T31n1619_無相思塵論

大正藏第 31 冊 No. 1619 無相思塵論

No. 1619

無相思塵論

陳那菩薩造

陳西印度三藏法師真諦譯

若說鄰虛　　是根本因　　不似起故　非境如根　　識似聚起　　不從彼生　聚無有體　　譬如二月　　由此二義　外物非塵　　有說鄰虛　　聚成萬物　識似彼起　　故立為塵　　鄰虛體相　若是實有　　識不似故　　非境如塵　鄰虛若塵　　則識無別　　若言相異　則識不同　　異相在假　　故體非真　鄰虛體量　　眾處無別　　若除鄰虛　萬識不起　　是故萬物　　悉是假名　于內塵相　　如外而顯　　立為識塵　識似現故　　是識緣緣　　隨生決定　共立功能　　令次第起　　二根共生　勝能為根　　于識無礙　　更互為因　勝能為塵　　互生無始

若有人執眼等六識。緣外境起。是人或分別鄰虛為境。是識因故。或分別鄰虛聚為境。似聚識起故塵者何相。若識能了別其體相。如其體相識起。是故說此名塵。鄰虛無此事。若鄰虛實是識因譬如五根。是故鄰虛非塵。若爾鄰虛聚應是境。如聚識起故。雖復如此如其相起。識不從此生。是故聚亦非塵。何以故。若塵能生識。似其體相可信為塵。何以故。可說此塵

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本《無相思塵論》

陳那菩薩造

陳西印度三藏法師真諦譯

如果有人說極微（鄰虛）是根本因，但識的生起並不像極微。外境不像根一樣是識的直接原因，識的生起類似於聚合，但並非直接從聚合產生。聚合本身沒有實體，就像空中的第二個月亮一樣。由於這兩個原因，外在事物不是識的所緣（塵）。有人說極微（鄰虛）聚合形成萬物，識的生起類似於這些聚合，因此將它們立為所緣（塵）。極微（鄰虛）的體相，如果是真實存在的，但識的生起並不像它，因此它不像塵一樣是識的所緣。如果極微（鄰虛）是塵，那麼識就沒有差別。如果說它們有不同的相，那麼識也就不同於極微。不同的相是虛假的，因此極微的體不是真實的。極微（鄰虛）的體量，在各處沒有差別。如果除去極微，萬種識就不會生起。因此，萬物都是假名。內在的塵相，如外在一樣顯現，立為識塵。識的生起類似於所緣，是識的緣緣，隨其生起而決定。共同建立功能，令次第生起。兩個根共同生起，勝能為根，于識無礙，更互為因。勝能為塵，互生無始。

如果有人執著于眼等六識，認為它們緣于外境而生起。這個人或者分別極微（鄰虛）為境，因為它是識的因；或者分別極微（鄰虛）聚為境，因為識的生起類似於聚合。那麼，塵的相是什麼呢？如果識能夠了別它的體相，並且識的生起就像它的體相，因此說這個名為塵。極微（鄰虛）沒有這件事。如果極微（鄰虛）確實是識的因，譬如五根，因此極微（鄰虛）不是塵。如果這樣，極微（鄰虛）聚應該是境，因為識的生起類似於聚。即使這樣，識的生起並不從此聚產生。因此，聚也不是塵。為什麼呢？如果塵能夠生識，並且類似於它的體相，才可以相信它是塵。為什麼呢？可以說這個塵。

【English Translation】 English version The Treatise on No-Appearance of Thought-Objects

By Bodhisattva Dignāga (Chenna)

Translated by Paramārtha (Zhendi), Tripitaka Master from Western India of the Chen Dynasty

