The Numerical Discourses

Chapter 12: The Single-Entry Path

1. The Abodes of Mindfulness

1. Thus I have heard:[1] One time, the Buddha was staying at Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park in Jeta’s Grove of Śrāvastī.

2. It was then that the Bhagavān addressed the monks, “There’s a single-entry path[2] that purifies the conduct of sentient beings and rids them of grief. When they lack afflictions, they attain great wisdom and achieve realization of nirvāṇa. That is to say, they cease the five hindrances and contemplate four abodes of mindfulness.[3]

3. “What’s called the single entry? It refers to focusing the mind. This is called the single entry. What is the path? It refers to the noble eightfold path. First is right view, second is right control, third is right speech, fourth is right action, fifth is right livelihood, sixth is right method, seventh is right mindfulness, and eighth is right samādhi.[4] This is called the path. Together, they are called the single-entry path.

4. “What are the five hindrances that are ceased? They are the hindrance of desire, hindrance of anger, hindrance of restlessness, hindrance of drowsiness, and hindrance of doubt. These are called the five hindrances that cease.

5. “How does one contemplate the four abodes of mindfulness? Here, a monk turns away bad thoughts and has no grief by contemplating the internal body.[5] He turns away bad thoughts and has no grief by contemplating external bodies. He turns away bad thoughts and has no grief by contemplating internal and external bodies. He contemplates internal feelings as feelings and enjoys himself.[6] He contemplates external feelings as feelings … He contemplates internal and external feelings as feelings … He contemplates internal mind and enjoys himself. He contemplates external mind … He contemplates internal and external mind … He contemplates internal principles … He contemplates external principles … He contemplates internal and external principles and enjoys himself.

Contemplation of Body

6. “How does a monk contemplate internal body? Here, a monk contemplates this body according to its nature and action. From head to toe and from toe to head, he contemplates the impurity of all these parts of the body, none of which are desirable. He further observes this body with its hair, beard, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, sinews, bones, marrow, brain, fat, intestines, stomach, heart, liver, spleen, and kidneys. He observes and knows all these related parts. He should observe and know its dung, urine, vomit, diarrhea,[7] tears, spit, blood, grease, and bile, none of which are desirable. Thus, monks, you should contemplate the body, enjoying yourselves, turning away bad thoughts, and having no grief.

7. “Furthermore, a monk returns to contemplating this body: ‘Does it possess the earth element … water … fire … air element?’ A monk contemplates the body in this way.

8. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates this body by discerning its elements: ‘This body has four elements.’ Like a butcher or a butcher’s apprentice cutting up a cow, he examines and sees it himself: ‘This is a leg, the heart, a joint, and the head.’ In this way, that monk discerns these elements when he examines this body: ‘The body has the earth … water … fire … air element.’ In this way, a monk contemplates the body and enjoys himself.

9. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates this body as having orifices from which impurities flow. He does so like someone viewing a bamboo park or looking at a stand of reeds. In this way, the monk contemplates this body as having orifices from which impurities flow.

10. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates a corpse that’s been dead for one night, two nights, three nights, four nights, five nights, six nights, or seven nights. The corpse is bloated, putrid, and impure. Again, he contemplates his own body as being no different than that: ‘My body will not escape this fate.’ Suppose, again, a monk contemplates a corpse that’s been pecked and eaten by crows and kites. Perhaps it’s been eaten by animals such as tigers, jackals, dogs, and insects. Again, he contemplates his own body as being no different than that: ‘My body will not escape this fate.’ This is called a monk contemplating the body and enjoying himself.

11. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates a corpse. Perhaps it’s half-eaten or scattered on the ground, being putrid and impure. Again, he contemplates his own body as being no different than that: ‘My body will not escape this fate.’

12. “Furthermore, he contemplates a corpse. It’s only bones, all the flesh is gone, and it’s smeared with blood. Again, he contemplates this body as being no different than that. A monk contemplates this body in this way.

13. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates a corpse as a bundle of wood wrapped in sinews. Again, he contemplates his own body as being no different than that. A monk contemplates this body in this way.

14. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates a corpse that has had its bones and sinews separated and scattered around in different places. Perhaps there’s a hand and leg bone in one place. Perhaps there’s a kneecap, pelvis, tail bone, arm bone, shoulder bone, rib bone, backbone, neck bone, or a skull there. Again, he contemplates this body as being no different than that: ‘I won’t escape this fate. My body will also be destroyed.’ A monk contemplates the body and enjoys himself in this way.

15. “Furthermore, a monk contemplates a corpse that’s white or the color of white shells. Again, he contemplates his own body as being no different than that: ‘I won’t escape this fate.’ This is called a monk contemplating his own body.

16. “Furthermore, suppose a monk sees a corpse and perceives its bones and blueish contusions, none of which are desirable. Perhaps a coating of ash or dust makes it all the same color and indiscernible. A monk contemplates his own body and turns away bad thoughts and has no grief in this way: ‘This body is impermanent and subject to being scattered.’ In this way, a monk contemplates internal body, contemplates external body, and contemplates internal and external body, understanding them to be nothing at all.

Contemplation of Feeling

17. “How does a monk contemplate internal feeling as feeling? Here, when he has a pleasant feeling, a monk realizes, ‘I’m having a pleasant feeling.’ When he has a painful feeling, he realizes, ‘I’m having a painful feeling.’ When he has a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful, he realizes, ‘I’m having a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful.’

18. “If he has a pleasant feeling from food, he realizes, ‘I’m having a pleasant feeling from this food.’[8] If he has a painful feeling from food, he realizes, ‘I’m having a painful feeling from this food.’ When he has a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful from food, he realizes, ‘I’m having a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful from this food.’

19. “If he has a pleasant feeling that’s not from food, he realizes, ‘I’m having a pleasant feeling that’s not from food.’ If he has a painful feeling that’s not from food, he realizes, ‘I’m having a painful feeling that’s not from food.’ When he has a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful that’s not from food, then he realizes, ‘I’m having a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful that’s not from food.’ A monk contemplates internal feeling in this way.

20. “Furthermore, when he has a pleasant feeling, a monk isn’t having a painful feeling at that time. He realizes, ‘I’m having a pleasant feeling.’ When he has a painful feeling, he isn’t having a pleasant feeling at that time. He realizes, ‘I’m having a painful feeling.’ If he has a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful, he isn’t having a pleasant or a painful feeling at that time. He realizes, ‘I’m having a feeling that’s neither pleasant nor painful.’

21. “He contemplates them as subject to arising and contemplates them as subject to ending. Again, he contemplates them as subject to arising and ending.[9] Perhaps he has a feeling; he then can know and see it as it happens and reflect on its source. Without depending on anything, he doesn’t produce notions about the world.[10] He isn’t alarmed by any of this. Not being alarmed, he then attains nirvāṇa: ‘Birth has been ended, the religious practice has been established, and the task has been accomplished. I truly know that I’m no longer subject to existence.’

22. “In this way, a monk turns away confused thoughts and has no grief by contemplating internal feeling. He turns away confused thoughts and has no grief by contemplating external feeling … by contemplating internal and external feeling. A monk contemplates internal and external feeling in this way.[11]

Contemplation of Mind

23. “How does a monk contemplate mind as mind?[12] Here, a monk has a craving mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a craving mind.’ His mind is without craving, and he also realizes, ‘My mind is without craving.’ He has a hateful mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a hateful mind.’ His mind is without hate, and he also realizes, ‘My mind is without hate.’ He has a deluded mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a deluded mind.’ His mind is without delusion, and he also realizes, ‘My mind is without delusion.’[13]

24. “He has a mind with craving thoughts, and he realizes, ‘I have a mind with craving thoughts.’ His mind has no craving thoughts, and he realizes, ‘My mind has no craving thoughts.’ His mind has collected senses, and he realizes, ‘My mind has collected senses.’[14] His mind is without collected senses, and he realizes, ‘My mind is without collected senses.’ His mind has confused thoughts, and he realizes, ‘My mind has confused thoughts.’ His mind is without confusion, and he realizes, ‘My mind is without confusion.’ He has a scattered mind, and he also realizes, ‘I have a scattered mind.’ He has an unscattered mind, and he realizes, ‘I have an unscattered mind.’

