation by beings in the second and higher dhyanas all belong to the plane of the first dhyana. Thus, they are not defiled, because these beings have become detached (virakta) from the lower planes; nor are they wholesome, because the wholesome dharmas of a lower plane are of an inferior kind.

(Question) How does the acquisition (lābha) of the attainments (samāpattis) of the Form Realm and Formless Realm occur when they are pure (śuddhaka) or defiled?

The stanza answers:

[Only one who has not attained them at all can acquire them.

Pure concentration arises through freedom from defilement;

Uncontaminated concentration arises through freedom from defilement;

Defiled concentration arises through birth and regression.]

Treatise: One who has not attained these absorptions (atadvān, tadasamanvāgataḥ) attains them either by becoming detached from a lower sphere (adhobhūmivairāgyāt) or by being born in a lower sphere (adhobhūmyupapattitas); except that the fourth absorption of the Formless Realm (the Summit of Existence) is attained only by becoming detached from the third absorption.

(Question) What is meant by the statement “one who has not attained any of them”?

(Answer) It means “one who has never attained them or has lost them.” In fact, one who has attained pure concentrations of the “conducive to decline” (hānabhāgīya) class and so forth may, through preparatory practice, attain pure concentrations of a higher class (nirvedhabhāgīya, conducive to penetrative discernment); one who has attained pure concentrations of the “conducive to stability” (sthitibhāgīya) class may, through regression, attain pure concentrations of the “conducive to decline” class.

The Vibhāṣā says: “Can a pure dhyāna be attained through detachment? Can a pure dhyāna be relinquished through detachment? Can a pure dhyāna be attained through regression?

Can a pure dhyāna be relinquished through regression? Can a pure dhyāna be attained through birth? Can a pure dhyāna be relinquished through birth?—It can.

Such is the case with the first dhyāna of the ‘conducive to decline’ class: ⁽¹⁾ One attains this dhyāna by becoming detached from the Desire Realm; ⁽²⁾ one loses this dhyāna by becoming detached from the Brahmā world (brahmaloka) [that is, by entering the second dhyāna]; ⁽³⁾ one attains this dhyāna upon regressing from detachment from the Brahmā world; ⁽⁴⁾ one loses this dhyāna upon regressing from detachment from the Desire Realm; ⁽⁵⁾ one attains this dhyāna upon being reborn above in the Brahmā world; ⁽⁶⁾ one loses this dhyāna upon being reborn in the Desire Realm.” [The same applies to the concentrations of the other spheres (Xuanzang).] One attains uncontaminated (anāsrava) concentrations through detachment;

this, too, refers only to the case of “one who has not attained them.” When a noble one becomes detached from a lower sphere, that person attains an uncontaminated concentration belonging to a higher sphere.

This occurs only for a practitioner who has completely lost that type of concentration.

One who has already attained a concentration attains that concentration with the quality of being uncontaminated under other conditions. Through the knowledge of destruction (kṣayajñāna), one attains an uncontaminated concentration belonging to the group beyond training (aśaikṣa); through the perfection of the faculties (indriyasaṃcāra), one attains an uncontaminated concentration belonging to the group in training (śaikṣa) or beyond training, as the case may be. [An uncontaminated concentration already attained is still attained through preparatory practice or regression, as explained above (Xuanzang).]

(Question) Does not a practitioner who has entered the “certainty of the right nature” (samyaktvaniyāma) still attain an uncontaminated concentration for the first time?

(Answer) Not necessarily. This is because those who cultivate in sequence (ānupūrvika) may enter the “certainty of the right nature” by relying on the preliminary concentration (anāgamya), and such a person does not necessarily attain a fundamental absorption (maulasamāpatti). [The treatise, however, discusses only cases in which the concentration is necessarily attained (Xuanzang).]

One who regresses from detachment from a sphere attains the defiled concentration of that sphere. One who dies in a higher concentration but is born in a lower sphere attains the defiled concentration of that lower sphere.

