Dharma · AI Companion

五支

pañcāṅga

某一修法或教义体系的五个支分。AI-generated

Type FrameworkDifficulty IntroductoryTruth-level span outside the four-fold two-truths frameworkInitial AI estimate · evolves with use

A Contemporary ReadingAI-generated

What this concept is saying

The “five factors” (五支, *pañcāṅga*) are five constituent factors that together make a meditative attainment—or, in some contexts, another contemplative method—what it is. The key word is “constituent.” A factor is not merely one of five steps in a technique, nor one item on a checklist. It is an operative dimension of the contemplative state itself.

This is why “five factors” does not always denote the same five things. The number marks a structural pattern; the actual factors depend on which attainment or practice is under discussion. Its best-known use is in the analysis of the four *dhyānas* (四静虑, the four meditative absorptions).

According to Vasubandhu’s *Abhidharmakośabhāṣya*, translated into Chinese by Xuanzang as the *Abhidharmakośa Treatise* (《阿毘达磨俱舍论》, T1558), the four absorptions have the following factors:

| Absorption | Constituent factors | |---|---| | First *dhyāna* | initial application (寻, *vitarka*), sustained examination (伺, *vicāra*), rapture (喜, *prīti*), ease or pleasure (乐, *sukha*), concentration (定/等持, *samādhi*) | | Second *dhyāna* | inner clarity (内等净), rapture, ease, concentration | | Third *dhyāna* | equanimity (舍, *upekṣā*), mindfulness (念, *smṛti*), discernment or clear comprehension (慧), pleasure, concentration | | Fourth *dhyāna* | equanimity, mindfulness, neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling (中受/非苦乐受), concentration |

There are eighteen factor-positions across the four absorptions, but only eleven distinct “real entities” or operative factors (*dravya*) in the Abhidharma analysis, because some recur. The first absorption contributes five; the second introduces inner clarity, bringing the cumulative total to six; the third introduces four further factors, bringing it to ten; and the fourth introduces neutral feeling, bringing it to eleven.

This arithmetic expresses a teaching about refinement. Meditation does not become deeper by accumulating ever more experiences. It becomes deeper through relinquishment, purification, and reorganization. Coarse operations fall silent; subtler qualities become prominent. The *Abhidharmakośa* therefore says that the first absorption is taught with five factors “in order gradually to abandon the former and establish the latter.” Other mental events—such as perception—are present, but are not counted as defining factors because they do not participate in this pattern of gradual removal and replacement.

The five factors of the first *dhyāna* deserve careful attention.

Initial application, 寻 (*vitarka*), is the mind’s coarse engagement with its object. It turns toward, takes up, or strikes the object. It is not ordinary discursive “thinking” in the broad modern sense, although verbal thought may sometimes be involved.

Sustained examination, 伺 (*vicāra*), is the subtler continued attending to and examination of that object. If initial application is like placing a bowl steadily on a table, sustained examination is like keeping one’s hand lightly on it and discerning its condition. The traditional distinction is between a relatively coarse placing or searching movement and a finer, continuous scrutiny.

Rapture, 喜 (*prīti*), is the uplifting, gladdening, energizing quality born of seclusion and collectedness. It is not simply believing “I am happy,” and it need not resemble excitement about getting something one wants. In mature practice it is less acquisitive: the mind brightens because certain burdens have temporarily fallen away.

Ease or pleasure, 乐 (*sukha*), must not be flattened into generic happiness. The *Abhidharmakośa* makes a particularly technical distinction here. On its interpretation, what is called “pleasure” in the first and second absorptions belongs to pliancy or lightness (轻安, *praśrabdhi*), rather than being an actual pleasure faculty in the strict sense. It argues that the five sensory consciousnesses are not operating within those absorptions, so bodily sensory pleasure cannot be the factor; mental pleasure cannot simultaneously be posited alongside rapture as a second concurrent feeling; and rapture and pleasure, understood as two feelings, do not occur together. In the third absorption, by contrast, pleasure is established as a distinct feeling factor. Thus the same Chinese word 乐 cannot be assumed to have an identical technical status at every level.

