中觀論疏 8.3

8.3

此品為五人故來：一有我部，謂有人能造業，業得果，有人作、有人受，破此見故有此品。二者無我部，但謂有業體能感果。三小乘無人無法部，亦知業空，但是拆法明空耳。四方廣邪見，謂無業果。五學大乘無所得人，令其進行。所以然者，法執難除，如云初地猶有法我執，乃至十地菩薩見法有性故見佛性不了，亦言住十住故見不了了也。又此品來意有通別，所言通者有四：一者此論歷法明中道，因中發觀，滅諸煩惱。今就業門顯於中道，故下偈云「雖空而不斷，雖有而不常」，長行釋云「此論所說義離於斷常」，故知就業明於中觀，故說此品。二者諸大乘經皆明懺悔轉業障義，如《涅槃》師子吼云：「一切諸業無有定性，唯有愚智。愚人則以輕為重、無而成有，智者轉重為輕、轉有令無。」今明若執業決定，則是愚人；如今品觀之，名為智者。《普賢觀》云「一切業障海，皆從妄想生。若欲懺悔者，端坐念實相。」眾生無始已來起六道業深而且大，故喻之如海，非實相觀無由滅之；今此品觀業即是實相，故能滅業障，故說此品。三者內外大小雖立諸業義並不成，如須跋陀羅謂：眾生果報皆由往業，無有現緣。尼乾子云：一切諸業必定受報，今雖修道不能斷之。二者如薩衛之流執三世是有，眾生未造善惡，未來已有善惡之業。又善惡二業雖謝過去，體終不無。如此名為於業門中起決定有見，不知此業本性自空，故不識第一義諦，亦不知業如幻夢而有，故亦迷世諦。今破此二諦所不攝業，故云觀業品。成實之流雖知業假，而拆業得空亦壞世諦，既壞世諦亦壞真諦。下偈云「諸業本不生，以無定性故；諸業亦不滅，以其不生故。」豈可拆業業方空耶？今破此等人業，明業本性空，故云觀業品。四者又為一切有所得畏罪懺悔之人故說此品。所以然者，彼謂造作惡業心生怖畏，故依大小而行懺悔欲滅此罪，如此之人非唯犯罪不滅乃更增過。所以然者，其本起罪，謂罪業為有，名為有見；復欲行於懺悔滅除此罪，於罪起於無見。既起有無則是煩惱，煩惱因緣是故有業，以有惑業便受業報，故淨名呵優婆離：「無重增此二比丘罪。當直除滅，勿擾其心。」直除滅者，觀此罪性即畢竟空，如此品所明。是以為無方便有所得行懺悔人，故說此品。問：如此人有何過耶？答：業本不生滅，今謂業生滅，豈非破第一義諦？既破真亦破俗，破二諦則無二慧，故無三世十方佛菩薩，亦破世間，故其罪極大矣。問：若爾，但應有實相懺悔，無有依篇聚法門行懺悔耶？答：〈因緣品〉云「佛有二種說，一真實說、二隨宜說。」若作實相懺悔，為大利根眾生依真實說；若依篇聚令捨罪修福，此為凡夫薄福鈍根人說。故實法可信，隨宜說法不可為實。又說此品者，為邪見外道如六師等言：無有黑業、無黑業報，白業亦爾。次方廣之流亦言：一切皆空，無有罪福。是故今明雖畢竟空，而善惡之業宛然不失。故下偈云「如世尊神通所作變化人，如是變化人復變化作人。」豈無業耶？故九道業宛然而常四絕。如是悟則生波若與方便，亦生四智，便入佛知見，故得成佛。今是大乘論，正令一切眾生因業門得成佛矣。次近生者，〈縛解品〉明無縛解。外人云：縛是煩惱，若無煩惱云何有業？以有業故必有煩惱。又業有二種：一有漏業、二無漏業。有漏業者名之為縛，無漏業者稱之為解。既其有業，即有縛解。問：業有幾種？答：業有多門。約身則有身、口、意，就界有罪、福、不動，就報則有現、生、後，約垢淨則有黑、白、雜及無漏業。如是一業、二業、三業、七業、十業，如文廣明也。問：云何為業體？答：毘曇取善惡色聲為身口二業體，以思為意業體。《成實》云「三業並以心為體，身口但是業具而非業也。」問：意地三煩惱與業云何異耶？答：毘曇三煩惱起，必與思俱。思自是業，三煩惱則非業，此易見也。成實師破此義立正義：意即是業，離意之外無有別思。成實者云：善法習報二因，報因正是業，習因邊非業，通名業耳。不善邊則有多釋。開善云：不善心亦是煩惱亦是業，若為治道斷之，則是煩惱而非業；若招生之義，但取前輕者為煩惱、取後重者為業。莊嚴光宅云：取決定者為業，不決定者為煩惱。如是十種決邊通名為業，十不決邊名為煩惱。次建初師云：不善還同於善，不善習因邊為煩惱，報因邊為業。又釋十使云：疑是煩惱而非業，五見是業而非煩惱，餘四使決者為煩惱、不決者為業。今不論同異，諸有計業，此品求之皆畢竟空，故以目品。

This chapter is introduced on account of five kinds of people: First, the school positing a self, which claims that there is a person capable of creating karma, karma obtains retribution, there is a person who acts, and there is a person who experiences; this chapter is here to refute this view. Second, the school of non-self, which merely claims that there is an essential substance of karma that can induce retribution. Third, the Hīnayāna school of neither person nor phenomena, which also knows that karma is empty, but only explains emptiness by dissecting phenomena. Fourth, those with the heterodox view of the Fangguang, who claim that there are no karma and retribution. Fifth, practitioners of the Mahāyāna who grasp at nothing, in order to make them advance. Why is this? Attachment to phenomena is difficult to eliminate. For example, it is said that at the first bhūmi there is still attachment to a phenomenal self, and even bodhisattvas of the ten bhūmis, seeing phenomena as possessing intrinsic nature, do not see Buddha-nature clearly; it is also said that because they abide in the ten abodes they do not see clearly. Moreover, the reason for this chapter's occurrence has both general and particular aspects. As for the general, there are four: First, this treatise examines phenomena step by step to elucidate the middle way, giving rise to contemplation in accordance with the middle and extinguishing all afflictions. Now it reveals the middle way regarding the gate of karma. Therefore, a subsequent verse says: “Although empty, it is not annihilated; / although existent, it is not permanent.” The prose commentary explains: “The meaning explained in this treatise is free from annihilation and permanence.” Thus we know that it elucidates middle contemplation regarding karma; hence this chapter is spoken. Second, all the Mahāyāna sūtras explain the meaning of repenting and transforming karmic hindrances. As the Lion's Roar [Chapter] of the Nirvāṇa [Sūtra] says: “All karma has no fixed nature; there are only the foolish and the wise. The foolish take the light to be heavy and the non-existent to become existent; the wise transform the heavy into the light and transform the existent into non-existence.” Now it is made clear that if one clings to karma as determined, one is a fool; if one contemplates it as in this chapter, one is called a wise person. The Contemplation of Samantabhadra says: “The ocean of all karmic hindrances / is entirely produced from false conceptualization. / If you wish to repent, / sit upright and contemplate the true mark.” Since beginningless time, sentient beings have generated karma of the six destinies that is deep and vast; hence it is compared to an ocean. Without