(Question) How many kinds of absorption arise after how many kinds of absorption?

The stanza answers:

[Following the uncontaminated, the wholesome arises,

In higher and lower spheres, as far as the third sphere;

Following the pure, the same also arises,

With the addition of a defiled concentration in the same sphere;

A defiled concentration gives rise to a pure concentration and a defiled concentration in the same sphere,

And to the pure concentration of one lower sphere.

At death, from a pure concentration arise all kinds of defiled concentrations;

From a defiled concentration arise defiled concentrations of its own and lower spheres.]

Treatise: 1. Immediately after the uncontaminated first dhyāna, six concentrations arise: (1–2) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the same sphere; (3–6) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the second and third dhyānas.

2. Immediately after the uncontaminated Sphere of Nothingness (ākiṃcanyāyatana), seven concentrations arise: (1–2) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the same sphere; (3–6) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness (vijñānānantyāyatana) and the Sphere of Infinite Space (ākāśānantyāyatana); ⁽⁷⁾ the pure concentration of the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception (naivasaṃjñānāsaṃjñāyatana), because this sphere has no uncontaminated concentration.

3. Immediately after the second dhyāna, eight concentrations arise: (1–2) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the same sphere; (3–8) the pure and uncontaminated concentrations of the third, fourth, and first dhyānas.

4. Immediately after the uncontaminated Sphere of Infinite Consciousness, nine concentrations arise: (1–2) two concentrations of the same sphere; (3–6) four concentrations, of which two belong to the Sphere of Infinite Space and two belong to the fourth dhyāna; (7–9) three concentrations, of which two belong to the Sphere of Nothingness and one belongs to the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception.

5. According to the foregoing principles, we see that ten concentrations arise immediately after the concentrations belonging to the dhyānas and the Formless Realm that were not specifically mentioned above.

The foregoing principle may be summarized as follows:

Immediately after an uncontaminated concentration (anāsrava), a wholesome concentration (śubha) arises as far as the third sphere, whether proceeding upward or downward.

The word “wholesome” denotes pure (śuddhaka) and uncontaminated concentrations, because both are wholesome in nature ().

Immediately after an uncontaminated concentration, there may arise: ⁽¹⁾ two kinds of concentration in the same sphere as that uncontaminated concentration, namely, the pure and the uncontaminated; ⁽²⁾ or two kinds of concentration, pure or uncontaminated, belonging to a higher or lower sphere as far as the third sphere in either direction (ūrdhvādhobhūmike yāvat tṛtīyāt). Because the distance would be too great, the practitioner cannot pass beyond these two intervening spheres.

Immediately after subsequent knowledge (anvayajñāna), one may enter a Formless concentration; but this is not possible after Dharma knowledge (dharmajñāna), because this knowledge relies upon and takes as its object only a lower sphere (adharālambanatvāt).

The foregoing concerns the concentrations that arise from an uncontaminated absorption (anāsravasamāpatti).

Immediately after any pure concentration, a defiled concentration of the same sphere may arise. The remainder is the same as in the cases of uncontaminated concentration. A defiled concentration cannot arise after an uncontaminated concentration.

Immediately after a defiled concentration, a pure or defiled concentration of the same sphere may arise.

And the pure concentration of one lower sphere.

Because the practitioner is oppressed by the afflictions of the same sphere—that is, the afflictions particular to the defiled concentration of a lower sphere—the practitioner has aroused esteem for the pure concentration of a lower sphere. Therefore, immediately after a defiled concentration belonging to a higher sphere (the second dhyāna), a pure concentration belonging to a lower sphere (the first dhyāna) may arise.

(Question) If the practitioner could distinguish correctly between pure and defiled concentrations, the practitioner should be able to pass from a higher defiled concentration to a lower pure concentration. Yet because the practitioner is defiled, the practitioner is incapable of making this distinction. How, then, can a pure concentration arise immediately after a defiled concentration?