Concentration, 定 or 等持 (*samādhi*), is unification and stable holding of the mind upon its object. Zhiyi’s *Great Calming and Contemplation* (《摩诃止观》, T1911) calls it “one-pointed mind” (一心). This does not mean forcing consciousness into a tiny point or becoming blank. It means that the mind is no longer scattered among competing objects and intentions.

The second absorption relinquishes initial application and sustained examination. What replaces their prominence is inner clarity or inner purification (内等净). The *Abhidharmakośa* identifies its underlying reality with the faculty of faith or confidence: when the practitioner attains the second absorption, deep confidence arises in the meditative ground without dependence upon the intermediate state of searching and examination. It is “purity” because confidence has the character of clarification, and “inner equality” because the mind is no longer driven outward in uneven currents. This is not blind belief. It is the settled confidence of a mind that no longer needs continually to touch and test its object.

The third absorption is not merely “the second absorption but calmer.” Its defining structure changes to equanimity, mindfulness, discernment, pleasure, and concentration. Equanimity prevents attachment to the powerful pleasure of the attainment. Mindfulness keeps the practitioner from losing the meditative orientation. Discernment clearly knows what is occurring. Pleasure remains, but rapture—the more stimulating uplift—has subsided. The state is therefore both deeply pleasant and guarded against intoxication by pleasure.

The fourth absorption refines this further. Pleasure gives way to neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling, while equanimity and mindfulness reach a purified form. Neutral feeling here does not mean numbness, dissociation, or indifference. It means freedom from the push and pull of pleasant and painful feeling within that absorption. Concentration remains throughout all four levels because without collectedness none of them would be an absorption.

Zhiyi’s *Great Calming and Contemplation* presents the first absorption’s five factors under the translations awakening or coarse apprehension (觉), examination (观), rapture, pleasure, and one-pointed mind. Here 觉 corresponds to 寻, 观 to 伺, and 一心 to 定 or 等持. Zhiyi explains them through the emergence of meditative “contact”: the first contact with the body while the mind rests on its object is called awakening; subtle discrimination of the contacts and their accompanying qualities is examination; rejoicing at attaining what was formerly unattained is rapture; serene ease is pleasure; and quiet stability is one-pointed mind.

An especially important point in this text is that the five factors arise together, though they differ in strength and may obscure one another. Zhiyi compares them to striking a bell once: the first sound is coarse and prominent, while subtler resonances become apparent afterward. They are not necessarily manufactured in five separate chronological installments. The dominant factor gives a phase its apparent character: coarse apprehension may initially cover examination; as it subsides, examination becomes evident; the other factors become manifest in a similar way.

This also explains why “five factors” is broader than a single universal formula. In the third absorption Zhiyi gives equanimity, mindfulness, discernment, pleasure, and one-pointed mind. In the skeleton contemplation, the first appearance of a contemplated color is classified as awakening, differentiation of the colors as examination, gladness at the unprecedented vision as rapture, serene enjoyment of the contemplative quality as pleasure, and stable abiding as one-pointed mind. In the Buddha-recollection *samādhi*, apprehending the Buddha as contemplative object is awakening; discerning the Buddha’s characteristics and virtues is examination; great gladness is rapture; pervasive bodily ease is pleasure; and deep, object-free stillness is one-pointed mind.

These applications do not imply that every five-part experience is interchangeable with first *dhyāna*. They show that a common functional architecture can appear within different contemplative systems: contact with or orientation toward the object, finer engagement with it, uplifting gladness, ease, and unification. The practice determines what the object is and how the factors should be interpreted.

The larger place of the five factors on the path of liberation now becomes visible. They describe how a mind dominated by the five hindrances (五盖)—sensual desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and remorse, and doubt—can acquire a different organization. The hindrances fragment, darken, agitate, or weaken the mind; the meditative factors gather, brighten, gladden, ease, and stabilize it. In that practical sense the hindrances are obstacles and the factors are remedies.

But absorption is not identical with liberation. Concentration can suppress hindrances and make the mind extraordinarily workable; it does not by itself uproot ignorance. The five factors belong primarily to the cultivation of concentration. Their liberating value is fulfilled when collectedness supports insight into impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, non-self, dependent arising, and emptiness. A concentrated mind may still appropriate its refinement as “my attainment.” The path must eventually know even rapture, equanimity, mindfulness, and concentration as conditioned phenomena—not as a permanent refuge or self.