If it is said that the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') is the fundamental cause, but the arising of consciousness is not like the ultimate particle. External objects are not the direct cause of consciousness like the sense organs; the arising of consciousness is similar to aggregates, but it does not arise directly from aggregates. Aggregates themselves have no substance, like the second moon in the sky. Because of these two reasons, external things are not objects (dust, 'chen') of consciousness. Some say that ultimate particles (neighboring void, 'lin xu') aggregate to form all things, and the arising of consciousness is similar to these aggregates, therefore they are established as objects (dust, 'chen'). The substance of the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu'), if it is truly existent, but the arising of consciousness is not like it, therefore it is not an object of consciousness like dust. If the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') is dust, then consciousness has no distinction. If it is said that they have different appearances, then consciousness is also different from the ultimate particle. The different appearances are false, therefore the substance of the ultimate particle is not real. The quantity of the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') is not different in all places. If the ultimate particle is removed, the myriad consciousnesses will not arise. Therefore, all things are provisional names. The internal appearance of dust is manifested like the external, and is established as consciousness-dust. The arising of consciousness is similar to the object, it is the object of consciousness's object, and it is determined by its arising. Together they establish function, causing sequential arising. Two sense organs arise together, the superior ability is the root, without obstruction to consciousness, mutually as cause. The superior ability is the dust, mutually arising without beginning.

If someone clings to the six consciousnesses, such as eye consciousness, believing that they arise from external objects. This person either distinguishes the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') as the object, because it is the cause of consciousness; or distinguishes the aggregate of ultimate particles (neighboring void, 'lin xu') as the object, because the arising of consciousness is similar to the aggregate. Then, what is the appearance of dust? If consciousness can discern its substance, and the arising of consciousness is like its substance, therefore it is said that this is called dust. The ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') does not have this. If the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') is indeed the cause of consciousness, like the five sense organs, therefore the ultimate particle (neighboring void, 'lin xu') is not dust. If so, the aggregate of ultimate particles (neighboring void, 'lin xu') should be the object, because the arising of consciousness is similar to the aggregate. Even so, the arising of consciousness does not arise from this aggregate. Therefore, the aggregate is also not dust. Why? If dust can produce consciousness, and is similar to its substance, then it can be believed to be dust. Why? This dust can be spoken of.

為識生緣故。聚者則不如此。非實有故。譬如二月由眼根亂。識似二月起二月非。識境界實無有故。聚亦如此。離鄰虛無有實體故。聚非識境界。是故外塵。由此二義非識境界。一一分不具故。有諸師說。是鄰虛聚整合萬物。有多種相具足。立此為境界。何以故。有別相能生證智。非但鄰虛及鄰虛聚。是故於鄰虛及鄰虛聚中。有相為六識作境鄰虛相者非塵。譬如堅等。鄰虛中有堅濕熱動觸。此物實有非眼識境界。眼識不如其起故。鄰虛中萬物亦如此。何以故。鄰虛者于萬物中若生識。是識則無差別。以萬物中鄰虛無有異故。若汝言由相差別故生識異。瓶等諸物相貌不同。緣此相故起識有異。是義不然。何以故。如此相貌差別。于瓶等假名物中。不無于鄰虛。實物中則無鄰虛。體量不異故。于萬物中鄰虛體量。所謂圓細無有差別。是故萬物相貌非是實有。是假名有。是假名相者。謂瓶等諸物。若除鄰虛。似瓶等識不生故。實物者。若析相應法似實物識不滅。如未析時。于瓶中五塵識生。析竟五塵識亦不滅故。五塵等是實有由此鄰虛及聚。萬物不能生識。是故外塵非識境界。若爾何法名塵。于內塵相如外顯現。是名識塵外塵實無所有。于內識中眾生亂心分別故。起六塵分別。此分別如在於外。如此顯現。是四緣中名識緣緣