(Answer) It is owing to the power of a previous vow (praṇidhāna). The practitioner had made the vow: “May I attain a pure concentration of a lower ground! What should I do regarding the defiled concentration of a higher ground?” The “continuum” is able to proceed owing to the power of the vow; therefore, a pure concentration belonging to a lower ground subsequently arises in succession to the defiled concentration of the higher ground. This is like a person who has resolved to sleep until a certain time, and therefore goes to sleep and awakens at that appointed time.

An undefiled concentration, regardless of the ground to which it belongs, never arises immediately after a defiled concentration [there is no reciprocal arising between these two types. A pure concentration, however, can arise reciprocally with both undefiled and defiled concentrations].

It was stated above that a defiled concentration succeeding a pure or defiled concentration always belongs to the same ground as the concentration it succeeds. This occurs only in cases where one is abiding in concentration. At the time of death, however, following a pure concentration attained during life, a defiled mind belonging to any ground may arise. At the time of death, following concentrations belonging to the Form Realm and Formless Realm, only a defiled mind belonging to the same ground or a lower ground can arise.

(Question) It was stated above that an undefiled concentration can succeed a pure concentration. Does this mean that every type of pure concentration can give rise to an undefiled concentration?

The stanza answers:

[Pure concentration is of four kinds:

Conducive to decline,

Conducive to stability, conducive to superior progress,

And conducive to penetration;

In sequence, they accord with the afflictions,

With their own ground, with a higher ground, and with the undefiled;

In this same order, they also mutually

Give rise to two, three, three, and one division.]

Treatise: Pure concentration is of four kinds: conducive to decline (hānabhāgīya), conducive to stability (sthitibhāgīya), conducive to superior progress (viśeṣabhāgīya), and conducive to penetration (nirvedhabhāgīya). However, pure concentration in the Sphere of Neither Perception nor Non-Perception is of only three kinds, excluding that conducive to superior progress, because there is no higher ground beyond this sphere.

(Question) What are these four kinds?

(Answer) When a pure concentration tends to lead to the arising of afflictions, it is called conducive to decline.

When a pure concentration tends to lead to a ground of its own level, it is called conducive to stability.

When a pure concentration tends to lead to a higher ground, it is called conducive to superior progress.

When a pure concentration tends to lead to an undefiled concentration, it is called conducive to penetration. Thus, it is precisely from pure concentration belonging to this last group that undefiled concentration arises.

(Question) How do these four kinds mutually arise?

(Answer) That which follows the division conducive to decline is either conducive to decline or conducive to stability.

That which follows the division conducive to stability is one of three divisions, excluding that conducive to penetration.

That which follows the division conducive to superior progress is one of three divisions, excluding that conducive to decline.

That which follows the division conducive to penetration is only that conducive to penetration (vị tự phi dư).

(Question) It was stated above that “immediately after a pure or undefiled concentration of a certain ground, a pure or undefiled concentration belonging to the third ground in the upward or downward direction may arise.” When this concentration arises, the practitioner can pass over one ground and change the character of the concentration; that is, the practitioner has cultivated the “leaping attainment” (vyutkrāntakasamāpatti). How, then, is this “leaping concentration” cultivated?

The stanza answers:

[The two kinds of concentration, forward and reverse,

Of the same kind, of different kinds, adjacent, and leaping;

Upon reaching concentration “of a different kind,” it is perfected

By those in the three continents, of sharp faculties, and beyond training.]

Treatise: Leaping attainment proceeds in two directions: “forward,” meaning the concentrations counted in ascending order (anuloma); and “reverse,” meaning the concentrations counted in descending order.

Both methods include undefiled and conditioned concentrations. [Only pure concentration is counted, not defiled concentration].

The eight grounds: namely, the five meditative absorptions and the five Formless attainments.

Successively (adjacent), one gradually proceeds from what is near to what is near.

Leaping over one ground (leaping) means passing over one ground.