A walkthrough in everyday life

Imagine an exhausted commuter arriving home after a day of notifications, meetings, and unresolved messages. She puts her phone away, sits down, and attends to the breath. This ordinary session should not immediately be declared *dhyāna*. Yet it can help us understand the functions represented by the first five factors.

First, the mind turns toward the breath and places attention there. That resembles initial application, 寻. Every time attention wanders and is deliberately returned, a coarse orienting movement is occurring. The common mistake is to identify 寻 with all thought whatsoever. Here it means engagement with the meditative object, not the stream of thoughts saying, “I was awkward in that meeting.”

Second, attention remains with the texture of breathing: the beginning, continuation, and ending of an inhalation; pressure and release; the difference between controlling and receiving the breath. This resembles sustained examination, 伺. The common mistake is to turn it into intellectual analysis—silently lecturing oneself about respiration. Sustained examination is finer continuity with the object, not multiplication of concepts about it.

As scattered preoccupations lose their grip, the mind may brighten. There can be a sense of relief, energy, or quiet delight: rapture, 喜. Its everyday analogue is not proof that meditative rapture has been attained. Still, it shows why rapture is more than a favorable opinion. It is an affective lifting of the mind. A familiar error is to chase this lift, turning a factor born of relinquishment into a new object of craving.

The body and mind may then feel settled and unburdened. This illustrates ease, 乐. It is not merely the thought “meditation is going well,” nor should every pleasant sensation be classified as the technical pleasure factor of an absorption. In the Abhidharma account, the status of 乐 differs by meditative level; in the first two absorptions it is explained through pliancy, while the third absorption possesses pleasure as a distinct feeling factor.

Finally, the mind stays with the breath without being repeatedly torn away. This illustrates concentration or one-pointedness, 定/一心. It is not tunnel vision produced by clenched effort. Nor is it blankness. Breath, awareness, and stability remain lucidly present.

Now apply Zhiyi’s bell analogy. The commuter need not wait for initial application to vanish completely before sustained examination, gladness, ease, or collectedness can exist. Several functions may be present together. At first the repeated “placing” of attention is loudest. As wandering diminishes, continuous engagement becomes more obvious. When that no longer requires much intervention, gladness and ease may stand out. Stability was developing all along, but is now the dominant feature.

A second scene reveals why the later absorptions require new factors. Suppose the meditator encounters profound ease and becomes fascinated by it: “At last I have found the state I need. How can I keep it?” Rapture and pleasure have appeared, but craving has quietly recruited them. The third-absorption structure offers a corrective map. Equanimity does not reject pleasure; it prevents leaning into it. Mindfulness remembers the contemplative task. Discernment knows pleasure as pleasure and detects attachment. Concentration keeps the mind steady. Pleasure can then be fully present without becoming a command.

The same pattern has a modest analogue in intimate relationships. After a painful argument, one partner finally experiences relief when the other speaks gently. Relief is pleasant, but if it instantly becomes “You must always make me feel this way,” pleasure has turned into appropriation. Equanimity allows warmth without grasping; mindfulness remembers the whole relationship rather than only the current feeling; discernment recognizes the conditions producing the moment. This is not equivalent to the third *dhyāna*. It is an everyday illustration of why pleasure alone is not mature freedom.

Consider also the algorithmic life of the phone. A notification supplies initial orientation, rapid scanning supplies continued engagement, a socially rewarding message supplies uplift, agreeable content supplies pleasure, and prolonged scrolling supplies a kind of attentional capture. Superficially, this can look like a five-part progression. But it is not meditative collectedness. The attention is repeatedly steered by external cues, craving, novelty, and commercial optimization. Absorption gathers the mind through seclusion from hindrances; compulsive scrolling continually refreshes the conditions of distraction. Similar psychological vocabulary does not establish spiritual equivalence.

This contrast also clarifies “inner clarity.” It is not confidence produced by an app’s reinforcement loop, nor the certainty of someone enclosed in an information bubble. The second absorption’s inner clarity emerges as coarse searching and examination subside within a stable contemplative ground. It is inward composure, not merely strong conviction.