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本爲了識別產生『緣』（因緣，hetu-pratyaya）的緣故，聚集起來的事物並非如此，因為它不是真實存在的。比如，就像二月時由於眼根的錯亂，意識似乎產生了二月，但實際上並沒有二月。意識的境界實際上並不存在，所以聚集起來的事物也是如此。由於鄰近的虛空沒有實體，所以聚集起來的事物不是意識的境界。因此，外在的塵埃（rupa）由於這兩個原因，不是意識的境界，因為每一個部分都不完整。有些老師說，是鄰近的虛空聚集起來形成了萬物，具有多種相貌，並以此作為境界。為什麼呢？因為有不同的相貌能夠產生證智（pramana-jnana）。不僅僅是鄰近的虛空和鄰近虛空的聚集。因此，在鄰近的虛空和鄰近虛空的聚集之中，有相貌作為六識的境界。鄰近虛空的相貌不是塵埃，比如堅硬等等。在鄰近的虛空中，有堅硬、潮濕、熱、運動等觸覺。這些事物是真實存在的，但不是眼識的境界，因為眼識不能如實地產生。鄰近虛空中的萬物也是如此。為什麼呢？如果鄰近虛空在萬物中產生意識，那麼這個意識就沒有差別，因為萬物中的鄰近虛空沒有差異。如果你們說，由於相貌的差別，所以產生的意識不同，比如瓶子等事物的相貌不同，因為這些相貌的緣故，產生的意識也有差異。這個說法是不對的。為什麼呢？因為這種相貌的差別，在瓶子等假名的事物中存在，但在鄰近虛空的實物中則不存在，因為它們的體量沒有差異。在萬物中，鄰近虛空的體量，比如圓形、細小，沒有差別。因此，萬物的相貌不是真實存在的，而是假名存在的。這個假名的相貌，指的是瓶子等事物。如果去除鄰近虛空，那麼類似瓶子等的意識就不會產生。實物是，如果分析相應的法，類似實物的意識不會消失，就像未分析時一樣。在瓶子中，五塵的意識產生，分析完畢后，五塵的意識也不會消失。五塵等是真實存在的。因此，鄰近虛空和聚集起來的萬物不能產生意識。所以，外在的塵埃不是意識的境界。如果這樣，那麼什麼法叫做塵埃呢？在內在的塵埃的相貌，如外在顯現，這叫做識塵（vijnana-rupa）。外在的塵埃實際上什麼都沒有，在內在的意識中，眾生由於錯亂的心而分別，所以產生了六塵的分別。這種分別就像在外一樣如此顯現。這是四緣（catuh-pratyaya）中的識緣（vijnana-pratyaya）。

【English Translation】 English version For the sake of recognizing the arising of 『causes』 (hetu-pratyaya), aggregates are not like that, because they are not truly existent. For example, like the illusion of a second moon arising from the derangement of the eye faculty in the second month, but there is no actual second moon. The realm of consciousness is actually non-existent, so aggregates are also like that. Because adjacent spaces have no substance, aggregates are not the realm of consciousness. Therefore, external dust (rupa) is not the realm of consciousness due to these two reasons, because each part is not complete. Some teachers say that adjacent spaces aggregate to form all things, possessing various appearances, and establish this as a realm. Why? Because there are distinct appearances that can generate valid cognition (pramana-jnana). Not just adjacent spaces and aggregates of adjacent spaces. Therefore, within adjacent spaces and aggregates of adjacent spaces, there are appearances that serve as objects for the six consciousnesses. The appearance of adjacent spaces is not dust, such as hardness, etc. In adjacent spaces, there are sensations of hardness, moisture, heat, and movement. These things are truly existent, but they are not the realm of eye consciousness, because eye consciousness does not arise accordingly. All things in adjacent spaces are also like that. Why? If adjacent spaces generate consciousness in all things, then this consciousness would have no difference, because adjacent spaces in all things have no difference. If you say that consciousness arises differently due to differences in appearance, such as the different appearances of objects like pots, and consciousness arises differently because of these appearances, this is not correct. Why? Because this kind of difference in appearance exists in nominally existent things like pots, but does not exist in the real substance of adjacent spaces, because their dimensions are not different. In all things, the dimensions of adjacent spaces, such as roundness and fineness, have no difference. Therefore, the appearances of all things are not truly existent, but nominally existent. This nominal appearance refers to things like pots. If adjacent spaces are removed, then consciousness resembling pots, etc., will not arise. Real substances are such that if corresponding dharmas are analyzed, consciousness resembling real substances will not disappear, just as it does not disappear when unanalyzed. In a pot, the consciousness of the five dusts arises, and after analysis, the consciousness of the five dusts does not disappear. The five dusts, etc., are truly existent. Therefore, adjacent spaces and aggregates of all things cannot generate consciousness. Therefore, external dust is not the realm of consciousness. If so, then what dharma is called dust? The appearance of internal dust manifests as external, this is called consciousness-dust (vijnana-rupa). External dust actually has nothing, in internal consciousness, sentient beings discriminate due to a confused mind, so the discrimination of the six dusts arises. This discrimination manifests as if it were external. This is the consciousness-condition (vijnana-pratyaya) among the four conditions (catuh-pratyaya).

