中觀論疏 1.16

1.16

正名門第二。問：品題因緣，是何等因緣？答：總談論意，因緣有三：一從下破四緣受名，以四緣攝生義盡；今破四緣，欲釋八不畢竟無生，顯於中實，令因中發觀，故從所破受名故以目品。二者因緣義總，故標在論初。以生死涅槃、凡聖解惑皆是假名相待，無有自性，稱為因緣義，故因緣義總。又九十六種術非因緣義，以對外道非因緣義，明一切佛法皆是因緣義，因緣義總。問：何故辨此因緣耶？答：亦為釋成八不義。以萬法皆是因緣、無有自性，以無自性是故不生，顯於中實，令因中發觀，是以建首辨通因緣。三者此品觀十二因緣，故云觀因緣品。問：何以知觀十二因緣以目品耶？答：凡有三證。一者論主偈云「能說是因緣，善滅諸戲論。」能說是因緣者，謂說十二因緣不生不滅等，故知是十二因緣。故青目釋云「前為聲聞人說十二因緣是生滅法，後為菩薩說十二因緣不生不滅。」二者論引《大品經》云「菩薩坐道場時，觀十二因緣如虛空不可盡。」三者後小乘兩品外人問云「前已聞大乘法入第一義，今欲聞聲聞法入第一義。」論主還舉十二因緣答之。小乘從十二生滅門入第一義，則知大乘悟十二無生滅門名入第一義。以三義推之，故知觀十二因緣以目因緣品也。問：何故從觀十二因緣立名：不從破四緣受稱也？答：略明十義。一者十二因緣正明內法過患，菩薩欲度十二因緣河，故觀於十二。四緣通有為無為，不正明內法過患，故菩薩不欲度於四緣河，故不就四緣以明觀行。但為外人不受十二無生，故舉四緣生立有生義；今破四緣生，還成十二無生義，所以觀十二緣也。二者十二因緣通於得失、苞含大小，是故觀之。如不達因緣成於兩見：一邪因外道、二無因執計，舉此二迷則總收九十六種術。得於因緣亦有二人：一者聲聞、二者菩薩。是故十二該羅得失、苞含大小。三者經言「三狩同度十二緣河。二乘未盡其原，猶如兔馬；大士方徹其底，類彼象王。」此論欲明菩薩所行，故觀於十二。四者經曰「凡夫順十二因緣故流轉生死，二乘逆十二因緣沈彼涅槃，大士體此因緣本自不生故不同凡夫之順，今亦不滅則異二乘之逆，故非凡夫行非賢聖行是菩薩行。」此論欲申明菩薩所行，故觀於十二。五者此論引《大品》云「菩薩坐道場時，觀十二因緣不生不滅如虛空不可盡，即具三種波若。」十二因緣不生不滅即實相波若，由十二因緣本無生無滅發生正觀即觀照波若，為眾生故如實說之即文字波若。問：觀因緣但是般若，亦是傴和不？答：大士體因緣雖畢竟空，於六道眾生宛然而有，以照因緣有、本來畢竟空，名為傴和般若。照畢竟空、於眾生宛然而有，名般若傴和。以因緣能生權實兩慧為法身父母，故命初觀之。六者《大涅槃經》明五種佛性，蓋是諸佛之祕藏、萬流之宗極，蘊在因緣之內。所以然者，十二因緣不生不滅謂境界佛性，由十二因緣本無生滅發生正觀即觀智佛性，斯觀明了即名菩提果佛性。正觀既彰，生死患累畢竟空永滅，即大涅槃果果佛性。然十二因緣本性寂滅，未曾境智亦非因果，不知何以目之，強名正性。正性者，五性之本也。然此五性更無別體，但因緣一法轉而為五。因緣既具五性，是以命初即須論之。七者《涅槃經》云「諸行無常是生滅法，生滅滅已寂滅為樂。雪山大士歎斯一偈為全如意珠，為此半行偈棄捨身命。」若住十二因緣迴流生死，是則無有常樂我淨。此論觀彼十二因緣本自不生今亦無滅即生滅便息，生滅既息是則為常，既其有常即具我樂淨，有斯大利故初觀因緣。八者此論雖無法不窮、無言不盡，統其要歸會通二諦。然二諦隨處明之，今就因緣辨則其言顯易，因緣宛然常畢竟空名第一義，雖畢竟空而因緣宛然稱為世諦。此論正申二諦，故觀因緣。九者欲釋中觀論三字，故明於因緣。十二因緣不生不滅具三種中道故稱中，發生三觀目之為觀，以觀辨於心論宣於口目之為論。一部始終但釋三字，是以因緣建乎首篇。十者大明物病不出二種：一者執性、二者迷假。此論正破性假二生悟入無生，故觀因緣。問：云何破性假耶？答既稱因緣，即知假因託緣，無有自性，故性病便息。本對自性，是故有假；在性既無，假亦非有；性假若空，便入實相。是故論云「因緣所生法，是即無自性。若無有自性，云何有是法？」問：此論但應破洗迷執，蕭焉無寄玄道自通，何故乃解五種佛性及三種波若？答：關內〈中論序〉云「其實既宣、其言既明，則於菩薩之行、道場之照朗然懸解矣。」菩薩之行為因、道場之照為果，內外迷執既盡，大乘因果則成。斯乃總攝萬流，豈止乎十義？因緣一品既具此十門，自下諸文其義亦類。若精鑒斯意，則如白日朗其胸衿、甘露流其四體矣。問：三種釋因緣，正用何耶？答：正用通因緣，以通必攝別，十二門亦然。

Second, the section on determining the correct name. Question: What causes and conditions are referred to in the chapter title "Causes and Conditions"? Answer: Speaking generally of the treatise's purport, there are three meanings of causes and conditions: First, it takes its name from the refutation below of the four conditions, because the four conditions completely subsume the meaning of origination; now, refuting the four conditions is intended to explain that the eight negations are ultimately unoriginated, revealing the middle and real, and causing the contemplation to arise from the middle; therefore, it takes its name from what is refuted, and thus titles the chapter. Second, the meaning of causes and conditions is general, and is therefore placed at the beginning of the treatise. Because saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, ordinary people and sages, understanding and delusion are all provisional designations in mutual dependence and have no intrinsic nature, this is termed the meaning of causes and conditions; hence, the meaning of causes and conditions is general. Furthermore, the ninety-six heterodox methods are not the meaning of causes and conditions; to counter the non-[doctrine]-of-causes-and-conditions of the non-Buddhists, it illuminates that all of the Buddha's teachings are the meaning of causes and conditions; hence the meaning of causes and conditions is general. Question: Why explain these causes and conditions? Answer: It also serves to explain and establish the meaning of the eight negations. Since myriad phenomena are all causes and conditions and have no intrinsic nature, and because they have no intrinsic nature they are unoriginated, this reveals the middle and real, causing contemplation to arise from the middle; therefore, the general causes and conditions are explained at the head. Third, this chapter contemplates the twelve links of dependent origination, and is therefore called the "Chapter on Contemplating Causes and Conditions." Question: How is it known that it takes its