Finally, imagine a parent sitting beside a sleeping child after a difficult evening. The house becomes quiet; irritation subsides; tenderness arises; the body softens; attention rests. These are valuable human qualities, but one should resist awarding them technical meditative labels too quickly. The five-factor analysis is most useful here as a disciplined question: What is orienting the mind? What sustains its contact? Is the gladness free of acquisition? Is ease accompanied by clarity? Is stability genuine, or merely fatigue? The map sharpens observation without turning every calm moment into an attainment.

Zhiyi adds a further warning: meditative signs must be examined for wholesome and distorted forms. He describes numerous “deviant characteristics” associated with experiences of contact and says that if one element is distorted, the others may also become contaminated. In contemporary terms, intensity is not a certificate of truth. Bodily vibrations, lights, bliss, unusual certainty, or altered self-experience may have many causes. Their presence does not by itself demonstrate *dhyāna*, insight, holiness, or supernatural authority. Where experiences are destabilizing, frightening, sleepless, manic, dissociative, or impair ordinary functioning, competent medical or psychological care may also be appropriate. Clinical categories and Buddhist contemplative analyses answer different questions and should not be casually collapsed into one another.

Why contemporary people need it

Contemporary culture often treats attention as a single resource: one either “has focus” or does not. The five-factor analysis is wiser and more exact. It asks what kind of focus has arisen, what supports it, what emotional tone accompanies it, whether coarse mental activity remains, and whether pleasure is governed by equanimity and clear knowing.

This matters because concentration is morally and spiritually ambiguous when isolated from the path. A person can be intensely concentrated while gambling, arguing online, manipulating an audience, or optimizing an addictive system. Bare attentional strength does not equal liberation. The meditative factors described here arise in a context of withdrawal from hindrances and must be integrated with ethical conduct and wisdom.

The teaching also corrects the contemporary fantasy that progress means adding extraordinary experiences. Across the four absorptions, refinement often means less: less coarse engagement, less internal commentary, less stimulating rapture, and eventually less dependence even on pleasure. What increases is not spectacle but freedom from the need for spectacle.

This offers a powerful diagnosis of burnout. A burned-out mind often alternates between forced application and collapse. It knows how to push itself toward an object, but not how to sustain gentle continuity; it seeks stimulation as a substitute for rapture, comfort as a substitute for pliancy, and digital capture as a substitute for concentration. The five factors distinguish these things. They show that wholesome collectedness includes affective nourishment and bodily-mental ease, not merely stricter control.

They also teach that healthy practice has an ecology. If the mind cannot stay with an object, demanding one-pointedness may be premature. Ethical conflict, sleep deprivation, untreated illness, fear, sensory overload, or the five hindrances may need attention. The factors are constituents of an attainment, not buttons that can be pressed independently of conditions.

AI and neuroscience provide useful comparisons but not final explanations. Researchers may study attentional stability, metacognition, affect, sensory processing, and altered states; computational systems can model selection, feedback, and signal competition. Such work may illuminate correlates or functions associated with meditation. It does not establish that an algorithm possesses Buddhist concentration, nor does a neural correlate prove or disprove the Buddhist account of liberation. Scientific constructs, first-person contemplative classifications, and soteriological claims operate at different explanatory levels, and their relationships remain partly unsettled.

Most importantly, the five factors protect practitioners from confusing a pleasant state with the end of the path. Rapture passes. Pleasure passes. Equanimity, mindfulness, and concentration are also conditioned. Their great value is that they make the mind less dispersed, less reactive, and more capable of seeing conditions as conditions. They are a raft within the training, not a permanent identity.

The path therefore moves through a double education. First, one learns to cultivate skillful states rather than remain helpless before distraction and craving. Then one learns not to cling even to the skillful states. The five factors belong to the first education directly and prepare the ground for the second. They show how freedom is cultivated; insight shows why none of the cultivated factors can rightly be called “I,” “mine,” or an everlasting refuge.

Common misunderstandings and clarifications

1. “Five factors” always means the five factors of the first absorption. No. That is its most familiar application, but not its whole range. The third absorption also has five factors, and *Great Calming and Contemplation* applies a fivefold architecture to proper meditation, skeleton contemplation, and Buddha-recollection *samādhi*. The names and meanings must be read within the relevant practice.