The cultivation of preparatory practice (prayoga) has four successive stages: ⁽¹⁾ cultivating the eight conditioned concentrations in forward and reverse order; ⁽²⁾ when this cultivation has become firm, next cultivating the seven undefiled concentrations in forward and reverse order; ⁽³⁾ when this cultivation has become firm, in order to acquire mastery over concentration, one must pass from the conditioned first meditative absorption to the third meditative absorption of the same quality; pass from this meditative absorption into the Sphere of Infinite Space; again pass from the concentration of that sphere into the Sphere of Nothingness; and then pass downward again in reverse order in the same way—all these concentrations being conditioned;

⁽⁴⁾ when this cultivation has become firm, one then similarly cultivates the undefiled concentrations in both directions.

When the practitioner can pass from the conditioned first meditative absorption into the undefiled third meditative absorption, from the undefiled third meditative absorption into the conditioned Sphere of Infinite Space, from the conditioned Sphere of Infinite Space into the undefiled Sphere of Nothingness, and then pass in reverse order in the same manner, the practitioner at that time accomplishes the “forward passage” into the third meditative absorption of a different quality (of a different kind), as well as the “reverse passage” from that meditative absorption, and the cultivation of the “leaping attainment” (vyutkrāntakasamāpatti) is regarded as perfected.

One cannot pass over two grounds and enter the fourth meditative absorption because the fourth ground is too distant.

Leaping attainment is cultivated only by persons in the three continents (dvīpas), by arhats belonging to the group “liberated irrespective of occasion” (asamayavimukta), because they have eliminated the afflictions and possess mastery over concentration. Arhats belonging to the group who have attained through view (dṛṣṭiprāptas) are all of sharp faculties (tīkṣṇendriya) and possess mastery over concentration, but they lack the first condition (remaining afflictions). Arhats belonging to the group “liberated on occasion” have completely eliminated the afflictions but lack the second condition (they lack mastery over concentration); therefore, neither of these two groups can cultivate leaping attainment.

(Question) How many meditative absorptions and Formless attainments are cultivated and “made manifest” (saṃmukhībhāva) by beings in other grounds?

The stanza answers:

[Concentrations are based upon beings of their own ground or a lower ground,

Not a higher ground, because they are useless;

Only one born at the Summit of Existence can arouse noble concentration

Belonging to a lower ground in order to eliminate the remaining afflictions.]

Treatise: The meditative absorptions and Formless attainments are all based upon beings of the same ground or of a lower ground.

A being at the Summit of Existence (bhavāgra) can arouse the concentration of the Summit of Existence. Beings in lower grounds, down to the Desire Realm, can also arouse this concentration. Concentrations of the other grounds can likewise be made manifest by beings who are in the same ground as those concentrations or in lower grounds. But a being in a higher ground cannot arouse a concentration belonging to a lower ground.

A concentration belonging to a lower ground proves of no benefit to a being in a higher ground, because such a concentration is comparatively too inferior.

The foregoing is the general principle; nevertheless, there are exceptional cases: A being born at the Summit of Existence may enter a “noble concentration” (ārya), namely an uncontaminated concentration belonging to the Sphere of Nothingness, in order to eliminate the afflictions belonging to the Summit of Existence. Indeed, the uncontaminated noble path (anāsrava) cannot be cultivated at the Summit of Existence (svasyābhāvāt), whereas the Sphere of Nothingness is very near (abhyāsa = saṃnikṛṣṭatva).

(Question) What are the objects of the concentrations of the dhyānas and the Formless attainments?

The stanza answers:

[The flavored concentration takes only its own plane as object;

The pure and uncontaminated take all as objects;

The wholesome fundamental Formless attainments

Do not take contaminated phenomena of lower planes as objects.]