25. “He has a pervasive mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a pervasive mind.’ His mind isn’t pervasive, and he realizes, ‘My mind isn’t pervasive.’ He has a great mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a great mind.’ His mind isn’t great, and he realizes, ‘My mind isn’t great.’ He has a measureless mind, and he realizes, ‘I have a measureless mind.’ His mind isn’t measureless, and he realizes, ‘My mind isn’t measureless.’ His mind is in samādhi, and he realizes, ‘My mind is in samādhi.’ His mind isn’t in samādhi, and he realizes, ‘My mind isn’t in samādhi.’ His mind has yet to be liberated, and he realizes, ‘My mind has yet to be liberated.’ His mind is liberated, and he realizes, ‘My mind is liberated.’ A monk contemplates mind as mind as an abode of mindfulness in this way.

26. “He contemplates [mind] as subject to arising and contemplates it as subject to ending. Again, he contemplates it as subject to arising and ending. Reflecting on these contemplations,[15] he can know and see what should and shouldn’t be considered.[16] Without depending on anything, he doesn’t produce notions about the world. Not producing such notions, he isn’t alarmed. Not being alarmed, then he has nothing remaining. Once nothing remains, he then attains nirvāṇa: ‘Birth has been ended, the religious practice has been established, and the task has been accomplished. I truly know that I’m no longer subject to existence.’

27. “In this way, a monk turns away confused thoughts and has no grief by contemplating internal mind as mind as an abode of mindfulness … contemplates external mind … contemplates internal and external mind as mind as an abode of mindfulness. In this way, a monk contemplates mind as mind as an abode of mindfulness.

Contemplation of Principles

28. “How does a monk contemplate principles as principles?[17] Here, a monk cultivates the awakening factor of mindfulness based on observation, lack of desire, and cessation, and then he abandons bad things. He cultivates the awakening factor of teachings … cultivates the awakening factor of effort … cultivates the awakening factor of joy … cultivates the awakening factor of calm … cultivates the awakening factor of samādhi … cultivates the awakening factor of equanimity based on observation, lack of desire, and cessation, and then he abandons bad things.[18] In this way, a monk contemplates principles as principles.

29. “Furthermore, a monk is liberated from craving and abandons bad and unwholesome things. With perception and examination, his mindfulness is based on joy and happiness, and he abides in the first dhyāna.[19] In this way, a monk contemplates principles as principles as an abode of mindfulness.

30. “Furthermore, a monk abandons perception and examination, possesses an inner joy, and his mind is unified. Having achieved the absence of perception and examination, he is mindful, calm, joyous, and happy, and he abides in the second dhyāna.[20] In this way, a monk contemplates principles as principles as an abode of mindfulness.

31. “Furthermore, a monk abandons joy and cultivates equanimity. He’s constantly aware of his experience of the happiness that’s sought by noble people, which is detached, mindful, and pure, as he abides in the third dhyāna.[21] In this way, a monk contemplates principles as principles as an abode of mindfulness.

32. “Furthermore, a monk is detached from pleasant and painful thoughts. No longer saddened or joyous, he has no pleasure or pain. Being detached, mindful, and pure, he abides in the fourth dhyāna.[22] Thus, a monk contemplates principles as principles as an abode of mindfulness.

