大乘百法明門論開宗義決 1.23

1.23

不死矯亂宗者。謂有四種不死矯亂。一覺未開覺。怖畏他人知其無知。不分明答我無所知。二於所證起增上慢。懼他詰問怖畏妄語。故不明說我有所證。三覺已開悟而未決定。怖畏妄語懼他詰問。故不明說我不決定。如是三種假託餘事以言矯亂。四羸劣愚鈍。世出世道皆不了知。於世文字亦不能了。懼他詰問知其愚癡。但反問彼。隨彼言轉便自稱言。我所依學不死淨天。而亂詰問於彼所問以言矯亂。是故名為不死矯亂。顯揚論中不破此計。以是愚癡無定宗故。

Regarding the "school of immortal evasive equivocations (amarāvikkhepa)": there are four kinds of immortal evasive equivocations. First, one whose awareness is not yet awakened; fearing that others will know of his ignorance, he does not answer clearly, "I do not know anything." Second, one gives rise to excessive pride regarding what he has realized; fearing other people's cross-examination and fearing lying, he does not clearly state, "I have realization." Third, his awareness is already awakened but not yet definitive; fearing lying and fearing other people's cross-examination, he does not clearly state, "I am not definitive." These three kinds resort to other matters and use evasive language. Fourth, one is feeble, dull, and foolish; he does not understand either worldly or world-transcending paths, nor can he understand worldly texts; fearing other people's cross-examination and that they will know his foolishness, he only asks them in return, turns according to their words, and then declares himself: "I rely upon and study the pure immortal devas." Thus, he counter-questions and uses evasive words in response to what was asked; therefore, it is called immortal evasive equivocation. In the Prakaraṇāryavācā-śāstra, this view is not refuted, because it is foolish and has no fixed tenet.