chapter title from contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination? Answer: There are three proofs in all. First, the treatise master's verse says: "He who can teach this dependent origination, / skillfully puts an end to all prapañca." Saying "can teach this dependent origination" refers to teaching that the twelve links of dependent origination are unceasing, unoriginated, and so forth; thus we know it is the twelve links of dependent origination. Therefore, Piṅgala explains: "Previously, for śrāvakas, he taught that the twelve links of dependent origination are phenomena of origination and cessation; later, for bodhisattvas, he taught that the twelve links of dependent origination are unoriginated and unceasing." Second, the treatise cites the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra: "When the bodhisattva sits at the place of awakening, he contemplates the twelve links of dependent origination as like space, inexhaustible." Third, in the two later Hīnayāna chapters, the opponent asks: "Previously, I heard the Mahāyāna Dharma to enter the ultimate truth; now I wish to hear the śrāvaka Dharma to enter the ultimate truth." The treatise master again raises the twelve links of dependent origination to answer him. If Hīnayāna enters the ultimate truth from the approach of the origination and cessation of the twelve [links], then one knows that Mahāyāna realizes the approach of the non-origination and non-cessation of the twelve [links], which is called entering the ultimate truth. Deducing from these three meanings, we know that contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination gives the title to the Chapter on Causes and Conditions. Question: Why establish the name from contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination, rather than taking the appellation from refuting the four conditions? Answer: We briefly explain ten meanings. First, the twelve links of dependent origination directly clarify the faults of internal phenomena; the bodhisattva wishes to cross the river of the twelve links of dependent origination, and therefore contemplates the twelve. The four conditions apply generally to the conditioned and unconditioned, and do not directly clarify the faults of internal phenomena; thus, the bodhisattva does not wish to cross the river of the four conditions, and therefore does not explain contemplative practice based on the four conditions. It is only because opponents do not accept the unoriginated nature of the twelve [links] that they cite origination from the four conditions to establish the doctrine that origination exists; now, refuting origination from the four conditions turns back to establish the doctrine of the unoriginated nature of the twelve [links]; this is why one contemplates the twelve conditions. Second, the twelve links of dependent origination apply universally to gain and loss, and encompass both the Great and Lesser [Vehicles]; therefore one contemplates them. For instance, not understanding causes and conditions leads to two views: first, the heterodox view of a false cause; second, the adherence to having no cause. Raising these two delusions completely gathers the ninety-six heterodox methods. There are also two types of people who comprehend causes and conditions: first, śrāvakas; second, bodhisattvas. Therefore, the twelve completely encompass gain and loss, and embrace both the Great and Lesser [Vehicles]. Third, a sūtra says: "Three beasts cross the river of the twelve conditions together. The two vehicles do not reach its bottom, like the hare and the horse; the Great Being alone penetrates to its bed, akin to the elephant king." This treatise wishes to clarify the bodhisattva's practice, and therefore contemplates the twelve. Fourth, a sūtra says: "Ordinary people, going along with the twelve links of dependent origination, cycle through birth