[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [中觀論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824) › 1.9 # 中觀論疏 1.9 中觀論疏 1.9 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1.9) 「云天竺諸國」者，第五敘注論之人。又開二別：前嘆此論為諸國所重、二別敘注釋之人。此文秤「云」，凡述二人：一羅什法師所云，故秤云也；二秦弘始七年天竺剎利汎舶至長安，聞羅什門徒三千解大乘之教，以《中》、《百》二論諮而驗之。羅什因為剖折，剎利乃頂受絕嘆不能已。已白云「跋荼闍梨當以此明振耀天竺，何由蘊此摩尼乃在邊地？」又云：「羲和鸞轡蘊明於無目之地，甚可恨也。夜光之寶鬻珍於田父之客，甚可惜也。」此剎利述天竺論師呵諸小乘人，歎羅什云：「我在天竺聞諸論師深怪罽賓小乘學者自美其師，以為比方如朗月之照。其師是鳩摩羅陀，造《日出論》。又自彌帝戾已後罕有其比，天竺論師呵云偏悟小才，非此喻也。若是拘止那國鳩摩羅耆婆法師以當此喻，無所愧也。何故？羅什如朗月之照無所愧，以其善解《中》、《百》故。」「敢預是天竺學大乘之流無不翫味斯論」，敢者，果也決也。喉衿，要宗事也。喉為內要，衿為外要，故借以喻焉。「其染翰申釋者甚亦不少」者，此出注論者非復一師。影公云：「凡數十家。」河西云：「凡七十家。」翰者，古人以雞勒毛為筆，故秤為翰。青目非天親，《付法藏》云「婆藪槃豆善解一切修多羅義，而青目注斯論有其乖失。」故知非也。「其中乖闕煩重者」，略明長行釋偈凡有四失：一長行釋與偈意乖；二釋偈不足而秤為闕；三少言可以通文，而長行在重言煩也；四前章已明，後須更說，故秤為重。曇影法師《中論疏》四處敘青目之失：一〈因緣品〉四緣立偈，云「此偈為問，蓋是青目傷巧處耳。」二釋四緣有廣略。影師云「蓋是青目勇於取類、劣於尋文。」三釋〈業品〉偈云「雖空不斷，青目云『空無可斷』，此非釋也。」四釋〈邪見品〉長行云「此中紛絃為復彼助鬧。復龍樹自有偈釋之。」今文云「法師裁而裨之」者，法師即羅什也。裁其煩重，裨其乖闕。「於通經之理盡」者，經即《中論》，外國詺論為經。《付法藏經》云「提婆造百論經」，《智度論》云「迦旃延造發智經」，故知目論為經，於通經理盡。「文或左右未盡善」者，如影師四處述之。 > "It is said that in the various countries of India..." is fifth, narrating the commentators on the treatise. This also divides into two parts: first, praising this treatise for being esteemed by various lands; second, separately recounting the commentators. This text says "It is said" to relate \[the accounts of\] two people: first, what Master Kumārajīva said, hence it says "It is said"; second, in the seventh year of the Hongshi era of the Qin, a kṣatriya of India sailed by boat to Chang'an, and hearing that Kumārajīva's three thousand disciples understood the Mahāyāna teaching, tested and verified them with the two treatises, the Madhyamaka-śāstra and Śata-śāstra. Kumārajīva analyzed and unraveled them for him, whereupon the kṣatriya bowed his head in receipt, endlessly marveling. He then said, "Bhadra-ācārya, you ought to illuminate and shine in India with this brilliance; why conceal this maṇi-jewel away in an outlying borderland?" He also said, "For Xihe's phoenix-drawn reins to conceal their light in a land of the sightless is truly regrettable. For the jewel that shines by night to hawk its treasure to rustic peasants is truly pitiful." This kṣatriya recounted Indian treatise masters reprimanding various Hīnayāna followers, and in praise of Kumārajīva said, "When I was in India, I heard various treatise masters deeply wonder that the Hīnayāna scholars of Jibin praised their own master, comparing him to the shining of the bright moon. Their master was Kumāralāta, who composed the Rīchū-lùn (\*Sūryodaya-śāstra). Since Mitrāni's time, there have been few to match him, yet Indian treatise masters scolded \[them\], saying this was a biased understanding and minor talent, not deserving of this metaphor. But if applied to Master Kumārajīva of the country of Kuci, he would have no cause for shame. Why? Kumārajīva is worthy of comparison to the shining of the bright moon without shame, because he skillfully understands the Madhyamaka-śāstra and Śata-śāstra." "None among those who dare to study the Mahāyāna in India do not savor this treatise": "dare" means certainly, decidedly. "Throat and collar" refer to essential points of doctrine: the throat is essential inside and the collar is essential outside, so they are borrowed as a metaphor. "Those who have dipped their brushes to elucidate and explain it are likewise not few": this reveals that the commentators on the treatise were not just a single master. Master Tanying said, "There were several dozen schools." \[Master Dao\]lang of Hexi said, "There were seventy schools." As for "brush", the ancients used rooster wing feathers to make pens, hence it is called a brush. Piṅgala is not Vasubandhu: the Fu fazang jing says, "Vasubandhu skillfully understood the meanings of all sūtras, but Piṅgala's commentary on this treatise contains errors and discrepancies." Hence we know he is not \[Vasubandhu\]. "Where it contains discrepancies, omissions, verbosity, and repetition": briefly, the prose commentary on the verses has four faults: first, the prose commentary contradicts the meaning of the verse; second, the explanation of the verse is insufficient, which is called an omission; third, a few words could clarify the text, yet the prose is repetitive and verbose; fourth, having already explained it in a previous section, it needlessly repeats it later, hence called repetition. Dharma Master Tanying, in his Commentary on the Madhyamaka-śāstra, recounts Piṅgala's faults in four places: first, regarding the verse establishing the four conditions in the "Examination of Causes and Conditions", he says, "This verse was posed as an inquiry; it was merely where Piṅgala overplayed his ingenuity." Second, regarding the explanation of the four conditions having extensive and brief forms, Master Tanying says, "It was merely that Piṅgala was eager to draw analogies but deficient in examining the text." Third, regarding the explanation of the verse in the "Examination of Karma", which says "Though empty, it is not annihilated", Piṅgala says, "'Empty' means there is nothing that can be annihilated"; this is not an explanation. Fourth, regarding the prose commentary in the "Examination of Erroneous Views", he says, "The tangled strings here merely add to the clamor; Nāgārjuna himself had verses to explain it." Now the text says "The Dharma Master edited and supplemented it": the Dharma Master is Kumārajīva. He trimmed its verbosity and repetition, and supplemented its discrepancies and omissions. "Conveying the principle of the sūtra to the utmost": "sūtra" refers to the Madhyamaka-śāstra; foreign countries designate treatises as sūtras. The Fu fazang jing says, "Āryadeva composed the Śata-śāstra-sūtra"; the Mahāprajñāpāramitopadeśa says, "Kātyāyana composed the Jñānaprasthāna-sūtra." Hence we know treatises are designated sūtras; he conveyed the principle of the treatise to the utmost. "Though in literary form and phrasing it was not yet completely flawless": as Master Tanying recounted in four places. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1.8) - [Next: 1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1.10) - [Up: 1](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824~en-mt.1.9) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.1.9) · Pramāṇa