中觀論疏 1.34

1.34

「聞大乘法中說畢竟空」下，第二次明迷大。又亦得云前文著有、此文滯空，即是迷於二諦。故前敘序云「覩空教則謂罪福俱泯，聞說有則封執定性。」探此文作之。就文為四：一則明聞教、二不識教意、三明起迷、四結過失。聞大乘法說畢竟空者，此聞教也。小乘法中不說畢竟空，唯大乘法有畢竟空，故言聞大乘法說畢竟空也。「不知何因緣故空」下，第二明不識教意。經中所以說畢竟空者，凡有四義：一為對破有病，所以說空。有病既息，空樂亦除，乃至五句無所依止。而捨有著空，故不識佛意。故〈行品〉云「大聖說空法，為離諸見故。若復見有空，諸佛所不化。」第二經說畢竟空者，此明第一義諦畢竟空，不明世諦畢竟空。而方廣之流謬取佛意，謂世諦亦畢竟空，故不知說空因緣。如《智度論》初卷云「明人等世諦故有，第一義諦故無。如實際等第一義故有，世諦故無。」即其證也。三者道門非空非不空，無名相中為眾生故假名相說，稱之為空。非空非不空即是中道，空不空即是假名。而學教之流不識中假，謂實有空，故不知說空因緣。故〈四諦品〉云「因緣所生法，我說即是空，亦為是假名，亦是中道義。」長行釋云「因緣所生法，無自性故空，空亦復空。但為教化眾生，故假名說。」即其證也。四者因緣有宛然即畢竟空。雖畢竟空，宛然因緣有，即是不壞假名而說實相、不動真際建立諸法。而稟教之流聞因緣有，即失畢竟空；聞畢竟空，即失因緣有。故不知說空意也。

From “Hearing ultimate emptiness taught in the Mahāyāna Dharma” downward is second, clarifying delusion regarding the Mahāyāna. One may also say that the previous text was attached to existence, while this text is stranded in emptiness—that is, deluded about the two truths. Thus the earlier preface says: “Seeing the teaching of emptiness, they claim that guilt and merit are both obliterated; hearing the exposition of existence, they are fixated on determinate nature.” It was composed by anticipating this passage. In the text there are four parts: first, hearing the teaching; second, failing to recognize the intent of the teaching; third, the arising of delusion; fourth, concluding the fault. “Hearing ultimate emptiness taught in the Mahāyāna Dharma” is hearing the teaching. Ultimate emptiness is not taught in the Hīnayāna Dharma; ultimate emptiness exists only in the Mahāyāna Dharma; hence it says “hearing ultimate emptiness taught in the Mahāyāna Dharma.” From “not knowing through what causes and conditions it is empty” downward is second, clarifying the failure to recognize the intent of the teaching. There are four reasons why ultimate emptiness is taught in the sūtras: First, to counter and destroy the disease of existence, emptiness is taught. Once the disease of existence has subsided, the medicine of emptiness is also removed, until none of the five positions is relied upon. But by abandoning existence and clinging to emptiness, they fail to understand the Buddha's intent. Thus the chapter on Examination of Actions says: “The Great Sage taught the Dharma of emptiness / to separate from all views. / If one again sees emptiness as an entity, / the Buddhas cannot convert them.” Second, when the sūtras teach ultimate emptiness, this clarifies that the ultimate truth is ultimately empty, not that the conventional truth is ultimately empty. Yet those of the Fangguang school mistakenly took the Buddha's intent to mean that the conventional truth is also ultimately empty; thus they did not know the causes and conditions for teaching emptiness. As the first fascicle of the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says: “It explains that persons and so forth exist through conventional truth and are non-existent through ultimate truth; while the true limit and so forth exist through ultimate truth and are non-existent through conventional truth.” This is its proof. Third, the gateway of the Path is neither empty nor non-empty; within that which lacks names and characteristics, for the sake of sentient beings, names and characteristics are provisionally spoken, calling it “empty.” Neither empty nor non-empty is the middle way; empty and non-empty is the provisional designation. But students of the teaching do not understand the middle and provisional, thinking that there is real emptiness; thus they do not know the causes and conditions for teaching emptiness. Thus the chapter on Examination of the Four Noble Truths says: “Phenomena arisen through causes and conditions, / I declare to be empty; / this is also a provisional designation, / and also the meaning of the middle way.” The prose commentary explains: “Phenomena arisen through causes and conditions are empty because they lack intrinsic nature; emptiness is also empty again. It is only to teach and convert sentient beings that it is provisionally designated.” This is its proof. Fourth, existence through causes and conditions is distinctly none other than ultimate emptiness. Although it is ultimately empty, it is distinctly existent through causes and conditions; this is explaining the true nature without destroying provisional designations, establishing all phenomena without stirring from the true limit. Yet students of the teaching, upon hearing of existence through causes and conditions, lose sight of ultimate emptiness; hearing of ultimate emptiness, they lose sight of existence through causes and conditions. Thus they do not know the intent of teaching emptiness.