中觀論疏 10.57

10.57

長行云「今當破」下，生第三章破第四非有邊無邊。用第三句破第四句，文易知也。「一切法空故」下，論有三分：初二十五品破大乘人法，辨大乘觀行；次兩品破小乘人法，明小乘觀行。此二竟前，今第三重明大乘觀行，生起來意具如初品。兩偈為二：初偈重廣明大乘觀行、次偈推功歸佛。又初偈明美法、次偈辨讚人。初偈來意者，上說未盡，今略明之。一者初大後小，明小從大出，顯出生義。次前小後大，明收入義。出生則從實起權，收入則攝權順實，蓋是三世十方諸佛始終權實之大意也。又依《攝大乘論》乘有三種：一者小乘、二者大乘、三者一乘，一乘最勝。前兩品明小乘觀行，二十五章明大乘觀行，今此一章辨一乘觀行，則具破三種乘迷、具申三種乘教。又自前二章但破大小乘諸見，今此一偈通破大小乘諸見之根。問：云何名為見根耶？答：一有起見人，謂九道眾生；二起見處，淨穢諸土；三起見時，謂三世也。由此三種能生大小諸見。今此品中明此三畢竟皆空，故無起見根，以根無故諸見不起。又接此〈邪見品〉生者，小乘破我及斷常等雖復已竟，論主猶謂不盡，此但破凡夫見耳，未破二乘見及菩薩見，故不暢大士之懷，故復以大乘畢竟空水洗之，令諸見時方見者一切無遺也。又自上已來破大小邪見，惑者便起邪正二心、大小兩念，故今明邪正平等、大小無二方攝為理極，故說此偈也。又說法有二：前略後廣，為解義故；前廣後略，為易持故。今是示易持，故最後說大乘法空。就偈為二：初句標一切法空，謂橫周萬法、竪窮四句畢竟皆空，即顯正也。次三句明於破邪：初句辨無所起見，次辨無起見處及起見時并起見人。「瞿曇大聖主」下，第二推功於佛。所以推功者，自上已來橫破萬法、竪窮四句，物謂蓋是龍樹自作、非佛誠言，便於此論不生信受，是故今推功歸佛，明上來之破皆是佛說非是我也，若不生信不信佛。二者總釋大小乘觀破邪見意，明上來作此破者但是佛破邪見耳，非有物可破。如《百論》云「愚人謂炎為水，知者告之言此非水也。為破水想，實無水可破。」三者經有序、正、流通，今影大乘經亦明三義：初標宗稱歎致敬、次後造論破邪申教、破邪既訖還稱歎致敬也。偈分為二：一者稱歎、二者致敬。稱歎為二：初歎人、兩句歎法。瞿曇者，此云泥土，即是姓也。有二因緣：一者釋迦先祖為王，厭世出家，事瞿曇仙人。時人呼師為大瞿曇，以資為小瞿曇，即從師姓也。次小瞿曇被害以後，大瞿曇以土和其血分為兩分，還遂各生男女，因是已來有瞿曇姓稱也。問：何故不云釋迦而稱瞿曇？答：瞿曇是本姓故也。略說五見及六十二見者，此偏舉外道見耳。然二乘及有所得大乘皆是一切見也。

