Comment on Samatha, Samaapatti, and Dhyaana in Chan (Zen)

·期刊原文

Comment on Samatha, Samaapatti, and Dhyaana in Chan (Zen)

By Chen, C. M.

Philosophy East and West

V. 16, No. 1/2 (1966) pp. 84-87

Copyright 1966 by University of Hawaii Press

Hawaii, USA

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p. 84

A certain causal condition (hetupratyaya) might be there when a hermit sets his pen to paper; otherwise, he should indulge himself in meditation (samaadhi) only. A few comments on Charles Luk's Ch'an and Zen Teaching may be in order. But, before commenting, a few quoted lines will help. [1]

"`Samatha is stopping or silencing [the active mind]; its characteristic is absolute, and its meditative study is that of all as void.
Samaapatti is attaining equanimity, evenness, or calmness [of mind]; its characteristic is relative, and its meditative study is that of all as unreal.
Dhyaana is unperturbed abstraction, which is beyond the absolute and the relative; its characteristic is nirvaa.nic, and its meditative study is that of the mean."

These are the main principles of the commentary on the twenty-five methods of meditative study taught in the Ta-fang-kuang-yuan-chueh-hsiu-to-lo-liao-i-ching-chih-chieh (The Suutra of Complete Enlightenment).

Surely, `samatha is the first stage of meditation, in which the active discriminative mind is stopped. It is neither objectively absolute nor subjectively meditative. As the above Suutra says, during `samatha the agitating consciousness is exposed and all thoughts are stopped. How, then, may meditative study of that "all-is-void" be achieved at this stage, as Han Shan says? He is somehow perplexed himself by the words of the Suutra: "with the appearing wisdom begotten by stillness." This wisdom is a result to be achieved only after `samatha is attained and the samaapatti stage begins to develop, but not in meditation within the stage of `samatha itself.

Samaapatti has its meditative effects negatively in relative illusions and "positively in the nature of enlightenment, though both are attained only after the stillness gained from samatha, but we cannot say that samatha alone occupies the absolute and samaapatti the relative. For this reason, the mind in samatha has no function with respect to maintaining the Absolute in in-

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This comment pertains to Ch'an and Zen Teaching, edited and translated by Charles Luk, Series Three (London: Rider & Co., 1960-1962). A review of this book appeared in Vol. XIII (2), July, 1963, of this Journal.

p. 85

sight, keeping relative illusions away from the Absolute, or causing them to be identified. All these functions, in fact, should be carried out only in the stage of samaapatti and not in `samatha. These three functions are called meditative study in the above-mentioned Suutra; it is different from "concentrative training" relative to the function of `samatha. The text, moreover, does not mention "meditative study" with reference to the definition of `samatha [2] and therefore supports the view expressed here on samaapatti.

Regarding the term "dhyaana," it is a common name referring to these three stages. The word "meditation" may be used for consideration in the first stage, `samatha for contemplation in the second stage, and samaapatti for absorption in the identification of these two stages in the third and final stage, samaadhi. There are many examples of them recorded in the Chinese Tripi.taka. The first four meditations of the realm of materiality (ruupadhaatu) were called the four dhyaanas. It was used in the sense of `samatha. The next four meditations of aruupadhaatu, which contain four kinds of samaapatti, were also called eight dhyaanas. It was used in the sense of samaapatti. Modern scholars use the word "ch'an," which is a transliteration of the Sanskrit "dhyaana." It is the sense of samaadhi, the final stage of truth, that became ch'an, or zen. As the term "dhyaana" was used so widely without an exact definition, the great sage Naagaarjuna confined the definition of "dhyaana" to the first four meditations of ruupadhaatu and referred to the next four as samaadhis. This term "samaadhi" should be used only for the final stage of full enlightenment. Hence, the book on meditation has a chapter called "The Definition of Meditative Terms," in which "dhyaana" is used for "samaadhi" as used in this Suutra. It is ironical, again, that the Suutra describes the Buddha's meditative attitude in the first paragraph with only the term "samaadhi," not "dhyaana." [3] Nevertheless, "dhyaana" as used in the Suutra on other occasions is certainly used in the sense of "samaadhi" or "ch'an." As Luk's book is prepared for modern readers, it has left out such terms as "dhyaana" to avoid confusion.

