中觀論疏 2.34

2.34

新通門第十。余至關內，得三藏師用《無上依經》意釋八不，今略述之。八不為四人說，亦得為八人說。為四人說者，為闡提說不生不滅中道。闡提有二：一邪見闡提，撥一切法，言諸法皆滅，即雖未滅必當歸滅。二嬰兒闡提，執諸法決定有，故名為生。所以名嬰兒者，其見諸法生，不敢言無，故執諸法有生，名為嬰兒。為治此二闡提，說不生不滅。以諸法本來未曾生，故不生，破嬰兒闡提。諸法今亦無滅，故破邪見執滅闡提。次不常不斷為破聲聞人。聲聞人亦有二執，即名二人。其人既怖畏生死，急欲斷之，名為斷見；欲住無為寂靜涅槃，故是常見。為破此二執，故云不常不斷。次不一不異治外道。外道有二：一計我與陰一、二計我與陰異。為破此二人，故明不一不異。次明不來不出，為破獨覺及初發心菩薩。此二人異者，獨覺一向樂觀因緣，不樂觀利他事；始行菩薩一向求利他行，不樂觀因緣。此二人所行乃異，而並謂乘因至果為來，從三界出為出，故來有所從、去有所至。為此二人故，明諸法不來不出也。所以束八不為四對，為對四人，亦為八人也。次明八不對治四障，亦治八障。治四障者，治闡提憎背大乘障，故說不生不滅。闡提人憎背大乘，如五百婆羅門云：大乘經典是無所有，云何令人同於虛空？故今明諸法本來不生不滅，令其信樂大乘也。次不一不異治外道計執一異障。以外道於五陰計即離我故，今明無此一異之我，故言治外道執一異障。三者不斷不常治聲聞怖畏生死障。以小乘人畏生死欲斷之，故是斷見；樂於涅槃無為，即是常見。故今明不斷不常治此斷常，使不怖生死、不樂涅槃。四者不來不出治獨覺及始行菩薩來去障。此二人行處乃異，而同謂來有所從、去有所至，故名為障，故說不來不出以治之。若言八不治八障者，闡提中有生滅為二、外道中一異為二、聲聞中斷常為二、獨覺中來出為二，故成八也。此皆順釋。若逆釋者，說不來不去，治始行及獨覺戲論障，言有來有出即是戲論。經云「若言如來有去有來，不解我所說義。如來者，無所從來亦無所去。」云何始行謂佛實有來去？故名戲論也。次不常不斷治聲聞相違障。言常即違斷、言斷則害常，云何汝具計斷常耶？故說不斷不常治相違障。次不一不異治外道增損障。若云人法一即是損，既稱為人法，豈可一耶，若言人法異即是增，以人法無別二體，謂有二體豈非增耶？故說不一不異以治之。次不生不滅治闡提有無障。邪見者謂無、有見者執有，今明不生不滅即治此有無障也。此並是用二悉壇意，謂各各為人及對治也。次明以四法為四人治四障：一者信樂大乘，為闡提人破背大乘障。二以無分別般若治外道執我一異障，以外道執我一異是有所得分別，故今明無分別般若，即是無所得般若。次以破虛空三昧破聲聞人怖畏生死障，聲聞人滅身智住無為虛空中，故今得破虛空三昧，破除此障也。四者菩薩修習大悲，為獨覺及始行菩薩，破獨覺不利益眾生，及始行菩薩有佛道可求，破佛有來去障。明菩薩修習大悲，自利利人自他不二。此四法即是八不。初信樂大乘謂不生不滅，以悟不生不滅故起信心也。次無分別般若即是不一不異，息一異之心名無分別。次破虛空三昧即是不斷不常，既破聲聞人住無為空中，即是不常不斷，亦無灰身滅智之斷。次修習大悲即是不來不去，以菩薩修習大悲，自利利人自他不二，知來去無來去、無來去來去也。次明以四法為因，得如來四德之果。以信樂大乘為因，破於闡提不信，得於淨果，果即不生不滅也。次行無分別般若為因，破外道一異分別，得如來我德果，果即非一非異，以非外道一異之我，故得於佛我，故此我非一非異也。次以行破虛空三昧為因，破聲聞得如來樂果。聲聞雖言住無為樂，此於大乘是生死苦。今破斷常，得不斷不常究竟樂果也。次修習大悲為因，破獨覺自為及始行謂佛有去來，明菩薩常行大悲，窮生死際以建此因，故得如來常住之果。真諦三藏用《無上依經》及《攝大乘論》意釋八不甚廣，今略取大意耳。初為各四人、次破四障、次行四因、後得四果，八不之要義顯於斯，與上諸解釋無相違背也。

Tenth, the section on the new explanation. When I arrived in the region within the passes, I obtained a Tripiṭaka master's explanation of the eight negations using the meaning of the *Anuttarāśraya-sūtra*, which I now briefly recount. The eight negations are spoken for four kinds of persons, and may also be said to be spoken for eight kinds of persons. As for being spoken for four kinds of persons: the middle way of non-arising and non-extinction is spoken for icchantikas. There are two kinds of icchantikas: first, wrong-view icchantikas, who repudiate all dharmas, asserting that all dharmas are extinguished—meaning that even if not yet extinguished, they will inevitably return to extinction; second, infant icchantikas, who grasp at dharmas as definitively existent, which is termed 'arising'. They are called 'infants' because, seeing dharmas arise, they dare not say they are non-existent, and thus grasp at dharmas as having arising, whence they are named 'infants'. To remedy these two icchantikas, non-arising and non-extinction are taught. Because all dharmas originally have never arisen, they are non-arising, refuting infant icchantikas. Dharmas also have no extinction at present, which refutes wrong-view icchantikas who grasp at extinction. Next, non-permanence and non-annihilation are taught to refute śrāvakas. Śrāvakas also have two kinds of grasping, and thus are named two persons: because such a person dreads saṃsāra and urgently wishes to sever it, this is called the annihilation view; wishing to abide in unconditioned, tranquil nirvāṇa, this is the permanence view. To refute these two attachments, it is said 'not permanent and not annihilated'. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy non-Buddhists. Non-Buddhists are of two kinds: first, those who posit the self and the aggregates as one; second, those who posit the self and the aggregates as different. To refute these two persons, non-unity and non-difference are elucidated. Next, non-coming and non-going are elucidated to refute pratyekabuddhas and newly resolved bodhisattvas. These two persons differ in that the pratyekabuddha exclusively delights in contemplating causes and conditions and does not delight in contemplating the matter of benefiting others; the beginner bodhisattva exclusively seeks the practice of benefiting others and does not delight in contemplating causes and conditions. Although the practices of these two persons differ, both maintain that mounting causes to reach the fruit constitutes coming, and departing from the three realms constitutes going