中觀論疏 4.30

4.30

This chapter has nine verses, divided into two parts: the first seven verses seek the ultimate emptiness of the five aggregates, and the latter two verses praise ultimate emptiness. When the five hundred Hīnayāna schools hear that the five aggregates are ultimately empty, it is like a knife wounding their hearts; when great beings hear it, joy immediately arises in them, and therefore it is praised. The *Lotus Sūtra* says: "Furthermore, there are those who abide in dhyāna and attain supernormal powers; hearing that all dharmas are empty, their hearts are filled with great joy." Therefore it is praised. The seven verses are divided into two: the first six verses examine the emptiness of the aggregate of matter, and the following one verse examines the emptiness of the four [mental] aggregates. Because the aggregate of matter is coarse and evident, it is examined first; the four mental aggregates are subtle and obscure, so they are refuted later. Furthermore, the aggregate of matter comes first, and the four mental aggregates come after. Moreover, by means of [the chapters on] coming and going and the six sense-faculties, the functions of the aggregate of matter were examined and found to be unobtainable; now, next, the emptiness of the substance of matter is examined. The examination of matter has three parts: first, three verses refute it by way of the approach that cause and effect are not separate; second, two verses refute it by way of the approach of being with a cause or without a cause; third, one verse refutes it by way of the approach of being similar or not similar. The three verses again have two parts: the first verse sets forth the primary topic, and two verses explain the primary topic. The primary topic has two parts: the first half is the topic of there being no effect separate from the cause; the second half is the topic of there being no cause separate from the effect. Question: What are the cause and effect of matter? Answer: If speaking in terms of concrete things, the head and feet are the cause, and the seven-foot body is the effect. If according to doctrinal principles: as non-Buddhists say, from the five subtle objects the five great elements are born, the five great elements give rise to the eleven faculties, the eleven faculties give rise to the material body; the material body is the effect, and the others are the causes. The Abhidharma masters hold that the four great elements create the five faculties; the four great elements are the cause, and the five faculties are the effect. The *Tattvasiddhi* holds that the four subtle atoms form the four great elements, the four great elements form the five faculties, the five faculties form the aggregate of matter; the aggregate of matter is the effect, and the rest are all causes. Both the Abhidharma and the *Tattvasiddhi* agree that past good and evil karma generates this retributive effect. Question: How does 'cause and effect are not separate' constitute a refutation? Answer: The opponent says that because matter and the cause of matter are mutually dependent, they exist; the author of the treatise clarifies that precisely because the cause of matter and matter are mutually dependent, they do not exist. Because they are mutually dependent, they lack intrinsic nature; lacking intrinsic nature, they are ultimately empty. Matter originally has no substance, but arises through causes and conditions: taking past karmic actions as the cause and the four great elements of the present life as the condition, relying on these causes and conditions matter therefore exists; one should know that it is immediately empty. It is just as when a face is taken as the cause and a mirror as the condition, an image appears within it, yet the image is ultimately empty. Furthermore, the chapter "Examination of the Four Noble Truths" says: "The effect arises from vice and merit; how can it be said not to be empty?" This explains the sūtra statement that "matter is emptiness": precisely because it arises from causes, it is therefore empty. The prose states, "Apart from threads there is no cloth": yet threads and cloth are mutually dependent. But deluded persons mostly grasp at one side, asserting that apart from threads there is no cloth, and that cloth is formed by threads, but they do not believe that apart from cloth there are no threads, saying that threads are not formed by cloth, so that apart from cloth there are threads. Now we clarify that the mutual dependence of threads and cloth is just of the same sort. We now ask: Since you have threads that are identical to the cloth and also have threads that are distinct from the cloth, there should also be cloth that is identical to the threads and cloth that is separate from the threads. If the threads identical to the cloth form the cloth, while the threads separate from the cloth do not form this cloth, then there should also be cloth identical to the threads that forms the threads, and cloth distinct from the threads that does not form these threads. Question: What are the threads identical to the cloth and the threads distinct from the cloth? Answer: Using threads to weave cloth—these are threads identical to the cloth. Not using threads to weave cloth—these are threads distinct from the cloth. Now, because of cloth there are threads—this is 'apart from cloth there are no threads'; not because of cloth there are threads—this is 'threads separate from cloth'.