中觀論疏 2.34

2.34

Tenth, the section on the new explanation. When I arrived in the region within the passes, I obtained a Tripiṭaka master's explanation of the eight negations using the meaning of the *Anuttarāśraya-sūtra*, which I now briefly recount. The eight negations are spoken for four kinds of persons, and may also be said to be spoken for eight kinds of persons. As for being spoken for four kinds of persons: the middle way of non-arising and non-extinction is spoken for icchantikas. There are two kinds of icchantikas: first, wrong-view icchantikas, who repudiate all dharmas, asserting that all dharmas are extinguished—meaning that even if not yet extinguished, they will inevitably return to extinction; second, infant icchantikas, who grasp at dharmas as definitively existent, which is termed 'arising'. They are called 'infants' because, seeing dharmas arise, they dare not say they are non-existent, and thus grasp at dharmas as having arising, whence they are named 'infants'. To remedy these two icchantikas, non-arising and non-extinction are taught. Because all dharmas originally have never arisen, they are non-arising, refuting infant icchantikas. Dharmas also have no extinction at present, which refutes wrong-view icchantikas who grasp at extinction. Next, non-permanence and non-annihilation are taught to refute śrāvakas. Śrāvakas also have two kinds of grasping, and thus are named two persons: because such a person dreads saṃsāra and urgently wishes to sever it, this is called the annihilation view; wishing to abide in unconditioned, tranquil nirvāṇa, this is the permanence view. To refute these two attachments, it is said 'not permanent and not annihilated'. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy non-Buddhists. Non-Buddhists are of two kinds: first, those who posit the self and the aggregates as one; second, those who posit the self and the aggregates as different. To refute these two persons, non-unity and non-difference are elucidated. Next, non-coming and non-going are elucidated to refute pratyekabuddhas and newly resolved bodhisattvas. These two persons differ in that the pratyekabuddha exclusively delights in contemplating causes and conditions and does not delight in contemplating the matter of benefiting others; the beginner bodhisattva exclusively seeks the practice of benefiting others and does not delight in contemplating causes and conditions. Although the practices of these two persons differ, both maintain that mounting causes to reach the fruit constitutes coming, and departing from the three realms constitutes going forth; hence coming has an origin and going has a destination. For the sake of these two persons, dharmas are elucidated as neither coming nor going. Thus, bundling the eight negations into four pairs matches four persons, and also matches eight persons. Next, it is elucidated that the eight negations remedy four hindrances, and also remedy eight hindrances. Regarding remedying four hindrances: non-arising and non-extinction are spoken to remedy the icchantika's hindrance of hating and turning away from the Mahāyāna. Icchantikas hate and turn away from the Mahāyāna, just as the five hundred brahmins said: 'The Mahāyāna scriptures are non-existent; how could they make people like empty space?' Therefore, it is now elucidated that all dharmas are originally unarisen and unextinguished, leading them to have faith and joy in the Mahāyāna. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at unity and difference. Because non-Buddhists grasp at a self as either identical to or separate from the five aggregates, it is now elucidated that there is no such self of unity or difference; hence it is said to remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at unity and difference. Third, non-annihilation and non-permanence remedy the śrāvaka's hindrance of fearing saṃsāra. Because Hīnayāna practitioners fear saṃsāra and wish to sever it, this is the annihilation view; delighting in the unconditioned of nirvāṇa is the permanence view. Therefore, it is now elucidated that non-annihilation and non-permanence remedy this annihilation and permanence, causing them neither to fear saṃsāra nor to delight in nirvāṇa. Fourth, non-coming and non-going remedy the hindrance of coming and going for pratyekabuddhas and beginner bodhisattvas. Although the spheres of practice of these two persons differ, they agree in asserting that coming has an origin and going has a destination, which is termed a hindrance; therefore, non-coming and non-going are spoken to remedy it. If it is said that the eight negations remedy eight hindrances: within icchantikas there are arising and extinction making two, within non-Buddhists unity and difference make two, within śrāvakas annihilation and permanence make two, and within pratyekabuddhas coming and going make two; thus they become eight. These are all explanations in the direct order. As for explanations in reverse order: speaking non-coming and non-going remedies the hindrance of prapañca of beginners and pratyekabuddhas, since stating that there is coming and departing is itself prapañca. The sūtra says: 'If one says that the Tathāgata goes or comes, one does not understand the meaning of what I have spoken. As for the Tathāgata, he comes from nowhere and goes nowhere.' How could a beginner maintain that the Buddha truly has coming and going? Hence it is called