Han Shan purposely relates the; three kinds of samaapatti to the void (`suunyataa), the unreal (prapa~nca), and the mean (madhyamaa pratipad) of T'ien-t'ai doctrine in harmony with the three processes of meditation -- `samatha, samaapatti, and dhyaana -- in the Suutra. At least, he is particular about the fact that the first three belong to samaapatti, which is the second of the processes of meditation, but nothing corresponds with the first and third processes. However, they are not in three pairs, as he suggests.

Birds have wings, fishes have fins, bulls have horns -- these three ideas

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Ibid., pp. 228-229.

3. Ibid., p. 165.

p. 86

may be made to correspond permutably. But they cannot be made to correspond with such statements as "rabbits have horns" or "tortoises have hair."

The three samaapattis -- i.e., the void, the unreal, and the mean -- are three names for one truth. When any one is accomplished, the other two are also accomplished simultaneously. Concerning these three, the ancients used to say, "All are but parts of a stupendous whole." This may be symbolized by a triangle with three sides. When the triangle is integrated, the three sides are included at the same time. On the other hand, the three kinds of meditative study -- `samatha, samaapatti, and dhyaana -- are like three different points on a line or path to be passed one after another at different times. How could they be made to correspond to the three samaapattis (void, unreal, mean)? This is possible only if the three samaapattis correspond with the three virtues or the three liberations, as shown in the following:

Three samaapattis Three Virtues Three Liberations
_________________________________________________________________________
void dharmakaaya unborn
unreal mukti formless
mean praj~naa non-vow
_________________________________________________________________________

But it is impossible if they correspond with the daily three meals because of the taking of the meals at three different times.

Another thing is noteworthy in this Suutra. The Buddha taught twenty-five different methods of meditative study to all bodhisattvas (persons whose essence is supreme wisdom) in his assembly, but these do not apply to aspirants of our age. Luk's book purposely offers certain systematic and pragmatic meditative methods for Western students who would derive an exact sequence of the process of meditations. Hence, the twenty-five permutable methods of the three types of meditative study in this Sutra are useless to them for the time being. All the bodhisattvas practiced, for a very long period, the common and regular sequence of the meditative process, as Luk's book emphasizes, before they appeared in the dharma (enlightened) assembly. So, after the realization of the identification of `samatha and samaapatti, they were quite able to receive and practice the three types of meditative study in a permutable order.

In our age, though there might be some bodhisattvas who are enlightened (bodhicitta), there is scarcely any bodhisattva who has realized either the first or the tenth stage. Confucius said, "If you are not in the position of an official, you should not think about political affairs." Similarly, we might

p. 87

be bodhisattvas without achieving the realization of identification of `samatha and samaapatti. We should therefore follow only the designated process of meditative study mentioned in the Suutra, the systematic and practical Buddhist meditations.

Lastly, there is another commentary on the same Suutra edited in the Chinese Tripi.taka. It is earlier, more familiar to every Ch'an devotee in China, and expresses the significance of traditional southern Ch'an better than Han Shan's commentary does. Why is it that the editor of this series did not choose it instead of Han Shan's? The reason is very simple. All Western publishers, including Rider & Co. (London), are worshippers of the golden calf. We should not pin our hopes upon them to disseminate the real, sacred, and secret Ch'an teachings. Tantric works have been mixed with Hinduism, and Ch'an works with T'ien-t'ai doctrine by design of both the publisher and the author for the purpose of reaching a wide audience. Therefore, hapless Western readers scarcely get to study any pure Buddhist Tantra or pure Ch'an. The best way, of course, is to learn the Chinese and Tibetan languages, through which direct study of the original doctrines can be achieved.