and death; the two vehicles, going against the twelve links of dependent origination, sink into that nirvāṇa; the Great Being realizes that these causes and conditions are originally unoriginated, and so does not accord with the ordinary person's following along, and are now also unceasing, and so differs from the two vehicles' opposing; hence it is neither the practice of ordinary people nor the practice of noble sages, but the bodhisattva practice." This treatise wishes to elucidate the practice of the bodhisattva, and therefore contemplates the twelve. Fifth, this treatise cites the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā: "When the bodhisattva sits at the place of awakening, he contemplates that the twelve links of dependent origination are unoriginated and unceasing, like space, inexhaustible; this then fully possesses the three kinds of prajñā." That the twelve links of dependent origination are unoriginated and unceasing is the real-mark prajñā; arising right contemplation because the twelve links of dependent origination are fundamentally without origination or cessation is the illuminative prajñā; explaining it in accordance with reality for the sake of sentient beings is the textual prajñā. Question: Is the contemplation of causes and conditions solely prajñā, or is it also upāya? Answer: Although the Great Being realizes that causes and conditions are ultimately empty, they distinctly exist for the sentient beings of the six paths; illuminating that the existence of causes and conditions is fundamentally and ultimately empty is called upāya-prajñā. Illuminating ultimate emptiness while it distinctly exists for sentient beings is called prajñā-upāya. Because causes and conditions can give birth to both expedient and real wisdom as the father and mother of the Dharma-body, they are commanded to be contemplated at the beginning. Sixth, the Mahāparinirvāṇa-sūtra explains the five kinds of Buddha-nature, which are indeed the secret treasury of all Buddhas and the ultimate source of the myriad streams, contained within causes and conditions. Why is this so? The unoriginated and unceasing nature of the twelve links of dependent origination is the realm Buddha-nature; the arising of right contemplation due to the fundamentally unoriginated and unceasing nature of the twelve links of dependent origination is the contemplative-wisdom Buddha-nature; when this contemplation is clearly realized, it is called the fruit Buddha-nature of bodhi. Once right contemplation is manifested, the afflictions and burdens of birth and death are ultimately empty and eternally extinguished, which is the fruit-of-fruit Buddha-nature of great nirvāṇa. However, the intrinsic nature of the twelve links of dependent origination is quiescent, never having been realm or wisdom, nor cause or fruit; not knowing how to designate it, it is forced to be called the correct nature. The correct nature is the root of the five natures. Yet these five natures have no separate substance; it is merely the single phenomenon of causes and conditions transformed into five. Since causes and conditions fully possess the five natures, they must be discussed right at the outset. Seventh, the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says: "All conditioned things are impermanent, these are phenomena of origination and cessation; when origination and cessation are extinguished, quiescent cessation is bliss. The Great Being of the Snowy Mountains praised this single verse as a complete wish-fulfilling jewel, and renounced his body and life for half a verse of it." If one abides in the twelve links of dependent origination and cycles through birth and death, then there is no permanence, bliss, self, or purity. This treatise contemplates that those twelve links of dependent origination are originally unoriginated and now also unceasing, so that origination and