2. The five factors are five strictly successive steps. Not in Zhiyi’s own presentation. He explicitly says that they arise together but differ in strength, mutually obscuring one another until each becomes prominent. His single-struck bell has coarse and subtle phases of resonance. Other Buddhist scholastic positions discussed in the text analyze their sequence or ontological status differently, so one should not erase the historical debate.

3. Initial application and sustained examination are just “thinking” and “more thinking.” This is too loose. Initial application is the relatively coarse turning or placing of mind upon its object; sustained examination is subtler continued engagement. Discursive language may accompany them, but does not exhaust their meaning.

4. Rapture and pleasure are synonyms. They perform different functions. Rapture uplifts and energizes; pleasure or ease soothes and satisfies. Moreover, the *Abhidharmakośa* technically distinguishes the status of 乐 across absorptions: in its analysis, the first two absorptions’ “pleasure” is associated with pliancy, whereas the third absorption establishes pleasure as a genuine feeling factor.

5. One-pointedness means blanking the mind. A blank, dull, or dissociated condition is not thereby *samādhi*. Concentration is stable unification upon an object or contemplative orientation. Lucidity matters. The continued presence of mindfulness and discernment in the higher structures makes clear that deepening meditation is not a descent into unconsciousness.

6. Equanimity means emotional indifference. Equanimity is non-leaning and balance, especially in relation to powerful pleasure. It prevents appropriation without abolishing sensitivity. Indifference does not care; equanimity can know and care without being thrown off balance.

7. Inner clarity is a mystical feeling of certainty. The second absorption’s 内等净 is technically tied by the *Abhidharmakośa* to confidence within a meditative ground no longer dependent on coarse application and examination. Intensity of conviction in ordinary life—especially ideological certainty—should not be equated with it.

8. Anything intense, blissful, or unusual must be a sign of correct absorption. Zhiyi explicitly warns that meditative experiences can possess distorted characteristics and that corruption in one dimension may affect the rest. The relevant tests include ethical quality, freedom from attachment, clarity, stability, and conformity to the structure of the practice—not intensity alone.

9. Five factors and five hindrances are two names for one list. They have opposite roles. The hindrances obstruct and disperse; the absorption factors organize and stabilize. Nor should their numerical equality be mistaken for identity. Buddhist texts frequently classify teachings by number; “five” alone does not establish that two sets are equivalent.

10. Mastering the five factors is liberation. It is a major discipline of mind, not the whole liberating path. Even exalted concentration remains conditioned. Without wisdom, it may become another refined possession. Within the complete path, ethical restraint protects the mind, concentration makes it stable and workable, and insight penetrates the conditioned and selfless nature of experience.

The deepest lesson of the five factors is therefore not “how to obtain five special sensations.” It is that contemplative stability has an intelligible structure—and that this structure itself becomes progressively relinquished. At first the practitioner learns to gather the mind: approach the object, remain with it, receive the gladness and ease born of seclusion, and become unified. Later, even the movement of approaching falls away; then stimulating gladness falls away; then dependence on pleasure falls away. What remains is increasingly balanced, mindful, and clear.

In the path of liberation, maturity is measured not by how many impressive states one can claim, but by how little the mind must grasp in order to be at peace—and by whether that peace becomes a basis for seeing things as they actually arise and cease.

Canonical EntryAI-generated

一、定义与核心要义

「五支」(pañcāṅga)指禅定或诸法门所具之五种构成支分。「支」译梵语 aṅga,意为构成部分、要素。此概念最常用于标示四静虑中各禅所立之支分,其中初静虑与第三静虑各立五支;亦用于标示正禅、骨观、念佛三昧等诸法门之五重结构。

二、主要阐述

四静虑支之建立

《俱舍论》以「实事」(dravya)标示支分的实体数量:诸支实事总为十一。初静虑五支即寻、伺、喜、乐、定(等持);第二静虑四支为内净、喜、乐、定;第三静虑五支为舍、念、慧、乐、定;第四静虑四支为舍、念、中受、定。初静虑五支即五种实事,第二静虑足前为六,第三静虑足前为十,第四静虑足前为十一。

