摩訶止觀 10.67

10.67

空見是瞋處、愛處、慢處。有見弱者，則摣破有法，掣理就空，疑不得起；若摣不破、掣不來，則嘊喍生疑。又今雖無疑，後當大疑。何以故？若空是理，應與聖等，既不等者，安得不疑？是誰計空？計空者我。我實非空，空亦非我，因空生我，謂：我行、我解、讚我、毀我。著此空邊，不可捨離。謂因空道，望通涅槃，則以空為戒，非雞、狗等。非因計因，是因盜戒取；計空為空，實非理空，非果計果，是果盜見取。空見偏僻，即是邪見。如是十使從空而生，欲苦下具十；集下有七，除身、邊、戒取；道下有八，除身、邊；滅下有七，除身、邊、戒取。合三十二。色、無色各除四瞋，各二十八，合八十八使，是名「集諦」。集迷苦起，苦由集生，苦集流轉，長爪不識。復有一鬼頭上火然，非想已來，尚自未免，何得於空不識苦集？

The view of emptiness is a site of anger, a site of craving, and a site of conceit. When the view of existence is weak, one tears down the phenomena of existence and wrenches principle into conformity with emptiness, so that doubt cannot arise; but if one cannot tear them down and wrench it over, one snarls and breeds doubt. Furthermore, even if there is no doubt now, later there will surely be great doubt. Why is this? If emptiness were the true principle, one should be equal to the noble ones. Since one is not equal to them, how could doubt fail to arise? Who is it that calculates emptiness? The one who calculates emptiness is the self. The self is truly not emptiness, nor is emptiness the self; yet based on emptiness the self arises, saying: 'I practice, I understand, they praise me, they revile me.' Clinging to this extreme of emptiness, one cannot relinquish it. Holding that the path of emptiness will open through to nirvāṇa, one takes emptiness to be the precept, rather than [the practices of] chickens, dogs, and the like. Calculating what is not the cause as the cause, this is the usurpation of cause by clinging to precepts and vows; calculating emptiness as emptiness when it is truly not the emptiness of principle, calculating what is not the fruit as the fruit, this is the usurpation of fruit by clinging to views. The view of emptiness being biased and warped, it is precisely a wrong view. In this way the ten proclivities arise from emptiness: under suffering in the desire realm all ten are complete; under arising there are seven, excluding the view of individuality, extreme views, and the clinging to precepts and vows; under the path there are eight, excluding the view of individuality and extreme views; under cessation there are seven, excluding the view of individuality, extreme views, and the clinging to precepts and vows. Together these make thirty-two. In the form and formless realms, each excludes the four [proclivities of] anger, leaving twenty-eight in each, totaling eighty-eight proclivities; this is called the 'truth of arising.' Arising arises from delusion regarding suffering; suffering is born from arising; suffering and arising cycle onward, yet Dīrghanakha did not recognize them. There was another ghost with a fire burning upon its head; even since the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception it had not yet escaped it. How, then, in emptiness could one fail to recognize suffering and arising?