中觀論疏 1.19.3

1.19.3

所以世出世俱破者，稟教之流謂世出世為二，故成二見。 故《大品》云「諸有二者，無道無果。 」《涅槃》云「明、無明，愚者謂二。 」《華嚴》云「迷惑賢聖道，生死涅槃謂二。 」《法華》云「如來如實知見三界之相」，天親釋云「眾生界與涅槃界不離，眾生有如來藏故。 」《淨名》云「悟不二故，得無生忍。 」今欲破如此二見、申無二之道，故前破世間、後破出世。 今明求世間出世間畢竟不可得，即是非世非出世乃名中道。 所以前破世間、後破出世者，蓋是從易至難為次第故也。 就二十一品，又開為三：初至〈觀業〉有十七品，破稟教邪迷、顯中道實相。 第二〈觀法〉一品次明得益。 第三〈時〉、〈因果〉、〈成壞〉有三品，重破邪迷、重明中道實相。 所以開此三者，依《智度論》釋〈習應品〉，初正說菩薩習應波若； 第二明於得益，謂重罪消滅、諸天守護； 三重明習應。 諸佛說經既其有三，菩薩造論義亦如是。 以邪教覆正經，其義不明照，故破於偏邪、顯中道之實相。 中道之實相既顯，三乘賢聖由之而成，故次明得益。 睿師序云「其實既宣、其言既明，於菩薩之行、道場之照朗然懸解矣。 」但略說未周，兼鈍根難悟，故重破邪迷、重說實相也。 就初十七品又開為二：初有七品，略破人法，明大乘觀行； 次十品，廣破人法，辨大乘觀行。 初略後廣，為解義故。 又利根易悟，略釋便解； 鈍根難了，廣開乃悟。 就七品即為七段。 就〈因緣品〉中自開為二：第一牒八不享造論意、第二重牒八不而解釋之。 就第一又二：初牒八不、第二序造論意。 就牒八不分為三別：第一正牒八不，明所申教體； 第二半偈，歎八不之用； 第三半偈，敬人美法。 初明教體，即是二諦； 次明教用，即是二智。 所以先明二諦、次明二智者，然諦智未曾一二，不二而二，故諦智方便約緣不同。 非諦無以悟智、非智無以明諦，如來內智明了、外照根緣，故說二諦言教。 內有二智、外說名諦，即是智能諦所。 諦不說諦、諦還說智，即是諦能智所。 欲明諦智行說因緣，今正赴緣說教，故先明於諦、次辨於智也。 又先明二諦後明二智者，前正明說教、後明教意。 所以說八不二諦者，為令眾生發生二智故也。 望佛從本至末，望緣即是因教發智也。 又此論正申二諦、傍明二智義，故先說諦而後智。 《百論》正明二智、傍明二諦，故先智而後諦也。 問：何故標八不有論初也。 答：略明十義。 一者為欲辨經論資申之義。 八不即是三世諸佛方等要經，論主稟經發生二智，然後為物造論，此即是經資於論。 後解釋八不，破外道迷失，謂論申於經也。 所以須牒經者，恐小乘之流不生信受，故命初標經八不，即明勸信意也。 二者題標中論，今解釋之。 初標八不即是中道，後解釋八不即是明論，是以題文稱中論也。 三者序眾生失本，故牒八不在論初。 問：失八不為有幾人？ 答略有四人：一者迷失八不，故有六道紛然。 如《涅槃經》云「是一味藥，隨其流處有六種味。 」即是失中道佛性成六道味。 八不即是中道佛性也。 二者諸外道等求此一道而不能得，故成九十六種。 如《涅槃經》云「凡夫之人雖加功苦，不得是藥。 」三者二乘之人封執諸法決定有生，聞說無生心不信受。 如《智度論》云「佛滅度後有五百部，聞畢竟空如刀傷心。 」四者學大乘人聞畢竟空，遂成斷見，失於罪福，又無二諦。 如此四人並失八不，今欲題其失本，以顯曉示之，令知所失，故在論初。 四者示眾聖得原，故標在論初。 得此八不亦有四人，如《涅槃》云「觀中道者凡有四種：下智觀故得聲聞菩提、中智觀故得緣覺菩提、上智觀故得菩薩菩提、上上智觀故得諸佛菩提。 」以為欲明眾聖得本，故題之在首。 五者此論以二諦為宗，八不正明二諦，故標之在初。 六者欲示學教人所表。

The reason both the mundane and the supramundane are refuted is that followers who receive the teaching consider the mundane and supramundane to be two, and thus form dualistic views. Therefore the Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā-sūtra says, 'For all those who hold to duality, there is neither path nor fruit.' The Nirvāṇa-sūtra says, 'Regarding vidyā (clarity) and avidyā (ignorance), the foolish consider them to be two.' The Avataṃsaka-sūtra says, 'Deluded regarding the path of the worthy and the noble, they consider saṃsāra and nirvāṇa to be two.' The Lotus Sūtra says, 'The Tathāgata truly sees and knows the characteristics of the triple world,' which Vasubandhu explains: 'The realm of sentient beings is not separate from the realm of nirvāṇa, because sentient beings possess the tathāgatagarbha.' The Vimalakīrtinirdeśa says, 'Because one awakens to non-duality, one attains the anutpattika-dharma-kṣānti.' Now, wishing to refute such dualistic views and elucidate the non-dual path, [the śāstra] first refutes the mundane and afterward refutes the supramundane. Now it clarifies that when one seeks the mundane and the supramundane, they are ultimately unfindable; that is, being neither mundane nor supramundane is what is called the middle way. The reason for first refuting the mundane and afterward refuting the supramundane is simply following the sequence from easy to difficult. With regard to the twenty-one chapters, they are again divided into three: First, from the beginning up to the 'Examination of Karma', there are seventeen chapters that refute the perverse delusions of those who receive the teaching and reveal the true mark of the middle way. Second, the single chapter 'Examination of Dharmas' next clarifies the attainment of benefit. Third, the three chapters 'Time', 'Causes and Effects', and 'Arising and Passing Away' re-refute perverse delusions and re-clarify the true mark of the middle way. As for why these three are established: according to the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa's commentary on the 'Chapter on Practicing in Accordance', it first directly explains the bodhisattva's practicing in accordance with prajñā; second, it clarifies the attainment of benefit, namely the eradication of grave sins and protection by all the devas; third, it re-clarifies practicing in accordance. Since the sūtras preached by all Buddhas have these three, the principle of the treatises composed by bodhisattvas is also