本论以「四句」辨支分归属:有是初支非第二支者谓寻伺;有是第二支非初支者谓内净;初二俱是者谓喜、乐、等持;俱非者谓除前余法。

初静虑唯立五支之缘由:「初说五支,拟渐离前、建立后故。无渐减故,不说想等」——以初五支为基础,逐次减前立后。

「乐」支实义辨析

《俱舍论》就第三静虑特立「乐支」详辨:初二静虑所说之「乐」乃轻安(praśrabdhi)所摄,并非真实乐根。理由有三:初二定中无五识故无身受乐;以说有喜故无心受乐;喜乐二受不俱行。并引《契经》证「轻安与乐别说」,以「轻安风」释定中如何生起身乐。

「内等净」之本体

《俱舍论》主张第二静虑「内等净」(adhyātma-samāpatti-śuddhi)之实体即信根:「若有证得第二静虑,则于定地亦可离中有深信生,名内等净。信是净相,故立净名;离外均流,故名内等;净而内等,故立内等净名。」并反对有余师所说「内等净、等持、寻伺皆无别体」之观点。

正禅五支之同起与次第

《摩诃止观》明初禅正禅五支为觉、观、喜、乐、一心:「若初触触身,在缘名『觉』;细心分别八触及十眷属,名为『观』;庆昔未得而今得故,名为『喜』;恬愉名为『乐』;寂然名为『一心』。」五支悉是定体。

经中特别强调五支「同起」:「五支同起而有强弱相翳,取成就者以判五支」,以「一槌撞钟,初麁、中细之异」为喻,觉相虽初盛,而观、喜、乐、一心四支已同时存在;觉强观未了,觉息观方明,余支亦然次第成就。

五支随法门而异

《摩诃止观》明五支非独正禅所系。三禅之五支为「舍、念、慧、乐、一心」,「还倚色法转妙,不倚喜生乐,此正乐遍身受」。骨观中见四色将发时:初色发时名觉,分别八色名观,昔所未见庆喜名喜,乐法恬愉名乐,定心湛然安住名一心。念佛三昧中亦具五支:觉念佛境界为觉支,分别念佛种种相功德为观支,心大欢喜为喜支,遍体怡乐为乐支,无缘无念湛湛深入为一心支。经云「一一五支皆具十种功德眷属支林」。

经中亦警示五支发起时须辨邪正:动触等十功德中各有二十种邪相,合八触共成一百六十邪法,「若一法有邪,余法亦皆染著」。

三、不同部类与译本的表述差异

初禅五支名目,《俱舍论》(阿毘达磨部)作「寻、伺、喜、乐、定(等持)」;《摩诃止观》(诸宗部)作「觉、观、喜、乐、一心」。「寻」与「觉」、「伺」与「观」、「定(等持)」与「一心」为同义异译。

五支之体性,《俱舍论》以「实事」数之,各支各有实体;《摩诃止观》则并列数说:《毘昙》以二十三心数一时而发,取强者判为五支;《成论》明五支前后相次而起,四支为方便,一心支为定体;《大集》以第六默然心为定体。经文自判定五支皆为定体。

术语对译:《俱舍论》以「支」译 aṅga、「静虑」译 dhyāna、「等持」译 samādhi、「轻安」译 praśrabdhi、「内等净」译 adhyātma-samāpatti-śuddhi,行文以「颂」「论」分立,引经证称「契经」。

