中觀論疏 7.17

7.17

「因世諦故得見第一義諦」下，自上已來總明觀五陰諸行空義，作二諦觀竟，今第二明得利益。佛說五陰是行，意令悟五陰空，即是因俗悟真、生於波若，得解脫五陰。而今聞五作五解，則不得第一義、不生波若，云何斷煩惱、得脫五陰身耶？又聞五作五解，於五上更起愛見，或言一時、或言前後，互相立破，則於五上重起煩惱，煩惱有業，業故受苦。此人故惑不除，於佛教上更造苦因，如此人不及不學問田舍人也。就文為三：初雙標真俗二章門、次釋二門、三結二門。「因世諦故」者，標世諦門也。「得見第一義」者，標真諦章門也。「所謂無明緣諸行」者，釋二章門也。前明十二相生，即是世諦也。所以就十二因緣明世諦者，欲顯十二相生根本由行故也。經云「十二因緣即是十二汲井」，以老死為井唇，無明為井底。無明下有實相水，所謂甚深甚深。惑心始起名為無明，無明漸次造行乃至老死。從彼極深出至淺處，去水逾遠逾增枯竭，故有憂悲苦惱。從無住本立一切法亦爾。聖人知因繩量水、因言量理，故立十二之繩以汲波若水，故云因世諦故得見第一義。問：十二既喻井，云何復喻繩？答：取十二言教為繩，十二法為井也。問：十二云何為世諦見第一義？答：大小乘有所得人聞十二作十二解，此不識佛意。佛意說十二令悟不十二，故以不十二十二為世諦，十二不十二為第一義也。「若得第一義諦」下，第二釋第一義章門。既用十二因緣相生名為世諦，知十二因緣空即是第一義諦。悟第一義空即十二因緣便滅，不見第一義空則是無明，以無明故便起行乃至生老病死憂悲苦惱。此中明見諦思惟可通大小乘。釋小乘見思，三師不同。一者依《雜心》明十五心為見道、第十六心則屬修道。成實師云：第十六心猶屬見諦。復有人云：第十六心望前屬前、望後屬後。大乘見道即是初地，二地已去名為修道。就十使煩惱，依毘曇宗可為三類：五見及疑但是緣理煩惱；貪瞋慢但是緣事煩惱；無明二分：與五見疑相應及獨頭無明則是緣理煩惱，與上三使相應迷事無明是緣事煩惱。斷十使，大開三位：一者五見及疑但見諦斷，餘四惑開為二分：若從五見疑後生則屬見道斷，緣六塵起者屬思惟斷。大乘見思斷者，經論不同，依《地持論》明二障三處斷，初地至十地斷惑障盡、初地至佛地斷知障盡。若約見思者，初地所斷二障屬見諦，二地去斷二障屬思惟斷。問：今作此釋與他何異？答：大小乘有所得人並言前有煩惱斷之令無。若爾，皆是罪過人也。《大品》云「若法先有後無，諸佛菩薩皆有罪過。」今二門推之，實無所斷。煩惱若有自體，即是本來是常，常不可斷；煩惱若無自體，即無煩惱可起，何所斷耶？而今言斷者，只悟煩惱本不起是名斷耳。「是故欲示空義故」下，第三總結。