。以是識體相故由此識生故。所以者何。是識作內塵相。從內塵生。具二法故。是故內塵名境界。問曰。如塵起識是亦可然。內塵是識一分共一時起。云何得作緣緣。答曰。立緣緣者。識緣此生無有二故。緣者或一時共起。能成余法從他生。決定隨逐生不生故。問若次第生所緣能緣相云何。答曰。若因在前果在後。果隨因因不隨果。若因有果必有。若因無果必無。果隨因或有或無。是名因果相。複次為安置功能次第故。立所緣能緣。是似塵識次第起為生。似果起功能生識相續。問曰。若內塵是識。緣緣是緣生。經當云何釋經言依根緣色眼識得生。廣說如經。答曰。功能體相能共造果。說名為根。問根者體用云何答勝能為體。此體因何法可比度知。有由生自果故。是其勝能可得了別。非有四大色此功能于識中無有妨礙。此功能在識中離識。其體不可顯示。如我所立根與汝所立根。同功能為體。此有何異。如此功能及似塵相。更互為因。如此功能及似塵相生從無始來悉爾。依功能說名根緣內塵相名境。是亂識不可言其相。得生此法更互為因亦無有始。何以故。或功能成熟故起似塵識。或似塵識故功能得成。識者或異二或不異二或不可說。如此內塵具二法故可為識境。

無相思塵論

【現代漢語翻譯】現代漢語譯本：因此，由於認識到識的體相，以及由於這個識的生起，所以會這樣說。為什麼呢？因為這個識產生了內在的塵相（指內心產生的虛幻影像）。它從內在的塵生起，具備兩種法則的緣故。因此，內在的塵被稱為境界（vishaya）。問：如果說塵的生起導致識的生起，這還可以理解。但內在的塵是識的一部分，並且是同時生起的，怎麼能作為緣緣（alambana-pratyaya，所緣緣，即作為識生起的對象和條件）呢？答：建立緣緣的說法，是因為識緣此（內塵）而生，沒有第二個原因。緣，有時是同時共同生起，能夠成就其他法，從其他法生起，決定地隨逐生或不生。問：如果（識和內塵）是次第生起的，那麼所緣（alambana，對像）和能緣（alambanaka，能取對像者）的相狀是怎樣的呢？答：如果因（hetu）在前，果（phala）在後，果隨逐于因，因不隨逐于果。如果因存在，果必定存在；如果因不存在，果必定不存在。果隨逐于因，有時存在，有時不存在。這叫做因果相。再者，爲了安置功能（karitra）的次第，所以建立所緣和能緣。這類似於塵的識次第生起而產生。類似於果的功能生起，識相續不斷。問：如果內在的塵就是識，緣緣就是緣生，那麼經典應該如何解釋『依根（indriya，感覺器官）緣色（rupa，顏色、形狀），眼識（caksu-vijnana）得以生起』這樣的說法呢？（廣說如經，即如經典中廣泛地解釋那樣）答：功能、體相能夠共同創造果，這被稱為根。問：根的體和用是怎樣的呢？答：殊勝的功能是其體。這個體通過什麼法可以比較度量得知呢？由於它能生起自身的結果，所以它的殊勝功能是可以瞭解和辨別的。並非四大色（四大元素）所組成，此功能在識中沒有妨礙。此功能在識中，離開識，其體不可顯示。如同我所建立的根與你所建立的根，都以功能為體，這有什麼不同呢？如此功能及類似於塵的相，更互相為因。如此功能及類似於塵的相的生起，從無始以來都是這樣。依據功能，說名為根；緣內在塵相，名為境。這是亂識（bhranta-vijnana，錯誤的認知），不可言說其相。得以生起此法，更互相為因，也沒有開始。為什麼呢？或者因為功能成熟的緣故，生起類似於塵的識；或者因為類似於塵的識的緣故，功能得以成就。識，或者與二者相異，或者與二者不異，或者不可說。如此內在的塵，具備兩種法則的緣故，可以作為識的境界。《無相思塵論》

