中觀論疏 10.5

10.5

就初又二：第一明外人迷空橫生邪難；「汝謂我著空」下，第二明論主悟空是故無失。二章各四。初章四者，第一明外人不解三法橫生疑難；第二明外人不識二法故橫生邪難；第三敘外人不解一法故橫生邪難；第四以不解上三門，封執定性一法，障佛不得早說大乘。問：何故敘外人不知三法？答凡欲答外問，必須識是問非問。今敘外人不解三法、橫生疑問，則不成問，即是答問也。初明不知三法者，一不知空，小乘人雖得人空，執諸法是有，不知本性空也。二「空因緣」者，謂說空之意。佛為治有病，是故說空，若復著空，佛所不化。三「空義」者，外人不解安處此空，佛說第一義為空，不言世諦亦空，汝不應聞空謂失因果罪福。故〈因緣品〉云「若都畢竟空，云何有罪福報應等，如是則無二諦。」又空義者，說空為明不空，故下云「空亦復空」。汝封執取空相，故不知空義。

Regarding the first, there are again two parts: first, explaining that the opponent is confused about emptiness and arbitrarily raises perverse challenges; from 'You claim that I am attached to emptiness...' onward, second, explaining that the author of the treatise has awakened to emptiness and therefore is without fault. Each of the two chapters has four sections. The four of the first chapter: first, explaining that the opponent fails to understand three dharmas and arbitrarily raises doubts and challenges; second, explaining that the opponent does not recognize two dharmas and so arbitrarily raises perverse challenges; third, recounting that the opponent fails to understand one dharma and so arbitrarily raises perverse challenges; fourth, that through failing to understand the above three approaches, they cling rigidly to the single dharma of a fixed nature, obstructing the Buddha from being able to expound the Mahāyāna earlier. Question: Why recount that the opponent does not know the three dharmas? Answer: Whenever one wishes to answer an opponent's question, one must distinguish what is a legitimate question from what is not. Here, recounting that the opponent fails to understand the three dharmas and arbitrarily raises doubtful questions shows that it does not constitute a valid question, and this is itself answering the question. In first explaining their ignorance of the three dharmas: first, they do not know emptiness; although Hīnayāna practitioners realize the emptiness of persons, they cling to dharmas as existing and do not know the emptiness of original nature. Second, 'causes and conditions of emptiness' refers to the intention behind speaking of emptiness. The Buddha spoke of emptiness in order to cure the sickness of existence; if one goes on to be attached to emptiness, the Buddha will not transform them. Third, the 'meaning of emptiness' is that the opponent does not understand how to situate this emptiness; the Buddha spoke of the ultimate truth as empty, but did not say that the conventional truth is also empty; you should not, upon hearing of emptiness, claim that cause and effect, sin and merit are lost. Hence the 'Chapter on Causes and Conditions' says: 'If all is utterly empty, how can there be retribution for sin and merit, etc.? If so, then there would be no two truths.' Furthermore, the meaning of emptiness is that emptiness is spoken of in order to clarify non-emptiness; hence it says below: 'emptiness is also empty.' Because you cling rigidly and grasp the marks of emptiness, you do not know the meaning of emptiness.