the contemplation of the true mark, there is no way to extinguish it. Now this chapter contemplates karma as being none other than the true mark, and is therefore able to extinguish karmic hindrances; hence this chapter is spoken. Third, although internal and external, Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, establish various karmas, their positions are not established. For instance, Subhadra claimed: “The retributions of sentient beings are entirely due to past karma; there are no present conditions.” Nirgrantha-jñātiputra said: “All karma must inevitably receive retribution; even if one now cultivates the path, one cannot sever it.” Second, those such as the Sarvāstivādins cling to the three times as being existent: before sentient beings have created good or evil, there already is good and evil karma in the future; furthermore, although good and evil karmas perish into the past, their substance is ultimately not non-existent. Such views are called giving rise to a view of definitive existence regarding the gate of karma. Not knowing that the fundamental nature of this karma is intrinsically empty, they do not recognize the ultimate truth; neither do they know that karma exists like an illusion or a dream, and thus they are also confused about conventional truth. Now, to refute the karma that is not subsumed by these two truths, it is called the “Examination of Karma.” Those of the Tattvasiddhi school, although knowing karma is provisional, dissect karma to arrive at emptiness and thereby also destroy conventional truth; having destroyed conventional truth, they also destroy ultimate truth. A subsequent verse says: “All karmas are fundamentally unproduced, / because they have no fixed nature; / all karmas are also unceasing, / because they are unproduced.” How could it be that only by dissecting karma does karma become empty? Now, to refute the karma of such people and elucidate that karma is fundamentally empty of intrinsic nature, it is called the “Examination of Karma.” Fourth, this chapter is also spoken for the sake of all people who possess apprehension, fear sin, and perform repentance. Why is this? They think that having committed evil karma, fear arises in their minds, and therefore, relying on the Mahāyāna or Hīnayāna, they practice repentance wishing to extinguish this sin. For such people, not only is their transgression of sin not extinguished, but they further increase their faults. Why is this? When they originally generated the sin, they took the sinful karma to be existent—this is called the view of existence. Then, wishing to practice repentance to extinguish and eliminate this sin, they give rise to the view of non-existence regarding the sin. Having given rise to existence and non-existence, these are afflictions; afflictions are the causes and conditions, and therefore there is karma; having delusion and karma, one then receives karmic retribution. Hence Vimalakīrti rebuked Upāli: “Do not further increase the sin of these two monks. You should eliminate it directly and not disturb their minds.” “Eliminating it directly” means contemplating that the nature of this sin is none other than ultimate emptiness, just as elucidated in this chapter. It is for the sake of those who lack skillful means, possess apprehension, and practice repentance that this chapter is spoken. Question: What fault do such people have? Answer: Karma is fundamentally unproduced and unceasing. Now they claim that karma is produced and ceases—is this not destroying the ultimate truth? Having destroyed the ultimate, they also destroy the conventional; destroying the two truths, there are no two wisdoms; hence there are no Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the three times and ten directions, and they also destroy the world. Therefore, their sin is extremely great. Question: If so, should there only be the repentance of the true mark, and no practice of repentance relying on the dharma-gates of the prātimokṣa rules? Answer: The “Examination of Causes and Conditions” says: “The Buddha has two kinds of preaching: first, preaching the truth; second, preaching according to expediency.” If one performs the repentance of the true mark, this is preaching according to the truth for sentient beings of great sharp faculties; if one relies on the prātimokṣa rules to cause them to abandon sin and cultivate merit, this is spoken for ordinary beings of slight merit and dull