【English Translation】 English version: Therefore, it is said so because of recognizing the nature of consciousness (識, vijnana), and because of the arising of this consciousness. Why is that? Because this consciousness produces the internal dust-like appearance (內塵相, internal dust-like appearance, referring to illusory images arising in the mind). It arises from the internal dust, possessing two laws. Therefore, the internal dust is called the object (境界, vishaya). Question: If the arising of dust leads to the arising of consciousness, that is understandable. But the internal dust is a part of consciousness and arises simultaneously. How can it act as a condition (緣緣, alambana-pratyaya, the object-condition, i.e., the object and condition for the arising of consciousness)? Answer: Establishing the statement of condition is because consciousness arises dependent on this (internal dust), and there is no second reason. Conditions sometimes arise simultaneously and together, able to accomplish other dharmas, arising from other dharmas, definitely following arising or non-arising. Question: If (consciousness and internal dust) arise sequentially, what is the appearance of the object (所緣, alambana) and the subject (能緣, alambanaka)? Answer: If the cause (因, hetu) is before and the effect (果, phala) is after, the effect follows the cause, but the cause does not follow the effect. If the cause exists, the effect must exist; if the cause does not exist, the effect must not exist. The effect follows the cause, sometimes existing and sometimes not existing. This is called the appearance of cause and effect. Furthermore, in order to arrange the sequence of functions (功能, karitra), the object and subject are established. This is similar to the sequential arising of consciousness resembling dust. Similar to the arising of the function of the effect, the consciousness continues uninterrupted. Question: If the internal dust is consciousness, and the condition is arising from conditions, then how should the sutras be explained when they say, 'Depending on the sense organs (根, indriya) and the object (色, rupa), eye-consciousness (眼識, caksu-vijnana) arises'? (Elaborated as in the sutras, i.e., as widely explained in the sutras) Answer: The function and nature are able to jointly create the effect, which is called the sense organ. Question: What is the nature and function of the sense organ? Answer: The superior function is its nature. Through what dharma can this nature be compared and measured? Because it can generate its own result, its superior function can be understood and distinguished. It is not composed of the four great elements (四大色, four great elements); this function does not hinder consciousness. This function is in consciousness, apart from consciousness, and its nature cannot be displayed. Just like the sense organ I establish and the sense organ you establish, both take function as their nature. What is the difference? Thus, the function and the appearance resembling dust are mutually causal. The arising of this function and the appearance resembling dust has been like this since beginningless time. Based on the function, it is called the sense organ; based on the internal dust-like appearance, it is called the object. This is deluded consciousness (亂識, bhranta-vijnana), and its appearance cannot be spoken of. Being able to arise from this dharma, they are mutually causal, and there is no beginning. Why? Either because the function matures, the consciousness resembling dust arises; or because of the consciousness resembling dust, the function is accomplished. Consciousness is either different from the two, or not different from the two, or cannot be spoken of. Thus, the internal dust, possessing two laws, can be the object of consciousness. Treatise on Dust Without Appearance (無相思塵論)