般若波羅蜜多心經幽贊 2.64

2.64

清淨逆觀者，既斷滅已，還逆觀察。由誰無故老死無？由誰滅故老死滅？知由無作、緣生種子、現行二生無故老死無，無常、緣生二生滅故老死滅；如是乃至知由無作、緣生發起纏、隨眠三無明無故行無，無常、緣生三無明滅故行滅，是名清淨順逆觀察。有依順染不說生支，機欲待故，說逆唯九，以業為識非集緣故。或觀十一，無明無因，智種闕故。世尊如是方便施設令獨覺等獲自菩提，而彼不了，妄執有實染、淨緣起，今說彼無，令捨執著。於雜染品唯說無無明乃至無老死，於清淨品唯說無無明盡乃至無老死盡，各但無順而例無逆，舉無初、後例中亦無，故第六地雖作此觀，尚執有實流轉、還滅，第七地中方除生滅障。生者順染，即此所無無明乃至老死；滅者順淨，即此所無無明盡乃至老死盡。其所無者，謂無所執作者、常住二種緣生，非無功能緣起滅理，以契經言不壞世諦入於勝義，無造、受者業不亡故。依他既非定緣起相，真理亦非無明等滅，故並無之。若善惡業一切都無，契經唯應說法非有，何容繁長言亦非無？待因緣故，諸法成立，自事既重，故應詳究。

As for the reverse contemplation of purification: having already achieved eradication, one again contemplates in reverse. From the absence of what is aging-and-death absent? From the cessation of what does aging-and-death cease? One knows that due to the absence of the two [aspects of] birth—non-action, conditioned seeds and active manifestation—aging-and-death is absent; due to the cessation of the two [aspects of] birth—impermanent, conditioned—aging-and-death ceases; and so on up to knowing that due to the absence of the three kinds of ignorance—non-action, conditioned, producing active entanglement and latent tendencies—formations are absent; due to the cessation of the three kinds of ignorance—impermanent, conditioned—formations cease. This is called the direct and reverse contemplation of purification. Some teachings, based on direct defilement, do not speak of the link of birth, in consideration of faculties and inclinations, speaking of only nine links in reverse, because karma serves as consciousness and not as a condition for origination. Or some contemplate eleven, because ignorance has no cause, lacking seeds of wisdom. The Bhagavat thus skillfully provisionally established [these] to cause pratyekabuddhas and others to attain their own bodhi, yet they did not understand, falsely grasping that there are real defiled and pure dependent originations; now it is said that they are nonexistent, causing them to abandon attachment. Regarding the category of defilement, it only says there is no ignorance up to no aging-and-death; regarding the category of purification, it only says there is no exhaustion of ignorance up to no exhaustion of aging-and-death; each merely negates the direct order, but by analogy negates the reverse order as well, and by adducing the negation of the first and the last, by analogy those in between are also nonexistent. Therefore, although on the sixth bhūmi one engages in this contemplation, one still grasps that there are real samsaric flow and cessation; only on the seventh bhūmi is the hindrance of arising and cessation removed. "Arising" is direct defilement, which is precisely the nonexistent ignorance up to aging-and-death mentioned here; "cessation" is direct purification, which is precisely the nonexistent exhaustion of ignorance up to exhaustion of aging-and-death mentioned here. What is negated is that there is no conditioned origination of the grasped agent or permanent entity; it does not mean there is no functional principle of dependent origination and cessation, since a sūtra says that without destroying conventional truth one enters into the ultimate, and because without an agent or recipient, karma is not lost. Since dependent nature definitely lacks the mark of dependent origination, and the true reality is also not the cessation of ignorance and so forth, both are nonexistent. If wholesome and unwholesome karma were completely nonexistent, the sūtra should only say that dharmas do not exist; why would it redundantly say that they are also not nonexistent? Because they depend on causes and conditions, all dharmas are established; since one's own matter is grave, one should carefully examine it.