English
There are two ways to identify the nature of experience and so on. First, the seven, except for the peak of existence, have three forms. What are they? They are those that correspond to and possess experience, the pure, and the uncontaminated. The eighth, the peak of existence, initially has two forms, but because consciousness is weak and the realm of activity is unclear, the noble path does not rely on it, so there is no uncontaminated. Second, "corresponding to experience" means existing together with the corresponding companion, desire. The virtue of the absorption of worldly beings with contamination is called pure because it corresponds to non-attachment and so on. The pure is experienced by it, because the pure is good, so there is attachment and desire for it. Therefore, corresponding to experience is a meditation with afflictions, so it arises from purity and abides in what corresponds to experience. Although there are also meditations with views and pride, only those with desire are said to correspond to experience, because only attachment to its object, if not necessarily arising from it, cannot become a higher state, so it is said. Uncontaminated refers to the absorption that transcends the world, possessing the aspect of truth. The second aspect has two parts: the actual limbs and the extended meaning. The first aspect has three points: explaining how the eighteen limbs are individually possessed, how many entities they belong to, and examining their differences. The first aspect has two parts: general meaning and textual meaning. The first aspect has three points: First, the reason why limbs are not explained for the formless realms is that the formless realms are of the same taste in tranquility. Where the realm of activity is coarse, limbs are established there. In the formless realms, because they are closer to tranquility, the activity of mind and mental factors is weak, so limbs are not established. Because there is more emphasis on samadhi, none of those mental factors are primary. And so on. Other teachers say that limbs are established where mental factors completely cease. In the first dhyana, suffering and displeasure cease, and similarly in the second, conceptualization and analysis cease, in the third, joy ceases, and in the fourth, pleasure ceases, and beyond that, no mental factors completely cease. The noble Vimoksha school says that the formless realms possess two limbs: equanimity and one-pointedness, and like cloth made of fine and coarse threads, the difference between the tranquility and non-tranquility of the mind increases from above. Brang To
Chinese
认为无色界的四者也是由忆念、舍、等持这四个支分组成。 迦摩罗什罗（Kamalaśīla）在《修习次第》第一篇中说，即使不能完全做到，也应具备舍、寻、伺、专注这四个支分。 第二个问题是关于数量的确定：既然还有感觉、触等其他的心理现象，为什么只将寻、伺等作为支分呢？ 回答是：其他的心理现象在之前的禅定中已经存在，而后面的禅定舍弃和抛弃了它们，所以才被称为支分。而感觉等并非如此。 如果这样说，那么等持也不应该成为支分了，对吗？ 回答是：等持是主要的，所以不需要舍弃。 或者说，这些支分对那个地界非常有益。 如果这样说，那么对于初禅来说，忆念比寻、伺更有益，这就不合理了。 注释中说，对于所观察的对象，对治、利益以及这两者的处所或所依是支分的原因。因此，应该与瑜伽行派的观点相一致地进行研究。 第三个问题是关于支分和具有支分的事物的含义的确定。 毗婆沙师说，等持既是禅定，又是禅定的支分和具有支分的事物，而其他的只是支分。 论师认为，就像“具有支分的军队”一样，支分之外没有其他的事物，它被认为是集合的总体和个体。 第二个问题是关于经文的含义： 初禅有五个支分，即对治不相顺品——贪欲、嗔恚、恼害等的寻、伺，以及从远离不相顺品而产生的喜和乐，这是利益支分，以及通过专注的力量成就这两者的处所或所依的支分——等持等。 第二禅有四个支分，即对治寻、伺的支分——内净，以及利益——喜等带来的乐，以及处所——等持。 第三禅有五个支分，即对治喜的支分——行舍，以及不忘舍的忆念，以及忆念和不忘的觉知这三者是对治的支分，以及利益——乐，以及心安住的等持是所依。 各种禅定的第四个边际有四个支分，即由于远离下地的八种过患，对治乐
English
It is also said that the four formless realms are composed of four limbs: mindfulness, equanimity, and samadhi. Kamalaśīla, in the first chapter of the Bhāvanākrama, states that even if one cannot fully achieve it, one should possess the four limbs of equanimity, investigation, analysis, and one-pointedness. The second question concerns the determination of number: Since there are other mental phenomena such as feeling and contact, why are only investigation and analysis considered limbs? The answer is that other mental phenomena exist in the previous dhyana, but the subsequent dhyana abandons and discards them, hence they are called limbs. Feeling and so on are not like that. If that is the case, then samadhi should not be a limb either, right? The answer is that samadhi is the main thing, so it does not need to be abandoned. Alternatively, those limbs are very beneficial to that level. If that is the case, then for the first dhyana, mindfulness is more beneficial than investigation and analysis, which is unreasonable. The commentary states that for the object to be examined, the antidote, the benefit, and the place or basis of these two are the reasons for the limb. Therefore, it