十二門論宗致義記 2.13

2.13

四句同前。一、釋名者，於有無二門徵遣其相，從是所遣，故以為名。二、來意者，前門破相，恐猶未悟，故更責可相法中有相故相？無相故相？為俱故相？是故來也。三、所明者，有無都盡，無寄觀空是也。四、釋文，有四：一、標；二、釋；三、結；四、類。初中，一切法者，是有為；無為等，一切皆空也。二、釋中二：初、徵標略破，後釋頌廣破。前中，先「何以故」徵標，謂何以得知一切法空？後立頌略釋。於中，初句破有相；二、破無相；三、破俱；四、結空。二、廣釋中三：先釋破有；二、破無；三、破俱。初中三：先奪令失相破，有標釋可知。二、縱則二相破，謂新舊二相故。三、「是故」下，結非。二、破無中，初標，後舉事釋顯。前破有中，以執有故無能相，能相無故亦無所相。此中以執無故無所相，所相無故亦無能相，是文意也。三、「如是」下，釋破俱句。以離二無第三，故空也。三、「是故」下，第三、總結非。四、類遣中六：一、以相類遣法，有標釋可知。二、以一類遣多，亦有標釋；三、以有類遣無；四、以物類遣有為；五、類遣無為；六、類遣我。是故成上標宗一切法空也。

The four clauses are the same as before. 1. Explaining the name: examining and dismissing their marks within the two gates of existence and non-existence, it takes its name from what is dismissed. 2. Purpose of introduction: the preceding chapter refuted the mark; fearing that [the opponent] has still not awakened, it further investigates whether within the dharmas that can be marked, they are marked because of having a mark, marked because of lacking a mark, or marked because of both; therefore it is introduced. 3. What is clarified: existence and non-existence are completely exhausted, which is the unattached contemplation of emptiness. 4. Explaining the text has four parts: 1. statement; 2. explanation; 3. conclusion; 4. analogical extension. In the first, 'all dharmas' refers to the conditioned, the unconditioned, and so forth, all of which are empty. In 2, the explanation, there are two parts: first, investigating the statement and briefly refuting it, and then explaining the verse to refute it at length. In the former, first 'Why is this?' investigates the statement, asking how it is known that all dharmas are empty; then it establishes the verse to explain briefly. In this, the first line refutes having a mark; the second refutes lacking a mark; the third refutes both; the fourth concludes with emptiness. In the extensive explanation there are three parts: first, explaining the refutation of existence; second, refuting non-existence; third, refuting both. In the first there are three parts: first, refuting by stripping away so that it loses the mark, which has statement and explanation as can be understood. Second, refuting by granting it [and showing] two marks, referring to the two marks of new and old. Third, from 'Therefore' onward, concluding the error. In the second, refuting non-existence, first is the statement, and then adducing facts to explain and clarify. In the preceding refutation of existence, because existence was clung to, there was no marking factor; because there was no marking factor, there was also no marked factor. Here, because non-existence is clung to, there is no marked factor; because there is no marked factor, there is also no marking factor—this is the import of the text. Third, from 'In this way' onward, explaining the refutation of the clause of both. Because apart from the two there is no third, it is empty. Third, from 'Therefore' onward, the third is a general conclusion of the error. In the fourth, analogical dismissal, there are six: 1. using marks to analogously dismiss dharmas, which has statement and explanation as can be understood; 2. using one to analogously dismiss many, which also has statement and explanation; 3. using existence to analogously dismiss non-existence; 4. using entities to analogously dismiss the conditioned; 5. analogously dismissing the unconditioned; 6. analogously dismissing the self. Therefore, the statement of the thesis above that all dharmas are empty is established.