like this. Because false teachings obscure the correct sūtras, their meaning is not clearly illuminated; hence, one refutes bias and perversity to reveal the true mark of the middle way. Once the true mark of the middle way is revealed, the worthy and noble ones of the three vehicles are realized through it; hence, [the treatise] next clarifies the attainment of benefit. Master Sengrui's preface says: 'When its reality has been proclaimed and its words have been clarified, one is brightly and completely enlightened regarding the practice of the bodhisattva and the illumination of the bodhimaṇḍa.' However, because a brief exposition was not exhaustive, and moreover dull-rooted individuals find it difficult to awaken, [the treatise] re-refutes perverse delusions and re-states the true mark. Regarding the first seventeen chapters, they are again divided into two: First, there are seven chapters that briefly refute persons and dharmas and clarify the contemplative practice of the Mahāyāna; next, there are ten chapters that broadly refute persons and dharmas and analyze the contemplative practice of the Mahāyāna. First brief and afterward broad is for the sake of understanding the meaning. Furthermore, sharp-rooted individuals awaken easily and understand through a brief explanation; dull-rooted individuals understand with difficulty and awaken only when it is broadly unfolded. As for the seven chapters, they constitute seven sections. Within the 'Examination of Causes and Conditions', it naturally divides into two: first, citing the eight negations to state the intention for composing the treatise; second, re-citing the eight negations and explaining them. With regard to the first, there are again two parts: first, citing the eight negations; second, introducing the intention for composing the treatise. With regard to citing the eight negations, it is divided into three distinct parts: first, directly citing the eight negations to clarify the essence of the teaching that is elucidated; second, half a verse praising the function of the eight negations; third, half a verse revering the person and praising the Dharma. The first clarifies the essence of the teaching, which is the two truths; next, it clarifies the function of the teaching, which is the two knowledges. As for why it first clarifies the two truths and next clarifies the two knowledges: truth and knowledge have never been one or two; they are two without being two; therefore, truth and knowledge are expediently distinguished according to conditions. Without truth, there is no way to awaken knowledge; without knowledge, there is no way to illuminate truth. As the Tathāgata's inner knowledge is completely clear and outwardly illuminates capacities and conditions, he preaches the verbal teachings of the two truths. Inwardly having the two knowledges and outwardly preaching them is called truth; that is, knowledge is the agent and truth is the object. Truth does not preach truth; truth also preaches knowledge; that is, truth is the agent and knowledge is the object. Wishing to clarify the causes and conditions of the practice and preaching of truth and knowledge, now directly addressing conditions to preach the teaching, [the treatise] first clarifies truth and next analyzes knowledge. Furthermore, the reason for first clarifying the two truths and afterward clarifying the two knowledges is that the former directly clarifies the preaching of the teaching, and the latter clarifies the intent of the teaching. The reason for preaching the two truths of the eight negations is to cause sentient beings to generate the two knowledges. Looking from the Buddha, it is from the root to the branch; looking from conditions, it is generating knowledge by means of the teaching. Furthermore, this treatise directly elucidates the two truths and secondarily clarifies the meaning of the two knowledges; hence it first preaches truth and afterward knowledge. The Śata-śāstra directly clarifies the two knowledges and