33. “He contemplates [principles] as subject to arising and contemplates them as subject to ending. Again, he contemplates them as subject to both arising and ending. He then attains the mindfulness abode of principles, and he can know and see them right in front of him. He turns away from confused notions, depends on nothing, and doesn’t produce notions about the world. Not producing such notions, he isn’t alarmed. Not being alarmed, [he then knows]: ‘Birth has been ended, the religious practice has been established, and the task has been accomplished. I truly know that I’m no longer subject to existence.’[23]

34. “Monks, sentient beings become purified, distance themselves from grief, and no longer delight in notions by relying on this single-entry path. They then gain wisdom and attain nirvāṇa. That is, they cease the five hindrances and cultivate the four abodes of mindfulness.”

35. When the monks heard what the Buddha taught, they rejoiced and approved.

Notes

1. This sūtra is a smaller recension of the same sūtra that MN 10 and MĀ 98 represent, and its mindfulness of body section is similarly a smaller version that what is found in MĀ 81 and MN 119. This text appears to represent an intermediate point in the development of these larger sūtras that collected contemplations under the four headings of the abodes of mindfulness. As such, it provides us with evidence that the larger texts are later developments that grew as Buddhists compiled comprehensive sets of practices under this rubric. The comparative simplicity of its introduction and conclusion also illustrates how Buddhist texts became progressively more detailed and verbose in style over time.
   We might wonder why this sūtra has been placed here in the Book of Ones. Wouldn’t the four abodes of mindfulness be better placed in the Book of Fours? It also seems out of place in subject matter compared to the rest of Chapter 12 and in it’s lack of the usual conclusion (“Therefore, monks … Thus, monks, you should train yourselves.”). Like the Asura Sūtra that begins Chapter 8, it was likely a later insertion that interrupted the original flow of this sūtra collection.
   A larger related issue is that this chapter and the next appear to have become disordered in the Chinese translation, given that Chapter 12 lacks a summary verse and the verse at the end of Chapter 13 appears to reference the last four of its sūtras. As a result, we can’t be entirely certain if this sūtra was present before it was translated in China or if a later redactor inserted it.
   Nonetheless, the logic of putting it in the Book of Ones must have been that the topic of the sūtrais ostensibly the single-entry path rather than four abodes of mindfulness. [back]
2. single-entry path. C. 一入道, G. ekayana maga (?), P. ekāyana magga, S. ekāyana marga. The Indic term equivalent to C. 一入 that’s found in parallels is either S. eka-ayana or eka-āyana. Both have concrete meanings of “one way,” “one approach,” or “single-file.” However, the term also has the psychological meaning of “fixing the mind on one thing,” i.e., focus or concentration. This is the meaning that this sūtra uses to gloss the term.
   However, 一入 lit. means “one entry” in C. It should be noted that S. nyayana means “entry,” and nyayāna means “access way.” Some have pointed out that 入 often translates S. āyatana, which is yet another related word in pronunciation. Its Buddhist meaning of “sense field” echoes the psychological meaning of ekāyana. Thus, it’s difficult to determine the exact G. word that was translated to C., and I’ve yet to find an attestation in extant G. sources. My experience, though, is that the variations that happened in Buddhist Prakrit parallels can be surprising at times. It’s not entirely out of the question that the C. 一入 may have translated an equivalent of S. ekāyatana. [back]
3. abodes of mindfulness. C. 意止, P. satipaṭṭhāna, S. smṛtyupasthāna. This was an early C. translation, which lit. means “mental calming” or “mental stop.” It’s quite similar to the early translation of S. prahāṇa (~ P. padhāna) as 意斷, which means “mental ending” or “mental excision.” Both were functional rather than literal translations that attempted to capture the basic sense of what the practices acheived. I’ve decided to translate 意止 with my standard “abodes of mindfulness” to avoid confusion. [back]
