[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) › 10.4 # 中觀論疏 10.4 中觀論疏 10.4 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [10.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10.4) 品開為二：第一外人過論主執空為共、第二論主破外人執有為共。蓋是寄外人以破空見，息執教者之斷心，就論主破有除謂情之常見。四諦既是佛法之大宗，具攝世出世法，故就此品破斷常見，顯示中道，令因中發觀也。就外人過論主中又開為二：一長行、二偈。長行可有二義：一者生起從〈顛倒品〉，次有〈四諦品〉所由；二者將欲過論主空，故前立有四諦義。就偈為二：第一過論主無四諦三寶無出世法、第二過論主無因果罪福無世間法。初又二：前半行牒論主執空；「如是則無有」下，第二為論主生過。又開二別：初明無四諦、次明無三寶。以無生故則無苦集，以苦是所生、集為能生故也。以無滅故則無滅道，道諦能滅，滅至滅諦，既其無滅，何有滅道？「以無四諦故」下，第二明無三寶。又開二別：初別明無三寶、次半行總結無三。別明無三，即為三別。就無僧寶中又開為二：初兩偈別明無僧、次半偈總結無僧。兩偈為二：初偈明無四行、次偈辨無向果，文並易見。又初一偈無四諦境、次一偈無四諦智。第三偈去明無僧寶，此解好，宜依之。後論主還外人過，亦作此別之。「空法壞因果」下，第二過論主執空失因果罪福。問：前已明無四諦三寶總破世出世因果，今何故復說？答：凡有三義。一者上來明執空之人，無佛趣鹿園所說四諦三寶，訖至雙林之教；今明無佛初成道為提謂等說人天因果罪福，故執空之人備破五乘教也。二者上明無內法因果罪福；今明無外法因果罪福，謂世間仁義禮智等。三者上來明無罪福境，今明無有罪福三寶。四諦是罪福之境，信之則生福、謗之則招罪也。答中三十四偈，大開為三：第一十三行明外人迷空；「汝上所說空法有過者」下，第二破外人著有；「若無有空」下，第三二行誡勸，誡令捨定性空勸學於因緣。 > The chapter opens into two parts: first, the opponent faults the author of the treatise for grasping emptiness as their common \[standpoint\]; second, the author of the treatise refutes the opponent's grasping existence as their common \[standpoint\]. This means using the opponent to refute nihilistic views and put an end to the annihilationist mindset of those who grasp the teachings; and relying on the author of the treatise to refute existence and eliminate the eternalist view of ordinary reckonings. Since the four truths are the grand tenet of the Buddha-Dharma and fully encompass worldly and supramundane dharmas, this chapter takes them up to refute annihilationist and eternalist views, reveal the middle way, and cause contemplation to arise based on the middle \[path\]. Within the opponent's faulting of the author of the treatise, it is again divided into two: first, prose; second, verses. The prose can have two senses: first, the genesis showing how it follows upon the 'Chapter on Errors' to lead to the 'Chapter on the Four Truths'; second, the intention to fault the author's \[assertion of\] emptiness, hence first establishing the meaning of having the four truths. As for the verses, they are divided into two: first, faulting the author of the treatise with having no four truths, no Three Jewels, and no supramundane dharmas; second, faulting the author of the treatise with having no cause and effect, no sin and merit, and no worldly dharmas. The first also has two parts: the first half-line repeats the author's grasping of emptiness; from 'If so, then there are no...' onward, the second raises faults against the author of the treatise. This is again divided into two distinctions: first, explaining that there are no four truths; next, explaining that there are no Three Jewels. Because there is no arising, there is no suffering or accumulation, for suffering is what is arisen, and accumulation is what can bring it to arise. Because there is no cessation, there is no cessation or path; the path truth can extinguish, extinguishing up to the cessation truth, and since there is no cessation, how could there be cessation or path? From 'Because there are no four truths...' onward, the second explains that there are no Three Jewels. This is again divided into two distinctions: first, separately explaining that there are no Three Jewels; next, a half-line summarizing that the three do not exist. Separately explaining that the three do not exist constitutes three distinct sections. Within the absence of the Sangha jewel, it is again divided into two: the first two verses separately explain that there is no Sangha; the following half-verse summarizes that there is no Sangha. The two verses are two: the first verse explains that there are no four practices; the next verse discerns that there are no directions and fruits; the text is quite plain to see. Furthermore, the first verse means there are no objects of the four truths; the next verse means there is no cognition of the four truths. From the third verse onward, it explains the absence of the Sangha jewel; this interpretation is good and ought to be followed. Later, when the author of the treatise returns the faults to the opponent, he also makes this distinction. From 'The dharma of emptiness destroys cause and effect...' onward, the second faults the author of the treatise for grasping emptiness and losing cause and effect, sin and merit. Question: Previously, it was already explained that the absence of the four truths and Three Jewels universally destroys worldly and supramundane cause and effect; why is it explained again now? Answer: There are altogether three meanings. First, what was explained previously was that a person who grasps emptiness has neither the four truths nor the Three Jewels spoken when the Buddha went to the Deer Park, through to the teaching at the Twin Trees; now it explains that there is no cause and effect, sin and merit of humans and devas spoken for Trapuṣa and others when the Buddha first attained the Way; hence a person who grasps emptiness completely destroys the teachings of the five vehicles. Second, what was explained above was the absence of internal dharmas' cause and effect, sin and merit; now it explains the absence of external dharmas' cause and effect, sin and merit, namely worldly benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and so forth. Third, what was explained above was the absence of the objective realm of sin and merit; now it explains that there are no Three Jewels of sin and merit. The four truths are the objective realm of sin and merit: having faith in them engenders merit; slandering them incurs sin. In the reply, there are thirty-four verses, broadly divided into three: the first thirteen lines explain that the opponent is confused about emptiness; from 'As for what you said above about the faults in the dharma of emptiness...' onward, the second refutes the opponent's attachment to existence; from 'If there were no emptiness...' onward, the third two lines are an admonition and exhortation, admonishing them to abandon emptiness of fixed nature and exhorting them to study dependent origination. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 10.3](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10.3) - [Next: 10.5](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10.5) - [Up: 10](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824~en-mt.10.4) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10.4](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.10.4) · Pramāṇa