Exposition: The concentration associated with craving (flavored concentration) takes its own “existence” (bhava) as its object, that is, “the existence belonging to its own plane.” Here, “existence” refers to the contaminated (anāsrava) [this is another presentation of the doctrine stated in Chapter Eight, Part Six: Flavored concentration has pure concentration (śuddhaka) as its object, that is, wholesome contaminated concentration rather than uncontaminated concentration].

It does not take a lower plane as its object because a practitioner who cultivates flavored concentration belonging to a certain plane has already become detached from the plane below it. Nor does it take a higher plane as its object, because the planes are determined and delimited by craving. Nor does it take the uncontaminated as its object, for if it did, it would become wholesome.

Wholesome concentration (subha), whether pure or uncontaminated, takes all dharmas as its objects, namely all dharmas that exist, conditioned as well as unconditioned.

The wholesome concentrations cultivated in the fundamental planes of the Formless Realm—as opposed to the concentrations belonging to the dhyānas and those cultivated in the neighboring planes (sāmantakas) of the Formless Realm—do not take contaminated dharmas belonging to lower planes as objects (sāsrvāyajñānapakṣa), but only dharmas belonging to the same plane or to a higher plane.

As for uncontaminated dharmas, wholesome concentrations also take them as objects; they take as their objects the entire category of subsequent knowledge (avayajñāna), all categories of subsequent knowledge (sarvānvayajñānapakṣa). They do not take Dharma-knowledge (dharmajñāna) as their object, since its object is the Desire Realm, which is too remote. Nor do they take as their object the cessation of dharmas—which is uncontaminated—belonging to a lower plane (adhobhūminirodha).

The concentrations cultivated in the neighboring planes of the Formless Realm also take a lower plane as their object, because they include an uninterrupted path (ānantaryamārga) that takes only lower planes as its objects.

(Question) Among the three kinds of concentration—uncontaminated, pure, and defiled—of the dhyānas and the Formless attainments, which are capable of eliminating the afflictions?

The stanza answers:

[The uncontaminated are capable of eliminating the afflictions,

As are the neighboring concentrations when pure.]

Exposition: All uncontaminated concentrations are capable of eliminating the afflictions; but not all pure concentrations possess this capability, still less the defiled concentrations.

Pure concentration does not eliminate afflictions belonging to a lower plane, because the practitioner has already become detached (virakta) from that lower plane and has escaped its afflictions. Pure concentration also does not eliminate afflictions of its own plane, because this kind of concentration does not obstruct them. Nor does it eliminate afflictions belonging to a higher plane, because those afflictions are subtler than this kind of concentration.

When the neighboring concentrations of the dhyānas and the Formless attainments are “pure,” they can also eliminate afflictions, because they counteract a lower plane.

(Question) How many neighboring concentrations (sāmantakas) are there?

The stanza answers:

[There are eight neighboring concentrations: pure in nature and associated with equanimous feeling;

The first neighboring concentration is also a noble concentration, or is of all three kinds.]

Exposition: Each fundamental concentration (maula) has a neighboring concentration, that is, a preliminary or introductory concentration through which one may enter the fundamental concentration.

(Question) Do the neighboring concentrations also have the three kinds—defiled, pure, and uncontaminated—like the fundamental concentrations? Do they also have the same feelings as the fundamental concentrations, namely joyful feeling in the first two dhyānas, pleasant feeling in the third dhyāna, and equanimous feeling in the fourth dhyāna?

(Answer) The neighboring concentrations are only of one kind, pure (śuddha), and are associated with equanimous feeling because they “proceed” through effort (yatnavāhya = abhisaṃskāravāhya), because fear of the lower plane has not yet ceased, and because the neighboring concentrations constitute the path of purification by which the practitioner becomes detached from a lower plane. Thus, they are associated only with equanimous feeling and are not associated with attachment or “flavor.”

The first neighboring concentration is called the “Not-Yet-Arrived” (anāgama) and is of two kinds: pure (śuddhaka) and noble (ārya), that is, uncontaminated.

