中觀論疏 2.32

2.32

Eighth, the section on the sequential order. Question: The eight negations are the core of the *Akutobhayā* and the essential contemplation of the Vaipulya; since the text repeats them, is that not redundant? Answer: Explaining the eight negations in two cycles has an extremely profound import; we will now briefly state six iterations. First, the initial setting forth of the eight negations clarifies the meaning of the middle and real; the subsequent iteration of the eight negations clarifies the meaning of the middle and provisional. As for the first, clarifying the middle and real: all that is practiced by the minds of all people who possess apprehension—Great or Small, internal or external—is arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence, unity and diversity, coming and going out, which obstructs the correct contemplation of the middle way; therefore, right at the outset one must wash them away. Since one seeks their arising and ceasing and cannot find them, it is said 'neither arising nor ceasing'; the same applies to coming and going out. The reason this is called the 'middle and real' is that calculating that such arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence exist is entirely false, and the real absence of such inverted, arbitrarily asserted arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence is called the 'real'; because arbitrarily asserting that this arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence exist is biased and deviant, the absence of such arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence is called the 'middle'. Therefore, the initial iteration of the eight negations clarifies the meaning of the middle and real. Next, the repeated iteration of the eight negations clarifying the middle and provisional: having refuted and washed away the arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence of apprehension completely and without remainder, one can then distinguish the two truths of provisionally designated causes and conditions. These two truths of provisionally designated causes and conditions can lead to the non-dual middle way; therefore, the meaning of the middle and provisional is complete. Second, the prior setting forth of the eight negations is the meaning of the middle prior to the provisional; without distinguishing the provisional, it first refutes this intrinsic nature of arising and ceasing, existence and non-existence, as unobtainable, and thus says 'neither existent nor non-existent', which is called the middle way. The subsequent repeated iteration of the eight negations can distinguish 'both existent and non-existent'. 'Both existent and non-existent' is the provisional statement of existence and non-existence, called the provisional subsequent to the middle. How could provisional existence and non-existence be [real] existence and non-existence? Provisional existence and non-existence are neither existent nor non-existent; this is called the middle way, namely the middle subsequent to the provisional. Therefore, only by iterating the eight negations twice is their meaning fully complete. Furthermore, in the first iteration of the eight negations, there is no refutation that is not round; in the subsequent repeated iteration of the eight negations, there is no elucidation that is not complete. Third, the initial iteration of the eight negations uses the sūtras to give rise to the treatise; the subsequent iteration of the eight negations uses the treatise to elucidate the sūtras. As for the first, the sūtras giving rise to the treatise: the eight negations are precisely the Vaipulya sūtras; only when the treatise-master embodied the middle way of the eight negations and gave rise to the correct contemplation could he compose the treatise; hence the sūtras gave rise to the treatise. Subsequently, iterating the eight negations and elaborating upon them is called the treatise elucidating the sūtras. Fourth, the initial iteration of the eight negations clarifies the intent of the eight negations; the subsequent repetition of the eight negations explains the text of the eight negations. Clarifying the intent of the eight negations means that the Buddha spoke these eight negations for those of great mind, and those of merit and sharp faculties all attained awakening; but sentient beings of the semblance and final ages, having meager merit and dull faculties, were confused about these eight negations, and the treatise-master appeared in the world to refute these confusions and once again elucidate the eight negations. Next, the repeated iteration of the eight negations explains the text of the eight negations. Question: The repeated iteration of the eight negations explaining the text of the eight negations cures whose illness? Answer: Namely, those above who did not seek the determined characteristics of the five aggregates, twelve sense bases, and so forth, and furthermore those above who, upon hearing of ultimate emptiness, gave rise to views and doubts—such people all fell into arising and ceasing, annihilation and permanence, unity and diversity, coming and going out; therefore, he negates them. Fifth, the initial iteration of the eight negations should have been explained immediately, but because the foreign questioner asked about the intent of composing the treatise and it was distant from the preceding text, they are repeated and brought forward. Sixth, the initial iteration of the eight negations sets forth the middle way; next, the questions and answers explain the middle way; and finally, the repeated iteration of the eight negations concludes the middle way.