[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Indian literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in) › [Buddhist Literature](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha) › [Taishō Tripiṭaka (Chinese Buddhist canon)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho) › [中觀論疏](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824) › 9.41 # 中觀論疏 9.41 中觀論疏 9.41 - **Language:** Classical Chinese ### [9.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9.41) 「若常樂我淨」，第三依名破倒不倒。所以稱依名破者，既名顛倒，云何有實？若是實有，何名顛倒？故云依名破。初偈就倒破倒、第二偈就倒破不倒。初偈如文。長行從「若謂」下，生第二偈。外人意云：四倒既無，則四行應有，以有無是相待法故。偈本正破。汝以倒無故不倒是有，是有無相待者，亦倒不倒相待，本有倒故可有不倒，無倒可待何有不倒？「如是顛倒滅」下，自上以來第一段破煩惱顛倒，今第二章總釋破意。以能如上正觀，煩惱顛倒則畢竟永滅；異斯觀者則不滅也。就文為二：初句逐近結顛倒滅，下三句結第一章明煩惱滅。煩惱顛倒既滅，則十二緣河傾、佛性河滿；異斯觀者，則佛性河傾、因緣河滿。「若煩惱性實」下，自上以來第一破外人煩惱顛倒生義，今第二章破外人修治道斷煩惱義。大小內外有所得人於煩惱中有二種過：一者不知煩惱本自不生，而橫謂有生；二者復興治道欲滅此煩惱，則是於顛倒中更復起倒。是故前章明煩惱本自不生，今此一章辨今無所滅。不生不滅即是正觀，煩惱方滅耳。若逐近生此一章者，上云如是顛倒滅，外便謂有煩惱可滅，是故次破其滅。兩偈為二：初破性實煩惱不可滅、第二破假名煩惱則無所滅，一切煩惱不出性假。又初破煩惱屬人，明不可滅；次破煩惱無人可屬，亦不得滅。又初破小乘人煩惱，明不可滅；次破大乘煩惱，明無所滅。皆上半牒、下半破，文易知也。問：若爾，經云「一念相應慧，斷煩惱及習。」今云何言無斷？答：若言有所斷，則煩惱不斷。今此中求斷不可得，則煩惱便斷也。又見有煩惱，修治道斷之，非唯煩惱不斷，於煩惱上更起能所病，謂有治道為能斷、煩惱是所斷。今悟煩惱性空，則二病俱息也。 > From "If permanence, pleasure, self, and purity..." is the third, refuting inversion and non-inversion relying on nominal designation. Why is it called refuting relying on nominal designation? Since it is named inversion, how could it be real? If it were really existent, why would it be named inversion? Hence it is called refuting relying on nominal designation. The first verse refutes inversion in terms of inversion; the second verse refutes non-inversion in terms of inversion. The first verse is as in the text. The prose from "If it is said..." onward generates the second verse. The opponent's meaning is: Since the four inversions are non-existent, the four practices should be existent, because existence and non-existence are mutually dependent phenomena. The root verse directly refutes this: You take non-inversion as existent because inversion is non-existent; if this is the mutual dependence of existence and non-existence, inversion and non-inversion are also mutually dependent. Only because there is fundamentally inversion could there be non-inversion; with no inversion to depend upon, how could there be non-inversion? From "In this way inversions are extinguished..." onward: from above up to here was the first section refuting afflictions and inversions; now the second section generally explains the intent of the refutation. Because one can contemplate correctly as above, afflictions and inversions are ultimately and permanently extinguished; for one who contemplates differently from this, they are not extinguished. In the text there are two parts: the first line directly concludes the extinction of inversions; the lower three lines conclude the first section, clarifying the extinction of afflictions. Once afflictions and inversions are extinguished, the river of the twelve links of dependent origination overturns and the river of Buddha-nature is filled; for one who contemplates differently from this, the river of Buddha-nature overturns and the river of dependent origination is filled. From "If the intrinsic nature of afflictions is real..." onward: from above up to here was the first, refuting the opponent's view of the arising of afflictions and inversions; now the second section refutes the opponent's view of cultivating the path of antidotes to sever afflictions. People with grasping in both Mahāyāna and Hīnayāna, inside and outside \[the Dharma\], have two kinds of faults regarding afflictions: first, not knowing that afflictions fundamentally do not arise of themselves, but arbitrarily claiming there is arising; second, further raising the path of antidotes wanting to extinguish these afflictions, which is to produce further inversions within inversions. Therefore the former section clarified that afflictions fundamentally do not arise of themselves, and this present section distinguishes that now there is nothing to be extinguished. Neither arising nor perishing is precisely the correct contemplation; only then are afflictions extinguished. If generating this section immediately following \[the previous\]: above it said that in this way inversions are extinguished, and the outsider then thought there were afflictions that could be extinguished; for this reason their extinction is refuted next. The two verses form two parts: the first refutes that afflictions of real intrinsic nature cannot be extinguished; the second refutes that provisionally designated afflictions have nothing to be extinguished; all afflictions do not go beyond nature and designation. Furthermore, the first refutes that afflictions belong to a person, clarifying they cannot be extinguished; the next refutes that afflictions have no person to belong to, and also cannot be extinguished. Furthermore, the first refutes the afflictions of Hīnayāna practitioners, clarifying they cannot be extinguished; the next refutes Mahāyāna afflictions, clarifying there is nothing to be extinguished. In all cases the first half cites and the second half refutes; the text is easily understood. Question: If so, the sūtra says: "Wisdom corresponding in a single thought-moment severs afflictions and habitual propensities." How can you now say there is no severing? Answer: If one says there is something severed, then afflictions are not severed. Now, here, seeking severing is unattainable, and then afflictions are severed. Furthermore, seeing that there are afflictions and cultivating the path of antidotes to sever them not only fails to sever afflictions, but on top of afflictions further generates the illness of subject and object, claiming that the path of antidotes is the agent of severing and afflictions are what is severed. Now, realizing that afflictions are empty of intrinsic nature, both illnesses together subside. > — English (machine translation) (machine translation) - [Previous: 9.40](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9.40) - [Next: 9.42](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9.42) - [Up: 9](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9) ## Translations (1) - [English (machine translation)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824~en-mt.9.41) — English, machine translation --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9.41](https://indike.org/pramana/in.bauddha.taisho.1824.9.41) · Pramāṇa