From "Because of conventional truth one attains the seeing of ultimate truth" onwards: the above has overall explained the meaning of the emptiness of all formations of the five aggregates, having completed the contemplation of the two truths; now the second [part] explains the attainment of benefit. The Buddha taught that the five aggregates are formations with the intention of leading [beings] to awaken to the emptiness of the five aggregates, which means awakening to the ultimate through the conventional, giving rise to prajñā, and attaining liberation from the five aggregates. Yet nowadays people hear of the five and form an understanding of five; then they do not attain the ultimate truth and do not give rise to prajñā—how could they sever afflictions and attain liberation from the body of the five aggregates? Furthermore, hearing of the five and forming an understanding of five, upon the five they further give rise to craving and views, claiming either that they are simultaneous or that they are sequential, mutually establishing and refuting them; thus upon the five they re-generate afflictions; afflictions entail karma, and due to karma they undergo suffering. Such people do not eliminate their past delusions, and upon the Buddha's teachings they further create causes of suffering; such people are not as good as uneducated rustics. In the text there are three parts: first, setting forth the two headings of ultimate and conventional; second, explaining the two headings; third, concluding the two headings. "Because of conventional truth" marks the heading of conventional truth. "Attains the seeing of ultimate truth" marks the heading of ultimate truth. "That is to say, ignorance conditions formations" explains the two headings. The preceding explanation of the twelve [links] mutually arising is precisely conventional truth. The reason for explaining conventional truth through the twelvefold dependent origination is that [the author] wishes to reveal that the root of the twelve [links] mutually arising is formations. A sūtra says: "The twelvefold dependent origination is precisely twelve drawings from a well," with old age and death as the lip of the well and ignorance as the bottom of the well. Beneath ignorance there is the water of the true mark, which is exceedingly profound. When the deluded mind first arises, it is called ignorance; ignorance progressively creates formations, up to old age and death. Emerging from that utmost depth to the shallows, the further away from the water, the more it dries up; therefore there are sorrow, lamentation, pain, and distress. The establishment of all phenomena from the rootless base is also like this. Sages know that one measures water by means of a rope and measures principle by means of words; hence they establish the rope of the twelve to draw up the water of prajñā. Therefore it is said: "Because of conventional truth one attains the seeing of ultimate truth." Question: Since the twelve are compared to a well, why are they also compared to a rope? Answer: Taking the verbal teachings of the twelve as the rope, and the twelve phenomena as the well. Question: How are the twelve conventional truth, and how is seeing the ultimate truth? Answer: People of both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna who have [views of] attainment hear of the twelve and form an understanding of twelve; this is not knowing the Buddha's intention. The Buddha's intention in teaching the twelve was to lead [beings] to awaken to the non-twelve; therefore, taking the non-twelve as twelve is conventional truth, and taking the twelve as non-twelve is ultimate truth. From "If one attains the ultimate truth" onwards is the second [part], explaining the heading of ultimate truth. Since using the mutual arising of the twelve links of dependent origination is called conventional truth, knowing that the twelve links of dependent origination are empty is precisely ultimate truth. Awakening to the ultimate emptiness, the twelve links of dependent origination are then extinguished; not seeing the ultimate emptiness is ignorance, and due to ignorance formations arise, up to birth, old age, sickness, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, and distress. Here, the explanation of [severing afflictions by] seeing the truth (darśana-heya) and cultivation (bhāvanā-heya) can apply to both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna. In explaining the Hīnayāna's [afflictions severed by] seeing and cultivation, three masters differ. The first relies on the *Miśrakābhidharmahṛdaya* to explain that the fifteen moments of mind are the path of seeing, while the sixteenth moment of mind belongs to the path of cultivation. Masters of the *Tattvasiddhi* say: the sixteenth moment of mind still belongs to seeing the truth. Others say: the sixteenth moment of mind viewed from before belongs to what precedes, and viewed from behind belongs to what follows. The Mahāyāna path of seeing is the first bhūmi; from the second bhūmi onward it is called the path of cultivation. Regarding the ten fetters of affliction, according to the Abhidharma tradition they can be divided into three classes: the five views and doubt are afflictions that focus on principle only; greed, anger, and arrogance are afflictions that focus on concrete matters only; ignorance has two parts: that which is associated with the five views and doubt and isolated ignorance are afflictions that focus on principle, while the ignorance deluded about concrete matters associated with the above three fetters is affliction that focuses on concrete matters. In severing the ten fetters, three broad stages are demarcated: first, the five views and doubt are severed by seeing the truth alone; the remaining four delusions are divided into two parts: if arising after the five views and doubt, they are severed by the path of seeing; if arising in connection with the six sense objects, they are severed by cultivation. As for the Mahāyāna's severing by seeing and cultivation, sūtras and treatises differ; relying on the *Bodhisattvabhūmi* (*Dichi lun*), it is explained that the two obscurations are severed in three places: from the first bhūmi to the tenth bhūmi, the affliction obscuration is severed completely; from the first bhūmi to the Buddha-bhūmi, the cognitive obscuration is severed completely. If categorized by seeing and cultivation: the two obscurations severed at the first bhūmi belong to seeing the truth; the two obscurations severed from the second bhūmi onward belong to severing by cultivation. Question: How does making this explanation now differ from others? Answer: People of both the Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna who have [views of] attainment all say that there are previously afflictions and one severs them to make them non-existent. If so, they are all faulty people. The *Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā-prajñāpāramitā* says: "If phenomena existed previously and became non-existent later, all buddhas and bodhisattvas would have faults." Examining it now through the two approaches, in reality there is nothing severed. If afflictions had an intrinsic nature, they would be fundamentally permanent, and the permanent cannot be severed; if afflictions lacked an intrinsic nature, there would be no afflictions that could arise—what would be severed? That one now speaks of "severing" is simply that awakening to afflictions as fundamentally non-arising is named "severing." From "Therefore, wishing to show the meaning of emptiness" onwards is the third [part], the overall conclusion.