forth; hence coming has an origin and going has a destination. For the sake of these two persons, dharmas are elucidated as neither coming nor going. Thus, bundling the eight negations into four pairs matches four persons, and also matches eight persons. Next, it is elucidated that the eight negations remedy four hindrances, and also remedy eight hindrances. Regarding remedying four hindrances: non-arising and non-extinction are spoken to remedy the icchantika's hindrance of hating and turning away from the Mahāyāna. Icchantikas hate and turn away from the Mahāyāna, just as the five hundred brahmins said: 'The Mahāyāna scriptures are non-existent; how could they make people like empty space?' Therefore, it is now elucidated that all dharmas are originally unarisen and unextinguished, leading them to have faith and joy in the Mahāyāna. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at unity and difference. Because non-Buddhists grasp at a self as either identical to or separate from the five aggregates, it is now elucidated that there is no such self of unity or difference; hence it is said to remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at unity and difference. Third, non-annihilation and non-permanence remedy the śrāvaka's hindrance of fearing saṃsāra. Because Hīnayāna practitioners fear saṃsāra and wish to sever it, this is the annihilation view; delighting in the unconditioned of nirvāṇa is the permanence view. Therefore, it is now elucidated that non-annihilation and non-permanence remedy this annihilation and permanence, causing them neither to fear saṃsāra nor to delight in nirvāṇa. Fourth, non-coming and non-going remedy the hindrance of coming and going for pratyekabuddhas and beginner bodhisattvas. Although the spheres of practice of these two persons differ, they agree in asserting that coming has an origin and going has a destination, which is termed a hindrance; therefore, non-coming and non-going are spoken to remedy it. If it is said that the eight negations remedy eight hindrances: within icchantikas there are arising and extinction making two, within non-Buddhists unity and difference make two, within śrāvakas annihilation and permanence make two, and within pratyekabuddhas coming and going make two; thus they become eight. These are all explanations in the direct order. As for explanations in reverse order: speaking non-coming and non-going remedies the hindrance of prapañca of beginners and pratyekabuddhas, since stating that there is coming and departing is itself prapañca. The sūtra says: 'If one says that the Tathāgata goes or comes, one does not understand the meaning of what I have spoken. As for the Tathāgata, he comes from nowhere and goes nowhere.' How could a beginner maintain that the Buddha truly has coming and going? Hence it is called prapañca. Next, non-permanence and non-annihilation remedy the śrāvaka's hindrance of mutual contradiction: asserting permanence contradicts annihilation, and asserting annihilation harms permanence; how could you grasp at both annihilation and permanence? Therefore, speaking non-annihilation and non-permanence remedies the hindrance of mutual contradiction. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of superimposition and deprecation: if one says person and dharma are one, that is deprecation—since they are called person and dharma, how could they be one? If one says person and dharma are different, that is superimposition—since person and dharma have no separate two substances, how is asserting two substances not superimposition? Therefore, non-unity and non-difference are spoken to remedy this. Next, non-arising and non-extinction remedy the icchantika's hindrance of existence and non-existence: the wrong-view one asserts non-existence, while the existence-view one grasps at existence; now elucidating non-arising and non-extinction remedies this hindrance of existence and non-existence. These all employ the sense of the two siddhāntas, namely [the siddhāntas] for individuals and for counteraction. Next, it is elucidated that four dharmas are used for four persons to remedy four hindrances: first, faith and joy in