4. noble eightfold path. In this passage, right speech has been placed after right method. About a third of the occurrences of the eightfold path in EĀ are inconsistently disordered. Moreover, these disordered lists are clustered in a couple fascicles of the C. translation, suggesting that they are a result of poor maintenance of the text in China. I therefore assume these instances are copyist errors and have corrected the order of the list in this passage accordingly. [back]
5. by contemplating internal body. C. 内自觀身, P. kāye kāyānupassī viharati. This translation doesn’t repeat “body” in the way other Indic parallels do in the opening formula, which is usually translated as “observing internal body as body.” Instead, 自 is used apparently to express a genitive (“from”) or instrumental (“by”) case. However, 自 can also functional as reflexive adjective (“self-”), making the intended reading unclear. In Buddhist language, “internal” usu. refers to oneself and “external” refers to other people or the environment, which makes reading 自 as a reflexive modifier conflict with those adjectives. I’ve therefore decided to read it as an instrumental preposition: “by (自) observing (觀) internal (内) body (身).” [back]
6. He contemplates internal feelings as feelings and enjoys himself. C. 内觀痛痛而自娯樂. Here, the translation matches the Indic parallels more literally by repeating feeling (痛), but this doesn’t happen again for mind or principles afterward. In the body of the sūtra, however, this literal repetition does occur for those abodes. This leads me to conclude that this initial passage was corrupted by a Chinese copyist or editor making haphazard changes to a passage that would have been confusing to someone who didn’t know the original Indic language.
   Also, 自娯樂 is another change, depicting the results of the contemplation in a positive light as “enjoyment” or “relaxation” (娯樂). This may have been intended as an abbreviation of the original passage, but it’s repeated throughout the remainder of the sūtra. The initial translation (除去惡念無有愁憂) appears to the more accurate translation when compared to parallels. The equivalent P. expression is vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ. I’ve maintained the C. reading in this case, for the time being, but in subsequent passages I’ve removed it when out of place. It would appear a redactor added it throughout in a haphazard way. [back]
7. vomit, diarrhea. I take 生熟二藏 to mean two things: 生藏 and 熟藏. These terms appear to be literal translations of S. āma-aśaya and pakva-aśaya (“raw organ” and “digested organ”), which are Indian idioms for the stomach and colon. Given the context here, in a list of bodily fluids and contents, this would seem to refer to the contents of the stomach and the large intestine. [back]
8. food. C. 食. The P. parallel has the term sāmisa (“material, physical, flesh”) for this and nirāmisa as the negation (“not material”) in the next paragraph. It’s interesting to note that in both S. and P. āmisa can have the sense of “food with meat in it,” i.e., non-vegetarian. S. āmiṣa can mean many things related to the physical body and its desires, but it can also simply refer to food, and this is the C. translator’s reading here. The result is that these passages specifically refer to eating an almsmeal, which certainly could be a focus of desire for a mendicant who eats only once a day. [back]
9. He contemplates them as arising … ending … arising and ending. C. 彼習法而自娯樂，亦觀盡法，復觀習盡之法, P. iti ajjhattaṁ vā vedanāsu vedanānupassī viharati, bahiddhā vā vedanāsu vedanānupassī viharati, ajjhattabahiddhā vā vedanāsu vedanānupassī viharati. Here, the C. translation is garbled at the beginning. The confusion stems from the subject being a pronoun 彼 (meaning “that” or “him” here) that lacks a verb in the initial phrase. It would be more natural to read 彼 as referring to the monk rather than the feelings discussed in the previous passages, and someone appears to have inserted 而自娯樂 (“and relaxes himself”) into the translation to add a verb for the monk to do. I’m guessing that, instead, 觀 was the verb that has been omitted. I would correct 彼習法 to 觀習法 (which is the reading in the subsequent conclusions later on in the sūtra), and then delete 而自娯樂 as spurious. I’ve translated this corrected version, which arrives at a passage close to the P. parallel.