secondarily clarifies the two truths; hence it first presents knowledge and afterward truth. Question: Why are the eight negations set forth at the beginning of the treatise? Answer: Ten meanings are briefly clarified. First, to distinguish the principle of the sūtras supporting and being elucidated by the treatise. The eight negations are the essential Vaipulya sūtras of all the Buddhas of the three periods. The author of the treatise received the sūtras and generated the two knowledges, and afterward composed the treatise for sentient beings; this is the sūtras supporting the treatise. Afterward, explaining the eight negations refutes the errors and delusions of the non-Buddhists; this is the treatise elucidating the sūtras. As for why it is necessary to cite the sūtras: fearing that followers of the Hīnayāna would not produce faith and acceptance, [the author] set forth the eight negations of the sūtra right at the beginning, which clarifies the intent of encouraging faith. Second, the title announces the 'Madhyamaka-śāstra', which is now explained: setting forth the eight negations at the beginning is the middle way, and afterward explaining the eight negations is clarifying the treatise; therefore, the title refers to the 'Madhyamaka-śāstra'. Third, introducing sentient beings' loss of the root, the eight negations are therefore cited at the beginning of the treatise. Question: How many kinds of people are there who lose the eight negations? Answer: Briefly, there are four kinds of people: First, those who are deluded about and lose the eight negations, and thus undergo the chaotic turmoil of the six destinies. As the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says, 'It is a medicine of a single flavor; following the places it flows, it has six flavors.' This is losing the Buddha-nature of the middle way to become the flavors of the six destinies. The eight negations are precisely the Buddha-nature of the middle way. Second, the various non-Buddhists and others seek this single path and are unable to attain it, and thus become ninety-six kinds [of heterodox views]. As the Nirvāṇa-sūtra says, 'Although ordinary persons exert painstaking effort, they do not obtain this medicine.' Third, people of the two vehicles adhere strictly to the view that all dharmas definitely arise; hearing of non-arising, their minds do not believe or accept it. As the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says, 'After the Buddha's passing, there were five hundred sects who, hearing of ultimate emptiness, felt as if their hearts were wounded by a knife.' Fourth, people who study the Mahāyāna hear of ultimate emptiness and thereupon form views of annihilation, abandoning transgression and merit, and denying the two truths. These four kinds of people all lose the eight negations. Now, wishing to state their loss of the root in order to clearly manifest and instruct them so that they realize what has been lost, [the eight negations] are placed at the beginning of the treatise. Fourth, to show that the assembly of noble ones has attained the source, they are set forth at the beginning of the treatise. Those who attain these eight negations are also four kinds of people. As the Nirvāṇa[-sūtra] says, 'Those who contemplate the middle way are of four kinds: through contemplating with inferior knowledge, one attains the bodhi of a śrāvaka; through contemplating with intermediate knowledge, one attains the bodhi of a pratyekabuddha; through contemplating with superior knowledge, one attains the bodhi of a bodhisattva; through contemplating with supreme knowledge, one attains the bodhi of all Buddhas.' Wishing to clarify that the assembly of noble ones has attained the root, it is placed at the head [of the treatise]. Fifth, this treatise takes the two truths as its primary tenet, and the eight negations directly clarify the two truths; hence they are set forth at the beginning. Sixth, it is to demonstrate what is signified to those who study the teaching.