The type of mind in the neighboring concentration that enables a being to undergo rebirth-linking is defiled (kliṣṭa); but the neighboring-concentration mind by which a practitioner enters concentration is not defiled—this was discussed above.

Other masters say that this Not-Yet-Arrived neighboring concentration is also associated with “flavor.”

(Question) Is the intermediate dhyāna (dhyānāntara) different from a neighboring concentration?

(Answer) It is different. A neighboring concentration is the gateway to detachment from a lower plane, whereas this is not the case with the intermediate dhyāna.

[The intermediate dhyāna is without initial application;

It is of all three kinds and has only equanimous feeling.]

Exposition: Both the fundamental first dhyāna and the first neighboring concentration are associated with initial application and sustained application. In the seven higher concentrations—that is, both their fundamental and neighboring concentrations—there is neither initial application nor sustained application. Only the intermediate dhyāna has sustained application (vicāra) without initial application (vitarka); it is therefore superior to the first dhyāna but inferior to the second dhyāna. For this reason, this concentration is called the intermediate dhyāna.

This shows that there is no intermediate dhyāna in the higher planes, because these planes do not have a higher part and a lower part (viśeṣābhātvāt, ascent and descent) as the first dhyāna does.

(Question) How many kinds of intermediate dhyāna are there? With what kind of feeling is it associated?

(Answer) The intermediate dhyāna may be associated with “flavor,” purity, or the uncontaminated. Like the neighboring concentrations, it is associated with feeling that is neither painful nor pleasant, because it is associated with the faculty of equanimity (upekṣendriya). It also “proceeds” through effort (abhisaṃskāravāhin), and is therefore not associated with joyful feeling (saumanasya); it is regarded as the “difficult path” (duḥkhā pratipad, the painful mode of progress).

(Question) What is the fruit of the intermediate dhyāna?

(Answer) It is the Great Brahmā (mahābrahmā). A practitioner who cultivates this concentration to its highest degree will be reborn as Great Brahmā.

(Question) The various meditative attainments (samāpatti) have been explained above; what, then, are the concentrations (samādhis)?

The stanza answers:

[The first dhyāna and those below the intermediate dhyāna

Have initial and sustained application;

The intermediate dhyāna has only sustained application; all above it have neither.]

Exposition: The sutras (Madhyama, 17, 22; Dīrgha, 9, 2; Saṃyukta, 18, 25) state that there are three kinds of concentration: ⁽¹⁾ concentration with initial and sustained application; ⁽²⁾ concentration without initial application but with sustained application; and ⁽³⁾ concentration without either initial or sustained application.

The intermediate dhyāna is the kind of concentration that lacks initial application but has sustained application.

All concentrations below the intermediate dhyāna are called “concentrations with initial and sustained application.” This is the case with the first dhyāna and all other concentrations dependent upon the first dhyāna.

Above the intermediate dhyāna, all concentrations are called “concentrations without initial or sustained application,” extending from the neighboring concentration of the second dhyāna through the fourth Formless attainment.

(Question) The sutras (Dīrgha, 8, 12; Ekottara, 16, 15; 41, 16) teach that there are three kinds of concentration called the concentration on emptiness (śūnyatāsamādhi), the concentration on signlessness (ānimittasamādhi), and the concentration on wishlessness (apraṇihitasamādhi). What, then, are these concentrations?

The stanza replies:

[Emptiness has the aspects of emptiness and non-self;

Signlessness has the four aspects of the Truth of Cessation;

Wishlessness has the remaining ten aspects;

All correspond to the aspects of the truths;

They are either pure or uncontaminated;

When uncontaminated, they become the three gates of liberation.]

Treatise: The concentration associated (saṃprayukta) with the aspects (ākāra) of the Truth of Cessation (nirodhasatya)—that is, the concentration in which the practitioner contemplates cessation—is called the concentration on signlessness. Thus, this concentration has four aspects.

(Question) Why is it so named?