   Uncorrected, the opening clause in the Taisho reads: “They are subject to arising, and he relaxes himself. He also contemplates them as subject to ending and further contemplates them as subject to arising and ending.” [back]
10. Perhaps he has a feeling … notions about the world. C. 或復有痛，而現在前可知可見，思惟原本。無所依倚，而自娯樂，不起世間想。, P. atthi vedanā’ti vā panassa sati paccupaṭṭhitā hoti. Yāvadeva ñāṇamattāya paṭissatimattāya anissito ca viharati, na ca kiñci loke upādiyati. The P. description of contemplation of feeling ends here.
    Again, 而自娯樂 seems misplaced in this passage. I’ve removed it from my translation. The uncorrected Taisho passage would read: “Perhaps he has a feeling; he then can know and see it as it happens and reflect on its source. Without depending on anything, he enjoys himself and doesn’t produce notions about the world.” [back]
11. This conclusion appears redacted in the way that the initial formula was at the beginning of the sūtra. A notable difference is that “he enjoys himself” hasn’t been inserted, but “bad thoughts” has been replaced by “confused thoughts.” The final statement also appears extraneous, added perhaps because the abbreviated passage was confusing. [back]
12. contemplate mind as mind. C. 觀心心法而自娯樂, P. citte cittānupassī. Here, 法 has been added to make the expression mean something like “mental objects of mind.” This isn’t repeated, so I’ve ignored it as another spurious redaction. I’ve also ignored 而自娯樂 (“and he enjoys himself”) here because it doesn’t occur in the questions that begin the other sections of the sutra, which indicates that it’s another spurious insertion. [back]
13. I’ve chosen to translate this passage in a concrete way that’s contextual for the contemplation of internal mind, which would be the contemplation of one’s own mind. The C. translation, however, reads very close to the P. parallel in that it lacks a pronoun subject for the theoretical quotations (“I have a craving mind” lit. reads as simply “mind with craving”). This makes the passage more abstract than the passages about feelings above. Still, the practitioner is “realizing” (i.e., becomes directly aware of) these things, so my assumption is that they become aware of specific instances of these types of mind. I’m very tempted to translate 心 as “thought” for this reason, but I think it does mean the mind in general. An angry thought might arise, and then the practitioner surmises that their mind still has anger (i.e., capable of becoming angry).
    Of course, this and next two paragraphs would presumably also apply to external and both internal and external minds, so the context is not only one’s own mind, but also other people’s. [back]
14. his mind has collected senses. C. 有受入心, P. saṅkhittaṁ vā cittaṁ. 受入 lit. means “holding senses”, while P. saṅkhitta means “contracted.” The basic meaning would seem to be “withdrawn” or “guarded” senses, akin to the metaphor of the turtle drawing its limbs into its shell. [back]
15. Reflecting on these contemplations. C. 思惟法觀而自娯樂. Lit. “Reflecting on contemplation of these dharmas, he enjoys himself.” Dharma presumably refers to the qualities of mind that were listed above. I’ve ignored “he enjoys himself” as a spurious insertion, which has been added at a different point in the conclusion than in the previous section. [back]
16. what should and shouldn’t be considered. C. 可思惟、不可思惟. In other passages, the expression 不可思惟 means something that shouldn’t be thought about, either because it leads to immorality or it isn’t a fruitful inquiry.
    For example, at T125.2.607c28, the Buddha explains that a fool thinks jealous thoughts about another’s property or a woman’s form. Then he says bad things and wishes that those things were his own.
    Another passage at T125.2.657a19 lists four things that should never be thought about (presumably because there’s no end to them): the inconceivability of sentient beings, the world, nāga countries, and Buddha worlds.
    Thus, in this passage, I take 可思惟、不可思惟 to mean what’s appropriate and not appropriate as a subject of contemplation. [back]