prapañca. Next, non-permanence and non-annihilation remedy the śrāvaka's hindrance of mutual contradiction: asserting permanence contradicts annihilation, and asserting annihilation harms permanence; how could you grasp at both annihilation and permanence? Therefore, speaking non-annihilation and non-permanence remedies the hindrance of mutual contradiction. Next, non-unity and non-difference remedy the non-Buddhist's hindrance of superimposition and deprecation: if one says person and dharma are one, that is deprecation—since they are called person and dharma, how could they be one? If one says person and dharma are different, that is superimposition—since person and dharma have no separate two substances, how is asserting two substances not superimposition? Therefore, non-unity and non-difference are spoken to remedy this. Next, non-arising and non-extinction remedy the icchantika's hindrance of existence and non-existence: the wrong-view one asserts non-existence, while the existence-view one grasps at existence; now elucidating non-arising and non-extinction remedies this hindrance of existence and non-existence. These all employ the sense of the two siddhāntas, namely [the siddhāntas] for individuals and for counteraction. Next, it is elucidated that four dharmas are used for four persons to remedy four hindrances: first, faith and joy in the Mahāyāna shatters the icchantika's hindrance of turning away from the Mahāyāna. Second, non-conceptual prajñā remedies the non-Buddhist's hindrance of grasping at the self as one or different; because the non-Buddhist's grasping at the self as one or different is a conceptual discrimination based on apprehension, now non-conceptual prajñā is elucidated, which is prajñā free of apprehension. Next, the samādhi that shatters empty space shatters the śrāvaka's hindrance of dreading saṃsāra: śrāvakas extinguish the body and intellect to abide in unconditioned empty space, so now attaining the samādhi that shatters empty space shatters and eliminates this hindrance. Fourth, the bodhisattva's cultivation of great compassion is for pratyekabuddhas and beginner bodhisattvas; it shatters the pratyekabuddha's failure to benefit sentient beings, and shatters the beginner bodhisattva's [view that] there is a Buddha path to be sought, shattering the hindrance that the Buddha has coming and going. It elucidates that when a bodhisattva cultivates great compassion, benefiting oneself and benefiting others are non-dual between self and other. These four dharmas are precisely the eight negations: first, faith and joy in the Mahāyāna refers to non-arising and non-extinction, for through awakening to non-arising and non-extinction one gives rise to faithful mind. Next, non-conceptual prajñā is precisely non-unity and non-difference, since calming minds of unity and difference is called non-conceptual. Next, the samādhi that shatters empty space is precisely non-annihilation and non-permanence; once one shatters the śrāvaka's abiding in unconditioned emptiness, this is non-permanence and non-annihilation, and there is also no annihilation of reducing the body to ashes and extinguishing intellect. Next, cultivating great compassion is precisely non-coming and non-going; since the bodhisattva cultivates great compassion, benefiting oneself and benefiting others are non-dual between self and other, knowing that coming and going are without coming and going, and being without coming and going is coming and going. Next, it is elucidated that taking the four dharmas as causes, one attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's four virtues. Taking faith and joy in the Mahāyāna as the cause, one shatters the icchantika's lack of faith and attains the fruit of purity; the fruit is precisely non-arising and non-extinction. Next, practicing non-conceptual prajñā as the cause, one shatters non-Buddhists' discrimination of unity and difference and attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's virtue of self; the fruit is precisely neither one nor different, and because it is not the non-Buddhist's self of unity or difference, one attains the Buddha's self, so this self is neither one nor different. Next, practicing the samādhi that shatters empty space as the cause shatters the śrāvaka [attachment] and attains the Tathāgata's fruit of bliss: although śrāvakas speak of the bliss of abiding in the unconditioned, in the Mahāyāna this is the suffering of saṃsāra; now shattering annihilation and permanence, one attains the fruit of ultimate bliss that is neither annihilated nor permanent. Next, cultivating great compassion as the cause shatters the pratyekabuddha's acting solely for oneself and the beginner's assertion that the Buddha has going and coming; it elucidates that the bodhisattva constantly practices great compassion, exhausting the limits of saṃsāra to establish this cause, and thus attains the fruit of the Tathāgata's eternal presence. Tripiṭaka Master Paramārtha explained the eight negations using the intentions of the *Anuttarāśraya-sūtra* and the *Mahāyānasaṃgraha* in great detail; here I have merely extracted the general import. First, being for each of the four persons; next, shattering the four hindrances; next, practicing the four causes; and afterwards, attaining the four fruits: the essential meaning of the eight negations is manifested here, and it does not contradict the explanations given above.