(Answer) Because nirvana, or cessation (nirodha), is free from ten characteristics (nimittas, signs), it is called “signless” (animitta). Thus, the concentration that takes nirvana as its object is “signless.” These ten “signs” are: (a) the five sense fields (āyatanas), namely the five external sources of sensory cognition, such as form and color, sound, and so forth; (b) masculinity and femininity; and (c) the three characteristics of the conditioned (saṃskṛtalakṣaṇas): arising, duration-and-change, and cessation.

The concentration associated with the two aspects of emptiness (śūnya) and non-self (anātman) is called the concentration on emptiness. Thus, it has the final two aspects of the Truth of Suffering.

The concentration on wishlessness is the concentration associated with the other aspects of the truths. On the one hand, these are the aspects of impermanence (anitya) and suffering (duḥkha)—the first two aspects of the Truth of Suffering—and the four aspects of the Truth of Origin, all of which arouse “dread” (udvega). On the other hand, they are the four aspects of the Truth of the Path, because the path resembles a raft and must be relinquished.

The concentration possessing these ten aspects aims to transcend the phenomena belonging to emptiness, suffering, origin, and the path. It is therefore called “wishlessness” (apraṇihita), meaning the absence of an aspiration directed toward them.

By contrast, nirvana under its four aspects—the object of the concentration on signlessness—should not be relinquished. The final two aspects of the Truth of Suffering, emptiness and non-self—the objects of the concentration on emptiness—do not arouse “dread,” because these two aspects pertain both to nirvana and to conditioned phenomena (saṃskṛtas).

Each of the three concentrations described above is of two kinds: pure (śuddhaka) or stainless (amala), that is, uncontaminated, according to whether it is mundane or supramundane concentration. If mundane, it exists in eleven planes; if supramundane, it exists in those planes in which the noble path is present.

When these concentrations are uncontaminated, they are called “gates of liberation” (vimokṣamukha), because they truly are the “gates” (dvāra) to nirvana, or liberation (mokṣa). Thus, there are the gate of liberation through emptiness (śūnyatavimokṣamukha), the gate of liberation through signlessness (animittavimokṣamukha), and the gate of liberation through wishlessness (apraṇihitavimokṣamukha). The sutra (Ekottara, 26, 5) also speaks of three other concentrations: the concentration on the emptiness of emptiness (śūnyataśūnyatāsamādhi), the concentration on the wishlessness of wishlessness (apraṇihitāpraṇihitasamādhi), and the concentration on the signlessness of signlessness (animittānimittasamādhi).

(Question) What are the characteristics of these concentrations?

The stanza replies:

[The first two take the concentrations of those beyond training as their objects,

And have the aspects of emptiness and impermanence;

The last takes as its object the non-analytical cessation

Of the concentration on signlessness, with the aspect of tranquility;

They are contaminated; humans and those “liberated independently of circumstances” cultivate them;

They are absent from the seven higher access concentrations.]

Treatise: The first two concentrations take as their objects the concentrations of those beyond training; that is, their respective objects are the concentration on emptiness and the concentration on wishlessness attained by an arhat.

The concentration on the emptiness of emptiness regards the concentration on emptiness—which contemplates phenomena as empty and without self—as empty, but not as without self, because contemplation of non-self (anātman) does not arouse dread as does contemplation of emptiness (śūnya).

The concentration on the wishlessness of wishlessness takes as its object the concentration on wishlessness of one beyond training—that is, the concentration that contemplates things under the aspects of impermanence, suffering, and so forth—and regards this concentration as impermanent. The concentration on the wishlessness of wishlessness does not regard the concentration on wishlessness as suffering (duḥkha), nor as cause, origin, condition, or production (hetu-samudaya-pratyaya-prabhava), because the concentration on wishlessness is uncontaminated and therefore is neither suffering nor a cause.

Although the concentration on wishlessness is the path (mārga), the concentration on the wishlessness of wishlessness also does not regard it as path, method, practice, or leading to deliverance (mārga-nyāya-pratipad-nairyāṇika), because the practitioner’s aim is to become disenchanted with the concentration on wishlessness.