17. How does a monk contemplate principles as principles? C. 云何比丘法法相觀意止, P. kathañca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu dhammesu dhammānupassī viharati. I’ve ignored the addition of 意止 (“abode of mindfulness”) as spurious since it wasn’t included in the questions introducing the previous three abodes. 相 is also suspicious to me as an insertion that tries to make sense of the repetition of 法 by changing it to “dharmas and aspects of dharmas.” [back]
18. awakening factor of joy. I’ve also corrected this factor of awakening, which in the Taisho reads 念覺意 instead of 喜覺意. This error occurs again in another passage below that lists the seven factors, but several other passages read as we would expect with the fourth item as 喜 (“joy”). This is another example of the textual corruption EĀ has suffered. Even basic lists like the eightfold path and factors of awakening are riddled with errors.
    awakening factor of calm. C. 猗覺意, P. passaddhisambojjhaṅga, S. praśrabdhisaṃbodhyaṅga. The early C. translation matches what we find in S. dictionaries for praśrabdhi (“trust, confidence”), yet a gloss at T125.2.746a2 interprets it to mean calming the body (“安其形體”) as a result of right livelihood (“等命者，知足於賢聖之財，悉捨家財”). Specifically, the gloss seems to mean the mendicant doesn’t busy themself with economic work. I’ve therefore translated accordingly even though the C. translation doesn’t lit. mean “calm.” [back]
19. C. 比丘於愛欲解脱，除惡、不善法。有覺、有觀，有猗念樂，於初禪，而自娯樂. The full definition of the first dhyāna occurs five times in EĀ, and each instance is garbled in one way or the other. In this instance, the beginning of the definition is close to what we would expect if the original read like other Indic parallels, but after 有覺有觀 (“with perception and examination”), the passage loses coherence. My translation represents a conservative reconstruction based on the other passages in EĀ, which would read (changes in bold): 比丘於愛欲解脱，除惡、不善法。有覺、有觀，念猗喜樂，遊於初禪. I’ve ignored the insertion of 而自娯樂 here and for the second dhyāna because it isn’t added to the third or fourth dhyānas, which indicates to me that it’s spurious. [back]
20. C. 比丘捨有覺有觀，内發歡喜，專其一意。成無覺無觀，念猗喜安，遊二禪，而自娯樂. The definition of the second dhyāna also occurs five times in EĀ. While they suffer from an occasional omission and a variety of different equivalent wordings, the basic meaning is much better preserved than it is with the first dhyāna’s definition. In this instance, I’ve ignored 而自娯樂 and read 内發歡喜 as 内有歡喜. It’s also notable that the other passages indicate that 猗 (“calm”) translates samādhi in the phrase 念猗喜安 (“mindful, calm, joyous, and happy”), and 喜安 (lit. “joy and peace”) translates S. prīti-sukha, which is usually translated to C. as 喜樂 (“joy and happiness”). [back]
21. C. 比丘捨於念，修於護。恒自覺知身覺樂，諸賢聖所求，護、念、清淨，行於三禪. For the third dhyāna, we have six full translations of its definition in EĀ. There’s quite a bit of wording variety and some confusion between them that likely stems from textual corruptions. In this instance, the main issue is that the definition begins by saying that 念 (“thought”) is abandoned rather than 喜 (“joy”), which is an error repeated in most of the other passages. Beyond this error, however, the definition matches Indic parallels fairly well in its basic meaning. [back]
22. C. 比丘捨苦、樂心。無復憂、喜，無苦、無樂。護、念、清淨，樂於四禪. The definition of the fourth dhyāna in EĀ is by far the most stable and consistent, but the beginning still suffers from problems of textual confusion. In a couple cases “sorrow and happiness” becomes “grief and sorrow” and only in two instances are they described as “previous.” Beyond this, however, the remainder is translated well enough, and we can tell that the original matched other Indic parallels. In this instance, I’ve only corrected the conclusion 樂於四禪 (“enjoys the fourth dhyāna”) to 遊於四禪 (“abides in the fourth dhyāna”). [back]
23. This conclusion shares the same outline as the previous three, but the text appears to suffer from a couple corruptions. At the start, it says “彼行習法，行盡法。并行習盡之法，而自娯樂,” which lit. means: “He practices subject to arising and practices subject to ending. He also practices subject to arising and ending, and then he enjoys himself.” I’ve adjusted it to match my translation of the previous conclusions. There is also an omission before the declaration of liberation at the end of the passage. Presumably, the quote was at least introduced, so I’ve inserted that minimal reconstruction in brackets. [back]

Translator: Charles Patton

Last Revised: 28 June 2023