四、与相关概念的关系

五支与四静虑:五支为四静虑支分建立之核心单位,初禅与三禅各五支,二禅与四禅各四支。

五支与五盖:《俱舍论》由结(盖)等差别复说有五种盖,五盖唯在欲界,以障蕴故唯五。五盖为障,五支为治,所对治与能对治相配。

五支与五净居:由杂修五品,生有五净居。

五支与根力觉道:七觉八道支一向无漏,三、四、五根力皆通有漏无漏二种。五根五力之「五」与五支之「五」同属依数立法之门。

五支与四果八智:五因立四果,由此集断得八智,顿修十六行。

五、代表性原文引用

《俱舍论》:「初说五支,拟渐离前、建立后故。无渐减故,不说想等。」

《俱舍论》:「信是净相,故立净名;离外均流,故名内等;净而内等,故立内等净名。」

《摩诃止观》:「正禅五支者:若初触触身,在缘名『觉』;细心分别八触及十眷属,名为『观』;庆昔未得而今得故,名为『喜』;恬愉名为『乐』;寂然名为『一心』。」

《摩诃止观》:「五支同起而有强弱相翳,取成就者以判五支。」

《摩诃止观》:「一一五支皆具十种功德眷属支林。」

By SutraAI-generated

阿毘達磨俱舍論T1558 · 毘曇部

《阿毘達磨俱舍論》論述「五支」,主要聚焦於初靜慮的五支——念、慧、尋、伺及內等淨。論中多處就此五支的體性、建立理由及其與有漏無漏的交涉詳加抉擇。

第一,關於五支的定義與現行。論中在討論意識與業道的關係時,明確提及「意識現在前時得五支等」,將五支與意識現行相聯,顯示五支乃心所法中之特定組合,於意識現前時可得相應成就。

第二,關於五支與有漏、無漏的關係。論中設難:若依止欲界身根不應得生色界觸識,則正在無漏定中之觸及身識應成無漏,豈非造成少支有漏、少分無漏的違理?論主答無違,引用契經「諸所有眼乃至廣說」,說明彼經中說十五界全皆有漏,故無違經之過;此乃約「餘觸」及「餘身識」密意而說。又以覺支攝為例,說明身輕安攝於覺支,無漏亦可如是說。

第三,關於五支漸減與建立後支之理則。論中說明:「由此可說,依初五支減二三四立第二等,即由此理初說五支,擬漸離前、建立後故。」意即初靜慮唯立五支,是為了預備逐漸離前、建立後支,故後支皆依初五支漸次減二、三、四而立。論主並破斥「此五資初定勝故立為支」之說,指出念、慧能資勝尋伺,故不應獨以此五為資初定之由。

第四,關於五支中內等淨之體性。論主先以譬喻說明:此定遠離尋伺鼓動,相續清淨而轉,名為內等淨;若有尋伺鼓動,相續不清淨而轉,則如河有浪。隨後抉擇內等淨之實體,論主主張「此即信根」,謂證得第二靜慮時,於定地可離中有深信生,信是淨相故立淨名,離外均流故名內等,淨而內等,故立內等淨名。

第五,關於內等淨是否有別體。有餘師主張內等淨、等持、尋伺皆無別體,論主雖承認「心分位殊亦得名心所」之理,但仍表示「非我所宗」,不以為正宗,顯示論主堅持此等法有其別體之立場。

綜上,《阿毘達磨俱舍論》論述五支之特色在於:專以初靜慮五支為對象,詳辨其漸次建立之理則、有漏無漏交涉之密意,並對內等淨體性提出「即是信根」之獨特抉擇,以有別體為正宗,展現其於定學支分之細密分析。

瑜伽師地論T1579 · 瑜伽部

《瑜伽師地論》對「五支」之施設,乃隨不同修法與教義體系而各有其義,並非單一固定科目。茲依論中所見,略述數端。

一、聖三摩地之五支。論問「云何建立五支差別」,答謂四靜慮中所有聖賢心一境性為體,依四種現法樂住建立四支;復依審諦觀察緣起法,並為斷除餘結縛故,建立第五支。當知此由二因緣故建立五支。

二、初靜慮圓滿五支。行者於初靜慮,遠離諸欲及一切惡不善法,有尋有伺,離生喜樂,「圓滿五支具足安住」,名住欲界對治修果。文中並以了相、勝解、遠離、攝樂、觀察、加行究竟、加行究竟果七作意,顯示入定之階位。

三、真實苾芻之成就五支與永斷五支。成就五支者:一不依止矯設方便邪活命法,二減省器物眾具善棄珍財,三悕慕沙門、愛樂學處而不違越禁戒,四正修方便淨命喜足而入現觀得清淨見,五修習先所得道心得解脫。永斷五支則為阿羅漢於五處不復能犯:不能捨學處而退還、不貯積執為己有而受用、不為財命妄語、不棄捨諸欲而行不與取、不計自他作等邪見而習近非梵行法。