cessation cease; since origination and cessation have ceased, this is permanence; since there is permanence, it fully possesses self, bliss, and purity. Because there is such great benefit, causes and conditions are contemplated first. Eighth, although there is no phenomenon this treatise does not exhaust and no word it does not fulfill, if one summarizes its essential return, it unifies the two truths. Now, the two truths are clarified according to the context, but if they are explained in terms of causes and conditions, the words are evident and easy: that causes and conditions distinctly exist while being constantly and ultimately empty is called the ultimate truth; that while being ultimately empty, causes and conditions distinctly exist is termed conventional truth. This treatise properly elucidates the two truths, and therefore contemplates causes and conditions. Ninth, it wishes to explain the three characters "Mādhyamika-śāstra" (Middle-Contemplation-Treatise), and therefore illuminates causes and conditions. The twelve links of dependent origination being unoriginated and unceasing fully possess the three kinds of middle way, and are thus called "middle"; generating the three contemplations is designated "contemplation"; clarifying them in the mind as contemplation and expounding them by the mouth as treatise is designated "treatise." From beginning to end, the entire treatise merely explains these three characters; this is why causes and conditions are established in the opening chapter. Tenth, to explain the sicknesses of beings broadly, they do not exceed two kinds: first, clinging to intrinsic nature; second, being deluded by the provisional. This treatise directly refutes both origination through intrinsic nature and through the provisional to realize entrance into non-origination; therefore it contemplates causes and conditions. Question: How does it refute intrinsic nature and the provisional? Answer: Since it is called causes and conditions, one knows that it relies provisionally on causes and depends on conditions, lacking intrinsic nature; thus the disease of intrinsic nature ceases. It is originally in contrast to intrinsic nature that the provisional exists; since intrinsic nature does not exist, the provisional does not exist either; if both intrinsic nature and the provisional are empty, one enters into the true mark. Therefore the treatise says: "Phenomena produced by causes and conditions are precisely without intrinsic nature. If there is no intrinsic nature, how can such phenomena exist?" Question: This treatise should only wash away delusions and attachments, so that being detached without reliance, the profound path opens of itself; why then does it explain the five kinds of Buddha-nature and the three kinds of prajñā? Answer: The Guanzhong "Preface to the Madhyamaka-śāstra" says: "Once its reality is proclaimed and its words are made clear, then one attains a luminous and profound understanding of the bodhisattva's practice and the illumination of the place of awakening." The bodhisattva's practice is the cause, and the illumination of the place of awakening is the fruit; once internal and external delusions and attachments are exhausted, the causes and fruits of the Mahāyāna are established. This completely subsumes the myriad streams; how could it be limited to ten meanings? Since the single chapter on Causes and Conditions possesses these ten approaches, the meanings of the subsequent texts are also of this sort. If one keenly examines this meaning, it will be like the bright sun illuminating one's heart and mind, and sweet dew flowing through one's four limbs. Question: Of the three explanations of causes and conditions, which is properly used? Answer: The general causes and conditions are properly used, because the general necessarily subsumes the particular; the twelve approaches are also like this.