faculties. Therefore, the true Dharma is trustworthy, whereas the Dharma spoken according to expediency cannot be taken as ultimate truth. Furthermore, this chapter is spoken for the sake of heterodox outsiders with wrong views, such as the six masters, who say: “There is no black karma, nor is there retribution for black karma; the same is true for white karma.” Next, those of the Fangguang school also say: “Everything is empty; there is neither sin nor merit.” Therefore, it is now explained that although it is ultimately empty, good and evil karma are distinctly not lost. Thus a subsequent verse says: “Just as the World-Honoured One through supernormal powers / creates a phantom person, / and such a phantom person / further creates a phantom person.” How could there be no karma? Thus, the karma of the nine realms is distinctly present while constantly free from the four extremes. Awakening in this way gives rise to prajñā and skillful means, and also gives rise to the four wisdoms, whereupon one enters the knowledge and vision of the Buddha, and therefore attains Buddhahood. Now, this is a Mahāyāna treatise, precisely causing all sentient beings to attain Buddhahood by means of the gate of karma. Next, as for its immediate occasion: the “Examination of Bondage and Liberation” explained that there is no bondage or liberation. The opponent says: “Bondage is affliction. If there are no afflictions, how could there be karma? Because there is karma, there must be afflictions. Furthermore, there are two kinds of karma: first, contaminated karma; second, uncontaminated karma. Contaminated karma is termed bondage; uncontaminated karma is called liberation. Since there is karma, there is bondage and liberation.” Question: How many kinds of karma are there? Answer: Karma has many categories. With respect to the body, there are body, speech, and mind; in terms of the realms, there are merit, demerit, and immobility; in terms of retribution, there are present, next-life, and subsequent; in terms of defilement and purity, there are black, white, mixed, and uncontaminated karma. In this way, there are one karma, two karmas, three karmas, seven karmas, and ten karmas, as explained at length in the text. Question: What is the essential substance of karma? Answer: The Abhidharma takes good and evil visible matter and sound as the substance of the two karmas of body and speech, and takes volition (cetanā) as the substance of mental karma. The Tattvasiddhi says: “All three karmas take the mind as their substance; body and speech are merely the instruments of karma, not karma itself.” Question: How do the three afflictions of the mental ground differ from karma? Answer: In the Abhidharma, when the three afflictions arise, they must be accompanied by volition. Volition is itself karma, whereas the three afflictions are not karma; this is easy to see. The masters of the Tattvasiddhi refute this meaning and establish the correct meaning: the mind is itself karma, and apart from the mind there is no separate volition. The proponents of the Tattvasiddhi say: of the two causes of wholesome dharmas—habitual cause and retribution cause—the retribution cause is precisely karma, while the aspect of habitual cause is not karma, being only conventionally called karma. Regarding the unwholesome aspect, there are many explanations. Master Kaishan says: unwholesome mind is both affliction and karma; if it is severed by the antidotal path, it is affliction and not karma; if in terms of the sense of inducing rebirth, one merely takes the prior, lighter one as affliction and the subsequent, heavier one as karma. Zhuangyan and Guangzhai say: one takes that which is determinate as karma, and that which is indeterminate as affliction. In this way, the ten determinate aspects are generally called karma, and the ten indeterminate aspects are called afflictions. Next, Master Jianchu says: the unwholesome is also the same as the wholesome; the habitual cause aspect of the unwholesome is affliction, and the retribution cause aspect is karma. Moreover, explaining the ten fetters, he says: doubt is affliction and not karma; the five views are karma and not afflictions; of the remaining four fetters, the determinate ones are afflictions and the indeterminate ones are karma. Now, without debating similarities and differences: whatever karma is conceptualized, when sought in this chapter, is all ultimately empty; hence it gives the chapter its title.