the Mahāyāna shatters the icchantika's hindrance of turning away from the Mahāyāna. Second, non-conceptual prajñā remedies the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at the self as one or different; because the non-Buddhist's grasping at the self as one or different is a conceptual discrimination based on apprehension, now non-conceptual prajñā is elucidated, which is prajñā free of apprehension. Next, the samādhi that shatters empty space shatters the śrāvaka's hindrance of dreading saṃsāra: śrāvakas extinguish the body and intellect to abide in unconditioned empty space, so now attaining the samādhi that shatters empty space shatters and eliminates this hindrance. Fourth, the bodhisattva's cultivation of great compassion is for pratyekabuddhas and beginner bodhisattvas; it shatters the pratyekabuddha's failure to benefit sentient beings, and shatters the beginner bodhisattva's [view that] there is a Buddha path to be sought, shattering the hindrance that the Buddha has coming and going. It elucidates that when a bodhisattva cultivates great compassion, benefiting oneself and benefiting others are non-dual between self and other. These four dharmas are precisely the eight negations: first, faith and joy in the Mahāyāna refers to non-arising and non-extinction, for through awakening to non-arising and non-extinction one gives rise to faithful mind. Next, non-conceptual prajñā is precisely non-unity and non-difference, since calming minds of unity and difference is called non-conceptual. Next, the samādhi that shatters empty space is precisely non-annihilation and non-permanence; once one shatters the śrāvaka's abiding in unconditioned emptiness, this is non-permanence and non-annihilation, and there is also no annihilation of reducing the body to ashes and extinguishing intellect. Next, cultivating great compassion is precisely non-coming and non-going; since the bodhisattva cultivates great compassion, benefiting oneself and benefiting others are non-dual between self and other, knowing that coming and going are without coming and going, and being without coming and going is coming and going. Next, it is elucidated that taking the four dharmas as causes, one attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's four virtues. Taking faith and joy in the Mahāyāna as the cause, one shatters the icchantika's lack of faith and attains the fruit of purity; the fruit is precisely non-arising and non-extinction. Next, practicing non-conceptual prajñā as the cause, one shatters non-Buddhists' discrimination of unity and difference and attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's virtue of self; the fruit is precisely neither one nor different, and because it is not the non-Buddhist's self of unity or difference, one attains the Buddha's self, so this self is neither one nor different. Next, practicing the samādhi that shatters empty space as the cause shatters the śrāvaka [attachment] and attains the Tathāgata's fruit of bliss: although śrāvakas speak of the bliss of abiding in the unconditioned, in the Mahāyāna this is the suffering of saṃsāra; now shattering annihilation and permanence, one attains the fruit of ultimate bliss that is neither annihilated nor permanent. Next, cultivating great compassion as the cause shatters the pratyekabuddha's acting solely for oneself and the beginner's assertion that the Buddha has going and coming; it elucidates that the bodhisattva constantly practices great compassion, exhausting the limits of saṃsāra to establish this cause, and thus attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's eternal presence. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha explained the eight negations using the intentions of the *Anuttarāśraya-sūtra* and the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* in great detail; here I have merely extracted the general import. First, being for each of the four persons; next, shattering the four hindrances; next, practicing the four causes; and afterwards, attaining the four fruits: the essential meaning of the eight negations is manifested here, and it does not contradict the explanations given above.