四、近住律儀之五支。一受遠離損害他支,二受遠離損害自他支(離非梵行),三違越所受重修行支(離妄語),四不越所受正念住支(離歌舞伎樂等),五不壞正念支(離諸酒眾放逸處)。

五、四靜慮立五支之理由。論問何故於四靜慮建立五支、四支,答以住所依、住饒益、住自性三故;又為對治三雜染住(染污住、苦惱住、愚癡住)而立;或以受欲者三種正所作事(求財寶、受用、自在)為相似法而立。又約對治自苦惱行立三種對治:缺減對治、身心逼惱對治、外境流散不寂靜對治。

六、修斷者之五支。論云「諸修斷者,略由五支攝受於斷,能於諸行如實顯了」:一身遠離,二心遠離,三由奢摩他品三摩地,四由毘鉢舍那品三摩地,五由常委所作。

七、與五支相對之四支。修習神足則略由四支攝諸斷行:修習支(欲、精進)、證勝進支(信、輕安)、護隨煩惱通達支(念、正知)、引發能淨隨煩惱支(思、捨)。

綜觀本論,「五支」之名數雖同,所攝法則隨施設之門而異:或就禪定體性而立(如聖三摩地、初靜慮),或就行者德行而立(如真實苾芻),或就律儀學處而立(如近住律儀),或就斷惑方便而立(如修斷者)。此隨機施設、五名同數而義各別,正是本論論述此概念之特色。

摩訶止觀T1911 · 諸宗部

《摩訶止觀》論「五支」,乃是就正禪或某一修法成就時所區分出的五個支分。全文一貫以「五支」為稱,未見別名。

一、正禪五支之名義與次第 就初禪明列:初觸觸身、在緣名「覺」;細心分別八觸及十眷屬,名為「觀」;慶昔未得而今得故,名為「喜」;恬愉名為「樂」;寂然名為「一心」。五支悉是定體,前方便另說。

二、諸經論對五支之異說 本文引述數家以辨:《毘曇》以二十三心數一時而發,取其強者判為五支;《成論》明五支前後相次而起,四支為方便,一心支為定體;《大集》以第六默然心為定體。復有人言五支在欲界第九心,或言在欲界定前,本文明言「此則非五支也」,今辨覺觀俱禪,正就初禪判。

三、五支同起而強弱相翳 五支並非單獨先後,乃同起而有強弱之別。文中以「一槌撞鐘,初麁、中細之異」為喻:初緣覺相盛,已具觀等四支;覺強觀未了,覺息觀方明;初已有喜,喜息則喜支成;初已有樂,樂未暢,喜息則樂成;初已有一心為四支所動,至樂謝則一心成。如開寶藏:覺是寶物而知珍貴,次分別金銀,別已領納生喜,喜故受樂,安快一心。

四、初禪與三禪五支之別 初禪以覺、觀家一心為體,故與四禪通論同用一心為體;進二禪則呵覺、觀,初禪即壞。三禪「與樂俱起,不倚喜生樂」,五支改為捨、念、慧、樂、一心,與初禪名相有異。

五、不淨觀中之五支 就骨人觀而言,初色發時名「覺」;分別八色名為「觀」;昔所未見,慶喜悲慚,名為「喜支」;色發時深有樂法,心地恬愉,名為「樂支」;定心湛然,安住不動,為「一心支」。本文同時指出此中「動痒、空明、五支等相」不同根本,亦異特勝、通明。

六、念佛發得之五支 念佛發時,覺此念佛境界為「覺支」;分別念佛種種相、種種功德法門皆分明識為「觀支」;心大歡喜、慶悅內充為「喜支」;一心安隱、遍體怡樂為「樂支」;無緣無念、湛湛深入為「一心支」。文中並言「一一五支皆具十種功德眷屬支林」,如來功德力熏故,「味倍餘支」。

七、五支與八觸、十功德之共起 不論何種五支,皆伴隨十功德、八觸、正邪等相共同顯現。本文明言「八觸十功德,此覺成禪;百六十邪,此覺壞禪」;「若一法有邪,餘法亦皆染著;若初觸無邪,餘法皆善」。可知五支非孤立,乃與八觸、十功德、叢林等共構完整的禪相。