From where the prose states, "Now we shall refute..." onward introduces the third section, refuting the fourth [view]: "neither finite nor infinite." Using the third proposition to refute the fourth proposition, the text is easy to understand. From "Because all dharmas are empty" onward, the treatise consists of three divisions: first, the initial twenty-five chapters refute the persons and dharmas of the Mahāyāna, explaining the practice of Mahāyāna contemplation; next, two chapters refute the persons and dharmas of the Hīnayāna, clarifying the practice of Hīnayāna contemplation. Having completed the previous two, the third division now again clarifies the practice of Mahāyāna contemplation, whose rationale for arising is fully as in the initial chapter. The two verses comprise two parts: the first verse again broadly clarifies the practice of Mahāyāna contemplation; the next verse attributes the merit to the Buddha. Furthermore, the first verse clarifies the praise of the Dharma; the next verse distinguishes the praise of the person. Regarding the rationale for the arrival of the first verse: since what was stated above was not exhaustive, it is now explained in brief. First, placing the Mahāyāna first and the Hīnayāna later clarifies that the Hīnayāna emerges from the Mahāyāna, revealing the meaning of emergence. Next, placing the Hīnayāna before and the Mahāyāna after clarifies the meaning of subsumption. Emergence entails arising from the real to initiate the expedient; subsumption entails gathering the expedient to accord with the real—this is indeed the grand purport of the beginning and end, expedient and real, of all Buddhas of the three times and ten directions. Furthermore, according to the Mahāyānasaṃgraha, vehicles are of three kinds: first, the Hīnayāna; second, the Mahāyāna; third, the Ekayāna; the Ekayāna is supreme. The preceding two chapters clarified the practice of Hīnayāna contemplation, the twenty-five chapters clarified the practice of Mahāyāna contemplation, and now this single chapter distinguishes the practice of Ekayāna contemplation, thereby fully refuting the delusions of the three vehicles and fully elucidating the teachings of the three vehicles. Furthermore, while the preceding two chapters merely refuted the various views of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, this single verse comprehensively refutes the root of all the views of both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. Question: What is called the root of views? Answer: First, there is the person who gives rise to views, namely the sentient beings of the nine destinies; second, the locus where views arise, the pure and defiled lands; third, the time when views arise, namely the three times. Through these three [factors], the various views of both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna can arise. Now in this chapter, it is clarified that these three are all ultimately empty; hence there is no root from which views arise, and because the root is absent, no views arise. Furthermore, this arises in continuation of the "Chapter on Heterodox Views" because, although the Hīnayāna refutation of the self, annihilation, permanence, and so forth is already complete, the treatise master still considered it inexhaustive; this merely refuted the views of ordinary beings, but did not yet refute the views of the two vehicles and the views of bodhisattvas, and thus did not fully express the aspiration of the great being (mahāsattva). Therefore, he washes them once more with the water of Mahāyāna ultimate emptiness, so that all views, times, directions, and viewers are left without a trace. Furthermore, from the above onward, heterodox views of both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna have been refuted; confused persons would thereupon generate dual notions of heterodox and correct, and dual thoughts of Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. Therefore, now clarifying that the heterodox and correct are equal and that the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna are non-dual at last subsumes [everything] into the ultimate principle; hence this verse is spoken. Furthermore, the exposition of the Dharma is twofold: first brief and later detailed, in order to facilitate understanding of the meaning; first detailed and later brief, in order to facilitate easy retention. Now, to indicate easy retention, the emptiness of Mahāyāna dharmas is spoken at the very end. Regarding the verse, it comprises two parts: the initial line marks that all dharmas are empty, which means horizontally pervading the myriad dharmas and vertically exhausting the four propositions, being ultimately empty—which manifests the correct. The next three lines clarify the refutation of the heterodox: the first line distinguishes that there is nothing from which views arise, and the next lines distinguish that there are neither loci where views arise, nor times when views arise, nor persons who give rise to views. From "Gautama, Great Holy Lord" onward, the second [part] attributes the merit to the Buddha. The reason for attributing the merit is that from above onward, the myriad dharmas have been horizontally refuted and the four propositions vertically exhausted; people might think this was merely composed by Nāgārjuna himself and was not the Buddha's true word, and so they would not generate faith and acceptance toward this treatise. Therefore, he now attributes the merit to the Buddha, clarifying that the refutations made above are all spoken by the Buddha and not by myself; if one does not produce faith, one disbelieves the Buddha. Second, it comprehensively explains the purport of refuting heterodox views in the contemplations of the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, clarifying that the execution of these refutations above was merely the Buddha refuting heterodox views, not that there are actual entities to be refuted. As the Śata-śāstra states: "A foolish person considers a mirage to be water; a wise person informs him, saying, 'This is not water.' It is to refute the conception of water; in reality there is no water to be refuted." Third, sūtras have a preface, main body, and transmission section. Now, reflecting the Mahāyāna sūtras, three meanings are also clarified: first, marking the principle, offering praise, and paying reverence; next, composing the treatise to refute the heterodox and elucidate the teachings; after refuting the heterodox is finished, returning to offer praise and pay reverence. The verse is divided into two: first, offering praise; second, paying reverence. Offering praise is twofold: first, praising the person; two lines praise the Dharma. "Gautama": this is translated as "mud/earth," which is a family name (gotra). There are two causal origins: first, an ancestor of the Śākyas was a king who grew weary of the world, left household life, and served the sage Gautama. People at the time called the master the Great Gautama and the disciple the Little Gautama, thus taking the master's surname. Next, after the Little Gautama was slain, the Great Gautama mixed his blood with earth, dividing it into two portions, which in turn gave birth to a boy and a girl; from this time onward, there came to be the surname Gautama. Question: Why not say Śākya, but instead call him Gautama? Answer: Because Gautama was his original surname. As for briefly stating the five views and the sixty-two views, this is merely citing the views of the non-Buddhists in particular. However, [the views of] the two vehicles and of the Mahāyāna with apprehension are all included within "all views."