should be studied in accordance with the views of the Yogacara school. The third question concerns the determination of the meaning of limb and the thing with limbs. The Vaibhāṣikas say that samadhi is both dhyana and both the limb and the thing with limbs of dhyana, while others are only limbs. The teacher believes that, like an "army with limbs," there is nothing other than limbs, and it is considered the general and specific of the collection. The second question concerns the meaning of the text: The first dhyana has five limbs, namely investigation and analysis, which are the antidotes to unfavorable factors such as desire, hatred, and harm, and the joy and happiness arising from being separated from unfavorable factors, which are the benefit limbs, and the samadhi, etc., which are the place or basis of these two, achieved by the power of one-pointedness. The second dhyana has four limbs, namely inner purity, which is the limb of the antidote to investigation and analysis, and happiness from joy, etc., which is the benefit, and the place, samadhi. The third dhyana has five limbs, namely equanimity of action, which is the antidote to joy, and the mindfulness of not forgetting equanimity, and the three of mindfulness and non-forgetting awareness are the limbs of the antidote, and the benefit is happiness, and the samadhi where the mind abides is the basis. The fourth limit of the various dhyanas has four limbs, namely, due to being separated from the eight faults of the lower ground, the antidote to happiness
Chinese
的支分忆念完全清净，以及行舍完全清净二者，和利益非乐非苦的舍受，以及所依禅定完全清净等。如是，禅定的支分有十八。第一的相违品，将欲的贪欲、害心、恼害的分别诸法合为一体，以及痛苦、不悦意、邪淫的戒律、掉举五者。对治是，断除第一的相违品之对治为忆念、正知、舍三者，然由寻伺之门而现证故，未以彼三之名宣说，而说寻伺二者为对治之支分，如是第二的相违品，将第一禅的贪欲和寻伺二者合为一体，以及痛苦、掉举、禅定、未圆满五者，断除彼三之对治，以心喜之近烦恼所遍缠故，未以彼等自名宣说，而以寻伺之散乱寂灭之极明来宣说，是故极明彼者乃忆念、正知、舍三 之自性。第三乃远离喜之近烦恼故，三者皆以自名宣说。第二，彼十八者亦由名之门而有，实体则有十一，即第一之支分五者，以及第二之极明，第三之禅定除外之四者，以及第四之受舍等。第三，第一二禅中，于多善地之心极调柔者，立名为乐，然非身受。以譬喻显示，调柔非乐，若如是，则后三禅较前更胜之故。是故乐乃身受，彼由禅定之差别所生之身调柔之触，谓身轻且形色安乐之觉受，与相符之风遍满且增长于身，由彼之威力，缘身调柔之触之禅定，与相符之身识及俱生相应故，且彼于身内生故，不转为出离禅定耶？说一切有部说，五门之识非于等持之地所摄故，彼不应理耶？禅定
English
The branch of perfect mindfulness, and the two of perfect equanimity of action, and the benefit of neither pleasure nor pain, and the support of perfect samadhi, etc. Thus, there are eighteen branches of meditation. The first opposing factors are the desire for desire, malice, and the thoughts of harming, and suffering, unpleasantness, immoral conduct, and distraction. The antidote is that the antidote to abandoning the first opposing factors is the three of mindfulness, awareness, and equanimity, but because of the manifestation through the door of investigation, the two of investigation are shown as the branch of the antidote without being shown by the names of the three. Similarly, the second opposing factors are the desire of the first meditation and the two of investigation, and suffering, excitement, samadhi, and incompleteness. Because the three antidotes to abandoning the five are completely entangled by the near affliction of joy, they are not expressed by their own names, but are expressed by the extreme clarity of the pacification of the disturbance of investigation. Therefore, that extreme clarity is the nature of the three of mindfulness, awareness, and equanimity. In the third, because it is separated from the near affliction of joy, all three are shown by their own names. Second, those eighteen are also from the door of name, but in reality there are eleven, namely the five branches of the first, and the extreme clarity of the second, the four excluding the samadhi of the third, and the equanimity of the fourth, etc. Third, in the first two meditations, the mind that is very tamed in many virtuous grounds is called happiness, but it is not bodily sensation. By showing with an example, taming is not happiness, because if so, the latter three meditations are superior to the former. Therefore, happiness is bodily sensation, and that which is born from the difference of samadhi, the touch of bodily taming, which means the feeling of lightness and comfortable shape, and the wind that is in accordance with it pervades and increases in the body. Because of that power, the samadhi that focuses on the touch of bodily taming, and the body consciousness that is in accordance with it and its co-emergence, and because it arises within the body, does it not turn into abandoning samadhi? The Sarvastivadins say that the consciousness of the five doors is not included in the ground of equanimity, so is it unreasonable? Meditation