肇論疏 1.29

1.29

Second, clarifying the doctrine of neither existence nor non-existence, which serves as the fundamental doctrine of the "Buzhenkong lun". "Speaking of" refers to what is spoken in the sūtras and treatises. The Pañcaviṃśatisāhasrikā Prajñāpāramitā says: "Form is neither empty nor non-empty; feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness are neither empty nor non-empty." The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Buddha-nature is not real like space, nor non-existent like a hare's horn." The Madhyamakaśāstra says: "Determinate existence clings to permanence; determinate non-existence clings to annihilationism. Therefore, the wise should not cling to existence or non-existence." Now he comprehensively explains these statements in the sūtras and treatises. That which is spoken of as "not existing" is not the existence of the view of existence and the view of permanence; and that which is spoken of as "not non-existing" is not the non-existence of wrong views and annihilationist views. Hence he speaks thus. The "view of existence" refers to the view that involves apprehension. The "wrong view" refers to the view of non-apprehension. The view of permanence is simply the view of existence; the view of annihilation is simply the wrong view. Furthermore, the view of existence means the view that there is a self; the view of permanence means that the body is permanent; the wrong view means the view that there is no self; the view of annihilation means that the body is impermanent. The Madhyamakaśāstra says: "In past ages, did I exist or did I not exist? Views such as the world being eternal all rely on past ages. In future ages, will I act or will I not act? Views such as the finite and infinite all rely on future ages." Alternatively, one may broadly take calculating the myriad dharmas as determinately existent to be "existence", and determinately non-existent to be "non-existence"; existence is permanence, and non-existence is annihilation. As for "If one takes existence to be existence, one then takes non-existence to be non-existence": if existence were determinately existent, non-existence would determinately be non-existence. "Since existence is not existence, non-existence is not non-existence." Some editions have a repeated character "wu" (non-existence), while others have only a single "wu". If there are two "wu" characters, then this clause is already complete, meaning that existence is already not existence, and non-existence is also not non-existence. If there is only a single "wu" character, then this clause negates existence, and only afterward negates non-existence. We now take the repeated character "wu" as correct. Below, from "Now, one who does not retain non-existence in contemplating dharmas": having previously refuted both existence and non-existence together, he now reiterates and comments on the two meanings. The present clause reiterates and comments on the clause "non-existence is not non-existence". As for "This is to contemplate existence without grasping at signs": this clause reiterates and comments on the clause "existence is not existence". If one does not retain non-existence in contemplating dharmas, then non-existence is not non-existence; if one contemplates existence without grasping at signs, then existence is not existence. Neither existence nor non-existence—this is the Middle Way. As for "Thus the characteristic of dharmas is the mark of signlessness": this refers to the dharma of the dharmatā. Being devoid of the characteristics of dharmas is called signlessness; taking this signlessness as their mark, they are called the dharmatā. As for "The mind of the sage abides without anywhere to abide": this refers to prajñā. Peaceful abiding in the unconditioned is called "abiding"; abiding where there is nowhere to abide, it is called "non-abiding". As for "The three vehicles equally contemplate prakṛti-śūnyatā and attain the Way": previously he said that existence is already not existence and non-existence is also not non-existence; these are all the wondrous principle of prakṛti-śūnyatā. The sages of the three vehicles together contemplate this principle and subsequently achieve the Way. The Nirvāṇa Sūtra says: "Wisdom contemplating the twelve links of dependent origination has four kinds in all: first, inferior; second, middling; third, superior; fourth, supreme. Inferior wisdom belongs to śrāvakas, middling wisdom belongs to pratyekabuddhas, superior wisdom belongs to bodhisattvas, and supreme wisdom belongs to Buddhas." When opening the Buddha and bodhisattvas [apart], there are four kinds; when combining the Buddha and bodhisattvas, there are three kinds. Thus these three kinds of persons together contemplate the prakṛti-śūnyatā of causes and conditions, and therefore achieve the fruits of the Way of the three vehicles. The Vajracchedikā Prajñāpāramitā Sūtra says: "All worthy ones and sages are distinguished by the unconditioned dharma." This is what it refers to. As for "Prakṛti-śūnyatā is the dharmatā of all dharmas": the prakṛti-śūnyatā of all dharmas is the true and real principle; therefore it is called the dharmatā. Below, from "Seeing the dharmatā of dharmas is therefore right contemplation": seeing emptiness is right, and seeing existence is wrong. As for "If the two vehicles did not see this principle, they would be inverted": some editions have the character 'gu' (therefore), which is incorrect. "She" means hypothetical. If hypothetically the two vehicles did not see prakṛti-śūnyatā, they would be inverted; but now they see emptiness, and therefore are not inverted. Below, from "Therefore the three vehicles have no difference in their contemplation of dharmas": having said they are not inverted, that there are nonetheless differences among the three vehicles is because their minds have great and small, and their wisdom has shallow and deep.