中觀論疏 8.6

8.6

「問曰」下，第三番立不失法，前立、次破。就立中為三：一序說、二正說、三解釋。「問曰今當復更說順業果報義」者，此品七番破立。初番立業體即破。次番辨業不斷不常救上立，論主即破。今立持業果報總救上義，故云今當復更說也。順業果報者，謂己所立義符順因果不違法相，論主若破則逆因果理違法相也。以符順因果，三乘賢聖所歎，論主若破則佛菩薩所毀也。此一偈明序說竟。「所謂不失法如券業如負財物」下，第二六偈正立義宗也。就文為二：初標二章門、次釋二門。不失法如券，標不失法章門。業如負財物，標業章門也。今總釋之。世人出債要具四種：一有財主、二有負債人、三立券書持負債主令不失財、四債主必還財物。財主者，六道眾生也。負債主，六道善惡業也。作業之時必有一法隨業起，持業令不失果，如取財時必立券也。負債人必還財主物，善惡業必辨六道果，還行人受之也。論文唯明券與負債人，但舉其要事，為存略故也。問：財主出物與前人，前人然後還債，可得言果從眾生出與業，業然後辨果還行人耶？答：大略舉喻，不必全合。若必全合，義亦有之，六道果報並從眾生心內所出故。《地經》云「三界皆一心作」也。問：外人舉此云何救上斷常耶？答：現見事中具此四種，因果業行亦具此四。斯既合事符理，賢愚並信，則知決定有於業果。但業是有為念念生滅，是故不常；此不失法持之令果不失，所以不斷。不斷不常，免上過也。問：業是有為念念生滅，不失法亦是有為念念生滅，云何得不斷不常耶？答真諦三藏出正量部，明不失法是功用常，待果起方滅，中間無念念滅。譬如券，還債竟然後乃裂破耳。此二章門俱有法、譬，不失法謂法說也，如券譬說也。業法說也，如負財譬說也。善業如他負財，惡業如負他財，亦得通喻善惡業必還報，如負財也。

From "The question says" downward is the third round, establishing the inexhaustible dharma (avipraṇāśa); first it establishes it, and next refutes it. Within the establishment there are three parts: 1. an introductory statement, 2. the direct statement, and 3. the explanation. "The question says: I shall now again explain the meaning that conforms to karma and retribution"—this chapter has seven rounds of refutation and establishment. In the first round, the substance of karma was established and immediately refuted. In the next round, he argued that karma is neither annihilated nor permanent to rescue the above establishment, and the treatise master immediately refuted it. Now he establishes that which preserves karma and retribution to comprehensively rescue the above thesis, hence he says, "I shall now again explain." "Conforms to karma and retribution" means that the thesis he establishes accords with cause and effect without violating the characteristics of phenomena; if the treatise master refutes it, he would oppose the principle of cause and effect and violate the characteristics of phenomena. Because it accords with cause and effect, it is praised by the worthy and noble of the three vehicles; if the treatise master refutes it, he would be disparaged by Buddhas and bodhisattvas. This one verse concludes the introductory statement. From "The so-called inexhaustible dharma is like a debt certificate, and karma is like borrowed property" downward is the second part, in which six verses directly establish the core thesis. In the text there are two parts: first, stating the two headings; next, explaining the two headings. "The inexhaustible dharma is like a debt certificate" states the heading of the inexhaustible dharma. "Karma is like borrowed property" states the heading of karma. Now let us explain them comprehensively. For people of the world to make a loan, four things are requisite: 1. having a creditor, 2. having a debtor, 3. executing a debt certificate to bind the debtor so that the property is not lost, and 4. the debtor must repay the property. The creditor is the sentient beings of the six destinies. The debtor is the wholesome and unwholesome karma of the six destinies. At the time of performing an action, there must be a dharma that arises following the karma, preserving the karma so that its fruit is not lost, just as when borrowing property a certificate must be executed. The debtor must repay the property to the creditor, and wholesome and unwholesome karma must yield the fruit of the six destinies, returning it to the practitioner to receive. The text of the treatise only explains the certificate and the debtor, merely citing the essentials for the sake of concision. Question: The creditor provides property to the other person, and only then does the other person repay the debt; can one say that the fruit comes forth from sentient beings and is given to karma, and only then does karma yield the fruit and return it to the practitioner? Answer: It is broadly citing a metaphor; it does not need to match completely. Even if it had to match completely, the principle is also there, for the retributions of the six destinies all emerge from within the minds of sentient beings; as the *Daśabhūmika Sūtra* says, "The triple realm is entirely made by the one mind." Question: How does the opponent's citing of this rescue [his position from] annihilation and permanence above? Answer: In observed everyday affairs these four things are present, and the actions of cause, effect, and karma also possess these four. Since this matches affairs and conforms to principle, and both the wise and foolish believe in it, one knows that karma and its fruit definitely exist. However, karma is conditioned and arises and ceases moment by moment, hence it is not permanent; this inexhaustible dharma preserves it so that the fruit is not lost, therefore it is not annihilated. Being neither annihilated nor permanent, it avoids the aforementioned fault. Question: Karma is conditioned and arises and ceases moment by moment, and the inexhaustible dharma is also conditioned and arises and ceases moment by moment; how can it be neither annihilated nor permanent? Answer: Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha cited the Sammatīya school, explaining that the inexhaustible dharma possesses functional permanence (kāritra-nitya), waiting for the fruit to arise before it perishes, without momentary perishing in the interim. It is like a certificate, which is torn up only after the debt has been fully repaid. Both of these headings have both the doctrinal statement and the metaphor: "inexhaustible dharma" is the doctrinal statement, and "like a certificate" is the metaphor. "Karma" is the doctrinal statement, and "like borrowed property" is the metaphor. Wholesome karma is like another owing property, and unwholesome karma is like owing property to another; it can also broadly serve as a metaphor for wholesome and unwholesome karma inevitably repaying retribution, just like borrowed property.