The concentration on the signlessness of signlessness takes non-analytical cessation (asaṃkhyākṣaya) as its object and regards it as tranquil (śānta).

This means that the concentration on the signlessness of signlessness takes as its object the non-analytical cessation (apratisaṃkhyānirodha) of the concentration on signlessness and contemplates this cessation (nirodha) under the aspect of “tranquility.” It does not take as its object the analytical cessation (pratisaṃkhyānirodha) of the concentration on wishlessness, because that concentration is uncontaminated (anāsrava), and there can be no “analytical cessation” of what is uncontaminated.

Among the four aspects used to contemplate “analytical cessation”—cessation, tranquility, excellence (praṇīta), and escape (niḥsaraṇa)—“tranquility” is the only aspect appropriate here. Indeed, the aspect of “cessation” applies to non-analytical cessation but also to “impermanent cessation” (anityatānirodha); non-analytical cessation is not “excellent,” because it is indeterminate (avyākṛta), nor is it “escape,” because it is not a “separation” from the defilements (visaṃyoga).

These three concentrations are exclusively contaminated, because they are averse to the noble path [they turn away from the noble path by regarding it merely as empty, and so forth]. Phenomena of this kind cannot be stainless, or uncontaminated.

(Question) By whom are these three kinds cultivated?

(Answer) They are cultivated only by human beings in the three continents (dvīpas), not by devas, and only by arhats of the “immovable” (akopya) class.

These concentrations are based on eleven planes: the Desire Realm, the preliminary concentration, the eight fundamental absorptions—the dhyānas and the Formless attainments, thus excluding the access concentrations—and the intermediate dhyāna.

The sutra states that there are four cultivations of concentration (samādhibhāvanā): “There is a way of cultivating concentration. If cultivated, practiced, and increased, it leads to the attainment of a pleasant abiding in this very life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra),” and so forth.

[To attain a pleasant abiding in this very life,

Cultivate the wholesome dhyānas;

To attain superior knowledge and vision,

Cultivate the pure divine eye;

To attain discerning wisdom,

Cultivate the wholesome preparatory practices;

To attain the exhaustion of all contaminants,

Cultivate the vajra-like concentration.]

Treatise: ⁽¹⁾ The expression “the wholesome first dhyāna” refers to the first pure or uncontaminated dhyāna. Through this dhyāna, the practitioner attains a pleasant abiding in this very life (dṛṣṭadharmasukhavihāra). The same applies to the remaining three dhyānas as to the first.

This type of concentration does not necessarily result in blissful abiding in a future life (apara-dṛṣṭa-dharma-sukha-vihāra), because a noble one who has attained this bliss may still fall away from it; the practitioner may be reborn in a higher realm; or the practitioner may attain nirvana. In all three cases, the practitioner does not experience this bliss in a future life.

⁽²⁾ The second cultivation of concentration results in the attainment of “knowledge and vision” (jñāna-darśana). This is the purified superknowledge of the divine eye (divyacakṣurabhijñā).

⁽³⁾ The third cultivation of concentration results in “discerning wisdom” (prajñāprabheda). This is the cultivation of concentration pertaining to the higher qualities that arise from preparatory practice, namely, the qualities belonging to the three realms and the uncontaminated qualities.

The concentration that gives rise to these qualities is called the “cultivation of concentration” (samādhibhāvanā) of these qualities.

⁽⁴⁾ In the fourth dhyāna, a type of concentration called the Vajra-Like Cultivation (Vajropama) arises. This concentration completely eliminates all contaminants (āsrava).

Tradition holds that, in expounding the four types of concentration above, the Blessed One was describing his own practice; for it was while abiding in the fourth dhyāna that he attained the Vajra-Like Concentration—although this concentration, as we have seen, can also be attained at other stages of concentration.